HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jcmorris@mwunix.mitre.org (Joe Morris)
Subject: AD compliance (AD 92-15-16, carburetor floats)
Organization: The MITRE Corporation
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 19:02:57 GMT

greg@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Gregory R. TRAVIS) writes:

>> [discussion of how to comply with an AD issued because unairworthy
>>  parts reached the field, but your own bird didn't have any maintenance
>>  done which could have involved those parts]

>I've received both this AD and the one on the Lycoming piston pins
>within the last week.  Both ADs specify my make of carb and engine
>as candidates for the AD.

>However, the engine was majored two years ago, at which time the carb
>was also overhauled (with metal floats).  Except for one bad
>cylinder (pushrod trashed the head) it has not been taken apart at
>all.  The bad cylinder was replaced in Feb. of 1991.

>To comply with the ADs, and make my bird airworthy again, my mechanic
>inspected the logs and made a one-time AD compliance note for the ADs
>that noted that the ADs were NA by date of parts replacement.

>Note that only an A&P-IA may show AD compliance - you cannot do it yourself.

Since I'm in exactly this situation -- the AD says that the troublesome
parts are dated 10/91 and my carburetor hasn't been reworked since well
before that date -- I called the FAA to ask what was required.

The maintenance inspector I spoke with said that no action is required if
the carburetor has not been repaired or otherwise touched since 10/91.
In particular, if you as the owner/operator of a specific airplane can
demonstrate that no such maintenance has occurred (the bird hasn't been
in a shop, or if so the logbooks and maintenance records show no work
on the carb), then the AD does not apply to your bird.

If the AD doesn't apply to your bird, there is no requirement that a
logbook entry be made.  It's recommended, however, that an annotation
be entered showing that the AD was received and found not to apply.

If the carburetor *has* been touched, however, then the AD does apply
and you must get an IA to sign off the compliance inspection even if
the magic stamp ("10/91") isn't on it.

If anyone has questions on this, just call your FSDO office and ask
to speak to the maintenance inspector.  By the end of this week I
expect that the inspectors will be quite familiar with this AD; the
one I spoke to didn't recognize it when I first called, but while I
was talking to him another owner called with the same question.

Joe Morris

PS: I normally don't include disclaimers because readers should know
that usenet postings usually represent personal and not organization
opinion.  However, given the ambiguity of the AD text and the potential
hassle factor if some other inspector takes the opposite view, I'll
remind readers that the above offered for the prevention of violation
notices only.  It is not represented as the formal policy of the FAA
(only FAA HQ can do that) and MITRE has no reason to take either side
of the argument.  Your {statute,nautical} mileage may vary.
From: Charles.K.Scott@dartmouth.edu (Charles K. Scott)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Shoulder Harnesses (Was: Re: Cessna sholdr harn review 
 (BAS))
Date: 22 Jul 92 16:33:13 GMT
 <1992Jul21.185938.20291@pony.Ingres.COM> <5019@transfer.stratus.com>  
 <greg.711776408@octopus>
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH

In article <greg.711776408@octopus>
greg@octopus.dpsi.com (Gregory R. Travis) writes:

> spenny@sw.stratus.com (Steve Pennypacker) writes:
> 
> >I agree with this, but I wish it was this simple.  I've never been able to 
> >get the shoulder harnesses in C-150s and 172s to stay attached to the lap
> >belt.

There is a wholly different problem with four point harnesses hitched
to the airframe that hasn't been brought up yet.  In a sudden stop of
sufficient force to create severe bodily injury, the seat can collaps. 
In some aircraft, the seat is designed to collaps at a survivable rate.
 But if the harness isn't attached to the seat then the occupant
doesn't benifit from the seats controlled collaps.  In fact the
occupant may be injured by the harness.  The difference is between a
sudden stop with no deceleration, and a stop involving a high rate of
deceleration but significantly less than being instantly stopped.  I'm
only beginning to take a look at this myself, perhaps others can
comment on this issue.

Corky Scott
From: kzk00@ccc.amdahl.com (  200  Klaus Kraemer)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: "remain clear of the ARSA..."
Date: 24 Jul 92 17:58:09 GMT
Reply-To: kzk00@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com (  200  Klaus Kraemer)
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

>>
>>   "Monterey Approach Cessna 8436Z off of Carmel Valley 1000 for 4500"
>>
>>   "36Z Monterey Approach remain clear of the ARSA"
>>
>> What's the "right" thing to do??
>>
>As with so many other ATC-pilot interaction problems, a phone call or visit to
>the tower might do wonders.
> 
I'd say, don't call, go there. Monterey Approach, Bay TRACON (just at
the north end of Oakland arpt), they always welcome pilots. Never mind
that sign that says to limit your visit to 15 minutes. I spent one and a half
hours at the Bay Approach radar screen before I realized that time wasn't
standing still.

