AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-hh
October 18, 2007 - October 29, 2007
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=140572#140572
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Werner Schneider <glastar(at)gmx.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Instrument panel beginner |
Don,
you do not need a full fledged 2-axis to have a second pilot on board,
so the Trutrak digitrak for 1650$ or the Trio EZ Pilot for 1770$ would
do, that coupled with a nice GPS will keep you "wing level" and on track.
From there you can upgrade for some more dollars with the ADI Pilot to
have roll and pitch info.
The altitude hold can in most airplanes be left to the manual pilot (you).
About the EFIS and mechanical gauges I keep my mouth shut as I'm biased
;-) but I can mostly agree to what Matt did put down in his mail (it's
just so nice to have all relevant flight info on one screen 8-) )
Werner
mosquito56 wrote:
>
> 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.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=140572#140572
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Instrument panel beginner |
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
These come recommended:
http://www.trioavionics.com/ez_pilot.htm
http://www.navaid-devices.com/hardware.htm
$1770 and $1300, respectively.
Regards,
Matt-
>
>
> 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.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=140572#140572
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Werner Schneider <glastar(at)gmx.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Instrument panel beginner |
Hello Matt,
my experience with Navaid are in a way I would not recommend them.
However trutrak is missing in your link list :-)
<http://www.trutrakap.com/autopilot2_2.htm>
MOHO
Werner
Matt Prather wrote:
>
> These come recommended:
>
> http://www.trioavionics.com/ez_pilot.htm
>
> http://www.navaid-devices.com/hardware.htm
>
> $1770 and $1300, respectively.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Matt-
>
>
>
>>
>>
>> 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.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=140572#140572
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Instrument panel beginner |
| From: | "mosquito56" <mosquito-56(at)hotmail.com> |
Great to see so many people putting in their 2 cents. I will be closing this subject
since everything is as clear as mud and alot of fun.
Lots of great info. Thanx much for the info. Had a ball.
Gday 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=140585#140585
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric Newton" <enewton57(at)cableone.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Instrument panel beginner |
The Dynon D100 is an autopilot? Since when?
Eric Newton
----- Original Message -----
From: "mosquito56" <mosquito-56(at)hotmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 10:47 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Instrument panel beginner
>
>
> 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.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=140572#140572
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Instrument panel beginner |
| From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
No discussion of instrument panel design should go without a reference to the three
excellent Kitplanes articles by Ricardo Price on Panel Design.
Go to the e-magazine section of Kitplanes online. Download the pdf's.
This series of articles has prevented me from publishing on the same topic because
I think he said it all. Remarkable!
Don't worry about people stealing an idea. If it's original, you will have to ram
it down their throats."
-- Howard Aiken
--------
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge, MA 01550
(508) 764-2072
emjones(at)charter.net
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=140608#140608
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Andrew Butler" <andrewbutler(at)ireland.com> |
Hello All,
After several months steep learning curve (still steep), I have come up
with a design that meets my particular requirements. I have followed Bobs
advice and gone for the Z13/8 type architecture. I have made some "minor"
additions to give me an asymmetric split bus. To support dual electronic
ignition, I need a backup battery and power supply and the attached
design gives that with the minimum of fuss.
I am writing to the group to ask for some help with regards the
following:
1. Dual electronic ignition is powered by either bus using bridge
rectifiers. There are four ON/OFF ignition switches to allow for
testing of each supply to each ignition system individually. Two
(2-10)s won't do it. Is there a switch that does OFF-ON-ON-BOTH? This
would allow me to reduce the four switches to two. Can anyone think
of any other way to test each of the four ignition power circuits?
2. Comments on the design. I am not looking for an endorsement, rather
a critical eye on any mistakes or bad practise Can you point out
anything that I may have missed?
3. How do I cater for the charge current limited aux battery that I
plan to install Do I need to anything special at all i.e. will the
design do the job without additional modification? Attached is the
spec. of a battery that I can source locally. Cycle use charging is
limited to 2.88Amp and trickle use limited to 1.08Amp.
4. Can anyone make any recommendations with regards an antenna and
cabling for my GARMIN 496? I will be panel mounting it. Satellite
weather is not available in Europe, and I am having difficulty
sourcing an antenna that is not dual weather/GPS capable. The cost o
f these antennas is prohibitive.
Thank you for your help.
Andrew Butler.
RV71700
Galway, Ireland.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Dr. Andrew Elliott" <a.s.elliott(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | shielded headset jack wiring? |
Gang:
The wiring diagram for my radio seems to show a shielded pair going to
the mike connector (audio and key) and a single shielded wire going to
the earphones.
[1] Is it reasonable to use a single 3-wire shielded cable for this?
[2] If I use stick-mounted PTT switches, is there any reason to use run
the key wire all the way to the mike connector? Couldn't I just run it
to the switch? (Yes, I know that this would make it impossible to use a
remote PTT through the connector.)
[3] If I do that, can I just run a shielded pair to the connector (mike
and earphones)?
Andy Elliott, Mesa, AZ
N601GE (reserved)
601XL/TD/QB, Corvair, building...
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Instrument panel beginner |
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
Yup Trutrak digitrak or a Pictorial pilot (same thing but with a turn
coordinator display) is all you need.
Link the above to a handheld GPS and have a steam guage ASI and
Altimeter.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Werner Schneider
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 11:08 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Instrument panel beginner
-->
Hello Matt,
my experience with Navaid are in a way I would not recommend them.
However trutrak is missing in your link list :-)
<http://www.trutrakap.com/autopilot2_2.htm>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bret Smith" <smithhb(at)tds.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Instrument panel beginner |
Don,
Regarding any and all aircraft avionics or electrical systems you will soon
discover that they are constantly changing and improving all the time. As a
result, like many of us, your original choices and decisions will change
frequently over time.
No subject can ever close... We all are here for one reason, to learn from
each other to do the best we can possibly do. Opinions will always vary and
sometimes the repertoire can become quite lively, but in the end we will
learn something...and that is the goal.
Here is my ongoing decision model from my website...
http://www.flightinnovations.com/considerations.html.
Welcome to our class.
Bret Smith
RV-9A (91314)
Mineral Bluff, GA
www.FlightInnovations.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
mosquito56
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 2:59 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Instrument panel beginner
-->
Great to see so many people putting in their 2 cents. I will be closing this
subject since everything is as clear as mud and alot of fun.
Lots of great info. Thanx much for the info. Had a ball.
Gday 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=140585#140585
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rob Turk" <matronics(at)rtist.nl> |
| Subject: | Re: Instrument panel beginner |
Bret,
As you said, opinions differ. I looked at your site, and while you have made
some excellent choises, I wonder why you don't include at least the very
basic flight instruments that do not rely on electric power.
Also, having (4) GPS antenna's on-board sounds a bit overdone. Most
GPS-based equipment accepts NMEA protocol. It's not hard to take one GPS
receiver and feed the NMEA protocol into all equipment that requires
position/speed information.
.. And so another episode in the discussion opens.. ;-)
Rob
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bret Smith" <smithhb(at)tds.net>
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 5:31 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Instrument panel beginner
>
> Don,
>
> Regarding any and all aircraft avionics or electrical systems you will
> soon
> discover that they are constantly changing and improving all the time. As
> a
> result, like many of us, your original choices and decisions will change
> frequently over time.
>
> No subject can ever close... We all are here for one reason, to learn from
> each other to do the best we can possibly do. Opinions will always vary
> and
> sometimes the repertoire can become quite lively, but in the end we will
> learn something...and that is the goal.
>
> Here is my ongoing decision model from my website...
> http://www.flightinnovations.com/considerations.html.
>
> Welcome to our class.
>
>
> Bret Smith
> RV-9A (91314)
> Mineral Bluff, GA
> www.FlightInnovations.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> mosquito56
> Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 2:59 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Instrument panel beginner
>
> -->
>
> Great to see so many people putting in their 2 cents. I will be closing
> this
> subject since everything is as clear as mud and alot of fun.
> Lots of great info. Thanx much for the info. Had a ball.
> Gday 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=140585#140585
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Instrument panel beginner |
| From: | sttwig(at)nwinfo.net |
Frank,
You suggest that all you need is Pictorial Pilot. What is you thoughts on
the ADI Pilot?
Steve
>
>
> Yup Trutrak digitrak or a Pictorial pilot (same thing but with a turn
> coordinator display) is all you need.
>
> Link the above to a handheld GPS and have a steam guage ASI and
> Altimeter.
>
> Frank
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> Werner Schneider
> Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 11:08 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Instrument panel beginner
>
> -->
>
> Hello Matt,
>
> my experience with Navaid are in a way I would not recommend them.
>
> However trutrak is missing in your link list :-)
>
> <http://www.trutrakap.com/autopilot2_2.htm>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Instrument panel beginner |
Good Morning All,
I have no doubt that confidence in the new electronics will eventually
change my mind, but any airplane that I fly will have standard, ancient, steam
gauge, airspeed, altimeter and mechanical turn needle instruments (Definitely
NOT a turn coordinator!) with a ball inclinometer installed within the turn
needle instrument.
About twenty hours of good training will allow anyone to control any
airplane safely with just those three operative instruments.
Figure a thousand bucks for the training, which will stay with you for life,
and another thousand or so for the three instruments.
Beyond that, everything else can be as fancy as possible, but as long as I
can see that needle, ball, and airspeed, I know that I can survive the flight.
Relying on an autopilot to get me out of trouble is a bit foreign to my
philosophy, though I can see where I may someday accept such equipment as being
reliable enough to bet my life on it.
Meanwhile, that couple of thousand bucks will give me great comfort while
the modern stuff is proving it's suitability to the task!
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Stearman N3977A
Downers Grove, Illinois
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "mwcreek(at)frontiernet.net" <mwcreek(at)frontiernet.net> |
Can anyone suggest the preffered method for labeling switches? I know
I can use a printer and make my own, but would would prefer something
more durable. I'm thinking of a plastic or aluminum plate with
silk-screen lettering.
Thanks,
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Instrument panel beginner |
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
Steve,
For a VFR airplane I think an ADI pilot is over the top. I use a
Pictorial Pilot in IMC as a backup to the Dynon. Remember that for IFR
flying you have to be sure you can safely fly the airplane if your
primary instrument (the Dynon D100 in my case) goes 'phut'.
In this case I simply use the Pictorial pilot and the altimeter/ASI for
my backup flying. During my instrument training we tested all sorts of
unusual attitude recovery with the Dynon covered up (my CFII is also
building an RV7 so we were both very keen to fully test all the failure
modes). Even with an RV which is a handful when flying in IMC the
Pictorial pilot was all that was needed.
Remember too that when pilots loose control (spatial disorientation) its
99% a failure in the roll mode...I.e you don't lose pitch and end up
pointing straight down/up..its a case of the thing rolls over on its
back...then you might lose pitch control.
Sure an ADI pilot would be nice but its definatly not a need.
But as I said previously the only reason I would consider a PP for VFR
is for a WX emergency..Its still more than you need but nice to
physically see that your wings are level. With the Digitrak you don't
have any visual feedback if you ended up in the clouds.
They sure are nice autopilots!
Frank
Zodiac 400hours.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
sttwig(at)nwinfo.net
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 10:18 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Instrument panel beginner
Frank,
You suggest that all you need is Pictorial Pilot. What is you thoughts
on the ADI Pilot?
Steve
(Corvallis)"
>
>
> Yup Trutrak digitrak or a Pictorial pilot (same thing but with a turn
> coordinator display) is all you need.
>
> Link the above to a handheld GPS and have a steam guage ASI and
> Altimeter.
>
> Frank
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> Werner Schneider
> Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 11:08 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Instrument panel beginner
>
> -->
>
> Hello Matt,
>
> my experience with Navaid are in a way I would not recommend them.
>
> However trutrak is missing in your link list :-)
>
> <http://www.trutrakap.com/autopilot2_2.htm>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rob Turk" <matronics(at)rtist.nl> |
| Subject: | Re: Instrument panel beginner |
Amen to that, Bob. That's how you got to be "Old Bob" in the first place
;-)
Blue skies,
Rob
----- Original Message -----
From: BobsV35B(at)aol.com
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 7:46 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Instrument panel beginner
Good Morning All,
I have no doubt that confidence in the new electronics will eventually
change my mind, but any airplane that I fly will have standard, ancient,
steam gauge, airspeed, altimeter and mechanical turn needle instruments
(Definitely NOT a turn coordinator!) with a ball inclinometer installed
within the turn needle instrument.
About twenty hours of good training will allow anyone to control any
airplane safely with just those three operative instruments.
Figure a thousand bucks for the training, which will stay with you for
life, and another thousand or so for the three instruments.
Beyond that, everything else can be as fancy as possible, but as long
as I can see that needle, ball, and airspeed, I know that I can survive
the flight.
Relying on an autopilot to get me out of trouble is a bit foreign to
my philosophy, though I can see where I may someday accept such
equipment as being reliable enough to bet my life on it.
Meanwhile, that couple of thousand bucks will give me great comfort
while the modern stuff is proving it's suitability to the task!
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Stearman N3977A
Downers Grove, Illinois
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
--> http://forums.matronics.com
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rob Turk" <matronics(at)rtist.nl> |
| Subject: | Re: Switch Labeling |
> Can anyone suggest the preffered method for labeling switches? I know I
> can use a printer and make my own, but would would prefer something more
> durable. I'm thinking of a plastic or aluminum plate with silk-screen
> lettering.
>
> Thanks,
> Mike C.
>
My panel is matte grey. I used a Dymo label printer, with transparent labels
and white print on them. Looks quite nice and has proven to be scratch
resistant.
Rob
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ron Raby" <ronr(at)advanceddesign.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Switch Labeling |
I paid for a silkscreen, painted the base coat had the silkscreen done and
finished with a dull clear coat.
Regards
Ron Raby
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rob Turk" <matronics(at)rtist.nl>
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 1:54 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Switch Labeling
>
>> Can anyone suggest the preffered method for labeling switches? I know I
>> can use a printer and make my own, but would would prefer something more
>> durable. I'm thinking of a plastic or aluminum plate with silk-screen
>> lettering.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Mike C.
>>
>
> My panel is matte grey. I used a Dymo label printer, with transparent
> labels and white print on them. Looks quite nice and has proven to be
> scratch resistant.
>
> Rob
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | David Nelson <david.nelson(at)pobox.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Switch Labeling |
Hi Mike,
Have you looked at Front Panel Express (http://www.frontpanelexpress.com).
They provide free CAD software to design your placards, etc.
I have no experience w/ them, yet. I learned this from Jim and Carolina's RV7
site (http://adap.com/rv7/). Jim provides some advice under the 'Panel 2'
section dated 3/29/07.
Regards,
/\/elson
RV-7A - Fuse
Austin, TX
On Thu, 18 Oct 2007, mwcreek(at)frontiernet.net wrote:
>
>
> Can anyone suggest the preffered method for labeling switches? I know I can
> use a printer and make my own, but would would prefer something more durable.
> I'm thinking of a plastic or aluminum plate with silk-screen lettering.
>
> Thanks,
> Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ernest Christley <echristley(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Switch Labeling |
mwcreek(at)frontiernet.net wrote:
>
>
> Can anyone suggest the preffered method for labeling switches? I know
> I can use a printer and make my own, but would would prefer something
> more durable. I'm thinking of a plastic or aluminum plate with
> silk-screen lettering.
Create your switch layout in a vector drawing program...Inkscape,
CorelDraw, any CAD program. Print a mirror image on cheap inject paper
with a laser printer. Iron it onto aluminum flashing from the hardware
store. Clean with MEK or some such first. Apply a lot of pressure and
let it get hot. Wear gloves. You know it is on good when the lettering
shows up clearly through the paper. Let it soak in warm, soapy water
for an hour.
You'll need sandpaper to get the lettering off.
Keep the image you create, because you'll modify it a couple of times as
you get better ideas. The flashing cuts easily with scissors. The nuts
that hold the screws will hold the label plate.
http://ernest.isa-geek.org/Delta/Pictures/SwitchPanel.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
Yes use a printer to make your own on clear acetate sheet...Put a nice
box around each one and exacto knife out the labels, Set your spacing
out to make the switches (keep printing paper copies) and then use clear
tape to lift the individual boxed labels and slap directly on panel.
More durable?...No need. Mine lasted for 7 years and still looked great.
BUT you keep the MS WORD file with your labels on your PC...If they ever
curl up simply wash them off with mineral spirits and print out a new
set...:)
This word best if you don't hae wrinkle finish paint on your panel.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
mwcreek(at)frontiernet.net
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 11:11 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Switch Labeling
-->
Can anyone suggest the preffered method for labeling switches? I know I
can use a printer and make my own, but would would prefer something more
durable. I'm thinking of a plastic or aluminum plate with silk-screen
lettering.
Thanks,
Mike C.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bret Smith" <smithhb(at)tds.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Instrument panel beginner |
Rob,
You asked "I wonder why you don't include at least the very basic flight
instruments that do not rely on electric power."
You will see that I am planning on the Z-13/8. This wiring structure
incorporates a dual buss with an 8amp alternate alternator to power
essential items should the main 60amp alternator go TU. The PRIMARY backup
is the TT two-axis autopilot. Triple backup is the TT ADI (with it's own
backup battery and GPS. No need for vacuum instruments with this level of
redundancy.
You said "having (4) GPS antenna's on-board sounds a bit overdone."
The primary GPS is the Garmin GNS430. The antenna will be mounted under
the glareshield (under a plexiglass panel) and will support the EFIS as well
as XM WX. The alt GPS is part of the Grand Rapids Horizon 1 EFIS and is
purely a VFR backup. It's antenna will be mounted beside the Garmin
antenna. Having dual antennas removes the single point of failure in the
design. The only other GPS is the backup for the TT ADI. I'm not sure
where you get a 4th GPS antenna although it doesn't really matter since
these small antennas together, side-by-side will fit in the palm of your
hand.
This model is a tried and true design and is currently being flown by
several fellow builders an a rock-solid IFR platform. Having dual P-Mags
offers an electrically independent engine as well. To my understanding, the
only "dark and stormy" scenario that would defeat the design is an in-flight
fire. In which case there is little one can do except land ASAP.
I welcome your critique.
Bret Smith
RV-9A (91314)
Mineral Bluff, GA
www.FlightInnovations.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rob Turk
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 1:09 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Instrument panel beginner
Bret,
As you said, opinions differ. I looked at your site, and while you have made
some excellent choises, I wonder why you don't include at least the very
basic flight instruments that do not rely on electric power.
Also, having (4) GPS antenna's on-board sounds a bit overdone. Most
GPS-based equipment accepts NMEA protocol. It's not hard to take one GPS
receiver and feed the NMEA protocol into all equipment that requires
position/speed information.
.. And so another episode in the discussion opens.. ;-)
Rob
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bret Smith" <smithhb(at)tds.net>
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 5:31 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Instrument panel beginner
>
> Don,
>
> Regarding any and all aircraft avionics or electrical systems you will
> soon
> discover that they are constantly changing and improving all the time. As
> a
> result, like many of us, your original choices and decisions will change
> frequently over time.
>
> No subject can ever close... We all are here for one reason, to learn from
> each other to do the best we can possibly do. Opinions will always vary
> and
> sometimes the repertoire can become quite lively, but in the end we will
> learn something...and that is the goal.
>
> Here is my ongoing decision model from my website...
> http://www.flightinnovations.com/considerations.html.
>
> Welcome to our class.
>
>
> Bret Smith
> RV-9A (91314)
> Mineral Bluff, GA
> www.FlightInnovations.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> mosquito56
> Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 2:59 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Instrument panel beginner
>
> -->
>
> Great to see so many people putting in their 2 cents. I will be closing
> this
> subject since everything is as clear as mud and alot of fun.
> Lots of great info. Thanx much for the info. Had a ball.
> Gday 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=140585#140585
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rob Turk" <matronics(at)rtist.nl> |
| Subject: | Re: Instrument panel beginner |
Bret,
I would include an altimeter and ASI as minimum backup, together with a
compass. No need for any vacuum stuff, just a static and pitot.
Relying on redundant electronics is fine, and if you trust your gear, go
for it. My worry would be something like a lightning surge. Your
electrical circuits are not immune to picking up surges from nearby
lightning, and a single surge can wipe out basically everything you have
that lets you navigate the plane. Not that you should be flying anywhere
near such conditions, but sometime you might get caught in bad weather.
You have plenty antennas to pick up a surge. Maybe someone with more
theoretical knowledge can go into details, but nearby lightning can
generate fields of something like 10 volts/foot. Having a number of
antennas several feet apart can easily cause a potential surge of a few
hundred volts to hit your precious gear.
The reference to 4 GPS antennas is taken directly from your site, I
didn't try to match your number to actual equipment. It says: "Antennas:
I will be installing (2) COM antennas, (1) NAV antenna, (1) Marker
Beacon antenna, (4)GPS antennas, (1) ELT antenna and (1) Transponder
antenna.".
Hth,
Rob
----- Original Message -----
From: Bret Smith
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 10:15 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Instrument panel beginner
Rob,
You asked "I wonder why you don't include at least the very basic
flight instruments that do not rely on electric power."
You will see that I am planning on the Z-13/8. This wiring
structure incorporates a dual buss with an 8amp alternate alternator to
power essential items should the main 60amp alternator go TU. The
PRIMARY backup is the TT two-axis autopilot. Triple backup is the TT
ADI (with it's own backup battery and GPS. No need for vacuum
instruments with this level of redundancy.
You said "having (4) GPS antenna's on-board sounds a bit overdone."
The primary GPS is the Garmin GNS430. The antenna will be mounted
under the glareshield (under a plexiglass panel) and will support the
EFIS as well as XM WX. The alt GPS is part of the Grand Rapids Horizon
1 EFIS and is purely a VFR backup. It's antenna will be mounted beside
the Garmin antenna. Having dual antennas removes the single point of
failure in the design. The only other GPS is the backup for the TT ADI.
I'm not sure where you get a 4th GPS antenna although it doesn't really
matter since these small antennas together, side-by-side will fit in the
palm of your hand.
This model is a tried and true design and is currently being flown by
several fellow builders an a rock-solid IFR platform. Having dual
P-Mags offers an electrically independent engine as well. To my
understanding, the only "dark and stormy" scenario that would defeat the
design is an in-flight fire. In which case there is little one can do
except land ASAP.
I welcome your critique.
Bret Smith
RV-9A (91314)
Mineral Bluff, GA
www.FlightInnovations.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "mike humphrey" <mike109g6(at)insideconnect.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Switch Labeling |
Mike C.
Wick's, Chief and A/C Spruce have pre-printed label sheets already on
adhesive. White on clear or black on clear or the white print on black.
Huge sheets with tons of labels common to all a/c. Very easy to peal and
stick. No spacing requirements. Take a look.
Mike H 9A/8A
----- Original Message -----
From: <mwcreek(at)frontiernet.net>
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 2:10 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Switch Labeling
>
>
> Can anyone suggest the preffered method for labeling switches? I know I
> can use a printer and make my own, but would would prefer something more
> durable. I'm thinking of a plastic or aluminum plate with silk-screen
> lettering.
>
> Thanks,
> Mike C.
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "H. M. Haught Jr. " <handainc(at)madisoncounty.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Switch Labeling |
Ernest -
Man, what a neat idea! What is inject paper? By the way, got any photos?
M. Haught
Ernest Christley wrote:
>
>
> mwcreek(at)frontiernet.net wrote:
>>
>>
>> Can anyone suggest the preffered method for labeling switches? I
>> know I can use a printer and make my own, but would would prefer
>> something more durable. I'm thinking of a plastic or aluminum plate
>> with silk-screen lettering.
> Create your switch layout in a vector drawing program...Inkscape,
> CorelDraw, any CAD program. Print a mirror image on cheap inject
> paper with a laser printer. Iron it onto aluminum flashing from the
> hardware store. Clean with MEK or some such first. Apply a lot of
> pressure and let it get hot. Wear gloves. You know it is on good
> when the lettering shows up clearly through the paper. Let it soak in
> warm, soapy water for an hour.
>
> You'll need sandpaper to get the lettering off.
> Keep the image you create, because you'll modify it a couple of times
> as you get better ideas. The flashing cuts easily with scissors. The
> nuts that hold the screws will hold the label plate.
>
> http://ernest.isa-geek.org/Delta/Pictures/SwitchPanel.jpg
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "H. M. Haught Jr. " <handainc(at)madisoncounty.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Instrument panel beginner |
Bret -
Enjoyed your site, and wanted to to know I am adapting your paint scheme
to a Bearhawk (file attached- dark color is a bright,deep orange over a
complimentary yellow shade - used for visibility in the bush). I like
the simplicity and I think it lends itself well to the Bearhawk lines.
Using your ideas for instrumentation, what are your thoughts on
instrumentation for a VFR airplane, that might occasionally, file
special VFR to get out of a low ceiling situation flying into clear air?
M. Haught
Bret Smith wrote:
>
> Rob,
> You asked "I wonder why you don't include at least the very basic
> flight instruments that do not rely on electric power."
> You will see that I am planning on the Z-13/8. This wiring
> structure incorporates a dual buss with an 8amp alternate alternator
> to power essential items should the main 60amp alternator go TU. The
> PRIMARY backup is the TT two-axis autopilot. Triple backup is the TT
> ADI (with it's own backup battery and GPS. No need for vacuum
> instruments with this level of redundancy.
>
> You said "having (4) GPS antenna's on-board sounds a bit overdone."
> The primary GPS is the Garmin GNS430. The antenna will be mounted
> under the glareshield (under a plexiglass panel) and will support the
> EFIS as well as XM WX. The alt GPS is part of the Grand Rapids
> Horizon 1 EFIS and is purely a VFR backup. It's antenna will be
> mounted beside the Garmin antenna. Having dual antennas removes the
> single point of failure in the design. The only other GPS is the
> backup for the TT ADI. I'm not sure where you get a 4th GPS antenna
> although it doesn't really matter since these small antennas together,
> side-by-side will fit in the palm of your hand.
>
> This model is a tried and true design and is currently being flown by
> several fellow builders an a rock-solid IFR platform. Having dual
> P-Mags offers an electrically independent engine as well. To my
> understanding, the only "dark and stormy" scenario that would defeat
> the design is an in-flight fire. In which case there is little one
> can do except land ASAP.
>
> I welcome your critique.
>
>
> Bret Smith
> RV-9A (91314)
> Mineral Bluff, GA
> www.FlightInnovations.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rob
> Turk
> Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 1:09 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Instrument panel beginner
>
>
> Bret,
>
> As you said, opinions differ. I looked at your site, and while you
> have made some excellent choises, I wonder why you don't include at
> least the very basic flight instruments that do not rely on electric
> power.
>
> Also, having (4) GPS antenna's on-board sounds a bit overdone. Most
> GPS-based equipment accepts NMEA protocol. It's not hard to take one
> GPS receiver and feed the NMEA protocol into all equipment that
> requires position/speed information.
>
> .. And so another episode in the discussion opens.. ;-)
>
> Rob
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bret Smith" <smithhb(at)tds.net>
> To:
> Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 5:31 PM
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Instrument panel beginner
>
>
> >
> > Don,
> >
> > Regarding any and all aircraft avionics or electrical systems you will
> > soon
> > discover that they are constantly changing and improving all the
> time. As
> > a
> > result, like many of us, your original choices and decisions will change
> > frequently over time.
> >
> > No subject can ever close... We all are here for one reason, to
> learn from
> > each other to do the best we can possibly do. Opinions will always vary
> > and
> > sometimes the repertoire can become quite lively, but in the end we will
> > learn something...and that is the goal.
> >
> > Here is my ongoing decision model from my website...
> > http://www.flightinnovations.com/considerations.html.
> >
> > Welcome to our class.
> >
> >
> > Bret Smith
> > RV-9A (91314)
> > Mineral Bluff, GA
> > www.FlightInnovations.com
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> > mosquito56
> > Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 2:59 AM
> > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Instrument panel beginner
> >
> > -->
> >
> > Great to see so many people putting in their 2 cents. I will be closing
> > this
> > subject since everything is as clear as mud and alot of fun.
> > Lots of great info. Thanx much for the info. Had a ball.
> > Gday 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=140585#140585
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >nbsp; Features Subscriptions
> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List">http://www.p;
> available via
> href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>
>
> *
>
>
> *
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: shielded headset jack wiring? |
>Gang:
>
>The wiring diagram for my radio seems to show a shielded pair going to the
>mike connector (audio and key) and a single shielded wire going to the
>earphones.
>
>[1] Is it reasonable to use a single 3-wire shielded cable for this?
It would be better to follow the manufacturer's
instructions.
>
>[2] If I use stick-mounted PTT switches, is there any reason to use run
>the key wire all the way to the mike connector? Couldn't I just run it
>to the switch? (Yes, I know that this would make it impossible to use a
>remote PTT through the connector.)
yes
>
>[3] If I do that, can I just run a shielded pair to the connector (mike
>and earphones)?
They can be single shielded wires then. Use the
shield as "ground" for the respective jack.
Don't forget to insulate the jacks from a
metal airframe.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jeff Page <jpx(at)qenesis.com> |
I am looking to buy 3 conductor shielded 16 gauge wire for my wing tip
strobes.
I have been looking for M27500-16TE3T14 but can only find M27500-16TG3T14.
Looking at wire specs, it is difficult to see differences.
I think the main difference between the two is that TE wire has
M22759/16 wires, which have thicker insulation than TG wire with
M22759/18 wires.
Since the wires are protected inside the jacket, does the insulation
thickness matter for my purposes ?
Thanks
Jeff Page
Dream Aircraft Tundra #10
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bret Smith" <smithhb(at)tds.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Instrument panel beginner |
Good points Rob, I failed to mention that the GRT EIS will be able to
display altitude and airspeed as well. I suppose a direct lightening strike
could do some damage, however, as long as the engine is running I have
options...such as pulling out my handheld COM and GPS. Hopefully with only
two exposed antennas (COM 1 and XPR) I can minimize the risk of electrical
surge.
Bret Smith
RV-9A (91314)
Mineral Bluff, GA
www.FlightInnovations.com
_____
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rob Turk
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 5:43 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Instrument panel beginner
Bret,
I would include an altimeter and ASI as minimum backup, together with a
compass. No need for any vacuum stuff, just a static and pitot.
Relying on redundant electronics is fine, and if you trust your gear, go for
it. My worry would be something like a lightning surge. Your electrical
circuits are not immune to picking up surges from nearby lightning, and a
single surge can wipe out basically everything you have that lets you
navigate the plane. Not that you should be flying anywhere near such
conditions, but sometime you might get caught in bad weather.
You have plenty antennas to pick up a surge. Maybe someone with more
theoretical knowledge can go into details, but nearby lightning can generate
fields of something like 10 volts/foot. Having a number of antennas several
feet apart can easily cause a potential surge of a few hundred volts to hit
your precious gear.
The reference to 4 GPS antennas is taken directly from your site, I didn't
try to match your number to actual equipment. It says: "Antennas: I will be
installing (2) COM antennas, (1) NAV antenna, (1) Marker Beacon antenna,
(4)GPS antennas, (1) ELT antenna and (1) Transponder antenna.".
Hth,
Rob
----- Original Message -----
From: Bret Smith <mailto:smithhb(at)tds.net>
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 10:15 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Instrument panel beginner
Rob,
You asked "I wonder why you don't include at least the very basic flight
instruments that do not rely on electric power."
