Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Flight Over Oceans With 4 Engines?  
User currently offlineAjaaron From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2000, 113 posts, RR: 0
Posted (11 years 4 months 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 3863 times:

I was travelling back to the UK form the Caribbean in an A340, and noticed that we passed near Santa Maria in the Azores which prompted me to ask:

Are there any time restrictions when very far from an airfield, e.g. like 180min ETOPS for the twin jets?, or can a 4 engined aircraft fly as far from an alternate as the operator pleases. Also would a 180min ETOP flight for say A330 or 777 be able to fly from the Carribean on a direct track to the UK. i.e. are the Azores within 180min of the route?

thanks,

Arn.

28 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineIMissPiedmont From United States of America, joined May 2001, 6343 posts, RR: 33
Reply 1, posted (11 years 4 months 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 3755 times:

Quad jets are able to continue normal flight with 1 engine out, although at a slightly lower altitude. Therfore they can be operated on any route. Of course, even in a quad, the pilots will be directed to land at the nearest airport that can diagnose and repair the aircraft.

And I think there is only a very tiny segemnt of the Atlantic that cannot be entered by 180 minute ETOPS aircraft and aircraft flying to the Carribean from Europe come nowhere near it.



Damn, this website is getting worse daily.
User currently offlineYikes! From Canada, joined Oct 2001, 284 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (11 years 4 months 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 3738 times:

ETOPS stands for Extended range Twin-engine OperationS. Tri's and Quad's don't have the same limitations.

User currently offlineCx flyboy From Hong Kong, joined Dec 1999, 6642 posts, RR: 55
Reply 3, posted (11 years 4 months 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 3728 times:

With an engine failure in a 4 engined aircraft in our company, you may continue with your flight provided you meet several requirements, all related to having enough fuel (Due to increased fuel burn) and the ability to maintain terrain clearance (Not normally a problem on Oceanic flights). There is no requirement to divert anywhere, and provided you meet the requirements, you can even continue to destination.

User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (11 years 4 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 3604 times:

ETOPS stands for Extended range Twin-engine OperationS

More accurately, it stands for Extended-range Twin-engine Operational Performance Standards


*sorry, couldnt resist*  Big grin


User currently offlineIMissPiedmont From United States of America, joined May 2001, 6343 posts, RR: 33
Reply 5, posted (11 years 4 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 3578 times:

Well of course the flight can continue to it's destination CX, if safe to do so. But if the aircraft is a 747 enroute to MCO, it would likely divert to MIA as it could be fixed there easily. Rare indeed as most aircraft fly into airports that present no problem for repairs.


Damn, this website is getting worse daily.
User currently offlineShenzhen From United States of America, joined Jun 2003, 1712 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (11 years 4 months 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 3553 times:

There will be restrictions in the coming years...

Think of a fire in the cargo bay... non-ETOPS 3/4 Enginges..30 minutes of halon... ETOPs, 180 minutes.


User currently offlineRick767 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2000, 2662 posts, RR: 51
Reply 7, posted (11 years 4 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 3461 times:

"Also would a 180min ETOP flight for say A330 or 777 be able to fly from the Carribean on a direct track to the UK. i.e. are the Azores within 180min of the route?"

Yes 180 min ETOPS is fine for a UK > Caribbean flight or vice versa. Off the top of my head typical ETOPS alternates for a Dominican Republic Flight would be Shannon (EINN), Lajes (LPLA) and Bermuda (TXKF).

In fact for most tracks we don't even need Lajes on that route as we could use Shannon (EINN) and Gander (CYQX) before Bermuda and still be within 180 minute range (1,200 nam for the 763).



I used to love the smell of Jet-A in the morning...
User currently offlineTimz From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 6903 posts, RR: 7
Reply 8, posted (11 years 4 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 3450 times:

Assuming Lajes, Sal, Bermuda and Antigua are all suitable, then the farthest-from-an-airport point anywhere north of Brazil is 24.062364 N, 42.277428 W, which is 1172.4 nm from Lajes, Sal and Antigua.

User currently offlineBackfire From Germany, joined Oct 2006, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (11 years 4 months 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 3361 times:

More accurately, it stands for Extended-range Twin-engine Operational Performance Standards


Er...don't think so. The 'OPS' is simply short for 'operations'.

