Jump to content

ETOPS certification


herve

Recommended Posts

Salut

@robder  Super, merci

The video is  is interesting for the implementation and exploitation of ETOPS data using the mcdu.

Concerning the CL650 and the ETOPS certification to summarize and if I understood correctly :
in private flight do what you want
in the USA up to 179.99999 it's cool after that it's ETOPS certified
in EU it's 120 ?
:-)

Hervé

 

Edited by herve
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did make a small error when talking about etops. In the US, up to 180 minutes is fine but don’t exceed it. Otherwise you’ll need etops certification if you are flying part 135, part 91 does not have an etops requirement. But etops is an ops spec which is granted to operators and the operators designate which aircraft will be placed on the etops program, those aircraft have special maintenance requirements when conducting etops flights among other things.

Edited by CaptCrash
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi

I didn't know the notions of part 91 and 135 (used in the USA among others).
One more thing in my brain :-)

To come back to Simbrief and the ETOPS Scenario block, I can do anything I want between 120 and 180 minutes.

It's up to me, the head honcho of my company, to define my certification... or not  :D

Thank you

Hervé

Edited by herve
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

In EASA land with a twin engined aircraft with a passenger seating configuration of 19 seats or less (CL60) you are good to go up to 120 minutes WITHOUT a CAA approval. That is sufficient for most Operations, but not all. Beyond 120 minutes you need a CAA approval on your OPS SPECS which can be hard to come by. To ,go beyond 120 you will need dispatcher training and procedures, maintenance procedures, pilot training and a monitoring of 'engine events' and oil consumption. Yet this is NOT yet a full blown ETOPS approval. Beyond 180 minutes at OEI TAS you need a specific full blown ETOPS approval. We get by with the 120 minutes on our CL650. 

 

EASA CAT. OP. MPA. 140 is the legislation here, it was ammended in 2019 by EU 2019/1387 which lifted the 100 000 lbs MTOM restriction which was penalizing for the new heavyweight jets such as the Global 7500.

This is the EASA text for up to 120 minutes OEI:

(a) Unless approved by the competent authority in accordance with Subpart F of Annex V (Part-SPA), the operator shall not operate a two-engined aeroplane over a route that contains a point further from an adequate aerodrome, under standard conditions in still air, than the appropriate distance for the given type of aeroplane among the following:
(1) for performance class A aeroplanes with a maximum operational passenger seating configuration (MOPSC) of 20 or more, the distance flown in 60 minutes at the one-engine-inoperative (OEI) cruising speed determined in accordance with point (b);
(2) for performance class A aeroplanes with an MOPSC of 19 or less, the distance flown in 120 minutes or, subject to approval by the competent authority, up to 180 minutes for turbojet aeroplanes, at the OEI cruising speed determined in accordance with point (b);
(3) for performance class B or C aeroplanes, whichever is less:
(i) the distance flown in 120 minutes at the OEI cruising speed determined in accordance with point (b);
(ii) 300 NM.
(b) The operator shall determine a speed for the calculation of the maximum distance to an adequate aerodrome for each two-engined aeroplane type or variant operated, not exceeding VMO (maximum operating speed) based upon the true airspeed that the aeroplane can maintain with one engine inoperative.
(c) The operator shall include the following data, specific to each type or variant, in the operations manual:
(1) the determined OEI cruising speed; and
(2) the determined maximum distance from an adequate aerodrome.

 

 

Edited by FYG001
Expanded
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To complete further the above, we use 358 KT TAS for our OEI on the CL650. With a 120 mins 'approval' this gives you a circle of 716NM around adequate airports. On the NAT this gives the following on a typical EGLF KTEB flight. Note that we had to manually drag the route further north than optimum to stay within the 120 mins circles of EGPK BIKF and CYYT. Would one of those have been below minimums, the flight planning would have to be more 'creative'.

 

 

358.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...