HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: burke@tss.com (Jim Burke)
Subject: Troubleshooting a Headset
Reply-To: burke@tss.com (Jim Burke)
Organization: Teknekron Software Systems. Inc.
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 21:11:57 GMT

I have a David Clark headset with a "helicopter" plug.  So, I bought an airplane
adapter ($45 from Chief).  Well, now the mic doesn't work and I suspect
it isn't the mic, but rather the adapter plug.  Any ideas on how I can
determine whether the problem is the mic, the cord connections, or the 
adapter plug?  I don't have any special test equipment and I don't 
know anyone with an airplane that takes a helicopter plug (or anyone
with a helicopter).  I'd hate to buy another $45 plug just to find out it
isn't the plug.

By the way, anyone know why helicopters use the single plug?

-- 

	Jim Burke	"Life is uncertain - eat dessert first!"
	Teknekron Software Systems		... burke@tss.com
  	phone:(415) 617-2432			... uunet!tekbspa!burke
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: Sally.Guthrie@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Sally Guthrie)
Subject: "Singin' in the Plane"
Followup-To: guthries@utkvx.utk.edu 
Organization: Extended Bulletin Board Service
Distribution: usa
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 19:19:07 GMT

Ah, yes, it would be fun . . .
Sally

--
   The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
     North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
        Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
           internet:  bbs.oit.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: cosper@seq.uncwil.edu (Kit Cosper)
Subject: Re: Homebuilt Fly-by-Wire
Organization: Univ. of North Carolina @ Wilmington
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 21:28:52 GMT

dlm@unislc.uucp (Dennis McCurdy) writes:

>Interesting article in the October "Kit Planes" on the possibility of
>developing homebuilt fly-by-wire technology. Sounds like a fun concept,
>but there are valid doubts about it actually coming to pass. The article

>Does anyone know of any companies/groups/individuals who may be working
>on this technology? Thoughts?


	Wouldn't the Fly Baby be categorized as "fly by wire" ?
	I mean, take away those wires and that thing AIN'T gonna fly!

	Comments from the gentleman from the Sate of Boeing^H^H^H^H^H^H
	Washington?

	(Do I REALLY need the smiley's here?)

	Kit

-- 
   Kit Cosper                        cosper@seq.uncwil.edu         
   PP-ASEL-IA                        AMA 31022
Newsgroups: rec.aviation


Here's another data point:

I bought a pair of Hildago's sunglasses with the brown #3 lenses and found
them to be really great for flying (epsecially  when it was very bright--
as in the winter after a snow).

However, when I was getting checked out in the club's Mooney, I had trouble
seeing the gear down/locked indicator on the floor without removing my shades.
Maybe that's just a fault of Mooney's since the windows are so small. ;-)

Sandy
"No one is totally worthless,
 they can always be used as a bad example."
From: Charles.K.Scott@dartmouth.edu (Charles K. Scott)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Sea Hawker/Osprey (was Re: Glass Goose)
Date: 2 Sep 92 16:32:00 GMT
Article-I.D.: dartvax.1992Sep2.163200.25232
 <92244.173852IO20081@MAINE.MAINE.EDU>  
 <1992Sep1.173530.8633@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu>
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH

In article <1992Sep1.173530.8633@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu>
yurkon@rudolf.nscl.msu.edu (John Yurkon) writes:

> I have the same fear, but some friends pointed out that the cross
> setion of the tail section is quite substantial and should be quite
> strong.

I've read several reports on this airplane, and the designer went
through considerable trouble to put the engine back there and make the
tail strong enough to carry it.  The only question I have is why? 
What's the point?  Why not just put the engine on a pod on top of the
cabin instead of going through all that trouble to hang the engine from
the tail?  Is there some advantage?  I haven't been able to think of
one.  Can anyone explain this?

