Is wind a consideration for ETOPS departue

[bluehawaii]

Ladies and Gents, I will appreciate your input to an ETOPS FAA Part 135 question.
An FAA Part 135 flight was determined not needing ETOPS the day before it's departure. However, on the day of the departure is it possible that due to unfavorable winds and/or temperatures, etc BEFORE THE DISPATCH of the flight, it may now need to meet all operational ETOPS requirements? Thanks.

[5LY]

If your route was modified to avoid unfavourable winds, then your track may have taken you from within 60 min.s of an aiport into ETOPs.

[mutt]

Since when do FAR135 operators have to comply with ETOPS?

[bluehawaii]

Mutt, Part 135 operators have always complied with ETOPS, if your flight is outside the continental USA more than 180mins flying time from adequate airports described in Part135.364.

[bluehawaii]

5LY, the route was not changed.

[mutt]

Thank you for the reference. :ok:

[bluehawaii]

5LY, the flight route is an oceanic operation and required ETOPS from the initial planning stage. For example a flight from San Francisco to Honolulu.

[5LY]

ETOPS is a planning excerise. The range circles on your planning chart are drawn without considering wind. For a given track, the wind does not affect planning except where they affect your ability to land at a specific airport, for example a surface wind that exceeds your x-wind lim.

[bluehawaii]

Thanks 5LY,how about if the wind becomes favourable (tailwinds) on the day of departure; and the circles around your alternate/destination airport overlap each other,do you still need ETOPS for that leg of the flight even if it results in less flight time. Reference (FAA FAR) Appendix G to Part 135 ETOPS--- Operational Requirements G135.2.5(d)1/2

[5LY]

Your circles are not dependant on the wind. They are drawn on a map and then reprinted by the thousand. They are a ground distance from an ETOPS alternate which represents a nominal time. Ie 120 or 180 minute cirlces. The wind has nothing to do with them. The wind on the day of departure has nothing to do with your planning as far as your range circles go.

Let's say you are authorized for 180 minutes. A specific distance is chosen by your company to represent 180 minutes at your chosen diversion speed. Wind is not considered. When you plan a trip ETP's (equal time points) will be calculated (considering the wind) to help you chose a diversion airport at any point on your route. Along a given route these ETP's move back and forth as the wind changes.

An actual diversion from a point most distant from a suitable airport with an unfavourable wind can take well over the time of the circle ie. 120 or 180 minutes and you are still legal. Also there is no requirement that you fly the nominated speed. There are a myriad of reasons why I might want to fly a slower or faster speed. (2 extremes would be a sturctural problem or a fire.)

The whole thing is a paper excersise to meet the requirements. It's a mental game that you play to ensure that you have options when you are out there on a dark stormy night and you have a problem. You know at a glance where to go if you have to.

[Hamrah]

BlueHawaii, can I just correct an earlier post.
In a TWIN engined aircraft, you must comply with ETOPS requirements if you are going to be more than 60 minutes ( still air ) from a suitable airfield ( suitable being defined as appropriate runway length and approach facilities for the aircraft type AND suitable weather available to make a landing during the period of time when it is required for possible diversion). ETOPS approval can be given up to 180 minutes for suitably equipped twin engined aircraft , the approval resting with the operator. I think the 777 might even have a longer interval.

[Cough]

Hamrah,

I know this sounds a daft question, but please point me to the bit in the regs which says the weather has to be suitable for an airfield making up the 60min circles.

Its an ongoing topic in our mob - I would love to get the eu-ops chapter and verse on it!

Thanks!

[BOAC]

To correct Hamrah's post - it is an 'adequate' airfield that is required, not 'suitable'. 'Suitable' or 'ETOPS Adequate' is the term used in ETOPS planning. This requires weather considerations, 'adequate' does not (apart from met services).

I'm not sure there is a 'definition' of 'adequate' in EUOPS (that I can find!), but this is one I have used for a long time:

"An adequate alternate aerodrome is an aerodrome which is expected to be available, if required. This means landing performance requirements on an adequate aerodrome are required to be met and the concerning aerodrome must have the necessary facilities and services such as ATC, airport lighting, communications, meteorological services, navigation aids, rescue and fire-fighting services and one suitable instrument approach procedure."

Mind you, all the above does not rule out commonsense!

Just to confuse the (ETOPS) issue, Boeing now say

"A noteworthy change is the addition of the term "ETOPS alternate airport," which is an adequate airport (i.e., one appropriate for the airplane type) that meets the stated requirements for planned diversion use and is listed in the certificate holder's operations specifications. The weather conditions at these airports are checked at dispatch or flight release, and again in flight, to determine whether they are at or above the operating minimums specified for a safe landing and can thus serve as an alternate for that flight. "ETOPS alternate" thus replaces the former ETOPS term "suitable airport," which denoted an alternate airport that was both above required weather minimums and available for diversion use. Under the new ETOPS rule, "suitable" no longer has an ETOPS-specific meaning. Therefore, where it appears in the new ETOPS rule, it is to be interpreted only according to its broadly accepted everyday meaning."


So there!:)