Gross Weight VS Max Takeoff Weight

[84KF]

My Kitfox 5 received it's airworthiness certificate in 1998.... and as I stated in a previous post...."It is not "licensed" or "certified" to any "gross weight".
There is nothing in any paper work on file with the FAA that mentions, or implies a "gross weight".
There is nothing in my Operating Limitations that states a "gross weight". (I will forward all the paperwork to anyone interested who requests it.)
There is no" gross weight" listed on the data plate

Review the application and registration process and show me exactly where one "certifies" the aircraft to any specific weight. http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf/0/0ca2845e2aafffbb86256dbf00640cb2/$FILE/AC20-27F.pdf
Show where in APPENDIX 5. SAMPLE AERONAUTICAL CENTER FORM 8050-1,
AIRCRAFT REGISTRATION APPLICATION , APPENDIX 6. SAMPLE FAA FORM 8130-6, APPLICATION FOR AIRWORTHINESS
CERTIFICATE (AMATEUR-BUILT) (FACE SIDE) or APPENDIX 6. SAMPLE FAA FORM 8130-6, APPLICATION FOR AIRWORTHINESS
CERTIFICATE (AMATEUR-BUILT) (REVERSE SIDE) where one submits the "magic numbers"

Randy L writes...
"...isn't it true that although "gross weight" is indeed not on the Airworthiness Certificate, Registration, or in the Operating Limitations, it is reflected in the W&B documentation which is required by your FAA Inspector or DAR for certification?"

It may be in some (not mine) , but is it required? No....

In accordance with APPENDIX 13. SAMPLE PROGRAM LETTER TO ACCOMPANY
APPLICATION FOR AIRWORTHINESS CERTIFICATE one should answer "yes" to the question "I have weighed the aircraft to determine that the most forward and aft center of
gravity positions are within established limits. The weight and balance report is
available at the aircraft, and a copy is submitted with this application
....and the words "gross weight" or "maximum weight" do not appear in AC No.: 20-27F, CERTIFICATION AND OPERATION OF AMATEUR-BUILT AIRCRAFT , the FAA publication I have been referencing in this post.

It is then the responsibility of the PIC to ensure that the most foward and most rearward limits are not exceeded, what ever the loading situation is at the time of flight.
I have to ask this... how can one be expected to "determine" what the "maximum weight" capability, structural or otherwise, of the aircraft is at that point in time.... it has not even been test flown yet?

[RandyL]

It is then the responsibility of the PIC to ensure that the most foward and most rearward limits are not exceeded, what ever the loading situation is at the time of flight.
I have to ask this... how can one be expected to "determine" what the "maximum weight" capability, structural or otherwise, of the aircraft is at that point in time.... it has not even been test flown yet?

Steve,

I've been immersed over in the RV world (5,700 flying planes) for the last eleven years and must say you bring the facts to light in a way I've never heard before. Thanks for the thoughtful and correct interpretation of the regs. Instead of just blindly following common interpretation you are taking the time to understand them and interpret accordingly. Of course that's part of what you do as an A&P with I.A., but its good to have some informed dialog on these issues. With this whole new set of regs we have to operate in (LSA) it's good to have some sharp minds reading and interpreting.

Thanks,

[jonbakerok]

I've been looking for a Kitfox for almost a year and I've ignored the 5's because I thought they didn't qualify as LSA. So I'm going to need some clarification. Are we saying that since the W&B info isn't sent to the FAA when you register your experimental, you can just change the gross anytime you want?

When I built my RV6, my DAR made sure I had the weight and balance written in the log and I had to have a W&B sheet with example loadings in the airplane. He wanted three things on the dataplate -- name, date, and gross weight. Are we saying that because the FAA never got a copy of the W&B, I could have turned it into an LSA by adding an entry to the log and changing the dataplate and W&B sheet?

Hey, nothing I sent to the FAA said it would cruise at 192 MPH, either.

Jon Baker
RV6A sold, RV4 in-progress
Looking for a Kitfox

[RandyL]

Hi Jon,

I'm an RV guy going Kitfox as well. I know for a fact that all the paperwork you submit to your DAR or FAA Inspector remains in a file at the FSDO they work out of and this includes the W&B documentation, equipment list, and everything else you submitted with it. W&B docs, and the builders understanding of them, are important and no DAR/inspector I've ever met would ever grant an AW Cert without them.

Some of us, me included, were using the term "gross weight", which I believe we get from the kit manufacturers, in place of MTOW (maximum takeoff weight). Steve (84KF) is correct in pointing out that the term "gross weight" is not the correct term, and that it actually doesn't appear in your AW Cert, Registration, or Operating Limitations. Again, they are on file at the FSDO however and ARE a factor in determining LSA compliance.

I think the real issue however is what qualfies or enables a particular aircraft to operate as an LSA so that the pilot can exercise Sport Pilot priveledges. As we all know certain older certified aircraft (Cubs, Champs, etc.) qualify as their various parameters fit within the LSA parameters. I would think that any new E-AB aircraft (not S-LSA or E-LSA) who's speed and weight parameters fit within the LSA regs would also qualify. Then of course any S-LSA or E-LSA aircraft would also qualify since it must meet the ASTM concensus standards. Regarding E-AB aircraft meeting the ASTM standards: I believe that's a gray area where there is some wiggle room. I for one am NOT clear on that particular area. I do know that the current Kitfox meets all parameters if not equipped with an in-flight adjustable prop which is why I will not equip mine with one.