HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ftwjm@acad3.alaska.edu
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Flying past Sidney, Neb.??
Date: 24 Jul 92 06:40:22 GMT
Organization: University of Alaska Fairbanks

The next time you fly over Sidney, Nebraska you should consider landing.  
Sidney is the home of Cabela's Outdoor Supply.  Cabela's is very 
accomodating to pilots.  If you dial up unicom they are happy to let 
Cabela's know you need the courtesy van.  The store is about a mile from 
the airport and it's a great sporting goods store.  For instance, the fishing 
goods surround a large freshwater aquarium filled with trophy-sized game 
fish.  If you are interested in rifles or shotguns these folks are really 
into high quality, spendy stuff.  They have a nice lunch counter and will 
give you a ride back to your plane whenever you like.  The FBO is great 
and will have you ready to go after shopping.  Sidney is only a little 
over 100 miles from Denver.  We were visiting Colorado Springs and took 
a morning's flight to divert to Sidney.  It was well worth it.  
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: exumfs@exu.ericsson.se (Mark Steph, XT/DO, x7534)
Subject: Re: Dogs in Planes
Reply-To: exumfs@exu.ericsson.se
Organization: Ericsson Network Systems
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 19:23:02 GMT

In article 15c0uqINNbco@smaug.West.Sun.COM, brianh@ism.isc.com (Brian Horn) writes:
>In article <1992Jul31.161123.656@scubed.com> schneide@scubed.com (Steve Schneider) writes:
>>discussion very closely.  I don't know if anyone else mentioned it,  but
>>the late great stunt pilot Art Scholl used to fly at airshows with his
>>dog named Aileron.  It was a small black dog, although I don't recall the
>
>BTW, Aileron is still hopping about at Rialto and still enjoys airplanes.
>(or at least last August? he was)

So did he teach his dog to roll over?
"Aileron: Roll!" :)

---
Mark Steph              | you can twist perceptions
exumfs@exu.ericsson.se  | reality won't budge 
(yes, .se *is* in Texas)| you can raise objections
PO Box 833875, MS L-05  | I will be the judge -- and the jury
Richardson, TX 75083    |      -Neil Peart, "Show Don't Tell"
From: lee@bluefuzz.sw.stratus.com (Lee Cooprider)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Shoulder Harnesses (Was: Re: Cessna sholdr harn review (BAS))
Date: 22 Jul 92 13:17:22 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Software Engineering

In article <5019@transfer.stratus.com> spenny@sw.stratus.com (Steve Pennypacker) writes:

>I've never been able to 
>get the shoulder harnesses in C-150s and 172s to stay attached to the lap
>belt.  Just so we're all talking about the same type of harness, the type
>I'm talking about is the manual, non inertia-reel harness with a fastener
>that consists of a mostly flat metal plate with a cutout in it, and the 
>cutout is supposed to fit into an interlocking peg on the lap belt.
>
>The only way I can prevent the shoulder harness buckle from coming undone is
>to adjust the harness so tight that I can't reach the panel.  Not very 
>useful.  
>
>So, is there any way to fasten/adjust those things so they don't come undone
>every few minutes?

The best solution to this that I have seen is to take one of those plastic
wire-ties (the ones with a ratchet surface on one side that slides thru a
rectangular hole in the end of the strip) and tie it around the peg on the lap
belt.  This makes the shoulder belt hold firmly to the now enlarged peg but it
is still easily removed.
-- 
Lee W. Cooprider				PP-ASEL/IA
Lee_Cooprider@vos.stratus.com			Skylane N2908F "Wiley"
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: mitchell@mdd.comm.mot.com (Bill Mitchell)
Subject: Re: QANTAS - U.S. Carrier warnings.
Bcc:  mitchell
Reply-To: mitchell@mdd.comm.mot.com (Bill Mitchell)
Organization: Motorola, Mobile Data Division - Seattle, WA
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 14:12:22 GMT

in rec.aviation, billg@bony1.bony.com (Bill Gripp) said:

>Yes, but the point is that KAL007 was VISUALLY identified as a
>commercial airliner before the order to shoot it down was issued.  It
>was shot down anyway.

Sorry to post, but mail bounced.

Please cite your source for this information.

