I’ve never heard of an operator with the 15% GTOW relief in Alaska.
That isn’t to say that rounding errors do not occur.
That isn’t to say that rounding errors do not occur.
FYI: you'll find these 91.323 affected aircraft were mostly pre-1950 aircraft and are no longer used as far as I know. It was an old rule requirement to keep 135/121 ops going when the CAA started to run things on their own.
Ah, that makes sense! Thanks for the info!
Zeldman
Touchdown! Greaser!
MooneyDriver78
En-Route
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2013
- Messages
- 4,692
- Display Name
Display name:
Tom
If I lived in Puerto Rico or Virgin Islands, not having to stop for fuel or deal with customs would be a big plus. Or crossing the North Atlantic… or flying to South America…
MooneyDriver78
En-Route
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2013
- Messages
- 4,692
- Display Name
Display name:
Tom
That is the Mooney Achilles’ heel as well. The hard rubber landing biscuits just don’t absorb energy like an Oleo strut would.
Katamarino
Pattern Altitude
Mine can fly for 20 and I find it very useful.
And if I needed another reason to be thankful for ownership
Tantalum
Final Approach
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2017
- Messages
- 9,250
- Display Name
Display name:
San_Diego_Pilot
-this was very eye opening to me when I was learning to fly, and shortly after getting my license. That beautiful Bonanza sitting on the ramp really can't necessarily carry any more weight than the 172 I was flying (it had the 180 conversion).. heck, there are 6 place twins out there (I'm looking at you, some of the new Seneca) that have shameful usefuls. It's my biggest issue with small GA.. and why I'm happy I found the Aztec. So what it burns 24-30 gph in cruise and "only" goes 170 knots, it's worth it if I can actually use the damn thing!
I completely agree. And the argument that "just don't fill it to the top" is a fatuous one.. who actually has a totalizer / fuel gauges they trust that much and has the ability to off load fuel easily..?? anyone? Let's say you flew alone with full tanks, you only did an hour and you filled it because gas was cheap at the podunk place you went for lunch. Oh surprise, the next weekend you decide to take an impromptu trip and need to take your wife, son, dog, and bags for a weekend to someplace 300 miles away.. good luck offloading 40+ gallons and doing it safely/accurately and threading that line between between overweight and having enough gas
'Go places' planes like the Mooney, Bonanza, etc., should be able to safely cover 500-600 nm in one leg, with the airplane's seats and interior volume reasonably occupied. Piper really did at least do this part correctly, most PA-28 will carry at least 800 lbs and the Six / Lance / Aztec all do really well with useful loads. Bonanza are pretty but they're realistically a 2-3 person plane if you're actually using it to go places
bflynn
Final Approach
Deelee
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2019
- Messages
- 1,783
- Display Name
Display name:
Deelee
Congrats. Live to be a fairly old private pilot. Don't fly overweight. Especially when the DA is higher - like in the summertime - like today.
I was not close to being overweight, but the two dogs my kid and I flew P&P for today were muuuuuuch bigger (but much more adorable) than expected. Still under max and we had lots of runway. But the takeoff roll was longer and we didn't climb out as fast as we did with zero dogs leaving home-base.
It is a basic example, but I can't imagine how we would have fared if we were bumping up against max weight today with the DA what it was. Would we have cleared the trees at the DER? Probably. Would I risk that with my 11 year old in the seat next to me? Nope.
Rounding errors.... similar to pocket gas.??
Gas doesn’t weigh anything north of bellingham I hear.
Jumpmaster
Line Up and Wait
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2014
- Messages
- 587
- Display Name
Display name:
AbnJag
My AG5B Tiger was ferried from the factory to the UK in 1991. I still have the ferry permit. My GW is 2400lbs and I believe the ferry pilot was close to 3500lbs. What gives me a sense of security is knowing my plane could structurally handle that much excess weight. So if I am at or near gross, I know there is margin built into the airframe. That said, I typically at 2200lbs and I am trying to learn to fly with fuel at tabs (38 gallons) rather than full at 52 gallons. Besides, my bladder (or my wife’s) dictates range more than any other factor.
EdFred
Taxi to Parking
My test pilot was Max Conrad. If he can do it...
I have never flown over gross weight in the Comanche. However, having taken off at max gross (actually weighed everyone and their gear) with OAT over 80F, I know they undershot what it can actually fly at and be safe.
I have never flown over gross weight in the Comanche. However, having taken off at max gross (actually weighed everyone and their gear) with OAT over 80F, I know they undershot what it can actually fly at and be safe.
steingar
Taxi to Parking
I have a stick. It is just. stick, didn't cost anything, I found it on the ground. As I filled the tank I marked it with the amount of gas I put in. The thing is actually 5 gallons off (there was 5 gallons in the tank when I started). No worry, I add 5 to the reading.
The nice thing about my airplane is it can lift close to a thousand pounds. That's pretty much everything that fits in it. I'm certain I could overload it, but it'd not be easy and someone would be really uncomfortable. Loaded with full fuel and 680 lbs of pax and bags I can fly for 5 hours before I hit VFR reserves. At 140 knots I could get somewhere too.
