CLP procedures

[clpsupervisor]

I have read the posts and some of the info is just off the wall. What we do here in CLP is simple and does work when the procedures are followed. We plan the W&B of each flt., get fuel from dispatch, then release the flt. to the city. Rarely are the load plans followed and that is why there are balance issues or weight issues.
When the CITY closes out both the pax & cargo, the W/B automatically goes via ACARS. If there is a delay in the a/c recieving a final W/B, 99.9% of the time it's due to no cargo or pax final from the city itself. A phone call from CLP is mute.(I just now tried to call PHL CLP coord. for a cargo close & no answer as usual). They know they need to close out their portion of the flt. Some say we should just close pax counts ourselves to save time. We can't, the final nos. wouldn't be correct. As far as "rarely catching the arrival fuels", we get a message telling us all about it, we can't change the fuel till we get a DECS release from dispatch after the city informs them of the true FOB. The arrival FOB messages are not always correct, we need confirmation of a correct FOB to avoid fuelers hooking up and charging us for fueling when it was never meant to be. Regardless of where the phone calls are made from or to, it still takes a phone call to talk to the ramp or gate. CLP works very nicely for the cities that can do their jobs correctly. Most people do not know what we can or can't do, why we should or shouldn't do certain things..etc. We would be more than willing to explain 1 simple thing, or the whole procedure from start to finish here if anyone has any questions. Just call...ask...There is so much more to all of this than what I can write. We can give true and accurate information. Some of the stations don't really know all the procedures or the whys & why nots. Most of our airline family is wonderful! Thank you!

 

[wings396]

And please tell me what the big benefit was to this CLP thing anyway??? :blink: I worked ops for over 20 years, and never had a problem getting the job done within the station before the upstart of CLP. I wasted more time on the phone with CLP than I can recall over the years due to last minute RWY changes, or FOB issues that were over the Min. Rls fuel. Before the CLP days, these items were done at the push of a key, and could have stayed that way. The creation of CLP was the brainchild of a select few at the former US East Mgmt. You still need agents in the station to put the cargo loads in, so you may as well have them do the entire job instead of creating another department to do the other 1/2 of the job. CLP was and is a waste... :down:

 

[luvn737s]

It's just one more way to lose vital information. The loaders are capable of running a simple computer program and are closer to the info, thus more able to keep things accurate. Actually, letting the flight deck compute their own trim would be most efficient of all.

 

[HPMKE]

It's just one more way to lose vital information. The loaders are capable of running a simple computer program and are closer to the info, thus more able to keep things accurate. Actually, letting the flight deck compute their own trim would be most efficient of all.

I work for US West in MKE and have done WB for 6 of my 7 years and if we go to CLP for the completely merged airline so be it.

The best answer I have yet to use will be used as often as possible if this comes to be and that when we get a weight restricted flight and the Shift Mgr or supervisor comes to me and asks why all I have to say will be "BECAUSE CLP SAID SO"
any questions call them!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[clpsupervisor]

And please tell me what the big benefit was to this CLP thing anyway??? :blink: I worked ops for over 20 years, and never had a problem getting the job done within the station before the upstart of CLP. I wasted more time on the phone with CLP than I can recall over the years due to last minute RWY changes, or FOB issues that were over the Min. Rls fuel. Before the CLP days, these items were done at the push of a key, and could have stayed that way.

This was rediculous to even say. I have worked W/B for 22 of 24 yrs. and still have the same problems now that I had 20 yrs. ago...no pax cnts. at dept. or no bag count. You watse your time with phone calls because you call the wrong place with FOB's. Dispatch is the one to call with a higher arrival fuel than the release fuel just like yrs. ago! They need to put it in the flt. plan & we then change it. It is all still "the push of a key".

 

[clpsupervisor]

I work for US West in MKE and have done WB for 6 of my 7 years and if we go to CLP for the completely merged airline so be it.

