HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: myers@ut-emx.uucp (Eric Myers)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: emergency AD 92-15-16 Any one else?
Date: 24 Jul 92 21:51:52 GMT
Organization: Center for Relativity, University of Texas

In article <1992Jul21.190902.2000@cfctech.cfc.com> joel@cfctech.cfc.com (Joel Lessenberry) writes:
>
>	I just received Emergency AD 92-15-16 in the mail which
>states that I cannot fly my plane until I examine the carb 
>float and prove that it was not manufactured in 10/91.
>
>	Since my plane is 15 years old, and since I have owned 
>it since 10/91, and since I know that no work has been done on
>the carb.... can I simply state so in the log???

  We just got this in the mail today, so I called our mechanic.  Since
we had the carb rebuilt recently I was concerned, but the floats were
not replaced.

  The AD applied only to carb floats with a specific part number and
the date stamp "10 91".  If you know you don't have this particular
float in place (e.g. no engine work before 10/91) then you don't need
to worry about it, it does not apply to you.  

  The AD will be noted in our engine logs, but marked "Not Applicable".

-- 
Eric Myers	"If God had intended for man to fly 
			He would have given us the brains to build airplanes."
Center for Relativity, Department of Physics, University of Texas at Austin
myers@emx.utexas.edu  |   myers@utaphy.bitnet   |   myers@ut-emx.UUCP
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: davea@col.hp.com (Dave Allen)
Subject: Re: "remain clear of the ARSA..."
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 21:55:58 GMT
Organization: HP Colorado Springs Division

glenb@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com (Glen Baker) writes:
>    "36Z Monterey Approach remain clear of the ARSA"
>  Right. Now I'm faced with some real nifty alternatives:
>    1) Fly down the valley, skirt the ARSA by hugging the hills, fly 
>       under the marine layer, out to sea, and wait for Approach to pull 
>       their heads out.
>    2) Turn around within the confines of the valley, below 2500 MSL ...
>    3) "Monterey Approach 36Z. Say date. Say time. Say initials."
>  What's the "right" thing to do??

#3 sounds extreme. You don't know how busy he/she is and the more it
stays friendly and cooperative the better off we all are. How about...
	4) Ask how long a delay to expect.
That will help you make your best choice from your remaining options.

dave allen - Fly because you love it.
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: exumfs@exu.ericsson.se (Mark Steph, XT/DO, x7534)
Subject: Non-owner AD compliance (was: Ramp checks...)
Reply-To: exumfs@exu.ericsson.se
Organization: Ericsson Network Systems
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 15:24:53 GMT

In article 8728@ryn.mro4.dec.com, bluejay@feathr.enet.dec.com (Bluejay Adametz) writes:
>
>The fact of the matter is that in some cases it's just plain impossible to
>determine AD status. Heck, there could be an AD sitting in a mail sack 
>downtown right now that renders my airplane unairworthy, but until the 
>Post Office does it's thing, there's no way I can know that.  And since ADs
>are only sent to the registered owners, the best a renter can generally do
>is to look at the logs periodically to see that things are being kept up
>to date in general and maybe keep an eye on various magazines and such 
>for high-publicity ADs.
>
>It all goes something like this:
>
>Operators/owners are responsible for getting the aircraft to a mechanic.
>Mechanics are responsible for performing and documenting AD compliance.
>Operators/owners are responsible for seeing that AD compliance is documented.
>Pilots are responsible for determining that ADs have been done.
>
>
>						- Bluejay Adametz
>						  Owner/operator: AA-5B N45210
>						  A&(almost)P
>						  CFII

It has been my opinion for a long time that it is impossible to fly
and do it legally. There is such a mass of intertwined FARs governing
pilots, mechanics, FBOs, etc. that I don't think its possible to 
taxi out, take off, go once around the pattern and land without
breaking at least one FAR.

If you want to fly cross country IFR, you'll probably break 20 or 30.
---
Mark Steph               | Leave out the fiction / The fact is:
exumfs@exu.ericsson.se   | This friction, Will only be worn by persistance
(yes, .se *is* in Texas) | Leave out conditions--Courageous convictions,
PO Box 833875, MS L-05   | Will drag the dream into existence
Richardson, TX 75083     |      -Neil Peart, "Vital Signs"

Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: dwcook@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (David Walter Cook)
Subject: Traffic around Oshkosh...
Followup-To: dwcook@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Originator: dwcook@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Organization: Computing Services Division, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 18:09:57 GMT

