HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jac@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (John Clear)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Can a 747 fly for 24hrs ?
Date: 15 Oct 92 04:25:48 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center

In article <4342@svin09.info.win.tue.nl> watson@win.tue.nl writes:
>In article <1992Oct13.232542.1@wharton.upenn.edu> baran04@wharton.upenn.edu (Dave Baran) writes:
>>
>>I believe that the "transport category" record is still held by a
>>Boeing 747-400 -- nonstop from Seattle to Cape Town.  I believe that
>>it took around 18 hours.
[stats on 747 deleted]
>
>I thought this record wasn't held by the 747-400, but rather by the 747-SP.
>The reason that I believ this is that SAA only took delivery of their first
>two -400's a couple of months ago (they ordered four), while this record
>has been around for much longer than that.

	I remember reading in The Guiness Book of Records that it was a 747SP,
and that the SPs use a special fuel to get the range up.  The Guiness book is
at home (in NY) and I'm at school (in IN) so I cant check, but I think it was
the 1978 (yes that is a 78) edition.  If it was indeed the '78 edition, then the
record definately predates the -400.  Anyone got a current copy around or a 
better source?


John

-- 
John A Clear -- jac@mentor.cc.purdue.edu, clearja@sage.cc.purdue.edu
PP-ASEL   C/LTC, CAP-NYW                                 
"When you think how well basic appliances work, it is hard to believe 
anyone ever gets on an airplane" -- Calvin and Hobbes
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: berry@athos.pei.com (Berry Kercheval)
Subject: Re: GTE CONTEL DUAT new features
Reply-To: berry@pei.com
Organization: Protocol Engines, Inc., Mt. View, California
	<1992Oct6.223804.3233@europa.asd.contel.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 19:48:59 GMT

>>>>> On Tue, 6 Oct 1992 23:12:29 GMT, system@gnd1.wtp.contel.com (Marty Anilane) said:

Marty> The Macintosh GE software came from a 3rd party source, with the most
Marty> important requirement the capabilty to receive, display, and store 
Marty> NAPLPS graphics. If someone in the Macintosh community knows of a
Marty> better NAPLPS decoder package please E-mail me.

Anyone know of a UNIX/X NAPLPS decoder?  Or source for the protocol?
I tried archie with no luck -- all I found was 'naplps.news at
cs.utk.edu which isn't very helpful.

--
Berry Kercheval :: berry@pei.com :: Protocol Engines, Inc.  Mt. View, CA
"Car pool fatigue: it's like shell shock, but you don't get any VA benefits.
They just fill your gas tank and send you back to the front."
From: ai686@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Ishaq Syed)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: FFA RULES
Date: 10 Oct 1992 02:57:44 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: slc4.ins.cwru.edu


How old do you have to be to get your liecance.  I would like to learn how
to fly but I am 14..And I don't have the money.  My parents won't let me join the air force eaither.  I don't know what to do..Please respond..I live in
Cleveland.

				Ishaq
-- 
           *_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*
           *_           ISHAQ SYED                            _*
           *_           E-MAIL:ai686@cleveland.freenet.edu    _*
           *_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*
Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: rec.aviation,rec.aviation.piloting
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 15:17:01 -0400 
From: Jeffrey Dunkle <jd5f+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: Heard On The Air
Distribution: na

In a story similar to Judy's about the controller "seeing" the new paint
job on the radar, I heard a similar tale where the controller (who,
unknowing to the pilot, had seen the person flying the plane in the
coffee shop before the flight in question) told the pilot to check his
zipper (which happened to be down)....the blushing, stammering pilot
asked..." How'd you.....?"  "New radar" was the reply.
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: Michael Steckner <steckner@lri.uwo.ca>
Subject: RE: ballasting a glider
Organization: Relayed-by-Sendmail
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 20:12:46 GMT
To: rec.aviation@julian.uwo.ca

About a week ago I contradicted someone who stated that LD does not change
with wing loading. I stated that if you look at some of the polars of modern
gliders you can see that they change. Well, I cannot find the stupid polars I
am looking for! BUT I have a reference which specifically addresses this issue,
and the added bonus is that it tries to explain why LD can change with wing
loading.

Piggott
Understanding gliding
2nd ed paperback 1987
pg 109 - 110

I quote (without permission, of course)

One surprising bonus can come from carrying extra weight, as we have seen. Far from spoiling the gliding angle, it may, in fact, improve it. The rather small
chord of the wingtips on some machines is actually more efficinet at the slightly
higher spees needed with extra weight. For example, the theoreitical performance
curves for the Kestrel show an improvement in the best gliding angle from 43:1 at
48 knots when it is flown at an all up weight of 880lb to over 44:1 at 53 kn with an extra 160 lb carried. 

