People die from the W&B being wrong. Here is an example of a multiple fatality in the USA (poor maintenance was also a factor in this one):
https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Reports/AAR0401.pdf
AIUI Commercial operations with small aeroplanes weigh passengers and baggage to avoid such events.
Maybe it is because I am a thirty-five year experienced design engineer but I consider going outside W&B a pretty stupid thing to do. Yes, I do weigh passengers and baggage if I am going to be close to MTOW. I have on more than one trip with family or friends sent the passengers to a nearby airfield with a big tarmac runway while I bring the aeroplane from a short grass one to collect them.
If the passengers tell you their weight, add a bit.
Know what you are doing, I once took an aeroplane from a long tarmac runway with it knowingly at MTOW. It was all fine because I had done the arithmetic but the rate of climb was very small.
As for the C152 thing, certainly where I learnt to fly the 152s were never filled above tabs and the instructors made sure that students did the arithmetic. Maybe I got lucky with my school. In fact I know that I did, people constantly post about bad training as being universal yet none of the examples quoted could be applied to the school I used.
When people like me engineer a thing, we use years of experience and regulations written in blood. We don’t do what we do just to make your life inconvenient. Presumably if you are not a surgeon you don’t presume to change the rules of surgery, if you are not an engineer why d you think you can change the rules of engineering?
And breathe :-)
AlexTB20, how precisely the weight is measured?
CS-23, amendment 4, CS 23.21:
(b) The following general tolerances are
allowed during flight testing. However, greater
tolerances may be allowed in particular tests –
Item Tolerance
Weight +5%, –10%
Critical items affected by weight +5%, –1%
C.G. ±7% total travel
:)
Mooney_Driver wrote:
Easy, Wizzair and Ryanair are probably the best in regards of wnb simply because they make money by busting pax with overweight handluggage.
Not quite.
Easyjet does not have a weight limit on hand luggage, only on dimensions. Since a few years LH Group has started to weigh hand luggage at many airports – only motivation for it is of course extra revenue. I don’t think passenger and hand luggage weights are a causing overweight airliners. Not a major safety relevant factor.
Mooney_Driver wrote:
The moment you are as much as 1 lb overweight or 1 mm out of CG and it can be proven and written into an accident report, you loose your insurance cover. No matter why the accident happened, your insurance will not pay ONE cent or, if it is not your plane, come after you for full regress on what they have to pay the owner. Families of pax lost or hurt will sue your estate with the full risk of your family having to caugh up.
- Checking weight and balance is very easy for ramp checkers and if they suspect you, they will do it. If they find you illegal, you will get busted.
Are you 100% sure about this? If there is no causal connection I think the insurance will pay.
Not to play down flying overweight here but I think even most PPL practical exam flights in 2 seaters are overweight to begin with.
Peter wrote:
Never heard of a plane being specially loaded to MTOW during differences training.
We do it with every pilot we introduce to the Mooney. It is part of the difference training syllabus and I think it is very important to do it. Most ATO’s I know here do it. In fact, you as a student trying to learn a new plane should insist that it is done. We also have an excel based load sheet which can be filled in in 2 minutes at the most. Every pilot is required to be able to produce this at any time. Also a ramp checker will want to see a wnb calculation carrying the current date and time.
AlexTB20 wrote:
Speaking of learning, today I will slowly approach the MTOW by taking 2 then 3 passengers with almost full tanks and no baggage, just to see how the airplane feels and how weight affects the handling on take off and landing.
I would do this with an experienced TB20 savy FI in the right seat. Obviously your difference training was lacking massively so 200 hours non withstanding I think there is room for improvement. If stuff like that was not done properly, then I wonder what else was missing. This btw is not your fault, but the ATO’s doing the difference training. But sometimes we as students have to think ourselfs what is really important to do. The fact that only now you realize that your plane is critical in terms of weight shows that emphasis on wnb seems to have been missing. So heaven knows what else did not get done.
Peter wrote:
My TB20GT has an empty weight of 900kg, so with full fuel (235kg) and full TKS (about 50kg) the payload is 215kg. So the Q is: what can you fit in which weighs 215kg or less? Not much, if you want to “go places”. Even with an empty plane, with 3 people, that is 72kg each, which is very unlikely in modern times. An average size man plus two quite slim ladies, perhaps and no luggage.
The question then has to be how much fuel can you take with 4 normal sized people inside your plane. Not much if I do a quick calculation. With 4 IATA Adults and their baggage you actually will be at a ZFW of 1374 kgs.
There are benefits to having a 40 kg person as your most frequent passenger!
If there is no causal connection I think the insurance will pay.
That is probably true but will depend on the insurer. The less you pay the more likely they are to take a close look 
We have an interesting thread on GA insurance…
I’ve never even heard of required difference training for going from one SEP to another.
In the US aircraft insurance policies have a well known provision that “the airworthiness certificate must be in full force and effect” I don’t know if this is applied elsewhere. Translated to English this means that the aircraft is not insured unless configured per the TCDS and operated within certified limitations. The reality of making a claim may be something different. FWIW.
I’ve never even heard of required difference training for going from one SEP to another
There is no such requirement per se. Not if there is no new „feature“ involved in the new type. But if it has variable pitch prop, retractable gear, turbo and a few other, and if you haven‘t dealt with these features before, then that requires difference training according to EASA Part-FCL. Lots of threads here on the sense and nonsense of these regs.
This btw is not your fault, but the ATO’s doing the difference training
There is no requirement for an ATO for doing differences training.
Katamarino wrote:
I’ve never even heard of required difference training for going from one SEP to another.
I just had a friend friend of mine check out a colleague of his newly aquired SEP in the US. The insurer had required 2h with an instructor. The funny thing is that they didn’t specify the instructor requirements, and my friend had zero hours on type in the last 5 years, and probably single digits in his entire flying career.