Corky Scott
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: kmcdonal@javelin.sim.es.com (Kevin McDonald)
Subject: Re: FYI--The Gay Pilots' Association
Organization: Evans & Sutherland Computer Corporation
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 16:10:48 GMT

hoey@husc8.harvard.edu (Steven Hoey) writes:


>GPA consists of a quarterly newsletter containing everything from member-
>submitted articles to our exclusive Cockpit personals section.  There are
                                     -------  
Hmmmm. I guess that about does it for that word.  I'm going to have to ride
in the "Pilot Compartment" from now on...
From: wsanders@ffeine.Sun.COM (Wiley Sanders)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Illuminations on visual air-route beacons
Date: 28 Aug 1992 16:32:51 GMT
Organization: Tradeshow Tech Support
NNTP-Posting-Host: ffeine.corp.sun.com

Also, there's one at Ukiah, California. I was surprised I didn't
notice this until a few weeks ago. Maybe it was recommissioned
lately?
-w

--
"What a waste it is to lose one's mind, or not to
have a mind as being wasteful. How true that is."     -Dan Quayle
From: drchambe@tekig5.pen.tek.com (Dennis Chamberlin)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Airplane pollution (was toxic waste)
Date: 4 Sep 92 18:16:28 GMT
Reply-To: drchambe@tekig5.pen.tek.com (Dennis Chamberlin)
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton,  OR.

In article <1992Sep3.205117.16240@news.arc.nasa.gov> doshay@ursa.arc.nasa.gov (David Doshay) writes:
>
>On my last trip to LA from San Jose (last weekend) I got 15 nautical (air) mpg
>(17 smpg). Just read a story about a kitplane (Velocity) that took a 5000 mile
>vacation and got 21 smpg at an average speed of 185 mph. 

I read a few years ago that small GA airplanes account for about 0.3% of
gasoline use in the US. 

These engines may emit more pollution per hour than a good auto engine, but
I wonder what a per-mile comparison would look like?
From: rob@cats.ucsc.edu (99708000)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Advice for Grand Canyon Trip
Date: 3 Sep 92 06:25:09 GMT
Organization: University of California; Santa Cruz
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucsco.ucsc.edu


Don't miss Zion NP while you are in the area (no flight restrictions--
but don't make an a** of yourself of course).
Lake Powell NRA and Canyonlands NP are definitely worth a visit if
you can head NE a couple hundred mi.

-- 

-Rob Strand

   From Bitnet: rob@ucscvm  From Internet: rob@ucscvm.ucsc.edu    
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: cstone@nodecg.ncc.telecomwa.oz.au (Charlie Stone 4915162)
Subject: Re: Assembling gliders
Organization: Network Computer Centre, Telecom, Perth
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 04:18:35 GMT

In article <1992Aug26.213522.2232@den.mmc.com> zwork@starfighter.den.mmc.com (Michael Corvin) writes:
>In article <1992Aug26.140558.3912@brtph560.bnr.ca>, rlarsen@bnr.ca (Richard Larsen P220) writes:
>... 
>|> He had forgotten to hookup the ailerons. How often is assembly a problem or cause of accidents? Has anyone ever had a wing come off?
>

I know of two instances where assembly problems caused accidents. Both
of them happened some years ago, but it could just as easily have been
yesterday (or tomorrow).  

One was a Grunau Baby, in which the tailplane 
was held on by fitting down over two bolts that stuck up from the back
of the fuselage.  You just aligned the fixing holes in the tailplane
over the bolts, pushed the tailplane into place and fixed it there 
by screwing a Nyloc nut on to each of the bolts.  Somehow, during the assembly
process, the nuts didnt get put on.  The Grunau got off the ground (aerotow)
and I believe up to about ten feet before the pilot corrected with a bit of 
down elevator and whammo off came the tailplane.  The aircraft was extensively
damaged, but the pilot was only slightly hurt.  The message is if you put an
aeroplane together, get some other qualified person to preflight it.

