Narrative:

On 5/sat/89, I flew my small aircraft to an air show in alpine, tx; from midland, tx. As in the past, I removed the operating handbook which included the weight and balance data. I didn't want the book to be damaged by the maneuvers required in the aerobatic flight. Also, I took along a friend who weighed 240#. Upon arriving at alpine an inspector immediately approached me wanting to know how much my passenger weighed. He then told me he once owned an small aircraft and he thought I was over gross and out of center of gravity. He asked me to do a weight and balance computation, to which I responded by telling him I didn't have the information in the airplane. He became quite upset. Realizing my problem, I immediately grounded the airplane and didn't fly in the air show. Later I flew back to midland in another airplane and dropped of my passenger. I took the handbook and weight & balance data back with me and flew home solo in the small aircraft. When I arrived in midland I did a weight and balance computation and found the airplane had been 75 pounds over gross for normal category, but within center of gravity. At this time, I am still waiting for notification of any possible action by the FAA. The reason this occurred is, that given the simple operation of an small aircraft and its use in aerobatics, it seemed unnecessary to have the operating handbook and weight & balance data in the aircraft while at an air show. When I was checked out in this airplane by a designated examiner and world class aerobatic competitor, we did several weight & balance problems to show the envelope areas of the airplane. Then he told me that the gross weight and center of gravity were set low by the factory for liability reasons, and the airplane is very safe and will carry a 300 pounds person in the front seat. Because of this, I didn't even consider a possible problem with my friend's weight. The airplane flew just fine. As a cfii and mei, I am well aware that the far's apply to all aircraft in general, but was under the impression that in this type of aircraft the interpretation would be more liberal. I was wrong! As I know several pilots who share this same view, I believe it would be helpful to publish information clarifying the importance of having the proper paperwork in all airplanes; no matter what kind or for what use. Also, staying within the factory limitations on weight & balance is not only safe, but also a legal requirement. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following: reporter states again the principles he outlines in his report and points out the somewhat inadequate but frequently used defense that everyone else does it the same way. Perhaps so. He further states that the particular inspector who is pursuing the matter was the assistant air show monitor and not the air show monitor himself. The reporter has received an official notice of investigation.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: WEIGHT AND BALANCE INFORMATION NOT ON BOARD ACFT AS REQUIRED BY FEDERAL AVIATION REG. ACFT OPERATED OVER ALLOWABLE GROSS WEIGHT.

Narrative: ON 5/SAT/89, I FLEW MY SMA TO AN AIR SHOW IN ALPINE, TX; FROM MIDLAND, TX. AS IN THE PAST, I REMOVED THE OPERATING HANDBOOK WHICH INCLUDED THE WT AND BAL DATA. I DIDN'T WANT THE BOOK TO BE DAMAGED BY THE MANEUVERS REQUIRED IN THE AEROBATIC FLT. ALSO, I TOOK ALONG A FRIEND WHO WEIGHED 240#. UPON ARRIVING AT ALPINE AN INSPECTOR IMMEDIATELY APPROACHED ME WANTING TO KNOW HOW MUCH MY PAX WEIGHED. HE THEN TOLD ME HE ONCE OWNED AN SMA AND HE THOUGHT I WAS OVER GROSS AND OUT OF CENTER OF GRAVITY. HE ASKED ME TO DO A WT AND BAL COMPUTATION, TO WHICH I RESPONDED BY TELLING HIM I DIDN'T HAVE THE INFO IN THE AIRPLANE. HE BECAME QUITE UPSET. REALIZING MY PROB, I IMMEDIATELY GNDED THE AIRPLANE AND DIDN'T FLY IN THE AIR SHOW. LATER I FLEW BACK TO MIDLAND IN ANOTHER AIRPLANE AND DROPPED OF MY PAX. I TOOK THE HANDBOOK AND WT & BAL DATA BACK WITH ME AND FLEW HOME SOLO IN THE SMA. WHEN I ARRIVED IN MIDLAND I DID A WT AND BAL COMPUTATION AND FOUND THE AIRPLANE HAD BEEN 75 LBS OVER GROSS FOR NORMAL CATEGORY, BUT WITHIN CENTER OF GRAVITY. AT THIS TIME, I AM STILL WAITING FOR NOTIFICATION OF ANY POSSIBLE ACTION BY THE FAA. THE REASON THIS OCCURRED IS, THAT GIVEN THE SIMPLE OPERATION OF AN SMA AND ITS USE IN AEROBATICS, IT SEEMED UNNECESSARY TO HAVE THE OPERATING HANDBOOK AND WT & BAL DATA IN THE ACFT WHILE AT AN AIR SHOW. WHEN I WAS CHKED OUT IN THIS AIRPLANE BY A DESIGNATED EXAMINER AND WORLD CLASS AEROBATIC COMPETITOR, WE DID SEVERAL WT & BAL PROBS TO SHOW THE ENVELOPE AREAS OF THE AIRPLANE. THEN HE TOLD ME THAT THE GROSS WT AND CENTER OF GRAVITY WERE SET LOW BY THE FACTORY FOR LIABILITY REASONS, AND THE AIRPLANE IS VERY SAFE AND WILL CARRY A 300 LBS PERSON IN THE FRONT SEAT. BECAUSE OF THIS, I DIDN'T EVEN CONSIDER A POSSIBLE PROB WITH MY FRIEND'S WT. THE AIRPLANE FLEW JUST FINE. AS A CFII AND MEI, I AM WELL AWARE THAT THE FAR'S APPLY TO ALL ACFT IN GENERAL, BUT WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT IN THIS TYPE OF ACFT THE INTERP WOULD BE MORE LIBERAL. I WAS WRONG! AS I KNOW SEVERAL PLTS WHO SHARE THIS SAME VIEW, I BELIEVE IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO PUBLISH INFO CLARIFYING THE IMPORTANCE OF HAVING THE PROPER PAPERWORK IN ALL AIRPLANES; NO MATTER WHAT KIND OR FOR WHAT USE. ALSO, STAYING WITHIN THE FACTORY LIMITATIONS ON WT & BAL IS NOT ONLY SAFE, BUT ALSO A LEGAL REQUIREMENT. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING: RPTR STATES AGAIN THE PRINCIPLES HE OUTLINES IN HIS RPT AND POINTS OUT THE SOMEWHAT INADEQUATE BUT FREQUENTLY USED DEFENSE THAT EVERYONE ELSE DOES IT THE SAME WAY. PERHAPS SO. HE FURTHER STATES THAT THE PARTICULAR INSPECTOR WHO IS PURSUING THE MATTER WAS THE ASSISTANT AIR SHOW MONITOR AND NOT THE AIR SHOW MONITOR HIMSELF. THE RPTR HAS RECEIVED AN OFFICIAL NOTICE OF INVESTIGATION.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.