757s on Trans Atlantic Flights

[Singlecoil]

I believe there is a seperate set of rules from ETOPS. SCAFE or something like that. Apparently those just recently changed to the great benefits of carriers who intend to fly twin engine aircraft long distance. I was told by our VP of Marketing that a 737-800 under the old rules on the worst day would have to bump 30 pax to do SEA-HNL. Under the new rules, there is no penalty.
NW probably benefits from the same rule change.

 

[redflyer65]

Is there a difference in international alternates for long haul flights like this? I remember a NWA Captain mentioning this at one point.

 

[Spooky 2]

Part 121 Flag fuel is 10% but there is a way around this that many carriers have emplyed over the last few years where by that 10% is only applicable to the oceanic portion of the flight. I'm not aware of any new regulations that would lessen the ETOPS requirements and after all it simply takes X numer of gallons to proceed to you ETP alternates on 1 engine at 10,000'. Don't see ho you can massage that number very much and certainly HNL to anywhere on the west coast is the most severe example that you find for this scenorio.

 

[RJAA]

With Continental's B752s from Europe, NY center likes to keep everybody at 16000ft for the last hour of the flight or so followed by circles and vectors into final to EWR on a good day, which does not help the situation.

 

[PlaneDrvr]

Part 121 Flag fuel is 10% but there is a way around this that many carriers have emplyed over the last few years where by that 10% is only applicable to the oceanic portion of the flight. I'm not aware of any new regulations that would lessen the ETOPS requirements and after all it simply takes X numer of gallons to proceed to you ETP alternates on 1 engine at 10,000'. Don't see ho you can massage that number very much and certainly HNL to anywhere on the west coast is the most severe example that you find for this scenorio.

Its called a "re-release/re-dispatch" flight plan; has been in use for years and years. I remember years ago it was the only way we could get the DC-8-61 (sleds, originally built as a 'domestic' a/c), to go westbound across the pond with anything close to a decent load of pax or freight.

Example: going from LGW-JFK, required Dest. fuel, 10% of that, plus 30mins reserve; and can't carry that amount of fuel. Released/dispatched LGW-GDR, with a 're-release/re-dispatch point' just prior to GDR, usually somewhere just prior to 50/50 (50N50W). Just prior to the re-dispatch point, you compute total fuel onboard and contact dispatch; if you have 'min req. fuel' for the re-release, 're-release-Dest.' (now the dest. fuel) + 10% of dest. fuel (now 10% of the fuel req. re-release-dest.) + 30mins, then you can be 're-released/re-dispatched' to Dest. JFK.

Its just a way of playing with the #s, and reducing the 10% required Int'l fuel requirement. Instead of needing 10% of the total dest. fuel (LGW-JFK), you only need to take-off with 10% of that required for LGW to re-release point; and from the re-release point only required to have 10% of that required from 're-release point to JFK'

As I said, its been used for years and still used today. Hope that helps.

DA

P.S. The ETOPS requirements cannot be changed. 180min ETOPS means at any point along the flight, a/c must be within 180mins of a suitable ALT airport. Remember ETOPS means; "Engines Turning Or People Swimming."

 

[FNG_that's me]

you only need to take-off with 10% of that required for LGW to re-release point; and from the re-release point only required to have 10% of that required from 're-release point to JFK'

Technically, I think you need to meet the fuel requirements for LGW-GDR(not just the re-release point), then Re-release point-JFK.

 

[AA717driver]

I think the TWA -200ER's were pretty weak on range, so comparing the 57-200 to anything that TWA had is simply a poor example IMO. The latest and greatest -200's dang near go as far as the 747-400 basic. As the 767-200ER line went on the range and GW increased significantly. TWA was a launch customer on the 767-200ER, thus they got the short end of the stick.

Spooky--The TWA 767-200ER's started life as straight "200's". They were brought up to "-200ER" standard either before or shortly after delivery. They had the same range as the other 767-200ER's rolling off the assembly line at that time that went to AA, UA, DL, etc..

The REALLY long range "-200ER's" that are operated by CAL are new derivations of the -200 airframe but with larger tanks. I believe CAL got them to do IAH-NRT and EWR-NRT before the 777's were delivered or for long thin routes. It's a different animal than the early -200ER's. (And, it really should have a different designation.)TC

 

[PlaneDrvr]

Technically, I think you need to meet the fuel requirements for LGW-GDR(not just the re-release point), then Re-release point-JFK.

Correct, sorry, I did not word it correctly; what I meant to say, "10% of the fuel to the re-release airport" (correct in the example I gave LGW-GDR). The 're-release point' being just prior to the re-release airport. As I said, wrong wording on my part, and you are correct, thanks for correcting the error.

DA

 

[DC8 Flyer]

disregard.

 

[Spooky 2]

Its called a "re-release/re-dispatch" flight plan; has been in use for years and years. I remember years ago it was the only way we could get the DC-8-61 (sleds, originally built as a 'domestic' a/c), to go westbound across the pond with anything close to a decent load of pax or freight.

Example: going from LGW-JFK, required Dest. fuel, 10% of that, plus 30mins reserve; and can't carry that amount of fuel. Released/dispatched LGW-GDR, with a 're-release/re-dispatch point' just prior to GDR, usually somewhere just prior to 50/50 (50N50W). Just prior to the re-dispatch point, you compute total fuel onboard and contact dispatch; if you have 'min req. fuel' for the re-release, 're-release-Dest.' (now the dest. fuel) + 10% of dest. fuel (now 10% of the fuel req. re-release-dest.) + 30mins, then you can be 're-released/re-dispatched' to Dest. JFK.

Its just a way of playing with the #s, and reducing the 10% required Int'l fuel requirement. Instead of needing 10% of the total dest. fuel (LGW-JFK), you only need to take-off with 10% of that required for LGW to re-release point; and from the re-release point only required to have 10% of that required from 're-release point to JFK'

As I said, its been used for years and still used today. Hope that helps.

DA

P.S. The ETOPS requirements cannot be changed. 180min ETOPS means at any point along the flight, a/c must be within 180mins of a suitable ALT airport. Remember ETOPS means; "Engines Turning Or People Swimming."

Not so fast. I'm pretty familair with Part 121.631 and this is not what I'm spaeking of. It's been awhile since I have done any 121 flying so forgive me if I'm not being clear in my attempt to describe this alternative method of fuel calculation. Lets say your going from EDDF to KLAX. That's about a 11:40 flight and of those 11:40 minutes, probably 8 hours are spent in Class 11 airspace, the rest are in Class 1 and in that airspace and ATC enviroment, you do not need the 10%, which is thus subtrated from you Min Fuel Release number of Gal/Lbs. I think this authority lives in your Opspecs and not in any Part 121 In my example there is no re-release or re-dispatch involved as described in 121.631. Might not have anything to do with the subject at hand so I'm sorry I even brought it up.

BTW. Most ETOPS diversions are not becasue of engine problems.