AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-ci

August 11, 2003 - August 20, 2003



      of these same neat, new ideas will NEVER find their way
      onto a certifies ship.
      
      So, in the narrow context of defining "quality" as
      evolving toward the lowest cost aircraft free
      of mechanically-induced accidents, I'll suggest that
      the finest (highest quality?) aircraft to have
      ever flown are being built in basements and garages.
      
      The only thing certified aviation has over us is
      the communications system presently mandated by the
      certification procedures. I'd bet that fewer than
      10% of all OBAM aircraft builders fully utilize
      the Internet for idea sharing. Sadly, this means
      that most builders will not experience the advantages
      you all enjoy here and on other list-servers.
      
      It also means that some are likely to experience sweat-
      generating events. The bright side is that there are
      plenty of FARs and dark-n-stormy-night stories to
      tap for information. At least their airplanes will
      be no worst than a C-172, which really isn't all
      that bad . . . I've got a lot of hours in C-172s
      and I don't walk up to one of them with any sense
      of trepidation . . .
      
      For those OBAM aircraft builders who chose to go
      the extra mile in discovering, trying, filtering
      and sharing ideas . . . I'll avoid the the word
      "quality" but enthusiastically argue that your
      airplanes are better than certified.
      
      Bob . . .
      
      
      
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject:
From: Bruce Uvanni <buvanni(at)us.ibm.com>
Date: Aug 11, 2003
JBON5L8FGD|June 13, 2003) at 08/11/2003 12:44:37 I have an SD8 backup alternator wired up as shown in Bob's all electric on a budget. I'm flying now but don't know how to test the SD8 to see if it is working. I also have an E.I. AMP/Volt meter installed with both alternators wired thourgh a switch to the amp meter. Thanks.............. BRUCE UVANNI BUVANNI(at)US.IBM.COM ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 11, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Ground Loops
> >Bob & List: > >During a recent addition of an RST audio panel, an ARC ADF, and a 2nd >comm (UPSAT SL30) to our stock '68 C177 I have had my share of >electronic gremlins haunting the job. One is alternator noise and the >other is the beacon noise. > >The alternator was changed 4 years ago and the noise was not as >pronounced in the comm 1 radio (KX170B) before the installation as it is >now. I added a 25yr old Radio Shack 5mfd, 60amp, 50Vdc line filter in >series with the alternator A+ but no change. I'm wondering if I >installed the device correctly. It is a 3" steel tube about the diameter >of a quarter. On each end there is an insulated threaded terminal. The >printing on the filter includes a RS stock number an arrow and the >electrical values. The mounting lug is the local ground for the device. >I first connected the device with the arrow pointing away from the >alternator and the alt noise was unchanged. So I reversed the connection >(arrow pointing to the alt) and the noise is the same. I'm wondering >which direction is correct and if the filter is in fact functioning. Any filter you put on the back of the alternator will have a beneficial effect ONLY on ADF and/or LORAN reception. These are effective in the low frequency radio ranges and have no benefits for AUDIO rate noises (ripple voltage) that is built in to every alternator. >I have done the obvious things such as fat wire separation and shields >connected only at the source of the noise but now I'm lost. I get a lot of requests like this. It's got to be frustrating to the well intentioned owner/builder who is trying to understand and fix the problem himself . . . it's frustrating for me to figure out a way to describe the full range of troubleshooting techniques and tools in a few paragraphs of a list-server inquiry. Tell you what, order my book. If the chapter on noise mitigation doesn't help you identify and break the chain of victim-propagation-source links, I'll refund your money. >Regarding the beacon noise, is there a filter which I can use (make) to >tame this annoyance. Because it pulses, it really is an antagonistic >little devil after several hours flying. Try running the strobe from a pair of 6v lantern batteries located right at the power supply and see if you still hear the noise. If so, then a filter installed right at the power supply will help. I'd try a S251D479 capacitor from B&C which you can buy at http://www.bandc.biz/cgi-bin/ez-catalog/cat_display.cgi?26X358218 A local parts store might be able to supply you with a computer grade, electrolytic with 10,000 uf or more, 16v or more. Wire it right across the power input leads to the strobe power supply. This will probably reduce the noise and maybe eliminate it. At worst, we may have to consider adding some filter inductance in series with the strobe supply too. If the lantern battery experiment doesn't show that noise is getting onto the system via the 14v supply, it's a whole new ball game . . . but one step at a time. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ron Raby" <ronr(at)advanceddesign.com>
Subject: Alternator
Date: Aug 11, 2003
Bob I have a kelly aerospace 70 amp alternator with two field connections F1 and F2. I also have the B&C alternator controllers. My question is what do I do with the second field connection? Do I run them both to terminal # 4 on the B&C? Thanks Ron Raby Lancair ES ====================================================================== > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "James Foerster" <jmfpublic(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Switches vs relays for lights, strobes
Date: Aug 11, 2003
Bob, I'm designing details of my panel. I have chosen to use switches for the 8 amp landing lights-two 50 watt auto units,for the taxi lights which draw 8 amps, and for the navigation lights which draw less. I could use small relays, but then the parts count goes up. For the strobe, mounted behind the rear seat, I'm not so sure. A relay would keep some of the noise from the power leads out of the panel, but I doubt that the power lead is the source of much noise anyway. I can size the wire for allowable voltage loss. What do you think? Switches for everything? Jim Foerster J400, panel on the mockup on the bench. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 11, 2003
From: Charles Brame <charleyb(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Shielding EI Wires
My Jeff Rose EI system came with an installed shielded wire to connect to the battery bus via an ignition switch. The shielded wire is grounded at the ignition module side and the center wire will obviously connect to the ignition switch. My question is: should the wire from the switch to the battery bus also be shielded? If so, where should it be grounded? Charlie Brame RV-6A N11CB San Antonio ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 11, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Alternator
> > >Bob > >I have a kelly aerospace 70 amp alternator with two field connections F1 and >F2. I also have the B&C alternator controllers. My question is what do I do >with the second field connection? Do I run them both to terminal # 4 on the >B&C? These are terminals for both brushes. You can ground one locally to the case of the alternator . . . or take it back to pin 7 (ground) on the regulator. If you can't find a screw handy on back of alternator for grounding extra field connection, perhaps the least problematical approach is to run the extra wire back to regulator. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Tinne maha" <tinnemaha(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: RG58 Coax article I promised
Date: Aug 11, 2003
Bob, Once again I feel eternally grateful for this educaitonal service you provide! Not only have you cleared up my suspicions answered my questions but given me better options too. Knowing it is core to homebuilding (and I feel it should becore to living)I take full responsibility for any all of my actions whether they be from knowledge gained here or elsewhere. I doubt that I alone am enough interest for you but I would love to purchase an 'LSE re-hab' kit consisting of the twisted pair shielded wires with BNC connectors installed on one end and a separate15 pin D-sub connector (it is female) for the controller input. I completely understand if you would rather just sell me the wires connectors. Please let me know the amount where to send a check. I can do the kit for $50. How long do you want the coil cables to be? My mailing address is 6936 Bainbridge, Wichita, KS 67226 Bob, I just dropped the check in the mail (really)along with a note specifying address phone number. 38" length please. Thank you tons for that! Would you mind clearing up another cloud in my mind? Per my kit manufacturer's instructions I connectedmy bonding strap toan engine mount bolt (tube fabric fuselage) but then I saw BC's instructions/advice not to include the engine mount in the ground cirquit. Why not? BC recommends mounting the bonding strap to the ground bus brass bolt that goes through an all metal firewall. That firewall is also connected to the engine mount, so doesn't that include it in the ground cirquit? Not sure yet if it applies here or not, but, by far, the most frustrating part of building my aircraft is getting contrary opinions from sources I assume to be much more qualified than I. The good side, ofcourse, is that it forces me to search for a deeper understanding but that process is very time consuming frustrating. With Bob as the backbone, this list makes the electrical part of that process much easier to deal with. Grant ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 11, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re:
> > >I have an SD8 backup alternator wired up as shown in Bob's >all electric on a budget. I'm flying now but don't know how to >test the SD8 to see if it is working. I also have an E.I. AMP/Volt >meter installed with both alternators wired thourgh a switch to the >amp meter. Turn main alternator off, turn aux alternator on. Reduce operating loads to a minimum. Run engine up to at least 2000 rpm. Bus voltage should be something above 13.8 volts and switching your amp meter to the Aux Alternator readout should show some amount of output current. You won't be able to fully load this alternator until you can operate at cruise RPMs. In this configuration, you should be able to increase system loads until alternator output is on the order of 10A without having the bus votlage drop below 13.0 volts. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 11, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Switches vs relays for lights, strobes
> > >Bob, > >I'm designing details of my panel. I have chosen to use switches for the >8 amp landing lights-two 50 watt auto units,for the taxi lights which draw >8 amps, and for the navigation lights which draw less. I could use small >relays, but then the parts count goes up. For the strobe, mounted behind >the rear seat, I'm not so sure. A relay would keep some of the noise from >the power leads out of the panel, but I doubt that the power lead is the >source of much noise anyway. I can size the wire for allowable voltage >loss. What do you think? Switches for everything? I don't understand your question. Are the switches of choice so small that there is a question as to suitability for these higher loads? I don't see a need for adding relay-buffering to a switched circuit unless your switches are way undersized. For what it's worth, saw a tandem-wing airplane last year at the Field of Dreams Fly-in, Coffey Co. Airport with miniature toggle switches for everything . . . including 55W landing light, nav lights and magnetos. He reported good service from these switches for over 3 years. What kind of switches are you contemplating? Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 11, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Shielding EI Wires
> > >My Jeff Rose EI system came with an installed shielded wire to connect >to the battery bus via an ignition switch. The shielded wire is grounded >at the ignition module side and the center wire will obviously connect >to the ignition switch. My question is: should the wire from the switch >to the battery bus also be shielded? If so, where should it be grounded? I wouldn't worry about it. Ordinary wire should be just fine for the power path. If it DOES have noise on it, it will be CURRENT noise that radiates out of a shield as if it wasn't even there. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ernest Kells" <ernest.kells(at)sympatico.ca>
Subject: Re: Part 91
Date: Aug 11, 2003
Jim and Others: In the following interchange there is an issue associated with different countries. This is "not necessarily" a question of Quality - - but STANDARDS. I am a Canadian like the first poster, with a 90+% complete RV-9A. I have built to CDN standards, not US standards - - I plan to fly a LOT in the US. I will not have a problem. I followed the Vans Aircraft instructions - except where they conflict with CDN standards. For example, the US will say that a rod end bearing is fastened with an AN3-5A nut (which must be torqued to standard). Canada says that a bearing in the rod end fastened with the AN3-5A nut will be held in compression (subject to seizing up north) and must be replaced with a AN3-3 (drilled bolt and castled nut). It's probably superior - but I'll bet that a coin got flipped in the decision. After all, most standards were developed during the war where everybody (especially Canada and the Commonwealth, US and Britain) totally shared in the design and manufacturing of aircraft. Although each country requires compliance to its standards for registration, each will respect the other's aircraft in each other's airspace. That's the only significant fact. A change in registration is slightly more complicated. Ernest Kells - RV-9A O235-N2C, Wood Prop 90% Complete - Fairings and Intersections 95% complete > > Cheers, I am interested in the regulations in USA as I expect to visit and tour with my OBAM as a Canadian. I have also tried to build to US and UK requirements for safety. My understanding was that OBAM aircraft do not have the standard 'certified' quality, thus permitting experimentation and............. > Not trying to start anything here but do you mean to imply that the planes > we build implicitly have "less" quality? > > I am sure some do and I am sure some don't. Just wondering about the > statement. Yes we do have more latitude for experimentation, but that > *could* lead to higher or lower quality. Just asking ... James ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 11, 2003
From: Kevin Horton <khorto1537(at)rogers.com>
Subject: Re: Part 91
> >Cheers, > I am interested in the regulations in USA as expect to visit >and tour with my OBAM as a Canadian. I have also tried to build to US and UK >requirements for safety. My understanding was that OBAM aircraft do not have >the standard 'certified' quality, thus permitting experimentation and >variation. > It would appear that Dan Checkoway (at dan(at)rvproject.com) refers >to the following: > >"Powered civil aircraft with standard category U.S. airworthiness >certificates...." > > Is that us? >Ferg >Europa A064 > Ferg - you shouldn't have any issues with respect to the aircraft when flying in the US. You just need to get a Special Flight Authorization from the FAA. There is a "blanket" Special Flight Authorization that you can download and carry with you: http://www1.faa.gov/avr/afs/afs800/formtext.htm The bigger issue is understanding the subtle differences between the ops rules in FAR 91 and our CARs. As far as Dan's site, http://www.rvproject.com/ , I'm not sure which part of the site you are referring to. But homebuilts do not receive a standard category U.S. airworthiness certificate. FAR 21.175 says: 21.175 Airworthiness certificates: classification. (a) Standard airworthiness certificates are airworthiness certificates issued for aircraft type certificated in the normal, utility, acrobatic, commuter, or transport category, and for manned free balloons, and for aircraft designated by the Administrator as special classes of aircraft. (b) Special airworthiness certificates are primary, restricted, limited, and provisional airworthiness certificates, special flight permits, and experimental certificates. FAR 21.191(g) says: 21.191: Experimental certificates. Experimental certificates are issued for the following purposes: (a) thru (f) cut to save space. (g) Operating amateur-built aircraft. Operating an aircraft the major portion of which has been fabricated and assembled by persons who undertook the construction project solely for their own education or recreation. -- Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit) Ottawa, Canada http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: <mjheinen(at)adelphia.net>
Subject: Re: Switches vs relays for lights, strobes
Date: Aug 11, 2003
I was considering using a pc flight simulator joystick with its associated microswithches to control a mac servo for trim, push to talk, autopilot engage/disengage.... I assume the switches are 50 mA with ?about 24 guage pvc coating. I was cosidering using these with relays???...or are these toys just not substantial enough for the cyles and currents? > > From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> > Date: 2003/08/11 Mon PM 04:45:21 EDT > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Switches vs relays for lights, strobes > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: LRE2(at)aol.com
Date: Aug 11, 2003
Subject: Re: Part 91
I cannot help but respond to the sanctimony of "building to regulations." By definition, regulations are the lowest acceptable standard. I am building, not to US, Canadian or UK standards, but to my own, which meet and whenever possible exceed any regs, standards or advisories that I can find or learn about. After all, after the final inspection and certification, I'm going to fly this airplane. I may be a bit heavier that the prototype, but when flying over the Rockies, in turbulent air, I need to know that regardless of what government officials have written to satisfy their job description, this plane has been built to the highest standard that I can attain. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 11, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Switches vs relays for lights,
strobes > >I was considering using a pc flight simulator joystick with its associated >microswithches to control a mac servo for trim, push to talk, autopilot >engage/disengage.... >I assume the switches are 50 mA with ?about 24 guage pvc coating. I was >cosidering using these with relays???...or are these toys just not >substantial enough for the cyles and currents? There's been a lot of discussion about building multitudinous switching features into stick grips. Given the total number of times per flight cycle that one operates things like flaps, landing lights, etc. it seems most practical to limit stick switches to those found on majority of bizjets . . . PTT, trim, and wheel master disconnect that interrupts power to any system that drives a flight surface like trims, a/p and except flaps. I don't know what construction was used in the switches you propose nor am I aware of a service history of these switches used as you propose. Yours is an experimental aircraft and if you're interested in taking your design through a proof of concept activity, it can certainly be done. If they are wired with 24AWG wire, then it is a certainty that you'll need relays. The S704-1 or similar relays offered by B&C are easy to use and would be suitable to this task. Be sure and include spike catcher diodes across the relay coils so that they don't eat the contacts of your small switches. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Mike Heinen" <mjheinen(at)adelphia.net>
Subject: Re: Switches vs relays for lights, strobes
Date: Aug 12, 2003
How much curretn is typical for a PTT(push to talk) and if low would a relay be needed for this also? Thanks ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> Subject: Re: Re: AeroElectric-List: Switches vs relays for lights, strobes > > > > >I was considering using a pc flight simulator joystick with its associated > >microswithches to control a mac servo for trim, push to talk, autopilot > >engage/disengage.... > >I assume the switches are 50 mA with ?about 24 guage pvc coating. I was > >cosidering using these with relays???...or are these toys just not > >substantial enough for the cyles and currents? > > There's been a lot of discussion about building multitudinous > switching features into stick grips. Given the total number > of times per flight cycle that one operates things like flaps, > landing lights, etc. it seems most practical to limit stick > switches to those found on majority of bizjets . . . PTT, > trim, and wheel master disconnect that interrupts power to > any system that drives a flight surface like trims, > a/p and except flaps. > > I don't know what construction was used in the switches > you propose nor am I aware of a service history of these > switches used as you propose. > > Yours is an experimental aircraft and if you're > interested in taking your design through a proof > of concept activity, it can certainly be done. > If they are wired with 24AWG wire, then it is a > certainty that you'll need relays. The S704-1 > or similar relays offered by B&C are easy to use > and would be suitable to this task. Be sure and > include spike catcher diodes across the relay coils > so that they don't eat the contacts of your small > switches. > > Bob . . . > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 12, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: OV Module question for Bob
