HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: gff%Rational.COM (Geoff Fitch)
Subject: Re: qu. on bay tour on 10/10
Organization: Rational
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 20:28:41 GMT

I believe the Blue Angels are flying over the bay for some sort
of festival. The thing to do is obvious: call flight service
and ask them!

As for tips, I assume you are flying from the south bay since you
are from NASA. You can go up or down either the west or east
side of the bay, but you may not get permission to transit the
SFO TCA if it is buzy. If the coast is clear of fog, you can
fly west of the Pacific coast shoreline as long as you say below
the TCA (which at points requires you to fly at 1000 ft AGL.

My suggestion is to contact Bay approach and ask for a TCA transition.
If you can't get it ask to go east overflying OAK airport. If you
go east they will want you to fly at 2000 ft or so until you pass
the OAK ARSA. Once you are north of SFO and OAK then you are free
to roam around the north bay as long as you stay clear of protected
airspace. On return, if it is clear it is fun to fly over the
Goldengate bridge then south along the coast shoreline. If you
are not familar with the local airspace, I spend some time 
studying it before you go. If it is buzy be prepared to listen
carefully and respond to ATC; you might not get a lot of time
to point out the sights to your passengers!

Geoff Fitch
gff@rational.com
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: amy@lloyd.Camex.COM (Amy Lindsay)
Subject: Re: gear-down check
Organization: Camex Inc., Boston MA
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 10:55:53 EDT

Maybe this is hopelessly niave, but...

Why doesn't everyone just visit their home tower (if they have one) and
ask the supervisor if she or he will institute this check at their field?

Why does the word have to be handed down from the federal level?  As far
as I can see, there's no reason why local towers CAN'T have a gear-down
check, and as long as the local pilots are making a reasonable request
in a reasonable tone, the worst the controllers can do is say "no."

...But they just might say "sure, sounds like a good idea."
					--amy
A.G.Lindsay, PP-ASEL   *   Cloud Rental: Reasonable Rates   *   amy@camex.com 
Typography & Design Department ~ Camex, Inc. ~ Boston, MA (617-426-7550 x575)
Student pilot about posting on rec.aviation: "Kinda like we're penguins on the
   ice shelf, wondering if there're killer whales below." (Eric Thiele)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: kkalan@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Kenneth Kalan)
Subject: Sharing Flight Expenses
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston Illinois.
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 15:04:36 GMT


Hi Netfolks

I was having a discussion with someone the other day and thought someone
out in netland would have the correct answer.

What constitutes sharing flight expenses with rental aircraft?

I think FAR 61.118 (b) (I'm taking my best quess at the number) states
that expenses can be shared, but I thought I saw or heard that only
fuel, tiedown, oil, etc., but not the rental fee could be shared.

If someone recalls reading this, could you either post or e-mail this
to me.

Thanks

Ken Kalan
PP ASEL
kgk@nwu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: twilson@alfred.carleton.ca (Tom Wilson)
Subject: Re: Any comments about the El Al crash?
Organization: Carleton University
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 13:53:21 GMT

In <Bvr5zv.4xz@access.digex.com> stephens@access.digex.com (John Stephens) writes:

>In article <6OCT199207332114@zeus.tamu.edu> sam4628@zeus.tamu.edu (MCCLUNEY, STEVEN ALEXANDER) writes:
>>In article <LHE.92Oct6082922@yang.sics.se>, lhe@sics.se (Lars-Henrik Eriksson) writes...
>>>When something like this happens the media starts writing lots of
>>>funny stuff about aviation. In Swedish newspapers I read yesterday
>>>that the 747 is unusual in that it is "stable", meaning that it can
>>>land with all engines failed. Today I read that the 747 engine mounts
>>>are designed so that the engines actually fall off the aircraft if
>>>they have been damaged enough.
>>> 
>>>This latter statement seems totally incredible. I would have dismissed
>>>it straight away if it wasn't for alleged quotes by Boing people
>>>supporting it.
>>> 
>>>Does anyone know if this really IS true?!?
>>> 
>>>--
>>
>>According to my old flight instructor (flight engineer, 727; copilot, 737;
>>I think he's in 767's now) many (perhaps all?) Boeing planes are designed
>>such that if an engine is vibrating badly it will come off before doing
>>damage to the rest of the plane.  As far as I know, this only applies
>>to engine vibration (i.e. they can't 'eject' an engine which is on fire).
>>
>I believe that all large jet aircraft, starting with the DC-8 or even before,
>are constructed so that an engine will break away from the wing before G-loads
>will deform the wing due to the engines weight.  There are specific "break-away"
>bolts holding the engine to the wing for that purpose.  These usually get
>to do their stuff only in the event of a VERY HARD landing where the wing
>would otherwise be strained too much to permit flight to continue safely.

