ETOPS and the ETP
If the airport is classed as Cat C, not suitable, then why bother nominate it as an EDTO alternate. It's your licence. Why would you fly on one engine, further than you had to do so, over nothing but water.
For ETOPS planning purposes, Majuro meets the legal requirements and is considered acceptable to be nominated as an enroute alternate. That is, if the s@#t hits the fan, the aircraft COULD land there if necessary. That doesn't mean it MUST go there. As stated previously, under Australia's CAOs (and QF/JQ rules apparently) there is no requirement to land at the nearest adequate airport if such action is deemed to be safe and operationally acceptable. That gives the commander much more leeway in deciding where to go in the event of a failure.
In a nutshell - Majuro isn't considered desirable ('suitable'?) as a diversion port and isn't approved as such by QF, however, it is 'adequate' and an aircraft could land there if the situation demands it.
Last edited by BuzzBox; 18th Nov 2013 at 03:24.
Point of Order...
Williamstown is the dock area near the bay in Melbourne. Williamtown is the fighter base near Newcastle, and is shared by myriad civil traffic. 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jetsbest - My typo.
Further, I was of the understanding that AFTER a CRITICAL SYSTEM failure.
The maximum diversion distance or EDTO limit takes into account other system failures. So that in the event of the sH#t really hitting the fan the aircraft was within a reasonable range of an airport to land at.
The certification of maximum diversion distance limitations takes into account additional system features or failures such as:
Cargo Fire Suppression
Cargo Fire Hold (lining) containment
Propulsion on the remaining engine
Equipment Cooling
Ice protection Failures (should you be down single engine / depressurised picking up ice)
So its not only the initial critical system failure, but the what if's if something else fails later.
MC
Further, I was of the understanding that AFTER a CRITICAL SYSTEM failure.
The maximum diversion distance or EDTO limit takes into account other system failures. So that in the event of the sH#t really hitting the fan the aircraft was within a reasonable range of an airport to land at.
The certification of maximum diversion distance limitations takes into account additional system features or failures such as:
Cargo Fire Suppression
Cargo Fire Hold (lining) containment
Propulsion on the remaining engine
Equipment Cooling
Ice protection Failures (should you be down single engine / depressurised picking up ice)
So its not only the initial critical system failure, but the what if's if something else fails later.
MC
Isn't the logic of EDTO, that after a critical system failure the AOC approval requires an aircraft to land within the maximum diversion threshold of 3 hours?
So why would someone become airborne and suffer a critical system failure only to continue to the destination, further than the ETOPS diversion threshold?
Last edited by BuzzBox; 18th Nov 2013 at 05:35.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: south pacific vagrant
Posts: 1,334
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
route distance limitation is derived at whatever speed is nominated for diversion and is nil wind.
at flight planning stage it is possible with wind forecasts allowed for to have a diversion time from an etp to airfield > 3hrs.
at flight planning stage it is possible with wind forecasts allowed for to have a diversion time from an etp to airfield > 3hrs.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wanaka
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Misinformation
There is so much misinformation about ETOPS and EDTO in this thread and assuming those speaking "authoritatively" are currently pilots operating in the environment it brings into question the quality of the training being provided by some airlines.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wanaka
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EDTO Diversion Time
Potentially a B777-300 could be 5hr 39mins away from the EDTO alternate.
Area of operation is determined by 240 minutes at two engine cruise speed...
240 mins at 490 kits = 1960 nautical miles
1960 nm at ETP1D speed (Single engine depressurised @ FL140 = 5hrs 39 mins
I don't know if there are any potential routes where this might apply but....
Area of operation is determined by 240 minutes at two engine cruise speed...
240 mins at 490 kits = 1960 nautical miles
1960 nm at ETP1D speed (Single engine depressurised @ FL140 = 5hrs 39 mins
I don't know if there are any potential routes where this might apply but....
There is so much misinformation about ETOPS and EDTO in this thread and assuming those speaking "authoritatively" are currently pilots operating in the environment it brings into question the quality of the training being provided by some airlines.
Area of operation is determined by 240 minutes at two engine cruise speed...
BGQ
Really? Do you want to amend that before you get hung drawn and quartered here by the professionals?
There is so much misinformation about ETOPS and EDTO in this thread and assuming those speaking "authoritatively" are currently pilots operating in the environment it brings into question the quality of the training being provided by some airlines.
