Etops 180

[GVA Dispatch]

Hi all,

Can anybody advice if there's a difference between the regulations for ETOPS 120 & 180? Especially regarding the minima to be applied for all involved airports, are the minima higher compared to 120 regulations?

Thanks

GVA Dispatch

[tangocharlie]

When I was involved with Etops minima, we went from 90, to 120,138,180 mins. The minima were the same. Just needed clearance from the authorities.

[vipero]

no differences at all.

[GVA Dispatch]

Thanks for the input. Just to be 100% clear, even for technical matters (maintenance) there are no differences between 120 & 180? Or is the procedure that you first receive 120 min approval, after a certain succesfull period you can apply for 180 min approval? Thus, no higher minima when upgrading to 180, but more a proof by the operator that they succesfully complied with 120 regulations for a certain period? Assuming that it's not possible to directly get a 180 approval, but step by step?

Thanks!

GVA Dispatch

[vipero]

that's it. Also consider a period at 138min between 120 and 180.

[Celestar]

Hi from the "next door" GVA Dispatch,

I agree with what is said above, no difference.

You might be interested to know that there's a minor change in EU-OPS 1.246 vs JAR-OPS 1.246, only terminology but might be handy to update any company documentation.

“Suitable” ETOPS en-route alternate is replaced by “Adequate”.


Below is an interesting document to read, showing that we might expect interesting changes in the future, both for FAA and EASA ETOPS operations.

http://www.easa.eu.int/ws_prod/r/doc...%202008-01.pdf


Rgds to all the team.