Should I be scared -- C172 over Gross

"Mortimer Schnerd, RN" mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com wrote in message
...
gatt wrote:
Tell it to the insurance company or your passengers if you prang the
landing because, say, you've never carried passengers in the back of a
C-172 before and, say, you hit a windshear on final.

Ferry pilots don't carry unwitting passengers in back when they're
overgross.



They might if they hadn't already loaded it to capacity with fuel.
Ferrying operations are a good example of flying overgrossed successfully.
Unfortunately, the cabin is usually stuffed with fuel bladders so there's
no room for passengers unless they want to ride outside in the smoking
section.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com




We as ferry pilots have to explain we are overgross and out contents to all
passengers if allowed by FAA, you know every now and then a client wishes to
ride along most are not pilots or just a private.

On Apr 17, 11:52 am, gatt wrote:

Tell it to the insurance company or your passengers if you prang the
landing because, say, you've never carried passengers in the back of a
C-172 before and, say, you hit a windshear on final.

Knowingly taking off over gross invalidates any insurance.
Hurt or kill a passenger and see what the judge has to say about it.

Dan

wrote:

Knowingly taking off over gross invalidates any insurance.

No. It doesn't invalidate mine, nor does it invalidate any of the policies
I've had in the last 18 yrs.

If insurance policies were invalidated by poor decision-making, they'd be
worthless.

John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180)

--
Message posted via AviationKB.com
http://www.aviationkb.com/Uwe/Forums...ation/200804/1

On Apr 17, 10:52*am, gatt wrote:
WingFlaps wrote:

Tell it to the insurance company or your passengers if you prang the
landing because, say, you've never carried passengers in the back of a
C-172 before and, say, you hit a windshear on final.

The insurance company doesn't give a crap. Your not over gross by the
name you land anyway.

-Robert

Robert M. Gary wrote:

Tell it to the insurance company or your passengers if you prang the
landing because, say, you've never carried passengers in the back of a
C-172 before and, say, you hit a windshear on final.

The insurance company doesn't give a crap. Your not over gross by the
name you land anyway.

I take that to mean "by the time you land," but, that doesn't take into
consideration departure stalls, engine failure, obstacle clearance data
or all kinds of things we don't know about. You and I don't even know
in this case whether his aircraft is capable of establishing full power.

"The Safety Board determined that the probable cause of this accident
was : the pilot's improper planning/decision, and his failure to
maintain adequate airspeed during a climb over rising terrain, which
resulted in a stall and collision with terrain. Factors relating to the
accident we failure of the pilot to ensure the airplane was within
its weight and balance limitations, high density altitude, and the
rising/mountainous terrain."

In another report at the same site:
"Witnesses described the airplane’s climb rate and speed as slow, and
they observed the airplane enter a roll and descent that was consistent
with a stall. Density altitude at the airport was 6,670 feet. The
airplane’s gross weight was calculated to be 84 pounds over the maximum
limit at the time of the impact.

"The Safety Board determined the probable cause of the accident to be
the pilot-in command’s improper decision to take off ... when the
airplane was overweight and when the density altitude was higher than he
was accustomed to, resulting in a stall caused by failure to maintain
airspeed. http://www.ntsb.gov/Speeches/jh980428.htm


I don't know about you guys, but, I never want my name to be associated
with "The Safety Board determined that the probable cause" and/or
"failure of the pilot to ensure the airplane was within its weight and
balance limitations."

-c
CP-ASEL-IA

WingFlaps wrote:

This is ridiculous. How on earth do you think ferry flights work,
they can be way over MTOW but the wings don't rip off do they? A 172
it's not going to notice a measely 40lbs over MTOW unless the COG is
wrong.

We all know about ferry flights, flown by a lone professional.
Professional ferry pilots don't ask anonymous Usenet posters how they
think the plane will fly, either.

Would you tell the passengers that the airplane is over it's
manufacturer specified takeoff weight limit, and allow them the free
will to get off? If you wouldn't do that...

If someone did get off, the problem is solved! G

I fly at max gross all the time, as my plane needs serious ballast to be
in CG with two big guys up front. I agree the wings won't fall off at
ferry flight weights. Think of how important a small spot of water or a
fouled plug, that might not have been a big deal within limits, becomes
when overweight. Think of how airplanes gain weight, and engines lose
performance as they age.

The unwitting passengers and the "if you have to ask as a pilot" part of
this equation that bugs me.