    I flew a cross country yesterday, (7/27), from Mitchell field, Milwaukee
    to Truax field, Madison, to Fond Du Lac County airport. It was a great
    day for flying in southeastern Wisconsin, with visability at 20 miles.
    The flight went great until I reached Fond Du Lac, (FLD). I hailed FLD 
    unicom to get an airport advisory. A very kind lady relayed the current
    winds and told me the active runway was 27. I announced my intentions to
    any traffic in the area and entered the pattern at midfield downwind.
    I received no transmissions of any other traffic in the FLD pattern or
    approaching the field. I noticed a lot of traffic to the north near 
    Oshkosh but none in the immediate area, (neither did my instructor).
    I turned base and then final using the radio at the appropriate times.
    There was a bit of a crosswind on final so I was concentrating on making
    a good landing for my instructor. Out of nowhere comes this Skylane
    landing on 36!! I never heard anyone announce themselves entering the
    pattern much less landing on the wrong runway!! It scared the hell out
    of me and I just feel lucky we did not collide. So watch out AROUND
    Oshkosh as well as in Oshkosh! Also, if you see that renegade Skylane
    make sure to keep him in front of you!  

    P.S.  I am a 35 hour student pilot who will be taking his
	  practical test in the next few weeks so if you have
	  ANY advice please mail it to me!!

	  Thank You ,

	  D. Walter Cook  (a.k.a.  Layla)
From: ron@pilot.njin.net (Ron Natalie)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: "remain clear of the ARSA..."
Date: 23 Jul 92 16:49:16 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

I buy the, temporary remain clear while we figure out where you
are and dig up a squawk code for you, but the "We can't let you
in because we can't handle it" is explicitly contrary to what
ARSA's are all about.  If these things are so busy that they
need that sort of protection then they should be TCA's.  I guess
I still have a bad taste in my mouth when the Denver TCA never
let VFR traffic in.

-Ron
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: masys@nlm.nih.gov (Dr. Daniel R. Masys)
Subject: Re: Looking for F-4 Story
Organization: National Library of Medicine
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 92 15:40:56 GMT

In article <9032@travis.csd.harris.com> gerry@hcx1.ssd.csd.harris.com (Gerry Baumgartner) writes:
>[...the F-4]
>aircraft landed on its belly and started swerving on the runway.  The pilot, 
>sensing the situation applied full afterburner and became airborne again.

Don't know about this belly landing of an F-4, but I have a Kodachrome
slide of an F-4 sliding down a runway on a brilliant "cushion" of yellow
flame as a result of a gear up landing.  Not just any F-4, however, this
is one of the Blue Angels caught at the end of the show in a forget-me-
gear!  I'm told that the pilot had his hand on the throttles when the
thing slammed to the pavement, and he involuntarily pushed them full
forward.  He punched out successfully, and the F-4 veered off the
runway and burned up a mile or so of cornfields before being destroyed;
in spite of full throttle in didn't become airborne again.

I got this picture from another Navy doc, who was the Blue Angels flight
surgeon at the time.  He had an 11 x 14 enlargement of it hanging on his
office wall, with a caption something like "Blue Angels fly approaches
to minimums". :-)

Dan Masys
masys@nlm.nih.gov


Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: hanlon@ariel.lerc.nasa.gov (Casey Hanlon (SVER))
Subject: emergency AD 92-15-16
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: NASA Lewis Research Center
Date: 22 Jul 1992 11:15 EST  

I received the AD in the mail two days ago.  Now get this, I fly behind two
IO 470's.  What's a carb float?  In this age of computerized records, one
would think that the FAA could restrict their mailings to only those owners
that might possibly be affected.

Casey Hanlon  ("Sometimes its better to remain silent and thought a fool
                than to open your mouth and remove all doubt"----Mark Twain)

Xref: sparky rec.aviation:12614 eunet.aviation:8
From: andy@raft.spider.co.uk (Andy Davis)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation,eunet.aviation
Subject: Re: Airline Safety Review
Date: 29 Jul 92 17:21:21 GMT
Reply-To: andy@raft.spider.co.uk (Andy Davis)
Organization: Spider Systems Limited, Edinburgh, UK.

Jonathan Bowen comments on the Airline Safety Review, and the suggestion
that human factors dominate - followed up by the anecdote about autopilot
mismanagement commanding an excessive rate of descent.  The article is a
good one for raw data.

The anecdote is striking though, because it is the complexity, and indirect
effect of modern systems which is baffling the mere mortals "in command".
If the pilot had been flying the aircraft "conventionaly" toward an
approach (even using an old-fashioned type of autopilot) it is pretty hard
to mistakenly stuff the nose down to a 3000fpm dive without noticing.
If however that descent is commanded by typing the request into a computer
and then hitting the "DO IT" button, it would take quite a bit of lateral
thinking on the part of the crew to ever work out what had happened, as the
aircraft made its terminal dive.

