Goboeing From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 2662 posts, RR: 15 Reply 2, posted (9 years 6 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 2328 times:
These are two routes to get to FLL from JFK for example; both of these are flights that are going tonight and these are the flight plans. The first one, if you have a US map, goes to Robbinsville (New Jersey), then J75 to Columbia, South Carolina, to Savannah, Georgia, to Ormond Beach, Florida and then on the MRLIN arrival to Fort Lauderdale. That route stays over land for the most part if you look on the map.
Jeff G From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 431 posts, RR: 1 Reply 3, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 2271 times:
Even the second flight plan, with the AR routes, isn't really considered an "overwater" route, since it remains within 162 miles of the shoreline. Most airliners are equipped to fly these routes, since all you really need are life vests. The "overwater" routes take you further away from shore, and therefore require more cabin equipment, like life rafts and survival gear. Many overwater routes also take you out of VHF range and require an HF radio. This equipment is expensive and many domestic airliners aren't suitably equipped. An "overwater" route from JFK to FLL would use "amber" airways, such as A300 or A557, not just AR (Atlantic Route) airways, such as AR7. This also means that you'd traverse RVSM airspace, and even though domestic airlines have to be equipped for RVSM by next January, not all operators have a RVSM program currently in place.
Therefore, it's entirely appropriate for ATC to question whether the flight in question is capable of accepting such routes. The benefit of the routes themselves is that they bypass Washington Center, which regularly freaks out when storms approach, and starts shutting down airspace. The amber routes take you away from the mess and on your way. They do take a little longer to fly, but that's far better than waiting for Wash to reopen their airspace.
OPNLguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 4, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 2258 times:
>>>Even the second flight plan, with the AR routes, isn't really considered an "overwater" route, since it remains within 162 miles of the shoreline.
With all due respect, I beg to differ. You might want to check out FAR 1.1 (Definitions)...
Extended over-water operation means--
(1) With respect to aircraft other than helicopters, an operation over water at a horizontal distance of more than 50 nautical miles from the nearest shoreline; and
(2) With respect to helicopters, an operation over water at a horizontal distance of more than 50 nautical miles from the nearest shoreline and more than 50 nautical miles from an off-shore heliport structure.
Bottomline--if you're more than 50nm from the nearest shoreline, you're "over-water"....
The 162nm figure came from an old National Airlines exemption request, and I'll have to dig it up (or rather, a discussion on another forum about its origins)...
Jeff G From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 431 posts, RR: 1 Reply 6, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 2204 times:
OPNL, I'd be interested in hearing the National Airlines exemption story. I was curious to know where the 162 nm figure came from. Perhaps that exemption is relatively common to airlines' ops specs - common enough to enter the vernacular?
I didn't mean to mislead anybody. I've just never heard JFK ATC use "overwater" in reference to Atlantic Routes, only Amber airways. The Atlantic Routes are assigned on a regular basis to a variety of airlines, so I ASSumed that equipment requirements there are somewhat more lax than on the "deep water" routes further out. It sure does seem though that the Amber routes aren't used nearly as much as the AR's, even when the crap hits the fan and they're the only routes available.