AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-cu
January 03, 2004 - January 15, 2004
Regards,
Troy Scott
tscott1217(at)bellsouth.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Werner Schneider" <wernerschneider(at)compuserve.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Visio Symbols |
Hi Chad,
I'm running Visio 2002 SR1 and the symbols do not work for me. How did you
create them?
Do you know, Visio 2002 at least has the explode function, with this I can
convert the CAD drawing into a Visio drawing (hovever tripling the size). I
think you could somehow import with this functionality however you need to
create then the handles manualy.
Let me know if you need more help.
For all others, copy the vss file into Program Files\Microsoft Office\Visio
10\1033\solutions or wherever your visio is installed and then under
file->stencils->open stencil you will find it.
Kind regards
Werner
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chad Robinson" <crobinson(at)rfgonline.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Visio Symbols
>
> Hello all,
>
> I have been working on a Visio symbol stencil set based on Bob's CAD
symbols -
> Bob, I hope you don't mind. I'm doing 5-10 a day as time permits, so this
> first copy is just a test set to be sure it works, but I'd appreciate it
if a
> few people would download the file and check it out. Visio 2000 or higher
is
> required.
>
> If this works out I'll incorporate most of the major symbols this weekend,
> then do the rest a few at a time as time permits. Check back periodically
for
> updates.
>
> http://www.lucubration.com/aero/
>
> Regards,
> Chad
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Fiveonepw(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Slow starter redux |
Thanks to all for the input- Some more data: Battery is about 1.5 years old,
most of time on a shelf, but used for system checkout and occasionally
charged with smart charger. Contactors are on firewall with shortest possible
(mere
inches) of #4 welding cable connecting batt & contactors. Approx. 3' of #2
weld cable to direct-drive (no gearing) Delco-Remy boat anchor. Ground is #2
weld cable bolted to crankcase at base of dipstick tube, then to Bob's ground
lug on firewall next to battery. All fat lugs are crimped and soldered.
Most have mentioned high resistance connections but all check OK. Might just
"borrow" the Biddle meter from work and ring it out anyway. (Biddle meter is
an instrument used to accurately measure resistance in micro-ohms- we use it
to measure resistance spotweld gun secondaries- neat tool!)
Others cite that a healthy battery and motor work well, so plan is to
purchase fresh battery from DigiKey and go from there. Bob has warned us to get
a
fresh one for flying anyway!
Also talked to Dick Waters (Air-Tec) about his Lexus starter, but he is
unsure if it will fit the cowling on a -6 (his earlier models would not he says).
He is investigating and may send one anyway for a trial-fit.
Thanks again to all and especially to Bob- many of you know what a thrill it
is to start bringing your project to life and everything (mostly!) actually
WORKS!!
From The PossumWorks in TN
Mark - getting close............
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Fiveonepw(at)aol.com |
Howdy again-
Battery shopping in new DigiKey catalog I just got and saw new 20 Ah
Panasonic with exact same case dimensions as the 17Ah model. Pulled up the data
sheets and it appears the only difference is case material (thinner) at a slightly
higher weight.
New batt:
http://www.panasonic.com/industrial/battery/oem/images/pdf/Panasonic_VRLA_LC-X1220P_LC_X1220AP.pdf
Old batt:
http://www.panasonic.com/industrial/battery/oem/images/pdf/Panasonic_VRLA_LC-RD1217P.pdf
Ordering the new one today- will let y'all know if it cures the problem-
Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jon Finley" <jon(at)finleyweb.net> |
Hi Chad,
Sorry to report that the symbols don't work too well for me. I've
opened them as a stencil. When I pull them onto a page the left side is
cut off (they are also VERY large).
Keep trying, this is good stuff!
Jon
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On
> Behalf Of Chad Robinson
> Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2004 12:56 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Visio Symbols
>
>
> -->
>
> Hello all,
>
> I have been working on a Visio symbol stencil set based on
> Bob's CAD symbols -
> Bob, I hope you don't mind. I'm doing 5-10 a day as time
> permits, so this
> first copy is just a test set to be sure it works, but I'd
> appreciate it if a
> few people would download the file and check it out. Visio
> 2000 or higher is
> required.
>
> If this works out I'll incorporate most of the major symbols
> this weekend,
> then do the rest a few at a time as time permits. Check back
> periodically for
> updates.
>
> http://www.lucubration.com/aero/
>
> Regards,
> Chad
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)BowenAero.com> |
Very timely. Just last night, I LOST a lot of work I had done in visio.
Apparently, if visio doesn't shut down gracefully it can corrupt it's
data files, giving you the error "Visio cannot open the file because
it's not a Visio file. " You can prevent this by downloading a visio
patch here:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;278261.
Your symbols worked great. They are different sizes, but otherwise
great. Thanks.
-
Larry Bowen
Larry(at)BowenAero.com
http://BowenAero.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chad Robinson [mailto:crobinson(at)rfgonline.com]
> Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2004 1:56 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Visio Symbols
>
>
> -->
>
> Hello all,
>
> I have been working on a Visio symbol stencil set based on
> Bob's CAD symbols -
> Bob, I hope you don't mind. I'm doing 5-10 a day as time
> permits, so this
> first copy is just a test set to be sure it works, but I'd
> appreciate it if a
> few people would download the file and check it out. Visio
> 2000 or higher is
> required.
>
> If this works out I'll incorporate most of the major symbols
> this weekend,
> then do the rest a few at a time as time permits. Check back
> periodically for
> updates.
>
http://www.lucubration.com/aero/
Regards,
Chad
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Hi There <rv90619(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: King radio connectors |
KX-125, sorry, thought all Kings where the same.
Cam
"Neal A. Dillman" wrote:
Cam,
You will need to be more specific. Which King radio?
-Neal-
Hi There wrote:
>
>Where can I find the connectors for the back of a King radio. I bought a used
radio and want to rewire it.
>
>Thanks
>Cam
>
>
>---------------------------------
>
>
>
>
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Neal A. Dillman" <neald(at)glyph.com> |
| Subject: | Re: King radio connectors |
Nope, All Kings are different. Check out:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Installation_Data/KX125.pdf
-Neal-
Hi There wrote:
>
>KX-125, sorry, thought all Kings where the same.
>
>Cam
>
>
>"Neal A. Dillman" wrote:
>
>Cam,
>
>You will need to be more specific. Which King radio?
>
>-Neal-
>
>Hi There wrote:
>
>
>
>>
>>Where can I find the connectors for the back of a King radio. I bought a used
radio and want to rewire it.
>>
>>Thanks
>>Cam
>>
>>
>>---------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>---------------------------------
>
>
>
>
hn
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Stone" <jrstone(at)insightbb.com> |
| Subject: | Magnaflite Starter MZ-62 series |
Builders,
I've got my eye on the Magnaflite MZ-6222 starter and would like to hear
of any experience in the field with this unit. It is probably the
lightest on the market and priced very competitively.
Thanks,
Jim
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: King radio connectors |
In a message dated 1/2/04 6:20:13 PM Pacific Standard Time, rv90619(at)yahoo.com
writes:
<< Where can I find the connectors for the back of a King radio. I bought a
used radio and want to rewire it.
>>
Try Allied Signal/Honeywell Product support at 1-800-257-0726 or
913-712-1400.
Harry Crosby
Pleasanton, California
RV-6, firewall forward
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Hi There <rv90619(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: King radio connectors |
I have the wiring diagram, it's the actual little connector that I need. The part
that you crimp onto the end of each wire then put in the back of the rack.
Thanks
Cam
"Neal A. Dillman" wrote:
Nope, All Kings are different. Check out:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Installation_Data/KX125.pdf
-Neal-
Hi There wrote:
>
>KX-125, sorry, thought all Kings where the same.
>
>Cam
>
>
>"Neal A. Dillman" wrote:
>
>Cam,
>
>You will need to be more specific. Which King radio?
>
>-Neal-
>
>Hi There wrote:
>
>
>
>>
>>Where can I find the connectors for the back of a King radio. I bought a used
radio and want to rewire it.
>>
>>Thanks
>>Cam
>>
>>
>>---------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>---------------------------------
>
>
>
>
hn
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard E. Tasker" <retasker(at)optonline.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Visio Symbols |
Is there any reason you could not post a version of this file saved in
an earlier version of Visio? I have Visio Technical 4 and can save
visio files in version 2, 3 and 4. Or did Microsoft, in its fine
monopolistic way remove the capability to save in previous version's
file formats?
Dick Tasker, RV9A #90573
Chad Robinson wrote:
>
>Hello all,
>
>I have been working on a Visio symbol stencil set based on Bob's CAD symbols -
>Bob, I hope you don't mind. I'm doing 5-10 a day as time permits, so this
>first copy is just a test set to be sure it works, but I'd appreciate it if a
>few people would download the file and check it out. Visio 2000 or higher is
>required.
>
>If this works out I'll incorporate most of the major symbols this weekend,
>then do the rest a few at a time as time permits. Check back periodically for
>updates.
>
>http://www.lucubration.com/aero/
>
>Regards,
>Chad
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Jurotich <mjurotich(at)hst.nasa.gov> |
| Subject: | LR3C-14 low volts warning light |
My LR3C-14 seems to working fine since it delivers 14.2 to 14.4 volts with
the engine running and when I connect an external test light between 14
volt buss and terminal 5 I get a blinking light. I assume that little low
voltage warning light bulb is burned out. How do I get the bulb out of the
holder? Access form the back of the panel is impossible without removing
the panel from the plane and that is not scheduled till mid Feb.
Matthew M. Jurotich
NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center
JWST ISIM Systems Engineer
m/c : 443
e-mail mailto: mjurotich(at)hst.nasa.gov
phone : 301-286-5919
fax : 301-286-7021
JWST URL: <http://ngst1.gsfc.nasa.gov>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James Redmon" <james(at)berkut13.com> |
| Subject: | Re: King radio connectors |
No problem - don't mess with the manufacturers...they want $5 a pin, and
$100 for a connector - total BS!!! Those avionics guys are smokin something
and they ain't sharing! ;-)
Checkout this page on my web site - it has the data you need.
You can get the pin extractor, the pins, AND the connector for less than $5.
You will still need to get a mounting tray if you don't already have one.
Enjoy,
James Redmon
Berkut #013 N97TX
www.berkut13.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Hi There" <rv90619(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: King radio connectors
>
> I have the wiring diagram, it's the actual little connector that I need.
The part that you crimp onto the end of each wire then put in the back of
the rack.
>
> Thanks
> Cam
>
> "Neal A. Dillman" wrote:
>
> Nope, All Kings are different. Check out:
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/Installation_Data/KX125.pdf
>
>
> -Neal-
>
> Hi There wrote:
>
> >
> >KX-125, sorry, thought all Kings where the same.
> >
> >Cam
> >
> >
> >"Neal A. Dillman" wrote:
> >
> >Cam,
> >
> >You will need to be more specific. Which King radio?
> >
> >-Neal-
> >
> >Hi There wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >>Where can I find the connectors for the back of a King radio. I bought a
used radio and want to rewire it.
> >>
> >>Thanks
> >>Cam
> >>
> >>
> >>---------------------------------
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >---------------------------------
> >
> >
> >
> >
> hn
>
>
> ---------------------------------
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Neal A. Dillman" <neald(at)glyph.com> |
| Subject: | Re: King radio connectors |
Cam,
OK. I think I understand what you want (let me make sure). You want
the pins for the molex connectors on the back of the unit.
(or do you want the connectors themselves??)
Either way, I think the other gentleman was correct. You could either
check with Honeywell or your local avionics shop. It is unlikely that
any local electronics shop would have either the connectors or the pins.
Best of luck.
Regards,
Neal
Hi There wrote:
>
>I have the wiring diagram, it's the actual little connector that I need. The
part that you crimp onto the end of each wire then put in the back of the rack.
>
>Thanks
>Cam
>
>"Neal A. Dillman" wrote:
>
>Nope, All Kings are different. Check out:
>
>http://www.aeroelectric.com/Installation_Data/KX125.pdf
>
>
>-Neal-
>
>Hi There wrote:
>
>
>
>>
>>KX-125, sorry, thought all Kings where the same.
>>
>>Cam
>>
>>
>>"Neal A. Dillman" wrote:
>>
>>Cam,
>>
>>You will need to be more specific. Which King radio?
>>
>>-Neal-
>>
>>Hi There wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>Where can I find the connectors for the back of a King radio. I bought a used
radio and want to rewire it.
>>>
>>>Thanks
>>>Cam
>>>
>>>
>>>---------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>---------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>hn
>
>
>---------------------------------
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James Redmon" <james(at)berkut13.com> |
| Subject: | Re: King radio connectors |
> Checkout this page on my web site - it has the data you need.
I hate it when I forget to paste the URL....sorry.
http://www.berkut13.com/extractor.htm
James Redmon
Berkut #013 N97TX
www.berkut13.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Scott Diffenbaugh" <diff(at)foothill.net> |
| Subject: | Pondering changing from Z-13 to Z-12 |
Bob,
>On Z-12, you responded to a previous post that if the bat contactor fails,
>the E bus will be operating off of battery only. Can I hook the SD20's B
>lead to the battery side of the contactor and it's field to the bat bus?
That's a long, always hot feed wire. Not sanitary but then, it's
YOUR OBAM airplane.
For my continued education, can you elaborate on why it's not sanitary?
The 10AWG B lead would be about 12" long with a 20A ANL current limiter at
the contactor. If the B lead wire or SD-20 shorts, wouldn't the current
limiter open, saving the battery, just like the fusible link between the
contactor and SD-8 on Z-13 (while in backup mode)? Or might there be
leakage through the backup devices, draining the battery after shutdown?
>Would this give me the best of all worlds, ie with contactor closed, retain
>autoswitching and all busses? With contactor open, keep the battery
charged
>while operating on the E bus, ie somewhat the same idea as Z-13? If this
is
>ok, what would be a reasonable design load for the E bus?
Contactor failure is rare. Probability of contactor failure during
instances where high endurance bus loads are necessary are even
more rare. If that's a major concern for you, I'd consider Z-12, dual
battery contactors, with SD-20+FAT altenrator and eliminate the
e-bus entirely. With 20A of standby power, there's no probability
of wanting to operate battery-only and the value of a dual-feed
e-bus is diminished.
This has a nice ring to it! Looks like it eliminates my contactor failure
concerns, my always hot B lead issue above, provides dual feed to the bus,
retains autoswitching, eliminates the extra complexity of the E bus, gives
the pilot choices in what devices to unload during backup (until overload
light stops flashing, right?). There has to be a catch????---besides $ &
weight.
If I go with dual contactors, & eliminate the E-bus, what failure modes (if
any) might I encounter during flight which would require me to open both
contactors?
Would the contactors be wired in parallel, ie one simply backs up the other
by jumping the fat wire terminals and replacing the existing 1-3 AUX
alternator switch with another 2-3 master switch?
This may sound like overkill, but any merit to using 3 position master
switches like on Z-13 and reset only field breakers? Or stick with 2
position switches and pull breakers? (I guess I am asking if with dual
contactors, there may be a need to open either field without opening its
contactor?)
PS: To help me with my decision whether to go with the SD20, do you
estimate weeks of months before you have some test results & direction on
the SD-8 voltage regulator concerns?
Thank you! Scott RV7A
Scott Diffenbaugh
diff(at)foothill.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chad Robinson <crobinson(at)rfgonline.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Visio Symbols |
Dick Tasker wrote:
> Is there any reason you could not post a version of this file saved in
> an earlier version of Visio? I have Visio Technical 4 and can save
> visio files in version 2, 3 and 4. Or did Microsoft, in its fine
> monopolistic way remove the capability to save in previous version's
> file formats?
Sorry folks, I only have Visio 2000, and there does not appear to be any
option to control the version of the files. I'll keep looking. Meanwhile,
expect another release in a day or two that fixes the other comments you've
all sent, and thanks for the feedback.
I'll make announcements to this list as the file is updated. Bob, any chance
you could drop me a line if you post any new ones?
Regards,
Chad
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Troy Scott" <tscott1217(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Muse and Gold Mine |
Charles Brame,
The PS Engineering MUSE will do exactly what you want.
Regards,
Troy Scott
tscott1217(at)bellsouth.net
All, Especially Bob Nuckells:
I've spent most of the last several days finishing THE BOOK and printing
nuggets from the AeroElectric discussion list archives. What a GOLD MINE!!
Thanks, everybody!
Troy
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Avionics Master Switch |
Bob,
I've been wiring my RV-7 per Z-11 and for convenience would like to add an
Avionics Master Switch. I've read your article reguarding their necessity (or
lack thereof) which included a schematic showing the switch wired between the
Main Power Bus and the E-Buss (after the diode). I also read on page 11-3 of the
Connection, "The avionics master switch controls e-bus connection to main
bus, selects an emergency mode e-bus feed directly from battery and also disables
the starter circuits if the switch is not positioned to shut off the
avionics". This sounds like you're combining the functions of the avionics master,
e-bus alternate feed and bat/alt master switch into one switch. Is this
correct? Could you direct me to a schematic showing this switch set up or explain
it
with switch type, etc. so an electrically challenged person (like me) can
understand? Thanks for the help...............
Dave
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Phil Collins" <philc1(at)ix.netcom.com> |
| Subject: | LR3C-14 low volts warning light |
1. Grasp yellow bulb between thumb and forefingers...
2. Rotate counter-clockwise until bulb is free of receptacle
3. Install new bulb with clockwise rotation
How many NASA Scientists does it take to change a light bulb? :)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Matt
Jurotich
Subject: AeroElectric-List: LR3C-14 low volts warning light
My LR3C-14 seems to working fine since it delivers 14.2 to 14.4 volts
with
the engine running and when I connect an external test light between 14
volt buss and terminal 5 I get a blinking light. I assume that little
low
voltage warning light bulb is burned out. How do I get the bulb out of
the
holder? Access form the back of the panel is impossible without
removing
the panel from the plane and that is not scheduled till mid Feb.
Matthew M. Jurotich
NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center
JWST ISIM Systems Engineer
m/c : 443
e-mail mailto: mjurotich(at)hst.nasa.gov
phone : 301-286-5919
fax : 301-286-7021
JWST URL: <http://ngst1.gsfc.nasa.gov>
==
==
==
==
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Phil Collins" <philc1(at)ix.netcom.com> |
| Subject: | LR3C-14 low volts warning light - apology |
I need to apologize publicly for that last comment. It was out of line
and I regretted it as soon as I clicked send. This board is about
offering useful assistance. I have been helped many times by the wealth
of knowledge offered by fellow listers.
In that light that a couple of additional suggestions. Can you test the
bulb without removing it by judicious application of power/ground at the
regulator? It could be a broken connection at the holder.
If you do remove the bulb use caution not to allow the holder to rotate
in its hole. The connections to the holder are likely to be 22 gauge
soldered connections not happy with a lot of strain.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Matt
Jurotich
Subject: AeroElectric-List: LR3C-14 low volts warning light
My LR3C-14 seems to working fine since it delivers 14.2 to 14.4 volts
with
the engine running and when I connect an external test light between 14
volt buss and terminal 5 I get a blinking light. I assume that little
low
voltage warning light bulb is burned out. How do I get the bulb out of
the
holder? Access form the back of the panel is impossible without
removing
the panel from the plane and that is not scheduled till mid Feb.
Matthew M. Jurotich
NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center
JWST ISIM Systems Engineer
m/c : 443
e-mail mailto: mjurotich(at)hst.nasa.gov
phone : 301-286-5919
fax : 301-286-7021
JWST URL: <http://ngst1.gsfc.nasa.gov>
==
==
==
==
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Steve Richard" <steve(at)oasissolutions.com> |
Does this file help anyone?
Steve Richard
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Chad
Robinson
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Visio Symbols
Dick Tasker wrote:
> Is there any reason you could not post a version of this file saved in
> an earlier version of Visio? I have Visio Technical 4 and can save
> visio files in version 2, 3 and 4. Or did Microsoft, in its fine
> monopolistic way remove the capability to save in previous version's
> file formats?
Sorry folks, I only have Visio 2000, and there does not appear to be any
option to control the version of the files. I'll keep looking. Meanwhile,
expect another release in a day or two that fixes the other comments you've
all sent, and thanks for the feedback.
I'll make announcements to this list as the file is updated. Bob, any chance
you could drop me a line if you post any new ones?
Regards,
Chad
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Troy Scott" <tscott1217(at)bellsouth.net> |
Bob Nuckells,
you wrote: "If getting the best starter wasn't an option for me, then adding
the run-on eliminator would be a good idea."
OK. When I bought the DemarsAero IO360B1E (several years ago), Demars
suggested the Sky-Tec starter for it's lightness. At the time I knew
NOTHING about starters except that they are expensive and they sometimes
break. I've spent most of the last several days studying your book and the
AeroElectric discussion group archives. I've read several of your posts in
which you discuss the run-on problem of the PM starters and the high inrush
current, which could even drop the system voltage to the point that the EI
wouldn't fire. WOW! The Sky-Tec starter sounds awful! How do they stay in
business? Anyway, you've offered fixes like the buffer relay to prevent
run-on and a second battery so the engine can start on one while the EI is
powered from the other. I could deal with the buffer relay, but having to
add a second battery just to keep the EI firing seems ridiculous. What
happens when the two batteries are connected to assist cold-weather
starting? Bottom Line: Do I need to try to sell the Sky-Tec starter and
buy a B&C starter?
Regards,
Troy Scott
tscott1217(at)bellsouth.net
Glasair Super IISRG, SOMEDAY!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Steve Richard" <steve(at)oasissolutions.com> |
Sorry, the first file must have been too big (over 1M) and did not show up
with the e-mail. I have zipped it and attached it to this e-mail. If it
doesn't come across this time, I'm not sure what the problem is. The file
contains over 50 visio symbols converted from AeroElectric CAD drawings.
Steve
Does this file help anyone?
Steve Richard
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Chad
Robinson
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Visio Symbols
Dick Tasker wrote:
> Is there any reason you could not post a version of this file saved in
> an earlier version of Visio? I have Visio Technical 4 and can save
> visio files in version 2, 3 and 4. Or did Microsoft, in its fine
> monopolistic way remove the capability to save in previous version's
> file formats?
Sorry folks, I only have Visio 2000, and there does not appear to be any
option to control the version of the files. I'll keep looking. Meanwhile,
expect another release in a day or two that fixes the other comments you've
all sent, and thanks for the feedback.
I'll make announcements to this list as the file is updated. Bob, any chance
you could drop me a line if you post any new ones?
Regards,
Chad
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Robert Dufresne <robertdufresne(at)videotron.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Visio Symbols |
Chad,
Same problem for me , i use Visio 2003
Robert
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jon Finley" <jon(at)finleyweb.net>
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Visio Symbols
>
> Hi Chad,
>
> Sorry to report that the symbols don't work too well for me. I've
> opened them as a stencil. When I pull them onto a page the left side is
> cut off (they are also VERY large).
>
> Keep trying, this is good stuff!
>
> Jon
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On
> > Behalf Of Chad Robinson
> > Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2004 12:56 AM
> > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Visio Symbols
> >
> >
> > -->
> >
> > Hello all,
> >
> > I have been working on a Visio symbol stencil set based on
> > Bob's CAD symbols -
> > Bob, I hope you don't mind. I'm doing 5-10 a day as time
> > permits, so this
> > first copy is just a test set to be sure it works, but I'd
> > appreciate it if a
> > few people would download the file and check it out. Visio
> > 2000 or higher is
> > required.
> >
> > If this works out I'll incorporate most of the major symbols
> > this weekend,
> > then do the rest a few at a time as time permits. Check back
> > periodically for
> > updates.
> >
> > http://www.lucubration.com/aero/
> >
> > Regards,
> > Chad
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Troy Scott" <tscott1217(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | "mother of all electric systems" or just add SD-8 |
Bob Nuckolls,
First, I apologize! I've just realized I've been mis-spelling your name.
In reading your book, I discovered the Fig's 17-5 and Z-14 dual battery,
dual alternator, split bus "mother of all electrical systems" design. The
clever name you've given this plan sounds like high praise to me. I assumed
that meant that's what I, as a serious pilot, should do. But I've since
come across more of your writings, particularly messages 3573, 3865, 2539,
3160, 4090 (and probably several others I haven't found yet) which all sound
like you really think the "all electric airplane on a budget" architecture
shown in Z-13 is very adequate and possibly preferable. It's certainly
lighter. As I've mentioned before I have the IO360 Lycoming with dual
ElectroAir EI and normal compression, and an all-electric (but not too
power-hungry) IFR panel. I thought I had decided to proceed with the
"mother of all...." plan, but if you think the "all electric on a budget"
plan is sufficient, that's what I'll do. Anxiously awaiting your reply to
this and the PM starter question I am
Troy Scott
tscott1217(at)bellsouth.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Troy Scott" <tscott1217(at)bellsouth.net> |
OK, guys, I'm sure I could find it, but it's late and I'm tired. What does
IBMM mean?
Troy
tscott1217(at)bellsouth.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Slade" <sladerj(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Narco VOA-5 indicator |
Hi Bob,
I've aquired a Narco VOA-5 LOC/Glide Slope indicator and I'd like to wire it
up for to a panel mount GPS such as the Garmin 430. The pinouts arn't in
you're list on the aeroelectric website or the Narco site. Where can I get
the pinouts and a connector?
Regards,
John Slade
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
>
>
>OK, guys, I'm sure I could find it, but it's late and I'm tired. What does
>IBMM mean?
>Troy
>tscott1217(at)bellsouth.net
Ignition battery management module - sometimes called
Aux Battery Management Module
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Troy Scott" <tscott1217(at)bellsouth.net> |
Troy,
Last week I had the problem you describe on the Nuckolls site. I just
installed Dual Lightspeed Ignitions on my Q200 and the New Skytec Starter
failed (It worked for many hours on mags just fine). Its repaired now and on
the way back. Rich at Skytec said the drive gear got bent on a kick back.
BTW the kick back wasn't bad and I wouldn't have expected to replace a
starter drive for it! Of course both Klaus and Rich are pointing fingers at
each other.
I think the problem that failed the final drive on my Skytec was a kickback
caused by low voltage. I have new Panasonic 17AH and 6.2AH batteries wired
directly to ignitions thru breakers as per Lightspeeds instructions. The
starter still cranks through a solenoid master to buss.
Lightspeed ignitions and ANY OTHER ELECTRONIC IGNITION screws up when they
get low voltage (5.5V in this case) or confused signals. I was starting on
the 17AH battery with both ignitions on and I think the cranking noise at
the battery sent bogus signals to the ignitions because the volts never
dropped below 7.9V even with the bent drive.
I have a friend who has a Glasair III (same battery setup cranking an IO540)
with duals and said his fix was to either start on the 17AH and use the 7.2
AH for ignition startup or start cranking on the 17AH with both ignitions
off, then turn on the "A" Ignition first (7.2 AH) then the "B" Ignition
(17AH). In his opinion this will happen to any electronic ignition that sees
strange noises at the buss or battery.
BTW the problem occurs with a B&C or Skytec. I'm using an ocilliscope this
time to see exactly where the problem was occurring. Skytec stated to the
FAA for STC approval of this 0200 starter that the in rush Amps is 180.
Good thing you are reviewing the problem before it becomes one for you. This
scenario has happened many times to these companies. You would think they
would warn the "NEW CUSTOMER" of the potential problems before they sell
their stuff with a smile.
Hope this helps. You can pass this along to the Nuckolls site if you wish.
Regards Jim Patillo N46JP Q200 Quickie
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jeff Hildebrand" <jhildebrand(at)crownequip.com> |
| Subject: | Replacement GNS-430 dsub pins |
We have a bent male dsub pin on our GNS-430 tray. I would like to
replace the pin, but don't know what part number the pin is and where to
get it.
Does anyone know what the part number is and where to get these pins?
Thanks,
Jeff Hildebrand
Lancair ES
http://lancair.northstartraffic.ca
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dan Branstrom" <danbranstrom(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Sky-Tec starter |
> Lightspeed ignitions and ANY OTHER ELECTRONIC IGNITION screws up when they
> get low voltage (5.5V in this case) or confused signals. I was starting on
> the 17AH battery with both ignitions on and I think the cranking noise at
> the battery sent bogus signals to the ignitions because the volts never
> dropped below 7.9V even with the bent drive.
>
> I have a friend who has a Glasair III (same battery setup cranking an
IO540)
> with duals and said his fix was to either start on the 17AH and use the
7.2
> AH for ignition startup or start cranking on the 17AH with both ignitions
> off, then turn on the "A" Ignition first (7.2 AH) then the "B" Ignition
> (17AH). In his opinion this will happen to any electronic ignition that
sees
> strange noises at the buss or battery.
I fly with someone who has dual electronic ignitions on their Lancair 360.
They were experiencing kickback on starting, requiring the replacement of
the starter gear. (Easily done at a local automobile electrical repair
business.)
When I volunteered to change the starter for them, it turned out that the
starter was loose. Putting the starter under the load of starting caused
the circuit ground to be interrupted just enough to cause a non-ignition
kickback.
After reinstalling the rebuilt starter, making sure that no ignition was on
the main battery solved all kickback problems.
Dan Branstrom
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Troy Scott" <tscott1217(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | radio station license |
Gentlemen,
Slightly off topic, maybe, but I know this vast repository of brainpower
will provide the answer: My SL30 installation instructions say I may need a
radio station license. I thought this requirement was eliminated in the mid
90s. Facts?
Regards,
Troy
tscott1217(at)bellsouth.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dan Branstrom" <danbranstrom(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Re: radio station license |
From the May 10, 2002 EAA e-Hotline:
Q & A: Question of the Week
Question For Aviation Information Services:
I understand that it is a legal requirement to carry documents in a
U.S.-registered certified aircraft. The mnemonic I recall is "ARROW":
Airworthiness Certificate
Registration Certificate
Radio Certificate
Owners Handbook (POH)
Weight & Balance
Is the same list also legally required for a homebuilt experimental?
Answer: Yes, the basic requirement for on-board aircraft paperwork is the
same for all U.S. registered aircraft, regardless of certification category.
The basic list is as follows:
A - Airworthiness Certificate. In the case of an experimental aircraft, this
requirement includes not only the certificate itself, but also the operating
limitations document that was issued along with (and as a part of) the
airworthiness certificate.
