HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ts@cup.portal.com (Tim W Smith)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Suit filed against Bell Helicopter
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 92 13:16:12 PDT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
Distribution: na
  <1992Jul22.175644.17058@eecs.nwu.edu>

> I'm not saying this is a good thing, but it does explain why lawsuits
> typically name everyone in sight.  I think this rule should be
> counterbalanced with judges declaring suits to be frivolous.

Another reason, I seem to recall (I can't be sure because I just packed
all my books because I'm moving) for suing everyone who might remotely be
connected is the way damages are paid for in some jurisdictions.   It
works like this:

	Me, H. Ross Perot, and Bill Gates decide to have some fun.  I talk
them into doing something stupid, and you get hurt.  You sue us.

	The court and jury determine that I am 98% responsible for the
accident, and that Ross and Bill are each 1% responsible, and that you
deserve $1,000,000.

	Clearly, I should pay $980,000 and Ross and Bill should each
pay $10,000.  Ross and Bill pull their 10K each from money that fell
down the cushions of their sofas.  I sell everthing I own and pay
you maybe $50,000 -- unless I start selling organs, you aren't going
to get anywhere near $980,000 out of me!

	This is clearly not very fair to you -- we caused $1,000,000
damage and you are only getting $60K.

	So instead of allocating damages 98% to me, and 1% each to
Ross and Bill, the court makes us, as a group, come up with $1,000,000
for you.  Most of this comes from Bill and Ross, since they have it
and I don't.  This gets you compensated, which is what is the important
thing.

	Ross and Bill can then sue me to get try and get back the money
they had to pay to cover my share of the damages.

	This is still unfair to Ross and Bill, since they are paying out
of proportion to their responsibility.  But someone has to get hurt in
this, since I don't have enough to cover my share.  Since Bill and Ross
*DID* help hurt you, it is better for them to be the ones who get hurt
than you.

--Tim Smith
From: randy@khan.gatech.edu (Randal T. Abler)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Question: what might cause a dead battery?
Date: 30 Jul 92 15:45:20 GMT
Organization: CERL-EE, Georgia Institue of Technology


Take the battery out, and charge it up for an hour or so on a charger.
Once the battery is completely dead, it may not recharge if you 
jump start the plane.   I have had this happen in our club Cessnas 
more than once.  

I *believe* the regulator may be sensing an
overload on the high initial charge and *eventually* it cuts the battery
out of the charging circuit, long before the battery gets any real charge.
-- 
Randal T. Abler   	randy@cerl.gatech.edu		 
CERL/EE Georgia Tech     
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: cosper@seq.uncwil.edu (Kit Cosper)
Subject: Re: Ramp checks--unreasonable search
Organization: Univ. of North Carolina @ Wilmington
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 21:19:25 GMT

jeg@netcom.com (Julian E. Gomez) writes:

>In article <1992Jul18.205548.17762@seq.uncwil.edu> cosper@seq.uncwil.edu (Kit Cosper) writes:
>" 	I'd hate to think that the Feds would try to pursue certificate
>" 	action because I keep some extra stuff in my bag, maybe I'd
>" 	better replace that old gum just to be on the safe side......

>They've already prosecuted (persecuted) pilots flying IFR
>with outdated sectionals.  I read about the case in IFR
>magazine a couple of years ago.

	I keep all of the charts up to date that I have in my flight
	bag, including sectionals, even though 90% of my X-C flying
	is IFR.  My fear is that they might try something because
	I have 3 or 4 sectionals in my bag that are expired, along
	with current versions of same.  I find the minimal expense
	of a few extra charts well worth the peace of mind.

	Kit


-- 
   Kit Cosper                        cosper@seq.uncwil.edu         
   PP-ASEL-IA                        AMA 31022
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: greg@octopus.dpsi.com (Gregory R. Travis)
Subject: Re: Shoulder Harnesses (Was: Re: Cessna sholdr harn review (BAS))
Organization: Data Parallel Systems, Inc
Date: 22 Jul 92 03:40:08 GMT

spenny@sw.stratus.com (Steve Pennypacker) writes:

>I agree with this, but I wish it was this simple.  I've never been able to 
>get the shoulder harnesses in C-150s and 172s to stay attached to the lap
>belt.

>So, is there any way to fasten/adjust those things so they don't come undone
>every few minutes?

