PDA

View Full Version : Who ties down the cargo?



Robert F. Dorr
06-04-2013, 04:23 PM
It looks like officials and reporters are belatedly catching on the the obvious cause of the sad loss of a Boeing 747-400 at Bagram in Aprl:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/04/world/asia/shifting-cargo-may-have-doomed-plane-that-crashed-near-kabul.html?_r=0

Do we benefit from having a contractor handle what would otherwise be called a strategic airlift mission?

Why are we using the Boeing 747-400 to handle heavy vehicles when it lacks roll-on, roll-off capability? (No, you can't buy my book "Boeing 747-400." It's out of print).

And most important to me is this question. Help me with this, please:

If this had been a military airlifter, who would have been responsible for making sure the cargo was properly loaded aboard and secured? What Air Force Specialty Code is involved? Is this the job of the loadmaster? Of an aerial port specialist? Who?

Same question, now, with regard to a contractor operated jet at Bagram. Who?

Trying to figure out what to think about this tragic aircraft loss.

RobotChicken
06-04-2013, 04:42 PM
:spy The lowest bidder`?? :plane

MedWeenie
06-04-2013, 04:55 PM
Loadmaster ties it down but the Aircraft Commander is ultimately in charge of the whole thing.

JD2780
06-04-2013, 05:17 PM
Loadmaster ties it down but the Aircraft Commander is ultimately in charge of the whole thing.

What happens on an contracted 747? Also, I've seen aerialport folks do some of the tie down portion of it, usually it's hectic back there if they're hot loading.

VFFTSGT
06-04-2013, 05:18 PM
From my understanding, loadmaster is the one that deals with it...if it was a military aircraft.

All the reading that I have done on this particular case though...the plane had civilian loadmaster but TCN's are apparently involved in loading the plane as well.

RobotChicken
06-04-2013, 05:23 PM
:wtf1: Well 'Someone' F'ed the pooch' for sure;it was not caused by 'Magic sky dude',he is busy elsewhere...

Robert F. Dorr
06-04-2013, 05:30 PM
In 2002, I took and published a photo of a loadmaster looking over a cargo that had not yet reached an aircraft. The guy was unquestionably a loadmaster but apparently he didn't belong in the location where I photographed him. I received this response (edited to make it one space between sentences):

"Robert F. Dorr (author and photographer) has goofed in his photo, caption and article on page 41 of the 28 October 2002 Air Force Times, 'Loadmasters have a rich heritage in the Air Force'.

"An Aerial Port cargo storage grid location ('the yard') is a secure area for AMC [Air Mobility Command] terminals to hold inbound and outbound cargo while the cargo awaits airlift or release to our customers. For a loadmaster to check cargo in the yard is unheard of. Crew members are unaware of what cargo may be selected by an Aerial Port Load Planning section. Your photo and caption gives the appearance that enlisted crew members (loadmasters) enter the yard to check cargo prior to an Aerial Port completing its portion of the mission execution. Not true.

"Cargo eligible to fly within the DoD is under the control of the terminal until qualified Load Planners select and the Air Freight personnel pull and sequence the cargo for upload on an outbound mission based on strict MAJCOM guidance. Generally, the first time a loadmaster may visually see and/or check selected cargo for his or her mission would be behind the aircraft when the Air Freight Material Handling Equipment (MHE) and a load team arrives for aircraft loading. At our larger Aerial Ports where qualified "Phase II" aerial porters exist, a loadmaster may arrive at a fully loaded aircraft or enter crew rest immediately and never have to stay while cargo is downloaded.

"Aerial Porters work daily with our aircrews to ensure DoD cargo moves expeditiously throughout the world, but please give our Aerial Porters their due. From Load planning to loading and unloading cargo (even without the loadmasters aboard)."

So at what point does the cargo chop from the aerial porter to the loadmaster?

Robert F. Dorr
06-04-2013, 05:32 PM
From my understanding, loadmaster is the one that deals with it...if it was a military aircraft.

