HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: zwork@starfighter.den.mmc.com (Michael Corvin)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Why not a bi-winged sailplane??
Date: 19 Aug 92 01:05:26 GMT
Organization: Martin Marietta Astronautics Group

Hey, the Wrights flew one or two biplane (and canard) gliders... ;-)

More seriously, I can think of a few 'unconventional' glider designs,
for example Burt Rutan's self-launching canard (or three surface?)
one whose engine folded into the fuselage ahead of the cockpit.  I
seem to recall that its performance was unremarkable.

Flying wing gliders have also been flown, some very successfully.  The idea
is that this is more structurally efficient and eliminates the wetted
area of the fuselage. Unfortunately, there is a conflict between using a
highly efficient planform and wing section and achieving good stability
and control with a flying wing.

The 'conventional' layout seems to be the best for gliders.

Philip Bridges gives one excellent reason the biplane configuration
has performance drawbacks for a glider - the higher induced drag resulting
from the interference between the wings.  Another contribution to higher
induced drag might come from the fact that the aspect ratio of the wings
on a biplane would not be as large as in a monoplane configuration.  The
aspect ratio of the highest performing gliders is very large - they have
very long slender wings.  Also, in a biplane one will have more fuselage
to wing joints, each of which creates interference drag.  In a conventional
glider, the wing joins the fuselage in the middle, the best location
to allow minimization of interference drag.

One of the main reasons to use a biplane configuration is structural.  In
the early days, the wire-braced biplane structure was much stronger than
the early monoplanes.  In fact, for a time before and partly during WW1 the
RAF refused to buy monoplanes because they thought them to be inherently
unsafe due to weak wings!  With carbon fibre glider wing construction this
is no longer such a big constraint...  They are surprisingly strong, although
also quite dramatically flexible, as anyone who has seen an ASH-24
winch-launched can attest.

"The Design of the Aeroplane" by Darrol Stinton that Philip mentions is a
fun book that I'd also recommend to anyone who finds themselves often
doodling airplanes and thinking up wild ideas... 

Keep doodling!

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Corvin 	      PP-ASEL, PP-G		zwork@starfighter.den.mmc.com
just another spaced rocket scientist at    Martin Marietta Astronautics Group
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
===============    My views, not Martin Marietta's   ========================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: masys@nlm.nih.gov (Dr. Daniel R. Masys)
Subject: Re: Dip gauges
Organization: National Library of Medicine
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 92 12:29:35 GMT

In article <greg.714079203@saltydog> greg@saltydog.dpsi.com (Gregory R. Travis) writes:
...how he carefully calibrated a dip gauge for his plane, and believes in
it, in contrast to Geoff's assertion:
>
>>DANGER!  These "dip gauges" are subject to all sorts of errors, particularly
>>in Cessnas

Might I summarize to suggest that dip gauges are quite useful if you own
the airplane, know its quirks, use it day in and day out in all sorts of
flying situations, etc.  Dip gauges are substantially less useful to the
renter pilot who knows not the internal geometry (e.g., fuel bladder
wrinkles) nor external geometry (e.g., wings level when ball centered??
maybe not...; does the tail sit at the factory spec, or is that nose
strut under/overinflated) of his craft.

In other words, seems like both parties are correct.  But isn't it always
that way on the net? ;-)

Dan Masys
masys@lhc.nlm.nih.gov


Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: lhe@sics.se (Lars-Henrik Eriksson)
Subject: Re: Principle of VOR
Originator: lhe@bast.sics.se
Reply-To: lhe@sics.se (Lars-Henrik Eriksson)
Organization: SICS, Kista (Stockholm), Sweden
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 18:09:09 GMT

In article <1992Aug19.160429.7613@col.hp.com>, cab@col (Chris Best) writes:
>>     What is the principle of VOR system ?   I've ever read that the difference
>> between phases of two waves(a wave for reference and a wave whose phase is 
>> different according to the direction ?) 
>
>----------
>
>An omnidirectional pulse is sent out, and at the same time, a directional
>pulse is started at magnetic zero and scanned clockwise.  Your receiver
>determines what radial you're on by the delay between the two received
>pulses (no delay = 000, max delay = 359).
>
>All this talk of phase differences and the like has never been part of
>this description (as I've heard it), but it must be in there somewhere, 
>for several people to have mentioned it.

