HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: cab@col.hp.com (Chris Best)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc
Subject: Re: Past the speed of sound...
Date: 16 Dec 1992 18:01:36 GMT
Organization: your service
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: hpctdke.col.hp.com

> >There *was* a very real problem with the blade shock waves, however, it
> >made the ground personel violently sick as the aircraft taxied or made a
> >low-level pass because the repeated shock waves (at a nice ultrasonic 10
> >kHz) where literaly trying to shake them to pieces -- an accoustic analog
> >to a microwave oven in principle.

10 KHz is in the audible range, not ultrasonic.  But I can still believe
that shock waves at that frequency might do weird things to a person.

----------

> But then again, a four-blade prop spinning at 2500 RPM would generate
> a 10kHz rate, right?  (OK, I'm guessing).  But that would be at cruise
> or takeoff, not during taxi.

No, it would produce 10,000 beats per minute (not per second), which
is around 170 Hz.  I'm not sure where the 10 KHz came from...
From: ron@topaz.bds.com (Ron Natalie)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc
Subject: Re: Surviving a Commercial Aircraft Accident
Date: 18 Dec 1992 16:17:18 GMT
Organization: BDS Systems
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: topaz.bds.com

> Pay attention to the safety briefing given by the cabin attendants at the
> beginning of the flight.  Read the pamphlet that describes the aircraft
> exits and safety systems such as oxygen masks and life vests (life vests
> are difficult to put on, and it is important that you understand).  Make
> sure your family pays attention.  Explain the items to your family, if
> need be.  Take note of which passengers between you and your exit don't
> pay attention to the safety briefing -- these people won't know what to do
> after an accident, and they may well keep you and your family from getting
> out safely as well. 

I generally don't wait for the "cabin attendents" to do anything.  If I'm
unfamiliar with the plane, I'll pull out the wordless workshop card from
the seat pocket in advance.  What happens if there is cause for evacuation
before taxi and the briefing starts.  There's been some pretty bad accidents
on the ground and the primary factor that determines if you survive or not
is whether you get out or not.  You need to know how to evacuate and operate
the doors, because chances are your fellow passengers (even ones who watch
the safety briefing wont).  I'm also curious as to why United doesn't arm
the slides until right before take off, rather than at the beginning of taxi
and then disarm them right after clearing the runway.  Again, the evidence
shows that there's still the strong possibility for the need for rapid evacuation until the engines are shut down.

The recommnendation to watch who is paying attention to the briefing is
bogus.  First, even people who understand the briefing are likely to panic
during an emergency.  Second, watching the briefing is no guarantee of whether
the person understands anything.  I've seen people sit there smiling attentively and still not no how to unbuckle their seat belts.  I don't usually watch
because this is the hundredth time I've watched that United video tape and
can point out a few things:
   1.  The cockpit is not a DC-10.
   2.  The passengers are shown correctly opening a DC-10 door (with the
	large lever), the door is shown going up (like DC-10 doors do) but
	then the scene switches to a 747 door swinging open, the slide
	deploying and people jumping out of a 747.
   3.  The demonstration of the mother putting on her own mask first, and
	then helping her child clearly shows all the passengers sitting
	around her holding their masks in their hands.

Has anybody ever noticed that the card in the seat pocket tells you that if
you're blind and can't operate the exit not to sit in the exit row.  Just
what good does providing this information in printed form serve?

However everything in the article after the words ENJOY YOUR FLIGHT
is well taken.

-Ron (always sits next to the exit).
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc
From: zwork@starfighter.den.mmc.com (Michael Corvin)
Subject: Re: Past the speed of sound...
Organization: Martin Marietta Astronautics Group
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 20:29:01 GMT

There was a single, experimental, swept wing F-84 (with wing root inlets
like the RF-84) that also mounted a huge turboprop (I don't recall the 
designation or power) in the nose, driving a mutlibladed prop with very short,
broad blades.  I believe that supersonic performance was the goal.
It was not successful and was reputed to be one of the noisiest aircraft
of all time.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.misc
From: n36f@pnet16.cts.com (Et2 Ellingson)
Subject: Re: CHP AIRCRAFT & SPEEDERS
Organization: People-Net [pnet16], NCTAMS EASTPAC
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 19:56:06 GMT