So there we are.

I have seen some adverts where they specify two best LD at two extreme wing
loading values. I thought the discus curves was one (Hmmm, talk about narrow
tips ...) the other being either the ASW27 vapourware or the LS7.

Hope this is a reasonable answe
From: perlman@cs.fit.edu (Marshal Perlman )
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: NEW REC.AVIATION.*
Date: 9 Oct 92 19:26:43 GMT
Organization: Florida Institute of Technology, CS Dept., Melbourne, FL
Originator: perlman@sun2.cs.fit.edu

DID this newsgroup BLOW up or what????

-- 
 Marshal Perlman <> Florida Institute of Technology <> (407) 768-8000 x 8435
                 Private Pilot - Airplane Single-Engine Land
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: greg@saltydog.dpsi.com (Gregory R. Travis)
Subject: Re: El Al Boeing crash on Amsterdam
Organization: Data Parallel Systems, Inc
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 04:01:45 GMT

In <1992Oct9.185304.28276@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> mperlman@nyx.cs.du.edu (Marshal "Airborne" Perlman) writes:

>>In the newspaper account I read, it was stated that a Boeing spokesman
>>said that there was no history of problems with this particular
>>aircraft, and that it was designed to be flyable on ONE engine.

>As far as I remember..the 747-400 <and 300> can fly on one engine..
><if they are at ALTITUDE>...but be serious..he was on take off...
>one engine isn't going to do SHIT.

A 747-anything will fly on no engines just fine, thank you.  Control
surfaces might be a bit difficult with the loss of hydraulic systems
but...

As Marshal implies flying is one thing.  Holding or gaining altitude
are something else entirely.

I would like to know what the Boeing guy really meant.  A 747 with
all four turning is pretty underpowered as it is.  A lone, operable,
engine on a 747 with the other three shut down is, like everything else
on or in the airplane, pretty much along for the ride and the ride is
going down.

greg

--
Gregory Reed Travis				D  P  S  I
Data Parallel Systems Incorporated   greg@dpsi.com (For MX mailers only!)
Bloomington, IN			     greg@indiana.edu (For the others)
Xref: sparky rec.aviation:16535 rec.aviation.homebuilt:103
From: Charles.K.Scott@dartmouth.edu (Charles K. Scott)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation,rec.aviation.homebuilt
Subject: Re: Pitching Moment ... OOPS! (was:Seawinds Sea Plane Kit)
Date: 9 Oct 92 11:51:03 GMT
 <2atz0rl@rpi.edu> <1992Oct8.162548.16634@news.arc.nasa.gov>  
 <byhp4g+@lynx.unm.edu>
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
X-Posted-From: InterNews1.0a5@newshost.dartmouth.edu

In article <byhp4g+@lynx.unm.edu>
klingler@pioneer.unm.edu (David Klingler) writes:

> My impression is
> that the Seahawk (now Seahawker) is a much better plane

Are you incorporating the "Glass Goose" mods Dave?  

Corky Scott
From: nancyr@aviatrix.EBay.Sun.COM (Nancy Ramirez)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: breast exam for Class III medical
Date: 15 Oct 92 20:40:37 GMT
Reply-To: nancyr@aviatrix.EBay.Sun.COM (Nancy Ramirez)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.  Mt. View, Ca.
NNTP-Posting-Host: aviatrix.ebay.sun.com


     This discussion comes back around from time to time, so
     I'm re-posting my experience...

     Back in May of '91 there were a good many pilots in the
     Santa Clara Valley who were very upset with a particular
     AME.  I was one of them.

     I had gone to him in spite of hearing negative comments.
     Might as well give him the benefit of the doubt, I thought.
     I was one angry and insulted lady when I left.  As I talked
     to others, I found several women (and men) equally disgusted.

     After seeing a printed article in an airport newsletter
     about this same AME, I decided to write a letter of my own
     to the Western-Pacific Regional Flight Surgeon.  Though I 
     had a good many signatures, I got 0 response.  I wanted
     the AME removed from his post.

     A month later the Office of Aviation Medicine mailed out a
     letter of its revised application policy.  I quote from
     this letter dated June 14, 1991:

     ... "Finally, certain parts of the medical evaluation, ie,
     breast, rectal, and pelvic examinations, will be performed
     only if you request them or if your medical history or
     physical findings suggest to the AME a possibility of a
     significant abnormality.  If the AME determines that one
     of these examinations is required, your personal physician
     may perform it.  Your AME will hold the application pending
     receipt of your personal physician's report." ...  