>I don't believe the engines are designed to break away in any other
>circumstances, and am very sure that they cannot be "jetisoned" by the pilot.

>John Stephens.


Yes, indeed, this is precisely what happened in the Air Canada crash
at Toronto some years ago. First-officer accidentally deployed
spoilers at about 50ft agl, stretch DC-8 hit hard, one engine sheared
off starting a fire. Captain didn't see the engine go, I think it was
outboard left, so he reapplied power to do a go around. They ended up
crashing in a golf course when the wing exploded.

Tom
-- 
Dr. Thomas C. Wilson         Telephone: 613-788-2600 - Ext: 3910
Carleton University (SSR108) Ottawa, Canada  K1S 5B6      
E-Mail: twilson@ccs.carleton.ca
(Usual disclaimers apply)    CompuServe: 71610.2247@compuserve.com
From: dst+@cs.cmu.edu (Dave Touretzky)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: breast exam for Class III medical
Date: 8 Oct 92 05:09:42 GMT
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon


Richard Kaplan M.D. writes:

> ... a breast exam is an important, safe, quick, and inexpensive screening
> exam and it is arguable that it is reasonable for any woman's FAA exam
> unless the patient objects.

Given today's litigious climate,  it's conceivable that *not* doing a breast
exam as part of a physical could leave a physician open to charges of
negligence.  After all, it only takes a minute and involves no pain or risk.
It could be awkward to someday have to explain to some hostile lawyer why
one did a less thorough job than for a "standard" physical just because it
was an FAA medical exam.  So maybe the doctor in question was just trying to
cover his own butt.  

Or maybe he lost a friend to breast cancer recently and vowed that he would
henceforth check *every* female patient, because he didn't want to see
more women die before their time.

On the other hand, I understand there are quite a few incidents of
"inappropriate" behavior towards women by male physicians, based on
complaints to state medical societies.  So it's conceivable that the doctor
in question was doing this exam for his own gratification rather than for
the patient's benefit.  I think that's the unspoken question the original
poster was raising.  But, optimist that I am, I prefer one of the other
explanations in the absence of additional information.

-- Dave Touretzky,  CFI-AIM,  Seneca N8147E (``The Pro Re Nata Beast'')
From: davehyde@TECNET1.JCTE.JCS.MIL
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Crew coordination
Date: 8 Oct 92 12:27:41 GMT

OK, one more try....

My wife is starting to talk about flying with me much more frequently.  Anyone
out there got any thoughts on crew coordination?  I.e, what type of things do
y'all get your passengers (experienced or otherwise) to do for you to reduce
your workload?

David Hyde
davehyde@tecnet1.jcte.jcs.mil
From: per@front.se
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: <None>
Date: 15 Oct 92 18:56:32 MET
Distribution: world
Organization: Front Capital Systems AB, Sweden

In article <1992Oct11.095508.1427@rai.juice.or.jp>, tetsuji@rai.juice.or.jp (Tetsuji Rai) writes:
> 
>     Hi, netters.
>    Title says it all.    I have a private pilot certificate(though it
> is still the temporary one), and am to get Japanese certificate.
> To convert a FAA PPL to a Japanese PPL, nothing is necessary except for
> the *real*(not temporary) certificate.   But i'm wondering whether I can
> get Europe's licence or Austraila's licence and how.    Is anything
> required for that ?
>    Thank you in advance.
> 
> Tetsuji

Congratulations to your PPL!

All (or most?) of the member states of ICAO recognize each others
Private Pilot Licenses. In some cases (e.g. Sweden) no paperwork is
needed, in some (e.g. USA) you immediately get a local PPL based on
your foreign PPL.

The book "Renting and Flying Airplanes Worldwide" by Geza Szurovy (TAB
Books) describes in detail which formalities there are, if any. It
also lists useful organizations, FBO:s, where you can get your
briefings etc.

It would be interesting to read more about what flying in Japan is
like.

Per Lindberg (per@front.se)         !      __!__
Front Capital Systems, Box 5727,    !  _____(_)_____  Ceci n'est pas une Piper
11487 Stockholm, Sweden. 8-6611510  !     !  !  !
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: rkaplan@netcom.com (Richard Kaplan)
Subject: Re: Class III medical exam
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 02:28:45 GMT

In article <199210061920.AA03525@tuna.wang.com> DAVID.CARACAPPA@OFFICE.WANG.COM ("David N. Caracappa") writes:
>Yesterday, when my wife went for her Class III medical, the doctor did a
>breast exam (among other things).  We could not think of any flight medical

Pelvic, rectal, prostate, and breast exams were
recently removed from the FAA specified procedures.
They now are performed only at the request of the
patient or if the doctor feels there is a particular
medical indication.  

That said, a breast exam is an important, safe,
quick, and inexpensive screening exam and it 
is arguable that it is reasonable for any
woman's FAA exam unless the patient objects.
Many people do not routinely schedule physical
exams, and thus even though the FAA may not
require a breast exam it may be very appropriate
from the patient's overall health care perspective.
-- 
Richard Kaplan M.D.           Medical Software Exchange BBS
806 2nd St. SW # 104          (507) 281-1989 14,400 HST
Rochester, MN  55902          (507) 281-1689 Voice
PP-ASEL-IA     N4VRB          rkaplan@mayo.edu|netcom.netcom.com  
Newsgroups: rec.aviation,rec.aviation.piloting,eunet.aviation
From: CBailey@msd.lmsc.lockheed.com (Carlton J. Bailey)
Subject: Re: gear-down check
Organization: LMSC P.A. Data Systems Engineering
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 92 19:51:13 GMT

In article <WD.92Oct10135433@sam.cs.tu-berlin.de> wd@cs.tu-berlin.de (Wolfgang Diestelkamp) writes:

>Until yesterday I had never heard that "check gear down" on
>any approach, but yesterday I had an interesting, and convincing,
>experience: I was on an IFR training flight, and the instructor asked
>if I had ever done a GCA (ground controlled approach, with vertical
>and horizontal guidance). As I had never done it before, we went
>out to some military field north of Hamburg (Hohn, EDNQ); the
>military controllers happily train GCA's as they need them to
>get their license prolonged just as we need landings.
>Anyway, a situation in which you would normally request a GCA
>is a high-workload situation (probably some instruments have failed
>else you could do an ILS or NDB approach and obviously you are
>in the soup under some pressure). So on these two training
>GCA's it was the first time I heard "check gear down" and,
>approaching decision altitude, even got "*recheck* gear down".
>I think it is very helpful in such an abnormal situation to get
>this, *particularly* if it is not a standard phrase like "roger"
>or something. Maybe they should say "check gear down" only in
>abnormal, stressfull situations ?
>-- 
>Wolfgang Diestelkamp
>wd@cs.tu-berlin.de
>wolfgang@first.gmd.de

This is not abnormal, all military field controlers ask for a gear check in 
the imc environment either acctual or simulated.  All military aircraft have 
to confirm thier landing configuration with ATC prior to touchdown.  They 
think this prevents gear up landing, and it does.

					Skyking
					Always Check Your Six!!!!!
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: spagiola@frinext.stanford.edu (Stefano Pagiola)
Subject: Re: Can a 747 fly for 24hrs ?
Reply-To: spagiola@frinext.stanford.edu
Organization: DSO, Stanford University
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 92 00:48:58 GMT

Christopher Davis writes
> Tim> The two 747-400 aircraft with are the primary components of
> Tim> the Presidential aircraft fleet operated by the 89th ALW at
> Tim> Andrews AFB also have airborne refuelling capability.
> 
> I was under the impression that 28000 and 29000 were heavily
>  modified -200 models, not -400s.

And you're right.  The Japanese gov't does have a 747-400.

Speaking of heavily modified 747s, I remember seeing the King of  
Saudi Arabia's (at that time, King Khalid) heavily modified private  
747SP several times at Geneva, Switzerland.  The only obvious  
exterior difference was the plethora of aerials, but the interior was  
apparently quite luxurious (and also included a fully-equipped  
hospital to deal with the King's fragile health).  Later they  
switched to a similarly-modified 747-300, but kept the SP around.

