Nat Mnps.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: CEE
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nat Mnps.
Hello,
My boss planned to fly to the US.
Am I allowed to fly from LPAZ to US, flying private?
Type of a/c mid size, above 2hrs from suitable airports.
Thks for assistance.
My boss planned to fly to the US.
Am I allowed to fly from LPAZ to US, flying private?
Type of a/c mid size, above 2hrs from suitable airports.
Thks for assistance.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: I can see it from here.
Posts: 678
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Generator failure will not kill you, pressurisation will, you will run out of squirt (or oxygen). Ops manual is relevant to the reg and PDPP is an option for extended overwater ops. i.e. Europe to Bermuda. Safe flying is risk management.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: CEE
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We have a couple of O2 bottles, all MNPS/RVSM certificates, I am experienced
with above 50 crossings.
So we are not immune from a failure, and we operate privately.
Rgds
.
with above 50 crossings.
So we are not immune from a failure, and we operate privately.
Rgds
.
In which case, what exactly is your question? It seems as if you should know most of the answers with the certificates in place and 50+ crossings under your belt.
If it helps, we recently flew a CJ3 from Boston to Europe vis St.John's, Lajes and Guernsey without any hassles. MNPS/RVSM/HF equipped and certified of course.
As you're private, ETOPS rules don't apply. It would be wise to run through some 'what if' scenarios regarding depressurisation, engine shutdown and electrical failure, as previously recommended.
Don't forget to do your eAPIS 'notification of arrival'.
Are you planning LPAZ direct to somewhere in the US, or via Bermuda or Canada?
Enjoy!
If it helps, we recently flew a CJ3 from Boston to Europe vis St.John's, Lajes and Guernsey without any hassles. MNPS/RVSM/HF equipped and certified of course.
As you're private, ETOPS rules don't apply. It would be wise to run through some 'what if' scenarios regarding depressurisation, engine shutdown and electrical failure, as previously recommended.
Don't forget to do your eAPIS 'notification of arrival'.
Are you planning LPAZ direct to somewhere in the US, or via Bermuda or Canada?
Enjoy!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: CEE
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello Eckhard, you have answered to my question, the first time I will do privately.
It's not confirmed, I will try from, LPLA, to get permission to land and refuelling.
Rgds
Ps: type of a/c H25B.
It's not confirmed, I will try from, LPLA, to get permission to land and refuelling.
Rgds
Ps: type of a/c H25B.
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Worldwide
Posts: 1,468
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aviation always carries risk - just nice to know what you have on board, and what limitations there are - I don't like nasty surprises, as I am not that clever!!
In my (limited) experience most mid size biz jets may be transcontinental (even then with limitation), but are not trans oceanic, I cannot speak for the GLEX, but for sure it probably has more systems redundancy than the smaller stuff. I believe it may even have been certified for LROPS.
One of the big problems is that the manufacturer/salesman sells these machines quoting 'fuel in the tanks' range, as opposed to operationally limited range.
It all depends on you and your bosses attitude to risk.
In my (limited) experience most mid size biz jets may be transcontinental (even then with limitation), but are not trans oceanic, I cannot speak for the GLEX, but for sure it probably has more systems redundancy than the smaller stuff. I believe it may even have been certified for LROPS.
One of the big problems is that the manufacturer/salesman sells these machines quoting 'fuel in the tanks' range, as opposed to operationally limited range.
It all depends on you and your bosses attitude to risk.
In your scenario you give me total electrical failure(ok, I've lost 4 engine GEN, 1 APU Gen, 1 RAT GEN ;-) ) I'm left with battery only, about 30 mins, you mean I should always plan on crossing remaining always in a 30 min range from an airport?
Cabin fire, I got 3 fire ext. in the cabin, if is a major fire I do not think they will cope, so no flying?
Then on top of that you give me, bad weather, a difficult passenger, engine failure, oxi problem, a dumb F/O, have to hand fly the aircraft, well I guess that would be almost game over on any aircraft, small, big, business jet or airliner, you will be swimming.
True that some aircraft have more or less redundancy, but if you have to plan on days like above, that everything will go wrong, then you won't be flying much.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: CEE
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It all depends on you and your bosses attitude to risk
experience on MNPS but it was on wide bodies.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: I can see it from here.
