HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: phil@eecs.nwu.edu (William LeFebvre)
Subject: the new charts are here...
Organization: EECS Department, Northwestern University
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 15:01:36 GMT

.....and the alphabet soup is warming on the stove.

The Chicago sectional is one blessed with being in the first round of
the "new" markings in preparation for the new airspace designations.
I just got the October 15 charts in the mail today.

It may have been mentioned here before, but this is what they are using:

Shaded cyan lines for TCAs and class B

Shaded SOLID magenta lines for ARSAs and class C

dashed cyan lines for control zones and class D (with an indication in
the circle of the airspace ceiling in MSL)

dashed magental lines for non-tower control zones and class E

They have done away with the cyan vignette for the 1200 foot floor
markings for contolled (class E) airspace, except in cases where it
abuts uncontrolled (class G) airspace.  The magenta vignettes look
kinda funny at first with no accompanying cyan shading.

What I think many readers here will be interested to hear is how they
handled oversized control zones.  There are quite a few CZs which 
extend beyond the ATA (say, towards a VOR) to accomodate instrument
approaches.  I read some comments here fearing that the entire CZ would
be converted in to class D airspace, requiring radio contact for the
whole area.  But in most cases they marked the ATA with a class D marking
and the extension is marked with class E markings.  In other words,
controlled airspace extends to the ground for both sections, but radio
contact is only required in the class D marked airspace (and that looks
like a 5 sm circle).

By the way, ATAs still exist and the communications requirement for
ATAs is still in effect until September 16, 1993.  Since the dashed
cyan markings (along with the ceiling) are for the control zone, I
imagine that the old 3000' agl ATA ceiling will remain with us until
next September.....

And now for the question.  On the north side of Chicago we have two
airports, Palwaukee and Glenview, in one control zone.  The new chart
still shows one CZ/class D airspace.  So what happens when one tower 
is closed and the other is still open?  Is the entire class D area
under the control of the remaining tower?  Will we need to establish
communications with them?  Or perhaps it should be marked as two separate
class D areas?

		William LeFebvre
		Computing Facilities Manager and Analyst
		Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science
		Northwestern University
		<phil@eecs.nwu.edu>

Newsgroups: rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.ifr
From: reece@eco.twg.com (Reece R. Pollack)
Subject: Re: Stay off the rudder!
Reply-To: reece@eco.twg.com
Organization: The Wollongong Group (East Coast Operations)
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 92 17:27:34 GMT


In article <1992Oct4.044538.155@ucsu.Colorado.EDU>, glenn@rintintin.Colorado.EDU (GLENN ROBERT ALAN) writes:
|>The safest way, of course, is to avoid such situations.  But if you are
|>going to do any significant cross-country flying and you want to get
|>anywhere, experience indicates you might encounter such a situation.
|>So be prepared.  The private pilot test standards require that you
|>be proficient in IMC flight in emergency situations.

Although I whole-heartedly endorse the teaching of emergency flight by
reference to instruments to private pilots, the end result can hardly be
called 'proficient in IMC flight' even for emergency use.

When I started my private pilot training, I told my instructor that I was
planning to start my instrument training shortly after my checkride, so
we spent quite a bit more time on instrument flight than we might otherwise
have. As a matter of fact, I considered myself quite proficient at it,
although not to -IA requirements.

Six weeks after my PP checkride, I got stuck in NC when an unexpected
stationary front moved in and lingered. Faced with a requirement to be
back home the next day, I opted to fly my instructor down on a commercial
flight and start my instrument training right then. What I learned was
that, at least to the novice, hoodwork bears only a casual resemblence
to actual IMC. I now have serious doubts that the average non-instrument
rated pilot could successfully handle unexpected IMC in any but the simplest
situations.

On the other hand, the emergency training is better than no training.

|>If you are planning
|>on traveling, make sure you stay proficient.  Get an IFR hood and another
|>friend who is a pilot.  Go up and practice level flight, turns, climbs,
|>decents, stall recoveries, VOR tracking (if you don't normally use it for
|>visual navigation).  Don't go barreling off into the wild blue yonder if
|>you think you might find IFR or on-top conditions, and you're not rated.
|>But for that one time when you absolutely, positively must get there 
|>and the weather is VFR but not quite perfect... 

