PAX weights

Hello!

May I ask that about what weights You are using for PAX? I can't get them to match with PFPX . All others number are correct both MJC8 Q400 Contro Panel/Weight & Balance site and PFPX.

If I compute weigts I get result ZFM is -(minus) 685 kg my test flight and TOM is -(minus) 580 kg if I compare weights to PFPX.

This is weight I tryed with PFPX:

Adults 82 kg
Children 41 kg
Infants 11 kg

FSX SE and MJC8 Q400 Pro

Rolf

Comments

  • Hi!

    Maybe this example shows better about what I mean:

    Test Flight

    Route:
    LOWI UNKEN L725 INPUL DCT NEMAL LOWW

    PFPX Weights (KG):
    (Adults -> 85 kg Children -> 16 kg Infants -> 4 kg)

    TRIP........................................939
    RELEASE...............................2 343

    Load Planning:

    Empty Weight......................17 523
    Payload.........46+0 PAX......5068
    Zero Fuel Wight...................22 591
    FUEL......................................2 343
    Ramp Weight........................24 934
    Take Off Weight LOWI.........24 829
    Landing Weight LOWW.......23980
    Underload..............................3717
    Max Extra Fuel......................2975

    MJC CONTROL PANEL:

    Baggage Section:
    FWD -> 390
    AFT -> 1238

    PAX Section:
    OA -> 18 OB -> 15 OC -> 5 OD -> 8

    DOM -> 18434

    T/O FUEL -> 2343
    TRIP FUEL -> 939

    Useful Load:

    PAX............................................3 900
    BAG...........................................1 618
    TRAFFIC LOAD........................5 518
    UNDERLOAD.............................2 356

    FINAL WEIGHT & BALANCE:

    ZFM -> 23 952
    TOM -> 26 295
    LM -> 23 356

    Rolf

  • Hello Rolf,

    the problem is that some aircraft can not take advantage of the possibilities offered by PFPX. Thus, the Majestics Dash counts only with a weight, whether man, woman or child. You can not find a separation in the Majestics Load Editor. Unfortunately, Majestics also reckons with an odd value, ie 84 pounds are used for a Pax, then 84.78 Kg for 76. This value, ie 84 Kg, must now also be set in PFPX. This is relatively easy, because you can specify different weights in the settings and then select them via the flight status. Since there is no separation between man, woman and child in the then created OFP (unlike in a load sheet, which does not exist for the Dash in eg TOPCAT), I can also provide a child with the 84 kg and as select passenger. Overall, I would have Pax type 5 options here, but this does not always work. So I have adjusted the weights in PFPX for all aircraft, just have to take care to consider the right flight status in the planning.
    In the OFP at the end only the total number of Paxe with the total weight appears. So in the end result, this results in full utilization with 76 Paxen in the OFP 6384 Kg, in the load editor of Majestics, which I use as a replacement Loadsheet printed, then 6444 Kg, so 60 Kg more. Real there will always be some difference! If you would like it the other way, you set 85 kg for PFPX, then PFPX plans with a maximum of 16 kg too much.

    Frank

  • Hi Frank!

    Thank You. As You can see from my example those weights are very much different.

    PFPX:
    Zero Fuel Wight...................22 591
    Take Off Weight LOWI.........24 829

    MJC:
    ZFM -> 23 952
    TOM -> 26 295

    I think there is something else that make so big differense. I saw a one You Tube video example today and this person had very close those weights between MJC and PFPX. I tryed this but no lucky.

    Rolf

  • Rolf,

    your problem is manifold:

    1. Pax weight differs between PFPX and the CPAN: PFPX assumes 110 kg per pax including baggage, whereas the CPAN figures are based on 120 kg including baggage (PFPX: 5,068 kg/46=110 kg; CPAN: (3,900 kg+1,618 kg)/46=120 kg); this alone accounts for a 450 kg difference (figures are rounded);
    2. Your Empty Weight or Dry Operating Mass (DOM) differs as well: PFPX assumes 17,523 kg, CPAN assumes 18,434 kg; here's another 911 kg in favor of the CPAN;
    3. Lastly, PFPX accounts for 105 kg of Taxi Fuel, i. e. fuel that you will burn while taxiing out for departure (note the difference between Ramp Weight and Takeoff Weight). Obviously, these 105 kg will not be part of your Takeoff Mass. CPAN, however, doesn't distinguish between Total Fuel and Takeoff Fuel, hence a third factor when you compare those weights.