You will see that I am planning on the Z-13/8. This wiring structure
incorporates a dual buss with an 8amp alternate alternator to power
essential items should the main 60amp alternator go TU. The PRIMARY backup
is the TT two-axis autopilot. Triple backup is the TT ADI (with it's own
backup battery and GPS. No need for vacuum instruments with this level of
redundancy.
You said "having (4) GPS antenna's on-board sounds a bit overdone."
The primary GPS is the Garmin GNS430. The antenna will be mounted under
the glareshield (under a plexiglass panel) and will support the EFIS as well
as XM WX. The alt GPS is part of the Grand Rapids Horizon 1 EFIS and is
purely a VFR backup. It's antenna will be mounted beside the Garmin
antenna. Having dual antennas removes the single point of failure in the
design. The only other GPS is the backup for the TT ADI. I'm not sure
where you get a 4th GPS antenna although it doesn't really matter since
these small antennas together, side-by-side will fit in the palm of your
hand.
This model is a tried and true design and is currently being flown by
several fellow builders an a rock-solid IFR platform. Having dual P-Mags
offers an electrically independent engine as well. To my understanding, the
only "dark and stormy" scenario that would defeat the design is an in-flight
fire. In which case there is little one can do except land ASAP.
I welcome your critique.
Bret Smith
RV-9A (91314)
Mineral Bluff, GA
www.FlightInnovations.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ernest Christley <echristley(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Switch Labeling |
H. M. Haught Jr. wrote:
>
>
> Ernest -
>
> Man, what a neat idea! What is inject paper? By the way, got any photos?
> M. Haught
>
Oops! That should be inkjet paper. Sorry for the typo. But do get the
cheapest storebrand paper you can find. The expensive stuff literally
will not work. The cheap stuff has a coating that dissolves in water.
The expensive stuff is formulated to be water resistant, and will make
you sad in this case.
All the photos I have of my project can be found at
http://ernest.isa-geek.org/Delta/Pictures . I'll actually get around to
writing about all of them some day.
> Ernest Christley wrote:
>>
>>
>> mwcreek(at)frontiernet.net wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Can anyone suggest the preffered method for labeling switches? I
>>> know I can use a printer and make my own, but would would prefer
>>> something more durable. I'm thinking of a plastic or aluminum plate
>>> with silk-screen lettering.
>> Create your switch layout in a vector drawing program...Inkscape,
>> CorelDraw, any CAD program. Print a mirror image on cheap inject
>> paper with a laser printer. Iron it onto aluminum flashing from the
>> hardware store. Clean with MEK or some such first. Apply a lot of
>> pressure and let it get hot. Wear gloves. You know it is on good
>> when the lettering shows up clearly through the paper. Let it soak
>> in warm, soapy water for an hour.
>>
>> You'll need sandpaper to get the lettering off.
>> Keep the image you create, because you'll modify it a couple of times
>> as you get better ideas. The flashing cuts easily with scissors.
>> The nuts that hold the screws will hold the label plate.
>>
>> http://ernest.isa-geek.org/Delta/Pictures/SwitchPanel.jpg
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
--
"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: | "Bill Hibbing" <n744bh(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Strobe cable |
Jeff,
Check http://strobeguy.safeshopper.com/32/cat32.htm?620
Give him a call and see if what he sells is what you want. I've only done
business with him one time but was very satisfied and he did save me a few
dollars.
Bill
Glasair SIIS-FT
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Page" <jpx(at)qenesis.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 9:37 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Strobe cable
>
> I am looking to buy 3 conductor shielded 16 gauge wire for my wing tip
> strobes.
> I have been looking for M27500-16TE3T14 but can only find M27500-16TG3T14.
> Looking at wire specs, it is difficult to see differences.
> I think the main difference between the two is that TE wire has M22759/16
> wires, which have thicker insulation than TG wire with M22759/18 wires.
> Since the wires are protected inside the jacket, does the insulation
> thickness matter for my purposes ?
> Thanks
> Jeff Page
> Dream Aircraft Tundra #10
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bret Smith" <smithhb(at)tds.net> |
| Subject: | Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation |
M,
Your paint scheme looks great! Actually, I "borrowed" the scheme from the
HondaJet prototype.
I must admit that I am not an avionics expert and would prefer to differ
your question to the many more knowledgeable folks on this list, however,
aside from the minimum requirements depicted in the FARs, I would consider
something like this:
* Dynon D100 - EFIS - Bright Screen
* Includes Backup Battery, Mounting Tray, Remote Mount Compass, USB to
Serial Port Cable & Factory Harness
* Dynon D120 - EMS - Bright Screen
* Includes 4 Cylinder Engine Probe Kit
* Garmin GPSMAP 396
* AirGizmo Panel Dock
* Garmin SL40 COM
* Garmin GTX327 Transponder*
* PS Engineering PM3000 Intercom
* UMA 2 1/4" Airspeed Indicator
* UMA 2 1/4" 20,000ft Atimeter
Bret Smith
RV-9A (91314)
Mineral Bluff, GA
www.FlightInnovations.com
_____
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of H. M.
Haught Jr.
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 7:12 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Instrument panel beginner
Bret -
Enjoyed your site, and wanted to to know I am adapting your paint scheme to
a Bearhawk (file attached- dark color is a bright,deep orange over a
complimentary yellow shade - used for visibility in the bush). I like the
simplicity and I think it lends itself well to the Bearhawk lines.
Using your ideas for instrumentation, what are your thoughts on
instrumentation for a VFR airplane, that might occasionally, file special
VFR to get out of a low ceiling situation flying into clear air?
M. Haught
Bret Smith wrote:
Rob,
You asked "I wonder why you don't include at least the very basic flight
instruments that do not rely on electric power."
You will see that I am planning on the Z-13/8. This wiring structure
incorporates a dual buss with an 8amp alternate alternator to power
essential items should the main 60amp alternator go TU. The PRIMARY backup
is the TT two-axis autopilot. Triple backup is the TT ADI (with it's own
backup battery and GPS. No need for vacuum instruments with this level of
redundancy.
You said "having (4) GPS antenna's on-board sounds a bit overdone."
The primary GPS is the Garmin GNS430. The antenna will be mounted under
the glareshield (under a plexiglass panel) and will support the EFIS as well
as XM WX. The alt GPS is part of the Grand Rapids Horizon 1 EFIS and is
purely a VFR backup. It's antenna will be mounted beside the Garmin
antenna. Having dual antennas removes the single point of failure in the
design. The only other GPS is the backup for the TT ADI. I'm not sure
where you get a 4th GPS antenna although it doesn't really matter since
these small antennas together, side-by-side will fit in the palm of your
hand.
This model is a tried and true design and is currently being flown by
several fellow builders an a rock-solid IFR platform. Having dual P-Mags
offers an electrically independent engine as well. To my understanding, the
only "dark and stormy" scenario that would defeat the design is an in-flight
fire. In which case there is little one can do except land ASAP.
I welcome your critique.
Bret Smith
RV-9A (91314)
Mineral Bluff, GA
www.FlightInnovations.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rob Turk
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 1:09 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Instrument panel beginner
Bret,
As you said, opinions differ. I looked at your site, and while you have made
some excellent choises, I wonder why you don't include at least the very
basic flight instruments that do not rely on electric power.
Also, having (4) GPS antenna's on-board sounds a bit overdone. Most
GPS-based equipment accepts NMEA protocol. It's not hard to take one GPS
receiver and feed the NMEA protocol into all equipment that requires
position/speed information.
.. And so another episode in the discussion opens.. ;-)
Rob
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bret Smith" <mailto:smithhb(at)tds.net> <smithhb(at)tds.net>
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 5:31 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Instrument panel beginner
>
> Don,
>
> Regarding any and all aircraft avionics or electrical systems you will
> soon
> discover that they are constantly changing and improving all the time. As
> a
> result, like many of us, your original choices and decisions will change
> frequently over time.
>
> No subject can ever close... We all are here for one reason, to learn from
> each other to do the best we can possibly do. Opinions will always vary
> and
> sometimes the repertoire can become quite lively, but in the end we will
> learn something...and that is the goal.
>
> Here is my ongoing decision model from my website...
> http://www.flightinnovations.com/considerations.html.
>
> Welcome to our class.
>
>
> Bret Smith
> RV-9A (91314)
> Mineral Bluff, GA
> www.FlightInnovations.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> mosquito56
> Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 2:59 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Instrument panel beginner
>
> -->
>
> Great to see so many people putting in their 2 cents. I will be closing
> this
> subject since everything is as clear as mud and alot of fun.
> Lots of great info. Thanx much for the info. Had a ball.
> Gday 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=140585#140585
>
>
>nbsp; Features Subscriptions
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List"
<http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List> >http://www.p;
available via href="http://forums.matronics.com"
<http://forums.matronics.com> >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
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Strobe cable |
>
>I am looking to buy 3 conductor shielded 16 gauge wire for my wing tip
>strobes.
As far as I know, the wire shipped in factory kits for
strobe installation has been a Belden product having
100% coverage, "Beldfoil" shield. These products
are described in the documents you'll find at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Mfgr_Data/Wire/Belden/
>I have been looking for M27500-16TE3T14 but can only find M27500-16TG3T14.
>Looking at wire specs, it is difficult to see differences.
>I think the main difference between the two is that TE wire has
>M22759/16 wires, which have thicker insulation than TG wire with
>M22759/18 wires.
>Since the wires are protected inside the jacket, does the insulation
>thickness matter for my purposes ?
No, either of those wires would do. The wire gage
isn't really critical either. Voltage drop in smaller
even smaller wires is insignificant for these
installations. The insulation for Belden wire
is PVC over Polyethylene. This is admittedly
a "1960s" wire product but has proven successful
in hundreds of thousands of aircraft. This is
a low energy circuit that doesn't need
fault protection for the installed wires so
spending much $time$ acquiring a more exotic
wire product may not be well invested.
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: Strobe cable |
>
>Jeff,
>
>Check http://strobeguy.safeshopper.com/32/cat32.htm?620
>
>Give him a call and see if what he sells is what you want. I've only done
>business with him one time but was very satisfied and he did save me a few
>dollars.
The wire illustrated at
http://strobeguy.safeshopper.com/32/1922.htm?248
appears to be the Belden product I cited earlier.
. . . and the price is certainly right! A Belden
distributor will want to sell you a 1000' at
about 5 cents per foot.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Strobe cable |
>
>Jeff,
>
>Check http://strobeguy.safeshopper.com/32/cat32.htm?620
>
>Give him a call and see if what he sells is what you want. I've only done
>business with him one time but was very satisfied and he did save me a few
>dollars.
The wire illustrated at
http://strobeguy.safeshopper.com/32/1922.htm?248
appears to be the Belden product I cited earlier.
. . . and the price is certainly right! A Belden
distributor will want to sell you a 1000' at
about 5 cents per foot.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Strobe cable (oops!) |
>
>Jeff,
>
>Check http://strobeguy.safeshopper.com/32/cat32.htm?620
>
>Give him a call and see if what he sells is what you want. I've only done
>business with him one time but was very satisfied and he did save me a few
>dollars.
The wire illustrated at
http://strobeguy.safeshopper.com/32/1922.htm?248
appears to be the Belden product I cited earlier.
. . . and the price is certainly right! A Belden
distributor will want to sell you a 1000' at
about 50 CENTS PER FOOT (not 5).
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David & Elaine Lamphere" <lamphere(at)vabb.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Switch Labeling |
For panel labeling (switches, controls, etc) I used Inkjet Decal paper. You
make up your file using Word, Wordpad, or whatever program you like, print
out the file on this paper. Spray on a coat of gloss clear Krylon. Cut,
apply like any other decal, soaking in water, then positioning. After
drying, you should then put a coat of a good quality clear paint over this -
I used a two part urethane for this. While a little more work, it does
result in nice labeling. Even did up a color coded fuel selector label. This
is a very flexible method for labels, graphics, and such that are not your
run-of-the mill items. If this is too much trouble, there's always the
clear, sticky back labels that you can get from ACS or EAA.
The website for this decal paper is:
http://www.decal-paper.com/inkjet.html
Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ernest Christley" <echristley(at)nc.rr.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 10:44 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Switch Labeling
>
>
> H. M. Haught Jr. wrote:
>>
>>
>> Ernest -
>>
>> Man, what a neat idea! What is inject paper? By the way, got any photos?
>> M. Haught
>>
>
> Oops! That should be inkjet paper. Sorry for the typo. But do get the
> cheapest storebrand paper you can find. The expensive stuff literally
> will not work. The cheap stuff has a coating that dissolves in water.
> The expensive stuff is formulated to be water resistant, and will make you
> sad in this case.
>
> All the photos I have of my project can be found at
> http://ernest.isa-geek.org/Delta/Pictures . I'll actually get around to
> writing about all of them some day.
>
>> Ernest Christley wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> mwcreek(at)frontiernet.net wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Can anyone suggest the preffered method for labeling switches? I know
>>>> I can use a printer and make my own, but would would prefer something
>>>> more durable. I'm thinking of a plastic or aluminum plate with
>>>> silk-screen lettering.
>>> Create your switch layout in a vector drawing program...Inkscape,
>>> CorelDraw, any CAD program. Print a mirror image on cheap inject paper
>>> with a laser printer. Iron it onto aluminum flashing from the hardware
>>> store. Clean with MEK or some such first. Apply a lot of pressure and
>>> let it get hot. Wear gloves. You know it is on good when the lettering
>>> shows up clearly through the paper. Let it soak in warm, soapy water
>>> for an hour.
>>>
>>> You'll need sandpaper to get the lettering off.
>>> Keep the image you create, because you'll modify it a couple of times as
>>> you get better ideas. The flashing cuts easily with scissors. The nuts
>>> that hold the screws will hold the label plate.
>>>
>>> http://ernest.isa-geek.org/Delta/Pictures/SwitchPanel.jpg
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
> --
> "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: | Neil Clayton <harvey4(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Strobe cable - another question/same topic |
I just installed my strobe cables yesterday (I now have two working
strobes - yea!!!)
Inside the wire bundle were the three conductors wrapped in a foil
sleeve, but there's a forth bare conductor, which I presume is a ground.
What do I do with that? Where to connect it? Snip it off?
Thanks
Neil
At 10:04 AM 10/19/2007, you wrote:
>
>
>
>>
>>I am looking to buy 3 conductor shielded 16 gauge wire for my wing tip
>>strobes.
>
> As far as I know, the wire shipped in factory kits for
> strobe installation has been a Belden product having
> 100% coverage, "Beldfoil" shield. These products
> are described in the documents you'll find at:
>
>http://www.aeroelectric.com/Mfgr_Data/Wire/Belden/
>
>>I have been looking for M27500-16TE3T14 but can only find M27500-16TG3T14.
>>Looking at wire specs, it is difficult to see differences.
>>I think the main difference between the two is that TE wire has
>>M22759/16 wires, which have thicker insulation than TG wire with
>>M22759/18 wires.
>>Since the wires are protected inside the jacket, does the insulation
>>thickness matter for my purposes ?
>
> No, either of those wires would do. The wire gage
> isn't really critical either. Voltage drop in smaller
> even smaller wires is insignificant for these
> installations. The insulation for Belden wire
> is PVC over Polyethylene. This is admittedly
> a "1960s" wire product but has proven successful
> in hundreds of thousands of aircraft. This is
> a low energy circuit that doesn't need
> fault protection for the installed wires so
> spending much $time$ acquiring a more exotic
> wire product may not be well invested.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
> ----------------------------------------
> ( "Problems are the price of progress. )
> ( Don't bring me anything but trouble. )
> ( Good news weakens me." )
> ( -Charles F. Kettering- )
> ----------------------------------------
>
>
>--
>269.15.1/1079 - Release Date: 10/19/2007 5:10 AM
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Strobe cable - another question/same topic |
Neil Clayton wrote:
>
> I just installed my strobe cables yesterday (I now have two working
> strobes - yea!!!)
> Inside the wire bundle were the three conductors wrapped in a foil
> sleeve, but there's a forth bare conductor, which I presume is a ground.
> What do I do with that? Where to connect it? Snip it off?
>
> Thanks
> Neil
>
>
Hi Neil,
That wire is the connection for the foil shield. Connect it wherever
the shield is supposed to be connected.
Bob W.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Strobe cable - another question/same topic |
>
>Neil Clayton wrote:
>
>
> >
> > I just installed my strobe cables yesterday (I now have two working
> > strobes - yea!!!)
> > Inside the wire bundle were the three conductors wrapped in a foil
> > sleeve, but there's a forth bare conductor, which I presume is a ground.
> > What do I do with that? Where to connect it? Snip it off?
> >
> > Thanks
> > Neil
> >
> >
>Hi Neil,
>
>That wire is the connection for the foil shield. Connect it wherever
>the shield is supposed to be connected.
>
>Bob W.
Neil, here's an excerpt from the wire catalog
on this technology.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Mfgr_Data/Wire/Belden/Beldfoil_Shielding.jpg
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: AA batteries... |
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.
Yes.
From a design perspective, producing this
product is problematic. Simply stacking AA
cells requires some pressure be maintained
between cells. The cells also have to have
some degree of "looseness" in their cavities
for production tolerance stackup. This means
that pressure contacts are subject to fretting
corrosion not unlike the condition we've all
seen in flashlights . . . bad cases require
that you "shake" the flashlight to get it
to brighten up.
I was skeptical of the posting and went out
to purchase three brands of 6v lantern
batteries from two sources. The first flag
went up when outside measurements of the
6v battery were exactly 2x the length
of a single AA cell. Stacked height of
two layers, 16 cells each would not have
enough room inside the 6v envelope to
wire and retain the loose cells. See:
http://tinyurl.com/2busaw
and
http://tinyurl.com/2fu59k
I pulled two batteries apart to find the expected
array of 4 f-cells. The loose "f-cell" used to be a
pretty common catalog item but now seems to have
gone underground and favored only by the military
as the Mil-B-18/79; BA-401/U (carbon zinc)
and BA-402/U (alkaline?).
http://tinyurl.com/2299l6
The last commercial stronghold of the f-cell seems
to be as components of a 6v lantern battery.
Bottom line is I believe the video is a hoax.
Several folks have communicated their interest
and obtained 6v lantern batteries. One guy had
the exact same brand as shown in the video. All
6v batteries examined had 4 "F" size cells.
The nagging question is why someone would do
such a thing. I'll bet thousands of 6V lantern
batteries have been torn open with the expectation
of finding a fist-full of AA cells . . .
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------
( "Problems are the price of progress. )
( Don't bring me anything but trouble. )
( Good news weakens me." )
( -Charles F. Kettering- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation |
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
Money, money, money...must be funny in a rich mans world.
Gee this an IFR panel minus a nice GNS 430 and the needles....way
overkill, even for your supposed "Special" VFR departures (I say
supposed because there is a fine line between special VFR and
IFR...which will get you killed in short order)
Lets see you a gyro setup in the D100 which is totally not required and
steam guage backups.
Your very best and most reliable attitude indicator is "looking out the
window"...Thats what VFR flying is all about...On top of that this panel
now has redundant ASI's and altimeters.
Its very nice but you will never use most of it VFR.
If you really must have that "special" capability your still better off
with a wing levelling autopilot that will keep you sunny side up without
having to have the skills of an instrument pilot...I.e engage the A/P
onthe ground and fly stright out up and thru.
Frank
zodiac 400 hours VFR
RV7a 225 hours IFR
________________________________
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bret
Smith
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 8:32 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation
M,
Your paint scheme looks great! Actually, I "borrowed" the scheme from
the HondaJet prototype.
I must admit that I am not an avionics expert and would prefer to differ
your question to the many more knowledgeable folks on this list,
however, aside from the minimum requirements depicted in the FARs, I
would consider something like this:
* Dynon D100 - EFIS - Bright Screen
* Includes Backup Battery, Mounting Tray, Remote Mount
Compass, USB to Serial Port Cable & Factory Harness
* Dynon D120 - EMS - Bright Screen
* Includes 4 Cylinder Engine Probe Kit
* Garmin GPSMAP 396
* AirGizmo Panel Dock
* Garmin SL40 COM
* Garmin GTX327 Transponder*
* PS Engineering PM3000 Intercom
* UMA 2 1/4" Airspeed Indicator
* UMA 2 1/4" 20,000ft Atimeter
Bret Smith
RV-9A (91314)
Mineral Bluff, GA
www.FlightInnovations.com
________________________________
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of H. M.
Haught Jr.
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 7:12 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Instrument panel beginner
Bret -
Enjoyed your site, and wanted to to know I am adapting your paint scheme
to a Bearhawk (file attached- dark color is a bright,deep orange over a
complimentary yellow shade - used for visibility in the bush). I like
the simplicity and I think it lends itself well to the Bearhawk lines.
Using your ideas for instrumentation, what are your thoughts on
instrumentation for a VFR airplane, that might occasionally, file
special VFR to get out of a low ceiling situation flying into clear air?
M. Haught
Bret Smith wrote:
Rob,
You asked "I wonder why you don't include at least the very
basic flight instruments that do not rely on electric power."
You will see that I am planning on the Z-13/8. This wiring
structure incorporates a dual buss with an 8amp alternate alternator to
power essential items should the main 60amp alternator go TU. The
PRIMARY backup is the TT two-axis autopilot. Triple backup is the TT
ADI (with it's own backup battery and GPS. No need for vacuum
instruments with this level of redundancy.
You said "having (4) GPS antenna's on-board sounds a bit
overdone."
The primary GPS is the Garmin GNS430. The antenna will be
mounted under the glareshield (under a plexiglass panel) and will
support the EFIS as well as XM WX. The alt GPS is part of the Grand
Rapids Horizon 1 EFIS and is purely a VFR backup. It's antenna will be
mounted beside the Garmin antenna. Having dual antennas removes the
single point of failure in the design. The only other GPS is the backup
for the TT ADI. I'm not sure where you get a 4th GPS antenna although
it doesn't really matter since these small antennas together,
side-by-side will fit in the palm of your hand.
This model is a tried and true design and is currently being
flown by several fellow builders an a rock-solid IFR platform. Having
dual P-Mags offers an electrically independent engine as well. To my
understanding, the only "dark and stormy" scenario that would defeat the
design is an in-flight fire. In which case there is little one can do
except land ASAP.
I welcome your critique.
Bret Smith
RV-9A (91314)
Mineral Bluff, GA
www.FlightInnovations.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [
mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rob
Turk
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 1:09 PM
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Instrument panel beginner
Bret,
As you said, opinions differ. I looked at your site, and while
you have made some excellent choises, I wonder why you don't include at
least the very basic flight instruments that do not rely on electric
power.
Also, having (4) GPS antenna's on-board sounds a bit overdone.
Most GPS-based equipment accepts NMEA protocol. It's not hard to take
one GPS receiver and feed the NMEA protocol into all equipment that
requires position/speed information.
.. And so another episode in the discussion opens.. ;-)
Rob
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bret Smith" <smithhb(at)tds.net> <mailto:smithhb(at)tds.net>
To:
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 5:31 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Instrument panel beginner
>
> Don,
>
> Regarding any and all aircraft avionics or electrical systems
you will
> soon
> discover that they are constantly changing and improving all
the time. As
> a
> result, like many of us, your original choices and decisions
will change
> frequently over time.
>
> No subject can ever close... We all are here for one reason,
to learn from
> each other to do the best we can possibly do. Opinions will
always vary
> and
> sometimes the repertoire can become quite lively, but in the
end we will
> learn something...and that is the goal.
>
> Here is my ongoing decision model from my website...
> http://www.flightinnovations.com/considerations.html.
>
> Welcome to our class.
>
>
> Bret Smith
> RV-9A (91314)
> Mineral Bluff, GA
> www.FlightInnovations.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On
Behalf Of
> mosquito56
> Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 2:59 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Instrument panel beginner
>
> -->
>
> Great to see so many people putting in their 2 cents. I will
be closing
> this
> subject since everything is as clear as mud and alot of fun.
> Lots of great info. Thanx much for the info. Had a ball.
> Gday 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=140585#140585
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>nbsp; Features Subscriptions href
"http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List"
<http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List> >http://www.p;
available via href="http://forums.matronics.com"
<http://forums.matronics.com> >http://forums.matronics.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List">http://www.
m
atronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bret Smith" <smithhb(at)tds.net> |
| Subject: | Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation |
Frank,
I agree with you up to a point... The panel shown is an actual panel offered
by Chief Aircraft and sells for $11,450.00!
http://www.chiefaircraft.com/airsec/Avionics/Avionics.html
You can actually do even better through John Stark. He had asked what "I"
would suggest for a VFR panel with some IFR capabilities. The addition of
an autopilot is for workload reduction or as a primary backup in the event
of an in-flight emergency.
I suppose any discussion on panel instrumentation should really be prefaced
with the intended price range...i.e.,
VFR panel under $5000.00
VFR/IFR panel under $10,000.00
IFR panel under $20,000.00
I personally know many pilots who spend $100,000+ for a spam can with 20
year old avionics only to spend another $20,000 to upgrade the panel. To
each his own.
Bret Smith
RV-9A (91314)
Mineral Bluff, GA
www.FlightInnovations.com
_____
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Hinde,
Frank George (Corvallis)
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 1:04 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation
Money, money, money...must be funny in a rich mans world.
Gee this an IFR panel minus a nice GNS 430 and the needles....way overkill,
even for your supposed "Special" VFR departures (I say supposed because
there is a fine line between special VFR and IFR...which will get you killed
in short order)
Lets see you a gyro setup in the D100 which is totally not required and
steam guage backups.
Your very best and most reliable attitude indicator is "looking out the
window"...Thats what VFR flying is all about...On top of that this panel now
has redundant ASI's and altimeters.
Its very nice but you will never use most of it VFR.
If you really must have that "special" capability your still better off with
a wing levelling autopilot that will keep you sunny side up without having
to have the skills of an instrument pilot...I.e engage the A/P onthe ground
and fly stright out up and thru.
Frank
zodiac 400 hours VFR
RV7a 225 hours IFR
_____
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bret
Smith
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 8:32 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation
M,
Your paint scheme looks great! Actually, I "borrowed" the scheme from the
HondaJet prototype.
I must admit that I am not an avionics expert and would prefer to differ
your question to the many more knowledgeable folks on this list, however,
aside from the minimum requirements depicted in the FARs, I would consider
something like this:
* Dynon D100 - EFIS - Bright Screen
* Includes Backup Battery, Mounting Tray, Remote Mount Compass, USB to
Serial Port Cable & Factory Harness
* Dynon D120 - EMS - Bright Screen
* Includes 4 Cylinder Engine Probe Kit
* Garmin GPSMAP 396
* AirGizmo Panel Dock
* Garmin SL40 COM
* Garmin GTX327 Transponder*
* PS Engineering PM3000 Intercom
* UMA 2 1/4" Airspeed Indicator
* UMA 2 1/4" 20,000ft Atimeter
Bret Smith
RV-9A (91314)
Mineral Bluff, GA
www.FlightInnovations.com
_____
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of H. M.
Haught Jr.
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 7:12 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Instrument panel beginner
Bret -
Enjoyed your site, and wanted to to know I am adapting your paint scheme to
a Bearhawk (file attached- dark color is a bright,deep orange over a
complimentary yellow shade - used for visibility in the bush). I like the
simplicity and I think it lends itself well to the Bearhawk lines.
Using your ideas for instrumentation, what are your thoughts on
instrumentation for a VFR airplane, that might occasionally, file special
VFR to get out of a low ceiling situation flying into clear air?
M. Haught
Bret Smith wrote:
Rob,
You asked "I wonder why you don't include at least the very basic flight
instruments that do not rely on electric power."
You will see that I am planning on the Z-13/8. This wiring structure
incorporates a dual buss with an 8amp alternate alternator to power
essential items should the main 60amp alternator go TU. The PRIMARY backup
is the TT two-axis autopilot. Triple backup is the TT ADI (with it's own
backup battery and GPS. No need for vacuum instruments with this level of
redundancy.
You said "having (4) GPS antenna's on-board sounds a bit overdone."
The primary GPS is the Garmin GNS430. The antenna will be mounted under
the glareshield (under a plexiglass panel) and will support the EFIS as well
as XM WX. The alt GPS is part of the Grand Rapids Horizon 1 EFIS and is
purely a VFR backup. It's antenna will be mounted beside the Garmin
antenna. Having dual antennas removes the single point of failure in the
design. The only other GPS is the backup for the TT ADI. I'm not sure
where you get a 4th GPS antenna although it doesn't really matter since
these small antennas together, side-by-side will fit in the palm of your
hand.
This model is a tried and true design and is currently being flown by
several fellow builders an a rock-solid IFR platform. Having dual P-Mags
offers an electrically independent engine as well. To my understanding, the
only "dark and stormy" scenario that would defeat the design is an in-flight
fire. In which case there is little one can do except land ASAP.
I welcome your critique.
Bret Smith
RV-9A (91314)
Mineral Bluff, GA
www.FlightInnovations.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rob Turk
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 1:09 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Instrument panel beginner
Bret,
As you said, opinions differ. I looked at your site, and while you have made
some excellent choises, I wonder why you don't include at least the very
basic flight instruments that do not rely on electric power.
Also, having (4) GPS antenna's on-board sounds a bit overdone. Most
GPS-based equipment accepts NMEA protocol. It's not hard to take one GPS
receiver and feed the NMEA protocol into all equipment that requires
position/speed information.
.. And so another episode in the discussion opens.. ;-)
Rob
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bret Smith" <mailto:smithhb(at)tds.net> <smithhb(at)tds.net>
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 5:31 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Instrument panel beginner
>
> Don,
>
> Regarding any and all aircraft avionics or electrical systems you will
> soon
> discover that they are constantly changing and improving all the time. As
> a
> result, like many of us, your original choices and decisions will change
> frequently over time.
>
> No subject can ever close... We all are here for one reason, to learn from
> each other to do the best we can possibly do. Opinions will always vary
> and
> sometimes the repertoire can become quite lively, but in the end we will
> learn something...and that is the goal.
>
> Here is my ongoing decision model from my website...
> http://www.flightinnovations.com/considerations.html.
>
> Welcome to our class.
>
>
> Bret Smith
> RV-9A (91314)
> Mineral Bluff, GA
> www.FlightInnovations.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> mosquito56
> Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2007 2:59 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Instrument panel beginner
>
> -->
>
> Great to see so many people putting in their 2 cents. I will be closing
> this
> subject since everything is as clear as mud and alot of fun.
> Lots of great info. Thanx much for the info. Had a ball.
> Gday 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=140585#140585
>
>
>nbsp; Features Subscriptions
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List"
<http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List> >http://www.p;
available via href="http://forums.matronics.com"
<http://forums.matronics.com> >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
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Emrath" <emrath(at)comcast.net> |
Can anyone tell me where to get a fiber washer insulator set for a 1/8 (aka
3.5mm) panel mount jack? This jack requires a 1/4" hole. This will
insulate the jack from the panel and be used for connecting a ipod to my
audio panel. If these are not available, what have others done to insulate
the ground connection from the panel.
Marty in Brentwood TN
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Doug Windhorn" <N1DeltaWhiskey(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fiber Washer |
I believe the jacks sold through B&C come with the washers. I don't know if
they are available separately.
Doug
----- Original Message -----
From: "Emrath" <emrath(at)comcast.net>
Sent: Friday, 19 October, 2007 14:44
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Fiber Washer
>
> Can anyone tell me where to get a fiber washer insulator set for a 1/8
> (aka
> 3.5mm) panel mount jack? This jack requires a 1/4" hole. This will
> insulate the jack from the panel and be used for connecting a ipod to my
> audio panel. If these are not available, what have others done to insulate
> the ground connection from the panel.
