nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Where can a plane go in an emergency from America to Europe?

Wanderer2010

I have a flight to New York next month and it got me thinking, if we hit an emergency somewhere over the Atlantic or we need to land, what are the options? Are there any runways in Greenland or Iceland that can be diverted to. Im not great for long flights and im trying to reassure myself to keep calm just in worst case scenario. Its Aer Lingus by the way.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

OU812

Aer Lingus hug land on transatlantic. They go up, round by Greenland & Iceland & down the east coast of Canada.

Was on a Virgin Atlantic recently that flew right over the middle (hour shorter in the air), wasn't worried but I tent to think that if somethings going to happen, it'll happen regardless of where you are.

Jimbob1977

Iceland, Greenland, Gander (Canada), Canadian Maritime Provinces.

Airlines tend to follow an arc that keeps them close to land.

Not as easy in the Pacific.

Del2005

OU812 wrote: »

Aer Lingus hug land on transatlantic. They go up, round by Greenland & Iceland & down the east coast of Canada.

Was on a Virgin Atlantic recently that flew right over the middle (hour shorter in the air), wasn't worried but I tent to think that if somethings going to happen, it'll happen regardless of where you are.

Was Virgin a 747? Each airplane has to keep within its ETOPS range of a suitable airport. So twins have to fly closer than a quad engine.

rainbowtrout

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

I have a flight to New York next month and it got me thinking, if we hit an emergency somewhere over the Atlantic or we need to land, what are the options? Are there any runways in Greenland or Iceland that can be diverted to. Im not great for long flights and im trying to reassure myself to keep calm just in worst case scenario. Its Aer Lingus by the way.

Yes, there are airports in Iceland (Reykjavik) and Greenland (Kangerlussuaq). Have flown to Kangerlussuaq.

Flights can also turn back to Shannon. This will probably not be an issue OP.

Phileas Frog

The reason for going north towards Greenland instead of "straight across" is because of the Great Circle Distance, not because of ETOPS

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Yes, there are airports in Iceland (Reykjavik) and Greenland (Kangerlussuaq). Have flown to Kangerlussuaq.

Flights can also turn back to Shannon. This will probably not be an issue OP.

And Gander in Newfoundland

OU812

Del2005 wrote: »

Was Virgin a 747? Each airplane has to keep within its ETOPS range of a suitable airport. So twins have to fly closer than a quad engine.

Yes.

Was a little disconcerting when I thought of it but it didn't occur to anyone else n the group at the time.

basill

It is zilch to do with flying over land. We fly minimum time routes in order to maximise revenue. So long as the aircraft is ETOPS approved on the day then they will as a general rule cross the Atlantic in the published track system. On days when we do "hug" land it is likely due to it being the shortest route, keeping clear of significant weather systems or the aircraft is non etops and hence must be within an hour of a nearest airport. The West Coast flights tend to follow a more northerly route as this is closest to the great circle.

To answer the original poster. If there is an emergency requiring a diversion on the day then we are approved for 180minutes ETOPS.

Mebuntu

basill wrote: »

To answer the original poster. If there is an emergency requiring a diversion on the day then we are approved for 180minutes ETOPS.

In layman's terms that means, if you lose an engine, you are allowed to fly for 3 hours on the other one.

Cloudio9

Mebuntu wrote: »

In layman's terms that means, if you lose an engine, you are allowed to fly for 3 hours on the other one.

I bet it’d feel a lot longer than 3 hours!

robbie1876

Mebuntu wrote: »

In layman's terms that means, if you lose an engine, you are allowed to fly for 3 hours on the other one.

To elaborate slightly further for the OP, your plane is not allowed to be more than 3 hours (at one engine speed) from a suitable airport. That'll get you a good way out into the Atlantic. The onboard systems, engines, procedures and crew training are all designed to comply with this ETOPS certification.

EdgeCase

Think about it this way : 307,000 flights were handled by NATS (National Air Traffic Services) in the US between the USA and Europe in 2011 and those kinds of numbers would typical this year and how many fatal transatlantic accidents have their been on those routes? Going back to 1985 there have been 3 involving US or European airlines, one of which was a terrorist incident and the other two were freak fire incidents that wouldn't have been recoverable if you were physically at an airport.

