AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-an
December 28, 2001 - January 19, 2002
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tom Brusehaver <cozytom(at)mn.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: DG replacement |
> Also, If some of the coming $1000 electronic Artificial Horizon units turn
> out well, you don't need a vacuum pump anymore, making this price
> competitive with the vacuum instruments. (I am assuming an essential bus
> arrangement or even a separate battery back up for it.)
After I got back from Osh this year, and agonizing
about $1500ea for electric gyros, I came to the
conclusion that vacuum gyro's will make me legal
and be nice backups to Icarus and other electronic
instruments, and still be cheaper than the $3K+.
I can imagine an iPaq velcro'd over the vacuum instruments
for most flight. Lest anyone worry, I also plan not
to fly hard IFR, in my single engine airplane. A quick
pop through a cloud layer, or broken layer is all I
plan on flying.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RC Allen Wiring |
>
>Bob:
>
>I am trying to wire my RC Allen electric AI & DG. The plug that fits the
>back of the instrument has me a little confused. Nothing came with the
>instruments so I ordered the plugs from Gulf Coast. Nothing then came with
>the plugs and I don't know how to wire or operate these plugs.
>
>They are parts number MS90376-12R. It also says Caplugs EC-12. Can you help
>me?
Those sound like numbers off the plastic cap that
slips over a connector to protect it. A phone
call to Gulf Coast and conversation with one of
their techs should produce the identification of
pins for +14 and ground.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ned Thomas" <nthomas(at)mmcable.com> |
| Subject: | MicroAir Transponder |
Bob,
I am interested in the T2000SFL. Will the T2000SFL require an encoder?
If
so do you recommend any encoders to go with the T2000SFL?
Thanks
Ned
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: spike catching diodes |
>
>12/27/01
>
>Hello Bob, I'd like to try again on this subject. Please see my previous post
>below. Many thanks. 'OC'
>
>Subj: spike catching diodes
>Date: 12/18/2001
>To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
>
>In a message dated 12/18/2001 2:52:36 AM Eastern Standard Time,
>aeroelectric-list- writes:
>
><<....skip.... Go to http://www.aeroelectric.com and click on link
> to Article Reprints and Newsgroup Treads. On the
> next page, find and click on "An illustrated discussion
> about spike catching diodes and how they work.".....skip..... >>
>
>12/18/01
>
>Hello Bob, Thanks for your testing and detailed write up on this subject. But
>I'm still left with some very simple layman's questions / doubts.
>
>The diagram on page 212 of Tony Bingelis' book Firewall Forward provides a
>basis for discussion / questions.
>
>1) Does the diode always get installed so that it provides a connection
>between the solenoid switch terminal and some other part of the circuit?
the diode should be installed such that it is across the
coil of the contactor (solenoid) as shown in all of our
drawings.
>2) Does it matter which other part of the circuit that the diode connection
>goes to? I see on Tony's diagram that the diode connection is made to the
>plus or input side of the relay. I see that on your sketch you show the diode
>connection going to ground. Which is correct / better?
. . . across the coil are the magic words. Depending on how
the contactor gets it's power to energize, one side of the diode
may or may not be connected directly to ground. For the
starter contactors we sell, the diode is built into the contactor
and just happens to have the arrow connection (anode) of the diode
connected to ground. On battery contactors . . . the anode eventually
gets to ground but it's through the battery master switch.
The one thing that can be said about the diode installation in
ALL situations is that the anode (arrow head end) always
connects to the (-) end of the coil, the cathode (bar end)
always connects to the (+) end of the coil.
>3) When diagramming this diode connection which is the proper direction for
>the diode triangle to be pointing? I see on Tony's diagram that the diode
>triangle has the base connected to the solenoid switch terminal. I see on
>your sketch that you have the point of the diode triangle connected to the
>solenoid switch terminal (and the base of the triangle connected to ground).
>
>4) When the switch has been closed for some time is there supposed to be any
>current flow through the diode?
No, current only flows for a few milliseconds AFTER the switch
controlling the contactor opens.
>5) Which way is the current from the collapsing coil field supposed to flow
>through the diode when the switch is opened? In the direction that the diode
>triangle is pointing or opposite to the direction the diode triangle is
>pointing?
When the contactor is first energized, electrons supplied by the
power source come from ground and out of the (+) connection of
coil connection. When the power source is interrupted, the collapsing
magnetic field makes the coil a source of electrons as opposed to
load for electron flow. The effect is to attempt to maintain flow in
the same direction as the excitation force; the (+) terminal still
produces a strong electron flow which drives the terminal negative
as shown in the many oscilloscope traces of the article I cited.
Electrons flow through a diode in opposition to the direction the
arrow points in the diode's symbol. So, in the short interval after
the switch opens, energy that would otherwise drive the (+) terminal
several hundred volts in a negative direction are clamped off
by diode and rendered harmless.
>6) When one has a diode in hand how can one tell by looking at its markings
>which end the triangle is pointing towards?
The banded end of the diode is the cathode (bar end) of
schematic symbol. A little study of the photos of battery
and cross feed contactors in our website catalog should
produce a re-enforcing view of how these devices are used.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Avionics Cooling Hose |
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
> Jerry, I know I've seen at least two sizes over the years
> but I'll bet the modern multi-output fans use 5/8" scat
> tube.
>
> How many radios do you have that need cooling?
>
*** Exactly one. A Northstar M1 Loran. The existing hose has perished from
old age. I tried to order the exact part from Beech, but the part #
doesn't reference anymore.
I also have a GNS430, but that is cooled by a "cool can". No WAY was
I going to plumb my new 430 to the outside world!
Best would be to get a two-port fan and plug up the outside world
connection, but I just don't have any $$ at the moment.
- Jerry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
>
>Bob,
>I was on the Microair web site the other night and see that they are
>waiting for TSO cert.(still) before they release their transponder for sale.
>Any idea when you'll be getting any? With their time table staement
>last year of "a couple of months", it should only take me 10 minutes or
>so to finish my 7.
>Just wondering...won't be working on the panel for another few minutes...
>
>Jim Duckett, RV-7A
My distributor has been using the "couple of months" statement
since day one . . . UNTIL the past few days where the date
1/04/01 shows in their computer data base for an inventory
date.
I presume they wouldn't get so definite about a date unless
they knew some hardware had been shipped.
Bob . . .
////
(o o)
===========o00o=(_)=o00o=========
< Go ahead, make my day . . . >
< show me where I'm wrong. >
=================================
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Transponder antenna location |
> Upper or lower side of the fuse Bob?
LOWER . . .
Bob. . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: New pricing on 760VHF Transceiver & Xpndr Availability |
>
>Bob,
>
>I am interested in the T2000SFL. Will the T2000SFL require an encoder? If
>so do you recommend any encoders to go with the T2000SFL?
We're probably going to offer the Ameri-King AK-350 solid
state encoder bundled with the T2000SFL and wired into
our harness for $180 more.
Bob . . .
////
(o o)
===========o00o=(_)=o00o=========
< Go ahead, make my day . . . >
< show me where I'm wrong. >
=================================
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ned Thomas" <nthomas(at)mmcable.com> |
I lost the web site for the EFIS for IPAQ. Does anyone have it?
Thanks,
Ned
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | David Aronson <aronsond(at)pacbell.net> |
| Subject: | Re: EFIS for IPAQ |
Ned:
Try:
http://www.icarusinstruments.com/
Dave
RV4 N504RV
Ned Thomas wrote:
>
> I lost the web site for the EFIS for IPAQ. Does anyone have it?
>
> Thanks,
> Ned
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: New pricing on 760VHF Transceiver |
>
>
>> I'll post a note on the AeroElectric List and
>> on the website when I know it's a Done Deal.
>
>I know Microair has a "panel" version of the 760 - one that looks like am
>ICOM A200, kind of. Do you know if it is functionally the same as the 2
>1/4 inch round one? Do you carry it too, and if so, have a price? I think
>I would like the panel version because I am used to that format and would
>fumble with the switches less.
If I'm reading their literature correctly, only the later
8.33 KHz channel spaced radio will be offered in the 6.3"
flat-pak. I've uploaded the poop sheet to:
http://209.134.106.21/articles/760sl.pdf
My distributor isn't talking about this one yet. I'll
bug them again next week.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Carl Froehlich" <carlfro(at)erols.com> |
Here it is,
http://www.icarusinstruments.com/
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Ned
Thomas
Subject: AeroElectric-List: EFIS for IPAQ
I lost the web site for the EFIS for IPAQ. Does anyone have it?
Thanks,
Ned
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ned Thomas" <nthomas(at)mmcable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: EFIS for IPAQ |
I found it using google.com. It's:
http://www.icarusinstruments.com/microEFIS.html
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ned Thomas" <nthomas(at)mmcable.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: EFIS for IPAQ
>
> I lost the web site for the EFIS for IPAQ. Does anyone have it?
>
> Thanks,
> Ned
>
>
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ned Thomas" <nthomas(at)mmcable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: EFIS for IPAQ |
Thanks Carl,
I guess our Aeroelectric emails crossed in the cyberspace....
BTW, are you using the Icarus? What do you think of it? Have you looked
at:
http://www.bluemountainavionics.com/
Your Fellow Builder,
Ned
----- Original Message -----
From: "Carl Froehlich" <carlfro(at)erols.com>
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: EFIS for IPAQ
>
> Here it is,
> http://www.icarusinstruments.com/
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Ned
> Thomas
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: EFIS for IPAQ
>
>
>
> I lost the web site for the EFIS for IPAQ. Does anyone have it?
>
> Thanks,
> Ned
>
>
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Brian & Debi Shannon" <wings(at)theshannons.net> |
| Subject: | B&C Voltmeter/Loadmeter |
Bob,
Would there be any reason to install the B&C voltmeter/loadmeter combo if
I'm planning on also putting in the VM1000 system?
Thanks for the help!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ned Thomas" <nthomas(at)mmcable.com> |
| Subject: | Fuel Pressure Sender |
Anybody know where I can find a 0 to 5 psi fuel psi sender?
Honeywell used to make one but they discontinued it. Tehnext size is 0
to 15 psi. My carb wants no more than 4 psi on it and I would like to
get an accurate reading at the carb. So I continue to look.
Thanks,
Ned
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Finn Lassen <finnlassen(at)netzero.net> |
| Subject: | Re: DG replacement |
Unfortunately you can't attach an external antenna to the cheap GPS units.
Finn
Gary Liming wrote:
>
> With the advent of the cheap $100-150 GPS from Walmart, etc. and an $80
> external antenna, what is wrong with the idea of finding one that can be
> mounted in the panel, and dedicated with the compass rose and heading
> screen on full time, and replacing it with the DG? This would be in
> addition to any other GPS navaid.
>
> Can GPS antennas be easily attached to two units, as in a simple "y"
> harness, or are two antennas a must?
>
> Also, If some of the coming $1000 electronic Artificial Horizon units turn
> out well, you don't need a vacuum pump anymore, making this price
> competitive with the vacuum instruments. (I am assuming an essential bus
> arrangement or even a separate battery back up for it.)
>
> Gary Liming
----------------------------------------------------
Sign Up for NetZero Platinum Today
Only $9.95 per month!
http://my.netzero.net/s/signup?r=platinum&refcd=PT97
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Grant Corriveau <grantC(at)total.net> |
> Michel,
>
> After looking over your two layouts, This is what I can find:
...
> 2: The layout of the switches and other controls seems to be
> a little hap-hazard by placing them where there was space
> available.
Michel, I didn't closely analyze your switch layout yet, but here are a
couple of points to consider if you haven't already....
1/ As you've noted - with the Zodiac's center control stick it is not
possible to just copy what other aircraft have done and assume it will work.
For example - a centrally positioned throttle won't work.
2/ Try to ensure that the switches that will be constantly needed while
flying are close to the appropriate hand. For example, you have the
elevator trim close to the throttle, which is good, as this hand is the one
that will be free to do the trimming while the other hand maintains control
pressure. The aileron trim, by contrast, is not often needed during the
flight and could conceivably be located elsewhere if you needed the panel
space.
(And in my estimate - foreward panel space on a Zodiac is always at a
premium, so don't 'waste' it on non-essential things - such as fuses and
breakers)
3/ The landing light switches, for example, would be awkward to reach while
maneuvering if they are simply included in the 'typical' bank of switches
over towards the co-pilots side of the aircraft. I have found that for
radios and gps etc., I can comfortably reach the upper center part of the
panel with my outboard hand, when required. I like your idea of the modular
center control column. I too removed the 'dual' Y yoke - largely because it
restricted me from reaching the lower right side of my panel. (If I need a
dual control - I'll reinstall something for a while)
4/ As nice as it might look to have a nice straight line of similarly-shaped
switches, from an operational point of view, it is often better to have
switches with different tactile 'feel' and function so that they can be
found without having to look too carefully.
5/ There may often be a conflict between a LOGICAL placement and an
ERGONOMIC placement of switches. I have an example of this with my car's
electric window switches. Because I have a standard gear shift, it is very
'ergonomic' to have the switches (left and right) located on the center
control pedastal, so that while driving with my outboard hand, I can raise
or lower the window with my inboard hand while it's not busy changing gears.
So one hand at least is always firmly on the wheel.
But this is often confusing! All my passengers, (and I too!) will fumble on
the outboard door sometimes, looking for the window switch in the logical
position next to the window!
This is part of the fun of building our own aircraft! And I guarantee you
that your first ideas will not be your last. Count on wanting to move some
things around - sooner or later ;-)
Have fun,
Grant
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Carl Froehlich" <carlfro(at)erols.com> |
I look at units like the Blue Mountain EFIS with envy. It is way out of my
price class.
Carl.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Ned
Thomas
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: EFIS for IPAQ
Thanks Carl,
I guess our Aeroelectric emails crossed in the cyberspace....
BTW, are you using the Icarus? What do you think of it? Have you looked
at:
http://www.bluemountainavionics.com/
Your Fellow Builder,
Ned
----- Original Message -----
From: "Carl Froehlich" <carlfro(at)erols.com>
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: EFIS for IPAQ
>
> Here it is,
> http://www.icarusinstruments.com/
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Ned
> Thomas
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: EFIS for IPAQ
>
>
>
> I lost the web site for the EFIS for IPAQ. Does anyone have it?
>
> Thanks,
> Ned
>
>
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
>
>
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Aircraft Heading |
| From: | Gary Graham <beeb(at)teleport.com> |
Am I missing something?
I don't see anything about GPS based systems like the Icarus EFIS or any GPS
that gives AIRCRAFT heading. As far as I can tell, you need an electronic
slaving compass (calibrated to the airframe) that gives updated magnetic
heading to some type of display. The most common basic system is a
'whiskey' compass (calibrated with error card filled out) and your fingers
to correct the precession errors in the DG (if you have one). I think ATC
is still asking pilots to fly headings regardless of the winds.
Gary
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Switch layout |
Thanks Grant and the several other people who helped
me with the panel. David even sent me an ACAD
drawing.
Point taken regarding the trim controls. Last night,
while I could not sleep, I moved the trim indicators
over the EIS. I must say that following David's
advise, I lowered the transceiver location and the EIS
to allow space for the compass on top of it.
I will move the aileron trim control to that location
as well.
Not wanting to have switches on the far right side, I
decided to add back a center console. It will be 4.5"
wide and include all engine switches (ignition,
master, alternate power, fuel pumps). The lighting
switches will be under the transceiver on the main
panel.
I keep three breakers on the panel (alternator, ess
bus and ov protection) on the far right side (near the
location of the fuse blocs).
Today, I visited a friend who has a dual battery, dual
ignition setup with a Subaru engine. I found that I
am on the right track with the components of my panel.
Sitting in the plane, I realized that the location I
selected for the phone jacks is not appropriate... the
plugs will interfere with my legs. I will move them
probably on a vertical channel under the vent against
the wall.
Some suggested that the vents will only vent my
knees... From sitting in the friend's plane, I'm not
convinced and it appears to still be the better
location.
I should have an updated drawing by tomorrow and I
hope to cut the panel next week.
Michel
--- Grant Corriveau wrote:
> Corriveau
>
> > Michel,
> >
> > After looking over your two layouts, This is what
> I can find:
> ...
> > 2: The layout of the switches and other controls
> seems to be
> > a little hap-hazard by placing them where there
> was space
> > available.
>
> Michel, I didn't closely analyze your switch layout
> yet, but here are a
> couple of points to consider if you haven't
> already....
>
> 1/ As you've noted - with the Zodiac's center
> control stick it is not
> possible to just copy what other aircraft have done
> and assume it will work.
> For example - a centrally positioned throttle won't
> work.
>
> 2/ Try to ensure that the switches that will be
> constantly needed while
> flying are close to the appropriate hand. For
> example, you have the
> elevator trim close to the throttle, which is good,
> as this hand is the one
> that will be free to do the trimming while the other
> hand maintains control
> pressure. The aileron trim, by contrast, is not
> often needed during the
> flight and could conceivably be located elsewhere if
> you needed the panel
> space.
>
> (And in my estimate - foreward panel space on a
> Zodiac is always at a
> premium, so don't 'waste' it on non-essential things
> - such as fuses and
> breakers)
>
> 3/ The landing light switches, for example, would be
> awkward to reach while
> maneuvering if they are simply included in the
> 'typical' bank of switches
> over towards the co-pilots side of the aircraft. I
> have found that for
> radios and gps etc., I can comfortably reach the
> upper center part of the
> panel with my outboard hand, when required. I like
> your idea of the modular
> center control column. I too removed the 'dual' Y
> yoke - largely because it
> restricted me from reaching the lower right side of
> my panel. (If I need a
> dual control - I'll reinstall something for a while)
>
> 4/ As nice as it might look to have a nice straight
> line of similarly-shaped
> switches, from an operational point of view, it is
> often better to have
> switches with different tactile 'feel' and function
> so that they can be
> found without having to look too carefully.
>
> 5/ There may often be a conflict between a LOGICAL
> placement and an
> ERGONOMIC placement of switches. I have an example
> of this with my car's
> electric window switches. Because I have a standard
> gear shift, it is very
> 'ergonomic' to have the switches (left and right)
> located on the center
> control pedastal, so that while driving with my
> outboard hand, I can raise
> or lower the window with my inboard hand while it's
> not busy changing gears.
> So one hand at least is always firmly on the wheel.
>
> But this is often confusing! All my passengers, (and
> I too!) will fumble on
> the outboard door sometimes, looking for the window
> switch in the logical
> position next to the window!
>
> This is part of the fun of building our own
> aircraft! And I guarantee you
> that your first ideas will not be your last. Count
> on wanting to move some
> things around - sooner or later ;-)
>
> Have fun,
> Grant
>
>
>
> Forum -
> Contributions of
> any other form
>
> latest messages.
> other List members.
>
> aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> http://www.matronics.com/subscription
> http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
>
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
> http://www.matronics.com/search
> http://www.matronics.com/archives
> http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
>
>
>
>
>
=====
----------------------------
Michel Therrien CH601-HD
http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby
http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601
Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
http://greetings.yahoo.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Rob Housman" <rob-housman(at)worldnet.att.net> |
If you would like a panel mount EFIS with solid state "gyros" (but without
the moving map) for US$1995 check out http://www.dynondevelopment.com/
Best regards,
Rob Housman
Europa XS Tri-Gear
Airframe complete
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Carl
Froehlich
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: EFIS for IPAQ
I look at units like the Blue Mountain EFIS with envy. It is way out of my
price class.
Carl.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Ned
Thomas
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: EFIS for IPAQ
Thanks Carl,
I guess our Aeroelectric emails crossed in the cyberspace....
BTW, are you using the Icarus? What do you think of it? Have you looked
at:
http://www.bluemountainavionics.com/
Your Fellow Builder,
Ned
----- Original Message -----
From: "Carl Froehlich" <carlfro(at)erols.com>
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: EFIS for IPAQ
>
> Here it is,
> http://www.icarusinstruments.com/
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Ned
> Thomas
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: EFIS for IPAQ
>
>
>
> I lost the web site for the EFIS for IPAQ. Does anyone have it?
>
> Thanks,
> Ned
>
>
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
>
>
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Aircraft Heading |
With all the discussion about DG alternatives, I suprised that no one has
mentioned the remote "Flux Gate" computer calibrated vertical compasses, such
as the one available from Ritchie for <$200. electrically driven, no
precession. Available in 2" panel mount. www.ritchie.com. LRE
Larry Eidemiller
Firewall Forward
FEW P51 Mustang
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Warren D. Shoun" <wbnb(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Don't Use www.ritchie.com |
Don't go to the www.ritchie com sight. It has nothing to do with aircraft and
will send your computer into a multipage, self generating advertisemen series
that locked up my computer.
Your mileage may vary.
~Cheers,
~Warren
LaVerne, CA.
LRE2(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> With all the discussion about DG alternatives, I suprised that no one has
> mentioned the remote "Flux Gate" computer calibrated vertical compasses, such
> as the one available from Ritchie for <$200. electrically driven, no
> precession. Available in 2" panel mount. www.ritchie.com. LRE
>
> Larry Eidemiller
> Firewall Forward
> FEW P51 Mustang
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charlie and Tupper England <cengland(at)netdoor.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Don't Use www.ritchie.com |
"Warren D. Shoun" wrote:
>
>
> Don't go to the www.ritchie com sight. It has nothing to do with aircraft and
> will send your computer into a multipage, self generating advertisemen series
> that locked up my computer.
> Your mileage may vary.
> ~Cheers,
> ~Warren
> LaVerne, CA.
>
try
http://www.ritchienavigation.com/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Melvinke(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Don't Use www.ritchie.com |
No problem with Ritchie.com. I obtained their flux-gate compass, and received
excellent service. Love the instrument. No need for a DG. KM.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Warren D. Shoun" <wbnb(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Don't Use www.ritchie.com |
The corrected www.ritchienavigation site worked fine and is very informative
and interesting. Have fun with www.ritchie.com if you like.
~Cheers,
~Warren
Melvinke(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> No problem with Ritchie.com. I obtained their flux-gate compass, and received
> excellent service. Love the instrument. No need for a DG. KM.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary K" <flyink(at)efortress.com> |
| Subject: | Re: EFIS for IPAQ |
> BTW, are you using the Icarus? What do you think of it? Have you looked
> at:
>
does anyone know the price of the icarus?
still waiting for the dynon, Gary K.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Coax through plastic bushings |
RG 400 is .194 and easily fits through Heyco bushing SB437-4.
Ron Smith
RV 8A
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Carl Froehlich" <carlfro(at)erols.com> |
$1500.
Carl Froehlich
RV-8A (almost done....)
Vienna, VA
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Gary K
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: EFIS for IPAQ
> BTW, are you using the Icarus? What do you think of it? Have you looked
> at:
>
does anyone know the price of the icarus?
still waiting for the dynon, Gary K.
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stephen J. Soule" <SSoule(at)pfclaw.com> |
| Subject: | Wonky Ammeter (long) |
Listers,
I would like your help diagnosing a condition with the ammeter on my RV-6A.
I have the B&C voltage regulator. I have the B&C Specialty L-40 alternator.
All is wired up according to diagram Z-1 from Bob's "Aeroelectric
Connection," except that I'm using an ammeter and a voltmeter ... or at
least I'm trying to. I am using Van's ammeter and a Van's 40 amp external
shunt.
Soon after starting the engine, the ammeter reads a few amps on the
discharge side. It comes positive when the engine revs get above 1200 or so.
When I turn on the transponder, electric boost pump, etc., the ammeter goes
to discharge (maybe -20 amps) then comes back positive.
If I turn on the radio, the ammeter goes to maximum discharge (greater than
40 amps) and stays there even if I turn the radio off again. But not always.
Sometimes when I leave the radio on, the ammeter swings back to the positive
side after being pegged at - 40 amps. The ammeter also always reads maximum
discharge when I key the microphone.
I had other troubles with the ammeter reading, but "fixed" those by moving
one of the leads on the Radio Shack diode between then essential bus and the
main bus. The diode has three "out" terminals. The ammeter reads in a more
bizarre fashion if I use the other "out" terminals.
The voltmeter shows steady voltage of between 12 and 14 volts when engine
RPM comes up from idle. The battery is always charged.
I can fly OK without the ammeter working, so have labeled it "INOP" for the
first 26 hours of flight, but now is the time to fix it.
Here are some ideas that have been floated by me:
1. The ammeter is wired backwards to the shunt. I should reverse the wires
from the gauge to the shunt. I can't see this as correct, though. If wired
backwards, it should just read "discharging" when charging, etc.
2. The shunt is the wrong size. The great needle deflections are caused by
the fact that I'm using the wrong shunt. If I had the right shunt the needle
on the ammeter would be just a little one side or the other of zero and I
would be a happy man. I don't buy this suggestion, either.
3. The voltage regulator looks funny and should be replaced with one like
everybody else uses. I like my B&C and don't want to use a Ford voltage
regulator.
4. The voltage regulator is OK, but is wired incorrectly in some way.
5. There is something wrong with the shunt and I should replace it. (The
shunt looks like such a simple device that it should either work or not
work.)
I welcome your thoughts. I think that the diode is to blame, but can't
figure out why. Like the ammeter shunt, it is so simple that it should
either work or not work. I wish (not for the first time on this project)
that I had taken some electrical tech courses in high school or college so I
could figure out what's going on here.
Stephen Soule
Huntington, Vermont
RV-6A N227RV
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "EWSpears" <ewspears(at)peoplepc.com> |
> > BTW, are you using the Icarus? What do you think of it? > does anyone
know the price of the icarus?
> still waiting for the dynon, Gary K.
The Icarus unit was designed and is made by my neighbor at Leeward Air
Ranch. The designers name is Craig Sellers and his company is
http://www.pcflightsystems.com/ You can order directly from him online for
$1395. He has a marketing agreement with Icarus which allows him to also
sell directly.
Unlike some of the other units out there that I would call "vapor-ware"
(lots of hype but no product), He has been shipping units for 6 months. I
have been using one of his units in my Avid Mk-IV for three months and it
works great. It will be in my RV8A in backup role when it's finished.
As an interesting sideline the PCEFIS was not originally designed just
for the market but was part of the computor Craig designed for his RV8X.
(Corvette Power). The computor in that plane does all the air and flight
data, completely controls and reports all engine systems, and autopilot. The
plane has been 99% finished for about a year now but the PCEFIS business has
taken all his time.
Esten Spears, RV8A, 80922, Leeward Air Ranch, Ocala, FL. Busy stringing
miles of wire!
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Instrument panel planning - udpate |
I would like to thank everyone who helped me with my
panel design. I got a tremendous amount of good
feedback really quickly. So far, I have 21 iterations
of my draft and I think I'm getting there. I hope to
cut the panel next week and I'll make a mockup today.
About the vents... I'm not sure if I will like them in
that location (some commented that they will only vent
my knees), but I have a hard time finding an alternate
location. The vents will be backed off the panel
about 1 inch (on a separate sub-panel).
I moved the phone jacks from under the panel after I
realized that I will likely destroy either the jacks
or the plug with my legs.
I realized that the way I will use the throttle, it is
better not to have other controls in the way.
I also moved most of the trim tab controls/indicators
following Grant's intervention. This allowed me to
bring the transponder to the left side.
Thanks to David Mullins, I think my switches and few
breakers are less in hap-hazard locations... With his
suggestion, I also have space for the compass and trim
stuff above the EIS.
I also received a load of great pictures from Jeff
Small showing his hinged fuse panel, his center
console and his instrument panel. Some of these
pictures will be brought to my web site soon. I hope
I could do such a nice job of building my panel!
Again, Thanks everyone! I wish you a great 2002 year.
The current updated panel design is:
http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601/images/DEC30-2001-2.JPG
Just prior to that, I had:
http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601/images/DEC30-2001-1.JPG
Please do not hesitate to add comments.
Michel
=====
----------------------------
Michel Therrien CH601-HD
http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby
http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601
Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
http://greetings.yahoo.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Van Caulart <etivc(at)iaw.on.ca> |
| Subject: | Re: DIY audio panel |
Listers, I originally posed this question shortly after Sept 11 and then
went away on business. I didn't see any replies and time has just run
away since then. Now in a slower period I'm thinking about the original
question. Does any one have any wisdom they can impart before I go
ahead?
Bob & the List:
First my gratitude Bob for your continued excellence. Well done.
My question is perhaps too simple but I'm having a mental block with
regard to setting up a simple audio panel. My aircraft is virgin '68
C177 with the following avionics KX170B King Nav/Com MRKR reciever. an
UPSAT GX55 GPS, a Narco AT150 xpndr w/enc. There is no intercom. I just
bought an UPSAT SL40 com which has an intercom function I plan on using.
I have the pinouts for each of the avionics devices. Do I just need
diodes in series with the audio outputs to isolate them from each other
while switching between coms using SPDT's mounted in the panel? I plan
on installing a spkr/phone, com1, com2, nav1, and two spare switches.
Comments, suggestions appreciated.
PeterVC, '68 C177, 150HP
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Liming <gary(at)liming.org> |
With the availability of pocket type PC based instruments, both the moving
map and the EFIS type display, has anyone seen a good way to mount these
things in the panel besides the yokes?
Gary Liming
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Wonky Ammeter (long) |
What is the purpose of this diode? It sounds like a full wave diode
rectifier bridge as diodes have but two leads. Since you are already a DC
system, I would remove the Diode bridge and see if everything then works.
Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh
Editor, EAA Safety Programs
cgalley(at)qcbc.org or experimenter(at)eaa.org
http://www.eaa.org for latest flying rules
Always looking for articles for the Experimenter
--- Original Message -----
From: "Stephen J. Soule" <SSoule(at)pfclaw.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Wonky Ammeter (long)
Listers,
I would like your help diagnosing a condition with the ammeter on my RV-6A.
I have the B&C voltage regulator. I have the B&C Specialty L-40 alternator.
All is wired up according to diagram Z-1 from Bob's "Aeroelectric
Connection," except that I'm using an ammeter and a voltmeter ... or at
least I'm trying to. I am using Van's ammeter and a Van's 40 amp external
shunt.
Soon after starting the engine, the ammeter reads a few amps on the
discharge side. It comes positive when the engine revs get above 1200 or so.
When I turn on the transponder, electric boost pump, etc., the ammeter goes
to discharge (maybe -20 amps) then comes back positive.
If I turn on the radio, the ammeter goes to maximum discharge (greater than
40 amps) and stays there even if I turn the radio off again. But not always.
Sometimes when I leave the radio on, the ammeter swings back to the positive
side after being pegged at - 40 amps. The ammeter also always reads maximum
discharge when I key the microphone.
I had other troubles with the ammeter reading, but "fixed" those by moving
one of the leads on the Radio Shack diode between then essential bus and the
main bus. The diode has three "out" terminals. The ammeter reads in a more
bizarre fashion if I use the other "out" terminals.
The voltmeter shows steady voltage of between 12 and 14 volts when engine
RPM comes up from idle. The battery is always charged.
I can fly OK without the ammeter working, so have labeled it "INOP" for the
first 26 hours of flight, but now is the time to fix it.
Here are some ideas that have been floated by me:
1. The ammeter is wired backwards to the shunt. I should reverse the wires
from the gauge to the shunt. I can't see this as correct, though. If wired
backwards, it should just read "discharging" when charging, etc.
2. The shunt is the wrong size. The great needle deflections are caused by
the fact that I'm using the wrong shunt. If I had the right shunt the needle
on the ammeter would be just a little one side or the other of zero and I
would be a happy man. I don't buy this suggestion, either.
3. The voltage regulator looks funny and should be replaced with one like
everybody else uses. I like my B&C and don't want to use a Ford voltage
regulator.
4. The voltage regulator is OK, but is wired incorrectly in some way.
5. There is something wrong with the shunt and I should replace it. (The
shunt looks like such a simple device that it should either work or not
work.)
