HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rls@uihepa.hep.uiuc.edu (Ray Swartz (Oh, that guy again))
Subject: Re: Damn aiplanes
Reply-To: rls@uihepa.hep.uiuc.edu
Organization: Vis-Orb Tragnetics Recorporation
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 15:38:56 GMT

In article <BuCFLJ.4su@chinet.chi.il.us>, harlow@chinet.chi.il.us (Steven A Harlow) writes:
>
> > >Another depressing note, this crash has gotten *extensive* local media
> > >TV station spent the first TWENTY minutes of their 10 pm broadcast
>Truely, the coverage this event has received has been amazing.
>
> > >                                  I kept asking myself "how many people
> > >died in automobile accidents around here this holiday weekend, and why

>This same weekend, a like number (~12) people were killed in shootings
>in Chicago.
>Another 28 were wounded.
>This received about 30 seconds of coverage.


	Actually, I heard 28 killed, 79 wounded.  I paid close attention to
these, as I am a Second Amendment proponent.  Of course, from the sounds of it,
and this being Chicago, few if any of the guns were legally owned.  Yet you'll
hear the call for "more gun laws" being the solution.
	Now back to aviation.


>As a pilot, I learned something from the news coverage (in spite
>of how it was reported).
>I'm just a little afraid that the public learned something different.

	What I've been noticing was all of the positive press that skydiving
has been getting since the accident.  All of the major stations have had one of
their reporters do a jump for the camera, and reporting positively on the
experience.  All of the reportage has been of the "it's those damn little
airplanes that are the problem, but unfortunately the skydivers have to get
into the airplanes to do a jump."  Not that I'm blaming the skydivers, it just
seems a little strange for the safety-fascist news organizations.

Ray Swartz
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: pdb1@ra.msstate.edu (Philip D Bridges)
Subject: Re: Naval Air Station Tower - Code 7 - Wazzat?
Organization: Mississippi State University
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 12:48:50 GMT

gak@n5abi.hou.tx.us (Gene A. Kennedy) writes:
>jeffg@loki.esd.sgi.com (Jeff C. Glover) writes:

>> What is code 7?

> Maybe someone will correct me if I didn't remember the meaning of 
>the number right, but I'am sure that the higher the number, the 
>more important the VIP :-)

It is just the opposite. The lower the number, the more important
the VIP. Code 7 is a full Colonel, Code 6 a one-star, etc. Code 1
is El Presidente.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
|      Philip Bridges                 |  "Strive for design simplicity:  |
|      Dept. of Aerospace Eng.        |   you never have to fix anything |
|      Miss. State University         |   you leave out."                |
|      (601) 325-3623                 |                                  |
|      pdb1@ra.msstate.edu            |           Bill Lear (1903-1978)  |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Newsgroups: rec.aviation
id <m0mS9u8-00011RC@crash.cts.com>; Tue, 8 Sep 92 11: 03 PDT
	id AA21314; Sun, 6 Sep 92 09: 44:12 EDT
	id AA26706 for ncrats!ncr-sd!crash!rec-aviation; Sun, 6 Sep 92 09: 39:29 EDT
	id AA05264; Sun, 6 Sep 92 08: 39:22 -0500
	(5.61/UUNET-internet-primary) id AA05058; Sun, 6 Sep 92 03: 02:23 -0400
	id AA13323; Sun, 6 Sep 92 03: 02:45 EDT
	id <m0mRGQ2-0001FIC@tous.oau.org>; Sun, 6 Sep 92 02: 48 EDT
	id <i583355@pro-carolina.cts.com>; Sat,  5 Sep 92 23: 09 EDT
From: gatech!pro-carolina.cts.com!delton (Don Elton)
Subject: Re: Air Lifeline experience
Organization: ProLine [pro-carolina] Orlando, Florida 407-858-9937
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 92 23:08:25 EDT

