AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-hg
October 06, 2007 - October 18, 2007
> > I've taken the opportunity to spread things sideways.
> >
> > http://ernest.isa-geek.org/Delta/Pictures/AvionicsBay.jpg
> > http://ernest.isa-geek.org/Delta/Pictures/AvionicsBayAndPanel.jpg
> >
> > The switch panel on the right flips down and hides most of the fuses
> > behind it. The small fuse panel on the left is just for audio
> > equipment...common ground and all that.
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Peter Mather" <peter(at)mather.com> |
| Subject: | Transponder antenna in rag/tube aircraft |
I'm getting reports of very poor reception of my transponder in my Piper
Colt. I've been through chaper 13 of the conection and can't really find
anything that addresses this sort of airframe.
Questions: I assume I should use a ground plane of 5 1/2" diameter as
per a composite aircraft? Do I make sure the ground plane is isolated
from the metal frame or bond it to it? Does it matter how close the
ground plane is to the metal structure?
Any help gratefully received
Thanks
Peter
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | ECLarsen81(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: WTB Crystal Radio |
Dan,
How far from Ann Arbor Michigan are you, I have a whole box. I do travel to
Chicago about every weekend. somewhere in these vicinities would save the
shipping.
Ed L.
In a message dated 10/5/2007 6:24:15 PM Central Daylight Time,
dan(at)azshowersolutions.com writes:
Thanks guys, I appreciate the response. Yes, I can still remember as a kid
when I pulled in the magical radio waves without power. I am trying to keep my
cost down as the cheapest I have been able to find the variable air caps is
about $10 each. That will unfortunately break the piggy bank...but if anyone
knows of a stash of them anywhere I'd sure like to hear of it. I would like
to get all the kids to build one, but it is looking more like a need to pair
up.
Thanks again,
Dan B
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ed Anderson" <eanderson(at)carolina.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: WTB Crystal Radio |
Ah, well do I remember my first Crystal radio back in 1950. Being
lacking in that stuff called Money back then as a 10 year old, I wrapped
enable coated wire around a Quakers Oatmeal box bring out a twist of
wire every 10-20 windings. The air of the box provided the capacitance
and of course the wire, the inductance, for my tuning circuit with the
twist poking out of the windings being scraped clean of its insulation.
A paper clip wired to the grounded end was used to tune the frequency by
clipping it on to the appropriate twist of wire. Lets say the bandwidth
was somewhat broad and hearing several stations at one time was not
unusually.
The crystal was also home made. I read someplace,probably Popular
Mechanics, that the crystal used in the those expensive commercial
crystal radio sets was lead sulfide. So I got some chunks of sulfur at
the drug store, found a lead fishing sinker or two and melted them down
in one of my mother's sewing thimbles. Then I dropped a chunk of sulfur
into the molten lead and when it cooled down, I had my lead sulfide
crystals. A piece of fine wire for the "cats whisker" and I had my
crystal radio. It actually worked.
However, later on they came out with geranium diode that cost about
$5.00 at the time. I saved up my pennies and purchased one and it made
a tremendous difference in easy of tuning - no more cat whisker hunting
for the "hot" spot on the lead filled thimble. I also incorporated a
real variable capacitor out of a radio I found discarded in the local
town junk yard. Interesting enough one of the stations, was far way in
Del Rio Texas, the station was apparently located just across the border
in Mexico where they apparently were not restricted power wise.
Thanks for bring back some great memories.
Ed
.
----- Original Message -----
From: ECLarsen81(at)aol.com
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Saturday, October 06, 2007 3:59 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: WTB Crystal Radio
Dan,
How far from Ann Arbor Michigan are you, I have a whole box. I do
travel to Chicago about every weekend. somewhere in these vicinities
would save the shipping.
Ed L.
In a message dated 10/5/2007 6:24:15 PM Central Daylight Time,
dan(at)azshowersolutions.com writes:
Thanks guys, I appreciate the response. Yes, I can still remember as
a kid when I pulled in the magical radio waves without power. I am
trying to keep my cost down as the cheapest I have been able to find the
variable air caps is about $10 each. That will unfortunately break the
piggy bank...but if anyone knows of a stash of them anywhere I'd sure
like to hear of it. I would like to get all the kids to build one, but
it is looking more like a need to pair up.
Thanks again,
Dan B
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
See what's new
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ernest Christley <echristley(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuse panel location |
Eric Newton wrote:
>
>
> Here is a webpage from my Bearhawk builder's site on how I set up my
> Fuse panel which is hinged and can swing out for easy access.
>
> http://mybearhawk.com/finish/electrical2.html
I'll try to get some pictures later tonight, but for everyone using
these fuse blocks...
You can get 90* 1/4" push-on fittings. I (fortunately) have a friend
with the expensive crimper, 'cause he uses bags of them in his
business. These are VERY nice to have when you're trying to fit the
fuse-block in a tight space like Eric is doing.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dan Billingsley <dan(at)azshowersolutions.com> |
| Subject: | Re: WTB Crystal Radio |
Ed, I am located out of Mesa, AZ. I will contact you off list.
Thanks,
Dan
ECLarsen81(at)aol.com wrote:
Dan,
How far from Ann Arbor Michigan are you, I have a whole box. I do travel to
Chicago about every weekend. somewhere in these vicinities would save the shipping.
Ed L.
In a message dated 10/5/2007 6:24:15 PM Central Daylight Time, dan(at)azshowersolutions.com
writes:
Thanks guys, I appreciate the response. Yes, I can still remember as a kid
when I pulled in the magical radio waves without power. I am trying to keep my
cost down as the cheapest I have been able to find the variable air caps is about
$10 each. That will unfortunately break the piggy bank...but if anyone knows
of a stash of them anywhere I'd sure like to hear of it. I would like to get
all the kids to build one, but it is looking more like a need to pair up.
Thanks again,
Dan B
---------------------------------
See what's new
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Fiveonepw(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Fuse panel location |
In a message dated 10/06/2007 11:32:43 AM Central Daylight Time,
walter.fellows(at)gmail.com writes:
If others have builder sites with similar documentation of electrical
installations please share them with us.
Similar theme here:
_http://websites.expercraft.com/n51pw/index.php?q=log_entry&log_id=5106_
(http://websites.expercraft.com/n51pw/index.php?q=log_entry&log_id=5106)
Browse thru the previous entries for how I got to this point. On current
project fuse blocks are mounted on sub-panel behind glovebox, which has hinged
panel on rear wall that drops down to expose them. This actually looks like a
neater approach so far...
>From The PossumWorks in TN
Mark
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ernest Christley <echristley(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | 90* push-on for fuse blocks |
The picture doesn't really tell the story, but I was trying to capture
how much neater the fuseblocks are when used with 90-degree push-ons.
It looks like the wires are coming straight out in the picture. Part of
this is the angle of the shot, and part of it is that the flip down
panel pulls the wires away from the fuseblock. With the swithpanel in
the closed position, all the wires lay nicely down the side of the
fuseblock.
http://ernest.isa-geek.org/Delta/Pictures/SwitchPanel.jpg
http://ernest.isa-geek.org/Delta/Pictures/SwitchPanelFuseBlock.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 90* push-on for fuse blocks |
Ernest Christley a crit :
> trying to capture how much neater the fuseblocks are when used with
> 90-degree push-ons.
> http://ernest.isa-geek.org/Delta/Pictures/SwitchPanelFuseBlock.jpg
>
Ernest,
Bought some of those 90 "flag" Fastons at the time for special cases,
but had little use for them : I discovered that they are far weaker at
the junction of the crimp and 90 push on portion. So I stuck as much as
I could to the regular and more robust Fastons.
Besides, I found that using 90s was putting each wire really really
close to the adjacent tab on the fuse block. And providing an ample
service loop was more difficult without a sharp angle just at the crimp.
Sooo, since I consider a nice row of well proportioned service loops as
very neat...;-)
Best regards,
--
Gilles
http://contrails.free.fr
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Emrath" <emrath(at)comcast.net> |
Listers,
I am installing my Garmin radios stack that was prewired from Stark
Aviation. The audio panel has a line for music input in intended to be
connected by me to a 3.5mm jack so that a music source can be conntected
thru the audio panel, Garmin's GMA 340. My question is, there is a left,
right and "lo", is the barrel of the jack the "Lo" and the tip the left
channel?
Marty
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
>
>
>I have a Kingsley machine with 10 clockwheels, manual wirefeed.
>
>Overly difficult to use for small projects.
>
>I would be willing to sell it to a good home though....
I used to have one too. Gave it away about 15 years
ago . . .
>My 2 cents.. Stick with Bob's simple labeling methods, build one end
>of most cables on the bench, run plenty of length and do not do not
>cut the far ends to length until the clamps and ties are tight.
>
>Take extra care to route cables in sensable cable-runs....then reroute
>them a week later because you figured out a better route.
>
>I have done plenty of this work, and sensable wirerouting and
>clampling goes a lot farther than stamped wires.
>
>also, good, hand-drawn prints are more valuable than stamping.
Hear, hear!!!!!
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------
( "Problems are the price of progress. )
( Don't bring me anything but trouble. )
( Good news weakens me." )
( -Charles F. Kettering- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Transponder antenna in rag/tube aircraft |
>I'm getting reports of very poor reception of my transponder in my Piper
>Colt. I've been through chaper 13 of the conection and can't really find
>anything that addresses this sort of airframe.
>
>Questions: I assume I should use a ground plane of 5 1/2" diameter as per
>a composite aircraft?
Yes . .
> Do I make sure the ground plane is isolated from the metal frame or bond
> it to it?
Doesn't matter it works as advertised even
when completely isolated from the metallic
airframe.
> Does it matter how close the ground plane is to the metal structure?
No
What's the largest area "window" you can see in the
tube structure on the side of the fuselage?
Here's an excerpt from the Aircraft Spruce
catalog at:
http://aircraftspruce.com/pdf/2008Individual/Cat08532.pdf
ANTENNAS FOR COMPOSITE AIRCRAFT
MODEL 5 - This transponder/DME antenna is an
etched copper clad epoxy circuit board dipole
that is designed to be installed inside non-conductive
aircraft without need for the additional
installation of a ground plane. The dimensions
are 6" x 7" and it can be installed in the aft
fuselage or the wings with the 6" dimension
vertical.VSWR is less than 1.2:1 over bands of 1032 to 1090 Mhz.
........................................................P/N 11-21005
..........$88.50
If you could mount this to the inside surface
of the fabric, 6" dimension vertical and 6"
of clearance all around edges, this might
perform much better and be easier to install
than a ground plane on the bottom.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------
( "Problems are the price of progress. )
( Don't bring me anything but trouble. )
( Good news weakens me." )
( -Charles F. Kettering- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Wire specifications |
>Good Afternoon Greg,
>
>I purchased and have used a shrink tube sleeve style wire
>marker. However, I find the additional bulk at the terminals to be
>objectionable and I really miss the convenience of having markings along
>the entire bundle length when doing trouble shooting. Does anyone on the
>list have any experience using a Kingsley wire marking system either
>directly or through a service provider of some sort?
I had a manual machine that I gave away
some years ago. It was a good way to invest
$5.00 of labor into a 50-cent piece of wire.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
Check out the Teflon vs. Tefzel discussion on pages
38 thru 40 at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/richter/response_1.pdf
Bob . . .
>Teflon jacket with silver plated conductor is actually pretty poor wire
>for use in aircraft. Silver plating isn't good in high vibration areas as
>it's brittle. Teflon wire is slippery, has poor cold flow tendencies, etc...
>
>Stick with Tefzel and you'll be fine. Ignore the surplus teflon as
>well. It's one of those things that's sort of "pennywise....but...".
>
>Chers,
>Stein
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
>MARVHAMM(at)aol.com
>Sent: Friday, October 05, 2007 10:20 AM
>To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Wire
>
>There is quite a lot of Teflon insulated surplus wire available on eBay
>including
>shielded wire at a fairly low cost.
>
>It appears to be high quality -- silver plated wire -- with high
>temperature limits -- 200 C.
>
>It is my understanding that smoke from teflon insulation is not quite in
>the same category as smoke from tefzel.
>
>I am gratified to hear the defense of tefzel, since Bob's arguments make
>sense.
>
>I know that tefzel is a very tough insulation material. Other than that,
>are there any other
>reasons that one might prefer tefzel over teflon?
>
>....... Marv Hamm
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
>
>Teflon wire is a pig to strip without very sharp tools or hot knife
>(Stein - how about adding hot knife strippers to your inventory?). The
>risk of cut wire strands is very high.
>It's a bit like working with Titanium rather than 4130 or Aluminium.
>Doug Gray
Teflon and Tefzel are both stripped very nicely by
strippers featured at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/strippers/strippers.html
These specialized stripping blades are described in:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Mfgr_Data/Tools/stripmaster.pdf
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Peter Harris" <peterjfharris(at)bigpond.com> |
| Subject: | Transponder antenna in rag/tube aircraft |
Related question please.
In my glass hull I fitted the transponder antenna about 4" inside the
perimeter of the circular VHF ground plane ie it shares this ground plane.
Is that a No-No?
Thanks
Peter H
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L.
Nuckolls, III
Sent: Monday, 8 October 2007 9:38 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Transponder antenna in rag/tube aircraft
>I'm getting reports of very poor reception of my transponder in my Piper
>Colt. I've been through chaper 13 of the conection and can't really find
>anything that addresses this sort of airframe.
>
>Questions: I assume I should use a ground plane of 5 1/2" diameter as per
>a composite aircraft?
Yes . .
> Do I make sure the ground plane is isolated from the metal frame or bond
> it to it?
Doesn't matter it works as advertised even
when completely isolated from the metallic
airframe.
> Does it matter how close the ground plane is to the metal structure?
No
What's the largest area "window" you can see in the
tube structure on the side of the fuselage?
Here's an excerpt from the Aircraft Spruce
catalog at:
http://aircraftspruce.com/pdf/2008Individual/Cat08532.pdf
ANTENNAS FOR COMPOSITE AIRCRAFT
MODEL 5 - This transponder/DME antenna is an
etched copper clad epoxy circuit board dipole
that is designed to be installed inside non-conductive
aircraft without need for the additional
installation of a ground plane. The dimensions
are 6" x 7" and it can be installed in the aft
fuselage or the wings with the 6" dimension
vertical.VSWR is less than 1.2:1 over bands of 1032 to 1090 Mhz.
........................................................P/N 11-21005
..........$88.50
If you could mount this to the inside surface
of the fabric, 6" dimension vertical and 6"
of clearance all around edges, this might
perform much better and be easier to install
than a ground plane on the bottom.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------
( "Problems are the price of progress. )
( Don't bring me anything but trouble. )
( Good news weakens me." )
( -Charles F. Kettering- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ronald Cox" <flyboyron(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Source for Strobe Cable |
Thanks, Bill,
That's exactly what I need.
Ron Cox
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dj Merrill <deej(at)deej.net> |
Bob,
What would you recommend, and where to get a decent set of tools to
work with Molex connectors? Crimper, extraction tool, etc.
Christmas is coming up and I'm starting to make out my list... *grin*
Thanks!
-Dj
--
Dj Merrill
Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118
http://econ.duke.edu/~deej/sportsman/
"Many things that are unexplainable happen during the construction of an
airplane." --Dave Prizio, 30 Aug 2005
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ernest Christley <echristley(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Transponder antenna in rag/tube aircraft |
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
>
>
>> I'm getting reports of very poor reception of my transponder in my
>> Piper Colt. I've been through chaper 13 of the conection and can't
>> really find anything that addresses this sort of airframe.
>>
>> Questions: I assume I should use a ground plane of 5 1/2" diameter as
>> per a composite aircraft?
>
> Yes . .
>
>> Do I make sure the ground plane is isolated from the metal frame or
>> bond it to it?
>
> Doesn't matter it works as advertised even
> when completely isolated from the metallic
> airframe.
>
>> Does it matter how close the ground plane is to the metal structure?
>
> No
>
> What's the largest area "window" you can see in the
> tube structure on the side of the fuselage?
>
> Here's an excerpt from the Aircraft Spruce
> catalog at:
>
> http://aircraftspruce.com/pdf/2008Individual/Cat08532.pdf
>
>
Bob, I could fit that antennae in my project, but I've been looking that
the one described by Matja Vidmar at
http://lea.hamradio.si/~s53mv/avionics/avionics.html , specifically
http://lea.hamradio.si/~s53mv/avionics/tranant.html
It's an 'annular' (is that correct) antennae, and the advertised benefit
is that it concentrates more of the energy in one direction. In my case
it will be facing down, so I'd expect the transponder reach the ground
better. Do you have any experience with this sort of antennae? Will it
work? Are there serious gotcha's that I haven't a clue about?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "RV_10" <john_rv10(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | "scratchy" transmission |
Hi,
I have just had exactly the same issue with my XCOM 760. I sent my unit
back
to the factory ' excellent service and quick turnaround. There was a
solder
joint on the board inside that had come adrift.
John Cleary
_____
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of lucky
Sent: Thursday, 4 October 2007 1:56 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: "scratchy" transmission
I noticed Van's is now selling a radio monitor so you can hear you
transmission. HYPERLINK
"http://www.vansaircraft.com/cgi-bin/catalog.cgi?ident=1191469174-304-2
79&br
owse=new&product=radio-monitor"http://www.vansaircraft.com/cgi-bin/ca
talog.c
gi?ident=1191469174-304-279&browse=new&product=radio-monitor
One of the descriptions says to be able to check for 'scratchy'
transmission. Well, 2 flights ago people started to tell me my
transmissions were becoming scratchy once the engine is running and the
range is short but OK prior to engine start even though the intercom
continues to work like a champ all the time and I can still hear others
quite well and from a long distance regardless of what else is on or off
that I can control with respect to avionics and engine. Anyone have
enough
hands on experience to know what the most probable causes of that are?
I
have tried the following with no luck:
changed RG400 cables between TX and Antenna, tried to transmit with
different headsets and from both pilot/copilot positions, ensured all
the
ground connectors FWF and in the avionics area appear to be 'normal',
ensured the headset jacks were still snug and no obvious connector
problems,
and checked the antenna inside the plane and outside the plane. I'd
have
swapped radios if one was available.
my radio is an XCOM760
"http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List"http://www.matronic
s.c
om/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
"http://forums.matronics.com"http://forums.matronics.com
7/10/2007
6:12 PM
7/10/2007
6:12 PM
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | luckymacy(at)comcast.net (lucky) |
| Subject: | "scratchy" transmission |
Thanks bud, that's exactly the kind of "special insight" I was looking for!
lucky
-------------- Original message --------------
From: "RV_10" <john_rv10(at)yahoo.com>
Hi,
I have just had exactly the same issue with my XCOM 760. I sent my unit back to
the factory excellent service and quick turnaround. There was a solder joint
on the board inside that had come adrift.
John Cleary
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of lucky
Sent: Thursday, 4 October 2007 1:56 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: "scratchy" transmission
I noticed Van's is now selling a radio monitor so you can hear you transmission. http://www.vansaircraft.com/cgi-bin/catalog.cgi?ident=1191469174-304-279&browse=new&product=radio-monitor
One of the descriptions says to be able to check for 'scratchy' transmission.
Well, 2 flights ago people started to tell me my transmissions were becoming scratchy
once the engine is running and the range is short but OK prior to engine
start even though the intercom continues to work like a champ all the time
and I can still hear others quite well and from a long distance regardless of
what else is on or off that I can control with respect to avionics and engine.
Anyone have enough hands on experience to know what the most probable causes
of that are? I have tried the following with no luck:
changed RG400 cables between TX and Antenna, tried to transmit with different headsets
and from both pilot/copilot positions, ensured all the ground connectors
FWF and in the avionics area appear to be 'normal', ensured the headset jacks
were still snug and no obvious connector problems, and checked the antenna
inside the plane and outside the plane. I'd have swapped radios if one was available.
my radio is an XCOM760
7/10/2007 6:12 PM
7/10/2007 6:12 PM
Thanks bud, that's exactly the kind of "special insight" I was looking
for!
lucky
Hi,
I have just had exactly the same issue with my XCOM
760. I sent my unit back to the factory excellent service and quick turnaround.
There was a solder joint on the board inside that had come adrift.
John Cleary
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of lucky
Sent: Thursday, 4 October 2007 1:56 PM
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: AeroElectric-List: "scratchy" transmission
One of the descriptions says to be able to check for 'scratchy' transmission.
Well, 2 flights ago people started to tell me my transmissions were
becoming scratchy once the engine is running and the range is short but
OK prior to engine start even though the intercom continues to work like
a champ all the time and I can still hear others quite well and from a long distance
regardless of what else is on or off that I can control with respect to
avionics and engine. Anyone have enough hands on experience to know what
the most probable causes of that are? I have tried the following with
no luck:
changed RG400 cables between TX and Antenna, tried to transmit with different
headsets and from both pilot/copilot positions, ensured all the ground connectors FWF
and in the avionics area appear to be 'normal', ensured the
headset jacks were still snug and no obvious connector problems, and checked
the antenna inside the plane and outside the plane. I'd have swapped radios
if one was available.
7/10/2007 6:12 PM
7/10/2007 6:12 PM
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Noel Karppinen" <noelk(at)grapevine.com.au> |
| Subject: | Jabiru Alternator Wiring |
I am at the stage of planning the wiring for a Jabiru 3300 installation. It
is one of the late model engines using the single phase alternator with a
Kubota RP201-53710 regulator. The aircraft will be used for night VFR
operations, so we want to be able to isolate the alternator and run on
battery power only in the event of alternator problems.
I am only just starting to come to grips with the pecularities of PM
alternators. After having been given a reference to this site and the
Aeroelectric Connection by a friend, I have spent the last few days
scanning the list and reading the book. This has clarified a number of
things, but I still have a few questions which, based on what I have seen
here so far, I am sure someone will be able to answer.
I have seen a number of references to problems with load dumping if the
alternator is disconnected from the battery. Is this a problem with PM
alternators or only wound field ones?
The simple Jabiru schematic in Figure Z-20 would appear to use the same
regulator looking at the pin-outs and wire colours, and would seem to meet
our requirement. Is the electrolytic capacitor at the output of the
regulatorfor noise filtering, or is it related to the load dumping
problem?
I have also seen a couple of schematics on builders web sites with slightly
different approaches. One used the alternator switch to both disconnect
the regulator sense line from the main bus and control a relay connecting
the regulator output line to the main bus, but no capacitor. The other had
a relay only in the regulator output line. The sense line was left
connected to the main bus, and would therefore have still been at +12V (
at least until the battery discharged) if the alternator switch was
opened. Once again, no capacitor. What are the advantages or problems
associated with these approaches?
Regards
Noel Karppinen
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MauleDriver <MauleDriver(at)nc.rr.com> |
DJ, I bought a Christmas basket of tools and connectors from Terminal
Town a while ago. I don't know enough to recommend anything but next
time you come by you'll have to take a look. One connector kit
contained a good selection of ring terminals and crimp on connectors.
The other kit a selection of Molex connectors. All the tools are
Eclipse brand. Spent about $400 including some tools I'm sure you
already have.
Dj Merrill wrote:
>
> Bob,
> What would you recommend, and where to get a decent set of tools to
> work with Molex connectors? Crimper, extraction tool, etc.
>
> Christmas is coming up and I'm starting to make out my list... *grin*
>
> Thanks!
>
> -Dj
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Jabiru Alternator Wiring |
Hello Noel
I believe there are no load dump issues with PM alternators. The
capacitor is for noise I think mostly for running without a battery in
the circuit. My architecture never does that and since the capacitor
didn't make any difference for me I eliminated it. I have a relay
between the alternator and the regulator for control and overvolt
cutoff. It does not take a robust contactor there as it is AC current
and that relay also lets me kill power to a misbehaving regulator. The
B+ output of the regulator has a CB (a fuse would be fine) to protect
against excess battery current going into a misbehaving regulator. My
control switch does control the relay and provide power to the
regulator. Some regulators draw a bit of current when not in use but
regardless I want to shut off that wire on a misbehaving regulator. If
you've detected a theme here - yes the regulator tends to be the most
failure prone component so mine is on the cool side of the firewall
where it gets warm to the touch but not hot.
Ken
Noel Karppinen wrote:
> I am at the stage of planning the wiring for a Jabiru 3300
> installation. It is one of the late model engines using the single
> phase alternator with a Kubota RP201-53710 regulator. The aircraft
> will be used for night VFR operations, so we want to be able to
> isolate the alternator and run on battery power only in the event of
> alternator problems.
>
> I am only just starting to come to grips with the pecularities of PM
> alternators. After having been given a reference to this site and the
> Aeroelectric Connection by a friend, I have spent the last few days
> scanning the list and reading the book. This has clarified a number
> of things, but I still have a few questions which, based on what I
> have seen here so far, I am sure someone will be able to answer.
>
> I have seen a number of references to problems with load dumping if
> the alternator is disconnected from the battery. Is this a problem
> with PM alternators or only wound field ones?
>
> The simple Jabiru schematic in Figure Z-20 would appear to use the
> same regulator looking at the pin-outs and wire colours, and would
> seem to meet our requirement. Is the electrolytic capacitor at the
> output of the regulatorfor noise filtering, or is it related to the
> load dumping problem?
>
> I have also seen a couple of schematics on builders web sites with
> slightly different approaches. One used the alternator switch to both
> disconnect the regulator sense line from the main bus and control a
> relay connecting the regulator output line to the main bus, but no
> capacitor. The other had a relay only in the regulator output line.
> The sense line was left connected to the main bus, and would therefore
> have still been at +12V ( at least until the battery discharged) if
> the alternator switch was opened. Once again, no capacitor. What are
> the advantages or problems associated with these approaches?
>
> Regards
>
> Noel Karppinen
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "John McKiernan" <rockyjs(at)mchsi.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Music Inputs |
Tip = Right
Ring = Left
Barrel = Common (Low)
Rocky
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
>
>DJ, I bought a Christmas basket of tools and connectors from Terminal Town
>a while ago. I don't know enough to recommend anything but next time you
>come by you'll have to take a look. One connector kit contained a good
>selection of ring terminals and crimp on connectors.
>The other kit a selection of Molex connectors. All the tools are Eclipse
>brand. Spent about $400 including some tools I'm sure you already have.
Are the terminals PIDG style. I.e. three piece with the
metal liners inside the insulation-grip sleeves?
See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/terminal.pdf
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
>
>Bob,
> What would you recommend, and where to get a decent set of tools to
>work with Molex connectors? Crimper, extraction tool, etc.
http://steinair.com
http://bandc.biz
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------
( "Problems are the price of progress. )
( Don't bring me anything but trouble. )
( Good news weakens me." )
( -Charles F. Kettering- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Transponder antenna in rag/tube aircraft |
>
>
>Related question please.
>In my glass hull I fitted the transponder antenna about 4" inside the
>perimeter of the circular VHF ground plane ie it shares this ground plane.
>Is that a No-No?
>Thanks
>Peter H
it will probably be fine.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Peter Harris" <peterjfharris(at)bigpond.com> |
| Subject: | Jabiru Alternator Wiring |
Ken,
Can you advise details of the AC relay and its connections? (Sometimes a 20A
fuse is used there)
Thanks
Peter H
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ken
Sent: Monday, 8 October 2007 11:44 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Jabiru Alternator Wiring
Hello Noel
I believe there are no load dump issues with PM alternators. The
capacitor is for noise I think mostly for running without a battery in
the circuit. My architecture never does that and since the capacitor
didn't make any difference for me I eliminated it. I have a relay
between the alternator and the regulator for control and overvolt
cutoff. It does not take a robust contactor there as it is AC current
and that relay also lets me kill power to a misbehaving regulator. The
B+ output of the regulator has a CB (a fuse would be fine) to protect
against excess battery current going into a misbehaving regulator. My
control switch does control the relay and provide power to the
regulator. Some regulators draw a bit of current when not in use but
regardless I want to shut off that wire on a misbehaving regulator. If
you've detected a theme here - yes the regulator tends to be the most
failure prone component so mine is on the cool side of the firewall
where it gets warm to the touch but not hot.
Ken
Noel Karppinen wrote:
> I am at the stage of planning the wiring for a Jabiru 3300
> installation. It is one of the late model engines using the single
> phase alternator with a Kubota RP201-53710 regulator. The aircraft
> will be used for night VFR operations, so we want to be able to
> isolate the alternator and run on battery power only in the event of
> alternator problems.
>
> I am only just starting to come to grips with the pecularities of PM
> alternators. After having been given a reference to this site and the
> Aeroelectric Connection by a friend, I have spent the last few days
> scanning the list and reading the book. This has clarified a number
> of things, but I still have a few questions which, based on what I
> have seen here so far, I am sure someone will be able to answer.
>
> I have seen a number of references to problems with load dumping if
> the alternator is disconnected from the battery. Is this a problem
> with PM alternators or only wound field ones?
>
> The simple Jabiru schematic in Figure Z-20 would appear to use the
> same regulator looking at the pin-outs and wire colours, and would
> seem to meet our requirement. Is the electrolytic capacitor at the
> output of the regulatorfor noise filtering, or is it related to the
> load dumping problem?
>
> I have also seen a couple of schematics on builders web sites with
> slightly different approaches. One used the alternator switch to both
> disconnect the regulator sense line from the main bus and control a
> relay connecting the regulator output line to the main bus, but no
> capacitor. The other had a relay only in the regulator output line.
> The sense line was left connected to the main bus, and would therefore
> have still been at +12V ( at least until the battery discharged) if
> the alternator switch was opened. Once again, no capacitor. What are
> the advantages or problems associated with these approaches?