Basically you're probably at vastly more risk in your car on the way to the airport and again on the escalator at the airport.

I'd just kick back and enjoy the view. It's an incredibly safe place to be, as counterintuitive as that may seem.

Statistically speaking, you're at a lot higher risk of being struck by lightning fatally than you are of being in an EU-US transatlantic flight.

Wanderer2010

Thanks for the replies so far, I wasn't aware of the amount of airports to be used in such situations. I have been in a few of these long term flights now but I still get nervous thinking of them. I know its illogical but I particularly think that flying at night over the Atlantic, it really feels like we are the only plane in the sky and we are totally isolated with nobody around us for hours, when surely the sky is still busy going from America to Europe overnight!

trellheim

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

Thanks for the replies so far, I wasn't aware of the amount of airports to be used in such situations. I have been in a few of these long term flights now but I still get nervous thinking of them. I know its illogical but I particularly think that flying at night over the Atlantic, it really feels like we are the only plane in the sky and we are totally isolated with nobody around us for hours, when surely the sky is still busy going from America to Europe overnight!

Have a look at the website FR24 ... here's the pond

https://www.flightradar24.com/55.45,-37.08/5

as you can see you are not alone !

Victor

Gander YQX
Kangerlussuaq SFJ
Keflavík KEF
Belfast International BFS
Glasgow GLA
Shannon SNN
Oslo OSL

There are probably other airports that can handle smaller aircraft.

You can use http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?P=OSL-JFK to create Great Circle trips.

Popeleo

I was on a flight to the US years ago that had to stop in Gander - a passenger had a heart attack on board. Big but deserted looking.

I thought it looked more like an airforce base - I looked it up and the airport does share the airfield with an airforce base.

Anyway, OP, you'll be fine. These things are planned for.

Thargor

When a plane is hugging land as described here can you look out and see Greenland, Iceland etc or are you still out at sea? Never thought about that tbh, need to plan for that on my next flight over if it is the case, Id easily do an extra couple of hours on a plane for a look at Greenland, will probably never see it otherwise.

faoiarvok

Thargor wrote: »

When a plane is hugging land as described here can you look out and see Greenland, Iceland etc or are you still out at sea? Never thought about that tbh, need to plan for that on my next flight over if it is the case, Id easily do an extra couple of hours on a plane for a look at Greenland, will probably never see it otherwise.

You won’t know the exact route to be flown ahead of time, they change day to day to account for the weather, to avoid strong headwinds slowing you down, and make use of tailwinds for a quicker flight east.

Candamir

Don’t forget Lajes (LPLA). When the track system is quite far south it can come into play.

Thargor wrote: »

When a plane is hugging land as described here can you look out and see Greenland, Iceland etc or are you still out at sea? Never thought about that tbh, need to plan for that on my next flight over if it is the case, Id easily do an extra couple of hours on a plane for a look at Greenland, will probably never see it otherwise.

Iceland is almost always covered in cloud, you might have better luck with Greenland and get some really spectacular views. Never gets boring. You’ll very rarely be over either on an east coast flight though, almost always fly over Greenland when going to the west coast.

duskyjoe

OU812 wrote: »

Aer Lingus hug land on transatlantic. They go up, round by Greenland & Iceland & down the east coast of Canada..

No they don’t hug land.......Aer Lingus is ETOPS 180mims approved. Some days going to Florida, the first bit of land fall after coasting out from Ireland will be the Florida coastline.

OP, you will be fine......chillax and enjoy the flight.

Nijmegen

I have to say, it's one thing I've never worried about on a flight going TATL. If an engine decides to disintegrate midair, as long as it doesn't roll down your window in the cabin you can sit back, relax, and get on with the journey as you're always in reach of safe harbour. People losing their heads around you are just worrying for the excitement of it. As is often said, your most dangerous part of the flight is the journey to the airport.

dfx-

duskyjoe wrote: »

No they don’t hug land.......Aer Lingus is ETOPS 180mims approved. Some days going to Florida, the first bit of land fall after coasting out from Ireland will be the Florida coastline.

