HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: Kevin@lemoore.ati.com
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc
Subject: Re: Good A&P Schools in CA..?
Date: 10 Jan 93 10:09:08 GMT
Reply-To: Kevin@lemoore.ati.com
X-Mailer: uAccess - Macintosh Release: 1.6v2


In article <1993Jan4.220603.2126@novell.com> (rec.aviation.misc), jscherer@db (John Scherer) writes:
> 
>  am looking for a good A&P school in CA..
> 
>  Thanks,
> 
>  John Scherer
> 
Southern California has a program as does Shasta College in the Redding area
of Northern California (at least it did at one time).

I wonder if there are any in the Fresno (Central Valley) area as this is an area
I've thought about persuing. 

*********************************************************
*  Kevin Kurtz				 *  Pam Kurtz	            *
*  Lemoore Elementary School *  Pamela@lemoore.ati.com  *
*  Kevin@lemoore.ati.com     *                          *
*********************************************************
*                    Lemoore, California                *
*                      (209) 924 - 3470                 *
*                   Fax: (209) 924 - 5975               *
*********************************************************           
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc
From: traurig@ncavax.decnet.lockheed.com (Scott Traurig)
Subject: Re: Canadian Air-Ambulances
Followup-To: rec.aviation.misc,misc.emerg-services
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 93 22:48:43 GMT

In article <1993Jan7.145334.17101@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>, rdale@nyx.cs.du.edu
(Robert P Dale) wrote:

>It seems that helicopters in Canada "do not have
> altimeters, devices which tell the pilot how high he is off
> of the ground" and would enable the helicopter to "land on runways
> even if weather conditions prevented the pilot from seeing the
> ground."  Wow.  Those are some altimeters...

     Perhaps they were speaking of a radar altimeter. A radar altimeter
uses a small downward pointing radar to deliver very accurate AGL (above
ground level) altitude information. Regular barometric altimeters use air
pressure to determine altitude ASL (above sea level), and must be
compensated for local variations in barometric pressure.  Thus, barometric
altimeters are subject to large enough inaccuracies such that it is
necessary to have a visual reference by a certain "decision height" in
order to continue a landing approach. (Actually, this is also true for
radar altimeters, except when aircraft are operating under special rules,
usually with additional nav aids, e.g. CAT 3 autoland, etc.).

     The barometric altimeter and ASL altitude is used by ATC (air traffic
control), and for most aircraft operations. Radar altimeters are typically
used for precision landing approaches.

     Of course, none of this explains why the Canadian helo didn't land.

Scott (traurig@ncavax.decnet.lockheed.com)
EMT-D/Merrimack (NH) Ambulance Rescue Service
From: randy@khan.gatech.edu (Randal T. Abler)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc
Subject: Re: ASRS CALLBACK # 163 (December, 1992)
Date: 6 Jan 93 20:10:03 GMT
Organization: CERL-EE, Georgia Institue of Technology

In article <1iev94INNg4m@transfer.stratus.com> lee@deneb.sw.stratus.com (Lee Cooprider) writes:
>In article <jcmorris.726329211@mwunix> jcmorris@mwunix.mitre.org (Joe Morris) writes:
>>mtanner@gmuvax2.gmu.edu (Michael C. Tanner) writes:
>
>>>The pilot who, with 1 mile visibility, requested a *visual* approach ...
>>>How hard would it have been for the controller to mention contact approaches?
>>
>>Probably that would be worth his job.  ATC cannot offer a contact approach;
>>it must be requested by the pilot.  See AIM paragraph 385.
> ...
>The intent of the restriction, as I understand it, is that the controller has
>no way to know that the weather conditions at the airport site are adequate
>for landing, but the pilot, who is looking at it, can see that a sight-guided
>approach is possible and takes responsibility for terrain and aircraft
>avoidance by requesting the contact approach.  Nothing in the procedures
>and regulations should have the intent of keeping a pilot ignorant of options.