> >Yes Bob, I do. The battery master contacter I purchased from you with the >diode fitted. The starter contacter came with my Rotax 912 engine an >initially I thought it had an internal diode. On first test of the >electrical system I soon found it didn't as it was causing my fuel flow >meter to reset. I then fitted a diode. The odd thing it the OV breaker is >tripping when I push the starter, not when I release it. Contactors bounce like golf balls. The act of "closing" the contactor will produce a multitude of short, interruptions before it finally settles down. I'm not privy to the specific characteristics of the contactor favored by Rotax. However, if it's a cranking issue, why have the alternator switch ON during cranking? If you wait until after the engine starts to put the OVM on-line, perhaps this issue will go away. BTW, the avionics disconnect relay on EXP-Bus products has been known to trip our ov modules too . . . until the recommended diode was added across the coil. > Before fitting the >10uF cap, it was tripping as I switched the master on. >Dave Without having your construction in-hand to test it's dynamic characteristics, I'm unable to explain its behavior. The circuit I publish is different than the circuit we build. The original design calls for a bi-lateral trigger diode that has gone obsolete. B&C did a lifetime buy of these part to support their production for the foreseeable future although one of their products uses the two-transistor+zener network in lieu of the trigger diode. I've been able to troubleshoot and fix several DIY ov modules for builders. If you'd care to send it to me, I'll check it out. Do I recall you are overseas? Mark customs tag as "returned for warranty repair". Some other things to check: Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 12, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: OV Module question for Bob
> >Sounds like the inductive kick back, or noise, from the starter is >creating a voltage spike that is causing some problems. > >One fix would be to place an inductor before the contactor. That is get >a torrid from radio shack and then wrap about 10 turns of primary wire >around the torrid this combined with the capacitor after the inductor >should filter out these voltage spikes. An inductor to carry starter current? That would be a REAL hog. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 12, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: IFR requirements
> >-listers, > Amen to this! >". . .All the regulations and anecdotes should be carefully combed for >useful, simple-ideas that help us evolve. 99% of what we KNOW about the >certified experience is of no value in this regard except to acknowledge >that they're not doing it right. Let us concentrate on deducing what >makes us look like really good pilots because our airplanes are free of >disappointments. Bob (Nuckolls). . ." > >Now. . .I want to be able to fly my RV-8 legal IFR (no, I don't intend >to fly in bad weather, just be able to file, etc.) I've already been >through the "paper charts" thing, and yes, I'll have them in the cockpit >and they'll be up to date. > . . . The part where we differ in >interpretation of the FARs is that some say you must have a wet compass. >As I read the reg, it just says "magnetic heading indicator" and the >solid state magnetometers with the EFIS-One/EFIS-Lite are just that, so >if someone can show me why/how I must have a wet compass . . . You don't. Your interpretation is correct. I've seen aircraft were fitted with an electric repeater compass that used a sensor with a floating magnet assembly back in the tail. A compass display not unlike an ADF indicator was placed on the panel. This, or any other electronic magnetic heading indicator would fill the requirement. The only thing the rule doesn't cite specifically is that the system designer should to take steps to insure reliable or isolated source power to meet the "second source for essential equipment" and "30-minute" rules cited elsewhere. One could purchase a bare-bones GPS engine, rig a digital display showing present magnetic track, run it from the battery bus, and meet this requirement handily . . . just think, an accurate, stable display of magnetic track irrespective of turning forces or turbulence . . . cool Keep in mind that the magnetic heading indicator rule has been around almost since day-one. In 1940, the wet compass was the only option. Classic checklists have called for setting gyros to agree with compass or runway heading (magnetic) since that time as well. The rule acknowledges that there are multiple ways to deduce which way you are heading (or tracking). The wet compass that used to be only source of data is (as others have noted on the list) on it's way to join the air-miles indicator (odometer for airplanes) that were part of the well-equipped aircraft of years gone by. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Rich Chiappe" <richc(at)skytecair.com>
Subject: Root Cause of Sky-Tec Starter Solenoid Failures
Date: Aug 12, 2003
While it has taken a while for me to find the matronics aeroelectric-list I am nonetheless very glad I was able to do so. My name is Rich Chiappe and I am the Manager of Sky-Tec, the Flyweight Starter manufacturer, and I would be more than happy to address the question of Sky-Tec starter failures. Denis, if you haven't already sent those solenoids off for inspection by Mr. Nuckolls, I too would be more than happy to open your solenoids and photograph the results for all to see on this board or even our website if you desire. We actually have a tool made-up for splitting the solenoids. Just please understand I suspect that Mr. Nuckolls' (who posted previously) motivation for "helping" may be less than neutral given his proximity to Sky-Tec's nearest competitor, B&C Products of Newton (Witchita) Kansas. First off, for what it's worth, I would like you all to understand the statements I make here are sincere and based on facts. I will leave the marketing "spin" at the door and pledge to you my sincere desire to offer you any information positive or negative about our products in the hopes that you will be completely and fairly informed