Narrative:

Reporter was administering an initial line check to a new captain and was occupying the right seat/doing normal copilot duties. FAA operations inspector was occupying the jump seat to observe. We had made a quick turn at ord and while I was away from the aircraft we had 2 extra flight attendants board to work the flight. By the time I returned to the aircraft the passenger were already boarding and I continued with my duties unaware of the 2 extra flight attendants. After we pushed from the gate and began our taxi I received (via ACARS) our weight data and checked it for accuracy. It looked ok, except for the fact that our FAA observer should have been listed as an extra crewmember, and he wasn't. Since I knew that he had checked in with the gate agent before the flight I had no reason to believe that he had not been included in the gate agent's total passenger count, I simply assumed that he was listed as a 'passenger' instead of an 'extra crewmember.' what I don't know, however, was that passenger weights are figured at a different value than extra crewmember weights so he really should have been listed as an extra crewmember. So, crew count showed 5 (normal = 2 cockpit plus 3 flight attendants) when in fact it should have showed 8 (2 cockpit plus 1 extra crewmember plus 5 flight attendants)! It was not until we were airborne and at cruise that the FAA inspector brought to my attention that the crew count was wrong!! Here's an excellent example of how cockpit resource management extends to all concerned including FAA inspectors and extra flight attendants...even the new captain. If only someone had informed me of the flight attendants this problem would have been prevented. Also, here's an excellent example for me of why I should look for understanding why when I read our company policy manual - now it makes sense - as extra crewmember must be listed as such because he is counted as a different weight!

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ERRONEOUS WT AND BAL. EXTRA FLT ATTENDANTS CAME ON BOARD, BUT NOT LISTED ON THE WT AND BAL.

Narrative: RPTR WAS ADMINISTERING AN INITIAL LINE CHK TO A NEW CAPT AND WAS OCCUPYING THE R SEAT/DOING NORMAL COPLT DUTIES. FAA OPS INSPECTOR WAS OCCUPYING THE JUMP SEAT TO OBSERVE. WE HAD MADE A QUICK TURN AT ORD AND WHILE I WAS AWAY FROM THE ACFT WE HAD 2 EXTRA FLT ATTENDANTS BOARD TO WORK THE FLT. BY THE TIME I RETURNED TO THE ACFT THE PAX WERE ALREADY BOARDING AND I CONTINUED WITH MY DUTIES UNAWARE OF THE 2 EXTRA FLT ATTENDANTS. AFTER WE PUSHED FROM THE GATE AND BEGAN OUR TAXI I RECEIVED (VIA ACARS) OUR WT DATA AND CHKED IT FOR ACCURACY. IT LOOKED OK, EXCEPT FOR THE FACT THAT OUR FAA OBSERVER SHOULD HAVE BEEN LISTED AS AN EXTRA CREWMEMBER, AND HE WASN'T. SINCE I KNEW THAT HE HAD CHKED IN WITH THE GATE AGENT BEFORE THE FLT I HAD NO REASON TO BELIEVE THAT HE HAD NOT BEEN INCLUDED IN THE GATE AGENT'S TOTAL PAX COUNT, I SIMPLY ASSUMED THAT HE WAS LISTED AS A 'PAX' INSTEAD OF AN 'EXTRA CREWMEMBER.' WHAT I DON'T KNOW, HOWEVER, WAS THAT PAX WTS ARE FIGURED AT A DIFFERENT VALUE THAN EXTRA CREWMEMBER WTS SO HE REALLY SHOULD HAVE BEEN LISTED AS AN EXTRA CREWMEMBER. SO, CREW COUNT SHOWED 5 (NORMAL = 2 COCKPIT PLUS 3 FLT ATTENDANTS) WHEN IN FACT IT SHOULD HAVE SHOWED 8 (2 COCKPIT PLUS 1 EXTRA CREWMEMBER PLUS 5 FLT ATTENDANTS)! IT WAS NOT UNTIL WE WERE AIRBORNE AND AT CRUISE THAT THE FAA INSPECTOR BROUGHT TO MY ATTN THAT THE CREW COUNT WAS WRONG!! HERE'S AN EXCELLENT EXAMPLE OF HOW COCKPIT RESOURCE MGMNT EXTENDS TO ALL CONCERNED INCLUDING FAA INSPECTORS AND EXTRA FLT ATTENDANTS...EVEN THE NEW CAPT. IF ONLY SOMEONE HAD INFORMED ME OF THE FLT ATTENDANTS THIS PROB WOULD HAVE BEEN PREVENTED. ALSO, HERE'S AN EXCELLENT EXAMPLE FOR ME OF WHY I SHOULD LOOK FOR UNDERSTANDING WHY WHEN I READ OUR COMPANY POLICY MANUAL - NOW IT MAKES SENSE - AS EXTRA CREWMEMBER MUST BE LISTED AS SUCH BECAUSE HE IS COUNTED AS A DIFFERENT WT!

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.