HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mskuhn@immd4.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Markus Kuhn (Inf4 - hiwi))
Newsgroups: aus.net.directory.osi-ds
Subject: OSI-DS 12: Titles and T.61 characters
Date: 27 Aug 92 17:13:22 GMT


From osi-ds-12-05.txt:

   3.5  Naming human users

[...]
                           It is proposed that pilots should ignore the
   standard's recommendations on storing personal titles, and letters
   indicating academic and professional qualifications within the
   commonName attribute, as this overloads the commonName attribute.  A
   personalTitle attribute has already been specified in the COSINE and
   Internet Schema, and another attribute could be specified for
   information about qualifications.

There might be some problems with this approach in Germany. Here the title
Dr. (Doktor) is officially a part of the name, i.e. it is written on
passports, documents, ... Perhaps the situation is different in English
speaking countries. In addition in an academic environment in Germany,
you will nearly never see a professor's name without "Prof. Dr.".
So I suggest that some limited titels (e.g. Dr. and Prof. Dr. in Germany)
should be allowed in commonName RDNs, where regional regulations permit
this in the directory. Of course I agree completely if you propose
that full titles like "Prof. Dr.-ing. Dr. habil Dr. h.c. mult John
I. Likemyname-Donti" should NOT be the RDN. :-)

I think this should be managed a little bit more liberal in the final
version of OSI-DS 12, e.g. by referencing to national regulations.
The German pilot DSA Managers are planning to set up guidelines for
these problems in a few months, and it would be nice if this would be
possible without conflicts with OSI-DS 12.

Another problem with RDNs in Germany: Should T.61 characters be allowed
in RDNs? Many German names need them, but also many terminals don't
support them. As the world is still waiting for X.500(92) supporting
ISO 10646 characters, I'd prefer if T.61 strings were not allowed in
RDNs in the pilot, because this string type might soon become obsolete.

stud. inf. Markus
(DS-Manager h.c. mult. Uni-Erlangen ;-)

-- 
Markus Kuhn, Computer Science student -=-=- University of Erlangen, Germany
Internet: mskuhn@immd4.informatik.uni-erlangen.de  |  X.500 entry available
-A distributed system is one in which the failure of a computer you didn't-
-even know existed can render your own computer unusable. (Leslie Lamport)-
From: A.Waugh@mel.dit.csiro.au (Andrew Waugh)
Newsgroups: aus.net.directory.osi-ds
Subject: Organisations within organisations
Date: 1 Sep 92 02:27:28 GMT


We have had an interesting X.500 question asked of us, and I wondered
if anyone else has been asked (and answered!) the question.

The question was asked by a large company which has subsidiary
companies. Where should these subsidiary companies be placed in the
DIT and what object class should they be?

The subsidiary companies could be treated as ordinary Australian
companies and placed in the tree immediately underneath the
Australian entry. This is ideal for people outside the companies
querying the database who aren't aware that the companies are
actually subsidiary companies.

However, the companies are actually subsidiaries and should also
appear as part of the organisational structure under the owning
company's entry. This is because, internally to the company, the
subsiduaries are treated like any other organizationalUnits.

The obvious solution is to put organizational entries for the
subsiduaries underneath the organizational entry for the owning
company. If the subsiduary also appeared in the directory as a
company in its own right, one or other of the entries could be an
alias for the other.

However, the recommended structure rules (X.521, Annex B) clearly
don't intend organisational entries to be nested in this way. These
structure rules are not changed in the 1992 DIS.

We could ignore the recommended structure rules and allow nested
organisational entries. But this leaves open the possibility that
any DUAs purchased might _assume_ the recommended structuring rules
and not work at all, or fail in odd ways, when presented with this
tree structure.

We could make the internal entries be organizationalUnit entries and
make them aliases which point to the real organizational entries.
This is a horrible perversion of the idea of aliases, and I don't
know what DUAs would do with this sudden change of object classes.

Basically, it boils down to the problem that the organisational
structure assumed by the standard seems overly simplistic...

What do people think?

