HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: goodin@kpc.com (Rich Goodin - Consultant)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Instrument Training
Date: 27 Aug 92 15:22:43 GMT
Organization: Kubota Pacific Computer, Santa Clara Ca.

> You should spread your training over a period of months, rather than trying
> to get it done in 2 weeks or something like that. About 2 or 3 flights
> a week of 1 to 1 1/2 hours worked well for me.

Just another data point on instrument training.  I did mine in about 10 days at
a local airport with an instructor I had flown with before.  Total cost: $2600
two years ago.  I prefer intense learning experiences, living IFR 8-10 hours a
day worked best for me (nice gentle low IFR on the east coast that entire week
helped a lot too:-).  Different strokes for different folks.  One point to keep
in mind with an intense course - plan to go out and USE IT soon afterwards.  I 
think this helps get things sorted out from short term to long term memory.

> Use Jepps. They are much better/more convenient than NOS + Notams. Its

Well, here go the Jepp wars again :-)  I've used both, try both and use what you
like.

> Always use the same aircraft. You get used to the radios, used to the way
> it feels, etc. Switching to another aircraft (mine didn't have an ADF)
> right before the checkride contributed to my failing the first time. I 
> took the second one in my own plane (I had passed the ADF portion the 
> first time :-) and passed easily. 

I think that you should fly the aircraft that you are most comfortable with for
any check ride.  Try some different aircraft during your training.  Some of the
more memorable experiences I've had single pilot IFR with my young son had to 
do with dealing with the differences encountered in flying multiple rental 
aircraft in high workload IFR situations (i.e. Where is that ^%&%&^%&^ control
anyway???? - What do you mean you need 120 knots down the ILS?, etc.)

Keep in mind that the big expense in flying IFR in my experience is not the 
initial training, it's staying current.  Not just FAA current, but that could
be the topic for a whole other thread.

Congrats on the rating...
Rich Goodin
Goodin & Associates, Inc.
currently: goodin@kpc.com
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: carruth@mksol.dseg.ti.com (matthew carruth)
Subject: Re: TAS while landing (was: Stupid Pilot Trick Awards)
Organization: internet
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 19:25:00 GMT

I've noticed the same thing on downwind landings.  The groundspeed is high so the 
IAS "seems" too high.
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My views are my own and do not reflect those of my employeers....
Newsgroups: rec.aviation,news.answers
From: bullock@watson.bms.com (JOAN BULLOCK)
Subject: Re: Comparing Tach and Hobbs rates?
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.4-b1  
Organization: Bristol Myers Squibb Pharmaceutical Research Institute
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 20:51:00 GMT

In article <1992Aug28.175651.8702@eecs.nwu.edu>, phil@eecs.nwu.edu 
(William LeFebvre) writes...

About tach time,
>I know its purely a function of RPM.
>I guess the question I want to ask is "what RPM makes 1 tach hour equal
>to 1 hobbs hour?"  But I have a real good feeling that that will vary 
>depending on the engine and probably will vary with tachometers as well.

>And not even then, now that I think about it.  The same RPM yields different
>power settings as altitude changes.


When I was a renter, I used to log tach time and take it on faith that it
was close enough.  Now that I own and fly the same plane all the time, I'm 
not so confident.

_In our Warrior_, our tach time runs fast at cruise RPM by about 10% I would 
estimate.  (It seems that it's 20-30 minutes longer on a long leg of ~ 4 1/2 
hours).  I also have noticed that it seems to be more accurate when the Hub 
(he's instrument rated) is out practicing approaches where a lot of time
is spent tooling around at 90 knots which is around 2150 RPM.  That being the 
case, 2375 RPM is probably not far from the RPM at which tach time = real 
time.  We cruise at between 2400 & 2500 RPM depending on altitude.  When the 
Hub's doing approaches, I would estimate about 1/2 the time is spent at 
around 2100 RPM and the rest varies between 2400 RPM cruise and climb & 
descent power.

So far I concur with what's been said.  However, I don't agree with the 
assumption that 2375 RPM equates to 75% power for the average fixed pitch 
prop.  We cruise at 65% power most of the time. And that corresponds to 
around 2400 RPM at low altitude and 2500 RPM at 6000 or 7000 ft, if I 
remember correctly.  Cruising at 75% power obviously calls for more RPM.  
I would guess that the power setting which results in tach time = real time 
would be closer to 60% at low altitude and less than that at higher altitude.  
But, as was suggested, power isn't the relevant factor since other
things influence it...RPM is what counts for tach time accuracy.

