HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: kls@ohare.Chicago.COM (Karl Swartz)
Subject: Re: Aha!  The three-man 767 rears its ugly head...
X-Submission-Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 10:54:58 GMT
Organization: Chicago Software Works
X-Submission-Message-ID: <1993Jan6.105458.10801@ohare.Chicago.COM>
Date: 06 Jan 93 04:26:38 PST

In article <airliners.1993.12@ohare.Chicago.COM> ckd@eff.org (Christopher Davis) writes:
>The aforementioned first 767 was last seen (by me anyway :) at Boeing
>Field, looking kinda lonely (it's been sitting there a fairly long time).

I'm surprised it's been that long -- I thought it had been involved
with the AOA development fairly recently.

>Unfortunately I don't have anywhere near enough influence to get a look at
>the cockpit layout...

Hmmm ... anyone else?

>Just for kicks, I looked it up in JP; here's the pertinent info.

>N767BA, Boeing 767-200 (that's right, 00, a reserved customer code) ...

I thought that code interesting as well.  The info I have says that 20
is supposed to be the code for Boeing itself, including prototypes.

>Other notes on the 757/767: the 757 prototype, N757A, was sitting nearby

It's supposed to become the flying testbed for the 777's fly-by-wire,
er, fly-by-light system quite soon now.  Were there any signs of
activity?

>the AWACS version of the 767 is looking to be launched by Japan soon

I wonder if 767 #1 will be any sort of prototype for this program?

>UPS has launched the 767 cargo variant.

I wonder how different it will be?  The 757-200 PF (Package Freight),
also for UPS, is notable in being the highest MGTOW 757 (250,000 lbs.
vs. 220,000 to 240,000 for the passenger variants) with correspondingly
higher thrust engines.  And FedEx's launch of the A300-600 cargo
variant seemed to generate a surprising amount of attention ...

-- 
Karl Swartz	|INet	kls@ditka.chicago.com		
1-415/854-3409	|UUCP	uunet!decwrl!ditka!kls
		|Snail	2144 Sand Hill Rd., Menlo Park CA 94025, USA
 Send sci.aeronautics.airliners submissions to airliners@chicago.com

Newsgroups: sci.aeronautics.airliners
From: driscoll@src.honeywell.com (Kevin Driscoll)
Subject: Re: Boeing link with Daimler-Benz on "jumbo jumbo?"
X-Submission-Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 00:14:58 GMT
Organization: Honeywell Systems & Research Center
X-Submission-Message-Id: <1993Jan8.001458.13702@src.honeywell.com>
Date: 07 Jan 93 22:03:38 PST

In article <airliners.1993.17@ohare.Chicago.COM> kls@ohare.Chicago.COM (Karl Swartz) writes:
>Boeing said today (Tuesday) that it has held discussions with Daimler-
>Benz regarding development of a "jumbo jumbo" airliner that could
>carry as many as 800 passengers on long-range routes.  Interesting to
>say the least since Daimler-Benz's aerospace subsidiary is Deutsche
>Airbus!

The BBC World Service reported today that the head of Airbus says they
have been talking to Boeing, appearenly independently from their Deutsche
subsidiary.  The BBC speculated that this might be a Boeing ploy "to
drive a wedge between the partners".

Newsgroups: sci.aeronautics.airliners
From: dtl8v@holmes.acc.Virginia.EDU (Heracleitus)
Subject: Plessey Avionics
X-Submission-Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 21:58:37 GMT
Organization: University of Virginia
X-Submission-Message-ID: <1993Jan7.215837.23343@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
Date: 07 Jan 93 22:03:35 PST


  Does anyone know the E-mail address, if any, or uucp address, of
Plessey Avionics, Havant, Hampshire, UK?  It is no relation to Plessey
Telecom (gpt.co.uk), I've found, at least in mail terms.  Any help
would be appreciated.

