How do you determine what a "safe" overweight condition is?

paflyer said:
The fact that you are pushing boundaries when you are still a complete novice is making people think that you are a statistic waiting to happen.

The design engineers, not operators, own any margins above published limitations. Debating it is pointless and hurts your credibility.

At this point in your career, accept it as gospel and move on. There is much to learn and, if you want to ever be considered an aviator, that learning never stops.
Click to expand...

Well, I can't just accept it as gospel. That is not in my nature to just do something because "someone said so". Call it anti-authority if you want. Yes, I'm anti-authority that is why I'm learning to fly myself somewhere. I want the freedom to go wherever I please.

My takeaway is that going 10% over gross is fine as long as you stay within CG and compensate by allowing a longer takeoff and landing distance and reduced climb rate. If I had to choose between being 10% over gross and not having enough fuel, I'm sorry but I'm going for the 10% over gross.
 
Jaybird180 said:
No wonder N00bs cant learn; its authoritarianism like this that prevents it. I am sure Cap'n Ron will be along to tell you about that one too.
Click to expand...

This particular "N00b" can't learn because he already knows all the answers.

It's not practical to teach a course in mechanical engineering and stress analysis in a post, or in a few hundred hours of flight/ground training. That's why experts exist.

When making safety decisions, it is absolutely critical to stay in the domain you understand, or rely on experts who do. Going outside that is stupid.
 
Hocky said:
Well, I can't just accept it as gospel. That is not in my nature to just do something because "someone said so". Call it anti-authority if you want. Yes, I'm anti-authority that is why I'm learning to fly myself somewhere. I want the freedom to go wherever I please.

My takeaway is that going 10% over gross is fine as long as you stay within CG and compensate by allowing a longer takeoff and landing distance and reduced climb rate. If I had to choose between being 10% over gross and not having enough fuel, I'm sorry but I'm going for the 10% over gross.
Click to expand...

You should apply for cadets. Military instructors will cure a lot of your problems.
 
MAKG1 said:
This particular "N00b" can't learn because he already knows all the answers.
Click to expand...

If you're talking about me, then no it is not "can't learn" it is "won't learn" what YOU are telling me because your arguments are not sufficient to convince me. No, I won't learn something that is not right. If you tell me the world is flat I won't learn that either.
 
Jimmy cooper said:
You should apply for cadets. Military instructors will cure a lot of your problems.
Click to expand...

Well clearly I would not survive in the military :rofl:

That's okay. There are enough "yessir" types more than willing to serve and I thank them it is definitely not for me.
 
Hocky said:
My takeaway is that going 10% over gross is fine as long as you stay within CG and compensate by allowing a longer takeoff and landing distance and reduced climb rate. If I had to choose between being 10% over gross and not having enough fuel, I'm sorry but I'm going for the 10% over gross.
Click to expand...

Sorry, this is completely wrong.

If you can't fit 30 minutes of fuel plus enough to make it to a reasonable fuel stop in your aircraft without going over gross, you're in the wrong aircraft or you have way too much crap.

Risking death to avoid a fuel stop is complete foolishness.

10% over gross can be fatal. Or it can be totally benign. Do YOU know which situation is which? Hint: it has little to do with the airplane.

It's not like you lose 10% of your climb rate. It's a LOT more than that.

You do NOT have freedom to dictate the laws of physics. They can kill you even if you don't believe it.
 
Jaybird180 said:
No wonder N00bs cant learn; its authoritarianism like this that prevents it. I am sure Cap'n Ron will be along to tell you about that one too.
Click to expand...
I can't tell if you are being serious or not. I thought PAflyer's response was spot-on.
 
Your right in assuming you probably would not make it thru cadets,but they might be able to help with your flaming immaturity.
 
Hocky said:
Call it anti-authority if you want. Yes, I'm anti-authority...
Click to expand...

Been shown to be a hazardous attitude for pilots to have.

Can you articulate why you think you are an exception to that general rule?


If I had to choose between being 10% over gross and not having enough fuel, I'm sorry but I'm going for the 10% over gross.
Click to expand...

False forced choice. When both options are bad, professional pilots simply scrub the flight or find a more appropriate plane for the mission.
 
