AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-dq
October 27, 2004 - November 05, 2004
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest. A good
citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Terry Watson" <terry(at)tcwatson.com> |
While "Why did my panel just go dark?" has some existential philosophical
implications, I think it is more productively treated as an engineering
question.
Terry
On Oct 27, 2004, at 12:54 PM, Matt Prather wrote:
>
>
> I think the original question was WHY the rules apply to experimentals.
Who, what, when, where, and how are engineering questions.
Why is a philosophical question and mostly meaningless.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: airworthiness |
On Oct 27, 2004, at 1:57 PM, Terry Watson wrote:
>
>
> While "Why did my panel just go dark?" has some existential
> philosophical
> implications, I think it is more productively treated as an engineering
> question.
Hmm, called on the carpet twice in about as many minutes.
I think your question is "how" did my panel go dark, "what" is the
system failure, "where" is the fault, etc., implying some physical
cause.
And I was thinking in terms of "why" the FAA makes a particular rule.
In that case the "why" is unimportant but compliance is not. And
before someone goes off on me about that, yes, many of the FARs
actually are based on sound logic.
Besides, I am having a bad day and felt like being a curmudgeon.
Sorry. I shouldn't talk to people when I get this way.
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
Antoine de Saint-Exupry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | PeterHunt1(at)aol.com |
Bob:
In your new Figure Z-10, shouldn't the e-bus contactor and the battery bus
contactor both be an S701-2, not an S702-1?
Say out there. Am I the only one utilizing the 20 amp aux alternator (on the
vacuum pump pad) and the appropriate switches to turn the main bus off
without also turning the essential bus off?
Pete
Clearwater, FL
RV-6, finishing wiring
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | echristley(at)nc.rr.com |
| Subject: | Re: Report on auto HID lights for aircraft |
>
> >Oh, yeah, and the post about the WW2 bombers that
used rheostat-
> adjustable
> >lights in their leading edges and nose to blend
with the daytime
> sky -
> >probably more of the same idea.
>
> Hmmm . . . an incandescent lamp at FULL voltage
already has a color
> temperature below that of sunlit clear sky . . .
adding any kind
> of rheostat or other voltage reducing scheme
would only serve to
> reduce the temperature still more pushing the
color toward red and
> away from the sky-blue. I'm also mystified by
the idea that one
> would run lights in the daytime and then
purposely adjust their
> color so that
> they were less visible.
>
Bombers. Anti-aircraft fire. Being invisible was a
good thing at times.
The sky if often sunlit, but not always clear. At
the rate we lost bombers over Europe, even a small
save rate would make any idea worthwhile.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric Ruttan" <ericruttan(at)chartermi.net> |
| Subject: | Re: airworthiness |
We do not have a "standard category U.S. airworthiness certificate", so FAR
14.91.205 Does not apply to OBAM.
The section is quoted from
http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/janqtr/14cfr91.205.htm
91.205 Powered civil aircraft with standard category U.S. airworthiness
certificates: Instrument and equipment requirements.
(a) General. Except as provided in paragraphs (c)(3) and (e) of this
section, no person may operate a powered civil aircraft with a standard
category U.S. airworthiness certificate in any operation described in
paragraphs (b) through (f) of this section unless that aircraft contains the
instruments and equipment specified in those paragraphs (or FAA-approved
equivalents) for that type of operation, and those instruments and items of
equipment are in operable condition.
Eric the Lawyer
Subject: AeroElectric-List: airworthiness
>
> < place I found that said anything about TSO is when talking
> about transponders and ELTs.>>
>
> 10/27/2004
>
> Hello Tom, What you write is correct, but when one goes through FAR Part
91, for instance, one will find several sections that require approved
equipment.
>
> FAR Sections 91.205 (b) (11), (12), (13), and (14) are examples. And of
course one of the primary ways that the FAA Administrator approves equipment
is through the TSO process.
>
> OC
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | electrical schematic software |
| From: | Sam Ray <str(at)us.ibm.com> |
10/27/2004 13:51:23
I'm looking for suggestions on which electrical schematic software package
to buy. What do you guys use?
Sam Ray
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "cgalley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: airworthiness |
Your quote doesn't Say any thing about TSO. There are at least 3 maybe more
ways of getting FAA approval.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Eric Ruttan" <ericruttan(at)chartermi.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: airworthiness
>
> We do not have a "standard category U.S. airworthiness certificate", so
FAR
> 14.91.205 Does not apply to OBAM.
>
> The section is quoted from
> http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/janqtr/14cfr91.205.htm
> 91.205 Powered civil aircraft with standard category U.S.
airworthiness
> certificates: Instrument and equipment requirements.
> (a) General. Except as provided in paragraphs (c)(3) and (e) of this
> section, no person may operate a powered civil aircraft with a standard
> category U.S. airworthiness certificate in any operation described in
> paragraphs (b) through (f) of this section unless that aircraft contains
the
> instruments and equipment specified in those paragraphs (or FAA-approved
> equivalents) for that type of operation, and those instruments and items
of
> equipment are in operable condition.
>
> Eric the Lawyer
>
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: airworthiness
> >
> > < > place I found that said anything about TSO is when talking
> > about transponders and ELTs.>>
> >
> > 10/27/2004
> >
> > Hello Tom, What you write is correct, but when one goes through FAR Part
> 91, for instance, one will find several sections that require approved
> equipment.
> >
> > FAR Sections 91.205 (b) (11), (12), (13), and (14) are examples. And of
> course one of the primary ways that the FAA Administrator approves
equipment
> is through the TSO process.
> >
> > OC
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bruce Gray" <Bruce(at)glasair.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Report on auto HID lights for aircraft |
It is if you're coming over the fence at 100 KTS.....
Bruce
www.glasair.org
-----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 aircraft
Given the expense of a HID lamp installation and given further
the utility of this lamp (operates less than 1% of total flight
time) are the extra dollars for "being able to see a cow on
the runway 1000' feet away" a good return on investment?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics(at)rv8.ch> |
| Subject: | Re: electrical schematic software |
Hi Sam,
I'm using visio. It's ok, but a lot of money for what I need.
I already had it to do network diagrams. It has not been
configured to have any intelligence about the objects that
are drawn.
There are a lot of cheaper programs out there that do the same
thing, like smartdraw.
Mickey
>I'm looking for suggestions on which electrical schematic software package
>to buy. What do you guys use?
--
Mickey Coggins
http://www.rv8.ch/
#82007 QB Wings/Fuselage
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Hicks, Wayne" <wayne.hicks(at)zeltech.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Report on auto HID lights for aircraft |
Go to a boat supply house (like West Marine, Boats US, etc.) and look at the
cheap 2,000,000 candle power hand held spot beams. $19. Remove the
plastic. Keep the reflector, bulb, and lens. The reflector and lens can be
cut down to the shape and size you need.
Look also at the "docking lights" that are made to screw into the front of a
boat's hull, sort of like headlights on a car. All cheap solutions.
====================
Wayne Hicks
Cozy IV Plans #678
http://www.maddyhome.com/canardpages/pages/waynehicks/index.html
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> aircraft |
| Subject: | Re: Report on auto HID lights for |
aircraft
aircraft
>
>It is if you're coming over the fence at 100 KTS.....
>
>Bruce
>www.glasair.org
What's your speed got to do with anything? My passenger's
perceptions of skill have to do with how rough the trip is
and how much cursing they hear from the left seat. In 20+
years of flying, I've taken lots of folks for rides that
I hope they remember as pleasant even during landings;
I've never had to avoid a cow or any other obstacle on the
runway. Perception of height above the ground is a greater
benefit to me than anything I see out the windshield. Try
landing at night with a hood on. Just watch down the centerline
for whatever distance your lights will show you and see how
well you do. You don't realize how important that peripheral
data visual data is until it's gone. For me at least, the
peripheral visual data is more valuable than the centerline data.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Report on auto HID lights for aircraft |
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
Hi Bob,
It seems like we are talking about two different uses of a landing light:
One is to provide the ability to judge the altitutude above and sink rate to
the desired touch down point. For this, a dim, difuse light like you
suggest seems perfectly adequate.
The other use is to help see and avoid hazards that may exist. For a
slow moving airplane, a dim relatively dim light probably allows you to
see hazards soon enough to avoid them. It is my belief (mostly based
on driving cars), that the faster you go, the more light you need to be
able to see and avoid hazards.
How is it that you haven't ever had to avoid a runway hazard at night?
I have had to delay a takeoff roll because of dear that were 500' or
so down the runway. I am not sure I would have seen these guys
at night if I had been using a 6V flashlight...
Are we talking about the same thing?
Regards,
Matt-
> aircraft
>
>
>>
>>
>>It is if you're coming over the fence at 100 KTS.....
>>
>>Bruce
>>www.glasair.org
>
> What's your speed got to do with anything? My passenger's
> perceptions of skill have to do with how rough the trip is
> and how much cursing they hear from the left seat. In 20+
> years of flying, I've taken lots of folks for rides that
> I hope they remember as pleasant even during landings;
> I've never had to avoid a cow or any other obstacle on the
> runway. Perception of height above the ground is a greater
> benefit to me than anything I see out the windshield. Try
> landing at night with a hood on. Just watch down the centerline for
> whatever distance your lights will show you and see how
> well you do. You don't realize how important that peripheral
> data visual data is until it's gone. For me at least, the
> peripheral visual data is more valuable than the centerline data.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
> ---
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
>
>On 10/27 10:38, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
> > Those of us who certify aircraft hardware for a living are
> > completely mystified as to the rational behind the Unison ignition
> > product. If two magnetos are enough, why install two more ignition
> > systems on top of the magnetos? Their decision was especially
> > mystifying when you look at all the wiring it takes to make that
> > system work. In my never humble opinion, that system has to be
> > the product of somebody's bad dream . . . it was certainly not
> > an evolutionary step in the right direction. While every other
> > technology is getting cheaper, works better, is getting lighter
> > and simpler, the Unison system got more expensive, heavier and
> > more complex.
> >
> > Bob . . .
>
>More expensive? yes.
>Heavier? maybe a dozen ounces,
>More complex? yes.
>More wiring? a few extra wires.
>
>Does it work? yes.
>
>What are the failure rates of LASAR vs. (pick your favorite EI).
>Anybody have any hard figures? Without that we're just assuming
>one is more reliable than the rest. We need some data here.
>
>BTW, what is "better"? Performance, Price, Efficiency, Reliability,
>Maintainability, Availability?
>
>Everyone has their own opinion about this too. A very rich man
>may place Price near the bottom of his list.
Don't see that opinion even figures into it. let us consider the
attributes cited:
Performance: Differences are measured in tiny percentages with
laboratory grade equipment . . . not an issue.
Price: Lasar was about 4x more expensive than the other systems
last time I checked.
Efficiency: again, very few differences that John Q. Pilot is going
to perceive in day-to-day operations of his airplane. 10% fuel
savings will be a BUNCH . . . and most folks report less.
Reliability: System reliability or component reliability? The
parts count of the Lasar system is much higher than Electro-Air
or Lightspeed both of which have higher parts count than
E-Mag/P-Mag systems. Of course, a magneto has the lowest
parts count yet . . . unfortunately, they are highly stressed
parts with low individual reliability numbers compared to their
more complex descendants. Now, this degredation of reliability
is most likely to show up as cost of ownership issues (needs
fixing more often using $high$ parts) as opposed to system
reliability (mayday, mayday, ignition system failure! we're
going down!).
Maintainability: Generally inversely related to parts complexity
and packaging. Here the E-Mag/P-Mag systems promise to be a
hands-down winner.
Availability: If the system is reliable, then availability is mostly
a concern for original installation hardware. Everyone has production
problems from time to time. You may need to wait on delivery
for original parts or spares from time to time irrespective of your
system of choice.
>Here's the reason I chose the LASAR system; if LASAR EI fails, you
>*fly* home. If (pick your favorite EI) fails, you *glide* somewhere
>which is usually -not- home. And I get some of the benefits of
>an all electric EI. Not all, but enough.
Why do you think that a failure of ANY system makes the engine
stop? We've always been discussing dual ignition systems. The
concern is, "What is probability of loosing two systems during
any one flight?" If we were (and still are) comfortable with
launching behind a couple of magnetos, ANY other system has
mean time between failure numbers that are better than magnetos.
So if we we are still comfortable with launching skyward sitting
behind a pair of magnetos, then what combination of electronic
or non-electronic ignition systems is any worse?
>Just my opinion. I'm no EE so if you can show me that LASAR
>is without merit I'll probably buy it. But safety is high on
>my list.
It has a lot of merit . . . 4x merit with a price to match.
It seems to have been configured with the idea that if 4 prop
bolts are good, 8 prop bolts are better. Let's go drill some
more holes.
From a flight system RELIABILITY perspective, there is little
value in spending dollars to improve over the current
numbers on dual magnetos. How many accidents cite dual ignition
failure as a contributing factor? Dual magnetos have served us
very well. EI systems CAN offer cost-of-ownership gains in lower cost
plugs, lower battery/starter wear when the engine starts sooner,
and a modicum of savings on fuel efficiency.
The biggest concern for replacing magnetos is "first to do
no harm". This means failure rates should be no WORSE than
a magneto. Now, if you can do this and get performance
improvements too, great. If you can do it for a price comparable
to or less than magnetos. Greater yet. If you can reduce the cost
of ownership too . . . Shazham! Electro-Air and Lightspeed
were very good first starts with good track records that go
back over ten years. E-Mag/P-Mag products pushed off in the same direction
with obvious potential for better performance yet. . . but no history
to date. Unison simply marched off in the wrong direction.
See this article on Lasar by Wichita's Favorite Son aviation journalist:
http://www.avweb.com/cgi-bin/udt/im.display.printable?client.id=avweb&story.id=182489
http://www.avweb.com/cgi-bin/udt/im.display.printable?client.id=avweb&story.id=182490
He likes it. He only has to fly 500 hours to get his money
back in fuel savings. He flies professionally, it would
take me 10-15 years to get that money back. You'll have to make your
own calculations. Hmmm . . . how about plugs? Unison drives
certified plugs. The OBAM aircraft ignition systems can
drive ACs or Champions at 1/4th the system acquisition price
and 1/10th the price on plugs NOW how long does it take to get
your money back?
As long as our brothers down in Texas don't stub their toes,
the E-Mag/P-Mag products are going to leave the competition in
the dust.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> aircraft |
| Subject: | Re: Report on auto HID lights for |
aircraft
aircraft
>
>
>
> are the extra dollars for "being able to see a cow on
> the runway 1000' feet away" a good return on investment?
>
>-----> They are if your municipal runway is a haven for deer. On my very
>first night landing with my instructor, I was 50 feet about the runway
>getting ready to flare when I saw 10 eyes glowing back at me. Had we had
>any smaller of a landing light, I would have been eating Bambi inside a
>destroyed Tomahawk.
We tap a LOT of deer in my part of the world too. Got one myself a few
years ago. Had great headlights. Got a really good look at him before
he trashed the front end of my car. Yup, I've also avoided some deer
because I had enough visibility down the road . . . but I've come close
to dying far more times due to the actions of 2-legged dears as opposed
to 4-legged deer. It's just as likely that you'll crash the airplane
because you attempted to avoid a deer and didn't have enough energy on
the airframe for it to fly. Life is a risky business and having
good tools can mitigate risk . . . but they're usually not as beneficial
as the purveyors of tools would have you believe.
If deer on the runway are a high risk hazard -AND- the big fuzzy can
be spotted soon enough for you to react in useful ways, it won't
(as you've experienced) take a klieg light on the wing to make the
difference. There are a LOT of high intensity lighting products
out there to choose from that are not nearly expensive as HID and
more visible in the daytime to boot.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Walter Tondu <walter(at)tondu.com> |
On 10/27 5:43, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
>
> >
> >On 10/27 10:38, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> >
> > > Those of us who certify aircraft hardware for a living are
> > > completely mystified as to the rational behind the Unison ignition
> > > product. If two magnetos are enough, why install two more ignition
> > > systems on top of the magnetos? Their decision was especially
> > > mystifying when you look at all the wiring it takes to make that
> > > system work. In my never humble opinion, that system has to be
> > > the product of somebody's bad dream . . . it was certainly not
> > > an evolutionary step in the right direction. While every other
> > > technology is getting cheaper, works better, is getting lighter
> > > and simpler, the Unison system got more expensive, heavier and
> > > more complex.
> > >
> > > Bob . . .
> >
> >More expensive? yes.
> >Heavier? maybe a dozen ounces,
> >More complex? yes.
> >More wiring? a few extra wires.
> >
> >Does it work? yes.
> >
> >What are the failure rates of LASAR vs. (pick your favorite EI).
> >Anybody have any hard figures? Without that we're just assuming
> >one is more reliable than the rest. We need some data here.
> >
> >BTW, what is "better"? Performance, Price, Efficiency, Reliability,
> >Maintainability, Availability?
> >
> >Everyone has their own opinion about this too. A very rich man
> >may place Price near the bottom of his list.
>
> Don't see that opinion even figures into it. let us consider the
> attributes cited:
>
> Performance: Differences are measured in tiny percentages with
> laboratory grade equipment . . . not an issue.
>
> Price: Lasar was about 4x more expensive than the other systems
> last time I checked.
I don't know what the average price of dual EI is because I didn't
get quotes for that. But I paid $2300 for LASAR.
> Efficiency: again, very few differences that John Q. Pilot is going
> to perceive in day-to-day operations of his airplane. 10% fuel
> savings will be a BUNCH . . . and most folks report less.
>
> Reliability: System reliability or component reliability? The
> parts count of the Lasar system is much higher than Electro-Air
> or Lightspeed both of which have higher parts count than
> E-Mag/P-Mag systems. Of course, a magneto has the lowest
> parts count yet . . . unfortunately, they are highly stressed
> parts with low individual reliability numbers compared to their
> more complex descendants. Now, this degredation of reliability
> is most likely to show up as cost of ownership issues (needs
> fixing more often using $high$ parts) as opposed to system
> reliability (mayday, mayday, ignition system failure! we're
> going down!).
Again, without firm figures about failure rates (Reliability) we
are just making assumptions. I wish there were somewhere to get
this hard evidence but it is unlikely.
Here I agree that parts counts, count, but lets look at the typical
circuit board and then lets look at one with double the parts count
that does effectively the same thing. With today's manufacturing
techniques and ultra reliable electronics I'm not sure that parts
counts is a huge factor. If were talking about double the amount
of parts under physical/rotational/etc stresses, ie mechanical parts
then I whole heartedly agree.
> Maintainability: Generally inversely related to parts complexity
> and packaging. Here the E-Mag/P-Mag systems promise to be a
> hands-down winner.
Generally also inversely related to parts availability as you note below
and the availability of resources to fix any related problems. I don't
think that any of us OBAM people are going to fix our own EI systems
when they break. We'll still rely on field maintenance and the manufacturer.
> Availability: If the system is reliable, then availability is mostly
> a concern for original installation hardware. Everyone has production
> problems from time to time. You may need to wait on delivery
> for original parts or spares from time to time irrespective of your
> system of choice.
>
>
> >Here's the reason I chose the LASAR system; if LASAR EI fails, you
> >*fly* home. If (pick your favorite EI) fails, you *glide* somewhere
> >which is usually -not- home. And I get some of the benefits of
> >an all electric EI. Not all, but enough.
>
> Why do you think that a failure of ANY system makes the engine
> stop? We've always been discussing dual ignition systems. The
> concern is, "What is probability of loosing two systems during
> any one flight?" If we were (and still are) comfortable with
> launching behind a couple of magnetos, ANY other system has
> mean time between failure numbers that are better than magnetos.
> So if we we are still comfortable with launching skyward sitting
> behind a pair of magnetos, then what combination of electronic
> or non-electronic ignition systems is any worse?
Let's just say for a moment that as a fact, while flying, anything
can and sometimes does happen. We do everything we can to prevent
this and the best thing we can do is build it ourselves (OBAM).
If, for instance on my aircraft, the battery lead comes off the
battery (single point of failure) & (sh$t happens principle) then I'm
still getting home by flying and not gliding. Now I could have
followed your diagrams and installed two batteries and the whole
shebang but we do make our decisions, right or wrong (hopefully
I'm not wrong and the lead stays on :)
I guess what I'm saying is that beyond the #1 most relevant thing
in the plane; the pilot, the engine is next. I know the airframe
is #1 but you get what I'm saying, all things being equal and the
plane still has wings, yadda yadda. When I started building
I didn't have a very good trust rating about EI. The more I know
(thank you) the more I can make informed decisions.
> >Just my opinion. I'm no EE so if you can show me that LASAR
> >is without merit I'll probably buy it. But safety is high on
> >my list.
>
> It has a lot of merit . . . 4x merit with a price to match.
> It seems to have been configured with the idea that if 4 prop
> bolts are good, 8 prop bolts are better. Let's go drill some
> more holes.
>
> From a flight system RELIABILITY perspective, there is little
> value in spending dollars to improve over the current
> numbers on dual magnetos. How many accidents cite dual ignition
> failure as a contributing factor? Dual magnetos have served us
> very well. EI systems CAN offer cost-of-ownership gains in lower cost
> plugs, lower battery/starter wear when the engine starts sooner,
> and a modicum of savings on fuel efficiency.
I believe that back when LASAR was designed it was trying to combine
the efficiencies of EI with mags for *Certified* aircraft. The
OBAM market wasn't nearly as large back then as now. And it does
a good job of combining both, albeit for a price.
> The biggest concern for replacing magnetos is "first to do
> no harm". This means failure rates should be no WORSE than
> a magneto. Now, if you can do this and get performance
> improvements too, great. If you can do it for a price comparable
> to or less than magnetos. Greater yet. If you can reduce the cost
> of ownership too . . . Shazham! Electro-Air and Lightspeed
> were very good first starts with good track records that go
> back over ten years. E-Mag/P-Mag products pushed off in the same direction
> with obvious potential for better performance yet. . . but no history
> to date. Unison simply marched off in the wrong direction.
>
> See this article on Lasar by Wichita's Favorite Son aviation journalist:
>
> http://www.avweb.com/cgi-bin/udt/im.display.printable?client.id=avweb&story.id=182489
> http://www.avweb.com/cgi-bin/udt/im.display.printable?client.id=avweb&story.id=182490
>
> He likes it. He only has to fly 500 hours to get his money
> back in fuel savings. He flies professionally, it would
> take me 10-15 years to get that money back. You'll have to make your
> own calculations. Hmmm . . . how about plugs? Unison drives
> certified plugs. The OBAM aircraft ignition systems can
> drive ACs or Champions at 1/4th the system acquisition price
> and 1/10th the price on plugs NOW how long does it take to get
> your money back?
Damn, If I knew how much flying was going to cost me over my lifetime
I would have Never taken lessons. This is not a cheap hobby no matter
how you slice it. At least I can build my own airplane for half the
cost of a new one and double the performance and fun.
> As long as our brothers down in Texas don't stub their toes,
> the E-Mag/P-Mag products are going to leave the competition in
> the dust.
I see your points and you do make some very convincing points. But
unfortunately, E-Mag/P-Mag aren't available now. When my LASAR
mags die I'll most likely replace them with dual EI.
Thanks Bob for your insight, always appreciated.
--
Walter Tondu
http://www.rv7-a.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: electrical schematic software |
>
>
>I'm looking for suggestions on which electrical schematic software package
>to buy. What do you guys use?
>
>Sam Ray
the data CD downloadable from my website at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/CD/AEC8_0.zip
has three cad programs on it that will open, edit, save and print
the autocad drawings found on the same disk. 90% of your
wirebook is already done.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> aircraft |
| Subject: | Re: Report on auto HID lights for |
aircraft
aircraft
>
>Bob,
>Thanks for the laugh and the list contributions. I had the visual of you
>walking down the walmart isle looking over flashlights and picking out the
>perfect handheld runway searchlight :-)
Found this one in my car . . . but it occurred to me that I'd
better carry two flashlights. I'm not sure how graceful I would
have been with no light at all!
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> aircraft |
| Subject: | Re: Report on auto HID lights for |
aircraft
aircraft
>
>
>Bombers. Anti-aircraft fire. Being invisible was a
>good thing at times.
>The sky if often sunlit, but not always clear. At
>the rate we lost bombers over Europe, even a small
>save rate would make any idea worthwhile.
I understand that. What I don't understand is why one would
want ANY lights showing on the airplane in the daytime irrespective
of some desire/attempt to make them "invisible" by adjusting color
temperature on lamps that could never be the right color
to disappear against a daytime blue sky.
It sounds like a mis-interpretation of some actions or
facts surrounding some other situation.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: New Figure Z-10 |
>
>Bob:
>
>In your new Figure Z-10, shouldn't the e-bus contactor and the battery bus
>contactor both be an S701-2, not an S702-1?
Actually, S701-1 contactors. Good eye. Thanks for the heads up.
Fixed drawing has been published at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Appendix_Z_Drawings/z10B.pdf
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Appendix_Z_Drawings/z10B.dwg
>Say out there. Am I the only one utilizing the 20 amp aux alternator (on the
>vacuum pump pad) and the appropriate switches to turn the main bus off
>without also turning the essential bus off?
>
>Pete
>Clearwater, FL
>RV-6, finishing wiring
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gerry Holland <gnholland(at)onetel.com> |
Larry Hi
> That is one big disappointment with the problems many are experiencing
> with the attitude display drifting 10-15 degrees. I just hope someone does
> not get killed before they decide to make *IT* their priority.
What is the basis for stating 'many'. Who is assembling this vast number of
complainants as inferred by you above.
Two things:
How many?
Where can they be found registered?
BTW. The Dynon is a non-IFR certified device, well here in Europe at least.
That doesn't mean it shouldn't work OK but in the same light peddling
information on poor or inadequate performance needs facts too. Can we have
them other than the one or two RV Builders who have experienced an
'occurrence'.
I'm not challenging you. Would just like facts rather than an
unsubstantiated statement.
I use a Dynon!
Regards
Gerry
Europa 384 G-FIZY
Trigear with Rotax 912 and Arplast CS Prop.
Dynon EFIS, KMD 150, Icom A-200 and SL70 Transponder.
PSS AoA Fitted.
http://www.g-fizy.com
Mobile: +44 7808 402404
WebFax: +44 870 7059985
gnholland(at)onetel.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Werner Schneider" <glastar(at)gmx.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Dynon update |
Larry,
> That is one big disappointment with the problems many are experiencing
> with the attitude display drifting 10-15 degrees. I just hope someone
does
I had this showing up twice ( 50 hrs in use) with a fast oscillation (1 sec
up 1 sec down, about 2-3 times then it was gone again) both times after
about 0.5-1.5hrs, but it was easily visible, that it was a non normal
behavior.
What was your experience on that? Did you get any feedback from them? I
blamed it partially to my installation where the Dynon gets very hot (had 3
times showing me thermal overload).
Would be interesting to get some details from you.
Werner
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Hicks, Wayne" <wayne.hicks(at)zeltech.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Report on auto HID lights for aircraft |
As for deer, I now buzz the runway at 50 feet first to scare them away.
Then I circle back and land.
====================
Wayne Hicks
Cozy IV Plans #678
http://www.maddyhome.com/canardpages/pages/waynehicks/index.html
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Report on auto HID lights for aircraft |
clamav-milter version 0.80c
on juliet.albedo.net
The idea was to make the aircraft blend into the light sky instead of
being a dark spot in the sky as seen from the ground. I believe that it
worked but was not practical to implement. Seems like a valid form of
camouflage and I think it was not a color thing so much as an attempt to
brighten the dark spot. I don't have any references though to prove it
isn't all a myth...
Ken
Robert L. Nuckolls, III aircraft wrote:
aircraft
>
>>Bombers. Anti-aircraft fire. Being invisible was a
>>good thing at times.
>>The sky if often sunlit, but not always clear. At
>>the rate we lost bombers over Europe, even a small
>>save rate would make any idea worthwhile.
>>
>>
>
> I understand that. What I don't understand is why one would
> want ANY lights showing on the airplane in the daytime irrespective
> of some desire/attempt to make them "invisible" by adjusting color
> temperature on lamps that could never be the right color
> to disappear against a daytime blue sky.
>
> It sounds like a mis-interpretation of some actions or
> facts surrounding some other situation.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Disappearing Motorcycles and Airplanes |
>
>The idea was to make the aircraft blend into the light sky instead of
>being a dark spot in the sky as seen from the ground. I believe that it
>worked but was not practical to implement. Seems like a valid form of
>camouflage and I think it was not a color thing so much as an attempt to
>brighten the dark spot. I don't have any references though to prove it
>isn't all a myth...
>Ken
Did a netsearch and came up with this tid-bit at
http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/wp-comments-popup.php?p=3714&c=1
"During WWII there was a camoflage scheme called Yehudi.
(For you younguns, Yehudi is the little guy who turns
on the light when you open the refrigerator door.)
Patrol bombers hunting subs in the North Atlantic could
be seen a long way off. Yehudi hid the bombers in the
background sky light.
It works like this: there was a row of lights along the
leading edge of the wings and around the nose of the plane.
The brightness of the lights was controlled by a rheostat
to match the brightness of the sky. The bomber would blend
into the background and could get a lot closer before being spotted.
So, you drive with your lights on all the time? Does that
include when you are driving out of the sunset? A motorcycle
can disappear completely under those circumstances."