OP, you will be fine......chillax and enjoy the flight.

this is the case for Europe-Caribbean flights.

Air France fly from Paris to Cancun and Havana from CDG 'straight across' and the first land after France is Cuba.

The return flight goes up the Eastern US coast.

Credit Checker Moose

Indeed. I flew LGW-HAV and the first landfall was Cuba. The return was over the east coast of the USA and Canada.

HTCOne

There are no hard and fast rules for how airlines route across the Atlantic (unless they’re non ETOPS/EROPS approved. Also particularly in the winter the Jetsstream can be blowing 250kts or more. Eastbound aircraft want to ride it, Westbound want to avoidit. If there’s a big weather system in the middle of the ocean then the tracks can be very far north, or south, or both.

Gander, Halifax, Goose Bay, Nuuk, Keflavik, Shannon, Prestwick, Lajes and Santa Maria were the traditional diversion airports and used to get money from ICAO for that reason. DUB probably gets nearlyas many diversions as SNN now. Reykjavik is a tiny airport suited only for props and biz jets.

Brennus335

OU812 wrote: »

Aer Lingus hug land on transatlantic. They go up, round by Greenland & Iceland & down the east coast of Canada.
.

Jimbob1977 wrote: »

Iceland, Greenland, Gander (Canada), Canadian Maritime Provinces.

Airlines tend to follow an arc that keeps them close to land.

Not as easy in the Pacific.

Seems to be a bit of confusion there, probably because of looking at the track on a Mercator projection flat map instead of the reality of a globe.
A straight track on a globe, will be presented as an arced track on a flat map.

Wanderer78

Is there much of a difference if a plane plummets into a lump of rock or water?

Brennus335

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Is there much of a difference if a plane plummets into a lump of rock or water?

ETOPs doesn't just apply for over water routes.
We quite often have to apply ETOPs planning for flights over Africa, Russia, and Australia due to being more than 60 mins from a suitable airfield.

We are also approved for up to 207 minute ETOPs.

The A350 is certified for up to 370 minute ETOPs.

basill

this is the case for Europe-Caribbean flights.

Air France fly from Paris to Cancun and Havana from CDG 'straight across' and the first land after France is Cuba.

The return flight goes up the Eastern US coast.

Can we all stop posting this diatribe as fact when it is fiction. As has been stated by both myself and a number of other posters the routes taken to fly across the Atlantic differ on a DAILY basis taking into account aircraft serviceability, winds, significant weather and the North Atlantic Track system amongst many other things. If you want to educate yourself on this then google North Atlantic Track System and fill your boots.

Victor

dfx- wrote: »

this is the case for Europe-Caribbean flights.

Air France fly from Paris to Cancun and Havana from CDG 'straight across' and the first land after France is Cuba.

The return flight goes up the Eastern US coast.

Even assuming a straight line, there are plenty of diversion airports along the way.
http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?P=cdg-HAV
http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?P=cdg-CUN

LXFlyer

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Is there much of a difference if a plane plummets into a lump of rock or water?

Every day hundreds of aircraft (if not more) fly across the Atlantic with no incidents.

Look at Flightradar24 and you will see the sheer scale of the number of flights.

You really are being unduly negative about this. You need to get a realistic perspective in terms of the number of aircraft flying safely. You’re not “alone” or “isolated” by any stretch of the imagination and frankly talking of aircraft “plummeting” anywhere is an overreaction.

And as posted there are numerous diversion airports available.

As I said look at Flightradar24 during the day to see all the flights heading west and in the early morning to see them all coming east.

Wanderer78

LXFlyer wrote:

You really are being unduly negative about this. You need to get a realistic perspective in terms of the number of aircraft flying safely. Youâ€™re not â€œaloneâ€ or â€œisolatedâ€ by any stretch of the imagination and frankly talking of aircraft â€œplummetingâ€ anywhere is an overreaction.

I'm just having a laugh folks, I'm aware very few flights crash, probably even less over the ocean, I certainly feel safe flying anywhere, it's an incredible achievement of mankind that we can