And I'd like to second other posters' opinions about looking at the
picture from the other side. If you have a handheld at home, listen to
the traffic and visualize what is going on. Just for the fun of it,
write down the call signs and a brief note of position/intention
and instructions/clearances, and then watch as the picture changes every
minute.

I frequently listen to Bay Approach on 120.1 when the evening arrival rush
into San Jose occurs. Within minutes, casual chat on the frequency can
explode into auctioneer-style activity. (SJC has three parallel runways,
the center one for jets, and it's the west coast hub of American Airlines;
at rush hour, the jets are lined up and flanked left and right by the
commuter planes.)

In such a situation, I heard an experienced controller as he tried to
accommodate a Cessna for an instrument approach (in clear skies). He
vectored the Cessna to fit into the stream of arrivals when he was
suddenly so overwhelmed that his instruction was:

"Cessna 1234X, turn right heading 090 for vectors out of this mess."

Klaus Kraemer, PP-ASEL IA, Mooney 201MX

Disclaimer: My employer DOES pay me to have opinions. (Guess whose.)
From: mpeters@wtcp.DaytonOH.NCR.COM (Michael Peters)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Gyrocopter Convention
Date: 21 Jul 92 17:40:34 GMT
Reply-To: mpeters@wtcp.DaytonOH.NCR.COM (Michael Peters)
Distribution: usa
Organization: WIN Dataplus Services WTC-1 - Dayton, OH

Here's the scoop on the annual gyro convention near Dayton, Ohio.

The convention starts on July 23rd and it ends on the 28th.  It's
at Brookville Airpark, west of Dayton, just north of I-70.  The gyro
organization is thinking about purchasing the airport and even building
a gyro museum.  I'm not sure of the cost, but it is minimal, say $10 to
$15 a day for a flight line pass.  Call Brookville Airpark at 513-836-0700
for more information.
-- 
Mike Peters

Mike.Peters@wtcp.DaytonOH.NCR.COM
...!uunet!ncrcom!wtcp!mpeters
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: mtanner@gmuvax2.gmu.edu (Michael C. Tanner)
Subject: CAVU -- really!
Organization: George Mason University, Fairfax Va.
Date: 22 Jul 92 10:22:00

I was looking up something in my FAA Contractions guide and decided to look up
CAVU, since nobody who posted translations actually cited a source.  Here it
is:

CAVU = clear or scattered clouds and visibility greater than ten miles

Really!  That's what it said.  Oh, and:

CAVOK = cloud and visibility OK

There does that help? :-)

Source:  FAA publication 7340.1K Contractions, change 5, 2/1/90.

OK, so it's a couple years old.  Somebody order a new one and look it up.  The
ordering information it gives is:

Superintendent of Documents
U.S. Government Prining Office
Washington, DC 20402

or call (202) 783-3238



-- mike


P.S.  I was originally looking up LTGCB.  It wasn't there.  I'm guessing it
meant "lightning in CB", unless it was a typo.
From: masys@nlm.nih.gov (Dr. Daniel R. Masys)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: prevalence of engine failures
Date: 22 Jul 92 15:28:02 GMT
Organization: National Library of Medicine

In article <1992Jul22.005359.190042@cs.cmu.edu> dst+@cs.cmu.edu (Dave Touretzky) writes:
>
>  GA pilots can expect to average 1 engine failure per 1,000 hours of flying.
>
Oh thanks, Dave.  My first engine failure was at a tad over 200 hours and
now I'm coming up on 1200.  Just hope the stupid 182 doesn't read this
newsgroup.

BTW, I actually think Dave may be correct. :-(

Dan Masys
masys@lhc.nlm.nih.gov
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: rkaplan@netcom.com (Richard Kaplan)
Subject: Temperature Related Altimeter Errors
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 92 05:33:00 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 

The current issue of IFR has an interesting article on 
temperature related altimeter errors, including some frightening
examples of potential impact into terrain when flying 
an instrument approach on a very cold day.

This makes me wonder.... why do we not adjust our altimeter
setting on the ground to correct for this?  What if the official
altimeter setting were established not by a barometric
reading but by the weather man fiddling with his altimeter
until it read exactly field elevation?