The "pulse" description is a common analogy for describing how a VOR
works in principle. It is not, however, a complete description of the
actual workings of a VOR. The radial is determined only by a phase
difference and no pulses, as such, are involved.

Of course, if you regard a specific point of the 30 Hz waveform as a
"pulse" (such as the positive-going zero crossing point), then the two
descriptions coincide.

How can I be so certain about this? Well, all detailed descriptions of
the VOR system I have seen explains it in the same way, using the
phase difference between two 30 Hz signals. I have never seen a
*detailed* explanation of the VOR that involves pulses.
-- 
-- 
Lars-Henrik Eriksson                            Internet: lhe@sics.se
Swedish Institute of Computer Science           Phone (intn'l): +46 8 752 15 09
Box 1263                                        Telefon (nat'l): 08 - 752 15 09
S-164 28  KISTA, SWEDEN                         Fax: +46 8 751 72 30
From: cshotton@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Chuck Shotton)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Transition Glider to Power
Date: 19 Aug 1992 20:59:11 GMT
Followup-To: rec.aviation
Organization: Academic Computing

In article <1992Aug19.154107.1217@sol.asl.hitachi.com>,
josh@sol.asl.hitachi.com (Joshua Koslov) wrote:
> 
> Does anyone on the net have experience transitioning from glider to power?  I am a Private glider pilot with probably a couple hundred PIC flights;  I am condidering some power flying.  What have people found in terms of how their glider experience has helped in learning or accelerating airplane training?
> 

I just finished adding an airplane rating to my PPG rating about 2 months
ago. It took about 7 months from start to finish, and I was done with about
2 hours over the minimum required. 

For what it's worth, very little of your glider time can be applied to your
airplane rating. As I read it, only glider cross country time has a chance
of applying, and I've never heard whether or not it does. The FARs aren't
clear on this point.

As for how hard/easy it was, the flying part was no problem. The landings
are substantially different. Most gliders are landed by flying them on, and
that technique just leads to the "hop, skip, jump" style of power landings.

The other "novelty" I ran into was dealing with ATC and the radio a LOT
more than in gliders. Besides that, you just have to get used to the
built-in thermal strapped to the nose.

--_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
Chuck Shotton                      |    
Ass't Director, Academic Computing |       "This space for rent."
UT Health Science Center Houston   |  
cshotton@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu       |         
_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: cep@taligent.com (Christophe Pettus)
Subject: Re: Stupid Pilot Horror Story -- What I did
Organization: Taligent, a little subsidiary of two really big companies.
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 19:26:46 GMT

In article <1992Aug18.010653.12399@seas.smu.edu> doug@seas.smu.edu (Doug Davis) writes:
>If your work telephone system supports what is called in telephony "SS7"
>then your extention (or direct dial number) could be recorded as well.. 
>This works for those on ISDN and some other modern telephone systems as well.

Understood; my knowledge that my particular work PDX doesn't work this
way is based on emperical evidence.

>For further reading :-) I point you to the comp.dcom.telecom archives
>at (I think) mintaka.lcs.mit.edu.

This is certainly off of rec.aviation, isn't it? :-)
--
-- Christophe

"Be calm.  Look cute."
From: tdw1@bunny.gte.com (Tom Walsh)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: portable scanners
Date: 20 Aug 92 18:29:24 GMT
Organization: GTE Laboratories

In article <1992Aug20.072220.16291@walter.cray.com> gregf@eastrg1.cray.com 
(Greg Fairbrother) writes:
> During an air show which band is used for military jets?  I am looking at
> a scanner from Radio Shack but none of their portable scanners have the
> goverment aircraft band.  Could you recommend a brand that would have
> this capability?