There is supposed to be a small piece of soft rubber hose around the body
of the "knob" on the lap belt.  The rubber knob keeps the shoulder
belt yoke attached to the knob by friction.  If this rubber piece is
gone (very common - they break with age) then the thing won't stay
in place.

greg
--
Gregory Reed Travis				D  P  S  I
Data Parallel Systems Incorporated   greg@dpsi.com (For MX mailers only!)
Bloomington, IN			     greg@indiana.edu (For the others)
From: petri@venus.iucf.indiana.edu (HOWARD PETRI)
Subject: Re: WANTED: Ultralight two-place
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4   
Reply-To: petri@venus.iucf.indiana.edu
Organization: INDIANA U. CYCLOTRON FACILITY, BLOOMINGTON, IN
Distribution:  world
Date: 23 JUL 92 09:19:30    

In article <122140196@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM>, jle@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Jer/ Eberhard) writes...
>> It has the same Rotax 503 as the Challenger, but only cruises at around 65-70
>> mph.  Sounds like Kolb traded speed for lift, compared to the Challenger's
>> design, and from the sounds of your description, I'd say they made the right
>> choice!
> 
>I'm confused.  Is this an experimental or an ultra-light?
>I was under the impression that an ultra-light was limited
>to 55mph airspeed.
> 
>Jer/ Eberhard
     Jer, I made the original post about the Challenger. It was licensed
experimental because it is a two place machine. Nevertheless it is  an
upgraded version of their single place UL and I sure wouldn't call it 
anything but a UL. This one flys 85 mph because it has clipped wings, 
which explains some of its other characteristics. As it was explained to
me by the pilot (he does hold a PPL) there are some gray areas dealing 
with the UL regs. I personally am not qualified to comment on them. I 
believe these regs are also in transition.

Howard
Pegasus N599JH  (EJ)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: kerry@Ingres.COM (Kerry Kurasaki)
Subject: Re: Cessna sholdr harn review (BAS)
Reply-To: kerry@Ingres.COM (Kerry Kurasaki)
Organization: Ask Computer Systems Inc., Ingres Division, Alameda CA 94501
Date: 21 Jul 92 18:59:38 GMT

In article <28140025@hpsrfh3.sr.hp.com> glennh@hpmwtd.sr.hp.com (Glenn Hetchler) writes:
>A few weeks back, someone inquired about shoulder harnesses for
>their Cessna.  At that time, I promised to write about my
>experiences with the BAS inertia reel Y harnesses I put in my 170A.
>Here is the report.
>
[Thanks for the detailed report.  I'm glad you got them.]

I'd like to share some information on shoulder harnesses that I've
picked up over the years.  I have every reason to believe that these are
true, but no references to cite.

One flight instructor I had early in my flying career served on a board
that studied the effectiveness of various restraint systems.  Her
conclusion was that while inertial-reel type harnesses are neat, it
is the old, manual, "strap-them-in-tight" harnesses that were the most
effective.

One glider instructor emphasized the importance of the lap belt.  A
formal Naval aviator and instructor, he told me that it is much more
important to secure the lap belt first, and then the should restraints.
(Most gliders have 4-point harnesses).  A properly secured lap belt
tightens up under the rib cage preventing the body from sliding forward.
I guess the 5-point system is the ultimate.

Finally, a sad story.  At one of our CAP meetings, we got to see slides
of various rescues and fatalities.  One somewhat gruesome picture (no
blood or anything like that.) was shown of a fatal C-210 accident
near Napa, CA (APC).  The crash was in the level land near the [SF]
bay and occurred during an instrument letdown.  The picture showed
a crumpled cockpit with the [dead] pilot wedged against the instrument
panel with the shoulder harness neatly stowed in its rack.  Left a very
lasting impression.

As trite as it may sound, the PROPER use of seat belts and shoulder
harnesses cannot be overemphasized.

Kerry
From: ron@pilot.njin.net (Ron Natalie)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: prevalence of engine failures
Date: 23 Jul 92 16:40:40 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

I think the operation is called EWOPS (Engines Work or Passengers
Swim).

_Ron
From: ark@alice.att.com (Andrew Koenig)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: prevalence of engine failures
Date: 23 Jul 92 17:01:36 GMT
Reply-To: ark@alice.UUCP ()
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Liberty Corner NJ

In article <92204.174222ROPBB@CUNYVM.BITNET> ROPBB@CUNYVM.BITNET (Bliss B. Siman) writes:

> I may be in the wrong place, but I hope you guys will put up with me. I am a
> very fearful flyer faced with a trip to Barcelona on Friday and just discovered
> the plane is a 767 which I am told has only two engines.

Don't worry about it.

