Load and Trimsheet Question
 

Hi,
What weight is to be entered in RTOW column?

Is it the MTOW for aircraft or the RTOW as computed, even if RTOW value is greater than aircraft Maximum Structural Takeoff Weight.

Thanks in advance.

You have an ATPL, fly the A320 and you don't know!!!? What do you really do?

Hint: grab hold of a dictionary, look up the 'R'' word and ponder its usage in an aviation context. If that doesn't help, apply CDF.

yes yes to the brits its an easy question and also thise that have been trained under JAR rules.

The rest of the none native speakers struggle with it sometimes and when some :mad: of a TRE decides they know better than anyone else then chaos starts including the native speakers.

So you get confusion what value goes in which box. You even start wondering if what you have been doing for the last 10 years yourself is wrong.

Then you should see the fun and games which occurs with reduced thrust take-offs and which number is the limiting value. The concept that its a self imposed limit just blows some of there minds.

Can i get the same as what you got please?:E

.........you wouldn't want it:eek:

This place is reaching new levels of toxicity.
Either help a brutha out or don't, no need to pick up stones and start throwing.

Which are you going to do, then, framer - help the 'brutha' or 'throw stones'? This question should be on Professional Pilot Training (includes ground studies) - PPRuNe Forums and not on a forum for 'Professional Pilots' who learn this stuff as bread and butter.

Re-read "Is it the MTOW for aircraft or the RTOW as computed, even if RTOW value is greater than aircraft Maximum Structural Takeoff Weight." - really!

It is highly unlikely that the OP would have received an answer in the Professional Pilot Training (Wannabees) forum. The EASA syllabus covers two type of Load And Trim Sheet, neither of which has a column marked RTOM. Sadly most students learn just enough to pass the exams, so very few would be able to answer the question. Posting the question in a forum reserved for professional pilots, would therefore provide a much greater probability of success.

This thread does however pose another wider question. Is ensuring that everything is placed in exactly the right pidgeon hole really more important than helping people to learn? If the answer to that question is yes, then please ignore this post, as I have never been a pilot and at 62 with heart disease I am never likely to become one.

Firstly, Keith, the question was about RTOW not RTOM to avoid further confusion.

Are you saying that EASA does not recognise/define/acknowledge RTOW/M? That an ATPL does not need to know what it is? If so, Lord help us all. If you are not slightly puzzled by the question "Is it the MTOW for aircraft or the RTOW as computed, even if RTOW value is greater than aircraft Maximum Structural Takeoff Weight." and the apparent lack of understanding of 'Regulated/Regulatory' (take your pick) for an ATPL, operating Airbus, then I am amazed. Don't you ever get the feeling that the question gives away more than it asks?

As for putting questions in the 'right pigeon hole', Keith, I would suggest that an ATPL should not need to visit this particular 'professional pilots' hole with a question like that, especially since the term would have appeared on every load sheet he/she has seen?

And finally, as for helping people to learn - that is what the ATPL course is for?

Finally finally, why not answer it yourself here if you feel the need?

"Enthusiasts, please use the 'Spectators Balcony' forum." There I am sure someone would have happily explained aircraft performance to this ATPL.

BOAC

I have no wish to nit pick, but If you look at the link below you will find that terms such as RTOW, MTOW etc have been replaced by the terms RTOM, MTOM etc. The subject area is now called Mass And Balance, not Weight And Balance.

I made no mistake in using the term RTOM, it is your insistence on using the term RTOW that is outdated.

http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP696.pdf


I am well aware of the difference between weight and mass. I am also well aware of the fact that this difference is ignored in EASA mass and balance courses. The terms mass and weight are used interchangeably.

The fact is that a candidate does not need to know the difference between mass and weight in order to pass the exams and get the qualification.

We can argue about whether or not this is a satifactory state of affairs, but this will not change the reality faced by current ATPL instructors and students.

The fact that you are not amazed does not amaze me.


As I have stated in my previous post the EASA syllabus uses two load and trim sheets.