You might consider posting this request on rec.radio.scanner

Tom Walsh
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: rrcunni@pbhyf.PacBell.COM (Ray Cunningham)
Subject: soaring school locations
Organization: Pacific * Bell
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 22:47:43 GMT

Thanks to Geoff, Chuck, Mark, Keith and others who responded
to my request for info on soaring schools. A couple of you 
requested that I post the information on the net. Here goes:

Phoenix - two glidrports- Estrella and Turf
Hobbs, New Mexico ( also the location of the Soaring
Society museum
Byron Calif- Ames Soaring club 510/516-1745
Boulder Colorado - The Cloud Base
Colorado Springs - Meadow Lake Airport
Ft. Collons - Owl Canyon Airport
Minden Nevada - High Country & Soar Minden

Thanks again for the info - a good list to start
with. 

I would be interested in hearing some stories on the transition
from power to gliders. I took a couple of lessons a few
years ago and found I really had lazy feet. Any tidbits of wisdom
on how to ease the trasnsition?
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: aboyd@quantum.on.ca (Andrew Boyd)
Subject: Re: That would never happen to me...BUT
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 92 17:26:45 GMT
Organization: Quantum Software Systems

In article <1992Aug10.191409.4269@peck.com> geoff@peck.com (Geoff Peck) 
writes:
>Fill the tanks, and learn how the particular aircraft you fly consume
>fuel, the way _you_ fly them.  Then you can estimate fuel consumption and
>fuel remaining based on time.

On the way to oshkosh, after clearing customs at chippewa county (CIU,
SW of Sault St Marie) I heard some yo-yo in a cherokee call chippewa 
unicom asking them to send the fuel truck out, as he had run out of gas 
on the taxiway (!)

Eric & I were chortling that we should have made a radio call, saying
that we would be landing momentarily, and that we had a DOT inspector
on board (we didn't, but the a/c had a canadian registration), and 
would the pilot please have his license & LVC available for inspection.

But we didn't make the radio call, as that would have been excessively 
sadistic, even for an instructor.  Imagine how anxious the pilot must 
have been, looking at those fuel gauges.  Imagine how badly he must 
have had to pee if he actually took off with full tanks :->

Worse, you're not supposed to leave the a/c (even to pee) until the 
US customs guy has said it's OK to.  I wonder if he made it to oshkosh?

----
#include <std.disclaimer>
From: randys@hpcvra.cv.hp.com (Randy Stockberger)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Small crash / Chrokee Question
Date: 20 Aug 92 01:40:05 GMT
Article-I.D.: hpcvra.101820017
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Co., Corvallis, OR, USA

Just a quick question.  Nothing in your post told me that all five people were
in the airplane.  Could some of the injured have been on the ground?

--
  Randy Stockberger
  randys@cv.hp.com
  503-750-3589
--
From: mpucket@jacobs.CS.ORST.EDU (Margaret Puckette)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Encore for mpucket
Summary: a plea for netiquette
Keywords: rec.aviation, netiquette, Never Again
Date: 19 Aug 92 06:53:05 GMT
Followup-To: rec.aviation
Organization: Computer Science Outreach Services - Oregon State University
Address: mpucket@jacobs.cs.orst.edu


Hello again, friends.

It was moving to log in after several weeks hiatus and find so many
letters referring to a discussion of my absence on rec.aviation...
and it was humbling to receive so much encouragement and support 
for my eco-flying activities and articles.  Thanks to each and every
one of you who wrote!

After a long string of negative postings and email, I had indeed felt
burned--it has happened to many of you.  I felt it best to back away and
leave, cool off and refocus on the really important things in life:  like
flying :-).  Rec.aviation is an incredible resource when used well, and
a source of pain and frustration when abused; that's where I felt like
getting off the bus.  I recall logging in and seeing the statement:
"You have new mail", and my heart would sink to the floor.

Disagreement and intelligent debate over any public statement in this
forum is educational and informative; personal put-downs, private or
public, are NOT.

Please let me emphasize the importance of *netiquette* in this forum!
There are REAL PEOPLE out there with aviation accomplishments, skills, 
and achievements who deserve the benefit of the doubt (and the dignity
of a chance to clarify their feelings and statements).  One of the more
interesting aspects of rec.aviation fly-ins (besides putting faces to
names) is hearing the stories that are *not* posted.  WOW!  We have done
(and survived) some scary flights!  But how many of us out there are
afraid to share our "Never Again" stories out of fear of flames?  And
how many are reluctant to share some knowledge out of fear of phrasing
something 'wrong', or of being forced to endure the humiliation of
stepping on someone's Pet Peeve?  How sad that many will not benefit
from the experiences of others because of this...

