Load +weight Error At Egss Today
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 849
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Matty
You are indeed correct - it is all coming back to me now. Used to do both FR and EZY myself, but a while back now. Thanks for clearing that up.
BOAC
Be afraid, be very afraid. Not too much though - I took a step backwards, turned to the dark side and hide in the flight deck these days. What could possibly go wrong?
You are indeed correct - it is all coming back to me now. Used to do both FR and EZY myself, but a while back now. Thanks for clearing that up.
BOAC
Be afraid, be very afraid. Not too much though - I took a step backwards, turned to the dark side and hide in the flight deck these days. What could possibly go wrong?
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Middlesesx
Posts: 2,075
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Slightly aside; is it not the case on the wide body a/c that the odd tonne of calculation being out does not make a huge difference. In turn by scale this can be applied to narrow bodied a/c. My rational for this is that baggage weights (nominal) that are applied to the majority of our flts and pax weights (nominal) often bear little comparison to the actuals of today and are based on a '90's matrix. Regarding load planning Boeing wide body aircraft have in most cases 100 plus plans with most airlines using no more than 10 plans as it starts to get confusing.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: San Jose
Posts: 727
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If it's that critical, just having the mobile freight moving around the cabin could have a significant effect, at least on a widebody. Ten people at the back of a 747 either using or waiting for the toilets is not uncommon at times, although that's less common on a smaller aircraft with less space and less toilets.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Fratton End
Posts: 438
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So operators therefore take the manufacturers flight envelope and restrict the front and aft limits to take into account movement of pax from the extreme ends of the arms. But you can't always take into account a person getting Kilograms and Pounds mixed up Dooh!
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Corfu & Manchester
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@ Boac,
""How Ryanair cope with their 'free-seating' I do not know, but I guess for them to be less than full is unusual.
""
Seeing you said this, I thought, I was once on a flight to Dublin with RYR, and the flight time was a bad one! Early ... early morning, hardly anyone on, but there was a large group (30 or so) congregated together, surely this didnt help the C.O.G. of the 737!
Now this was some time back, has this free seating been addressed since then?
Thanks
Mixales
""How Ryanair cope with their 'free-seating' I do not know, but I guess for them to be less than full is unusual.
""Seeing you said this, I thought, I was once on a flight to Dublin with RYR, and the flight time was a bad one! Early ... early morning, hardly anyone on, but there was a large group (30 or so) congregated together, surely this didnt help the C.O.G. of the 737!
Now this was some time back, has this free seating been addressed since then?
Thanks
Mixales
Join Date: May 2007
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What exactly happened with the Air Med? If it was loaded differently to the loading instructions sent by Central Load Control then the Dispatcher is to blame as they are responsible for ensuring the a/c is loaded as per the instructions. CLC will send a loadsheet based on their instructions unless advised otherwise. If the crew simply didn't like the way the a/c was being loaded (and with so much weight in the front who can blame them) then CLC are at fault for such a bad trim.
Either way CLC is probably a factor here. When a Servisair station goes over to CLC its experienced weight and balance trained Dispatchers are gradually replaced by (cheaper) "ramp rats" with far less knowledge of the job. Dispatchers leave because they find no longer having any control over the w&b of an aircraft erodes what (little) authority they have left. Unfortunately Servisair seems to have no respect for (or understanding of) the role of a Dispatcher.
It wouldn't be so bad if CLC actually knew what they were doing, but many of them have very little aviation experience and have just been given a computer training course and list of standard loading instructions to follow! (see the Load Controller Job thread in the Flight Ops Crewing and Dispatch Forum to see how they are recruited!) Some of these so called Load Controllers have insufficient knowledge of w&b or the a/c turnaround and loading process, and while they can get away with it on a (full!) charter flight, give them a wide bodied/containerised a/c or a scheduled flight with cargo and mail and 2 classes of pax and no standard load plan (or say, an Air Mediterranee) and they have no idea how to trim it properly. This combination of inexperienced Load Control and ramp rat will inevitably lead to situations like the Air Med, which unfortunately are becoming more common than Servisair would ever dare to admit!