One is entitled the Medium Range Jet Transport 1 (MRJT1). This is an early version of the BOEING 737. The terms RTOM and RTOW do not appear anywhere on this sheet. The area used for calculating maximum allowable take-off mass simply uses the term "Maximum mass for, Zero Fuel, Take-off and Landing"

During my time as CGI at a school in Bournemouth one of our students visited a friend at the terminal and brought back a copy of a RYANAIR load and trim sheet. It was identical to that for the MRJT1 with the exception of the added RYANAIR logos. So not all real world load and trim sheets explicitly include the terms RTOM or RTOW.

The second type of sheet is entitled the Long Range Jet Transport 1 (LRJT1). This is an A330. This sheet does not include the terms RTOM or RTOW and does not include an area for calculating the maximum allowable take-off mass. In their document "Getting to grips with weight and balance" AIRBUS show how to calculate the maximum traffic load capacity. Curiously this explanation completely ignores the possibility that the take-off and landing may be performance limited. Instead it simply uses the structural limits.

I am quite sure that every instructor has often felt exasperated by the questions asked by students. But nothing useful is gained by expressing this exasperation. It is far more productive to simply give the student the correct answer together with the clearest explanation possible.


I suspect that you did your training many years ago and would be shocked at the attitude of some of the modern students. But these attitudes simply reflect the world in which we now live. Everyone wants the prizes, but very few want to work to get them. (Yes I know, I sound like a silly of fart)

HERC
To answer your question you need to look at the defintion of the term Regulated Take-Off Mass (or weight if you prefer).

REGULATED TAKE-OFF MASS
This is the lower of the Performance Limited Take-Off Mass (PLTOM)and the Structural Limited Take-Off Mass MSTOM).

So if you put the correct RTOM into the sheet you will never exceed either of these limits.

BAOC these online question banks have a lot to do with the problem.

They just bang them in and don't actually learn what the theory is behind it all.

The pilots who shall we say come from a less theoretical licensing authority pre JAR really have no clue at all about some of this stuff. Start taking about phases of flight and performance limitation in the 3rd sector and you might as well be talking Marcian never mind English or their native lingo.

C'mon BOAC, you know I said to either help or not, and suggested not throwing stones.
I chose not to help because I couldn't. While you were busy saying that he would have seen the term on every load sheet he's ever seen I was busy thinking " I've been flying 737's for 6 years and it's never appeared on one of my load sheets, manual or otherwise".
The inclination to dive straight in with sniping snarling attacks when someone tries to better themselves lowers the forums tone. It smacks of either oversized ego or undersized confidence. I was merely pointing out that it's not mandatory to hang around throwing stones, you can just walk on by you know.

Framer, I don't see BOAC as throwing stones. Harsh criticism - yes - but we shouldn't play on here and expect any less.
BOAC is probably a bit bugged - as I am - by pilots hitting these pages for a quick answer to everything, from rostering patterns at XYZ Airlines to something which should be obvious an English speaker - like the meaning of the word 'Regulated'.

When with a little research and deduction, they could come to the correct conclusion all by themselves.

If someone is a total newbie or clearly aspiring to the next level, I am always quite happy to answer such questions myself - where I am qualified to do so. But by the time someone is flying an A-320 I would expect them to know where to look for answers to stuff that will almost certainly appear in CARs, lists of definitions, operations manuals, text books, Wikipedia etc.

Thank you M E A - the poster appears to know what 'RTOW' is eg "or the RTOW as computed", but then asks "even if RTOW value is greater than aircraft Maximum Structural Takeoff Weight." which surely gives us the clue that he/she actually doesn't know, although some are unable to see this, and certainly an 'ATPL' 'flying' an A320 should know what to do when RTOW exceeds MTOW - isn't that kind of basic?

Thanks
 

Keith Williams thanks for clearing up that little confusion that a fellow colleague stirred up in my mind.

The reason I posted this question despite knowing the answer was that forum is read by very experienced professionals too and maybe someone can lead me to a reference thereof.

BOAC - I hope my words satifsfy your shock over my asking such a basic question.

Thanks any way for your comments/ criticism.

Well, it was far from clear in post 1 that you were "knowing the answer" I must admit. I'd be interested to know what 'doubts' your "fellow colleague" could have put in your mind and whether he/she was also "knowing the answer"?

Now, to tidy up on Mr Williams post - don't forget (I know you know) that RTOW is also subject to MLW restrictions, will you?