Gross Weight

You'll never convince the FAA that anything over gross is legitimate (unless
you are in Alaska). If you have an accident/incident, your insurer will not
be impressed either. Your instructor was a dork to let you break the rules
during an instructional flight (duh!). Not the best way to train safe
pilots.

Bob Gardner

"Fred Choate" wrote in message
...
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

You are right Bob.....I agree. But I was hoping for discussion on the
topic, not whether my old instructor did a good or a bad thing..... (But
I do agree with you about my old instructor. That lesson should not have
been flown, but on the upside, I did learn from it)

I chatted with an instructor down at my FBO after my discussion at work, and
his spin was "once you go over the max weight, you are essentially a test
pilot". I hadn't heard that one before, and will remember it.

Fred


"Bob Gardner" wrote in message
...
You'll never convince the FAA that anything over gross is legitimate
(unless you are in Alaska). If you have an accident/incident, your insurer
will not be impressed either. Your instructor was a dork to let you break
the rules during an instructional flight (duh!). Not the best way to train
safe pilots.

Bob Gardner

"Fred Choate" wrote in message
...
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

Fred,

"once you go over the max weight, you are essentially a test
pilot".


As Bob pointed out, you are also illegal and not covered by insurance.


--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

"Thomas Borchert" wrote in message
...
Fred,

"once you go over the max weight, you are essentially a test
pilot".


As Bob pointed out, you are also illegal and not covered by insurance.


--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

That is NOT true. If you're insured, you're insured. Just as you're
insured driving your car even if you've got 3x the legal alchohol limit in
your system...

KB

"Kyle Boatright" wrote in message
...

"Thomas Borchert" wrote in message
...
Fred,

"once you go over the max weight, you are essentially a test
pilot".


As Bob pointed out, you are also illegal and not covered by insurance.


--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

That is NOT true. If you're insured, you're insured. Just as you're
insured driving your car even if you've got 3x the legal alchohol limit in
your system...

KB

Not true. Car insurance is different, at least in the state of California.
There can be no exclusions the insurer has to pay, a plane is different,
they can and will void your claim if they can find a way.

"Aluckyguess" wrote in message
...

"Kyle Boatright" wrote in message
...

"Thomas Borchert" wrote in message
...
Fred,

"once you go over the max weight, you are essentially a test
pilot".


As Bob pointed out, you are also illegal and not covered by insurance.


--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

That is NOT true. If you're insured, you're insured. Just as you're
insured driving your car even if you've got 3x the legal alchohol limit
in
your system...

KB

Not true. Car insurance is different, at least in the state of California.
There can be no exclusions the insurer has to pay, a plane is different,
they can and will void your claim if they can find a way.

Cite.

I don't have a cite. I have been sued by a few insurance companies. You
learn a lot that way. Mostly you learn they like stringing it out
forfreakinever.

"Dave Stadt" wrote in message
m...

"Aluckyguess" wrote in message
...

"Kyle Boatright" wrote in message
...

"Thomas Borchert" wrote in message
...
Fred,

"once you go over the max weight, you are essentially a test
pilot".


As Bob pointed out, you are also illegal and not covered by insurance.


--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

That is NOT true. If you're insured, you're insured. Just as you're
insured driving your car even if you've got 3x the legal alchohol limit
in
your system...

KB

Not true. Car insurance is different, at least in the state of
California.
There can be no exclusions the insurer has to pay, a plane is different,
they can and will void your claim if they can find a way.

Cite.

On Fri, 8 Jul 2005 at 06:29:38 in message
, Aluckyguess wrote:

"Kyle Boatright" wrote in message
...

"Thomas Borchert" wrote in message
...
Fred,

"once you go over the max weight, you are essentially a test
pilot".


As Bob pointed out, you are also illegal and not covered by insurance.


--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

That is NOT true. If you're insured, you're insured. Just as you're
insured driving your car even if you've got 3x the legal alchohol limit in
your system...

KB

Not true. Car insurance is different, at least in the state of California.
There can be no exclusions the insurer has to pay, a plane is different,
they can and will void your claim if they can find a way.

AFAIK in the UK there would be two types of insurance involved in the
same policy. The part relating to claims by third parties would have to
stand because that insurance is not for you but for those 'third
parties' who suffer the consequences - even though you pay the premiums
to be legal..

Insurance companies may pay out for victims even if the actual driver
was not insured. That is often quoted as a reason for high premiums.

However if you leave you car outside your house or on the drive way with
the key in the ignition then you will probably get nothing if it is
stolen.
--
David CL Francis

On Fri, 8 Jul 2005 06:57:36 -0400, "Kyle Boatright"
wrote:

That is NOT true. If you're insured, you're insured.

This does not appear to be the case with aircraft insurance. Rather,
it seems that every time you go up, you are warranteeing (warranting?)
that everything is in order. And if the insurance company can prove
that something was NOT in order, then ba-bing! it will disclaim any
responsibility.

I'm not even sure it's the case with automobile insurance, though to
be sure I've always gotten a fair shake from mine. People who insure
with the cut-rate companies (Giego, Allstate, Progressive) sometimes
have a different experience.


-- all the best, Dan Ford

email (put Cubdriver in subject line)

Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com
the blog: www.danford.net
In Search of Lost Time: www.readingproust.com

This does not appear to be the case with aircraft insurance.
Rather, it seems that every time you go up, you are warranteeing
(warranting?) that everything is in order. And if the insurance
company can prove that something was NOT in order, then
ba-bing! it will disclaim any responsibility.

Not so. Avemco says they won't do this, and others will have a hard job
disclaiming responsiblity based on something that didn't contribute to
the accident, at least in many states. Further, as I've asked before,
can you provide a cite of a real example to support your claim that
insurance companies behave this way?