I cannot recall seeing a single documented account of a commercial jet
aircraft in which two engines failed.

I have heard several accounts where one engine failed, as well as:

	a case were all four engines failed on a 747 after it
	flew through a cloud of volcanic ash;  the engines were
	restarted and the airplane landed safely.

	a case where all three engines failed on a DC-10 due
	to a maintenance error that was repeated on all three
	engines; the pilot was able to restart one engine and
	land safely.

In other words, I have not heard of a single case where passengers
incurred any risk from having two engines instead of three or four.

The 767 is an excellent airplane; it has a sterling safety record, it
is comfortable to ride in, and it is astonishingly quiet.  The only thing
that might make you nervous is that the motors that raise and lower the
flaps are on the noisy side; they sound sort of growly and whiny and you
can expect to hear them shortly after takeoff and befor landing.  Those
sounds are normal.

Again: Don't worry about flying on a 767.  They're good, safe airplanes.
-- 
				--Andrew Koenig
				  ark@europa.att.com
From: bspain@riker (Bradley K Spain)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: "remain clear of the ARSA..."
Keywords: ARSA
Date: 29 Jul 92 22:33:30 GMT
Followup-To: ...Remain Clear of the ARSA
Distribution: rec.aviation
Organization: Los Alamos National Laboratory, NM

In article <7480331@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com> glenb@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com (Glen Baker) writes:
> .... are in fact within their authority when they say "36Z we don't like
> your kind 'round here. Remain clear of the ARSA..." :-)
>
> I guess from now on I'll give 'em a call on the phone. "Hello Monterey
> Approach? I'll be departing from Carmel Valley in about 45 minutes to
> an hour. Well, no, I can't be more specific than that since there's no
> phone on the field..."
>
> ..glen
>
Glen,	
	Sounds like you got a bum deal, but I can't really understand your
frustration.  If you are departing from Carmel Valley, fly the valley until
past the SNS R180 and go wherever you want. You can climb to VFR altitudes in
the Salinas Valley or cross over at the Laureles Canyon Grade (sic). 
	Last week I was flying a UH-60 BlackHawk to Watsonville up the Salinas
valley from Camp Roberts @ 6.5 and had no trouble with Monterey Approach.  
Granted we called them from abeam the Chular NDB and only really needed 
advisories to skirt, but the second trip in (around 7:45pm local) we needed
vectors to the LOC approach into WVI and that took us right over MRY @ 4.5.
I know this is above the ARSA but traffic coming up through the deck isn't
far away.  Not once did we ever have any problems.  
	Try not to get so defensive with the folks that are trying to offer
suggestions.  


********************************************************
Brad Spain     WarHawk 26                 

Fixed wing pilots merely fly but,  
Helicopter drivers beat the air into submission

bspain@riker.acs.calpoly.edu    bspain@hypnos.calpoly.edu                  
********************************************************
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: lunger@helix.enet.dec.com (Dave Lunger)
Subject: Re: Dogs in Planes
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 21:30:22 GMT


In article <152oqeINNas@agate.berkeley.edu>, morishig@sizzlean.berkeley.edu (Nina Morishige) writes...
>Has anyone got any experience 
>flying with their dogs, or is it probably a bad idea? 

My 7 year old golden retriever has many many hours in airplanes. First
in my skyhawk, and now in the centurion. You must evaluate the demeanor
of your pooch, take someone else along in case the pooch gets a bit
nervous. Nowadays, I just take my pooch along, no restraint... stays
in the back seats, and generally sits there or wanders around the
various seats and baggage area.

By the way, I knew my pooch would be a frequent GA-flyer when I got her
at 8 weeks old. Her name is Cessna.

My plane's name is Fido.

Good luck with your pooch!

Dave Lunger
From: rex@eng.umd.edu (Rex Root)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: good charts - was  Re: Ramp checks--unreasonable search
Keywords: Charts, Ramp Checks.
Date: 31 Jul 92 18:12:43 GMT
Organization: College of Engineering, University of Maryland, College Park

Just a correction to William's post:

                              Riverdale, MD ... not (MN) Minnesota

In article <1992Jul31.161911.9616@eecs.nwu.edu> phil@eecs.nwu.edu (William LeFebvre) writes:
>To inquire about new subscriptions, call NOS at 301-436-6993.
>Their address is:
>
>National Ocean Service
>NOAA, N/CG33
>Distribution Branch
>Riverdale, MN 20737
            ^^
            MD

	*******************************************************

   Rex L. Root Jr.  PP-ASEL-G              "I only fly inverted on purpose."   
   Electrical Engineering Dept.
   University of Maryland                               ()   ()
   College Park, Maryland  20742                  _______\___/_______
   e-mail: rex@eng.umd.edu                            |   ( )   |
   voice: (301) 405-3688                         ---------------------
   FAX: (301) 314-9281                                     T
From: ari@rhi.hi.is (Ari Kristinn Jonsson)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: P-38 out of the Ice!
Date: 28 Jul 92 10:30:12 GMT

Hi everybody!