Area of operation is determined by 240 minutes at two engine cruise speed...
Really? Do you want to amend that before you get hung drawn and quartered here by the professionals?
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wanaka
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for proving my point
For maximum diversion times above 180 minutes there is a requirement to consider 2 cases.
(1) an area which is a function of the all engine operating cruise speed at normal cruise altitude, corrected for wind and temperature and the most limiting capability of the cargo and baggage compartment fire suppression system time minus 15 minutes.
(2) an area which is a function of the single engine inoperative cruise speed at driftdown altitude, corrected for wind and temperature and the most limiting system (not including cargo and baggage compartment fire suppression system) time minus 15 minutes.
Admittedly the second requirement would normally be the most limiting but the point is that diversion times can exceed the 120/180/240 mins
(1) an area which is a function of the all engine operating cruise speed at normal cruise altitude, corrected for wind and temperature and the most limiting capability of the cargo and baggage compartment fire suppression system time minus 15 minutes.
(2) an area which is a function of the single engine inoperative cruise speed at driftdown altitude, corrected for wind and temperature and the most limiting system (not including cargo and baggage compartment fire suppression system) time minus 15 minutes.
Admittedly the second requirement would normally be the most limiting but the point is that diversion times can exceed the 120/180/240 mins
Last edited by BGQ; 28th Dec 2013 at 10:40.
That one could exceed 120/180 was not in doubt here ?
You've made a critical opinion elucidated it with a statement (regarding a different ETOPS regulation for a different type of a/c) of fact, and when challenged then subsequently state that the reg that you didn't mention is the normal case.
It could be that I misread the intent of your post, rereading your last sentence on your middle post.
You've made a critical opinion elucidated it with a statement (regarding a different ETOPS regulation for a different type of a/c) of fact, and when challenged then subsequently state that the reg that you didn't mention is the normal case.
It could be that I misread the intent of your post, rereading your last sentence on your middle post.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Surrounding the localizer
Posts: 2,200
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
Potentially a B777-300 could be 5hr 39mins away from the EDTO alternate.
Area of operation is determined by 240 minutes at two engine cruise speed...
240 mins at 490 kits = 1960 nautical miles
1960 nm at ETP1D speed (Single engine depressurised @ FL140 = 5hrs 39 mins
Area of operation is determined by 240 minutes at two engine cruise speed...
240 mins at 490 kits = 1960 nautical miles
1960 nm at ETP1D speed (Single engine depressurised @ FL140 = 5hrs 39 mins
"ETOPS is the acronym created by ICAO to describe the operation of
twin-engine turbine aircraft over a route that contains a point further than
60 minutes flying time from an Adequate Aerodrome, at the approved
single engine inoperative cruise speed (under still air ISA conditions).
ETOPS includes operations over remote land areas and water."
So yes you can exceed the time, but most likely due to the wind component. I'm not sure how you can define the area of operation (I'm assuming you mean the ETOPs segment) as being based on the normal 2 engine cruise speed, unless of course this is a local Oz variation.
digression
Haughtey - I'm guessing your Ops Manual doesn't cover EDTO/ ETOPS greater than 180 minutes (admittedly not many would). Only that case are actual wind and temp are considered. Not unique to OZ (or NZ for that matter).
There are two (2) things to consider though
FAR 121 Appendix P (g) refers.
There are two (2) things to consider though
FAR 121 Appendix P (g) refers.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Surrounding the localizer
Posts: 2,200
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
CS, yep it does, up to 207 minutes….all copy and pasted EASA stuff, with a local variation or 2.
ETOPS Fuel Requirements
Unlike the area of operation, which is determined in still air and ISA
conditions, fuel planning must consider the expected weather conditions
forecast en-route (wind component, ISA deviation, icing). For dispatch of
an aircraft under ETOPS, both the standard fuel planning (refer to
Section ****, and the ETOPS fuel planning must be calculated, and the
higher of the two uplifted.
ETOPS Fuel Planning
ETOPS fuel planning requires the calculation of Critical Fuel Reserves by
consideration of a Critical Fuel Scenario. This fuel planning is split into two
parts:
a. Standard fuel scenario from departure to the Critical ETP.
b. Critical Fuel Scenario from the Critical ETP to the diversion
aerodrome.
The Critical ETP is the ETP exhibiting the lowest fuel surplus or the
highest fuel deficit. The highest fuel deficit is considered to be the required
additional ETOPS fuel reserve.
