oldbscaler
Member
- Mar 13, 2003
- 72
- 0
Adding CAT II authorization will have nothing to do with fuel requirements. It will only help you actually land at the destination airport more often
Hidden Rj Costs
- Thread starter diogenes
- Start date
Furloughedagain
Senior
Actually having Cat II capabilities alters Exemption 3585 for us with regard to destination weather.
3585 requires that we have landing min visibility in the main body of the forecast in order to depart or 1/2 the forecast landing visibility IF we utilize a second alternate.
There were many, many times when we are required to use a second alternate due to forecast weather being only slightly below approach mins.
Certified Cat II means that we can use Cat II mins for the first part of the equation and require only a single alternate -- i/e carry less fuel and more payload. (At least that was how it was explained to us. )
The expense of certifying 1800 pilots and 160+ airplanes as Cat II was prohibitive if only used for the handful of times a year when visibility would actually require Cat II mins... however, the revenue lost due to passengers, bags, mail left behind due to hauling excess fuel around MORE than makes up for it.
Believe me, i'd MUCH rather be sitting back in the 737 letting CLP worry about all of this BS for me. Unfortunately, we play the hand we're dealt.
3585 requires that we have landing min visibility in the main body of the forecast in order to depart or 1/2 the forecast landing visibility IF we utilize a second alternate.
There were many, many times when we are required to use a second alternate due to forecast weather being only slightly below approach mins.
Certified Cat II means that we can use Cat II mins for the first part of the equation and require only a single alternate -- i/e carry less fuel and more payload. (At least that was how it was explained to us. )
The expense of certifying 1800 pilots and 160+ airplanes as Cat II was prohibitive if only used for the handful of times a year when visibility would actually require Cat II mins... however, the revenue lost due to passengers, bags, mail left behind due to hauling excess fuel around MORE than makes up for it.
Believe me, i'd MUCH rather be sitting back in the 737 letting CLP worry about all of this BS for me. Unfortunately, we play the hand we're dealt.
PropPiedmont
Senior
- Dec 10, 2003
- 273
- 0
Just for in formational purporses:
At PDT each passenger weighs 190 lbs year rouund and each bag weighs 30 lbs. When it comes to weight restrictions for the Dash 8s there are a few different situations that occur. With the -100 the ZFW is the controlling factor, with the -200 it is the landing weight, and with the -300 it is usually bulk in the cargo bin. Now these controlling factors are based on good weather days, of course if the weather is bad then more fuel is added which changes the norms for each -8.
At PDT each passenger weighs 190 lbs year rouund and each bag weighs 30 lbs. When it comes to weight restrictions for the Dash 8s there are a few different situations that occur. With the -100 the ZFW is the controlling factor, with the -200 it is the landing weight, and with the -300 it is usually bulk in the cargo bin. Now these controlling factors are based on good weather days, of course if the weather is bad then more fuel is added which changes the norms for each -8.
PropPiedmont
Senior
- Dec 10, 2003
- 273
- 0
Yes, the 400 is coming to SBY. But be very careful if you decide to go for a ride. I hear the deHavilland sales crew might allow the PDT chief pilot to fly. If this happens you all might want to evacuate the eastern shore.
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #21
And now, for a cost savings suggestion, offered free of charge, sans consulting firm.
As the carry on bag weight is figured in with the passenger weight, why is a full bag weight added yet again when the bag is carried in the express flight's cargo bin instead of the overhead bin? This results in the bag being counted twice.
I understand this weight needs to be shown for balance purposes, but shouldn't a corresponding deduction be made in the weight shown in the cabin?
Done properly, this would enable the flight to safely carry more payload.
Just to show how asinine the current sit-rep is, if the crew says we're carrying 5 bags too many in the bin, we can take 5 of the smallest carry-on's off, and have the f/a store them in the cabin and, voila! an overweight flight is now legal, even though in reality, the flight weighs the same.
Red One is correct - the restrictions shown on the release have nothing to do with what the flight is booked for - the release can say 35 pax/50 bags allowable while the flight has been booked to 50 for months.
As the carry on bag weight is figured in with the passenger weight, why is a full bag weight added yet again when the bag is carried in the express flight's cargo bin instead of the overhead bin? This results in the bag being counted twice.
I understand this weight needs to be shown for balance purposes, but shouldn't a corresponding deduction be made in the weight shown in the cabin?
Done properly, this would enable the flight to safely carry more payload.
Just to show how asinine the current sit-rep is, if the crew says we're carrying 5 bags too many in the bin, we can take 5 of the smallest carry-on's off, and have the f/a store them in the cabin and, voila! an overweight flight is now legal, even though in reality, the flight weighs the same.
