AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-au
April 16, 2002 - April 28, 2002
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Liming <gary(at)liming.org> |
| Subject: | Re: KT-76C Installation Manual |
Ditto. I'm in the same boat for the KT76A that I just got. The King
website won't give you anything without a dealer account.
>
>
>I've come across a KT-76C transponder, of course without manuals. Is
>there any source for downloading the installation manual, or does
>Bendix/King keep pretty tight reins on that sort of thing. I have a
>fairly indecipherable pin diagram for making up a harness but......I need
>more! Any suggestions?
>Bill Yamokoski
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dfmorrow(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Electronic compass errors |
Responding to questions by Gordon Robertson and Ronnie Brown
Gordon Robertson wrote:
>>An electronic compass would behave very much as a whiskey compass so long as
>>the magnetic sensor was mounted in gimbals. It would show turning error
when
>>mounted in an airplane.
>I dont understand this. I always thought the turning errors in a whiskey
>compass were due to the weight compensation of the compass to counteract
>magnetic dip, and as you turn or accelerate the local g vector is now
>different from what the compass was designed for so it registers a turn.
The effect of magnetic dip is to tilt the compass card away from vertical.
This
can make it harder to read the scale in area where magnetic dip is very large.
Some manufacturers add a small weight to the south end of the compass card to
counteract this. Note that the weight causes the compass card to tilt; it
doen't cause the card to rotate about its axis. The horizontal component of
the
magnetic field is what causes the card to rotate about its axis. Magnetic dip
varies from 90deg north down near the north magnetic pole to 90deg south down
near the south magnetic pole. Airpath sells their compasses in two flavors --
one model for use in the northern hemisphere and one model for use in the
southern hemisphere. Presumable the southern hemisphere model has the
weight on the north end of the card. The weight can only level the compass
card
at one value of magnetic dip, so the card will have some degree of tilt at
most
locations.
When the airplane is in a banked turn, the local gravity vector (the
combination
of g force and gravity) is tilted to the same angle of bank. The compensating
weight still affects only the tilt of the card. Only the magnetic field
causes
rotation of the card about its axis. Thus the compensating weight has no
effect on bearing indicated by the compass.
Here is an example that may make it more clear what causes turning error.
Imagine an airplane flying due north. The magnetic dip at this location is
45deg
north down. The compass card will be oriented due north. Suppose the pilot
rolls
the airplane nearly 90deg to the left and pulls beaucoup g's to execute a
turn.
Because of the big g force the axis of the compass card rolls nearly 90deg to
the left also and is aligned east-west. The compass card will now roll 45deg
below the horizon to follow the magnetic vector with its 45deg dip. So we now
have the airplane turning through due north with the compass indicating 045
and
lagging the turn.
You mentioned acceleration error. This is also caused by magnetic dip. The
compass card is designed so that its center of gravity is below the pivot
points
of the gymbals. This causes the card to come to rest in a level position.
Consider an airplane flying due east. If it accelerates, the center of
gravity
of the compass card will shift backward causing the compass card to tilt. This
causes the top of the card to tilt to the east. This is the same direction of
tilt that occurs in an airplane flying north and banking to the right. The
magnetic dip will cause the card rotate the same in either case.
>In a flux-gate magnetometer, which is the basis for the electronic
>compasses, there is no need to compensate mechanically for the local
>magnetic dip. It directly measures that component of the earth's magnetic
>field that is aligned with the sensor axes. This should be independent of
>the local gravity vector (assuming the compass is NOT gimballed) so
>therefore should be immune to turning errors and acceleration errors.
>Can somebody enlighten me on why it still shows these errors?
A flux gate compass fixed to the airframe measures the magnetic vector's
position
relative to the airframe. This is not enought to determine heading.
Consider an
airplane equipped with a really spiffy 3 axis magnetometer flying due east.
The
magnetometer will report that the magnetic field vector is pointing directly
off the
left wing. Suppose the pilot pulls a half loop and ends up flying inverted
due
west. The magnetometer will still report that the magnetic field vector is
pointing
directly off the left wing. So you need additional information to determine
heading.
If you know the magnetic field is pointing left AND the airplane is flying
upright
and level then you can say the heading is east. Basically any change in the
airplane's attitude in pitch, yaw, or roll will change the direction of the
magnetic vector measured by the magnetometer and there is no way to extract
just
the heading without additional information.
You might think you could make do with a single axis magnetometer oriented to
measure
just the magnetic field strength along the fore and aft direction of the
airframe.
The sensor would be indiferent to roll and we could probably ignore
variations in
pitch since they are very small in cruise flight. Unfortunately this sensor
can
only measure north or south and not east or west. For example flying either
east or west it will measure zero field strength. Likewise, flying on a
heading
of either 045 or 315 it will measure the same field strength.
OK, you say, let's have a two axis magnetometer, we'll add one to measure the
field strength from left to right. This works fine in level flight because
neither
sensor responds to the vertical component of the magnetic field. If the
airplane
banks, however, the left-right sensor will now respond to the vertical
component
of the magnetic field and we have -- dum di di dum -- turning error!
Ronnie Brown wrote:
>Me either. My PAI vertical card compass does a good job of displaying
>heading as long as I am doing 1/2 standard rate turns, and does pretty good
>even with standard rate turns. I would think the Richie should do this well
>too.
A vertical card magnetic compass functions just like a whiskey compass and has
the same turning errors. The magnitude of the turning error depends on
several
factors:
1) Heading. Maximum error is when turning through headings of north
or south. No error east or west.
2) Geographical location. Magnetic dip is greatest near the magnetic poles.
At the magnetic equator, dip is zero and there is no turning error.
3) Bank angle. This depends on rate of turn and speed. A half standard rate
turn
at 100 knots requires a bank angle of just 8 degrees. A full standard
rate turn
at 200 knots requires a bank angle of 29 degrees.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Grosvenor" <dwg(at)iafrica.com> |
| Subject: | Crowbar OV Module |
Hi Bob
On your circuit diagram for the Crowbar OV Module, there is a resistor with
the value marked as 6.04k with a DigiKey part no. BC60.4KZCT. Is this
resistor a 6.04k or a 60.4k as indicated by the part number?
Dave
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Crowbar OV Module Drawing Error |
>
>Hi Bob
>
>On your circuit diagram for the Crowbar OV Module, there is a resistor with
>the value marked as 6.04k with a DigiKey part no. BC60.4KZCT. Is this
>resistor a 6.04k or a 60.4k as indicated by the part number?
>
>Dave
The value 6.04K is right, the part number is wrong. I've fixed
the drawing and uploaded it to the website.
Thanks for the heads up!
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Livingston John W Civ ASC/ENFD <John.Livingston(at)wpafb.af.mil> |
| Subject: | Electronic compass errors |
So..... If one had a 3 axis magnetometer and a 3 axis gravity/inertia vector, one
or more rate gyros, a computer with software, and a display, then one could
build an electronic compass that was accurate during turns. I think I'll buy
a $99 GPS.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: Dfmorrow(at)aol.com [mailto:Dfmorrow(at)aol.com]
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Electronic compass errors
Responding to questions by Gordon Robertson and Ronnie Brown
Gordon Robertson wrote:
>>An electronic compass would behave very much as a whiskey compass so long as
>>the magnetic sensor was mounted in gimbals. It would show turning error
when
>>mounted in an airplane.
>I dont understand this. I always thought the turning errors in a whiskey
>compass were due to the weight compensation of the compass to counteract
>magnetic dip, and as you turn or accelerate the local g vector is now
>different from what the compass was designed for so it registers a turn.
The effect of magnetic dip is to tilt the compass card away from vertical.
This
can make it harder to read the scale in area where magnetic dip is very large.
Some manufacturers add a small weight to the south end of the compass card to
counteract this. Note that the weight causes the compass card to tilt; it
doen't cause the card to rotate about its axis. The horizontal component of
the
magnetic field is what causes the card to rotate about its axis. Magnetic dip
varies from 90deg north down near the north magnetic pole to 90deg south down
near the south magnetic pole. Airpath sells their compasses in two flavors --
one model for use in the northern hemisphere and one model for use in the
southern hemisphere. Presumable the southern hemisphere model has the
weight on the north end of the card. The weight can only level the compass
card
at one value of magnetic dip, so the card will have some degree of tilt at
most
locations.
When the airplane is in a banked turn, the local gravity vector (the
combination
of g force and gravity) is tilted to the same angle of bank. The compensating
weight still affects only the tilt of the card. Only the magnetic field
causes
rotation of the card about its axis. Thus the compensating weight has no
effect on bearing indicated by the compass.
Here is an example that may make it more clear what causes turning error.
Imagine an airplane flying due north. The magnetic dip at this location is
45deg
north down. The compass card will be oriented due north. Suppose the pilot
rolls
the airplane nearly 90deg to the left and pulls beaucoup g's to execute a
turn.
Because of the big g force the axis of the compass card rolls nearly 90deg to
the left also and is aligned east-west. The compass card will now roll 45deg
below the horizon to follow the magnetic vector with its 45deg dip. So we now
have the airplane turning through due north with the compass indicating 045
and
lagging the turn.
You mentioned acceleration error. This is also caused by magnetic dip. The
compass card is designed so that its center of gravity is below the pivot
points
of the gymbals. This causes the card to come to rest in a level position.
Consider an airplane flying due east. If it accelerates, the center of
gravity
of the compass card will shift backward causing the compass card to tilt. This
causes the top of the card to tilt to the east. This is the same direction of
tilt that occurs in an airplane flying north and banking to the right. The
magnetic dip will cause the card rotate the same in either case.
>In a flux-gate magnetometer, which is the basis for the electronic
>compasses, there is no need to compensate mechanically for the local
>magnetic dip. It directly measures that component of the earth's magnetic
>field that is aligned with the sensor axes. This should be independent of
>the local gravity vector (assuming the compass is NOT gimballed) so
>therefore should be immune to turning errors and acceleration errors.
>Can somebody enlighten me on why it still shows these errors?
A flux gate compass fixed to the airframe measures the magnetic vector's
position
relative to the airframe. This is not enought to determine heading.
Consider an
airplane equipped with a really spiffy 3 axis magnetometer flying due east.
The
magnetometer will report that the magnetic field vector is pointing directly
off the
left wing. Suppose the pilot pulls a half loop and ends up flying inverted
due
west. The magnetometer will still report that the magnetic field vector is
pointing
directly off the left wing. So you need additional information to determine
heading.
If you know the magnetic field is pointing left AND the airplane is flying
upright
and level then you can say the heading is east. Basically any change in the
airplane's attitude in pitch, yaw, or roll will change the direction of the
magnetic vector measured by the magnetometer and there is no way to extract
just
the heading without additional information.
You might think you could make do with a single axis magnetometer oriented to
measure
just the magnetic field strength along the fore and aft direction of the
airframe.
The sensor would be indiferent to roll and we could probably ignore
variations in
pitch since they are very small in cruise flight. Unfortunately this sensor
can
only measure north or south and not east or west. For example flying either
east or west it will measure zero field strength. Likewise, flying on a
heading
of either 045 or 315 it will measure the same field strength.
OK, you say, let's have a two axis magnetometer, we'll add one to measure the
field strength from left to right. This works fine in level flight because
neither
sensor responds to the vertical component of the magnetic field. If the
airplane
banks, however, the left-right sensor will now respond to the vertical
component
of the magnetic field and we have -- dum di di dum -- turning error!
Ronnie Brown wrote:
>Me either. My PAI vertical card compass does a good job of displaying
>heading as long as I am doing 1/2 standard rate turns, and does pretty good
>even with standard rate turns. I would think the Richie should do this well
>too.
A vertical card magnetic compass functions just like a whiskey compass and has
the same turning errors. The magnitude of the turning error depends on
several
factors:
1) Heading. Maximum error is when turning through headings of north
or south. No error east or west.
2) Geographical location. Magnetic dip is greatest near the magnetic poles.
At the magnetic equator, dip is zero and there is no turning error.
3) Bank angle. This depends on rate of turn and speed. A half standard rate
turn
at 100 knots requires a bank angle of just 8 degrees. A full standard
rate turn
at 200 knots requires a bank angle of 29 degrees.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James B. Robinson" <jbr(at)hitechnetworks.net> |
Bob
I have some small annunciator lights that appear to have soldier or
faston connection. They look like they would fit the .110 faston
connectors. Any recomendations?
Jim Robinson
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jaye and Scott Jackson <jayeandscott(at)shaw.ca> |
| Subject: | Fw: [Wing] Accepting reality |
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tedd McHenry" <tedd(at)vansairforce.org>
Subject: Re: [Wing] Accepting reality
> If you're interested in Pat's RV-4, you can see pictures of it on the Wing
web
> site at
>
> http://www.vansairforce.org/airplanes/C-FJOJ
>
> Tedd McHenry
> Van's Air Force
> Western Canada Wing
> tedd(at)vansairforce.org
> www.vansairforce.org
>
> On Sat, 13 Apr 2002, Pat Dayman wrote:
>
> >
> > Unfortunately, reality has set in. I have a Fiancee, (and now a 7 year
old)
> > and it is time to buy a house. Much to my disapointment, I must sell my
> > RV-4 CF-JOJ. If anyone knows of anyone interested in a complete RV-4
with
> > 500hrs TT and 325 on the engine, please give them my e-mail address.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Pat Dayman
> >
> > patman(at)itdoesntsuck.com
> >
> > (703) 628-0254
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wing mailing list
> Wing(at)vansairforce.org
> http://vansairforce.org/mailman/listinfo/wing
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Non PMA strobe and navigation lights, experience |
Look in RV list archives on the matronics server.
You'll find information about the difference in
specifications.
In the Zenith list archives, you should find some more
information on the quality of its construction.
--- Werner Schneider
wrote:
> Schneider"
>
> Dear Listers,
>
> I've seen in the ASP catalog, that the Aeroflash
> Nav/Strobe kit is nearly
> half the price of the Whelen.
>
> Has anyone any experience about this equipment? Why
> not saving some bucks
> for better things =(;o)
>
> Many thanks for your feedback!
>
> Werner
>
>
>
> Forum -
> Contributions of
> any other form
>
> latest messages.
> other List members.
>
> aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> http://www.matronics.com/subscription
> http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
>
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
> http://www.matronics.com/search
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
>
>
>
>
=====
----------------------------
Michel Therrien CH601-HD
http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby
http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601
http://taxes.yahoo.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
>
>
>Bob
>
>I have some small annunciator lights that appear to have soldier or
>faston connection. They look like they would fit the .110 faston
>connectors. Any recomendations?
>
>Jim Robinson
It's a toss-up Jim. If I had the fast-ons in the
drawer (and I can stand the added clearance length
behind the fixture) I'd probably use them. But given
the rare need to replace a fixture, solder is fine
too. If I didn't have the fast-ons immediately handy
I'd solder it.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Robinson" <jbr(at)hitechnetworks.net> |
Thanks Bob
I think I will soldier the jumpers and use fastons for the wires going
to and from
Jim
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | jakent(at)unison.ie |
| Subject: | KT-76A/C manuals |
Try eBay. These manuals appear fairly frequently. I got one for my KX-155 recently
and there were several available at that time. John Kent.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Fw: RE: EFIS D-10 encoder output |
| From: | czechsix(at)juno.com |
FYI, just in case anyone else is interested, the Dynon unit (if/when it
ever becomes available) will have an encoder output to the transponder
eliminating the need for a separate encoder. Nice feature that I hope to
use....
--Mark Navratil
Cedar Rapids, Iowa
RV-8A finish kit endless fiberglass....
--------------------------------------------------------
Mark,
No, the encoder will act as we noted before. Thank you for the heads up,
and we will clarify that on the website!
Thank you and have a great day.
Gillian C. Torode
Business Manager
Dynon Development Inc.
19501 144th Ave NE
Suite C-500
Woodinville, WA 98072
(425)402-4404 Phone (425)984-1751 Fax
-----Original Message-----
From: menavrat(at)rockwellcollins.com [mailto:menavrat(at)rockwellcollins.com]
Subject: RE: EFIS D-10 encoder output?
Hi Gillian, just looking at your update FAQ's on your website and it has
the following:
What instruments/avionics will the EFIS-D10 connect to/communicate with?
The EFIS-D10, as presently specified and developed, is a
stand-alone instrument that does not communicate with
any other instruments or avionics. Future upgrades will
allow
the instrument to communicate with a second EFIS-D10
as well as future products from Dynon Development.
Communication with other manufacturer's products is still under
consideration.
Does this mean you've changed your previous plans to include an encoder
output which would interface with transponders? If not you might want to
clarify on the FAQ's....
Thanks,
--Mark Navratil
Cedar Rapids, Iowa
RV-8A finish kit stuff, starting wiring soon...
"Gillian Torode" on 11/12/2001 12:55:31 PM
cc:
Subject: RE: EFIS D-10 encoder output?
Mark,
Yes, the encoder output will come standard and connect to a (mode C)
transponder.
Thank you for your interest in our product.
Gillian C. Torode
Business Manager
Dynon Development Inc.
19501 144th Ave NE
Suite C-500
Woodinville, WA 98072
(425)402-4404 Phone (425)984-1751 Fax
-----Original Message-----
From: menavrat(at)rockwellcollins.com [mailto:menavrat(at)rockwellcollins.com]
Subject: EFIS D-10 encoder output?
Will the D-10 have a standard output with encoder data that can be
connected to a transponder? Does this feature cost extra?
Thanks,
--Mark Navratil
Cedar Rapids, Iowa
RV-8A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Frank and Dorothy <frankv(at)infogen.net.nz> |
| Subject: | Re: Electronic compass errors |
At 05:59 17/04/2002, you wrote:
>The effect of magnetic dip is to tilt the compass card away from vertical.
True, but the effect is negligible.
>This
>can make it harder to read the scale in area where magnetic dip is very large.
>Some manufacturers add a small weight to the south end of the compass card to
>counteract this.
In the southern hemisphere, the weight is added to the North end of the
compass. But compasses in planes built Down Under still work adequately Up
Over. Ask Jon Johansen.
>Note that the weight causes the compass card to tilt; it
>doen't cause the card to rotate about its axis. The horizontal component of
>the magnetic field is what causes the card to rotate about its axis.
True... but only when the compass card is horizontal. When it is tilted
relative to the horizon it is the component which is in the same plane
(geometrically speaking, not aeronautically :) as the compass card that
causes the card to turn. If the card is sitting in a pool of whiskey, or in
some kind of gimbal arrangement, then in a balanced turn it will NOT be
horizontal. It will (in a perfectly balanced turn) be inclined at the same
angle that airplane is inclined. This tilting of the compass card relative
to the magnetic field is what causes the turning error.
Let's start with a simple but not very realistic example. Imagine you're
hovering directly over the North magnetic pole. Consequently, your compass
card is at right angles to the field and cannot distinguish which direction
is North. For the sake of simplicity, lets assume that your compass is
attached to the airframe, rather than remaining horizontal(ish) in a pool
of whiskey. Now, imagine that you can roll your helicopter 45 degrees left,
(whilst still maintaining the stationery hover -- that's the unrealistic
part of this thought experiment) -- your compass is now at 45 degrees to
the field and therefore can now locate magnetic North -- it is vertically
below you, but since you are hovering in a rolled attitude, your compass
will say that North is off to the left relative to the airframe. Similarly,
if you hover whilst rolled to the right, your compass will indicate that
North is now to the right of the airframe.
Now for a more realistic example. Hopefully the parallels to the imaginary
"North pole hover" above are clear....
As I said in an earlier message, here in NZ the field dips at 67 degrees
and has a variation of about 20 degrees East of true North. Consider an
instant of time when my aircraft is banked 23 degrees and flying on a
heading of 90M (110 true) and in a balanced turn -- obviously this
situation will only be true for an instant. At that instant, the horizontal
plane of the aircraft is exactly at right angles to the magnetic field, and
so is the compass card (because this is a perfectly balanced turn, the
compass card will be in the same attitude as the airframe). In this
attitude, the magnetic field is at right angles to the compass card -- just
like when hovering horizontally over the magnetic North pole, the compass
card cannot tell which way is North!
Now, I continue my turn for 360 degrees, but bank a little steeper (and
still in balance) until I'm on the same heading again. This time, the
magnetic North relative to the compass card and airframe will be to the
right (opposite of the North pole example because NZ is in the southern
hemisphere). I continue my turn for another 360 degrees until I'm on the
same heading again, but bank a little shallower than 23 degrees (and still
maintaining balance) . This time, the magnetic North relative to the
compass card and airframe will be to the left.
Just to make things more complex, the same kind of effects apply when
pitching up or down relative to the inclined plane which lies at right
angles to the magnetic field vector -- North will appear to be in front or
behind the aircraft.
And, even more complex again... As you turn a circle horizontally through
this inclined magnetic field, you are continually changing your 'pitch' and
'roll' relative to the field.
Hope this clarifies the situation for people.
Frank.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | David Mullins <n323xl(at)attbi.com> |
| Subject: | Re: AeroElectric-List KT-76A/C pinouts |
> Gary and William,
Here are the pinouts I received from http://www.vistaaviation.com
I purchased a factory overhauled King KT-76A from them about
6 weeks ago. This is what they sent me to hook it up to my RMI
Micro Encoder. Aircraft Spruce sells the manual for $10.50 the
last time I looked. I will be picking one up with my next order.
Dave Mullins
Nashua, New Hampshire
http://N323XL.iwarp.com
Vista wrote:
> > >
> > > > David install manuals are no longer provided by Bendix/King with
each unit. One copy is provided to each shop, additional copies
cost money.
> > > > > 1 ground
> > > > > 2 14v dimmer
> > > > > 3 ground
> > > > > 4 not used
> > > > > 5 not used
> > > > > 6 not used
> > > > > 7 not used
> > > > > 8 ALTITUDE D4 KT-76C ONLY
> > > > > 9 DME suppression
> > > > > 10 ext standby
> > > > > 11 14v input
> > > > > 12 not used
> > > > >
> > > > > A ground
> > > > > B ALTITUDE B4
> > > > > C ALTITUDE B2
> > > > > D ALTITUDE C1
> > > > > E ALTITUDE B1
> > > > > F ext ident
> > > > > G not used
> > > > > H ALTITUDE C4
> > > > > I not used
> > > > > J ALTITUDE A4
> > > > > K ALTITUDE A2
> > > > > L ALTITUDE C2
> > > > > M ALTITUDE A1
> > > > > N not used
> > > > >
> ____________________________________________________________________
> From: "William Yamokoski" <yamokosk(at)lmc.cc.mi.us>
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: KT-76C Installation Manual
>
>
> I've come across a KT-76C transponder, of course without manuals. Is there any
source for downloading the installation manual, or does Bendix/King keep pretty
tight reins on that sort of thing. I have a fairly indecipherable pin diagram
for making up a harness but......I need more! Any suggestions?
> Bill Yamokoski
>
> ___________
> From: Gary Liming <gary(at)liming.org>
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: KT-76C Installation Manual
>
>
> Ditto. I'm in the same boat for the KT76A that I just got. The King
> website won't give you anything without a dealer account.
>
> >
> >
> >I've come across a KT-76C transponder, of course without manuals. Is
> >there any source for downloading the installation manual, or does
> >Bendix/King keep pretty tight reins on that sort of thing. I have a
> >fairly indecipherable pin diagram for making up a harness but......I need
> >more! Any suggestions?
> >Bill Yamokoski
>
> ___
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: master switch reminder |
How about putting a piezo buzzer and a bright LED on the instrument panel the
lights up when the master is on and the buss voltage is below 13 volts, ala
alternator not charging or master left on when engine is not running?
Steve
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary A. Sobek" <rv6flier(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: master switch reminder |
As a warning to leaving my master switch on, I leave my tail strobe on
all the time. It is "ON" the shutdown checklist. If I had it to do
over again, it would be on a pull type circit breaker instead of a
switch. The tail strobe "ON" also serves as a warning when getting
read to start up.
My RG battery is 5 years old and still going strong. Yes I have left
the master on while checking out or showing off the electrical system
and had it go completely dead 3 times in 5 years.
=====
Gary A. Sobek
"My Sanity" RV-6 N157GS O-320 Hartzell,
1,019.5+ Flying Hours So. CA, USA
http://SoCAL_WVAF.tripod.com
http://taxes.yahoo.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Grosvenor" <dwg(at)iafrica.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Crowbar OV Module Drawing Error |
Bob
Take a look at the new OVM drawing file you uploaded. Old file had a pg1
and pg2. This one has 2 x pg1's (or 2 x pg2's).
Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Crowbar OV Module Drawing Error
>
>Hi Bob
>
>On your circuit diagram for the Crowbar OV Module, there is a resistor with
>the value marked as 6.04k with a DigiKey part no. BC60.4KZCT. Is this
>resistor a 6.04k or a 60.4k as indicated by the part number?
>
>Dave
The value 6.04K is right, the part number is wrong. I've fixed
the drawing and uploaded it to the website.
Thanks for the heads up!
Bob . . .
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Andy Karmy" <andy(at)karmy.com> |
| Subject: | Re: master switch reminder |
From: "Gary A. Sobek" <rv6flier(at)yahoo.com>
>As a warning to leaving my master switch on, I leave my tail strobe on
>all the time. It is "ON" the shutdown checklist. If I had it to do
So does that mean that you have your tail strobe on a seperate switch from the
wing strobes? Is this the white tail strobe on the bottom of the rudder, or a
red one on the top of the fin?
Thus far my thinking was to simply put all three white strobes on one switch, but
I like your idea above...
--
Andy Karmy
andy(at)karmy.com
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Aircraft wire arc tracking question |
Hi bob,
While doing a web search on aircraft wiring I found this site on aircraft
wire arc tracking accidents.
Any opinion ?
http://members.aol.com/papcecst/index.html
Thank you,
Gilles
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Sanders, Andrew P" <andrew.p.sanders(at)boeing.com> |
"'avionics-list(at)matronics.com'"
| Subject: | Transmit problem |
Not sure if this question is better addressed in the aeroelectric or
avionics lists so here it goes to both.
I have two TKM navcom replacements for Cessna ARC radios. They work very
well and I'm happy with them. They were in the airplane when I bought it
several years ago and I'd buy them again if I needed inexpensive
replacements.
I have had a problem a few times lately where when both units are on and I
transmit on one, I can barely hear it in the headset and others report
hearing a carrier but no modulation. If I power off either one of the
radios, transmitting works fine. This is intermittant and goes away after a
half hour or so. Of course, I haven't been able to duplicate this on the
ground. Both radios have been sent off for tuneup by TKM, arrived back
yellow tagged.
Poking around, there are a couple of relays that I wonder if are associated
with the problem. First, there is factory "patch panel" that gathers
various avionics wiring, such as audio in/out, grounds, etc. On this board
is a relay Potter-Brumfield KHP17D11. Without detatching the board from the
firewall and tracing the wiring on the back, I don't know what it does.
I've been checking to see if I could find a replacement and it is obsoleate
and unavailable.
There is a second relay in the wire bundle behind the instrument panel,
Potter-Brumfield #R10-E1Y2-V185. It is a DPDT unit that looks like is wired
to buffer between the PPT's and the avionics. It seems that instead of
having the PPT's in parallel to the "patch panel" they in parallel to the
relay that then grounds the "tip" line to the avionics.
This one is available and inexpensive.
The problem kinda "feels" like a something sticking and these seem like
likly suspects, but I don't want to trouble shoot by throwing parts at it.
Any ideas? Am I even going in the right direction?
Thanks,
Andrew
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: master switch reminder |
>
>From: "Gary A. Sobek" <rv6flier(at)yahoo.com>
>
> >As a warning to leaving my master switch on, I leave my tail strobe on
> >all the time. It is "ON" the shutdown checklist. If I had it to do
>
>So does that mean that you have your tail strobe on a seperate switch from
>the wing strobes? Is this the white tail strobe on the bottom of the
>rudder, or a red one on the top of the fin?
>
>Thus far my thinking was to simply put all three white strobes on one
>switch, but I like your idea above...
If you have active notification of low voltage on the
panel . . . nice flashing light that shows that the
alternator is NOT keeping the bus above 13.0 volts,
then this light will be flashing any time the master
is on and the alternator is not putting . . . and
the last time I tried to get anything out of an
alternator with the engine shut down, it wasn't
being at all cooperative!
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: master switch reminder |
>
>
>My RG battery is 5 years old and still going strong. Yes I have left
>the master on while checking out or showing off the electrical system
>and had it go completely dead 3 times in 5 years.
Got any idea what its capacity is?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Aircraft wire arc tracking question |
><Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr>
>
>Hi bob,
>
>While doing a web search on aircraft wiring I found this site on aircraft
>wire arc tracking accidents.
>Any opinion ?
>
>http://members.aol.com/papcecst/index.html
When I had the electrical/avionics group doing the
GP-180 (now Piaggio P-180) a very good friend and rep
for Raychem came into Learjet and showed us Raychem's
spec 55 wire as a possible substitute for 22759/16
Kapton. It was lighter and less expensive to boot.
I got quite a data-dump on various insulation technologies
which included Kapton. Kapton was the lightest wire technology
could produce at that time (about 1983). Jim showed me
test data and anecdotal information on Kapton insulation
failure . . . one particularly vivid example was a
picture of wire bundles shedding insulation at the
wing folding hinge of an carrier based aircraft.
I wasn't particularly interested in either wire for
my program. We were already up to our armpits in
22579/16 wire for the Lears and it was unlikely
that I could convince my program managers to
spend any time/money on a wire change for the
three airplanes being prototyped.
Airliners have a lot of high-voltage, 400 cycle
a/c power that's especially dangerous if the
wire's insulation is compromised. For our 14/28
volt airplanes the 22759/16 wire has amassed
a very good track record in the industry.
You weren't considering Kapton wire for your
airplane, were you?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Crowbar OV Module Drawing Error |
>
>Bob
>
>Take a look at the new OVM drawing file you uploaded. Old file had a pg1
>and pg2. This one has 2 x pg1's (or 2 x pg2's).
>Dave
Thanks for the heads-up . . . AutoCAD won't drive Acrobat
with multiple pages like it will a printer so I have to
write out a .pdf file for each page and then assemble
the document with Acrobat later . . . seems I took page
1.0 and pasted another page 1.0 onto it!
Got it fixed . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | mprather(at)spro.net |
| Subject: | Electrical Circuits Like Plumbing... |
Someone (Andrew Sanders) asked me to describe how I think electrical
circuits are like plumbing... This is not something that I came up
with, but at the same time I can't remember having learned it(?).
In order to visualize, in a physical way, how electricity moves through
a circuit, you can sometimes think of the circuit in question as a
plumbing system (in a house?). Unless you have a good sense of
imagination for the types of appliances that may exist in plumbing this
model only really works with DC circuits.
To start with, think of a conductor (wire) as a water pipe. Think
of a battery as tank of water on a hill (or up high in a building). It
provides water pressure as long as it has water in it. But it might run
out (go dead). A generator can be likened to a pump. Switches can be
viewed as valves (like faucets, taps, or hose bibs) and resistors can be
thought of as constrictions in a pipe.
Obviously, I am thinking of water as being the electricity itself. If
you get really nuts, its probably more accurate to consider the water to
be electron holes, instead of the electrons themselves (it keeps the
signs of the calculations straight!).
Components in an electrical system that consume power (like lights
and radios, and flap motors) can be thought of like showers,
dishwashers, and toilets.
Places where you have resistive shorts in a circuit (worn insulation)
can be like having a leak in the plumbing, and a dead short is like
having a completely broken pipe where water can get out of the system
(and make a mess, and cause the rest of your plumbing to not work).
Items that have a resistive connection (like a relay with dirty
contacts) can be viewed to be like a faucet with a clogged aerator -
doesn't let enough water through.
Even the units used to describe system behavior are pretty useful.
Voltage is kind of like water pressure (psi, pascals, inHg, etc).
Current is kind of like how fast water is moving in a pipe (Amperes).
Power is like how much total water gets moved in the pipe(volume)(watts)
I don't think there is a very good analog to electrical resistance, but
if you just think of resistors as being sections of pipe with kinks, or
reduced diamater, you get the idea. A big resistor is a very small pipe
(capillary), and a small resistor might be a barely a constriction at
all. This might remind you that all wires have some resistance just
like all water pipes slow the flow a little.
