Re: Fracturing the Pacific

Date:         19 Aug 97 04:14:07 
From:         fidevos@eduserv1.rug.ac.be (Filip De Vos)
Organization: University of Ghent, Belgium
References:   1 2 3 4 5
Followups:    1 2
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

Karl Swartz (kls@ohare.Chicago.COM) wrote:

: Without considering strong winds in the far north, it looks to me as
: if ORD-NRT, ORD-HKG, and JFK-NRT, flown with great circle routes, are
: all doable with 180 minutes ETOPS with at least as many alternates as
: are available when flying the North Atlantic under 120 minute rules.

: Deeper routes pose a greater challenge.  Barrow, Alaska (BRW) is well-
: positioned, but the longest runway is only 6,500' long.  Weather is
                                             ^^^^^^
Considering the benefits of twins, would investing in a bit of concrete
not be advantagious by the airlines with large Asia-America traffic?

(I had the same thoughts concerning some Atlantic diversion sites in
Greenland earlier. To my knowledge no Greenland sites were expanded to
allow acces to bigger planes like 767s)

: likely a problem, though the presence of ILS helps.  Assuming BRW is a
: suitable alternate, JFK-HKG is well within 180 minute rules using FAI,
: BRW, UHMM, and SEL as alternates.  Dropping BRW requires a more
: significant diversion, but might not be untenable.

However, considering the precedent, the problem might be solved by a
further extension of ETOPS rules.

--
Filip De Vos                    I fart in the general direction of
                                anthropic principles... :-)
FilipPC.DeVos@rug.ac.be         --   Michael L. Siemon   --