Both Contact approaches and SVFR must be requested by the pilot, and cannot
be offered by ATC. I always figured that this was done since both
SVFR & contact approaches may be somewhat riskier than normal procedures,
and this prevents ATC from forcing the pilot into these procedures.  
I certianly wouldn't mind the controller "mentioning" a contact approach 
in a situation were I already had my hands full and might well be too
overloaded to think about asking for it.  Around Atlanta & Chicago I
have been vectored right over an airport when it was obvious that controller
wanted me to request a contact approach - seems ironic that ATC can't 
mention something but they can send me flying round in circles waiting for
me to catch on.


-- 
Randal  Abler   	randy@cerl.gatech.edu		 
CERL/EE Georgia Tech
From: sherman@sofbas.enet.dec.com (My name is...)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc
Subject: Certificate Confirmation
Date: 5 Jan 93 17:37:26 GMT
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation


Is there a public access utility somewhere where an employer can check on 
a job applicant's pilot certificate/medical certificate?


kbs
From: ben@bailey.UUCP (Ben Bailey)
Subject: Fly-in restuarant in Fl.
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc
Date: 11 Jan 93 01:40:50 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: Ben Bailey's Home..Tampa Fl.

Just wanted to let others know about a restuarant in Lake Wales
(South West of Orlando) that has a private air strip (turf)
2450x50 that allows you to walk to the restuarant. 

This isn't an inexpensive item: Dinner selections begin at $42.00/per.
I stopped by today to see it, with the premise that it might be a
future site to fly to.  It's interesting (most definately), and has
won many awards, including Mobile Guide four stars.  

It shows up in the AFD as:
	Chalet Suzanne Air Strip (x25) N27.57.02 W81.35.99
	RW 18-36 2450X50 (TURF) LIRL
	Attended 1300-0200Z.
	813-676-6011
	813-676-6011
	CTAF/UNICOM 122.8
	St. Petersburg FSS

If anyone goes or has been, I would appreciate a followup!

Ben
--
Ben Bailey                 ben@bailey.uucp -- bailey!ben@uunet.uu.net
12210 Shady Forest Dr.     ben@bailey.tscs.com
Riverview, Fl. 33569       -- The main thing is to keep the main
813-677-5021                  thing the main thing.  Mainly.
From: lmcgee@bondo.corp.sgi.com (Lee McGee)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc
Subject: Re: Flying defensively...
Date: 12 Jan 93 20:38:27 GMT
Reply-To: lmcgee@sgi.com
Organization: Silicon Graphics

In article <1993Jan12.185211.2068@dg-rtp.dg.com>, waugh@rtpnet05.rtp.dg.com (Matthew Waugh) writes:
|> So the discussion is, are twins safer than singles. As I see it
|> these are some areas to consider:
|> 1. How likely is an engine failure? I got some mail, and heard
|>    elsewhere, that having 2 engines doesn't make either one of
|>    them failing any less likely (which makes sense). So you are
|>    as likely to lose one of your 2 engines in a twin, as you are
|>    to lose your only engine in a single. 

Oops?  There seem to be two ways to look at this statistic:

An experiment
-------------

Buy a dozen eggs.  Drop them all onto your desk from a height of six
inches, to see whether they will break or not.

Say you find that out of twelve egg drops, six eggs break.  You optimistically 
conclude, then, that the chances of an egg breaking from the six-inch "flight"
is one in two.

Get some fresh eggs (same brand and size!).  Run this experiment;

Drop one egg.  Your chance that it breaks is one in two, as observed above.

Drop two eggs.  You should, statistically, have one of four results in an average four egg drops:

	No eggs break.
	Left egg breaks, right egg intact.
	Left egg intact, right egg breaks.
	Both eggs break.

...or, out of eight eggs dropped, four egg failures.  So the chances of
an egg failing are, as you say, still one out of two!

But your chance of having no failure at all is only one out of four!  With 
a single, you at least had a one in two chance of having no faiure and surviving with all of your eggs intact.