This model can be useful when thinking about bus loading issues for
instance. Think of when you are in an old hose with lame plumbing. If
you flush the toilet at the same time that the shower is going, the
person in the shower may get a little upset at the lack of water
pressure. This might be kind of like having 2 components being driven
by a length of too small (resistive) wire. If you try to turn them
both on, the bus voltage (pressure) sags.
Hopefully you get the idea.
If you get really excited about this, you can imagine some AC effects.
Like, if sections of the plumbing are made with expandable (rubber)
hose, you could think of this as being like a capacitor. Think of the
dynamic effects when you open and close switches (valves) near the
rubber hose.
Similarly, the mass of the water in a long pipe might be viewed as
having inductance. If you turn the water on at an appliance and let it
run for a minute, and then suddenly turn it off, the mass of the water
moving causes a rise in pressure - a water hammer. This is kind of like
the ignition system on an engine. You let current flow through the coil
(inductor), and then the points open, and get a big voltage (some
circuits need flyback diodes because of this behavior - protect circuits
from high voltage transients coming from rapid changes in current
through inductors).
The last example is a bit of a stretch, but works in my head. Mr
Nuckolls, you probably would have another way of dealing with my AC
examples, but... it works for me! Then again, maybe you just stay away
from plumbing altogether, given you electrical expertise. :)
Hope this might help someone (who has experience with plumbing).
Regards,
Matt Prather
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorton(at)cyberus.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Aircraft wire arc tracking question |
>
>
> When I had the electrical/avionics group doing the
> GP-180 (now Piaggio P-180) a very good friend and rep
> for Raychem came into Learjet and showed us Raychem's
> spec 55 wire as a possible substitute for 22759/16
> Kapton. It was lighter and less expensive to boot.
>
Bob,
Looks like a typo above, but it reads as if 22759/16 has kapton
insulation. Just to clarify for others - 22759/16 is not kapton wire.
--
Kevin Horton RV-8 (installing engine & electrics)
Ottawa, Canada
http://members.rogers.com/khorton/rv8.html
http://eccentrix.com/misc/rv8/rv8.html
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Aircraft wire arc tracking question |
>
> >
> >
> > When I had the electrical/avionics group doing the
> > GP-180 (now Piaggio P-180) a very good friend and rep
> > for Raychem came into Learjet and showed us Raychem's
> > spec 55 wire as a possible substitute for 22759/16
> > Kapton. It was lighter and less expensive to boot.
> >
>
>Bob,
>
>Looks like a typo above, but it reads as if 22759/16 has kapton
>insulation. Just to clarify for others - 22759/16 is not kapton wire.
Good call. The 22759/16 is on of the Tefzels . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Transmit problem |
>
>
>Not sure if this question is better addressed in the aeroelectric or
>avionics lists so here it goes to both.
>
>I have two TKM navcom replacements for Cessna ARC radios. They work very
>well and I'm happy with them. They were in the airplane when I bought it
>several years ago and I'd buy them again if I needed inexpensive
>replacements.
>
>I have had a problem a few times lately where when both units are on and I
>transmit on one, I can barely hear it in the headset and others report
>hearing a carrier but no modulation. If I power off either one of the
>radios, transmitting works fine. This is intermittant and goes away after a
>half hour or so. Of course, I haven't been able to duplicate this on the
>ground. Both radios have been sent off for tuneup by TKM, arrived back
>yellow tagged.
>
>Poking around, there are a couple of relays that I wonder if are associated
>with the problem. First, there is factory "patch panel" that gathers
>various avionics wiring, such as audio in/out, grounds, etc. On this board
>is a relay Potter-Brumfield KHP17D11. Without detatching the board from the
>firewall and tracing the wiring on the back, I don't know what it does.
>I've been checking to see if I could find a replacement and it is obsoleate
>and unavailable.
http://www.rfparts.com/relay.html says they can supply the 24 VDC
version. Also http://www.surplussales.com/Relays/RESealPI-1.html
and http://eceserv0.ece.wisc.edu/~eceparts/RELAY_DC.HTM
>There is a second relay in the wire bundle behind the instrument panel,
>Potter-Brumfield #R10-E1Y2-V185. It is a DPDT unit that looks like is wired
>to buffer between the PPT's and the avionics. It seems that instead of
>having the PPT's in parallel to the "patch panel" they in parallel to the
>relay that then grounds the "tip" line to the avionics.
>This one is available and inexpensive.
>
>The problem kinda "feels" like a something sticking and these seem like
>likly suspects, but I don't want to trouble shoot by throwing parts at it.
>Any ideas? Am I even going in the right direction?
First, as I recall, the covers on both of those relays
can be removed. I'd pull them out of their sockets
and slip the covers off.
Use some contact cleaner in a spray can to hose
down the contacts and use a piece of ordinary copy machine
paper as if it were sandpaper to polish the contacts.
Fold into a very narrow strip and wet with cleaner. Slip
between the normally open contacts and then hold the
relay closed with your finger while you pull the strip
of paper out. While holding the relay "energized" slip
the paper between the normally closed contacts and do the
same thing. You don't want to use anything more abrasive
than paper . . . you need to clean of the surface of the
contacts and not disturb any finish.
This would be good start . . . and it may fix it. Also,
de-mate any connectors in the system, wet with cleaner
and then mate/de-mate several times before re-assembly.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Kozinski" <KOZINSKI(at)symbol.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Avionics-List: Transmit problem |
Andrew,
Have you tried swaping the top and bottom radios? I have the same TKM's...1-720,
1-760 ch. The only problem I have every had was with decreased sensitivity,
but for $80, I got the tune-up from TKM with great service.
I would be cautious about picking and poking and spending money you may not need
to spend. What type of plane? (Mine's a 172) If you are getting a "carrier"
w/o modulation, then the radio is going into Transmit but the mic audio is
not connecting. Check your mic connections. Clean up the male plugs with some
fine sand paper...or just plug them in-an-out a few times. If you have anything
else in the line, remove it. Such as a intercom box. Go back to the basic's...such
as when the problem exist...use the external mic vs. a headset. Eliminate
all the periperals and start with a bare system. Once that works, then
start plugging in the extra's. If all this fails, then start to shake, rattle
and roll all the connections.
Let us know how you make out. Don't forget to fly the plane first.
Gary
k1gk(at)arrl.net
>>> andrew.p.sanders(at)boeing.com 04/17/02 06:55PM >>>
--> Avionics-List message posted by: "Sanders, Andrew P"
Not sure if this question is better addressed in the aeroelectric or
avionics lists so here it goes to both.
I have two TKM navcom replacements for Cessna ARC radios. They work very
well and I'm happy with them. They were in the airplane when I bought it
several years ago and I'd buy them again if I needed inexpensive
replacements.
I have had a problem a few times lately where when both units are on and I
transmit on one, I can barely hear it in the headset and others report
hearing a carrier but no modulation. If I power off either one of the
radios, transmitting works fine. This is intermittant and goes away after a
half hour or so. Of course, I haven't been able to duplicate this on the
ground. Both radios have been sent off for tuneup by TKM, arrived back
yellow tagged.
Poking around, there are a couple of relays that I wonder if are associated
with the problem. First, there is factory "patch panel" that gathers
various avionics wiring, such as audio in/out, grounds, etc. On this board
is a relay Potter-Brumfield KHP17D11. Without detatching the board from the
firewall and tracing the wiring on the back, I don't know what it does.
I've been checking to see if I could find a replacement and it is obsoleate
and unavailable.
There is a second relay in the wire bundle behind the instrument panel,
Potter-Brumfield #R10-E1Y2-V185. It is a DPDT unit that looks like is wired
to buffer between the PPT's and the avionics. It seems that instead of
having the PPT's in parallel to the "patch panel" they in parallel to the
relay that then grounds the "tip" line to the avionics.
This one is available and inexpensive.
The problem kinda "feels" like a something sticking and these seem like
likly suspects, but I don't want to trouble shoot by throwing parts at it.
Any ideas? Am I even going in the right direction?
Thanks,
Andrew
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Aircraft wire arc tracking question |
>
> Airliners have a lot of high-voltage, 400 cycle
> a/c power that's especially dangerous if the
> wire's insulation is compromised. For our 14/28
> volt airplanes the 22759/16 wire has amassed
> a very good track record in the industry.
>
> You weren't considering Kapton wire for your
> airplane, were you?
>
Of course not !
But I was impressed by those stories of airliners with burning wires,
firecracker sounds etc.
Cheers
Gilles
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Aircraft wire arc tracking question |
><Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr>
>
> >
> > Airliners have a lot of high-voltage, 400 cycle
> > a/c power that's especially dangerous if the
> > wire's insulation is compromised. For our 14/28
> > volt airplanes the 22759/16 wire has amassed
> > a very good track record in the industry.
> >
> > You weren't considering Kapton wire for your
> > airplane, were you?
> >
>
>Of course not !
>But I was impressed by those stories of airliners with burning wires,
>firecracker sounds etc.
Just checking! :-) (Actually, I did have a builder
consider using some Kapton he found in a local surplus
store a few years back) I was disappointed in the approach
that the author of that website took to present
factual data about a serious issue. His writing is
so punctuated with rhetoric and words designed to whip
up hysteria that he dilutes the effectiveness of his
mission.
Politicians and bureaucrats are nearly impossible to
embarrass and the easiest charges to dismiss are those
delivered like a soapbox crusader on a street corner
with a megaphone. It's a sure bet that real data
becomes hidden in the noise.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fwd: voltage warning |
>>Bob,
>> Thanks for a great book in The Aeroelectric Connection. I recommend it
>> to anyone who asks about wiring in my Glastar.
Thank you! I'm pleased that you find the work useful.
>> I have a B&C Hi/Lo voltage sensor that seems to have a mind of it's
>> own. It will occasionally flash the indicator even thou the voltage is
>> in the normal range. I have a Rocky Mountain engine monitor in place so
>> I can read the buss voltage from there, but I have also connected my
>> Omega digital multimeter directly to the sensor and it's within a couple
>> of tenths of a volt of the engine monitor reading.
>> I'm using an automotive solid state voltage regulator (VR166 type) and
>> the B&C L40 alternator on my 360 Lycoming and they seem to work just
>> fine. My question is, can I utilize the "I" terminal on the regulator as
>> a failure indicator for the alternator to replace the voltage sensor.
Why substitute for something that needs fixing? The symptoms
you describe speak to a possible problem inside the device.
Perhaps a broken component or poorly soldered joint.
>> I can't seem to find any wiring diagrams for the regulator that use
>> this terminal. I've installed your crowbar over voltage sensor with a
>> field circuit breaker right next to the master switch, so I probably
>> don't really need another over voltage sensor.
Agreed.
>> A failure light on the alternator should warn me about a low voltage
>> situation. Am I all wet here?
The "I" terminal on the automotive regulators is nearly
to useless . . . Let's fix the sensor you already have.
How long have you had it? Have you talked to B&C about
this problem?
>>Thanks, Charlie Burton & Glastar 331Fox
Consider joining us on the Aero-Electric List. This is a good
place to carry on this kind of discussion. Lots of folks get to
share in the discussion and answers.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | 22759 /16 vs /34 |
Hello,
I keep reading about 22759/16 and I noticed that my
wires are different. They are 22759/34 (the /34) is
different.
Is there any impact? What is the difference. Is it
OK for me to use the /34 wires?
Will these transform my CH601 into a F15?
Thanks!
Michel
=====
----------------------------
Michel Therrien CH601-HD
http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby
http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601
http://taxes.yahoo.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Carl Coulter <coulter(at)gci.net> |
| Subject: | Electrical Circuits Like Plumbing... |
Someone (Andrew Sanders) asked me to describe how I think
electrical
circuits are like plumbing... This is not something that I came up
with, but at the same time I can't remember having learned it(?)
******************************************************
If one wanted a mechanical analogy for electricity. I would probably
pick hydraulics. It is a closed system - what goes out comes back.
This idea I got while searching for an electrical equivalent to
hydraulics. Electricity is easy to understand - hydraulics now, that's
tough -)
carl
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 22759 /16 vs /34 |
>
>Hello,
>
>I keep reading about 22759/16 and I noticed that my
>wires are different. They are 22759/34 (the /34) is
>different.
>
>Is there any impact? What is the difference. Is it
>OK for me to use the /34 wires?
>
>Will these transform my CH601 into a F15?
No . . . 22759 comes in lots of slash-numbers,
none of which are anything other than Tefzel and/or
close cousins to Tefzel.
Here's some data sheets that speak to some of
the variants . . .
http://209.134.106.21/articles/WireData/22759_1.pdf
http://209.134.106.21/articles/WireData/22759_2.pdf
http://209.134.106.21/articles/WireData/22759_3.pdf
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Electrical Circuits Like Plumbing... |
No, no, no, you've got it backwards. Hydraulics is easy and electricity is
magic, at least to us chemical engineers.
Best regards,
Rob Housman
Europa XS Tri-Gear
90% complete... you know the rest.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Carl
Coulter
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Electrical Circuits Like Plumbing...
Someone (Andrew Sanders) asked me to describe how I think
electrical
circuits are like plumbing... This is not something that I came up
with, but at the same time I can't remember having learned it(?)
******************************************************
If one wanted a mechanical analogy for electricity. I would probably
pick hydraulics. It is a closed system - what goes out comes back.
This idea I got while searching for an electrical equivalent to
hydraulics. Electricity is easy to understand - hydraulics now, that's
tough -)
carl
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | William Mills <courierboy(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Aircraft wire arc tracking question |
Well said Bob -
That site has so many exclamation points that my high school
"critical thinking" class kept me from reading more than three
paragraphs.
Bill
-------snip-----------
> I was disappointed in the approach
> that the author of that website took to present
> factual data about a serious issue. His writing is
> so punctuated with rhetoric and words designed to whip
> up hysteria that he dilutes the effectiveness of his
> mission.
>
> Politicians and bureaucrats are nearly impossible to
> embarrass and the easiest charges to dismiss are those
> delivered like a soapbox crusader on a street corner
> with a megaphone. It's a sure bet that real data
> becomes hidden in the noise.
>
> Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | mprather(at)spro.net |
| Subject: | Re: Electrical Circuits Like Plumbing... |
You're right. Electricity is like hydraulics. A good refinement
of my explanation. Though I think more people have exposure to
house plumbing than tractor hydraulics.
Matt Prather
----- Original Message -----
From: Carl Coulter <coulter(at)gci.net>
Date: Thursday, April 18, 2002 11:28 am
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Electrical Circuits Like Plumbing...
>
> Someone (Andrew Sanders) asked me to describe how I think
> electrical
> circuits are like plumbing... This is not something that I came up
> with, but at the same time I can't remember having learned it(?)
>
> ******************************************************
>
> If one wanted a mechanical analogy for electricity. I would
> probably
> pick hydraulics. It is a closed system - what goes out comes back.
>
> This idea I got while searching for an electrical equivalent to
> hydraulics. Electricity is easy to understand - hydraulics now,
> that's
> tough -)
>
> carl
>
>
> _-
>
- The AeroElectric-List Email Forum -
> _-
>
!! NEW !!
> _-
>
List Related Information
> _-
>
=======================================================================
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Aircraft wire arc tracking question |
> I was disappointed in the approach
> that the author of that website took to present
> factual data about a serious issue. His writing is
> so punctuated with rhetoric and words designed to whip
> up hysteria that he dilutes the effectiveness of his
> mission.>
> Politicians and bureaucrats are nearly impossible to
> embarrass and the easiest charges to dismiss are those
> delivered like a soapbox crusader on a street corner
> with a megaphone. It's a sure bet that real data
> becomes hidden in the noise.
.
Sure.
Out of curiosity, could you sum up some real facts about this issue ?
Thank you
Gilles
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Aircraft wire arc tracking question |
><Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr>
>
> > I was disappointed in the approach
> > that the author of that website took to present
> > factual data about a serious issue. His writing is
> > so punctuated with rhetoric and words designed to whip
> > up hysteria that he dilutes the effectiveness of his
> > mission.>
> > Politicians and bureaucrats are nearly impossible to
> > embarrass and the easiest charges to dismiss are those
> > delivered like a soapbox crusader on a street corner
> > with a megaphone. It's a sure bet that real data
> > becomes hidden in the noise.
>.
>
>Sure.
>Out of curiosity, could you sum up some real facts about this issue ?
>
>Thank you
Kapton is very tough and provides effective insulation
and protective qualities when new. Old installations
seem to suffer from cracking that allows contaminants
to come in contact with hot wires. In 115 volt
systems (and 28v to a lesser degree) the contaminants
become more and more conductive such that small, low-energy
arcing degrades more of the adjacent insulation.
Eventually, the condition progresses to a high-energy
event that causes smoke, propagation of failures into
other systems and sometimes fire. It's a situation
that grows over system operating time. Given that
we don't use Kapton and further given that the heavy
iron flies more hours per month than we do in 10 years,
it just isn't an issue for us.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Aircraft wire arc tracking question |
> Eventually, the condition progresses to a high-energy
> event that causes smoke, propagation of failures into
> other systems and sometimes fire. It's a situation
> that grows over system operating time. Given that
> we don't use Kapton and further given that the heavy
> iron flies more hours per month than we do in 10 years,
> it just isn't an issue for us.
>
Oh, I was not worried about our wonderbirds !
My concern was, we all do fly on big birds too....albeit as passengers.
Thanks for the info,
Gilles
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Sanders, Andrew P" <andrew.p.sanders(at)boeing.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Re: Transmit problem |
Andrew wrote:
... Snip ...
>>I have had a problem a few times lately where when both units are on and I
>>transmit on one, I can barely hear it in the headset and others report
>>hearing a carrier but no modulation.
... Snip ...
>>Potter-Brumfield KHP17D11
... Snip ...
Bob responded:
... Snip ...
> http://www.rfparts.com/relay.html says they can supply the 24 VDC
> version. Also http://www.surplussales.com/Relays/RESealPI-1.html
> and http://eceserv0.ece.wisc.edu/~eceparts/RELAY_DC.HTM
... Snip ...
> First, as I recall, the covers on both of those relays
> can be removed. I'd pull them out of their sockets
> and slip the covers off.
> Use some contact cleaner in a spray can to hose
> down the contacts and use a piece of ordinary copy machine
> paper as if it were sandpaper to polish the contacts.
... Snip ...
Gary responded:
> Have you tried swaping the top and bottom radios?
... Snip ...
> If you are getting a "carrier" w/o modulation, then
> the radio is going into Transmit but the mic audio
> is not connecting. Check your mic connections.
> Clean up the male plugs with some fine sand paper...
> or just plug them in-an-out a few times. If you have
> anything else in the line, remove it. Such as a
> intercom box. Go back to the basic's...such as when
> the problem exist...use the external mic vs. a headset.
... Snip ...
Gentlemen:
Thanks for the response. Yes, I found those sources for the KHP
relay, but the one I have is 12v not 24. I did find a source
of the 12v coil ones, but they have a $250 per item minimum.
Neither of the relays is plugged in. Both are soldered. I did
find the R10 new surplus for 3.50, so I'll probably just replace
that one. The KHP I'll clean in place.
Here are the previous actions I've taken:
first thing I tried was pulling the plugs on the portable intercom
and hooking directly to the radios.
Tried several different headsets, through both Pilot & Copilot jacks.
Then cleaned all the contacts on both jacks & plugs, switched radio
positions cleaning their connectors while doing it.
The failure still occurs with the only seemingly common point being
the second mentioned relay or associated wires/connections.
All the other connections in the circuit are soldered or crimped
rings and secure.
I'll do the clean up and see if it helps.
Should anyone have any other thoughts, I'd love to hear them.
Thanks all,
Andrew
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom Barnes" <skytop(at)megsinet.net> |
| Subject: | RV-6 antenna placement |
Bob,
I have all my antennas in hand and no holes drilled yet.
Will you please critique my plan for their placement on my RV-6
(slider).
1) AV-17 Comm antenna bent wire, 26" long (10+16). Mount on
floor (with .063 doublers just forward of fuel selector valve), 24
inches aft of firewall, on the center line.
2) Transponder antenna, 2.5" long. Mount 3" aft of firewall
approx 7" inboard RH side.
3) AV-569 Marker beacon, boat type 12" long. Mount 3" aft of
firewall 3-5" inboard LH side.
4) CI-215 VOR/GS/LOC cat whiskers, each rod 23.25". Mount at
least 26" aft of COMM antenna (topic #1 above). At first, I planned to
mount this on the vertical stab, but after rethinking the eye safety
issue, I will mount it down under the belly near the center line.
5) ELT antenna mounts horizontally to a piece of 2X2 angle in
the empennage hidden by the fuse-stab fairings.
6) GPS antenna just forward of wind shield.
7) Van's wind screen antenna for backup COMM.
Objectives (in no particular order):
Good reception/transmission
Minimize the number of coax cables that have to be routed over the spar;
Keep antennas out of the way of engine grime as much as possible.
Eye safety
Thanks in advance for your help.
Tom Barnes
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Don Eaves" <doneaves(at)midsouth.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Home Grown Electronic Ignition: |
Bob - Anyone -
Has anyone looked at what it would take to build an Electronic Ignition?
Would it be worth it - Time & Money?
Can it be done?
Where do we start?
Take a standard automotive Electronic ignition - converting it or
Take a off the shelf automotive or 4 cylinder motorcycle Electronic
Conversion Kit - converting it...
Yes I know there are some great products on the market -
But if you could save a buck - Have the equal or better reliability -
And Learn something in the process...
Don Eaves
RV6 Flying 115+- Hours
doneaves(at)midsouth.rr.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Aircraft wire arc tracking question |
><Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr>
>
> > Eventually, the condition progresses to a high-energy
> > event that causes smoke, propagation of failures into
> > other systems and sometimes fire. It's a situation
> > that grows over system operating time. Given that
> > we don't use Kapton and further given that the heavy
> > iron flies more hours per month than we do in 10 years,
> > it just isn't an issue for us.
> >
>
>Oh, I was not worried about our wonderbirds !
>My concern was, we all do fly on big birds too....albeit as passengers.
Given the number of departures on any given day that
precede a comfortable arrival at some remote airport
and given that the numbers of uncomfortable arrivals
for any reason are miniscule by comparison, I don't
give wires a second thought when putting my buns
into the seat of one of big iron birds.
Got two trips coming up next month (first airline
travel since 9-11) and I'm not looking forward to
them . . . and it has nothing to do with how
well the airplanes are designed or maintained.
I'm working hard to maintain the proper mind-set
for getting through the symbolism-before-substance
security checks without being accosted . . .
I wonder if the guy who maintains the bad-wire
website flies? The big iron birds are going to
have to get pretty bad before they even begin to
be as hazardous as driving to the airport to get
on one.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie and Tupper England <cengland(at)netdoor.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Home Grown Electronic Ignition: |
Don Eaves wrote:
>
>
> Bob - Anyone -
>
> Has anyone looked at what it would take to build an Electronic Ignition?
> Would it be worth it - Time & Money?
> Can it be done?
> Where do we start?
> Take a standard automotive Electronic ignition - converting it or
> Take a off the shelf automotive or 4 cylinder motorcycle Electronic
> Conversion Kit - converting it...
> Yes I know there are some great products on the market -
> But if you could save a buck - Have the equal or better reliability -
> And Learn something in the process...
>
> Don Eaves
> RV6 Flying 115+- Hours
> doneaves(at)midsouth.rr.com
>
Go to:
http://www.nonprofitnet.com/contact/
& ask the same question. There's a gentleman in Oklahoma
City who designed one using off the shelf auto parts that
used the shell of a magneto to house it, & there are non-mag
variations as well. Contact! magazine ran an article about
it years ago.
Or, call Mark Landoll (advertises harmonic dampeners in the
back of Sport Aviation). Mark has one flying on his RV-4;
the designer is based on the same private strip near OKC.
Charlie
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Air-Tec Starters & Alternators... |
| From: | czechsix(at)juno.com |
Just some FYI for those interested....I talked to Air-Tec in Florida
yesterday to learn more about their starters and alternators. Apparently
they have been been in business for some time catering especially to the
airboat market, but also a number of exp. aircraft. They have two
starters that work on Lycomings they call the model 1.0 and 1.4. They
cost $199. They are both Nippo Dienso starters with custom brackets
made to mount to a Lycoming. They use a solenoid to engage the starter
(not a Bendix drive). The starter motors are not permanent magnet like
Sky-Tec or Magnaflite use.....the advantage being that they are a bit
more efficient and easier on the battery, however, they are quite a bit
heavier. The more powerful 1.4 model which they recommend for the O-360
is 14 lbs, and the 1.0 model is 12 lbs. For me this is a big enough
weight penalty that I will go with the Sky-Tec instead (around 7 and a
half pounds for reference...). However if you're on a tight budget,
and/or don't mind having some extra weight up front (like some of you
RV-4 and -6 guys with wood props...) this might be a great way to go.
Sounds like the units have a good reputation for reliability that I wish
Sky-Tec could match.
Air-Tec also sells a 50 amp Mitsubishi alternator with brackets and a
regulator that includes OV protection for $350. Sounds like a pretty
reasonable deal. Total weight including the brackets and regulator is
11 lbs...not sure how this compares to the N.D. alternators a lot of guys
are running that are typically around 6-7 lbs for a 40 amp and 8-9 lbs
for a 60 amp.....but I think that's just the alternator and doesn't
include the brackets (?) or the regulator / relay / OV protection /etc.
Add it all up and it might come out to around 11 lbs like the Air-Tec
system.
Hope this helps somebody....
--Mark Navratil
Cedar Rapids, Iowa
RV-8A finish kit....just finished cutting/bending/welding my control
sticks....happy with them now....
From: "Donald Mei" <don_mei(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: RV-List: Skytec Starter
--> RV-List message posted by: "Donald Mei"
Dear listers,
Mark Navratil wrote that for money's sake he will probably go with a
Sky-Tec. You all are ignoring a small starter manufacturer that caters
specificly to the kit plane market, Air-tec. I have one of their light
weight starters on my RV and it (combined with an odyssey bat) spins the
engine like crazy. (1 light speed ignition, no problems) The best part
is
that the Air-tec is built on some Jap auto starter (reliable) and only
costs
$200. The following is info from the Yeller Pages:
AIR-TEC INC (DICK WATERS) 800-366-4746 EXPERIMENTAL (NON-CERTIFIED)
ENGINES
AND AUTOMOTIVE STARTERS W/BRACKETS FOR LYCOMINGS
Don't fail to consider this guy. Light weight, great service, and 600+
hours of trouble free service on my RV.
Dare to spend less.
Don Mei
RV-4 - N92CT
3B9 - Chester, CT
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Regulator question |
| From: | czechsix(at)juno.com |
Bob,
Just have a question about alternator regulators....I have a B&C
regulator, and was under the impression that it would work with pretty
much any externally regulated alternator. However yesterday when I
talked to the guy at Air-Tec, who sells an externally regulated
Mitsubishi alternator with a regulator as a set, he was hesitant to sell
me the alternator by itself....he said not all externally regulated
alternators work the same way (and went on to give me several examples of
Jap. alternators that work different ways...and something about some of
them having a "stator" connection as well as a "field" connection, some
of them only having a "field" connection, etc). He was not familiar with
B&C's regulator and could not guarantee it would work and said it could
ruin the regulator if I hooked it up wrong. I didn't follow everything
he threw at me but the gist of my question is: in your experience what
do I need to watch out for if I choose to use something other than B&C's
beautiful but pricey alternator? For example my local alternator shop
sells a reman N.D. 50 amp externally regulated alternator off a early
'80's Honda Civic for $45, and Mark Landoll who advertises in Sport
Aviation and Kitplanes sells a similar unit for $50. Is there a "gotcha"
I need to watch out for in getting an alternator that might not work with
the B&C regulator?
Thanks,
--Mark Navratil
Cedar Rapids, Iowa
RV-8A finish kit stuff....
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Regulator question |
>
>Bob,
>
>Just have a question about alternator regulators....I have a B&C
>regulator, and was under the impression that it would work with pretty
>much any externally regulated alternator. However yesterday when I
>talked to the guy at Air-Tec, who sells an externally regulated
>Mitsubishi alternator with a regulator as a set, he was hesitant to sell
>me the alternator by itself....he said not all externally regulated
>alternators work the same way (and went on to give me several examples of
>Jap. alternators that work different ways...and something about some of
>them having a "stator" connection as well as a "field" connection, some
>of them only having a "field" connection, etc). He was not familiar with
>B&C's regulator and could not guarantee it would work and said it could
>ruin the regulator if I hooked it up wrong.
He's right . . . not all regulators work the same . . .
> I didn't follow everything
>he threw at me but the gist of my question is: in your experience what
>do I need to watch out for if I choose to use something other than B&C's
>beautiful but pricey alternator? For example my local alternator shop
>sells a reman N.D. 50 amp externally regulated alternator off a early
>'80's Honda Civic for $45, and Mark Landoll who advertises in Sport
>Aviation and Kitplanes sells a similar unit for $50. Is there a "gotcha"
>I need to watch out for in getting an alternator that might not work with
>the B&C regulator?
. . . but I've never encountered a mix/match situation of
alternators/regulators that failed to perform within the
design limits of the product. By that, I mean that while
I may have incorporated features into my designs intended
to make my products more desirable than my competitors
but by-in-large, there are no lurking hazards to avoid
in making a selection of which components to pair up
in your airplane.
EXCEPTION: - I developed a special regulator for B&C
that makes their 14V alternators perform well in a 28V
airplane. Some folks do not understand that the alternators
were unchanged from their original 14V configuration.
When paired with a "conventional" 28V reguator, the
alternator field gets smoked.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "William Yamokoski" <yamokosk(at)lmc.cc.mi.us> |
| Subject: | Re: KT-76A/C manuals |
________________________________________________________________________________
"'aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com'" ,
"'avionics-list(at)matronics.com'"
| From: | Tom DeMarino <tvd(at)ix.netcom.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Avionics-List: Transmit problem |
>
>I have had a problem a few times lately where when both units are on and I
>transmit on one, I can barely hear it in the headset and others report
>hearing a carrier but no modulation. If I power off either one of the
>radios, transmitting works fine. This is intermittant and goes away after a
>half hour or so. Of course, I haven't been able to duplicate this on the
>ground. Both radios have been sent off for tuneup by TKM, arrived back
>yellow tagged.
The fact that they work when one is turned off leads me to believe you have
a grounding problem. When you turn one off, you complete the ground for
the other one. I would inspect those bundles under the instrument panel
and check the grounds (or clean them up and re-install). That would be my
first guess... -TOm
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Rotax regulator location |
Hi Bob,
Our kit manufacturer advises to install the Rotax 914 voltage regulator
remote from the engine compartment for temperature reasons.
They suggest we locate it under the front seat or farther back aft of the
baggage compartment.
Are there any drawbacks to such a location ?
Isn't there any voltage drop issue due to wire length ?
Since all the wires go to and from this unit, is it smart to have all these
wires coming from the firewall and then going back to it ?
My preferred location would be mounting the unit on the cabin side of the
firewall, to minimize cable length.
Any advice ?
Thank you,
Gilles
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fergus Kyle" <VE3LVO(at)rac.ca> |
"I wouldn't sweat flying. On the other hand, I wouldn't do anything to draw
attention to myself, either. Who knows what makes 'em decide "YOU! what are
you carrying?"
Actually, I think you mean "I wouldn't sweat riding." Some other
poor fish is doing the 'flying'. Passengers fly, stews fly. Pilots just sit
there.
Cheers, Ferg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rotax regulator location |
><Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr>
>
>Hi Bob,
>
>
>Our kit manufacturer advises to install the Rotax 914 voltage regulator
>remote from the engine compartment for temperature reasons.
>They suggest we locate it under the front seat or farther back aft of the
>baggage compartment.
>
>Are there any drawbacks to such a location ?
Yes . . . the longer the leads in any noise generating installation
the greater the likelihood of coupling noise into other systems.
>Isn't there any voltage drop issue due to wire length ?
