Date: 201901
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: EMB-505 / Phenom 300
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: Pressurization System
Component problem: Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Fractional
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Weight And Balance
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General Flight Cancelled / Delayed
Contributing factors: Aircraft; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Upon preflighting and reviewing [the] logbook we discovered that the auto pressurization was deferred along with a maximum fuel load. Our first concern was with passenger comfort due to a flight in manual pressurization. I spoke with Owner Services and my partner spoke with the owners; who were already on site about the issue. The owners were insistent on taking the plane; in its current condition; and did not to be delayed any further. But this did not solve the fuel weight issue.After double checking the performance numbers for the flight; I confirmed that we were over maximum ramp weight and maximum takeoff weight with six passengers and maximum fuel. The aircraft was at 19222 lbs; the max ramp weight is 18497 lbs; the max takeoff weight is 18397 lbs. At this time my partner was inside the FBO speaking with the owners and a [Company] representative trying to find a good solution to our issues. I called the ACP (Assistant Chief Pilot) to inform the company of the weight issue. I stated that we are over maximum ramp and takeoff weight with 6 passengers. The ACP started that he has been working with my partner of the issue for an hour and that we are okay for takeoff and would just need to burn the gas in route to our destination. I again stated that we were over maximum ramp and takeoff weight and asked how could we take off in that condition. Again the ACP stated that we can take off; but would need to burn the fuel in the air. Feeling that. Was getting nowhere in the conversation; I ended the call. I then sent an email to the company stating that the aircraft was over maximum ramp and takeoff weight (19222 lbs) and attached a picture of the limitation from the FOM. After my partner returned from seeing to the owner's needs; I informed him about the weight issue also. He then called and informed the company that we would not be doing this trip. In the end; the company was able to accommodate the owners with [another aircraft] that was onsite with no furthering delays.The main reason for this report the pushback I received from the ACP concerning a limitation on the aircraft. Namely the maximum ramp and takeoff weights. It might be a good procedure for ACP to reference the limitations section of the AOM when something like this happens in the future. The issue of manual pressurization with owners on board; this should never be done in my opinion. During [another flight] there were times when the cabin pressure was climbing or descending at 3000 fpm! As the pilot monitoring during this leg; it was all that I could do to keep the cabin pressure under control in moderate turbulence; heavy rain; and dealing with two reroutes. I was definitely tasked overloaded. If I also had to deal with passengers during this time; I feel that there would have been a safety of flight issue. Not to mention the substandard owner experience.


Second narrative: Auto pressurization controller was inoperative. We followed the MEL and procedure for operating aircraft in this condition. The weather was showers throughout the flight with moderate turbulence. ATC gave us everlasting reroutes that compounded the already excessive workload due to manually operating the pressurization. At one point we asked for vectors and the controller gave us a fix and airway that we had to look up. We were able to load route and proceed without any flight deviation.With using the manual pressurization mode we had cabin climb and descent rates of over 2;000 feet per minute. When an aircraft has the MEL we cannot be flying passengers due to the comfort level. The company was trying to get us to fly a passenger trip but the aircraft was over fueled and we would have been over our max ramp weight by almost 1000 lbs. The company before they realized we were over weight was trying to disregard their policy of flying a passenger trip over 1 hour with the pressurization problem.


Synopsis: EMB505 flight crew reported a communication breakdown between flight crew and company personnel during preflight as well as excessive workload during the flight.