>
> Regards
>
> Noel Karppinen
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Peter Harris" <peterjfharris(at)bigpond.com> |
| Subject: | Transponder antenna in rag/tube aircraft |
Thanks again Bob !
Peter H
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L.
Nuckolls, III
Sent: Tuesday, 9 October 2007 3:33 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Transponder antenna in rag/tube aircraft
>
>
>Related question please.
>In my glass hull I fitted the transponder antenna about 4" inside the
>perimeter of the circular VHF ground plane ie it shares this ground plane.
>Is that a No-No?
>Thanks
>Peter H
it will probably be fine.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Jabiru Alternator Wiring |
Peter
I'm using a 40 amp rated automotive relay with push on connections.
About a 1" cube. Think they are sometimes called a VF4 by Tyco. $3. or
maybe $4. from places like digi-key.
Ken
Peter Harris wrote:
>
>Ken,
>Can you advise details of the AC relay and its connections? (Sometimes a 20A
>fuse is used there)
>Thanks
>Peter H
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ken
>Sent: Monday, 8 October 2007 11:44 PM
>To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Jabiru Alternator Wiring
>
>
>Hello Noel
>
>I believe there are no load dump issues with PM alternators. The
>capacitor is for noise I think mostly for running without a battery in
>the circuit. My architecture never does that and since the capacitor
>didn't make any difference for me I eliminated it. I have a relay
> between the alternator and the regulator for control and overvolt
>cutoff. It does not take a robust contactor there as it is AC current
>and that relay also lets me kill power to a misbehaving regulator. The
>B+ output of the regulator has a CB (a fuse would be fine) to protect
>against excess battery current going into a misbehaving regulator. My
>control switch does control the relay and provide power to the
>regulator. Some regulators draw a bit of current when not in use but
>regardless I want to shut off that wire on a misbehaving regulator. If
>you've detected a theme here - yes the regulator tends to be the most
>failure prone component so mine is on the cool side of the firewall
>where it gets warm to the touch but not hot.
>Ken
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Emrath" <emrath(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | GMA 340 Audio Panel and Garmin 496 |
Listers:
Here is another issue that I've not been able to solve, maybe someone has
already done this and/or give me some advice. I have a Garmin GMA 340 Audio
Panel, pre-wired by Stark Aviation. I also have a Garmin 496. I would like
to connect the alerts/alarms feature of my 496 to the audio panel. My
understanding is these alarms come over the "music out" from the 496 but
maybe this isn't the only output. My audio panel has Music inputs, which I
have planned to connect to a 1/8" jack for use with an IPOD. Only one
music source can be used by the Pilot (me) so if I used 1/8 inch music cord
(1/8 inch plugs on either end). I could either plug in my IPOD or the 496,
but not both at the same time.
I am using a Garmin Power/Data cable to wire ship power to the 496. This
cord has the following wires with labels as:
Red DC Input
Blue Port 1 out
White Alarm
Orange voice (-)
Violet port 2 out
Black Grd
Yellow Port 1 in
Brown Voice +
Green port 2 in.
I am presently useing the Red DC Input, Black Grd, and Blue Port 1 out
(split to 3 leads for GPS steering, commuication to my fuel totalizer and
Sl-30 for airport freq data exchanging).
My wire harness for the Audio Panel also has two lines emanating marked
Unswitched Audio Hi and one marked Unswitched Audio Lo as wired by Stark
Aviation. I'm not sure how these are to be used.
So here's the question, if you've followed me so far, can any of these
Power/Date wires be connect to my Audio Panel to enable me to hear just the
alarms while listening to my IPOD?
Later, I may hook up the satellite radio to the music inputs and will need a
switch to select between IPOD and Satellite Radio.
Can someone point me in the right direction (Mr. Stein?), other than to
change my whole equipment package?
Marty in Brentwood TN
RV-6A taking way too long!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Got a new toy . . . |
I've been the pleased and successful user of Tektronix's
low cost but very capable TDS series 'scopes for a number of
years. My TDS210 has flown thousands of miles connected to a
battery/inverter pack on the floor. The inverter also powered
a bubble-jet printer that takes screen dumps from the scope
and puts them on paper. Later scanning allowed me to share
'scope traces with folks in a variety of venues.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Curves/4_bounce500Knocap1.gif
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Curves/95_GMC_Safari_1.gif
I just retired my TDS210 by selling it to a customer as a
startup 'scope and purchased a new TDS2012 for the same
money that the TDS210 cost me 5 or 6 years ago. The 2012
is 100Mhz vs. 60 and a color screen. Instead of a printer
output port, it features a USB thumb drive socket on the
front that dumps the screen to a .jpg image . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Curves/TDS2012_Sample.jpg
at the same time, it writes the data to a .cvs file that
can be imported by a variety of applications including
Excel. Once in tabular form, one can do a variety of
additional analyses on the numbers or plot it like . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Curves/TDS2012_Sample.pdf
I love this business. As long as it remains a free
market, we'll be able to look to more capability for
less $time$ tomorrow. Thought some of you 'scope drivers
out there would like to know about this product:
http://www.tek.com/site/ps/3G-19558/pdfs/3GW_19558.pdf
Lots of bang for the buck!
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------
( "Problems are the price of progress. )
( Don't bring me anything but trouble. )
( Good news weakens me." )
( -Charles F. Kettering- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Peter Harris" <peterjfharris(at)bigpond.com> |
| Subject: | Jabiru Alternator Wiring |
Thanks ken
What are the connections?
Peter
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ken
Sent: Tuesday, 9 October 2007 9:57 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Jabiru Alternator Wiring
Peter
I'm using a 40 amp rated automotive relay with push on connections.
About a 1" cube. Think they are sometimes called a VF4 by Tyco. $3. or
maybe $4. from places like digi-key.
Ken
Peter Harris wrote:
>
>Ken,
>Can you advise details of the AC relay and its connections? (Sometimes a
20A
>fuse is used there)
>Thanks
>Peter H
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ken
>Sent: Monday, 8 October 2007 11:44 PM
>To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Jabiru Alternator Wiring
>
>
>Hello Noel
>
>I believe there are no load dump issues with PM alternators. The
>capacitor is for noise I think mostly for running without a battery in
>the circuit. My architecture never does that and since the capacitor
>didn't make any difference for me I eliminated it. I have a relay
> between the alternator and the regulator for control and overvolt
>cutoff. It does not take a robust contactor there as it is AC current
>and that relay also lets me kill power to a misbehaving regulator. The
>B+ output of the regulator has a CB (a fuse would be fine) to protect
>against excess battery current going into a misbehaving regulator. My
>control switch does control the relay and provide power to the
>regulator. Some regulators draw a bit of current when not in use but
>regardless I want to shut off that wire on a misbehaving regulator. If
>you've detected a theme here - yes the regulator tends to be the most
>failure prone component so mine is on the cool side of the firewall
>where it gets warm to the touch but not hot.
>Ken
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
>Hey Bob -
>
>You mentioned a possible opportunity to visit Brad a few weeks ago.
>Were you able to sit down with them over coffee and traces?
>Anything to share?
>
>neal
I'm going down tomorrow. I'll have to make
it a quick, one-day trip. But there's a couple
of audio books I've been wanting to 'read'
so it will be a pleasant diversion.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------
( "Problems are the price of progress. )
( Don't bring me anything but trouble. )
( Good news weakens me." )
( -Charles F. Kettering- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dave Saylor" <Dave(at)AirCraftersLLC.com> |
| Subject: | GMA 340 Audio Panel and Garmin 496 |
Marty,
The music output from the 496 should go to the music input ( No. 1 or No. 2,
your choice) of the GMA340. All that comes from the music out is the XM
stuff. By running it into the music input, it will mute when you receive
other transmissions.
The "voice" + and - from the GPS power cord go to the unswitched audio on
the audio panel. That will get you all the voice outputs from the GPS for
warnings, etc.
On my installation, I toggled Music 1 input between XM and the 1/8 jack you
mentioned with a simple switch.
Any questions feel free to call.
Dave Saylor
AirCrafters LLC
140 Aviation Way
Watsonville, CA
831-722-9141
831-750-0284 CL
www.AirCraftersLLC.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Emrath
Sent: Monday, October 08, 2007 5:38 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: GMA 340 Audio Panel and Garmin 496
Listers:
Here is another issue that I've not been able to solve, maybe someone has
already done this and/or give me some advice. I have a Garmin GMA 340 Audio
Panel, pre-wired by Stark Aviation. I also have a Garmin 496. I would like
to connect the alerts/alarms feature of my 496 to the audio panel. My
understanding is these alarms come over the "music out" from the 496 but
maybe this isn't the only output. My audio panel has Music inputs, which I
have planned to connect to a 1/8" jack for use with an IPOD. Only one
music source can be used by the Pilot (me) so if I used 1/8 inch music cord
(1/8 inch plugs on either end). I could either plug in my IPOD or the 496,
but not both at the same time.
I am using a Garmin Power/Data cable to wire ship power to the 496. This
cord has the following wires with labels as:
Red DC Input
Blue Port 1 out
White Alarm
Orange voice (-)
Violet port 2 out
Black Grd
Yellow Port 1 in
Brown Voice +
Green port 2 in.
I am presently useing the Red DC Input, Black Grd, and Blue Port 1 out
(split to 3 leads for GPS steering, commuication to my fuel totalizer and
Sl-30 for airport freq data exchanging).
My wire harness for the Audio Panel also has two lines emanating marked
Unswitched Audio Hi and one marked Unswitched Audio Lo as wired by Stark
Aviation. I'm not sure how these are to be used.
So here's the question, if you've followed me so far, can any of these
Power/Date wires be connect to my Audio Panel to enable me to hear just the
alarms while listening to my IPOD?
Later, I may hook up the satellite radio to the music inputs and will need a
switch to select between IPOD and Satellite Radio.
Can someone point me in the right direction (Mr. Stein?), other than to
change my whole equipment package?
Marty in Brentwood TN
RV-6A taking way too long!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Noel Karppinen" <noelk(at)grapevine.com.au> |
| Subject: | Re: Jabiru Alternator Wiring |
Hi Ken
You said:
>I have a relay
> between the alternator and the regulator for control and overvolt
>cutoff. It does not take a robust contactor there as it is AC current
>and that relay also lets me kill power to a misbehaving regulator. The
>B+ output of the regulator has a CB (a fuse would be fine) to protect
>against excess battery current going into a misbehaving regulator.
Thanks for the infornmation. I had wondered about the possibility of
isolating the regulator from the alternator, but I have not seen any
previous references to this being done. Could you confirm that I have
understood this correctly. i.e that you do not have any relay between the
regulator output and the main bus, just the circuit breaker.
Noel Karppinen
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Jabiru Alternator Wiring |
Noel Karppinen wrote:
>Hi Ken
>
>You said:
>
>>I have a relay
>> between the alternator and the regulator for control and overvolt
>>cutoff. It does not take a robust contactor there as it is AC current
>>and that relay also lets me kill power to a misbehaving regulator. The
>>B+ output of the regulator has a CB (a fuse would be fine) to protect
>>against excess battery current going into a misbehaving regulator.
>
> Thanks for the infornmation. I had wondered about the possibility of
> isolating the regulator from the alternator, but I have not seen any
> previous references to this being done. Could you confirm that I have
> understood this correctly. i.e that you do not have any relay between
> the regulator output and the main bus, just the circuit breaker.
>
> Noel Karppinen
Yes that is correct Noel. Actually I thought the current Z figure had
also been changed to show that now. I run an electrically dependant
engine so neither the alternator or the battery bus go through another
battery contactor or relay. Another reason to do this might be that I
have also found that the John Deere regulator fails instantly if run
with a totally dead battery -which is about the same as not having a
battery connected. (My little AGM batteries simply won't accept any
significant current initially if they are totally dead) Maybe the big
capacitor would protect against that but I have doubts.
Peter the little VF4 relays just use our common PIDG push on
connections. You can mount the relay in a socket if you wish but that
is not necessary. I think B&C also sell a slightly different suitable
relay in a plastic case that does not use a socket.
Ken
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Fuse panel location |
Great job on documenting your work for the Bearhawk Eric. You should be
an instructor. I will borrow your swing out panel idea or build a swing
down panel using a cut-out portion of my avionics shelf on the co-pilots
side.
Question: Where did you get the electronic amp sensor? Great idea. Also,
it looks like you did not use a shunt in front of your ANL?
Thanks
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Ernest Christley
Sent: Saturday, October 06, 2007 5:28 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Fuse panel location
-->
Eric Newton wrote:
>
>
> Here is a webpage from my Bearhawk builder's site on how I set up my
> Fuse panel which is hinged and can swing out for easy access.
>
> http://mybearhawk.com/finish/electrical2.html
I'll try to get some pictures later tonight, but for everyone using
these fuse blocks...
You can get 90* 1/4" push-on fittings. I (fortunately) have a friend
with the expensive crimper, 'cause he uses bags of them in his
business. These are VERY nice to have when you're trying to fit the
fuse-block in a tight space like Eric is doing.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Z-19 (Revised) Emergency Operations |
Ok,
So let's assume I have Z-19 installed as written. What would be
the normal operating procedure for moving the power/engine switches in
the event of failures...
1. Alternator goes poop.
2. Field wire breaks off at the connector (I've seen this one a few
times. Not sure why the wire used is still so light).
3. Master battery moves to low voltage.
4. ANL blows (I know, that's extreme).
5. Starter engages and won't quit.
6. Fuel Pump #1 goes poop and I need to switch on secondary power and
fuel pump #2 but all else is normal.
7. Cockpit fire.
Assumptions - this is an electrically dependent engine and therefore I
always need at least one fuel pump/ecu. The rest is out the window.
Thanks
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Peter Harris" <peterjfharris(at)bigpond.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Jabiru Alternator Wiring |
Thanks Ken.
Peter
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ken
Sent: Tuesday, 9 October 2007 11:01 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Jabiru Alternator Wiring
Noel Karppinen wrote:
>Hi Ken
>
>You said:
>
>>I have a relay
>> between the alternator and the regulator for control and overvolt
>>cutoff. It does not take a robust contactor there as it is AC current
>>and that relay also lets me kill power to a misbehaving regulator. The
>>B+ output of the regulator has a CB (a fuse would be fine) to protect
>>against excess battery current going into a misbehaving regulator.
>
> Thanks for the infornmation. I had wondered about the possibility of
> isolating the regulator from the alternator, but I have not seen any
> previous references to this being done. Could you confirm that I have
> understood this correctly. i.e that you do not have any relay between
> the regulator output and the main bus, just the circuit breaker.
>
> Noel Karppinen
Yes that is correct Noel. Actually I thought the current Z figure had
also been changed to show that now. I run an electrically dependant
engine so neither the alternator or the battery bus go through another
battery contactor or relay. Another reason to do this might be that I
have also found that the John Deere regulator fails instantly if run
with a totally dead battery -which is about the same as not having a
battery connected. (My little AGM batteries simply won't accept any
significant current initially if they are totally dead) Maybe the big
capacitor would protect against that but I have doubts.
Peter the little VF4 relays just use our common PIDG push on
connections. You can mount the relay in a socket if you wish but that
is not necessary. I think B&C also sell a slightly different suitable
relay in a plastic case that does not use a socket.
Ken
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Schloss" <Bluebird(at)townsqr.com> |
Hello All,
I'm getting ready to order from WireMaster but the prices they are
quoting are much higher than previously posted on this list.
I have asked for prices on MIL-W-22759. They said there are several
types of wire with that number. They have asked me for additional
numbers or letters that follow the 22759 which is not the wire size.
Can anyone help me with the full MIL SPEC Number?
thanks
phil
----- Original Message -----
From: John McMahon
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Friday, October 05, 2007 11:52 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: WireMaster
Hi Phil,
Several of us have dealt with them and have been very satisfied.
Deb Sullivan
Account Executive
WireMasters, Inc.
Phone: 800-635-5342
Fax: 615-791-6182
Email: dsullivan@ wiremasters.net
Web site: http://www.wiremasters.net/
On 10/5/07, Philip W. Schloss < Bluebird(at)townsqr.com> wrote:
Can someone give me a phone number of web address for WireMaster
Thanks
phil
John McMahon
Lancair Super ES, S/N 170, N9637M (Reserved)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Neal George" <n8zg(at)bellsouth.net> |
Phil -
I'd suggest you call Stein. 877-282-8996.
He'll ask you three questions: What size? What color? How long? Then
he'll thank you for your business. And ship the same day.
You'll receive new wire (and the correct type of wire) at a good price,
quite possibly less than advertised. And you'll be supporting one of our
own in the process. And you won't feel as guilty when you call next year
asking for help (pointers?) with your avionics wiring.
neal
==================
Hello All,
I'm getting ready to order from WireMaster but the prices they are quoting
are much higher than previously posted on this list.
I have asked for prices on MIL-W-22759. They said there are several types
of wire with that number. They have asked me for additional numbers or
letters that follow the 22759 which is not the wire size.
Can anyone help me with the full MIL SPEC Number?
thanks
phil
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ralph Hoover <hooverra(at)verizon.net> |
Per Garmin 340 manual. This is also standard practice in the audio industry.
Tip = Left
Ring = Right
Sleeve = Common
--
Ralph C. Hoover
RV7A
hooverra at verizon dot net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ernest Christley <echristley(at)nc.rr.com> |
Schloss wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> I'm getting ready to order from WireMaster but the prices they are quoting are
much higher than previously posted on this list.
>
> I have asked for prices on MIL-W-22759. They said there are several types of
wire with that number. They have asked me for additional numbers or letters
that follow the 22759 which is not the wire size.
>
> Can anyone help me with the full MIL SPEC Number?
>
>
MIL-W-22759/16-22-0
that's 22AWG black
MIL-W-22759/16-22-9
that's 22AWG white, green is 5 and red is 2
MIL-W-22759/16-18-2
that's green 18AWG
Did you ask for Deb Sullivan. Prices fluctuate, but my invoice is dated
3/07/2006.
--
"Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in
a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside,
thoroughly used up, totally worn out, with chocolate in one hand and wine in
the other, loudly proclaiming 'WOO HOO What a Ride!'"
--Unknown
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jeff Page <jpx(at)qenesis.com> |
Bob, I just read your comments on Greg Richter's "Aircraft Wiring For
Smart People". I found it very enlightening, since I had originally
accepted most of it at face value. I really like your style of
including the references for your facts. I am eagerly awaiting my
copy of your book to eventually be delivered by Canada Post that I
ordered a week ago.
One part of your comments that most interested me was characteristics
of the choice of a 14V versus 28V system. Prior to any thought at
all, I had assumed I would build a 14V airplane. Greg's article
originally prompted me to consider a 28V one.
Most equipment will work happily with any voltage. A few parts are a
little harder to get, or slightly more expensive. Many aircraft
manufacturers now produce 28V products. Cessna has built many more
aircraft than I have, so holding them up as an example seems
practical. So I have been planning a 28V airplane.
The only hitches I have found so far, is that the company I might buy
an inexpensive autopilot from sells only 14V servos and Dynon sells
only a 14V heated pitot tube. This can be solved with a DC-DC
converter, but that adds a nice heat source under the instrument panel
and another part to fail (although not a critical one for a VFR only
airplane).
So after reading your comments, and realizing that Dynon expects that
virtually all of their market to build 14V aircraft, I am back to
thinking I should build a 14V system. This certainly simplifies a few
things.
Before I make the final decision for 14V, do you know of any important
reasons in favor of a 28V system ? Most reasons, such as slightly
lighter weight are insignificant really.
Thanks,
Jeff Page
Dream Aircraft Tundra #10
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "rtitsworth" <rtitsworth(at)mindspring.com> |
Jeff,
Lots of emotion on 24v vs 28v - features and compromises on both sides.
One advantage of 28v is often overlooked is that: essentially twice the
power is available from the alternator for essentially the same alternator
weight. This comes into play if you're building an all electric, dual
alternator bird. The backup alternator is typically smaller than he main
one. With a 28v system the smaller backup alternator (say 20 amps = 480
watts) will power more stuff, than a similar 14v Alternator (20 amps = only
280 watts). That may or may-not be significant depending on the bird you're
building and/or it's mission profile.
Rick
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jeff Page
....Before I make the final decision for 14V, do you know of any important
reasons in favor of a 28V system ? Most reasons, such as slightly
lighter weight are insignificant really. Thanks,
Jeff Page
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MauleDriver <MauleDriver(at)nc.rr.com> |
Yes they are. Both the ring terminals and the splices are 2 pieces of
tinned plated copper with a plastic sleeve. Looks like the knife locks
are too. There is a selection of ring terminals for both various wire
sizes and post sizes. They are all listed according to "mil spec" codes
such as MS-25036-102 for a #6 ring and 22/18 AWG wire. The AV/24 -
Aviation Electrical Maintenance Kit from Terminaltown.com is in a nice
metal case with 24 plastic labeled compartments with ring terminals,
splices, wire caps, and knife locks. It was $200. The 'Molex' kit
with crimper was $90. Don't know how those prices compare but it was a
good start for me.
Thanks for the lesson and the link to your pdf.
BTW, B&C and Steinair are my main suppliers but I found TerminalTown to
be a good supplier of this kit and a few other OBAM oriented items. I
think Wm Curtis had mentioned them in a post.
I'm not affiliated with any of the above.
Bill "still wiring my RV10" Watson
Durham NC
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>> DJ, I bought a Christmas basket of tools and connectors from Terminal
>> Town a while ago. I don't know enough to recommend anything but next
>> time you come by you'll have to take a look. One connector kit
>> contained a good selection of ring terminals and crimp on connectors.
>> The other kit a selection of Molex connectors. All the tools are
>> Eclipse brand. Spent about $400 including some tools I'm sure you
>> already have.
>>
> Are the terminals PIDG style. I.e. three piece with the
> metal liners inside the insulation-grip sleeves?
>
> See:
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/terminal.pdf
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Settle" <billsettle(at)bellsouth.net> |
I agree with Neal 100%. I met Stein at OSH this year for the first time... Great
Guy.
-------------- Original message from "Neal George" : --------------
Phil -
I'd suggest you call Stein. 877-282-8996.
He'll ask you three questions: What size? What color? How long? Then he'll
thank you for your business. And ship the same day.
You'll receive new wire (and the correct type of wire) at a good price, quite possibly
less than advertised. And you'll be supporting one of our own in the
process. And you won't feel as guilty when you call next year asking for help
(pointers?) with your avionics wiring.
neal
==================
Hello All,
I'm getting ready to order from WireMaster but the prices they are quoting are
much higher than previously posted on this list.
I have asked for prices on MIL-W-22759. They said there are several types of wire
with that number. They have asked me for additional numbers or letters that
follow the 22759 which is not the wire size.
Can anyone help me with the full MIL SPEC Number?
thanks
phil
I agree with Neal 100%. I met Stein at OSH this year for the first time...
Great Guy.
-------------- Original message from "Neal George" <n8zg(at)bellsouth.net>:
--------------
Phil -
I'd suggest you call Stein. 877-282-8996.
He'll ask you three questions: What size?
What color? How long? Then he'll thank you for your business.
And ship the same day.
You'll receive new wire (and the correct type of wire) at
a good price, quite possibly less than advertised. And you'll
be supporting one of our own in the process. And you won't feel as guilty
when you call next year asking for help (pointers?) with your
avionics wiring.
neal
==================
Hello All,
I'm getting ready to order from WireMaster but the
prices they are quoting are much higher than previously posted on this list.
I have asked for prices on MIL-W-22759.
They said there are several types of wire with that number. They have asked
me for additional numbers or letters that follow the 22759 which is not the
wire size.
Can anyone help me with the full MIL SPEC Number?
thanks
phil
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric Newton" <enewton57(at)cableone.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fuse panel location |
Thanks for the kind words.
The donut AMP pickup device goes with my Grand Rapids EIS system (as an
option you have to purchase). No shunt needed with the amp device.
Eric Newton - Long Beach, MS
BH #682- Mississippi Mudbug
BEARHAWK BUILDER'S MANUALS
http://mybearhawk.com
----- Original Message -----
From: <longg(at)pjm.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2007 1:32 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Fuse panel location
>
> Great job on documenting your work for the Bearhawk Eric. You should be
> an instructor. I will borrow your swing out panel idea or build a swing
> down panel using a cut-out portion of my avionics shelf on the co-pilots
> side.
>
> Question: Where did you get the electronic amp sensor? Great idea. Also,
> it looks like you did not use a shunt in front of your ANL?
>
> Thanks
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> Ernest Christley
> Sent: Saturday, October 06, 2007 5:28 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Fuse panel location
>
>
> -->
>
> Eric Newton wrote:
>>
>>
>> Here is a webpage from my Bearhawk builder's site on how I set up my
>> Fuse panel which is hinged and can swing out for easy access.
>>
>> http://mybearhawk.com/finish/electrical2.html
> I'll try to get some pictures later tonight, but for everyone using
> these fuse blocks...
>
> You can get 90* 1/4" push-on fittings. I (fortunately) have a friend
> with the expensive crimper, 'cause he uses bags of them in his
> business. These are VERY nice to have when you're trying to fit the
> fuse-block in a tight space like Eric is doing.
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Jabiru Alternator Wiring |
>
>Noel Karppinen wrote:
>
>>Hi Ken
>>
>>You said:
>>
>>>I have a relay between the alternator and the regulator for control and
>>>overvolt cutoff. It does not take a robust contactor there as it is AC
>>>current and that relay also lets me kill power to a misbehaving
>>>regulator. The B+ output of the regulator has a CB (a fuse would be
>>>fine) to protect against excess battery current going into a misbehaving
>>>regulator.
>>
>>Thanks for the infornmation. I had wondered about the possibility of
>>isolating the regulator from the alternator, but I have not seen any
>>previous references to this being done. Could you confirm that I have
>>understood this correctly. i.e that you do not have any relay between the
>>regulator output and the main bus, just the circuit breaker.
>>
>>Noel Karppinen
>
>Yes that is correct Noel. Actually I thought the current Z figure had
>also been changed to show that now. I run an electrically dependant
>engine so neither the alternator or the battery bus go through another
>battery contactor or relay. Another reason to do this might be that I
>have also found that the John Deere regulator fails instantly if run with
>a totally dead battery -which is about the same as not having a battery
>connected. (My little AGM batteries simply won't accept any significant
>current initially if they are totally dead) Maybe the big capacitor would
>protect against that but I have doubts.
>
>Peter the little VF4 relays just use our common PIDG push on
>connections. You can mount the relay in a socket if you wish but that is
>not necessary. I think B&C also sell a slightly different suitable relay
>in a plastic case that does not use a socket.
>
>Ken
>
>
>--
>269.14.6/1060 - Release Date: 10/9/2007 4:43 PM
>
>
>incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
>Checked by AVG.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------
( "Problems are the price of progress. )
( Don't bring me anything but trouble. )
( Good news weakens me." )
( -Charles F. Kettering- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 14V verus 28V |
>
>Bob, I just read your comments on Greg Richter's "Aircraft Wiring For
>Smart People". I found it very enlightening, since I had originally
>accepted most of it at face value. I really like your style of
>including the references for your facts. I am eagerly awaiting my
>copy of your book to eventually be delivered by Canada Post that I
>ordered a week ago.
>
>One part of your comments that most interested me was characteristics
>of the choice of a 14V versus 28V system. Prior to any thought at
>all, I had assumed I would build a 14V airplane. Greg's article
>originally prompted me to consider a 28V one.
>
>Most equipment will work happily with any voltage. A few parts are a
>little harder to get, or slightly more expensive. Many aircraft
>manufacturers now produce 28V products. Cessna has built many more
>aircraft than I have, so holding them up as an example seems
>practical. So I have been planning a 28V airplane.
>
>The only hitches I have found so far, is that the company I might buy
>an inexpensive autopilot from sells only 14V servos and Dynon sells
>only a 14V heated pitot tube. This can be solved with a DC-DC
>converter, but that adds a nice heat source under the instrument panel
>and another part to fail (although not a critical one for a VFR only
>airplane).
>
>So after reading your comments, and realizing that Dynon expects that
>virtually all of their market to build 14V aircraft, I am back to
>thinking I should build a 14V system. This certainly simplifies a few
>things.
>
>Before I make the final decision for 14V, do you know of any important
>reasons in favor of a 28V system ? Most reasons, such as slightly
>lighter weight are insignificant really.
Weight differences are minuscule to non-existent and very
few aircraft really need the 2x power capability for alternator
sizing . . . so the big driver for me is that when you go
28v you lock yourself out of all current automotive offerings
for devices (quite suitable for use on our airplanes) and you
have to build your own battery from 2x 12v devices or purchase
a "real" 24v battery - invariably more expensive and heavier
for the same contained energy.
There's just no compelling reason for considering 28v in
the first place unless you're planning on exploiting
the used/refurbished hardware from tens of thousands
of Cessnas . . . and that's a step backwards.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: 14V verus 28V |
| From: | "N395V" <airboss(at)excaliburaviation.com> |
I built with a 28V system for what I thought were some good reasons and then had
to deal with the nightmare of much of what I needed not being available in 28V
so I had to add a converter (more weight and expense)
Then I had to add a 14v bus and wiring (more complexity)
Net result
More weight
More cost
More expense
Net benefit... I'll let you know if I ever realize any.
--------
Milt
2003 F1 Rocket
2006 Radial Rocket
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=139188#139188
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Z-19 E Bus feeder questions - Fuse selection? |
| From: | "mikef" <mikefapex(at)gmail.com> |
In looking at the Z-19 diagram I see the Endurance Bus (EB) is potentially fed
from the Main Power Distribution Bus (with a 7 amp fuse) or
the Main Battery Bus (with a 10 amp fuse). The EB contains 26 amps worth of fused
instruments and corresponding load.
