Offloading makes the news!

I suspect that it was a case of a 737-700 wanting to be used rather than a 737-800.

Technically, the 73H is a bigger airplane by about 6 meters. The 73G has a smaller payload capacity and a longer flight distance than the 73H though.

I'm suprised that 3 men (~300Kg-~350Kgs maybe including luggage) would've actually made that much difference.

 

I may be able to shed some light here having recently sat next a 737 FO from
ADL to SYD. 737's used by DJ and QF basically come in 2 specs. A high spec=greater distance and on some acft that means a chip in the engine that allow greater take off thrust or range.QF has a mix of high and low specs (the high spec cost more ) but also have a number of slightly cheaper low spec acfrt. DJ 738s are low spec which isnt really an issue except on the longhauls when the WX is V hot. The FO advsd QF quiet often is approached to carry bags for DJ ex DRW...they can take the pax but not all the bags.
Re weights.....weights and balance of the aircraft can be critical .taking those extra 2 punters can mean the diff between a nonstop flt or enroute refuel which costs ,000s in extra costs...hope the boys were given next flight with free Live TV and send to the lounge as well.
My mining mate in WA where hot conditions are freq has told me the QF717s normally have a few seats blocked off and that increases as the WX gets hotter...and they have had their engines rechipped for more power.
The Aussie climate isnt a airline friendly place at times

 

sorry shud have added agree total waste on newspaper inches
Now Ben Cousins arrested along with Daniel Chick...thats news

 

The Nadi Hump as i think it was called where QF 707's (not sure of the aircraft) had been allowed higher thrust and higher engine temps for a period of time due to the hot conditions and the high load.
E

 

Thats right also the Qantas short versions of the 707 originally had injectors to boost take off performance but once engines advanced to Bypass type I think so later versions didnt need them. Thats why QF took the stubby 707 and later the 747SP..which were a real fav of mine ..always amused us that the Pan Am SP had to stop in Nadi more often than op direct vs the QF SP which I think had RR engines with a lot more poke

 

all correct as i mentioned a mate booked DJ once ex DRW on the midnight horror and on arr in SYD had to go round to QF to pick up his bags that DJ cudnt carry...now he tvls QF ex DRW as 767s most nights

 

Almost right. MTOW is the sum of aircraft basic operating weight (empty apart from a few odds and sodds) plus fuel plus payload. We have 180 seats in our B737-800s while Qantas have 164ish (can't recall exact number). So the situation can arise where we have a higher payload and less "room" (actually weight) for fuel, and have a higher fuel burn because of the heavier payload. Therefore less range for the same aircraft.

Also, there are multiple different MTOW's available for the B737-800 (although the changes are just paper and chips as noted earlier by Standby). We have some of our 800s as High Gross Weight and some at Low Gross Weight (the leased ones that we needed to get in a hurry after Ansett fell over). The HGW are the -26 engines and the LGW have the -24 engines as NM noted, but I would be interested to know NM's source for saying that we have them registered at the same MTOWs. Obviously if a HGW aircraft is operating at close to its MTOW and has to be downgraded to a LGW, something has to give and hopefully that something won't be a few tonnes of fuel.

cheers

CrazyDave98

 

NM, as you point out, the actual limit is the plaque. I suspect what is on the CASA website is a generic MTOW for the type rather than the specific aircraft. We certainly don't operate our -24 engined LGW aircraft to same MTOW as the -26 engined HGW. So we can end up with an offload situation if we have to downgrade from a HGW to LGW which we of course try to avoid. But even HGW can be caught short by particular bad weather forecasts requiring diversion fuel beyond normal holding requirements or very high headwinds. I was offloaded from one of our NAN-MEL flights when we operated that route.

And as noted before, on challenging routes the HGW will have longer range with same payload because it can take extra fuel where MTOW is the limit rather than fuel volume.

All of our owned aircraft and all future deliveries will be HGW - only leased aircraft are LGW (most easy to spot by lack of winglets and live2air).

cheers

CrazyDave98

 

Generally the Low Gross Weights (such as VH-VOA, B, C & D) have MTOW 71894kg (and none of these have winglets) while the High Gross Weight have MTOW of 79015kg