HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: eandersn@mach1.wlu.ca (Niels Ejvind Andersen)
Subject: Re: Is Hangering Cost Effective (cost of tie down at Teterboro, NJ...)
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5
Organization: Wilfrid Laurier University
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 19:39:58 GMT

Hangars do have *one* advantage over outdoor tie-downs, as the following
story illustrates:

I was talking to the owner of an nice-looking older-model Cessna 172 at
Guelph Air Park one day.  He was just passing through, but I have seen him
several times since.  He pointed out to me that his airplane has several
small depressions in the upper surfaces of the wings, horizontal stabilizers,
and elevators.  The airplane has an entry in the Journey Log explaining
the depressions -- in the late 60's, the aircraft sat outside in a hail
storm!  The damage to the airplane was relatively minor, and apparently
the depressions don't affect the flight characteristics of the plane.
--
Niels Ejvind Andersen     [eandersn@mach2.wlu.ca / 70511.2302@compuserve.com]
Information Systems, Wilfrid Laurier University, Waterloo, ON  N2L 3C5 Canada
                                                                  ... VFR NC4
Xref: sparky rec.aviation.owning:284 rec.aviation.soaring:392 eunet.aviation:145
From: adf@crosfield.co.uk (alex france)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.owning,rec.aviation.soaring,eunet.aviation
Subject: Re: looking for a Ka6
Date: 18 Dec 92 09:39:57 GMT
Organization: Crosfield Electronics, Hemel Hempstead, United Kingdom.

In article <1992Dec17.220401.14365@dsg.cs.tcd.ie> sloubtin@dsg.cs.tcd.ie (Sylvain Louboutin) writes:
>What would be the price of a decent Ka6-CR,  including the trailer?  I
>hope that I should not worry about taxes if I buy a glider in EEC in
>1993;  am I dreaming? 

It was my understanding that although you may no longer have to worry about
and 'duties' you will still have to worry about VAT (Value Added Tax or
whatever you call it in your home country) which retains different rates
in different countries. The 'payed tax in country purchased' stuff only applies
to small purchases for 'personal use' (e.g. 110 litres of beer!). For larger
items you would still have to claim back the tax in the country purchased
and pay VAT at the rate of the country you import it into.

Anyone believe otherwise (and if so, how come we can still claim back
the VAT on avgas when flying across the channel?).

Alex.

# Alex France, Crosfield Electronics, | Phone: +44 442 230000 xt.3541 #
# Hemel Hempstead, HP2 7RH, England.  | Email: adf@crosfield.co.uk    #
# AA5A, G-BEZI - more of a 'buzzin' than a 'hummin' Grumman.          #
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.owning
From: hgp@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (howard.page)
Subject: Re: Is Hangering Cost Effective (cost of tie down at Teterboro, NJ...)
Organization: AT&T
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 15:13:37 GMT

In article <greg.724621721@saltydog>, greg@saltydog.dpsi.com (Gregory R. Travis) writes:
	.
	.
	.
> 
> Gee, my fully-enclosed hangar (with electric door and lights, no less!) only
> costs me $50.00 a month.
> 

I just checked into the cost of a *tie-down* at Teterboro, NJ.....



.... $225/month!!!


Howard G. Page
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.owning
From: greg@saltydog.dpsi.com (Gregory R. Travis)
Subject: Re: Is Hangering Cost Effective
Organization: Data Parallel Systems, Inc
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 19:48:41 GMT

In <28687@oasys.dt.navy.mil> beglin@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Gordon Beglin) writes:

>So, for me at least, I'd *love* to be able to hangar my 172---
>if there was affordable hangaring around! $250.00/mo for a hangar
>vs. $75.00 for a tie-down is a lot of difference to me.

Gee, my fully-enclosed hangar (with electric door and lights, no less!) only
costs me $50.00 a month.

Ahh, the great plains...

greg, having some fun rubbin' it in...
--
Gregory Reed Travis				D  P  S  I
Data Parallel Systems Incorporated   greg@dpsi.com (For MX mailers only!)
Bloomington, IN			     greg@indiana.edu (For the others)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.owning
From: acampane@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Angelo Campanella)
Subject: Re: Sunscreens
Organization: The Ohio State University
 <2526@usna.NAVY.MIL>
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 02:56:22 GMT


AW COME-ON!! A bannana owner like you doesn't know what is a bannana!

