HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: maverick@buhub.bradley.edu (Darin Petersen)
Subject: more ice!
Organization: Bradley University
Distribution: rec
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 92 22:42:53 GMT

This whole ice topic is of great interest to me because:

1) I have never encountered ice in my 1.5 year flying history
2) I plan on getting my instr. rating next summer when I wont get the
chance of picking up ice. (in the chicago area)

So my first encounter with ice will probably be next winter when I'm not
with an instructor to say we're in potential danger. 

On another note, has anyone encountered ice that froze their ailerons in
place! (eek!) or elevator?

I've always wondered about this.

--
            __|__          Darin Petersen - PP-ASEL
     ________(*)________  Maverick@buhub.bradley.edu
            o/ \o    
            
              
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.ifr
From: jcmorris@mwunix.mitre.org (Joe Morris)
Subject: Re: more ice!
Organization: The MITRE Corporation
Distribution: rec
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 16:15:13 GMT

maverick@buhub.bradley.edu (Darin Petersen) writes:

>On another note, has anyone encountered ice that froze their ailerons in
>place! (eek!) or elevator?

Yep.  The technical term for many pilots who have run into this situation
is "statistics".

Depending on just how the ice accumulates and where, it can jam the
control surfaces and make an airplane uncontrolable.  That's a problem
with using a good autopilot in an icing environment: it never makes large
control movements, so the ice doesn't get broken off before it gets
too firm to be overcome.

I don't think that it's too common to find this type of icing in the
environments where a non-deiced bird (translation: anything which can
be afforded by most usenet readers) will go, since by the time that
enough ice to lock the controls has accumulated the wings have probably
stalled and the airplane has augured into a hillside.  It isn't unheard of,
however, for this to occur in the corporate airplanes which are
certificated for known icing.

But don't forget that icing forecasting is far more inexact than the
majority of other parts of weather analysis and forecasting.  If you
find yourself in any icing worse than trace, make a point of exercising
(within limits!) the controls to ensure that you don't get into this
problem.

And after you do land following an icing encounter, do a careful 
inspection of your airplane to see just where the ice did accumulate.
Different birds like to pick up ice in different places, and (while
I do not recommend deliberately getting into icing) if you should
find yourself picking up some solid water it is useful to know just
how and where your paricular airplane does it.

Joe Morris
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.ifr
From: buchanan@rintintin.Colorado.EDU (BUCHANAN TIMOTHY E)
Subject: Re: Intersection names
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 05:15:32 GMT

The FAA turned down my suggestion for an intersection name, and I can't
imagine why-

November so/and/so, cleared to EATME; hold as published.
From: hurvitz@oscar.UUCP (Dennis Hurvitz)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.ifr
Subject: Re: IFR Icing Strategies
Date: 11 Dec 92 22:15:07 GMT

In article <1992Dec10.230428.533@ncar.ucar.edu>, elmore@rap.ucar.edu (Kim Elmore) writes:
> 
> 	Eh?  Not to quibble, but lapse rate is nothing more than
> change in temperature of the environment (as applied here) with change
> in height (dT/dz).  That's always a defined number, regardless.  If

perhaps i wasn't clear enough. "does not have a lapse rate" meant that
the standard lapse rate would not apply to the airmass in question.
 
mebbe i'm wrong, but i thought that was one of the *fundamental*
characteristics of an "unstable" airmass. that of no STANDARD lapse
rate, or in my lazy way, "no lapse rate". you cannot estimate how much
altitude you would need to climb to reach -15C or -20C in such a weather
situation.

> 	The magic 18,000' ft in your example may be where the
> temperature falls below -20C or where the clouds stop.  Someone else


dennis hurvitz
cutlass 5271u
duchess 6009k
From: rkaplan@netcom.com (Richard Kaplan)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.ifr
Subject: Re: Intersection names
Date: 20 Dec 92 22:16:17 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)




Austin, Minnesota (AUM) is home of the locally famous
(? nationally infamous) Geo Hormel corporation, manufacturers
of various mass market processed food.

I noticed today that the IAF for the VOR 18 approach
to AUM is SPAMM intersection.

