Good advice BOAC, these demands increasingly sound like they are being posted by someone fishing for the answers to a homework question or an assignment. they certainly don't sound like they're a genuine request for information from a professional aviator.

Rgds.

- indeed, but I get my laughs a different way:)

I mean, come on - 'stay high and get the fuel burn with the pax on oxy'?:D:D:D

He has a different persona for each amusing concept....

I've lost of the names that he has used here, but SSG was the one I remember the most, btw he hates the following:

1: Reduced thrust takeoffs.
2: Optimized V-speeds or improved climb.
3: Low hour cadets.
4: Co-pilots :)

Now I'm sure that he is going to insist that ETOPS is unsafe and we shouldn't do it :):)

Mutt

Way to much attitude and not enough facts here from a couple of posters. Here is a B737-800 180' ETOPS flight plan from KSEA to PHNL. Suggest some might take a careful look at AC120-42B regarding what the parameters for these kinds of operations require.



TOTAL

ETP02 FUEL EXCESS OF 0

TIME TO
DIST W/C CFR FOB EXC ETP / ALT
ETP1 KPDX/KSFO 0469/0473 P020/P022 009712 030260 20548 01.31/01.23
N41114 W131282

ETP2 KSFO/PHOG 1074/1023 P021/P002 020057 020057 0 03.18/03.11

KPDX/KSFO - EQUAL TIME POINT DATA - ETP01
DIVERSION SUMMARY
ETP LOCATION N41 11.4 W131 28.2 ETE 01.31
GWT AT DIVERSION 163187 FOB

029941

DIVERSION AIRPORTS KPDX KSFO
G/C DIST 0469 0473


CRITICAL FUEL REQUIRED CALCULATION
FLIGHT CONDITION DECOMP DECOMP PRESS

DECOMP DECOMP PRESS

CONFIG 2 ENG. 1 ENG. 1 ENG.

2 ENG. 1 ENG. 1 ENG.

SPEED LRC 310 310

LRC 310 310

F.L. 100 100 180

100 100 180

AVG W/C P020 P020 P029

P022 P022 P023

ENROUTE TEMP ISA M014 M014 M031

M012 M012 M029

FORECAST ICING PCT 000100 000100 000100

000100 000100 000100

TIME TO ALT NO HOLD 01.23 01.20 01.22

01.23 01.20 01.23

CRUISE 007507 007385 006903

007534 007414 006982

DESCENT 000348 000266 000304

000348 000266 000304

HOLD 001400 001288 001292

001399 001288 001291

APU 000306 000295 000302

000305 000295 000304

ICING 000125 000130 000122

000126 000130 000123

TOTAL 009686 009364 008923

009712 009393 009004

CRITICAL FUEL REQUIRED AT ETP01 - DECOMP 2 ENG TO KSFO
AMOUNT TIME
CFR

009712 01.23

FOB 030260
QTY DIFF. 020548

KSFO/PHOG - EQUAL TIME POINT DATA - ETP02
DIVERSION SUMMARY
ETP LOCATION N33 55.2 W143 57.0 ETE 03.18
GWT AT DIVERSION 153163 FOB

019917

DIVERSION AIRPORTS KSFO PHOG
G/C DIST 1074 1023
CRITICAL FUEL REQUIRED CALCULATION
FLIGHT CONDITION DECOMP DECOMP PRESS

DECOMP DECOMP PRESS

CONFIG 2 ENG. 1 ENG. 1 ENG.

2 ENG. 1 ENG. 1 ENG.

SPEED LRC 310 310

LRC 310 310

F.L. 100 100 180

100 100 180

AVG W/C P021 P021 P050

P002 P002 P000

ENROUTE TEMP ISA M005 M005 M019

P004 P004 M005

FORECAST ICING PCT 000100 000100 000100

000100 000100 000100

TIME TO ALT NO HOLD 03.11 02.54 02.42

03.11 02.53 02.46

CRUISE 017224 017224 015133

017534 017379 015856

DESCENT 000348 000266 000305

000348 000266 000296

HOLD 001245 001133 001149

001245 001132 001143

APU 000642 000590 000551

000642 000582 000565

ICING 000281 000297 000262

000288 000300 000274

TOTAL 019740 019510 017400

020057 019659 018134

CRITICAL FUEL REQUIRED AT ETP02 - DECOMP 2 ENG TO PHOG
AMOUNT TIME
CFR

020057 03.11

FOB 020057
QTY DIFF.

0
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Spooky 2 -

Why don't you cut and paste the numbers I need out of your form..I'm not making heads or tails out of your company abbreviations.

MTOW
BEW
PAX weight for 150 pax
departing Fuel in lbs
Enroute Alt and fuel burn per hour, time to diversion point
Diversion Alt, (15k), fuel burn per hours, time to destination
Fuel remaining at diversion point.