LGW went to CLC in February and since then its Dispatchers (many with over 10 years experience) have repeatedly raised their concerns at the loadsheet and trim errors constantly being made by CLC. For the most part these errors have so far (thankfully) been rectified by the Dispatcher before pushback. It seems that current management puts cost cutting higher up the list of priorities than safety as our concerns are falling on deaf ears. Unless a flight is actually delayed by CLC's incompetence, no-one seems to care!
Either way CLC is probably a factor here. When a Servisair station goes over to CLC its experienced weight and balance trained Dispatchers are gradually replaced by (cheaper) "ramp rats" with far less knowledge of the job. Dispatchers leave because they find no longer having any control over the w&b of an aircraft erodes what (little) authority they have left. Unfortunately Servisair seems to have no respect for (or understanding of) the role of a Dispatcher.
It wouldn't be so bad if CLC actually knew what they were doing, but many of them have very little aviation experience and have just been given a computer training course and list of standard loading instructions to follow! (see the Load Controller Job thread in the Flight Ops Crewing and Dispatch Forum to see how they are recruited!) Some of these so called Load Controllers have insufficient knowledge of w&b or the a/c turnaround and loading process, and while they can get away with it on a (full!) charter flight, give them a wide bodied/containerised a/c or a scheduled flight with cargo and mail and 2 classes of pax and no standard load plan (or say, an Air Mediterranee) and they have no idea how to trim it properly. This combination of inexperienced Load Control and ramp rat will inevitably lead to situations like the Air Med, which unfortunately are becoming more common than Servisair would ever dare to admit!
LGW went to CLC in February and since then its Dispatchers (many with over 10 years experience) have repeatedly raised their concerns at the loadsheet and trim errors constantly being made by CLC. For the most part these errors have so far (thankfully) been rectified by the Dispatcher before pushback. It seems that current management puts cost cutting higher up the list of priorities than safety as our concerns are falling on deaf ears. Unless a flight is actually delayed by CLC's incompetence, no-one seems to care!
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If it's that critical, just having the mobile freight moving around the cabin could have a significant effect, at least on a widebody. Ten people at the back of a 747 either using or waiting for the toilets is not uncommon at times, although that's less common on a smaller aircraft with less space and less toilets.
taking off(and hopefully landing) is performed with all pax in their assigned seats.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: London
Posts: 389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Free-seating actually helps avoid trim problems rather than causing more. There are a number of key points when comparing free-seating to allocated from a trim point of view:
1. The trim envelope will be 'narrowed' as a result of a free-seating policy, therefore giving a better margin for error than an allocated seating operation.
2. Passengers will generally tend to spread themselves reasonably well through the cabin on a free-seating operation.
3. It is immediataely clear visually if there is a major imbalance of pax spread in the cabin, whereas you can't tell if pax have moved on an allocated seating flight......unless you cross-check all the seat allocations.
4. Most/many loadsheet systems do not account for the trim difference due to sex or adult/child differences. On a 2-class operation, the front-end is more likely to be a heavy Adults/males mix, with a greater proportion of children at the rear of the cabin.....but the loadsheet is very likely based on "15 in Bay A and 15 bay C" having a very similar trim affect. Single-class / free-seating helps eliminate this, as Males/Females/Children will probably have an even spread throughout the cabin.
Free-seating has it's problems, and may not be popular from a consumer perspective, but for trim purposes I believe it has a number of safety advantages and is less prone to gross error.
In trim
1. The trim envelope will be 'narrowed' as a result of a free-seating policy, therefore giving a better margin for error than an allocated seating operation.
2. Passengers will generally tend to spread themselves reasonably well through the cabin on a free-seating operation.
3. It is immediataely clear visually if there is a major imbalance of pax spread in the cabin, whereas you can't tell if pax have moved on an allocated seating flight......unless you cross-check all the seat allocations.
