On Thu, 7 Jul 2005 21:23:42 -0700, "Fred Choate"
wrote:

Here is a topic that was of discussion at work today:

How much is too much over gross weight? For example.....the 172 has a gross
weight of 2300 lbs, but what if you are 2345 at time of takeoff.....is that
too much over, even if you are going to be burning enough fuel before your
first scheduled stop to be under weight for landing?

What about airframe age, prop age...etc? Does it make a difference on
decision to "carry a little extra"?

I know that when I was receiving training, my instructor once had me bring 2
male adults with me to a lesson. That put 4 male adults in a 172 with full
fuel. I don't recall the specific weight we were at, but we were over
weight. The airport we flying out of had 8000' of runway, and my instructor
had me doing pattern work. The aircraft was very clumsy, and made me really
work at flying it. I didn't like that feeling at all! It was a good
training day.

Anyway, it was a good discussion between a few of us at work, so I thought
it might make a good topic here.

Fred


As others have written, you are being a test pilot under those conditions.

Some a/c will fly better over gross than will others.

So far as the 15% overage for Alaska is concerned, my understanding is that
there is not a blanket endorsement for all a/c, but rather that overage is
governed by the verbiage in 14 CFR 91.323.

I do know that at least one manufacturer (Mooney) has some data for flying
an Ovation at more than the MGW. Someone I know who flew his Ovation
around the world contacted Mooney and was able to obtain some sort of
authorization allowing him to do so in order to carry extra fuel.
Performance figures were obviously different -- I believe they were
supplied also by Mooney.

Data point: My a/c was born in 1965. About ten years ago, when my shop
obtained some scales, I decided to perform a real weight and balance,
instead of merely relying on the adds/subtracts over the years of the
various modifications done to the a/c. Well, I lost 80 lbs of useful load.
What that meant is that I had been frequently over MGW.

Did it shorten the airframe life -- I dunno.

Did I have a problem with short field performance? I was never in a
critical situation.

Did I not meet book figures? No, I did not; but how many a/c do?

As to insurance coverage if you fly over MGW, instead of relying on
anecdotes here, I would read your insurance policy. I buy insurance in
part to protect me against my mistakes or oversights. If I had a policy
which required that I be in compliance with every single in order to be
covered, I'd find a different company. My policy is in effect unless I
charge any person or organization for the use of the aircraft, although I
may be reimbursed for operating expenses.


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)