     Quite clearly, any AME who insists he must perform one of
     the above exams, is mistaken and should be so informed.  
     ...

     The point is, not all doctors KNOW the correct procedure
     for this examination.  I've had numerous breast exams
     over the years with no problems, but this guy didn't know 
     what he was doing.  It was a complete insult.

     If the doctor doesn't know what he's doing, then he
     should KEEP HIS HANDS OFF!!!


     Nancy Ramirez
Newsgroups: rec.aviation,rec.aviation.piloting,eunet.aviation
From: wd@cs.tu-berlin.de (Wolfgang Diestelkamp)
Subject: Re: gear-down check
Organization: Technical University of Berlin, Germany
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 12:54:46 GMT


Until yesterday I had never heard that "check gear down" on
any approach, but yesterday I had an interesting, and convincing,
experience: I was on an IFR training flight, and the instructor asked
if I had ever done a GCA (ground controlled approach, with vertical
and horizontal guidance). As I had never done it before, we went
out to some military field north of Hamburg (Hohn, EDNQ); the
military controllers happily train GCA's as they need them to
get their license prolonged just as we need landings.
Anyway, a situation in which you would normally request a GCA
is a high-workload situation (probably some instruments have failed
else you could do an ILS or NDB approach and obviously you are
in the soup under some pressure). So on these two training
GCA's it was the first time I heard "check gear down" and,
approaching decision altitude, even got "*recheck* gear down".
I think it is very helpful in such an abnormal situation to get
this, *particularly* if it is not a standard phrase like "roger"
or something. Maybe they should say "check gear down" only in
abnormal, stressfull situations ?
-- 
Wolfgang Diestelkamp
wd@cs.tu-berlin.de
wolfgang@first.gmd.de

From: bills@hplvec.LVLD.HP.COM (Bill Standerfer)
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 13:24:14 GMT
Subject: Re: Medical exam (was Re: Beginner needs advice...badly!)
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Co., Loveland, CO
Newsgroups: rec.aviation

In article <122140255@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM>, jle@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Jer/ Eberhard)
writes:
>>  I've never heard of anyone doing it in 40 hours.
>
>Now you have!  Private Pilot, ASEL, Part 141, 37.2 hours.
>

Ditto!  36.5 hours.

Bill Standerfer, Eternal Student
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: jbrown@qdeck.com (Jordan Brown)
Subject: Re: What Constitutes "Cross Country"
Organization: Quarterdeck Office Systems, Santa Monica CA
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 23:46:03 GMT

bobw@ncr-fc.ftcollins.NCR.COM (Bob Waldron) writes:
>My advice is to use your own judgment when logging x-country or
>any type of time in your log book.

While I agree that a 49-mile trip or a >50-mile trip that didn't include
a landing at the far end can be valuable XC experience, the FAA _will_
go by the exact FAR definitions if they decide to check up on your
experience, and so you should be careful that when you fill out an
FAA form, a ratings application for instance, that you count only those
hours that meet the FAR requirements for the rating you are pursuing.

This is easiest if you log as XC only those flights that meet the FAR
requirements.  I would suggest using the landing >50 rule.

The fact that you don't log the 49-mile flight as XC, or don't log the
100-mile no-landing flight as XC, doesn't erase that experience from your
brain, which is the _really_ important part.  If, on the other hand,
you log a 49-mile flight as an XC and the FAA examiner notices it,
it _will_ be disallowed and if this takes you below the required number
of hours you will get a pink slip, and your instructor might get in
trouble for recommending a candidate who does not meet the requirements,
and in general you will be unhappy.  Note that the examiner for your home
airport will almost certainly know which airports are more than 50 nm from
it...
From: bobw@ncr-fc.ftcollins.NCR.COM (Bob Waldron)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: What Constitutes "Cross Country"
Date: 12 Oct 1992 09:29:23 -0500
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu


When I was building x-country time for my instrument rating I
understood the requirement was a flight greater than 50nm from
your point of origin plus a landing at that distant airport.

On one particular flight up to Laramie WY in my trusty KitFox
I discovered high and gusty winds at Laramie (almost always the
case).  I circled the field several times watching the wind sock,
talked to unicom, even lined up on final but aborted the landing
due to nasty cross winds.  Upon returning to Ft. Collins I told
my instructor of the non-landing, however, he said go ahead and
log that time as x-country.

His reasoning was that x-country flight are to get you away from
familiar surroundings, make you navigate, find and talk to un-
familiar airports, calculate fuel consumption, determine altitudes,
look up communication frequencies, (test your bladder ;-)), etc.
He said 'I know you can land the darn airplane, thats not the point
of a x-country'.