R - Registration. This refers to the FAA registration card (FAA Form
8050-3).
R - Radio Station License. This is no longer required for domestic U.S.
operations. However, if you plan to fly across international borders, you
must have one.
O - Operating Limitations. This includes not only an FAA approved Pilot
Operating Handbook (if there is one for your aircraft) but also any other
required documents, markings, and/or placards specified in the aircraft's
type certificate. In the case of an experimental aircraft, this is another
reference to the operating limitations document that was issued along with
the airworthiness certificate, along with any placards or markings required
by the FARs.
W - Weight and Balance. A copy of the most current weight and balance info,
including empty weight center of gravity (CG), fore and aft CG limits, and
arms for all loading points (seats, fuel, baggage, etc.).
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | klehman(at)albedo.net |
| Subject: | Re: Over-voltage, etc |
Bob
Well knock me over with a feather! I separated the connections on my
automotive starter, and the arc from the solenoid is indeed much larger
than the arc from the motor when I make and break the connections.
Thank you very much for spending the time to answer this and my previous
questions. Together with rereading your book and web page about spikes,
and other peoples contributions here, my concerns have all been
addressed (well - for now anyway ;) ) When the answers are not what one
is expecting, it makes all learning much more fun!
Ken
> Motors are not as inductive as you might think. Recall the
> discussions on motor performance a few weeks ago. 12v motors
> don't run on 12v, they run on the DIFFERENCE between applied
> voltage (12v) and counter emf (several volts below applied).
> When you unhook a running motor, the only "kick" you get
> is from a very small amount of leakage inductance . . . the
> energies are small and no-lethal to other components in your
> system.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dave Morris <dave(at)davemorris.com> |
| Subject: | Re: radio station license |
According to the latest BFR review manual from the FAA, the acronym is now
AROW and eliminates the radio station license requirement.
Dave Morris
At 02:25 PM 1/4/2004, you wrote:
>
>
> >From the May 10, 2002 EAA e-Hotline:
>
>Q & A: Question of the Week
>Question For Aviation Information Services:
>I understand that it is a legal requirement to carry documents in a
>U.S.-registered certified aircraft. The mnemonic I recall is "ARROW":
>Airworthiness Certificate
>Registration Certificate
>Radio Certificate
>Owners Handbook (POH)
>Weight & Balance
>Is the same list also legally required for a homebuilt experimental?
>
>Answer: Yes, the basic requirement for on-board aircraft paperwork is the
>same for all U.S. registered aircraft, regardless of certification category.
>The basic list is as follows:
>
>A - Airworthiness Certificate. In the case of an experimental aircraft, this
>requirement includes not only the certificate itself, but also the operating
>limitations document that was issued along with (and as a part of) the
>airworthiness certificate.
>
>R - Registration. This refers to the FAA registration card (FAA Form
>8050-3).
>
>R - Radio Station License. This is no longer required for domestic U.S.
>operations. However, if you plan to fly across international borders, you
>must have one.
>
>O - Operating Limitations. This includes not only an FAA approved Pilot
>Operating Handbook (if there is one for your aircraft) but also any other
>required documents, markings, and/or placards specified in the aircraft's
>type certificate. In the case of an experimental aircraft, this is another
>reference to the operating limitations document that was issued along with
>the airworthiness certificate, along with any placards or markings required
>by the FARs.
>
>W - Weight and Balance. A copy of the most current weight and balance info,
>including empty weight center of gravity (CG), fore and aft CG limits, and
>arms for all loading points (seats, fuel, baggage, etc.).
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chad Robinson <crobinson(at)rfgonline.com> |
| Subject: | Visio Symbols - v1 released |
As before, this can be downloaded from http://www.lucubration.com/aero
Regards,
Chad
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Over-voltage, etc |
>
>Bob
>
>Well knock me over with a feather! I separated the connections on my
>automotive starter, and the arc from the solenoid is indeed much larger
>than the arc from the motor when I make and break the connections.
>
>Thank you very much for spending the time to answer this and my previous
>questions. Together with rereading your book and web page about spikes,
>and other peoples contributions here, my concerns have all been
>addressed (well - for now anyway ;) ) When the answers are not what one
>is expecting, it makes all learning much more fun!
I'll try to get some data from a B&C (series-wound field) starter.
I KNOW that leakage inductance in a PM starter is VERY small . . .
if there are any residual energies capable of being a nuisance,
it will come from a all wired magnet motor.
I'm planning on expanding the spikes article presently published
on the website to include this new data.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics(at)rv8.ch> |
>
>Sorry, the first file must have been too big (over 1M) and did not show up
>with the e-mail. I have zipped it and attached it to this e-mail. If it
>doesn't come across this time, I'm not sure what the problem is. The file
>contains over 50 visio symbols converted from AeroElectric CAD drawings.
I've put this set on my web site. http://rv8.ch/files/
There are both visio 5 and visio 2003 versions. Those with
4.5 might try the visio 5 set.
These were sent to me by Steve - thanks!
--
Mickey Coggins
http://www.rv8.ch/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Werner Schneider" <wernerschneider(at)compuserve.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Visio Symbols |
Seems Visio 2002 can not open the 2003 stencils =(;o((
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mickey Coggins" <mick-matronics(at)rv8.ch>
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Visio Symbols
>
>
> >
> >Sorry, the first file must have been too big (over 1M) and did not show
up
> >with the e-mail. I have zipped it and attached it to this e-mail. If it
> >doesn't come across this time, I'm not sure what the problem is. The
file
> >contains over 50 visio symbols converted from AeroElectric CAD drawings.
>
> I've put this set on my web site. http://rv8.ch/files/
> There are both visio 5 and visio 2003 versions. Those with
> 4.5 might try the visio 5 set.
>
> These were sent to me by Steve - thanks!
>
>
> --
> Mickey Coggins
> http://www.rv8.ch/
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics(at)rv8.ch> |
| Subject: | Re: Visio Symbols |
Welcome to the wonderful world of yearly Microsoft upgrades!
My advice - buy Microsoft stock, so every time you have
to spend money with them it won't hurt as much. :-)
The Visio 5 version of the file should work with all
versions of Visio. It works with my Visio 2000 version.
>
>Seems Visio 2002 can not open the 2003 stencils =(;o((
>> I've put this set on my web site. http://rv8.ch/files/
>> There are both visio 5 and visio 2003 versions. Those with
>> 4.5 might try the visio 5 set.
--
Mickey Coggins
http://www.rv8.ch/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Danielson" <johnd(at)wlcwyo.com> |
| Subject: | Testing a strobe |
I think I have a bad strobe. How do you test a strobe bub.
I checked the power supply, I have 230+ volts at the red wire and neg 0
on the white. I am assuming the black is ground.
Appreciate any help.
John L. Danielson
307-266-2524
johnd(at)wlcwyo.com
WLC, Inc.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Scott Diffenbaugh" <diff(at)foothill.net> |
| Subject: | FW: Continuation of Thread: Pondering changing from |
Z-13 to Z-12
Scott Diffenbaugh
diff(at)foothill.net
-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Diffenbaugh [mailto:diff(at)foothill.net]
Subject: Pondering changing from Z-13 to Z-12
Bob,
>On Z-12, you responded to a previous post that if the bat contactor fails,
>the E bus will be operating off of battery only. Can I hook the SD20's B
>lead to the battery side of the contactor and it's field to the bat bus?
That's a long, always hot feed wire. Not sanitary but then, it's
YOUR OBAM airplane.
For my continued education, can you elaborate on why it's not sanitary?
The 10AWG B lead would be about 12" long with a 20A ANL current limiter at
the contactor. If the B lead wire or SD-20 shorts, wouldn't the current
limiter open, saving the battery, just like the fusible link between the
contactor and SD-8 on Z-13 (while in backup mode)? Or might there be
leakage through the backup devices, draining the battery after shutdown?
>Would this give me the best of all worlds, ie with contactor closed, retain
>autoswitching and all busses? With contactor open, keep the battery
charged
>while operating on the E bus, ie somewhat the same idea as Z-13? If this
is
>ok, what would be a reasonable design load for the E bus?
Contactor failure is rare. Probability of contactor failure during
instances where high endurance bus loads are necessary are even
more rare. If that's a major concern for you, I'd consider Z-12, dual
battery contactors, with SD-20+FAT altenrator and eliminate the
e-bus entirely. With 20A of standby power, there's no probability
of wanting to operate battery-only and the value of a dual-feed
e-bus is diminished.
This has a nice ring to it! Looks like it eliminates my contactor failure
concerns, my always hot B lead issue above, provides dual feed to the bus,
retains autoswitching, eliminates the extra complexity of the E bus, gives
the pilot choices in what devices to unload during backup (until overload
light stops flashing, right?). There has to be a catch????---besides $ &
weight.
If I go with dual contactors, & eliminate the E-bus, what failure modes (if
any) might I encounter during flight which would require me to open both
contactors?
Would the contactors be wired in parallel, ie one simply backs up the other
by jumping the fat wire terminals and replacing the existing 1-3 AUX
alternator switch with another 2-3 master switch?
This may sound like overkill, but any merit to using 3 position master
switches like on Z-13 and reset only field breakers? Or stick with 2
position switches and pull breakers? (I guess I am asking if with dual
contactors, there may be a need to open either field without opening its
contactor?)
PS: To help me with my decision whether to go with the SD20, do you
estimate weeks of months before you have some test results & direction on
the SD-8 voltage regulator concerns?
Thank you! Scott RV7A
Scott Diffenbaugh
diff(at)foothill.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Narco VOA-5 indicator |
>
>Hi Bob,
>I've aquired a Narco VOA-5 LOC/Glide Slope indicator and I'd like to wire it
>up for to a panel mount GPS such as the Garmin 430. The pinouts arn't in
>you're list on the aeroelectric website or the Narco site. Where can I get
>the pinouts and a connector?
My library doesn't include the VOA-5. Is there an avionics
shop nearby? Many times, these shops have an extensive library
and will allow you to copy data for little or no cost. They
may also be able to support you with low quantity purchases
of harness parts.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "George" <gtb(at)georgesmail.com> |
, "Albertson Family" ,
, ,
"Adriel Heisey" , <80wsax2(at)tenlink.com>,
, "Brian Wade" ,
"Brian Marshall" , "Blane Cox" ,
"Billie Dreistadt" ,
"Bass Cpl Collin E" , ,
"barnstormers.com admin"
| Subject: | Ref: Mystic River |
----- Original Message -----
From: Judy M. Neff
Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2004 6:53 PM
To: Undisclosed Recipients
Subject: Fw: Mystic River, about a new movie from a former Vietnam U.S.
Marine
Subject: Fw: Mystic River, about a new movie from a former Vietnam U.S.
Marine
--------------------------------------------------
Mystic River, the new movie being released this Wednesday is starring
Sean Penn and Tim Robbins who have been known to spew hate speech against
our current President, assaulting his character for doing what he is
attempting to do with the war on terror, to protect Americans from further
attack. Which has been very successful so far. These 2 liberal actors have
sided with Saddam Hussain and Osama Bin Laden and against our own country,
as demonstrated by Penn's going to Iraq prior to the war in protest of our
pending attack to remove the terrorist regime of Saddam Hussain, saying that
we have no right to attack innocent people and that it was the Bush
administration that is starting this war. Let us not forget 9/11/2001. I
figure I have no way to let the liberals in Hollywood know that they are
just actors....and not representative of mainstream America, by myself. But
if each one of us route this note to all of your friends who support our
troops and the administration, and make sure that they do not goto this
movie. Encourage all you know......not to go to it. By doing this.....these
actors won't be able to get a job. Look what it did for Alec Baldwin's
career! He's a washed up actor that watches his mouth these days. We have 2
days until this movie starts. Let the boycott begin. Route this to every
loyal patriotic person you know and stay away from this movie with these
anti-American activists. These are 2 very outspoken hate ministers and we
can make a difference.
IT'S WHAT WE "DO" THAT COUNTS, NOT WHAT WE INTEND TO DO!
SEMPER FI
228 YEARS
DOING IT THE RIGHT WAY
UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS NOVEMBER 10, 1775
-------------------------------------------
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric Ruttan" <ericruttan(at)chartermi.net> |
, ,
"Albertson Family" , ,
"Adriel Heisey" , <80wsax2(at)tenlink.com>,
, "Brian Wade" ,
"Brian Marshall" , "Blane Cox" ,
"Billie Dreistadt" ,
"Bass Cpl Collin E" , ,
"barnstormers.com admin"
| Subject: | Re: Ref: Mystic River |
Evil triumphs when good men do nothing
Edmund Burke
In that vein I rebuke the sender for his in appropriate political rhetoric
that is as insightful as he is couth. The many lies and deceptions
contained herein will go unaddressed.
----- Original Message -----
From: "George" <gtb(at)georgesmail.com>
; "Albertson Family" ;
; ; "Adriel Heisey"
; <80wsax2(at)tenlink.com>; ;
"Brian Wade" ; "Brian Marshall" ;
"Blane Cox" ; "Billie Dreistadt"
; "Bass Cpl Collin E" ;
; "barnstormers.com admin"
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Ref: Mystic River
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Judy M. Neff
> Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2004 6:53 PM
> To: Undisclosed Recipients
> Subject: Fw: Mystic River, about a new movie from a former Vietnam U.S.
> Marine
>
>
> Subject: Fw: Mystic River, about a new movie from a former Vietnam U.S.
> Marine
> --------------------------------------------------
> Mystic River, the new movie being released this Wednesday is starring
> Sean Penn and Tim Robbins who have been known to spew hate speech against
> our current President, assaulting his character for doing what he is
> attempting to do with the war on terror, to protect Americans from further
> attack. Which has been very successful so far. These 2 liberal actors have
> sided with Saddam Hussain and Osama Bin Laden and against our own country,
> as demonstrated by Penn's going to Iraq prior to the war in protest of our
> pending attack to remove the terrorist regime of Saddam Hussain, saying
that
> we have no right to attack innocent people and that it was the Bush
> administration that is starting this war. Let us not forget 9/11/2001. I
> figure I have no way to let the liberals in Hollywood know that they are
> just actors....and not representative of mainstream America, by myself.
But
> if each one of us route this note to all of your friends who support our
> troops and the administration, and make sure that they do not goto this
> movie. Encourage all you know......not to go to it. By doing
this.....these
> actors won't be able to get a job. Look what it did for Alec Baldwin's
> career! He's a washed up actor that watches his mouth these days. We have
2
> days until this movie starts. Let the boycott begin. Route this to every
> loyal patriotic person you know and stay away from this movie with these
> anti-American activists. These are 2 very outspoken hate ministers and we
> can make a difference.
>
> IT'S WHAT WE "DO" THAT COUNTS, NOT WHAT WE INTEND TO DO!
>
> SEMPER FI
> 228 YEARS
> DOING IT THE RIGHT WAY
> UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS NOVEMBER 10, 1775
>
> -------------------------------------------
>
>
> ---
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> just add SD-8 |
| Subject: | Re: "mother of all electric systems" or |
just add SD-8
just add SD-8
>
>
>Bob Nuckolls,
>
>First, I apologize! I've just realized I've been mis-spelling your name.
No biggie . . . I answer to all of the above . . .
>In reading your book, I discovered the Fig's 17-5 and Z-14 dual battery,
>dual alternator, split bus "mother of all electrical systems" design. The
>clever name you've given this plan sounds like high praise to me. I assumed
>that meant that's what I, as a serious pilot, should do.
Z-14 is the system of choice for airplanes like a Lancair IVP
with dual everything and a pilot that's comfortable with
spending lots of time in weather that most of us avoid. This
is the style of electrical system that SHOULD be in airplanes
like Kingairs and Beechjets but isn't.
Z-14 can can be implemented under reasonable cost and weight
budgets compared to contemporary certified ships . . so it's
not necessarily contra-indicated for the builder who wants
the best . . .
> But I've since
>come across more of your writings, particularly messages 3573, 3865, 2539,
>3160, 4090 (and probably several others I haven't found yet) which all sound
>like you really think the "all electric airplane on a budget" architecture
>shown in Z-13 is very adequate and possibly preferable. It's certainly
>lighter.
Your sense of my thinking is correct. What we need to consider
is that the vast majority of builders bring a lot of baggage
with them from the experience (and hyperbole) from their membership
in the certified world. Remember that a large percentage of
dark-n-stormy night stories in the journals deal with electrical
system adventures -AND- they're always about system designs
and hardware with a PROVEN lousy track record with respect to
modern hardware.
Simply fitting the certified ship with a ND alternator
and well-maintained RG battery would probably negate most
of the dark-n-stormy night stories without having to
alter architecture at all. Add the E-bus and we'd
wipe out all but a few of the nail-biters that read so
well in front of a warm fire on a winter evening.
Adding a substantial second engine driven power source
to craft the two-layer electrical system depicted in
Z-13 offers outstanding system reliability numbers
because of inherent tolerance to most common failures.
> As I've mentioned before I have the IO360 Lycoming with dual
>ElectroAir EI and normal compression, and an all-electric (but not too
>power-hungry) IFR panel. I thought I had decided to proceed with the
>"mother of all...." plan, but if you think the "all electric on a budget"
>plan is sufficient, that's what I'll do. Anxiously awaiting your reply to
>this and the PM starter question I am
Do your load analysis and convince YOURSELF that 8A
of continuous second-source power will keep the E-bus
alive indefinitely so that battery reserves are held
for approach to landing phase. If this exercise yields
attractive numbers . . . then I believe you have
all the information you need to make the choice
with understanding and resulting comfort.
Now, this still leaves some lingering questions
as to the physics of heat rejection for the SD-8's
regulator. I have a new regulator on the desk in
front of me courtesy of B&C . . . I'll try to get
started on the study this week. In any case, if
the current SD-8 regulator is found wanting, there
WILL be a suitable alternative available soon that
will make sure Z-13 is not fitted with hidden
shortcomings.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Testing a strobe |
>
>I think I have a bad strobe. How do you test a strobe bub.
>I checked the power supply, I have 230+ volts at the red wire and neg 0
>on the white. I am assuming the black is ground.
>Appreciate any help.
Wwap the non-working tube with one that is. See if the problem
stays with the bulb assembly or with the location on the airplane.
If you have a 'scope . . . check to see if you have a healthy
trigger pulse appearing on the white wire . . . it will be very
short but should be on the order of several hundred volts.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John Danielson" <johnd(at)wlcwyo.com> |
| Subject: | Testing a strobe |
Can I check the power supply with a voltage-OHM METER?
John L. Danielson
307-266-2524
johnd(at)wlcwyo.com
WLC, Inc.
-----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: Re: AeroElectric-List: Testing a strobe
>
>I think I have a bad strobe. How do you test a strobe bub.
>I checked the power supply, I have 230+ volts at the red wire and neg 0
>on the white. I am assuming the black is ground.
>Appreciate any help.
Wwap the non-working tube with one that is. See if the problem
stays with the bulb assembly or with the location on the airplane.
If you have a 'scope . . . check to see if you have a healthy
trigger pulse appearing on the white wire . . . it will be very
short but should be on the order of several hundred volts.
Bob . . .
==
==
==
==
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charles Brame <charleyb(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | MP3 input to panel mounted intercom |
Bob,
My SL-10 does have the "music input." My question is: Can I wire MP3 or
CD player headphone output directly to the "music input?"
Charlie Brame
RV-6A N11CB
San Antonio
---------------------------
>
> From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: MP3 input to panel mounted intercom
>
>
> >
> >
> >Bob, et.al.,
> >
> >I want to use an MP3 player through my SL-10MS intercom. The intercom
> >has stereo music input wiring, but I am a loss as to how to wire a MP3
> >player to it.
> >
> >Most of the MP3 players (and CD players) I have looked at only have an
> >output for headphones. As I understand it, you should not hook headphone
> >or speaker output directly to an intercom input.
> >
> >How should a generic MP3 player, or any other music source, be connected
> >to a panel intercom system?
>
> If your panel intercom is does not feature a "music input"
> then it's going to take some experimentation . . . or you
> can add a audio isolation/mixer amplifier to your system
> as described in:
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/AEC/9009/9009-700D.pdf
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Avionics Shop in OK |
I need to get some avionics work done (installs) in a production airplane.
Does anyone have a recommendation for someone in Northeast Oklahoma?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Jurotich <mjurotich(at)hst.nasa.gov> apology |
| Subject: | Re: LR3C-14 low volts warning light - |
apology
apology
Thank you Phil. My problem is the light bulb is recessed in the holder and
I did not build the airplane. If I had some spare bulbs I would risk
breaking the bulb by using pliers. I am also not familiar with what the
base of a bayonet bulb looks like. These are suppose to 10,000 hour
bulbs. It connected with 22 gage wire. I was thinking of hollowing out a
pencil eraser to see if I could push and turn. The question is
serious. If the bulb is burned out I would switch with the power on bulb
since I much prefer a low voltage warning. The Feb panel rebuild to IFR
capable get LED warning lights.
Matthew M. Jurotich
NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center
JWST ISIM Systems Engineer
m/c : 443
e-mail mailto: mjurotich(at)hst.nasa.gov
phone : 301-286-5919
fax : 301-286-7021
JWST URL: <http://ngst1.gsfc.nasa.gov>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Phil Collins" <philc1(at)ix.netcom.com> |
| Subject: | LR3C-14 low volts warning light |
Although not obvious from the appearance of the (yellow) lens, the base
of the bulb is threaded like a miniature household light bulb, so it
actually screws into the holder.
If you get the bulb out, you can also check to see if the holder is
getting power and check continuity to the regulator. One side of the
holder goes to a main bus fuse. The other side of the holder goes to
the regulator. (Pin5?)
I, too, like LEDs for their reliability and used them for the rest of my
panel indicators (some of them are ultra-bright LEDs). I retained the
yellow low-voltage warning lamp that we're discussing for obervability
reasons. It really gets my attention! Because I have dual electronic
ignition and a single alternator, it is important that the low-voltage
warning can draw my attention from what ever task I'm performing. My
suggestion is to get the indicator working so you can see how you like
it before you replace it with an LED.
I don't have a photo of the bulb. The photos of the bulbs on the B & C
website are too small to be of use, but my guess is that B & C
www.bandcspecialty.com could set you up with a replacement bulb for a
very few dollars.
Good luck,
Phil
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Matt
Jurotich apology
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: LR3C-14 low volts warning light
Thank you Phil. My problem is the light bulb is recessed in the holder
and
I did not build the airplane. If I had some spare bulbs I would risk
breaking the bulb by using pliers. I am also not familiar with what the
base of a bayonet bulb looks like. These are suppose to 10,000 hour
bulbs. It connected with 22 gage wire. I was thinking of hollowing out
a
pencil eraser to see if I could push and turn. The question is
serious. If the bulb is burned out I would switch with the power on
bulb
since I much prefer a low voltage warning. The Feb panel rebuild to IFR
capable get LED warning lights.
Matthew M. Jurotich
NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center
JWST ISIM Systems Engineer
m/c : 443
e-mail mailto: mjurotich(at)hst.nasa.gov
phone : 301-286-5919
fax : 301-286-7021
JWST URL: <http://ngst1.gsfc.nasa.gov>
==
==
==
==
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming(at)sigecom.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Replacement GNS-430 dsub pins |
Try this:
http://www.bandc.biz/cgi-bin/ez-catalog/cat_display.cgi?24X358218#s604p
You will need the male pin. If it happens again, you probably have a bad
female pin in that slot. You will need extract tool to get old bent one
out. And you will need the little $40 crimper that they sell for crimping
the new pin before inserting in the d-sub.
Regards,
Indiana Larry, RV7 Tip-up TMX-O-360 ACS2002 Dynon CNS430 Digitrak
On Finish Kit and FWF
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Hildebrand" <jhildebrand(at)crownequip.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Replacement GNS-430 dsub pins
>
> We have a bent male dsub pin on our GNS-430 tray. I would like to
> replace the pin, but don't know what part number the pin is and where to
> get it.
>
>
> Does anyone know what the part number is and where to get these pins?
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> Jeff Hildebrand
>
> Lancair ES
>
> http://lancair.northstartraffic.ca
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Hibbing" <n744bh(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: LR3C-14 low volts warning light - apology |
Matt,
I haven't been following this thread closely but if the bulb has enough
clearance from the housing a piece of vynil tubing with an i.d. about the
same as the bulb diameter can be used as a "soft" wrench for those places
where fingers won't go. You might need to experiment with the size to find
something that will grip the bulb firmly. It should work with either
bayonet or screw type bases if the bulb isn't seated too tightly.
Bill
Glasair
----- Original Message -----
From: "Matt Jurotich apology" <mjurotich(at)hst.nasa.gov>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: LR3C-14 low volts warning light - apology
apology
>
> Thank you Phil. My problem is the light bulb is recessed in the holder
and
> I did not build the airplane. If I had some spare bulbs I would risk
> breaking the bulb by using pliers. >
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BAKEROCB(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | LR3C-14 low voltage light |
AeroElectric-List message previously posted by: Matt Jurotich
<>
1/5/2004
Hello Matthew, You don't say which fuse or CB you are using to feed the LVL.
If that fuse or CB is out the light will not come on.
There is a related issue on choosing which fuse or CB to feed the LVL. I'll
copy below a previous posting on this subject that may be of interest to you.
If you wish to follow up just search for LR3B-14 Voltage Reg Function.
'OC' Baker, Builder of KIS TR-1 #116 4/14/97 - 11/17/03
In a message dated 05/14/2002 2:51:59 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
aeroelectric-list-digest(at)matronics.com <> writes:
<< When the LR-3 regulator senses low voltage and illuminates the low
voltage warning light, can the light be shut off by pulling the field
breaker (or opening the Alternator switch if you have one)? In a single
alternator system it would be nice to be able to extinguish the light
after you recognize the low voltage situation.... --Mark Navratil >>
5/14/2002
Hello Mark, Which breaker you pull would be a function of which breaker you
are using to power the LV light. The LR-3 just completes a circuit to ground to
activate the light.
If you've wired the LR-3 as per B&C instructions pulling the field breaker or
opening the alternator switch will not turn off the light.
There was a short thread a while back on which is the "right" breaker to use
to power the LV light. The B&C instructions say to use the bus voltage sense
breaker feeding pin 3 of the LR-3 to also feed the the LV light. I chose to do
otherwise for reasons given in the thread. I'll resurrect it for you if you
are interested.
My approach would be along biblical lines: "If thine LV light offend thee,
pluck it out" ie just loosen or remove the bulb. Just don't forget to screw it
back in before next flight.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)BowenAero.com> |
What if the OVM fails to do it's thing during the in-plane test? I'll
subject everything on the master buss to abnormally high voltage.
Right? Is this a concern? Should I pull all the fuses from the master
fuse block first?
Thanks,
-
Larry Bowen
Larry(at)BowenAero.com
http://BowenAero.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert L. Nuckolls, III [mailto:bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2003 1:14 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: OVM
>
>
> -->
>
> >-->
> >
> >I have Bob's OVM-14 Over Voltage Protection module for my internally
> >regulated alternator installed in my plane. What's the
> easiest way to
> >test it & verify I've installed it correctly?
>
> Testing is best accomplished on the bench but there's a
> technique described in:
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/crowbar.pdf
> for testing in the airplane too.
>
> Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
>
>What if the OVM fails to do it's thing during the in-plane test? I'll
>subject everything on the master buss to abnormally high voltage.
>Right?
you betch . . .
> Is this a concern?
yes . . .
> Should I pull all the fuses from the master
>fuse block first?
yes . . .
I prefer to do a bench test on the OVM but it can
be done in the airplane after addressing the concerns
you've identified.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RSamuelson(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | External regulator on a Van's Alternator |
What is involved in modifying a Van's internally regulated 60A alternator to
accept field supply from a LR3C?
Tnaks for the help.
Roy Samuelson
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)BowenAero.com> |
Alright. Thanks. Maybe that would be a good footnote to have on the
testing schematic....Or is it already there and I missed it?
-
Larry Bowen
Larry(at)BowenAero.com
http://BowenAero.com
Robert L. Nuckolls, III said:
>
>
>>
>>
>>What if the OVM fails to do it's thing during the in-plane test? I'll
>>subject everything on the master buss to abnormally high voltage.
>>Right?
>
> you betch . . .
>
>> Is this a concern?
>
> yes . . .
>
>> Should I pull all the fuses from the master
>>fuse block first?
>
> yes . . .
>
> I prefer to do a bench test on the OVM but it can
> be done in the airplane after addressing the concerns
> you've identified.
>
> Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: External regulator on a Van's Alternator |
>
>What is involved in modifying a Van's internally regulated 60A alternator to
>accept field supply from a LR3C?
>
>Tnaks for the help.
Unless you've successfully made this conversion on
several machines, I recommend you run it internally
regulated as shown in Z-24.
It takes some experience and tools to make the mod
and put it all back together with the same
degree serviceability as a factory assembled alternator.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: MP3 input to panel mounted intercom |
>
>
>Bob,
>
>My SL-10 does have the "music input." My question is: Can I wire MP3 or
>CD player headphone output directly to the "music input?"
>
>Charlie Brame
>RV-6A N11CB
>San Antonio
probably
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Replacement GNS-430 dsub pins |
>
>
>Try this:
>http://www.bandc.biz/cgi-bin/ez-catalog/cat_display.cgi?24X358218#s604p
>
>You will need the male pin. If it happens again, you probably have a bad
>female pin in that slot. You will need extract tool to get old bent one
>out. And you will need the little $40 crimper that they sell for crimping
>the new pin before inserting in the d-sub.
Measure the diameter of the male pin in question. If it's
0.040" or thereabouts, the pins stocked by B&C are what you
need. I memory serves me, the GNS radios use hi-density
d-sub pins which are smaller. They can be installed with
same crimper but use a different extraction tool.
I spent about 30 minutes trying to find some net-based
suppliers for the machined high-density pins but everyone
seems to be in love with the formed sheet metal pins.
You can get pins and extraction tools from Digikey.
I THINK the B&C BCT-1 tool will install these pins
but I've not tried it.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Testing a strobe |
>
>Can I check the power supply with a voltage-OHM METER?
>
>John L. Danielson
>307-266-2524
>johnd(at)wlcwyo.com
>WLC, Inc.
