Skibum9 From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 1229 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (7 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 12666 times:
Quoting Dtwclipper (Reply 5): Quoting N328KF (Reply 3):
Now ask yourself, "how many engines does a 747-400 have?"
That's easy: 4. Why else would they call it a 747?
With that line of thinking, please explain the 707....My god I hope that it had engines, the 717.... I guess the other one is for looks ..... the 727....I guess the third inlet is to provide ram air for the interior cabin... the 737....must of lost an engine in flight somewhere (must have been designed for Kalitta), the 767..... can't figure out where they are hiding the extra four engine....and the 777, maybe each engine really counts as 3.5 engines given their size. The things that make you go hmmmmm......
Ikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21041 posts, RR: 60 Reply 10, posted (7 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 12604 times:
ETOPS will eventually be redefined to apply to all aircraft. It's in study right now. And yes, the T will no longer refer to "twin" once that is changed.
The thinking is that the need for emergency landing locations and facilities to handle the passengers due to serious medical problem or cargo bay fire, for example (one reason for ETOPS that has nothing to do with engine out), does not depend on the number of engines a jet has. ETOPS for non-twins would deal with suitable diversion airports along a route in a more structured way.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
StudentFlyer From Australia, joined Sep 2004, 688 posts, RR: 4 Reply 11, posted (7 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 12553 times:
Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 10): ETOPS will eventually be redefined to apply to all aircraft. It's in study right now. And yes, the T will no longer refer to "twin" once that is changed.
For the time being, it should be applied to BA 747s... The T would stand for trijet...
Sorry, just couldn't help myself.
But yes, I do agree if ETOPS does get applied to all aircraft. I agree with Ikramerica here!
LTU932 From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 13864 posts, RR: 51 Reply 12, posted (7 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 12321 times:
Quoting StudentFlyer (Reply 11): For the time being, it should be applied to BA 747s... The T would stand for trijet...
Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 10): ETOPS will eventually be redefined to apply to all aircraft.
Doesn't it actually apply already today for all aircraft? After all, it also means Engines Turn Or Passengers Swim.
Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 10): The thinking is that the need for emergency landing locations and facilities to handle the passengers due to serious medical problem or cargo bay fire, for example (one reason for ETOPS that has nothing to do with engine out), does not depend on the number of engines a jet has. ETOPS for non-twins would deal with suitable diversion airports along a route in a more structured way.
It may all depend also on how the FAA and JAA see things IMO, which is why an application of ETOPS for all aircraft and not only twins is being studied (one of the possible names for this might be LROPS, which stands for Long Range Operations). I believe the JAA in Europe currently only certifies aircraft and airlines for up to ETOPS 180 while the FAA and other aviation authorities do contemplate ratings such as ETOPS 207 and 330 (when ETOPS 330 actually happens). Why is it that the JAA doesn't certify aircraft for ETOPS ratings higher than 180? I recall there was a reason for that, but I don't remember the details right now.
Kiwiandrew From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 8435 posts, RR: 14 Reply 13, posted (7 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 12311 times:
Quoting LTU932 (Reply 12): Doesn't it actually apply already today for all aircraft? After all, it also means Engines Turn Or Passengers Swim
no , it means
Enticing Treats
for Oour Pacific Sharks
anyway - I believe the term these days is EROPS just meaning Extended Range OPs - and those are the standards which all long haul a/c , not just twins , must meet
Moderation in all things ... including moderation ;-)
SCEagle From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 136 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted (7 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 12275 times:
Boeing767mech From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 994 posts, RR: 3 Reply 15, posted (7 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 12244 times:
N160LH From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 279 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (7 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 12209 times:
When ETOPS started it referred to twin's and tri's (the 727)... However, I have heard that studies are suggesting that in the future every FAR 121 certified aircraft will have its own ETOPS rating... Meaning that each aircraft will be maintained with ETOPS MX pratices, and have its own unique time allotment from alternate airports...
N160LH
"I do alright up in the air, its down on the ground that I tend to mess up..."
N1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 25869 posts, RR: 79 Reply 17, posted (7 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 12193 times:
Quoting Kiwiandrew (Reply 13):
anyway - I believe the term these days is EROPS just meaning Extended Range OPs - and those are the standards which all long haul a/c , not just twins , must meet
The term is still ETOPS because EROPS doesn't exist yet.
Quoting N160LH (Reply 16): When ETOPS started it referred to twin's and tri's (the 727)...