4. Most/many loadsheet systems do not account for the trim difference due to sex or adult/child differences. On a 2-class operation, the front-end is more likely to be a heavy Adults/males mix, with a greater proportion of children at the rear of the cabin.....but the loadsheet is very likely based on "15 in Bay A and 15 bay C" having a very similar trim affect. Single-class / free-seating helps eliminate this, as Males/Females/Children will probably have an even spread throughout the cabin.
Free-seating has it's problems, and may not be popular from a consumer perspective, but for trim purposes I believe it has a number of safety advantages and is less prone to gross error.
In trim
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: essex uk
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Any airline that lets Aviance mess with their M&B must be mad! Most flight dispatchers out their do not get enough training in this area, it's ok if done on computer but I've seen some shocking stuff when the manual M&B sheet has to be dusted off due to a computer fault.
Aviance handled Asiana cargo at EGSS (not sure if they still do) M&B training was minimal for the 747-4 cargo, yet I've seen captains just glance at load sheets and sign their life away, and this was all manual, no computers. Wide bodied cargo can get complicated when you chuck in a full load with some haz mat.
This is not aimed at all flight dispatchers, as I know some have had good training, but for Joe Bloggs just joining the dispatch department from baggage being trained by someone who just has a basic knowledge of M&B, watch out on the flight deck.
Aviance handled Asiana cargo at EGSS (not sure if they still do) M&B training was minimal for the 747-4 cargo, yet I've seen captains just glance at load sheets and sign their life away, and this was all manual, no computers. Wide bodied cargo can get complicated when you chuck in a full load with some haz mat.
This is not aimed at all flight dispatchers, as I know some have had good training, but for Joe Bloggs just joining the dispatch department from baggage being trained by someone who just has a basic knowledge of M&B, watch out on the flight deck.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: at home
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes its true Aviance have taken over the Air Med contract as from the
Servisair fiasco BUT Today what did Aviance do to Air Med.?
answer = sent a whole load of bags back from STN on a ferry flight to somewhere in France !
plane came back an hour later !just to unload the bags !
Well done Air Med for being so cooperative !
Servisair fiasco BUT Today what did Aviance do to Air Med.?
answer = sent a whole load of bags back from STN on a ferry flight to somewhere in France !
plane came back an hour later !just to unload the bags !
Well done Air Med for being so cooperative !
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When I worked for KLM there was no such thing as a dispatcher. Instead they were called Limas (short for load-controller). The Lima would be in charge of the turn-around and load planning. The loading instructions and load-sheet were prepared at the departure gate using CODECO and it worked very well. They were also responsible for all post-departure messages (LDM MVT PSM etc... )
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: platform9
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In my opinion it doesn't matter if you work manually, computerised (whatever system), CLC or not. It's all a matter of communication. If there is any (significant) difference between planned situation vss actual situation, it should be reported asap to the responsible for the final data so corrective action can be taken before departure.
I work in CLC myself, and I can assure there is a big difference in all spoke stations. Some are able to report all loading details std minus 10min, others report sometimes when a/c standing by at holding point.
I work in CLC myself, and I can assure there is a big difference in all spoke stations. Some are able to report all loading details std minus 10min, others report sometimes when a/c standing by at holding point.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 243
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Happens all the time. I am a captain working out of a major UK airport flying a fairly large passenger jet. On stand couple of weeks ago the agent arrived on the flight deck with 5 minutes to go to departure and handed me a computer loadsheet for another airframe. You just have to assume that you are the only one who has some idea of reality sometimes. This is what we are paid for I guess.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Hampshire UK
Posts: 145
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CL44-Struts
Canadair never designed a rear support strut for the 44-even for the J model it was never deemed necessary-but Cargolux managed to 'point one to the heaven' on the ground at Findel-so did Affretair-TMAC, and probably most infamous of all-Transglobe on one of the very first pax flights to Niagra Falls.
TMAC had a squadron of goats come flying out the back of a D model at 30mph....
TMAC had a squadron of goats come flying out the back of a D model at 30mph....
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Berks UK
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CLC we're not all bad!
