A B767 PLT QUESTIONS THE USE AND PRACTICALITY OF RUSSIAN ARPTS AS ETOPS ALTERNATES WITHOUT TRAINING.

Narrative

ON A FLT FROM KIX TO ANC; DISPATCH ISSUED A RUSSIAN AIRFIELD AS OUR ETOPS ALTERNATE. IT IS MY OPINION THAT THIS WAS UNSAFE FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1) WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED PROPER TRAINING TO OPERATE IN RUSSIAN AIRSPACE AND ATC PROCS. OUR COMPANY FEELS THAT A VIDEO TAPE AND SOME LITERATURE IS SUFFICIENT. AS A MINIMUM; 1 DAY OF GND SCHOOL WITH A SIMULATOR WOULD BE MORE APPROPRIATE. 2) THE ACFT IS NOT EQUIPPED WITH THE APPROPRIATE ALTIMETER WITH METRIC READOUT TO PROVIDE ACCURATE READINGS. 3) RUSSIAN AIRFIELDS WITH WX AT PUBLISHED MINIMUMS FOR ALTERNATES IS UNSAFE. THE REASON FOR THIS AIRFIELD IS AS AN ETOPS ALTERNATE WHEN SOMETHING MECHANICAL OCCURS (ENG FIRE/FAILURE; ETC). I IMAGINE DIVERTING TO THESE RUSSIAN AIRFIELDS UNDER CLR WX WITH THE SUBSTANTIAL ATC DIFFERENCES AND THE UNIVERSAL LACK OF CREW EXPERIENCE IN RUSSIAN AIRSPACE WOULD MAKE A DIVERSION VERY CHALLENGING. HOWEVER; WITH WX AT PUBLISHED MINIMUMS AND WITH A MAJOR MECHANICAL FAILURE OR FIRE; LANGUAGE PROBS; AND ATC DIFFERENCES WOULD MAKE THIS WITHOUT QUESTION DANGEROUS AND UNSAFE. 4) THE ACCURACY AND RELIABILITY OF WX FORECAST AND OBSERVATIONS ARE UNKNOWN.