Yeah, some . . . but that can be mitigated with larger wire
for a modest weight penalty . .
>Since all the wires go to and from this unit, is it smart to have all these
>wires coming from the firewall and then going back to it ?
>My preferred location would be mounting the unit on the cabin side of the
>firewall, to minimize cable length.
This goes back to issues of putting a product on the market
wherein the builder may not have done their homework.
The easiest thing to do is hedge their bet by asking
future users to "go easy" on this thing . . . words like
"enhanced operating life" are often heard to justify
their pleading.
It's hard for someone to put their shiny new electro-whizzy
in a box and send it out to the hard, cold, hot, shaky, cruel,
wet, world for use by people who don't understand your product
(and shouldn't need to). It's like sending your kid out
the door when he leaves home. I know, I've been there
several times on all counts.
You do the best you are willing to learn how to do in making
your "offspring" perform under the situations it is likely
to encounter and rise up to expectations of future
customers.
If you called Rotax (they'll tell you the same thing all
over again, THEY buy it from somebody else and THEY
don't understand it either. They're not going to tell you
where they get it and let you talk to the guys who designed
it either. So given that we have no window into the heart
of folks who know the most about this product, all we have
to go on is life experiences concerning the product
weighed against what we know to be the elegant design.
I've seen hundreds of airplanes at OSH and elsewhere
that install the Rotax voltage regulator under
the cowl and we're not hearing a great outpouring of
sad stories about regulator life.
We KNOW that the thing BELONGS under the cowl where
the noise can be walled off from potential victims
and wire lengths can be minimized.
Sooooo . . . how to mitigate risk? How big a deal is it
to MOVE it later? Not hard, I suspect, especially
if you make provisions for a later move. How about
putting wires in for the remote location and tie them
off. Probably won't add 1 pound to your airplane.
Run it where you know it should be installed and
during your performance fly-off, put some thermocouples
on the outside of the case and see how warm it REALLY
gets . . . You measure temperatures after an extended
cruise at zero electrical loading, then on next flight
repeat the exercise with maximum loading. This will
tell you two important data points. How much does
the temperature rise due to environmental energy
input and how much hotter does it get due to internally
dissipated energy? You'll need to measure ambient
temps adjacent to the regulator and also on the
base sheet metal to which the regulator is mounted.
THEN, let's talk about it like engineers instead
of worrisome mothers. If we decide that moving
is indeed a good thing to do, then the task will
be minimized. If we decide it's not necessary,
then keep on truck'n and pull out extra wires
at the airplane's first annual.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Keith Hughes" <rv6tc(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 19 Msgs - 04/18/02 |
Waaaaayyyyyyy off topic.....delete if you get easily offended.
I fly for a living.The two hour check in is only BS if you don't get picked
for any of the random inspections. If you get singled out, well, depending
on the airport, it could be close. Two days ago, I was flying out of PDX
(Portland OR). From experience, we know their screening is a little too
"extreme", so when the Captain I was flying with went through, he had
removed anything metal that he could get to, including his wings and his
belt. I didn't go that far, but as it turns out, it didn't matter, we both
beeped. Close to fifteen minutes later I was on my way. I tried to wait
for the Captain, but it became futile. After I went and bought coffee, and
came back and watched them take his shoes off for the second time, I decided
someone needed to get the plane ready. They were picking through his flight
bag asking stupid %$#&#$# questions like "What's this?" while holding his
FAA-mandated FLASHLIGHT. Funny part (to me not him) was that he had just
returned form Saudi flying F-16's for the Guard in the "War on Terror". He
got through after 25 minutes ( and we didn't have to wait in the line that
was backed up to the counter). We departed late.
One other story. We (at the airlines) have ZERO influence on who gets
tagged for random checks. The color of your friend's skin or his name or
anything else have nothing to do with it. There is a computer program that
selects the individuals. One reason I'm sure of this is that we had two
middle eastern men boarding the plane a few weeks ago that were acting
"strange' and giving our F/As a hard time. You know what the Captain and I
could do about it? Nothing. Why? Because we live in a society that
"cares" more about your "rights" not to be "profiled" than it does your
safety. Read the paper.... their are scumbag lawyers that are willing to
sue the airlines for "profiling" people because of their nationality. But
rest assured, they won't say a word about the treatment grandma gets when
they strip search her because she was carrying knitting-needles.
Sorry.... That turned into more of a rant than I wanted, but doing this
daily gets a little old. Just be glad you didn't get me started on guns in
the cockpit..........
Keith Hughes
RV-6 Denver
(my other plane is a 737)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Joe Larson" <jpl(at)showpage.org>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 19 Msgs - 04/18/02
>
> I ran into a friend of mine in New York airport.
> Small world. A great guy, but he has a dusty
> complexion. (Maybe from a Greek mother or
> grandmother.) His family had their luggage
> searched at the NW counters. Then they also
> got pulled aside while getting on the plane.
>
> The sum of my experience -- that 2 hour early arrival
> they want is B.S. The airlines have always wanted us
> to arrive a lot earlier than necessary. They're using this
> as an excuse to get us their earlier 'cause it makes their
> jobs easier.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorton(at)cyberus.ca> |
| Subject: | Light Speed Plasma II EI wiring |
I'm installing a Light Speed Plasma II electronic ignition in my
RV-8. Klaus Savier (Light Speed's owner) strongly recommends running
the shielded power and ground wires directly to the battery
terminals. He says this is needed to prevent radio noise. I'm
powering the thing from a battery bus, which is right next to my rear
mounted battery, so the power line has to go all the way back there
anyway. But, I would much rather just run the ground line to the
ground block up in the forward fuselage.
Has anyone installed their Light Speed EI with the ground line going
to a ground block instead of the battery negative terminal? How did
it work out?
Thanks,
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | George Braly <gwbraly(at)gami.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rotax regulator location |
Robert,
I have done some extensive temperature measurements under the cowl on spam
cans, including turbocharged spam cans.
If you land a turbocharged Bonanza, with the CHTs deliberately held high on
final approach ( ie, > 380F, cowl flaps closed, gear down flaps down,
dragging the airplane in at high power for a long final) on a 105F dead calm
evening, and then taxi 100 yards, shut down, and put the airplane into a
closed hangar, what you see is that the temperature of the case of such
things as the magneto and the fuel pump begin to rise in temperature as they
heat soak.
They rise steadily for about 30 to 35 minutes, and reached a peak of about
210F, if I recall correctly. After that, they start to cool off.
I think the worst heat problem is on the 30 minute quick turn fuel stop with
the subsequent re-start.
Just a data point for everybody.
Regards, George
-----Original Message-----
From: Robert L. Nuckolls, III [mailto:nuckolls(at)kscable.com]
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Rotax regulator location
><Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr>
>
>Hi Bob,
>
>
>Our kit manufacturer advises to install the Rotax 914 voltage regulator
>remote from the engine compartment for temperature reasons.
>They suggest we locate it under the front seat or farther back aft of the
>baggage compartment.
>
>Are there any drawbacks to such a location ?
Yes . . . the longer the leads in any noise generating installation
the greater the likelihood of coupling noise into other systems.
>Isn't there any voltage drop issue due to wire length ?
Yeah, some . . . but that can be mitigated with larger wire
for a modest weight penalty . .
>Since all the wires go to and from this unit, is it smart to have all these
>wires coming from the firewall and then going back to it ?
>My preferred location would be mounting the unit on the cabin side of the
>firewall, to minimize cable length.
This goes back to issues of putting a product on the market
wherein the builder may not have done their homework.
The easiest thing to do is hedge their bet by asking
future users to "go easy" on this thing . . . words like
"enhanced operating life" are often heard to justify
their pleading.
It's hard for someone to put their shiny new electro-whizzy
in a box and send it out to the hard, cold, hot, shaky, cruel,
wet, world for use by people who don't understand your product
(and shouldn't need to). It's like sending your kid out
the door when he leaves home. I know, I've been there
several times on all counts.
You do the best you are willing to learn how to do in making
your "offspring" perform under the situations it is likely
to encounter and rise up to expectations of future
customers.
If you called Rotax (they'll tell you the same thing all
over again, THEY buy it from somebody else and THEY
don't understand it either. They're not going to tell you
where they get it and let you talk to the guys who designed
it either. So given that we have no window into the heart
of folks who know the most about this product, all we have
to go on is life experiences concerning the product
weighed against what we know to be the elegant design.
I've seen hundreds of airplanes at OSH and elsewhere
that install the Rotax voltage regulator under
the cowl and we're not hearing a great outpouring of
sad stories about regulator life.
We KNOW that the thing BELONGS under the cowl where
the noise can be walled off from potential victims
and wire lengths can be minimized.
Sooooo . . . how to mitigate risk? How big a deal is it
to MOVE it later? Not hard, I suspect, especially
if you make provisions for a later move. How about
putting wires in for the remote location and tie them
off. Probably won't add 1 pound to your airplane.
Run it where you know it should be installed and
during your performance fly-off, put some thermocouples
on the outside of the case and see how warm it REALLY
gets . . . You measure temperatures after an extended
cruise at zero electrical loading, then on next flight
repeat the exercise with maximum loading. This will
tell you two important data points. How much does
the temperature rise due to environmental energy
input and how much hotter does it get due to internally
dissipated energy? You'll need to measure ambient
temps adjacent to the regulator and also on the
base sheet metal to which the regulator is mounted.
THEN, let's talk about it like engineers instead
of worrisome mothers. If we decide that moving
is indeed a good thing to do, then the task will
be minimized. If we decide it's not necessary,
then keep on truck'n and pull out extra wires
at the airplane's first annual.
Bob . . .
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Carter" <dcarter(at)datarecall.net> |
| Subject: | Fw: RV-List: Electrical Wire Question (lheated pitot |
tube)
AeroElectric Bob,
On the RV-list, Mike Nellis posted his data on "temp vs time" of a 5814
heated pitot tube. In his web document he expressed concern about the 425
deg F temp of the probe sitting on the bench in still air. The 20 amp peak
inrush and stabilized 9 amp current draw seem normal from what I remember
others saying.
Any comments?
David Carter
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Nellis" <mike(at)bmnellis.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Electrical Wire Question
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Mike Nellis"
>
> Hi Bob,
>
> I did some limited testing on the current draw for the 5814 heated pitot
> tube and you can see the graph and data at this link.
> http://bmnellis.com/pitotcurrent.htm
>
> Some others have already mentioned it, but I'd go with the 14 ga wire and
> play it safe. Keep in mind that my data was obtained with the pitot tube
> just sitting on the bench. A better process would have been to emerse the
> pitot tube in a bucket of water to simulate the cooling effects of moist
air
> at 180mph. The peak current draw was approx 19 amps and stabilized at
> around 9 amps.
>
> Mike Nellis - http://bmnellis.com
> Georgetown, TX
> Waiting to start Fuselage
> RV6 N699BM Reserved
> 1947 Stinson 108-2 N9666K
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <Bobpaulo(at)aol.com>
> To:
> Subject: RV-List: Electrical Wire Question
>
>
> > --> RV-List message posted by: Bobpaulo(at)aol.com
> >
> > I am in the process of installing a heated pitot tube that will draw
> between
> > 6.5 to 8 amps. Here are my intentions and tell me if I am on the correct
> > path:
> >
> > 1. I plan to use 16 gauge wires and insulate them (again) with 1/8 inch
> > shrink tubing all the way to the panel.
> >
> > 2. I am going to use one shrink tube to contain both wires. Or would 2
> > separate be overkill????
> >
> > 3. I will install one bay toward tip so my run should be 16 ft. Max
(very
> > generous estimate).
> >
> > In looking at the wire chart it appears I could even use 18
guage-although
> I
> > am new at this. It seems that I would be better off (safer) to use 16
> > gauge????
> >
> > Thoughts guys???? Bob in Arkansas (RV-6)
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorton(at)cyberus.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Fw: RV-List: Electrical Wire Question |
(lheated pitot tube)
Well, these things are designed to produce enough heat to cover the
worst case conditions - high speed, cool temperatures and lots of
super-cooled water droplets. Some aircraft I am familiar with will
burn out the pitot heat if it is left running too long when on the
ground. Assuming you don't turn it on until you are taking the
runway for takeoff, and you turn it off soon after landing, I don't
see a problem. Even if you forget to turn it off after landing, odds
are you'll have the aircraft shutdown before it overheats. You'll
realize it was left on when you try to put the pitot cover on and
burn your hand. :)
Seriously, I'm going to have checklists for each major phase of
flight, and I am going to pull out the card and read it, instead of
assuming I've got the checks memorized. The pitot heat will be on
the appropriate checklists.
Kevin Horton
>
>
>AeroElectric Bob,
>
>On the RV-list, Mike Nellis posted his data on "temp vs time" of a 5814
>heated pitot tube. In his web document he expressed concern about the 425
>deg F temp of the probe sitting on the bench in still air. The 20 amp peak
>inrush and stabilized 9 amp current draw seem normal from what I remember
>others saying.
>
>Any comments?
>
>David Carter
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Mike Nellis" <mike(at)bmnellis.com>
>To: ; "Bob Paulo"
>Subject: Re: RV-List: Electrical Wire Question
>
>
>> --> RV-List message posted by: "Mike Nellis"
>>
>> Hi Bob,
>>
>> I did some limited testing on the current draw for the 5814 heated pitot
>> tube and you can see the graph and data at this link.
>> http://bmnellis.com/pitotcurrent.htm
>>
>> Some others have already mentioned it, but I'd go with the 14 ga wire and
>> play it safe. Keep in mind that my data was obtained with the pitot tube
>> just sitting on the bench. A better process would have been to emerse the
>> pitot tube in a bucket of water to simulate the cooling effects of moist
>air
>> at 180mph. The peak current draw was approx 19 amps and stabilized at
>> around 9 amps.
>>
>> Mike Nellis - http://bmnellis.com
>> Georgetown, TX
>> Waiting to start Fuselage
>> RV6 N699BM Reserved
>> 1947 Stinson 108-2 N9666K
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: <Bobpaulo(at)aol.com>
>> To:
>> Subject: RV-List: Electrical Wire Question
>>
>>
>> > --> RV-List message posted by: Bobpaulo(at)aol.com
>> >
>> > I am in the process of installing a heated pitot tube that will draw
>> between
>> > 6.5 to 8 amps. Here are my intentions and tell me if I am on the correct
>> > path:
>> >
>> > 1. I plan to use 16 gauge wires and insulate them (again) with 1/8 inch
>> > shrink tubing all the way to the panel.
>> >
>> > 2. I am going to use one shrink tube to contain both wires. Or would 2
>> > separate be overkill????
>> >
>> > 3. I will install one bay toward tip so my run should be 16 ft. Max
>(very
>> > generous estimate).
>> >
>> > In looking at the wire chart it appears I could even use 18
>guage-although
>> I
>> > am new at this. It seems that I would be better off (safer) to use 16
>> > gauge????
>> >
>> > Thoughts guys???? Bob in Arkansas (RV-6)
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Light Speed Plasma II EI wiring |
>
>I'm installing a Light Speed Plasma II electronic ignition in my
>RV-8. Klaus Savier (Light Speed's owner) strongly recommends running
>the shielded power and ground wires directly to the battery
>terminals. He says this is needed to prevent radio noise. I'm
>powering the thing from a battery bus, which is right next to my rear
>mounted battery, so the power line has to go all the way back there
>anyway. But, I would much rather just run the ground line to the
>ground block up in the forward fuselage.
With all due respect for my good friend Klaus and
his fine product, this is BS. If I were to levy
a requirement like this upon one of my customers
flying a certified iron bird, I'd get tarred,
feathered and ridden out of Dodge on my slide
rule . . . that is if the FAA didn't get to me
first.
Wire this, or any other device, so as to achieve
the elegant solution with respect to operability
and failure tolerance. WHEN and IF a noise problem
arises, let's see if it can be mitigated with
simple and common techniques that have been
available to us for decades. Failing victory
on this effort, we go hammer on Klaus to clean
up his product!
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rotax regulator location |
Bob,
Thank you once again for your answer.
> >They suggest we locate it under the front seat or farther back aft of the
> >baggage compartment.
> >
> >Are there any drawbacks to such a location ?
>
> Yes . . . the longer the leads in any noise generating installation
> the greater the likelihood of coupling noise into other systems.
>
> >Isn't there any voltage drop issue due to wire length ?
>
> Yeah, some . . . but that can be mitigated with larger wire
> for a modest weight penalty . .
>
OK
asking
> future users to "go easy" on this thing . . . words like
> "enhanced operating life" are often heard to justify
> their pleading.
Yes. In the (912) manual they say the rectifier can be damage by
temperatures above 80C(176 F). They don't say anything in the pdf newer
version downloaded from Rotax.
>
..snip...
>
> I've seen hundreds of airplanes at OSH and elsewhere
> that install the Rotax voltage regulator under
> the cowl and we're not hearing a great outpouring of
> sad stories about regulator life.>
> We KNOW that the thing BELONGS under the cowl where
> the noise can be walled off from potential victims
> and wire lengths can be minimized.
Sure. What is a little different here is we're dealing with a turbo
version, and the cowl is a tight fit around the engine and exhaust system.
So rather high temperatures are reached under the cowl during normal
operation and even HIGHER some time after shutting down.
>
> Sooooo . . . how to mitigate risk? How big a deal is it
> to MOVE it later? Not hard, I suspect, especially
> if you make provisions for a later move. How about
> putting wires in for the remote location and tie them
> off. Probably won't add 1 pound to your airplane.
>
> Run it where you know it should be installed and
> during your performance fly-off, put some thermocouples
> on the outside of the case and see how warm it REALLY
> gets . . . You measure temperatures after an extended
> cruise at zero electrical loading, then on next flight
> repeat the exercise with maximum loading. This will
> tell you two important data points. How much does
> the temperature rise due to environmental energy
> input and how much hotter does it get due to internally
> dissipated energy? You'll need to measure ambient
> temps adjacent to the regulator and also on the
> base sheet metal to which the regulator is mounted.
The kit manufacturer has already done extensive flight testing with many
thermocouples in different places under the cowling. I heard the
temperatures are a bit on the high side, but they did not publish their
results.
I'll try to question the test pilot next time I go to the factory, hopefully
within two weeks.
>
> THEN, let's talk about it like engineers instead
> of worrisome mothers. If we decide that moving
> is indeed a good thing to do, then the task will
> be minimized. If we decide it's not necessary,
> then keep on truck'n and pull out extra wires
> at the airplane's first annual.
>
Well, what we're trying to do is doing it reasonably right in the first
place. We feel that while we're capable of great efforts during the
building, once we start flying, we'll be happy not to modify things
Hence my question about the cabin side of the firewall : the rationale being
the cable length nearly stays the same, but the unit is protected from
direct heat radiated by the red hot turbo (though we may install heat
shields), and is OUT of the confined space of the cowling, avoiding heat
soaking after shut down.
You answered my question : introducing the noisy alternator leads into the
cabin is NOT a very good idea.
But of course I'll dig into this temperature and aft mounting issue.
Nevertheless the idea of daily taking extra copper ballast for a free ride
is not very appealing (the bird is expected to be circa 350 kg empty).
So what if I just PLANNED the routing of the wires in case of change of
location ?
The fuselage structure is rather simple, and the routing for the battery
cables has to be established. So I'll make sure there is space for optional
cables.
Good idea, not a good idea ?
Comments welcome
Thanks again,
Gilles
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Electrical Wire Question (lheated pitot tube) |
>
>
>AeroElectric Bob,
>
>On the RV-list, Mike Nellis posted his data on "temp vs time" of a 5814
>heated pitot tube. In his web document he expressed concern about the 425
>deg F temp of the probe sitting on the bench in still air. The 20 amp peak
>inrush and stabilized 9 amp current draw seem normal from what I remember
>others saying.
Yup, those critters do run hot . . . I'm doing work on pitot heaters
on the Beechjet right now and I've measured tube temperatures in
excess of 220F at altitude, 320Kts and -50 C OAT. Of course, the
problem here is the rarified air that doesn't cool things very well.
This is one of several cases where things on airplanes can get hotter
as you go up in altitude in spite of the very cold ambient temperatures.
Not to worry about the high temps while testing on the bench. We
do this all the time at RAC on production tubes. These critters
are assembled with silver braze that doesn't flow until straw-
yellow heat . . . a hell-of-a-lot hotter than 425F!
>Any comments?
Let's look at the post . . .
>David Carter
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Mike Nellis" <mike(at)bmnellis.com>
>To: ; "Bob Paulo"
>Subject: Re: RV-List: Electrical Wire Question
>
> > > --> RV-List message posted by: Bobpaulo(at)aol.com
> > >
> > > I am in the process of installing a heated pitot tube that will draw
> > > between 6.5 to 8 amps. Here are my intentions and tell me if I am on
> the correct
> > > path:
> > >
> > > 1. I plan to use 16 gauge wires and insulate them (again) with 1/8 inch
> > > shrink tubing all the way to the panel.
Don't understand this. The ability of a wire to carry current
is based upon temperature rise . . . a few strands in free air
can carry more snort than wires buried in wire bundles. I don't
understand why anyone would want to put more blankie around
a wire that's already too hot . . .
> > > 2. I am going to use one shrink tube to contain both wires. Or would 2
> > > separate be overkill????
One tube covering two wires will run hotter than two
wired covered individually . . . but wires with no additional
covering run cooler still.
> > > 3. I will install one bay toward tip so my run should be 16 ft. Max
> > >(very generous estimate).
>
> > > In looking at the wire chart it appears I could even use 18
>guage-although
> > I
> > > am new at this. It seems that I would be better off (safer) to use 16
> > > gauge????
It's not a matter of "SAFE" . . . he's not going to smoke
an 18AWG wire with 9 amps flowing in it and the inrush that
flows during the time it takes to get the tube warmed up
is not a serious threat either.
I'm mystified as to why two wires are talked about. The pitot
tube heater is neither a potential victim nor an antagonist
with respect to noise . . . it can use a local ground on
a metal airplane just fine.
There's a better reason to consider heavier wire . . .
since the pitot tube heater is put there to melt ice, it
stands to reason that we might like to pipe every practical
BTU to the tube instead of warming up a wire bundle. I'd
go with 14AWG to reduce voltage drop and ground locally to
reduce the voltage drop still further.
Further, if he's using fuses, the time constant the heavy
current draw during warmup will put a pretty good stress on
a fuse. 14AWG wire allows fusing at 15A which should keep
everybody happy.
These guys ought to be working with us here on the Aero-Electric
List . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike Nellis" <mike(at)bmnellis.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Electrical Wire Question (lheated pitot tube) |
Oh but we are Bob,
I originally posted my test results about 18 months ago on the list and I
read everything every day. I just wish I knew more about this stuff so I
could be a contributor instead of a parasite. But I'm learning.
Mike Nellis - http://bmnellis.com
Georgetown, TX
Waiting to start Fuselage
RV6 N699BM Reserved
1947 Stinson 108-2 N9666K
> These guys ought to be working with us here on the Aero-Electric
> List . . .
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | RE: Rotax regulator location |
>
>Robert,
>
>I think the worst heat problem is on the 30 minute quick turn fuel stop with
>the subsequent re-start.
>
>Just a data point for everybody.
>
>Regards, George
Good data points George, thanks!
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rotax regulator location |
>
>Yes. In the (912) manual they say the rectifier can be damage by
>temperatures above 80C(176 F). They don't say anything in the pdf newer
>version downloaded from Rotax.
Hmmmm . . . most semiconductor devices are rated to operate
with internal temperatures of 175 degrees C. If they limit
ambient for full load to 80C then this means that under
rated thermal stress, their devices run 95C over ambient.
I'm a bit surprised . . . but unless their design has
changed since the last time I looked at it, there are
no special provisions for cooling such as vents, heat sink
fins or fans.
Most of our electro-whizzies for targets are tested
for operation at 70C. By-and-large, this hasn't been
difficult to live with . . . 80C shouldn't be hard
either. Now the question is how hot will it get in your
installation.
It would be nice if they had published reference
locations for where temperatures should be measured
ON their device. Some hot spot on skin or base and
put limits on that. Just calling out 80C ambient
makes no allowance for air movement which has
a profound effect on cooling. 80C in a still-air
oven is a harder to work in that one with air
motion.
>Well, what we're trying to do is doing it reasonably right in the first
>place. We feel that while we're capable of great efforts during the
>building, once we start flying, we'll be happy not to modify things
>Hence my question about the cabin side of the firewall : the rationale being
>the cable length nearly stays the same, but the unit is protected from
>direct heat radiated by the red hot turbo (though we may install heat
>shields), and is OUT of the confined space of the cowling, avoiding heat
>soaking after shut down.
Sounds like a plan.
>You answered my question : introducing the noisy alternator leads into the
>cabin is NOT a very good idea.
> But of course I'll dig into this temperature and aft mounting issue.
Keep the AC wires from the alternator bundled separately
from other wires as much as practical and you'll probably
be okay.
>Nevertheless the idea of daily taking extra copper ballast for a free ride
>is not very appealing (the bird is expected to be circa 350 kg empty).
>So what if I just PLANNED the routing of the wires in case of change of
>location ?
If it's back behind the seats of a 4-place, I'd suspect
it would take about 40' total for about .9 pounds. Your
choice of course . . . it's been my experience that wire
is a lot easier to take out of a finished airplane than
it is to put in.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Galls FS-039 Wig-Wag - FOLLOW-UP |
>
>Bob,
>
>I wonder if you have come to any conclusions about the Galls 039 flasher
>unit that I sent you? Can that model be made to behave or do I need to
>buy the 033 model?
Richard,
Your FS-039 is on the way back. Went out yesterday
via priority mail. I've published suggested wiring
as Option 5 in the Wig-Wag section of the Down-loadable
Articles Index. You can get it directly by clicking
on:
http://209.134.106.21/articles/FS039.pdf
Sorry to take so long with this. Too many balls in
the air at once. . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Werner Schneider" <WernerSchneider(at)compuserve.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rotax regulator location |
Hello George,
you're right on that, we had an accident with an MCR01(Bambi) after such a
short fuel stop and this type of aircraft, if not modified, has a problem in
the
first half hour after landing if they want to start again.
Werner
----- Original Message -----
From: "George Braly" <gwbraly(at)gami.com>
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Rotax regulator location
>
> Robert,
>
> I have done some extensive temperature measurements under the cowl on spam
> cans, including turbocharged spam cans.
>
> If you land a turbocharged Bonanza, with the CHTs deliberately held high
on
> final approach ( ie, > 380F, cowl flaps closed, gear down flaps down,
> dragging the airplane in at high power for a long final) on a 105F dead
calm
> evening, and then taxi 100 yards, shut down, and put the airplane into a
> closed hangar, what you see is that the temperature of the case of such
> things as the magneto and the fuel pump begin to rise in temperature as
they
> heat soak.
>
> They rise steadily for about 30 to 35 minutes, and reached a peak of about
> 210F, if I recall correctly. After that, they start to cool off.
>
> I think the worst heat problem is on the 30 minute quick turn fuel stop
with
> the subsequent re-start.
>
> Just a data point for everybody.
>
> Regards, George
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert L. Nuckolls, III [mailto:nuckolls(at)kscable.com]
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Rotax regulator location
>
>
>
>
> ><Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr>
> >
> >Hi Bob,
> >
> >
> >Our kit manufacturer advises to install the Rotax 914 voltage regulator
> >remote from the engine compartment for temperature reasons.
> >They suggest we locate it under the front seat or farther back aft of the
> >baggage compartment.
> >
> >Are there any drawbacks to such a location ?
>
> Yes . . . the longer the leads in any noise generating installation
> the greater the likelihood of coupling noise into other systems.
>
> >Isn't there any voltage drop issue due to wire length ?
>
> Yeah, some . . . but that can be mitigated with larger wire
> for a modest weight penalty . .
>
>
> >Since all the wires go to and from this unit, is it smart to have all
these
> >wires coming from the firewall and then going back to it ?
> >My preferred location would be mounting the unit on the cabin side of the
> >firewall, to minimize cable length.
>
> This goes back to issues of putting a product on the market
> wherein the builder may not have done their homework.
> The easiest thing to do is hedge their bet by asking
> future users to "go easy" on this thing . . . words like
> "enhanced operating life" are often heard to justify
> their pleading.
>
> It's hard for someone to put their shiny new electro-whizzy
> in a box and send it out to the hard, cold, hot, shaky, cruel,
> wet, world for use by people who don't understand your product
> (and shouldn't need to). It's like sending your kid out
> the door when he leaves home. I know, I've been there
> several times on all counts.
>
> You do the best you are willing to learn how to do in making
> your "offspring" perform under the situations it is likely
> to encounter and rise up to expectations of future
> customers.
>
> If you called Rotax (they'll tell you the same thing all
> over again, THEY buy it from somebody else and THEY
> don't understand it either. They're not going to tell you
> where they get it and let you talk to the guys who designed
> it either. So given that we have no window into the heart
> of folks who know the most about this product, all we have
> to go on is life experiences concerning the product
> weighed against what we know to be the elegant design.
>
> I've seen hundreds of airplanes at OSH and elsewhere
> that install the Rotax voltage regulator under
> the cowl and we're not hearing a great outpouring of
> sad stories about regulator life.
>
> We KNOW that the thing BELONGS under the cowl where
> the noise can be walled off from potential victims
> and wire lengths can be minimized.
>
> Sooooo . . . how to mitigate risk? How big a deal is it
> to MOVE it later? Not hard, I suspect, especially
> if you make provisions for a later move. How about
> putting wires in for the remote location and tie them
> off. Probably won't add 1 pound to your airplane.
>
> Run it where you know it should be installed and
> during your performance fly-off, put some thermocouples
> on the outside of the case and see how warm it REALLY
> gets . . . You measure temperatures after an extended
> cruise at zero electrical loading, then on next flight
> repeat the exercise with maximum loading. This will
> tell you two important data points. How much does
> the temperature rise due to environmental energy
> input and how much hotter does it get due to internally
> dissipated energy? You'll need to measure ambient
> temps adjacent to the regulator and also on the
> base sheet metal to which the regulator is mounted.
>
> THEN, let's talk about it like engineers instead
> of worrisome mothers. If we decide that moving
> is indeed a good thing to do, then the task will
> be minimized. If we decide it's not necessary,
> then keep on truck'n and pull out extra wires
> at the airplane's first annual.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rotax regulator location |
>
> Hello George,
>
> you're right on that, we had an accident with an MCR01(Bambi) after such a
> short fuel stop and this type of aircraft, if not modified, has a problem
in
> the
> first half hour after landing if they want to start again.
>
> Werner
>
Hi Werner,
Could you give us more details about the problem you had ?
Was it with a 912, 912S or a turbocharged 914 ?
And was the accident related with some vapor lock or rather ignition failure
or something ?
Further, did it happen in spite of particular precautions such as turning
the nose into the wind, or opening the oil inspection cover, etc.
As you can imagine I'd like to learn as much as possible on the subject !
Thank you,
Gilles
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rotax regulator location |
>
> I have done some extensive temperature measurements under the cowl on spam
> cans, including turbocharged spam cans.
>
> If you land a turbocharged Bonanza, with the CHTs deliberately held high
on
> final approach ( ie, > 380F, cowl flaps closed, gear down flaps down,
> dragging the airplane in at high power for a long final) on a 105F dead
calm
> evening, and then taxi 100 yards, shut down, and put the airplane into a
> closed hangar, what you see is that the temperature of the case of such
> things as the magneto and the fuel pump begin to rise in temperature as
they
> heat soak.
>
> They rise steadily for about 30 to 35 minutes, and reached a peak of about
> 210F, if I recall correctly. After that, they start to cool off.
>
> I think the worst heat problem is on the 30 minute quick turn fuel stop
with
> the subsequent re-start.
>
.
>
> Regards, George
George,
Thanks for the input.
You're perfectly right, and your results are in concordance with measures I
witnessed at Dynaero some years ago.
During the heat soaking period after shut off, one could HEAR bubbles
running in the fuel lines from the fuel pump and carbs. I forgot the peak
temperatures.
At that time, my main concern was about how to cool the fuel lines to
prevent vapor lock. The solution might have been some opening at the top of
the close fitting cowling, but this was found impractical.