-- 
mitchell@mdd.comm.mot.com (Bill Mitchell)

Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: bible@iastate.edu (Anthony E Bible)
Subject: Re: Ropes and gliders
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, IA
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 14:38:46 GMT

In article <9207291245.AA14432@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> PJERN@CHGVMIC1.VNET.IBM.COM writes:
>There has been a little discussion recently about emergencies
>(wave offs?) on tow.
>
>.disclaimer on:
>
>I am not a sailplane pilot, although I have looged a few flights
>in them.
>
>.edisclaimer:
>
>I don't understand one thing:  Why on earth would a sailplane
>pilot NOT drop the rope?  It seems like having the rope hanging
>from the nose is a Bad Idea.
>
>(I seem to be reading that the glider pilot in the case being discussed
>kept the rope all the way back to the strip, and it seems to not be
>unusual to do so.  Am I missing something?)

	My training was to drop the rope before landing.  My suspicion is that
if I were dumped off a few hundred feet above the ground I might not think to
do that what with figuring out where to go and all.  Also, for Schweizer
hitches (don't know if this is universally true or not) the hitch auto-releases
when there is back pressure on it so leaving the rope on is not as serious a
problem as it might seem at first blush.


>
>Phil Jern (have engine, will travel)


Regards,
tony (no engine, will travel :)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: brent@telebit.com (Brent Chapman)
Subject: Re: Carlsbad Caverns Fly In
Organization: Telebit Corporation; Sunnyvale, CA, USA
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 01:10:25 GMT

wb8foz@skybridge.SCL.CWRU.Edu (David Lesher) writes:

>Others said
># > Carlsbad Caverns Fly In (CACAFI*)
># 
># I didn't know it was legal to fly an airplane inside of a cave.  It must
># be a really big cave....

>Whne I was on the Left Coast a few weeks ago, and saw that funny
>looking structure at Moffitt, my first thought was:
>	Does Geoff solo his students in there?

"That funny looking structure at Moffett" is Hangar 1, built to house the
USS Macon and later dirigibles (which were never built).

At the Moffett Air Show (the last of which will be later this year, since
Moffett is closing), you can take a ride on a tethered hot air balloon...
Inside Hangar 1...


-Brent
--
Brent Chapman                                   Great Circle Associates
Brent@GreatCircle.COM                           1057 West Dana Street
+1 415 962 0841                                 Mountain View, CA  94041
From: bennett@refine.enet.dec.com (Steve Bennett)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: WANTED: Ultralight two-place
Date: 23 Jul 92 17:53:22 GMT
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation


In article <122140196@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM>, jle@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Jer/ Eberhard) writes...
> 
>I'm confused.  Is this an experimental or an ultra-light?
>I was under the impression that an ultra-light was limited
>to 55mph airspeed.
> 

My Kolb is an Experimental, not an ultralight.  The Challenger described in the
original post was also an Experimental, not an ultralight.

An ultralight is a single-place machine limited to, among other things, a
maximimum level flight speed of 55 knots (not mph).

There are regs about 2-place ultralights, but these can only be used for
training by USUA-certified instructors.

-Steve
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Bennett			|  bennett@refine.enet.dec.com
Video, Image & Printers Group	|  Kolb Twinstar N614BT
DEC - Westford, MA		|  "I'm not lost, I'm positionally challenged!"
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: jle@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Jer/ Eberhard)
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 22:39:53 GMT
Subject: Re: Shoulder Harnesses (Was: Re: Cessna sholdr harn review (BAS))
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA
Newsgroups: rec.aviation

> |> I've never been able to 
> |> get the shoulder harnesses in C-150s and 172s to stay attached to the lap
> |> belt.  Just so we're all talking about the same type of harness, the type
> |> I'm talking about is the manual, non inertia-reel harness with a fastener
> |> that consists of a mostly flat metal plate with a cutout in it, and the 
> |> cutout is supposed to fit into an interlocking peg on the lap belt.
> 
> It sounds like your lap built is missing a part, which is a small nylon 
> washer which when installed allows a snug fit for the should belt 
> cutout.  With this, you can go ahead and wear the shoulder belt just 
> loose enough to reach stuff.

If the washer is missing, it may be simulated with a wire-tie.
The wire-tie is plastic, put around the stud, clipped to length
(as short as possible) and the shoulder belt then clips in and
stays in.

