Compass trouble

[Road Dog]

I took my Piper Warrior in for its annual and the mechanic
said that the compass card was missing and that he'd have
to swing the plane to generate a new one.

After swinging it, he claimed that he couldn't get the
E-W deviation within the minimum. So he suggested we
try "mu" shield (or something) to block the source of
magnetism which he claims is coming from one of the
instruments. (He says the compass works fine outside
the plane.)

Note: The instruments are all original, stock. Nothing
has been changed (except a radio was added which he says
is not the source.)

The mu shield fails too. He says the next thing to try is
to move the compass up to between the visors.

He says he has spent 3 hours on this so far. I'm beginning to
wonder, shouldn't a mechanic be able calibrate a compass
in a stock Piper after 3 hours ? Is he incompetent ?
Padding the bill ? Or does this really take this long ?

He has inspected and fixed everything else. Do you think
its reasonable at this time to ask him to sign off
everything else, and take the plane somewhere else where,
presumably, they know how to calibrate a compass ?

[Stealth Pilot[_2_]]

On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 19:45:50 -0700, Road Dog >
wrote:

>I took my Piper Warrior in for its annual and the mechanic
>said that the compass card was missing and that he'd have
>to swing the plane to generate a new one.
>
>After swinging it, he claimed that he couldn't get the
>E-W deviation within the minimum. So he suggested we
>try "mu" shield (or something) to block the source of
>magnetism which he claims is coming from one of the
>instruments. (He says the compass works fine outside
>the plane.)
>
>Note: The instruments are all original, stock. Nothing
>has been changed (except a radio was added which he says
>is not the source.)
>
>The mu shield fails too. He says the next thing to try is
>to move the compass up to between the visors.
>
>He says he has spent 3 hours on this so far. I'm beginning to
>wonder, shouldn't a mechanic be able calibrate a compass
>in a stock Piper after 3 hours ? Is he incompetent ?
>Padding the bill ? Or does this really take this long ?
>
>He has inspected and fixed everything else. Do you think
>its reasonable at this time to ask him to sign off
>everything else, and take the plane somewhere else where,
>presumably, they know how to calibrate a compass ?

the problem doesnt seem to be the compass but some stray magnetism in
the aircraft.
swinging a compass takes about 15 minutes.

[Road Dog]

Stealth Pilot wrote:
>
> the problem doesnt seem to be the compass but some stray magnetism in
> the aircraft.

So he claims but what would this be that wasn't there
when the plane left the factory ? Without any new
equipment, how could it get so bad that it throws the
compass off more than 10 degrees through mu shield ?

In any case, thanks for the reply.

[[email protected]]

It's possible that something got magnetized during a lightening
strike. Happens
in Mooneys where that 4130 chromealloy tube runs down the center of
the
windshield.

You should check it on cardinal headings with the compensator magnets
completely removed. Should not be off more than about 15 degrees.

I've heard that stronger compensation magnets are available. I think
it would
be better to find the source of interference, as tweeking it that far
will cause
errors on some headings.

BTW, a great way to compensate compasses: On a large part of a ramp,
taxiing
with everything running... Use the track info on the GPS--which is
calibrated in
magnetic heading--to line up on a cardinal heading. Taxi on the
cardinal heading
and smoothly come to a stop without changing the heading -- which can
be
verified by the DG. Much more accurate than lining up on a compass
rose.
Best done with someone along who can make sure you don't run into
anything!!
Best done on some ramp that isn't loaded with steel.

Bill Hale BPPP instructor a&p


On Apr 12, 8:22*am, Stealth Pilot >
wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 19:45:50 -0700, Road Dog >
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >I took my Piper Warrior in for its annual and the mechanic
> >said that the compass card was missing and that he'd have
> >to swing the plane to generate a new one.
>
> >After swinging it, he claimed that he couldn't get the
> >E-W deviation within the minimum. So he suggested we
> >try "mu" shield (or something) to block the source of
> >magnetism which he claims is coming from one of the
> >instruments. (He says the compass works fine outside
> >the plane.)
>
> >Note: The instruments are all original, stock. Nothing
> >has been changed (except a radio was added which he says
> >is not the source.)
>
> >The mu shield fails too. He says the next thing to try is
> >to move the compass up to between the visors.
>
> >He says he has spent 3 hours on this so far. I'm beginning to
> >wonder, shouldn't a mechanic be able calibrate a compass
> >in a stock Piper after 3 hours ? Is he incompetent ?
> >Padding the bill ? Or does this really take this long ?
>
> >He has inspected and fixed everything else. Do you think
> >its reasonable at this time to ask him to sign off
> >everything else, and take the plane somewhere else where,
> >presumably, they know how to calibrate a compass ?
>
> the problem doesnt seem to be the compass but some stray magnetism in
> the aircraft.
> swinging a compass takes about 15 minutes.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[Drew Dalgleish]

On Sat, 12 Apr 2008 22:22:43 +0800, Stealth Pilot
> wrote:

>On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 19:45:50 -0700, Road Dog >
>wrote:
>
>>I took my Piper Warrior in for its annual and the mechanic
>>said that the compass card was missing and that he'd have
>>to swing the plane to generate a new one.
>>
>>After swinging it, he claimed that he couldn't get the
>>E-W deviation within the minimum. So he suggested we
>>try "mu" shield (or something) to block the source of
>>magnetism which he claims is coming from one of the
>>instruments. (He says the compass works fine outside
>>the plane.)
>>
>>Note: The instruments are all original, stock. Nothing
>>has been changed (except a radio was added which he says
>>is not the source.)
>>
>>The mu shield fails too. He says the next thing to try is
>>to move the compass up to between the visors.
>>
>>He says he has spent 3 hours on this so far. I'm beginning to
>>wonder, shouldn't a mechanic be able calibrate a compass
>>in a stock Piper after 3 hours ? Is he incompetent ?
>>Padding the bill ? Or does this really take this long ?
>>
>>He has inspected and fixed everything else. Do you think
>>its reasonable at this time to ask him to sign off
>>everything else, and take the plane somewhere else where,
>>presumably, they know how to calibrate a compass ?
>
>the problem doesnt seem to be the compass but some stray magnetism in
>the aircraft.
>swinging a compass takes about 15 minutes.
>
Swinging a compass in 15 minutes may be possible if no corrections are
needed but to create a new card properly requires 8 points instead of
just 4. chasing stray magnetism can take up a lot of time. Unless you
have other reasons to believe that your mechanic is incompetent or
trying to screw you then I'd be inclinded to trust him.

[Steve Foley]

"Road Dog" > wrote in message
m...

> The mu shield fails too. He says the next thing to try is
> to move the compass up to between the visors.

