QF 10 yesterday load sheets
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: darwin australia
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
QF 10 yesterday load sheets
just arrived in oz from QF 010 747-400 Heathrow to melbourne this morning
were delayed 2 hours after doors closed due to a problem with the load sheet not matching some other supplied sheet of what was supposed to be on board. Were told that Weight info from the check in is supposed to be colated sent to singapore load sheet worked out and sent back all good. Apparently some data got mixed up somewhere and caused the error. Crew had to crank the weight and balance sheet manually and said that it can take a fair while and we were on our way. Could it be possible that other load sheets have been made up and mistakes not noticed?. Does all the carriers out of LHR use this same system from check in?
were delayed 2 hours after doors closed due to a problem with the load sheet not matching some other supplied sheet of what was supposed to be on board. Were told that Weight info from the check in is supposed to be colated sent to singapore load sheet worked out and sent back all good. Apparently some data got mixed up somewhere and caused the error. Crew had to crank the weight and balance sheet manually and said that it can take a fair while and we were on our way. Could it be possible that other load sheets have been made up and mistakes not noticed?. Does all the carriers out of LHR use this same system from check in?
Nunc est bibendum
All carriers will use some form of automated system. The checks and cross checks are pretty extensive but like all systems designed by humans, not infallible if the right set of circumstances line up. That's why the checks and balances are all there in the first place- despite everyone's best efforts, errors will occasionally be made.
I must admit that whilst I'm pretty familiar with the QF load control system, from the description you've provided I have NFI what issue it is you've described- particularly an issue that would cause reversion to a full manual load sheet.
I must admit that whilst I'm pretty familiar with the QF load control system, from the description you've provided I have NFI what issue it is you've described- particularly an issue that would cause reversion to a full manual load sheet.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: darwin australia
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Put the info up pretty much as the captain explained to us sitting up the back sweating our ring off. The only bit I left out is when he said "this is how we used to 40 years ago" unquote.
Keg,
Does QF list the locations of their DGs on the loadsheet as well as the NOTOC ? Maybe the positions on the NOTOC did not match the loadsheet, that what I thought when I read "due to a problem with the load sheet not matching some other supplied sheet".
The only other additional info would be a pax manifest and NOTOC ?
Does QF list the locations of their DGs on the loadsheet as well as the NOTOC ? Maybe the positions on the NOTOC did not match the loadsheet, that what I thought when I read "due to a problem with the load sheet not matching some other supplied sheet".
The only other additional info would be a pax manifest and NOTOC ?
Nunc est bibendum
Hmm. Still not enough info for me to decipher what the problem was. Perhaps final load sheet didn't match the same rego/ codes/ basic weights as the provisional NOTOC. That wouldn't require a manual load sheet though?!?!
swh. No, final loadsheet is normally delivered by ACARS and thus there are no DG notes on it. If we need new info we get a new NOTOC.
Can't see it being a manifest problem either. The loadsheet is the confirmed numbers on board and may differ in numbers from the manifest provided to the cabin crew at doors close minus a bit. Again though, even if it was, no manual load sheet required. Confirm numbers on board, confirm whether missing pax has bags or not, get final load sheet.
Computer system problem resulting in no accurate final load sheet being able to be delivered? That's certainly possible but that's a computer problem on the other end. I suppose it may fit into the way you've described it bizbug.
swh. No, final loadsheet is normally delivered by ACARS and thus there are no DG notes on it. If we need new info we get a new NOTOC.
Can't see it being a manifest problem either. The loadsheet is the confirmed numbers on board and may differ in numbers from the manifest provided to the cabin crew at doors close minus a bit. Again though, even if it was, no manual load sheet required. Confirm numbers on board, confirm whether missing pax has bags or not, get final load sheet.
Computer system problem resulting in no accurate final load sheet being able to be delivered? That's certainly possible but that's a computer problem on the other end. I suppose it may fit into the way you've described it bizbug.
Sprucegoose
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Hughes Point, where life is great! Was also resident on page 13, but now I'm lost in Cyberspace....
Age: 59
Posts: 3,485
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
In this situation who gets to do the manual load sheet? F/O? S/O? Or does the old fella get to do it himself?
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In Frozen Chunks (Cloud Cuckoo Land)
Age: 17
Posts: 1,521
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the specialists (or in this case overseas outsourced labour) can't figure it out, I would be wondering why the crew would do it manually.
(its the same if we have a diversion, we are meant to do it manually "cause its to hard" for the specialist load controllers to do.....personally whilst we do have a step by step guide, and it isnt hard, it is time consuming for crew who havent seen or done one since initial endorsement..... why take the added liability. Everyone else in the company certainly isnt.)
(its the same if we have a diversion, we are meant to do it manually "cause its to hard" for the specialist load controllers to do.....personally whilst we do have a step by step guide, and it isnt hard, it is time consuming for crew who havent seen or done one since initial endorsement..... why take the added liability. Everyone else in the company certainly isnt.)
