Flying over gross?

[Wilbur]

It comes down to professionalism and ethics. Professionals fly within weight limits, and if pressured to fly over have the ethics to say, "No." It's no more complicated than that. Professionals do not require regulators looking over their shoulders to make sure they follow the law, they do it themselves.

[Doc]

Some of the folks squawking the loudest have been there. I know what kind of ops you worked with.....you know who you are.

My very first flight as captain on the 'Rex was overweight. Hard to lay blame, but to make a long story short, the ground crew gave my load to the Hawker, and his load to me. Sure glad I can fly.

Want to see how your airplane will fly 20% overloaded? Without actually doing it? Do a take off at cruise power. Then climb at a setting you would use for circuits.
Do this when your airplane is at gross. Doing it empty is cheating!

[xsbank]

Now Doc, I know you don't 'really' mean for someone to do a takeoff at cruise power, even if it would go fast enough to fly, coz I KNOW that you were only using an analogy, right?

Just say NO. Be polite, you don't wish to p*ss off the client or your boss, just say no. If the boss flies the trip, get another job. Live long enough to be as crusty and grumpy as ., Doc and me (and Snoopy and Widow and any one else with the common sense to not need to be 'old' to be smart).

If your boss is a dickhead, ask him how his business would be if you killed some of his best clients and there was no insurance to cover it? Ask him if he will pay for all your legal fees at the trial? Ask him if he will continue to pay your full pay while you are awaiting trial and after you are convicted? Ask him if he will visit you very Sunday? Will he bake you a cake with a file in it?

Five pages.... just say NO.

[snoopy]

Well, one could argue that no-one is being forced to read this thread either - but you're reading it - aren't you?

"It" goes on all the time - so for whatever reason, pilots aren't saying no. Those that do may lose their job, and as quickly as that happens, they could very easily be replaced by someone who will say yes - read the post that started the thread in the first place. In an economy like the one we're in, people are going to be even more afraid to lose their jobs, and operators more likely to cut corners to outlast their competition. Since nobody's minding the shop (TC - lights are on but nobody's home) who's to do anything about it?

As long as this continues to happen, well, it will continue to happen.

Isn't the point to discuss the problem to find out why it is still happening and perhaps put a stop to it? Support those that say no instead of yes, or those that try to justify why "it" is ok?

The person who started the thread claims to be a newbie. Where's the education, support, encouragement and understanding from the senior folk, who have a responsibility to mentor newcomers to the industry and set a good example?

Wilbur seems to think we're all professionals and don't need any oversight in this industry. I beg to differ.

[Widow]

Driver or pilot? Skilled labour or professional?

[Cat Driver]

The problem of pilots flying airplanes overloaded and with piss poor maintenance has been condoned ever since I can remember.

It will not change because there will always be pilots who will do it because this mind set has been systemic in the small airplane segment of the industry forever.

Those of us who refuse to fly in contravention of the law know that when we refuse and if we leave the employ of that operator be it our choice or being fired we will not be back home before another pilot is flying the airplane and it all starts over again.

I have been posting here long enough to get a feel for a lot of the other posters and I do not agree with a lot of their opinions...here is one.

It comes down to professionalism and ethics. Professionals fly within weight limits, and if pressured to fly over have the ethics to say, "No." It's no more complicated than that.

B.S. it is far more complicated than that, having to choose between unemployment or taking the risk you can get away with overloading or flying poorly maintained airplanes can be a very difficult decision for a lot of pilots.

Knowing that as soon as you leave another pilot will replace you and in many cases take the risks does not make the decision any easier.

Professionals do not require regulators looking over their shoulders to make sure they follow the law, they do it themselves.

That is a simplistic comment because the issues are far more complex than that.

However if there is no need for a regulator why doesn't the government just shut TCCA down and only have professionals flying Wilbur?

[IntermCFI]

I never thought I would post again, and if this becomes a trend I'll have to get a new user name

The fact this thread made it to 4 pages before "troll" was noted blows my mind, good job Westward_bound, but I think this took on a life of it's own and hopefully will save a life.

