Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Tech Log
Reload this Page >

Alt CG on B777..

Wikiposts
Search

Notices
Tech Log The very best in practical technical discussion on the web

Alt CG on B777..

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 3rd October 2007 | 06:01
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
From: UAE
Alt CG on B777..

Is there some way of figuring out the actual cost savings using the alternative aft CG system on the B777 ? I know some B777 operators are using it and others not. Loading an aircraft using the system and applying it to performance calculations results in among other things lower Vspeeds for takeoff.

Cheers
Yani Yani is offline  
Reply
Old 7th October 2007 | 12:13
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
From: in a cave, grrrr!
Hi Yani!

Could you tell me more about that "alternative CG" ?
I wasn't aware about such a procedure! Maybe I forgot to attend the right course!!!
My airline currently fly 777, mainly balanced around 24%

bst rgds
CONCOMBRE is offline  
Reply
Old 7th October 2007 | 23:35
  #3 (permalink)  
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,486
Likes: 8
From: The No Transgression Zone
Perhaps the performance figures are recalculated on a reduced stall speed at aft CoG? ---as this would cause the tail to carry a greater percentage of the load
Pugilistic Animus is offline  
Reply
Old 7th October 2007 | 23:50
  #4 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 2,188
Likes: 6
From: La Belle Province
I *think* this has been discussed before, but "cg" and "aft" are both under the four letter search threshold, so not easy to find the thread(s).

From what I recall, it's actually the use of a Forward CG limit which is moved aft of the 'normal' one. That than allows the stall speeds etc to be calculated for that "less forward" limit, which will give slightly lower stall speeds (due exactly to the tail lift/downforce issue mentioned above).

If my recollection is correct, it should really be called an alternative forward cg option, because AFAIK the aft limit itself isn't moved, and is in amy case pretty much irrelevant* for most performance purposes.

* unless you start mucking about with Vmca etc., but I can't see anyone going down that route ....
Mad (Flt) Scientist is offline  
Reply
Old 8th October 2007 | 01:56
  #5 (permalink)  
CR2

Top Dog
 
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 2,098
Likes: 0
From: Close to FACT
On the 744F alternate fwd cg enables a higher payload to be carried from a restrictive runway. You get a performance calculation for the full envelope, for 20ish % MACTOW and 24ish % MACTOW. Can give you a couple of tons more.
CR2 is offline  
Reply
Old 8th October 2007 | 02:24
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
B777 Alt Cg

When the CG is moved aft, the aircraft pitching moment is reduced .This results in a reduced downward tail load required to trim the aircraft.Since the required wing lift is the sum of the aircraft weight and the tail-download for trim, this aft CG reduces the required wing lift.This reduction of required wing lift manifest itselfs as reduction in speed for the same pitch attitude and weight that reduces the stall-limited speed.The wing lift reduction also reduces the takeoff attitude -limited speed ( the parameter used to set the margin to tail strike rotation). These reduction in speeds reduces the field length required for given takeoff weight;the reduction in tail down load reduces the trim drag which improves climb capability
Using the alt cg option on the B777-300 B777-300 ER allows the possibility of are Higher Assummed temp or increasing the performance TOW at the particular airfield when the Takeoff MAC is 26% or greater.
This ALT CG selection is usually available when the Boeing OPT ( optmized Performace Tool) is used via the EFB or the Laptop.

BM
bigmountain is offline  
Reply
Old 9th October 2007 | 07:55
  #7 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
From: UAE
Thanks for input guys.

I aware of the benefits of using the Alt CG principle, eg reduced V speeds and increased assumed temp, which reduces the general wear and tear on the aircraft components and therefore leads to cost savings. My actual query is how to calculate the actual cost savings using this method. It is perhaps a question for the Boeing Company.....
Yani Yani is offline  
Reply
Old 9th October 2007 | 08:18
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 320
Likes: 0
From: i don't know
Take the TO weight calculation with and then without alt cg. With the difference go into the flightplan and check what +/- burn you get.
Its not accurate, but the computer curve should consider the +/- downforce in kg/lb needed to trim the aircraft by giving us the resp. max TOW.

GMDS
GMDS is offline  
Reply
Old 9th October 2007 | 12:45
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,085
Likes: 0
From: Eternal Beach
Alt CofG is used for takeoff. As mentioned above it offers slightly lower V figures and a degree or two in assumed temp TO thrust.

Cruise CofG is different - and dependant, if l am correct, on your company and configuration of the type being flown. Unless you are operating the 77W where 7.5 is currently the default setting. Otherwise it would be closer to 30.

Therefore cost saving means not off loading freight when taking off from WSSS at 29 degrees at MTW (and using TOGA to do it) for a six hour flight.

halas
halas is offline  
Reply

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 © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.