The best answer I have yet to use will be used as often as possible if this comes to be and that when we get a weight restricted flight and the Shift Mgr or supervisor comes to me and asks why all I have to say will be "BECAUSE CLP SAID SO"
any questions call them!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This was funny! You make it sound like we restrict flts. for the heck of it, on purpose, for no good reason. Do you know what a MTOW is? It is a maximum take off weight. It means this is the max. this a/c can weigh and still t/o. If the fuel load, the pax & the cargo all add up to weigh more than the MTOW, dah..the plane cannot t/o...so a restriction is put on the flt. so the MTOW is not exceeded! Not to make your life difficult or tick you off.
Unfortunately, a lot of cities ignore this. It is not our fault an a/c may not be able to carry thousands of #'s more than it does...seriously...we are not in charge of the specs on the a/c's. Oh, and by the way...the child cnts. someone said we rely on too heavily..we use them to bail out whom ever went over the restriction and put the a/c over MTOW...if we didn't beg for child cnts (that are FAA requirements anyway)..the ramp or gate would be offloading what they overloaded.

 

[wings396]

Stop trying to justify your position or department. I know damn well who to call about the FOB issue, but before a call was not even needed. Wasting time on the phone going back and forth with someone 1/2 way accross the state or country is useless to say the least. The A/C is in your station along with everthing that is going to be loaded on it, so do the full W&B job there. The guy who plans the load in CLP may know the weight of the cargo that you have, but is clueless as to it's bulk size... So there goes another phone call to have the load adjusted so that it will really work with what you have. If you did W&B for 20+ years before CLP, you should know just how much it is not needed to do the job. As I said before, doing one job in 2 locations is a pure waste period. You have the people doing 1/2 the function in the station, so let them do it all without some big office operation doing the rest...Kind of like having 2 guys change one lightbulb..

 

[Dog Wonder]

You have the people doing 1/2 the function in the station, so let them do it all without some big office operation doing the rest

Not such a big office, about 40 people. Before CLP there were many more doing Load Control just in the hubs.

As long as CLP is cheaper it is here to stay.

 

[a320av8r]

Not such a big office, about 40 people. Before CLP there were many more doing Load Control just in the hubs.

As long as CLP is cheaper it is here to stay.

Just a point from the receiving end-
When we first went to CLP I thought the same thing- here we go again, works better from the station, gonna be delayed, etc.
CLP is more than what the title says. It is not just load planning but performance too. All of the various factors are taken into account from current weather to MEL's and temporary airport NOTAMs, anti-ice, balanced field length, reduced climb, etc. I like knowing that the performance and numbers are done consistantly and correctly.
There are those that would argue that it's just entering data but I know that there is more to it. Most jobs look easy from the outside but are much more involved when on the inside.
If W/B is delayed, 99% of the time it is due to cargo or pax haven't been closed out. If I have a weight restriction I call the agent listed on the TPS and discuss it. It is always resolved either with a change or a good reason why the restriction is there. But, again, 99.999% of the time it is for a good reason.
Our CLP folks do a great job and I appreciate them.
As to the first officer doing the W/B on a computer or whatever- he/she has enough to do during taxi out without adding more, argueably the busiest person on the airline during that time.
West folks will like it when they get used to it.

 

[smallstFSA]

I always thought that CLP was originally started as a way to eliminate the OPS person in the non-tower stations and therefore reducing the head count. No other argument made any sense to me since a local person in charge of local flts eliminates phones calls and the need to have two people doing the same job.

When I did the local load planning manpower, load location and turn time were all considered. An example would be something like a light to medium load with 4 agents available (3 rampers plus the ops guy) You can unload one end while loading the other and be done with the operational end in 10-15 min. Now this might not create the ultimate CG but well within the envelope.

Another thing we used to do was hold out a smaller out zone to load with interlines and locals. This permitted the man loading the majority of out zones from killing himself trying to make all the bags fit in a small area (the front of a 737-3) and again gain productivity and time by splitting the load a little more between two areas.

But what do I know, all I got for striving for efficiency and quicker turns was being told that a high school drop out could do it better for $8.00 an hr.