I have an e-mail I would like to share between myself and a fellow pilot about this very thing, I have editted out names but I hope you have no problems spotting my replys. The reason I'm posting this is to show how dangerous an attitude there is out there for flying over weight.

Hi ######,

This trip will be with 3 pax to Villeneuve and then 4 pax to Red Earth. On way back drop off one at Villeneuve again.

People are: ######, #######, #####, one other girl from CZVL. Weights are 200+175+110+110, plus you and I.

T/O weight w/o locker fuel is 5896 in worst case if we can get fuel in VL. ( Max T/O is 5680.)

T/O CYBW is 5786

T/O CZVL is 5896 (refuel in VL, OTW 5541) (216 overweight)

T/O CEH5 is 5670 (if refueled in VL)

However, I think it would be better to leave with 10 gals in each Locker which will change things a wee bit but still within window of what we have done before. That means we do not have to refuel and would have a 5.4 hr range. Presuming VFR all landings (close IFR on approachs).

T/O CYBW 5906 (just 226 over weight)

T/O CZVL 5771

T/O CEH5 5526

Comments?

I think we should leave the lockers empty and just take the 10 minutes in Villeneuve and top up the fuel tanks, there is no reason to fly over weight so why risk it.

Ok, check if we can do it late afternoon (they may have card service). If we do it in am we will be overweight anyway. The difference in carrying the extra 20 gallons is only 10 lbs (226 vs 216, see below carefully). Doing it in pm not only mean no locker fuel but also constricts us to cut back on main/aux load by 110 lbs (max of 868 lbs fuel, or 145 gals).



The only way to stay totally within max weight is to cut back on aux fuel also. If that becomes our policy than we can never carry full fuel even with 2 pax.

2 Pilots, 2 Pax, plus 70 lbs bags = 850 lbs

2 main, 2 Aux = 978 lbs

Total Payload = 1828

Basic empty = 3848

Total = 5676 (max 5680)

I think you need to evaluate clearly where you draw the line. For me there is no problem up to 300 lbs over, which is only 5% of A/C weight. The 340’s have a max weight of 6400 lbs on the same gear.

Play with the calculator to check out the different configs.

Waiting for word from the company with the fuel.

I think you have a mis-type 20 Gallons is 120lbs.

Your plane has limitations to the amount it can carry, I hope you didn't go in buying it expecting to be able to fill all six seats, not a single 6 seat airplane allows you to fill them with adults, as soon as you do you cannot carry fuel.

Fortunately TC and Cessna has made it so I don't have to evaluate my limits. The C310 may have the same gear as the C340 but this isn't what I'm concerned about. There is a reason behind Cessna stating 5680lbs as the gross weight, and I intend to stay as close to these limits as possible. Stating you have no problem flying 300to 400lbs overweight is a dangerous attitude, Complacency is a killer, where do you draw the line?

Not only our lives but the lives of your staff are in our hands and I for one intend to keep them alive. If we need to fuel up in Villeneuve twice then that's what we need to do, our lives aren't worth the 15 minutes it is going to take to fill up.

Your plane has limits and I think you need to start planning around those limits, if this means not carry enough fuel to make it round trip, or fueling up on the way so be it.

Hi ####### ‘ol buddy,

For the record, the spreadsheet will clearly tell you that 20 gals is 120 lbs and I never suggested otherwise. Furthermore I never said 300-400 lbs, I said ‘up to 300 lbs’.



I thought I made it very clear, guess not, so please take the time to look at the spreadsheet or do your own hand calc’s.



So, you do the math and tell me what you would plan for fueling for this trip.

Needless to say we didn't leave over gross and took more fuel in Vill, at the end of the day he actually thanked me and realised that if he just change how much fuel he took he could actually make more use of the airplane.

Scary thing is this isn't a 250 hour wonder he has been flying for over 20 years

[square]

No one can force you to fly overweight, and no one can fire you for not flying overweight. I've heard of people doing it, and they chose to. Though it's pretty stupid because you're assuming total liability for every little thing that could go wrong (bird strikes, blown tires, etc) and a lot of the time it loses your company money because they can't send out a second charter.