Only for the relatively steady state high votlage supply
that illuminates the gas in the tube. You'll need a 'scope
to check the trigger pulse.
Bob . . .
>-----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
>To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Testing a strobe
>
>
>
>
> >
> >I think I have a bad strobe. How do you test a strobe bub.
> >I checked the power supply, I have 230+ volts at the red wire and neg 0
> >on the white. I am assuming the black is ground.
> >Appreciate any help.
>
> Wwap the non-working tube with one that is. See if the problem
> stays with the bulb assembly or with the location on the airplane.
> If you have a 'scope . . . check to see if you have a healthy
> trigger pulse appearing on the white wire . . . it will be very
> short but should be on the order of several hundred volts.
>
> Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mark Steitle <msteitle(at)mail.utexas.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: External regulator on a Van's Alternator |
>
>What is involved in modifying a Van's internally regulated 60A alternator to
>accept field supply from a LR3C?
>
>Tnaks for the help.
>
>Roy Samuelson
Roy,
I went down this road a while back and managed to successfully convert both
of my alternators. I believe that I figured out an easy way to do the mod
necessary for external regualtion. E-mail me off-list if you want and I
will send you a step-by-step guide for doing this.
Mark S.
msteitle(at)mail.utexas.edu
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric Ruttan" <ericruttan(at)chartermi.net> |
| Subject: | Re: External regulator on a Van's Alternator |
Why don't you post it on the list so we all know and it is archived for
future reference?
----- Original Message -----
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: External regulator on a Van's Alternator
>
> >
> >What is involved in modifying a Van's internally regulated 60A alternator
to
> >accept field supply from a LR3C?
> >
> >Tnaks for the help.
> >
> >Roy Samuelson
> Roy,
> I went down this road a while back and managed to successfully convert
both
> of my alternators. I believe that I figured out an easy way to do the mod
> necessary for external regualtion. E-mail me off-list if you want and I
> will send you a step-by-step guide for doing this.
>
> Mark S.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Scott Diffenbaugh" <diff(at)foothill.net> |
| Subject: | Z-12 dual contactor questions |
Bob,
In my previous Z-12 question of hooking the SD-20 B lead to the battery
side of the contactor in case the contactor fails, you responded:
"That's a long, always hot feed wire. Not sanitary but then, it's
YOUR OBAM airplane."
For my continued education, can you elaborate on why it's not sanitary?
In my case, the 10AWG B lead would be about 12" long with a 20A ANL current
limiter at
the contactor. If the B lead wire or SD-20 shorts, wouldn't the current
limiter open, saving the battery? (Just like the fusible link between the
contactor and SD-8 on Z-13 while in backup mode)? Or is the problem that
there might be
leakage through the backup devices, draining the battery after shutdown?
You suggested as an alternative to consider dual contactors.
This has a nice ring to it! Looks like it eliminates my contactor failure
concerns, my always hot B lead issue above, provides dual feed to the bus,
retains autoswitching, eliminates the extra complexity of the E bus, gives
the pilot choices in what devices to unload during backup (until overload
light stops flashing, right?). There has to be a catch????---besides $ &
weight.
If I go with dual contactors, & eliminate the E-bus, what failure modes (if
any) might I encounter during flight which would require me to open both
contactors?
Would the contactors be wired in parallel, ie one simply backs up the other
by jumping the fat wire terminals and replacing the existing 1-3 AUX
alternator switch with another 2-3 master switch?
Thanks! Scott, RV7A
Scott Diffenbaugh
diff(at)foothill.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mark Steitle <msteitle(at)mail.utexas.edu> |
| Subject: | Modifying Internally Regulated Geo Alternator |
Since there seems to be a number of people that would like to read this,
I'm posting it to the list.
This is how I went about converting my Geo alternators. My a/c is being
wired per Z-14.
Mark S.
************************************
First remove the back cover, exposing the diode bridge, regulator assy. and
brush holder.
Second, remove the regulator and brush holder and throw the regulator assy
in the spare parts bin because it won't be needed.
Next remove the brush holder and fabricate a little brace/spacer from 1/8"
phenolic that will support the right side of the brush holder off the diode
bridge. This piece will be about 7/8" x 1/4" with a #8 hole in each end. Do
not make this piece out of metal or it will short out the diode bridge.
Also make up a jumper wire about three inches long with a ring terminal on
each end. One end will attach to the right terminal on the brush holder and
the other will attach to the alternator case (gnd.).
The other terminal on the brush holder will need a spacer under it to keep
the brushes aligned properly. The left brush will need to have the lead
wire un-soldered from the brush holder. The wire comes through the back of
the brush holder. Unsolder it, remove the brush and spring, and drill out
the hole just a bit to allow for a 4-6" long #20 wire with shrink tube to
fit snugly through the hole. Solder the #20 wire to the end of the braided
wire on the left brush. Now we're ready to reassemble the whole thing.
Pass the #20 wire through the hole drilled in the brush holder (from the
inside) and reinsert the spring and brush. Screw the brush holder back into
place, with a spacer washer under the left terminal.
The ground wire goes on the right terminal and attaches to a nearby screw
on the alternator case.
Feed the wire soldered to the left brush through a hole in the alternator
cover, with a grommet to prevent chaffing. Reinstall rear cover. This wire
will go to the "F" terminal of the external voltage regulator. I used a
generic Ford unit from a mid-seventies model. The S & A terminals of the
regulator tie together and get fed from the battery contactor/alternator
switch & 5 amp breaker on the panel. The "B" terminal on the alternator
goes to the battery contactor. The other terminal on the regulator isn't used.
I modified two alternators and they both work great. It takes about 30
minutes to do the modifications. All I need to do now is add a crowbar
over-voltage protector to each regulator and I'm set to go.
Hope this helps someone.
Mark S.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | single connector for instrument panel? Jabiru J400 |
| From: | "Scott, Ian" <ian_scott(at)rslcom.com.au> |
I think that I already know the answer to this question, however I am considering
installing a single connector between the firewall and the instrument panel
in my Jabiru, so that I can easily remove the panel from the plane, without disconnecting
all the switches on the panel, and the radios etc.
I know that it could be a point of failure, however I wonder how big this is, What
connector should I use?
(simple day VFR aircraft, that runs haply with master switch off, (self exciting
ignition).
Thanks
Ian Scott
----------------------------------------------------
RSL COM has an extensive and competitive range of
local and long distance call packages. We also
offer converged multimedia and data services through
our own state-of-the-art integrated voice & data network.
Visit http://www.rslcom.com.au to find out more.
This message is for the named person's use only.
Privileged/confidential information may be contained in
this message. If you are not the addressee indicated in
this message (or responsible for delivery of the message
to such person), you may not copy or deliver this
message to anyone. In such case, you should destroy
this message, and notify us immediately.
Any views expressed in this message are those of the
individual sender, except where the message states
otherwise and the sender is authorised to state them to
be the views of any such entity.
----------------------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Hebeard2(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Stein Bruch alive? |
Guys,
In November of last year Stein Bruch of Stein Air advertised on this list
some AK-450 ELTs for sale. I ordered one of these and sent Stein a check in early
December. Since then I have heard nothing. An e-mail sent December 30, 2003
remains unanswered.
The check I wrote has not yet cleared my bank. Now it appears his website is
down. Does anyone have any information regarding Stein?
Harley E. Beard
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Stein Bruch alive? |
Website:
http://www.steinair.com/
It has been up all this week, emailed and order and got a response in ten
minutes.
stein(at)steinair.com
Mailed the check today.... Hope I have better luck! : )
SteveD.
Europa A217
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Tasker <retasker(at)optonline.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Stein Bruch alive? |
The web site is definitely up and I ordered and received parts
(including my AK-450 ELT) a couple weeks ago.
I paid using Paypal, so maybe that speeded up things.
Dick Tasker, RV9A 90573
ScramIt(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>Website:
>http://www.steinair.com/
>It has been up all this week, emailed and order and got a response in ten
>minutes.
>stein(at)steinair.com
>Mailed the check today.... Hope I have better luck! : )
>
>SteveD.
>Europa A217
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James E. Clark" <james(at)nextupventures.com> |
| Subject: | Stein Bruch alive? |
I recently (yesterday) received email about a shipment of backordered items.
So I would say that all is alive and well.
James
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
> Hebeard2(at)aol.com
> Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2004 6:02 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Stein Bruch alive?
>
>
> Guys,
>
> In November of last year Stein Bruch of Stein Air advertised on this list
> some AK-450 ELTs for sale. I ordered one of these and sent Stein
> a check in early
> December. Since then I have heard nothing. An e-mail sent
> December 30, 2003
> remains unanswered.
>
> The check I wrote has not yet cleared my bank. Now it appears his
> website is
> down. Does anyone have any information regarding Stein?
>
> Harley E. Beard
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Glen Matejcek" <aerobubba(at)earthlink.net> |
Hi Bob-
Got a quick one for you. I'm getting deeper and deeper into the finer
details of my electrical sys, and just noted that you recommend a 20 to 50k
uFd cap to filter the SD-8, yet B&C only supplies a 10k uFd cap. Should I
be concerned? Comments / observations?
As ever, thanks for your time and expertise.
Glen Matejcek
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dave Morris <dave(at)davemorris.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: SD-8 cap |
The value isn't critical. The larger the value, the larger the charge it
can store and the more the cap will look like a "battery" in case the
battery isn't there.
Dave Morris
At 07:40 PM 1/6/2004, you wrote:
>
>
>Hi Bob-
>
>Got a quick one for you. I'm getting deeper and deeper into the finer
>details of my electrical sys, and just noted that you recommend a 20 to 50k
>uFd cap to filter the SD-8, yet B&C only supplies a 10k uFd cap. Should I
>be concerned? Comments / observations?
>
>As ever, thanks for your time and expertise.
>
>Glen Matejcek
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Hi There <rv90619(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Stein Bruch alive? |
Just last night I sent him an email about an order that he make a mistake on. About 15 minutes later he sent me an email back and the problem was resolved. I have dealt with the guy a couple of times and he's about the best I've dealt with over the internet, I'm sure it was something that just slipped through. His website was up just a few seconds ago when I checked: http://www.steinair.com/ email: stein@steinair.com
Good luck
Hebeard2(at)aol.com wrote:
Guys,
In November of last year Stein Bruch of Stein Air advertised on this list
some AK-450 ELTs for sale. I ordered one of these and sent Stein a check in early
December. Since then I have heard nothing. An e-mail sent December 30, 2003
remains unanswered.
The check I wrote has not yet cleared my bank. Now it appears his website is
down. Does anyone have any information regarding Stein?
Harley E. Beard
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Werner Schneider" <wernerschneider(at)compuserve.com> |
Hello Mickey,
still counting parts or trying to get the kit out of custom?
Werner
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: SD-8 cap |
>
>The value isn't critical. The larger the value, the larger the charge it
>can store and the more the cap will look like a "battery" in case the
>battery isn't there.
>
>Dave Morris
Dave is correct. B&C's drawings for recommended capacitor
does indeed call out a 10KuF cap but I think the only one
they sell is the S251D479 shown at
http://www.bandc.biz/cgi-bin/ez-catalog/cat_display.cgi?26X358218
which is 47KuF at 16V.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Single connector for instrument panel? |
>
>
>
>I think that I already know the answer to this question, however I am
>considering installing a single connector between the firewall and the
>instrument panel in my Jabiru, so that I can easily remove the panel from
>the plane, without disconnecting all the switches on the panel, and the
>radios etc.
>
>I know that it could be a point of failure, however I wonder how big this
>is, What connector should I use?
>
>(simple day VFR aircraft, that runs haply with master switch off, (self
>exciting ignition).
If it were my airplane, I'd use the D-sub connector with machined
crimp pins in every practical situation where a connector is desired.
For the application you're considering, I think the D-sub would
do just fine.
Electrical Issues:
For pins that carry continuous current over 3A, you can parallel
pins for increased capacity. Put a 6" piece of 22AWG into the
wire grip on every pin that gets paralleled with another pin. Bring
the pigtails together into a butt splice and continue on with
the larger wire. See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Parallel_Dsub_Pins//Parallel_Dsub_Pins.gif
Mechanical Issues:
If you've got a lot of eggs in the one basket, let's make it a
robust basket.
I'd use cable-to-cable connectors as shown in
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Parallel_Dsub_Pins/Dsub_Safety.jpg
Install hoods on both connectors to immobilize wires as they
exit the rear of the connector shell. As a general rule, we
don't use anything smaller than 8-32 screws for structural
attach . . . this is no exception. Instead of relying on the
standard 4-40 hardware that usually holds d-subs together,
use safety wire as shown to maintain connection. You could
use the stock hardware AND safety wire . . . but don't
do it without the safety wire.
Having said all this, there ARE connectors out there that
are "more suited" in the eyes of my contemporaries. Mil-C-38999
series connectors have a variety of pin combinations that
would lend themselves to a "cleaner" installation. These
will be much larger, MUCH more expensive and require a
variety of expensive tools for assembly. I'd certainly
use them in a Beechjet . . . but I think the baling-wire-
and-sheet-metal approach described here is a satisfactory
alternative.
Using the techniques described above, your odds of successful
and trouble free installation of connector in a high-value
wire bundle are very good.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rick Johnson <ricklj(at)silverstar.com> |
Could someone point me in the right direction? I would like to buy some
extra terminals (Molex terminal 4366-GL) for my Icom A200 radio. I need
to practice soldering/crimping before I start on the real thing. Does
anyone know of an outlet were I can purchase them? Thanks!
rick johnson
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rich Chiappe <service(at)skytecair.com> |
| Subject: | Starters: Sky-Tec/B&C/Magnaflite... Setting the Record |
Straight
On 1/3/200 Bob wrote Re: AeroElectric-List: Sky-Tec starter:
--> If getting the best starter wasn't an option for me, then
adding the run-on eliminator would be a good idea. Bob . . .
It was a lovely implication that the Sky-Tec PM starter wasn't the best for the
customer's application. A bold jab, Bob. It's too bad we can't keep things
on this board geared toward matters of fact and not opinion.
Here are some facts about Sky-Tec starters to help clear up some of the misconceptions
I've been reading on this board for close to a year (plus) now:
First of all, not all Sky-Tec starters are the same. In short, we manufacture
two basic types of Lycoming starter: Permanent Magnet "Flyweight(tm)" (LS & PM)
starters and wound-field "Hi-Torque" (HT and HTI) starters. Each has distinct
advantages and trade-offs. As has been noted on this board, the LS and PM
starters achieve their incredible weight savings (only 7.8 lbs) by utilizing
a permanent magnet motor. So while it offers incredible torque and unmatched
weight, the permanent magnet motor will draw more current than most on initial
in-rush (the split second required to get the starter motor turning initially).
This increased current draw is not a problem for the vast majority of aircraft
because most have electrical systems more than capable of the incremental
load (which explains why we've sold more LS/PM starters than any other). The
LS/PM utilize brass bushings and a plastic stationary gear and pivot arm which
some have implied make the starter less durable (metal must be better than plastic,
right?). Nothing could be further from the truth. In twelve years of
manufacturing lightweight starters, Sky-Tec has NEVER seen a brass bushing or
plastic stationary gear (or pivot arm) fail - NEVER - ZERO - ZILCH. We could
have engineered the use of heavier/more expensive all ball bearings/metal gears/metal
pivot arms, etc. to be sure. But why? The result would be a heavier
and more expensive starter. To us, that didn't make sense at the time and never
will. Bottom line: If your application is a weekend flyer who is sensitive
to cost and weight (and your aircraft electrical system is near par), the LS
& PM is nearly always the best starter for you. We have more than 20,000 LS/PM's
out there - they work very well and those that have them LOVE them in nearly
all cases (as evidenced in fact by the steady increase in their sales year
after year, their use as OEM starters on most aircraft and Lycoming factory).
The Sky-Tec Hi-Torque series of starters, on the other hand, utilize wound-field
motors that draw less current but tend to weigh just a little more than the
permanent magnet types (8.5 lbs for the HT and 9.4 lbs for the HTI - which is
1.7/0.8 lbs. lighter, respectively than the B&C). The HT/HTI's are all steel
construction and all ball bearing construction so please don't let someone tell
you that all "Sky-Tec starters" (generic/plural) use bushings and plastic parts.
Truth is some do and some don't, as it turns out. It depends on the intended
application of the particular model of starter. If rugged, steel construction
is required by your application (bush operators, helicopters, seaplanes,
charter operators, severe applications, etc.) then the HT and HTI are the way
to go.
If your application utilizes dual electronic ignitions (no impulse coupler or retard
points available) and sufficient provision has not been made for voltage
supply during initial starting, you will find the High-Torque Inline Lycoming
(HTI also known as the "NL" model) starter to be the best starter for your application.
Any starter, regardless of brand, can break on a kickback. Permanent
magnet starters may pull the voltage down below the ignition system's minimum
tolerance and could causing a ill-timed spark event. However, the High-Torque
inline both draws less current and has an internal kickback protection system
(field replaceable shear pin) that will enable you to avoid the damage and
expense of a broken starter or should a kickback occur, enable you to repair
your starter in the field while you fix your ignition timing/voltage problem.
As an aside, the High-Torque Inline Lycoming starter also sports a sleek, inline
form that allows it to fit applications that would otherwise preclude someone
from using any lightweight starter (RG Cessnas, A/C'd Pipers, etc.) making
it pretty much the only 'universal' lightweight starter capable of starting
just about any Lycoming-powered aircraft (-235 through -720). So if your application
is a tight fit (Cardinal RG, Falco, etc.), the HTI is the best starter
for you.
In addition, Sky-Tec also manufactures Continental and Franklin starters and tendencies
and features of one model do not necessarily translate across the line
to other models. Again, each is designed to be the best for a particular application
and may utilize different motor architectures, gear reduction and other
variables.
If we want to discuss which is "the best" general Lycoming starter in the industry,
Sky-Tec will gladly put our new High-Torque Inline Lycoming starter against
all comers for torque, ruggedness, low current draw, light weight, fit, features,
performance and price/value.
A note on Magnaflite regarding the question on a previous post. I would simply
caution that anyone considering purchasing a Magnaflite right now do some quick
research into their recent Bendix recall before buying into their "lightest/cheapest"
pitch. As far as I can tell, the Magnaflite will always be the cheapest
lightweight starter available because it is designed to be just that - the
cheapest to make. They do so by utilizing the same engagement method our grandfathers
used on their engines 50 years ago - the mechanical Bendix drive. Rarely
do motors/windings fail in starters. Typically the Bendix is the first
to go (most well before TBO). That's why Sky-Tec and B&C do not use Bendix drives.
Bendix failures account for probably 90% of "old style" starter failures
and they require constant maintenance and attention. In 2003, Kelly experienced
some problems with a supplier and suffered some issues with premature Bendix
failure. They seem to be addressing those problems and have been very up-front
with their customers from what we've heard. But the story is the same:
with a Bendix, it's not a function of "if" it's going to fail but "when" (then
again, to be fair, I guess ultimately the same is true of any mechanical device
- but our experience has proved without a doubt that electromechancal solenoid-engaged
drive will out perform the old Bendix by a long shot.
And finally, for all board posters that have questions/concerns about Sky-Tec starters,
please do not ever hesitate to call us and ask for me personally. I
try my best to tend to this board periodically but can only do so as I find time.
At our pace of sales, extra time is becoming rarer and rarer. I will try
to do so to keep up the quality of information available on this board as I can,
but if you prefer to get instant answers, please feel free to call me.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Here is how to get in touch with me:
- Rich Chiappe
Sky-Tec
800-476-7896
richc(at)skytecair.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Trudy Ettelson" <tettelso(at)socal.devry.edu> |
Setting the Record Straight
| Subject: | Re: Starters: Sky-Tec/B&C/Magnaflite... |
Setting the Record Straight
** Reply Requested When Convenient **
Please remove me from your list. I receive thousands of blind copies
from your list and others of its kind, which I don't need. I am an
English professor at DeVry University and am not in the aerospace
industry.> service(at)skytecair.com 01/07/04 10:10AM >>>
On 1/3/200 Bob wrote Re: AeroElectric-List: Sky-Tec starter:
--> If getting the best starter wasn't an option for me, then
adding the run-on eliminator would be a good idea. Bob . . .
It was a lovely implication that the Sky-Tec PM starter wasn't the best
for the customer's application. A bold jab, Bob. It's too bad we can't
keep things on this board geared toward matters of fact and not
opinion.
Here are some facts about Sky-Tec starters to help clear up some of the
misconceptions I've been reading on this board for close to a year
(plus) now:
First of all, not all Sky-Tec starters are the same. In short, we
manufacture two basic types of Lycoming starter: Permanent Magnet
"Flyweight(tm)" (LS & PM) starters and wound-field "Hi-Torque" (HT and
HTI) starters. Each has distinct advantages and trade-offs. As has
been noted on this board, the LS and PM starters achieve their
incredible weight savings (only 7.8 lbs) by utilizing a permanent magnet
motor. So while it offers incredible torque and unmatched weight, the
permanent magnet motor will draw more current than most on initial
in-rush (the split second required to get the starter motor turning
initially). This increased current draw is not a problem for the vast
majority of aircraft because most have electrical systems more than
capable of the incremental load (which explains why we've sold more
LS/PM starters than any other). The LS/PM utilize brass bushings and a
plastic stationary gear and pivot arm which some have implied make the
starter less durable (m!
etal must be better than plastic, right?). Nothing could be further
from the truth. In twelve years of manufacturing lightweight starters,
Sky-Tec has NEVER seen a brass bushing or plastic stationary gear (or
pivot arm) fail - NEVER - ZERO - ZILCH. We could have engineered the
use of heavier/more expensive all ball bearings/metal gears/metal pivot
arms, etc. to be sure. But why? The result would be a heavier and
more expensive starter. To us, that didn't make sense at the time and
never will. Bottom line: If your application is a weekend flyer who is
sensitive to cost and weight (and your aircraft electrical system is
near par), the LS & PM is nearly always the best starter for you. We
have more than 20,000 LS/PM's out there - they work very well and those
that have them LOVE them in nearly all cases (as evidenced in fact by
the steady increase in their sales year after year, their use as OEM
starters on most aircraft and Lycoming factory).
The Sky-Tec Hi-Torque series of starters, on the other hand, utilize
wound-field motors that draw less current but tend to weigh just a
little more than the permanent magnet types (8.5 lbs for the HT and 9.4
lbs for the HTI - which is 1.7/0.8 lbs. lighter, respectively than the
B&C). The HT/HTI's are all steel construction and all ball bearing
construction so please don't let someone tell you that all "Sky-Tec
starters" (generic/plural) use bushings and plastic parts. Truth is
some do and some don't, as it turns out. It depends on the intended
application of the particular model of starter. If rugged, steel
construction is required by your application (bush operators,
helicopters, seaplanes, charter operators, severe applications, etc.)
then the HT and HTI are the way to go.
If your application utilizes dual electronic ignitions (no impulse
coupler or retard points available) and sufficient provision has not
been made for voltage supply during initial starting, you will find the
High-Torque Inline Lycoming (HTI also known as the "NL" model) starter
to be the best starter for your application. Any starter, regardless of
brand, can break on a kickback. Permanent magnet starters may pull the
voltage down below the ignition system's minimum tolerance and could
causing a ill-timed spark event. However, the High-Torque inline both
draws less current and has an internal kickback protection system (field
replaceable shear pin) that will enable you to avoid the damage and
expense of a broken starter or should a kickback occur, enable you to
repair your starter in the field while you fix your ignition
timing/voltage problem. As an aside, the High-Torque Inline Lycoming
starter also sports a sleek, inline form that allows it to fit
applications that wo!
uld otherwise preclude someone from using any lightweight starter (RG
Cessnas, A/C'd Pipers, etc.) making it pretty much the only 'universal'
lightweight starter capable of starting just about any Lycoming-powered
aircraft (-235 through -720). So if your application is a tight fit
(Cardinal RG, Falco, etc.), the HTI is the best starter for you.
In addition, Sky-Tec also manufactures Continental and Franklin
starters and tendencies and features of one model do not necessarily
translate across the line to other models. Again, each is designed to
be the best for a particular application and may utilize different motor
architectures, gear reduction and other variables.
If we want to discuss which is "the best" general Lycoming starter in
the industry, Sky-Tec will gladly put our new High-Torque Inline
Lycoming starter against all comers for torque, ruggedness, low current
draw, light weight, fit, features, performance and price/value.
A note on Magnaflite regarding the question on a previous post. I
would simply caution that anyone considering purchasing a Magnaflite
right now do some quick research into their recent Bendix recall before
buying into their "lightest/cheapest" pitch. As far as I can tell, the
Magnaflite will always be the cheapest lightweight starter available
because it is designed to be just that - the cheapest to make. They do
so by utilizing the same engagement method our grandfathers used on
their engines 50 years ago - the mechanical Bendix drive. Rarely do
motors/windings fail in starters. Typically the Bendix is the first to
go (most well before TBO). That's why Sky-Tec and B&C do not use
Bendix drives. Bendix failures account for probably 90% of "old style"
starter failures and they require constant maintenance and attention.
In 2003, Kelly experienced some problems with a supplier and suffered
some issues with premature Bendix failure. They seem to be addressing
those prob!
lems and have been very up-front with their customers from what we've
heard. But the story is the same: with a Bendix, it's not a function
of "if" it's going to fail but "when" (then again, to be fair, I guess
ultimately the same is true of any mechanical device - but our
experience has proved without a doubt that electromechancal
solenoid-engaged drive will out perform the old Bendix by a long shot.
And finally, for all board posters that have questions/concerns about
Sky-Tec starters, please do not ever hesitate to call us and ask for me
personally. I try my best to tend to this board periodically but can
only do so as I find time. At our pace of sales, extra time is becoming
rarer and rarer. I will try to do so to keep up the quality of
information available on this board as I can, but if you prefer to get
instant answers, please feel free to call me.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Here is how to get in touch with me:
- Rich Chiappe
Sky-Tec
800-476-7896
richc(at)skytecair.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Molex terminals |
try digikey or mouser
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Hebeard2(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Stein Bruch Alive Redux |
Guys,
Many thanks for the reassurance received from many of you. I was able to
access Stein's website, and sent him another e-mail last night. Waiting for a
reply.
Harley E. Beard
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dave Morris <dave(at)davemorris.com> Jabiru J400 |
| Subject: | Re: single connector for instrument panel? |
Jabiru J400
J400
Would one of the big 15 pin Molex connectors work well for this application?
Dave Morris
At 04:16 PM 1/6/2004, you wrote:
>
>
>
>I think that I already know the answer to this question, however I am
>considering installing a single connector between the firewall and the
>instrument panel in my Jabiru, so that I can easily remove the panel from
>the plane, without disconnecting all the switches on the panel, and the
>radios etc.
>
>I know that it could be a point of failure, however I wonder how big this
>is, What connector should I use?
>
>(simple day VFR aircraft, that runs haply with master switch off, (self
>exciting ignition).
>
>Thanks
>
>Ian Scott
>
>----------------------------------------------------
>RSL COM has an extensive and competitive range of
>local and long distance call packages. We also
>offer converged multimedia and data services through
>our own state-of-the-art integrated voice & data network.
>Visit http://www.rslcom.com.au to find out more.
>
>This message is for the named person's use only.
>
>Privileged/confidential information may be contained in
>this message. If you are not the addressee indicated in
>this message (or responsible for delivery of the message
>to such person), you may not copy or deliver this
>message to anyone. In such case, you should destroy
>this message, and notify us immediately.
>
>Any views expressed in this message are those of the
>individual sender, except where the message states
>otherwise and the sender is authorised to state them to
>be the views of any such entity.
>----------------------------------------------------
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Bean <jim-bean(at)att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: single connector for instrument panel? Jabiru |
J400
I used a pair of CPC series connectors for my panel and they worked very
well. They look like the "Cannon" connectors on big planes but they are
plastic and much cheaper. They use the same pins and tools as the dsub
type connectors.
Along with removal, another BIG plus for me was that I could wire the
airplane separately from the panel. Instead of having sheaves of wires
dangling off both sides of the fuselage, each wire got immediately
plugged into the connector and finished. Same with the panel, but on the
bench.
The chief problem with the CPC is that the biggest wire you can use is
#20. I used the fuse block system off of the panel so the wires in my
case are just #22 radio and instrument feeds.
Mouser and DigiKey both carry them. They use the "109" pins. The tools
can come from B&C.
Jim Bean
RV-8
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "hollandm" <hollandm(at)pacbell.net> |
| Subject: | Buttsplice vs. Solder Heatshrink? |
My question is dirt simple. Is there any particular reason why a solder joint,
covered by heat shrink, isn't as good or functional as a butt splice?
Perhaps I'm missing something but the solder joint would seem to be simpler, lighter
and electrically equivalent to a compression fitted splice.
Looking at having to do a lot of joining or two or more wires!
Mike Holland
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "hollandm" <hollandm(at)pacbell.net> |
| Subject: | Battery Bus Lead Length? |
In Bob's drawings, the battery bus feed length is specified as "6-inches or less".
Since the battery and bus are on opposite sides of the firewall this may
be a difficult specification to meet thus how critical is this?
What factors, other than providing a sufficient size wire for the loads anticipated
and appropriate circuit protection, enter into this spec.?
Thanks
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Starters: Setting the Record Straight |
On 1/3/200 Bob wrote:
--> If getting the best starter wasn't an option for me, then
adding the run-on eliminator would be a good idea. Bob . . .
It was a lovely implication that the Sky-Tec PM starter wasn't the best
for the customer's application. A bold jab, Bob. It's too bad we can't
keep things on this board geared toward matters of fact and not
opinion.
Rich my friend, I've never said that any Sky-Tec product wasn't
the best or worst for anyone's APPLICATION. In fact, I've often said
that Sky-Tec products are by-and-large good value . . . but
I'll support my statement about the "best starter there is"
by noting that while Sky-Tec starters are the product of
choice for many OEMs, they ALL looked at the B&C starter years
before Sky-Tec existed. They all offered to buy them in volume at
prices below cost of manufacturing . . . TCM even demanded
an exclusive on the IO-240 starter! They had some fixed notion
of acceptable price irrespective of performance. Nobody could
tear up a B&C starter on the test stand and they all tried.