All the reading that I have done on this particular case though...the plane had civilian loadmaster but TCN's are apparently involved in loading the plane as well.

TCNs? Third country nationals? Someone who is neither American nor Afghan?

Pullinteeth
06-04-2013, 05:45 PM
TCNs? Third country nationals? Someone who is neither American nor Afghan?

Correct...TCNs are typically from the Asian subcontinent but not always...

Robert F. Dorr
06-04-2013, 05:52 PM
Can anyone tell me whether Third Country Nationals load cargo at Bagram?

RobotChicken
06-04-2013, 06:00 PM
Correct...TCNs are typically from the Asian subcontinent but not always...
:spy "Wonderful"!!:omfg:

Robert F. Dorr
06-04-2013, 06:07 PM
OK, As a guy with about 43 years experience in transportation and airlift - this is what I know. For strictly Air Mobility Command (AMC) (formally known as Military Airlift Command (MAC) Bob) missions - the aerial port is responsible for load planning, actual loading, and tie down of all cargo whether it's a military aircraft or a contracted Civil Reserve Airlift Fleet (CRAF) commercial aircraft flying an AMC contracted mission. The loadmaster is like a quality control for the load - but as someone else has said, the aircraft commander is ultimately responsible for his aircraft and the load.

Having said that, this was not an AMC nor CRAF mission. There are surface (read ocean carriers) who provide what is called multi-modal movements. That is, they get the cargo to the ocean port from it's inland origin, put it on a ship, sail it to a destination ocean port and then move it to it's final inland destination. Those carriers often use airlift between in the inland points of origin and/or destination - and they do it both for cargo originating in the US and for cargo originating in the AOR returning to the US.

This was one of those flights. For those flights - the carrier - in the case National Air Cargo - is responsible for everything using their own people. The military is in no way involved in the load planning, loading, and/or tie down of the cargo aboard that aircraft - only the carrier's personnel.

Very helpful. But let's forget about a contractor situation and talk about an Air Force flight. At least two people here have said the loadmaster is responsible for tying down the cargo. Are they wrong?

RobotChicken
06-04-2013, 06:10 PM
:spy How about security,monitoring???? Thanks..'calmo'.

Calmo70
06-04-2013, 06:12 PM
OK, As a guy with about 43 years experience in transportation and airlift - this is what I know. For strictly Air Mobility Command (AMC) (formally known as Military Airlift Command (MAC) Bob) missions - the aerial port is responsible for load planning, actual loading, and tie down of all cargo whether it's a military aircraft or a contracted Civil Reserve Airlift Fleet (CRAF) commercial aircraft flying an AMC contracted mission. The loadmaster is like a quality control for the load - but as someone else has said, the aircraft commander is ultimately responsible for his aircraft and the load.

Having said that, this was not an AMC nor CRAF mission. There are surface (read ocean carriers) who provide what is called multi-modal movements. That is, they get the cargo to the ocean port from it's inland origin, put it on a ship, sail it to a destination ocean port and then move it to it's final inland destination. Those carriers often use airlift between in the inland points of origin and/or destination - and they do it both for cargo originating in the US and for cargo originating in the AOR returning to the US.

This was one of those flights. For those flights - the carrier - in the case National Air Cargo - is responsible for everything using their own people. The military is in no way involved in the load planning, loading, and/or tie down of the cargo aboard that aircraft - only the carrier's personnel.

RobotChicken
06-04-2013, 06:20 PM
:spy How about security,monitoring???? Thanks..'calmo'.

Calmo70
06-04-2013, 06:31 PM
Very helpful. But let's forget about a contractor situation and talk about an Air Force flight. At least two people here have said the loadmaster is responsible for tying down the cargo. Are they wrong?

If the loadmaster is at the aircraft when it is loaded, then he can tell the aerial porters how he/she wants the cargo tied down. If he is not there - as someone else has mentioned, the aerial porters have people who are what is called Phase II qualified. That means they have had specialized training that qualifies them the to load an aircraft without the aircrew (including the loadmaster) present. If that is the case, the Phase II qualified individual makes the determination how the cargo is tied down.