Take a look here. I've only heard about it, never used it.

http://www.sacskyranch.com/degauss.htm

[Jay Somerset]

On Sat, 12 Apr 2008 16:11:59 GMT, (Drew
Dalgleish) wrote:

>On Sat, 12 Apr 2008 22:22:43 +0800, Stealth Pilot
> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 19:45:50 -0700, Road Dog >
>>wrote:
>>
>>>I took my Piper Warrior in for its annual and the mechanic
>>>said that the compass card was missing and that he'd have
>>>to swing the plane to generate a new one.
>>>
>>>After swinging it, he claimed that he couldn't get the
>>>E-W deviation within the minimum. So he suggested we
>>>try "mu" shield (or something) to block the source of
>>>magnetism which he claims is coming from one of the
>>>instruments. (He says the compass works fine outside
>>>the plane.)
>>>
>>>Note: The instruments are all original, stock. Nothing
>>>has been changed (except a radio was added which he says
>>>is not the source.)
>>>
>>>The mu shield fails too. He says the next thing to try is
>>>to move the compass up to between the visors.
>>>
>>>He says he has spent 3 hours on this so far. I'm beginning to
>>>wonder, shouldn't a mechanic be able calibrate a compass
>>>in a stock Piper after 3 hours ? Is he incompetent ?
>>>Padding the bill ? Or does this really take this long ?
>>>
>>>He has inspected and fixed everything else. Do you think
>>>its reasonable at this time to ask him to sign off
>>>everything else, and take the plane somewhere else where,
>>>presumably, they know how to calibrate a compass ?
>>
>>the problem doesnt seem to be the compass but some stray magnetism in
>>the aircraft.
>>swinging a compass takes about 15 minutes.
>>
>Swinging a compass in 15 minutes may be possible if no corrections are
>needed but to create a new card properly requires 8 points instead of
>just 4. chasing stray magnetism can take up a lot of time. Unless you
>have other reasons to believe that your mechanic is incompetent or
>trying to screw you then I'd be inclinded to trust him.

If you look at a deviation card, I think you'll find it takes 12
points -- every 30 degrees, not every 45 degrees.
--
Jay (remove dashes for legal email address)

[John[_9_]]

On Apr 11, 10:45�pm, Road Dog > wrote:
> I took my Piper Warrior in for its annual and the mechanic
> said that the compass card was missing and that he'd have
> to swing the plane to generate a new one.
>
> After swinging it, he claimed that he couldn't get the
> E-W deviation within the minimum. So he suggested we
> try "mu" shield (or something) to block the source of
> magnetism which he claims is coming from one of the
> instruments. (He says the compass works fine outside
> the plane.)
>
> Note: The instruments are all original, stock. Nothing
> has been changed (except a radio was added which he says
> is not the source.)
>
> The mu shield fails too. He says the next thing to try is
> to move the compass up to between the visors.
>
> He says he has spent 3 hours on this so far. I'm beginning to
> wonder, shouldn't a mechanic be able calibrate a compass
> in a stock Piper after 3 hours ? Is he incompetent ?
> Padding the bill ? Or does this really take this long ?
>
> He has inspected and fixed everything else. Do you think
> its reasonable at this time to ask him to sign off
> everything else, and take the plane somewhere else where,
> presumably, they know how to calibrate a compass ?


Sure you could take it somewhere else and spend the same or more money
for them to tell you the same thing. If your guy is conscientous
enough to notice the compass card is missing he seems pretty good to
me. It is possible for some of the steel parts in the aircraft to
become magnetized either through a lightning strike or even to pick up
magnetism through the ground just from sitting in the same spot in the
same way for years. That is more common on steel tube aircraft than
largely aluminum but is still possible.

I had a similar tough time swinging a compass in a Commander 114 which
has a large steel support bar just above the compass. Couldn't find a
degaussing devise but was able to get more powerful compensating
magnets which took care of the problem but virtually every point had 2
to 8 points of variation instead of the normal 0 to 5 or less. I also
once found an aircraft compass that had no magnets installed!

John Dupre'

[Ron Wanttaja]

On Sun, 13 Apr 2008 15:38:49 -0700 (PDT), John > wrote:

> I had a similar tough time swinging a compass in a Commander 114 which
> has a large steel support bar just above the compass. Couldn't find a
> degaussing devise but was able to get more powerful compensating
> magnets which took care of the problem but virtually every point had 2
> to 8 points of variation....

Damn...Do you realize that a "point" on a compass is a bit over 11 degrees? So
your compass was 22 to 88 degrees off...should we start calling you "Wrong Way
Dupre'"? :-)

(or maybe we'll just assume you meant 'degrees')

My own compass-swinging adventure is at:

http://www.bowersflybaby.com/tech/hillbilly.html

There are certain advantages of Experimental category.....

Ron Wanttaja

[Drew Dalgleish]

On Sat, 12 Apr 2008 22:15:41 -0400, Jay Somerset
> wrote:

>On Sat, 12 Apr 2008 16:11:59 GMT, (Drew

>>Swinging a compass in 15 minutes may be possible if no corrections are
>>needed but to create a new card properly requires 8 points instead of
>>just 4. chasing stray magnetism can take up a lot of time. Unless you
>>have other reasons to believe that your mechanic is incompetent or
>>trying to screw you then I'd be inclinded to trust him.
>
>If you look at a deviation card, I think you'll find it takes 12
>points -- every 30 degrees, not every 45 degrees.
>--
>Jay (remove dashes for legal email address)

You're right Jay I was thinking 8 extra but that's obviously not what
I wrote.

[[email protected]]

On Apr 12, 10:07 am, Road Dog > wrote:
> Stealth Pilot wrote:
>
> > the problem doesnt seem to be the compass but some stray magnetism in
> > the aircraft.
>
> So he claims but what would this be that wasn't there
> when the plane left the factory ? Without any new
> equipment, how could it get so bad that it throws the
> compass off more than 10 degrees through mu shield ?
>
> In any case, thanks for the reply.

Pipers sometimes suffer from magnetized engine mounts. I think
it might have to do with the alternator ground cable terminals getting
corroded so that the alternator ground current runs throught the mount
tubing instead, magnetizing it and screwing up the compass.

Dan

[nrp]

Might it be possible to kludge a degausser? I'm looking for a
volunteer to try this scheme:

1) Get a 500 ft length of 4 conductor (3 conductor plus ground) # 14
AWG Romex still in the box coil.

2) Configure/connect the ends to make it a 2000' long single wire
bundle of about 400 turns.

3) There should then be enough resistance in the wire to plug it into
the 110 V 60 Hz line for short periods.

4) Remove the compass. With the power on, sweep the airplane
anywhere there is steel, and then step back several feet before
turning power off. Reinstall the compass.

No warranty. Don't wear any watches. Remove all credit cards etc
from your billfold..........

If nothing else, a gun type soldering iron puts out a pretty strong
field above the transformer, but of course it is small and will soon
get hot.

[Morgans[_2_]]

"nrp" > wrote

> Might it be possible to kludge a degausser? I'm looking for a
> volunteer to try this scheme:
> No warranty. Don't wear any watches. Remove all credit cards etc
> from your billfold..........

I wonder about the possibility of it working without some type of iron core,
to form and concentrate the field.

Seems to me, that there have been articles about degaussing done with a
welder connected through the frame, slowly ramped up, then down.

Anyone remember something like this?
--
Jim in NC

[nrp]

The iron core is the steel in your airplane. Even with no iron, the
coil would current limit however by just the sheer length of 2000 ft
of number 14 wire.

Is there an electrical engineer out there?