Thanks.

Not sure why you need the weight of the pax as it tells you the ZFW along with the MTOW? That's all that counts.

Unfortunetly I do not have the computer skills to make this pretty, nor the time. It's there though so it can't be that hard to find.

41,286 is the fuel required and it's easy to spot in the first data block.

I hope no-one would be soliciting planning data for an ETOPS mission from an internet source. That would seem to be not entirely kosher.

Spooky -

So you would take off to Hawaii not knowing your passenger load or BEW for that matter to understand how ZFW was derived?

When was the last time you punched into an FMS and put your starting weights in there?

You really sound counfused. Maybe it's a language problem but I suspect not. Look at the material provided in my post. I don't think the BEW has anything to do with ETOPS...in this case.

Are you a Boeing 737NG pilot? Yes or no?

Spooky 2

You aren't familiar with SGG, are you?

GF

I guess not. Just looked at this thread kinda late in the game.

I don't think I have ever seen a box on the FMC that asks for BEW?

Sorry, I meant SSG, a denizen here with strange views on how FAR 25 or airline ops should be accomplished. That he could not digest several flight plans shown here says it all.

I've never seen BEW, either.

GF

Spooky - Yeah, why would you need to know the passenger weights or the basic empty weight of your aircraft?....lol.

Alright, I've got better things to do...:bored:

Look at the information that Spooky2 printed in post #86.... It shows Operating Weight Empty, Payload, Estimated Zero Fuel Weight and Estimated Takeoff Weight.........

You keep asking about Basic Empty Weight, why on earth would a crew need to know the Basic Empty Weight on an airliner? Aha, maybe it's because you don't know the difference between Basic Empty Weight and Basic Operating Weight?

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6158/...35bdeba5fb.jpg

You can easily see the difference between Empty Weight and Basic Operating weight, so why would a crew need to know the BEW?

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6173/...8cef11e5_z.jpg

It's quite amusing that you start asking questions about the LAX-HNL route, but when the information is given to you, you appear unable to either understand it or to know how to use it, so you immediately divert the conversation.........

Mutt

Mutt -

Let's imagine for three minutes that you fly airliners and that you are going to do the longest over water trip on Earth...

Now imagine that your airline has chosen the very best pilots to do this seemingly demanding trip, because you just don't have many options for a number of problems that can happen enroute....you either go back, you go forward, you put it in the water.

Translated for those that don't fly over mountains, in the ice, over hostile terrain at night, that means you deal with the problem up in the air, better yet, get ahead of the problem so that it can be prevented and mitigated.

Ergo, the sharp pilot will want to know if the $10/ hour dispatcher got his weights right, if the BEW or BOW is correct, if the dispatcher calculated 150 midgets to get past fuel limitations or if they calculated correctly for the charter flight of football players at an average weight of 225 lbs a piece.

For an airline pilot to not need to know the weight of his aircraft, the passenger weights, not know his fuel burns at altitude and just get a little 8x11 page of information from some girl in dispatch saying...'your good to go' and blindly head off out of over the Pacific is beyond stupid...it's so stupid that I can't believe even the airlines are that dumb...it's so stupid that I can't believe even the most sell out unprofessional, chief pilot butt kissing FO wouldn't sit there half way to HNL and not want to pull out the book and a little calculator and try to see, just for grins, if the numbers are correct.

There are only two answers for this...either you guys are complete idiots in every sense of the aviation term or you have been culled by the very best chief pilots to not ask questions, not wonder whether the numbers are correct, not ponder looking out over the water if your going to make it, because the culling process is so extensive that they have found the guys that will follow the captain into the side of a mountain and not ask questions.

My guess is the latter, as we have a library full of crashes where the FO went right to the scene of the accident by saying little more then 'well um, I think we are a little low'.

So why would I expect that FO, now a captain, flying to Hawaii to actually question the numbers, to actually want to know why 150 football players loading up only equates to 10000 pounds of passenger weight that mysteriously doesn't make it on your computerized dispatch form.

You don't want to know..out of sight, out of mind.

Mutt, any pretext that your some sort of aviation expert on this forum is a long dead conclusion on my part.

You don't give me the numbers I ask because your either to dumb to give them to me, or you don't want to give them to me. If you can't do a simple fuel burn calc, if you can't pull the numbers out of some abreviated company dispatch for all of us to see clearly, you hiding, your stalling, your do everything you can to muddy this up, hence in the end, your not for real.

