I would like to introduce a very comprehensive website on LROPS, which would be in effect since early 2003 reagrding flights over extreme areas, like the Poles.

http://europe-aviation-rulemaking.org/lrops/index.html

This website provides many advanced technical documents on ETOPS and LROPS, as well as a section 'Economics' stating the costs for diversion and the better economics of using LROPS-compliant quadjet on flights flying over extreme regions. It said the ETOPS diversion typically costs US$1 million per event, and thost for Arctic would be much higher.

It also said it is not possible to ferry a twinjet to the base to repair, so transport of engines to the diversion airport is needed. But a quadjet itself can be ferried to the base for repair.

Lastly the 'Polar survival kits' section under 'LROPS design' main topic said it is impossible to provide each passenger a polar survival kit because of its large size (the bag is 80cm long) and weight. It also said airlines must ensure all passengers to have full polar clothing for landing in the polar airports. This is again impractical, especially when the passengers are travelling between 2 warm destinations (as they would never carry polar clothings just for ETOPS flights!!) So LROPS ensures airlines do not need to divert to cold polar airports, and have more time to divert to better and warmer airports.

All these proves Boeing's claim of B777 provides best economy for long routes is not correct, and quadjets like A340 is the much better solution.