I'm pleased that Sky-Tec was able to address the OEM notion
of proper pricing. Irrespective of what you or I might
say about their choice, it WAS a demonstrable quantum jump
in quality for users of those engines.
B&C starters run routinely and predictably to TBO on Robinson
helicopters and come back for overhaul looking like they'd
run another 2000 hours.
We're still hearing stories from Sky-Tec customers about
recurring incidents of problems that point to what may
be a combination of engineering or manufacturing problems.
We're assured by Sky-Tec that these are isolated incidents
and/or have been addressed with design changes . . . and
that's a good thing to hear . . . won't argue with it.
But if I hear of another multiple-failure event from
a Sky-Tec customer, you can bet yer sweet bippy, I'll
"jab" you again. My job is not to be spokesperson for
Sky-Tec, B&C or any other manufacturer . . . but to
hold them to the standards that customers are entitled
to expect.
When I used the term "best", it was akin to comparing
an Olds with a Chevy 6-cyl stick . . . there are marked
differences in design and manufacturing philosophies but
is the 6-cyl a "poor value"??? I drove nothing but
4 and 6-cyl, no frills cars until I bought my present vehicle,
a EFI-V6 GMC van with lots of extras. It depends on whether
one's mission and budget comfortably allows some risk of
inconvenience or discomfort in trade for difference in cost
of ownership of competing products.
Similarly, Firestones are product-of-choice for a lot of car
manufacturers but they're the only brand of tire for
which I've personally experienced tread separation . . .
TWICE. I no longer buy them myself but neither do I refuse
to take out a rental car fitted with Firestones.
If you can buy a set of top-flight Firestones for a good
price, they can be honestly said to be a "good value" . . .
but may I suggest that assessing "value" and "quality" are
different tasks.
What started this thread was a discussion about delayed
starter disengagement which is a characteristic of ANY
brand of PM starter when the builder elects to use an
off-board contactor for improved start switch life.
Here are some facts about Sky-Tec starters to help clear up some of the
misconceptions I've been reading on this board for close to a year
(plus) now:
First of all, not all Sky-Tec starters are the same. In short, we
manufacture two basic types of Lycoming starter: Permanent Magnet
"Flyweight(tm)" (LS & PM) starters and wound-field "Hi-Torque" (HT and
HTI) starters. Each has distinct advantages and trade-offs. As has
been noted on this board, the LS and PM starters achieve their
incredible weight savings (only 7.8 lbs) by utilizing a permanent magnet
motor. So while it offers incredible torque . . .
. . . "incredible" is difficult to quantify. Can you offer
comparative measured data?
. . . and unmatched weight, the
permanent magnet motor will draw more current than most on initial
in-rush (the split second required to get the starter motor turning
initially). This increased current draw is not a problem for the vast
majority of aircraft because most have electrical systems more than
capable of the incremental load (which explains why we've sold more
LS/PM starters than any other).
The "split second" is tens of milliseconds before the armature
is accelerated into motion that the motor draws "locked rotor
current". This is on the order of 500-700 amps depending
on ship's wiring, battery condition and style of starter. Until
twitchy processor based engine accessories came along, virtually
every user could happily ignore this short lived event.
This can happen with ANY starter brand or configuration depending
on ship's wiring, battery size and condition. Given that the vast
majority of aircraft are not fitted with electronics having
this vulnerability, it only makes sense and it's to your credit
that the lower cost, lighter technology has enjoyed a relatively
happy service history in the marketplace.
The LS/PM utilize brass bushings and a
plastic stationary gear and pivot arm which some have implied make the
starter less durable (metal must be better than plastic, right?).
Nothing could be further
from the truth. In twelve years of manufacturing lightweight starters,
Sky-Tec has NEVER seen a brass bushing or plastic stationary gear (or
pivot arm) fail - NEVER - ZERO - ZILCH. We could have engineered the
use of heavier/more expensive all ball bearings/metal gears/metal pivot
arms, etc. to be sure. But why? The result would be a heavier and
more expensive starter. To us, that didn't make sense at the time and
never will. Bottom line: If your application is a weekend flyer who is
sensitive to cost and weight (and your aircraft electrical system is
near par), the LS & PM is nearly always the best starter for you. We
have more than 20,000 LS/PM's out there - they work very well and those
that have them LOVE them in nearly all cases (as evidenced in fact by
the steady increase in their sales year after year, their use as OEM
starters on most aircraft and Lycoming factory).
No argument there . . .
The Sky-Tec Hi-Torque series of starters, on the other hand, utilize
wound-field motors that draw less current but tend to weigh just a
little more than the permanent magnet types (8.5 lbs for the HT and 9.4
lbs for the HTI - which is 1.7/0.8 lbs. lighter, respectively than the
B&C). The HT/HTI's are all steel construction and all ball bearing
construction so please don't let someone tell you that all "Sky-Tec
starters" (generic/plural) use bushings and plastic parts. Truth is
some do and some don't, as it turns out. It depends on the intended
application of the particular model of starter. If rugged, steel
construction is required by your application (bush operators,
helicopters, seaplanes, charter operators, severe applications, etc.)
then the HT and HTI are the way to go.
If your application utilizes dual electronic ignitions (no impulse
coupler or retard points available) and sufficient provision has not
been made for voltage supply during initial starting, you will find the
High-Torque Inline Lycoming (HTI also known as the "NL" model) starter
to be the best starter for your application. Any starter, regardless of
brand, can break on a kickback. Permanent magnet starters may pull the
voltage down below the ignition system's minimum tolerance and could
causing a ill-timed spark event. However, the High-Torque inline both
draws less current and has an internal kickback protection system (field
replaceable shear pin) that will enable you to avoid the damage and
expense of a broken starter or should a kickback occur, enable you to
repair your starter in the field while you fix your ignition
timing/voltage problem.
Wasn't aware of the field-replaceable shear pin. Sounds
like a good move.
. . . . As an aside, the High-Torque Inline Lycoming
starter also sports a sleek, inline form that allows it to fit
applications that would otherwise preclude someone from using any
lightweight starter (RG Cessnas, A/C'd Pipers, etc.) making it
pretty much the only 'universal' lightweight starter capable of starting
just about any Lycoming-powered aircraft (-235 through -720). So if
your application is a tight fit (Cardinal RG, Falco, etc.), the HTI
is the best starter for you.
The B&C Lyc starters were STC'd on the 235 through 720
right out of the gate. This is one reason why they started
with and retained the wound field design. The other was
lower locked-rotor current.
In addition, Sky-Tec also manufactures Continental and Franklin
starters and tendencies and features of one model do not necessarily
translate across the line to other models. Again, each is designed to
be the best for a particular application and may utilize different motor
architectures, gear reduction and other variables.
If we want to discuss which is "the best" general Lycoming starter in
the industry, Sky-Tec will gladly put our new High-Torque Inline
Lycoming starter against all comers for torque, ruggedness, low current
draw, light weight, fit, features, performance and price/value.
I'd LIKE to discuss it . . . but with data. Have you compared
your products with others on the data acquisition test stand?
I've invited Bill to sponsor laboratory testing on the full range of
starters in the marketplace and plot them all onto one
piece of paper. He's got a Lycoming shell that could
be fitted with loads for dynamic testing of starters. He
also has a stock of Prestolite "pig" starters that could
provide a testing baseline. I object to the non-quantified
terms like "incredible" and would really like to see
some comparison of the full range of products in the
marketplace.
Bill hasn't shown an interest in sponsoring this kind
of activity. Hmmmm . . . wonder if Aviation Consumer
or Light Plane Maintenance would sponsor an article?
A note on Magnaflite regarding the question on a previous post. I
would simply caution that anyone considering purchasing a Magnaflite
right now do some quick research into their recent Bendix recall before
buying into their "lightest/cheapest" pitch. As far as I can tell, the
Magnaflite will always be the cheapest lightweight starter available
because it is designed to be just that - the cheapest to make. They do
so by utilizing the same engagement method our grandfathers used on
their engines 50 years ago - the mechanical Bendix drive. Rarely do
motors/windings fail in starters. Typically the Bendix is the first to
go (most well before TBO). That's why Sky-Tec and B&C do not use
Bendix drives. Bendix failures account for probably 90% of "old style"
starter failures and they require constant maintenance and attention.
In 2003, Kelly experienced some problems with a supplier and suffered
some issues with premature Bendix failure. They seem to be addressing
those problems and have been very up-front with their customers from what we've
heard. But the story is the same: with a Bendix, it's not a function
of "if" it's going to fail but "when" (then again, to be fair, I guess
ultimately the same is true of any mechanical device - but our
experience has proved without a doubt that electromechancal
solenoid-engaged drive will out perform the old Bendix by a long shot.
Agreed. I couldn't recommend an inertia-engaged
staring motor on anything but garden tractors
and outboards . . .
And finally, for all board posters that have questions/concerns about
Sky-Tec starters, please do not ever hesitate to call us and ask for me
personally. I try my best to tend to this board periodically but can
only do so as I find time. At our pace of sales, extra time is becoming
rarer and rarer. I will try to do so to keep up the quality of
information available on this board as I can, but if you prefer to get
instant answers, please feel free to call me.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Here is how to get in touch with me:
- Rich Chiappe
Sky-Tec
800-476-7896
richc(at)skytecair.com
As always Rich, I appreciate your time and support
of this List's charter to shine the light of data
and understanding through the fog of marketing
hyperbole and hangar legends. It can only serve to
make us all better at what we do.
By the way, I think there is a really good chance
that Raytheon Aircraft will be offering a full range
of testing services at what I trust will be attractive
prices to all comers by the end of 2004. There's been
a lot of grumbling amongst the bean-counters about how
our test labs have become a financial albatrosses. Years
ago, I used to enjoy access to Beech's labs in an
informal, over the counter basis. I could call out for
a window of opportunity and get in for a quick look-see
at my product's environmental vitals and walk out with
good data and a $75/hr tab to pay. I've got a charter and
encouragement from RAC management to see if we can renew that kind
of relationship with local industries who do not have
but can use such facilities.
It will probably be more like $150/hr today. Lab testing
will include the full range of DO-160 and MIL-STD-810
environmental tests . . . all or any part. I'm hoping
that we can attract/encourage a lot of developmental
investigation that often goes un-explored only to bite both
manufacturer and consumer at a later date.
I'm too close to retirement at RAC to consider more
than an assisting role but I may become a marketing
representative later on. Shucks, I've got a few products
of my own I'd like to shake, rattle, and zap if I
could get the right price! Keep us in mind should
you have need of such services. We've got some of the
best hammers in the business for beating on things to
see how well they are built!
Bob . . .
-----------------------------------------
( Experience and common sense cannot be )
( replaced with policy and procedures. )
( R. L. Nuckolls III )
-----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Keeping Cables Separated |
| From: | Don Boardman <dboardm3(at)twcny.rr.com> |
Hi Bob,
PS Engineering in the installation manual for their PMA4000 Series Selector
Panel and Intercom system under NOISE state:
"Radiated signals can be a factor when low level microphone signals are
"bundled" with current carrying power wires. Keep these (I assume they mean
the mic and phone) cables physically separated."
I planed on running all wiring from mid-ship forward to behind the panel in
the same "tray" based on what I THOUGHT ??? has been suggested on the list.
Some words of wisdom please.
Thanks,
Don B
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <scott_m_richardson(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Multiple wires in a D-Sub pin? |
There are a number of places where it would be useful to have two wires
(22ga) come
together at a D-Sub pin or socket (in my case, splitting the altitude
encoder signals between
a transponder and IFR GPS unit). Two 22ga wires will fit into an
uncrimped pin, which
leads me to think that I should be able to get a good crimp. Is this
acceptable/recommended
practice or should I be using a butt splice outside of the D-Sub
connector?
Thanks for any advice.
Scott
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
Scott M. Richardson
scott_m_richardson(at)sbcglobal.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Neville Kilford" <nkilford(at)etravel.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery Bus Lead Length? |
I believe that the main concern is over having a long unprotected wire. Six
inches is arbitrary -- it could be longer, as required, but there is more
risk of damage, etc., in a longer wire. Presumably risks can be mitigated by
taking care to think about ways in which the cable might become damaged in
normal use (chafing, for example) or in a crash.
Perhaps Bob and others will add to my simplistic view of things.
Cheers.
Nev
--
Jodel D-150 in progress
UK
----- Original Message -----
From: "hollandm" <hollandm(at)pacbell.net>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Battery Bus Lead Length?
>
> In Bob's drawings, the battery bus feed length is specified as "6-inches
or less". Since the battery and bus are on opposite sides of the firewall
this may be a difficult specification to meet thus how critical is this?
>
> What factors, other than providing a sufficient size wire for the loads
anticipated and appropriate circuit protection, enter into this spec.?
>
> Thanks
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dave Morris <dave(at)davemorris.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery Bus Lead Length? |
I think I remember that the 6 inch figure relates to a standard for the
maximum length of wire that does not need to be fused.
Dave Morris
At 05:20 AM 1/8/2004, you wrote:
>
>
>I believe that the main concern is over having a long unprotected wire. Six
>inches is arbitrary -- it could be longer, as required, but there is more
>risk of damage, etc., in a longer wire. Presumably risks can be mitigated by
>taking care to think about ways in which the cable might become damaged in
>normal use (chafing, for example) or in a crash.
>
>Perhaps Bob and others will add to my simplistic view of things.
>
>Cheers.
>
>Nev
>
>--
>Jodel D-150 in progress
>UK
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "hollandm" <hollandm(at)pacbell.net>
>To:
>Subject: AeroElectric-List: Battery Bus Lead Length?
>
>
> >
> > In Bob's drawings, the battery bus feed length is specified as "6-inches
>or less". Since the battery and bus are on opposite sides of the firewall
>this may be a difficult specification to meet thus how critical is this?
> >
> > What factors, other than providing a sufficient size wire for the loads
>anticipated and appropriate circuit protection, enter into this spec.?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming(at)sigecom.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Buttsplice vs. Solder Heatshrink? |
Nothing wrong with that approach. If you have several to do, don't do them
all at the same spot but space them out so you can later shrink over the
whole bunch and not look like a snake that swallowed an egg. Another thing
to consider is using the machined d-sub pins. After you put a pin on each
joining wire, you slide a hear shrink on and shrink it down after plugging
together. Works nice on the wires that might need to come back apart at a
later time but costs more. But for things like the panel where there are
lots of connections, you should consider Bob's suggestion that was posted
yesterday of using the D-sub connector with machined pins using safety wire
to hold the two halves together.
Keep in mind solder does make a hard connection and that needs some relief
with the heat shrink and other supports.
Best wishes. Larry in Indiana
----- Original Message -----
From: "hollandm" <hollandm(at)pacbell.net>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Buttsplice vs. Solder Heatshrink?
>
> My question is dirt simple. Is there any particular reason why a solder
joint, covered by heat shrink, isn't as good or functional as a butt splice?
>
> Perhaps I'm missing something but the solder joint would seem to be
simpler, lighter and electrically equivalent to a compression fitted splice.
>
> Looking at having to do a lot of joining or two or more wires!
>
> Mike Holland
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Keeping Cables Separated |
>
>Hi Bob,
>
>PS Engineering in the installation manual for their PMA4000 Series Selector
>Panel and Intercom system under NOISE state:
>
>"Radiated signals can be a factor when low level microphone signals are
>"bundled" with current carrying power wires. Keep these (I assume they mean
>the mic and phone) cables physically separated."
No, keep avionics and instrumentation wiring separate
from power distribution wiring. This is generally easy to do
since avionics/instrumentation tend to be central on the
panel while power distribution/control can be along the
edges and around the skin of the aircraft.
Bob . . .
-----------------------------------------
( Experience and common sense cannot be )
( replaced with policy and procedures. )
( R. L. Nuckolls III )
-----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Low Density 9-PIN D-Sub Dust cover.... |
>
>I'm not sure there is such a thing..... a black plastic cover for 9-PIN
>D-Sub connectors.. but I am curious if anyone has a known source for such
>an item.
>I am planning to install 9-PIN D-Sub connectors on my instrument panel so
>I can run a serial data cable to a laptop computer and record GRT EIS data
>and calibrate/update the Dynon EFIS-D10 data. Leaving the D-subs exposed
>on the panel is un-sitely and I would like to have black plastic covers to
>mask these and keep dirt/dust away from the exposed pins. More of a
>cosmetic thing than anything else.....
I've seen them. Folks who specialize in protective
caps for pipes, tubing and connectors will have them
but usually in bags of 100 for some manufacturer's needs.
I don't recall having seen them as catalog items in
small quantities. I searched my usual on-line suppliers
without success. If I run across them in the future, I'll
post a note here.
Incidentally, while looking for these I stumbled onto
an offer for "fusible wire" . . . See:
http://www.imperialinc.com/items.asp?item=0713440
I'm not recommending these as suitable for any
application on our airplanes. I still prefer the
fiberglas covered 22759 wire as described elsewhere.
Just an interesting tid-bit on fusible links from
another segment of industry.
Bob . . .
-----------------------------------------
( Experience and common sense cannot be )
( replaced with policy and procedures. )
( R. L. Nuckolls III )
-----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Multiple wires in a D-Sub pin? |
>
>There are a number of places where it would be useful to have two wires
>(22ga) come
>together at a D-Sub pin or socket (in my case, splitting the altitude
>encoder signals between
>a transponder and IFR GPS unit). Two 22ga wires will fit into an
>uncrimped pin, which
>leads me to think that I should be able to get a good crimp. Is this
>acceptable/recommended
>practice or should I be using a butt splice outside of the D-Sub
>connector?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery Bus Lead Length? |
>
>
>I believe that the main concern is over having a long unprotected wire. Six
>inches is arbitrary -- it could be longer, as required, but there is more
>risk of damage, etc., in a longer wire. Presumably risks can be mitigated by
>taking care to think about ways in which the cable might become damaged in
>normal use (chafing, for example) or in a crash.
>
>Perhaps Bob and others will add to my simplistic view of things.
You got it right. When all switches are OFF, the goal is to
have no wire of significant current carrying capacity fed
by a fuse greater than 5A. An always hot feeder of that
size and length is considered an increased risk for post
crash fire and we work diligently to avoid them.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> Jabiru J400 |
| Subject: | Re: single connector for instrument panel? |
Jabiru J400
Jabiru J400
>Jabiru J400
>
>Would one of the big 15 pin Molex connectors work well for this application?
>
>Dave Morris
ANY connector will FUNCTION. Connectors of this genere
are widely used in automotive applications . . . which
is pretty much okay because they install wires into
pins with automatic machines. I'd go with the D-sub
because of the way that machined pins are put on . . .
you can't make a poor connection. Someone else mentioned
the AMP circular plastic connectors that accept the
same 20AWG pins as a D-sub . . . these would be good
too.
I haven't used a mate-n-lock/molex style connector
in a new design in decades.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Boss" <bossone(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Low Density 9-PIN D-Sub Dust cover.... |
Go to RADIO SHACK
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Low Density 9-PIN D-Sub Dust cover....
>
> >
> >I'm not sure there is such a thing..... a black plastic cover for 9-PIN
> >D-Sub connectors.. but I am curious if anyone has a known source for such
> >an item.
>
>
> >I am planning to install 9-PIN D-Sub connectors on my instrument panel so
> >I can run a serial data cable to a laptop computer and record GRT EIS
data
> >and calibrate/update the Dynon EFIS-D10 data. Leaving the D-subs exposed
> >on the panel is un-sitely and I would like to have black plastic covers
to
> >mask these and keep dirt/dust away from the exposed pins. More of a
> >cosmetic thing than anything else.....
>
> I've seen them. Folks who specialize in protective
> caps for pipes, tubing and connectors will have them
> but usually in bags of 100 for some manufacturer's needs.
> I don't recall having seen them as catalog items in
> small quantities. I searched my usual on-line suppliers
> without success. If I run across them in the future, I'll
> post a note here.
>
> Incidentally, while looking for these I stumbled onto
> an offer for "fusible wire" . . . See:
>
> http://www.imperialinc.com/items.asp?item=0713440
>
> I'm not recommending these as suitable for any
> application on our airplanes. I still prefer the
> fiberglas covered 22759 wire as described elsewhere.
> Just an interesting tid-bit on fusible links from
> another segment of industry.
>
> Bob . . .
>
> -----------------------------------------
> ( Experience and common sense cannot be )
> ( replaced with policy and procedures. )
> ( R. L. Nuckolls III )
> -----------------------------------------
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fergus Kyle" <VE3LVO(at)rac.ca> |
I'm not sure there is such a thing..... a black plastic cover for 9-PIN
D-Sub connectors..but I am curious if anyone has a known source for such an
item.
I am planning to install 9-PIN D-Sub connectors on my instrument panel so I
can run a serial data cable to a laptop computer and record GRT EIS data and
calibrate/update the Dynon EFIS-D10 data. Leaving the D-subs exposed on the
panel is un-sightly and I would like to have black plastic covers to mask
these and keep dirt/dust away from the exposed pins. More of a cosmetic
thing than anything else..... Any links, part nos. or manufacturer's phone
number would be greatly appreciated...TIA, Jack Lockamy"
Would two-or-three inch heatshrink do? (Cheap, replaceable, locally avail)
Ferg
Europa A064 mono
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Glen Matejcek" <aerobubba(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | RE: RE: SD-8 cap |
>>
>From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
>Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: RE: SD-8 cap
>>
>>The value isn't critical. The larger the value, the larger the charge it
>>can store and the more the cap will look like a "battery" in case the
>>battery isn't there.
>
>>Dave Morris
>Dave is correct. B&C's drawings for recommended capacitor
>does indeed call out a 10KuF cap but I think the only one
>they sell is the S251D479 shown at
>http://www.bandc.biz/cgi-bin/ez-catalog/cat_display.cgi?26X358218
>which is 47KuF at 16V.
>
>Bob . . .
Hmmmm... The one they sent me is a Sprauge 10k uF 50V cap, and I'm feeling
a bit of cap envy. Perhaps I should call B&C and find out what's up. I
hate to sound like a lawyer, but I presume a change in spec represents an
increase in performance.
gm
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
>Bob,
>
>Our 503-1 kit, which is the noise filter cap kit, has the 10KuF cap in
>it. Attached is a picture of it. It sells for $33.00. So we sell both
>sizes of caps.
Okay, I stand corrected. Thanks for the info!
Bob . . .
>
>
>Todd
>
>
>
>From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
>
>Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: RE: SD-8 cap
>
>
>-->
>
>
>
>
> >-->
>
> >
>
> >The value isn't critical. The larger the value, the larger the charge
>
> >it can store and the more the cap will look like a "battery" in case
>
> >the battery isn't there.
>
> >
>
> >Dave Morris
>
>
> Dave is correct. B&C's drawings for recommended capacitor
>
> does indeed call out a 10KuF cap but I think the only one
>
> they sell is the S251D479 shown at
>
>
><http://www.bandc.biz/cgi-bin/ez-catalog/cat_display.cgi?26X358218>http://www.bandc.biz/cgi-bin/ez-catalog/cat_display.cgi?26X358218
>
> which is 47KuF at 16V.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
Bob . . .
-----------------------------------------
( Experience and common sense cannot be )
( replaced with policy and procedures. )
( R. L. Nuckolls III )
-----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Werner Schneider" <wernerschneider(at)compuserve.com> |
| Subject: | Battery Bus Lead Length/external power plug |
Hello Bob and all,
what is the risk, I would like to mount an external power plug, but would
like a bit simpler approach as the top setup Bob has on the web. I'm using
it myself only (charging) and very seldom jumpstart. The plug will be around
4-6 inches from the batterie. What is against to connect the plug directly
to the batterie, what would you recommend?
Many thanks for your advice
Werner
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | flmike <flmike2001(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Low Density 9-PIN D-Sub Dust cover.... |
Try:
http://www.niagaraplastics.com/prodsub.asp?site=dsub_icp.htm
http://www.caplugs.com/catalog/starpage.asp?series=17&seriesid=17&classid=122
(Caplugs DCC series)
Not black, but I didn't look too hard. (You've got a
Sharpie marker right?)
They should be able to sample you a few.
If that doesn't work for you, you can make a nice
little cover out of a little piece of aluminum with a
couple 4-40 thumbscrews to hold it on. (or a $50 CNC
machined and anodized one with captive thumbscrews and
a bead-chain retainer like we put on the flight data
recorders at my old employer).
Mike
__________________________________
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/signingbonus
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | kempthornes <kempthornes(at)earthlink.net> |
Why not use female socket DB9 on the panel? Inset and fasten invisibly
such as with glue, it would look most cool IMHO.
>
>I am planning to install 9-PIN D-Sub connectors on my instrument panel so I
K. H. (Hal) Kempthorne
RV6-a N7HK - Three trips to OSH now.
PRB (El Paso de Robles, CA)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Troy Scott" <tscott1217(at)bellsouth.net> |
Gentlemen,
Does anyone have a source for a progressive off-on-on DPDT switch rated for
20amps? It needs to look about like the panel switches from B&C.
Thanks!
Troy Scott
tscott1217(at)bellsouth.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Hobby Stevens" <rayco(at)sbcglobal.net> |
I bought a used King KT76A transponder with the tray, but the edge card connector
that attaches to the tray is missing. I am looking for a source to purchase
the connector. I have not yet contacted King Radio directly (or BendixKing,
or Allied Signal/Honeywell, or whatever their name is now).
Based on an earlier post regarding King radio connectors, I looked on the Molex
website for the correct connector. I think that it would be Molex part #09-50-6125
(12 dual circuits). Using this part number and description, I then looked
at Digikey and Mouser, but I cannot find this particular Molex connector.
Any suggestions would be appreciated.
Thanks,
Hobby Stevens
(Got my late Xmas present today - my Garmin 430 arrived)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Hebeard2(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Stein Bruch is alive! |
Guys,
Yesterday I heard from Stein Bruch. Seems his out of town vacation, a snow
storm, and misrouting of my shipment by UPS, all combined for the untimely delay
for which Stein apologized. Best of all my AK-450 ELT arrived today, one day
earlier than forecast.
All is well.
Harley E. Beard
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James Redmon" <james(at)berkut13.com> |
| Subject: | Essential Bus Alt Feed Wire Protection |
Bob,
Until recently, I was using the standard "canard" wiring configuration (aft
engine, front battery) with the Z-12 diagram. For CG reasons, I am better
off placing my battery in the aft compartment of the plane but not engine
side of the firewall. I have obviously have relocated the master relay,
battery and reduced the size cable running forward to the fuse blocks.
My question is, regarding the appropriate connection and type of protection
I should use for the Essential Bus alternate feed. It is planned to be a
12-15ft run of 12-gauge wire from battery to switch to bus. Should I use a
current limiter (alt. fuse type), fusible link, standard ATC fuse from a
battery bus, or something else?
Obviously, I want this connection to be resilient to nuisance trips, spike
loads, etc. as possible but still afford some reasonable protection for the
long run of wire.
Ideas? Other questions?
James Redmon
Berkut #013 N97TX
www.berkut13.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Liming <gary(at)liming.org> |
| Subject: | Re: KT76A connector |
>
>I bought a used King KT76A transponder with the tray, but the edge card
>connector that attaches to the tray is missing. I am looking for a source
>to purchase the connector. I have not yet contacted King Radio directly
>(or BendixKing, or Allied Signal/Honeywell, or whatever their name is now).
>
> Based on an earlier post regarding King radio connectors, I looked on
> the Molex website for the correct connector. I think that it would be
> Molex part #09-50-6125 (12 dual circuits). Using this part number and
> description, I then looked at Digikey and Mouser, but I cannot find this
> particular Molex connector.
Go to
http://www.berkut13.com/extractor.htm
which is an interesting page that has Mouser part numbers for what you need.
(Thanks, James Redmon!)
Gary Liming
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
>
>
>Gentlemen,
>
>Does anyone have a source for a progressive off-on-on DPDT switch rated for
>20amps? It needs to look about like the panel switches from B&C.
Why 20A?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: RE: SD-8 cap |
>
>
>
> >>
> >From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
> >Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: RE: SD-8 cap
>
>
>
> >>
> >>The value isn't critical. The larger the value, the larger the charge it
> >>can store and the more the cap will look like a "battery" in case the
> >>battery isn't there.
> >
> >>Dave Morris
>
> >Dave is correct. B&C's drawings for recommended capacitor
> >does indeed call out a 10KuF cap but I think the only one
> >they sell is the S251D479 shown at
> >http://www.bandc.biz/cgi-bin/ez-catalog/cat_display.cgi?26X358218
> >which is 47KuF at 16V.
> >
> >Bob . . .
>
>
>Hmmmm... The one they sent me is a Sprauge 10k uF 50V cap, and I'm feeling
>a bit of cap envy. Perhaps I should call B&C and find out what's up. I
>hate to sound like a lawyer, but I presume a change in spec represents an
>increase in performance.
Todd corrected my mis-statement about the caps offered by
B&C. At the time my parts business transferred to Newton
a couple years ago, B&C was selling a 10KuF for the SD-8,
I was selling a 47KuF for Rotax 912 installations. I had
some discussions with Bill at that time suggesting that
a single offering of the 47KuF would fulfill both requirements
nicely and I was under the mistaken impression that he'd
done that.
The rule-of-thumb for filter caps on power supplies is
1,000 uF/Amp of supply. Hence, the 10K is fine for SD-8,
and a 22K or larger was good for the 18A output on the
Rotax . .
At the time I selected the 47Kuf, I believe it was in
the same case diameter as the 22KuF and only slightly
longer and slightly more expensive . . . but it is
quite a bit larger than the 10KuF part Bill had already
brought on board for the SD-8. Obviously, both sizes
are now offered and the 10KuF you have is fine.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> plug |
| Subject: | Re: Battery Bus Lead Length/external power |
plug
plug
>
>
>Hello Bob and all,
>
>what is the risk, I would like to mount an external power plug, but would
>like a bit simpler approach as the top setup Bob has on the web. I'm using
>it myself only (charging) and very seldom jumpstart. The plug will be around
>4-6 inches from the batterie. What is against to connect the plug directly
>to the batterie, what would you recommend?
