HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: Charles.K.Scott@dartmouth.edu (Charles K. Scott)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Christavia MK IV  Homebuilt
Date: 29 Sep 92 11:46:00 GMT
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
X-Posted-From: InterNews1.0a5@newshost.dartmouth.edu

In article <richards.1.717720010@owl.nstn.ns.ca>
richards@owl.nstn.ns.ca (Mark Richardson) writes:

> Quite a while back I noticed there was a guy posting some articles on 
> building his Christavia MK IV.  Had I any functioning brain cells at the
> time, I would have noted his name and, yes, even saved the articles.  If
> any one knows how to contact him through E-mail, please drop me a line ,
> (please use E-mail rather than the group.  Our feeder has been a little
> flaky lately).

I'm the person posting the Christavia articles and I've contacted Mark.

Corky Scott
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: hrose@psych.mun.ca (Herbert Rose)
Subject: Re: Scardy-moms
Organization: Memorial University of Newfoundland
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 14:20:44 GMT

dmunday@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu writes:

>I finally did it.  I've been flying off and on for twelve years, and I finally
>got my mom to go flying with me.  Funny my dad wanted to go as soon as I had
>my ticket lo over a decade ago.
> 
I had (have) the opposite problem.  Mom was my first passenger (if you do
not count DOT).  It was just about evening and perfectly smooth.  She
gets nervous on airliners when it gets bumpy so she was worried.  But
it when great despite the fact that medium turns were too much.  And 
she loved it.

Dad, who wanted to be a pilot but teaches psychology instead, still 
refuses to fly with me.  There's hope though I've only had my licence 
a year.

Tonya
From: dunn@hpcc01.corp.hp.com (Steve Dunn)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Stay off the rudder!
Date: 2 Oct 92 19:11:19 GMT
Organization: the HP Corporate notes server

/ hpcc01:rec.aviation / greg@saltydog.dpsi.com (Gregory R. Travis) /  9:56 am  Sep 30, 1992 /
>In article <92266.215322VPN1@psuvm.psu.edu> VPN1@psuvm.psu.edu writes:

>>I just read a new idea (to me), passed along by
>>Greg Travis:  If you get into strong turbulence,
>>IFR, stay off the rudder and you won't get into a spin.

My s.o. and I had a mountain check-out recently, and the CFII showed us
how much more effective it is to bring the wings level by use of rudder
input than aileron wrenching.  I'm not sure this applies in extreme cases,
but it does work in light to moderate stuff.

It was explained this way:  assume L wing goes down; pilot applies right wing
down control (this increases the lift on the left wing and increases the drag
on it at the same time).  If you don't compensate with rudder, the left wing
falls further behind,  slows down, looses more lift, drops further.  See where
this is going?  If, instead, you apply right rudder, the left wing speeds up
immediately which increases lift and starts it back up towards the wings-level
attitude.

Since then I've been trying to fly with better rudder control in all weather.
It seems to work.

sd
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: waugh@rtpnet05.rtp.dg.com (Matthew Waugh)
Subject: Fly-In - Georgia
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 92 03:13:02 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Data General Corporation, RTP, NC.

The attached is posted for Tom Jackson - if you reply, please use
the address below - not that I won't forward things, it's just
faster if you don't rely on me :-)

Mat

From: TomJack%USCN.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu 
	(Tom Jackson Geriatric Service 404-721-2633)

For anyone who might be interested, the following fly-in is being put on
by my home FBO.  This is the first time they have tried something like
this.  They are a friendly, old-fashioned outfit who put flying and
service first.  I would like to see them do well with this, and
encourage you to come.  As an additional incentive, tours of N888SB, my
1966 Aztec will be made available free of charge to all netters
interested. :-)

Daniel Field (DNL) is the smaller field in Augusta, Georgia.  Augusta is
located on the Georgia/South Carolina border about halfway between
Atlanta and the Atlantic.  Forrest Boshears, the inspiration for the
fly-in,  was one of the co-founders of Augusta Aviation, shortly after
WWII.  He continued to be active until his tragic death at the age of 73
last year.  His immaculately restored J-3 Cub should be on display.  It
has been maintained by his son, who remains the FAA DE for the field,
and who has signed me off for my PP, IFR, and MEL ratings.