[Alan[_6_]]

In article > nrp > writes:
>Might it be possible to kludge a degausser? I'm looking for a
>volunteer to try this scheme:
>
>1) Get a 500 ft length of 4 conductor (3 conductor plus ground) # 14
>AWG Romex still in the box coil.
>
>2) Configure/connect the ends to make it a 2000' long single wire
>bundle of about 400 turns.
>
>3) There should then be enough resistance in the wire to plug it into
>the 110 V 60 Hz line for short periods.


With a bit over 23 amps from the resistance (5.05 ohms), you will need to
hope the inductance will limit the current, or the breaker on any normal
120 volt AC source will trip pretty quickly.

A bit over 2700 watts will warm it up pretty quickly, too.


>4) Remove the compass. With the power on, sweep the airplane
>anywhere there is steel, and then step back several feet before
>turning power off. Reinstall the compass.


You might want to remove the magneto as well. There are almost certainly
other magnetic parts in the instruments that you want out of there first --
no sense destroying the instruments in the panel. Any permanent magnet motors
will not appreciate it. In fact, anything with a coil to pick up energy from
that field could well be damaged. The alternator and connected parts may
not like this.


As with old shadow mask color TV degaussing, do it fairly slowly, and
step back fairly slowly. Turn the coil horizontal then turn it off.


>No warranty. Don't wear any watches. Remove all credit cards etc
>from your billfold..........

You should expect this to break something expensive.


Alan

[John[_9_]]

On Apr 13, 7:20*pm, Ron Wanttaja > wrote:
> On Sun, 13 Apr 2008 15:38:49 -0700 (PDT), John > wrote:
> > I had a similar tough time swinging a compass in a Commander 114 which
> > has a large steel support bar just above the compass. *Couldn't find a
> > degaussing devise but was able to get more powerful compensating
> > magnets which took care of the problem but virtually every point had 2
> > to 8 points of variation....
>
> Damn...Do you realize that a "point" on a compass is a bit over 11 degrees? *So
> your compass was 22 to 88 degrees off...should we start calling you "Wrong Way
> Dupre'"? :-)
>
> (or maybe we'll just assume you meant 'degrees')
>
> My own compass-swinging adventure is at:
>
> http://www.bowersflybaby.com/tech/hillbilly.html
>
> There are certain advantages of Experimental category.....
>
> Ron Wanttaja

Remind me not to tell you about my first long solo cross country
flight.....

John Dupre'

[Rip[_2_]]

nrp wrote:
> Might it be possible to kludge a degausser? I'm looking for a
> volunteer to try this scheme:
>
> 1) Get a 500 ft length of 4 conductor (3 conductor plus ground) # 14
> AWG Romex still in the box coil.
>
> 2) Configure/connect the ends to make it a 2000' long single wire
> bundle of about 400 turns.
>
> 3) There should then be enough resistance in the wire to plug it into
> the 110 V 60 Hz line for short periods.
>
> 4) Remove the compass. With the power on, sweep the airplane
> anywhere there is steel, and then step back several feet before
> turning power off. Reinstall the compass.
>
> No warranty. Don't wear any watches. Remove all credit cards etc
> from your billfold..........
>
> If nothing else, a gun type soldering iron puts out a pretty strong
> field above the transformer, but of course it is small and will soon
> get hot.
Radio Shack used to sell big degaussing coils as "bulk tape erasers".
Their only drawback was that it had a thermal overload switch that would
shut it off after about a minute.
Bypassing the switch let you keep it on until it was too hot to hold,
but it worked great on Mooneys and Navions. Never tried mine on a Piper.

Rip

[nrp]

> You should expect this to break something expensive.
>
> Alan

I agree you are very possibly right.

However, I don't think an alternator would be bothered in that it
doesn't need any magnetism to start. Magnetoes might be another story
& would require an experiment. Obviously remove all radios as a
precaution too.

Do you have any feeling as to just how powerful a degausser this might
be? If it is too powerful, operating it more remotely would allow a
more general degaussing. How close to a 4130 steel tube would it have
to be to demagnetize for example? Another experiment......

At least the wire coil could be reused to wire a house or hangar etc
as long as it isn't allowed to get too hot. A ballast such as a
toaster/iron or other high current device is series could limit the
current and degaussing power.

[Denny]

This is not rocket science.. A 120 volt solenoid can be used as a
degausser, as can the ones used for TV's... Even small ac motors will
have a pretty good induction field - esp. if you can open the metal
case up... The way to test is to magnetize a screw driver and then
use your degausser to demagnetize it... If it will do that it will do
the airframe...

Start with it right against the metal and run it back and forth across
the surface gradually increasing the distance away from the metal
until you are at least a foot away...

denny

[Stealth Pilot[_2_]]

On Sat, 12 Apr 2008 16:11:59 GMT, (Drew
Dalgleish) wrote:


>>the problem doesnt seem to be the compass but some stray magnetism in
>>the aircraft.
>>swinging a compass takes about 15 minutes.
>>
>Swinging a compass in 15 minutes may be possible if no corrections are
>needed but to create a new card properly requires 8 points instead of
>just 4. chasing stray magnetism can take up a lot of time. Unless you
>have other reasons to believe that your mechanic is incompetent or
>trying to screw you then I'd be inclinded to trust him.

your first one will take lots longer.
you need two people.
one pilot in the aircraft another outside with an accurate land
compass.

in a location well away from metal objects like hangars line up the
aircraft with magnetic north using the land compass to align.
(in my tailwind I just lift the tailwheel to reposition so I suppose
that would be a sizeable time aid)
take the cover off the compass front. usually just one screw is
removed, the other loosened and the cover swings away.
under the cover are two screws. one labeled NS the other EW.
with the engine running at idle, all electrics turned on, you adjust
the NS screw with a bronze or austinitic stainless screwdriver, until
the card is reading N. (both screwdrivers mentioned are non magnetic)

turn the aircraft and line it up to magnetic east using the land
compass. adjust the EW screw until the compass reads E.

using the land compass to align, turn the aircraft to face due
magnetic south.
here is the important bit. using the NS screw, adjust out *HALF* the
error.

turn the aircraft to face west using the land compass (and standing
well back from the aircraft)
here is the other important bit. using the EW screw, adjust out *HALF*
the error.

now turn the aircraft back to mag north using the land compass to
align. record on the chart the error seen on the aircraft compass.
turn to 30 degrees magnetic aligning with the land compass. again
record the error on the correction chart.
repeat this for every 30 degree increment around the compass card.

now provided that all your corrections are under 5 degrees you have a
newly swung and adjusted compass.
lifting the tailwheel to position it all takes me 15 minutes.

at the end of it all the engine (idling all this time) and oil are
quite hot so that is the time to drain the oil for the oil change.

Stealth Pilot

[RST Engineering]

Compass calibration is somewhat of a black magic art, but my suspicion is
that some steel parts of your aircraft have become magnetized and are a very
good source of compass errors.

You said that you replaced a radio. Remove the radio from the rack. Take
an unmagnetized steel screwdriver and see if any of the steel screws holding
the rack to the airframe are little magnets. Do the same with any steel
that you can find in the general vicinity of the compass. Try the engine
mounts as well.

Go to a TV repair shop that has been around for a while. In general, the
dingier, dirtier the store the better chance you have for finding what you
need. Ask the nice TV fixit guy if he has an old degaussing coil and ask
him if he would rent it to you.

Remove all instruments with moving coil/magnet meters (VOR/ILS indicators,
analog ammeters/voltmeters, etc.) from the panel.

Turn the airplane to the compass heading with the WORST error. Now remove
the compass. Run that degaussing coil over the whole instrument panel
slowly. When you think you are done, do NOT switch the degaussing coil off
until you are at least a foot or two away from the aircraft. If you screw
this up and switch the coil off close to the panel you will have more
problems than when you started.

Now put the compass back in its mount. Did it clear up the error? If not,
remove the compass again and run that degaussing coil S L O W L Y over the
engine mount, switching it off again when you get it a foot or two away from
the mount. Did that clear up the error?

If not, Sacramento Sky Ranch has a degausser on steroids that they rent out
for problems just like this.

Mumetal shields are a patch for the real problem ... which is that you are
carrying a magnet around with you that is sucking the compass towards it on
all headings. Solve the problem; don't patch it.

Jim

--
"If you think you can, or think you can't, you're right."
--Henry Ford

"Road Dog" > wrote in message
m...

>I took my Piper Warrior in for its annual and the mechanic
> said that the compass card was missing and that he'd have
> to swing the plane to generate a new one.
>
> After swinging it, he claimed that he couldn't get the
> E-W deviation within the minimum. So he suggested we
> try "mu" shield (or something) to block the source of
> magnetism which he claims is coming from one of the
> instruments. (He says the compass works fine outside
> the plane.)

[Roy Smith]

In article >,
"RST Engineering" > wrote:

> Mumetal shields are a patch for the real problem ... which is that you are
> carrying a magnet around with you that is sucking the compass towards it on
> all headings. Solve the problem; don't patch it.

Don't forget that people cary magnets into the plane with them too. Steel
tools. Electronic gizmos. Wris****ches. Not to mention sunglasses:

http://www.framesdirect.com/magnetic-clip-on-eyewear-gst-lgp.html

The solution to that is a fluxgate out on the wingtip, but that's a few
more AMU's than most people are willing to spend.

[Vaughn Simon]

"RST Engineering" > wrote in message
m...
> Go to a TV repair shop that has been around for a while. In general, the
> dingier, dirtier the store the better chance you have for finding what you
> need. Ask the nice TV fixit guy if he has an old degaussing coil and ask him
> if he would rent it to you.
>
Or watch EBay.
http://cgi.ebay.com/Heavy-Duty-Degausser-Degaussing-Coil-Repair-Fix-TV-CRT_W0QQitemZ200213926678QQihZ010QQcategoryZ61395Q QssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItemVaughn

[Woody]

Get a campers compass with visible pointer and use it to locate sources of
magnetism...


"RST Engineering" > wrote in message
m...
> Compass calibration is somewhat of a black magic art, but my suspicion is
> that some steel parts of your aircraft have become magnetized and are a
> very good source of compass errors.
>
> You said that you replaced a radio. Remove the radio from the rack. Take
> an unmagnetized steel screwdriver and see if any of the steel screws
> holding the rack to the airframe are little magnets. Do the same with any
> steel that you can find in the general vicinity of the compass. Try the
> engine mounts as well.
>
> Go to a TV repair shop that has been around for a while. In general, the
> dingier, dirtier the store the better chance you have for finding what you
> need. Ask the nice TV fixit guy if he has an old degaussing coil and ask
> him if he would rent it to you.
>
> Remove all instruments with moving coil/magnet meters (VOR/ILS indicators,
> analog ammeters/voltmeters, etc.) from the panel.
>
> Turn the airplane to the compass heading with the WORST error. Now remove
> the compass. Run that degaussing coil over the whole instrument panel
> slowly. When you think you are done, do NOT switch the degaussing coil
> off until you are at least a foot or two away from the aircraft. If you
> screw this up and switch the coil off close to the panel you will have
> more problems than when you started.
>
> Now put the compass back in its mount. Did it clear up the error? If
> not, remove the compass again and run that degaussing coil S L O W L Y
> over the engine mount, switching it off again when you get it a foot or
> two away from the mount. Did that clear up the error?
>
> If not, Sacramento Sky Ranch has a degausser on steroids that they rent
> out for problems just like this.
>
> Mumetal shields are a patch for the real problem ... which is that you are
> carrying a magnet around with you that is sucking the compass towards it
> on all headings. Solve the problem; don't patch it.
>
> Jim
>
> --
> "If you think you can, or think you can't, you're right."
> --Henry Ford
>
> "Road Dog" > wrote in message
> m...
>
>>I took my Piper Warrior in for its annual and the mechanic
>> said that the compass card was missing and that he'd have
>> to swing the plane to generate a new one.
>>
>> After swinging it, he claimed that he couldn't get the
>> E-W deviation within the minimum. So he suggested we
>> try "mu" shield (or something) to block the source of
>> magnetism which he claims is coming from one of the
>> instruments. (He says the compass works fine outside
>> the plane.)
>
>

[Drew Dalgleish]

On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 21:53:31 +0800, Stealth Pilot
> wrote:

>On Sat, 12 Apr 2008 16:11:59 GMT, (Drew
>Dalgleish) wrote:
>
>
>>>the problem doesnt seem to be the compass but some stray magnetism in
>>>the aircraft.
>>>swinging a compass takes about 15 minutes.
>>>
>>Swinging a compass in 15 minutes may be possible if no corrections are
>>needed but to create a new card properly requires 8 points instead of
>>just 4. chasing stray magnetism can take up a lot of time. Unless you
>>have other reasons to believe that your mechanic is incompetent or
>>trying to screw you then I'd be inclinded to trust him.
>
>your first one will take lots longer.
>you need two people.
>one pilot in the aircraft another outside with an accurate land
>compass.
>
>in a location well away from metal objects like hangars line up the
>aircraft with magnetic north using the land compass to align.
>(in my tailwind I just lift the tailwheel to reposition so I suppose
>that would be a sizeable time aid)
>take the cover off the compass front. usually just one screw is
>removed, the other loosened and the cover swings away.
>under the cover are two screws. one labeled NS the other EW.
>with the engine running at idle, all electrics turned on, you adjust
>the NS screw with a bronze or austinitic stainless screwdriver, until
>the card is reading N. (both screwdrivers mentioned are non magnetic)
>
>turn the aircraft and line it up to magnetic east using the land
>compass. adjust the EW screw until the compass reads E.
>
>using the land compass to align, turn the aircraft to face due
>magnetic south.
>here is the important bit. using the NS screw, adjust out *HALF* the
>error.
>
>turn the aircraft to face west using the land compass (and standing
>well back from the aircraft)
>here is the other important bit. using the EW screw, adjust out *HALF*
>the error.
>
>now turn the aircraft back to mag north using the land compass to
>align. record on the chart the error seen on the aircraft compass.
>turn to 30 degrees magnetic aligning with the land compass. again
>record the error on the correction chart.
>repeat this for every 30 degree increment around the compass card.
>
>now provided that all your corrections are under 5 degrees you have a
>newly swung and adjusted compass.
> lifting the tailwheel to position it all takes me 15 minutes.
>
>at the end of it all the engine (idling all this time) and oil are
>quite hot so that is the time to drain the oil for the oil change.
>
>Stealth Pilot
>
>
>
My home airport has a compass rose and I use that. Taxiing aroud and
getting lined up on each heading takes me quite a bit longer than
that. Having a helper would speed things I'm sure but if we consider
man hours since the OP was about mechanics time then double your
15minutes. I was going to ask how do you know if it's an accurate land
compass but it occurs to me that a GPS would do the job and then you
could do it by yourself . I still don't think I could do it as fast as
you can though. It takes me that long to find my brass screwdriver.

[Alan[_6_]]

In article > (Drew Dalgleish) writes:

>My home airport has a compass rose and I use that. Taxiing aroud and
>getting lined up on each heading takes me quite a bit longer than
>that. Having a helper would speed things I'm sure but if we consider
>man hours since the OP was about mechanics time then double your
>15minutes.

It is easier to shut down and just turn the plane from heading to
heading manually.

> I was going to ask how do you know if it's an accurate land
>compass but it occurs to me that a GPS would do the job and then you
>could do it by yourself .

How?

A GPS knows where it is, not which way it is facing.


Alan

[Stealth Pilot[_2_]]

On Wed, 16 Apr 2008 02:31:50 GMT, (Drew
Dalgleish) wrote:

>On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 21:53:31 +0800, Stealth Pilot
> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 12 Apr 2008 16:11:59 GMT, (Drew
>>Dalgleish) wrote:
>>

>. I was going to ask how do you know if it's an accurate land
>compass

the compass is supremely well made but not anything better than an
army prismatic compass.

think about how a compass functions. it cannot be in error if made
accurately. you use the compass about 20 feet back from the aircraft
to remove any influence of the fuselage.

Stealth Pilot

[Drew Dalgleish]

On Wed, 16 Apr 2008 05:19:27 +0000 (UTC),
(Alan) wrote:

>In article > (Drew Dalgleish) writes:
>
>>My home airport has a compass rose and I use that. Taxiing aroud and
>>getting lined up on each heading takes me quite a bit longer than
>>that. Having a helper would speed things I'm sure but if we consider
>>man hours since the OP was about mechanics time then double your
>>15minutes.
>
> It is easier to shut down and just turn the plane from heading to
>heading manually.
>
>> I was going to ask how do you know if it's an accurate land
>>compass but it occurs to me that a GPS would do the job and then you
>>could do it by yourself .
>
> How?
>
> A GPS knows where it is, not which way it is facing.
>
>
> Alan
Do it while flying. The GPS know which way it's going.

[Drew Dalgleish]

On Wed, 16 Apr 2008 21:46:41 +0800, Stealth Pilot
> wrote:

>On Wed, 16 Apr 2008 02:31:50 GMT, (Drew
>Dalgleish) wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 21:53:31 +0800, Stealth Pilot
> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sat, 12 Apr 2008 16:11:59 GMT, (Drew
>>>Dalgleish) wrote:
>>>
>
>>. I was going to ask how do you know if it's an accurate land
>>compass
>
>the compass is supremely well made but not anything better than an
>army prismatic compass.
>
>think about how a compass functions. it cannot be in error if made
>accurately. you use the compass about 20 feet back from the aircraft
>to remove any influence of the fuselage.
>
>Stealth Pilot

That makes sense Thanks.

[nrp]

A GPS only can measure your ground track, not aircraft heading.

[David Lesher]

(Drew Dalgleish) writes:

>> A GPS knows where it is, not which way it is facing.
>>
>Do it while flying. The GPS know which way it's going.

Only by inference.
--
A host is a host from coast to
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433

[Jay Somerset]

On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 02:03:18 GMT, (Drew
Dalgleish) wrote:

>On Wed, 16 Apr 2008 05:19:27 +0000 (UTC),
>(Alan) wrote:
>
>>In article > (Drew Dalgleish) writes:
>>
>>>My home airport has a compass rose and I use that. Taxiing aroud and
>>>getting lined up on each heading takes me quite a bit longer than
>>>that. Having a helper would speed things I'm sure but if we consider
>>>man hours since the OP was about mechanics time then double your
>>>15minutes.
>>
>> It is easier to shut down and just turn the plane from heading to
>>heading manually.
>>
>>> I was going to ask how do you know if it's an accurate land
>>>compass but it occurs to me that a GPS would do the job and then you
>>>could do it by yourself .
>>
>> How?
>>
>> A GPS knows where it is, not which way it is facing.
>>
>>
>> Alan
>Do it while flying. The GPS know which way it's going.

You really don't seem to understand -- heading and track are two
different things. They are only aligned if you are flying directly
into, or away from, the wind.

So your GPS is pretty well useless in flight for aligning a compass,
as you can never tell precisely the wind direction aloft. Certainly
not within the +/- 3 degrees that you should be trying to calibrate
against.
--
Jay (remove dashes for legal email address)

[Steve - KDMW]

On Apr 17, 9:15*am, Jay Somerset > wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 02:03:18 GMT, (Drew
>
>
>
>
>
> Dalgleish) wrote:
> >On Wed, 16 Apr 2008 05:19:27 +0000 (UTC),
> >(Alan) wrote:
>
> >>In article > (Drew Dalgleish) writes:
>
> >>>My home airport has a compass rose and I use that. Taxiing aroud and
> >>>getting lined up on each heading takes me quite a bit longer than
> >>>that. Having a helper would speed things I'm sure but if we consider
> >>>man hours since the OP was about mechanics time then double your
> >>>15minutes.
>
> >> *It is easier to shut down and just turn the plane from heading to
> >>heading manually.
>
> >>> I was going to ask how do you know if it's an accurate land
> >>>compass but it occurs to me that a GPS would do the job and then you
> >>>could do it by yourself .
>
> >> *How?
>
> >> *A GPS knows where it is, not which way it is facing.
>
> >> * * * *Alan
> >Do it while flying. The GPS know which way it's going.
>
> You really don't seem to understand -- heading and track are two
> different things. *They are only aligned if you are flying directly
> into, or away from, the wind.
>
> So your GPS is pretty well useless in flight for aligning a compass,
> as you can never tell precisely the wind direction aloft. *Certainly
> not within the +/- 3 degrees that you should be trying to calibrate
> against.
> --
> Jay (remove dashes for legal email address)- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Someone explained it pretty clearly earlier... use the GPS on the
ground. Taxi slowly to get your heading/track where you want it then
stop slowly and smoothly.

Steve
KDMW

[Rich Anderson]

Several years ago we had a Piper at our facility (TGH Aviation/The Gyro House) with the exact same problem. After trying all of the standard procedures to no avail, out of frustration I took a very strong magnet and moved it swiftly up and down the center windshield support strut and then quickly pulled it away. Effectively scrambling (degaussing)the electrons in the metal strut. Much to my surprise, as this was an act of desperation on my part, the compass returned to normal working order and has not had a problem since. This is the only aircraft type where I have ever witnessed this happening. It's a long shot but you might want to try it.

Rich Anderson
President, TGH Aviation


I took my Piper Warrior in for its annual and the mechanic
said that the compass card was missing and that he'd have
to swing the plane to generate a new one.

After swinging it, he claimed that he couldn't get the
E-W deviation within the minimum. So he suggested we
try "mu" shield (or something) to block the source of
magnetism which he claims is coming from one of the
instruments. (He says the compass works fine outside
the plane.)

Note: The instruments are all original, stock. Nothing
has been changed (except a radio was added which he says
is not the source.)

The mu shield fails too. He says the next thing to try is
to move the compass up to between the visors.

He says he has spent 3 hours on this so far. I'm beginning to
wonder, shouldn't a mechanic be able calibrate a compass
in a stock Piper after 3 hours ? Is he incompetent ?
Padding the bill ? Or does this really take this long ?

He has inspected and fixed everything else. Do you think
its reasonable at this time to ask him to sign off
everything else, and take the plane somewhere else where,
presumably, they know how to calibrate a compass ?

[Jay Somerset]

On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 09:46:24 -0700 (PDT), Steve - KDMW
> wrote:

>On Apr 17, 9:15*am, Jay Somerset > wrote:
>> On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 02:03:18 GMT, (Drew
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Dalgleish) wrote:
>> >On Wed, 16 Apr 2008 05:19:27 +0000 (UTC),
>> >(Alan) wrote:
>>
>> >>In article > (Drew Dalgleish) writes:
>>
>> >>>My home airport has a compass rose and I use that. Taxiing aroud and
>> >>>getting lined up on each heading takes me quite a bit longer than
>> >>>that. Having a helper would speed things I'm sure but if we consider
>> >>>man hours since the OP was about mechanics time then double your
>> >>>15minutes.
>>
>> >> *It is easier to shut down and just turn the plane from heading to
>> >>heading manually.
>>
>> >>> I was going to ask how do you know if it's an accurate land
>> >>>compass but it occurs to me that a GPS would do the job and then you
>> >>>could do it by yourself .
>>
>> >> *How?
>>
>> >> *A GPS knows where it is, not which way it is facing.
>>
>> >> * * * *Alan
>> >Do it while flying. The GPS know which way it's going.
>>
>> You really don't seem to understand -- heading and track are two
>> different things. *They are only aligned if you are flying directly
>> into, or away from, the wind.
>>
>> So your GPS is pretty well useless in flight for aligning a compass,
>> as you can never tell precisely the wind direction aloft. *Certainly
>> not within the +/- 3 degrees that you should be trying to calibrate
>> against.
>> --
>> Jay (remove dashes for legal email address)- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
>Someone explained it pretty clearly earlier... use the GPS on the
>ground. Taxi slowly to get your heading/track where you want it then
>stop slowly and smoothly.

Yes, if you have a large enough ground area to do that at the 6
different directions (back and forth) that you need. Most GA airports
do not have anything like that amount of space. You would have to taxi
for at least 50-100 yards to have a reliable track.

But yes, in theory, this would work.
--
Jay (remove dashes for legal email address)

[RST Engineering]

Do you really have to quote a hundred lines of previous text for a four line
answer?

Jim

--
"If you think you can, or think you can't, you're right."
--Henry Ford



"Jay Somerset" > wrote in message
...

> Yes, if you have a large enough ground area to do that at the 6
> different directions (back and forth) that you need. Most GA airports
> do not have anything like that amount of space. You would have to taxi
> for at least 50-100 yards to have a reliable track.

[karl mcgruber]

"Jay Somerset" <>>>
You would have to taxi
> for at least 50-100 yards to have a reliable track.
>
> But yes, in theory, this would work.
> --
> Jay

No. 10 or 20 feet will be just fine.

[Jay Somerset]

On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 09:51:13 -0700, "karl mcgruber" <skywagon
> wrote:

>
>
>"Jay Somerset" <>>>
>You would have to taxi
>> for at least 50-100 yards to have a reliable track.
>>
>> But yes, in theory, this would work.
>> --
>> Jay
>
>No. 10 or 20 feet will be just fine.

No it won't. Watch a stationary GPS give you a position that wobbles
up to 20-50 feet away from its centroid. If you use a very short
track, you could be out way more than the allowable compass deviation.

Simple geometry -- work out the angular error with just a 10 foot
lateral error from a 20 foot base. (Hint: 30 degrees)
--
Jay (remove dashes for legal email address)

[Jay Somerset]

On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 06:48:40 -0700, "RST Engineering"
> wrote:

>Do you really have to quote a hundred lines of previous text for a four line
>answer?
>
>Jim

Gee. Guess that's what happens when one tries to keep the enough
context in a thread so that someone who comes into the discussion
without having seen all the earlier posts can understand the issues.

But it was only 48 lines -- why exaggerate?
--
Jay (remove dashes for legal email address)

[Jay Maynard]

On 2008-04-19, Jay Somerset > wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 06:48:40 -0700, "RST Engineering"
> wrote:
>>Do you really have to quote a hundred lines of previous text for a four line
>>answer?
> Gee. Guess that's what happens when one tries to keep the enough
> context in a thread so that someone who comes into the discussion
> without having seen all the earlier posts can understand the issues.

Usenet etiquette has, for at least two decades, been to trim away what
you're not commenting on, keeping just enough text to make your answer
comprehensible.

There are folks around here who refuse to trim at all. I use a 43-line
terminal window to read Usenet with, and when it's full of stuff quoted 7
layers deep, I just hit N and go to the next message.

Posting like that just gives ammunition to those who argue that people
should adopt the equally abhorrent practice of top-posting.

If someone wants context, they can use the "read parent article" function of
their newsreader.
--
Jay Maynard, K5ZC http://www.conmicro.com
http://jmaynard.livejournal.com http://www.tronguy.net
Fairmont, MN (FRM) (Yes, that's me!)
AMD Zodiac CH601XLi N55ZC (ordered 17 March, delivery 2 June)

[Dave[_19_]]

For this very reason...

I LOVE top posters!

:)

Dave (and I trim too!)




On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 11:21:27 GMT, Jay Maynard
> wrote:

>On 2008-04-19, Jay Somerset > wrote:
>> On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 06:48:40 -0700, "RST Engineering"

---Snip---
>There are folks around here who refuse to trim at all. I use a 43-line
>terminal window to read Usenet with, and when it's full of stuff quoted 7
>layers deep, I just hit N and go to the next message.
>
>Posting like that just gives ammunition to those who argue that people
>should adopt the equally abhorrent practice of top-posting.

[Travis Marlatte]

"Jay Maynard" > wrote in message
...
> On 2008-04-19, Jay Somerset > wrote:
>> On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 06:48:40 -0700, "RST Engineering"
> wrote:
>>>Do you really have to quote a hundred lines of previous text for a four
>>>line
>>>answer?
> There are folks around here who refuse to trim at all. I use a 43-line
> terminal window to read Usenet with, and when it's full of stuff quoted 7
> layers deep, I just hit N and go to the next message.

Apparently your curiosity got the best of you since you bothered to not only
scroll through to find the 4 new lines of text but also (roughly) counted
the quoted text.

Some post on top. Some post at the bottom. Some trim. Some don't.

Using a mouse wheel to scroll works pretty well. There have been times when
people trim excessively and I have to go find a past post that didn't trim
to refresh my memory as to the context. I would rather have excessive
quoting that requires a fraction of a second to scroll past than excessive
trimming that makes me unfilter read articles, find the thread in the long
list, re-find my position in the thread and then find a post that has enough
context to be useful.

Email threads are typically top post oriented. That makes it much simpler,
doesn't it? The new text is right at the top and the rest is an easy scroll
away but easily ignored.

It seems that the phylosophy to bottom post is causing the problem. Bottom
posting makes all the intermediate text get in the way and trimming becomes
the curtious thing to do. Just top post and leave it all there. When the
thread gets too long, it's probably time to move on to something else
anyway.

I have been bottom posting and trimming just to go along with the vocal few
that seem to get all bent out of shape otherwise. After thinking about, I
think I'll start top posting.

Of course, mixed top and bottom does get a little confusing...

--
-------------------------------
Travis
Lake N3094P
PWK

[karl mcgruber]

Your math is simply complete BS, as well as your 50-100 yards.



"Jay Somerset" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 09:51:13 -0700, "karl mcgruber" <skywagon
> > wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>"Jay Somerset" <>>>
>>You would have to taxi
>>> for at least 50-100 yards to have a reliable track.
>>>
>>> But yes, in theory, this would work.
>>> --
>>> Jay
>>
>>No. 10 or 20 feet will be just fine.
>
> No it won't. Watch a stationary GPS give you a position that wobbles
> up to 20-50 feet away from its centroid. If you use a very short
> track, you could be out way more than the allowable compass deviation.
>
> Simple geometry -- work out the angular error with just a 10 foot
> lateral error from a 20 foot base. (Hint: 30 degrees)
> --
> Jay (remove dashes for legal email address)

[Jay Maynard]

On 2008-04-19, Travis Marlatte > wrote:
> Using a mouse wheel to scroll works pretty well.

Not when reading news in a text mode reader in a terminal window, it
doesn't.

> I would rather have excessive quoting that requires a fraction of a second
> to scroll past than excessive trimming that makes me unfilter read
> articles, find the thread in the long list, re-find my position in the
> thread and then find a post that has enough context to be useful.

Optimize for the common case. Out of how many articles do you have to do
this once?

Further, your newsreader almost certainly has a function to read the parent
of the article you're currently on. Try using that; it makes life a lot
simpler.

> Email threads are typically top post oriented. That makes it much simpler,
> doesn't it? The new text is right at the top and the rest is an easy scroll
> away but easily ignored.

Just because Microsoft screwed this up is no reason to enshrine it in
practice.

> It seems that the phylosophy to bottom post is causing the problem. Bottom
> posting makes all the intermediate text get in the way and trimming becomes
> the curtious thing to do. Just top post and leave it all there. When the
> thread gets too long, it's probably time to move on to something else
> anyway.

Top posting is evil because it totally divorces your response from what
you're responding to, thus destroying any context in your replies.

Do you have conversations backwards? Then why post that way?

> I have been bottom posting and trimming just to go along with the vocal few
> that seem to get all bent out of shape otherwise. After thinking about, I
> think I'll start top posting.

There are a nonzero number of people who ignore those discourteous enough to
top post.
--
Jay Maynard, K5ZC http://www.conmicro.com
http://jmaynard.livejournal.com http://www.tronguy.net
Fairmont, MN (FRM) (Yes, that's me!)
AMD Zodiac CH601XLi N55ZC (ordered 17 March, delivery 2 June)

[Bob Noel]

In article >,
"Travis Marlatte" > wrote:

no. because we read top down not bottom up.

>
> away but easily ignored.
> doesn't it? The new text is right at the top and the rest is an easy scroll
> Email threads are typically top post oriented. That makes it much simpler,

--
Bob Noel
(goodness, please trim replies!!!)

[Bob Noel]

In article >,
Jay Maynard > wrote:

> Just because Microsoft screwed this up is no reason to enshrine it in
> practice.

Eventually the real story of top-posting will come out. Some engineers
at microsoft wanted to prove how bad they could make the GUI and
still have the lemmings thinks it's a wonderful thing. :-)

--
Bob Noel
(goodness, please trim replies!!!)

[Jay Somerset]

On Sat, 19 Apr 2008 19:39:48 -0700, "karl mcgruber" <skywagon
> wrote:


>"Jay Somerset" > wrote in message
...
>> On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 09:51:13 -0700, "karl mcgruber" <skywagon
>> > wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>"Jay Somerset" <>>>
>>>You would have to taxi
>>>> for at least 50-100 yards to have a reliable track.
>>>>
>>>> But yes, in theory, this would work.
>>>> --
>>>> Jay
>>>
>>>No. 10 or 20 feet will be just fine.
>>
>> No it won't. Watch a stationary GPS give you a position that wobbles
>> up to 20-50 feet away from its centroid. If you use a very short
>> track, you could be out way more than the allowable compass deviation.
>>
>> Simple geometry -- work out the angular error with just a 10 foot
>> lateral error from a 20 foot base. (Hint: 30 degrees)
>> --
>> Jay (remove dashes for legal email address)
>Your math is simply complete BS, as well as your 50-100 yards.

And I suppose you believe the world is flat, as well.

If you are so convinced that I am wrong, and that you can get a good
deviation card using a 10-20 taxi, then go ahead. And when you get a
"say heading" from ATC, don't say I didn't warn you.

But then, MS Flight Sim probably doesn't ever give you that audio, so
you probably won't hear it after all.
--
Jay (remove dashes for legal email address)

[karl mcgruber]

> But then, MS Flight Sim probably doesn't ever give you that audio, so
> you probably won't hear it after all.
> --
> Jay (remove dashes for legal email address)


Since "somerset" doesn't appear in the FAA pilot database, I'd be guessing
you're the one playing games while I'm out flying for a living. Certainly
your knowledge portends that.

[Travis Marlatte]

MS didn't invent email.