Unfortunately, this is a well known problem to computer people, usually
described as "Garbage In => Garbage Out", and the solution is also well
known - data entry validation.  The snag is that an aircraft flight deck
is not the place to be cluttered with computers saying "Are you sure?"
to every command input.  An even more insidious implication is that the
computer only has to say "are you sure?" to the commands which seem
implausible or dangerous to it - now, the machine is making decisions to
question things on a basis which is non-obvious to the pilot.

The problem is that the pilot does not have inbuilt direct links between
the action (typing something) and the result (a descent).  That is, a control
column is easy to learn - the harder you push, the more you go down.  Using
a keyboard to type an amount to descend by has no obvious mental model.

I don't think I have an answer though - perhaps it is because I am a
computer engineer by profession, and know how badly they can screw you up,
that I don't trust them to fly my airplane!

Andy
From: john@newave.mn.org (John A. Weeks III)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: QANTAS - U.S. Aircraft Carrier warnings.
Date: 22 Jul 92 15:28:33 GMT
Organization: Newave Communications, Ltd, Lake Wobegon, MN

In article <1992Jul21.134119.2431@cbnewsm.cb.att.com> wolit@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (Jan Wolitzky) writes:
> > The F-14 can also carry dumb bombs.  Perhaps the Iranian pilots would
> > get lucky that day.  And don't discount the gun...

> I'm also not aware of any use of the F-14 to deliver iron bombs, nor of any
> training, etc., for such.

Since the A-12 has been cancelled, and the A-6 airframes are getting quite old,
the Navy is without a long-term heavy bomber/attack plane.  As a contingency,
the Navy is working on a plan to use the F-14 Tomcat as a bomber/attack plane.
They have designed under body and under wing bomb racks and have been running
bombing trials for the past year.  According to one of the pilots, the F-14
makes an excellent attack plane because it is so stable at low altitudes,
very fast, and it carries a large bomb load.  The Navy had one of the test
planes on static display at the McConnel AFB airshow earlier this year.

> And while I acknowledged the threat of cannon fire, you have to
> get really close and act really hostile for that (and usually you have
> to make multiple passes, as in the case of Liberty), which would
> have allowed plenty of time for Vincennes safely to make a positive
> identification before firing missiles.

What if the pilot was on a one-way mission?  I'm sure that a Tomcat crashing
into a ship would cause dramatic damage.  It would probably be nearly
impossible to stop a Tomcat diving on a target from 20,000 feet.  An Airbus
crashing into a ship would probably also cause quite a bit of damage.  When
religion gets mixed up with war, one cannot predict what someone else might
do.

-john-

-- 
==============================================================================
John A. Weeks III		(612) 942-6969		    john@newave.mn.org
Newave Communications, Ltd.			    ..!uunet!tcnet!newave!john
From: M21208@mwvm.mitre.org
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: "remain clear of the ARSA..."
Date: 28 Jul 92 07:54:22 GMT
Organization: The MITRE Corporation, McLean VA 22102

In article <Jul.27.09.49.45.1992.5685@pilot.njin.net>
ron@pilot.njin.net (Ron Natalie) writes:
 
>Unless, you're VFR.  Then you get no guarantee of any advisories
>or separation in ARSA's.  They exist purely for IFR handling.  In
>this resepect they're worse than TRSA's which at least provided
>advisories between PARTICIPATING VFR traffic.  In ARSA's every
>body must PARTICIPATE but only the IFR people are protected.
 
 
Uh, bullhocky.
 
From the ATC handbook, paragraph 7-101:
 
a) ARSA services include the following:
  (1)  Sequencing of all aircraft to the primary airport.
  (2)  Standard IFR services to IFR aircraft.
  (3)  Separation, traffic advisories, and safety alerts between IFR and VFR
       aircraft.
  (4)  Mandatory traffic advisories and safety alerts between VFR aircraft.
b)  Provide ARSA services to all aircraft operating within the ARSA.
c)  Provide ARSA services to all participating aircraft in the outer area.
d)  Aircraft should not normally be held.  However, if holding is necessary,
    inform the pilot of the expected length of delay.
 
There are also some separation standards included that apply between IFR and
VFR aircraft.  Between VFR aircraft basically all the controller has to do
is keep them from hitting, which I suspect is all you want anyway.
 