The other involved a Glasflugel Libelle.  This type uses a device called a
skewbar to translate a spanwise pushrod movement to the up and down of ailerons
in a minimum of space.  (also used in P51 Mustangs I hear) These devices are
handed - that is you can't swap them left to right, because the control sense
is reversed.  The Libelle was pulled to bits for an annual inspection (C of A)
and as you have no doubt guessed, the skewbars were installed in the wrong
sides on re assembly - or later by some person or persons unknown (during the 
         ^^^^^^^^^^^
24 hours between the inspector working on it and the test flight).  There was
a lot of legal activity surrounding this incident and as you might imagine
heaps of confusing bullshit distributed by all (guilty) parties involved.  This 
reversal of sense escaped everyone concerned, including the guy that did
the pre-flight and the test pilot.  On take off (aerotow) the glider took
off smoothly and went for some distance before the pilot needed to correct
with the ailerons (about 15 feet up I was told).  When he did, it stuck a 
wing into the deck and totalled the glider.  The pilot walked away from that
one too, a very lucky guy.  I think that the message here is ALWAYS consciously
check the controls for sense of movement before flying.

Charlie Stone
 *******************************************************************
  											 
      My next trick is impossible;  Therefore I shan't attempt it.  
  											 
     C.Stone.    							 
     Perth, Australia.						      	
 *******************************************************************
														
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: dls@genrad.com (Diana L. Syriac)
Subject: Re: Reasons to fly (was Number of U.S Pilots)
Organization: GenRad, Inc.
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 11:34:47 GMT

In article <ritter.715534681@claude> ritter@claude.ma30.bull.com (Roger Ritter) writes:
>dls@genrad.com (Diana L. Syriac) writes:
>
>>2.  Join the 99's and FLY to their meeting every month plus half a dozen 
>>    other "flyins", like the skiing trip, or the sleigh ride, or the Air
>>    Classic races, or.....
>
>They won't let me join.  Wrong sex, or something like that. Now I
>ask you, is that fair?? :-)

You can join as a 49 1/2 if your wife's a pilot too.  I know, that's not the
same.  And I agree, it is discriminatory.  However, it is an excellent 
organization and it's doing its darnedest to get more girls (and boys!) into
flying.  They have a neat elementary school "course"/lecture.

Diana


->Diana L. Syriac (Carlson) dls@genrad.com	Ham: KC1SP (Sweet Pea)      <-
->I'D RATHER BE FLYING!	P-ASEL, INST		CAP: 1LT, Freedom 690 Mobile<-
->AD ASTRA, PER ASPERA				Airplane: C-172 N6513E	    <-
->GenRad, MS/6, 300 Baker Ave, Concord, Mass.  01742  (508)369-4400 x2459   <-
From: jouvelot@alexandria.lcs.mit.edu (Pierre Jouvelot)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: FAR 91.205 ?
Date: 27 Aug 92 19:39:48 GMT
Reply-To: jouvelot@brokaw.lcs.mit.edu
Distribution: rec
Organization: MIT Lab for Computer Science


Hi,

I am wondering whether flying a non-turbo non-super charged engine with
a stuck MP gauge would break FAR 91.205.

My reading is no since this FAR requires an operating MP gauge for
"altitude engines" only.  An "altitude engine" is, according to FAR 1, a
"reciprocating aircraft engine having a rated takeoff power that is
reproducible from sea level to an established higher altitude".  I
assume that "higher" means here "strictly higher" :-)

Is my interpretation correct? Can anyone tell me why this only applies
to altitude engines?