         What
         The Boshears Memorial Fly-In

         When
         October 24 - 25, 1992

         Where
         Daniel Field - Augusta, Georgia

         Why
         To encourage interest in aviation - To profile Daniel Field
         history to the community - To inspire public participation in
         Daniel Field

         Expected Attendance
         30,000

         Participants
         Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA) - General Aviation
         Commission - South Carolina Breakfast Club - CSRA Pilots
         Association - Augusta Aviation - Civil Air Patrol

         Activities
         Flybys - War Birds - Refreshments - Vendors - Static Displays
         Experimentals - Hot Air Balloons - Flea Market
         Saturday Night Awards Banquet with Guest Speaker

         History
         Daniel Field was the site of the country's first aviation
         school, the Augusta School of Aviation, founded by the Wright
         Brothers in 1910 and again in 1916.  During World War II,
         2,000 men and 100 planes were assigned to Daniel Field.  Now
         the field operates as a private plane airport.

         For More Information, Call (706) 733-1647 or  1-800-487-9068.


Matthew Waugh			waugh@dg-rtp.dg.com
RTP Network Services 		
Data General Corp.		
RTP, NC. (919)-248-6034
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: ron@turing.toronto.edu (Ron Wessels)
Subject: Re: Trivia question
Organization: CSRI, University of Toronto
Date: 28 Sep 92 21:33:18 GMT

egdorf@zaphod.lanl.gov (Skip Egdorf) writes:
>How about the person flying outside the US. The high performance
>checkout is in the FAR's and doesn't apply outside the jurisdiction.

Really?  My understanding is that, as a Canadian pilot, I am still bound by
Canadian regulations, even in US airspace, "except where such regulations
are contradictory or repugnant to" the foreign regulations.  [ I always
liked that phrase ].  Essentially, my impression is that I am bound by the
more restrictive of the two regulations.

-- 
Ron Wessels		University of Toronto		ron@turing.toronto.edu
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: mperlman@nyx.cs.du.edu (Marshal "Airborne" Perlman)
Subject: Re: GTE CONTEL DUAT new features
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 92 15:58:29 GMT

How is DUAT paid by us? (Well..it is our tax money.)

Are you paid per minute on line? Do you get more money if there are 
more calls?

I figured you get paid a 'bonus' for more having more calls..becuase I noticed
that when using PLAIN LANG. TRANSLATIONS...you are only allowed one per
call..thus...if you want more...you must call back.

How much do you get paid per call?
--
           Marshal Perlman <> Florida Institute of Technology 
                    ***** perlman@zach.fit.edu ***** 
               Private Pilot - Airplane Single-Engine Land

Newsgroups: rec.aviation,rec.aviation.misc
From: hrose@psych.mun.ca (Herbert Rose)
Subject: Re: aircraft with the same names as land vehicles
Organization: Memorial University of Newfoundland
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 15:53:08 GMT

radack@ces.cwru.edu (Gerald Radack) writes:

>Have you ever noticed that there many models of aircraft share names with
>models of cars or trucks? For example,

>	Cessna Citation...........Chevy Citation
>	Cessna Caravan............Dodge Caravan
>	Piper Cherokee............Jeep Cherokee
  On a side note of this, I rolled a Caravan once.  Unfortunately it was
  a Dodge.  Very fortunately no one was hurt at all.

  Tonya
From: billa@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Bill Arnold)
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 17:04:55 GMT
Subject: Re: *long* cross country
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA
Newsgroups: rec.aviation

In rec.aviation, dab@asylum.UUCP (Dave Bridgham) writes:

> I'm thinking about flying from Boston to Portland, Oregon and San
> Francisco in the next month.  This would be my first trip of anywhere
> near this length and my first trip over the Rockies.  Any suggestions
> from the net?  What would the weather be like this time of year out
> west?  I figure on planning for seven days coast to coast though it
> would be fine if it didn't take quite so long.
> 
> 						Dave Bridgham

You don't say what you are flying, so I don't know about such things
as the service ceiling or your airplane.  Anyway, for your first trip
over the Rockies, I suggest you not go over them.  There is a very nice
route west that lets you avoid "rugged" mountains.

Cross Wyoming roughly along Interstate 80 (Cheyenne, Rawlins, Rock
Springs.  Going into Utah, there is a nice, wide gap in the mountains
near Logan, Utah.  From there, you can fly into Idaho, roughly along
the major towns (Pocatella, Boise, etc).  From Idaho, you can cross
into Oregon, roughly passing LaGrande, Oregon.  Then, fly down the
Columbia River Gorge to Portland.  Troutdale, Oregon had a very nice
airplort last time I was there.

The weather in Sept and Oct should be marvelous.  You can do the trip
I suggested and never get above 9,500 feet MSL.  Across Nebraska,
Wyoming, Utah, and Oregon (especially, the Columbia River Gorge),
you can expect headwinds of 10 to 35 mph.  The turbulence is usually
not bad, especially if you fly from about 7 am to 2 pm.