Having said all that - if the loadmaster comes to the aircraft after the cargo is tied down and doesn't like it, he/she will more than likely go to the aircraft commander who will virtually always agree with the loadmaster and then request the aerial porters come back out and do it the way the loadmaster wants it.

And - wherever there is an aerial port presence, I can guarantee you the loadmaster will not be the one doing the actual work of loading/tying down the cargo - that will be done by the aerial porters.

VFFTSGT
06-04-2013, 06:39 PM
If the loadmaster is at the aircraft when it is loaded, then he can tell the aerial porters how he/she wants the cargo tied down. If he is not there - as someone else has mentioned, the aerial porters have people who are what is called Phase II qualified. That means they have had specialized training that qualifies them the to load an aircraft without the aircrew (including the loadmaster) present. If that is the case, the Phase II qualified individual makes the determination how the cargo is tied down.

Having said all that - if the loadmaster comes to the aircraft after the cargo is tied down and doesn't like it, he/she will more than likely go to the aircraft commander who will virtually always agree with the loadmaster and then request the aerial porters come back out and do it the way the loadmaster wants it.

And - wherever there is an aerial port presence, I can guarantee you the loadmaster will not be the one doing the actual work of loading/tying down the cargo - that will be done by the aerial porters.

Bob, it sounds like Clam knows more about loading than me. It is possible I am wrong - I did preface my statement with 'from my understanding.' Also, on the TCN note, I cannot confirm it first hand...again it is just what I have read.

Calmo70
06-04-2013, 06:59 PM
Bob, it sounds like Clam knows more about loading than me. It is possible I am wrong - I did preface my statement with 'from my understanding.' Also, on the TCN note, I cannot confirm it first hand...again it is just what I have read.

VFF - On the TCN question - you're absolutely correct. There are TCNs that load/tie down the cargo for the contracted carriers (the one's I mentioned - multi-modal carriers). Some contractors have American supervisors - but I've also seen aircraft being loaded without any American supervision.

And, there are local nationals around the world working in aerial ports that help load/tie down cargo on military/CRAF aircraft - however those are always under US Military supervision.

LovedtoFly
06-04-2013, 07:12 PM
If he is not there - as someone else has mentioned, the aerial porters have people who are what is called Phase II qualified.

These people are called APEX Loadmasters now...(Aerial Port Expeditors)

ttribe
06-04-2013, 07:32 PM
Ultimately it is up to the flying crew to ensure that their load is properly secure. Period. Even if someone who is supposed to be qualified to push your load aboard and lock it down, part of any pre-flight check is to ensure that the load is secured correctly. "If" the load on that mishap 747 was not properly secured, then someone on board that airplane did not do their job correctly. Even in the big movers like FEDEX or UPS, someone on the crew goes back and checks the load before every take off. TCN's may have been part of the chain of trouble, but the pre-flight check should catch a load mistake. When I was young I trusted someone else to do a peice of my pre-flight work and it cost me my qualification when he didn't do it right. It never happened again.
I know that if that jet had a load of heavy trucks, it's a more complicated load check. Proper chaining is critical. It could just be that something broke, and caused the CG to shift.

One point of order to add to the original question. On tankers, the Boom operator is the loadmaster when they carry cargo or people.

RobotChicken
06-04-2013, 07:37 PM
:spy Is there 'redundancy' for said chain failure?(if shit happens)

Slyoldawg
06-04-2013, 07:38 PM
It looks like officials and reporters are belatedly catching on the the obvious cause of the sad loss of a Boeing 747-400 at Bagram in Aprl:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/04/world/asia/shifting-cargo-may-have-doomed-plane-that-crashed-near-kabul.html?_r=0

Do we benefit from having a contractor handle what would otherwise be called a strategic airlift mission?

Why are we using the Boeing 747-400 to handle heavy vehicles when it lacks roll-on, roll-off capability? (No, you can't buy my book "Boeing 747-400." It's out of print).