"Joseph D. Mazza" <mazz+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
>>>I pointed out that it's illegal for the CHP to use time/distance to
>>>clock a speeder form an aircraft (or from a cruiser on an overpass, for
>>>that matter)...
>> 
>>Why?
>>I remember a freshman calculus class proof where it was
>>shown that for any  measured time/distance/speed leg,
>>the average/total-leg speed must be attained for at least
>>an instant.
>
>It's not a question of PHYSICS; it's a question of California LAW.  No
>one argues the accuracy of time/distance calculations.  The CA
>legislature simply doesn't considered it sporting for the CHP to lurk
>around in aircraft or on overpasses simply timing cars and issuing
>tickets.  They want the CHP to at least have _work_ at it, and for the
>motorist to at least have a chance.  Much the same reason the CHP has
>resrictions on radar use/funding.
>
>So, the CHP has had to use "pacing" (both with their cruisers and
>airctaft) instead of "timing" to keep it LEGAL.
>
> 
>
>

I think the motorist had a chance just before he/she stepped to far down on
the gas pedal.
 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Arthur M.Ellingson 4790C E. Elua Way, Ewa Beach, Hi. 96706  1-(808)499-2781 |
| UUCP: humu!nctams1!pnet16!n36f                                              |
| ARPA: humu!nctams1!pnet16!n36f@nosc.mil                                     |
| INET: n36f@pnet16.cts.com                                                   |
| RULE #1  IF IT WORKS DON'T FIX IT!!!, IF IT DOESN'T BUY AN AMIGA..(hehe)    |
 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: egeiselman@falcon.aamrl.wpafb.af.mil
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc
Subject: VR COCKPIT QUESTION 12/16
Date: 16 Dec 92 09:58:21 EST
Organization: USAF AL/CFH, WPAFB, Dayton, OH


I have an exercise that I would like to propose to the net.  This exercise is
intended to demonstrate that the collective creativity and expertise of net
participants can be harnessed via a specific methodology.  I think the net
should be exploited as a population of subject matter experts and a source of
user input from which the extracted information may be applied to solving real
design problems.  Through an iterative process of concept refinement, using
the collective knowledge base of the net, it may be possible that otherwise
undiscovered design questions, problems, concepts, capabilities, and etc be
revealed.  I am going to take a look at this idea by doing the following:  I
will post a purposely vague design question to the participants of the net. Do
with the information what you will.  For those of you who choose to
participate in the exercise, e-mail your individual responses to me.  Please
use the date of the post you are responding to in the subject field of the
message.  Also, be sure to include the date of the post you are responding to
in the body of the mail message.  Feel free to submit questions to the net for
clarification and discussion but I will not extract information directly from
the net.  If you need a definition or have a question, ask the net first.
About four weeks after the original post I will submit an edited compilation
of the net response.  This post will hopefully act to spark more ideas, make
clarifications, and identify problem areas.  The refinement process will
continue.  The net may then respond to the new description in order to patch
holes, make corrections, and propose changes.  This iterative process will
continue until responses die off and/or the concept is solidified.  I will
document this process and report the results (I will post the report). 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sample question:

Let's say your are given a virtual reality system.  Your system consists of a 
high resolution wide field-of-view full color head mounted display devise 
(display), an extremely accurate head tracking system (transducer), and a 60Hz 
graphics generator (image generator).  Given this technology, how should it be
applied to the flight deck of a commercial airliner? 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Note:  Please indicate, in your e-mail responses, if you would like your name
and/or affiliation to be excluded from any publication which may result from
this exercise.  Any information on personal background or experience you want
to include may be of some use.  All credit and acknowledgements will be made
as appropriate.  My thanks to all who participate.

-- 

"The opinions and views expressed here are strictly my own and do not 
necessarily reflect the official position of either the U.S. Air Force 
or its contractors."

Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc
From: zwork@starfighter.den.mmc.com (Michael Corvin)
Subject: Re: Fuel Gauges...
Organization: Martin Marietta Astronautics Group
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 22:37:17 GMT

It is easier to accurately measure fuel flow than it is to measure the amount
of fuel in a tank.  Fuel "totalizers", available for most airplanes (but
not very cheap...) do exactly this and integrate the flow rate to get
the amount of fuel used.  One needs to initialize them with
the amount of fuel you are starting with.  (Note that on several airplanes
the fuel flow gauge is a primary engine gauge used to set power.)