Jer/ Eberhard, (SLASH), HAM = N0FZD     | Hewlett-Packard - MS99, 1UP10,15'East
Pilot: COMM, INST, CFI-Airplane & Glider| 3404 East Harmony Road (303) 229-2861
CAP CFI, Check & Mission, Pikes Peak 218| Fort Collins, Colorado  80525-9599 
EMAIL:  jle@fc.hp.com or Jer_Eberhard@fc.hp.com
From: mtc@hpcc01.corp.hp.com (Mark Cousins)
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 04:27:58 GMT
Subject: Re: Help me spend money! Plane advice needed.
Organization: HP General Systems Division
Newsgroups: rec.aviation

In rec.aviation, reece@eco.twg.com (Reece R. Pollack) writes:

>This is from memory, and unfortunately I don't remember the details
>of the vanilla Archer. There probably are a few other variants I
>haven't listed, so anyone with a reference at hand is invited to follow
>up with details.

OK.  I have a reference (Clarke) and here are the details:

Model         Years   HP  Wing  Name
PA-28-150     62-67  150    H   Cherokee 150
PA-28-160     62-67  160    H   Cherokee 160
PA-28-180     63-72  180    H   Cherokee 180
PA-28-180     73     180    H   Challenger
PA-28-180     74-75  180    H   Archer
PA-28-140     64     140    H   Cherokee 140
PA-28-140     65-68  150    H   Cherokee 140
PA-28-140     69-77  150    H   Cruiser
PA-28-140     71-77  150    H   Fliteliner
PA-28-235     64-72  235    H   Cherokee 235
PA-28-235     73     235    H   Charger
PA-28-235     74-77  235    H   Pathfinder
PA-28-151     74-77  150    T   Warrior
PA-28-161     77-on  160    T   Warrior II
PA-28-181     76-on  180    T   Archer II
PA-28-236     79-on  235    T   Dakota
PA-28-201T    79     200    T   Turbo Dakota
PA-28R-180    67-71  180    H   Arrow 180
PA-28R-200    69-71  200    H   Arrow 200
PA-28R-200B   72-76  200    H   Arrow II
PA-28R-201    77-78  200    T   Arrow III
PA-28R-201T   77-78  200    T   Turbo Arrow III
PA-28RT-201   79-on  200    T   Arrow IV
PA-28RT-201T  79-on  200    T   Turbo Arrow IV

H means "Hershey-bar" (constant-chord) wing; T means tapered wing.

I believe that the Arrow III was reincarnated during the Millar days at Piper
in the mid/late 80s.
>
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
From: elmore@virga.ucar.edu (Kim Elmore)
Subject: Re: Temperature Related Altimeter Errors
Organization: Research Applications Program/NCAR, Boulder, CO
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 14:54:55 GMT

In article <49lmknk.rkaplan@netcom.com> rkaplan@netcom.com (Richard Kaplan) writes:

	... Complimentary stuff ommitted (Gee <blush!> thanks!)


>If the weather observer determined the official altimeter
>setting such that this setting made his altimeter read 
>field elevation, there would be less chance for impact
>with terrain during an instrument approach.  And this
>would not affect safety at altitude because all
>aircraft would be using the same reference while airborne.

	I must've missed the point in my attempted answer... The
altimiter setting we receive is supposed to do just that: make the
altimeter read field elevation when we're down.  Well, *almost*.
Actually, the altimeter setting is supposed to make the altimeter read
10 feet below field elevation since, by international agreement, the
altimeter sits about 10 feet above the bottom of the gear and we want
to know the altitude of the gear when landing.  Because of the physics
I described earlier, this will be the only place the altimeter is
correct if the atmosphere is non-standard.

