HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Several years ago we were preparing to depart from Catalina in a
friends AVCON/Cherokee 140 after an enjoyable weekend.  The wind was
out of the west at 5 to 10 knots.  

While we completed the preflight we observed a Beech 18 (twin) depart
from runway 4.  After starting the engine we announced to unicom that
we were taxiing to depart from runway 4.  The unicom operator came on
the air and announced that the active runway at Catalina was runway
22.  We responded with the observation that the wind was favoring
runway 4 and we would be using runway 4.  The unicom operator then
told us that Catalina was a private airport and if we didn't like his
runway assignment we were denied permission to take-off.  We
respectfully declined his runway assignment and proceeded to taxi.  

We heard no more over the radio; however about 60 seconds later a jeep
pulls right in front of us forcing us to abruptly stop and blocking
any further taxiing.  The guy jumped out of the jeep and ran over to
the plane and started yelling at us.  He told us that we weren't going
anywhere without his permission; as far as we were concerned the
airport was closed.  His position was that a 10 knot tail-wind was not
strong enough to justify switching the pattern around.  The Beech 18
was a "special case" because it's a twin.  

Since there was nothing we could do, with a "mad man" ready to ram us
with his jeep, we went back to the tie-down area and waited for the
winds to subside before departing on runway 22.  After we got home we
called the FAA to report the incident.  It was then we learned that
this clown was an FAA Accident Prevention Councilor!!  No action
resulted from our complaint (at least none was reported back to us).

Claude Goldsmith, CFII <claude@sunfse.ese.lmsc.lockheed.com>
 twisted-pair (408) 742-7514	      | Opinions expressed are not 
 on the air - WB6UOO                  | necessarily those of my 
 through the air - Mooney N6416U      | employer.
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.piloting
From: frye@cerl.uiuc.edu (G. David Frye)
Subject: Re: Right Turn-out?
Organization: UIUC Computer-based Education Research Lab
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 19:10:27 GMT

In article <Ef0K2uq00YUo06zK1g@andrew.cmu.edu> Jeffrey Dunkle tells about
leaving the pattern in an unconventional way and "getting caught":

>Of course, just then the local "self declared dean" of the field CFI's
>was flying back to the home drome, calling "....entering pattern upwind
>for runway 2....."  (By the way, I'd been on CTAF frequency since
>start-up and never heard an " x miles out...landing" position report
>from him.
>
>He later dinged me in the lounge for making an "illegal" turnout. 
>(There was never any near collision or anything....just that he was
>there to see/hear my right turnout.)

I think it's pretty funny that he'd have the nerve to call you on this while
making what amounts to an unconventional pattern ENTRY himself.  Since all
he has to go on is the AIM's traffic pattern diagram, show it to him and ask
him where the upwind entry point is.

By the way, a practical approach to your desire to turn eastbound is to do
so after "leaving the pattern" -- i.e. flying straight out until you're well
beyond the point where you'd normally turn crosswind, and after you've reached
pattern altitude or higher.  On the upwind, announce "123FY is departing the
pattern to the north, then turning eastbound."

G. David Frye, CFIAI
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
INTERNET: frye@cerl.uiuc.edu   NovaNET: frye / s / nova   PHONE: (217) 333-7439
   reminder:  I post all email flame back to the newsgroup that generated it.
        We have a 4-month-old baby.  We don't have TIME for a lifestyle.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: mtc@hpcc01.corp.hp.com (Mark Cousins)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.piloting
Subject: Re: Landing at Gnoss Field
Date: 10 Nov 92 23:53:45 GMT
Organization: HP General Systems Division

In rec.aviation.piloting, amazon@sgi.com (Stormwind) asks about Gnoss Field,
Novato, CA.

Gnoss's reputation as crosswind heaven is well-deserved.  I've never been
there when there wasn't a crosswind, and that includes mornings.  One time I
tuned up the CTAF and heard that everyone was landing to the northwest, so I
joined the pattern from the right 45.  I ended up floating halfway down the
runway thanks to a nice tailwind, arrgh.  So don't assume that the current
pattern is correct.

The crosswinds are bad enough that full-rudder sideslips and landing on the
upwind wheel are the often the order of the day.

In studying an overhead photo of the airport in the FBO, I realized that there
used to be another runway at Gnoss, more closely aligned with the wind.  I
don't know when it was decommissioned, but as I recall you can sort-of still
see it from the air.