>
> Marty in Brentwood TN
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fiber Washer |
>
>Can anyone tell me where to get a fiber washer insulator set for a 1/8 (aka
>3.5mm) panel mount jack? This jack requires a 1/4" hole. This will
>insulate the jack from the panel and be used for connecting a ipod to my
>audio panel. If these are not available, what have others done to insulate
>the ground connection from the panel.
>
>Marty in Brentwood TN
This is an "odd" sized fiber washer for the
a/c industry. I've seen them available on special
order in bags of 100 or 1,000 but never in ones
for end users.
See http://mcmaster.com and do a search for
93920A160 This washer has a 1/4" clearance
hole, extends a .03" barrel through a 5/16"
hole and has a .5" x .04" flange.
A mating flat washer would be 90089A315
Bags of 100 will cost you about $20 total. Considering
how much $time$ you might spend looking for
a few, these might be the lower cost solution.
Alternatively, consider drilling holes in the sheet
metal that will clear all the jack's hardware, probably
.5"
Back up the holes with a sheet of 1/16" fiberglas or
phenolic sheet. Then drill 1/4" holes in fiberglas
to mount the jacks. The insulator sheet can be
bonded into place with something like E6000 to
avoid adding any visible, extra holes in the panel.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fiber Washer |
>
>
>I believe the jacks sold through B&C come with the washers. I don't know
>if they are available separately.
>
>Doug
These washers will be for the standard .25" headphone
and .205" microphone jacks, both of which mount in
3/8" holes. Marty is looking for smaller ones.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------
( "Problems are the price of progress. )
( Don't bring me anything but trouble. )
( Good news weakens me." )
( -Charles F. Kettering- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jeff Page <jpx(at)qenesis.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Strobe Cable |
Bob,
Your first answer is what I really needed. I have been putting
together a list of all the wire I expect I will need (probably as
accurate as a weather forecast).
I want to buy everything at once from a single vendor, which reduces
shipping and brokerage charges to Canada significantly.
I have been amazed at how many vendors really don't have common sizes
and colors in stock. One of the largest Canadian vendors has only 10%
of what I need in stock :-(
Wire Masters has everything, expect they have to substitute
M27500-16TG3T14 for the TE that I requested. Since the thinner
insulation is ok, then I can place my order.
Thanks,
Jeff
> Jeff,
>
> Check http://strobeguy.safeshopper.com/32/cat32.htm?620
>
> Give him a call and see if what he sells is what you want. I've
> only done business with him one time but was very satisfied and he
> did save me a few dollars.
> I am looking to buy 3 conductor shielded 16 gauge wire for my wing tip
> strobes.
As far as I know, the wire shipped in factory kits for
strobe installation has been a Belden product having
100% coverage, "Beldfoil" shield. These products
are described in the documents you'll find at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Mfgr_Data/Wire/Belden/
> I have been looking for M27500-16TE3T14 but can only find M27500-16TG3T14.
> Looking at wire specs, it is difficult to see differences.
> I think the main difference between the two is that TE wire has
> M22759/16 wires, which have thicker insulation than TG wire with
> M22759/18 wires.
> Since the wires are protected inside the jacket, does the insulation
> thickness matter for my purposes ?
No, either of those wires would do. The wire gage
isn't really critical either. Voltage drop in smaller
even smaller wires is insignificant for these
installations. The insulation for Belden wire
is PVC over Polyethylene. This is admittedly
a "1960s" wire product but has proven successful
in hundreds of thousands of aircraft. This is
a low energy circuit that doesn't need
fault protection for the installed wires so
spending much $time$ acquiring a more exotic
wire product may not be well invested.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Peter Mather" <peter(at)mather.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fiber Washer |
Marty
I used a very short section of heat shrink on the threads that go through
the panel and then a couple of disks of transparent plastic cut from a some
old packaging with a holes made with an appropriately sized hole punch -
works fine
Best Regards
Peter
----- Original Message -----
From: "Emrath" <emrath(at)comcast.net>
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 10:44 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Fiber Washer
>
> Can anyone tell me where to get a fiber washer insulator set for a 1/8
> (aka
> 3.5mm) panel mount jack? This jack requires a 1/4" hole. This will
> insulate the jack from the panel and be used for connecting a ipod to my
> audio panel. If these are not available, what have others done to insulate
> the ground connection from the panel.
>
> Marty in Brentwood TN
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "B Tomm" <fvalarm(at)rapidnet.net> |
| Subject: | TurboCad symbols |
Bob,
OK, where does one obtain the symbols you use in your drawings so that I can
import and customize my wiring diagrams? I just bought Turbo Cad 14 but it
doesn't include much for symbols. At least for what I can find.
Bevan
TurboCad rookie
RV7A waiting for wires
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "B Tomm" <fvalarm(at)rapidnet.net> |
| Subject: | Turbocad symbols |
There must be a way to copy and move symbols already on the drawing but I
cannot find it if it's there. There must be others that are or will be on
the steep part of the "learning Cad" curve. Any advice as to how to quickly
get some drawings done. I'm beginning to think about just hand drawing
these suckers and getting on with it. Not very professional looking but
hey, this Cad stuff is adding a lot of time.
Bevan
RV7A waiting for wire and getting frustrated
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | paul wilson <pwmac(at)sisna.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fiber Washer |
If one can find a suitable insulting material.Then make your own
washers. Harbor Freight sells hollow punches. They come in various
sizes. A quick smack with a hammer makes the washer makes OD then
another makes the inside hole. Thin nylon make good insulating
washers. Make 2 washers for a step washer. Only limited by the punch
sizes. However thin tubing will also punch holes in insulating
material. Just sharpen the tube and is will cut things like plastic.
Try the hobby store for choices of tubing. More fun as an experimenter.
Tubing around the conductor is another way, then only one flat washer
is needed.
Paul
===========
At 10:07 PM 10/19/2007, you wrote:
>
>
>
>>
>>Can anyone tell me where to get a fiber washer insulator set for a 1/8 (aka
>>3.5mm) panel mount jack? This jack requires a 1/4" hole. This will
>>insulate the jack from the panel and be used for connecting a ipod to my
>>audio panel. If these are not available, what have others done to insulate
>>the ground connection from the panel.
>>
>>Marty in Brentwood TN
>
> This is an "odd" sized fiber washer for the
> a/c industry. I've seen them available on special
> order in bags of 100 or 1,000 but never in ones
> for end users.
>
> See http://mcmaster.com and do a search for
>
> 93920A160 This washer has a 1/4" clearance
> hole, extends a .03" barrel through a 5/16"
> hole and has a .5" x .04" flange.
>
> A mating flat washer would be 90089A315
>
> Bags of 100 will cost you about $20 total. Considering
> how much $time$ you might spend looking for
> a few, these might be the lower cost solution.
>
> Alternatively, consider drilling holes in the sheet
> metal that will clear all the jack's hardware, probably
> .5"
>
> Back up the holes with a sheet of 1/16" fiberglas or
> phenolic sheet. Then drill 1/4" holes in fiberglas
> to mount the jacks. The insulator sheet can be
> bonded into place with something like E6000 to
> avoid adding any visible, extra holes in the panel.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Harry Manvel" <hmanvel(at)manvel.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Fiber Washer |
Go to www.mcmaster.com. Enter "fiber washer" in the search window. They
have anything you could want.
Harry Manvel
----- Original Message -----
From: "paul wilson" <pwmac(at)sisna.com>
Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2007 8:49 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Fiber Washer
>
> If one can find a suitable insulting material.Then make your own washers.
> Harbor Freight sells hollow punches. They come in various sizes. A quick
> smack with a hammer makes the washer makes OD then another makes the
> inside hole. Thin nylon make good insulating washers. Make 2 washers for a
> step washer. Only limited by the punch sizes. However thin tubing will
> also punch holes in insulating material. Just sharpen the tube and is will
> cut things like plastic. Try the hobby store for choices of tubing. More
> fun as an experimenter.
> Tubing around the conductor is another way, then only one flat washer is
> needed.
> Paul
> ===========
>
> At 10:07 PM 10/19/2007, you wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>Can anyone tell me where to get a fiber washer insulator set for a 1/8
>>>(aka
>>>3.5mm) panel mount jack? This jack requires a 1/4" hole. This will
>>>insulate the jack from the panel and be used for connecting a ipod to my
>>>audio panel. If these are not available, what have others done to
>>>insulate
>>>the ground connection from the panel.
>>>
>>>Marty in Brentwood TN
>>
>> This is an "odd" sized fiber washer for the
>> a/c industry. I've seen them available on special
>> order in bags of 100 or 1,000 but never in ones
>> for end users.
>>
>> See http://mcmaster.com and do a search for
>>
>> 93920A160 This washer has a 1/4" clearance
>> hole, extends a .03" barrel through a 5/16"
>> hole and has a .5" x .04" flange.
>>
>> A mating flat washer would be 90089A315
>>
>> Bags of 100 will cost you about $20 total. Considering
>> how much $time$ you might spend looking for
>> a few, these might be the lower cost solution.
>>
>> Alternatively, consider drilling holes in the sheet
>> metal that will clear all the jack's hardware, probably
>> .5"
>>
>> Back up the holes with a sheet of 1/16" fiberglas or
>> phenolic sheet. Then drill 1/4" holes in fiberglas
>> to mount the jacks. The insulator sheet can be
>> bonded into place with something like E6000 to
>> avoid adding any visible, extra holes in the panel.
>>
>> Bob . . .
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Andrew Butler" <andrewbutler(at)ireland.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Turbocad symbols |
Hi Bevan,
I used Visio. Much easier to learn than AutoCad and it will import CAD
drawings. That is what I did and a couple of days ago I posted my design
for comments (having saved it to PDF), so you can see the results are
just as good as doing it in CAD.
If you end up using Visio, I can send you my visio's if you wish to help
you along. There are some idiosyncrasies in the the conversion process.
Don't know how much it costs.
Andrew.
RV71700, Galway Ireland.
----- Original Message -----
From: "B Tomm"
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Turbocad symbols
Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2007 01:44:05 -0700
There must be a way to copy and move symbols already on the drawing
but I
cannot find it if it's there. There must be others that are or will
be on
the steep part of the "learning Cad" curve. Any advice as to how to
quickly
get some drawings done. I'm beginning to think about just hand
drawing
these suckers and getting on with it. Not very professional looking
but
hey, this Cad stuff is adding a lot of time.
Bevan
RV7A waiting for wire and getting frustrated
===========
===========
===========
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Emrath" <emrath(at)comcast.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Fiber Washer |
Thanks Bob, I forgot to check McMaster for this. I wonder what others
are
doing to insulate their music input jacks or is that not needed? What
about
not insulating the jack (this is for stereo music input), and just run a
ground wire from the "LO" to my single point ground point?
--------------------> Lo
--------------q left channel
------------------p right channel
Marty
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Fiber Washer
>
>Can anyone tell me where to get a fiber washer insulator set for a 1/8
>(aka
>3.5mm) panel mount jack? This jack requires a 1/4" hole. This will
>insulate the jack from the panel and be used for connecting a ipod to
my
>audio panel. If these are not available, what have others done to
insulate
>the ground connection from the panel.
>
>Marty in Brentwood TN
This is an "odd" sized fiber washer for the
a/c industry. I've seen them available on special
order in bags of 100 or 1,000 but never in ones
for end users.
See http://mcmaster.com and do a search for
93920A160 This washer has a 1/4" clearance
hole, extends a .03" barrel through a 5/16"
hole and has a .5" x .04" flange.
A mating flat washer would be 90089A315
Bags of 100 will cost you about $20 total. Considering
how much $time$ you might spend looking for
a few, these might be the lower cost solution.
Alternatively, consider drilling holes in the sheet
metal that will clear all the jack's hardware, probably
.5"
Back up the holes with a sheet of 1/16" fiberglas or
phenolic sheet. Then drill 1/4" holes in fiberglas
to mount the jacks. The insulator sheet can be
bonded into place with something like E6000 to
avoid adding any visible, extra holes in the panel.
Bob . . .
Marty =D2=D3=AC
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Turbocad symbols |
>
>There must be a way to copy and move symbols already on the drawing but I
>cannot find it if it's there. There must be others that are or will be on
>the steep part of the "learning Cad" curve. Any advice as to how to quickly
>get some drawings done. I'm beginning to think about just hand drawing
>these suckers and getting on with it. Not very professional looking but
>hey, this Cad stuff is adding a lot of time.
>
>Bevan
>RV7A waiting for wire and getting frustrated
I took some time today to sift through the symbol library,
rename files for better organization, correct errors
and delete some junk. The "clean" library is posted at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/ACAD_Symbols_Library/Symbols_5.zip
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: Fiber Washer |
>Thanks Bob, I forgot to check McMaster for this. I wonder what others are
>doing to insulate their music input jacks or is that not needed? What about
>not insulating the jack (this is for stereo music input), and just run a
>ground wire from the "LO" to my single point ground point?
>
>--------------------> Lo
>--------------q left channel
> ------------------p right channel
Any outlying component of your avionics/audio system
(like mic, phones and audio input jacks) that
has a "mounting ground" should be isolated from the
airframe. This includes virtually all of the
jacks for full size and miniature plugs where the
plug "barrel" is one of the system's connections.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "B Tomm" <fvalarm(at)rapidnet.net> |
| Subject: | Turbocad symbols |
Thanks Bob,
I've downloaded them, unzipped them but cannot open them with Turbo Cad.
Without wasting your time on this , is there a simple off the top of your
head explanation how to get the symbols into a usable format inside the
symbols library?
Thanks
Bevan
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "B Tomm" <fvalarm(at)rapidnet.net> |
| Subject: | Turbocad symbols |
When I try to open a symbol, it says the .DWG file is not a win32
application. Any thoughts on this?
My computer is a PC if that makes any difference
Bevan
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Turbocad symbols |
"B Tomm" wrote:
>
> When I try to open a symbol, it says the .DWG file is not a win32
> application. Any thoughts on this?
>
> My computer is a PC if that makes any difference
>
> Bevan
Hi Bevan,
You have to associate .dwg with TurboCAD. I haven't used Windows in
quite a while so I don't know the procedure. For a symbol library, run
TurboCAD and see what settings they have for libraries. There should be
a way to set the path to the library file. You may just have to set
the path to the directory where the symbol .dwg files are located, or
there might be an import function of some sort. While in TurboCAD, you
should be able to open a .dwg file without the association. That just
lets you run the application by clicking on the data file. Clicking on
a .doc file runs Word for example.
Bob W.
--
N93BD - Rotary Powered BD-4 - http://www.bob-white.com
3.8 Hours Total Time and holding
Cables for your rotary installation - http://www.roblinphoto.com/shop/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Turbocad symbols |
I seem to recall opening two files and just copying symbols one at a
time from Bob's drawing to my drawing as needed.
Ken
Bob White wrote:
>
>"B Tomm" wrote:
>
>
>
>>
>> When I try to open a symbol, it says the .DWG file is not a win32
>>application. Any thoughts on this?
>>
>>My computer is a PC if that makes any difference
>>
>>Bevan
>>
>>
>
>Hi Bevan,
>
>You have to associate .dwg with TurboCAD. I haven't used Windows in
>quite a while so I don't know the procedure. For a symbol library, run
>TurboCAD and see what settings they have for libraries. There should be
>a way to set the path to the library file. You may just have to set
>the path to the directory where the symbol .dwg files are located, or
>there might be an import function of some sort. While in TurboCAD, you
>should be able to open a .dwg file without the association. That just
>lets you run the application by clicking on the data file. Clicking on
>a .doc file runs Word for example.
>
>Bob W.
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Donald J Smith" <donaldjsmith(at)ukonline.co.uk> |
| Subject: | LV warning module with EFIS |
Is it necessary to have a LV warning module when using an EFIS? Many (eg
stratomastor Enigma) have alarm and warning functions that will warn of a
low voltage occurrence.
Ref Z16 in Aeroelectric connection.
Regards
Donald J Smith
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Horton <khorton01(at)rogers.com> |
| Subject: | Re: LV warning module with EFIS |
On 20 Oct 2007, at 19:04, Donald J Smith wrote:
>
>
> Is it necessary to have a LV warning module when using an EFIS?
> Many (eg
> stratomastor Enigma) have alarm and warning functions that will
> warn of a
> low voltage occurrence.
If you are unhappy with the consequences of a total electrical
failure, then you should ensure that you have active notification of
an alternator failure. A low voltage warning, with a very noticeable
warning, is a good way to do that, as a low system voltage is a good
indication of an alternator failure. It really doesn't matter
whether the low voltage warning is provided by a separate low voltage
warning system, or whether it is provided by some other system
(engine monitor, EFIS, etc), as long as it is effective.
If you are convinced that the low voltage warning provided by the
EFIS will be quickly noticeable, then it should be all you need.
--
Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
Ottawa, Canada
http://www.kilohotel.com/rv8
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <jlatimer1(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Turbocad symbols |
> Bob White wrote:
>
> >
> >"B Tomm" wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >> When I try to open a symbol, it says the .DWG file is not 'a win32
> >>application. Any thoughts on this?
> >>
> >>My computer is a PC if that makes any difference
> >>
Right click on the file icon. Select properties and then select "open with" then
select turbocad from the list of programs. There will be a box that you check
that makes sure that Windows associates .dwg files with turbocad everytime
you try to open a .dwg file. Hope that works for you.
Jerry
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: LV warning module with EFIS |
| From: | "mosquito56" <mosquito-56(at)hotmail.com> |
Thanks for the question and the answer. I will put low voltage on my checklist
when I install my electrical system. I am just getting started and gleaming every
morsel of info I from the list.
Have a good one.
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=140939#140939
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation |
| From: | "mosquito56" <mosquito-56(at)hotmail.com> |
As I understand it right now, that fantastic panel only has 3 guages in it.
I see an
an altitude indicator
a speed indicator
a VSI.
Is the dynon efis system legal as minimul flight instruments for EX-AB?
I'm sure I could look it up but to lazy right now.
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=140940#140940
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Turbocad symbols |
>
>I seem to recall opening two files and just copying symbols one at a time
>from Bob's drawing to my drawing as needed.
>Ken
I'm not a TurboCAD user so I'm fishing in the dark here
a bit. The process for using symbols is to first begin
with a blank drawing. Open TurboCAD then within TurboCAD
say File_Open and then click on say Wirebook_A_Border.dwg.
Once the border is brought in, do a File_SaveAs and give
it a name for a diagram you want to create, say Landing_Lights.
Save it to a directory OTHER than were your symbol library
is stored.
Now, you can Insert_File and pick pieces from the symbol
library. You'll need a Bus_Tap_Fuse, a switch, a lamp symbol,
etc. You arrange these blocks on a page and hook them up with
wires. Then add descriptive text like reference designators,
part numbers, etc.
Suggest you begin with one of the Wire Books published on
the website. Download:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/ACAD_Wirebook_Samples/SEMINAR.DWG
into the directory where your wirebook is going tor reside.
Then open TurboCAD before using TurboCAD to open SEMINAR.DWG.
Do an immediate SAVEAS under the name for your own wirebook.
On the pages within this drawing, the majority of what you'll
need is probably already drawn. Edit this drawing to delete
features you don't need and add features you will need. You
"insert" items from the symbol library as needed.
When I'm teaching AutoCAD, I start with this list of basic
drawing commands:
AR, *ARRAY
B, *BLOCK
WB, *WRITEBLOCK
BR, *BREAK
CI, *CIRCLE
C, *CHANGE
CH, *CHAMFER
CO, *COPY
D, *DIMSTYLE
DI, *DIST
DO, *DONUT
DT, *DTEXT
E, *ERASE
ED, *DDEDIT
EL, *ELLIPSE
XT, *EXTEND
EXIT, *QUIT
F, *FILLET
H, *HATCH
I, *INSERT
IP, *ISOPLANE
L, *LINE
LA, *LAYER
LI, *LIST
LT, *LINETYPE
M, *MOVE
MI, *MIRROR
OF, *OFFSET
OS, *OSNAP
P, *PAN
PE, *PEDIT
PL, *PLINE
PG, *POLYGON
P, *PAN
R, *REDRAW
RG, *REGEN
RT, *RECTANGLE
REN *RENAME
RO, *ROTATE
S, *STRETCH
SC, *SCALE
SCR, *SCRIPT
T, *TRIM
V, *VIEW
XP, *EXPLODE
Z, *ZOOM
Additionally, you'll need to explore and grasp
the use of object snap commands like
Intersection
Center
End
Tangent
Perpendicular
Nearest
and
Insertion.
I think you'll find it much easier to modify an existing
array of pages as opposed to starting from scratch. Do you
have a TurboCAD tutorial? I just opened my TurboCAD version
10 that I purchased off Ebay some months ago. It sees to open
and/or insert items from the symbol library just fine. TurboCAD
also recognizes the AutoCAD views I assigned to each page
in the composite drawing . . . I'm pretty sure this software
will let you do anything needed to craft your own wirebook
but you'll have to become familiar with the basic drawing
and editing commands unique to TurboCAD. I was able to copy
and edit text and print one view at a time to the printer.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: LV warning module with EFIS |
>
>
>Is it necessary to have a LV warning module when using an EFIS? Many (eg
>stratomastor Enigma) have alarm and warning functions that will warn of a
>low voltage occurrence.
>
>Ref Z16 in Aeroelectric connection.
You only need one LV warning system. You choose.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "B Tomm" <fvalarm(at)rapidnet.net> |
| Subject: | Turbocad symbols |
Bob and all,
Thanks for all the help here. I worked on it until 3:30 this AM and again
today after a long nap. I'm doing much better now. The plan at the moment
is to begin with existing drawings and moving, copying symbols to get it to
be what it needs to be. So far so good. A few more hours and I'll be on my
way. Thanks again for all the input received. This list is a great
resource.
Bevan
Wires are beginning to know where they are supposed to go.
-----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: Saturday, October 20, 2007 11:15 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Turbocad symbols
-->
>
>I seem to recall opening two files and just copying symbols one at a
>time from Bob's drawing to my drawing as needed.
>Ken
I'm not a TurboCAD user so I'm fishing in the dark here
a bit. The process for using symbols is to first begin
with a blank drawing. Open TurboCAD then within TurboCAD
say File_Open and then click on say Wirebook_A_Border.dwg.
Once the border is brought in, do a File_SaveAs and give
it a name for a diagram you want to create, say Landing_Lights.
Save it to a directory OTHER than were your symbol library
is stored.
Now, you can Insert_File and pick pieces from the symbol
library. You'll need a Bus_Tap_Fuse, a switch, a lamp symbol,
etc. You arrange these blocks on a page and hook them up with
wires. Then add descriptive text like reference designators,
part numbers, etc.
Suggest you begin with one of the Wire Books published on
the website. Download:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/ACAD_Wirebook_Samples/SEMINAR.DWG
into the directory where your wirebook is going tor reside.
Then open TurboCAD before using TurboCAD to open SEMINAR.DWG.
Do an immediate SAVEAS under the name for your own wirebook.
On the pages within this drawing, the majority of what you'll
need is probably already drawn. Edit this drawing to delete
features you don't need and add features you will need. You
"insert" items from the symbol library as needed.
When I'm teaching AutoCAD, I start with this list of basic
drawing commands:
AR, *ARRAY
B, *BLOCK
WB, *WRITEBLOCK
BR, *BREAK
CI, *CIRCLE
C, *CHANGE
CH, *CHAMFER
CO, *COPY
D, *DIMSTYLE
DI, *DIST
DO, *DONUT
DT, *DTEXT
E, *ERASE
ED, *DDEDIT
EL, *ELLIPSE
XT, *EXTEND
EXIT, *QUIT
F, *FILLET
H, *HATCH
I, *INSERT
IP, *ISOPLANE
L, *LINE
LA, *LAYER
LI, *LIST
LT, *LINETYPE
M, *MOVE
MI, *MIRROR
OF, *OFFSET
OS, *OSNAP
P, *PAN
PE, *PEDIT
PL, *PLINE
PG, *POLYGON
P, *PAN
R, *REDRAW
RG, *REGEN
RT, *RECTANGLE
REN *RENAME
RO, *ROTATE
S, *STRETCH
SC, *SCALE
SCR, *SCRIPT
T, *TRIM
V, *VIEW
XP, *EXPLODE
Z, *ZOOM
Additionally, you'll need to explore and grasp
the use of object snap commands like
Intersection
Center
End
Tangent
Perpendicular
Nearest
and
Insertion.
I think you'll find it much easier to modify an existing
array of pages as opposed to starting from scratch. Do you
have a TurboCAD tutorial? I just opened my TurboCAD version
10 that I purchased off Ebay some months ago. It sees to open
and/or insert items from the symbol library just fine. TurboCAD
also recognizes the AutoCAD views I assigned to each page
in the composite drawing . . . I'm pretty sure this software
will let you do anything needed to craft your own wirebook
but you'll have to become familiar with the basic drawing
and editing commands unique to TurboCAD. I was able to copy
and edit text and print one view at a time to the printer.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Becoming CAD-proficient to a practical level of usefulness |
>
>Bob and all,
>
>Thanks for all the help here. I worked on it until 3:30 this AM and again
>today after a long nap. I'm doing much better now. The plan at the moment
>is to begin with existing drawings and moving, copying symbols to get it to
>be what it needs to be. So far so good. A few more hours and I'll be on my
>way. Thanks again for all the input received. This list is a great
>resource.
>
>Bevan
>Wires are beginning to know where they are supposed to go.
Pleased that you're making progress!
When you're ready to print any one of those views to
your printer or .pdf generator, know that each view's
upper left and lower right corners are marked with a
tiny, .001" radius circle. When you're ready to print one
page of your drawing, you can say "print to window" and
use the "snap-to-circle-center" command to find those
circles and define the print window. Alternatively, you
can print a particular view number. If you leave the
big master drawing's borders and views unmodified, then
each border becomes a box wherein you can edit contents
to match your needs and take advantage of the organization
for storing, editing, and printing your wirebook.
This is how I do drawings for many of my customers. ALL
drawings are crafted on the views/sheets of a single
AutoCAD file. Any change to any sheet advances the revision
level of the entire package. It's easy to keep my customer
apprised of progress . . I have only one file to forward.
When I'm finished with my work, the customer takes data
from the individual views and pastes it to their particular
organization for files, drawing organization, drawing
numbering, etc.
To all the other AEList readers - Acquiring a functional
familiarity with a CAD program can seem daunting. Virtually
any CAD program worth loading on your computer is capable of
understanding a 1000+ commands . . .
About 1985, I was where you are today. I had a PC-XT, 20Mb
hard drive, yellow screen computer with the grand total of
640K of ram. I think the thing ran at the blazing speed
of 4MHz.
I was offered a copy of AutoCAD v1.17 as I recall. It would
load and run in the XT environment. The very first images
published in the 'Connection were produced on this computer
running AutoCAD and printed on a pen-plotter.
I don't recall when I discovered the .pgp file . . . it
probably wasn't while running v1.17. The folks at AutoDesk
correctly deduced that if they were going to woo users of
other CAD systems to AutoCAD, the transition need to be
as seamless as possible. A really nice thing about
ACAD was that it understood plain english. If you wanted to
draw a line you typed "line ". This capability was
consistent with the majority of commonly used draw, edit
and housekeeping commands. I think other CAD programs were
similarly endowed.
AutoDesk provided an ASCII text file lookup table that
would convert any string of characters into an AutoCAD
command. The file was called ACAD.PGP.
That was the list I published yesterday . . .
AR, *ARRAY
B, *BLOCK
WB, *WRITEBLOCK
BR, *BREAK
CI, *CIRCLE
C, *CHANGE
CH, *CHAMFER
CO, *COPY
D, *DIMSTYLE
DI, *DIST
DO, *DONUT
DT, *DTEXT
E, *ERASE
ED, *DDEDIT
EL, *ELLIPSE
XT, *EXTEND
EXIT, *QUIT
F, *FILLET
H, *HATCH
I, *INSERT
IP, *ISOPLANE
L, *LINE
LA, *LAYER
LI, *LIST
LT, *LINETYPE
M, *MOVE
MI, *MIRROR
OF, *OFFSET
OS, *OSNAP
P, *PAN
PE, *PEDIT
PL, *PLINE
PG, *POLYGON
P, *PAN
R, *REDRAW
RG, *REGEN
RT, *RECTANGLE
REN *RENAME
RO, *ROTATE
S, *STRETCH
SC, *SCALE
SCR, *SCRIPT
T, *TRIM
V, *VIEW
It was the intent of the programers to provide
users with (1) a way to shorten commonly used
commands to one or two letter strings and (2)
translate your commonly used commands for another
CAD application in to AutoCAD english.
I wasn't migrating from another cad system but
I was interested in speed. I discovered that if
I drove the mouse left-handed and typed right-
handed, I could move through the AutoCAD environment
much faster than by hitting pull-downs or typing
the full command line.
After a few years, it occurred to me that my .pgp
list was a good study guide. 99% of all the things
I asked AutoCAD to do in support of my tasks were
listed in the .pgp file.
When giving AutoCAD tutorials I can sit
across the table from a student and we both
have screens, keyboards, and monitors driving
of the same computer. I can do things that the
student sees, duplicates and then expands
upon. I use the .pgp file as a teaching list for
the commands for which first-competency is needed.
We can go through the list of 44 commands in
one day with sufficient frequency to offer good
retention. I teach these functions by MODIFYING
existing drawings. The CAD system is a tool for
describing your creations. It's important to be
proficient in the language of illustration first so
that the creative process doesn't get bogged down
in the mechanics of the language. In fact, we'll
usually start perhaps one or two new drawings . . .
the rest of the class concentrates on mechanics.
I'll suggest that this same list is useful
to all of you who are desirous of adding some CAD
skills to your bag of tricks. The commands may
be different but I would encourage you to become
proficient at getting your CAD system of choice
to do the functions cited in the list. I've not
modified the list in years. Out of the full
constellation of commands your CAD system responds
to, this list of 44 commands will trim your initial
learning task down to a very manageable size.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Solid State Relay Alert |
Solid state "relays" for AC have been around for decades.
They generally use Triacs as the control device, are designed
for use at 120VAC and above and drop about 1.5 to 2 volts in
the "turned on" mode . . . not a big deal in a 120VAC circuit.
I've been watching a number of new solid state relay products
popping up for the DC world. They have the general appearance
of the photo posted here:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Relays/Solid_State_Relay.jpg
I've purchased a couple of exemplar products and was disappointed
to find that while they were "rated" for service in systems down
to 12VDC, their turned-on voltage drop was about 1.5 volts at
full load. The critter shown above was rated at 40A . . . but
would need a healthy heat-sink to get rid of the wasted energy.
These are not suited for use at 14V and only marginally suited
for 28V. I'll keep watching . . .
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------
( "Problems are the price of progress. )
( Don't bring me anything but trouble. )
( Good news weakens me." )
( -Charles F. Kettering- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Solid State Relay Alert |
| From: | "Nuisance" <aflyer(at)lazy8.net> |
Bob, is this a bi-polar device? !.5 Volts drop is pretty typical for a darlington.
Wouldn't the power FET based SSRs do pretty well at the 5 - 10 Amp load range
common for lights, fuel pumps, radios, etc.?