I see by your by-line that you have an A-33...

We owned one from 1970 to 1979.  Can't say much fer or agin it.  I certainly
learned ALL about blowing exhaust gaskets... Hauled a nice load, however, and
is a little forgiving in unforseen icing coditions.
 Then we got a Mooney 201;

10 knots faster and 2 GPH less fuel burn.

But then the kids were pretty well grown by then and we did not need the 
larger cabin space..

The Mooney was and still is a great follow-up re the A-33;
(Most of my flying is now solo).
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.owning
From: patter@dasher.cc.bellcore.com (patterson,george r)
Subject: Re: Sunscreens
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 92 23:17:37 GMT

In article <1992Dec11.190353.9874@pony.Ingres.COM> kerry@Ingres.COM (Kerry Kurasaki) writes:
>In article <jcmorris.724093692@mwunix> jcmorris@mwunix.mitre.org (Joe Morris) writes:
>>
>>A sunscreen also keeps the local lowlives from seeing what type of
>>avionics you've got for them to steal.
>
>I've wondered about this.  I assume that avionics theft/robbery is
>done by the pros and not by the corner druggie.  I've heard that the
>pros usually can tell what's inside the plane by looking outside at
>the antennae hung off the plane.

Except that the pro will perform two thefts for one piece of equipment.
He'll steal, for example, a Narco Mk12-D from one aircraft, break into
another which has the same thing, and swap radios. In the second aircraft
he leaves no sign that he's broken in. The result is that he has and can
sell a radio which has not been reported stolen. The "stolen" one will
be flying around in someone's plane for years before anyone checks the
numbers.

Once they do check the numbers (all radio shops in this area routinely
do this for everything they repair), the owner of the second aircraft
has lots of explaining to do, the equipment is confiscated, and the thief
is long gone.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
                    | Try to live your life so that you wouldn't be
George Patterson -  | afraid to sell the family parrot to the town
                    | gossip.
                    |                            Will Rogers
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.owning
From: greg@saltydog.dpsi.com (Gregory R. Travis)
Subject: The $2000 check (was Re: Is Hangering Cost Effective)
Organization: Data Parallel Systems, Inc
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 19:01:59 GMT

In <1992Dec17.173421.9306@s1.gov> ark@s1.gov (Alene Kercheval) writes:

[Who is really Berry Kercheval]

>So here's something to consider: the hangar fee is something fixed you
>can reliably budget for, but something like replacing the tail can be
>an awful shock to your wallet.  (And Geoff will pipe up here and
>mention that if you can't write a $2000 check to fix your plane at a
>random time you can't afford it.  It's pretty true, I've done it and
>I've watched Geoff do it! :-)

Indeed, I just wrote the proverbial $2000.00 check yesterday for a
new transponder in the 172 (merry Christmas, FAA).  While they had things
apart for the transponder I told them to go ahead and do the static
cert. 'cause it's due in Feb. anyway.  Of course, when they did that and
the TXPD cert. they found that the original Cessna blind encoder was bad
(non-linear above 10,000' [as if I ever fly there]) so that meant another
$300.00 for an encoder.

What started out as a $1065 job for a new King TXPD turned into a $1700
job when the bill was written.  I needed some other stuff - like a new
alternator filter (to fix the ADF) too.

*Sigh*

p.s. I spent $400 last year to FIX the bloody Cessna TXPD - symptoms were
an inability to come "on-line" in cold weather.  Thought it was fixed until
THIS winter when it started acting up again (which I discovered this year
as I tried to go into the Indianapolis ARSA.  Now I'm a mode-C criminal).
I figured that it wasn't cost-effective to repair it every year.  At least I
have a two-year warranty on the King...

radar contact,
greg
--
Gregory Reed Travis				D  P  S  I
Data Parallel Systems Incorporated   greg@dpsi.com (For MX mailers only!)
Bloomington, IN			     greg@indiana.edu (For the others)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.owning
From: jcmorris@mwunix.mitre.org (Joe Morris)
Subject: Re: Is Hangering Cost Effective
Organization: The MITRE Corporation
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 17:08:12 GMT

Jeffrey Dunkle <jd5f+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:

>Open Question:  Does hangering "pay for itself" in terms of "measurable"
>savings?

>                             Some of us more progressive types (members
>10 years or less) want to hanger them.....primarily because our avionics
>repair bill runs about 2 thousand dollars or more a year, let alone
>paint and interior deterioration.  We do not even use window sun blocks.

