1148. A Discussion of SAE-AGE-2 Aerospace Recommended Practice ARP No. 1049

Paper

Abstract

In 1974, the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) AGE-2A Subcommittee for Cargo Handling, issued a proposed Aerospace Standard or Aerospace Recommended Practice in draft form which covered a suggested Integral Weight and Balance System concept. Initiated by Mr. Fred Bearden, Project Engineer at Pan American World Airways, the purpose of this AS or ARP (the exact classification of the document was not then determined) was to set up guidelines for airlines, airframe manufacturers and system manufacturers to use in devising the ultimate in an on board weight and balance system.
The proposed specification was submitted to many major airlines and the ‘big 3’ airframe manufacturers plus Fairchild BLH, Eldec and Canadian Marconi as manufacturers of Integral Weight and Balance Systems. Comment from the recipients was requested and in February 1976 replies had been received from Fairchild, BLH, Boeing, Lockheed, TWA and Pan Am in writing plus some verbal comments from CM and Eldec on the proposed specification.
In a meeting at Pan Am later that year Mr. Bearden solicited the respondees to attend and review the comments prior to preparing and submitting a second draft to SAE-AGE-3 subcommittee for discussion. Unfortunately only Fairchild responded in person but additional phone comments were obtained by Fred Bearden from TWA, BLH and Canadian Marconi. The revisions to the proposed specification were studied by the Pan Am people and Fairchild and a second draft was then prepared by Mr. Beardon for presentation to SAE. At the fall, 1975 subcommittee meeting in Key Biscayne Florida, a full day was spent in committee going over the proposed specification (which was now established as an ARP and assigned No. 1049) for formulation of the third draft. Attendance at this meeting included representation from a number of major airlines including Iberia, BOAC, TWA PAA, AA, Air France, Swissair, etc. plus airframes such as Airbus, Boeing, Lockheed, Fokker, etc. For the manufacturers IWBS only Fairchild was represented.
A broad view of the overall IWBS systems capabilities was taken into consideration by Fairchild in its comments on the specification and our attempts were to make sure that all systems were fairly represented in the specification and that the ARP did not reflect any specific type system. As a result the ARP is quite broad in scope which, since it is not meant to detail specific hardware, is correct. Comments from several airlines who are aware of the ARP still indicate that it is perhaps too hardware or procedural oriented and this is the reason for bringing this ARP to the Society’s attention.
Fairchild has felt since the beginning of this program that SAWE should be intimately involved in the formulation of this specification and we hope that as a result of presenting this document formally at this conference some form action will be taken by the Society in providing input and suggestions to the SAE for improvements or modifications to the ARP.
Following is a copy of the third draft of the ARP. While it was intended for review at a recent SAE-AGE-2 subcommittee meeting in Houston, we do not believe this took place so any comments which can be made to it now can be reviewed at the next SAE-AGE-2 subcommittee meeting.