The upshot is, I don't believe the tach for my log anymore.  Timex time does 
it.  And I'd bet you'd get a different story from every engine out there.


Joan Bullock
Warrior N2227Z
bullock@bms.com
From: brianh@pongo.Eng.Sun.COM (Brian Horn)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Air Lifeline experience
Date: 31 Aug 1992 15:20:25 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca.
NNTP-Posting-Host: pongo

In article <1992Aug31.123604.9403@genrad.com> dls@genrad.com (Diana L. Syriac) writes:
>I could be mistaken, but is there ACTUALLY a clause in this AirLifeLine
>organization which requires you to be a Private pilot?  Why couldn't a
>Commercial pilot or even ATP pilot be donating his time?  You 
>agreed that Commercial pilots are appropriate for this type of flying.
>What makes you think there WEREN'T used?

	Ok, just to add some facts to the speculation, AirLifeLine and/or
Angel Flight only require at *least* a private pilots licence.  CPs and ATPs
are welcome as well.  My direct source on this was my last mission was
with me (as PIC/owner) and my co-pilot was a ATP who normally flies DC-9s
(shortly to be flying 767s).  This gives us one CP and one ATP on board.
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: dla@westford.ccur.com (Dave Anderson)
Subject: VFR flight not recommended...
Reply-To: dla@westford.ccur.com (Dave Anderson)
Organization: Concurrent Computer Corp. Westford MA.
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 21:19:21 GMT

MIA FT 240024 25 SCT 80 SCT C250 BKN 0520G35 OCNL C25 BKN CHC C10 OVC
    1TRW/RW+ G55. 06Z C8 BKN 0240G60 CHC C8 X 1/2TRW/RW+ G80. 09Z C3
    OVC 1TRW+ 0975G110. 15Z C10 BKN 1160G90 CHC C8 X 1TRW/RW+. 18Z
    MVFR CIG TRW WND..

===============================================================================
  Dave Anderson - ATP/CFII ASMEL               508-392-2441
  Concurrent Computer Corporation              dla@westford.ccur.com
  One Technology Way
  Westford, MA 01886
===============================================================================
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: verhulst@raven.aosg.gsf.dec.com ()
Subject: Re: crossing a runway, and instructor relations
Organization: AOSG
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 13:42:32 GMT

> Not only have I not gotten the free copy of Av.

			         ^^^^^
>USA they promised, I haven't gotten anything from AOPA since I joined.

There ain't no such thing as a free lunch!!  It's included as part of your
membership.  Trust me, you're paying for it!

Anyway, on the membership form I think you have to check the box that asks you
if you want it or not.

Tony V.
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: wd@cs.tu-berlin.de (Wolfgang Diestelkamp)
Subject: Re: Finding toxic waste (Re: Flying for the Environment)
Organization: Technical University of Berlin, Germany
	<71659@apple.Apple.COM> <1992Aug26.043506.12564@walter.bellcore.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 08:50:33 GMT

In article <1992Aug26.043506.12564@walter.bellcore.com> venky@thelonious.bellcore.com (G A Venkatesh) writes:
> In article <71659@apple.Apple.COM> stadler@Apple.COM (Andy Stadler) writes:
> >In article <1992Aug25.123144.18737@walter.bellcore.com>
> > venky@thelonious.bellcore.com (G A Venkatesh) writes:
> >>
> >>Would it be reasonable, in addition to requiring civility, to expect a 
> >>restraint on controversial topics that is only marginally related to 
> >>rec.aviation?
> >
> >I must absolutely disagree.  Does this mean we must only write about 100%
> >pure flying?
> >
> 
> Sigh. No. All it means is that when you write about flying related to
> *controversial* issues, you stress the flying not the issue. Judgement
> is called for but that is something pilots are used to without having to 
> go into the extreme examples that you outlined, no?

