Seat Changes On A321--weight And Balance

[Art at ISP]

This was unusual for mainline...

I flew BOS-PHL early this morning, and just before boarding they made an announcement that due to the light load and the fact that the 321 is so long, they had to block off rows 8-18 due to weight and balance. There were only 65 booked on the flight. This was the first time I ever saw seat shifting due to weight and balance on a main line jet--it's normal on RJ's though.

The agents did their best to apologize for the situation, and they asked discreetly for all Preferred members to wait behind (my assumption is they were going to put as many Preferreds in F as they could). This was very well handled by the ground staff at BOS--a few grumbles from customers but in the end they all understood.

The flight itself? VERY early into PHL and we were parked and the jetway was in place right away!! MAJOR improvement on that count.

Keep it up.....

The only negative was that the tray table in the seat was completely broken..and it was obvious as the armrest was up since it wouldn't go down....shouldn't that have been fixed on the RON?? The problem was a missing bracket and 2 screws....

My best to you all....

 

[USFlyer]

This has happened to me several times on A319s PHL-SEA during the winter months. Loads tend to run light to SEA in January-February.

 

[Hope777]

Art, it does happen when the cargo load is light. We also have the same problem on the 737-400 with light loads. It can also be that the ramp, loaded MORE cargo in a bin then Central Load Plan requested. Once in a while mistakes happen and you load the aircraft say forward instead of loading it aft, this would also effect the W & B of the aircraft.

 

[ta152]

Makes me wonder how tricky it will be for the operartors to load an Airbus 380.
Getting 500 people and their carry on junk loaded and unloaded is going to be a challenge for the flight crews.

 

[javaboy]

yes not unsual, in fact out of ISP using the MD80 back in the day, same thing had to add ballast to airplane to keep within balance.

 

[LGA777]

Actually this often happens on the 321 when its booked under 70 in Y but full or almost in F.

LGA777

 

[Art at ISP]

Thanks all,

It was booked to 65, and I think they were moving preferreds to first...all in all it was very efficiently done.....

It does happen to be the lightest load I have seen on a 321 of late.

My best to you all....

 

[ua767fo]

Art,
Under certain conditions. airplanes need to carry ballast for balance purposes. A lightly loaded DC9-80 is notorious. Typically, 1500-2000 lbs of sandbags in the front bin for a ferry. Although most passengers never see blocking, it happens quite frequently, and contributes to the safe operation. Btw, when ferrying a B727-200, you typically need a minimum of 6000# of additional fuel in the center tank for balance.

Regards from DEN

 

[diogenes]

Corporate choices enter into this arena, as well.

For example, the PI 737-200's were a piece of cake w&b-wise. Fill the front with cargo, move to the back, fill it if you need to. Never a balance issue:seldom a weight issue, particularly the ones with the -15 Pratts - hot rods!!

When U, in order to lighten the a/c to save fuel, removed the forward airstairs and modified the galleys, the center of gravity shifted aft. We frequently had to block aft seats and/or leave off aft cargo.

I doubt the fuel savings offset the direct and indirect costs, but just another day at the Palace.

Some years later, the Palace decided to load the a/c slightly aft heavy. Theoretically, this would reduce trim settings and lessen drag, reducing fuel costs.

Problem was, you now were offloading and reloading out of the same bin, slowing turn times.

Historically, on full or late flights, local ramp agents would look at whatever bin was light inbound, and reload as much as w&b would permit into that bin. This way, you would offload and onload at the same time. Thus cutting fuel costs (APU burn), crew costs and protecting passenger connections.

I asked one of the whiz kids how much fuel we were saving from my station to CLT with the Palace scheme.

$5. Five bucks. F-I-V-E clams. Eff-eye-vee-eee stinkin' dineros.

Some freakin' chairwarmer had extrapolated that figure, adjusted for the various stage lengths on the system, and come up with a big savings on paper.

I'd bet the farm those savings were not offset by the direct and indirect costs of the additional time the a/c sat on the ground.

Just a little insight into the acumen that led to two BK's.

Here's a little more.

AL used a min/max w&b system (similiar to how Noah distributed weight on the ark); PI used a decimal or index system.

Sooooo, during the 'best practices' phase AL taught all of the PI guys their min/max system (I must add, the index system was intuitive and easily learned; the min/max, not so easy).

Problem was, you could not apply the min/max system to 767's (what the heck, Uncle Ed didn't want 'em anyway).


Soooo, all of the AL/PI guys got sent back to training on the index system.