Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
737-800 Weight And Balance  
User currently offlineQANTAS747-438 From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 1963 posts, RR: 2
Posted (1 year 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 4945 times:

On a 737-800, If you were to take the OEW plus a fuel load of around 28.0 (no paxs or bags), where would the plane's center of gravity be? Would it be nose heavy or tail heavy? What about if that same plane had only 12.0 on the fuel (with no paxs or bags), how would that change things?


My posts/replies are strictly my opinion and not that of any company, organization, or Southwest Airlines.
9 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineAA737-823 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 5821 posts, RR: 11
Reply 1, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 4839 times:

I don't have any numbers for you, but I CAN tell you that on ferry flights on -700s, the plane must be ballasted aft.
I would think the -800 would be similar, though not identical, in nature.


User currently offlineSKC From United States of America, joined Oct 2012, 103 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 4823 times:

Quoting AA737-823 (Reply 1):
I don't have any numbers for you, but I CAN tell you that on ferry flights on -700s, the plane must be ballasted aft.
I would think the -800 would be similar, though not identical, in nature.

If your -700s require ballast for ferry flights, it must just be due to configuration, as SWA doesn't.



ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
User currently offlineAA737-823 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 5821 posts, RR: 11
Reply 3, posted (1 year 3 months 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 4691 times:

Quoting SKC (Reply 2):
If your -700s require ballast for ferry flights, it must just be due to configuration, as SWA doesn't.

Really? Hmm. Our are configured somewhat similarly to Southwest's... namely, all coach, 136 seats. Three lavs, no aft galley...


User currently offlineFlyASAGuy2005 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 7004 posts, RR: 11
Reply 4, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 4178 times:

Quoting QANTAS747-438 (Thread starter):

Hope this helps but in my experience, the 738 is usually loaded up front (bags) when its light (shorter flights say under 2 hours) and almost always loaded in the back on longer flights. On the -700 you can almost always get away with loading in the back regardless.

One of the reasons why I loved the '57. You could put 130 bags in the front or 130 bags in the back and it wouldn't make much of a difference.



What gets measured gets done.
User currently offlineCrimsonNL From Netherlands, joined Dec 2007, 1871 posts, RR: 41
Reply 5, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 3929 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CHAT OPERATOR

Sorry for my late reply, I hope my answer is still of use to you. I created some fake flights in a loadcontrol system with 738's from 4 different airlines. All of them with a full economy config varying between 160-189 economy seats. With a take-off fuel of 28000 pounds I got the following MAC at TOW values for the 4 different aircraft. I won't specify the airlines but they are all European.

MAC at TOW
1: 19.81%
2: 22.13%
3. 20.17%
4. 21.16%

Martijn



Nothing's worse then flying the same registration twice, except flying it 4 times..
User currently offlineQANTAS747-438 From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 1963 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 3790 times:

Quoting CrimsonNL (Reply 5):
Sorry for my late reply, I hope my answer is still of use to you. I created some fake flights in a loadcontrol system with 738's from 4 different airlines. All of them with a full economy config varying between 160-189 economy seats. With a take-off fuel of 28000 pounds I got the following MAC at TOW values for the 4 different aircraft. I won't specify the airlines but they are all European.

MAC at TOW
1: 19.81%
2: 22.13%
3. 20.17%
4. 21.16%

Thanks for the hard numbers. Could you explain in more depth what they refer to?



My posts/replies are strictly my opinion and not that of any company, organization, or Southwest Airlines.
User currently offlineFlyASAGuy2005 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 7004 posts, RR: 11
Reply 7, posted (1 year 2 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 3628 times:

Quoting QANTAS747-438 (Reply 6):
Thanks for the hard numbers. Could you explain in more depth what they refer to?

This is the aerodinamic chord if i'm not mistaken. When I use to be on the ramp, the software Delta uses for payload planning and loading (for ramp personnel not the stuff dispatchers use) would take the % and dumb it down for us to make practical sense.

Every a/c's chord is different so say on a 757 the chord "length" was so huge, it didn't really matter where you loaded the bags. The software ran a number between 1 and 99. 1 being the max nose heavy that you can be and 99 being the max tail hevy that you can be. In between this is your "safe" zone for the given chord for that a/c. A 757 loaded heavily forward on a standard run to Florida from Atlanta with full pax would be between 40 and 50. Loaded heavily aft and you're at 70-80.

On an MD88 however, the chord is much "shorter" and the Number is always very low due to the a/c being inherently nose-heavy when full. So if you fill up the back as much as possible at best you're getting a 30.

The numbers that crimsonNL posted is telling me that all those flights are fairly tail heavy.

[Edited 2013-06-29 16:20:19]


What gets measured gets done.
User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2804 posts, RR: 59
Reply 8, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 3608 times:

Quoting FlyASAGuy2005 (Reply 7):
The numbers that crimsonNL posted is telling me that all those flights are fairly tail heavy.

No, they are pretty evenly loaded and if anything a bit nose heavy, typically a MAC table runs from 10% to 35% at the higher TOW weights, look in the 737 ACAP chapter 7.4.10.



Non French in France
User currently offlineFlyASAGuy2005 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 7004 posts, RR: 11
Reply 9, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 3414 times:

After posting I felt like I had it backwards but goes back to what I initially said.

Quoting FlyASAGuy2005 (Reply 4):
Hope this helps but in my experience, the 738 is usually loaded up front (bags) when its light (shorter flights say under 2 hours) and almost always loaded in the back on longer flights. On the -700 you can almost always get away with loading in the back regardless.



What gets measured gets done.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic 737-800 Weight And Balance
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
"Appreciable Effect On Weight And Balance" posted Thu May 23 2013 06:30:44 by shiny
WN 738 Weight And Balance Question posted Tue Apr 10 2012 20:01:41 by Swafa
DL4094 - Improper Weight And Balance? posted Thu Oct 27 2011 04:22:24 by theflcowboy
BA PHX-LHR: Weight And Balance? Config? posted Sun Aug 28 2011 14:39:06 by itsasmallworld
Weight And Balance Measurements posted Fri May 20 2011 02:51:59 by SAAFNAV
RJ Weight And Balance Question posted Mon Sep 21 2009 12:03:38 by Mcg
Weight And Balance On A 747 Combi posted Wed Jul 22 2009 03:59:00 by BuyantUkhaa
767ER Weight And Balance posted Sun Mar 8 2009 22:40:40 by RSW88
Cessna Stationair Etc. Weight And Balance Issues? posted Thu Jan 3 2008 13:19:27 by TupolevTu154
Weight And Balance posted Thu Jun 16 2005 21:41:29 by Corsair2

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format