HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: niles@parc.xerox.com (Les Niles)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc,rec.aviation
Subject: Re: radios and non-pilots
Date: 10 Nov 92 16:24:03 GMT
Article-I.D.: pizzicat.NILES.92Nov10082403
	<1dn32sINNbsh@agate.berkeley.edu>
	<1992Nov10.105313.4012@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU>
Organization: Xerox PARC, Palo Alto, CA

In article <1992Nov10.105313.4012@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> c60c-3gi@web-3c.berkeley.edu (Masayuki Karahashi) writes:
   now finally my question...so now that I am stuck with it and am stuck
   on the ground since looks like I am not going to be flying anytime soon
   (at least in a plane), although I believe I will eventually be able to
   get that medical sooner or later, what can I do with it?  Can I listen
   to planes (for fun, ie, use it like a scanner) or is even turning on a 
   tranciever illegal if you are not air born?

You can listen to whatever you like (in the U.S., at least).  You, and 
the station, only need licenses for transmitting, and your ICOM doesn't
become a transmitter until you push the push-to-talk switch.
Good luck with the medical.

  -les  niles@parc.xerox.com
        Skylane N2461G
From: kerry@Ingres.COM (Kerry Kurasaki)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc
Subject: Re: Flying Under Bridges
Date: 10 Nov 92 20:31:04 GMT
Article-I.D.: pony.1992Nov10.203104.17622
Reply-To: kerry@Ingres.COM (Kerry Kurasaki)
Organization: Ask Computer Systems Inc., Ingres Division, Alameda CA 94501

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

Well, yes and no.  While on the surface, seaplanes must obey the boating
rules.  In the air, it's the FARs.

:-)  So you touch down 100' before the bridge, motor along until
:-)  you are under it and beyond, and then put takeoff power back
:-)  in and fly out.
From: masys@nlm.nih.gov (Dr. Daniel R. Masys)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc
Subject: Re: Almost running out of fuel
Date: 5 Nov 92 13:52:38 GMT
Organization: National Library of Medicine

In article <7850@transfer.stratus.com> spenny@sw.stratus.com (Steve Pennypacker) writes:
>As I'm sure you (Dan) know, avgas has a dye in it which indicates the octane
>level.  If it had been leaking out of the fuel caps over a period of a 
>couple of days, I would think you'd have a nice blue (depending on what type 
>of fuel you use) stain running back from the fuel caps, no?  

I ran that 1970 C172 almost exclusively on autogas--no stains.  Although
it had a little 100LL from Hanscom mixed in, the autogas dilution was
sufficient that there was only the faintest of marks on the wings.  Another
mogas difference...

Dan Masys
masys@nlm.nih.gov
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc
From: geoff@peck.com (Geoff Peck)
Subject: Re: radios and non-pilots
Organization: Geoffrey G. Peck, Consultant, San Jose CA
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 06:48:24 GMT

In article <1992Nov09.184922.22715@news.mentorg.com> patb@patb.mentorg.com
(Patrick Bryant) writes:
> But Freg 122.9 is reserved for air-to-air and miscellaneous air-to-ground
> transmissions.

Nope.  122.75 is air-to-air.  122.9 is aeronautical multicom, which is used
for aircraft talking to each other in the vicinity of an airport which has
no ground facilities.

> When working for Argonne National Laboratory in 1977 we were conducting a
> field experiment that required contact with airbone aircraft.  We had
> a portable radio tuned to 122.9.  Note: range was very limited due to
> ground abstructions.

You're welcome to _listen_.  You're not welcome to _transmit_ without a
license.

Fortunately (?), the FCC has a very minimal enforcement branch.  Many
transgressions are made by well-meaning folks with regard to wrong
frequencies or wrong uses of aviation-band transceivers.  Rarely, except
in the case of repeated, blatent, and destructive transmissions, do people
get caught.

						Geoff
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc
From: jle@fc.hp.com
 (Jer/ Eberhard)
Subject: Re: Public perception of general aviation
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 19:34:36 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Workstation Kernel, Ft. Collins, CO
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1.1 PL6]

Dave Touretzky (dst+@cs.cmu.edu) wrote:

> #5.  Hey Sean, do you think we could get the old
> Sky King shows released on video?

They are released on video.
You can own the whole set thru one of EAA or AOPA.