Pierre
--
. CRI, Ecole des Mines, Paris (France): jouvelot@cri.ensmp.fr
. LCS, MIT, Cambridge (USA): jouvelot@lcs.mit.edu
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: reece@eco.twg.com (Reece R. Pollack)
Subject: Re: Locked on the Controls (was GLiding instruction)
Reply-To: reece@eco.twg.com (Reece R. Pollack)
Organization: The Wollongong Group (East Coast Operations)
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 19:59:55 GMT


In article <1992Aug24.204218.9950@microsoft.com>, t-dougf@microsoft.com (Douglas Fields) writes:
|>What about unlocking a CFI from the controls? The other day I was flying
|>over Puget sound near the canadian border over water at 6500, when all of
|>a sudden I see a floatplane on a perpendicular course not 20' above me
|>and perhaps 500' away. God knows why we didn't see him, but I let out a
|>suprised something (it was incoherent) and slammed on the controls to
|>dive out of the way. My instructors reaction was to stop looking out the
|>window and pull back just as hard on the controls. ARGH!
|>
|>So, after I regained my composure, about 500 feet down, and spoke
|>coherently that there was a seaplane not 20' above us, he said, "You
|>have a lot to learn about crew concept."

I know the feeling. On saturday, my CFII and I were climbing out of FDK
(Fredrick, Md) when he asked me if I saw a small helicopter that was also
climbing on a parallel course. I caught sight of it off to our right, and
we both watched it climb along side, gaining on us in altitude as we gained
on it from behind (ok, so 22C's a dog in climbs).

As we reached about 800 AGL, the helicopter suddenly cut left and headed
straight for us. I instinctively pushed the nose over to avoid a collision,
and a fraction of a second later Steve did the same, only he started pushing
where I'd stopped. I got a *really good* view of a stone quarry *above* the
nose, and yelled, "I've got it! Let go!" He did, and I recovered the dive at
about 500 AGL.

I think I now have my answer to how I'll react if an instructor or examiner
does something I think is hazardous to my health.

--
Reece R. Pollack
PP-ASEL -- Octopus Flying Club (based GAI)
Now, where did I leave that ASRS form???
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: jkf@Franz.COM (Sean Foderaro)
Subject: more on taxi clearances
Organization: Franz Inc., Berkeley, CA
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 18:43:39 GMT



 The Aug 1992 Callback makes an interesting point about taxi clearances.
Suppose you are parked on the west side of a field with a north/south
runway (18/36).  The taxiway parallel to this runway is on the east 
side of the field (so in order to take off you have to taxi across
18/36 at midfield to reach the taxiway).   36 is the active runway.  
Next to the runup area for 36 are the gas pumps.  

 You call up ground and ask to taxi to 36 and  are told 'taxi to 36'.
The person in the plane next to you then calls ground and asks to taxi to
the gas pumps and is told 'taxi to the gas pumps'.   

 You both are going to essentially the same part of the field following
the same path yet the rules state you must hold short of 18/36 yet 
the fellow going to the gas pumps can cross 18/36 without getting 
further permission.

 I guess that it makes sense in that the guy going to the gas pumps doesn't
necessarily know which runway is active yet if you are taxing to 36 you 
certainly know that it is an active runway.

 What this says that if you happen to be taxing behind someone and they
cross a runway without asking permission this doesn't mean that you can 
necessarily play follow the leader and also cross that runway.   

-sean





Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: RLPA80@waccvm.corp.mot.com (John.Reed Maffeo)
Subject: Re: hang glider variometers?
Organization: Motorola
Date: 28 Aug 1992 21:56:35 MST

------------------------- Original Article -------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: rlarsen@bnr.ca (Richard Larsen P220)
Subject: hang glider variometers?
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, BNR-RTP
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 17:35:41 GMT

>Does anyone know about wrist worn audio variometers used by hang gliderpilots.

There is a nice one made by Ball in Boulder, CO that is nice it beeps
while pressure drops and warbles when it rises. (or vica versa).
They are not real popular around here. Most HG pilots opt for more
sophisticated instruments. Is there anything in particular you want to
know?
From: ron@pilot.njin.net (Ron Natalie)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Flying saves money (sic)
Date: 27 Aug 92 20:07:47 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

> +  Auto maps last for *years*, and are free; airplane maps last 
>    somewhere between 8 and 26 weeks and can easily cost $0.01/mile.