That will work.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | RE: Testing the OVM in-situ . . . |
Whoa! Let's back up. I was visualizing something else when this question
came up. NO, there is no risk to other system components by simulating
an OV condition as described in the instructions at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/crowbar.pdf
Note that the 18 volt power (ship's battery + boost battery)
is applied only to the alternator regulator feed line
(which causes the regulator to shut down) and applied voltage
appears only across the OV module. Ignore all of previous
discussions below. The test procedure is safe and sanitary
as published.
Bob . . .
>
>Alright. Thanks. Maybe that would be a good footnote to have on the
>testing schematic....Or is it already there and I missed it?
>
>-
>Larry Bowen
>Larry(at)BowenAero.com
>http://BowenAero.com
>
>
>Robert L. Nuckolls, III said:
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>What if the OVM fails to do it's thing during the in-plane test? I'll
> >>subject everything on the master buss to abnormally high voltage.
> >>Right?
> >
> > you betch . . .
> >
> >> Is this a concern?
> >
> > yes . . .
> >
> >> Should I pull all the fuses from the master
> >>fuse block first?
> >
> > yes . . .
> >
> > I prefer to do a bench test on the OVM but it can
> > be done in the airplane after addressing the concerns
> > you've identified.
> >
> > Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming(at)sigecom.net> |
| Subject: | SuperBright Leds |
I recently bought some LEDs from SuperBrightLeds. The product I bought was
the instrument cluster and gauge backligtt that comes in a base. Problem is
I don't have any idea what this base fits into. Any one have experience
with this? Their product code is T1.5 Instrument led bulb.
http://www.superbrightleds.com/cgi-bin/store/commerce.cgi?product=CAR&keywords=&cart_id=3829562.15232&next=50
Larry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Hi There <rv90619(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: SuperBright Leds |
Looks like a GM light. The ones that attach to the GM circuit board type IP.
Cam
LarryRobertHelming wrote:
I recently bought some LEDs from SuperBrightLeds. The product I bought was
the instrument cluster and gauge backligtt that comes in a base. Problem is
I don't have any idea what this base fits into. Any one have experience
with this? Their product code is T1.5 Instrument led bulb.
http://www.superbrightleds.com/cgi-bin/store/commerce.cgi?product=CAR&keywords=&cart_id=3829562.15232&next=50
Larry
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)BowenAero.com> |
I ran the music input on my NAT intercom to a 3.5mm jack. I turned the
pot adjustment on the intercom to max. But each of the three audio
devices I've tested as music input are very weak. Judging by the
archives I'm not alone. I searched the internet for "walkman amps" and
came across this:
http://www.hobbytron.net/CK154A.html
Think this will help the situation?
There is a hand-written note in the intercom installation manual I got
from NAT that notes the music in source should be 3v p-p (1v RMS). This
doesn't mean much to me, but if someone could translate, it might
provide some clues.
Thanks.
-
Larry Bowen
Larry(at)BowenAero.com
http://BowenAero.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Keeping Cables Separated 2 |
| From: | Don Boardman <dboardm3(at)twcny.rr.com> |
Bob, a follow up if I may.
>> "Radiated signals can be a factor when low level microphone signals are
>> "bundled" with current carrying power wires. Keep these (I assume they mean
>> the mic and phone) cables physically separated."
>
> No, keep avionics and instrumentation wiring separate
> from power distribution wiring.
By power distribution wiring, your mean the # 4's and the relayed # 12 to
the E-bus from the battery bus (under co-pilot's seat) RIGHT?
>This is generally easy to do
> since avionics/instrumentation tend to be central on the
> panel while power distribution/control can be along the
> edges and around the skin of the aircraft.
The Fat wires will run up through the floor on the co-pilot's side at the
firewall behind the rudder pedals and then across the firewall behind the
avionics and instrumentation to connect to the fuse blocks which are on a
hinged shelf located under and flush with the bottom of the panel on the
pilot's side. You responded to an earlier post and indicated that this
should not be a problem ... Yes?
AND
Soooooo ... running my shielded mic and phone cables from the intercom in
the panel to the rear passengers jacks side by side with my Fat current
carrying wires which they will meet up with at the firewall and then travel
back together under the floor is OK?
AND
Running my Transponder coax in this "bundle" (actually in a 2" wide
u-channel acting as a raceway or tray) is OK?
Thanks,
Don B.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Robert McCallum <robert.mccallum2(at)sympatico.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: SuperBright Leds |
LarryRobertHelming wrote:
>
>I recently bought some LED's from SuperBrightLeds. The product I bought was
>the instrument cluster and gauge backlight that comes in a base. Problem is
>I don't have any idea what this base fits into. Any one have experience
>with this? Their product code is T1.5 Instrument led bulb.
>http://www.superbrightleds.com/cgi-bin/store/commerce.cgi?product=CAR&keywords=&cart_id=3829562.15232&next=50
>
>Larry
>
>
They plug into the instrument panel on your car. The printed circuit
board on the back of many (most??) car dashboards have holes for the
various indicator light bulbs into which these bulbs fit. They are
retained by twisting them slightly so that they lock into the opening
much like a standard bayonet base bulb does into its socket. The metal
tabs on the edge of these bulbs contact the printed circuit traces
adjacent to the holes to achieve their connection.
Bob McC
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Main/E-bus Switching Sequence |
| From: | Don Boardman <dboardm3(at)twcny.rr.com> |
Hi Bob,
I am wiring a 2-10 switch as my main Master Switch and also a 2-10 as my
E-bus "Alt Master" Switch (OFF, Alt Feed, Alt Feed/Aux Alt).
After losing the main alternator and while switching from the main bus to
the E-bus can both the main master and the E-bus master both be in the "BAT"
position at the same time as not to loose power to the E-bus during the
change over?
And in the same vain when the airport, or lake in my case, is made while
switching back from E-bus to main master's BAT position can both switches be
feeding the E-bus during the transition.
Hope my concerns are clear, its getting late,
Don B.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Lockamy" <jacklockamy(at)att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Low Density 9-PIN D-Sub Dust cover.... |
Thanks Bob.... seems to me I have seen them before also. Just thought someone
else may have a lead on where to find them.
Jack Lockamy
Camarillo, CA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jack Lockamy" <jacklockamy(at)att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Low Density 9-PIN D-Sub Dust cover.... |
Thanks Mike.... that's exactly what I was looking for. Just don't know what I
would do with 5,000 of them :-).
I'll check Radio Shack as another poster mentioned.
Thanks again,
Jack Lockamy
Camarillo, CA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Werner Schneider" <wernerschneider(at)compuserve.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Battery Bus Lead Length/external power plug |
Thanks Bob,
now I know what I do tonight =(;o)
Werner
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III plug" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Battery Bus Lead Length/external power plug
plug
>
> >
> >
> >Hello Bob and all,
> >
> >what is the risk, I would like to mount an external power plug, but would
> >like a bit simpler approach as the top setup Bob has on the web. I'm
using
> >it myself only (charging) and very seldom jumpstart. The plug will be
around
> >4-6 inches from the batterie. What is against to connect the plug
directly
> >to the batterie, what would you recommend?
>
> That will work.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Keeping Cables Separated 2 |
>
>Bob, a follow up if I may.
>
> >> "Radiated signals can be a factor when low level microphone signals are
> >> "bundled" with current carrying power wires. Keep these (I assume they
> mean
> >> the mic and phone) cables physically separated."
> >
> > No, keep avionics and instrumentation wiring separate
> > from power distribution wiring.
>
>By power distribution wiring, your mean the # 4's and the relayed # 12 to
>the E-bus from the battery bus (under co-pilot's seat) RIGHT?
Any wiring that carries 14v between ships components.
> >This is generally easy to do
> > since avionics/instrumentation tend to be central on the
> > panel while power distribution/control can be along the
> > edges and around the skin of the aircraft.
>
>The Fat wires will run up through the floor on the co-pilot's side at the
>firewall behind the rudder pedals and then across the firewall behind the
>avionics and instrumentation to connect to the fuse blocks which are on a
>hinged shelf located under and flush with the bottom of the panel on the
>pilot's side. You responded to an earlier post and indicated that this
>should not be a problem ... Yes?
>
>
>AND
>Soooooo ... running my shielded mic and phone cables from the intercom in
>the panel to the rear passengers jacks side by side with my Fat current
>carrying wires which they will meet up with at the firewall and then travel
>back together under the floor is OK?
>
>
>AND
>Running my Transponder coax in this "bundle" (actually in a 2" wide
>u-channel acting as a raceway or tray) is OK?
Sure . . . Look. The act of running potentially antagonistic
wires together is not an automatic formula for noise problems.
In many cases, like a very complex biz jet, we don't have
the option of catering to our fondest wishes for wire routing.
Proper grounding will probably hold-off 95% of the potential
problems . . . after this, wire routing is a very low risk
endeavor. So rather than get into detailed and worrisome
discussions about this wire running next to that wire, just
do the best you can with sensitivity to practical concerns
for installation. Obviously, one could run potential victims
across the cockpit hanging out in space and have zero risk
for grabbing noise from adjacent wires . . . but it's a
bear to have your passengers get tangled up in the wires.
The worst thing that happens is you'll have some little
noise problem to troubleshoot later. Look forward to it
as an educational challenge . . . an opportunity to hone
skills that many folks in this business don't possess.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Off to Jeff City Seminar |
Dee and I are packing for a road trip to Jeff City, Mo
for a weekend seminar. I know there's a ton of open items
on the List traffic . . . some going back weeks before
Xmas. I'll try to get to those next week. We had guests
the entire holiday vacation interval and I really got behind
on things I was planning to do.
I DID get a new sink, garbage disposer and faucets
installed . . . made one of my guests hold the flashlight
for me!
I'll be back on the List Monday and try to get caught
up.
Bob . . .
-----------------------------------------
( Experience and common sense cannot be )
( replaced with policy and procedures. )
( R. L. Nuckolls III )
-----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Main/E-bus Switching Sequence |
>
>Hi Bob,
>
>I am wiring a 2-10 switch as my main Master Switch and also a 2-10 as my
>E-bus "Alt Master" Switch (OFF, Alt Feed, Alt Feed/Aux Alt).
>
>After losing the main alternator and while switching from the main bus to
>the E-bus can both the main master and the E-bus master both be in the "BAT"
>position at the same time as not to loose power to the E-bus during the
>change over?
Yes
>And in the same vain when the airport, or lake in my case, is made while
>switching back from E-bus to main master's BAT position can both switches be
>feeding the E-bus during the transition.
yes
Bob . . .
-----------------------------------------
( Experience and common sense cannot be )
( replaced with policy and procedures. )
( R. L. Nuckolls III )
-----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Essential Bus Alt Feed Wire Protection |
>
>
>Bob,
>
>Until recently, I was using the standard "canard" wiring configuration (aft
>engine, front battery) with the Z-12 diagram. For CG reasons, I am better
>off placing my battery in the aft compartment of the plane but not engine
>side of the firewall. I have obviously have relocated the master relay,
>battery and reduced the size cable running forward to the fuse blocks.
>
>My question is, regarding the appropriate connection and type of protection
>I should use for the Essential Bus alternate feed. It is planned to be a
>12-15ft run of 12-gauge wire from battery to switch to bus. Should I use a
>current limiter (alt. fuse type), fusible link, standard ATC fuse from a
>battery bus, or something else?
Feed it from a suitably fat fuse on the battery bus and install
an E-bus control relay as shown in:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/temp/E-BusFatFeed.gif
>Obviously, I want this connection to be resilient to nuisance trips, spike
>loads, etc. as possible but still afford some reasonable protection for the
>long run of wire.
If you THINK there is a potential for "nuisance trips" and "spike
loads" then you've not fully grasped the manner in which your
system operates. One can take the belt-suspenders approach and
make everything robust . . . or take the time to deduce exactly
how all the stuff on the E-bus works and design for comfortable
accommodation. "Nuisance trip" is a euphemism for "didn't do
my homework." Works good in the certified aircraft world but
no excuses in the OBAM aircraft community.
Bob . . .
-----------------------------------------
( Experience and common sense cannot be )
( replaced with policy and procedures. )
( R. L. Nuckolls III )
-----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brett Ferrell <bferrell(at)123mail.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Essential Bus Alt Feed Wire Protection |
Quoting "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" :
> >My question is, regarding the appropriate connection and type of
> protection
> >I should use for the Essential Bus alternate feed. It is planned to be
> a
> >12-15ft run of 12-gauge wire from battery to switch to bus. Should I
> use a
> >current limiter (alt. fuse type), fusible link, standard ATC fuse from
> a
> >battery bus, or something else?
>
> Feed it from a suitably fat fuse on the battery bus and install
> an E-bus control relay as shown in:
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/temp/E-BusFatFeed.gif
>
Bob - are you recommending this in-lieu of using a switch-breaker? I'm using the
SD-20 for my all-electric Velocity as was planning on using a 20A Switchbreaker
to activate the backfeed, and then take the master off-line if needed.
Brett
--
Visit us at www.velocityxl.com
44VF Velocity XL/FG
I68 Cincinnati, OH
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Troy Scott" <tscott1217(at)bellsouth.net> |
Original message:
>Gentlemen,
>
>Does anyone have a source for a progressive off-on-on DPDT switch rated for
>20amps? It needs to look about like the panel switches from B&C.
Why 20A?
Bob . . .
Bob,
I KNEW you'd catch that. Just can't slip anything past you, can I? :-)
I'm thinking of a way to simplify Z-14 by eliminating the battery contactor
on the "#2" side of the setup. I wouldn't do this unless I could put the
battery very close to the switch, like behind the instrument panel, on the
aft side of the firewall. OK, shoot holes in this, please.
Regards,
Troy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Essential Bus Alt Feed Wire Protection |
>
>
>Quoting "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" :
> > >My question is, regarding the appropriate connection and type of
> > protection
> > >I should use for the Essential Bus alternate feed. It is planned to be
> > a
> > >12-15ft run of 12-gauge wire from battery to switch to bus. Should I
> > use a
> > >current limiter (alt. fuse type), fusible link, standard ATC fuse from
> > a
> > >battery bus, or something else?
> >
> > Feed it from a suitably fat fuse on the battery bus and install
> > an E-bus control relay as shown in:
> >
> > http://www.aeroelectric.com/temp/E-BusFatFeed.gif
> >
>
>Bob - are you recommending this in-lieu of using a switch-breaker? I'm
>using the SD-20 for my all-electric Velocity as was planning on using a
>20A Switchbreaker to activate the backfeed, and then take the master
>off-line if needed.
We're talking about the E-Bus alternate feed being
a long, relatively fat wire and needing to be made-cold
when all switches are OFF.
Controlling the SD-20 is another issue. I'm not sure what
you're proposing here. Which Z-Figure are you considering?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Hibbing" <n744bh(at)bellsouth.net> |
Larry,
Check the specs on your stereo for the output voltage of the preamp, it
could be anywhere from 0.5 to maybe 5.0 or better. As long as the specs
give you 3.0V or less you should be OK.
Also, check the squelch controls on your intercom and make sure that they
are set high enough that the intercom isn't muting. I had the same problem
and found that my copilots squelch was not set high enough and was muting
everything but the com radio even though there was no headset connected to
those copilot jack plugs.
Bill
Glasair
----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)BowenAero.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Stereo amp.
>
> I ran the music input on my NAT intercom to a 3.5mm jack. I turned the
> pot adjustment on the intercom to max. But each of the three audio
> devices I've tested as music input are very weak. Judging by the
> archives I'm not alone. I searched the internet for "walkman amps" and
> came across this:
>
> http://www.hobbytron.net/CK154A.html
>
> Think this will help the situation?
>
> There is a hand-written note in the intercom installation manual I got
> from NAT that notes the music in source should be 3v p-p (1v RMS). This
> doesn't mean much to me, but if someone could translate, it might
> provide some clues.
>
> Thanks.
>
> -
> Larry Bowen
> Larry(at)BowenAero.com
> http://BowenAero.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James Redmon" <james(at)berkut13.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Essential Bus Alt Feed Wire Protection |
> >My question is, regarding the appropriate connection and type of
protection
> >I should use for the Essential Bus alternate feed. It is planned to be a
> >12-15ft run of 12-gauge wire from battery to switch to bus. Should I use
a
> >current limiter (alt. fuse type), fusible link, standard ATC fuse from a
> >battery bus, or something else?
>
> Feed it from a suitably fat fuse on the battery bus and install
> an E-bus control relay as shown in:
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/temp/E-BusFatFeed.gif
Excellent! That is exactly what I needed. Thank you.
> >Obviously, I want this connection to be resilient to nuisance trips,
spike
> >loads, etc. as possible but still afford some reasonable protection for
the
> >long run of wire.
>
> If you THINK there is a potential for "nuisance trips" and "spike
> loads" then you've not fully grasped the manner in which your
> system operates. One can take the belt-suspenders approach and
> make everything robust . . . or take the time to deduce exactly
> how all the stuff on the E-bus works and design for comfortable
> accommodation. "Nuisance trip" is a euphemism for "didn't do
> my homework." Works good in the certified aircraft world but
> no excuses in the OBAM aircraft community.
Ha! Ain't that the truth! Actually, I was just likely over-analyzing
possible scenarios as I do not anticipate any system induced "trips" or
other issues. The system is in place and I have run through just about
every device on/off combination I can think of without a single hitch (sans
engine start). I guess I'm a "belt-suspenders" kind of guy but on a tight
budget. ;-)
Please correct me if my logic is flawed in this worst possible case: The
plane is IFR equipped and utilized solid state ADI. I plan to run "master
only" during VFR ops (two alts/one bat Z-12), but due to the criticality of
systems during IFR flight - I plan to run with both the master and alt feeds
engaged (no power down to avionics if main power feed is disrupted somehow).
I understand this would be a very rare possibility, but should a component
fail in a shorted mode, I sure want the component level protection to catch
it...and not blow the alt feed.
I think we are in lock-step and I'll proceed with the attached "relay" based
alt feed setup.
Thanks again!
-James
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Essential Bus Alt Feed Wire Protection |
Nice! But thinking about it.... is this really
required?
What I mean is that while I was testing my electrical
system, I used a fused battery connected to my system
with aligator clips. Every so often, the clip
connected to the contactor dropped in the fuselage and
the 20-amp fuse blew away. I never noticed any noise,
spark or damages.
I cannot call that experience above anything that
would make me an expert; so, I wonder what kind of
failure would make the wire go hot without the fuse
burning.
I see one potential issue with my setup... the 12awg
wire is switched behind the panel. If there would be
a contact to ground from the e-Bus wire at the switch,
I think it could drain a lot of current on the
unprotected segment of wire through the main bus. (the
wire from switch to e-Bus post is not protected from
the e-Bus)
Michel
--- "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
>
> Feed it from a suitably fat fuse on the battery
> bus and install
> an E-bus control relay as shown in:
>
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/temp/E-BusFatFeed.gif
>
>
=====
----------------------------
Michel Therrien CH601-HD, C-GZGQ
http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601
http://www.zenithair.com/bldrlist/profiles/mthobby
http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby
__________________________________
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/signingbonus
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brett Ferrell <bferrell(at)123mail.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Essential Bus Alt Feed Wire Protection |
Quoting "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" :
>
> >Bob - are you recommending this in-lieu of using a switch-breaker? I'm
>
> >using the SD-20 for my all-electric Velocity as was planning on using a
>
> >20A Switchbreaker to activate the backfeed, and then take the master
> >off-line if needed.
>
> We're talking about the E-Bus alternate feed being
> a long, relatively fat wire and needing to be made-cold
> when all switches are OFF.
>
> Controlling the SD-20 is another issue. I'm not sure what
> you're proposing here. Which Z-Figure are you considering?
>
> Bob . . .
Bob - I'm using Z12 with the SD-20 low voltage controller bringing the second alt
online, and wire to the E-Bus is not particularly long, but it will be reasonably
fat since I'm going to use an EFIS and all electric IFR instruments, so
instead of the depicted switch I was going to use a switch breaker to control
the altnerate feed source from the battery bus.
Brett
--
Visit us at www.velocityxl.com
44VF Velocity XL/FG
I68 Cincinnati, OH
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Hi There <rv90619(at)yahoo.com> |
The guy with the hanger next to me has an RV4 with that same amp in it to power
an MP3 player and an XM radio, works great. He ended up cutting that board in
half and running mono. I'm putting one in my plane, in fact I found a volume
control pot at Radio Shack that has a on/off switch built into it, makes the
install and bit nicer.
Cam
Larry Bowen wrote:
I ran the music input on my NAT intercom to a 3.5mm jack. I turned the
pot adjustment on the intercom to max. But each of the three audio
devices I've tested as music input are very weak. Judging by the
archives I'm not alone. I searched the internet for "walkman amps" and
came across this:
http://www.hobbytron.net/CK154A.html
Think this will help the situation?
There is a hand-written note in the intercom installation manual I got
from NAT that notes the music in source should be 3v p-p (1v RMS). This
doesn't mean much to me, but if someone could translate, it might
provide some clues.
Thanks.
-
Larry Bowen
Larry(at)BowenAero.com
http://BowenAero.com
---------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)BowenAero.com> |
Bill-
The specs say 500 ohms/3v p-p max for intercom music input. The inputs
I'm using for testing are just old walkmans. I'll see if I can measure
the output.
I think the squelch is ok. There is only one squelch control. Even
with it set to 'live', I can barely hear the music. An idling engine
would drown it out.
Thanks,
-
Larry Bowen
Larry(at)BowenAero.com
http://BowenAero.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bill Hibbing [mailto:n744bh(at)bellsouth.net]
> Sent: Friday, January 09, 2004 11:54 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Stereo amp.
>
>
> -->
>
> Larry,
> Check the specs on your stereo for the output voltage of the
> preamp, it could be anywhere from 0.5 to maybe 5.0 or better.
> As long as the specs give you 3.0V or less you should be OK.
> Also, check the squelch controls on your intercom and make
> sure that they are set high enough that the intercom isn't
> muting. I had the same problem and found that my copilots
> squelch was not set high enough and was muting everything but
> the com radio even though there was no headset connected to
> those copilot jack plugs. Bill Glasair
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)BowenAero.com>
> To:
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Stereo amp.
>
>
>
> >
> > I ran the music input on my NAT intercom to a 3.5mm jack. I turned
> > the pot adjustment on the intercom to max. But each of the three
> > audio devices I've tested as music input are very weak. Judging by
> > the archives I'm not alone. I searched the internet for "walkman
> > amps" and came across this:
> >
> > http://www.hobbytron.net/CK154A.html
> >
> > Think this will help the situation?
> >
> > There is a hand-written note in the intercom installation
> manual I got
> > from NAT that notes the music in source should be 3v p-p (1v RMS).
> > This doesn't mean much to me, but if someone could
> translate, it might
> > provide some clues.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > -
> > Larry Bowen
> > Larry(at)BowenAero.com
> > http://BowenAero.com
> >
> >
>
>
> ============
> Matronics Forums.
> ============
> ============
> http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/AeroElectric-List.htm
> Search Engine: http://www.matronics.com/search
> ============
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie & Tupper England <cengland(at)netdoor.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Low Density 9-PIN D-Sub Dust cover.... |
Jack Lockamy wrote:
>
>I'm not sure there is such a thing..... a black plastic cover for 9-PIN D-Sub
connectors.. but I am curious if anyone has a known source for such an item.
>
>I am planning to install 9-PIN D-Sub connectors on my instrument panel so I can
run a serial data cable to a laptop computer and record GRT EIS data and calibrate/update
the Dynon EFIS-D10 data. Leaving the D-subs exposed on the panel
is un-sitely and I would like to have black plastic covers to mask these and
keep dirt/dust away from the exposed pins. More of a cosmetic thing than anything
else.....
>
>Any links, part nos. or manufacturer's phone number would be greatly appreciated...
>
>TIA,
>Jack Lockamy
>Camarillo, CA
>RV-7A N174JL reserved
>www.jacklockamy.com
>
Hi Jack,
Since esthetics is important, why not just hide the connectors
completely? A bracket mounted horizontally to the bottom edge of the
panel would allow the connector to mount behind the panel pointed down,
even with the bottom of the panel. Easily accessible but no panel real
estate used & no cover needed. If you need locking connectors you can
get spring loaded 'bales' that snap onto the sides of the cord end
connector.
Charlie
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ian " <jabiru22(at)yahoo.com.au> |
| Subject: | Back up electrical generator (wind driven, in flight |
deployable)
Not sure if you have seen this, though I thought that it was interesting
http://www.basicaircraft.com/index.asp
Ian
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | richard(at)riley.net |
| Subject: | Pin out for a JET turn and slip? |
I'm looking for the pin outs for a JET turn and slip indicator. I've never
seen one like it before - a square face 2 1/4 x 1 1/4. Part number
501-1186-01. It also says ARU-54/A. Any suggestions?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Robert McCallum <robert.mccallum2(at)sympatico.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: OT: Corroded Wiring |
Jon Finley wrote:
>
>Hi all,
>
>I am restoring an automobile and have found a fair amount of corrosion
>where wires are joined (quite a few butt-splice type connections). Is
>this type of corrosion usually just on the surface? Would I be better
>off to replace all of these connections or is cleaning them sufficient?
>
>Thanks,
>
>Jon Finley
>
>
This type of corrosion is generally NOT just on the surface, especially
if road salt is involved. The wires rapidly corrode through and break,
or at the very least have very high resistance at those points,
sometimes resulting in overheating and failure. Replacing any corroded
connections is generally your best bet.
Bob McC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Back up electrical generator (wind driven, in flight |
>From: Ian (jabiru22(at)yahoo.com.au)
>Not sure if you have seen this, though I thought that it was interesting
>http://www.basicaircraft.com/index.asp
>Ian
This deployable wind driven generator has been around for a while, as have
others. On sailboats a WDG is all you've got. This one has the benefit of
being deployable and compact and apparently powerful enough to do the job.
BUT I don't own stock in the company so I propose some questions for
discussion:
1) Isn't a small spare alternator really a much better way to go?
2) If you read the testimonials; isn't deciding to take off on your back-up
electrical system ill-advised?
3) If the device will get you out of a jam in IMC, isn't icing a concern?
4) If 3) is yes, how about an exhaust driven turbo-generator to replace the
muffler? (As usual I'll take my 10% fee for the idea.)
5) My own similar design (paper only) is made from a NACA duct and a turbine
wheel from an upright vacuum cleaner.
6) Doesn't Bob have eight ways to do this job? Are they (as I suspect)
better? For extra credit explain why. Compare and contrast the systems.
Regards,
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge MA 01550-2705
Phone (508) 764-2072
Email: emjones(at)charter.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Emrath" <emrath(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Internally Lit Instruments |
tests=DATE_IN_FUTURE_24_48
I have salvaged flight instruments that are lit internally. These are
marked 28 volt. Is it possible to just change the bulb out for 12 volt
bulbs and if so, anyone know of a source for the bulb?
Marty in Brentwood TN
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Neal A. Dillman" <neald(at)glyph.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Internally Lit Instruments |
Marty,
Most internally lit instruments take a "light wedge" that you should be
able to find for $25-35 each. If you can take them apart, SPT at
www.sptpanel.com sells the "grain of wheat" bulbs that you would need to
rebulb the wedges. That said, I am not sure if the wedges are sealed
units or not.
Regards,
Neal
Emrath wrote:
>
>I have salvaged flight instruments that are lit internally. These are
>marked 28 volt. Is it possible to just change the bulb out for 12 volt
>bulbs and if so, anyone know of a source for the bulb?
>Marty in Brentwood TN
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Traveling Man" <travliman58(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Keeping Cables Separated 2 |
Hello list. I just found this list through the Matronics Zenith List, I
hope to be building my 601 soon.
I am an electrical/mechanical designer for a Resistance Welding Controls
Manufacturer. Part of my job is trying to eliminate noise in the electrical
wiring systems.
I agree with everything Mr. Knuckolls has written. Grounding properly is
first, we typically run multiple grounds from different sections of our
cabinets and chassis to make SURE everything is well grounded.
With regard to separating high voltage from low, the further apart you can
run parallel sections of harness the better, where they must cross, cross at
a 90 degree angle. No system is perfect, do the best you can, if you have a
noise problem, at least now you have an idea of what might be causing it.
Good luck.
Bob Lindley
CH601-HD, Just paper on the table for now
Youth and skill are unbeatable in combination
until opposed by age and treachery.
Rethink your business approach for the new year with the helpful tips here.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | richard(at)riley.net |
| Subject: | Re: Pin out for a JET turn and slip? |
>
>I'm looking for the pin outs for a JET turn and slip indicator. I've never
>seen one like it before - a square face 2 1/4 x 1 1/4. Part number
>501-1186-01. It also says ARU-54/A. Any suggestions?
Further data - I've found out it's from an AV8 Harrier.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BAKEROCB(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Ray Allen PR3 LED Indicator |
1/11/2004
Hello Electrical Experts, I have some questions about how a Ray Allen
(Formerly Menzimer) RP3 LED Indicator may go bad.
The indicator has 6 wires feeding it. Three of the wires (orange, green,
blue) come from a servo or sensor and provide position information that causes
one
of the LED's to illuminate showing the position of the servo or sensor shaft.
A separate red wire feeds 12 volts through a one amp fuse or circuit breaker.
A separate black wire connects to ground. A separate white wire will dim the
LED's when 12v + (only) is applied to this wire.
My questions are:
1) What if some variable voltage ranging from zero to 12 + volts is
mistakenly applied to the separate white dimming wire?
2) Is it possible that doing 1) above could cause the indicator to fail
internally and then cease functioning by causing the one amp fuse or circuit
breaker in the red 12v feed line to open when ever connection is made?
Thanks for your help.
'OC' Baker, Builder of KIS TR-1 #116 4/14/97 - 11/17/03
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <beecho(at)beecho.org> |
| Subject: | Ray Allen PR3 LED Indicator |
I had the same problem. The chip in my indicator went bad. I returned
it to Ray Allen and they promptly replaced it no charge even though it
was 4 years old.
Tom
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
BAKEROCB(at)aol.com
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Ray Allen PR3 LED Indicator
1/11/2004
Hello Electrical Experts, I have some questions about how a Ray Allen
(Formerly Menzimer) RP3 LED Indicator may go bad.
The indicator has 6 wires feeding it. Three of the wires (orange, green,
blue) come from a servo or sensor and provide position information that
causes one
of the LED's to illuminate showing the position of the servo or sensor
shaft.
A separate red wire feeds 12 volts through a one amp fuse or circuit
breaker.
