Gary,
Thanks, The full URLs work great.
R. Williams
---------- Original Message -----------
From: "Gary Orpe" <garyo@bak.rr.com>
To: <Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 19:49:29 -0700
Subject: RE: Light-Sport Aircraft Yahoo group Re: Transponders in NORDO aircraft
>
>
>
>
> http://groups.
> http://groups.
> Try these instead.
>
> Gary O.
> N181RL
> 661 746-4780
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups. com [mailto:Sport_ Aircraft@ yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of Richard Williams
> Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2009 7:07 PM
> To: Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups. com
> Subject: Re: Light-Sport Aircraft Yahoo group Re: Transponders in NORDO aircraft
>
>
>
> Dan,
>
> clicking the links for the pilot and first officer .pdf files is trying to find those files on my computer.
>
> Can you post the actual URLs
>
> Thanks,
>
> R. Williams
>
>
>
> ---------- Original Message -----------
> From: Dan <live2av8@usjet.net>
> To: Sport_Aircraft@yahoogroups. com
> Sent: Thu, 01 Oct 2009 20:57:26 -0500 (CDT)
> Subject: Light-Sport Aircraft Yahoo group Re: Transponders in NORDO aircraft
>
> >
> >
> >
> > Posted by: "Peter Walker" peterwalker58@yahoo.com
> >
> >
> > Hello
> > just a little bit too much information. The only thing that you left out is "When is the working party going to be formed to make law mandating a transponder on radio controlled model aircraft and anything bigger".
> > The question should have been phased as a technical specification of a minimum system for an aircraft that requires a transponder and the limits that would apply to an aircraft that is deemed NOT to so equipped
> > I hope you didnt ask the cops a similar sort of question like" Where I can go drink this 6 pack" when you were 16....
> > Peter
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Peter you may have the wrong idea as to why I even asked the FAA. I [WINDOWS-1252?]don't proclaim to be a writer. It would be interesting to see the version you sent to the FAA, perhaps your wording is much better. Was just trying to hush the seemingly 3000 emails regarding the subject.
> > During the beginning of Sport Pilot many were saying they [WINDOWS-1252?]didn't have to put the altitude encoding and transponder equipment on their machines because they [WINDOWS-1252? ]didn't have an alternator, just the lighting coil on their Rotax 2 and 4 stroke engines. I said no, the way I understood the rule was if your using the engine to keep the electrical system charged/sustained then you have an [WINDOWS-1252? ]"engine [WINDOWS-1252? ]driven" electrical system.
> > Hence the reason for trying to resolve the question via the FAA.
> >
> >
> > In addition, to find out if the SP/LSA rules would help prevent yet another near miss like we had here at MSP. The answer is [WINDOWS-1252?]'not [WINDOWS-1252? ]likely' because the two pilots involved in the near miss, along with many others around the nation still [WINDOWS-1252? ]haven't put the transponder and altitude encoding equipment on their machines.
> >
> >
> > Near as I can tell they thought the class B tier altitudes were AGL. Field elevation at their airport is about 900ft., add another 3,500 and your at 4,400 msl, a jet liner cleared to 4,000 msl is then about 400-500 ft. below you. Just like the trike [WINDOWS-1252?]pilot's description.
> > Waaay back in 83 as a meager UL student pilot I knew the difference between AGL and MSL in a TCA. But somehow these two, one a UFI, the other a UFIE at that time [WINDOWS-1252?]didn't know the difference. If one knew he certainly [WINDOWS-1252? ]didn't contact the other by radio.
> >
> >
> > In the Files section [WINDOWS-1252?]I've posted the trike pilots version of the Near miss:
> > Near miss_Trike pilot.pdf
> > You'll also find the version by the first officer of the Airbus A320
> > Near miss_First Officer Airbus 320.pdf
> >
> >
> > And of course my letter to the FAA regarding equipment requirements is posted there as well.
> >
> >
> > I [WINDOWS-1252?]can't help but put part of the blame on GPS as well, if they [WINDOWS-1252? ]didn't have GPS receivers I [WINDOWS-1252? ]don't think they [WINDOWS-1252? ]would've made the flight. Low ceiling, visibility not the greatest, neither pilot adept at x-country flight by just using an aero chart and compass, made even more difficult since they [WINDOWS-1252? ]couldn't see the ground that well [WINDOWS-1252? ]"with no ground visible to speak of. Just an occational glimps of [WINDOWS-1252? ]green.".
> >
> >
> > Although the airline pilots and ALPA wanted this to be made well known, it never made the 10 [WINDOWS-1252?]o'clock news because they [WINDOWS-1252? ]didn't want to scare passengers into thinking [WINDOWS-1252? ]it's not safe to fly, having passengers think the near misses [WINDOWS-1252? ]couldn't be avoided. At least [WINDOWS-1252? ]that's the way Brit Etzold from ALPA relayed it to me.
> >
> >
> > This topic apparently [WINDOWS-1252?]wasn't discussed in detail enough back in March 2006 with the thread: Class B/C/D and Mode C Veil issues
> > Here's the message I posted regarding it back then:
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/ group/Sport_ Aircraft/ message/6299
> >
> >
> > On 9/25/2009 Jim Bair wrote:
> >
> > Mike's description of the rules is perfect. I would only add that the way for more restrictive rules to occur is for some wayward UL pilot (who doesn't need a transponder) to screw up and actually violate the Class B (unaware of exactly where they are or knowing but unaware that they shouldn't be there) and have a near miss with an airliner. That is exactly how we keep getting saddled with more and more rules that we would prefer we didn't have.
> >
> >
> > Jim must mean have yet ANOTHER near miss, again and again, we already had the near miss, just before Sport Pilot became rule.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Dan Mattsen
> >
> >
> >
> ------- End of Original Message -------
>
>
>
------- End of Original Message -------
__._,_.___
No comments:
Post a Comment