So, are two eggs are more dangerous than one, then?  Yes.  But at least with two eggs, you have one left unbroken to eat more frequently (3 times in four vs 1 out of two).

|> You are not more likely to lose one of your engines though.

See results of above experiment.  Makes my head spin!

-- 
________________________
Lee McGee lmcgee@sgi.com    		Spring is what winter
Silicon Graphics, Inc	   		  Always goes inter.  
PHONE (415) 390-2403	    
FAX   (415) 961-9584 	  			- Ogden Nash  
PAGE  (415) 807-2246
From: martinl@torolab6.VNET.IBM.COM
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 09:27:26 EST
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc
Subject: Flying Defensively
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not those of IBM
News-Software: Usenet 3.0

 Jon writes:
 > So, if anything, twin
 >instructors tend to be more shy of using the mixture control to
 >produce engine failure. All this says nothing about training to do
 >with engine shutdown and restart in flight, which will be done for
 >real, at a safe altitude. But then you'd do that on an aerobatics
 >course in a single as well.
 --

 Stopping the engine in an aerobatic single? Don't you think thats a bit
 dangerous, even at altitiude? Remember, if the engine is hot, especially
 an injected one, it may take some doing to get it restarted. Fine if
 you are in a twin, but pretty nervewracking in a symetrically winged
 bird.

 Consider these numbers (for a Pitts S2B):

 Best-possible-maximum-glide-ratio-if-everything-is-just-peachy - 2.5:1
 (I start a glide approach 2000 ft back from the numbers at 800 AGL, in
  zero wind, 1000 AGL if I'm still turning onto final, or with light winds)
 Best glide speed - 100 mph (147 fps)
 Work it out - 3200 fpm - down!

 Aerobatic airplanes do not glide far. You will have enough chances to
 experience engine stoppages for real if you get into the game long
 enough. (I have 5 in 310 hours - a new record?).

Xref: sparky rec.aviation.misc:1232 misc.emerg-services:5756
From: brianh@smaug.West.Sun.COM (Brian Horn)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc,misc.emerg-services
Subject: Re: Canadian Air-Ambulances
Date: 7 Jan 1993 16:17:26 -0800
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Distribution: na
NNTP-Posting-Host: pongo71

In article <traurig-070193165644@skydvr.sanders.lockheed.com> traurig@ncavax.decnet.lockheed.com (Scott Traurig) writes:
>In article <1993Jan7.145334.17101@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>, rdale@nyx.cs.du.edu
>(Robert P Dale) wrote:
>
>>It seems that helicopters in Canada "do not have
>> altimeters, devices which tell the pilot how high he is off
>> of the ground" and would enable the helicopter to "land on runways
>> even if weather conditions prevented the pilot from seeing the
>> ground."  Wow.  Those are some altimeters...
[deleted]
>     Of course, none of this explains why the Canadian helo didn't land.

Is it possible that the situation was that there was considerable loose
snow in the area and the helo pilot was concerned with "white-out"?

Xref: sparky rec.aviation.misc:1233 rec.aviation.owning:347
From: hurvitz@oscar.UUCP (Dennis Hurvitz)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc,rec.aviation.owning
Subject: ferrying an aircraft from greensboro-ft collins-sandyeggo
Date: 7 Jan 93 19:02:44 GMT
Distribution: na

well, i believe i've found a 152. i'll be flying to greensboro north
carolina on 10 january. the airplane is located in mocksville, at twin
lakes aviation. the broker is jim palmer (in case there are any netters
that have had any run-ins with this guy, please give me a call)..

the prepurchase looks ok, and assuming there are no surprises, i will be
ferrying this puppy to ft.collins for a new engine. the guys at firewall
had a factory new o-235-L2C laying around. i hope to be in ft. collins
by the 13th, so if there are any netters interested in helping put away
a few brews (i'm gonna need it after flying a 152 for 1250+ nautical
miles from north carolina to colorado, in the winter, in 2 days..), give
firewall forward a call and leave a message with mark, and i'll call ya.
in fact, i'd be really appreciative if i can bum a ride down to denver
airport..