And most important to me is this question. Help me with this, please:

If this had been a military airlifter, who would have been responsible for making sure the cargo was properly loaded aboard and secured? What Air Force Specialty Code is involved? Is this the job of the loadmaster? Of an aerial port specialist? Who?

Same question, now, with regard to a contractor operated jet at Bagram. Who?

Trying to figure out what to think about this tragic aircraft loss.

During my Flight Engineer days it was the responsibility of the Loadmaster to secure the load and the Flight Engineer then checked the load and pressure doors to make sure all was secure. It was ultimately the pilot's responsibility to insure everything was ready to go. I never had a pilot go after me to check the security of the load during my flying days. They took the Flight Engineer's word that everything was ready to go. During those years I did find cargo locks unsecured and pressure door locks unsecured. After securing them I usually had a word or two with the Loadmaster. Personally, I never trusted anyone in the flying business to simply take their word that everything was secure.

technomage1
06-04-2013, 07:43 PM
One thing I've always noticed whenever I've used them (admittedly not much) is that the cargo straps always look beat up - like they've been around for 100 years or more. Is there any rule that states how many times they may be used or to inspect them for wear prior to use?

Absinthe Anecdote
06-04-2013, 07:56 PM
Has anyone heard when accident investigation will be released?

ttribe
06-04-2013, 08:15 PM
Has anyone heard when accident investigation will be released?

It really depends on who is responsible for the report. FAA?, USAF?, DOD?. I'm sure their insurance company will even have their own investigation. Maybe even Boeing. I wouldn't look for a final report for at least a year, unless what they find is real clear cut.

VFFTSGT
06-04-2013, 08:35 PM
One thing I've always noticed whenever I've used them (admittedly not much) is that the cargo straps always look beat up - like they've been around for 100 years or more. Is there any rule that states how many times they may be used or to inspect them for wear prior to use?

Yes there is and I don't know why some that look 100 years old are still around...someone just not taking the initiative to dump them maybe?

Seemed like we had an endless supply of new ones at my last base.

ttribe
06-04-2013, 08:46 PM
Yes there is and I don't know why some that look 100 years old are still around...someone just not taking the initiative to dump them maybe?

Seemed like we had an endless supply of new ones at my last base.

If a loadmaster writes up worn out straps and they are not replaced, they usually wind up with a mysterious cut or two. This is good to ensure it is replaced. Not that Ive been party to , or seen such things happen.

VCO
06-04-2013, 09:36 PM
Does it strike anyone else as odd that they apparently used 5,000 lb rated cargo straps instead of 25,000 lb chains to secure 80 tons of cargo? The article states that the charred cargo straps were cut. Well no sh**! Coming from an equipment background, you use chains to secure heavy equipment on trailers, not cargo straps. Those are saved for the lighter stuff.

imnohero
06-04-2013, 10:18 PM
There are cargo straps rated at 20K pounds. The problem with straps as heavy cargo tiedown is that a) they stretch and b) they can be fatigued (read: weakened) with no outward signs. It is also possible for a single tiedown to fail and cause a cascade failure in the remaining tiedowns. If we assume that noone did anything intentionally wrong, the most likely scenario is that a tiedown failed and caused a reaction failure of the remaining tiedowns.

The article said something about the tiedown straps appearing to be cut. Though a material analysis may answer this question definitively, don't count on it. A scrap across a nylon strap can weaken it at that point enough to cause a failure that looks like a cut. And with the fire, these are not the best circumstances for that sort of analysis.

These are some of the reasons that the military requires chains be used on heavy cargo instead of straps.