--
Jer/ (Slash) Eberhard, jle@fc.hp.com, Jer_Eberhard@fc.hp.com
Hewlett-Packard UDL, 3404 East Harmony Road MS-99, Ft Collins, CO  80525-9599
Phone 303 229-2861, FAX 303 229-2838, 1UP10, Incoming 40 44.1N+105 33.0W
Civil Air Patrol, Pikes Peak 218, MSN Check Pilot, CFI Airplane & Glider, N0FZD
From: hdnea@usho92.hou281.chevron.com (David Neal)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc
Subject: Re: Flying Under Bridges
Date: 9 Nov 92 21:44:46 GMT
Organization: Chevron

In article <1dmajiINNflp@news.aero.org> lmiller@aero.org (Lawrence H. Miller) writes:
>In article <1992Nov8.031519.27384@peck.com> geoff@peck.com (Geoff Peck) writes:
>>In article <1992Nov7.081317.28968@ringer.cs.utsa.edu>
>>
>>> Any ideas from you Ercoupe-loopers?
>>
>>Many Ercoupes have no rudder pedals; instead, they have interconnected
>>ailerons and rudders.
>
>	Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe most Ercoupes
>	have no pedals, and no pilot controllable rudder.
>

Right -- Ercoupes don't have rudder pedals. Later versions of
the same design (notably the Mooney Mite) do.

In fact, in a book of Ercoupe history I found at 1/2 Price books,
there is a picture of a woman with no legs winning some sort
of award for flying her Ercoupe. Although her courage in flight
is admirable, her getting a _medical_ past the FAA is truly
the act of a herione. :-)

I think the 'Ercoupe looper' crack was an attempt at sarcasm.
Perhaps the poster was equating flying under a bridge with looping 
an Ercoupe?


>-- 
>Larry Miller		The Aerospace Corporation
>lmiller@aero.org	PO Box 92957		
>310-336-5597		LA, CA 90009-2957


-- 
David Neal -- hdnea@hou281.chevron.com 
Conserve water, California's deserts need more cotton farms.
Barbie says, Take quaaludes in gin and go to a disco right away!
 But Ken says, WOO-WOO!!  No credit at ``Mr. Liquor''!!
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc
From: thughes@lonestar.utsa.edu (Toby . Hughes)
Subject: Re: Stay on the ground, Reba.
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 16:51:26 GMT

In article <9211121538.AA16837@tecnet1.jcte.jcs.mil> davehyde@tecnet1.jcte.jcs.mil writes:
>
>In article <1992Nov10.211435.27216@eecs.nwu.edu>,
>William LeFebvre <phil@eecs.nwu.edu> writes:
>
>>WHY was this such a big deal?  So the guy made an emergency landing.
>>SO WHAT?  This is like pulling over to the side of an expressway because
>>you have a flat.


It was a bit more than that.  The problem was that the nose gear was stuck
in transit, neither up and locked nor down and locked, because a mechanic
left a flashlight wedged in the strut.  The nosegear collapsed on landing,
sending Reba and her crew on a rather noisy, nose-down, shower of sparks
ride down the runway.  Hardly like pulling over to change a tire, more like
a blowout at 60 MPH on a mountain road.  There are emergency landings and
there are EMERGENCY landings!

TH
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc
From: jbrown@qdeck.com (Jordan Brown)
Subject: Re: Exhaust pipes on GA aircraft
Organization: Quarterdeck Office Systems, Santa Monica CA
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 04:56:08 GMT

dobosz_m@wfooff.enet.dec.com (Mike Dobosz) writes:
>If one were concerned with decreasing noise produced by the average general 
>aviation aircraft, wouldn't it be a simple fix to have the exhaust pipes 
>point up instead of down?

I'm not sure, but I believe the bulk of the noise from a prop airplane is
from the prop rather than the exhaust.  Consider that a turboprop airplane
on takeoff sounds much more like a piston airplane than it does like a jet.
The only time you can really hear the turboprop whine is when they're starting
up and a little bit at taxi power.
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc
From: calvin@boi.hp.com (Calvin K McDonald)
Subject: Re: Exhaust pipes on GA aircraft
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 17:01:33 GMT
Reply-To: calvin@hpdmd48.boi.hp.com
Organization: Hewlett-Packard - Boise, Idaho
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1.4 PL6]

The prop noise idea makes a lot of sense, but, I have noticed that the noise
level is tightly coupled to the model of airplane.  There is an obvious 
common relationship of airplane and engine type (exhaust system).  Is this
also true of the prop?