I suspect that you could significantly reduce the avionics problems by
using a reflective sunscreen.  Hangaring would be better, but a sunscreen
is slightly less expensive.

It's a little late to demo the issue this year, but next summer find someone
on the airport whose bird has a sunscreen installed.  After the sun has
been up for several hours open the door and feel the seat, control
panel, radios, etc.: they will be warm but that's all.  Remove the 
sunscreen, close up the bird, and go get a Coke; when you're finished
go back to the bird and again feel the equipment, which by this time
may be too warm to be comfortable.  (Obviously, I'm assuming that the
bird isn't in the shade of a hangar...)

A sunscreen also keeps the local lowlives from seeing what type of
avionics you've got for them to steal.

Joe Morris
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.owning
From: patter@dasher.cc.bellcore.com (patterson,george r)
Subject: Re: The $2000 check
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 92 04:49:25 GMT

In article <1992Dec19.224446.466@qiclab.scn.rain.com> al@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Alan Peterman) writes:

>Second tip - there's lots of demand for ARC and Narco radios to
>replace ones that have died...lots were sold, and many have failed.

Fine. I have a repairable Narco Mk12-a (needs a new tube somewhere in the
nav side). Make me an offer.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
                    |
George Patterson -  | I don't know if I believe in love at first sight.
                    | I've never seen a Porshe full of money.
                    |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: hurvitz@oscar.UUCP (Dennis Hurvitz)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.owning
Subject: looking for a c152 for purchase
Date: 11 Dec 92 22:47:01 GMT
Distribution: na

i probably outta have my head examined, but i'm looking for a clean
c152, low time on airframe/mid time engine, ifr equiped (not a hodge
podge of radios) no damage history with good logs.

if anyone in net.land knows of such a 152 for sale, please call me or
email me. i'd be most appreciative.


thanks,

dennis hurvitz
619-452-4617

Newsgroups: rec.aviation.owning
From: reha@cbnewsi.cb.att.com (reha.gur)
Subject: sad story
Organization: AT&T
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1992 18:59:52 GMT

Well, it's been a week after the northeast storm and I have a sad tale. At
our airport BLM in NJ we had at least three planes damaged by the storm.

Two were from the flight school and they were blown over. The third was
my plane, a 182 Skylane. I had no warnnig that there would be high winds so
I was surprised when I was woken up at 2 in the morning on Friday by the wind.
I went to the airport to make sure the plane was okay ((I do not have a hanger)
BLM hangers are $285 hanger plus! $80 tiedown per month)). The plane was fine
but the ropes were chafing. I could not untie them and put new ones on since
the winds were pretty fierce and the ropes were holding. I went home.

The worst winds came monday around 9am Friday. The ropes were broken off 
The plane went up on its wing and came down with a side load that sheared
of the nosewheel. There is also damage to the tip of the wing and to several
stations along the wing. I estimate about 7-8 thousand dollars worth of damage.
And I don't have any ground insurance (I self insure.).

What a way to start off the new year! Oh well, there goes that
stormscope I wanted for this year.

Reha Gur
(N3311U)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.owning
From: mklein@dis.com (Mark Klein)
Subject: Oh no! I've taken the plunge!
Organization: DIS International, Ltd.  Novato, California
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 03:15:30 GMT

After being a wannabe for the better part of my flying career, I've finally
taken the plunge and acquired a piece of an airplane.  I say piece, because
I've just joined an existing partnership of two other pilots.  Being a first
timer, I felt that it's better to get my feet wet splitting the costs rather
than absorbing the entire costs of airplane ownership.  I guess I've got a
lot to learn!

Anyway, the bird is a Javelin conversion of a Cessna P-210.  First of all,
are there any other Javelin owners out there on the net?  If so, please
EMail me - I'd like to know what I've gotten myself into.  For those of you
not familiar with the Javelin, they take a standard P-210 and replace the
normal powerplant with a Lycoming 350 horse monster that gobbles 40gph in
climb.  The airframe is beefed up a bit, speed brakes are added and in this
case, a Robertson STOL kit was added.  Additionally, there are the two 
vacuum pumps that are necessary and two alternators.  