-- 
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.ifr
From: jcmorris@mwunix.mitre.org (Joe Morris)
Subject: Re: more ice!
Organization: The MITRE Corporation
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 16:50:26 GMT

masys@nlm.nih.gov (Dr. Daniel R. Masys) writes:

>In article <1992Dec11.224253.13612@bradley.bradley.edu> maverick@buhub.bradley.edu (Darin Petersen) writes:

>>On another note, has anyone encountered ice that froze their ailerons in
>>place! (eek!) or elevator?

>A related phenomenon is quite common: freezing of the elevator trim tab
>actuator.  This really gets your attention if you have been struggling
>to climb up through icing conditions, finally break out on top and 
>attempt to trim for level flight.  The trim wheel is frozen solid and
>you have to force the yoke forward mightily to get the nose down.

>Usually, after some minutes of this, as you continue to try to rotate
>the trim wheel, there is a sudden bang and the nose pitches down 
>violently as the ice breaks loose.

>I've had the "pleasure" of experiencing this in both a 172 and 182
>(and it may be more common with Cessna trim mechanisms than other brands).

Although it's not icing-related, it's worth noting that a similar situation
has been suggested for some of the Malibu crashes: failure of the elevator
trim servo, resulting in significant autopilot-provided pressure on the
elevator through the control wheel cables.  When the pilot (who has been
given no indication that there is any problem) disconnects the autopilot
the elevator pressure is immediately removed, allowing the (very) out-
of-position trim tab to abruptly drive the attitude to an extreme nose-high
(or nose-low) attitude, resulting in panic responses and a possible upset.

That's one reason I like the S-TEC 60-2 autopilot in my 182: it has a 
Sonalert which screams if the trim fails to respond to its commands.

The original comment here is another reason for pilots in non-icing-approved
birds to stay out of ice.  Yes, I've been in ice, and there are a lot of
times that you can get away with it, especially where the clouds are 
relatively thin, dry, or very cold...but unless you've got a golden
escape mechanism (e.g., a lot of above-freezing air somewhere below you)
ice is nothing to be taken lightly.  And consider what your insurance policy
might say about an airplane bent because of an encounter with ice...not to
mention the comments from your friendly neighborhood FAA inspector.

A suggestion: find a corporate pilot and try to snag a ride on a flight
in icing weather.  If you've got an instrument ticket and can find the
right corporate pilot you might even be able to do this with the owner's
blessing as a second set of eyes on an instrument flight, and you can
pick the pilot's brain for all sorts of useful tips your instructor
never told you (like where the best bars are near SUS, or why local
slang for the visual approach to 23L at TYS is called the "Duck Inn Approach").

Joe Morris
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.ifr
From: lhe@sics.se (Lars-Henrik Eriksson)
Subject: Re: more ice!
Organization: Swedish Institute of Computer Science, Kista
Distribution: rec
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 05:44:14 GMT

In article <1992Dec11.224253.13612@bradley.bradley.edu> maverick@buhub.bradley.edu (Darin Petersen) writes:
   On another note, has anyone encountered ice that froze their ailerons in
   place! (eek!) or elevator?

A glider flyer in my club encountered icing that froze the airbrakes
in the extended position (fortunatly, they were getting out of the
cloud at the time). He made a very interesting off-field landing.
Strangely enough, the aircraft was not damaged.

(Yes, Glider IFR is legal and not unusual in Sweden)

--
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: olsen@HING.LCS.MIT.EDU (James Olsen)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.ifr
Subject: Re: GPS and IFR Approache
Date: 18 Dec 1992 18:53:48 GMT
Organization: MIT Laboratory for Computer Science
NNTP-Posting-Host: hing.ai.mit.edu

In article <1992Dec17.200401.19185@linus.mitre.org>, Bob Noel writes:

>The receiver costs will be a wash (MLS or GPS).

That's an interesting question, since a huge market for GPS receivers in
general will tend to make the aviation GPS receivers less expensive.
But even if the actual costs turn out to be comparable, GPS seems likely
to offer a much better price/performance ratio, especially for general
aviation (GA).

MLS is a Microwave *Landing* System, and a very good one, if you are
flying to an MLS-equipped airport (i.e., a big airport).  However, it
does not help with enroute navigation, nor with small airports that
won't qualify for MLS, much less with airports that don't have any
instrument approach aids at all.

