Re: End of the line for 747?

Date:         30 Mar 99 01:53:11 
From:         "John Weiss" <jrweiss@seanet*NOSPAM*.com>
References:   1 2
View raw article
  or MIME structure

Gerard Foley wrote in message ...
>David Bromage (dbromage@fang.omni.com.au) wrote:
>: Also, beside shear range, aren't there routes that will not be
>: practical for a twin because of etops restrictions?
>
>Boeing wants a 207 minute ETOPS for that very reason, and would like the
>current restrictions on ETOPS relaxed greatly.

As a 747-400 pilot who flies international routes, I question the wisdom of
longer ETOPS.  Though it might be a bit disturbing to lose 25% of my
available engine and electrical power and 1/8 of my hydraulic pumps, I'd be
a _lot_ more worried if I lost 50% of my available engine and electrical
power and 1/4 of my hydraulic pumps.  Why would I want to fly _longer_ over
water in that condition?

IMO, longer ETOPS is a matter of marketing, not safety priorities...

--
John R. Weiss
Seattle, WA
Remove *NOSPAM* from address for e-mail reply