"gatt" wrote in message
news:zKCdneYD7P5nGprVnZ2dnUVZ_qGknZ2d@integraonlin e...
tman wrote:
Flown C172's for quite a while, and never had anybody in the back.
Now I'm planning on quite a trip, with 2 pax and luggage.

You shouldn't be scared, you should be confident. (And above all safe.)

In more cavalier flying days I have done this once or twice, right at or
slightly over gross, in a 172 on an ideal day. For the purpose of
discussion let's assume you're going to do it.

Where's your CG and how will it influence takeoff and climbout? What
happens if the engine quits on departure? How much extra runway do you
have, and what does your density altitude look like? An airplane that
is overgross might still perform better in straight climbout than an
undergross airplane on hot, humid day. If you've got 11,000 feet of
runway ahead of you with the elevation at near sea level, and no obstacles
to clear, and it's cold and dry, that will help. If you're going to be
going over mountains or it's turbulent, you need to know what to expect.

My biggest concern here would be the "never had anybody in back" factor.
When you launch and land with four adults on board, even under gross it's
a different feel. If you've experienced that and you already know what to
expect with an airplane near max gross, you will be able to recognize how
the airplane is handling differently once you're over gross. Without that
previous experience it would be pretty tough to tell whether you're
experiencing a situation caused by being over-gross, or something that
feels normal with four adults on board. The additional stress and
distraction on the PIC could be more of a factor than that placed on the
airframe.

Finally, I personally -hate- feeling like I'm a half-ass pilot or that I
just put my pax at the edge of my envelope without their knowledge. If
they're all aware of it and they understand, that's one thing, but if
something happens you might end up feeling like a total heel, or worse.

If I were going to do this flight I would run around the pattern a few
times with pax in back so you get a feel for what's supposed to happen.

Keep your airspeeds up, keep your pitch and bank rates low, watch your
angle of attack (!!!), stay coordinated and fly like you're carrying a
load of nitroglycerin. Work your CG figures for both takeoff and landing,
and also empty in case you have to divert. If you're "scared" you're more
likely make mistakes.

Having said all that, I don't think I'd make the flight myself. But I
have before, in a 172 at maybe 40lbs over gross, and nothing broke.

-c

Gatt,

read this on a piper but very similer on a 172.

http://aircraftdelivery.net/ferrypil...nkedpermit.pdf
http://aircraftdelivery.net/ferrypil...nkedpermit.pdf

NW_Pilot wrote:

read this on a piper but very similer on a 172.

http://aircraftdelivery.net/ferrypil...nkedpermit.pdf

Fascinating!

"No person may be carried in this aicraft unless he/she is essential to
the flight and has been advised of the contents of this authorization
and of the airworthiness status of this aircraft."

I think pretty much anybody who's ever flown a C-172 on a warm summer
day, with more than one passenger, has pushed it near or over gross. I
turned down a commercial flight in February because the aircraft would
have been overgross on takeoff, just barely under by the time we got to
the target, and they wanted to do low-level performance-intensive flight
once we got there.

They called a local pilot out of Corvallis to do it, but he wouldn't
carry all three of 'em either.

-c

On Apr 18, 8:39*am, gatt wrote:


I think pretty much anybody who's ever flown a C-172 on a warm summer
day, with more than one passenger, has pushed it near or over gross. *

You people need to go on diets! The 172 should be a 3 seater with full
fuel (144l)...

Cheers

WingFlaps wrote:
On Apr 18, 8:39 am, gatt wrote:

I think pretty much anybody who's ever flown a C-172 on a warm summer
day, with more than one passenger, has pushed it near or over gross.

You people need to go on diets! The 172 should be a 3 seater with full
fuel (144l)...

Unfortunately, too true. Under the pilot's storm window on a B-17 is a
placard with the maximum crew weight: 1200 lbs. Let's see: 10 men in
uniform, bunny suits, flight suits, boots, gloves, mae west, parachute
and harness, body armor, flak helmet...

I went to a park on Sunday with my wife and noted that previous
generations would be absolutely stunned by the average American's
physical condition nowadays.

An old 96th BG waistgunner/armorer told me one time that they would
sneak in extra ammunition for the long raids, but if the pilots found
out they'd make 'em offload it. So they ditched the fire
extinguishers, waist and radio room windows and just about everything
else nonessential and replaced it with a steel plate on the floor of the
waist, and whatever extra ammo could be slipped onboard in the tail
without the pilots finding out. "Aft of CG limit" apparently meant
nothing to gunners.

(Also mentioned using their oxygen masks to keep cigarettes lit on the
way to Schweinfurt.)

-c