My advice is to use your own judgment when logging x-country or
any type of time in your log book.(familia ahe PIC discussions)
Your log book is an attempt to accurately represent YOUR EXPERIENCE
as a pilot and not just a 'water mark' check-off or a trophy to
show off all your time.  You only cheat your self if you stretch
the truth when logging time.  Also, if you fly a perfectly wonderful
and very technical 49nm x-country in which you gained valuable
experience you can in good a conscious call this a x-country.

Bob Waldron
bob.waldron@ftcollins.ncr.com
From: eric@cm.cf.ac.uk (Eric Griffiths)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: What if a 747 could fly for 24 hrs ?
Date: 15 Oct 92 17:12:12 GMT
Organization: University of Wales College of Cardiff
X-Mailer: Cardiff Computing Maths PP Mail Open News Gateway

In article <1992Oct14.171941.6901@bmerh85.bnr.ca> rivan@bnr.ca writes:
[stuff deleted]
|I was thinking that a party on this day that would run
|midnight for 24hrs would be a great idea (and money maker
|be neat.  So how do you do it?  Easy . Calculate a latitude on
[more stuff deleted]
OR
Why not charter Concorde (probably already been thought of)?
At Mach 2, it could "catch up" with midnight local time
below it or fly ahead in anticipation of fuel stops,
letting 2400 hrs "catch up" with it, at any latitude
OR (economy version)
stroll around the South Pole for a day with your
favourite tipple :-)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: jrp@bohra.cpg.oz.au (John Pitman)
Subject: &$ 747 24 hrtr flihght
Organization: Computer Power Software
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 04:34:47 GMT

I think that the endurance record for a 747 is just over 20 hours (maybe 21?)
for a QANTAS 747/400 whcih flew non stop LONDON to SYDNEY - reduced load (like
about 20 bodies) and SPECIAL fuel - brewed in Germany, special trucked to UK,
and tanks topped off at the start of the takeoff strip. I suspect that they

would have flown it at optimum range settings. You should be able to work out
the speed, or ring QANTAS pr office somewhere. Is their motto 'We never crash',
or would that be asking for trouble?
jp
From: pcs$2012@altair.selu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: homebuilt BD4
Date: 12 Oct 92 23:28:35 -0600
Distribution: world
Organization: Southeastern Louisiana University

I am looking for information on a BD4 it is a four pasanger that came out in
the late 60's . If you have built one or flown one I would like to hear from
you
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 14:23:06 EDT
From: <VPN1@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: gear down check

I'm not sure one more comment is needed, but Wolfgang's
military GCA posting induces me to add my two cents'
worth.  Telling (or asking) the pilot to check gear
down is SOP at all military fields (U.S. and probably
other) and it used to be true (I haven't been near a
carrier for a long time) that a guy stood near the LSO
and called "hook down, gear down" at every approach.
      So far as creating complacency is concerned, no
way!  Very few mistakes could be more embarrassing than
to get a wave-off because you had forgotten to drop
your hook or gear.  There's a slightly better chance of
not being noticed at an airfield, but not much.
     My vote is for any help I can get.
                      vince norris,   penn state u.
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: stephens@access.digex.com (John Stephens)
Subject: Re: GTE CONTEL DUAT new features
Organization: Severn Companies, Inc., Lanham, MD 20706
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 13:25:12 GMT

In article <2229@usna.NAVY.MIL> dfr@usna.navy.mil (PROF D. Rogers (EAS FAC)) writes:
>
>Currently I prefer DTC mainly because I like their user interface
>somewhat better than Contel. DTC also seems to be a bit faster.
>Finally I have learned a trick with DTC that allows a very fast
>download -- set cols = 24 rows = 999. (You might be able to
>do the same thing with Contel)
>
With DTC, set rows=0 to get continuous scrolling.  This is a deliberate
design feature to avoid paging.

John Stephens.

Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: pthomson@iastate.edu (I Forgot)
Subject: Re: What makes a pilot fly? Money!
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 16:52:27 GMT

In <37289@uflorida.cis.ufl.edu> dth@reef.cis.ufl.edu (David Hightower) writes:

>In article <BvKwwD.Ft0@ithaca.com> eric@ithaca.com (Eric Wagner) writes:
>>
>>Plane rental 52 hrs      = $2300
>>Flight instr 30 hrs      = $ 600
>>Ground instr 13 hrs      = $ 200

>This is interesting.  I wonder how wide the differences 
>are in training rates.