Doug Lamb
University of Virginia
dtl8v@Virginia.EDU
From: kls@ohare.Chicago.COM (Karl Swartz)
Newsgroups: sci.aeronautics.airliners
Subject: Re: Aha!  The three-man 767 rears its ugly head...
Date: 6 Jan 93 23:01:19 GMT
Organization: Chicago Software Works
X-Submission-Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 22:42:42 GMT
X-Submission-Message-ID: <1993Jan6.224242.12504@ohare.Chicago.COM>

In article <airliners.1993.19@ohare.Chicago.COM> dme5907@bcstec.ca.boeing.com (David M. Eklund) writes:
>Due to extensive modification from the YF-22 program on N757A the decision
>was made to take a 757 off the production line for a flying testbed
>of the 777's flight control laws.  It successfully completed its tests
>a couple of months ago and will now be modified again and sold to its
>respective customer.

Ah!  Is there anything else in the works for N757A, then, or is
it just parked until something new comes along?  And, the $64,000
question, *which* production 757 was used for the tests?  8-)

-- 
Karl Swartz	|INet	kls@ditka.chicago.com		
1-415/854-3409	|UUCP	uunet!decwrl!ditka!kls
		|Snail	2144 Sand Hill Rd., Menlo Park CA 94025, USA
 Send sci.aeronautics.airliners submissions to airliners@chicago.com
Newsgroups: sci.aeronautics.airliners
From: rdd@rascal.ics.utexas.edu (Robert Dorsett)
Subject: McDonnell Douglas warns against carry-on electronic devices
X-Submission-Date: Thu, 31 Dec 92 03:12:50 CST
X-Submission-Message-Id: <9212310912.AA02337@rascal.ics.utexas.edu>
Date: 05 Jan 93 00:24:06 PST

It'd be interesting to learn how MDC came to its very specific conclusion 
about the bank incident... :-)


--
Robert Dorsett
Internet: rdd@rascal.ics.utexas.edu
UUCP: ...cs.utexas.edu!rascal.ics.utexas.edu!rdd


----------

>From AIRLINE PILOT, December 1992, p. 40:


"McDonnell Douglas Corporation has warned all operators of DC-8, DC-9,
DC-10, MD-11, and MD-80 aircraft about reported interference to
avionics from passenger carry-on electronic equipment.  The
manufacturer further recommends that operators of its aircraft
prohibit onboard use of 'any passenger-operated carry-on electronic
radio transmitting device which intentionally radiates' electromagnetic
energy.

"The reason for the warning, said McDonnell Douglas Aircraft Company,
is that a DC-10 recently '...abruptly banked to the right twice during
climb to a cruising altitude.  The suspected cause of these incidents
was...  a passenger operating a small audio [compact disc] player.'

"In 1983, at the request of airlines, the Radio Technical Commission
for Aeronautics began investigating the effects that carry-on
electrical and electronic devices can have on the operations of
aircraft systems.

"RTCA compiled and analyzed data on the emission characteristics of
various carry-on electronic devices and the effectiveness of aircraft
cabin shielding in protecting aircraft radio navigation and
communication systems.

"Douglas continues to support these RTCA conclusions and
recommendations but warns that 'many advances in technology...  have
greatly increased the number and variety of portable electronic devices
that passengers may wish to operate onboard an aircraft.'

"These devices, says the company, 'include, but are not limited to,'
citizen-band radios, cellular telephones, transmitters that remotely
control devices such as toys, and portable compact disc players.

"Douglas also recommends that 'non-transmitting carry-on electronic
devices not be used during takeoff and landing, or whenever directed by
a crewmember.'  The manufacturer suggests that these devices may be
used at other times, 'provided that the operator of the aircraft has
given permission for their use.'

"Examples of these nontransmitting devices are audio and video
recorders and playback devices, electronic games, computers and
peripheral devices, calculators, FM receivers, televisions, and
electric shavers.

"In light of rapidly changing technology, FAA has again asked RTCA to
study and make recommendations concerning portable electronic devices.
As a result, a new RTCA special committee will be formed."







