W & B question

[Singlecoil]

The only 2 people who are gonna know if land a bit overweight are the 2 pilots. There is no alarm that is going to go off and be sent to the FAA. Just use common sense.

Not always true. We have data mining in the form of FOQA data in which the numbers are automatically sent via acars to dispatch. Will the company self disclose on you if they see a violation? I would say that you can count on that.

 

[ImbracableCrunk]

What is considered normal fuel burn by the FAA or CAA for that matter?
Based on what parameters is BOF (burn off fuel) computed?

I'm sorry your friends got written off, when I was a kid I got written off by an inspector that said I didn't report that both propellers strike on the runway upon arrival, I was flying a Navajo Panther conversion with the Qtips, I believe your friends case would be just as easy to beat

Lets examine a few things here as to what the FAA considers regulatory compliance, (discussed with a few professional aviators now with the friendly folks at the FAA) first there is no regulatory restrictions to fly a Jet at any end of the envelope, you can take off and climb at max angle to 8,000 feet and then cruise to your destination at minimum clean speed, in the other end you can climb at VMO/ MMO and cruise at your max altitude, both are regulatory compliant and there is no violation as long as you do meet your fuel requirements. You guys are thinking in terms of what you input on your FMC and the fuel over destination that it is showing you for arrival and the FMC is not even a legal means to determine fuel requirement compliance, it is only guidance and all ICAO nations (including the USA) have the same requirement, you must use your performance charts specified in the Aircraft Operations Manual, you guys are thinking in terms of well my company cruises at ECON therefore I have to meet the requirements at ECON and the regulatory compliance has nothing to do with any speed and/or altitude, first of all ECON will be different within different operators of the same A/C just by interchanging cost indexes on the FMC, the FAA doesn't care if you cruise at .78 or .84, they don't care if you cruise at 8,000 or FL400 you guys are restricting yourself's to what you input on the FMC for your filed route and performance and the FMC is not even a legal means to determine fuel requirements regulatory compliance, only your A/C performance charts are the legal binding document.

The question came in the case that you would be a little over for the T/O to meet max landing weight (as programmed on the FMC) and Fuel Over Destination FMC calculations has NO BEARING or RELEVANCE, only your projected Burn Off Fuel specified in your performance numbers. Thus the example that was brought up (don't remember by who) You are taxing and ended up not burning all your taxi fuel before departure and ended up 1,000 heavier all you need to do is pick another performance within the broad spectrum of the performance of the airplane specified on the manuals (your release burn summary is based on that) that meet your BOF requirements without infringing on your alternate and reserves requirements and you are regulatory compliant. Don't even need a new release if you just pick a lower altitude on your burn summary, they are based on your performance charts

So you're the guy that everybody knows that had the fed go after for the Q-tips! Reminds me of the fed that went after the Avro pilots for turning on an engine during climb out. (It was the flaps retracting.)

This has nothing to do with FMC or its predictions. All it has to do with is the release and are you taking off with a fuel load that makes your FB+ZFW>MaxLdgWt. Does it need to be on paper, or in your head?

Our Op Specs require an amended release for any altitude changes of >4,000, so you can't exactly play it too much. There is a section on the release that gives you a FB for, I think 1 and 2 thousand foot deviations from planned cruise, but beyond that, you're just guessing.

When do you think 121.195 would be used?

 

[Dumb Pilot]

So you're the guy that everybody knows that had the fed go after for the Q-tips!

I don't know if this has become urban legend by now but this happened to me in FLL

This has nothing to do with FMC or its predictions. All it has to do with is the release and are you taking off with a fuel load that makes your FB+ZFW>MaxLdgWt. Does it need to be on paper, or in your head?

Our Op Specs require an amended release for any altitude changes of >4,000, so you can't exactly play it too much. There is a section on the release that gives you a FB for, I think 1 and 2 thousand foot deviations from planned cruise, but beyond that, you're just guessing.

Precisely, thank you. I understand that if you are in an RJ and flying from MSP to GRB your choices are limited but that is not every case thus my original comment. If I am 1,000 pounds heavier and I'm number two on line for T/O with a lets say TYO/PUD sector ahead of me, all I have to do is choose one of those altitudes available on my navlog (release)
that would give me a higher BOF without infringing on my Alt/Res reserve numbers in a medium sector on the 76 that could be as much as 2,000 pounds and Voila.

When do you think 121.195 would be used?

I understand the regulation, but the example was about you being slightly overweight for T/O or relation to your plan and if you took off you are immediately in violation of .195, it is not the case

 

[AutoBus]

I don't know if this has become urban legend by now but this happened to me in FLL



Precisely, thank you. I understand that if you are in an RJ and flying from MSP to GRB your choices are limited but that is not every case thus my original comment. If I am 1,000 pounds heavier and I'm number two on line for T/O with a lets say TYO/PUD sector ahead of me, all I have to do is choose one of those altitudes available on my navlog (release)
that would give me a higher BOF without infringing on my Alt/Res reserve numbers in a medium sector on the 76 that could be as much as 2,000 pounds and Voila.



