HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rkaplan@netcom.com (Richard Kaplan)
Subject: Re: Temperature Related Altimeter Errors
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 92 22:51:57 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 

In article <1992Jul27.200719.8467@ncar.ucar.edu> elmore@virga.ucar.edu 
(Kim Elmore) writes:


>>altimeter setting were established not by a barometric
>>reading but by the weather man fiddling with his altimeter
>>until it read exactly field elevation?
>
>	Ah!  Because of the Gas Law.  Lemme explain it...

> ...... Excellent and detailed explanation of meteorology omitted...

No matter what altimeter calibration source I use, there will
be a significant range of altitudes over which the altimeter
will read incorrectly if there is a non-standard atmosphere
(as there almost always is).  But for the most part I 
do not care to know exactly what my altitude is, so long
as all the other pilots around me are using the same reference.

The only time I truly want to know EXACTLY what my altitude
is would be when I am on an instrument approach.  IN such
a case, I would prefer to have my altimeter calibrated
so that field elevation correlates with my altimeter
setting as closely as possible.

If the weather observer determined the official altimeter
setting such that this setting made his altimeter read 
field elevation, there would be less chance for impact
with terrain during an instrument approach.  And this
would not affect safety at altitude because all
aircraft would be using the same reference while airborne.




-- 
Richard Kaplan M.D.           Medical Software Exchange BBS
806 2nd St. SW # 104          (507) 281-1989 14,400 HST
Rochester, MN  55902          (507) 281-1689 Voice
PP-ASEL-IA     N4VRB          rkaplan@mayo.edu|netcom.netcom.com
From: john@newave.mn.org (John A. Weeks III)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Phantom controller
Keywords: hand held, FCC, FAA
Date: 21 Jul 92 02:50:16 GMT
Article-I.D.: newave.70
Organization: Newave Communications, Ltd, Lake Wobegon, MN

In article <23@horse.UUCP> mikeh@wsg.COM ( The Big Kahuna) writes:
> The hole thing brought up two points in my mind. One, has anyone else hered 
> of phantom controllers? and also, imagine what would have happend to this
> pilot if the Delta captin was not there to back him up. The tower was blocked
> from the signal and it was there word against the pilots. Thats what scares
> me about the FAA.

Is there anything like a personal flight data recorder available for
general aviation planes?  I was thinking that something that could record
the pervious 30 minutes of radio traffic, plus record a few instruments
would be real handy.  This could help CYA in an incident like the one
described above, or at the very least, help the FAA after a crash.  Any
armchair inventors out there?

-john-

-- 
==============================================================================
John A. Weeks III		(612) 942-6969		    john@newave.mn.org
Newave Communications, Ltd.			    ..!uunet!tcnet!newave!john
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: masys@nlm.nih.gov (Dr. Daniel R. Masys)
Subject: Re: 182 Stalling characteristics
Organization: National Library of Medicine
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 92 13:24:45 GMT


In article <9207231804.AA29798@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> PJERN@CHGVMIC1.VNET.IBM.COM writes:
>
>Uh, Dan.....
>How does a gear geometry change change the stall characteristics?

Glad you asked (it sounded a little strange when I read it to myself, also).
The lowering of the main gear appears to allow the wing to keep flying
longer in ground effect (if you believe in ground effect).  Anyway, even
Richard Collins believes it as he wrote a review of the Skylane in the
February 1977 issue of _Flying_.

...and that's how gear geometry changes stall characteristics.

Dan Masys
masys@nlm.nih.gov
From: schoen@slcs.slb.com (Eric Schoen)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Piston pins (was: What's the "truth" about obviously-inapplicable AD's???
Date: 31 Jul 92 13:48:14 GMT
Organization: Schlumberger Laboratory for Computer Science


I *had* an IO-360 overhaul in June 1991.  I heard of the piston pin problem
some months back from an Aviation Consumer article.  So, I looked at the bill.
No LW14077 parts on the bill.  So, I called my overhauler.  He said
(paraphrasing) that they reused my old piston pins...they don't wear out.
Hmmm.  I still don't know whether to be relieved or not.