JR

 

[DHG750R]

Just a point from the receiving end-

CLP is more than what the title says. It is not just load planning but performance too. All of the various factors are taken into account from current weather to MEL's and temporary airport NOTAMs, anti-ice, balanced field length, reduced climb, etc. I like knowing that the performance and numbers are done consistantly and correctly.

Agreed . However It is important to remember , CLP was born with the transition to SABRE in mind . The performance calculations that occured with the previous system were no different , In some special cases the information coming from the station had the most up to date information in it .

The TPS data was a result of the changeover to SABRE and not he changeover to CLP.

 

[wings396]

That is correct. The Stations were able to handle any performance issues as well before CLP. If the A/C had any MEL/CDL issues that restricted performance, they were taken into account by the computer system. I know that Dispatch used to enter some of these items into the system in advance. I can recall a certain dispatcher that would not release a flight from a station if the field conditions and the deicing report were not updated...This was in the summer months, which I always found amusing.

 

[PA18]

Very interesting and informative thread.

There does seem to be an epidemic lately of waiting for numbers at the end of the runway because the cargo numbers have not been provided to CLP from the loading station (with both the station ops tower person on radio and the dispatcher via ACARS telling the crew the same thing.)

Is it possible to designate one person -- the lead for example -- as the one responsible to get the numbers to CLP as quickly as possible, and make that person accountable if the flight is delayed for that reason?

Also, is it preferable for crews to ACARS the dispatcher with the arrival FOB than to radio it in to the local ops tower?

And with regard to FOB, the crew needs a fuel slip for every departure, even if it is FOB. I have been informed by fuelers that the company is charged a fee by the FBO for having the fueler read the gauges and produce a fuel slip, even if no fuel is pumped.

 

[diogenes]

If I've got to load the passenger and cargo data in the station, why not push a few more keys and do the w&b?

Agreed, if everything works right, CLP works fine. It is when the flight is going to gross that things get sticky.

With regards to performance issues, mainline stations STILL have agents qualified to handle those issues - it's not a big deal.

Remember, the East stations had computer w&b before there ever was SABRE or CLP.

With regards to MTOW, don't make me laugh. I have experienced many times CLP holding some weight in their pocket. Many times, against my better judgement, I abided by CLP restrictions and loaded to their limit. Only to watch them close the flight out and have up to 1200 lbs. of unused payload, and I'm left with a cartload of freight sitting on the ramp.

As I've said, it the interests of the company and my sanity, I'd pre-calculate a flight and load it to what I knew was in the graph, and present CLP with a fait accompli.

I've been lead to believe the CLP program plans for optimum trim for fuel savings, and that is a worthy goal. Contrast that to - how much fuel is that optimum trim going to save on a 275 mile fight at FL 17,000? Compared to the money saved by the scenario smallestFSA lays out?

"When I did the local load planning manpower, load location and turn time were all considered. An example would be something like a light to medium load with 4 agents available (3 rampers plus the ops guy) You can unload one end while loading the other and be done with the operational end in 10-15 min. Now this might not create the ultimate CG but well within the envelope.

Another thing we used to do was hold out a smaller out zone to load with interlines and locals. This permitted the man loading the majority of out zones from killing himself trying to make all the bags fit in a small area (the front of a 737-3) and again gain productivity and time by splitting the load a little more between two areas."

I asked someone in the know how much fuel was saved in my 275 mile flight scenario, and he said, "about $10 worth!"

Now, absent compelling information otherwise,I'd save that $ 10. But if I can save more than $10 by turning the flight quicker, then the crew has this little doo-hickie called trim tabs.

 

[BoeingBoy]

I've been lead to believe the CLP program plans for optimum trim for fuel savings, and that is a worthy goal.

I suspect you've been lead to believe correctly. For a given t/o weight, the trim setting is nearly always very, very close to being the same (at least on the 737's). That tells me that the CG is the nearly always the same for a given weight.

I'd frankly be surprised if there's $10 worth of fuel burn difference between CG being at the two opposite ends of the envelope in your 275 mile flight. In theory, the lowest fuel burn would be the result of having the CG at the aft edge of the envelope - something I've not seen since ferrying 727's.

Jim