But anyway, what I actually wanted to tell you is that your accusations of whatever company you meant in Fort Mac were outright libel. And rather out of line for someone who doesn't know what they're talking about.

[Cat Driver]

No one can force you to fly overweight,

Correct.

and no one can fire you for not flying overweight.

Incorrect, in fact I was fired for refusing to fly overloaded by a well known company and to make it even more frustrating the work I was doing was for a major oil company.

My replacement was flown up to Johnson Point on an airplane owned by the oil company.

I knew the chief pilot of the oil company because I used to fly a DC3 for Mobil Oil out of the same hangar, so when I got back to calgary I went to him...he listened and said there was nothing he could do about it as he had nothing to do with the charter agreement with the company I was flying for.

I went to TC and told them what happened and they said they could do nothing as it was my word against the owner of the company I was flying for.

I never even got paid for the two weeks of flying I did.

[square]

Wow, hard to believe people can get away with firing you for that. The labour board would eat them alive if they knew. I guess people are afraid to speak up. But one thing you should be eager to do is improve the safety culture in your company. Especially if you've got seniority. Only way a bad company will change is from the pilots & safety team on up, no one person can bully you all at once.

[square]

My 206 has a STOL kit that comes with an upgross. The POH has a supplement installed that says the max gross is now 3499 instead of 3300. No additional training was provided, nor was it required, as the aircraft is still operated according to the (revised) POH. We also don't have an 'up-gross' op spec.

3300 on a 206? How old is that thing? Ones I flew are all 3600, 70's and 80's, and I think you can get 3800 with a belly pod or wing extensions.

[square]

OK just finished reading this thread and as long as we're on topic I have just one more thing to add

You can kill yourself at gross too

Taking off of the mudpit in back of the lodge when its 35 degrees out. Or there's no wind to help you off. Or you're uphill. Or it's one-way out with a tail-wind. Check out the trees at the end. Scary. No, 2000's not enough.. sometimes it's half-load only.

PDM! It's your job dude

[Rudder Bug]

Taking off of the mudpit in back of the lodge when its 35 degrees out.

Excellent point Square. The customers or some employers don't have a clue of the density altitude.

[iflyforpie]

My 206 has a STOL kit that comes with an upgross. The POH has a supplement installed that says the max gross is now 3499 instead of 3300. No additional training was provided, nor was it required, as the aircraft is still operated according to the (revised) POH. We also don't have an 'up-gross' op spec.

3300 on a 206? How old is that thing? Ones I flew are all 3600, 70's and 80's, and I think you can get 3800 with a belly pod or wing extensions.

Hundredth one ever made and probably in better condition than most. It will carry more than a new 206H.

[Cat Driver]

Wow, hard to believe people can get away with firing you for that. The labour board would eat them alive if they knew.

Really? You think I just made that up to make you neophytes think I have a big dick?

I guess people are afraid to speak up.

Speak up to who? I refused to carry overloads and was fired, I spoke up to everyone who I thought could help me...no one did.

But one thing you should be eager to do is improve the safety culture in your company.

Being eager is one thing, changing a company that has had that mindset forever is beyond the ability of any one pilot.

Especially if you've got seniority. Only way a bad company will change is from the pilots & safety team on up, no one person can bully you all at once.

Sure nothing to it all you need is seniority and a magic wand.

Come back and let me know how it worked after you get some more experience in this industry.

It does not change because there is no effective oversight of the regulations.

[AJV]

I'm still waiting for my first job, but as I do my research on potential employers, I hear so much about pilots being forced(directly or indirectly) to fly in dangerous situations. Seems that at least for the low time guy looking for his first job(or 2), the likelihood of coming up against these situations is very high. If the industry isn't going to change and help prevent this, then maybe there needs to be some sort of coarse available to teach the young guy how to fly overweight and out of balance. Yes I know that kind of comes with experience, but I know I don't want to risk my life to learn it. I know running such a coarse legally is probably not going to happen, but maybe the experienced guys here can make up a thread that will contain some tips and thoughts on "operational flying". You know, maybe what to expect with flight controls in far aft/fore c of g. What might happen if a gust of cross wind came 50ft from threshold when you're still aft/fore of limits. Just how much extra distance is needed for being 100lbs over....etc.