Eric

-- 
Eric Schoen
Schlumberger Laboratory for Computer Science 
Internet: schoen@slcs.slb.com   In the air: N201DR
USMail: P.O. Box 200015, Austin, TX, 78720-0015
From: bills@hplvec.LVLD.HP.COM (Bill Standerfer)
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1992 14:51:20 GMT
Subject: Re: Trimble Flightmate GPS Experience?
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Co., Loveland, CO
Newsgroups: rec.aviation

In article <1381@seqp4.sequoia.com>, cantrell@seqp4.sequoia.com (Paul
Cantrell) writes:
>[...]
>The Loran instrument approaches seems to be stalled or dead. It looks to
>me like GPS is probably the system that will get used for these
>approaches. Hopefully the FAA will move fast enough so we won't all get
>impatient.
>

It seems to me that some of the stalling (now is that fully stalled or
partially stalled? :-) ) is due to the lack of adequate standards for the use
of loran receivers in the approach mode.  Our loran is an ARNAV FMS5000
(converted from an R50i) which meets both TSO C61b and C115a for enroute
navigation.  However, the user interface leaves a lot to be desired for an
approach.  I assume you would have to input a flight plan which will take a few
minutes to do.  Then, you'll have to switch to the approach sensitivity, which
will take another minute or so.  While this system might very well have the
necessary guts to do a loran approach, it is not yet suitable due to the user
interface.  If, for example, there were ready-made flight plans on the ROM card
for all the approaches (certainly feasable with today's technology), then this
could work quite well, but we aren't there quite yet.

>The obvious down side to the dual Loran/GPS unit is the cost - a
>combination GPS and Loran unit is very expensive. However, if GPS
>approaches get approved in significant numbers, it may be well worth the
>price to an IFR pilot. Also, the price of GPS seems to be dropping rapidly.

It will take a significant price drop for me to jump in.  At four grand or so
to add the GPS sensor to our loran, I'll get along without it for quite a
while.

Bill Standerfer
From: netnews@leadsv.UUCP (Leads Network News)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Shoulder Harnesses (Was: Re: Cessna sholdr harn review
Keywords: n
Date: 24 Jul 92 16:22:46 GMT
Organization: LMSC, Sunnyvale

>> There is a wholly different problem with four point harnesses hitched
>> to the airframe that hasn't been brought up yet... 
>
>----------
>
>Something else that hasn't been mentioned: the shoulder harness,
>being attached to the frame with no recoil mechanism, keeps you
>from leaning forward far enough to scan the skies ABOVE you.
From: claude@leadse9.UUCP (Claude Goldsmith)
I have inertia-reel shoulder belts in my own plane.  However I have
flown many many other aircraft over the years that were equiped with
the fixed type of shoulder belt.  My proceedure under those
circumstances is to cinch the belts tight during take-off and landing
and to loosen the shoulder belt during cruise.  This seems to work
well for me.  I chose the inertia reel type for my own plane primarily
to avoid the annoyance of making the periodic adjustments.

Unlike the automotive scenario, it is very unlikely that you will
encounter a sudden airframe stoppage during cruise.  If you do, the
shoulder belt is probably not going to save you.  If a problem enroute
dictates an unscheduled off-airport landing, cinch the belts tight on
final. 

>
>I'm always tempted to just not wear it - but there must be some
>FAR that says if it's there, ya gotta wear it.  (anyone?)

For takeoff and landing.


Claude Goldsmith, CFII <claude@sunfse.ese.lmsc.lockheed.com>
 twisted-pair (408) 742-7514	      | Opinions expressed are not 
 on the air - WB6UOO                  | necessarily those of my 
 through the air - Mooney N6416U      | employer.
From: clayton@cc.usu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Right hand Left hand
Date: 31 Jul 92 12:21:39 MDT
Organization: Utah State University

	Believe it or not the right hand is for the stick and the left hand is
for the power, flaps, gear, weapon selection....All AC that I have flown with a
stick are set up that way.  This, I think, comes down from our military AC. 
When I fly with my left hand and control power with my right THIS feels
backward sometimes.
From: rjc@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Rich Carr)
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 15:04:24 GMT
Subject: Re: GLIDER: POST task? (was Re: Re: SOARING: 15m Nats in Minden)
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA
Newsgroups: rec.aviation

I didn't have the facts quite right about the events in Minden.
Here's what Charlie Spratt has to say in 'Sailplane Racing News:'

    At the mandatory pilots meeting it had been explained that the
    ARSA was to be considered a cyliinder that extended into outer
    space, and any leg that went through that cylinder would be
    disallowed.  This meant that the pilots had to photograph a
    steering turnpoint around the ARSA.

    Several pilots did not get this crucial turnpoint photo; such
    names as Striedeck, Sorenson, Jacobs, Gantenbrink, and Bradford
    were among the list.

    I know that none of these pilots flew through the ARSA, but just
    as with a missed turnpoint photo, the C.D. needs proof that the
    rules have been followed.  Hannes Linke reviewed the ruling and
    found no inequities.