Can't speak for anyone else but I've never seen the reference you describe, and there doesn't appear to be a single mention of it in relation to ETOPS on the Internet either.

Perhaps you're confusing it with MOPS which are 'mininum operational performance standards'? *




*sorry, couldn't resist  Big grin


User currently offlineRick767 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2000, 2662 posts, RR: 51
Reply 10, posted (11 years 4 months 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 3358 times:

I don't think I've ever seen an "official" definition of what ETOPS actually stands for either.

On my ETOPS course it was "Extended range Twin Operating ProcedureS".

At the end of the day every airline can call it what they want I suppose  Big grin



I used to love the smell of Jet-A in the morning...
User currently offlineIMissPiedmont From United States of America, joined May 2001, 6343 posts, RR: 33
Reply 11, posted (11 years 4 months 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 3288 times:

But none has so far mentioned that all current air routes are for the 4 engined airliner? And the first T does indeed refer to twins.

Just parting thoughts.



Damn, this website is getting worse daily.
User currently offlineBa299 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2003, 173 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (11 years 4 months 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 3218 times:

In BA ETOPS stay for: Extended range Twin engine Operations.
In UK we are very lucky about ETOPS specially because we can use the 180 min also on the Atlantic. This is very good during the winter when there are no suitable airport in Iceland. So we take EINN in Ireland and CYQY (or something else) in Canada and we can cross the ocean without trouble.


User currently offlineUTA_flyinghigh From Tunisia, joined Oct 2001, 6495 posts, RR: 50
Reply 13, posted (11 years 4 months 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 3182 times:

Engines T urn Or Passengers Swim
heheheheh. Big grin
Will



Fly to live, live to fly - Air France/KLM Flying Blue Platinum, BMI Diamond Club Gold, Emirates Skywards
User currently offlineMxCtrlr From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 2485 posts, RR: 35
Reply 14, posted (11 years 4 months 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 3171 times:

I heard it used as both ETOPS - Extended range Twin Operations and EROPS - Extended Range Operations. Personally, I agree with Will above, Engines Turn Or Pax Swim!

MxCtrlr  Smile/happy/getting dizzy
Freight Dogs Anonymous - O.O.T.S.K.  Smokin cool



DAMN! This SUCKS! I just had to go to the next higher age bracket in my profile! :-(
User currently offlineGordonsmall From UK - Scotland, joined Jun 2001, 2191 posts, RR: 21
Reply 15, posted (11 years 4 months 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 3167 times:

I think EROPS was the set of regulations that preceded ETOPS, I know several A310 operators described their aircraft as being EROPS capable.

Regards,
Gordon



Statistically, people who have had the most birthdays tend to live the longest.
User currently offlineRayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 8041 posts, RR: 5
Reply 16, posted (11 years 4 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3090 times:

However, with the 777-300ER likely going to get ETOPS 240 certification, the need for the 773ER to "dog leg" routes on transoceanic flights will be much less than before. For example, if NZ orders the 773ER to replace/supplement their 747-400 fleet, they can fly this plane between AKL and LAX on a fairly straight routing thanks to ETOPS 240 certification.

User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (11 years 4 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 3056 times:

they can fly this plane between AKL and LAX on a fairly straight routing thanks to ETOPS 240 certification.

As if they couldnt already do that with ETOPS180...  Big grin  Laugh out loud


User currently offlineRayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 8041 posts, RR: 5
Reply 18, posted (11 years 4 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 3048 times:

ConcordeBoy,

Sorry, the 777-200ER can't fly between LAX and AKL in a fairly straight line due to ETOPS 180 considerations. This is probably a good reason why NZ won't get the 777-200ER for transpacific flying unless the plane gets ETOPS 240 certification soon. But since the 777-300ER is aimed at ETOPS 240 certification out of the box, you could fly between LAX and AKL without the dog-leg routing that burns more fuel along the way.


User currently offlineTsentsan From Singapore, joined Jan 2002, 2016 posts, RR: 15
Reply 19, posted (11 years 4 months 2 hours ago) and read 2983 times:

Am I right to say that probably the only few routes that a twin jet cant do while a tri/quad can would something in terms of ETOPS and such would be like:

SYD-Buenos Aires (issit EZE?)
SYD-JNB
The Australian Antartica flights...