Not around here, the way they hack the roads it only takes a few
maps before they are Obsolete for Navigation even with the development
in a recession! 

>+  It's not only unnecessary, but illegal, to use $600 headsets in 
>   your car.

You obviously don't have children :-)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: jeq@i88.isc.com (Jonathan E. Quist)
Subject: Re: Two planes collide over Santa Paula Airport
Organization: INTERACTIVE Systems Corporation, Naperville, IL
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 17:23:07 GMT

In article <Btx29D.37G@news.cso.uiuc.edu> rls@uihepa.hep.uiuc.edu writes:
>In article <6816@tekig7.PEN.TEK.COM>, drchambe@tekig5.pen.tek.com (Dennis
>Chamberlin) writes:
>
>>In article <1992Sep1.151634.16989@news.acns.nwu.edu> drmax@casbah.acns.nwu.edu
>(Marianna Max) writes:
>>>The news report stressed that the
>>>problem was the uncoordinated airport in a residential neighborhood.
>>
>>Sounds like another journalists' freshly minted contribution to our vocabulary.
>
>	Actually, this happens quite often in mass media news reports.  They,
>in their ignorance of aviation, point out that the field is uncontrolled,
>thinking that that is the cause.  You also get things like "the engine
>stallled" when the pilot reports that the aircraft stalled, and other such.

But of course, the real reason for this particular crash was that
neither of the pilots had filed a flight plan...


-- 
Jonathan E. Quist                              INTERACTIVE Systems Corporation
jeq@i88.isc.com  '71 CL450-K4 "Gleep", DoD #094        Naperville, IL
        There are many things a person should experience in a lifetime.
       Among them are an infant's first cry, and an infant's first laugh.
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: dbriggs@zia.aoc.nrao.edu (Daniel Briggs)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Blimp touch and goes...
Date: 27 Aug 92 06:21:26 GMT
Organization: National Radio Astronomy Observatory, Socorro NM

In article <1992Aug27.024115.9148@microsoft.com>
  joero@microsoft.com (Joe Robison) writes:
>> Javier Henderson, N6VBG         | Beat the 55mph limit (legally):
>> jhenderson@pomona.claremont.edu | Learn to fly powered aircraft!
>>                                                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>And the blimp isn't a powered aircraft?
>Besides, redline on my sailplane is over double that...

Hey, I can do pretty close to 200 mph flying nothing but my body.  Though
I'll admit that I do tend to wear some equipment to slow me down
(reasonably gently) at the end.  (BTW, some of the hotter canopies can do
about 60 mph on final, if you dive them at bit for some extra speed.)

-- 
| Daniel Briggs  (dbriggs@nrao.edu)                      |        USPA B-14993
| New Mexico Tech / National Radio Astronomy Observatory |            DoD #387
| P.O. Box O / Socorro, NM 87801   (505) 835-7391        |
Support the League for Programming Freedom  (info from league@prep.ai.mit.edu)
From: jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Finding toxic waste (Re: Flying for the Environment)
Keywords: ponds, plumes, piles, and stains
Date: 25 Aug 1992 17:56:03 GMT
Organization: UT Health Science Center Houston


John, while I agree with much of the substance of your article, I find the
tone more than a little offensive (and so, I suspect, will many others in this
group). Margaret is neither an "econazi" nor a "little twinket" (she's
defnintely _not_ little! :-), and using putdowns like the latter borders on
being sexist. This group is trying very hard not to be like rec.ham-radio was
during the no-code wars. Didn't you read the thread just concluded about the
level of flamage?