But as the fuel pump is fitted with a return line, running the pump to clear
the lines and fill them with fresh fuel before starting seemed to be a
satifactory workaround.
For the 30 minute fuel stop, we have two oil and water inspection covers on
the top of the cowling. I thought it would be useful to open them wide as
soon as the engine stops to help establishing some "chimney effect".
cheers,
Gilles
Cheers,
Gilles
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Rotax regulator location |
Hi, Bob,
> Hmmmm . . . most semiconductor devices are rated to operate
> with internal temperatures of 175 degrees C. If they limit
> ambient for full load to 80C then this means that under
> rated thermal stress, their devices run 95C over ambient.
> I'm a bit surprised . . . but unless their design has
> changed since the last time I looked at it, there are
> no special provisions for cooling such as vents, heat sink
> fins or fans.
>
> Most of our electro-whizzies for targets are tested
> for operation at 70C. By-and-large, this hasn't been
> difficult to live with . . . 80C shouldn't be hard
> either. Now the question is how hot will it get in your
> installation.
>
Rather hot I'm afraid. I'll try to get the info from the kit factory. Also,
it would be interesting to examine the engine installation on the prototypes
: the heat generated is much dependant of the layout and insulation worked
into the turbo and exhaust area.
> It would be nice if they had published reference
> locations for where temperatures should be measured
> ON their device. Some hot spot on skin or base and
> put limits on that. Just calling out 80C ambient
> makes no allowance for air movement which has
> a profound effect on cooling. 80C in a still-air
> oven is a harder to work in that one with air
> motion.
I'll ask Rotax on this point
>
> Keep the AC wires from the alternator bundled separately
> from other wires as much as practical and you'll probably
> be okay.
>
>
OK
>
> If it's back behind the seats of a 4-place, I'd suspect
> it would take about 40' total for about .9 pounds. Your
> choice of course . . . it's been my experience that wire
> is a lot easier to take out of a finished airplane than
> it is to put in.
OK, I'll try to talk my buddy homebuilder into this ;-)
Thank you
Gilles
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Casey" <glcasey(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | Undercowl temperatures |
<>
Thanks for the data points. I am designing my electronics for 125C (257F)
so it looks like there is some margin. By the way, what temperature did you
measure as the normal rise across the engine (lower cowl, or cowl outlet vs.
ambient)? I would be interested in seeing more of you data if you want to
E-mail off-line.
Gary Casey
ES project
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | To boost or to charge |
Hello friends,
I am wiring my aircraft and one thing that stopped me
from making a large opening in my fuselage side skin
is this...:
If I have a choice, am I better to have a capability
of "charging" the battery from outside, or is it
better to be able to "boost" the aircraft so I can
start it from an external source (my car)?
The charging option would result in a much lighter and
simpler installation.
At first, I was thinking that it would be good to
"boost" the aircraft, but doing so would result in
flying with discharged batteries... euh. Now, I am
just not certain which is best.
Michel
PS: it is surprising how much wires can go in a simple
airplane... ouf!
=====
----------------------------
Michel Therrien CH601-HD
http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby
http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601
http://games.yahoo.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Werner Schneider" <WernerSchneider(at)compuserve.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Rotax regulator location |
Hello Gilles,
as this item is off topic for this list I will mail it to you personally.
Werner
From: "gilles.thesee" <Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Rotax regulator location
<Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr>
>
>
> >
> > Hello George,
> >
> > you're right on that, we had an accident with an MCR01(Bambi) after such
a
> > short fuel stop and this type of aircraft, if not modified, has a
problem
> in
> > the
> > first half hour after landing if they want to start again.
> >
> > Werner
> >
> Hi Werner,
>
> Could you give us more details about the problem you had ?
> Was it with a 912, 912S or a turbocharged 914 ?
> And was the accident related with some vapor lock or rather ignition
failure
> or something ?
> Further, did it happen in spite of particular precautions such as turning
> the nose into the wind, or opening the oil inspection cover, etc.
> As you can imagine I'd like to learn as much as possible on the subject !
>
> Thank you,
>
> Gilles
>
>
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | More Rotax questions |
Hi, Bob and all
The first question, while Rotax oriented, could interest Lycoming or
Continental people :
While examining the wiring diagram suggested by Rotax in their maintenance
manual, I discovered they made some clone of the standard circuit found on
any light plane.
A few differences though :
Question 1
They feed the starter contactor direct from the HOT side of the battery
contactor. Of course this minimizes the connection count between the battery
and the starter motor. But what are the pros and cons of such a layout ?
Strangely enough they don't do the same for the backup fuel pump. It is fed
from the main (and only) bus bar.
My intention is to run it on an always hot battery bus.
Question 2
The main ALWAYS RUNNING fuel pump gets its power from the B+ lead at the
voltage regulator.
My question is, what happens when we open the alt breaker or it trips
because of an overvoltage (fig Z 16) ?
Does the pump keep running, or is the B lead 'dead' and we instantly lose
fuel pressure ?
Rotax says the capacitor permits alternator to give power without a
battery but I wonder what happens to the alternator output when the OV
module pulls
the C lead to ground....
My impression is this C lead is supposed to give some voltage feedback to
the regulator.
To recap : may I keep the main fuel pump on the regulator, or do I HAVE to
run it from an other and more reliable source ?
Thank you,
Gilles
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Undercowl temperatures |
> < 210F, if I recall correctly. After that, they start to cool off.>>
>
> Thanks for the data points. I am designing my electronics for 125C (257F)
> so it looks like there is some margin. By the way, what temperature did
you
> measure as the normal rise across the engine (lower cowl, or cowl outlet
vs.
> ambient)? I would be interested in seeing more of you data if you want to
> E-mail off-line.
>
> Gary Casey
> ES project
Hi all,
Why not post those infos to the 'List ? Maybe several people around here
could be interested too.
Thanks
Gilles
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: To boost or to charge |
>
>Hello friends,
>
>I am wiring my aircraft and one thing that stopped me
>from making a large opening in my fuselage side skin
>is this...:
Why through the skin? I've seen external connections
to battery placed under dip-stick doors, adjacent
to a nose gear strut accessible through hot air outlet
in cowl, just inside baggage doors, etc.
>If I have a choice, am I better to have a capability
>of "charging" the battery from outside, or is it
>better to be able to "boost" the aircraft so I can
>start it from an external source (my car)?
I like to have an external power connection MOSTLY
for powering up an airplane while in shop for
continuous operation of systems for maintenance.
If you do a reasonable job of maintaining a battery
and making sure the airplane gets parked with all
the switches OFF . . . it's very improbable that
you'll ever need to connect external power to accommodate
a dead battery.
HOWEVER, given that accidents do happen, the time
when you will MOST want to get the engine started
is after the baggage is all loaded, you have a
void-time clearance and a simple charging
connection will prove inadequate.
The way to put the FASTEST charge on a ship's
battery is to get the engine going and run at
fast idle with minimum electrical equipment
turned on. This gives you 40-60 amps of snort
to stuff back into the battery. Even jumper cables
from another vehicle won't be this fast . . . voltage
drop in the jumpers will limit the recharge rate.
If it were my airplane and I was going to the
trouble to put ANY kind of ground power connection,
I'd go for the whole enchilada . . . you're not
going to fly this airplane forever and odds are
strong that the next person to own your airplane
will NEED that capability . . . Of two identical
houses, the one with the hot-tub is more likely
to yield your asking price. The weight penalty
is small.
>The charging option would result in a much lighter and
>simpler installation.
>
>At first, I was thinking that it would be good to
>"boost" the aircraft, but doing so would result in
>flying with discharged batteries... euh. Now, I am
>just not certain which is best.
>
>Michel
>PS: it is surprising how much wires can go in a simple
>airplane... ouf!
Are you worrying . . . or taking the time to analyze
mission requirements and failure mode effects?
This is what separates padded-cockpit-airplane-
drivers from DESIGNERS and PILOTS who UNDERSTAND
their goals for completing a particular mission.
Most folks who believe they're building
a hedge against disaster with osmotic attention
to the dark-n-stormy-night stories can
ONLY worry about such things . . . because they
haven't a clue.
You my friend, do not fit into that class of
airplane owner/operator.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Electrical Wire Question (lheated pitot tube) |
>
>Oh but we are Bob,
>I originally posted my test results about 18 months ago on the list and I
>read everything every day. I just wish I knew more about this stuff so I
>could be a contributor instead of a parasite. But I'm learning.
Okay my friend . . . just jerking your chain a bit :-) I
miss being on all the lists I used to subscribe to . . .
maybe when Dee finishes her PhD, I can stay home and
slave over the hot list-servers all day . . . (sigh)
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: fuel system vapor |
> > They rise steadily for about 30 to 35 minutes, and reached a peak of about
> > 210F, if I recall correctly. After that, they start to cool off.
> >
> > I think the worst heat problem is on the 30 minute quick turn fuel stop
> > with the subsequent re-start.
>
>
>During the heat soaking period after shut off, one could HEAR bubbles
>running in the fuel lines from the fuel pump and carbs. I forgot the peak
>temperatures.
This conversation came up at OSH some years ago. One
of the pilots told about a system he saw on an airplane
that was used in heavy duty, quick turnaround service
that was plagued with hard starting due to hot fuel
lines. This operator put a "T" fitting at the carb
and took the extra port off through a valve to one
of the fuel tanks.
Before attempting to start the hot engine, he opened
the valve and purged all the lines up to the carb
with cool fuel using the boost pump. Said it took
about thirty seconds to purge the lines and bring
temps in the lines nearly down to external ambient
no matter how hot it was under the cowl.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bruce Gray" <bruce.gray(at)snet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: To boost or to charge |
HOWEVER, given that accidents do happen, the time
when you will MOST want to get the engine started
is after the baggage is all loaded, you have a
void-time clearance and a simple charging
connection will prove inadequate.
Bob,
Please tell me you don't really advocate launching IFR with a depleted
battery.
While my son was working on his IFR rating he called me and related an
experience he just had with his IFR instructor. He had just landed after
an actual IFR approach and they both stopped for a short break. Well,
when they tried to start backup the battery was dead. So this whiz-bang
CFII gets the aircraft jump started and launches into actual IFR for
home base with my son as a student. Needless to say that when I heard
this I went into a 15 minute dissertation with my son as to why this was
a very foolish and dangerous thing to do. I told the CFII the same thing
the next day.
Bruce
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: To boost or to charge |
Thanks Bob for the quick reply.
--- "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" >
The way to put the FASTEST charge on a ship's
> battery is to get the engine going and run at
> fast idle with minimum electrical equipment
> turned on. This gives you 40-60 amps of snort
> to stuff back into the battery. Even jumper
> cables
I thought that for 12V 18A RG batteries, a charge rate
of 3ah was best with a maximum of about 4ah. At least,
that's what its spec sheet is saying. I presumed that
a very fast charge would damage the battery.
> Are you worrying . . . or taking the time to
> analyze
> mission requirements and failure mode effects?
> This is what separates padded-cockpit-airplane-
> drivers from DESIGNERS and PILOTS who UNDERSTAND
> their goals for completing a particular mission.
Well, I'm building a plane with redundant batteries
only because I will fly with an auto engine which will
depend on electricity to run. I don't know if this is
just worrying or analysis, but if I get myself the
trouble and weight of two batteries to accomodate the
engine in case of an alt failure, I don't see why I
would go to fly with an alternator and no battery... ?
If no battery is safe enough, then one should be fine
too (and I would remove my second contactor and
battery). :-)
Michel
=====
----------------------------
Michel Therrien CH601-HD
http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby
http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601
http://games.yahoo.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom Barnes" <skytop(at)megsinet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Galls FS-039 Wig-Wag - FOLLOW-UP |
Thanks Bob for the drawing on the Galls FS-039 that you designed for
Richard's situation. I have now studied it and figured how I can adapt
it for my situation simply by switching from single element bulbs to
dual element (hi/lo beam) bulbs and use your S700-2-10 as described in
figure 11-17 of the AeroElectric Connection. Note my panel is already
engraved with OFF/FLASH/LDG LIGHTS.
Considering that I am designing for a tail dragger, and TAXI
lights are aimed the same as for landing lights (this is my
understanding); referring to fig 11-17, I will use pin 6 to supply 12V
to the red wire of the Galls which will operate the high beam and always
flash provided the switch is left in the ON position, and pin 4 to a
relay that kicks 12V to the low beam sides. Working with the dual
element bulb allows me to use a single switch. A byproduct of the dual
element bulb is that the (bright) flashing beam will be aimed more
straight ahead rather than down.
Thanks again, Tom Barnes
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Robert L. Nuckolls, III
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Galls FS-039 Wig-Wag - FOLLOW-UP
>
>Bob,
>
>I wonder if you have come to any conclusions about the Galls 039
flasher
>unit that I sent you? Can that model be made to behave or do I need to
>buy the 033 model?
Richard,
Your FS-039 is on the way back. Went out yesterday
via priority mail. I've published suggested wiring
as Option 5 in the Wig-Wag section of the Down-loadable
Articles Index. You can get it directly by clicking
on:
http://209.134.106.21/articles/FS039.pdf
Sorry to take so long with this. Too many balls in
the air at once. . .
Bob . . .
=
=
=
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
=
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | RE: To boost or to charge |
>
>
>
> HOWEVER, given that accidents do happen, the time
> when you will MOST want to get the engine started
> is after the baggage is all loaded, you have a
> void-time clearance and a simple charging
> connection will prove inadequate.
>
>
>
>Bob,
>
>Please tell me you don't really advocate launching IFR with a depleted
>battery.
Nope . . . but 60A into a 17 a.h. battery will get it mostly
full in 15-20 minutes. You won't charge it any faster any other
way.
>While my son was working on his IFR rating he called me and related an
>experience he just had with his IFR instructor. He had just landed after
>an actual IFR approach and they both stopped for a short break. Well,
>when they tried to start backup the battery was dead. So this whiz-bang
>CFII gets the aircraft jump started and launches into actual IFR for
>home base with my son as a student. Needless to say that when I heard
>this I went into a 15 minute dissertation with my son as to why this was
>a very foolish and dangerous thing to do. I told the CFII the same thing
>the next day.
Amen . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: To boost or to charge |
>
>Thanks Bob for the quick reply.
>
>
>I thought that for 12V 18A RG batteries, a charge rate
>of 3ah was best with a maximum of about 4ah. At least,
>that's what its spec sheet is saying. I presumed that
>a very fast charge would damage the battery.
Every momma wants the world to be nice to her
sons . . . but in the real world, it just doesn't
happen ALL the time. Tire manufacturers
would like to see you enhance the performance
of their products by confining operations to
well rolled sod fields . . .
To maximize battery performance for a number of deep-
discharge cycles, (1) minimize depth of each cycle
as much as practical and (2) stuff watt-seconds
back into the battery very gently . . . that's how they
test them in the lab establish published performance
values. Batteries never get treated that well in
service. Yeah, from time to time you might find
yourself in a situation that calls for a 60 amp
recharge from dead but it's not the norm and
shouldn't make any difference in the grand scheme
of things.
In the real world, after 10 minutes of cranking
a fussy engine, the battery is seriously
depleted . . . how would anyone limit the
recharge rate once the engine does
start? It doesn't happen. Hard on the battery?
Yes. Do we care? Depends. Is the mission to maximize
battery life or fly airplanes? If the latter, then
we use the battery in the manner dictated by design
parameters of the system and replace as necessary.
> > Are you worrying . . . or taking the time to
> > analyze
> > mission requirements and failure mode effects?
> > This is what separates padded-cockpit-airplane-
> > drivers from DESIGNERS and PILOTS who UNDERSTAND
> > their goals for completing a particular mission.
>
>Well, I'm building a plane with redundant batteries
>only because I will fly with an auto engine which will
>depend on electricity to run. I don't know if this is
>just worrying or analysis, but if I get myself the
>trouble and weight of two batteries to accomodate the
>engine in case of an alt failure, I don't see why I
>would go to fly with an alternator and no battery... ?
>
>If no battery is safe enough, then one should be fine
>too (and I would remove my second contactor and
>battery). :-)
The battery should be the single most reliable
source of power for the airplane. My personal
choice for combinations of equipment would be
one battery and two alternators a la Fig Z-12
or Z-13. If there's no way to drive a second
alternator of any size, then you might want
to consider dual batteries . . . but I think
the risks of not having battery capacity
needed to comfortably land the airplane is
more dependent on properly maintaining
one good battery than by having two . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Don Eaves" <doneaves(at)midsouth.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Home Grown Electronic Ignition: |
Thanks Charley - I will contact Mark & try to get issue 47 of Contact...
Don Eaves
doneaves(at)midsouth.rr.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Charlie and Tupper England" <cengland(at)netdoor.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Home Grown Electronic Ignition:
>
> Don Eaves wrote:
> >
> >
> > Bob - Anyone -
> >
> > Has anyone looked at what it would take to build an Electronic Ignition?
> > Would it be worth it - Time & Money?
> > Can it be done?
> > Where do we start?
> > Take a standard automotive Electronic ignition - converting it or
> > Take a off the shelf automotive or 4 cylinder motorcycle Electronic
> > Conversion Kit - converting it...
> > Yes I know there are some great products on the market -
> > But if you could save a buck - Have the equal or better reliability -
> > And Learn something in the process...
> >
> > Don Eaves
> > RV6 Flying 115+- Hours
> > doneaves(at)midsouth.rr.com
> >
> Go to:
>
> http://www.nonprofitnet.com/contact/
>
> & ask the same question. There's a gentleman in Oklahoma
> City who designed one using off the shelf auto parts that
> used the shell of a magneto to house it, & there are non-mag
> variations as well. Contact! magazine ran an article about
> it years ago.
>
> Or, call Mark Landoll (advertises harmonic dampeners in the
> back of Sport Aviation). Mark has one flying on his RV-4;
> the designer is based on the same private strip near OKC.
>
> Charlie
>
>
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fergus Kyle" <VE3LVO(at)rac.ca> |
| Subject: | Off topic, but topical |
">Frankly, I don't understand why all of you>professional pilots don't say
"enough" and refuse to>fly anymore until you are exempt from the security
>checks. I'd sure as hell support you.>Bill Irvine>C-310
As a retried and garrulous old pteridactyl, I heartily agree but
thought I was a solo dissident. I am never more embarrassed for one of my
former trades than to watch some infantile high school dropout with twenty
minutes training rifling through a Captain's luggage asking 'what's this
for?', 'what's that for?"
With the certain knowledge that either operating aviator can destroy
300 lives aboard and many below by just carefully timing a twist of the
wrist, the "security" people have so little professional skills that their
cynicism drives them only to creative reproduction. The way to the top lies
through hiring more below you.
"The problem is to differentiate between the professional pilots, and
terrorists with a stolen uniform and fake ID. I recall a purported
pros-pective terrorist who was arrested with an airline pilot uniform in his
luggage shortly after 9/11. Don't want guys like that being able to skip
security."
Wrong. The problem is to differentiate between infiltrated
'security' terrorists and a professional protector. There are moves afoot to
distinguish "VIP" passengers from us riffraff by means of some hoked-up
research, and having seen the ulterior motives of many executives - I can
imagine the prestige of one who holds a "platinum" Security Pass. What a
wave of anger sweeps over one who watches his son (making his way as Captain
to his scheduled airliner) being fingered by a seemingly ill-trained
stranger - AND having to remove his shoes! - in order to take his passengers
and fellow workers to 35,000 feet at 900 kph - with his hands.
"But, I agree with your main point, that the current practices are
designed to make people feel better, not to actually accomplish
something. Canada has its share of "head in the sand" rules too.
We've got "no fly zones" of 1/2 mile around our parliament buildings
and the Prime Minister's residence. The politicians must be pretty
stupid if they think that offers them any protection."
It didn't take this 11/9 event to prove them stupid but their
consummate insolence in protecting themselves first (and so blatantly) shows
the apathy and treachery of their motives.
By reducing the aviators to the level of the unproven public in
this theatrical way, they lessen the resolve to professional behaviour,
invite mediocrity and destroy faith in security methods. Our discussion is
proof of the failure.
.....and the liquor trucks still roll up to the aircraft with
impunity.
Ferg Kyle
Europa A064
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charles Brame <charleyb(at)earthlink.net> |
Michel Therrien
| Subject: | To boost or to charge |
Here is a web site with one solution to the jump and/or charge
problem. http://solanopilots.com/quickjumpsolution.htm
Charlie
RV-6A N11CB (res)
San Antonio
> From: Michel Therrien
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: To boost or to charge
>
>
> Hello friends,
>
> I am wiring my aircraft and one thing that stopped me
> from making a large opening in my fuselage side skin
> is this...:
>
> If I have a choice, am I better to have a capability
> of "charging" the battery from outside, or is it
> better to be able to "boost" the aircraft so I can
> start it from an external source (my car)?
>
> The charging option would result in a much lighter and
> simpler installation.
>
> At first, I was thinking that it would be good to
> "boost" the aircraft, but doing so would result in
> flying with discharged batteries... euh. Now, I am
> just not certain which is best.
>
> Michel
> PS: it is surprising how much wires can go in a simple
> airplane... ouf!
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Irvine <wgirvine(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Balanced alternators |
Bob,
I'm converting my C-310 from generators to
alternators. Along with the usual voltage
regulators, Cessna used a "balancing regulator" to
keep the loads evenly distributed between the two
alternators. Is this really necessary?
I'm assuming that, since no two alternators are
exactly alike, the one with the higher set voltage
will come on-line first, and carry the load until the
demand causes the voltage to drop slightly, then the
second alternator will pick up the slack. If this is
true, I can just connect both alternator outputs to
the buss, and be done with it.
Personally, I don't care if my alternator loads are
balanced. If one alternator is putting out 20 amps,
and the other one 10 amps, so what? As long as my
buss voltage stays at 28 volts, I'm happy. Why was
Cessna so concerned about this? BTW, both alternators
are 60 amp, so I have plenty of capacity.
Or... could the alternators get into some sort of
oscillation, fighting each other? I can see a case
where the second (lower voltage) alternator would come
on-line and it's voltage would very slightly spike
past the buss voltage, which would cause the first
(higher voltage) alternator to reduce it's output
momentarily, then back to normal. But even if this
oscillation were to happen, I would think it would all
be over before a volt meter could even register the
hiccup. Or is this a real problem? I don't want to
have "dueling voltage regulators" on a dark-n-stormy
night!
Thanks for your help,
Bill Irvine
C-310
Thought for the day:
Never be afraid to try something new. Remember that a
lone amateur built the ark; a large group of
professionals built the Titanic.
http://games.yahoo.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Dudley <rhdudley(at)att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Galls FS-039 Wig-Wag - FOLLOW-UP |
Thanks, Bob.
RHDudley
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
>
> >
> >Bob,
> >
> >I wonder if you have come to any conclusions about the Galls 039 flasher
> >unit that I sent you? Can that model be made to behave or do I need to
> >buy the 033 model?
>
> Richard,
>
> Your FS-039 is on the way back. Went out yesterday
> via priority mail. I've published suggested wiring
> as Option 5 in the Wig-Wag section of the Down-loadable
> Articles Index. You can get it directly by clicking
> on:
>
> http://209.134.106.21/articles/FS039.pdf
>
> Sorry to take so long with this. Too many balls in
> the air at once. . .
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Swartzendruber" <dswartzendruber(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Balanced alternators |
The only good reason I know of to balance alternators is so that you
know when one quits. Without balancing, one alternator could become
completely unloaded when the loads are lower, and you'd get a nuisance
alternator failure indication. Making them both stay online keeps the
fail lights off. A Low Voltage light is not adequate as an alternator
failure indication in a dual system because the good alternator will
prevent the bus from dropping when the other alternator fails.
David Swartzendruber
Wichita
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Balanced alternators
>
>
> -->
>
> Bob,
> I'm converting my C-310 from generators to
> alternators. Along with the usual voltage
> regulators, Cessna used a "balancing regulator" to
> keep the loads evenly distributed between the two
> alternators. Is this really necessary?
>
> I'm assuming that, since no two alternators are
> exactly alike, the one with the higher set voltage
> will come on-line first, and carry the load until the
> demand causes the voltage to drop slightly, then the
> second alternator will pick up the slack. If this is
> true, I can just connect both alternator outputs to
> the buss, and be done with it.
>
> Personally, I don't care if my alternator loads are
> balanced. If one alternator is putting out 20 amps,
> and the other one 10 amps, so what? As long as my
> buss voltage stays at 28 volts, I'm happy. Why was
> Cessna so concerned about this? BTW, both alternators
> are 60 amp, so I have plenty of capacity.
>
> Or... could the alternators get into some sort of
> oscillation, fighting each other? I can see a case
> where the second (lower voltage) alternator would come
> on-line and it's voltage would very slightly spike
> past the buss voltage, which would cause the first
> (higher voltage) alternator to reduce it's output
> momentarily, then back to normal. But even if this
> oscillation were to happen, I would think it would all
> be over before a volt meter could even register the
> hiccup. Or is this a real problem? I don't want to
> have "dueling voltage regulators" on a dark-n-stormy
> night!
>
> Thanks for your help,
> Bill Irvine
> C-310
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Arming Airline Pilots |
>
>My apologies for the non Aeroelectric-list item. Airline captains were
>required to be armed for years since they were protecting the U.S. mail.
>Apparently, the gov't thinks less of its citizens than it does of its
>"People" magazines. It's not highly repeated or reported in the press, but
>those same weapons have prevented armed hijacking attempts, and that was
>when the highjackers had guns. If you think it's time for the gov. to quit
>*&!$%*ng around and solve the problem, sign the online petition at:
>
>http://www.PetitionOnline.com/apsa/
Thanks for the heads up Ken. I've added my signature to the
petition and I would encourage other readers of this list to
express themselves with this important tool of democracy.
The response counter said I was #20213 to join the cause.
In the minutes since I responded, the count is up to
20232 . . . looks like 100,000 signatures is a reachable
goal.
I would also encourage readers to check out
http://www.congress.org/
This website will keep you current on (generally
ignored by the media) activities of our elected leaders
and offers a convenient way to voice your opinions
and concerns to your representatives via e-mail. You
can also browse through letters by your fellow citizens.
It's a sobering dip-stick into the pool of public
perception and opinion.
I use this service several times a week. Just this
morning sent a note off to my reps from Kansas. See
http://www.congress.org/congressorg/bio/letterslist/?id=255
and check on letter from Wichita re: Airport "Gate Rape"
The Internet can be a very powerful tool for the protection
of our liberties . . . whether or not one agrees with
views of others, it's a sure bet your views will go
un-recorded unless you at least take time to put words down
somewhere and hit the "SEND" key . . .
The antithesis of liberty is servitude.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: More Rotax questions |
><Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr>
>
>
>Hi, Bob and all
>
>The first question, while Rotax oriented, could interest Lycoming or
>Continental people :
>
>While examining the wiring diagram suggested by Rotax in their maintenance
>manual, I discovered they made some clone of the standard circuit found on
>any light plane.
>A few differences though :
>
>Question 1
>They feed the starter contactor direct from the HOT side of the battery
>contactor. Of course this minimizes the connection count between the battery
>and the starter motor. But what are the pros and cons of such a layout ?
If the starter contactor sticks, you have no way to shut
the system down. I know of at least one Glasair that narrowly
avoided serious damage to the airplane after an uncontrolled
contactor sticking event.
>Strangely enough they don't do the same for the backup fuel pump. It is fed
>from the main (and only) bus bar.
>My intention is to run it on an always hot battery bus.
These guys do not make their living working to produce
considered, elegant solutions to a system architecture
problem.
>Question 2
>The main ALWAYS RUNNING fuel pump gets its power from the B+ lead at the
>voltage regulator.
>My question is, what happens when we open the alt breaker or it trips
>because of an overvoltage (fig Z 16) ?
>Does the pump keep running, or is the B lead 'dead' and we instantly lose
>fuel pressure ?
>Rotax says the capacitor permits alternator to give power without a
>battery but I wonder what happens to the alternator output when the OV
>module pulls
>the C lead to ground....
Unknown . . . unless you've wired it per one of our drawings
wherein the OV event disconnects the alternator from the airplane.
>My impression is this C lead is supposed to give some voltage feedback to
>the regulator.
It may well be the bus voltage sense lead for the regulator. I've
tried for years to get an internal schematic of this product
so that I could provide learned advice to users.
>To recap : may I keep the main fuel pump on the regulator, or do I HAVE to
>run it from an other and more reliable source ?
No power source will be more reliable than the battery
bus . . .
The factory wiring diagrams from Rotax and a number of others
have been collected in a file folder marked "How not to wire
and airplane" . . . Selected drawings from this folder will be
used to illustrate an article on the topic.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Undercowl temperatures |
><Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr>
>
> > <about
> > 210F, if I recall correctly. After that, they start to cool off.>>
> >
> > Thanks for the data points. I am designing my electronics for 125C (257F)
> > so it looks like there is some margin. By the way, what temperature did
>you
> > measure as the normal rise across the engine (lower cowl, or cowl outlet
>vs.
> > ambient)? I would be interested in seeing more of you data if you want to
> > E-mail off-line.
> >
> > Gary Casey
> > ES project
>
>Hi all,
>
>Why not post those infos to the 'List ? Maybe several people around here
>could be interested too.
You beat me to it Gilles . . . I was going to suggest the same
thing. There are few things more useless than good information
not shared or bad information not challenged.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | George Braly <gwbraly(at)gami.com> |
| Subject: | Re: fuel system vapor |
>> This conversation came up at OSH some years ago. One
of the pilots told about a system he saw on an airplane
that was used in heavy duty, quick turnaround service
that was plagued with hard starting due to hot fuel
lines. This operator put a "T" fitting at the carb
and took the extra port off through a valve to one
of the fuel tanks.
Before attempting to start the hot engine, he opened
the valve and purged all the lines up to the carb
with cool fuel using the boost pump. Said it took
about thirty seconds to purge the lines and bring
temps in the lines nearly down to external ambient
no matter how hot it was under the cowl.
Bob . . .<<
Bob, It is usually NOT the temperature of the fuel lines.
Rather, it IS usually the temperature of the mechanical fuel pump.
soak, will be 210F. It will burn your fingers.
If you prime the engine, crank and get it to Whoooommmm --- cough --
cough-- sputter- stop! What happened?
The NEW fuel coming from the tanks hits the HOT fuel pump. At the
fuel pump, which is massive and HOT, the new fuel flashes to vapor, and the
pump cavitates and can't pump vapor, so no fuel goes on to the fuel spider
and out to the injectors, and the engine dies for lack of fuel.
If, OTOH, before doing that, you set the mixture control to ICO,
then hit the boost pump for about 60 to 120 seconds, it will circulate cold
fuel through the fuel pump internals and back to the tank.
That will cool the fuel pump off to the point that it is no longer
too hot to touch with the hand, and then you can make a normal engine start
and when the fuel from the tanks hits the pump, the pump is cool enough so
it does not flash it to vapor and the pump continues to do its proper thing
and pump the good stuff. Result? Engine starts normally and runs fine.
Once the pump pumps the liquid and gets it into the fuel lines, it doesn't
really make any difference if the fuel line is so hot it turns the fuel to
vapor, it will still end up going out the fuel injector and into the intake
plenum.
That is literally ALL there is to a hot start on an injected TCM engine.
Regards, George
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | George Braly <gwbraly(at)gami.com> |
| Subject: | Undercowl temperatures |
Gary,
The temperature rise in the engine compartment during cruise flight is
rather modest. 30 to 60F is about all you ever see, and then, it has to be
in a hot area to get much past 30F rise.
Now, taxiing around on the ground, is another matter. Sitting pointed
down wind, with a 10 knot tail wind, and the engine at idle, will just about
insure no air flow at all in the engine compartment!!! Stuff can get hot.
The area behind the rear engine baffle structure and away from the hot
exhaust plumbing will usually only see about 30F rise over ambient.
Regards, George
-----Original Message-----
From: Gary Casey [mailto:glcasey(at)adelphia.net]
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Undercowl temperatures
<>
Thanks for the data points. I am designing my electronics for 125C (257F)
so it looks like there is some margin. By the way, what temperature did you
measure as the normal rise across the engine (lower cowl, or cowl outlet vs.
ambient)? I would be interested in seeing more of you data if you want to
E-mail off-line.