I welcome your thoughts. I think that the diode is to blame, but can't
figure out why. Like the ammeter shunt, it is so simple that it should
either work or not work. I wish (not for the first time on this project)
that I had taken some electrical tech courses in high school or college so I
could figure out what's going on here.
Stephen Soule
Huntington, Vermont
RV-6A N227RV
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Carl Froehlich" <carlfro(at)erols.com> |
My local group of three RV-8 builders is doing this. We each will have two
iPAQ PC on the panel, one running the ICARUS EFIS, the other running the
Anywhere map. All have at least a stand alone AI (vacuum for one, electric
RC Allen for the other two) as backup. All will have the GX-60 as the
primary IFR navigation system.
The simplest mounting is a strip of 2" wide heavy duty Velcro on the iPAQ
slide on case. The more elegant mounting uses some tapered pieces of angle
on the slide case to better orientate the iPAQ display for optimal view
angle. Advantages for handheld PC based displays are you can do all this
without drilling a big hole in the panel so you can move things about as you
gain experience, and you can replace the handheld PC with newer (faster,
cheaper, better) units as they come out.
Carl Froehlich
Vienna, VA
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Gary
Liming
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: EFIS
With the availability of pocket type PC based instruments, both the moving
map and the EFIS type display, has anyone seen a good way to mount these
things in the panel besides the yokes?
Gary Liming
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: DIY audio panel |
Van Caulart wrote:
> I have the pinouts for each of the avionics devices. Do I just need
> diodes in series with the audio outputs to isolate them from each other
> while switching between coms using SPDT's mounted in the panel?
*** HI Peter,
No, no, NO, do NOT put diodes in series with your audio outputs!
Your audio would be horribly munged.
The standard for aircraft audio is that each item has a 600-ohm output
impedance, and they can just be all wired together without damage.
So you can just put an SPST switch in series with each audio output,
and bring the other side of all the the SPST's to a single "main audio
node". In fact, that's what's inside my KMA20 audio panel.
- Jerry Kaidor ( jerry(at)tr2.com )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gordon Robertson" <res0rlvx(at)verizon.net> |
| Subject: | Flux gate compasses |
No problem with Ritchie.com. I obtained their flux-gate compass, and
received
excellent service. Love the instrument. No need for a DG. KM.
Can anyone explain the turning or acceleration errors associated with
flux-gate compasses? I think there should be no acceleration based errors,
but the vertical componenet of the earth's magnetic field may still cause
turning errors.
Gordon Robertson
RV8 fuse
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ned Thomas" <nthomas(at)mmcable.com> |
Carl,
Would your local RV-8 group happen to have any pictures you could email. I
am in the process of building my panel and am quite interested in seeing
what they have done.
Thanks,
Ned
----- Original Message -----
From: "Carl Froehlich" <carlfro(at)erols.com>
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: EFIS
>
> My local group of three RV-8 builders is doing this. We each will have
two
> iPAQ PC on the panel, one running the ICARUS EFIS, the other running the
> Anywhere map. All have at least a stand alone AI (vacuum for one,
electric
> RC Allen for the other two) as backup. All will have the GX-60 as the
> primary IFR navigation system.
>
> The simplest mounting is a strip of 2" wide heavy duty Velcro on the iPAQ
> slide on case. The more elegant mounting uses some tapered pieces of
angle
> on the slide case to better orientate the iPAQ display for optimal view
> angle. Advantages for handheld PC based displays are you can do all this
> without drilling a big hole in the panel so you can move things about as
you
> gain experience, and you can replace the handheld PC with newer (faster,
> cheaper, better) units as they come out.
>
> Carl Froehlich
> Vienna, VA
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Gary
> Liming
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: EFIS
>
>
> With the availability of pocket type PC based instruments, both the moving
> map and the EFIS type display, has anyone seen a good way to mount these
> things in the panel besides the yokes?
>
> Gary Liming
>
>
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | tom(at)websiteasp.com |
I was wondering if anyone on the list finds this type of device useful. It
is a self-contained 9 volt powered resistance tester that has an audible
tone that changes pitch with resistance variations less than 1 ohm.
Supposedly great for finding intermittants (by wiggling wires), etc.
Available from Wilco Electronic Devices, Inc. 612-937-9372 or as part LRT-1
from www.edmo.com.
There have been a number of DIY designs from Jim Weir and others for a
simple audible continuity or voltage tester that are pretty simple to build.
The Circuit Buzzer seems as described above seems to goes one step further.
But, is is worth it? Does anyone know of any DIY plans for this type of
device?
Blue skies in '02,
Tom
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Switch layout |
Hello Grant, Jeff, David,
I worked a bit more on my project and here is what it
currently look like. I will change that a bit and put
the headphone jacks under the panel on each side (as I
did on my prototype).
Do you think that the throttle is too close to the
edge of the inst. panel (so I can use it with my hand
on top left).
Thanks a lot for your support!
=====
----------------------------
Michel Therrien CH601-HD
http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby
http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601
Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
http://greetings.yahoo.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ned Thomas" <nthomas(at)mmcable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Flux gate compasses |
Gordon,
I ave been looking into the Ritchie compasses. Which model do you have? Is
it the all in one piece digital "Mag One" or perhaps the "M 2W" 2 piece
unit that has the sensor housing seperate from the instrument panel mount?
Thanks,
Ned
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gordon Robertson" <res0rlvx(at)verizon.net>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Flux gate compasses
>
> No problem with Ritchie.com. I obtained their flux-gate compass, and
> received
> excellent service. Love the instrument. No need for a DG. KM.
>
>
> Can anyone explain the turning or acceleration errors associated with
> flux-gate compasses? I think there should be no acceleration based
errors,
> but the vertical componenet of the earth's magnetic field may still cause
> turning errors.
>
> Gordon Robertson
> RV8 fuse
>
>
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Chris Adkins" <ccadkins(at)dragg.net> |
| Subject: | RE: Microair 760 Installation Manual |
Hi Bob,
I've been trying to download the Installation Manual for the Microair
Transceiver and I'm unable to open anything other than the first page of the
document. All other downloads from your site work fine for me. Is there a
known problem with this document?
Thanks for all the wonderful advice and help you give the list, and all of
us via your site. There's absolutely NO WAY I would have attempted a
complete panel upgrade on my own without your book, your site, and this
list.
Chris Adkins
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Stephen J.
Soule
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Wonky Ammeter (long)
Listers,
I would like your help diagnosing a condition with the ammeter on my RV-6A.
I have the B&C voltage regulator. I have the B&C Specialty L-40 alternator.
All is wired up according to diagram Z-1 from Bob's "Aeroelectric
Connection," except that I'm using an ammeter and a voltmeter ... or at
least I'm trying to. I am using Van's ammeter and a Van's 40 amp external
shunt.
Soon after starting the engine, the ammeter reads a few amps on the
discharge side. It comes positive when the engine revs get above 1200 or so.
When I turn on the transponder, electric boost pump, etc., the ammeter goes
to discharge (maybe -20 amps) then comes back positive.
If I turn on the radio, the ammeter goes to maximum discharge (greater than
40 amps) and stays there even if I turn the radio off again. But not always.
Sometimes when I leave the radio on, the ammeter swings back to the positive
side after being pegged at - 40 amps. The ammeter also always reads maximum
discharge when I key the microphone.
I had other troubles with the ammeter reading, but "fixed" those by moving
one of the leads on the Radio Shack diode between then essential bus and the
main bus. The diode has three "out" terminals. The ammeter reads in a more
bizarre fashion if I use the other "out" terminals.
The voltmeter shows steady voltage of between 12 and 14 volts when engine
RPM comes up from idle. The battery is always charged.
I can fly OK without the ammeter working, so have labeled it "INOP" for the
first 26 hours of flight, but now is the time to fix it.
Here are some ideas that have been floated by me:
1. The ammeter is wired backwards to the shunt. I should reverse the wires
from the gauge to the shunt. I can't see this as correct, though. If wired
backwards, it should just read "discharging" when charging, etc.
2. The shunt is the wrong size. The great needle deflections are caused by
the fact that I'm using the wrong shunt. If I had the right shunt the needle
on the ammeter would be just a little one side or the other of zero and I
would be a happy man. I don't buy this suggestion, either.
3. The voltage regulator looks funny and should be replaced with one like
everybody else uses. I like my B&C and don't want to use a Ford voltage
regulator.
4. The voltage regulator is OK, but is wired incorrectly in some way.
5. There is something wrong with the shunt and I should replace it. (The
shunt looks like such a simple device that it should either work or not
work.)
I welcome your thoughts. I think that the diode is to blame, but can't
figure out why. Like the ammeter shunt, it is so simple that it should
either work or not work. I wish (not for the first time on this project)
that I had taken some electrical tech courses in high school or college so I
could figure out what's going on here.
Stephen Soule
Huntington, Vermont
RV-6A N227RV
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "iflych2" <iflych2(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Re: RE: Microair 760 Installation Manual |
My copy works fine. May be a problem with your reader. Is it the latest
version.
R
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ghgrigson123(at)cs.com |
| Subject: | Re: Flux gate compasses |
Ned,
I bought the M-4 (which is the larger one at 3 3/8 "). I like the remote
sensor that goes in a nonferrous location like a wing tip. The cable to the
flux sensor is shielded and about 20 feet long (plenty long enough). I will
install a connector at the wing tip end to facilitate removing the tip. It
will sense any magnetic disturbances and correct the heading info on your
"ship" when you initialize it. The whole unit looks great! I hope it works
great.
Greg
Honolulu
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stephen J. Soule" <SSoule(at)pfclaw.com> |
| Subject: | Wonky Ammeter (long) |
The diode is in there because it is shown on the Z-1 drawing. I wish I had a
better grasp of the theory, but I don't. Thanks for the input.
Steve Soule
-----Original Message-----What is the purpose of this diode?
It sounds like a full wave diode
rectifier bridge as diodes have but two leads. Since you are
already a DC
system, I would remove the Diode bridge and see if
everything then works.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stephen J. Soule" <SSoule(at)pfclaw.com> |
| Subject: | Wonky Ammeter (long) |
I can answer some of these questions and I hope that I clarify things.
The diode bridge is a square of plastic. Three corners are 90 degree angle,
one corner is not. Three input leads are oriented one way, the fourth, in
the non-90 degree corner, is oriented in another direction. I was told, I
think in the "Aeroelectric Connection," that the lead in the odd corner was
the input and the other three were output. I will test the diode package as
suggested to see if I have the connections right.
As far as I know, the B&C voltage regulator does not have an adjustment
procedure after installation. The installation instructions are all on one
sheet of paper and I do not see anything about adjustment or calibration.
The shunt is wired from the battery lead on the starter contactor to the
main bus. It does not (I hope) actually supply the power to the main bus. I
have checked twice. What am I actually measuring here?
Steve
-----Original Message-----
From: jdnewsum [mailto:jdnewsum(at)qwest.net]
Sent: Sunday, December 30, 2001 10:12 PM
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Wonky Ammeter (long)
>
Stephen,
Since your voltmeter reads correctly between 12 and 14 volts when
the engine is running and the battery charge is being maintained, It would
appear that there is nothing wrong with the voltage regulator and the
charging system.
You should not remove the diode because it is used to supply current
to the devices connected to the essential bus in normal operation. The
purpose of the diode is to allow current to flow from the main bus to the
essential bus (during normal operation) but not in the reverse direction
when the alternator has failed and the battery is supplying power to the
circuits connected to the essential bus.
The diode package that you refer to as shown in Figure Z1 is a
package of 4 diodes wired internally as a bridge network for rectification
of an AC input for used in a DC output power supply. The diode package has
two input terminals and two output terminals (not three outputs). Since the
diodes inside the package are intended for power supply applications they
are rated for higher currents and voltages than typical switching diodes and
are more rugged. You are only using one of the four diodes inside this
package to connect the main bus to the essential bus. You should have only
two wires connected to the diode package (the other connections shown in
Figure Z1 are internal to the diode package). If the diode is installed
properly, the essential bus will be approximately 0.6 volts (voltage drop
across the diode)lower than the main bus. You could also insure that the
diode is functioning correctly and is installed in the correct orientation
by disconnecting the leads from the diode bridge and using a Digital
Voltmeter(DVM)to check it. Most DVM's will have a diode checking function.
If not, use the OHM function of the DVM. The diode should be an open
circuit when the plus lead of the DVM is connected to the terminal that
would go to the essential bus and the negative lead of the DVM is connected
to the terminal that would to the main bus. It should read a low resistance
value when the leads of the DVM are reversed.
The size of the shunt should not be a problem since it is supplied
by Van's as appropriate for use with their ammeter. Where is your Shunt
located in the wiring? If it is installed to monitor alternator load
current (in series with the alternator B lead), as you turn on devices, the
system current load will go up and the reading of the ammeter should
increase proportionately as the alternator supplies more current to the
electrical system. This would be the preferred method especially since you
have a voltmeter installed. From the description of your problem, it sounds
like you have installed the ammeter to monitor battery charging current. In
this case as more current is supplied by the battery the ammeter will read
proportionately more negative as more current is supplied from the battery.
It should not jump to full scale as you turn things on. With the B&C
voltage regulator is there an adjustment procedure that must be performed
when it is intially installed?
I hope this is is of some help in trouble shooting your problem.
Dave
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Wonky Ammeter (long) |
I do not understand the function of the diode. Many, many planes were built
before the solid state diode was invented. KISS comes to mind here.
Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh
----- Original Message -----
From: "Stephen J. Soule" <SSoule(at)pfclaw.com>
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Wonky Ammeter (long)
I can answer some of these questions and I hope that I clarify things.
The diode bridge is a square of plastic. Three corners are 90 degree angle,
one corner is not. Three input leads are oriented one way, the fourth, in
the non-90 degree corner, is oriented in another direction. I was told, I
think in the "Aeroelectric Connection," that the lead in the odd corner was
the input and the other three were output. I will test the diode package as
suggested to see if I have the connections right.
As far as I know, the B&C voltage regulator does not have an adjustment
procedure after installation. The installation instructions are all on one
sheet of paper and I do not see anything about adjustment or calibration.
The shunt is wired from the battery lead on the starter contactor to the
main bus. It does not (I hope) actually supply the power to the main bus. I
have checked twice. What am I actually measuring here?
Steve
-----Original Message-----
From: jdnewsum [mailto:jdnewsum(at)qwest.net]
Sent: Sunday, December 30, 2001 10:12 PM
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Wonky Ammeter (long)
>
Stephen,
Since your voltmeter reads correctly between 12 and 14 volts when
the engine is running and the battery charge is being maintained, It would
appear that there is nothing wrong with the voltage regulator and the
charging system.
You should not remove the diode because it is used to supply current
to the devices connected to the essential bus in normal operation. The
purpose of the diode is to allow current to flow from the main bus to the
essential bus (during normal operation) but not in the reverse direction
when the alternator has failed and the battery is supplying power to the
circuits connected to the essential bus.
The diode package that you refer to as shown in Figure Z1 is a
package of 4 diodes wired internally as a bridge network for rectification
of an AC input for used in a DC output power supply. The diode package has
two input terminals and two output terminals (not three outputs). Since the
diodes inside the package are intended for power supply applications they
are rated for higher currents and voltages than typical switching diodes and
are more rugged. You are only using one of the four diodes inside this
package to connect the main bus to the essential bus. You should have only
two wires connected to the diode package (the other connections shown in
Figure Z1 are internal to the diode package). If the diode is installed
properly, the essential bus will be approximately 0.6 volts (voltage drop
across the diode)lower than the main bus. You could also insure that the
diode is functioning correctly and is installed in the correct orientation
by disconnecting the leads from the diode bridge and using a Digital
Voltmeter(DVM)to check it. Most DVM's will have a diode checking function.
If not, use the OHM function of the DVM. The diode should be an open
circuit when the plus lead of the DVM is connected to the terminal that
would go to the essential bus and the negative lead of the DVM is connected
to the terminal that would to the main bus. It should read a low resistance
value when the leads of the DVM are reversed.
The size of the shunt should not be a problem since it is supplied
by Van's as appropriate for use with their ammeter. Where is your Shunt
located in the wiring? If it is installed to monitor alternator load
current (in series with the alternator B lead), as you turn on devices, the
system current load will go up and the reading of the ammeter should
increase proportionately as the alternator supplies more current to the
electrical system. This would be the preferred method especially since you
have a voltmeter installed. From the description of your problem, it sounds
like you have installed the ammeter to monitor battery charging current. In
this case as more current is supplied by the battery the ammeter will read
proportionately more negative as more current is supplied from the battery.
It should not jump to full scale as you turn things on. With the B&C
voltage regulator is there an adjustment procedure that must be performed
when it is intially installed?
I hope this is is of some help in trouble shooting your problem.
Dave
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stephen J. Soule" <SSoule(at)pfclaw.com> |
| Subject: | Wonky Ammeter --- diode bridge |
Cy,
Dave's response explains the diode bridge as well as Bob Nuckolls does in
the Aeroelectric Connection ... "The purpose of the diode is to allow
current to flow from the main bus to the essential bus (during normal
operation) but not in the reverse direction when the alternator has failed
and the battery is supplying power to the
circuits connected to the essential bus." I don't understand enough about
the theory to elaborate. Perhaps Mr. Nuckolls will step in at this point ...
I operate the aircraft with the main bus on and the essential bus off.
Everything works, except the ammeter. If I switch the main bus and the
essential bus on at the same time, the ammeter reads zero no matter what is
going on.
Steve Soule
electrically challenged in Huntington, Vermont
-----Original Message-----
I do not understand the function of the diode. Many, many planes were built
before the solid state diode was invented. KISS comes to mind here.
Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Wonky Ammeter --- diode bridge |
I thought that the Voltage regulator reverse current relay or control takes
care of this.
Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh
----- Original Message -----
From: "Stephen J. Soule" <SSoule(at)pfclaw.com>
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Wonky Ammeter --- diode bridge
Cy,
Dave's response explains the diode bridge as well as Bob Nuckolls does in
the Aeroelectric Connection ... "The purpose of the diode is to allow
current to flow from the main bus to the essential bus (during normal
operation) but not in the reverse direction when the alternator has failed
and the battery is supplying power to the
circuits connected to the essential bus." I don't understand enough about
the theory to elaborate. Perhaps Mr. Nuckolls will step in at this point ...
I operate the aircraft with the main bus on and the essential bus off.
Everything works, except the ammeter. If I switch the main bus and the
essential bus on at the same time, the ammeter reads zero no matter what is
going on.
Steve Soule
electrically challenged in Huntington, Vermont
-----Original Message-----
I do not understand the function of the diode. Many, many planes were built
before the solid state diode was invented. KISS comes to mind here.
Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Wonky Ammeter (long) |
Stephen J. Soule wrote:
> You should not remove the diode because it is used to supply current
> to the devices connected to the essential bus in normal operation. The
> purpose of the diode is to allow current to flow from the main bus to the
> essential bus (during normal operation) but not in the reverse direction
*** OK, here' s a question.
The diode has a forward drop of .6 - .7 volts. Now, that's a lot of
voltage for a lead-acid battery. If there is an emergency battery on the
essential bus - that is being kept charged through that diode - it will
be in a constant state of half ( or less than half ) charge. Because the
main bus will rise only to the value needed to keep the main battery charged.
...Or is there something I don't understand here?
- Jerry Kaidor ( jerry(at)tr2.com )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | RE: Microair 760 Installation Manual |
>
>Hi Bob,
>I've been trying to download the Installation Manual for the Microair
>Transceiver and I'm unable to open anything other than the first page of the
>document. All other downloads from your site work fine for me. Is there a
>known problem with this document?
>
>Thanks for all the wonderful advice and help you give the list, and all of
>us via your site. There's absolutely NO WAY I would have attempted a
>complete panel upgrade on my own without your book, your site, and this
>list.
>
>Chris Adkins
A number of browser/acrobat/hardware/connectivity combinations have
difficulty downloading .pdf files . . . especially if they are
large. The work-around for 99% of these problems has been to
right-click the link to the document and then tell your browser
to store it to some handy location on your hard drive.
When the download is completed, THEN open Acrobat Reader and
then use it to open the document from the hard drive location.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: DG replacement |
>
>Unfortunately you can't attach an external antenna to the cheap GPS units.
>
>Finn
I've been flying with the Magellan GPS receivers
velcroed to the top of the glare-shield for several
years. I've got dual GPS for under $250 total.
Works well . . . just no moving maps or internal
data bases.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Circuit Buzzer |
>
>I was wondering if anyone on the list finds this type of device useful. It
>is a self-contained 9 volt powered resistance tester that has an audible
>tone that changes pitch with resistance variations less than 1 ohm.
>Supposedly great for finding intermittants (by wiggling wires), etc.
>Available from Wilco Electronic Devices, Inc. 612-937-9372 or as part LRT-1
>from www.edmo.com.
>
>There have been a number of DIY designs from Jim Weir and others for a
>simple audible continuity or voltage tester that are pretty simple to build.
>The Circuit Buzzer seems as described above seems to goes one step further.
>But, is is worth it? Does anyone know of any DIY plans for this type of
>device?
>
>Blue skies in '02,
>
>Tom
The first time I worked a program that required multi-layer
etched circuit board (about 1975 . . . I was building video
time base correctors for early VCR's) a common problem in
production were tiny "cat whiskers" of solder plating that would
short two adjacent traces together . . VERY hard to find.
We had a "tone" type continuity tester such as you describe
that would differentiate small changes (micro-ohms) in small
resistances (milli-ohms) with differences in pitch of the
tone.
We found these quite useful for locating the shorts and
clearing them. Some months later, I found that I could
"blow" the shorts out by putting a power supply across the
connected traces . . . problem was to deliver significant
fusing energy at a voltage level too low to damage any
solid state devices. I charged a 100,000 uFD capacitor to
0.4 volts and connected the capacitor between the two failed
traces. A tiny puff of smoke would reveal the former
location of the short whereupon the site was cleaned and coated
with polyurethane varnish.
Fortunately, those kinds of problems have long since been
solved with better fabrication techniques. Haven't used
that critter in over 20 years tho . . . can't think of
anyplace it would have been useful to me since.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wonky Ammeter |
>
>Listers,
>
>I would like your help diagnosing a condition with the ammeter on my RV-6A.
>I have the B&C voltage regulator. I have the B&C Specialty L-40 alternator.
>All is wired up according to diagram Z-1 from Bob's "Aeroelectric
>Connection," except that I'm using an ammeter and a voltmeter ... or at
>least I'm trying to. I am using Van's ammeter and a Van's 40 amp external
>shunt.
>
>Soon after starting the engine, the ammeter reads a few amps on the
>discharge side. It comes positive when the engine revs get above 1200 or so.
>When I turn on the transponder, electric boost pump, etc., the ammeter goes
>to discharge (maybe -20 amps) then comes back positive.
If you're using a (-)zero(+) type ammeter then you've had
to make some major changes to Figure Z-1 that will make
diagnosis of your difficult difficult without seeing exactly
how you have changed things.
>If I turn on the radio, the ammeter goes to maximum discharge (greater than
>40 amps) and stays there even if I turn the radio off again. But not always.
>Sometimes when I leave the radio on, the ammeter swings back to the positive
>side after being pegged at - 40 amps. The ammeter also always reads maximum
>discharge when I key the microphone.
Hmmmm . . . doesn't sound good. The meter may be mechanically
sticking at full scale after being whanged too hard. This
can't happen without some kind of error in how it's wired.
>I had other troubles with the ammeter reading, but "fixed" those by moving
>one of the leads on the Radio Shack diode between then essential bus and the
>main bus. The diode has three "out" terminals. The ammeter reads in a more
>bizarre fashion if I use the other "out" terminals.
The diode between the main bus and essential bus should have
no effect on how ammeter behaves. . .
>The voltmeter shows steady voltage of between 12 and 14 volts when engine
>RPM comes up from idle. The battery is always charged.
12-14 is not very "steady" . . . depending on how your alternator
is belted, you should get a bus voltage of no less than 13.5 at
just above ground idle RPM . . . this voltage should not change
more than a few tenth's of a volt depending on what you have
turned on.
>I can fly OK without the ammeter working, so have labeled it "INOP" for the
>first 26 hours of flight, but now is the time to fix it.
>
>Here are some ideas that have been floated by me:
>
>1. The ammeter is wired backwards to the shunt. I should reverse the wires
>from the gauge to the shunt. I can't see this as correct, though. If wired
>backwards, it should just read "discharging" when charging, etc.
Correct.
>2. The shunt is the wrong size. The great needle deflections are caused by
>the fact that I'm using the wrong shunt. If I had the right shunt the needle
>on the ammeter would be just a little one side or the other of zero and I
>would be a happy man. I don't buy this suggestion, either.
Agreed.
>3. The voltage regulator looks funny and should be replaced with one like
>everybody else uses. I like my B&C and don't want to use a Ford voltage
>regulator.
There are thousands of B&C regulators out there in happy
service of their users . . .
>4. The voltage regulator is OK, but is wired incorrectly in some way.
The voltage regulator also should have no effect on
what appears to be rather bizzare behavior of your
ammeter.
>5. There is something wrong with the shunt and I should replace it. (The
>shunt looks like such a simple device that it should either work or not
>work.)
>
>I welcome your thoughts. I think that the diode is to blame, but can't
>figure out why. Like the ammeter shunt, it is so simple that it should
>either work or not work. I wish (not for the first time on this project)
>that I had taken some electrical tech courses in high school or college so I
>could figure out what's going on here.
If you've "Used Z-1 except . . ." then we
need to know what the exception is. Send me
a wiring diagram that shows what you've done.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Wonky Ammeter |
>
>Stephen J. Soule wrote:
>> You should not remove the diode because it is used to supply current
>> to the devices connected to the essential bus in normal operation. The
>> purpose of the diode is to allow current to flow from the main bus to the
>> essential bus (during normal operation) but not in the reverse direction
>
>*** OK, here' s a question.
>
> The diode has a forward drop of .6 - .7 volts. Now, that's a lot of
>voltage for a lead-acid battery. If there is an emergency battery on the
>essential bus - that is being kept charged through that diode - it will
>be in a constant state of half ( or less than half ) charge. Because the
>main bus will rise only to the value needed to keep the main battery charged.
>
>...Or is there something I don't understand here?
>
> - Jerry Kaidor ( jerry(at)tr2.com )
Jeeesshhh guys . . . buy ya books and buy ya books and we're
having these kinds of discussions? . . . may I recommend
some remedial reading?
http://209.134.106.21/articles/Rev9/ch17-9.pdf
In particular, check out the description of figure 17-2
that begins on page 17-7. The very minor modification
to the classic cookie-cutter spam-can electrical system
(Fig 17-1) combined with preventative maintenance of the
ship's battery would make the vast majority of dark-n-
stormy-night stories about electrical system problems a
ho-hum deal.
All those gidgets and gadgets have specific roles to
play and with characteristics that have been deduced
suited to the task.
It sounds like the posting that started this thread is
mostly centered in a mis-application of a battery ammeter
in a system architectured like Figure 17-2 (or Appendix
Z, Figure Z-1) . . . which will not support the battery
ammeter installation (because of b-lead fusing out on
the firewall). The diode has nothing to do with battery
maintenance for either a main or standby battery . . . it's
only used to insure that any time the main bus is up,
the e-bus is up and that the e-bus can NEVER be loaded
by the main bus.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | RE: Wonky Ammeter II |
>
>Jerry,
>The voltage drop across a diode that is forward biased is a function of the
>current flowing through the diode but .6 volts drop is a typical value. The
>AeroElectric Figure Z1 schematic (my copy is vintage April 2000) does not
>incorporate an emergency battery for backup of the essential bus but instead
>relies on a manual switch to connect the primary battery to the essential
>bus (and bypass the diode) in the case of alternator failure. Since the
>voltage regulator for the alternator would be set to keep the voltage at
>somewhere between 13.8 to 14.2 volts in normal operation and the charging
>voltage for a 12V battery should be around 14 volts, you would be correct
>that if an emergency battery was installed, it would require a different
>scheme to keep it properly charged.
>
>Dave
IF an auxiliary battery is necessary (we don't put
"emergency" batteries in our airplanes because our
airplanes do not suffer electrical emergencies . . .
then check out figure 17-6 of . . .
http://209.134.106.21/articles/Rev9/ch17-9.pdf
If you needed a dozen batteries in your airplane,
you can install as many as necessary by simply adding
a battery, battery contactor, battery master switch
and a battery bus assigned to that battery's specific
tasks. Again, diodes have no role to play other than
to trap the spike from the contactor coil's collapsing
magnetic field . . . and this is most aimed at saving
the switch that controls the contactor . . .
With the rising interest in removing things that suck
from modern airplanes, the lightweight vacuum pump pad
alternators all but eliminates the need for a second
battery in 95+ percent of all the amateur built airplanes
under construction.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ed Perry" <eperry(at)san.rr.com> |
I just had to tell somebody......and I knew you all would appreciate it.
I turned on my Master Switch today at 5:20pm and on came all the lights.
It was too cool for words. My wife didn't seem to appreciate it as much
as I thought she would. Oh well...I guess she waiting for me to start
the engine to get real excited. Thanks to Bob and all who helped with
my questions I'm sure there will be more.
Ed Perry
eperry(at)san.rr.com
RV-8QB 180hp/CS
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BAKEROCB(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | location of audio jacks |
In a message dated 12/31/2001 2:52:56 AM Eastern Standard Time, Michel
Therrien writes:
<<....skip..... I moved the phone jacks from under the panel after I
realized that I will likely destroy either the jacks
or the plug with my legs......skip......>>
12/31/01
Hello Michel, I've got around 5,000 hours in dozens of different kinds of
airplanes and I've come to the conclusion that there is no good place to put
the phone jacks. Just some places that are less bad than the others.
After much deliberation over several years I think I've arrived at the least
bad place(s), at least for my particular airplane.
The pilots jacks are located behind the co pilot's seat where the pilot can
reach across and plug / unplug as needed. The co pilot's jacks are located
behind the pilot's seat where the co pilot can reach across and plug / unplug
as needed.
Excess cord dangles down into the baggage area or lies on the baggage
compartment cover lid instead of gathering in your lap. No cord stringing
across your chest. No way for the knees to bang on them getting in or out.
Plugs can be easily reached even after strapping in. Arrange the plugs so
that they don't get abused by passing baggage over them or plug and unplug as
needed to avoid baggage abuse.
Disadvantage: You do have to get the audio wires from back of the seats to
the instrument panel. Mine go up a central tunnel to under the seats so the
push to talk buttons on top of the control sticks can be connected and then
on forward to the instrument panel.
Give it some thought.
'OC' Baker, Builder of KIS TR-1 #116 4/14/97 - ?/?/?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Boyd C. Braem" <bcbraem(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Re: DG replacement |
Another "soft" IFR flyer.
Sorry, guys, but this is one of my pet peeves--worse even than getting
Paul and Victoria's travelogue updates--including their buzzing of P
O'Night field in Tampa on their last trip--real good PR for RV fliers, everywhere.
If you file and open an IFR flight plan, even for just a quick "pop"
thru the clouds, you are consenting to be ordered around by ATC. If ATC
tells you to hold altitude halfway thru your pop-up and then tells you
to turn to xxx heading and stay in the soup, you could well see ice sart
to build up. Are you going to call ATC and say "can't comply"--"I'm not
really very good at flying IFR"? I expect you'll be getting a call or
letter from your FSDO.
There is no hard or soft IFR--there is just IFR--if you file be prepared
to fly it.
Boyd
Our Navy squadron taught "advanced" instrument training to newbies--one
of them died in a "death spiral" in a CAVU night flight over the
Caribbean with three different people telling him to "fly your
instruments". We figured that he fixated on the light of a tanker just
below the horizon, thinking it was a star........