about them. Our goal at Sky-Tec is 100% customer satisfaction. Given the fact that we make a mechanical device that is used in a completely uncontrollable range of environments, we understand that some portion of our products will experience difficulties and/or failures. It just goes with the territory. But it is our hope that even those unpleasurable experiences be restored to satisfaction by our unmatched support and professionalism. As I mentioned to Mr. Walsh in a separate e-mail, if we fail to succeed in the latter, then we simply deserve to lose your business. But understand our efforts are sincere and whole-hearted. Yes, under extreme vibration (see next paragraph), the solenoids on Sky-Tec's LS and PM starters can become what we refer to as "pitted". As I was more than eager to show many of you at our booth at Oshkosh using our cut-away LS starter, LS and PM starters manufactured before August of 2002 were manufactured with a mount that enabled the solenoid plunger to be "held off" its seat when the starter was in the rested position. Looking at the geometry of our starter(or B&C's for that matter), you'll notice the solenoid is a long moment away from the centerline of your engine. That long moment transfers that vibration to the solenoid and in it's "held-off" position, it is enable to 'wiggle' in it's insulative housing. Over time, under continued vibration, that solenoid plunger may wiggle itself a "pit" into the interior wall of its insulation. When the plunger comes to rest in that pit and an owner goes to fire the starter, in severe cases, the solenoid may not be strong enough to 'climb out' of this pit resulting in NOTHING (a click with NO starter activity). An immediately subsequent start attempt may find the plunger safely away from its 'pit' and the starter fires as it should and you experience all the GOOD things about a Sky-Tec starter (fast spin, quick start). But the condition is typically accompanied by intermittent operation. We have addressed this issue by changing one operation of the precision machining on our mounts which now allows the solenoid to "seat" fully and resists vibration almost entirely. This change was made in August, 2002. Now, a note on vibration. I am not referring to the vibration we ALL experience with our horizontally opposed Lycomings (yes, I realize they ALL vibrate - I realize these aren't Ferrari 12 cylinder racing engines). You should see my Starduster shake on shutdown! So no, I don't think our expectation is that you can balance a sandbag on the cowling, much less a quarter as Mr. O'Connor humorously suggested. The severe vibration we're referring to is an extreme case where an engine has a harmonic or other imbalance which imparts an abnormal (for a Lycoming engine) level of vibration to engine accessories including the starter/solenoid. Remember, as we state (all too often probably), Sky-Tec has 25,000-30,000 starters out there in service. And I (yes, I'm the guy who receives the repairs) will see only 2-5 come back to the factory each week which failed (or became intermittent) with a pitted solenoid problem. Most of these we will fix under warranty and in so doing will replace the mount with the post August 2002 machine cut that allows the solenoid to REST fully in the retracted position which GREATLY reduces the movement of the solenoid plunger and virtually eliminates the tendency to 'pit' the inside of the insulation. The remainder of those 20K+ starters are performing as engineered well past engine TBO's. So what do we propose as a resolution if you suspect your engine experiences abnormal vibration or an intermittent Sky-Tec starter? - Have the prop dynamically balanced (we will try to ask this question of you only once in future conversations - sorry about that, Denis) - At annual or other convenient time, send me your starter and I will replace the mount with one with the post 8/02 machining cut in it. I will not charge for this. You pay only shipping and any other repair costs (if any) you wish us to perform while we have the starter. - For harsh operating environments (including high-vibration applications), we recommend the Sky-Tec HT (including the new HTI) line of starters. They do not utilize the same solenoid design and as a result are more 'heavy-duty' and rugged. Remember also that HT/HTI's are the ONLY starter recommended for Lycoming-powered rotorcraft. If you would like to 'upgrade' to an HT, we can discuss a 'trade-up' program - just contact me directly for details. Above all, if you ever have a question about our starters - operation or lack thereof - please do not hesitate to contact me directly or through this board (I will try to get in a habit of monitoring the digest regularly). In all, I think you all will find and the market will continue to prove that Sky-Tec manufactures a superior starter over any of its heavy or light weight competitors. From time to time, we anticipate there will be failures but pledge to address them with unmatchable customer service. We also pledge to keep our discussions to facts - those being RELEVANT facts too. For instance, our competitors love to distract with irrelevant facts like "plastic gears" and "ball bearings". So let me be up-front: Yes we have "plastic gears" in our LS/PM starters and the LS/PM line does not use ball bearings in its design - but there are good reasons for both of these which I will discuss on a separate post if necessary not the least of which is our starters have NEVER died because of either of these components! Because of this, clearly discussion of such minutia is a smoke screen used to disctract us from the core discussion: how do they work, how will they last, and how will you take care of me if it doesn't. Also, to address another previous post: NO - Sky-Tec 24V starters utilize 24V solenoids - not 12V solenoids. Beyond putting an ohm-meter on them, one way to confirm this is to look at our prices of 24V starters - see how much more they are than the 12V starters? That's because of how much it costs me to have those 24V armatures and solenoids manufactured to our specs - they are not inexpensive to have made (right). Man, just how do these innacuracies get started out there anyway? Please call me if you have other questions so we can keep things based on the facts and not speculation. If there's anything we can do at the factory to support you better, please feel free to contact me directly: - Rich Chiappe Sky-Tec 350 Howard Clemons Rd Granbury, Texas 76048 (800) 476-7896 richc(at)skytecair.com www.skytecair.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 12, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Switches vs relays for lights,
strobes > >How much curretn is typical for a PTT(push to talk) and if low would a relay >be needed for this also? PTT currents are typically very low. Even in the good ol' days of vacuum tube radios, the PTT line pulls down on a relay inside the radio. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 12, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Grounding Antennas??
