Removing back seat

typical 170 W&B graph
 

Attachments

  • cessna W&B.jpg
    cessna W&B.jpg
    2.4 MB · Views: 13
The W&B graph is generic to the model and year. It is for convenience, but doesn't note the differences between various options which might or might not be installed in a particular aircraft. It does not have to be updated to reflect changes.

The equipment list is authoritative for that aircraft. It MUST be up-to-date.
 
JOhnH said:
I wasn't sure where to post this.

My wife and I are planning a 2 week trip from DAB to PHX at the end of the month. My wife has raised a bunch of Saguaro Cacti from seed and they are getting to the size that she wants to return them to Arizona (that is not why we are going, just an additional task).

Our 172 has a useful load with full fuel of about 800# which should be plenty, but the potted cacti will take up quite a bit of space. My A&P has agreed to remove the back seat and replace it when we return. No Charge.
This would give us a lot more room to haul the cacti plus 2 weeks worth of gear. Plus since we are flatlanders, any reduction in weight will give us more confidence taking off from high altitude airports.

Does this sound reasonable? Stupid? Safe? Legal?
(Please don't ask or comment on WHY we are taking cacti to Arizona :dunno:). But the people at the Arizona Botanical Garden seem pleased.

By the way, is anyone here based at GEU?
Click to expand...

I would make sure I had a good barrier between the cacti and the cockpit capable of restraining them not only in turbulence but an accident as well. They have the ability to turn an 'oops' or uncomfortable bout of turbulence into a bloody and painful mess.
 
SoloEqs said:
No inspection ports in the Land of AZ. I think you're thinking of the People's Republic of California.
Click to expand...

No, there was a time (I haven't been back since 2000) that entry required a quick inspection. I remember inhaling an entire banana down right before we got to the checkpoint, coming back from Vegas with my parents.

Interesting that the state did away with it.
 
Nothing to add, except that Saguaro are really cool.
 
SoloEqs said:
The W&B graph is generic to the model and year. It is for convenience, but doesn't note the differences between various options which might or might not be installed in a particular aircraft. It does not have to be updated to reflect changes.

The equipment list is authoritative for that aircraft. It MUST be up-to-date.
Click to expand...

Read the 172 N owners manual. It is the W&B and equipment list and must have the Empty weight and moment entered each time it is changed.

The older format does not have this section, just the pages to compute each load. You must have a separate sheet showing the empty weight and moment to use the graph.

http://alameda-aero.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Cessna172NPOH.pdf

note page 6-5 and 6-9 these pages are used to record the changes in your W&P data. a separate sheet is not required.
 
Last edited:
murphey said:
Not always the POH. The TCDS is usually thr final authority.
Click to expand...

The Type Certificate Data Sheet (TCDS) is not a regulatory document.

From Order 8620.2A

TCDS.

Consistent with 14 CFR, a TCDS is part of a product’s type certificate (TC). A TCDS is a summary of the product’s type design.
It is used primarily by authorized persons during initial or recurrent issuance of a Standard Airworthiness Certificate. It is neither a regulation, a maintenance requirements document, or a flight manual document. As such, for aircraft holding a valid and current airworthiness certificate, a TCDS should not be used as a sole source to determine what maintenance is required or what the flight operations requirements are.
Any language on a TCDS, by itself, is not regulatory and is simply not enforceable. There must be a corresponding rule to make any language on the TCDS mandatory. For example, there is a mention of “operating limitations” on most TCDS. The corresponding rule for “operating limitations” is 14 CFR § 91.9(a) which states, “Except as provided in paragraph (d) of this section, no person may operate a civil aircraft without complying with the operating limitations specified in the approved Airplane or Rotorcraft Flight Manual, markings, and placards, or as otherwise prescribed by the certificating authority of the countryof registry.” Without § 91.9, the TCDS requirement to comply with operating limitations would not be enforceable.
Click to expand...
 
JOhnH said:
Interesting comment!
Of course it would be more interesting if I knew where it was directed.
I assume you think it was an awfully stupid question.
Click to expand...

You would be wrong. You would have to be a Cessna 170 fanatic to know what I mean and why all the crap that comes up from the reg readers with no historic knowledge of the question makes me say OH GOD!
And that is about all I have to say about that!:mad2::mad2::mad2:
 
Tim said:
You would be wrong. You would have to be a Cessna 170 fanatic to know what I mean and why all the crap that comes up from the reg readers with no historic knowledge of the question makes me say OH GOD!
And that is about all I have to say about that!:mad2::mad2::mad2:
Click to expand...

If you are not careful you be accused of taking a gumpy pill.
 
Just as a quick point, when we told our mechanic that we take off the wheel pants from the C-172 in winter, he wrote up a weight & balance sheet for our logbook with values when the wheel pants are off to be in the log book next to the sheet with the pants on.

We've never gotten one with the back seat out, but I would expect it to be about the same. That seat is attached with only four(?) bolts and is not structural.
 
murphey said:
When driving into AZ, you're required to stop at state inspection ports. Any open fruits & veggies must be tossed for fear of bugs. I don't remember about plants but you really should get the botanical org to confirm there's no problem importing the plants.
Click to expand...