Venus
06-04-2013, 10:46 PM
As what goes on in Afghanistan National Air Cargo is a stand alone operation, they use mainly TCN's majority of where I was at Filipinos. To be a load master in the civilian world is not as stringent as the USAF in qualifications. The only thing USAF port Dogs do with these guys is supply them with a 60K offloader and driver . Unlike a C-17,130 or C-5 a civilian acft does not have the 25K tiedowns in the floor. Most the time a MRAP is palletized to 463L pallets as per AMC instructions then loaded on the 747 then strapped in . The only thing holding the cargo is locks in the floor rail system and additional tiedown straps. But what the hell that is what National bidded and got the contract.

loadsmith
06-04-2013, 11:26 PM
So what I fail to understand it why the load didn't shift on departure from Bastion. I have been a Loadmaster for the past 18 years and I hate like hell to think the Loadie is at fault here. Going back to what some folks have said about the AC checking the cargo, I have had a few ACs check what we had loaded but most pilots wouldn't be able to tell you if a chain is on backwards or if a chain should be used in lieu of a strap. This is my opinion on what I have seen on my airframes, we do our best to educate eachother while deployed but the loadmaster would be the one disqualified (Q-3'd) if there is a loading mishap (damage to the aircraft), not necessarily the pilot in command.

Robert F. Dorr
06-05-2013, 12:43 AM
So what I fail to understand it why the load didn't shift on departure from Bastion. I have been a Loadmaster for the past 18 years and I hate like hell to think the Loadie is at fault here. Going back to what some folks have said about the AC checking the cargo, I have had a few ACs check what we had loaded but most pilots wouldn't be able to tell you if a chain is on backwards or if a chain should be used in lieu of a strap. This is my opinion on what I have seen on my airframes, we do our best to educate eachother while deployed but the loadmaster would be the one disqualified (Q-3'd) if there is a loading mishap (damage to the aircraft), not necessarily the pilot in command.

I haven't read anywhere else that the cargo was loaded at Bastion and that it flew to Bagram with this cargo aboard and took off a second time in the same configuration. Is that what you're saying? A 747-400 at Bastion?

loadsmith
06-05-2013, 12:47 AM
I haven't read anywhere else that the cargo was loaded at Bastion and that it flew to Bagram with this cargo aboard and took off a second time in the same configuration. Is that what you're saying? A 747-400 at Bastion?

http://avherald.com/h?article=46183bb4

National Air Cargo confirmed their aircraft N949CA with 7 crew, 4 pilots, 2 mechanics and a load master - initial information had been 8 crew -crashed at Bagram. The airline later added, that the aircraft had been loaded with all cargo in Camp Bastion (Afghanistan, about 300nm southwest of Bagram), the cargo had been inspected at Camp Bastion, the aircraft subsequently positioned to Bagram for a refuelling stop with no difficulty, no cargo was added or removed, however, the cargo was again inspected before the aircraft departed for the leg to Dubai Al Maktoum.

The runway there is 11483 x 150 http://www.acukwik.com/AirportInfo/OAZI

RobotChicken
06-05-2013, 03:30 AM
:closed_2 "OPPS"!!

Robert F. Dorr
06-05-2013, 10:41 AM
How do you load MRAPs aboard a 747-400? No clamshell door. No roll-on, roll-off capability. How?

imnohero
06-05-2013, 11:10 AM
the palletize them.

loadsmith
06-05-2013, 12:26 PM
How do you load MRAPs aboard a 747-400? No clamshell door. No roll-on, roll-off capability. How?


There's 10 photos in the article as well that will help explain the concept a little better.

http://www.charleston.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123176933

Some 747s have a front cargo door that opens but I don't believe NAC has any of those in their inventory.

http://www.aerospace-technology.com/projects/boeing747-400f/images/boeing747freighter_4.jpg

Chikasaz
06-05-2013, 06:45 PM
To put the MRAPS or the MATV types on 747s, you have to palatalize them. You use two 463L pallets and use chains to secure them to the pallets. Its pretty simple generally to load them on 747s if the rollers are working correctly. AMC sent hundreds of MATVs to Afghanistan back in 2009-2010 on 747s and there were never any big problems like this.

BOB - The AFSC that deals with the loading and offloading of AMC aircraft is the 2T2X1 - Aerial Porter. We help load the AC and tie down the R/S - Rolling Stock according to the loadmaster. Generally the loadmaster will help chaining down the R/S in Afghanistan as it helps them out if they have time. Half the time you will even get the officers that will come down and help.