Gary Casey
ES project
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Brick" <jbrick(at)wolfenet.com> |
| Subject: | AeroElectric Connection Chart Question |
In Figures 8-3 and 8-4 of The Aero-Electric Connection, the wire current
capacity appears to be for wire in conduit or bundled, but the text on page
8-9 says "single strand in free air." The question comes from comparison
with an old chart (Fig 11-7 1988) in AC 43.13 where those (Aero-Electric)
currents plot very close to the wire in bundles curve and far from the
single wire curve. Is there a contradiction?
jb
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: More Rotax questions |
Hi bob,
> If the starter contactor sticks, you have no way to shut
> the system down. I know of at least one Glasair that narrowly
> avoided serious damage to the airplane after an uncontrolled
> contactor sticking event.
I see.
>
..............
>
> >Question 2
> >The main ALWAYS RUNNING fuel pump gets its power from the B+ lead at the
> >voltage regulator.
> >My question is, what happens when we open the alt breaker or it trips
> >because of an overvoltage (fig Z 16) ?
> >Does the pump keep running, or is the B lead 'dead' and we instantly
lose
> >fuel pressure ?
> >Rotax says the capacitor permits alternator to give power without a
> >battery but I wonder what happens to the alternator output when the OV
> >module pulls
> >the C lead to ground....
>
> Unknown . . . unless you've wired it per one of our drawings
> wherein the OV event disconnects the alternator from the airplane.
>
Bob, I WAS SPEAKING or fig Z 16.
>
> >My impression is this C lead is supposed to give some voltage feedback to
> >the regulator.
>
> It may well be the bus voltage sense lead for the regulator. I've
> tried for years to get an internal schematic of this product
> so that I could provide learned advice to users.
I seem to remember the docs say it is made by Ducati.
>
>
> >To recap : may I keep the main fuel pump on the regulator, or do I HAVE
to
> >run it from an other and more reliable source ?
>
> No power source will be more reliable than the battery
> bus . . .
>
Okay. It'll run on the battery bus, then.
> The factory wiring diagrams from Rotax and a number of others
> have been collected in a file folder marked "How not to wire
> and airplane" . . . Selected drawings from this folder will be
> used to illustrate an article on the topic.
I'm drooling in anticipation ;-)
Thank you as usual.
I'm learning more and more every day.
Cheers,
Gilles
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Sticking starter contactor |
gilles.thesee wrote:
> > If the starter contactor sticks,
*** This happened to a friend of mine at the airport yesterday. He hasn't
flown much recently - busy times at work, and a new baby last month. He
came out and managed to start his bird, a O-470 powered fixed-gear Cessna.
He taxied out. Ran it up. Then all the radios died. Bus voltage was 10.5.
He taxied back and parked it. He took the cowl off, and cleaned some
connectors. Turned the master on - and the starter immediately began to
crank!
Seems that the starter relay was stuck "ON". And the starter was drawing
current out of the system as he taxied. I guess he's lucky the poor thing
didn't explode when he ran it up.
- Jerry Kaidor ( jerry(at)tr2.com )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Balanced alternators |
>
>Bob,
>I'm converting my C-310 from generators to
>alternators. Along with the usual voltage
>regulators, Cessna used a "balancing regulator" to
>keep the loads evenly distributed between the two
>alternators. Is this really necessary?
Not really . . .
>I'm assuming that, since no two alternators are
>exactly alike, the one with the higher set voltage
>will come on-line first, and carry the load until the
>demand causes the voltage to drop slightly, then the
>second alternator will pick up the slack. If this is
>true, I can just connect both alternator outputs to
>the buss, and be done with it.
True . . .
>Personally, I don't care if my alternator loads are
>balanced. If one alternator is putting out 20 amps,
>and the other one 10 amps, so what? As long as my
>buss voltage stays at 28 volts, I'm happy. Why was
>Cessna so concerned about this? BTW, both alternators
>are 60 amp, so I have plenty of capacity.
>
>Or... could the alternators get into some sort of
>oscillation, fighting each other? I can see a case
>where the second (lower voltage) alternator would come
>on-line and it's voltage would very slightly spike
>past the buss voltage, which would cause the first
>(higher voltage) alternator to reduce it's output
>momentarily, then back to normal. But even if this
>oscillation were to happen, I would think it would all
>be over before a volt meter could even register the
>hiccup. Or is this a real problem? I don't want to
>have "dueling voltage regulators" on a dark-n-stormy
>night!
This is possible . . . it depends on a lot of
variables including but no limited to regulator
dynamics, battery condition, wire sizes, etc.
To avoid this condition on many light twins
fitted with alternators (including Barons, C337)
the philosophy was to tie both alternators
in parallel. Feed both fields from one regulator.
This kinda-sorta made them balance and it absolutely
prevented the dueling alternator phenomenon. If
it were my airplane, I'd put in a second battery
and run right/left independent systems with a
cross-feed a la Figure Z-14.
If this is not possible/practical, go ahead and
wire as independent systems driving the same bus
a la Figure Z-12 (This is how the Bonanza,
C-210, big Pipers, etc. do it).
If you find there are conditions that create
a stability problem and given that one alternator
runs the airplane just fine, run one alternator
at a time.
There ARE techniques to make two alternators
parallel and share a load. Dave S. and I fiddled
with it a bit at B&C 5 years ago. I also built
a system that we (Electro-Mech) proposed to
Cessna about 20 years ago . . . it's not difficult
to do but adds complexity and very little value.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: More Rotax questions |
> > >Rotax says the capacitor permits alternator to give power without a
> > >battery but I wonder what happens to the alternator output when the OV
> > >module pulls the C lead to ground....
> >
> > Unknown . . . unless you've wired it per one of our drawings
> > wherein the OV event disconnects the alternator from the airplane.
> >
>Bob, I WAS SPEAKING or fig Z 16.
Okay. The philosophy in that drawing is to open
everything that hooks the alternator to the airplane
in case of overvoltage. My first impression was that
you were referring to one of the canned diagrams
generated by Rotax or one of their dealers.
Of course Z-16 drawing does not speak to an electrically
dependent fuel delivery system. When I did that drawing, all
the Rotax installations I'd worked with to that point used
an electric pump as backup for a mechanical pump.
When you're depending on electrically delivered fuel,
at least one of the pumps should run from a battery bus.
> >
> >
> > >To recap : may I keep the main fuel pump on the regulator, or do I HAVE
>to
> > >run it from an other and more reliable source ?
> >
> > No power source will be more reliable than the battery
> > bus . . .
> >
>Okay. It'll run on the battery bus, then.
You're off 'n running . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: More Rotax questions |
Bob,
>
> Okay. The philosophy in that drawing is to open
> everything that hooks the alternator to the airplane
> in case of overvoltage. My first impression was that
> you were referring to one of the canned diagrams
> generated by Rotax or one of their dealers.
>
> Of course Z-16 drawing does not speak to an electrically
> dependent fuel delivery system. When I did that drawing, all
> the Rotax installations I'd worked with to that point used
> an electric pump as backup for a mechanical pump.
>
> When you're depending on electrically delivered fuel,
> at least one of the pumps should run from a battery bus.
The Aux pump will definitly run on a battery bus.
What is bothering me is my friend sticks to the ignition keyswitch and to
date I have no practical way to have AT THE SAME TIME the ignition on AND
the main pump running with just the ordinary switch.
But it seems I found an English firm able to tailor make a key switch to
your specs.They use a multi-waffer design that allows any switching
sequence.
I'm still trying to sort out their spec sheet, but hopefully I'll be able to
get a quotation for a switch with an 'accessory' function.
This way I hope I'll achieve the running of the pump from a safer source,
and the ordinary ignition switching without changing the spam can pilot's
old habits.
By the way I'm wondering what would be best : ordinary 'Off, R, L, Both,
Start' (main pump running as soon as one ignition is on), or 'Off,
Accessories, R, L, Both, Start' ?
>
> > > >To recap : may I keep the main fuel pump on the regulator, or do I
HAVE
> >to
> > > >run it from an other and more reliable source ?
> > >
> > > No power source will be more reliable than the battery
> > > bus . . .
> > >
> >Okay. It'll run on the battery bus, then.
>
>
> You're off 'n running . . .
>
Thank you once more,
Gilles
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorton(at)cyberus.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Off topic, but topical |
Hi Ferg,
I've taken this off line, as it isn't really about electrics.
Thanks for your comments. I've got a couple interspersed in with yours.
>
>
>">Frankly, I don't understand why all of you>professional pilots don't say
>"enough" and refuse to>fly anymore until you are exempt from the security
>>checks. I'd sure as hell support you.>Bill Irvine>C-310
>
> As a retried and garrulous old pteridactyl, I heartily agree but
>thought I was a solo dissident. I am never more embarrassed for one of my
>former trades than to watch some infantile high school dropout with twenty
>minutes training rifling through a Captain's luggage asking 'what's this
>for?', 'what's that for?"
> With the certain knowledge that either operating aviator can destroy
>300 lives aboard and many below by just carefully timing a twist of the
>wrist, the "security" people have so little professional skills that their
>cynicism drives them only to creative reproduction. The way to the top lies
>through hiring more below you.
>
>"The problem is to differentiate between the professional pilots, and
>terrorists with a stolen uniform and fake ID. I recall a purported
>pros-pective terrorist who was arrested with an airline pilot uniform in his
>luggage shortly after 9/11. Don't want guys like that being able to skip
>security."
> Wrong. The problem is to differentiate between infiltrated
>'security' terrorists and a professional protector. There are moves afoot to
>distinguish "VIP" passengers from us riffraff by means of some hoked-up
>research, and having seen the ulterior motives of many executives - I can
>imagine the prestige of one who holds a "platinum" Security Pass. What a
>wave of anger sweeps over one who watches his son (making his way as Captain
>to his scheduled airliner) being fingered by a seemingly ill-trained
>stranger - AND having to remove his shoes! - in order to take his passengers
>and fellow workers to 35,000 feet at 900 kph - with his hands.
I am a frequent traveller, so I probably would benefit from such a
program. But I can't understand how any such program could be made
impossible to infiltrate (i.e. fake platinum Security Pass). So I
don't support the concept. If we put any shortcuts in the system,
the bad guys could use them as a way to bypass security. 9/11 (or
11/9, September 11, etc) all over again.
You didn't really answer my original point - how should security tell
the difference between an airline pilot and someone with an airline
uniform and a forged ID?
Now, don't get me wrong - I'm not defending the current system. I
agree that the idiots doing the security checks are just wasting
everyone's time. I spent two weeks in Israel a couple of years ago -
those guys know how to do security. Problem is the North American
public wouldn't stand for the extra time, so they would stop flying,
and the airlines would be toast. But we've got to be able to do
better than we are doing now.
Of course the next time it'll probably be a transport truck full of
explosives in the Lincoln Tunnel, etc. We always prepare to fight
the last war, so we concentrate on aviation security and ignore all
the other things the bad guys could try to do.
>
>"But, I agree with your main point, that the current practices are
>designed to make people feel better, not to actually accomplish
>something. Canada has its share of "head in the sand" rules too.
>We've got "no fly zones" of 1/2 mile around our parliament buildings
>and the Prime Minister's residence. The politicians must be pretty
>stupid if they think that offers them any protection."
> It didn't take this 11/9 event to prove them stupid but their
>consummate insolence in protecting themselves first (and so blatantly) shows
>the apathy and treachery of their motives.
Couldn't have said it better myself :)
>
> By reducing the aviators to the level of the unproven public in
>this theatrical way, they lessen the resolve to professional behaviour,
>invite mediocrity and destroy faith in security methods. Our discussion is
>proof of the failure.
I think 9/11 was sufficient to destroy faith in security as it is
practiced in North America.
I think the biggest deterrent to another 9/11 is the hijackers
knowing that if they stand up and head for the front every man in the
plane will immediately beat the crap out of them.
> .....and the liquor trucks still roll up to the aircraft with
>impunity.
Wonder how much profit the airlines make on the booze?
>Ferg Kyle
>Europa A064
Take care,
Kevin Horton
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | gmouck <gmouck(at)attcanada.ca> |
| Subject: | The qualifications are used as selection |
Hint: type all the qualifications as found on the job ad then beneath each qualification
state (in bullet points) how your skills, knowledge and experience
relate to the qualifications. You can also include non-work related experience,
e.g. school, volunteer, etc. It is important to illustrate the depth/level
and scope of your skills/knowledge.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Graham Singleton <grasingleton(at)avnet.co.uk> |
| Subject: | Re: Rotax regulator location |
>
>
>Hello Gilles,
>
>as this item is off topic for this list I will mail it to you personally.
>
>Werner
I'm sure the Euroap group would be interested as well, they use the same
engine and similar installation. I would like a copy too please, Werner.
Graham
grasingleton(at)avnet.co.uk
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Graham Singleton <grasingleton(at)avnet.co.uk> |
| Subject: | Re: fuel system vapor |
> This conversation came up at OSH some years ago. One
> of the pilots told about a system he saw on an airplane
> that was used in heavy duty, quick turnaround service
> that was plagued with hard starting due to hot fuel
> lines. This operator put a "T" fitting at the carb
> and took the extra port off through a valve to one
> of the fuel tanks.
> Bob . . .
This same logic is applied to many of our automobiles, there is a permanent
bleed of fuel back to the tank which keeps cool fuel always available and
also cools the mechanical pump. The same logic is used by Rotax who have
always recommended a bleed back for their 912/914 series. Those early
Europs builders who didn't heed the suggestion occasionally had hot take
off problems, (vapour lock,) with mogas.
Graham
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorton(at)cyberus.ca> |
| Subject: | RE: RV-List: Lightspeed cables? |
It'll be interesting to see how this works out in service. I would
have thought that the long wires connected to the end of the coax
would allow lots of noise to be transmitted, which could be picked up
by the radios, intercom, etc. But, I'm no expert.
I'm going to feed this over to the Aeroelectric List to see if anyone
over there has useful comments. I'll be doing the same task on my
Lightspeed soon.
Kevin Horton
>--> RV-List message posted by: "Carl Froehlich"
>
>Ken,
>
> I share your concern with making this connection. Years of
>working with
>coax has taught me that coax terminated by anything other than a coaxial
>connector is subject to fatigue failure. Here is what I did (dual
>Lightspeed EI install):
>- prepare the coax pigtails, about 2" each of center conductor and shield.
>- Splice 12" or so of quality 18 gauge aircraft wire to each pigtail by
>soldering, then covering the splice with heat shrink.
>- Take (4) 10" sections of leftover coax and pull out the center conductor
>and shield (all you have left is the black outer jacket). Slide these
>jackets over the new 18 gauge wire pigtails.
>- Using a 3" or so piece of small diameter plastic rod, encase both coax/18
>gauge wire junctions and plastic rod in a large piece of heat shrink. The
>idea is this will completely immobilize the junction from flexing.
>- Using an adel clamp, mount the now encased coax/wire transition piece to
>something near where you mounted the coils. If this is the top set of
>coils, the aft baffle works well.
>- Trim the pigtails to length and crimp on the end connectors. Recommend
>making a loop of the pigtails to allow for some flex.
>
> I'll see if I can get someone to take a digital picture of
>this for you.
>
>Hope this helps.
>Carl Froehlich
>RV-8A (at the hanger, doing the last few things)
>Vienna, VA
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Ken Balch
>To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: RV-List: Lightspeed cables?
>
>
>--> RV-List message posted by: Ken Balch
>
>I'm just getting around to crimping the terminals to my Lightspeed coax
>leads and I'd like to see some pictures of other installations. There
>doesn't seem to be any way to properly heat shrink the terminals onto
>the coax with one crimped to the center conductor and another to the
>braid. I crimped two terminals to one coax lead and really don't like
>how flimsy it looks hanging off the ignition coil. How have people
>secured these terminals in place?
>
>--
>Regards,
>Ken Balch
>Ashland, MA
>RV-8 #81125 (N118KB)
>to the airport on Saturday...
>groups.yahoo.com/group/BostonRVBuilders/files/
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Casey" <glcasey(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | contactor sticking |
<>
Automotive systems have no way to shut the system down and I have never
heard of a starter contactor sticking - and there are a lot more cars than
airplanes. Am I missing something here? Are the aircraft contactors that
much less reliable than the automotive ones?
Gary Casey
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Casey" <glcasey(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | Dual alternators, single battery |
<>
But wait - you just convinced me a couple of lists ago that the best (and
lightest) approach would be to use 2 alternators and a single battery. I
figured on running two smallish (40-amp ND) alternators and a single battery
on my ES with an all-electronic engine. Am I missing something?
Gary Casey
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | RE: RV-List: Lightspeed cables? |
| From: | "nknobil(at)gwi.net" <nknobil(at)gwi.net> |
Did anyone run Carl's idea by Klaus at LSE? He specifically indicates in the installation
manual -not- to use heat shrink on the coil-end connectors.
I'm not impressed with the apparent ruggedness of the recommended installation,
but I respect Klaus' experience.
Nick Knobil
Bowdoinham, Maine
RV-8 N80549 (not flying yet, but soon!)
O-360-A1A, Whirlwind 200C, Dual LSE CDIs, Ellision TBI
Original Message:
-----------------
From: Kevin Horton khorton(at)cyberus.ca
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2002 06:52:58 -0400
Subject: AeroElectric-List: RE: RV-List: Lightspeed cables?
It'll be interesting to see how this works out in service. I would
have thought that the long wires connected to the end of the coax
would allow lots of noise to be transmitted, which could be picked up
by the radios, intercom, etc. But, I'm no expert.
I'm going to feed this over to the Aeroelectric List to see if anyone
over there has useful comments. I'll be doing the same task on my
Lightspeed soon.
Kevin Horton
>--> RV-List message posted by: "Carl Froehlich"
>
>Ken,
>
> I share your concern with making this connection. Years of
>working with
>coax has taught me that coax terminated by anything other than a coaxial
>connector is subject to fatigue failure. Here is what I did (dual
>Lightspeed EI install):
>- prepare the coax pigtails, about 2" each of center conductor and shield.
>- Splice 12" or so of quality 18 gauge aircraft wire to each pigtail by
>soldering, then covering the splice with heat shrink.
>- Take (4) 10" sections of leftover coax and pull out the center conductor
>and shield (all you have left is the black outer jacket). Slide these
>jackets over the new 18 gauge wire pigtails.
>- Using a 3" or so piece of small diameter plastic rod, encase both coax/18
>gauge wire junctions and plastic rod in a large piece of heat shrink. The
>idea is this will completely immobilize the junction from flexing.
>- Using an adel clamp, mount the now encased coax/wire transition piece to
>something near where you mounted the coils. If this is the top set of
>coils, the aft baffle works well.
>- Trim the pigtails to length and crimp on the end connectors. Recommend
>making a loop of the pigtails to allow for some flex.
>
> I'll see if I can get someone to take a digital picture of
>this for you.
>
>Hope this helps.
>Carl Froehlich
>RV-8A (at the hanger, doing the last few things)
>Vienna, VA
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Ken Balch
>To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: RV-List: Lightspeed cables?
>
>
>--> RV-List message posted by: Ken Balch
>
>I'm just getting around to crimping the terminals to my Lightspeed coax
>leads and I'd like to see some pictures of other installations. There
>doesn't seem to be any way to properly heat shrink the terminals onto
>the coax with one crimped to the center conductor and another to the
>braid. I crimped two terminals to one coax lead and really don't like
>how flimsy it looks hanging off the ignition coil. How have people
>secured these terminals in place?
>
>--
>Regards,
>Ken Balch
>Ashland, MA
>RV-8 #81125 (N118KB)
>to the airport on Saturday...
>groups.yahoo.com/group/BostonRVBuilders/files/
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: contactor sticking |
Gary Casey wrote:
>
>
> < the system down. I know of at least one Glasair that narrowly
> avoided serious damage to the airplane after an uncontrolled
> contactor sticking event.>>
>
> Automotive systems have no way to shut the system down and I have never
> heard of a starter contactor sticking - and there are a lot more cars than
> airplanes. Am I missing something here? Are the aircraft contactors that
> much less reliable than the automotive ones?
*** My guess is that airplanes just sit around a lot more than cars.
- Jerry Kaidor ( jerry(at)tr2.com )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jeff Hottle" <jeffh(at)primatech.com> |
| Subject: | Re: contactor sticking |
>Automotive systems have no way to shut the system down and I have never
>heard of a starter contactor sticking...
Now you have, Gary. It happened to my first car (a 1965 Mustang). Luckily I
had some tools in the car and was able to get the battery cable
disconnected.
Jeff
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: More Rotax questions |
><Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr>
>
>Bob,
>
>
> >
> > Okay. The philosophy in that drawing is to open
> > everything that hooks the alternator to the airplane
> > in case of overvoltage. My first impression was that
> > you were referring to one of the canned diagrams
> > generated by Rotax or one of their dealers.
> >
> > Of course Z-16 drawing does not speak to an electrically
> > dependent fuel delivery system. When I did that drawing, all
> > the Rotax installations I'd worked with to that point used
> > an electric pump as backup for a mechanical pump.
> >
> > When you're depending on electrically delivered fuel,
> > at least one of the pumps should run from a battery bus.
>
>The Aux pump will definitly run on a battery bus.
>What is bothering me is my friend sticks to the ignition keyswitch and to
>date I have no practical way to have AT THE SAME TIME the ignition on AND
>the main pump running with just the ordinary switch.
>But it seems I found an English firm able to tailor make a key switch to
>your specs.They use a multi-waffer design that allows any switching
>sequence.
Uggh! Waffer switches that I'm familar with are lacking
in robustness and voltage handling capabilities . . .
I haven't used a waffer switch on a panel in a very
long time.
>I'm still trying to sort out their spec sheet, but hopefully I'll be able to
>get a quotation for a switch with an 'accessory' function.
>This way I hope I'll achieve the running of the pump from a safer source,
>and the ordinary ignition switching without changing the spam can pilot's
>old habits.
How about this? How about a pressure switch that lights
an indicator for low fuel pressure? This would remind one
to make sure that at least one of the two pumps is on
as well as provide failure warning of active pump.
>By the way I'm wondering what would be best : ordinary 'Off, R, L, Both,
>Start' (main pump running as soon as one ignition is on), or 'Off,
>Accessories, R, L, Both, Start' ?
Are you going to hook anything other than a fuel
pump to the accessory switch?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bill Irvine <wgirvine(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Balanced alternators |
> To avoid this condition on many light twins
> fitted with alternators (including Barons, C337)
> the philosophy was to tie both alternators
> in parallel. Feed both fields from one regulator.
Yeah, that's how Cessna did it in a lot of their
bigger twins. But with both alternators permanantly
tied together, I worry about one alternator somehow
going bad and taking out the regulator. So then I
would turn off the primary regulator and turn on the
secondary regulator, where the bad alternator would
take that one out, too. I suppose that I'm just
worrying over nothing, seeing as how this system is
used on a certified airplane and is therefore,
perfect.
> If it were my airplane, I'd put in a second battery
> and run right/left independent systems with a
> cross-feed a la Figure Z-14.
Wish I could do that. You've dealt with the FAA
before; can you imagine how they would react to that
change? Sometimes ya gotta pick your battles.
> If you find there are conditions that create
> a stability problem and given that one alternator
> runs the airplane just fine, run one alternator
> at a time.
What a simple solution. Fly on one alternator. If it
quits, the low-volt warn light comes on. Turn off the
dead alternator, turn on the other one. Continue to
fly. Can't make it much simpler than that!
Thanks for your help, Bob.
Bill Irvine
C-310
http://games.yahoo.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: Re: fuel system vapor |
>
>
> >> This conversation came up at OSH some years ago. One
> of the pilots told about a system he saw on an airplane
> that was used in heavy duty, quick turnaround service
> that was plagued with hard starting due to hot fuel
> lines. This operator put a "T" fitting at the carb
> and took the extra port off through a valve to one
> of the fuel tanks.
>
> Before attempting to start the hot engine, he opened
> the valve and purged all the lines up to the carb
> with cool fuel using the boost pump. Said it took
> about thirty seconds to purge the lines and bring
> temps in the lines nearly down to external ambient
> no matter how hot it was under the cowl.
>
> Bob . . .<<
>
>
> Bob, It is usually NOT the temperature of the fuel lines.
>
> Rather, it IS usually the temperature of the mechanical fuel pump.
>
>soak, will be 210F. It will burn your fingers.
>
> If you prime the engine, crank and get it to Whoooommmm --- cough --
>cough-- sputter- stop! What happened?
>
> The NEW fuel coming from the tanks hits the HOT fuel pump. At the
>fuel pump, which is massive and HOT, the new fuel flashes to vapor, and the
>pump cavitates and can't pump vapor, so no fuel goes on to the fuel spider
>and out to the injectors, and the engine dies for lack of fuel.
>
> If, OTOH, before doing that, you set the mixture control to ICO,
>then hit the boost pump for about 60 to 120 seconds, it will circulate cold
>fuel through the fuel pump internals and back to the tank.
>
> That will cool the fuel pump off to the point that it is no longer
>too hot to touch with the hand, and then you can make a normal engine start
>and when the fuel from the tanks hits the pump, the pump is cool enough so
>it does not flash it to vapor and the pump continues to do its proper thing
>and pump the good stuff. Result? Engine starts normally and runs fine.
>
>Once the pump pumps the liquid and gets it into the fuel lines, it doesn't
>really make any difference if the fuel line is so hot it turns the fuel to
>vapor, it will still end up going out the fuel injector and into the intake
>plenum.
>
>That is literally ALL there is to a hot start on an injected TCM engine.
Understand. The system described flushed EVERYTHING under
the cowl with cool fuel before an attempt was made to start
the engine. The use of "lines" as the all-inclusive noun was
a poor choice on my part.
I turned a cone full of ice-cream upside down on the fuel
pump of my pride-n-joy '41 Pontiac to get it started one
hot summer day . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Balanced alternators |
| From: | James Freeman <flyeyes(at)bellsouth.net> |
On Tuesday, April 23, 2002, at 11:54 AM, Bill Irvine wrote:
>> If you find there are conditions that create
>> a stability problem and given that one alternator
>> runs the airplane just fine, run one alternator
>> at a time.
>
> What a simple solution. Fly on one alternator. If it
> quits, the low-volt warn light comes on. Turn off the
> dead alternator, turn on the other one. Continue to
> fly. Can't make it much simpler than that!
>
> Thanks for your help, Bob.
>
> Bill Irvine
> C-310
>
>
There may be a problem with this approach--at least on Continentals
with $%#
gear-driven alternators. These alternators have a drive shaft
(at least on the Cont IO-360) that is apparently made of cheese-whiz, so
that it will fail without damaging the accessory case in the event that
the alternator seizes.
The problem is, if you turn the alternator on with significant electrical
demands and the engine turning at cruise RPM, the sudden increase in load
can be enough to fail the shaft. I have personally witnessed this twice
in our Cessna 337. In both cases, a pilot unfamiliar with the electrical
system responded to the "ALT NOT CHARGING" light by "cycling" the
alternator switches, immediately failing an alternator drive shaft.
In this airplane, either the front or rear "ALT NOT CHARGING" is on at
least 90% of the time because one or the other of the alternators is
taking most or all of the load. You can always eliminate the warning
light by turning off the OTHER alternator, but we are careful not to
restart the alternator before shutting down. Every single part of the
charging system, including the annunciator panel, has been replaced with
no change in this behavior.
We manage it by using a good digital voltmeter to monitor bus voltage, and
alternating which engine we start first, to verify, at least on every
other flight, that each alternator is charging.
HTH
James Freeman
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | mprather(at)spro.net |
Question for 'lectric Bob:
Do you have experience with any of these holders? I can't
even tell what brand they are.
http://shop.store.yahoo.com/delcity/atcbladfuspa.html
Are they way cheesier than the ones you sell on your site?
I am designing the electric system for my starterless, day VFR
varieze which will have a very low system power budget. I have
a Microair comm, will purchase a Microair transponder, a few
engine enstruments, an LSE ignition (and one mag). Its all
driven by a sealed battery which is charged by a B&C 200G. Pretty
standard stuff.
I think the above holders would probably get the job done. Actually,
I think I need one for the always hot bus, and one for the main
bus. Can you see a reason why these won't work, or why I'll have
problems with them?
I am not necessarily trying to cut cost corners here, but if these
will do the job, why not. I even think I kind of like the built-in
ground bus. I am about to place orders for all the pieces to go in
my airplane, and this is the last decision to make.
Thanks and regards,
Matt Prather
VariEze N34RD
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: More Rotax questions |
> >They use a multi-waffer design that allows any switching
> >sequence.
>
> Uggh! Waffer switches that I'm familar with are lacking
> in robustness and voltage handling capabilities . . .
> I haven't used a waffer switch on a panel in a very
> long time.
Okay, that dooms the multiwaffer thing.
Yet they were saying their models could handle lots of volts and many amps.
> >This way I hope I'll achieve the running of the pump from a safer source,
> >and the ordinary ignition switching without changing the spam can pilot's
> >old habits.
>
>
> How about this? How about a pressure switch that lights
> an indicator for low fuel pressure? This would remind one
> to make sure that at least one of the two pumps is on
> as well as provide failure warning of active pump.
>
>
Hey, that's an idea !
Any suggestions for the pressure switch ?
> >By the way I'm wondering what would be best : ordinary 'Off, R, L, Both,
> >Start' (main pump running as soon as one ignition is on), or 'Off,
> >Accessories, R, L, Both, Start' ?
> Are you going to hook anything other than a fuel
> pump to the accessory switch?
>
No, I was just trying to duplicate the way we handle Lycs or Contis with
that %&# key..
Bob, your help is invaluable. This switch is the last dark corner in our
power distribution scheme. Of course I still have individual systems to
define. But things are so much clearer now.
If we are successful in translating these ideas into a neatly wired
aircraft, you'll have lots of French homebuilders on the 'List next year ;-)
Thanks a lot,
Gilles
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Dual alternators, single battery |
>
>< prevented the dueling alternator phenomenon. If
> it were my airplane, I'd put in a second battery
> and run right/left independent systems with a
> cross-feed a la Figure Z-14.>>
>
>But wait - you just convinced me a couple of lists ago that the best (and
>lightest) approach would be to use 2 alternators and a single battery. I
>figured on running two smallish (40-amp ND) alternators and a single battery
>on my ES with an all-electronic engine. Am I missing something?
No, but he was talking about a certified C-310 that was originally
fitted with smaller paralleling generators feeding a single
bus and one battery . . . typical of most light twins. I helped
a twin Comanche owner re-configure his system as suggested
so as to achieve a truly redundant electrical system on
his airplane (Figure Z-14)
Our C-310 driver is considering new alternators
each big enough to power the whole airplane, he could
easily run dual-alt/single-bus/single-battery and just
run one alternator at a time. However, most
owners of light twins were at least partially suckered into
believing that because they had two of everything, they
had a bulletproof system . . . not so it seems.
Hence the dual-alt/split-bus/dual-battery suggestion.
For a single engine airplane having dissimilar alternators
then using the smaller alternator as a simple back up
makes more sense like Figures Z-12/Z-13
. . . . but if Figure Z-14 really floats your boat . . .
there's certainly nothing "wrong" with it.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: contactor sticking |
>
>< the system down. I know of at least one Glasair that narrowly
> avoided serious damage to the airplane after an uncontrolled
> contactor sticking event.>>
>
>Automotive systems have no way to shut the system down and I have never
>heard of a starter contactor sticking - and there are a lot more cars than
>airplanes. Am I missing something here? Are the aircraft contactors that
>much less reliable than the automotive ones?
No. In fact, there's no such thing as an "aircraft
quality" contactor used on any 14V airplane I've ever
seen. I've never had a starter contactor stick on
a car but I've heard of it.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Balanced alternators |
>
>
>On Tuesday, April 23, 2002, at 11:54 AM, Bill Irvine wrote:
>
> >> If you find there are conditions that create
> >> a stability problem and given that one alternator
> >> runs the airplane just fine, run one alternator
> >> at a time.
