Differences

[womanpilot73]

Hey ya'll... So I should be actually dispatching again by the end of April and had a few questions.

At my former job I was dispatching 767's and a 330 internationally. This new job will be MD11's and 747's - also international but just cargo, no pax. Just wondering what I can expect to be different, from a dispatch perspective, with 3 and 4 engine a/c, as opposed to 2 engine a/c.

I'm still so green, so anything you all can teach me is greatly appreciated! Thank you

 

[highspeed]

Not a dispatcher so ymmv, but I'd think direct crossings on the NATS vs ETOPS routes would make it slighty diff

 

[womanpilot73]

Not a dispatcher so ymmv, but I'd think direct crossings on the NATS vs ETOPS routes would make it slighty diff

I was told ETOPS won't apply... Can you expand on this?

 

[amorris311]

I was told ETOPS won't apply... Can you expand on this?

ETOPS is for two engine operations. Both the 747 and MD-11 have more than two engines.

 

[womanpilot73]

ETOPS is for two engine operations. Both the 747 and MD-11 have more than two engines.

Thanks... I actually didn't know that, but my only experience thus far was at RIA

 

[highspeed]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:NAT.png

Instead of having to remain a certian number of mins from a suitable airport on 1 engine (ETOPS), 3+ engine a/c can go straight across. Saves time/fuel/etc. If I remember the flight plans at VS well enough, the route was pretty simple because they'd file to the start of the NAT track, then the track itself which is pre-defined, then the exit point. Might make things easier in your role.

 

[womanpilot73]

So I won't be choosing ETOPS alternates... What about driftdown? Will I have to choose alternates for driftdown (ETP's)? Just not sure how this works...sorry if I'm asking stupid questions. Haha

 

[manniax]

Driftdown shouldn't be a problem if your aircraft are capable of dumping fuel, which I presume they are.

 

[amorris311]

So I won't be choosing ETOPS alternates... What about driftdown? Will I have to choose alternates for driftdown (ETP's)? Just not sure how this works...sorry if I'm asking stupid questions. Haha

Drift down is based on weight temperature and the minimum clearances enroute. If your only flying over the ocean and landing at the first airport when you approach land I wouldn't worry. If you're dispatching flights that are crossing serious mountain ranges then I would begin to look at that.

 

[womanpilot73]

Drift down is based on weight temperature and the minimum clearances enroute. If your only flying over the ocean and landing at the first airport when you approach land I wouldn't worry. If you're dispatching flights that are crossing serious mountain ranges then I would begin to look at that.

Good point, thank you...

 

[deltabobo]

womanpilot73, talk to our common friend down at National who used to DX at CKS. Yes, you put on enroute alternates for 3-4 engine aircraft, but they don't abide by the meat of ETOPS: the critical fuel scenario. Concerning driftdown, look at airway B881, the airway with some of the highest MOCAs in the world, because you're in the Himalayas. With a 767 you couldn't fly on that airway (unless you were at RIA...inside joke), but with an MD-11, 747, or even a 777, you can fly that route. The 777 was designed with flying on B881 at max gross weight, and losing an engine; it would still clear the highest obstacle.

 

[womanpilot73]

womanpilot73, talk to our common friend down at National who used to DX at CKS. Yes, you put on enroute alternates for 3-4 engine aircraft, but they don't abide by the meat of ETOPS: the critical fuel scenario. Concerning driftdown, look at airway B881, the airway with some of the highest MOCAs in the world, because you're in the Himalayas. With a 767 you couldn't fly on that airway (unless you were at RIA...inside joke), but with an MD-11, 747, or even a 777, you can fly that route. The 777 was designed with flying on B881 at max gross weight, and losing an engine; it would still clear the highest obstacle.

Will do...thanks SB ;-)

 

[No_Se]

If you're flying within the NAT times, it's pretty simple, Just keep track of fuel remaining and all enroute alternate, destination, alternate wx. If you're flying outside of the NATS times, it will be a random route, I always used to check with ATC when using random routing to make sure the route was doable at the altitude requested. Nothing worse for the crew and dx to get a completely different route than released.

 

[No_Se]

womanpilot73, talk to our common friend down at National who used to DX at CKS. Yes, you put on enroute alternates for 3-4 engine aircraft, but they don't abide by the meat of ETOPS: the critical fuel scenario. Concerning driftdown, look at airway B881, the airway with some of the highest MOCAs in the world, because you're in the Himalayas. With a 767 you couldn't fly on that airway (unless you were at RIA...inside joke), but with an MD-11, 747, or even a 777, you can fly that route. The 777 was designed with flying on B881 at max gross weight, and losing an engine; it would still clear the highest obstacle.

lol, that brings back memories. I got a very nasty call from a Captain one night about that issue. I was still inexperienced..hey I learned something but he didn't need to be such an a**. As a side note, this can also be an issue over Greenland depending on aircraft...I had one with a DC10

 

[McCrosky]

With 3/4 eng airplanes you'll need to designate enroute alternates buying 90 minutes for an adequate airport. One airline I worked for required those be at alternate mins the whole time. Current not so much. You also need to have file to reached those airports with 2 engines shut down and clear terrain. We do a drift down check in some remote area but its usually due to MD11 Mel issues.

The biggest difference I found at an all cargo carrier is you're either empty or bumping against a max weight. Especially at a supplemtal carrier. The sales department promises the moon to customers regardless of actual operational abilities. Cargo runs are also predominantly against the NATS so that something else to deal. But... No sick pax. No sky muffins to track down. It's not all bad.

 

[manniax]

No sky muffins to track down. It's not all bad.

Sky muffins?

 

[MT]

Sky muffins?

1 for an aircraft 20 - 50 seats. 1 more for every 50 seats

 

[womanpilot73]

If you're flying within the NAT times, it's pretty simple, Just keep track of fuel remaining and all enroute alternate, destination, alternate wx. If you're flying outside of the NATS times, it will be a random route, I always used to check with ATC when using random routing to make sure the route was doable at the altitude requested. Nothing worse for the crew and dx to get a completely different route than released.

I never used random routes at RIA... Seemed like a lot of times those routes just didn't make sense. If I was running against the tracks during valid times, often we'd just move them a degree north of south of said tracks. Though sometimes it was better to just build a different route altogether. But RR...nope!

 

[womanpilot73]

With 3/4 eng airplanes you'll need to designate enroute alternates buying 90 minutes for an adequate airport. One airline I worked for required those be at alternate mins the whole time. Current not so much. You also need to have file to reached those airports with 2 engines shut down and clear terrain. We do a drift down check in some remote area but its usually due to MD11 Mel issues.

The biggest difference I found at an all cargo carrier is you're either empty or bumping against a max weight. Especially at a supplemtal carrier. The sales department promises the moon to customers regardless of actual operational abilities. Cargo runs are also predominantly against the NATS so that something else to deal. But... No sick pax. No sky muffins to track down. It's not all bad.

Thanks for that insight McCrosky! I was actually wondering about the payload being maxed all the time ;-)

 

[manniax]

1 for an aircraft 20 - 50 seats. 1 more for every 50 seats

Ah ok. I prefer to call them "aisle donkeys" myself.