	I *thought* the question dealt with altitude errors during
approach, when, in extremely cold conditions, I might find myself
physically well below the MDA with an altimeter that tells me
everything is just fine.  This would occur only in *very* cold cases,
which are occasionally encountered in Canada, Alaska and the northern
border states.  However, I don't think I ever said it that way... :-)

					Kim Elmore
					N5OP, PP ASEL/Glider 2232456
*  _._. __._ _.. _.._ _.. . _. ..... ___ .__. _. ..... ___ .__. _.. _.._ _._  *
*   "All these *WIRES*!!  Why do they call it 'wireless'?"                    *
*		Doc Evans (NQ0I) commenting on his ham radio shack.           *
*  _._. __._ _.. _.._ _.. . _. ..... ___ .__. _. ..... ___ .__. _.. _.._ _._  *
Replies to: elmore@virga.rap.ucar.edu (wires)
	    44.28.0.67 n5op@n5op.ampr.org (radio)
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/


Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: bspain@riker (Bradley K Spain)
Subject: Re: ARSAs etc., (was "remain clear of the
Organization: Los Alamos National Laboratory, NM
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 22:05:28 GMT

>In article 26028@ccad.uiowa.edu, yiannis@ccad.uiowa.edu (Yiannis Papelis) writes:
>[good advice deleted]
>>to the frequency.   The second way is by using a computer simulations of
>>ATC.  There are both commercial, shareware and public domain ATC simulators.
>
In article <1992Jul27.163041.8004@exu.ericsson.se> exumfs@exu.ericsson.se writes:
>Try TRACON, from Wesson International. This is an excellant simulation
>and it will make you sweat! .... 
>---
>Mark Steph         

	To add an endorsement to Mark's comments, I have played "TRACON" for
3 years now and enjoy it immensley.  I am a military pilot flying in and around the Los Angeles area and can honestly say that the realism of the game has 
given me a better understanding of the airspace in which I fly.  If anyone is
interested in becoming a controller, this is the game.  I've no comment about
the windows version, but the Dos version it great.

************************************************************************* 
1LT Bradley K. Spain      WarHawk 26	Fixed wing pilots merely fly, BUT
bspain@hypnos.calpoly.edu 		Chopper drivers beat the air
					into submission.
*************************************************************************
From: lmcgee@bondo.corp.sgi.com (Lee McGee)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Shoulder Harnesses (Was: Re: Cessna sholdr harn review (BAS))
Date: 21 Jul 92 22:51:46 GMT
Reply-To: lmcgee@sgi.com
Organization: Silicon Graphics Corp IS

In article <5019@transfer.stratus.com>, spenny@sw.stratus.com (Steve Pennypacker) writes:
|> I've never been able to 
|> get the shoulder harnesses in C-150s and 172s to stay attached to the lap
|> belt.  Just so we're all talking about the same type of harness, the type
|> I'm talking about is the manual, non inertia-reel harness with a fastener
|> that consists of a mostly flat metal plate with a cutout in it, and the 
|> cutout is supposed to fit into an interlocking peg on the lap belt.

It sounds like your lap built is missing a part, which is a small nylon 
washer which when installed allows a snug fit for the should belt 
cutout.  With this, you can go ahead and wear the shoulder belt just 
loose enough to reach stuff.

Whether or not this is kept up with seems to depend on the FBO.  Some
are very good about this, others never seem to have the washer installed.


-- 
________________________________________________________________

Lee McGee
Silicon Graphics, Inc		"Simplicity, then add lightness"
lmcgee@sgi.com			   
PHONE (415) 390-2403	            -- William B. Stout --  
FAX   (415) 961-9584	              Ford Motor Company		
PAGE  (415) 807-2246          Formerly Stout Metal Airplane Company
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: ark@alice.att.com (Andrew Koenig)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Manufacturer being sued _for_no_reason_
Date: 22 Jul 92 20:56:52 GMT
Article-I.D.: alice.23283
Reply-To: ark@alice.UUCP ()
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Liberty Corner NJ

In article <Brst3z.BqL@news.cso.uiuc.edu> rls@uihepa.hep.uiuc.edu writes:

> 	I just got this off of the wire.  Disgusting, as usual.

> ``All things point to pilot error but
> 			    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> nevertheless we have brought suit against the manufacturers.''
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> [...]

I heard an interesting point about such things.

These days, a lawsuit works approximately as follows.  First someone files
a suit.  Next there is ``discovery,'' a period of time during which lawyers
interview everyone in sight to try to find out what evidence there is
that might be used in court.  Finally there is the trial.

It sometimes happens that facts come out during discovery that implicate
someone who appeared completely innocent at the time the suit is filed.
At that point it is not possible to go back and refile to include that
additional party.

