tman wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote:
Tell you what; instead of my "advising you" on what to do specifically
with this flight, let me suggest to you that you run a weight and
balance for this aircraft at full tanks, THEN run the same pax and
baggage loading figuring 1/4 tanks, just to see what this does to the cg.

I did. CG is pretty much center of the acceptable range.
C172 410lbs in the front seats, 170lbs in the back, 30lbs in the baggage
area, fuel to tabs -- CG is "good". Same situation, empty fuel. CG
good too.

A lot of ppl are talking about CG issues. Hey maybe I better check my
math before I fly this thing!

For your scenario, as long as the fuel burn doesn't alter the cg to a
dangerous area your main concern is the over gross condition.
I should note that you might well be flying an aircraft down the line
someday where the fuel burn COULD be a cg altering consideration. This
was why I had you do both W&B :-)

There are several ways to approach this situation and all of them are
relevant.
The prime condition for me would be the insurance condition. You should
consider that in the event of an accident...ANY accident, even one not
involving the over gross condition, the aircraft insurance could most
certainly become an issue post accident because of the over gross condition.

Your training and skill at handling an over gross airplane, even one
"just a tad over gross" should be a consideration.

As PIC, you are asking your Pax to fly with you in an aircraft that is
over gross at takeoff; something that you might wish to reconsider.

Bottom line for me advice wise is that for some pilots, the airplane
won't necessarily fall out of the sky at 40lbs over gross, but are you
one of these pilots, and secondly, have you considered the rest of the
above factors?
The decision as PIC is yours. Make it a wise one.
--
Dudley Henriques