> >Thanks Bob, > >Both antennas are painted white inside the bolt holes. Will I need to >remove this? They both came with rubber gaskets for the bottom surface >so I was wondering, along with the paint, how they are normally >grounded. > >Vince Ackerman Sorry for the delay on this . . . You need to remove paint where ever a fastener puts FORCE on the parts to effect both mechanical mounting and electrical connection. This would not include the inside surfaces of holes but would include clamping surfaces under the heads of screws and nuts. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 12, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Alternator pulley
> Bob, >I have a NiponDensmo 55 amp alternator that I am considering installing in >my homebuilt. Looking at the spec sheet that was included with the >alternator, it says it does not develop the full 55 amps until around >6,000 RPMs. I am using a franklin engine and the RPMs never exceed 2,750. >Again loking at the spec sheet it appears the most I ever will be able to >get out of the alternator withot changing the pulley is somewhere around >35-40 amps. My question is would it be safe to use a 40 amp shunt and >meter for my amp meter? Sure . . . you can RATE an alternator anywhere you like for FULL output as long as it's capable of that value. For example, the SD-20 vacuum pump driven alternator is REALLY a 40A machine de-rated to 20A for either cooling or RPM limited operation. A pulley change seems pretty simple. Why not do this and get the full benefits of your alternator's capability? Bob . . . -------------------------------------------- ( Knowing about a thing is different than ) ( understanding it. One can know a lot ) ( and still understand nothing. ) ( C.F. Kettering ) -------------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dennis O'Connor" <doconnor(at)chartermi.net>
Subject: Re: Root Cause of Sky-Tec Starter Solenoid Failures
Date: Aug 12, 2003
Ahhh jeezzzz, Rich.... There you go spoiling a perfectly good argument with facts... Denny ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rich Chiappe" <richc(at)skytecair.com> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Root Cause of Sky-Tec Starter Solenoid Failures ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "James Foerster" <jmfpublic(at)comcast.net>
Subject: RE: Switches vs relays for lights, strobes
Date: Aug 12, 2003
Bob, My intention is to use switches rated for the load. Also, the switch panel has been designed for easy replacement of the switches, from the pilots seat, with PIDG terminals and enough slack wire to facilitate the job. You asked what switches I'm using. For the high current lighting, I have found an internally lighted Radio Shack 275-0712 unit that is rated for 30 amps. They do have a spec sheet, which reads: Switch (275-0712) Specifications Faxback Doc. # 16582 Model #:...........................................................R13-133B Switching Function (Circuit):................................3P SPSP ON-OFF Rating:..........................................................30A 12V DC Contact Resistance:...........................................50 m/ohms Max Insulation Resistance:...............................DC 500V 100 m/ohms Min Voltage Breakdown:........................................AC 1500V 1 minute Lamp Rating:...........................................DC 12V 50 mA +/- 10% I bought one and it looks nice with the built-in red indicator. I like the idea of a lighted switch when I have high drain power running. This switch mounts in a round hole, and if it fails, replacement is easy. As you have said, corrosion is more likely to fail a switch than burned contacts. All the other panel switches are also rocker units with FASTON tabs for PIDG terminals. Jim Foerster ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Todd Houg <thoug(at)attglobal.net>
Subject: Root Cause of Sky-Tec Starter Solenoid Failures
Date: Aug 12, 2003
Rich, Thanks much for the straight story on the Sky-Tec starters. I wish more manufacturers would provide this kind of information in a public forum. Unfortunately, too many people carry a grudge for one reason or another and continue to flog the manufacturers publicly. This makes it difficult for the manufacturer to satisfy the customer in a public forum without coming across in a negative or derogatory manor. I wish you and your comapany the best and hope you continue to monitor and respond to questions regarding your products. Now for my question . . . I purchased a low time Sky-Tec starter (LS) second hand and would like to know how to tell if it has the post August 2002 mount? Thanks, Todd Houg RV-9A - Fuselage construction -----Original Message----- From: Rich Chiappe Subject: AeroElectric-List: Root Cause of Sky-Tec Starter Solenoid Failures While it has taken a while for me to find the matronics aeroelectric-list I am nonetheless very glad I was able to do so. My name is Rich Chiappe and I am the