HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jrb@uxv.larc.nasa.gov (jim branstetter)
Subject: Re: In-flight radar from ground stations?
Reply-To: jrb@uxv.larc.nasa.gov (jim branstetter)
Organization: NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA USA
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 22:37:26 GMT

the faa in conjunction with nasa langley research center is studying the issues of providing 
graphical weather information to the cockpit.  faa will have a demonstration of some 
prototype displays at oshkosh in the faa display area.  look for a pc demo. 

nasa is working on two fronts, datalink of cockpit graphic weather research - being done at 
langley and utilizing flight simulators and planned for flight testing with their 737.  also a 
small business grant was let to vigyan, inc. to study satellite dissemination of weather 
products directly to aircraft.  

there will be a nasa presentation on the former at oshkosh, 1000 on monday aug 2, followed 
by a forum on realtime weather information for the cockpit including speakers from the 
latter.  both events will be in tent no. 1


Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: tucker@netcom.com (Anthony Tucker)
Subject: Re: Student Pilot Initial Solo
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 92 21:48:46 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Services
Distribution: usa

YEA I forgot one thing in the other posting 
My instructor is the BEST. at least for me.
Whe have very good comunication and I have complete
confidence in what he says.  It helps that he flyes
F16 sometimes, except he does want me to hit all the number's
i.e. airspeed, alt., like I was flying formation not the
within that the pts states.  This trying to hit the number's
will make my future study easier and he doesn't beat on me when
I don't he just quietly ask's where are we going?  It definitly
gets my attention, but he doesn't let me keep my head in the cockpit
cause I'm vfr and should be looking OUTSIDE where all the hard objects
are.

YAHOO!!!!!

tucker@netcom.netcom.com
From: myshatyn@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Mike Myshatyn)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Protecting your logbook
Date: 29 Jul 92 14:26:57 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA

Phil Jern writes...

> For some reason, I've become paranoid about the idea of losing
> my logbook, and I'd like to know what other rec.aviators do in order
> to preserve their records.  I've been considering xerox
> photocopying the whole thing, and sticking the copies in the
> safe-deposit box.

I do keep a xerox  copy of my  logbook  in a safe  deposit  box.  I usually
update  the xerox  copy 2-3 times  per year.  In  addition  to that, I have
written a UNIX 'awk'  script and I keep an  electronic  copy of my logbook.
The electronic version won't do me any good legally (w.r.t.  the FAA) but I
use it for checking  currency, filling out insurance forms, filling out FAA
8710 forms,  etc.  Plus, the  electronic  copy is used as a cross  check to
make sure that I added up the columns correctly in my real logbook.

--
 Mike Myshatyn    Bonanza N4896J           Hewlett-Packard Company
   ASEL/AMEL COMM, INSTR, CFI-IA           User-Interface Technology Division
 ...!hplabs!fc.hp.com!myshatyn             Ft. Collins, CO  80525
 or ... myshatyn@fc.hp.com                 (303) 229-4067
From: ron@pilot.njin.net (Ron Natalie)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: "remain clear of the ARSA..."
Date: 27 Jul 92 13:49:45 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

> I like ARSAs and TCAs. They are there to protect me.

Unless, you're VFR.  Then you get no guarantee of any advisories
or separation in ARSA's.  They exist purely for IFR handling.  In
this resepect they're worse than TRSA's which at least provided
advisories between PARTICIPATING VFR traffic.  In ARSA's every
body must PARTICIPATE but only the IFR people are protected.

-Ron
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: maples@Cadence.COM (Ken Maples)
Subject: Re: Shoulder Harnesses (Was: Re: Cessna sholdr harn review (BAS))
Organization: Cadence Design Systems, Inc.
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 16:13:08 GMT


Steve, if you're having trouble keeping the Cessna (old-style) shoulder 
harness attached to the lap belt, you might try looking at the tang on the
shoulder harness.  The attachment "pin" (don't know what else to call it)
from the shoulder harness should have a small plastic collar on it.  You
have to look close to see it.  However if it's gone, the shoulder harness will
not stay attached to the lap belt.  I've seen a few Cessna missing this
plastic collar.  That could be why your's keeps coming undone.  