There are better technologies for measuring fuel volume in a tank than the
error-ridden, failure-prone float and potentiometer arrangement used
in most GA aircraft.  However, they are not as cheap.  Also, I suspect
that the liability situation (especially given the significance of fuel
planning in such a large proportion of accidents) inhibits innovators
from producing and certifying them for GA aircraft.  Bizjets and airliners
use more accurate systems, but I do not know specifically what principles
any particular systems are based on (more info, someone?).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.misc
From: mpaton@oakhill.sps.mot.com (Michael J Paton)
Subject: Re: Turning Prop in reverse: was Turning the prop during storage
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 03:54:36 GMT
Reply-To: mpaton@tempest.UUCP (Michael J Paton)
Organization: Motorola Inc., Austin, Texas

In article <48160004@hpgrla.gr.hp.com> joell@hpgrla.gr.hp.com (Joel Larner) writes:
>Damage to the magneto impulse coupler can also occur if you turn the
>prop backwards.  All it takes is a small turn.  Turning a prop forward
>is harzardous only if you assume it is cold.  If you do everything
>reasonable to check that the mags are cold, then assume the mags are
>still HOT and handle the prop accordingly you can minimize the risk.
>

Err, this isn't meant to be a flame or anything, but damage to the impulse
couplings I've seen (Slick as fitted to Lycoming O-360) can't be done by
turning backwards.

Assuming this isn't a "my mechanic told me once", could you post more details
of what type couplings and what damage occurs.

Michael Paton
mpaton@tempest.sps.mot.com

Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc
From: jle@fc.hp.com
 (Jer/ Eberhard)
Subject: Re: Slippery Runway Takeoff [Accident]
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 17:54:31 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Workstation Kernel, Ft. Collins, CO
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1.1 PL6]

Please do not reply to me... reply to address below...

> SIR BARP:  Snow and Ice on Runway, Braking Action R____ to Poor

SIR BARP:    Snow and Ice on Runway, Braking Action Reported Poor

There was an add for a DUAT decoder in Flying or AOPA a couple of years
ago with a picture of a pristine Helio H-250 (my second favorite
airplane) crumpled against a runway light.  The caption was something to
the effect that without the services of whoever, "SIR BARP" would get
you.  Its one contraction I don't have trouble remembering.

This is posted for a friend... please respond to Dr. Merl:

<<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>>
Merl F. Raisbeck                      |
RAISBECK@OUTLAW.UWYO.EDU              |	    "Common sense isn't"
307-742-6638  FAX 307-742-2156        |             --Lazarus Long
<<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>><<>>

--
Jer/ (Slash) Eberhard, jle@fc.hp.com, Jer_Eberhard@fc.hp.com
Hewlett-Packard UDL, 3404 East Harmony Road MS-99, Ft Collins, CO  80525-9599
Phone 303 229-2861, FAX 303 229-2838, 1UP10, Incoming 40 44.1N+105 33.0W
Civil Air Patrol, Pikes Peak 218, MSN Check Pilot, CFI Airplane & Glider, N0FZD
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc
From: kez224@gemini (Never send a monster to do to work of an evil scientist.)
Subject: Re: CHP AIRCRAFT & SPEEDERS
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: State University of New York at Albany - CSC
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 17:46:00 GMT

