HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: geoff@peck.com (Geoff Peck)
Subject: CHARTER: rec.aviation.student
Followup-To: rec.aviation.misc
Reply-To: geoff@peck.com
Organization: Geoffrey G. Peck, Consultant, San Jose CA
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 17:23:41 GMT

Welcome to rec.aviation.student.  This message, and companion messages
like it, will be posted to each of the new rec.aviation.* groups weekly
through the end of November, to allow people to view the charters of each
newsgroup and better understand where to post articles.

The charter of rec.aviation.student is:

****************************************************************************
*   It's been said that every good pilot is a student pilot -- for life.   *
*   This group is dedicated to learning experiences and questions,         *
*   particularly (but not exclusively) by and for those who haven't yet    *
*   attained the private pilot certificate.  Written exams, solo flights,  *
*   learning to land, maneuvers, flight tests, instructors and             *
*   instructional techniques, etc.                                         *
****************************************************************************

There are now a thirteen separate subgroups on rec.aviation; if the charter
above doesn't match the content of the article you're posting (or you're
following up), please consider one of the other groups as a more
appropriate forum:

    announce (MOD)    military      piloting        soaring
    answers  (MOD)    misc          products        stories (MOD)
    homebuilt         owning        simulators      student
    ifr 

A common question is "what should I do if an article spans the charters of
two or more groups?"  The answer is cross-posting.  If you have an article
which clearly crosses the boundaries of several groups, you should post a
**single** copy of the article to **all* of the groups.  Don't post
separate copies to each group.  Most modern newsreaders will display the
article exactly once to the reader -- in the first group in which it is
encountered and read.

If you feel that the replies should be directed to a subset of the groups
to which you are submitting your post, be sure to include a line of the
form "Followup-to: groupname" in the header of your message.  See the
header of this message for an example.

If you are replying to a cross-posted article and your reply is germane to
only a subset of the original groups, please ensure that you check the
Newsgroups: line to remove unnecessary groups.  If the reply is germane to
all the groups in which the article was originally posted, try to ensure
that all the groups are listed in the Newsgroups: line.  Some older
newsreaders cause a reply to go only to the group which is currently being
read.

Use cross-posting sparingly.  If an article "90% belongs" in one group and
"10% belongs" in another, post it only to the first group.

						Geoff
From: ron@topaz.bds.com (Ron Natalie)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.student
Subject: Re: Rotary vs Fixed wing for beginners?
Date: 7 Oct 1992 14:18:00 GMT
Organization: BDS Systems
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: topaz.bds.com

In the US, if you intend to get a commercial helicopter license, you
can get it in about the same amount of money if you go Airplane Private,
Airplane Commercia, Helicopter Commercial, that you'd spend doing all
your training in a helicopter, and you get an rated for both!

-Ron
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.student
From: hchong@netcom.com (Hoi Chong)
Subject: First SOLO!!! 
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 02:32:13 GMT

Ok, I got about 18 hours, and zillions of touch-and-go's.  Suppose to
go a couple of hours back, but that darn crosswind keep messing me up
during the afternoon flights.

This morning at SJC, airline traffic was slightly above moderate, VFR
traffic light.  The first landing (in 172 with instructor) was quite a bounce,
partly due to coming in a bit too low for me (like to come in high and
no power), jam the power in and hold the nose level, go around.

2nd one with instructor did a more or less perfact landing, so was the
3rd and 4th.  The instructor then got off at runup area after getting
permission from tower to do so.  Now I was ready.

Climb to 500, contemplating turning right for crosswind as the tower
said "turn crosswind", so I complied immediately.  Before I get to
downwind, tower said "traffic on final 3 miles, go for extended downwind".
I said to myself "great, this guy is messing with my first solo".

Beamed the numbers, gone past the usual point for baseleg, looked and found
no other plane on final, and no word from the tower.  Slightly worried 
(ok, gentle panic) I called tower to verify order to continue downwind.
Tower came back and confirmed extended downwind.  "We will call you when
ready for base."  Ok, fine.  I started whistling to myself.

"XXX turn baseleg."  Finally, a sigh of relief.  Turned baseleg, and then
final.  Came in a bit low for me (still well above glideslope), so I 
applied power some.  Saw my instructer behind the taxiway sign but too
small to figure out his facial expression.  Cross the numbers and then
landed with a small thump.

Called up the tower while still braking and request for a taxi back
(preempt the tower from switching me back to ground).  Tower said go for
it and hurry up.  Apparently another plane coming in came in too close
to me.  Later I found out that he had to go around.  (Not my fault because
I got off the runway faster than most people do after that landing).