I understand the regulation, but the example was about you being slightly overweight for T/O or relation to your plan and if you took off you are immediately in violation of .195, it is not the case

Technically it's illegal, that's the regulation, why bother having a regulation if you are allowed to finese your way around it. The release is indeed a plan and there are expectations that the actual flight will need to vary from the plan eventually, that's why you have reserve, hold, contingency fuel, the FAA does not look kindly on blowing off the plan (without dispatch concurence) before takeoff.


Do yourself a favor, burn down to where you need to be or have the dispatcher refigure the burn for a higherspeed/lower altitude.

Anything else borders on wink-wink compliance with the regualtions, trouble with that is, after a while wink-wink becomes the norm. then people start finding themselves with FAA actions and Fines (think the fast taxiing airline)

 

[Pull To Guns]

Technically it's illegal, that's the regulation, why bother having a regulation if you are allowed to finese your way around it. The release is indeed a plan and there are expectations that the actual flight will need to vary from the plan eventually, that's why you have reserve, hold, contingency fuel, the FAA does not look kindly on blowing off the plan (without dispatch concurence) before takeoff.


Do yourself a favor, burn down to where you need to be or have the dispatcher refigure the burn for a higherspeed/lower altitude.

Anything else borders on wink-wink compliance with the regualtions, trouble with that is, after a while wink-wink becomes the norm. then people start finding themselves with FAA actions and Fines (think the fast taxiing airline)

If the dispatcher amends the release for a higher speed/lower altitude, the new higher burn off fuel requirement will be reflected as MORE fuel required for min. takeoff fuel on the release and will not help your problem. If your MTOW is already limited by MLW at the destination, the higher fuel requirement per the new release will force you to offload payload to keep within limits.

I wish I had a dollar for every time I have had to explain this.

 

[Dumb Pilot]

Technically it's illegal, that's the regulation, why bother having a regulation if you are allowed to finese your way around it. The release is indeed a plan and there are expectations that the actual flight will need to vary from the plan eventually, that's why you have reserve, hold, contingency fuel, the FAA does not look kindly on blowing off the plan (without dispatch concurence) before takeoff.


Do yourself a favor, burn down to where you need to be or have the dispatcher refigure the burn for a higherspeed/lower altitude.

Anything else borders on wink-wink compliance with the regualtions, trouble with that is, after a while wink-wink becomes the norm. then people start finding themselves with FAA actions and Fines (think the fast taxiing airline)

You have a LOT of nerve sir, I'm not doing a wink wink (or whatever that expression means) on anything, I AM using one of the burn performance that is prescribed on my burn summary. If you notice I don't fly for a fast taxing airline but rather a place where we consider ourselves to be professionals. Do yourself a favor and get off that high horse

 

[AutoBus]

If the dispatcher amends the release for a higher speed/lower altitude, the new higher burn off fuel requirement will be reflected as MORE fuel required for min. takeoff fuel on the release and will not help your problem. If your MTOW is already limited by MLW at the destination, the higher fuel requirement per the new release will force you to offload payload to keep within limits.

I wish I had a dollar for every time I have had to explain this.

Perhaps you have to explain it so many times because it make no sense what-so-ever.


Let me me explain it to you, the new higher burn, will allow you to make landing weight at the destination, Yes it will require MORE FUEL at TAKE OFF, BUT SINCE YOU Have too much fuel right NOW (because of the shorter taxi), THATS WHAT YOU WANT!

 

[AutoBus]

You have a LOT of nerve sir, I'm not doing a wink wink (or whatever that expression means) on anything, I AM using one of the burn performance that is prescribed on my burn summary. If you notice I don't fly for a fast taxing airline but rather a place where we consider ourselves to be professionals. Do yourself a favor and get off that high horse

If your release addresses that information, IE 453lbs more burn to fly the segment at 340 vs 360, etc, you have a leg to stand on. Otherwise I would recommend you get an amendment from the dispatcher supporting your conclusion.

That's pretty much common sense, correct me if i'm wrong.


To Recap, you can't blindly takeoff into the sunset KNOWING you will arrive at your destination overwieght.

You can't depart under those conditions change some flight paramater and hope and pray that you will burnoff enough fuel to be legal to land (without having it in FAA approved writing)

You can depart legally (per the release), and unknowingly find yourself overweight at your destination due to directs, winds, errors, etc. No-Problem you burnoff to legal landing weight and land.

 

[Dumb Pilot]

If your release addresses that information, IE 453lbs more burn to fly the segment at 340 vs 360, etc, you have a leg to stand on. Otherwise I would recommend you get an amendment from the dispatcher supporting your conclusion.

Are you seriously making this statement? Do you know what a burn summary is?

I apologize for saying that you had a lot of nerve, now I realize that you just don't have a clue

 

[Pull To Guns]

Perhaps you have to explain it so many times because it make no sense what-so-ever.