I can tell you factually, well-known net.gods are holding back.

...my own "Never Again" story took place late at night, 2 years ago,
in the clouds, when the engine quit because I RAN OUT OF FUEL!  So I
was heroic and saved the plane, my life, and my kids...now do you think
I should share my 'clever' handling of this emergency knowing I'd be
reamed for the series of stupid decisions leading up to this?  Would
you expose yourself (like I just did...boy, this is dumb :-< ) ??????

So what's it gonna be?  The Tyranny of the Righteous?  Or can we just
begin talking our differences (and experiences) through like adults?
This is an open forum; let's use this freedom wisely.


**********************************************************************
Margaret "with tons more eco-flying stories" Puckette
AOPA Archer N1939G
From: dfr@usna.navy.mil (PROF D. Rogers (EAS FAC))
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: book
Keywords: WWII, B-17, M-262
Date: 15 Aug 92 17:06:02 GMT

G'day
 
Here is an `aviation' book that I recently read and enjoyed:
 
Aces -- A Novel of World War II
 
by Robert Denny
 
published by Donald I. Fine, New York, ISBN 1-55611-225-4
 
It is a novel about the 8th Air Force (B-17's) near the end of
WWII and the German M-262 jet fighter.
 
Dave Rogers
From: cantrell@seqp4.sequoia.com (Paul Cantrell)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: "remain clear of the ARSA..." (response to Geoff)
Date: 14 Aug 92 16:50:37 GMT
Organization: Sequoia Computer Systems

In article <Aug.10.12.31.59.1992.14818@pilot.njin.net>, ron@pilot.njin.net (Ron Natalie) writes:
>                      Still you're right, it sucks, especially the
> implication that approach ignores people to deny them access rather
> than acknowledging their presence.
> 
> -Ron


If I thought approach was ignoring me in order to deny access, I'd have
them check the tapes, and explain what was going on. There's always the
chance that the guy was busy on the landline. But if he was answering
other people, but not me, a check of the tapes with the supervisor
might turn up the problem (it *might* be a problem with your radio...)

				PC
-- 
cantrell@sequoia.com
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: richards@hawk.nstn.ns.ca (Mark Richardson)
Subject: East Coast Fly-In
Organization: Software Kinetics Ltd.
Distribution: na
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1992 00:28:41 GMT

Hi Folks,

I thought I'd take the opportunity to invite everyone to EAA Chapter 305
30th annual Fly-In, Sept 4-7.  The location is Stanley airport, in Stanley
Nova Scotia, Canada.  This fly-in is the largest east of Montreal, and hosted
118 airplanes two years ago (the weather sucked last year).  There is a ton
of room for camping, and washroom/water facilities are available.  If you
are a local yokel (< 200 miles) and, like myself, have a collection of 
airplane parts in your garage, then by all means drive out.

have a good one....

**********************************************************************
Mark Richardson                                  Software Kinetics Ltd
Project Engineer                                   Voice: 902-468-3680
richards@hawk.nstn.ns.ca                             Fax: 902-468-3679
                         RV-6 Kit Serial #20819 
**********************************************************************
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: hagood@sabre.den.mmc.com (Dave Hagood)
Subject: Re: Where oh where is mpuckett?
Organization: Martin Marietta Astronautics Group
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 22:00:43 GMT

In article <1992Aug14.155939.16628@eecs.nwu.edu>, phil@eecs.nwu.edu (William LeFebvre) writes:
|> [stuff deleted
|> 
|> And I don't blame her.  Not one little bit.  Some people on this list
|> acted absolutely DEPLORABLY during the spin discussion/argument/flame fest.
|> There seem to be some people on this list that are absolutely adamant
|> about expressing their own ideas as fact, and to hell with everyone else.
|> 
|> [more stuff deleted]
|>
|> So much for "global hangar flying".  Seems like this list tends more
|> towards "global weiner roasting" at the expense of certain people's
|> feelings and emotions.
|> 

	I agree with William.  Some of these flame wars get WAY out of hand,
and the "what constitutes a spin" war was a perfect example.