A separate black wire connects to ground. A separate white wire will dim
the
LED's when 12v + (only) is applied to this wire.
My questions are:
1) What if some variable voltage ranging from zero to 12 + volts is
mistakenly applied to the separate white dimming wire?
2) Is it possible that doing 1) above could cause the indicator to fail
internally and then cease functioning by causing the one amp fuse or
circuit
breaker in the red 12v feed line to open when ever connection is made?
Thanks for your help.
'OC' Baker, Builder of KIS TR-1 #116 4/14/97 - 11/17/03
==
==
==
==
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Low Density 9-PIN D-Sub Dust cover.... |
Go to www.mouser.com and search for 152-1042-1P 0r 1s
For the 9 pin d sub at $0.50 in ones and 3p or 3s for 25pin dsubs They are
RED in color.
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jack Lockamy" <jacklockamy(at)att.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Low Density 9-PIN D-Sub Dust cover....
>
> Thanks Bob.... seems to me I have seen them before also. Just thought
someone else may have a lead on where to find them.
>
> Jack Lockamy
> Camarillo, CA
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Dual battery, single master switch problem |
Bob,
You may remember a while ago, I mentioned I wanted to
have a single master switch to operate both electrical
circuits (both contactors). I installed normally
closed momentary switches to test the contactors
independtly, but I use a split master switch for both
contactors and for the alternator. (see diagram at
http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby/misc/electprob.gif ).
This evening, I found a bizzare behavior when one
battery goes weak. It appears that when one battery
is weak and I turn on the radio, something happens.
At least one of the contactor closes. I think this is
because the weak battery creates a closed circuit
using the two contactor coils (which are joined at my
contactor test switches).
Now I see that having two separate master switches
would resolve this problem as the two contactor coils
would not be linked together.
I wonder if I could also solve this problem by
inserting diodes between the contactor coil (ground
side) and the contactor test switch. This, I think
would prevent the second battery from feeding the
first contactor coil (and vice versa).
Please let me know if you think this would work.
Thanks!
Michel
=====
----------------------------
Michel Therrien CH601-HD, C-GZGQ
http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601
http://www.zenithair.com/bldrlist/profiles/mthobby
http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby
__________________________________
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/signingbonus
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Dual battery, single master switch problem |
I slept on this problem last night and realized that I
already made the electrical system more complex than
it needs to be and than it is in the AeroElectric's
diagram. Instead of adding more components, I decided
to remove the split master switch and go with a pair
of toggle master switches (one DPDT for Bat1/Alt and
the other one for Bat 2).
For those who copied on my diagram, I suggest you
reflect on this too. The issue is when there is a
charged battery and a discharged battery in the system
(this could happen if you are running on the essential
bus for a long period, as an example and both
batteries don't discharge at the same rate). Then,
because the two ground side of the master relay coils
are attached together, this creates a circuits whereby
the coils can be activated, closing the master relays.
Having two separate master switches as per Bob's
diagrams eliminate this possibility.
Michel
--- Michel Therrien wrote:
> Therrien
>
> Bob,
>
> You may remember a while ago, I mentioned I wanted
> to
> have a single master switch to operate both
> electrical
> circuits (both contactors). I installed normally
> closed momentary switches to test the contactors
> independtly, but I use a split master switch for
> both
> contactors and for the alternator. (see diagram at
> http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby/misc/electprob.gif
> ).
>
> This evening, I found a bizzare behavior when one
> battery goes weak. It appears that when one battery
> is weak and I turn on the radio, something happens.
> At least one of the contactor closes. I think this
> is
> because the weak battery creates a closed circuit
> using the two contactor coils (which are joined at
> my
> contactor test switches).
>
> Now I see that having two separate master switches
> would resolve this problem as the two contactor
> coils
> would not be linked together.
>
> I wonder if I could also solve this problem by
> inserting diodes between the contactor coil (ground
> side) and the contactor test switch. This, I think
> would prevent the second battery from feeding the
> first contactor coil (and vice versa).
>
> Please let me know if you think this would work.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Michel
=====
----------------------------
Michel Therrien CH601-HD, C-GZGQ
http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601
http://www.zenithair.com/bldrlist/profiles/mthobby
http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby
__________________________________
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/signingbonus
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: LED as blown fuse indicator |
>Bob,
>A friend has told me about using LED's as blown fuse indicators. Do you
>have any thoughts on that and would you have any hook-up info? ( What
>LED's to use & how wired)
>
>Thanks,
>Wayne Berg
This has been discussed many times on the AeroElectric List.
You can buy fuses with LED's built into them . . . but consider:
How often do you need to find/replace fuses in your car? In
your total flying experience, how often have you had to troubleshoot
a blowing breaker problem? These are such very rare events that
adding leds as a troubleshooting enhancement offers little or
no return on investment of $time$.
You can certainly do this in an experimental airplane. If
you've got time and dollars to spare it's no big deal one
way or another . . . but if you're realling wanting to get
first light under the wheels as soon as practical, I'd rather
see you spend resources on more useful activities that run
toward that goal.
Bob . . .
-----------------------------------------
( Experience and common sense cannot be )
( replaced with policy and procedures. )
( R. L. Nuckolls III )
-----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Essential Bus Alt Feed Wire Protection |
>
>
>Quoting "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" :
>
> >
> > >Bob - are you recommending this in-lieu of using a switch-breaker? I'm
> >
> > >using the SD-20 for my all-electric Velocity as was planning on using a
> >
> > >20A Switchbreaker to activate the backfeed, and then take the master
> > >off-line if needed.
> >
> > We're talking about the E-Bus alternate feed being
> > a long, relatively fat wire and needing to be made-cold
> > when all switches are OFF.
> >
> > Controlling the SD-20 is another issue. I'm not sure what
> > you're proposing here. Which Z-Figure are you considering?
> >
> > Bob . . .
>
>Bob - I'm using Z12 with the SD-20 low voltage controller bringing the
>second alt online, and wire to the E-Bus is not particularly long, but it
>will be reasonably fat since I'm going to use an EFIS and all electric IFR
>instruments, so instead of the depicted switch I was going to use a switch
>breaker to control the altnerate feed source from the battery bus.
I'd use a relay at the battery bus to control any e-bus feed over 7A.
The FAA would make me do it for any feed over 5A on a certified ship.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | SD-8 Feeding E-Bus |
| From: | Don Boardman <dboardm3(at)twcny.rr.com> |
Hi Bob,
Hope you had fun at your weekend seminar and all went well.
In figure (Z-13) The SD-8 section shows a #12 wire running from the
regulator via the capacitor to a 701 relay. There is no need to protect this
wire?
The relay has the OVM-14 connected. No Diode needed?
The #12 wire running form the always hot side of the battery contactor up to
the relay to grab the juice from the SD-8 is protected by a #16 fuselink.
I understand why the protection. My contactor is under the co-pilot's seat,
with the battery and the battery bus, and the SD-8's relay is planned for
behind the panel. Does this leave an always hot wire protected with a #16
fuselink which would be over the 5A guideline for maximizing crash safety?
Would the following alternative routing work? In my case I think the
following would facilitate wire installation.
My alternate feed for the e-bus is via #12 wire and a 701 relay located at
the battery bus under the seat, fused at 15 amps. Instead of bringing the
#12 feed from the SD-8's 701 relay to the under seat contactor, could I
feed the system via the e-bus located behind the panel?
At the e-bus I would use a #16 fuselink or a fuse slot from the e-bus.
My thought is that the juice from the SD-8 with its "14v" would take the
following path back to the battery.
Regulator via capacitor to the relay, relay to e-bus, run back though the
#12 e-bus feed, though the feed relay to the battery bus, to the contactor
and finally to the battery. Boy the life of an electron!.
If the above works, my conclusion is, that when both Master and E-bus
switches are off in the case of a potential
$#&
%%*&
*&$
the #12 wire
from the SD-8's relay is dead along with the relayed e-bus feed from the
battery bus.
As always thank you for your time and knowledge shared,
Don B.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Essential Bus Alt Feed Wire Protection |
>
>Nice! But thinking about it.... is this really
>required?
>
>What I mean is that while I was testing my electrical
>system, I used a fused battery connected to my system
>with aligator clips. Every so often, the clip
>connected to the contactor dropped in the fuselage and
>the 20-amp fuse blew away. I never noticed any noise,
>spark or damages.
>
>I cannot call that experience above anything that
>would make me an expert; so, I wonder what kind of
>failure would make the wire go hot without the fuse
>burning.
>
>I see one potential issue with my setup... the 12awg
>wire is switched behind the panel. If there would be
>a contact to ground from the e-Bus wire at the switch,
>I think it could drain a lot of current on the
>unprotected segment of wire through the main bus. (the
>wire from switch to e-Bus post is not protected from
>the e-Bus)
It's not a mater of getting wires hot for crash safety
but a matter of how big the sparks are while the airplane
is disassembling itself on the rocks. I've never been able
to find any definitive testing offered for the 5A rule . . . this
is especially curious since they don't make a distinction
between fuses and breakers on the 5A limited feeder. The
sparks downstream of the breaker are 10 to 100x bigger
than sparks from a faster fuse . . .
It's one of those things 99.9% of us will never have
to test in real life. Bottom line for OBAM aircraft
is do what ever makes YOU most comfortable.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Courtesy Light Timer |
| From: | Don Boardman <dboardm3(at)twcny.rr.com> |
Hi Bob,
A while back you talked about wiring a courtesy light(s) from the battery
bus. You mentioned putting the light(s) on a timer. Great idea! Turn on the
light without switching on the master and with a timer, no fear of
accidentally leaving a light on to kill the battery.
I certainly have never done that !
#
%*&&)(+!.
At the time of the post you did not elaborate, no particulars, about the
timer itself. How would one go about incorporating such an "automatic" timer
on such a circuit?
Thanks,
Don B.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 11051 Lesher |
>Below is the result of your inquiry. It was submitted by
>Lee Lesher (leelesher(at)cs.com) on Wednesday, January 7, 2004 at 20:08:04
>
>Wednesday, January 7, 2004
>
>Lee Lesher
>
>,
>Email: leelesher(at)cs.com
>Comments/Questions: Bob,
>
>I have installed a KX-125 in my RV-8 with a Flightcom 403
>intercom. Everything works normally but when I push to talk with either
>the front or rear button The Van's ammeter pegs negatively and the
>instrument lights and the trim indicator dim. Any ideas?
>
>Thanks, Lee Lesher, Colorado Springs, CO
It sounds as if these accessories are both sensitive
to strong radio frequency energy from your transmitter . . .
which suggests further that there is an abnormal
amount of RF energy in the cockpit. I'd look for a
coax shield that has not been properly terminated
in the connector at the back of the radio tray. This
can cause your coax feedline to become an emitter
of transmitter energy into wiring behind the panel.
I will invite you to join us on the AeroElectric List
to continue this and similar discussions. It's useful to
share the information with as many folks as possible.
A further benefit can be realized with membership on
the list. . . there are lots of technically capable folks
on the list who can offer suggestions too. You can
join at . . .
http://www.matronics.com/subscribe/
Thanks!
Bob . . .
--------------------------------------------
( Knowing about a thing is different than )
( understanding it. One can know a lot )
( and still understand nothing. )
( C.F. Kettering )
--------------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Buttsplice vs. Solder Heatshrink? |
>
>
>Nothing wrong with that approach. If you have several to do, don't do them
>all at the same spot but space them out so you can later shrink over the
>whole bunch and not look like a snake that swallowed an egg. Another thing
>to consider is using the machined d-sub pins. After you put a pin on each
>joining wire, you slide a hear shrink on and shrink it down after plugging
>together. Works nice on the wires that might need to come back apart at a
>later time but costs more. But for things like the panel where there are
>lots of connections, you should consider Bob's suggestion that was posted
>yesterday of using the D-sub connector with machined pins using safety wire
>to hold the two halves together.
>
>Keep in mind solder does make a hard connection and that needs some relief
>with the heat shrink and other supports.
As do crimped joints as well. Insulation support adjacent
to the electrical joint is automatically provided by the
PIDG style terminal technology.
Raychem makes solder butt splices that depend on nothing
but solder for the mechanical and electrical connection
with the final assembly being supported by a rather stiff
cover of heatshrink for anti-flexure support.
See
http://www.raychem.com/US/datasheets/1654025_Sec_8/8-6_8-11.pdf
So, if doing this with $1.00/pop solder sleeves is a good
thing to do, I don't see why you couldn't use a similar
technique using off-the-shelf solder and heatshrink.
Bob . . .
-----------------------------------------
( Experience and common sense cannot be )
( replaced with policy and procedures. )
( R. L. Nuckolls III )
-----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rick Fogerson" <rickf(at)cableone.net> |
| Subject: | Brass Instrument Screws for MicroAir avionics |
The MicroAir radio and xpdr use 8-36 thread screws which is not common. Does anyone
know of a source for these. I need 8 and would prefer countersunk brass
screws but might have to consider other if forced to.
Thanks for help,
Rick Fogerson
RV3 wiring
Boise, ID
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)BowenAero.com> |
| Subject: | Courtesy Light Timer |
That reminds me of this interesting, but overpriced, fuse block I saw in
Gall's catelog. It has a timer.
http://www.galls.com/style.html?style=SE007&assort=general_catalog
-
Larry Bowen
Larry(at)BowenAero.com
http://BowenAero.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Don Boardman [mailto:dboardm3(at)twcny.rr.com]
> Sent: Monday, January 12, 2004 10:15 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Courtesy Light Timer
>
>
> -->
>
> Hi Bob,
>
> A while back you talked about wiring a courtesy light(s) from
> the battery bus. You mentioned putting the light(s) on a
> timer. Great idea! Turn on the light without switching on the
> master and with a timer, no fear of accidentally leaving a
> light on to kill the battery. I certainly have never done
> that ! # %*&&)(+!.
>
> At the time of the post you did not elaborate, no
> particulars, about the timer itself. How would one go about
> incorporating such an "automatic" timer on such a circuit?
>
>
> Thanks,
> Don B.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rick Fogerson" <rickf(at)cableone.net> |
| Subject: | Grand Rapids EIS 4000 MAP sensor |
Grand Rapids recommends placing the MAP sensor in the cockpit because it uses a
plastic case. I'm not going to because I've gone to a lot of effort and some
$'s to protect the cockpit from engine fires. Placing the sensor in the cockpit
means you would have to bring a manifold pressure hose through the firewall.
Has anyone else had any good or bad experience with this sensor in the engine
compartment.
thanks,
Rick Fogerson
Boise, ID
RV3 wiring
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rick Fogerson" <rickf(at)cableone.net> |
| Subject: | Wire bundling for minimum avionics noise |
Hi Bob,
I've read your book Re what wires can be bundled together several times and I'm
not completely sure if what I have done will avoid noise in the avionics. Could
you take a look and see if it appears okay? I have an RV3 with 2 batteries,
battery buses, contactors, and dual Electonic Ignition relays in the back.
Essentially there are three bundles in question as follows:
1) Starter power (2AWG), all ground block wires, and all LR-3 voltage reg. wires
bundled.
2) All engine sensor wires (EGT, CHT, Oil Temp/Press, Fuel Press, and MAP) bundled.
3) Avionics, pump, and auto pilot power and ground wires, Ess Bus sw, MicroAir
radio and xpdr shielded/twisted pairs and PTT twisted pair to head phones and
microphones. I'm most uncertain of this one!
Thanks Bob for all your help. I'm just about finished with wiring and couldn't
have done it with out you!
Rick Fogerson
RV3 wiring almost completed
Boise, ID
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-List: Brass Instrument Screws for MicroAir avionics |
McMaster Carr sells 8-36 screws, but only in the socket head cap form
factor, not a pan-head machine screw. See page 2898 of McMaster's online
catalog. For example, part #91251A494. http://www.mcmaster.com
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rick Fogerson" <rickf(at)cableone.net>
Subject: RV-List: Brass Instrument Screws for MicroAir avionics
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Rick Fogerson"
>
> The MicroAir radio and xpdr use 8-36 thread screws which is not common.
Does anyone know of a source for these. I need 8 and would prefer
countersunk brass screws but might have to consider other if forced to.
> Thanks for help,
> Rick Fogerson
> RV3 wiring
> Boise, ID
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-List: Brass Instrument Screws for MicroAir avionics |
Ah...found what you're looking for:
http://www.wicksaircraft.com/gotopage.php?page=94
)_( Dan
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com>
Subject: Re: RV-List: Brass Instrument Screws for MicroAir avionics
> McMaster Carr sells 8-36 screws, but only in the socket head cap form
> factor, not a pan-head machine screw. See page 2898 of McMaster's online
> catalog. For example, part #91251A494. http://www.mcmaster.com
>
> )_( Dan
> RV-7 N714D
> http://www.rvproject.com
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Rick Fogerson" <rickf(at)cableone.net>
> To: "RV List" ;
> Sent: Monday, January 12, 2004 9:18 PM
> Subject: RV-List: Brass Instrument Screws for MicroAir avionics
>
>
> > --> RV-List message posted by: "Rick Fogerson"
> >
> > The MicroAir radio and xpdr use 8-36 thread screws which is not common.
> Does anyone know of a source for these. I need 8 and would prefer
> countersunk brass screws but might have to consider other if forced to.
> > Thanks for help,
> > Rick Fogerson
> > RV3 wiring
> > Boise, ID
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bob Gibson" <bgibson(at)scientech.com> |
| Subject: | Web Page - Fuse Equivalency and Klixon Circuit Breaker |
"Dissection"
I'm working on a project with the FAA to establish "equivalency" between the
Bussman HKP panel fuse (the glass cartridge design) and the Bussman 15600
fuseblock which uses ATC blade-type fuses.
Just for fun, I also "dissected" a Klixon circuit breaker to show the parts
count (and complexity).
Summary and photos at
http://www.stratosaviation.net/CurrentStatusBOBKAT.html?1073933558719
Bob Gibson
AA5 - N5826L
Clearwater Airpark (CLW)
Mobile 727.644.8361
Web www.geocities.com/n5826l
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Brett Ferrell" <bferrell(at)123mail.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Courtesy Light Timer |
Don -
I've installed this timer / dimmer into my dome lights from the battery bus
on my Velocity. The lights stay on for 15 seconds and then gradually fade
to black "theater lighting" style....
http://www.seriousauto.com/electrical/lights-up/index.htm
Brett
----- Original Message -----
From: "Don Boardman" <dboardm3(at)twcny.rr.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Courtesy Light Timer
>
> Hi Bob,
>
> A while back you talked about wiring a courtesy light(s) from the battery
> bus. You mentioned putting the light(s) on a timer. Great idea! Turn on
the
> light without switching on the master and with a timer, no fear of
> accidentally leaving a light on to kill the battery.
> I certainly have never done that !
> #
> %*&&)(+!.
>
> At the time of the post you did not elaborate, no particulars, about the
> timer itself. How would one go about incorporating such an "automatic"
timer
> on such a circuit?
>
>
> Thanks,
> Don B.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-List: Brass Instrument Screws for MicroAir avionics |
Try a hardware store.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rick Fogerson" <rickf(at)cableone.net>
Subject: RV-List: Brass Instrument Screws for MicroAir avionics
> --> RV-List message posted by: "Rick Fogerson"
>
> The MicroAir radio and xpdr use 8-36 thread screws which is not common.
Does anyone know of a source for these. I need 8 and would prefer
countersunk brass screws but might have to consider other if forced to.
> Thanks for help,
> Rick Fogerson
> RV3 wiring
> Boise, ID
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Grand Rapids EIS 4000 MAP sensor |
Use a steel bulkhead fitting on the line so the plastic case is protected.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rick Fogerson" <rickf(at)cableone.net>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Grand Rapids EIS 4000 MAP sensor
>
> Grand Rapids recommends placing the MAP sensor in the cockpit because it
uses a plastic case. I'm not going to because I've gone to a lot of effort
and some $'s to protect the cockpit from engine fires. Placing the sensor
in the cockpit means you would have to bring a manifold pressure hose
through the firewall. Has anyone else had any good or bad experience with
this sensor in the engine compartment.
> thanks,
> Rick Fogerson
> Boise, ID
> RV3 wiring
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Grand Rapids EIS 4000 MAP sensor |
>
>Grand Rapids recommends placing the MAP sensor in the cockpit because it
>uses a plastic case. I'm not going to because I've gone to a lot of
>effort and some $'s to protect the cockpit from engine fires. Placing the
>sensor in the cockpit means you would have to bring a manifold pressure
>hose through the firewall. Has anyone else had any good or bad experience
>with this sensor in the engine compartment.
>thanks,
>Rick Fogerson
>Boise, ID
>RV3 wiring
It would be interesting to know the pedigree of the MAP
sensor . . . MOST products designed for this application
live very happily under the hood of a car . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Wire bundling for minimum avionics noise |
>
>Hi Bob,
>I've read your book Re what wires can be bundled together several times
>and I'm not completely sure if what I have done will avoid noise in the
>avionics. Could you take a look and see if it appears okay? I have an
>RV3 with 2 batteries, battery buses, contactors, and dual Electonic
>Ignition relays in the back. Essentially there are three bundles in
>question as follows:
>
>1) Starter power (2AWG), all ground block wires, and all LR-3 voltage reg.
>wires bundled.
>
>2) All engine sensor wires (EGT, CHT, Oil Temp/Press, Fuel Press, and MAP)
>bundled.
>
>3) Avionics, pump, and auto pilot power and ground wires, Ess Bus sw,
>MicroAir radio and xpdr shielded/twisted pairs and PTT twisted pair to
>head phones and microphones. I'm most uncertain of this one!
Looks good. I'll suggest your risks of noise from
bundle-to-bundle coupling are quite low . . .
>Thanks Bob for all your help. I'm just about finished with wiring and
>couldn't have done it with out you!
Pleased to be of assistance.
Bob . . .
-----------------------------------------
( Experience and common sense cannot be )
( replaced with policy and procedures. )
( R. L. Nuckolls III )
-----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: SD-8 Feeding E-Bus |
>
>Hi Bob,
>
>Hope you had fun at your weekend seminar and all went well.
>
>In figure (Z-13) The SD-8 section shows a #12 wire running from the
>regulator via the capacitor to a 701 relay. There is no need to protect this
>wire?
>
>
>The relay has the OVM-14 connected. No Diode needed?
>
>
>The #12 wire running form the always hot side of the battery contactor up to
>the relay to grab the juice from the SD-8 is protected by a #16 fuselink.
>I understand why the protection. My contactor is under the co-pilot's seat,
>with the battery and the battery bus, and the SD-8's relay is planned for
>behind the panel. Does this leave an always hot wire protected with a #16
>fuselink which would be over the 5A guideline for maximizing crash safety?
You betcha. The SD-8's control relay should be right next to the
fusible link installation close to the battery contactor.
>Would the following alternative routing work? In my case I think the
>following would facilitate wire installation.
>My alternate feed for the e-bus is via #12 wire and a 701 relay located at
>the battery bus under the seat, fused at 15 amps.
Yes.
> Instead of bringing the
>#12 feed from the SD-8's 701 relay to the under seat contactor, could I
>feed the system via the e-bus located behind the panel?
>At the e-bus I would use a #16 fuselink or a fuse slot from the e-bus.
That would probably be okay . . . from a noise perspective,
we like to feed the battery first (it's your best filter)
and then bring power from the battery to the e-bus . . . but
try it and see if you can hear any alternator noise. It's
easy to re-configure . . .
This DOES allow running the SD-8 to the e-bus with the altenrnate
feedpath open i.e., no battery at all.
>My thought is that the juice from the SD-8 with its "14v" would take the
>following path back to the battery.
>Regulator via capacitor to the relay, relay to e-bus, run back though the
>#12 e-bus feed, though the feed relay to the battery bus, to the contactor
>and finally to the battery. Boy the life of an electron!.
>
>If the above works, my conclusion is, that when both Master and E-bus
>switches are off in the case of a potential
>$#&
>%%*&
>*&$
> the #12 wire
>from the SD-8's relay is dead along with the relayed e-bus feed from the
>battery bus.
You could do this but I'd feel better about putting the
both e-bus alternate feed and SD-8 disconnect relays
right at the battery bus and wiring as shown in the digram.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Fiveonepw(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Grand Rapids EIS 4000 MAP sensor |
Hi Rick-
You might wish to consider using a 1/8" steel bulkhead fitting (same size a
priming lines) with a length of metal tubing on each side. The hose to the MAP
sensor slips very nicely over the tubing and should be a lot more fireproof
than your fuel line...
Wicks calls it a "Union" :
http://www.wicksaircraft.com/gotopage.php?page=138
Bottom of the page. They must be an endagered species, 'cause they ain't
cheap! ($15)
The nuts and sleeves (AN818-2D & MS20819-2D) I got from Genuine Aircraft
Harware (couldn't find 'em anywhere else!) phone #(805)239-3169
From The PossumWorks in TN
Mark
In a message dated 1/12/04 11:25:53 PM Central Standard Time,
rickf(at)cableone.net writes:
> Grand Rapids recommends placing the MAP sensor in the cockpit because it
> uses a plastic case. I'm not going to because I've gone to a lot of effort and
> some $'s to protect the cockpit from engine fires. Placing the sensor in
> the cockpit means you would have to bring a manifold pressure hose through the
> firewall.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | SD-8 Feeding E-Bus followup |
| From: | Don Boardman <dboardm3(at)twcny.rr.com> |
Good morning Bob,
OK, I will install the SD-8 relay at the battery bus, actually very close to
the contactor. It can be close enough to run a short 4" jumper of #16 from
the bat side of the contactor to the relay input. Then #12 to the SD-8.
From previous post:
>> In figure (Z-13) The SD-8 section shows a #12 wire running from the
>> regulator via the capacitor to a 701 relay. There is no need to protect this
>> wire? Is it that this wire sees no current if the relay is not closed?
>> The relay has the OVM-14 connected. No Diode needed?
Thanks,
Don B.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Tasker <retasker(at)optonline.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-List: Brass Instrument Screws for MicroAir avionics |
Did they specifically state that these are 8-36 screws? Or is it
possible that they are metric M4x0.7 screws (4mm dia, thread pitch 0.7mm)?
Dick Tasker, 9A #90573
Rick Fogerson wrote:
>--> RV-List message posted by: "Rick Fogerson"
>
>The MicroAir radio and xpdr use 8-36 thread screws which is not common. Does
anyone know of a source for these. I need 8 and would prefer countersunk brass
screws but might have to consider other if forced to.
>Thanks for help,
>Rick Fogerson
>RV3 wiring
>Boise, ID
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <huwrachel(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | RE: AeroElectric-List Digest: 14 Msgs - 01/12/04 (confirm |
please)
huwrachel(at)earthlink.net here,
I am controlling the email that is sent to my inbox. By asking for you
to confirm that you really sent email to me I can ensure that I receive
no spam and that your email address really exists.
This is a one time confirmation, please click the link below and your
email will be delivered straight away, now and in the future.
Click to confirm:
http://vetomail.com/ok/c249c6fd-4961-4232-b1a9-9ab137ff615f
<http://vetomail.com/ok/c249c6fd-4961-4232-b1a9-9ab137ff615f>
You are receiving this message in response to your email to
huwrachel(at)earthlink.net, a VetoMail customer.
VetoMail asks that senders verify their address before email is
delivered. When you have clicked the link above a webpage will be
displayed, if the page displays correctly your address has been
verified. You will only need to do this once per VetoMail protected
email address.
Thankyou.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: SD-8 Feeding E-Bus followup |
>
>Good morning Bob,
>
>OK, I will install the SD-8 relay at the battery bus, actually very close to
>the contactor. It can be close enough to run a short 4" jumper of #16 from
>the bat side of the contactor to the relay input. Then #12 to the SD-8.
I think that's the most elegant solution.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dave Morris <dave(at)davemorris.com> 01/12/04 (confirm please) |
| Subject: | Re: RE: AeroElectric-List Digest: 14 Msgs - |
01/12/04 (confirm please)
(confirm please)
This is the sort of thing that is driving eCommerce sites nuts these
days. You guys that have spam blockers that require verification need to
realize that automated systems cannot possibly respond to these
confirmation requests, and thus you are losing all the e-mails those sites
are sending you.
Dave Morris
>
>huwrachel(at)earthlink.net here,
>
>I am controlling the email that is sent to my inbox. By asking for you
>to confirm that you really sent email to me I can ensure that I receive
>no spam and that your email address really exists.
>
>This is a one time confirmation, please click the link below and your
>email will be delivered straight away, now and in the future.
>
>Click to confirm:
>http://vetomail.com/ok/c249c6fd-4961-4232-b1a9-9ab137ff615f
><http://vetomail.com/ok/c249c6fd-4961-4232-b1a9-9ab137ff615f>
>
>
>You are receiving this message in response to your email to
>huwrachel(at)earthlink.net, a VetoMail customer.
>
>VetoMail asks that senders verify their address before email is
>delivered. When you have clicked the link above a webpage will be
>displayed, if the page displays correctly your address has been
>verified. You will only need to do this once per VetoMail protected
>email address.
>
>Thankyou.
>
>
Dave Morris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Chris Adkins" <ccadkins(at)dragg.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RV-List: Brass Instrument Screws for MicroAir |
avionics
Those screws are metric. I have both a transponder and a transceiver,
and the manual even states that they're metric.
Chris
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-
> aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Richard Tasker
> Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2004 10:50 AM
> To: rv-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: RV-List: Brass Instrument Screws for
> MicroAir avionics
>
>
>
> Did they specifically state that these are 8-36 screws? Or is it
> possible that they are metric M4x0.7 screws (4mm dia, thread pitch
0.7mm)?
>
> Dick Tasker, 9A #90573
>
> Rick Fogerson wrote:
>
> >--> RV-List message posted by: "Rick Fogerson"
> >
> >The MicroAir radio and xpdr use 8-36 thread screws which is not
common.
> Does anyone know of a source for these. I need 8 and would prefer
> countersunk brass screws but might have to consider other if forced
to.
> >Thanks for help,
> >Rick Fogerson
> >RV3 wiring
> >Boise, ID
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
==
>
==
>
==
http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/AeroElectric-List.htm
>
==
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Chris Adkins" <ccadkins(at)dragg.net> |
| Subject: | RE: AeroElectric-List Digest: 14 Msgs - 01/12/04 |
(confirm please)
And in addition, Mr. huwrachel(at)earthlink.net has just been added to MY
"Junk Senders List"!!!