The thing is that we are right now talking about one particular
thread evolving into one article by mpucket, that was followed up
by one guy (whose name I forgot) in a very *personally* attacking
manner.
This thread was originally started by an article about how great
it is to fly, and at times you could even detect pollution; flying
*was* stressed in that article; then slowly the contents changed
towards the environmental aspect of flying, but not out
of nothing. You may like that or not, if you don't, read
the nettiquette and criticise in private. Yet the result was,
that mpucket, who had just recovered from some bad flaming
(which I haven't been following due to my vacation, so I
can't even say whether it may have been justified) was again
so badly flamed, in a language that does in no way belong
into rec.aviation, that I would understand her if she'd now
permanently withdraw her wisdom from rec.aviation. That's what
should be condemmned, not the posting of a controversial issue
as seen in this thread.
And a word to mpucket: Please do ignore this posting, and
stay tuned with us.
-- 
Wolfgang Diestelkamp
wd@cs.tu-berlin.de
wolfgang@first.gmd.de
From: jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Flying saves money (sic)
Date: 2 Sep 1992 18:56:09 GMT
Organization: UT Health Science Center Houston

In article <1992Sep2.182621.5833@eecs.nwu.edu> phil@eecs.nwu.edu (William LeFebvre) writes:
[about the airlines' use (or not) of Flight Service]
>And who do they file pilot reports with?

ATC. They're just as happy to take them.
-- 
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.
 "Keep in mind that Amateur Radio As We Know It Today will cease to exist
            at midnight tonight." -- Dave Newkirk, WJ1Z
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: kerry@Ingres.COM (Kerry Kurasaki)
Subject: Re: There I was - mag check
Reply-To: kerry@Ingres.COM (Kerry Kurasaki)
Organization: Ask Computer Systems Inc., Ingres Division, Alameda CA 94501
Date: 31 Aug 92 18:58:45 GMT

In article <1992Aug29.180926.29970@dvnspc1.Dev.Unisys.COM> jac@dvnspc1.Dev.Unisys.COM (Judy Cadmus) writes:
>
>[Story of forgetting to set mags to BOTH deleted]
>
One safety seminar I attended suggested something called a GIMP check.
That is,
	GAS - Fuel Selector(s) ON
	IGNITION - BOTH
	MIXTURE - Proper Setting
	PROP - FULL INCREASE

Other methods are a complete left to right scan of the instrument panel
before taxiing onto the active runway.

Some ideas for you to consider or ignore.  See if it works for you.

Kerry


:) Oh yeah, now how do I remember to release the parking
:) brake before takeoff?
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: spagiola@frinext.stanford.edu (Stefano Pagiola)
Subject: Re: McDonnell Douglas MD-90
Reply-To: spagiola@frinext.stanford.edu
Organization: DSO, Stanford University
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 92 01:49:06 GMT

Greg Lyon writes
> I was just wondering if anyone knew what the timeframe is  
for the 
> production of the MD-90 (ie.  when is the first one to be  
delivered,
> and who will the first airlines to receive them).
> 
Rollout should be this fall, with first flight in February  
and deliveries early the following year.

--
-
Stefano Pagiola
Food Research Institute, Stanford University
spagiola@frinext.stanford.edu (NeXTMail encouraged)
From: sivaram@hplred.HP.COM (S. Sivaramakrishnan)
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 21:13:47 GMT
Subject: Advice for Grand Canyon Trip
Organization: Hewlett Packard Labs, Palo Alto CA
Newsgroups: rec.aviation



I am planning to trip from Palo Alto (about 25 miles south of San Franscisco)
to the Grand Canyon and back in a C-182 with 3 others.  I am looking for
any subtle details that I should know.

I am intending to fly south to Bakersfield (purely to avoid the Sierras so
that I may find a spot to ditch in case of an emergency, a 100 nm detour) and
then go north east towards the GC.  I also intend to land at Las Vegas
McCarran International and at Fresno(drive to Sequoia).

I would invite comments on sights to overfly/avoid, "cliff-hanging"
restaurants, and 1-page summary of "How to make a $1000000 by gambling".

Thanks to net advice, I bought a new Peltor 7004 which I shall test wear
and compare it to the couple of DC clones that I shall be carrying along.

Air space restrictions at the GC are supposedly for noise abatement, except
that helicopter routes are at much lower altitudes.........what am I missing?

Sivaram
From: spenny@sw.stratus.com (Steve Pennypacker)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Warm fuzzy
Date: 25 Aug 92 20:50:56 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.

In article <7188@lib.tmc.edu>, jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard) writes:
> In article <1992Aug24.194627.6547@i88.isc.com> ericth@i88.isc.com (Eric Thiele) writes:
> >If only I had the scratch for the ARSA Fighter
> 
> Yeah. Me too. If only I had that kinda cash...or even the dough for the
> Hummin' Little Grumman...or the Spirit of rec.aviation...or whoever it was's
> 172 out west for $10K...
> 
> Damn, how I wish I hadn't spent all my money before I discovered flying.