Ken Maples
Cadence Design Systems
San Jose, Ca
maples@cadence.com
From: ludeman@astroatc.UUCP (Weekend Pilot)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: GLIDER: POST task? (was Re: Re: SOARING: 15m Nats in Minden)
Date: 27 Jul 92 16:38:52 GMT
Reply-To: ludeman@astroatc.UUCP (Weekend Pilot)
Organization: Astronautics Technology Cntr, Madison, WI

In article <122140202@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM> aland@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Aland Adams) writes:
>Here is a summary of current 15-M, Standard and Open class tasks.
Nice summary, one minor clarification....

>One task I didn't cover was the one used for Sports class events.
>This is vaguely similar to the Speed-only POST but the competition
>director declares a minimum scratch distance and each pilot has
>to come up with their own minimum based on their sailplane's handicap.

This is how it was done a few years ago (prior to the intro. of
Speed Only POST).  These days we're using the Speed Only POST
exclusively in Sports.  The sole modification for Sports Class 
has to do with the start time interval rule wherin the interval
is calculated according to a formula which is handicap specific.
(1.5 x handicap x miles to first turn = max. S.T.I. in minutes, if
I remember correctly.  The CD has the authority to amend this
as he sees fit and may still restrict close in turns if he chooses).

The speed only post is a nice task -- it's fun, provides a useful basis 
for performance comparison and doesn't require the kind of inspired
clairvoyance that the std POST task does to do well (std POST requires
not only that you fly well to do well, you also have to be able to 
predict well ahead of time how fast you're liable to be in order to 
avoid overtime penalties while still getting max. distance).

-- 
Evan Ludeman                    "Verbosity leads to unclear,
rutgers!cs.wisc.edu!               inarticulate things."             
astroatc!ludeman                    -- Mr. PotatoE Head
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: M21208@mwvm.mitre.org
Subject: Re: "remain clear of the ARSA..."
Organization: The MITRE Corporation, McLean VA 22102
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 08:21:04 GMT

In article <7480331@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com>
glenb@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com (Glen Baker) writes:
 
> Actually, I got the info that I was seeking. Several people have lead
> me to believe that ATC could *not* refuse an ARSA clearance request
> once they had established two-way communication (yes, in every case
> they *have* used my tail-number). This appears to be incorrect and they
> are in fact within their authority when they say "36Z we don't like
> your kind 'round here. Remain clear of the ARSA..." :-)
>
Yet another excerpt from the friendly ATC Handbook, paragraph 7-103:
"The ARSA program requires pilots to establish two-way radio communications
before entering the ARSA.  If the controller responds to a radio call with
"(a/c callsign), stand by", radio communications have been established and
the pilot can enter the ARSA.  If workload or traffic conditions prevent
immediate provision of ARSA service, inform the pilot to remain outside the
ARSA until conditions permit the services to be provided.
Phraseology:"(a/c callsign) remain outside the ARSA and stand by."
 
Scott
From: glenb@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com (Glen Baker)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Speaking of engine out...
Date: 27 Jul 92 16:28:24 GMT
Organization: What, me? Organized?


 Well the good news is that he walked away from it. The bad news is that
 his plane is history...

 Saw something I don't want to see again. Watched an avid flyer with an
 engine out fail to make the field at Truckee yesterday. Helpless feeling
 circling above watching him go down. Disbelief as he hit the dirt road
 and the plane flipped over in a cloud of dust. Relief when he appeared
 walking around the airplane.

 Guy had 8 hours on the plane. Had just completed it and was flying off
 the 40. Doesn't know why the engine quit. Then again, he wasn't sure
 which Rotax he had in it. 

 Plane was a total wreck but the passenger area was completely intact.
 Impressive. 

 ..glen
From: mperlman@nyx.cs.du.edu (Marshal "Airborne" Perlman)
Subject: COMM. KNOB FALLS OFFF IN FLIGHT
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 92 04:52:17 GMT

As my CFI and I went out yesterday...we were told to switch from the CT FREQ 
(126.8) to RADR ADV. (128.35)...and when I looked at the radio..wellllllll

first of all.when i rotated...i noticed something flying off and hitting my arm
but didn't think about it too much..i was trying to fly <G>..

anyhow..i looked at the radio and noticed the control knob for 
the radio was GONE..and tried to turn it by hand...no go..it was TOO HARD.