Rich Carr
From: prang@ssc-vax.boeing.com (Ron Wanttaja)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Precautionary landing- student XC solo
Summary: Straight Ins
Date: 26 Jul 92 03:23:04 GMT
Organization: Boeing Defense and Space Group, Seattle WA

In article <1992Jul03.190637.29626@microsoft.com>, t-dougf@microsoft.com (Douglas Fields) writes:
> 
> Oh yeah, at Pt. Angeles, uncontrolled, I did a straight in... Called at
> 10, 7, 5, and at 4 I said, "Pt. Angeles Traffic, Cessna 68747 on four
> mile final straight in for 26. If there is any traffic that would rather
> I do a regular pattern, speak now or forever hold your peace..."

He's lucky I'm disconnected from rec.aviation, or I'd *really* be flaming
him now.... :-)

                                |"It's hard to register disapproval when
                               _|_/ you don't have a radio... or net
                 	      /(_)\   access.... :-)"
                      -------:==^==:-------      
                           [[|  o  |]]             
  -----------------__________\_____/__________-----------------
                          _  /     \  _
                         T T/_______\T T      Ron Wanttaja 
			 | |         | |      prang@ssc-bee 
			 """         """      prang@ssc-bee.boeing.com
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: jaap@cs.ruu.nl (Jaap Romers)
Subject: Re: United flight's cargo door?
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 09:59:49 GMT
Organization: Utrecht University, Dept. of Computer Science

In <1992Jul22.030335.11022@microsoft.com> joero@microsoft.com (Joe Robison) writes:

>In article <jcmorris.711658927@mwunix> jcmorris@mwunix.mitre.org wrote:
>> barrk@tramp.Colorado.EDU (Keith S. Barr) writes:
>> 
>> >In article <1992Jul16.203235.22436@news.nd.edu> ulick@angelico.helios.nd.edu (Ulick Stafford) writes:
>> >>I read something recently but I can't remember where about the door of the
>> >>United 747 that became detached over the Pacific being found, and that
>> >>it revealed new information about the incident.
>> 
>> >It was indeed found, and it confirmed that the latch had not been properly
>> >engaged.  
>
>...
>
>> The door was recovered from the floor of the Pacific at a depth of
>> approximately 14,200 feet.  (That's roughly 440 atmospheres of pressure!)
>
>Talk about your needles and haystacks...how in the world did they find it?

Yes, I'am interested too. If they can find this door, why aren't they able
to find a blackbox of the KAL007, which is transmitting signals....

jaap
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: gaynier@elec.uq.oz.au (Ron Gaynier)
Subject: SOARING NEAR ADELAIDE
Summary: Soaring near Adelaide Australia
Keywords: SOARING, TONY BIBLE
Organization: Prentice Centre, University of Queensland
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 23:52:42 GMT

Sorry to waste bandwidth, but I've lost your email address Tony.

Here is the info you want.

1.	Adelaide Hills Soaring Group Inc.
	PO BOX 1, Bridgewater, SA 5155

	Secretary: Emilis Prelgauskas (085) 34 4011



2.	Adelaide Soaring Club
	PO BOX 94, Gawler, SA 5118
	
	Secretary: Louise Armitage   (085) 68 5006



3. 	Adelaide University Gliding Club
	Sports Assoc. Adelaide University
	North Terrace, Adelaide, SA 5000

	Secretary: Andrew Huggins   (083) 40 2775



I hope your friend enjoys the soaring!

Ron Gaynier


Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: barriost@gtephx.UUCP (Tim Barrios)
Subject: Re: Phantom controller
Organization: AG Communication Systems, Phoenix, Arizona
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 05:01:35 GMT

In article <2612.164.uupcb@ssr.com>, dick.zeitlin%acc1bbs@ssr.com (Dick Zeitlin) writes:
> It's happened at LGA more than once.  But there was a warning on the
> ATIS to avoid confusion and chaos.