Therefore, when a suit is filed, common practice is to name everyone who
might conceivably have been involved, regardless of whether there any
evidence available at that point.
-- 
				--Andrew Koenig
				  ark@europa.att.com
Newsgroups: rec.aviation,sci.aeronautics
From: rdd@cactus.org (Robert Dorsett)
Subject: CAL 747 (Re: Coffee cups in the cockpit (Re: A320 yarns))
Organization: Capital Area Central Texas UNIX Society, Austin, Tx
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 22:17:31 GMT

In article <1992Jul27.124325.10642@bony1.bony.com> richieb@bony1.bony.com (Richard Bielak) writes:
>>I think it unlikely properly-trained pilots would get in a tug-of-war
>>with the computer, since that would be stupid.  I find it more likely
>>they could get in trouble because their mental model of the aircraft
>>was not the same as reality (i.e., they think throttles are off,
>>really they're at 110%, or some such).
>
>This is *precisely* the problem. 
>
>There was a China Airlines 747 which did a roll followed by a 20,000
>foot dive for that reason. When the airplane was crusing at 30,000
>feet one of its outboard engines flame-out. The autopilot applied
>whatever controls were needed to handle the resulting yaw. To restart
>the engine, the 747 had to descent to a lower altitude.
>
>When the captain took over from the autopilot he didn't expect the
>control forces to be what they were and the airplane got away from
>him. 

No, the airplane was already way out of keel by the the captain asserted
control.  The the accident report emphasizes spatial disorientation as a 
significant factor in how long it took to get the right side up.  It
also criticises him for not "clicking it off" at the first sign of speed
deceleration.

Also, note that the 747 is a "push it off" interface--if the pilot
encounters considerable force (assuming it was in trim), it's likely
that the autopilot would have shut off *then*.

A more significant problem than the *control* forces were the *G* forces--
the captain stated that at points, he was unable to raise his arms to
grip the wheel.  

See:

	Date: February 19, 1985
	Type: Boeing 747-SP
	Registration: N4522V
	Operator: China Airlines
	Where: San Francisco, California
	Report No. NTSB-AAR-86-03
	Report Date: March 29, 1986
	Pages: 48

It's about twenty bucks, from NTIS.  It has some comments on pilot behavior
in automated cockpits (even of the -200 vintage); this may help sway some
skeptics' opinions that problems don't exist. :-)





---
Robert Dorsett
rdd@cactus.org
...cs.utexas.edu!cactus.org!rdd
From: Charles.K.Scott@dartmouth.edu (Charles K. Scott)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Building a Christavia, art. #9 Engine
Date: 21 Jul 92 19:27:42 GMT
 <1992Jul20.191938.10190@nlm.nih.gov>
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH

In article <1992Jul20.191938.10190@nlm.nih.gov>
masys@nlm.nih.gov (Dr. Daniel R. Masys) writes:

> If I were in your shoes at this point, I would be asking myself,
> "what if this little mill ends up costing $7000 (twice the current
> quoted price for the basic engine)?

That's easy, if the projected costs are that high then an aircraft
engine is what will be used, also I'll be out of business because
there's no way I can afford that much for an engine.  But they won't be
because none of what I've talked about so far adds up that high.  I
used to be an auto mechanic, building engines isn't something I'm
afraid of.  My racing engine builder friend just wants to help and I'm
happy to let him.  He knows a lot more about engines than I ever will
so I defer to his greater knowledge.  However, I can assemble it and
racing stuff can be had over the counter for reasonable cost.  What
doesn't happen though is paying 25 bucks for a valve, or $75 for an oil
dip stick.  Auto parts, even race auto parts are still bargains.  This
engine, when completed will be cranking out at least 150 hp.  The way
Robby knows engines and how to set them up, it's far more likely to
produce more than that.  Wonder what a zero timed 200 horsepower
certified engine goes for? :-)

Much of this is pure hanger talk.  I don't have the engine in hand,
just a promise from my friend to begin looking for a suitable block and
to begin thinking about how he will configure the parts when the time
comes.  Anything can happen between now, and the time I definately need
the engine.  In the meantime, Robby has offered a runout block for
mockup.  I can't even use it for several more years.

Corky Scott