>I'm currently in the PP program, and I'm paying the following:

>	C-152		$22.00/Hr (Dry)
>	
>	Fuel		$1.80/Gal (100LL)

>	Instruction
>	Basic 		$12.00/Hr (through PP)
>	Advanced	$15.00/Hr (Instrument, ME, Complex Acft)
>	Aerobatic	$20.00/Hr (Citabria)

>Are these rates better (or worse) than the averages?  What exactly 
>are the averages?

>On a related note, our FAA Examiner here charges $125.00 for a 
>PP-ASEL checkride.  Is this average?

>Dave

>_________________________________________________________________________
>Dave Hightower		|    opinion? I'm allowed to have an opinion?
>dth@cis.ufl.edu		| well, if I DID have one, it'd be mine, all mine!
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------


Well as for the examiners fee, I took the insturment checkride (and passed)
in August, paid $100.  I paid $75 for my private checkride in '87.

As for aircraft rates, the local FBO charges:  (all include fuel)
 
         C-150      $37/hr
         C-172      $45/hr
         C-172RG    $63/hr
         C-182      $75/hr

        Flight Instruction $15/hr
        Ground Instruction $10/hr (not real sure on this though)


But I was lucky to have a retired farmer with a CFI-I near my home who
did all my insturment instruction for nearly nothing, just charged to use his
plane.  So my insturment rating cost less that $1500 for everything.

==============================================================================
Paul Thomson                   Iowa State University
pthomson@iastate.edu           Meteorology Dept.
==============================================================================
From: al@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Alan Peterman)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Genave avionics
Date: 7 Oct 92 16:42:13 GMT
Article-I.D.: qiclab.1992Oct7.164213.24915
Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon.

In article <1992Oct6.192953.5567@sunova.ssc.gov> mark@europa.ssc.goc (Mark Hall) writes:
>This post was supposed to ask if anyone has any info on Genave avionics.
>Specifically I have come by a Genave audio panel (model TAU-200) for my 
>homebuilt and would like to know if there is anybody who can tell me if
>these units are reliable, worth reapiring, etc? What's the company history?
>This unit looks like a King; are they related? Are there any wiring diagrams
>in the house?

Genave was pretty poor stuff before they went out of business
in the late 60's (maybe early 70's)..Parts and service
are basically unavailable.  I didn't buy a Genave transponder
for $10...which tells you how little they are worth.

If you must go cheap, get a RST audio panel kit - it's well done and 
under $200 last time I looked.  Check first with your GADO
office to be sure they will allow installation of it 
in your plane.  Some GADO offices won't allow kit avionics
in anything bu homebuilts..

-- 
Alan L. Peterman                                 (503)-684-1984 hm & work
                       al@qiclab.scn.rain.com
It's odd how as I get older, the days are longer, but the years are shorter!
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: ckd@eff.org (Christopher Davis)
Subject: Re: Can a 747 fly for 24hrs ?
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation Tech Central
	<Bw3Lp0.79y@ais.org>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 22:31:12 GMT

Tim> == Tim Tyler <tim@ais.org> 

 Tim>     The two 747-400 aircraft with are the primary components of
 Tim> the Presidential aircraft fleet operated by the 89th ALW at
 Tim> Andrews AFB also have airborne refuelling capability.

I was under the impression that 28000 and 29000 were heavily modified
-200 models, not -400s.
--
Christopher K. Davis      |       NET.INSIGHTS INTO ARTISTIC CRITICISM:
<ckd@eff.org>   EFF #14   | ``[Y]ou don't cure bad art by locking it all up
System Administrator, EFF | in one museum, you cure it by throwing tomatoes
+1 617 864 0665  [CKD1]   | at bad artists.'' --Barry Shein <bzs@world.std.com>
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: n933x@pnet16.cts.com (Et2 Rich)
Subject: Re: What is Redout?
Organization: People-Net [pnet16], NCTAMS EASTPAC
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 02:36:06 GMT

A "redout" is the other end of a blackout.  A blackout being a +g force that
causes one's blood to leave the area above the shoulders and therefore lose
one's senses.  A redout, then, is an excessive -g force that causes too large
of a concentration of blood to the brain and overwhelmes the senses.  Though I
don't know much biology, I think if you hang upside down from a tree you will
get a glimpse of the effect, but to really experience it you would probably
have to accelerate for a bit while in that same position.  No, I have never
experienced a redout except in a flight simulator type software situation.

UUCP: humu!nctams1!pnet16!n933x
ARPA: humu!nctams1!pnet16!n933x@nosc.mil
INET: n933x@pnet16.cts.com