Minimum Weight Question
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: OO-KAY
Posts: 104
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Minimum Weight Question
Can anyone carify what this might mean?:
I have a very old document relating to a ferry flight for a Boeing 707, it states "gross weight is minimum required for flight". Do I take it that this means that the a/c was to be ferried empty and with only the required amount of fuel?
Thanks
I have a very old document relating to a ferry flight for a Boeing 707, it states "gross weight is minimum required for flight". Do I take it that this means that the a/c was to be ferried empty and with only the required amount of fuel?
Thanks
Moderator
Difficult to say without having the relevant documents to hand.
However, some aircraft will have a minimum gross weight indicated on the CG diagram. Generally, this will be associated with Vmca determinations. It is a limitation although usually not a concern as the weight will be sufficiently low not to present a problem for the great bulk of operations.
However, some aircraft will have a minimum gross weight indicated on the CG diagram. Generally, this will be associated with Vmca determinations. It is a limitation although usually not a concern as the weight will be sufficiently low not to present a problem for the great bulk of operations.
§25.25 Weight limits.
(b) Minimum weight. The minimum weight (the lowest weight at which compliance with each applicable requirement of this part is shown) must be established so that it is not less than—
(1) The lowest weight selected by the applicant;
(2) The design minimum weight (the lowest weight at which compliance with each structural loading condition of this part is shown); or
(3) The lowest weight at which compliance with each applicable flight requirement is shown.
(b) Minimum weight. The minimum weight (the lowest weight at which compliance with each applicable requirement of this part is shown) must be established so that it is not less than—
(1) The lowest weight selected by the applicant;
(2) The design minimum weight (the lowest weight at which compliance with each structural loading condition of this part is shown); or
(3) The lowest weight at which compliance with each applicable flight requirement is shown.
Prof. Airport Engineer
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Australia (mostly)
Posts: 726
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
j_t, westhawk and Mad (Flt) Scientist covered the background to minimum gross weight back in 2006 http://www.pprune.org/tech-log/24595...el-weight.html
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Alaska, PNG, etc.
Age: 60
Posts: 1,550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In absence of additional context indicating otherwise, that's how I'd interpret that sentence. Airplane should be as light as possible without running out of fuel prior to landing.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: La Belle Province
Posts: 2,179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As JT says, context is key here.
I can imagine that sentence really meaning "gross weight [as defined above] is minimum required for flight" - meaning that the document defines a weight, and is saying you mustn't go below it - which could speak to VMC or other considerations.
I can also imagine it really meaning "gross weight is [to be the]minimum required for flight" i.e. keep the aircraft as light as you can, with no lower limit.
The nature of the ferry might give a clue; if it was a ferry with significant airframe or systems damage (to get to a repair base) that might yield clues.
In our case, we've had some ferry flight permits where the aircraft had to be kept as light as possible, to minimize loads for example, and some where a minimum flight weight had to be achieved to respect VMC in light of system defects.
I can imagine that sentence really meaning "gross weight [as defined above] is minimum required for flight" - meaning that the document defines a weight, and is saying you mustn't go below it - which could speak to VMC or other considerations.
I can also imagine it really meaning "gross weight is [to be the]minimum required for flight" i.e. keep the aircraft as light as you can, with no lower limit.
The nature of the ferry might give a clue; if it was a ferry with significant airframe or systems damage (to get to a repair base) that might yield clues.
In our case, we've had some ferry flight permits where the aircraft had to be kept as light as possible, to minimize loads for example, and some where a minimum flight weight had to be achieved to respect VMC in light of system defects.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: nowhere
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 747-400 has a minimum weight. In my experience, the basic weight for the pax aircraft with its heavy furnishings is higher than the minimum weight so no issue anyways. But on the freighter, it is less than the basic weight. Mind you not by very much so it still should not be an issue. Maybe it could be for an aircraft stripped down to bare bones and then being ferried to its final resting place.
361,200 pounds minimum weight for the 747 freighter.
361,200 pounds minimum weight for the 747 freighter.
Last edited by JammedStab; 7th Jul 2014 at 02:15.
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Dallas
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This brings to mind something I read in an accident report concerning the loss of a DC-8 freighter during takeoff for a three engine ferry flight. The crew used incorrect V speeds and improper application of throttles on the takeoff roll.
The report contains the statement:
I thought the decision to carry that much additional fuel was odd, given the fact the aircraft was being operated with three engines. The additional weight required higher V speeds and would have exacerbated controllability issues.
Not having any experience in the DC-8 (or any other four engine transport category aircraft) I am not familiar with minimum weight requirements and their effect on aircraft operation.
The above linked thread
http://www.pprune.org/tech-log/24595...el-weight.html
gave some insight, but it just seems counterintuitive that an aircraft operating with degraded performance would be required have an additional 30,000 lbs of fuel on board.
Any comments would be appreciated.
The report contains the statement:
The captain and his crew departed DOV on the first ferry flight and arrived in MCI at 1739 on the day of the accident. The block-to-block time for the flight was 3.3 hours.
AT1 arranged for a qualified airframe and powerplant (A&P) mechanic to fly from DEN to MCI to prepare N782AL for the three-engine ferry. The captain prepared the flight departure papers and discussed fueling requirements with another AT1 captain who had flown N782AL to MCI.
Both captains agreed that the fuel load should be 75,000 pounds, to include 30,000 pounds of ballast fuel and 45,000 pounds of usable fuel.
http://www.airdisaster.com/reports/ntsb/AAR95-06.pdf
AT1 arranged for a qualified airframe and powerplant (A&P) mechanic to fly from DEN to MCI to prepare N782AL for the three-engine ferry. The captain prepared the flight departure papers and discussed fueling requirements with another AT1 captain who had flown N782AL to MCI.