hahaha..we told the tower our problem..and they said that they'd
keep in contact with us till we decided to land or find the knob..so
for about 5 minutes..we flew around...taking turns...one flying..one looking.
back and forth...hehehehhehheh...thank god we didn't get to an
odd freq and loose contact w/ the tower.....i even tried to pull the knob
off the NAV and use it..but it was on too tight! aftera bout 5 minutes..
he found the knob and put it back on with some GUM...hahaahahahahhaha
...

it was pretty scary at the time...considering we almost lost the radios use..
but not when I go back and think about it..its pretty funny..at one point..
my CFI turned around to look in the back of the plane for the knob..and as he
turned around...pushed the controllers forward and we went into a shallow
dive .. and he yelled at me 'what the hell are you doing'...hahah


pretty strange
--
==============================  *  Marshal Perlman               * DO
=-> mperlman@nyx.cs.du.edu <-=  *  Huntington Beach, California  * NOT
==============================  *  (Surf City, U.S.A)            * EAT
"It's the greenhouse effect, officer. That's why I am not wearing pants."
From: woof@hpfcmgw.FC.HP.COM (Steve Wolf)
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1992 15:47:44 GMT
Subject: Re: Heard on the Air Call-signs
Organization: HP Fort Collins, CO
Newsgroups: rec.aviation

Re: misunderstood callsigns

When callsigns end in "AA", they always sounds to me like "Alfalfa".
Good cropduster tailnumbers!  :-)
--
Steve Wolf				PHONE: (303) 229-2088
Hewlett-Packard				UUCP:  hplabs!fc.hp.com!woof
Fort Collins, CO			ARPA:  woof@fc.hp.com
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: yiannis@ccad.uiowa.edu (Yiannis Papelis)
Subject: Re: ARSAs etc., (was "remain clear of the ARSA")
Organization: CAD-Research, University of Iowa, Iowa City
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 13:51:43 GMT

In some article dick.zeitlin%acc1bbs@ssr.com (Dick Zeitlin)  writes:
>
>Why not outline your desires, make a request, and ask how long a
>delay to expect.  The "remain clear" is an easy way for the controller
>to keep things in hand until he can sort 'em out.  The delay may be
>minimal or none, if you're not providing him with a conundrum to
>resolve.
>
A couple of comments on dealing with transitioning through ARSAs.  I have
spent considerable amount of time (at least relative to my flight time)
in the tower and the approach room of the local ARSA and the resulting
discussions were very enlightning, (highly recommended past time activity).

In many ARSAs, the approach controllers make arrangements with
the tower controllers where approach 'protects' a certain area
of the ARSA (the takeoff/landing corridor) and no communication is needed
between them unless an A/C enters this protected area.  
Very often, approach will vector all A/C not landing in the primary airport
around the corridor and as a result, even if you get permission to transition
it is likely not in a straight line.  Considering the relatively small size 
of an ARSA, when the controller sais 'stay away' because of workload you
are not being denied much, since even if you got in, vectoring around
the protected area and/or other A/C would be equivalent to going around 
the ARSA.  It is often as easy to overly or underfly the ARSA under
these circumstances.   When landing in the primary, knowledge of what 
the controller is trying to do can do wonders.  For example, calling from a
location where it is easy to be sequenced into the traffic may get you
easy access whereas arrival on a 'weird' quadrant may be too much to
handle at the particular moment.  Again listening ahead helps.

On a different note, I was really amazed when I realized that very few of
the controllers are pilots!, most of them expressed great amazement at
their first trip in a general aviation plane, some said 'gee, I 
now understand why it takes some guys so long to respond'.  (Some 
might see a great opportunity here, when was the last time you took 
your controller for a ride?).  

It is often said that controllers should have to deal with the 
system as pilots, which will make them better understand the system.  
I think the same goes for pilots, try sometime to do a controllers job 
and get a feel for the situation.  I have found two ways to do that,
the first is by attending plug-in sessions, or listening
to the frequency.   The second way is by using a computer simulations of
ATC.  There are both commercial, shareware and public domain ATC simulators.
Give them a try, and believe me, it is NOT easy !!!

-- 
Yiannis E. Papelis,            - Electrical & Computer Engineering, U of Iowa
Center of Computer Aided Design- Home of the Iowa Driving Simulator & future
e-mail: yiannis@ccad.uiowa.edu - home of the National Advanced Driving Simulator
From: schinner@hp-vcd.vcd.hp.com (Jim Schinnerer)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Good pictures, was:  prevalence of engine failures
Date: 28 Jul 92 15:59:58 GMT
Organization: Hewlett Packard, Vancouver, WA, USA

>I cannot recall seeing a single documented account of a commercial jet
>aircraft in which two engines failed.