After taxi back instructor signaled go for next one so I proceded to the
hold bar.  Request tower for takeoff but tower said wait.  I did and it
was quite a wait (not so unnieving after first landing).  After clarence
the take off and pattern was uneventful, not until final.

On final I said "oh, oh" wee bit too high.  So power off, and started 
praying that I drop fast enough (still 20 degree flap).  About 20 yards
from the numbers the red-and-white came out and I let out a "jackpot!"

I started my usual talking to myself "flare, (pause) flare, (pause),
oops, darn float, hold it, (pause) flare, (pause) hold it..."  Touched
down, w/o any "thump" whatsoever.  "Not bad", I said to myself.  Perfect,
except for that slight float.

The 3rd one was quite eventful as well.

No, we did not break out the beer or cut my T-shirt.  Just logged in 
0.6 hours of solo!  Woooo....
From: mwc@tandoori.East.Sun.COM ()
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.student
Subject: training pgm?
Date: 13 Oct 1992 18:48:29 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.  Mt. View, Ca.
Distribution: usa
Reply-To: mwc@tandoori.East.Sun.COM ()
NNTP-Posting-Host: tandoori.east.sun.com

Hi folks,

	I've uncovered the following "learn to fly" program at a local
airport. Looks reasonable. What questions should I ask when I call them?

TIA for your comments!


						Eagle East Aviation
						Lawrence municipal airport
						(508) 683-3314

			Private Pilot 28/20 Program

	Eagle East Aviation's "28/20" program is the most affordable
	way to train for your private pilot license. The program
	includes 28 hrs of flight instruction, 20 hrs of solo
	flight, pre/post-flight ground instruction as well as
	enrollment in our 6 wk private pilot ground school.

	This program is designed to follow our "Learn to Fly"
	program, and will allow you to exceed FAA minimum flight time
	requirements for your private pilot license. In the air you
	will train for all the manuevers required for your flight
	test, fly cross country flights (50nm or more), and solo the
	aircraft.*** On the ground you will prepare for your private
	pilot written exam, as well as the oral section of your
	practical test.

	We offer the 28/20 program in several aircraft to meet your
	requirements and budget. We also allow payment to be made in
	installments. Ask us for details. If you have any questions
	about the 28/20 program, our aircraft, or anything at all,
	please feel freee to ask our dispatchers, or one of our
	instructors.

		Cessna 150			$2798
		Piper Warrior			$3199
		Cessna 172			$3199
	
	*** This is not a guaranteed course. Student may require
	additional training.

	Program is refundable up to one yr after date of purchase.
	Refund is subject to a 5% administrative fee after remaining
	hrs are prorated at non-discount rates. Program is non-refundable
	after one yr from date of purchase.

Newsgroups: rec.aviation.student
From: dmcmilla@djm.cs.gmr.com (Don McMillan CS 50)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.student
Subject: ultralight training
Date: 8 Oct 92 12:16:22 GMT
Reply-To: dmcmilla@djm.cs.gmr.com (Don McMillan CS 50)

I'm interested in learning to fly untralights.  Are there clubs set up for
this purpose?  Any ideas on how to find them (in SE Michigan)?


 \_\_\_\_      \_\_\_\_\_   \_      \_           Don McMillan       __  .   .  
 \_      \_         \_       \_\_  \_\_          GM Research Labs  /  ` |\ /|  
  \_       \_        \_       \_ \_\_ \_         (313) 986-1436    | ,_ | | |  
   \_       \_        \_       \_  \_  \_                          \__/ |   |  
    \_       \_        \_       \_      \_                                     
     \_      \_   \_   \_        \_      \_      CSNet: mcmillan@gmr.com
      \_\_\_\_      \_\_          \_      \_     I-net: dmcmilla@djm.cs.gmr.com
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.student,rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.misc
From: hchong@netcom.com (Hoi Chong)
Subject: Re: more medical problems...
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 15:11:06 GMT

From article <1992Oct12.102237.8720@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU>, by c60c-3gi@web-3e.berkeley.edu (Masayuki Karahashi):
> I've been working at the FAA for a third class medical.  They've finally 
> ginven me their results which were not favorable.  The letter they sent
> me read:

Actually, we are quite lucky in this country.  In some country (I am not
naming names), your chance of flying is ZERO if you wear glasses, even if
you wanna pay.  

Hope you will be able to get your 3rd class.

