Phalconphixer
14th Jan 2020, 13:51
They say the only stupid question is the one that isn't asked, so here's a daft question instead from a budding author... the story will probably never even make it to self publishing so it's curiosity as much as anything else...
Ok...here goes...
Our hero has to perform a weekend round trip from GCFV to BGSF, each leg of which is well within the range of his aircraft of choice, a Gulfstream G650.
The Outbound leg comprises Capt and First Officer with weekend baggage, and for the return leg, the same two crew plus four lightweight passengers each with a max of 60Kgms baggage.
Now my dilemma: obviously both legs of the trip could be completed using the Great Circle SE-NW-SE overwater the whole way. However, I would assume that even if this route could be legally approved, either or both HF and or SATCom communication would be required. Now, that's an awful lot of water to cover without any diversionary landfall in the case of problems en-route, not to mention the fact that this direct routing would be cutting across the normal east-west-east traffic on the NATS Tracks, even allowing for the max service ceiling of 51000 feet.
So would any sensible crew in a suitably equipped aircraft even contemplate the direct route... OR...
Would they be far more inclined to use a European routing? For instance, FUE-LIS with a Comfort stop at ABZ, then a left turn for a much shorter overwater leg passing abeam KEF before routing finally into Kangerslusuaq?
Another related question could Narsasuaq BGBW be a named viable alternate if BGSF was socked in through weather? I seem to recall that many moons ago BGBW was special training required...?
Like I said its only for a story so has absolutely no relevance to a real life situation...
Thanks...
Ok...here goes...
Our hero has to perform a weekend round trip from GCFV to BGSF, each leg of which is well within the range of his aircraft of choice, a Gulfstream G650.
The Outbound leg comprises Capt and First Officer with weekend baggage, and for the return leg, the same two crew plus four lightweight passengers each with a max of 60Kgms baggage.
Now my dilemma: obviously both legs of the trip could be completed using the Great Circle SE-NW-SE overwater the whole way. However, I would assume that even if this route could be legally approved, either or both HF and or SATCom communication would be required. Now, that's an awful lot of water to cover without any diversionary landfall in the case of problems en-route, not to mention the fact that this direct routing would be cutting across the normal east-west-east traffic on the NATS Tracks, even allowing for the max service ceiling of 51000 feet.
So would any sensible crew in a suitably equipped aircraft even contemplate the direct route... OR...
Would they be far more inclined to use a European routing? For instance, FUE-LIS with a Comfort stop at ABZ, then a left turn for a much shorter overwater leg passing abeam KEF before routing finally into Kangerslusuaq?
Another related question could Narsasuaq BGBW be a named viable alternate if BGSF was socked in through weather? I seem to recall that many moons ago BGBW was special training required...?
Like I said its only for a story so has absolutely no relevance to a real life situation...
Thanks...