B777-200
Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Communication Breakdown
Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Weight And Balance; Ground Event / Encounter Fuel Issue; Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue
General None Reported / Taken
Aircraft; Company Policy; Human Factors; Procedure
Overloaded TakeoffPush back; engine start; fuel indications all normal. Initial taxi took additional power to move aircraft; which is unusual in a B777-200 at typical [long distance] weights. On takeoff roll; initial acceleration was sluggish even though we were TO2 max; the takeoff roll seemed longer than normal and climbout was less than usual. We were filed for initial cruise FL350; but given option of FL370 as FL350 taken; so we climbed FL370 (FMC said Max FL391). Upon level off at FL370; aircraft struggled to maintain normal cruise Mach speed .83; and I noticed amber hook was seemingly higher than normal (about 245 kts).Shortly after level off; EICAS caution 'FUEL DISAGREE'. Followed Emergency Check List and Progress Page 2 indicated totalizer about 10;000 lbs. higher than calculated. Determined no fuel leak; and followed up with QRH review of ETOPS failures; selected fuel probes synoptic display from maintenance section in FMC; and noticed many center tank fuel probes inoperative. We called Dispatch/Maintenance conference call on satcom and sent fuel maintenance display to them; all three parties agreed no fuel leak; use calculated fuel; determined it was appropriate to continue flight.We started to burn substantially above plan; and we started to suspect we were heavier than closeout. We referred to performance manual cruise pages; 1.3g maneuver data; and .84 cruise data; and our suspicions were confirmed: amber hook was indicating maneuvering speeds for approximately 50;000 lbs. heavier aircraft; also fuel flow predictions the same.We called Dispatch and Duty Pilot; asked them to contact ZZZ Station Personnel to obtain FUEL UPLIFT in gallons from fuel company. Prior procedures required us to check this information from the fuel slip. It would have caught this serious error. Initially fuel company kept sending info strictly off our aircraft gauges; but we explained to Dispatch this was not correct; due to inoperative center fuel probes; and we strongly suspected fueler had overfilled the amount required for the flight to ZZZ1.After an hour or so; Dispatch confirmed that we were approximately 50;000 lbs. (7500 gallons) heavier than planned.Our performance data/climb; cruise; descent; and landing data were invalid. The flight crew; not knowing this situation at the time of departure; could have encountered serious consequences; if an emergency such as engine failure occurred the crew may not have acted appropriately because of the unknown situation. implications for engine failure at V1 on takeoff; implications for stopping on wet runway from V1; implications for enroute engine out performance and drift down; implications for correct Vref in ZZZ1.This is an extremely serious incident in my opinion; possibly could have been caught with a simple fuel slip check.Inexperienced fuelers; lack of back up checks by the pilots; cross checking required fuel vs actual loaded fuel; possible fuel sensor failuresRecommend having someone in the crew cross check the fuel slip provided by the fueler against the master flight plan.
Overloaded Takeoff by 50;000 lbs.Push back; engine start; fuel indications all normal. Initial taxi took additional power to move; which is unusual in a -200 weights.On takeoff roll; initial acceleration seemed sluggish even though we were TO2 max; the takeoff roll seemed longer than normal (I'm new as 777 Captain) and climbout was less than stellar. We were filed for initial cruise FL350; but given option of 370 as 350 taken; so we climbed 370 (FMC said Max 391). Upon level off at 370; aircraft struggled to maintain normal cruise Mach.83; and I noticed amber hook was seemingly higher than normal (about 245 kts).Shortly after level off; EICAS caution 'FUEL DISAGREE'. Followed Emergency Check List and Progress Page 2 indicated totalizer about 10;000 higher than calculated. Determined no fuel leak; and followed up with QRH review of ETOPS failures; selected fuel probes display from maintenance selection on FMC; and noticed center tank fuel probes inoperative. I called Dispatch/Maintenance conference call on satcom and sent fuel maintenance display to them; all three parties agreed no fuel leak; use calc fuel; ok to continue.We started to burn substantially above plan; and I started to suspect we were heavier than closeout. I referred to performance manual cruise pages; 1.3g maneuver data; and .84 cruise data; and my suspicions were confirmed: amber hook was indicating maneuvering speeds for approximately 50;000 lbs heavier aircraft; also fuel flow predictions the same.I called Dispatch and Duty Pilot; asked them to contact ZZZ Station Personnel to obtain FUEL UPLIFT in gallons from fuel company. We used to check this information from the fuel slip; it would have caught this serious error. Initially fuel company kept sending info strictly off our aircraft gauges; but I explained to Dispatch that was no good due to inoperative center probes; and I strongly suspected fueler had overshot the mark substantially and not checked uplift gallons from bowser.After an hour or so; Dispatch confirmation came through: 50;000 lbs. (7500 gallons) extra fuel had been loaded by accident.Our performance data was invalid; we were going to be just barely under max landing weight in ZZZ1; implications for engine failure at V1 on takeoff; implications for stopping on wet runway from V1; implications for enroute engine out performance and drift down; implications for correct Vref in ZZZ1.We prepared for the landing in ZZZ1 using max landing weight assumption for Vref and distance calculation. The difference in Vref for FMC calc weight and max wt was nearly 10 kts.; and at the higher speed green AOA band was correct. Landed normally.This is an extremely serious incident in my opinion; possibly could have been caught with a simple fuel slip check.Lack of due care by fueler combined with fuel probe failure. Lack of fuel slip check in procedures.Recommend a fuel slip check prior to departure by crew.
B777-200 flight crew reported overweight configuration inflight due to overfueling.