GPS is a *Global* Positioning System.  Since it is available everywhere,
not just on approach to a specially-equipped runway, it can potentially
give much greater value.  It is likely to eventually offer:

 - enroute navigation

 - non-precision approaches (very good ones), even at airports with
   *no* ground equipment

 - precision approaches with ground equipment even cheaper than MLS

Even with only enroute navigation capability (and generally inferior to
GPS), Loran has swept through the GA market like wildfire.  The current
"pre-operational" GPS system is already catching up with it.  When its
full capabilities become available, GPS is likely to become highly
desirable for VFR-equiped aircraft, and almost indispensible for
IFR-equipped aircraft.

Therefore, the question will probably not be "MLS or GPS", but "GPS or
GPS+MLS".  MLS will have a tough time winning that one, especially in GA.

>Also, do you realize what it costs to build a GPS satellite, place
>the payload into the correct orbit, maintain the ground control system, 
>and production line (assuming you want to replace sick payloads)?

GPS satellite financing is a thorny question, but if the US Defense
Department decides at some point to stop financing it, it will by that
time have many, many, many civilian users, with aviation users only a
small minority.  A GPS user fee, or receiver tax, or other financing
method, could be spread over such a broad base as to be very small for
each user.

-- 
Jim Olsen   olsen@cag.lcs.mit.edu   "Tache d'etre heureux." -- St-Exupery
From: davea@col.hp.com (Dave Allen)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.ifr
Subject: Re: more ice!
Date: 18 Dec 1992 23:30:39 GMT
Organization: HP Colorado Springs Division
NNTP-Posting-Host: qadata.col.hp.com

Regarding taxiing or taking off through slush,
how much slush-turned-to-ice does it take to disable retractable landing
gear or flaps? I'd hate to have to report "gear up and frozen" someday. :-(

dave allen - Fly because you love it.
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.ifr
From: elmore@rap.ucar.edu (Kim Elmore)
Subject: Re: IFR Icing Strategies
Organization: NCAR, Research Application Program
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 17:04:43 GMT

In article <729@oscar.UUCP> hurvitz@oscar.UUCP (Dennis Hurvitz) writes:
>
>perhaps i wasn't clear enough. "does not have a lapse rate" meant that
>the standard lapse rate would not apply to the airmass in question.
> 
>mebbe i'm wrong, but i thought that was one of the *fundamental*
>characteristics of an "unstable" airmass. that of no STANDARD lapse
>rate, or in my lazy way, "no lapse rate". you cannot estimate how much
>altitude you would need to climb to reach -15C or -20C in such a weather
>situation.

	Not quite... There are various types of instabilities and I
won't bore everyone with all of them.  A Standard lapse rate is just
that: a standard agreed to by a bunch of people who needed some way to
define an atmosphere.  The Standard lapse rate is almost never found
in practice and an atmosphere that had it would be crashingly dull.
But what concerns us as pilots in this case is whether or not the
atmosphere is convectively unstable.  That occurs when the
environmental lapse rate is greater than the pseudoadiabatic (or wet
adiabatic) lapse rate.  The pseudoadiabatic lapse rate (variable with
environmental temperature) is the rate a saturated airparcel cools as
it rises assuming all water that condenses in it falls out.  That
number is dependent on how much water vapor is in the parcel to begin
with and so dependednt on temerature.


					Kim Elmore
					N5OP, PP ASEL/Glider 2232456
*  _._. __._ _.. _.._ _.. . _. ..... ___ .__. _. ..... ___ .__. _.. _.._ _._  *
*    Said by NQ0I while working on his shack:                                 *
*		"All these *wires*!  Why do they call it `wireless'!?"        *
*  _._. __._ _.. _.._ _.. . _. ..... ___ .__. _. ..... ___ .__. _.. _.._ _._  *
Replies to: elmore@brightband.rap.ucar.edu (wires)
	    44.20.0.67 n5op@n5op.ampr.org (radio)
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/



Newsgroups: rec.aviation.ifr
From: bboswell@dante.NMSU.Edu (Brent Boswell)
Subject: Getting the IFR ticket
Organization: New Mexico State University
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 03:06:37 GMT