Good advice, but don't get the idea that this gives you a way out if you
get yourself in trouble. Don't even think of it as an option until you've
good and truely gotten yourself screwed.

|>If you plan on a lot of traveling, an instrument rating might be a wise
|>investment, although not all have the money.

Amen. 

--
Reece R. Pollack
PP-ASEL -- Octopus Flying Club (based GAI)
Only 3 hours to go to my -IA...
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.piloting
From: leonam@vccnw01.its.rpi.edu (Marcus B. Leonard)
Subject: Re: FAR's where?
Keywords: FAR
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 00:24:35 GMT

In article <Bw6JHn.BGw@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu> mssrh@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu (Scott R. Hutinger) writes:
>Would anyone know where some of the more "least used" fars could be
>located?  I noticed that they can be purchared from the feds at some
>price...something like 43.00/set.  I did call AOPA last year and they
>did send me a part 105 (parachute) set.  I really don't want to spend a
>lot of money just to get FAR's that may have changed, and may not have.
>
>I would like to read some other FAR parts, but wonder if someone
>knows of a FULL set of FARS, not just the somewhat more common parts?

The complete FARs are less-well-known as chapter 14 of the Code of Federal
Regulations.  Most good libraries (including RPI's, anyway) should have a
complete (and current) set of the CFR.  I have no idea what it would cost
to order it from the government, but if you only need an occasional
reference, use your library's copy.

				Marc Leonard
				leonam@rpi.edu
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.piloting
From: carlson@linac.fnal.gov (Kermit Carlson)
Subject: Re: Parapalegic Pilots?
Organization: Fermilab, Batavia, IL
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 14:59:07 GMT

In article <Bvr99y.Cu@waterloo.hp.com> enns@waterloo.hp.com (Roger Enns) writes:
>I have a co-worker here who has the flying bug.  He is wheelchair
>bound, and wonders what solutions, if any, exist to allow him to
>learn to fly.  He has taken a couple of ultralight lessons, but
>wants to learn in something more substantial.  I know the old
>Ercoupes had the rudder linked with ailerons.  Are there any
>other aircraft with similar control systems? 
>
>Thanks in advance, and please e-mail responses if possible.
>
>--
>Roger Enns (enns@waterloo.hp.com) Panacom Automation Division, HP
>C-GIIV Dragonfly, 1979 RX7 13B, 1985 Colt

Roger,

   At a Wings seminar last spring at DPA, a local CFI along with
the local FSDO officals described the triumph of a local pilot
who was able to obtain a pilots license and SODA even though
he was confined to a wheel chair. I believe that there was a
stipulation of with whom he could fly. The CFI described the
special attachemnts that they had developed to allow the use
of rudders and brakes. I havent followed the development of
the STC for the planes (Cessna 172/182, I believe) or how
things have progressed. The FSDO had been extremely helpful
in the development and authorization of special proceedures
and equipment. I can put you in touch with those involved
here so that you could hopefully find someone that could
help near you. I have a call into that CFI for more information....

                                           73,

                                            Kermit Carlson
                                            Cessna N51411

Newsgroups: rec.aviation.piloting
From: patter@dasher.uucp (24224-guthrie)
Subject: Re: Medical waivers
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 92 17:43:34 GMT

In article <1992Oct7.003704.2083@cbnewsi.cb.att.com> alegria@cbnewsi.cb.att.com (carlos.a.alegria) writes:

>All this talk refers to eyeglasses and vision in general....
>So let me change the topic a bit...I have a good
>friend that really wants to learn to fly and she will be attending
>ground school shortly. She is deaf. I am curious, what are the
>restrictions that the FAA puts on people that are deaf or
>hard of hearing? I could think of restrictions regarding flying
>in controlled airspace...are there any others?

One of the magazines I subscribe to had a blurb on a deaf pilot. He had
to stay out of controlled airspace (except in emergency) because of the
lack of ability to use the radio. That's all.