Newsgroups: sci.aeronautics.airliners
From: megazone@obsidian.WPI.EDU (MegaZone23)
Subject: Re: First Flights on airliners
X-Submission-Date: 8 Jan 1993 06:08:56 GMT
Organization: WPI USAF -- United Society of Animation Fans
X-Submission-Message-Id: <1ij5poINN2un@bigboote.WPI.EDU>
Date: 08 Jan 93 01:30:33 PST

In article <airliners.1993.25@ohare.Chicago.COM> dseelema@zeus.UWaterloo.ca (Alek Seelemann) writes:
>no-no #1) is a mystery. Boeing cleaned up because the 707 was so  
>over-designed it could (and did, once) perform barrel rolls. Very  
>confidence inspiring!

OK, actually that was the prototype 367-80 that rolled on a demo flight,
I believe the pilot was Tex Johnson..

Of course it seems impressive, but it is more pilot skill. A well designed,
not necessarily over-designed, airframe can barrel roll. Propperly done
it is a 1g manauever. It looks fantastic, but it isn't really that much
of a demonstration. I've seen films of helicopters, I mean big cargo
choppers, barrel rolling. It is more a measure of the pilot than the plane.

Of course it is still a good selling point since most people don't know
the physics... Now, an aerleron roll would be impressive...

###############################################################################
# I have one prejudice, and that is against stupidity.  Use your mind, think! #
#Email megazone@wpi.wpi.edu  Moderator, WPI anime FTP site 130.215.24.1 /anime#
###############################################################################

Newsgroups: sci.aeronautics.airliners
From: Pete Mellor <pm@cs.city.ac.uk>
Subject: Things that cannot possibly go wrong 
X-Submission-Date: Mon, 4 Jan 93 13:50:17 GMT
X-Submission-Message-Id: <747.9301041350@csrsun8.cs.city.ac.uk>
Date: 05 Jan 93 00:24:11 PST

The following extract from Douglas Adams' latest book* contain a lesson 
for designers of complex systems, particularly computerised ones (e.g., 
fly-by-wire): 

     ... all mechanical or electrical or quantum-mechanical or hydraulic or 
     even wind, steam or piston-driven devices, are now required to 
     have a certain legend emblazoned on them somewhere. It doesn't matter 
     how small the object is, the designers of the object have got to find 
     a way of squeezing the legend in somewhere, because it is their attention 
     which is being drawn to it rather than necessarily that of the user's. 

     The legend is this: 

     `The major difference between a thing that might go wrong and a thing 
      that cannot possibly go wrong is that when a thing that cannot possibly 
      go wrong goes wrong it usually turns out to be impossible to get at or 
      repair' 


* "Mostly Harmless" (The fifth book in the increasingly inaccurately named 
  "Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy" trilogy) by Douglas Adams, Heinemann, 
  London, 1992, ISBN 0434 00926 1 

Peter Mellor, Centre for Software Reliability, City University, Northampton 
Sq., London EC1V 0HB, Tel: +44(0)71-477-8422, JANET: p.mellor@city.ac.uk 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Newsgroups: sci.aeronautics.airliners
From: Geoff.Miller@Corp.Sun.COM (Geoff Miller)
Subject: Stratocruiser (was: First Flights on airliners)
X-Submission-Date: 9 Jan 1993 00:15:06 GMT
Followup-To: sci.aeronautics.airliners
Reply-To: Geoff.Miller@Corp.Sun.COM
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Menlo Park, Ca.
X-Submission-Message-Id: <1il5eaINNt6f@jethro.Corp.Sun.COM>
Date: 09 Jan 93 02:24:58 PST



dseelema@zeus.UWaterloo.ca (Alek Seelemann) writes:

>DeHavilland was aware of metal fatigue. Why the heck they designed  
>square windows (sharp corners == stress concentration == engineering  
>no-no #1) is a mystery.