?

Cheers
-TTT




NO URLS in signature
User currently offlineTimz From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 6903 posts, RR: 7
Reply 20, posted (11 years 4 months ago) and read 2975 times:

ConcordeBoy is right about AKL-LAX. If you fly a direct route from AKL to LAX you'll pass just N of the point that is 1200 nm from Hilo and LAX. So even if 180 minutes is a bit less than 1200 nm, the route is "fairly straight".

As for what routes a twin will never fly: depends on what alternates continue to exist. Will Ascension always be available? How about Easter Island? Is Wake endangered? But yeah, the South Pacific route (AKL-EZE now; there's never been a SYD-EZE nonstop has there?) will likely be the last to go ETOPS.


User currently offlineRickb From United Kingdom, joined May 2003, 243 posts, RR: 9
Reply 21, posted (11 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 2837 times:

A couple of questions - what speed is taken into consideration with ETOPS? Presumably with an engine out altitude and therefore speed are reduced ? In which case obviously the distance reachable within 90/120/180/240 minutes is reduced from normal cruising speed?

Also - one last point - on an A330, B767 or B777 under ETOPS - what percentage of N1 is used to maintain altitude/cruising speed?

Thanks in advance,

RickB


User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 22, posted (11 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 2829 times:

United operated LAX-AKL with a 777-200ER under just 180 minute rules for quite a while before discontinuing the route, with only a very very slight route deviation.

Its possible they used their 207 minute power, but I don't believe it was necessary.

N


User currently offlineAJ From Australia, joined Nov 1999, 2397 posts, RR: 25
Reply 23, posted (11 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 2830 times:

Run an AKL-LAX flight with 180 minutes ETOPS at http://gc.kls2.com/.

A straight line is often not the quickest way between AKL and LAX, on the 747-400 we would often head further east before turning north to take advantage of the prevailing winds. On a twin that would take you into the 180 minutes no-go zone.


User currently offlineCx flyboy From Hong Kong, joined Dec 1999, 6642 posts, RR: 55
Reply 24, posted (11 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 2823 times:

Rickb,

For ease of planning, our company refers to the times as also distances.
60mins = 434nm
120mins = 853nm
138mins = 979nm (Our A330s were until recently only 138mins)
180mins = 1272nm

These are determined using the "agreed one-engine inoperative cruise speed". They take into account Max Continuous Thrust on the remaining engine, Descent at MMO/VMO to the flight level for the one engine inoperative diversion and cruise at the flight level for the remainder of the rule time at MCT/VMO.


25 Rickb : CX flyboy, Thanks very much - thats exactly the information I wanted !! Cheers RickB
26 Post contains images Gigneil : AJ- Just how much farther east? I have shaded here both 207 and 180, would you have gone into the 207 (darker) zone? N
27 ConcordeBoy : Its possible they used their 207 minute power, but I don't believe it was necessary. ETOPS207 is allowed in the northern Pacific only. Also Gigneil, t
28 Rickb : If an ETOPS flight (or really any twin) has a problem and ends up with an engine out - the remaining engine is run at max continuous thrust for potent
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Flight Over Oceans With 4 Engines?
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...
Questions About Operations With Engines Turned Off posted Fri Jun 24 2005 02:45:12 by BABUMUSHAI
Parked Jet With Engines Spinning posted Sun Jul 11 2004 06:58:47 by Flybyguy
747-300 With 3 Engines? posted Tue Mar 9 2004 10:47:43 by Bookin
777 First Plane To Cross Oceans With Only 2 Engine posted Mon Feb 23 2004 05:19:58 by Jasonwinn
A Northwest DC9 With 9 Engines posted Sat Mar 1 2003 13:59:28 by BR715-A1-30
DC-10 With 2 Engines? posted Wed Jan 16 2002 00:15:49 by TechRep
Imagine The A318 With A321 Engines And Wings... posted Sun May 21 2006 20:54:37 by A342
Technical Question On A340 Engines & Flight posted Fri Jan 13 2006 21:46:52 by Fergulmcc
Any 767-200 With RR Engines? posted Wed Nov 23 2005 23:07:58 by Socal
Aircraft With "turning And Burning"- Engines. posted Sun Oct 30 2005 22:32:08 by AmericanB763ER

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format