CAP Preflight - Complete ORM and Weight & Balance from iPad

[Eclipse]

There's no such thing as a "wing approved W&B form"

That would be incorrect.

[PHall]

There's no such thing as a "wing approved W&B form"

That would be incorrect.

Cite please.

[Eclipse]

My wing has tail-number specific W&B forms for several aircraft, and has for years.

[JeffDG]

My wing has tail-number specific W&B forms for several aircraft, and has for years.

Has it met your standard of being approved by NHQ?  Otherwise, I guess, it's just another custom thing that is illegal to use.

[Eclipse]

My wing has tail-number specific W&B forms for several aircraft, and has for years.

Has it met your standard of being approved by NHQ?  Otherwise, I guess, it's just another custom thing that is illegal to use.

No idea, and not my lane.  Simply indicating they exist.

[JeffDG]

My wing has tail-number specific W&B forms for several aircraft, and has for years.

Has it met your standard of being approved by NHQ?  Otherwise, I guess, it's just another custom thing that is illegal to use.

No idea, and not my lane.  Simply indicating they exist.

But your claim is that if they're not approved by NHQ, then they're not valid.

I don't see any approved supplement to 60-1 specifying such a form, so I would contend it's not an "official" wing form.

[Eclipse]

No idea, and not my lane.  Simply indicating they exist.
But your claim is that if they're not approved by NHQ, then they're not valid.

I don't see any approved supplement to 60-1 specifying such a form, so I would contend it's not an "official" wing form.

I wouldn't argue with you.  I merely pointed out they exist.

Am I advocating their use?  Is this my call or my lane?

No.

However as a point of the discussion, why would a supplement be necessary?

[JeffDG]

No idea, and not my lane.  Simply indicating they exist.
But your claim is that if they're not approved by NHQ, then they're not valid.

I don't see any approved supplement to 60-1 specifying such a form, so I would contend it's not an "official" wing form.

I wouldn't argue with you.  I merely pointed out they exist.

Am I advocating their use?  Is this my call or my lane?

No.

However as a point of the discussion, why would a supplement be necessary?

youve said that if its not approved by NHQ it shoulnt be used...are you backing off from that?

[Eclipse]

That's not actually what I said, and not in the context of "everything", nor is this a comparison.

The application we're discussing is a "because I felt like it" job by a member.  It could beat sliced bread for awesomeness, or maybe not.
Many here like it.  However it hasn't been vetted by anyone.   My points were based more on the validity of the data then the
regulatory issue of "allowing" it's use.  I pointed out where we've already found an issue, and there are likely more. 

W&B which is lower then actual isn't a safety issue, the reverse is.  Since the app doesn't likely  know about the former, I'd say there's
at least a strong possibility there are some CAP planes where the latter is true.

My wings W&B forms >have< been vetted, on a regular basis, and approved by several corporate officers over a period of years.
I don't see much in 60-1 about W&B, except that the POH is supposed to always win, so I don't see, necessarily, where custom forms
that address actual W&B because of airframe mods or included equipment would need a supp.  You may well have a point that the wing
can't mandate a form that supersedes the "POH always wins" universal rule.

As a point of personal consistency, I've already raised the issue as to the how and why here, and its possible we won't have them shortly.

It's also not my lane or my call, so at the point they are still mandated, they can be added to the list of stuff which is not my lane or call
but still "is".  (It's a pretty big pile.)

[Check Pilot/Tow Pilot]

Many here like it.  However it hasn't been vetted by anyone. 

Bullsh*t, I vetted it for the two planes I fly.

You know you two can be such pains in the backside.   

Here is a CAP member providing his free time to provide an app for the benefit of the membership and all you two can do is pontificate about who is right about some Fracking W&B form.  Who gives a sh*t!!!  Start your own thread about approved W&B forms.

[Eclipse]

Bullsh*t, I vetted it for the two planes I fly.

548 to go.

[CaPilot04]

Make that 546, I vetted for the two aircraft I fly as well.  Works perfect.  Nice Work!!!

[Check Pilot/Tow Pilot]

Still think it's a good idea to add something like this:

"The pilot in command is solely responsible for assuring correct data and proper loading of your aircraft prior to flight"

[Check Pilot/Tow Pilot]

BTW, I wrote this up for the developer this morning as a good method to upload the W&B and ORM to WMIRS as a photo capture using an iPad with CAP Preflight and no special software:

I use the e104 Upload Process to upload the W&B and ORM. Here is the process and screenshots are attached:

1. Take screenshots (photos) of the CAP Preflight ORM and W&B by simultaneously pressing the power button and main button on your iPad.
2. Log into WMIRS
3. Select your mission number
4. Select the 104 Data button to the right of your sortie
5. This is where you can enter your electronic e104.  Scroll to the bottom of the page
6. Select Upload Files and an upload file area will be displayed
7. To upload the ORM, select the Choose File button below the text AIF ORM Matrix.
8. You will be prompted to Take Photo or Video or Choose Existing.  Select the Choose Existing button
9. A photos selection box will be displayed.  Choose the ORM screenshot photo you took in step 1
10. A small representation of a photo and the words 1 Photo will be displayed beside the Choose Existing button
11. To upload the W&B, you will need to choose the Other section and enter W&B in the Description text box
12. Repeat steps 8. to 10. to upload your ORM
13. Choose the Upload Files button to upload your photos
14. The uploaded photos will be displayed as imageXXX.jpg below the Description text box
15. Select the Return to e104 button to complete the process

[SunDog]

Manuvering speed(Va) is affected by actual aircraft weight. A little esoteric, most of the time, but as weight drops, so does Va. The less you weigh, the lower the max speed for "abrupt" control inputs. Best to know what the max gross really is, and how much your airplane really weighs today.

