Funny, I don't remember reading anything in the document in question that removed a Captain's prerogative to descend to take advantage of more favourable winds.

In fact, the exact opposite was mentioned. Management don't get everything right all the time but fair's fair.

Mr Buzzy.

Sorry I havent been around to reply but one must work for a living.

Now lets get one thing straight here son.
When a very very senior Check and Training Captain (that could possibly decide the degree of competence of your friend) says blatantly that both you and your mate is incorrect, who am I to question his professionalism?

No Mr Buzzy, as a professional aviator I will not enter into diatribe and petty arguments when you clearly have neither experience nor little knowledge on the subject at hand.

It is also clear that your mate has not amended his manuals, especially when you quoted inacurrate manual references from an unamended manual.

Just stick to listening to your scanner and playing Flight Sim 2004 Mr Buzzy.
Who knows pal, you just may actually learn something from those twits that did the programming!

No apology is required or will be forthcoming Mr Buzzy.

Beer Can Bozo!
I have now seen the manual with my own eyes!

You are wrong wrong wrong!!!

Admit it and you will be one step closer to not being an arrogant ar*ehole!

Like I said and have said all along.

Ít is 250 below 5000' with the exception of class G where it is 210 below 5000'

Vol A1 Chapter 8 pages 189 and 196 effective the 13th of May 2005!

You and your mate need to check your data by the sounds! From what I have seen you are wrong and are belting into my training area at 250 knots when you should be 210!

Go on say it! Apologize f&*kwit, its the first step for you!

bbbbbbbbbbbzzzzzzzzzzzzzbbbbbbbbzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Mr Buzzy.

Sounds like some sage words from BCD here.
Carry on like a juvenile brat and thats how people will treat you.

And just where is this precious training area Mr Buzzy?
You dont even adequately cover your location in your profile so dont expect to be taken seriously by anyone when you use masked expletives.

"sage words" now what the hell does that mean? Get over yourself and speak English!

bbbbbbbbbzzzzzzzz..sage!..bzzzzzzbbbbzzzzzzzzzzz

Messiah

Your words of wosdom seem not to have influenced the Australian Airlines guy this morning telling the POCO that 300kg more fuel than requested had been loaded, and the as they were now 300 kg over MBRW, they would be late departing, as opposed to off blocks, while they burned the excess fuel before releasing the brakes.

Sound management I thought.....

Messiah, not sure what you mean by totaliser.... I have to add the value on the three gauges visible to me to work out how much fuel is on board.

But, to answer your question, when accepting the load sheet, if it says I am at or below MBRW, I sign and go.

As the LDP will not allow out of limits sheets, one should know at the time the fuel load is checked to be within the required 3%. if too much fuel has been loaded.

If too much fuel, liaise with the POCO and agree to either off load pax or baggage or freight, or burn the excess before take-off. This of course assumes that the over fuelling doesn't put one above MRW.

As for checking fuel amount on the take-off roll ... get real.

:{ I was always to slow to look at all em gauges at once.
The bloody thing seems to spring from Toga to 80kts check and steer the bloody thing down the runway .

Geez Messiah, are you STILL flogging that well and truly dead horse. You still don't get the concept of MBRW do you!

To answer your question. I go. Why? Two reasons. 1. I wouldn't be looking at the totaliser anyway as the engine instruments and the performance are more important to me than the fact that the fuel sloshing towards the back of the tank will have registered an increase of a couple of hundred kg. 2. I was under the MBRW weight when I released the brakes to begin the take off roll. The totaliser isn't as accurate when under acceleration which is what we are doing when passing through 40-80 knots on the take off roll.

When I released the brakes at the start of the take off roll (hence the term max brakes release weight) if I was indicating under that weight I'm legal. If I was 100kg over, I'm illegal.

Get it yet? It really isn't that hard!! Who gives a stuff what the totaliser says at 40, 80, 150 knots or at any other stage it is under significant acceleration! It's MBRW that matters!