We're even having this problem in Phoenix now.  New on a briefing from
yesterday:

Phoenix AZ (Phoenix Sky Harbor Intl) [PHX]: July NOTAM #1:
     Attention all aircraft be alert to the possibility of UNATHORIZED air
     traffic control clearances issued on air traffic contrl frequencies in
     the PHX area . recent transmissions have been heard by pilots on PHX
     approach frequency 126.6 if you receive a transmission that is
     questionable , verify with air traffic control

-- 
Tim Barrios, AG Communication Systems, Phoenix, AZ
UUCP: ...!{ncar!noao!enuucp | att}!gtephx!barriost
Internet: gtephx!barriost@enuucp.eas.asu.edu or barriost@gtephx.att.com
voice: (602) 582-7101        fax:   (602) 581-4022
From: lee@bluefuzz.sw.stratus.com (Lee Cooprider)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: VFR Flight Following in TCA/ARSA
Date: 28 Jul 92 19:52:07 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Stratus Computer, Software Engineering

In article <1992Jul27.180716.8138@microsoft.com> t-dougf@microsoft.com (Douglas Fields) writes:

>They always grant it (almost). My question is, they don't tell me to do
>anything special. So, am I allowed to make turns, altitude changes, etc?

I have found that sometimes controllers for a TCA or ARSA forget to request
"advise prior to change of altitude" and yet expect to be notified.  It is
helpful to them to be alerted to such a change (or heading deviation) so that
they can maintain separation from IFR traffic without last minute vectors,
especially in busy areas.

So, in a TCA or ARSA, I have gotten into the habit of announcing intended
changes whether or not I have been requested to.  I always get a "thank you
08F" or equivalent and only once got a "maintain current altitude for
traffic, lower in 5 miles" (which was, of course, just fine).

-- 
Lee W. Cooprider				PP-ASEL/IA
Lee_Cooprider@vos.stratus.com			Skylane N2908F "Wiley"
From: ron@pilot.njin.net (Ron Natalie)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Phantom controller
Keywords: hand held, FCC, FAA
Date: 21 Jul 92 14:52:28 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

I've been thinking of hooking up my little 30 dollar micro casette
recorder that will do 2 hours per side to the record out of my
intercom.  Haven't tried it yet...

-Ron
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: siegman@EE.Stanford.EDU (Anthony E. Siegman)
Subject: Re: prevalence of engine failures
Organization: Stanford University
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 92 21:25:07 GMT

>the reliability is absolutely rock-solid.  So, the chances of even one
>engine failing are very remote.  The chances of both engines failing
>are so small as to be negligible compared to everyday risks (such as
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

   Except of course for the famous case, discussed in this group a
year or so, in which a mechanic doing maintenance on a United Airlines
trijet under some kind of confusing circumstances made the same minor
mistake -- something involving a missing O-ring for an oil plug -- on
all three engines, and the plane, in passenger service, subsequently
lost _all three engines_, a significant distance out _over water_,
somewhere off Miami.

   [It did turn out OK; they restarted at least one engine and got
back safely in the end.]
From: prang@ssc-vax.boeing.com (Ron Wanttaja)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Bonded Aluminum Structures
Date: 22 Jul 92 07:27:08 GMT
Article-I.D.: ssc-bee.5410
Organization: Boeing Defense and Space Group, Seattle WA

I was scanning the news on a local public access system, and saw a question
regarding the use of bonded aluminum in the homebuilt arena.

Bonded aluminum structures aren't strangers to homebuilts... one can go
back to the '60s, where the BD-1 used 'em.  The BD-1, of course, became the
American Yankee which begat the TR-2 and Grumman Tiger.

Why aren't they used more often?  I suspeect several reasons:

1.  They probably don't have any great advantages over ordinary composites,
or even ordinary aluminum structures.  An RV-6 weighs about 1000 pounds
with a 160 HP engine, probably a bit less than a smaller, slower Grumman
TR-2.
2.  The materials aren't readily available.  Mind, that *IS* a
chicken-and-egg situation, where Wicks, etc. doesn't carry the makings
because there's no demand for it, and without the availability of the
materials it's tough for someone to try them out.
3.  Quality control problems rear their heads when you talk about
amateur-built construction.  How do you detect voids in an aluminum
honeycomb sandwich?  The big boys do it with ultrasound-type systems, but
what can the homebuilder do?

Of course, I didn't mention them in the book because I don't know of any
kit using that form of construction.

Another question asked regarded how the Fly Baby is considered
"Experimental" when over 400 are flying.  It's "experimental" in the sense
that it has not been tested to meet government certification regulations.
A Fly Baby built in 1992 would probably not meet Part 23; no stall warning
horn, for one thing.

"Experimental" is merely a certification category.