In article <1992Dec14.195606.25011@nctams1.uucp>, n36f@pnet16.cts.com (Et2 Ellingson) writes...
>"Joseph D. Mazza" <mazz+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
>>>>I pointed out that it's illegal for the CHP to use time/distance to
>>>>clock a speeder form an aircraft (or from a cruiser on an overpass, for
>>>>that matter)...
>>> 
>>>Why?
>>>I remember a freshman calculus class proof where it was
>>>shown that for any  measured time/distance/speed leg,
>>>the average/total-leg speed must be attained for at least
>>>an instant.
>>
>>It's not a question of PHYSICS; it's a question of California LAW.  No
>>one argues the accuracy of time/distance calculations.  The CA
>>legislature simply doesn't considered it sporting for the CHP to lurk
>>around in aircraft or on overpasses simply timing cars and issuing
>>tickets.  They want the CHP to at least have _work_ at it, and for the
>>motorist to at least have a chance.  Much the same reason the CHP has
>>resrictions on radar use/funding.
>>
>>So, the CHP has had to use "pacing" (both with their cruisers and
>>airctaft) instead of "timing" to keep it LEGAL.
>>
>> 
>>
>>
> 
>I think the motorist had a chance just before he/she stepped to far down on
>the gas pedal.
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>| Arthur M.Ellingson 4790C E. Elua Way, Ewa Beach, Hi. 96706  1-(808)499-2781 |
>| UUCP: humu!nctams1!pnet16!n36f                                              |
>| ARPA: humu!nctams1!pnet16!n36f@nosc.mil                                     |
>| INET: n36f@pnet16.cts.com                                                   |
>| RULE #1  IF IT WORKS DON'T FIX IT!!!, IF IT DOESN'T BUY AN AMIGA..(hehe)    |
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
So, are we saying that if I stole someone's car in Cal. and got caught driving
it down the road 5 miles away, that I could only be charged with possesion
of a stolen vehicle, because no-one actually saw me take it?
I always thought it'd be a great idea to computerize the toll booths and give
tickets to those whoose time was to short for the distance.  The reason the
cops probably balk at this is that then they would have to catch criminals
and other dangerous stuff.  I wonder what percentage of the average police
force would not be needed if there were no speed laws.\
I'm not sure how radar works, is it by doppler effect or timing between
reflected waves, or is that the same thing either way really. But, isn't
that really timing the distance of the vehicle, just faster timings?
ken-
From: barrey@Novell.com (Barrey Jewall)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc
Subject: Re: Surviving a Commercial Aircraft Accident
Date: 19 Dec 92 02:58:51 GMT
Organization: Novell, Inc.

In <1992Dec18.225352.996@cactus.org> rdd@cactus.org (Robert Dorsett) writes:


>7.  Buy a smokehood!

>Smoke's been the real killer in recent airline crashes: the Habsheim A320
>crash; the Chicago ground-collision; the USAir crash at LAX; the Delta 727 
>crash in Dallas.  They always find these heaps of bodies--often unburned--
>next to a blocked door.  A smokehood should be mandatory equipment: it only
>costs about $15, and can give you another minute or two of maneuvering time.


I'm sure that may of us would be interested in a phone number or
address where such an item might be purchased.

Some people might also like a more through description of a smokehood.

good points raised, however.

Thanks,
Barrey


--
+ Barrey Jewall - Network  Admin.++  and yea, though I walk through the shadow 
+ barrey@novell.com	         ++ of death, I shall fear no evil, for I am
+ Novell, Inc.- San Jose, Calif. ++ the meanest sonofabitch in the valley...
From: sgavian@amy5.stanford.edu (Sarah Gavian)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc
Subject: CFI Practice
Date: 11 Dec 1992 18:26:44 GMT
Organization: Stanford University
Distribution: ba
NNTP-Posting-Host: amy5.stanford.edu

Do you need a study partner for the CFI exam?

I am currently preparing for the FAA CFI (Certificated Flight Instructor)  
practical exam and would like to practice by staging mock exams with  
someone else also studying for the same exam.  We could take turns  
"teaching" and "learning" to sharpen our respective skills.


If interested, call me, Omar Saibou, at (415) 323-7632  or
e-mail my wife, Sarah, at this account.
From: falk@peregrine.Sun.COM (Ed Falk)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc
Subject: Re: CHP AIRCRAFT & SPEEDERS
Date: 18 Dec 1992 04:00:12 GMT
Organization: Sun
NNTP-Posting-Host: peregrine

In article <PD0TB6GK@cc.swarthmore.edu> jeremy@cs.swarthmore.edu (Jeremy Brest) writes:
>rfh3273@galileo.rtn.ca.boeing.com (Dick Harrigill) writes:
>
>>I remember a freshman calculus class proof where it was
>>shown that for any  measured time/distance/speed leg,
>>the average/total-leg speed must be attained
>
>It's called the mean value theorem.  In high school calculus we saw a
>movie in which a cop used it to nail a speeder, and then let him off
>with a warning since he was willing to listen to the math lecture.  A
>classic.