John
--------
Life is too short to run lean of peak.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=141074#141074
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Becoming CAD-proficient to a practical level of |
usefulness
| From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
> About 1985, I was where you are today. I had a PC-XT, 20Mb
> hard drive, yellow screen computer with the grand total of
> 640K of ram. I think the thing ran at the blazing speed
> of 4MHz.
Bob,
4.77 MHz. You must have been a rich man. That system isn't far from $10k when you
add it up. A box of 5 1/4" diskettes was $50.
See: http://www.periheliondesign.com/downloads/tandy1989.pdf
I want to put in two cents for the non-AutoCAD world. AutoCAD was always the personal
computer CAD leader, and their prices show it. For professionals it is
a great choice.
For less-frequent users, AutoCAD Lite is not considered by many to be the best
choice compared to several smaller programs. TurboCAD may be the most popular
smaller program. I personally use DesignCAD, which one reviewed referred to as
"Just like ACAD but $3,000 cheaper." I liked DesignCAD because you can call their
tech support and get right through immediately.
As for learning curve....In a short afternoon, one can go through all the CAD commands,
but becoming proficient takes time. Nothing makes it easier than to WANT
to draw something. Desire is the best motivation. Learning is very hard by
the slow rote method.
I sometimes think everyone should learn CAD, but that's only because I love it.
Realistically, for some it may be a waste of time. But if you like engineering
and design there is no option.
Some change of thinking is required to introduce CAD to the beginner. Beginners
often think of CAD as just a clumsy way of drawing. Then they learn about some
odd and wonderful ideas--
--CAD has no scale. Everything is done "life-sized". For layout purposes ONLY,
the output can be scaled, but don't scale printed drawings generally.
--CAD drawings can be directly used to make parts.
--CAD can draw things that are almost IMPOSSIBLE to draw otherwise. Spirals, splines,
geometric non-linear shapes for example.
--CAD can reuse drawings and parts of drawings. This is hugely powerful and time
saving and more than makes up for the strange kabuki dance you have to learn
to use CAD.
Free gift for CAD users--
See: http://www.periheliondesign.com/downloads/Superellipses.pdf
"Everything you've learned in school as "obvious" becomes
less and less obvious as you begin to study the universe.
For example, there are no solids in the universe. There's
not even a suggestion of a solid. There are no absolute con-
tinuums. There are no surfaces. There are no straight lines."
- R. Buckminster Fuller
--------
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge, MA 01550
(508) 764-2072
emjones(at)charter.net
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=141090#141090
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation |
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
I guess the question for me is the whole concept of a VFR panel with
"some" IFR capabilities.
If what we are saying is an IFR pilot who mainly flys VFR and who wants
to do enroute IFR, thats one thing and perfectly OK.
If we are talking about a VFR pilot who intends to fly "special" that to
me is a fine line as the average VFR jock has little knowledge of
weather and one day will almost certainly cut it too fine and find
himself up the proverbial creek without a paddle.
To that end its just a matter of time before a WX emergency happens and
then as you said the A/P is for an emergency backup...even so there is
still no need for an AI.
11K really?...WoW!..I paid 9k (with a 430 and needles) for a full IFR
panel in the RV7.
I think the discussion started with our VFR friend wondering what he
needed in the panel...The approach I took is "you better be able to see
out the window"...And if you can then an AI is redundant...But an A/P is
a useful device and can be used to get your tail on the ground (together
with a resolution to get an IFR ticket) in the event of the WX
emergency.
At least thats how I ended up with my IFR ticket....:)
Frank
________________________________
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bret
Smith
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 11:40 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation
Frank,
I agree with you up to a point... The panel shown is an actual panel
offered by Chief Aircraft and sells for $11,450.00!
http://www.chiefaircraft.com/airsec/Avionics/Avionics.html
You can actually do even better through John Stark. He had asked what
"I" would suggest for a VFR panel with some IFR capabilities. The
addition of an autopilot is for workload reduction or as a primary
backup in the event of an in-flight emergency.
I suppose any discussion on panel instrumentation should really be
prefaced with the intended price range...i.e.,
VFR panel under $5000.00
VFR/IFR panel under $10,000.00
IFR panel under $20,000.00
I personally know many pilots who spend $100,000+ for a spam can with 20
year old avionics only to spend another $20,000 to upgrade the panel.
To each his own.
Bret Smith
RV-9A (91314)
Mineral Bluff, GA
www.FlightInnovations.com
________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Terry Watson" <terry(at)tcwatson.com> |
| Subject: | Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation |
Most of us who are building or flying RV's will remember that we lost Bill
Benedict, then general manager of Vans, and his son Jeremy in the factory's
gyroless RV-9(?) in low clouds on the way to an air show. Both were
competent pilots and both knew better than to fly into the clouds, yet they
did. Until that time, I think Van always thought of his designs as planes
you looked out the window to fly, as did perhaps most of the builders. I
believe most of the factory RV's now have some sort of artificial horizon or
autopilot, or both.
Terry
_____
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Hinde,
Frank George (Corvallis)
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 8:23 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation
I guess the question for me is the whole concept of a VFR panel with "some"
IFR capabilities.
If what we are saying is an IFR pilot who mainly flys VFR and who wants to
do enroute IFR, thats one thing and perfectly OK.
If we are talking about a VFR pilot who intends to fly "special" that to me
is a fine line as the average VFR jock has little knowledge of weather and
one day will almost certainly cut it too fine and find himself up the
proverbial creek without a paddle.
To that end its just a matter of time before a WX emergency happens and then
as you said the A/P is for an emergency backup...even so there is still no
need for an AI.
11K really?...WoW!..I paid 9k (with a 430 and needles) for a full IFR panel
in the RV7.
I think the discussion started with our VFR friend wondering what he needed
in the panel...The approach I took is "you better be able to see out the
window"...And if you can then an AI is redundant...But an A/P is a useful
device and can be used to get your tail on the ground (together with a
resolution to get an IFR ticket) in the event of the WX emergency.
At least thats how I ended up with my IFR ticket....:)
Frank
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation |
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
Yes indeed Terry, tragic and very avoidable accident.
Its hard for me to imaging is Bill was a very experienced VFR or IFR
pilot he would have done that...But the bottom line is he did.
But then an A/P (especially a Pictorial pilot which has reliable turn
coordinator display) is quite adequate to keep straight and level and
safely do shallow turns.
Frank
________________________________
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Terry
Watson
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 9:20 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation
Most of us who are building or flying RV's will remember that we lost
Bill Benedict, then general manager of Vans, and his son Jeremy in the
factory's gyroless RV-9(?) in low clouds on the way to an air show. Both
were competent pilots and both knew better than to fly into the clouds,
yet they did. Until that time, I think Van always thought of his designs
as planes you looked out the window to fly, as did perhaps most of the
builders. I believe most of the factory RV's now have some sort of
artificial horizon or autopilot, or both.
Terry
________________________________
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 8:23 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation
I guess the question for me is the whole concept of a VFR panel with
"some" IFR capabilities.
If what we are saying is an IFR pilot who mainly flys VFR and who wants
to do enroute IFR, thats one thing and perfectly OK.
If we are talking about a VFR pilot who intends to fly "special" that to
me is a fine line as the average VFR jock has little knowledge of
weather and one day will almost certainly cut it too fine and find
himself up the proverbial creek without a paddle.
To that end its just a matter of time before a WX emergency happens and
then as you said the A/P is for an emergency backup...even so there is
still no need for an AI.
11K really?...WoW!..I paid 9k (with a 430 and needles) for a full IFR
panel in the RV7.
I think the discussion started with our VFR friend wondering what he
needed in the panel...The approach I took is "you better be able to see
out the window"...And if you can then an AI is redundant...But an A/P is
a useful device and can be used to get your tail on the ground (together
with a resolution to get an IFR ticket) in the event of the WX
emergency.
At least thats how I ended up with my IFR ticket....:)
Frank
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation |
In a message dated 10/22/2007 11:23:50 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
terry(at)tcwatson.com writes:
Most of us who are building or flying RV=99s will remember that we lo
st Bill
Benedict, then general manager of Vans, and his son Jeremy in the factory
=99s
gyroless RV-9(?) in low clouds on the way to an air show. Both were compete
nt
pilots and both knew better than to fly into the clouds, yet they did. Unti
l
that time, I think Van always thought of his designs as planes you looked o
ut
the window to fly, as did perhaps most of the builders. I believe most of t
he
factory RV=99s now have some sort of artificial horizon or autopilot,
or
both.
Terry
I know I am an outsider to this list, but please, let's all realize that
instrument competency is not an inborne trait.
It takes training and practice to maintain proficiency.
Buying an autopilot or installing an attitude gyro is not sufficient to kee
p
us alive without instrument proficiency.
Twenty hours of serious training with needle, ball and airspeed will do the
initial job, but proficiency requires constant use. For one thing, it is mu
ch
easier to fly IFR in the system than it is to convert a VFR flight into an
IFR one. Even the most experienced and competent IFR pilot has his/her hands
full when encountering IFR in an unplanned manner.
Please, PLEASE! Do not count on an autopilot to save your life.
Learn how and practice how to use the simplest of instrumentation. It may
not be legal, but it will save your life and the life of those who may be ri
ding
with you.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bret Smith" <smithhb(at)tds.net> |
| Subject: | Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation |
Frank,
Very eloquently spoken. Just think, for another 2K, you could have had
glass! (Just kidding) That reminded me of during my IFR training when
I learned that the AI is never a primary instrument. Made me wonder why
every VFR equipped Cessna and Piper had one.
Thanks for your input on this List...
Bret Smith
RV-9A "Fuselage"
Blue Ridge, GA
www.FlightInnovations.com
----- Original Message -----
From: Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 11:22 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation
I guess the question for me is the whole concept of a VFR panel with
"some" IFR capabilities.
If what we are saying is an IFR pilot who mainly flys VFR and who
wants to do enroute IFR, thats one thing and perfectly OK.
If we are talking about a VFR pilot who intends to fly "special" that
to me is a fine line as the average VFR jock has little knowledge of
weather and one day will almost certainly cut it too fine and find
himself up the proverbial creek without a paddle.
To that end its just a matter of time before a WX emergency happens
and then as you said the A/P is for an emergency backup...even so there
is still no need for an AI.
11K really?...WoW!..I paid 9k (with a 430 and needles) for a full IFR
panel in the RV7.
I think the discussion started with our VFR friend wondering what he
needed in the panel...The approach I took is "you better be able to see
out the window"...And if you can then an AI is redundant...But an A/P is
a useful device and can be used to get your tail on the ground (together
with a resolution to get an IFR ticket) in the event of the WX
emergency.
At least thats how I ended up with my IFR ticket....:)
Frank
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bret
Smith
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 11:40 AM
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation
Frank,
I agree with you up to a point... The panel shown is an actual panel
offered by Chief Aircraft and sells for $11,450.00!
http://www.chiefaircraft.com/airsec/Avionics/Avionics.html
You can actually do even better through John Stark. He had asked what
"I" would suggest for a VFR panel with some IFR capabilities. The
addition of an autopilot is for workload reduction or as a primary
backup in the event of an in-flight emergency.
I suppose any discussion on panel instrumentation should really be
prefaced with the intended price range...i.e.,
VFR panel under $5000.00
VFR/IFR panel under $10,000.00
IFR panel under $20,000.00
I personally know many pilots who spend $100,000+ for a spam can with
20 year old avionics only to spend another $20,000 to upgrade the panel.
To each his own.
Bret Smith
RV-9A (91314)
Mineral Bluff, GA
www.FlightInnovations.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation |
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
Exactly my point Bob,
Even with my IFR ticket I realise I am out of my element when hand
flying in the clouds and turning around for an approach. It took me over
50 hours to get my IFR ticket and the idea of me 50 hours ago
encountering clouds and using an AI to keep me right side up is just
nonsensicle...I might be able to do it for a a few minutes but I'm sure
I would have lost it eventually.
Thats why (with my IFR ticket) my default position is you should be
nowhere near clouds if your a VFR jock period.
In the event you do enounter clouds the autopilot will fly the airplane
sunnyside up much better than you will.....It does it better than I can
now and I have probably 100hours in the soup.
of course all this is in the RV7 which is not exactly the best
instrument platform.
Stay safe
Frank
________________________________
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
BobsV35B(at)aol.com
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 9:41 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation
In a message dated 10/22/2007 11:23:50 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
terry(at)tcwatson.com writes:
Most of us who are building or flying RV's will remember that we
lost Bill Benedict, then general manager of Vans, and his son Jeremy in
the factory's gyroless RV-9(?) in low clouds on the way to an air show.
Both were competent pilots and both knew better than to fly into the
clouds, yet they did. Until that time, I think Van always thought of his
designs as planes you looked out the window to fly, as did perhaps most
of the builders. I believe most of the factory RV's now have some sort
of artificial horizon or autopilot, or both.
Terry
I know I am an outsider to this list, but please, let's all realize that
instrument competency is not an inborne trait.
It takes training and practice to maintain proficiency.
Buying an autopilot or installing an attitude gyro is not sufficient to
keep us alive without instrument proficiency.
Twenty hours of serious training with needle, ball and airspeed will do
the initial job, but proficiency requires constant use. For one thing,
it is much easier to fly IFR in the system than it is to convert a VFR
flight into an IFR one. Even the most experienced and competent IFR
pilot has his/her hands full when encountering IFR in an unplanned
manner.
Please, PLEASE! Do not count on an autopilot to save your life.
Learn how and practice how to use the simplest of instrumentation. It
may not be legal, but it will save your life and the life of those who
may be riding with you.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
________________________________
See what's
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation |
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
Ya I wondered that too Bret, Particularly when you realise just how
short lived a vacuum pump is. My guess it was more about liability than
anything else. Or maybe our training was due to the fact the Gyro will
eventually roll over and die...Hopefully it won't take you with it!
Autopilots in small airplanes were of course almost unheard of not many
years back. When you consider you can now get a superbly reliable wing
leveler for less than $2k (experimental) then it makes them almost
mandatory equipment in my mind and more useful than an AI...especially a
non glass AI.
Oh yes I do have a Dynon D100 and an EMS D10...Super pieces of
equipment, wouldn't be without them but then I assume I won't be looking
out the window either.
My GNS 430 goes in for its WAAS upgrade next month and I'm told that its
just awesome!
Cheers and good luck with the 9a...awesome airplane you'll love it.
Frank
Rv7a 225 hours
________________________________
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bret
Smith
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 9:45 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation
Frank,
Very eloquently spoken. Just think, for another 2K, you could have had
glass! (Just kidding) That reminded me of during my IFR training when
I learned that the AI is never a primary instrument. Made me wonder why
every VFR equipped Cessna and Piper had one.
Thanks for your input on this List...
Bret Smith
RV-9A "Fuselage"
Blue Ridge, GA
www.FlightInnovations.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Terry Watson" <terry(at)tcwatson.com> |
| Subject: | Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation |
With considerable respect Bob, a VFR pilot with some kind of gyro instrument
or an autopilot has a much better chance of completing a 180 turn when he
inadvertently flies into a cloud that he does without. If he thinks that
having the instruments makes him an instrument pilot he is likely going to
kill himself anyway. I think I recall my last two BFR's having that 180
degree turn under the hood as a part of it.
I would almost always defer to your judgment on these matters, but the point
where I disagree is that IF you are saying gyro instruments are
inappropriate in a VFR airplane. Instrument competency (or flying in the IFR
system) is another question entirely.
As for being an outsider to the list, you are one of the reasons I follow
the list.
Terry
_____
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
BobsV35B(at)aol.com
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 9:41 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation
In a message dated 10/22/2007 11:23:50 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
terry(at)tcwatson.com writes:
Most of us who are building or flying RV's will remember that we lost Bill
Benedict, then general manager of Vans, and his son Jeremy in the factory's
gyroless RV-9(?) in low clouds on the way to an air show. Both were
competent pilots and both knew better than to fly into the clouds, yet they
did. Until that time, I think Van always thought of his designs as planes
you looked out the window to fly, as did perhaps most of the builders. I
believe most of the factory RV's now have some sort of artificial horizon or
autopilot, or both.
Terry
I know I am an outsider to this list, but please, let's all realize that
instrument competency is not an inborne trait.
It takes training and practice to maintain proficiency.
Buying an autopilot or installing an attitude gyro is not sufficient to keep
us alive without instrument proficiency.
Twenty hours of serious training with needle, ball and airspeed will do the
initial job, but proficiency requires constant use. For one thing, it is
much easier to fly IFR in the system than it is to convert a VFR flight into
an IFR one. Even the most experienced and competent IFR pilot has his/her
hands full when encountering IFR in an unplanned manner.
Please, PLEASE! Do not count on an autopilot to save your life.
Learn how and practice how to use the simplest of instrumentation. It may
not be legal, but it will save your life and the life of those who may be
riding with you.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
_____
See what's
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation |
Good Afternoon Terry,
I personally feel that every flying machine should have the capability of
being flown without outside reference.
For me, that means a T&B, airspeed and altimeter. Additional toys are always
helpful!
What I am fearful of is anyone being encouraged to fly beyond his or her
capabilities utilizing equipment that happens to be on board.
I am certain that there are modern solid state instruments that are just as
reliable and as economical as my beloved needle, ball and airspeed, but
regardless of what style instrumentation is chosen, it takes practice and
proficiency to utilize it.
Even a wing leveler has to be understood and used properly.
I have never flown any flying machine which I could not keep right side up
or recover from an unusual attitude by using basic needle, ball, and airspeed
technique.
We don't need to be able to shoot approaches or communicate with the FEDs to
be able to keep an airplane right side up. It would be nice if we could call
for and obtain assistance, but communication is not imperative for survival.
I am prejudiced toward instrument flying because I learned how to do it very
early in my career.
It is my opinion that it takes a lot longer to learn how to be a safe VFR
pilot than it does to learn how to be a safe IFR pilot.
That does not mean that the flying machine needs to have a full panel and
sophisticated radios to be flyable in IFR conditions.
What it does mean is that any pilot should have adequate equipment and
skills to be able to avoid disaster if sight of the horizon is lost.
While making a turn off shore during daylight hours the visibility can be
good, but a haze may cause a loss of visual reference for just a few moments.
At night, the ability to safely control the airplane for a few seconds or a
few minutes until good references are in sight is invaluable.
No one intentionally gets into those situations, but it takes experience to
be able to stay out of them. While that experience is being gained, it sure is
nice to be able to control the aircraft without a visual reference.
I urge everyone to practice flight by whatever reference instruments are
installed often enough so that when that daytime haze condition or a night time
turn away from lights causes a momentary loss of reference, maintaining
control is second nature.
Certainly, no one intends to get into conditions where instrument flight is
required and I do not believe everyone has to be fully qualified to pick up a
clearance and shoot an approach, but I do believe we should all be able to
keep the airplane under control for a few minutes when we inadvertently lose
our orientation via outside the aircraft references.
I vote for twenty hours of concentrated training using needle, ball, and
airspeed or whatever style rate instrumentation is available. The main reason I
like needle, ball, and airspeed is that they are cheap, reliable and
ubiquitous.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
In a message dated 10/22/2007 1:42:35 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
terry(at)tcwatson.com writes:
I would almost always defer to your judgment on these matters, but the point
where I disagree is that IF you are saying gyro instruments are
inappropriate in a VFR airplane. Instrument competency (or flying in the IFR system)
is
another question entirely.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation |
Well Mister redeloach,
I have never been accused of being wise, but I do believe there are many wh
o
will agree that I am old and I have been an active licensed pilot for over
sixty-one years. Where does two out of three leave me?
I believe that anyone who flies is capable of flying into a condition where
visual reference is lost. It happens to ducks and it happens to me.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
In a message dated 10/22/2007 2:47:52 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
redeloach(at)fedex.com writes:
Keep on making sense. Someone must. Lot=99s of these typist have pro
bably
never heard how to be OLD, WISE, and a PILOT!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Hibbing" <n744bh(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation |
Bob,
When I mention JFK Jr in regards I really wasn't trying to infer that
you should depend on an a/p to save your life. But, from what I
understand, he was not instrument rated and didn't even like to use an
a/p. The NTSB report indicated that he was a victim of spatial
disorientation, something that any low time IFR pilot or VFR pilot can
easily have happen. Even high time IFR pilots that are not maintaining
proficiency could have it happen to them. And when that happens to you
a good operating a/p certainly could keep you alive while you try to
sort things out. Heck, JFK was so far behind his airplane it's amazing
he even got hurt in the crash. Now, if a person is building an airplane
to have a good time with in the local area on a sunny day then you sure
don't need to install an a/p. I'm starting to work on a Skybolt and you
can bet that I'm not going to have any fancy stuff in it to have fun in
the local area.
Bill
Glasair SIIS-FT
----- Original Message -----
From: BobsV35B(at)aol.com
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 11:40 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation
I know I am an outsider to this list, but please, let's all realize
that instrument competency is not an inborne trait.
It takes training and practice to maintain proficiency.
Buying an autopilot or installing an attitude gyro is not sufficient
to keep us alive without instrument proficiency.
Twenty hours of serious training with needle, ball and airspeed will
do the initial job, but proficiency requires constant use. For one
thing, it is much easier to fly IFR in the system than it is to convert
a VFR flight into an IFR one. Even the most experienced and competent
IFR pilot has his/her hands full when encountering IFR in an unplanned
manner.
Please, PLEASE! Do not count on an autopilot to save your life.
Learn how and practice how to use the simplest of instrumentation. It
may not be legal, but it will save your life and the life of those who
may be riding with you.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
See what's
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ed Anderson" <eanderson(at)carolina.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation |
I fully agree, Terry. I spent 20 rather anxious filled ICM minutes when
I foolish got caught crossing a cold front to what I expect to be fair
and clear behind it. Despite a 180, I got enveloped in clouds at 8500
MSL that turned out to have ice. Ice formed on front of windshield and
in front of gas caps on the wings but fortunately not any more than
that.
I had 3 items that undoubtedly saved my butt that day.
1. I did have an AI as well as needle and ball (which I do practice
with).
2. Had a heated pitot tube which I belatedly remember to turn on -
immediately after I did there was a blip as I presume an slug of water
that had been ice went through.
3. Had a Garmin 195 which mean I at least knew where I was headed.
Managed to complete the turn, fly back toward a large lake while
descending and finally broke out at 2000 MSL over the lake. Proceeded
to north of Atlanta, GA and landing at Cherokee county airport in
blowing snow near dusk. I had no luck communication with anyone - which
after I landed I discovered the radio antenna had snapped off flush with
its mount on the fuselage - I presume due to ice induced vibration.
I walked on shaky knees into the FBO and the first thing I saw as an
article posted on their read-board about the average life span of a VFR
pilot in ICM conditions being a few seconds less than 3 minutes. My
guardian angle got a few gray hairs on that one.
But, the point is regardless of dumb thought process or poor decision
that got me to that point, without those instruments and a small bit of
skill at using them, I would not be writing this. So I am a firm
believer in four things.
1. Never, Never mess with ICM conditions
2. Always have a minimum set of equipment to do a 180 in those
conditions - even if only a VFR pilot - you never plan on becoming
involved in such a situation, but its happened to more than me.
3. Know how to use those basic instruments and practice doing a 180.
4. A GPS to get you someplace (rather than boring circles in those
conditions).
FWIW
Ed
----- Original Message -----
From: Terry Watson
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 2:39 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation
With considerable respect Bob, a VFR pilot with some kind of gyro
instrument or an autopilot has a much better chance of completing a 180
turn when he inadvertently flies into a cloud that he does without. If
he thinks that having the instruments makes him an instrument pilot he
is likely going to kill himself anyway. I think I recall my last two
BFR's having that 180 degree turn under the hood as a part of it.
I would almost always defer to your judgment on these matters, but the
point where I disagree is that IF you are saying gyro instruments are
inappropriate in a VFR airplane. Instrument competency (or flying in the
IFR system) is another question entirely.
As for being an outsider to the list, you are one of the reasons I
follow the list.
Terry
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
BobsV35B(at)aol.com
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 9:41 AM
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation
In a message dated 10/22/2007 11:23:50 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
terry(at)tcwatson.com writes:
Most of us who are building or flying RV's will remember that we
lost Bill Benedict, then general manager of Vans, and his son Jeremy in
the factory's gyroless RV-9(?) in low clouds on the way to an air show.
Both were competent pilots and both knew better than to fly into the
clouds, yet they did. Until that time, I think Van always thought of his
designs as planes you looked out the window to fly, as did perhaps most
of the builders. I believe most of the factory RV's now have some sort
of artificial horizon or autopilot, or both.
Terry
I know I am an outsider to this list, but please, let's all realize
that instrument competency is not an inborne trait.
It takes training and practice to maintain proficiency.
Buying an autopilot or installing an attitude gyro is not sufficient
to keep us alive without instrument proficiency.
Twenty hours of serious training with needle, ball and airspeed will
do the initial job, but proficiency requires constant use. For one
thing, it is much easier to fly IFR in the system than it is to convert
a VFR flight into an IFR one. Even the most experienced and competent
IFR pilot has his/her hands full when encountering IFR in an unplanned
manner.
Please, PLEASE! Do not count on an autopilot to save your life.
Learn how and practice how to use the simplest of instrumentation. It
may not be legal, but it will save your life and the life of those who
may be riding with you.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
See what's
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "H. M. Haught Jr. " <handainc(at)madisoncounty.net> |
| Subject: | Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation |
I think I started this thread with my inquiry about the VFR
instrumentation. I have a "full panel" in my Pacer, and it has saved my
neck more than once. As brought out in this thread, if you fly a lot,
you will run into conditions that may not be IFR, but are disorienting,
as well as blundering into IFR conditions. I had a good instructor that
insisted I be "competent" on instruments (long time Navy and then Air
Force basic instructor), so I spent a considerable amount of time under
the hood. Most of my BFR instructors have also checked me out under the
hood (unusual attitudes, 180 turns, etc.) and it has saved my beef.
Got caught on the coast of Florida in some fast moving weather, did a
180 and got socked in on approach to the airport I had crossed. All I
could do was set up a climb, hope I didn't hit a tower and keep the
airplane right side up as I climbed out on the runway heading (chart
showed no towers). Getting on the radio, I determined that I could
indeed climb out on top and got vectors to the closest view to the
ground with the control center filing me as "Special VFR) . And yes, I
did experience vertigo on that flight, plus, the Pacer is not a good
instrument platform. It wasn't fun, and I would not do it again on
purpose. Other occasions have caused me to practice flying on
instruments as often as I can.
I would like to get my IFR rating, and would definitely take instruction
if I can afford a "basic IFR" panel, just for situations that I
mentioned. Low ceiling over my location, clear air a few miles away.
However, from the responses, I doubt I can afford that kind of
equipment. Right now, my thinking is to install the TruTrak EFIS,
depending upon the cost, the Pictorial Turn and Bank, ICOM Radio, and
maybe a used Garmin GPS panel unit as well as a "steam guage" altimeter
and airspeed. I've flown the Pictorial Turn and Bank in my Pacer
(velcroed on the top of the panel) when Younkin was developing it and
was impressed. With the EFIS as primary and the pictorial T&B as backup
I would feel comfortable continuing to fly as I do now, with the GPS as
backup to the gyro. Probably can't afford to go with an auto pilot,
unless they get even cheaper but will install wiring and components to
add additional equipment later as I can afford it.
I certainly wasn't advocating a VFR pilot intentionally filing IFR. I
was just stating what I have wanted to do on occasion if I had the
equipment and experience to do it safely.
It also appears that everyone has a different definition of "basic".
M. Haught
Bill Hibbing wrote:
> Bob,
>
> When I mention JFK Jr in regards I really wasn't trying to infer that
> you should depend on an a/p to save your life. But, from what I
> understand, he was not instrument rated and didn't even like to use an
> a/p. The NTSB report indicated that he was a victim of spatial
> disorientation, something that any low time IFR pilot or VFR pilot can
> easily have happen. Even high time IFR pilots that are not
> maintaining proficiency could have it happen to them. And when that
> happens to you a good operating a/p certainly could keep you alive
> while you try to sort things out. Heck, JFK was so far behind his
> airplane it's amazing he even got hurt in the crash. Now, if a person
> is building an airplane to have a good time with in the local area on
> a sunny day then you sure don't need to install an a/p. I'm starting
> to work on a Skybolt and you can bet that I'm not going to have any
> fancy stuff in it to have fun in the local area.
>
> Bill
> Glasair SIIS-FT
>
> -----
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Becoming CAD-proficient to a practical level |
of usefulness
>
>
> > About 1985, I was where you are today. I had a PC-XT, 20Mb
> > hard drive, yellow screen computer with the grand total of
> > 640K of ram. I think the thing ran at the blazing speed
> > of 4MHz.
>
>
>Bob,
>
>4.77 MHz. You must have been a rich man. That system isn't far from $10k
>when you add it up. A box of 5 1/4" diskettes was $50.
>
>See: http://www.periheliondesign.com/downloads/tandy1989.pdf
Actually, just over a $grand$. We had a "policy" at
Beech that said "NO IBM clones . . . you never know
when IBM might be in the market for a stable of King
Airs". When we became Raytheon, I heard through the
grapevine that Raytheon MASS put out yearly contracts
for clone suppliers. I got the name of the present
favored supplier and called them. I told them we were
Raytheon WICHITA and wanted a quote on what a PC-XT
would cost us. They asked, "How many" . . ." Hmmmm . . .
dunno. . . how about 25? "Okay, call you back."
An hour later he called to quote $1050+UPS. Okay, I
circulated a sign-up sheet in the Targets Group
and two days later I had 27 checks in my hot little
fist. About 10 days later this UPS guy backs up
to my garage and is looking at his COD delivery ticket
with some incredulity . . . "That will be $28,000
please."
Biggest check I ever wrote in my life. I became the local
warranty service rep for the Bit Bucket of N. Newton, MA
and over the next 4 years, built up a rather interesting,
very educational, and mildly profitable computer business.
Got out when the local store fronts began selling clones
at a few hundred over my costs.
Most of my personal computer upgrades were trade-ins
from my customers. Got to massage my own computer
usage on the coat-tails of the business. I've probably
owned 40 computers over the years! The most I ever
paid for one was $2700 for the latest and greatest,
20 MHz 286 machine . . . boy, was that a learning
experience! The same machine was half that price a
year later. I've since adopted a purchasing philosophy
that upgrades my computers AFTER the next generation
machines come out. You get 'last years' model for
peanuts. Nowadays, I seldom drop more than $600
on any CPU purchase. My lab test drivers come off
ebay for under $150.
Now, if only we could purchase last year's model
hip replacement in the same free-market,
consumer-supplier driven environment . . .
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Solid State Relay Alert |
>
>Bob, is this a bi-polar device? !.5 Volts drop is pretty typical for a
>darlington.
Don't know what the internal technology is . . . only
that 1.5V is 10% of system voltage in the switching device
alone!
>Wouldn't the power FET based SSRs do pretty well at the 5 - 10 Amp load
>range common for lights, fuel pumps, radios, etc.?
FETs or arrays of FETS can be used to
produce exceedingly low on-resistances.
Under 1 milliohm is now quite practical.
This would toss off 20 mv at 20A for a
grand heat load of 400 milliwatts. That's
MY kind of heat sink problem.
Point is that this particular product,
no matter how attractively priced, is
not ready for top billing in our airplanes.