                                          Ron Wanttaja
					  prang@ssc-bee (STILL denied
						 rec. groups)  
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: tel@cbnews.cb.att.com (thomas.e.lester)
Subject: Re: Bent Firewalls in General
Organization: AT&T
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 15:08:35 GMT

In article <1992Jul23.180302.8087@tss.com> burke@tss.com (Jim Burke) writes:
>
>I'm curious about how big a deal other's view a "slightly" bent firewall.
>Also, what do you do when one IA says something doesn't affect a plane's
>airwortiness and another says it does?  I suppose you can't make a guy
>sign off on something he says isn't airworthy, but how do you then 
>protect yourself from repairs that are not in fact necessary?  If the 
>guy won't sign it off, what then?  Or, are we owners pretty much at
>the mercy of the guy that signs off on that particular annual?

    Seems that if you feel strongly enough about it, take it to a second
    mechanic. I'm sure you could find a mechanic to sign off on
    anything if you looked hard enough and paid enough.
    Just be sure thats REALLY what you want to happen.



-- 
	-----------------------------------------------------------------
	Tom Lester				att!cblph!tel
	Sonerai IIL (under TEST)		(614) 860-3259
	N4LX 					(614) 927-8106
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: osh@cray.com (O'Shaughnessy John)
Subject: Re: good charts - was  Re: Ramp checks--unreasonable search
Keywords: Charts, Ramp Checks. 
Organization: Cray Research, Inc, Mendota Heights, MN
Date: 31 Jul 92 12:15:18 CDT

Should that address be MD for Maryland, and not MN for Minnesota?

No Minnesota zip codes start with anything other than a '5'.

John
-- 
-----
John M. O'Shaughnessy					osh@a00308.cray.com
Cray Research, Inc.	Voice: 612.683.7322		Fax: 612.683.7509
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: venky@thelonious.bellcore.com (G A Venkatesh)
Subject: Re: prevalence of engine failures
Reply-To: venky@thelonious.bellcore.com (G A Venkatesh)
Organization: Bellcore, Morristown NJ
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 92 18:54:17 GMT

In article <1992Jul23.134236.7577@xn.ll.mit.edu> olsen@xn.ll.mit.edu writes:
>ROPBB@CUNYVM.BITNET (Bliss B. Siman) writes:
>>I may be in the wrong place, but I hope you guys will put up with me.
>>I am a very fearful flyer faced with a trip to Barcelona on Friday
>>and just discovered the plane is a 767 which I am told has only two
>>engines.
>
>The kind of flight you are talking about is called ETOPS (Extended
>Twin-engine OPerationS), and is subject to very stringent
>requirements.

I don't mean to scare the person that asked the original question, but how
stringent are the procedures for showing that the requirements have been
met? Do they require actual flight testing over a long period of time
or can you just provide a "proof of concept" like, for example, thrust 
reversers that never deploy in flight?

venky
From: hutton@ncrcol.ColumbiaSC.NCR.COM (ed Hutton ext. 6488)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: One of those perfect moments
Date: 31 Jul 92 14:35:31 GMT
Organization: NCR E&M Columbia SC.

In article <1992Jul28.232129.15793@selway.umt.edu> cap@selway.umt.edu (Charles A. Smith) writes:

[background for required greaser landing deleted]
>
>Some of you may remember that I was having trouble with my landings in
>my new_to_me Skylane.  Well, I greased it. And I had it stopped in less
>than 500 feet.  Best landing I've ever made.
>
>The man turns to me and says, "Are we down yet?"  :-)
>
	This is where you look a little humble. Shrug your shoulders and
say, "Sorry about the landing. I guess we'll walk away. You can have it on
the way back." :-)

Ed
-- 
edward.hutton@ColumbiaSC.NCR.COM (Ed Hutton)    
"The highest art form of all is a human being in control of himself and his
airplane in flight, urging the spirit of a machine to match his own."
                                                            -- Richard Bach
From: niles@parc.xerox.com (Les Niles)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Protecting your logbook
Date: 27 Jul 92 18:12:12 GMT
Organization: Xerox PARC, Palo Alto, CA

In article <9207271351.AA07285@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> PJERN@CHGVMIC1.VNET.IBM.COM writes:
>For some reason, I've become paranoid about the idea of losing
>my logbook, and I'd like to know what other rec.aviators do in order
>to preserve their records.  I've been considering xerox^H^H^H^H^H
>photocopying the whole thing, and sticking the copies in the
>safe-deposit box.  What do you do?  This situation doen't seem to be
>covered too much in the FAR's.
>
>Would the photocopies of logbook/endorsements be legal?

Don't know about the legalities, but I copy each page of my log as it 
gets completed, and keep the copies in my office.  As long as disaster
doesn't simultaneously strike both the office and wherever my log is, 
I should be covered.

  -les  niles@parc.xerox.com
        Skylane N2461G
Newsgroups: rec.aviation