Narrative:

While preparing the weight and balance form for our flight from ord to cle, I failed to recognize that we would be taking off over our landing structural weight. This is the highest weight that you can take off with in order to land under the aircraft's landing structural weight. It is calculated by adding the planned fuel burn-off to the landing structural weight. In our case, landing structural weight was 41226 pounds and fuel burn was 2229 pounds, thus our may takeoff weight was 43455 pounds. We calculated our takeoff weight to be 44358 pounds, approximately 903 pounds over the maximum takeoff weight for the flight. After we pushed away from the gate, we found the error, however, we did not exceed any aircraft limitations, because we knew we could increase our en route fuel burn to that our landing weight would be below landing structural weight (41226 pounds). We did this by running the APU for the entire flight, flying at a lower altitude than originally planned and using flaps 9 degrees earlier than normal. Our actual landing weight was 40900 pounds. Once again, we did not exceed any aircraft limits. Takeoff structural for the emb 145ER is 45414 pounds, our actual takeoff weight was 44358 pounds. My main concern is that the weight and balance form on the file shows that we took off over our planned landing structural takeoff limitation. Once again, we discovered the problem and corrected it before any aircraft limit was exceeded. Contributing factors include the rush to push the flight on time, having more passenger than originally expected, and the fact that our weight was less than aircraft takeoff structural weight (easier for me to overlook the fact that we were over planned landing structural takeoff limit).

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN EMB145 FLT CREW TAKES OFF OVER MAX PLANNED TKOF WT, BUT MANAGES TO BURN EXTRA FUEL TO AVOID AN OVERWT LNDG AT DEST ARPT.

Narrative: WHILE PREPARING THE WT AND BAL FORM FOR OUR FLT FROM ORD TO CLE, I FAILED TO RECOGNIZE THAT WE WOULD BE TAKING OFF OVER OUR LNDG STRUCTURAL WT. THIS IS THE HIGHEST WT THAT YOU CAN TAKE OFF WITH IN ORDER TO LAND UNDER THE ACFT'S LNDG STRUCTURAL WT. IT IS CALCULATED BY ADDING THE PLANNED FUEL BURN-OFF TO THE LNDG STRUCTURAL WT. IN OUR CASE, LNDG STRUCTURAL WT WAS 41226 LBS AND FUEL BURN WAS 2229 LBS, THUS OUR MAY TKOF WT WAS 43455 LBS. WE CALCULATED OUR TKOF WT TO BE 44358 LBS, APPROX 903 LBS OVER THE MAX TKOF WT FOR THE FLT. AFTER WE PUSHED AWAY FROM THE GATE, WE FOUND THE ERROR, HOWEVER, WE DID NOT EXCEED ANY ACFT LIMITATIONS, BECAUSE WE KNEW WE COULD INCREASE OUR ENRTE FUEL BURN TO THAT OUR LNDG WT WOULD BE BELOW LNDG STRUCTURAL WT (41226 LBS). WE DID THIS BY RUNNING THE APU FOR THE ENTIRE FLT, FLYING AT A LOWER ALT THAN ORIGINALLY PLANNED AND USING FLAPS 9 DEGS EARLIER THAN NORMAL. OUR ACTUAL LNDG WT WAS 40900 LBS. ONCE AGAIN, WE DID NOT EXCEED ANY ACFT LIMITS. TKOF STRUCTURAL FOR THE EMB 145ER IS 45414 LBS, OUR ACTUAL TKOF WT WAS 44358 LBS. MY MAIN CONCERN IS THAT THE WT AND BAL FORM ON THE FILE SHOWS THAT WE TOOK OFF OVER OUR PLANNED LNDG STRUCTURAL TKOF LIMITATION. ONCE AGAIN, WE DISCOVERED THE PROB AND CORRECTED IT BEFORE ANY ACFT LIMIT WAS EXCEEDED. CONTRIBUTING FACTORS INCLUDE THE RUSH TO PUSH THE FLT ON TIME, HAVING MORE PAX THAN ORIGINALLY EXPECTED, AND THE FACT THAT OUR WT WAS LESS THAN ACFT TKOF STRUCTURAL WT (EASIER FOR ME TO OVERLOOK THE FACT THAT WE WERE OVER PLANNED LNDG STRUCTURAL TKOF LIMIT).

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.