I saw it; a truly wonderful movie.  Just a series of still drawings
with a voice over in a deep southern accent.

  The cop, he say "son, y'all ever hear of Roll's theorem?".  And
  the college boy, he say "sho' I heard of it, I gotta study it fo'
  a test next week"

		-ed falk, sun microsystems
		 sun!falk, falk@sun.com
	"Towards the end, the smell of their air began to change"
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc
From: eandersn@mach1.wlu.ca (Niels Ejvind Andersen)
Subject: Re: Surviving a Commercial Aircraft Accident
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5
Organization: Wilfrid Laurier University
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1992 00:36:15 GMT


In article <BzFAoL.JDD@mach1.wlu.ca> I posted an article, based on notes
I took at a Transport Canada Aviation Safety Seminar, with six rules for
surviving a commercial aviation accident (as a passenger).

Robert Dorsett (rdd@cactus.org) adds: 
: 7.  Buy a smokehood!
: Smoke's been the real killer in recent airline crashes: the Habsheim A320
: crash; the Chicago ground-collision; the USAir crash at LAX; the Delta 727 
: crash in Dallas.  They always find these heaps of bodies--often unburned--
: next to a blocked door.  A smokehood should be mandatory equipment: it only
: costs about $15, and can give you another minute or two of maneuvering time.
: 
: Flight International reported a few years ago that it'd cost a total of about
: $8 million to equip EVERY airliner in existence with a smokehood, along with
: a life preserver.  Nobody's ever gone for it, though.  

The Transport Canada official who gave the lecture that prompted me to post
the six rules was asked about smoke hoods, and she mentioned three
disadvantages to them: (1) the passengers will be required to learn about
yet another safety device when they start their flight, (2) the passengers
waste precious time putting them on, time that is much better spent moving
towards the exit in a crouch position to avoid the smoke and toxic fumes,
and (3) the smoke hood may trap some of the smoke and fumes they are meant
to keep out.

The smokehood the official was referring to had its own supply of oxygen.

Robert, can you tell us any more about smokehoods?  I had never heard of
them until they were mentioned at the safety seminar.

For those of you joining this thread late, I must emphasize that we are
discussing how to improve our chances of getting out of a crashed airliner
safely, if we should ever find ourselves in one, extremely remote as
that possibility might be.

I don't fly on large airliners that often, but I do pilot 2- and 4-seat
Cessnas, and daily I take a much greater risk -- I drive back and forth
to work!
--
Niels Ejvind Andersen     [eandersn@mach2.wlu.ca / 70511.2302@compuserve.com]
Information Systems, Wilfrid Laurier University, Waterloo, ON  N2L 3C5 Canada
                                                                  ... VFR NC4
From: mtc@hpcc01.corp.hp.com (Mark Cousins)
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 19:44:58 GMT
Subject: Creature of habit?
Organization: HP General Systems Division
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc

OK, I admit it:  I have always been skeptical of the reports from pilots to
the effect that when they get back into the car, they sometimes try to fly it.
Sounded pretty implausible to me.

Well one thing you learn as you get older (or, at least, I have) is how little
you know.  What I'm trying to say is that it happened to me.

It's kind of a mild case, but I was pulling into a parking spot and as I was
slowing, I reached to the center console of the rented car and tried to pull
the shift lever back, "closing the throttle."  Yikes.

This next vignette has not much to do with personal flying, but it does
illustrate that maybe I need to stay out of airports for a while . . .

Yesterday I was shopping.  The entrance to one store is protected by those
things -- whatever they're called -- that detect the anti-theft devices
attached to clothing.  Well, they look an awful lot like the airport security
stations so out of habit I reached into my pocket to remove my keys, change,
pocket knife, etc.  Fortunately I caught myself before I looked too much like
some kind of nut case.

Mark
-- 
Mark Cousins                Hewlett-Packard Co.        mtc@hpsemc.cup.hp.com
HP-UX VAB programs    19055 Pruneridge Ave., MS 46T5
(408) 447-4659             Cupertino, CA  95014          FAX: (408) 447-4364