Confused with MTOW

[frank marriott]

With ref to what Andy has said re 700kg it is my understanding that even if the LSA weight lifted to 700kgs existing J230s would still be limited to 600kg unless the manufacturer reissued a flight manual and SCoA which both currently state 600kg.

 

Don't shoot me, that is my understanding - and happy to be corrected.

 

 

[Guest Andys@coffs]

Frank

 

Mine was factory assist kit built, not LSA, see here for jabiru's claims re MTOW for kit built J230 http://www.jabiru.net.au/aircraft-kits/j230-kit and the reason I made the claim that my aircraft could have been good for 700kgs in some circumstances.

 

Andy

 

 

[Dafydd Llewellyn]

DafyddThanks for your post I have now spent the time to read the document you referred to (without a doubt the happiest 5 minutes tonight!!) and I'll admit to being confused.

 

In what way did my post that you referenced relate to the comment you made? I mean sure there was no <SARCASM ON> or <OFF> codes so that the reader could be left in no doubt that I was tongue in cheek, but I'll bet the majority of folks will have worked that out for themselves, so what is it that I inferred that you disliked? bear in mind that I clearly delineate marketing material and a POH, the latter I expect to contain the truth, and the basis for the truth, marketing material....not so much.....

 

Andy

Andy, I was not having a go at you - apologies if it seemed that way. Just trying to answer the question of "where does the empty weight in the POH come from?" - Answer - it comes from the aircraft being weighed. (so does the empty centre of gravity). If you look in the front of the log book, you should also find a page that gives the record of empty weight alterations. These things are required by CAO 100.7. This is normally done, for factory - built aircraft, at the factory, just prior to the production flight tests; and provided the aircraft is not modified (which includes re-painting, by the way), it normally does not need revision in the life of the aircraft. However, for decades, the applicability of CAO 100.7 was overlooked by the RAA.

 

 

[AVOCET]

Andy, I was not having a go at you - apologies if it seemed that way. Just trying to answer the question of "where does the empty weight in the POH come from?" - Answer - it comes from the aircraft being weighed. (so does the empty centre of gravity). If you look in the front of the log book, you should also find a page that gives the record of empty weight alterations. These things are required by CAO 100.7. This is normally done, for factory - built aircraft, at the factory, just prior to the production flight tests; and provided the aircraft is not modified (which includes re-painting, by the way), it normally does not need revision in the life of the aircraft. However, for decades, the applicability of CAO 100.7 was overlooked by the RAA.

Seems to me that there's a lot that RAA has overlooked in regards to compliance with the CAO's.

It's a pitty that there's so much to wade through in regards to what's applicable to our aircraft .

 

Unless your day requires constant reference to these orders , it seems to us mere mortals ( no offence)

 

that it all just a bit much to take in , let alone comprehend what's required for our specific application .

 

But then I'm a lazy bastard !

 

I guess that's why we need raa to do it for us .

 

Mike

 

 

[Guest Andys@coffs]

Actually the list of what we don't have to comply with is very clearly documented in the exemption documents that your aircraft operates under. For trikes for example all the exemptions listed are in CAO95.32. Section 3 which as an extract at the time I googled it was:-

 

3 Exemption under regulation 308

 

3.1 If the conditions set out in this Order are complied with, in relation to an aeroplane to which this Order applies, the aeroplane is exempt from compliance with the following provisions of CAR 1988:

 

(a) Parts 4, 4A, 4B, 4C, 4D, 5 and 7;

 

(b) subregulations 83 (1), (2) and (3) in respect of VHF equipment;

 

© regulations 133, 139, 155 and 157;

 

(d) regulation 163AA;

 

(e) paragraph 166A (2) (f) in respect of powered parachutes;

 

(f) Division 4 of Part 13;

 

(g) regulations 207 and 208;

 

(h) regulation 210 as far as advertising of flying training to qualify for a pilot standard specified in the appropriate Operations Manual is concerned;

 

(i) regulation 230;

 

(j) subregulation 242 (2);

 

(k) regulation 252;

 

(l) regulation 258.

 

 

[eightyknots]

Another consideration on weights. There is an allowance for floats if the airframe can handle it within the regulations. Does anyone else think that it is strange that there is no allowance for a BRS if it also could fit within the design weights.

Yes, I think it's strange and I would like to see this properly addresses.

 

 

[Chocolate]

And no mention yet of balance in this thread.

 

Perhaps start a new thread with with balance horror stories we can all learn from?

 

 

[eightyknots]

And no mention yet of balance in this thread.Perhaps start a new thread with with balance horror stories we can all learn from?

Here is a "horror story" about balance on video. Warning: contents may disturb! Seven people lost their lives in this incident.

 

 

 

[jetjr]

Much of the MTOW restrictions in RAA are governed by the stall speed restriction

 

Doesnt matter in J230 has capacity for 600,700 or 760, to stall at 45 kts can only be done with 600 kg or less

 

 

[rankamateur]

Here is a "horror story" about balance on video. Warning: contents may disturb! Seven people lost their lives in this incident.

Was this not an unrestrained load incident?

 

 

[M61A1]

And no mention yet of balance in this thread. Perhaps start a new thread with with balance horror stories we can all learn from?

Actually it was brought up in post #3.

 

 

[M61A1]

Seems to me that there's a lot that RAA has overlooked in regards to compliance with the CAO's.It's a pitty that there's so much to wade through in regards to what's applicable to our aircraft .

Unless your day requires constant reference to these orders , it seems to us mere mortals ( no offence)

 

that it all just a bit much to take in , let alone comprehend what's required for our specific application .

 

But then I'm a lazy bastard !

 

I guess that's why we need raa to do it for us .

 

Mike

Para 3.1 of CAO 100.7 would appear to say that weighing is a requirement for a Certificate of Airworthiness. Even though a lot of our aircraft do not have a CoA,the RAA manuals still require weight and balance to be carried out though, so I don't see that it's been overlooked.

 

 

[AVOCET]

Para 3.1 of CAO 100.7 would appear to say that weighing is a requirement for a Certificate of Airworthiness. Even though a lot of our aircraft do not have a CoA,the RAA manuals still require weight and balance to be carried out though, so I don't see that it's been overlooked.

I wasn't talking about weight and balance ??

How did you get that from my post ?

 

The weight & balance is part of the data sheet and paper work with the first rego , any one who's built or designed a plane knows about w/b

 

Mike

 

 

[tillmanr]

The RAA ops manual states that all aircraft have to be placarded with MTOW. I had to send photos of these in when registering last year.