Speaking of round vs. square windows, I noticed that all versions of
the Boeing Stratocruiser had circular windows except those operated 
by Northwest and United.  Was there a technical reason for this?  (I
have the impression that these were later models than, say, the Pan Am
and BOAC ships.)  Or was the window shape changed because of customer
preference, to give the passengers a better view on those long overwater
trips?  :)



Geoff


-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
Geoff Miller			+ + + + + + + +        Sun Microsystems
geoffm@purplehaze.Corp.Sun.COM	+ + + + + + + +     Menlo Park, California
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-


Newsgroups: sci.aeronautics.airliners
From: raveling@Unify.com (Paul Raveling)
Subject: Re: Tire burn-out during landings
X-Submission-Date: Thu, 31 Dec 92 20:30:05 GMT
Organization: Unify Corporation (Sacramento)
X-Submission-Message-Id: <cx8am9t@Unify.Com>
Date: 05 Jan 93 00:24:07 PST

In article <airliners.1992.208@ohare.Chicago.COM>, barnett@convex.com (Paul Barnett) writes:
> In <airliners.1992.200@ohare.Chicago.COM> yarvin-norman@CS.YALE.EDU (Norman Yarvin) writes:
> 
> >In any case, the practicality of preventing tires from disintegrating
> >depends on how fast tires presently disintegrate.  How much matter really is
> >there in that cloud of smoke?  Perhaps a gram per cubic meter of smoke?  And
> >how much tire is left on the runway?  Do they have to go out and scrape it
> >off now and then?  (I imagine not.)  Seems to me the loss of tire material
> >is negligible also.  Compared, that is, with the other costs of running the
> >airplane.

	Tires have to be replaced more often than I personally might have
	expected.  My dad says that the Western Airlines record for most
	landings between changing sets of tires was 283, and was held by
	a DC-10.  It would be interesting to know some statistics for
	mean replacement frequency and cost, which have doubtless changed
	some since he worked for Western.  With tire pressures of 190 psi
	and loading on the order of tens of thousands of pounds per tire,
	not counting forces at touchdown, it figures that they won't be cheap.


------------------
Paul Raveling
Raveling@Unify.com


Newsgroups: sci.aeronautics.airliners
From: kls@ohare.Chicago.COM (Karl Swartz)
Subject: Re: Economics of new vs. older planes
X-Submission-Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 11:33:22 GMT
Organization: Chicago Software Works
X-Submission-Message-ID: <1993Jan6.113322.11041@ohare.Chicago.COM>
Date: 06 Jan 93 04:26:43 PST

In article <airliners.1993.5@ohare.Chicago.COM> Geoff.Miller@Corp.Sun.COM (Geoff Miller) writes:
>In article <airliners.1992.203@ohare.Chicago.COM> drinkard@bcstec.ca.boeing.com (Terrell D. Drinkard) writes:

>>Unfortunately for 727 owners, they are stage two noise compliant.  This
>>means that they will no longer be allowed to operate in the domestic US 
>>after 2000 or so.  Europe is much the same.  This short economic life must
>>be take into account before purchasing our hypothetical 727.

>Can't they be made Stage III compliant with hush kits?

Yes, but that adds a performance/fuel consumption penalty on top of
that already paid for having a third engine as well as older and less
efficient engines and wings.  With fuel a major cost these days many
airlines don't seem to find this all that attractive.

>Also, either UPS or FedEx are reengining their 727s with Rolls-Royce Tays, 
>which are Stage III compliant and more fuel efficient than the JT8Ds to boot.

UPS at least has them.  The conversions are being done by Dee Howard
and are fairly noticeable -- I saw one at San Antonio last summer.
But as I recall the price-tag is in the $15 million range, nearly half
the price of a brand-new replacement.  When you figure that a typical
727 airframe has perhaps half of its economic life remaining this is
starting to look like a dead heat.  Now consider that three Tays are
likely, though by no means certain, to use more fuel and require more
maintenance expense.

Another factor is crew -- all the potential 727 replacements have only
two-person cockpits vs. three on the 727.  I believe someone (perhaps
Dee Howard) is offering a glass cockpit for the 727 in conjunction
with a re-engining though this of course would add significantly to
the cost, and so far I'm not aware of any having been so converted.

Looking at the major passenger carriers, most seem to be voting for
replacement and not upgrades.  The only notable exception that comes
to mind is that Delta recently ordered 15 hush kits for 727s used on
the northeast shuttle service.