    To sum things up, you are seeing a total difference of 450 kg + 911 kg + 105 kg = 1,466 kg

    X-Check with those TOMs according to the load sheets: 26,295 kg (CPAN) - 24,829 kg (PFPX) = 1,466 kg

    Other than adjusting the values for Paxes in PFPX, if you also adjust your DOM in the CPAN as well as keep in mind the fuel being used while taxiing, those numbers should match up pretty nicely.

    Kind regards,
    Oliver

  • Oliver,

    Thank You. Mayby I get this problem to solve now.

    Rolf

  • Let us know should you have any further questions.

    Oliver

  • Of course, you also need to match all the base weights between the Majestics Editor and PFPX, with the editor's weights and, of course, the Majestic Dash's dominating. In the picture you can see my settings for the Dash in PFPX. The maximum values ​​for TOM, LM and ZFW are visible in the Majestics Editor, the DOM can be found in aircraft.cfg with 17043 Kg. The DOM (Dry Operating Mass = DOW) already includes the crew and the catering. An empty weight can not be found here, but unfortunately PFPX works with an empty weight, but offers no additional possibility to enter a DOM (BOW, DOW). Here you have to enter the 17043 at Empty Weight. In addition to the difference mentioned in the other answer in the Paxen (60 or 16 kg with full Pax number) comes in the Majestics Load Editor is still a small trap, because you enter there the takeoff fuel, so it should not take the value here, which is at PFPX as RELEASE, because there is the Taxy Fuel still included. Of course, it does not quite fit, if the calculated fuel a small shortfall. Of course, this is not reflected in the OFP, but in the load editor. What I said earlier with the passengers is also true for the luggage, and here too you have to be careful that your desired luggage weight fits and you enter this in the editor. I take 10 kg per Pax in the normal flight, in the charter 20 kg, which can be set in PFPX again and can select under Flight, so in the end once the weight of the passengers under the type and the luggage under Flight.

  • use just only ZFM from plan PFPX and no problems;)
  • Not exactly the point, but did someone whitnessed that occassionaly the FMC Fuel Page assumes the PAX weight to bei 11kg only. After reloading the aircraft it's the given weight again. This to me happened two times this week.
  • > @DCLAN said:
    > the FMC Fuel Page assumes the PAX weight to bei 11kg
    this value does not affect anything(PAX advisory value) , since in the end the main thing is that the calculation should be weight without fuel and the amount of fuel on board B)
  • Thank You all!

    I feel I stubid. I tryed a few changes those PFPX weights but no a good result. I show to You my numbers with a three pictures:

    Rolf

  • Hi again!

    After try and error I got those weight numbers to match very close (difference is about + 200 - 300 kg from PFPX).

    This is what I did:

    Rolf

  • Hi Rolf,

    you´ve read my PM?

    First, the weights from the majestics for DOM, MZFW, MTOW, MLW, max Cargo/Baggage and Fuel are given! You can see these maximums on the Majestics loading tool. You must also take these values ​​in PFPX, for each aircraft individually, so note the ID!

    The Majestics calculates for each Pax with 84,78 kg, so you have now in PFPX either 84 (PFPX plans at full passenger number 76 with about 60 kg too little, or you specify 85 kg, then plans PFPX with 16 kg too much. I take 84 Kg, with 85 maybe even better.
    Important, you have to remember where you set the value, so under Adults and Type S, I often calculate the luggage with 10 kg, which I have specified under L / R. You also have to select this again in the PFPX flight planning later, otherwise it will not work.

    In the PFPX picture you´ve 94 Kg Payload - 10 Kg Bagagge = 84 Kg for 1 Pax

    If you then plan the flight, the OFP comes out in the end, and in it all contain now calculated weight values ​​and the fuel quantities. You will find a MIN T / O Fuel value and a RELEASE value. This represents the block fuel, including the fuel for rolling and serves as a value for the amount of fuel we need to refuel. But as captain I have to take the decision a little bit more (rounding up or bad weather, ...). In our case, I once presented both and once used the original plan, once taken a little more fuel. It is important that you accept the values ​​correctly in the Load Editor of the Majestics.
    In the event that I take everything as planned in the original by PFPX, the difference in TOW between PFPX and the Majestics Load Editor is exactly only the 60 kg resulting from the weight of the passengers 84 / 84.78 kg. In the second case, where I rounded up the fuel, the TOW difference between PFPX and the load editor of the Majestics increases by an additional 28 Kg.