Andrew Waugh				  

------------------------------------------------------------------------
CSIRO Division of Information Technology            Open Systems Program
723 Swanston Street                               (phone) +61 3 282 2615
Carlton, VIC 3053, Australia                        (fax) +61 3 282 2600
                       email: ajw@mel.dit.csiro.au
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: mrp@ITD.Adelaide.EDU.AU (Mark Prior)
Newsgroups: aus.net.directory
Subject: Re: PRODiR AU level results
Date: 28 Aug 92 07:51:44 GMT
Organization: Information Technology Division, University of Adelaide

In article <8346@sirius.ucs.adelaide.edu.au>, Directory Administrator <camayoc@itd.adelaide.edu.au> writes:
|> PRODiR AU DSA results for Fri Aug 28 00:08:56 CST 1992
|>
Sorry about this the program that formats the stats has decided it
just wants to dump core. I am waiting for more info about this from
the UK (it's a binary only thing) but hopefully we will be back in
business next week.

Mark.
--
Mark Prior                              Phone : +61 8 228 5680
Information Technology Division         Telex : UNIVAD AA89141
University of Adelaide                  Fax   : +61 8 223 6245
GPO Box 498 Adelaide S.AUSTRALIA 5001   E-mail: mrp@ITD.Adelaide.EDU.AU
Newsgroups: aus.aviation
From: ccrdb@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Ray Belbin)
Subject: Dick Smith
Organization: James Cook University
Distribution: aus
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 92 01:11:21 GMT

	Dick certainly knows how to shake trees. Have you seen his
newsletter in this months AOPA? I agree that the dispersion of
frequencies for CTAFs was a little silly. I like the idea that we may be
able to fly up to 12500 soon without oxygen. His comparisons to New
Zealands traffic management were pushing credibility though, since NZ
has only 2 zones to really worry about.

	All his points bear consideration though, I for one will go for
his next Newsletter.

	AMATS has been an improvement, but why stop here?

					me again

  ======================================================================
      Ray Belbin (ccrdb@manta.jcu.edu.au)   |   Phone: 077 814 773
      TROPICAL Townsville , Queensland      |          077 814 545
                                            |   Fax:   077 796 371
    "Self-immolation beats masochism - ask me - the aus.aviation hog!"
  ======================================================================         
       
Newsgroups: aus.aviation
From: ccrdb@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Ray Belbin)
Subject: 172 down in QLD
Organization: James Cook University
Distribution: aus
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 92 04:13:25 GMT

At this stage from the radio news in Townsville, "a Cessna 172 was
enroute New Guinea to Cooktown when it came down near Princess Charlotte
Bay". The 172 was resting upside
 down at the crash site.
The search
was commenced after they were reported overdue.

I wonder if they were using FSU SAR or Private SAR?


======================================================================
   Ray Belbin (ccrdb@manta.jcu.edu.au)   |   Phone: 077 814 773
   TROPICAL Townsville , Queensland      |          077 814 545
                                         |   Fax:   077 796 371
======================================================================         

WHO SAYS I HOG AUS.AVIATION?
LET'S GET AUS.AVIATION MOVING!       
Newsgroups: aus.aviation
From: logier@cheops.qld.tne.oz.au (Rob Logie)
Subject: Re: Hire Rates (was: Re: Pilot Training here in Australia.)
Organization: Telecom Australia, TNE Computer Support Services
Distribution: aus
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 07:47:52 GMT

ccla@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Lee Askew) writes:

>>Average around here is $100/hr for a C150 wet with instructor.
>>$120/hr for a 172, $105 for a Beech Skipper.  My instructor is

Stuff deleted

>do 50' bombing runs over nudist beaches. its the only way to fly. 
>Its the only place to fly. 

I was always under the impression that there where some rules and regulations
that governed this sort of flying, not to metioned how the charter company
you got the plane from would react.  I would suggest, IMHO, that this
is not really the place to discuss that sort of behaviour if you wish not
to have your license suspended etc.


>Lee
>(Lima Echo Echo)
>BlueWater Aviation Townsville.

>     



-- 
Rob Logie                         | The opions expressed are mine alone and in
AOTC  ( A.C.N. 051 775 556 )      | no-way reflect the views or policies of the
TNE Computer Support Services     | Australian and Overseas Telecommunications
EMAIL: logier@cheops.qld.tne.oz.au| Corporation. "These are my opinions alone"
Newsgroups: aus.aviation
From: ccla@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Lee Askew)
Subject: Hire Rates (was:Re: Pilot Training here in Australia.)
Organization: James Cook University
Distribution: aus
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 01:48:32 GMT

Before I get flamed regarding a previous news item where, i mentioned
the following:

'do 50' bombing runs over nudist beaches. its the only way to fly.'