No, it only applied to twins, not trijets. The DC-10 and L1011 never had to deal with ETOPS
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
Spencer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2004, 1624 posts, RR: 19 Reply 18, posted (7 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 12178 times:
I think the application to all aircraft is to be called LROPS, but just how will it be applied to all aircraft though? I mean, the ETOPS ruling is such that the distance to the nearest ETOPS equipped airport is within a certain time frame for a twin, not a tri or quad. By the way and just out of interest, I read that the chances of an engine loss on a quad is higher than that on a twin, which probably makes sense actually due that a quad has twice the number of engines, ie twice the probability than that of a twin! What's today's upper limit, (according to the capability of the airline), isn't it 180 minutes? Or is it 207 minutes (180 +15%). I know there's a proposal for a 240 minute "extension" and even with a possible 330minute certification. Isn't the latter just what the new 773ER was made for? Is the 777LR free from ETOPS restrictions?
Spencer.
[Edited 2006-04-08 10:46:54]
EOS1D4, 7D, 30D, 100-400/4.5-5.6 L IS USM, 70-200/2.8 L IS2 USM, 17-40 f4 L USM, 24-105 f4 L IS USM, 85 f1.8 USM
Kiwiandrew From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 8435 posts, RR: 14 Reply 19, posted (7 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 12160 times:
Quoting N1120A (Reply 17): The term is still ETOPS because EROPS doesn't exist yet.
ooops - when does EROPS kick in - is it still just a concept or is there a definite date when it applies to all types regardless of number of engines ?
Moderation in all things ... including moderation ;-)
N1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 25869 posts, RR: 79 Reply 20, posted (7 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 12137 times:
Quoting Spencer (Reply 18): What's today's upper limit, (according to the capability of the airline), isn't it 180 minutes? Or is it 207 minutes (180 +15%).
The upper limit is ETOPS 180 with a case by case (almost always over the North Pacific) application 180 + 15% or ETOPS 207
Quoting Spencer (Reply 18): I know there's a proposal for a 240 minute "extension" and even with a possible 330minute certification.
ETOPS 330 would basically eliminate all the rest of the ETOPS no go areas from the map
Quoting Spencer (Reply 18): Isn't the latter just what the new 773ER was made for? Is the 777LR free from ETOPS restrictions?
The 777LR is still subject to ETOPS rules. It is a twin after all. As far as ETOPS 330 goes, Boeing did the testing for it with the prototype 773ER, but that is simply because it was the first new long range twin after the proposal. It would most likely also be available on the 772LR as well and the 787 and A350
Quoting Kiwiandrew (Reply 19): ooops - when does EROPS kick in - is it still just a concept or is there a definite date when it applies to all types regardless of number of engines ?
I don't think a definate date has been decided
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
Monteycarlos From Australia, joined Mar 2005, 2107 posts, RR: 31 Reply 21, posted (7 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 12124 times:
Quoting SonicZoom87 (Thread starter): Well just as the heading asks, I want to know what is the ETOPS for a Boeing 747-400.
Man I haven't seen anyone get quite that roasted for a long time!
Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 10): ETOPS will eventually be redefined to apply to all aircraft. It's in study right now. And yes, the T will no longer refer to "twin" once that is changed.
Yeah, EROPS which will eventually become LROPS... However if it is redefined at all is contentious right now. Hell the way aircraft are going we won't need either!
Bond007 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 5098 posts, RR: 8 Reply 24, posted (7 years 2 months 1 week 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 11770 times:
Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 23): Quoting BA747YYZ (Reply 4):
None, would be my guess.
Smartest thing I've read in Civ-Av in six months.
It would have been if he didn't say 'my guess' !!
Jimbo
I'd rather be on the ground wishing I was in the air, than in the air wishing I was on the ground!
25 DEVILFISH: The 727 should have been the 737, and vice versa. What were they thinking? Didn't Navy Aviation have something similar called "LOROPS"?
27 Stitch: I'm going to guess here you're asking how long a 747 can fly on two engines (assuming it loses two of it's four unit in flight). The answer to that q
28 Spencer: Talking of 747s shutting down, remember the BA Lump that flew through volcanic ash and had a full 4 engine shutdown?! The a/c dropped to 12,000 before
29 N160LH: No it applied to the 727 when it first came out, but you are right about the DC-10 and L-1011... Just did a research paper on ETOPS MX... Turbine eng
30 TommyBP251b: We also could name the Etops for a 747 "EFOPS": Extended four-engine operations.
31 Julius2005: Think that in normal conditions ETOPS do not apply to B747's, could someone explain me what isit all about???
32 Spencer: Basically Julio, if I've understood your question right, then the chance a twin with an engine out (ie. running on one engine) making it to its desti
33 AirportGal: I believe the term being bantered around is LROPS - Long Range Operations.
34 Starlionblue: Common mistake. It's actually "Extended-range Twin-engine Operational Performance Standards". LROPS stands for "Long Range Operational Performance St
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined May 2005, 30 posts, 
From Canada, joined Mar 2006, 377 posts, 
From Australia, joined Sep 2004, 688 posts, 
From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 13864 posts, 
From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 8435 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2004, 1624 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
Printer friendly format 