If someone flying "air lifeline" or some other such charity flying service
were to just donate the money they spend on these missions to the people in
need directly they'd probably find that the money would go farther for a
commercial flight in many cases.  Again, remember that the urgency for such
trips isn't as great as many would have you believe.
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: petri@venus.iucf.indiana.edu (HOWARD PETRI)
Subject: FAA Records
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4   
Reply-To: petri@venus.iucf.indiana.edu
Organization: INDIANA U. CYCLOTRON FACILITY, BLOOMINGTON, IN
Distribution:  na
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 21:16:50 GMT

     I didn't get a reply to this one yet so I'll try again. 
Recently there was a post on how to contact the FAA in regards to one's
personal aircraft records and their accuracy. Could somebody please repost 
this information. If inaccurate, are these records easily corrected?

Howard Petri
Pegasus N599JH 
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: spagiola@frinext.stanford.edu (Stefano Pagiola)
Subject: Re: What's the deal with 727s at LGA?????
Reply-To: spagiola@frinext.stanford.edu
Organization: DSO, Stanford University
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 92 21:54:27 GMT

Nitin Gupta writes
>  When I was at the US Open over the weekend, there were a
>  LOT of 727s flying over from LGA. Being as old as they are,
>  they produced a lot of noise, particularly on their initial
>  climb out. The vast majority (probably 3/4) of the planes
>  were 727s. When Airbus, 767s, 737s flew over, the noise was
>  substantially less.
> 
>  My question: why so many 727s? Is it because airlines don't
>  want to phase in the 757 in their place right now due to
>  lack of funds. I have read that the 757 is more efficient
>  (not only in terms of fuel) than the 727. I suspect that
>  funding is the case, since 727s are now out of production.
> 

One specific reason why there are so many 727s at LGA is that both  
the USAir shuttle (ex Trump shuttle, ex Eastern shuttle) and Delta  
Shuttle (ex Pan Am shuttle, ex New York Air) use them.  Why?  Good  
size for the market. Also, these are generally older, non-advanced  
727-200s which are real cheap to have sitting around doing nothing  
(remember that they guarantee you a seat, so they must keep stand-by  
planes sitting around in case the previous one is full).

Yes, 757s are more efficient and quieter.  But they are also bigger.   
737-400s, A320s, and MD-80s are also quieter, more efficient, and  
more in the 727's size range.  And there are a lot of them around.   
But before all 727s are replaced (1832 were built, a record at the  
time) it will be a long, long time (remember there are still DC-3s  
flying around).

--
-
Stefano Pagiola
Food Research Institute, Stanford University
spagiola@frinext.stanford.edu (NeXTMail encouraged)
From: clearja@sage.cc.purdue.edu (John Clear)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: CAP Members!!!
Date: 10 Sep 92 03:18:31 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center


	Thanks to all of you who have responded to my initial post.  If there
are any other CAP members out there send me your info.  Here is the list as it
stands now.  If there are any corrections/additions please let me know.  When
I said "ratings" in my initial post, I forgot how many hats most of us wear =),
so I just put in Aero-ratings.

Here it is:

Name                  Rank     Wing  Aero-Rating            Callsign
----                  ----     ----  -----------            --------
Baran, David          S/M      CA    Mission Pilot, Scanner Eagle 984
BARAN04@WILMA.WHARTON.UPENN.EDU

Boyle, Brian          Captain  NJ    Mission Pilot Trainee  Zig Zag 324
bdboyle@maverick1.erenj.com 

Carlson, Kermit       Captain  IL    Check pilot            Red Fox 77
carlson@linac.fnal.gov

Chapman, Brent        1Lt      CA    Mission Pilot          Eagle 408
brent@napa.Telebit.COM 

Clear, John           C/LTC    NY    PP-ASEL        
jac@mentor.cc.purdue.edu

Lipman, Derrell       1Lt      CA    PP-ASEL
derrell@kirk.retix.com 

Lorenzetti, Michael   1Lt      OR    Mission Pilot trainee
mikelor@ic.MENTORG.COM 

Mahler, Stephen       1Lt      LA    PP-ASEL                Magnolia 1409
mahler@usl.edu 

