HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: serafin@epcot.spdc.ti.com (Mike Serafin)
Subject: Re: Transponder problems
Organization: TI Semiconductor Process and Design Center
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 21:21:01 GMT

In article <1992Sep15.153257.19905@qiclab.scn.rain.com> al@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Alan Peterman) writes:
>In article <1992Sep14.222857.11456@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU> ginsberg@t.Stanford.EDU (Matthew L. Ginsberg) writes:
>>
>>Transponders typically take about five minutes to warm up.  That's why
>>the switch typically includes a "standby" mode -- you should power it
>>on to standby when you start the plane, and turn it on just before
>>departing.  If you leave it powered off till you are (for example)
>>cleared onto the runway for takeoff, you won't get a peep out of it
>>for the next few minutes.
>
>Close, but not the whole story.  Most GA transponders have a warm up time
>of about 45-60 seconds.  This is to allow the transmit tube to get warm
>and stabilize at the correct frequency.  Putting the unit in standby will
>do the warm up, and the transponder will come on line IMMEDIATELY after
>being put in the "on" mode, if warmed up in standby.
>
>Now for the "bad" news.  Most of the cheaper encoders being sold now
>use a solid state pressure sensor that lives in an "oven" that is 
>warmed to a preset temperature.  This requires 3-10 minutes (depending
>on the ambient temperature) to get to operating temperature.  Often
>the encoder is powered off the transponder, so until you turn the
>transponder to standy (or on) the encoder does not start to warm,
>so you may not get mode C for quite a while.  This is why we chose
>to use the more expensive mechanical encoder for our plane, since
>we often were in the air less than 7 minutes from engine start.
>

And for the really bad news, some planes are wired (mine for instance) with a
seperate switch to turn on the encoder.  Switching the transponder to 'stby',
'on', or 'alt' don't do much if you ain't got power to the encoder.  Once or
twice ATC has gotten real impatient waiting for that mode C because I forgot
the OTHER damn switch.  

*******************************************************************************
Mike Serafin          email=serafin@epcot.spdc.ti.com
1964 C310I N48WM       
PP-ASMEL-I
*******************************************************************************
From: markk@sagredo.West.Sun.COM (Mark Allen Kampe)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Professional soaring (was soaring decisions)
Date: 9 Sep 92 23:40:16 GMT
Reply-To: markk@pongo.West.Sun.COM
Organization: Sun Microsystems
NNTP-Posting-Host: pongo.west.sun.com

Paul Raveling observed that hawks have negative flaps.  I think it goes well beyond
that. 

I have always enjoyed watching hawks soar.  One day I had the pleasure of observing
a red-tailed hawk at very close range (less than three meters) playing in a stiff 
wind.  The clear object of the game was to remain motionless (with reference to the
ground).  When I was a dozen meters away, it looked easy, but as I got closer I saw 
how hard she was working in order to remain in one position.  She was continuously 
making subtle adjustments to the camber, length, sweep, wash-out, and dihedral of 
her wings.

After observing how nimbly and effectively she was able to manipulate her L/D in
a gusty wind, I reflected on how crude our most advanced sailplanes still are.
She probably had a dirty stall speed of 3kt, a redline somewhere around 60kt,
an L/D that was continuously adjustable from .1 to 100, highly sensitive angle
of attack and differential temperature sensors and 10,000+ hours of PIC time (with
over half of it thermalling).
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: hanlon@ariel.lerc.nasa.gov (Casey Hanlon (SVER))
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Twin Beechcraft crashed in Hinckley, Il
Date: 11 Sep 92 16:04:00 GMT
Organization: NASA Lewis Research Center
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

Ed Hutton writes:
>...you are FOUR times as likely to suffer a fatal accident if you lose an 
>engine in a twin...

This is a classic example of the misuse of statistics.  What can be stated
from the statistics is that IF you crash after suffering an engine failure
in a twin, the chances of their being a fatility are 4 times as great 
as those for single engine aircraft that crash after suffering an engine
failure.  The thing to keep in mind is that there are no requirements for 
for reporting engine failures provided there were no injuries or damage to the
aircraft, ie no crash.  These types of statistics are also misleading in
another respect, generally speaking twins have more seats than do singles.
Consequently the twin is likely to have more people aboard than the 
corresponding single.  But the factor of 4 is most misleading in that
it makes it sound like twins are death traps.  The latest NTSB statistics
indicate that the fatality rate, (based upon hours flown) indicate that
twins and singles are equally save to fly.  The simple truth of the matter
is that in the majority of cases, an engine failure in a twin simply leads
to an unscheduled stop for repairs, and not a crash.  Yes the climb rate
with one engine stopped is abysmal compared to climb with both engines 
operating, but it is outstanding when compared with the climb rate of
ALL single engine aircraft that have lost an engine.  That extra engine
allows the twin driver more options in deciding where to land.

