Waypoint ETO on EASA Navlog
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: EASA side of the globe
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Waypoint ETO on EASA Navlog
Hello,
We in our company are using a navlog where we have to write the ETO on every waypoint of our navlog. Of course after about 5 minutes we get direct after direct after direct until we fly over approximately 5 of the 35 waypoints on our navlog.
For the ATO I know you need an position/time/fuel once an hour, but is there a requirement that we write ETO on every waypoint.
I could understand this requirement in the old days when we flew VOR to VOR, or even in non radar coverage areas (oceanic or remote) but now we have a fancy FMS which tells us anything we would like to know.
So my question is this writing of waypoints an EASA requirement and what EASA rule is this based on
We in our company are using a navlog where we have to write the ETO on every waypoint of our navlog. Of course after about 5 minutes we get direct after direct after direct until we fly over approximately 5 of the 35 waypoints on our navlog.
For the ATO I know you need an position/time/fuel once an hour, but is there a requirement that we write ETO on every waypoint.
I could understand this requirement in the old days when we flew VOR to VOR, or even in non radar coverage areas (oceanic or remote) but now we have a fancy FMS which tells us anything we would like to know.
So my question is this writing of waypoints an EASA requirement and what EASA rule is this based on
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Near Stuttgart, Germany
Posts: 1,095
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
So my question is this writing of waypoints an EASA requirement and what EASA rule is this based on
But I really don't understand your problem. If you get a direct-to-waypoint clearance, you read the ETO of that waypoint from your FMS and enter it in your flightlog. When passing the waypoint (ten minutes, twenty minutes or an hour later...), you check the estimate against the actual time over. Two seconds of your time consumed that would have otherwise been spent dozing. On a one hour flight, that leaves you with about three time checks to do. Back in the old days (not so long ago!) without those direct-to legs we had to do it 35 times per hour!
Last edited by what next; 8th Oct 2013 at 18:39.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: EASA side of the globe
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The problem is not to fill in a RETO or a ATO enroute but to fill in the ETO for 35+ waypoints straight after take-off to calculate through the flightplan.
Seems silly knowing you are not going to fly over 20-25 of these waypoints and that the remaining 5-10 are going to have new RETO's as soon as you get your first direct anyway.
Seems silly knowing you are not going to fly over 20-25 of these waypoints and that the remaining 5-10 are going to have new RETO's as soon as you get your first direct anyway.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Not UK
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry SOB, I have to go with WN on this.
I see your point, if the aim is to do the barest minimum of paperwork.
However, until such time as the Authority ( whichever it is!) approves the removal of a paper flight plan you have to compete the paper one.
So, we have to add up the times for 35+ points.....Awwww!
But hands up the man who hasn't spotted a discrepancy between paper and FMGS.
As I understand it the RETO is changed when it is the next waypoint.
For what it's worth, when I get a DIR TO I enter a RETO for that point, and I always select Abeams when I go direct. When I pass abeam a point I enter the ATO. it may not be required but it does help to avoid the old "Thumb in Bum....Mind in Neutral" Syndrome!
I see your point, if the aim is to do the barest minimum of paperwork.
However, until such time as the Authority ( whichever it is!) approves the removal of a paper flight plan you have to compete the paper one.
So, we have to add up the times for 35+ points.....Awwww!
But hands up the man who hasn't spotted a discrepancy between paper and FMGS.
As I understand it the RETO is changed when it is the next waypoint.
For what it's worth, when I get a DIR TO I enter a RETO for that point, and I always select Abeams when I go direct. When I pass abeam a point I enter the ATO. it may not be required but it does help to avoid the old "Thumb in Bum....Mind in Neutral" Syndrome!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: EASA side of the globe
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well flyingstig, there you hit the nail straight on the head.
The autorities HAVE approved our company for the removal of a paper flightplans, but left us with a iPad flightplan which is a lot more difficult to write all these times on.
So hence the question where in EU-OPS does it say we have to write an ETO over every waypoint? Or is this just something that we continued doing from "the old days"
The autorities HAVE approved our company for the removal of a paper flightplans, but left us with a iPad flightplan which is a lot more difficult to write all these times on.
So hence the question where in EU-OPS does it say we have to write an ETO over every waypoint? Or is this just something that we continued doing from "the old days"
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Not UK
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It comes back to what WN said.
If its in your manual, that manual is approved by the Authority. It therefore becomes a requirement of the Authority.
the trick is to only put in your manual:
What EASA (or the appropriate Authority) specifies as a 'requirement' ( not recommendation!)
What you decide YOU WANT/REQUIRE.
Some DFOs have been known to insert their own personal "Top Tips" without realising that they are effectively making them a requirement under their Authority.
The Manual is audited against the Regs.
The Operation is audited against Manual.
If its in your manual, that manual is approved by the Authority. It therefore becomes a requirement of the Authority.
the trick is to only put in your manual:
What EASA (or the appropriate Authority) specifies as a 'requirement' ( not recommendation!)
What you decide YOU WANT/REQUIRE.
Some DFOs have been known to insert their own personal "Top Tips" without realising that they are effectively making them a requirement under their Authority.
The Manual is audited against the Regs.
The Operation is audited against Manual.