MAKG1 said:
Sorry, this is completely wrong.

If you can't fit 30 minutes of fuel plus enough to make it to a reasonable fuel stop in your aircraft without going over gross, you're in the wrong aircraft or you have way too much crap.

Risking death to avoid a fuel stop is complete foolishness.

10% over gross can be fatal. Or it can be totally benign. Do YOU know which situation is which? Hint: it has little to do with the airplane.

It's not like you lose 10% of your climb rate. It's a LOT more than that.

You do NOT have freedom to dictate the laws of physics. They can kill you even if you don't believe it.
Click to expand...

You've got to give the OP credit for one thing: He has provided an opportunity for several of us that hardly ever agree on anything something that we can agree on.
 
JOhnH said:
You've got to give the OP credit for one thing: He has provided an opportunity for several of us that hardly ever agree on anything something that we can agree on.
Click to expand...

Well that's nice except MAKG is wrong so probably you are too?

I never said I want to change the laws of physics. This has nothing to do with physics. It is to do with acceptable margins and risks. I am saying that I am not convinced that going up to 10% over leads to an unacceptable risk. Sure there is a risk. But there is risk anyway going up we all know the stats for small planes. They're not safe compared to other modes of transportation (except maybe motorcycles). We all accept that risk. What's a little more?
 
Hocky said:
Well clearly I would not survive in the military :rofl:

That's okay. There are enough "yessir" types more than willing to serve and I thank them it is definitely not for me.
Click to expand...
Since you obviously disagree with almost everyone on this board, and you seem to have no respect for their opinions, why do you keep pushing the issue? Do you think you will wear us down so that we change our minds? Or are you just waiting for someone to give you permission.

Why don't you just go ahead and load up to 110% of mgw and report back after each flight? If you are still around after 2-300 flights, we might change our mind. Or might not.
 
Hocky said:
What's a little more?
Click to expand...

It isn't necessarily a little.


Full power at rest in a 172 is about 2400 RPM. Try setting it to 2100 or 2200 on a LONG runway and see just how much more you need. Abort no more than halfway down, as it may be possible to get 5 feet off the ground, but not 50, and cramming the throttle to full behind the power curve a few feet up can have bad results.

Then try doing it with 20 deg flaps. That's the go-around configuration.

Do this with an instructor, as you're far too unaware of your own limitations to do this safely on your own.

I've taken off in a 172 at 7000 feet more than once. Even 20% under gross, you use up thousands of feet of runway to get to 50 feet. Conveniently, this is analyzed in the POH. Read that before making more of a fool of yourself.
 
Hocky said:
My takeaway is that going 10% over gross is fine as long as you stay within CG and compensate by allowing a longer takeoff and landing distance and reduced climb rate. If I had to choose between being 10% over gross and not having enough fuel, I'm sorry but I'm going for the 10% over gross.
Click to expand...

This is completely foolish. 10% over gross? Gross in my plane is 2500 pounds. There is no way I would consider flying 250 pounds overweight. You have no understanding of the consequences of that much of a deviation. It might not lead to collapsed wings, but what does it do to your flight envelope?

You are much better off to fly within the limits and to plan a fuel stop.
 
Jaybird180 said:
Not the video I wanted but this will do

http://youtu.be/Scd4TWNGLhU
Click to expand...

Is this the one you were looking for?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yDu...outube.com/watch?v=yDu0jYiz-v8&has_verified=1

The takeoff roll on that thing is stunning.

It's a clear case of overloading, and it worked earlier in the day with somewhat heavier loading (more fuel) and the same passengers.

It's not the only error (and a good pilot should be able to spot the other one), but given that pilot's poor performance and total obliviousness, it's a fair bet he made the same mistake earlier in the day.
 
Last edited:
Hocky said:
Well, I can't just accept it as gospel. That is not in my nature to just do something because "someone said so". Call it anti-authority if you want. Yes, I'm anti-authority that is why I'm learning to fly myself somewhere. I want the freedom to go wherever I please.

My takeaway is that going 10% over gross is fine as long as you stay within CG and compensate by allowing a longer takeoff and landing distance and reduced climb rate. If I had to choose between being 10% over gross and not having enough fuel, I'm sorry but I'm going for the 10% over gross.
Click to expand...