I am presently a student pilot (don't have my VFR yet) and I'm thinking about  
going for my instrument ticket after I get my VFR ticket.  My instructor is a  
CFII, so no problem there.  My questions are: 1) why are there so many more  
flight hours involved in getting an instrument ticket and 2) what makes the  
instrument written so much more difficult than the written for Private  
Pilot-Single Engine Land?  I self-studied for the private pilot written and  
passed it on the first attempt, but several people have told me that it's much  
better to take a class for the instrument written...
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.ifr
From: jbrown@qdeck.com (Jordan Brown)
Subject: Re: Getting the IFR ticket
Organization: Quarterdeck Office Systems, Santa Monica CA
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 01:11:49 GMT

bboswell@dante.NMSU.Edu (Brent Boswell) writes:
>1) why are there so many more flight hours involved in getting an
>instrument ticket

One answer is "there aren't".  If you're a typical Private Pilot candidate,
you'll have 66 hours when you get your license, with little or none of that
being instrument work.  40 hours of instrument work will take you up to 106,
and the requirement is for 125.  That's only 19 hours of flying not devoted
to the project of getting the "Instrument Airplane" on your certificate.
I think you'll find no problem in meeting the IFR requirements by the time
you're ready to take the test.

Why 40 hours?  You'll need it.  In fact, even though the legal minimum is
15 hours of instruction it would be better to assume that all 40 will be
instructed.

I think that the reason that the IFR requirements and tests are "harder"
than the base Private Pilot stuff is that IFR is far less forgiving of
errors than VFR - relatively subtle errors can bite you very hard.

>and 2) what makes the instrument written so much more difficult than the
>written for Private Pilot-Single Engine Land?  I self-studied for the
>private pilot written and passed it on the first attempt, but several
>people have told me that it's much better to take a class for the
>instrument written...

Don't know why it's harder, but it is.  It's complex material.

Can't say I'm in favor of a class, though; for myself at least I prefer
to self-study and have an instructor available for questions.  I'm actively
opposed to "cram" techniques, whether they be classes or reading - the
purpose of the test is to make sure that you know the material, and it is
just as important that you know it six months later as it is that you know
it on the day of the test.
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.ifr
From: erik@isy.liu.se (Erik Astrand)
Subject: Re: IFR Icing Strategies
Organization: Dept of EE, University of Linkoping
Date: 13 Dec 92 11:37:47 GMT

greg@saltydog.dpsi.com (Gregory R. Travis) writes:

>Bill Cox did a writeup on the system for some mag a while back.  He raved
>and said he would rather have TKS than boots any day (he did prefer heated
>leading edges over both though!).

Do you remember which mag and when? Anyone else?

-- 
Erik Astrand                                          Phone:  +46 13 281709
Dept of Electrical Engineering                        Fax:    +46 13 282599
University of Linkoping                               Email:  erik@isy.liu.se
S-581 83  Linkoping, SWEDEN
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.ifr
From: mikec@ginger.lcs.mit.edu (Mike Ciholas)
Subject: Re: GPS and IFR Approache
Organization: MIT Laboratory for Computer Science
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 16:39:31 GMT

In article <1992Dec11.175343.28252@linus.mitre.org> Bob Noel writes:
>In article <75436@apple.apple.COM> rcm@Apple.COM (Robert Charles Monsen)
>writes:
>>GPS digs the FAA out of three holes simultaneously: the MLS fiasco, the
>>faliure to get LORAN approaches going, and the deterioration of the VOR
>>system. Small wonder they want to get it operational as fast as possible...

I strongly support the move to GPS for enroute and landing navigation.
The improved flexibility and cost savings potential are enormous
benefits.

>what "MLS fiasco"???

Costs too much, does too little.  I believe the US airlines recently
did an about face on MLS and are no longer pushing for it.  Now that
the US has sucessfully got the ICAO to endorse MLS there is no turning
back.  Some airports in the US will have MLS.  As a backup for the big
jets, its probably a good thing since it is arguably better than ILS
in performance.  But it will never be a GA thing.  DGPS can and will
be (and the big jets will like it too).

>From what I've seen regarding LORAN accuracy (i.e., seasonal variation),
>I'm glad the FAA didn't go charging off and implement LORAN approaches.