Tom Brusehaver wrote:
>
>
> > Also, If some of the coming $1000 electronic Artificial Horizon units turn
> > out well, you don't need a vacuum pump anymore, making this price
> > competitive with the vacuum instruments. (I am assuming an essential bus
> > arrangement or even a separate battery back up for it.)
>
> After I got back from Osh this year, and agonizing
> about $1500ea for electric gyros, I came to the
> conclusion that vacuum gyro's will make me legal
> and be nice backups to Icarus and other electronic
> instruments, and still be cheaper than the $3K+.
>
> I can imagine an iPaq velcro'd over the vacuum instruments
> for most flight. Lest anyone worry, I also plan not
> to fly hard IFR, in my single engine airplane. A quick
> pop through a cloud layer, or broken layer is all I
> plan on flying.
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Besing" <azpilot(at)extremezone.com> |
| Subject: | Re: location of audio jacks |
I did the same thing, with the exception of crossing the sides. Wish I would
have thought of that. I do very much like the wires in the back. I've
received many compliments on it. I will probably build a hanger of some
sort to hang the headsets on in the baggage compartment so you don't have to
move them out of the way when getting in or out of the airplane.
Paul Besing
RV-6A N197AB Arizona
http://www.lacodeworks.com/besing
Flying
Kitlog Pro Builder's Log Software
http://www.kitlog.com
----- Original Message -----
From: <BAKEROCB(at)aol.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: location of audio jacks
>
> In a message dated 12/31/2001 2:52:56 AM Eastern Standard Time, Michel
> Therrien writes:
>
> <<....skip..... I moved the phone jacks from under the panel after I
> realized that I will likely destroy either the jacks
> or the plug with my legs......skip......>>
>
> 12/31/01
>
> Hello Michel, I've got around 5,000 hours in dozens of different kinds of
> airplanes and I've come to the conclusion that there is no good place to
put
> the phone jacks. Just some places that are less bad than the others.
>
> After much deliberation over several years I think I've arrived at the
least
> bad place(s), at least for my particular airplane.
>
> The pilots jacks are located behind the co pilot's seat where the pilot
can
> reach across and plug / unplug as needed. The co pilot's jacks are located
> behind the pilot's seat where the co pilot can reach across and plug /
unplug
> as needed.
>
> Excess cord dangles down into the baggage area or lies on the baggage
> compartment cover lid instead of gathering in your lap. No cord stringing
> across your chest. No way for the knees to bang on them getting in or out.
> Plugs can be easily reached even after strapping in. Arrange the plugs so
> that they don't get abused by passing baggage over them or plug and unplug
as
> needed to avoid baggage abuse.
>
> Disadvantage: You do have to get the audio wires from back of the seats to
> the instrument panel. Mine go up a central tunnel to under the seats so
the
> push to talk buttons on top of the control sticks can be connected and
then
> on forward to the instrument panel.
>
> Give it some thought.
>
> 'OC' Baker, Builder of KIS TR-1 #116 4/14/97 - ?/?/?
>
>
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Peter Eedy" <pecch(at)ozemail.com.au> |
| Subject: | Re: Missing Pages from Revision 10 books |
Hi Bob
All the best for 2002 from "Downunder".
I've just updated your book and a wonderfully informative manual it is,
particularly to those of us far from any homebuilding scene.
Is the "List of Effective Pages dated 11/01" is the current one ?
I'm happy to download any further updates so don't bother posting them to
Australia, just email me and I'll get them.
Thanks again.
Peter Eedy
pecch(at)ozemail.com.au
Griffith. NSW. Australia.
61 02 6961 9884 WK
61 02 6963 0566 HM
0418 490150 MOB
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Missing Pages from Revision 10 books
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Dual battery - batery master switches. Oh.... and switches |
TWO topics:
TOPIC ONE: dual battery switches
I just re-read Bob's book chapter 17. I will say that
now, following the discussions on this list, I
understand it better.
Still, I need more clarification in one area. I am
interested in a dual-battery, single alternator
installation.
The primary battery bus would feed my ignition 1 and
fuel pump 1. The aux battery bus would feed ign 2 and
fuel pump 2. That's OK... I think.
My problem is with the switches.
To control the electrical system, as per Figure Z-2 of
Rev 9, I would have:
- a battery/alt master switch
- an aux battery master switch
- an alt feed to e-bus switch
Should I forget to turn the aux-battery master on, I
would probably not notice it and that battery would
not get charged... is this right?
As well, it appears that the aux-battery will powerup
the entire electrical system if its switch is closed
even with the battery/alt master switch off.
Can these controls be simplified? Can we couple the
e-bus feed with the aux-battery contactor for example?
My assumption here is that if we need alternate e-bus
feed, we probably opened the primary battery contactor
already and the aux battery contactor could open with
the closure of the e-bus feed... is this logical?
TOPIC TWO: Switches
While I can appreciate that the quality of switches
vary considerably, I am wondering about the relevance
of that variation. I explain:
Earlier this year.... euh... I mean, last year, I
bought cheap (3$) 12V, 16AMP illuminated switches at
Canadian Tire and then, an electronic surplus store.
I wanted to test one of them, but I ended up doing a
very heavy test.
I used my cave diving light battery as a power source
for the switch (it is 12V, 14AH). What I wanted to
see was the luminescence of the switch when powered
on. I connected the wire wrong and ended up testing
the battery in a totally shorted situation (many many
AMPs).
I did not have a fuse on my battery lead and what
happened when I opened the circuit (I thought), was
that I shorted the two poles around the light circuit.
I heard a bizzare sound, smelled smoke and saw my
gauge 16 wire melting. Not thinking much longer, I
pulled the wire off while it was red (OUCH!!) and
then, treated myself for some burns.
After all the emotion passed, I rechecked the switch.
It is perfect! There is not a trace that it had been
abused. The feeding wires are gone, but the switch is
intact.
Is there any reason for me to believe that these
switches are not good enough?
Thanks!
Michel
PS: Thanks to all who helped me with my panel
planning. I am a very with the result. (and I'll
recheck for the phone jacks).
=====
----------------------------
Michel Therrien CH601-HD
http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby
http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601
Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
http://greetings.yahoo.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Peter Eedy" <pecch(at)ozemail.com.au> |
| Subject: | Re: Missing Pages from Revision 10 books |
Oopps
That was supposed to be an email sorry all.
Peter Eedy
pecch(at)ozemail.com.au
Griffith. NSW. Australia.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Gary K" <flyink(at)efortress.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Dual battery - batery master switches. Oh.... and |
switches
I simplified mine by not having any aux switches. A diode connects the aux
bat to the main bus and the aux bat goes to the aux bus for fuel pump 2 and
ignition 2. They each have their own switch. It seems pretty simple, not
sure if there is anything wrong with it. The bad thing is that if you leave
the backup pump or ignition on it will drain the aux battery, but it's no
different than leaving a master switch on. I plan on using a shutdown
checklist and catching any problems in the next preflight so it doesn't seem
like a bad setup. I guess if I start loading the aux bus with other stuff
then it gets worse.
Gary K.
>
> Still, I need more clarification in one area. I am
> interested in a dual-battery, single alternator
> installation.
>
> The primary battery bus would feed my ignition 1 and
> fuel pump 1. The aux battery bus would feed ign 2 and
> fuel pump 2. That's OK... I think.
>
> My problem is with the switches.
>
> To control the electrical system, as per Figure Z-2 of
> Rev 9, I would have:
>
> - a battery/alt master switch
> - an aux battery master switch
> - an alt feed to e-bus switch
>
> Should I forget to turn the aux-battery master on, I
> would probably not notice it and that battery would
> not get charged... is this right?
>
> As well, it appears that the aux-battery will powerup
> the entire electrical system if its switch is closed
> even with the battery/alt master switch off.
>
> Can these controls be simplified? Can we couple the
> e-bus feed with the aux-battery contactor for example?
> My assumption here is that if we need alternate e-bus
> feed, we probably opened the primary battery contactor
> already and the aux battery contactor could open with
> the closure of the e-bus feed... is this logical?
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ronnie Brown" <romott(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Aircraft Heading |
The website is actually at www.ritchienavigation.com and the remote magnetic compass is at
http://www.ritchienavigation.com/mseries.htm
----- Original Message -----
From: <LRE2(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Aircraft Heading
|
| With all the discussion about DG alternatives, I suprised that no one has
| mentioned the remote "Flux Gate" computer calibrated vertical compasses, such
| as the one available from Ritchie for <$200. electrically driven, no
| precession. Available in 2" panel mount. www.ritchie.com. LRE
|
| Larry Eidemiller
| Firewall Forward
| FEW P51 Mustang
|
|
|
|
|
|
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Dual battery - batery master switches. Oh.... and |
switches
I reflected on this a little bit more after I wrote my
initial message.
--- Gary K wrote:
>A
> diode connects the aux
> bat to the main bus
But how do you get the aux bat charged? for it to have
a full charge, it must exposed to the 13.8v of the
alternator.
What I am wondering now, is if both battery contactors
should always be in sync. For what purpose would I
keep the aux battery contactor closed while the main
battery contactor would be open?
What I'm trying to achieve is a fairly fool proof
system that remains simple. So, I could imagine
operating in two environments:
- fully functional: battery contactors closed, e-bus
alternate feed open.
- electrical failure: battery contactors open, e-bus
alternate feed closed.
This would all operate from a single dpdt switch on
the panel.
The downside would be a reduction of flexibility:
ignition 1 could not be powered by battery 2 in the
"failure mode"... but how far do we need to go?
On the other hand, I believe we could wire the e-bus
so it feeds from any of the two batteries. A switch
could select a feed from either Battery 1 or Battery
2. There would be no "off" position with this switch
as the activation would be made with the "failure
mode" switch.
How would that be?
Michel
=====
----------------------------
Michel Therrien CH601-HD
http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby
http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601
Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
http://greetings.yahoo.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Missing Pages from Revision 10 books |
>
>Hi Bob
>
>All the best for 2002 from "Downunder".
>
>I've just updated your book and a wonderfully informative manual it is,
>particularly to those of us far from any homebuilding scene.
Thank you for the kind words . . .
>Is the "List of Effective Pages dated 11/01" is the current one ?
The list has an error that has been corrected
on the downloadable copy which you can retrieve
at:
http://209.134.106.21/articles/Rev10/cover.pdf
>I'm happy to download any further updates so don't bother posting them to
>Australia, just email me and I'll get them.
>
>Thanks again.
>
>Peter Eedy
Bob . . .
////
(o o)
===========o00o=(_)=o00o=========
< Go ahead, make my day . . . >
< show me where I'm wrong. >
=================================
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Dual battery - batery master switches. Oh.... and |
switches
>
>
>TWO topics:
>
>TOPIC ONE: dual battery switches
>
>I just re-read Bob's book chapter 17. I will say that
>now, following the discussions on this list, I
>understand it better.
>
>Still, I need more clarification in one area. I am
>interested in a dual-battery, single alternator
>installation.
>
>The primary battery bus would feed my ignition 1 and
>fuel pump 1. The aux battery bus would feed ign 2 and
>fuel pump 2. That's OK... I think.
>
>My problem is with the switches.
>
>To control the electrical system, as per Figure Z-2 of
>Rev 9, I would have:
>
>- a battery/alt master switch
>- an aux battery master switch
>- an alt feed to e-bus switch
>
>Should I forget to turn the aux-battery master on, I
>would probably not notice it and that battery would
>not get charged... is this right?
Right
>As well, it appears that the aux-battery will powerup
>the entire electrical system if its switch is closed
>even with the battery/alt master switch off.
Right
>Can these controls be simplified? Can we couple the
>e-bus feed with the aux-battery contactor for example?
>My assumption here is that if we need alternate e-bus
>feed, we probably opened the primary battery contactor
>already and the aux battery contactor could open with
>the closure of the e-bus feed... is this logical?
You COULD have both contactors close when the
DC power master is ON and run the aux battery
contactor through another set of contacts on the
e-bus alternate feed switch to open the aux battery
contactor when the e-bus is ON . . . but this
gives you a single point of failure for both contactors -
the wiring common to both through the DC power
master.
>TOPIC TWO: Switches
>
>While I can appreciate that the quality of switches
>vary considerably, I am wondering about the relevance
>of that variation. I explain:
>
>Earlier this year.... euh... I mean, last year, I
>bought cheap (3$) 12V, 16AMP illuminated switches at
>Canadian Tire and then, an electronic surplus store.
>I wanted to test one of them, but I ended up doing a
>very heavy test.
>
>I used my cave diving light battery as a power source
>for the switch (it is 12V, 14AH). What I wanted to
>see was the luminescence of the switch when powered
>on. I connected the wire wrong and ended up testing
>the battery in a totally shorted situation (many many
>AMPs).
>
>I did not have a fuse on my battery lead and what
>happened when I opened the circuit (I thought), was
>that I shorted the two poles around the light circuit.
> I heard a bizzare sound, smelled smoke and saw my
>gauge 16 wire melting. Not thinking much longer, I
>pulled the wire off while it was red (OUCH!!) and
>then, treated myself for some burns.
>
>After all the emotion passed, I rechecked the switch.
>It is perfect! There is not a trace that it had been
>abused. The feeding wires are gone, but the switch is
>intact.
>
>Is there any reason for me to believe that these
>switches are not good enough?
See http://209.134.106.21/articles/swtchrat.pdf
Know that most switches fail in airplanes from effects
of aging. Some plastics get brittle, contacts corrode,
springs rust and/or break, rivets get loose . . .
The switches you cite may serve your purposes well. I
suggest this not based upon the results of any bench
tests you might have observed . . . ALL the switches
used on airplanes are tested in one form or another
but this does not PREVENT failures at some point in the
future . . . it's only a predictor of longevity.
The switches you've cited . . . are they available
in double pole versions. How do you plan to handle
alternator and battery contactor functions? Separate
switches? There are good reasons for not doing this.
Irrespective of the kind of switches you use, the
systems we're building SHOULD be tolerant of the
failure of any one switch. When your first switch
failure occurs, you should decide (1) if the service life
was satisfactory for your purposes and/or (2) whether
or not a total change out of the switches with the
same or another type is warranted.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Dual battery - batery master switches. Oh.... |
and switches
Wow! Thank you very much for "working" on new year's
holiday!
See below:
> You COULD have both contactors close when the
> DC power master is ON and run the aux battery
> contactor through another set of contacts on the
> e-bus alternate feed switch to open the aux
> battery
> contactor when the e-bus is ON . . . but this
> gives you a single point of failure for both
> contactors -
> the wiring common to both through the DC power
> master.
I could make the wiring to to the two contactors
separate, so the only single point of failure would be
the switch itself. I recognize the fact that it might
fail, but if I follow your recommendation of putting
what keeps the engine alive on the battery busses,
then, such failure would not be catastrophic. And I
think it would be a very bad bad day if I notice a
switch failure the same day I have another problem.
The switch failures I've seen in the past started with
either intermitent problems (we have to flick it a
couple of times before it does what we need it to do),
or with bad contacts (we can hear the sparks of the
contacts). Both these situations can be prevented by
changing the switches at the first symptoms. After
all, they are cheap, and with your fast-on connectors,
easy to change.
So, I'm pretty confident that the single point of
failure at the switch is a better compromise than the
one of complexity. (but of course, I'm not an expert
and I could easilly be convinced otherwise).
An alternative could be two switches with a bridge
forcing simultaneous operation... does this exist?
=====
----------------------------
Michel Therrien CH601-HD
http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby
http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601
Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
http://greetings.yahoo.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Tom Brusehaver <cozytom(at)mn.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: DG replacement |
> If you file and open an IFR flight plan, even for just a quick "pop"
> thru the clouds, you are consenting to be ordered around by ATC. If ATC
> tells you to hold altitude halfway thru your pop-up and then tells you
> to turn to xxx heading and stay in the soup, you could well see ice sart
> to build up. Are you going to call ATC and say "can't comply"--"I'm not
> really very good at flying IFR"? I expect you'll be getting a call or
> letter from your FSDO.
>
> There is no hard or soft IFR--there is just IFR--if you file be prepared
> to fly it.
I agree 100%, and do plan on maintaining currency, and
skills, both with instructors, and simulated IFR.
I don't plan on taking my single engine airplane into
an 800ft overcast for 3 long hours over rugged terrain.
I don't plan on launching into known ice, through overcast
at night.
If the situation were to dictate possible icing, known
or otherwise, I would postpone the trip. If the situation
were to threaten t-storms, I would take another route
or postpone the trip.
If enroute I encounter low ceilings, ice, extreem
turbulence, or other unforcast conditions then I deal with
it, and make the best descision. Maybe I end up in the
soup for 2 hours, if I train for it, it should be a
non-event. If the airplane has trouble, then I'll
deal with it.
Yes there is only IFR, hard IFR is usually planned, or very
unplanned. Training is the key to insuring you don't
exceed your abilities.
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: DG replacement |
Boyd C. Braem wrote:
>
> If you file and open an IFR flight plan, even for just a quick "pop"
> thru the clouds, you are consenting to be ordered around by ATC. If ATC
> tells you to hold altitude halfway thru your pop-up and then tells you
> to turn to xxx heading and stay in the soup,
*** I'm in my Instrument training. A few days ago, ATC vectored me ( &
my CFII, natch ) all over the California Central Valley, exactly at the top
of the soup. My Sundowner never seemed so fast :).
you could well see ice sart
> to build up. Are you going to call ATC and say "can't comply"--"I'm not
> really very good at flying IFR"?
*** If you start to see ice build up, you have more to advise ATC of
than your own IFR abilities. You may shortly be declaring an emergency.
- Jerry Kaidor ( jerry(at)tr2.com )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ned Thomas" <nthomas(at)mmcable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: New pricing on 760VHF Transceiver & Xpndr Availability |
Bob,
How can I get in line to order the package?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: New pricing on 760VHF Transceiver & Xpndr
Availability
>
> >
> >Bob,
> >
> >I am interested in the T2000SFL. Will the T2000SFL require an encoder?
If
> >so do you recommend any encoders to go with the T2000SFL?
>
>
> We're probably going to offer the Ameri-King AK-350 solid
> state encoder bundled with the T2000SFL and wired into
> our harness for $180 more.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
> ////
> (o o)
> ===========o00o=(_)=o00o=========
> < Go ahead, make my day . . . >
> < show me where I'm wrong. >
> =================================
>
>
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | edlindee(at)olypen.com |
Congratulations!!!
It is great to see news like that to give the listers a boost
towards completion.
>
> I just had to tell somebody......and I knew you all would
appreciate it.
> I turned on my Master Switch today at 5:20pm and on came all the
lights.
> It was too cool for words. My wife didn't seem to appreciate it as
much
> as I thought she would. Oh well...I guess she waiting for me to
start
> the engine to get real excited. Thanks to Bob and all who helped
with
> my questions I'm sure there will be more.
>
>
> Ed Perry
> eperry(at)san.rr.com
>
> RV-8QB 180hp/CS
>
>
> _-
=====================================================================
==
> _-
=====================================================================
==
messages.
> _-
=====================================================================
==
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
> _-
=====================================================================
==
>
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------
This message was sent using OlyPen's WebMail.
http://www.olypen.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Brian & Debi Shannon" <wings(at)theshannons.net> |
| Subject: | Ammeter/Voltmeter |
Bob or anyone else...
I've been looking at the B&C ammeter/voltmeter and like the looks of
it....question is I also am planning on installing a VM-1000...Any ideas out
there whether or not this is just redundancy or is there a reason to have
the "manual" ie. non-electronic ammeter/nvoltmeter as well? Thanks for any
comments,
Brian
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stephen J. Soule" <SSoule(at)pfclaw.com> |
| Subject: | Ammeter/Voltmeter |
How would one connect this combined ammeter/voltmeter to the Z-1 schematic
from the Aeroelectric Connection?
Steve Soule
Huntington, Vermont
-----Original Message-----
Bob or anyone else...
I've been looking at the B&C ammeter/voltmeter and like the looks of
it....question is I also am planning on installing a VM-1000...Any ideas out
there whether or not this is just redundancy or is there a reason to have
the "manual" ie. non-electronic ammeter/nvoltmeter as well? Thanks for any
comments,
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Ammeter/Voltmeter |
>
>Bob or anyone else...
>
>I've been looking at the B&C ammeter/voltmeter and like the looks of
>it....question is I also am planning on installing a VM-1000...Any ideas out
>there whether or not this is just redundancy or is there a reason to have
>the "manual" ie. non-electronic ammeter/nvoltmeter as well? Thanks for any
>comments,
>
>
>Brian
If I recall correctly, the VM1000 has an audible warning
of low voltage in addition to an accurate display of
bus voltage and your choice of one current via a hall effect
sensor.
This is sufficient to cover all the features of the VLM-14
voltmeter/loadmeter. I'd use the hall effect sensor to display
alternator load amperes. If you install two alternators, run
BOTH alternator output leads through the same sensor. Run the
VM-1000 from the essential bus.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Nicholas Knobil" <nknobil(at)gwi.net> |
| Subject: | Alternator Fuse vs. Limiter |
Bob,
I purchased the 80AK JSS type fuse for the wire between my 40A B&C
Alternator and the Starter Contactor back in October.
I see from the latest edition of the 'Connection that you've changed this to
a 60A Limiter, although the part number on the website still seems to be
80AK.
Would you comment on the differences between the two critters, and if it
would be worth the effort and cost to replace the old technology with the
new?
Regards,
Nick Knobil
Bowdoinham, Maine
RV-8 N80549
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Brian & Debi Shannon" <wings(at)theshannons.net> |
| Subject: | RE: AeroElectric-List Digest: 3 Msgs - 01/02/02 |
BoB or anyone!
Hi, Not being an electrical guru, I have a question as to what the
differences are between these two NAV/GS diplexers, ie which one is better?
Can anyone help or does anyone have experience with either of them?
Aeroelectric carries the RAMI (slightly more expensive) and ACS carries the
COMANT... Thanks,
Brian
COMANT CI 507 DIPLEXER VOR / GLIDE SLOPE
Electrical
Frequency 108 to 118 MHz 329 to 335 MHz
VSWR 1.5:1 Maximum
Insertion Loss 0.5 dB Maximum
Isolation 20 dB Minimum
Impedance 50 Ohms
Power RF NA
Mechanical
Weight 0.20 lb.
Height 0.88 in
Material Aluminum die cast
Finish Aluminum
Federal Specifications
RTCA NA
FAA TSO C34c, C36c, C40a
RAMI AV-570 Diplexer Specifications:
Application: Nav. & Glideslope
Frequency: 108-118 & 329-333 MHz
Filtering: 30dB Min/ 40dB Avg.
Impedance: 50 Ohms
Insertion loss: 1 dB Max
Isolation: 38 dB Min.
Connector: (3)Type BNC females
Weight: 3.5 oz
RF power capability: Receive only
Dimensions: 2"x1-3/4"x1-1/8"
TSO C34e,C36e,C40c, DO-160c
Enc.Cat. D2-BC SxxxxFxxxxxxxxxxx
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fergus Kyle" <VE3LVO(at)rac.ca> |
I'm surprised that RAMI doesn't give the standing wave ratio figure, and
COMANT hasn't acceded to TO160, but otherwise both seem about the same. I'd
go RAMI personally.
Ferg
A064
> Brian
>
>
> COMANT CI 507 DIPLEXER VOR / GLIDE SLOPE
> Electrical
> Frequency 108 to 118 MHz 329 to 335 MHz
> VSWR 1.5:1 Maximum
> Insertion Loss 0.5 dB Maximum
> Isolation 20 dB Minimum
> Impedance 50 Ohms
> Power RF NA
> Mechanical
> Weight 0.20 lb.
> Height 0.88 in
> Material Aluminum die cast
> Finish Aluminum
> Federal Specifications
> RTCA NA
> FAA TSO C34c, C36c, C40a
>
>
> RAMI AV-570 Diplexer Specifications:
>
> Application: Nav. & Glideslope
> Frequency: 108-118 & 329-333 MHz
> Filtering: 30dB Min/ 40dB Avg.
> Impedance: 50 Ohms
> Insertion loss: 1 dB Max
> Isolation: 38 dB Min.
> Connector: (3)Type BNC females
> Weight: 3.5 oz
> RF power capability: Receive only
> Dimensions: 2"x1-3/4"x1-1/8"
> TSO C34e,C36e,C40c, DO-160c
> Enc.Cat. D2-BC SxxxxFxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternator Fuse vs. Limiter |
>
>
>Bob,
>
>I purchased the 80AK JSS type fuse for the wire between my 40A B&C
>Alternator and the Starter Contactor back in October.
>
>I see from the latest edition of the 'Connection that you've changed this to
>a 60A Limiter, although the part number on the website still seems to be
>80AK.
>
>Would you comment on the differences between the two critters, and if it
>would be worth the effort and cost to replace the old technology with the
>new?
>
>Regards,
>
>Nick Knobil
>Bowdoinham, Maine
>RV-8 N80549
Both are very OLD technologies. I chose the fuse alternative
early on because I didn't have sources for low-cost limiters
and bases . . . further, the fuse was easier to install and
a bit more compact.
EITHER technology will provide the needed performance
characteristics. When B&C began using the limiters and bases
for their STC'd alternator kits, it made sense to move
to that technology for AEC customers as well. The combined
purchase volumes for both venues made the mechanically
more robust product more attractive.
////
(o o)
===========o00o=(_)=o00o=========
< Go ahead, make my day . . . >
< show me where I'm wrong. >
=================================
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BAKEROCB(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | VM1000 INSTALLATION |
In a message dated 01/03/2002 2:52:35 AM Eastern Standard Time, Brian
writes:
<< Bob or anyone else... I've been looking at the B&C ammeter/voltmeter and
like the looks of it....question is I also am planning on installing a
VM-1000...Any ideas out
there whether or not this is just redundancy or is there a reason to have
the "manual" ie. non-electronic ammeter/nvoltmeter as well? Thanks for any
comments, Brian >>
1/4/2002
Hello Brian, Thank you for raising this subject. I would like to see some
further dialogue on the VM1000. I'm not sure that this is the precisely
correct venue, but it will provide a start.
I have installed a VM1000, and a VMS fuel quantity system in my KIS TR-1
still under construction. So it might be a little late to help me, but maybe
some tidbits might fall out that will benefit you and others.
My thoughts are not structured so I'll just be putting them out as a number
of individual items.
1) To first answer your question about an additional voltmeter and ammeter
being needed. I don't think so, but let me caveat a bit. I have a B&C LR-3
voltage regulator installed with their low voltage warning light on the
instrument panel so in addition to any analog and digital reading and
flashing on the VM1000 I will get the B&C warning light indication.
2) No audio warnings come from the VM1000. You will have to add the EC 100 to
get any audio warnings.
3) The VMS people from Lance Turk on down have been absolutely superb to deal
with. I could not ask for better support.
4) I feel that there are some "gotchas" with the system. I don't know the
best way to steer you around them, but let me raise them as individual items:
4A) You must find a space / location to mount the DPU. About the size of a
cigar box. You must have reasonable access to the DPU after installation and
of course a lot of wiring goes to and from the DPU. Should be aft of the
firewall.
4B) The fuel quantity system requires an IO Board. This is just a naked PCB
(printed circuit board) and you must devise some way to mount it / contain it
/ protect it.
4C) The alternator current out transducer is also just a naked PCB with a
hole in the middle that you feed the fat wire from the alternator through (in
the proper direction the first time hopefully and before you crimp the big
terminals on). Since both the alternator and the starter contactor are
probably forward of the firewall you'll want to run the fat wire from the
alternator to the input side of the starter contactor without penetrating the
firewall. This means the preferred location for the alternator current out
transducer is forward of the firewall. But VMS says the transducer is
preferably mounted in the cabin area and that if this is not possible the
transducer should be protected from high heat sources and possible fluid
contamination. I found this protection impossible to provide. I guess if the
transducer ever quits working I'll either decide to live without it or buy
another transducer, make up a new fat wire, and press on.
4D) Wiring up the two D sub connectors that go into the DPU is not a trivial
exercise. Unless you are pretty skilled with the soldering iron I recommend
some specific technique practice before you tackle that job.
4E) VMS gives you a roll of very high quality four wire shielded cable to
connect the DPU P1 engine transducers, but not all of the transducers require
all four wires. If I had it to do over I would buy some two and three wire
shielded cable and use those for the transducers that only require two or
three wires. Would be easier to wire and be a bit less weight.
4F) If you are going to use a fuel flow transducer it can be a bitch to
locate. Since I don't know the type of engine or fuel system (or airplane)
that you are building I can't be more specific now, but am prepared to
discuss.
5) Your oil pressure and fuel pressure transducers should be mounted on the
engine mount, not the engine, with short flexible firesleeved hoses going
from the ports on the engine to the transducers. Soldering wires to the
connectors on the back of these two transducers is also tricky.
6) In a more conventional engine instrumentation system you have three
elements: the transducer, the instrument, and the connecting wire(s). If
something is not working your trouble shooting is relatively straight
forward. But in the VMS system you have the DPU in the wiring between the
transducer and the instrument. If something is not working and you suspect it
is the DPU you must pull it out and send it to VMS for testing. If they say
it ground checks OK then what?
7) I have the VMS chronometer. It must be connected to the DPU with the same
ribbon cable that connects the VM1000 display and any other VMS instruments.
I think that if I had it to do over again I'd look long and hard at one of
the other availabe electronic chronometers. Maybe one with some temperature
and electrical indications.
8) I have the VMS air temperature system and I don't know why. I feel that
OAT is not very significant for the airplane that I am building and the
flight spectrum that I'll be flying in. Since I have a fuel injected engine
the CAT indication is supefluous. What I am doing is installing the CAT
transducer in the engine baffling as sort of an overheat / firewarning
device. The digital reading goes up to 99 degrees C so maybe that will be of
some use / value to me. Location of the OAT transducer is also problematical.
We have a local RV-6A builder who is very precise (fussy?) in his ways. He
felt that he had to move his OAT transducer out near a wing tip to get
accurate OAT.
9) My original plan was to install the VMS EPI 800 system, but just about the
time I was making my decision I was flying a Beechcraft that had one of the
all cylinder graphic CHT -EGT indicators. We were having some EGT problems
that eventually turned out to be a cracked exhaust manifold so in that blush
of enthusiasm I went for the VM1000. If I had it to do over again I'd take
another hard look at the EPI 800.
Well Brian I hope I haven't introduced too many doubts in your mind. (A major
contributor to delay in my project is indecision). But I know that I would
have benefited from some informal input regarding the VMS hardware before I
made my choices and I hope that this and subsequent discussions may be
helpful to you and other builders. Please let me know if I can answer any
specific questions.
'OC' Baker, Builder of KIS TR-1 #116 4/14/97 - ?/?/?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "dave ford" <dford(at)michweb.net> |
Bob,
For the 40 amp alternator is the 80 amp fuse the right size to use or
should I look for a 60 amp?
Dave Ford
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Brian & Debi Shannon" <wings(at)theshannons.net> |
| Subject: | RE: AeroElectric-List Digest: 3 Msgs - 01/04/02 |
'OC'
Thanks for the great inputs! I too would like some more discussion on the
VM-1000 as the documentation available is pretty limited! See below for
specific comments/answers:
> >
> >Hello Brian, Thank you for raising this subject. I would like to
> >see some
> >further dialogue on the VM1000. I'm not sure that this is the precisely
> >correct venue, but it will provide a start.
> >
> >I have installed a VM1000, and a VMS fuel quantity system in my KIS TR-1
> >still under construction. So it might be a little late to help
> >me, but maybe
> >some tidbits might fall out that will benefit you and others.
> >
> >My thoughts are not structured so I'll just be putting them out
> >as a number
> >of individual items.