Actually, the key is to buy an airplane before you get married and before
you buy a house (and, I suppose, before you have kids, although I can't 
speak for that one).  Or to find a rich spouse.

I made the mistake of not having an airplane when I got married and it's 
taken me almost 5 years to get an OK for a plane (well, OK, so I couldn't
afford one anyway when I first got out of school... but that's beside the
point, right?).  But now that I've got the green light, there's no taking it
away!  

Hmmm, with enough partners we could buy the ARSA Fighter...
-- 
     Steve Pennypacker		     PP-ASEL

     spenny@wiley.ts.stratus.com     Stephen_Pennypacker@vos.stratus.com
From: rjg@umnstat.stat.umn.edu (Robert J. Granvin)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Lifeguard and the econazi thread
Keywords: doing good
Date: 26 Aug 92 17:56:51 GMT
Organization: School of Statistics, University of Minnesota

In article <1992Aug26.134944.24254@almserv.uucp>, smith@ur-guh.com (Russ Smith) writes:
|> I'd also like to encourage Ms. Puckett (sp?) and others to continue posting
|> on eco-flights et al as I find this to be quite close in nature (punny!) to
|> the Lifeguard flights (however, I do find it necessary to add that we
|> don't see totally eye-to-eye on the informer bit -- to me, taking an EPA
|> inspector or a reporter for a ride and allowing him/her to visually note
|> things to potentially investigate settles -much- better than arbitrarily
|> reporting sites as eco-hazards -- there really are people out there with
|> innocent 55 gallon drums in their yards...somewhat hazy distinction, I know,
|> but there none-the-less).

Just a point of order, since I've forgotten the details of the post that
started the assinine (phrased, at least) counter-attack... But, were the
"55-gallon drums" being referred to located in a back yard, or more along
the lines of dumped in a ravine?

If you've got drums in your back yard, I'd probably ignore them (provided
that it's clear you're doing something with them, or they're empty, or not
glowing green or oozing sludge, or something obvious).  But if I spot drums
dumped in a river gorge on public lands, I'll report the damn things if I 
feel they are suspicious.

So, would someone doublecheck the attribution of the one point of argument
and clarify what the argument is all about?  (Or do we just have one or
two people bent on blowing off steam at any opportunity?)

-- 
Robert J. Granvin                                       School of Statistics
rjg@umnstat.stat.umn.edu                             University of Minnesota
From: cliff@geronimo.eece.unm.edu (Cliff Wood)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Stevens Acro
Date: 26 Aug 92 16:25:41 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque

If anyone has the address for the person or organization
who sells the plans for the stevens acro, I would appreciate
an address.  I believe they have been sold to a organization
in Australia.
Cliff
From: ritter@claude.ma30.bull.com (Roger Ritter)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: What do you do during long boring flights?
Date: 31 Aug 92 14:16:20 GMT
Organization: Bull HN Informations Systems Inc.

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)?  Please 
>email if you think it is illegal and don't want FAA to see it. 

Let's see now, I check my position on the chart, look for obvious
landmarks on the ground, check for traffic, look ahead for my next
checkpoint, check my compass course, check for traffic, look at
the engine gauges, note en-route timing, check for traffic, check
my position on the chart ...

With no nav radios or instruments, I don't let Rocky fly very far
without some check of my course and position.  Lostness can surround
me very quickly if I let it. :-)  Boredom is not a factor here.
-- 
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
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: gopal@cirrus.com (Gopal Ramachandran)
Subject: Re: US Customs
Organization: Cirrus Logic Inc.
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 20:06:09 GMT

In article <23581@alice.att.com> ark@alice.UUCP () writes:

>I can't find enough good things to say about US Customs.  [think about it]
I can.
My experience with US Customs in Ft Lauderdale FL a few years ago
wasnt very good either, but the US Customs folk in California (Brown
field in San Diego and in Calexico) have been very cordial and
helpful. I have made about 2 dozen trips to Mexico over the past 13
years and have had no bad experiences.
	Once we returned to the US after having had to hand prop an
IO-470 Continental on a Cessna 310 and after explaining the problem to
the Customs people, they inspected us while we left one engine running
the whole time. They also appreciate it when you help them out by
prefilling the Private Aircraft Arrival Form, especially on busy
holiday weekends. I just get a blank one every time I re-enter the US
so it will be ready for my next trip.