Really. I saw no such places on the Interstate anytime I've driven there. Nor any massive traffic jams backed up for miles to check every car going into AZ. LOL.

At the Mexico border, yes. From the north, no.

When was this?
 
Tom-D said:
Read the 172 N owners manual. It is the W&B and equipment list and must have the Empty weight and moment entered each time it is changed.

The older format does not have this section, just the pages to compute each load. You must have a separate sheet showing the empty weight and moment to use the graph.

http://alameda-aero.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Cessna172NPOH.pdf

note page 6-5 and 6-9 these pages are used to record the changes in your W&P data. a separate sheet is not required.
Click to expand...

I'm on a wireless connection, and that pdf is taking forever, so I'm not able to read those pages.

However, looking at the EL for my 1970 C150K, I see differences in the weights of various seat models, altimeter models, radios, etc. If the 172N has the same sort of options, the numbers could be different between two aircraft rolling out the factory door one after the other. The EL also lists equipment by whether it is optional or required.

Unless the POH is specific to the N number, it's not authoritative for W&B.
 
murphey said:
No, there was a time (I haven't been back since 2000) that entry required a quick inspection. I remember inhaling an entire banana down right before we got to the checkpoint, coming back from Vegas with my parents.

Interesting that the state did away with it.
Click to expand...

I lived in Arizona from the mid-1980s to the late 1990s, and not only never saw a checkpoint like that, I never saw anywhere that such checkpoints could have been (buildings, wide spots in the road, etc), especially on the highways from LV into AZ.

I wonder if it was a drunk-driver roadblock? They did those a few times.
 
AuntPeggy said:
Just as a quick point, when we told our mechanic that we take off the wheel pants from the C-172 in winter, he wrote up a weight & balance sheet for our logbook with values when the wheel pants are off to be in the log book next to the sheet with the pants on.

We've never gotten one with the back seat out, but I would expect it to be about the same. That seat is attached with only four(?) bolts and is not structural.
Click to expand...

read the letter

http://www.pilotsofamerica.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=31766&d=1381847718.
 
1. Can I bring my houseplants with me when I move to Arizona?

Yes, but houseplants transported into Arizona must be free of insects and in a commercial potting mix rather than soil from your yard. Plants transported by a commercial mover should be placed near one of the trailer doors to facilitate inspection upon entering the state. Plants transported in a private vehicle will not be inspected. You do not need a certificate from your origin state department of agriculture to transport houseplants to AZ.

For more information, call (602) 542-0979.
Click to expand...

http://www.azda.gov/MasterContent/FAQ.aspx
 
Its always a bad idea to raise wildlife at home and then releasing them to the wild when they're no longer cute and cuddly. They've lost their ability to live on their own and won't know how to seek food or water on their own. :D
 
FastEddieB said:
Again, does not that letter refer specifically to the 170?
Click to expand...

Yes, it does, do you see any reason the FAA would not use the same reasoning on the 172 which has the same structure and weighs ? After all this letter came directly from the FAA FSDO that answers all the Airworthiness questions about these issues.

read the subject of the letter and pay attention to the last 2 words " 170 Series aircraft." Do you believe the 172 is not in that series?
 
Last edited:
I know Ron (A&P) did a separate W&B for my 180 for the back seat out.

The only thing I can see that would get you in trouble is all the extra room might make one overload or unbalance the CG with all that space back there ....

Weigh those plants unless there's just a few, and do you a W&B like you're supposed to do before a loaded flight.
 
Tom-D said:
read the subject of the letter and pay attention to the last 2 words " 170 Series aircraft." Do you believe the 172 is not in that series?
Click to expand...

Tom,

I noticed that, and agree it's vague.

My interpretation was it meant 170A or 170B or whatever designations Cessna may have used for that series.

But NOT something as potentially different as a 172 or 177 or 177RG, let's say.

Logically, Cessna could tomorrow come out with a composite 174, with the rear seat structure tied in to the fuselage strength. Would one expect that letter to cover ALL future "170 Series" aircraft?

Not arguing. Just thinking one might be on shaky ground using that letter carte blanche for anything other than a 170.

Best bet? Apply for, and get, a similar letter for the "172 series" of aircraft.
 
txflyer said:
The only thing I can see that would get you in trouble is all the extra room might make one overload or unbalance the CG with all that space back there ....
Click to expand...

To reiterate...

Normally a baggage compartment has a placarded maximum weight.

Calculated based on the floor strength, and allowing for the fact that 100 lbs (let's say) can triple or more, depending on the aircraft category.

So, how much weight can the floor below the rear seats carry? The attachment points for the seats may be heavily reinforced, leaving the floor beneath largely unsupported. If we don't know for sure, there remains some risk, however small, of a 3g load causing something to give.

Just looking out for Mr. Murphy and his law. And sometimes just because we can't imagine something being a problem just shows a lack of imagination! :wink2:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top