Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
RISCfuture

747-8 ETOPS procedures

Recommended Posts

Hello! As I'm sure we all know, the 747-8 was (one of?) the first aircraft to be certified for ETOPS-330 operations. (OK, EROPS, whatever.) I'm wondering if anyone knows typical crew procedures for ETOPS specific to the 747-8. I'm aware of all the general stuff like marking your entry and exit points, tracking ETPs and suitable airports, etc., that you would typically do same as in any other ETOPS aircraft. But, for example, some 737 ETOPS certifications require the APU to be on during the ETOPS segment. (Or maybe I'm wrong about that.) Anyone aware of similar ETOPS procedures for 747-8s?


Tim "Stretch" Morgan
Falcon BMS (72nd VFW), Digital Combat Simulator, Prepar3D v4

https://pcpartpicker.com/list/22DqFt

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, RISCfuture said:

Hello! As I'm sure we all know, the 747-8 was (one of?) the first aircraft to be certified for ETOPS-330 operations. (OK, EROPS, whatever.) I'm wondering if anyone knows typical crew procedures for ETOPS specific to the 747-8. I'm aware of all the general stuff like marking your entry and exit points, tracking ETPs and suitable airports, etc., that you would typically do same as in any other ETOPS aircraft. But, for example, some 737 ETOPS certifications require the APU to be on during the ETOPS segment. (Or maybe I'm wrong about that.) Anyone aware of similar ETOPS procedures for 747-8s?

You must be thinking of the 787.  The 747-8 doesn't do ETOPS as it's not required on aircraft with more than two engines.

Edited by thibodba57

Brian Thibodeaux | B747-400/8 First Officer, C-130 Flight Engineer, ATP, CFI

beta.gif   

My Liveries

Share this post


Link to post

I'm very much thinking of the 747-8. https://www.aviationtoday.com/2015/03/19/boeing-747-8-intercontinental-approved-for-etops/

EDIT: All four-engine aircraft built after 2015 require ETOPS approval for oceanic operations.

Edited by RISCfuture

Tim "Stretch" Morgan
Falcon BMS (72nd VFW), Digital Combat Simulator, Prepar3D v4

https://pcpartpicker.com/list/22DqFt

Share this post


Link to post
20 minutes ago, thibodba57 said:

You must be thinking of the 787.  The 747-8 doesn't do ETOPS as it's not required on aircraft with more than two engines.

🤦‍♂️


Erik Olson

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah...this one is kinda the FAA's fault...

I think ICAO, it's EROPS, but FAA kept ETOPS (changing it to ExTended OPerationS), but applied it to all flights over remote areas: 14 CFR 121.161, and 14 CFR 121 Appendix P Section II.


Kyle Rodgers

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, thibodba57 said:

You must be thinking of the 787.  The 747-8 doesn't do ETOPS as it's not required on aircraft with more than two engines.

Agree. Even though our airline has retired all 747's we never dispatched them under ETOPS Ops. However we used similar procedures but for decompression and engine failures in remote areas. 


Edward

i9-9900K 4.7GHz | Gigabyte Z390 AORUS Master | EVGA FTW3 ULTRA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti 11GB | CORSAIR H115i PRO Liquid CPU Cooler | G.SKILL TridentZ 32GB (4 x 8GB) DDR4 4000 (PC4 32000) | CORSAIR RM850x PSU | W10 Pro | ASUS 24” Monitor | Prepar3D v5 | MSFS2020

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

ETOPS (or EROPS or whatever name it's given this week) is a planning exercise, nothing more.

Once you've moved under your own power there's no such thing as an ETOPS flight, it's just a flight. From there on, irrespective of how many engines you have, where your flying or what colour your tech log is, you continually monitor appropriate diversion airfields and have a contingency plan (often discussed between the two of you) for various failures (engine failure and de-pressurisation are the obvious two). This is no different from when you're flying from London to Manchester or London to Hong Kong, whether you have 2, 3 or 4 engines or what the aircraft is.

The APU usage is just for two engine aircraft, if you loose an engine you're down to one generator so you would generally start the APU to reduce the load and reliance on said generator. On the 744 the APU won't start in flight (you still have 50% more engines than a 777 even if you loose one).

Hope this helps,

Ian Webber

Share this post


Link to post

It’s lose NOT loose. They are completely different words! 

  • Like 1

Glenn

Ryzen 3700X, X570 Pro Wifi, 32GB 3600mhz RAM, Nvidia Titan Xp "Galactic Empire", RM750x PSU, H700 case, 2x NVMe M2 SSD, 1x SATA SSD

Share this post


Link to post

I realize everything that you guys are saying, but other threads here like 

 claim that at least for the 737, you need the APU on for the entire ETOPS portion of the flight. Which tells me that, yes, there is such a thing as an "ETOPS flight" with specific in-flight ETOPS procedures.