Ratcliff, Gregory     1Lt      OH    Check Pilot     
gratclif@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu

Reistein, Kevin       Captain  NC    PP-ASEL                Kittyhawk 532
KEVINR@RALVM14.VNET.IBM.COM 

Ritter, Roger         Captain  NH    PP-ASEL, Observer      Profile 49
ritter@claude.ma30.bull.com 

Standerfer, Bill      Capatain CO    Mountain Mission Pilot Pikes Peak 253
bills@lvld.hp.com                    CAP-CFII(single,multi)

Syriac, Diana         Captain  MA    Mission Pilot          Freedom 690
dls@genrad.com

Tuiskula, Warren      Captain  MA    Solo                   Freedom 684
warren_tuiskula@vos.stratus.com

Van Horn, Robert      1Lt      CA    PP-ASEL-IA   
rvanhorn@nrtc.northrop.com

Whitlock, Dave        1Lt      Pac   Region Staff
davew@tfs.COM 


Thanks to all again!

John
-- 
John A Clear -- jac@mentor.cc.purdue.edu, clearja@sage.cc.purdue.edu
PP-ASEL   C/LTC, CAP-NYW                                 
'The best way to accelerate an IBM is at 9.8m/s^2' 
'Hard work may not kill me, but why take the chance?'
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: mark@hpcvxmsr.cv.hp.com (Mark Rowe)
Subject: Re: Bird in Engine Compartment
Reply-To: mark@.cv.hp.com
Organization: UDT-CV (ITO)
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 17:26:26 GMT

In article <1992Sep10.154833.16092@exu.ericsson.se>, exumfs@exu.ericsson.se (Mark Steph) writes:
> ...  He promptly called me and said he'd had a head-on collision
> with another Piper without any fatalaties or damage to his airplane.
                                 ^^^^^^^^^^
I suspect that there was a fatality.

Mark Rowe       Corvallis, OR       PP-SEL G I       Comanche N5943P
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: jbrown@qdeck.com (Jordan Brown)
Subject: Re: Interstate Landing--Not such a good idea
Organization: Quarterdeck Office Systems, Santa Monica CA
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 03:26:58 GMT
Keywords: Emergency Landing Road Interstate

greg@saltydog.dpsi.com (Gregory R. Travis) writes:
>	They repeatedly asked for a special VFR clearance into
>	BMG but were denied (because of inbound IFR traffic I assume).  They
>	then landed on Ind. 37 as a precautionary measure.

This sounds like an excellent example of a pilot that should have used
the E word.  Sure, it would attract the authorities' attention, but so will
landing on a highway, and having the tower resequence a few IFR flights
so you can land on a real runway beats dodging cars any day.
From: mandel@romulus (Hector Mandel)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Hinckley Crash
Date: 9 Sep 92 21:00:04 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

robg@Apple.COM (Rob Griffiths) writes:
: 
: With the Hinckley crash, I would expect an increased focus on the safety
: of jump planes, from both a maintenance and load carrying standpoint.
: 

Why just skydiving planes?  Shouldn't this be applicable to *all* planes?  It
seems to me that you are presuming that maintenance on skydiving planes is 
shoddy compared to other planes ... is there justification for this belief?

: >You can pile 10 skydivers in to a plane that would normally only
: >have 6 passenger seats.  It is clear that the FARs regard skydivers 
: >as "special" passengers.
: 
: True.  In years past, all that was really a focus was weight and balance.
: Going forward, I think this may be changing...

I thought that the occupancy limits for jumpships were based on weight and 
balance considerations taking into account that a stripped down interior allows
for more weight in the form of passengers.  Are you overlooking the fact that
the seats and all the dressings in a passenger plane contribute to the total
weight.  Remember also that skydivers don't carry any baggage on board.  (BTW,
we also tend to be in much better physical condition and lighter weight than 
your average commercial passengers :) :).  