-- 
Karl Swartz	|INet	kls@ditka.chicago.com		
1-415/854-3409	|UUCP	uunet!decwrl!ditka!kls
		|Snail	2144 Sand Hill Rd., Menlo Park CA 94025, USA
 Send sci.aeronautics.airliners submissions to airliners@chicago.com

From: linas@hparc0.aus.hp.com (Linas Petras)
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 00:18:47 GMT
Subject: Re: Advice wanted:  CDROM star charts
Organization: HP Australasian Response Centre (Melbourne)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

One of the best sources for catalogs on CDROM, (if not the best) is NASA 
Selected Astronomical Catalogs Volume 1, from the Astronomical Data Center.
It contains from memory 150 different catalogs, including the SAO catalog
which gives you about 250,000 star positions.

Unfortunately the program that comes with the CD only gives you the results
in tabular form, but it should be fairly easy to write a program to access the
data, which is provided in either FITS or ASCII form.

I'm not sure of the address I ordered my from (cost ~US$30.00), but perhaps
someone else can give you an order address.

Hope this helps. 

(PS If anyone has any software that they would be prepared to share for reading
    these CD's I would be interested in getting a copy).

-- 
Linas Petras
The comments are my own and do not represent	Hewlett-Packard Aust Ltd.
the views of my employeer			Phone: +61 3 272 2744
						Internet:linas@hparc0.aus.HP.COM
Newsgroups: sci.astro,sci.physics
From: scip2124@nusunix1.nus.sg (MARC PAUL JOREF VAN LOO)
Subject: Re: That Great Pulsar Timing Flame War
Organization: National University of Singapore
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 08:51:51 GMT

  There exists no decent derivation of the
  gravitational radiation of a binary pulsar.
  Yu's objection to this derivation is correct.
  But I found out recently that it is not new:
  Read the 16th lecture of Buchwald's book
  17 simple lectures on GR. (1982).

  If you still maintain after reading this book
  that gravitational radiation (or GR in general)
  is a clear and undebatable subject, you must
  be very hard-headed.

Xref: sparky sci.astro:13676 sci.space:18797 news.answers:4956
From: palmer@sfu.ca (Leigh Palmer)
Subject: Re: AAS Meeting
Organization: Simon Fraser University
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 17:27:27 GMT

Chris Metzler satisfied my requirement before I asked!

Leigh
Xref: sparky sci.astro:13681 sci.space:18802 news.answers:4961
From: apryan@vax1.tcd.ie
Subject: Perseid storms 1993/1862
Organization: Trinity College Dublin
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 02:15:54 GMT

Thank you to Paul Schlyter, Stockholm, Sweden who emailed much interesting
information including:

(all UT) 
perhelion 1862 Aug. 23.41, 
full moons:
1860 Aug  1.73  (partial lunar eclipse, 44% of Moon in umbra)
1860 Aug 31.37  (no eclipse)
1861 Aug 20.49  (no eclipse)
1862 Aug  9.91  (no eclipse)
1863 Aug 28.87  (no eclipse)
1864 Aug 17.57  (no eclipse)


We are still looking for the precise dates of maxima from 1860-1864 incl. Can 
anyone help? Or can only Brian Marsden satisfy such exacting requests!?

T.Ryan and D.Moore, Astronomy Ireland, P.O.Box 2888, Dublin 1, Ireland.
apryan@vax1.tcd.ie
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: karl@thuja.gsfc.nasa.gov (Karl A. Anderson)
Subject: Computing solar declination angle (was Re: Computing solar elevation
Organization: NASA/GSFC Laboratory for Terrestrial Physics
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 15:20:28 GMT

angle by the minute)
Keywords: 

In article <1993Jan5.161935.26860@nsisrv.gsfc.nasa.gov>, karl@thuja.gsfc.nasa.gov
(that's me) writes:
|> I'm not an astronomer, so please excuse my evident ignorance.  Purely for my
|> own interest, I'm trying to compute the solar elevation angle at each minute 
|> on a specified day of the year.  I found an undocumented algorithm for the 
|> sine of the solar elevation angle at each hour, which seems to work:
|> 
|> 	do 10 hour=1,24
|> 10	   sel = sd*sin(la) + cd*cos(la)*cos(.2618*(hour-12))
|> 
|> Where 
|> 
|> sel = sine of the solar elevation angle,
|> sd = sine of the solar declination angle on this Julian day,
|> cd = cosine of solar declination angle,
|> la = latitude in radians,
|> hour = day hour, 1 through 24.
|> 
|> I have no idea what the constant .2618 means.  When I tried replacing hour with
|> minute (1-1440), and replacing (hour-12) with (minute-720), I got some 
|> obviously wrong answers.  Do I just need to replace the constant?  Can anybody 
|> tell me the correct value? 