Now if I just can get my FAA waiver for my 2nd class (for my glasses, what
else?)... (
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.student
From: gff%Rational.COM (Geoff Fitch)
Subject: Re: High-wing vs. low-wing training
Organization: Rational
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 20:02:05 GMT

Obvisously it really doesn't matter in the grand
scheme of things, but I'd give one bit of advice.
If you think you are going to want to learn both
high- and low-wing planes relatively soon after
you get your ticket, then train in a low-wing. That
way you get the fuel management procedures engrained
in your habits.
From: hutton@ncrcol.ColumbiaSC.NCR.COM (ed Hutton ext. 6488)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.student
Subject: Re: High-wing vs. low-wing training
Date: 6 Oct 92 22:41:28 GMT
Organization: NCR E&M Columbia SC.

In article <1992Oct5.232632.6046@netcom.com> mbk@netcom.com (Miles Kehoe) writes:
>
>Me, I vote for mushy stall and no spin!

	This post brought back a fond memory. First time I checked
out in a Cherokee (I learned in Cessnoids), the instructor asked
for a power on stall. I performed the usual Cessnoid routine,
but nothing happened. The instructor said, "Recover!" I turned to
him and said, "From what?" The difference in glide ratio caught
my attention though. 

Ed

-- 
edward.hutton@ColumbiaSC.NCR.COM (Ed Hutton)    
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.student
From: hopkins@gvlf9-o.gvl.unisys.com (Bill Hopkins)
Subject: Re: phone number for FAA
Reply-To: hopkins@gvl.unisys.com
Organization: Paramax Systems Corp (A Unisys Company), Great Valley Labs, PA
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 17:23:33 GMT

In article <1992Oct7.101533.21505@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU>
c60c-3gi@web-3e.berkeley.edu (Masayuki Karahashi) writes:
>does anyone know the phone number for the FAA in Oklahoma City?
>specifically the speical issuance dept.  If I am correct, it's
>called the Mike Monroney Aeromedical Center or something like that..

Right you are!  From the AOPA "book" (see, I told it was useful):
	Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center
	Post Office Box 25082
	Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73125
	405/680-3296
and
	Aeromedical Certification Branch
	(at Monroney Center: includes requesting information on medical
	certification problems, if not being handled by regional flight surgeon)
	Post Office Box 26080
	Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73126
	405/680-4821, 680-4827
so there's also
	FAA Regional Office - Western-Pacific Region
	(governing AZ, CA, NE, HI, Pacific Ocean, Asia)
	Carl B. Schellenberg, Administrator
	Post Office Box 92007
	Worldway Postal Center
	Los Angeles, CA 90009
	213/297-1427

>or is there a general FAA number that I can call to find this info?

	FAA
	800 Independence Avenue, S.W.
	Washington, DC 20591
	202/366-4000
	(includes office of Federal Flight Surgeon)


Good luck.

	Bill (who's Mike Monroney, anyway?) Hopkins

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
hopkins@GVL.Unisys.Com      Paramax Systems Corporation (A Unisys Company)
215-648-2854 or 363-7464    Great Valley Labs, PO Box 517, Paoli, PA 19301
MXE 016 radial, 8 nmi          Opening my mouth is not company policy.
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.student
From: dougg@kbsw1.uucp (Doug Gerecht 806 1031)
Subject: Re: training pgm?
Date: 14 Oct 92 16:20:09
Distribution: usa
Organization: Kentek Information Systems

In article <1bf5ltINN1dr@seven-up.East.Sun.COM> mwc@tandoori.East.Sun.COM () writes:

	   Eagle East Aviation's "28/20" program is the most affordable
	   way to train for your private pilot license. The program
	   includes 28 hrs of flight instruction, 20 hrs of solo
	   flight, pre/post-flight ground instruction as well as
	   enrollment in our 6 wk private pilot ground school.


		   Cessna 150			$2798
		   Piper Warrior		$3199
		   Cessna 172			$3199

	   *** This is not a guaranteed course. Student may require
	   additional training.


This works out to about $20/hour for instructor and $55/hour for the
plane ($47/hour for the 152) plus free ground school.  Seems like a
pretty good deal.  Note that this does not guarantee that you get your
license.  If you feel you might be particularly addept at flying you
might look around since you might not need the whole 48 hours to get
your ticket.

Just my too sense worth.


