Cargo Question - again

[PCD001]

Is there a variable in how much cargo is loaded on the aircraft ??

Here we have 3 different flights, from 3 different companies, all with the same aircraft, all with the same number of pax, all with the same reputation of 120%.
Flt 1 = http://flynet.turksim.org/index.php5?st ... 208&p=2627 Cargo 5700kg.
Flt 2 = http://flynet.turksim.org/index.php5?st ... 438&p=2627 Cargo 5700kg.
Flt 3 = http://flynet.turksim.org/index.php5?st ... 695&p=2627 Cargo 1508kg.

Is there a reason flight 3 has 4192kg less cargo than the other two flights ?
5700kg is the correctly calculated cargo.

Cheers now
Bob.

[hezza]

Maybe it has to do with the amount of fuel carried.
Your flight seems to be outside the legal IFR-reserve operating range of even the 90-30ER (2100nm source MD) so presumably you had some fuel in the cargo area?
The other flights you link to are shorter and therefore maybe not maxed out on fuel.

Just a thought, BTW I love T-tails too

Graham

[joefremont]

I think the difference is that for the first two flights the weight information for the MD-90 was incorrect. I compared the values in our database to boeings numbers and they are correct, and for the last flight with 1508kg of cargo I did the math and with 172 passangers at 102kg of person(77kg) and baggage(25kg) plus the aircrafts empty weight, you have 1508kg left before you hit the aircrafts zero fuel weight.

As for the first two flights the max zero fuel weight had not yet entered so on those it did not calculate correctly.

[PCD001]

Thanks a lot for the detailed reply Joe, all understood now. Sorry you had to get involved in math . . . again !
@ Graham,. . Yes, I think they are fast becoming a dying type, only the small ERJ's and the CRJ's still in production. I'm still looking for my wide-bodied, Long distance, 'T' tail aircraft. I'd go with a VC10 if it wasn't so poor on fuel economy - guess thats RW facts for you.

Cheers now
Bob