> >
> > What a simple solution. Fly on one alternator. If it
> > quits, the low-volt warn light comes on. Turn off the
> > dead alternator, turn on the other one. Continue to
> > fly. Can't make it much simpler than that!
> >
> > Thanks for your help, Bob.
> >
> > Bill Irvine
> > C-310
> >
> >
>There may be a problem with this approach--at least on Continentals
>with $%#
gear-driven alternators. These alternators have a drive shaft
>(at least on the Cont IO-360) that is apparently made of cheese-whiz, so
>that it will fail without damaging the accessory case in the event that
>the alternator seizes.
>
>The problem is, if you turn the alternator on with significant electrical
>demands and the engine turning at cruise RPM, the sudden increase in load
>can be enough to fail the shaft. I have personally witnessed this twice
>in our Cessna 337. In both cases, a pilot unfamiliar with the electrical
>system responded to the "ALT NOT CHARGING" light by "cycling" the
>alternator switches, immediately failing an alternator drive shaft.
>
>In this airplane, either the front or rear "ALT NOT CHARGING" is on at
>least 90% of the time because one or the other of the alternators is
>taking most or all of the load. You can always eliminate the warning
>light by turning off the OTHER alternator, but we are careful not to
>restart the alternator before shutting down. Every single part of the
>charging system, including the annunciator panel, has been replaced with
>no change in this behavior.
>
>We manage it by using a good digital voltmeter to monitor bus voltage, and
>alternating which engine we start first, to verify, at least on every
>other flight, that each alternator is charging.
I think the C-310 used pulleys off the accessory case
to drive the generators . . . so this particular characteristic
of the el-crudo TCM gear drives shouldn't be an issue.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuse holders |
>
>Question for 'lectric Bob:
>
>Do you have experience with any of these holders? I can't
>even tell what brand they are.
>
>http://shop.store.yahoo.com/delcity/atcbladfuspa.html
>
>Are they way cheesier than the ones you sell on your site?
Don't know. They speak the right words about materials.
>I am designing the electric system for my starterless, day VFR
>varieze which will have a very low system power budget. I have
>a Microair comm, will purchase a Microair transponder, a few
>engine enstruments, an LSE ignition (and one mag). Its all
>driven by a sealed battery which is charged by a B&C 200G. Pretty
>standard stuff.
>
>I think the above holders would probably get the job done. Actually,
>I think I need one for the always hot bus, and one for the main
>bus. Can you see a reason why these won't work, or why I'll have
>problems with them?
This is an experimental airplane. We can try anything
in a properly configured system confident in the knowledge
that we can upgrade the quality of any component because
we're tired of replacing it as opposed to getting a beefier
on cause the old one damned near got us killed.
>I am not necessarily trying to cut cost corners here, but if these
>will do the job, why not. I even think I kind of like the built-in
>ground bus. I am about to place orders for all the pieces to go in
>my airplane, and this is the last decision to make.
The risks of the experiment are quite low. Give them a try . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Balanced alternators |
>
> > To avoid this condition on many light twins
> > fitted with alternators (including Barons, C337)
> > the philosophy was to tie both alternators
> > in parallel. Feed both fields from one regulator.
>
>Yeah, that's how Cessna did it in a lot of their
>bigger twins. But with both alternators permanantly
>tied together, I worry about one alternator somehow
>going bad and taking out the regulator. So then I
>would turn off the primary regulator and turn on the
>secondary regulator, where the bad alternator would
>take that one out, too. I suppose that I'm just
>worrying over nothing, seeing as how this system is
>used on a certified airplane and is therefore,
>perfect.
Nope. I've seen it happen. I knew enough about
the alternator system in 1968 when I was a lowly
tech writer at Cessna to complain about the
main/aux regulator switch on the C-337 . . .
Nobody seemed disposed to worry about it much,
shucks . . . if the FAA signed off on it, it
HAD to be okay, right?
> > If it were my airplane, I'd put in a second battery
> > and run right/left independent systems with a
> > cross-feed a la Figure Z-14.
>
>Wish I could do that. You've dealt with the FAA
>before; can you imagine how they would react to that
>change? Sometimes ya gotta pick your battles.
Does your airplane have a alternate battery
location approved. The Twin Comanche had both
forward and rearward battery installations
and the idea of putting in duplicate systems
wasn't a tough thing to sell.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | RE: Lightspeed cables? |
I am mystified here . . . are we really talking about coaxial
cable like we use for antennas or is somebody referring to
shielded wire?
If ordinary shielded wire, then consider:
http://209.134.106.21/articles/shldwire/shldwire.html
. . . there is no value in being able to keep the shielding
totally intact around a noisy center conductor . . . these
conductors don't propagate noise by radiation. Small gaps
a the ends for connection are not a noise risk.
Bob . . .
>
>
>Did anyone run Carl's idea by Klaus at LSE? He specifically indicates in
>the installation manual -not- to use heat shrink on the coil-end connectors.
>
>I'm not impressed with the apparent ruggedness of the recommended
>installation, but I respect Klaus' experience.
>
>Nick Knobil
>Bowdoinham, Maine
>RV-8 N80549 (not flying yet, but soon!)
>O-360-A1A, Whirlwind 200C, Dual LSE CDIs, Ellision TBI
>
>Original Message:
>-----------------
>From: Kevin Horton khorton(at)cyberus.ca
>Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2002 06:52:58 -0400
>To: rv-list(at)matronics.com, aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: AeroElectric-List: RE: RV-List: Lightspeed cables?
>
>
>It'll be interesting to see how this works out in service. I would
>have thought that the long wires connected to the end of the coax
>would allow lots of noise to be transmitted, which could be picked up
>by the radios, intercom, etc. But, I'm no expert.
>
>I'm going to feed this over to the Aeroelectric List to see if anyone
>over there has useful comments. I'll be doing the same task on my
>Lightspeed soon.
>
>Kevin Horton
>
> >--> RV-List message posted by: "Carl Froehlich"
> >
> >Ken,
> >
> > I share your concern with making this connection. Years of
> >working with
> >coax has taught me that coax terminated by anything other than a coaxial
> >connector is subject to fatigue failure. Here is what I did (dual
> >Lightspeed EI install):
> >- prepare the coax pigtails, about 2" each of center conductor and shield.
> >- Splice 12" or so of quality 18 gauge aircraft wire to each pigtail by
> >soldering, then covering the splice with heat shrink.
> >- Take (4) 10" sections of leftover coax and pull out the center conductor
> >and shield (all you have left is the black outer jacket). Slide these
> >jackets over the new 18 gauge wire pigtails.
> >- Using a 3" or so piece of small diameter plastic rod, encase both coax/18
> >gauge wire junctions and plastic rod in a large piece of heat shrink. The
> >idea is this will completely immobilize the junction from flexing.
> >- Using an adel clamp, mount the now encased coax/wire transition piece to
> >something near where you mounted the coils. If this is the top set of
> >coils, the aft baffle works well.
> >- Trim the pigtails to length and crimp on the end connectors. Recommend
> >making a loop of the pigtails to allow for some flex.
> >
> > I'll see if I can get someone to take a digital picture of
> >this for you.
> >
> >Hope this helps.
> >Carl Froehlich
> >RV-8A (at the hanger, doing the last few things)
> >Vienna, VA
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
> >[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Ken Balch
> >To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> >Subject: RV-List: Lightspeed cables?
> >
> >
> >--> RV-List message posted by: Ken Balch
> >
> >I'm just getting around to crimping the terminals to my Lightspeed coax
> >leads and I'd like to see some pictures of other installations. There
> >doesn't seem to be any way to properly heat shrink the terminals onto
> >the coax with one crimped to the center conductor and another to the
> >braid. I crimped two terminals to one coax lead and really don't like
> >how flimsy it looks hanging off the ignition coil. How have people
> >secured these terminals in place?
> >
> >--
> >Regards,
> >Ken Balch
> >Ashland, MA
> >RV-8 #81125 (N118KB)
> >to the airport on Saturday...
> >groups.yahoo.com/group/BostonRVBuilders/files/
> >
>
>
Bob . . .
--------------------------
TEMPORARY WEBSITE ADDRESS:
http://209.134.106.21
--------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Robinson" <jbr(at)hitechnetworks.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: Lightspeed cables? |
Bob
Klaus use coaxial antenna type wire (RG-- wire)
Jim
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard RIley <Richard(at)riley.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: Lightspeed cables? |
One problem I've had with the Lightspeed installation is the RG interior
insulation sleeve melting and shorting out the center conductor to the
shield. I replaced the wire with some milspec high temp co-ax I found
surplus and it worked fine. Don't know if this would be a problem in
anything but an EZ type aircraft.
>
>
>Bob
>Klaus use coaxial antenna type wire (RG-- wire)
>Jim
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: More Rotax questions |
> How about this? How about a pressure switch that lights
> an indicator for low fuel pressure? This would remind one
> to make sure that at least one of the two pumps is on
> as well as provide failure warning of active pump.
>
Hi Bob,
How about these variations on the key theme ?
Lest the pilot tries to start the engine in spite of the lo fuel press
light, how about using a double pole switch for the main pump ?
The second poles could be in series with the starter key wire. Actuation of
the starter would be impossible unless the main pump switch is in the on
position. I could use a relay to run a light or buzzer in case one forgets
the pump on after turning the master switch off. (the pump will run from an
always hot battery bus).
Or else using one set of grouding contacts on the key switch to actuate the
pump ? The ignition checks could be done through a spring loaded double
throw switch.
Well, I'm not quite sure of this one..
Cheers,
Gilles
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorton(at)cyberus.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: Lightspeed cables? |
We're talking RG58 coax here. Picture at:
http://www.lightspeedengineering.com/Manuals/Ignition_Coil_Diag.htm
All Klaus says in the installation instructions is "Trim the wires to
length and connect them with quality crimp connectors or by soldering
and heat shrink insulation. Do not use any heat shrink on the black
RG58 cable going to the coils."
Kevin
>
>
> I am mystified here . . . are we really talking about coaxial
> cable like we use for antennas or is somebody referring to
> shielded wire?
>
> If ordinary shielded wire, then consider:
>
> http://209.134.106.21/articles/shldwire/shldwire.html
>
> . . . there is no value in being able to keep the shielding
> totally intact around a noisy center conductor . . . these
> conductors don't propagate noise by radiation. Small gaps
> a the ends for connection are not a noise risk.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
>>
>>
>>Did anyone run Carl's idea by Klaus at LSE? He specifically indicates in
>>the installation manual -not- to use heat shrink on the coil-end connectors.
>>
>>I'm not impressed with the apparent ruggedness of the recommended
>>installation, but I respect Klaus' experience.
>>
>>Nick Knobil
>>Bowdoinham, Maine
>>RV-8 N80549 (not flying yet, but soon!)
>>O-360-A1A, Whirlwind 200C, Dual LSE CDIs, Ellision TBI
>>
>>Original Message:
>>-----------------
>>From: Kevin Horton khorton(at)cyberus.ca
>>Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2002 06:52:58 -0400
>>To: rv-list(at)matronics.com, aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>>Subject: AeroElectric-List: RE: RV-List: Lightspeed cables?
>>
>>
>>
>>It'll be interesting to see how this works out in service. I would
>>have thought that the long wires connected to the end of the coax
>>would allow lots of noise to be transmitted, which could be picked up
>>by the radios, intercom, etc. But, I'm no expert.
>>
>>I'm going to feed this over to the Aeroelectric List to see if anyone
>>over there has useful comments. I'll be doing the same task on my
>>Lightspeed soon.
>>
>>Kevin Horton
>>
>> >--> RV-List message posted by: "Carl Froehlich"
>> >
>> >Ken,
>> >
>> > I share your concern with making this connection. Years of
>> >working with
>> >coax has taught me that coax terminated by anything other than a coaxial
>> >connector is subject to fatigue failure. Here is what I did (dual
>> >Lightspeed EI install):
>> >- prepare the coax pigtails, about 2" each of center conductor and shield.
>> >- Splice 12" or so of quality 18 gauge aircraft wire to each pigtail by
>> >soldering, then covering the splice with heat shrink.
>> >- Take (4) 10" sections of leftover coax and pull out the center conductor
>> >and shield (all you have left is the black outer jacket). Slide these
>> >jackets over the new 18 gauge wire pigtails.
>> >- Using a 3" or so piece of small diameter plastic rod, encase both coax/18
>> >gauge wire junctions and plastic rod in a large piece of heat shrink. The
>> >idea is this will completely immobilize the junction from flexing.
>> >- Using an adel clamp, mount the now encased coax/wire transition piece to
>> >something near where you mounted the coils. If this is the top set of
>> >coils, the aft baffle works well.
>> >- Trim the pigtails to length and crimp on the end connectors. Recommend
>> >making a loop of the pigtails to allow for some flex.
>> >
>> > I'll see if I can get someone to take a digital picture of
>> >this for you.
>> >
>> >Hope this helps.
>> >Carl Froehlich
>> >RV-8A (at the hanger, doing the last few things)
>> >Vienna, VA
>> >
>> >-----Original Message-----
>> >From: owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com
>> >[mailto:owner-rv-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Ken Balch
>> >To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> > >Subject: RV-List: Lightspeed cables?
>> >
>> >
>> >--> RV-List message posted by: Ken Balch
>> >
>> >I'm just getting around to crimping the terminals to my Lightspeed coax
>> >leads and I'd like to see some pictures of other installations. There
>> >doesn't seem to be any way to properly heat shrink the terminals onto
>> >the coax with one crimped to the center conductor and another to the
>> >braid. I crimped two terminals to one coax lead and really don't like
>> >how flimsy it looks hanging off the ignition coil. How have people
>> >secured these terminals in place?
>> >
>> >--
>> >Regards,
>> >Ken Balch
>> >Ashland, MA
>> >RV-8 #81125 (N118KB)
>> >to the airport on Saturday...
>> >groups.yahoo.com/group/BostonRVBuilders/files/
>> >
>>
>>
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
> --------------------------
> TEMPORARY WEBSITE ADDRESS:
> http://209.134.106.21
> --------------------------
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Sticking contactors or solenoids |
Sticking of the Ford style starter solenoids is a common problem in
automobiles.
Not the starter mounted ones, but the fender wall mounted style solenoids.
There are bulletins on it saying the it is caused by a low voltage condition.
Low battery, corroded connections, etc. It usually stops cranking in 5 to 10
mins., unless someone disconnects the battery cable, when the battery is
discharged, the starter shorts out or one of the cables melts down.
Steve
Springfield Auto Parts Co., Inc.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Robinson" <jbr(at)hitechnetworks.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: Lightspeed cables? |
In my last airplane (Glasair 1) we had Lightspeed ign on one set of
plugs with the coils mounted on top the engine and the coax run as
per the installation info. We had no problem in 200 hrs of flight.
However , in my Glasair lll I am mounting the coils on the firewall.
Just for what it's worth.
Jim Robinson
N79R
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Casey" <glcasey(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | Starter contactors |
<<>Automotive systems have no way to shut the system down and I have never
>heard of a starter contactor sticking...
Now you have, Gary. It happened to my first car (a 1965 Mustang). Luckily I
had some tools in the car and was able to get the battery cable
disconnected.>>
I forgot about the old Fords with an external contactor - a good rap with a
hammer was the cure for those. Fortunately, they were located right under
the hood by the fender line so water from the hood could run on them,
causing the internal corrosion that usually was the cause of their demise.
At least they were easy to replace.
Back to airplanes, if there is no redundant contactor for the starter, the
failure scenario options would be: 1. discover the problem, shut the engine
down and let the running starter pull the batter down until it stops, or 2:
Don't discover the problem and the starter continues to run until something
bad happens - probably the starter runs until it seizes from overheating.
If you do have a redundant contactor system (starter contactor in series
with the master contactor) the scenarios are: 1. Discover the problem,
shut the engine down and then shut off the master to stop the starter, or 2:
Don't discover the problem and the starter continues to run until something
bad happens - probably the starter runs until it seizes from overheating.
I can see a difference in convenience with the redundant system (with the
master in series you don't have to recharge the battery when you fix it),
but not a difference in flight safety. I'm not advocating either approach
(I wouldn't dare do that on this list), but I can see the benefits of the
"hot" starter contactor and I don't see a flight safety disadvantage.
Gary Casey
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | RE: Lightspeed cables? |
>
>One problem I've had with the Lightspeed installation is the RG interior
>insulation sleeve melting and shorting out the center conductor to the
>shield. I replaced the wire with some milspec high temp co-ax I found
>surplus and it worked fine. Don't know if this would be a problem in
>anything but an EZ type aircraft.
>
> >
> >
> >Bob
> >Klaus use coaxial antenna type wire (RG-- wire)
> >Jim
> >
For power and/or control wires? Spark plug
wires?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard RIley <Richard(at)riley.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: Lightspeed cables? |
The co-ax runs between the ignition box and the coils, so it's for power of
some form.
For power and/or control wires? Spark plug
> wires?
>
> Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: RE: Lightspeed cables? |
| From: | "nknobil(at)gwi.net" <nknobil(at)gwi.net> |
After checking with Klaus, I used RG-400 coax instead of the RG-58 that comes with
the installation kit. Was this the same stuff you used?
Nick Knobil
Bowdoinham, Maine
RV-8 N80549
O-360-A1A, Whirlwind 200C C/S, Dual LSE CDIs, Ellison TBI
Original Message:
-----------------
From: Richard RIley Richard(at)riley.net
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2002 22:35:25 -0700
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: RE: Lightspeed cables?
One problem I've had with the Lightspeed installation is the RG interior
insulation sleeve melting and shorting out the center conductor to the
shield. I replaced the wire with some milspec high temp co-ax I found
surplus and it worked fine. Don't know if this would be a problem in
anything but an EZ type aircraft.
>
>
>Bob
>Klaus use coaxial antenna type wire (RG-- wire)
>Jim
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | mprather(at)spro.net |
| Subject: | Re: RE: Lightspeed cables? |
The coax drives the low tension, switched side of the coils. I
think he uses coax to suppress the rf generated by the sharp
cutoff that his CDI boxes may generate. I am guess that this is
probably un-necessary. The outputs from his box are bnc however, so
you at some point have to switch from coax to straight wire. I'd guess
you could probably get just as good noise performance by running
twisted pair. It seems like the signal content of the CDI output is
really low frequency in the scheme of things.
Matt Prather
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com>
Date: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 8:10 am
Subject: AeroElectric-List: RE: Lightspeed cables?
>
> >
> >One problem I've had with the Lightspeed installation is the RG
> interior>insulation sleeve melting and shorting out the center
> conductor to the
> >shield. I replaced the wire with some milspec high temp co-ax I
> found>surplus and it worked fine. Don't know if this would be a
> problem in
> >anything but an EZ type aircraft.
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >Bob
> > >Klaus use coaxial antenna type wire (RG-- wire)
> > >Jim
> > >
>
> For power and/or control wires? Spark plug
> wires?
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
> _-
>
- The AeroElectric-List Email Forum -
> _-
>
!! NEW !!
> _-
>
List Related Information
> _-
>
=======================================================================
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | lhdodge1(at)mmm.com |
22, 2000) at 04/24/2002 11:20:20 AM
I read in your manual that you recommend the sheet metal tabs that keep a
switch from turning in the panel (requires a separate hole). Do you offer
these as a separate item? If not, where can one find them?
Larry Dodge
RV-6, 16LD
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Crimper for large wires |
| From: | lhdodge1(at)mmm.com |
22, 2000) at 04/24/2002 11:23:25 AM
I need to crimp some #8, #4, and #2 wires to ring lug type terminations.
Where can one get a tool to crimp these?
Larry Dodge
RV-6, 16LD
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | mprather(at)spro.net |
| Subject: | Re: Crimper for large wires |
Why not solder the #2 and #4? Don't tell my ex-girlfriend but
I soldered #4 terminals onto the battery cables for my car on
the kitchen gas stove a while back. Actually, come to think of
it, you can tell her now. I think Bob says that strain relief
isn't such a big deal on big cable, anyway. You can put heat
shrink over the joint when finished. It came out slick for me.
Matt Prather
----- Original Message -----
From: lhdodge1(at)mmm.com
Date: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 10:23 am
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Crimper for large wires
>
> I need to crimp some #8, #4, and #2 wires to ring lug type
> terminations.Where can one get a tool to crimp these?
>
> Larry Dodge
> RV-6, 16LD
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Crimper for large wires |
I soldered some no 4 connectors recently using Bob's
instructions
(http://209.134.106.21/articles/big_term.pdf).
It went much better than I expected and I used a
propane torch.
See:
http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601/images/Dcp01506.jpg
http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601/images/Dcp01472.jpg
Michel
--- mprather(at)spro.net wrote:
> mprather(at)spro.net
>
> Why not solder the #2 and #4? Don't tell my
> ex-girlfriend but
> I soldered #4 terminals onto the battery cables for
> my car on
> the kitchen gas stove a while back. Actually, come
> to think of
> it, you can tell her now. I think Bob says that
> strain relief
> isn't such a big deal on big cable, anyway. You can
> put heat
> shrink over the joint when finished. It came out
> slick for me.
>
> Matt Prather
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: lhdodge1(at)mmm.com
> Date: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 10:23 am
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Crimper for large wires
>
> lhdodge1(at)mmm.com
> >
> > I need to crimp some #8, #4, and #2 wires to ring
> lug type
> > terminations.Where can one get a tool to crimp
> these?
> >
> > Larry Dodge
> > RV-6, 16LD
> >
=====
----------------------------
Michel Therrien CH601-HD
http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby
http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601
http://www.zenithair.com/bldrlist/profiles/mthobby
http://games.yahoo.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | starter contactor sticking... |
| From: | czechsix(at)juno.com |
The starter contactor got stuck on my Toyota Corolla a couple years ago. At the
time it was about an 8 year old car, and Corolla's have one of the best reputations
for reliability out there. Actually happened to my wife...she had just
finished filling up at a gas station and started the car, and the starter wouldn't
disengage. She turned off the ignition and pulled out the key, put it
in neutral and got out of the car. Called me on her cellphone...I could here
it cranking away in the background. Fortunately she was only a mile from where
I work but it was still almost 10 minutes by the time I got there, and it was
still cranking! Pretty impressive battery in my opinion. Just as I arrived
somebody at the gas station was in the process of popping the battery cable off.
Made some impressive sparks as he removed it. Had it towed to the Toyota
dealer and they fixed it, but said they'd never heard of such a thing before
in 25 years of business. By the way both the starter and the battery were fine...still
using them with no problem...
So it does happen...
--Mark Navratil
Cedar Rapids, Iowa
RV-8A finish kit stuff...
From: "Gary Casey" <glcasey(at)adelphia.net>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: contactor sticking
<>
Automotive systems have no way to shut the system down and I have never
heard of a starter contactor sticking - and there are a lot more cars than
airplanes. Am I missing something here? Are the aircraft contactors that
much less reliable than the automotive ones?
Gary Casey
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | George Braly <gwbraly(at)gami.com> |
| Subject: | RE: Lightspeed cables? |
I believe it is the high voltage (300-400 volts) used by the CDI ignition
coil.
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard RIley [mailto:Richard(at)riley.net]
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: RE: Lightspeed cables?
The co-ax runs between the ignition box and the coils, so it's for power of
some form.
For power and/or control wires? Spark plug
> wires?
>
> Bob . . .
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Vincent Welch" <welchvincent(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Crimper for large wires |
Any electrical contractor will have the tools to make this size crimps for
you. Check the phone book, they'll probably do them for free.
Vince
>From: lhdodge1(at)mmm.com
>Reply-To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>To: AeroElectric-List Digest Server
>
>Subject: AeroElectric-List: Crimper for large wires
>Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2002 11:23:23 -0500 22, 2000) at 04/24/2002 11:23:25 AM
>
>
>I need to crimp some #8, #4, and #2 wires to ring lug type terminations.
>Where can one get a tool to crimp these?
>
>Larry Dodge
>RV-6, 16LD
>
>
>http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
>
>
Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
http://www.hotmail.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 24 Msgs - 04/23/02 |
| From: | Grant Corriveau <grantC(at)total.net> |
on 24/04/02 02:51, AeroElectric-List Digest Server at
aeroelectric-list-digest(at)matronics.com wrote:
> What a simple solution. Fly on one alternator. If it
> quits, the low-volt warn light comes on. Turn off the
> dead alternator, turn on the other one. Continue to
> fly. Can't make it much simpler than that!
>
> Thanks for your help, Bob.
>
> Bill Irvine
> C-310
Or why not split the main bus into a left and right, each powered from it's
own alternator? In the event of an alternator failure, a bus tie switch
could be used to transfer all the load to one or the other alternator, after
reducing electrical loads...
If you automated this bus tie function, you've basically have the same set
up as the B737s, A320s, DC9/MD80s, (and other?) twin engine aircraft 'out
there'... fwiw.
--
Grant Corriveau
Montreal
Zodiac 601hds/CAM100
C-GHTF
www.theWingStayedON.ca
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Carter" <dcarter(at)datarecall.net> |
| Subject: | Re: contactor sticking |
I'm flying a Cessna 172 that has a checklist item in the start/after start
section that reads:
"Check for starter staying engaged - Loadmeter will be pegged full
right."
Makes it pretty simple to diagnose - won't fly with it stuck "on" with that
in the checklist - if pilot uses the checklist.
David Carter
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Crimper for large wires |
Nico Press tools can be used.
Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh
Editor, EAA Safety Programs
cgalley(at)qcbc.org or experimenter(at)eaa.org
Always looking for articles for the Experimenter
----- Original Message -----
From: <lhdodge1(at)mmm.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Crimper for large wires
I need to crimp some #8, #4, and #2 wires to ring lug type terminations.
Where can one get a tool to crimp these?
Larry Dodge
RV-6, 16LD
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Switch keepers |
>
>I read in your manual that you recommend the sheet metal tabs that keep a
>switch from turning in the panel (requires a separate hole). Do you offer
>these as a separate item? If not, where can one find them?
>
>Larry Dodge
>RV-6, 16LD
When I was selling the switches out of our shop, I had
to order and add anti-rotation washers and replace the
decorative knurled nut with a hex nut. I think B&C
is using the same suppliers I used to use so they
should have loose washers and hex-nuts for sale.
I've forwarded a copy of this reply to Todd at
B&C . . . give him a call at 316.283.8000 or email
to sales(at)bandcspecialty.com
I suspect he can fix you up.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Lightspeed cables? |
>
>The co-ax runs between the ignition box and the coils, so it's for power of
>some form.
>
>
> For power and/or control wires? Spark plug
> > wires?
> >
> > Bob . . .
Hmmmm . . . that's too bad. There's no good reason to do
this with RF quality coaxial cable.
RE: Lightspeed cables?
The coax drives the low tension, switched side of the coils. I
think he uses coax to suppress the rf generated by the sharp
cutoff that his CDI boxes may generate. I am guess that this is
probably un-necessary. The outputs from his box are bnc however, so
you at some point have to switch from coax to straight wire.
Given that you are stuck with BNC connectors, consider
using RG-400 coax (high temperature, modern insulation)
that can be terminated quite handily with crimp or solder
connectors like:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/antenna/antenna.html#s605cm
with tools like:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/tools/tools.html#rct-2
then terminate the "wired" end using a technique like
this:
http://209.134.106.21/articles/pigtail/pigtail.html
The RG-400 is MUCH easier to work with since the insulations
used are solder-friendly.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Crimper for large wires |
>
>
>I need to crimp some #8, #4, and #2 wires to ring lug type terminations.
>Where can one get a tool to crimp these?
>
>Larry Dodge
>RV-6, 16LD
Tools to do a predictable and effective job are not
cheap . . . and you have very few total joints to
make in the larger sizes.
Why not solder them like:
http://209.134.106.21/articles/big_term.pdf
you may also find it useful to review:
http://209.134.106.21/articles/rules/review.html
>
>Nico Press tools can be used.
>Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh
With reservations . . . getting a gas-tight closure
of terminal metal on the strands of a wire CAN
be accomplished with a variety of home-grown methods.
Before I would be comfortable with using non-standard
crimp tools, I'd want to install some terminals
and then slice them open to make sure I was getting
a homogenous fusion of terminal and wire.
By-in-large, I prefer soldering these big guys.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | RE: Lightspeed cables? |
>
>
>I believe it is the high voltage (300-400 volts) used by the CDI ignition
>coil.
Hmmmm . . . ordinary shielded wires with 600 volt ratings are
not hard to come by and a WHOLE lot easier to work with.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Harlow" <jharlow(at)onearrow.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Crimper for large wires |
go to this site, http://www.terminaltown.com/Pages/Page21.html , they sell a
hammer operated crimper that works on #4 thru #8 wire.
John
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jerry Carter" <jcarter8(at)midsouth.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Switch for dimming light |
I'm upgrading my panel and adding an annunciator for my GPS. The lights will
require dimming. Unfortunately, I cannot add another instrument to my
dimmer. I would like to place a small switch under the instrument for
day\night operation. I think what I need is a Zener diode, but I'm uncertain
as to which of the many in the Mouser catalog to get and how to wire it to
the switch. I could probably figure it out if I had one in my hand, but any
suggestions would be appreciated.
Jerry Carter
RV-8A
117 hrs and already redoing the panel!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Cameron" <toucan(at)78055.com> |
| Subject: | Electric DG has its own problems, apparently. |
First flight with the new electric DG today. I did prefer it to the
Ritchie electronic compass it replaced. However, . . .
Thirty minutes into the flight, the compass card of the DG starting
spinning at a rapid rate. After maybe 30 seconds of watching this
(probably with my mouth hanging open -- glad no one was there to see),
I tried pulling the heading knob out. That stopped the spinning, but
over the next five minutes or so, the little red flag gradually peeked
out and the DG spun down to a stop.
Back on the ground, I discovered that the 2A fuse was cooked. The DG
came with zero documentation, so I don't know at this point if it needs
a larger fuse. Question: Did the DG fry itself, cooking the fuse as a
result, or did the fuse pop and cause the card to spin and the DG to
shut down? Seems I have a chat with RC Allen in my future.
More later.
Jim Cameron
Lancair Super ES, N143ES
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Electric DG has its own problems, apparently. |
Jim Cameron wrote:
>
>
> Back on the ground, I discovered that the 2A fuse was cooked. The DG
> came with zero documentation, so I don't know at this point if it needs
> a larger fuse. Question: Did the DG fry itself, cooking the fuse as a
> result, or did the fuse pop and cause the card to spin and the DG to
> shut down? Seems I have a chat with RC Allen in my future.
>
*** I vote for the DG frying itself. Who's keeping the pool?
- Jerry Kaidor ( jerry(at)tr2.com )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Electric DG has its own problems, apparently. |
>
>Jim Cameron wrote:
> >
> >
> > Back on the ground, I discovered that the 2A fuse was cooked. The DG
> > came with zero documentation, so I don't know at this point if it needs
> > a larger fuse. Question: Did the DG fry itself, cooking the fuse as a
> > result, or did the fuse pop and cause the card to spin and the DG to
> > shut down? Seems I have a chat with RC Allen in my future.
> >
>*** I vote for the DG frying itself. Who's keeping the pool?
Try upping the fuse size . . . 2A seems a bit light
for a DG. If you have 22AWG or larger wire feeding
the critter, a fuse up to 5A doesn't create a hazard.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | George Braly <gwbraly(at)gami.com> |
| Subject: | RE: Lightspeed cables? |
I suspect he did it because of the availability of the BNC type connector,
which he wanted to use on the box end.
-----Original Message-----
From: Robert L. Nuckolls, III [mailto:nuckolls(at)kscable.com]
Subject: AeroElectric-List: RE: Lightspeed cables?
>
>
>I believe it is the high voltage (300-400 volts) used by the CDI ignition
>coil.
Hmmmm . . . ordinary shielded wires with 600 volt ratings are
not hard to come by and a WHOLE lot easier to work with.
Bob . . .
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Electric DG has its own problems, |
apparently.
| From: | Denis Walsh <deniswalsh(at)earthlink.net> |
I vote for fuse. It was spinning not froze, and besides it probably has
some sort of inverter so could take 3or 4 A.
Based on almost total ignorance.
Where would this list be if we didn't share our ignorance??
DNA
DLW
> From: jerry(at)tr2.com
> Reply-To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2002 21:10:44 -0700 (PDT)
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Electric DG has its own problems, apparently.
>
>
> Jim Cameron wrote:
>>
>>
>> Back on the ground, I discovered that the 2A fuse was cooked. The DG
>> came with zero documentation, so I don't know at this point if it needs
>> a larger fuse. Question: Did the DG fry itself, cooking the fuse as a
>> result, or did the fuse pop and cause the card to spin and the DG to
>> shut down? Seems I have a chat with RC Allen in my future.
>>
> *** I vote for the DG frying itself. Who's keeping the pool?
>
> - Jerry Kaidor ( jerry(at)tr2.com )
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Robinson" <jbr(at)hitechnetworks.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: Lightspeed cables? |
>
>
> >
> >
> >One problem I've had with the Lightspeed installation is the RG interior
> >insulation sleeve melting and shorting out the center conductor to the
> >shield. I replaced the wire with some milspec high temp co-ax I found
> >surplus and it worked fine. Don't know if this would be a problem in
> >anything but an EZ type aircraft.
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >Bob
> > >Klaus use coaxial antenna type wire (RG-- wire)
> > >Jim
> > >
>
> For power and/or control wires? Spark plug
> wires?
>
> Bob . . .
Bob
These are the control wires from the CD control boxes to the coils.
The plug wires go from the coils to the plugs. (Duh)
Jim
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | 2-1/4" Becker or Microair....? |
Hello friends,
Well well well... I was looking at the balance in my
bank account and determined that if I want to order my
transponder, I should do it soon (before we get crazy
as we do each spring and spend everything we have ;-).
I am hesitating between the Microair T2000 and the
Becker 4401.
The buttons appear to be easier to operate with the
Becker unit. As well, the LCD screen of the Becker
appears to be easier to read than the Microair's LCD
screen.
However, the Becker I would buy is rated 175 watts
(which I'm not sure what it means). The Microair is
rated 200 watts nominal (170 watts minimum).
Any other considerations? What's the track record of
both companies in terms of quality of product (I know
I only read good things so far about Microair).
Is 170-175 watts enough for that type of device?
Thanks!
Michel
=====
----------------------------
Michel Therrien CH601-HD
http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby
http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601
http://www.zenithair.com/bldrlist/profiles/mthobby
http://games.yahoo.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Casey" <glcasey(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | ignition system noise |
<>
In my experience the primary noise output from the primary side of most any
ignition system is conducted, not radiated. The coax from the electronics
to the coil would reduce the radiated EMI from that length of wire, but I
don't know if it justifies a coax as long as it is reasonably short. The
real problem is the supply and ground wires which have large transient
current and accompanying voltage transients. My usual approach is to make
sure the system has a robust ground, preferably right on the engine. The
transients have very high frequency content and for some reason it seems
like there is a lot of energy in the 100 to 150 mhz range as well as up
around 700 mhz. This noise get conducted back through the power and ground
leads into the rest of the system. I'm not an expert on EMI, so that is
just my experience talking.
Gary Casey
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Spinning DG problems |
04/25/2002 09:57:13 AM
....Thirty minutes into the flight, the compass card of the DG starting
spinning at a rapid rate.....
Jim,
I had a very similar experience with my *brand new* RC Allen DG. Mine is
vacuum operated, but after 2 hours in my new RV-6, the compass card started
behaving erraticaly and finally started spinning like a top. After
removing it from the panel, two screws fell out the vacuum port and I could
hear other loose hardware rattling around inside.
I called the manufacturer (Kelly Mfg., 555 S. Topeka, Wichita, KS 67202)
and spoke with Shirley Medlam. She was very nice, but told me that since I
had bought it over a year ago, it was no longer under warranty. If it only
needed bearings, it would cost $100. Anything else would be considered an
overhaul and would cost $275. Electric overhauls were more expensive, but I
have forgotten the amount she told me.
Figuring I didn't have much to lose, I disassembled it myself. The problem
was immediately obvious- there is a semicircular stop screwed to the
gyroscope frame (gimbal?) to keep it from flipping upside-down. The screws
had backed out and the stop fell off. A screwdriver and a little locktite
cured the problem.
It was a bit scary at first, because I didn't know if I would need special
tools or fixtures to reassemble it (I didn't- just an allen wrench and a
small screwdriver) I'm glad I took it apart, because now I have a good
understanding of how it works, (the thing is cleverly made, but not very
complicated or difficult to figure out) plus I saved a bunch of money and
time.
Good luck,
Danny Kight
Anderson, SC
RV-6 N722DK flying!!! 58 hours
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | mprather(at)spro.net |
| Subject: | Re: ignition system noise |
That supports the thinking that you probably don't really need coax to
drive the coils. It would be pretty easy to take a bnc jack and just
run aircraft wire into it.
To reduce/eliminate the power bus noise caused by the CDI's transient
current demand one could wire a fairly large (10-15kuF) electrolytic
cap across the power and ground leads to the ignition. To be most
effective the cap should be mounted right at the ignition unit.
Something like what 'lectric Bob specifies for alternator noise
reduction should do the job. Klaus used to specify such a cap for
his older systems.
In a scenario where the above cap gets rid of the big sags on the bus,
but you are still left with high frequency noise that is causing you
problems elsewhere in the system sometimes a cap of a smaller value
(maybe 100uF) in parallel with the larger one will help.
However, noise in the 100MHz to 1GHz range, if its of moderate
amplitude, shouldn't cause any problems for high quality equipment. I
wouldn't go trying to solve this kind of 'problem' unless it's really
causing something to malfunction.
Here is an article that discusses using multiple vaules of bypass caps.
Its a bit technical, but kind of interesting.
http://www.ultracad.com/esr.htm
Were you observing periodic dipping on the power bus (ripple) with the
ignition running (viewed with a scope), or did you take some kind of FFT
measurement? I can imagine that everytime the CDI box changes modes,
its transients might have some high frequency content (sharpness). Or,
possibly the CDI module has a brain to look up ignition curve advance
values at various RPM's and MP's? That might be discretely clocked at
the frequencies you mentioned. That would be interesting since Klaus
advertises that he uses discrete components instead of u-processors in
order achieve better static discharge tolerance.
Sorry for the lengthy ramble.
Matt Prather
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gary Casey" <glcasey(at)adelphia.net>
Date: Thursday, April 25, 2002 7:30 am
Subject: AeroElectric-List: ignition system noise
>
> < think he uses coax to suppress the rf generated by the sharp
> cutoff that his CDI boxes may generate. I am guess that this is
> probably un-necessary. The outputs from his box are bnc however, so
> you at some point have to switch from coax to straight wire. I'd
> guessyou could probably get just as good noise performance by running
> twisted pair. It seems like the signal content of the CDI output is
> really low frequency in the scheme of things.>>
>
> In my experience the primary noise output from the primary side of
> most any
> ignition system is conducted, not radiated. The coax from the
> electronicsto the coil would reduce the radiated EMI from that
> length of wire, but I
> don't know if it justifies a coax as long as it is reasonably
> short. The
> real problem is the supply and ground wires which have large transient
> current and accompanying voltage transients. My usual approach is
> to make
> sure the system has a robust ground, preferably right on the
> engine. The
> transients have very high frequency content and for some reason it
> seemslike there is a lot of energy in the 100 to 150 mhz range as
> well as up
> around 700 mhz. This noise get conducted back through the power
> and ground
> leads into the rest of the system. I'm not an expert on EMI, so
> that is
> just my experience talking.
>
> Gary Casey
>
>
> _-
>
- The AeroElectric-List Email Forum -
> _-
>
!! NEW !!
> _-
>
List Related Information
> _-
>
=======================================================================
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | mprather(at)spro.net |
| Subject: | Re: ignition system noise |
Oh yeah, I have one more comment (sorry).
There isn't really anything magic about coax, except that it has
very tightly controlled AC impedence (50ohm for RG-58)(not DC impedance
which can be measured with an ohmmeter). This is useful for carrying RF
(AC by definition) energy from a transmitting device with a specific
output impedance (again 50ohm) to a receiving device with a specific
input impedance. This allows maximum power transfer (because of the
matched impedance) and minimum loss. I wonder if Klaus's boxes have
50ohm output impedance. I am betting that the coils don't have 50ohm
input impedance.
Like 'electric Bob said, regular insulated wire is as good for high
voltage as coax. Look at how thin the insulation between the conductors
for coax is - this can give you some idea about the breakdown voltage.
I'll be quiet now.
Matt Prather
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gary Casey" <glcasey(at)adelphia.net>
Date: Thursday, April 25, 2002 7:30 am
Subject: AeroElectric-List: ignition system noise
ht on the
> engine. The
> transients have very high frequency content and for some reason it
> seemslike there is a lot of energy in the 100 to 150 mhz range as
> well as up
> around 700 mhz. This noise get conducted back through the power
> and ground
> leads into the rest of the system. I'm not an expert on EMI, so
> that is
> just my experience talking.
>
> Gary Casey
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ronald A. Cox" <racox(at)ix.netcom.com> |
| Subject: | Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 34 Msgs - 04/24/02 |
Gilles:
It sound like you're trying to engineer out the possibility of a poor or
poorly trained pilot from your airplane. It can't be done. You can head
in that direction, but you'll never get there.
I think Bob's philosophy on most of these things (and I'm sure he'll
patiently reply once again, as he always does) is to make the system as
robust as possible, and make failures as benign as possible. Eliminate
designed-in traps, and make the system stable and reliable.
But I don't think it's to make it impossible to do something wrong.
Unlikely? Yes. As harmless as possible? Yes. But the pilot must still
use his brain and the necessary checklist(s). I want my checklist to be as
short as possible, but critical items will still be there. It may even be a
memory checklist that uses the airplane as it's own checklist (that'll start
another off-topic thread! ).
One of my copilots mentioned the military version of this:
He called it LACASWNTO = "Look Around Cockpit And See What Needs Turned On"
In a fiarly simple, well-planned cockpit, I think it probably works pretty
well! But it is a checklist, and every airplane needs one.
If someone is flying your airplane, they should be familiar with the
systems, including the need for that pump to remain on.
By tying the two functions together, and then adding yet another switch for
ignition tests, you are adding another layer of complexity, and really
probably decreasing the reliability of the system as a whole. There are
other issues regarding system failures and how they might be (or could not
be) handled, that would come up.
I think Bob's pretty much answered this one. I'd take his advice and make
it simple, robust, put important things on the checklist, and don't let a
poor pilot fly your airplane.
Oh yes, and also, get your keyswitch-loving friend to either understand and
agree with the toggle switch philosophy or discard it yourself. You two
will go nuts trying to reconcile his closed minded ("gotta be a key")
attitude and your rightly questioning and seeking ("can it be better?")
attitude. You'll end up with a poor compromise of both your philosophies.
With this kind of basic philosophical differences (I'm betting there are
others), you will be lucky to finish your airplane at all, let alone share
it operationally!
Ron
> From: "gilles.thesee" <Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr>
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: More Rotax questions
>
<Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr>
> Hi Bob,
>
> How about these variations on the key theme ?
>
> Lest the pilot tries to start the engine in spite of the lo fuel press
> light, how about using a double pole switch for the main pump ?
> The second poles could be in series with the starter key wire. Actuation
of
> the starter would be impossible unless the main pump switch is in the on
> position. I could use a relay to run a light or buzzer in case one forgets
> the pump on after turning the master switch off. (the pump will run from
an
> always hot battery bus).
>
> Or else using one set of grouding contacts on the key switch to actuate
the
> pump ? The ignition checks could be done through a spring loaded double
> throw switch.
> Well, I'm not quite sure of this one..
>
> Cheers,
>
> Gilles
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charles Brame <charleyb(at)earthlink.net> |
I started wiring my VM-1000 yesterday, which means installing about a
jillion sub-D connectors. First challenge was stripping the cover off
the ends of each cable - the instructions specify to "Carefully" remove
1.25 inches of the outer cover. The EGT/CHT cables are oval shaped, and
the other cable is anything but uniformly round. Consequently, my wire
stripper was useless where the outer cover is concerned. I resorted to
a sharp pocket knife and only nicked one of the interior wires, I think.
There has to be a better way. Any suggestions?
Charlie
RV-6A
San Antonio
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Steven Kay <skay(at)optonline.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Spinning DG problems |
> I wouldn't mention that too loudly...You are aware that by opening a certified
> instrument that can only be repaired by a certified overhaul shop, that you
> broke about a gazillion regulations as viewed by our beloved FAA. Now you have
> to remove the part# or serial # to get back in their good graces. -Steve (DO
NOT
> ARCHIVE)
>
>
> Figuring I didn't have much to lose, I disassembled it myself.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Stripping cable |
>
>
>I started wiring my VM-1000 yesterday, which means installing about a
>jillion sub-D connectors. First challenge was stripping the cover off
>the ends of each cable - the instructions specify to "Carefully" remove
>1.25 inches of the outer cover. The EGT/CHT cables are oval shaped, and
>the other cable is anything but uniformly round. Consequently, my wire
>stripper was useless where the outer cover is concerned. I resorted to
>a sharp pocket knife and only nicked one of the interior wires, I think.
>
>There has to be a better way. Any suggestions?
You bet . . . instead of "carefully" cutting it off, how
about "rip 'er off" instead. On all shielded wire except
coax that must be neatly trimmed for crimped connectors,
I use a pair of strippers to remove outer jacket and who
cares how it rips up the shield below. I trim off enough
of the shield strands so that when I wind them around the
center conductor just off the end of the outer jacket,
I get 3/16 to 1/4" coverage of shield strands. I'll then
use a solder sleeve or the technique shown at:
http://209.134.106.21/articles/pigtail/pigtail.html
In these pictures, you see where one of the die-holes
in my wire stripper did a fair job of trimming the end
of the shield conductors. I have a lot of 3 and 4
conductor shielded where the best that the wire stripper
can do is something akin to ripping the outer jacket
PLUS most of the shield. Even then, there are MORE
than enough strands of shielding to make an effective
connection with either solder sleeves -OR- the techniques
shown in the comic book above. Neat doesn't count
for a lot here because after you've soldered the joint
and put heat shrink over it, the end product looks just
the same no matter how sexy you're trim job was.
Recall that in MOST cases, shields are just that,
shields. They carry pico amperes of current . . . ONE
strand properly terminated would suffice; it's
really easy to get 15-20 strands connected without
being fastidious so why bother? Even when the shield
does have current carrying duties, a dozen strands
in good contact with the pigtail are sufficient.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: ignition system noise |
>
>That supports the thinking that you probably don't really need coax to
>drive the coils. It would be pretty easy to take a bnc jack and just
>run aircraft wire into it.
>
>To reduce/eliminate the power bus noise caused by the CDI's transient
>current demand one could wire a fairly large (10-15kuF) electrolytic
>cap across the power and ground leads to the ignition. To be most
>effective the cap should be mounted right at the ignition unit.
>Something like what 'lectric Bob specifies for alternator noise
>reduction should do the job. Klaus used to specify such a cap for
>his older systems.
I haven't found the output from a CDI system to be all that
bad. The energies involved to ignite the spark are much less
than the energy required to flash a strobe tube. The ignition
system needs to make it's noise more times per second but the
noise of an individual event is tiny compared to that from
a strobe supply.
Electrolytic caps of the type used on the alternators are
effective for reducing noise in the audio frequency domain.
They are of little value in shunting off stuff over 10 Khz.
IF the CDI ignition proves to be worthy of a conducted
noise line filter, adding some inductance in series goes
a very long way to killing the noise with little additional
capacitor.
I think Klaus used to put a big cap on the original
MDS (multi-spark) system that was so bad for radiated
and conducted noise that I'm aware of no airplane owner
that has been able to leave the system on his airplane
(Talked to numbers of folk at OSH that had to take them
off after unsuccessfully trying to whip the noise problem).
>In a scenario where the above cap gets rid of the big sags on the bus,
>but you are still left with high frequency noise that is causing you
>problems elsewhere in the system sometimes a cap of a smaller value
>(maybe 100uF) in parallel with the larger one will help.
There's no reason for the system to put big bumps onto
the bus . . . the energy requirements just aren't there.
>However, noise in the 100MHz to 1GHz range, if its of moderate
>amplitude, shouldn't cause any problems for high quality equipment. I
>wouldn't go trying to solve this kind of 'problem' unless it's really
>causing something to malfunction.
Exactly . . rather than hang a bunch of filtering on
of unknown or questionable effectiveness, get the
airplane running and see what you've got. Then do
a considered noise propagation/identification study
as defined in the 'Connection to see what's
really needed.
It is a certainty that RF grade coax and fat
electrolytic capacitors are not strong candidates
for any honors in corraling a noise problem -
if one exists.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: More Rotax questions |
><Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr>
>
>
> > How about this? How about a pressure switch that lights
> > an indicator for low fuel pressure? This would remind one
> > to make sure that at least one of the two pumps is on
> > as well as provide failure warning of active pump.
> >
>
>Hi Bob,
>
>How about these variations on the key theme ?
>
>Lest the pilot tries to start the engine in spite of the lo fuel press
>light, how about using a double pole switch for the main pump ?
>The second poles could be in series with the starter key wire. Actuation of
>the starter would be impossible unless the main pump switch is in the on
>position. I could use a relay to run a light or buzzer in case one forgets
>the pump on after turning the master switch off. (the pump will run from an
>always hot battery bus).
>
>Or else using one set of grouding contacts on the key switch to actuate the
>pump ? The ignition checks could be done through a spring loaded double
>throw switch.
>Well, I'm not quite sure of this one..
Sounds like a lot of fuss for little benefit. Ya
gotta go with whatever you believe to be the
most useful for you . . . I wouldn't do this on
my airplane
Bob . . .
>Cheers,
>
>Gilles
>
>
Bob . . .
--------------------------
TEMPORARY WEBSITE ADDRESS:
http://209.134.106.21
--------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Russ Werner" <russ(at)maui.net> |
| Subject: | Re: ignition system noise |
Just a thought, but how about the shielded wire normally used for wiring
mags?
Russ
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: ignition system noise
>
> >
> >That supports the thinking that you probably don't really need coax to
> >drive the coils. It would be pretty easy to take a bnc jack and just
> >run aircraft wire into it.
> >
> >To reduce/eliminate the power bus noise caused by the CDI's transient
> >current demand one could wire a fairly large (10-15kuF) electrolytic
> >cap across the power and ground leads to the ignition. To be most
> >effective the cap should be mounted right at the ignition unit.
> >Something like what 'lectric Bob specifies for alternator noise
> >reduction should do the job. Klaus used to specify such a cap for
> >his older systems.
>
> I haven't found the output from a CDI system to be all that
> bad. The energies involved to ignite the spark are much less
> than the energy required to flash a strobe tube. The ignition
> system needs to make it's noise more times per second but the
> noise of an individual event is tiny compared to that from
> a strobe supply.
>
> Electrolytic caps of the type used on the alternators are
> effective for reducing noise in the audio frequency domain.
> They are of little value in shunting off stuff over 10 Khz.
> IF the CDI ignition proves to be worthy of a conducted
> noise line filter, adding some inductance in series goes
> a very long way to killing the noise with little additional
> capacitor.
>
> I think Klaus used to put a big cap on the original
> MDS (multi-spark) system that was so bad for radiated
> and conducted noise that I'm aware of no airplane owner
> that has been able to leave the system on his airplane
> (Talked to numbers of folk at OSH that had to take them
> off after unsuccessfully trying to whip the noise problem).
>
>
> >In a scenario where the above cap gets rid of the big sags on the bus,
> >but you are still left with high frequency noise that is causing you
> >problems elsewhere in the system sometimes a cap of a smaller value
> >(maybe 100uF) in parallel with the larger one will help.
>
> There's no reason for the system to put big bumps onto
> the bus . . . the energy requirements just aren't there.
>
>
> >However, noise in the 100MHz to 1GHz range, if its of moderate
> >amplitude, shouldn't cause any problems for high quality equipment. I
> >wouldn't go trying to solve this kind of 'problem' unless it's really
> >causing something to malfunction.
>
> Exactly . . rather than hang a bunch of filtering on
> of unknown or questionable effectiveness, get the
> airplane running and see what you've got. Then do
> a considered noise propagation/identification study
> as defined in the 'Connection to see what's
> really needed.
>
> It is a certainty that RF grade coax and fat
> electrolytic capacitors are not strong candidates
> for any honors in corraling a noise problem -
> if one exists.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Grover" <grover(at)ev1.net> |
I have a couple of questions regarding the use of diodes on the Master Relay
and Start Relay.
What type, size, etc. diode is used on the diagrams in the AeroElectric
book?
How do you install them?
Any websites with a picture of the installation would be helpful? -- a
picture is worth a 1000 words.
Thanks,
David
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Ford" <dford(at)michweb.net> |
| Subject: | trim servo speed & MKIII |
I'm looking for a way to configure my electric elevator trim to allow
high speed trim in the pattern (flaps down) and adjustable lower speed
trim in cruise (via speed controller) using a micro switch to sense flap
position. My problem being I already have the Matronics MKIII which
when I purchased it, according to Vans takes the place of the servo
relay deck and the speed controller. It seems easy to wire in a micro
switch if I had both relay and controller but I wondered if anyone has
any ideas to bypass the speed control function of the MKIII or am I
forced to go back to the other 2 devices?
Dave Ford
RV6
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ralph E. Capen" <recapen(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: trim servo speed & MKIII |
David,
I have designed, built, tested, and applied for patents on, a bracket and
relay system based on the MKIII governor which uses a flap input ( or any
input which will carry approx 500ma ). My system uses two matronics
governors and provides all of the features in both modes of operation.
It will continue to operate correctly during the transition between speeds.
It powers the standard MAC/RayAllen servos.
Contact me offline if you're interested.
Ralph Capen
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Ford" <dford(at)michweb.net>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: trim servo speed & MKIII
>
> I'm looking for a way to configure my electric elevator trim to allow
> high speed trim in the pattern (flaps down) and adjustable lower speed
> trim in cruise (via speed controller) using a micro switch to sense flap
> position. My problem being I already have the Matronics MKIII which
> when I purchased it, according to Vans takes the place of the servo
> relay deck and the speed controller. It seems easy to wire in a micro
> switch if I had both relay and controller but I wondered if anyone has
> any ideas to bypass the speed control function of the MKIII or am I
> forced to go back to the other 2 devices?
>
> Dave Ford
> RV6
>
>
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: ignition system noise |
>
>Just a thought, but how about the shielded wire normally used for wiring
>mags?
>
>Russ
I'm sorry, I don't understand the question. . .
we were talking about perceived value of adding
capacitors to the input power of CDI ignitions
and using RF grade coax as shielded wire. I'm
not sure what you're asking here.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Fwd: diodes on contactors |
I have a couple of questions regarding the use of diodes on the Master Relay
and Start Relay.
What type, size, etc. diode is used on the diagrams in the AeroElectric
book?
Just about ANY diode will work electrically. I like the
1N5400 series devices (Radio Shack sells two in a blister
pak for about $1.25) . . . These are robust devices mechanically
and easy to work with.
How do you install them?
Any websites with a picture of the installation would be helpful? -- a
picture is worth a 1000 words.
See http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/switch/s701-1l.jpg
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Esten Spears" <ewspears(at)peoplepc.com> |
, ,
,
Cliff,
Are you completely out of the business? A number of people including
myself are searching for some kind of altitude hold to use with Navaid.
Most of the RV's being finished nowdays (7's, 8's, & 9's) have Mac Servo
Elevator Trim as Standard. Many (mine included) also feature a Rocky
Mountain uEncoder which has serialized air data (vert speed) output. I
addition I have a PCFlightsystems electronic gyros setup.
With all this electronic input data available; I would think building an
altitude hold utilizing the Mac 8A trim servo would be easy for an
electronics guru.
If not a finished product I would welcome a kit or at least design dwgs.
and setup instructions.
Esten Spears, RV8A, 80922, Leeward Air Ranch, Ocala, FL.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fergus Kyle" <VE3LVO(at)rac.ca> |
| Subject: | Stripping outer cable covers |
"I started wiring my VM-1000 yesterday, which means installing about a
jillion sub-D connectors. First challenge was stripping the cover off
the ends of each cable - the instructions specify to "Carefully" remove
1.25 inches of the outer cover. The EGT/CHT cables are oval shaped, and
the other cable is anything but uniformly round. Consequently, my wire
stripper was useless where the outer cover is concerned. I resorted to
a sharp pocket knife and only nicked one of the interior wires, I think.
There has to be a better way. Any suggestions?"
The stripping of large and irregular covers has always been a
bane. I suggest you pracice with a scalpel-style razor knife. Discover what
JUST nicks the outer cover, then tension it so as to rip the remaining
material inside the nick.
Ferg
Europa A064
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Casey" <glcasey(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | "certified" instruments |
<<> I wouldn't mention that too loudly...You are aware that by opening a
certified
> instrument that can only be repaired by a certified overhaul shop, that
you
> broke about a gazillion regulations as viewed by our beloved FAA. Now you
have
> to remove the part# or serial # to get back in their good graces. -Steve
(DO NOT
> ARCHIVE)
> Figuring I didn't have much to lose, I disassembled it myself.>>
My approach always goes something like this: "gee, officer, it must have
been like that when I bought the plane (car, instrument, whatever) - I'll
look through the logbook to try to find the entry (which won't be there, of
course), and I ALWAYS take my stuff to a gen-u-ine certified repair shop. I
can't imagine how that could have happened...." Once I took a TC apart to
find that a wire had rubbed on the gyro - re-routed and spliced it and
worked like new. Later it failed for some other reason and I sent it back
to the factory. There was no comment from them.
Works every time.
Gary Casey
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Stripping outer cable covers |
In a message dated 4/26/2002 6:39:30 AM Pacific Daylight Time, VE3LVO(at)rac.ca
writes:
<< my wire
stripper was useless where the outer cover is concerned. I resorted to
a sharp pocket knife and only nicked one of the interior wires, I think.
There has to be a better way. Any suggestions?" >>I
I have used a small pair of sharp point scizzors and starting at the end just
cut or split the cover on up the cable and then pull it off and cut it off.
It doesn't nick any wires as can happen with a knife of stripper.
Cliff A&P/IA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom Barnes" <skytop(at)megsinet.net> |
Charlie,
Regarding the brown wires for the EGT and CHT transducers, you
can use your pocket knife, but only BARELY cut into it the cover. Then
bend the wire at the cut and it opens to the wires inside. The red
shielded wires work the same.
Good luck,
Tom Barnes -6 get'n close
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Charles Brame
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Stripping cable
I started wiring my VM-1000 yesterday, which means installing about a
jillion sub-D connectors. First challenge was stripping the cover off
the ends of each cable - the instructions specify to "Carefully" remove
1.25 inches of the outer cover. The EGT/CHT cables are oval shaped, and
the other cable is anything but uniformly round. Consequently, my wire
stripper was useless where the outer cover is concerned. I resorted to
a sharp pocket knife and only nicked one of the interior wires, I think.
There has to be a better way. Any suggestions?
Charlie
RV-6A
San Antonio
=
=
=
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
=
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BAKEROCB(at)aol.com |
In a message dated 04/26/2002 2:52:21 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
aeroelectric-list-digest(at)matronics.com Charles Brame
writes:
<>
4/26/2002
Hello Charlie, Yes, wiring up the new D sub connectors is a bitch. The bulk
of the four wire cable that VMS provides is part of the problem.
Realize that for many of the transducers you don't need all four wires. Why
not buy some quality shielded two and three wire cable and use that for those
transducers that need only two or three wires?
As far as stripping shielded cable is concerned one can buy adjustable
strippers for stripping coax cable down to various levels. Radio Shack has
one. These can be used for stripping shielded cable down to the level
desired. Use scraps of cable to adjust and test until you get the results
that you want.
For stripping the insulated wires themselves Klein Tools has a cheap
adjustable stripper (Cat no. 1004) with a stop. If you run a bunch of tests
on scraps of wire and adjust the stripper just right you can strip along with
the big bucks boys.
'OC' Baker, Builder of KIS TR-1 #116 4/14/97 - ?/?/?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary K" <flyink(at)efortress.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Altitude Hold |
I've got the same setup and would also be interested.
Gary K.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Esten Spears" <ewspears(at)peoplepc.com>
; ;
;
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Altitude Hold
>
> To: Cliff Cady EZ-Trim
> Cliff,
> Are you completely out of the business? A number of people including
> myself are searching for some kind of altitude hold to use with Navaid.
> Most of the RV's being finished nowdays (7's, 8's, & 9's) have Mac
Servo
> Elevator Trim as Standard. Many (mine included) also feature a Rocky
> Mountain uEncoder which has serialized air data (vert speed) output. I
> addition I have a PCFlightsystems electronic gyros setup.
> With all this electronic input data available; I would think building
an
> altitude hold utilizing the Mac 8A trim servo would be easy for an
> electronics guru.
> If not a finished product I would welcome a kit or at least design
dwgs.
> and setup instructions.
> Esten Spears, RV8A, 80922, Leeward Air Ranch, Ocala, FL.
>
>
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Cameron" <toucan(at)78055.com> |
| Subject: | Electric DG failure |
Kelly Mfg, who now produce the RC Allen gyros, do have a peculiar
warranty policy. They stamp a date on the case which is one year from
the manufacture date, and that's the date the warranty expires. If you
buy one (as I did) that has been in the distribution pipeline and on a
dealer's shelf for a while, you may have little or no warranty remaining
when the unit is installed!
I spoke with Shirley yesterday about the problem, and she suggested
trying another 2A fuse. I may do that, or, as Bob suggested, try a 3A
or even a 5A fuse. That may solve the problem. If not, Shirley did
agree to fix the unit under warranty, which expired the end of March.
I'll keep the list posted on how it all comes out.
Jim Cameron, Lancair ES N143ES
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Certified AD Compliance, was Spinning DG problems |
| From: | <racker(at)rmci.net> |
Can you allude to any official references regarding your statement below?
Current EAA position paper states that once a certified engine is placed on
an experimental, it automatically no longer conforms to its type design
(data plate or not), and is not subject to mandatory AD compliance.
If the engine is to be used on a certified ship again, it must be shown the
engine is in full AD compliance and be signed off as being in a condition
for safe operation. And it must have the data plate .
Rob Acker (RV-6).
>
>
> That all changed about a year ago. That's why you need to take the tag
> off your engine as well, so you aren't governed by the AD's.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Steven Kay <skay(at)optonline.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Certified AD Compliance,was Spinning DG problems |
That's how it was described to me at the local (FRG) MIDO and confirmed at the
National Aviation Transportation Center at HWV at an EAA meeting. Can't say i've
seen the official refs. I'll look into it further -Steve
racker(at)rmci.net wrote:
>
> Can you allude to any official references regarding your statement below?
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: More Rotax questions |
>
> Sounds like a lot of fuss for little benefit. Ya
> gotta go with whatever you believe to be the
> most useful for you . . . I wouldn't do this on
> my airplane
>
>
Bob,
You're right. Maybe I'm a bit too imaginative...We better keep things
simple.
Of course, you can't see it, but despite my endless questioning we DO follow
your advice ;-)
Cheers
Gilles
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 34 Msgs - 04/24/02 |
Ron,
Thank you for your message.
>
> It sound like you're trying to engineer out the possibility of a poor or
> poorly trained pilot from your airplane. <...>
Oh, but we all are well trained pilots, aren't we ? ;-)
>
> I think Bob's philosophy on most of these things (and I'm sure he'll
> patiently reply once again, as he always does) is to make the system as
> robust as possible, and make failures as benign as possible. Eliminate
> designed-in traps, and make the system stable and reliable.
Bob did answer, as always, and despite my tendancy to overdo it.
>
> I think Bob's pretty much answered this one. I'd take his advice and make
> it simple, robust, put important things on the checklist, and don't let a
> poor pilot fly your airplane.
>
> Oh yes, and also, get your keyswitch-loving friend to either understand
and
> agree with the toggle switch philosophy or discard it yourself. You two
> will go nuts trying to reconcile his closed minded ("gotta be a key")
> attitude and your rightly questioning and seeking ("can it be better?")