So what's wrong with regarding skydivers as "special passengers" anyway??  
We *are* special for several reasons; we don't carry luggage, we don't insist 
on snacks and drinks, we weigh less, we don't need barf bags and we are
perfectly willing to jump out (provided we're at altitude, of course) should
the pilot have a problem that would be mitigated by a significant reduction
in cargo weight :-) :-)

Hector Mandel, C-20629
 
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: braner@theory.TC.Cornell.EDU (Moshe Braner)
Subject: Re: Canard Pros -n- Cons
Summary: no real advantage
Organization: Cornell Theory Center
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 01:47:28 GMT

Some articles I have read have destroyed my early enthusiasm with
canards.  Any clean light small plane will go fast on little power,
i.e., be efficient.  The horiz stab of a standard plane does NOT
need to generate negative lift for stability.  That's a common
myth...  Typically it generates negative lift at high speeds and
positive lift at low speeds.  A well-designed plane will have
near zero stab lift at cruise, for negligible stab induced drag.
Now to the real canard canard (pun intended):  When you design
a plane, you start with a target weight and target stall speed.
Assuming a given maximum coefficient of lift, that determines
the wing size.  With a canard, one must ensure that the canard
stalls well before the main wing.  That means a higher angle
of incidence for the canard.  The plane MUST fly at an attitude
that leaves the canard below stall AOA, and the main wing is then
at an even lower AOA, with a max C of L that is rather low, say
around 1.0.  A similar wing in a conventional configuration can
go up to, say, a C of L of 1.5.  The net result is that the
canard plane needs a bigger wing, or else must land at higher
speeds.  If you insist on slower landings (to allow short field
operation) you must invest extra $$$ in a larger wing, and that
larger wing will create extra drag too.

- Moshe

(Cessna 172 with STOL kit -- I'll get a Lancair IV as soon as
I win the lottery...)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: jhenderson@pomona.claremont.edu
Subject: Trying to contact ATC
Organization: Pomona College
Date: 9 Sep 92 13:44:52 PDT

Hello,

I'm trying to get in touch with an Air Traffic Controller, to ask a few
specific questions about the profession.

Thank you.
______________________________________________________________________________
Javier Henderson, N6VBG         | Beat the 55mph limit (legally):
jhenderson@pomona.claremont.edu | Learn to fly!
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: BLANIK L-13 FOR SALE
From: guy.byars@cccbbs.UUCP (Guy Byars) 
Date: 14 Sep 92 12:59:00 GMT
Reply-To: guy.byars@cccbbs.UUCP (Guy Byars) 
Distribution: world
Organization: Cincinnati Computer Connection BBS - Cincinnati, OH - 513-752-8248

FOR SALE:  BLANIK L-13 SAILPLANE (Two Place Glider)

 I am posting this for a friend, so the details are sketchy:

Total Time:  I don't know, but I think it is low.

Trailer   :  None.

Condition :  Good.  I have seen it, it looks OK.

Location  :  Clemson SC

Asking    :  $14,000.

Contact   : Ray Smith  Work: 803-882-2959 (Clemson Airport)

Again my knowledge is sketchy, Please call Ray for complete info.
                                                                                                     
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: loreen@raider.SanDiego.NCR.com (Loreen Prinz)
Subject: medical yanked : -(
Keywords: medical, multiple sclerosis
Reply-To: Loreen.Prinz@SanDiego.NCR.com
Organization: NCR Engineering and Manufacturing, San Diego, CA
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 01:50:06 GMT

Hi,

I went for a medical renewal and was refused since I have recently been
diagnosed with multiple sclerosis.  I was told by the doctor that I can
appeal the desision by writing to the FAA.  My symptoms are minor, i.e.
slight double vision that comes and goes and doesn't affect normal
activities such as driving, and a tingly sensation in my left side that
also comes and goes and doesn't affect normal movements.  Would anyone 
have any hints as to how to approach the appeal?