Below is a picture of what the MATVs generally look like on the AMC contracted flights.

-http://imageshack.us/a/img834/9610/94200910200167932135421.jpg-

BigBaze
06-05-2013, 08:23 PM
KC-10: Aerial Port brings already built pallets out to the aircraft on a K-Loader, the boom operator directs and supervises the load, verifies each pallet against the manifest secures them with latch pawls, or chains down anything like a Humvee. It is his/her responsibility to ensure the cargo is loaded/secured properly, and the aircraft commander's responsibility to do the final walk through and ensure the cargo is properly restrained for flight. All the flight engineer really does is position fuel at the boom's request to satisfy tipping requirements. Once the cargo arrives at the jet, the boom runs the show, all the way to download.

Pullinteeth
06-06-2013, 06:44 PM
From a current aerial porter....

"Cargo section of APS will compile and palletize- then ramp section will load it. I am not aware of Phase II aerial porters (I haven't heard of it but that means nothing really). Aerial porters will physically load the cargo/pallets/rolling stock etc-the loadmasters will be able tweak how they want it loaded and even sometimes assist with the upload. They may supervise the the loading of the cargo. Sometimes they will tell you at the plane that they want a change in how it's loaded or how the pallet is put together depending on several factors. The line b/w aerial porters and loadmasters can be blurred but the clearest difference is that the loadmaster travels with the load. Aerial porters do not travel with the load. Loadmasters are essentially in control of that load in flight ensuring that all the weights, balances and other factors affecting the safety of the flight are accounted for. They must account for things like a shifting of a load in flight and/or if one type of cargo can be next another type. Load planning, which is an aerial port section will do the initial planning how its loaded, but it is ultimately up to the loadmaster where the cargo will be when it takes off."

loadsmith
06-07-2013, 02:29 AM
Here a recent article and within it there is a good video showing the APS folks working with MRAPS on a 747:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2335148/Bragram-747-cargo-plane-crash-MRAP-vehicles-plane-carrying-broke-free-straps-causing-crash.html

VFFTSGT
06-07-2013, 03:39 AM
Here a recent article and within it there is a good video showing the APS folks working with MRAPS on a 747:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2335148/Bragram-747-cargo-plane-crash-MRAP-vehicles-plane-carrying-broke-free-straps-causing-crash.html

Looking at the pic with all the straps on the MRAP...it seems hard to believe one could move that much if one or two straps broke. I image they are in park and/or have the brake set. They appear to be jacked up with blocks on them. So, I would think it take a lot for one to move... It does seem odd to me that those straps are used over chains. The article seems to suggest several straps broke after take off but how does "several" straps just break? Unless they used so few that the MRAP still exceed the weight capacity of the many straps that appear to be used.

JD2780
06-07-2013, 03:45 AM
From my limited experience, when loading MRAPs though would put blocks under it because as the plane bounced the suspension would move as well. Putting cribbing under the vehicle, then strapping would limit the range of motion and thus limiting the shock loading of the straps.

loadsmith
06-07-2013, 04:23 AM
From my limited experience, when loading MRAPs though would put blocks under it because as the plane bounced the suspension would move as well. Putting cribbing under the vehicle, then strapping would limit the range of motion and thus limiting the shock loading of the straps.

You are correct fine Sir, we call it "Sleeper Shoring" and it basically does what you mentioned.

RobotChicken
06-07-2013, 04:28 AM
Well someone was 'ashore and sleeping' when that AC went down! It did not just decide to commit suicide on that mission!

JD2780
06-07-2013, 11:09 AM
You are correct fine Sir, we call it "Sleeper Shoring" and it basically does what you mentioned.

