737-800 ETOPS??

[DVR6K]

Saw this picture yesterday whilst killing some bank holiday time...

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/0574714/M/

Noticed that "ETOPS" is written on the nosegear door and was wondering when this might be useful on a 737?? I assume that not all -800s are automatically ETOPS equipped when they come out of the factory? I'm aware this is probably not breathtakingly new but I can't say I've ever noticed it before and wouldn't think range or payload of an -800 would be enough to warrant long distances across water.

Happy Easter!

[DeltaT]

737-300s go ETOPS120 all the time.
If its specifically designed with a ETOPS distance/time in mind it can be a selling point for certain Routes.

[Jet II]

New Gen 737's are cleared for 180 minute ETOPs - in fact the Classic -200's could be cleared for 120 minute but I don't think many operators bothered.

There is an extra cost in maintaining to ETOP's standard so unless the route really needs it I don't think many airlines are willing to pay the cash

[LAWN DART DRIVER]

Continental has a base of 737-800's in Guam that use ETOPS. So all 800's and 700's are ETOPS. Private Air flys a 737-700 to the states so they must also have ETOPS A/C.

[thrustucantrust]

We have a dyslexic engineer so consequently all our 738s had SPOTE on the nosegear doors.

[OverRun]

Originally Posted by DVR6K

. . . range or payload of an -800 would be enough to warrant long distances across water . .

There was a classic quote from the Boeing supersalesman, who retired a couple of years ago, about the -800 (165 pax, 2940 nm). He said it had the almost same passenger capacity and range as the early Boeing 707s (181 pax and 3000 nm). That should do to start some serious overwater ops.

My own thoughts are that Boeing snuck a bit of a swift one through with the -800 and -900 and mis-used the 'grandfather' clause - again. To my simple mind, the main relationship between an early model 737 and a late model 737 is that they both have two engines and a single aisle. I hope no-one seriously believes that the 737-100 certification was really meant to cover the -800. I'm sure the Europeans don't.

[On-MarkBob]

FlyGlobespan are planning ETOPS with their 737 - 800s this year.

With regard to the certification 737 - 100 and - 800, it's not grandfather rights, purely the Type Data Certificate. To certify a brand new aircraft is very costly so they simply include it on the same type certificate. For the same reason is a PA28 -140 Cherokee the same aircraft as a PA28R - 201T Piper Turbo Arrow? Why not, after all it's still a PA28!

[OverRun]

As On-MarkBob says, there is just one type certificate for the Boeing 737, and it covers all the variants.
A16we
Back on the original topic, here are (some of) the type certificate words on ETOPS:
The type design reliability and performance of the Model 737-600, -700, and 800 airplanes have been evaluated in accordance with FAA Advisory Circular 120-42A and found suitable for Extended Range Operations with Two-Engine Airplanes (ETOPS) when operated and maintained in accordance with Boeing Document D044A007, “737-600/-700/-800 ETOPS CONFIGURATION, MAINTENANCE, AND PROCEDURES". This finding does not constitute approval to conduct ETOPS operations.

Swerving off topic again, but philosophically, is one to suppose that aircraft engineering is like the fabled axe? Three new heads, two new handles, and it's still the same axe?

For the 737 and the PA-28 alike, their type certificates embrace a new wing, new engine(s), new tailplane, new systems, new landing gear, new cockpit, new structure. The type certificate similarities are that the 737 has still got a single aisle and two engines and the PA-28 has still got one engine and no aisle and my axe still has one handle and one head. I still wonder how far a type certificate can be stretched before a new one is needed?

[seacue]

Not the 737-800, but Aloha Airlines flies the 737-700 from Hawaii to the US mainland, a distance of 2400 miles (3870 km) or more. There are no intermediate islands for diversion.

[Groundloop]

However by being able to certify a new aircraft under old regulations can be a big advantage which is what Boeing did with the 737NGs.

Under new regs the 800 and 900 what have needed larger emergency exits than the overwing exits Boeing got away with. Just compare the exit arrangement of the A321 (certified under newer regs) with the 737-800 and -900. Similar capacities but different size exits required. However because the original 737-100 was certified under old regs the NGs came under the same requirements.

[AlphaWhiskyRomeo]

Can anyone explain why ETOPS is written on the nose gear door?

I've seen it on Continental 757s and wondered exactly who it's aimed at and why.


T.I.A.

[Liam82]

Excel airways ( UK ) fleet of 737-800's will also be ETOPS from this year, G-XLAF is the first, it has also had winglets fitted as part of the program, ETOPS again is printed on the nose gear bay doors.

[Swedish Steve]

Airlines sometimes operate mixed fleets of ETOPS and non ETOPS aircraft.
The present BA B767 fleet is mixed. The T4 Longhaul aircraft are ETOPS maintained. The T1 shorthaul fleet is not. The ETOPS on the doors is to alert engineering that they are working on an ETOPS aircraft. Certain part numbers must be fitted to ETOPS aircraft, while a lower mod state may be fitted to a non-ETOPS aircraft. This is detailed in the IPC and the ETOPS manual. The shorthaul aircraft are all ETOPS capable, but all the ETOPS critical parts must be checked for compliance before the aircraft is declared ETOPS. This has just happened to the four ex shorthaul aircraft that are now enjoying sunnier climes!