1. Why are the fuses feeding the EB so much smaller than the potential load of
the EB? Would use exceeding the
7 amp and 10 amp fuses cause a blown fuse and loss of power to all of the EB?
2. Why are the fuse sizes different between the Main Power bus and Main Battery
bus, when feeding the EB?
Thanks for any clarifications,
Mike
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=139195#139195
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Speedy11(at)aol.com |
I concur. Prompt service from Stein. In one shipment he got the color
wrong and immediately shipped the correct one when I called. And he's one of
us
- not a huge corporation with twenty-five step answering system which forces
you to choose between english and spanish and an ordertaker who may be in
India.
Stan Sutterfield
I'd suggest you call Stein. 877-282-8996.
He'll ask you three questions: What size? What color? How long? Then
he'll thank you for your business. And ship the same day.
You'll receive new wire (and the correct type of wire) at a good price,
quite possibly less than advertised. And you'll be supporting one of our
own in the process. And you won't feel as guilty when you call next year
asking for help (pointers?) with your avionics wiring.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Z-19 E Bus feeder questions - |
Fuse selection?
Mike,
I'll wait for the Bob's definitive answer but this makes no
sense. That would be like adding a 100 am panel to your home and feeding
it off a 20 amp breaker in your main panel.
The lead from the main power bus to the endurance bus should be
a direct feed from the same terminal as the main feed. Between them is a
diode to prevent backflow if the e-bus alternate is used.
Also, I have an issue with the orphaned switch for fuel pump #2.
Why not integrate it with the engine primary and secondary switching?
Note that if fuel pump #1 makes trouble, this diagram provides no way to
isolate it, but rather one method to switch the bus that feeds it. With
switch #2 I can turn it off/on at will which is fine as a backup, but I
want that functionality for #1 also.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of mikef
Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2007 12:56 PM
Subject: [Probable SPAM] AeroElectric-List: Z-19 E Bus feeder questions
- Fuse selection?
In looking at the Z-19 diagram I see the Endurance Bus (EB) is
potentially fed from the Main Power Distribution Bus (with a 7 amp fuse)
or the Main Battery Bus (with a 10 amp fuse). The EB contains 26 amps
worth of fused instruments and corresponding load.
1. Why are the fuses feeding the EB so much smaller than the potential
load of the EB? Would use exceeding the 7 amp and 10 amp fuses cause a
blown fuse and loss of power to all of the EB?
2. Why are the fuse sizes different between the Main Power bus and Main
Battery bus, when feeding the EB?
Thanks for any clarifications,
Mike
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=139195#139195
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "david stroud" <dstroud(at)storm.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: 14V verus 28V |
I'm in a similar boat, Milt. I muckled onto a real nice Huosai engine,
prop and ss exhaust, then only to find a sweet deal on a Jasco 28v
alt. All dirt cheap so, for me, a good enough reason for 28v. I already
had a 14v King radio though and foolishly thought I'd go thru the 2 x 14v
battery combo and pull off 14v halfway with a battery equalizer, allowing
me to pick and choose the rest of the components 28 or 14 v only to learn
that the battery equalizer costs about $750 which is about what a new alt
would cost. So..my solution is to go mostly 28v with a drop converter to 14v
for one or two items. With a payload of 1,800 + lbs I don't need to watch
every ounce but I am mindful of it.
David Stroud Ottawa, Canada
C-FDWS Christavia
Fairchild 51 under construction
----- Original Message -----
From: "N395V" <airboss(at)excaliburaviation.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2007 12:35 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: 14V verus 28V
>
> I built with a 28V system for what I thought were some good reasons and then
had to deal with the nightmare of much of what I
needed not being available in 28V so I had to add a converter (more weight and
expense)
>
> Then I had to add a 14v bus and wiring (more complexity)
>
> Net result
>
> More weight
> More cost
> More expense
>
> Net benefit... I'll let you know if I ever realize any.
>
> --------
> Milt
> 2003 F1 Rocket
> 2006 Radial Rocket
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bruce Gray" <Bruce(at)glasair.org> |
| Subject: | Re: 14V verus 28V |
The main reason Cessna, Piper, and Beech all went 28v is commonality of
production. There's nothing wrong with 28v, you just have to shop for your
electro whizzies at the local truck stop rather then at NAPA.
Bruce
www.Glasair.org
Glasair III, 28v
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of david
stroud
Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2007 2:15 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: 14V verus 28V
I'm in a similar boat, Milt. I muckled onto a real nice Huosai engine,
prop and ss exhaust, then only to find a sweet deal on a Jasco 28v
alt. All dirt cheap so, for me, a good enough reason for 28v. I already
had a 14v King radio though and foolishly thought I'd go thru the 2 x 14v
battery combo and pull off 14v halfway with a battery equalizer, allowing
me to pick and choose the rest of the components 28 or 14 v only to learn
that the battery equalizer costs about $750 which is about what a new alt
would cost. So..my solution is to go mostly 28v with a drop converter to 14v
for one or two items. With a payload of 1,800 + lbs I don't need to watch
every ounce but I am mindful of it.
David Stroud Ottawa, Canada
C-FDWS Christavia
Fairchild 51 under construction
----- Original Message -----
From: "N395V" <airboss(at)excaliburaviation.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2007 12:35 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: 14V verus 28V
>
> I built with a 28V system for what I thought were some good reasons and
then had to deal with the nightmare of much of what I
needed not being available in 28V so I had to add a converter (more weight
and expense)
>
> Then I had to add a 14v bus and wiring (more complexity)
>
> Net result
>
> More weight
> More cost
> More expense
>
> Net benefit... I'll let you know if I ever realize any.
>
> --------
> Milt
> 2003 F1 Rocket
> 2006 Radial Rocket
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Jabiru Alternator Wiring |
| From: | "DaveG601XL" <david.m.gallagher(at)ge.com> |
Bob,
If you meant to say something in your 10/09 posting, nothing got printed out that
I can see. I am also expecting to use a Jabiru engine with the PM alternator
and am interested in your input to this thread.
Thanks,
--------
David Gallagher
601 XL, tail and wings completed,
fueslage almost done, engine next.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=139225#139225
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Fusible Link - is length of wire a concern? |
| From: | "mikef" <mikefapex(at)gmail.com> |
And another question :)
Question: is there a suggested maximum wire length used when incorporating fusible
links in a system? (or threshold for switching to something else?)
Background: I am building a Z-19 system for my pusher aircraft. The important electrical
components are all in the rear of the aircraft near the engine. This
includes the Main Power bus and Ammeter shunt. The Master switch and Ammeter
are located up front on the panel, being separated by about 10' of wire length
in both cases.
I am wondering if that is too far to run the fusible link wire from the Main power
bus to the Master switch. Same concern for the shunt to ammeter fusible links.
Thanks for input and advice,
Mike
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=139227#139227
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: [Probable SPAM] Z-19 E Bus feeder questions - Fuse |
selectio
| From: | "mikef" <mikefapex(at)gmail.com> |
I agree, it seems wrong. Which means I've probably missed something fundamental
with the design/diagram. Hopefully Bob will weigh in and shed some light. His
explanations routinely make things clearer.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=139229#139229
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Lloyd, Daniel R." <LloydDR(at)wernerco.com> |
I would also agree that the service from Steinair is above and beyond,
Stein and his team are always there to help with avionics questions and
will work with you to resolve your problems, even if you were not a
customer.
That in my opinion is what makes a VAR, the value added reseller, and
Stein is definitely a value add.
Dan Lloyd
N289DT RV10E flying
_____
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Speedy11(at)aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2007 2:13 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Wiremaster
I concur. Prompt service from Stein. In one shipment he got the color
wrong and immediately shipped the correct one when I called. And he's
one of us - not a huge corporation with twenty-five step answering
system which forces you to choose between english and spanish and an
ordertaker who may be in India.
Stan Sutterfield
I'd suggest you call Stein. 877-282-8996.
He'll ask you three questions: What size? What color? How
long? Then
he'll thank you for your business. And ship the same day.
You'll receive new wire (and the correct type of wire) at a good
price,
quite possibly less than advertised. And you'll be supporting
one of our
own in the process. And you won't feel as guilty when you call
next year
asking for help (pointers?) with your avionics wiring.
_____
See what's new
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Z-19 E Bus feeder questions |
- Fuse selection?
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
As has been discussed, fuses are generally there to protect the wire.
Wire is sized to be electrically adequate (with margin - sometimes large)
and mechanically robust. The sizes of the fuses (and the total sum of the
values of the fuses) are only peripherally related to the total bus draw.
I would say that the size of the fuse feeding the e-bus should be
determined by what the actual loads will be. The wires fed by the e-bus
are already protected by the individual fuses. While 7A for the e-bus
feed might seem small, I question what single engine airplane would need
26A continuous on the endurance bus.
Free anecdotes (worth what you pay for it): My car has a 75A alternator,
but adding up the fuse values shows that the bus capacity is in the realm
of 175A.
Also, Z19 as drawn has a 16g feed. The 10C rise load for 16g is 12.5A -
far short of the 26A fuse load on the bus. That's okay for the reasons
mentioned above.
Regards,
Matt-
>
> Mike,
> I'll wait for the Bob's definitive answer but this makes no
> sense. That would be like adding a 100 am panel to your home and feeding
> it off a 20 amp breaker in your main panel.
>
> The lead from the main power bus to the endurance bus should be
> a direct feed from the same terminal as the main feed. Between them is a
> diode to prevent backflow if the e-bus alternate is used.
>
> Also, I have an issue with the orphaned switch for fuel pump #2.
> Why not integrate it with the engine primary and secondary switching?
> Note that if fuel pump #1 makes trouble, this diagram provides no way to
> isolate it, but rather one method to switch the bus that feeds it. With
> switch #2 I can turn it off/on at will which is fine as a backup, but I
> want that functionality for #1 also.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of mikef
> Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2007 12:56 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: [Probable SPAM] AeroElectric-List: Z-19 E Bus feeder questions
> - Fuse selection?
>
>
> In looking at the Z-19 diagram I see the Endurance Bus (EB) is
> potentially fed from the Main Power Distribution Bus (with a 7 amp fuse)
> or the Main Battery Bus (with a 10 amp fuse). The EB contains 26 amps
> worth of fused instruments and corresponding load.
>
> 1. Why are the fuses feeding the EB so much smaller than the potential
> load of the EB? Would use exceeding the 7 amp and 10 amp fuses cause a
> blown fuse and loss of power to all of the EB?
>
> 2. Why are the fuse sizes different between the Main Power bus and Main
> Battery bus, when feeding the EB?
>
> Thanks for any clarifications,
>
> Mike
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=139195#139195
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: [Probable SPAM] Z-19 E Bus feeder questions - Fuse |
se
| From: | "mikef" <mikefapex(at)gmail.com> |
Matt,
What you say makes sense. But what has me asking the questions is why the large
difference between the fuse size of the Main power bus and the listed components
on the Endurance Bus. Even if you cut the E-bus in half, amperage load-wise,
you still get a 13/7 mix. That just seems askew.
matt wrote: >>
As has been discussed, fuses are generally there to protect the wire.
Wire is sized to be electrically adequate (with margin - sometimes large)
and mechanically robust. The sizes of the fuses (and the total sum of the
values of the fuses) are only peripherally related to the total bus draw.
I would say that the size of the fuse feeding the e-bus should be
determined by what the actual loads will be. The wires fed by the e-bus
are already protected by the individual fuses. While 7A for the e-bus
feed might seem small, I question what single engine airplane would need
26A continuous on the endurance bus.
Free anecdotes (worth what you pay for it): My car has a 75A alternator,
but adding up the fuse values shows that the bus capacity is in the realm
of 175A.
Also, Z19 as drawn has a 16g feed. The 10C rise load for 16g is 12.5A -
far short of the 26A fuse load on the bus. That's okay for the reasons
mentioned above.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=139268#139268
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Z-19 E Bus feeder questions - Fuse selection? |
>
>In looking at the Z-19 diagram I see the Endurance Bus (EB) is potentially
>fed from the Main Power Distribution Bus (with a 7 amp fuse) or
>the Main Battery Bus (with a 10 amp fuse). The EB contains 26 amps worth
>of fused instruments and corresponding load.
>
>1. Why are the fuses feeding the EB so much smaller than the potential
>load of the EB? Would use exceeding the
>7 amp and 10 amp fuses cause a blown fuse and loss of power to all of the EB?
>
>2. Why are the fuse sizes different between the Main Power bus and Main
>Battery bus, when feeding the EB?
>
>Thanks for any clarifications,
If your e-bus loads are that large, then it's not
an endurance bus. The point of the e-bus is to
drop to the aboslute minimum loads on battery(ies)
in the en route phase of flight for the purpose of
keeping the alternator failure in the maintenance
event, not emergency event (or even tense) category.
Effective use of the e-bus requires you have . . .
(a) a calculated (measure all the real loads) and
(b) verified ability to run those loads for whatever
value of duration you adopt as your design goal. I like
to use duration of fuel aboard. Verification calls
for periodic cap checks or periodic early replacement
such that the design goals are maintained.
The Z-figures are ARCHITECTURE drawings crafted to
offer solutions to a variety of design goals for
a variety of aircraft. The sizes of things (wire sizes,
fuses, etc) and numbers of things and where those
things get powered from are up to the individual
builder to select and adjust as needed.
You size the fuses and wires in accordance with
the levels of operating loads and protection dictated
by the final design. If your e-bus loads are
truly that big, then you'll need some really
big batteries to provide significant performance
under the e-bus operating philosophy.
Suggest you shoot for an e-bus load on the order
of 5A or less. Some of my builders are under
3A.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------
( "Problems are the price of progress. )
( Don't bring me anything but trouble. )
( Good news weakens me." )
( -Charles F. Kettering- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Emrath" <emrath(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: music inputs |
Ralph,
Thanks, but can you tell me what page of the manual. I've a number of
replies that say the tip is the Right channel. I guess is really doesn't
matter too much when all is said and done.
Marty
From: Ralph Hoover <hooverra(at)verizon.net>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Music inputs
Per Garmin 340 manual. This is also standard practice in the audio industry.
Tip = Left Ring = Right Sleeve = Common
--
Ralph C. Hoover
RV7A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Carl Morgan" <zk-vii(at)rvproject.gen.nz> |
| Subject: | Re: music inputs |
Hi,
340 Install, Rev L, Pg B-11 in the appendix area has a pictorial detail.
Also see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stereo_jack_plug for industry wide /
background if you still have questions.
Regards,
Carl
--
ZK-VII - RV 7A QB - finishing? - New Zealand
http://www.rvproject.gen.nz/
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Emrath
> Sent: Thursday, 11 October 2007 2:36 p.m.
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: music inputs
>
>
> Ralph,
> Thanks, but can you tell me what page of the manual. I've a number of
> replies that say the tip is the Right channel. I guess is really doesn't
> matter too much when all is said and done.
>
> Marty
>
> From: Ralph Hoover <hooverra(at)verizon.net>
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Music inputs
>
>
> Per Garmin 340 manual. This is also standard practice in the
> audio industry.
> Tip = Left Ring = Right Sleeve = Common
>
> --
> Ralph C. Hoover
> RV7A
>
>
> 10/10/2007 5:11 p.m.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike" <mlas(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 14V verus 28V |
Jeff,
When I was building my ALL electric Lancair I went round and round on
this issue. I couldn't find any more than three reasons for a 28v
system. 1 Anti-ice/de-ice systems, 2 the need to have a Christmas tree
amount of lights, and 3 air conditioning. Most of us are not building
airplanes with ice systems, or air conditioning and lighting now comes
in low use systems. My airplane has all the bells and whistles as far
as EFIS, Auto pilot, In-flight Entertainment, Electron ignition,
electronic engine monitor, back up EFIS, ect. With the navigation and
landing lights off my nominal use of power is about 15~20 amps @ 14vdc.
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bruce
Gray
Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2007 11:50 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: 14V verus 28V
The main reason Cessna, Piper, and Beech all went 28v is commonality of
production. There's nothing wrong with 28v, you just have to shop for
your
electro whizzies at the local truck stop rather then at NAPA.
Bruce
www.Glasair.org
Glasair III, 28v
10/2/2007 11:10 AM
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "rtitsworth" <rtitsworth(at)mindspring.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 14V verus 28V |
The only components that I could not find readily available in 28v (vs 14v)
were the Ray Allen trim servos (and they sell small converters). Most all
28V aircraft components are now essentially the same price as 14v. I do
have a 28-14V converter, but it only drives the cigarette style power ports.
Rick
All electric, Dual Alt, Lancair ES
-----Original Message-----
"N395V" said
... had to deal with the nightmare of much of what I needed not being
available in 28V so I had to add a converter (more weight and expense)...
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ernest Christley <echristley(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: music inputs |
Emrath wrote:
>
> Ralph,
> Thanks, but can you tell me what page of the manual. I've a number of
> replies that say the tip is the Right channel. I guess is really doesn't
> matter too much when all is said and done.
>
>
If you get it backwards, it will feel like you're standing with your
back to the band. What will THAT do to your situational awareness?
8*)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Casey <glcasey(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | 430W installation |
I have recently upgraded my 430A to a 430W (WAAS capable) in my
Lancair ES. I received the 430 back along with a new slightly larger
antenna. The antenna cable requires a new connector (threaded vs the
old BNC) and the "book" from Garmin recommends a length between 13
and 35 feet to get the recommend 3 to 7 db loss. Whether they
"require" at least a 3 db loss is not 100% clear in the manual.
Anyway, I installed the antenna under the glare shield in the same
place as the previous antenna, adjacent to the Pinpoint(now Chelton)
GPS antenna. Originally the Chelton used a Crossbow GPS receiver
that was a little marginal and it dropped out now and then, while the
Garmin was "bullet-proof" and often received an adequate signal when
inside the steel hangar (door open). The Pinpoint GPS has been much
better and hasn't dropped once since I installed it. It has a larger
antenna than the previous postage-stamp version, but didn't seem to
interfer with the Garmin reception. Now things are different and the
Garmin is having trouble. First thing I did was change my 2-foot
antenna RG400 to a 13-foot RG400, but there was no detectable
change. I raised the antenna as high as possible while staying under
the glare shield. Then I mounted it to a small aluminum ground plane
and laid it on top of the radio stack, simulating a mounting on top
of the glare shield. The height of the signal bars seems to be
independent of all those changes, including the cable length. It
does receive lots of satellites, typically 9 usable signals at any
given time, so what could possibly go wrong? Every once in a while
the GPS will drop out completely - not just giving and integrity
warning, but a complete loss. When I look at the signal strength
page I will see perhaps one hollow bar and nothing else. How could
it lose all the satellites at once? After maybe 30 seconds to 3
minutes it comes back on line and works well again, including the
vertical navigation functions. I can't come up with a common event
that triggers this - it's not a com transmission, but it seems to
happen after 10 minutes or so of flying and I haven't yet had it
happen twice in one flight, although all my flights have been short
since the installation. So far it has never happened on the ground.
It might be happening more often when pointed east, but I'm not
convinced that is a factor. The tech at Lancair said "the WAAS
signal is more sensitive because it uses satellites closer to the
horizon." I didn't think that was the case as I thought all the
satellites were continuously moving.
Has anyone had a similar experience? Any suggestions?
Gary Casey
Lancair ES
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fusible Link - is length of wire a concern? |
>
>And another question :)
>
>Question: is there a suggested maximum wire length used when incorporating
>fusible links in a system? (or threshold for switching to something else?)
>
>Background: I am building a Z-19 system for my pusher aircraft. The
>important electrical components are all in the rear of the aircraft near
>the engine. This includes the Main Power bus and Ammeter shunt. The Master
>switch and Ammeter are located up front on the panel, being separated by
>about 10' of wire length in both cases.
Fuses, breakers, fusible links are all "weak links in a chain"
intended to provide orderly, low maintenance, predictable
failure of an "overloaded chain" that minimizes damage to the system.
It matters not how long that chain is.
>I am wondering if that is too far to run the fusible link wire from the
>Main power bus to the Master switch. Same concern for the shunt to ammeter
>fusible links.
You lost me. "Fusible link wire?" If an when fusible
links are practical, the fusible link wire is but a
few inches long and enclosed in a material that minimizes
risks to adjacent wires if that particular piece of wire
burns. I'm also wondering about a protected wire that runs
from "main power bus to the master switch", are you speaking
of the fat wire that runs from the battery contactor to the
main bus fuse block or breakers? This wire doesn't get
protection, fusible link or otherwise. Fusible links are
not recommended in any locations other than those depicted
in the Z-figures and then only for relatively small wires.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------
( "Problems are the price of progress. )
( Don't bring me anything but trouble. )
( Good news weakens me." )
( -Charles F. Kettering- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Z-19 E Bus feeder questions |
- Fuse selection?
>
>Mike,
> I'll wait for the Bob's definitive answer but this makes no
>sense. That would be like adding a 100 am panel to your home and feeding
>it off a 20 amp breaker in your main panel.
>
> The lead from the main power bus to the endurance bus should be
>a direct feed from the same terminal as the main feed. Between them is a
>diode to prevent backflow if the e-bus alternate is used.
>
> Also, I have an issue with the orphaned switch for fuel pump #2.
>Why not integrate it with the engine primary and secondary switching?
>Note that if fuel pump #1 makes trouble, this diagram provides no way to
>isolate it, but rather one method to switch the bus that feeds it. With
>switch #2 I can turn it off/on at will which is fine as a backup, but I
>want that functionality for #1 also.
Wondering what you're referring to here. The Z-19 as published
was for a specific engine and fuel system that offered only
1 ECU and 1 fuel pump. See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Adobe_Architecture_Pdfs/Z19M_1.pdf
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Adobe_Architecture_Pdfs/Z19M_2.pdf
What's the "orphaned switch"?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Fusible Link - is length of wire a concern? |
| From: | "mikef" <mikefapex(at)gmail.com> |
Bob,
You answered: >>
You lost me. "Fusible link wire?" If an when fusible
links are practical, the fusible link wire is but a
few inches long and enclosed in a material that minimizes
risks to adjacent wires if that particular piece of wire
burns.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=139398#139398
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Z-19 E Bus feeder questions - Fuse selection? |
| From: | "mikef" <mikefapex(at)gmail.com> |
Bob,
Thank you for clarifying the Z-19 architecture drawing for this e-bus question.
I do not have all that stuff hanging off my e-bus but was thinking that maybe
somebody did. And that was the reason for their appearance in the diagram. All
those components seem reasonable to have, but like you said, maybe not all on
the e-bus.
I think I have the right mix on my own e-bus, I wanted to understand the Z-19 diagram
to a better degree, and the different fuse sizes to potential e-bus loads
led me around the bend.
Thanks,
Mike
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=139400#139400
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Jabiru Alternator Wiring |
>
>Noel Karppinen wrote:
>
>>Hi Ken
>>
>>You said:
>>
>>>I have a relay between the alternator and the regulator for control and
>>>overvolt cutoff. It does not take a robust contactor there as it is AC
>>>current and that relay also lets me kill power to a misbehaving
>>>regulator. The B+ output of the regulator has a CB (a fuse would be
>>>fine) to protect against excess battery current going into a misbehaving
>>>regulator.
>>
>>Thanks for the infornmation. I had wondered about the possibility of
>>isolating the regulator from the alternator, but I have not seen any
>>previous references to this being done. Could you confirm that I have
>>understood this correctly. i.e that you do not have any relay between the
>>regulator output and the main bus, just the circuit breaker.
>>
>>Noel Karppinen
>
>Yes that is correct Noel. Actually I thought the current Z figure had
>also been changed to show that now. I run an electrically dependant
>engine so neither the alternator or the battery bus go through another
>battery contactor or relay. Another reason to do this might be that I
>have also found that the John Deere regulator fails instantly if run with
>a totally dead battery -which is about the same as not having a battery
>connected. (My little AGM batteries simply won't accept any significant
>current initially if they are totally dead) Maybe the big capacitor would
>protect against that but I have doubts.
>
>Peter the little VF4 relays just use our common PIDG push on
>connections. You can mount the relay in a socket if you wish but that is
>not necessary. I think B&C also sell a slightly different suitable relay
>in a plastic case that does not use a socket.
>
>Ken
>
I need to update the Jabiru drawings to reflect the
philosophy illustrated in Z-16 for Rotax. You can
make the translation yourself. The same relay is used,
it's simply moved from the DC output leg of the
regulator/rectifier to the AC interface between
alternator and regulator/rectifier.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------
( "Problems are the price of progress. )
( Don't bring me anything but trouble. )
( Good news weakens me." )
( -Charles F. Kettering- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Jabiru alternators |
>Bob:
>
>I am a new member to the aeroelectric list, and have only recently
>downloaded a copy of you book. I posted a message a couple of days ago
>about Jabiru alternators, and so far have only received a replies from
>only one person. I have attached the messages below.
>
>
> >
> > I have also seen a couple of schematics on builders web sites with
> > slightly different approaches. One used the alternator switch to both
> > disconnect the regulator sense line from the main bus and control a
> > relay connecting the regulator output line to the main bus, but no
> > capacitor. The other had a relay only in the regulator output line.
> > The sense line was left connected to the main bus, and would therefore
> > have still been at +12V ( at least until the battery discharged) if
> > the alternator switch was opened. Once again, no capacitor. What are
> > the advantages or problems associated with these approaches?
There are many approaches to system architecture
and I've been asked many times to convince someone
as to the value of one approach over another. I
crafted the words in Chapter 17 to explain the
simple ideas behind the drawings published in
Appendix Z. It's beyond the scope of my mission
and hours-in-the-day to do critical design review
on the myriad of alternative schemes.
Virtually every alternative offers some level of
performance and functionality . . . and is not
intrinsically "unsafe" as long as the design rules
for fusing, wire sizing, ov protection, etc. are
observed. Keep in mind that only an exceedingly
tiny percentage of serious accidents begin with
electrical system problems . . . and most of those
had nothing to do with architecture.
A design goal for the Z-figures is to craft an
elegant solution supported by a published
operating and design philosophy. I am in no way
suggesting that the 'Connection offers an "ultimate
solution." The 'Connection is like a favorite
restaurant that serves dishes worthy of
your continued consumption because they're
consistent and comfortably predictable. If
you understand the ingredients (simple ideas)
that go into any/all recipes for success, then the
recipe that ultimately satisfies your own design
goals becomes a matter of personal taste.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------
( "Problems are the price of progress. )
( Don't bring me anything but trouble. )
( Good news weakens me." )
( -Charles F. Kettering- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Visit to Emagair |
As promised, I finally took a day off last Tuesday
and drove to Azel, TX to visit Tom and Brad at Emagair.
I only had a few hours to talk but it was a drink
from a firehose.
These guys are a uniquely talented and willing team
of individuals who can close their eyes and see a
product that does not yet exist . . . and bring
it to market in a practical, measured and honorable way.
If there's a down-side to their product line, it's the
torrent of new and useful features that "get in the
way" of making money. There's an old saw that has
circulated around my craft for decades: "At some
point in time, you shoot the engineers and go to
production."
At the same time, it was refreshing to visit a
facility and converse with the principals in an
operation that is constantly pushing out the
boundaries of the best-they-know-how-to-do. I
just retired from an environment where the last
five years was expended putting band-aids on 15-30
year old designs.
We had a very productive meeting. I walked away
with some exciting ideas on how the technology
and processes they shared could become part
of an effort to elevate the functionality of
products for my TC aircraft customers. I'm
looking forward to an interesting, exciting
and productive future with these guys.
We agreed to put our heads together and get
synchronized on the most useful recipes for success
and I'll be updating my references to Emagair
products in the 'Connection. Hopefully in the
next 30 days or so. Right now I need to make up
for the day I blew off to go "play".
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------
( "Problems are the price of progress. )
( Don't bring me anything but trouble. )
( Good news weakens me." )
( -Charles F. Kettering- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Z-19 E Bus feeder questions |
- Fuse selection?
Bob,
Re: orphaned switch. Well, not exactly orphaned, it just seems randomly
placed for my situation. Specifically I am applying this to a system
with one ECU and two fuel pumps.
I'm on board with expected loads for the ebus and the system routing
stuff. The primary power and secondary power are set. If we loose
primary power, we turn on secondary - no problem.
If pump #1 is burning (figuratively) up and we turn on #2 (already has a
power source), we still have power to pump #1. Ok, you know these
automotive jobs will die quickly with no fuel pump, so if pump #1 fails
we need to turn on pump #2. Not a problem, but there is some delay
there. A more robust way may might be to use a pressure switch to catch
#1 in the event of a failure and flip over to #2 auto-magically.
Given all that I would like to isolate #1 should the above events occur.
I would like to add auto failover or at least have the ability to switch
each fuel pump on independent of each other regardless of their
relationship to primary or secondary power.
I agree with your thoughts on limiting the e-bus (in an emergency) to
bare bones equipment, however the diagram showing the primary feed as 7
amps would be inadequate for normal use even if I only used the com
(shown 7 amps). Ok, so all of this can vary - no problem.
I would probably have an issue if under emergency mode I forget to shut
down all but non-essential (probably dark, smoke or some other ugliness)
and flip on my little 10 amp eBus alternate only to find I've just blown
a fuse which I can't replace at the moment (busy flying). I believe I
can adjust that logic and the diagram to fit.
Perhaps select items like the MX20 and 530W should be split out onto
another bus to bring the total load down. My setup is a more complex IFR
support. Just more considerations.
There rest of the diagram looks solid (at least from my understanding).
One question? Do I need both the shunt and the ANL in front of the
alternator as shown? My Subaru has the built in regulator, but I would
still like to add an OV protection module.
Thanks
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Robert L. Nuckolls, III
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2007 10:12 AM
Subject: RE: [Probable SPAM] AeroElectric-List: Z-19 E Bus feeder
questions - Fuse selection?
-->
>
>Mike,
> I'll wait for the Bob's definitive answer but this makes no
>sense. That would be like adding a 100 am panel to your home and
>feeding it off a 20 amp breaker in your main panel.
>
> The lead from the main power bus to the endurance bus should
>be a direct feed from the same terminal as the main feed. Between them
>is a diode to prevent backflow if the e-bus alternate is used.
>
> Also, I have an issue with the orphaned switch for fuel pump
>#2. Why not integrate it with the engine primary and secondary
>switching? Note that if fuel pump #1 makes trouble, this diagram
>provides no way to isolate it, but rather one method to switch the bus
>that feeds it. With switch #2 I can turn it off/on at will which is
>fine as a backup, but I want that functionality for #1 also.
Wondering what you're referring to here. The Z-19 as published
was for a specific engine and fuel system that offered only
1 ECU and 1 fuel pump. See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Adobe_Architecture_Pdfs/Z19M_1.pdf
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Adobe_Architecture_Pdfs/Z19M_2.pdf
What's the "orphaned switch"?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Switch selection . . . |
Comments/Questions: Hey Bob...
I know that in the past you have said "115 VAC rating is directly
translatable to 14 VDC applications"
I want to use these mini toggle switches on some panels I am building and I
was wondering what kind of load you think I could safely/continuously run
thorough them:
SPECIFICATIONS
Contact ratings (resistive loads): Gold plated brass; 0.4 Volt-Amps max. at
20 V max.
Silver; 3 Amps at 250 VAC, 6 Amps at 125 VAC or 4 Amps at 30 VDC
Gold plated silver; 3 Amps at 250 VAC, 6 Amps at 125 VAC or 4 Amps at 30
VDC. Gold plating withstands up to 100 mA at 30 VDC.
Initial contact resistance: 10 milliohms maximum
Insulation resistance: 1000 megohms min. at 500 VDC
Dielectric strength: 1000 V rms min. - between terminals
1500 V rms min. - between poles and terminals and frame
Electrical life: Gold: 100,000 cycles min.
Silver (at full load): SP & DP - 50,000 cycles min. 3P: 40,000 cycles min.
4P: 30,000 cycles min.
Operating temperature range: -40C to +85C
They are the series 5000 minis from APEM and you can see the doc on them here:
http://www.apem.com/pdf/APEM_A.pdf
Their ratings are pretty clear. They call out 4A at 30 VAC
(probably a resistive load) and 6A at 125 VAC. The DC rating
will get better as the voltage goes down . . . ergo my earlier
assertion that 125 VAC ratings sit the same pew as 14 VDC
ratings is still pretty good.
Your concerns for "safety" can be addressed only with
architecture, Plan-A/Plan-B designs and operating
philosophies. These switches are rated for 30-50K
cycles as controllers of major current . . . 100K
cycles for low currents where you don't blow the gold
off. I can tell you that none of these switches will
make it to catalog ratings . . . not because you've
poorly selected a switch but because over the decades
it takes to put that many cycles on the switch,
environmental effects will prevail.
So, once we accept the fact that EVERY switch will
fail at some point in time . . . and assuming we've
designed to be failure tolerant, then it matters
not what switches you install from a safety perspective.
The only future effect on your decisions will be on
cost of ownership.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------
( "Problems are the price of progress. )
( Don't bring me anything but trouble. )
( Good news weakens me. )
( -Charles F. Kettering- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Visit to Emagair |
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
Hey Bob,
Aren't you retired? :)
Regards,
Matt-
>
>
> As promised, I finally took a day off last Tuesday
> and drove to Azel, TX to visit Tom and Brad at Emagair.
> I only had a few hours to talk but it was a drink
> from a firehose.
>
snip
> products in the 'Connection. Hopefully in the
> next 30 days or so. Right now I need to make up
> for the day I blew off to go "play".
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
>
>Bob,
>Re: orphaned switch. Well, not exactly orphaned, it just seems randomly
>placed for my situation. Specifically I am applying this to a system
>with one ECU and two fuel pumps.
Okay, I don't show that in Z-19. Z-19 was crafted to
address the specifics of an engine that had only
one fuel pump and one ECU . . . and the builder's
desire to have two power sources of power for
that combination.
Your choice/need to have a second pump is a new
design goal. How will you become aware of the failure
of #1 pump in flight? What is the value of being able
to remove the #2 pump from the system if its pressure
goes down. Should the pumps be plumbed in series or
would they be better plumbed in parallel?
Adding the second pump opens a whole new catalog
of considerations for how it will be used and
under what conditions. But I suspect the need to
shut off a failed #1 pump before bringing the #2
pump on line is very low if not zero.
>I'm on board with expected loads for the ebus and the system routing
>stuff. The primary power and secondary power are set. If we loose
>primary power, we turn on secondary - no problem.
>
>If pump #1 is burning (figuratively) up and we turn on #2 (already has a
>power source), we still have power to pump #1. Ok, you know these
>automotive jobs will die quickly with no fuel pump, so if pump #1 fails
>we need to turn on pump #2. Not a problem, but there is some delay
>there. A more robust way may might be to use a pressure switch to catch
>#1 in the event of a failure and flip over to #2 auto-magically.
This pre-supposes some advance ideas of how the pumps
fail. Every automotive pump electrical failure I've
encountered caused the pump to draw zero current. The
siren call of automatic changeover systems is strong . . .
but they add complexity in both system design but
operationally (another thing to preflight).
>Given all that I would like to isolate #1 should the above events occur.
>I would like to add auto failover or at least have the ability to switch
>each fuel pump on independent of each other regardless of their
>relationship to primary or secondary power.
>
>I agree with your thoughts on limiting the e-bus (in an emergency) to
>bare bones equipment, however the diagram showing the primary feed as 7
>amps would be inadequate for normal use even if I only used the com
>(shown 7 amps). Ok, so all of this can vary - no problem.
>
>I would probably have an issue if under emergency mode I forget to shut
>down all but non-essential (probably dark, smoke or some other ugliness)
>and flip on my little 10 amp eBus alternate only to find I've just blown
>a fuse which I can't replace at the moment (busy flying). I believe I
>can adjust that logic and the diagram to fit.
If that fuse powers something absolutely needed for
comfortable termination of flight and you don't have
a backup for that system, then replacing the fuse
is a waste of valuable time. Your system needs to be
crafted such that the time to shift from Plan-A to
Plan-B is no longer than what it takes to perceive,
interpret and react with the throwing of no more than
a couple of switches. I.e, 5 seconds or less.
Fiddling with fuses does not fit this operating
philosophy. Besides, replacing a fuse is most likely
to blow another fuse and leave you in the same
position that you were in before you started digging
around for spare fuses.
>Perhaps select items like the MX20 and 530W should be split out onto
>another bus to bring the total load down. My setup is a more complex IFR
>support. Just more considerations.
>
>There rest of the diagram looks solid (at least from my understanding).
>One question? Do I need both the shunt and the ANL in front of the
>alternator as shown? My Subaru has the built in regulator, but I would
>still like to add an OV protection module.
Your choice. You should have the ANL but the shunt
can go anywhere or be left out all together. How
do you plan to make good used of the data that an
ammeter on the shunt will offer? Is that data useful
in flight? Is there a way to reduce or eliminate in-flight
usefulness of that data?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | RE: [Probable SPAM] Z-19 E Bus feeder questions |
| From: | "Glaeser, Dennis A" <dennis.glaeser(at)eds.com> |
If pump #1 is burning (figuratively) up and we turn on #2 (already has a
power source), we still have power to pump #1. Ok, you know these
automotive jobs will die quickly with no fuel pump, so if pump #1 fails
we need to turn on pump #2. Not a problem, but there is some delay
there. A more robust way may might be to use a pressure switch to catch
#1 in the event of a failure and flip over to #2 auto-magically.
Given all that I would like to isolate #1 should the above events occur.
I would like to add auto failover or at least have the ability to switch
each fuel pump on independent of each other regardless of their
relationship to primary or secondary power.
You can look at auto-failover design that Jan Eggenfeller and Gary
Newsted show in their original installation manual
(www.eggenfellneraircraft.com/iindex.htm). However their bad
experiences with pressure switches have led them to abandon that
approach. It's additional failure modes overshadowed it's usefulness.
They now recommend each pump be a simple on-off switch, powered by it's
respective battery. For takeoff and landing, turn both pumps (and
ignition switches) on, so no power loss if one fails. At a safe
altitude, turn off the aux pump and ignition - now you have time to
react if something fails. I have warning lights (LEDs) that are on when
my aux pump and aux ignition are on.
Dennis Glaeser
RV7A-EH6 (painting and final assembly)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Visit to Emagair |
>
>Hey Bob,
>
>Aren't you retired? :)
Uhhh . . . sorta. I'm exploring potential
opportunities to do things for others that
my last billet deduced were of insufficient
value to exploit. However, I'm discovering that
the industry's affliction with MBAD (masterful
business management disease) is pretty wide
spread. I'll give it a try but I'm not going
to die on that hill either.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------
( "Problems are the price of progress. )
( Don't bring me anything but trouble. )
( Good news weakens me." )
( -Charles F. Kettering- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bret Smith" <smithhb(at)tds.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Visit to Emagair |
Bob,
Thank you from all of us "builders" out here who look to you for insight and
guidance. Just want you to know we appreciate all you do and especially the
"CEUs" you continue to garner. Anxiously awaiting the re-draw on the P-Mags
for Z13/8...
Bret Smith
RV-9A "Fuselage"
Blue Ridge, GA
www.FlightInnovations.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net>
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2007 3:48 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Visit to Emagair
>
>
> Hey Bob,
>
> Aren't you retired? :)
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Matt-
>
>>
>>
>> As promised, I finally took a day off last Tuesday
>> and drove to Azel, TX to visit Tom and Brad at Emagair.
>> I only had a few hours to talk but it was a drink
>> from a firehose.
>>
> snip
>
>> products in the 'Connection. Hopefully in the
>> next 30 days or so. Right now I need to make up
>> for the day I blew off to go "play".
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Bob . . .
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gaye and Vaughn" <vaughnray(at)bvunet.net> |
Bob,
I have decided on a ULPower 260i engine for my Europa. It has one ECU
and one fuel pump. In my book there is a Z-19 drawing, but I can't find
it on the disk I picked up at your seminar or on your latest download
from your site. Do you suppose that you could email it to me? Thanks
Vaughn Teegarden
vaughnray(at)bvunet.net
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Allen Fulmer" <afulmer(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | Z-19 E Bus feeder questions - Fuse selection? |
By the way, Bob, both Z19 and Z19RB (rear battery) have 2 fuel pumps
depicted (the Eggenfellner Subs. have 2 pumps).
While Z19 only has a switch to control Pump #2, I don't see any problem with
adding a pressure fail-over switch to automatically turn on #2 in the event
#1 quits pumping.
Allen Fulmer
RV7 QB Fuselage
Eggenfellner Subaru E6T coming Dec 8th 2007
Alexander City, AL
N808AF reserved
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Robert
L. Nuckolls, III
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2007 9:12 AM
Subject: RE: [Probable SPAM] AeroElectric-List: Z-19 E Bus feeder
questions - Fuse selection?
>
>Mike,
> I'll wait for the Bob's definitive answer but this makes no
>sense. That would be like adding a 100 am panel to your home and feeding
>it off a 20 amp breaker in your main panel.
>
> The lead from the main power bus to the endurance bus should be
>a direct feed from the same terminal as the main feed. Between them is a
>diode to prevent backflow if the e-bus alternate is used.
>
> Also, I have an issue with the orphaned switch for fuel pump #2.
>Why not integrate it with the engine primary and secondary switching?
>Note that if fuel pump #1 makes trouble, this diagram provides no way to
>isolate it, but rather one method to switch the bus that feeds it. With
>switch #2 I can turn it off/on at will which is fine as a backup, but I
>want that functionality for #1 also.
Wondering what you're referring to here. The Z-19 as published
was for a specific engine and fuel system that offered only
1 ECU and 1 fuel pump. See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Adobe_Architecture_Pdfs/Z19M_1.pdf
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Adobe_Architecture_Pdfs/Z19M_2.pdf
What's the "orphaned switch"?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jon Hussey" <jandlhussey(at)sbcglobal.net> |
Greetings,
I'm new at this please be gentle. Other than a new switch (Off-Master on- Master
on, Alternator on) have there been any corrections/changes to Figure Z-8.
I can't seem to find the drawing on line. Can anybody provide a link?
Thank you in advance.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=139503#139503
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jeff Page <jpx(at)qenesis.com> |
| Subject: | Re: 14V verus 28V |
I appreciate everyone's opinions and the consensus is clear. I will
be building a 12V aircraft, without worrying that I had missed
something important.
Thanks !
Jeff Page
Dream Aircraft Tundra #10
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brett Ferrell <bferrell(at)123mail.net> |
| Subject: | Strange breaker issues |
Bob/all,
I have a strange issue with my newly flying homebuilt Velocity. My nav
light breaker keeps tripping, but only when the engine is running. If I
turn on the nav lights (red/green/two rear-facing whites of a Whelen
wingtip kit, supposed to pull 2A - it's not clear if that's a piece or
together, are on a 5A Klixon breaker), without the engine running they
will stay lighted for long periods of time without issue (easily over a
half hour during testing, even with the strobes and other loads on, or
without other loads). However, when I turn them on with the engine
running, the breaker trips within 5 minutes typically.
My first thought was to remove one load at a time to see if one of my
molex connectors had a partial short, or if they were just pulling too
much load together, so I started this test in the hangar and found it
wouldn't trip in the hangar.
Other, probably not relevant data:
1) all uses have dedicated direct ground wires due to composite construction
2) grounds are routed on a common ground bus on 1 ground that runs from
the engine at back to a forest of tabs at the rear firewall, and a set
of tabs on the canard, to the battery
3) set up as dual-alternator, single battery system
4) engine uses electronic ignition
5) the (rear-mounted) alternators use current limiters on the firewall,
not breakers in the panel
Brett
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rob Turk" <matronics(at)rtist.nl> |
| Subject: | Re: Strange breaker issues |
If these Whelen strobe/nav lights are like mine they draw close to 7A. Maybe
they draw 5A when running on 12V battery power, and it goes up a bit to 7A
when you start the engine and your ships power goes to 14V.
Rob
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brett Ferrell" <bferrell(at)123mail.net>
Sent: Friday, October 12, 2007 1:46 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Strange breaker issues
>
>
> Bob/all,
>
> I have a strange issue with my newly flying homebuilt Velocity. My nav
> light breaker keeps tripping, but only when the engine is running. If I
> turn on the nav lights (red/green/two rear-facing whites of a Whelen
> wingtip kit, supposed to pull 2A - it's not clear if that's a piece or
> together, are on a 5A Klixon breaker), without the engine running they
> will stay lighted for long periods of time without issue (easily over a
> half hour during testing, even with the strobes and other loads on, or
> without other loads). However, when I turn them on with the engine
> running, the breaker trips within 5 minutes typically.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Brett Ferrell <bferrell(at)123mail.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Strange breaker issues |
I've got the stobes switched and 'breakered' separately with a 7A Klixon. The
wingtip position/nav (A600 PG/PR) lights, which are clearly shown as 4 amps at
14V on page 24 of thier documentation, but here I see the wattage (26 and 24,
respectively) for the first time, and so it does appear that is the "total
power consumption" for one Lamp Assembly (forward and aft) but not the pair....
Oops.
http://www.whelen.com/pb/Aviation/Anti-Collision_Light_Systems_Installation_and_Service_Manual.pdf
Brett
Quoting Rob Turk :
>
> If these Whelen strobe/nav lights are like mine they draw close to 7A. Maybe
> they draw 5A when running on 12V battery power, and it goes up a bit to 7A
> when you start the engine and your ships power goes to 14V.
>
> Rob
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Brett Ferrell" <bferrell(at)123mail.net>
> To:
> Sent: Friday, October 12, 2007 1:46 PM
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Strange breaker issues
>
>
> >
> >
> > Bob/all,
> >
> > I have a strange issue with my newly flying homebuilt Velocity. My nav
> > light breaker keeps tripping, but only when the engine is running. If I
> > turn on the nav lights (red/green/two rear-facing whites of a Whelen
> > wingtip kit, supposed to pull 2A - it's not clear if that's a piece or
> > together, are on a 5A Klixon breaker), without the engine running they
> > will stay lighted for long periods of time without issue (easily over a
> > half hour during testing, even with the strobes and other loads on, or
> > without other loads). However, when I turn them on with the engine
> > running, the breaker trips within 5 minutes typically.
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Strange breaker issues |
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
2A sounds low for nav lights. Is this a 12/14V system, or 24/28V? Are
these LED lights or conventional incandescent bulbs? If conventional
bulbs, I think you can count on at least 5A for the system. When the
engine is running the bus voltage comes up, and since lights aren't
constant power devices, they will draw more current - popping the breaker.
At least that's my theory...
Regards,
Matt-
>
>
> Bob/all,
>
> I have a strange issue with my newly flying homebuilt Velocity. My nav
> light breaker keeps tripping, but only when the engine is running. If I
> turn on the nav lights (red/green/two rear-facing whites of a Whelen
> wingtip kit, supposed to pull 2A - it's not clear if that's a piece or
> together, are on a 5A Klixon breaker), without the engine running they
> will stay lighted for long periods of time without issue (easily over a
> half hour during testing, even with the strobes and other loads on, or
> without other loads). However, when I turn them on with the engine
> running, the breaker trips within 5 minutes typically.
>
> My first thought was to remove one load at a time to see if one of my
> molex connectors had a partial short, or if they were just pulling too
> much load together, so I started this test in the hangar and found it
> wouldn't trip in the hangar.
>
> Other, probably not relevant data:
> 1) all uses have dedicated direct ground wires due to composite
> construction
> 2) grounds are routed on a common ground bus on 1 ground that runs from
> the engine at back to a forest of tabs at the rear firewall, and a set
> of tabs on the canard, to the battery
> 3) set up as dual-alternator, single battery system
> 4) engine uses electronic ignition
> 5) the (rear-mounted) alternators use current limiters on the firewall,
> not breakers in the panel
>
> Brett
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Strange breaker issues |
>
>Bob/all,
>
>I have a strange issue with my newly flying homebuilt Velocity. My nav
>light breaker keeps tripping, but only when the engine is running. If I
>turn on the nav lights (red/green/two rear-facing whites of a Whelen
>wingtip kit, supposed to pull 2A - it's not clear if that's a piece or
>together, are on a 5A Klixon breaker), without the engine running they
>will stay lighted for long periods of time without issue (easily over a
>half hour during testing, even with the strobes and other loads on, or
>without other loads). However, when I turn them on with the engine
>running, the breaker trips within 5 minutes typically.
>
>My first thought was to remove one load at a time to see if one of my
>molex connectors had a partial short, or if they were just pulling too
>much load together, so I started this test in the hangar and found it
>wouldn't trip in the hangar.
>
>Other, probably not relevant data:
>1) all uses have dedicated direct ground wires due to composite construction
>2) grounds are routed on a common ground bus on 1 ground that runs from
>the engine at back to a forest of tabs at the rear firewall, and a set of
>tabs on the canard, to the battery
>3) set up as dual-alternator, single battery system
>4) engine uses electronic ignition
>5) the (rear-mounted) alternators use current limiters on the firewall,
>not breakers in the panel
Nav lamps are typically 2A PER BULB. Your total
draw on this system could be as much as 8A with
the alternator on line. Get your meter out and
measure it.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------
( "Problems are the price of progress. )
( Don't bring me anything but trouble. )
( Good news weakens me." )
( -Charles F. Kettering- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
>
>
>Greetings,
> I'm new at this please be gentle. Other than a new switch (Off-Master
> on- Master on, Alternator on) have there been any corrections/changes to
> Figure Z-8. I can't seem to find the drawing on line. Can anybody provide
> a link?
> Thank you in advance.
Figures Z-1 through Z-10 were replaced with a new
series Z-11 and up which are published at:
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/Rev11/AppZ_R11K.pdf
Sounds like you're working with a copy of the 'Connection
that is quite old.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------
( "Problems are the price of progress. )
( Don't bring me anything but trouble. )
( Good news weakens me." )
( -Charles F. Kettering- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | RE: Z-19 and considerations of SYSTEM reliability |
>
>By the way, Bob, both Z19 and Z19RB (rear battery) have 2 fuel pumps
>depicted (the Eggenfellner Subs. have 2 pumps).
>While Z19 only has a switch to control Pump #2, I don't see any problem with
>adding a pressure fail-over switch to automatically turn on #2 in the event
>#1 quits pumping.
Oh yeah, THAT #2 pump switch. Having a sr. moment here.
"Automatic" features are not necessarily "problems",
but they add to parts count which drives up probability
of a SYSTEM failure. For example:
I did what I believe was the first speed controlled
pitch trim system on the Lear 55 and ultimately the
30 series fleet about 1980. The speed control board
was pretty simple and fit on about 3 x 3" of copper-clad.
Then the systems guys began to worry about failures
of the speed control system and levied some requirements
for monitoring and warning. Over the past 25 years,
the preponderance of failures have been in the warning
system . . . and the failures in the speed control system
that produced a too-fast motor were less than 1% of all
failures. The monitor board was about twice the parts
count and accounts for most of the cost-of-ownership
for the system. It catches only 1% of all failures which
turned out to be so benign that the monitor board wasn't
really necessary after all.
My cautionary comments go to the fact that the more
complex your airplane becomes as a complete flight system,
the more it costs you to maintain it and the more likely
it is to present an in-flight conundrum to be pondered
and reacted to. A part that is not present is not going
to be the part that generates an in-flight distraction
or and on-the-ground maintenance event.
Your task as a system integrator is deducing
the return on investment for adding ANY components
to your system. What is the value of that device in
reducing the probability of breaking a sweat while
airborne? My second car was a '57 Chevy BelAir with
all the goodies on it. My third car was a '59 Chevy
six-cylinder, stick shift with no goodies. Subsequent
cars were similarly lacking in fluff. I learned very
quickly that my best return on investment was the simplest
combination of hardware that provided comfortable,
reliable, lowest cost, easiest to maintain transport
from point A to point B.
Our low-wing, TC aircraft have been fitted with
boost pumps since day one. 95+ percent of all engine
falters in flight have to do with fuel issues.
We were taught to hit the pump switch first. Perception,
interpretation and reaction took perhaps two seconds.
. . . and the pump is already ON for takeoff and
landing. So, what is the return on investment of
adding an automatic "failover" device in those aircraft?
Now, if these engines tend to quit and be hard to
get restarted then perhaps some form of automatic,
fast reaction system is called for. But if it just
falters, windmills and recovers immediately upon
return of fuel flow, then perhaps the automatic
system is less than elegant. THAT decision is
entirely yours . . . I'm only suggesting that
you ponder the decision with good data and a goal
of arriving at the elegant solution.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | paul wilson <pwmac(at)sisna.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Strange breaker issues |
I measured a pair cold and it is close to 7A measured at the bulb end
ignoring the wiring. Suggest you use a 10a CB and be sure the wire
can deal with the amps.
Paul
===========
At 06:40 AM 10/12/2007, you wrote:
>
>I've got the stobes switched and 'breakered' separately with a 7A Klixon. The
>wingtip position/nav (A600 PG/PR) lights, which are clearly shown as 4 amps at
>14V on page 24 of thier documentation, but here I see the wattage (26 and 24,
>respectively) for the first time, and so it does appear that is the "total
>power consumption" for one Lamp Assembly (forward and aft) but not
>the pair....
> Oops.
>
>http://www.whelen.com/pb/Aviation/Anti-Collision_Light_Systems_Installation_and_Service_Manual.pdf
>
>Brett
>
>Quoting Rob Turk :
>
> >
> > If these Whelen strobe/nav lights are like mine they draw close
> to 7A. Maybe
> > they draw 5A when running on 12V battery power, and it goes up a bit to 7A
> > when you start the engine and your ships power goes to 14V.
> >
> > Rob
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Brett Ferrell" <bferrell(at)123mail.net>
> > To:
> > Sent: Friday, October 12, 2007 1:46 PM
> > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Strange breaker issues
> >
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Bob/all,
> > >
> > > I have a strange issue with my newly flying homebuilt Velocity. My nav
> > > light breaker keeps tripping, but only when the engine is running. If I
> > > turn on the nav lights (red/green/two rear-facing whites of a Whelen
> > > wingtip kit, supposed to pull 2A - it's not clear if that's a piece or
> > > together, are on a 5A Klixon breaker), without the engine running they
> > > will stay lighted for long periods of time without issue (easily over a
> > > half hour during testing, even with the strobes and other loads on, or
> > > without other loads). However, when I turn them on with the engine
> > > running, the breaker trips within 5 minutes typically.
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CardinalNSB(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | making fuseable links |
Please critique this idea for making fuseable link for #20 wire (ammeter
shunt, for instance)
Instead of soldering in a piece #24 wire at the end, what if I just stripped
a 2 inch "gap" and then carefully chisled out, perhaps half or so of the
strands.
Is there a milspec of 20 gauge wire that uses the same strands as #24, so as
to maintain the flexability of the smaller wire gauge wire "link".
Am I correct that the reason for splicing the link into both ends of the
protected wire is for physical strength, as opposed to crimping the link portion
to the appliance with only connection to be made to the protected wire?
Question, in the drawings the insulating sleeve is looking "loose" over the
fuseable link, is this a necessary design element, or would a tight fitting
fireproof sleeve work as well?
Thanks, Skip
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CardinalNSB(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | el cheapo battery tester |
I coldn't resist the $16 battery tester on sale at Harbor Freight, for 12
volt batteries, it says for CCA up to 1000 amps and is rated at 100 amps.
Will this cause harm to "regular car batteries, flooded wet cells", and to
Odyssey type sla batteries?
The security shop next door throws out batteries all the time, out of about
20 I got out of the trash over the years 2 have held voltage overnight, but I
have never relied on them for anything.
What is the best way to use this product to test both types of batteries, or
should I go get my money back?
Thanks, Skip
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "SkipperClyde" <Bluebird(at)townsqr.com> |
Bob
I have appendix Z dated 04/05. I was working from Figure Z-11 Generic light Aircraft
Electrical System, which looks to be exactly what I need.
Looking through the revision 07/06 I don't find a similar Figure Z-11 but Z13/8
comes close.
Are there problems with the original Z-11 or should I look to find something out
of the new revision to model my system after.
thanks
phil
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=139573#139573
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: making fuseable links |
>Please critique this idea for making fuseable link for #20 wire (ammeter
>shunt, for instance)
>
>Instead of soldering in a piece #24 wire at the end, what if I just
>stripped a 2 inch "gap" and then carefully chisled out, perhaps half or so
>of the strands.
>
>Is there a milspec of 20 gauge wire that uses the same strands as #24, so
>as to maintain the flexability of the smaller wire gauge wire "link".
>
>Am I correct that the reason for splicing the link into both ends of the
>protected wire is for physical strength, as opposed to crimping the link
>portion to the appliance with only connection to be made to the protected wire?
>
>Question, in the drawings the insulating sleeve is looking "loose" over
>the fuseable link, is this a necessary design element, or would a tight
>fitting fireproof sleeve work as well?
>
>Thanks, Skip
Do some experiments and find out. What you propose
seems feasible . . . the processes and materials
depicted have been bench and field tested. If you
have your own recipe for success to explore and
offer to the community, we'd be pleased to know
it. We can hypothesize a lot of variations on the
theme but the proof of the pudding is in the
tasting.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
>
>Bob
>
>I have appendix Z dated 04/05. I was working from Figure Z-11 Generic
>light Aircraft Electrical System, which looks to be exactly what I need.
>
>Looking through the revision 07/06 I don't find a similar Figure Z-11 but
>Z13/8 comes close.
>
>Are there problems with the original Z-11 or should I look to find
>something out of the new revision to model my system after.
I'm lost now. We started off with a discussion about Z-8, I take
it that's a typo and perhaps Z-13/8 was the real reference.
Z-11 is essentially unchanged with respect to architecture.
The modifications were to clarify part numbers and perhaps
make some substitutions. I think it used to have the B&C LR3
regulator and now shows a generic Ford product.
Keep in mind that these are ARCHITECTURE drawings. Various
features and component selections are sort of mix-n-match
between the drawings and should be accomplished as your
personal needs and situation dictates. If it were my airplane,
Z-13/8 would be the architecture of choice.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Allen Fulmer" <afulmer(at)charter.net> |
| Subject: | RE: Z-19 and considerations of SYSTEM reliability |
Thanks Bob,
I can't seem to find the email but I think Eggenfellner has decided that a
simple switch on Pump#2 is fine. They were having too much trouble with the
pressure switch for automatic fail-over.
As a computer geek I find it so hard to resist "automatic techno gadgets"!
Thanks for the detailed exhortation.
Allen Fulmer
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Robert
L. Nuckolls, III
Sent: Friday, October 12, 2007 9:54 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: RE: Z-19 and considerations of SYSTEM
reliability
>
>By the way, Bob, both Z19 and Z19RB (rear battery) have 2 fuel pumps
>depicted (the Eggenfellner Subs. have 2 pumps).
>While Z19 only has a switch to control Pump #2, I don't see any problem
with
>adding a pressure fail-over switch to automatically turn on #2 in the event
>#1 quits pumping.
Oh yeah, THAT #2 pump switch. Having a sr. moment here.
"Automatic" features are not necessarily "problems",
but they add to parts count which drives up probability
of a SYSTEM failure. For example:
I did what I believe was the first speed controlled
pitch trim system on the Lear 55 and ultimately the
30 series fleet about 1980. The speed control board
was pretty simple and fit on about 3 x 3" of copper-clad.
Then the systems guys began to worry about failures
of the speed control system and levied some requirements
for monitoring and warning. Over the past 25 years,
the preponderance of failures have been in the warning
system . . . and the failures in the speed control system
that produced a too-fast motor were less than 1% of all
failures. The monitor board was about twice the parts
count and accounts for most of the cost-of-ownership
for the system. It catches only 1% of all failures which
turned out to be so benign that the monitor board wasn't
really necessary after all.
My cautionary comments go to the fact that the more
complex your airplane becomes as a complete flight system,
the more it costs you to maintain it and the more likely
it is to present an in-flight conundrum to be pondered
and reacted to. A part that is not present is not going
to be the part that generates an in-flight distraction
or and on-the-ground maintenance event.
Your task as a system integrator is deducing
the return on investment for adding ANY components
to your system. What is the value of that device in
reducing the probability of breaking a sweat while
airborne? My second car was a '57 Chevy BelAir with
all the goodies on it. My third car was a '59 Chevy
six-cylinder, stick shift with no goodies. Subsequent
cars were similarly lacking in fluff. I learned very
quickly that my best return on investment was the simplest
combination of hardware that provided comfortable,
reliable, lowest cost, easiest to maintain transport
from point A to point B.
Our low-wing, TC aircraft have been fitted with
boost pumps since day one. 95+ percent of all engine
falters in flight have to do with fuel issues.
We were taught to hit the pump switch first. Perception,
interpretation and reaction took perhaps two seconds.
. . . and the pump is already ON for takeoff and
landing. So, what is the return on investment of
adding an automatic "failover" device in those aircraft?
Now, if these engines tend to quit and be hard to
get restarted then perhaps some form of automatic,
fast reaction system is called for. But if it just
falters, windmills and recovers immediately upon
return of fuel flow, then perhaps the automatic
system is less than elegant. THAT decision is
entirely yours . . . I'm only suggesting that
you ponder the decision with good data and a goal
of arriving at the elegant solution.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: el cheapo battery tester |
>I coldn't resist the $16 battery tester on sale at Harbor Freight, for 12
>volt batteries, it says for CCA up to 1000 amps and is rated at 100 amps.
>
>Will this cause harm to "regular car batteries, flooded wet cells", and
>to Odyssey type sla batteries?
>
>The security shop next door throws out batteries all the time, out of
>about 20 I got out of the trash over the years 2 have held voltage
>overnight, but I have never relied on them for anything.
>
>What is the best way to use this product to test both types of batteries,
>or should I go get my money back?
>
>Thanks, Skip
The tester you have has some utility. In spite of the
claims as to what it's capable of doing, the simplest
description of functionality says it will put a signifiant
load (50+ amps) on a battery to demonstrate it's ability
to carry a load. I suspect it's similar to this device:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Tools/Battery_Testers/HF_Resistor_Load.jpg
While more portable and convenient than hooking the
battery to your car and measuring terminal voltage while
cranking, the fixed resistor tester is a simple, gross
look at a battery's performance but not very quantitative.
The next step up is a tester like this:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Tools/Battery_Testers/HF_Carbon_Pile_Load.jpg
Here the goal is to put as much load on the battery as it
will tolerate while holding terminal voltage at the bottom
of the green arc appropriate to the battery's temperature.
There's a timer and buzzer in the tester that starts
when you crank up the current.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Tools/Battery_Testers/HF91129_2.jpg
When the buzzer goes off at 15 seconds, read the current
that the battery will support at the voltage appropriate
to the temperature. This is a MEASURE of that battery's
ability to crank an engine.
CAPACITY is another matter entirely. To make this determination,
you need to deplete and measure the energy the battery will
deliver at a load current of interest (like your e-bus loads).
This takes a device like:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Tools/Battery_Testers/CBA2_1.jpg
To make a learned decision as to the suitability of
any battery to do a task, you should consider both
short term high current, low-energy loads and long
term, low current, high-energy loads.
The tester you have is a good value but it's limited.
It does not tell you everything you'd really like to know
about any given battery.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------
( "Problems are the price of progress. )
( Don't bring me anything but trouble. )
( Good news weakens me." )
( -Charles F. Kettering- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Yaesu VXA-100 external PTT |
| From: | Bob Bittner <rbittner(at)us.ibm.com> |
Hi.
I have a Yaesu VXA-100 and the Yaesu external headset adapter cable. The
standard PTT switch (which works fine with other radios & intercoms) does
not work on this handheld/cable combination. It does not trigger tx.
Is anyone out there using a Yaesu handheld radio with an external PTT?
Do you have a wiring diagram that shows how to hook in an external PTT?
Thanks.
---------------------------------------------- >+
Bob Bittner
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | RE: Z-19 and considerations of SYSTEM reliability |
Et al,
Thanks for all the input. I will go the 2 switch route and decide
whether it is more elegant to hang them off each bus as shown by #2 in
the diag, or incorporate them behind the diodes for primary and
secondary power. Either option should provide the same level of
redundancy. I am very excited to lay this out for real.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Allen
Fulmer
Sent: Friday, October 12, 2007 11:21 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: RE: Z-19 and considerations of SYSTEM
reliability
-->
Thanks Bob,
I can't seem to find the email but I think Eggenfellner has decided that
a simple switch on Pump#2 is fine. They were having too much trouble
with the pressure switch for automatic fail-over.
As a computer geek I find it so hard to resist "automatic techno
gadgets"! Thanks for the detailed exhortation.
Allen Fulmer
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Robert
L. Nuckolls, III
Sent: Friday, October 12, 2007 9:54 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: RE: Z-19 and considerations of SYSTEM
reliability
>
>By the way, Bob, both Z19 and Z19RB (rear battery) have 2 fuel pumps
>depicted (the Eggenfellner Subs. have 2 pumps).
>While Z19 only has a switch to control Pump #2, I don't see any problem
with
>adding a pressure fail-over switch to automatically turn on #2 in the
>event #1 quits pumping.
Oh yeah, THAT #2 pump switch. Having a sr. moment here.
"Automatic" features are not necessarily "problems",
but they add to parts count which drives up probability
of a SYSTEM failure. For example:
I did what I believe was the first speed controlled
pitch trim system on the Lear 55 and ultimately the
30 series fleet about 1980. The speed control board
was pretty simple and fit on about 3 x 3" of copper-clad.
Then the systems guys began to worry about failures
of the speed control system and levied some requirements
for monitoring and warning. Over the past 25 years,
the preponderance of failures have been in the warning
system . . . and the failures in the speed control system
that produced a too-fast motor were less than 1% of all
failures. The monitor board was about twice the parts
count and accounts for most of the cost-of-ownership
for the system. It catches only 1% of all failures which
turned out to be so benign that the monitor board wasn't
really necessary after all.
My cautionary comments go to the fact that the more
complex your airplane becomes as a complete flight system,
the more it costs you to maintain it and the more likely
it is to present an in-flight conundrum to be pondered
and reacted to. A part that is not present is not going
to be the part that generates an in-flight distraction
or and on-the-ground maintenance event.
Your task as a system integrator is deducing
the return on investment for adding ANY components
to your system. What is the value of that device in
reducing the probability of breaking a sweat while
airborne? My second car was a '57 Chevy BelAir with
all the goodies on it. My third car was a '59 Chevy
six-cylinder, stick shift with no goodies. Subsequent
cars were similarly lacking in fluff. I learned very
quickly that my best return on investment was the simplest
combination of hardware that provided comfortable,
reliable, lowest cost, easiest to maintain transport
from point A to point B.
Our low-wing, TC aircraft have been fitted with
boost pumps since day one. 95+ percent of all engine
falters in flight have to do with fuel issues.
We were taught to hit the pump switch first. Perception,
interpretation and reaction took perhaps two seconds.
. . . and the pump is already ON for takeoff and
landing. So, what is the return on investment of
adding an automatic "failover" device in those aircraft?
Now, if these engines tend to quit and be hard to
get restarted then perhaps some form of automatic,
fast reaction system is called for. But if it just
falters, windmills and recovers immediately upon
return of fuel flow, then perhaps the automatic
system is less than elegant. THAT decision is
entirely yours . . . I'm only suggesting that
you ponder the decision with good data and a goal
of arriving at the elegant solution.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | making fuseable links |
Why not just find and use a 20 AWG fuse link? Are we worried about
corrosion or some kind of electron acceleration over a 6" fuse link? For
that matter to make it really elegant, have a custom 20 AWG fuse link
made (or make it yourself) that is seamless between the shunt and the
load meter. Two less connections to worry about.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Robert L. Nuckolls, III
Sent: Friday, October 12, 2007 12:01 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: making fuseable links
-->
>Please critique this idea for making fuseable link for #20 wire
>(ammeter
>shunt, for instance)
>
>Instead of soldering in a piece #24 wire at the end, what if I just
>stripped a 2 inch "gap" and then carefully chisled out, perhaps half or
so
>of the strands.
>
>Is there a milspec of 20 gauge wire that uses the same strands as #24,
>so
>as to maintain the flexability of the smaller wire gauge wire "link".
>
>Am I correct that the reason for splicing the link into both ends of
>the
>protected wire is for physical strength, as opposed to crimping the
link
>portion to the appliance with only connection to be made to the
protected wire?
>
>Question, in the drawings the insulating sleeve is looking "loose" over
>the fuseable link, is this a necessary design element, or would a tight
>fitting fireproof sleeve work as well?
>
>Thanks, Skip
Do some experiments and find out. What you propose
seems feasible . . . the processes and materials
depicted have been bench and field tested. If you
have your own recipe for success to explore and
offer to the community, we'd be pleased to know
it. We can hypothesize a lot of variations on the
theme but the proof of the pudding is in the
tasting.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | A look at the future - Perhaps a wiring system that |
could fit into the palm of your hand
Or at least a new material for making diodes and chip material. How
about an EFIS as thin as a wafer?
Nanowire
http://news.rpi.edu/update.do?artcenterkey=1883
Nanotube sandwich your next carbon fibre aircraft. This is a very kool
concept as nanotube weaving could cut the weight of your already light
carbon aircraft and allow you to keep the strength and power.
http://news.rpi.edu/update.do?artcenterkey=1545
Rennselaer Nano Home
http://www.rpi.edu/research/nanotechnology/index.html
NANOTUBES DETECT, REPAIR WING DAMAGE
Adding even a small amount of carbon "nanotubes" can go a long way
toward enhancing the strength, integrity, and safety of composite
structures, according to a new study at Rensselaer Polytechnic
Institute, New York. Researchers there have developed a simple new
technique for identifying and repairing small, potentially dangerous
cracks in high-performance aircraft wings and many other composite
structures. By infusing the polymer with electrically conductive carbon
nanotubes and monitoring the electrical resistance at different points
in the structure, Professor Nikhil Koratkar, who developed the method,
can pinpoint the location and length of even the tiniest stress-induced
crack.
Once a crack is located, Koratkar can then send a short electrical
charge to the area in order to heat up the carbon nanotubes and in turn
melt an embedded healing agent that will flow into and seal the crack.
"What's novel about this application is that we're using carbon
nanotubes not just to detect the crack, but also to heal the crack,"
Koratkar said. "We use the nanotubes to create localized heat, which
melts the healing agent, and that's what cures the crack." To learn
more, visit www.rpi.edu <http://www.rpi.edu/> .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net> |
| Subject: | Re: making fuseable links |
I would suspect that such a "fuse link" would allow the wire immediately
downstream of it to get hotter than the wire farther from the link.
Basically we would be expecting some current to pass from the continuous
strands to the broken strands and hope that the rest of the wire would
share current equally in all strands from that point. Any corrosion
would further degrade that and I would expect the continuous strands to
run hotter outside the link than we might like prior to the fuse link
open circuiting. I'd guess the risk is probably small but the wire
insulation is not equivalent to the glass spaghetti that I have around
my fuse link segments and I can't imagine any commercial product
utilizing such a method. If I wanted to use this method I would still
solder the point that transitions to all strands.
FWIW I found it easy to solder in fuse links and immobilize the solder
joint with a few layers of heat shrink or silicone tape.
Ken
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
>
>
>> Please critique this idea for making fuseable link for #20 wire
>> (ammeter shunt, for instance)
>>
>> Instead of soldering in a piece #24 wire at the end, what if I just
>> stripped a 2 inch "gap" and then carefully chisled out, perhaps half
>> or so of the strands.
>>
>> Is there a milspec of 20 gauge wire that uses the same strands as
>> #24, so as to maintain the flexability of the smaller wire gauge wire
>> "link".
>>
>> Am I correct that the reason for splicing the link into both ends of
>> the protected wire is for physical strength, as opposed to crimping
>> the link portion to the appliance with only connection to be made to
>> the protected wire?
>>
>> Question, in the drawings the insulating sleeve is looking "loose"
>> over the fuseable link, is this a necessary design element, or would
>> a tight fitting fireproof sleeve work as well?
>>
>> Thanks, Skip
>
>
> Do some experiments and find out. What you propose
> seems feasible . . . the processes and materials
> depicted have been bench and field tested. If you
> have your own recipe for success to explore and
> offer to the community, we'd be pleased to know
> it. We can hypothesize a lot of variations on the
> theme but the proof of the pudding is in the
> tasting.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Neil Clayton <harvey4(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Ground loop risk? |
I'm feeding my strobes from the 12 volt buss behind the panel.
Is it necessary to run the ground for the strobes back to the panel
ground buss, or can I just run the ground to the battery terminal
since I'm in that vicinity?
I'm trying to save a wire going forward.
Will I risk a ground loop if I have more than one ground termination point?
Thanks
Neil
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <bakerocb(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | RE: Z-19 and considerations of SYSTEM reliability |
10/13/2007
Hello Bob, You wrote: " . . . and the pump is already ON for takeoff and
landing."
Just a reminder that in some aircraft the electrically driven fuel boost
pump is not turned on for takeoff or landing.
The problem in those aircraft is that with the engine driven fuel pump and
the electrically driven fuel boost pump both operating the engine can be
drowned in fuel and not operate properly or at all.
The function of the electrically driven fuel boost pump in those aircraft is
to prime the engine prior to starting the engine and to be turned on in
flight in case of failure of the engine driven fuel pump.
'OC' Says: "The best investment we can make is the effort to gather and
understand knowledge."
--------------------------------------
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: RE: Z-19 and considerations of SYSTEM
reliability
..... snip .............
Our low-wing, TC aircraft have been fitted with
boost pumps since day one. 95+ percent of all engine
falters in flight have to do with fuel issues.
We were taught to hit the pump switch first. Perception,
interpretation and reaction took perhaps two seconds.
. . . and the pump is already ON for takeoff and
landing. So, what is the return on investment of
adding an automatic "failover" device in those aircraft?
Now, if these engines tend to quit and be hard to
get restarted then perhaps some form of automatic,
fast reaction system is called for. But if it just
falters, windmills and recovers immediately upon
return of fuel flow, then perhaps the automatic
system is less than elegant. THAT decision is
entirely yours . . . I'm only suggesting that
you ponder the decision with good data and a goal
of arriving at the elegant solution.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Ground loop risk? |
>
>I'm feeding my strobes from the 12 volt buss behind the panel.
>Is it necessary to run the ground for the strobes back to the panel ground
>buss, or can I just run the ground to the battery terminal since I'm in
>that vicinity?
>I'm trying to save a wire going forward.
>Will I risk a ground loop if I have more than one ground termination point?
What kind of airplane? If a metal airplane it is
perfectly useful to use local grounds for
landing lights
taxi lights
nav lights
pitot heaters
strobe power supplies
landing gear hydraulic pumps
etc.
These are ALL potential antagonists
for loading alternator noise onto the
airframe. But taking potential victims
to the single point grounds on firewall
and/or instrument panel as suggested
in Figure Z-15 of:
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/Rev11/AppZ_R11K.pdf
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: Z-19 and considerations of SYSTEM reliability |
>
>10/13/2007
>
>Hello Bob, You wrote: " . . . and the pump is already ON for takeoff and
>landing."
>
>Just a reminder that in some aircraft the electrically driven fuel boost
>pump is not turned on for takeoff or landing.
>
>The problem in those aircraft is that with the engine driven fuel pump and
>the electrically driven fuel boost pump both operating the engine can be
>drowned in fuel and not operate properly or at all.
>
>The function of the electrically driven fuel boost pump in those aircraft
>is to prime the engine prior to starting the engine and to be turned on in
>flight in case of failure of the engine driven fuel pump.
Sure . . . which re-enforces the notion that NOTHING
written anywhere by anyone that is not specific to
a study of demonstrated test data about a particular
design is to be taken as gospel. Every new recipe
for success combines simple ideas for the purpose
of meeting a design goal. It's up to the writer
of specific instructions to explain the rationale
for that particular combination of parts and recommend
a modus operandi for that system.
This is what the 40-hour fly-off is all about.
But many builders have put their own flavors onto
another builder's recipe. Too many modified recipes
have been turned loose on open skies and grinning pilots
with undiscovered potential for problems. Its fortunate
that reliance on electrical systems issues is Waaaaayyy
down the list of things that routinely bend airplanes
and kill folks. Fiddling with these recipes generally
don't generate much physical risk, only surprise and
cost of ownership. But we're talking about powerplants
here so the details are worthy of extra attention.
Now, may I take you to task my friend for, "The function
of an electrically driven fuel boost . . .". The POH
for many of the aircraft I fly instructs a pilot to turn
the boost pump on for take-offs and landings.
Bottom line is that there should be GOOD reasons
for doing or not doing a lot of things on our
airplanes . . . but the final word needs to
come from designers and testers that have, "Been
there. Done that." All other assertions are worthy
of measured skepticism and further study.
>'OC' Says: "The best investment we can make is the effort to gather and
>understand knowledge."
HEAR, Hear!
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | RE: Z-19 and considerations of SYSTEM reliability |
>
>Thanks Bob,
>
>I can't seem to find the email but I think Eggenfellner has decided that a
>simple switch on Pump#2 is fine. They were having too much trouble with the
>pressure switch for automatic fail-over.
>
>As a computer geek I find it so hard to resist "automatic techno gadgets"!
>Thanks for the detailed exhortation.
Yup, a lot of what's being done in new systems
design is driven more by what we're capable of
doing as opposed to crafting the minimum parts
count, highest reliability, lowest cost (i.e.
elegant) solution.
The drive to add whippy new features is oft offered
by folks who have little or poor connection to
end users. We see this in the Heavy Iron Aviation
all the time. In addition to bureaucratic
pressures to do or not do things, decisions
about what's attractive to the end user (owners
and pilots) tend not to be made with the elegant
solution as a design goal.
Walter, Dwayne, Ed, Arthur, Bill, Al and Lloyd
would be sad to observe the remnants of their
legacies.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Engine sensor ground |
| From: | "vicster_26" <vicster(at)netvigator.com> |
Hello,
I understand that in a single point ground system, those sensors that are connected
to the engine case should have their ground returned from the instrument
to the engine side of the firewall ground. A question here, with some of these
new electronic engine analyzers where you have multiple sensors connecting to
one instrument via a D-sub connector, how do you resolve the issue of returning
the relevant ground back to engine side when the ground is grounded internally
in the instrument. In my case, most of the sensors are isolated from the
engine except for the Oil Temp which is obviously threaded directly to the engine
case.
I have a factory built airplane with very basic instrumentation and avionics, in
fact it had just one old chunky radio and the avionics master switch is simply
a 5amp switch type circuit breaker. Now that I am installing a few more avionics,
is there any problems with connecting all of them to this one circuit breaker
or perhaps running a bus from this switch/circuit breaker to separate circuit
breakers for each avionics?
Thanks in advance
Vic
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=139789#139789
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
>Bob,
>
>I have decided on a ULPower 260i engine for my Europa. It has one ECU and
>one fuel pump. In my book there is a Z-19 drawing, but I can't find it on
>the disk I picked up at your seminar or on your latest download from your
>site. Do you suppose that you could email it to me? Thanks
>
>Vaughn Teegarden
>vaughnray(at)bvunet.net
All of the latest drawings are on the website's
Page-Per-System library at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/ACAD_Architecture_Dwgs/
for the AutoCAD .dwg format and . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Adobe_Architecture_Pdfs/
for the .pdf versions.
Your heads-up on the CD download is appreciated.
I forgot to update it. I've loaded Ver 11.1 up at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/CD
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded |
I've just uploaded the latest copy of the 'Connection's
data CD. Version 11.1 zip file may be accessed at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/CD/AEC_11p1.zip
This is about a 400M file. It can take awhile on even
some "high speed" systems.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------
( "Problems are the price of progress. )
( Don't bring me anything but trouble. )
( Good news weakens me." )
( -Charles F. Kettering- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | luckymacy(at)comcast.net (lucky) |
| Subject: | Re: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded |
Speaking of slow, anyone care to share what their average transfer rate/total time
was?
I have this "upgraded" comcast high speed service (was upgraded last week) and
if anything things seem slower. I was averaging 12.0KB to 16.0KB per second throughout
the day. Estimated times remaining were bouncing back and forth between
8.5 to 7.2 hours for the first hour or two. An hour later and I've barely
transferred over 10% of the toal 393 MB.
Pretty lame for a local comcast system that claimes 8MB per second on downloads.
So I'm wondering how much of a bottleneck Bob's host website was vs. local
comcast by comparing what others might be seeing.
Looking forward to do some number comparisons.
thx,
luck
-------------- Original message --------------
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net>
>
>
> I've just uploaded the latest copy of the 'Connection's
> data CD. Version 11.1 zip file may be accessed at:
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/CD/AEC_11p1.zip
>
> This is about a 400M file. It can take awhile on even
> some "high speed" systems.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
> ----------------------------------------
> ( "Problems are the price of progress. )
> ( Don't bring me anything but trouble. )
> ( Good news weakens me." )
> ( -Charles F. Kettering- )
> ----------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
Speaking of slow, anyone care to share what their average transfer rate/total
time was?
I have this "upgraded" comcast high speed service (was upgraded last week)
and if anything things seem slower. I was averaging 12.0KB to 16.0KB per
second throughout the day. Estimated times remaining were bouncing back
and forth between 8.5 to 7.2 hours for the first hour or two. An
hour later and I've barely transferred over 10% of the toal 393 MB.
Pretty lame for a local comcast system that claimes 8MB per second on downloads.
So I'm wondering how much of a bottleneck Bob's host website was
vs. local comcast by comparing what others might be seeing.
Looking forward to do some number comparisons.
thx,
luck
=====
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Casey <glcasey(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Z-19 and considerations of SYSTEM reliability |
I missed the start of this thread so pardon me if my post misses the
mark. Regarding an automatic way to turn on the backup pump, as I
understand it either or both Columbia and Cirrus have this feature.
I put it in my Lancair, but it has a Lycoming engine in which fuel
pressure does not affect fuel flow - it doesn't matter whether it has
one or both pumps working. Some engines (Continental fuel injection
systems) are affected by inlet fuel pressure and there have been
problems with over-fueling these engines, according to what I have
read. Both Cirrus and Columbia use Continental engines, so that is
contradictory. My system consists of a pressure switch (normally
on), a latching relay and a warning light. The manual switch has
Off, Auto and On positions. I turn it to Auto to prime the engine,
after which I turn it Off and then back to Auto to verify there are
no fuel leaks (the pump should stay off with the mixture pulled and
the engine not running). Before takeoff I verify the pump is in the
Auto position. The problem is that I have the pressure switch set at
the minimum operating pressure of about 11 psi the pump will
occasionally turn on. Maybe I should set the switch at a pressure
significantly below operating pressure. If I run a tank dry the pump
will come on BEFORE the engine quits, although it doesn't prevent it
from surging for a few seconds until all the air is purged.
Botttom line - I think this feature is a good thing for engines that
aren't affected by having the backup pump come on even though the
primary pump is working well. In my mind, an "active" safety system
in an airplane that has the pilot in the loop is not a good thing.
Sometime unavoidable, but still not a good thing. I like the idea
that the backup pump will turn on instantly when needed without me
having to do it.
Gary Casey
>
> From: <bakerocb(at)cox.net>
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: RE: Z-19 and considerations of SYSTEM
> reliability
>
>
> 10/13/2007
>
> Hello Bob, You wrote: " . . . and the pump is already ON for
> takeoff and
> landing."
>
> Just a reminder that in some aircraft the electrically driven fuel
> boost
> pump is not turned on for takeoff or landing.
>
> The problem in those aircraft is that with the engine driven fuel
> pump and
> the electrically driven fuel boost pump both operating the engine
> can be
> drowned in fuel and not operate properly or at all.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Patrick ONeill" <poneill(at)irealms.com> |
| Subject: | Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded |
It took me about 4 hours to download (maybe more, I didn't watch the time
precisely.) Cox here claims 12Mbps download and usually delivers. I would
imagine there were a lot of downloads after Bob's announcement and the site
had significant traffic to accommodate. The lengthy download was likely not
due to your Internet connection but the server's.
And thanks very much Bob for taking the time to make all this information
available. I have never encountered a more useful collection of information
on any subject matter. It is truly great!
Best Regards,
Patrick Oneill
_____
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of lucky
Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2007 5:51 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded
Speaking of slow, anyone care to share what their average transfer
rate/total time was?
I have this "upgraded" comcast high speed service (was upgraded last week)
and if anything things seem slower. I was averaging 12.0KB to 16.0KB per
second throughout the day. Estimated times remaining were bouncing back and
forth between 8.5 to 7.2 hours for the first hour or two. An hour later and
I've barely transferred over 10% of the toal 393 MB.
Pretty lame for a local comcast system that claimes 8MB per second on
downloads. So I'm wondering how much of a bottleneck Bob's host website was
vs. local comcast by comparing what others might be seeing.
Looking forward to do some number comparisons.
thx,
luck
======
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Walter Fellows" <walter.fellows(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded |
I am getting about 8kb/sec on the fastest residential line available in
Seattle through the phone company on a direct line to the modem (no
wireless). I usually get 130-200 kb/sec from a free site for approximately
15 mb files.
On 10/14/07, lucky wrote:
>
> Speaking of slow, anyone care to share what their average transfer
> rate/total time was?
>
> I have this "upgraded" comcast high speed service (was upgraded last week)
> and if anything things seem slower. I was averaging 12.0KB to 16.0KB per
> second throughout the day. Estimated times remaining were bouncing back and
> forth between 8.5 to 7.2 hours for the first hour or two. An hour later
> and I've barely transferred over 10% of the toal 393 MB.
>
> Pretty lame for a local comcast system that claimes 8MB per second on
> downloads. So I'm wondering how much of a bottleneck Bob's host website was
> vs. local comcast by comparing what others might be seeing.
>
> Looking forward to do some number comparisons.
>
> thx,
> luck
>
> =====
>
> *
>
>
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rob Turk" <matronics(at)rtist.nl> |
| Subject: | Re: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded |
I'm seeing 9.4KB/s in Europe. Still 10+ hours to go according to
Internet Explorer. My first attempt aborted after 130MB. This type of
file is the perfect candidate for P2P sharing, maybe a thought for the
next release?
Rob
----- Original Message -----
From: lucky
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com ; aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2007 2:50 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded
Speaking of slow, anyone care to share what their average transfer
rate/total time was?
I have this "upgraded" comcast high speed service (was upgraded last
week) and if anything things seem slower. I was averaging 12.0KB to
16.0KB per second throughout the day. Estimated times remaining were
bouncing back and forth between 8.5 to 7.2 hours for the first hour or
two. An hour later and I've barely transferred over 10% of the toal 393
MB.
Pretty lame for a local comcast system that claimes 8MB per second on
downloads. So I'm wondering how much of a bottleneck Bob's host website
was vs. local comcast by comparing what others might be seeing.
Looking forward to do some number comparisons.
thx,
luck
======
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Emrath" <emrath(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Strange breaker issues |
Brett:
On page 18 of this document, it shows 2amps at 14V. That is just for the one
position light. On page 24 it says up ot 4amps TOTAL, which I would take to
include both the colored and the white position lights. So as Bob says,
using this model the Nav lights draw 4amps each side, two bulbs per side or
8amps total. Thus it depends upon which model position/strobe light you use
how the wire will be sized and fused. Hope this helps
Marty in Brentwood TN
RV-6A wiring (man there's a lot of wire).
I've got the stobes switched and 'breakered' separately with a 7A
Klixon. The
wingtip position/nav (A600 PG/PR) lights, which are clearly shown as 4
amps at
14V on page 24 of thier documentation, but here I see the wattage (26
and 24,
respectively) for the first time, and so it does appear that is the
"total
power consumption" for one Lamp Assembly (forward and aft) but not the
pair....
Oops.
http://www.whelen.com/pb/Aviation/Anti-Collision_Light_Systems_Installation_
and_Service_Manual.pdf
Brett
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gaye and Vaughn" <vaughnray(at)bvunet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded |
I tried the download after reading your email and was getting a 9 to 10
KB/sec download speed. I am assuming that there are a lot of Bob's
followers that are downloading now and slow speeds usually are the
result of a very heavily used website, so I will wait until the stampede
is over and try again next week. I also have Optinet with a usual
download speed of 4+ MB/sec.
Vaughn
----- Original Message -----
From: lucky
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com ; aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2007 8:50 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded
Speaking of slow, anyone care to share what their average transfer
rate/total time was?
I have this "upgraded" comcast high speed service (was upgraded last
week) and if anything things seem slower. I was averaging 12.0KB to
16.0KB per second throughout the day. Estimated times remaining were
bouncing back and forth between 8.5 to 7.2 hours for the first hour or
two. An hour later and I've barely transferred over 10% of the toal 393
MB.
Pretty lame for a local comcast system that claimes 8MB per second on
downloads. So I'm wondering how much of a bottleneck Bob's host website
was vs. local comcast by comparing what others might be seeing.
Looking forward to do some number comparisons.
thx,
luck
======
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | paul wilson <pwmac(at)sisna.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Z-19 and considerations of SYSTEM reliability |
Don't you guys with backup pumps use a pressure regulator like all
modern autos and trucks? If not, then why not?
These auto units usually have a return line for the excess fuel. Some
are controlled by vacuum to allow a slightly higher pressure when
vacuum is low.
Paul
===================
At 07:45 AM 10/14/2007, Gary Casey wrote:
>Some engines (Continental fuel injection
>systems) are affected by inlet fuel pressure and there have been
>problems with over-fueling these engines, according to what I have
>read.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Dudley <rhdudley1(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded |
Now, at 12:00 noon it is down to 9.3 KB/sec. at 90MB of 402MB.
My software is now projecting another 9+ hours at the present rate.
Initially the projection 3 hours ago was for a total of 7 hours.
It sounds like server load and/or internet traffic load.
Richard Dudley
Rob Turk wrote:
> I'm seeing 9.4KB/s in Europe. Still 10+ hours to go according to
> Internet Explorer. My first attempt aborted after 130MB. This type of
> file is the perfect candidate for P2P sharing, maybe a thought for the
> next release?
>
> Rob
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: lucky <mailto:luckymacy(at)comcast.net>
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> ;
> aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>
> Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2007 2:50 PM
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded
>
> Speaking of slow, anyone care to share what their average transfer
> rate/total time was?
>
> I have this "upgraded" comcast high speed service (was upgraded
> last week) and if anything things seem slower. I was averaging
> 12.0KB to 16.0KB per second throughout the day. Estimated times
> remaining were bouncing back and forth between 8.5 to 7.2 hours
> for the first hour or two. An hour later and I've barely
> transferred over 10% of the toal 393 MB.
>
> Pretty lame for a local comcast system that claimes 8MB per second
> on downloads. So I'm wondering how much of a bottleneck Bob's
> host website was vs. local comcast by comparing what others might
> be seeing.
>
> Looking forward to do some number comparisons.
>
> thx,
> luck
>
> =====
>
>
>href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
>href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Steve Thomas <lists(at)stevet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded |
Don't forget that there are a lot of factors that determine download
speeds, and your individual connection to the Internet is only one
factor. Server capability is one major factor as is the pipe that it
must pass through to wherever the stream is going. And, yes, the
pipe does slow down significantly throughout the day. One person
already mentioned that the server must deal with many requests right
after an announcement comes out. Waiting for a while should improve
things. But the server is probably the limiting factor.
Best Regards,
Steve
____________________________________________________________________
On Oct 14, 2007, at 5:50 AM, lucky wrote:
> Speaking of slow, anyone care to share what their average transfer
> rate/total time was?
>
> I have this "upgraded" comcast high speed service (was upgraded
> last week) and if anything things seem slower. I was averaging
> 12.0KB to 16.0KB per second throughout the day. Estimated times
> remaining were bouncing back and forth between 8.5 to 7.2 hours for
> the first hour or two. An hour later and I've barely transferred
> over 10% of the toal 393 MB.
>
> Pretty lame for a local comcast system that claimes 8MB per second
> on downloads. So I'm wondering how much of a bottleneck Bob's host
> website was vs. local comcast by comparing what others might be
> seeing.
>
> Looking forward to do some number comparisons.
>
> thx,
> luck
>
> =====
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bruce Gray" <Bruce(at)glasair.org> |
| Subject: | Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded |
Doesn't anyone have some spare space with a T1 connection that they can
upload a copy of the zip on and share the mirror site link with us?
Bruce
<http://www.Glasair.org> www.Glasair.org
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Steve
Thomas
Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2007 12:40 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded
Don't forget that there are a lot of factors that determine download
speeds,
and your individual connection to the Internet is only one factor.
Server
capability is one major factor as is the pipe that it must pass through
to
wherever the stream is going. And, yes, the pipe does slow down
significantly throughout the day. One person already mentioned that the
server must deal with many requests right after an announcement comes
out.
Waiting for a while should improve things. But the server is probably
the
limiting factor.
Best Regards,
Steve
____________________________________________________________________
On Oct 14, 2007, at 5:50 AM, lucky wrote:
Speaking of slow, anyone care to share what their average transfer
rate/total time was?
I have this "upgraded" comcast high speed service (was upgraded last
week)
and if anything things seem slower. I was averaging 12.0KB to 16.0KB
per
second throughout the day. Estimated times remaining were bouncing back
and
forth between 8.5 to 7.2 hours for the first hour or two. An hour later
and
I've barely transferred over 10% of the toal 393 MB.
Pretty lame for a local comcast system that claimes 8MB per second on
downloads. So I'm wondering how much of a bottleneck Bob's host website
was
vs. local comcast by comparing what others might be seeing.
Looking forward to do some number comparisons.
thx,
luck
======
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List">http://www.
matro
nics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded |
>Don't forget that there are a lot of factors that determine download
>speeds, and your individual connection to the Internet is only one
>factor. Server capability is one major factor as is the pipe that it must
>pass through to wherever the stream is going. And, yes, the pipe does
>slow down significantly throughout the day. One person already mentioned
>that the server must deal with many requests right after an announcement
>comes out. Waiting for a while should improve things. But the server is
>probably the limiting factor.
I think this is the case. When testing my Cox service with
NetMagic's speed test utility, typical numbers are 4-6 mbps
download and 581 kbps upload. Keep in mind that these are
BITS per second that reflect the system's data rate. File
sizes are in BYTES . . . 8-bits per byte. Roughly speaking,
a system that downloads at 1 mbps will take 7-10 seconds
to download a million byte string depending on formats,
compression, error checking, etc.
All other things being equal, I should be able to bring
the 400MB file down in something like 10 minutes or so.
I think I recall having that kind of access some time
ago . . . but I don't recall now if my site was running
off Matronics or the server I owned out in SF. It took
me right at two hours to upload the file to the server
last night. I would have expected a download to be
about 6x faster or 20 minutes. I just did a trial
access of the CD and my browser reported a 6+ hour
task.
I'm thinking about splitting the CD up into individual
sections. A great deal of the material does not change
from revision to revision . . . the published works
for example. I'll put some thought into a re-organization
of the information offered such that it's still accessible
but subject to less repetitive downloading effort.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Engine sensor ground |
>
>Hello,
>
>I understand that in a single point ground system, those sensors that are
>connected to the engine case should have their ground returned from the
>instrument to the engine side of the firewall ground. A question here,
>with some of these new electronic engine analyzers where you have multiple
>sensors connecting to one instrument via a D-sub connector, how do you
>resolve the issue of returning the relevant ground back to engine side
>when the ground is grounded internally in the instrument. In my case,
>most of the sensors are isolated from the engine except for the Oil Temp
>which is obviously threaded directly to the engine case.
Suggest you create and utilize an instrument panel
ground bus to bring case grounded panel mounted
stuff and associated ground wires to nearly common
point. See Figure Z-15 and the collection of files
in . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Grounding/
>I have a factory built airplane with very basic instrumentation and
>avionics, in fact it had just one old chunky radio and the avionics master
>switch is simply a 5amp switch type circuit breaker. Now that I am
>installing a few more avionics, is there any problems with connecting all
>of them to this one circuit breaker or perhaps running a bus from this
>switch/circuit breaker to separate circuit breakers for each avionics?
For just one radio, the "avionics master" switch
was a waste of time and reduction in reliability.
In fact, if you're only going to install a few radios
total, I'll suggest you ditch the AMS and just
turn the radios on/off as part of your checklist
ritual.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------
( "Problems are the price of progress. )
( Don't bring me anything but trouble. )
( Good news weakens me." )
( -Charles F. Kettering- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rob Turk" <matronics(at)rtist.nl> |
| Subject: | Re: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded |
It must be the upload server. I now have as low as 7.4 KB/s, 44% done.
Meanwhile I ran another download which got me 1.2 MegaByte/s. That's
about as fast as I ever get. My ADSL2 line has a theoretical maximum of
20 Mbit/s but I'm happy with the 12-13 Mbit/s I get.
Time for Bob to seed a download farm ;-)
Rob
----- Original Message -----
From: Richard Dudley
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2007 6:23 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded
17KB/sec.
Now, at 12:00 noon it is down to 9.3 KB/sec. at 90MB of 402MB.
My software is now projecting another 9+ hours at the present rate.
Initially the projection 3 hours ago was for a total of 7 hours.
It sounds like server load and/or internet traffic load.
Richard Dudley
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded |
| From: | Dj Merrill <deej(at)deej.net> |
Bruce Gray wrote:
> Doesnt anyone have some spare space with a T1 connection that they can
> upload a copy of the zip on and share the mirror site link with us?
Yes, as soon as I can get the file downloaded...
-Dj
--
Dj Merrill
Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118
http://deej.net/sportsman/
"Many things that are unexplainable happen during the construction of an
airplane." --Dave Prizio, 30 Aug 2005
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorton01(at)rogers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded |
On 14 Oct 2007, at 15:07, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
>
>
>> Don't forget that there are a lot of factors that determine
>> download speeds, and your individual connection to the Internet is
>> only one factor. Server capability is one major factor as is the
>> pipe that it must pass through to wherever the stream is going.
>> And, yes, the pipe does slow down significantly throughout the
>> day. One person already mentioned that the server must deal with
>> many requests right after an announcement comes out. Waiting for
>> a while should improve things. But the server is probably the
>> limiting factor.
>
> I'm thinking about splitting the CD up into individual
> sections. A great deal of the material does not change
> from revision to revision . . . the published works
> for example. I'll put some thought into a re-organization
> of the information offered such that it's still accessible
> but subject to less repetitive downloading effort.
Another good option would be BitTorrent, or another peer to peer
service. With BitTorrent, computers that have downloaded all, or
part of the file, are used as upload servers. The available
bandwidth goes up very quickly once the file has spread to several
computers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BitTorrent
--
Kevin Horton
Ottawa, Canada
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded |
>
>Bruce Gray wrote:
> > Doesn't anyone have some spare space with a T1 connection that they can
> > upload a copy of the zip on and share the mirror site link with us?
>
> Yes, as soon as I can get the file downloaded...
-Dj
I can mail you the CD if you wish.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | luckymacy(at)comcast.net (lucky) |
| Subject: | Re: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded |
After 9 hours, my transfer rate has fallen to 7.76KB/Sec and it says I still have
4hr 42mins left ;-)
-------------- Original message --------------
From: luckymacy(at)comcast.net (lucky)
Speaking of slow, anyone care to share what their average transfer rate/total time
was?
I have this "upgraded" comcast high speed service (was upgraded last week) and
if anything things seem slower. I was averaging 12.0KB to 16.0KB per second throughout
the day. Estimated times remaining were bouncing back and forth between
8.5 to 7.2 hours for the first hour or two. An hour later and I've barely
transferred over 10% of the toal 393 MB.
Pretty lame for a local comcast system that claimes 8MB per second on downloads.
So I'm wondering how much of a bottleneck Bob's host website was vs. local
comcast by comparing what others might be seeing.
Looking forward to do some number comparisons.
thx,
luck
======
After 9 hours, my transfer rate has fallen to 7.76KB/Sec and it says I still
have 4hr 42mins left ;-)
Speaking of slow, anyone care to share what their average transfer rate/total
time was?
I have this "upgraded" comcast high speed service (was upgraded last week)
and if anything things seem slower. I was averaging 12.0KB to 16.0KB per
second throughout the day. Estimated times remaining were bouncing back
and forth between 8.5 to 7.2 hours for the first hour or two. An
hour later and I've barely transferred over 10% of the toal 393 MB.
Pretty lame for a local comcast system that claimes 8MB per second on downloads.
So I'm wondering how much of a bottleneck Bob's host website was
vs. local comcast by comparing what others might be seeing.
Looking forward to do some number comparisons.
thx,
luck
======
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
A note from Matt Dralle:
Now, if there are two people trying to download it at the same time, the
total download time will double for each person or 1 hour 10 minutes. If
there are three people, it will triple, etc.
I next took a look at the web logs for this file and found that there are a
ton of people in the last couple of days trying to download the file. If
you look at the time stamps, many of these are occurring at the same time.
That's just a lot of data for a lot of people to pull off the server at one
time. It also looks like a lot of people are thinking something is wrong,
so after a while, then stop the transfer and start it again, which just
causes further delays as a whole."
He tacked a copy of the download logs and
there was a general overload of the server.
Sometimes there were as many as 6 or 7 folks
trying at the same time which DOES slow things
down a lot.
I'll suggest that folks still looking at
long downloads stop terminate the activity
and then wait a week or so. The server is
simply swamped right now.
If our benevolent brother -Dj is able to support
this activity with wider bandwidth, perhaps
we'll have an alternate repository that
facilitates better service.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------
( "Problems are the price of progress. )
( Don't bring me anything but trouble. )
( Good news weakens me." )
( -Charles F. Kettering- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "earl_schroeder(at)juno.com" <earl_schroeder(at)juno.com> |
| Subject: | Low cost batteries |
Another source of low cost AA and AAA batteries.
http://tinyurl.com/2flodm
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Randy" <brinker(at)suddenlinkmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded |
I'm with suddenlink cable isp which was cox here in arkansas and am
downloading now. shows about 5kb sec with 27 hours to go. wow hopefully
it will be finished when I get up in the morning.
randy
----- Original Message -----
From: Patrick ONeill
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2007 8:51 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded
It took me about 4 hours to download (maybe more, I didn't watch the
time precisely.) Cox here claims 12Mbps download and usually delivers.
I would imagine there were a lot of downloads after Bob's announcement
and the site had significant traffic to accommodate. The lengthy
download was likely not due to your Internet connection but the
server's.
And thanks very much Bob for taking the time to make all this
information available. I have never encountered a more useful collection
of information on any subject matter. It is truly great!
Best Regards,
Patrick Oneill
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of lucky
Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2007 5:51 AM
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com; aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded
Speaking of slow, anyone care to share what their average transfer
rate/total time was?
I have this "upgraded" comcast high speed service (was upgraded last
week) and if anything things seem slower. I was averaging 12.0KB to
16.0KB per second throughout the day. Estimated times remaining were
bouncing back and forth between 8.5 to 7.2 hours for the first hour or
two. An hour later and I've barely transferred over 10% of the toal 393
MB.
Pretty lame for a local comcast system that claimes 8MB per second on
downloads. So I'm wondering how much of a bottleneck Bob's host website
was vs. local comcast by comparing what others might be seeing.
Looking forward to do some number comparisons.
thx,
luck
======
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
10/13/2007 7:26 PM
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Walter Fellows" <walter.fellows(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded |
I have been downloading since about 7am this morning pacific time, I am at
83% and running about 5-6kb/sec. Bob, you should be proud the demand is so
great it is brought your server down to this rate. Thanks again.
On 10/14/07, Randy wrote:
>
> I'm with suddenlink cable isp which was cox here in arkansas and am
> downloading now. shows about 5kb sec with 27 hours to go. wow hopefully it
> will be finished when I get up in the morning.
>
> randy
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Patrick ONeill
> *To:* aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> *Sent:* Sunday, October 14, 2007 8:51 AM
> *Subject:* RE: AeroElectric-List: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded
>
> It took me about 4 hours to download (maybe more, I didn't watch the time
> precisely.) Cox here claims 12Mbps download and usually delivers. I would
> imagine there were a lot of downloads after Bob's announcement and the site
> had significant traffic to accommodate. The lengthy download was likely not
> due to your Internet connection but the server's.
>
>
> And thanks very much Bob for taking the time to make all this information
> available. I have never encountered a more useful collection of information
> on any subject matter. It is truly great!
>
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Patrick Oneill
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *From:* owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:
> owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] *On Behalf Of *lucky
> *Sent:* Sunday, October 14, 2007 5:51 AM
> *To:* aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com; aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> *Subject:* Re: AeroElectric-List: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded
>
>
> Speaking of slow, anyone care to share what their average transfer
> rate/total time was?
>
>
> I have this "upgraded" comcast high speed service (was upgraded last week)
> and if anything things seem slower. I was averaging 12.0KB to 16.0KB per
> second throughout the day. Estimated times remaining were bouncing back and
> forth between 8.5 to 7.2 hours for the first hour or two. An hour later
> and I've barely transferred over 10% of the toal 393 MB.
>
>
> Pretty lame for a local comcast system that claimes 8MB per second on
> downloads. So I'm wondering how much of a bottleneck Bob's host website was
> vs. local comcast by comparing what others might be seeing.
>
>
> Looking forward to do some number comparisons.
>
>
> thx,
>
> luck
>
>
> =====
>
> * *
>
> * *
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> **
>
> * *
>
> *
>
> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
> href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
> *
>
> ------------------------------
> Release Date: 10/13/2007 7:26 PM
>
> *
>
>
> *
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Patrick ONeill" <poneill(at)irealms.com> |
| Subject: | Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded |
I went ahead and put the ZIP on my site if it helps any of you still
trying
to get it:
http://www.noimnotcrazy.com/aemirror/AEC_11p1.zip
I'll leave the mirror up for a few days to help catch up unless Bob or
anyone objects.
On a quick test Firefox estimated 10 mins. I'm not sure how many people
it
can accommodate before slowing down, but it should help.
Best Regards,
Patrick Oneill
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Randy
Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2007 7:28 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded
I'm with suddenlink cable isp which was cox here in arkansas and am
downloading now. shows about 5kb sec with 27 hours to go. wow hopefully
it
will be finished when I get up in the morning.
randy
----- Original Message -----
From: Patrick <mailto:poneill(at)irealms.com> ONeill
Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2007 8:51 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded
It took me about 4 hours to download (maybe more, I didn't watch the
time
precisely.) Cox here claims 12Mbps download and usually delivers. I
would
imagine there were a lot of downloads after Bob's announcement and the
site
had significant traffic to accommodate. The lengthy download was likely
not
due to your Internet connection but the server's.
And thanks very much Bob for taking the time to make all this
information
available. I have never encountered a more useful collection of
information
on any subject matter. It is truly great!
Best Regards,
Patrick Oneill
_____
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of lucky
Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2007 5:51 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded
Speaking of slow, anyone care to share what their average transfer
rate/total time was?
I have this "upgraded" comcast high speed service (was upgraded last
week)
and if anything things seem slower. I was averaging 12.0KB to 16.0KB
per
second throughout the day. Estimated times remaining were bouncing back
and
forth between 8.5 to 7.2 hours for the first hour or two. An hour later
and
I've barely transferred over 10% of the toal 393 MB.
Pretty lame for a local comcast system that claimes 8MB per second on
downloads. So I'm wondering how much of a bottleneck Bob's host website
was
vs. local comcast by comparing what others might be seeing.
Looking forward to do some number comparisons.
thx,
luck
======
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List">http://www.
matro
nics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
_____
Release Date: 10/13/2007 7:26 PM
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Patrick ONeill" <poneill(at)irealms.com> |
| Subject: | Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded |
I went ahead and put the ZIP on my site if it helps any of you still
trying
to get it:
http://www.noimnotcrazy.com/aemirror/AEC_11p1.zip
I'll leave the mirror up for a few days to help catch up unless Bob or
anyone objects.
On a quick test Firefox estimated 10 mins. I'm not sure how many people
it
can accommodate before slowing down, but it should help.
Best Regards,
Patrick Oneill
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Randy
Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2007 7:28 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded
I'm with suddenlink cable isp which was cox here in arkansas and am
downloading now. shows about 5kb sec with 27 hours to go. wow hopefully
it
will be finished when I get up in the morning.
randy
----- Original Message -----
From: Patrick <mailto:poneill(at)irealms.com> ONeill
Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2007 8:51 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded
It took me about 4 hours to download (maybe more, I didn't watch the
time
precisely.) Cox here claims 12Mbps download and usually delivers. I
would
imagine there were a lot of downloads after Bob's announcement and the
site
had significant traffic to accommodate. The lengthy download was likely
not
due to your Internet connection but the server's.
And thanks very much Bob for taking the time to make all this
information
available. I have never encountered a more useful collection of
information
on any subject matter. It is truly great!
Best Regards,
Patrick Oneill
_____
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of lucky
Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2007 5:51 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded
Speaking of slow, anyone care to share what their average transfer
rate/total time was?
I have this "upgraded" comcast high speed service (was upgraded last
week)
and if anything things seem slower. I was averaging 12.0KB to 16.0KB
per
second throughout the day. Estimated times remaining were bouncing back
and
forth between 8.5 to 7.2 hours for the first hour or two. An hour later
and
I've barely transferred over 10% of the toal 393 MB.
Pretty lame for a local comcast system that claimes 8MB per second on
downloads. So I'm wondering how much of a bottleneck Bob's host website
was
vs. local comcast by comparing what others might be seeing.
Looking forward to do some number comparisons.
thx,
luck
======
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List">http://www.
matro
nics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
_____
Release Date: 10/13/2007 7:26 PM
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded |
| From: | Doug Gray <dgra1233(at)bigpond.net.au> |
Patrick,
Thanks for hosting the file. Download in ~15 mins.
Bob,
Thanks for making these resources available.
Doug Gray
> I went ahead and put the ZIP on my site if it helps any of you still
> trying to get it: http://www.noimnotcrazy.com/aemirror/AEC_11p1.zip
> I'll leave the mirror up for a few days to help catch up unless Bob or
> anyone objects. On a quick test Firefox estimated 10 mins. I'm not
> sure how many people it can accommodate before slowing down, but it
> should help. Best Regards, Patrick Oneill
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rob Turk" <matronics(at)rtist.nl> |
| Subject: | Re: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded |
MessageThanks Patrick! I got it from your site in 20 minutes. I
cancelled the download from Bob's site, it was crawling along at less
than 5KB/s. Estimated another 5 hours or so...
Thanks again,
Rob
----- Original Message -----
From: Patrick ONeill
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2007 6:38 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded
I went ahead and put the ZIP on my site if it helps any of you still
trying to get it:
http://www.noimnotcrazy.com/aemirror/AEC_11p1.zip
I'll leave the mirror up for a few days to help catch up unless Bob or
anyone objects.
On a quick test Firefox estimated 10 mins. I'm not sure how many
people it can accommodate before slowing down, but it should help.
Best Regards,
Patrick Oneill
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Randy
Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2007 7:28 PM
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded
I'm with suddenlink cable isp which was cox here in arkansas and am
downloading now. shows about 5kb sec with 27 hours to go. wow hopefully
it will be finished when I get up in the morning.
randy
----- Original Message -----
From: Patrick ONeill
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2007 8:51 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is
uploaded
It took me about 4 hours to download (maybe more, I didn't watch
the time precisely.) Cox here claims 12Mbps download and usually
delivers. I would imagine there were a lot of downloads after Bob's
announcement and the site had significant traffic to accommodate. The
lengthy download was likely not due to your Internet connection but the
server's.
And thanks very much Bob for taking the time to make all this
information available. I have never encountered a more useful collection
of information on any subject matter. It is truly great!
Best Regards,
Patrick Oneill
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of lucky
Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2007 5:51 AM
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com;
aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is
uploaded
Speaking of slow, anyone care to share what their average transfer
rate/total time was?
I have this "upgraded" comcast high speed service (was upgraded
last week) and if anything things seem slower. I was averaging 12.0KB
to 16.0KB per second throughout the day. Estimated times remaining were
bouncing back and forth between 8.5 to 7.2 hours for the first hour or
two. An hour later and I've barely transferred over 10% of the toal 393
MB.
Pretty lame for a local comcast system that claimes 8MB per second
on downloads. So I'm wondering how much of a bottleneck Bob's host
website was vs. local comcast by comparing what others might be seeing.
Looking forward to do some number comparisons.
thx,
luck
======
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List">http://www.
matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
Release Date: 10/13/2007 7:26 PM
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List">http://www.
matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tony Babb" <tonybabb(at)alejandra.net> |
| Subject: | Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded |
Patrick,
Thanks, I got it in about 20 minutes. It may have helped that I did it
at
around 6am ET.
Tony
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Patrick
ONeill
Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2007 9:39 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded
I went ahead and put the ZIP on my site if it helps any of you still
trying
to get it:
http://www.noimnotcrazy.com/aemirror/AEC_11p1.zip
I'll leave the mirror up for a few days to help catch up unless Bob or
anyone objects.
On a quick test Firefox estimated 10 mins. I'm not sure how many people
it
can accommodate before slowing down, but it should help.
Best Regards,
Patrick Oneill
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Randy
Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2007 7:28 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded
I'm with suddenlink cable isp which was cox here in arkansas and am
downloading now. shows about 5kb sec with 27 hours to go. wow hopefully
it
will be finished when I get up in the morning.
randy
----- Original Message -----
From: Patrick <mailto:poneill(at)irealms.com> ONeill
Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2007 8:51 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded
It took me about 4 hours to download (maybe more, I didn't watch the
time
precisely.) Cox here claims 12Mbps download and usually delivers. I
would
imagine there were a lot of downloads after Bob's announcement and the
site
had significant traffic to accommodate. The lengthy download was likely
not
due to your Internet connection but the server's.
And thanks very much Bob for taking the time to make all this
information
available. I have never encountered a more useful collection of
information
on any subject matter. It is truly great!
Best Regards,
Patrick Oneill
_____
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of lucky
Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2007 5:51 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded
Speaking of slow, anyone care to share what their average transfer
rate/total time was?
I have this "upgraded" comcast high speed service (was upgraded last
week)
and if anything things seem slower. I was averaging 12.0KB to 16.0KB
per
second throughout the day. Estimated times remaining were bouncing back
and
forth between 8.5 to 7.2 hours for the first hour or two. An hour later
and
I've barely transferred over 10% of the toal 393 MB.
Pretty lame for a local comcast system that claimes 8MB per second on
downloads. So I'm wondering how much of a bottleneck Bob's host website
was
vs. local comcast by comparing what others might be seeing.
Looking forward to do some number comparisons.
thx,
luck
======
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List">http://www.
matro
nics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
_____
Release Date: 10/13/2007 7:26 PM
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List">http://www.
matro
nics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | larry dodge <n16ld(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded |
Is a CD being offerred for Version 11.1?
---------------------------------
Looking for a deal? Find great prices on flights and hotels with Yahoo! FareChase.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike Schuler" <mike.schuler(at)sympatico.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded |
I'm building a Falco and am interested in anything about the electrical
installation. What does the "download" that's referred to give us?
Thanks,
Mike
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Harley <harley(at)agelesswings.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is |
uploaded
Thanks, Patrick...
That did it! I was getting as high as 26kbs when trying to download the
original, but that would still take too long for me (Firefox was
reporting an estimated 4 hours).
At your mirror site, I was seeing 300kbs! Don't know how long it
actually took, as I went to take a shower and shave while it was
downloading, but Firefox was reporting 14 minutes when I left it.
I typically see a little less than the estimated time when I download
other files.
It was done when I came back.
Wonder if Matt's upload speed may be a problem? I know that here, on
this DSL line I have, my download speed is 3-4mbs, but the upload is
only 300kbs or so. If Matt's servers have the same limitations, that
might explain some of the slowdown (as well as the number of people
trying to access it).
Harley Dixon
Long EZ N28EZ
Hangar 29, Airport
Canandaigua, NY
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Patrick ONeill wrote:
> I went ahead and put the ZIP on my site if it helps any of you still
> trying to get it:
>
> http://www.noimnotcrazy.com/aemirror/AEC_11p1.zip
>
> I'll leave the mirror up for a few days to help catch up unless Bob or
> anyone objects.
>
> On a quick test Firefox estimated 10 mins. I'm not sure how many
> people it can accommodate before slowing down, but it should help.
>
> Best Regards,
> Patrick Oneill
>
> --
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Dudley <rhdudley1(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded |
Thanks Patrick. I downloaded it in about 20 minutes from your mirror site.
Richard Dudley
Patrick ONeill wrote:
> I went ahead and put the ZIP on my site if it helps any of you still
> trying to get it:
>
> http://www.noimnotcrazy.com/aemirror/AEC_11p1.zip
>
> I'll leave the mirror up for a few days to help catch up unless Bob or
> anyone objects.
>
> On a quick test Firefox estimated 10 mins. I'm not sure how many
> people it can accommodate before slowing down, but it should help.
>
> Best Regards,
> Patrick Oneill
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> Randy
> Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2007 7:28 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded
>
> I'm with suddenlink cable isp which was cox here in arkansas and
> am downloading now. shows about 5kb sec with 27 hours to go. wow
> hopefully it will be finished when I get up in the morning.
>
> randy
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Patrick ONeill <mailto:poneill(at)irealms.com>
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>
> Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2007 8:51 AM
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is
> uploaded
>
> It took me about 4 hours to download (maybe more, I didn't
> watch the time precisely.) Cox here claims 12Mbps download
> and usually delivers. I would imagine there were a lot of
> downloads after Bob's announcement and the site had
> significant traffic to accommodate. The lengthy download was
> likely not due to your Internet connection but the server's.
>
>
>
> And thanks very much Bob for taking the time to make all this
> information available. I have never encountered a more useful
> collection of information on any subject matter. It is truly
> great!