If the ETOPS sector is covered by only one suitable aerodrome, the
critical fuel will be based on ENTRY and EXIT, and in most cases the latter
will be the most critical.
Critical Fuel Scenario
The ETOPS Critical Fuel Scenario is based on the study of three failure
cases, occurring at the Critical ETP, with their respective diversion profiles
and consequent fuel requirements. The fuel requirements for each of the
three failure cases are then compared to the standard fuel requirement,
and the highest quantity will be uplifted. This fuel uplift will then assure
safe completion of the flight, regardless of flight scenario (normal flight or
diversion).
The Critical Fuel Scenario is defined as follows:
a. Descent at the selected speed schedule to the required diversion
level.
b. Cruise at the selected diversion speed.
c. Normal descent to 1,500 ft above the diversion aerodrome.
d. 15 minutes holding.
e. First approach and missed approach as an instrument procedure.
f. Second approach and landing as a visual circuit.
Three separate failure cases must be considered as follows:
a. Engine Failure
1. Descent at the selected speed cruise to the selected level
schedule.
2. Diversion cruise at the selected level and speed.
b. Depressurisation
1. Emergency descent at Vmo/Mmo (speedbrakes extended)
down to FL100.
2. Diversion cruise performed at LRC speed.
c. Depressurisation and Engine Failure (Worst Case Scenario)
1. Emergency descent at Vmo/Mmo (speedbrakes extended)
down to FL100.
2. Diversion cruise at the selected speed schedule.
Additional Fuel Reserves
ETOPS requires that additional fuel be added to the fuel calculated in the
three cases above to allow for:
a. Contingency fuel – 5%.
b. Performance Factor for each individual aircraft.
c. APU fuel consumption.
d. Icing penalty – for total anti-ice (engine and wing) at 10,000 ft.
e. Effect of any MEL items.
f. Effect of any CDL items.
The OFP calculates the fuel requirements for the two engines
and single engine depressurised cases using the actual aircraft weight at
the Critical ETP, and automatically selects the higher of the two fuel
requirements (the single engine pressurised case is never limiting).
Contingency fuel, aircraft performance factor, and APU fuel consumption
are automatically calculated by the OFP. Icing, MEL/CDL penalties are
applied by dispatcher if required.
Pretty comprehensively covered and unambiguous…and fuel is the critical issue..always.
ETOPS Fuel Requirements
Unlike the area of operation, which is determined in still air and ISA
conditions, fuel planning must consider the expected weather conditions
forecast en-route (wind component, ISA deviation, icing). For dispatch of
an aircraft under ETOPS, both the standard fuel planning (refer to
Section ****, and the ETOPS fuel planning must be calculated, and the
higher of the two uplifted.
ETOPS Fuel Planning
ETOPS fuel planning requires the calculation of Critical Fuel Reserves by
consideration of a Critical Fuel Scenario. This fuel planning is split into two
parts:
a. Standard fuel scenario from departure to the Critical ETP.
b. Critical Fuel Scenario from the Critical ETP to the diversion
aerodrome.
The Critical ETP is the ETP exhibiting the lowest fuel surplus or the
highest fuel deficit. The highest fuel deficit is considered to be the required
additional ETOPS fuel reserve.
If the ETOPS sector is covered by only one suitable aerodrome, the
critical fuel will be based on ENTRY and EXIT, and in most cases the latter
will be the most critical.
Critical Fuel Scenario
The ETOPS Critical Fuel Scenario is based on the study of three failure
cases, occurring at the Critical ETP, with their respective diversion profiles
and consequent fuel requirements. The fuel requirements for each of the
three failure cases are then compared to the standard fuel requirement,
and the highest quantity will be uplifted. This fuel uplift will then assure
safe completion of the flight, regardless of flight scenario (normal flight or
diversion).
The Critical Fuel Scenario is defined as follows:
a. Descent at the selected speed schedule to the required diversion
level.
b. Cruise at the selected diversion speed.
c. Normal descent to 1,500 ft above the diversion aerodrome.
d. 15 minutes holding.
e. First approach and missed approach as an instrument procedure.
f. Second approach and landing as a visual circuit.
Three separate failure cases must be considered as follows:
a. Engine Failure
1. Descent at the selected speed cruise to the selected level
schedule.