This was the only reference I could find to the technique.
It's pretty fishy . . . an airplane with lots of lights up
front would be a pretty unusual sight . . . wonder how many
lights (wattage and spacing) it would take to get enough
"fill" to make the airplane disappear? As big as those
airplanes were, I'm wondering if they carried enough DC
power generation to power the system. It also begs the
question about color temperature of incandescent lamps.
Adjusting voltage for "brightness" isn't the issue for
making the airplane disappear. There are old lamp catalogs
that show 1000 watt sealed beam lamps for aircraft applications.
30 years ago, our police helicopters carried 1000 watt
spot lights on them . . . while very bright, they still
put out "red" light that would be quite visible against
a daytime-blue sky.
I also have trouble visualizing an array of rheostats
(variable resistors) that would provide the means for
tweaking intensity of the lamps. We have to be talking
about thousands of watts worth of lamps which translates
into big momma rheostats (or lots off little ones)
to control the currents involved.
It's interesting that the writer makes a link between
sky background and ground based surroundings that would
apply to cars and motorcycles. I think all vehicles, ground
and airborne tend to "disappear" when backlighted by the
sun irrespective of the operation of headlights. If anyone
runs across more data on this, I'd like to know about it.
For the moment, it doesn't pass the smell test.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> aircraft |
| Subject: | Re: Report on auto HID lights for |
aircraft
aircraft
>
>
>Hi Bob,
>
>It seems like we are talking about two different uses of a landing light:
>One is to provide the ability to judge the altitutude above and sink rate to
>the desired touch down point. For this, a dim, difuse light like you
>suggest seems perfectly adequate.
>
>The other use is to help see and avoid hazards that may exist. For a
>slow moving airplane, a dim relatively dim light probably allows you to
>see hazards soon enough to avoid them. It is my belief (mostly based
>on driving cars), that the faster you go, the more light you need to be
>able to see and avoid hazards.
>
>How is it that you haven't ever had to avoid a runway hazard at night?
>I have had to delay a takeoff roll because of dear that were 500' or
>so down the runway. I am not sure I would have seen these guys
>at night if I had been using a 6V flashlight...
>
>Are we talking about the same thing?
>
>Regards,
>
>Matt-
I think so. One is faced the same decision whether landing
or taking off and trading off risks with addition of more
effective tools. We're talking about moving hazards . . .
and they can move rather quickly to boot. In the years
I worked accident investigation and analysis for court
testimony, I noted that irrespective of how fast the
vehicle(s) were moving, it's 3-5 seconds from the time
that anyone perceives an accident is about to happen that
the event occurs.
Had a guy split the turnout lanes on I435 in front of
me in KC a few weeks ago. He was coming to a stop
in front of trailing traffic at 60+ mph with half
his rear profile hanging out into my lane. I had enough
time to get on the binders. The anti-skid was doing
its job and I didn't loose steering. I steered right
with the sincere hope that nobody was in the lane to
my right and missed the car by perhaps a foot or so.
500 milliseconds less time and/or sliding tires would
have brought us together. I had about 3 seconds to get
the job done and the fact that he still had significant
forward motion on him as I went past made the difference.
Yeah, klieg lights might very well reveal a deer on the
runway 1000 feet away and prompt you to abort a takeoff.
But just because the runway is clear when you begin the
takeoff roll doesn't mean a deer isn't going to get in
the way at some time before you get enough altitude to
clear a deer. Further, if you have 5+ seconds of warning
(gotta see him 350 feet or more away) you have a good
chance to get stopped and/or get airborne to clear.
When one studies all of the circumstances where vehicles
tangle with moving obstructions (deer or other vehicles)
the window of opportunity to avoid the accident is
exceedingly small and almost never involves the ability
to see and perceive hazards more than a few hundred
feet away. Modern automotive headlamps are 55W in the
high beam. I'm always amazed at what they'll show me
looking down the road. Bought one of those rechargeable
searchlights at Wallyworld a few months ago. It's a 6
volt, 4 amp bulb (24 watts) and I'm certain it would
illuminate a deer on the runway a whole lot more than
350 feet away.
I'm not suggesting that folks not install whatever
lights that will mitigate risks for night operations. I
do suggest that hanging lots of watts or lumens
on the wing without evaluating real world operations
against cost of ownership is not very elegant. The
cost of an HID lamp installation is significant and
it has failure modes that are much more difficult to
fix than replacing a lamp.
If dollars are not a concern, one might opt for
dual HID installations to really light up the field
while on short final. On the other hand, one might
find more utility and realize increased safety by installing
some automotive halogens and using the left over
dollars to install a second wing leveler.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bristolsabre(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Metallic Paint and built in antennas |
I plan to use metallic paint on my composite Mustang replica.
The radio and VOR antennas are inside the verical and horizontal surfaces.
I have heard from other builders that this will work, but none have been able
to tell me if the signal strenght/range is affected.
Anybody have any experience with this?
Tore
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SportAV8R(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Report on auto HID lights for aircraft |
As for deer, I now buzz the runway at 50 feet first to scare them away.
Then I circle back and land.
I use this technique, too. (At least, that's what I'd say to law enforcement personnel
if questioned...) It's great fun, but the deer hardly even look up.
A known deer on the runway is a bona fide problem, like flying into known icing
conditions. Now, ten feet AGL will get their attention, but by the time you
circle back to land, they are often right back at it again.
'Tis a dilemma.
-Stormy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SportAV8R(at)aol.com |
IIRC (and since I was the one to bring it up...) I saw it on the History channel
or Discovery; there was actual archival footage.
-BB
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Disappearing Motorcycles and Airplanes |
clamav-milter version 0.80c
on juliet.albedo.net
The third paragraph at
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/6583/project389.html says 10
sealed beams.
Further down it talks about electochromatic panels but I think the age
of radar etc has likely ended most research into this.
Ken
>snip
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fergus Kyle" <VE3LVO(at)rac.ca> |
"Besides, I am having a bad day and felt like being a curmudgeon.
Sorry. I shouldn't talk to people when I get this way."
Don't say that!
How dull this list would be if we were all the same...............?
Ferg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Werner Schneider" <glastar(at)gmx.net> |
| Subject: | condenser for aeroflash strobe searched |
I need the investigation capabilities of the list once more!
One of my Aeroflash strobe units Part NO. Power Supply: 152-0007 12V Single
Flash just gave up with a leaking Elco
The problem is, the label is no longer readable, it could be a 0 or an U
Elco: United Chemi-Con 180(0)F or (U)F 350VDC 85C
the second problem is that this was a custom made elco for Aeroflash with a
low diameter to fit into the housing.
Did anybody replace such a condenser in an Aeroflash unit and where did you
get the replacement part?
Many thanks for your help
Werner
Gruss
Rolf
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "William J. Applegate" <bigapple(at)gct21.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Report on auto HID lights for aircraft |
clamav-milter version 0.80c on juliet.albedo.net
Hi All,
The info that I remember on this was that it was a very promising
concept but, radar made it a non factor when it came onboard during WW II,
Bill Applegate
Ken wrote:
>
>The idea was to make the aircraft blend into the light sky instead of
>being a dark spot in the sky as seen from the ground. I believe that it
>worked but was not practical to implement. Seems like a valid form of
>camouflage and I think it was not a color thing so much as an attempt to
>brighten the dark spot. I don't have any references though to prove it
>isn't all a myth...
>Ken
>
>Robert L. Nuckolls, III aircraft wrote:
>
>
>
aircraft
>>
>>
>>
>>>Bombers. Anti-aircraft fire. Being invisible was a
>>>good thing at times.
>>>The sky if often sunlit, but not always clear. At
>>>the rate we lost bombers over Europe, even a small
>>>save rate would make any idea worthwhile.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> I understand that. What I don't understand is why one would
>> want ANY lights showing on the airplane in the daytime irrespective
>> of some desire/attempt to make them "invisible" by adjusting color
>> temperature on lamps that could never be the right color
>> to disappear against a daytime blue sky.
>>
>> It sounds like a mis-interpretation of some actions or
>> facts surrounding some other situation.
>>
>> Bob . . .
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Tasker <retasker(at)optonline.net> |
| Subject: | Re: condenser for aeroflash strobe searched |
It would be 180 uF, but I can't help you with anything else unfortunately.
Dick Tasker
Werner Schneider wrote:
>
>I need the investigation capabilities of the list once more!
>
>One of my Aeroflash strobe units Part NO. Power Supply: 152-0007 12V Single
>Flash just gave up with a leaking Elco
>
>The problem is, the label is no longer readable, it could be a 0 or an U
>
>Elco: United Chemi-Con 180(0)F or (U)F 350VDC 85C
>
>the second problem is that this was a custom made elco for Aeroflash with a
>low diameter to fit into the housing.
>
>Did anybody replace such a condenser in an Aeroflash unit and where did you
>get the replacement part?
>
>Many thanks for your help
>
>Werner
>
>Gruss
>Rolf
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Disappearing Motorcycles and Airplanes 0.00 |
0.80c on juliet.albedo.net
Received: contains a forged HELO clamav-milter version 0.80c on juliet.albedo.net
----- Original Message -----
| From: | Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net> |
Date: Thursday, October 28, 2004 12:49 pm
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Disappearing
Received: contains a forged HELO clamav-milter
version 0.80c on juliet.albedo.net
>
> The third paragraph at
>
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/6583/project389.html
> says 10
> sealed beams.
> Further down it talks about electochromatic panels
but I think the
> age
> of radar etc has likely ended most research into this.
> Ken
>
> >snip
>
>
Also, a few more points.
The sky is redder in the mornings and evenings.
The eye is more sensitive to light intensity vs
color. Much easier to pick out a dark spot, vs an
orangish smudge.
The technique had only limited success since it only
worked moderately in specific conditions, and as
stated has been eclipsed by radar. If it worked,
the military would definitely be using in today.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "cgalley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: condenser for aeroflash strobe searched |
It is 180 Micro farad capacitor
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Tasker" <retasker(at)optonline.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: condenser for aeroflash strobe searched
>
> It would be 180 uF, but I can't help you with anything else unfortunately.
>
> Dick Tasker
>
> Werner Schneider wrote:
>
> >
> >I need the investigation capabilities of the list once more!
> >
> >One of my Aeroflash strobe units Part NO. Power Supply: 152-0007 12V
Single
> >Flash just gave up with a leaking Elco
> >
> >The problem is, the label is no longer readable, it could be a 0 or an U
> >
> >Elco: United Chemi-Con 180(0)F or (U)F 350VDC 85C
> >
> >the second problem is that this was a custom made elco for Aeroflash with
a
> >low diameter to fit into the housing.
> >
> >Did anybody replace such a condenser in an Aeroflash unit and where did
you
> >get the replacement part?
> >
> >Many thanks for your help
> >
> >Werner
> >
> >Gruss
> >Rolf
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike Danielle" <mikeda(at)CASCADEACCESS.COM> |
AAARRRRGGGGHHHH! Frustration is rampant here. I own a Great Lakes replica powered
by a Ranger engine. Very simple electrical system with only nav lights and
an ICOM A-200 radio. I've got very loud magneto noise which cannot be overcome
with the radio's squelch. The noise can be totally eliminated by turning
off the left magneto. This has been a long standing problem. I've changed my
antenna to one of AAE's dipole designs. (no ground plane required) I've had
my magnetos overhauled recently and the full shielded modifications installed.
All plug wires are shielded as are the p leads. The p lead shields are grounded
at the magnetos. At the panel, the p lead shields are gounded at the
common ground.
Here's my question for you Bob. In your appendix "Z" figure z-26 you show the
p lead shields jointly grounded to the left mag switch. The right mag switch
is independently grounded. Your notes to this figure state that the shields should
not be attached to any form of ground at the panel. My shields just go
to the same common ground that both mag switches share. Is this a likely cause
of my noise problem?
Lastly, you've mentioned in several of your replies that many noise problems have
been eliminated by removing the p lead shield grounding at the panel entirely.
Is this a better way to go?
Thanks
Long Lurking Mike
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Magneto noise |
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
Hi Mike,
This is a pretty common problem... You can look in the archives to
see other similar questions. More comments/questions embedded
below...
>
>
> AAARRRRGGGGHHHH! Frustration is rampant here. I own a Great Lakes
> replica powered by a Ranger engine. Very simple electrical system with
> only nav lights and an ICOM A-200 radio. I've got very loud magneto
> noise which cannot be overcome with the radio's squelch. The noise can
> be totally eliminated by turning off the left magneto. This has been a
> long standing problem. I've changed my antenna to one of AAE's dipole
> designs. (no ground plane required) I've had my magnetos overhauled
> recently and the full shielded modifications installed. All plug wires
> are shielded as are the p leads. The p lead shields are grounded at the
> magnetos. At the panel, the p lead shields are gounded at the common
> ground.
>
I assume you mean that the p-lead shields are connected to the
magneto bodies, and nowhere else (on the engine end)?
What did they replace (if anything) during the overhaul? Did they get
new cap's/condensors?
It's interesting to me that only turning off the left mag alleviates the
problem. Is there any chance that you have a 'hot' mag? Will the
engine continue to run with both mag switches turned off?
> Here's my question for you Bob. In your appendix "Z" figure z-26 you
> show the p lead shields jointly grounded to the left mag switch. The
> right mag switch is independently grounded. Your notes to this figure
> state that the shields should not be attached to any form of ground at
> the panel. My shields just go to the same common ground that both mag
> switches share. Is this a likely cause of my noise problem?
>
Typically, its best if the switch end of the p-lead circuit is floating -
the noise
induced on the p-lead shield by the running magneto can be 'injected' into
the ground path for other components by conduction. If the shield is only
connected to ground at the mag, then the only method to propagate noise
is by radiation - much less likely to cause problems - esp since the shielded
wire is coax. Having the shields connected to each other at the switches
probably won't cause any issues, but by the same token it serves no useful
purpose.
I think it would be better if people stopped thinking about grounding the
mag to turn it off. Instead, we should decide that each mag requires two
wires to control it. To turn the mag on, the two wires should be
disconnected
from each other, and to turn it off, they should be connected. This whole
grounding it has caused more headaches for more people than I care to
think about..
> Lastly, you've mentioned in several of your replies that many noise
> problems have been eliminated by removing the p lead shield grounding at
> the panel entirely. Is this a better way to go?
>
Probably.
> Thanks
> Long Lurking Mike
>
>
In my plastic airplane, even after I did what was described above, I still
ended up with a fairly large amount of radiated noise - even with the p-lead
and shield completely disconnected from the magneto. I installed a lonestar
mag filter cap (for Bendix mags only, I think), which significantly
reduced the
noise.
Regards,
Matt-
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <bakerocb(at)cox.net> |
AeroElectric-List message previously posted by: "Eric Ruttan"
<http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/janqtr/14cfr91.205.htm
91.205 Powered civil aircraft with standard category U.S.
airworthiness certificates: Instrument and equipment requirements.
(a) General. Except as provided in paragraphs (c)(3) and (e) of this
section, no person may operate a powered civil aircraft with a standard
category U.S. airworthiness certificate in any operation described in
paragraphs (b) through (f) of this section unless that aircraft
contains the instruments and equipment specified in those paragraphs (or FAA-approved
equivalents) for that type of operation, and those instruments and
items of equipment are in operable condition. Eric the Lawyer>>
10/28/2004
Hello Eric the lawyer, You have reached an erroneous conclusion based on incomplete
information. Please let me explain the situation to you.
You are correct in that amateur built experimental aircraft (OBAM if you will)
are issued special category airworthiness certificates and that FAR Sec 91.205
reads as you have written.
An integral part of the special airworthiness certificate of each amateur built
experimental aircraft is a set of Operating Limitations about four pages long.
The wording in these Operating Limitations comes from FAA Order 8130.2D AIRWORTHINESS
CERTIFICATION OF AIRCRAFT AND RELATED PRODUCTS and is specific to each
individual amateur built experimental aircraft being certified.
Some of the wording is standard and is included in each and every set of Operating
Limitations. Here are some standard wording quotes extracted from a recently
issued set of Operating Limitations:
QUOTE: In addition, this aircraft must be operated in accordance with applicable
air traffic and general operating rules of Part 91 and all additional limitation
herein prescribed under the provisions of Part 91.3 (e). The operating limitations
are a part of the Form 8130-7, special airworthiness certificate, and
are to be carried in the aircraft at all times and be available to the pilot
in command of the aircraft. UNQUOTE
QUOTE: Aircraft instruments and equipment installed and used under 91.205 must
be inspected and maintained in accordance with the requirements of part 91. Any
maintenance or inspection of this equipment must be recorded in the aircraft
maintenance records. UNQUOTE
It is incorrect to state that FAR Sec 91.205 does not apply to amateur built experimental
aircraft. It does.
OC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike Danielle" <mikeda(at)CASCADEACCESS.COM> |
| Subject: | Re: Magneto noise |
----- Original Message -----
From: "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Magneto noise
> I assume you mean that the p-lead shields are connected to the
> magneto bodies, and nowhere else (on the engine end)?
That is correct. The shield is attached to integral fittings at the p lead
connection
>
> What did they replace (if anything) during the overhaul? Did they get
> new cap's/condensors?
Coils, points, condenser, caps - the works.
>
> It's interesting to me that only turning off the left mag alleviates the
> problem. Is there any chance that you have a 'hot' mag? Will the
> engine continue to run with both mag switches turned off?
No, everything works as it should.
>
>
> Typically, its best if the switch end of the p-lead circuit is floating -
> the noise
> induced on the p-lead shield by the running magneto can be 'injected' into
> the ground path for other components by conduction. If the shield is only
> connected to ground at the mag, then the only method to propagate noise
> is by radiation - much less likely to cause problems - esp since the
shielded
> wire is coax. Having the shields connected to each other at the switches
> probably won't cause any issues, but by the same token it serves no useful
> purpose.
>
Well, that makes sense. But Bob's appendix z, figure z-26 recommends
grounding both shields to the mag switch ground. I guess I'm confused about
the intent of that circuit.
I will proceed from here by just grounding the p lead shields at the mags
and leave the panel end "floating" as you described. I've no idea why the
left mag makes a racket while the other, wired identically, is nice and
quiet. I'll get this done on Sunday and report back. Thanks for the input.
Mike
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Magneto noise |
In a message dated 10/28/2004 8:19:17 PM Central Standard Time,
mikeda(at)CASCADEACCESS.COM writes:
I will proceed from here by just grounding the p lead shields at the mags
and leave the panel end "floating" as you described. I've no idea why the
left mag makes a racket while the other, wired identically, is nice and
quiet. I'll get this done on Sunday and report back. Thanks for the input.
Good Evening Mike,
You are missing the most important point. You don't want the switch end of
the shield to float in the normal sense of such things as you would a shield
for a strobe wire. What you want is to use the shield as the ground to shut
down the mags. Don't ground it or the mag switches at the point where the
switches are mounted. Keep everything isolated from all grounds except the
shields where they ground to the mag.
You should just use the shield to complete grounding of the P lead to the
magneto.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Airpark LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8502
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Magneto noise |
>
>
>AAARRRRGGGGHHHH! Frustration is rampant here. I own a Great Lakes
>replica powered by a Ranger engine. Very simple electrical system with
>only nav lights and an ICOM A-200 radio. I've got very loud magneto noise
>which cannot be overcome with the radio's squelch. The noise can be
>totally eliminated by turning off the left magneto. This has been a long
>standing problem. I've changed my antenna to one of AAE's dipole
>designs. (no ground plane required) I've had my magnetos overhauled
>recently and the full shielded modifications installed. All plug wires
>are shielded as are the p leads. The p lead shields are grounded at the
>magnetos. At the panel, the p lead shields are gounded at the common ground.
>
>Here's my question for you Bob. In your appendix "Z" figure z-26 you show
>the p lead shields jointly grounded to the left mag switch. The right mag
>switch is independently grounded. Your notes to this figure state that
>the shields should not be attached to any form of ground at the panel. My
>shields just go to the same common ground that both mag switches
>share. Is this a likely cause of my noise problem?
>
>Lastly, you've mentioned in several of your replies that many noise
>problems have been eliminated by removing the p lead shield grounding at
>the panel entirely. Is this a better way to go?
This works . . . sometimes. First, disconnect the p-leads at both
mags and run the engine (I presume you can shut the engine down
by shutting off the fuel). If the noise is still there, then you're
looking for something besides p-lead noise. If the noise
goes away, then try wiring as described the 'Connection. If you
have the classic keyswitch, see figure Z-26. If you're using toggles,
see figure z-12 for an exemplar magneto wiring. The suggestion is
to NOT ground the p-lead shield at the cockpit end . . . only the
engine end. Use the p-lead shield to PROVIDE ground for the switch
at the cockpit end. More than one radio noise problem has been solved
with this technique.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Magneto noise |
> > Typically, its best if the switch end of the p-lead circuit is floating -
> > the noise
> > induced on the p-lead shield by the running magneto can be 'injected' into
> > the ground path for other components by conduction. If the shield is only
> > connected to ground at the mag, then the only method to propagate noise
> > is by radiation - much less likely to cause problems - esp since the
> > shielded wire is coax. Having the shields connected to each other at
> the switches
> > probably won't cause any issues, but by the same token it serves no useful
> > purpose.
> >
>Well, that makes sense. But Bob's appendix z, figure z-26 recommends
>grounding both shields to the mag switch ground. I guess I'm confused about
>the intent of that circuit.
>
>I will proceed from here by just grounding the p lead shields at the mags
>and leave the panel end "floating" as you described. I've no idea why the
>left mag makes a racket while the other, wired identically, is nice and
>quiet. I'll get this done on Sunday and report back. Thanks for the input.
Most people are unaware of what the GRD terminals do in a keyswitch.
See the switching function matrix on Figure Z-26. There are two
GRD terminals and they connect to other terminals on the switch
at various times during switch rotation and they're not even connected
to each other unless you're in the START position. Further, GRD terminals
do not connect to the switch frame and therefore do not get "grounded" to
the airframe through the mounting.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rick Fogerson" <rickf(at)cableone.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: Bendix King Skyforce IIIC GPS battery |
For those who don't have to have color but still have all the navigational
capabilities, the skymap II is worth considering. It does not have the
internal battery problem to deal with, has rechargeble battery backup if you
lose your electrical, weighs about 1/2 and is 1/2 the depth of the III so it
can be mounted on the front of the panel, and requires only 20% of the watts
of the III. Also, the price is only $875 Vs $2100 at Vans. I'm going with
the II for the above reasons and spend the $1200 bucks on something else.
Rick Fogerson
RV3 90%
Boise, ID
From: "kurt schrader" <smokey_bear_40220(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: RE: Bendix King Skyforce IIIC GPS battery
>
>
> Thanks Chuck,
>
> This is just what I need. I am in ABQ this week, so
> I'll order one when I get home and have this thing up
> and running over $100 cheaper.
>
> I appreciate all the responces,
>
> Kurt S. KitFox S-5/NSI turbo
>
> --- Chuck Jensen wrote:
>
>> Jensen
>>
>> For all the DIYs. The disassembly is not difficult
>> but as you work your way
>> down through the board levels, just remove the
>> screws and clips as you go.
>> The battery leads are soldered directly onto the
>> board. Use a solder-sucker
>> to desolder the pigtail joints. Put the new battery
>> pigtails in place,
>> soldered it (not too many close-by components to be
>> heat damaged) and
>> reassemble. Plug in, turn on and allow internal
>> battery to charge up.
>>
>> Cycle unit off/on. The database will likely be
>> corrupted (it's probably a
>> Political Database). If the memory is corrupted, go
>> into SETUP and clear
>> memory. The code to clear memory is either 3-3-3-3
>> or 1-2-3-4. When the
>> memory is cleared, your pin number is reset to
>> 1-2-3-4. You will lose all
>> your saved flight plans and/or waypoints, but that's
>> not the end of the
>> world!
>>
>> Kurt, an external battery may get disconnected, or
>> not charged; each time
>> resulting in loss of your memory and corrupted
>> database. Replacing the
>> internal battery is a once-every-5-year project and
>> takes less than an
>> hour...2 hours for the dexterity-challenged. Not a
>> big deal.
>>
>> As to the battery itself, the McMaster-Carr P/N is
>> 6951K999 and the
>> description is "disposable lithium battery Hawker
>> Entercell 3.7V TO6/8AA TCL
>> with one wire pigtail each end." Price was $13.46
>> with $3.45 shipping.
>>
>> Chuck
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike Danielle" <mikeda(at)CASCADEACCESS.COM> |
| Subject: | re: magneto noise |
Thanks to both Bobs for the help with the mag noise problem. I understand the
circuitry now and will re-wire the mags this Sunday.
cheers,
Mike
NC31GL
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "William Yamokoski" <yamokosk(at)lakemichigancollege.edu> |
battery
| Subject: | Re: RE: Bendix King Skyforce IIIC GPS |
battery
Hi Folks,
I thought technology was supposed to get cheaper as time marched on:) I bought
a Skyforce IIIC in 2000 for $1645. Guess they figure they've got a pretty
good product.
Bill Yamokoski, N4970Y
410 hrs on the Glastar/Eggensoob
Also, the price is only $875 Vs $2100 at Vans. I'm going with
the II for the above reasons and spend the $1200 bucks on something else.
Rick Fogerson
RV3 90%
Boise, ID
From: "kurt schrader" <smokey_bear_40220(at)yahoo.com>
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: RE: Bendix King Skyforce IIIC GPS battery
>
>
> Thanks Chuck,
>
> This is just what I need. I am in ABQ this week, so
> I'll order one when I get home and have this thing up
> and running over $100 cheaper.
>
> I appreciate all the responces,
>
> Kurt S. KitFox S-5/NSI turbo
>
> --- Chuck Jensen wrote:
>
>> Jensen
>>
>> For all the DIYs. The disassembly is not difficult
>> but as you work your way
>> down through the board levels, just remove the
>> screws and clips as you go.
>> The battery leads are soldered directly onto the
>> board. Use a solder-sucker
>> to desolder the pigtail joints. Put the new battery
>> pigtails in place,
>> soldered it (not too many close-by components to be
>> heat damaged) and
>> reassemble. Plug in, turn on and allow internal
>> battery to charge up.
>>
>> Cycle unit off/on. The database will likely be
>> corrupted (it's probably a
>> Political Database). If the memory is corrupted, go
>> into SETUP and clear
>> memory. The code to clear memory is either 3-3-3-3
>> or 1-2-3-4. When the
>> memory is cleared, your pin number is reset to
>> 1-2-3-4. You will lose all
>> your saved flight plans and/or waypoints, but that's
>> not the end of the
>> world!
>>
>> Kurt, an external battery may get disconnected, or
>> not charged; each time
>> resulting in loss of your memory and corrupted
>> database. Replacing the
>> internal battery is a once-every-5-year project and
>> takes less than an
>> hour...2 hours for the dexterity-challenged. Not a
>> big deal.
>>
>> As to the battery itself, the McMaster-Carr P/N is
>> 6951K999 and the
>> description is "disposable lithium battery Hawker
>> Entercell 3.7V TO6/8AA TCL
>> with one wire pigtail each end." Price was $13.46
>> with $3.45 shipping.
>>
>> Chuck
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Disappearing Motorcycles and Airplanes |
>
>The third paragraph at
>http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/6583/project389.html says 10
>sealed beams.
>Further down it talks about electochromatic panels but I think the age
>of radar etc has likely ended most research into this.
>Ken
Interesting! Thanks for the heads up on this. I don't know what
I spelled wrong in my original searches but didn't turn up nearly
as many hits on the concept as another search this morning.
This anecdote underscores the nature of simple-ideas combined with
the grey-matter of several individuals to sift through data (not
the least of which is historical) and achieve understanding.
I'm doing a white paper for RAC right now on an electrical system
upgrade to one of our airplanes. One of the most interesting (and
revealing) aspects of the work is the historical study. It serves
to illuminate how far back in time and technology the roots of our
products go (and how far behind they are today!). It's been an
interesting project.
Did you know that electrical systems were being placed on airplanes
as early as 1915? Less than 10 years after the Brothers sold the
Army its first airplane, they were running radio transmitters into
trailing wire antennas powered by wind driven generators?
Bob . . .
--------------------------------------------------------
< Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition >
< of man. Advances which permit this norm to be >
< exceeded -- here and there, now and then -- are the >
< work of an extremely small minority, frequently >
< despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed >
< by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny >
< minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes >
< happens) is driven out of a society, the people >
< then slip back into abject poverty. >
< >
< This is known as "bad luck". >
< -Lazarus Long- >
<------------------------------------------------------>
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Metallic Paint and built in antennas |
>
>I plan to use metallic paint on my composite Mustang replica.
>The radio and VOR antennas are inside the verical and horizontal surfaces.
>I have heard from other builders that this will work, but none have been able
>to tell me if the signal strenght/range is affected.
>Anybody have any experience with this?
>Tore
That's easy. it IS affected. Now's the hard part. Few folks
will be able to tell you how much and even if we could
tell you EXACTLY (Hey, Tore. Putting that antenna inside the
vertical fin as you've described is going to attenuate your
signal by 1.383 dB), how would that help you?
Is changing paint an option? If not, use what you've planned.
If radio performance proves to be less than satisfactory, then
you KNOW where your investigation for improved performance will
begin. You may find that the antennas work fine for the way
you use your airplane and no further action is called for.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: condenser for aeroflash strobe searched |
>
>
>It would be 180 uF, but I can't help you with anything else unfortunately.