>
>
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Patrick Oneill
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On
> Behalf Of lucky
> Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2007 5:51 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com;
> aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is
> uploaded
>
>
>
> Speaking of slow, anyone care to share what their average
> transfer rate/total time was?
>
>
>
> I have this "upgraded" comcast high speed service (was
> upgraded last week) and if anything things seem slower. I was
> averaging 12.0KB to 16.0KB per second throughout the day.
> Estimated times remaining were bouncing back and forth
> between 8.5 to 7.2 hours for the first hour or two. An hour
> later and I've barely transferred over 10% of the toal 393 MB.
>
>
>
> Pretty lame for a local comcast system that claimes 8MB per
> second on downloads. So I'm wondering how much of a
> bottleneck Bob's host website was vs. local comcast by
> comparing what others might be seeing.
>
>
>
> Looking forward to do some number comparisons.
>
>
>
> thx,
>
> luck
>
>
>
> =====
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
>href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Release Date: 10/13/2007 7:26 PM
>
>
>href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
>href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dj Merrill <deej(at)deej.net> |
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
> If our benevolent brother -Dj is able to support
> this activity with wider bandwidth, perhaps
> we'll have an alternate repository that
> facilitates better service.
Try:
http://deej.net/sportsman/manuals/AEC_11p1.zip
If it doesn't overload the server, I should be able to leave this up
for a few days.
-Dj
--
Dj Merrill - N1JOV
Glastar Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ
http://deej.net/sportsman/
"Many things that are unexplainable happen during the construction of an
airplane." --Dave Prizio, 30 Aug 2005
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Matt Dralle <dralle(at)matronics.com> |
| Subject: | Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded |
It is/was the sheer number of people trying to download the file. I've got a commercial
T1 line here for service, but its been pegged all weekend with download
attempts. Thank you to Patrick for the mirror!!
Matt Dralle
Matronics
At 05:17 AM 10/15/2007 Monday, you wrote:
>
>Thanks, Patrick...
>
>That did it! I was getting as high as 26kbs when trying to download the original,
but that would still take too long for me (Firefox was reporting an estimated
4 hours).
>
>At your mirror site, I was seeing 300kbs! Don't know how long it actually took,
as I went to take a shower and shave while it was downloading, but Firefox
was reporting 14 minutes when I left it. I typically see a little less than the
estimated time when I download other files.
>
>It was done when I came back.
>
>Wonder if Matt's upload speed may be a problem? I know that here, on this DSL
line I have, my download speed is 3-4mbs, but the upload is only 300kbs or so.
If Matt's servers have the same limitations, that might explain some of the
slowdown (as well as the number of people trying to access it).
>
>Harley Dixon
>Long EZ N28EZ
>Hangar 29, Airport
>Canandaigua, NY
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Patrick ONeill wrote:
>>I went ahead and put the ZIP on my site if it helps any of you still trying to
get it:
>>
>>http://www.noimnotcrazy.com/aemirror/AEC_11p1.zip
>>
>>I'll leave the mirror up for a few days to help catch up unless Bob or anyone
objects. On a quick test Firefox estimated 10 mins. I'm not sure how many people
it can accommodate before slowing down, but it should help.
>>
>>Best Regards,
>>Patrick Oneill
>>
>> --
>>
>
>
Matt G Dralle | Matronics | PO Box 347 | Livermore | CA | 94551
925-606-1001 V | 925-606-6281 F | dralle(at)matronics.com Email
http://www.matronics.com/ WWW | Featuring Products For Aircraft
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | The price of popularity . . . |
>I have been downloading since about 7am this morning pacific time, I am at
>83% and running about 5-6kb/sec. Bob, you should be proud the demand is so
>great it is brought your server down to this rate. Thanks again.
It's a mixed bag. Unfortunately, download traffic to
the server is adversely affecting access to Matronics
systems. This is a 400M file. Download traffic attempting
to acquire the data placed a VERY heavy load on the server.
Everyone's transfers have dropped to a snail's pace . . .
access to the rest of the AeroElectric site is restricted
and I suspect effects of this bottle neck is reflected
across the system.
The AeroElectric Data CD Ver 11.1 has been temporarily removed
from the website's server. My apologies to those who were
in the middle of the download when the file was pulled.
I'll see if I can find a more appropriate repository for this
data that can support the interest without over-stressing Matt's
system.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | AEC mirror services? |
Many thanks to those who have stepped in to help
clear the "log jam". What are the possibilities/
opportunities to set up permanent mirrors for this
data?
I looked at the "split up" idea and it turns out
that most of the data is for the website. A small
fraction of the total is fixed resources. It appears
that interest in 'Connection's data resources are
in danger of overloading present hardware. Unless
I can spread out the loads, I may have scale back
access to CD copy by mail only.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------
( "Problems are the price of progress. )
( Don't bring me anything but trouble. )
( Good news weakens me." )
( -Charles F. Kettering- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded |
>Thanks Patrick. I downloaded it in about 20 minutes from your mirror site.
>Richard Dudley
>
>Patrick ONeill wrote:
>>I went ahead and put the ZIP on my site if it helps any of you still
>>trying to get it:
>>
>><http://www.noimnotcrazy.com/aemirror/AEC_11p1.zip>http://www.noimnotcrazy.com/aemirror/AEC_11p1.zip
>>
>>I'll leave the mirror up for a few days to help catch up unless Bob or
>>anyone objects.
>>
>>On a quick test Firefox estimated 10 mins. I'm not sure how many people
>>it can accommodate before slowing down, but it should help.
>>
>>Best Regards,
>>Patrick Oneill
Thank you sir!
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
>
>Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> >
> > If our benevolent brother -Dj is able to support
> > this activity with wider bandwidth, perhaps
> > we'll have an alternate repository that
> > facilitates better service.
>
> Try:
>http://deej.net/sportsman/manuals/AEC_11p1.zip
>
> If it doesn't overload the server, I should be able to leave this up
>for a few days.
-Dj, I'm not going to link to the mirrors directly
from the website. This will reduce download traffic
to individuals who are cognizant of the mirrors by
virtue of their participation here on the List.
Need to think about the best way to handle this
in the future. Thank you so much for your interest
and assistance!
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------
( "Problems are the price of progress. )
( Don't bring me anything but trouble. )
( Good news weakens me." )
( -Charles F. Kettering- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Dj Merrill <deej(at)deej.net> |
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
> -Dj, I'm not going to link to the mirrors directly
> from the website. This will reduce download traffic
> to individuals who are cognizant of the mirrors by
> virtue of their participation here on the List.
That sounds like a good idea. :-)
>
> Need to think about the best way to handle this
> in the future. Thank you so much for your interest
> and assistance!
>
I'd recommend Bittorrent. It is designed for this sort of thing,
and spreads the bandwidth among many machines versus just one server.
You can provide a web link on the server that points to the seed of the
bittorrent file, and as more clients download parts of the file, they
also share in the distribution by allowing other client machines to
download the part they already have from them. As more people download,
they also share their bandwidth to help upload to the other people. A
true sharing system.
-Dj
--
Dj Merrill - N1JOV
Glastar Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ
http://deej.net/sportsman/
"Many things that are unexplainable happen during the construction of an
airplane." --Dave Prizio, 30 Aug 2005
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fergus Kyle" <VE3LVO(at)rac.ca> |
Looks as though everyone wanted to board the bus through that single door,
at the same time! No wonder the last guy said, "it took 15 minutes to find
a seat!"
I've got to admit I tagged on and when it changed from 7 hours
estimate to 12, I logged off. Maybe later...............
Cheers, Ferg
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Instrument panel beginner |
| From: | "mosquito56" <mosquito-56(at)hotmail.com> |
I am currently trying to design my instrument panel for a Jabir3300. I love the
dynon system but $6,000 is a little much for dual panel.
I am looking for suggestions concerning instrument panels.
Anyone have any input on iktechnologies, dynon, and grand rapids? I have heard
only good on dynon and grand rapids.
I am beginning to think that flat panel is not that much more expensive when you
add instruments, vacuum pump and 6cht and egt sensors.
Any thought on flat panel vs steam in terms of cost. Obvious flat panel would be
better but I am on a budget.
Don
601xl
Fuse almost done
need engine
need instruments
--------
Don Merritt
KLRD
Rans S-12 Flying not built
Zodiac 601xl-Middle Fuse -Jab3300 on order
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=140114#140114
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Instrument panel beginner |
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
I'm sorry but you said a very naughty word..."Vac**M pump"...cough cough
gag!...:)
OK I fly my RV7a IFR and if I never see a vacuum pump as long as I live
it will be too soon! Unreliable pieces of junk that will do their
darndest to kill you when in IMC.
For Visual rules flying you really don't need gyro instruments. If I
were doing another 601 (I owned one for 400 hours) I'd put a steam
driven ASI an altimeter and spend the rest of my money on a trutrak
pictorial pilot...Yes an autopilot will be far more useful in this
airplane (at least if you intend to use it for cross country flying)
than a whiz bang panel any day of the week...The Pictorial pilot also
gives you a turn coordinator that actually works!
But yes your right for IFR then Dynon is light years better than
anything being driven with a vacuum pump.
How about just the Dynon EMS (engine instruments), and the rest as I
described above.
Frank
Zodiac 601 HDS 400 hours (VFR)
RV7a 220 hours (IFR)
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
mosquito56
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2007 12:09 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Instrument panel beginner
-->
I am currently trying to design my instrument panel for a Jabir3300. I
love the dynon system but $6,000 is a little much for dual panel.
I am looking for suggestions concerning instrument panels.
Anyone have any input on iktechnologies, dynon, and grand rapids? I have
heard only good on dynon and grand rapids.
I am beginning to think that flat panel is not that much more expensive
when you add instruments, vacuum pump and 6cht and egt sensors.
Any thought on flat panel vs steam in terms of cost. Obvious flat panel
would be better but I am on a budget.
Don
601xl
Fuse almost done
need engine
need instruments
--------
Don Merritt
KLRD
Rans S-12 Flying not built
Zodiac 601xl-Middle Fuse -Jab3300 on order
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=140114#140114
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Schoen" <flybill2usa(at)msn.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Instrument panel beginner |
Hi Don
My glass experience is mostly limited to modern airliners and not
Experimental airplanes, so I am not an expert but I can share that I am
a huge proponent of modern glass instruments. I have a Dynon D-100 in
my RV-7 which is not flying yet, but those who have either the D-10 or
D-100 that have been flying really like them and have had few problems
as far as I know. The advantages of glass over "steam" are well
documented. Reliability, freedom from gyro problems, initial cost and
maintenance and repair bills, flexibility, capability etc. Airlines love
them cause their parts counts and frequency of repair are much lower. Of
course they have dual or triple redundancy and high end stuff in their
panels.
I will be using a GR 6000 for all engine instruments plus it has back up
capability for Altitude and airspeed. I will also be using an Auto
pilot as a kind of T & B back-up in the very unlikely total failure of
the single Dynon in IMC. So, for whatever an opinion is worth, no steam
gages for me.
Bill Schoen
RV-7 N727BN (res)
South Fork, Colorado
----- Original Message -----
From: mosquito56<mailto:mosquito-56(at)hotmail.com>
To:
aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2007 1:08 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Instrument panel beginner
>
I am currently trying to design my instrument panel for a Jabir3300. I
love the dynon system but $6,000 is a little much for dual panel.
I am looking for suggestions concerning instrument panels.
Anyone have any input on iktechnologies, dynon, and grand rapids? I
have heard only good on dynon and grand rapids.
I am beginning to think that flat panel is not that much more
expensive when you add instruments, vacuum pump and 6cht and egt
sensors.
Any thought on flat panel vs steam in terms of cost. Obvious flat
panel would be better but I am on a budget.
Don
601xl
Fuse almost done
need engine
need instruments
--------
Don Merritt
KLRD
Rans S-12 Flying not built
Zodiac 601xl-Middle Fuse -Jab3300 on order
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=140114#140114
matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=140114#140114>
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Instrument panel beginner |
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
Yes me too...for IFR.. but gyro instruments are overkill for VFR..ASI,
ALT and turn coordinator (not that I ever needed mine) can be had for a
couple of hundred bucks...A D100 is $2.5K....Wonderful IFR instrument
but just not needed in a VFR airplane.
Save yer money for something useful...hence the autopilot.
Frank
601 400 hours
RV7a 220hours
________________________________
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill
Schoen
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2007 1:02 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Instrument panel beginner
Hi Don
My glass experience is mostly limited to modern airliners and not
Experimental airplanes, so I am not an expert but I can share that I am
a huge proponent of modern glass instruments. I have a Dynon D-100 in
my RV-7 which is not flying yet, but those who have either the D-10 or
D-100 that have been flying really like them and have had few problems
as far as I know. The advantages of glass over "steam" are well
documented. Reliability, freedom from gyro problems, initial cost and
maintenance and repair bills, flexibility, capability etc. Airlines love
them cause their parts counts and frequency of repair are much lower. Of
course they have dual or triple redundancy and high end stuff in their
panels.
I will be using a GR 6000 for all engine instruments plus it has back up
capability for Altitude and airspeed. I will also be using an Auto
pilot as a kind of T & B back-up in the very unlikely total failure of
the single Dynon in IMC. So, for whatever an opinion is worth, no steam
gages for me.
Bill Schoen
RV-7 N727BN (res)
South Fork, Colorado
----- Original Message -----
From: mosquito56 <mailto:mosquito-56(at)hotmail.com>
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2007 1:08 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Instrument panel beginner
I am currently trying to design my instrument panel for a
Jabir3300. I love the dynon system but $6,000 is a little much for dual
panel.
I am looking for suggestions concerning instrument panels.
Anyone have any input on iktechnologies, dynon, and grand
rapids? I have heard only good on dynon and grand rapids.
I am beginning to think that flat panel is not that much more
expensive when you add instruments, vacuum pump and 6cht and egt
sensors.
Any thought on flat panel vs steam in terms of cost. Obvious
flat panel would be better but I am on a budget.
Don
601xl
Fuse almost done
need engine
need instruments
--------
Don Merritt
KLRD
Rans S-12 Flying not built
Zodiac 601xl-Middle Fuse -Jab3300 on order
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=140114#140114
http://www.p; available via
title=http://forums.matronics.com/
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tony Babb" <tonybabb(at)alejandra.net> |
Interesting idea. So do I have to do anything to offer my server or is it
automatic? If I download to my PC I would think my operating system may
prevent this sharing unless I do something to allow access. I'm uploading
the CD to my website, will post a link when it's ready.
Tony
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dj
Merrill
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2007 11:12 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: CD REV 11.1
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
> -Dj, I'm not going to link to the mirrors directly
> from the website. This will reduce download traffic
> to individuals who are cognizant of the mirrors by
> virtue of their participation here on the List.
That sounds like a good idea. :-)
>
> Need to think about the best way to handle this
> in the future. Thank you so much for your interest
> and assistance!
>
I'd recommend Bittorrent. It is designed for this sort of thing, and
spreads the bandwidth among many machines versus just one server.
You can provide a web link on the server that points to the seed of the
bittorrent file, and as more clients download parts of the file, they also
share in the distribution by allowing other client machines to download the
part they already have from them. As more people download, they also share
their bandwidth to help upload to the other people. A true sharing system.
-Dj
--
Dj Merrill - N1JOV
Glastar Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ http://deej.net/sportsman/
"Many things that are unexplainable happen during the construction of an
airplane." --Dave Prizio, 30 Aug 2005
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tony Babb" <tonybabb(at)alejandra.net> |
| Subject: | Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded |
All,
My dear wife, unknowingly, donated about 400MB of space on her website. You
can download from here also ----> http://www.pslt.biz/AEC_11p1.zip. I'll
take it down in a week or so.
Tony
Velocity SEFG
62% done, 78% to go
www.alejandra.net/velocity
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
Obviously wikipedia entries need to be taken with a grain of salt, but
here's what's been written there about BitTorrent:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BitTorrent
Interestingly, while I am at work (big corporate), I can't actually go to
any of the peer-peer webpages.. It appears that if we want to share
something on BitTorrent, somebody will have to start it by downloading
some client software (with Bob's permission). Use this software to select
the Aeroelectric Book to be made into a BitTorent, which will divide the
book into multiple small chunks. Then it appears that people that want to
access the torrent would also download the client - allowing them to
participate in the Torrent.
After writing this, I realized that you might not be asking about
BitTorrent.. :) To just do a plain hosting/sharing, you'd have to save a
copy of the downloaded manual to a web/ftp viewable location.. I don't
know whether your server is setup for this. My ISP only provides about
20M, so I can't host it with my current setup.
Regards,
Matt-
>
>
> Interesting idea. So do I have to do anything to offer my server or is it
> automatic? If I download to my PC I would think my operating system may
> prevent this sharing unless I do something to allow access. I'm uploading
> the CD to my website, will post a link when it's ready.
>
> Tony
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dj
> Merrill
> Sent: Monday, October 15, 2007 11:12 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: CD REV 11.1
>
>
> Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>>
>> -Dj, I'm not going to link to the mirrors directly
>> from the website. This will reduce download traffic
>> to individuals who are cognizant of the mirrors by
>> virtue of their participation here on the List.
>
> That sounds like a good idea. :-)
>
>>
>> Need to think about the best way to handle this
>> in the future. Thank you so much for your interest
>> and assistance!
>>
> I'd recommend Bittorrent. It is designed for this sort of thing, and
> spreads the bandwidth among many machines versus just one server.
> You can provide a web link on the server that points to the seed of the
> bittorrent file, and as more clients download parts of the file, they also
> share in the distribution by allowing other client machines to download
> the
> part they already have from them. As more people download, they also share
> their bandwidth to help upload to the other people. A true sharing
> system.
>
> -Dj
>
> --
> Dj Merrill - N1JOV
> Glastar Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118 N421DJ http://deej.net/sportsman/
>
> "Many things that are unexplainable happen during the construction of an
> airplane." --Dave Prizio, 30 Aug 2005
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | luckymacy(at)comcast.net (lucky) |
| Subject: | Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded |
thanks. used it & was averaging around 225KB/s tnsfr rate.
luck
-------------- Original message --------------
From: "Tony Babb" <tonybabb(at)alejandra.net>
All,
My dear wife, unknowingly, donated about 400MB of space on her website. You can download from here also ----> http://www.pslt.biz/AEC_11p1.zip. I'll take it down in a week or so.
Tony
Velocity SEFG
62% done, 78% to go
www.alejandra.net/velocity
http://www.p; available via href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
thanks. used it & was averaging around 225KB/s tnsfr rate.
luck
All,
My dear wife, unknowingly, donated about 400MB of space on her website. You can download from here also ----> http://www.pslt.biz/AEC_11p1.zip. I'll take it down in a week or so.
Tony
Velocity
SEFG
62% done,
78% to go
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Henador Titzoff <henador_titzoff(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded |
Kevin and others,
I have a 2.5 Mbps line in and out of my office. I use Bit Torrent all the time,
but I am not thrilled about it. Contrary to what all the hoopla says, it is
dog awful slow. The concept is great, but the implementation isn't what it's
cracked up to be. I often seed, but my download rates are always around 1K-6K
Bps. These rates are from several Bit Torrent sites, so I'm quoting numbers
from experience from several sources.
Henador
----- Original Message ----
From: Kevin Horton <khorton01(at)rogers.com>
Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2007 3:59:45 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded
Another good option would be BitTorrent, or another peer to peer
service. With BitTorrent, computers that have downloaded all, or
part of the file, are used as upload servers. The available
bandwidth goes up very quickly once the file has spread to several
computers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BitTorrent
--
Kevin Horton
Ottawa, Canada
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ernest Christley <echristley(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded |
Henador Titzoff wrote:
>
> Kevin and others,
>
> I have a 2.5 Mbps line in and out of my office. I use Bit Torrent all the time,
but I am not thrilled about it. Contrary to what all the hoopla says, it
is dog awful slow. The concept is great, but the implementation isn't what it's
cracked up to be. I often seed, but my download rates are always around 1K-6K
Bps. These rates are from several Bit Torrent sites, so I'm quoting numbers
from experience from several sources.
>
The hype is stolen by people gaming the system, mainly in two ways.
Some people use clients that intentionally try to make it appear as if
they're uploading, when they're not. These people aught to be
shot...but what ya' gonna' do? People are selfish and greedy.
The biggest problem is that most people use an assymetric internet
service provider. My ISP, TimeWarner Cable, will often give me 600kbps
downstream, but I'm throttled to 50kbps upstream. It's the corporate
viewpoint that we're all 'consumers' and not 'customers'. In fact, the
whole DOCSIS standard is wrapped around the idea that people don't want
to participate in the internet, just be served by it. Unfortunately,
this works for the most part, because most people would rather just
consume vs truly participate. What ya' gonna' do? People are also lazy.
But I still love 'em. Be awful lonely without 'em.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded |
>I m building a Falco and am interested in anything about the electrical
>installation. What does the download that s referred to give us?
>
>Thanks,
>
>Mike
Mike,
One of the publishing efforts we've mounted here
at the AeroElectric Connection is to offer a CD
that contains an image of the website at
http://aeroelectric.com along with a number of
good teaching texts on electronics. We sell the
CD for $10 . . . but have offered it for free
to anyone who wants to download it. The links
are on the catalog page of the website. A description
of the CD contents is at:
https://matronics.com/aeroelectric/Catalog/pub/pub.html#cdrom
The file has been downloaded hundreds of times
but over a long period of time and not by
great numbers of folks trying to get it at the
same time. It didn't occur to me that my announcement
for the latest version of the CD would produce
the response and subsequent stresses on the
servers that host the data.
So, we'll have to figure out a more practical
way to do distribution.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Low cost batteries |
>
>
>Another source of low cost AA and AAA batteries.
>
>http://tinyurl.com/2flodm
Boy! That is a bargain. It would be interesting
to get a few of those cells and see how much
'snort' they contain.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Richard Riley <richard(at)RILEY.NET> |
| Subject: | Re: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded |
I've put it up on bittorrent, it's tracked at thepiratebay.org
At 05:45 PM 10/15/2007, you wrote:
>
>
>Kevin and others,
>
>I have a 2.5 Mbps line in and out of my office. I use Bit Torrent
>all the time, but I am not thrilled about it. Contrary to what all
>the hoopla says, it is dog awful slow. The concept is great, but
>the implementation isn't what it's cracked up to be. I often seed,
>but my download rates are always around 1K-6K Bps. These rates are
>from several Bit Torrent sites, so I'm quoting numbers from
>experience from several sources.
>
>Henador
>
>
>----- Original Message ----
>From: Kevin Horton <khorton01(at)rogers.com>
>To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2007 3:59:45 PM
>Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded
>
>
>
>
>Another good option would be BitTorrent, or another peer to peer
>service. With BitTorrent, computers that have downloaded all, or
>part of the file, are used as upload servers. The available
>bandwidth goes up very quickly once the file has spread to several
>computers.
>
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BitTorrent
>
>--
>Kevin Horton
>Ottawa, Canada
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Low cost batteries |
| From: | Ron Quillin <rjquillin(at)gmail.com> |
At 21:10 10/15/2007, you wrote:
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>Another source of low cost AA and AAA batteries.
>>
>>http://tinyurl.com/2flodm
>
> Boy! That is a bargain. It would be interesting
> to get a few of those cells and see how much
> 'snort' they contain.
>
> Bob . . .
While I can't provide any quantitative data (sorry Bob) I can say,
based on first hand experience, that they "seem" to provide a
comparable service life as expensive advertising burdened units.
I have fixed loads, meters and such...
Any fairly simple test you'd like to see performed?
Ron Q.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Low cost batteries |
>>
>>
>> Bob . . .
>
>While I can't provide any quantitative data (sorry Bob) I can say, based
>on first hand experience, that they "seem" to provide a comparable service
>life as expensive advertising burdened units.
>
>I have fixed loads, meters and such...
>Any fairly simple test you'd like to see performed?
If you have some of these, perhaps you could mail
me 4 or so and I'll put them on the ol' battery
runner-downer and plot their performance against
some other devices tested. See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Curves/El-Cheeso_Battery_Test_3.jpg
It would be interesting to see where they fall in
the constellation of AA battery products.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded |
| From: | "mosquito56" <mosquito-56(at)hotmail.com> |
We spoke on the phone today about shunts. If I get as much info from the book I
will be more than glad to pay for it. I tried to buy something from you today
(I am just starting my instrument panel), but it looks like you don't sell anything.
I will post in a few days so you can email me where to send the money. Thanx
in advance.
Don
--------
Don Merritt
KLRD
Rans S-12 Flying not built
Zodiac 601xl-Middle Fuse -Jab3300 on order
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=140221#140221
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "mike humphrey" <mike109g6(at)insideconnect.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded |
MessagePatrick,
15 minutes total download.
Thanks,
Mike H
----- Original Message -----
From: Patrick ONeill
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2007 12:38 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded
I went ahead and put the ZIP on my site if it helps any of you still
trying to get it:
http://www.noimnotcrazy.com/aemirror/AEC_11p1.zip
I'll leave the mirror up for a few days to help catch up unless Bob or
anyone objects.
On a quick test Firefox estimated 10 mins. I'm not sure how many
people it can accommodate before slowing down, but it should help.
Best Regards,
Patrick Oneill
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Randy
Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2007 7:28 PM
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is uploaded
I'm with suddenlink cable isp which was cox here in arkansas and am
downloading now. shows about 5kb sec with 27 hours to go. wow hopefully
it will be finished when I get up in the morning.
randy
----- Original Message -----
From: Patrick ONeill
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2007 8:51 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is
uploaded
It took me about 4 hours to download (maybe more, I didn't watch
the time precisely.) Cox here claims 12Mbps download and usually
delivers. I would imagine there were a lot of downloads after Bob's
announcement and the site had significant traffic to accommodate. The
lengthy download was likely not due to your Internet connection but the
server's.
And thanks very much Bob for taking the time to make all this
information available. I have never encountered a more useful collection
of information on any subject matter. It is truly great!
Best Regards,
Patrick Oneill
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of lucky
Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2007 5:51 AM
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com;
aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Ver 11.1 of the Data CD is
uploaded
Speaking of slow, anyone care to share what their average transfer
rate/total time was?
I have this "upgraded" comcast high speed service (was upgraded
last week) and if anything things seem slower. I was averaging 12.0KB
to 16.0KB per second throughout the day. Estimated times remaining were
bouncing back and forth between 8.5 to 7.2 hours for the first hour or
two. An hour later and I've barely transferred over 10% of the toal 393
MB.
Pretty lame for a local comcast system that claimes 8MB per second
on downloads. So I'm wondering how much of a bottleneck Bob's host
website was vs. local comcast by comparing what others might be seeing.
Looking forward to do some number comparisons.
thx,
luck
======
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List">http://www.
matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
Release Date: 10/13/2007 7:26 PM
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List">http://www.
matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "noelk" <noelk(at)grapevine.com.au> |
I am planning an installation based on figure Z-20. I have been checking on availability
of suitable capacitors. I can find only two types - one has PCB mount
pins, the other (at about 4 times the price) has screw terminals. Neither comes
with any form of mounting bracket. What methods have other people used to
physically mount the capacitors? I am a little concerned that if is just use a
metal strap, for example, to mount it on the firewall, it might in time wear
through the plastic sleeve.
Noel Karppinen
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=140242#140242
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
>
>I am planning an installation based on figure Z-20. I have been checking
>on availability of suitable capacitors. I can find only two types - one
>has PCB mount pins, the other (at about 4 times the price) has screw
>terminals. Neither comes with any form of mounting bracket. What methods
>have other people used to physically mount the capacitors? I am a little
>concerned that if is just use a metal strap, for example, to mount it on
>the firewall, it might in time wear through the plastic sleeve.
Use the one with screw terminals. Put
a buffer between the clamp and capacitor
body like the "adel" clamps. In fact,
an MS21919DG clamp of the appropriate
size is idea for this task.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/adel.html
http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/appages/ms21919clamps.php
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------
( "Problems are the price of progress. )
( Don't bring me anything but trouble. )
( Good news weakens me." )
( -Charles F. Kettering- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Welcome to the List Mr. Merritt |
>
>
>We spoke on the phone today about shunts. If I get as much info from the
>book I will be more than glad to pay for it. I tried to buy something from
>you today (I am just starting my instrument panel), but it looks like you
>don't sell anything.
> I will post in a few days so you can email me where to send the money.
> Thanx in advance.
>Don
>
>--------
>Don Merritt
>KLRD
>Rans S-12 Flying not built
>Zodiac 601xl-Middle Fuse -Jab3300 on order
Yes, I recall the conversation. You can place an
order for the book at:
https://matronics.com/aeroelectric/Catalog/AECcatalog.html
The book is also available from several
dealers namely:
http://steinair.com
http://bandc.biz
http://buildersbooks.com/
Suggest you cruise over the website at:
http://aeroelectric.com/
. . . not necessarily to read in detail
but to get sense of what's there. When
you get the book, do the same thing.
When you've oriented yourself as to
what data is stored where, get on the
List and pose questions. There
are about 1500 folks here with goals
just like yours.
Welcome to the List!
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------
( "Problems are the price of progress. )
( Don't bring me anything but trouble. )
( Good news weakens me." )
( -Charles F. Kettering- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Welcome to the List Mr. Merritt |
| From: | "mosquito56" <mosquito-56(at)hotmail.com> |
Went to the site, input credit card number and saw a loadtester and some shunts.
Do I need the loadmaster? If I need the loadmaster, then do I need shunt?Since
I don't really understand shunts that well,(Understand is an overcurrent dump),
what size dump do I need.
