Lead Sled
Sitt'n on the throne...
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2004
- Posts
- 2,066
Well said BigD
One of the big lessons that all pilots need to learn if they want to grow old is what is safe isn't always legal and what is legal isn't always safe. A pilot has to simultaneously operate within 3 specific spheres to maintain an acceptable level of safety:
1. The pilot’s individual limitations. A freshly soloed student pilot will have different personal limitations than a 500-hour private pilot, who will have different personal limitations than a 20,000-hour airline captain.
2. The aircraft’s limitations. There will always be aircraft that are more suited for a particular mission than another. A Super Cub might be just the ticket for flying off of a sand bar in Alaska, but you wouldn’t want to try shooting an ILS to minimums in icing conditions in one. A Lear is one fine airplane, but it isn’t the machine you want to be operating if your runway is only 3,000’ long. All aircraft have limitations whether they are a Super Cub or a B747. A Cessna 172 is probably one of the finest general aviation aircraft ever built and it has one of the best safety records. Can it be misused? Of course – fill it with fuel, put four people in it, and try taking off from an airport in Colorado during the middle of summer. You’ll probably make the headlines in the local papers.
3. The legal limitations imposed by the FARs.
Flight safety is, in large part, a mind set that allows you to keep within those three spheres. Where pilots get into trouble is when they attempt to operate outside of the area where all three of those spheres intersect. The accident record is full of reports where highly experienced airline or corporate pilots “bought the farm” trying to operate in conditions that the aircraft wasn’t suitably equipped to handle. (For example, trying to shoot an ILS to minimums in icing conditions in a Super Cub.) The same thing goes for “VFR only" private pilots continuing into IFR conditions in suitably equipped aircraft. The same would be true of an experienced pilot trying to operate a light twin under conditions that would leave him/her “hanging” if an engine quit.
You’ve heard the old saying…
“There are old pilots and there are bold pilots, but there are no old, bold pilots.”
You can ignore the dangers, and place your trust in the laws of probability. (After all, they say that nowadays, an engine failure is a “once in a career” occurrence – yeah, right!) But remember, if you choose this path, the danger doesn’t go away, it merely lies in wait.
Hey, we’ve all been there. In the exuberance of youth and with the desire and drive to build up our flying credentials many of us are willing to do just about anything to get our hands on an airplane. There was a time when I wouldn't have given much thought to operating properly equipped and maintained single-engine or multiengine light airplane almost anywhere, anytime day or night. That however, was a long time ago. I now have a much better understanding of just what can go wrong and realize that there are just some operations that are better off not being attempted.
As long as I’m quoting interesting old aviation sayings, here’s another one that I think pertains to the situation…
“A superior pilot is one who uses his superior judgment to avoid situations requiring the use of his superior skills.”
Oh well, I'll climb off of my soap box.
'Sled
bigD hit the nail square on the head. The airplane will fly just fine 25 pounds over. It will even fly just fine 250 pounds over. It gets better - if it's not a Part 135 airplane, it probably hasn't been weighed recently. Since airplanes have a tendency to gain weight with age, I would be very surprised if your W&B figures in the flight manual are correct. But as bigD said, that's not the point.bigD said:The plane will fly just fine 25 over gross. But that's not the point. You'll do 25 and get away with it, and next time you'll be faced with the same question, only it's 50 pounds. Where are you going to draw the line?
One of the big lessons that all pilots need to learn if they want to grow old is what is safe isn't always legal and what is legal isn't always safe. A pilot has to simultaneously operate within 3 specific spheres to maintain an acceptable level of safety:
1. The pilot’s individual limitations. A freshly soloed student pilot will have different personal limitations than a 500-hour private pilot, who will have different personal limitations than a 20,000-hour airline captain.
2. The aircraft’s limitations. There will always be aircraft that are more suited for a particular mission than another. A Super Cub might be just the ticket for flying off of a sand bar in Alaska, but you wouldn’t want to try shooting an ILS to minimums in icing conditions in one. A Lear is one fine airplane, but it isn’t the machine you want to be operating if your runway is only 3,000’ long. All aircraft have limitations whether they are a Super Cub or a B747. A Cessna 172 is probably one of the finest general aviation aircraft ever built and it has one of the best safety records. Can it be misused? Of course – fill it with fuel, put four people in it, and try taking off from an airport in Colorado during the middle of summer. You’ll probably make the headlines in the local papers.
3. The legal limitations imposed by the FARs.
Flight safety is, in large part, a mind set that allows you to keep within those three spheres. Where pilots get into trouble is when they attempt to operate outside of the area where all three of those spheres intersect. The accident record is full of reports where highly experienced airline or corporate pilots “bought the farm” trying to operate in conditions that the aircraft wasn’t suitably equipped to handle. (For example, trying to shoot an ILS to minimums in icing conditions in a Super Cub.) The same thing goes for “VFR only" private pilots continuing into IFR conditions in suitably equipped aircraft. The same would be true of an experienced pilot trying to operate a light twin under conditions that would leave him/her “hanging” if an engine quit.
You’ve heard the old saying…
“There are old pilots and there are bold pilots, but there are no old, bold pilots.”
You can ignore the dangers, and place your trust in the laws of probability. (After all, they say that nowadays, an engine failure is a “once in a career” occurrence – yeah, right!) But remember, if you choose this path, the danger doesn’t go away, it merely lies in wait.
Hey, we’ve all been there. In the exuberance of youth and with the desire and drive to build up our flying credentials many of us are willing to do just about anything to get our hands on an airplane. There was a time when I wouldn't have given much thought to operating properly equipped and maintained single-engine or multiengine light airplane almost anywhere, anytime day or night. That however, was a long time ago. I now have a much better understanding of just what can go wrong and realize that there are just some operations that are better off not being attempted.
As long as I’m quoting interesting old aviation sayings, here’s another one that I think pertains to the situation…
“A superior pilot is one who uses his superior judgment to avoid situations requiring the use of his superior skills.”
Oh well, I'll climb off of my soap box.
'Sled