A wise mentor once told me that sometimes it's better to just shut up than continue to dig the hole for yourself. Trust me, stop digging.

FO : STOP !

(Sudden braking , reversers)


CAPT: WTF?


FO: I swear i saw the fuel gauge move.

:hmm:

Mr buzz off and beer can up my arse;

MY very good mate who is a very very very junior check and tripping second captain whose place I was just at has the REAL manuals and I would like to refer you to page 968 38259487, paragraph 34257 which states that

"....those associates of flight crew who are obsessive and anal over their interpretations of other companies FCOMs really do give the impression to others reading that they are exquisitely anally retentive in their life pursuits and would make exceptionally boring, uninteresting and useless cockpit companions"

Yes, these blokes certainly don't need to use condoms for birth control.

What the hell do these "mates" you are quoting from think of such useless and pointless my manual quoting is better and more accurate than yours?


bbbbbbbbbbbb but but but I really do bbbbbbbbbbb buzzzzzzz shshshshshsh!!!! like a moron.
:yuk:

No prizes for second IBEX.

bbbbbbzzzzzzzzzz...f*&koff...bbbzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Isn't MBRW and MTOW the same thing? My aeroplane only has MTW and MTOW anyhow.

It appears the only reason given for this ridiculous practice is to cover your ar$e in the event you stuff up. That seems to be a very sad way to operate an aeroplane in fear for your job. If you were to do an RTO why would you end up in the bushes off the end unless you stuffed it up big time anyway thru your own incompetence? If that happened you have a lot more to worry about than whether the fuel gauge read 200kg more fuel or not.

It does not make any operational sense whatsoever and I would be embarressed to tell pax you are just WASTING fuel before you go and then stopping for fuel on the way because you can't make it non-stop as planned.

You tossers!

Like I said Messiah, PLEASE go ahead and display that attitude next time you have the CAA on board, or next time you have an interview with a decent airline....

It will mean that much less competition for the rest of us...

Messiah

You are the absolute laughing stock of this board. Clearly, you are a senior check and training captain on MS flight sim 2000, and the instruction book doesn't quite explain the concept of MBRW. You have dug yourself into a monumental hole, and now your posts are just becoming plain amusing. Even a 152 pilot could comprehend this very simple topic! I have pity on you, Messiah.

He's not 'THE' Messiah, he's just a very naughty boy! :D :}

This whole forum is the laughing stock and is only viewed for entertainment value.

The Triple 7 has no MBRW only MTW and MTOW. Cannot remember if the 152 has sorry.

I found out about this wierd fuel burning practice from a KA pilot over a beer, and can tell you that the blokes I have spoken of this from EK, CX and KA all think I'm joking.

So yes WIZ I'll keep displaying this attitude and maybe if you can see past all the red tape one day you'll get a job with a decent airline too.

Got one thanks awfully

lol classic keg

To the messiah, you are so wrong. Trying to convince people you are right is like trying to convince people that Michael Schumacher is not actually the greatest driver of all times.

( I know some may argue he has not had the competition of other notable drivers I would say the truth is different. I believe it has not been the case that the competition he has faced has been bad but the fact that his brillinace makes the competition look very ordinary indeed. One only has to look at the many times when against all adversity he has triumphed.)

Also I take strong exception to the names you are using to refer to your fellow pilots. Come join Qantas (not that they'd have you) and we'll teach you to respect properly your fellow pilots and in particular your superiors. We'll teach you how to refer to your superiors as 'Capt' or 'Sir', which is the least they deserve after years of sterling service (You, safely assuming you are not a captain, probably refer to your captain by his christian name such is the disrespectful attitude you have displayed in this forum). No doubt taking into account your indifferent attitude neither do you even try to make such gestures as carry their bags after a flight when they have through their operation been enriching you with their knowledge and skill. NO RESPECT that's your problem. I think you should apologise immediately now and admit you are wrong.