> >
> >1) To first answer your question about an additional voltmeter
> >and ammeter
> >being needed. I don't think so, but let me caveat a bit. I have
> >a B&C LR-3
> >voltage regulator installed with their low voltage warning light on the
> >instrument panel so in addition to any analog and digital reading and
> >flashing on the VM1000 I will get the B&C warning light indication.
> >
I too have the LR-3 so this should be sufficient...although I wanted to use
my own annunciator (I thought powered by the VM-1000) w/ audio alerts as
well..
> >2) No audio warnings come from the VM1000. You will have to add
> >the EC 100 to
> >get any audio warnings.
Is this true? Can you verify this? How about external annunciator lights
other than the EC-100...Is this possible? Sounds like I might want to give
VMS a call...I checked their website and it doesn't have much info. I also
have an old VM-1000 manual, but it says nothing about having to have the
EC-100 to have audio alerts or external annunciators. Actually it gives the
wiring for the annunciators coming off of I/O Board J4 (pins 2-14)...I'm a
little confused about this...Perhaps they changed the architecture when they
introduced the EC-100???
> >
> >3) The VMS people from Lance Turk on down have been absolutely
> >superb to deal
> >with. I could not ask for better support.
> >
> >7) I have the VMS chronometer. It must be connected to the DPU
> >with the same
> >ribbon cable that connects the VM1000 display and any other VMS
> >instruments.
> >I think that if I had it to do over again I'd look long and hard
> >at one of
> >the other availabe electronic chronometers. Maybe one with some
> >temperature
> >and electrical indications.
I'm going with a Davtron M877...
curate OAT.
> >
> >9) My original plan was to install the VMS EPI 800 system, but
> >just about the
> >time I was making my decision I was flying a Beechcraft that had
> >one of the
> >all cylinder graphic CHT -EGT indicators. We were having some
> >EGT problems
> >that eventually turned out to be a cracked exhaust manifold so
> >in that blush
> >of enthusiasm I went for the VM1000. If I had it to do over
> >again I'd take
> >another hard look at the EPI 800.
What would the advantages be of the EPI 800 over the VM-1000. I was under
the impression that it still used a DPU, just that the presentation(ie
individual guages) was different.
> >
> >Well Brian I hope I haven't introduced too many doubts in your
> >mind. (A major
> >contributor to delay in my project is indecision). But I know
> >that I would
> >have benefited from some informal input regarding the VMS
> >hardware before I
> >made my choices and I hope that this and subsequent discussions may be
> >helpful to you and other builders. Please let me know if I can
> >answer any
> >specific questions.
> >
Thanks again for the post!
Brian
> >
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | D-sub Hi Density Pins? |
*** Hello,
Does anybody have a source for the high-density machined D-sub pins?
B&C only has the low-density ones....
Thanks,
- Jerry Kaidor ( jerry(at)tr2.com )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BAKEROCB(at)aol.com |
In a message dated 01/04/2002 10:07:18 PM Eastern Standard Time,
jandkstone(at)earthlink.net writes:
<< Great comments on the VM-1000. I am considering that unit and would like
to know what the EPI-800 is. Thanks, Jim HRII >>
1/5/2002
Hello Jim, The VMS EPI 800 system provides six separate liquid crystal 2 1/4
inch diameter engine instrumentation guages that have both analog and digital
readouts. They are:
1) RPM 2) Manifold Pressure 3) CHT & EGT for one cylinder (selectable) at a
time
4) Oil Pressure and Temperature 5) Fuel Pressure and Fuel Flow 6) Volts and
Amps.
The EPI 800 guages are sold separately so you don't have to purchase /
install all six, but you still need a DPU to feed the transducer information
to the guages. I would say that the main difference between the VM 1000 and
the EPI 800 is that you get a continuous graphic display of EGT and CHT for
all cylinders with the VM 1000 that is not available with the EPI 800. On the
other hand the Fuel Pressure, Oil Pressure, Volts, Fuel Flow, Oil
Temperature, and Amp dials within the VM 1000 display are smaller than those
same dials in the EPI 800 system.
I recommend that you contact VMS and get some of their literature / price
lists. The engine instrumentation decision for your plane is a fairly
$ignificant one and the more information that you have at hand before you
make that decision the better off you will be. Phone 360-714-8203. Web site
<>. Tell them I sent you.
Along the line of gathering information prior to a decision it would be nice
if VMS would sell their installation and operation manual to a prospective
buyer with a discount of that amount if the buyer eventually bought their
system. You might want to suggest that to them, I know it would have helped
me. One could even then take the DPU dimensions from the manual, make a
wooden block mockup and play around with where and how to mount it.
One other comment. It may very well be that a major reason that I got the VMS
engine instrumentation system is that I really admired their fuel quantity
system. In my opinion it is the finest capacitance system available. The
general state of fuel quantity systems in light aircraft (even amateur built
experimentals) borders on disgrace. I don't see why we should perpetuate that
situation in our own aircraft if we can avoid it.
Good luck,
'OC' Baker, Builder of KIS TR-1 #116 4/14/97 - ?/?/?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Jim Bean <jim-bean(at)att.net> |
| Subject: | Re: D-sub Hi Density Pins? |
I get them from Digikey. 800-344-4539. Catalog page 97 Series 109.
Jim Bean
jerry(at)tr2.com wrote:
>
>
> *** Hello,
>
> Does anybody have a source for the high-density machined D-sub pins?
> B&C only has the low-density ones....
> Thanks,
>
> - Jerry Kaidor ( jerry(at)tr2.com )
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom Barnes" <skytop(at)megsinet.net> |
| Subject: | Transceiver wiring - hi/lo |
Will someone please explain the hi/lo as it relates to interfacing a
radio transceiver (MicroAir 760) to an audio panel such as RST-564. The
radio documention mentions hi/lo pin outs but the audio panel doesn't.
Thanks in advance.
Tom Barnes -6 panel
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "iflych2" <iflych2(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Transceiver wiring - hi/lo |
The low is the ground wire.
R
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternator fuse |
>
>Bob,
>
>For the 40 amp alternator is the 80 amp fuse the right size to use or
>should I look for a 60 amp?
>
>Dave Ford
The JJS/JJN series fuses are very fast acting and were
deliberately oversized for alternator b-lead applications
to prevent nuisance tripping. An JJS/JJN-80 fuse is
fine for alternators from 35 to 60A.
Given low cost availability of the ANL series limiters
and in light of their VERY robust overcurrent carrying
behavior, you'll want to size the limiter closer to the
rated output of the alternator. ANL limiters are available
in a variety of sizes which you can check out by
downloading this data sheet.
http://www.bussmann.com/library/bifs/2024.pdf
Note these devices are designed to clear HARD faults
in the hundreds of amperes . . . exactly the type of
fault to be expected in the alternator b-lead circuit.
B&C stocks the ANL40 and ANL60 parts.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
Bob: I'm planning on using the B&C 40 Amp alternator. I notice that in
the B&C catalog it says that the 40 Amp ANL is appropriate for use with up to
a 40 Amp alternator. Is this correct, or should I use the 60 Amp ANL?
Harry Crosby
Pleasanton, California
RV-6, finish kit stuff
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: D-sub Hi Density Pins? |
Hi Jim,
Thanks for your answer! Unfortunately....
Jim Bean wrote:
>
>
> I get them from Digikey. 800-344-4539. Catalog page 97 Series 109.
> Jim Bean
>
*** That is alas the standard-density kind, AMP 205090-1. What I need is
the high-density kind, either
AMP 204370-2 or
Positronic M39029/58-360 or
ITT Cannon 030-2042-000 or
Military M39029/58-360
- Jerry
> jerry(at)tr2.com wrote:
> >
> >
> > *** Hello,
> >
> > Does anybody have a source for the high-density machined D-sub pins?
> > B&C only has the low-density ones....
> > Thanks,
> >
> > - Jerry Kaidor ( jerry(at)tr2.com )
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Swartzendruber" <dswartzendruber(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: D-sub Hi Density Pins? |
Newark has the Amp part number in stock for .64 ea.
David Swartzendruber
> What I need is
> the high-density kind, either
> AMP 204370-2 or
> Positronic M39029/58-360 or
> ITT Cannon 030-2042-000 or
> Military M39029/58-360
>
> - Jerry
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | " theslumlord" <theslumlord(at)mediaone.net> |
| Subject: | low vacuum light |
Has anyone made a "roll your own" low vacuum indicator light from an
automotive MAP sensor?
Ralph Bookout, Certified Slumlord
RV6 finishing
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: D-sub Hi Density Pins? |
David Swartzendruber wrote:
>
Excellent! Thank you David!
I just ordered them. Long live the Internet!
- Jerry
> Newark has the Amp part number in stock for .64 ea.
>
> David Swartzendruber
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Miles McCallum" <milesm(at)avnet.co.uk> |
| Subject: | Re: low vacuum light |
Planning to use one - an adjustable vacuum differential switch set to about
4"Hg - plenty to chose from, but best fit seems to be from Herga - i think
it's www.herga.com (or possibly.co.uk)
M
>
> Has anyone made a "roll your own" low vacuum indicator light from an
> automotive MAP sensor?
> Ralph Bookout, Certified Slumlord
> RV6 finishing
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson(at)usjet.net> |
| Subject: | Re: low vacuum light |
> Has anyone made a "roll your own" low vacuum indicator light from an
> automotive MAP sensor?
> Ralph Bookout, Certified Slumlord
> RV6 finishing
Ralph, I used a switch from Pres-Air-Trol, P/N VM11120A, I believe. I have
sent a picture of it to the Matronics photo share site,
http://www.matronics.com/photoshare/. It may take a day or two to post.
Alex Peterson
Maple Grove, MN
6A N66AP flying 73 hours
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ronnie Brown" <romott(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | Re: low vacuum light |
I found the Pres-Air-Trol, P/N VM11120A switch at
http://www.actionsparepair.com/pressure-switches.html
and more data at http://www.presair.com/presvac.htm
Velocity provides a similar switch for preventing gear retraction until the airspeed
is
greater than 80 kts.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom Barnes" <skytop(at)megsinet.net> |
| Subject: | low vacuum light |
Ralph,
I believe you can find the answer in the Feb 2001 issue of
Kitplanes where beginning on page 43, Jim Wier talks about building a
monitor for anything that has an electrical signal output.
Tom Barnes -6
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
theslumlord
Subject: AeroElectric-List: low vacuum light
Has anyone made a "roll your own" low vacuum indicator light from an
automotive MAP sensor?
Ralph Bookout, Certified Slumlord
RV6 finishing
=
=
=
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
=
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BAKEROCB(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: VMS Engine Instrumentation |
In a message dated 01/06/2002 2:52:16 AM Eastern Standard Time,
wings(at)theshannons.net writes:
< 'OC' Thanks for the great inputs! I too would like some more discussion on
the
VM-1000 as the documentation available is pretty limited! See below for
specific comments/answers:>
> >2) No audio warnings come from the VM1000. You will have to add
> >the EC 100 to get any audio warnings.
1/6/2002
Hello Brian, To the extent that I have the latest VMS intallation and
operation manual for the VM 1000 and EC-100 (5010012_.doc) and have read the
input and outputs for those equipments, that is true. There is no audio
output connection from the VM 1000. There is an audio output connection from
the EC-100.
I suppose it would be possible to create some external annunciator lights
from the just the VM 1000 output alone, but since the VM 1000 outputs come
from the ribbon cable leading from the DPU to the instruments you would have
to tap into the ribbon cable to obtain such an output. In my conversations
with the technical types at VMS they are very reluctant to see any
modifications of their equipment because of the very small and sensitive
electrical signals involved. Realize also that now they have TSO'd much of
their stuff and would resist modifications from that aspect.
The old manual that I have is 5010002G.DOC and the IO Board terminals are J3
(pins 7 through 12) and they deal strictly with fuel level inputs. No words
whatsoever about annunciators. You may have an even older manual. I think
that you are right to assume that things changed significantly when the
EC-100 was introduced (the IO Board and the EC-100 are not used at the same
time) and things have changed further when the new sub D connectors for the
DPU and IO Board were introduced.
You are right about the DPU still being needed. Advantages of the EPI 800
over the VM 1000 might be:
1) Cheaper because one would not have to buy instruments that were not needed
/ desired such as manifold pressure (fixed pitch prop), fuel flow & fuel
pressure (say for a high wing carbureted engine airplane), volts & amps ( say
if one already had a chronometer that provided volts and amps), CHT & EGT
(lots of airplanes don't have this info).
2) Bigger dials than on some dial portions of the VM 1000.
Disadvantages of the EPI 800 vs the VM 1000 might be:
1) VM 1000 has continuous graphic display of all cylinders EGT & CHT.
2) EPI 800 guages might be more difficult to install (more holes).
I think that you can see the choice between the two can be very subjective.
Case some what on point: The Eagle 150 uses some VMS EPI 800 guages, but a
non VMS fuel pressure guage. Why? Because (I was told) the manufacturer did
not want to pay for and put in a VMS guage that purported to show both fuel
pressure and fuel flow, but not have the fuel flow portion of the guage
working. I can understand their decision not to include fuel flow capability
in their engine instrumentation (fuel flow is pretty small in the TCM IO-240B
engine) and also envision some minimum equipment list implications if they
had the dual fuel pressure and fuel flow guage in the instrument panel but
the fuel flow never worked.
You are welcome. Also I wish that others with a lot more knowledge and
experience than I have with the VMS systems would contribute to this
discussion. Thanks.
'OC' Baker, Builder of KIS TR-1 #116 4/14/97 - ?/?/?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
>
>Bob: I'm planning on using the B&C 40 Amp alternator. I notice that in
>the B&C catalog it says that the 40 Amp ANL is appropriate for use with up to
>a 40 Amp alternator. Is this correct, or should I use the 60 Amp ANL?
40 is fine.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ned Thomas" <nthomas(at)mmcable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: VMS Engine Instrumentation |
----- Original Message -----
From: <BAKEROCB(at)aol.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: VMS Engine Instrumentation
>
> In a message dated 01/06/2002 2:52:16 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> wings(at)theshannons.net writes:
>
> < 'OC' Thanks for the great inputs! I too would like some more discussion
on
> the
> VM-1000 as the documentation available is pretty limited! See below for
> specific comments/answers:>
>
> > >2) No audio warnings come from the VM1000. You will have to add
> > >the EC 100 to get any audio warnings.
>
> other than the EC-100...Is this possible? Sounds like I might want to
give
> VMS a call...I checked their website and it doesn't have much info.>
>
> 1/6/2002
>
> Hello Brian, To the extent that I have the latest VMS intallation and
> operation manual for the VM 1000 and EC-100 (5010012_.doc) and have read
the
> input and outputs for those equipments, that is true. There is no audio
> output connection from the VM 1000. There is an audio output connection
from
> the EC-100.
>
> I suppose it would be possible to create some external annunciator lights
> from the just the VM 1000 output alone, but since the VM 1000 outputs come
> from the ribbon cable leading from the DPU to the instruments you would
have
> to tap into the ribbon cable to obtain such an output. In my conversations
> with the technical types at VMS they are very reluctant to see any
> modifications of their equipment because of the very small and sensitive
> electrical signals involved. Realize also that now they have TSO'd much of
> their stuff and would resist modifications from that aspect.
>
>
> The old manual that I have is 5010002G.DOC and the IO Board terminals are
J3
> (pins 7 through 12) and they deal strictly with fuel level inputs. No
words
> whatsoever about annunciators. You may have an even older manual. I think
> that you are right to assume that things changed significantly when the
> EC-100 was introduced (the IO Board and the EC-100 are not used at the
same
> time) and things have changed further when the new sub D connectors for
the
> DPU and IO Board were introduced.
>
> the impression that it still used a DPU, just that the presentation(ie
> individual guages) was different.>
>
> You are right about the DPU still being needed. Advantages of the EPI 800
> over the VM 1000 might be:
>
> 1) Cheaper because one would not have to buy instruments that were not
needed
> / desired such as manifold pressure (fixed pitch prop), fuel flow & fuel
> pressure (say for a high wing carbureted engine airplane), volts & amps
( say
> if one already had a chronometer that provided volts and amps), CHT & EGT
> (lots of airplanes don't have this info).
>
> 2) Bigger dials than on some dial portions of the VM 1000.
>
> Disadvantages of the EPI 800 vs the VM 1000 might be:
>
> 1) VM 1000 has continuous graphic display of all cylinders EGT & CHT.
>
> 2) EPI 800 guages might be more difficult to install (more holes).
>
> I think that you can see the choice between the two can be very
subjective.
> Case some what on point: The Eagle 150 uses some VMS EPI 800 guages, but a
> non VMS fuel pressure guage. Why? Because (I was told) the manufacturer
did
> not want to pay for and put in a VMS guage that purported to show both
fuel
> pressure and fuel flow, but not have the fuel flow portion of the guage
> working. I can understand their decision not to include fuel flow
capability
> in their engine instrumentation (fuel flow is pretty small in the TCM
IO-240B
> engine) and also envision some minimum equipment list implications if they
> had the dual fuel pressure and fuel flow guage in the instrument panel but
> the fuel flow never worked.
>
>
>
> You are welcome. Also I wish that others with a lot more knowledge and
> experience than I have with the VMS systems would contribute to this
> discussion. Thanks.
>
> 'OC' Baker, Builder of KIS TR-1 #116 4/14/97 - ?/?/?
>
>
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | N1deltawhiskey(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Dual battery switching and other questions |
Bob (and other listers),
I have been looking at your figure Z-2, dual battery arrangement, to be
applied to an all electronic ignition Subaru installation. Have been
wondering about the control of the batteries.
In your arrangement, you show one battery switch coupled to the alternator
field switch. The second battery has a second switch. I assume this is
because of the desire to control these individually.
Is there any reason why both contactors cannot (or more correctly, should
not) be connected to the same switch? If one wanted individual control, I
would install individual NC pull open switches in the usual CB location on
the panel rather than with the main switch grouping. These would be
installed in series with the master battery. Physically, this complicates
the system slightly, but operationally (weakest link theory applies here)
simplifies the arrangement giving the appearance of a single battery control
switch. It also would preclude turning only the main battery on leaving the
aux battery off
Is there a significant hole in my thinking on this one?
On a related line, each battery has a separate direct/alternate feed to the
ignition buss/essential buss. Is there any reason the switches for these
alternate feeds could not be coupled into a single action by the use of a
DPST switch to sub for the two SPST switches?
My rationale for considering these changes is that on an alternator
procedure, a simple Alt off, Alt Feed on, Bat off procedure would put one
totally in the essential buss configuration.
So, are there holes in this thinking process (perhaps I shouls ask "what" are
the holes ...)?
One last unrelated question -- is it safe to mount the fuse blocks you sell
such that the fuses are pointed downward (e.g., is there any chance they
could drop out)?
Doug Windhorn
P.S., thanks for your service to the community.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mark Steitle <msteitle(at)mail.utexas.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: D-sub Hi Density Pins? |
I bought some at Altex Electronics (Austin, TX) for .32 each. I think
Altex is nationwide.
>
>*** Hello,
>
> Does anybody have a source for the high-density machined D-sub pins?
>B&C only has the low-density ones....
>Thanks,
>
> - Jerry Kaidor ( jerry(at)tr2.com )
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: D-sub Hi Density Pins? |
Mark Steitle wrote:
>
>
> I bought some at Altex Electronics (Austin, TX) for .32 each. I think
> Altex is nationwide.
*** Wow, that's half the price that Newark charged me. Oh well, too late -
they're already on order. It's not obvious from Altex's web site that these
are high-density pins, anyway.
Thanks for the info, Mark.
- Jerry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Liming <gary(at)liming.org> |
| Subject: | Airworthiness procedures |
A lot of my instruments are electric, so maybe this applies, but I am going
to risk possibly off-topic questions. It's just that I get conflicting
answers to this, and I respect a lot of the members of this list,
especially Bob.
My understanding of the air worthiness certification procedure is that when
you are ready, you schedule a DAR and he looks at the plane, and assuming
nothing major is wrong or can be fixed easily, a certificate is issued for
day only VFR flying. Then, after some hours are flown off in a designated
test area, you can have it inspected again for night VFR flying, assuming
you have the proper night equipment. Then, you can have it inspected for
IFR flying if you have a proper IFR panel.
The two questions are:
Do the inspections have to separate like this? Do TSO'd instruments have
to be used for an IFR approval? If not, is it just the DAR's opinion about
whether a non TSO'd instrument will be approved or not?
Gary Liming
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Mark Steitle <msteitle(at)mail.utexas.edu> |
| Subject: | Re: Airworthiness procedures |
Gary,
Not to plug any one product over another, but Blue Mountain Avionics
(www.bluemountainavionics.com) covers this topic pretty well in the
"Questions" section. Helped clear things up for me.
>The two questions are:
>
>Do the inspections have to separate like this? Do TSO'd instruments have
>to be used for an IFR approval? If not, is it just the DAR's opinion about
>whether a non TSO'd instrument will be approved or not?
>
>Gary Liming
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Tom Barnes" <skytop(at)megsinet.net> |
| Subject: | low vacuum light |
Oops, that is the Feb 2002 issue of Kitplanes.
Tom
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Tom
Barnes
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: low vacuum light
Ralph,
I believe you can find the answer in the Feb 2001 issue of
Kitplanes where beginning on page 43, Jim Wier talks about building a
monitor for anything that has an electrical signal output.
Tom Barnes -6
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
theslumlord
Subject: AeroElectric-List: low vacuum light
Has anyone made a "roll your own" low vacuum indicator light from an
automotive MAP sensor?
Ralph Bookout, Certified Slumlord
RV6 finishing
=
=
=
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
=
=
=
=
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
=
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | N1deltawhiskey(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Alternator question |
Bob,
Would like to get your feedback on the following:
"The alternator is a Nippon Denso 55 Amp, three phase, square wave output
with internal regulator and overload protection."
When queried about the "overload protection", I got the following reply:
"I believe that it is referred to as a "Crowbar" and it's purpose is to
protect the device from reverse polarity connections with regards to main
bus power. (IE: connecting the battery backwards). ...."
My questions:
Is this satisfactory to use as is? Is the internal regulator satisfactory
and does the "crowbar" circuit operate similarly to your units?
Can access be gained to an external field input so it be modified as you
recommend with an external alternator and crowbar circuit? Would the
internal devices need to be disconnected/removed?
What would be some of the potential problems I could face if it were not
modified?
Thanks, Doug Windhorn
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "James Foerster" <jfoerst(at)jps.net> |
| Subject: | extending single point ground |
Bob,
I am building a Jabiru J400 composite plane, and wish to be able to
remove the instrument panel as a unit for modifications and repairs. I
intend the use of techniques from the latest Aeroelectric Connection.
Rather than have the forest of ground tabs on the cabin side of the
firewall just opposite the engine compartment single ground point, I
would like to extend the ground with a #4 welding cable to the
instrument panel where the forest of ground tabs would be located, along
with the fuse block. Obviously, the 14volt power lead could be much
smaller. Would this introduce problems with common mode noise? I
intend to keep all the high current ahead of the firewall, and have
found a cheaper source of 200 amp contactors-type II- to help with this.
I will likely use two batteries with one alternator: the permanent
magnet unit on the Jabiru 3300 engine. I will use OV protection, as
well as monitor voltage and current draw from the batteries.
Thanks Jim Foerster
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | David Mullins <n323xl(at)mediaone.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternator question |
I have another question to add to this one.
I have retro fitted a 55 amp ND Alt to a corvair engine
conversion for my KR2S. It is from a 85-88 chevy sprint.
The Corvair harmonic balancer's built in pulley is 6 3/4"
diameter and the alt pulley is 2 3/4". At my projected
engine RPM of 3350 that makes the alternator turn 8000
RPM. I would like to know if this speed is acceptable? or
I can get a 4" alt pulley from AS&S and make the speed
6500.
Dave Mullins
Nashua, New Hampshire
http://N323XL.iwarp.com
N1deltawhiskey(at)aol.com wrote:
>
> Bob,
>
> Would like to get your feedback on the following:
>
> "The alternator is a Nippon Denso 55 Amp, three phase, square wave output
> with internal regulator and overload protection."
>
> When queried about the "overload protection", I got the following reply:
>
> "I believe that it is referred to as a "Crowbar" and it's purpose is to
> protect the device from reverse polarity connections with regards to main
> bus power. (IE: connecting the battery backwards). ...."
>
> My questions:
>
> Is this satisfactory to use as is? Is the internal regulator satisfactory
> and does the "crowbar" circuit operate similarly to your units?
>
> Can access be gained to an external field input so it be modified as you
> recommend with an external alternator and crowbar circuit? Would the
> internal devices need to be disconnected/removed?
>
> What would be some of the potential problems I could face if it were not
> modified?
>
> Thanks, Doug Windhorn
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Oke" <wjoke(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Instrument Panel Voltmeter - Worthwhile ?? How to Do |
it ??
One sub-theme observable over the months I have monitored this list is
that a good, solid, reliable indicator of the health of an aircraft's
electrical system is the voltage measured at the distribution bus.
So, 13.8 volts or so in operation healthy alternator and normal
charging, 15.5 volts sick regulator (overvoltage), 12.5 volts no
charge (sick alternator), 10.5 volts - battery just about dead, best
land soon. That sort of thing.
Has anyone out there got a good way of implementing a full time voltage
regulator on a typical light aircraft or homebuilt ?
There are lots of low-end (meaning cheap) digital multimeters on the
market for $10 or so. The concept would be to pull the guts out of one,
hard wire the rotary function selector to the 20 DCV range, mount the
LCD display (typically 1/2" x 2") somewhere on the panel and power it
through the battery master so that it is on when ever the power is.
Would have to have some protection against a hard fault in the voltmeter
bringing the whole system down but that should be doable.
If one had a system architecture with different busses separated by
diodes, etc. then a simple rotary selector switch could be used to look
at different voltage points as desired.
So workable or just problems ? I know there are some 2 1/4" full-time
voltmeters available but a small digital solution would be more elegant,
presumably more reliable, and cost-effective.
I will confess to two hidden agendas here - the "big" airplane I fly
professionally has just such a DC volt monitor system (and 6 DC busses
to think about) and I am in the final stages of panel design for an
RV-6A !
Jim Oke
Winnipeg, MB
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternator question |
>
>Bob,
>
>Would like to get your feedback on the following:
>
>"The alternator is a Nippon Denso 55 Amp, three phase, square wave output
>with internal regulator and overload protection."
>
>When queried about the "overload protection", I got the following reply:
>
>"I believe that it is referred to as a "Crowbar" and it's purpose is to
>protect the device from reverse polarity connections with regards to main
>bus power. (IE: connecting the battery backwards). ...."
. . . which shows that the individual has now personal
knowledge or understanding of the product's capabilites.
>My questions:
>
>Is this satisfactory to use as is? Is the internal regulator satisfactory
>and does the "crowbar" circuit operate similarly to your units?
>
>Can access be gained to an external field input so it be modified as you
>recommend with an external alternator and crowbar circuit? Would the
>internal devices need to be disconnected/removed?
B&C's alternator's being life as brand new ND alternators.
They are modified to remove the internal regulators -AND-
rotors get balanced to about 10x better specs than factory
stock.
These alternators have been in the marketplace for over
10 years. Sales are pushing 2000 pieces. Return rate for
the entire fleet has been under 1% . . . typical returns
are for customer induced damage . . . they have yet to
see the first return for wearout or failure.
>What would be some of the potential problems I could face if it were not
>modified?
The stock automotive alternator is a fine machine.
MILLIONS run the lifetime of the automobile and go to
the junkyard still working . . .
None-the-less . . . in spite of a demonstrated performance
record, the failure rate is NOT zero . . . external
ov protection can be added as shown in:
http://209.134.106.21/articles/crowbar.pdf
http://209.134.106.21/articles/bleadov.pdf
Experience has shown that these alternators run
very happily at 10000+ RPM in cruise IF they are
well balanced. This is why B&C leaves the factory
stock, small pulley in place for improved cowl
clearance and better output from the alternator
at idle and taxi RPMs . . .
If it were MY airplane, I wouldn't run the alternator
stock without external OV protection.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Airworthiness procedures |
>
>
>A lot of my instruments are electric, so maybe this applies, but I am going
>to risk possibly off-topic questions. It's just that I get conflicting
>answers to this, and I respect a lot of the members of this list,
>especially Bob.
>
>My understanding of the air worthiness certification procedure is that when
>you are ready, you schedule a DAR and he looks at the plane, and assuming
>nothing major is wrong or can be fixed easily, a certificate is issued for
>day only VFR flying. Then, after some hours are flown off in a designated
>test area, you can have it inspected again for night VFR flying, assuming
>you have the proper night equipment. Then, you can have it inspected for
>IFR flying if you have a proper IFR panel.
>
>The two questions are:
>
>Do the inspections have to separate like this? Do TSO'd instruments have
>to be used for an IFR approval? If not, is it just the DAR's opinion about
>whether a non TSO'd instrument will be approved or not?
I searched FAR 91 for the string "TSO" and found requirements
for TSO holy-water on ELT's, Flight Data Recorders, and Altitude
reporting equipment combined with a transponder as follows:
---------------
Sec. 91.217 Data correspondence between automatically reported pressure
altitude data and the pilot's altitude reference.
No person may operate any automatic pressure altitude reporting equipment
associated with a radar beacon transponder--
(a) When deactivation of that equipment is directed by ATC;
(b) Unless, as installed, that equipment was tested and calibrated to
transmit altitude data corresponding within 125 feet (on a 95 percent
probability basis) of the indicated or calibrated datum of the altimeter
normally used to maintain flight altitude, with that altimeter referenced to
29.92 inches of mercury for altitudes from sea level to the maximum operating
altitude of the aircraft; or
(c) Unless the altimeters and digitizers in that equipment meet the
standards of TSO-C10b and TSO-C88, respectively.
------------------
If the regulators and my teachers are speaking the same English,
92.217(b) says you can do an as-installed calibration check of
whatever equipment you plan to use . . . alternatively, 91.217(c)
says calibration is not required if ALL devices (altimeter, encoder
and transponder) are TSO'd.
Obviously, required periodic pitot-static system tests will probably
address the issues of 92.217(b) whether or not your equipment
is TSO'd.
If anyone offers an official opinion as to the need for TSO
certification of equipment, I'd respectfully ask for citations
on the applicable FAR.
FAR91 is silent with respect to TSO on gyros with the exceptions
noted above.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Liming <gary(at)liming.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Instrument Panel Voltmeter - Worthwhile |
?? How to Do it ??
>So workable or just problems ? I know there are some 2 1/4" full-time
>voltmeters available but a small digital solution would be more elegant,
>presumably more reliable, and cost-effective.
Last month's Kitplanes had a Jim Weir article on building just such a
voltmeter very cheaply that would accept lots of mods. He fit it onto a 2
1/4 instrument hole.
Gary Liming
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: extending single point ground |
>
>Bob,
>I am building a Jabiru J400 composite plane, and wish to be able to
>remove the instrument panel as a unit for modifications and repairs. I
>intend the use of techniques from the latest Aeroelectric Connection.
>Rather than have the forest of ground tabs on the cabin side of the
>firewall just opposite the engine compartment single ground point, I
>would like to extend the ground with a #4 welding cable to the
>instrument panel where the forest of ground tabs would be located, along
>with the fuse block. Obviously, the 14volt power lead could be much
>smaller. Would this introduce problems with common mode noise? I
>intend to keep all the high current ahead of the firewall, and have
>found a cheaper source of 200 amp contactors-type II- to help with this.
> I will likely use two batteries with one alternator: the permanent
>magnet unit on the Jabiru 3300 engine. I will use OV protection, as
>well as monitor voltage and current draw from the batteries.
> Thanks Jim Foerster
Answers for this cannot be very definitive. Degradation
of system performance is a matter of degree and personal
perceptions. One is obviously free to TRY anything and
I've seen some rather spectacular wiring jobs at OSH wherein
the owner/pilot reports great performance . . .