I think I gave under $10 for the one in
the picture. I had hopes. We're getting
close but not quite there yet.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation |
Good Evening Bill,
In am not at all opposed to having an autopilot available. In fact I have
two of them in my Bonanza. One is a full autopilot with altitude hold and
approach coupling. The other is an old Century I wing leveler.
I hate carrying any extra weight, but I do consider my back up autopilot to
be worth carrying the two point two extra pounds that it weighs.
If I could get one approved in my Stearman at a reasonable cost, I would
probably do so. My only objection is to installing one as a substitute for
training and checking. The twenty hours or so of training required to reach a
high level of rate instrument flight capability seems to me to be a better
investment. The cost is about the same, but the training will last a life time
and the rate instruments are available in almost all certificated airplanes.
They are low cost enough and light enough to place in everything that has
any sort of electrical power at all. If no electrical power is available, a
venturi will work just fine.
Best of all is to have an autopilot combined with the skills to fly without
it. Even an autopilot needs training to use properly.
We can all point out many things that JFKjr needed, but his mistakes could
have happened to any of us at some stage in our training.
Very Sad and very bad for our light plane image. We do not need such things
happening to anyone else.
IFR capability and training would have saved him. Why not encourage all to
get that training?
It is LOT easier to learn to fly IFR than it is to learn how to get around
the country safely in VFR conditions.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
In a message dated 10/22/2007 5:44:12 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
n744bh(at)bellsouth.net writes:
Bob,
When I mention JFK Jr in regards I really wasn't trying to infer that you
should depend on an a/p to save your life. But, from what I understand, he was
not instrument rated and didn't even like to use an a/p. The NTSB report
indicated that he was a victim of spatial disorientation, something that any
low time IFR pilot or VFR pilot can easily have happen. Even high time IFR
pilots that are not maintaining proficiency could have it happen to them. And
when that happens to you a good operating a/p certainly could keep you alive
while you try to sort things out. Heck, JFK was so far behind his airplane
it's amazing he even got hurt in the crash. Now, if a person is building an
airplane to have a good time with in the local area on a sunny day then you
sure don't need to install an a/p. I'm starting to work on a Skybolt and you
can bet that I'm not going to have any fancy stuff in it to have fun in the
local area.
Bill
Glasair SIIS-FT
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bill Hibbing" <n744bh(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation |
Yep, I totally agree Bob. The way I see it was that JFK made 2 mistakes
and if he had only made one he probably would still be around. His
first was not waiting until the next morning to make the flight and the
second was not engaging the a/p when things started to go badly. I have
an old airline buddy that lives in CT within easy view of Long Island
Sound when airborne. She went out to fly her Eagle the evening of JFK's
accident and after a couple of minutes thought to herself "what the heck
am I doing flying in this haze?" She turned back to her home airfield
and put the airplane away for another day. The good IFR training is
always worth the money but there are probably more than a few pilots
that don't fly enough to maintain a high level of proficiency,
especially on the 1-2-3 method of instrument flying. Anyway, enough
from me on this subject.
Bill
Glasair SIIS-FT
----- Original Message -----
From: BobsV35B(at)aol.com
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 6:51 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation
Good Evening Bill,
In am not at all opposed to having an autopilot available. In fact I
have two of them in my Bonanza. One is a full autopilot with altitude
hold and approach coupling. The other is an old Century I wing leveler.
I hate carrying any extra weight, but I do consider my back up
autopilot to be worth carrying the two point two extra pounds that it
weighs.
If I could get one approved in my Stearman at a reasonable cost, I
would probably do so. My only objection is to installing one as a
substitute for training and checking. The twenty hours or so of
training required to reach a high level of rate instrument flight
capability seems to me to be a better investment. The cost is about the
same, but the training will last a life time and the rate instruments
are available in almost all certificated airplanes.
They are low cost enough and light enough to place in everything that
has any sort of electrical power at all. If no electrical power is
available, a venturi will work just fine.
Best of all is to have an autopilot combined with the skills to fly
without it. Even an autopilot needs training to use properly.
We can all point out many things that JFKjr needed, but his mistakes
could have happened to any of us at some stage in our training.
Very Sad and very bad for our light plane image. We do not need such
things happening to anyone else.
IFR capability and training would have saved him. Why not encourage
all to get that training?
It is LOT easier to learn to fly IFR than it is to learn how to get
around the country safely in VFR conditions.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
In a message dated 10/22/2007 5:44:12 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
n744bh(at)bellsouth.net writes:
Bob,
When I mention JFK Jr in regards I really wasn't trying to infer
that you should depend on an a/p to save your life. But, from what I
understand, he was not instrument rated and didn't even like to use an
a/p. The NTSB report indicated that he was a victim of spatial
disorientation, something that any low time IFR pilot or VFR pilot can
easily have happen. Even high time IFR pilots that are not maintaining
proficiency could have it happen to them. And when that happens to you
a good operating a/p certainly could keep you alive while you try to
sort things out. Heck, JFK was so far behind his airplane it's amazing
he even got hurt in the crash. Now, if a person is building an airplane
to have a good time with in the local area on a sunny day then you sure
don't need to install an a/p. I'm starting to work on a Skybolt and you
can bet that I'm not going to have any fancy stuff in it to have fun in
the local area.
Bill
Glasair SIIS-FT
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
See what's new
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Neal George" <n8zg(at)bellsouth.net> |
| Subject: | Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation |
Well said Bob ! Ladies and Gentlemen, Old Bob has exposed the nugget of
this thread.
I'd add that it's immeasurably safer (to your ticket and your person), and
less expensive, too, especially of you use your airplane to go places on
anything resembling a schedule.
I travel A LOT in the course of my AF duties. I take the CherokeeJet
whenever possible (115 Kts - WFO, downhill). More often than not, I beat my
co-workers there _and_ home, at less expense, and on MY schedule, not the
cattle car's.
And always on a IFR flight plan. Simply couldn't do it VFR and make the
meetings (or stay married). IFR will (OK, should) keep one out of a hot MOA
or campaigning congressman TFR... even those that bloom out of
nowhere...after launch...VFR (CAVU, even)...six hours and a fuel stop en
route... (plausible fiction follows)
FBI - "Capt George, why were you flying a straight line from Morganton to
Manassas that intersected the TFR surrounding Congressman Bluster's campaign
stop?"
Me - "Didn't happen."
FBI - "Capt George, we have radar track data that puts you directly over the
congressman's podium while the TFR was active."
Me - "I called 1-800-WXBRIEF, talked to YOUR contractor, filed IFR Direct
MRN-HEF, specifically asked about TFRs, and was ensured there were no TFR's
associated with my route of flight. We discussed en route weather and the
area that until recently resembled a certain mouse. I had a discrete squawk
code and was in constant communication with ATC on an IFR flight plan under
ATC control. How could I have violated a TFR?"
FBI - "Capt George, give me your License."
Me - "NoSir. I remember the trouble Bob Hoover had... Shall we review the
tape?"
(End plausible fiction, but I expect it would go downhill from there...)
Anybody remember a few weeks ago when one of our associates was beat up for
"loitering" over a power plant...at >160 kts...more than 5 NM away...well
over 3000 ft above...on a straight line to landing?
Bonus! - Dxxxx Airlines can't abandon me in Atlanta <8-O - but I CAN drag
out a fuel stop to enjoy supper, or divert and spend the evening with
friends or family if the weather or SAFETY dictate...
Neal E. George
2023 Everglades Drive
Navarre, FL 32566
Home - 850-515-0640
Cell - 850-218-4838
On Behalf Of BobsV35B(at)aol.com
It is LOT easier to learn to fly IFR than it is to learn how to get around
the country safely in VFR conditions.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | D Wysong <hdwysong(at)GMAIL.COM> |
| Subject: | Re: Solid State Relay Alert |
> Point is that this particular product,
> no matter how attractively priced, is
> not ready for top billing in our airplanes.
> I think I gave under $10 for the one in
> the picture. I had hopes. We're getting
> close but not quite there yet.
>
> Bob . . .
The DC SSRs from Crydom (e.g. - D06D series) are the same
"brick" form-factor as the Chinese knock off you picked up
(and admittedly more expensive), but the spec voltage drop
on a D06D60 (60 ADC model) at rated load is 0.6 V vs 1.5 V.
Still 5% on a 12V system, but are we throwing the SSR baby
out with the Chinese bath water here?
Any idea how the heat dissipation requirements for these
critters compare with the tried/true S701-1 contactors
operating at the same load? I know the "can" contactors get
"warm", too, but I'm wondering if we can quantify "warm" in
order to to make an apples-to-apples comparison?
I'm also wondering how we would factor in the "wasted" power
on the S701-1 coil, additional durability of the SSR device,
etc., into our trade study.
Thanks as always for the insight and education, Bob.
D
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <bakerocb(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Electrically Driven Fuel Boos Pump |
10/23/2007
Hello Fellow Listers, There was a recent thread on the list regarding
electrically driven fuel boost pumps and the fact that some aircraft and
engine configurations required that the electrically driven fuel boost pump
be OFF for takeoff and landing while the engine driven fuel pump is
operating normally.
I would appreciate it if someone familiar with the Beechcraft A36 airplane
would review the below accident initial report and let us know if the A36 is
one of those airplanes that is supposed to have the electrically driven fuel
boost pump OFF for takeoff and landing.
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id 071022X01627&key=1
Thank you.
'OC' Says: "The best investment we can make is the effort to gather and
understand knowledge."
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Solid State Relay Alert |
| From: | "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net> |
Bob, et al,
For a couple years I have been selling the 35A "Powerlink Jr." Solid State Relay
on my website.
The device is based on an International Rectifier IRF2804 which has a maximum 10V
Rds(on) of 0.0023 Ohms.
The device has a hold-on current of 200 microamps, weighs 3.1 ounces, and has it's
own heat sink.
http://www.periheliondesign.com/powerlinkjr.htm
--------
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge, MA 01550
(508) 764-2072
emjones(at)charter.net
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=141295#141295
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/powerlink_jr_35a_155.jpg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Electrically Driven Fuel Boost Pump |
Good Morning OC,
Normal procedure would have the auxiliary pump turned off for takeoff.
The fuel control system used on the stock A36 uses engine RPM as one of the
determinants of fuel flow. If the auxiliary pump is used, it sends out the
maximum amount of fuel possible regardless of the engine RPM. Consequently, if
the pump is used on the ground at low RPM, the engine will flood and may quit.
However, at very high power settings, the fuel flow may increase slightly
with the auxiliary pump turned on or it may not affect engine operations at
all.
Whether it does or not is dependent on just which engine is installed and
how strongly the auxiliary pump pumps.
Normal procedure is to have the pump off unless the fuel flow is low or
unsteady. If either of those events occur, the auxiliary pump should be turned
on. That could cause a rough running engine, but that rarely happens. Generally
speaking, if the engine pump is operating normally during full power
operation and the auxiliary pump is turned on there will be a small power loss
from
the overly rich mixture. The manual suggests that the engine be manually
leaned if that does happen.
If the throttle is retarded while the auxiliary pump and the engine pump are
both operative, a serious power loss could occur.
In any case, it is highly unlikely that the auxiliary fuel pump played any
part in this accident.
Stranger things have happened though!
Any help at all?
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
In a message dated 10/23/2007 8:30:18 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
bakerocb(at)cox.net writes:
I would appreciate it if someone familiar with the Beechcraft A36 airplane
would review the below accident initial report and let us know if the A36 is
one of those airplanes that is supposed to have the electrically driven fuel
boost pump OFF for takeoff and landing.
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id 071022X01627&key=1
Thank you.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Solid State Relay Alert |
>
> > Point is that this particular product,
> > no matter how attractively priced, is
> > not ready for top billing in our airplanes.
> > I think I gave under $10 for the one in
> > the picture. I had hopes. We're getting
> > close but not quite there yet.
> >
> > Bob . . .
>
>The DC SSRs from Crydom (e.g. - D06D series) are the same "brick"
>form-factor as the Chinese knock off you picked up (and admittedly more
>expensive), but the spec voltage drop on a D06D60 (60 ADC model) at rated
>load is 0.6 V vs 1.5 V. Still 5% on a 12V system, but are we throwing the
>SSR baby out with the Chinese bath water here?
Don't see how . . .
>Any idea how the heat dissipation requirements for these critters compare
>with the tried/true S701-1 contactors operating at the same load? I know
>the "can" contactors get "warm", too, but I'm wondering if we can quantify
>"warm" in order to to make an apples-to-apples comparison?
The S701 is suited for carrying 200+ amps for cracking . . . it's
also a bi-directional switch. You can both charge and discharge the
battery through its metallic contacts.
Coil power dissipated is on the order of 10W . . . but VOLTAGE
DROP across closed contacts is on the order of 100 mV.
>I'm also wondering how we would factor in the "wasted" power on the S701-1
>coil, additional durability of the SSR device, etc., into our trade study.
It isn't just a "wasted power" consideration; we also
have voltage drop across closed contacts. After sizing system
components in a pitot heater circuit to keep wiring and
control losses below 5%, the simple act of replacing
a pitot heat SWITCH with a SS relay suddenly boosts
voltage drops to over 10%.
In the case of the S701, there are no components internal
to the product that become at-risk due to temperature
rise. In a SS relay, you have a semiconductor device that
must be held below certain temperature levels (generally
150C) to avoid killing the device. This is where we become
concerned for efficient conduction of heat into surrounding
environs.
Not necessarily a terrible thing if that meets your
personal design goals . . . but it's not something
I would recommend. I've had a number of inquiries
from readers about the various new kids on the block
and the devices I evaluated were certainly priced right
but short of my design goals.
>Thanks as always for the insight and education, Bob.
My pleasure sir.
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: Solid State Relay Alert |
>
>Bob, et al,
>
>For a couple years I have been selling the 35A "Powerlink Jr." Solid State
>Relay on my website.
>
>The device is based on an International Rectifier IRF2804 which has a
>maximum 10V Rds(on) of 0.0023 Ohms.
>
>The device has a hold-on current of 200 microamps, weighs 3.1 ounces, and
>has it's own heat sink.
Understand . . . and at the present time, you're
the only kid on the block who has addressed the
voltage drop design goals. But there's a dust
cloud rising over the hill and one or more of
those riders is carrying the next great thing
in solid state relays.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Solid State Relay Alert |
| From: | "marcausman" <marc(at)verticalpower.com> |
Or if you want to take a look at a whole SYSTEM that uses solid-state switching technology, look here: www.verticalpower.com
We do work with conventional contactors for the high current loads, though. When
very high-current solid-state relays become practical, I'm sure they will be
controllable in the same manner as the current contactors.
--------
Marc Ausman
http://www.verticalpower.com
RV-7 IO-390 Flying
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=141305#141305
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jeff Page <jpx(at)qenesis.com> |
| Subject: | Antenna mounting |
I am planning on mounting a NAV/COM antenna on each wing.
I expect I should put a doubler under the skin and I should drill
whatever holes are necessary prior to rivetting on the skins.
I know nothing about the mounting characteristics of these antennas :-(
Do they all need the same size hole ?
Or do I need to select an antenna now and tailor the installation for it ?
Recommendations for use with a Garmin SL30 ?
Thanks,
Jeff Page
Dream Aircraft Tundra #10
PS. Thanks for the Wire Masters recommendation. Deb Allen was very
helpful and prompt. They had everything I needed to wire my entire
plane at very attractive pricing.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ralph E. Capen" <recapen(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Antenna mounting |
My NAV antenna is on the top of my VS...COMMs are 1) under copilot 2) windshield
copper foil.
The Comm under the copilot has a doubler, the Nav on the VS has a hat section and
a doubler (to put it nicely under the fiberglass cap.
Ralph Capen RV6AQB (early tail) N822AR @ N06 finishing forever....
-----Original Message-----
>From: Jeff Page <jpx(at)qenesis.com>
>Sent: Oct 23, 2007 12:59 PM
>To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: AeroElectric-List: Antenna mounting
>
>
>I am planning on mounting a NAV/COM antenna on each wing.
>I expect I should put a doubler under the skin and I should drill
>whatever holes are necessary prior to rivetting on the skins.
>
>I know nothing about the mounting characteristics of these antennas :-(
>Do they all need the same size hole ?
>Or do I need to select an antenna now and tailor the installation for it ?
>
>Recommendations for use with a Garmin SL30 ?
>
>Thanks,
>Jeff Page
>Dream Aircraft Tundra #10
>
>PS. Thanks for the Wire Masters recommendation. Deb Allen was very
>helpful and prompt. They had everything I needed to wire my entire
>plane at very attractive pricing.
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Doug Waddingham <lancairav8r(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Firewall/bulkhead connectors |
I am doing the firewall forward connections on my Lancair 360. I want
an easy "cannon plug" style firewall connector for all the wiring that
goes from the engine to the engine monitor (about 15 wires) and another
connector for anything and everything else that has to pass through the
firewall. Digikey has an amazing number of choices. If anyone has
already done this and has a part number of what you used for the
connector would you mind passing it along? I have spent hours looking
through the catalog and I'm still not sure what the best connector for
this application is.
Thanks
Doug
Doug Waddingham
Centennial, CO
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ralph E. Capen" <recapen(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Firewall/bulkhead connectors |
I have three of these on my firewall.
One two-pin for a battery hawk.
The other two are larger and allow me to disconnect the engine from the firewall
with a single connector - the other of the two is for the manifold of sensors.
I did not put a firewall disconnect for my thermocouples.
I used quarter turn bayonet style - and have already reaped the benefits of my
decision.
I have the part numbers at the hangar - I'll try to dig up some pictures too.
Don't remember if I got them from Digi-key or Allied - but it doesn't matter...both
vendors carry the line.
Ralph Capen
-----Original Message-----
>From: Doug Waddingham <lancairav8r(at)gmail.com>
>Sent: Oct 23, 2007 3:42 PM
>To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>Subject: AeroElectric-List: Firewall/bulkhead connectors
>
>
>I am doing the firewall forward connections on my Lancair 360. I want
>an easy "cannon plug" style firewall connector for all the wiring that
>goes from the engine to the engine monitor (about 15 wires) and another
>connector for anything and everything else that has to pass through the
>firewall. Digikey has an amazing number of choices. If anyone has
>already done this and has a part number of what you used for the
>connector would you mind passing it along? I have spent hours looking
>through the catalog and I'm still not sure what the best connector for
>this application is.
>
>Thanks
>
>Doug
>
>Doug Waddingham
>Centennial, CO
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Donald J Smith" <donaldjsmith(at)ukonline.co.uk> |
| Subject: | Question on Z16 in aeroelectric connection |
Can anyone explain how the alternator output is stopped or disconnected when
the Alternator OV Disconnect Relay breaks the Voltage Regulator Yel wire? I
do not undersatnd how this works when C B and R are still connected. An
explanation as to how this regulator works would be useful.
Regards
Donald J Smith
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Question on Z16 in aeroelectric connection |
| From: | "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net> |
Disconnecting the alternator doesn't stop it's output, sort of. The
primary goal of the relay is to keep a misbehaving alternator from
damaging other things that are connected to the system, like avionics, and
the battery.
Disconnecting the alternator from the bus will mostly drive its output
current to zero (and hence power/wattage), though the output voltage may
go up quite a bit - 80v (unregulated/failed regulator) - on a wound field
unit I think, or become quite unstable/noisy (who cares) - it's not
connected to anything.
Regards,
Matt-
>
>
> Can anyone explain how the alternator output is stopped or disconnected
> when
> the Alternator OV Disconnect Relay breaks the Voltage Regulator Yel wire?
> I
> do not undersatnd how this works when C B and R are still connected. An
> explanation as to how this regulator works would be useful.
>
> Regards
>
> Donald J Smith
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Book not shipped ? |
>
>Bob,
>
>I placed an order for the AeroElectric Connection on Oct 2nd and
>received an e-mail acknowledgement.
>However, no charge has gone through on my credit card as of Oct 23rd.
>On Oct 18th I filled in the e-mail contact form requesting you follow
>up on my order, but I have received no response. So I am resorting to
>posting to this list. Please contact me at jpx(at)Qenesis.com
>
>Thanks !
>
>Jeff Page
We've been trying to herd quite
a few cats and letting the orders stack
up to batches of 15 or 20 books before
we sit down to process them. Your order
was processed a few minutes ago and the
book will go into tomorrow's mail.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Frank Stringham" <fstringham(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: E-MAG wiring Z13-8 |
Bob and others
I have wired my aircraft (rv7A) according to the scheme Z13-8. I sure hate
to rewire .....so after meeting with the good folks from E-mag is the Z13-8
no longer viable or am I still OK to go with it!
Thanks for all your efforts in behalf of we experimenters.
Frank @ SGU RV7A 95% DONE 120% TO GO
>From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net>
>Reply-To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>To: "Brad Dement"
>Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: E-MAG wiring
>Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2007 10:09:33 -0600
>
>
>
>Brad,
>
>I note that it has been about 18 months since we last "talked".
>I've been trying to plan a trip to your neck of the woods
>so we can meet personally. I was at OSH this past year but
>had to make it a quick in-and-out to support the forums I'd
>signed up for . . . my dad was in his last days in Medicine Lodge,
>KS and I didn't have time for socializing.
>
>In any case, I'd like to take this opportunity to renew our
>acquaintance to update myself on the progress of your efforts
>over the past year and a half. I also need to expand
>my understanding of your products so that I don't offer
>poor advise when publishing words and drawings that speak
>of e-Mag devices.
>
>After adding e-Mag products to our electrical system architecture
>drawings over a year ago, I put on my "systems integrator"
>hat for certified aircraft and deduced that from the
>pilot's perspective, it's useful to test the systems ability
>to run self powered during preflight. From both a builder's
>and pilot's perspectives, it's useful to minimize the number
>of switches on the panel.
>
>I crafted a suggested wiring diagram which was published
>as our Figure Z-33 and excerpted in one or more of the
>full-up aircraft drawings. See:
>
>http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Adobe_Architecture_Pdfs/Z33K.pdf
>
>In this drawing you can see that three-position, progressive
>transfer switches are incorporated to have an OFF position
>that grounds the RED control lead and breaks power to the
>ORN lead from the battery bus.
>
>The mid position removes the ground from the control lead
>but does not apply power. The upper position leaves the
>control lead ungrounded and adds bus power to the system.
>The thought was that by means of logical positioning of
>switches a pilot could demonstrate that a P-Mag would run
>self-powered during a preflight run-up.
>
>A third maintenance switch was necessary to take advantage
>of built-in timing functions. A switch under the cowl
>would offer a means by which the e-mag/p-mag could be
>powered up for timing leaving the rest of the aircraft
>'cold'.
>
>Here are the Figure Z-33 notes that accompany the wiring
>diagram in the AeroElectric Connection.
>
>--------begin excerpt-------
>
>Figure Z-33 P-Mag Maintenance Mode and Hand
>Propping Option. E-Mags and P-Mags are a unique
>product in that as the factory points out, have TWO
>switchable functionsPower and control. Their installation
>manuals suggest separate switches but in a quest for the
>minimalist panel, I crafted the drawing for P-Mags in Figure
>Z-33 which is repeated in Figure Z-13/8.
>
>. . . now, be aware that the sequence of switching functions
>depicted have been commented on by the good folks at EMagair
>suggesting that switch movements should bring
>power on first followed by activating the magneto.
>
>My wiring diagram shows the opposite sequence, ignition
>"active" first followed by supporting power. The reason is
>quite simple. There are separate but divergent interests in
>the ownership and operation of the p-mag:
>(1) When sitting at the end of the runway doing a pre-flight,
>the PILOT'S interest is "are the built in alternators for each
>P-Mag functioning?" By wiring as I've suggested, moving
>the switch from full up to the mid position deprives a P-Mag
>of electrical support and (if the run-up RPMS are high
>enough), the ignition will not falter when dropped to the mid
>position. Of course, the opposite ignition needs to be
>completely OFF at this time.
>
>Pre-flight test sequence would be:
>
>RUN-UP RPM . . . . . Set
>L-IGN Switch . . . . . . . OFF
>R-IGN Switch . . . . . . . ON but no BAT (mid position)
>Note engine does not falter
>L-IGN Switch . . . . . . . ON but no BAT (mid position)
>R-IGN Switch . . . . . . . OFF
>Note engine does not falter
>Both IGN Switches . . . . BAT
>
>(2) A secondary interest is what might be called the
>maintenance mode for ground ops where the mechanic
>wants to have the systems powered but inactive for using a
>P-mag's built-in timing features -OR- for hand propping the
>engine where again, it's useful to be able to hear the timing
>buzzer.
>
>In this mode, you MUST have battery power available to the
>P-Mags even when in the inactive state. The diagram
>shows a third switch (accessible through the oil check/
>filler door?) that places temporary power on both ignitions
>while leaving absolute control over activity in the hands of
>whoever has access to pilot's controls on the panel.
>If one chooses this architecture, then a light on the panel
>should be included to alert the pilot should the switch be left
>in the maintenance position. Not a big risk from a fight
>operations and safety perspective but it WOULD run the
>battery down.
>
>This figure adds a switch to allow powering up the e-Mag/p-Mag
>product while leaving it de-activated. This feature
>activates the built in aural timing buzzer needed for timing
>the ignition system -AND- for proper pre-positioning the
>prop for hand-propping the engine.
>
>--- end of excerpt ----
>
>I've been told via the 'grapevine' that operating the
>p-Mag in the manner suggested has some issues with respect
>to product performance. Specifically that if power is
>removed from a p-Mag and then replaced that the processor
>wanders into the weeds and upsets the system's timing.
>
>Understand my friend that I was in no way trying to do
>an end-run on you . . . it seemed that the wiring/operating
>scheme I was suggesting covered some bases that I would
>be required to address with systems wieners, test pilots
>and DERs should I be tasked with qualifying your product
>onto a type certificated aircraft.
>
>If indeed it is a bad thing to remove and then replace
>power on a p-Mag while it's operating, then I'm mystified.
>Irrespective of the aircraft's electrical architecture,
>DO-160 suggests we design our products to gracefully
>recover from a power interruption . . . if the
>'grapevine' stories are accurate, then the p-Mag would
>not fair well in a DO-160 investigation.
>
>If the internal alternator is poised to pick up the load
>during a power outage I'm further mystified as to why
>a p-Mag would even be aware of bus power interruptions.
>The spirit and intent of the proposed pre-flight test
>was to demonstrate that the p-Mag was ready, willing
>and able to run if the bus goes down. I would expect
>the processor in a running p-Mag to be oblivious
>of whether or not bus power was present.
>
>I confess that my assumptions about functionality
>of your product were being filtered through the logic
>used to craft products for the TC aircraft world and
>I may have stubbed my toe by not clearing this idea
>with you. I'd be pleased to understand the true
>nature of the beast with a goal of offering our
>collective customers the best we know how to do in
>crafting an owner built and maintained aircraft.
>
>I still want to visit your facilities. I also
>need to drop into George Braley's place in
>southern OK. I might just take a couple days pretty
>soon and make this trip happen. I've been 'retired'
>from Beech for about two months . . . I've done more
>new design work the past 6 weeks than I've done the
>past 6-years! Problem is that what I thought was going
>to be a 20 hr/wk retirement activity has turned into
>a more-than-full-time job. I've told my principal
>that I can do this for awhile . . . but I've have
>some fun things that need to happen pretty soon too.
>
>It would also be helpful if you could give me a
>engineer's narrative of field problems with e-mag
>products in the field. Folks are asking me about them
>and I have to confess ignorance in the matter. Further,
>if there's anything in my bag-of-tricks that might
>be helpful in your endeavors, I can make you a really
>great deal. I've written several times that the e-Mag
>products promise to be the next great thing in ignition
>systems for light aircraft. I'd be pleased to be of
>assistance for making that hopeful assertion a
>demonstrable reality.
>
>Kindest regards,
>
>Bob . . .
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
Help yourself to FREE treats served up daily at the Messenger Caf. Stop by
today!
http://www.cafemessenger.com/info/info_sweetstuff2.html?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_OctHMtagline
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Antenna mounting |
>
>I am planning on mounting a NAV/COM antenna on each wing.
>I expect I should put a doubler under the skin and I should drill
>whatever holes are necessary prior to rivetting on the skins.
>
>I know nothing about the mounting characteristics of these antennas :-(
>Do they all need the same size hole ?
There are no "standards" for antenna mounting holes
and patterns . . .
>Or do I need to select an antenna now and tailor the installation for it ?
Yes . .
>Recommendations for use with a Garmin SL30 ?
When you say Nav/Com antenna, we're not sure
which one you're referring to. The communications
antenna is generally separate from the localizer/omnirange
navigation antenna. The typical nav/com installation
is a suite of two antennas and may add a third
for glide slope if the radio includes that capability.
In any case, which ever antenna you're citing, you'll
have to have the antenna in hand (or manufacturer's
installation data) before you can craft your hole
pattern.
Virtually any of the antennas on the market will
perform as advertised with your radio . . . as
long as you have the right type connected to
each of the radio's antenna ports.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------
( "Problems are the price of progress. )
( Don't bring me anything but trouble. )
( Good news weakens me." )
( -Charles F. Kettering- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Frank Stringham" <fstringham(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: E-MAG wiring Z13-8 |
Bob and others
I have wired my aircraft (rv7A) according to the scheme Z13-8. I sure hate
to rewire .....so after meeting with the good folks from E-mag is the Z13-8
no longer viable or am I still OK to go with it!
Thanks for all your efforts in behalf of we experimenters.
Frank @ SGU RV7A 95% DONE 120% TO GO
ps. have problems with the old computer so if you get this twice.....sorry
>From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net>
>Reply-To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>To: "Brad Dement"
>Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: E-MAG wiring
>Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2007 10:09:33 -0600
>
>
>
>Brad,
>
>I note that it has been about 18 months since we last "talked".
>I've been trying to plan a trip to your neck of the woods
>so we can meet personally. I was at OSH this past year but
>had to make it a quick in-and-out to support the forums I'd
>signed up for . . . my dad was in his last days in Medicine Lodge,
>KS and I didn't have time for socializing.
>
>In any case, I'd like to take this opportunity to renew our
>acquaintance to update myself on the progress of your efforts
>over the past year and a half. I also need to expand
>my understanding of your products so that I don't offer
>poor advise when publishing words and drawings that speak
>of e-Mag devices.
>
>After adding e-Mag products to our electrical system architecture
>drawings over a year ago, I put on my "systems integrator"
>hat for certified aircraft and deduced that from the
>pilot's perspective, it's useful to test the systems ability
>to run self powered during preflight. From both a builder's
>and pilot's perspectives, it's useful to minimize the number
>of switches on the panel.
>
>I crafted a suggested wiring diagram which was published
>as our Figure Z-33 and excerpted in one or more of the
>full-up aircraft drawings. See:
>
>http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Adobe_Architecture_Pdfs/Z33K.pdf
>
>In this drawing you can see that three-position, progressive
>transfer switches are incorporated to have an OFF position
>that grounds the RED control lead and breaks power to the
>ORN lead from the battery bus.
>
>The mid position removes the ground from the control lead
>but does not apply power. The upper position leaves the
>control lead ungrounded and adds bus power to the system.
>The thought was that by means of logical positioning of
>switches a pilot could demonstrate that a P-Mag would run
>self-powered during a preflight run-up.
>
>A third maintenance switch was necessary to take advantage
>of built-in timing functions. A switch under the cowl
>would offer a means by which the e-mag/p-mag could be
>powered up for timing leaving the rest of the aircraft
>'cold'.