If you are anti-authority, doesn't participating in one of the most heavily government regulated hobbies completely go against that?
 
That sure makes me want to challenge authority and go out and be a max-gross-weight test pilot! :no::nono:
MAKG1 said:
Is this the one you were looking for?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yDu...outube.com/watch?v=yDu0jYiz-v8&has_verified=1

The takeoff roll on that thing is stunning.

It's a clear case of overloading, and it worked earlier in the day with somewhat heavier loading (more fuel) and the same passengers.

It's not the only error (and a good pilot should be able to spot the other one), but given that pilot's poor performance and total obliviousness, it's a fair bet he made the same mistake earlier in the day.
Click to expand...
 
Hocky said:
...I'm sorry but I'm going for the 10% over gross.
Click to expand...

You know, everything you post to the internet remains there forever, right?

If and when you have your over gross accident/incident, all these posts would be readily available to an investigator to establish your predisposition to flaunting regulations.

Make it kind of hard to make the case, "It was unintentional - I would never intentionally fly over gross!"

Because you just said you would.
 
FastEddieB said:
You know, everything you post to the internet remains there forever, right?

If and when you have your over gross accident/incident, all these posts would be readily available to an investigator to establish your predisposition to flaunting regulations.

Make it kind of hard to make the case, "It was unintentional - I would never intentionally fly over gross!"

Because you just said you would.
Click to expand...

No, you misunderstand. He is looking to us for permission. Then he can tell the investigators, "some guys on POA said I could".
 
Hocky said:
Well that's nice except MAKG is wrong so probably you are too?

I never said I want to change the laws of physics. This has nothing to do with physics. It is to do with acceptable margins and risks. I am saying that I am not convinced that going up to 10% over leads to an unacceptable risk. Sure there is a risk. But there is risk anyway going up we all know the stats for small planes. They're not safe compared to other modes of transportation (except maybe motorcycles). We all accept that risk. What's a little more?
Click to expand...
What a freaking idiotic statement. You, sir, are dangerous from the get-go.

You want freedom without responsibility. Your potential passengers know nothing of the risk assessment and decision making process and they are trusting YOU to make a safe choice.

It's going to look great for GA when you auger your overloaded "respectable " airplane full of liquid propane and dry ice into some neighborhood.
 
FastEddieB said:
You know, everything you post to the internet remains there forever, right?

If and when you have your over gross accident/incident, all these posts would be readily available to an investigator to establish your predisposition to flaunting regulations.

Make it kind of hard to make the case, "It was unintentional - I would never intentionally fly over gross!"

Because you just said you would.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, we read about guys like this (too much) in Aftermath articles.
 
Hocky said:
...wherever I please.

My takeaway is that going 10% over gross is fine as long as you stay within CG and compensate by allowing a longer takeoff and landing distance and reduced climb rate. If I had to choose between being 10% over gross and not having enough fuel, I'm sorry but I'm going for the 10% over gross.
Click to expand...

Your takeaway is flat wrong. I've been patient and helpful but that statement in the face of engineering that says different is the end of it for me.

You'll get along fine -- until you don't. Cya.
 
Sorry, late for the party.

I'd add 10 pounds at a time and fly around the pattern. When you crash, just back off that last 10 pounds and you're good to go :idea:

Is it too early for sarcasm :rolleyes2:

The bottom line is that once you go past a limit, you no longer have any idea how close to disaster you are. Basically, you're a test pilot. Some might be OK with this, others, not so much. Whatever you do, stay within the CG range. Bad stuff can happen :yikes:
 
Last edited:
MAKG1 said:
Is this the one you were looking for?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yDu...outube.com/watch?v=yDu0jYiz-v8&has_verified=1

The takeoff roll on that thing is stunning.

It's a clear case of overloading, and it worked earlier in the day with somewhat heavier loading (more fuel) and the same passengers.

It's not the only error (and a good pilot should be able to spot the other one), but given that pilot's poor performance and total obliviousness, it's a fair bet he made the same mistake earlier in the day.
Click to expand...
I was looking for the one where a bunch of people and everything but the kitchen sink was loaded into a C-172. They got about 10feet AGL.
 