I was looking at the Ft. Mac company site, getting slightly excited about the potential job, then came on here to search and was quickly put back into my demoralized state. But maybe if I had some sort of "operational flying" cheat sheet, I might feel a little more confident applying.

Anyways, just a though.

Dude, go and get an instructor rating and fly 1500 hours, get your ATPL and get a job in a big aircraft where all the weight and balance is done for you and is done legally. I say this because you exibit the personality of a type of person that is willing to take risks because you think they are "calculated" risks as well as the type of person that can be bullied into doing something he or she should not do. Stop arguing with people on here that just want you to live to see a new day, they know what they are talking about.
Be safe and smart, if not then I hope not to hear of you in one of Transports safety letters....

[Just another canuck]

I once took off with 6 drums of what I thought were fuel, but what later learned were asphalt. 6.6 pounds/gallon vs. 10.8 pounds/gallon. Couldn't figure out why the hell the airplane felt the way it did... I had no course on how to fly over gross, but learned very quickly. The pods of the caravan were also filled with other various items which would have been fine had the drums actually been filled with fuel. I didn't do my own loading... I just showed up, check the tie-downs and blasted off. I made sure I more thoroughly investigated what was on my plane from then on in...

[Wilbur]

Cat, you're right in that there will be times where making the choice to fly over-gross, or not, is not an easy decision to make because of the employment consequences. But that doesn't complicate the issue of right vs wrong, legal vs illegal, and what constitutes ethical and professional behaviour. There is no judgement involved, there is no gray area, there is no subjectivity. You do your weight and balance and you know you are either within limits or not. In fact, this is probably one of the least complicated decisions a pilot has to make in the course of a work day.

Widow hit the nail on the head, are pilots professionals or merely skilled labour? Clearly some can be found in both groups, and I suggest the professionals consistently use their own ethical compass to guide their decisions and behaviour. What TC enforcement may or may not do likely doesn't even enter their thinking.

And obviously, what I'm talking about here does not include honest mistakes or decisions made on the basis of faulty information about the weight of your cargo.

[Cat Driver]

Widow hit the nail on the head, are pilots professionals or merely skilled labour?

Professional or skilled labor is a subjective description when it comes to pilots Wilbur, I never really thought much about it during my career because labels never really meant that much to me. However be they professionals or unskilled labor there are still the same complex issues that enter the equation when it comes to any given pilot deciding if they will take more than the legal load.

When I first started flying float planes I flew overloaded on a regular basis because the " old experts " not only did it but made the new guys think it separated the pros from the wannabes and thus the peer pressure supported by the direct or insidious pressure from the owners of the companies kept the fly overloaded syndrome going.

Clearly some can be found in both groups, and I suggest the professionals consistently use their own ethical compass to guide their decisions and behaviour.

That on paper sounds good, but it still leaves that problem of how to change the behavior of the non-professionals.

What TC enforcement may or may not do likely doesn't even enter their thinking

Could the reason be they know that the risk of being prosecuted by TC is remote because historically TC turns a blind eye to this practice?

I find your thought process to be interesting Wilbur and haven't quite figured out exactly how you come to your opinions regarding these issues of regulatory enforcement and noncompliance of same.

One of the most perplexing issues you and I seem to have different ideas on is the issue of people having an ethical compass, and what actions should be taken to deal with those who display an unethical moral compass.

So in that I have the soapbox at the moment I want to ask you a question.

What is more detrimental to the health of the aviation industry in Canada.

Having a public servant at the level of DGCA who has been proven to have not only a lack of a moral compass but actively ignores the very same laws he is sworn to uphold.