>
>Here are the Figure Z-33 notes that accompany the wiring
>diagram in the AeroElectric Connection.
>
>--------begin excerpt-------
>
>Figure Z-33 P-Mag Maintenance Mode and Hand
>Propping Option. E-Mags and P-Mags are a unique
>product in that as the factory points out, have TWO
>switchable functionsPower and control. Their installation
>manuals suggest separate switches but in a quest for the
>minimalist panel, I crafted the drawing for P-Mags in Figure
>Z-33 which is repeated in Figure Z-13/8.
>
>. . . now, be aware that the sequence of switching functions
>depicted have been commented on by the good folks at EMagair
>suggesting that switch movements should bring
>power on first followed by activating the magneto.
>
>My wiring diagram shows the opposite sequence, ignition
>"active" first followed by supporting power. The reason is
>quite simple. There are separate but divergent interests in
>the ownership and operation of the p-mag:
>(1) When sitting at the end of the runway doing a pre-flight,
>the PILOT'S interest is "are the built in alternators for each
>P-Mag functioning?" By wiring as I've suggested, moving
>the switch from full up to the mid position deprives a P-Mag
>of electrical support and (if the run-up RPMS are high
>enough), the ignition will not falter when dropped to the mid
>position. Of course, the opposite ignition needs to be
>completely OFF at this time.
>
>Pre-flight test sequence would be:
>
>RUN-UP RPM . . . . . Set
>L-IGN Switch . . . . . . . OFF
>R-IGN Switch . . . . . . . ON but no BAT (mid position)
>Note engine does not falter
>L-IGN Switch . . . . . . . ON but no BAT (mid position)
>R-IGN Switch . . . . . . . OFF
>Note engine does not falter
>Both IGN Switches . . . . BAT
>
>(2) A secondary interest is what might be called the
>maintenance mode for ground ops where the mechanic
>wants to have the systems powered but inactive for using a
>P-mag's built-in timing features -OR- for hand propping the
>engine where again, it's useful to be able to hear the timing
>buzzer.
>
>In this mode, you MUST have battery power available to the
>P-Mags even when in the inactive state. The diagram
>shows a third switch (accessible through the oil check/
>filler door?) that places temporary power on both ignitions
>while leaving absolute control over activity in the hands of
>whoever has access to pilot's controls on the panel.
>If one chooses this architecture, then a light on the panel
>should be included to alert the pilot should the switch be left
>in the maintenance position. Not a big risk from a fight
>operations and safety perspective but it WOULD run the
>battery down.
>
>This figure adds a switch to allow powering up the e-Mag/p-Mag
>product while leaving it de-activated. This feature
>activates the built in aural timing buzzer needed for timing
>the ignition system -AND- for proper pre-positioning the
>prop for hand-propping the engine.
>
>--- end of excerpt ----
>
>I've been told via the 'grapevine' that operating the
>p-Mag in the manner suggested has some issues with respect
>to product performance. Specifically that if power is
>removed from a p-Mag and then replaced that the processor
>wanders into the weeds and upsets the system's timing.
>
>Understand my friend that I was in no way trying to do
>an end-run on you . . . it seemed that the wiring/operating
>scheme I was suggesting covered some bases that I would
>be required to address with systems wieners, test pilots
>and DERs should I be tasked with qualifying your product
>onto a type certificated aircraft.
>
>If indeed it is a bad thing to remove and then replace
>power on a p-Mag while it's operating, then I'm mystified.
>Irrespective of the aircraft's electrical architecture,
>DO-160 suggests we design our products to gracefully
>recover from a power interruption . . . if the
>'grapevine' stories are accurate, then the p-Mag would
>not fair well in a DO-160 investigation.
>
>If the internal alternator is poised to pick up the load
>during a power outage I'm further mystified as to why
>a p-Mag would even be aware of bus power interruptions.
>The spirit and intent of the proposed pre-flight test
>was to demonstrate that the p-Mag was ready, willing
>and able to run if the bus goes down. I would expect
>the processor in a running p-Mag to be oblivious
>of whether or not bus power was present.
>
>I confess that my assumptions about functionality
>of your product were being filtered through the logic
>used to craft products for the TC aircraft world and
>I may have stubbed my toe by not clearing this idea
>with you. I'd be pleased to understand the true
>nature of the beast with a goal of offering our
>collective customers the best we know how to do in
>crafting an owner built and maintained aircraft.
>
>I still want to visit your facilities. I also
>need to drop into George Braley's place in
>southern OK. I might just take a couple days pretty
>soon and make this trip happen. I've been 'retired'
>from Beech for about two months . . . I've done more
>new design work the past 6 weeks than I've done the
>past 6-years! Problem is that what I thought was going
>to be a 20 hr/wk retirement activity has turned into
>a more-than-full-time job. I've told my principal
>that I can do this for awhile . . . but I've have
>some fun things that need to happen pretty soon too.
>
>It would also be helpful if you could give me a
>engineer's narrative of field problems with e-mag
>products in the field. Folks are asking me about them
>and I have to confess ignorance in the matter. Further,
>if there's anything in my bag-of-tricks that might
>be helpful in your endeavors, I can make you a really
>great deal. I've written several times that the e-Mag
>products promise to be the next great thing in ignition
>systems for light aircraft. I'd be pleased to be of
>assistance for making that hopeful assertion a
>demonstrable reality.
>
>Kindest regards,
>
>Bob . . .
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
Help yourself to FREE treats served up daily at the Messenger Caf. Stop by
today!
http://www.cafemessenger.com/info/info_sweetstuff2.html?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_OctHMtagline
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Michael T. Ice" <aurbo(at)ak.net> |
| Subject: | Re: E-MAG wiring Z13-8 |
Frank,
I and others have waited for this revision as well. To be safe rather than
sorry I chose to take out the Z13-8 wiring system to the E/P mags and
rewired according to the Emagair system. It is hard to fault the
manufacturers suggested way to wire their product. It isn't all that hard to
rewire according to the Emagair plan. I would suggest that you rip out the
Z13-8 and go with the Emagair system.
Mike
----- Original Message -----
From: "Frank Stringham" <fstringham(at)hotmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 5:05 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: E-MAG wiring Z13-8
>
>
> Bob and others
>
> I have wired my aircraft (rv7A) according to the scheme Z13-8. I sure hate
> to rewire .....so after meeting with the good folks from E-mag is the
> Z13-8 no longer viable or am I still OK to go with it!
>
> Thanks for all your efforts in behalf of we experimenters.
>
> Frank @ SGU RV7A 95% DONE 120% TO GO
>
> ps. have problems with the old computer so if you get this twice.....sorry
>
>
>>From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net>
>>Reply-To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>>To: "Brad Dement"
>>Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: E-MAG wiring
>>Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2007 10:09:33 -0600
>>
>>
>>
>>Brad,
>>
>>I note that it has been about 18 months since we last "talked".
>>I've been trying to plan a trip to your neck of the woods
>>so we can meet personally. I was at OSH this past year but
>>had to make it a quick in-and-out to support the forums I'd
>>signed up for . . . my dad was in his last days in Medicine Lodge,
>>KS and I didn't have time for socializing.
>>
>>In any case, I'd like to take this opportunity to renew our
>>acquaintance to update myself on the progress of your efforts
>>over the past year and a half. I also need to expand
>>my understanding of your products so that I don't offer
>>poor advise when publishing words and drawings that speak
>>of e-Mag devices.
>>
>>After adding e-Mag products to our electrical system architecture
>>drawings over a year ago, I put on my "systems integrator"
>>hat for certified aircraft and deduced that from the
>>pilot's perspective, it's useful to test the systems ability
>>to run self powered during preflight. From both a builder's
>>and pilot's perspectives, it's useful to minimize the number
>>of switches on the panel.
>>
>>I crafted a suggested wiring diagram which was published
>>as our Figure Z-33 and excerpted in one or more of the
>>full-up aircraft drawings. See:
>>
>>http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Adobe_Architecture_Pdfs/Z33K.pdf
>>
>>In this drawing you can see that three-position, progressive
>>transfer switches are incorporated to have an OFF position
>>that grounds the RED control lead and breaks power to the
>>ORN lead from the battery bus.
>>
>>The mid position removes the ground from the control lead
>>but does not apply power. The upper position leaves the
>>control lead ungrounded and adds bus power to the system.
>>The thought was that by means of logical positioning of
>>switches a pilot could demonstrate that a P-Mag would run
>>self-powered during a preflight run-up.
>>
>>A third maintenance switch was necessary to take advantage
>>of built-in timing functions. A switch under the cowl
>>would offer a means by which the e-mag/p-mag could be
>>powered up for timing leaving the rest of the aircraft
>>'cold'.
>>
>>Here are the Figure Z-33 notes that accompany the wiring
>>diagram in the AeroElectric Connection.
>>
>>--------begin excerpt-------
>>
>>Figure Z-33 P-Mag Maintenance Mode and Hand
>>Propping Option. E-Mags and P-Mags are a unique
>>product in that as the factory points out, have TWO
>>switchable functionsPower and control. Their installation
>>manuals suggest separate switches but in a quest for the
>>minimalist panel, I crafted the drawing for P-Mags in Figure
>>Z-33 which is repeated in Figure Z-13/8.
>>
>>. . . now, be aware that the sequence of switching functions
>>depicted have been commented on by the good folks at EMagair
>>suggesting that switch movements should bring
>>power on first followed by activating the magneto.
>>
>>My wiring diagram shows the opposite sequence, ignition
>>"active" first followed by supporting power. The reason is
>>quite simple. There are separate but divergent interests in
>>the ownership and operation of the p-mag:
>>(1) When sitting at the end of the runway doing a pre-flight,
>>the PILOT'S interest is "are the built in alternators for each
>>P-Mag functioning?" By wiring as I've suggested, moving
>>the switch from full up to the mid position deprives a P-Mag
>>of electrical support and (if the run-up RPMS are high
>>enough), the ignition will not falter when dropped to the mid
>>position. Of course, the opposite ignition needs to be
>>completely OFF at this time.
>>
>>Pre-flight test sequence would be:
>>
>>RUN-UP RPM . . . . . Set
>>L-IGN Switch . . . . . . . OFF
>>R-IGN Switch . . . . . . . ON but no BAT (mid position)
>>Note engine does not falter
>>L-IGN Switch . . . . . . . ON but no BAT (mid position)
>>R-IGN Switch . . . . . . . OFF
>>Note engine does not falter
>>Both IGN Switches . . . . BAT
>>
>>(2) A secondary interest is what might be called the
>>maintenance mode for ground ops where the mechanic
>>wants to have the systems powered but inactive for using a
>>P-mag's built-in timing features -OR- for hand propping the
>>engine where again, it's useful to be able to hear the timing
>>buzzer.
>>
>>In this mode, you MUST have battery power available to the
>>P-Mags even when in the inactive state. The diagram
>>shows a third switch (accessible through the oil check/
>>filler door?) that places temporary power on both ignitions
>>while leaving absolute control over activity in the hands of
>>whoever has access to pilot's controls on the panel.
>>If one chooses this architecture, then a light on the panel
>>should be included to alert the pilot should the switch be left
>>in the maintenance position. Not a big risk from a fight
>>operations and safety perspective but it WOULD run the
>>battery down.
>>
>>This figure adds a switch to allow powering up the e-Mag/p-Mag
>>product while leaving it de-activated. This feature
>>activates the built in aural timing buzzer needed for timing
>>the ignition system -AND- for proper pre-positioning the
>>prop for hand-propping the engine.
>>
>>--- end of excerpt ----
>>
>>I've been told via the 'grapevine' that operating the
>>p-Mag in the manner suggested has some issues with respect
>>to product performance. Specifically that if power is
>>removed from a p-Mag and then replaced that the processor
>>wanders into the weeds and upsets the system's timing.
>>
>>Understand my friend that I was in no way trying to do
>>an end-run on you . . . it seemed that the wiring/operating
>>scheme I was suggesting covered some bases that I would
>>be required to address with systems wieners, test pilots
>>and DERs should I be tasked with qualifying your product
>>onto a type certificated aircraft.
>>
>>If indeed it is a bad thing to remove and then replace
>>power on a p-Mag while it's operating, then I'm mystified.
>>Irrespective of the aircraft's electrical architecture,
>>DO-160 suggests we design our products to gracefully
>>recover from a power interruption . . . if the
>>'grapevine' stories are accurate, then the p-Mag would
>>not fair well in a DO-160 investigation.
>>
>>If the internal alternator is poised to pick up the load
>>during a power outage I'm further mystified as to why
>>a p-Mag would even be aware of bus power interruptions.
>>The spirit and intent of the proposed pre-flight test
>>was to demonstrate that the p-Mag was ready, willing
>>and able to run if the bus goes down. I would expect
>>the processor in a running p-Mag to be oblivious
>>of whether or not bus power was present.
>>
>>I confess that my assumptions about functionality
>>of your product were being filtered through the logic
>>used to craft products for the TC aircraft world and
>>I may have stubbed my toe by not clearing this idea
>>with you. I'd be pleased to understand the true
>>nature of the beast with a goal of offering our
>>collective customers the best we know how to do in
>>crafting an owner built and maintained aircraft.
>>
>>I still want to visit your facilities. I also
>>need to drop into George Braley's place in
>>southern OK. I might just take a couple days pretty
>>soon and make this trip happen. I've been 'retired'
>>from Beech for about two months . . . I've done more
>>new design work the past 6 weeks than I've done the
>>past 6-years! Problem is that what I thought was going
>>to be a 20 hr/wk retirement activity has turned into
>>a more-than-full-time job. I've told my principal
>>that I can do this for awhile . . . but I've have
>>some fun things that need to happen pretty soon too.
>>
>>It would also be helpful if you could give me a
>>engineer's narrative of field problems with e-mag
>>products in the field. Folks are asking me about them
>>and I have to confess ignorance in the matter. Further,
>>if there's anything in my bag-of-tricks that might
>>be helpful in your endeavors, I can make you a really
>>great deal. I've written several times that the e-Mag
>>products promise to be the next great thing in ignition
>>systems for light aircraft. I'd be pleased to be of
>>assistance for making that hopeful assertion a
>>demonstrable reality.
>>
>>Kindest regards,
>>
>>Bob . . .
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Help yourself to FREE treats served up daily at the Messenger Caf. Stop
> by today!
> http://www.cafemessenger.com/info/info_sweetstuff2.html?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_OctHMtagline
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Eckenroth" <Jeckenroth(at)NBN.NET> |
I have a Terk Commander XM installed in my RV9A with the audio into the
unswitched music input of the audio panel (PMA 8000). The Terk Commander
does not have a volume control as it is intended to be run through the car
radio and utilize the volume control in the radio. I can control the volume
by adjusting the individual controls on the headsets but this is not ideal.
I would like a method of adjusting the volume between the XM output and the
audio panel input. I am sure that I am not the first to confront this
problem. When responding please keep in mind that I can follow instructions
but I am not electronically gifted.
Paul Eckenroth
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Donald J Smith" <donaldjsmith(at)ukonline.co.uk> |
| Subject: | Re: Question on Z16 in aeroelectric connection |
The rotax alternator is a permanent magnet type and it has two outputs (two
yellows). I'm guessing but these might be different phases. So
disconnecting one yellow line might still allow output to the regulator.
regards
Donald
----- Original Message -----
From: "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net>
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 12:27 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Question on Z16 in aeroelectric connection
>
> Disconnecting the alternator doesn't stop it's output, sort of. The
> primary goal of the relay is to keep a misbehaving alternator from
> damaging other things that are connected to the system, like avionics, and
> the battery.
>
> Disconnecting the alternator from the bus will mostly drive its output
> current to zero (and hence power/wattage), though the output voltage may
> go up quite a bit - 80v (unregulated/failed regulator) - on a wound field
> unit I think, or become quite unstable/noisy (who cares) - it's not
> connected to anything.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Matt-
>
>
> >
> >
> > Can anyone explain how the alternator output is stopped or disconnected
> > when
> > the Alternator OV Disconnect Relay breaks the Voltage Regulator Yel
wire?
> > I
> > do not undersatnd how this works when C B and R are still connected. An
> > explanation as to how this regulator works would be useful.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Donald J Smith
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: XM audio input |
| From: | Ron Quillin <rjquillin(at)gmail.com> |
A dual ~1K pot seems like a simple solution.
Outputs from the Terk to the top, CW, end of the pots, wipers to the
PMA inputs and pot CCW ends to common.
A "volume" control.
Use a log, audio, taper pot.
Ron Q.
At 08:35 10/24/2007, you wrote:
>
>
>I have a Terk Commander XM installed in my RV9A with the audio into
>the unswitched music input of the audio panel (PMA 8000). The Terk
>Commander does not have a volume control as it is intended to be run
>through the car radio and utilize the volume control in the
>radio. I can control the volume by adjusting the individual
>controls on the headsets but this is not ideal. I would like a
>method of adjusting the volume between the XM output and the audio
>panel input. I am sure that I am not the first to confront this
>problem. When responding please keep in mind that I can follow
>instructions but I am not electronically gifted.
>
>Paul Eckenroth
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | MauleDriver <MauleDriver(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation |
Hear hear Neal and Bob! I'd 2nd the motion to encourage everyone who
wants to travel with their plane to get the Instrument rating. It gives
you the minimum skills needed to stay alive in unforeseen visibility
situations. With continued care and use, it opens the door to real
travel with your personal a/c.
Everything they said with some emphasis; As a frequent flyer along TFR
alley, flying IFR reduces the liability and just makes the whole thing
easier. In fact, almost any CC flight is easier IFR. And when it's
not, just cancel it as I did for a beautiful flight over Manhatten recently.
BTW, getting the rating WILL remove any radio inhibitions you may
harbor. Knowing how to work in the system is one of the very satisfying
skills gained in addition to hand flying on the guages.
Neal George wrote:
> Well said Bob ! Ladies and Gentlemen, Old Bob has exposed the nugget
> of this thread.
>
> I'd add that it's immeasurably safer (to your ticket and your person),
> and less expensive, too, especially of you use your airplane to go
> places on anything resembling a schedule.
>
> I travel A LOT in the course of my AF duties. I
> take the CherokeeJet whenever possible (115 Kts - WFO, downhill).
> More often than not, I beat my co-workers there _and_ home, at less
> expense, and on MY schedule, not the cattle car's.
>
> And always on a IFR flight plan. Simply couldn't do it VFR and make
> the meetings (or stay married). IFR will (OK, should) keep one out of
> a hot MOA or campaigning congressman TFR... even those that bloom out
> of nowhere...after launch...VFR (CAVU, even)...six hours and a fuel
> stop en route... (plausible fiction follows)
> FBI - "Capt George, why were you flying a straight line from Morganton
> to Manassas that intersected the TFR surrounding Congressman
> Bluster's campaign stop?"
> Me - "Didn't happen."
> FBI - "Capt George, we have radar track data that puts you directly
> over the congressman's podium while the TFR was active."
> Me - "I called 1-800-WXBRIEF, talked to YOUR /contractor/, filed IFR
> Direct MRN-HEF, specifically asked about TFRs, and was ensured there
> were no TFR's associated with my route of flight. We discussed en
> route weather and the area that until recently resembled a certain
> mouse. I had a discrete squawk code and was in constant communication
> with ATC on an IFR flight plan under ATC control. How could I have
> violated a TFR?"
> FBI - "Capt George, give me your License."
> Me - "NoSir. I remember the trouble Bob Hoover had... Shall we
> review the tape?"
> (End plausible fiction, but I expect it would go downhill from there...)
>
> Anybody remember a few weeks ago when one of our associates was beat
> up for "loitering" over a power plant...at >160 kts...more than 5 NM
> away...well over 3000 ft above...on a straight line to landing?
>
> Bonus! - Dxxxx Airlines can't abandon me in Atlanta <8-O - but I CAN
> drag out a fuel stop to enjoy supper, or divert and spend the evening
> with friends or family if the weather or SAFETY dictate...
>
> *Neal E. George*
> 2023 Everglades Drive
> Navarre, FL 32566
> Home - 850-515-0640
> Cell - 850-218-4838
>
>
> *On Behalf Of *BobsV35B(at)aol.com
> It is LOT easier to learn to fly IFR than it is to learn how to get
> around the country safely in VFR conditions.
>
> Happy Skies,
>
> Old Bob
> **
> *
>
>
> *
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Question on Z16 in aeroelectric connection |
>
>
>The rotax alternator is a permanent magnet type and it has two outputs (two
>yellows). I'm guessing but these might be different phases. So
>disconnecting one yellow line might still allow output to the regulator.
>
>regards
>
>Donald
No, it's a single phase alternator with yellow output
wires. Breaking either wire disconnects the alternator
from the regulator and shuts down the power generation
system.
Yes, output voltage from the unloaded alternator windings
is high but current is zero.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Frank Stringham" <fstringham(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: EMag wrong ??? |
Bob and others
I believe I asked the wrong question in yesterdays post.
I have wired my aircraft (rv7A) according to the scheme Z13-8. I sure hate
to rewire .....so after meeting with the good folks from E-mag is the Z13-8
no longer viable or am I still OK to go with it!
What I should have asked is:
1. Who out there is using Z13-8 or Z33 with Emag products and have either
had good luck with no problems to the mags or tragedy?
2. If Tragedy to the mags can the problem be traced to the wiring scheme of
Z13-8?
3. Has there been anyone with any wiring scheme....Emag suggested or
otherwise that has a mag problem and can definitly say it was because of the
wiring (loose wire or poor connections excluded)
I believe that there may be a precieved problem with how these mags are
wired that may or may not becausing problems with the mags where in fact
actual use may not bare this out.
Thanks for your imput from those of you with expience in the field.
Frank @ SGU RV7A Wiring Done.....maybe
_________________________________________________________________
Help yourself to FREE treats served up daily at the Messenger Caf. Stop by
today!
http://www.cafemessenger.com/info/info_sweetstuff2.html?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_OctHMtagline
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: EMag wrong ??? |
>
>
>Bob and others
>
>I believe I asked the wrong question in yesterdays post.
>
>I have wired my aircraft (rv7A) according to the scheme Z13-8. I sure hate
>to rewire .....so after meeting with the good folks from E-mag is the
>Z13-8 no longer viable or am I still OK to go with it!
There's nothing wrong with it . . . for P-Mags.
Obviously, you don't want to "preflight" the
power supply to an E-Mag, you KNOW that the
device won't run with power removed.
>What I should have asked is:
>1. Who out there is using Z13-8 or Z33 with Emag products and have either
>had good luck with no problems to the mags or tragedy?
No. . .
>2. If Tragedy to the mags can the problem be traced to the wiring scheme
>of Z13-8?
No . . .
>3. Has there been anyone with any wiring scheme....Emag suggested or
>otherwise that has a mag problem and can definitly say it was because of
>the wiring (loose wire or poor connections excluded)
No . . .
>I believe that there may be a precieved problem with how these mags are
>wired that may or may not becausing problems with the mags where in fact
>actual use may not bare this out.
>
>Thanks for your imput from those of you with expience in the field.
While visiting Emagair two weeks ago, we had some
discussions about design goals and risks. I was
also made privy to some of changes to their design
goals that will make the P-mag replacement of magnetos
still more transparent to the owner/operator.
I have been and continue to be skeptical of the
rumors circulating the 'Net concerning dual failure
of Emagair products resulting in a forced landing.
None of these stories were accompanied with a detailed
failure mode effects analysis of events leading up
to the unintentional arrival with the earth.
Z-13/8 is going to be revised to suggest that
P-mags be permanently powered from the E-bus
and that operational control of the P-mag be
accomplished with the simple, single pole
switch used for magnetos. This architecture
will still allow for the occasional verification
of P-mag self powered operations because it's
a simple matter to power the electrical system
down during ground ops for the purpose of
conducting tests. Further, drain on the E-Bus
during battery-only ops will be eliminated
because future plans for P-mags call for
switching to internal power full time once
the engine is started.
But as a day-to-day operational concern for
preflight and operation of the aircraft, the
wiring in Z-13/8 goes to the design goals
stated for pre-flight testing of internal
P-mag power and presents no special concerns
for abnormal behavior of or damage to the
ignition system.
If you're already wired per Z-13/8, there
is no imperative for revising it as long
as you personally embrace the design goals
that drove the architecture. In the revised
drawing, we will suggest that internal power
supplies for the P-mag are so robust and
reliable that likelihood of pre-flight
testing revealing a deficiency is too small
be concerned with on a flight-by-flight basis.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: EMag wrong ??? |
| From: | "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com> |
Oh really?
A dual failure maybe not..But failures, almost certainly.
My engine temps suddenly went through the roof to the degree that it was
likely an engine teardown was in order.
Every potential cause was eliminated which put it down to the timing
going beserk.
Yes I was one of those but fourtunatly made it to the airport...It
happened on two separate occasions, once in IMC.
In fact Emagair themselves will tell you that they had a problem with
the units resetting their own timing. So while it was probably not a
dual failure the fact that the effective timing comes from the first one
to fire then unless that mag is shutdown the consequential detonation
can bring the airplane down....it did once (reported on Vans airforce
website) and I don't think I was dreaming at the time either...More like
a nightmare!
Now several improvments have been made since and no further problems
have been encountered. It is also fair to say that in both of the near
forced landings (one actual and mine was a near miss) IF the pilot had
been savvy enough to shut down one of the Emags we could have probably
found which mag it was and probably saved what must have been
considerable stress on our brand new engines. But alas we didn't....So
we take some of the blame there.
So while there is no concrete proof the evidence is highly compelling
that these units used to loose their timing with almost disasterous
results (to our pocket books if not to our lives).
Having said that. The units have performed very well..I have had a lot
of problems (more than most according to Brad). The folks at Emagair
have however worked very hard to rectify issues in a timely manner and I
would say I have at least 150 hours of fault free flying behind them
since.
Yes I do believe in E/Pmags now but they have most certainly not got a
blemish free track record. Lets hope those days are firmly behind us.
Frank
RV7a 225 hours
-----Original Message-----
I have been and continue to be skeptical of the
rumors circulating the 'Net concerning dual failure
of Emagair products resulting in a forced landing.
None of these stories were accompanied with a detailed
failure mode effects analysis of events leading up
to the unintentional arrival with the earth.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Best Prices Offered Anywhere |
Mile High Aviation
We Will Not Be Undersold!
ASA Pathfinder CX-2 Electronic Flight Computer
CX-2 Flight Computer
Price $61.95
Retail Price $80.00
To Order Call: 401-228-6677
Http://WWW.MILE-HIGH-AVIATION.COM
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jesse Jenks <jessejenks(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | RE: AeroElectric-List Digest: 20 Msgs - 10/22/07 |
Great discussion on instrument training vs. autopilot. I am definitely on O
ld Bob's side. Spend the money on training. It will make you so much safer
and more confident, and increase your fun factor. I fly IFR professionally
every day in an airplane with 2 very capable autopilots, and still enjoy th
e sense of satisfaction that comes from hand flying in the clouds. I know s
ome people here don't have access to that level of training or practice, bu
t there are other ways to maintain proficiency. In the past when I have per
iods where I don't fly IFR regularly, I simply turn on Microsoft Flight Si
mulator. It is a very effective way to practice. Also, force yourself to sp
end time during normal flying to practice on instruments. Take a safety pil
ot and a hood. It WILL make you a better and safer pilot. An autopilot can
not do that for you. I part ways with my opinion of the attitude indicator
though. Simply put, it is the only instrument that you could safely use to
fly the airplane IMC all by itself. Needle ball and airspeed is a great ski
ll to practice, but in modern times that is called "partial panel" Sorry Ol
d Bob. I am genuinely curious though about why you prefer the T&B over the
turn coordinator? On a fun/related note, I was catching a ride on an Airbus
yesterday and had to sit in the cockpit because the cabin was full. The Fi
rst Officer was flying from DCA to ORD in some fairly nasty weather. That a
irplane is extremely automated, but he hand flew most of the departure and
arrival procedures. We are still pilots guys. Don't rely on computers to do
your job.
Jesse
> Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 23:55:38 -0700
> From: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> To: aeroelectric-list-digest(at)matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List Digest: 20 Msgs - 10/22/07
>
> *
>
> ========================
> Online Versions of Today's List Digest Archive
> ========================
>
> Today's complete AeroElectric-List Digest can also be found in either of
the
> two Web Links listed below. The .html file includes the Digest formatted
> in HTML for viewing with a web browser and features Hyperlinked Indexes
> and Message Navigation. The .txt file includes the plain ASCII version
> of the AeroElectric-List Digest and can be viewed with a generic text edi
tor
> such as Notepad or with a web browser.
>
> HTML Version:
>
> http://www.matronics.com/digest/digestview.php?Style=82701&View=h
tml&Chapter 07-10-22&Archive=AeroElectric
>
> Text Version:
>
> http://www.matronics.com/digest/digestview.php?Style=82701&View=t
xt&Chapter 07-10-22&Archive=AeroElectric
>
>
> ========================
=======================
> EMail Version of Today's List Digest Archive
> ========================
=======================
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> AeroElectric-List Digest Archive
> ---
> Total Messages Posted Mon 10/22/07: 20
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> Today's Message Index:
> ----------------------
>
> 1. 06:18 AM - Re: Solid State Relay Alert (Nuisance)
> 2. 08:04 AM - Re: Becoming CAD-proficient to a practical level of us
efulness (Eric M. Jones)
> 3. 08:24 AM - Re: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation (Hinde, Frank G
eorge (Corvallis))
> 4. 09:20 AM - Re: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation (Terry Watson)
> 5. 09:40 AM - Re: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation (Hinde, Frank G
eorge (Corvallis))
> 6. 09:41 AM - Re: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation (BobsV35B(at)aol.c
om)
> 7. 09:55 AM - Re: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation (Bret Smith)
> 8. 10:08 AM - Re: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation (Hinde, Frank G
eorge (Corvallis))
> 9. 10:19 AM - Re: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation (Hinde, Frank G
eorge (Corvallis))
> 10. 11:39 AM - Re: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation (Terry Watson)
> 11. 12:30 PM - Re: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation (BobsV35B(at)aol.c
om)
> 12. 01:48 PM - Re: FW: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation (BobsV35B@a
ol.com)
> 13. 03:42 PM - Re: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation (Bill Hibbing)
> 14. 04:08 PM - Re: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation (Ed Anderson)
> 15. 04:42 PM - Re: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation (H. M. Haught J
r.)
> 16. 04:43 PM - Re: Re: Becoming CAD-proficient to a practical level o
f usefulness (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
> 17. 04:43 PM - Re: Re: Solid State Relay Alert (Robert L. Nuckolls,
III)
> 18. 04:52 PM - Re: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation (BobsV35B(at)aol.c
om)
> 19. 06:38 PM - Re: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation (Bill Hibbing)
> 20. 08:46 PM - Re: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation (Neal George)
>
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 1 ____________________________
_________
>
>
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Solid State Relay Alert
> From: "Nuisance" <aflyer(at)lazy8.net>
>
>
> Bob, is this a bi-polar device? !.5 Volts drop is pretty typical for a da
rlington.
>
> Wouldn't the power FET based SSRs do pretty well at the 5 - 10 Amp load r
ange
> common for lights, fuel pumps, radios, etc.?
>
> John
>
> --------
> Life is too short to run lean of peak.