  As somebody wrote a few days ago, parts of a least one of the
P-38s are out of the ice.  I know since I ran into those parts
when in Greenland last week!

  I took a day-trip to Kulusuk, last Wednesday, as a tour-guide.
After finishing the tour and waiting for the flight back to 
Reykjavik, I noticed two engines and some other stuff lying on
the ground next to a Dornier on skis.  So of course I walked 
over to have a look.

  There were two engines, two wings, and the long vertical stabilizer
plus a bunch of smaller pieces that were hard to recognize.  The 
wings looked like they were in surprisingly good shape, but quite a
bit banged up and dented.  Same with the engines.  Most of the cowling
was missing, but it seemed surprisingly little damaged.  Of course
I'm no expert on those engines, but I would have expected the things
to look a lot worse after 50 years in ice.

  An interesting note on the side.  The people working on this project
are supposedly exhausting themselves.  The pilots flying back and forth
between the digging-site on the glacier and Kulusuk say this is 
way too nerve-wrecking, and the guys at the site are flown down to
Kulusuk every once in a while to cool them off, after having stayed
too long on the glacier.  I sure do hope that they have the best of
luck getting the rest of the planes up, after having worked so hard
at this.

  If I hear anything else, or happen to get to take another trip to
Greenland I'll keep you all up to date.

  Happy flying,
  Ari Jonsson

=========================================================================
Ari Kristinn Jonsson, Softis hf, Taeknigardur.  Tel: (1) 694911
Home: Breidvangur 56, Hafnarfjordur.  Tel: (1) 53004
Disclaimer:  My opinions , restrictions may apply, void where prohibited.
=========================================================================
--
=========================================================================
Ari Kristinn Jonsson, Softis hf, Taeknigardur.  Tel: (1) 694911
Home: Breidvangur 56, Hafnarfjordur.  Tel: (1) 53004
Passion:  Being a PPASEL, with 89 hours and 15 minutes.
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: exumfs@exu.ericsson.se (Mark Steph, XT/DO, x7534)
Subject: Re: Manufacturer being sued _for_no_reason_
Reply-To: exumfs@exu.ericsson.se
Organization: Ericsson Network Systems
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 18:35:17 GMT

In article BqL@news.cso.uiuc.edu, rls@uihepa.hep.uiuc.edu (Ray Swartz (Oh, that guy again)) writes:
>	I just got this off of the wire.  Disgusting, as usual.
>
>Ray Swartz
>
>
>	CHICAGO (UPI) -- The estate of blues guitarist Stevie Ray Vaughan,
>killed with four others when a helicopter crashed into a fog-shrouded
>ski hill in southern Wisconsin, sued the pilot, the helcopter company
>and the makers of the helicopter Wednesday.
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>[...]

Oh, there's a reason, all right: Bell Helicopter has money and (I assume) some
type of liability insurance to cover suits like this.

Any clue as to why they are sueing the pilot? I thought the pilot died in the
crash, too???

---
Mark Steph               | Leave out the fiction / The fact is:
exumfs@exu.ericsson.se   | This friction, Will only be worn by persistance
(yes, .se *is* in Texas) | Leave out conditions--Courageous convictions,
PO Box 833875, MS L-05   | Will drag the dream into existence
Richardson, TX 75083     |      -Neil Peart, "Vital Signs"

Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: wolit@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (Jan Wolitzky)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: QANTAS - U.S. Aircraft Carrier warnings.
Date: 21 Jul 92 13:41:19 GMT
Organization: AT&T

> The Iranian Air Force also had exocet missiles.  While the F-14 isn't
> designed to handle one of these, humans tend to be very creative animals.
> The F-14 can also carry dumb bombs.  Perhaps the Iranian pilots would
> get lucky that day.  And don't discount the gun...the Isrealie Air Force
> did quite a number on the Liberty with nothing more than guns.