How many ground wires run from the instrument panel to ground?\
How much current to they carry? If I absolutely HAD to have
a disconnect for maintenance, I'd run every appliance's ground
wire through the connector to the single point ground on
the firewall . . . but what you propose may meet your needs
just fine. 4AWG is a bit hoggy for instrument panel loads.
I suspect 10AWG would be okay.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternator question |
>
>I have another question to add to this one.
>
>I have retro fitted a 55 amp ND Alt to a corvair engine
>conversion for my KR2S. It is from a 85-88 chevy sprint.
>The Corvair harmonic balancer's built in pulley is 6 3/4"
>diameter and the alt pulley is 2 3/4". At my projected
>engine RPM of 3350 that makes the alternator turn 8000
>RPM. I would like to know if this speed is acceptable? or
>I can get a 4" alt pulley from AS&S and make the speed
>6500.
I'd rather use the small pulley for better output
during ground operations . . . see other post on this
topic.
Bob .. . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Matthew Mucker" <matthew(at)mucker.net> |
| Subject: | Instrument Panel Voltmeter - Worthwhile ?? How |
to Do it ??
> Has anyone out there got a good way of implementing a full time voltage
> regulator on a typical light aircraft or homebuilt ?
>
Jim,
Assuming you mean "voltage monitor," you can buy bare panel-mount voltage
meters, for starters. Try Radio Shack (ick!), Digi-Key, or Mouser for
starters. Page 877 of the DigiKey catalog (online), for instance, has
digital panel mount voltmeters. Jim Weir just finished talking about this
topic as well, see last month's (December? January?) Kitplanes magazine.
(Yikes! The digital panel meters in DigiKey's catalog are pricey, at ~$40
or so.)
You can also find analog voltmeters with an appropriate scale. These would
be enormously easy to use: just hook up two wires and go!
-Matt
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Instrument Panel Voltmeter - Worthwhile |
?? How to Do it ??
>
>One sub-theme observable over the months I have monitored this list is
>that a good, solid, reliable indicator of the health of an aircraft's
>electrical system is the voltage measured at the distribution bus.
>
>So, 13.8 volts or so in operation healthy alternator and normal
>charging, 15.5 volts sick regulator (overvoltage), 12.5 volts no
>charge (sick alternator), 10.5 volts - battery just about dead, best
>land soon. That sort of thing.
>
>Has anyone out there got a good way of implementing a full time voltage
>regulator on a typical light aircraft or homebuilt ?
Don't understand the question. All alternators come with
regulators . . . I presume you're speaking about system monitoring.
>There are lots of low-end (meaning cheap) digital multimeters on the
>market for $10 or so. The concept would be to pull the guts out of one,
>hard wire the rotary function selector to the 20 DCV range, mount the
>LCD display (typically 1/2" x 2") somewhere on the panel and power it
>through the battery master so that it is on when ever the power is.
>Would have to have some protection against a hard fault in the voltmeter
>bringing the whole system down but that should be doable.
>
>If one had a system architecture with different busses separated by
>diodes, etc. then a simple rotary selector switch could be used to look
>at different voltage points as desired.
>
>So workable or just problems ? I know there are some 2 1/4" full-time
>voltmeters available but a small digital solution would be more elegant,
>presumably more reliable, and cost-effective.
>
>I will confess to two hidden agendas here - the "big" airplane I fly
>professionally has just such a DC volt monitor system (and 6 DC busses
>to think about) and I am in the final stages of panel design for an
>RV-6A !
I think you're making this too complicated. Check out
downloadable articles available from our website at
http://www.aeroelectric.com along with products that
address this issue specifically.
I seldom find it necessary to monitor system voltage
in more than one place. Suggest you check out a chapter
of the 'Connection at:
http://209.134.106.21/articles/Rev9/ch17-9.pdf
. . . and then see if your proposed system architecture
really meets your needs without being overly complex. BIG
airplanes are poor examples of what's necessary or useful
for little airplanes.
Bob . . .
>Jim Oke
>Winnipeg, MB
>
>
Bob . . .
////
(o o)
===========o00o=(_)=o00o=========
< Go ahead, make my day . . . >
< show me where I'm wrong. >
=================================
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Swartzendruber" <dswartzendruber(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Alternator question |
I think he is talking about the drive pulley which means he'd use the
large pulley for better output during ground operations, not the small
one.
David Swartzendruber
> >
> >I have retro fitted a 55 amp ND Alt to a corvair engine
> conversion for
> >my KR2S. It is from a 85-88 chevy sprint. The Corvair harmonic
> >balancer's built in pulley is 6 3/4" diameter and the alt
> pulley is 2
> >3/4". At my projected engine RPM of 3350 that makes the
> alternator turn
> >8000 RPM. I would like to know if this speed is acceptable? or
> >I can get a 4" alt pulley from AS&S and make the speed
> >6500.
>
> I'd rather use the small pulley for better output
> during ground operations . . . see other post on this
> topic.
>
> Bob .. . .
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | David Mullins <n323xl(at)mediaone.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Alternator question |
David,
The small pulley would make the alternator turn faster at
any RPM. The 4" pulley would make the alt turn slower.
I only wanted to know if 8000 RPM was excessive for the
unit.
Dave Mullins
Nashua, New Hampshire
http://n323xl.iwarp.com
David Swartzendruber wrote:
>
> I think he is talking about the drive pulley which means he'd use the
> large pulley for better output during ground operations, not the small
> one.
>
> David Swartzendruber
>
> > >
> > >I have retro fitted a 55 amp ND Alt to a corvair engine
> > conversion for
> > >my KR2S. It is from a 85-88 chevy sprint. The Corvair harmonic
> > >balancer's built in pulley is 6 3/4" diameter and the alt
> > pulley is 2
> > >3/4". At my projected engine RPM of 3350 that makes the
> > alternator turn
> > >8000 RPM. I would like to know if this speed is acceptable? or
> > >I can get a 4" alt pulley from AS&S and make the speed
> > >6500.
> >
> > I'd rather use the small pulley for better output
> > during ground operations . . . see other post on this
> > topic.
> >
> > Bob .. . .
> >
> >
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Kevin Kinney <kkinney(at)fuse.net> |
| Subject: | Re: D-sub Hi Density Pins? |
>
>
>>Does anybody have a source for the high-density machined D-sub pins?
>>B&C only has the low-density ones....
>>
I'll be the one to ask. I'm familiar with D-sub connectors, but what
are high-density pins? Why & where are they used instead of
low-density? I'm assuming low density pins are the stamped sheet metal
ones, correct?
Perpetual novice,
Kevin Kinney
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: D-sub Hi Density Pins? |
Kevin Kinney wrote:
>
>
> >
> >
> >>Does anybody have a source for the high-density machined D-sub pins?
> >>B&C only has the low-density ones....
> >>
> I'll be the one to ask. I'm familiar with D-sub connectors, but what
> are high-density pins? Why & where are they used instead of
> low-density? I'm assuming low density pins are the stamped sheet metal
> ones, correct?
*** Nope. Both the high-density and low density pins are tubular machined.
I think the high density ones are used for connectors with LOTS of pins
spaced more closely together than the DB25 etc.
- Jerry Kaidor ( jerry(at)tr2.com )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Swartzendruber" <dswartzendruber(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Alternator question |
I'm sorry, I misunderstood and thought that the 4" pulley was replacing
the 6 3/4" pulley on engine. B&C runs their alternators at 8000rpm and
higher all the time. Bill at B&C came up with some information once
that said the ND alternators he is using are supposed to be good up to
16,000 as they are when he buys them. I think Bill will tell you to
limit it to 10,000 or 12,000 if you're buying one of his.
David Swartzendruber
>
> David,
>
> The small pulley would make the alternator turn faster at
> any RPM. The 4" pulley would make the alt turn slower.
> I only wanted to know if 8000 RPM was excessive for the
> unit.
>
> Dave Mullins
> Nashua, New Hampshire
> http://n323xl.iwarp.com
>
> David Swartzendruber wrote:
>
> > -->
> >
> > I think he is talking about the drive pulley which means
> he'd use the
> > large pulley for better output during ground operations,
> not the small
> > one.
> >
> > David Swartzendruber
> >
> > > >
> > > >I have retro fitted a 55 amp ND Alt to a corvair engine
> > > conversion for
> > > >my KR2S. It is from a 85-88 chevy sprint. The Corvair harmonic
> > > >balancer's built in pulley is 6 3/4" diameter and the alt
> > > pulley is 2
> > > >3/4". At my projected engine RPM of 3350 that makes the
> > > alternator turn
> > > >8000 RPM. I would like to know if this speed is acceptable? or I
> > > >can get a 4" alt pulley from AS&S and make the speed 6500.
> > >
> > > I'd rather use the small pulley for better output
> > > during ground operations . . . see other post on this
> > > topic.
> > >
> > > Bob .. . .
> > >
> > >
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Dual battery switching and other questions |
>
>Bob (and other listers),
>
>I have been looking at your figure Z-2, dual battery arrangement, to be
>applied to an all electronic ignition Subaru installation. Have been
>wondering about the control of the batteries.
>
>In your arrangement, you show one battery switch coupled to the alternator
>field switch. The second battery has a second switch. I assume this is
>because of the desire to control these individually.
>
>Is there any reason why both contactors cannot (or more correctly, should
>not) be connected to the same switch? If one wanted individual control, I
>would install individual NC pull open switches in the usual CB location on
>the panel rather than with the main switch grouping. These would be
>installed in series with the master battery. Physically, this complicates
>the system slightly, but operationally (weakest link theory applies here)
>simplifies the arrangement giving the appearance of a single battery control
>switch. It also would preclude turning only the main battery on leaving the
>aux battery off
Under what circumstances do you find the architecture shown
in Z-2 to be deficient? What fault condition would be mitigated
by making any changes? Obviously, you can wire the airplane any
way you wish . . . my personal goals are to minimize parts count,
and pilot workload in any perceived failure condition. Do you
perceived some condition that is not covered by the system
as published?
>Is there a significant hole in my thinking on this one?
>
>On a related line, each battery has a separate direct/alternate feed to the
>ignition buss/essential buss. Is there any reason the switches for these
>alternate feeds could not be coupled into a single action by the use of a
>DPST switch to sub for the two SPST switches?
Yes, the two pathways to the e-bus should be totally independent.
You don't want a bad switch killing both pathways.
>My rationale for considering these changes is that on an alternator
>procedure, a simple Alt off, Alt Feed on, Bat off procedure would put one
>totally in the essential buss configuration.
>
>So, are there holes in this thinking process (perhaps I shouls ask "what" are
>the holes ...)?
Assume that every part you install has some mode of failure.
Do an analysis to determine if the failure of any single
part (or the wiring associated with that part) creates
a situation from which there is no graceful recovery.
>One last unrelated question -- is it safe to mount the fuse blocks you sell
>such that the fuses are pointed downward (e.g., is there any chance they
>could drop out)?
No
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Liming <gary(at)liming.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Airworthiness procedures |
Thanks for the lookup on the FARs. I was really wondering how the
inspector makes his decision about what to include on the airworthiness
certificate for phase II. Finally, I called the FSDO (local st. louis) and
talked to an FAA Inspector Sydney Buff. He told me that when the plane is
ready, An inspector will look over everything, and assuming everything is
ok, will make out a certificate with operating limitations. If the plane
is equipped for VFR night, the certificate will say so. If it has an IFR
panel, it will also say so. At this point I asked him what if I had
something new that hasn't been approved yet that is supposed to fulfill
some of the IFR functions (like an EFIS, or electronic engine monitor?) He
said trying new untested things is what an experimental is all about. He
would discuss the capabilities to determine if they are supposed to meet
the FARs for the limitations, and then issue a phase i certificate with
those capabilities. Whether or not an item is TSO'd only comes up if, in
trying to determine if an instrument provides a particular function, there
would be no question about a TSO'd one.
At this time all that is approved is VFR day only, no passengers,
restricted to a designated test area for 25 hours (or 40 hours is the
engine is not certified.) During this phase 1 period, it is up to the
owner to make sure that all the instruments, avionics, and equipment
conform to provide the necessary functions required by the operating
limitations as defined in the FARs. At the end of the period, if everything
is found to provide the intended functionality, phase 2 begins and flight
for the noted limitations (like night or IFR) are then approved.
If you upgrade the panel later from VFR to IFR, another inspection would be
necessary and another phase 1 period flown off.
I wasn't sure about how this worked, hope this helps.
Gary Liming
>
>
> >
> >
> >A lot of my instruments are electric, so maybe this applies, but I am going
> >to risk possibly off-topic questions. It's just that I get conflicting
> >answers to this, and I respect a lot of the members of this list,
> >especially Bob.
> >
> >My understanding of the air worthiness certification procedure is that when
> >you are ready, you schedule a DAR and he looks at the plane, and assuming
> >nothing major is wrong or can be fixed easily, a certificate is issued for
> >day only VFR flying. Then, after some hours are flown off in a designated
> >test area, you can have it inspected again for night VFR flying, assuming
> >you have the proper night equipment. Then, you can have it inspected for
> >IFR flying if you have a proper IFR panel.
> >
> >The two questions are:
> >
> >Do the inspections have to separate like this? Do TSO'd instruments have
> >to be used for an IFR approval? If not, is it just the DAR's opinion about
> >whether a non TSO'd instrument will be approved or not?
>
>
> I searched FAR 91 for the string "TSO" and found requirements
> for TSO holy-water on ELT's, Flight Data Recorders, and Altitude
> reporting equipment combined with a transponder as follows:
>[reg snipped]
> If anyone offers an official opinion as to the need for TSO
> certification of equipment, I'd respectfully ask for citations
> on the applicable FAR.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Dual battery switching and other questions |
> >One last unrelated question -- is it safe to mount
> the fuse blocks you sell
> >such that the fuses are pointed downward (e.g., is
> there any chance they
> >could drop out)?
>
> No
No to which question? (is it safe? or could they
drop?)
I'm also quite interested in this as I saw a few nice
installations where the fuse blocs are installed on an
hinged panel behind the instrument panel.
=====
----------------------------
Michel Therrien CH601-HD
http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby
http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601
http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Liming <gary(at)liming.org> |
| Subject: | Lights on E-bus? |
I am leaning towards Z-11 (like the old Z-2) with a couple of additions,
but a question comes up - why aren't the lights (Pos, Strobe, Landing) on
the e-bus? I know they aren't essential, but if the alt failure occurs,
and I've gotten myself to a safe approach and feel I can use up the rest of
the battery for landing lights, why should I have to turn the Master to
Batt (thereby incurring the battery contactor drain, in order to then turn
on the lights? If they were on the E-bus, I would only have to turn on the
lights as needed. I would, though, need to remember to turn them off when
I threw the E-bus feed switch. If I do this, there is little left on
the"master" bus at all, except just a way of isolating the alternator. Is
there anything I am leaving out?
Also, I am using the RMI monitor which has provisions for a battery back up
(it has its own charging circuit) as well as another instrument that does
the same. How would you go about making the trade offs between having a
small motorcycle battery for the two instruments as a backup, and the main
battery for the rest of the e-bus, opposed to just having everything run
off the ebus battery? I would have a maintenance procedure to simply
replace all batteries in regular periods.
Thanks,
Gary Liming
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ronnie Brown" <romott(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Airworthiness procedures |
EAA has an excellent collection of articles, regulations, FAR's etc for homebuilding
and
registering experimental aircraft. See
http://members.eaa.org/home/homebuilders/index.html (you need to be an EAA member).
If you aren't a member, you really ought to join if you are building an expermental!!!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gary Liming" <gary(at)liming.org>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Airworthiness procedures
|
|
| Thanks for the lookup on the FARs. I was really wondering how the
| inspector makes his decision about what to include on the airworthiness
| certificate for phase II. Finally, I called the FSDO (local st. louis) and
| talked to an FAA Inspector Sydney Buff. He told me that when the plane is
| ready, An inspector will look over everything, and assuming everything is
| ok, will make out a certificate with operating limitations. If the plane
| is equipped for VFR night, the certificate will say so. If it has an IFR
| panel, it will also say so. At this point I asked him what if I had
| something new that hasn't been approved yet that is supposed to fulfill
| some of the IFR functions (like an EFIS, or electronic engine monitor?) He
| said trying new untested things is what an experimental is all about. He
| would discuss the capabilities to determine if they are supposed to meet
| the FARs for the limitations, and then issue a phase i certificate with
| those capabilities. Whether or not an item is TSO'd only comes up if, in
| trying to determine if an instrument provides a particular function, there
| would be no question about a TSO'd one.
|
| At this time all that is approved is VFR day only, no passengers,
| restricted to a designated test area for 25 hours (or 40 hours is the
| engine is not certified.) During this phase 1 period, it is up to the
| owner to make sure that all the instruments, avionics, and equipment
| conform to provide the necessary functions required by the operating
| limitations as defined in the FARs. At the end of the period, if everything
| is found to provide the intended functionality, phase 2 begins and flight
| for the noted limitations (like night or IFR) are then approved.
|
| If you upgrade the panel later from VFR to IFR, another inspection would be
| necessary and another phase 1 period flown off.
|
| I wasn't sure about how this worked, hope this helps.
|
| Gary Liming
|
| >
| >
| > >
| > >
| > >A lot of my instruments are electric, so maybe this applies, but I am going
| > >to risk possibly off-topic questions. It's just that I get conflicting
| > >answers to this, and I respect a lot of the members of this list,
| > >especially Bob.
| > >
| > >My understanding of the air worthiness certification procedure is that when
| > >you are ready, you schedule a DAR and he looks at the plane, and assuming
| > >nothing major is wrong or can be fixed easily, a certificate is issued for
| > >day only VFR flying. Then, after some hours are flown off in a designated
| > >test area, you can have it inspected again for night VFR flying, assuming
| > >you have the proper night equipment. Then, you can have it inspected for
| > >IFR flying if you have a proper IFR panel.
| > >
| > >The two questions are:
| > >
| > >Do the inspections have to separate like this? Do TSO'd instruments have
| > >to be used for an IFR approval? If not, is it just the DAR's opinion about
| > >whether a non TSO'd instrument will be approved or not?
| >
| >
| > I searched FAR 91 for the string "TSO" and found requirements
| > for TSO holy-water on ELT's, Flight Data Recorders, and Altitude
| > reporting equipment combined with a transponder as follows:
| >[reg snipped]
| > If anyone offers an official opinion as to the need for TSO
| > certification of equipment, I'd respectfully ask for citations
| > on the applicable FAR.
|
|
|
|
|
|
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <racker(at)rmci.net> |
The whole purpose of the e-bus is to shed all non-essential loads in case
of ALT failure. Pos/Strobe/Landing lights are non-essential.
If you put these on the e-bus and accidentally left these on your battery
would be drained in short order, defeating its purpose (which is to ensure
you have more electrical than fuel supply).
I just left these items on the main bus. In case of alt failure, I'd
switch to e-bus and continue to my destination. When the airport is in
sight, I'd simply flip the master switch & lights on and land.
Rob Acker (RV-6).
>
>
> I am leaning towards Z-11 (like the old Z-2) with a couple of
> additions, but a question comes up - why aren't the lights (Pos,
> Strobe, Landing) on the e-bus? I know they aren't essential, but if
> the alt failure occurs, and I've gotten myself to a safe approach and
> feel I can use up the rest of the battery for landing lights, why
> should I have to turn the Master to Batt (thereby incurring the
> battery contactor drain, in order to then turn on the lights? If they
> were on the E-bus, I would only have to turn on the lights as needed.
> I would, though, need to remember to turn them off when I threw the
> E-bus feed switch. If I do this, there is little left on the"master"
> bus at all, except just a way of isolating the alternator. Is there
> anything I am leaving out?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ed Perry" <eperry(at)san.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Maxi Fuse for Alternator B lead |
Hi Bob,
I am looking for a way around the $40 fuse set up. I found the Maxi Fuse
holder with a 60amp fuse, It comes with an 8-10awg wire. Can this setup
be used reliably or am I asking for trouble? My concerns are that I will
be running the 4awg wire from the alternator and then reducing to the
8-10awg wire to connect to the starter contactor. Have I restricted the
load carrying capabilities to the smaller wire? Is that bad?The person
that I talked to said that if it comes with a 60amp fuse it will
certainly handle it. It made sense but I thought I should get your
opinion.
Ed Perry
eperry(at)san.rr.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Liming <gary(at)liming.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Airworthiness procedures |
>
>EAA has an excellent collection of articles, regulations, FAR's etc for
>homebuilding and
>registering experimental aircraft. See
>http://members.eaa.org/home/homebuilders/index.html (you need to be an EAA
>member).
>
>If you aren't a member, you really ought to join if you are building an
>expermental!!!
I am a member, and a I did go there, but under
hombuilders/registering/articles or homebuilding/testing/ there wasn't
anything that addressed my question. That's why I've asking around. It
has been surprising the various answers I've gotten, too.
Gary Liming
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Liming <gary(at)liming.org> |
I know the ACS type keyswitch doesn't really provide hard security, but it
does have a psychological barrier I would like to retain. In your book,
though, you state those switches "contribute to occasional engine
kick-back with possible damage to engine and/or starter." This is a
different issue from whether or not a key is used to turn the switch, but
of the way the contacts work. What is this kick back, and what is it about
the switch contacts that causes it?
Thanks,
Gary Liming
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ronnie Brown" <romott(at)adelphia.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Airworthiness procedures |
AC20-27E (has lots of changes from previous versions) addresses the operating limitations
and the phase 1 and phase 2 tests as well as how to do major changes which do not
now
require a new DAR/FAA inspection.
You're right, the questions about TSO'd requirements are harder to find. Good
work by
Bob!
I am with in 3-4 months of having my airworthiness inspection so I have been reading
the
stuff at EAA and found it very helpful!
Ronnie
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Dual battery switching and other questions |
>
>> >One last unrelated question -- is it safe to mount
>> the fuse blocks you sell
>> >such that the fuses are pointed downward (e.g., is
>> there any chance they
>> >could drop out)?
>>
>> No
>
>No to which question? (is it safe? or could they
>drop?)
>
>I'm also quite interested in this as I saw a few nice
>installations where the fuse blocs are installed on an
>hinged panel behind the instrument panel.
sorry for the obfuscation . . . the retention
force on the fuse clips exceeds the mass of the
fuses by a factor of 10x or better. It takes LOTS
of acceleration force to unseat these little buggers.
I'd have no problem hanging them upside down if
that's the most convenient way to install and
maintain them.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Lights on E-bus? |
>
>
>I am leaning towards Z-11 (like the old Z-2) with a couple of additions,
>but a question comes up - why aren't the lights (Pos, Strobe, Landing) on
>the e-bus? I know they aren't essential, but if the alt failure occurs,
>and I've gotten myself to a safe approach and feel I can use up the rest of
>the battery for landing lights, why should I have to turn the Master to
>Batt (thereby incurring the battery contactor drain, in order to then turn
>on the lights? If they were on the E-bus, I would only have to turn on the
>lights as needed. I would, though, need to remember to turn them off when
>I threw the E-bus feed switch. If I do this, there is little left on
>the"master" bus at all, except just a way of isolating the alternator. Is
>there anything I am leaving out?
The e-bus is normally loaded only with those items that you
need for comfortable, continuation of flight with a dead
alternator. The e-bus concept is discussed in pretty
fine detail in:
http://209.134.106.21/articles/Rev9/ch17-9.pdf
If you can keep the en route e-bus loads on the order
of a few amps, then your battery's ability to support
needed electro-goodies exceeds your fuel endurance . . .
this is a GOOD thing.
When the airport is in sight and any controlling
agency knows you're inbound battery-only, then
turn the master back on and run anything you think
you'd like to have . . . if the battery is up to
it all the way to the ramp, great. If it's not
up to the task, then it shouldn't matter.
>Also, I am using the RMI monitor which has provisions for a battery back up
>(it has its own charging circuit) as well as another instrument that does
>the same. How would you go about making the trade offs between having a
>small motorcycle battery for the two instruments as a backup, and the main
>battery for the rest of the e-bus, opposed to just having everything run
>off the ebus battery? I would have a maintenance procedure to simply
>replace all batteries in regular periods.
How long will the monitor run on the internal battery?
If it's equal to or greater than fuel endurance,
great. I'd replace that battery as often as you replace
the main battery. If it's one of those get-me-on-the-
ground-in-20-minutes things, then PERHAPS you'll want
to consider loading the e-bus with the RMI equipment.
Question: If the RMI goes belly-up, how would this affect
probability of positive outcome of your flight? Just
because the indicators are not working doesn't mean
the things they display are at risk . . . if the
monitor is on the main bus and curiosity has the
better of you, turn the main bus on for a look-see
and then shut it off.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: D-sub Hi Density Pins? |
>
>>
>>
>>>Does anybody have a source for the high-density machined D-sub pins?
>>>B&C only has the low-density ones....
>>>
>I'll be the one to ask. I'm familiar with D-sub connectors, but what
>are high-density pins? Why & where are they used instead of
>low-density? I'm assuming low density pins are the stamped sheet metal
>ones, correct?
Look on the back of your computer . . . the video cable
connector is the same physical size as the serial data
connector. The serial data is 9-pin; the video cable
is 15-pin. The pins are described as 20 and 22 AWG
rated pins. Both sizes are available in machined
(preferred) and open-barrel, sheet metal.
Here's a drawing on a 20AWG standard density d=sub (sometimes
called the "109-series" for the spacing between pins.
http://catalog.tycoelectronics.com/TE/docs/pdf/7/68/213867.pdf
Here's a 22AWG high density part (90-series).
http://catalog.tycoelectronics.com/TE/docs/pdf/0/59/221950.pdf
Actually, there's also a "50-series" micro-miniature but hopefully
we won't see any of these showing up on airplanes!
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "iflych2" <iflych2(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Instrument Panel Voltmeter - Worthwhile ?? How |
to Do it ??
Weir has a nice webpage with all his Kitplane projects.
http://www.rst-engr.com/kitplanes/
R
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard D. Fogerson" <rickf(at)velocitus.net> |
| Subject: | Mag and elec. ign VS dual elec. ign. failure mode analysis |
Bob,
The engine I'm buying from Bart Lalonde allows me to obtain a duel
electronic ignition system at basically the same price as a system with
1 mag and 1 electronic ignition. I believe the dual electronic ignition
system would be marginally more efficient, certainly easier and more
fool proof to change plugs, and has a certain aesthetic appeal to me. I
also plan on the B&C alternator and voltage regulator and doing your
design for the wiring. So, cost aside, does either system have a clear
and/or compelling advantage over the other from a failure mode analysis
viewpoint?
Thanks, Rick Fogerson
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Oke" <wjoke(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Instrument Panel Voltmeter - Worthwhile ?? How |
to Do it ??
To all;
Yes, of course, I wanted to ask about a system voltage monitor device (and
not a voltage regulator as I mis-typed).
Will consult Kitplanes to see what the Jim W. solution looks like.
Jim Oke
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Instrument Panel Voltmeter - Worthwhile ??
How to Do it ??
> >
> >Has anyone out there got a good way of implementing a full time voltage
> >regulator on a typical light aircraft or homebuilt ?
>
>
> Don't understand the question. All alternators come with
> regulators . . . I presume you're speaking about system monitoring.
>
>
> >There are lots of low-end (meaning cheap) digital multimeters on the
> >market for $10 or so. The concept would be to pull the guts out of one,
> >hard wire the rotary function selector to the 20 DCV range, mount the
> >LCD display (typically 1/2" x 2") somewhere on the panel and power it
> >through the battery master so that it is on when ever the power is.
> >Would have to have some protection against a hard fault in the voltmeter
> >bringing the whole system down but that should be doable.
> >
> >If one had a system architecture with different busses separated by
> >diodes, etc. then a simple rotary selector switch could be used to look
> >at different voltage points as desired.
> >
> >So workable or just problems ? I know there are some 2 1/4" full-time
> >voltmeters available but a small digital solution would be more elegant,
> >presumably more reliable, and cost-effective.
> >
> >I will confess to two hidden agendas here - the "big" airplane I fly
> >professionally has just such a DC volt monitor system (and 6 DC busses
> >to think about) and I am in the final stages of panel design for an
> >RV-6A !
>
> I think you're making this too complicated. Check out
> downloadable articles available from our website at
> http://www.aeroelectric.com along with products that
> address this issue specifically.
>
> I seldom find it necessary to monitor system voltage
> in more than one place. Suggest you check out a chapter
> of the 'Connection at:
>
> http://209.134.106.21/articles/Rev9/ch17-9.pdf
>
> . . . and then see if your proposed system architecture
> really meets your needs without being overly complex. BIG
> airplanes are poor examples of what's necessary or useful
> for little airplanes.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
> >Jim Oke
> >Winnipeg, MB
> >
> >
>
> Bob . . .
>
> ////
> (o o)
> ===========o00o=(_)=o00o=========
> < Go ahead, make my day . . . >
> < show me where I'm wrong. >
> =================================
>
>
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Mag and elec. ign VS dual elec. ign. failure mode |
analysis
>
>Bob,
>
>The engine I'm buying from Bart Lalonde allows me to obtain a duel
>electronic ignition system at basically the same price as a system with
>1 mag and 1 electronic ignition. I believe the dual electronic ignition
>system would be marginally more efficient, certainly easier and more
>fool proof to change plugs, and has a certain aesthetic appeal to me. I
>also plan on the B&C alternator and voltage regulator and doing your
>design for the wiring. So, cost aside, does either system have a clear
>and/or compelling advantage over the other from a failure mode analysis
>viewpoint?
>
>Thanks, Rick Fogerson
I presume that by "either system" you're referring to
elect/mag versus elect/elect ignition systems.
I suggest that when an engine is supplied with mags
(and the rebate for leaving them off is poor to none)
that the builder take off one mag and put an electronic
ignition on. Store the take-off mag in a dry environment
and when the first mag fails, put the take-off mag back
on the engine. When the second mag fails, then buy
a second electronic ignition to replace it.
There's nothing wrong with a magneto as a backup to
the electronic ignition . . . it's very unlikely that
the magneto will ever be called to do hard work while
airborne. As long as you paid for the things, you might
as well get your money's worth out of them.
Yes, 95% of your performance improvement will come from
installation of the first electronic ignition. Biggest
benefit is 10x to 100x more reliability, easier
starting and cost of plugs. Fuel savings over the lifetime
of the airplane will be disappointingly small unless you
spend a LOT of time cruising at low manifold pressures
(8000' plus).
Since your situation isn't going to force magnetos
upon you, I'd go for the the whole (dual) enchilada.
If it were my airplane, I'm not sure I'd worry much
about adding a second battery. I'd go for
the all-electric-airplane-on-a-budget approach and
feed both ignition systems from the battery bus.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Maxi Fuse for Alternator B lead |
>
>Hi Bob,
>
>I am looking for a way around the $40 fuse set up. I found the Maxi Fuse
>holder with a 60amp fuse, It comes with an 8-10awg wire. Can this setup
>be used reliably or am I asking for trouble? My concerns are that I will
>be running the 4awg wire from the alternator and then reducing to the
>8-10awg wire to connect to the starter contactor. Have I restricted the
>load carrying capabilities to the smaller wire? Is that bad?The person
>that I talked to said that if it comes with a 60amp fuse it will
>certainly handle it. It made sense but I thought I should get your
>opinion.
Go for it. Keep the wire gage constant. Install the
MAX60 and holder as close as practical to the starter
contactor. Extend the other lead of the fuseholder with
the same size wire and run it to the alternator b-lead.