Have a nice day.

mutt:

In post #39 I stated the procedure we used on the L-1011 at TWA. I can't imagine has changed much at all for the LAX-HNL OR HNL-LAX tracks. One of our westbound crews (I was on layover in HNL to take the airplane back to LAX) had to shut down No.1 and pull the firepull to stop the leak. They were not too far west of the ETP so they headed for Hilo. Had they not followed company procedure and instead continued to HNL they would not have made it.

whenrealityhurts

I'm sure others who have tried to be civil and work with you can speak up for themselves, but I personally can't let that collection of stupidity and arrogance go unremarked.

if you had bothered to read any of the details mutt and spooky2 actually posted, then you'd find that the information you apparently think is unknown is there, plain as the nose on your face.

And just in case that's too complex for you, look at the Perf Init page mutt posted. Right there:
pax/weight
5/170.

It even does the maths for you, 850lbs.

It's settled then, 25 years of ETOPS experience, million of hours of safe overwater ops, not an open ocean ditching since Captain Ogg's in a B377 was all dumb luck. We need no stinking computer flight plans, we'll come in 3 hours early, spin out a plan using graphs and the trusty E-6B. That a CFP is vastly more accurate is irrelevant.

Thanks, SSG, Whenrealityhurts for the enlightenment.

GF

Suspect that WRH is an MS sim kinda guy. Nothing wrong with that but when you argue with those that are trying to enlighten, := it becomes somewhat futle in continuing the conversation. To bad because it is an interesting subject.

Galaxy

Maybe thats the point. Either you represent the airline industry, which doesnt jive with the safety record, or you and your ilk are being exposed as frauds.

WRH
 

I'm genuinely curious as to your agenda both here and now also on the Max demonstrated Cross wind thread.

You've had plenty of very informative, accurate and generally polite replies from folks who have had years of hands on experience in the industry and ETOPS ( Spooky, mutt, Galaxy for example). They've provided you with plenty of information, tried to be open with you and yet now you are resorting to accusing people of being "frauds" := :=

Why the attitude?

"Exposed as frauds", by whom? You, I think not.

It is you who refuses to post a legitimate reply to what you see as safety or operational discrepancies. The "industry" has developed wonderfully accurate, safe and tested procedures for overwater, not to mention your other hobby horses, that have stood the test of experience. If these are insufficient, in your view, post something positive to improve our procedures. The information posted here is standard, military, airline, corporate, where are our failings?

Using ZFW is an industry standard, pilots don't need to add up each passenger and bag to check the work of dispatch; just as I could spot an error in the load plan climbing the ladder in the C-5. No experienced pilot needs to do manual flight plans. Where there have their been errors, like EK at YMML, it is rare and investigated and corrected.

The record speaks for itself.

GF

'Operational discrepancies?'

Galaxy, every pilot on Earth knows the weight of the passengers on board..how a pilot departing for 6 hours over the ocean wouldn't want to have those numbers is beyond me.

Known ZFW as some type of 'good enough' is beyond silly..because that is taking blind faith that the passenger load is correct, and that it has been correctly added to a correct BEW/BOW...again beyond silly.

Galaxy...this isn't even a debate...

To the other poster that mentioned Mutt's pax numbers of '5'....850lbs is right up with Mutt's modus operandi to plan an airline trip to Hawaii with five passengers to make the fuel limitations..

All this said...well I have learned that this is the Internet...so if you guys are experienced airline captains never looking back into the cabin to get some general idea on what your passenger load is..well then your going to have to take my word for it that I am posting this from the International Space Station. Yes, I am an astronaut...and I will be doing my first space walk, then skydive from orbit into the backyard of the Playboy mansion for a massage.

Fair is fair...if you can dream up who you want to be, then so can I. Good day.

I tried to find this routine on the usual internet video sources, but without success.

You, sir, are a retard, pure and simple.

Anyone with half a brain could have understood it to be an EXAMPLE of what the Perf init input screen looks, like, not the one specific to a flight to Hawai'i. Unfortunately, that requires half a brain more than you seem to have.

And, incidentally, mutt's data had (if I read it correctly) a payload of 26.1 (tonnes, or 1000s of pounds, it hardly matters, it certainly isn't 850lbs/5 pax)

Spooky2, on the other hand, had a payload of 41446. I'm pretty sure his is lbs, so again, a lot more than 5 pax.

Nope, we don't use Honeywell FMS Manuals as flight planning tools..... the picture was to educate YOU about BEW and BOW....... but as usual you use something like this to divert the discussion rather than focusing on the pertinent points..... poor show :(:(:(

Have you ever seen a DCS LOADSHEET? Do you know the role of a LOAD CONTROLLER?

In the words of GB Shaw, Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance............

Mutt

This guy would be funny if he were not so pathetic. Lets just hope he is in fact nothing more than a wanna be, and he does not actually sit in either the left seat or right seat of an airliner. I think the best solution is to ignore him/her.

Sadly he sounds English.

Even more sadly, I think he might be one of ours. :{