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
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.piloting
From: barnett@convex.com (Paul Barnett)
Subject: Re: Re(2): aircraft right of way
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 17:34:42 GMT
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

In <1992Nov11.185850.35172@uu0570.foggybottom.com> Rob_L._Allbritton@uu0570.foggybottom.com writes:

>patter@dasher.cc.bellcore.com writes:
>  > The Newark/Kennedy ATC people set their 
>  > radars to ignore the 1200 transponder code in 
>  > this area. They say it "looks like a 
>  > beehive".                                     

>That is *very* upsetting to me. Remind me not to fly near the New York
>TCA. Besides, isn't that just slighly illegal, or at least against some
>internal regulation?

I don't know if it is "against" the rules, but unfortunately the
practice is apparently not confined to the New York TCA.

However, it may be appropriate to note that the primary return, or the
secondary without the legend (which includes the altitude information)
is still painted on the controller's screen.

Your mileage may vary:  I am simply reporting my observations when the
mode was demonstrated to me in Minneapolis (Center or Approach?  I've
visited both).
 
I didn't think to ask:  does the computer-detected "conflict alert"
get disabled as well?
--
Paul Barnett             Internet: barnett@convex.com
Convex Computer Corp.      Office: 214-497-4846
Richardson, TX        Mobile/Home: 214-236-8438
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.piloting
From: kerry@Ingres.COM (Kerry Kurasaki)
Subject: Re: Right Turn-out?
Reply-To: kerry@Ingres.COM (Kerry Kurasaki)
Organization: Ask Computer Systems Inc., Ingres Division, Alameda CA 94501
Date: 12 Nov 92 20:10:56 GMT

In article <2380@usna.NAVY.MIL> dfr@usna.navy.mil (PROF D. Rogers (EAS FAC)) writes:
>
>Your action was neither improper nor illegal just unconventional.
>At an uncontrolled airport you can basically do anything you
>want as regards pattern entry or exit.
>

Recheck FAR 91.127.  There are a few limitations, such as making "left-hand
traffic unless ..."  So there are some rules.

Kerry
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.piloting
From: cep@taligent.com (Christophe Pettus)
Subject: Re: Landing at Gnoss Field
Organization: Taligent, a little subsidiary of two really big companies.
Distribution: ba
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 18:44:14 GMT

I've flown into Gnoss several times, both during training and
post-training.  It's not as bad as all that; you can expect crosswind
components of up to 8-12 knots in the late afternoon, so know your
airplane's, and your own, limitations.  In the morning, it shouldn't
be a problem for a pilot of average skill.
--
-- Christophe

"I draw the line at Styrofoam packing kernels, you sick pervert."
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.piloting
From: Gary.Moore@launchpad.unc.edu (Gary Moore)
Subject: Re: Heard on the Air
Organization: University of North Carolina Extended Bulletin Board Service
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 13:28:30 GMT


While landing into the wind is certainly the safest and most effecient
method, it is by no means regulatory, especially at uncontrolled airports.
 The unicom may provide ADVISORIES but have no jursdication over dictating
what runway a particuliar aircraft should use.  

Now while this particuliar example might have been an extreme, there are
times when a pilot may have justifable reasons for choosing a different
runway than the one advised.

From: bmp@pollux.svale.hp.com (Brian M. Perkin)
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 00:23:33 GMT
Subject: Re: Re: New ATIS Twist - heard on the air
Organization: Hewlett Packard CPCD, Sunnyvale CA
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.piloting

I talked to one of the tower controllers at RHV.
He has stopped using hold short clearances entirely.

The two controllers I talked to weren't real thrilled with
the idea because now they have some pilots reading back all
clearances and some pilots still aren't reading back
anything.

Brian
From: lihan@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Bruce G. Bostwick)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Batteries & Damage Done...
Date: 7 Nov 92 17:46:24 GMT
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX

In article <1992Nov5.024151.5104@nmsu.edu> bboswell@dante.NMSU.Edu (BOSWELL) writes:
[battery boilover story trimmed out]
>This is the part that gets me though: he said the most damage a 24V charge  
>could have done to the battery is to boil off some of the acid, which could be
>made up for by adding more water to the battery.  Judging by the way the  
>battery reacted, though, I'd have to say there's some more damage (to the  
>battery).  Any ideas?