I have a hearing loss in one ear myself. My examiner has told me that,
while it's fine for a third class certificate, I'd have to get a waiver
to get a second class. 

patter@dasher.cc.bellcore.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
                    | "Under Consideration": We never heard of it.
George Patterson -  | "Under Active Consideration": We're searching the
                    |    files for it.
                    |         Kelvin Throop - The Management Dictionary
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: mparker@adobe.com (Mike Parker)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.piloting
Subject: Re: A very short aviation story
Date: 13 Oct 92 21:57:52 GMT
Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated, Mountain View

In article <1992Oct13.155351.7265@nntpserver.chevron.com> hdnea@usho92.hou281.chevron.com (David Neal) writes:

>Actually the reverse. He started the gear raising process while
>all three tires were still fully on the runway. The plane sort
>of nodded (I said bowed) as the nosegear raised itself inwards
>towards the belly.
>
Being of the "down and welded" persuasion I have to ask.  Is this what
happens when one tries to take off with the gear switch in the up
position but the squat switches working properly?  As soon as the plane
gets light, up comes the gear?  I'd probably land, tie down, go home, and
do my laundry too.

mike
From: dfr@usna.navy.mil (PROF D. Rogers (EAS FAC))
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.piloting
Subject: Re: A very short aviation story
Date: 14 Oct 92 02:07:24 GMT
Organization: U. S. Naval Academy

In article <1992Oct13.155351.7265@nntpserver.chevron.com> hdnea@usho92.hou281.chevron.com (David Neal) writes:
!In article <2250@usna.NAVY.MIL! dfr@usna.navy.mil (PROF D. Rogers (EAS FAC)) writes:
!!In article <1992Oct13.064134.18531@peck.com! hdnea@usho92.hou281.chevron.com (David Neal) writes:
!!!I was just about to leave when a pretty yellow and brown v-tail Beech
!!!taxis down to the end of 16. He spends 10 full minutes doing his
!!                                        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
!!!pre-departure takeoff. 
!!
!!Bonanzas have a prohibition against exceeding 1000-1200 rpm before the
!!engine is warm (100 degrees F). It takes about 10 minutes to warm it
!!up even in the summer. More like 15+ if it is cold. So that is probably
!!what he was waiting for.
!!
!That probably explains that. 
!
!!!As his big engine spools up, it makes enough noise that I can hear it
!!!above the FM radio from 1/2 of a mile away. He soon has enough speed to
!!!rotate and promptly raises the gear. The Beech bows to me as he rocks down
!!!on his nosegear and then quickly lifts the nose of the plane into the air.
!!!The gear comes back down, and the pilot shoots out of my line of vision as
!!!he passes the stand of trees blocking view of the runway.
!!
!!This is interesting. Are you suggesting here that the mains came up
!!while the nose gear remained on the runway?
!
!Actually the reverse. He started the gear raising process while
!all three tires were still fully on the runway. The plane sort
!of nodded (I said bowed) as the nosegear raised itself inwards
!towards the belly.

Ahh... He may have placed the gear handle in the up position too
soon or early on. Bad news.
!
!!
!!With a two bladed prop the tip is normally not to much more than 6"
!!from the pavement. You get a bit more clearance with a 3 blade.
!!
!
!I have no idea exactly how close he came to the runway. If
!the plane resting on the fully extended nosegear is
!considered 100% of his clearance, then he was down to 25% of
!his clearance based on my observation. Is that clearer?
!
!
!!!Before I can key to transmit he begins to call traffic and makes an
!!!immediate hard turn into the downwind leg. Downwind to base, base to final
!!!and he is flying the plane like a pro.  Smooth flare, nice landing and he
!!!taxis off behind the FBO.
!!
!!!A few minutes later he and his wife leave in a Cadillac, guess they are
!!!done flying for the day.
!!
!!Probably said there is something screwy with the gear so took the
!!plane to the shop to have it jacked up and the gear swung and checked.
!!
!!He got a good scare but it also sounds like he handled the situation
!!very well.
!!
!
!Hmm.. hopefully my relaying of the events didn't seem critical.
!My comments in the last paragraph were meant to be humorous.

I didn't take it as critical at all. Just trying to explain
the probable cause. No worries.
!
!I guess I could have said "Gee, saw a near prop-strike today".

