3
$\begingroup$

In the MEL for the A320 it is mentioned that ELAC 1 is a NO GO if carrying out EDTO operations. Why is ELAC 1 specifically for EDTO? In that case shouldn't it be for non EDTO operations also.

This somewhat contradicts ELAC 2 being a NO GO. Could someone please clarify this with an official reference.

$\endgroup$
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ For those of us not embroiled in A320 operations: ELAC - ELevator Aileron Computer, and EDTO - Extended Diversion Time Operations $\endgroup$ – CatchAsCatchCan Aug 8 '19 at 8:40
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ EDTO is the new term for ETOPS, not A320 specific, but the name didn't catch on. $\endgroup$ – ymb1 Aug 8 '19 at 10:16
  • $\begingroup$ @ymb1 didn't mean to pertain specifically to the A320. But while conducting EDTO on the A320. $\endgroup$ – Jai Aug 10 '19 at 9:45
0
$\begingroup$

An item may be on the MEL be sure being into for a flight, day ,or other period is an acceptable risk but when giving that approval the authorities always consider the " next worst failure" which most often is the second version of the " failed "item. It was judged that the pilot workload, or reduction on safety margins , when under Erops ( I'm a traditionalist) and potentially up to 3 hours or more from a laudable airfield.

As a general eules, far fewer items are on an erops aircraft rather than an Aircraft released for "normal" service, which assumes a diversion airfield within one hour. (The last MMEL I negotiated was parts of the Airbus A400M avionics, 8 ish years ago)

| improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.