![]() Sounds straight forward enough, but all too often this is ignored, at a cost of damage to the aircraft. Turning now to the practicalities of contour compliance- or is the ULD actually physically in conformity with the required contour? Out of contour loads not only pose a physical risk to hold liners but also could block the flow of smoke and therefore slow the detection of a fire in the hold. It is also important to understand that the 2″ gap that exists between the aircraft hold liner and the ULD, as long as the ULD has its correct contour, is there to allow for smoke to circulate to the smoke detectors in case of a fire. ![]() This is important information as certain aircraft Weight and Balance Manuals specify that only those pallets certified to a particular NAS 3610 classification may be loaded.īoth these two subjects may sound rather specialist and only for consideration by “techies” but that would be incorrect, they are both important for the safe operation of the aircraft. ![]() PMC) does NOT, unlike for a container, signify a contour, but is instead the NAS3610 classification to which the pallet is certified. The second is that the 3rd digit on a pallet (e.g. This requirement, which is in compliance with the requirements of the aircraft manufacturers, is an important safety consideration and although it is often ignored by “volume chasing” ULD build up teams, failure to follow this requirement is a safety hazard.Ģ. The first can be found in SS 50/0 Appendix D, and here the critical point to be observed is that on some sides of the ULD there is a requirement that pallet and net loads have an extra 2″ of lateral clearance inside the container contour. There are two rather important but often misunderstood components of this information that require some clarification:ġ. While in Attachment F of this same standard can be found a useful table showing the compatibility between aircraft types and IATA contours, though it should be noted that this must be used with care particularly on main deck ULD as there are many variations. These contours are then published in the IATA ULDR in various formats, the most common being this type of schematic as found in Attachment A of SS40/1 in Section 4Īnother useful reference point for contours is under Section 5 SS 50/0 Attachment E where detailed drawings of each IATA contour can be found Alongside this activity the ULD Board will, upon the request of an OEM or airline, establish an IATA standard contour, a list of which are published in the IATA ULDR. With data provided by Boeing and Airbus, IATA publishes in the ULD Regulations drawings showing the aircraft contours (Section 2.3). These days it can generally be said that lower deck containers follow well-established contours but main deck contours can be a very different matter not only varying between aircraft types but also varying according to which position in the aircraft the ULD is located. The starting point for any ULD contour is the data from the aircraft manufacturer. There are two important questions to be asked of any ULD being placed into an aircraft:ġ) Is the contour compatible with the aircraft?Ģ) Is the ULD actually physically in conformity with the required contour? ![]() ![]() ULD contours are not just something dreamt up by a designer, they are very strictly defined in order to take into account the structural dimensions of the aircraft into which they are loaded, and, because aircraft come in many different shapes and sizes, there are a considerable number of contours – remember that every cubic inch of space in an aircraft has value, so it makes sense to squeeze in as much cargo as possible. The three main variables are the base size, the overall size and the contour and it is this last item that we will address in this article. It would come as no surprise to pretty well anybody having any involvement with ULD that contours come in all sorts of different shapes and sizes. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |