Have you ever...

"Matt Barrow" wrote in message ...
The zones are part of FEDERAL law.

I know that with a CHL, I can carry on the school grounds in Texas, just not
in any of the buildings...

"Gig 601XL Builder" wrote in message news:6fa7e.38$nh1.5@okepread03...
I beleive that the Federal Gun Free Zones were found unconstitutional.

As well as should the other 1000+ gun laws that came after "SHALL NOT BE
INFRINGED"...

Mike Rapoport wrote:
Consolidate the three definitions of
"night" to one (perhaps "when it is dark")

Consolidating the twilight with the one-hour would be OK, but I don't think
there's any (safe and logical) way to combine the lights (sunrise, sunset)
and one-hour definitions.

Hilton

Matt,

Yes, the person who disregards the rules of licensing will, naturally,
dutifully obey the other rules of flying.


Nah, only those that make _sense_, not the superflous (sp?) guvnmint
stuff - see?

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Jay,

It would be child's play to make a chart that says "when the temperature is
'x' and the altitude is 'y' your runway must be 'z' length" for each
aircraft type. In fact, I'm surprised that this isn't a required part of
the POH.


This post after you so strongly advocate AGAINST rote learning? You don't make
sense!

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Jay,

And you could eliminate all the "pressure altitude" versus "density
altitude" computational B.S., too. Never used it yet.


Every year, pilots get hurt by disregarding DA effects on their flying.
And you want to do away with at least trying to educate them on it?

And what's wrong with having airspace numbered A thru G instead of
ridiculous acronyms?

As you can easily see, your view on what makes sense and what doesn't
is extremely personal...

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

On Wed, 13 Apr 2005 19:54:29 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote:

It would be child's play to make a chart that says "when the temperature is
'x' and the altitude is 'y' your runway must be 'z' length" for each
aircraft type. In fact, I'm surprised that this isn't a required part of
the POH.

There in fact IS such a chart. It's actually one of those adjustable
cardboard devices that allows you to dial in various parameters such
as temperature, altitude, wind, direction of wind, runway surface
type, whether it's sloped up or down and by how much, what type of
airplane etc. etc.

Dial all that stuff in and the calculator reads out the necessary
runway length. Compare that to the runway you are about to use.

I found mine at Sporty's Pilot Shop. Saw it recommended in the "Hold
on Harvey (or whatever the name was) FAA video about density altitude.

There were three very sobering video's in the VCR. The above
mentioned one was poor quality because the Video cam wasn't found for
several years or so in the wreck. It was shot from a Cessna L-19, or
the civilian version of it and there were two guys in it flying up a
mountain range that kept getting higher and higher. They got
themselves trapped heading into a mountain canyon that rose faster
than they could climb and attempted to turn around. The pilots last
words were "Hang on Harvey (or whatever the passengers name was)" and
you see the ground go upside down. You can hear the stall warning
horn going off as the pilot attempts the turn (to the right). He
drops the nose, but then has to pull it back up right away because the
ground is so close. The stall warning horn goes off again and the
ground goes upside down.

In the second accident you are looking at a scene in a really rugged
canyon from the hikers viewpoint. They hear the sound of an airplane
and a Cessna goes by at about their eye level. You hear them
discussing it and then the airplane noises come back and you see the
airplane coming back at them, but below the rim of the canyon. It
smashes right into it below them.

The third accident was the best quality video because it was shot at
an airshow. It looked like it was a Beech T-34 or something very
similar. It was at a high altitude runway and it was apparently very
hot. The pilot goes up for a loop and as he's rounding out for the
pull out, he runs out of air.

All of these accidents were due to the pilots not understanding the
affect of density altitude on the performance of their airplane, and
not allowing for it.

In addition to the crash video's there is a comprehensive discussion
by a very heavy set FAA crash investigator who had an ego to match.
He was impressively overbearing and caustic.

Most density altitude misshaps occur in the high plains or mountain
area's of the west, but not all of them.

There was a density altitude related accident here at a local turf
runway airport in Vermont a number of years ago. A pilot (think he
was flying a Cherokee) was visiting and decided to take off with three
passengers during the heat of the day (it was high summer). Several
of the local pilots got in his face and aggressively spoke to him
about the situation pointing out how hot it was and that with the full
load what effect that would have on his marginal performance and tried
to persuade him to wait.

He relented and waited another couple of hours then decided he was
going to go and loaded his passengers, one of whom was his son. Again
the pilots intervened. One offered to drive the passengers to the
nearby Class D airport (KLEB) which has mile long paved runways. He
could fly there, pick up the passengers and take off with his full
load no problem. He refused the offer.

His takeoff was to the north, which is slightly uphill. The airplane
broke ground abouth 3/4 the length of the 2500 foot long runway and
wallowed nose high along the runway without gaining much height.

He wandered off to the right in this condition with his nose so high
he probably could not see the tall pinetree he flew into that bordered
the runway.

The airplane clipped off the top of the tree and crashed nose down on
the far side of it killing the two front seat occupants. His son and
the other rear passenger survived.

Corky Scott

"Hilton" wrote in message
ink.net...
Mike Rapoport wrote:
Consolidate the three definitions of
"night" to one (perhaps "when it is dark")

Consolidating the twilight with the one-hour would be OK, but I don't
think
there's any (safe and logical) way to combine the lights (sunrise, sunset)
and one-hour definitions.

Hilton



It would be relatively easy if you forget about calculated sunrise and
sunset times and say "dark".

Mike
MU-2

On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 12:03:05 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote in ZNO6e.8341$Bb3.4369@attbi_s22::

What would YOU eliminate from the Private Pilot training curriculum?

The current required material for airman certification (Private,
Instrument and Commercial) seems appropriate. Students might also
benefit from exposure to FAA Orders 7110.65* and perhaps some of the
FSDO Inspectors' related orders**. It also makes sense to make FAA
Advisory Circulars*** more readily available (free of charge) to
students and airmen by having those publications at the located FBO
training facilities.

Much of that material is covered in the Aeronautical Information
Manual, but I still believe there is significant benefit in depth of
understanding by reading the actual orders and circulars.


* http://www.faa.gov/atpubs/
** http://www.faa.gov/avr/afs/faa/8700/
*** http://www.faa.gov/regulations_polic...ory_circulars/

On Wed, 13 Apr 2005 19:59:30 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote in
CSe7e.15587$8Z6.12366@attbi_s21::

If we're
trying to be more inclusive, and get more people into the sky, I think we
need to make the process not just easier, but more logical.

I believe the aim of pilot certification is not to "get more people
into the sky," but to train safe pilots.