Both captains agreed that the fuel load should be 75,000 pounds, to include 30,000 pounds of ballast fuel and 45,000 pounds of usable fuel.
http://www.airdisaster.com/reports/ntsb/AAR95-06.pdf
Not having any experience in the DC-8 (or any other four engine transport category aircraft) I am not familiar with minimum weight requirements and their effect on aircraft operation.
The above linked thread
http://www.pprune.org/tech-log/24595...el-weight.html
gave some insight, but it just seems counterintuitive that an aircraft operating with degraded performance would be required have an additional 30,000 lbs of fuel on board.
Any comments would be appreciated.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: La Belle Province
Posts: 2,179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
....The additional weight required higher V speeds and would have exacerbated controllability issues
.....
gave some insight, but it just seems counterintuitive that an aircraft operating with degraded performance would be required have an additional 30,000 lbs of fuel on board.
.....
gave some insight, but it just seems counterintuitive that an aircraft operating with degraded performance would be required have an additional 30,000 lbs of fuel on board.
If they were having to add ballast fuel, they were nowhere near a performance limit in terms of heavy weight; they'd still have had to meet appropriate climb and takeoff distance etc.
Also, an excessively light a/c might have "too much" performance, in the sense of requiring excessive or unusual pitch attitudes to maintain the scheduled speeds. Going outside of the weight/cg envelope in ANY direction - heavier, lighter, more aft or more forward - all have their problems. The a/c was certified to be inside that envelope, so anything that keeps you inside the envelope is good.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: A few degrees South
Posts: 809
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am still not convinced about the explanation of minimum weight. Provided you take VMCA somehow in to account.
Ballast weight or ballast fuel is usually there for CG requirements.
On the other hand, the lighter the weight, the more G's will be there in turbulence. Maybe the engine pylons on the DC8 were the reason for this?
Ballast weight or ballast fuel is usually there for CG requirements.
On the other hand, the lighter the weight, the more G's will be there in turbulence. Maybe the engine pylons on the DC8 were the reason for this?
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: nowhere
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I thought the decision to carry that much additional fuel was odd, given the fact the aircraft was being operated with three engines. The additional weight required higher V speeds and would have exacerbated controllability issues.
Not having any experience in the DC-8 (or any other four engine transport category aircraft) I am not familiar with minimum weight requirements and their effect on aircraft operation.
it just seems counterintuitive that an aircraft operating with degraded performance would be required have an additional 30,000 lbs of fuel on board.
Any comments would be appreciated.
Not having any experience in the DC-8 (or any other four engine transport category aircraft) I am not familiar with minimum weight requirements and their effect on aircraft operation.
it just seems counterintuitive that an aircraft operating with degraded performance would be required have an additional 30,000 lbs of fuel on board.
Any comments would be appreciated.
Have seen ballast fuel options on empty 727's and non-ideally loaded 747 combi.
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Or-E-Gun, USA
Posts: 326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Minimum Weight Makes Sense!
I'm not an engineer, but try this... A Massive Wing Area (think feather?) and very little weight. Without some greater weight, ambient winds and other weather will control that 'feather' no matter how much thrust is applied. The control surfaces can do only so much, especially at low speeds. While 'forcing' a super-light 747 off the ground may be possible, controlling an even lighter one for landing in anything but a perfect headwind must be a significant challenge. I don't know how to fly feathers.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: nowhere
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FAR 25.25 Weight limits.
(b) Minimum weight. The minimum weight (the lowest weight at which compliance with each applicable requirement of this part is shown) must be established so that it is not less than—
(1) The lowest weight selected by the applicant;
(2) The design minimum weight (the lowest weight at which compliance with each structural loading condition of this part is shown); or
(3) The lowest weight at which compliance with each applicable flight requirement is shown.
(b) Minimum weight. The minimum weight (the lowest weight at which compliance with each applicable requirement of this part is shown) must be established so that it is not less than—
(1) The lowest weight selected by the applicant;
(2) The design minimum weight (the lowest weight at which compliance with each structural loading condition of this part is shown); or
(3) The lowest weight at which compliance with each applicable flight requirement is shown.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: nowhere
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FAR 25.25 Weight limits.
(b) Minimum weight. The minimum weight (the lowest weight at which compliance with each applicable requirement of this part is shown) must be established so that it is not less than—
(1) The lowest weight selected by the applicant;
(2) The design minimum weight (the lowest weight at which compliance with each structural loading condition of this part is shown); or
(3) The lowest weight at which compliance with each applicable flight requirement is shown.
(b) Minimum weight. The minimum weight (the lowest weight at which compliance with each applicable requirement of this part is shown) must be established so that it is not less than—
(1) The lowest weight selected by the applicant;
(2) The design minimum weight (the lowest weight at which compliance with each structural loading condition of this part is shown); or
(3) The lowest weight at which compliance with each applicable flight requirement is shown.
"Minimum Inflight Weight (MFW):
The minimum allowed weight during flight. Establishes the load factor for airplane fixed equipment"
Not really sure what it means though.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/133403992/...Weight-Balance
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: La Belle Province
Posts: 2,179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For major items of structure, the loads are a function of the overall aero forces, or the load factor times the weight (mass). So the loads on the wing structure, for example, are similar at 50,000 lbs and 3g as at 75,000lbs and 2g. But a piece of fixed equipment - say a radio - sees a load on its fittings dependent on its own mass and the g. So the highest loads on things like brackets for radios occurs at min weight, as that's whee the highest g is created.
Of course, it's never that simple.
Of course, it's never that simple.