Setting altimeters with no radio

On Mon, 13 Nov 2006 02:33:10 -0600, Jim Macklin wrote:
I have zero actual experience with AIDS, having left the "open market" a
long long time ago.

When I was in the Navy, it was the "good ol' days" (i.e. anything that you
could possibly catch was curable by penicillin)... Well, that's not
completely true since herpes had come around before I left, but it didn't
kill you, it just made you *wish* you were dead... sick-grin

These days, I doubt that it would be as fun to be single and in the
Navy... Something about having to wear steel-belted radial body condoms
just seems like it would take the fun out of meeting strange women waking
up in bed with even *stranger* women... I alway thought it was interesting
how you could go to bed with a really nice looking woman that you
encounter at the bar and wake up with something that albeit female, you
had to wonder if it walked upright...

Recently, Mxsmanic posted:

Neil Gould writes:

Ever hear of WAAS?

Yes. And it's not part of GPS.

It's a part of my 295, and every Garmin aviation GPS newer than that.
Nothing else is relevant to me as a pilot.

Neil

The formula is ...
good looking= blood alcohol level times the number of hours
since your last full nights' sleep times the number of days
since you were last laid, divided by the months since your
last VD movie.





"Grumman-581" wrote
in message
news | On Mon, 13 Nov 2006 02:33:10 -0600, Jim Macklin wrote:
| I have zero actual experience with AIDS, having left the
"open market" a
| long long time ago.
|
| When I was in the Navy, it was the "good ol' days" (i.e.
anything that you
| could possibly catch was curable by penicillin)... Well,
that's not
| completely true since herpes had come around before I
left, but it didn't
| kill you, it just made you *wish* you were dead...
sick-grin
|
| These days, I doubt that it would be as fun to be single
and in the
| Navy... Something about having to wear steel-belted radial
body condoms
| just seems like it would take the fun out of meeting
strange women waking
| up in bed with even *stranger* women... I alway thought it
was interesting
| how you could go to bed with a really nice looking woman
that you
| encounter at the bar and wake up with something that
albeit female, you
| had to wonder if it walked upright...

"Jim Macklin" wrote in message
...
Not below 3000 AGL, it does above that.

"Travis Marlatte" wrote in
message
et...
| VFR, it doesn't really matter, does it?
|

You seem to be suggesting that when flying VFR above 3000', we have an
obligation to fly specific altitudes within some tolerence and, therefore,
need to have an accurate means of determining our altitude. That is
certainly not the case. Prudent, yes. Required, no.

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

"Travis Marlatte" wrote:
You seem to be suggesting that when flying VFR above 3000', we have an
obligation to fly specific altitudes within some tolerence and, therefore,
need to have an accurate means of determining our altitude. That is
certainly not the case. Prudent, yes. Required, no.

I would consider the following to be an "obligation":


*91.159***VFR cruising altitude or flight level.

Except while holding in a holding pattern of 2 minutes or less, or while
turning, each person operating an aircraft under VFR in level cruising
flight more than 3,000 feet above the surface shall maintain the
appropriate altitude or flight level prescribed below, unless otherwise
authorized by ATC:

(a) When operating below 18,000 feet MSL and‹

(1) On a magnetic course of zero degrees through 179 degrees, any odd
thousand foot MSL altitude +500 feet (such as 3,500, 5,500, or 7,500); or

(2) On a magnetic course of 180 degrees through 359 degrees, any even
thousand foot MSL altitude +500 feet (such as 4,500, 6,500, or 8,500).

(b) When operating above 18,000 feet MSL, maintain the altitude or flight
level assigned by ATC.

The word SHALL has a legal meaning...
§ 91.159 VFR cruising altitude or flight level.
Except while holding in a holding pattern of 2 minutes or
less, or while turning, each person operating an aircraft
under VFR in level cruising flight more than 3,000 feet
above the surface shall maintain the appropriate altitude or
flight level prescribed below, unless otherwise authorized
by ATC:

(a) When operating below 18,000 feet MSL and-

(1) On a magnetic course of zero degrees through 179
degrees, any odd thousand foot MSL altitude +500 feet (such
as 3,500, 5,500, or 7,500); or

(2) On a magnetic course of 180 degrees through 359 degrees,
any even thousand foot MSL altitude +500 feet (such as
4,500, 6,500, or 8,500).

(b) When operating above 18,000 feet MSL, maintain the
altitude or flight level assigned by ATC.

Last updated: August 7, 2006



"Travis Marlatte" wrote in
message
...
| "Jim Macklin" wrote
in message
| ...
| Not below 3000 AGL, it does above that.
|
| "Travis Marlatte" wrote
in
| message
| et...
| | VFR, it doesn't really matter, does it?
| |
|
| You seem to be suggesting that when flying VFR above
3000', we have an
| obligation to fly specific altitudes within some tolerence
and, therefore,
| need to have an accurate means of determining our
altitude. That is
| certainly not the case. Prudent, yes. Required, no.
|
| -------------------------------
| Travis
| Lake N3094P
| PWK
|
|

peter writes:

No, your statement before was that it required measurement of angles
and "triangulation" whereas the actual procedure does not measure any
angles at all and is closer to "trilateration" or determining the
distances to the satellites at known positions

It does indeed measure angles, rest assured. Of course, it does a lot
more than that.

Not sure what you mean by times being equal to sides (the units don't
match for one thing) ...

Then let's just leave it at that. This is not a sandbox, and I don't
have time to play.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Neil Gould writes:

It's a part of my 295, and every Garmin aviation GPS newer than that.

Those are receivers, not the GPS. WAAS is completely independent of
GPS.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Recently, Mxsmanic posted:

Neil Gould writes:

It's a part of my 295, and every Garmin aviation GPS newer than that.

Those are receivers, not the GPS. WAAS is completely independent of
GPS.

When we speak of GPS _usage_ in aviation, we are specifically and almost
exclusively talking about receivers. Those are the devices that we either
have in our planes or take with us to the plane. All that is relevant is
that we understand the devices that we use. Therefore, it is easy to
establish that equipment that we don't have and don't use is of lesser
importance. That is one difference between a real life and a sim life.

Neil

Travis Marlatte schrieb:
VFR, it doesn't really matter, does it?

I've always thought that airspace boundaries are to be respected by VFR
traffic, too.

Stefan