Wow there seems to be a rather large anti CLC theme in this forum.
I am a recently recruited CLC Hub Controller, I have completed a 6 week training course plus shadowing. My licence covers me for All bulk/loose loaded narrow body aircraft as well as 747's and 777's. I will hopefully in the near future be attending a course to have 767's and containerised Airbusses added to my licence.
All of my colleagues who have been involved in the set up of CLC are from across the airline with all sorts of experience, some of us have sound experience from more than one department, if I remember correctly we had - Customer Service Experience, Flight Control, Cabin Crew, Loading, Cargo, Operations and a few other departments that I can't recall.
In my albeit limited experience there have been a number of occaisions where various stations will pay little or no attention to the loadplan. We even get Flight Deck who think they can over rule the load plan without checking the consequences.
For example - Boeing 737-800 loadplan was C1 - 20 Bags, 2 - 120 Bags and the rest in 3. Firstly the TRC called to query it - he was told quite clearly that there was nothing wrong with the trim (he seemed to think it was nose heavy - in actual fact it was trimming closer to the tail than the nose). Anyway off he went and 10 mins later called again saying the Captain isn't happy with the Loadplan and he wants 140 bags in 3 and the rest in 2. The CLC Controller moved the bags and warned the TRC that the aircraft was now trimming at the tail with only 0.8 away from limits. TRC (sounding rather worried now) tried to back track and readjust but he was told that if thats what the Capt wants then thats what he gets!! Next thing the Fuel message came through and was put into the system - BINGO the a/c was well out of trim to the extent that approx 40 bags had to be moved from 3 to 2. Of course the a/c was significantly delayed whils bags redistributed, Capt not happy and said he was going to write a report, he was told that if it was done his way then he wouldn't have gone anywhere! Funnily enough no report ever materialised - I wander if he saw the error of his ways!
Anyway, for those who are anti CLC, please don't jump to conclusions and blame CLC out right. Yes it may be a new department and yes mistakes will be made but between us we have lots of aviation experience in different fields and we are guided by some very experienced people.
I am a recently recruited CLC Hub Controller, I have completed a 6 week training course plus shadowing. My licence covers me for All bulk/loose loaded narrow body aircraft as well as 747's and 777's. I will hopefully in the near future be attending a course to have 767's and containerised Airbusses added to my licence.
All of my colleagues who have been involved in the set up of CLC are from across the airline with all sorts of experience, some of us have sound experience from more than one department, if I remember correctly we had - Customer Service Experience, Flight Control, Cabin Crew, Loading, Cargo, Operations and a few other departments that I can't recall.
In my albeit limited experience there have been a number of occaisions where various stations will pay little or no attention to the loadplan. We even get Flight Deck who think they can over rule the load plan without checking the consequences.
For example - Boeing 737-800 loadplan was C1 - 20 Bags, 2 - 120 Bags and the rest in 3. Firstly the TRC called to query it - he was told quite clearly that there was nothing wrong with the trim (he seemed to think it was nose heavy - in actual fact it was trimming closer to the tail than the nose). Anyway off he went and 10 mins later called again saying the Captain isn't happy with the Loadplan and he wants 140 bags in 3 and the rest in 2. The CLC Controller moved the bags and warned the TRC that the aircraft was now trimming at the tail with only 0.8 away from limits. TRC (sounding rather worried now) tried to back track and readjust but he was told that if thats what the Capt wants then thats what he gets!! Next thing the Fuel message came through and was put into the system - BINGO the a/c was well out of trim to the extent that approx 40 bags had to be moved from 3 to 2. Of course the a/c was significantly delayed whils bags redistributed, Capt not happy and said he was going to write a report, he was told that if it was done his way then he wouldn't have gone anywhere! Funnily enough no report ever materialised - I wander if he saw the error of his ways!
Anyway, for those who are anti CLC, please don't jump to conclusions and blame CLC out right. Yes it may be a new department and yes mistakes will be made but between us we have lots of aviation experience in different fields and we are guided by some very experienced people.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: United kingdom
Age: 65
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I worked as Dispatcher (Load Control Clerk) for Servisair at MAN a long, long time ago before computer networks and centralised anything.