I've only had one situation where I had to leave behind some gas. I knew it was coming up and made certain that the airplane was light. Just takes a bit of planning. I don't do many impromptu trips with multiple pax and stuff. I doubt that many do. If one does run into that situation one can leave something behind. Ship it, or buy a new one when you get there.
keen9
Pre-takeoff checklist
You evaluated the airplane's load capability in the presence of a gust while taking off at max gross weight. Impressive, but you should focus on the flying. MTOGW is not only performance.
Clip4
Touchdown! Greaser!
Tantalum
Final Approach
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2017
- Messages
- 9,250
- Display Name
Display name:
San_Diego_Pilot
..and your tanks are probably not unreasonably huge. Most PA-28 also have around 900 or so useful, at least.. with 50 gallon tanks topped off you can still get 3-4 people in there, depending and with 50 gallons fly a solid 4 hrs.. pretty much at the limit of the amount of time most want to sit in a small GA, esp as passenger
The OP is talking about a plane that, with full tanks, basically makes it a one (skinny) person plane. What's the point of tanks that huge? With the M20K miserly fuel burn are you every really going to need more than 50-60 gallons anyway? For 75% of your trips.
I agree that HUGE tanks just seems like an extra headache in most situations.
EdFred
Taxi to Parking
What gust and what lack of focus? It was a hot, calm, June day. The acceleration was a bit sluggish compared to when I fly it 500lbs lighter, but that's expected. Climbout was still better than most SE GA aircraft at gross - pretty easy to the see the VSI when it's straight in front of me. There was no performance issues at cruise, no pitch , roll, or cooling issues during climb or cruise. How is standard monitoring of systems and noting the performance difference a lack of focus of flying?
schmookeeg
En-Route
Seriously? So one pilot can fly longer range if they want to? Or tanker that delicious inexpensive fuel sometimes discovered?
I don't know why "full tanks" is magical. Fuel loadouts can and should be managed. I think anyone relying on "full fuel" leaving them some specific desired remaining payload is just being lazy.
EdFred
Taxi to Parking
But sometimes you get full tanks and 800lbs of payload. I like having the extra fuel just in case I need to 180 even when past the 1/2 way point of the trip.
Tantalum
Final Approach
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2017
- Messages
- 9,250
- Display Name
Display name:
San_Diego_Pilot
It's not magical, but it's an added task for something, most people, will probably never need, and I really question how useful 170 remaining "useful" actually is; is the bigger part of my complaint and agreement with OP
Example, if I show up at the PA-28 and the tanks are full, or almost, because of the whole cheap fuel example from above.. then it's easy to replan that.. 10-20 lbs is pretty easy to shed if you have to. Hell most people's $150 "deluxe professional" flying bags I see are 20 lb behemothes anyway. Leave the extra water bottles in the car home, take out the 3 quarts of spare oil, the mag light, and you're basically there.
But now on the flip side you have a plane that is sitting there with 90 gallons in it, all you need is 40 for this trip, and you have 2 other people with you and only 170 lbs useful. What do you do? This is not as easy as leaving a backpack in the car.
We're not airlines, some people do have trips that come up with short notice and many aren't planning weeks and weeks out playing a rubik's cube of fuel loads. I just don't understand the value of being able to carry THAT MUCH GAS.
When I was flying the Cirrus the rule was to keep it at tabs, gives enough flexibility that you still have a solid 3 hrs of gas in there and good load carrying. If someone is hellbent on flying a plane that negates its usefulness with full tanks because of the "what if I want to fly from Texas to Iceland in one leg? it's nice to know I can do that" thing that's fine, the solution to that is not insurmountable. It just seems ridiculous to me
But so does selling NFTs of dumb digital artwork for millions of dollars..
EdFred
Taxi to Parking
My brother is pretty certain those NFTs are just being bought/sold/made by drug dealers as a legitimate way to move money.
keen9
Pre-takeoff checklist
Gusts are invisible, and can happen unexpectedly. That is why when MTOGW is based on structure, the analysis assumes a gust. Just ignore that though. It'll work until it doesn't as has been mentioned several times earlier in this thread.
EdFred
Taxi to Parking
And yet that same structure has a 41% gross weight difference across all models, with mine rolling off the production line at the low end. I have zero worries.
Checkout_my_Six
Touchdown! Greaser!
Are we thinking max gust loading is a structural issue while over gross weight?....it's certified to 6G's. 
Keep your speed up and if you are able to climb all is good ....it will stall slightly higher with less control authority.
Flying is not the concern.....structurally, it's the carrier deck landing on an immediate return to landing that concerns me.
Keep your speed up and if you are able to climb all is good ....it will stall slightly higher with less control authority.
Flying is not the concern.....structurally, it's the carrier deck landing on an immediate return to landing that concerns me.
Last edited:
Don't use that as an excuse to overload it, though.
Just because it can do it once doesn't mean it can do it over and over. Fatigue will become an issue at some point, and that point may be unknown.
Bend a paperclip in half, then straightern it. Looks okay, right? Can still clip papers, right? Now bend it in half and back a hundred times. You probably won't make it that far.