Thanks in advance,

Loreen

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Loreen Prinz                                   NCR mail stop 9144
Software Engineer                              16550 W. Bernardo Drive
loreen@raider.sandiego.ncr.com                 San Diego, CA 92127
(619) 485-3574                                 (619) 485-2598 (fax)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: ron@pilot.njin.net (Ron Natalie)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: crossing a runway, and instructor relations
Date: 10 Sep 92 15:33:20 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

> There ain't no such thing as a free lunch!!  It's included as part of your
> membership.  Trust me, you're paying for it!

Yeah, but since they have the pretense of charging $24 otherwise it
gives the appearance of a great deal (really, AOPA dues aren't much
more than some of the other magazine subscriptions I have).

By the way, the day after I complained about the long delays on my
AOPA membership, a package with my AOPA wings, decal, and the Av USA
showed up.

-Ron
From: ron@pilot.njin.net (Ron Natalie)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Logging time for the Inst
Date: 13 Sep 92 18:30:37 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

I flew with two other's to IFR to OSH and back.  I have had zilch
Instrument instruction (just a little hood work for my private and
BFRs).  On the way out I was in the back seat, and I probably spent
more time looking out the window for traffic (and finding some) and
keeping track on the chart of where exactly we were.  I also learned
a great deal from listening to the way a VERY experienced IFR traffic
dealt with some interesting ATC problems.  Of course he was also a
CFII and I logged 4.6 hours of instrument instruction on the way home
(including some actual).

-Ron

Why is it that the FAA can bring in dozens of extra controlers, extra
equipment for the OSH tower, a control tower for FLD, the trailer and
equipment for the "FISK" Tracon, coordinate with non-FAA ground
personal and generally get Oshkosh going, but they can't add a few
controllers to allow reasonable IFR departures?
From: randy@khan.gatech.edu (Randal T. Abler)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: C152 Checkout
Date: 14 Sep 92 17:30:42 GMT
Organization: CERL-EE, Georgia Institue of Technology

In article <1992Sep14.161532.21510@almserv.uucp> smith@ur-guh.com writes:
>Is this standard? That is, checkout in a "big" plane and be auto-checkedout
>in a smaller one? 

Although each FBO sets its own rules (or the rules are dictated by
their insurance policy), downward checkouts in similiar airplanes
seem to be pretty standard.  All three of the FBO's I've checked out 
at (as a transient) allowed me to fly the smaller Cessna's based on a 
checkout in the larger planes - 
Charlie Brown flying club (FTY):
	checked out in a C182RG, covered C172RG,  C182, C172, C152
	didn't cover C210
	Their stated policy says that at the instructors discretion, a
	checkout may cover all smaller planes.	
Sky Harbor (Duluth, mn):
	checked out in a C172, covered C152
	didn't cover the citabria or Arrow
Palo Alto Flying Club (Palo Alto, CA)
	checked out in a C182, covered C172, C152
	didn't cover any of the low wing planes 

-- 
Randal T. Abler   	randy@cerl.gatech.edu		 
CERL/EE Georgia Tech     
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: jhenderson@pomona.claremont.edu
Subject: The LA airspace is empty...
Organization: Pomona College
Date: 8 Sep 92 10:17:44 PDT

Last night, we went to Palm Springs, from Brackett. We departed POC around
8ish, and got flight following from Ontario Approach. The controller for the
east sector of the ARSA was extremely busy, talking nonstop, and telling all
VFR pilots trying to enter the ARSA from the east to remain clear of it, and to
expect radar services within 5 to 10 minutes. Pretty much normal stuff.

(Incidentally, flying eastbound with all those powerful landing lights on the
heavies inbound for LAX pointing at you is, well, interesting...)

On the way back, close to midnight, I called Ontario approach just out of the
Banning pass, and was issued a transponder code and given radar services
immediately. 10 minutes later, the radio had yet to produce any sound! Just in
case, I called for a radio check ("loud and clear").

It was just neat! Visibility was at least 30 miles, very smooth, and relaxing.

By the way, in reference to the recent thread on what to do on boring
flights...around here, identifying airports at night as you fly by worked just
dandy last night.