i hope there are no headwinds, cuz the cars below will pass me.. guess i
could taxi all the way there.   :)



dennis hurvitz
From: cab@col.hp.com (Chris Best)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc
Subject: Re: Aviation Weather (Was Re: ASRS CALLBACK # 163 (December, 1992))
Date: 7 Jan 1993 21:56:41 GMT
Organization: your service
NNTP-Posting-Host: hpctdke.col.hp.com

> That's getting pretty bold on the controller's part, if you ask me.  The
> strongest "prod" I've heard is "the field is below Basic VFR minimums, say
> intentions."

----------

Maybe I read it here, maybe not: I heard of a controller who announced
the same thing about VFR minimums, and then offered, "Is there anything
SPECIAL I con do for you?"

A bit stronger prod.
From: joell@hpgrla.gr.hp.com (Joel Larner)
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 18:31:54 GMT
Subject: Re: Well, it was bound to happen to me eventually...
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Greeley, CO
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc

> Well the reverse has happened to me.  Approaching the let down point at the
> end of a long cross country: "What the hell happened to that gearshift?!"

Yup, I can't tell you how many times I have been taxiing with someone behind
me, and I look up for the rear-view-mirror.

-------------------------------------------------------
Joel Larner - Hewlett Packard, Greeley Storage Division
CAP SAR Pilot            email:  joell@hpgrjq.gr.hp.com
                           CAP:  Pikes Peak 293
                    In The Air:  N182H


Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc
From: jallred@spdg.com (John Allred)
Subject: Re: Flying defensively...
Organization: Stratos Product Development Group (Seattle)
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 21:44:10 GMT

In article <1993Jan12.185211.2068@dg-rtp.dg.com> waugh@rtpnet05.rtp.dg.com (Matthew Waugh) writes:
> <a good summary of twin/single risk factors>

One quibble:
>The FAA agrees (so what does that prove) that twins, when flown by 
>proficient pilots, are safer, since it won't allow for hire passenger
>flights in a single engine aircraft.

Say what?  Many charter and scheduled carriers (for example, Lake Union
Air in Seattle) regularly use single engine aircraft in for-hire
operations.

John Allred (jallred@spdg.com)

-- 
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc
From: jbrown@qdeck.com (Jordan Brown)
Subject: Re: What is a lomcovak?
Organization: Quarterdeck Office Systems, Santa Monica CA
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 1993 22:34:25 GMT

davehyde@tecnet1.jcte.jcs.mil writes:
>I would guess that control power, not "power and torque", are what keep a
>Citabria from doing one.  You just can't get rates high enough to get the
>axes to couple.  But, never having flown one, its just a guess.

My assumption has always been that the reason that tumbling maneuvers
were not allowed (not "impossible", rather "not authorized") was structural.
I know (well, my acro instructor told me) that's the reason why tail slides
aren't authorized in Decathlons even though they're clearly possible.
From: lee@deneb.sw.stratus.com (Lee Cooprider)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc
Subject: Re: ASRS CALLBACK # 163 (December, 1992)
Date: 6 Jan 1993 15:53:08 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Software Engineering
NNTP-Posting-Host: deneb.sw.stratus.com

In article <jcmorris.726329211@mwunix> jcmorris@mwunix.mitre.org (Joe Morris) writes:
>mtanner@gmuvax2.gmu.edu (Michael C. Tanner) writes:

>>The pilot who, with 1 mile visibility, requested a *visual* approach ...
>>How hard would it have been for the controller to mention contact approaches?
>
>Probably that would be worth his job.  ATC cannot offer a contact approach;
>it must be requested by the pilot.  See AIM paragraph 385.

