Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Pax weights on DAL mainline

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

180ToTheMarker

12 months of October
Joined
Feb 18, 2003
Posts
658
At ASA, our pax weights just went from 170/175 to 190/195...this really affects our ability to carry 50 folks not to mention a jumpseater, especially on short flights because we are landing weight limited.

Is DAL mainline affected and if so, can the MD-88 carry a full load plus a j/s an short flights...ie MEM-ATL???

Thanks
 
180tothemarker,


I am sure it affects us somehow, but we don't really see it. We are given our weight and balance already prepared just before push back, and we choose what derated thrust setting we want(not always a choice, though since we have been very full as of late)--and I haven't seen any problems carrying a jumpseater. (you all are welcome!) I don't know very much about the MD-88 and weight problems, but the 757 and 767 can handle the extra weight it seems....

Bye Bye--General Lee
 
So General,


Since it appears, sadly so, that the DAL pilots will have to take a paycut, could y'all ask the company, in the spirit of cooperation, to allow unlimited jumpseaters?
I am sure, considering what the company is asking, that this should be an easy deal to strike.
 
Also, some of the W&B issues that came up during the 1900 investigations don't really affect mainline aircraft as much because of the multiple baggage bins and being able to spread the load out evenly throughout the CG range. Sucks when you have all the weight at the end of a long arm like on the 1900, RJs, EMB120's etc. I guess the ATR is the only one that's a bit different in that regard.
 
180ToTheMarker said:
Is DAL mainline affected and if so, can the MD-88 carry a full load plus a j/s an short flights...ie MEM-ATL???

Thanks
I don't really think it would have the same effect. I'm not currently flying the MD-88, but if memory serves me, and it just might not, the MD-88 has a Max Zero Fuel Weight of 118,000lbs, a Max Take Off Weight of 149,500lbs and a Max Landing Weight of 130,000lbs. If the MD-88 took off at MZF it could land with 12,000lbs of fuel, which is usually plenty enough to make it to an alternate and still have 5000lbs remaining.
 
Well it happened to me for the first time. We had to leave a JS rider behind. We had and ALT but only 250 lbs above ramp fuel. Our max was 50 peeps and 65 bags, and that includes the carry on "valet" bags that people leave at the bottom of the stairs.

Here is the part that does not make sense, the new weights include one personal item and one carry on bag per pax. Now, if you can not fit your carry on in the "LARGE" overhead bin it goes in the back and gets counted again as 30 lbs. Not to mention not everyone brings a carry on bag with them.

We will be leaving a WHOLE bunch of revenue pax behind, not to mention JS riders. Spread the word.
 
i find this interesting. someone please confirm: ASA now uses 190/195 (summer/winter) weights for pax, and if a pax "pink tags" a carry-on that adds another 30 pounds to the cargo? what's the average weight for a checked bag, and do you have a new method for accounting for "heavy" bags?

and i thought our new weights were restrictive. too many krispy kreme's down south apparently.
 
Well, thank God McDonalds rescinded their "Super Size" meals----so we as a nation can't get any fatter....... Next thing you know the "average" will be 215 pounds......


Bye Bye--General Lee
 
rptrain said:
i find this interesting. someone please confirm: ASA now uses 190/195 (summer/winter) weights for pax, and if a pax "pink tags" a carry-on that adds another 30 pounds to the cargo? what's the average weight for a checked bag, and do you have a new method for accounting for "heavy" bags?

and i thought our new weights were restrictive. too many krispy kreme's down south apparently.
That is correct, 190/195 plus 30 pounds for a pink tag. If they can stuff the back on the airplane it does not count. Our standard for checked luggage is 30 pounds as well. Somebody went over the deep end with the new weights, we should just make all of the RJ's 40 seaters, that is all we will be able to take!
 
rptrain said:
i find this interesting. someone please confirm: ASA now uses 190/195 (summer/winter) weights for pax, and if a pax "pink tags" a carry-on that adds another 30 pounds to the cargo? what's the average weight for a checked bag, and do you have a new method for accounting for "heavy" bags?

and i thought our new weights were restrictive. too many krispy kreme's down south apparently.
Dear lord, America has gotten fat. We need a low-carb airline. :)
 
The new weights will cause us problems with pax and JSers. But, I think that 190 is an accurate average weight to use, and a carry-on that ends up going in the cargo hold weighs at least 30 lbs! C'mon, you know people don't weigh 170 lbs except for the fit and young, and those carry-ons that people struggle with up in the terminal are 30 lbs or more. I think everyone knows this to be true but hate the thought of bumping passengers/bags/JSers. I hate bumping revenue paying passengers and JSers as well as I am a commuter.

Dispatch needs to do their part by not fueling us so heavily for far away alternates when one close by works. I see this all the time here at ASA. How many times do they list an alternate when the weather doesn't require one? We as pilots must look at the weather and fuel carefully, and then converse with dispatch to eliminate what is not required. Unforunately in ATL, passengers get bumped before bags as ASA, and all airlines, have to pay bag delivery fees to have a passenger's bag delivered to their home if it wasn't on that person particular flight. Anyway, that's what I think for what it's worth.
 
Another problem is CG. The RJ is already nose heavy and there are situations where, due to weight, no ballast can be added to the cargo area. This means we will bump some pax from "section A" just to be legal. Be sure to ask your FA's for a kid count!!!
 
Freebrd said:
Dispatch needs to do their part by not fueling us so heavily for far away alternates when one close by works. I see this all the time here at ASA. How many times do they list an alternate when the weather doesn't require one? We as pilots must look at the weather and fuel carefully, and then converse with dispatch to eliminate what is not required. Unforunately in ATL, passengers get bumped before bags as ASA, and all airlines, have to pay bag delivery fees to have a passenger's bag delivered to their home if it wasn't on that person particular flight. Anyway, that's what I think for what it's worth.
Call up your dispatcher and tell them to knock it off, eventually they will get the hint. If they never get a phone call regarding the distant alternate (when MCN is ok), they will continue to piss on the carpet.

The duder
 

Latest resources

Back
Top