	Personally, I miss Margaret's postings, so I e-mailed her a plea
to resume posting her interesting and humorous adventures.  Perhaps if
enough people agree and do the same, she will resume.  If not, rec.aviation
will be the worse for her absence.

	And please, folks, LIGHTEN UP!

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
									|
David M. Hagood			Martin Marietta Astronautics Group	|
									|
Voice:  (303) 977-9657		When in danger, or in doubt,		|
E-mail: hagood@den.mmc.com	Run in circles, scream and shout.	|
Fax: (303) 977-1530							|
									|
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
     static char *disclaimer = "My opinions, not Martin Marietta's."    |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: suffron@informix.com (Nancy Suffron)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Towing Mooneys (was Re: back to the machine shop)
Keywords: wet fuel
Date: 16 Aug 92 23:50:55 GMT
Organization: Informix Software, Inc.

In article <19832@leadsv.UUCP> netnews@leadsv.UUCP (Leads Network News) writes:
>Norm shows up at Oshkosh every year selling motorized aileron trim
>tabs, covers for fuel tank fillers to keep rain water out ...

Does he have anything to keep water out of the tanks when the line-guy
forgets to put a fuel cap back on after fueling your plane, it rains
three inches at the airport that night, and you don't see what the
line-guy didn't do until you crawl up on top of the wing during preflight
one hour before sunset when you aren't night current and you want to get
back home with two passengers before the next round of thunderstorms
that are due in eight hours that promise to keep you grounded for most
of the next day? :-[

My "license to learn" is proving to be quite useful. ;-)

Nancy
PP-ASEL

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nancy Suffron                   email: suffron@informix.com
Client Services Engr.       phonemail: 913-599-8475
Informix Software, Inc.     snailmail: 16011 College Blvd.
                                       Lenexa, KS  66219
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: brent@telebit.com (Brent Chapman)
Subject: Re: Flying to Oregon: Questions.
Organization: Telebit Corporation; Sunnyvale, CA, USA
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 00:58:50 GMT

randys@hpcvra.cv.hp.com (Randy Stockberger) writes:

>Or perhaps Newport, many motels to chose from, a wonderful flight down
>the coast, seafood...

We spent Thursday night in Newport, and had a wonderful time.  There are
lots of good restaurants and shops, and the new aquarium just South of town
is really great (unfortunately, August is the peak tourist month, and the
place was _packed_ with families on vacation).

The airport is about 3 miles South of town.  There's an FBO there, but
not much else; you'll have to arrange a ride to town somehow (since we
were going to do some sightseeing in the area while we were there, we
arranged ahead of time through the FBO to rent a car).

The biggest problem with the Oregon Coast this time of year,
particularly for a non-instrument-rated pilot, seems to be the
weather.  Throughout the week, the area forecasts for the Oregon Coast
were 10-15 OVC, and this mostly seemed to be born out.  I was fully
prepared to shoot an approach into Newport (which has a VOR/DME
approach with about 750 foot minimums) on Thursday afternoon, but it
turned out to be a rare (for this time of year, according to the FBO)
crystal clear day there.  Friday, however, was MVFR/IFR all day long.
At around 4pm, we finally decided it wasn't going to get any better,
and launched IFR into 25 OVC 10 conditions.  We didn't break out on top
until 8000 feet.

A twin that had come up the coast landed while we were sitting around
getting ready to depart; he'd been headed further northward, VFR, and
put down at Newport when he ran into lowering ceiling north of town.
He waited about a half hour for things to change (not improve, just
change), then when someone else came in IFR and reported things were
about 25 OVC 10 on up to the next airport, he scrambled out and took
off again to continue scud-running up the coast.  I couldn't help
wondering if CAP was going to end up looking for this guy some day; he
implied that he was a VFR-only pilot, he was flying a twin (a 310;
speed is _not_ an advantage in scud running, since it just gets you
into trouble faster), and he didn't seem that familiar with the area.


-Brent
--
Brent Chapman                                   Great Circle Associates
Brent@GreatCircle.COM                           1057 West Dana Street
+1 415 962 0841                                 Mountain View, CA  94041
Newsgroups: rec.aviation