Manager of Sky-Tec, the Flyweight Starter manufacturer, and I would be more than happy to address the question of Sky-Tec starter failures. Denis, if you haven't already sent those solenoids off for inspection by Mr. Nuckolls, I too would be more than happy to open your solenoids and photograph the results for all to see on this board or even our website if you desire. We actually have a tool made-up for splitting the solenoids. Just please understand I suspect that Mr. Nuckolls' (who posted previously) motivation for "helping" may be less than neutral given his proximity to Sky-Tec's nearest competitor, B&C Products of Newton (Witchita) Kansas. First off, for what it's worth, I would like you all to understand the statements I make here are sincere and based on facts. I will leave the marketing "spin" at the door and pledge to you my sincere desire to offer you any information positive or negative about our products in the hopes that you will be completely and fairly informed about them. Our goal at Sky-Tec is 100% customer satisfaction. Given the fact that we make a mechanical device that is used in a completely uncontrollable range of environments, we understand that some portion of our products will experience difficulties and/or failures. It just goes with the territory. But it is our hope that even those unpleasurable experiences be restored to satisfaction by our unmatched support and professionalism. As I mentioned to Mr. Walsh in a separate e-mail, if we fail to succeed in the latter, then we simply deserve to lose your business. But understand our efforts are sincere and whole-hearted. Yes, under extreme vibration (see next paragraph), the solenoids on Sky-Tec's LS and PM starters can become what we refer to as "pitted". As I was more than eager to show many of you at our booth at Oshkosh using our cut-away LS starter, LS and PM starters manufactured before August of 2002 were manufactured with a mount that enabled the solenoid plunger to be "held off" its seat when the starter was in the rested position. Looking at the geometry of our starter(or B&C's for that matter), you'll notice the solenoid is a long moment away from the centerline of your engine. That long moment transfers that vibration to the solenoid and in it's "held-off" position, it is enable to 'wiggle' in it's insulative housing. Over time, under continued vibration, that solenoid plunger may wiggle itself a "pit" into the interior wall of its insulation. When the plunger comes to rest in that pit and an owner goes to fire the starter, in severe cases, the solenoid may not be strong enough to 'climb out' of this pit resulting in NOTHING (a click with NO starter activity). An immediately subsequent start attempt may find the plunger safely away from its 'pit' and the starter fires as it should and you experience all the GOOD things about a Sky-Tec starter (fast spin, quick start). But the condition is typically accompanied by intermittent operation. We have addressed this issue by changing one operation of the precision machining on our mounts which now allows the solenoid to "seat" fully and resists vibration almost entirely. This change was made in August, 2002. Now, a note on vibration. I am not referring to the vibration we ALL experience with our horizontally opposed Lycomings (yes, I realize they ALL vibrate - I realize these aren't Ferrari 12 cylinder racing engines). You should see my Starduster shake on shutdown! So no, I don't think our expectation is that you can balance a sandbag on the cowling, much less a quarter as Mr. O'Connor humorously suggested. The severe vibration we're referring to is an extreme case where an engine has a harmonic or other imbalance which imparts an abnormal (for a Lycoming engine) level of vibration to engine accessories including the starter/solenoid. Remember, as we state (all too often probably), Sky-Tec has 25,000-30,000 starters out there in service. And I (yes, I'm the guy who receives the repairs) will see only 2-5 come back to the factory each week which failed (or became intermittent) with a pitted solenoid problem. Most of these we will fix under warranty and in so doing will replace the mount with the post August 2002 machine cut that allows the solenoid to REST fully in the retracted position which GREATLY reduces the movement of the solenoid plunger and virtually eliminates the tendency to 'pit' the inside of the insulation. The remainder of those 20K+ starters are performing as engineered well past engine TBO's. So what do we propose as a resolution if you suspect your engine experiences abnormal vibration or an intermittent Sky-Tec starter? - Have the prop dynamically balanced (we will try to ask this question of you only once in future conversations - sorry about that, Denis) - At annual or other convenient time, send me your starter and I will replace the mount with one with the post 8/02 machining cut in it. I will not charge for this. You pay only shipping and any