Casey Hanlon  
From: bills@hplvec.LVLD.HP.COM (Bill Standerfer)
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 16:20:51 GMT
Subject: Re: What do you do during long boring flights?
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Co., Loveland, CO
Newsgroups: rec.aviation

In article <j2gnm#n.hchong@netcom.com>, hchong@netcom.com (Hoi Chong) writes:
>Usually, we listen to radio in the cars during long solo drive, but what do 
>you do for long solo flights (assuming FAA does not permit radio)?

Hmmm, lessseee...

In a Malibu, I wonder how close to TBO that very expensive engine up front is
(and if it will even get close to that number).

In a Cub, I wonder if those semis on the road below are chuckling at the little
airplane they are passing.

In a 210, I wonder just how much fuel I have left.

In a Turbo Arrow, I wonder how long that finicky TSIO-360 is going to last
(sorry Scott, I couldn't resist).

In a Seneca, I wonder how long *those* finicky TSIO-360s are going to last
(except "The Reliable Beast", of course).

In a 150, I wonder why I'm doing this.

In a 310, I wonder if I'll ever understand the fuel system.

In an MU-2, I wonder how anyone could possibly afford such a fuel flow rate.

In a 182, I wonder why they don't make these anymore.

And in the Baron, I sit back, watch the world go by, and enjoy the ride. :-)

Bill Standerfer
From: pauls@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com (Paul Stafford)
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 15:07:52 GMT
Subject: Re: Beachfront Home For Rent, Newport Beach, CA
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Santa Rosa, CA
Newsgroups: rec.aviation

 Whats' this bullshit doing here???
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: derrell@kirk.retix.com (Derrell Lipman)
Subject: Re: Use solo to actually do something?
In-reply-to: kerry@Ingres.COM's message of 14 Sep 92 17:23:21 GMT
Organization: Retix, Santa Monica
Date: 14 Sep 92 17:59:28

In article <1992Sep14.172321.2534@pony.Ingres.COM> kerry@Ingres.COM (Kerry Kurasaki) writes:

> In article <1912pbINN2n2@darkstar.UCSC.EDU> rob@cats.ucsc.edu (99708000) writes:
> >
> >>|> > Can you like solo X-country down to LA and say go to Disneyland, and
> >>|> > then come back?  Or maybe visit friends or something, and come back the

my instructor signed me off for a solo cross country with an overnight
stop, but put restrictions on the signoff.  i think he stated that
there must be no actual or forcast ceilings lower than 9000 ft and no
pilot reports of <some kind of adverse weather>.  this worked out
well.  it allowed me to take the weekend trip while keeping him (and
me, for that matter) safe.
--

--derrell    (derrell-lipman@retix.com)

Cogito Signum - "Consider the stamp"

	"Consider the stamp, my son, for its usefulness consists in
         its ability to stick to one thing until it gets there."

			Omega Phi Alpha motto.
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: dave@exloghou.exlog.com (Dave St.Clair)
Subject: Purchase of Cessna 182
Followup-To: dave@exlog.com
Summary: What to look for in buying a plane?
Keywords: Cessna 182, Parnership
Organization: Exlog, Inc.
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 92 18:12:36 GMT

(Sorry if this is a repost -- my admin said it bounced back.)

I'm a fairly recent pilot and am considering a partnership in a 1977 Cessna 182.
It has approximately 1300 TTAE and has been stored under cover (basically, a
car port-type structure) for its entire life. The current partners fly the
plane about 60-75 hours a year.

I'd like some advice on what I need to do to insure the airplane is in good
shape.  I plan on going over the maintenance records and talking to the
mechanic who performed the last annual.  Obviously, I'm going to fly it and
check the interior/exterior appearance/wear.

What else should I do?  Are there particular areas I should pay close attention
to? Don't be afraid to include "obvious" things -- I'm liable to
overlook these.  Also, any input on partnerships would be appreciated.

I've read the latest FAQ on the cost of ownership.