>
>Dick Tasker
>
>Werner Schneider wrote:
>
>
> >
> >I need the investigation capabilities of the list once more!
> >
> >One of my Aeroflash strobe units Part NO. Power Supply: 152-0007 12V Single
> >Flash just gave up with a leaking Elco
> >
> >The problem is, the label is no longer readable, it could be a 0 or an U
> >
> >Elco: United Chemi-Con 180(0)F or (U)F 350VDC 85C
> >
> >the second problem is that this was a custom made elco for Aeroflash with a
> >low diameter to fit into the housing.
> >
> >Did anybody replace such a condenser in an Aeroflash unit and where did you
> >get the replacement part?
> >
> >Many thanks for your help
I saw a strobe supply somewhere (OSH Flymarket perhaps) where the
owner had drilled holes in the case and brought leads out to an
external capacitor mounted on the outside. Will never know exactly
why this happened but it seems likely that he could not find an
exact replacement and the capacitor he had was too big to fit
inside. You need a photo-flash capacitor of 180uF/350V ratings.
It if doesn't fit inside, the electrons will not be insulted if
you bolt it up to the outside. Resist any urges to make your strobe
put out more Joules per flash by increasing capacitor size above
180uF . . . this puts more strain on several critical parts of
the system and may shorten life dramatically.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | JSMONDAY(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Carbon Fiber effect on Radio transmission/reception |
Since metallic paint was a topic.... how much does carbon fiber affect radio
transmission/reception??
Thanks,
John S. Monday
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | George Neal E Capt AU/PC <Neal.George(at)maxwell.af.mil> |
| Subject: | Re: Disappearing Motorcycles and Airplanes |
Trailing wire...hmmmm
CQDX CQDX CQDX...N8ZG airborne mobile
Nothing like combining hobbies!
Neal:)
Army its first airplane, they were running radio transmitters into
trailing wire antennas powered by wind driven generators?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <chaztuna(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: Bendix King Skyforce IIIC GPS battery |
Skyforce is owned by King now. They aren't cheap on anything.
Charlie Kuss
do not archieve
>
> From: "William Yamokoski" <yamokosk(at)lakemichigancollege.edu>
> Date: 2004/10/29 Fri AM 08:58:19 EDT
> To:
> battery
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: RE: Bendix King Skyforce IIIC GPS
> battery
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Trampas" <tstern(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | condenser for aeroflash strobe searched |
A good source for flash capacitors is the cheap disposable camera's with
flashes. Not sure what value etc they are but it might be an option.
Regards,
Trampas
www.sterntech.com
-----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: condenser for aeroflash strobe searched
>
>
>It would be 180 uF, but I can't help you with anything else unfortunately.
>
>Dick Tasker
>
>Werner Schneider wrote:
>
>
> >
> >I need the investigation capabilities of the list once more!
> >
> >One of my Aeroflash strobe units Part NO. Power Supply: 152-0007 12V
Single
> >Flash just gave up with a leaking Elco
> >
> >The problem is, the label is no longer readable, it could be a 0 or an U
> >
> >Elco: United Chemi-Con 180(0)F or (U)F 350VDC 85C
> >
> >the second problem is that this was a custom made elco for Aeroflash with
a
> >low diameter to fit into the housing.
> >
> >Did anybody replace such a condenser in an Aeroflash unit and where did
you
> >get the replacement part?
> >
> >Many thanks for your help
I saw a strobe supply somewhere (OSH Flymarket perhaps) where the
owner had drilled holes in the case and brought leads out to an
external capacitor mounted on the outside. Will never know exactly
why this happened but it seems likely that he could not find an
exact replacement and the capacitor he had was too big to fit
inside. You need a photo-flash capacitor of 180uF/350V ratings.
It if doesn't fit inside, the electrons will not be insulted if
you bolt it up to the outside. Resist any urges to make your strobe
put out more Joules per flash by increasing capacitor size above
180uF . . . this puts more strain on several critical parts of
the system and may shorten life dramatically.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dj Merrill <deej(at)thayer.dartmouth.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: Disappearing Motorcycles and Airplanes |
George Neal E Capt AU/PC wrote:
>
> Trailing wire...hmmmm
> CQDX CQDX CQDX...N8ZG airborne mobile
> Nothing like combining hobbies!
>
> Neal:)
What, don't you carry your amateur handheld with
you in the plane now? A mile high is an awesome
antenna location for 2m and 73cm... *grin*
I haven't tried shortwave, though.
-Dj
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Schlatterer" <billschlatterer(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | RE: Aero Electric-List: Magneto noise |
I think the issue is explained on page 16-13 of the Connection. Just
happened to be reading that section.
Bill S
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Matt
Prather
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Magneto noise
Hi Mike,
This is a pretty common problem... You can look in the archives to
see other similar questions. More comments/questions embedded
below...
>
>
> AAARRRRGGGGHHHH! Frustration is rampant here. I own a Great Lakes
> replica powered by a Ranger engine. Very simple electrical system with
> only nav lights and an ICOM A-200 radio. I've got very loud magneto
> noise which cannot be overcome with the radio's squelch. The noise can
> be totally eliminated by turning off the left magneto. This has been a
> long standing problem. I've changed my antenna to one of AAE's dipole
> designs. (no ground plane required) I've had my magnetos overhauled
> recently and the full shielded modifications installed. All plug wires
> are shielded as are the p leads. The p lead shields are grounded at the
> magnetos. At the panel, the p lead shields are gounded at the common
> ground.
>
I assume you mean that the p-lead shields are connected to the
magneto bodies, and nowhere else (on the engine end)?
What did they replace (if anything) during the overhaul? Did they get
new cap's/condensors?
It's interesting to me that only turning off the left mag alleviates the
problem. Is there any chance that you have a 'hot' mag? Will the
engine continue to run with both mag switches turned off?
> Here's my question for you Bob. In your appendix "Z" figure z-26 you
> show the p lead shields jointly grounded to the left mag switch. The
> right mag switch is independently grounded. Your notes to this figure
> state that the shields should not be attached to any form of ground at
> the panel. My shields just go to the same common ground that both mag
> switches share. Is this a likely cause of my noise problem?
>
Typically, its best if the switch end of the p-lead circuit is floating -
the noise
induced on the p-lead shield by the running magneto can be 'injected' into
the ground path for other components by conduction. If the shield is only
connected to ground at the mag, then the only method to propagate noise
is by radiation - much less likely to cause problems - esp since the
shielded
wire is coax. Having the shields connected to each other at the switches
probably won't cause any issues, but by the same token it serves no useful
purpose.
I think it would be better if people stopped thinking about grounding the
mag to turn it off. Instead, we should decide that each mag requires two
wires to control it. To turn the mag on, the two wires should be
disconnected
from each other, and to turn it off, they should be connected. This whole
grounding it has caused more headaches for more people than I care to
think about..
> Lastly, you've mentioned in several of your replies that many noise
> problems have been eliminated by removing the p lead shield grounding at
> the panel entirely. Is this a better way to go?
>
Probably.
> Thanks
> Long Lurking Mike
>
>
In my plastic airplane, even after I did what was described above, I still
ended up with a fairly large amount of radiated noise - even with the p-lead
and shield completely disconnected from the magneto. I installed a lonestar
mag filter cap (for Bendix mags only, I think), which significantly
reduced the
noise.
Regards,
Matt-
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | HF and trailing wire antennas |
On Oct 29, 2004, at 9:34 AM, George Neal E Capt AU/PC wrote:
>
>
> Trailing wire...hmmmm
> CQDX CQDX CQDX...N8ZG airborne mobile
> Nothing like combining hobbies!
I had such a rig in my Comanche for my ocean crossings. I changed the
heterodyne crystals in my Collins KWM-2 transceiver to put it on the
aviation frequencies and fed an adjustable-length trailing wire antenna
using a plastic funnel as a drogue. I had calculated the number of
turns on the crank to let out the proper length wire for each of the
frequencies. I had an SWR bridge so I could fine-tune the length of
the antenna for lowest SWR. Surprisingly, it worked pretty well.
Nowadays general-coverage transceivers are much easier to come by as
are automatic antenna tuners. It is almost worth it to install HF in
any airplane especially since some of these radios also can be made to
transmit AM on the aviation frequencies (the Icom IC-706mkIIg comes to
mind here). This strikes me as a good thing as a potential backup.
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest. A good
citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> transmission/reception |
| Subject: | Re: Carbon Fiber effect on Radio |
transmission/reception
transmission/reception
>
>Since metallic paint was a topic.... how much does carbon fiber affect radio
>transmission/reception??
Carbon fiber is a severe attenuator. It's a sure bet that
antennas mounting within a carbon fiber airplane will
be unsatisfactory.
Carbon fiber is a good enough conductor that we intially
thought it would substitute for aluminum as an antenna
ground plane. It's good, but not THAT good. Our antenna
installations now get aluminum ground planes added on the
underside of the skin.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Disappearing Motorcycles and Airplanes 0.00 |
Received: contains a forged HELO
>
> Did you know that electrical systems were being
placed on airplanes
> as early as 1915? Less than 10 years after the
Brothers sold the
> Army its first airplane, they were running radio
transmitters into
> trailing wire antennas powered by wind driven
generators?
>
> Bob . . .
>
Say, WHAT?!
Was it actual voice systems or morse code?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Disappearing Motorcycles and Airplanes |
>
>Further proof of the effectiveness of this technique can be found in an old
>black and white documentary that has been playing on the cable channels
>lately. I suspect that this detail slipped by the censors inadvertently,
>but towards the end of the piece, there is exterior footage of a B-52
>flying a low level mission over a lot of snow and ice. Occasionally you
>can see it's shadow. The shadow is clearly that of a B-17. Now that would
>have to confuse a gunner! BTW, I think the name of the documentary was
>Doctor Strangelove....
Gee . . . saw that movie just a few weeks ago . . . now I need to
go watch it again . . .
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron Raby" <ronr(at)advanceddesign.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Metallic Paint and built in antennas |
I would check with the paint mfg to see if the metal in the paint is
actually metal. I was told that it may actually be some sort of fine ground
up plastic material.
Regards
Ron Raby
Lancair ES
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Metallic Paint and built in antennas
>
>
> >
> >I plan to use metallic paint on my composite Mustang replica.
> >The radio and VOR antennas are inside the verical and horizontal
surfaces.
> >I have heard from other builders that this will work, but none have been
able
> >to tell me if the signal strenght/range is affected.
> >Anybody have any experience with this?
> >Tore
>
> That's easy. it IS affected. Now's the hard part. Few folks
> will be able to tell you how much and even if we could
> tell you EXACTLY (Hey, Tore. Putting that antenna inside the
> vertical fin as you've described is going to attenuate your
> signal by 1.383 dB), how would that help you?
>
> Is changing paint an option? If not, use what you've planned.
> If radio performance proves to be less than satisfactory, then
> you KNOW where your investigation for improved performance will
> begin. You may find that the antennas work fine for the way
> you use your airplane and no further action is called for.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
> ---
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | HAL KEMPTHORNE <hal_kempthorne(at)sbcglobal.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: Bendix King Skyforce IIIC GPS battery |
I've had a II almost since they first came out. I have seen used ones on ebay
for much less than $900 - like $350 or so I think. They use six AA batts and
if NiCad they will recharge when plugged into system. I mounted mine on a hinge
so it can be used in the Sierra backcountry in Bubba as well as airplane.
hal
Rick Fogerson wrote:
For those who don't have to have color but still have all the navigational
capabilities, the skymap II is worth considering. It does not have the
internal battery problem to deal with, has rechargeble battery backup if you
lose your electrical, weighs about 1/2 and is 1/2 the depth of the III so it
can be mounted on the front of the panel, and requires only 20% of the watts
of the III. Also, the price is only $875 Vs $2100 at Vans.
K. H. (Hal) Kempthorne
RV6-a N7HK - Three trips to OSH now.
PRB (El Paso de Robles, CA)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: amateur air mobile |
>
>
>George Neal E Capt AU/PC wrote:
>
> >
> > Trailing wire...hmmmm
> > CQDX CQDX CQDX...N8ZG airborne mobile
> > Nothing like combining hobbies!
> >
> > Neal:)
>
> What, don't you carry your amateur handheld with
>you in the plane now? A mile high is an awesome
>antenna location for 2m and 73cm... *grin*
>I haven't tried shortwave, though.
I helped a Long-Ez owner in Brazil install an HF transceiver
for over the ocean hops . . . his back seat was an aux fuel
tank. He used it for both aviation contact and entertainment
on the ham bands.
I've used my 2m hand held from the cockpit. Soon learned that
you couldn't work repeaters from 10,000 feet. You hit to many
machines at once. I'd put out a call on a repeater's input
frequency and told prospective listeners that I'd listen and
conduct the conversation on another simplex/direct frequency.
It wasn't uncommon to have a conversation with someone over
100 miles away.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Riley <richard(at)RILEY.NET> |
| Subject: | Re: Quality Stick Grips |
reflector(at)tvbf.org, aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
<20041029141032.14109.qmail(at)web90010.mail.scd.yahoo.com>
At 07:10 AM 10/29/04, "Jim, Jim Monti, Monti" wrote:
>Morning Richard,
>
>Sorry for the delay in replying. I was off doing other
>things and not looking at anything on Yahoo for a
>while..
That's fine, I'll post my reply to the email sites to make sure you get it.
>--- Richard Riley wrote:
> > At 05:42 AM 10/5/04, you wrote:
> > >Morning Richard,
> > >
> > >I am an outside observer of some emails to a couple
> > >of different sites.
> > >
> > >I have a question.
> > >
> > >Where did you get your information about the
> > >Infinity Aerospace Grips?
> > >
> > >As an engineer and long time private pilot, and
> > >there is nothing else on the market for the price,
> > >and quality that fits the capabilities of the
> > >Infinity Aerospace grip.
> > >
> > >Would like to hear your comments.
> > >
> > >Howard
> >
> > I've dealt with him - and with people who've dealt
> > with him - for 12
> > years. Though I agree with you that the grips are
> > OK, they're hardly the only thing out there. CH
> > makes a good one for less.
>
>If you are sitting still, on the ground, the switches
>in a CH grip may be alright, but you WANT more force
>required if you are bouncing around in turbulence
>(sp).... You NEED a very noticeable tactile response
>out of the switch and the CH switches AREN'T good for
>that.
The CH stick I have is exactly that. The switches aren't the same as the
computer joystick, their activation force is probably a pound or so. In
the same range as the Infinity stick.
> > Automatic Flagman makes a very good one for a little
> > more (they changed their name, I can't remember what
> > the new one is, something like Stick Grips Inc.)
>
>Sorry a toy grip isn't what I want to put my life on.
The Flagman grip is anything but a toy. Aircraft Spruce has them in 2 and
4 switch models, $130 and $185. The sample I saw was covered in
beautifully sewn molded leather. They were originally made for the
cropdusting industry, where you spend 12 hours a day with the stick grip in
your hand. That's what the "flagman" refers to.
> > I was given one of his grips and took it apart.
> > It's fine, but nothing special. The switches are
> > better than the ones on computer joysticks but
> > they're all available from Mouser or Digikey.
>
>Yes and your point..... Digikey and the like are sites
>for small quantities of components. Unless you are
>buying 500K quantities, the switch MFGRs won't give
>you good prices or the time of day.... I have used
>Digikey for small quantities for years.
Exactly. If, for example, you're buying a Thrustmaster Fighter-X grip, and
changing out the 5 switches so they're higher force, it will cost all of
$10 for the stick and $20 for the switches. Yes, it will take an evening's
work to retrofit them (hint - for drilling out the holes where the switch
caps go, a unibit is very handy) but we're building our own AIRPLANES from
scratch. A couple of hours work on a stick grip is hardly challenging.
If I can buy all the switches I need form Digikey for a price that's low, I
don't care if I can talk to the manufacturers or not. That's why stocking
distributors exist.
> > Or if you keep your eyes open, you can buy a real
> > B-8 grip for less than he
> > charges. I got a grip from an Apache helicopter for
> > $100.
>
>And it was worn out, and you have to expend your time
>and money to repair it.
Actually, no, it wasn't. Certainly the helicopter it was from had to have
been scrap, but the grip itself had seen very little use. It's all a
matter of shopping around and finding what's right for you. I had to expend
time to adapt it, but I would have had to do the same thing with an
Infinity grip - as you know, all homebuilts are different, and no matter
what grip you use you'll have to make it work with a homebuilt.
>My point is... it is one thing to try and save money,
>but safety and functionality are FIRST.
>
>I have consulted as a mechanical engineer in the
>consumer market, military market, and commercial
>market for years (like 25 year), and you don't want a
>toy switch being the failure point one day when you
>life might depend on it.
So, don't use toy switches. If you're adapting from a computer joystick,
use switches from Digikey. Pick what activation force you want, what cap
size and color, and install them. You'll have a stick that's better than
Infinity's, at a lower price, and the satisfaction of knowing that you did
it yourself. If you want real, genuine brand new NASA/Milspec switches and
you're willing to pay for them, you can get them (I use Flame Enterprises,
www.flamecorp.com). If you want commercial grade switches that are good
for 100,000 cycles, use Mouser.
In either case, for heaven's sake don't wire your airplane so that if a
single switch on your joystick fails you're going to crash. You can safely
finish a flight without a push to talk button, or an ident button, or a
starter, or whatever else you're going to put on a stick. Your trim forces
shouldn't be so strong that you can't survive runaway trim. If something
can fail, 1) examine the consequences of that failure 2) minimize the risk
and 3) build in redundancy. My design goal is that no single failure in
ANY system is non-survivable. (I can't quite get there - the primary wing
carry-through structure always seems to be a single point failure.) But I
always have 2 layers of redundancy in my electrical system. A switch
failing in my joystick doesn't qualify as an emergency, much less immediate
flaming death.
If it did, I would never use a joystick that cost as little as the
Infinity. My life is worth more than that.
> > If you just want to save money, buy a Thrustmaster
> > "Top Gun" computer joystick on Ebay
> > for $10 and change the push switches for $5 each.
> > Leave the hat switch,
> > it's the same as the one Infinity uses.
>
>NO it's not the same one, I know....
It may not be today, but 4 years ago I took them both apart. The hat
switches had the same part number stamped on the side.
It's not like there's another large demand elsewhere for inexpensive 4-way
hat switches shaped like that. There are the milspec switches, but they
run $50-100. http://www.ottoeng.com/control/togglemt_t4.htm. Neither
Thrustmaster or Infinity is using those.
Remember, the "toy" switches are spec'ed for 10 time the use of a milspec
switch - 1 million cycles for the toy, 100,000 for the millspec. The toy
sees more use in an hour killing space aliens than an aircraft trim switch
will see in it's lifetime.
> > The Thrustmaster grips are nice
> > because they have soft rubber inserts where you
> > grip, and come in a large and small size.
>
>Do you have any idea what the cost of injection
>molding tools are...... apparently not... The tools
>for one grip (2 halves) in good steel, will be $15K to
>$20K. The cost of those tools are included in the
>first 4K sets of "sold" sets, they aren't freebies. SO
>there is a cost of custom plastics that the end user
>is helping to pat for.
Um.... So? The point is I can get a very nice stick grip, with rubber
inserts in the side, for about $10 on Ebay. $15 if you include
shipping. Given that fact, it doesn't matter to me how much the tooling is
- I'm sure given their volumes that CH and Thrustmaster are spending a lot
more on their tooling than Jim is. If Jim has to amortize the cost of his
tooling over a smaller production run, that's his problem, not his
customer's. If there's a grip that serves the purpose, adapted from a much
larger run and therefor cheaper, the customer is the one that should make
the decision and get the benefit. Jim isn't guaranteed a profit. If
there's a better choice out there, people will take it. Welcome to the
miracle that is the free market.
Thank goodness Nippondenso makes millions of alternators per year. If we
had to pay for the development costs for alternators on a volume of 1000
homebuilt aircraft per year, they'd be $5,000 each.
> > Actually, his early grips were surplus cast
> > urethane foam he bought from Thrustmaster.
> > I know because I bought some too, and they
> > told me.
>
>I was trying to save money back then.
You were? Or Jim was? I'm confused. Are you in business with him? Or is
"Howard" Jim himself?
>I place a value on my time. I consult for $65/hr doing
>plastics design (hold several patents for my designs).
>I used to do home additions at one time in my life for
>a couple of years at $20/hr,
Everyone building a homebuilt aircraft makes a similar calculation. We
have a source of income, or we couldn't afford the expensive bits. At the
same time, we've decided that we want to do most or all of the work
ourselves, rather than paying someone else to do it.
>I won't burn my time and energy trying to save a few
>dollars, because my time is more valuable than that.
So why are you building your own airplane?
>My safety in flight is more valuable than that.
If you don't think that something you build is as safe or safer than
something you buy, why are you building your own airplane?
>If you want to use a toy to affect your safety while
>flying, that is your choice.
1) I'm not using toy switches - my grip is Milspec, from an AH-64. 2) Toy
switches are made to see a LOT of use. 3) Someone who builds or adapts
their own grip doesn't have to use toy switches, he can buy commercial or
milspec grade switches easily.
>I don't think redoing another assembly is good use of
>my time.
Then you are probably better off buying a production airplane. "Redoing
another assembly" is certainly faster than building complex parts from scratch.
>Have a nice day.
>
>Howard
And you as well.
Richard
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Harbor Freight has $20 Battery Maintainer |
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/HF_Battery_Maintainer.jpg
I've had one a couple of days playing with it. It looks good.
It sells for 2/3 to 1/2 similar products.
Bob . . .
--------------------------------------------------------
< Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition >
< of man. Advances which permit this norm to be >
< exceeded -- here and there, now and then -- are the >
< work of an extremely small minority, frequently >
< despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed >
< by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny >
< minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes >
< happens) is driven out of a society, the people >
< then slip back into abject poverty. >
< >
< This is known as "bad luck". >
< -Lazarus Long- >
<------------------------------------------------------>
http://www.aeroelectric.com
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Dynon update |
| From: | Gerry Holland <gnholland(at)onetel.com> |
Mike Hi!
> a quick search of the RV-List will reveal some details here.
> I have 30 emails from rv'ers who experience this problem. It is my
> personal opinion that it is a fleet wide problem. Not installation, not
> unique to a device. I know of 6 personally in my home town alone with
> this problem. I can readily reproduce it. I was the first to do so. We
> have been working different software resolutions. Dynon can now readily
> reproduce the problem as well.
Many thanks for this feedback. Will keep an eye on the developments.
Gerry
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Harbor Freight has $20 Battery Maintainer 0.00 |
FORGED_...
I heard about "battery desulfators" a couple of years ago so did some
research on them and found that they had positive benefits.
I bought one for under $75 bucks and started testing it on all the old
"dead" batteries that I could find, low and behold, it worked.
I've been using it on all our cars, trucks, motorcycles and airplane and
after "rejuvenating " the battery we would use the automatic trickle charge
function to maintain the charge. I'm very impressed with this little unit and
recommend it to anyone that wants to save their batteries from dying prematurely.
Bill
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Harbor Freight has $20 Battery Maintainer 0.00 |
FORGED_...
In a message dated 10/29/2004 12:43:56 PM Central Standard Time,
WRBYARS(at)aol.com writes:
I heard about "battery desulfators" a couple of years ago so did some
research on them and found that they had positive benefits.
I bought one for under $75 bucks and started testing it on all the old
"dead" batteries that I could find, low and behold, it worked.
I've been using it on all our cars, trucks, motorcycles and airplane and
after "rejuvenating " the battery we would use the automatic trickle charge
function to maintain the charge. I'm very impressed with this little unit
and
recommend it to anyone that wants to save their batteries from dying
prematurely.
Bill
Good Morning Bill,
Could you supply a manufacturer, model and source?
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Airpark LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8502
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Lloyd, Daniel R." <LloydDR(at)wernerco.com> |
Gerry
I can tell you one I know for sure is Mike Stewart from Team RV, he has
a write up on it.
Hope this helps
Dan
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gerry
Holland
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Dynon update
-->
Larry Hi
> That is one big disappointment with the problems many are
> experiencing with the attitude display drifting 10-15 degrees. I just
> hope someone does not get killed before they decide to make *IT* their
priority.
What is the basis for stating 'many'. Who is assembling this vast number
of complainants as inferred by you above.
Two things:
How many?
Where can they be found registered?
BTW. The Dynon is a non-IFR certified device, well here in Europe at
least.
That doesn't mean it shouldn't work OK but in the same light peddling
information on poor or inadequate performance needs facts too. Can we
have them other than the one or two RV Builders who have experienced an
'occurrence'.
I'm not challenging you. Would just like facts rather than an
unsubstantiated statement.
I use a Dynon!
Regards
Gerry
Europa 384 G-FIZY
Trigear with Rotax 912 and Arplast CS Prop.
Dynon EFIS, KMD 150, Icom A-200 and SL70 Transponder.
PSS AoA Fitted.
http://www.g-fizy.com
Mobile: +44 7808 402404
WebFax: +44 870 7059985
gnholland(at)onetel.com
==
==
==
==
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dj Merrill <deej(at)thayer.dartmouth.edu> |
Received": contains.a.forged.HELO(at)matronics.com
Received: contains a forged HELO
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> It wasn't uncommon to have a conversation with someone over
> 100 miles away.
That's awesome... :-)
-Dj
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Dynon update |
FYI,
I just installed Dynon's latest beta OS, 1.9.10, and so far it's working
perfectly. I've only flown it once (about to fly it again in a few minutes)
but so far so good. I reserve the right to update this later if the
symptoms show up again...
The guys at Dynon mentioned that if this latest OS doesn't fix the issue
(which it apparently has in other installations as well), then they asked me
to do more data logging through the 2nd serial port. If analyzing the data
doesn't turn anything up, they mentioned the possibility of sending somebody
out to fly with me to see and evaluate the issue more closely.
Anyway, like I said things look much better as of 1.9.10. But if it's not,
the company is definitely making it a priority to resolve the issue. I have
faith in these guys.
)_( Dan
RV-7 N714D
http://www.rvproject.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lloyd, Daniel R." <LloydDR(at)wernerco.com>
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Dynon update
>
> Gerry
> I can tell you one I know for sure is Mike Stewart from Team RV, he has
> a write up on it.
> Hope this helps
> Dan
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gerry
> Holland
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Dynon update
>
> -->
>
> Larry Hi
>
> > That is one big disappointment with the problems many are
> > experiencing with the attitude display drifting 10-15 degrees. I just
>
> > hope someone does not get killed before they decide to make *IT* their
> priority.
>
> What is the basis for stating 'many'. Who is assembling this vast number
> of complainants as inferred by you above.
>
> Two things:
>
> How many?
>
> Where can they be found registered?
>
> BTW. The Dynon is a non-IFR certified device, well here in Europe at
> least.
> That doesn't mean it shouldn't work OK but in the same light peddling
> information on poor or inadequate performance needs facts too. Can we
> have them other than the one or two RV Builders who have experienced an
> 'occurrence'.
>
> I'm not challenging you. Would just like facts rather than an
> unsubstantiated statement.
>
> I use a Dynon!
>
> Regards
>
> Gerry
>
> Europa 384 G-FIZY
> Trigear with Rotax 912 and Arplast CS Prop.
> Dynon EFIS, KMD 150, Icom A-200 and SL70 Transponder.
> PSS AoA Fitted.
>
> http://www.g-fizy.com
> Mobile: +44 7808 402404
> WebFax: +44 870 7059985
> gnholland(at)onetel.com
>
>
> ==
> ==
> ==
> ==
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Disappearing Motorcycles and Airplanes 0.00 |
>
>
>>
>> Did you know that electrical systems were being
> placed on airplanes
>> as early as 1915? Less than 10 years after the
> Brothers sold the
>> Army its first airplane, they were running radio
> transmitters into
>> trailing wire antennas powered by wind driven
> generators?
>>
>> Bob . . .
>>
>
> Say, WHAT?!
>
> Was it actual voice systems or morse code?
Code. They were spark transmitters but I believe they used
vacuum-tube-based receivers. Tube-based CW transmitters didn't show up
really until the end of WW-I. Voice transmission started a few years
later.
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest. A good
citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | George Neal E Capt AU/PC <Neal.George(at)maxwell.af.mil> |
| Subject: | HF and trailing wire antennas |
Brian -
I haven't seen you in my shop, but now I know who's been reading my notes
and leaving cookie crumbs on the bench. N8ZG's panel *will* contain a 706.
73... neal
(the Icom IC-706mkIIg comes to mind here). This strikes me as a good thing
as a potential backup.
Brian Lloyd
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Harbor Freight has $20 Battery Maintainer 0.00 |
On Oct 29, 2004, at 12:58 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> I've had one a couple of days playing with it. It looks good.
> It sells for 2/3 to 1/2 similar products.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------
> < Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition >
> < of man. Advances which permit this norm to be >
> < exceeded -- here and there, now and then -- are the >
> < work of an extremely small minority, frequently >
> < despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed >
> < by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny >
> < minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes >
> < happens) is driven out of a society, the people >
> < then slip back into abject poverty. >
> < >
> < This is known as "bad luck". >
> < -Lazarus Long- >
> <------------------------------------------------------>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com
Ah Bob, a man who quotes Heinlein is a man after my own heart.