Chris :-)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-
> aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dave Morris
01/12/04
> (confirm please)
> Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2004 2:08 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: RE: AeroElectric-List Digest: 14 Msgs
-
> 01/12/04 (confirm please)
>
> 01/12/04 (confirm please)
>
> This is the sort of thing that is driving eCommerce sites nuts these
> days. You guys that have spam blockers that require verification need
to
> realize that automated systems cannot possibly respond to these
> confirmation requests, and thus you are losing all the e-mails those
sites
> are sending you.
>
> Dave Morris
>
>
>
> >
> >huwrachel(at)earthlink.net here,
> >
> >I am controlling the email that is sent to my inbox. By asking for
you
> >to confirm that you really sent email to me I can ensure that I
receive
> >no spam and that your email address really exists.
> >
> >This is a one time confirmation, please click the link below and your
> >email will be delivered straight away, now and in the future.
> >
> >Click to confirm:
> >http://vetomail.com/ok/c249c6fd-4961-4232-b1a9-9ab137ff615f
> ><http://vetomail.com/ok/c249c6fd-4961-4232-b1a9-9ab137ff615f>
> >
> >
> >You are receiving this message in response to your email to
> >huwrachel(at)earthlink.net, a VetoMail customer.
> >
> >VetoMail asks that senders verify their address before email is
> >delivered. When you have clicked the link above a webpage will be
> >displayed, if the page displays correctly your address has been
> >verified. You will only need to do this once per VetoMail protected
> >email address.
> >
> >Thankyou.
> >
> >
>
> Dave Morris
>
>
>
==
>
==
>
==
http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/AeroElectric-List.htm
>
==
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Boddicker <trumanst(at)netins.net> |
Bob,
I know you have been busy. Just checking. I sent you a PDF off list to look
at. Did you get it?
Thanks,
Kevin Boddicker
Luana, Iowa
Tri Q200 N7868B
Building
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Steve Mineart" <smineart(at)kdsi.net> |
| Subject: | aeroelectric seminar |
Bob,
Can't thank you enough for the excellent workshop at Jeff City, you've
really thought out a wealth of things electric, and are willing to meet us
wherever we're at on the learning curve. I thought I'd be a lone novice
among a bunch of guys talking about esoterica. I came away a believer that
I could approach my electric system confidently ( one wire at a time) . I
highly recommend the seminar to anyone building their plane. Thanks again!
Steve Mineart
CH601XL, tail, 90% L-wing
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: aeroelectric seminar |
>
>Bob,
>Can't thank you enough for the excellent workshop at Jeff City, you've
>really thought out a wealth of things electric, and are willing to meet us
>wherever we're at on the learning curve. I thought I'd be a lone novice
>among a bunch of guys talking about esoterica. I came away a believer that
>I could approach my electric system confidently ( one wire at a time) . I
>highly recommend the seminar to anyone building their plane. Thanks again!
Steve, thank you for the kind words. This was an exceptionally
"hungry" class . . . when Sunday afternoon rolls around I always
wish we had another day to go.
In addition to what you've already cited as beneficial about
last weekend, please consider this only a beginning of what
should be the most enjoyable part of the project. Consider
the paradigm shift I suggested by perhaps putting just enough
electrics in to get your fly-off done:
Rivets you drive are EXPECTED to be lifetime installations.
Bolts holding the engine are something that one hopes won't
be removed for at least 2,000 hours. It's difficult to shift
one's mode of thinking from "carved in stone" to "big box
of Tinker Toys" when it comes to stuff bolted to the panel.
Perhaps the 40-hour fly-off will help with readjustment
of the mindset. While you have almost zero choices/decisions
to make with respect to airframe, flight controls and power
plant, the electrical/avionics is a clean slate that can
ultimately reflect what YOU want from your airplane.
Further, that goal doesn't have to be met on any time table
nor does anything you try have to be left in place forever.
The learning curve on this stuff is very steep. I don't
know if you heard me mention an Ez builder who attended
one of my earliest seminars. He had been working on his
airplane about 10 years and already had lots of wiring
and other hardware installed. He wrote a month after
the seminar to say we went home and ripped out all
the stuff he'd already put in . . . and replaced everything
(and more) in a weekend!
Stay on the List and keep us apprised of both questions
and your progress!
Bob . . .
-----------------------------------------
( Experience and common sense cannot be )
( replaced with policy and procedures. )
( R. L. Nuckolls III )
-----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Schaefer" <dschaefer1(at)kc.rr.com> |
Any idea where I can find a 3/4" or 1" BRASS bolt to replace the 1 3/4" 5/16
bolt from B&C on the ground strip? I understand that the composite guys may
have a 1/2" firewall and need the long bold and gaggle of washers but us RV
guys only have a very thin stainless firewall. I called B&C today and they
don't have any shorter bolts.
Regards,
David Schaefer
RV6-A Finishing
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming(at)sigecom.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Buttsplice vs. Solder Heatshrink? |
Bob, I need to make a #2awg wire about 3 inches longer that runs to my
starter. I already got round connectors on ends. The reason is due to
needing to reroute the wire and allow a bit of slack for attaching
standoffs. What is the preferred way to do this or should I just bite the
bullet and buy new wire?
Indiana Larry
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Buttsplice vs. Solder Heatshrink?
>
> >
> >
> >Nothing wrong with that approach. If you have several to do, don't do
them
> >all at the same spot but space them out so you can later shrink over the
> >whole bunch and not look like a snake that swallowed an egg. Another
thing
> >to consider is using the machined d-sub pins. After you put a pin on
each
> >joining wire, you slide a hear shrink on and shrink it down after
plugging
> >together. Works nice on the wires that might need to come back apart at
a
> >later time but costs more. But for things like the panel where there are
> >lots of connections, you should consider Bob's suggestion that was posted
> >yesterday of using the D-sub connector with machined pins using safety
wire
> >to hold the two halves together.
> >
> >Keep in mind solder does make a hard connection and that needs some
relief
> >with the heat shrink and other supports.
>
> As do crimped joints as well. Insulation support adjacent
> to the electrical joint is automatically provided by the
> PIDG style terminal technology.
>
> Raychem makes solder butt splices that depend on nothing
> but solder for the mechanical and electrical connection
> with the final assembly being supported by a rather stiff
> cover of heatshrink for anti-flexure support.
>
> See
> http://www.raychem.com/US/datasheets/1654025_Sec_8/8-6_8-11.pdf
>
> So, if doing this with $1.00/pop solder sleeves is a good
> thing to do, I don't see why you couldn't use a similar
> technique using off-the-shelf solder and heatshrink.
>
> Bob . . .
>
> -----------------------------------------
> ( Experience and common sense cannot be )
> ( replaced with policy and procedures. )
> ( R. L. Nuckolls III )
> -----------------------------------------
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Don Boardman <dboardm3(at)twcny.rr.com> |
Hi Bob,
These Questions are from a previous post. They got lost in the shuffle.
1) In figure (Z-13) the SD-8 section shows a #12 wire running from the
regulator via the capacitor to the DS-8 relay near the contactor. Is there
a need to protect this wire when the relay is open? Is it that this wire
sees no current if the relay is open and when the relay is closed the wire
is protected by the #16 wire at the contactor?
2) The DS-8 relay has the OVM-14 connected. No Diode needed?
Thanks,
Don B.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Lonnie Benson" <lonben(at)erols.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Ground Bolt? |
Check your local plumbing supply store or cut the bolts you have to the
desired length.
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Schaefer" <dschaefer1(at)kc.rr.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Ground Bolt?
>
> Any idea where I can find a 3/4" or 1" BRASS bolt to replace the 1 3/4"
5/16
> bolt from B&C on the ground strip? I understand that the composite guys
may
> have a 1/2" firewall and need the long bold and gaggle of washers but us
RV
> guys only have a very thin stainless firewall. I called B&C today and
they
> don't have any shorter bolts.
>
> Regards,
>
> David Schaefer
> RV6-A Finishing
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "F1Rocket" <f1rocket(at)telus.net> |
| Subject: | Pyrotechnic actuation |
Hi all,
I'm trying to set up a method to control up to eight pyrotechnics mounted under
the wing.
The minimum actuation voltage is 1.5 volts. The switch will be from the momentary
stick grip. The first set will be triggered with one click of the button,
second set with the second click, and so on. I'm a little worried about false
actuation, so maybe a system where the button has to be held for one second?
The total number of shots will be 8.
Any ideas out there what might work?
Thanks,
Jeff
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Pyrotechnic actuation |
>
>In a message dated 1/13/2004 9:06:30 PM Mountain Standard Time,
>f1rocket(at)telus.net writes:
>
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I'm trying to set up a method to control up to eight pyrotechnics mounted
> > under the wing.
> >
> > The minimum actuation voltage is 1.5 volts. The switch will be from the
> > momentary stick grip. The first set will be triggered with one click
> of the
> > button, second set with the second click, and so on. I'm a little
> worried about
> > false actuation, so maybe a system where the button has to be held for one
> > second?
> >
> > The total number of shots will be 8.
> >
> > Any ideas out there what might work?
I did the recovery parachute controllers for the last three
installations at RAC on development aircraft. These
systems were totally actuated with explosives albeit
tiny ones in most cases. Monitoring and control of such
systems is relatively easy. The BIG consideration for
our systems was that they're completely redundant . . . two
systems operated in parallel with each other and we needed
to provide 100% testing of ship's wiring and initiators
for each preflight.
Can you provide some data on the initiators used in your
system?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Ground Bolt? |
>
>
>Any idea where I can find a 3/4" or 1" BRASS bolt to replace the 1 3/4" 5/16
>bolt from B&C on the ground strip? I understand that the composite guys may
>have a 1/2" firewall and need the long bold and gaggle of washers but us RV
>guys only have a very thin stainless firewall. I called B&C today and they
>don't have any shorter bolts.
Cut it off. Clamp head in vise and use hacksaw . . . or grap
head in visegrips and use bandsaw. After cutting, chamfer the
end of the threads on belt sander to remove burrs.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Buttsplice vs. Solder Heatshrink? |
>
>
>
>Bob, I need to make a #2awg wire about 3 inches longer that runs to my
>starter. I already got round connectors on ends. The reason is due to
>needing to reroute the wire and allow a bit of slack for attaching
>standoffs. What is the preferred way to do this or should I just bite the
>bullet and buy new wire?
Go to a welding shop and get some #4 welding cable to make
new jumpers. Connections this short can be smaller and the
welding cable is cheap, VERY flexible and quite suited to
the task.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Ground Bolt? |
Run a nut on the bolt BEFORE cutting.
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: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Ground Bolt?
>
> >
> >
> >Any idea where I can find a 3/4" or 1" BRASS bolt to replace the 1 3/4"
5/16
> >bolt from B&C on the ground strip? I understand that the composite guys
may
> >have a 1/2" firewall and need the long bold and gaggle of washers but us
RV
> >guys only have a very thin stainless firewall. I called B&C today and
they
> >don't have any shorter bolts.
>
> Cut it off. Clamp head in vise and use hacksaw . . . or grap
> head in visegrips and use bandsaw. After cutting, chamfer the
> end of the threads on belt sander to remove burrs.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie Kuss <chaskuss(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Ground Bolt? |
>
>
>>
>>
>>Any idea where I can find a 3/4" or 1" BRASS bolt to replace the 1 3/4" 5/16
>>bolt from B&C on the ground strip? I understand that the composite guys may
>>have a 1/2" firewall and need the long bold and gaggle of washers but us RV
>>guys only have a very thin stainless firewall. I called B&C today and they
>>don't have any shorter bolts.
>
> Cut it off. Clamp head in vise and use hacksaw . . . or grap
> head in visegrips and use bandsaw. After cutting, chamfer the
> end of the threads on belt sander to remove burrs.
>
> Bob . . .
Bob,
This will work much better if a nut is first threaded onto the bolt to be cut.
Then bevel the cut edge of the newly shortened bolt. Last, back the nut off of
the bolt. This will ensure that the all important first thread is straight and
true. Ask me how I know!! :-)
Charlie Kuss
RV-8A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RSamuelson(at)aol.com |
I have the same problem. I tried to cut threads on the long bolt but the nut
didn't fit correctly.
Can I use a bronze bolt? I can get them at my local marine hardware store.
Roy Samuelson
RV7A
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Ground Bolt? |
| From: | caspainhower(at)aep.com |
01/14/2004 10:40:22 AM
> Cut it off. Clamp head in vise and use hacksaw . . . or grap
> head in visegrips and use bandsaw. After cutting, chamfer the
> end of the threads on belt sander to remove burrs.
If the bolt length allows, I will also thread a nut on prior to cutting the
bolt. That way the nut will chase the threads when it is removed.
Obviously a die or thread chaser would do the same thing.
Craig S.
601XS
This e-mail message and all attachments transmitted with it from the
Nuclear Generation Group of American Electric Power are for the sole
use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and
privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or
distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please
contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original
message.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Instrument Wiring |
| From: | Don Boardman <dboardm3(at)twcny.rr.com> |
Hi Bob,
Tried a search in the archives but no joy.
I'm hesitant about taking anything for granted when it comes to building
airplanes, hence sometimes the questions which the answer to seems obvious.
My question concerns wiring up the several engine instruments for DC.
Is it proper technique to run groups of instruments off of one fuse and
daisy chain the +14v feed to the instruments one after the other?
Now the grounds. Daisy chain or each ground run separately?
Into the thick of it!
Thanks,
Don B
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
>
>
>Original message:
>
> >Gentlemen,
> >
> >Does anyone have a source for a progressive off-on-on DPDT switch rated for
> >20amps? It needs to look about like the panel switches from B&C.
>
> Why 20A?
>
> Bob . . .
>
>Bob,
>
>I KNEW you'd catch that. Just can't slip anything past you, can I? :-)
>I'm thinking of a way to simplify Z-14 by eliminating the battery contactor
>on the "#2" side of the setup. I wouldn't do this unless I could put the
>battery very close to the switch, like behind the instrument panel, on the
>aft side of the firewall. OK, shoot holes in this, please.
What are you doing about a cross-feed connection? Do you plan
to use the aux battery for cranking? Cranking currents are
a LOT bigger than 20A
Bob . . .
-----------------------------------------
( Experience and common sense cannot be )
( replaced with policy and procedures. )
( R. L. Nuckolls III )
-----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Ground Bolt? |
>
>
> > Cut it off. Clamp head in vise and use hacksaw . . . or grap
> > head in visegrips and use bandsaw. After cutting, chamfer the
> > end of the threads on belt sander to remove burrs.
>
>If the bolt length allows, I will also thread a nut on prior to cutting the
>bolt. That way the nut will chase the threads when it is removed.
>Obviously a die or thread chaser would do the same thing.
>
>Craig S.
>601XS
Another advantage of having a nut on while cutting is
that it's easier to grab the hex faces of both nut and
head in a vise. Threads this coarse are not difficult
to clean up by chamfering on the sander after the cut
but an ability to "chase" finer threads on smaller screws
is certainly helpful.
Bob . . .
-----------------------------------------
( Experience and common sense cannot be )
( replaced with policy and procedures. )
( R. L. Nuckolls III )
-----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Re Ground bolt |
>
>I have the same problem. I tried to cut threads on the long bolt but the nut
>didn't fit correctly.
>Can I use a bronze bolt? I can get them at my local marine hardware store.
Sure
Bob . . .
-----------------------------------------
( Experience and common sense cannot be )
( replaced with policy and procedures. )
( R. L. Nuckolls III )
-----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Chad Robinson <crobinson(at)rfgonline.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Ground Bolt? |
>>Any idea where I can find a 3/4" or 1" BRASS bolt to replace the 1 3/4" 5/16
>>bolt from B&C on the ground strip? I understand that the composite guys may
>>have a 1/2" firewall and need the long bold and gaggle of washers but us RV
>>guys only have a very thin stainless firewall. I called B&C today and they
>>don't have any shorter bolts.
>
>
> Cut it off. Clamp head in vise and use hacksaw . . . or grap
> head in visegrips and use bandsaw. After cutting, chamfer the
> end of the threads on belt sander to remove burrs.
Another good trick for cutting bolts is to thread a nut or two onto it first,
above the cut point. After cutting, removing the nuts will clean up the threads.
Regards,
Chad
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: SD-8 Hook up |
>
>Hi Bob,
>
>These Questions are from a previous post. They got lost in the shuffle.
>
>1) In figure (Z-13) the SD-8 section shows a #12 wire running from the
>regulator via the capacitor to the DS-8 relay near the contactor. Is there
>a need to protect this wire when the relay is open? Is it that this wire
>sees no current if the relay is open and when the relay is closed the wire
>is protected by the #16 wire at the contactor?
The burning source for this path is the battery. This is
why we use a fusible link (or battery bus fuse) at the
battery end -AND- mount the disconnect relay as close to
battery as practical. There are no other concerns for
"protection" of the wire elsewhere along the path.
>2) The DS-8 relay has the OVM-14 connected. No Diode needed?
This relay doesn't have much "kick" . . . but you can
add the diode if you wish.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Instrument Wiring |
>
>Hi Bob,
>
>Tried a search in the archives but no joy.
>
>I'm hesitant about taking anything for granted when it comes to building
>airplanes, hence sometimes the questions which the answer to seems obvious.
>
>My question concerns wiring up the several engine instruments for DC.
>Is it proper technique to run groups of instruments off of one fuse and
>daisy chain the +14v feed to the instruments one after the other?
>
>Now the grounds. Daisy chain or each ground run separately?
Engine instruments are not critical items for comfortable
termination of flight. If you have lots of fuse slots to
spare, there's nothing wrong with driving each instrument
from its own feeder . . . but if you ran them all from
a single feeder, that's okay too.
Bob . . .
-----------------------------------------
( Experience and common sense cannot be )
( replaced with policy and procedures. )
( R. L. Nuckolls III )
-----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Leonard Garceau" <lhgcpg(at)westriv.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Grand Rapids EIS 4000 MAP sensor |
I used a small steel tubing to go from the engine thru the firewall then
used rubber hose to connect to the MAP.
Leonard
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rick Fogerson" <rickf(at)cableone.net>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Grand Rapids EIS 4000 MAP sensor
>
> Grand Rapids recommends placing the MAP sensor in the cockpit because it
uses a plastic case. I'm not going to because I've gone to a lot of effort
and some $'s to protect the cockpit from engine fires. Placing the sensor
in the cockpit means you would have to bring a manifold pressure hose
through the firewall. Has anyone else had any good or bad experience with
this sensor in the engine compartment.
> thanks,
> Rick Fogerson
> Boise, ID
> RV3 wiring
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | don522(at)webtv.net (Don McCallister) |
Bob, are you having seminars towards the rest of this month or next???
A friend is asking me. Thanks.
Don Mc
Do not archeive.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dan Branstrom" <danbranstrom(at)verizon.net> |
For information, go to http://www.aeroelectric.com/whatsnew.html I copied
this from there.
Up-coming Forums and/or Weekend Seminars Scheduled
Jefferson City, MO January 10/11, 2004
Kansas City, MO, February 7/8, 2004
Groton, CT March 6/7, 2004
Nashville, TN May 1/2, 2004
Ft Worth, TX May 22/23, 2004
Dan Branstrom
McCallister)
>
> Bob, are you having seminars towards the rest of this month or next???
> A friend is asking me. Thanks.
> Don Mc
>
> Do not archeive.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "hollandm" <hollandm(at)pacbell.net> |
| Subject: | Adding a "T" connector in the com line? |
I'm thinking of putting a BNC T-connector in my COM antenna line, in the event
of a com radio malfunction, to facilitate using a handheld, which will be my 2nd
com.
Is there any issue with this in terms of interference with the primary antenna
feed or introducing a noise source?
Thanks
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)BowenAero.com> |
| Subject: | Grand Rapids EIS 4000 MAP sensor |
I plan to do the same with copper tubing.....
-
Larry Bowen
Larry(at)BowenAero.com
http://BowenAero.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Leonard Garceau [mailto:lhgcpg(at)westriv.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 1:38 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Grand Rapids EIS 4000 MAP sensor
>
>
> -->
>
> I used a small steel tubing to go from the engine thru the
> firewall then used rubber hose to connect to the MAP.
>
> Leonard
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Rick Fogerson" <rickf(at)cableone.net>
> To: ; "RV List"
>
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Grand Rapids EIS 4000 MAP sensor
>
>
>
> >
> > Grand Rapids recommends placing the MAP sensor in the
> cockpit because
> > it
> uses a plastic case. I'm not going to because I've gone to a
> lot of effort and some $'s to protect the cockpit from engine
> fires. Placing the sensor in the cockpit means you would
> have to bring a manifold pressure hose through the firewall.
> Has anyone else had any good or bad experience with this
> sensor in the engine compartment.
> > thanks,
> > Rick Fogerson
> > Boise, ID
> > RV3 wiring
> >
> >
>
>
> ============
> Matronics Forums.
> ============
> ============
> http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/AeroElectric-List.htm
> Search Engine: http://www.matronics.com/search
> ============
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Adding a 'T' connector in the com line? |
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
This is a question that has been addressed in various ways in
the archive. The short answer is that putting a T in line will at the
least need to have a 50ohm terminator plugged in when the
alternate feed isn't in use. Even then, I think you will see noticeable
degradation in your comm performance. Not from interference
per se, but because of feedline impedance issues.
What has been discussed in the past is to include some kind of
splitter device which connects only one device at a time to the
antenna. While this is nifty if you often plan to switch back and forth
between to comm radios, I think it seems like overkill for a rarely
used radio (your handheld). And, the splitter still represents a place
where the impedance of the feedline isn't perfect.
If it were my airplane, I would consider 2 options. The simplest
is to just plan to use the handheld's rubber ducky. It will work great
out to about 25mi, once you are in the air. It is light weight,
aerodynamic, and probably came with the radio. How often do you
NEED to be able to talk further than 25mi?
The other option I would consider is to see if I could route the antenna
feed line somewhere that I could cut it and install a pair of BNC
connectors - one male, and one female - in a location that is easily
accessible from the pilot seat while in flight. Maybe the glove box, or
in a loop of cable that is tucked behind the panel. Then, if my comm
crap's out, I pull the loop out, unplug the antenna from the radio, and
attach it to the handheld. The down side of this idea is that you will be
monkeying with some antenna cable while you might need to be flying
the plane instead.
Matt-
N34RD
>
>
> I'm thinking of putting a BNC T-connector in my COM antenna line, in the
> event of a com radio malfunction, to facilitate using a handheld, which
> will be my 2nd com.
>
> Is there any issue with this in terms of interference with the primary
> antenna feed or introducing a noise source?
>
> Thanks
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dave Morris <dave(at)davemorris.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Adding a "T" connector in the com line? |
You can't treat RF transmission lines like DC wires. A "T" connector could
be used, but you would need to make sure you disconnect any unused coax
going to the primary comm radio in the event you hook up the handheld. You
don't want anything "dangling" off the direct line between the radio and
the antenna. A better solution might be to get a $25 coax switch designed
for VHF frequencies (example
http://www.mfjenterprises.com/products.php?prodid=MFJ-1702C) and mount it
on the instrument panel along with a BNC connector to allow you to switch
between the built-in radio and any external radio you decide to plug into
the BNC.
Dave Morris
At 07:20 PM 1/14/2004, you wrote:
>
>I'm thinking of putting a BNC T-connector in my COM antenna line, in the
>event of a com radio malfunction, to facilitate using a handheld, which
>will be my 2nd com.
>
>Is there any issue with this in terms of interference with the primary
>antenna feed or introducing a noise source?
>
>Thanks
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Adding a "T" connector in the com line? |
>
>I'm thinking of putting a BNC T-connector in my COM antenna line, in the
>event of a com radio malfunction, to facilitate using a handheld, which
>will be my 2nd com.
>
>Is there any issue with this in terms of interference with the primary
>antenna feed or introducing a noise source?
Not a T but a simple cable-male/cable-female splice in the
line that allows you to break into the external com antenna
and attach a short jumper for the hand held. See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/commtap/commtap.html
I prefer plan -A- but if you want a sexier solution
you can go for -B- . . .
A T-connector will not disconnect the alternate com
system when transmitting. This puts a LOT more power
into the receiver of the non-transmitting radio
than it is designed to withstand . . . usually
toasts the front end transistor.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "AI Nut" <ainut(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Grand Rapids EIS 4000 MAP sensor |
Many people discourage the use of copper tubing as it will leak and break
over time. Apparently, copper can't stand up to the relatively high
vibration environment.
AI Nut
----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)BowenAero.com>
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Grand Rapids EIS 4000 MAP sensor
>
> I plan to do the same with copper tubing.....
>
> -
> Larry Bowen
> Larry(at)BowenAero.com
> http://BowenAero.com
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Leonard Garceau [mailto:lhgcpg(at)westriv.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 1:38 PM
> > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Grand Rapids EIS 4000 MAP sensor
> >
> >
> > -->
> >
> > I used a small steel tubing to go from the engine thru the
> > firewall then used rubber hose to connect to the MAP.
> >
> > Leonard
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Rick Fogerson" <rickf(at)cableone.net>
> > To: ; "RV List"
> >
> > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Grand Rapids EIS 4000 MAP sensor
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Grand Rapids recommends placing the MAP sensor in the
> > cockpit because
> > > it
> > uses a plastic case. I'm not going to because I've gone to a
> > lot of effort and some $'s to protect the cockpit from engine
> > fires. Placing the sensor in the cockpit means you would
> > have to bring a manifold pressure hose through the firewall.
> > Has anyone else had any good or bad experience with this
> > sensor in the engine compartment.
> > > thanks,
> > > Rick Fogerson
> > > Boise, ID
> > > RV3 wiring
> > >
> > >
> >
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)BowenAero.com> |
| Subject: | Grand Rapids EIS 4000 MAP sensor |
What's recommended then? Name your source. I think I got the copper
idea from Tony Bengelis's book. If it's coiled/supported/etc properly,
it should be good.
Thanks,
-
Larry Bowen
Larry(at)BowenAero.com
http://BowenAero.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: AI Nut [mailto:ainut(at)earthlink.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 10:05 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Grand Rapids EIS 4000 MAP sensor
>
>
>
>
> Many people discourage the use of copper tubing as it will
> leak and break over time. Apparently, copper can't stand up
> to the relatively high vibration environment.
>
> AI Nut
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)BowenAero.com>
> To:
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Grand Rapids EIS 4000 MAP sensor
>
>
>
> >
> > I plan to do the same with copper tubing.....
> >
> > -
> > Larry Bowen
> > Larry(at)BowenAero.com
> > http://BowenAero.com
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Leonard Garceau [mailto:lhgcpg(at)westriv.com]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 1:38 PM
> > > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> > > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Grand Rapids EIS 4000 MAP sensor
> > >
> > >
> > > -->
> > >
> > > I used a small steel tubing to go from the engine thru
> the firewall
> > > then used rubber hose to connect to the MAP.
> > >
> > > Leonard
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Rick Fogerson" <rickf(at)cableone.net>
> > > To: ; "RV List"
> > >
> > > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Grand Rapids EIS 4000 MAP sensor
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Grand Rapids recommends placing the MAP sensor in the
> > > cockpit because
> > > > it
> > > uses a plastic case. I'm not going to because I've gone
> to a lot of
> > > effort and some $'s to protect the cockpit from engine fires.
> > > Placing the sensor in the cockpit means you would have to bring a
> > > manifold pressure hose through the firewall. Has anyone
> else had any
> > > good or bad experience with this sensor in the engine compartment.
> > > > thanks,
> > > > Rick Fogerson
> > > > Boise, ID
> > > > RV3 wiring
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
>
>
> ============
> Matronics Forums.
> ============
> ============
> http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/AeroElectric-List.htm
> Search Engine: http://www.matronics.com/search
> ============
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "AI Nut" <ainut(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Grand Rapids EIS 4000 MAP sensor |
A fitting through the firewall, and rubber tubing will work just fine, but
you might want to get the reinforced type so that it can't collapse under
vacuum (over time.) Replace every few years just in case; it's cheap
enough. You might pose this question on the homebuilt or general aviation
newsgroups.
Some of the books I have on homebuilts talk about the problems with copper
tubing. I need to replace mine as it's used as a borboun (sp?) tube for the
panel oil pressure sensor 8-(. Would not like to have hot oil in my lap.
If I can figure a way, I'll not use that sensor and try to use one under the
cowling so as not to bring hot oil into the cockpit at all.
AI Nut
----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)BowenAero.com>
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Grand Rapids EIS 4000 MAP sensor
>
> What's recommended then? Name your source. I think I got the copper
> idea from Tony Bengelis's book. If it's coiled/supported/etc properly,
> it should be good.
>
> Thanks,
>
> -
> Larry Bowen
> Larry(at)BowenAero.com
> http://BowenAero.com
>
>
<<>>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dave Morris <dave(at)davemorris.com> |
Hmmm... I don't think you can use a headphone jack in an RF application
like that without introducing a huge impedance bump in the system. I would
sure put an SWR bridge on the whole thing and see what happens. VHF
circuits are very sensitive to discontinuity in the line and only
connectors that maintain the 50 Ohm impedance should be used. I think I
would go for Plan A.
Dave Morris
At 08:34 PM 1/14/2004, you wrote:
>
>
> >
> >I'm thinking of putting a BNC T-connector in my COM antenna line, in the
> >event of a com radio malfunction, to facilitate using a handheld, which
> >will be my 2nd com.
> >
> >Is there any issue with this in terms of interference with the primary
> >antenna feed or introducing a noise source?
>
> Not a T but a simple cable-male/cable-female splice in the
> line that allows you to break into the external com antenna
> and attach a short jumper for the hand held. See:
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/commtap/commtap.html
>
> I prefer plan -A- but if you want a sexier solution
> you can go for -B- . . .
>
> A T-connector will not disconnect the alternate com
> system when transmitting. This puts a LOT more power
> into the receiver of the non-transmitting radio
> than it is designed to withstand . . . usually
> toasts the front end transistor.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Loran Antenna Pre Amp |
| From: | Don Boardman <dboardm3(at)twcny.rr.com> |
Hi Bob,
I am installing a Apollo 612C (3-1/8 round) Loran for back up navigation.