This is not quite as robust as the b-lead fuse kits
or ANL limiters . . . but I think it will probably perform
well for you.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Airworthiness procedures |
>
>
>Thanks for the lookup on the FARs. I was really wondering how the
>inspector makes his decision about what to include on the airworthiness
>certificate for phase II. Finally, I called the FSDO (local st. louis) and
>talked to an FAA Inspector Sydney Buff. He told me that when the plane is
>ready, An inspector will look over everything, and assuming everything is
>ok, will make out a certificate with operating limitations. If the plane
>is equipped for VFR night, the certificate will say so. If it has an IFR
>panel, it will also say so. At this point I asked him what if I had
>something new that hasn't been approved yet that is supposed to fulfill
>some of the IFR functions (like an EFIS, or electronic engine monitor?) He
>said trying new untested things is what an experimental is all about. He
>would discuss the capabilities to determine if they are supposed to meet
>the FARs for the limitations, and then issue a phase i certificate with
>those capabilities. Whether or not an item is TSO'd only comes up if, in
>trying to determine if an instrument provides a particular function, there
>would be no question about a TSO'd one.
>
> At this time all that is approved is VFR day only, no passengers,
>restricted to a designated test area for 25 hours (or 40 hours is the
>engine is not certified.) During this phase 1 period, it is up to the
>owner to make sure that all the instruments, avionics, and equipment
>conform to provide the necessary functions required by the operating
>limitations as defined in the FARs. At the end of the period, if everything
>is found to provide the intended functionality, phase 2 begins and flight
>for the noted limitations (like night or IFR) are then approved.
>
>If you upgrade the panel later from VFR to IFR, another inspection would be
>necessary and another phase 1 period flown off.
>
>I wasn't sure about how this worked, hope this helps.
>
>Gary Liming
The voice of light and reason from the hallowed halls
of darkness and ignorance. Send that guy a bottle of
his favorite beverage for Christmas. Put me down for
a $10 donation to the cause.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Xpndr Availability |
>
>Bob,
>
>How can I get in line to order the package?
You can put an "order" in from my website order-form.
Just state that you're waiting for a transponder in
the comments box. My distributor says they're en route
from Australia.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
>
>
>I know the ACS type keyswitch doesn't really provide hard security, but it
>does have a psychological barrier I would like to retain.
. . . in addition to lack of security, they're fat, expensive,
not more robust than toggle switches and inconvenient (how many
time have you strapped in and found the keys are still in your
pocket?) Further, only low dollar airplanes take advantage of this
"protection" . . . twin engine airplanes don't fly with two keys.,
Hence, I'll suggest that the notion of protection is a myth . .
> In your book,
>though, you state those switches "contribute to occasional engine
>kick-back with possible damage to engine and/or starter." This is a
>different issue from whether or not a key is used to turn the switch, but
>of the way the contacts work. What is this kick back, and what is it about
>the switch contacts that causes it?
I've not been able to "prove" this but analysis suggests that
during an aborted cranking operation, the prop is still in motion
when the right-mag disabling contacts open . . . IF the right mag
chooses to deliver what ever spark it can produce at this time
and it lights the fire in one cylinder . . . you get a kickback.
Another anecdotal data point is that I've not heard of a single
kickback incident with toggle ignition switches.
Bob . . .
////
(o o)
===========o00o=(_)=o00o=========
< Go ahead, make my day . . . >
< show me where I'm wrong. >
=================================
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Boyd C. Braem" <bcbraem(at)home.com> |
Bob--
I've got dual ignition toggles and starter pushbutton with PM-type
starter and I can get some pretty impressive kickbacks. However, I
think that the problem is due more to low starter torgue than to the
wiring and LightSpeed ignition. It appears that the engine (IO-540 with
10:1 pistons) gets hung up during start with the pistons in the "wrong"
position when the spark is delivered. I will be changing out the
starter at the next annual/conditional, and see what happens.
"Robert L. Nuckolls, III" wrote:
>
>
> >
> > In your book,
> >though, you state those switches "contribute to occasional engine
> >kick-back with possible damage to engine and/or starter." This is a
> >different issue from whether or not a key is used to turn the switch, but
> >of the way the contacts work. What is this kick back, and what is it about
> >the switch contacts that causes it?
>
> I've not been able to "prove" this but analysis suggests that
> during an aborted cranking operation, the prop is still in motion
> when the right-mag disabling contacts open . . . IF the right mag
> chooses to deliver what ever spark it can produce at this time
> and it lights the fire in one cylinder . . . you get a kickback.
>
> Another anecdotal data point is that I've not heard of a single
> kickback incident with toggle ignition switches.
>
> Bob . . .
>
> ////
> (o o)
> ===========o00o=(_)=o00o=========
> < Go ahead, make my day . . . >
> < show me where I'm wrong. >
> =================================
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Maxi Fuse for Alternator B lead |
In a message dated 1/10/02 7:22:26 AM Pacific Standard Time,
nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com writes:
<< Install the MAX60 and holder as close as practical to the starter
contactor. >>
Hi Bob. Now you are confusing me (not hard to do BTW). I thought the idea
was to always locate the wire protector (fuse) as close as possible to the
source of current, in this case the alternator. What have I missed?
Harry Crosby
Pleasanton, California
RV-6, finish kit stuff
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Carl Froehlich" <carlfro(at)erols.com> |
As a side note to this discussion - I am running dual electronic ignitions,
each has it's own on/off toggle switch, and a starter relay operated from a
stick switch. I had two concerns:
- Each ignition is feed from a separate battery via a pull breaker that is
on the battery side of that battery's master switch. This presents an
increased opportunity to inadvertently leave one or both ignitions hot after
shut down.
- Observing the sometimes less than adequate control of children (of all
ages) that tend to gather around RVs at fly ins, I wanted a way to protect
against someone turning on one of the masters then hitting the starter
switch and driving the prop into someone's head.
Here is my solution:
- I have a small peizo buzzer wired to each ignition. Each buzzer gets
power via a 1/2 amp inline solder fuse (the kind that looks like a small
resistor) to guard against a fault in the buzzer tripping that side's
ignition breaker. The ground for each buzzer comes from the alternator
"light" connection. This setup allows for the buzzer(s) to sound when the
ignition switch(s) is on and the engine is not running. After engine start
the alternator light connection goes to buss voltage, thus the buzzer(s) do
not sound.
- On a side panel I installed a small key on/off switch that is in line with
the stick start button, which in turn operates the starter relay (the
starter relay controls power to the starter contactor). I realize this
places 3 switches in series for engine start instead of one hefty push
button, but this is for engine start only. If something fails I'll fix it
before flight.
Carl Froehlich
RV-8A (almost done)
Vienna, VA
----- Original Message -----
From: "Boyd C. Braem" <bcbraem(at)home.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Keyswitch
>
> Bob--
>
> I've got dual ignition toggles and starter pushbutton with PM-type
> starter and I can get some pretty impressive kickbacks. However, I
> think that the problem is due more to low starter torgue than to the
> wiring and LightSpeed ignition. It appears that the engine (IO-540 with
> 10:1 pistons) gets hung up during start with the pistons in the "wrong"
> position when the spark is delivered. I will be changing out the
> starter at the next annual/conditional, and see what happens.
>
> "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" wrote:
> >
> >
> > >
> > > In your book,
> > >though, you state those switches "contribute to occasional engine
> > >kick-back with possible damage to engine and/or starter." This is a
> > >different issue from whether or not a key is used to turn the switch,
but
> > >of the way the contacts work. What is this kick back, and what is it
about
> > >the switch contacts that causes it?
> >
> > I've not been able to "prove" this but analysis suggests that
> > during an aborted cranking operation, the prop is still in motion
> > when the right-mag disabling contacts open . . . IF the right mag
> > chooses to deliver what ever spark it can produce at this time
> > and it lights the fire in one cylinder . . . you get a kickback.
> >
> > Another anecdotal data point is that I've not heard of a single
> > kickback incident with toggle ignition switches.
> >
> > Bob . . .
> >
> > ////
> > (o o)
> > ===========o00o=(_)=o00o=========
> > < Go ahead, make my day . . . >
> > < show me where I'm wrong. >
> > =================================
> >
>
>
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Livingston John W Civ ASC/ENFD <John.Livingston(at)wpafb.af.mil> |
I had similar worries, but implemented a mechanical solution. My battery master
switches (2), E bus switch, and ignition switches are grouped together with
guard tabs on the ends and one separating the ignition switches from the other
3. The guard tabs are just bent aluminum. Inline holes are drilled and a so
that a short alum. rod can be slipped through so that the switches cannot be
toggled. A rivnut is put on an end guard tab and I screw the rod into it. This
arrangement neatly shuts off all power the aircraft. I put another set of holes
(below the line of switches) so that the rod can be slipped into during flight.
I originally was going to hinge a cover over these switches, but the rod
was easier and looks better.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: Carl Froehlich [mailto:carlfro(at)erols.com]
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Keyswitch
As a side note to this discussion - I am running dual electronic ignitions,
each has it's own on/off toggle switch, and a starter relay operated from a
stick switch. I had two concerns:
- Each ignition is feed from a separate battery via a pull breaker that is
on the battery side of that battery's master switch. This presents an
increased opportunity to inadvertently leave one or both ignitions hot after
shut down.
- Observing the sometimes less than adequate control of children (of all
ages) that tend to gather around RVs at fly ins, I wanted a way to protect
against someone turning on one of the masters then hitting the starter
switch and driving the prop into someone's head.
Here is my solution:
- I have a small peizo buzzer wired to each ignition. Each buzzer gets
power via a 1/2 amp inline solder fuse (the kind that looks like a small
resistor) to guard against a fault in the buzzer tripping that side's
ignition breaker. The ground for each buzzer comes from the alternator
"light" connection. This setup allows for the buzzer(s) to sound when the
ignition switch(s) is on and the engine is not running. After engine start
the alternator light connection goes to buss voltage, thus the buzzer(s) do
not sound.
- On a side panel I installed a small key on/off switch that is in line with
the stick start button, which in turn operates the starter relay (the
starter relay controls power to the starter contactor). I realize this
places 3 switches in series for engine start instead of one hefty push
button, but this is for engine start only. If something fails I'll fix it
before flight.
Carl Froehlich
RV-8A (almost done)
Vienna, VA
----- Original Message -----
From: "Boyd C. Braem" <bcbraem(at)home.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Keyswitch
>
> Bob--
>
> I've got dual ignition toggles and starter pushbutton with PM-type
> starter and I can get some pretty impressive kickbacks. However, I
> think that the problem is due more to low starter torgue than to the
> wiring and LightSpeed ignition. It appears that the engine (IO-540 with
> 10:1 pistons) gets hung up during start with the pistons in the "wrong"
> position when the spark is delivered. I will be changing out the
> starter at the next annual/conditional, and see what happens.
>
> "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" wrote:
> >
> >
> > >
> > > In your book,
> > >though, you state those switches "contribute to occasional engine
> > >kick-back with possible damage to engine and/or starter." This is a
> > >different issue from whether or not a key is used to turn the switch,
but
> > >of the way the contacts work. What is this kick back, and what is it
about
> > >the switch contacts that causes it?
> >
> > I've not been able to "prove" this but analysis suggests that
> > during an aborted cranking operation, the prop is still in motion
> > when the right-mag disabling contacts open . . . IF the right mag
> > chooses to deliver what ever spark it can produce at this time
> > and it lights the fire in one cylinder . . . you get a kickback.
> >
> > Another anecdotal data point is that I've not heard of a single
> > kickback incident with toggle ignition switches.
> >
> > Bob . . .
> >
> > ////
> > (o o)
> > ===========o00o=(_)=o00o=========
> > < Go ahead, make my day . . . >
> > < show me where I'm wrong. >
> > =================================
> >
>
>
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BAKEROCB(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | TSO Requirements |
In a message dated 01/10/2002 2:54:38 AM Eastern Standard Time, Gary Liming
writes:
<<....skip...... Do TSO'd instruments have to be used for an IFR approval? If
not, is it just the DAR's opinion about whether a non TSO'd instrument will
be approved or not?>>
1/10/2002
Hello Gary, You've already gotten some good answers to your questions. Please
let me add a little tidbit. The power of the inspector, particularly if he is
an FAA employee, can be very intimidating and subjective. One may be tempted
to "go over his head" on some issues, but beware the power and obtuseness of
the federal bureacracy.
Case in point. A while back I was observing the certification inspection of a
Pulsar by an FAA employee. He wanted the airplane to have TSO'd seatbelts.
There was no such tag on the belts. The owner very quickly and smoothly
called the seat belt seller and had the seller fax a piece of paper.
Inspector was happy. Airplane passed inspection.
Much better result than insisting that the inspector was wrong. Pick your
fights carefully.
'OC' Baker, Builder of KIS TR-1 #116 4/14/97 - ?/?/?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Liming <gary(at)liming.org> |
>
>
> >
> >
> >I know the ACS type keyswitch doesn't really provide hard security, but it
> >does have a psychological barrier I would like to retain.
>
> . . . in addition to lack of security, they're fat, expensive,
> not more robust than toggle switches and inconvenient (how many
> time have you strapped in and found the keys are still in your
> pocket?) Further, only low dollar airplanes take advantage of this
> "protection" . . . twin engine airplanes don't fly with two keys.,
> Hence, I'll suggest that the notion of protection is a myth . .
Well, respectfully, I may have to disagree. I'm sure its not a myth. Most
thefts are crimes of opportunity - just ask a policeman. Seeing the lack
of a key in the ignition does provide a measure of security, at least to
those unfamiliar with aircraft ignition systems, which is 99% of the
public, and those <1% that are knowledgeable aren't likely to steal
airplanes because it would be a career ending decision. I see no reason
why the argument shouldn't apply equally to cars, too, but I'll bet your
car has a keyed ignition switch and it costs an order of magnitude less
than the planes we are talking about. With or without the key there is
still the need for "hard security" i.e, controlling access to the plane
itself in either case. I guess "low dollar" airplanes (the ones for only
$150,000 parked out on the tie downs) have designers that don't assume the
owner springs for locked hangars and night guards?
One other advantage of a key is that if I have the key in my pocket, I know
the prop is not going to start turning from an accidental thrown switch
while I'm doing a preflight.
Those are the advantages of a keyed switch. For disadvantages, it is a few
ounces heavier than two toggles and it does take up about 50% more panel
real estate than two toggles, I agree. Carrying yet another key on the key
ring is another disadvantage, but not if you are going to have door locks
on the plane anyway.
To be fair, we have to say that a disadvantage of the toggle switch labeled
"Start" is that it has zero security.
> > In your book,
> >though, you state those switches "contribute to occasional engine
> >kick-back with possible damage to engine and/or starter." This is a
> >different issue from whether or not a key is used to turn the switch, but
> >of the way the contacts work. What is this kick back, and what is it about
> >the switch contacts that causes it?
>
> I've not been able to "prove" this but analysis suggests that
> during an aborted cranking operation, the prop is still in motion
> when the right-mag disabling contacts open . . . IF the right mag
> chooses to deliver what ever spark it can produce at this time
> and it lights the fire in one cylinder . . . you get a kickback.
>
> Another anecdotal data point is that I've not heard of a single
> kickback incident with toggle ignition switches.
I would like to understand the physics of that better. When you say
"aborted cranking operation" - you mean the operator decided to stop the
start function, but failed to return the switch to "off"? Is this the same
thing as moving the toggle to "start" and then letting it fall back to "on"
without returning it to "off"? How does the operation differ between the
two switching methods?
Thanks,
Gary Liming
PS - I am not a lost cause - I ordered the fuse blocks today! :
)
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Paul Besing" <azpilot(at)extremezone.com> |
I see both sides to this. I installed a key switch, just because I was used
to keys in cessnas and such. I was not aware of the problems with them.
They do wear out, and I have heard many stories of people being grounded
because their switch failed. I do like having a "set of keys" for the
airplane. The only time I take them out is if I go flying to another
destination and leave the airplane. Other than that, they stay in the
ignition while it is in the hanger. Jeff Rose's ignition doesn't respond
well to keyed ignitions either, mainly because of the interuppted power
while doing a mag check. On my next airplane, I think I will go the toggle
route, with those cool red military looking switch guards installed. For
security, I will have outside locks, and maybe some type of hidden push
button to activate everything.
I just hope my key switch doesn't fail while I own the airplane. That would
be a major pain to replace. It took me about 3 freaking hours to wire it
the first time, and I"m sure I forgot by now how to do it again.
Paul Besing
RV-6A N197AB Arizona
http://www.lacodeworks.com/besing
Flying
Kitlog Pro Builder's Log Software
http://www.kitlog.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gary Liming" <gary(at)liming.org>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Keyswitch
>
> >
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >I know the ACS type keyswitch doesn't really provide hard security, but
it
> > >does have a psychological barrier I would like to retain.
> >
> > . . . in addition to lack of security, they're fat, expensive,
> > not more robust than toggle switches and inconvenient (how many
> > time have you strapped in and found the keys are still in your
> > pocket?) Further, only low dollar airplanes take advantage of this
> > "protection" . . . twin engine airplanes don't fly with two keys.,
> > Hence, I'll suggest that the notion of protection is a myth . .
>
> Well, respectfully, I may have to disagree. I'm sure its not a myth.
Most
> thefts are crimes of opportunity - just ask a policeman. Seeing the lack
> of a key in the ignition does provide a measure of security, at least to
> those unfamiliar with aircraft ignition systems, which is 99% of the
> public, and those <1% that are knowledgeable aren't likely to steal
> airplanes because it would be a career ending decision. I see no reason
> why the argument shouldn't apply equally to cars, too, but I'll bet your
> car has a keyed ignition switch and it costs an order of magnitude less
> than the planes we are talking about. With or without the key there is
> still the need for "hard security" i.e, controlling access to the plane
> itself in either case. I guess "low dollar" airplanes (the ones for only
> $150,000 parked out on the tie downs) have designers that don't assume the
> owner springs for locked hangars and night guards?
>
> One other advantage of a key is that if I have the key in my pocket, I
know
> the prop is not going to start turning from an accidental thrown switch
> while I'm doing a preflight.
>
> Those are the advantages of a keyed switch. For disadvantages, it is a
few
> ounces heavier than two toggles and it does take up about 50% more panel
> real estate than two toggles, I agree. Carrying yet another key on the
key
> ring is another disadvantage, but not if you are going to have door locks
> on the plane anyway.
>
> To be fair, we have to say that a disadvantage of the toggle switch
labeled
> "Start" is that it has zero security.
>
> > > In your book,
> > >though, you state those switches "contribute to occasional engine
> > >kick-back with possible damage to engine and/or starter." This is a
> > >different issue from whether or not a key is used to turn the switch,
but
> > >of the way the contacts work. What is this kick back, and what is it
about
> > >the switch contacts that causes it?
> >
> > I've not been able to "prove" this but analysis suggests that
> > during an aborted cranking operation, the prop is still in motion
> > when the right-mag disabling contacts open . . . IF the right mag
> > chooses to deliver what ever spark it can produce at this time
> > and it lights the fire in one cylinder . . . you get a kickback.
> >
> > Another anecdotal data point is that I've not heard of a single
> > kickback incident with toggle ignition switches.
>
> I would like to understand the physics of that better. When you say
> "aborted cranking operation" - you mean the operator decided to stop the
> start function, but failed to return the switch to "off"? Is this the
same
> thing as moving the toggle to "start" and then letting it fall back to
"on"
> without returning it to "off"? How does the operation differ between the
> two switching methods?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Gary Liming
>
> PS - I am not a lost cause - I ordered the fuse blocks today! :
)
>
>
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mike & Lee Anne (mwiebe(at)sympatico.ca)" <mwiebe(at)sympatico.ca> |
| Subject: | Key switch debate |
Gary et.al.....I'm an aeroelectric disciple, but like you, I wanted the
psychological barrier of a key switch. Here was my compromise. I put
both my ignitions (one mag, one electronic) on individual toggle
switches. Beside them, I put a starter key switch for that
psychological boost. I got the key switch from my local automotive
aftermarket shop, so it's a hell of alot simpler than the typical ACS
unit. I think the simplest I could find has four terminals, of which I
used two, simply to energize the starter relay. Once I start, I just
leave the key in the "on" position, even though it really doesn't do
anything more. The risk point is if my engine quits in the air and I've
somehow managed to lose the key in the meantime - a low probability
occurence in my mind. This was my compromise.
Mike
>I know the ACS type keyswitch doesn't really provide hard security, but
it
>does have a psychological barrier I would like to retain.
. . . in addition to lack of security, they're fat, expensive,
not more robust than toggle switches and inconvenient (how many
time have you strapped in and found the keys are still in your
pocket?) Further, only low dollar airplanes take advantage of this
"protection" . . . twin engine airplanes don't fly with two keys.,
Hence, I'll suggest that the notion of protection is a myth . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Richard McCraw" <rmccraw(at)wcvt.com> |
> >I know the ACS type keyswitch doesn't really provide hard security, but
it
> >does have a psychological barrier I would like to retain.
Maybe you could accomplish the desired result by installing a keyswitch in a
prominent location, but don't wire it to anything. :-)
Rick McCraw
RV-7, A-36
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Don Hyde <DonH(at)axonn.com> |
Perhaps you've noticed that two separate keys are now the accepted security
wisdom for keeping dangerous airplanes out of the hands of suicidal
teenagers.
In the current security climate, I figure some sort of ignition keyswitch is
likely to become pretty much mandatory. Imagine trying to explain some
novel security arrangement to an aviation-ignorant and self-important
government "security specialist." Much easier to point to the ignition
switch "just like on a Ford", and your "separate door key" (though cars
don't have those any more).
Maybe you could figure out how to make it freeze the nosewheel for a
steering lock. They'd probably eat that up.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard McCraw [mailto:rmccraw(at)wcvt.com]
> Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 9:49 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Keyswitch
>
>
>
>
>
> > >I know the ACS type keyswitch doesn't really provide hard
> security, but
> it
> > >does have a psychological barrier I would like to retain.
>
>
> Maybe you could accomplish the desired result by installing a
> keyswitch in a
> prominent location, but don't wire it to anything. :-)
>
> Rick McCraw
> RV-7, A-36
>
>
> ===========
> ===========
> ===========
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fergus Kyle" <VE3LVO(at)rac.ca> |
This may be out a bit too far, but I have been considering another 'twist'
to the security at airports drama.
Our local elite hardware outlet advertises a neat, small
accurate magnet lock which could easily be hidden above and behind my
composite cockpit. The "key" is a small exotic metal magnet hidden in my
ring. As I lean forward to unlock the gullwing door, my free hand finds the
unique spot behind which lurks the magnet lock. This enables the unlock.
Anyone could watch and still not fathom the method.
Of course playing with magnets means being careful of compasses
and components- let alone the bankcard. Still it seems an alternative.
Ferg
diesel Europa A064
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Maxi Fuse for Alternator B lead |
>
>In a message dated 1/10/02 7:22:26 AM Pacific Standard Time,
>nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com writes:
>
><< Install the MAX60 and holder as close as practical to the starter
> contactor. >>
>
>
>Hi Bob. Now you are confusing me (not hard to do BTW). I thought the idea
>was to always locate the wire protector (fuse) as close as possible to the
>source of current, in this case the alternator. What have I missed?
The alternator is NOT the source of current that opens
this fuse . . . Alternators are physically incapable of
putting out much more than their design limit with respect
to current (not so for voltage . . . you can get 100V+
from a runaway alternator).
The current source that might antagonize the alternator
b-lead is the BATTERY . . . good for 700-1500 amps
in a fault condition through fat wires. Hence, the
alternator b-lead protection goes at the end of the
wire opposite the alternator connection.
Consider that the alternator b-lead breaker has always
been right at the bus even on the spam cans.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Matthew Mucker" <matthew(at)mucker.net> |
> This may be out a bit too far, but I have been considering another 'twist'
> to the security at airports drama.
> Our local elite hardware outlet advertises a neat, small
> accurate magnet lock which could easily be hidden above and behind my
> composite cockpit. The "key" is a small exotic metal magnet hidden in my
> ring. As I lean forward to unlock the gullwing door, my free hand
> finds the
> unique spot behind which lurks the magnet lock. This enables the unlock.
> Anyone could watch and still not fathom the method.
> Of course playing with magnets means being careful of
> compasses
> and components- let alone the bankcard. Still it seems an alternative.
In the whole offense-versus-defense struggle, ultimately, offense will
always win.
The key to defense is to make it harder to steal/damage/whatever the thing
you're trying to protect than the attacker is willing to attempt. So if
information is worth $1,000,000 to a hacker, and it costs him $1,000,001 to
get that information, the security is effective. (Even though the attacker
can get the information, it costs more to do so than the information is
worth to him. Remember that the same thing will have different value to
different people.)
So we need to consider how much it is "worth" to someone attempting to steal
an airplane. And the defense (locks, etc.) have to make the effort to steal
the plane "worth" more than having the plane.
Personally, I feel the method outlined above is over the top and
unnecessary. (Heck, what if you have to leave the plane in a hurry?) As
another lister said, a keylock is not "secure" by any stretch of the
imagination. But it does take time and effort to overcome a keyswitch.
Assuming a thief wants AN airplane (as opposed to YOUR airplane), the thief
will take the one with the unlocked doors and keys in the ignition (or the
one with no keyswitch).
On the other side of the coin, if a thief wants YOUR airplane, and wants it
badly enough, he's going to get it. There's simply no security of any kind
that is indefeatable.
The way to approach this problem is to determine the value of your airplane
to a potential thief, and design a security system accordingly. If a thief
might spend 3 minutes on the tarmac at night before he's observed and
busted, design a system that takes 3 and a half minutes to defeat.
Granted, I'm talking in theory here, but from the theory comes the
application!
-Matt
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
>eroElectric-List message posted by: "Paul Besing"
Well, respectfully, I may have to disagree. I'm sure its not a myth. Most
thefts are crimes of opportunity - just ask a policeman. Seeing the lack
of a key in the ignition does provide a measure of security, at least to
those unfamiliar with aircraft ignition systems, which is 99% of the
public, and those <1% that are knowledgeable aren't likely to steal
airplanes because it would be a career ending decision. I see no reason
why the argument shouldn't apply equally to cars, too, but I'll bet your
car has a keyed ignition switch and it costs an order of magnitude less
than the planes we are talking about.
LOTS of folks can drive cars and the opportunities for pinching
a car are huge in number; very few folks can drive airplanes
and there's only about 150,000 of them in the whole country.
Stolen airplanes are, by-in-large, taken by someone who is
looking for and intent upon acquiring an airplane.
With or without the key there is
still the need for "hard security" i.e, controlling access to the plane
itself in either case. I guess "low dollar" airplanes (the ones for only
$150,000 parked out on the tie downs) have designers that don't assume the
owner springs for locked hangars and night guards?
The best security for an airplane is a piece of hardened
chain and a really good lock to hold it looped around the
prop in a figure-8 across the hub. It's right out in the
open where anyone can see it without even approaching your
aircraft. It's also out in the open where attempts to cut it
of will be more easily observed.
One other advantage of a key is that if I have the key in my pocket, I know
the prop is not going to start turning from an accidental thrown switch
while I'm doing a preflight.
You preflight with non-pilots at the cockpit controls?
Lost the key for a AA-1 Yankee on a trip to
Arkansas a few years back. I reached behind
the panel, wiggled a couple of wires at the backs
of the magneto p-lead filters until the terminals broke off
their screws, propped the engine and got the airplane
home.
10 minutes with a crimp tool and some new
terminals repaired the damage. If somebody
WANTS your airplane and has a rudimentary
understanding of how it works and the skill
to fly it . . . is going to get it. The
key-locked switch is a minor inconvenience.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Robinson" <jbr(at)hitechnetworks.net> |
Kyle
Do you have any info on this switch? I am planning not to have an
ignition key switch (two rockers) . Does this switch turn on when
exposed to the magnet and stay on until it is exposed to the
magnet again then it turns off? ( like a regular switch).
Jim Robinson
Glll 79R
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Ed Holyoke <bicyclop(at)pacbell.net> |
If they want your radios, and they can't get in, they'll break your
canopy. It won't bother them much but it'll break your heart. You'll
have to pay the deductible on your insurance either way. Repairing the
canopy keeps you on the ground longer.
Ed Holyoke
This may be out a bit too far, but I have been considering another
'twist'
to the security at airports drama.
Our local elite hardware outlet advertises a neat, small
accurate magnet lock which could easily be hidden above and behind my
composite cockpit. The "key" is a small exotic metal magnet hidden in my
ring. As I lean forward to unlock the gullwing door, my free hand finds
the
unique spot behind which lurks the magnet lock. This enables the unlock.
Anyone could watch and still not fathom the method.
Of course playing with magnets means being careful of
compasses
and components- let alone the bankcard. Still it seems an alternative.
Ferg
diesel Europa A064
=
=
=
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
=
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Andrew Seefried" <seefried(at)telus.net> |
Hey Matt, Better to design a security system to satisfy the insurance co.
Andrew Seefried
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Miller Robert <rmiller3(at)earthlink.net> |
Off Topic - sorry.
Rather than stealing the whole plane, I worry more about thieves breaking
through the canopy/canopy lock and stealing avionics or other components.
Solutions?
Robert
Fergus Kyle wrote:
>
> This may be out a bit too far, but I have been considering another 'twist'
> to the security at airports drama.
> Our local elite hardware outlet advertises a neat, small
> accurate magnet lock which could easily be hidden above and behind my
> composite cockpit. The "key" is a small exotic metal magnet hidden in my
> ring. As I lean forward to unlock the gullwing door, my free hand finds the
> unique spot behind which lurks the magnet lock. This enables the unlock.
> Anyone could watch and still not fathom the method.
> Of course playing with magnets means being careful of compasses
> and components- let alone the bankcard. Still it seems an alternative.
> Ferg
> diesel Europa A064
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Carter" <dcarter(at)datarecall.net> |
All the CAP Cessnas that I fly have a big orange metal plate that fits
between the two control columns and also fits over the throttle, prop
control, and mixture control, (all in the full out, not flying position) as
well as covering all the radios in the center of the instrument panel. It
is secured by a big lock. This is the aviation equivalent to "the club"
used on autos.
Granted, us home builders aren't building Cessnas - but perhaps I can design
a "club" equivalent for my RV-6 to cover the avionics (why steal the whole
plane when all you want is $10,000 to $15,000 worth of easy to carry
avionics?) and lock the throttle and mixture in the idle and cutoff
position.
Bob's chain on the prop (wrapped in soft cloth or plastic to protect finish)
is good for protecting the plane from theft (no time wasted on designing and
building another mod to the airplane) but does not protect the avionics.
David Carter
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Xpndr Availability |
>
>>
>>Bob,
>>
>>How can I get in line to order the package?
>
> You can put an "order" in from my website order-form.
> Just state that you're waiting for a transponder in
> the comments box. My distributor says they're en route
> from Australia.
>
> Bob . . .
Just talked to the distributor . . . seems there's
an itty-bitty paperwork problem on the part of-you-
know-who. The product is now awaiting "final"
approval . . . then who knows, maybe we still need
a "final, final," or even a "supreme" approval . . .
Shheessshh!
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Robinson" <jbr(at)hitechnetworks.net> |
One thing we haven't mentioned is canopy covers. I know it can be
removed , but it removes the easy, casual evaluation of your
airplane security when it's parked on the ramp. Another small
deterrent. The determined thief is going to get what he wants,
however. Airshows are a different story, we are letting everyone
look. Another idea, a long way from starter switches however.
Jim Robinson
Glll 79R
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
>
>You may remember me as the guy with the Kitfox who had problems with a tripping
over voltage protector due to spikes generated every time the starter circuit
was disengaged. Anyway the plane is done, it's flown, and the electrical system
works great.
>I've been looking for the male to the female faston connectors I got from you
last year. I thought there were some in your catalog but I certainly don't see
them now. They seem to be a mystery to Aircraft Spruce (which sells the females,
only) and my local auto places don't have much to offer either.