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=141074#141074
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 2 ____________________________
_________
>
>
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Becoming CAD-proficient to a practical le
vel of
> usefulness
> From: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net>
>
>
>
> > About 1985, I was where you are today. I had a PC-XT, 20Mb
> > hard drive, yellow screen computer with the grand total of
> > 640K of ram. I think the thing ran at the blazing speed
> > of 4MHz.
>
>
> Bob,
>
> 4.77 MHz. You must have been a rich man. That system isn't far from $10k
when you
> add it up. A box of 5 1/4" diskettes was $50.
>
> See: http://www.periheliondesign.com/downloads/tandy1989.pdf
>
> I want to put in two cents for the non-AutoCAD world. AutoCAD was always
the personal
> computer CAD leader, and their prices show it. For professionals it is
> a great choice.
>
> For less-frequent users, AutoCAD Lite is not considered by many to be the
best
> choice compared to several smaller programs. TurboCAD may be the most pop
ular
> smaller program. I personally use DesignCAD, which one reviewed referred
to as
> "Just like ACAD but $3,000 cheaper." I liked DesignCAD because you can ca
ll their
> tech support and get right through immediately.
>
> As for learning curve....In a short afternoon, one can go through all the
CAD commands,
> but becoming proficient takes time. Nothing makes it easier than to WANT
> to draw something. Desire is the best motivation. Learning is very hard b
y
> the slow rote method.
>
> I sometimes think everyone should learn CAD, but that's only because I lo
ve it.
> Realistically, for some it may be a waste of time. But if you like engine
ering
> and design there is no option.
>
> Some change of thinking is required to introduce CAD to the beginner. Be
ginners
> often think of CAD as just a clumsy way of drawing. Then they learn about
some
> odd and wonderful ideas--
>
> --CAD has no scale. Everything is done "life-sized". For layout purposes
ONLY,
> the output can be scaled, but don't scale printed drawings generally.
> --CAD drawings can be directly used to make parts.
> --CAD can draw things that are almost IMPOSSIBLE to draw otherwise. Spira
ls, splines,
> geometric non-linear shapes for example.
> --CAD can reuse drawings and parts of drawings. This is hugely powerful a
nd time
> saving and more than makes up for the strange kabuki dance you have to le
arn
> to use CAD.
>
> Free gift for CAD users--
> See: http://www.periheliondesign.com/downloads/Superellipses.pdf
>
> "Everything you've learned in school as "obvious" becomes
> less and less obvious as you begin to study the universe.
> For example, there are no solids in the universe. There's
> not even a suggestion of a solid. There are no absolute con-
> tinuums. There are no surfaces. There are no straight lines."
>
> - R. Buckminster Fuller
>
> --------
> Eric M. Jones
> www.PerihelionDesign.com
> 113 Brentwood Drive
> Southbridge, MA 01550
> (508) 764-2072
> emjones(at)charter.net
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=141090#141090
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 3 ____________________________
_________
>
>
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation
> From: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com>
>
> I guess the question for me is the whole concept of a VFR panel with
> "some" IFR capabilities.
>
> If what we are saying is an IFR pilot who mainly flys VFR and who wants
> to do enroute IFR, thats one thing and perfectly OK.
>
> If we are talking about a VFR pilot who intends to fly "special" that to
> me is a fine line as the average VFR jock has little knowledge of
> weather and one day will almost certainly cut it too fine and find
> himself up the proverbial creek without a paddle.
>
> To that end its just a matter of time before a WX emergency happens and
> then as you said the A/P is for an emergency backup...even so there is
> still no need for an AI.
>
> 11K really?...WoW!..I paid 9k (with a 430 and needles) for a full IFR
> panel in the RV7.
>
> I think the discussion started with our VFR friend wondering what he
> needed in the panel...The approach I took is "you better be able to see
> out the window"...And if you can then an AI is redundant...But an A/P is
> a useful device and can be used to get your tail on the ground (together
> with a resolution to get an IFR ticket) in the event of the WX
> emergency.
>
> At least thats how I ended up with my IFR ticket....:)
>
> Frank
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bret
> Smith
> Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 11:40 AM
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation
>
>
> Frank,
>
> I agree with you up to a point... The panel shown is an actual panel
> offered by Chief Aircraft and sells for $11,450.00!
>
> http://www.chiefaircraft.com/airsec/Avionics/Avionics.html
>
> You can actually do even better through John Stark. He had asked what
> "I" would suggest for a VFR panel with some IFR capabilities. The
> addition of an autopilot is for workload reduction or as a primary
> backup in the event of an in-flight emergency.
>
> I suppose any discussion on panel instrumentation should really be
> prefaced with the intended price range...i.e.,
> VFR panel under $5000.00
> VFR/IFR panel under $10,000.00
> IFR panel under $20,000.00
>
> I personally know many pilots who spend $100,000+ for a spam can with 20
> year old avionics only to spend another $20,000 to upgrade the panel.
> To each his own.
>
> Bret Smith
> RV-9A (91314)
> Mineral Bluff, GA
> www.FlightInnovations.com
>
>
> ________________________________
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 4 ____________________________
_________
>
>
> From: "Terry Watson" <terry(at)tcwatson.com>
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation
>
> Most of us who are building or flying RV's will remember that we lost Bil
l
> Benedict, then general manager of Vans, and his son Jeremy in the factory
's
> gyroless RV-9(?) in low clouds on the way to an air show. Both were
> competent pilots and both knew better than to fly into the clouds, yet th
ey
> did. Until that time, I think Van always thought of his designs as planes
> you looked out the window to fly, as did perhaps most of the builders. I
> believe most of the factory RV's now have some sort of artificial horizon
or
> autopilot, or both.
>
>
> Terry
>
>
> _____
>
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Hinde,
> Frank George (Corvallis)
> Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 8:23 AM
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation
>
>
> I guess the question for me is the whole concept of a VFR panel with "som
e"
> IFR capabilities.
>
>
> If what we are saying is an IFR pilot who mainly flys VFR and who wants t
o
> do enroute IFR, thats one thing and perfectly OK.
>
>
> If we are talking about a VFR pilot who intends to fly "special" that to
me
> is a fine line as the average VFR jock has little knowledge of weather an
d
> one day will almost certainly cut it too fine and find himself up the
> proverbial creek without a paddle.
>
>
> To that end its just a matter of time before a WX emergency happens and t
hen
> as you said the A/P is for an emergency backup...even so there is still n
o
> need for an AI.
>
>
> 11K really?...WoW!..I paid 9k (with a 430 and needles) for a full IFR pan
el
> in the RV7.
>
>
> I think the discussion started with our VFR friend wondering what he need
ed
> in the panel...The approach I took is "you better be able to see out the
> window"...And if you can then an AI is redundant...But an A/P is a useful
> device and can be used to get your tail on the ground (together with a
> resolution to get an IFR ticket) in the event of the WX emergency.
>
>
> At least thats how I ended up with my IFR ticket....:)
>
>
> Frank
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 5 ____________________________
_________
>
>
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation
> From: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com>
>
> Yes indeed Terry, tragic and very avoidable accident.
>
> Its hard for me to imaging is Bill was a very experienced VFR or IFR
> pilot he would have done that...But the bottom line is he did.
>
> But then an A/P (especially a Pictorial pilot which has reliable turn
> coordinator display) is quite adequate to keep straight and level and
> safely do shallow turns.
>
> Frank
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Terry
> Watson
> Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 9:20 AM
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation
>
>
> Most of us who are building or flying RV's will remember that we lost
> Bill Benedict, then general manager of Vans, and his son Jeremy in the
> factory's gyroless RV-9(?) in low clouds on the way to an air show. Both
> were competent pilots and both knew better than to fly into the clouds,
> yet they did. Until that time, I think Van always thought of his designs
> as planes you looked out the window to fly, as did perhaps most of the
> builders. I believe most of the factory RV's now have some sort of
> artificial horizon or autopilot, or both.
>
>
> Terry
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)
> Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 8:23 AM
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation
>
>
> I guess the question for me is the whole concept of a VFR panel with
> "some" IFR capabilities.
>
>
> If what we are saying is an IFR pilot who mainly flys VFR and who wants
> to do enroute IFR, thats one thing and perfectly OK.
>
>
> If we are talking about a VFR pilot who intends to fly "special" that to
> me is a fine line as the average VFR jock has little knowledge of
> weather and one day will almost certainly cut it too fine and find
> himself up the proverbial creek without a paddle.
>
>
> To that end its just a matter of time before a WX emergency happens and
> then as you said the A/P is for an emergency backup...even so there is
> still no need for an AI.
>
>
> 11K really?...WoW!..I paid 9k (with a 430 and needles) for a full IFR
> panel in the RV7.
>
>
> I think the discussion started with our VFR friend wondering what he
> needed in the panel...The approach I took is "you better be able to see
> out the window"...And if you can then an AI is redundant...But an A/P is
> a useful device and can be used to get your tail on the ground (together
> with a resolution to get an IFR ticket) in the event of the WX
> emergency.
>
>
> At least thats how I ended up with my IFR ticket....:)
>
>
> Frank
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 6 ____________________________
_________
>
>
> From: BobsV35B(at)aol.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation
>
>
> In a message dated 10/22/2007 11:23:50 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
> terry(at)tcwatson.com writes:
>
> Most of us who are building or flying RV=99s will remember that we lo
> st Bill
> Benedict, then general manager of Vans, and his son Jeremy in the factor
y
> =99s
> gyroless RV-9(?) in low clouds on the way to an air show. Both were comp
ete
> nt
> pilots and both knew better than to fly into the clouds, yet they did. U
nti
> l
> that time, I think Van always thought of his designs as planes you looke
d o
> ut
> the window to fly, as did perhaps most of the builders. I believe most o
f t
> he
> factory RV=99s now have some sort of artificial horizon or autopilot,
> or
> both.
> Terry
>
>
> I know I am an outsider to this list, but please, let's all realize that
> instrument competency is not an inborne trait.
>
> It takes training and practice to maintain proficiency.
>
> Buying an autopilot or installing an attitude gyro is not sufficient to
kee
> p
> us alive without instrument proficiency.
>
> Twenty hours of serious training with needle, ball and airspeed will do
the
>
> initial job, but proficiency requires constant use. For one thing, it is
mu
> ch
> easier to fly IFR in the system than it is to convert a VFR flight into a
n
> IFR one. Even the most experienced and competent IFR pilot has his/her ha
nds
>
> full when encountering IFR in an unplanned manner.
>
> Please, PLEASE! Do not count on an autopilot to save your life.
>
> Learn how and practice how to use the simplest of instrumentation. It may
> not be legal, but it will save your life and the life of those who may be
ri
> ding
> with you.
>
> Happy Skies,
>
> Old Bob
> AKA
> Bob Siegfried
> Ancient Aviator
> Stearman N3977A
> Brookeridge Air Park LL22
> Downers Grove, IL 60516
> 630 985-8503
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 7 ____________________________
_________
>
>
> From: "Bret Smith" <smithhb(at)tds.net>
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation
>
> Frank,
>
> Very eloquently spoken. Just think, for another 2K, you could have had
> glass! (Just kidding) That reminded me of during my IFR training when
> I learned that the AI is never a primary instrument. Made me wonder why
> every VFR equipped Cessna and Piper had one.
>
> Thanks for your input on this List...
>
> Bret Smith
> RV-9A "Fuselage"
> Blue Ridge, GA
> www.FlightInnovations.com
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 11:22 AM
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation
>
>
> I guess the question for me is the whole concept of a VFR panel with
> "some" IFR capabilities.
>
> If what we are saying is an IFR pilot who mainly flys VFR and who
> wants to do enroute IFR, thats one thing and perfectly OK.
>
> If we are talking about a VFR pilot who intends to fly "special" that
> to me is a fine line as the average VFR jock has little knowledge of
> weather and one day will almost certainly cut it too fine and find
> himself up the proverbial creek without a paddle.
>
> To that end its just a matter of time before a WX emergency happens
> and then as you said the A/P is for an emergency backup...even so there
> is still no need for an AI.
>
> 11K really?...WoW!..I paid 9k (with a 430 and needles) for a full IFR
> panel in the RV7.
>
> I think the discussion started with our VFR friend wondering what he
> needed in the panel...The approach I took is "you better be able to see
> out the window"...And if you can then an AI is redundant...But an A/P is
> a useful device and can be used to get your tail on the ground (together
> with a resolution to get an IFR ticket) in the event of the WX
> emergency.
>
> At least thats how I ended up with my IFR ticket....:)
>
> Frank
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bret
> Smith
> Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 11:40 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation
>
>
> Frank,
>
> I agree with you up to a point... The panel shown is an actual panel
> offered by Chief Aircraft and sells for $11,450.00!
>
> http://www.chiefaircraft.com/airsec/Avionics/Avionics.html
>
> You can actually do even better through John Stark. He had asked what
> "I" would suggest for a VFR panel with some IFR capabilities. The
> addition of an autopilot is for workload reduction or as a primary
> backup in the event of an in-flight emergency.
>
> I suppose any discussion on panel instrumentation should really be
> prefaced with the intended price range...i.e.,
> VFR panel under $5000.00
> VFR/IFR panel under $10,000.00
> IFR panel under $20,000.00
>
> I personally know many pilots who spend $100,000+ for a spam can with
> 20 year old avionics only to spend another $20,000 to upgrade the panel.
> To each his own.
>
> Bret Smith
> RV-9A (91314)
> Mineral Bluff, GA
> www.FlightInnovations.com
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 8 ____________________________
_________
>
>
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation
> From: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com>
>
> Exactly my point Bob,
>
> Even with my IFR ticket I realise I am out of my element when hand
> flying in the clouds and turning around for an approach. It took me over
> 50 hours to get my IFR ticket and the idea of me 50 hours ago
> encountering clouds and using an AI to keep me right side up is just
> nonsensicle...I might be able to do it for a a few minutes but I'm sure
> I would have lost it eventually.
>
> Thats why (with my IFR ticket) my default position is you should be
> nowhere near clouds if your a VFR jock period.
>
> In the event you do enounter clouds the autopilot will fly the airplane
> sunnyside up much better than you will.....It does it better than I can
> now and I have probably 100hours in the soup.
>
> of course all this is in the RV7 which is not exactly the best
> instrument platform.
>
> Stay safe
>
> Frank
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> BobsV35B(at)aol.com
> Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 9:41 AM
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation
>
>
> In a message dated 10/22/2007 11:23:50 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
> terry(at)tcwatson.com writes:
>
> Most of us who are building or flying RV's will remember that we
> lost Bill Benedict, then general manager of Vans, and his son Jeremy in
> the factory's gyroless RV-9(?) in low clouds on the way to an air show.
> Both were competent pilots and both knew better than to fly into the
> clouds, yet they did. Until that time, I think Van always thought of his
> designs as planes you looked out the window to fly, as did perhaps most
> of the builders. I believe most of the factory RV's now have some sort
> of artificial horizon or autopilot, or both.
>
>
>
> Terry
>
>
>
> I know I am an outsider to this list, but please, let's all realize that
> instrument competency is not an inborne trait.
>
> It takes training and practice to maintain proficiency.
>
> Buying an autopilot or installing an attitude gyro is not sufficient to
> keep us alive without instrument proficiency.
>
> Twenty hours of serious training with needle, ball and airspeed will do
> the initial job, but proficiency requires constant use. For one thing,
> it is much easier to fly IFR in the system than it is to convert a VFR
> flight into an IFR one. Even the most experienced and competent IFR
> pilot has his/her hands full when encountering IFR in an unplanned
> manner.
>
> Please, PLEASE! Do not count on an autopilot to save your life.
>
> Learn how and practice how to use the simplest of instrumentation. It
> may not be legal, but it will save your life and the life of those who
> may be riding with you.
>
> Happy Skies,
>
> Old Bob
> AKA
> Bob Siegfried
> Ancient Aviator
> Stearman N3977A
> Brookeridge Air Park LL22
> Downers Grove, IL 60516
> 630 985-8503
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> See what's
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 9 ____________________________
_________
>
>
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation
> From: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde(at)hp.com>
>
> Ya I wondered that too Bret, Particularly when you realise just how
> short lived a vacuum pump is. My guess it was more about liability than
> anything else. Or maybe our training was due to the fact the Gyro will
> eventually roll over and die...Hopefully it won't take you with it!
>
> Autopilots in small airplanes were of course almost unheard of not many
> years back. When you consider you can now get a superbly reliable wing
> leveler for less than $2k (experimental) then it makes them almost
> mandatory equipment in my mind and more useful than an AI...especially a
> non glass AI.
>
> Oh yes I do have a Dynon D100 and an EMS D10...Super pieces of
> equipment, wouldn't be without them but then I assume I won't be looking
> out the window either.
>
> My GNS 430 goes in for its WAAS upgrade next month and I'm told that its
> just awesome!
>
> Cheers and good luck with the 9a...awesome airplane you'll love it.
>
> Frank
> Rv7a 225 hours
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bret
> Smith
> Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 9:45 AM
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation
>
>
> Frank,
>
> Very eloquently spoken. Just think, for another 2K, you could have had
> glass! (Just kidding) That reminded me of during my IFR training when
> I learned that the AI is never a primary instrument. Made me wonder why
> every VFR equipped Cessna and Piper had one.
>
> Thanks for your input on this List...
>
> Bret Smith
> RV-9A "Fuselage"
> Blue Ridge, GA
> www.FlightInnovations.com
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 10 ___________________________
_________
>
>
> From: "Terry Watson" <terry(at)tcwatson.com>
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation
>
> With considerable respect Bob, a VFR pilot with some kind of gyro instrum
ent
> or an autopilot has a much better chance of completing a 180 turn when he
> inadvertently flies into a cloud that he does without. If he thinks that
> having the instruments makes him an instrument pilot he is likely going t
o
> kill himself anyway. I think I recall my last two BFR's having that 180
> degree turn under the hood as a part of it.
>
>
> I would almost always defer to your judgment on these matters, but the po
int
> where I disagree is that IF you are saying gyro instruments are
> inappropriate in a VFR airplane. Instrument competency (or flying in the
IFR
> system) is another question entirely.
>
>
> As for being an outsider to the list, you are one of the reasons I follow
> the list.
>
>
> Terry
>
>
> _____
>
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> BobsV35B(at)aol.com
> Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 9:41 AM
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation
>
>
> In a message dated 10/22/2007 11:23:50 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
> terry(at)tcwatson.com writes:
>
> Most of us who are building or flying RV's will remember that we lost Bil
l
> Benedict, then general manager of Vans, and his son Jeremy in the factory
's
> gyroless RV-9(?) in low clouds on the way to an air show. Both were
> competent pilots and both knew better than to fly into the clouds, yet th
ey
> did. Until that time, I think Van always thought of his designs as planes
> you looked out the window to fly, as did perhaps most of the builders. I
> believe most of the factory RV's now have some sort of artificial horizon
or
> autopilot, or both.
>
>
> Terry
>
>
> I know I am an outsider to this list, but please, let's all realize that
> instrument competency is not an inborne trait.
>
>
> It takes training and practice to maintain proficiency.
>
>
> Buying an autopilot or installing an attitude gyro is not sufficient to k
eep
> us alive without instrument proficiency.
>
>
> Twenty hours of serious training with needle, ball and airspeed will do t
he
> initial job, but proficiency requires constant use. For one thing, it is
> much easier to fly IFR in the system than it is to convert a VFR flight i
nto
> an IFR one. Even the most experienced and competent IFR pilot has his/her
> hands full when encountering IFR in an unplanned manner.
>
>
> Please, PLEASE! Do not count on an autopilot to save your life.
>
>
> Learn how and practice how to use the simplest of instrumentation. It may
> not be legal, but it will save your life and the life of those who may be
> riding with you.
>
>
> Happy Skies,
>
> Old Bob
> AKA
> Bob Siegfried
> Ancient Aviator
> Stearman N3977A
> Brookeridge Air Park LL22
> Downers Grove, IL 60516
> 630 985-8503
>
>
> _____
>
> See what's
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 11 ___________________________
_________
>
>
> From: BobsV35B(at)aol.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation
>
>
> Good Afternoon Terry,
>
> I personally feel that every flying machine should have the capability of
> being flown without outside reference.
>
> For me, that means a T&B, airspeed and altimeter. Additional toys are al
ways
> helpful!
>
> What I am fearful of is anyone being encouraged to fly beyond his or her
> capabilities utilizing equipment that happens to be on board.
>
> I am certain that there are modern solid state instruments that are just
as
> reliable and as economical as my beloved needle, ball and airspeed, but
> regardless of what style instrumentation is chosen, it takes practice and
> proficiency to utilize it.
>
> Even a wing leveler has to be understood and used properly.
>
> I have never flown any flying machine which I could not keep right side u
p
> or recover from an unusual attitude by using basic needle, ball, and airs
peed
>
> technique.
>
> We don't need to be able to shoot approaches or communicate with the FEDs
to
> be able to keep an airplane right side up. It would be nice if we could c
all
> for and obtain assistance, but communication is not imperative for survi
val.
>
> I am prejudiced toward instrument flying because I learned how to do it
very
> early in my career.
> It is my opinion that it takes a lot longer to learn how to be a safe VF
R
> pilot than it does to learn how to be a safe IFR pilot.
>
> That does not mean that the flying machine needs to have a full panel and
> sophisticated radios to be flyable in IFR conditions.
>
> What it does mean is that any pilot should have adequate equipment and
> skills to be able to avoid disaster if sight of the horizon is lost.
>
> While making a turn off shore during daylight hours the visibility can b
e
> good, but a haze may cause a loss of visual reference for just a few mom
ents.
>
>
> At night, the ability to safely control the airplane for a few seconds or
a
> few minutes until good references are in sight is invaluable.
>
> No one intentionally gets into those situations, but it takes experience
to
> be able to stay out of them. While that experience is being gained, it su
re is
>
> nice to be able to control the aircraft without a visual reference.
>
> I urge everyone to practice flight by whatever reference instruments are
> installed often enough so that when that daytime haze condition or a nigh
t time
>
> turn away from lights causes a momentary loss of reference, maintaining
> control is second nature.
>
> Certainly, no one intends to get into conditions where instrument flight
is
> required and I do not believe everyone has to be fully qualified to pick
up a
>
> clearance and shoot an approach, but I do believe we should all be able t
o
> keep the airplane under control for a few minutes when we inadvertently
lose
> our orientation via outside the aircraft references.
>
> I vote for twenty hours of concentrated training using needle, ball, and
> airspeed or whatever style rate instrumentation is available. The main re
ason I
>
> like needle, ball, and airspeed is that they are cheap, reliable and
> ubiquitous.
>
> Happy Skies,
>
> Old Bob
> AKA
> Bob Siegfried
> Ancient Aviator
> Stearman N3977A
> Brookeridge Air Park LL22
> Downers Grove, IL 60516
> 630 985-8503
>
>
> In a message dated 10/22/2007 1:42:35 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
> terry(at)tcwatson.com writes:
>
> I would almost always defer to your judgment on these matters, but the p
oint
> where I disagree is that IF you are saying gyro instruments are
> inappropriate in a VFR airplane. Instrument competency (or flying in the
IFR system)
> is
> another question entirely.
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 12 ___________________________
_________
>
>
> From: BobsV35B(at)aol.com
> Subject: Re: FW: AeroElectric-List: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation
>
> Well Mister redeloach,
>
>
> I have never been accused of being wise, but I do believe there are many
wh
> o
> will agree that I am old and I have been an active licensed pilot for ove
r
> sixty-one years. Where does two out of three leave me?
>
> I believe that anyone who flies is capable of flying into a condition whe
re
>
> visual reference is lost. It happens to ducks and it happens to me.
>
> Happy Skies,
>
> Old Bob
> AKA
> Bob Siegfried
> Ancient Aviator
> Stearman N3977A
> Brookeridge Air Park LL22
> Downers Grove, IL 60516
> 630 985-8503
>
>
> In a message dated 10/22/2007 2:47:52 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
> redeloach(at)fedex.com writes:
>
> Keep on making sense. Someone must. Lot=99s of these typist have pro
> bably
> never heard how to be OLD, WISE, and a PILOT!
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 13 ___________________________
_________
>
>
> From: "Bill Hibbing" <n744bh(at)bellsouth.net>
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation
>
> Bob,
>
> When I mention JFK Jr in regards I really wasn't trying to infer that
> you should depend on an a/p to save your life. But, from what I
> understand, he was not instrument rated and didn't even like to use an
> a/p. The NTSB report indicated that he was a victim of spatial
> disorientation, something that any low time IFR pilot or VFR pilot can
> easily have happen. Even high time IFR pilots that are not maintaining
> proficiency could have it happen to them. And when that happens to you
> a good operating a/p certainly could keep you alive while you try to
> sort things out. Heck, JFK was so far behind his airplane it's amazing
> he even got hurt in the crash. Now, if a person is building an airplane
> to have a good time with in the local area on a sunny day then you sure
> don't need to install an a/p. I'm starting to work on a Skybolt and you
> can bet that I'm not going to have any fancy stuff in it to have fun in
> the local area.
>
> Bill
> Glasair SIIS-FT
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: BobsV35B(at)aol.com
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 11:40 AM
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation
>
>
> I know I am an outsider to this list, but please, let's all realize
> that instrument competency is not an inborne trait.
>
> It takes training and practice to maintain proficiency.
>
> Buying an autopilot or installing an attitude gyro is not sufficient
> to keep us alive without instrument proficiency.
>
> Twenty hours of serious training with needle, ball and airspeed will
> do the initial job, but proficiency requires constant use. For one
> thing, it is much easier to fly IFR in the system than it is to convert
> a VFR flight into an IFR one. Even the most experienced and competent
> IFR pilot has his/her hands full when encountering IFR in an unplanned
> manner.
>
> Please, PLEASE! Do not count on an autopilot to save your life.
>
> Learn how and practice how to use the simplest of instrumentation. It
> may not be legal, but it will save your life and the life of those who
> may be riding with you.
>
> Happy Skies,
>
> Old Bob
> AKA
> Bob Siegfried
> Ancient Aviator
> Stearman N3977A
> Brookeridge Air Park LL22
> Downers Grove, IL 60516
> 630 985-8503
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -----
> See what's
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 14 ___________________________
_________
>
>
> From: "Ed Anderson" <eanderson(at)carolina.rr.com>
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation
>
> I fully agree, Terry. I spent 20 rather anxious filled ICM minutes when
> I foolish got caught crossing a cold front to what I expect to be fair
> and clear behind it. Despite a 180, I got enveloped in clouds at 8500
> MSL that turned out to have ice. Ice formed on front of windshield and
> in front of gas caps on the wings but fortunately not any more than
> that.
>
> I had 3 items that undoubtedly saved my butt that day.
>
> 1. I did have an AI as well as needle and ball (which I do practice
> with).
> 2. Had a heated pitot tube which I belatedly remember to turn on -
> immediately after I did there was a blip as I presume an slug of water
> that had been ice went through.
> 3. Had a Garmin 195 which mean I at least knew where I was headed.
>
> Managed to complete the turn, fly back toward a large lake while
> descending and finally broke out at 2000 MSL over the lake. Proceeded
> to north of Atlanta, GA and landing at Cherokee county airport in
> blowing snow near dusk. I had no luck communication with anyone - which
> after I landed I discovered the radio antenna had snapped off flush with
> its mount on the fuselage - I presume due to ice induced vibration.
>
> I walked on shaky knees into the FBO and the first thing I saw as an
> article posted on their read-board about the average life span of a VFR
> pilot in ICM conditions being a few seconds less than 3 minutes. My
> guardian angle got a few gray hairs on that one.
>
> But, the point is regardless of dumb thought process or poor decision
> that got me to that point, without those instruments and a small bit of
> skill at using them, I would not be writing this. So I am a firm
> believer in four things.
>
> 1. Never, Never mess with ICM conditions
> 2. Always have a minimum set of equipment to do a 180 in those
> conditions - even if only a VFR pilot - you never plan on becoming
> involved in such a situation, but its happened to more than me.
> 3. Know how to use those basic instruments and practice doing a 180.
> 4. A GPS to get you someplace (rather than boring circles in those
> conditions).
>
> FWIW
>
> Ed
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Terry Watson
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 2:39 PM
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation
>
>
> With considerable respect Bob, a VFR pilot with some kind of gyro
> instrument or an autopilot has a much better chance of completing a 180
> turn when he inadvertently flies into a cloud that he does without. If
> he thinks that having the instruments makes him an instrument pilot he
> is likely going to kill himself anyway. I think I recall my last two
> BFR's having that 180 degree turn under the hood as a part of it.
>
>
>
> I would almost always defer to your judgment on these matters, but the
> point where I disagree is that IF you are saying gyro instruments are
> inappropriate in a VFR airplane. Instrument competency (or flying in the
> IFR system) is another question entirely.
>
>
>
> As for being an outsider to the list, you are one of the reasons I
> follow the list.
>
>
>
> Terry
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> BobsV35B(at)aol.com
> Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 9:41 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation
>
>
>
> In a message dated 10/22/2007 11:23:50 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
> terry(at)tcwatson.com writes:
>
> Most of us who are building or flying RV's will remember that we
> lost Bill Benedict, then general manager of Vans, and his son Jeremy in
> the factory's gyroless RV-9(?) in low clouds on the way to an air show.
> Both were competent pilots and both knew better than to fly into the
> clouds, yet they did. Until that time, I think Van always thought of his
> designs as planes you looked out the window to fly, as did perhaps most
> of the builders. I believe most of the factory RV's now have some sort
> of artificial horizon or autopilot, or both.
>
>
>
> Terry
>
>
>
> I know I am an outsider to this list, but please, let's all realize
> that instrument competency is not an inborne trait.
>
>
>
> It takes training and practice to maintain proficiency.
>
>
>
> Buying an autopilot or installing an attitude gyro is not sufficient
> to keep us alive without instrument proficiency.
>
>
>
> Twenty hours of serious training with needle, ball and airspeed will
> do the initial job, but proficiency requires constant use. For one
> thing, it is much easier to fly IFR in the system than it is to convert
> a VFR flight into an IFR one. Even the most experienced and competent
> IFR pilot has his/her hands full when encountering IFR in an unplanned
> manner.
>
>
>
> Please, PLEASE! Do not count on an autopilot to save your life.
>
>
>
> Learn how and practice how to use the simplest of instrumentation. It
> may not be legal, but it will save your life and the life of those who
> may be riding with you.
>
>
>
> Happy Skies,
>
> Old Bob
> AKA
> Bob Siegfried
> Ancient Aviator
> Stearman N3977A
> Brookeridge Air Park LL22
> Downers Grove, IL 60516
> 630 985-8503
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> See what's
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 15 ___________________________
_________
>
>
> From: "H. M. Haught Jr. " <handainc(at)madisoncounty.net>
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation
>
> I think I started this thread with my inquiry about the VFR
> instrumentation. I have a "full panel" in my Pacer, and it has saved my
> neck more than once. As brought out in this thread, if you fly a lot,
> you will run into conditions that may not be IFR, but are disorienting,
> as well as blundering into IFR conditions. I had a good instructor that
> insisted I be "competent" on instruments (long time Navy and then Air
> Force basic instructor), so I spent a considerable amount of time under
> the hood. Most of my BFR instructors have also checked me out under the
> hood (unusual attitudes, 180 turns, etc.) and it has saved my beef.
> Got caught on the coast of Florida in some fast moving weather, did a
> 180 and got socked in on approach to the airport I had crossed. All I
> could do was set up a climb, hope I didn't hit a tower and keep the
> airplane right side up as I climbed out on the runway heading (chart
> showed no towers). Getting on the radio, I determined that I could
> indeed climb out on top and got vectors to the closest view to the
> ground with the control center filing me as "Special VFR) . And yes, I
> did experience vertigo on that flight, plus, the Pacer is not a good
> instrument platform. It wasn't fun, and I would not do it again on
> purpose. Other occasions have caused me to practice flying on
> instruments as often as I can.
>
> I would like to get my IFR rating, and would definitely take instruction
> if I can afford a "basic IFR" panel, just for situations that I
> mentioned. Low ceiling over my location, clear air a few miles away.
> However, from the responses, I doubt I can afford that kind of
> equipment. Right now, my thinking is to install the TruTrak EFIS,
> depending upon the cost, the Pictorial Turn and Bank, ICOM Radio, and
> maybe a used Garmin GPS panel unit as well as a "steam guage" altimeter
> and airspeed. I've flown the Pictorial Turn and Bank in my Pacer
> (velcroed on the top of the panel) when Younkin was developing it and
> was impressed. With the EFIS as primary and the pictorial T&B as backup
> I would feel comfortable continuing to fly as I do now, with the GPS as
> backup to the gyro. Probably can't afford to go with an auto pilot,
> unless they get even cheaper but will install wiring and components to
> add additional equipment later as I can afford it.
>
> I certainly wasn't advocating a VFR pilot intentionally filing IFR. I
> was just stating what I have wanted to do on occasion if I had the
> equipment and experience to do it safely.
>
> It also appears that everyone has a different definition of "basic".
>
> M. Haught
>
> Bill Hibbing wrote:
> > Bob,
> >
> > When I mention JFK Jr in regards I really wasn't trying to infer that
> > you should depend on an a/p to save your life. But, from what I
> > understand, he was not instrument rated and didn't even like to use an
> > a/p. The NTSB report indicated that he was a victim of spatial
> > disorientation, something that any low time IFR pilot or VFR pilot can
> > easily have happen. Even high time IFR pilots that are not
> > maintaining proficiency could have it happen to them. And when that
> > happens to you a good operating a/p certainly could keep you alive
> > while you try to sort things out. Heck, JFK was so far behind his
> > airplane it's amazing he even got hurt in the crash. Now, if a person
> > is building an airplane to have a good time with in the local area on
> > a sunny day then you sure don't need to install an a/p. I'm starting
> > to work on a Skybolt and you can bet that I'm not going to have any
> > fancy stuff in it to have fun in the local area.
> >
> > Bill
> > Glasair SIIS-FT
> >
> > -----
> >
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 16 ___________________________
_________
>
>
> From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net>
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Becoming CAD-proficient to a practi
cal level
> of usefulness
>
>
>
> >
> >
> > > About 1985, I was where you are today. I had a PC-XT, 20Mb
> > > hard drive, yellow screen computer with the grand total of
> > > 640K of ram. I think the thing ran at the blazing speed
> > > of 4MHz.
> >
> >
> >Bob,
> >
> >4.77 MHz. You must have been a rich man. That system isn't far from $10k
> >when you add it up. A box of 5 1/4" diskettes was $50.
> >
> >See: http://www.periheliondesign.com/downloads/tandy1989.pdf
>
> Actually, just over a $grand$. We had a "policy" at
> Beech that said "NO IBM clones . . . you never know
> when IBM might be in the market for a stable of King
> Airs". When we became Raytheon, I heard through the
> grapevine that Raytheon MASS put out yearly contracts
> for clone suppliers. I got the name of the present
> favored supplier and called them. I told them we were
> Raytheon WICHITA and wanted a quote on what a PC-XT
> would cost us. They asked, "How many" . . ." Hmmmm . . .
> dunno. . . how about 25? "Okay, call you back."
>
> An hour later he called to quote $1050+UPS. Okay, I
> circulated a sign-up sheet in the Targets Group
> and two days later I had 27 checks in my hot little
> fist. About 10 days later this UPS guy backs up
> to my garage and is looking at his COD delivery ticket
> with some incredulity . . . "That will be $28,000
> please."
>
> Biggest check I ever wrote in my life. I became the local
> warranty service rep for the Bit Bucket of N. Newton, MA
> and over the next 4 years, built up a rather interesting,
> very educational, and mildly profitable computer business.
> Got out when the local store fronts began selling clones
> at a few hundred over my costs.
>
> Most of my personal computer upgrades were trade-ins
> from my customers. Got to massage my own computer
> usage on the coat-tails of the business. I've probably
> owned 40 computers over the years! The most I ever
> paid for one was $2700 for the latest and greatest,
> 20 MHz 286 machine . . . boy, was that a learning
> experience! The same machine was half that price a
> year later. I've since adopted a purchasing philosophy
> that upgrades my computers AFTER the next generation
> machines come out. You get 'last years' model for
> peanuts. Nowadays, I seldom drop more than $600
> on any CPU purchase. My lab test drivers come off
> ebay for under $150.
>
> Now, if only we could purchase last year's model
> hip replacement in the same free-market,
> consumer-supplier driven environment . . .
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 17 ___________________________
_________
>
>
> From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net>
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Solid State Relay Alert
>
>
>
> >
> >Bob, is this a bi-polar device? !.5 Volts drop is pretty typical for a
> >darlington.
>
> Don't know what the internal technology is . . . only
> that 1.5V is 10% of system voltage in the switching device
> alone!
>
>
> >Wouldn't the power FET based SSRs do pretty well at the 5 - 10 Amp load
> >range common for lights, fuel pumps, radios, etc.?
>
> FETs or arrays of FETS can be used to
> produce exceedingly low on-resistances.
> Under 1 milliohm is now quite practical.
> This would toss off 20 mv at 20A for a
> grand heat load of 400 milliwatts. That's
> MY kind of heat sink problem.
>
> Point is that this particular product,
> no matter how attractively priced, is
> not ready for top billing in our airplanes.
> I think I gave under $10 for the one in
> the picture. I had hopes. We're getting
> close but not quite there yet.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 18 ___________________________
_________
>
>
> From: BobsV35B(at)aol.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation
>
>
> Good Evening Bill,
>
> In am not at all opposed to having an autopilot available. In fact I have
> two of them in my Bonanza. One is a full autopilot with altitude hold and
> approach coupling. The other is an old Century I wing leveler.
>
> I hate carrying any extra weight, but I do consider my back up autopilot
to
> be worth carrying the two point two extra pounds that it weighs.
>
> If I could get one approved in my Stearman at a reasonable cost, I would
> probably do so. My only objection is to installing one as a substitute fo
r
> training and checking. The twenty hours or so of training required to r
each a
>
> high level of rate instrument flight capability seems to me to be a bet
ter
> investment. The cost is about the same, but the training will last a lif
e time
>
> and the rate instruments are available in almost all certificated airpla
nes.
>
> They are low cost enough and light enough to place in everything that ha
s
> any sort of electrical power at all. If no electrical power is available,
a
> venturi will work just fine.
>
> Best of all is to have an autopilot combined with the skills to fly witho
ut
> it. Even an autopilot needs training to use properly.
>
> We can all point out many things that JFKjr needed, but his mistakes coul
d
> have happened to any of us at some stage in our training.
>
> Very Sad and very bad for our light plane image. We do not need such thin
gs
> happening to anyone else.
>
> IFR capability and training would have saved him. Why not encourage all
to
> get that training?
>
> It is LOT easier to learn to fly IFR than it is to learn how to get aroun
d
> the country safely in VFR conditions.
>
> Happy Skies,
>
> Old Bob
> AKA
> Bob Siegfried
> Ancient Aviator
> Stearman N3977A
> Brookeridge Air Park LL22
> Downers Grove, IL 60516
> 630 985-8503
>
>
> In a message dated 10/22/2007 5:44:12 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
> n744bh(at)bellsouth.net writes:
>
> Bob,
>
> When I mention JFK Jr in regards I really wasn't trying to infer that you
> should depend on an a/p to save your life. But, from what I understand,
he was
>
> not instrument rated and didn't even like to use an a/p. The NTSB repor
t
> indicated that he was a victim of spatial disorientation, something that
any
> low time IFR pilot or VFR pilot can easily have happen. Even high time
IFR
> pilots that are not maintaining proficiency could have it happen to them
. And
>
> when that happens to you a good operating a/p certainly could keep you a
live
> while you try to sort things out. Heck, JFK was so far behind his airpl
ane
> it's amazing he even got hurt in the crash. Now, if a person is buildin
g an
> airplane to have a good time with in the local area on a sunny day then
you
> sure don't need to install an a/p. I'm starting to work on a Skybolt an
d you
>
> can bet that I'm not going to have any fancy stuff in it to have fun in
the
> local area.
>
> Bill
> Glasair SIIS-FT
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 19 ___________________________
_________
>
>
> From: "Bill Hibbing" <n744bh(at)bellsouth.net>
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation
>
> Yep, I totally agree Bob. The way I see it was that JFK made 2 mistakes
> and if he had only made one he probably would still be around. His
> first was not waiting until the next morning to make the flight and the
> second was not engaging the a/p when things started to go badly. I have
> an old airline buddy that lives in CT within easy view of Long Island
> Sound when airborne. She went out to fly her Eagle the evening of JFK's
> accident and after a couple of minutes thought to herself "what the heck
> am I doing flying in this haze?" She turned back to her home airfield
> and put the airplane away for another day. The good IFR training is
> always worth the money but there are probably more than a few pilots
> that don't fly enough to maintain a high level of proficiency,
> especially on the 1-2-3 method of instrument flying. Anyway, enough
> from me on this subject.
>
> Bill
> Glasair SIIS-FT
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: BobsV35B(at)aol.com
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 6:51 PM
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation
>
>
> Good Evening Bill,
>
> In am not at all opposed to having an autopilot available. In fact I
> have two of them in my Bonanza. One is a full autopilot with altitude
> hold and approach coupling. The other is an old Century I wing leveler.
>
> I hate carrying any extra weight, but I do consider my back up
> autopilot to be worth carrying the two point two extra pounds that it
> weighs.
>
> If I could get one approved in my Stearman at a reasonable cost, I
> would probably do so. My only objection is to installing one as a
> substitute for training and checking. The twenty hours or so of
> training required to reach a high level of rate instrument flight
> capability seems to me to be a better investment. The cost is about the
> same, but the training will last a life time and the rate instruments
> are available in almost all certificated airplanes.
>
> They are low cost enough and light enough to place in everything that
> has any sort of electrical power at all. If no electrical power is
> available, a venturi will work just fine.
>
> Best of all is to have an autopilot combined with the skills to fly
> without it. Even an autopilot needs training to use properly.
>
> We can all point out many things that JFKjr needed, but his mistakes
> could have happened to any of us at some stage in our training.
>
> Very Sad and very bad for our light plane image. We do not need such
> things happening to anyone else.
>
> IFR capability and training would have saved him. Why not encourage
> all to get that training?
>
> It is LOT easier to learn to fly IFR than it is to learn how to get
> around the country safely in VFR conditions.
>
> Happy Skies,
>
> Old Bob
> AKA
> Bob Siegfried
> Ancient Aviator
> Stearman N3977A
> Brookeridge Air Park LL22
> Downers Grove, IL 60516
> 630 985-8503
>
> In a message dated 10/22/2007 5:44:12 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
> n744bh(at)bellsouth.net writes:
> Bob,
>
> When I mention JFK Jr in regards I really wasn't trying to infer
> that you should depend on an a/p to save your life. But, from what I
> understand, he was not instrument rated and didn't even like to use an
> a/p. The NTSB report indicated that he was a victim of spatial
> disorientation, something that any low time IFR pilot or VFR pilot can
> easily have happen. Even high time IFR pilots that are not maintaining
> proficiency could have it happen to them. And when that happens to you
> a good operating a/p certainly could keep you alive while you try to
> sort things out. Heck, JFK was so far behind his airplane it's amazing
> he even got hurt in the crash. Now, if a person is building an airplane
> to have a good time with in the local area on a sunny day then you sure
> don't need to install an a/p. I'm starting to work on a Skybolt and you
> can bet that I'm not going to have any fancy stuff in it to have fun in
> the local area.
>
> Bill
> Glasair SIIS-FT
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -----
> See what's new
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 20 ___________________________
_________
>
>
> From: "Neal George" <n8zg(at)bellsouth.net>
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: VFR Preferred Instrumentation
>
> Well said Bob ! Ladies and Gentlemen, Old Bob has exposed the nugget of
> this thread.
>
> I'd add that it's immeasurably safer (to your ticket and your person), an
d
> less expensive, too, especially of you use your airplane to go places on
> anything resembling a schedule.
>
> I travel A LOT in the course of my AF duties. I take the CherokeeJet
> whenever possible (115 Kts - WFO, downhill). More often than not, I beat
my
> co-workers there _and_ home, at less expense, and on MY schedule, not the
> cattle car's.
>
> And always on a IFR flight plan. Simply couldn't do it VFR and make the
> meetings (or stay married). IFR will (OK, should) keep one out of a hot
MOA
> or campaigning congressman TFR... even those that bloom out of
> nowhere...after launch...VFR (CAVU, even)...six hours and a fuel stop en
> route... (plausible fiction follows)
> FBI - "Capt George, why were you flying a straight line from Morganton to
> Manassas that intersected the TFR surrounding Congressman Bluster's campa
ign
> stop?"
> Me - "Didn't happen."
> FBI - "Capt George, we have radar track data that puts you directly over
the
> congressman's podium while the TFR was active."
> Me - "I called 1-800-WXBRIEF, talked to YOUR contractor, filed IFR Direct
> MRN-HEF, specifically asked about TFRs, and was ensured there were no TFR
's
> associated with my route of flight. We discussed en route weather and th
e
> area that until recently resembled a certain mouse. I had a discrete squ
awk
> code and was in constant communication with ATC on an IFR flight plan und
er
> ATC control. How could I have violated a TFR?"
> FBI - "Capt George, give me your License."
> Me - "NoSir. I remember the trouble Bob Hoover had... Shall we review t
he
> tape?"
> (End plausible fiction, but I expect it would go downhill from there...)
>
> Anybody remember a few weeks ago when one of our associates was beat up f
or
> "loitering" over a power plant...at >160 kts...more than 5 NM away...well
> over 3000 ft above...on a straight line to landing?
>
> Bonus! - Dxxxx Airlines can't abandon me in Atlanta <8-O - but I CAN drag
> out a fuel stop to enjoy supper, or divert and spend the evening with
> friends or family if the weather or SAFETY dictate...
>
> Neal E. George
> 2023 Everglades Drive
> Navarre, FL 32566
> Home - 850-515-0640
> Cell - 850-218-4838
>
>
> On Behalf Of BobsV35B(at)aol.com
>
> It is LOT easier to learn to fly IFR than it is to learn how to get aroun
d
> the country safely in VFR conditions.
>
> Happy Skies,
>
> Old Bob
>
>
>
>
>
===========
===========
===========
>
>
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live Hotmail and Microsoft Office Outlook ' together at last. -
Get it now.
http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/outlook/HA102225181033.aspx?pid=CL10062
6971033
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BobsV35B(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: RE: AeroElectric-List Digest: 20 Msgs - 10/22/07 |
In a message dated 10/25/2007 12:24:30 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
jessejenks(at)hotmail.com writes:
Sorry Old Bob. I am genuinely curious though about why you prefer the T&B
over the turn coordinator?
Good Afternoon Jesse,
I have written about that several times on this and other lists. I will send
the compilation of data to you off list. If you can wade through my
disjointed thoughts, you may not agree with my reasons, but I think you will see
how
and why I came to the conclusions that I have.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
________________________________________________________________________________
Bob and others,
Can someone point me to the "diode note" shown in drawing Z19? Could not
find it in the notes section of the "Connection"
Thanks
Peter Laurence
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Z-19 ECU wiring question |
| From: | "mikef" <mikefapex(at)gmail.com> |
Hi,
I am installing a Z-19 system for my Suzuki 1.3L 4 stroke driven aircraft and have
a question about recommendations for wiring these components in that style
system. And use a Single Toggle Switch to turn them ON/OFF. Each of these components
has their own power lead. I am using RotaryAviation's EC2 engine controller,
and I have received these amperage figures for components:
A. EC2 - .25 amp
B. Injectors - about .75 amp each (exact load depends on rpm)
C. Coil - 1.5 amp average but depends on RPM, could be as high as 9 amps
per coil.
I want to dual power these from the Main Battery Bus and Engine Battery bus using
a Perihelion Schotty Diode (max 60 amps load).
Question 1: In trying to estimate the fuse sizes for the above loads I am unsure
how to do so for the COILS. If I maximize the load size I could be at 36 amps.
At the same time making them 1.5 x 4 = 6 amps worries me with a nuisance fuse
blow.
Question 2: recommendations:
A. total the load outcome from Question 1 and run power wire from a single fuse,
in and out of the diode and into a switch. Then split the power lines into three
on the other side of the switch, and at the components end?
B. fuse each component separately, route each power into the diode, then coming
out of the diode split into three power wires. Connect to a TPST (triple pole
single throw) switch for turning all of them ON/OFF, then continue into each
component.
I've asked Rotaryaviation this question several days ago but they've not gotten
back to me. I need to order wire for this endeavor, whichever way is the best,
and would like to move forward.
Thank you for any suggestions and advice,
Mike
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=141783#141783
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Walter Fellows" <walter.fellows(at)gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Best Prices Offered Anywhere |
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Electrical Drawing Critisism Wanted |
| From: | "DaveG601XL" <david.m.gallagher(at)ge.com> |
Here is the drawing I have generated so far based on what I hope I have learned
from this group and Bob's book. I am building a Jabiru 3300 powered Zenith 601XL.
I am trying to make it a fairly simple day/night VFR machine. Electrical
items planned include Dynon FlightDek 180, Garmin 296, Com, Xponder, Trutrack
wing leveler, intercom, fuel boost pump and nav/landing/cockpit lights. If
anybody here has a few minutes, please shoot holes in my overall electrical schematic.
It is a combination of a few different Z diagrams and other builder's
sites, like Matt's zodiacxl.com.
You may debate my choice of instruments if you wish, but I am mainly trying to
make sure I didn't do anything stupid with the electrons and get to the point
of passing the smoke test. I started this exercise knowing virtually nothing
so I guess this is a final exam of sorts. Now fire away.
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=141813#141813
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/my_drawing_01_124.pdf
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Off to Houston . . . |
Dr. Dee and I are hitting the asphalt early
tomorrow for a little jaunt down to Houston, TX
for a weekend seminar in the facilities of EAA
Chapter 12. See:
http://aeroelectric.com/seminars/Houston.html
Will be off line until Monday. Come join us if
you can, you don't need a reservation.
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 drawing |
><PLaurence@the-beach.net>
>
>
>Bob and others,
>
>Can someone point me to the "diode note" shown in drawing Z19? Could not
>find it in the notes section of the "Connection"
Note 24 is on page Z-11 of appendix Z at:
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/Rev11/AppZ_R11K.pdf
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: Electrical Drawing Critisism Wanted |
>
>
>Here is the drawing I have generated so far based on what I hope I have
>learned from this group and Bob's book. I am building a Jabiru 3300
>powered Zenith 601XL. I am trying to make it a fairly simple day/night
>VFR machine. Electrical items planned include Dynon FlightDek 180, Garmin
>296, Com, Xponder, Trutrack wing leveler, intercom, fuel boost pump and
>nav/landing/cockpit lights. If anybody here has a few minutes, please
>shoot holes in my overall electrical schematic. It is a combination of a
>few different Z diagrams and other builder's sites, like Matt's zodiacxl.com.
>
>You may debate my choice of instruments if you wish, but I am mainly
>trying to make sure I didn't do anything stupid with the electrons and get
>to the point of passing the smoke test. I started this exercise knowing
>virtually nothing so I guess this is a final exam of sorts. Now fire away.
I'd recommend that you use the OV protection
relay to open the AC output from the alternator
by having it break one of the two blue leads.
This philosophy is illustrated in
http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Adobe_Architecture_Pdfs/Z16M.pdf
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------
( "Problems are the price of progress. )
( Don't bring me anything but trouble. )
( Good news weakens me." )
( -Charles F. Kettering- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | The Kuffels <kuffel(at)cyberport.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Electrical Drawing Critisism Wanted |
David,
Am of the opinion the use of the Dynon D-180, or any other EFIS
with internal battery backup, justifies a simplification to Bob's
method of feeding the Endurance Bus. In your diagram, remove the
Note 12 diode, remove the Avionics Master Switch and connect the
14AWG wire which fed the diode from the Main Bus to the unused
contact on the 1-3 E-Bus Alt Feed Switch.
This results in fewer parts and eliminates the voltage drop
across the diode along with the heat the diode generates. While
Bob specifies a very robust unit, the heat sensitive diode is
still a weak link compared to the other components in the path.
Now, come an electrical emergency (fire, trim runaway, A/P
failure, alternator runaway, etc.), you have one and only one
consistent action to take.. turn off the battery master.
Continue to fly the plane with the EFIS (and your GPS as backup).
At your leisure: 1) tell the EFIS and GPS you want them to
continue to operate on their internal battery power 2) turn off
everything fed by the Endurance Bus 3) switch the Endurance Bus
Alternate Feed to Battery Direct and 4) turn on each E-Bus load
one at a time and verify the item doesn't contribute to the problem.
Would also suggest the use of combined circuit breaker-switches
instead of the acres of breakers and separate switches of most
aircraft.
Fewer components, simpler procedures. Bob, what are the
negatives to this approach?
Tom Kuffel, AL7AU, CFI
Whitefish, MT
Building Sportsman
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ron Quillin <rjquillin(at)gmail.com> |
At 14:26 10/26/2007, you wrote:
>It sounds as though I'm in the same boat as Paul.
>
>I think I almost understood your response Ron. Could you (or someone)
>elaborate just a bit more??
>
>Thanks,
>
>Jon
My proposed solution made at least two assumptions:
1) the output from the external XM radio provides more than adequate
signal amplitude; plenty loud.
2) you have no issues affecting audio quality; ground loops,
impedance mismatch, stereo/mono issues.
One only needs to interrupt the existing signal connection from the
radio to the audio panel and insert a variable attenuator; aka volume
control. The catch, it only makes the signal softer; no gain.
The output from the external receiver is connected between the CW
(high) and CCW (common) terminals of the 'volume control'. The input
to the audio panel is connected between the center (wiper) terminal
and the CCW common terminal. Two, or dual, section control; one for
left and one for right channels.
Most any acceptable (to the user) control between a minimum of say 1k
up to around 10k with a log (audio) taper should be fine.
As always watch lead dress and strain relief for cables.
Ron Q.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ken <klehman(at)albedo.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Z-19 ECU wiring question |
Mike
I suspect the manufacturer will come up with a recommendation.
However my thinking would be 18 awg and 10 amps minimum for the
injectors but in fact I ran 14awg and 15 amp fuse on my subaru which
also powers the ecu and a couple of other minor things.
Don't know about your coils but you might want to measure what they
really draw for a few seconds on 12 or 14 volts. My two DIS coils will
draw about 7 amps each max steady so I also ran them with 14awg and a 15
amp fuse even though the average current is much less. I believe the car
had metric equivalent of almost 14awg and was also fused at 15 amps. I
did not want to risk that the high current pulses might eventually
weaken the fuse and I wanted minimal voltage drop. I'm sure that 16awg
would have been fine as well. Another consideration was that if a driver
shorts on I did not want the fuse to blow and also kill my second coil
since two cylinders working is better than none... At the time I wasn't
sure it the engine would windmill long enough to turn on my second
ignition but as it happens mine will windmill down to at least 40 knots.
With 4 coils that will really draw 9 amps when on continuously, I would
consider wiring them in pairs with a fuse for each pair.
Ken
mikef wrote:
>
>Hi,
>
>I am installing a Z-19 system for my Suzuki 1.3L 4 stroke driven aircraft and
have a question about recommendations for wiring these components in that style
system. And use a Single Toggle Switch to turn them ON/OFF. Each of these components
has their own power lead. I am using RotaryAviation's EC2 engine controller,
and I have received these amperage figures for components:
>
>A. EC2 - .25 amp
>B. Injectors - about .75 amp each (exact load depends on rpm)
>C. Coil - 1.5 amp average but depends on RPM, could be as high as 9 amps
per coil.
>
>I want to dual power these from the Main Battery Bus and Engine Battery bus using
a Perihelion Schotty Diode (max 60 amps load).
>
>Question 1: In trying to estimate the fuse sizes for the above loads I am unsure
how to do so for the COILS. If I maximize the load size I could be at 36 amps.
At the same time making them 1.5 x 4 = 6 amps worries me with a nuisance fuse
blow.
>
>Question 2: recommendations:
>A. total the load outcome from Question 1 and run power wire from a single fuse,
in and out of the diode and into a switch. Then split the power lines into
three on the other side of the switch, and at the components end?
>
>B. fuse each component separately, route each power into the diode, then coming
out of the diode split into three power wires. Connect to a TPST (triple pole
single throw) switch for turning all of them ON/OFF, then continue into each
component.
>
>I've asked Rotaryaviation this question several days ago but they've not gotten
back to me. I need to order wire for this endeavor, whichever way is the best,
and would like to move forward.
>
>Thank you for any suggestions and advice,
>
>Mike
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Eric Parlow" <ericparlow(at)hotmail.com> |
| Subject: | 24v Battery Charger Recommendation |
Looking for a 24v battery charger; recommendations?
Two tasks: charging & maintaining
Does one charger do both well?
ERic--
RV-10 N104EP
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ernest Christley <echristley(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | transponder recommendation |
Transponders seem to be like hammers. Everybody needs one, and within
very wide limits it's hard to tell one from another.
I'm going with the Dynon EFIS, and it has serial output for an altitude
encoder. If I buy one that accepts serial input, I won't have to buy
and maintain another piece of equipment to produce the Gray Code that
most seem to want. Other than that, I have no extraordinary
requirements. It'll squawk 1200 nearly always. Maybe an occasional
7500, if I have to point the nose at the beach instead of the mountains,
because the wife is with me. Power is a non-issue. I live in the
crowded east coast, and the annular slot antennae I built is supposed to
give me 6dB of gain in the direction that ATC will be (down).
What is a good choice for a cheap, minimalist transponder that accepts
serial input?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rob Turk" <matronics(at)rtist.nl> |
| Subject: | Re: transponder recommendation |
Some regions in Europe are demanding Mode-S transponders as early as March
2008, so expect used-but-good Mode-C transponders to show up soon on sites
like Barnstormers.
If you need Mode-S in your area any time soon then you may want to look at
Filser. Their TRT800 transponder has the encoder built-in, so only static
pressure is needed. They have versions that fit 2 1/4" round panel cut-outs
and versions that are drop-in replacement for the square boxes.
Rob
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ernest Christley" <echristley(at)nc.rr.com>
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 4:41 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: transponder recommendation
>
>
> Transponders seem to be like hammers. Everybody needs one, and within
> very wide limits it's hard to tell one from another.
>
> I'm going with the Dynon EFIS, and it has serial output for an altitude
> encoder. If I buy one that accepts serial input, I won't have to buy and
> maintain another piece of equipment to produce the Gray Code that most
> seem to want. Other than that, I have no extraordinary requirements.
> It'll squawk 1200 nearly always. Maybe an occasional 7500, if I have to
> point the nose at the beach instead of the mountains, because the wife is
> with me. Power is a non-issue. I live in the crowded east coast, and the
> annular slot antennae I built is supposed to give me 6dB of gain in the
> direction that ATC will be (down).
>
> What is a good choice for a cheap, minimalist transponder that accepts
> serial input?
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)cox.net> |
| Subject: | Re: 24v Battery Charger Recommendation |
>
>
>Looking for a 24v battery charger; recommendations?
>
>Two tasks: charging & maintaining
>
>Does one charger do both well?
>
>ERic--
>RV-10 N104EP
Is your battery a "real" 24V device or a pair
of 12s in series? 24V hardware is rare compared
to 12V stuff. In fact, I'm not aware of any
24 charger/maintainers but I'm sure they're out
there. A Google search is the place to start.
If you have a pair of 12s, consider a pair of
Battery Tender like:
http://www.batteryweb.com/batterytender-detail.cfm?Model=021-0123
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Tools/Battery_Chargers/Battery_Tender_Jr.jpg
I've found these "in the wild" for a little
as $29 plus shipping. They recharge like this:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Curves/Battery_Tender_Recharge.pdf
You'll find a LOT of 24v battery service products
but you'll not too that their prices are not
nearly as attractive as the "wall wart" style
tenders.
Know too that Schumacher products sold at Wall
Mart are now "smart chargers". See
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Tools/Battery_Chargers/Schumacher_WM-1562.jpg
and recharge like this:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Curves/schumacher_3.jpg
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Curves/schumacher_6.jpg
Their smallest models are on the order of $20
each and you don't need to pay shipping
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------
( "Problems are the price of progress. )
( Don't bring me anything but trouble. )
( Good news weakens me." )
( -Charles F. Kettering- )
----------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ernest Christley <echristley(at)nc.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: transponder recommendation |
Rob Turk wrote:
>
> Some regions in Europe are demanding Mode-S transponders as early as
> March 2008, so expect used-but-good Mode-C transponders to show up
> soon on sites like Barnstormers.
>
> If you need Mode-S in your area any time soon then you may want to
> look at Filser. Their TRT800 transponder has the encoder built-in, so
> only static pressure is needed. They have versions that fit 2 1/4"
> round panel cut-outs and versions that are drop-in replacement for the
> square boxes.
>
> Rob
>
>
Thanks for the heads-up. I'll just wait.
>>
>>
>> Transponders seem to be like hammers. Everybody needs one, and
>> within very wide limits it's hard to tell one from another.
>>
>> I'm going with the Dynon EFIS, and it has serial output for an
>> altitude encoder. If I buy one that accepts serial input, I won't
>> have to buy and maintain another piece of equipment to produce the
>> Gray Code that most seem to want. Other than that, I have no
>> extraordinary requirements. It'll squawk 1200 nearly always. Maybe
>> an occasional 7500, if I have to point the nose at the beach instead
>> of the mountains, because the wife is with me. Power is a
>> non-issue. I live in the crowded east coast, and the annular slot
>> antennae I built is supposed to give me 6dB of gain in the direction
>> that ATC will be (down).
>>
>> What is a good choice for a cheap, minimalist transponder that
>> accepts serial input?
>>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Frank Stringham" <fstringham(at)hotmail.com> |
Way off topic but I need help. My very old Dell Latitude D600 power cord
(PA-6 type cord) just gave up the ghost!!!!
Local stores have none.......checks of various net providers have come up
empty. Any ideas where I might get one of theses.
Frank @ sgu RV7A baffling is baffling
_________________________________________________________________
Make every IM count. Download Messenger and join the im Initiative now.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "JOHN TIPTON" <jmtipton(at)btopenworld.com> |
| Subject: | Re: transponder recommendation |
Rob says: so expect used-but-good Mode-C transponders to show up
>> soon on sites like Barnstormers
Yes: and e-bay
John (England)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ernest Christley" <echristley(at)nc.rr.com>
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 1:00 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: transponder recommendation
>
>
> Rob Turk wrote:
>>
>> Some regions in Europe are demanding Mode-S transponders as early as
>> March 2008, so expect used-but-good Mode-C transponders to show up soon
October 18, 2007 - October 29, 2007
AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-hh