I'm not even a load!! Bam!!! Just paid a attention when my vehicles were loaded.

rmehle00
06-19-2013, 06:07 PM
As a current Aerial Porter (2T2X1) I can provide information about stuff. These missions are not uncommon in the desert. These types of missions are what we call "Tender" missions. We, the air force, submit what we need moved (weight, height, length, etc.) from point A to point B and commercial companies bid on this. Whoever can move the cargo for the lowest cost or who we would get the most of our money worth is the one that wins. After that it is all up to the company to get it to its destination. They will bring in a plane and depending on the location, we the aerial port will provide support to them such as providing equipment, drivers, and sometimes pushers. These missions are used to get cargo to a water port since Afghanistan is a land locked country. Once they get to a water port they are put on a ship and brought back to the US.

Since this cargo originated from Camp Bastion, it is unlikely that the commercial contractor has vehicles capable to reach the deck of the 747, so the port there most likely supplied the vehicles with drivers as well as pushers to put the cargo on the plane. The company will also provide a Representative for the local port to work with getting everything taken care of. The military is not authorized to load plan cargo on any commercial aircraft so the Rep is the one that actually load plans the cargo on the plane to ensure it is within its CG. Once the plane is loaded the Rep or if the plane has a flying load master or engineer will do a QC of the cargo on the plane to ensure it is all restrained properly and is good to go.

As far as tying down the cargo, commercial planes are nothing like those we use in the military. First off, they do not have a solid floor to drive a vehicle on so pallets are used instead which we call sub-flooring. Secondly they do not have the same type of tie down points that we have on military planes. The point has been brought up about why straps were used and not chains. On commercial planes they do not have the ability to use them so straps that are rated over 20,000lbs are used instead. The crew is responsible for securing everything to the plane, but we do help out to since we are nice like that and to get the plane out even faster. After everything is done, they then do a QC of everything and make sure it is done correctly.

Another question about why wasn’t a military plane used? There are many reasons as to why they weren’t, and can’t answer the exact reason. However to use military airlift it can be hard because our fresh fleet of C-17’s are so over tasked with missions that a lot of them have already exceeded their life span of mission hours that they were designed for. As a result military missions are being used to transport sensitive and classified materials.

If this had been moved on a military aircraft, the aerial port would load plan the cargo, we would load the cargo without the crew is someone is APEX qualified, tie it down according to the cert letter (tells us how to load, tie down, any shoring needed, and so on for large items on military aircraft), then when the crew arrives the load master will inspect the cargo on board to make sure it is loaded according to the cert letter and tied down properly as well. If there wasn’t anyone APEX qualified, then the same process is done just with the crew there for loading.

c130aviator
06-20-2013, 06:12 PM
Its the loadmasters job. Not the pilot, not the aerial porter, not the cargo/pallet builder, etc. Its the loadmasters job period.




I am an Instructor loadmaster.

Juggs
06-20-2013, 06:15 PM
TO 1C-130A-9CL-1

Cargo Inspection and Loading

1. Cargo inspection - Completed
a. Load Plan -Checked
b. Weight CB dimensions Verified
c. Pallet and net/tiedown conditions - Checked

This is no joke the first 3 steps of my checklist would prevent such a loadshift during takeoff. There are another 3 checklists that are run to make sure things are secured in the aircraft as well.
Loads live and die by the checklist. Our TO's arent a reference they are bible. I hold my students to checklist discipline more than just about anything. To include notes, cautions, and warnings.

Ours is JPub 3-09.3 CAS. Our students are held to that as well or people die as well. I love the 130. Noting beats a ramp jump from one of those.

Juggs
06-20-2013, 06:17 PM
Its the loadmasters job. Not the pilot, not the aerial porter, not the cargo/pallet builder, etc. Its the loadmasters job period.




I am an Instructor loadmaster.

It's the loads JOB, yet the loads I've dealt with have always welcomed help when it's a quick turnaround. Ultimate responsibility of the safety of the aircraft and crew lies with the ACC.