Or:

A pilot who bends to pressure and flies overloaded because he / she has a family to feed and knows there is no protection to be found from the regulator should they lose their job for abiding by the law?

I'm not sure exactly who you are Wilbur but I know who I am and I have been around long enough to be able to separate the wheat from the chafe.

[iflyforpie]

A pilot who bends to pressure and flies overloaded because he / she has a family to feed and knows there is no protection to be found from the regulator should they lose their job for abiding by the law?

This struck a chord with me and sorry that it is out of context.

For me, I have a family to feed and would assume the worst-case scenario that TCCA would not do anything if I went kiying to them that I was being told to fly overweight and lost my job as a result.

But is death a better alternative? How about not being able to work for month, years, or ever because I piled an overloaded aircraft up into the trees? Where is the company and the owner going to be? Shut down, bankrupt, and hidden behind lawyers? Or continuing on, business as usual, without a care for my situation. Am I going to be insured? How am I going to provide for my family now?

How about re-starting a flying career? The way these forum members burn a name into their memory and produce double digit pages of trash-talk on how stupid they were; I think my flying career would be over.

If you fly overweight:

-You are breaking the law.
-You are invalidating the C of A.
-You are invalidating your insurance coverage.
-You are putting your life, the lives of your passengers, and the lives of the people on the ground at risk.
-You are becoming an unpaid test-pilot for your aircraft manufacturer.
-You are compromising what little professionalism we have left in this industry.
-You are giving another juicy reason for the media to attack aviation.

Can't think of any more right now, feel free to add.

[Rudder Bug]

Just take the aircraft’s gross weight minus the required fuel minus crew, survival gear and flight bags and you obtain the load the customer can put in the aircratf.

That’s what you should go with, it is that simple. If someone disagree, show the numbers and the papers and sell another trip for the excess if any.

If your boss isn’t happy with it and threatens to fire you, go work somewhere else and cover your ass, period.

[Westward_Bound]

Well I'm glad I kinda left this to the old timers to duke out, turned into quite the discussion.

For all those "westward_bound haters" that this discussion created, just know this all started from a reply I made to a similar thread that was talking about poor maintenance and out of limits flying. I was only saying that there would probably be less deaths if those guys who flew out of limits had some knowledge of how their aircraft would handle in such a situation. But yeah, people then jumped on me and somehow turned it into me saying I want to fly out of limits.

I was only trying to prove a point on how to make unsafe situations safer. But at least some good discussion came of it!

[square]

"How to make unsafe situations safer"? *shakes head!!* Why would you accept an unsafe situation to begin with?? 4 pages of people scorching you and you still don't get it.

[Westward_Bound]

"How to make unsafe situations safer"? *shakes head!!* Why would you accept an unsafe situation to begin with?? 4 pages of people scorching you and you still don't get it.

grrrrrr....wow....no it's in fact you who "doesn't get it". For effin sakes dude, get your head out of your ass and read my godamn posts. I can't believe the people who respond the same as you fly airplans!! How can you get by in life if you can't even read a simple messageboard without taking things so far out of context!!???

Seriously, some people here amaze me at their lack of proper comprehension and it's getting really annoying.

YES I UNDERSTAND DON'T FLY OUT OF LIMITS, PRETTY EFFING SIMPLE!!! But that's BESIDE MY POINT!!!!!

You are unsafe if all you want to know what you need to know and nothing more.

[Rudder Bug]

Westward_Bound

I am glad you enjoyed reading all that and I hope it could have been somewhat constructive at times. I admit I have personally flown way out of limits deliberately in every respect in the past. Nobody was teaching it. We learned watching the old farts pushing the flying machines beyond their legal and approved limits but we were wrong, and very wrong. Things have changed since and we don't need another hero.

You can get in big trouble nowaday if you get cought flying illegally or in a cavalier manner, or acquire a reputation of not being a safe pilot, etc. We are not in the sixties anymore and you are legally protected and covered if you refuse to jeopardize your safety for a living. It's your life and your career, and I really hope you find a job at the right place.

Keep us posted.

RB