Narrative:

On oct/X/92 and oct/Y/92, I flew an small aircraft aircraft number from apa, co, to aus, tx, to ile, tx. Upon delivering the aircraft to ia inspector who is an ia (inspector authority), ia reviewed the logbooks. Actually ia and I flew the aircraft together to demonstration the aircraft, and check equipment and radios to be working properly. After the demonstration flight, ia then reviewed the logbooks. He then got upset and informed me that the radios installed in the aircraft were not original, and because of this, the weight and balance was inaccurate. He also felt that the current annual inspection had not been properly signed off in both the airframe and the engine logs. However, the current annual signoff stated that the aircraft was in compliance with annual inspection. This signoff was in the airframe logbook and covered the entire aircraft, engine included. Ia was unhappy with the logbooks and lack of FAA form #337's missing from the flight manual, indicating updated weight and balance. He then threatened to report me to the FAA for violating the FARS regarding weight and balance and flying an aircraft without current annual inspection. Once again, the annual inspection was current. As for weight and balance, I am proficient at calculating weight and balance and I am familiar with the useful load of small aircraft series aircraft. I may have unwittingly flown aircraft without being able to technically calculate the exact weight and balance for my flts, as there was not an updated weight and balance in the aircraft, after the new radios had been installed. Safety was at no time ever sacrificed during these flts, and there were no incidents involved which ever compromised safety in any way.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: COMMERCIAL PLT OF SMA ACFT OPERATED WITHOUT CURRENT WT AND BAL DATA.

Narrative: ON OCT/X/92 AND OCT/Y/92, I FLEW AN SMA ACFT NUMBER FROM APA, CO, TO AUS, TX, TO ILE, TX. UPON DELIVERING THE ACFT TO IA INSPECTOR WHO IS AN IA (INSPECTOR AUTHORITY), IA REVIEWED THE LOGBOOKS. ACTUALLY IA AND I FLEW THE ACFT TOGETHER TO DEMO THE ACFT, AND CHK EQUIP AND RADIOS TO BE WORKING PROPERLY. AFTER THE DEMO FLT, IA THEN REVIEWED THE LOGBOOKS. HE THEN GOT UPSET AND INFORMED ME THAT THE RADIOS INSTALLED IN THE ACFT WERE NOT ORIGINAL, AND BECAUSE OF THIS, THE WT AND BAL WAS INACCURATE. HE ALSO FELT THAT THE CURRENT ANNUAL INSPECTION HAD NOT BEEN PROPERLY SIGNED OFF IN BOTH THE AIRFRAME AND THE ENG LOGS. HOWEVER, THE CURRENT ANNUAL SIGNOFF STATED THAT THE ACFT WAS IN COMPLIANCE WITH ANNUAL INSPECTION. THIS SIGNOFF WAS IN THE AIRFRAME LOGBOOK AND COVERED THE ENTIRE ACFT, ENG INCLUDED. IA WAS UNHAPPY WITH THE LOGBOOKS AND LACK OF FAA FORM #337'S MISSING FROM THE FLT MANUAL, INDICATING UPDATED WT AND BAL. HE THEN THREATENED TO RPT ME TO THE FAA FOR VIOLATING THE FARS REGARDING WT AND BAL AND FLYING AN ACFT WITHOUT CURRENT ANNUAL INSPECTION. ONCE AGAIN, THE ANNUAL INSPECTION WAS CURRENT. AS FOR WT AND BAL, I AM PROFICIENT AT CALCULATING WT AND BAL AND I AM FAMILIAR WITH THE USEFUL LOAD OF SMA SERIES ACFT. I MAY HAVE UNWITTINGLY FLOWN ACFT WITHOUT BEING ABLE TO TECHNICALLY CALCULATE THE EXACT WT AND BAL FOR MY FLTS, AS THERE WAS NOT AN UPDATED WT AND BAL IN THE ACFT, AFTER THE NEW RADIOS HAD BEEN INSTALLED. SAFETY WAS AT NO TIME EVER SACRIFICED DURING THESE FLTS, AND THERE WERE NO INCIDENTS INVOLVED WHICH EVER COMPROMISED SAFETY IN ANY WAY.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 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.