Dave Rogers

Newsgroups: rec.aviation.piloting
From: cohler@vxcrna.cern.ch (Mike Cohler)
Subject: Turn indicators - possible danger
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: European Organization for Nuclear Research, CERN
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 09:32:00 GMT

There is an articel in the recent edition of the UK General Aviation 
Safety Information Leaflet concerning turn and slip indicators and 
Turn Co-ordinators.  The article was prompted by an investigation into
a fatal accident where a pilot  did not recover from an  inverted spin.
It appears that a standard Turn and Slip instrument indicates ONLY yaw,
and therefore recovery from any spin, erect or inverted, can be achieved
by reference to the turn indicator to select which foot to push on
the rudder.   However in some modern Turn Co-ordinators, the instrument
indicates a combination of Yaw and Roll, and although this type of
instrument will correctly indicate the direction of spin in an erect
spin, may or may not indicate correctly in an inverted spin, and hence
mey delay the recovery in an inverted spin.   There is now a recommendation
NOT to use such Turn Co-ordinators in any aircraft placarded for
aerobatic flight, but only to use the standard Turn and Slip indicator
in which the turn indicator is sensitive to Yaw ONLY. 

==============================================================
|                                                            |
|        Mike Cohler -  preferred email address:             |
|                       MDC1@VAXA.YORK.AC.UK                 |
|                   ie  MDC1%VAXA.YORK.AC.UK@UKACRL.BITNET   |
|                                                            |
|        UK PPL and Glider Pilot                             |
|                                                            |
==============================================================
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.piloting
From: hchong@netcom.com (Hoi Chong)
Subject: Re: wanna be a pilot with eye-glasses???
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 21:21:45 GMT

From article <1992Oct7.173953.3109@tellab5.tellabs.com>, by gandy@tellabs.com (John Gandy):
> In article <1992Oct5.191930.13861@nntpserver.chevron.com>, hdnea@usho92.hou281.chevron.com (David Neal) writes:
>> In article <1992Oct5.160155.18100@porthos.cc.bellcore.com> patter@dasher.uucp (24224-guthrie) writes:
>> >In article <1992Oct3.232600.5132@nic.funet.fi> asunta@convex.csc.FI (Miika Asunta) writes:
>> >>
>> >>I have about -6 in both eyes.
>> >>
>> >>Have I any chance to become a private pilot?
>> >
>> >I don't know what this means.
>> 
>> Try ~20/450 in one eye and 20/500 in the other. 
>> 
>> I had to take the eye exam portion of the medical
>> twice, once without corrective lenses, and once with.
>          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 
> You, too! I was perplexed and more than a little miffed when I
> was asked to remove my soft contacts simply to prove that I
> indeed could not read the big "E" on the top of the eye chart
> (thats the 20/250 line...I have 20/500 in both eyes).

I had to take off my glasses even for 3rd class.  They were 20/250 (I still
can read the biggest row).  The doctor said I need to be able to read one
row below w/o glasses in order to get 2nd class w/o waiver.  Darn!  I
actually can read the that particular row if I squint my eyes really hard.
I didn't even bother to try 'cause I know I was passing the 3rd class. 

Wonder if it is acceptable (morally or legally) if I go for another try
(actually it will be the first try for 2nd class)?  I am pretty sure I can
wing (is that right spelling) it.  Would the FAA get suspecious that my 
eyes had improved?  (or does only the doctor has my record)?  No, don't worry,
I am not going to fly with airliner.  I am doing better than quite a few flight
engineers and co-pilots right now.
From: patter@dasher.uucp (24224-guthrie)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.piloting
Subject: Re: Current FAR's
Date: 8 Oct 92 21:39:30 GMT
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ

In article <tcryal.718575661@vincent1.iastate.edu> tcryal@iastate.edu (Tod C Ryal) writes:
>Reading all the posts on eyesight restrictions brings up a question.
>Where can I get a copy of the 1992 (or 1993 since that's coming soon) 
>FAR's?

Most FBOs sell them. Check for it in the display of maps and training
manuals.

patter@dasher.cc.bellcore.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
                    | "Unfair Competition": Selling cheaper than we do.
George Patterson -  | "Note and Initial": Let's spread the responsibility
                    |    for this.
                    |         Kelvin Throop - The Management Dictionary
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.piloting
From: rkaplan@netcom.com (Richard Kaplan)
Subject: Re: Parapalegic Pilots?
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 03:38:55 GMT

In article <Bvr99y.Cu@waterloo.hp.com> enns@waterloo.hp.com (Roger Enns)
 writes:

>I have a co-worker here who has the flying bug.  He is wheelchair
>bound, and wonders what solutions, if any, exist to allow him to
>learn to fly.  He has taken a couple of ultralight lessons, but

The International Wheelchair Aviators can be a good
source of information.  Contact Bill Blackwood at (619) 746-5018
in Escondido, California.  In general, paraplegic pilots
can attain an unrestricted private certificate without
significant difficulty by using a hand control available
for about $250 - $500.  A (very) few quadriplegic pilots have 
also been licensed.  Although paraplegic pilots
may need assistance checking high-wing fuel tanks, they
are usually fully independent otherwise.