Now, we all know that the 747 does not need an APU running in flight, but I was simply wondering if there were any other in-flight ETOPS procedures I might have missed.


Tim "Stretch" Morgan
Falcon BMS (72nd VFW), Digital Combat Simulator, Prepar3D v4

https://pcpartpicker.com/list/22DqFt

Share this post


Link to post
13 minutes ago, RISCfuture said:

I realize everything that you guys are saying, but other threads here like 

 claim that at least for the 737, you need the APU on for the entire ETOPS portion of the flight. Which tells me that, yes, there is such a thing as an "ETOPS flight" with specific in-flight ETOPS procedures.

 

 

Unless your ETOPS program is approved for APU On Demand.  In that case, the APU may remain off while in the ETOPS segment as long as that aircraft is approved to fly under APUOD for that flight.  If not, you're required to operate under the APU Continuous Run procedures. 

Edited by 559AS

Ryan Syferd (KSEA)



 

Share this post


Link to post

Some countries to dilneate the differencecare calling it EDTO Extended Diversion Time Operations.

Not to be confused with Etops which was primarily an engine based limitation EDTO limits ALL civilian passenger aircraft based off things like cargo hold fire suppression limits etc.

The time of 4 engine aircraft blasting off 6 hours from a diversion field are if not gone very soon to be gone.

Its not mch good have 8 engines if your fire suppression system in your cargo hold expires after 90 minutes.

Erops, Edto etc...similar limits are now applicable to ANY passenger carrying aircraft.


Darren Howie

Share this post


Link to post
On 9/23/2018 at 10:09 PM, GHarrall said:

It’s lose NOT loose. They are completely different words! 

I dunno Glenn.  Did you see the engine wobble animation we have in the 747 right now? 

Is a bug.. but it sure looks LOOSE to me.  🤣

  • Like 5
  • Upvote 1

Robert S. Randazzo coolcap.gif

PLEASE NOTE THAT PMDG HAS DEPARTED AVSIM

You can find us at:  http://forum.pmdg.com

Share this post


Link to post
On 9/24/2018 at 2:36 AM, iwebber said:

ETOPS (or EROPS or whatever name it's given this week) is a planning exercise, nothing more.

Once you've moved under your own power there's no such thing as an ETOPS flight, it's just a flight. From there on, irrespective of how many engines you have, where your flying or what colour your tech log is, you continually monitor appropriate diversion airfields and have a contingency plan (often discussed between the two of you) for various failures (engine failure and de-pressurisation are the obvious two). This is no different from when you're flying from London to Manchester or London to Hong Kong, whether you have 2, 3 or 4 engines or what the aircraft is.

There is one significant difference which you haven't mentioned here and it has been a major consideration ever since ETOPS operations were first introduced.  If a twin engined aircraft suffers an engine failure it is required to land at the nearest suitable airfiled, whereas this operational restriction does not normally apply to a 3 or 4 engined aircraft.  It is perhaps worth bearing in mind that when ETOPS was first introduced a 2 engined jet aircraft was not permitted to fly more than 60 minutes from the nearest suitable airfield. 

There is no doubt that the reliability of today's commercial jet aircraft has improved immensely because of ETOPS, but this reliability can be easily taken for granted until something major like an engine failure or the decompression case you mentioned happens many miles from anywhere.  I know which aircraft I would rather be flying in when this sort of failure happens - the more engines it has the better - wobbling or not!! 🙂

Edited by berts
text added

Bertie Goddard

Share this post


Link to post
14 hours ago, berts said:

If a twin engined aircraft suffers an engine failure it is required to land at the nearest suitable airfiled

Define suitable... and require is a big word.

You're right, of course, but fundamentally, if you have a failure that means you can't continue your flight to your destination safely you land at the nearest suitable airfield, irrespective of how many engines you have or what colour your tech log is.

Suitable is the word they use, it's defined for ETOPS planning purposes but once you're in flight you can go where you think is best.

As I said, ETOPS/EROPS/EDTO is just a planning exercise to prove that the flight can be completed safely within all the ETOPS/EROPS/EDTO rules that are published. Once you're under way (bar a few type specific foibles), it's just a flight...

Ian Webber

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, iwebber said:

if you have a failure that means you can't continue your flight to your destination safely you land at the nearest suitable airfield, irrespective of how many engines you have or what colour your tech log is

Not true, if you lose one of four it may well be better to continue  to destination.  There is a complex decision support system just for this and there is definitely not a certainty that you will divert.


Dan Downs KCRP

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
  • Donation Goals

    AVSIM's 2020 Fundraising Goal

    Donate to our annual general fundraising goal. This donation keeps our doors open and providing you service 24 x 7 x 365. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. We reset this goal every new year for the following year's goal.


    28%
    $7,035.00 of $25,000.00 Donate Now
×
×
  • Create New...