 ................................... | .................................... 
:                        \__________( )__________/                         :
: Calvin K. McDonald              o'   `o      HP Network Printer Division :
: Hardware Design Engineer                     Boise, Idaho                :
: Email: calvin@hpdmd48.boi.hp.com             Phone:  (208) 323-4678      :
 .......................................................................... 
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.misc,rec.aviation,rec.aviation.homebuilt
From: mperlman@nyx.cs.du.edu (Marshal "Airborne" Perlman)
Subject: Re: Flying Saucers
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 92 14:53:53 GMT

Why buy a flying saucer when the aliens will give us one for free! JUST ASK!
--
 Marshal Perlman <> Florida Institute of Technology <> (407) 768-8000 x 8435
                 Private Pilot - Airplane Single-Engine Land

Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: hchong@netcom.com (Hoi Chong)
Subject: Re: Stay on the ground, Reba.
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 07:20:03 GMT

From article <1992Nov10.164227.1265@newsgate.sps.mot.com>, by beutel@chdasic.sps.mot.com (Jim Beutel):
> 
> Seems that Reba MacEntyre does not want to heed
> a warning..... Even several of them.
> 
> Reba, stay on the ground before anyone else gets hurt!

I thought the problem was that she was not on the plane.


Xref: sparky rec.aviation:17208 rec.aviation.misc:554
From: stadler@Apple.COM (Andy Stadler)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation,rec.aviation.misc
Subject: Re: Public perception of general aviation
Date: 9 Nov 92 22:42:49 GMT
Followup-To: rec.aviation
Organization: Apple Computer Inc., Cupertino, CA

In article <1992Nov6.200439.10780@news.arc.nasa.gov> doshay@ursa.arc.nasa.gov
 (David Doshay) writes:
>
>The same was true out here in the Bay area after the World Series Earthquake.
>Pilots ammassed a huge quantity of blankets, clothes, food, and other stuff
>and flew it all over th Watsonville from Reid Hillview, an airport that the
>county kept trying to close. A bit of it made the news and the papers, but it
>was kind of in the corner in the back kind of coverage. The County Board of
>Supervisors even gave a certificate of commendation to the airport and pilots
>that did the airlift. A few of the Supervisors seem to have cut out some of 
>the more extreme "close the airport" retoric.
>
>Doing good deeds helps our image, now we have to get them to look.

David, you've unlocked the key to the GA public perception problem.

More Earthquakes.



--Andy    stadler@apple.com
From: dick.zeitlin%acc1bbs@ssr.com (Dick Zeitlin) 
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: the effect of bad man
Date: 4 Nov 92 13:43:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: Advanced Computer Concepts BBS, New Rochelle, NY 914-654-1981
Reply-To: dick.zeitlin%acc1bbs@ssr.com (Dick Zeitlin) 

PF> .There's no more reason to believe that every 300-600 hour pilot (as
  > .indicated in Robert's generalization) is busy developing REALLY scary
  > .attitudes than there is to believe that every 3000 ATP knows all and
  > .tells all.

Most generalizations are defective, but the accident statistics do
indicate that pilots in the 400-600 hour range have a disproportionately
bad record.

        D/

 * OLX 2.2 * Bring back A-N airways!!    Dick.Zeitlin%acc1bbs@ssr.com
                                      
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: peted@microsoft.com (Peter Duniho)
Subject: Re: temp/dewpoint
Date: 11 Nov 92 00:36:04 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation
Distribution: rec

In article <1992Nov9.222333.10806@acuson.com> hutch@acuson.com (Jim Hutchinson) writes:
>I believe the instrument that measures humidity is also called a "sling
>psychrometer". You can buy one from Edmund Scientific in New Jersey.
>

And, as was pointed out to me by some friendly people via email,
the term that I used ("sphygnomemeter" (probably spelled wrong again...
sorry :/)) is actually the name of that thing they use to measure
your blood pressure and has nothing to do with aviation.  "Sling
psychrometer" seems to be the correct term; either that, or everyone
that mentioned it to me was wrong.  :)  (If they'd just name things
in English, I wouldn't have this problem...honest! :) )...
-- 
Pete Duniho         "Give me a fish, or a mountain, to scale..."
peted@microsoft.com              -- Toy Matinee
From: geoffm@purplehaze.Corp.Sun.COM (Geoff Miller)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Public perception of general aviation
Followup-To: recc.aviation
Date: 11 Nov 1992 23:23:06 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Menlo Park, Ca.
NNTP-Posting-Host: purplehaze.corp.sun.com



In article <pvf.721333462@diablo> pvf@alantec.com (Paul Fries) writes:

>But that name would not be appropriate for a modern TV program.
>Ripcords are virtually never used for main parachutes anymore.
>The only ripcord on most rigs is for the reserve. 


You mean static lines are the norm now?  I thought static lines were
only used for a student parachutist's first jump or two.  Seems to me
that being able to control the opening of one's parachute would be 
part of the rush involved with jumping out of a perfectly good airplane.