We dont really do this up here, as you would all already know this is
not legal. At least for a PPL, not to mention very dangerous.

Lee.
PA28-R,C172
Townsville - 45 minutes to Dunk in a bag(172).



Newsgroups: aus.aviation
From: ccrdb@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Ray Belbin)
Subject: Re: Car Engines
Organization: James Cook University
Distribution: aus
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 06:32:42 GMT




>ccrdb@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Ray Belbin) writes:

>>Possibilities....

>>	There has been increasing progress being made with regard to the
>>use of car engines in aircraft. Shock! Horror! Yes I know that the CAA
>>released an article about a bad experience with converting a V-6 car
>>engine for use in a glider tug in the last year. But the big problem
>>here was the cruddy 2:1 reduction unit supplied with the engine from the
>>US. 

>Reduction certainly is a potential problem.

>>	Well, never mind the yanks! In good old oz a guy from Victoria
>>has been making reduction units for 80 hp Suburu engines which are
>>selling like wildfire in Uncle Sam! This is the AMAX Suburu conversion.
>>The engine is, I believe, a low hours one from Japan, converted by AMAX
>>in oz.


>>	My question to the net is, is there anybody out there who will
>>now buy a new 150 horse lycoming ($25000) or second hand lyc (14000)
>>instead of 150 horse Suburu to re-engine their plane?

>There are other problems apart from reduction.  I'd want dual electrics like
>a lyc and I would be concerned that a car engine is likely to be operated in
>a quite different part of its performance envelope if it is used in a plane.
>Just think how short-lived even a heavily modified car racing engine is.

>John Schmidt


YEP! In US there is a company making twin-plug heads for 150 hp Suby
Liberty/Legacy motors. I'm not sure if it is planned or used in the
aussie version.

Whereas with lycoming donks you have an overhaul at 2000 hrs, the CAA
envisage overhauls of car motors would be 1000 hours (since the car
engine has twice the revs). The huge difference is that lyc might cost
$10 000 for the overhaul, but with Suby, why not put in a new engine for
$5000 at every second overhaul?

Performance, maybe a person could use 65% most of the time. Or, use a
V-6 (200-230hp) and use at 50% - should fix longevity problems.

					Ray
					(definely doing wetland tour
Cooinda and camping and 4-wheel driving in Kakadu shortly)

  ======================================================================
      Ray Belbin (ccrdb@manta.jcu.edu.au)   |   Phone: 077 814 773
      TROPICAL Townsville , Queensland      |          077 814 545
                                            |   Fax:   077 796 371
    "Self-immolation beats masochism - ask me - the aus.aviation hog!"
  ======================================================================         
       
Newsgroups: aus.aviation
From: int493b@mdw026.cc.monash.edu.au (Mr R.T. O'Sullivan)
Subject:  Para and hang gliding
Organization: Monash University
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 03:45:49 GMT

Keywords: gliding


Hi there, I was just wondering if there was anyone out there interested in paragliding or even hangliding. I f there is, I would be interested in having a chat..    Subjects: good spots, learning to fly, costs involved, training , basically anything.  I'm doing a course this september ( paragliding) 
Please no hangliding vs para gliding debates etc//

The Mongoose.





Newsgroups: aus.aviation
From: ednschmi@kraken.itc.gu.edu.au (John Schmidt)
Subject: Re: Dick Smith
Organization: ITC, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia
Distribution: aus
Date: 27 Aug 92 02:02:30 GMT

ccrdb@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Ray Belbin) writes:

>	Dick certainly knows how to shake trees. Have you seen his
>newsletter in this months AOPA? I agree that the dispersion of
>frequencies for CTAFs was a little silly. I like the idea that we may be
>able to fly up to 12500 soon without oxygen. His comparisons to New
>Zealands traffic management were pushing credibility though, since NZ
>has only 2 zones to really worry about.

>	All his points bear consideration though, I for one will go for
>his next Newsletter.

>	AMATS has been an improvement, but why stop here?

>					me again

I agree.  Uncontroversial it was NOT!!! Nevertheless very interesting.

John Schmidt

Newsgroups: aus.aviation
From: ccrdb@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Ray Belbin)
Subject: Thruster or Mooney 205? (Again!)
Organization: James Cook University
Distribution: aus
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 92 01:55:37 GMT


I'll try it again...