Hm.  Clearly the controller cannot offer a contact approach.  However, is the
controller prohibited from informing the pilot of an option that available
thru the FAR/AIM, in essence, reading the pilot a paragraph of useful
information?  For example, "I am unable to authorize a visual approach because
the weather information available to me is insufficient.  However, if you are
clear of clouds...<rest of contact approach preconditions>...and can land
while remaining clear of clouds, you could request a contact approach."

The intent of the restriction, as I understand it, is that the controller has
no way to know that the weather conditions at the airport site are adequate
for landing, but the pilot, who is looking at it, can see that a sight-guided
approach is possible and takes responsibility for terrain and aircraft
avoidance by requesting the contact approach.  Nothing in the procedures
and regulations should have the intent of keeping a pilot ignorant of options.
-- 
Lee W. Cooprider				PP-ASEL/IA
Lee_Cooprider@vos.stratus.com			Skylane N2908F "Wiley"
From: ewv@craycos.com (Eric Varsanyi)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc
Subject: Re: 1/93 AOPA Pilot: DEA confiscates helicopter...
Date: 7 Jan 93 19:49:08 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Cray Computer Corporation

In article <1993Jan6.153854.19532@cbnewsj.cb.att.com> hgp@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (howard.page) writes:
>confiscating a helicopter from someone because the DEA
>didn't believe the pilot was appropriately rated.

Yes, what exactly does the DEA have to do with airman ratings? This one
struck me as odd too. Perhaps they thought they saw bales of drugs strapped
to the helicopter, shot it down, confiscated the remains, realized there
were no drugs, then tried to find some other way to justify their
actions (sadly, only a semi :) ).

-Eric
From: Larry.Mc.Donald@ofa123.fidonet.org
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc
Subject: Wanted, adf loop
Date: 5 Jan 93 00:04:14 GMT
X-Sender: newtout 0.06 Jan  3 1993



Does anyone have an old motorised ADF loop as was popular about 
30 years ago on back that they would be willing to part with?

   Thanks!



... Larry.Mc.Donald, N6ZMB, Fullerton, California!  <cough, cough>
___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.10

--- Maximus 2.01wb
From: cab@col.hp.com (Chris Best)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc
Subject: Re: FCC regs for revealing radio communications
Date: 5 Jan 1993 18:07:51 GMT
Organization: your service
NNTP-Posting-Host: hpctdke.col.hp.com

> >Something tells me this isn't quite right...
> 
> Correct, this isn't quite right.  The FCC (*not* FAA) regulation prohibits
> a person from passing on information overheard on the air for gain.  It
> does not prohibit a party directly involved in the communication from
> passing the information on.  So, ATC can pass on your icing report since
> they are a party to it (you reported the icing to them).  Similarly, your
> instructor can tell you what ATC said since he's in the aircraft the
> transmission was directed to.  If you overheard another airplane reporting
> icing, you could pass that on to your instructor, as long as you are not
> paid for the information.

----------

A good answer.  I figured it was probably something like this, but
I couldn't put my finger on it.

Applause, also, for seeing my real point, through an apparently 
facetious question.
From: camelsho@conquest.ksu.ksu.edu (   James A Seymour)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc
Subject: Ain't No Such Thing?
Date: 10 Jan 1993 03:27:44 -0600
Organization: Kansas State University
NNTP-Posting-Host: conquest.ksu.ksu.edu

I was wondering what, if any modern jet engines are available for
general aviation.  Is there such a thing as an effecient jet 
engine available? (upon camparison with internal combustion engines,
be they rotaries or pistoned.)

If such an animal exists, why are there no readily available 
GA jet planes?  (Or are there a few out there that I have not
heard about?  I know about the Berkut (sp?) and the er, uhm, 
BD5J?  Are there any others?)


         james seymour/camel/camelsho@matt.ksu.ksu.edu
From: john@n7kbt.rain.com (John Opalko)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc
Subject: Questions on getting A&P
Date: 11 Jan 93 02:26:58 GMT
Article-I.D.: n7kbt.C0o44z.21K
Distribution: usa
Organization: Two strange people in Forest Grove, OR

At 37, I'm getting tired of the computer racket and I'm thinking of going for
my A&P license.  I'd appreciate it if anyone has any words of wisdom for this
PPASEL contemplating the proverbial mid-life career change.