Well, batteries do react pretty dramatically to an overvoltage like
that, and usually the plates (the critical part of all this) are
undamaged, at least physically.  The operative word is _usually_.

If it's lead-acid, which a 12-volter probably is, such a brief
exposure to excessive charging voltage probably won't distort the
plates enough to risk a short.  It does, however, change the ratio of
Pb to PbSO4 in the sulfated plates (I forget which pole they are) and
the concentration of the acid electrolyte, and it probably changes a
number of maddeningly subtle other details in the battery.  The
flat-battery start after the jump is probably not a good sign -- if it
started _exactly_ the same way, that means the charging efficiency
(the ratio of charging to discharge energy for technophiles out there) is
gone and the battery is probably a deader -- I wouldn't count on
getting anything more than a few blades' worth of start out of it, and
it will probably drag down the alternator before long.

Batteries are mysterious creatures.  Science will only explain so much
of how they behave.  Best rule is to treat them like living creatures
and be kind to them, feed them, water them, and try not to be too rude
-- 
<BGB>
lihan@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu        /     "I can't complain,
(really Bruce Bostwick)        /   but sometimes I still do"
from the great state of TEXAS /         --Joe Walsh--
From: thughes@lonestar.utsa.edu (Toby . Hughes)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc
Subject: Re: Flying Under Bridges
Date: 9 Nov 92 22:35:34 GMT
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio


PREVIOUS POST IS RESUBMITTED BELOW FOR COMMENT:


>In light of recent discussion about looping non-aerobatic aircraft and
>buzzing farmhouses in Pitts Specials, I feel it necessary to ask the following:
>
>When flying under a bridge, whether it be the Golden Gate, Mackinac, Brooklyn,
>or the Devil's River in West Texas, is it advisable to fly low, near the
>surface, or high, with minimum clearance on the bridge?  The determining factor
>is, of course, cable stretched across the span, but there is mixed feeling as
>to whether most cables are stretched just below the structure, or down on the
>water.  Any ideas from you Ercoupe-loopers?
>
>Please answer as soon as possible, as I am also concerned with the technical
>aspects of inverted flight in high-wingers over snow fields on moonlit nights.
>
>TH

GEEZ!!! Larry warned me against trying subtle humor on USENET, and I wouldn't
listen!

OK, folks, it was all an attempt at sarcasm.  The list had been filled for days
with ernest discussion on the hows and how-to's of flying acrobatic maneuvers
in non-acro rated aircraft.  If the discussion was serious, the complete
irresponsibility of a pilot who would perform such a manuever, especially
with passengers in the aircraft, called for a demeaning response.  If the
discussion was in jest, I thought perhaps to introduce some other equally
foolish maneuvers into the agenda.

Since posting the above, I have seen wavering disbelief, questions as to
whether or not it was meant to be taken seriously, and advice directed to
me NOT TO DO IT!  Thanks so much; I won't.  But the fact that so many seem
to have taken the questions seriously enough to provide answers and further
discussion indicates that there are some out there who would try these things,
and that's the scariest part of the entire equation.

I have seen up close and personal what's left after an aircraft accident.
It ain't your routine car-wreck, folks, and they just don't make band-aids
big enough for what you can do to yourself when you don't treat flying as
the serious business that it is.

  "Between the amateur and the professional there is a difference not only
   in degree, but in kind."  - Bernard De Voto


TH
From: randy@khan.gatech.edu (Randal T. Abler)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc
Subject: Re: Flying Under Bridges
Summary: Seaplane take off and landing
Date: 10 Nov 92 13:26:42 GMT
Organization: CERL-EE, Georgia Institue of Technology

In article <1992Nov8.233551.11326@selway.umt.edu> cap@selway.umt.edu (Charles A. Smith) writes:
>
>Thinking about this sort of situation, it seems reasonable that in order to 
>takeoff between two bridges, that one might extend the "takeoff roll"
>a bit downwind, and actually be completely airborne as one passed under the
>first bridge, so that one could clear the second bridge by as much as possible.
>
>Are seaplanes given an exemption from the bridge rule?
>

There is no explicit rule covering flying under bridges.
Two rules that are might apply:  91.119 (Minimum safe altitudes)
and 91.13 (Careless and Reckless operations). 