Thanks to a number of people for explaining how the constant .2618 is derived, and
furnishing the correct value.  My program now works pretty well, except that the
daylength it computes (which is why I'm doing this) is about 10 minutes shorter
than the one published in the Washington Post.  I've found that daylength is
sensitive to latitude, but I believe the Post gets its data from the Naval
Observatory in Washington, DC at 39 degrees, so that's what I'm using.

I want to verify the (also undocumented) algorithm I'm using to compute the sine
and cosine of the solar declination angle from Julian day jd:

       sd = 0.39785*sin(4.869 + 0.0172*jd + 0.03345*sin(6.224 + 0.0172*jd))
       cd = sqrt(1-sd**2)

Again, I have no idea where the constants came from.  I eagerly await your
insights.
-- 
Karl A. Anderson		| Internet: karl@thuja.gsfc.nasa.gov
NASA/GSFC code 920.2 (HSTX)	| voice: (301) 286-3815
Greenbelt, MD 20771		| #include "std_disclaimer"
From: mccricks@cc.gatech.edu (D. Scott McCrickard)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
Subject: Angular position/velocity of planets
Keywords: planets
Date: 12 Jan 93 02:56:55 GMT
Organization: Georgia Tech College of Computing

I'm trying to simulate the motions of the planets and was wondering if
there were an easy way to determine the angular position and velocity of
a planet relative to the sun.

I'm assuming at time 0 the planet is at position 0 degrees, which I'm
arbitrarily assuming is perihelion.  It's easy enough when the orbits
are assumed to be circular, but I'd like to throw in eccentricity of orbit.

Also, I assume that not all planets reach perihelion along a line.  I'd
like to know where each planet reaches perihelion (preferably in degrees
relative to earth's perihelion).

Most sources I've checked give average distance from the sun, eccentricity
of orbit, and inclination of orbit to ecliptic, but I don't think these alone
will give me what I need.

I'd appreciate any help, either directly or by recommending a good text.
My email address is included below.

Thanks in advance.
					
---- D. Scott McCrickard (mccricks@cc.gatech.edu)
Newsgroups: sci.astro
From: betz@gozer.idbsu.edu (Andrew Betz)
Subject: Re: Universal Time Clock
Organization: SigSauer Fan Club 
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 21:29:11 GMT

In article <1993Jan8.112822.19223@mr.med.ge.com> hinz@picard.med.ge.com (David Hinz (hinz@picard.med.ge.com)) writes:
>: I'm looking for a Universal Time Clock that receives radio
>: signals to give universal time accurately.  I have checked the
>: 
>: Does anyone know who carries the clocks?

i've seen the kind that plug into a PC's expansion slot from an
electronics firm (MCM in dayton, ohio, i think it was).  the price
tag was around $150.

>As I recall (fuzzily), UCT is brodcast at octaves above, below, and including
>250MHz.  These frequencies are certified primary standards, as well, so
 ^^^^^^
that would be VHF line of sight.

>the're as accurate as it gets.  Any radio that can receive these frequencies
>would be fine, most short-wave sets can pick up 3 or more.

try 5.0000, 10.0000, and 15.0000 MHz.  there's a few more (7735 MHz?),
but these can almost always be heard.

drew 
--
betz@gozer.idbsu.edu
*** brought into your terminal from the free state of idaho ***
"Now I am become death, destroyer of worlds." - Oppenheimer

Xref: sparky sci.astro:13708 sci.bio:4802 sci.chem:5679 sci.physics:22166