I agree that Margaret's political activities are only peripherally related to
flying, but there _is_ that relation. I don't think that articles eulogizing
the spotted owl are appropriate here, but articles describing turns about a
55-gallon drum are.
-- 
Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL | Never ascribe to malice that which can
jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu      | adequately be explained by stupidity.
  "Anything that an F-4 can outturn is not maneuverable." -- Mary Shafer
From: kerry@Ingres.COM (Kerry Kurasaki)
Subject: [IN]sensible students
Reply-To: kerry@Ingres.COM (Kerry Kurasaki)
Organization: Ask Computer Systems Inc., Ingres Division, Alameda CA 94501
Date: 31 Aug 92 19:45:32 GMT

In article <1992Aug31.173216.25902@cbnews.cb.att.com> tel@cbnews.cb.att.com (thomas.e.lester) writes:
>>>This brings up a question.  How does a CFI handle a student that does
>>>not seem "sensable."  Have any CFIs out there had a student that you
>>>had to say "You a not mature enough to be a pilot" ?
>>
>>Personally, if I had such a situation, I would tell the student exactly
>>why I will no longer fly with him and if the case was extreme, I would
>>pass the word to as many local flight schools as possible what my
>>experiences were.  
>
>	And open yourself to a horendous slander suit. I don't disagree 
>    with your  actions. I just wonder if the threat of slander or liable
>    would inhibit an instructor.  Especially if the student is well
>    heeled and arrogant enough to drag your butt thru the courts.
>
>    This seems like a case of "damned if you do......."

I am not an attorney, but I am a CFI...

I consider this a responsibility of being a CFI to evaluate pilots,
and counsel, as necessary, pilots that do not appear to have the
"maturity" to act as PIC.  And reporting them to the FAA/FSDO as
necessary if their actions do not improve over time.

w.r.t. slander and legal action.  Nothing will prevent anybody from
suing you for anything.  On the otherhand, being a CFI is an indication
that you have considerable expertise in the aviation field.  Certainly
much more so than the student pilot you might be having trouble with.
The FAA uses the terminology of the flight instructor in a role as a
"practical psychologist".  Indeed, on my checkride, the FAA inspector
stressed the importance of detecting psychological handicaps to safe
aviating.

If "passing the word" consists of describing your observations without
adding color, or using the phrase "in my opinion, Joe X is unsafe because
he did Y while I was in the right seat", then I don't see where there
is much of a case for slander.

In many cases, you can turn your back, walk away, and ignore things;
but to be a CFI, I feel that this is part of your duty to protect aviation
by informing the proper authorities if you think someone has a deep
psychological defect that prevents him/her from being a safe pilot.
Otherwise, you should not be instructing.

Kerry
From: geoff@peck.com (Geoff Peck)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Building your own (dirt) runway?
Date: 31 Aug 92 08:14:48 GMT
Organization: Geoffrey G. Peck, Consultant, San Jose CA

In article <1992Aug27.043437.3459@usho93.hou281.chevron.com>
hdnea@usho92.hou281.chevron.com (David Neal) writes:
> My good friend Chas Hunt and I are in the process of installing
> a runway lighting system on his farm outside of Austin, TX. [...]
> We got everything we needed [...] at Home Depot.

Ah, but does Home Depot have ILSes?  :-)

						Geoff
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: steinarb@idt.unit.no (Steinar Bang)
Subject: Last Crusade: Fighter planes (Was: Lost Arc:  Flying Wing)
Organization: Norwegian Institute of Technology, Trondheim, Norway
Distribution: rec
Date: 26 Aug 92 17:04:27

>>>>> donovanh@sptekwv1.wv.tek.com (Donovan Hammer) writes:

>> In the movie "Raiders of the Lost Arc" there was this WWII German
>> flying wing type airplane.
>> Anybody know anything about it?
>> Was it a Hollywood invention?

> That plane was a "Hollywood invention" although it did demonstrate
> that the person who came up with it had a feel for some of the
> exotic designs developed in Germany before and during WWII.

What about the long-nosed fighter planes following the car with Indy
and his dad in "Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade". Can't remember
ever having seen any real pictures of pre-WWII fighter planes looking
like that.

Definitely wasn't a Me-109 or a Fw-190.

- Steinar