Another nice alternative is to fly roughly along the Canadian border until
you get to Spokane, Washington.  Then, head south to Portland.  The
mountains do not rise much above 6,000 feet, except for a few peaks.
This route has some great views.

Hope this helps.  Take your time.  Watch the weather.  Lenticular
clouds streaming from any peaks means very high winds.

Bill Arnold
billa@hpfcma.fc.hp.com
"No guarantees."
From: dxk10@po.CWRU.Edu (David Kazdan Md)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Ancient History
Date: 27 Sep 92 01:31:30 GMT
Reply-To: dxk10@po.CWRU.Edu (David Kazdan Md)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: thor.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, mazz+@andrew.cmu.edu ("Joseph D. Mazza") says:

>Regarding the LORAN question, you're right. The O-scope was used to
>measure the time delay between the master and slave stations by
>superimposing the two signals on the scope and reading the delay on the
>counters.  Then, after making some corrections (day/night, 1 hop "e",
>etc), the delay was plotted as a parabolic line of position by
>interpolating between delay lines printed on LORAN charts.  Plotting
>another Master/Slave pair produced a two LOP fix.
>
>                                       Captain Joseph D. Mazza, USN
>                                       Commanding Officer, NROTC Unit
>                                       and Professor of Naval Science
>                                       Carnegie Mellon University
>


Thank you for the info; I have read about the original use of
LORAN and it always seemed like an interesting application of
the best available technology.

Please excuse some real nitpicking:  I would guess the plot
was hyperbolic, not parabolic.

		73,

		David, AD8Y


-- 
David Kazdan, M.D.      dxk10@po.cwru.edu
Department of Biomedical Engineering, Case Western Reserve University,
Cleveland, Ohio
From: mikec@oregano.lcs.mit.edu (Mike Ciholas)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Airplanes with horns
Date: 29 Sep 92 21:42:54 GMT
Article-I.D.: mintaka.1992Sep29.214254.29856
Organization: MIT Laboratory for Computer Science

In article <1992Sep29.195705.8930@news.arc.nasa.gov>
	doshay@ursa.arc.nasa.gov (David Doshay) writes:
>In article <1992Sep29.172248.9156@ncrcae.ColumbiaSC.NCR.COM>,
	hutton@ncrcol.ColumbiaSC.NCR.COM (ed Hutton ext. 6488) writes:
>|> Any reason not to use the "horn" as a back-up
>|> to the vacuum pump?
>At low speeds this works fine, but for the folks that feel the need to spend
>BIG $$$ to go faster, the extra cost of back-up under the cowl is small
>relative to the cost of the whole plane. And somehow it would look just a
>little out of place to have one of those big external venturi horns hanging
>out of, say, a 250 mph aircraft.>
>David		doshay@soma.arc.nasa.gov

Not to mention the drag.  One data point: A Cessna 170 (father of the
172) gains about 5 to 8 MPH when the venturi is removed and a vacuum
pump is added.  At higher speeds, the drag will be higher.  Using
exhaust gases to drive the venturi would not be suitable as they would
foul the orifice in the venturi throat and the exhaust pulses may do
strange things to the instruments.  Without some sort of heating
system, venturis pick up ice very easily.

Mike Ciholas
mikec@lcs.mit.edu
From: brian@porky.contex.com (Brian Love)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Jeppesen RNAV En Route Charts
Date: 30 Sep 92 18:32:46 GMT
Organization: Xyvision Design Systems

Now that I'm flying a plane equipped with an RNAV, I've noticed that my
Jeppesen subscription doesn't include RNAV approaches.  A quick call
confirmed they're an extra cost item (lovely).  Actually, there are two
related extra cost items:  RNAV approaches and RNAV enroute charts.  They
offered to send me some samples which I gladly accepted.  The RNAV approach
plate looked like I'd expected, but I admit to some confusion regarding the
RNAV enroute charts.  In what way are they useful?

		
 initial   per	   Jeppesen
  cost    year	  Subscriptions
--------------------------------------------------------------------
  $16  +   $47	RNAV approach plates: entire US
  $16  +   $51	RNAV enroute charts: entire US
  $43  +  $129	NE region: ME,NH,VT,MA,CT,RI,NY,PA,NJ,DE,MD,VA,WV,DC
  $43  +  $127	SE region: TN,AL,MS,NC,SC,GA,FL
  $79  +  $235	E Coast region: NE, SE and Great Lakes region
				(KY,MI,IN,OH,WI,IL)