-- 

		dougg@kentek.com	Doug Gerecht
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.student
From: wd@cs.tu-berlin.de (Wolfgang Diestelkamp)
Subject: Re: mechanical vs electronic
Organization: Technical University of Berlin, Germany
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 12:12:42 GMT

In article <1992Oct13.191310.2246@drycas.club.cc.cmu.edu> GRIGG@dirac.physics.jmu.edu (Steve Grigg) writes:
>     I understand that Sporty's E6B can be used during the FAA exams. Does
> anyone have any feelings one way or the other about using a mechanical or
> electronic during the course of flight school and exam schedule? Thanks in
> advance.

I must say I have a quite definite feeling about this matter,
conservative as it may be though:
In spite of the fact that I work as a computer scientist
(or is it *because* of it ?) I prefer the mechanic devices
over electronic things very much. On the mechanic computers
I can *see* how they calculate, I can check for plausibility,
whereas the electronic computer gives me some final results
that I have no chance to check for plausibility (unless I do
an estimate in my head-computer, but if I do that - and there
are some pretty good rules-of-thumb i.e. for WCA etc. - I might
as well use no computer at all). Related to this is the problem
of entering data: You type 210Knots instead of 120 Knots and
have no chance noticing this, whereas on the mechanical computer
you may be a few percent off, not an order of magnitude
(an unconfirmed rumor says that this happened to the KAL flight
that was shot down over Siberia in 1983).
And a third reason to me why students should use the mechanical thing:
It's not difficult to switch to the electronic computer later,
but it probably is very difficult to do it the other way round.
Now to conclude: I do like to use a laptop sometimes now to
do my flight planning, but the reason is more that I don't
have to *write* down all the stuff for the flight log, but instead
get a neat flight log printed out within a few seconds.
OK, as I said, I may be overly conservative with this, but
I do work with computers a lot ...
-- 
Wolfgang Diestelkamp
wd@cs.tu-berlin.de
wolfgang@first.gmd.de
From: tapiiri@vipunen.hut.fi (Pirita Mikkanen)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.student
Subject: ZONTA Int Foundation
Date: 12 Oct 92 13:59:12 GMT
Reply-To: tapiiri@vipunen.hut.fi (Pirita Mikkanen)
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology


Sorry for posting this into this newgroup, but couldn't find
better...


Well, for women graduating or doing their post-grad studies
on aviation science or technology there are scholarships (or
something) from the ZONTA foundation.
(Somebody got confused on my research fild, which is aerosols ;-)

Ask for further information

ZONTA International Foundation
557 West Randolph Street,
Chicago, Illinois 60661-2206

GOOD LUCK!

-- 
* Pirita Mikkanen		*  Olen elossa			*
* p tomaatti 701 2451		*	Olen siis onnellinen	*
* p ty| 456 4772		*			;)	*
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.student
From: wd@cs.tu-berlin.de (Wolfgang Diestelkamp)
Subject: Re: mechanical vs electronic
Organization: Technical University of Berlin, Germany
	<WD.92Oct14131233@sam.cs.tu-berlin.de>
	<1992Oct14.180611.25455@news.arc.nasa.gov>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 10:20:18 GMT


> Most of the newer flight computers have multi-line prompted entry displays
> that remain viewable when the final answer comes up with some flag flashing.
> This way you have a chance to go back and correct this kind of entry problem.
> 
> If your groundspeed comes out 334 kts in a 172, it should be obvious that 
> the wind is prob not THAT strong.  :^}

True of course; this is a case where your "head-computer" can check for
plausibility very easily. It doesn't take much though to confuse things
profoundly: Imagine a -12 instead of +14 degree WCA for instance; you have to
maintain that mental image of what is going on; and what I was suggesting
is that the use of a (electronic) computer can easily lead you to a point
where you seemingly don't need a mental image, just the numbers in the
computer. Sure, this is not necessarily so, but chances are IMHO much higher
than with the "conventional" things.
-- 
Wolfgang Diestelkamp
wd@cs.tu-berlin.de
wolfgang@first.gmd.de

Newsgroups: rec.aviation.student,rec.aviation.misc,rec.aviation.products
From: dsb@s1.gov (David S. Brown)
Subject: HP-41C Navigation module
Originator: dsb@s1.gov
Organization: DCSP, Lawrence Livermore National Lab.
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 23:00:59 GMT


I would like to obtain one but HP doesn't sell it anymore. 

was it that bad?