I became aware lately of an attempt to fly an aircraft non-stop around
Australia. It was a Mooney 205 being fitted with long range tanks for 60
hours endurance. But then I saw an article on TV News talking about a
non-stop flight around the country showing a Gemini Thruster taxiing to
a runway in Tamworth. Does anybody know anything of this?


======================================================================
   Ray Belbin (ccrdb@manta.jcu.edu.au)   |   Phone: 077 814 773
   TROPICAL Townsville , Queensland      |          077 814 545
                                         |   Fax:   077 796 371
======================================================================
From: mhayes@mips.com (Mike Hayes)
Newsgroups: aus.aviation
Subject: Re: Sydney stories
Date: 28 Aug 92 00:42:43 GMT
Distribution: aus
Organization: MIPS Computer Systems, Sunnyvale, California
NNTP-Posting-Host: bismarck.mips.com

Greg Rose writes:

>It's good to be nice to the briefers, as you were above, but an
>acceptable answer is "it's OCTA".

Yeah, I do believe in being nice to them, especially at this early
stage - at least it's free !

>In a Zone, he can tell you to do whatever he wants to. I can't imagine
>why he seems to think that he is restricted to departing off a leg of
>the circuit. Anyway, a left circuit and departure overhead *IS*
>departing from a leg of the circuit!

>In a nutshell, the Tower controller was either green, or pushy.

That's pretty much what I reckon - probably the former ...

> I wouldn't offer them so many alternatives next time; unless he says
>otherwise departing overhead off downwind is what you'd do anyway,
>isn't it?

I agree, but I guarantee that's not what the tower would be expecting
me to do, and so I'm still not sure that I'd want to push it.
Maybe I'll ring BK TWR and ask them ... stand by 1
-- 
Mike Hayes       Email: mhayes@mips.com      Voice: (+612)412-0089
From: u8843619@csdvax.csd.unsw.edu.au
Newsgroups: aus.aviation
Subject: Flying in Guam
Date: 29 Aug 92 00:04:04 +1000
Organization: University of New South Wales




I plan to go to Guam, Micronesia in January. I hold an Australian 
Commercial Pilot's Licence and I plan to hire a plan and have a look
around. Has anyone had experience in flying in Guam ? I would be interested
in any information you might have ( eg weather, cost, legal requirements, 
things to do and see, types of planes available, etc).

I have also posted this to rec.aviation. 

Thanks in advance,


Derek Chung
Faculty of Law
University of New South Wales
Kensington, Australia
Newsgroups: aus.aviation
From: ccrdb@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Ray Belbin)
Subject: "But when I get 7 nm .."
Organization: James Cook University
Distribution: aus
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 92 23:32:22 GMT


	I'm certainly very much in favour of our new AMATS system, with
its CTAFs, MTAFs and better simplified CTR zone entry and departure
procedures. Just the same , the use of radio in this country, I feel ,
is on it's way the land of confusion. I'm not merely talking about what
to say when the mike is keyed , but whether to use the radio at all.

	On the one hand the IFR pilots are (rightfully) whinging about
VFRs not responding to broadcasts, whilst on the other, Dick Smith and
that Yuppie aviation mag journalist (the one wearing expensive leather
jacket, a bald head, Ray-bans, and gets his Beechcraft Duchess flying for
free) are telling us to shut up!

	I agree that we ought to avoid, as much as possible, yapping to
FSU regarding items that can easily be done in flight preparation .
These are TAFs and other forecasts, QNH and NOTAMS which should be done
by phone and encompass most contingencies (like alternates).

	However, general broadcasting of intentions is an area of radio
usage that seems to be becoming (to me anyway) very hazy. For example, I
understand the procedure for CTAF to be that a call inbound should be
made 'somewhere' before 5nm (if below 3000') . But when I get to 7 nm ,
and go to change frequency, I imagine a King Air pilot at 5nm in
full frontal attack position, reaching for his frequency selection from
CTAF to area. Does anyone else feel like that?

	I find myself adopting a most cumbersome procedure of
broadcasting my inbound intentions on both area and CTAF/MTAF.

On area frequency.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
....  All Stations Charters Towers, HSJ, Cessna 182, 6 miles to the
northwest, inbound at 2500, ETA five zero .... <pause, listen> ... All
stations Charters Towers , HSJ switching to 126.7 ...
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Then the same call on CTAF. Anyone else do it like that?
Maybe someone can set me straight, or am I covered in pertol and about
to get torched?

