ETOPS ... When?

[savi]

Question from altariste:

Adequate/suitable alternate
Regarding this subject, I would like to solve one little question:

ETOPS definition call for an ETOPS SEGMENT when we are more than 60 m from any adequate aerodrome. EASY.
A s far as we fly within this threshold distance we are not flying ETOPS ¿RIGHT?
If an adequate aerodrome doesnot have anything to do with weather conditions at the airport, ¿ Could we fly within 60minutes from airports closed cause of weather and still not being consider as ETOPS?
JAR OPS 1.245 state thet " Any operations planned to fly a twin engined public transport aeroplane beyond threshold distance from an adequate aerodrome will be considered to be ETOPS"
When dispatching an ETOPS flight route should be within distance to suitable airports, not enough adequate ones. ¿WHY?
I think definition does not match real operations, because when dispatching we are looking for suitable airports and not adequates. When airbone we should remain in distance to open weather alternates, adequates are not enough.
This mess could be solved if adequates satisfies just landing weather minima and suitables planning minima.
Anyone out there can explain this, I´m sure I am missing some point. SORRY FOR THE POST LENGHT.

I cannot find answer.
Many thanks.

[Wizofoz]

Could we fly within 60minutes from airports closed cause of weather and still not being consider as ETOPS?

The answer is yes. Weather does not effect whether an aerodrome is an adequate aerodrome or not.

Remember, ETOPS is a relatively new phenomenon. Before it's invention, people flew twins all over the world without needing to have a weather-suitable airport en route, just an adequate one within 60mins. It wasn't until the invention of ETOPS with the requirement to have a SUITABLE (Adequate plus weather) airport within the ETOPS threshold that confusion crept in as to whether or not weather made a difference in the definition of an adequate airport.

I think definition does not match real operations, because when dispatching we are looking for suitable airports and not ad equates

Fell free to do so in your operation, but it is not required under any existing regulations. if you are within 60 mins of an adequate, even if it's zero-zero in fog, you are non-ETOPS.

When dispatching an ETOPS flight route should be within distance to suitable airports, not enough adequate ones. ¿WHY?

Because the greater requirements for an aerodrome to be Suitable (E.G the weather must be such that a landing is assured) makes up for any decrease in saftey because the airport is further away. This, coupled with ETOPS requirements in terms of proven shut-down rates and equipment on board, provides at least equivelent saftey to a non-ETOPS flight.

This mess could be solved if adequates satisfies just landing weather minima and suit ables planning minima.

Again, not the case under regulation. In the planning stages, an airport is suitable if, during the relevant period (earliest arrival minus an hour to latest arrival plus an hour) it is forcast to be above the ETOPS minimum (roughly best available approach minus one category). In flight it is suitable if it is above landing minimum.There is NO weather requirement for an aerodrome to qualify as an Adequate aerodrome.

Not saying it makes sense, just that those are the rules!!

It's for these and other reasons that ETOPS has proven to be statistically safer than non-ETOPS (even four engine) long range operations.

[savi]

Quote:
Could we fly within 60minutes from airports closed cause of weather and still not being consider as ETOPS?

The answer is yes. Weather does not effect whether an aerodrome is an adequate aerodrome or not.

I think definition does not match real operations, because when dispatching we are looking for suitable airports and not adequates

Fell free to do so in your operation, but it is not required under any existing regulations. if you are within 60 mins of an adequate, even if it's zero-zero in fog, you are non-ETOPS.

Are you sure? It is not possible, I think - see Annex 6.

Annex 6:

4.7 Additional requirements for extended range operations by aeroplanes with two turbine power-units (ETOPS)

4.7.1 Unless the operation has been specifically approved
by the State of the Operator, an aeroplane with two turbine
power-units shall not, except as provided in 4.7.4, be operated
on a route where the flight time at single-engine cruise speed
to an adequate en-route alternate aerodrome exceeds a threshold
time established for such operations by that State.

4.7.3 A flight to be conducted in accordance with 4.7.1
shall not be commenced unless, during the possible period of
arrival, the required en-route alternate aerodrome(s) will be
available and the available information indicates that conditions
at those aerodromes will be at or above the aerodrome
operating minima approved for the operation.


Thak you for reply.

[172_driver]

Actually, in converting JAR-OPS to EU-OPS they changed the wording to "adequate" for ETOPS flights as well. According to OPS 1.246 you just need an adequate aerodrome within your approved diversion time.

Still you've got the planning minima table for ETOPS en-route alternates in OPS 1.297. Is the whole definition of adequate vs. suitable falling apart?

[Ndicho Moja]

I am sure you will find that both are required; "Suitable" relates to weather and "adequate" relates to the physical characteristics of the runway/airport. At least at the planning stage. Once dispatched then all the rules change.