Gopal
-- 

Gopal Ramachandran <gopal@cirrus.com>
UUCP:  uunet!cirrus.com!gopal
Cirrus Logic Inc, Fremont CA  PH: (510)-226-2138 FAX: (510)-226-2160
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: steinarb@idt.unit.no (Steinar Bang)
Subject: Carrier version of the F-86F Sabre
Organization: Norwegian Institute of Technology, Trondheim, Norway
Distribution: rec
Date: 28 Aug 92 15:16:48

Watching a British documentary series ("The Nuclear Age", recommended)
on the telly yesterday, I saw what looked like a carrier version of
the F-86F (ie. a version without the nose radome of the later
versions) Sabre.

It had a long nose undercarriage like the carrier Phantoms and
foldable wings.

It was only a short glimpse, so I can't be certain, and I have never
heard about such a version, so... can anybody confirm/deny?

- Steinar
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: gopal@cirrus.com (Gopal Ramachandran)
Subject: Re: High Altitude Leaning Question
Organization: Cirrus Logic Inc.
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 23:03:29 GMT

Bill Standerfer (Hi, Bill) writes some good advice in response to:
>>..I would like to know the proper procedure for leaning an engine prior to
>>takeoff from a high altitude field.

>Now, if you have a turbocharged engine, follow the POH religiously!...  
>..  In most cases, it will be full rich or a specific fuel flow..

Another complication is in airplanes where before you can lean the
engine for the best power, you have to adjust multiple controls to get
the right manifold pressure! I'm talking about aircraft with manually
controlled waste gates (typically Rajay turbocharger installations)
such as in early Piper Aerostars and Twin Comanches, early Turbo
Mooneys, etc
	
With such airplanes you dont have the time to open the throttles on
the T.O. run, then start pushing in the waste gate controls to get 30"
MAP, while being careful not to overboost, and then lean the mixtures,
all the while staying on the centerline, watching the airspeed and
engine gauges.

What I like to do is set the engine or engines up during the runup
(making sure I'm in an area where I cant pick up rocks, sand, etc) by
opening the throttle all the way, adjusting the waste gate and
mixture, and then closing the throttle. The engine is quite happy this
way. On the TO roll, all you have to do is push thr throttles wide
open and then not have to worry about the other controls except for
very minor adjustments while airborne. Airplanes with manual waste
gates typically always have either EGTs, or fuel flow gauges, or both.

There is another possible technique:
setting climb power waste gate setting and mixture while airborne 
and approaching to land, and leaving that setting in during the
landing. The advantage is that a go-around could be quickly initiated
just by pushing in the throttles, but the disadvantage is that the
turbos stay hot longer and take longer to spin down. Typically all
Rajay-equipped a/c POHs say to open the waste gates completely at
altitude before you start closing the throttles.

I fly a RAM-modified Cessna 414 with Hoskins fuel management systems.
These are nice as you can very accurately set the fuel flow for T.O.
and the fuel controller maintains this very precisely at just about
any interesting altitude.

Gopal
-- 

Gopal Ramachandran <gopal@cirrus.com>
UUCP:  uunet!cirrus.com!gopal
Cirrus Logic Inc, Fremont CA  PH: (510)-226-2138 FAX: (510)-226-2160
From: donovanh@sptekwv1.wv.tek.com (Donovan Hammer;685-2499;60-850;;sptekwv1)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Last Crusade: Fighter planes (Was: Lost Arc:  Flying Wing)
Date: 26 Aug 92 16:56:48 GMT
Reply-To: user@host.wv.tek.com
Distribution: rec
Organization: Tektronix Inc, Wilsonville, OR

> 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

I saw the movie only once and it was a long time ago, but at the time
I had the impression that it was an Me-108 which was a side-by-side
seated trainer aircraft.  Its tail and wing planform are very similar
to the Me-109, so it's used allot in movies as a substitute for the
Me-109.  I don't really recall the scene in the movie well, so don't
take this as absolute truth.


-- 
                                       Don Hammer

 ==================================== ========================
| Donovan Hammer, Principal Engineer |                        |
| Tektronix                          |                        |
|        / Computer Graphics Group   | Save the whales,...    |
| PO Box 1000, MS 60-850             | collect the whole set. |
| Wilsonville, Ore. 97070            |                        |
| phone - (503) 685-2499             |                        |
| fax   - (503) 682-1500             |                        |
| email - donovan.hammer@TEK.COM     |                        |
 ==================================== ========================

Return-Received-To: donovan.hammer@tek.com
Newsgroups: rec.aviation