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion,
butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance
accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders,
give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new
problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight
efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
--Lazarus Long (AKA Robert A. Heinlein)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Joe Dubner <jdubner(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: amateur air mobile |
On 29-Oct-04 09:07 Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> I helped a Long-Ez owner in Brazil install an HF transceiver
> for over the ocean hops . . . his back seat was an aux fuel
> tank. He used it for both aviation contact and entertainment
> on the ham bands.
Bob,
Two questions, please . . .
What did he use for an antenna? I've had an Icom IC-706 in my Long-EZ
for the past year for 2m FM and entertainment but haven't solved the HF
antenna dilemma yet.
How does he deal with the EMI situation running 100W? My meager 10W of
RF on 146 MHz does a number on the engine gauges, particularly those
that run unshielded wire to their senders. Key the mic and pick up 500
RPM -- best thing since nitrous oxide :-)
(For those not familiar with the Long-EZ, it uses composite construction
with a rear-mounted engine that requires 10 - 12 feet of connecting wire
to reach the instrument panel. On my airplane the 2m antenna is a
vertical dipole in one winglet, the aircraft comm antenna is another
vertical dipole in the other winglet, and the VOR antenna (which I no
longer use) is a horizontal dipole in the canard.)
Thanks and 73,
Joe, K7JD
Long-EZ 821RP
Clarkston, WA
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: HF and trailing wire antennas |
On Oct 29, 2004, at 3:00 PM, George Neal E Capt AU/PC wrote:
>
>
>
> Brian -
> I haven't seen you in my shop, but now I know who's been reading my
> notes
> and leaving cookie crumbs on the bench.
Oreos, right?
> N8ZG's panel *will* contain a 706.
> 73... neal
Good idea. I recommend the SGC-231 tuner. It works well with the
'706, has very wide coverage and matching range, and is light and
compact.
73 de Brian, WB6RQN
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest. A good
citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: amateur air mobile |
On Oct 29, 2004, at 3:34 PM, Joe Dubner wrote:
> What did he use for an antenna? I've had an Icom IC-706 in my Long-EZ
> for the past year for 2m FM and entertainment but haven't solved the HF
> antenna dilemma yet.
You need some sort of counterpoise to make it work. A piece of wire
the same length as the radiator should work reasonably well. If you
can run one down one wing and one down the other it may work. In a
conventional planform you can run from the VS out to each wingtip.
> How does he deal with the EMI situation running 100W? My meager 10W of
> RF on 146 MHz does a number on the engine gauges, particularly those
> that run unshielded wire to their senders. Key the mic and pick up 500
> RPM -- best thing since nitrous oxide :-)
This is more frequency dependent than power dependent. Differing
frequencies will produce differing results but all unshielded and
unbypassed wiring will pick up some RF. Put some ferrite beads on the
wiring and add small bypass caps to ground at the instrument.
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest. A good
citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Fiveonepw(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Harbor Freight has $20 Battery Maintainer 0.00 |
FORGED_...
In a message dated 10/29/04 2:06:57 PM Central Daylight Time,
brianl(at)lloyd.com writes:
> A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion,
> butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance
> accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders,
> give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new
> problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight
> efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
>>>>>>>>>
...or build an airplane! GROK!
Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | $20 Battery Maintainer |
0.01 SUBJ_DOLLARS Subject starts with dollar amount
1.40 DATE_IN_FUTURE_96_XX Date: is 96 hours or more after Received: date
>
>
>In a message dated 10/29/2004 12:43:56 PM Central Standard Time,
>WRBYARS(at)aol.com writes:
>
>I heard about "battery desulfators" a couple of years ago so did some
>research on them and found that they had positive benefits.
>I bought one for under $75 bucks and started testing it on all the old
>"dead" batteries that I could find, low and behold, it worked.
>I've been using it on all our cars, trucks, motorcycles and airplane and
>after "rejuvenating " the battery we would use the automatic trickle charge
>function to maintain the charge. I'm very impressed with this little unit
>and
>recommend it to anyone that wants to save their batteries from dying
>prematurely.
>
>Bill
>
>
>Good Morning Bill,
>
>Could you supply a manufacturer, model and source?
During my RAC sponsored battery study earlier this year
I asked about this technology at both Hawker and Concord.
The Hawker guy (marketing type) didn't have an opinion
and was not familiar with them. Concord guy (vp of marketing
but technically very savy guy) said they tried on an old
battery that they ran through a couple of discharge-recharge
cycles and recovered a lot of the battery's capacity . . .
but repeated the experiment on a similar battery with similar
results but without the "de-sulfator" . . . I have one that
I purchased and used it on a barely functional battery pulled
from my father-in-law's car. After a week .1C charge/ 1C discharge
cycles, I measured an increase in capacity from about 10 a.h.
(barely started the car) to about 16 a.h. Cranking current test
values rose moderately from about 150A to 220A.
I wouldn't say these critters will RECOVER a battery. I just
haven't had time to set up the experiment to compare the life
of two new batteries run on the same cycles but with de-sulfator
installed on one battery. It's on the list of things to do.
In the mean time, every battery manufacturer I talked to was
unanimous in their endorsement of battery maintainers . . .
ESPECIALLLY for flooded batteries. I use the Battery Minders
here in the shop. I picked up the Harbor Freight product to
check it out. I'm running a battery down now and will put a
data acquisition system on it to see how it compares with
the Battery Minder.
Anyone wanting to diddle with the desulfators can do a
Google search and get a TON of data on products to purchase
and projects to build.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | line of sight communication |
1.40 DATE_IN_FUTURE_96_XX Date: is 96 hours or more after Received: date
>
>
>Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
> > It wasn't uncommon to have a conversation with someone over
> > 100 miles away.
>
> That's awesome... :-)
If you do the path-loss calculation for VHF comm frequencies
you'll find that 1 watt of transmitter is good for about 1200
miles to a run-of-the-mill receiver and dipole antennas. If you
can see 'em you can talk to them.
I recall an experiment many moons ago (about 1970 I think)
where a couple of guys hauled a repeater up in a 172 to 12,000
feet or so. For duration of fuel aboard, the distances over which
folks communicated with each other were pretty spectacular.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Craze" <garycraze(at)hotmail.com> |
Received: contains a forged HELO 1.40 DATE_IN_FUTURE_96_XX
Date: is 96 hours or more after Received: date
Our Ham club has both a 2M and 70cm voice repeater tied into a telephone
autopatch. With my 2M handheld and a spare comm antenna in our old
Archer, I use to be able to hit the repeater and make a good quality
phone call from 75-80 miles away. Useful when coming home from a cross
country and calling the wife.
-Gary
-----Original Message-----
| From: | owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com |
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Robert L. Nuckolls, III
Subject: AeroElectric-List: line of sight communication 0.00
DATE_IN_FUTURE_96_XX Date: is 96 hours or more after Received: date
-->
>
>
>Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
> > It wasn't uncommon to have a conversation with someone over
> > 100 miles away.
>
> That's awesome... :-)
If you do the path-loss calculation for VHF comm frequencies
you'll find that 1 watt of transmitter is good for about 1200
miles to a run-of-the-mill receiver and dipole antennas. If you
can see 'em you can talk to them.
I recall an experiment many moons ago (about 1970 I think)
where a couple of guys hauled a repeater up in a 172 to 12,000
feet or so. For duration of fuel aboard, the distances over which
folks communicated with each other were pretty spectacular.
Bob . . .
---
==
==
==
==
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <beecho(at)beecho.org> |
Received: contains a forged HELO 1.40 DATE_IN_FUTURE_96_XX
Date: is 96 hours or more after Received: date
In 1960 I was flying L-19s in the Army and our UHF transmitters had 1/8th of
a watt output! No problem over amazingly long distances...
Tom
-----Original Message-----
| From: | owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com |
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L.
Nuckolls, III
Subject: AeroElectric-List: line of sight communication 0.00
Date: is 96 hours or more after Received: date
>
>
>Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
> > It wasn't uncommon to have a conversation with someone over
> > 100 miles away.
>
> That's awesome... :-)
If you do the path-loss calculation for VHF comm frequencies
you'll find that 1 watt of transmitter is good for about 1200
miles to a run-of-the-mill receiver and dipole antennas. If you
can see 'em you can talk to them.
I recall an experiment many moons ago (about 1970 I think)
where a couple of guys hauled a repeater up in a 172 to 12,000
feet or so. For duration of fuel aboard, the distances over which
folks communicated with each other were pretty spectacular.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | dsvs(at)comcast.net |
| Subject: | Re: $20 Battery Maintainer 0.01 SUBJ_DOLLARS |
a forged HELO 1.40 DATE_IN_FUTURE_96_XX Date: is 96 hours or more after
Bob,
The BatteryMinder adds claim the unit does desulfation. Is this a different process
than the desulfators you are refering to? Does your BatteryMinder have
a button that says desulfation? Thanks. Don
-------------- Original message --------------
>
>
>
> >
> >
> >In a message dated 10/29/2004 12:43:56 PM Central Standard Time,
> >WRBYARS(at)aol.com writes:
> >
> >I heard about "battery desulfators" a couple of years ago so did some
> >research on them and found that they had positive benefits.
> >I bought one for under $75 bucks and started testing it on all the old
> >"dead" batteries that I could find, low and behold, it worked.
> >I've been using it on all our cars, trucks, motorcycles and airplane and
> >after "rejuvenating " the battery we would use the automatic trickle charge
> >function to maintain the charge. I'm very impressed with this little unit
> >and
> >recommend it to anyone that wants to save their batteries from dying
> >prematurely.
> >
> >Bill
> >
> >
> >Good Morning Bill,
> >
> >Could you supply a manufacturer, model and source?
>
>
> During my RAC sponsored battery study earlier this year
> I asked about this technology at both Hawker and Concord.
> The Hawker guy (marketing type) didn't have an opinion
> and was not familiar with them. Concord guy (vp of marketing
> but technically very savy guy) said they tried on an old
> battery that they ran through a couple of discharge-recharge
> cycles and recovered a lot of the battery's capacity . . .
> but repeated the experiment on a similar battery with similar
> results but without the "de-sulfator" . . . I have one that
> I purchased and used it on a barely functional battery pulled
> from my father-in-law's car. After a week .1C charge/ 1C discharge
> cycles, I measured an increase in capacity from about 10 a.h.
> (barely started the car) to about 16 a.h. Cranking current test
> values rose moderately from about 150A to 220A.
>
> I wouldn't say these critters will RECOVER a battery. I just
> haven't had time to set up the experiment to compare the life
> of two new batteries run on the same cycles but with de-sulfator
> installed on one battery. It's on the list of things to do.
>
> In the mean time, every battery manufacturer I talked to was
> unanimous in their endorsement of battery maintainers . . .
> ESPECIALLLY for flooded batteries. I use the Battery Minders
> here in the shop. I picked up the Harbor Freight product to
> check it out. I'm running a battery down now and will put a
> data acquisition system on it to see how it compares with
> the Battery Minder.
>
> Anyone wanting to diddle with the desulfators can do a
> Google search and get a TON of data on products to purchase
> and projects to build.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
> ---
>
>
>
>
>
>
Bob,
The BatteryMinder adds claimthe unit does desulfation. Is this a different process
than the desulfators you are refering to? Does your BatteryMinder have a button
that says desulfation? Thanks. Don
-------------- Original message --------------
-- AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
-- AeroElectric-List message posted by: BobsV35B(at)aol.com
In a message dated 10/29/2004 12:43:56 PM Central Standard Time,
WRBYARS(at)aol.com writes:
I heard about "battery desulfators" a couple of years ago so did some
research on them and found that they had positive benefits.
I bought one for under $75 bucks and started testing it on all the old
"dead" batteries that I could find, low and behold, it worked.
I've been using it on all our cars, trucks, motorcycles and airplane and
after "rejuvenating " the bat
tery we would use the automatic trickle charge
function to maintain the charge. I'm very impressed with this little unit
and
recommend it to anyone that wants to save their batteries from dying
prematurely.
Bill
Good Morning Bill,
Could you supply a manufacturer, model and source?
During my RAC sponsored battery study earlier this year
I asked about this technology at both Hawker and Concord.
The Hawker guy (marketing type) didn't have an opinion
and was not familiar with them. Concord guy (vp of marketing
but technically very savy guy) said they tried on an old
battery that they ran through a couple of discharge-recharge
cycles and recovered a lot of the battery's capacity . . .
but repeated the experiment on a similar battery with similar <
BR> results but without the "de-sulfator" . . . I have one that
I purchased and used it on a barely functional battery pulled
from my father-in-law's car. After a week .1C charge/ 1C discharge
cycles, I measured an increase in capacity from about 10 a.h.
(barely started the car) to about 16 a.h. Cranking current test
values rose moderately from about 150A to 220A.
I wouldn't say these critters will RECOVER a battery. I just
haven't had time to set up the experiment to compare the life
of two new batteries run on the same cycles but with de-sulfator
installed on one battery. It's on the list of things to do.
In the mean time, every battery manufacturer I talked to was
unanimous in their endorsement of battery maintainers . . .
ESPECIALLLY for flooded batteries. I use the Battery Minders
here in the shop. I picked up the Harbor Freight prod
uct to
check it out. I'm running a battery down now and will put a
data acquisition system on it to see how it compares with
the Battery Minder.
Anyone wanting to diddle with the desulfators can do a
Google search and get a TON of data on products to purchase
and projects to build.
Bob . . .
---
==============================
======================
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dj Merrill <deej(at)thayer.dartmouth.edu> |
Received": contains.a.forged.HELO.1.40.DATE_IN_FUTURE_96_XX.Date:is.96.hours.or.more.after.Received:date(at)matronics.com
Received: contains a forged HELO 1.40 DATE_IN_FUTURE_96_XX
Date: is 96 hours or more after Received: date
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
> If you do the path-loss calculation for VHF comm frequencies
> you'll find that 1 watt of transmitter is good for about 1200
> miles to a run-of-the-mill receiver and dipole antennas. If you
> can see 'em you can talk to them.
>
>
>
>
Different frequencies, but have you ever tried moon bounce?
-Dj
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: line of sight communication |
On Oct 29, 2008, at 6:16 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>>> It wasn't uncommon to have a conversation with someone over
>>> 100 miles away.
>>
>> That's awesome... :-)
>
>
> If you do the path-loss calculation for VHF comm frequencies
> you'll find that 1 watt of transmitter is good for about 1200
> miles to a run-of-the-mill receiver and dipole antennas. If you
> can see 'em you can talk to them.
>
> I recall an experiment many moons ago (about 1970 I think)
> where a couple of guys hauled a repeater up in a 172 to 12,000
> feet or so. For duration of fuel aboard, the distances over which
> folks communicated with each other were pretty spectacular.
The distance to the horizon is given by the following formula:
D = 1.17 * sqrt( He )
D = distant to the horizon in nm
He = height of eye in feet.
So, for an aircraft at 12,000' AGL the distance to the horizon is 128
nm. For two aircraft at 12000' AGL they will have LoS to 256 mi. And
I know that there is going to be a problem with the Fresnel zone
somewhere in there but this is good enough for a start.
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
Antoine de Saint-Exupry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Early Aviation Radios |
1.40 DATE_IN_FUTURE_96_XX Date: is 96 hours or more after Received: date
>
>
> >
> >
> >>
> >> Did you know that electrical systems were being
> > placed on airplanes
> >> as early as 1915? Less than 10 years after the
> > Brothers sold the
> >> Army its first airplane, they were running radio
> > transmitters into
> >> trailing wire antennas powered by wind driven
> > generators?
> >>
> >> Bob . . .
> >>
> >
> > Say, WHAT?!
> >
> > Was it actual voice systems or morse code?
>
>Code. They were spark transmitters but I believe they used
>vacuum-tube-based receivers. Tube-based CW transmitters didn't show up
>really until the end of WW-I. Voice transmission started a few years
>later.
The 1919 airborne radios were indeed CW transmitters only. The
reference I found talked about a 25 mile range. I'm pretty
sure these would have been vacuum tube. Although the DH5
was a honk'n big airplane for the time, a wind driven generator
big enough to spin up a spark rig would have really draggy
and the equipment would have been REALLY heavy.
This article:
http://earlyradiohistory.us/sec011.htm
speaks to vacuum tube transmitters as laboratory curiosities
as early as 1914. Marconi demonstrated voice transmissions
with vacuum tubes in 1915
http://earlyradiohistory.us/1915mwt.htm
and this music transmission in 1916
http://earlyradiohistory.us/1916powr.htm
Here's a really cool collection of articles
http://earlyradiohistory.us/
I'm still looking for how they developed high voltage
for the tubes . . . Some ol' gray beards at RAC
suggested dual commutator generators. Armatures
like the old dynamotors have two windings. A low
voltage winding that was regulated for filaments,
and a second winding with commutator on other end
of stack for high voltage.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: amateur air mobile |
>
>On 29-Oct-04 09:07 Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
> > I helped a Long-Ez owner in Brazil install an HF transceiver
> > for over the ocean hops . . . his back seat was an aux fuel
> > tank. He used it for both aviation contact and entertainment
> > on the ham bands.
>
>Bob,
>
>Two questions, please . . .
>
>What did he use for an antenna? I've had an Icom IC-706 in my Long-EZ
>for the past year for 2m FM and entertainment but haven't solved the HF
>antenna dilemma yet.
He ran a wire from canard center out to tip and then back to the
vertical fin tip on one wing and then back to fuselage just behind
canopy. This was fabricated from copperweld and VERY stout mounting
hardware . . . he was really nervous about some part of it getting
loose and tangled in prop.
>How does he deal with the EMI situation running 100W? My meager 10W of
>RF on 146 MHz does a number on the engine gauges, particularly those
>that run unshielded wire to their senders. Key the mic and pick up 500
>RPM -- best thing since nitrous oxide :-)
He knew it was happening and simply avoided reading any
instruments while talking.
>(For those not familiar with the Long-EZ, it uses composite construction
>with a rear-mounted engine that requires 10 - 12 feet of connecting wire
>to reach the instrument panel. On my airplane the 2m antenna is a
>vertical dipole in one winglet, the aircraft comm antenna is another
>vertical dipole in the other winglet, and the VOR antenna (which I no
>longer use) is a horizontal dipole in the canard.)
The ship's ground system was used as the 'counterpoise" for
the HF antenna system. Automatic antenna tuner was tucked away
in front of ship's battery in nose. Radio was the a little Icom,
I don't recall the model number now. It was the first of the
cigar-box sized hf transceivers available about 10 years ago.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Line of sight communication |
1.40 DATE_IN_FUTURE_96_XX Date: is 96 hours or more after Received: date
>
>
>Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
> >
> > If you do the path-loss calculation for VHF comm frequencies
> > you'll find that 1 watt of transmitter is good for about 1200
> > miles to a run-of-the-mill receiver and dipole antennas. If you
> > can see 'em you can talk to them.
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> Different frequencies, but have you ever tried moon bounce?
A friend of mind was into that about 1975. Had a big dish
in the back yard. Interesting stuff but beyond my budget at
the time.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: $20 Battery Maintainer |
>
>Bob,
>The BatteryMinder adds claim the unit does desulfation. Is this a
>different process than the desulfators you are refering to? Does your
>BatteryMinder have a button that says desulfation? Thanks. Don
No, the ones I buy are straight programmed power supplies for charging.
They have some more recent additions that include the pulse generator
for desulfation and they're about $30 more expensive.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | luckymacy(at)comcast.net (lucky) |
Received: contains a forged HELO 1.40 DATE_IN_FUTURE_96_XX Date: is 96 hours
or more after Received: date
If you go to the Udvar-Haasy Virginia location of the Smithsonian Air And Space
Museum you will see what I think they advertise as the earliest US airborne radio
system as well as the literally rickety crates they were in. In fact, the
history of comm and nav gear is a predominent part of the museum as well as more
historical engines in one place than I've ever seen by far. Some of them
cut up for internal viewing. The early radios were massive/heavy by today's standards
but to see one in person which took up the space of a small kitchen table
shoe horned into one of those crates with the little wind mill power generator
out the sides of the planes is almost comical. Those guys had guts and
drive, that's for darn sure. They have a decent web site and the info might even
be on that for those interested.
>
>
>
> >
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >>
> > >> Did you know that electrical systems were being
> > > placed on airplanes
> > >> as early as 1915? Less than 10 years after the
> > > Brothers sold the
> > >> Army its first airplane, they were running radio
> > > transmitters into
> > >> trailing wire antennas powered by wind driven
> > > generators?
> > >>
> > >> Bob . . .
> > >>
> > >
> > > Say, WHAT?!
> > >
> > > Was it actual voice systems or morse code?
> >
> >Code. They were spark transmitters but I believe they used
> >vacuum-tube-based receivers. Tube-based CW transmitters didn't show up
> >really until the end of WW-I. Voice transmission started a few years
> >later.
>
> The 1919 airborne radios were indeed CW transmitters only. The
> reference I found talked about a 25 mile range. I'm pretty
> sure these would have been vacuum tube. Although the DH5
> was a honk'n big airplane for the time, a wind driven generator
> big enough to spin up a spark rig would have really draggy
> and the equipment would have been REALLY heavy.
>
> This article:
>
> http://earlyradiohistory.us/sec011.htm
>
> speaks to vacuum tube transmitters as laboratory curiosities
> as early as 1914. Marconi demonstrated voice transmissions
> with vacuum tubes in 1915
>
> http://earlyradiohistory.us/1915mwt.htm
>
> and this music transmission in 1916
>
> http://earlyradiohistory.us/1916powr.htm
>
> Here's a really cool collection of articles
>
> http://earlyradiohistory.us/
>
> I'm still looking for how they developed high voltage
> for the tubes . . . Some ol' gray beards at RAC
> suggested dual commutator generators. Armatures
> like the old dynamotors have two windings. A low
> voltage winding that was regulated for filaments,
> and a second winding with commutator on other end
> of stack for high voltage.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
> ---
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "William Bernard" <billbernard(at)worldnet.att.net> |
| Subject: | Wiring ARC IN-514R |
I have an ARC IN-514R CDI that I would like to wire to show course deviation from
an apollo GX-55 gps. (There is a plane on the field with this indicator wired
to a flybuddy, but the man who wired it is no longer in the area.)
The owner says tht the display is similar to a localizer in that the needle simply
moves left or right and the flag always show 'to'. Setting a couse has no
effect using the OBS has no effect.
I think that the nav left and right pins on the GX55 could be wired to the loc
left and right pins on the IN-514R and the TO & FROM pins wired together. My
question is is there anything else? There are also "nav valid +" and "nav valid
-" pins on the GX55 that seem to have no logical place on the IN-514R and there
is a ground pin and a wiper arm pin on the IN-514R that seem to have no logical
connection to the GX55.
Also, Does anyone know of a source for the cannon plug to fit the back of the IN-514R?
Thanks for the help.
Bill
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | GMC <gmcnutt(at)shaw.ca> |
| Subject: | Wiring ARC IN-514R |
Hi Bill
My avionics technician did this conversion for me so I cannot give you
specifics about wires. I am using the indicator with a UPS SL-60 which
should have the same outputs as your GX55. All outputs should be shown in
the GX55 installation manual.
Getting the connector may be difficult, they are getting scarce, try
watching e-bay.
The left/right function works normally and the sensitivity is controlled
within the GPS by the enroute/terminal/approach modes. If these are not
automatic in the GX55 leave it set at Terminal (one mile) mode.
The to/from and off flags work same as a VOR and changes To/From if waypoint
is on "hold". If not in "waypoint hold" mode you will not see a "from"
indication as the GPS will be going "to" the next waypoint.
The OBS knob has been removed, the hole plugged and the internal VOR numbers
blanked out, it makes a nice GPS indicator. I was charged $90 Cdn so it must
be a 1-2 hr job.
George in Langley BC.
-----Original Message-----
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Wiring ARC IN-514R
I have an ARC IN-514R CDI that I would like to wire to show course deviation
from an apollo GX-55 gps. (There is a plane on the field with this indicator
wired to a flybuddy, but the man who wired it is no longer in the area.)
The owner says tht the display is similar to a localizer in that the needle
simply moves left or right and the flag always show 'to'. Setting a couse
has no effect using the OBS has no effect.
I think that the nav left and right pins on the GX55 could be wired to the
loc left and right pins on the IN-514R and the TO & FROM pins wired
together. My question is is there anything else? There are also "nav valid
+" and "nav valid -" pins on the GX55 that seem to have no logical place on
the IN-514R and there is a ground pin and a wiper arm pin on the IN-514R
that seem to have no logical connection to the GX55.
Also, Does anyone know of a source for the cannon plug to fit the back of
the IN-514R?
Thanks for the help.
Bill
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ronald J. Parigoris" <rparigor(at)SUFFOLK.LIB.NY.US> |
| Subject: | What's a "Watt"? |
Have been doing foolish things as of late, like thinking about radios and stuff
to populate
the panel of a Europa XS.
I am pretty naive about RF.
As far as DC goes, a Watt = Voltage x Current. Looking in a Pocket Reference
guide there
is only 1 conversion table for Watts.
With Aircraft Transceivers, there is more DC Watts going in than the Watts coming
out.
With Aircraft Transponders, there is a lot more Watts coming out than DC Watts
going in.
What's a Transceiver Watt?
What's a Transponder Watt?
Perhaps with a Radio it is a Watt hour or Watt second?
Thanks.
Ron Parigoris
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: What's a "Watt"? |
On Oct 30, 2004, at 7:09 PM, Ronald J. Parigoris wrote:
>
>
> Have been doing foolish things as of late, like thinking about radios
> and stuff to populate
> the panel of a Europa XS.
>
> I am pretty naive about RF.
>
> As far as DC goes, a Watt = Voltage x Current. Looking in a Pocket
> Reference guide there
> is only 1 conversion table for Watts.
That is correct but it works for volts and amps in AC/RF as well as DC.
>
> With Aircraft Transceivers, there is more DC Watts going in than the
> Watts coming out.
That is because the radio is less that 100% efficient in its conversion
of DC power into RF power. The different is what makes your radio
warm.
>
> With Aircraft Transponders, there is a lot more Watts coming out than
> DC Watts going in.
That is because that, while the transponder puts out a lot of watts, it
is for a very short duration (milliseconds) so while the peak power
output is something like 200W, the average is well under 1W. So even
the transponder is converting excess power into heat as not all the
power coming in goes out to the antenna.
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest. A good
citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Harbor Freight has $20 Battery Maintainer 0.00 |
FORGED_...
I checked several and found the following one to be what I considered the
bestest with the mostest.
Bill
vdcelectronics.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bristolsabre(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Metallic Paint and built in antennas |
Bob,
Thanks for taking the time, I have been away all weekend to a flyin in
Sebring and an airshow at NAS JAX so I only just received your comment.
Of course I could paint the tailfeathers with ordinary paint, but this being
a Mustang replica I had planned on using silver metallic as a base.
I have found base metallic with clear coat that looks very much like alu.
Regards
T S Bristol
FEW TF51
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bristolsabre(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Metallic Paint and built in antennas |
Thanks for the info, but in my experience from painting a few cars, it
contains aluminum.
The small metal particles tend to sink to the bottom if you delay spraying.
This is European paint (Standox and Spies Heckert) which also seems much more
aluminumlike than what I have seen here in the US. This of course is the strong
stuff, not the waterbased stuff the use on cars nowdays.
The FEW prototype was more like grey. But I will check with Standox when I
get back to Norway.
Regards
T S Bristol
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jerzy Krasinski <krasinski(at)provalue.net> |
| Subject: | Driving electronic rpm meter from both magnetos |
Bob,
I use electronic rpm meter for the engine, and the problem is how to
trigger the meter in order to have indications of rpm while switching
from one magneto to the other.
The simplest, but a crude way would be to add a switch selecting the
magneto providing the signal to rpm meter.
A diode from the P wire to the meter input (for each of the magnetos)
would do the same automatically. But here comes a question - what is the
peak voltage on the P wire during operation of the magneto? Also, that
might be not the safest way, with blown diodes funny things might happen.
A resistor from each P wire to the meter input (for each of the
magnetos) would form a voltage divider by a factor of 2 in case when
one P wire is grounded. The resistor must be not too small in order not
to damp the coil of the magneto. Do you know what would be the lower
limit of the resistance that can be safely connected to the P wire
without significant reduction of the spark energy? I guess this
approach would be safer than with the diodes.
I wonder if you have a recommended diagram for driving an electronic rpm
meter from both magnetos?
Thank you,
Jerzy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Joe Dubner <jdubner(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: amateur air mobile |
> He ran a wire from canard center out to tip and then back to the
> vertical fin tip on one wing and then back to fuselage just behind
> canopy. This was fabricated from copperweld and VERY stout mounting
> hardware . . . he was really nervous about some part of it getting
> loose and tangled in prop.
Thank you, Bob (and Lloyd too).
It sounds like a real P.I.T.A., just as I feared. With the pusher prop
and composite body, this is a tough nut to crack, especially if one
isn't willing to go external with the antenna (I'm not). Maybe I'll try
a loaded dipole in the canard someday.
--
Joe
Long-EZ 821RP
Clarkston, WA
On 29-Oct-08 20:03 Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
>
>>
>>On 29-Oct-04 09:07 Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>>
>> > I helped a Long-Ez owner in Brazil install an HF transceiver
>> > for over the ocean hops . . . his back seat was an aux fuel
>> > tank. He used it for both aviation contact and entertainment
>> > on the ham bands.
