changing registration on Loadsheet....

[C.M]

In case a load sheet arrives with a wrong aircraft registration ( however for practical purposes we assume an identical aircraft ) can you think of a practical and legal issue against crossing out the registration and hand-writing the correct one ?
Note : Assume any minor difference in Basic empty mass and Basic Index have also been crossed out and corrected
All other data are assumed to be as we want because we supply this data to the dispatcher for the loadsheet preparation.
I dealt with this issue the other day , I asked for a new load sheet, It took 10 minutes for the new one to arrive and I had 6 minutes to spare before I had to push to meet my CTOT.

[john_tullamarine]

Some thoughts .. (you have identified the main concerns in your post) -

First consideration is procedural -

(a) is the swap permitted by State of Registry and local regulatory requirements as well as operator requirements ?

then the technical considerations -

(b) do the two aircraft have the same loadsheet/trimsheet specified. That is to say, the AFM/POH/W&B manual data and configuration must apply equally for one as well as the other.

(c) if (a) and (b) are OK then, providing the empty weight and CG (moment/IU) data are corrected for the hull change, all should be fine.

However, from a practical point of view, for a sensible trimsheet system, the loadsheet could be reworked for the aircraft swap in a minute or so. Is going to the trouble you propose worth the effort ? A competent tech crew member could do the work in the cockpit with little time loss.

[rog747]

if the L/S arrives in the cockpit with the incorrect a/c regn on it then any traffic officer worth his/her sort
A/ should have noticed that first
B/ get the load sheet re-done PDQ for the crew - if the Skip then elects to do a manual L/S then the T/O needs to get a copy from him for the file on shore

to LMC major changes like that is not very professional in my experience - if we had an a/c swap last minute then a new L/S was always done

[Skyjob]

May be a factor also if airline uses fleet weights which can define load sheet differences

[172_driver]

We've fleet weights and for each individual I can check if there's any change to Dry Operating Weight or Index.

To put in perspective; if 1 out of 10 of our 737's has a correction of +660 kg to DOW, but the others has 0 kg. Do you really believe that's true? Or is it just a case that most fit within the margin of fleet weights, one didn't.

I think there's bigger fish to fry out there. Such as standard weights for pax and luggage. Unlike the DOW/DOI, those discrepancies I cannot find in my manual.

Measure with a ruler, cut with an axe.

[Skyjob]

To put in perspective; if 1 out of 10 of our 737's has a correction of +660 kg to DOW, but the others has 0 kg. Do you really believe that's true? Or is it just a case that most fit within the margin of fleet weights, one didn't.
I think there's bigger fish to fry out there. Such as standard weights for pax and luggage. Unlike the DOW/DOI, those discrepancies I cannot find in my manual.
A correction to fleet weight usually may be because one airframe has some repair work or additional equipment installed or some structural items changed, be careful thinking this correction is not true for a reason.
I agree in regards to standard weights, actual bag weights would be a great starting point, as passenger weights cannot yet be given more accurately. However, an increase seems to be required as in general people are getting bigger.

[Piloto Maluco]

A new one has to be issued.

It happened to the flight I was supervising once; the pilots were not understanding why they were not receiving the FPL on the FMC... So the dispatcher had to print it and gave it to them.
Then the aircraft pushed back;
I had a look at the loadsheet and saw that it was not the correct registation; had to call to the tower to the aicraft come back to the apron. 45 mns lost, a huge cost to the company.... (fuel; pax that missed their tight connection at HUB)....

[172_driver]

A correction to fleet weight usually may be because one airframe has some repair work or additional equipment installed or some structural items changed, be careful thinking this correction is not true for a reason.
I agree in regards to standard weights, actual bag weights would be a great starting point, as passenger weights cannot yet be given more accurately. However, an increase seems to be required as in general people are getting bigger.

It's been some time since I was sharp on, then EU-OPS. I tend to remember if at the actual weighing, the individual's weight does not vary too much, within margin, from fleet weight you can stick to fleet weight? Our airframes are quite old and all patched up in different places. It would seem unlikely that 9 out of 10 are on the kg same weight, while one is 660 kg heavier. It leads me to believe that it just didn't fall within the margins to use fleet weight on that one.

In Split the other day our dispatcher gave us the weight of what they had loaded. It didn't match with our loadsheet, that had the pieces at standard weight. Apparently they use actual weights at that station. We were 400 kg heavier than our loadsheet said.

[john_tullamarine]

A few interesting comments ..

May be a factor also if airline uses fleet weights which can define load sheet differences

Of no relevance to the topic. All fleet weight does is reduce costs a bit for the operator. The operational side of things should just be pulling the declared weight/IU for the hull for the loadsheet calculations - whether the data are fleet or individual makes no difference.

if 1 out of 10 of our 737's has a correction of +660 kg to DOW, but the others has 0 kg

I do hope this is a wind up. If the individual hull variations are significant, the benefit of fleet weights is lost in the operational cost penalties. Any sensible operator would schedule multiple fleets for the purpose of fleet weights in such a situation. No one in their right mind would tolerate that sort of variation across a fleet weight mix. More importantly, fleet weight protocols will involve a maximum variation of an individual aircraft from the mean. For instance, in Oz, this is 0.5% which wouldn't permit the scenario which you describe.

I agree in regards to standard weights

All standard weights should be based on periodically revisited statistical reviews. Provided this is done, and for larger aircraft, the use of standard weights usually figures reasonably well - swings and roundabouts.