Posts: 678
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It has to be said that a large ammount of mid sized jets cross the North Atlantic every day, it is a normal operation. Not only twins but tri engines also. As far as risk is concerned, you have that when you leave your bed in the morning, I reckon the greatest risk is the drive to work. If all the correct preparations are made there is no reason to assume disaster, just prepare for it or find another vocation in life.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Jungle or Sand!!!!!!
Posts: 153
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well that's it, I am giving up flying and going to be a truck driver, wait no to dangerous, how about a bomb disposal expert nope bit scary, hmmmmm what about a florist, nope just might nip my finger on those shears.......
Ah stuff this, going to stay in bed and tell my boss it's not safe out there.....
I blame the stupid dumb a$$, that thought all these crap rules up
Ah stuff this, going to stay in bed and tell my boss it's not safe out there.....
I blame the stupid dumb a$$, that thought all these crap rules up
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Europe
Posts: 651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with Nuname though. There's tons of aircraft crossing everyday, we just did it some weeks ago in a twin Cessna piston and it was a joyride - planned out well.
Risk obviously depends on how direct you want to go, but if your owner trusts you and doesn't mind a couple of extra hours, why not go via Iceland / Greenland?
Risk obviously depends on how direct you want to go, but if your owner trusts you and doesn't mind a couple of extra hours, why not go via Iceland / Greenland?
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Worldwide
Posts: 1,468
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aerocaman
This is what I was trying to say
Thanks NuName
This is what I was trying to say
It has to be said that a large ammount of mid sized jets cross the North Atlantic every day, it is a normal operation. Not only twins but tri engines also. As far as risk is concerned, you have that when you leave your bed in the morning, I reckon the greatest risk is the drive to work. If all the correct preparations are made there is no reason to assume disaster, just prepare for it or find another vocation in life.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: uk
Age: 75
Posts: 588
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aeroncaman
It is all very easy to adopt your safer than safe attitude but it is really just scaremongering.
EASA Ops stipulates 2 hour single engine rule which normally equates to about 620 n.m. Safe flying of the North Atlantic within the rules is easy with planning and forethought. As somebody mentioned safe flying is effective risk management but you can never make the risk zero as you seem to want to. How many people have suffered a double generator failure on a modern generation twin jet? The chances are minimal. Most generators have a service life of 1,000 hours. I think it would be imprudent to fly 2 hours from a safe landing with two generators that were either very high time or indeed brand new. That is risk management. If every one adopted your attitude then very little effective GA flying would be carried out. What one needs is an ops manual that demonstrates how it can be done with an acceptable level of risk.
Having operated Hawkers for about 25,000 hours (50,000 engine hours) we have suffered 3 premature failures of generators. 1
,000 chance per hour, If my memory of statistics and probabilities is correct this equates to 1 in 64 million of having a double generator failure in any one hour or 1 in 13 million during any 5 hours flight.
Of course add in the chances of an engine falure and a generator failure of the other and the chances get a bit worse, but come on we have to accept some risk in our carreers or we would all have chosen to be bank clerks.
It is all very easy to adopt your safer than safe attitude but it is really just scaremongering.
EASA Ops stipulates 2 hour single engine rule which normally equates to about 620 n.m. Safe flying of the North Atlantic within the rules is easy with planning and forethought. As somebody mentioned safe flying is effective risk management but you can never make the risk zero as you seem to want to. How many people have suffered a double generator failure on a modern generation twin jet? The chances are minimal. Most generators have a service life of 1,000 hours. I think it would be imprudent to fly 2 hours from a safe landing with two generators that were either very high time or indeed brand new. That is risk management. If every one adopted your attitude then very little effective GA flying would be carried out. What one needs is an ops manual that demonstrates how it can be done with an acceptable level of risk.
Having operated Hawkers for about 25,000 hours (50,000 engine hours) we have suffered 3 premature failures of generators. 1
,000 chance per hour, If my memory of statistics and probabilities is correct this equates to 1 in 64 million of having a double generator failure in any one hour or 1 in 13 million during any 5 hours flight.Of course add in the chances of an engine falure and a generator failure of the other and the chances get a bit worse, but come on we have to accept some risk in our carreers or we would all have chosen to be bank clerks.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: uk
Age: 75
Posts: 588
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do not think even you contemplate the worst case scenario. If you did you and your passengers would fly in immersion suits when ever over water to cater for the double engine failure case. No doing so is a risk.