>>
>>Bob,
>>
>>Two questions, please . . .
>>
>>What did he use for an antenna? I've had an Icom IC-706 in my Long-EZ
>>for the past year for 2m FM and entertainment but haven't solved the HF
>>antenna dilemma yet.
>
> He ran a wire from canard center out to tip and then back to the
> vertical fin tip on one wing and then back to fuselage just behind
> canopy. This was fabricated from copperweld and VERY stout mounting
> hardware . . . he was really nervous about some part of it getting
> loose and tangled in prop.
>
>>How does he deal with the EMI situation running 100W? My meager 10W of
>>RF on 146 MHz does a number on the engine gauges, particularly those
>>that run unshielded wire to their senders. Key the mic and pick up 500
>>RPM -- best thing since nitrous oxide :-)
>
> He knew it was happening and simply avoided reading any
> instruments while talking.
>
>>(For those not familiar with the Long-EZ, it uses composite construction
>>with a rear-mounted engine that requires 10 - 12 feet of connecting wire
>>to reach the instrument panel. On my airplane the 2m antenna is a
>>vertical dipole in one winglet, the aircraft comm antenna is another
>>vertical dipole in the other winglet, and the VOR antenna (which I no
>>longer use) is a horizontal dipole in the canard.)
>
> The ship's ground system was used as the 'counterpoise" for
> the HF antenna system. Automatic antenna tuner was tucked away
> in front of ship's battery in nose. Radio was the a little Icom,
> I don't recall the model number now. It was the first of the
> cigar-box sized hf transceivers available about 10 years ago.
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: amateur air mobile |
On Oct 31, 2004, at 9:45 AM, Joe Dubner wrote:
>> He ran a wire from canard center out to tip and then back to the
>> vertical fin tip on one wing and then back to fuselage just behind
>> canopy. This was fabricated from copperweld and VERY stout mounting
>> hardware . . . he was really nervous about some part of it getting
>> loose and tangled in prop.
>
> Thank you, Bob (and Lloyd too).
>
> It sounds like a real P.I.T.A., just as I feared.
It is one of those problems that is much more easily accommodated
during the construction phase rather than after the fact.
> With the pusher prop
> and composite body, this is a tough nut to crack, especially if one
> isn't willing to go external with the antenna (I'm not). Maybe I'll
> try
> a loaded dipole in the canard someday.
There isn't a lot of real estate in that canard for metal. More metal
is always better in an antenna. Look for some way to run your antenna
and counterpoise in the main wing.
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest. A good
citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dr. Andrew Elliott" <a.s.elliott(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Multimeter needs? |
I a going to buy a new multimeter to support my rewiring efforts, and I
was wondering if there is any need to get an RMS-capable meter. With
similar capabilities otherwise, the 4000-count RMS meter is about $40
more than the non-RMS version. Comments?
Andy Elliott
N481HY/AA-1(TD,160)/KFFZ
That's "One Hot Yankee"
http://members.cox.net/n481hy/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Multimeter needs? |
>
>
>I a going to buy a new multimeter to support my rewiring efforts, and I
>was wondering if there is any need to get an RMS-capable meter. With
>similar capabilities otherwise, the 4000-count RMS meter is about $40
>more than the non-RMS version. Comments?
>
>Andy Elliott
>N481HY/AA-1(TD,160)/KFFZ
>That's "One Hot Yankee"
>http://members.cox.net/n481hy/
I own about a half dozen multi-meters in various places around
the upstairs shop, downstairs shop, toolbox at work. I have access
to dozens more at various places around Raytheon Aircraft. When
it comes time to poke and prod in search of data, its a very rare
instance that I find the handiest meter lacking in features suited
to the task. The short answer is that $20 multimeter from Sears
like that featured in Figure 6 of
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/LowOhmsAdapter_3.pdf )
is going to do what you need to do 99.9% of the time. The
instruments I own with higher accuracy, counters, RMS, capacity
measurements, etc are very seldom called upon to exercise those
features. If this is your first instrument, make it a cheapie
that you don't need to worry about dropping a wrench through the
face. Of all the instruments I own, only one (the Fluke) cost
me more than $75 and most were under $40.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | What's this 3-diode contactor wiring stuff about? |
>Bob, I get the Volt Spike catching Diode set up on the relays, But...
>on the B&C web site they BAT relat they sell has 3 Diodes!?
>
>http://www.bandc.biz/S701-2.htm
>
>1) Across relay coil NEG coil (switch side) to POS coil terminal (expect that)
>
>2) Positive "jumper" from the +BAT terminal to POS coil terminal (Expected
>but is a diode required?),
>
>3)POS coil terminal to the Switched side Terminal (starter/bus side). What
>is that for?
>
>I tought ONE diode per relay is required. Is this over kill?
Check out the cross-feed contactor in Figure Z-14 of the AeroElectric
Connection. You can get a copy of the Z-figures at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Rev10/z10.pdf
The S701-2 is set up for that application such that it can close using
power from
EITHER the main bus OR the auxiliary bus. Some folks use the -2
configuration
for battery contactors when there are two batteries installed and
possibility
that one of them suffers complete discharge and needs support from the
ship's system using bus-power as opposed to battery-power to close
the contactor.
For most cases, the -1 contactor suffices particularly if you have
ground power jack wired to the battery such that a dead battery
can be externally recharged.
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: | Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics(at)rv8.ch> |
| Subject: | Re: Multimeter needs? |
I've been meaning to ask you this question, Bob, and this
thread reminded me. I bought a cheapie that has the
ability to measure current. This seems pretty cool, and
seems to work ok. I am curious - does your experience with
this feature tell you that this is an accurate way to measure
current?
Thanks,
Mickey
--
Mickey Coggins
http://www.rv8.ch/
#82007 QB Wings/Fuselage
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> magnetos |
| Subject: | Re: Driving electronic rpm meter from both |
magnetos
magnetos
>
>
>Bob,
>I use electronic rpm meter for the engine, and the problem is how to
>trigger the meter in order to have indications of rpm while switching
>from one magneto to the other.
>
>The simplest, but a crude way would be to add a switch selecting the
>magneto providing the signal to rpm meter.
>
>A diode from the P wire to the meter input (for each of the magnetos)
>would do the same automatically. But here comes a question - what is the
>peak voltage on the P wire during operation of the magneto? Also, that
>might be not the safest way, with blown diodes funny things might happen.
>
>A resistor from each P wire to the meter input (for each of the
>magnetos) would form a voltage divider by a factor of 2 in case when
>one P wire is grounded. The resistor must be not too small in order not
>to damp the coil of the magneto. Do you know what would be the lower
>limit of the resistance that can be safely connected to the P wire
>without significant reduction of the spark energy? I guess this
>approach would be safer than with the diodes.
I'd use resistors but only read one mag at a time and use the
resistors to prevent fault on tachometer wiring from taking
a magneto down.
>I wonder if you have a recommended diagram for driving an electronic rpm
>meter from both magnetos?
Sure. See
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Engine/Mags_with_Electronic_Tach.pdf
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "cgalley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Multimeter needs? |
Root Mean Squared - Might be useful with alternating current but what value
for DC? Tell me, Please!
Cy Galley - Chair,
AirVenture Emergency Aircraft Repair
A Service Project of Chapter 75
EAA Safety Programs Editor - TC
EAA Sport Pilot
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Multimeter needs?
>
>
> >
> >
> >I a going to buy a new multimeter to support my rewiring efforts, and I
> >was wondering if there is any need to get an RMS-capable meter. With
> >similar capabilities otherwise, the 4000-count RMS meter is about $40
> >more than the non-RMS version. Comments?
> >
> >Andy Elliott
> >N481HY/AA-1(TD,160)/KFFZ
> >That's "One Hot Yankee"
> >http://members.cox.net/n481hy/
>
> I own about a half dozen multi-meters in various places around
> the upstairs shop, downstairs shop, toolbox at work. I have access
> to dozens more at various places around Raytheon Aircraft. When
> it comes time to poke and prod in search of data, its a very rare
> instance that I find the handiest meter lacking in features suited
> to the task. The short answer is that $20 multimeter from Sears
> like that featured in Figure 6 of
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/LowOhmsAdapter_3.pdf )
>
> is going to do what you need to do 99.9% of the time. The
> instruments I own with higher accuracy, counters, RMS, capacity
> measurements, etc are very seldom called upon to exercise those
> features. If this is your first instrument, make it a cheapie
> that you don't need to worry about dropping a wrench through the
> face. Of all the instruments I own, only one (the Fluke) cost
> me more than $75 and most were under $40.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
> ---
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Burton" <dburton(at)nwlink.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Multimeter needs? |
> Root Mean Squared - Might be useful with alternating current but what
value
> for DC? Tell me, Please!
>
> Cy Galley - Chair,
Exactly.
I think a simple volt ohm meter is all you need. I have one that has a
rubber protector around the outside of the case which protects it from
impact and also protects the plane from dents when you drop the meter.
Mine has a built in light for the display which I use a lot.
I find myself switching back and forth between dc volts and ohms a lot.
Since these two functions are opposed to each other on my least favorite
meter I spend a lot of time fooling with the meter trying to change the
setting. I would suggest trying to find a meter that has these adjacent to
each other. I had an old meter with push buttons to change functions. It
was great to use but was really a bench model.
One thing that I dislike about another meter I use is that you have to
select the range you want to test in. My favorite meter auto-ranges. The
meter is never off-scale, you just select the function you want (DC etc.)
and the meter displays the result to the highest accuracy it can.
Good luck!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Trampas" <tstern(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Multimeter needs? |
With semiconductors the way they are today most the meter capabilities are
all on a silicon chip, in fact digikey sells the chips.
I have a $350 Fluke multimeter I would not trade for the world, I have had
it for over 10 years! The Fluke has a couple of features cheap multimeters
don't like how quick it updates the LCD, Auto Ranging, etc. However every
time there is a sell for $5 multimeters at Harbor Freight I pick up a
couple. I place one or two in each car I own and when someone asks me to fix
something I show them how to fix it and then give them the multimeter. These
multimeters work great and are very accurate, again the electronics are
cheap. The only draw backs are, LCD update rate and auto ranging, but again
for anything on cars or planes it is not that critical.
Regards,
Trampas Stern
www.sterntech.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of David
Burton
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Multimeter needs?
> Root Mean Squared - Might be useful with alternating current but what
value
> for DC? Tell me, Please!
>
> Cy Galley - Chair,
Exactly.
I think a simple volt ohm meter is all you need. I have one that has a
rubber protector around the outside of the case which protects it from
impact and also protects the plane from dents when you drop the meter.
Mine has a built in light for the display which I use a lot.
I find myself switching back and forth between dc volts and ohms a lot.
Since these two functions are opposed to each other on my least favorite
meter I spend a lot of time fooling with the meter trying to change the
setting. I would suggest trying to find a meter that has these adjacent to
each other. I had an old meter with push buttons to change functions. It
was great to use but was really a bench model.
One thing that I dislike about another meter I use is that you have to
select the range you want to test in. My favorite meter auto-ranges. The
meter is never off-scale, you just select the function you want (DC etc.)
and the meter displays the result to the highest accuracy it can.
Good luck!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Francis, David CMDR" <David.Francis(at)defence.gov.au> |
| Subject: | SEC: UNCLASSIFIED - BREAKERS & SWITCH QUESTIONS |
Bob,
Two questions, wiring is Z-14:
a. I have just 2 breakers, 2 x 5 amp for my two voltage regulators. In a
past post you said:
If you use breakers, go with the screws. You need to connect all the
breakers together with a common bus bar which will screw directly
onto the breaker terminals. One of the goals for using fuse blocks is to
reduce the system parts count. If you use fast-on breakers, then
the parts reduction gained with fast-ons at the breakers is lost
when you have to fabricate a bus bar, support it, insulate it
and install a jumper wire from the bus to the breaker with
more screws and two terminals, only one of which is a fast-on.
Really messy.
Bob . . .
I plan the breakers to he either side of the two low volts warning lights,
how do I terminate wires to the screw terminals, and
b. I have the (2-10 equivalent)Carling miniature toggle switches with LEDs
in the bat handles. They are rated at 3 amp at 28VDC, presumably around 5
amps at 12VDC. My landing lights are 55 watts each = 4.5 amps, but are
resistive loads. Can I wire direct or should I go via a relay for each lamp?
Switch derating factors in AC43.13 suggest relays?
Regards, David Francis, Canberra, Australia.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)BowenAero.com> |
| Subject: | Multimeter needs? |
I don't know what RMS is. My $30 Craftsman multimeter met all my needs
while building the plane. Except when I fried it trying to use it to time
my mags (hey, in theory that should have worked!). I replaced it with one
from Radio Shack, but I don't like it nearly as much as the Sears.
-
Larry Bowen, RV-8 16.2 hrs.
Larry(at)BowenAero.com
http://BowenAero.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dr. Andrew Elliott [mailto:a.s.elliott(at)cox.net]
> Sent: Sunday, October 31, 2004 11:36 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Multimeter needs?
>
> -->
>
> I a going to buy a new multimeter to support my rewiring
> efforts, and I was wondering if there is any need to get an
> RMS-capable meter. With similar capabilities otherwise, the
> 4000-count RMS meter is about $40 more than the non-RMS
> version. Comments?
>
> Andy Elliott
> N481HY/AA-1(TD,160)/KFFZ
> That's "One Hot Yankee"
> http://members.cox.net/n481hy/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Robert McCallum <robert.mccallum2(at)sympatico.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Multimeter needs? |
Larry;
RMS refers to Root Mean Square, and is the value, when referring to
alternating current, which most closely represents the direct current
equivalent. With reference to the normal 115 volt AC electricity
available in the wall plugs of your house, 115 is the RMS value
representing the effective voltage available. The peak voltage is
actually 1.414 X 115 = 163 volts for a 60 cycle sine wave which is what
most of North America uses. You can treat the RMS 115 volt value as
though it were a DC value when applying Ohm's law for a resistive load
for example. When it comes to DC voltages and currents found in
aeroplanes RMS is not applicable, it is an alternating current term.
Bob McC
Larry Bowen wrote:
>
>I don't know what RMS is. My $30 Craftsman multimeter met all my needs
>while building the plane.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Stone" <jsto1(at)tampabay.rr.com> |
FYI, PCFlight Systems Ocala FL has a 10.5" display with integrated EFIS
and Engine monitor. It also supports 4, 6, and 8 cyl configurations. I
have one in my Jabiru J450.
See: http://www.pcflightsystems.com/
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of lucky
aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Dynon update
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Multimeter needs? |
On Oct 31, 2004, at 6:25 PM, cgalley wrote:
>
> Root Mean Squared - Might be useful with alternating current but what
> value
> for DC? Tell me, Please!
None, well, very little. If you have ripple on your DC then it might
be of passing interest.
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest. A good
citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Multimeter needs? |
On Oct 31, 2004, at 9:31 PM, Larry Bowen wrote:
>
>
> I don't know what RMS is.
Root mean squared. It is the square root of the mean (average) of the
squares of the instantaneous values of the signal. In DC, RMS voltage
equals DC voltage so there is no value to using RMS for DC measurements
unless there is some AC/ripple on the DC. If your AC signal is a pure
sine wave, RMS is a simple conversion from either the average or peak
value. RMS becomes important when dealing with unusual AC waveforms.
The short version is that RMS capability really isn't all that useful
when working with DC electrical systems. It is very interesting when
working with AC power circuits and audio.
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest. A good
citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie Kuss <chaztuna(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | Multimeter needs? |
Larry,
If you let a impulse coupled mag "snap" while your meter is hooked up, it
will take it (or even a real magneto buzz box) out. Best method is to move
the prop till the mag snaps, then back it up a bit and hook up the meter.
Otherwise, the high voltage generated in the mag's primary coil, will ruin
your meter or buzz box.
Charlie Kuss
>
>I don't know what RMS is. My $30 Craftsman multimeter met all my needs
>while building the plane. Except when I fried it trying to use it to time
>my mags (hey, in theory that should have worked!). I replaced it with one
>from Radio Shack, but I don't like it nearly as much as the Sears.
>
>-
>Larry Bowen, RV-8 16.2 hrs.
>Larry(at)BowenAero.com
>http://BowenAero.com
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Dr. Andrew Elliott [mailto:a.s.elliott(at)cox.net]
> > Sent: Sunday, October 31, 2004 11:36 AM
> > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Multimeter needs?
> >
> > -->
> >
> > I a going to buy a new multimeter to support my rewiring
> > efforts, and I was wondering if there is any need to get an
> > RMS-capable meter. With similar capabilities otherwise, the
> > 4000-count RMS meter is about $40 more than the non-RMS
> > version. Comments?
> >
> > Andy Elliott
> > N481HY/AA-1(TD,160)/KFFZ
> > That's "One Hot Yankee"
> > http://members.cox.net/n481hy/
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Multimeter needs? |
| From: | "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)BowenAero.com> |
I figured that is what happened. Is my meter trashed, or is there a way
to fix it?
The subsequent timing with a buzz box and A&P helper went fine, and I'm
pretty sure we let the impulse mag click several times with the box in
place. I assumed it had built in protection against the jolt. No?
-
Larry Bowen
Larry(at)BowenAero.com
http://BowenAero.com
Charlie Kuss said:
>
>
> Larry,
> If you let a impulse coupled mag "snap" while your meter is hooked up,
> it
> will take it (or even a real magneto buzz box) out. Best method is to move
> the prop till the mag snaps, then back it up a bit and hook up the meter.
> Otherwise, the high voltage generated in the mag's primary coil, will ruin
> your meter or buzz box.
> Charlie Kuss
>
>>
>>
>>I don't know what RMS is. My $30 Craftsman multimeter met all my needs
>>while building the plane. Except when I fried it trying to use it to
>> time
>>my mags (hey, in theory that should have worked!). I replaced it with
>> one
>>from Radio Shack, but I don't like it nearly as much as the Sears.
>>
>>-
>>Larry Bowen, RV-8 16.2 hrs.
>>Larry(at)BowenAero.com
>>http://BowenAero.com
>>
>>
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: Dr. Andrew Elliott [mailto:a.s.elliott(at)cox.net]
>> > Sent: Sunday, October 31, 2004 11:36 AM
>> > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>> > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Multimeter needs?
>> >
>> > -->
>> >
>> > I a going to buy a new multimeter to support my rewiring
>> > efforts, and I was wondering if there is any need to get an
>> > RMS-capable meter. With similar capabilities otherwise, the
>> > 4000-count RMS meter is about $40 more than the non-RMS
>> > version. Comments?
>> >
>> > Andy Elliott
>> > N481HY/AA-1(TD,160)/KFFZ
>> > That's "One Hot Yankee"
>> > http://members.cox.net/n481hy/
>>
>>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "cgalley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Multimeter needs? |
Won't the ripple have to be very large? The absolute value of a ripple
current isn't significant.
A scope would be a
Cy Galley - Chair,
AirVenture Emergency Aircraft Repair
A Service Project of Chapter 75
EAA Safety Programs Editor - TC
EAA Sport Pilot
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Lloyd" <brianl(at)lloyd.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Multimeter needs?
>
>
> On Oct 31, 2004, at 6:25 PM, cgalley wrote:
>
> >
> > Root Mean Squared - Might be useful with alternating current but what
> > value
> > for DC? Tell me, Please!
>
> None, well, very little. If you have ripple on your DC then it might
> be of passing interest.
>
>
> Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
> brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
> +1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
>
> There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest. A good
> citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Multimeter needs? |
>
>
>
>I've been meaning to ask you this question, Bob, and this
>thread reminded me. I bought a cheapie that has the
>ability to measure current. This seems pretty cool, and
>seems to work ok. I am curious - does your experience with
>this feature tell you that this is an accurate way to measure
>current?
>
>Thanks,
>Mickey
Don't know what would be any "better". The only down-side
for digital instruments is the ability to sense trends and
dynamic behavior by watching digits. I have a number of analog
instruments I keep around when it becomes necessary to "watch
the bouncing ball" . . . but when it comes to return on
investment for accuracy and capability, the low cost digital
instruments are an amazing value.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | speaking of measurements |
Some days ago, someone mentioned an article in the Jan 04
issue of Circuit Cellar on a low range ohmmeter. I had published
an article on such an instrument some time ago.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/LowOhmsAdapter_3.pdf
I ordered a back issue of Circuit Cellar to look over the
article cited. It's a processor based design with a digital
display. The range and accuracy of the device is not markedly
better than the design I proposed but the parts-count, complexity
and time-to-assemble is huge compared to the design I proposed.
My recommendation is that if anyone is interested in adding
low resistance measurement capability to their toolbox, the
techniques described in the article on my website is the
way to go.
I own a killobuck micro-ohmmeter but when I need a first-look
at a circuit from the milli-ohms perspective, my $25 adapter
comes out before I kick the big-dog awake.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jerzy Krasinski <krasinski(at)provalue.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Driving electronic rpm meter from both magnetos |
Robert L. Nuckolls, III magnetos wrote:
magnetos
>
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>Bob,
>>I use electronic rpm meter for the engine, and the problem is how to
>>trigger the meter in order to have indications of rpm while switching
>>
>>
>>from one magneto to the other.
>
>
>>The simplest, but a crude way would be to add a switch selecting the
>>magneto providing the signal to rpm meter.
>>
>>A diode from the P wire to the meter input (for each of the magnetos)
>>would do the same automatically. But here comes a question - what is the
>>peak voltage on the P wire during operation of the magneto? Also, that
>>might be not the safest way, with blown diodes funny things might happen.
>>
>>A resistor from each P wire to the meter input (for each of the
>>magnetos) would form a voltage divider by a factor of 2 in case when
>>one P wire is grounded. The resistor must be not too small in order not
>>to damp the coil of the magneto. Do you know what would be the lower
>>limit of the resistance that can be safely connected to the P wire
>>without significant reduction of the spark energy? I guess this
>>approach would be safer than with the diodes.
>>
>>
>
> I'd use resistors but only read one mag at a time and use the
> resistors to prevent fault on tachometer wiring from taking
> a magneto down.
>
>
>
>
>>I wonder if you have a recommended diagram for driving an electronic rpm
>>meter from both magnetos?
>>
>>
>
> Sure. See
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Engine/Mags_with_Electronic_Tach.pdf
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
>---
>
>
>
Bob,
Thank you for the answers and the diagram.
In the diagram on
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Engine/Mags_with_Electronic_Tach.pdf
I think, the resistors should be connected to terminals "1" on the switches, rather
than to terminals "3" which are the ground.
Also, the wire from the start button should go to termional "4" rather than to
terminal "6"
What resistance would you recommend to separate the tachometer from the magneto?
Is 1k sufficient to protect magneto from a short in the meter?
Jerzy
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Multimeter needs? |
On Nov 1, 2004, at 10:15 AM, Larry Bowen wrote:
>
>
> I figured that is what happened. Is my meter trashed, or is there a
> way
> to fix it?
Probably trashed if it doesn't have a protection fuse. The voltage
spike when the impulse coupling snaps is a pretty hefty one, like 300V.
Not conducive to the longevity of a solid-state device.
You can't use an ohmmeter to time a mag since the primary of the coil
looks like a DC short across the points. You can't see when the points
open. You need an AC signal (a buzz-box generates this) to tell when
the points open.
> The subsequent timing with a buzz box and A&P helper went fine, and I'm
> pretty sure we let the impulse mag click several times with the box in
> place. I assumed it had built in protection against the jolt. No?
Yes.
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest. A good
citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Multimeter needs? |
On Nov 1, 2004, at 10:17 AM, cgalley wrote:
>
> Won't the ripple have to be very large? The absolute value of a ripple
> current isn't significant.
No, it probably isn't. But if you want to see how much ripple you have
you can tell the meter to AC-couple and then turn on the AC mode to
read only the value of the ripple. Since the ripple is not a pure sine
wave, only an RMS meter will tell you the actual magnitude of the
ripple voltage.
> A scope would be a
Yes, a scope would be a good tool. I have a Velleman HPS-40
scope/meter that I like a lot. I paid about $280 for it and it is a
perfectly-good 12MHz scope as well as doing all the voltmeter things.
It doesn't measure ohms tho'. For that I need another meter.
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest. A good
citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Driving electronic rpm meter from both |
| From: | Larry Landucci <lllanducci(at)tds.net> |
Bob,
Could you describe a similar circuit if a conventional ACS ignition
switch (with start position) is used rather than the two toggle system?
What would be a reasonable value for the resistors?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jerzy Krasinski <krasinski(at)provalue.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Driving electronic rpm meter from both magnetos |
Bob,
Disregard the comment on the starting wire connection.
I have both magnetos with impulse coupling, and I did not notice that in
your diagram only one of them is impulse coupled.
Jerzy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jerzy Krasinski <krasinski(at)provalue.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Driving electronic rpm meter from both magnetos |
Bob,
Probabbly the best solution would be to connect the upper resistor to
terminal "4" of the upper switch, and the lower resistor to terminal
"1" of the lower switch
Jerzy
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> magnetos |
| Subject: | Re: Driving electronic rpm meter from both |
magnetos
magnetos
>
>Bob,
>
>Thank you for the answers and the diagram.
>
>In the diagram on
>
>http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Engine/Mags_with_Electronic_Tach.pdf
>
>I think, the resistors should be connected to terminals "1" on the
>switches, rather than to terminals "3" which are the ground.
Good eye. I've revised the drawing and re-posted at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Engine/Mags_with_Electronic_Tach_A.pdf
>Also, the wire from the start button should go to termional "4" rather
>than to terminal "6"
No that one is correct. We want to enable the starter only when the right
magneto is OFF.
>What resistance would you recommend to separate the tachometer from the
>magneto? Is 1k sufficient to protect magneto from a short in the meter?
Probably. Give it a try and then run an experiment for us.
While operating from one magneto, clip-lead the tach signal
line to ground and see if you can perceive any changes in
operation of the engine.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Pat Hatch" <pat_hatch(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Driving electronic rpm meter from both magnetos |
Jerry,
Until Bob responds, I would agree that the resistors should go to terminals
"1", however, the wire from the start button is correct on terminal "4."
The logic is that you want the right mag to be OFF for engine start and only
the left mag ON because of the impulse coupler. This prevents you from
starting with the right mag ON which could cause a kickback during the
start.
Pat Hatch
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jerzy Krasinski" <krasinski(at)provalue.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Driving electronic rpm meter from both
magnetos
>
>
> Robert L. Nuckolls, III magnetos wrote:
>
>> magnetos
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Bob,
>>>I use electronic rpm meter for the engine, and the problem is how to
>>>trigger the meter in order to have indications of rpm while switching
>>>
>>>
>>>from one magneto to the other.
>>
>>
>>>The simplest, but a crude way would be to add a switch selecting the
>>>magneto providing the signal to rpm meter.
>>>
>>>A diode from the P wire to the meter input (for each of the magnetos)
>>>would do the same automatically. But here comes a question - what is the
>>>peak voltage on the P wire during operation of the magneto? Also, that
>>>might be not the safest way, with blown diodes funny things might happen.
>>>
>>>A resistor from each P wire to the meter input (for each of the
>>>magnetos) would form a voltage divider by a factor of 2 in case when
>>>one P wire is grounded. The resistor must be not too small in order not
>>>to damp the coil of the magneto. Do you know what would be the lower
>>>limit of the resistance that can be safely connected to the P wire
>>>without significant reduction of the spark energy? I guess this
>>>approach would be safer than with the diodes.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I'd use resistors but only read one mag at a time and use the
>> resistors to prevent fault on tachometer wiring from taking
>> a magneto down.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>I wonder if you have a recommended diagram for driving an electronic rpm
>>>meter from both magnetos?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Sure. See
>>
>> http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Engine/Mags_with_Electronic_Tach.pdf
>>
>>
>> Bob . . .
>>
>>
>>---
>>
>>
>>
>
> Bob,
>
> Thank you for the answers and the diagram.
>
> In the diagram on
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Engine/Mags_with_Electronic_Tach.pdf
>
> I think, the resistors should be connected to terminals "1" on the
> switches, rather than to terminals "3" which are the ground.
>
> Also, the wire from the start button should go to termional "4" rather
> than to terminal "6"
>
> What resistance would you recommend to separate the tachometer from the
> magneto? Is 1k sufficient to protect magneto from a short in the meter?
>
> Jerzy
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie Kuss <chaztuna(at)adelphia.net> magnetos |
| Subject: | Re: Driving electronic rpm meter from both |
magnetos
>snipped
> > I'd use resistors but only read one mag at a time and use the
> > resistors to prevent fault on tachometer wiring from taking
> > a magneto down.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>I wonder if you have a recommended diagram for driving an electronic rpm
> >>meter from both magnetos?
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Sure. See
> >
> > http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Engine/Mags_with_Electronic_Tach.pdf
> >
> >
> > Bob . . .
Bob
I just tried the link, but there was nothing there
Charlie Kuss
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Stone" <jsto1(at)tampabay.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Xponder Ant ground plane size question. |
Does anyone happen to know what the optimum size and shape a ground
plane should be to use an AV-22 transponder antenna on a composite
aircraft?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ralph E. Capen" <recapen(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Xponder Ant ground plane size question. |
Don't know if he's using the same antenna or not, but James Redmon's Berkut13.com
website has stuff on his installation of a transponder antenna in the speedbrake
area of his Berkut.
-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Stone <jsto1(at)tampabay.rr.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Xponder Ant ground plane size question.
Does anyone happen to know what the optimum size and shape a ground
plane should be to use an AV-22 transponder antenna on a composite
aircraft?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Stone" <jsto1(at)tampabay.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Wiring ARC IN-514R |
Here are a couple major electronics parts suppliers. If you have the
Cannon part number they may have the part. Some require a minimum
purchase so beware.
http://www.digikey.com/ http://www.jameco.com/
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
William Bernard
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Wiring ARC IN-514R
-->
I have an ARC IN-514R CDI that I would like to wire to show course
deviation from an apollo GX-55 gps. (There is a plane on the field with
this indicator wired to a flybuddy, but the man who wired it is no
longer in the area.)
The owner says tht the display is similar to a localizer in that the
needle simply moves left or right and the flag always show 'to'. Setting
a couse has no effect using the OBS has no effect.
I think that the nav left and right pins on the GX55 could be wired to
the loc left and right pins on the IN-514R and the TO & FROM pins wired
together. My question is is there anything else? There are also "nav
valid +" and "nav valid -" pins on the GX55 that seem to have no logical
place on the IN-514R and there is a ground pin and a wiper arm pin on
the IN-514R that seem to have no logical connection to the GX55.
Also, Does anyone know of a source for the cannon plug to fit the back
of the IN-514R?
Thanks for the help.
Bill
==
==
==
==
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James Redmon" <james(at)berkut13.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Xponder Ant ground plane size question. |
5.5 inches, according to Jim Weir. Works very will for me and many others.
http://www.berkut13.com/berkut30.htm
James Redmon
Berkut #013 N97TX
http://www.berkut13.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Stone" <jsto1(at)tampabay.rr.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Xponder Ant ground plane size question.
>
>
> Does anyone happen to know what the optimum size and shape a ground
> plane should be to use an AV-22 transponder antenna on a composite
> aircraft?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | George Neal E Capt AU/PC <Neal.George(at)maxwell.af.mil> |
| Subject: | Xponder Ant ground plane size question. |
5.5-inch circle should do a good job.
Neal
>Does anyone happen to know what the optimum size and shape a ground
plane should be to use an AV-22 transponder antenna on a composite
aircraft?<
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Xponder Ant ground plane size question. |
| From: | "John Schroeder" <jschroeder(at)perigee.net> |
5.25" min. diameter. 6 inches is OK. Bob has a "how to" on his website
for this. Let me know and I can send it to you.
John
>
>
> Does anyone happen to know what the optimum size and shape a ground
> plane should be to use an AV-22 transponder antenna on a composite
> aircraft?
>
>
--
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <bakerocb(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Multimeter needs? |
AeroElectric-List message previously posted by: "cgalley"
<>
11/1/2004
Hello Cy, You asked so here goes.
Your question implies that there is no AC electricity in our amateur built aircraft
to measure. It might be a very rare occurrence, but I had occasion recently
to measure RMS AC voltage in my amateur built experimental airplane.
The current used to provide the back lighting in the LCD (Liquid Crystal Display)
instruments for the Vision Microsystems 1000 electronic engine instrumentation
system is AC current provided by a small inverter in the system DPU (Data
Processing Unit).
When my instruments would not light one of the checks that I was asked to conduct
was to determine if there was at least 89 volts RMS between two of the 26 wires
in the ribbon cable going from the DPU to the instruments.
My el cheapo Radio Shack digital multi meter was up to the task and I was able
to do my trouble shooting by measuring AC RMS voltage.
There may be other LCDs out there that require AC electricity.
OC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Xponder Ant ground plane size question. |
>
>Does anyone happen to know what the optimum size and shape a ground
>plane should be to use an AV-22 transponder antenna on a composite
>aircraft?
Ground planes for all antennas are optimum when their radius is
equal to the length of the antenna. Transponder antennas are 2.6""
tall so 5.2" diameter works for the ground plane disk. Comm antennas
are about 23" long so a series of 23" radials will synthesize a
46" disk.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> magnetos |
| Subject: | Re: Driving electronic rpm meter from both |
magnetos
magnetos
>
>
>Bob,
>
>Disregard the comment on the starting wire connection.
>I have both magnetos with impulse coupling, and I did not notice that in
>your diagram only one of them is impulse coupled.
>
>Jerzy
Oh . . . then you don't NEED to run the start enable line through
either of the switches but running it to terminal 4 would offer
an extra layer of "disable" when the mag switch is off.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Base Station Antenna |
>Bob,
>
>I subscribe to the rv-list and the aeroconnection list and have your
>aeroconnection book. All are a great resource.
>I spent way to much time on the computer trying to read and digest all the
>info that you provide. Thank you for your time and willingness to share
>your experience and knowledge.
You're most welcome.
>I have an old Narco Escort II I accquired through a project purchase. I
>would like to hook it up and use it as a base station just to listen
>(listen only) to the local traffic while I am building my RV-8. I need an
>antenna and being the cheap pilot that I am. I would like to make one to
>use. I have read your antenna section, but am a little hazy on the ground
>plane dimensions. I figure the antenna length should be about 22". Should
>the ground plane be 22" also? If so is that a diameter or a radius. Would
>a piece of aluminum at those dimensions work or would you still recommend
>using the foil tape?
How about a j-pole antenna? These are solid metal and therefore when mounted
on a properly grounded mast, do not represent a lightning hazard for a
land-based radio or it's operator. You can build this from a length
of copper pipe, a copper tee, and a copper ell. 3/4" pipe makes for a
rugged antenna. See:
http://www.packetradio.com/jpol2.htm
http://www.packetradio.com/jpol.htm
Enter 126.5 Mhz in the calculator box at it gives you all the critical
dimensions. A friend of mine built one of these for our airport when we
owned
it in 1989 and the same antenna is still up on the telephone pole
working fine
after 15 years.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Driving electronic rpm meter from both |
>
>Bob,
>Could you describe a similar circuit if a conventional ACS ignition
>switch (with start position) is used rather than the two toggle system?
This scheme won't work with a keyswitch. Not enough poles.
What does the manufacturer of your tachometer recommend?
> What would be a reasonable value for the resistors?
I don't recall what I've seen used in the past. 1K comes to
mind. Jerzy is going to try it and tell us how it works.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> magnetos |
| Subject: | Re: Driving electronic rpm meter from both |
magnetos
magnetos
>
>
>Bob,
>Probabbly the best solution would be to connect the upper resistor to
>terminal "4" of the upper switch, and the lower resistor to terminal
>"1" of the lower switch
>Jerzy
???? Not sure what you're suggesting here . . . I believe that's what
it shows now at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Engine/Mags_with_Electronic_Tach_A.pdf
Bob . . .
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>---
Bob . . .
--------------------------------------------------------
< Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition >
< of man. Advances which permit this norm to be >
< exceeded -- here and there, now and then -- are the >
< work of an extremely small minority, frequently >
< despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed >
< by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny >
< minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes >
< happens) is driven out of a society, the people >
< then slip back into abject poverty. >
< >
< This is known as "bad luck". >
< -Lazarus Long- >
<------------------------------------------------------>
http://www.aeroelectric.com
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> magnetos |
| Subject: | Re: Driving electronic rpm meter from both |
magnetos
magnetos
> magnetos
>
>
> >snipped
> > > I'd use resistors but only read one mag at a time and use the
> > > resistors to prevent fault on tachometer wiring from taking
> > > a magneto down.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >>I wonder if you have a recommended diagram for driving an electronic rpm
> > >>meter from both magnetos?
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > > Sure. See
> > >
> > > http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Engine/Mags_with_Electronic_Tach.pdf
> > >
> > >
> > > Bob . . .
>
>Bob
> I just tried the link, but there was nothing there
>Charlie Kuss
You missed the second link for revision A:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Engine/Mags_with_Electronic_Tach_A.pdf
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> QUESTIONS |
| Subject: | Re: SEC: UNCLASSIFIED - BREAKERS & SWITCH |
QUESTIONS
QUESTIONS
>
>
>Bob,
>
>Two questions, wiring is Z-14:
>
>a. I have just 2 breakers, 2 x 5 amp for my two voltage regulators. In a
>past post you said:
>
> If you use breakers, go with the screws. You need to connect all the
> breakers together with a common bus bar which will screw directly
> onto the breaker terminals. One of the goals for using fuse blocks is to
> reduce the system parts count. If you use fast-on breakers, then
> the parts reduction gained with fast-ons at the breakers is lost
> when you have to fabricate a bus bar, support it, insulate it
> and install a jumper wire from the bus to the breaker with
> more screws and two terminals, only one of which is a fast-on.
> Really messy.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
>I plan the breakers to he either side of the two low volts warning lights,
>how do I terminate wires to the screw terminals, and
Oh, sorry. I thought you were talking about using circuit breaker panels
instead of fuseblocks wherein you would need to build a bus-bar
across the rows of breakers. I understand now that you're talking
only about the pair field circuit OV crowbar breakers. Obviously, one
attaches WIRES to both terminals of these breakers . . . fast-on
or screw terminals would be fine here.
Screw terminals use ring terminals,
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/s816p.jpg
and the fast-on blades use the fast-on female terminals.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/MVC-004X.JPG
>b. I have the (2-10 equivalent)Carling miniature toggle switches with LEDs
>in the bat handles. They are rated at 3 amp at 28VDC, presumably around 5
>amps at 12VDC. My landing lights are 55 watts each = 4.5 amps, but are
>resistive loads.
Actually, lamps are LAMP loads and hard on switches. See
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/swtchrat.pdf
> Can I wire direct or should I go via a relay for each lamp?
>Switch derating factors in AC43.13 suggest relays?
Saw a Dragonfly at a flyin a couple of years ago where the builder
used miniature switches. See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/miniswitches.jpg
His landing and taxi lights were 50w devices. He said he flew
at night quite a bit and that the switches worked well for
over 5 years. You can do a lot to help the switches out
by adding inrush limiters to the circuits. See:
http://dkc3.digikey.com/PDF/T043/1047.pdf
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | B Tomm <fvalarm(at)rapidnet.net> |
| Subject: | BOB, somethings wrong with the clock |
Bob,
Your recent posts indicate that they were sent in 2008! That keeps them on
the top of my email list. Nice way to keep them in my view but...
Otherwise thanks for the help on this forum and for the book. I have
learbed much and look forward to the electrical work coming soon.
Bevan
RV7A fuse
-----Original Message-----
From: Robert L. Nuckolls, III [SMTP:b.nuckolls(at)cox.net]
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Line of sight communication 0.00
DATE_IN_FUTURE_96_XX Date: is 96 hours or more after Received: date
>
>
>Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
> >
> > If you do the path-loss calculation for VHF comm frequencies
> > you'll find that 1 watt of transmitter is good for about 1200
> > miles to a run-of-the-mill receiver and dipole antennas. If you
> > can see 'em you can talk to them.
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> Different frequencies, but have you ever tried moon bounce?
A friend of mind was into that about 1975. Had a big dish
in the back yard. Interesting stuff but beyond my budget at
the time.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James Foerster" <jmfpublic(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: speaking of measurements |
Bob,
It was I who mentioned this article, and after reading your description of
the easy to build constant current source, I would fully agree that this is
the way to go. The complicated microprocessor design is clever, and
probably neccessary for microohm measurements, but certainly not for the
milliohm measurements that we all might use for switches and high current
connections. I had not seen that design on your website before.
Jim Foerster J400
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Trampas" <tstern(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Driving electronic rpm meter from both magnetos |
Depending on the tachometer used you can connect a capacitor in series with
each p-lead and then combine them and connect to the tachometer.
I have just order some tachometer adapter boards which takes any type of
p-lead, and converts to an optical isolated open collector output. Using two
of these, one on each p-lead, then connecting the outputs together to create
one signal for the tachometer.
I have also designed a circuit which will take 8-28Vdc and output a stable
12Vdc at 2Amps. I designed this circuit for a friend who did not want the
weight of the big passive filters for his radios. Additionally he wanted a
circuit which would isolate his radio such that he could leave the radio on
while starting the engine.
Regards,
Trampas Stern
www.sterntech.com
-----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: Driving electronic rpm meter from both
magnetos
magnetos
> magnetos
>
>
> >snipped
> > > I'd use resistors but only read one mag at a time and use the
> > > resistors to prevent fault on tachometer wiring from taking
> > > a magneto down.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >>I wonder if you have a recommended diagram for driving an electronic
rpm
> > >>meter from both magnetos?
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > > Sure. See
> > >
> > > http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Engine/Mags_with_Electronic_Tach.pdf
> > >
> > >
> > > Bob . . .
>
>Bob
> I just tried the link, but there was nothing there
>Charlie Kuss
You missed the second link for revision A:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Engine/Mags_with_Electronic_Tach_A.pdf
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: BOB, somethings wrong with the clock |
>
>Bob,
>
>Your recent posts indicate that they were sent in 2008! That keeps them on
>the top of my email list. Nice way to keep them in my view but...
>
>Otherwise thanks for the help on this forum and for the book. I have
>learbed much and look forward to the electrical work coming soon.
>
>Bevan
>RV7A fuse
Yeah, had a computer wander off into the weeds. I'm still
wrestling with some issues but about to go buy a new one.
When you can replace one for under $400 and it runs faster
to boot, you can't justify spending much time praying over it.
This one has been running 24/7 for two years. It's entitled
to be creaky in the joints.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> magnetos |
| Subject: | Driving electronic rpm meter from both |
magnetos
magnetos
>I have also designed a circuit which will take 8-28Vdc and output a stable
>12Vdc at 2Amps. I designed this circuit for a friend who did not want the
>weight of the big passive filters for his radios.
why did he need passive filters for his radios?
> Additionally he wanted a
>circuit which would isolate his radio such that he could leave the radio on
>while starting the engine.
why did he worry about leaving his radio on while starting
the engine?
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Driving electronic rpm meter from both magnetos |
On Nov 2, 2004, at 9:37 AM, Trampas wrote:
>
> Depending on the tachometer used you can connect a capacitor in series
> with
> each p-lead and then combine them and connect to the tachometer.
I have been watching this thread for some time and didn't answer
because I figured someone else would. There seems too be a fair number
of misconceptions about how this might work.
Short answer:
You cannot combine the p-lead signals from both mags to drive your
tach. There is no combination of resistors, capacitors, or diodes that
will make it work reliably so don't try. Put in a switch to select
which mag will drive your tach input and let it go at that.
Long answer:
Have you ever looked at the signal on a p-lead of a mag? It is not a
simple on/off signal. It is a very complex, high-voltage, damped sine
wave with other cruft added in for flavor. Put a 'scope on your p-lead
to see what I mean. This is not a signal that can be combined with
anything else to make sense.
Also, since the timing of the two mags is slightly different (no matter
how good you are the points will never open at exactly the same time)
the waveforms on the p-leads are not even close to being synchronized.
Depending on how you connect the p-leads together through capacitors or
diodes, you might even compromise how the mags work thus leading to
strange behavior of your ignition system.
There is a way to take the p-lead signal and turn it into something
that looks somewhat like a simple pulse but it will take a fair number
of components to filter out the high-frequency (ringing) part of the
signal and then process it to produce a clean pulse. The problem then
is, once you do that, the signal no longer looks even remotely like the
signal from a p-lead and you tach may not recognize it anymore.
So add in a SPDT switch that selects right or left mag as input to your
tach and be done with it.
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest. A good
citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Grommet/bushing like thingy whatsit |
| From: | "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" <mstewart(at)iss.net> |
OK the answer was sent to me directly. Its called Gromstrip, at least
that's the brand name of it.
I would like to hear if there is another name for it as a google search
only brought up a couple of suppliers.
Here is a description:
Gromstrip is a continuous length of extruded U-Channel for use as a
protective covering on sharp edges. It can be cut to desired length and
easily inserted into any hole, regardless of shape. Gromstrip requires
minimum space, grips surfaces snugly, and won't jar loose. Wherever
wires pass through a metal piece, Gromstrip used on sharp edges will
protect against fraying and cut-through of the wires.
Can be had here:
http://www.edmo.com/s2/s2-23.asp
here:
http://terminaltown.com/Pages/Page111.html
Thanks
Mike Stewart
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Grommet/bushing like thingy whatsit
Atlanta)"
By Buddy commercial mechanic has this stuff he calls 'alligator strip.'
Its plastic strip, highly flexible, designed to line the inside of a
hole to protect the wires on a pass through like a bulkhead. What is
really cool about this stuff is that you simply cut it to what ever the
hole size is, which you don't have to know. Grommets frustrate me cause
I never have the right size and I know one day it will break down and
crack and fall apart. This stuff has to be cheap and is very easy to
install. It would function like a plastic bushing does, but again, you
do not have to know the hole size. Does anyone know what the commercial
name for this stuff is so I can go buy lots of it? Every hole in the
plane (except firewall) from a vent tube coming from the wing root, to
battery cable, could be protected easily with this stuff on every pass
through.
Thanks
Mike Stewart
Getting ready for wire
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Trampas" <tstern(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Driving electronic rpm meter from both magnetos |
The passive the filter is the inductor/capacitor solution which you and
others have mentioned several times. I think he actually purchased the
filter kit from Radio Shack.
The noise problem is the same as others have had, hum in radio or intercom
from avionics, alternator, etc.
The reason for having the option to leave the radio on was not so that he
really could, it was more so that he did not have to worry about it. That is
he did not want to have to worry about the possibility of load dumps or
low/high voltages harming his radio/electronics. My approach to electronic
designs is "do no harm to other devices and let no other devices do harm to
you." So the filter was designed to provide clean and safe power for
electronics.
Regards,
Trampas
www.sterntech.com
-----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: Driving electronic rpm meter from both
magnetos
magnetos
>I have also designed a circuit which will take 8-28Vdc and output a stable
>12Vdc at 2Amps. I designed this circuit for a friend who did not want the
>weight of the big passive filters for his radios.
why did he need passive filters for his radios?
> Additionally he wanted a
>circuit which would isolate his radio such that he could leave the radio on
>while starting the engine.
why did he worry about leaving his radio on while starting
the engine?
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DWENSING(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Grommet/bushing like thingy whatsit |
In a message dated 11/2/04 9:44:16 AM Eastern Standard Time, mstewart(at)iss.net
writes:
> OK the answer was sent to me directly. Its called Gromstrip, at least
> that's the brand name of it.
>
Mike,
I have heard it also called "Caterpillar" grommet. You know like the creeper
little fuzzy creature. It sort of resembles a caterpillar. Radio Shack is also
a source if you need some quick.
Dale Ensing
RV-6A N118DE
Waiting for the FAA guy to come see....
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Trampas" <tstern(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Driving electronic rpm meter from both magnetos |
Brian,
You are correct in some respects. However there are a number of different
ways for a tachometer to get a pick up signal. For example some tachometers
use an AC coupled signal which is then low pass filtered to get the signal.
In which case placing dual caps will work, and yes there are some negative
aspects to the option, but it will work, even if the timing is slightly off
between magnetos due to the low pass filtering in the device.
I have taken a long look at just about every ignition system know, and like
you said there is no one simple solution as it really depends on the design
of the tachometer. For example most automotive tachometers will not work
with p-leads due to the negative voltage spike that is not there with the
traditional car ignition system. For this reason I designed a conversion
circuit which will convert the ignition signal to a pulse train. Now of
different ignition systems it does require different conversion circuit for
example the Jabiru ignition system uses something like a Magnetronic
ignition system which has a different signal that other ignition systems. I
also designed converter circuits to buffer inductive pick up signals as
well.
Now you can take two of these circuits and use them to combine the
tachometer signals as that each of these circuits create an open collector
output which can be logically "or'ed" together. If there is a slight
difference in the timing of the signals this oring action will take car of
the difference.
Personally however I would prefer to have two electronic tachometers in my
engine monitoring system, one for the left magneto and one for the right.
The take the maximum of the two tachometers to show as the "main" tach. Then
I want the engine monitor to alarm if the tachometers ever differ by more
than 50 rpms. This way if in flight one of the magnetos or ignition systems
fail I will be notified at that moment. Thus I do not have to wait till the
next mag check to find out I have a bad magneto. In fact this is just the
way the Pulsar 200 engine monitor is designed.
I would also always place a low amperage fuse in line with my tachometer if
I am running off a p-lead system, regardless of the tachometer. This way if
the tachometer should ever short the p-lead it will blow the fuse and the
engine will keep running.
Regards,
Trampas Stern
www.sterntech.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brian
Lloyd
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Driving electronic rpm meter from both
magnetos
On Nov 2, 2004, at 9:37 AM, Trampas wrote:
>
> Depending on the tachometer used you can connect a capacitor in series
> with
> each p-lead and then combine them and connect to the tachometer.
I have been watching this thread for some time and didn't answer
because I figured someone else would. There seems too be a fair number
of misconceptions about how this might work.
Short answer:
You cannot combine the p-lead signals from both mags to drive your
tach. There is no combination of resistors, capacitors, or diodes that
will make it work reliably so don't try. Put in a switch to select
which mag will drive your tach input and let it go at that.
Long answer:
Have you ever looked at the signal on a p-lead of a mag? It is not a
simple on/off signal. It is a very complex, high-voltage, damped sine
wave with other cruft added in for flavor. Put a 'scope on your p-lead
to see what I mean. This is not a signal that can be combined with
anything else to make sense.
Also, since the timing of the two mags is slightly different (no matter
how good you are the points will never open at exactly the same time)
the waveforms on the p-leads are not even close to being synchronized.
Depending on how you connect the p-leads together through capacitors or
diodes, you might even compromise how the mags work thus leading to
strange behavior of your ignition system.
There is a way to take the p-lead signal and turn it into something
that looks somewhat like a simple pulse but it will take a fair number
of components to filter out the high-frequency (ringing) part of the
signal and then process it to produce a clean pulse. The problem then
is, once you do that, the signal no longer looks even remotely like the
signal from a p-lead and you tach may not recognize it anymore.
So add in a SPDT switch that selects right or left mag as input to your
tach and be done with it.
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest. A good
citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Vincent Welch" <welchvincent(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Grommet/bushing like thingy whatsit |
Also made my Panduit.....find any electrical supply outfit that reps Panduit
and request a catalog.
Vince
>From: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" <mstewart(at)iss.net>
>Reply-To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>To:
>Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Grommet/bushing like thingy whatsit
>Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2004 09:43:09 -0500
>
>
>
>OK the answer was sent to me directly. Its called Gromstrip, at least
>that's the brand name of it.
>
>I would like to hear if there is another name for it as a google search
>only brought up a couple of suppliers.
>Here is a description:
>Gromstrip is a continuous length of extruded U-Channel for use as a
>protective covering on sharp edges. It can be cut to desired length and
>easily inserted into any hole, regardless of shape. Gromstrip requires
>minimum space, grips surfaces snugly, and won't jar loose. Wherever
>wires pass through a metal piece, Gromstrip used on sharp edges will
>protect against fraying and cut-through of the wires.
>
>Can be had here:
>http://www.edmo.com/s2/s2-23.asp
>here:
>http://terminaltown.com/Pages/Page111.html
>
>Thanks
>Mike Stewart
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
>Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)
>To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: AeroElectric-List: Grommet/bushing like thingy whatsit
>
>Atlanta)"
>
>By Buddy commercial mechanic has this stuff he calls 'alligator strip.'
>Its plastic strip, highly flexible, designed to line the inside of a
>hole to protect the wires on a pass through like a bulkhead. What is
>really cool about this stuff is that you simply cut it to what ever the
>hole size is, which you don't have to know. Grommets frustrate me cause
>I never have the right size and I know one day it will break down and
>crack and fall apart. This stuff has to be cheap and is very easy to
>install. It would function like a plastic bushing does, but again, you
>do not have to know the hole size. Does anyone know what the commercial
>name for this stuff is so I can go buy lots of it? Every hole in the
>plane (except firewall) from a vent tube coming from the wing root, to
>battery cable, could be protected easily with this stuff on every pass
>through.
>
>Thanks
>
>
>Mike Stewart
>
>Getting ready for wire
>
>
Get ready for school! Find articles, homework help and more in the Back to
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Christopher Stone <rv8iator(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Niagara/Denso Alternator Overvoltage protection |
Good Morning all...
We (two RV-8 builders) are at the "add electrical system" point in the construction
process. From front to back the first item in question is the alternator.
Having followed this list for some time I have concluded the Denso 40 amp alternator
is the item that fits our output/weight/simplicity criteria.
A search of the archives was less then productive.
The question(s):
Has anyone installed the Niagara alternater with over volatge protection package.
The alternator appears to be a standard Denso with internal regulation. The overvoltage
protection is by Zeftronics.
http://www.niagaraairparts.com/ASP101-PIT%201.pdf
The overvoltage circuit appears to function by sensing alternator output voltage.
When the voltage exceeds the preset threshold it then opens a contactor in
series with the alternator output.
This looks like it will work... A couple of questions though.
What is the time constant of the circuit? Is it fast enough to catch an overvoltage
event before it can damage black boxes?
Since it instantly unloads the alternator, if the alternator wasn't already fried
which caused the overvoltage event, wouldn't it be fried by the sudden loss
of load?
Thanks in advance...
This list has been a gold mine of information!
Chris Stone
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Bristolsabre(at)aol.com |
Bob,
I just received among other things, my Professional Ratchet Crimping Tool
from BANDC, but I have a feeling it is put together incorrectly.
The yellow/ 12-10 AG is at the top and the red/22-18 AWG closest to the pivot
point of the tool.
That will give the lowest pressure to the biggest connector. I was just able
to crimp a 12-10
connector, but I had to use all my strenght.
Are any of the interchangeable dies for crimping coax cable?
Regards
Tore S Bristol
FEW Tf 51
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Driving electronic rpm meter from both magnetos |
On Nov 2, 2004, at 11:26 AM, Trampas wrote:
>
> Brian,
>
> You are correct in some respects. However there are a number of
> different
> ways for a tachometer to get a pick up signal.
I am correct within the context of the question which was how to
combine the signals from two p-leads into one commercial off-the-shelf
tach. If you want to go into custom tach design as we will down this
message it is very possible to build something that will readily
combing the signals from the two p-leads and drive the tach.
> For example some tachometers
> use an AC coupled signal which is then low pass filtered to get the
> signal.
> In which case placing dual caps will work, and yes there are some
> negative
> aspects to the option, but it will work, even if the timing is
> slightly off
> between magnetos due to the low pass filtering in the device.
The problem is that you are summing the two waveforms. Consider that
you are summing the high frequency component. I can see complete
cancelation in some cases. Now if you put in a diode peak detector
followed by low pass filtering *before* you get to the tach it just
might work but just summing the two waveforms is unlikely to produce
the results you expect no matter what you do after.
> I have taken a long look at just about every ignition system know, and
> like
> you said there is no one simple solution as it really depends on the
> design
> of the tachometer. For example most automotive tachometers will not
> work
> with p-leads due to the negative voltage spike that is not there with
> the
> traditional car ignition system.
Actually you do get a negative excursion with a kettering ignition
system but it does have a significant DC component which provides a
bias. The major peak is like + + + +. The magneto output is
symmetrical about zero if you consider subsequent firings with the
major peak being + - + -, etc.
> For this reason I designed a conversion
> circuit which will convert the ignition signal to a pulse train. Now of
> different ignition systems it does require different conversion
> circuit for
> example the Jabiru ignition system uses something like a Magnetronic
> ignition system which has a different signal that other ignition
> systems. I
> also designed converter circuits to buffer inductive pick up signals as
> well.
In the case of most electronic ignitions you just pick off the firing
signal while it is still something like a TTL level. No muss, no fuss,
and no filtering needed.
For a magneto or kettering ignition it isn't hard to produce a filter
to make a signal useful. You can use a series resistor, a full-wave
bridge rectifier, a shunt capacitor to sample the peak and provide
low-pass, and then drive an optoisolator to keep the HV cruft out of
the rest of your digital electronics. The cap will discharge pretty
quickly through the LED in the opto. Select resistor value to current
limit the LED and cap value to control fall-time.
> Now you can take two of these circuits and use them to combine the
> tachometer signals as that each of these circuits create an open
> collector
> output which can be logically "or'ed" together. If there is a slight
> difference in the timing of the signals this oring action will take
> car of
> the difference.
Yes, if you do all this ahead of the tach. That is what I was
originally saying. OTOH, if the tach has its own input conditioning
circuitry that expects the HV pulse, doing all this produces a pulse
that won't drive your tach anymore which gets me back to my original
answer.
> Personally however I would prefer to have two electronic tachometers
> in my
> engine monitoring system, one for the left magneto and one for the
> right.
Agreed. I would also have the system looking for missing pulses to
tell me if I am having a problem with one of the mags too.
> The take the maximum of the two tachometers to show as the "main"
> tach. Then
> I want the engine monitor to alarm if the tachometers ever differ by
> more
> than 50 rpms.
Well, if they are from the same engine they never will differ in
frequency. OTOH you might miss a pulse and that tells you something.
The engine monitor can then tell you about the missing pulses and flag
the mag as possibly failing.
> This way if in flight one of the magnetos or ignition systems
> fail I will be notified at that moment. Thus I do not have to wait
> till the
> next mag check to find out I have a bad magneto. In fact this is just
> the
> way the Pulsar 200 engine monitor is designed.
It only makes sense.
> I would also always place a low amperage fuse in line with my
> tachometer if
> I am running off a p-lead system, regardless of the tachometer. This
> way if
> the tachometer should ever short the p-lead it will blow the fuse and
> the
> engine will keep running.
Good idea but the series resistor does the same thing, i.e. provides
isolation of the mag from the tach circuitry. To me it appears that
the resistor is both necessary and sufficient.
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest. A good
citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Crimping tool |
>
>Bob,
>I just received among other things, my Professional Ratchet Crimping Tool
>from BANDC, but I have a feeling it is put together incorrectly.
>The yellow/ 12-10 AG is at the top and the red/22-18 AWG closest to the pivot
>point of the tool.
> That will give the lowest pressure to the biggest connector. I was just
> able
>to crimp a 12-10
>connector, but I had to use all my strenght.
Hmmm . . . I noted that in my evaluation of the tool a couple
of weeks ago. I sent the tool back to B&C and copied them
on the note suggesting that the dies were installed into the
tool backwards (you can remove them and re-install the
other direction).
However, I noted further that the tool put the crimps
too far apart on a PIDG terminal. Further, the insulation
grip did not close a red terminal down on 22AWG Tefzel. See
the following photos. I cannot recommend that tool. See
following pictures on my website.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/P255.jpg
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/P256.jpg
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/P257.jpg
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/P258.jpg
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/P259.jpg
>Are any of the interchangeable dies for crimping coax cable?
Yes . . . but die-sets were more than half
cost of tool and taking time to change them out
was a bit of a pain. All my tools are dedicated to
a single task.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Low Vacuum switch |
| From: | "Bordelon, Greg" <gbordelon(at)hess.com> |
3.60 ALT_MED Misspelled medication name
I wish to install a low vacuum warning light on my panel. I found these
switches from Honeywell,
http://content.honeywell.com/sensing/hss/hobbscorp/P3_6.pdf (scroll to
the bottom) that I think will work to illuminate a lamp. I wanted to ask
what anyone else is using for a low vacuum switch?
Thx - Greg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | richard dudley <rhdudley(at)att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Low Vacuum switch |
Hi Greg,
Precise Flight (preciseflight.com) has a vacuum switch that they will
sell separately. They have a whole alternate vacuum system with a
shuttle valve that uses manifold vacuum. It includes the switch.
However, they will sell the switch and an annunciator light separately.
Hope this helps.
Regards,
Richard Dudley
Bordelon, Greg wrote:
>
>I wish to install a low vacuum warning light on my panel. I found these
>switches from Honeywell,
>http://content.honeywell.com/sensing/hss/hobbscorp/P3_6.pdf (scroll to
>the bottom) that I think will work to illuminate a lamp. I wanted to ask
>what anyone else is using for a low vacuum switch?
>
>Thx - Greg
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Trampas" <tstern(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Driving electronic rpm meter from both magnetos |
I think we have beat the horse pretty well. So it basically boils down to
"it depends on the tachometer."
Regards,
Trampas
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brian
Lloyd
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Driving electronic rpm meter from both
magnetos
On Nov 2, 2004, at 11:26 AM, Trampas wrote:
>
> Brian,
>
> You are correct in some respects. However there are a number of
> different
> ways for a tachometer to get a pick up signal.
I am correct within the context of the question which was how to
combine the signals from two p-leads into one commercial off-the-shelf
tach. If you want to go into custom tach design as we will down this
message it is very possible to build something that will readily
combing the signals from the two p-leads and drive the tach.
> For example some tachometers
> use an AC coupled signal which is then low pass filtered to get the
> signal.
> In which case placing dual caps will work, and yes there are some
> negative
> aspects to the option, but it will work, even if the timing is
> slightly off
> between magnetos due to the low pass filtering in the device.
The problem is that you are summing the two waveforms. Consider that
you are summing the high frequency component. I can see complete
cancelation in some cases. Now if you put in a diode peak detector
followed by low pass filtering *before* you get to the tach it just
might work but just summing the two waveforms is unlikely to produce
the results you expect no matter what you do after.
> I have taken a long look at just about every ignition system know, and
> like
> you said there is no one simple solution as it really depends on the
> design
> of the tachometer. For example most automotive tachometers will not
> work
> with p-leads due to the negative voltage spike that is not there with
> the
> traditional car ignition system.
Actually you do get a negative excursion with a kettering ignition
system but it does have a significant DC component which provides a
bias. The major peak is like + + + +. The magneto output is
symmetrical about zero if you consider subsequent firings with the
major peak being + - + -, etc.
> For this reason I designed a conversion
> circuit which will convert the ignition signal to a pulse train. Now of
> different ignition systems it does require different conversion
> circuit for
> example the Jabiru ignition system uses something like a Magnetronic
> ignition system which has a different signal that other ignition
> systems. I
> also designed converter circuits to buffer inductive pick up signals as
> well.
In the case of most electronic ignitions you just pick off the firing
signal while it is still something like a TTL level. No muss, no fuss,
and no filtering needed.
For a magneto or kettering ignition it isn't hard to produce a filter
to make a signal useful. You can use a series resistor, a full-wave
bridge rectifier, a shunt capacitor to sample the peak and provide
low-pass, and then drive an optoisolator to keep the HV cruft out of
the rest of your digital electronics. The cap will discharge pretty
quickly through the LED in the opto. Select resistor value to current
limit the LED and cap value to control fall-time.
> Now you can take two of these circuits and use them to combine the
> tachometer signals as that each of these circuits create an open
> collector
> output which can be logically "or'ed" together. If there is a slight
> difference in the timing of the signals this oring action will take
> car of
> the difference.
Yes, if you do all this ahead of the tach. That is what I was
originally saying. OTOH, if the tach has its own input conditioning
circuitry that expects the HV pulse, doing all this produces a pulse
that won't drive your tach anymore which gets me back to my original
answer.
> Personally however I would prefer to have two electronic tachometers
> in my
> engine monitoring system, one for the left magneto and one for the
> right.
Agreed. I would also have the system looking for missing pulses to
tell me if I am having a problem with one of the mags too.
> The take the maximum of the two tachometers to show as the "main"
> tach. Then
> I want the engine monitor to alarm if the tachometers ever differ by
> more
> than 50 rpms.
Well, if they are from the same engine they never will differ in
frequency. OTOH you might miss a pulse and that tells you something.
The engine monitor can then tell you about the missing pulses and flag
the mag as possibly failing.
> This way if in flight one of the magnetos or ignition systems
> fail I will be notified at that moment. Thus I do not have to wait
> till the
> next mag check to find out I have a bad magneto. In fact this is just
> the
> way the Pulsar 200 engine monitor is designed.
It only makes sense.
> I would also always place a low amperage fuse in line with my
> tachometer if
> I am running off a p-lead system, regardless of the tachometer. This
> way if
> the tachometer should ever short the p-lead it will blow the fuse and
> the
> engine will keep running.
Good idea but the series resistor does the same thing, i.e. provides
isolation of the mag from the tach circuitry. To me it appears that
the resistor is both necessary and sufficient.
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest. A good
citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Robert McCallum <robert.mccallum2(at)sympatico.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Grommet/bushing like thingy whatsit |
Used to be generically referred to as "strip grommet" or "grommet strip"
Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta) wrote:
>I would like to hear if there is another name for it as a google search
>only brought up a couple of suppliers.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Denis Walsh <denis.walsh(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Niagara/Denso Alternator Overvoltage protection |
I have been operating the Niagra Denso 40 for a couple years, probably
350 hours or so. I concur it is a great machine.I can't speak for the
zeff ov thingy. I have the Nuckolls version, which probably does have
a very rapid response, and uses a huge contactor, which also responds
fast with a snap. I have most certainly checked the capability of the
Denso to react to instant unload and it has not fried. This has been
done several times both inadvertantly and advertantly before I knew it
was a risk.
One additional thing I would highly recommend is the Nuckolls low
voltage warning lite. It is cheap, cute, bright, and will remind you
to turn off the batt switch after flight by flashing in your face. If
it flashes in flight it will remind you to look for a nearby landing
site, where they will have an auto shop which can fix or replace your
denso...
Denis
On Nov 2, 2004, at 12:36 PM, Christopher Stone wrote:
>
>
> Good Morning all...
>
> We (two RV-8 builders) are at the "add electrical system" point in the
> construction process. From front to back the first item in question
> is the alternator. Having followed this list for some time I have
> concluded the Denso 40 amp alternator is the item that fits our
> output/weight/simplicity criteria.
>
> A search of the archives was less then productive.
>
> The question(s):
>
> Has anyone installed the Niagara alternater with over volatge
> protection package.
>
> The alternator appears to be a standard Denso with internal
> regulation. The overvoltage protection is by Zeftronics.
>
> http://www.niagaraairparts.com/ASP101-PIT%201.pdf
>
> The overvoltage circuit appears to function by sensing alternator
> output voltage. When the voltage exceeds the preset threshold it then
> opens a contactor in series with the alternator output.
>
> This looks like it will work... A couple of questions though.
>
> What is the time constant of the circuit? Is it fast enough to catch
> an overvoltage event before it can damage black boxes?
>
> Since it instantly unloads the alternator, if the alternator wasn't
> already fried which caused the overvoltage event, wouldn't it be fried
> by the sudden loss of load?
>
> Thanks in advance...
>
> This list has been a gold mine of information!
>
> Chris Stone
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Driving electronic rpm meter from both magnetos |
On Nov 2, 2004, at 10:11 PM, Trampas wrote:
>
> I think we have beat the horse pretty well. So it basically boils down
> to
> "it depends on the tachometer."
Almost. I don't think you can combine the signals from the two p-leads
without significant preprocessing. And once you do that the rest is
cake.
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
Antoine de Saint-Exupry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming(at)sigecom.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Niagara/Denso Alternator Overvoltage protection |
Just wondering, with the Nuckolls version of ov, what indication do you get
if the cute little warning light burns out? Is that part of the
preflight/startup procedures to test to ensure it is working at least at the
start of a flight? Wouldn't an LED be a better choice for the light?
Indiana Larry, RV7 TipUp "SunSeeker"
The sincerest satisfactions in life come in doing and not dodging duty;
in meeting and solving problems, in facing facts;
in flying a virgin plane never flown before.
- Richard L. Evans & Larry R Helming
----- Original Message -----
From: "Denis Walsh" <denis.walsh(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Niagara/Denso Alternator Overvoltage
protection
>
> I have been operating the Niagra Denso 40 for a couple years, probably
> 350 hours or so. I concur it is a great machine.I can't speak for the
> zeff ov thingy. I have the Nuckolls version, which probably does have
> a very rapid response, and uses a huge contactor, which also responds
> fast with a snap. I have most certainly checked the capability of the
> Denso to react to instant unload and it has not fried. This has been
> done several times both inadvertantly and advertantly before I knew it
> was a risk.
>
> One additional thing I would highly recommend is the Nuckolls low
> voltage warning lite. It is cheap, cute, bright, and will remind you
> to turn off the batt switch after flight by flashing in your face. If
> it flashes in flight it will remind you to look for a nearby landing
> site, where they will have an auto shop which can fix or replace your
> denso...
>
> Denis
> On Nov 2, 2004, at 12:36 PM, Christopher Stone wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Good Morning all...
> >
> > We (two RV-8 builders) are at the "add electrical system" point in the
> > construction process. From front to back the first item in question
> > is the alternator. Having followed this list for some time I have
> > concluded the Denso 40 amp alternator is the item that fits our
> > output/weight/simplicity criteria.
> >
> > A search of the archives was less then productive.
> >
> > The question(s):
> >
> > Has anyone installed the Niagara alternater with over volatge
> > protection package.
> >
> > The alternator appears to be a standard Denso with internal
> > regulation. The overvoltage protection is by Zeftronics.
> >
> > http://www.niagaraairparts.com/ASP101-PIT%201.pdf
> >
> > The overvoltage circuit appears to function by sensing alternator
> > output voltage. When the voltage exceeds the preset threshold it then
> > opens a contactor in series with the alternator output.
> >
> > This looks like it will work... A couple of questions though.
> >
> > What is the time constant of the circuit? Is it fast enough to catch
> > an overvoltage event before it can damage black boxes?
> >
> > Since it instantly unloads the alternator, if the alternator wasn't
> > already fried which caused the overvoltage event, wouldn't it be fried
> > by the sudden loss of load?
> >
> > Thanks in advance...
> >
> > This list has been a gold mine of information!
> >
> > Chris Stone
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | DWENSING(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Garmin GPS antenna |
Bob and GPS savvy lister,
I have a remote mount Garmin GPS antenna, model GA 26C, that came with my 295
about 5 years ago. Have never tried using it until now. It does not work!
Garmin says they do not service antennas and my option is to buy a new one for
$100.
Is there any way to check out a GPS antenna (like resistance value) before I
try opening the case and examining for broken wire, etc.?
Dale Ensing
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Harley <harley(at)AgelessWings.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Garmin GPS antenna |
Morning, Dale...
First, it's not just an antenna...it's also an amplifier of sorts. But,
if it really is faulty, it may be a better choice to get one of these
units instead of Garmin...I think you'll find they are basically the
same thing.
http://www.gpsgeek.com/page3.html
Harley Dixon
DWENSING(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>Bob and GPS savvy lister,
>
>I have a remote mount Garmin GPS antenna, model GA 26C, that came with my 295
>about 5 years ago. Have never tried using it until now. It does not work!
>Garmin says they do not service antennas and my option is to buy a new one for
>$100.
>Is there any way to check out a GPS antenna (like resistance value) before I
>try opening the case and examining for broken wire, etc.?
>
>Dale Ensing
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Trampas" <tstern(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Driving electronic rpm meter from both magnetos |
Brian,
I remember seeing the capacitor coupling system some where:
www.rkymtn.com/minstall.pdf. So basically it does work with the Rocky
Mountain instrument.
The reason it works is the low frequency component of the p-leads signals
are relatively in phase, other wise your timing is wrong on one or both
magnetos.
Regards,
Trampas Stern
www.sterntech.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brian
Lloyd
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Driving electronic rpm meter from both
magnetos
On Nov 2, 2004, at 10:11 PM, Trampas wrote:
>
> I think we have beat the horse pretty well. So it basically boils down
> to
> "it depends on the tachometer."
Almost. I don't think you can combine the signals from the two p-leads
without significant preprocessing. And once you do that the rest is
cake.
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
Antoine de Saint-Exupry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Grommet/bushing like thingy whatsit |
On my website I sell Panduit's Lightening Hole Wire Mounts. These take a lot
of hassle out of stringing wires through rib and bulkhead lightening holes.
Regards,
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge MA 01550-2705
Phone (508) 764-2072
Email: emjones(at)charter.net
Teamwork: " A lot of people doing exactly what I say."
(Marketing exec., Citrix Corp.)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Werner Schneider" <glastar(at)gmx.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Niagara/Denso Alternator Overvoltage protection |
When you switch on the OV/Low Voltage light will be on(I've replaced it with
a LED)
So that is your test.
Werner
----- Original Message -----
From: "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming(at)sigecom.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Niagara/Denso Alternator Overvoltage
protection
>
> Just wondering, with the Nuckolls version of ov, what indication do you
get
> if the cute little warning light burns out? Is that part of the
> preflight/startup procedures to test to ensure it is working at least at
the
> start of a flight? Wouldn't an LED be a better choice for the light?
>
> Indiana Larry, RV7 TipUp "SunSeeker"
>
> The sincerest satisfactions in life come in doing and not dodging duty;
> in meeting and solving problems, in facing facts;
> in flying a virgin plane never flown before.
> - Richard L. Evans & Larry R Helming
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Denis Walsh" <denis.walsh(at)comcast.net>
> To:
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Niagara/Denso Alternator Overvoltage
> protection
>
>
>
> >
> > I have been operating the Niagra Denso 40 for a couple years, probably
> > 350 hours or so. I concur it is a great machine.I can't speak for the
> > zeff ov thingy. I have the Nuckolls version, which probably does have
> > a very rapid response, and uses a huge contactor, which also responds
> > fast with a snap. I have most certainly checked the capability of the
> > Denso to react to instant unload and it has not fried. This has been
> > done several times both inadvertantly and advertantly before I knew it
> > was a risk.
> >
> > One additional thing I would highly recommend is the Nuckolls low
> > voltage warning lite. It is cheap, cute, bright, and will remind you
> > to turn off the batt switch after flight by flashing in your face. If
> > it flashes in flight it will remind you to look for a nearby landing
> > site, where they will have an auto shop which can fix or replace your
> > denso...
> >
> > Denis
> > On Nov 2, 2004, at 12:36 PM, Christopher Stone wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Good Morning all...
> > >
> > > We (two RV-8 builders) are at the "add electrical system" point in the
> > > construction process. From front to back the first item in question
> > > is the alternator. Having followed this list for some time I have
> > > concluded the Denso 40 amp alternator is the item that fits our
> > > output/weight/simplicity criteria.
> > >
> > > A search of the archives was less then productive.
> > >
> > > The question(s):
> > >
> > > Has anyone installed the Niagara alternater with over volatge
> > > protection package.
> > >
> > > The alternator appears to be a standard Denso with internal
> > > regulation. The overvoltage protection is by Zeftronics.
> > >
> > > http://www.niagaraairparts.com/ASP101-PIT%201.pdf
> > >
> > > The overvoltage circuit appears to function by sensing alternator
> > > output voltage. When the voltage exceeds the preset threshold it then
> > > opens a contactor in series with the alternator output.
> > >
> > > This looks like it will work... A couple of questions though.
> > >
> > > What is the time constant of the circuit? Is it fast enough to catch
> > > an overvoltage event before it can damage black boxes?
> > >
> > > Since it instantly unloads the alternator, if the alternator wasn't
> > > already fried which caused the overvoltage event, wouldn't it be fried
> > > by the sudden loss of load?
> > >
> > > Thanks in advance...
> > >
> > > This list has been a gold mine of information!
> > >
> > > Chris Stone
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary Craze" <garycraze(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Garmin GPS antenna |
I'll second that. The external antenna that came with my 295 stank.
There are a lot of good, external amplified antennas out there that work
much better. I got one off eBay about a year ago for $20.
Here's an example...
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=34289&item=572928
7376&rd=1&ssPageName=WDVW
It performs much, much better than the external antenna that came with
my 295.
Regards,
Gary
N801GC (reserved)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Harley
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Garmin GPS antenna
-->
Morning, Dale...
First, it's not just an antenna...it's also an amplifier of sorts. But,
if it really is faulty, it may be a better choice to get one of these
units instead of Garmin...I think you'll find they are basically the
same thing.
http://www.gpsgeek.com/page3.html
Harley Dixon
DWENSING(at)aol.com wrote:
>
>Bob and GPS savvy lister,
>
>I have a remote mount Garmin GPS antenna, model GA 26C, that came with
>my 295
>about 5 years ago. Have never tried using it until now. It does not
work!
>Garmin says they do not service antennas and my option is to buy a new
one for
>$100.
>Is there any way to check out a GPS antenna (like resistance value)
before I
>try opening the case and examining for broken wire, etc.?
>
>Dale Ensing
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> protection |
| Subject: | Re: Niagara/Denso Alternator Overvoltage |
protection
protection
>
>
>Good Morning all...
>
>We (two RV-8 builders) are at the "add electrical system" point in the
>construction process. From front to back the first item in question is
>the alternator. Having followed this list for some time I have concluded
>the Denso 40 amp alternator is the item that fits our
>output/weight/simplicity criteria.
>
>A search of the archives was less then productive.
>
>The question(s):
>
>Has anyone installed the Niagara alternater with over volatge protection
>package.
>
>The alternator appears to be a standard Denso with internal
>regulation. The overvoltage protection is by Zeftronics.
>
>http://www.niagaraairparts.com/ASP101-PIT%201.pdf
>
>The overvoltage circuit appears to function by sensing alternator output
>voltage. When the voltage exceeds the preset threshold it then opens a
>contactor in series with the alternator output.
We published techniques for adding OV protection to
alternators having built in regulators a number of years
ago. See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/bleadov.pdf
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/crowbar.pdf
>This looks like it will work... A couple of questions though.
>
>What is the time constant of the circuit? Is it fast enough to catch an
>overvoltage event before it can damage black boxes?
Depends on the ov sensor circuit. First, let's define "fast enough".
See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/MSTD704_28V_OV.jpg
This is an excerpt from Mil-STD-704 on aircraft power quality
where we're advised that one should EXPECT bus voltage conditions
that lie between the upper and lower curves as part of NORMAL
operation. This graph is for 28v system, cut the voltages in
half for a 14v system. Many OV sensor systems are TOO FAST
in that they nuisance trip when presented with conditions that
live between the upper and lower curves. OV conditions are
a function of generator/regulator issues and have a little
different nature than transient conditions originating from
other sources.
Consider also:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/MSTD704_28V_Trans.jpg
This graph speaks to transient conditions one should expect
as a normal operating condition on the bus. Again, cut
the voltage values on the left in half.
And finally take a peek at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/MSTD704_28V_Noise.jpg
This graph speaks to noise from the power generation system
and/or other appliances that take power from the bus. The
peek noise in the middle is 1 Vrms (3v pk-pk) on a 28v
system or roughly 10% pk-pk noise for a system. This means
that a 14v system can be expected to have as much as 1.5
volts peak-peak trash in the range from 1000 to 5000 Hz
with the amplitude falling off either side as depicted.
Any device, including OV sensors, need to be designed
with these conditions in mind. For OV sensors, one wants
to respond as quickly as practical for any real OV condition
but to adequately ignore the things that normally go
"bump" on the bus.
>Since it instantly unloads the alternator, if the alternator wasn't
>already fried which caused the overvoltage event, wouldn't it be fried by
>the sudden loss of load?
Maybe. An issue surfaced a few months ago when Vans
began recommending AGAINST adding ov protection as depicted
in our drawings. Seems a few builders had managed to
zing the voltage regulators in Vans-supplied alternators
by turning them on/off while loaded.
The drawings have been published on the AeroElectric
website for at least 6 years and we're not hearing
about alternators dropping like flies. There are
studies and plans for investigating the phenomenon
in more detail but they're back-burner projects. My
sense at the moment is that rebuilt alternators with
aftermarket regulators installed may be at-risk for
load-dump damage. I'd like to believe that Nipon Denso
recognizes the risk of load-dump damage and designs
their factory stock regulators to stand off the transient.
It's a sure bet that ND has their own, in-house
equivalents of the Mil-STD-704 data I cited above.
Bottom line is that your $risk$ to the system is far
greater for NOT having ov protection than for leaving
it off in favor of coddling a sub-standard alternator.
The wiring diagrams for adding external ov protection
on internally regulated alternators will be modified to
add the appropriate transient suppressor so that
the technique will function worry-free for even the
most wimpish of after-market regulators.
The short answer to your original question is: Don't
know a thing about design philosophy behind the ov
sensor cited in the Niagara Airparts installation but
it's a reasonable bet that the part was developed originally
for a certified system by folks who had some idea of what
the requirements were.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> protection |
| Subject: | Re: Niagara/Denso Alternator Overvoltage |
protection
protection
>
>
>Just wondering, with the Nuckolls version of ov, what indication do you get
>if the cute little warning light burns out? Is that part of the
>preflight/startup procedures to test to ensure it is working at least at the
>start of a flight? Wouldn't an LED be a better choice for the light?
>
>Indiana Larry, RV7 TipUp "SunSeeker"
The system we offer as both assembled and do-it-yourself
projects is described at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/MSTD704_28V_Noise.jpg
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/lvwarn/9021-620.pdf
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/AEC/9005/9005.html
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/AEC/9005/9005-701B.pdf
When purchased from us, the device IS supplied with an LED
fixture. Further, it's not an OVER voltage sensor but a
LOW voltage sensor. It begins to flash every time you
power up the bus before starting the engine and therefore
meets the desire of regulators for certified systems for
adequate pre-flight testing. Of course, one could turn
an alternator OFF at any time to see if the low voltage
light comes on . . .
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> protection |
| Subject: | Re: Niagara/Denso Alternator Overvoltage |
protection
protection
>
>When you switch on the OV/Low Voltage light will be on(I've replaced it with
>a LED)
>So that is your test.
>
>Werner
What did you "replace"? If you bought it from me, it came
with an LED.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ALWAYSPDG(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Crimping tool |
Bob, I have a question for you. I am looking for a wire stripper than can
strip wire around 6 or even 4 gauge wire. Do you know where to look to purchase
a stripper like this?
Thanks,
Mike
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Werner Schneider" <glastar(at)gmx.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Niagara/Denso Alternator Overvoltage protection |
Sorry Bob,
I was referring to the Voltage Regulator from B&C which has an inbuilt OV
protection and came with the light bulb, I replaced it acceding to your
sketch with a LED together with the two resistors.
Should read more careful next time
Werner
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III protection" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Niagara/Denso Alternator Overvoltage
protection
protection
>
>
> >
> >When you switch on the OV/Low Voltage light will be on(I've replaced it
with
> >a LED)
> >So that is your test.
> >
> >Werner
>
> What did you "replace"? If you bought it from me, it came
> with an LED.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
> ---
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie Kuss <chaztuna(at)adelphia.net> magnetos |
| Subject: | Re: Driving electronic rpm meter from both |
magnetos
Instead of all these electronic gyrations you are going through, why not do
this instead? Forget using the mags as a signal source. Mount a hall effect
sensor on the rear of the flywheel. Use that as the tach's signal. With
this setup, you can have an combination of mags, electronic ignitions.
etc. The ignition design won't matter one wit! I know my RMI MicroMonitor
offers this option to drive the tach.
Charlie Kuss
> magnetos
>
>
> > magnetos
> >
> >
> > >snipped
> > > > I'd use resistors but only read one mag at a time and use the
> > > > resistors to prevent fault on tachometer wiring from taking
> > > > a magneto down.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >>I wonder if you have a recommended diagram for driving an
> electronic rpm
> > > >>meter from both magnetos?
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > Sure. See
> > > >
> > > > http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Engine/Mags_with_Electronic_Tach.pdf
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Bob . . .
> >
> >Bob
> > I just tried the link, but there was nothing there
> >Charlie Kuss
>
> You missed the second link for revision A:
>
>http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Engine/Mags_with_Electronic_Tach_A.pdf
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
>---
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | SportAV8R(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Hangar Radios |
Mark-
most likely the AM antenna in your boom box is of the ferrite rod type, consisting
of a number of turns of fine wire wrapped around a ferrite stick, and coupled
to some more turns which may in turn connect to the telescoping whip antenna.
This arrangement serves as an impedance matching transformer to couple a
very electrically short whip antenna to the radio's input stage. Since the antenna
is so electrically short at the frequencies on which it is receiving, the
physical direction it is pointed makes (predictably) no real difference in sig
strength... the best way to pull in weak stations would be to turn the entire
radio cabninet until ideal aiming of the ferrite rod itself is attained. For
best results, get the radio outside of a metal building and away from noisy
AC mains.
IIRC, the rod inside the radio box should point toward (not broadside to) the station
of interest. Good luck getting your Rush / Hannity fix ;-)
-Stormy
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> protection |
| Subject: | Re: Niagara/Denso Alternator Overvoltage |
protection
protection
>
>Sorry Bob,
>
>I was referring to the Voltage Regulator from B&C which has an inbuilt OV
>protection and came with the light bulb, I replaced it acceding to your
>sketch with a LED together with the two resistors.
>
>Should read more careful next time
Oh, okay. Now I understand. Thanks!
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Kingsley Hurst" <khurst(at)taroom.qld.gov.au> |
Bob,
I will have my battery forward of the firewall and within 200mm (8") of
the engine ground stud. I will also have a firewall ground kit (B&C) on
the composite firewall no more than 300mm (12") from the battery.
In connecting up the earth straps which routing method would you prefer?
1) Battery -ive, Firewall Gnd, Engine Gnd
or
2) Battery -ive, Engine Gnd, Firewall Gnd
or
3) Battery -ive to Firewall Gnd and another Battery -ive to Engine Gnd
Left to my own devices I would choose No 2 because I think it is the
most likely way to prevent the smoking behind the panel problem you
cited. Also, I think I would use a continuous strap with a third flag
terminal somewhere in the middle so that in the event of the connection
at the engine coming loose, I would still have battery power. I am well
aware that losing battery power in my little VFR aircraft would not
really matter, nevertheless, if there is such a thing as 'best practice'
in this case, I would prefer to adopt it.
Thanks again in anticipation of your valued assistance.
Kingsley Hurst
Europa Mono Classic 281 in Oz.
________________________________________________________________________________
I wish them well and hope we get lots of happy feedback
from their first couple of years worth of customers.
Bob . . .
Any real live (customer flying) operational data on the E/P-Mags so far?
Thanks,
David Shani
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)BowenAero.com> |
I emailed them this past Sunday asking for lead times, but never heard back.
-
Larry Bowen
Larry(at)BowenAero.com
http://BowenAero.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Shani [mailto:David.Shani@sanmina-sci.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 2004 7:16 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: RE: EMags
>
> --> <David.Shani@sanmina-sci.com>
>
>
>
> I wish them well and hope we get lots of happy feedback
> from their first couple of years worth of customers.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
> Any real live (customer flying) operational data on the
> E/P-Mags so far?