We had a simple system, before we loaded the aircraft we asked the captain after giving him his passenger / baggage weights and numbers how he would like to have his bags loaded. We used a pen and paper, no huge maths involved and it all worked out fine. Everything was done there and then and everyone knew what was happening.
I left aviation a long time ago and now work in Computer Networking and often see the over application of the technology in the name of efficiency.
No doubt this new system saves money for someone some where and makes the IT guys important.
We had a simple system, before we loaded the aircraft we asked the captain after giving him his passenger / baggage weights and numbers how he would like to have his bags loaded. We used a pen and paper, no huge maths involved and it all worked out fine. Everything was done there and then and everyone knew what was happening.
I left aviation a long time ago and now work in Computer Networking and often see the over application of the technology in the name of efficiency.
No doubt this new system saves money for someone some where and makes the IT guys important.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Berks UK
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry not sure I understand!
Basic Weight and Index is passed by the TRC/TRM/Dispatcher and this should be displayed on a weight statement on board the aircraft.
Fuel Figures are passed by Crew to TRC/TRm etc and passed to CLC who enter into the system the figures passed.
Weights for bags and pax are authorised weights
Cargo and Mail is actual weight as passed
And so on and so forth, if you are implying that we make up weights in CLC then I am sorry you are mistaken.
Basic Weight and Index is passed by the TRC/TRM/Dispatcher and this should be displayed on a weight statement on board the aircraft.
Fuel Figures are passed by Crew to TRC/TRm etc and passed to CLC who enter into the system the figures passed.
Weights for bags and pax are authorised weights
Cargo and Mail is actual weight as passed
And so on and so forth, if you are implying that we make up weights in CLC then I am sorry you are mistaken.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: North of CDG
Posts: 1,043
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bluejay - you're assuming that everything gets done via CLC. Where I work (between the M6 and the M42 
), the only loadsheets produced through CLC are KLM 737s (by KLM CLC in AMS) and SAS, plus City Airline (by SAS Load Control in BKK). The rest is planned on site and produced at the gate. It works well - provided you have skilled load planners (we do).
2/ Not all airlines use standards weights for baggage. Some (and the CAA would like more) use actual bag weights (since these can turn out to be very different depending on the route).
3/ When faced with an "unusual" flight (i.e, an airline that rarely visits), I always double-check with the Flight Crew if they are happy with the planned loading before we start. If the CPT then decides to amend the Load Plan to his/her liking and second-guess us, that's fine provided he/she is willing to take the delay in case the a/c ends up out of trim.
And there is no way he/she will be able to send a report to the airline before me! The delay will be down to "CPT's request". Full stop.
Seeing it from both sides of the fence these days, I confirm that dispatch quality varies a lot between stations - hence some crews' preference to plan loading their way. Still, I believe the best a crew can do on a turnaround is to interfere as little as possible.
Cheers
), the only loadsheets produced through CLC are KLM 737s (by KLM CLC in AMS) and SAS, plus City Airline (by SAS Load Control in BKK). The rest is planned on site and produced at the gate. It works well - provided you have skilled load planners (we do).2/ Not all airlines use standards weights for baggage. Some (and the CAA would like more) use actual bag weights (since these can turn out to be very different depending on the route).
3/ When faced with an "unusual" flight (i.e, an airline that rarely visits), I always double-check with the Flight Crew if they are happy with the planned loading before we start. If the CPT then decides to amend the Load Plan to his/her liking and second-guess us, that's fine provided he/she is willing to take the delay in case the a/c ends up out of trim.
And there is no way he/she will be able to send a report to the airline before me! The delay will be down to "CPT's request". Full stop.
Seeing it from both sides of the fence these days, I confirm that dispatch quality varies a lot between stations - hence some crews' preference to plan loading their way. Still, I believe the best a crew can do on a turnaround is to interfere as little as possible.
Cheers