At altitude, the book says it should cruise along at 224 knots if you're 
in a hurry or if not (e.g. 60-65% power) at 198 knots.  I've verified 
the book values at 5,000 and at 15,000 ft.  At 15,000 at 62% we trued at
185 knots drinking 16.2 gph.  I'll verify the numbers in the flight levels 
when I get there.

-- 
============================================================================
Mark Klein                                                   415-892-8400
DIS International, Ltd.
mklein@dis.com
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.owning
From: patter@dasher.cc.bellcore.com (patterson,george r)
Subject: Re: sad story
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 92 04:37:44 GMT

In article <1992Dec20.185952.20912@cbnewsi.cb.att.com> reha@cbnewsi.cb.att.com (reha.gur) writes:
>
>Two were from the flight school and they were blown over. The third was
>my plane, a 182 Skylane. I had no warnnig that there would be high winds so
>I was surprised when I was woken up at 2 in the morning on Friday by the wind.

I was awake at the time and I was also disturbed that the media weather people
(in my case, the radio) seemed to have no clue that this was going to occur.

>I went to the airport to make sure the plane was okay ((I do not have a hanger)
>BLM hangers are $285 hanger plus! $80 tiedown per month)). The plane was fine
>but the ropes were chafing. I could not untie them and put new ones on since
>the winds were pretty fierce and the ropes were holding. I went home.

It's too late for this time, but if you are others are in this situation
in future and have or can get new rope, you can double up on your tie-downs.
Some of the people preparing for Andrew tripled their tie-down ropes and
tied 2x4s to the tops of the wings as spoilers. Don't take this as criticism;
I have a coil of 5/8" poly and didn't even think of it myself.

Personally, during that storm I was considering buying chains (no smilie).
I'm still thinking about it. My half-inch nylon pulled through, though.

>The worst winds came monday around 9am Friday. The ropes were broken off 
>The plane went up on its wing and came down with a side load that sheared
>of the nosewheel. There is also damage to the tip of the wing and to several
>stations along the wing. I estimate about 7-8 thousand dollars worth of damage.
>And I don't have any ground insurance (I self insure.).

You've convinced me to renew my insurance policy! Hope the repairs are
less than you think.

One suggestion. It might be cheaper to convert your 182 to a taildragger
than to restore the nosegear. Judging from the prices in TAP, it would
be worth more when it's done. Even if you don't want a taildragger, it
might pay to convert it, sell it, and pick up another aircraft. Just a
thought.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
                    |
George Patterson -  | "Better" is the enemy of "Good enough".
                    |                     Russian proverb.
                    |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: dfr@usna.navy.mil (PROF D. Rogers (EAS FAC))
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.owning
Subject: Re: Sunscreens
Date: 12 Dec 92 01:55:31 GMT
Organization: U. S. Naval Academy

In article <1992Dec11.190353.9874@pony.Ingres.COM> kerry@Ingres.COM (Kerry Kurasaki) writes:
!In article <jcmorris.724093692@mwunix! jcmorris@mwunix.mitre.org (Joe Morris) writes:

!!A sunscreen also keeps the local lowlives from seeing what type of
!!avionics you've got for them to steal.

!Since the "time" is the same for the "crime" of breaking into an Banana
!as it is for a C-172, I would think that the heavier iron would have
!a higher incident rate than your trainer/small 4-seater.

What's a Banana?

Dave Rogers
Bonanza E33A N2255A
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.owning
From: kerry@Ingres.COM (Kerry Kurasaki)
Subject: Sunscreens
Reply-To: kerry@Ingres.COM (Kerry Kurasaki)
Organization: Ask Computer Systems Inc., Ingres Division, Alameda CA 94501
Date: 11 Dec 92 19:03:53 GMT

In article <jcmorris.724093692@mwunix> jcmorris@mwunix.mitre.org (Joe Morris) writes:
>
>A sunscreen also keeps the local lowlives from seeing what type of
>avionics you've got for them to steal.

I've wondered about this.  I assume that avionics theft/robbery is
done by the pros and not by the corner druggie.  I've heard that the
pros usually can tell what's inside the plane by looking outside at
the antennae hung off the plane.

Since the "time" is the same for the "crime" of breaking into an Banana
as it is for a C-172, I would think that the heavier iron would have
a higher incident rate than your trainer/small 4-seater.
From: al@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Alan Peterman)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.owning
Subject: Re: The $2000 check
Date: 19 Dec 92 22:44:46 GMT
Article-I.D.: qiclab.1992Dec19.224446.466
Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon.

