Differences

[No_Se]

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!

Simple moving the route outside the track structure would be the easiest but not always the most efficient, especially if you're running heavy. Agreed, RR can get weird and usually need to be edited though I haven't had a lot of issues
over the North Atlantic other the occasional track crossings. In other parts of the world, RR will never work.

 

[PlaneFan82]

My current carrier requires our ETP's for our 74's to meet C055 mins at all times. As far as driftdown, I have only had a problem crossing the Andes at really high weights coming out of Chile and Argentina. We usually just change the route, and go up the western coast of S. America. As far as RRs across the North Atlantic, it is no big deal. You just cannot fly at wrong way altitudes and must be cognizant of making sure you are not crossing an active track system.

 

[ArmchairFlyer]

lol, that brings back memories. I got a very nasty call from a Captain one night about that issue. I was still inexperienced.. As a side note, this can also be an issue over Greenland depending on aircraft...I had one with a DC10

Domestically try sending a heavy -10 out of OAK due east and see how badly it hits your payload. This is cargo carrier speaking since WP73 mentioned she was doing that. I thought you were going to Pinnacle or something? Cargo?
As mentioned ETOP's deals with twin engines. Here's some more info...
Blah Blah
Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 121, §121.161. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) may authorize ETOPS with two-engine airplanes over a route that contains a point farther than 60 minutes flying time from an adequate airport at an approved one-engine inoperative cruise speed under standard conditions in still air (adequate airport is defined in part 121, § 121.7 and Appendix 1 of this AC). The FAA may also authorize ETOPS with passenger-carrying airplanes with more than two engines over a route that contains a point farther than 180 minutes flying time from an adequate airport at an approved one-engine inoperative cruise speed under standard conditions in still air. This AC provides guidance for obtaining authorization to conduct operations under part 121 in Polar Areas as well.

NAT tracks are a good thing when they are on. Reason is there is just so much traffic during those times that it's the best way to provide separation.

Hope this helps
ACF

 

[womanpilot73]

Domestically try sending a heavy -10 out of OAK due east and see how badly it hits your payload. This is cargo carrier speaking since WP73 mentioned she was doing that. I thought you were going to Pinnacle or something? Cargo?
As mentioned ETOP's deals with twin engines. Here's some more info...
Blah Blah
Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 121, §121.161. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) may authorize ETOPS with two-engine airplanes over a route that contains a point farther than 60 minutes flying time from an adequate airport at an approved one-engine inoperative cruise speed under standard conditions in still air (adequate airport is defined in part 121, § 121.7 and Appendix 1 of this AC). The FAA may also authorize ETOPS with passenger-carrying airplanes with more than two engines over a route that contains a point farther than 180 minutes flying time from an adequate airport at an approved one-engine inoperative cruise speed under standard conditions in still air. This AC provides guidance for obtaining authorization to conduct operations under part 121 in Polar Areas as well.

NAT tracks are a good thing when they are on. Reason is there is just so much traffic during those times that it's the best way to provide separation.

Hope this helps
ACF

Thank you very much for the info...

Pinnacle? Ummm...no, there's no amount of $$ for me to go there. I did interview with Compass and got called to interview at Express Jet, but had to CX that one. Cargo it is...and I'm excited to get back to dispatching!

Appreciate the help, as always

 

[ArmchairFlyer]

Nice which cargo co, if I might inquire?

 

[F9DXER]

...and I'm excited to get back to dispatching!

She is happier to be in FL than northern IL.

 

[ArmchairFlyer]

Hmm, Arrow now Fine?

 

[womanpilot73]

Nice which cargo co, if I might inquire?

We are starting up a sister airline to Nordic Global Airlines, which is based in HEL. The start up will be US based, 121 Supplemental Cargo. The SOC will DX both airline's a/c.

 

[womanpilot73]

She is happier to be in FL than northern IL.

Indeed ;-)

 

[No_Se]

Cargo is the only way to go

 

[manniax]

Cargo is the only way to go

Not true! I'm not saying it's not a good way to go, of course, but I got to a major without ever working in cargo at all. It does seem to pay better initially than most regionals though, if you can get a job at a cargo place right out of school - I will say that.

 

[womanpilot73]

Not true! I'm not saying it's not a good way to go, of course, but I got to a major without ever working in cargo at all. It does seem to pay better initially than most regionals though, if you can get a job at a cargo place right out of school - I will say that.

I agree...this job is paying 10K more a year than my last.