BA Centralised Load Control

[OA32]

Not sure if this is the right place, but here goes. I have always been led to believe that it is a legal requirement for a signed copy of a loadsheet showing the final figures be kept on the ground in case of an accident. It would appear that BA (in jersey) only receive the final figures after the a/c has pushed and pass these by radio to the crew. This obviously means there is no copy signed by the captain reflecting this kept on the ground, the voice transmission is not recorded and kept so there is no hard copy that the right figures were passed. Could someone please explain how this is approved as it seems odd that they don't just wait for a L/S with the correct figures. Also most airlines I have heard of don't do it this way even British Midland didn't when they tryed the madness of CLC.

[Rainboe]

The Captain will have signed an estimated or projected loadsheet. The take-off performance will have been worked out based on these figures with a margin for error. The crew will not proceed with the take-off until the correct figures are passed by voice radio or ACARS (and acknowledged by ACARS). As long as they are within the allowed margin of error, the previously worked out take-off performance is used, or if outside the margin, which is quite rare, the take-off performance will be recalculated.

Now, you asked a sensible question about CLC and then added your personal opinion without actually knowing anything about it! It happens to work fine. I have been using it for some 12 years with no problem (apart from the figures sometimes fail to come through on ACARS or are delayed). It allows the airline to save those vital 10 minutes+ when someone would be frantically entering a load of numbers in a computer to try and get a printed loadsheet, rush to the aeroplane and get the crew to check and sign, then close the doors and kiss them goodbye at last! This time could then be taken up by actually pushing back and getting going. You obviously won't believe this as your question was so prejudiced, but it works, and works well, and BA is by no means the only airline doing this. It satisfies all requirements regarding legality, and I believe, as a former BA pilot, is as safe as the previous system.

[OA32]

Thankyou for your reply, I do have some small knowledge of this subject as I have been a load controller for about 3 years, before that I was a dispatcher for BM in jersey whilst they attempted CLC and eventually gave up due to the delays and endless mistakes that cost them money. Admittedly I am somewhat prejudiced against this issue, but it relies on all members of the chain knowing exactly what they are talking about and the consequences of getting it wrong, especially at the smaller airfields. It also helps if the people doing the clc know what the plane looks like and what occurs in the practical world. In jersey the crew have a tendency to request push and start stating they are fully ready, then spend up to 5 mins, holding up all manner of traffic, before taxiing or at the holding point waiting for the final figures. One might suggest that at the smaller airfields they consider obtaining final figures before pushing so as not to inconvenience all the other traffic that is ready to depart.

[Human Factor]

Having used the CLC "Provisional Loadsheet" system for a significant number of years, in the VAST majority of cases you receive a message saying "Compliance with Issue x" where x is the issue number of the provisional loadsheet. The margin of error permitted is type dependent. For example, on the 777 the margin of error is +1000kg/-5000kg and +/- 2% of the MACTOW. Your performance calculations are based on this margin. If the final loadsheet, which is received via ACARS or radio, exceeds this margin ("Revisions to Issue x"), you recalculate the performance for the new figures.

In my experience, "Revisions" occur about one sector in twenty.

[Rainboe]

The fact that BM could not get CLC to work properly when many other airlines have achieved satisfactory results is not reason enough to call the system 'madness'. I think it is only viable for a large airline with a well established company communication system. Initially one tends to feel it is not 'right', but time has given everybody confidence in the system not letting them down. However, strict discipline must be applied to CLC to get those figures out in time- it is unacceptable to hold up a queue for take-off 'waiting for our figures!'. Inevitably discrepancies cause delays there rather than sitting on the gate, and I always made a point of reporting when those figures were late and what inconvenience it caused. Iron out those problems, and it works. I'm not sure even BA has 'ironed out those problems' adequately, but that is not my problem anymore!