--
-
Stefano Pagiola
Food Research Institute, Stanford University
spagiola@frinext.stanford.edu (NeXTMail encouraged)
spagiola@FRI-nxt-Pagiola.stanford.edu (NeXTMail encouraged)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Maintenance costs for Bell 47-G3,B-1 ???
From: dporter@altair.csustan.edu (Darren Porter)
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 92 05:03:27 GMT
Organization: California State University, Stanislaus
Originator: dporter@altair.csustan.edu

We are getting many different figures on the hourly maintenance rate we should
set aside per hour of flight time.  It is very confusing.  If anybody has some
knowledge of the subject could you please e-mail me some figures and your
justifications for them.

Thanks in advance.

dporter@csustan.edu
Darren Porter

-- 
______________________________________________________________________
|Darren T. Porter                        |  internet mail:           | 
|Mathematics Student                     |       dporter@csustan.edu |
|California State University, Stanislaus | 			     |
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: kmcdonal@javelin.sim.es.com (Kevin McDonald)
Subject: Vancouver information, please
Summary: Looking for info on Vancouver airports
Organization: Evans & Sutherland Computer Corporation
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 17:22:47 GMT

Well, here we go, the first trip outside the United States.  We'll be
heading up to Vancouver in a little over a week but I don't know
anything about the place.

The only airport I am aware of is Vancouver International Airport but
the good gen av accommodations are usually at the smaller, well, gen av
airports.  Any recommendations?

Also, any ideas on things to see and do would be appreciated.  Isn't this
great being hooked up with the entire world?!?!?!

Thank you in advance,

		Kevin McDonald
From: poole@cs.widener.edu (Phil Poole)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Signature file
Date: 8 Oct 92 03:28:40 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Widener University CS Department, Chester PA
NNTP-Posting-Host: betty.cs.widener.edu


Cool Now I have a place to use my signature file.


NO flames this just a joke.!



                             \     /
                              \ _ /
                           ----/_\----
               x--------------( . )--------------x
                    x|x   | |_|\_/|_| |   x|x     
                     x    x           x    x    

CF-18 Hornet

-- 
Phil Poole	    |	Widener University SUN networks Co-manager
		    |	Widener University ACM Chapter President
poole@cs.widener.edu|	School Photographer.
From: tjgerman@53iss6.Waterloo.NCR.COM (Trevor German)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: FISH STRIKE
Date: 14 Oct 92 13:29:46 GMT
Organization: Imaging Systems Division, NCR Corp, Waterloo, Ont., CANADA


	All this talk of bird strikes reminds me of a news item I heard
	a while back from Seattle or somewhere on the west coast. A
	pilot had to make an emergency landing after reporting to the
	tower that he had apparently made a "Fish Strike".

		As far as I remember what happened was an Osprey carrying
	a large salmon flew in the path of the jet as it was taking off
	and, in order to evade capture by this rather bigger bird, dropped
	the fish. The fish hit the aircraft's windshield making a rather
	bloody oily mess if not breaking the window.  The pilot safely
	returned to the airport.

		Can anyone remember this and give more details. One wonders
	if the pilot is still being ribbed by his co-workers on this one.

		Does anyone have any other unusual ***-strike stories.
--
       >|  "Only average people            | Trevor J German BSc    |<
       >|        never make mistakes."     | NCR, Waterloo, Ontario |<
       >| tjgerman@53iss6.Waterloo.NCR.COM | Canada.                |< 
From: bills@hplvec.LVLD.HP.COM (Bill Standerfer)
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 14:02:12 GMT
Subject: Re: Jeppesen RNAV En Route Charts
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Co., Loveland, CO
Newsgroups: rec.aviation

In article <2998@contex.contex.com>, brian@porky.contex.com (Brian Love)
writes:
>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?

I don't know why Jepp leaves the RNAV approach charts out of the normal sub,
but they do.  I guess they think it is less clutter for those who don't want
them.  On the practical side, however, I've been taking the RNAV sub for, oh,
15 years or so, and I've *never* had occasion to use an RNAV approach when
IFR.  Every year it gets harder to keep it.  However, home base does have 2
RNAV approaches, so I keep it around for those rare times when both the ILS
and the weather are down at the same time.