Scott
 
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: kerry@Ingres.COM (Kerry Kurasaki)
Subject: Re: Stupid Pilot Trick Awards
Reply-To: kerry@Ingres.COM (Kerry Kurasaki)
Organization: Ask Computer Systems Inc., Ingres Division, Alameda CA 94501
Date: 30 Jul 92 23:58:46 GMT

[Stupid Pilot Trick Awards]
>
>      I don't want to go into a dissertation here, but I believe there is a
>good reason why the NTSB does not assign blame.  They only collect and
>interpret the FACTS!

About 5 years ago, I heard a story of some biz jet that crashed due
to a thrust reverser that deployed [assymetrically] in-flight.  With
the right (or left) one hanging out, the plane was thought to be
uncontrollable.

Now comes the NTSB to test this hypothesis.  They get another biz jet
(same make and model) and arrange to have it modified so that a
thrust reverser can be deployed assymetrically in-flight.  They fly
the same profile, and trigger the device.

To me, this sounds exactly like the joke of the software engineer
whose brakes fail but somehow manages to stop his car from going off
a 3000 foot cliff.  What does he say?  "Lessee, let's try this again
and see if the same thing happens!"

As it turns out, the NTSB concluded that while a contributing factor,
the aircraft was contollable even with the reverser deployed.  Maybe
they know what they're doing?????
From: verhulst@raven.aosg.gsf.dec.com
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Gee Bee R2 was Re: Airshow Report
Date: 29 Jul 92 22:04:10 GMT
Organization: AOSG

>OK, so how does the average airplane, not designed for the ragged edge as the
>Gee Bee was, avoid an aileron-induced stall of the wing with the aileron down
>at high angles of attack? The description would seem to apply to any aircraft
>at high alpha.

Well, aileron induced stall can be a problem with many airplanes, which is
why we're all taught to NOT attempt to pick up a dropping wing with the
ailerons when we're close to stall.  An airplane can be designed to minimize
this "feature" by washing out the wintips.  Washout is the technique of twisting
the wing so that the tip is flying at a lower angle of attack than the root
of the wing.  This lets the wing roots stall first and tips last - ensuring 
aileron authority 'till the last moment.  If wanna see some real washout,
look at a head-on picture of the Concorde - better yet, the real thing.

Tony V.
From: brecher@pyramid.unr.edu (Steve Brecher)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Controlled airspace
Date: 30 Jul 92 05:09:26 GMT
Reply-To: brecher@pyramid.unr.edu (Steve Brecher)
Organization: still disorganized in Reno, NV

In <1992Jul28.171604.6806@crash.cts.com>, dm@pnet01.cts.com (Dan Melson)
writes:

> ron@pilot.njin.net (Ron Natalie) writes:
> >"in wich air traffic control is exercised" means anytime they
> >tell you to do something (i.e. wherever you may be if you got
> >the radio on and they know who you are).  The point of ARSA's
> >(and ATA's for that matter) is to require you to have the radio
> >on.  ATA's are not controlled airspace (yet).
> 
> I advise you to thoroughly read your FARs.  Both ATAs and Control Zones *are*
> controlled airspace.  Controlled airspace includes all sorts of things 
besides
> TCAs and ARSAs - The Continental Control Area and Positive Control Airspace,
> ATAs, Control Zones, airspace on or within four miles of Victor airways,
> etcetera.

The original poster is correct w/r ATAs.  More precisely, ATAs per se are
neither controlled airspace nor uncontrolled airspace, in the same sense
that a peach is neither fish nor fowl.  Dan, if you have a specific FAR
citation w/r ATAs being controlled airspace, please provide.  If an ATA is
in the middle of nowhere with no form of controlled airspace (CZ, ARSA,
etc.) encompassing it, then the VFR pilot is not subject to controlled
airspace weather requirements.  ATC is not required to provide separation
of aircraft in an ATA, except on the ground and with respect to spacing
and sequencing of arrivals and departures; there is no separation
requirement within ATA airspace in general [ATC Handbook, 7110.65G, 3-9,
3-10.]

--
brecher@pyramid.cs.unr.edu (Steve Brecher)

Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: jeq@i88.isc.com (Jonathan E. Quist)
Subject: Re: Re: Ramp checks--unreasonable search
Organization: INTERACTIVE Systems Corporation, Naperville, IL
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 16:45:56 GMT

In article <2540038@hp-vcd.vcd.hp.com> schinner@hp-vcd.vcd.hp.com (Jim Schinnerer) writes:
>
>to be shipping.  So, from what the majority of the posters to this thread are
>saying is that if I make the flight anyway, I bust an FAR.  The ARSA hasn't
>changed, there isn't any new airspace, but there is a new frequency down
>at McMinnville - who cares.
>
>Somehow, I am not yet convinced...

