OTOPS
Topic Author
Posts: 22
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 12:59 pm

Extended Toilet Operations

Thu Apr 23, 2009 3:34 pm

What are the rules concerning lavatory failures? How many per passenger have to be operational before the aircraft must divert?
Airbus-A name that manages to make aviation sound uncool.
 
2H4
Posts: 7960
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 11:11 pm

Extended Toilet Operations

Thu Apr 23, 2009 3:54 pm

The procedures governing lav failures and Extended Toilet Ops are predicated upon the departure city.

For example, on a SEA-MEX route, a flight can venture further out to sea and fly a more direct route like the one on the left of this diagram:



But due to the potency of the local cuisine, the return trip from MEX to SEA must remain in range of acceptable diversion airfields, and must therefore adhere to the route on the right of the diagram.

2H4

[Edited 2009-04-23 09:23:35]
Intentionally Left Blank
 
User avatar
KLASM83
Posts: 397
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2005 10:08 am

Extended Toilet Operations

Thu Apr 23, 2009 4:15 pm

What a nice, new way to think of ETOPS. I hear that some airlines currently at ETOPS 180 may try to get ETOPS 207, provided that they can supply PAX with enough Pepto-Bismol and Kaopectate per person. Generally it is 1.5 times the total seats on the airplane, but I'll ask my professor once I go to Air Transport today.

Quoting 2H4 (Reply 1):

Simply awesome  thumbsup 
Don't you want to hang out and waste your life with us?
 
OTOPS
Topic Author
Posts: 22
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 12:59 pm

Extended Toilet Operations

Thu Apr 23, 2009 4:27 pm



Quoting 2H4 (Reply 1):

Bwaaahahaha LOVE IT!
Airbus-A name that manages to make aviation sound uncool.
 
Viscount724
Posts: 18859
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:32 pm

Extended Toilet Operations

Thu Apr 23, 2009 10:00 pm

Quoting OTOPS (Thread starter):
What are the rules concerning lavatory failures? How many per passenger have to be operational before the aircraft must divert?

An AA 763 from ZRH to JFK diverted to YHZ last Friday due "lavatory problems". Following from Transport Canada incident summary.

AAL65, Boeing 767-300, enroute from Zurich (LSZH) to New York (KJFK), diverted to Halifax (CYHZ) due to lavatory problems. No emergency was declared and there was no other impact on operations.

[Edited 2009-04-23 15:01:22]
 
User avatar
longhauler
Posts: 4941
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:00 am

RE: Extended Toilet Operations

Fri Apr 24, 2009 12:57 pm

In the Minimum Equipment List, we have charts to aid in making the decision before departure. It is just common sense, taking into account; flight length, number of passengers, time of day, route (yes route! some ethnicities pee more than others I guess) and the location of the inop lav.

During flight, it is more or less left up to crew discretion with the aid of SOC, (System Operations Control).

Considerations are maintenance facilities ... not just at a diversion point, but at the destination. If you were flying to a remote place, where maintenance facilities were not available, then it might be better to turn back!

I have only ever made a "lav diversion" once ... flying from YVR to YYZ, and all of the lavs become inop, and nothing we could do brought them back ... we landed in YYC.

Once flying a YYZ-TPA flight, we found the lavs inop due to a frozen water system. The aircraft originated that day in YQT and overnighted on a cold winter day. We let the passengers vote .. and they voted to continue as we were only about 1:20 from landing. Of course we made the obligatory "you can do Number 1, but not Number 2 PA!"
Just because I stopped arguing, doesn't mean I think you are right. It just means I gave up!
 
PER744
Posts: 397
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2003 11:38 am

RE: Extended Toilet Operations

Sat Apr 25, 2009 5:56 am

One of the scenarios in our simulator runs for ATC training is for a diversion due to lav issues, so you can be safe in the knowledge that we practice for such situations :-P

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests