A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

RAE42SNB42



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old July 7th 07, 12:41 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Ron Natalie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,175
Default RAE42SNB42

Bob Gardner wrote:
One more time...it is ICAO that dictates these things, not the FAA. The
FAA just conforms to ICAO standards.

The ICAO is just the latest insanity.

The old non-ICAO compliant SA's and FT's were just as
inane, so you can't blame the Frenchies for that.
  #12  
Old July 7th 07, 02:35 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Dallas
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 541
Default RAE42SNB42

On Fri, 6 Jul 2007 18:37:06 -0700, Bob Gardner wrote:

One more time...it is ICAO that dictates these things, not the FAA. The FAA
just conforms to ICAO standards.


Back in the days before solid state memory, when copper wires and teletype
machines ruled, transmission time and printing time were equal. Cutting
out three fourths of the characters, numbers and spaces reduced
transmission and printing time by three fourths. In those days, coding was
a brilliant idea.

Today, a TAF can be sent in a fraction of a second to a CRT or laser
printer that uses the same amount of time to print a page with one
character as it does to print a page of War and Peace.

The original reason for coding has long since disappeared.

....Now, I'll answer my own question in light of your response that the ICAO
dictates these things.

Some where in China is a 20 year veteran pilot that would have to learn
that the new word for BR is mist.

--
Dallas
  #13  
Old July 7th 07, 03:02 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Dallas
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 541
Default RAE42SNB42

On Fri, 6 Jul 2007 18:33:44 -0500, Dan Luke wrote:

You might as well ask why Donald Duck doesn't wear pants.


Oh, that's easy... so he can swim whenever he wants to.

:-)

Maybe a better question would be why have we never seen Donald Duck swim?
Or fly?

--
Dallas
  #14  
Old July 7th 07, 06:28 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Jim Logajan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,958
Default RAE42SNB42

"Peter R." wrote:
On 7/6/2007 7:53:45 PM, Jim Logajan wrote:

Snow forecast in July in the U.S.?

Or did I decode that wrong?


Yes, you did decode that wrong. That is not from a forecast.


D'oh!
  #15  
Old July 7th 07, 07:37 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Jon
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 194
Default RAE42SNB42

On Jul 7, 9:35 am, Dallas wrote:
On Fri, 6 Jul 2007 18:37:06 -0700, Bob Gardner wrote:
One more time...it is ICAO that dictates these things, not the FAA. The FAA
just conforms to ICAO standards.


Back in the days before solid state memory, when copper wires and teletype
machines ruled, transmission time and printing time were equal. Cutting
out three fourths of the characters, numbers and spaces reduced
transmission and printing time by three fourths. In those days, coding was
a brilliant idea.

Today, a TAF can be sent in a fraction of a second to a CRT or laser
printer that uses the same amount of time to print a page with one
character as it does to print a page of War and Peace.

The original reason for coding has long since disappeared.


But there are still some legacy systems out there that are being
supported.

The architecture evolved into a rather impressive collection of
dissimilar systems, custom protocols. A true living, breathing example
of the old phrase "the great thing about standards is that there's so
many to choose from" producing a rather hairy beast indeed.

Modernization will help to (among other things) address this, but it
can't happen instantaneously without horribly breaking operational
systems and procedures. Action did indeed need to occur a while ago
but there's no point harping on that at this point, given the time
machine isn't even in Beta yet

SWIM looks to be one part of the NAS Architecture that will facilitate
it getting the

http://nas-architecture.faa.gov/nas/Reference/documents/TR04008.doc

...Now, I'll answer my own question in light of your response that the ICAO
dictates these things.

Some where in China is a 20 year veteran pilot that would have to learn
that the new word for BR is mist.

--
Dallas


Just my personal take on it, FWIW (maybe more than you paid for it :P)

Regards,
Jon

  #16  
Old July 7th 07, 11:52 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
B A R R Y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 517
Default RAE42SNB42

On Sat, 07 Jul 2007 13:35:56 GMT, Dallas
wrote:

Some where in China is a 20 year veteran pilot that would have to learn
that the new word for BR is mist.



Baby rain, of course! G
  #17  
Old July 7th 07, 11:59 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Dallas
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 541
Default RAE42SNB42

On Sat, 07 Jul 2007 18:52:23 -0400, B A R R Y wrote:

that the new word for BR is mist.


Baby rain, of course! G


I always wondered what that stood for...

G
--
Dallas
  #18  
Old July 8th 07, 12:04 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
B A R R Y
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 517
Default RAE42SNB42

On Sat, 07 Jul 2007 22:59:27 GMT, Dallas
wrote:

On Sat, 07 Jul 2007 18:52:23 -0400, B A R R Y wrote:

that the new word for BR is mist.


Baby rain, of course! G


I always wondered what that stood for...

G



Thank Martha King.
  #19  
Old July 8th 07, 12:11 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Dallas
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 541
Default RAE42SNB42


Winds and Temperatures Aloft Forecast (FD)

To decode a forecast of winds between 100 and 199 knots, subtract 50 from
two-digit direction code and multiply by 10. Then, add 100 to the
two-digit wind speed code.


[Bangs head on table repeatedly]

:-)

Yeah, I know.. it's not that hard... but it drives me crazy.

--
Dallas
  #20  
Old July 8th 07, 12:25 AM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,892
Default RAE42SNB42

Dallas wrote:

Winds and Temperatures Aloft Forecast (FD)


To decode a forecast of winds between 100 and 199 knots, subtract 50 from
two-digit direction code and multiply by 10. Then, add 100 to the
two-digit wind speed code.



[Bangs head on table repeatedly]


:-)


Yeah, I know.. it's not that hard... but it drives me crazy.


If the forecast wind is over 100 knots and it isn't the jet stream,
you have bigger issues to contend with.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:59 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.