Gross Weight

Engine horsepower will have no effect on what happens to the landing gear
when you are over gross, or out of balance...



"Mike Granby" wrote in message
oups.com...

But I'm not a test pilot, and
have no intention of being one.

If being 1lb over-weight makes you a test pilot, then so does having an
engine which is operating at 1hp less that its rated outputs. Or a wing
that is contaminated with bugs and is producing less than the CoL that
was present during POH testing. Or brakes that are operating at 1% less
than new condition. Or, well, you get the idea...........

If you take off at 45 lbs. over gross in a 172 and are forced to immediately
return to the ground, assuming you don't change anything, such as draining
fuel or restarting the engine for some period, you will be over gross for an
infinite period.

But since nobody ever has to turn back, and no one ever lands "hard" in an
emergency, there's really nothing to worry about, is there?


"Dave Stadt" wrote in message
m...

"Jose" wrote in message
m...
As a practical matter, if being 45 pounds over gross makes the
difference
between somebody going or being left behind, I can tell you that
you'll
be as
popular as a turd in the punchbowl if you leave that person behind.

Leave some gas behind and alter your flight plan if necessary.

If your limit is 45 over gross, how far over your limit is ok?

If you take off 45 lbs. over in a 172 in how many minutes will you be at
gross?


Jose
--
Nothing takes longer than a shortcut.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"Lakeview Bill" wrote in message
...
Engine horsepower will have no effect on what happens to the landing gear
when you are over gross, or out of balance...

Does the landing gear fall off if you are overgross or out of CG?

A brand new 172 would have the advantage of not having endured the
overstresses brought on by 30 years of operation over gross...


"Fred Choate" wrote in message
...
Mike,
I like your post. I was thinking today about how a pilot would approach
flying a brand new 172, versus a mid 70's 172. Would the pilot look at
the
performance differently, thinking that the new bird would handle it better
than the older one?

Fred

"Mike Granby" wrote in message
oups.com...

One could argue that the speed limit is a lot more of
an arbitrary number than an aircraft's gross weight figures.

Like the max gross on the Warrior 161 that can be changed by putting a
sticker in the POH? Or the max gross in that Cessna that can be changed
by limiting the flap travel? Or the max gross on the PA-32-260 which is
the same as that on the PA-32-300, despite having a lot less power for
take-offs in marginal conditions? Once you start deciding for yourself
what is acceptable and was isn't in terms of speed, and ignoring the
"experts" who set the limits, you're in the same position as busting
max gross. You're thinking for yourself, and ignoring the rules. Thus,
if one is likely to make you an across-the-board rule breaker, so is
the other. There are good arguments against over weight operation, but
this slippery-slope argument isn't one of them.

Also, let's do away with this by-the-book argument. None of us fly
light aircraft by the book. We don't take-off from fields that are
*exactly* what is stated as required by the book and we don't land into
fields that are *exactly* what the book says we need to stop. We add a
safety margin that we are comfortable with, and that is based upon our
own experience of the aircraft that we've built-up over time. The book
figures are, as we always reminded, with a new aircraft with a pilot
who is probably a damn sight better than we are. So, since our aircraft
aren't new, and since we're not that good, we might as well say that on
every take-off, we're a test pilot, since we're operating in conditions
that aren't documented in the POH.

The fact is that over-weight operation is not particularly dangerous
unless you're out of balance or in marginal conditions re the take-off
in the first place. The structural effects aren't going to be a
problem, and the stall speed effects aren't going to be a problem. The
failure mode that matters is failing to get out of ground effect, or
failing to get into the air at all. And that is something that can
happen whether or not you stick to max gross, and that you have to use
your judgement to decide upon based upon your knowledge of the airplane
and what you're comfortable with. So while it isn't legal, it isn't
particularly dangerous, and it is far more common than most people
would admit.

"Lakeview Bill" wrote in message
...
A brand new 172 would have the advantage of not having endured the
overstresses brought on by 30 years of operation over gross...


"Fred Choate" wrote in message
...
Mike,
I like your post. I was thinking today about how a pilot would approach
flying a brand new 172, versus a mid 70's 172. Would the pilot look at
the
performance differently, thinking that the new bird would handle it
better
than the older one?

Fred

"Mike Granby" wrote in message
oups.com...

One could argue that the speed limit is a lot more of
an arbitrary number than an aircraft's gross weight figures.

Like the max gross on the Warrior 161 that can be changed by putting a
sticker in the POH? Or the max gross in that Cessna that can be changed
by limiting the flap travel? Or the max gross on the PA-32-260 which is
the same as that on the PA-32-300, despite having a lot less power for
take-offs in marginal conditions? Once you start deciding for yourself
what is acceptable and was isn't in terms of speed, and ignoring the
"experts" who set the limits, you're in the same position as busting
max gross. You're thinking for yourself, and ignoring the rules. Thus,
if one is likely to make you an across-the-board rule breaker, so is
the other. There are good arguments against over weight operation, but
this slippery-slope argument isn't one of them.

Also, let's do away with this by-the-book argument. None of us fly
light aircraft by the book. We don't take-off from fields that are
*exactly* what is stated as required by the book and we don't land into
fields that are *exactly* what the book says we need to stop. We add a
safety margin that we are comfortable with, and that is based upon our
own experience of the aircraft that we've built-up over time. The book
figures are, as we always reminded, with a new aircraft with a pilot
who is probably a damn sight better than we are. So, since our aircraft
aren't new, and since we're not that good, we might as well say that on
every take-off, we're a test pilot, since we're operating in conditions
that aren't documented in the POH.

The fact is that over-weight operation is not particularly dangerous
unless you're out of balance or in marginal conditions re the take-off
in the first place. The structural effects aren't going to be a
problem, and the stall speed effects aren't going to be a problem. The
failure mode that matters is failing to get out of ground effect, or
failing to get into the air at all. And that is something that can
happen whether or not you stick to max gross, and that you have to use
your judgement to decide upon based upon your knowledge of the airplane
and what you're comfortable with. So while it isn't legal, it isn't
particularly dangerous, and it is far more common than most people
would admit.

I can only assume that you didn't ask the question that you intended to
ask...



"Dave Stadt" wrote in message
...

"Lakeview Bill" wrote in message
...
Engine horsepower will have no effect on what happens to the landing
gear
when you are over gross, or out of balance...

Does the landing gear fall off if you are overgross or out of CG?

"Lakeview Bill" wrote in message
news
I can only assume that you didn't ask the question that you intended to
ask...

Actually I did. What's all this about landing gear? Cessna gear can take
some ungodly high Gs and at 45 over gross the last thing you would need to
worry about is the gear.

In article ,
Dave Stadt wrote:

Actually I did. What's all this about landing gear? Cessna gear can take
some ungodly high Gs and at 45 over gross the last thing you would need to
worry about is the gear.

A Cessna 152 landed with a Piper on its back, without much problem,
so the gear can take alot more then the gross weight.

Pic of the Cessper :
http://community.webshots.com/photo/...44907920sThfTi

John
--
John Clear - http://www.clear-prop.org/

And just what do you do with that 7 1/2 gallons of gas? Especially if
you are not at you home field.

And have you ever tried draining several gallons of fuel out of an
airplane? I know it is done but it typically is not that easy
especially at a remote location.

And after draining 7 1/2 gallons our of a Champ I only have 4 1/2
gallons left.

Brian

Engine horsepower will have no effect on
what happens to the landing gear when
you are over gross, or out of balance...

If 1lb over-weight breaks the landing gear, you need more landing
practice. Hell, if 200lb over-weight breaks it, you're still banging it
in way too hard.........