Zodiac 601xl, with jab3300
Current plans:
Dynon d100
I-k technologies ems
Dual landing and dual taxi lights
Dual electric trim tabs
Electric flaps. Funky motor- get to that at later time, I think I will need
to change it out. It came with previously owned kit.
If you could recommend whether I need a loadmaster, what shunt if needed I will
order imediately.
Don
--------
Don Merritt
KLRD
Rans S-12 Flying not built
Zodiac 601xl-Middle Fuse -Jab3300 on order
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=140314#140314
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Instrument panel beginner |
| From: | "mosquito56" <mosquito-56(at)hotmail.com> |
I am leaning toward the d-100 and I-K tech ems. Would I still need an altimeter
and airspeed backup?
Does the equation change with night flight?
Don
--------
Don Merritt
KLRD
Rans S-12 Flying not built
Zodiac 601xl-Middle Fuse -Jab3300 on order
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=140316#140316
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Ice <aurbo(at)ak.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Instrument panel beginner |
Don,
Whoa! Slow down. Take adeep breath. Your enthusiasm is something we have all experienced
but make a list after reading the book and think about it for awhile.
If you don't you will have a box full of parts that you thought you needed and
will never use. Ask me how I Know.
If you have a Dynon that is all you need. But what do you want. It is your airplane.
Make a wish list then do a reality check.
Mike Ice
RV-9
firewall forward
----- Original Message -----
From: mosquito56 <mosquito-56(at)hotmail.com>
Date: Tuesday, October 16, 2007 12:24 pm
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Instrument panel beginner
> 56(at)hotmail.com>
> I am leaning toward the d-100 and I-K tech ems. Would I still need
> an altimeter and airspeed backup?
> Does the equation change with night flight?
> Don
>
> --------
> Don Merritt
> KLRD
> Rans S-12 Flying not built
> Zodiac 601xl-Middle Fuse -Jab3300 on order
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=140316#140316
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ernest Christley <echristley(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Instrument panel beginner |
Michael Ice wrote:
>
> Don,
>
> Whoa! Slow down. Take adeep breath. Your enthusiasm is something we have all
experienced but make a list after reading the book and think about it for awhile.
If you don't you will have a box full of parts that you thought you needed
and will never use. Ask me how I Know.
>
> If you have a Dynon that is all you need. But what do you want. It is your airplane.
Make a wish list then do a reality check.
>
>
Heed Michael's advice well.
The clip pictures of what you *think* you want and tape them to a
cardboard mockup of your panel. Get some hangar flying in. Actually
reach out and act like you're modifying the controls. Go through your
checklist. You will find out what you thought you'd like in theory
isn't the same as in practice. Move stuff around and repeat the
process. Keep at it until you know that every pilot who sit in your
cockpit will envy you.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jeff Page <jpx(at)qenesis.com> |
| Subject: | Nav/Com Antenna position |
I read somewhere that it was recommended to leave a few feet between
NAV/COM antennas and GPS antennas.
This would mean that a typical Cessna doesn't meet the
recommendations, since many have a NAV/COM on each side of the cabin
roof and the GPS antenna in between.
Is this an important recommendation I should attempt to achieve ?
I could put the NAV/COM antennas outboard of the high wing fuel tanks,
giving me about 12 feet between them, but at a cost of longer cables
and future difficulty if they ever need replacement.
What is the best positioning for these antennas on a high wing all
aluminmum aircraft ?
Thanks,
Jeff Page
Dream Aircraft Tundra #10
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Yaesu VXA-100 external PTT |
| From: | "Rhino" <bsimmons(at)rainbowdata.com> |
[quote="rbittner(at)us.ibm.com"]Hi.
I have a Yaesu VXA-100 and the Yaesu external headset adapter cable. The standard
PTT switch (which works fine with other radios & intercoms) does not work
on this handheld/cable combination. It does not trigger tx.
Is anyone out there using a Yaesu handheld radio with an external PTT?
Do you have a wiring diagram that shows how to hook in an external PTT?
Thanks.
---------------------------------------------- >+
Bob Bittner
> [b]
Bob,
Yaesu tends to use standard connectors, so the pinout diagram for their standard
8 pin microphone connection should work in your case. Luckily, Yaesu makes ham
radios as well, so several ham sites have pinout diagrams for their radios.
Try this link. The 8 pin diagram is the second entry in the table of contents.
Hope this helps.
http://hamradio.online.ru/ftp3/All_YAESU_mods_from_mods_dk_in_ONE_file.pdf
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=140390#140390
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "david stroud" <dstroud(at)storm.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: Yaesu VXA-100 external PTT |
These people may have to info or what you need, Bob.
http://www.wingsandwheels.com/page6.htm
I've been running
a Yaesu vxa-100 for many years in my current ride but I cannot
remember exactly how I got the PTT to work. There are only three inputs to
handheld though, antenna, external power and the Headset adapter line
wherein I think you'd find the PTT attach point. I think the PTT line just went
from the adapter to the switch and then to ground. They've got the headset
adapter thing for $44 but may part with the info only if you've got the plug etc.
By the way, my old vxa-100 is the aviator PILOT model with VOR capability
so they said. What Yaesu did not tell it's customers is that the VOR
capability only works from a vehicle in a stationary postition. Kripes.
When we bitched vehemently to their head office in California, they advised
that an acceptable solution would be to take the unit back to where you bought
it and upgrade (at your own cost) to the next higher model. Hmmm.....
David Stroud Ottawa, Canada
C-FDWS Christavia
Fairchild 51 under construction
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rhino" <bsimmons(at)rainbowdata.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 4:22 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Yaesu VXA-100 external PTT
>
> [quote="rbittner(at)us.ibm.com"]Hi.
> I have a Yaesu VXA-100 and the Yaesu external headset adapter cable. The standard
PTT switch (which works fine with other radios
& intercoms) does not work on this handheld/cable combination. It does not trigger
tx.
>
> Is anyone out there using a Yaesu handheld radio with an external PTT?
>
> Do you have a wiring diagram that shows how to hook in an external PTT?
>
> Thanks.
> ---------------------------------------------- >+
> Bob Bittner
>
> > [b]
> Bob,
>
> Yaesu tends to use standard connectors, so the pinout diagram for their standard
8 pin microphone connection should work in your
case. Luckily, Yaesu makes ham radios as well, so several ham sites have pinout
diagrams for their radios. Try this link. The 8 pin
diagram is the second entry in the table of contents. Hope this helps.
>
> http://hamradio.online.ru/ftp3/All_YAESU_mods_from_mods_dk_in_ONE_file.pdf
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=140390#140390
>
>
> --
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Nav/Com Antenna position |
>
>I read somewhere that it was recommended to leave a few feet between
>NAV/COM antennas and GPS antennas.
>This would mean that a typical Cessna doesn't meet the
>recommendations, since many have a NAV/COM on each side of the cabin
>roof and the GPS antenna in between.
>Is this an important recommendation I should attempt to achieve ?
>I could put the NAV/COM antennas outboard of the high wing fuel tanks,
>giving me about 12 feet between them, but at a cost of longer cables
>and future difficulty if they ever need replacement.
>What is the best positioning for these antennas on a high wing all
>aluminmum aircraft ?
>Thanks,
>Jeff Page
>Dream Aircraft Tundra #10
Every supplier of every product has his/her
list of fondest wishes for pristine installation
maintenance and operation of their particular
product. It's often difficult to know
exactly where each item falls with respect to
absolute requirements, risk mitigation, and
"gee, wouldn't this be nice."
In practice, planting the antenna farm on top
of high wing airplane cabins has proven practical . . .
even tho spacing was not compliant with
the fondest wishes of all suppliers involved.
Give it a try.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Welcome to the List Mr. Merritt |
>
>
>Went to the site, input credit card number and saw a loadtester and some
>shunts. Do I need the loadmaster? If I need the loadmaster, then do I need
>shunt?Since I don't really understand shunts that well,(Understand is an
>overcurrent dump), what size dump do I need.
>
>Zodiac 601xl, with jab3300
>
> Current plans:
> Dynon d100
> I-k technologies ems
> Dual landing and dual taxi lights
> Dual electric trim tabs
> Electric flaps. Funky motor- get to that at later time, I think I
> will need to change it out. It came with previously owned kit.
>
>If you could recommend whether I need a loadmaster, what shunt if needed I
>will order imediately.
>Don
Lost you here Don. Yes, there are a few products other
than the book and CD offered on the link I gave you . . .
but until you've acquired the book and had some
conversation with myself and others here on the List,
making any recommendations for purchase of other
products is premature.
Suggest you get the book. You talked about entering
your card number . . . but I've not seen an order
come into the system under your name. To place an
order, you fill out the data boxes at top, put
quantities into boxes for each product you want to
purchase and then click the "submit" box at the
bottom. You will receive a receipt for your order
via e-mail. When we fill your order you will get
two more e-mails, one from the bank acknowledging
the charge to your card and a receipt from us
showing what all was shipped to you.
If you offered some data with the intent of
placing an order, I suspect you did not hit the
submit button at the bottom and the order was
never placed.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ernest Christley <echristley(at)nc.rr.com> |
I built a transponder antennae, and the plans I used called for using a
surface mount SMA connector. Good enough, but now to get cable to match
to it. I happened to have a spare antennae for my wireless router, with
an SMA connector on one end. Inspect the cable, and it's RG-174.
I haven't a clue what RG-174 is.
Google-time. Search for "coax cable RG-174". The first hit is an ad,
but the second one appears to be REAL information. John Bryant and Bill
Bowers (didn't he design some antennae for airplanes?) ran some tests on
the stuff. Appears that using it could cost you a dB...if you need
100ft. I need about 8, and I could make it shorter if I HAD to.
So the question. Is there any reason NOT to use this thin, light, cheap
cable?
Just to take the obvious off the table:
It can be delicate...Fix that with proper routing and strain relief.
Those connectors are awfully small for my fat fingers...Deal with it,
and do it over till you get it right.
I'm thinking I will do good to cut the cable off this antennae since it
already has the SMA connector and I know it works.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rob Stapleton, Jr." <foto(at)alaska.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Yaesu VXA-100 external PTT |
I am using the VXA-700 and it has its own screw in micro connector that goes
from the radio into an RCA coupler/splitter, which then goes into a FlyteCom
mixer box, and then to a separate push to talk.
My two cents worth.
It would not work with other set ups, or with Dave Clark helmets, only the
Fcom set up.
Rob
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rhino
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 12:22 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Yaesu VXA-100 external PTT
[quote="rbittner(at)us.ibm.com"]Hi.
I have a Yaesu VXA-100 and the Yaesu external headset adapter cable. The
standard PTT switch (which works fine with other radios & intercoms) does
not work on this handheld/cable combination. It does not trigger tx.
Is anyone out there using a Yaesu handheld radio with an external PTT?
Do you have a wiring diagram that shows how to hook in an external PTT?
Thanks.
---------------------------------------------- >+
Bob Bittner
> [b]
Bob,
Yaesu tends to use standard connectors, so the pinout diagram for their
standard 8 pin microphone connection should work in your case. Luckily,
Yaesu makes ham radios as well, so several ham sites have pinout diagrams
for their radios. Try this link. The 8 pin diagram is the second entry in
the table of contents. Hope this helps.
http://hamradio.online.ru/ftp3/All_YAESU_mods_from_mods_dk_in_ONE_file.pdf
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=140390#140390
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
Why not use surface mount BNC connector? Or, why not use an SMA connector
on the end of RG-400. I think one of the connectors listed on this page
might work:
http://www.smelectronics.us/smacableconnectorsa.htm
Then again, you can buy premade cables with SMA on one end and BNC on the
other. Eliminates the need to find correct crimp tools. If it's RG-174,
as you pointed out, the losses will be small for short runs.
Regards,
Matt-
>
>
> I built a transponder antennae, and the plans I used called for using a
> surface mount SMA connector. Good enough, but now to get cable to match
> to it. I happened to have a spare antennae for my wireless router, with
> an SMA connector on one end. Inspect the cable, and it's RG-174.
>
> I haven't a clue what RG-174 is.
>
> Google-time. Search for "coax cable RG-174". The first hit is an ad,
> but the second one appears to be REAL information. John Bryant and Bill
> Bowers (didn't he design some antennae for airplanes?) ran some tests on
> the stuff. Appears that using it could cost you a dB...if you need
> 100ft. I need about 8, and I could make it shorter if I HAD to.
>
> So the question. Is there any reason NOT to use this thin, light, cheap
> cable?
>
> Just to take the obvious off the table:
> It can be delicate...Fix that with proper routing and strain relief.
> Those connectors are awfully small for my fat fingers...Deal with it,
> and do it over till you get it right.
>
> I'm thinking I will do good to cut the cable off this antennae since it
> already has the SMA connector and I know it works.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Welcome to the List Mr. Merritt |
| From: | "mosquito56" <mosquito-56(at)hotmail.com> |
Thanx for the info, maybe getting ahead of myself thanx. Ordering now
Don
--------
Don Merritt
KLRD
Rans S-12 Flying not built
Zodiac 601xl-Middle Fuse -Jab3300 on order
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=140452#140452
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Total Newbie with many questions |
| From: | "mosquito56" <mosquito-56(at)hotmail.com> |
I have a few questions but I am not sure if I should put my questions in 1 post
or split them up into different post? Suggestions?
--------
Don Merritt
KLRD
Rans S-12 Flying not built
Zodiac 601xl-Middle Fuse -Jab3300 on order
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=140459#140459
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Instrument panel beginner |
| From: | "mosquito56" <mosquito-56(at)hotmail.com> |
I am not sure what "Whoa slow down means"? What am I doing to fast?
I also have had some input regarding save my money and getting an autopilot.
I only just got my spl license and only have 100 hrs total. This would make
me equivalent to a two year old just learning to walk, so any input is definitely
appreciated.
If I bought the plane so I could fly it. Why do I want an autopilot? I get
in the plane, take off, climb to altitude, turn toward heading and push a button
on the autopilot? I then become a passenger until I have to contact atc for
landing?
I have flown thousands of hrs on Flight Sim with the autopilot engaged. I have
NEVER flown in a small airplane with the autopilot engaged. Is there a major
difference that I don't know about?
Forgive me in advance,
I tend to come off with an antagonistic attitude. I believe in honest straightforward
discussion with honest direct words and don't mean to be antagonistic in
any way. I can take honest criticismsisims.
Don
--------
Don Merritt
KLRD
Rans S-12 Flying not built
Zodiac 601xl-Middle Fuse -Jab3300 on order
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=140464#140464
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michael Ice <aurbo(at)ak.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Instrument panel beginner |
Don,
Forgive me if my comment "Whoa slow down" offended you. Please feel free to order
anything and everything you want from all the wonderful vendors. They will
love you for it.
Have fun,
Mike Ice
----- Original Message -----
From: mosquito56 <mosquito-56(at)hotmail.com>
Date: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 11:07 am
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Instrument panel beginner
> 56(at)hotmail.com>
> I am not sure what "Whoa slow down means"? What am I doing to
> fast?
> I also have had some input regarding save my money and
> getting an autopilot. I only just got my spl license and only have
> 100 hrs total. This would make me equivalent to a two year old
> just learning to walk, so any input is definitely appreciated.
> If I bought the plane so I could fly it. Why do I want an
> autopilot? I get in the plane, take off, climb to altitude, turn
> toward heading and push a button on the autopilot? I then become a
> passenger until I have to contact atc for landing?
> I have flown thousands of hrs on Flight Sim with the autopilot
> engaged. I have NEVER flown in a small airplane with the autopilot
> engaged. Is there a major difference that I don't know about?
>
> Forgive me in advance,
> I tend to come off with an antagonistic attitude. I believe in
> honest straightforward discussion with honest direct words and
> don't mean to be antagonistic in any way. I can take honest
> criticismsisims.Don
>
> --------
> Don Merritt
> KLRD
> Rans S-12 Flying not built
> Zodiac 601xl-Middle Fuse -Jab3300 on order
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=140464#140464
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ernest Christley <echristley(at)nc.rr.com> |
Matt Prather wrote:
>
> Why not use surface mount BNC connector? Or, why not use an SMA connector
> on the end of RG-400.
The plans said to use SMA. The antennae is awfully small, and so the
SMA didn't seem like a half bad idea.
http://ernest.isa-geek.org/Delta/Pictures/TransponderAntennae.jpg
Most of all, I think you missed the part where I said I have a cable in
hand. 8*) Changing to BNC might be a good experiment...except that I
already have a cable in my hand.
The question was directed more at the suitability of RG-174. There's a
lot of back and forth about RG-58 vs RG-400, but RG-174 I've not heard
about. It is MUCH thinner, more flexible, no more expensive, just as
available (now that the RatShack is useless and everything is ordered
off the internet anyway) and lighter. I'm looking for a solid reason
NOT to use it, because I've not heard about it and those unknown
unknowns are the ones that will get you killed. Other than that minor
detail, it looks like a winner all the way around.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Hibbing" <n744bh(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Instrument panel beginner |
Why do you want an autopilot? Hmmm...if JFK Jr was still around he probably
could tell you. The NTSB has got a book a couple of inches thick with the
reports of people that had the "why would I need an autopilot" attitude.
They keep it right next to the book of the guys whose famous last words were
"watch this you guys." I don't mean to be antagonistic and just passing
along my $.02 worth.
Bill
Glasair SIIS-FT
----- Original Message -----
From: "mosquito56" <mosquito-56(at)hotmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 2:05 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Instrument panel beginner
>
>
> I am not sure what "Whoa slow down means"? What am I doing to fast?
> I also have had some input regarding save my money and getting an
> autopilot. I only just got my spl license and only have 100 hrs total.
> This would make me equivalent to a two year old just learning to walk, so
> any input is definitely appreciated.
> If I bought the plane so I could fly it. Why do I want an autopilot? I
> get in the plane, take off, climb to altitude, turn toward heading and
> push a button on the autopilot? I then become a passenger until I have to
> contact atc for landing?
> I have flown thousands of hrs on Flight Sim with the autopilot engaged.
> I have NEVER flown in a small airplane with the autopilot engaged. Is
> there a major difference that I don't know about?
>
> Forgive me in advance,
> I tend to come off with an antagonistic attitude. I believe in honest
> straightforward discussion with honest direct words and don't mean to be
> antagonistic in any way. I can take honest criticismsisims.
> Don
>
> --------
> Don Merritt
> KLRD
> Rans S-12 Flying not built
> Zodiac 601xl-Middle Fuse -Jab3300 on order
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=140464#140464
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Instrument panel beginner |
| From: | James H Nelson <rv9jim(at)juno.com> |
Don,
In todays airspace, keeping your head out of the cockpit and
watching for traffic is a death defying task. The auto pilot will allow
you to keep ahead of your airplane and use your map. It is like a friend
along to do the mundane keep it level and going straight ahead while you
talk to maybe enroute or checking atis ect. My first plane (I built)
needed it because it would slooowly roll off heading and go downward as I
tried to look at the map. No hands off flying for more than a few
moments. Takes the fun out of cross countrys. Thus, my new build has a
TT wing leveler and altitude hold. I can now go solo on long cross
countrys and enjoy it. I would have one before I got any AH or DG for
the panel. Then it would be an inexpensive (?) glass panel to replace
the horizon. and directional gyro openings. Think of resale. Then
again, look at your pocket book and work into the future.
Jim
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
Sorry, I did miss the fact that you already have a cable.. If it's not
too difficult to swap it later, I'd try running the cable you already have
- it's paid for. If the performance isn't acceptable, change it for
something lower loss at TXP frequency. I notice that around 1000MHz,
RG-174 is significantly more lossy than the larger diameter cables..
There will be a measurable drop in radiated power (if you chose to look),
but that might not affect system performance noticeably. TXP works line
of sight, and the ground station antennas are likely pretty well
optimized.
Regards,
Matt-
>
>
> Matt Prather wrote:
>>
>>
>> Why not use surface mount BNC connector? Or, why not use an SMA
>> connector
>> on the end of RG-400.
>
> The plans said to use SMA. The antennae is awfully small, and so the
> SMA didn't seem like a half bad idea.
> http://ernest.isa-geek.org/Delta/Pictures/TransponderAntennae.jpg
> Most of all, I think you missed the part where I said I have a cable in
> hand. 8*) Changing to BNC might be a good experiment...except that I
> already have a cable in my hand.
>
>
> The question was directed more at the suitability of RG-174. There's a
> lot of back and forth about RG-58 vs RG-400, but RG-174 I've not heard
> about. It is MUCH thinner, more flexible, no more expensive, just as
> available (now that the RatShack is useless and everything is ordered
> off the internet anyway) and lighter. I'm looking for a solid reason
> NOT to use it, because I've not heard about it and those unknown
> unknowns are the ones that will get you killed. Other than that minor
> detail, it looks like a winner all the way around.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Instrument panel beginner |
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
Depends what you want the airplane for.
I had a Zodiac and flew it for 400 hours...Loved it. I ended up using it
primarily for cross country work. It didn't have an autopilot but I
found that I was constantly adjusting my heading to keep going where I
wanted it to go.
I never in my 600 hours of flying needed an artificial horizon...I could
see that if I took off in marginal weather and got cutoff by the low
clouds that POSSIBLY being able to keep the thing flying straight and
level (While you asked ATC for help) could be a benefit.
So, no I don't think you need either an AI or a/p...but if I were to
make an upgrade, the first place I would spend my money would be on an
autopilot instead of a Dynon or similar.
The reason being is that you would only need the Dynon in an emergency
(and believe me if you got into clouds that IS an emergency) but you
could use the A/P all the time to make for relaxed cross country
flying....If you had a weather emergency you can simply engage the A/P
and it will keep your wings level and you can fly in any direction
simply by turning the knob to any desired heading...Say ATC said "Turn
left fly heading 360"..If you were a low time VFR pilot you could very
easily loose control of the airplane during such a manouver, but the A/P
will do it for you in complete safety.
Flying a real airplane is not like flight sim...But you can make it so
with an autopilot but really a glass panel is a waste of money for a
simple light airplane IMO. If you had a really small panel like in a S1
Pitts then you can buy a Dynon D180? And save a whole bunch of space
that way but you really don't have that problem in the Zodiac.
As you have just ordered your kit you have lots of time to make this
decision, and avioincs is getting better all the time.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
mosquito56
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 12:06 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Instrument panel beginner
-->
I am not sure what "Whoa slow down means"? What am I doing to fast?
I also have had some input regarding save my money and getting an
autopilot. I only just got my spl license and only have 100 hrs total.
This would make me equivalent to a two year old just learning to walk,
so any input is definitely appreciated.
If I bought the plane so I could fly it. Why do I want an autopilot?
I get in the plane, take off, climb to altitude, turn toward heading and
push a button on the autopilot? I then become a passenger until I have
to contact atc for landing?
I have flown thousands of hrs on Flight Sim with the autopilot
engaged. I have NEVER flown in a small airplane with the autopilot
engaged. Is there a major difference that I don't know about?
Forgive me in advance,
I tend to come off with an antagonistic attitude. I believe in honest
straightforward discussion with honest direct words and don't mean to be
antagonistic in any way. I can take honest criticismsisims.
Don
--------
Don Merritt
KLRD
Rans S-12 Flying not built
Zodiac 601xl-Middle Fuse -Jab3300 on order
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=140464#140464
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Terry Watson" <terry(at)tcwatson.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Instrument panel beginner |
I am definitely sold on the idea of an autopilot for my RV-8A, but for a
light sport like I think he is building where the intended mission is local
recreational flying, I don't think the need is so obvious.
As to the "woa, slow down" comment, I thought it was quite appropriate if
taken without offense. There is a lot to know before the final decisions on
instruments and radios are made. Building gets you immersed in the process
of creating your own personal airplane and at least in my case, my decisions
keep changing as I learn more and more choices become possible.
Terry
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill
Hibbing
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 12:48 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Instrument panel beginner
Why do you want an autopilot? Hmmm...if JFK Jr was still around he probably
could tell you. The NTSB has got a book a couple of inches thick with the
reports of people that had the "why would I need an autopilot" attitude.
They keep it right next to the book of the guys whose famous last words were
"watch this you guys." I don't mean to be antagonistic and just passing
along my $.02 worth.
Bill
Glasair SIIS-FT
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Total Newbie with many questions |
>
>
>I have a few questions but I am not sure if I should put my questions in 1
>post or split them up into different post? Suggestions?
What ever suits you. We're not terribly good at
keeping the subject of any particular thread
"pure" anyhow. But one question per posting
with a lucid subject line is always okay.
How may we be of service?
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Instrument panel beginner |
| From: | "mosquito56" <mosquito-56(at)hotmail.com> |
No offense taken anytime, anywhere by anyone except my wife.
Can you be a little more specific. I don't get what you mean. How much do I need
to know to ask a question? Sorry, you have me totally confused.
Don
--------
Don Merritt- Laredo, Tx
Apologies if I seem antagonistic.
I believe in the freeflowing ideas and discussions between individuals for assistance
in this thing we call life.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=140512#140512
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Instrument panel beginner |
| From: | "mosquito56" <mosquito-56(at)hotmail.com> |
I thank you all as you have saved me massive amounts of money. I only reason I
wanted a dynon was for the artificial horizon for the weather emergency problem.
With the autopilot, I can set atitude and heading and pray for a hole. If I
get to close to atc territory I can yell for help.
THANX A BUNCH
--------
Don Merritt- Laredo, Tx
Apologies if I seem antagonistic.
I believe in the freeflowing ideas and discussions between individuals for assistance
in this thing we call life.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=140515#140515
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Instrument panel beginner |
There are no "dumb Questions"... but sometimes questions need to be asked
several times in different ways, before the answers make sense. We've all been
there. and from time to time, still are. LRE2
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Instrument panel beginner |
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
Sounds right to me..
I'll just interject that many autopilots include turn rate indicator
functionality - so you get that in the bargain. I think those autopilots
are that best bet.
And, the total cost of a mechanical airspeed and sensitive altimeter, (the
only basic flight instruments provided by an EFIS which are _required_ for
VFR operations) are much less than any of the EFIS systems. I have many
hours in airplanes where the only additional flight instruments are a
slip/skid indicator and a compass. I've done long x-country flights like
that. No big deal if you don't push the weather.
So, hierarchy of level of _flight instrument_ equipment would be as follows:
1. Mech Airspeed, Sensitive Altimeter --> Basic day VFR flight, maybe
with a few sunset/sunrise runs if equipped with appropriate lights.
2. Above plus turn-rate indicating wing leveler (usually can be coupled
with a handheld GPS) --> Upgraded VFR x-country setup. Would feel
comfortable with some night VFR - _good_ vis. (CAVU) only. I'm chicken.
3. Above plus EFIS (I'd consider replacing the function of the mechanical
altimeter and airspeed with GPS data) --> light IFR (getting through a
cloud deck of known thickness - coastal marine layer, weak frontal
conditions, inversion haze). Single engine airplanes flown for fun by
private pilots shouldn't generally be out making long flights in the crud
and shooting approaches to mins - my opinion. If the EFIS craps out, the
wing leveler and GPS data will get me someplace where the weather is
better, and even let me shoot an approach if absolutely necessary (done
it). Having this equipment also implies that no _single_ component
failure (EFIS, AP, GPS, battery, alternator) will endanger the flight..
Regards,
Matt-
>
>
> I am definitely sold on the idea of an autopilot for my RV-8A, but for a
> light sport like I think he is building where the intended mission is
> local
> recreational flying, I don't think the need is so obvious.
>
> As to the "woa, slow down" comment, I thought it was quite appropriate if
> taken without offense. There is a lot to know before the final decisions
> on
> instruments and radios are made. Building gets you immersed in the process
> of creating your own personal airplane and at least in my case, my
> decisions
> keep changing as I learn more and more choices become possible.
>
> Terry
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill
> Hibbing
> Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 12:48 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Instrument panel beginner
>
>
>
> Why do you want an autopilot? Hmmm...if JFK Jr was still around he
> probably
>
> could tell you. The NTSB has got a book a couple of inches thick with the
> reports of people that had the "why would I need an autopilot" attitude.
> They keep it right next to the book of the guys whose famous last words
> were
>
> "watch this you guys." I don't mean to be antagonistic and just passing
> along my $.02 worth.
>
> Bill
> Glasair SIIS-FT
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Bob,
Have you seen this:
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/824477/6_volt_battery_hack_youll_be_amazed/
Dennis
--
Dennis Golden
Golden Consulting Services, Inc.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Instrument panel beginner |
| From: | Dj Merrill <deej(at)deej.net> |
mosquito56 wrote:
>
> I thank you all as you have saved me massive amounts of money. I only reason
I wanted a dynon was for the artificial horizon for the weather emergency problem.
> With the autopilot, I can set atitude and heading and pray for a hole. If
I get to close to atc territory I can yell for help.
> THANX A BUNCH
You could look at something like the Trutrak ADI Pilot II, which is an
autopilot with an attitude display if you wanted both of those features:
http://www.trutrakflightsystems.com/instruments_ADI_pilot_2.htm
-Dj
--
Dj Merrill
Sportsman 2+2 Builder #7118
http://deej.net/sportsman/
"Many things that are unexplainable happen during the construction of an
airplane." --Dave Prizio, 30 Aug 2005
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Instrument panel beginner |
| From: | "mosquito56" <mosquito-56(at)hotmail.com> |
LMAO, now suggesting I replace a $2,000 overly expensive system with a $4,000 system.
What am I missing?
I can't seem to find an autopilot cheaper then the dynon d-100
Don
--------
Don Merritt- Laredo, Tx
Apologies if I seem antagonistic.
I believe in the freeflowing ideas and discussions between individuals for assistance
in this thing we call life.
October 06, 2007 - October 18, 2007
AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-hg