-- 
Richard Kaplan M.D.           Medical Software Exchange BBS
806 2nd St. SW # 104          (507) 281-1989 14,400 HST
Rochester, MN  55902          (507) 281-1689 Voice
PP-ASEL-IA     N4VRB          rkaplan@mayo.edu|netcom.netcom.com  
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: rlarsen@bnr.ca (Richard Larsen P220)
Subject: Glider test flight
Keywords: glider
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, BNR-RTP
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 17:59:12 GMT

When I saw the Solaire add in the July issue of soaring I had to take the drive to S.C. to check out such affordible aircraft.

I took a check ride in the krosno KR03A tandem trainer. This is intended as a replacement for the Schwizer 2-33 trainer. It offers more performance than the 2-33 (vne = 107 mph, ld = 27, manuvering speed = 80 mph, and it will spin). It was a pleasant craft to fly with great visibility for both front and back seats.

Next I flew the SZD 51-1. This was the first solo fiberglass sailplane I have flown. It was intimidating but my takeoff was not too bad. Just a little PIO. I did a shallow stall, steep banked turns, and a dive at 90 kts. A thunderstorm prevented me from finding any lift so my flight was short. The landing was fair. For a Schwizer jockey it was intimidating but I suppose it was easy to handle as fiberglass slippers go. The ld is 35 and vne is 118 kts. It is rated for acrobatics and is AFFORDIBLE. Price is $





26,000.

The SZD 48-1 was not available to fly. It has an ld of 40, vne of 153 kts, adjustable back and head rests, can carry 330 lbs of water balast, and like all SZD aircraft has a relief tube. This one cost $27,000.

Does anyone know about using cloth wing and fusilage covers. Do they block UV?
Is there any problem with water getting under the covers and causing fungus problems? 
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: brent@telebit.com (Brent Chapman)
Subject: Re: prevalence of engine failures
Organization: Telebit Corporation; Sunnyvale, CA, USA
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 18:04:29 GMT

kerry@Ingres.COM (Kerry Kurasaki) writes:

>First of all, please do not confuse the recent engine failure banter which
>is about light piston engine airplanes with the transport category aircraft
>you will be flying.  Airliners, in general, have higher certification
>standards than general aviation airplanes.  Over water airliners have
>higher standards still.

>How's this:  Sorry, I can't remember the reference.  Either this month's
>Flying of an edition of Av Leak.

>Engines were recently pulled from a Lockheed L-1011 with over 20,000
>hours of flight time on them!  That's over 2 years of continuous operation!
>They have been on the plane for over 5 years (more like 10) with normal
>maintenance and inspections.

Flying, August 1992, p. 52 (reproduced without permission):

"The Big Engine That Could"

Do you think you have a lot of hours?  A Rolls-Royce RB211-524B4
installed in the tail of a Delta L-1011 probably has more.  The engine
was installed on April 15, 1987, and stayed there until May 7 this year,
when it was removed for the first time.  In those five years the engine
logged 24,267 hours and 4,110 cycles, setting the world record for
reliability.  The previous mark was 20,534 hours, a mark that this
RB.211 passed on July 21 last year.  Also in early May, the original
shipset of four RB.211-524Gs on a Qantas 747-400 passed the 10,000-hour
mark without removal; two more RR-powered -400s (with British Airways)
have since passed the same mark.  Not to be outdone, Pratt & Whitney
announced a similar milestone for a Northwest Airlines 747-400, whose
for PW4000s just passed 10,000 hours on the wing.
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: masys@nlm.nih.gov (Dr. Daniel R. Masys)
Subject: Re: Active noise-canceling headsets
Organization: National Library of Medicine
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 92 15:13:05 GMT

In article <1992Jul22.220740.16987@col.hp.com> davea@col.hp.com (Dave Allen) writes:
>Just got a monthly newletter with an article about a gear-up landing.
>The pilot got a runway change at the last minute and didn't get the gear
>down. He was using an active noise-canceling headset. After the "landing"
>he took off the headset, and you already know the first thing he heard -
>the gear warning horn.
>
>Naturally he's suing the headset manufacturer. The author's point was that
>there's just too much that we need to hear in an aircraft, and too much
>that we don't hear with a noise-canceling headset.

According to the spec sheets on the Bose and Telex ANR headsets, the
active noise reduction kicks in only for sounds whose frequency is
below 300Hz.  Above that frequency both sets are noise-attenuators only,
and are actually not quite as good at attentuation as standard DCs.
This is why the sets are particularly good for 6 cylinder engines with
a low, throbbing frequency and do not much impress folks who fly behind
4 cylinder Lycs, for example.  

So unless this fellow intends to demonstrate that his gear horn produces
a 300Hz or lower tone (which wouldn't be the case for any gear horn I've
ever heard) OR that he wouldn't have heard it with a standard headset,
he'll be skating on pretty thin technical ice.  Sounds like a wetware
failure to me.  I continue to be impressed that the ANR's enable me
to hear much more subtle cockpit noises, both high and low frequency,
than before, due to the cancellation of the droning low pitch rumble
of the Continental up front.

But then, as we have seen ample evidence of recently, anybody can sue
anybody for anything, (bucko! :-) ).

Dan Masys
masys@lhc.nlm.nih.gov


Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: brent@telebit.com (Brent Chapman)
Subject: Re: GYRO FAILURE IN TIGER
Organization: Telebit Corporation; Sunnyvale, CA, USA
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 04:35:22 GMT

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

>Symptoms were a drunken roll (the gyro's, not mine) and eventual
>collapse at about 60 degrees of roll and 15 degrees nose-up indicated
>pitch.  The DG and turn coordinatnor agreed with each other and
>the airspeed indicator and altimeter showed no change of pitch.

>All the time I had nominal suction.  After landing and having
>dinner we took off again (VFR) and the gyro functioned normally
>for the remainder of the trip.  It failed during a following flight
>though and again "resurrected" itself.

Same thing happened to me last year during my instrument training.  I
took off, under the hood on a beautiful VFR day, from Concord (where I
had just landed minutes before after an approach, and hadn't shut down),
and the AI failed on the climbout.  I noted it, checked the suction (high
end of the green), cross-checked the other instruments (all green), and
then said to my instructor "how'd you do that?"  He said "do what?"; he'd
been watching outside for traffic, and hadn't noticed it was dead yet...


-Brent
--
Brent Chapman                                   Great Circle Associates
Brent@GreatCircle.COM                           1057 West Dana Street
+1 415 962 0841                                 Mountain View, CA  94041
From: hale@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Bill Hale)
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 18:46:59 GMT
Subject: HT Reprise
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA
Newsgroups: rec.aviation


OK, I've been asked to give a rookie pilot who has the $$ and owns his airplane
some advice on HTs, namely renewing the KX-99 v ICOM-21 debate.

I've reviewed the tons of old posts; they are helpful, but I'm still in
a quandry.

The units look very much alike, and cost about the same.  I know the
KX-99 has an excellent VOR converter.

The only differentiators I can spot seem to be that the ICOM has knob input
for frequencies, which I think might  be a +, while the King gadgets to cut
into existing antennas automagically tilt toward them.  So does the possibility
of $400 refurb units.

Am I missing something of significance here?  Will sumamrize.

+Regards, Bill Hale;  hale@hpfclm.FC.HP.COM   [hplabs|hpfcla]!hpfclm!hale
+Thru ether-K0QA; In ether-BE33 N33HP CFIAIME A&P; Twisted pair 1-303-229-3037
+Snail: c/o HP UTD MS73 3404 E Harmony, Ft Collins, CO 80525 Incoming:40 44.2N
+105 33.1W; Pictures 303-299-6441       M1 bigot
From: ark@alice.att.com (Andrew Koenig)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: Ramp checks--unreasonable search
Date: 21 Jul 92 15:29:42 GMT
Article-I.D.: alice.23258
Reply-To: ark@alice.UUCP ()
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Liberty Corner NJ

In article <1992Jul20.184309.5373@pony.Ingres.COM> kerry@Ingres.COM (Kerry Kurasaki) writes:

> :)  Gee, I thought that aircraft logs were the most flammable pieces
> :)  in the airplane.  (Would seem pretty difficult for the FAA to blame
> :)  the PIC for an unairworthy aircraft if their evidence is ashes.)

No, it's very easy -- if the logbooks are destroyed, the airplane is
unairworthy.  Period.
-- 
				--Andrew Koenig
				  ark@europa.att.com
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 20:14:46 EDT
From: <VPN1@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: GYRO FAILURE IN TIGER

jkf@franz.com (Sean Foderaro) is on his way to OSH from OAK.
Email from his wife tells me he had attitude gyro failure
for about an hour, after which it apparently began function-
ing again.  I have no further details.  I was asked to post
this to ask if anyone has had a similar experience or can
offer an explanation.  I'm leaving at dawn Wed. a.m. for OSH.
Can anyone help?     vince norris, penn state u.
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: prevalence of engine failures
From: Bliss B. Siman <ROPBB@CUNYVM.BITNET>
Date: Wednesday, 22 Jul 1992 17:42:22 EDT
Organization: City University of New York/ University Computer Center