The Minimum safe altitudes section starts out with "Except when
necessary for takeoff or landing ...", so it doesn't apply to
the seaplane above.

That leaves careless and reckless: 
91.13(a) Aircraft operation for the purpose of air navigation.  No
person may operate an aircraft in a careless or reckless manner so as
to endanger the life or property of another.

That may or may not apply - if the seaplane was operated normally
(no aerobatics on take-off!), and the pilot had engine out options,
a way of seeing boats on the river, etc, then he should be OK.
He may still have to explain why he chose that spot to land, and
not a mile farther up the river, where there are no bridges (if
that is the case).

Note that local ordinances may impose additional restrictions.
-- 
Randal  Abler   	randy@cerl.gatech.edu		 
CERL/EE Georgia Tech
From: wwxiong@topper.ksu.ksu.edu (Weize Wade Xiong)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc
Subject: Wanted: World-War-2 Fighter Aircraft Gif.
Date: 8 Nov 1992 13:23:10 -0600
Organization: Kansas State University
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: topper.ksu.ksu.edu


If some body have pictures of WW2 fighters' picture please post some.
Thanks.


Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc
From: lhe@sics.se (Lars-Henrik Eriksson)
Subject: Re: Exceed Vne or max G's first? (was Re: looping a non-acro aircraft)
Organization: Swedish Institute of Computer Science, Kista
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 15:16:47 GMT

In article <lg6l49INN5ek@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM> jfarrell@cloudbase (Jerry Farrell) writes:

   I can't believe the physics is different for powered vs. unpowered craft.
   Can someone explain the discrepancy?

Vne is determined by two things: flutter and risk of overstressing the
airframe. The first of these depends on true airspeed, the second on
indicated airspeed. If, for a particular aircraft, flutter is the
limiting factor for Vne, indicated Vne will decrease will altitude. If
airframe load is the limiting factor, indicated Vne will be constant
with altitude (at least until true airspeed becomes high enough that
flutter becomes a factor).

I believe this is the third or fourth time I write this in the past
few weeks, yet the question keeps coming up. Do my postings disappear
somewhere?
--
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: anderson@world.std.com (Dave Anderson)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc
Subject: Accident stats and Willie Horton
Date: 6 Nov 92 15:32:33 GMT
Article-I.D.: world.BxAwIA.IHD
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA


> Other random statistics:  Arkansas is tied for the #2 spot among the states
> in motor vehicle deaths at 3.3 per 100 million miles

   Amazing -- how did Mary Matalin's smear squad ever miss this statistic?

===============================================================================
  Dave Anderson - ATP/CFII ASMEL
  Concurrent Computer Corporation              508-392-2441
  One Technology Way                           dla@westford.ccur.com
  Westford, MA 01886                           anderson@world.std.com
===============================================================================
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc
From: fskevin@mars.lerc.nasa.gov (Kevin R. Kirtley (SVER))
Subject: Re: FAR 91.119.A (was: Problem Pilots)
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: NASA Lewis Research Center
Date: 10 Nov 1992 14:32 EDT  

In article <n2wcobn@Unify.Com>, raveling@Unify.com (Paul Raveling) writes...

      Stuff about low level flying in sparsely populated area deleted.
> 
>	What do you think?  Should we (a) condemn such a pilot for
>	pushing to the brink of safe procedures, (b) admire such a pilot
>	for his skills, (c) do both, or (d) do neither? 
> 
>Paul Raveling
>Raveling@Unify.com

    well take your pick; however, the most fun I've had in an airplane was
tree top flying over UNpopulated hills of Pennsylvania in a J-3 Cub. Many in
net land may condemn such flying but we had a solid airplane, experienced pilot,
calm weather, and knew the terrain. As for legality, I'll let the esquires duke
it out. As for violating safe procedures, it never crossed my mind.

Kevin
Short Wing Piper Lover
From: jpw@minerva.ece.drexel.edu (Joseph Wetstein)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc
Subject: DUAT access from internet
Date: 13 Nov 92 02:02:47 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Drexel University, Philadelphia PA



Is it possible for me to access DUAT services through my (INTERNET) terminal?

I don't have access to a modem at school.