>Any ideas where I can find some?
For some reason, the folks who make the PIDG style
(metal lined insulation grips) choose NOT to make the
mating male Fast-On connector. It's a bummer but that's
the way it is. If we ever come across the male blade
terminal in a PIDG, we'll certainly put it up
in the catalog.
ALTERNATIVELY . . . consider the knife splice. I
prefer these over a mated pair of Fast-Ons. They
offer ease of opening for maintenance . . and excellent
retention of joint under tension. Cover with a piece
of heatshrink. Cut away heatshrink to open and
just put new heatshrink on when you re-close the
joint.
Bob . . .
////
(o o)
===========o00o=(_)=o00o=========
< Go ahead, make my day . . . >
< show me where I'm wrong. >
=================================
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | <racker(at)rmci.net> |
Take your avionics with you. A thief only needs a 3/32" allen wrench and
10 seconds to take your radios. Same time it would take you.
Regarding the whole airplane, put a hidden kill switch somewhere.
Keyswitches are easily defeated (think about it, someone who is in the
business of stealing airplanes knows the pinout). Toggle/start button
combos are in some ways more secure for the average Cessna keyswitch type
thief (since they can and should be wired so a very specific sequence is
required for starter engagement).
A hidden kill switch takes time to find, the thief will move on to an
easier target. Also keeps the people who shouldn't be in your cockpit
anyway during a preflight from putting a prop blade through your head.
Rob Acker (RV-6).
>
>
> Off Topic - sorry.
> Rather than stealing the whole plane, I worry more about thieves
> breaking through the canopy/canopy lock and stealing avionics or other
> components. Solutions?
> Robert
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Charles Brame <charleyb(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Keyswitch - another proposal |
I thought I would throw my idea for a keyed switch out for feedback.
I plan to install toggle ignition switches, one for a mag and one for a
Jeff Rose electronic ignition, and a push button start switch. I also
plan to have a keyed switch as a Master Switch. I don't want a typical
aircraft keyed switch, but rather a simple keyed On/Off switch to
operate the Master Contactor. As of yet, I haven't decided if I want the
keyed switch to also authorize the ignition/starter circuits.
Any comments or recommendations?
Charlie Brame
RV-6A N11CB (res.)
San Antonio
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | BAKEROCB(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | starting kickback |
In a message dated 01/10/2002 2:54:38 AM Eastern Standard Time, Gary Liming
writes:
<< I know the ACS type keyswitch doesn't really provide hard security, but it
does have a psychological barrier I would like to retain. In your book,
though, you state those switches "contribute to occasional engine
kick-back with possible damage to engine and/or starter." This is a
different issue from whether or not a key is used to turn the switch, but
of the way the contacts work. What is this kick back, and what is it about
the switch contacts that causes it? Thanks, Gary Liming >>
1/11/2002
Hello Gary, Because there are so many different possible combinations of
magnetos and switching it is impossible to cover every possible cause of
kickbacks in one posting, but let me post one scenario for you.
1) While cranking the engine during starting the spark plugs need to fire
near top dead center of the piston rather than the 25 degrees or so before
top dead center that they need to fire during normal running.
2) So various means exist to retard or delay the sparking of aircraft engine
magnetos during cranking. One means is impulse coupling, another means is
retard breaker points. Sometimes these devices are put on both magnetos,
sometimes on just one of the magnetos.
3) Lets say we have an engine with an impulse coupling on the left magneto
only and the right magneto is direct drive.
4) The ignition switch is set up so that in the crank position the P lead on
the left mag is not connected to ground and the magneto can fire the spark
plugs near piston top dead center. And the P lead to the right magneto is
connected to ground when the ignition switch is in the crank position so that
the right magneto will not fire the spark plugs at 25 degrees before piston
top dead center and cause a kickback.
5) But now lets suppose that the contact points in the ignition switch are
worn to the point that the right magneto is not positively grounded when the
switch is in the crank position. The result is that the right magneto may
fire at 25 degrees or so before piston top dead center during cranking and
cause a kickback.
6) On some engines with light propellers this kickback can be so violent that
the starter gears are damaged, metal is introduced into the engine, and
engine failure can result.
'OC' Baker, Builder of KIS TR-1 #116 4/14/97 - ?/?/?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Liming <gary(at)liming.org> |
Thanks, OC for the description of what is happening. This is more about
the physics of the switches I was interested in. From what I get by
applying your explanation to my list of pros and cons:
1. Key switches when working properly prevent kickback by not allowing any
other combination of switch settings when cranking other than grounding the
non-retarded mag. Toggle switches when working properly allow an operator
to set the mag on that should be grounded which would allow kickback. I
think this is a previously unstated advantage of keyswitches.
2. Keyswitches that have worn contacts might allow kickback; toggle
switches with worn contacts might allow kickback.
(Please don't tell me my checklist is broken - I really doubt I allow
unauthorized people in my cockpit during preflight or any other time more
than any other list member. This could happen from a lineman who has to
move your plane out of weather whose never been in anything but a spamcan,
or as another lister pointed out, a rubbernecker at an airshow, or one of
several other scenarios. Safety is as much about things you don't intend
to happen as things that conform to the checklist.)
I am not on a crusade to sell keyswitches - I just want an objective list
of *both* pros and cons to make up my mind.
>Hello Gary, Because there are so many different possible combinations of
>magnetos and switching it is impossible to cover every possible cause of
>kickbacks in one posting, but let me post one scenario for you.
>
>1) While cranking the engine during starting the spark plugs need to fire
>near top dead center of the piston rather than the 25 degrees or so before
>top dead center that they need to fire during normal running.
>
>2) So various means exist to retard or delay the sparking of aircraft engine
>magnetos during cranking. One means is impulse coupling, another means is
>retard breaker points. Sometimes these devices are put on both magnetos,
>sometimes on just one of the magnetos.
>
>3) Lets say we have an engine with an impulse coupling on the left magneto
>only and the right magneto is direct drive.
>
>4) The ignition switch is set up so that in the crank position the P lead on
>the left mag is not connected to ground and the magneto can fire the spark
>plugs near piston top dead center. And the P lead to the right magneto is
>connected to ground when the ignition switch is in the crank position so that
>the right magneto will not fire the spark plugs at 25 degrees before piston
>top dead center and cause a kickback.
>
>5) But now lets suppose that the contact points in the ignition switch are
>worn to the point that the right magneto is not positively grounded when the
>switch is in the crank position. The result is that the right magneto may
>fire at 25 degrees or so before piston top dead center during cranking and
>cause a kickback.
>
>6) On some engines with light propellers this kickback can be so violent that
>the starter gears are damaged, metal is introduced into the engine, and
>engine failure can result.
>
>'OC' Baker, Builder of KIS TR-1 #116 4/14/97 - ?/?/?
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stein Bruch" <stein(at)steinair.com> |
| Subject: | Keyswitch - another proposal |
Regarding all this key switch "stuff", go to a large boat supply store or
check online at http://www.boatus.com . I visited one of their stores this
week and was amazed. Thy have a GREAT selection of electrical components
including Ground Blocks, Terminal Strips, and the SAME ANL current limiters
that Bob sells. WAYYYY better than an auto parts store, plus the stuff is
high quality. I found several different styles of key switches, push
buttons, etc..
Just and FYI,
Stein Bruch
RV6, Minneapolis
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of
Charles Brame
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Keyswitch - another proposal
I thought I would throw my idea for a keyed switch out for feedback.
I plan to install toggle ignition switches, one for a mag and one for a
Jeff Rose electronic ignition, and a push button start switch. I also
plan to have a keyed switch as a Master Switch. I don't want a typical
aircraft keyed switch, but rather a simple keyed On/Off switch to
operate the Master Contactor. As of yet, I haven't decided if I want the
keyed switch to also authorize the ignition/starter circuits.
Any comments or recommendations?
Charlie Brame
RV-6A N11CB (res.)
San Antonio
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Don Hyde <DonH(at)axonn.com> |
Unfortunately we are being forced into the position where the potential
value to the thief might be the value of the refinery or nuclear waste
storage site he could crash it into. That could be what we will be held to
(by the gimme).
The chain on the prop looks pretty good (and cost effective) to me, if it
can slow a thief down enough that someone will see him and put a stop to it
in time.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Matthew Mucker [mailto:matthew(at)mucker.net]
> Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 9:48 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Security
>
>
>
>
> > This may be out a bit too far, but I have been considering
> another 'twist'
> > to the security at airports drama.
> > Our local elite hardware outlet advertises a neat, small
> > accurate magnet lock which could easily be hidden above and
> behind my
> > composite cockpit. The "key" is a small exotic metal magnet
> hidden in my
> > ring. As I lean forward to unlock the gullwing door, my free hand
> > finds the
> > unique spot behind which lurks the magnet lock. This
> enables the unlock.
> > Anyone could watch and still not fathom the method.
> > Of course playing with magnets means being careful of
> > compasses
> > and components- let alone the bankcard. Still it seems an
> alternative.
>
>
> In the whole offense-versus-defense struggle, ultimately, offense will
> always win.
>
> The key to defense is to make it harder to
> steal/damage/whatever the thing
> you're trying to protect than the attacker is willing to
> attempt. So if
> information is worth $1,000,000 to a hacker, and it costs him
> $1,000,001 to
> get that information, the security is effective. (Even
> though the attacker
> can get the information, it costs more to do so than the
> information is
> worth to him. Remember that the same thing will have
> different value to
> different people.)
>
> So we need to consider how much it is "worth" to someone
> attempting to steal
> an airplane. And the defense (locks, etc.) have to make the
> effort to steal
> the plane "worth" more than having the plane.
>
> Personally, I feel the method outlined above is over the top and
> unnecessary. (Heck, what if you have to leave the plane in a
> hurry?) As
> another lister said, a keylock is not "secure" by any stretch of the
> imagination. But it does take time and effort to overcome a
> keyswitch.
> Assuming a thief wants AN airplane (as opposed to YOUR
> airplane), the thief
> will take the one with the unlocked doors and keys in the
> ignition (or the
> one with no keyswitch).
>
> On the other side of the coin, if a thief wants YOUR
> airplane, and wants it
> badly enough, he's going to get it. There's simply no
> security of any kind
> that is indefeatable.
>
> The way to approach this problem is to determine the value of
> your airplane
> to a potential thief, and design a security system
> accordingly. If a thief
> might spend 3 minutes on the tarmac at night before he's observed and
> busted, design a system that takes 3 and a half minutes to defeat.
>
> Granted, I'm talking in theory here, but from the theory comes the
> application!
>
> -Matt
>
>
> ===========
> ===========
> ===========
> ===========
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Matthew Mucker" <matthew(at)mucker.net> |
| Subject: | Keyswitch - another proposal |
I'd have the keyed switch operate ONLY the starter.
That way you can't start the plane without the keys, but you don't need the
keys to operate stuff like radios, lights, etc.
>
> I plan to install toggle ignition switches, one for a mag and one for a
> Jeff Rose electronic ignition, and a push button start switch. I also
> plan to have a keyed switch as a Master Switch. I don't want a typical
> aircraft keyed switch, but rather a simple keyed On/Off switch to
> operate the Master Contactor. As of yet, I haven't decided if I want the
> keyed switch to also authorize the ignition/starter circuits.
>
> Any comments or recommendations?
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Arthur Glaser <airplane(at)megsinet.net> |
I used to lock a big chain around the prop on my last experimental. It could not
be stolen unless removed which would be a pain.
Don Hyde wrote:
>
> Perhaps you've noticed that two separate keys are now the accepted security
> wisdom for keeping dangerous airplanes out of the hands of suicidal
> teenagers.
>
> In the current security climate, I figure some sort of ignition keyswitch is
> likely to become pretty much mandatory. Imagine trying to explain some
> novel security arrangement to an aviation-ignorant and self-important
> government "security specialist." Much easier to point to the ignition
> switch "just like on a Ford", and your "separate door key" (though cars
> don't have those any more).
>
> Maybe you could figure out how to make it freeze the nosewheel for a
> steering lock. They'd probably eat that up.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Richard McCraw [mailto:rmccraw(at)wcvt.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2002 9:49 PM
> > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
> > Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Keyswitch
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > >I know the ACS type keyswitch doesn't really provide hard
> > security, but
> > it
> > > >does have a psychological barrier I would like to retain.
> >
> >
> > Maybe you could accomplish the desired result by installing a
> > keyswitch in a
> > prominent location, but don't wire it to anything. :-)
> >
> > Rick McCraw
> > RV-7, A-36
> >
> >
> > ===========
> > ===========
> > ===========
>
________________________________________________________________________________
Listers:
Molex makes these connectors - scroll toward the bottom of these pages:
http://www.terminaltown.com/Pages/Page9.html for the red ones (awg 22-18) or
here http://www.terminaltown.com/Pages/Page10.html for the blue (awg 16-14)
ones.
Regards,
Gaylen Lerohl
Terminaltown
> >I've been looking for the male to the female faston connectors I got from
you last year. I thought there were some in your catalog but I certainly
don't see them now. They seem to be a mystery to Aircraft Spruce (which
sells the females, only) and my local auto places don't have much to offer
either.
> >Any ideas where I can find some?
>
>
> For some reason, the folks who make the PIDG style
> (metal lined insulation grips) choose NOT to make the
> mating male Fast-On connector.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ed Perry" <eperry(at)san.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Maxi Fuse for Alternator B Lead |
Hi Bob,
Just when I felt OK with running the 60amp Maxi Fuse I went out and
checked my truck alternator. It uses what looks to be an 8awg wire. The
Maxi Fuse Holder comes with a 10awg. I checked my electric calculator
and it says that I need an 8awg. What happens if I use the 10awg with a
60amp fuse? Does the wire melt first or the fuse blow? Would it be
better to use a 40 amp fuse? In the event that it is not a good idea to
run this setup, do you have anyway to connect an 8awg wire to the #8
screws on my 50amp circuit breaker?
As Always Thank You for your help,
Ed Perry
eperry(at)san.rr.com
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Swartzendruber" <dswartzendruber(at)earthlink.net> |
| Subject: | Re: MIDI Fuse for Alternator B Lead |
Bob,
Have you stopped using the Littelfuse MIDI fuses in the alternator B lead?
They make a fairly inexpensive fuse holder for that series of fuses as well.
I've included links to the Littelfuse website for those of you that would
like to take a look. If there is something you don't like about using these
fuses, I'd like to be educated about it.
David Swartzendruber
http://www.littelfuse.com/ASP/Search/detail.asp?ID=131
http://www.littelfuse.com/ASP/Search/detail.asp?ID=289
>
> Hi Bob,
>
> Just when I felt OK with running the 60amp Maxi Fuse I went out and
> checked my truck alternator. It uses what looks to be an 8awg wire. The
> Maxi Fuse Holder comes with a 10awg. I checked my electric calculator
> and it says that I need an 8awg. What happens if I use the 10awg with a
> 60amp fuse? Does the wire melt first or the fuse blow? Would it be
> better to use a 40 amp fuse? In the event that it is not a good idea to
> run this setup, do you have anyway to connect an 8awg wire to the #8
> screws on my 50amp circuit breaker?
>
> As Always Thank You for your help,
> Ed Perry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Oke" <wjoke(at)home.com> |
How's this for an idea. Put a simple on/off toggle on the forward side of
the firewall (protected appropriately from heat, oil, etc.) that is
reachable through the oil dipstick access. Wire the starter contractor
through it. After flight, when checking the oil, flip the switch to the off
position. This should frustrate most bad guys trying to start the airplane
while you are away. Next time out to fly, check the oil and while inside the
cowl, flip the switch "on" to allow the circuit to be completed with the
usual cockpit switches.
About as cheap as it gets really. If the switch dies, worst that happens is
that you will not be able to crank the engine. An inconvenience but hardly a
safety hazard. Probably not bad protection for airshow and fly-in "switch
flippers" either.
Jim Oke
RV-6
----- Original Message -----
From: <racker(at)rmci.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Security
>
> Take your avionics with you. A thief only needs a 3/32" allen wrench and
> 10 seconds to take your radios. Same time it would take you.
>
> Regarding the whole airplane, put a hidden kill switch somewhere.
>
> Keyswitches are easily defeated (think about it, someone who is in the
> business of stealing airplanes knows the pinout). Toggle/start button
> combos are in some ways more secure for the average Cessna keyswitch type
> thief (since they can and should be wired so a very specific sequence is
> required for starter engagement).
>
> A hidden kill switch takes time to find, the thief will move on to an
> easier target. Also keeps the people who shouldn't be in your cockpit
> anyway during a preflight from putting a prop blade through your head.
>
> Rob Acker (RV-6).
>
>
> >
> >
> > Off Topic - sorry.
> > Rather than stealing the whole plane, I worry more about thieves
> > breaking through the canopy/canopy lock and stealing avionics or other
> > components. Solutions?
> > Robert
>
>
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David Carter" <dcarter(at)datarecall.net> |
Gaylen at Terminaltown and Bob Kuckolls,
When I looked at the two pages in the Terminaltown website, I also noticed
the "knife lock" items, Nife-16/14 & -22/18.
Bob, this morning you said, "Alternatively . . . consider the knife splice.
I prefer these over a mated pair of Fast-Ons. They offer ease of opening
form maintenance . . . Cover with . . .heatshrink . . . cut heatshrink to
open and . . . put on new heatshrink with you re-close. . ."
- Is this "Knife lock" what you were referring to?
If so, I don't quite visualize, from looking at the picture, what this thing
is. If the insulated part on the left goes on 1 wire end and the
uninsulated part sticking out is attached to the other wire, then how do
they mate? Does the uninsulated end slide in and lock somehow? ( I should
buy a package of 10 and educate myself.)
David Carter
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gaylen Lerohl" <lerohl@rea-alp.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: faston
<lerohl@rea-alp.com>
>
> Listers:
> Molex makes these connectors - scroll toward the bottom of these pages:
> http://www.terminaltown.com/Pages/Page9.html for the red ones (awg 22-18)
or
> here http://www.terminaltown.com/Pages/Page10.html for the blue (awg
16-14)
> ones.
>
> Regards,
> Gaylen Lerohl
> Terminaltown
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Vern Smith <vismith(at)sympatico.ca> |
Installing microswitches mounted on both doors, wired in series to the input of
your alarm system which turns on your strobe light/ wig-wag landing light ..just
remember to activate the alarm circuit when locking up your aircraft..it
works...Vern Smith
Miller Robert wrote:
>
> Off Topic - sorry.
> Rather than stealing the whole plane, I worry more about thieves breaking
> through the canopy/canopy lock and stealing avionics or other components.
> Solutions?
> Robert
>
> Fergus Kyle wrote:
>
> >
> > This may be out a bit too far, but I have been considering another 'twist'
> > to the security at airports drama.
> > Our local elite hardware outlet advertises a neat, small
> > accurate magnet lock which could easily be hidden above and behind my
> > composite cockpit. The "key" is a small exotic metal magnet hidden in my
> > ring. As I lean forward to unlock the gullwing door, my free hand finds the
> > unique spot behind which lurks the magnet lock. This enables the unlock.
> > Anyone could watch and still not fathom the method.
> > Of course playing with magnets means being careful of compasses
> > and components- let alone the bankcard. Still it seems an alternative.
> > Ferg
> > diesel Europa A064
> >
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Curt Reimer" <cgreimer(at)mb.sympatico.ca> |
> 1. Key switches when working properly prevent kickback by not allowing any
> other combination of switch settings when cranking other than grounding
the
> non-retarded mag. Toggle switches when working properly allow an operator
> to set the mag on that should be grounded which would allow kickback. I
> think this is a previously unstated advantage of keyswitches.
It is relatively simple to use a DPDT toggle switch for the non-retarded mag
so that you can't
engage the starter with this mag on. You just run the starter circuit
through the other set of
contacts. No possibility of kickback. Also doubles as a security measure:
any aircraft-stealing
yahoo is obviously going to flip on both mag switches before trying to
start. The starter won't
energize. The thief then abandons my airplane in disgust thinking my battery
is dead and goes
looking for easier prey, like maybe an aircraft with a key switch that he
has learned how to hotwire.
Yet another advantage for toggle switches. :-)
I hope aircraft thieves don't subscribe to this list.
Curt
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | czechsix(at)juno.com |
I'm using a simple keyswitch for my starter that is spring-loaded for
momentary "on" and just has two contacts in the back. I got it at a
local locksmith's shop along with a matching lock (same key) for my
forward baggage door on my RV-8A. Total for both was about $30. For the
mag and elec. ignition I'm using two toggle switches. Yes, yes, yes I
know this wouldn't stop a thief and is not intended to. The canopy will
not even be locked (take my avionics, don't damage the airplane please).
My only reason for the keyed start switch is for safety. I respectfully
disagree with Bob on this one....of course I'm not going to let somebody
sit in my airplane unattended and push buttons, but this does not mean it
could never happen. History is full of fatal accidents that resulted from
scenarios that weren't supposed to occur. Of course you can't possibly
design for every imaginable accident scenario without going overboard in
complexity, but a simple keyed start switch is hardly excessive IMHO.
Whether at my home airport or a fly-in, as long as the key's in my pocket
nobody (other than a thief) is going to crank that engine intentionally
or otherwise. Not a flame to those who disagree, just my airplane and my
personal choice....
--Mark Navratil
Cedar Rapids, Iowa
RV-8A finishing
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Fergus Kyle" <VE3LVO(at)rac.ca> |
| Subject: | Hidden Magnetic catch |
Background:
>> Our local elite hardware outlet advertises a neat, small accurate
magnet lock which could easily be hidden above and behind my composite
cockpit. The "key" is a small rare-earth magnet hidden in my ring. As I lean
forward to unlock the gullwing door, my free hand finds the unique spot
behind which lurks the magnet lock. This enables the unlock. Anyone could
watch and still not fathom the method.<<
Reply:
>Personally, I feel the method outlined above is over the top and
unnecessary. (Heck, what if you have to leave the plane in a hurry?)
Defence:
Maybe, but it's simple, easy to install and relatively cheap. It is
only for entry and has nothing to do with exit, unless of course you keylock
yourself IN.
Reply:
As another lister said, a keylock is not "secure" by any stretch of the
imagination. But it does take time and effort to overcome a keyswitch.
Assuming a thief wants AN airplane (as opposed to YOUR airplane), the thief
will take the one with the unlocked doors and keys in the ignition (or the
one with no keyswitch).
Defence:
Exactly. It takes more time to overcome a second defence - the magnet. So
the thief moves on.......
Reply:
On the other side of the coin, if a thief wants YOUR airplane, and wants it
badly enough, he's going to get it. There's simply no security of any kind
that is indefeatable.
Defence:
True, but then that is outside the purpose of the initial suggestion.
For instance, if they smash the canopy to enter, they won't be stealing the
whole aircraft by flying it - not for long anyway. Nor, if they are vandals,
will any aircraft defence work to prevent damage - unless it's hung 100feet
from a cherrypicker. Then they'll steal the whole kaboodle, with an aircraft
for dividend.
Ferg
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
>
>Gaylen at Terminaltown and Bob Kuckolls,
>
>When I looked at the two pages in the Terminaltown website, I also noticed
>the "knife lock" items, Nife-16/14 & -22/18.
>
>Bob, this morning you said, "Alternatively . . . consider the knife splice.
>I prefer these over a mated pair of Fast-Ons. They offer ease of opening
>form maintenance . . . Cover with . . .heatshrink . . . cut heatshrink to
>open and . . . put on new heatshrink with you re-close. . ."
> - Is this "Knife lock" what you were referring to?
>
>If so, I don't quite visualize, from looking at the picture, what this thing
>is. If the insulated part on the left goes on 1 wire end and the
>uninsulated part sticking out is attached to the other wire, then how do
>they mate? Does the uninsulated end slide in and lock somehow? ( I should
>buy a package of 10 and educate myself.)
Take a peek at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/wiring/wiring.html#s816
In the descriptor for this product, you'll see a place to
"click here" to see how mated pairs of knife splices are
used to join wires using heatshrink to finish off the joints.
Bob . . .
////
(o o)
===========o00o=(_)=o00o=========
< Go ahead, make my day . . . >
< show me where I'm wrong. >
=================================
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: MIDI Fuse for Alternator B Lead |
>
>Bob,
>Have you stopped using the Littelfuse MIDI fuses in the alternator B lead?
>They make a fairly inexpensive fuse holder for that series of fuses as well.
>I've included links to the Littelfuse website for those of you that would
>like to take a look. If there is something you don't like about using these
>fuses, I'd like to be educated about it.
>David Swartzendruber
>
>http://www.littelfuse.com/ASP/Search/detail.asp?ID=131
>http://www.littelfuse.com/ASP/Search/detail.asp?ID=289
Dave,
Thanks for the heads up on this. I've been thinking
about an integrated shunt/fuseholder using the MIDI
series fuses . . . when I started considering this
project, I didn't find the off-the-shelf fuseholders
listed. I've put in for a quotation on the holders
and fuses to match. I'll get some samples in and then
see about getting Bill to add them to the catalog.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Liming <gary(at)liming.org> |
>
>It is relatively simple to use a DPDT toggle switch for the non-retarded mag
>so that you can't
>engage the starter with this mag on. You just run the starter circuit
>through the other set of
>contacts. No possibility of kickback. Also doubles as a security measure:
>any aircraft-stealing
>yahoo is obviously going to flip on both mag switches before trying to
>start. The starter won't
>energize. The thief then abandons my airplane in disgust thinking my battery
>is dead and goes
>looking for easier prey, like maybe an aircraft with a key switch that he
>has learned how to hotwire.
>Yet another advantage for toggle switches. :-)
Which is how Bob has wired them in Z-11 and later, but not the earlier ones
like Z4 which is what I was thinking of. That is an advantage that both
key switches and toggles have.
Gary Liming
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Carl Bertrand" <cgbrt(at)mondenet.com> |
Hi,
Decided to jump-in on this and pass-on my solution to a start circuit
problem.
I have a 912 in my 701 with a Keyswitch at mid panel which I can operate
with my right hand for ground starts, leaving my left hand to operate the
choke and throttle. For airstarts with this setup I need to let go of the
stick to turn the keyswitch or grow a third hand.
The solution to the third hand came to me when I installed a military style
stick grip with lots of available button switches. I connected one of those
switches trough a guarded arming switch by the throttle to activate the
starter circuit. In an emergency I can now keep my right hand on the stick
and turn the arming switch on with my left then use it to choke and operate
the throttle.
The arming switch is to prevent inadvertent starter selection in the air or
on the ground.
In practice it works well, hope I never have to use it for real.
Carl
701/912/amphibs
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Haywire" <haywire(at)telus.net> |
| Subject: | Security of Avionics |
Sorry that this is still a little off topic, but I heard a really unique
solution on one of these lists about a year back. Can't remember who, but
one of the listers made a cardboard cut-out that fit into his panel space.
He then had pictures of old instruments & radios which he printed life size
from his computer and pasted onto his "panel". The result is an old basic
VFR panel, which obviously won't hold up to a close inspection, but when
peering through his tinted canopy, it looks very real & very worthless.
Cardboard panel is easily popped out and stored in the cargo area, revealing
his "real" expensive panel.
I plan to use this idea when the time comes. Along with an ignition key.
And a chain on the prop. And an alarm system. And an armed guard.........
Oh what the hell, maybe I'll just sleep in it....
S. Todd Bartrim
13B RV-9 (finishing)
C-FSTB (reserved)
> >
> > Off Topic - sorry.
> > Rather than stealing the whole plane, I worry more about
> thieves breaking
> > through the canopy/canopy lock and stealing avionics or other
> components.
> > Solutions?
> > Robert
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Rick DeCiero <rsdec1(at)star.net> |
I have been trying to figure out what dead weight I would install in the tail should
it be necessary for weight and balance. The security chain and lock stowed
in a floor mounted tool box sounds like an excellent option. For the electrical
end of it, I will probably end up with a hidden keyed SPST switch.
Rick D.
Murphy Rebel
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Steve Williams <sbw(at)sbw.org> |
| Subject: | Bend large copper lug? |
My B&C starter and a friend's Sky-Tec starter both have the large lug pointing
aft, whereas the Grumman's stock Prestolite starter's lug points to the side.
That means the stock starter cable doesn't mate well with the new starters.
I've been thinking I'd have a new cable fabricated with the ring lug clocked differently,
but I hadn't yet actually tried to find the right clocking.
Now my friend says that he found a copper ring lug and bent it 90 degrees so the
cable can approach the starter from the same direction as before, that is, directly
toward the starter from the aft.
I haven't wanted to bend the ring lug because I figured it'd weaken it badly.
Of what material is a typical large ring lug? I thought they were plated copper,
but maybe they're steel or something.
Can a copper lug safely be bent in this way? Will it have any tendency to break
at the bend?
Thanks.
Steve Williams
http://www.sbw.org/
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Bend large copper lug? |
Steve Williams wrote:
>
> I haven't wanted to bend the ring lug because I figured it'd weaken it badly.
>
> Of what material is a typical large ring lug? I thought they were plated copper,
but maybe they're steel or something.
>
> Can a copper lug safely be bent in this way?
*** I think you can bend it if you anneal the copper first. You heat it up
red hot and then.... I don't remember whether you quench it or let it air
cool. Anybody else remember?
- Jerry Kaidor ( jerry(at)tr2.com )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "iflych2" <iflych2(at)home.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Bend large copper lug? |
Air cooling will anneal it. ( Nice web site, Steve.)
R
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Bend large copper lug? |
In a message dated 1/13/2002 12:20:13 PM Pacific Standard Time, sbw(at)sbw.org
writes:
<< That means the stock starter cable doesn't mate well with the new starters.
So true.
I've been thinking I'd have a new cable fabricated with the ring lug clocked
differently, but I hadn't yet actually tried to find the right clocking.
Now my friend says that he found a copper ring lug and bent it 90 degrees so
the cable can approach the starter from the same direction as before, that
is, directly toward the starter from the aft.
I haven't wanted to bend the ring lug because I figured it'd weaken it badly.
Of what material is a typical large ring lug? I thought they were plated
copper, but maybe they're steel or something.
Can a copper lug safely be bent in this way? Will it have any tendency to
break at the bend?
Thanks.
Steve Williams >>
Hi Steve,
I'm not sure but I don't think the lug is copper. I have had this same
problem on about 5 starters that I have installed now and I have just bent
the lug about 100 degrees (not quite a 90) and installed it that way. I
think it is malleable enough that you would have to bend it several times
back and forth to break it. You can clock it some if necessary by twisting
the cable thru the last foot or so.
Cliff
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jim Robinson" <jbr(at)hitechnetworks.net> |
| Subject: | Re: Bend large copper lug? |
Isn't that going to be hard to do with it attached to the wire. At
least that what I understood from the post.
Jim
Glll 79R
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
| Subject: | Re: Bend large copper lug? |
Don't get it too hot as you can melt it. It doesn't matter whether you let
ot cool quick or slow. It still will be the same softness.
Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh
----- Original Message -----
From: <jerry(at)tr2.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Bend large copper lug?
Steve Williams wrote:
>
> I haven't wanted to bend the ring lug because I figured it'd weaken it
badly.
>
> Of what material is a typical large ring lug? I thought they were plated
copper, but maybe they're steel or something.
>
> Can a copper lug safely be bent in this way?
*** I think you can bend it if you anneal the copper first. You heat it up
red hot and then.... I don't remember whether you quench it or let it air
cool. Anybody else remember?
- Jerry Kaidor ( jerry(at)tr2.com )
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Bend large copper lug? |
>
>My B&C starter and a friend's Sky-Tec starter both have the large lug pointing
aft, whereas the Grumman's stock Prestolite starter's lug points to the side.
>
>That means the stock starter cable doesn't mate well with the new starters.
>
>I've been thinking I'd have a new cable fabricated with the ring lug clocked differently,
but I hadn't yet actually tried to find the right clocking.