How about the Mexicana 737 (brand new) that lost both engines and landed
on a dyke in Louisiana.  This was a while back, but I think it was a
problem in the fuel system.  I think they flew it off the dyke eventually.

---------------------------------------------------------
Jim Schinnerer  -  PP-ASEL-IA       |  Hewlett Packard
Mooney - 350X  -  "Buster"          |  Vancouver, WA
email - schinner@vcd.hp.com         |  (206) 944-3324
---------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: gratclif@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Gregory W Ratcliff)
Subject: Re: Small Children in GA aircraft
Keywords:  fly kids children noise
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 04:14:05 GMT

I've also worried about this problem..... My two year old has
about 30 hours under his diaper.  

We have used cotton in the ears from early on.  The catch is to
put the cotten in AFTER takeoff.  He pulled it out once or
twice, but soon realized its much nicer with the cotten in.

Now, how do you explain to a two year old that you can't go
for a   "ERRKANE BIDE?" every day? 

ERRKANE BIDE == "airplane ride" in twoish.

happy flying,
gwr

-- 
Gregory W. Ratcliff  Ratcliff.8@osu.edu  on the internet   
Columbus, Ohio     ICBM
nz8r@w8cqk 	 on the air
N1697X     	 in the air
From: dougm@moses.juliet.ll.mit.edu (Doug Marquis x4018 g41)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: In-flight radar from ground stations?
Date: 28 Jul 92 12:42:41 GMT
Reply-To: dougm@atc.ll.mit.edu
Organization: M.I.T. Lincoln Laboratory - Group 41

In article <1992Jul23.125735.4309@bb1t.monsanto.com> demcma@bb1t.monsanto.com writes:

>   At the risk of exposing my total ignorance (and maybe stupidity also) on the
>   subject, I'd like to inquire as to the technical/practible feasibility of data 
>   transmission of ground-based weather radar either by video or fax


I forgot to add that the traffic information service (TIS) and
graphical weather products in the GA cockpit can be seen (in demo form)
at an Oshkosh booth.  Sorry, I don't know which booth, although I
expect that it will be either FAA or MIT Lincoln Laboratory.

--
                                    -*- Doug -*-
                                    dougm@atc.ll.mit.edu
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: ggr@koonda.acci.com.au (Greg Rose)
Subject: Re: Product Liability (was Re: Active noise-canceling headsets)
Organization: Australian Computing and Communications Institute
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 03:31:56 GMT

In article <BrwuB9.M7J@taligent.com> cep@taligent.com (Christophe Pettus) writes:
[about product liability lawsuits]
>I have a couple of useful suggestions:

1. Lobby for law reform.

2. Leave the country.

In the limit, these are the only options in a near-democratic society.
While I agree that pushing the system harder to make it fail (by
submitting counter liability suits, or submitting even more frivolous
suits) might well work, it is at least as antisocial as the current
system itself. Also, suing anyone else makes even more money for the
lawyers, making their evolutionary niche that much more secure.

While I agree in principle with most of the comments that have been
posted in this discussion, in practice they seem to involve adding
even more special cases to the applicable body of law, and thus are
even more likely to make the situation inequitable. Simplicity is the
key to good law, IMHO.
--
Greg Rose                 Australian Computing and Communications Institute
ggr@acci.com.au                                              +61 3 282 2532
From: k9jma@cbnewsc.cb.att.com (edwin.m.schaefer)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Phantom controller
Keywords: hand held, FCC, FAA
Date: 21 Jul 92 12:41:27 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: AT&T