What's *really* required to get the certificate?  I mean beyond what the FARs
say.  War stories are always welcome.

What kind of $$ can I expect to earn?  I suspect I'm asking for a cut in pay,
but I'd like to know about what I'd be making (assume the PDX area).

What are the chances I won't be the token old fart in the class?  Do I really
want to plunge myself in with a bunch of folks who weren't born until I was
voting?  :-)

About what's the impossibility factor of getting a job?  Assume the Pacific
Northwest, Portland, OR, preferred.  Note that, at this point at least, I'd
like to work for an FBO at a relatively small airport, although I wouldn't
turn my nose up at an airline job or a position with Boeing.

I assume I have to supply my own tools.  How big a second mortgage are we
talking about here?

Is there a good A&P school in the Portland area?

Are A&P schools typically daytime classes only, or can I go at night?  I
think the school I looked at years ago back in Illinois (D.A.V.E.A.) was
strictly daytime only.

Am I crazy for even contemplating this?  Should I go back to C++ and X?

Anything else that I forgot to ask?


Thanks,

-- 
John Opalko			Somewhere in the foothills of the Coast Range,
john@n7kbt.rain.com		Forest Grove, Oregon, USA

		"Fast; cheap; correct.  Pick two."
From: jeg@Apple.COM (Julian Gomez)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc
Subject: another sad day for aviation
Date: 5 Jan 93 00:43:42 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer Inc., Cupertino, CA

It is with considerable sadness that I report the passing of John
Galipault yesterday, 1/3/93, due to complications following emergency
heart surgery. John founded and was the head of the Aviation Safety
Institute, an independent organization dedicated to improving safety in
all aspects of aviation. He was the first person the media turned to
following major aviation incidents and always provided a calm, reasoned
viewpoint. John was a very strong proponent of general aviation and
made sure to present positive comments when the media were looking for
easy scapegoats. He also started the Aviation Special Interest Group on
Compuserve a decade ago, providing a place for anybody interested in
aviation to electronically chat with others of the same feather.

I'll post any further important details from Compuserve here.  It's
pretty upsetting; John is the second pilot friend I've lost in the last
six months.  Funeral services will be held in Worthington, OH on
Wednesday.  He will be missed.

"Oh I have slipped the surly bonds of earth ...


Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc
From: brecher@well.sf.ca.us (Steve Brecher)
Subject: Re: Flying defensively...
Organization: none, in Reno NV USA
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 22:13:48 GMT

In <1993Jan12.185211.2068@dg-rtp.dg.com>, waugh@rtpnet05.rtp.dg.com
(Matthew Waugh) says:

> The FAA ... won't allow for hire passenger flights in a single engine
> aircraft.

Not true.  See, e.g., FAR 135.163, which specifies equipment requirements
for carrying passengers under IFR, and which refers to single-engine
aircraft.  FAR Part 135 as a whole pertains to for-hire operations (air
taxi).

--
brecher@well.sf.ca.us (Steve Brecher)

Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc
From: bruce@Think.COM (Bruce Walker)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc
Subject: East Coast Aero Club
Date: 4 Jan 1993 16:40:37 GMT
Organization: Thinking Machines Corporation, Cambridge MA, USA
Distribution: ne
NNTP-Posting-Host: mickey.think.com

Could someone please give me a contact for the East Coast Aero Club at BED?  I
remember seeing a reference to it here, but evidentally I didn't save the
article, and I can't find a phone number from information.

-- 
--Bruce Walker
  Thinking Machines Corporation, Cambridge, MA
  bruce@think.com; +1 617 234 4810; WT1M