Also, you don't know how carefully that ferry pilot might have been flying. Gentle takeoff, slow climb out, never got close to VA, stayed in calm air, etc., and was probably well under max weight by the time he landed.
schmookeeg
En-Route
Yes, I did this with my Bonanza as well and never felt "put out" by it?
I'm not sure if we're disagreeing or not.
Your argument seems to be that there should be some minimum payload left in aircraft designs? So what's that number? 400? 600? Is your number the same as OPs? As mine? (I suspect not)When the plane turns 50 and gets re-weighed, do you then seek an STC to shrink the tanks?
I think 170 is correct because there should always be one pilot onboard at a bare minimum, so the rest as potential fuel makes sense to "use" all of the "useful" load even in the most minimal scenario. I guess I don't understand another way to do it -- 170 x (number of seats)?
genna
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2015
- Messages
- 1,721
- Display Name
Display name:
ТУ-104
This is a problem is plane is shared, but not really if you are a sole owner. Don't have it sitting at 90g. As far as this Mooney, I think this long range STC adds 36g to the tanks. Maybe filling it all the way is not very practical for 90% of situations(I could fly like that if I'm solo, even with my dog), but you can still have 5-15g over the standard tank and have 2 people in the plane. Givess you ability to make that max speed for a few hours and/or fly into airports with no fuel. Options.....
EdFred
Taxi to Parking
Are we thinking max gust loading is a structural issue while over gross weight?....it's certified to 9G's.
Keep your speed up ....it will stall slightly higher with less control authority.
And since you don't have as much AoA delta when heavier, it's harder to actually induce the necessary Gs to do damage.
EdFred
Taxi to Parking
Not advocating flying over gross, but it would be pretty hard to "bend that paper clip" on an airplane by flying over gross, unless you are one to perform repeated carrier landings.
UngaWunga
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2014
- Messages
- 2,020
- Display Name
Display name:
UngaWunga
Yup. Done that and have been concerned as those trees at the end of the runway get rather close.
The joke was in the training Cubs that on warm days with a larger instructor the squirrels would be throwing acorns at you for getting too close. Legal weight limits don't always mean safe.
Sometimes you just don't know how many times that paper clip might have been bent. The Embry Riddle wing sep and the resulting Piper spar AD might be an example of too many hard landings. Or did it get bounced around above Va too many times? Or what other ways might it have been overstressed? There's no recording stress meter on the panels of our planes, so we never really know what they might have seen.
If a pilot gets away with flying on overloaded plane in rough air, or while making a hard landing, the clip might have been bent one time. How many other times was the clip bent? And how many bends does it have left?
EdFred
Taxi to Parking
Except going over gross raises Va, making it harder to do actual damage to the wing through maneuvers. Keep in mind it can go to 2.8G in normal category. You aren't getting there by increasing the weight in the plane. It will stall out before it reached critical.
Correct about Va, as far as structural failure goes. But you still may be inducing fatigue without an immediate failure.
Also, don't forget that 2.8g has to multiplied by the weight to get the total force acting on the structure. 2.8g is the limit when at max weight. If you increase the weight, you have to reduce the max g's proportionately. With enough weight, the structure can fail under 1g, just sitting on the ramp.
For example, a plane at max weight would be fine in a 60 degree bank, seeing only 2g and therefore a load of 2 x max weight. If you increase that weight to 50% over max, though, the load becomes 2g x 1.5 x max weight, or 3 x max weight and you're in an overstress condition even though you're still only at 2g.
Also, don't forget that 2.8g has to multiplied by the weight to get the total force acting on the structure. 2.8g is the limit when at max weight. If you increase the weight, you have to reduce the max g's proportionately. With enough weight, the structure can fail under 1g, just sitting on the ramp.
For example, a plane at max weight would be fine in a 60 degree bank, seeing only 2g and therefore a load of 2 x max weight. If you increase that weight to 50% over max, though, the load becomes 2g x 1.5 x max weight, or 3 x max weight and you're in an overstress condition even though you're still only at 2g.
Tantalum
Final Approach
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2017
- Messages
- 9,250
- Display Name
Display name:
San_Diego_Pilot
if I were designing planes (can you imagine?) I'd want, or assume yes, somewhere in the 400-600 remaining left with full tanks. Options and STCs, fine, people for crazy missions that's fine. It just seems on principle peculiar to me that a plane can basically be "fueled out".. so to speak. I'm also spoiled with the Aztec currently at full tanks you can still pack 6 full grown men in there
But I digress. To me it's more about planning for that unknown mission, and potentially finding myself in a situation where I can't use the plane without offloading 20 gallons
Missions vary. I was just as surprised as the OP when I started exploring planes that weren't 172 (shudder) and PA-28
Tantalum
Final Approach
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2017
- Messages
- 9,250
- Display Name
Display name:
San_Diego_Pilot
Sure, it just adds an extra layer of planning. Which is fine.. but personally if I'm going to need that much gas once a year, or less, then I'd rather just be able to fill it and not worry about over grossing should I elect to fly with a few friends for that impromptu Saturday AVX lunch. Incidentally AVX does not have gas and it's over water, so you need to tanker gas