Please email responses, if possible. If there's sufficient interest,
I'll post a summary.

Thanks,

Dave St.Clair
dave@exlog.com
From: ritter@claude.ma30.bull.com (Roger Ritter)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Wrong Way Corrigan
Keywords: transatlantic
Date: 14 Sep 92 21:10:36 GMT
Organization: Bull HN Informations Systems Inc.

bullock@watson.bms.com (JOAN BULLOCK) writes:


>I see by the old EAA calender on the wall that next friday, Sept 25 is 
>Wrong Way Corrigan Day.  Is anyone out there suffiently familiar with the 
>history rather than the myth to post the full unadulterated story?  

>Did Corrigan truly set out from Long Island (I believe) for the west coast 
>and wind up in Ireland?  Or was that just a cover story and his destination 
>actually was Europe.  Hearsay subscribes to both versions - with equal 
>conviction. 

>Would appreciate it if someone would solve this burning mystery.  Or at 
>least post a source.

I have a copy of Corrigan's book - "That's My Story" (I think -- it's at
home).  In it, he claims that it was indeed a mistake.  Air & Space
magazine interviewed him a couple of years ago, and he still claimed
that he was heading for California and hit Ireland by accident.  Some
people believed him, some didn't.  No proof exists, that I know of,
for either argument.

Douglas Corrigan applied for permission to fly to Europe, and was
denied on the grounds that his airplane was not safe for the trip.
So he decided to do a non-stop flight from New York to California.
Corrigan's claim was that the magnetic compass in his old Curtiss
Robin was broken - leaking fluid and unreliable.  Thus, he relied on
another compass (?an earth-inductor compass as was recently discussed
on this group?), which had to be set before takeoff.  He set it
backwards by mistake.  Following the reciprocal of his planned
course, he set off.  Since he was flying over clouds the entire trip
(or at least the daylight portion of it), he didn't notice that he
was over ocean instead of land until it was far too late to do
anything about it.  When he did find land, it was Europe.  He landed
to instant fame and an eternal nickname.
-- 
Roger Ritter N1FZZ (R.Ritter@ma30.bull.com) PP-ASEL, AGI
1946 Luscombe 8A N71983 "Rocky"
Sheep do not so much fly as plummet!        NH CAP: Profile 49
From: greg@saltydog.dpsi.com (Gregory R. Travis)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Interstate Landing--Not such a good idea
Keywords: Emergency Landing Road Interstate
Date: 8 Sep 92 21:11:22 GMT
Organization: Data Parallel Systems, Inc

From today's (Tuesday, Sept 8, 1992) Bloomington _Herald-Times_:

=
AIRPLANE RUNS OUT OF GAS, MAKES LANDING ON HIGHWAY

  Four men made a hasty airplane landing on S. Ind. 37 early Saturday
morning after they lost visibility and then ran out of gas while on their
way to Kentucky from Bloomington.

  The men, Daniel Gonzales, Rosendo Gomez, Moises Hernandez and Loreto Franco,
all of Mt. Prospect, Ill., told police they were on their way to Kentucky at
6:30 am to go hang gliding when they lost visibility because of fog near
the Ohio River and turned back toward Bloomington, Indiana State police
trooper Rick Wright said.

  Unable to land at the Bedford Airport and low on fuel, the men decided to
land on Ind. 37 near Needmore School in Lawrence County.

  Fortunately, there was little traffic when it landed and no accidents
resulted, Wright said.

  Bedford Tower sent fuel and then police "shut the road down, turned it
into runway 3-7 [sic], and then sent them on their way," he said.

  Although none of the men were cited or fined at the time of the
landing, Gonzales, the pilot, did not have a proper license to fly in
those conditions, police said.
=

Ob notes:

	Bedford is an uncontrolled field.  There is no "Bedford Tower"

	Ind. 37 is a four-land highway with a median between the two sets
	of lanes.  It isn't an interstate though.

	Bloomington was IFR at the time they made their landing and had
	been all morning.  Although the paper says they were going to
	Kentucky from Bloomington, this is not that sure.  It is
	reasonable to assume, however, that they flew at least 70
	miles (the distance from Bloomington to the Ohio river) in
	visibilities running from 1.5-2.5 in fog before they decided
	to turn back.

	Rumor has it that they took off with 20 gallons of fuel from
	Bloomington (if that's where they were from) as they were concerned
	about gross.  20 gallons is at least two hours, which should get a 172
	to and from the Kentucky border with some reserves.