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> David Shani
>
>
> =========
> =========
> Matronics Forums.
> =========
> http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/AeroElectric-List.htm
> =========
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tony Babb" <tonybabb(at)alejandra.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Hangar Radios |
Ok, I know I should read the 'connection about this but I have a similar
problem pulling in FM stations in my garage where I build most evenings. My
radio has an external antenna jack, does this have to be outside my garage
or is it sufficient to simply use an external antenna assuming it's better
than the telescoping one that's currently there?
Tony
----- Original Message -----
From: <SportAV8R(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Hangar Radios
>
> Mark-
>
> most likely the AM antenna in your boom box is of the ferrite rod type,
consisting of a number of turns of fine wire wrapped around a ferrite stick,
and coupled to some more turns which may in turn connect to the telescoping
whip antenna. This arrangement serves as an impedance matching transformer
to couple a very electrically short whip antenna to the radio's input stage.
Since the antenna is so electrically short at the frequencies on which it is
receiving, the physical direction it is pointed makes (predictably) no real
difference in sig strength... the best way to pull in weak stations would be
to turn the entire radio cabninet until ideal aiming of the ferrite rod
itself is attained. For best results, get the radio outside of a metal
building and away from noisy AC mains.
>
> IIRC, the rod inside the radio box should point toward (not broadside to)
the station of interest. Good luck getting your Rush / Hannity fix ;-)
>
> -Stormy
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Lapsley R & Sandra E. Caldwell" <caldwel(at)ictransnet.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Grommet/bushing like thingy whatsit |
I couldn't find them on your website. Where are they.
Roger
Subject: Re: Grommet/bushing like thingy whatsit
From: Eric M. Jones (emjones(at)charter.net
)
Date: Wed Nov 03 - 5:34 AM
On my website I sell Panduit's Lightening Hole Wire Mounts. These take a lot
of hassle out of stringing wires through rib and bulkhead lightening holes.
Regards,
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge MA 01550-2705
Phone (508) 764-2072
Email: emjones(at)charter.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Driving electronic rpm meter from both magnetos |
On Nov 3, 2004, at 3:20 PM, Charlie Kuss , magnetos(at)froghouse.org wrote:
> magnetos
>
> Instead of all these electronic gyrations you are going through, why
> not do
> this instead? Forget using the mags as a signal source. Mount a hall
> effect
> sensor on the rear of the flywheel. Use that as the tach's signal. With
> this setup, you can have an combination of mags, electronic ignitions.
> etc. The ignition design won't matter one wit! I know my RMI
> MicroMonitor
> offers this option to drive the tach.
That is a very good idea. OTOH, using the p-lead is attractive as the
p-lead is already in the cockpit and available without having to make
any mechanical modifications.
It is amazing just how industrious we can be when trying to be lazy.
;-)
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest. A good
citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Hangar Radios |
On Nov 3, 2004, at 1:48 PM, Fiveonepw(at)aol.com wrote:
> My new hangar faces away from almost all AM & FM stations I like to
> listen to
> on my cheap ghetto-blaster. I can get the FM by poking the antenna
> out the
> door, but the AM is, as described here often, very much line-of-sight.
> I
> "think" the AM antenna is not connected to the external telescoping
> antenna, as it
> makes no difference in being in/out/extended/pointed anywhere in
> particular.
> Any suggestions short of getting a different hangar? GOTTA have my AM!
Actually AM broadcast is so low in frequency that it is not
line-of-sight. Regardless, your metal hangar is acting as a giant
shield and keeping the signal from getting to the internal loopstick
antenna.
To get signal from outside to inside get a bunch of hookup wire and
wrap several turns around your radio, top to bottom, not side to side.
I would guess that 10 turns is a good starting point. Attach one end
of the wire to a good ground and the other end outside and up in the
air, as long as you can make it. 100' would not be too much.
The coil of wire around the radio makes half a transformer to couple to
the loopstick antenna which forms the other half of the transformer.
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
Antoine de Saint-Exupry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Crimping tool |
>
>Bob, I have a question for you. I am looking for a wire stripper than can
>strip wire around 6 or even 4 gauge wire. Do you know where to look to
>purchase
>a stripper like this?
>
>
>Thanks,
>
>Mike
Sorry, never had occasion to use a stripper on wire this size.
I use a knife. There are are single blade coax strippers
that use notches of three different depths opposite the blade
to determine cut-depth. One of these used in the notch for
removing outer jacket of coax might be useful. You could also
make your own from blocks of wood, a bit of hardware and
a single edge razor blade.
Bob . . .
---
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Hangar Radios clamav-milter version 0.80j on juliet.al... |
In a message dated 11/3/2004 10:33:52 PM Central Standard Time,
klehman(at)albedo.net writes:
Maybe something to do with getting it farther from the
fluorescent lights??
Ken
Or getting it further away from the reinforcing rod in the concrete?
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Airpark LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8502
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <chaztuna(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Driving electronic rpm meter from both magnetos |
Just out of curiousity, is there any situation where a faulty tachometer could
short your magneto P leads to ground? Having one or both magnetos neutralized
by a faulty (non critical) instrument would suck!
Using a crank triggered sensor eliminates that possibility.
Charlie
>
> From: Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com>
> Date: 2004/11/04 Thu AM 09:14:07 EST
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Driving electronic rpm meter from both magnetos
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Fiveonepw(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Hangar Radios |
In a message dated 11/04/2004 8:19:42 AM Central Standard Time,
brianl(at)lloyd.com writes:
To get signal from outside to inside get a bunch of hookup wire and
wrap several turns around your radio, top to bottom, not side to side.
I would guess that 10 turns is a good starting point. Attach one end
of the wire to a good ground and the other end outside and up in the
air, as long as you can make it. 100' would not be too much.
>>>
By "hookup wire" do you mean any ordinary insulated wire, and is there any
advantage to use shielded wire (even coax) for the vertical run (except for the
actual exposed element) to help reject nearby signals close to the freq of
interest? Does the length or orientation of the exposed element matter? Any
benefit by taking the loop into the radio and looping around the actual AM
antenna?
Thanks Brian- great information!
Mark Phillips
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Steve Thomas <lists(at)stevet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Hangar Radios |
Hello Brian,
Thursday, November 4, 2004, 6:13:16 AM, you wrote:
BL> To get signal from outside to inside get a bunch of hookup wire and
BL> wrap several turns around your radio, top to bottom, not side to side.
BL> I would guess that 10 turns is a good starting point. Attach one end
BL> of the wire to a good ground and the other end outside and up in the
BL> air, as long as you can make it. 100' would not be too much.
What happens when it gets struck by lightening?
--
Best regards,
Steve
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics(at)rv8.ch> |
| Subject: | Short antenna cable for back of radio |
Hi,
I'm looking for a short antenna cable like the one shown
on this web page.
http://www.rv8.ch/article.php?story=20041104202747822
Does anyone know where I can purchase this?
Thanks,
Mickey
--
Mickey Coggins
http://www.rv8.ch/
#82007 QB Wings/Fuselage
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Trampas" <tstern(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Driving electronic rpm meter from both magnetos |
Charlie,
It is possible, that a wire shorts or the tachometer itself does. Brian and
I have suggested two methods to prevent the engine quitting.
1) Brian suggested placing a 1K resistor inline with P-lead before
tachometer.
2) I suggested placing a low amperage fuse in line, 0.1 or 0.2 amps should
work.
Either method should work fine. In fact in my engine monitor the circuit is
designed with a 1.5K resistor inline for this very reason. I also recommend
that users place a fuse in the circuit where the p-lead is tapped for the
tachometer. The fuse is more for the case where the wire shorts or user
wires something wrong.
Also for those of you out there using a Jabiru engine with the tachometer
connected to the alternator, you may also want to add the in-line fuse or
resistor. This will keep from hurting the alternator or at least stopping
the charging if the tachometer or wire shorts.
However the best option for a tachometer is the inductive crank sensor.
Regards,
Trampas Stern
www.sterntech.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
chaztuna(at)adelphia.net
Subject: Re: Re: AeroElectric-List: Driving electronic rpm meter from both
magnetos
Just out of curiousity, is there any situation where a faulty tachometer
could short your magneto P leads to ground? Having one or both magnetos
neutralized by a faulty (non critical) instrument would suck!
Using a crank triggered sensor eliminates that possibility.
Charlie
>
> From: Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com>
> Date: 2004/11/04 Thu AM 09:14:07 EST
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Driving electronic rpm meter from both
magnetos
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Grommet/bushing like thingy whatsit |
>From: Lapsley R & Sandra E. Caldwell (caldwel(at)ictransnet.com)
>I couldn't find them on your website. Where are they.
http://www.periheliondesign.com/glastarparts.htm
I used to sell these mostly to Glastar builders. I'll move them or change
the title.
Regards,
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge MA 01550-2705
Phone (508) 764-2072
Email: emjones(at)charter.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Hangar Radios |
On Nov 4, 2004, at 12:12 PM, Steve Thomas wrote:
> BL> To get signal from outside to inside get a bunch of hookup wire and
> BL> wrap several turns around your radio, top to bottom, not side to
> side.
> BL> I would guess that 10 turns is a good starting point. Attach one
> end
> BL> of the wire to a good ground and the other end outside and up in
> the
> BL> air, as long as you can make it. 100' would not be too much.
>
>
> What happens when it gets struck by lightening?
Probably the same thing that happens when your power line or phone line
gets struck by lightning; something bad.
Put a lightning arrester from the outside wire antenna and the ground.
This can be as simple as a narrow gap between the antenna terminal and
the ground terminal.
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest. A good
citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Driving electronic rpm meter from both magnetos |
In a message dated 11/4/2004 8:21:36 PM Central Standard Time,
Fiveonepw(at)aol.com writes:
My EIS4000 tells
me within 10 rpms what the engine speed is with the right mag off- the
engine
sounds absolutely IDENTICAL with the other'n off.
Good Evening Mark,
I guess I must be missing something!
When you say it sounds absolutely IDENTICAL with the other one off, does
that mean you perceive no drop?
The precise number is not the big deal. What is the big deal is that you
note any change from norm.
Also, you do want to have some drop, and, on most engines, it should be
about the same on either mag.
The drop is because the point of peak combustion pressure will be different
when operating on one mag than it will be when running on two. There will be
a slight difference in the power output and that should be easily
discernible either by sound or by a difference in the RPM. If there is no change
at
all when checking the mags, that usually means that the mags do not ground when
the switch is turned off and they will be "hot" all the time.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Airpark LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8502
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Driving electronic rpm meter from both magnetos |
On Nov 4, 2004, at 10:20 PM, Fiveonepw(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> I'm sorry folks, but this is driving me nuts! What is the possible
> benefit
> of knowing EXACTLY the relative rpm drop when checking mags? My
> EIS4000 tells
> me within 10 rpms what the engine speed is with the right mag off- the
> engine
> sounds absolutely IDENTICAL with the other'n off. Am I missing some
> amazing,
> critical-to-safety-of-flight thing here or are y'all just so
> anal-retentive ya
> gotta know exactly the rpm drop within some rediculous precision?
No, it probably doesn't matter that much. OTOH, the engine mfgr specs
a specific difference in drop between the two engines as a go/no-go
item and that number is usually something like 50 RPM.
OTOH, I find that the feel of the engine running on one mag or the
other is just as important but may be difficult to teach a new student.
How do I teach, "Feel that? It just doesn't feel right." I can teach
that they should taxi back to the shop if the difference in drop is
more than 50 RPM.
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest. A good
citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Hangar Radios |
On Nov 4, 2004, at 12:05 PM, Fiveonepw(at)aol.com wrote:
> By "hookup wire" do you mean any ordinary insulated wire,
Yes.
> and is there any
> advantage to use shielded wire (even coax) for the vertical run
> (except for the
> actual exposed element) to help reject nearby signals close to the
> freq of
> interest?
Perhaps but this is not calibrated. Just make it as simple as possible
for now.
> Does the length or orientation of the exposed element matter?
Again, perhaps. Length is probably more important.
> Any
> benefit by taking the loop into the radio and looping around the
> actual AM
> antenna?
Perhaps. Experiment with it. I suspect if you wind it that closely
you will end up with more coupling than you like which will detune the
tuned circuits.
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest. A good
citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Driving electronic rpm meter from both magnetos |
On Nov 4, 2004, at 11:08 AM, wrote:
>
> Just out of curiousity, is there any situation where a faulty
> tachometer could short your magneto P leads to ground? Having one or
> both magnetos neutralized by a faulty (non critical) instrument would
> suck!
> Using a crank triggered sensor eliminates that possibility.
Yes, but so does having an isolation resistor between the p-lead wiring
at the mag switch in the cockpit and the wiring that runs to the
tachometer. That way if the tach wiring shorts, the isolation resistor
prevents that from causing a problem with the mag.
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest. A good
citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Another bad story |
I just posted the following to the AOPA "Never Again Online" forum.
You can read the original article at:
http://www.aopa.org/pilot/never_again/2004/na0411.html
--------
Here we have another scary story in the "Never Again
Online" column. This one from a man who suffers from a
failure of the charging system, recognizes the fact, and
then does just about everything wrong, surviving by,
"The Lord must have heard my wife's prayer because I
know I was not a good enough pilot to have come through
all this without a scratch." Oh please Mr. Stone. What
a load of road apples.
This "Never Again" has *nothing* to do with a failure of
the charging system at night and everything to do with a
pilot who exhibits not even the slightest familiarity
with his airplane and poor decision-making skills to
boot.
Mr. Stone, you took a simple minor system failure and
through poor decision-making and failure to understand
the basic functions of your airplane turned it into
something much worse, at least in your mind. Even so
the whole thing should have been handled easily.
Maybe this event will prompt you to get some training
and practice with your airplane before you become a
statistic and affect my insurance rates, not to mention
causing the FAA to issue yet another unnecessary ruling
to protect us from ourselves.
And if I were your wife I would have slapped you silly.
Brian Lloyd
---------
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest. A good
citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Fiveonepw(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Driving electronic rpm meter from both magnetos |
In a message dated 11/4/04 10:05:47 PM Central Standard Time,
brianl(at)lloyd.com writes:
> OTOH, the engine mfgr specs
> a specific difference in drop between the two engines as a go/no-go
> item and that number is usually something like 50 RPM.
>
>>>>
Understood- but what does the actual number really mean? If I switch off
either mag and nothing happens, I know that entire system is either not working
at all or not grounding- If I switch either mag off and the engine runs rough,
then there is likely something wrong with an individual plug/wire system.
Both of these failures would seem pretty obvious to the ear. What else can a
mag check really indicate?
Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mark C. Milgrom" <milgrom(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Another bad story |
Agreed, Brian. However, you must give Mr. Stone a least a little bit of
credit for writing the article in the first place. After all, if YOU
did something really stupid while flying YOUR airplane, would you have
the courage to write an article about it and expose yourself to public
humiliation?
Mark Milgrom
Brian Lloyd wrote:
>
>I just posted the following to the AOPA "Never Again Online" forum.
>You can read the original article at:
>
>http://www.aopa.org/pilot/never_again/2004/na0411.html
>
>--------
>Here we have another scary story in the "Never Again
>Online" column. This one from a man who suffers from a
>failure of the charging system, recognizes the fact, and
>then does just about everything wrong, surviving by,
>"The Lord must have heard my wife's prayer because I
>know I was not a good enough pilot to have come through
>all this without a scratch." Oh please Mr. Stone. What
>a load of road apples.
>
>This "Never Again" has *nothing* to do with a failure of
>the charging system at night and everything to do with a
>pilot who exhibits not even the slightest familiarity
>with his airplane and poor decision-making skills to
>boot.
>
>Mr. Stone, you took a simple minor system failure and
>through poor decision-making and failure to understand
>the basic functions of your airplane turned it into
>something much worse, at least in your mind. Even so
>the whole thing should have been handled easily.
>
>Maybe this event will prompt you to get some training
>and practice with your airplane before you become a
>statistic and affect my insurance rates, not to mention
>causing the FAA to issue yet another unnecessary ruling
>to protect us from ourselves.
>
>And if I were your wife I would have slapped you silly.
>
>Brian Lloyd
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David E. Nelson" <david.nelson(at)pobox.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Another bad story |
Interesting story...the thing I find odd is that at the very end about what was
learned is that he doesn't mention anything about believeing his instruments
even though "I was still not convinced that the ammeter was discharging." I
wonder why he was convinced that it was charging? I find this discouraging
since he's apparently an instrument rated private pilot and faith in your
instruments is compounded even more, IMHO.
Regards,
/\/elson
On Fri, 5 Nov 2004, Brian Lloyd wrote:
>
> I just posted the following to the AOPA "Never Again Online" forum.
> You can read the original article at:
>
> http://www.aopa.org/pilot/never_again/2004/na0411.html
>
> --------
> Here we have another scary story in the "Never Again
> Online" column. This one from a man who suffers from a
> failure of the charging system, recognizes the fact, and
> then does just about everything wrong, surviving by,
> "The Lord must have heard my wife's prayer because I
> know I was not a good enough pilot to have come through
> all this without a scratch." Oh please Mr. Stone. What
> a load of road apples.
>
> This "Never Again" has *nothing* to do with a failure of
> the charging system at night and everything to do with a
> pilot who exhibits not even the slightest familiarity
> with his airplane and poor decision-making skills to
> boot.
>
> Mr. Stone, you took a simple minor system failure and
> through poor decision-making and failure to understand
> the basic functions of your airplane turned it into
> something much worse, at least in your mind. Even so
> the whole thing should have been handled easily.
>
> Maybe this event will prompt you to get some training
> and practice with your airplane before you become a
> statistic and affect my insurance rates, not to mention
> causing the FAA to issue yet another unnecessary ruling
> to protect us from ourselves.
>
> And if I were your wife I would have slapped you silly.
>
> Brian Lloyd
> ---------
>
>
> Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
> brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
> +1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
>
> There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest. A good
> citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
>
>
--
~~ ** ~~ If you didn't learn anything when you broke it the 1st ~~ ** ~~
time, then break it again.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Another bad story |
On Nov 5, 2004, at 10:05 AM, Mark C. Milgrom wrote:
>
>
> Agreed, Brian. However, you must give Mr. Stone a least a little bit
> of
> credit for writing the article in the first place. After all, if YOU
> did something really stupid while flying YOUR airplane, would you have
> the courage to write an article about it and expose yourself to public
> humiliation?
Oh, you mean the time I ran out of gas and had to make a dead-stick
landing at Brackett Field in Pomona while on a supervised IFR
cross-country for my commercial ticket? Yeah. That story was in
Flying Magazine's "I learned about flying from that" series about 25
years ago. It ended up in their collection.
That was an interesting chain of errors that lead to bad decisions but
I had the help of my CFI to make it happen. Oh, and one of the
problems was unfamiliarity with the aircraft I was flying. It was the
first time I had flown that type of aircraft. When we landed in San
Diego I wanted to refuel the aircraft but the CFI nixed it. I was the
PIC but I abdicated my responsibility. It showed how an incident or
accident requires a chain of events; that you can break that chain at
any point and prevent the incident/accident.
So, yes, mea culpa. It makes me more sensitive and leads me to
emphasize decision making and understanding the aircraft when training
my students.
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest. A good
citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Another bad story |
On Nov 5, 2004, at 10:05 AM, David E. Nelson wrote:
>
>
>
> Interesting story...the thing I find odd is that at the very end about
> what was
> learned is that he doesn't mention anything about believeing his
> instruments
> even though "I was still not convinced that the ammeter was
> discharging." I
> wonder why he was convinced that it was charging? I find this
> discouraging
> since he's apparently an instrument rated private pilot and faith in
> your
> instruments is compounded even more, IMHO.
That had also crossed my mind. It also reinforces that old adage:
"It is better to be down there wishing you were up here than to be up
here wishing you were down there."
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest. A good
citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | M Mladejovsky <mladejov(at)sarcos.com> |
Anybody know the sensitivity of the UBG16 inputs used with external
"function modules"?
In other words, how many mV at the input does it take to display
1000 or 1999 on the UBG readout?
Another question. How much filtering is there inside the instrument?
In other words, how much filtering is required externally if you
want to use the UBG 16 as digital voltmeter to read the "average"
voltage of a signal that might have a 10% ripple at several hundred
Hz.
Mike Mladejovsky
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Driving electronic rpm meter from both magnetos |
On Nov 5, 2004, at 9:40 AM, Fiveonepw(at)aol.com wrote:
> Understood- but what does the actual number really mean? If I switch
> off
> either mag and nothing happens, I know that entire system is either
> not working
> at all or not grounding- If I switch either mag off and the engine
> runs rough,
> then there is likely something wrong with an individual plug/wire
> system.
> Both of these failures would seem pretty obvious to the ear. What
> else can a
> mag check really indicate?
Excessive drop on one mag with a smooth-running engine: mag timing.
Excessive drop on either mag even if the difference is within specs:
mixture.
Do you ever watch what the EGT does when you turn off one mag? If you
have an engine monitor seeing the amount of the EGT rise will tell you
something as well (higher than normal EGT rise probably indicates late
mag timing and will be accompanied by a greater-that-normal RPM drop).
One of the important things is to know how your airplane normally
feels, looks, and sounds during a normal run-up. What is the normal
drop for each mag? What is normal EGT rise on one mag? What is the
manifold pressure at the run-up RPM normally? Where does the oil
pressure sit at idle and run-up RPM? If any of these things change it
is grounds to wonder what has changed in the engine even if everything
is still within "normal" specs.
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
Antoine de Saint-Exupry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Scott Aldrich" <sa(at)mwutah.com> |
| Subject: | Driving electronic rpm meter from both magnetos |
I wasn't really following this so I apologize if this is already answered in
this discussion.
I was planning on the Grand Rapids EIS for my M14P. To be able see the RPM
on each mag I will need a switch to select which mag runs the tach., or at
least that is the simplest solution??
Thanks,
Scott
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brian
Lloyd
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Driving electronic rpm meter from both
magnetos
On Nov 5, 2004, at 9:40 AM, Fiveonepw(at)aol.com wrote:
> Understood- but what does the actual number really mean? If I switch
> off
> either mag and nothing happens, I know that entire system is either
> not working
> at all or not grounding- If I switch either mag off and the engine
> runs rough,
> then there is likely something wrong with an individual plug/wire
> system.
> Both of these failures would seem pretty obvious to the ear. What
> else can a
> mag check really indicate?
Excessive drop on one mag with a smooth-running engine: mag timing.
Excessive drop on either mag even if the difference is within specs:
mixture.
Do you ever watch what the EGT does when you turn off one mag? If you
have an engine monitor seeing the amount of the EGT rise will tell you
something as well (higher than normal EGT rise probably indicates late
mag timing and will be accompanied by a greater-that-normal RPM drop).
One of the important things is to know how your airplane normally
feels, looks, and sounds during a normal run-up. What is the normal
drop for each mag? What is normal EGT rise on one mag? What is the
manifold pressure at the run-up RPM normally? Where does the oil
pressure sit at idle and run-up RPM? If any of these things change it
is grounds to wonder what has changed in the engine even if everything
is still within "normal" specs.
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
Antoine de Saint-Exupry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Driving electronic rpm meter from both magnetos |
On Nov 5, 2004, at 12:49 PM, Scott Aldrich wrote:
>
>
> I wasn't really following this so I apologize if this is already
> answered in
> this discussion.
>
> I was planning on the Grand Rapids EIS for my M14P. To be able see
> the RPM
> on each mag I will need a switch to select which mag runs the tach.,
> or at
> least that is the simplest solution??
I haven't looked closely at the GR engine monitor but doesn't it have
two mag inputs to avoid the problem?
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest. A good
citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Another bad story |
>
>I just posted the following to the AOPA "Never Again Online" forum.
>You can read the original article at:
>
>http://www.aopa.org/pilot/never_again/2004/na0411.html
>
>--------
>Here we have another scary story in the "Never Again
>Online" column. This one from a man who suffers from a
>failure of the charging system, recognizes the fact, and
>then does just about everything wrong, surviving by,
>"The Lord must have heard my wife's prayer because I
>know I was not a good enough pilot to have come through
>all this without a scratch." Oh please Mr. Stone. What
>a load of road apples.
>
>This "Never Again" has *nothing* to do with a failure of
>the charging system at night and everything to do with a
>pilot who exhibits not even the slightest familiarity
>with his airplane and poor decision-making skills to
>boot.
>
>Mr. Stone, you took a simple minor system failure and
>through poor decision-making and failure to understand
>the basic functions of your airplane turned it into
>something much worse, at least in your mind. Even so
>the whole thing should have been handled easily.
>
>Maybe this event will prompt you to get some training
>and practice with your airplane before you become a
>statistic and affect my insurance rates, not to mention
>causing the FAA to issue yet another unnecessary ruling
>to protect us from ourselves.
>
>And if I were your wife I would have slapped you silly.
>
>Brian Lloyd
Dead on accurate analysis sir. We've often
heard the adage that a pilot's license is a "license
to learn" but all too often, learning seems to slow
down or even cease.
The FAA is fond of developing new requirements for new
production but allowing older airplanes to "grandfather"
along in their originally certified condition. For the
most part, I agree with this philosophy but with one
exception. If I were made "Emperor for a day" of the FAA,
I'd write a requirement for low voltage warning, periodic
cap tests of batteries -OR- yearly replacement, and
and dual feed e-bus installation for all aircraft that
are used for night-cross-country whether VFR or IFR.
It's probably the simplest change we could make to
any certified ship and would make the vast majority
of electrical system dark-stormy-night stories go away.
Bob . . .
>---------
>
>
>Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
>brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
>+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
>
>There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest. A good
>citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
>
>
Bob . . .
--------------------------------------------------------
< Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition >
< of man. Advances which permit this norm to be >
< exceeded -- here and there, now and then -- are the >
< work of an extremely small minority, frequently >
< despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed >
< by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny >
< minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes >
< happens) is driven out of a society, the people >
< then slip back into abject poverty. >
< >
< This is known as "bad luck". >
< -Lazarus Long- >
<------------------------------------------------------>
http://www.aeroelectric.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Maureen & Bob Christensen" <mchriste(at)danvilletelco.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 35amp PM alternator |
This is a fairly old thread (but I remember your comments) . . . but I'm planning
my breaker / switches and "rough wiring" for my RV-8.
Without Avionics I'm figuring the following night IFR load on approach?
Heated Pitot 10A
Landing Lights 8A
Nav Lights 8A
Strobes 8A
Panel / Inst Lts 2A
Gyros 2A
Total 38A
I may be a little high but should be close?? What am I doing wrong?
Thanks,
Bob Christensen
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: 35amp PM alternator
>
>
> >
> >
> >Ken, I reviewed my info sheet on Deere alternators. There is a 35 amp that
> >is light weight, which I consider usable. There is also a 40/50 that is
> >much heavier. I knew there was one of them that I had conflicting info on -
> >was the 40/50, not a "35/40".
> >
> >As noted, one could use 2 of the 20 amp alterntors to have a 40 amp
> >capacity. Would be appealing if had a pulley at each end of engine so each
> >alternator had its own belt - true redundancy and separation in case 1 belt
> >broke it wouldn't take out the other. I don't plan on trying this.
> >
> >That 35amp "limit" is the reason I am interested the "Simplification"
> >architecture - eliminating the 1amp current draw of a "battery contactor"
> >(or 2) - and am interested in using LED lights to the max instead of
> >incandescant bulbs - to keep night IFR load below 35 amps.
> >
> >David
>
> I'd like to see your final load analysis. The largest full-up
> IFR load I've run to date on a 14v system is 27A.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
> ---
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Scott Aldrich" <sa(at)mwutah.com> |
| Subject: | Driving electronic rpm meter from both magnetos |
I am not sure if it has two inputs. I was assuming it only had one based on
the post by Mark (Fiveonepw) who said his EIS4000 is only on the right mag.
I could have misunderstood his post.
I will check with GRT.
Thanks,
Scott
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brian
Lloyd
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Driving electronic rpm meter from both
magnetos
On Nov 5, 2004, at 12:49 PM, Scott Aldrich wrote:
>
>
> I wasn't really following this so I apologize if this is already
> answered in
> this discussion.
>
> I was planning on the Grand Rapids EIS for my M14P. To be able see
> the RPM
> on each mag I will need a switch to select which mag runs the tach.,
> or at
> least that is the simplest solution??
I haven't looked closely at the GR engine monitor but doesn't it have
two mag inputs to avoid the problem?
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest. A good
citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Another bad story |
On Nov 5, 2004, at 1:22 PM, Mickey Coggins wrote:
> What I can't quite figure out is why anyone would
> fly any distance without a handheld radio, and
> without a portable GPS. These things are very
> cheap, and they are very cheap insurance.
And if you are on this list, why would you have an airplane that could
experience a total electrical system failure?
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest. A good
citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Hangar Radios |
On Nov 5, 2004, at 1:54 PM, jerb wrote:
> AM, were dating our self here!
It has its place.
> Our kids listen to FM and their kids are into the pay satellite stuff.
I listen to the BBC on my SSB HF receiver to get the news. They beat
the snot out of the US news services for international balance.
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl(at)lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest. A good
citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brian Lloyd <brianl(at)lloyd.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Another bad story |
October 27, 2004 - November 05, 2004
AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-dq