______________________________________________________________________________
Javier Henderson, N6VBG         | Beat the 55mph limit (legally):
jhenderson@pomona.claremont.edu | Learn to fly!
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: blh+@cs.cmu.edu (Bruce Horn)
Subject: Re: Las Vegas->Chicago Race
Followup-To: rec.aviation
Summary: Sorry, wrong Ginsberg	
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 12:24:09 GMT

Sorry, Matt.  I momentarily swapped your name with another Ginsberg's.

This month's Sport Aviation also had a picture of the Lancair ES, and news
that they plan to build a larger, turbine powered and pressurized Cirrus for
certification as a joint project between Euraviation and Israviation of
Luxembourg and Israel, respectively.  Quite a few other homebuilt
manufacturers are considering certification either under the old part 23
rules or the new Small Airplane Certification Compliance Program.

If we can handle the liability problem satisfactorily, there might be life
in GA yet.




-- 
Bruce Horn, Carnegie Mellon School of Computer Science
uucp: ...!seismo!cmucspt!cmu-cs!blh
ARPA: Bruce.Horn@cs.cmu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: best@anasazi.com (Mike Best)
Subject: Re: Canard Pros -n- Cons
Organization: Anasazi Inc, Phoenix AZ USA
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 16:48:45 GMT

In article <5556@ssc-bee.ssc-vax.boeing.com> prang@ssc-vax.boeing.com (Ron Wanttaja) writes:
>In article <1992Sep12.003350.18439@news.arc.nasa.gov>, doshay@ursa.arc.nasa.gov (David Doshay) writes:
>>
>> [Visibility in a canard stuff deleted]
>>
>Not necessarily.  The pilot gets a pretty good view in a Long-EZ... but all
>the passenger sees is sky and strakes.  Oh, OK, a little horizon thrown in.

That's true!  I spent about 40 hours in the back seat of a Long until my
Dad got the courage to let me solo and the difference was striking.  
The back seat visibility is even worse on landing due to the nose high
attitude ("snobby" landing?).  However, the pilot's view is, IMO, better
than that of any plane in the Long's class.  With no engine up front 
you feel like you are sitting on the nose.

>Locally, a guy owns a plane called a Two-Easy... essentially a Long-EZ wing
>on a (four-seat) Defiant fuselage.  He ended up cutting some windows into
>the lower front fuselage to let folks see the ground.

Isn't that one of the Ellison brother's (they make the experimental throttle
body injector)?  That was Bob Beard's plane until he crashed and was fatally
injured in it.  I saw it in Chandler AZ at Tom McNeilly's place and at the
time he wasn't sure what he was going to do with it.  Is it flying now?

By the way, several Long EZs now have the windows in the strakes.  These
windows are salvaged from canabalized airliners.
>
>On the subject of canard efficiency... some aero-engineering students once
>wrote a program to determine the optimum ratio of canard vs. main wing
>area.  The program told them that the most efficient configuration had the
>canard five times *larger* than the wing.
>
>Think about it.

That'd mess up the view.

>My personal opinion?  They make neat looking airplanes, but I dislike the
>compromises.  I have a good buddy (former hangar mate) with a trophy-winning
>Long-EZ.  A fast plane (on an O-235) but he uses an uncomfortable amount of
>runway taking off and landing.  

True, the Long EZ does land long and it takes off long using an O-235. 
I am putting a 160 HP O-320 into mine which should, if nothing else,
make me feel better about the takeoff.  The Long has a great range and
fuel economy which makes it a good cross country plane ... 
just don't take any luggage!

>Maneuvers well at altitude... but not as good as some.  Terry bounced me once
>and came back with pipper burns all over his canopy.  He flew around me at 
>150 mph while I circled inside him, keeping lined up the whole time.  If only 
>I'd armed the Le Prieurs.... :-)

I guess it all comes down to what kind of flying you want to do, for some
it is flying in circles :)  (emphasize the humor).

Mike Best
Newsgroups: rec.aviation