PPRuNe Forums - WX for adequate aerodromes

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)

- Flight/Ground Ops, Crewing and Dispatch (https://www.pprune.org/flight-ground-ops-crewing-dispatch-39/)

- - WX for adequate aerodromes (https://www.pprune.org/flight-ground-ops-crewing-dispatch/590545-wx-adequate-aerodromes.html)

WX for adequate aerodromes

In the case of NON-etops operations with large transport turbojets, what is the relevance of WX forecasts along the route? Do they need to be taken into account or not?

Makeshift example: planning Casablanca to Moscow, and on the day all north of Italy, Austria and Czech Republic are LVP or CAT I (Lyon, Geneva, Basel, Zurich, Bratislava, and Budapest too). Aircraft is ILS cat 1 only, thus alternate planning minima are not met.

The question probably forks on the word "available" adequate aerodrome, and I was actually trained how to interpret it, however before passing the knowledge I'd much appreciate double verification.

Quote:

Originally Posted by CAT.OP.MPA.107

Adequate aerodrome The operator shall consider an aerodrome as adequate if, at the expected time of use, the aerodrome is available and equipped with necessary ancillary services such as air traffic services (ATS), sufficient lighting, communications, weather reporting, navigation aids and emergency services.

FD

Can't find an EASA source but I know our company rules state if you not operating to ETOPS rules and are instead using the twin/60 minute rules there is no formal requirement to check weather at these adequate airfields along your route....in reality of course........

I can certainly think of a couple of occasions on Siberian routes when forecasts meant a dispatch in accordance with ETOPS regs wouldn't have been possible but using the 60 minute rule it was legit...TBF to the company when we've done this we did have the met for the adequate airfields and they were all just about CAT 1...

Thanks wiggy. I actually have all the EASA regs right here, and the only relevant bit is what I quoted already. My understanding is the same as yours: there is no formal requirement to check the weather.

.. in reality if course ... it could get a little akward. As long as the WX is nice we have a look and smile, but if the WX is in fact non-landable only then we say - hey, actually we are not required to study these. :sad:

The ETOPS consequence you describe, ... funny, thanks for sharing that.

On a similar topic, what about on-board chart coverage? Can we consider an aerodrome to be adequeate for the prupouse of 60min-distance planning, if there are no charts on board?