Red One is correct - the restrictions shown on the release have nothing to do with what the flight is booked for - the release can say 35 pax/50 bags allowable while the flight has been booked to 50 for months.
OK, as afar as the ERJ's, the W & B restrictions vary per carrier and there several reasons for it. Tran States by far is the worst and there is a reason for it. Trans States INCLUDES carry ons into the passengers weight while Mesa does not. Our flights from EWR-PIT often can carry a full load of passengers but only 15 or so bags. We could carry 50 carry on bags but only 15 checked. Now if we only get 5 carry on bags, WE CAN NOT make up the difference in checked bags because Trans States procedures are very restictive. So with only five carry on bags, we have lost 900lbs which is 30 checked bags. CCY needs to work with these carriers to fix this problem. Now Mesa, the carry on bags are counted as they are boarded and accordingly shown on the weight and balance. The problem with Trans States is the Zero Fuel weight not Max T/O. Sad part is when we don't get at least 20 carry on bags, we have a Balance problem with the ERJ. CRJ's for the most part are less restrictive. Either way, something needs to give otherwise lets just cancel the contracts with these carriers becuase they are not helping our bottom line. And while we are venting, CAN WE GET A BRIDGE PLATE PLEASE?
Chicken Taco
Member
- Aug 29, 2002
- 50
- 0
OK,
I'll take a second here to explain CHQ's W/B program. Each pax weighs 192 pounds summer/197 winter. This includes 15 pounds per person for any carry-on bags that make it into the cabin. If a carry-on goes into the bin, it gets counted as 22 pounds. Unfortunately, there is no credit for the person not taking it in the cabin. Checked bags count as 30 pounds each.
Now for the release restrictions. This is only slightly better than throwing darts. Our computer system calculates a payload number based on the most restrictive applicable weight of: Max Takeoff, Max Landing, Zero Fuel, or Field/Obstacle climb. From this payload number, the system comes up with a PAX/Bags figure. Something like 50/70. However, this is just one potential combination. Each 192 pound passenger can be swapped for 6 checked bags, 8 carry-on's, or any combination thereof up to the max bin limits. So a flight with a printed 44/40 could actually take 52 bags if only 42 pax are boarded. We may also be able to increse the payload due to changes in weather, runway in use, etc. BOS is a great example where RW 27 departures are restructive, but a short taxi delay for 22 or 33 might net us an extra 1000 pounds of payload. Furthermore, we can often improve the situation by shaving a bit of fuel. This is of course at the discretion of the captain, but can be an option if the dispatcher has been overly generous as is often the case.
In any case of a possible restriction, I strongly urge the gate or ops agent to consult with the captain before restricting the flight and wasting more of U's money by bumping pax or bags without need. I'll spare the board further gory details, but if anybody wants to dive into this indepth, please feel free to PM me, as I can provide a lot more specific info. Finally, when faced with restriction, please toss pax before bags. The cost of four vouchers or Z-class tix is a lot less than the delivery when we have to leave 25 bags to meet the restriction..
..CT
I'll take a second here to explain CHQ's W/B program. Each pax weighs 192 pounds summer/197 winter. This includes 15 pounds per person for any carry-on bags that make it into the cabin. If a carry-on goes into the bin, it gets counted as 22 pounds. Unfortunately, there is no credit for the person not taking it in the cabin. Checked bags count as 30 pounds each.
Now for the release restrictions. This is only slightly better than throwing darts. Our computer system calculates a payload number based on the most restrictive applicable weight of: Max Takeoff, Max Landing, Zero Fuel, or Field/Obstacle climb. From this payload number, the system comes up with a PAX/Bags figure. Something like 50/70. However, this is just one potential combination. Each 192 pound passenger can be swapped for 6 checked bags, 8 carry-on's, or any combination thereof up to the max bin limits. So a flight with a printed 44/40 could actually take 52 bags if only 42 pax are boarded. We may also be able to increse the payload due to changes in weather, runway in use, etc. BOS is a great example where RW 27 departures are restructive, but a short taxi delay for 22 or 33 might net us an extra 1000 pounds of payload. Furthermore, we can often improve the situation by shaving a bit of fuel. This is of course at the discretion of the captain, but can be an option if the dispatcher has been overly generous as is often the case.
In any case of a possible restriction, I strongly urge the gate or ops agent to consult with the captain before restricting the flight and wasting more of U's money by bumping pax or bags without need. I'll spare the board further gory details, but if anybody wants to dive into this indepth, please feel free to PM me, as I can provide a lot more specific info. Finally, when faced with restriction, please toss pax before bags. The cost of four vouchers or Z-class tix is a lot less than the delivery when we have to leave 25 bags to meet the restriction..
..CT