In article <70@newave.mn.org> john@newave.mn.org (John A. Weeks III) writes:
>In article <23@horse.UUCP> mikeh@wsg.COM ( The Big Kahuna) writes:
>> The hole thing brought up two points in my mind. One, has anyone else hered 
>> of phantom controllers? and also, imagine what would have happend to this
>> pilot if the Delta captin was not there to back him up. The tower was blocked
>> from the signal and it was there word against the pilots. Thats what scares
>> me about the FAA.
>
>Is there anything like a personal flight data recorder available for
>general aviation planes?  I was thinking that something that could record
>the pervious 30 minutes of radio traffic, plus record a few instruments
>would be real handy.  This could help CYA in an incident like the one
>described above, or at the very least, help the FAA after a crash.  Any
>armchair inventors out there?
>
>-john-
>
>-- 
>==============================================================================
>John A. Weeks III		(612) 942-6969		    john@newave.mn.org
>Newave Communications, Ltd.			    ..!uunet!tcnet!newave!john

I have seen magazine articles describing a single cable used
to connect a small battery operated microcasette recorder to the
aircraft intercom/headphone jacks. Seems kind of complex to be trying
to rewind/replay the tape inflight - probably best to just ask the
controller for repeats if you are unsure of the message.

However, I believe that if you played such a tape in an official setting
you would be violating the Communications Act of 1934 provisions
against disclosing the content of intercepted transmissions.  Or the
feds might see this as an illegal "wiretap" of their system. Therefore you
wouldn't be able to use your tape to question the validity of the FAA
official record and might have more grief from the government. They are
getting more agressive about this kind of thing since ECPA. So not a
good way to CYA. And why help FAA even after a crash? NTSB maybe but FAA?!
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: cep@taligent.com (Christophe Pettus)
Subject: Re: Product Liability (was Re: Active noise-canceling headsets)
Organization: Taligent, a little subsidiary of two really big companies.
Distribution: usa
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 00:12:30 GMT

In article <1992Jul24.203250.4996@cbnews.cb.att.com> tel@cbnews.cb.att.com (thomas.e.lester) writes:
>	Well, if those families can prove that your injury was x% your fault,
>	 Then yes!  If you are totaly faultless, then you would have no 
>	 fear.  % fault is what was used to drag the manufacturer
>	 into these suits.  Why not use the match to stop the fire ?
>
>	 If you can't get the laws changed, use them to beat the system.

I'd rather change the broken product liability system than encourage more
trivial suit-filing.
--
-- Christophe

"Be calm.  Look cute."
From: beede@sctc.com (Mike Beede)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Coffe cups in the cockpit (Re: A320 yarns)
Date: 26 Jul 92 15:41:42 GMT
Organization: SCTC

bcoleman@hayes.com (Bill Coleman) writes:

>In article <1992Jul21.133757.17508@bony1.bony.com>, richieb@bony1.bony.com (Richard Bielak) writes:
>> 
>> Of course, the real answer is that the designers of the system are to
>> blame. I think the guy who thought of not moving the throttles when
>> the computer changes power in the A-320, should be fired, banned from
>> aircraft design and travel everywhere by foot...

>How would pilots react to a system where a "ghost-like" influence keeps
>moving levers on them? For example, the pilot chooses the reduce the
>throttle levers. The flight system, detecting a possible impending
>stall condition (or something), moves them back up. The pilot, seeing that
>the computer has moved the levels back up, again pulls them down. Soon
>we have a battle of wits in which the pilot stops flying the plane 
>because he is fighting with the computer. 

Well, not only am I not a airline pilot, I am not even a private
pilot.  However, like everyone on USENET, lack of experience won't
keep me from commenting....

I _do_ have experience with at least three automated
throttle-management devices.  I call them ``cruise controls''.  And,
in spite of my relative lack of training, I know what to do if I
release the gas and then feel the pedal get pulled down -- I (in order
of increasing desperation) 1) turn off the control switch, 2) depress
the brake, 3) turn off the ignition, 4) place the gear selector in
``N'', 5) apply the parking brake, 6) move the gear selector to ``R'',
7) move the gear selector to ``P'', 8) start looking for soft
snowbanks/hedges/garages/pedestrians/etc. I have never had to go past
1) so far.  [Humor-impaired can email to obtain smilified version of
this paragraph.  Include stamped self-addressed email envelope.]

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).

I guess the bottom line is: do the flight-control systems move yoke
and pedals when ``flying'' the plane?  I'm not talking about little
stability-augmentation sorts of movements, I'm talking about directing
the path of the plane in gross fashion.  Throttles should do the same.

	Mike




-- 
Mike Beede         Secure Computing
beede@sctc.com     1210 W. County Rd E, Suite 100           
------------------ Arden Hills, MN  55112
                       (612) 482-7420