In article <greg.724618919@saltydog> greg@saltydog.dpsi.com (Gregory R. Travis) writes:
>
>Indeed, I just wrote the proverbial $2000.00 check yesterday for a
>new transponder in the 172 (merry Christmas, FAA)...
>
>What started out as a $1065 job for a new King TXPD turned into a $1700
>job when the bill was written.  
>
>p.s. I spent $400 last year to FIX the bloody Cessna TXPD - symptoms were
>an inability to come "on-line" in cold weather. 

I wrote about this a few years ago - but it's worth repeating every once in
a while.  There's no such thing as "a good old radio".  I was an avionics
technician as well as a plane owner, and I can tell you that you WILL
save money by replacing radios BEFORE they fail.

Cessna transponders were OK for their day, but after 10-15 years they
will start to develop expensive problems.  The transmit tube, the 
switches and the adjustment pots go bad - especially if the plane
has been tied down.  When the transponder (or almost any other
radio starts to become flakey, get it fixed (if necessary) and
replace it while it is working.

As an example, I replaced the ARC transponder from our 1976 Cardinal
in 1990.  It was working fine (had been tweaked up a few times in
the preceding two years) so we easily sold it for $500 to a FBO
who wanted it for a "hot spare".  We got a new King KT-76A and
put it in...(deciding to tell all....) and since we got the King
at dealer cost our net outlay was a whoping $150.  The total
install took me only 2 hours, and running new certs and the paperwork
was another hour.  

In avionics, preventive maintainence sometimes means replacing a working
(but elderly) radio with a new one...and it can save LOTS of money
since there are lots of people (aka suckers) who want to buy older
radios to replace their non-working ones easily.  They don't seen
to realize that the working one may well suffer from similar ailments
to those that plagued the now deceased equipment..

Second tip - there's lots of demand for ARC and Narco radios to
replace ones that have died...lots were sold, and many have failed.

I'm in the market now for another plane, if I get one with older
radios, they'll be gone in a flash, and I'll put in new stuff,
like the King KX-125 and KT-76 which are reasonable, relatively
state-of-the-art, reliable and perform well.  By doing this, and 
selling working radios, a swap of 2 navcoms and the transponder
can be accomplished for suprisingly little outlay.


-- 
Alan L. Peterman                                 (503)-684-1984 hm & work
                       al@qiclab.scn.rain.com
It's odd how as I get older, the days are longer, but the years are shorter!
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.owning
From: zwork@starfighter.den.mmc.com (Michael Corvin)
Subject: Re: Is Hangering Cost Effective (cost of tie down at Teterboro, NJ...)
Organization: Martin Marietta Astronautics Group
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 00:09:56 GMT

In article <BzGzyn.FA@mach1.wlu.ca>, eandersn@mach1.wlu.ca (Niels Ejvind Andersen) writes:
|> Hangars do have *one* advantage over outdoor tie-downs, as the following
|> story illustrates:
|> 
|> I was talking to the owner of an nice-looking older-model Cessna 172 at
|> Guelph Air Park one day.  He was just passing through, but I have seen him
|> several times since.  He pointed out to me that his airplane has several
|> small depressions in the upper surfaces of the wings, horizontal stabilizers,
|> and elevators.  The airplane has an entry in the Journey Log explaining
|> the depressions -- in the late 60's, the aircraft sat outside in a hail
|> storm!  The damage to the airplane was relatively minor, and apparently
|> the depressions don't affect the flight characteristics of the plane.
|> --
|> Niels Ejvind Andersen     [eandersn@mach2.wlu.ca / 70511.2302@compuserve.com]
|> Information Systems, Wilfrid Laurier University, Waterloo, ON  N2L 3C5 Canada
|>                                                                   ... VFR NC4

Several of our flying club's planes, which have spent most of their
groundborne existence here in Denver tied down outside, have suffered
the same fate - they are slightly, but noticeably, dimpled.  Denver
and the Front Range are notorious for hail...  [We tell student pilots
that the dimpled C-152 actually flies better, like a golf ball :-) ]

Keeping fabric-covered planes tied down outside during the hail season
is rather risky here.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Corvin 	      PP-ASEL, PP-G		zwork@starfighter.den.mmc.com
just another spaced rocket scientist at    Martin Marietta Astronautics Group
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
===============    My views, not Martin Marietta's   ========================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.owning