I may be in the wrong place, but I hope you guys will put up with me. I am a
very fearful flyer faced with a trip to Barcelona on Friday and just discovered
the plane is a 767 which I am told has only two engines.  So I get on to find o
ut what people are saying about a 2 engine plane across the Atlantic and read
what seems very light-hearted banter about engine failure.  Can anyone respond
to my concerns--flying TWA, by the way--which will help insure that I make the
flight. My daughter and husband will kill me if I back out, but right now I am
REAL upset.  Any help would be appreciated.
From: pauls@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com (Paul Stafford)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Re: "remain clear of the ARSA..."
Date: 22 Jul 92 17:42:00 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Santa Rosa, CA


 36Z: Monterrey Approach, remain clear this freq...

 Seriously, dig up the appropriate FAR and say something like:

 36Z : Monterrey App, per FAR 91.nnn 36Z will resume own navigation. See ya.

 are there normal routes thru the Monterey ARSA that they normally use,
 like Bay uses to route traffic thru the TCA, like West Bayshore? you could
 then say in addition that you will be following one of those, to help out.

 Paul "I miss my RV4" Stafford
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
From: jcmorris@mwunix.mitre.org (Joe Morris)
Subject: Re: United flight's cargo door?
Organization: The MITRE Corporation
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 14:35:35 GMT

joero@microsoft.com (Joe Robison) writes:

>In article <jcmorris.711658927@mwunix> jcmorris@mwunix.mitre.org wrote:

>> The door was recovered from the floor of the Pacific at a depth of
>> approximately 14,200 feet.  (That's roughly 440 atmospheres of pressure!)

>Talk about your needles and haystacks...how in the world did they find it?

The falling debris was tracked by radar to a (relatively) well-defined
area of the ocean surface.  It was finally located using a deep-water
submarine and sonar.

The search also located (but did not recover) one of the cargo pods.

Joe Morris / MITRE
From: schinner@hp-vcd.vcd.hp.com (Jim Schinnerer)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Hatz CB-1 info wanted
Date: 21 Jul 92 18:04:00 GMT
Article-I.D.: hp-vcd.2540034
Organization: Hewlett Packard, Vancouver, WA, USA

I have come to the conclusion that it will soon be time for me to
build a plane.  Specifically, I want to build a small bi-plane with
two seats and a smallish engine.  Show quality aerobatics is not
in my foreseen future, but low cost operation definitely is.

My research thus far has pointed me in the direction of the Hatz CB-1.
Plans built, steel tube, wood, fabric covered, two seats, O-200.

Does anyone have experience with this aircraft, or know of anyone who
does?  Also, does anyone know what happened to the Marquart Charger?
This plane was written up in Ken Armstrong's book, but seems to have
fallen off the planet.

Thanks in advance...

---------------------------------------------------------
Jim Schinnerer  -  PP-ASEL-IA       |  Hewlett Packard
Mooney - 350X  -  "Buster"          |  Vancouver, WA
email - schinner@vcd.hp.com         |  (206) 944-3324
---------------------------------------------------------
From: dela@ee.rochester.edu (Del Armstrong)
Newsgroups: rec.aviation
Subject: Audio annunciators (Was: Active noise-canceling headsets)
Date: 24 Jul 92 13:03:09 GMT
Reply-To: dela@ee.rochester.edu (Del Armstrong)
Organization: University of Rochester - Dept of Electrical Engineering


In article <70401@apple.Apple.COM>, rcm@Apple.COM (Robert Charles Monsen) writes:
|>The idea was to build an annunciator panel that fed audio annunciations
|>into your intercom, along with having a bank of flashing lights and toggles
|>to turn em off. The audio annunciations would be digitized voice, preferably
|>a low, somewhat sexy female voice :). You could use it for vacuum failure,
|>alternator failure, stall warning, gear warning, altitude warning (with a
|>bit more complexity), TCA warning (with a LOT more complexity), etc.
|>
|>Female aviators might prefer the "Patrick Stuart" version. :) For a small
|>fee, you could get it in your spouse's voice. "Bob! The VACUUM!".

I've always preferred the idea of using my 3 year old daughter's voice.

 "Daddy, why are we landing with the gear up?"


	Del Armstrong	

	Systems & Networking Staff - Dept of EE and ME
	University of Rochester, Rochester, NY
	Internet: 	dela@ee.rochester.edu
	UUCP:		...!rochester!ur-valhalla!dela

"If God had meant for us to use computers, (s)he would 	have given us
only two fingers to count with."
Newsgroups: rec.aviation