I had a look at the loadsheet and saw that it was not the correct registation

That doesn't say much for the flightcrew's procedural discipline, does it ?

if at the actual weighing, the individual's weight does not vary too much, within margin, from fleet weight you can stick to fleet weight?

There probably exist various rules for fleet weight procedures. The idea of fleet weight is to use a suitable mean data set for a group of aircraft which fit within a prescribed scatter. If, on reweigh, an aircraft finds itself outside the boundaries then either the fleet weight data gets changed (after all, that's just a paperwork exercise for the guys in the back office) or that aircraft goes into another fleet or gets addressed individually.

It would seem unlikely that 9 out of 10 are on the kg same weight,

Ten nominally identical aircraft won't be sufficiently "identical" for all to have the identical weight and CG .. they might be reasonably close, but identical would be in the realm of fairytales.

[172_driver]

I do hope this is a wind up. If the individual hull variations are significant, the benefit of fleet weights is lost in the operational cost penalties. Any sensible operator would schedule multiple fleets for the purpose of fleet weights in such a situation. No one in their right mind would tolerate that sort of variation across a fleet weight mix. More importantly, fleet weight protocols will involve a maximum variation of an individual aircraft from the mean. For instance, in Oz, this is 0.5% which wouldn't permit the scenario which you describe.

Our fleet of 737s, -600 to -800, come from a host of backgrounds.. They have/had a variety of equipment installed such as airstairs and different galleys. The people at the back office has arranged them within different fleets, but even within an existing fleet we have tables for individual differences to DOW/DOI. Most are 0/0 but I took an example of one that has +660 kg on DOW. I think it complies with the intent of the 0,5 % rule (thanks for the number), and so does our CAA it seems.

If the accuracy of the loadsheet can be verified, to the best of our knowledge, correct registration or not, I am happy to go.

I have another one for you JT that you might find interesting. Due to custom regulations (and don't ask about the rationale) on our charter destinations we ferry tax free merchandise in the cargo hold as freight. At the oustation it's handed over to our passengers and for the return magically disappears into the standard weight of pax + hand luggage. I would guess it's regularly in the order of 500 kg.

[BluSdUp]

If Your Load sheet reflects reality to the best of Your knowledge you are good to go.
I can not think of anyone serving hard time for faking a loadsheet.
The gross errors in weight and trim is on top of my list.
Murphy , Newton and Darwin takes care of those that dont.

Flying a 737 that is not particularly sensitive to either weight or balance helps.
A Beech 100 with 10 offshoreworkers with 20 kilo carry-on bags now that was a bit of a balance to say the least out of a 900 meter strip.
Then again we only had 3 of them and 2 Beech 200 so the concept of fleetweight was rather unknown.
I do recall one ambitious pilot suggesting we weigh the Pax before each trip.
He had a short meeting with the Ops Manager, Old Cpt A, and that problem was no more.

Oh , and I always used to carry a spare loadsheet and a deice form.
Must remember to pick one up.
Happy Rotation
Cpt B

[john_tullamarine]

Our fleet of 737s, -600 to -800, come from a host of backgrounds

That's fine and I presume the boffins comply with whatever rules apply in your case. For Oz, the rules are at https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2018C00475. 600kg would be a tad big for us, I fear.

Due to custom regulations

Sleight of hand and magic are the things which spring to mind ...

I would guess it's regularly in the order of 500 kg

Putting any customs considerations to one side, one hopes that the weight realities are accounted somewhere ?

I can not think of anyone serving hard time for faking a loadsheet.

I suspect that in most jurisdictions censure would be rather significant ...

Flying a 737 that is not particularly sensitive to either weight or balance helps

Although my 73 stick time is dated, I wouldn't have thought so.

He had a short meeting with the Ops Manager, Old Cpt A, and that problem was no more.

Interesting thoughts .. ?

[172_driver]

Putting any customs considerations to one side, one hopes that the weight realities are accounted somewhere ?

In a numerical sense no. But we're not oblivious to the fact that bottles of booze are still onboard, even though they're not showing on the loadsheet anymore. We rarely max out the thrust reduction leaving an arbitrary margin which, hopefully, consumes any discrepancies. The EFB neatly give us the expected performance, both runway remaining and engine out climb gradients.

[underfire]

in context of weights..and loadsheets...Southwest Airlines suddenly grounds scores of planes due to aircraft weight issues (https://www.bizjournals.com/chicago/news/2018/08/13/southwest-airlines-suddenly-grounds-scores-of.html?ana=yahoo&yptr=yahoo)

[rog747]

blimey SW have been flying 737's almost all versions since they were born - bit of c*** up

poignant ditty to this thread to wake everyone up lol

I recall Tranavaia had a 737-222 (ex UA) PH-TVH they used solely on the scheduled LGW-AMS flight that was rather old and had a few bits of metal riveted on it to ensure it stayed together and was tonnes heavier AEW/DOW than the rest of the fleet - hence they put it on a dedicated route

it was very nose heavy - and she went out of trim very easily especially if busy in business class and less pax in Y down the back - funny old thing and took getting used to.

hard to imagine a 737 Classic going out of trim but this one was a pig - I gather the -800 has to be trimmed with the pax spread around sensibly

had no problems with 737-200 to 400's nor the 757 - all were chuck it on and it flew

[underfire]

Finnair started a program and measures passenger weights (but doesnt use the data at this point) https://money.cnn.com/2017/11/03/news/finnair-airline-weighing-passengers/index.html

Samoa
https://www.cnn.com/2013/04/02/travel/samoa-air-fare-by-weight/index.html