Re: Is the 737 a hazard for cargo loaders?

Date:         21 Sep 98 00:31:48 
From:         Boeing707@worldnet.att.net (levelflight)
References:   1
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

On 10 Sep 98 02:08:24 , Richard Hay <rhay10@scu.edu.au> wrote:
>IIRC reading a Qantas executive saying that the 737's were a OH&S hazard
>for their freight loaders - the under floor cargo bays being so small that
>back injuries are common
>
>Anybody had any personal experiences? - are A320s any better?

A resounding no. I work in 737-200s/-300s/ and -400s for USAirways in
FLL. The 737 airplane is a joy to work from a bin standpoint. The bins
average about 4-5 feet high depending upon the model and which bin
youre in.
Our initial ground training for the A319/320/321 seems to indicate
about the same dimensions.
As for the worst airplanes I've ever worked from a bin standpoint,
here are my nominations: (first listed as the worst)
   1. Fokker F-100. Without a doubt the most backbreaking (literally)
        bin I've ever worked. The rear bin is even worse. The bin
        floors are covered with a fiberglas panel that gets all over
        you, as an added bonus.
   2. MD-80/DC-9.  Three bins on a narrowbody?!? Also not much height
       inside, albeit a little more than the F100.
   3. Bac-111. Cargo doors were heavy and sometimes came off the
       tracks. Also rear bin was claustrophobic. The one redeeming
       quality about the 111 was that we had the front bin carpeted;
       great for napping between offload and onload!!

Ken Smith
Boeing707@worldnet.att.net