Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Misc. Forums > Spectators Balcony (Spotters Corner)
Reload this Page >

LH A321 overweight takeoff @ DUB

Wikiposts
Search
Spectators Balcony (Spotters Corner) If you're not a professional pilot but want to discuss issues about the job, this is the best place to loiter. You won't be moved on by 'security' and there'll be plenty of experts to answer any questions.

LH A321 overweight takeoff @ DUB

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 5th Sep 2009, 09:11
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: formally Alamo battleground, now the crocodile with palm trees!
Posts: 960
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Exclamation LH A321 overweight takeoff @ DUB

Found this article here (in German). To summarise:

* Ground personnel used incorrect baggage weights for about 80 pax. 14 kgs instead of 23 kgs (assuming 2 pieces/pax).
* Pilots needed two attempts to raise the nose for the airplane to become airborne, plane was overweight.
* Incident was not reported to the German LBA (Civil Aviation Authority) because no "operative parameters" had been exceeded.

The rest is just typical blablabla. Am just stunned about the last headword...

7 7 7 7
Squawk7777 is offline  
Old 5th Sep 2009, 09:43
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: on the golf course (Covid permitting)
Posts: 2,131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Doesn't mean that it was overweight - highly unlikely on a flight from DUB to Germany in any case.

Not playing it down in any way, but it would appear to be a case of an incorrect loadsheet and presumably the wrong elevator trim being set, resulting in a nose heavy aircraft requiring a bigger pull to get it airborne.
TopBunk is offline  
Old 5th Sep 2009, 11:30
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: A few degrees South
Posts: 809
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
A 700 kg loadsheet error on a more then a hundred times max take off weight, you really think they would struggle in to the air? You really think they noticed?
latetonite is offline  
Old 5th Sep 2009, 14:43
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: right here
Posts: 342
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thumbs down

looks like someone gave an internal incident report to the press..... more like a non-event.
FCS Explorer is offline  
Old 5th Sep 2009, 15:13
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 2,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Are we missing something here?

On a intra European scheduled flight why would each passenger be checking in 2 hold loaded bags of 14kg each? Many business passengers would only have carry on baggage. Even if there was an error of some 700 kilos it would make very little difference to the practical speeds. I am not familiar with the A321, but on a 757 that sort of error would amount to around 1 knot to the various reference speeds! In any event standard weights are normally used for baggage.

From DUB to anywhere in Germany you are talking about a 2 hour flight with 80 passengers. It is difficult to understand how a significant and supposedly newsworthy error could result from any of the baseline limits being exceeded?
In fact I see from your translation that none of them were.

So why would no report be made if there was a serious incident? Two attempts made to raise the nose, eh? If no report was made, who flagged the supposed incident?
Bealzebub is offline  
Old 5th Sep 2009, 18:19
  #6 (permalink)  
5LY
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: canada
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The check gross weight message is triggered when the 320 weighs itself after takeoff and finds that it is over 5 tonnes (11000 lbs.) heavier than was entered in the FMC before takeoff.

I've seen it more than once and aircraft handled perfectly normally. All of this to illustrate how silly this whole thread is.
5LY is offline  
Old 5th Sep 2009, 18:33
  #7 (permalink)  
Resident insomniac
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: N54 58 34 W02 01 21
Age: 79
Posts: 1,873
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Bealzebub
On a intra European scheduled flight why would each passenger be checking in 2 hold loaded bags of 14kg each? Many business passengers would only have carry on baggage.
The text states that there were 80 businesspeople bound for Lagos, each with two bags @ 23kg.

I recall an incident (a good few years ago) when an aircraft had 'difficulty' taking off. It was discovered that the passengers were predominantly coin-dealers on their way to a trade fair and their baggage (including carry-on) was stuffed with coins . . .

Lufthansa-Frühmaschine
How does one translate 'early-machine'?
G-CPTN is offline  
Old 5th Sep 2009, 18:47
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: on the rock
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
"Lufthansa-Fruehmaschine" can't be translated one to one. It just means that it was the first "LH morning flight" to FRA.
sunny11410 is offline  
Old 5th Sep 2009, 19:01
  #9 (permalink)  
Resident insomniac
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: N54 58 34 W02 01 21
Age: 79
Posts: 1,873
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Thanks - that's how I initially translated it - then I thought it might be a typo - then I wondered if it had another meaning. It's the way Germans capitalise nouns yet leave 'Nigerian' as lower case . . .
G-CPTN is offline  
Old 5th Sep 2009, 20:25
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
...'Nigerian' as lower case
And, why not?
411A is offline  
Old 5th Sep 2009, 21:01
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Manchester
Age: 45
Posts: 615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Can someone please change the title of this thread as there is no way on this planet that the aircraft was "overweight" in the sense of exceeding MAUW/MZFW.

And as for the few hundred kilo error, if it were that, I can imagine V speeds increasing by a couple of knots, and if the Pax were randomly distributed across the cabin, then no trim issues either.

A complete non-event.
Ex Cargo Clown is offline  
Old 5th Sep 2009, 21:13
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: Ex-pat Aussie in the UK
Posts: 5,803
Received 123 Likes on 60 Posts
It's typical to reduce the max take-off weight on paper voluntarily as air service charges are paid on fleet average weight. They may mean that this "paper" MTOW was exceeded, however the MTOW the aircraft is capable of wasn't.
Checkboard is offline  
Old 6th Sep 2009, 00:47
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Brasília - Brazil
Age: 38
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
it appears, to me, like a more a problem with miss calculation of the CoG position and trim setting.

in a short runway this can be a problem.
Omykron is offline  
Old 6th Sep 2009, 01:17
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: kent, england
Posts: 594
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Guess by that post your not a pilot then?
judging by the number of posts you are an insominiac?
wake up,
Smell the coffee,
More importantly just get real.
PS. What's your line of work? Prime?
fokker1000 is offline  
Old 6th Sep 2009, 13:19
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: near EDDF
Posts: 775
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
BTW: the 1st flight in the morning (LH 4985) was a A319
IFixPlanes is offline  
Old 10th Sep 2009, 10:40
  #16 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: formally Alamo battleground, now the crocodile with palm trees!
Posts: 960
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Exclamation

Gee people, what's up with all this hostility? Other people put cr@p threads in R&N, especially links from news sites (look at the AMX hijack right now). The only thing that puzzles me about LH is that incorrect loading does not trigger the equivalent of a MOR.
Squawk7777 is offline  
Old 13th Sep 2009, 10:14
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: eidw
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
it wasnt a 319. Most mornings it is a 319 except when loads are high.
EI-TECH is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.