Narrative:

While waiting for takeoff, we were informed by our company that our aircraft was too heavy for takeoff and we needed to return to the gate and off-load some 6000 pounds of cargo to return to takeoff limits. The original weight data forms indicated that even though we were close to maximum takeoff limits, the numbers added up properly. After off-loading approximately 6000 pounds of the cargo, the second weight data form added up properly and was close to the original takeoff weight. The problem was that the first weight data form listed 120 passenger in tourist. The second form listed 150 passenger in tourist (all other cabin counts remained the same). The 30 passenger difference amounted to the 6000 pound discrepancy. This problem was caused by the person reporting or doing the weight and balance calculations. Either an outright error in addition, reporting, or possibly a typographical error of a 2 instead of a 5 in the final count (120 versus 150). The crew added the numbers correctly, but were not required nor thought it necessary to request a physical head count prior to departure. In the future, when close to maximum gross takeoff weight, a head count will be a valuable tool in xchking the accuracy of the weight data report.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: WDB RAMP WT EXCEEDED DURING TAXI.

Narrative: WHILE WAITING FOR TKOF, WE WERE INFORMED BY OUR COMPANY THAT OUR ACFT WAS TOO HVY FOR TKOF AND WE NEEDED TO RETURN TO THE GATE AND OFF-LOAD SOME 6000 LBS OF CARGO TO RETURN TO TKOF LIMITS. THE ORIGINAL WT DATA FORMS INDICATED THAT EVEN THOUGH WE WERE CLOSE TO MAX TKOF LIMITS, THE NUMBERS ADDED UP PROPERLY. AFTER OFF-LOADING APPROX 6000 LBS OF THE CARGO, THE SECOND WT DATA FORM ADDED UP PROPERLY AND WAS CLOSE TO THE ORIGINAL TKOF WT. THE PROB WAS THAT THE FIRST WT DATA FORM LISTED 120 PAX IN TOURIST. THE SECOND FORM LISTED 150 PAX IN TOURIST (ALL OTHER CABIN COUNTS REMAINED THE SAME). THE 30 PAX DIFFERENCE AMOUNTED TO THE 6000 LB DISCREPANCY. THIS PROB WAS CAUSED BY THE PERSON RPTING OR DOING THE WT AND BAL CALCULATIONS. EITHER AN OUTRIGHT ERROR IN ADDITION, RPTING, OR POSSIBLY A TYPOGRAPHICAL ERROR OF A 2 INSTEAD OF A 5 IN THE FINAL COUNT (120 VERSUS 150). THE CREW ADDED THE NUMBERS CORRECTLY, BUT WERE NOT REQUIRED NOR THOUGHT IT NECESSARY TO REQUEST A PHYSICAL HEAD COUNT PRIOR TO DEP. IN THE FUTURE, WHEN CLOSE TO MAX GROSS TKOF WT, A HEAD COUNT WILL BE A VALUABLE TOOL IN XCHKING THE ACCURACY OF THE WT DATA RPT.

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.