Notes:
Jeppesen charts are selectively updated every 30 days.  The "initial cost"
listed above does not include the initial shipping charges, which run
$5-10.  The "per year" cost does include postage fees for the montly
updates.

		
   per		     NOS
  year		   Subscriptions
--------------------------------------------------------------------
  $130  	comparable NE region w corresponding En Route Charts
  $130		comparable SE region (includes KY)
  $330		comparable E Coast region

Notes:
NOS charts are completely updated every 56 days (ie slightly more than 6
times per year).  An NOS subscription includes RNAV approaches.  There is
not a one-to-one mapping for the enroute charts so the cost may vary by
approximately +- $20/yr.  The NOS "E Coast" region also includes Puerto
Rico and the Virgin Islands.


(sorry, I couldn't resist stirring the embers...)


Brian C. Love            |  Xyvision        |  Remember, you can put it in the
PP-ASEL-IA               |  Wakefield, MA   |  hands of your attorney, but you
M20J  N1024C  "Charlie"  |  (617) 245-4100  |  can't make it stand up in court.
From: dst+@cs.cmu.edu (Dave Touretzky)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Mooney answers
Date: 30 Sep 92 00:07:13 GMT
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon

Thanks for the Mooney answers I've received so far; additional replies
from Mooney drivers would be most welcome, either by net or email.

Jim Schinnerer asks, about my tale:

> How come you have to use two Mooneys???

Well Jim, the answer is obvious:  we multi drivers aren't satisfied with just
one of anything!

Actually, the real reason is scheduling availability.  The two birds are
owned by different clubs.  My friend is only in town for 2 weeks, so we
needed to use both planes in order to get in enough hours.

Oh, and here's yet another question for the Mooney mavens:  both birds
constantly have the Ram Air annunciator lit.  Pressing the knob in only
helps for a few seconds, then it eases out by a sixteenth of an inch and the
light comes back on.  Is this problem common to all Mooneys?

-- Dave Touretzky,  CFI-AIM,  "student Mooney instructor"
From: geoff@peck.com (Geoff Peck)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: AUDIO TAPE GROUND SCHOOL: ANY AVAILABLE?
Date: 27 Sep 92 18:59:19 GMT
Organization: Geoffrey G. Peck, Consultant, San Jose CA

In article <1992Sep24.192234.9062@eagle.lerc.nasa.gov>
tostan@bert.lerc.nasa.gov (Stan Mohler) writes:
> There used to be a set of audio tapes with a workbook you could buy from a
> Denver-based company called ATC which contained a complete ground school for
> the Private Pilot exam.  They also had one for instrument rating.  I don't
> think ATC exists anymore.  Does anyone know where I can get an up-to-date
> set of audio tapes like this?  Mind you, I'm looking for COMPLETE ground
> schools.  Not "review" tapes.

Yes, ATC is no longer.  Their tapes, at least the videotapes, were
definitely not "complete" ground schools -- they were very much in the
"FAA-question-and-answer" format.  They did prefix the interminably long
and boring Q-and-A sessions with a short review of the material in several
major areas, but the bulk of material was most definitely Q-and-A.  Given
the paucity of visual material on their videotapes, I wouldn't be at all
surprised if their audiotapes were simply the audio tracks of their
videotapes.  Another annoying problem with the ATC materials, at least the
few tapes I viewed, was that they occasionally gave wrong answers.  Not a
good thing.  Not too great a surprise that they're out of business...

I thought for a couple of minutes about how one might construct a set of
audio tape lessons for the private pilot syllabus, and rapidly reached the
conclusion that there is too much material which is not amenable to
audiotape presentation to make such a course practical.  Examples?
There's a lot of visual material -- runway markings, gauge markings, chart
interpretation, cloud identification.  And there's a lot of material which
requires excellent recall of detail -- regulations such as VFR flight
minima, interpretation of printed weather briefings and so on.

So, I think you're out of luck as far as an audiotape ground school goes.
You might be able to take advantage of some of the audio tapes which
are in the current Sporty's catalog as a supplement to a more
traditional form of learning.  Examples include Pilot's Communications
and Airport Communications from Sporty's, and a whole list of titles
from PIC (Pilot Information Cassettes?):  TCA Operations, How to Get a
Good VFR Weather Briefing, FSS Communications, Controlled Airpsace, VFR
Communications at Non-Controlled Airports, VFR Night Operations, How to
Win an Argument with a Cross-wind, Oshkosh Tower Communications, Mayday
Album.  Each of these is roughly $10, so you could spend quite a bit of
money here.  If you do go buy some or all of these, you might consider
posting a brief review to the net...

