Narrative:

After receiving the accuload I failed to copy the data as being for runway 16L. Then after some confusion and our haste to meet our extended slot time, I copied the data from the runway 16L accuload for our departure on runway 25. As a result, we experienced a longer takeoff roll than normal and a person on the ground reported to the tower that we had blown the top out of a tree on the departure end of runway 25. We estimated that we were about 75-100 ft above the trees. Nothing was heard inside the aircraft by any of the flight crew. Nor was there any physical damage to the aircraft on inspection when we arrived in ewr. We are recommending to the company that they have our london load planning personnel send accuload data for runways 16L or 16R and runway 25, so that the captain can have the data to choose from without a lengthy delay or having the so taking the data from the performance manual. I might add that we were legal for runway 25 on this flight and, of course, the major change would have been flaps 17 degrees rather than 9.4 degrees which we used. Maybe we need a xchk with the captain, ie, checklist response. We have already communicated with our load planning personnel as I discussed above.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: THE SO ON AN ACR DC10 USES THE WRONG CHART FOR THE TKOF DATA RECEIVED. ACFT CONFIGN USED THE WRONG FLAP SETTING BASED ON THIS ERRONEOUS INFO. ACFT ALLEGEDLY CLIPS TREES AT END OF RWY.

Narrative: AFTER RECEIVING THE ACCULOAD I FAILED TO COPY THE DATA AS BEING FOR RWY 16L. THEN AFTER SOME CONFUSION AND OUR HASTE TO MEET OUR EXTENDED SLOT TIME, I COPIED THE DATA FROM THE RWY 16L ACCULOAD FOR OUR DEP ON RWY 25. AS A RESULT, WE EXPERIENCED A LONGER TKOF ROLL THAN NORMAL AND A PERSON ON THE GND RPTED TO THE TWR THAT WE HAD BLOWN THE TOP OUT OF A TREE ON THE DEP END OF RWY 25. WE ESTIMATED THAT WE WERE ABOUT 75-100 FT ABOVE THE TREES. NOTHING WAS HEARD INSIDE THE ACFT BY ANY OF THE FLC. NOR WAS THERE ANY PHYSICAL DAMAGE TO THE ACFT ON INSPECTION WHEN WE ARRIVED IN EWR. WE ARE RECOMMENDING TO THE COMPANY THAT THEY HAVE OUR LONDON LOAD PLANNING PERSONNEL SEND ACCULOAD DATA FOR RWYS 16L OR 16R AND RWY 25, SO THAT THE CAPT CAN HAVE THE DATA TO CHOOSE FROM WITHOUT A LENGTHY DELAY OR HAVING THE SO TAKING THE DATA FROM THE PERFORMANCE MANUAL. I MIGHT ADD THAT WE WERE LEGAL FOR RWY 25 ON THIS FLT AND, OF COURSE, THE MAJOR CHANGE WOULD HAVE BEEN FLAPS 17 DEGS RATHER THAN 9.4 DEGS WHICH WE USED. MAYBE WE NEED A XCHK WITH THE CAPT, IE, CHKLIST RESPONSE. WE HAVE ALREADY COMMUNICATED WITH OUR LOAD PLANNING PERSONNEL AS I DISCUSSED ABOVE.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.