Let me me explain it to you, the new higher burn, will allow you to make landing weight at the destination, Yes it will require MORE FUEL at TAKE OFF, BUT SINCE YOU Have too much fuel right NOW (because of the shorter taxi), THATS WHAT YOU WANT!

Pre-Push, I am correct, Post-Push, you are correct, although you will probably not get an "official" amended release as the flight is already being conducted since it is away from the gate and is not in pre-planning stage anymore. You can get new advisory numbers from your dispatcher however and make your decision from that. The original release will still stand.

I have had many "Pre-Push" conversations with crews trying to get more payload on, hardly any of the other kind like the specific taxi fuel situation which I failed to address in my original post.

 

[AutoBus]

Pre-Push, I am correct, Post-Push, you are correct, although you will probably not get an "official" amended release as the flight is already being conducted since it is away from the gate and is not in pre-planning stage anymore. You can get new numbers from your dispatcher however and make your decision from that.

I have had many "Pre-Push" conversations with crews trying to get more payload on, hardly any of the other kind like the specific taxi fuel situation which I failed to address in my original post.

I agree with all of the above, in my example I was in a Post-Push mode (I should have made that clearer)

 

[AutoBus]

Are you seriously making this statement? Do you know what a burn summary is?

I apologize for saying that you had a lot of nerve, now I realize that you just don't have a clue

That's right, no clue. Hey sorry, your right. As a 20+ year domestic FAR 121 puke I have no idea what "burn Summary" means in the context of YOUR flight planning software and your company procedures, please enlighten me.

 

[ImbracableCrunk]

Pre-Push, I am correct, Post-Push, you are correct, although you will probably not get an "official" amended release as the flight is already being conducted since it is away from the gate and is not in pre-planning stage anymore. You can get new advisory numbers from your dispatcher however and make your decision from that. The original release will still stand.

I have had many "Pre-Push" conversations with crews trying to get more payload on, hardly any of the other kind like the specific taxi fuel situation which I failed to address in my original post.

My airline puts a release weight in the paperwork. According to the FOM, it's supposed to be the MTOW, but they use it more like a planned TOW. That means any time you're a little heavier than planned (short taxi, a little extra fuel, etc.) you get an amended release. Makes for a lot of unnecessary work. Happens pre- and post-push.

Ex: Release Wt. 156.1, MTOW 161.1, Actual Wt. 156.3.
You're nowhere near the limits for performance, but [DING-DONG] ACARS for an ammendment.

 

[ImbracableCrunk]

It sounds like we're coming toward a consensus. DP, I'm with you on the FB as long as you have something that says -2,000 CRZ ALT = +450lbs in the performance summary or navlog or whatever.

Just saying you'll drop the gear/flaps isn't in the paperwork, and that's where the small lawyer center in some pilot's brains starts to squawk.

Some things are "Show me where it says I can't," and some are "Show me where it says I can." Performance numbers are the can-type.

I think the Q-tip things has risen to urban legend status. Last time I heard it, I think it was a Centurion.

 

[Dumb Pilot]

It sounds like we're coming toward a consensus. DP, I'm with you on the FB as long as you have something that says -2,000 CRZ ALT = +450lbs in the performance summary or navlog or whatever.

Just saying you'll drop the gear/flaps isn't in the paperwork, and that's where the small lawyer center in some pilot's brains starts to squawk.

I never said that bro, where did I say that? What I'm saying is that there is a LOT more performance information on our release paper work than we normally give a glance too, I have worked with both the CAA and the FAA as a check airman and a designee capacity, And I am telling you that we tend to restrict ourselves here more in the States than other captains following the same regulations.(the FAA is a subscriber of ICAO, once you translate from English to American the regulation say the same damn thing) There is a wide, WIDE envelope of information and performance choices contained within our release paperwork that we have given away to the dispatcher, we are going the same way that the medical industry is going by asking for permission to big brother every time we want to change a couple of thousand feet or change 15 knots on our speeds because we have gotten up to the point that we are more worried about CYA than learning what is and what isn't what we can do with our release information, this whole discussion started with an example that wasn't double the weight or anything like that, it started with an example of somebody being a few hundred pounds over and there is quite a bit of latitude contained within our release information. That is all I'm saying, you guys seem to think that if you are a couple of hundred pounds over and you don't get permission from big brother you busted .125 NO! sorry but that is just NOT the case

Autobus
read what we have posted (the both of us) and we probably tended to be a little dismissive of each others point of view, I didn't mean to say that you are not a professional and an individual that is dedicated to your career after 20+years in this crappy business. But telling me after my 27 years "do yourself a favor and talk to the dispatcher" like I'm a moron and I don't understand the paperwork I have at hand is a little dismissive too.

Anyhow, I formally apologize

To the original question by Flying Corporal

The short answer is NO, I agree with my colleagues that you cannot take off knowing within your "plan" that you will land overweight, but my recommendation is to approach your check airman core and get educated as to what is contained within your release paperwork, so that you know what you can and cannot adjust within the confinements of that release

Done with this particular thread, good day