The Ercoupe seems quite appealing for disabled pilots
due to its rudderless design; however, entry into
the aircraft tends to be a significant obstacle.
The Cessna Cardinal seems to be quite popular with
disabled pilots due to its wide, strutless entry.

Lower extremity amputees and post-polio patients have
also successfully achieved licensure.  There is
even a custom prosthetic foot available for amputee
pilots which consists of a removable forefoot to 
avoid unintended operation of brakes instead of
rudder.

I work with a number of spinal cord injured patients
on a clinical level, and I am currently in the
process of compiling a survey of options available
to wheelchair aviators.  If anyone has any suggestions
for resources I might utilize in this regard, they
would be much appreciated.



-- 
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.piloting
From: jhenderson@pomona.claremont.edu
Subject: Re: Medical waivers
Organization: Pomona College
Date: 7 Oct 92 09:45:14 PDT

> 
> All this talk refers to eyeglasses and vision in general....
> So let me change the topic a bit...I have a good
> friend that really wants to learn to fly and she will be attending
> ground school shortly. She is deaf. I am curious, what are the
> restrictions that the FAA puts on people that are deaf or
> hard of hearing? I could think of restrictions regarding flying
> in controlled airspace...are there any others?

I read about a man, who is also deaf, who got his private ticket just a few
months ago. He can only fly out of uncontrolled airports, and has to stay away
from airspace that needs a clearance to enter, such as ARSA's, ATA's, TCA's.

It must've been on either Plane & Pilot or AOPA Pilot, the only two rags I get
(well I also get theat Pacific Flyer freebie at the local FBO, but I didn't
read it there).
______________________________________________________________________________
Javier Henderson, N6VBG         | Beat the 55mph limit (legally):
jhenderson@pomona.claremont.edu | Learn to fly!
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.piloting
Newsgroups: rec.aviation

In rec.aviation, q1hl@jupiter.sun.csd.unb.ca (Nameless CS Student) writes:


>For a change, I have my copy of Canadian ATC Manops (Manual of
>operations) home with me, including the change to the gear warning.
>Following is the COMPLETE TEXT:

Much of which I've deleted for brevity:

>2.	Presently, ATS direction specifies that a landing gear  check  be
>	issued  by  the airport controller, to all aircraft equipped with
>   	retractable landing gear, while on approach for landing.   Howev-
>   	er,  neither  ICAO nor FAA air traffic control procedures contain
>   	the "CHECK GEAR DOWN" requirement.  Removing this phrasology will
>   	also  fulfil  a Canadian Airspace Review (CAR) recommendation for
>   	achieving commonality with our ICAO and FAA counterparts.  

Now here's a wonderful example of Bureaucrat think!  Let's see if I
understand this reasoning.  Mikey doesn't do it.  Just like in the
commercial, we want to be like Mikey.  Soooo...  We're not going to do
it any more.

>   3.	It is ultimately the pilot's responsibility to  ensure  that  the
>   	landing  gear  is extended in sufficient time to execute a normal
>   	landing.  ATS does not have the responsibility of issuing a  rem-
>   	inder to safe-guard against this type of pilot error.

ARG!  OF COURSE IT'S THE PILOT'S RESPONSIBILITY!!!  As with other
arguments I've seen, this really doesn't address the central issue.
Gear up landings are a common pilot error.  If a gear check issued by a
controller helps in alleviating this error, why not do it instead of
arguing about who's responsibility it is?  If it doesn't help then
eliminate it, but for heavens sake if there's data available, let's look
at it.  Sounds to me like we could replace "ATS does not have the
responsibility" in the above paragraph with "ATS does not *want the
liability*".

>   Chris Rasley, PP-SEL (+night), Glider (student), ATC (CYFC)

Please note that I'm responding to and critisizing the material Chris
has presented, not Chris or Chris' comments.


Scott Turner  scott@hpisla.LVLD.HP.COM
HP VXI Systems Division
Turbo Arrow N2134N  "Baby"

Newsgroups: rec.aviation