Some ? about ACFT weights

[Franki]

Hi

I'm a Flightsimmer and I simply dont get some weight thing right. Hope som Pro's her can explain it to me.

I'm using the Boeing 767-300F a lot and now my questions:

When i look at the Boeing specifications it says that it can transport around 60 Tons of cargo. When i then look around on different websites to get some more info around weights of the 767-300F I found this:
(weight numbers are roundet up or down for easyer calc.)

Own ACFT weight : 85000 KG
Max Payload: 60000 KG

MZFW: 126000 KG

Thats my understanding problem. If i have read and understand the term ZFW right, it's ACFT own weight + Payload.

But ACFT own weight and Payload is here 145000 KG. So where to put the last 19000 KG.

Hope some can help my understand this weight thing better.

Thanks

Frank Petersen
Norway

[chiglet]

Fuel???
we aim to please, it keeps the cleaners happy

[Franki]

@ chiglet

?? What do you mean.

[EGPFlyer]

I'm sure chiglet won't mind me replying

Basic empty weight 85T + max cargo weight 60T + fuel = MTOW

[Franki]

That how to get the MTOW, that i know, but the ZFW limit what about that ??

Can anybody explain that to me whey this 19 T are missing.

[Whirley]

the 19 tonnes isnt missing i think you have incorrect figures for zfw and payload and aps weights

[chiglet]

I say again....Fuel.
Zero Fuel Weight is the weight of the aeroplane without fuel:ok:
Basic Empty Weight = a/c as it stands.
Max Take Off Weight = A Blinkin' heavy a/c
So, put pax/cargo on = Max ZERO FUEL WEIGHT
Ergo, put fuel on board plus pax/cargo plus Empty Weight= MTOW
we aim to please, it keeps the cleaners happy

[Notso Fantastic]

Franki, on your figures,
<Own ACFT weight : 85000 KG
Max Payload: 60000 KG
MZFW: 126000 KG>

The Max ZFW of 126k is the limit, therefore depending on configuration, the A/C weight may be light enough to allow up to 60k payload. With fewer seats/catering and in the lightest configuration, Boeing reckons that the max payload would be about 60k so that the limit of 126k is observed. I think what they are saying is the lightest possible ACFT weight is 66k. The fuel hasn't even entered the equation yet!

[Franki]

AHA now we are maybee comming to a good point here. So it could be the AC weight itself that is wrong acording to many websites. Thanks for that tip.

Do any one have the correct specifications for the B767-300F with GE engines and/or PW engines.
Thanks

[Notso Fantastic]

Not 'wrong', but maybe Boeing are exaggerating a bit. Cargo versions of aeroplanes have a heavier empty weight- the strengthened floor/door outweigh the seats and galleys not fitted. But imagine a private 767 with few seats, one galley, fewer toilets. It could be conceivable that the empty weight is a lot lighter and up to 60k payload could be carried. But any useful configuration would trade off payload against increased empty weight. It reminds you of range promises and how realistic they are- there is a similarity to manufacturers claims about their aeroplanes with car salesmen and investment promises!

[PhilandLinda]

Hi Frank,

My first post, so want to say Hi to all. I'm a Load Controller in Aus, so I hope my own questions may be accepted within the forum.

Your question intrigued me, particularly as I was not licensed on the 767's. However, the basics are the same for all aircraft types. Your answer has come in part from what I have read.

The ZFW is the structural limit of the aircraft, before you look at ramp fuel, taxi-out burn, BRW and LW. I feel that the term "cargo" used by Boeing refers to a broad term depending on intended usage.

Hey, you're in a Sim, just place the 19 tonne under the seat in front of you, or in the overhead locker. :)

Regards, Phil