> attitude. You'll end up with a poor compromise of both your philosophies.
You and Bob are perfectly right.
I was trying to gather as much information as I could. But be sure we'll
follow Bob's advice.
>
> With this kind of basic philosophical differences (I'm betting there are
> others), you will be lucky to finish your airplane at all, let alone share
> it operationally!
You bet !
But fortunately we've already shared an airplane in the past, and survived
the many many system shortcomings of this unlimited aerobatics bird.
And because we're (over ?)optimistic we hope we can complete another
project.
At least we now have a complete fuselage, wing, controls and engine. We just
have to throw in a few instruments and some electrical stuff, discuss the
paint scheme, and we're off !
Cheers,
Gilles
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Liming <gary(at)liming.org> |
| Subject: | Right angle BNCs |
I have a need for some right angle BNC connectors to accommodate a tight
fit and for proper strain relief. I was looking at the Radio Shack 278-127
and was planning to use RG400. However, the shield makes contact with the
connector sleeve by screwing the sleeve over the shield. Is this good
enough, or is there another right angle connector I could use?
\
Thanks,
Gary Liming
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Werner Schneider" <WernerSchneider(at)compuserve.com> |
| Subject: | to twist or not to twist |
Hello all,
I have fuel pumps for pumping between the aux tank and the main and the
pos/nav/strobe lights in the wing (wingspan 10.5m). As I'm running ground
and positive lead down to the fuselage, I'm wondering, if it make sense to
make the two each two of them as a twisted pair (or in the nav/strob/pos the
5 of 'em) single strang down to the center?
I did look through my aerolectric book, but could not find anything about
this (which does not mean it is in there =(;o)).
Any help on this topic greatly appreciated.
Werner
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ahmed Eskander" <eskander(at)talk21.com> |
| Subject: | Bendix King Handheld KX99 |
To
I have made the sin of shutting off the battrey master before shutting
the engine (912 Rotax). my handheld transceiver KX-99 (Bendix King)
which was powered form the the plane battrey, could not be switched on
again.
The local Radio Engineer is telling me that the Audio Synthesizer Board
gone bust and the price of the new one from the States $740!
I bought this handheld brand new 4 years ago for $550. Any good ideas
and cheaper solutions Guys? Please Help!
Ahmed Eskander
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Right angle BNCs |
In a message dated 4/26/02 9:26:41 PM Eastern Daylight Time, gary(at)liming.org
writes:
> was planning to use RG400. However, the shield makes contact with the
> connector sleeve by screwing the sleeve over the shield. Is this good
> enough, or is there another right angle connector I could use?
> \
> Thanks,
>
> Gary Liming
>
Gary, To my knowledge, BNC connectors that screw on are designed for coaxial
cables that have a solid (not stranded) center conductor. RG400 has a
stranded center conductor and will not be able to be used with a screw on
connector reliably.
As far as I know, the screw on connectors are for RG59 and used in closed
circuit television or cable/sat. TV applications only.
John Z.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CBFLESHREN(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Right angle BNCs |
Sorry to chime in John/Gary, but would it be possible to twist the fine
strands of the RG400 & "tin" w/ solder ? I don't have any here to try .
Might make the final thickness of the center conductor too thick . Just "my
humble curiosity" . Thanks
Chris Fleshren
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: More Rotax questions |
><Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr>
>
> >
> > Sounds like a lot of fuss for little benefit. Ya
> > gotta go with whatever you believe to be the
> > most useful for you . . . I wouldn't do this on
> > my airplane
> >
> >
>Bob,
>
>You're right. Maybe I'm a bit too imaginative...We better keep things
>simple.
>Of course, you can't see it, but despite my endless questioning we DO follow
>your advice ;-)
I'm not worried about it. The ULITMATE decisions about
how your airplane is configured must be your choice. My
fondest wish is that everyone on the list participates
in the discussions at their chosen levels. When all
is said and done, I hope that personal decisions are
made with a real understanding of the options.
I had a builder a few years ago spend a LOT of time
talking about his airplane via e-mail and phone without
ever telling me how his airplane was going together.
Didn't find out until some time after his airplane
was finished that he had put it together pretty much
like a production C-172. He had used a B&C alternator
system and RG battery but the rest was pretty much
contemporary spam-can architecture.
I supposed I was a bit shocked about the revelation
at first . . . we HAD discussed his project and concepts
from the 'Connection at length. The key here was that
I know he understood the proposed philosophies and
he made a personal decision to build his machine
in the configuration he knew best and was comfortable
with.
His machine is no less future friendly than a spam-can
and like tens of thousands of other pilots, I don't
approach my rental air-chariot with trepidation . . .
but I also know that with the things I carry in my
flight bag and the understanding I have of the system,
I don't give a rat's rear end if ANY of that stuff is
working after take off. I intend to end the flight
comfortably and on my terms.
My wish is that everyone is just an comfortable/
confident about product of their labors no matter
how it is configured.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Electric DG failure |
>
> Kelly Mfg, who now produce the RC Allen gyros, do have a peculiar
>warranty policy. They stamp a date on the case which is one year from
>the manufacture date, and that's the date the warranty expires. If you
>buy one (as I did) that has been in the distribution pipeline and on a
>dealer's shelf for a while, you may have little or no warranty remaining
>when the unit is installed!
>
> I spoke with Shirley yesterday about the problem, and she suggested
>trying another 2A fuse. I may do that, or, as Bob suggested, try a 3A
>or even a 5A fuse. That may solve the problem. If not, Shirley did
>agree to fix the unit under warranty, which expired the end of March.
>I'll keep the list posted on how it all comes out.
When did the fuse go? Had the gyro been operating properly
for any time prior to the event or did it puff first time
out of the gate? Do you have access to a current limited
power supply? You might try powering it up on the ground
with a power supply set to 3A . . . you can also hook
a 3-4 ohm power resistor in series with the device, power
it up and see if you get any promising activity . . . like
you can hear the gyro start to spin up even if it's
sluggish. These kinds of explorations can help you decide
if the bigger-fuse thing is a rational thing to try.
I've had some cases of fuse problems due to large capacitors
across the power input pins of a powered device. The inrush
repeatedly hit the otherwise properly rated fuse and caused
it to open after perhaps the 10th or 20th hit.
Nothing wrong with either the product or the fuse . . .
going up one fuse size stopped the problem (this was
related to me by a builder who was initially very unhappy
about having gone with fuses in his project. He allowed
as how this radio had performed quite well with a breaker
in the supply line).
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Stripping cable |
I started wiring my VM-1000 yesterday, which means installing about a
jillion sub-D connectors. First challenge was stripping the cover off
the ends of each cable - the instructions specify to "Carefully" remove
1.25 inches of the outer cover. The EGT/CHT cables are oval shaped, and
the other cable is anything but uniformly round. Consequently, my wire
stripper was useless where the outer cover is concerned. I resorted to
a sharp pocket knife and only nicked one of the interior wires, I think.
There has to be a better way. Any suggestions?
You bet . . . instead of "carefully" cutting it off, how
about "rip 'er off" instead. On all shielded wire except
coax that must be neatly trimmed for crimped connectors,
I use a pair of strippers to remove outer jacket and who
cares how it rips up the shield below. I trim off enough
of the shield strands so that when I wind them around the
center conductor just off the end of the outer jacket,
I get 3/16 to 1/4" coverage of shield strands. I'll then
use a solder sleeve or the technique shown at:
http://209.134.106.21/articles/pigtail/pigtail.html
In these pictures, you see where one of the die-holes
in my wire stripper did a fair job of trimming the end
of the shield conductors. I have a lot of 3 and 4
conductor shielded where the best that the wire stripper
can do is something akin to ripping the outer jacket
PLUS most of the shield. Even then, there are MORE
than enough strands of shielding to make an effective
connection with either solder sleeves -OR- the techniques
shown in the comic book above. Neat doesn't count
for a lot here because after you've soldered the joint
and put heat shrink over it, the end product looks just
the same no matter how sexy you're trim job was.
Recall that in MOST cases, shields are just that,
shields. They carry pico amperes of current . . . ONE
strand properly terminated would suffice; it's
really easy to get 15-20 strands connected without
being fastidious so why bother? Even when the shield
does have current carrying duties, a dozen strands
in good contact with the pigtail are sufficient.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Right angle BNCs |
>
>
>I have a need for some right angle BNC connectors to accommodate a tight
>fit and for proper strain relief. I was looking at the Radio Shack 278-127
>and was planning to use RG400. However, the shield makes contact with the
>connector sleeve by screwing the sleeve over the shield. Is this good
>enough, or is there another right angle connector I could use?
>\
>Thanks,
Gary, To my knowledge, BNC connectors that screw on are designed for coaxial
cables that have a solid (not stranded) center conductor. RG400 has a
stranded center conductor and will not be able to be used with a screw on
connector reliably.
As far as I know, the screw on connectors are for RG59 and used in closed
circuit television or cable/sat. TV applications only.
John Z.
Sorry to chime in John/Gary, but would it be possible to twist the fine
strands of the RG400 & "tin" w/ solder ? I don't have any here to try .
Might make the final thickness of the center conductor too thick . Just "my
humble curiosity" . Thanks
Chris Fleshren
How about putting a regular cable male on the end
and use a right angle adapter? I've looked without
success for a right-angle crimp-on that will work
with our low cost tooling. No luck so far but I'm
still looking. When I used to make up pre-fab antenna
cables and the customer needed right angle on one
or both ends, I would install the cable-male with
crimp, slip internal-melting-wall heatshrink
over the cable and install a right angle adapter.
Slip the heatsrink over the cable connector and
shrink it down. Made for a very neat installation
with no concerns for integrity of the connection.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Bendix King Handheld KX99 |
>
>
>To
>I have made the sin of shutting off the battrey master before shutting
>the engine (912 Rotax). my handheld transceiver KX-99 (Bendix King)
>which was powered form the the plane battrey, could not be switched on
>again.
> The local Radio Engineer is telling me that the Audio Synthesizer Board
>gone bust and the price of the new one from the States $740!
> I bought this handheld brand new 4 years ago for $550. Any good ideas
>and cheaper solutions Guys? Please Help!
>Ahmed Eskander
Do you have separate battery and alternator switches? Was the
alternator still ON when you switched the battery OFF? ONe
of the problems with hand-helds is that they're not INSTALLED
in the airplane and not subject to the same rigors of DO-160
testing as panel mounted stuff.
If I were going to tie any hand helds into ship's power,
I would probably use a Radio Shack 270-030 noise filter
downstream of a small fuse (1A) and then put a couple
of 1N4745, glass zener diodes across the output feeding
the radio.
The filter will take off the short duration gremlins
that most radios don't care about. The zeners would function
like the crowbar ov protection system used on the Grummans
some years back . . . ov conditions of long duration would
fail the diode shorted (without allowing the output
to rise above 16 volts) and open the fuse.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Switch for dimming light |
>
>
>I'm upgrading my panel and adding an annunciator for my GPS. The lights will
>require dimming. Unfortunately, I cannot add another instrument to my
>dimmer. I would like to place a small switch under the instrument for
>day\night operation. I think what I need is a Zener diode, but I'm uncertain
>as to which of the many in the Mouser catalog to get and how to wire it to
>the switch. I could probably figure it out if I had one in my hand, but any
>suggestions would be appreciated.
You'll need to experiment with this. Do you have access to a
variable DC power supply? Set in a dark hangar for 10-15 minutes
until your eyes dark-adapt. Adjust the voltage to the annunicator
power to get desired intensity. Then SUBTRACT that voltage from
14 to get the size of zener you need. Also, while it's running
from your power supply, measure the worst case current required
at that voltage level sow that we can calculate the power
handling requirement for the zener . . . it may take something
larger than a 1W device.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Steven Kay <skay(at)optonline.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Bendix King Handheld KX99 |
Bob,
I'd like to see a schematic to be sure of the configuration
when you can find the time. Sounds like cheap inssurance for
the goodies in the flight bag. -Steve
"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" wrote:
>
>
> If I were going to tie any hand helds into ship's power,
> I would probably use a Radio Shack 270-030 noise filter
> downstream of a small fuse (1A) and then put a couple
> of 1N4745, glass zener diodes across the output feeding
> the radio.
>
> The filter will take off the short duration gremlins
> that most radios don't care about. The zeners would function
> like the crowbar ov protection system used on the Grummans
> some years back . . . ov conditions of long duration would
> fail the diode shorted (without allowing the output
> to rise above 16 volts) and open the fuse.
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | What's this crimpers for ? |
Hi, Bob and all
some years ago a colleague gave me two crimpers :
One is an AMP black thing with "Type C" engraved on it, and three color dots
: white 32-30, red 28-24, yellow 24-20 painted on the head.
The other is a Buchanan, MS 3191-1, with three interchangeable cylindrical
dies, painted red, blue, yellow, with the classic color code on a sticker.
I witnessed a demo with the Buchanan on a nice little gold plated terminal,
but I'm unable to say what type.
Do you think one of those crimpers could be of some use for the wiring of
our project ? Maybe for sub-d terminals ?
Any info appreciated.
Thanks
Gilles
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ahmed Eskander" <eskander(at)talk21.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Bendix King Handheld KX99 |
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Bendix King Handheld KX99
Thank you Bob.
I have only Battrey Master, no Alternator Master.
I am installing Avionics Master supplying Radio Shack Noise Filter which I
am not sure if it is 270-030 (I shall check tomorrow) to be connected to 10
Amps fuse for Icom A200 + 2 Amps fuse for KT 76A and Ameri-King Encoder + 1
Amp for Flightcom Intercom. Will this be satisfactory?
Is there away of putting Alternator Master for the Rotax 912?
It seem there will be no chance for the recovery of Bendix King KX99.
Thanks again Bob.
Ahmed
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Right angle BNCs |
In a message dated 4/27/02 8:13:40 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
CBFLESHREN(at)aol.com writes:
> would it be possible to twist the fine
> strands of the RG400 & "tin" w/ solder ? I don't have any here to try .
> Might make the final thickness of the center conductor too thick . Just "my
> humble curiosity" . Thanks
>
> Chris Fleshren
>
Gary, Chris, Bob, I found a "solderless" right angle BNC in my RF connector
stuff out in the shop just now. It is designed to fit RG-6 and RG-59 but I
think you could shim the RG-400 with heat shrink so that it fits tightly at
the strain relief. It is not one of the twist on type that we were
addressing earlier, even though it is made to be solderless. It has a screw
connection for the center conductor and a crimp for the shield. I would
solder a tiny ring terminal on the end of the center conductor of the RG-400
or solder a small piece of brass tubing on it, flattened and drilled for the
screw connection and screw it home, crimp the pre-tinned shield under the
crimp wings, solder and pot the strain relief with RTV for best life
expectancy.
Post your address Gary, and I'll send it to you for experimentation.
John Z.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | John & Amy Eckel <eckel1(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | transmitter output |
Hi folks,
I am starting to think about which com radio to buy. I am wondering
if there is a minimum output wattage I should look for?
Thanks,
John
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard D. Fogerson" <rickf(at)velocitus.net> |
| Subject: | Antenna Questions from Aeroelectric Book |
Hi Bob,
I'm working my way thru your book and have a couple of questions on the
antenna chapter:
1) I, along with every other builder probably, would like to put my com
and xpdr antenna in the wing tips. You say in that chapter that
"foxtails flown from the tip are not recommended". What is a foxtail
and does that statement preclude mounting a bent whip antenna to the
outboard rib? Since the entire antenna would be horizontal, I gather
from your figures that the radiation pattern would be in the vertical
plane and perhaps that would limit good transmission to all stations on
the horizon except for those few directly off the wing tip?
2) How about an antenna wire bent in a wave pattern where a good share
of the wire is vertical although in short segments? Probably
interference between horizontal sections?
3) I suppose you couldn't have an antenna in both wings to take care of
each side? Physics is always getting in the way of doing what I want!
4) How about the xpdr antenna mounted to the outboard rib? Same thing?
5) One last question on another topic. With dual ignition and dual
batteries in the back, I want to put a hidden switch on the line from
main bat/con solenoid to the voltage regulator. What would work best, a
toggle switch, toggle switch with fuse, re-settable cb, or cb switch?
Thanks,
Rick Fogerson
RV3 fuselage
Boise, ID
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard D. Fogerson" <rickf(at)velocitus.net> |
| Subject: | Source for Eye ball bulkhead fittings |
Hi All,
I've read in the archives about these fittings for routing throttle and
mixture cables through the firewall at an angle but can't find any
reference for a source. Does anyone know where they can be purchased?
Thanks,
Rick Fogerson
RV3 fuselage
Boise, ID
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Werner Schneider" <WernerSchneider(at)compuserve.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Source for Eye ball bulkhead fittings |
Hello Rick,
ASP sells them for 26.30 each, numbers are 05-00722/23/24/26 with hole dia
.125/.188/.250/.260.
Kind regards
Werner (GlaStar final assembly)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard D. Fogerson" <rickf(at)velocitus.net>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Source for Eye ball bulkhead fittings
>
> Hi All,
> I've read in the archives about these fittings for routing throttle and
> mixture cables through the firewall at an angle but can't find any
> reference for a source. Does anyone know where they can be purchased?
>
> Thanks,
> Rick Fogerson
> RV3 fuselage
> Boise, ID
>
>
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)BowenAero.com> |
| Subject: | Source for Eye ball bulkhead fittings |
Avery had the next generation of the eyeball firewall pass through
thingys at their booth at SNF. Instead of being held to the firewall
with those 6 tiny screws, there is one big nut that holds the whole
works in place. I thought it was pretty nice. He said they were too
new to be in the catalog. Still $27 ea. or $25 ea for three or more.
-
Larry Bowen
RV-8 fuse
Larry(at)BowenAero.com
http://BowenAero.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On
> Behalf Of Richard D. Fogerson
> Sent: Sunday, April 28, 2002 12:21 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Source for Eye ball bulkhead fittings
>
>
> -->
>
> Hi All,
> I've read in the archives about these fittings for routing
> throttle and mixture cables through the firewall at an angle
> but can't find any reference for a source. Does anyone know
> where they can be purchased?
>
> Thanks,
> Rick Fogerson
> RV3 fuselage
> Boise, ID
>
>
> ===========
> ===========
> ===========
> Search Engine:
> http://www.matronics.com/search
> ===========
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Source for Eye ball bulkhead fittings |
In a message dated 4/28/2002 1:19:39 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
WernerSchneider(at)compuserve.com writes:
<< ASP sells them for 26.30 each, numbers are 05-00722/23/24/26 with hole dia
.125/.188/.250/.260.
Kind regards
Werner (GlaStar final assembly)
>>
Who is ASP and how do you contact them?
Cliff
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jerry Calvert" <rv6(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Source for Eye ball bulkhead fittings |
Cleavelands has them. http://www.cleavelandtool.com/catalog/rvacc.html
Part number is FPT1 for single unit and FPT3 for a 3-pack.
I used them on the throttle and mixture cables and highly recommend them.
For wire cables that have the wire inside and the metal outter (like lawn
mower cables) use Van's cable clamps, they're cheaper.
Jerry Calvert
Edmond Ok RV6
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard D. Fogerson" <rickf(at)velocitus.net>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Source for Eye ball bulkhead fittings
>
> Hi All,
> I've read in the archives about these fittings for routing throttle and
> mixture cables through the firewall at an angle but can't find any
> reference for a source. Does anyone know where they can be purchased?
>
> Thanks,
> Rick Fogerson
> RV3 fuselage
> Boise, ID
>
>
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re:Maint.records |
Is it not true that records are required to be kept for two years or until
superseded, except for life limited items, total time in service, AD
compliance and some other necessary items?
If a DG or compass was repaired three years ago, it may not be in the maint.
records. Personally, I record my transponder, altimeter (IFR), compass and
VOR checks on index cards. It prevents cluttering the logs. I toss the old
ones when the new checks are performed.
Steve
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Werner Schneider" <WernerSchneider(at)compuserve.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Source for Eye ball bulkhead fittings |
Sorry,
all the details under http://www.aircraftspruce.com/main.html
Werner
----- Original Message -----
From: <FlyV35B(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Source for Eye ball bulkhead fittings
>
> In a message dated 4/28/2002 1:19:39 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
> WernerSchneider(at)compuserve.com writes:
>
> << ASP sells them for 26.30 each, numbers are 05-00722/23/24/26 with hole
dia
> .125/.188/.250/.260.
>
> Kind regards
>
> Werner (GlaStar final assembly)
> >>
> Who is ASP and how do you contact them?
> Cliff
>
>
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Transmitter output? |
>
>Hi folks,
>I am starting to think about which com radio to buy. I am wondering
>if there is a minimum output wattage I should look for?
>Thanks,
>John
check out . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/avionics/weir_760.html
Actually, transmitter power is the least critical of
your radio's performance ratings. The most difficult
part of bulding a radio is the RECEIVER; it's ratings
come in a compendium of features like signal/signal+noise ratios,
sensitivity, third order intermodulation resistance, bandwidth,
image rejection ratio, etc, etc. By-in-large, picking through
this techno-stew in a quest for the holy grail of receivers
is probably not very useful.
The only time your radio's shortcomings will come to light
in any of these regards is when you fly into DFW with
several hundred other airplanes and ground sources of
radio signals all competing for use of the ether . . .
pretty rare in the lifetime of experiences for your airplane.
I'd pick a radio that has the features you think you'll
really NEED and USE for the MAX dollars you think you want
to spend. Your satisfaction with your purchase will have
more to do with the manufacturer's product quality and
after-the-sale service than with anything printed in the
specifications section of the installation manual.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Melvinke(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Racemate alternator |
I am looking at using a Racemate alternator (www.racemate.com) on my
autoconversion aircraft engine. This utilizes a concentric alternator within
the high performance water-pump - a neat and space-saving arrangement used by
the Team-38 autoconversion.. Does anyone know of a failure mode for an
alternator that might cause it to freeze solid and thus take out the
water-pump with it?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Right angle BNCs |
>
>In a message dated 4/27/02 8:13:40 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
>CBFLESHREN(at)aol.com writes:
>
>
> > would it be possible to twist the fine
> > strands of the RG400 & "tin" w/ solder ? I don't have any here to try .
> > Might make the final thickness of the center conductor too thick . Just
> "my
> > humble curiosity" . Thanks
> >
> > Chris Fleshren
> >
>
>
>Gary, Chris, Bob, I found a "solderless" right angle BNC in my RF connector
>stuff out in the shop just now. It is designed to fit RG-6 and RG-59 but I
>think you could shim the RG-400 with heat shrink so that it fits tightly at
>the strain relief. It is not one of the twist on type that we were
>addressing earlier, even though it is made to be solderless. It has a screw
>connection for the center conductor and a crimp for the shield. I would
>solder a tiny ring terminal on the end of the center conductor of the RG-400
>or solder a small piece of brass tubing on it, flattened and drilled for the
>screw connection and screw it home, crimp the pre-tinned shield under the
>crimp wings, solder and pot the strain relief with RTV for best life
>expectancy.
>
>Post your address Gary, and I'll send it to you for experimentation.
>
>John Z.
>
>
Bob . . .
--------------------------
TEMPORARY WEBSITE ADDRESS:
http://209.134.106.21
--------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Right angle BNCs |
>
>In a message dated 4/27/02 8:13:40 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
>CBFLESHREN(at)aol.com writes:
>
>
> > would it be possible to twist the fine
> > strands of the RG400 & "tin" w/ solder ? I don't have any here to try .
> > Might make the final thickness of the center conductor too thick . Just
> "my
> > humble curiosity" . Thanks
> >
> > Chris Fleshren
> >
>
>
>Gary, Chris, Bob, I found a "solderless" right angle BNC in my RF connector
>stuff out in the shop just now. It is designed to fit RG-6 and RG-59 but I
>think you could shim the RG-400 with heat shrink so that it fits tightly at
>the strain relief. It is not one of the twist on type that we were
>addressing earlier, even though it is made to be solderless. It has a screw
>connection for the center conductor and a crimp for the shield. I would
>solder a tiny ring terminal on the end of the center conductor of the RG-400
>or solder a small piece of brass tubing on it, flattened and drilled for the
>screw connection and screw it home, crimp the pre-tinned shield under the
>crimp wings, solder and pot the strain relief with RTV for best life
>expectancy.
>
>Post your address Gary, and I'll send it to you for experimentation.
Would like to see one of these myself. I am skeptical of
any threaded fasteners in coax connectors.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Antenna Questions from Aeroelectric Book |
>
>
>Hi Bob,
>I'm working my way thru your book and have a couple of questions on the
>antenna chapter:
>
>1) I, along with every other builder probably, would like to put my com
>and xpdr antenna in the wing tips.
xpndr needs to go on the belly.
> You say in that chapter that
>"foxtails flown from the tip are not recommended". What is a foxtail
>and does that statement preclude mounting a bent whip antenna to the
>outboard rib? Since the entire antenna would be horizontal, I gather
>from your figures that the radiation pattern would be in the vertical
>plane and perhaps that would limit good transmission to all stations on
>the horizon except for those few directly off the wing tip?
The "fox tails" statement was a tongue-in-cheek reference to
some outlandish things some people do with their radio antennas
in the quest for style-statements or unscientific performance
enhancements.
>2) How about an antenna wire bent in a wave pattern where a good share
>of the wire is vertical although in short segments? Probably
>interference between horizontal sections?
>
>3) I suppose you couldn't have an antenna in both wings to take care of
>each side? Physics is always getting in the way of doing what I want!
>
>4) How about the xpdr antenna mounted to the outboard rib? Same thing?
Comm antennas under tip fairings are poor performers. VOR antennas
do much better. Bob Archer's wing tip VOR antennas have a
pretty good service record. Comm antenna needs to be a whisker
on the fuselage too . . . on top or out the bottom.
>5) One last question on another topic. With dual ignition and dual
>batteries in the back, I want to put a hidden switch on the line from
>main bat/con solenoid to the voltage regulator. What would work best, a
>toggle switch, toggle switch with fuse, re-settable cb, or cb switch?
I'm not visualizing what wire you're talking
about. I'm not aware of any wire that runs from the battery
contactors directly to the voltage regulator. What would
be the function of the switch?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Lightspeed wiring . . . |
>
>We're talking RG58 coax here. Picture at:
>
>http://www.lightspeedengineering.com/Manuals/Ignition_Coil_Diag.htm
>
Hmmmm . . . I can think of no good reason not to use ordinary
shielded wire for this application whereupon it's quite easy
to terminate the coil end by techniques shown in:
http://209.134.106.21/articles/pigtail/pigtail.html
or
http://209.134.106.21/articles/shldwire/shldwire.html
>All Klaus says in the installation instructions is "Trim the wires to
>length and connect them with quality crimp connectors or by soldering
>and heat shrink insulation. Do not use any heat shrink on the black
>RG58 cable going to the coils."
Yeah . . . RG-58 insulation is so marginal that it
won't hold shape under the fairly modest temperatures
needed to close down a piece of heat shrink . . .
In my not so humble opinion, a poor choice of materials
for this task. I'd be a little concerned about using
RG-58 under the cowl.
Since you're stuck with the BNC connector at the black
box end, then I'd go with RG-400 and terminate with
techniques outlined in the first of the articles quoted
above.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 2-1/4" Becker or Microair....? |
>
>Hello friends,
>
>Well well well... I was looking at the balance in my
>bank account and determined that if I want to order my
>transponder, I should do it soon (before we get crazy
>as we do each spring and spend everything we have ;-).
>
>I am hesitating between the Microair T2000 and the
>Becker 4401.
>
>The buttons appear to be easier to operate with the
>Becker unit. As well, the LCD screen of the Becker
>appears to be easier to read than the Microair's LCD
>screen.
>
>However, the Becker I would buy is rated 175 watts
>(which I'm not sure what it means). The Microair is
>rated 200 watts nominal (170 watts minimum).
>
>Any other considerations? What's the track record of
>both companies in terms of quality of product (I know
>I only read good things so far about Microair).
>
>Is 170-175 watts enough for that type of device?
Transmitter power out is the least of your
considerations for choosing a radio of any kind.
See earlier post on comm radios . . .
I am STILL waiting on my stocking order for
Microair transponders . . . I've given up
asking about them.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James B. Robinson" <jbr(at)hitechnetworks.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Lightspeed wiring . . . |
Bob
I have a question regarding the starter contactor S702-1. Can a
continous duty contactor S701-1 be used in this role? In my
configuration it woul make a much cleaner installation.
Jim Robinson
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom Barnes" <skytop(at)megsinet.net> |
| Subject: | transmitter output |
John,
I have a Microair 760 as a second unit. This unit has been
discussed on this and other lists, over and over and I can't remember
ever hearing anyone bash it. For the ease of installation, light
weight, small size, multi functions and general acceptance, it seemed
"right" for my panel. This is one you should definitely consider.
Tom Barnes -6 finishing
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of John
& Amy Eckel
Subject: AeroElectric-List: transmitter output
Hi folks,
I am starting to think about which com radio to buy. I am wondering
if there is a minimum output wattage I should look for?
Thanks,
John
=
=
=
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
=
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)kscable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: AeroElectric Connection Wire Chart Question |
>
>In Figures 8-3 and 8-4 of The Aero-Electric Connection, the wire current
>capacity appears to be for wire in conduit or bundled, but the text on page
>8-9 says "single strand in free air." The question comes from comparison
>with an old chart (Fig 11-7 1988) in AC 43.13 where those (Aero-Electric)
>currents plot very close to the wire in bundles curve and far from the
>single wire curve. Is there a contradiction?
To quote from the repertoire of Dick Martin's
retorts on 1968 television, "You bet your sweet bippy".
This, ladies and gentlemen, is a good demonstration
of how seemingly reasonable but not quite accurate
information can become accepted as fact simply
because it's been repeated so often or is written
down in some book . . .
It's taken me some time to respond to this because
I've been digging around looking for the resources
I might have used when chapter 8 was crafted about
10 years ago. (I went to the files and discovered
that all of the AutoCAD generated figures for that
chapter were drawn in AutoCAD v1.17 it was running
on a PC-XT and output to a plodding pen plotter!)
I remember duplicating Figure 8-4 from some reference
but I'm unable to put my hands on it after all this time.
Suffice it to say, the data shown there IS NOT
properly displayed or attributed with respect to
significance. Just for grins, I took a piece of
22AWG wire, attached a thermocouple to the outside
surface and stuck it on a 10A constant current power
supply. Guess what? I got a 38 degree C rise. 5A
amps 1/2 the current and dissipates 1/4th the power
so we would expect something on the order of a 10
degree C rise.
In retrospect, there are other data points
that would have raised the question had
I been prompted to consider it. For example,
EVERY 22AWG wire in heavy-iron birds are
driven by a 5A breaker. It's a matter of routine for
wires in these airplanes to disappear into large wire
bundles of 1-3" in diameter. One could deduce
from this fact alone that a 5A temperature rise
for 22AWG wire would have to be more on the order
of 10 degree C suited for wire bundles as opposed
to the 35 degree C value shown in Figure 8-4.
This is an excellent lesson in how good science
is practiced. We need to accept questions on
ANY offering of "fact" at ANY time and be willing
to defend the answer with good numbers and critical
thought.
Readers can correct their books for Figure
8-4 by changing the 35C curve to 10C and drawing
another line above it with the same slope and
crossing intersection of 22AWG and 10Amps. Label
the new line 35C. The old 10C line could be
relabeled 3C.
Wire table on Page 8-8, next to last column,
scratch out "35" and write in "10". There are
other references to temperature rise in the text
that can be fixed accordingly.
Chapter 8 wasn't on the short list of chapters to
be worked on last week but it is now. The
chapter has been offering bad data for over
10 years but thanks to the inquisitive mind and
a willingness of Mr. Brick to ask the question,
it's going to get fixed. I thank you sir!
Bob . . .
P.S. Many of my compatriots at RAC have had
copies of this book for years. They've offered
lots of useful feedback on other things but this
item has slipped by unnoticed until now.
April 16, 2002 - April 28, 2002
AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-au