	Apparently they were not able to locate the Bedford airport on their
	return and diverted to Bloomington, about 15NM to the northeast of
	Bedford.  They repeatedly asked for a special VFR clearance into
	BMG but were denied (because of inbound IFR traffic I assume).  They
	then landed on Ind. 37 as a precautionary measure.


cub reporter 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)
From: junio@shadow.twinsun.com (Jun Hamano)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Oops, the throttle came off!
Date: 6 Sep 92 06:12:44 GMT

William LeFebvre writes:

> When I get to the part of the Cessna "Before Takeoff" checklist that reads
> "Cabin doors and windows--closed and locked", I thump the door hard with 
> my hand or elbow.

A lot of people seem to do this, and they do this too hard.  Our
FBO has to keep ordering replacement door panels for our 152s
every once in a while.

Since my door opened once when I took off, I, for myself, made it
a habit to check it's latched _visually_.

--
      |
   __-+-__      Jun Hamano
_-+ (\o/) +-_   junio@twinsun.com
  !   .   !
From: ron@pilot.njin.net (Ron Natalie)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Hinckley Crash
Date: 10 Sep 92 22:32:56 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

> Umm, last time I checked, this is also not true.  There are no exceptions
> to the seated and belted rule for skydivers.

91.107 (b) During the takeoff and landing of a [aircraft] each person
on board that aircraft must occupy an approved seat or berth with a
safety belt and shoulder harness, if installed, properly secured about
that person.  However, a person who has not reached the second
birthday may be held by an adult who is occupying an approved seat
or berth, and a person on board for the purpose of engaging in sport
parachuting may use the floor as a seat.

The ambiguous part is whether the floor has to have seatbelts
installed or not.  Also note that 91.107(c) says that (b) doesn't
apply to the pilot (so if you are a 1.9 year old PIC or going
to jump out after flying the plane to altitude you must wear your
seatbelt).

-Ron
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: mperlman@nyx.cs.du.edu (Marshal "Airborne" Perlman)
Subject: Re: Pilot Age and Aviation Accidents
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 92 16:34:22 GMT

zari@math.ethz.ch (Alain Zarinelli) writes:


>    "    Age Group                   Accident Rate

>         17-19                          7.2
>         20-29                          9.0

That is odd how it goes up between these two.

>         50-59                          3.3
>         60-69                          3.1

It doesn't suprise me that these two are the lowest.

BUT..what I would like to see <I dunno if anyone has done this> is a percentage
chart on the breakdown between driving and flying. (i.e. how many accidents and
deaths [percentage-wise] of Auto vs. Aero.> 

I'd love to see that and send it to the news...every time a plane crashes
it is talked about on every channel, and people think to themselfs, "Flying
is dangerous." I have never seen any of the MANY accidents I see on the news
on TV [well..one..but it was REAL bad]...I just think that a higher percent
of car drivers are hurt then pilots/pass.

I could be wrong tho'!
--
Marshal Perlman - Huntington Beach - California - USA - Earth - Milky Way 
                 Private Pilot - Airplane Single-Engine Land
From: merlyn@ora.com (Randal L. Schwartz)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Choosing a pattern at an unfamiliar airport
Date: 14 Sep 92 18:30:19 GMT
Article-I.D.: romulus.MERLYN.92Sep14113015
Organization: Stonehenge Consulting Services; Portland, Oregon, USA

In article <1992Sep14.152919.21091@almserv.uucp> smith@ur-guh.com (Russ Smith) writes:
   As for WLF's situation, I would have announced something like "Cessna ABC
   will be entering the 45 to downwind for a RIGHT hand pattern for active 1-5,
   number 2 on the RIGHT hand pattern", emphasizing "right" so ambiguity is
   lessened; if it IS a "right" pattern, great, no loss, little frequency congestion;
   if it isn't, you've done everything possible other than to leave entirely
   to make the area safer.


Maybe it's a local difference, but I've always heard of that as being
"on the 45 to a RIGHT downwind", with the qualifier word in front of
"downwind".  At least, that's how tower calls it for me.