Geoff


-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
Geoff Miller                    + + + + + + + +        Sun Microsystems
geoffm@purplehaze.Corp.Sun.COM  + + + + + + + +     Menlo Park, California
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
From: bboswell@dante.NMSU.Edu (BOSWELL)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Batteries & Damage Done...
Date: 5 Nov 92 02:41:51 GMT
Article-I.D.: nmsu.1992Nov5.024151.5104
Organization: New Mexico State University

I was wondering: what damage can be done to a 12-V aircraft battery when  
charged with 24-V juice?

The story behind the question:

Today I went to fly solo in my flight club's Cessna 150.  I get to the airport,  
get the plane pre-flighted, and I am all strapped in ready to go.  However when  
I pull the starter handle the prop turns maybe about 1/4 turn before the the  
battery decides it doesn't have the juice to turn it more.  I notice that there  
is SOME charge in the battery, though...
So I turn on the radio, call the FBO and have them send the tug (an old M38A1  
military jeep w/24V electric), a lineman, and jumper cables.
I was all set up on my end, but when the lineman connected his end, the battery  
boiled out some battery acid(!).  I IMMEDIATELY disconnected my end, chewed out  
the lineman, and told him to hook up across 1 battery (instead of the jeep's  
2!).  [Note: the electronics/avionics/instruments are fine.  The master was  
off]
Once we got the connection right, the plane started without a hitch.  I ran the  
engine at 1500 RPM for about 10 min. to try and get the battery charged.   The  
ammeter was reading a stong charge (but not in the red).   Then I shut down to  
put the cover back on the battery.  Much to my dismay, when I went to start it  
again, the battery was as flat as it was before:  once again, 1/4 turn and  
kaput!
About this time I realise there's about 10 min. left before the next people (a  
flight lesson) are scheduled for the plane, so I roll it back into it's  
tiedown.
The instructor from the twosome who was scheduled next is also an A&P.  I asked  
him if the battery acid could have done any damage, but he said that the  
battery box and firewall in a 150 are stainless steel and would have been  
resistant to the acid.  He opened up the cowling to check everything else and  
said it was fine, no corrosion damage.  After his student pre-flighted, he hand  
propped the plane and they took off.
This is the part that gets me though: he said the most damage a 24V charge  
could have done to the battery is to boil off some of the acid, which could be  
made up for by adding more water to the battery.  Judging by the way the  
battery reacted, though, I'd have to say there's some more damage (to the  
battery).  Any ideas?
From: cantrell@seqp4.sequoia.com (Paul Cantrell)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Helicopter icing
Keywords: helicopter,ifr,icing
Date: 12 Nov 92 22:25:21 GMT
Organization: Sequoia Computer Systems

In article <pdb1.721491915@Isis.MsState.Edu>, pdb1@ra.msstate.edu (Philip D Bridges) writes:
> It is also possible to let go of the cyclic for short periods of time on
> helicopters without stability augmentation systems.

You should probably say "on some helicopters..." or define the period of
time. I've flown some helicopters that would be in a critical attitude
within 1 second of letting go of the cyclic. Generally, the collective is
the control you would let go of while tuning a radio. If you can only
reach the radio with your right hand, you can hold the cyclic with your
left hand, in order to free up your right hand.

> Thus helicopters certified for IFR today all have full-time stability
> augmentation systems to give them good stability characteristics.

Well, the Bell 222 (and presumably the reengined version 230) is certified
single pilot IFR without a stability augmentation system. However, the
corporate flight department I know who operates without a sa system uses
two pilots in this ship.

> Most helicopter ifr operations are still in military helicopters, and they
> are exempt from having to meet FAA requirements for ifr certification.

Yes, but in general the military doesn't operate IFR without stability
augmentation systems either. Only the Huey (which is similar stability to
a 222 - lousy but certifiable) is operated IFR without a stability
augmentation system. The OH-6 (Hughes 500) OH-58 (Bell Jetranger) and
Cobra are not operated IFR. The Blackhawk and Chinook have stability
augmentation systems. I believe all the large Sikorksy ships do as well.
So the military isn't really that different - no IFR in small helicopters.

Besides the cost and weight penalty of a stability augmentation system in a
small helicopter like a JetRanger or Hughes 500, not to mention any of the
piston helicopters, there are other major reasons to not operate light
helicopters IFR:

	1) Limited Range makes it difficult to meet alternate minimums
	   at any reasonable weight.

	2) Limited useful load gets cut into real quick by adding the
	   IFR navigation equipment.

	3) Helicopters can operate VFR in many situations which would
	   require IFR by a fixed wing.

	4) IFR system tries to treat a helicopter like a fixed wing,
	   ignoring range, speed, and icing limitations.