>
>Now my friend says that he found a copper ring lug and bent it 90 degrees so the
cable can approach the starter from the same direction as before, that is,
directly toward the starter from the aft.
>
>I haven't wanted to bend the ring lug because I figured it'd weaken it badly.
>
>Of what material is a typical large ring lug? I thought they were plated copper,
but maybe they're steel or something.
>
>Can a copper lug safely be bent in this way? Will it have any tendency to break
at the bend?
We do this all the time . . . even the whippier
copper alloys are ductile . . . they wouldn't make
good gas-tight joints when you clamp down on them
with nuts=n=washers if they weren't. I used to
stock the larger terminals with an extra long tongue
between the hole and the end of the wire so that terminals
could be custom formed if need be.
A single bending operation to get the lug pointed the
right direction will not seriously affect the terminal's
mechanical properties.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | CBFLESHREN(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | coax connector deal ! |
FWIW , FYI , there is a great deal (so far) on Ebay for 100 NEW coax
connectors . I'll concede it sounds like a "Nuckolls Quantity" . These are
the nice silver plated/Mil Spec females , don't know the intended impedance
(diameter) . Item # 1321148455 . Chris . Do Not
Archive .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: coax connector deal ! |
>
>FWIW , FYI , there is a great deal (so far) on Ebay for 100 NEW coax
>connectors . I'll concede it sounds like a "Nuckolls Quantity" . These are
>the nice silver plated/Mil Spec females , don't know the intended impedance
>(diameter) . Item # 1321148455 . Chris . Do Not
>Archive .
>
I looked into this. The ad doesn't say what dash number
of connector these are and there are many. Given that they
are surplus to FletchAir, there's a strong probability that
these are optimized for RG-58 coax . . . not a problem
for use with RG-400 . . . the BIG unknown is the shape
of the center pin . . . the older crimp center pins were
kind of barrel shaped in the wire grip area . . . these
may not work well with anything but the AMP tool designed
to install them.
Bob . . .
////
(o o)
===========o00o=(_)=o00o=========
< Go ahead, make my day . . . >
< show me where I'm wrong. >
=================================
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Steve Williams <sbw(at)sbw.org> |
| Subject: | Re: coax connector deal ! |
>... The ad doesn't say what dash number ...
There's a little sheet visible in one of the photos. It says:
M39012/16-0004 AMP P/N 2-331350-1
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: coax connector deal ! |
>
>>... The ad doesn't say what dash number ...
>
>There's a little sheet visible in one of the photos. It says:
>
>M39012/16-0004 AMP P/N 2-331350-1
Good eye. I missed that. Okay, these are optimized
for RG-58 and would work with RG-400 . . . original
problem persists in that I believe the contact is not
a smooth cylinder in the wire grip area. There is
risk that the hex-die tool we offer will not properly
install these pins.
Tried to look up sub-assembly drawings for details
on this connector. Root drawing:
http://catalog.tycoelectronics.com/TE/docs/pdf/4/50/222054.pdf
Detail parts drawings (particularly on the
2-331347-8 contact) are not available from
the Tyco/AMP website so I cannot confirm my
hypothesis.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Knicholas2(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | What alternator is this? |
Maybe you can help - I just picked up a Lycoming 0-320 that has an alternator
on it. However, I can't determine the amperage output on it and the
previous owner did not know. The only numbers on it are:
D7AF 10300 JA NEC
What do ya think?
Kim Nicholas
RV9
Seattle
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Lonnie Benson" <lonben(at)erols.com> |
| Subject: | Re: What alternator is this? |
It would appear that it is a Nippon Electric Corp. Alternator. Do an
internet search or call your local Japanese Car Dealer Parts Dept.
Lonnie Benson
Seattle native living in Virginia
Murphy Rebel
Ready to install engine.
----- Original Message -----
From: <Knicholas2(at)aol.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: What alternator is this?
>
> Maybe you can help - I just picked up a Lycoming 0-320 that has an
alternator
> on it. However, I can't determine the amperage output on it and the
> previous owner did not know. The only numbers on it are:
>
> D7AF 10300 JA NEC
>
> What do ya think?
>
> Kim Nicholas
> RV9
> Seattle
>
>
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: What alternator is this? |
>
>Maybe you can help - I just picked up a Lycoming 0-320 that has an alternator
>on it. However, I can't determine the amperage output on it and the
>previous owner did not know. The only numbers on it are:
>
>D7AF 10300 JA NEC
That sorta-kinda looks like a Ford part number
but the best way to find out is call a local alternator
overhaul shop.
Do you know the make and model of the airplane that
flew the engine?
Bob . ..
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Press-to-Test for Warning lights |
>Bob
>I have some annunciators light that I would like to have a press to
>test button to check lights during pre flight . How would something
>like this be wired?
>
>Jim
Sure, take a peek at:
http://209.134.106.21/articles/p-t-t.pdf
However, see if it makes more sense to exercise the
system that operates the light to see that ALL of the
stuff works. Most P-T-T systems test light bulbs, full
exercise of the warning system tests the sensor, the lamps
-AND- the power source.
Bob . . .
////
(o o)
===========o00o=(_)=o00o=========
< Go ahead, make my day . . . >
< show me where I'm wrong. >
=================================
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Bruce Uvanni" <buvanni(at)us.ibm.com> |
01/17/2002 02:51:26 PM
Bob: B & C Specialties sells a C905-60 ANL60 current limiter.
I'm using your fig. Z-13.
Can this limiter be used in-place of the 80a fuse between the alt shunt and
starter contactor?
Please respond to buvanni(at)us.ibm.com. I only get the digest.
BRUCE UVANNI
PHONE: (802) 769-2822
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | RE:D7AF 10300 JA |
D7AF 10300 JA is a Ford part no. for a 40 amp alt. used on a 1977 Ford car
and light truck. The Motorcraft service part no. is GL-168A and the industry
no. is 7078, however the 7078 is rebuilt as a 65 amp alt. If it is an
automotive alt. the rotor shaft diam. is a different size as is the nut. The
fan blades are also reverse rotation from an aviation alt. It is possible
that someone used automotive cases, since the cases are the same. The rotor,
stator, fan, nut, pulley and brushes are different in an aviation alt.
Steve
Springfield Auto Parts Co., Inc.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ned Thomas" <nthomas(at)mmcable.com> |
| Subject: | Seperate Gyro master switch??? |
I am thinking of selling my Vacuum pump and vacuum gyros and going total
electric. Is it best to have a seperate switch to isolate (keep turned off)
the electric gyros during start up of the engine?
Thanks,
ned
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mitch Williams" <mitchw62(at)Prodigy.net> |
| Subject: | Replace Generator Fuse on 57 C172 |
Electric Bob and all,
I have a '57 C172 with a 35A generator, with an 35A AGS fuse. My supply of
AGS fuses run out I either need to find some more or replace it.
options:
1. Replace fuse holder with AGC holder, and use 35 A AGC fuses. I don't
like this option because I don't think the AGC fuses or holders are big
enough for this rating.
2. Find some AGS fuses.
3. Install the firewall mounted current limiter on your website with an A&P
approval.
4. Install a new 35A breaker, with A&P approval.
What do you all recommend.
mitch
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Seperate Gyro master switch??? |
>
>I am thinking of selling my Vacuum pump and vacuum gyros and going total
>electric. Is it best to have a seperate switch to isolate (keep turned off)
>the electric gyros during start up of the engine?
Don't know why you'd want to do this . . . none of the
heavy-iron birds do it. Gyros are tested the same way
other electrical/electronic gizmos for airplanes are
tested to the same DO-160 requirements.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: current limiter |
>
>
>Bob: B & C Specialties sells a C905-60 ANL60 current limiter.
>I'm using your fig. Z-13.
>Can this limiter be used in-place of the 80a fuse between the alt shunt and
>starter contactor?
>Please respond to buvanni(at)us.ibm.com. I only get the digest.
Yes . . . the ANL limiters are picked with ratings closer to
the output of the alternator.
See http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/ckrtprot/ckrtprot.html#bleadfuse
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Bob, I have a question |
>Bob,
>
>In advance, thanks for your help.
>
>At the back of my Glasair, is a spare VOR antenna that was connected to a coax
cable for a length of a couple feet and then left unterminated. I wish to connect
to that end now and to bring the wire forward to the radio stack, a distance
of some 8 feet forward from where the unterminated end now sits at the rear
of the plane.
>
>My question is how to connect to the unterminated end to another piece of coax
so as to minimize signal losses at the connection. Can I simply solder the two
shields and the two center conductors together, separate the solder joints with
electrical tape? I will have no need in the future to separate the connections
again. Or, should I unstall BNC connectors?
If it were my airplane, I'd install a mated pair of cable
connectors to extend the feedline up to the radio. Suggest
you consider RG-400 as the extension feedline material.
Bob . . .
////
(o o)
===========o00o=(_)=o00o=========
< Go ahead, make my day . . . >
< show me where I'm wrong. >
=================================
________________________________________________________________________________
| Subject: | Re: Replace Generator Fuse on 57 C172 |
Mitch Williams wrote:
>
>
> Electric Bob and all,
> I have a '57 C172 with a 35A generator, with an 35A AGS fuse. My supply of
> AGS fuses run out I either need to find some more or replace it.
>
> options:
*** OR:
Find a friend with a metal lathe. Have him make up a pair of brass caps.
These brass caps will effectively convert an AGC fuse to an AGS fuse. This
is, of course, for your automotive application.
> 1. Replace fuse holder with AGC holder, and use 35 A AGC fuses. I don't
> like this option because I don't think the AGC fuses or holders are big
> enough for this rating.
>
> 2. Find some AGS fuses.
*** Might be best. I know they're hard to find nowadays ( I used to have a
Cessna 140 ).
>
> 3. Install the firewall mounted current limiter on your website with an A&P
> approval.
> 4. Install a new 35A breaker, with A&P approval.
*** A&P can't, by himself, approve such mods. Your approval has to come
from further up the food chain, from the FSDO. Well, your A&P might manage
the breaker, but not the current limiter.
Basically, you gather up all your information and fill out an FAA
form 337. You go down to the FSDO with your 337. They either say "that
looks good", and stamp and sign it. Or, more likely, they point out some
changes which you go home and do. Then they stamp and sign it. Or maybe
they point out still some more changes that you go home and do, and then
maybe they stamp and sign it.
Now your stamped and signed 337 constitutes a "field approval". You go
to your friendly A&P and say "please do this", or "please supervise me as
I do this". I've found that busy, independant A&P's ( and all good A&P's
around here are busy ) are usually happy to do this, when you can show that
you've done your homework - with a stamped and signed 337. Shops are
typically less flexible. They have high overheads and need to make real
money. I stay out of shops.
- Jerry Kaidor ( jerry(at)tr2.com )
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Jan Hoeffel" <janh(at)connectto.net> |
| Subject: | RE: AeroElectric-List Digest: 2 Msgs - 01/16/02 |
Question - Are polyfuses (automatically resettable fuses) suitable for use
in aircraft?
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Replace Generator Fuse on 57 C172 |
>
>Electric Bob and all,
>I have a '57 C172 with a 35A generator, with an 35A AGS fuse. My supply of
>AGS fuses run out I either need to find some more or replace it.
>
>options:
>1. Replace fuse holder with AGC holder, and use 35 A AGC fuses. I don't
>like this option because I don't think the AGC fuses or holders are big
>enough for this rating.
Agreed . . . AGC fuse holders (as are all the glass fuses)
are large area, low pressure contact technologies . . . not
very exciting for longevity and performance in high current
applications.
>2. Find some AGS fuses.
Can you give me dimensions of the AGS fuse? It's not in the
present catalogs but there are some fuses that are a little larger
than the AGC that might interchange with it.
>3. Install the firewall mounted current limiter on your website with an A&P
>approval.
This would require a one time approval . . . doable but . . .
>4. Install a new 35A breaker, with A&P approval.
This would probably be the easiest thing to do. Get a 35A breaker
used on any other Cessna and go see your local Feds for
help with a one time field approval (Form 337). Any
IA could help you fill it out. Shouldn't be difficult,
just time consuming.
Bob . . .
////
(o o)
===========o00o=(_)=o00o=========
< Go ahead, make my day . . . >
< show me where I'm wrong. >
=================================
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ned Thomas" <nthomas(at)mmcable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Seperate Gyro master switch??? |
Just thought it would be good to have everything off while cranking the
starter so that full battery power is available to the starter and also so
that the gyros would not have the potential to experience variations in
power while the starter is cranking. Is this not a possibility? I had
assumed that even without an avionics master switch we would still keep all
the radios off until after starting the engine. Is this assumption wrong?
Thanks,
ned
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Seperate Gyro master switch???
>
> >
> >I am thinking of selling my Vacuum pump and vacuum gyros and going total
> >electric. Is it best to have a seperate switch to isolate (keep turned
off)
> >the electric gyros during start up of the engine?
>
> Don't know why you'd want to do this . . . none of the
> heavy-iron birds do it. Gyros are tested the same way
> other electrical/electronic gizmos for airplanes are
> tested to the same DO-160 requirements.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Michel Therrien <mtherr(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | Battery Bus questions |
Hello Bob and Friends,
I spent some time reading the archives. I learned a
lot.
In my installation, fuel pumps and electric ignitions
are essential in keeping the fan on the nose of the
plane running. My current understanding is that those
essential items should be on the battery bus (pump 1
and ign 1 on battery 2, and pump 2 & ign 2 on battery
2). Additionally, the essential bus is fed from one
of the battery bus.
If I understand anything wrong so far, please let me
know.
oh. In my installation, the batteries will be located
far away in the tail of the aircraft.
The questions:
- Would it be appropriate to have two alternate feeds
for the essential bus (from battery 1 and from battery
2)?
- A friend has reservation about leaving always hot
circuits. He prefers that everything is shut down
when you turn off the master switch (in case of a
fire, gas spill, crash...). Is his reasoning well
founded. In my installation, I would have several
always hot circuit (to the switches) for the fuel
pumps, ignitions, essential bus.
- The Z diagrams show the battery bus linked to the
battery by a 6 inch wire. Could I locate the battery
busses far away from the batteries (behind the
instrument panel while batteries are in the tail).
This would reduce the number of wires running from the
tail to the front and it would also make the fuse
blocs more accessible. I would assume in that case
that the battery bus feed line would be protected with
a fuselink.
Thanks!
Michel Therrien
=====
----------------------------
Michel Therrien CH601-HD
http://pages.infinit.net/mthobby
http://mthobby.pcperfect.com/ch601
http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/
________________________________________________________________________________
Buss makes AGU-35 fuses that are 13/32" dia. and 1.5" in length.
Steve
Springfield Auto Parts Co., Inc.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Seperate Gyro master switch??? |
>
>Just thought it would be good to have everything off while cranking the
>starter so that full battery power is available to the starter and also so
>that the gyros would not have the potential to experience variations in
>power while the starter is cranking. Is this not a possibility? I had
>assumed that even without an avionics master switch we would still keep all
>the radios off until after starting the engine. Is this assumption wrong?
>
>Thanks,
>ned
Back in the "good ol' days" of lead acid batteries, cranking
a balky engine on a cold morning was something of a religious
experience. When you're available energy was on the raggity edge
of NOT getting the engine started, conventional wisdom suggested
that you relieve battery loads as much as possible.
Now that we're educated both in the nefarious ways of lead-acid
technology and beneficiaries of RG batteries this time-honored
concern becomes a non issue.
What would you expect your bus-loading to be just after you've
turned the battery master on? 5-7 amps is a good guess. How
much does it take to crank an engine? Start at 150 amps and go
up from there. Are you going to allow a battery to stay in place
after it's energy reserves are less than that required to run the
e-bus for 4+ hours? If not, then there is zero likelihood that
5-7 amps of parasitic load is going to have any practical
effect on the probability of getting the engine started.
With respect to "variations in power" . . . any device qualified
to be installed on an airplane should be designed to accept
ANYTHING the airplane will throw at it other than runaway-
alternator, over-voltage conditions. This is why OV protection
on an alternator is still important. Other bus voltage wiggles
are also a non-issue.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ned Thomas" <nthomas(at)mmcable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Seperate Gyro master switch??? |
Bob,
With what you have said below do you recommend that we no longer follow the
tradition of shutting off the radios before leaning back to kill the engine?
So I can just leave the radio switches in the on position?
I have a Jabiru engine. For cold starts several owners have experienced
extended crank times and have reported even cranking with the with battery
being "jumped" with their car jumper cables.
I was worried about that causing "power variations" that might hurt the
gyros?????
When I turn my key in the car to the starter cranking positon it disconnects
power from almost every thing else. Is that because they cars use lead acid
batteries?
ned
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Seperate Gyro master switch???
>
> >
> >Just thought it would be good to have everything off while cranking the
> >starter so that full battery power is available to the starter and also
so
> >that the gyros would not have the potential to experience variations in
> >power while the starter is cranking. Is this not a possibility? I had
> >assumed that even without an avionics master switch we would still keep
all
> >the radios off until after starting the engine. Is this assumption
wrong?
> >
> >Thanks,
> >ned
>
> Back in the "good ol' days" of lead acid batteries, cranking
> a balky engine on a cold morning was something of a religious
> experience. When you're available energy was on the raggity edge
> of NOT getting the engine started, conventional wisdom suggested
> that you relieve battery loads as much as possible.
>
> Now that we're educated both in the nefarious ways of lead-acid
> technology and beneficiaries of RG batteries this time-honored
> concern becomes a non issue.
>
> What would you expect your bus-loading to be just after you've
> turned the battery master on? 5-7 amps is a good guess. How
> much does it take to crank an engine? Start at 150 amps and go
> up from there. Are you going to allow a battery to stay in place
> after it's energy reserves are less than that required to run the
> e-bus for 4+ hours? If not, then there is zero likelihood that
> 5-7 amps of parasitic load is going to have any practical
> effect on the probability of getting the engine started.
>
> With respect to "variations in power" . . . any device qualified
> to be installed on an airplane should be designed to accept
> ANYTHING the airplane will throw at it other than runaway-
> alternator, over-voltage conditions. This is why OV protection
> on an alternator is still important. Other bus voltage wiggles
> are also a non-issue.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Seperate Gyro master switch??? |
>
>Bob,
>
>With what you have said below do you recommend that we no longer follow the
>tradition of shutting off the radios before leaning back to kill the engine?
I don't recommend anything . . .I'm saying that all of the
rational used in past years for worrying about it have either
been eliminated or shown to be irrational.
>So I can just leave the radio switches in the on position?
You certainly may if you wish . . .
>I have a Jabiru engine. For cold starts several owners have experienced
>extended crank times and have reported even cranking with the with battery
>being "jumped" with their car jumper cables.
Could it be that this engine has some problems
with fuel handling and/or ignition system?
>I was worried about that causing "power variations" that might hurt the
>gyros?????
>
>When I turn my key in the car to the starter cranking positon it disconnects
>power from almost every thing else. Is that because they cars use lead acid
>batteries?
. . . and people run batteries in their cars until they
failed to crank the engine for the Nth time . . . by the
time the battery reaches this condition in an airplane,
it has been useless as a standby source of power for a very
long time. A battery properly maintained for service in
an airplane will be discarded when its capacity drops to
perhaps 50-75% of new . . . meaning that its performance
as a cranking battery will never be an issue. If the
Jabiru is hard to start when cold, then perhaps some other
Band-Aid is in order . . . pre-heating perhaps? A shot
of ether in the air cleaner? A pilot-owner that has not
figured out how to consistently get the engine going in
a few seconds of cranking is bound to suffer poor life
of batteries, starters and other mechanical issues with
the engine.
Used to own a C-85 powered J-3 on an airport I owned.
Depending on temperature & how long since the engine last
ran, I experimented to see how much primer it took
to get the engine started on the first pull every time.
I tried to teach this to my renters, most picked up on
it right away and increased their enjoyment of the
airplane. A few managed to flood the engine no matter
what . . . I could sit in the office and watch them
wear out trying . . . walk out to the airplane,
clear the cylinders with a dozen blades of reverse
rotation and then start the engine on a single pull.
Did this twice while one guy watched . . . don't think
he EVER caught on.
Understanding will win over brute force about every
time.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Aucountry(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Seperate Gyro master switch??? |
In a message dated 1/18/02 9:07:39 AM, nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com writes:
<< Understanding will win over brute force every time.
Bob . . . >>
excellent quote . I took out the 'about'
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Ned Thomas" <nthomas(at)mmcable.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Seperate Gyro master switch??? |
Okay, Just trying to learn not be combatant.
Sounds like I don't need to worry about turning the radios off during shut
down of the airplane. However, my certified plane it is a 1976 model. Is
that old enough to worry with shut down of radios before engine?
And, yes I agree, the Jabiru evidently has issues to be resolved for cold
starting but the question is, Could long cranking negatively affect the
running gyros? You know the kind of cranking that makes the lights dim...
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Seperate Gyro master switch???
>
> >
> >Bob,
> >
> >With what you have said below do you recommend that we no longer follow
the
> >tradition of shutting off the radios before leaning back to kill the
engine?
>
>
> I don't recommend anything . . .I'm saying that all of the
> rational used in past years for worrying about it have either
> been eliminated or shown to be irrational.
>
>
> >So I can just leave the radio switches in the on position?
>
> You certainly may if you wish . . .
>
>
> >I have a Jabiru engine. For cold starts several owners have experienced
> >extended crank times and have reported even cranking with the with
battery
> >being "jumped" with their car jumper cables.
>
> Could it be that this engine has some problems
> with fuel handling and/or ignition system?
>
>
> >I was worried about that causing "power variations" that might hurt the
> >gyros?????
> >
> >When I turn my key in the car to the starter cranking positon it
disconnects
> >power from almost every thing else. Is that because they cars use lead
acid
> >batteries?
>
>
> . . . and people run batteries in their cars until they
> failed to crank the engine for the Nth time . . . by the
> time the battery reaches this condition in an airplane,
> it has been useless as a standby source of power for a very
> long time. A battery properly maintained for service in
> an airplane will be discarded when its capacity drops to
> perhaps 50-75% of new . . . meaning that its performance
> as a cranking battery will never be an issue. If the
> Jabiru is hard to start when cold, then perhaps some other
> Band-Aid is in order . . . pre-heating perhaps? A shot
> of ether in the air cleaner? A pilot-owner that has not
> figured out how to consistently get the engine going in
> a few seconds of cranking is bound to suffer poor life
> of batteries, starters and other mechanical issues with
> the engine.
>
> Used to own a C-85 powered J-3 on an airport I owned.
> Depending on temperature & how long since the engine last
> ran, I experimented to see how much primer it took
> to get the engine started on the first pull every time.
> I tried to teach this to my renters, most picked up on
> it right away and increased their enjoyment of the
> airplane. A few managed to flood the engine no matter
> what . . . I could sit in the office and watch them
> wear out trying . . . walk out to the airplane,
> clear the cylinders with a dozen blades of reverse
> rotation and then start the engine on a single pull.
> Did this twice while one guy watched . . . don't think
> he EVER caught on.
>
> Understanding will win over brute force about every
> time.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Mitch Williams" <mitchw62(at)Prodigy.net> |
>Buss makes AGU-35 fuses that are 13/32" dia. and 1.5" in length.
>Steve
>Springfield Auto Parts Co., Inc.
Thank you all for the replies.
Steve,
The AGS fuses were 5/16" by 1 5/16"??. I think.
To use the AGU, (which is quite a bit larger) I'd have to replace the fuse
holder, and I don't think these have been used before in Cessna 172's, so
then I'll have to get field approval.
If I have to go field approval route, I would like to upgrade to either
current limiting or a breaker.
Thank you for your input.
mitch
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "David A. Leonard" <dleonar1(at)maine.rr.com> |
| Subject: | Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 13 Msgs - 01/17/02 |
An Interesting Website fo avionics..Aircraft Electronics Association .
http://www.aea.net/aeatodayDetail.asp?ID=55
Check out the pilots troubleshooting guide:
http://www.aea.net/R1/Secure/guide1.pdf
General stuff, but life is all just basics anyway!
On their "safeguard your avionics" page,
http://www.aea.net/R1/Secure/guide2.pdf
They like avionics masters.. not to rehash an old thread, but you can see
this Master switch controversy is well entrenched... hard to blame the
general public for wanting masters when the Industry is still recommending
them! After all, this is the group that the "industry" formed, so its
hard to fault a tech for believing them! I'm not trying to bring this up
for discussion once again..I think it was well covered last month!
David Leonard
________________________________________________________________________________
Mitch,
Some time back, I converted a Cessna 170 from fuses to breakers. I never
throw anything away. So I have a small collection of AGS fuses -
unfortunately, no 35's. I think I have a 50, a 25, a 15, a 10, and a 5.
If you want'em, you can have'em. Just pay for shipping. You can have
the fuseholders, too.
- Jerry
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org> |
Why not just bend the clips so they will hold the smaller diameter fuses??
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mitch Williams" <mitchw62(at)Prodigy.net>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: RE: Fuses
>Buss makes AGU-35 fuses that are 13/32" dia. and 1.5" in length.
>Steve
>Springfield Auto Parts Co., Inc.
Thank you all for the replies.
Steve,
The AGS fuses were 5/16" by 1 5/16"??. I think.
To use the AGU, (which is quite a bit larger) I'd have to replace the fuse
holder, and I don't think these have been used before in Cessna 172's, so
then I'll have to get field approval.
If I have to go field approval route, I would like to upgrade to either
current limiting or a breaker.
Thank you for your input.
mitch
http://www.matronics.com/browselist/aeroelectric-list
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Gary Liming <gary(at)liming.org> |
| Subject: | "How to safeguard your avionics" |
>On their "safeguard your avionics" page,
>http://www.aea.net/R1/Secure/guide2.pdf
On this page they say to make sure the airframe static wicks and grounding
straps are in good condition. Are static wicks necessary in slower
(<200mph) aircraft? With respect to avionics, how do they help? If they
are needed, how do you go about determining position and quantity?
Thanks,
Gary Liming
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Stan Blanton" <stanb(at)door.net> |
| Subject: | current limiter in b-lead |
Bob,
Your new Fig. Z-22 shows an ANL current limiter in the b-lead when using a
Skytec starter. I assume this wire run would only go from the alternator to
the built-in starter solinoid and thus be fairly short.(Reference your fig.
Z-14, rev.8)
Would the circuit protection still be necessary and if so at which end to
protect which device/length of wire?
Without a PM starter system doesn't your circuit protection get put near the
normal starter solenoid?
Thanks,
Stan Blanton
RV-6
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Seperate Gyro master switch??? |
>
>Okay, Just trying to learn not be combatant.
Understand . . . and forgive me if I sounded in any
way hostile.
>Sounds like I don't need to worry about turning the radios off during shut
>down of the airplane. However, my certified plane it is a 1976 model. Is
>that old enough to worry with shut down of radios before engine?
I've been working with aircraft electrical systems for over
30 years. I can't remember how many times I've hooked spike
hunting equipment to an aircraft bus to see if I could
identify ANYTHING that was more than a nuisance . . . found
plenty of noises that propagated from one system to another
causing data losses and other un-useful behavior. I've
never been able to catch a radio-killer spike . . . shutting
the system down was the most benign of actions. Bringing an
alternator on line with the RPM high, a marginally designed
regulator and a soggy battery would sometimes produce an
overshoot that would trip an OV relay . . . these only lasted
for a few hundreds of milliseconds and peaked out at less
than 20 volts . . . Could never capture any event associated
with cranking the engine that contained more energy than
the alternator overshoot . . . by in large, the whole culture
that has grown up around the need to "protect" electronics
was based on a lot of worries about things we didn't want
to take the time to understand.
I've been renting airplanes for over 20 years and I've
lost track of the numbers of airplanes I've climbed into
that still had all the radios ON from the last shutdown.
The only radio failures I've ever experienced
were things that simply died while in operation and never
associated with a noteworthy electrical event such as
engine start, landing or flap operation, or system shutdown.
Based on my analysis of electrical system component
ability to produce transients, extensive investigation
with test equipment designed to identify potential
hazards, and personal participation in the qualification
of hundreds of products destined to be installed on
aircraft, I judge that even the older radios and
airplanes are not at risk of damage by the things
that we've been taught to worry about all these years.
>And, yes I agree, the Jabiru evidently has issues to be resolved for cold
>starting but the question is, Could long cranking negatively affect the
>running gyros? You know the kind of cranking that makes the lights dim...
Nope.
Again, I do my best to answer lots of e-mails every
day and I'm oft mistaken for being tense or even
militant . . . please be assured that I am not. I'm
pleased to share what I have learned over the years
and in my haste to get a concept across, a terse
dissertation might be misread as contentious.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Seperate Gyro master switch??? |
>
>
>In a message dated 1/18/02 9:07:39 AM, nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com writes:
>
><< Understanding will win over brute force every time.
>
> Bob . . . >>
>
>excellent quote . I took out the 'about'
Hmmm . . . I put the "about" in after considering
the case wherein the one wielding force has a bigger
club . . . one might say he didn't really "win" but
since he does have the bigger club, I'm not going to
debate him about it either!
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Aucountry(at)aol.com |
| Subject: | Re: Seperate Gyro master switch??? |
In a message dated 1/18/02 3:41:35 PM, nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com writes:
<< I've been renting airplanes for over 20 years and I've
lost track of the numbers of airplanes I've climbed into
that still had all the radios ON from the last shutdown.
The only radio failures I've ever experienced
were things that simply died while in operation and never
associated with a noteworthy electrical event such as
engine start, landing or flap operation, or system shutdown.
>>
So, I guess this begs the question: "Does an Avionics Master make any sense""
If the radios can be left on, the an avionics master is wasted time and
money, not to mention a single point for failure.
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | Glenn Rainey <nimbusaviation(at)yahoo.com> |
| Subject: | starter wiring routing |
Hi Folks!
I my Long EZ the first builder has routed the starter
cable INSIDE that copper pipe / ground-bus which runs
much of the length of the fuselage, and which
conduits various other wiring across the firewall.
My perception is that this routing of the big cable
inside the pipe is both unnecessary and potentially a
source, at engine crank, of induction spikes in the
smaller wiring. Maybe this ties in somewhat with the
recent discusion on bus noise and spikes.
Anyone have a feel for the size of this issue?
I suppose the only thing at risk might be the CHT /
EGT gauges.
My solution would be simple of course, as I need to
tear down a lot of this a/c wiring anyway!
cheers
Glenn Rainey
Scotland
http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: starter wiring routing |
>
>Hi Folks!
>
>I my Long EZ the first builder has routed the starter
>cable INSIDE that copper pipe / ground-bus which runs
>much of the length of the fuselage, and which
>conduits various other wiring across the firewall.
>
>My perception is that this routing of the big cable
>inside the pipe is both unnecessary and potentially a
>source, at engine crank, of induction spikes in the
>smaller wiring. Maybe this ties in somewhat with the
>recent discusion on bus noise and spikes.
>
>Anyone have a feel for the size of this issue?
>
>I suppose the only thing at risk might be the CHT /
>EGT gauges.
>
>My solution would be simple of course, as I need to
>tear down a lot of this a/c wiring anyway!
Actually, running ALL wiring the length of the airplane
in the same conduit (whether or not the conduit is also
part of the ground system) is the ideal way to keep
noises and magnetic effects from getting out into
the cockpit/panel environment . . . further, if every
electron running aft in that bundle has a companion
electron running forward in the same bundle, the
potential for cross coupling effects from one system
to another are minimized. This is discussed in some detail
in the AeroElectric Connection chapters on grounding
and noise.
Bob . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
| From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Seperate Gyro master switch??? |
>
>
>In a message dated 1/18/02 3:41:35 PM, nuckolls(at)aeroelectric.com writes:
December 28, 2001 - January 19, 2002
AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-an