I was. JTAC instructor, not a load, not an aerial porter not anybody. Just a guy that whenever I offered help to the loads they were always happy to get it.

c130aviator
06-20-2013, 06:25 PM
TO 1C-130A-9CL-1

Cargo Inspection and Loading

1. Cargo inspection - Completed
a. Load Plan -Checked
b. Weight CB dimensions Verified
c. Pallet and net/tiedown conditions - Checked

This is no joke the first 3 steps of my checklist would prevent such a loadshift during takeoff. There are another 3 checklists that are run to make sure things are secured in the aircraft as well.
Loads live and die by the checklist. Our TO's arent a reference they are bible. I hold my students to checklist discipline more than just about anything. To include notes, cautions, and warnings.

technomage1
06-20-2013, 06:29 PM
Our TO's arent a reference they are bible.

No TO is a reference. It is an order. Not to dig you, but the same is true of any career field that uses TOs. We have a grand total of 1 that we use. Everything else in our job can be done in multiple ways - but not that TO. It will be out, open, and being looked at while that work is being accomplished.

c130aviator
06-20-2013, 06:29 PM
Understood. Just stating that the OP asked who was responsible in the military. I would have to say it ultimately is the loadmaster fault for load shift. Things can be caught, additional restraint applied, etc. Sad that something like this had to happen to bring the importance of a loadmasters job to the public. Cargo is easily overlooked, that is why they designated a loadmaster to aircraft during the Berlin Airlift, where our history started.

Port Dawg
07-13-2013, 03:47 PM
Hello Mr. Dorr,

I am an aerial porter with 7 years of experience in the career field working nearly every section except the Data Records and ATOC functions. While the common misconception with "Loadmasters" is that they "Load" the aircraft. Nothing can be farther from the truth. The truth is, that the "Loadmasters" get all the glory, while my butt does all the work. The loads are only responsible for the passengers and cargo once it's been loaded and during flight...etc. But the USAF advertising and AFN commercials will have you believing otherwise.

In regards to "Who's responsible" to tie down the cargo, in MOST cases it would be a myriad of personnel. The MAIN responsibility to initially tie down the cargo, is the responsibility of the load team (US) aerial porters. UNLESS that aircraft is a "Contracted aircraft" which was exactly the case of the aircraft that crashed. Air National Cargo has a completely different set of regulations that governs the tiedown allowed to be used on such cargo as an MRAP vehicle. In my personal opinion, I would NEVER ride on an aircraft like that if it was tied down with STRAPS!! OMG Those CGU-1B straps are only rated at 5,000 lbs a piece! In our AMC regulations we are told to NEVER MIX straps with chains. This is shown in the picture of the MRAP on the aircraft one can clearly see chains used to restrain the cargo PALLETS to the aircraft floor along with supplemental rail restraint. But also, one can clearly see straps criss-crossed all over the MRAP vehicle. This is very dangerous because during takeoff and landing the G-forces that are exerted 1.5 Aft/lateral 3.0 Fwrd 2.0 Aft are immense, and I was almost certain that I would see a disaster like this at some point in my career. It's such a shame, because when I was in the desert. I would see such stupid stuff as contractors SMOKING on aircraft that we were on, next to hazardous materials!!!

These contractors need to crack down on their people and a VERY hard look needs to be taken at which types of vehicles are loaded and what type of restraint is used on these aircraft. We owe it to these guys who died and everyone who flies with them everyday!

But no, loadmasters will usually never walk cargo unless there is a very very specific issue with the "Shoring" that goes underneath, or something is just unacceptable, they will visit the cargo yard and say they need this or that done....but that's very rare. For normal pallets and cargo, the "Load planning" function is usually the first ones to visually inspect the cargo, then ramp services "Pulls the load" from the yard, and inspects it for correct sequence before proceeding to the Aircraft. Then once at the aircraft the civillian rep, or the loadmaster assists in the loading. But WE are the pushers. So on a civillian aircraft such as an Air National bird, the civillian would be the one responsible ULTIMATELY for the tiedown of the aircraft.


Hope that answers your question.

akruse
07-14-2013, 03:59 PM
Dorr, do you know if the Army/EADS fixed the miserable airflow in the cabin along with the overheating avionics with the 72?