Rules for single engine commercial flying over water ?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rules for single engine commercial flying over water ?
Hi Folks,
Just been through EUOPS etc and can't find anything to prohibit singe engine land plane commercial operations over water - is it just me or is there nothing there. Appreciate any pointers - tks
Just been through EUOPS etc and can't find anything to prohibit singe engine land plane commercial operations over water - is it just me or is there nothing there. Appreciate any pointers - tks
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the Certification regulation (Part 25?) require assumption of one engine failure at take off ( and hence V1, VR), which would make two engines the minimum for commercial operations. You may want to investigate it further, hope this helps
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Durham
Posts: 483
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NO!
A long time ago I suggested to my instructor we could hop over the Firth of Forth in Scotland. This was in a C172. Big NO NO. It was the same with high ground over 1500 feet. Maybe things have moved on? This was PPL training, maybe commercial is different with single engines?
Last edited by DERG; 10th Feb 2011 at 07:32. Reason: clarification
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: MI
Posts: 570
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just wondering -
.....can't find anything to prohibit singe engine land plane commercial operations over water.....
.....can't find anything to prohibit singe engine land plane commercial operations over water.....
I can't lay my hands on the regs at the moment, but whilst I don't think that there's a prohibition on SE PT over water (/mountains/ forest...), I think that there is a prohibition on SE PT in IFR; that'll pretty much prevent it happening with any reliability, in most of the world.
G
G
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Genghis, that's my reading of the EASA law - no night or IFR but nothing else except equipment requirements.
UK Law a bit better in that it mentions, in the event of an engine failure, that the aircraft must be able to "reach a place at which it can safely land"
EASA doesn't seem to have the UK caveat.
I'll keep digging
Cheers
UK Law a bit better in that it mentions, in the event of an engine failure, that the aircraft must be able to "reach a place at which it can safely land"
EASA doesn't seem to have the UK caveat.
I'll keep digging
Cheers
EU-OPS
1.240 - Routes and areas of operation
Subpara (a)6:
Noted separately by reference below OPS 1.525(a).
No exemption in respect of 1.240(a)6 is made under appendix 1 to 1.005(a).
1.240 - Routes and areas of operation
Subpara (a)6:
If single-engine aeroplanes are used, surfaces are available which permit a safe forced landing to be executed.
No exemption in respect of 1.240(a)6 is made under appendix 1 to 1.005(a).
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tks selfin,
"surfaces are available which permit a safe forced landing to be executed"
Had been through the above - found it an interesting difference from the UK caveat - the definition of a "safe forced landing" could be debatable as opposed to "safely land"
"surfaces are available which permit a safe forced landing to be executed"
Had been through the above - found it an interesting difference from the UK caveat - the definition of a "safe forced landing" could be debatable as opposed to "safely land"
JW,
Overlooked including OPS 1.542 in my last post.
OPS 1.542 - En-route — Single-engine aeroplanes.
Additionally two-engine aeroplanes unable to satisfy the climb requirements under appendix 1 to 1.525(b) shall be treated as single-engine aeroplanes (OPS 1.525(b)).
Overlooked including OPS 1.542 in my last post.
OPS 1.542 - En-route — Single-engine aeroplanes.
(a) An operator shall ensure that the aeroplane, in the meteorological conditions expected for the flight, and in the event of engine failure, is capable of reaching a place at which a safe forced landing can be made. For landplanes, a place on land is required, unless otherwise approved by the Authority.
(b) When showing compliance with subparagraph (a) above:
(b) When showing compliance with subparagraph (a) above:
1. the aeroplane must not be assumed to be flying, with the engine operating within the maximum continuous power conditions specified, at an altitude exceeding that at which the rate of climb equals 300 ft per minute; and
2. the assumed en-route gradient shall be the gross gradient of descent increased by a gradient of 0,5 %.
2. the assumed en-route gradient shall be the gross gradient of descent increased by a gradient of 0,5 %.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Between a rock and a hard place
Posts: 1,280
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are (at least was) a few cargo operators of C208 in Norway & Sweden. Nord-Flyg flew Stockholm-Helsinki, a fair bit over water. Out of curiosity how the regs were interpreted I asked a JAA representative about it. They responded that some NAA's approve this type of operation, while others do not.