The most convincing story I ever heard was at the FAA tent at OSH some
years back.  The guy was scud running between the south side of Chicago
and Indianapolis, in marginal VFR, with an old chart.  The story went
that the flight was uneventful, until he came face to face with
the biggest radio transmitter tower he'd ever seen, 1/4 mile directly in
front of him.  He was flying slightly below the level of the
topmost guy wire attachment.
-- 
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: BCLEWIS@LSTC2VM.stortek.com (Brian Lewis)
Subject: Re: War story and story request
Organization: StorageTek SW Engineering
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 18:52:35 GMT

I had a partial power loss in a Centurion on a trip from Tallahassee to
Columbus, Ohio.  My instructor's philosophy on fuel management was to
burn an hour from the left tank, an hour from the right, then to run the
left one dry.  In theory, you would know how much fuel (time) is left in
the right tank.
 
Apparently the engine was shock-cooled in the time between running the
left tank dry and switching to the right one.  As I recall, it cracked
two cylinders.  We had enough power to make it the remaining 60 miles
home, but I don't think we had enough power that we could have done a
go-around.
 
Needless to say, that instructor no longer teaches that technique.  And
my personal rule is that I don't switch tanks unless I'm over an airport.
You never know....
 
Brian
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: waugh@rtpnet05.rtp.dg.com (Matthew Waugh)
Subject: Re: Shoulder Harnesses (Was: Re: Cessna sholdr harn review (BAS))
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 92 23:06:34 GMT
Organization: Data General Corporation, RTP, NC.

In article <5019@transfer.stratus.com> spenny@sw.stratus.com (Steve Pennypacker) writes:
>
>So, is there any way to fasten/adjust those things so they don't come undone
>every few minutes?

Take the shoulder strap, and pass it under the lap belt and bring it
back over the top and clip it. *MUCH* better at keeping the clip
attached.
Neat trick an instructor showed me once. I never cease to be amazed
at the little things instructors know :-)

Mat

Matthew Waugh			waugh@dg-rtp.dg.com
RTP Network Services 		
Data General Corp.		
RTP, NC. (919)-248-6034
Newsgroups: rec.aviation,news.answers
From: jimm@simsol.UUCP (Jim Morris)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: VFR Flight Following in TCA/ARSA
Date: 29 Jul 92 18:08:39 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Systems Simulation Solutions, Beaverton, OR

In article <1992Jul27.180716.8138@microsoft.com>, t-dougf@microsoft.com (Douglas Fields) writes:
> They always grant it (almost). My question is, they don't tell me to do
> anything special. So, am I allowed to make turns, altitude changes, etc?
> 
> So, when in a TCA/ARSA with flight following, and they have said only
> okay, you have flight following (sq. whatever), what can and can't you
> do?

When one is VFR and in radio contact with ATC, you may (in any
airspace; even a TCA) fly at any altitude you wish, change altitude
whenever you wish, fly any heading you wish, or change your heading any
time you wish, UNLESS you have been given a specific restriction, in
which case you should obviously comply.

Unless the frequency is unusually busy, I always notify ATC of any
changes I make in altitude or heading when I am in radio contact with them.
I TELL them, I don't ask them.  They will appreciate your
telling them of your intentions. They often get annoyed if you request
changes in altitude or heading (assuming you are not restricted).
From: ms@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Mark Stolz)
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 04:16:07 GMT
Subject: Re: Help me spend money! Plane advice needed.
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA
Newsgroups: rec.aviation

> > * What are your experiences with these (or other) airplanes?
> 
> > Feel free to post directly to the net or email a response to me, I will
> > summarize, unless you indicate that you wish your mail to remain private
> > (or unless nobody responds).
> 
> Bottom_line:  In the mountains, < 200hp is looking for delays and
> problems.  I have flown 100hp Cessna 150s and 85hp cubs in the mountains
> on "good" days.  It was fun, but by no stretch of the imagination was
> this anything like "reliable transportation".  I am also a glider pilot
> and am able to "soar", to help their apparent performance.  I say again,
> < 200hp creates more problems than the perceived cost savings predict.
> 
> To the net:  Please note that these are my opinions.  I am not fishing
> to ignite a flame war.  If you have different experiences, please post
> them, I am anxious to hear them.
> 
> Jer/ Eberhard, (SLASH), HAM = N0FZD     | Hewlett-Packard - MS99, 1UP10,15'East
> Pilot: COMM, INST, CFI-Airplane & Glider| 3404 East Harmony Road (303) 229-2861
> CAP CFI, Check & Mission, Pikes Peak 218| Fort Collins, Colorado  80525-9599 
> EMAIL:  jle@fc.hp.com or Jer_Eberhard@fc.hp.com
Newsgroups: rec.aviation