2. Diversion cruise at the selected level and speed.
b. Depressurisation
1. Emergency descent at Vmo/Mmo (speedbrakes extended)
down to FL100.
2. Diversion cruise performed at LRC speed.
c. Depressurisation and Engine Failure (Worst Case Scenario)
1. Emergency descent at Vmo/Mmo (speedbrakes extended)
down to FL100.
2. Diversion cruise at the selected speed schedule.
Additional Fuel Reserves
ETOPS requires that additional fuel be added to the fuel calculated in the
three cases above to allow for:
a. Contingency fuel – 5%.
b. Performance Factor for each individual aircraft.
c. APU fuel consumption.
d. Icing penalty – for total anti-ice (engine and wing) at 10,000 ft.
e. Effect of any MEL items.
f. Effect of any CDL items.
The OFP calculates the fuel requirements for the two engines
and single engine depressurised cases using the actual aircraft weight at
the Critical ETP, and automatically selects the higher of the two fuel
requirements (the single engine pressurised case is never limiting).
Contingency fuel, aircraft performance factor, and APU fuel consumption
are automatically calculated by the OFP. Icing, MEL/CDL penalties are
applied by dispatcher if required.
Pretty comprehensively covered and unambiguous…and fuel is the critical issue..always.
Last edited by haughtney1; 28th Dec 2013 at 15:15.
Interesting. Must be a regional variation. I'm not that up to speed with EASA regs but here's the FARs, -actually 121.633 (not the ref above).
(a) For ETOPS up to and including 180 minutes, no person may list an airport as an ETOPS Alternate Airport in a dispatch or flight release if the time needed to fly to that airport (at the approved one-engine inoperative cruise speed under standard conditions in still air) would exceed the approved time for the airplane's most limiting ETOPS Significant System (including the airplane's most limiting fire suppression system time for those cargo and baggage compartments required by regulation to have fire-suppression systems) minus 15 minutes.
(b) For ETOPS beyond 180 minutes, no person may list an airport as an ETOPS Alternate Airport in a dispatch or flight release if the time needed to fly to that airport:
(1) at the all engine operating cruise speed, corrected for wind and temperature, exceeds the airplane's most limiting fire suppression system time minus 15 minutes for those cargo and baggage compartments required by regulation to have fire suppression systems (except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section), or
(2) at the one-engine-inoperative cruise speed, corrected for wind and temperature, exceeds the airplane's most limiting ETOPS Significant System time (other than the airplane's most limiting fire suppression system time minus 15 minutes for those cargo and baggage compartments required by regulation to have fire-suppression systems).
(c) For turbine-engine powered airplanes with more than two engines, the certificate holder need not meet paragraph (b)(1) of this section until February 15, 2013.
(a) For ETOPS up to and including 180 minutes, no person may list an airport as an ETOPS Alternate Airport in a dispatch or flight release if the time needed to fly to that airport (at the approved one-engine inoperative cruise speed under standard conditions in still air) would exceed the approved time for the airplane's most limiting ETOPS Significant System (including the airplane's most limiting fire suppression system time for those cargo and baggage compartments required by regulation to have fire-suppression systems) minus 15 minutes.
(b) For ETOPS beyond 180 minutes, no person may list an airport as an ETOPS Alternate Airport in a dispatch or flight release if the time needed to fly to that airport:
(1) at the all engine operating cruise speed, corrected for wind and temperature, exceeds the airplane's most limiting fire suppression system time minus 15 minutes for those cargo and baggage compartments required by regulation to have fire suppression systems (except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section), or
(2) at the one-engine-inoperative cruise speed, corrected for wind and temperature, exceeds the airplane's most limiting ETOPS Significant System time (other than the airplane's most limiting fire suppression system time minus 15 minutes for those cargo and baggage compartments required by regulation to have fire-suppression systems).
(c) For turbine-engine powered airplanes with more than two engines, the certificate holder need not meet paragraph (b)(1) of this section until February 15, 2013.
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
thought this was an OZ thread
errhhh, why are we quoting FARs etc in this thread when we are supposedly talking about what applies in Oz?
Unless the relevant Oz rule specifically requires compliance with a particular FAR or EU rule, then quotation out of context is just misleading for those who suffer from PPRuNe Kool-Aid dependency...
Unless the relevant Oz rule specifically requires compliance with a particular FAR or EU rule, then quotation out of context is just misleading for those who suffer from PPRuNe Kool-Aid dependency...