Unfortunately, they sorta did.  Of course, they are all NOTAM'ed out
of service.  I wish they hadn't set them up because the experience the
FAA and pilots (if any at all) will get will be detrimental to the
adoption of GPS non-precision approaches and later DGPS precision
approaches.  Guilty by association, you see.  Here is one area where
the pushing of AOPA has not served us well, IMHO.  They are doing some
interesting work on GPS and DGPS that seems more technical and less
political.  It is better to win on technical grounds than political.

There is a wide spread unconscious notion that area navigation is the
same, be it Loran or GPS.  NO, NO, NO!  The underlying technology of
GPS and Loran are vastly different.  Just because the displays look
the same doesn't mean the quality of information is the same.

Mike Ciholas
mikec@lcs.mit.edu
Xref: sparky rec.aviation.ifr:511 sci.space:17931 sci.electronics:21221
From: greg@coombs.anu.edu.au (Greg Price)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.ifr,sci.space,sci.electronics
Subject: GPS prediction software (SRI International)
Keywords: GPS SRI
Date: 20 Dec 92 15:02:06 GMT
Organization: Australian National University
NNTP-Posting-Host: 150.203.76.2

Hi there! I have some public domain GPS satellite simulation/prediction
software written by SRI International (Menlo Park, CA), it's great software,
the only problem being that I have version 1.62 (March '88) and I'm after
a more recent version. I you have a more recent version of the software,
please drop me a line, or if you know how to contact SRI International
via email, etc. please let me know. The author of the software is Dr. Glenn
Siebert. If you are interested in seeing this software, send me some mail
and I will see about mail a copy, or putting it on some ftp site.

Thanks,
Greg Price
(greg@coombs.anu.edu.au)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.ifr
From: berta@ghost.dsi.unimi.it (Luca Bertagnolio IK2OVV)
Subject: Re: Intersection names
Organization: Computer Science Dep. - Milan University
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 18:48:51 GMT

ronnie@media.mit.edu (Ron Schnell) writes:

>When the conversion was first made to 5 letters, there was one near
>Caldwell Airport in NJ (CDW) that used to be called PATTERSON.  The
>conversion changed it to PATRN.  This caused a problem when ATC
>gave you a clearance ("Cleared to PATRN (pronounced pattern)), so
>they changed it back to PATTERSON for a while.  I don't know 
>what it is now.  I think that slr told me the story why it happened,
>but I may be wrong.  I definitely noticed it changing back, though.

In Italy we had a similar problem with a fix called CENTU, along the
G23 airway connecting OST (Ostia VOR, at Rome Fiumicino) and ALG
(Alghero VOR, Sardinia).  Its name resembles the italian number "cento",
one hundred, and that because this fix is at 100 DME from OST VOR.

The problems started when someone, speaking italian, was "cleared to
CENTU" or "cleared to FL100";  we usually not say "flight level" each
time, so that caused some confusion ("autorizzati a cento/CENTU" is
*very* similar!).

So, this fix is now called BATOX.

Luca Bertagnolio IK2OVV <berta@dsi.unimi.it>
From: tanemeth@economics.adelaide.edu.au
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.ifr
Subject: Re: Getting the IFR ticket
Date: 17 Dec 92 10:23:03 ACST
Organization: Economics, University of Adelaide
NNTP-Posting-Host: eco.economics.adelaide.edu.au

In article <1992Dec16.030637.21395@nmsu.edu>, bboswell@dante.NMSU.Edu (Brent Boswell) writes:
>...
> CFII, so no problem there.  My questions are: 1) why are there so many more
> flight hours involved in getting an instrument ticket and 2) what makes the
> instrument written so much more difficult than the written for Private
> Pilot-Single Engine Land?  I self-studied for the private pilot written and
> passed it on the first attempt, but several people have told me that it's much
> better to take a class for the instrument written...

Once you are IFR, you are sharing the airspace with professional pilots
(who do it for a living) and you are expected to operate to those standards,
under ALL conditions.  You have to be able to demonstrate that you are able
to handle the worst (reasonable) situations, including equipment failure and
similar, without danger to yourself or other IFR aircraft.  Actually FLYING
in IMC is taken for granted, it is the procedures, planning, and training
for situational awareness and command judgement that takes the time.

Tom Nemeth