Narrative:

Suspect air carrier personnel inattn to calculating land plan prior to crew arrival for flight. Since then, person responsible has been fired. It would help if we had english speaking personnel for ground handling at international flts prior to takeoff, it was verified the long runway at svmi would be available for landing at our ETA. On takeoff from runway 9R at mia, we suspected cargo overweight due to climb performance of nx. During initial climb, I called a at mia operations to request cargo be weighed upon our arrival at svmi. He said he would check into it. In-flight I could not verify we were actually overloaded, or by how much. After landing at svmi, ground personnel of FBO said there were no scales to weigh the cargo and proceeded to unload the airplane. In spanish I was told they thought the cargo was in kilos. From FBO's operations at svmi, I called their mia operations and was told in spanish they thought 38000 kilos of cargo was loaded on the aircraft even though they had manifested 43328 kilos. The air carrier flight plan showed 44000 pounds of cargo and the air carrier load sheet showed 43328 pounds. Prior to takeoff from mia, we verified with a and B of mia operations a payload of 43328 pounds. I reported this situation to C, air carrier D.O. From svmi because of the variance in cargo paperwork and input and inability to weigh the cargo at destination, it still could not be verified that the airplane had been overloaded. As a safety precaution at svmi, the crew performed a thorough postflt, preflight, and overweight landing inspection to the best of their abilities. Upon arrival at kmia, nx was met by a and maintenance of mia operations. Even though we still could not verify the cargo weight was different from the flight plan and aia load plan weights, for safety precautions I recommended a complete maintenance overweight landing inspection be made on north X.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN ACR FREIGHTER MAY HAVE BEEN LOADED IN KILOS VICE LBS.

Narrative: SUSPECT ACR PERSONNEL INATTN TO CALCULATING LAND PLAN PRIOR TO CREW ARR FOR FLT. SINCE THEN, PERSON RESPONSIBLE HAS BEEN FIRED. IT WOULD HELP IF WE HAD ENGLISH SPEAKING PERSONNEL FOR GND HANDLING AT INTL FLTS PRIOR TO TKOF, IT WAS VERIFIED THE LONG RWY AT SVMI WOULD BE AVAILABLE FOR LNDG AT OUR ETA. ON TKOF FROM RWY 9R AT MIA, WE SUSPECTED CARGO OVERWT DUE TO CLB PERFORMANCE OF NX. DURING INITIAL CLB, I CALLED A AT MIA OPS TO REQUEST CARGO BE WEIGHED UPON OUR ARR AT SVMI. HE SAID HE WOULD CHK INTO IT. INFLT I COULD NOT VERIFY WE WERE ACTUALLY OVERLOADED, OR BY HOW MUCH. AFTER LNDG AT SVMI, GND PERSONNEL OF FBO SAID THERE WERE NO SCALES TO WEIGH THE CARGO AND PROCEEDED TO UNLOAD THE AIRPLANE. IN SPANISH I WAS TOLD THEY THOUGHT THE CARGO WAS IN KILOS. FROM FBO'S OPS AT SVMI, I CALLED THEIR MIA OPS AND WAS TOLD IN SPANISH THEY THOUGHT 38000 KILOS OF CARGO WAS LOADED ON THE ACFT EVEN THOUGH THEY HAD MANIFESTED 43328 KILOS. THE ACR FLT PLAN SHOWED 44000 LBS OF CARGO AND THE ACR LOAD SHEET SHOWED 43328 LBS. PRIOR TO TKOF FROM MIA, WE VERIFIED WITH A AND B OF MIA OPS A PAYLOAD OF 43328 LBS. I RPTED THIS SIT TO C, ACR D.O. FROM SVMI BECAUSE OF THE VARIANCE IN CARGO PAPERWORK AND INPUT AND INABILITY TO WEIGH THE CARGO AT DEST, IT STILL COULD NOT BE VERIFIED THAT THE AIRPLANE HAD BEEN OVERLOADED. AS A SAFETY PRECAUTION AT SVMI, THE CREW PERFORMED A THOROUGH POSTFLT, PREFLT, AND OVERWEIGHT LNDG INSPECTION TO THE BEST OF THEIR ABILITIES. UPON ARR AT KMIA, NX WAS MET BY A AND MAINT OF MIA OPS. EVEN THOUGH WE STILL COULD NOT VERIFY THE CARGO WT WAS DIFFERENT FROM THE FLT PLAN AND AIA LOAD PLAN WEIGHTS, FOR SAFETY PRECAUTIONS I RECOMMENDED A COMPLETE MAINT OVERWT LNDG INSPECTION BE MADE ON N X.

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.