Mating a sophisticated weapon system like Exocet to an F-14 involves
more than finding a hardpoint on the wing on which to hang the
missile.  It has to be integrated into the plane's fire control and
radar systems, cockpit controls and displays.  You have to investigate
the aerodynamic stability of the combination throughout the mission
flight envelope, develop weapon delivery tactics, train the aircrew,
etc.  All of this is vulnerable to observation by a variety of
intelligence-gathering techniques, and there was no evidence for any
of it actually happening, as far as I know.  I'm also not aware of
any use of the F-14 to deliver iron bombs, nor of any training, etc., for
such.  And while I acknowledged the threat of cannon fire, you have to
get really close and act really hostile for that (and usually you have
to make multiple passes, as in the case of Liberty), which would
have allowed plenty of time for Vincennes safely to make a positive
identification before firing missiles.
-- 
Jan Wolitzky, AT&T Bell Labs, Murray Hill, NJ; 908 582-2998
          att!mhuxd!wolit or jan.wolitzky@att.com
   (Affiliation given for identification purposes only)
           Si fractum non sit, noli id reficere.
From: lee@bluefuzz.sw.stratus.com (Lee Cooprider)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Earth Inductor Compass
Date: 27 Jul 92 21:41:11 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Software Engineering

In article <5161@transfer.stratus.com> lee@bluefuzz.sw.stratus.com (Lee Cooprider) writes:

>I think that the needle and ball was his only venturi-powered instrument.

Except, as we now have probably learned, for the earth-inductor compass...
-- 
Lee W. Cooprider				PP-ASEL/IA
Lee_Cooprider@vos.stratus.com			Skylane N2908F "Wiley"
From: collet@ensta.ensta.fr (Pierre Collet)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Prop Skid (was:Bad month at the airport)
Date: 29 Jul 92 13:30:43 GMT
Organization: Ensta, Paris, France
NNTP-Posting-Host: ensta.ensta.fr

In article <1992Jul23.140107.34@front.se> per@front.se writes:
>
>When I applied full throttle for takeoff, the cherokee veered sharply
>to the left and started a wild skid. Wheee!!
>
>Although I routinely applied a little pressure on the right rudder, I
>must have, equally routinely, relied on the nosewheel's friction to
>keep the plane straight on course down the centerline. Not enough, I
>found out that day.
>
>Per Lindberg (per@front.se)         !			      __!__


On the same thread, approx 3 months ago, I landed on a grass strip
after a boomer turned it into a mudfield. (I discovered this only after I
landed the tower didn't warn me, and the strip looked OK from where I was).
There was a strong crosswind (15-20kts Xwind component) coming from the
right, and I greased the swamping err... the landing (there was not much
need for grease either).

Well, as I discovered the state of the runway (the brakes were useless)
I was only concerned with not getting stuck in the mud.

At the end of the runway I U-turned to the left to taxi back on the
"grass" taxiway, and there I began to turn left heading back to the
runway with full right rudder, full right brakes, full left ailerons
(remember the right crosswind when landing is now a left crosswind).
My engine was turning clockwise, so the more power, the more I turned.
Quite embarrassing. I told the tower about my problem as I was heading
towards the runway, and they said it was ok if I clipped it as there
was no plane around. I did a U-turn, and on the left it went back again :->

After my second cycloid, the tower asked me whether I wanted some
music. I said why not, and THEY ACTUALLY PUT A WALTZ ON THE FREQUENCY
for a moment !!! :-> :-> :->  I couldn't believe it !

Well, I was back to the hanger after four cycloids with my belly aching
from laughter !!

If there was a point to these lines, there it is : Don't expect to taxi
straight with poor friction on the taxiway + Xwind + engine turning the
wrong way !!

Pete
From: ulick@angelico.helios.nd.edu (Ulick Stafford)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Re: Ramp checks--unreasonable search
Date: 29 Jul 92 19:21:26 GMT
Organization: University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame

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

When I tried to line up a current Chicago sectional with an out of date
Detroit section the isogonic lines didn't line up.  Sure the error was slight,
but I'd imagine that using a very old sectional may have erronious compass
readings (not that it matters much here in the midwest near the agonic line).

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 
+ 'There was a  master come unto the earth, + Ulick Stafford, PP-ASEL       +
+    born in the holy land of Indiana,      + Dept of Chemical Engineering, +
+ in the mystical hills east of Fort Wayne'.+ Notre Dame, IN 46556          +
+      B'fhearr liom bheith ag eitilt.      +    ulick@bach.helios.nd.edu   +
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Newsgroups: rec.aviation