--
Randal L. Schwartz / Stonehenge Consulting Services (503)777-0095
merlyn@reed.edu (guest account) merlyn@ora.com (better for permanent record)
cute quote: "Welcome to Portland, Oregon -- home of the California Raisins!"
From: lmcgee@bondo.corp.sgi.com (Lee McGee)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Seatbelts (was: Re: Hinckley Crash)
Date: 10 Sep 92 23:13:30 GMT
Reply-To: lmcgee@sgi.com
Organization: Silicon Graphics Corp IS

In article <Sep.10.18.32.56.1992.28376@pilot.njin.net>, ron@pilot.njin.net (Ron Natalie) writes:  ( a quote of 91.107 I presume)
|> 
|> 91.107 (b) During the takeoff and landing of a [aircraft] each person
|> on board that aircraft must occupy an approved seat or berth with a
|> safety belt and shoulder harness, if installed, properly secured about
|> that person.  However, a person who has not reached the second
|> birthday may be held by an adult who is occupying an approved seat
|> or berth, and a person on board for the purpose of engaging in sport
|> parachuting may use the floor as a seat.

My wife is fairly slim and light, and I have a six year old daughter, 
also obviously quite narrow-hipped.  Can I as PIC "approve" them
to share a single seat and seatbelt for takeoff and landing of an
aircraft?  Both like to ride up front while cruising (the daughter
hates being alone in back), and it's a pretty big hassle for us to push
the six-year old back over the seat to the back seat, and then buckle 
her in when we're sharing a C172 or similar aircraft.

(especially when trying to concentrate on entering the traffic pattern).

If that was an accurate quote of 91.107, I read nothing that precludes
sharing of seatbelts, as long as the belts are "properly secured about
that person", whatever that means.

Not that I would ever try anything like that - the airplanes I rent
are parked right in from of the control tower windows!  Just curious,
for what it's worth.  A good lecture would not be unexpected!





-- 
________________________________________________________________

Lee McGee
Silicon Graphics, Inc		"Simplicity, then add lightness"
lmcgee@sgi.com			   
PHONE (415) 390-2403	            -- William B. Stout --  
FAX   (415) 961-9584	              Ford Motor Company		
PAGE  (415) 807-2246          Formerly Stout Metal Airplane Company
From: rh@craycos.com (Robert Herndon)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Overloaded Cherokee Crash comments
Date: 7 Sep 92 20:10:23 GMT
Organization: Cray Computer Corporation

Hudson Leighton comments in <8361@orbit.cts.com>:

> I never belive what I read in a newspaper that involves anything technical

I'm sceptical of anything technical I hear from a non-techie, ever since
I got a message one day in high school from one of the secretaries.  The
message said not to come out to the computer center that afternoon, since
the computer was down with a BROKEN CARBURETOR [sic].

+rh
P.S., this happened in 1974, and I had a stack of Hollerith cards with me
that day.  [Just a clue to help you figure out what was actually broken.]
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: gaynier@elec.uq.oz.au (Ron Gaynier)
Subject: Gyro forces of prop?
Summary: Could the gyro forces of the prop cause a tail dragger to tip?
Keywords: Tail wheeler tip up
Organization: Prentice Centre, University of Queensland
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1992 04:21:45 GMT

I have a question for the net that I haven't seen addressed before
(maybe I haven't been paying attention).

At our gliding club recently I saw our tug (Pawnee 235) nearly have
a prop strike and I was wondering if the conservation of angular momentum
of the spinning prop had anything to do with it. Briefly here is what
happened.

				^
				|
				|
wind direction	------------>	|
				|
				|
		  direction of aeroplane (stationary on ground)

The tug had just refueled and was sitting on the ground, the pilot wanted
to turn the plane around 180 degrees and head in the other direction. He
first tried to turn to the right (down wind) but the weathercocking affect
of the wind prevented him from doing so. He decided instead to turn to the
left (into wind). He got it rolling by applying throttle and then applied 
full left rudder, full left wheel brake, and FULL back stick. The plane 
began a very tight pirouette around the left wheel with the wind now aiding 
this motion. The tail started to come off the ground and the prop nearly 
hit the ground, the pilot quickly cut the throttle and the tail fell back
down again. The pilot insists HE HAD FULL BACK STICK.

I was reminded of the old high school science demonstrations with gyroscopes
and began to wonder if the spinning prop being rapidly rotated in an arc to 
the left applied enough force (through the conservation of angular momentum) 
to force the nose down and the tail up. 

Is it possible? Any tail dragger pilots have a similar experience?

Ron "I'm not a power pilot, I don't pretend to know" Gaynier

Newsgroups: rec.aviation