	5) Few helicopters are certified for known icing (outside of
	   Russia :-)
-- 
                  THIS                  | Paul Cantrell "PC"
                  SPACE                 | cantrell@sequoia.com
              INTENTIONALLY             | DoD #1144
               LEFT BLANK               | HELO/ASEL/ZX10 Pilot
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: skip@mitre.org (Skip Guild)
Subject: Re: 3 letter codes
Organization: The MITRE Corp
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 12:26:58 GMT

In article <1992Nov4.184058.15977@cascade.Stanford.EDU> eap@everest.Stanford.EDU (Eric Perozziello) writes:

>Does anybody have a list of the 3 letter airport codes?
>
>Specifically, I'd like to know where STC is....

Pickup the airports.nav plain text file stored on seas.smu.edu.  It's a data 
file supporting the fplan.exe flight planning program.
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: phil@eecs.nwu.edu (William LeFebvre)
Subject: Re: Stay on the ground, Reba.
Organization: EECS Department, Northwestern University
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 21:14:35 GMT

In article <1992Nov10.190406.14500@newsgate.sps.mot.com>, beutel@chdasic.sps.mot.com (Jim Beutel) writes:
|> For those of you that dont listen to the daily news 
|> reports, This past weekend in Nashville TN a private
|> jet (lear type or small citation) with country western
|> singer Reba MacEntyre on board made an emergency landing 
|> with the nose gear in the up position. 

Warning:  pet peeve ahead.....

WHY was this such a big deal?  So the guy made an emergency landing.
SO WHAT?  This is like pulling over to the side of an expressway because
you have a flat.  The pilot recognized the problem, dealt with it, made
a good landing, no one was hurt or killed.  Sounds to me like the pilot
dealt with a mechanical failure just like he was trained to do.  So
just WHY do people think this is news?

I guess it's just that old "airplanes are deadly mentality":  the
newscasters are calling it a "close call", etc.  I'm sorry, but that
didn't sound like a "close call" to me.


		William LeFebvre
		Computing Facilities Manager and Analyst
		Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science
		Northwestern University
		<phil@eecs.nwu.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: aviva@ultra.com (Aviva Garrett)
Subject: Re: Public perception of general aviation
Keywords: n
Reply-To: aviva@ultra.com (Aviva Garrett)
Organization: Ultra Network Technologies
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 92 19:25:20 GMT

In article <15350@sunfse.ese.lmsc.lockheed.com> claude@color3.UUCP (Claude Goldsmith) writes:
>We can argue that at worst our airplanes are our RV of choice.  After
>all, we tolerate our neighbors boats, travel trailers , etc.
>Unfortunately though we need publicly supported airports.  

Don't forget that these people need publicly supported roads,
highways, and (possible) boat ramps to use their RV of choice.

..Aviva


-- 
Aviva Garrett
Ultra Network Technologies / 101 Daggett Drive / San Jose CA 95134
aviva@ultra.com  ...!ames!ultra!aviva  (408) 922-0100 
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: chris@a.cs.okstate.edu (Chris Schuermann)
Subject: Re: ercoupe aerobatics
Organization: Oklahoma State University
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 92 13:30:36 GMT

From article <BxMIA1.F7H@plato.ds.boeing.com>, by prang@ssc-bee (Ron Wanttaja):
> In article <92315.192252VPN1@psuvm.psu.edu> VPN1@psuvm.psu.edu writes:
>>
>>A different question is whether there is enough elevator authority to pull
>>an Ercoupe through a loop without diving to Vne + 50 to get enough airspeed
>>to go over the top of a very large loop, and then coming out at Vne + 50 or
>>more.  I suspect the wings would fold.

Take a look at the main wing spar in a 'Coupe.  I don't think you could
possibly break it! :-)  Actually, during an overstress condition, the rear
spar breaks in an Ercoupe.  This causes the wings to gain a bit of dihedral.
It also binds the aleron pushrods which hang up everything else in an
Ercoupe.  I've seen it done... My grandfather likes to recount a story
about landing a 'Coupe with a broken rear spar using only the throttle.
> 
> To amplify Mr. Norris' comment, remember that the Ercoupe was designed to
> be a safe, spinproof aircraft.  To reduce the possibility of a stall, Fred
> Wieck deliberately reduced the elevator travel to prevent the wing from
> being driven to a high AOA.  That's why it doesn't have enough elevator
> authority.
> 
> It's also why Ercoupes have a history of hard landings by those with little
> time in the aircraft... they try to flare, and find there's no more
> elevator left.  Crunch.
> 
Or even those with lots of hours...:-)
> 
> 
Newsgroups: rec.aviation