					Ray Belbin
					THE AUS.AVIATION PIG
					piddly 200 hrs
					Homebuilder - Vans RV6A



Newsgroups: aus.aviation
From: Jon.Biddell@unsw.edu.au (Jon Biddell)
Subject: Re: Pilot Training here in Australia.
Organization: University of NSW
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 13:42:04 GMT

In article <511500003@peg.pegasus.oz.au> ilanet@peg.pegasus.oz.au writes:
>From: ilanet@peg.pegasus.oz.au
>Subject: Re: Pilot Training here in Australia.
>Date: 25 Aug 92 21:07:00 GMT


>Having been reading this conference for a while but not contributing,
>I thought that Philip was a good person to reply to.

>Regarding places to fly to from Sydney .. up the coast at 500' above
>sea level to Taree is very pleasant and pax normally love it.

>Regarding place to fly from at Bankstown .. I think that Whitworth 
>Aviation is one of the best .. but agree with one of the respondents
>the Clamback and Hennessy are pretty good.


I fully agree that Whitworth are good, in fact a friend and I (as well as 
many others from here) do ALL our flying with them...

As for C&H, I wouldn't piss on them if they were on fire - the only 
instructors I've dealt with there are arrogant, gung-ho pigs, and the 
aircraft are not in what I would call "tip top" condition (unlike Whitworth'
s)..

Just my $0.02 worth, anyway.

Jon

P.S. If anyone is coming to Sydney and wants a scenic tour or a joy flight, 
I have a commercial pilot friend who is looking for the hours, and the rates 
are v. reasonable.  Drop me email here..



 __^__                                                              __^__
( ___ )------------------------------------------------------------( ___ )
 | / | Jon Biddell              Email: Jon.Biddell@unsw.EDU.AU      | \ |
 | / | PC Consultant            Snail: P.O. Box 1 KENSINGTON  2033  | \ |
 | / | University of NSW        Voice    : +61-2-697-2929           | \ |
 | / | Sydney, NSW, Oz          Fax      : +61-2-662-2057           | \ |
 | / | DoD #: 577               VoiceMail: +61-2-962 0080           | \ |
 | / |--------------------------------------------------------------| \ |
 | / | Quote of the week...                                         | \ |
 |___|           Quote deleted do to lack of creativity !!!         |___|
(_____)------------------------------------------------------------(_____)
   ^                                                                  ^
Newsgroups: aus.aviation
From: ednschmi@kraken.itc.gu.edu.au (John Schmidt)
Subject: Re: Car Engines in Planes
Organization: ITC, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia
Distribution: aus
Date: 26 Aug 92 04:40:18 GMT

ccrdb@marlin.jcu.edu.au (Ray Belbin) writes:

>Possibilities....

>	There has been increasing progress being made with regard to the
>use of car engines in aircraft. Shock! Horror! Yes I know that the CAA
>released an article about a bad experience with converting a V-6 car
>engine for use in a glider tug in the last year. But the big problem
>here was the cruddy 2:1 reduction unit supplied with the engine from the
>US. 

Reduction certainly is a potential problem.

>	Well, never mind the yanks! In good old oz a guy from Victoria
>has been making reduction units for 80 hp Suburu engines which are
>selling like wildfire in Uncle Sam! This is the AMAX Suburu conversion.
>The engine is, I believe, a low hours one from Japan, converted by AMAX
>in oz.

>	In my area here, there are 3 gyro-copters using the AMAX units.
>One of these guys originally installed the 100 horse Continental from a
>Cessna 150 and had problems developing enough power for his machine.
>Then he put in the 80 horse AMAX conversion and says he gets far greater
>performance than the Continental.

>	So what - who wants an 80 hp donk? Well, I am led to believe
>that AMAX are well into working on a 150hp Suburu Legacy conversion,
>possibly to retail for around $5000 (includes reduction unit). 

If this works, it could be interesting.

>	My question to the net is, is there anybody out there who will
>now buy a new 150 horse lycoming ($25000) or second hand lyc (14000)
>instead of 150 horse Suburu to re-engine their plane?

There are other problems apart from reduction.  I'd want dual electrics like
a lyc and I would be concerned that a car engine is likely to be operated in
a quite different part of its performance envelope if it is used in a plane.
Just think how short-lived even a heavily modified car racing engine is.

John Schmidt

Newsgroups: aus.aviation