But no big deal - that'll all be in the POH with the STC. Data stored elsewhere is convenient, and advisory. If Wing has some available online, that's handy, but not official, and not mandated. Probably good to have for planning, just not valid for actual W&B. . .though some guys probably do use it for real, when they know they'll be within limits anyway.

Being REAL close to max goss is OK. That's real real, real close. CG range is a lot less forgiving. Stall speed increases very little when REAL close to max gross. If you gotta fly "fat", make sure the CG isn't pushing the limit, which in our airplanes is usually the aft limit.

If you feel "fat", cull the junk in the back. Remove the extra case of oil, the extra first aid kit, the 10 half-full bittles of water, etc.  Some of our airplanes have a steel tie-down kit that would secure a tug -boat, and that kit is HEAVY. 

I don't think the rules allow you to remove the survival kit. I never bothered to check, because if it was THAT close, I wasn't taking the extra crew member anyway. Ditto with the PFDs.

A few pounds aft has a pretty big moment arm. I worry more about being close to CG  limits than gross weight limits; you're more or less guess-timating weight, anyway, unless the airplane was weighed yesterday and your crew is telling the truth about their weights.

Tough to be out of limits in a C172 with two guys on board, CG  or gross weight. Not so tough with a third person on board. C182s are another story, as they vary so much in fuel load, empty weight, useful load, and equipment. The glass are often two-seaters for practical purposes - not much available load at all, and very heavy. The C182Rs have more leeway.

[JeffDG]

My wings W&B forms >have< been vetted, on a regular basis, and approved by several corporate officers over a period of years.

And what you don't get is that that "vetting" that has been done by "several corporate officers" is both completely irrelevant, and is in no way required by FAA or CAP regulations.

W&B is 100% the responsibility of the Pilot-in-Command.  I don't care if a form has been "vetted" by God Almighty Himself, I, as the PIC, am still responsible for vetting the calculation myself.

You're the one that said:

Has this been vetted and approved by NHQ?

There is neither a requirement for such vetting, nor is there any process for such vetting.

[Eclipse]

My wings W&B forms >have< been vetted, on a regular basis, and approved by several corporate officers over a period of years.

And what you don't get is that that "vetting" that has been done by "several corporate officers" is both completely irrelevant, and is in no way required by FAA or CAP regulations.

Don't think I ever said it was, though I have already pointed out why it should be.

You're the one that said:

Has this been vetted and approved by NHQ?

There is neither a requirement for such vetting, nor is there any process for such vetting.

Well, if it's not required, and there's no process, then the numbers must automatically be correct.  Carry on.

[a2capt]

It's ultimately the pilots problem if the data is not calculated correctly. The needed information is in each aircraft, specific to that aircraft. It's required to be there.

If you want to use a sheet of paper and draw the grid, do the math each time, or you want to use a spreadsheet that's on your phone, tablet, etc. Whatever. 

It's the pilots responsibility. When you get ramp checked, they might ask, "show me your weight and balance".. now if your tablet croaked, that's your problem. If your paper blew away..

"My battery died", the modern day "the dog ate it."

[JeffDG]

It's ultimately the pilots problem if the data is not calculated correctly. The needed information is in each aircraft, specific to that aircraft. It's required to be there.

If you want to use a sheet of paper and draw the grid, do the math each time, or you want to use a spreadsheet that's on your phone, tablet, etc. Whatever. 

It's the pilots responsibility. When you get ramp checked, they might ask, "show me your weight and balance".. now if your tablet croaked, that's your problem. If your paper blew away..

"My battery died", the modern day "the dog ate it."

If you're ramp checked in Part 91, all you need to show is that you have the aircraft's W&B information in the aircraft, not that you've calculated a specific W&B for a specific flight...that's the FAA regulations, not CAP.   The pilot is only required to be aware that the A/C is within W&B limits for the flight.  If you fly the same A/C within known limits frequently, there is no legal requirement that you do a W&B for each flight, simply knowing that "If the front passenger is under 400 pounds, and I'm under MGW and within limits." is sufficient for FAA regulations.

Part 135 and Part 121 have to do a specific W&B calc for each flight, but we don't operate under either of those regulations.

[Eclipse]

The only way to be aware of this is to use the wing's approved W&B forms.

No...the only way to be aware of this is if you look in the approved flight manual that is required to be carried in the aircraft.  That is the legal and official source of record.  Any other paperwork that you may have or distribute is caveat emptor.

There's no such thing as a "wing approved W&B form"

Just to circle back on this conversation - my wing, in fact, does have "wing approved" W&B forms which are tail-number specific, however they
are not mandated, and the onus remains on the pilot to ultimately insure the number are correct.

So we both get to be right.  I will stipulate to the hug having already occurred.