    PFPX TOW = 26859 Kg / Majestics Load Editor = 26919 Kg = 60 Kg Difference

    PFPX TOW = 26859 Kg / Majestics Load Editor = 26947 Kg = 88 Kg Difference because 28 Kg more Fuel. Real, the OFP would then corrected manually, in a then before the block off handed Loadsheet all values ​​would be correct in it, including the more fuel tanked by the Captain

  • Hi Frank!

    I didn't noticed Your PM, sorry for that but thank You very much for Yours detailed information. Very helpfull, indeed. I'm old fart from Finland and my english language is very poor level so it's take a little time as I get all those things to clear on my brain.

    Ok - I'll start to scrutinise Your last post.

    Rolf

  • The PM would then anyway not been helpful, or would have been incomprehensible, because I thought of the name Rolf Germany or Austria. In that case we would have been able to make a call on the phone. But my Finnish skills are = 0. :D

    So if there are any more questions, just ask.

  • Hi Frank!

    I got those weight match with same differences as You - 55-60 kg...

    Well - finnish language - it's very easy IMO :)

    Thank You

    Rolf

  • Hello!

    I found this Loading tables from one of the my computer folder and I post it there if somebody is interesting it:

    Rolf

  • Hi,

    I did this chart quite a while ago and since I did another one more precise as it goes PAX per PAX instead of by 10th of PAX.

    It can be printed on A5 paper (3 sheets) for convenience.

    Enjoy,

    JP

  • jpgmultimodal

    Thank You very much!

    Rolf

  • Hello again!

    A one question is remain. I try to follow the Franks guide and I think that Majestics Load Editor not calculate a cargo weight at all - am I right?

    PFPX to do it and it is affect to the ZFM / TOM / LM and thats why Majestics Load Editor shows less weight than PFPX -correct?

    So I should leave cargo weight out from PFPX and use 0 (zero) kg?

    Rolf

  • Hi JP,

    Some questions to your more detailled load sheet. First the maximum numbers for OA, OB, OC and OD are different to the older sheet and are not matching the max numbers in the control panel. Is this a special airline configuration you are referencing here?

    In the old sheet you start filling the pax sectors from the back (OD). In the newer sheet you fill OA first. If I take your example with 30 pax, the CG is out of limits far to the left.

    4/6/10/10 works much better than 9/10/9/2 - any idea about that?

    Rgds
    Reinhard

  • Hi,

    the Dash Editor simply calculates the CG location automatically based on the inputs you need to make manually for both the Paxe and the Load. PFPX sets the values ​​for the load automatically according to the area code. Since I calculate in Pax per Pax 10 kg suitcase, and i.d.R. with 76 Paxen fly, I enter the 760 Kg (76 x 10) also manually.

  • edited September 2019

    Hello Reinhard,

    I used different operators load configuration like: MALEV, CROATIAN, ARIK, FLYBE and of course MJC. Note that Flybe has a different layout sections and a MAX capacity of 78 PAX.

    I mixed all bits and pieces from every operator to obtain something which suits me.

    My aim was to keep the CG in the center as practicable as possible to have a well balanced aircraft at all times.

    The MAX number of the different sections of the MJC balance sheet (Control Panel) is not followed by the book but it does not matter if the aircraft is well balanced at the end.

    If you take the example of the 30 PAX and if you load 4/6/10/10, it work fine only if you do not have any luggage.

    I used 13 Kg luggage per PAX so when I load the 9/10/9/2, I load 390 Kg in the H7 AFT hold and then the CG is OK.

    The AFT hold has 2 sections H6 and H7 and you should load H7 first then when you reach 454 Kg (or 34 standard bags) you continue to load H6 up to a total of 1225 Kg.

    In our MJC Q400 these two AFT holds are considered as one as it was probably going to be too complicated to do two AFT holds for the Sim and of no practical use ; maybe the Q400 used by MJC has only one AFT hold, I do not know. I just show it on my loading chart to be as close as possible as a real (Flybe) plane.

    The MAX loads in H7 / H6 / H5 are taken from Flybe.

    H5 is seldom used (mostly crew bags) as with the aircraft full (76 PAX) the luggage total weight is only 988 Kg.

    During training flights, it is recommended to have a 200 Kg ballast in the H7 hold for balance purposes.

    This loading chart has been made to suit my needs and can be amended to suit your own configuration.

    Regards,

    JP

Sign In or Register to comment.