If not, does anyone have one they want to sell?  I have
several HP-41C's and could easily devote one full time to
my flight bag.


dsb

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          David S. Brown  --  KD6MFZ                                                    
         o o o o o o o . . .                       _____=======_T___      
       O      _____                .__  / .__      |dsbrown@llnl.gov|    
     .][__n_n_|DD[  ====_____      |  \ \ |__)   + | (510) 422-2475 | +     
    >(________|__|_[_________]_|___|__/_/_|__)___|_|__FAX:_423-9572_|_|     
    _/oo OOOO oo   ooo   ooo   'o^o            o^o`'o^o           o^o`      
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            P.O. Box 808  7000 East Av  L-270  Livermore CA 94550 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: mmuller@bonnie.ics.uci.edu (Mark Timothy Muller)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.student
Subject: Re: High-wing vs. low-wing training
Date: 8 Oct 92 23:03:17 GMT


A topic that hasn't been discussed at all in the talks about lowvhigh wings
is cost.  As another student who plans on getting his license in a few weeks
i have found that the high wing 172's&152's are the primary trainers used
by local FBO's usually because they are at least 10$ less expensive to fly.
and remember even 10$/hour can be a decent amount over 40-60+ hours.
Mark.
:
Expires:
Sender:
Reply-To: mmuller@ics.uci.edu (Mark Timothy Muller)
Followup-To:
Distribution:
Organization: Univ. of Calif., Irvine, Info. & Computer Sci. Dept.
Keywords:
From: purtill@idacrd.UUCP (Mark Purtill)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.student
Subject: Learning to fly in Princeton
Date: 16 Oct 92 14:02:12 GMT
Distribution: nj
Organization: idacrd, princeton, nj


	Anyone had any experience learning to fly at the Princeton
airport?  Or other airports not wildly far away from Princeton?
Likewise, recommendations for groundschools, book stores, etc. would
be appreciated.
	Email to me, I will summarize to the net if there is any
interest.

^.-.^ Mark Purtill, purtill@ccr-p.ida.org || purtill%idacrd@uunet.uu.net
((")) \@_: IDA/CCR-P, Thanet Road, Princeton NJ  08540;  (609) 924-4600.
Alternate email: purtill%idacrd@princeton.edu UUCP: uunet!idacrd!purtill
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.student
From: robie@umbc4.umbc.edu (Mr. William Robie; POSI (GRAD))
Subject: High v. Low Wing for Students? EITHER!!
Organization: Univ. of MD, Baltimore County
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 14:36:03 GMT

High-wing planes fly a bit differently from low-wing planes.

Low-wing planes usually fly a bit differently from *other* low-wing
planes and, likewise, not all high-wing planes fly alike.

I have flown lots of each type of airplane and would like to make the
following observation:

It just isn't a big enough difference for a potential student to worry about!
I have seen would-be pilots who were whipped up into a state of anxiety 
because they thought this was a major issue that *HAD* to be resolved before
they could possibly learn to fly. One type of plane, they thought, would be
child's play to learn in.  The other (but they couldn't decided which was
supposed to be which) would be infinitely harder.  

Not so.

Pick an FBO that is convenient, has a good INSTRUCTOR and reasonable rates,
then go learn to fly in whatever they have.  Learn to fly that plane well
and get your license in it.  After doing that, find another (or the same)
good instructor who can give you time in other aircraft.

This isn't that big a deal, folks.  Don't sweat it!  Pilots can argue for
HOURS (and it's fun to do) over the comparative plusses and minuses of
various makes, types, configurations, etc., of aircraft.  It's fun to
do, but (especially for a student worried about which sort of trainer
is "best") these arguments are TRIVIAL!!  A good instructor can get you
through a license just as easily in one sort of trainer as another -- and 
you will never feel the difference.  You will later find out that a
transition from one to another of the more common production planes
is not an event of any huge significance.  Sure, it seems a little wierd
at first, but the skills you learn in one can be fairly easily translated
into skills needed to fly the other.

Wait until you are ready to *buy* a plane before you get too emotionally
overwrought about whether you have to duck your head to get inside the
thing, or kneel on the ground to drain the tank sumps.


Another note for when you *do* get your license:
Low-time pilots are generally *quite* enthusiastic (and should be!), but
their experience range is, of course, limited.  The lack of experience,
combined with a love of, and enthusiasm for, flight makes for some very
animated and heated discussions over matters that are often irrelevant.
This may make you look like a knowledgeable pilot (to those less experienced),
but it can also confuse them -- make them think that tiny differences are
of massive importance.  Have you ever met someone who tried to make things
in which they had expertise seem far more mysterious and complicated than
they really were (in order to impress others with their incredible knowledge)?
Remember what you thought of that person?  Think about it ...


Bill

"All airplanes fly differently for the same reasons."