					Geoff
From: chem4-aa@garnet.berkeley.edu (Lonnie C. Martin)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: "setting" transponder
Date: 4 Oct 1992 19:19:41 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: garnet.berkeley.edu

Seems like I recall seeing postings from ATC Specialists. Would one of you
be willing to tell us what is _really_ expected upon "recycle transponder"?

Lonnie
-- 
Lonnie C. Martin    lonnie@hydrogen.cchem.berkeley.edu
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: steve@lawday.DaytonOH.NCR.COM (Steve Bridges)
Subject: Re: gear-down check
Keywords: gear-down, FAA
Organization: NCR Corporation - Law Department
Distribution: usa
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1992 13:45:16 GMT

dfr@usna.navy.mil (PROF D. Rogers (EAS FAC)) writes:

>[stuff about gear down check/liability deleted....]

I think it's a great idea.  When I was doing my multi-training, we used
Springfield Ohio as a training site for engine out landings and rejected
takeoff because of the longer runway.

The Ohio ANG has an A-7 unit based there.  There is a part-time control
tower, and every time we here cleard to land, there was a "N2066P, cleared
to land, check gear down."  It was a great aid.  I've not landed an airplan
yet gear up, and I hope I never will due to pilot error. 

My own personal opinion -- It should be used at controlled fields.

I fail to see why the FAA would not institute this simple check for
liability reasons.  It makes no sense at all (note from the sig -- I work
for a corporate law department, I'm not an attorney, and I don't pretend to
understand some of the decisions lawyers make about liability).

Steve
-- 
Steve Bridges, Programmer/Analyst| NCR - Law Department, WHQ-5
steve@lawday.DaytonOH.NCR.COM ___| Phone:(513)-445-4486 622-4486 (VOICEplus)
Reserve sci.military moderator| "The airplane does not recognize attitude,
providing a maneuver is conducted at one G" -- A.M. "Tex" Johnston
From: cstacy@ai.mit.edu (Christopher C. Stacy)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Medical exam (was Re: Beginner needs advice...badly!)
Date: 29 Sep 92 15:05:30 GMT
	<vb_pphc.vancleef@netcom.com> <1992Sep28.210134.6467@ads.com>
Distribution: usa
Organization: random
In-reply-to: charleen@ADS.COM's message of 28 Sep 92 21:01:34 GMT


  In her message of 28 Sep, Charleen Bunjiovianna asks what the FAA medical
  examination is looking for, and whether controlled hypertension is a problem.

Hi there.

You ought to obtain a copy of the Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) and
Airman's Information Manual (AIM), the former being the source of the relevant
regulations.  They come in a variety of formats (I like the ones that have
both under a single bound cover), and you can get them at most any airport
shop, or mail-order from a place like Sporty's.

You would want to look over part 67 - Medical Standards and Certification.
If you are just going to be a private pilot, you will need a Third Class
medical certificate (before you solo), and it's good for 2 years.
Basically, all they are looking for is to make sure there's nothing
that could interfere with your flying, so that you are not going to
be a medical hazard to yourself or others.

There are simple requirements for: vision (it doesn't need to be perfect),
hearing, ear-nose-throat, inner ear, no mental illness or neurologic
problems, no heart trouble, and no drug-controlled diabetes.
Hypertension is not specifically mentioned in the requirements, as far
as I can see.  (Perhaps a doctor on the net can clarify this for us.)

There's all kinds of useful information in the FAR/AIM books, and you will
need to be familiar with alot of it for your flying.  It's a little hard to
read sometimes though, with that legalistic format and style.

Hopefully you'll be able to Pass Thru your medical, and then you'll 
Lift Off soon, and Fly Away! Maybe you will even someday learn to Roll!  :)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: kerry@Ingres.COM (Kerry Kurasaki)
Subject: Re: Logging PIC (sorry ... sigh )
Keywords: PIC, logging
Reply-To: kerry@Ingres.COM (Kerry Kurasaki)
Organization: Ask Computer Systems Inc., Ingres Division, Alameda CA 94501
Date: 28 Sep 92 17:21:13 GMT

In article <1992Sep27.193434.4675@peck.com> geoff@peck.com (Geoff Peck) writes:
>Aargh.  The logging question again.  Definitively, now:
>
>(3)  A high performance endorsement is an endorsement, not a rating.
>     "Airplane Single Engine Land" is a rating.

Just to complicate things.  I believe you cannot LOG PIC if the aircraft
requires a type-rating and you do not hold a type rating for that
aircraft even though you hold category and class ratings.  Does this
apply to anyone on the net?
Newsgroups: rec.aviation