Thanks,
Joe
-- 
Joseph P. Wetstein                  __|__          "I may be Captain by
jpw@coe.drexel.edu              ---o-(_)-o---       rank, but I never wanted
                                                    to be anything else but 
KA3VJY						    an engineer" - Scotty
Xref: sparky rec.aviation.misc:651 rec.aviation:17277
From: tel@cbnews.cb.att.com (thomas.e.lester)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc,rec.aviation
Subject: Re: radios and non-pilots
Date: 13 Nov 92 16:21:19 GMT
Article-I.D.: cbnews.1992Nov13.162119.11382
Organization: AT&T

In article <1e07i1INNhgr@freedom.genrad.com> dls@freedom.genrad.com (Diana L. Carlson) writes:
!>
!>I have just had the opportunity to fill out the application for an airplane
!>radio station license, and I can assure you that one of the questions that 
!>was to be filled in WAS IN FACT the Aircraft registration number.  This is
!>a LEGAL and VALID FCC Callsign.  Stop and think about it.  If it wasn't a
!>callsign, then why would they be using the same "sequences" as they do for
!>Amateur Radio licenses?  (For those who don't know, in the USA, all ham
!>licenses must start with one of four letters:  A, K, N, or W, NOTHING ELSE).
!>And in fact, you can have your airplane registration number be your Amateur
!>callsign, IF it happens to start with an N....Dave's been thinking of changing
!>ours to N1JYX :-)....
!>
	Bzzzzzt.   Sorry, but not possible.  Aircraft registration
	numbers must not have more than 2 letter suffix.

	Rules include:  1 to 5 alphanumeric characters
			of which the last 1 or 2 may may alpha
			(but not Alpha followed by numeric)

			Also rules about leading numbers, letters, etc.
-- 
	-----------------------------------------------------------------
	Tom Lester				att!cblph!tel
	Sonerai IIL (under TEST)		(614) 860-3259
	N4LX 					(614) 927-8106
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc,rec.aviation
From: c60c-3gi@web-3c.berkeley.edu (Masayuki Karahashi)
Subject: Re: radios and non-pilots
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 10:53:13 GMT


in addition to this hand-held radio and non-pilots topic, I have another
question:

Some of you know that Im the one having lots and lots of trouble getting
my third class medical due to my cardiac stuff, but anyway...while back,
when I was still taking some lessons (air and ground...obviously before
my first solo) my instructor *highly* recommended to me that I get a hand 
held radio in case (1) the radio in the plane fails (2) that'll allow me to 
listen to multiple channels at once, for example, listen to ATIS and keep
track of the pattern traffic, etc, (3) it feels safer that way (having
some backup).  Now Im the type that likes to go for the good ones if I am
goinf to go for something.  SO, I broke my back and emptied my wallet and 
decided to buy one...ended up buying a ICOM IC-A20 for lots and lots of 
money...needless to say, I was broke then.  ANYWAY...

now finally my question...so now that I am stuck with it and am stuck
on the ground since looks like I am not going to be flying anytime soon
(at least in a plane), although I believe I will eventually be able to
get that medical sooner or later, what can I do with it?  Can I listen
to planes (for fun, ie, use it like a scanner) or is even turning on a 
tranciever illegal if you are not air born?

I don't want to sell it since I believe I will be flying eventually and I
am also contemplating gliders while I am trying to get my medical, so once
I start gliders, it will be useful...

whatever...

---Masayuki Karahashi
c60c-3gi@web.berkeley.edu
"I think its time to change major"
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc,rec.aviation
From: geoff@peck.com (Geoff Peck)
Subject: Re: radios and non-pilots
Organization: Geoffrey G. Peck, Consultant, San Jose CA
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 07:56:42 GMT

In article <1dv8kqINNfe@agate.berkeley.edu> chem4-aa@garnet.berkeley.edu (Lonnie C. Martin) writes:
> I'm not sure I have ever flown an airplane that didn't have a fleet license,
> b ut I _think_ the airplane N number _would_ be on the radio station license
> (when the license is not the fleet kind, I mean).  
>
> Any airplane owner care to clear this up?

That is correct.  The aircraft's station license is assigned to match the
airplane's registration.  Conveniently, "N" just happens to be one of the
letters assigned by international convention for U.S. use as a radio
call-sign prefix.  (The other three letters assigned to the U.S. are
K, W, and A.)

Indeed, I believe that the international radio "naming" convention is also
conventionally used for aircraft registration prefixes.

						Geoff