JB1842 said:
If you are anti-authority, doesn't participating in one of the most heavily government regulated hobbies completely go against that?
Click to expand...


No not at all. It is not really that tightly regulated when you think about it.

Yes, I've got to get the certifications. But once I have that I can pretty much do whatever I want as long as I stay out of Class A,B,C,D. There is a lot of Class E and G space out there. I can do pretty much whatever I want there. I can decide to fly somewhere and just go and not have to deal with security or even deal with people. I can fly from A to B without talking to anyone and without taking any direction from anyone, and do this flying 500 feet over the general public. That sounds like freedom to me. I have no intention in going into the more regulated air space. If I am a little over gross, nobody will know. If I accidentally get too close to a cloud, nobody will know. Freedom...
 
The sun will burn out in 10 billion years.
 
FastEddieB said:
You know, everything you post to the internet remains there forever, right?

If and when you have your over gross accident/incident, all these posts would be readily available to an investigator to establish your predisposition to flaunting regulations.

Make it kind of hard to make the case, "It was unintentional - I would never intentionally fly over gross!"

Because you just said you would.
Click to expand...

Yep. If someone pointed me to these postings I would say "clearly those posts were made for entertainment purposes only and were referring to hypothetical situations and should not be construed as indicating actual behavior". :D
 
Hocky said:
I have no intention in going into the more regulated air space. If I am a little over gross, nobody will know. If I accidentally get too close to a cloud, nobody will know. Freedom...
Click to expand...

Because the airspace en route / at OSH is not at all regulated.
 
Hocky said:
Well, I can't just accept it as gospel. That is not in my nature to just do something because "someone said so". Call it anti-authority if you want. Yes, I'm anti-authority that is why I'm learning to fly myself somewhere. I want the freedom to go wherever I please.

My takeaway is that going 10% over gross is fine as long as you stay within CG and compensate by allowing a longer takeoff and landing distance and reduced climb rate. If I had to choose between being 10% over gross and not having enough fuel, I'm sorry but I'm going for the 10% over gross.
Click to expand...

Well, the option to not "doing it because someone said so" when the numbers were developed in conjunction with engineers and the marketing/sales departments (they always want the biggest numbers), is to do the research and reverse engineering calculations yourself and find out where the limiting factors are and see what you find as acceptable. You see what you are doing by following the "well, these guys do it regularly" is just applying the other side of the logic coin you rejected earlier, operating on 'hearsay'.

The 10% is issued on a ferry permit routinely because a ferry pilot operates solo in elevated risk conditions anyway, the FAA doesn't care if we kill ourselves. The FAA will even allow greater overweight conditions which if you have to land back at that weight will require an inspection.

With CAR-3 planes operating Restricted, pilots set the weight limit. If you think the plane will fly off at that weight, you write it in the log and it becomes official.

The thing is, the numbers were developed to allow for the continued airworthiness and safety of the airframe, not necessarily to keep you alive on any given flight. Would I fly 10% over? Oh, there's a good chance I've done it before.
 
Henning said:
Would I fly 10% over? Oh, there's a good chance I've done it before.
Click to expand...

Thank you, this is my point that real pilots for fly for a living assess the risk and probably bend the rules all the time.
 
FastEddieB said:
Been shown to be a hazardous attitude for pilots to have.

Can you articulate why you think you are an exception to that general rule?
Click to expand...

Maybe because he also suffers from a big dose of Invulnerability as well?

Dan
 
Henning said:
But we assess the risks beyond the average.
Click to expand...

And pro pilots still die on occasion from complacency.

When I was in Colorado Springs once, I arrived to find one of the runways closed in patchy IMC because some hotshot USAF bomber pilot with a billion hours dug a hole next to the runway with his Mooney. The scary thing is, there were perhaps five airports within 20 miles that were completely clear at the time, but he opted to complete the mission no matter what.
 
Hocky said:
Thank you, this is my point that real pilots for fly for a living assess the risk and probably bend the rules all the time.
Click to expand...

Are you trying to find truth or justification for an answer you already have in mind?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top