The antenna uses an A-6 Bulkhead Pre Amp... BNC on both ends. My question,
as I can no longer put my hands on the manual, is whether the pre amp is
mounted close to the roof mounted antenna or close to the Loran unit? Or
doesn't it matter?
Thanks,
Don B.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dj Merrill <deej(at)thayer.dartmouth.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: Adding a "T" connector in the com line? |
Dave Morris wrote:
>
> You can't treat RF transmission lines like DC wires. A "T" connector could
> be used, but you would need to make sure you disconnect any unused coax
> going to the primary comm radio in the event you hook up the handheld. You
> don't want anything "dangling" off the direct line between the radio and
> the antenna. A better solution might be to get a $25 coax switch designed
> for VHF frequencies (example
> http://www.mfjenterprises.com/products.php?prodid=MFJ-1702C) and mount it
> on the instrument panel along with a BNC connector to allow you to switch
> between the built-in radio and any external radio you decide to plug into
> the BNC.
In fact I have a similar device that I'd be willing to
let go cheap. It is a Narco VP-16 unit, has one antenna
and two comm radio connections. It has an electric relay
that connects the antenna to Comm 1 when no power and
Comm 2 when energized.
I think I paid something like $50 or it, but since I'm
not going to use it, make me an offer off list
if you are interested.
-Dj
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
>
>
>Hmmm... I don't think you can use a headphone jack in an RF application
>like that without introducing a huge impedance bump in the system. I would
>sure put an SWR bridge on the whole thing and see what happens. VHF
>circuits are very sensitive to discontinuity in the line and only
>connectors that maintain the 50 Ohm impedance should be used. I think I
>would go for Plan A.
>
>Dave Morris
I did run out to the lab and put this rig on the test
equipment . . . you can see the "bump" but it isn't
all that bad. Given that VSWR on a comm antenna over
the range of interest can be 3:1 or so, the little
discontinuity offered by the jack was no big deal . . .
but it IS a tad flimsy . . . 1/4" jack would probably
be more reliable.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Neal A. Dillman" <neald(at)glyph.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Loran Antenna Pre Amp |
Don,
If I remember correctly, That preamp is designed to work with "long-wire
antennas" (ie: an ADF antenna). The unit get's mounted to the fuselage
(it needs to see ground) next to the start of the long-wire antenna.
Regards,
Neal
Don Boardman wrote:
>
>Hi Bob,
>
>I am installing a Apollo 612C (3-1/8 round) Loran for back up navigation.
>The antenna uses an A-6 Bulkhead Pre Amp... BNC on both ends. My question,
>as I can no longer put my hands on the manual, is whether the pre amp is
>mounted close to the roof mounted antenna or close to the Loran unit? Or
>doesn't it matter?
>
>
>Thanks,
>Don B.
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Loran Antenna Pre Amp |
In a message dated 1/14/04 9:49:53 PM Central Standard Time,
dboardm3(at)twcny.rr.com writes:
I am installing a Apollo 612C (3-1/8 round) Loran for back up navigation.
Good Evening Dan,
Will the Loran be a back up for a GPS?
I can see where you may feel that the GPS could be compromised by terrorist
action or even by some misguided interference by the US Military, but LORAN, at
it's very best, can't hold a candle to a one hundred dollar handheld GPS when
it comes to accuracy or routine reliability.
I have seen panel mount VFR GPS units go for one hundred dollars or less on
Ebay.
The Loran antenna is generally bigger and draggier than a GPS antenna.
The Loran will undoubtedly weigh more than a current production handheld GPS
and probably no more than an older, low cost, used, panel mount GPS
Even if I had the 612C on my shelf, I don't think I would spend the time it
took to install it in an airplane.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Airpark LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8502
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Don Boardman <dboardm3(at)twcny.rr.com> |
HI OLD BOB,
> dboardm3(at)twcny.rr.com writes:
> I am installing a Apollo 612C (3-1/8 round) Loran for back up navigation.
> Good Evening Don,
>
> Will the Loran be a back up for a GPS?
YES, A KING KMD150
> I can see where you may feel that the GPS could be compromised by terrorist
> action or even by some misguided interference by the US Military,
NO NOT A CONCERN
> but LORAN, at
> it's very best, can't hold a candle to a one hundred dollar handheld GPS when
> it comes to accuracy or routine reliability.
FLOWN MANY A HAPPY HOUR WITH LORAN. WEATHER EFFECTS ON RARE OCASION.
> The Loran antenna is generally bigger and draggier than a GPS antenna.
ISN'T BIGGER BETTER,... JUST KIDDING.
> The Loran will undoubtedly weigh more than a current production handheld GPS
IN MOST CASES I'D RATHER NOT FIDDLE WITH A HANDHELD IN THE COCKPIT.
> and probably no more than an older, low cost, used, panel mount GPS
> Even if I had the 612C on my shelf, I don't think I would spend the time it
> took to install it in an airplane.
OLD BOB, YOU HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD. ON THE SELF! I SPENT $1400 IN 1988
FOR IT TO INSTALL IN A MOTORGLIDER. NEVER GOT INSTALLED. SO HAVING HAD GOOD
EXPERIENCES WITH LORAN AND REALLY LIKING THE WAY IT LOOKS, IT'S IN THE
PANEL. EMPHISIS REALLY LIKING THE WAY IT LOOKS.
> Happy Skies Old Bob,
I do appreciate your comments and in most cases sound advice.
Don B.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Loran Antenna Pre Amp |
| From: | Don Boardman <dboardm3(at)twcny.rr.com> |
Hi Neal,
So are you saying that using a "real" Loran Antenna, one of those that was
designed to look like a Cessna com antenna, the pre amp is not necessary?
> If I remember correctly, That preamp is designed to work with "long-wire
> antennas" (ie: an ADF antenna). The unit get's mounted to the fuselage
> (it needs to see ground) next to the start of the long-wire antenna.
>
> Regards,
> Neal
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dave Morris <dave(at)davemorris.com> |
That's good to know! My point of reference is amateur radio and satellite
tracking, where we pump hundreds of watts through the transmission line and
listen for very faint signals, and a 3:1 SWR or an insertion loss of 3dB
would be intolerable. I suppose in this application it's not so bad.
Dave
>
>
> >
> >
> >Hmmm... I don't think you can use a headphone jack in an RF application
> >like that without introducing a huge impedance bump in the system. I would
> >sure put an SWR bridge on the whole thing and see what happens. VHF
> >circuits are very sensitive to discontinuity in the line and only
> >connectors that maintain the 50 Ohm impedance should be used. I think I
> >would go for Plan A.
> >
> >Dave Morris
>
> I did run out to the lab and put this rig on the test
> equipment . . . you can see the "bump" but it isn't
> all that bad. Given that VSWR on a comm antenna over
> the range of interest can be 3:1 or so, the little
> discontinuity offered by the jack was no big deal . . .
> but it IS a tad flimsy . . . 1/4" jack would probably
> be more reliable.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
Dave Morris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Loran Antenna Pre Amp |
>
>Hi Bob,
>
>I am installing a Apollo 612C (3-1/8 round) Loran for back up navigation.
>The antenna uses an A-6 Bulkhead Pre Amp... BNC on both ends. My question,
>as I can no longer put my hands on the manual, is whether the pre amp is
>mounted close to the roof mounted antenna or close to the Loran unit? Or
>doesn't it matter?
It depends on what the pre-amp expects to see at its input. The additional
capacity of coax feeder between antenna and pre-amp may upset the designer's
intentions. I think it's safe to mount it as close to the antenna as
practical.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
In a message dated 1/15/04 12:14:12 AM Central Standard Time,
dboardm3(at)twcny.rr.com writes:
AND REALLY LIKING THE WAY IT LOOKS, IT'S IN THE
PANEL.
Good Morning Don,
Now that is a reason I can really identify with!
No more reason is needed by any of us.
Incidentally, my son and I jointly own a Piper Pacer in which we recently
deactivated a Loran.
When we installed it fifteen or more years ago, we used two identical
antennas. One for the King comm unit and one for the Apollo Loran. It is my
recollection that we mounted some sort of amplifier directly alongside the Loran
antenna in the wing. When we deactivated the Loran, the antenna was connected
via
a new length of coax so that a handheld could easily be used with it in the
cockpit. We had an electronics technician make the change. I am not certain he
removed the amplifier, but I do know it was removed from the circuit.
The aircraft is regularly flown IFR. We did want a bit of a back up in case
of primary comm failure.
A Garmin 196 is currently being used as a back up to the Terra NAV equipment,
but we do have plans to install an IFR approved Trimble TNL 2000 Approach
Plus in place of the panel mounted Apollo Loran. One of the airports into which
the Pacer is regularly operated has no IFR approaches other than two GPSs.
On top of that, I just like the looks of the Trimble unit!
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
>
> > I can see where you may feel that the GPS could be compromised by terrorist
> > action or even by some misguided interference by the US Military,
>
>NO NOT A CONCERN
>
>
> > but LORAN, at
> > it's very best, can't hold a candle to a one hundred dollar handheld
> GPS when
> > it comes to accuracy or routine reliability.
>
>FLOWN MANY A HAPPY HOUR WITH LORAN. WEATHER EFFECTS ON RARE OCASION.
>
> > The Loran antenna is generally bigger and draggier than a GPS antenna.
>
>ISN'T BIGGER BETTER,... JUST KIDDING.
>
> > The Loran will undoubtedly weigh more than a current production
> handheld GPS
>
>IN MOST CASES I'D RATHER NOT FIDDLE WITH A HANDHELD IN THE COCKPIT.
>
> > and probably no more than an older, low cost, used, panel mount GPS
> > Even if I had the 612C on my shelf, I don't think I would spend the time it
> > took to install it in an airplane.
>
>OLD BOB, YOU HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD. ON THE SELF! I SPENT $1400 IN 1988
>FOR IT TO INSTALL IN A MOTORGLIDER. NEVER GOT INSTALLED. SO HAVING HAD GOOD
>EXPERIENCES WITH LORAN AND REALLY LIKING THE WAY IT LOOKS, IT'S IN THE
>PANEL. EMPHISIS REALLY LIKING THE WAY IT LOOKS.
LORAN, in spite of it's age is still a very capable nav system
and it's really hard to beat the return on investment compared
to what the gvmt paid for the VOR, ADF and GPS systems over the
years. Neat thing about LORAN is that it's not affected by sunspot
activity and tougher to jam but is affected by thunderstorms and
on-board noise sources. GPS on the other hand is relatively unaffected
by thunderstorms.
Given the dirt cheap chip-sets for receiving/decoding both
signals, it's always mystified me as to why folks didn't offer
dual receivers . . . with software to integrate the two signals
together into a nav package with a very high order of accuracy
and reliability. It's a certainty that the dollars to maintain
the few transmitters in the LORAN chains is a small fraction of
that required to maintain VOR/ADF facilities and COULD be an
excellent substitute while augmenting GPS. A dual LORAN/GPS
package need be no larger than either as a stand-alone system.
Software for integrating multiple nav signals for improved
accuracy and reliability is old hat.
Of course, folks-who-know-more-about-aviation-than-we-do
STILL can't find their fannies with both hands to get
wide area GPS error transmission systems up and running
for aircraft. In the mean time, folks-who-know-more-about-boats-
than-we-do have been doing it for decades. I guess we'd
better not suggest too many ideas outside the box until
after they find their box.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming(at)sigecom.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Grand Rapids EIS 4000 MAP sensor |
You should use something like the stainless braided hoses for connection
from engine to firewall. The pressure is not great but the vibration is the
concern. Vans Aircraft sells a kit for connecting the MAP from the engine
to the cockpit side of the firewall where you would then jury rig whatever
you need to do to get into your engine monitor. This is how I did it with
my ACS2002 system. You might give Vans a call. Here is their web site to
get you started. www.vansaircraft.com
Best Wishes.
Indiana Larry, RV7 Tip-up TMX-O-360 ACS2002 Dynon CNS430 Digitrak
On Finish Kit
----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)BowenAero.com>
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Grand Rapids EIS 4000 MAP sensor
>
> What's recommended then? Name your source. I think I got the copper
> idea from Tony Bengelis's book. If it's coiled/supported/etc properly,
> it should be good.
>
> Thanks,
>
> -
> Larry Bowen
> Larry(at)BowenAero.com
> http://BowenAero.com
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: AI Nut [mailto:ainut(at)earthlink.net]
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 10:05 PM
> > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Grand Rapids EIS 4000 MAP sensor
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Many people discourage the use of copper tubing as it will
> > leak and break over time. Apparently, copper can't stand up
> > to the relatively high vibration environment.
> >
> > AI Nut
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)BowenAero.com>
> > To:
> > Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Grand Rapids EIS 4000 MAP sensor
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > I plan to do the same with copper tubing.....
> > >
> > > -
> > > Larry Bowen
> > > Larry(at)BowenAero.com
> > > http://BowenAero.com
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Leonard Garceau [mailto:lhgcpg(at)westriv.com]
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 1:38 PM
> > > > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> > > > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Grand Rapids EIS 4000 MAP sensor
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -->
> > > >
> > > > I used a small steel tubing to go from the engine thru
> > the firewall
> > > > then used rubber hose to connect to the MAP.
> > > >
> > > > Leonard
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Rick Fogerson" <rickf(at)cableone.net>
> > > > To: ; "RV List"
> > > >
> > > > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Grand Rapids EIS 4000 MAP sensor
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Grand Rapids recommends placing the MAP sensor in the
> > > > cockpit because
> > > > > it
> > > > uses a plastic case. I'm not going to because I've gone
> > to a lot of
> > > > effort and some $'s to protect the cockpit from engine fires.
> > > > Placing the sensor in the cockpit means you would have to bring a
> > > > manifold pressure hose through the firewall. Has anyone
> > else had any
> > > > good or bad experience with this sensor in the engine compartment.
> > > > > thanks,
> > > > > Rick Fogerson
> > > > > Boise, ID
> > > > > RV3 wiring
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> >
> >
> > ============
> > Matronics Forums.
> > ============
> > ============
> > http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/AeroElectric-List.htm
> > Search Engine: http://www.matronics.com/search
> > ============
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James E. Clark" <james(at)nextupventures.com> |
Bob,
I think Northstar did in fact try this approach. I think the model number
was the M2 (or was it the 600?)
The problem, I think, is that it was not a market success and the mindset of
current buyers is probably one that would not pay more for a unit that has
the "Loran backup feature". Most people would probably view the offering as
"old technology" and shy away from it ... a double whammy.
In any case, it **seems** that in their efforts to try to do this, they lost
ground and the GPS only crowd got ahead of them. Pity. I have used a
Northstar M1 Loran, in conjunction with a handheld GPS, in my Piper for the
10 years I have had it. Being panel mounted has advantages and having knobs
that can be turned in turbulent weather has advantages as well.
Recently I have been trying to convince a friend who still has one of the
OLD TI lorans in his Cessna to at least replace it with one of the M1s I
have in "storage". :-) .
James
> -----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
> Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2004 9:17 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Why Loran
>[SNIP]
>
> Given the dirt cheap chip-sets for receiving/decoding both
> signals, it's always mystified me as to why folks didn't offer
---------> dual receivers . . . with software to integrate the two
signals
> together into a nav package with a very high order of accuracy
> and reliability. It's a certainty that the dollars to maintain
> the few transmitters in the LORAN chains is a small fraction of
> that required to maintain VOR/ADF facilities and COULD be an
> excellent substitute while augmenting GPS. A dual LORAN/GPS
> package need be no larger than either as a stand-alone system.
> Software for integrating multiple nav signals for improved
> accuracy and reliability is old hat.
> [SNIP]
> Bob . . .
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Grand Rapids EIS 4000 MAP sensor |
>
>
>You should use something like the stainless braided hoses for connection
>from engine to firewall. The pressure is not great but the vibration is the
>concern. Vans Aircraft sells a kit for connecting the MAP from the engine
>to the cockpit side of the firewall where you would then jury rig whatever
>you need to do to get into your engine monitor. This is how I did it with
>my ACS2002 system. You might give Vans a call. Here is their web site to
>get you started. www.vansaircraft.com
We're getting wrapped around some pretty big axles here . . .
First, a MAP sensor looks at manifold pressure . . . which
is never greater than atmospheric unless you're super-charged.
Second, given the amount of air that runs into the engine at
full throttle, the amount of air that gets in should the
MAP sensor line become completely disconnected is VERY
small by comparison. Loss of this line is immediately
observable on the instrument and zero risk to the engine.
A copper line to convey pressure in a very low viscosity
fluid (air) can be quite small in cross section and
has a lot of cross section in walls compared to
the bore . . . these are not especially vulnerable
to vibration stress cracking. Taking this line through
the firewall in metal fittings is a firewall integrity
issue . . . easy and cheap to do. If this is an automotive
MAP sensor, I'd consider mounting it to some point low on
right on the engine or at least on the firewall and avoid
penetrating the firewall at all. If one decided to bring
the sensor inside the cabin, it's not a big deal.
Jacketed lines, stainless hardware, etc. etc. are certainly
capable of doing the job . . . but I'll suggest they're
not necessary.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Troy Scott" <tscott1217(at)bellsouth.net> |
>Original message:
>
> >Gentlemen,
> >
> >Does anyone have a source for a progressive off-on-on DPDT switch rated
for
> >20amps? It needs to look about like the panel switches from B&C.
>
> Why 20A?
>
> Bob . . .
>
>Bob,
>
>I KNEW you'd catch that. Just can't slip anything past you, can I? :-)
>I'm thinking of a way to simplify Z-14 by eliminating the battery contactor
>on the "#2" side of the setup. I wouldn't do this unless I could put the
>battery very close to the switch, like behind the instrument panel, on the
>aft side of the firewall. OK, shoot holes in this, please.
What are you doing about a cross-feed connection? Do you plan
to use the aux battery for cranking? Cranking currents are
a LOT bigger than 20A
Bob . . .
Bob,
My electrical system(s) architecture is in the planning (evolving) stage.
What I'm thinking NOW is a system much like Z-14, except eliminating the
charging system on the secondary bus and replacing the cross feed contactor
with a big diode. I would put the EFIS One and one electronic ignition on
the secondary system, with the electronic ignition on the battery bus. This
secondary system should provide relatively steady, clean power to the
electronic ignition and the EFIS One during engine starting. On the primary
bus, I would interlock the starter button with the switch for the other
electronic ignition, such that the electronic ignition on the same battery
as the starter will necessarily be OFF during starting. Hopefully, this
will avoid the occasional kickback (or other) starting problems that happen
because the electronic ignition either goes off-line or (worse) gets
confused.
Because I'm NOT (at this stage of my planning) thinking of having much other
than the EFIS One, one electronic ignition, the electric fuel pump and four
voyager lights on the secondary system, I think probably using a hefty
switch instead of a contactor on this secondary battery might be sufficient;
That is, if the wire from the battery to the switch is relatively short
and/or well protected at the battery end. Thoughts?
Regards,
Troy Scott
tscott1217(at)bellsouth.net
P.S. I can't take full credit for the system architecture I've described.
It's a variation on an idea given to me by Glen Matejcek.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jeff Hildebrand" <jhildebrand(at)crownequip.com> |
| Subject: | Garmin GMA 340 audio panel music input |
I am wiring a CD player to my Garmin GMA 340 audio panel. In the
installation guide it shows 3 pins for Music 1 input.
Music 1 L In
Music 1 R In
Music 1 Return
What is the Music 1 Return pin for?
Thanks,
Jeff Hildebrand
Lancair Super ES
http://lancair.northstartraffic.ca
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Dudley <rhdudley(at)att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Garmin GMA 340 audio panel music input |
Jeff,
The return is the completion of the two circuits rather than using
airframe ground, isolating the audio from noise and stray currents in
the ground. So, the body of the jack is isolated from airfram ground.
Richard Dudley
-6A final details
Jeff Hildebrand wrote:
>
>
> I am wiring a CD player to my Garmin GMA 340 audio panel. In the
> installation guide it shows 3 pins for Music 1 input.
>
> Music 1 L In
>
> Music 1 R In
>
> Music 1 Return
>
> What is the Music 1 Return pin for?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jeff Hildebrand
>
> Lancair Super ES
>
> http://lancair.northstartraffic.ca
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
>
>
> >Original message:
> >
> > >Gentlemen,
> > >
> > >Does anyone have a source for a progressive off-on-on DPDT switch rated
>for
> > >20amps? It needs to look about like the panel switches from B&C.
> >
> > Why 20A?
> >
> > Bob . . .
> >
> >Bob,
> >
> >I KNEW you'd catch that. Just can't slip anything past you, can I? :-)
> >I'm thinking of a way to simplify Z-14 by eliminating the battery contactor
> >on the "#2" side of the setup. I wouldn't do this unless I could put the
> >battery very close to the switch, like behind the instrument panel, on the
> >aft side of the firewall. OK, shoot holes in this, please.
>
> What are you doing about a cross-feed connection? Do you plan
> to use the aux battery for cranking? Cranking currents are
> a LOT bigger than 20A
>
> Bob . . .
>
>Bob,
>
>My electrical system(s) architecture is in the planning (evolving) stage.
>What I'm thinking NOW is a system much like Z-14, except eliminating the
>charging system on the secondary bus and replacing the cross feed contactor
>with a big diode. I would put the EFIS One and one electronic ignition on
>the secondary system, with the electronic ignition on the battery bus. This
>secondary system should provide relatively steady, clean power to the
>electronic ignition and the EFIS One during engine starting. On the primary
>bus, I would interlock the starter button with the switch for the other
>electronic ignition, such that the electronic ignition on the same battery
>as the starter will necessarily be OFF during starting. Hopefully, this
>will avoid the occasional kickback (or other) starting problems that happen
>because the electronic ignition either goes off-line or (worse) gets
>confused.
>
>Because I'm NOT (at this stage of my planning) thinking of having much other
>than the EFIS One, one electronic ignition, the electric fuel pump and four
>voyager lights on the secondary system, I think probably using a hefty
>switch instead of a contactor on this secondary battery might be sufficient;
>That is, if the wire from the battery to the switch is relatively short
>and/or well protected at the battery end. Thoughts?
What are voyager lights?
Hmmm . . . how about Figure Z-13 with a second battery (Z-30).
Run the electronic ignition and EFIS from small aux battery
but don't close the aux battery contactor until after the
engine starts.
I'm really confused. If you don't plan to have two alternators,
then you don't have a "secondary system". Let's back up
and see what the requirments are:
List each bus you plan to incorporate.
List each item on the bus and how much continuous current
it draws.
Cite any needs to protect products that can't live in real
world such as EFIS, electronic ignition, etc.
Then, let's see what kind of architecture fits your
needs.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jeff Hildebrand" <jhildebrand(at)crownequip.com> |
| Subject: | Garmin GMA 340 audio panel music input |
Sorry, but I don't understand. I am connecting an in dash automotive cd
player straight to my GMA 340, does this mean that I connect the return
to ground?
Jeff
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Richard Dudley
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Garmin GMA 340 audio panel music input
Jeff,
The return is the completion of the two circuits rather than using
airframe ground, isolating the audio from noise and stray currents in
the ground. So, the body of the jack is isolated from airfram ground.
Richard Dudley
-6A final details
Jeff Hildebrand wrote:
>
>
> I am wiring a CD player to my Garmin GMA 340 audio panel. In the
> installation guide it shows 3 pins for Music 1 input.
>
> Music 1 L In
>
> Music 1 R In
>
> Music 1 Return
>
> What is the Music 1 Return pin for?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jeff Hildebrand
>
> Lancair Super ES
>
> http://lancair.northstartraffic.ca
<http://lancair.northstartraffic.ca/>
>
==
==
==
==
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Intercom hiss |
><bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
>
>I consider myself very lucky. The only noise in the headsets is only a very
>faint whine of the alt. But I do have a question about intercom hiss/white
>noise. What causes this?
It's the rushing noise of electrons over the various pieces
and parts. Once you've eliminated external noise sources,
turning up the gain may let you hear the heartbeat of the
solid state devices that make up the system.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <danobrien(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Unprotected fuel pump wires on battery bus. |
Two philosophies discussed on the list raise the following dilemma. Philosophy
1 says to put the boost pump on the battery bus because it may be necessary for
continued operation of the engine in situations where it makes sense to open
the master switch. Philosophy 2 says to avoid having always-hot feeders protected
at more than 5 amps for crash safety reasons. My boost pump is to be protected
at 10 amps, and the battery bus will be in the rear of the airplane.
What's the best course given this dilemma?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | RSamuelson(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Mounting the OV Contactor |
Building a RV7A with Van's internally regulated Alternator, Odyssey battery
set up with the master relay, starter contactor, ANL and gascolator mounted
below the battery on the right side, Lycoming O-360 engine (not here yet).
Where is the best place to mount the S701-1 Alternator OV Disconnect
Contactor?
Above the Gascolator on the right side? On the left side where the Concord
battery would be?
Thanks for the advice,
Roy Samuelson
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Letempt, Jeffrey CW4" <jeffrey.letempt(at)us.army.mil> |
| Subject: | Main DC Power Master Switch |
Bob,
Let me first say thank you for the OUTSTANDING seminar last week at
Jefferson City, MO!!! I am sure posts like this happen all the time, but if
you are on the fence about attending a weekend seminar - you GOTTA do it.
The best $150 I have spent in a long time.
I will be using a modified Z-11 for my plane. I will be using an internally
regulated alternator and will be adding OV protection and a low voltage
monitoring system (not using the LR-3). Now for the question....Why is a
700-2-10 switch required for the "Main DC Power Master Switch"? It looks to
me like a S700-2-3 would do the same thing. Maybe I am not reading the
schematic correctly.
Additionally, why is there a 7 amp fuse inline coming off the main battery
bus to the E-Bus for the essential bus alternate feed circuit? Aren't those
circuits already protected on the essential bus with their own fuses.
Unless I am missing something, this means that if I have a problem that
would require me to turn off the master switch that power would be routed to
the essential bus from the main battery bus to power the flight critical
stuff. Now what happens if I have a problem with my NAV/COMM that also has
a 7 amp fuse and the fuse on the main battery bus blows instead of the fuse
on the essential bus protecting the radio? I would loose all the power to
the essential bus and I would only have power to the main battery bus.
Thanks,
Jeff
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
In a message dated 1/15/04 8:18:28 AM Central Standard Time,
bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net writes:
Given the dirt cheap chip-sets for receiving/decoding both
signals, it's always mystified me as to why folks didn't offer
dual receivers . . . with software to integrate the two signals
together into a nav package with a very high order of accuracy
and reliability. It's a certainty that the dollars to maintain
the few transmitters in the LORAN chains is a small fraction of
that required to maintain VOR/ADF facilities and COULD be an
excellent substitute while augmenting GPS. A dual LORAN/GPS
package need be no larger than either as a stand-alone system.
Software for integrating multiple nav signals for improved
accuracy and reliability is old hat.
Good Afternoon Bob,
Obviously, that has been done by both Northstar and Trimble.
The Trimble TNL 3000 was their first offering of a dual use box. It receives
both Loran and GPS signals. They have a comparator circuit that allows the
set to use whichever is deemed the most accurate by the algorithm used. The
TNL 3000T then came along and it was IFR certified for enroute and terminal use,
but not for approaches. When Trimble went to the approach approval, they
dropped the Loran portion.
There have been many good TNL 3000 and TNL 3000Ts available on Ebay for
anywhere from a hundred bucks to a thousand. Those early Trimbles are built of
only the finest components. Gold Plated contacts throughout and extruded side
rails. Unfortunately, they didn't make the cut in the market place, but I think
the Trimbles are great units if you can get one cheap enough. Same goes for
the Northstar units I suppose, but I have no direct user knowledge concerning
their combo unit.
I did have a TNL 3000 in my Bonanza which was replaced with a 3000T. That
was subsequently replaced with a Trimble 2000 Approach unit. I kinda hated to
give up the Loran as long as it was already installed, but I really wanted the
capability to shoot the GPS approaches. As you know, they never did get any
Loran approaches approved for the general public. There were a few that were
up and running on a test basis, but they were never released for the use of we
vast unwashed masses.
I do miss the Loran, but then again, I thought the four course ranges were
pretty neat as well!
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Airpark LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8502
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Jewell" <jjewell(at)telus.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Grand Rapids EIS 4000 MAP sensor |
Hi Bob,
Do you see anything against using automotive vacuum tubing in this
application?
A fitting with a short say 3" length of steel tubing on the number three
cylinder head for heat protection would seem to deal with the main heat
related potential failure mode.
Jim in Kelowna
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Grand Rapids EIS 4000 MAP sensor
>
> >
> >
> >You should use something like the stainless braided hoses for connection
> >from engine to firewall. The pressure is not great but the vibration is
the
> >concern. Vans Aircraft sells a kit for connecting the MAP from the
engine
> >to the cockpit side of the firewall where you would then jury rig
whatever
> >you need to do to get into your engine monitor. This is how I did it
with
> >my ACS2002 system. You might give Vans a call. Here is their web site
to
> >get you started. www.vansaircraft.com
>
> We're getting wrapped around some pretty big axles here . . .
> First, a MAP sensor looks at manifold pressure . . . which
> is never greater than atmospheric unless you're super-charged.
> Second, given the amount of air that runs into the engine at
> full throttle, the amount of air that gets in should the
> MAP sensor line become completely disconnected is VERY
> small by comparison. Loss of this line is immediately
> observable on the instrument and zero risk to the engine.
> A copper line to convey pressure in a very low viscosity
> fluid (air) can be quite small in cross section and
> has a lot of cross section in walls compared to
> the bore . . . these are not especially vulnerable
> to vibration stress cracking. Taking this line through
> the firewall in metal fittings is a firewall integrity
> issue . . . easy and cheap to do. If this is an automotive
> MAP sensor, I'd consider mounting it to some point low on
> right on the engine or at least on the firewall and avoid
> penetrating the firewall at all. If one decided to bring
> the sensor inside the cabin, it's not a big deal.
>
> Jacketed lines, stainless hardware, etc. etc. are certainly
> capable of doing the job . . . but I'll suggest they're
> not necessary.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming(at)sigecom.net> |
January 03, 2004 - January 15, 2004
AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-cu