Flying a light jet over water

GX

Well-Known Member
I've been looking at the CJ3 quite a bit out of curiosity. Empty, is got pretty good legs (1900NM), but load it up, and it's an 1100NM jet. Theoretically, I'm looking at the prospect of flying that airplane to Hawaii with some pax, and bags, but can't make it. What's the routing for a trip like that, or a trip to a place that is really hard to reach is a light jet?

Does Part 91 have ETOPS reqs?
 
Mainland US to Hawaii is one of the longest over-water segments out there. We have to run ETOPS 180, whereas the North Atlantic can be done ETOPS 120 (or even non-ETOPS if you don't mind Greenland and Iceland). While you don't have an ETOPS requirement under Part 91, it's still not a good idea to head out into that much open water with a wet footprint.
 
In other words, pack your bags and buy a ticket?

ETOPS 180, and 120 are different in that you have to haul more fuel for one than the other?
 
In other words, pack your bags and buy a ticket?

ETOPS 180, and 120 are different in that you have to haul more fuel for one than the other?

Yes, and yes.

120 ETOPS requires you to be within 120 minutes of a suitable alternate in still air, and 180 ETOPS extends that out to 180 minutes. The fuel requirements are scenario-based; the scenario first looks at an engine failure at the equal time point(s) with a corresponding driftdown at single-engine cruise speed to the nearest alternate. It then also looks at a rapid decompression with a two-engine cruise at 10,000' to the nearest alternate. Normally, the rapid decompression is the fuel critical scenario, and shouldn't be disregarded for anyone going over large bodies of water in non-ETOPS aircraft.
 
For the scenario sake, what you're saying is that it would take an aircraft capable of flying 180 minutes, minimum, at 10,000 feet to make an alternate to make this flight safely? So, Citation X, Falcon 200, or a large cabin jet?
 
For the scenario sake, what you're saying is that it would take an aircraft capable of flying 180 minutes, minimum, at 10,000 feet to make an alternate to make this flight safely? So, Citation X, Falcon 200, or a large cabin jet?

Pretty much it, especially in the East Pacific. Nothing out there between California and Maui. You use every bit of that 180 ETOPS.
 
Pretty much it, especially in the East Pacific. Nothing out there between California and Maui. You use every bit of that 180 ETOPS.

Thanks. Great info. And there is no situation you can think of where you would ever fly a smaller jet (enough legs to get there, but not meet ETOPS requirements, Part 91) into a situation like that?

This is all scenario based, and a learning experience for me. This is NOT based on anything real.
 
Thanks. Great info. And there is no situation you can think of where you would ever fly a smaller jet (enough legs to get there, but not meet ETOPS requirements, Part 91) into a situation like that?

This is all scenario based, and a learning experience for me. This is NOT based on anything real.

Zombies - for sure zombies. Or some kind of pandemic. There are a lot of lights on the X that restrict the altitude to 410 or lower. It would suck to be fat dumb and happy, get a light and know that if you followed the emergency procedure you would run out of gas.

Sometimes when we arrive in Hawaii we see smaller aircraft on the ramp and snicker about wet footprint. I'm sure some people do it.
 
Thanks. Great info. And there is no situation you can think of where you would ever fly a smaller jet (enough legs to get there, but not meet ETOPS requirements, Part 91) into a situation like that?

This is all scenario based, and a learning experience for me. This is NOT based on anything real.

If you can't make it there on one engine look at what the people who ferry single engine planes over the atlantic do and plan accordingly.
 
Zombies - for sure zombies. Or some kind of pandemic. There are a lot of lights on the X that restrict the altitude to 410 or lower. It would suck to be fat dumb and happy, get a light and know that if you followed the emergency procedure you would run out of gas.

Sometimes when we arrive in Hawaii we see smaller aircraft on the ramp and snicker about wet footprint. I'm sure some people do it.

I was thinking about that as I typed the question. I can't imagine anything worse than planning a trip to Hawaii only to end up ditching a multi-million dollar jet in blue water and going for a swim, if everything aligns and the crash is survivable. Throw in rough seas, darkness, and hoping to God that the Coast Guard finds the right haystack, and one's life changes in an instant. But, I thought I'd ask.

And I'm sure there are those who do it. Money cannot buy brains.

I appreciate the sincere and honest responses. Based on forum temperment lately, it could have been a big love fest.

If you can't make it there on one engine look at what the people who ferry single engine planes over the atlantic do and plan accordingly.

I thought everyone wanted to wear a Gumby suit.
 
If you run out of gas at 410 and the coast gaurd doesn't meet you at the crash site, you suck at using radios.
 
If you run out of gas at 410 and the coast gaurd doesn't meet you at the crash site, you suck at using radios.

Radios don't work the majority of those flights. At least they didn't when I was criss-crossing the Pacific between Asia and Hawaii and the West Coast. SELCAL was the way of the non-radar world.
 
What I would do part 91 is plan for the worst circumstance. Engine and pressurization failure at your ETP(equal time point). If you can't make it to an airport with reserve don't do it. a cj3 isn't even close to an option. Hell even a hawker 800xp most of the time isn't.
 
Unless there is no other way, why would you want to do it? Either buy a ticket, or get something that fits the mission. This sounds like a pleasure trip. Getting wet and loosing an airplane doesn't sound "pleasurable ".
 
I think in most cases if they can afford a CJ3, they can afford something that will actually make it to Hawaii comfortably.
 
Back
Top