As for the RNAV enroute charts, I've taken those for a short time in the
distant past and found them not very useful.  They do eliminate the clutter of
airways and intersections so you have a nice, clean map on which to plot your
course.  However, you'll often need those airways and intersections when you
get near the busier terminal areas.  Clearances will often include references
to intersections or airways, so you'll have to pull out the normal enroute
charts.  And when you go into the airport areas which have Area Charts, you
should be using those anyway.

The best alternative I've found to the RNAV enroute charts is a good flight
planning program.  The good ones these days like Mentor and Flightsoft (the
one I use) will print out your route on one page so you can get the big
picture, plus print out RNAV coordinates for your direct route.  I then follow
the progress on the normal enroute chart.

This works for me, but your mileage may vary...

Bill Standerfer
From: peggy@cybernet.cse.fau.edu (Peggy golden)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Uncontrolled Fields
Date: 8 Oct 92 15:42:04 GMT
Organization: Cybernet BBS, Boca Raton, Florida

I learned to fly at a controlled airport in an ARSA (Louisville) and was
pretty indfferent to the controlled airspace issue until we moved to South
Florida. Here we have many uncontrolled airports in an area with heavy air
traffic (both general aviation and commerical). Truthfully, general aviation
is not the fun experience it was in the midwest (and perhaps in Austin
Texas). I would not recommend studnet piloting at an uncontrolled field
here. It is simp[ly too dangerous. BTW, I fly out of BCT (Boca Raton) which
is an uncontrolled airport wedged in between the FLL and PBI ARSA's (soon to
be type C airspace). It is *VERY* scary.

Peggy Golden

Peggy A. Golden
Dept. of Management and International Business
Florida Atlantic University
also...Warrior N38897
golden@acc.fau.edu
Newsgroups: rec.aviation,rec.aviation.homebuilt
From: doshay@ursa.arc.nasa.gov (David Doshay)
Subject: Re: Seawinds Sea Plane Kit
Organization: NASA-Ames Biocomputation Center
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 17:17:05 GMT

In article <1992Oct7.133046.4595@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu>, baldwin@pacific.cps.msu.edu (Reid A Baldwin) writes:
|> In article <1992Oct6.170739.7735@news.arc.nasa.gov>, doshay@ursa.arc.nasa.gov (David Doshay) writes:
|> |> Another thing that has occured
|> |> to me is that if the engine is further back then the pitching moments
|> |> from power changes will be less.
|> |> 
|> 
|> Why would the pitching moment be influenced by fore-aft placement?

Because the engine/prop is so much higher than the Cg, there is no way to
angle the engine enough to point the thrust line through the Cg. Thus for
the same diameter prop, if you move the engine further from the Cg the component
of thrust causing rotation about the Cg will decrease. The extra distance
also allows for some leeway in pointing the thrust line.

David		doshay@soma.arc.nasa.gov

The thought police insist I tell you:
my thoughts, not NASA's
From: merlyn@ora.com (Randal L. Schwartz)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: with regard to looking for a plane to look for a boat...
Date: 13 Oct 92 20:51:01 GMT
Article-I.D.: romulus.MERLYN.92Oct13135056
Organization: Stonehenge Consulting Services; Portland, Oregon, USA


Weeks ago, I posted a request for assistance in finding a boat
in the Seattle area via some friendly co-pilots in their planes.

Many people responded, and I thank you.

The boat has been found by more conventional means, and is now up for
sale.  I wish someone would buy it in a hurry, because I won't be
flying until I get the cash out of the deal, but *after* it sells, I
may be subscribing to rec.aviation.owning. :-) (They say the two
happiest days for a boat owner are the day you get the boat and the
day you sell it... let's hope these two joyous days are not far
apart.)

I know this is the wrong audience, but if you know someone that wants
a like-new ocean-capable 44-foot sailing vessel for around $170,000 on
a factory repo, have *I* got a deal for you... :-)

Randal L. Schwartz, PP-ASEL-IA, and a kinda happy boat owner to boot... :-)
--
Randal L. Schwartz / Stonehenge Consulting Services (503)777-0095
merlyn@reed.edu (guest account) merlyn@ora.com (better for permanent record)
cute quote: "Welcome to Portland, Oregon -- home of the California Raisins!"
Newsgroups: rec.aviation,rec.aviation.misc