Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
The DC-10's Version Of Etops Restrictions?  
User currently offlineMD11Fanatic From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 81 posts, RR: 0
Posted (7 years 8 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 3862 times:

Do the large Trijets such as the DC-10 or MD-11 have any sort of restrictions or guidelines for operations, such as ETOPS is to the twin-engine aircraft, or are the DC-10s and the like exempt from any such operating procedures?

Also, do the four-engine jets have to follow ETOPS or any variation of such for operation?

8 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineTristarSteve From Sweden, joined Nov 2005, 4069 posts, RR: 33
Reply 1, posted (7 years 8 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 3848 times:

No. The T in ETOPS stands for twin engine. 3 and 4 engine aircraft have always been exempt, although this is about to change. The FAA is bringing in restrictions for them.

User currently offlineJetMech From Australia, joined Mar 2006, 2699 posts, RR: 53
Reply 2, posted (7 years 8 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 3847 times:

Quoting TristarSteve (Reply 1):
The FAA is bringing in restrictions for them.

EROP's ?

Regards, JetMech



JetMech split the back of his pants. He can feel the wind in his hair.
User currently offlineFuturecaptain From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (7 years 8 months 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 3802 times:

LROPS. Long Range Operations I believe included 3 and 4 engine jets. They arn't exempt from most safety procedures.

User currently offlineFLY2HMO From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (7 years 8 months 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 3673 times:

Quoting Futurecaptain (Reply 3):
LROPS. Long Range Operations I believe included 3 and 4 engine jets. They arn't exempt from most safety procedures.

Hmmm. I bet that has something to do with the BA 744 flight that flew LAX-LHR on 3 engines not that long ago doesn't it?  mischievous 


User currently offlineFXRA From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 713 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (7 years 8 months 10 hours ago) and read 3562 times:

the latest I read from the FAA now defines ETOPS as Extend Operations, removing the Twin. Basically from the few pages I read of it, for 3 and 4 engine aircraft, nothing much changes until you reach 180 minutes from suitable airport or for Over the Poles operations. And then the gist is the designation of ETOPS Alternate airports and having a plan for passenger handling should you divert.

The same ruling essentially allows twins to operate as far as the airline wants from an airport. The theory being engine and systems reliability have increased so much that diversions for other reasons (medical for example) almost equal mechanical diversions, and having for engines won't help a passenger having cardiac arrest. These new rules do not apply to 3 and 4 engines all cargo aircraft.

later
JD



Visualize Whirled Peas
User currently offlineBlackbird From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (7 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 3458 times:

So they want to take away all restrinctions from twinjets, and add restrictions to three and four engines? That sounds totally backward.

Andrea Kent


User currently offline3201 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (7 years 7 months 4 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 3420 times:

Quoting FXRA (Reply 5):
the latest I read from the FAA now defines ETOPS as Extend Operations, removing the Twin

This is correct, as of Februrary when the new rule went into effect, although some aspects have delayed implementation.

Quoting Blackbird (Reply 6):
So they want to take away all restrinctions from twinjets, and add restrictions to three and four engines?

No. They tweaked and clarified and rationalized some of the twin rules, made some less conservative, introduced some new ones, and put them into the FAR's instead of just an AC. They added some new rules for 3- and 4-engined aircraft, but most are not restrictive (much or at all) as long as you don't attach an overly conservative interpretation to them.

While there was no tidy rule like ETOPS before, most or all operators already did analysis for decompression, for losing one engine, and for losing two engines, making sure they had enough fuel to divert safely, even if they had to dump fuel to level off.


User currently offline3201 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (7 years 7 months 4 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 3415 times:

Quoting FXRA (Reply 5):
The same ruling essentially allows twins to operate as far as the airline wants from an airport.

This is only partly true. The point is that now the distance the aircraft can be operated depends on the aircraft, the operating practices, and the support the operator has arranged, not on arbitrary limits. The limits have been clarified, and some new ones have been introduced. I would say the new rule makes a lot more sense than the old one.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic The DC-10's Version Of Etops Restrictions?
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
What's This Little Door On The DC-10? posted Mon May 2 2005 01:11:49 by Starlionblue
Open Panel On The Port Side On The DC-10 posted Wed Jan 12 2005 17:00:13 by Alphafloor
Rolls Royce & The DC-10/MD-11 posted Fri Mar 19 2004 22:07:28 by FlyCaledonian
Why Were The DC-10 Wings Slightly Slanted Down...? posted Fri Aug 22 2003 18:45:53 by Chicago757
DC-10 Lost Part Of The Body posted Thu Nov 25 2004 08:15:45 by Tobi3334
The Last Northwest DC-10 Flight posted Thu Nov 2 2006 21:08:48 by LemonKitty
DC-10 / MD-11 What's The Difference? posted Sat Jun 17 2006 23:55:28 by ContinentalGuy
Is The LM 2500 A Turbo Jet Version Of The CF-6? posted Wed May 31 2006 23:17:30 by 747400sp
What Was The Range Of The DC-8-62? posted Sun Oct 30 2005 03:01:05 by AmericanB763ER
Old Photo Of DC-10: Tech/ops Question posted Wed Jun 22 2005 16:38:12 by September11

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format