But otherwise, feel free to ignore this top post.
--
-------------------------------
Travis
Lake N3094P
PWK

"Jay Maynard" > wrote in message
...
> On 2008-04-19, Travis Marlatte > wrote:
>> Using a mouse wheel to scroll works pretty well.
>
> Not when reading news in a text mode reader in a terminal window, it
> doesn't.
>
>> I would rather have excessive quoting that requires a fraction of a
>> second
>> to scroll past than excessive trimming that makes me unfilter read
>> articles, find the thread in the long list, re-find my position in the
>> thread and then find a post that has enough context to be useful.
>
> Optimize for the common case. Out of how many articles do you have to do
> this once?
>
> Further, your newsreader almost certainly has a function to read the
> parent
> of the article you're currently on. Try using that; it makes life a lot
> simpler.
>
>> Email threads are typically top post oriented. That makes it much
>> simpler,
>> doesn't it? The new text is right at the top and the rest is an easy
>> scroll
>> away but easily ignored.
>
> Just because Microsoft screwed this up is no reason to enshrine it in
> practice.
>
>> It seems that the phylosophy to bottom post is causing the problem.
>> Bottom
>> posting makes all the intermediate text get in the way and trimming
>> becomes
>> the curtious thing to do. Just top post and leave it all there. When the
>> thread gets too long, it's probably time to move on to something else
>> anyway.
>
> Top posting is evil because it totally divorces your response from what
> you're responding to, thus destroying any context in your replies.
>
> Do you have conversations backwards? Then why post that way?
>
>> I have been bottom posting and trimming just to go along with the vocal
>> few
>> that seem to get all bent out of shape otherwise. After thinking about, I
>> think I'll start top posting.
>
> There are a nonzero number of people who ignore those discourteous enough
> to
> top post.
> --
> Jay Maynard, K5ZC http://www.conmicro.com
> http://jmaynard.livejournal.com http://www.tronguy.net
> Fairmont, MN (FRM) (Yes, that's me!)
> AMD Zodiac CH601XLi N55ZC (ordered 17 March, delivery 2 June)

[Jay Maynard]

On 2008-04-21, Travis Marlatte > wrote:
> MS didn't invent email.

No, they didn't. Before Outlook screwed up everyone's expectations, though,
top-posting was universally reviled. Microsoft's mistake changed all that,
and not for the better.
--
Jay Maynard, K5ZC http://www.conmicro.com
http://jmaynard.livejournal.com http://www.tronguy.net
Fairmont, MN (FRM) (Yes, that's me!)
AMD Zodiac CH601XLi N55ZC (ordered 17 March, delivery 2 June)

[Travis Marlatte]

I can understand both perspectives and, in fact, am leaning toward
preferring top posting. Your hard line position and blaming MS seems a
little fanatical.

I noticed that you didn't ignore my top post.
--
-------------------------------
Travis
Lake N3094P
PWK

"Jay Maynard" > wrote in message
...
> On 2008-04-21, Travis Marlatte > wrote:
>> MS didn't invent email.
>
> No, they didn't. Before Outlook screwed up everyone's expectations,
> though,
> top-posting was universally reviled. Microsoft's mistake changed all that,
> and not for the better.
> --
> Jay Maynard, K5ZC http://www.conmicro.com
> http://jmaynard.livejournal.com http://www.tronguy.net
> Fairmont, MN (FRM) (Yes, that's me!)
> AMD Zodiac CH601XLi N55ZC (ordered 17 March, delivery 2 June)

[B A R R Y[_2_]]

Travis Marlatte wrote:
> I can understand both perspectives and, in fact, am leaning toward
> preferring top posting.

Same here.

I bottom post, as I always have on Usenet, out of respect to convention.
Over time, I have formed an opinion that top posting or intertwining
comments makes the most sense from a readability standpoint.

To my eyes, what creates the real problems are people who don't trim
long posts combined with both top and bottom posting in long threads.

If a reply is properly trimmed and attributed, the reply is readable and
makes perfect sense regardless of where the reply is placed.

[Jay Maynard]

On 2008-04-21, Travis Marlatte > wrote:
> I can understand both perspectives and, in fact, am leaning toward
> preferring top posting. Your hard line position and blaming MS seems a
> little fanatical.

No, it's just backed by 20 years on the Internet. You see, I was here before
Microsoft ever dreamed of making software to use it.

Those who insist on topposting make a point of ignoring long-standing
Internet etiquette.

> I noticed that you didn't ignore my top post.

Because I had a point to make.
--
Jay Maynard, K5ZC http://www.conmicro.com
http://jmaynard.livejournal.com http://www.tronguy.net
Fairmont, MN (FRM) (Yes, that's me!)
AMD Zodiac CH601XLi N55ZC (ordered 17 March, delivery 2 June)

[Jay Somerset]

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 08:30:34 -0700, "karl mcgruber" <skywagon
> wrote:

>
>> But then, MS Flight Sim probably doesn't ever give you that audio, so
>> you probably won't hear it after all.
>> --
>> Jay (remove dashes for legal email address)
>
>
>Since "somerset" doesn't appear in the FAA pilot database, I'd be guessing
>you're the one playing games while I'm out flying for a living. Certainly
>your knowledge portends that.

What makes you think I would EVER use my real name in an email
address? So I'm not surprised you couldn't find the listing under
"somerset". I am there under my real name.

But your name is not in the FAA databases either, either domestic or
foreign. Perhaps you are also using a pseudonym. Or more likely, you
are not a certificated pilot.
--
Jay (remove dashes for legal email address)

[Blueskies]

"Jay Maynard" > wrote in message ...
> On 2008-04-21, Travis Marlatte > wrote:
>> I can understand both perspectives and, in fact, am leaning toward
>> preferring top posting. Your hard line position and blaming MS seems a
>> little fanatical.
>
> No, it's just backed by 20 years on the Internet. You see, I was here before
> Microsoft ever dreamed of making software to use it.
>
> Those who insist on topposting make a point of ignoring long-standing
> Internet etiquette.
>
>> I noticed that you didn't ignore my top post.
>
> Because I had a point to make.
> --
> Jay Maynard, K5ZC http://www.conmicro.com
> http://jmaynard.livejournal.com http://www.tronguy.net
> Fairmont, MN (FRM) (Yes, that's me!)
> AMD Zodiac CH601XLi N55ZC (ordered 17 March, delivery 2 June)


So what is that break in the middle response called...center posting?

[B A R R Y[_2_]]

Jay Somerset wrote:
> Or more likely, you
> are not a certificated pilot.


Karl is a professional pilot who has been here for years.

[Jay Maynard]

On 2008-04-21, B A R R Y > wrote:
> I bottom post, as I always have on Usenet, out of respect to convention.
> Over time, I have formed an opinion that top posting or intertwining
> comments makes the most sense from a readability standpoint.

What people call "interleaving" or "intertwining" comments is the actual
convention. Pure bottom-posting is no better than top-posting, and for the
same reason: there's no correspondence between your comments and what you're
commenting on.

> To my eyes, what creates the real problems are people who don't trim
> long posts combined with both top and bottom posting in long threads.

Yes, indeed. Lack of trimming is a real pain.

> If a reply is properly trimmed and attributed, the reply is readable and
> makes perfect sense regardless of where the reply is placed.

No. Top posting still breaks the relationship between your comments and what
you're commenting on.

You don't have conversations backwards...but that's what a top-posted
message reads like.
--
Jay Maynard, K5ZC http://www.conmicro.com
http://jmaynard.livejournal.com http://www.tronguy.net
Fairmont, MN (FRM) (Yes, that's me!)
AMD Zodiac CH601XLi N55ZC (ordered 17 March, delivery 2 June)

[Blanche]

Isn't it brass, not bronze, screwdriver?

[Stealth Pilot[_2_]]

On 23 Apr 2008 21:53:34 GMT, Blanche > wrote:

>Isn't it brass, not bronze, screwdriver?

non magnetic is the requirement.
it can be brass, bronze or austinitic stainless steel.
it can be beautifully made or the hammered and filed end of a bronze
welding rod.

Stealth Pilot