other repair costs (if any) you wish us to perform while we have the starter. - For harsh operating environments (including high-vibration applications), we recommend the Sky-Tec HT (including the new HTI) line of starters. They do not utilize the same solenoid design and as a result are more 'heavy-duty' and rugged. Remember also that HT/HTI's are the ONLY starter recommended for Lycoming-powered rotorcraft. If you would like to 'upgrade' to an HT, we can discuss a 'trade-up' program - just contact me directly for details. Above all, if you ever have a question about our starters - operation or lack thereof - please do not hesitate to contact me directly or through this board (I will try to get in a habit of monitoring the digest regularly). In all, I think you all will find and the market will continue to prove that Sky-Tec manufactures a superior starter over any of its heavy or light weight competitors. From time to time, we anticipate there will be failures but pledge to address them with unmatchable customer service. We also pledge to keep our discussions to facts - those being RELEVANT facts too. For instance, our competitors love to distract with irrelevant facts like "plastic gears" and "ball bearings". So let me be up-front: Yes we have "plastic gears" in our LS/PM starters and the LS/PM line does not use ball bearings in its design - but there are good reasons for both of these which I will discuss on a separate post if necessary not the least of which is our starters have NEVER died because of either of these components! Because of this, clearly discussion of such minutia is a smoke screen used to disctract us from the core discussion: how do they work, how will they last, and how will you take care of me if it doesn't. Also, to address another previous post: NO - Sky-Tec 24V starters utilize 24V solenoids - not 12V solenoids. Beyond putting an ohm-meter on them, one way to confirm this is to look at our prices of 24V starters - see how much more they are than the 12V starters? That's because of how much it costs me to have those 24V armatures and solenoids manufactured to our specs - they are not inexpensive to have made (right). Man, just how do these innacuracies get started out there anyway? Please call me if you have other questions so we can keep things based on the facts and not speculation. If there's anything we can do at the factory to support you better, please feel free to contact me directly: - Rich Chiappe Sky-Tec 350 Howard Clemons Rd Granbury, Texas 76048 (800) 476-7896 richc(at)skytecair.com www.skytecair.com eJ8+IgYSAQaQCAAEAAAAAAABAAEAAQeQBgAIAAAA5AQAAAAAAADoAAEIgAcAGAAAAElQTS5NaWNy b3NvZnQgTWFpbC5Ob3RlADEIAQ2ABAACAAAAAgACAAEEkAYAAAIAAAEAAAAQAAAAAwAAMAIAAAAL AA8OAAAAAAIB/w8BAAAAXQAAAAAAAACBKx+kvqMQGZ1uAN0BD1QCAAAAAGFlcm9lbGVjdHJpYy1s aXN0QG1hdHJvbmljcy5jb20AU01UUABhZXJvZWxlY3RyaWMtbGlzdEBtYXRyb25pY3MuY29tAAAA AB4AAjABAAAABQAAAFNNVFAAAAAAHgADMAEAAAAgAAAAYWVyb2VsZWN0cmljLWxpc3RAbWF0cm9u aWNzLmNvbQADABUMAQAAAAMA/g8GAAAAHgABMAEAAAAiAAAAJ2Flcm9lbGVjdHJpYy1saXN0QG1h dHJvbmljcy5jb20nAAAAAgELMAEAAAAlAAAAU01UUDpBRVJPRUxFQ1RSSUMtTElTVEBNQVRST05J Q1MuQ09NAAAAAAMAADkAAAAACwBAOgEAAAAeAPZfAQAAACAAAABhZXJvZWxlY3RyaWMtbGlzdEBt YXRyb25pY3MuY29tAAIB918BAAAAXQAAAAAAAACBKx+kvqMQGZ1uAN0BD1QCAAAAAGFlcm9lbGVj dHJpYy1saXN0QG1hdHJvbmljcy5jb20AU01UUABhZXJvZWxlY3RyaWMtbGlzdEBtYXRyb25pY3Mu Y29tAAAAAAMA/V8BAAAAAwD/XwAAAAACAfYPAQAAAAQAAAAAAAAC+XsBBIABAEcAAABSRTogQWVy b0VsZWN0cmljLUxpc3Q6IFJvb3QgQ2F1c2Ugb2YgU2t5LVRlYyBTdGFydGVyIFNvbGVub2lkIEZh aWx1cmVzAM0YAQWAAwAOAAAA0wcIAAwADQAOAAEAAgAMAQEggAMADgAAANMHCAAMAA0ABQASAAIA FAEBCYABACEAAABFM0ZFQkNBQkQ0NEEwRDQ1QUY1RTMxRDMyRTQxMzcxOQBhBwEDkAYA3BoAACEA AAALAAIAAQAAAAsAIwAAAAAAAwAmAAAAAAALACkAAAAAAAMALgAAAAAAAwA2AAAAAABAADkAAMi6 gf1gwwEeAHAAAQAAAEcAAABSRTogQWVyb0VsZWN0cmljLUxpc3Q6IFJvb3QgQ2F1c2Ugb2YgU2t5 LVRlYyBTdGFydGVyIFNvbGVub2lkIEZhaWx1cmVzAAACAXEAAQAAABYAAAABw2D9gbr9aOZBYM9G J5Ld1YS02kspAAAeAB4MAQAAAAUAAABTTVRQAAAAAB4AHwwBAAAAFAAAAHRob3VnQGF0dGdsb2Jh bC5uZXQAAwAGENAsA5gDAAcQcCAAAB4ACBABAAAAZQAAAFJJQ0gsVEhBTktTTVVDSEZPUlRIRVNU UkFJR0hUU1RPUllPTlRIRVNLWS1URUNTVEFSVEVSU0lXSVNITU9SRU1BTlVGQUNUVVJFUlNXT1VM RFBST1ZJREVUSElTS0lORE9GSU4AAAAAAgEJEAEAAACUFwAAkBcAAI8sAABMWkZ1vUX8mz8ACgED AfcCpAPjAgBjaMEKwHNldDAgBxMCg0MAUA7mcHJxMg/mfRMKgAjIIDsJbzI1NUsCgAqBdgiQd2sL gGTaNAxgYwBQCwNjAEELYMBuZzEwMzMLpgfwumkPYCwKogqECoBUD3CUbmsEIG0VEGggAhABBcB0 aGUgc3RyOQtwZ2gFQBlABbB5IIMCIBjzU2t5LVQFkAsZMQrAdASQcy4gSX4gA/EYoARgCXAYYABw dXpmANB0CHAbcRvQCGBs9GQgETBvFHABABjxBADmIBSyGiBmIAuAGMEAwEx0aRoxC4AgYR2wdacC YBcAGLJ1bRugVR8ihRzwbh9wZWx5LBjwjG9vHHIaEHBlbwtQPRkgYwrAGgEgAAnAdWQ+ZxkgGMIC IBkgCXBhc/caMQWxAHBvGQEk4h2gBaC/AjALgApQIeEYsAkAZxjzfxyMICQhsBugGAAeYQDAa9UH kWkFQGQGkGYXAB2ALwVAGMYciiZCcx9xc2b/GhAZAinAGdEHgAXAH98b0e8ZAAhgBUAFoG0LgCaw ANCvA2AEESzjJDBnH3F2GSD/BbEEgSagH3AZ8gOBBbAbp755CGAlczIBBcAugWEKsPsiURkCYgeQ BUAlgi4wIoB/MfMlygRgAwAZ4SVzCXBz7nACIB2gJlFxClAZQB+RfwQgCXAv0AsgLrIygx3BZM0V EHQbkBdKTm8H4BjC9m0aEDb2IBugOxEXShvA/SAgcg9hD6AdoCAACQAH4AcfgAeAGp4gKExTKf8Z MAWRNAIlgiWCHWQgUCkA/SZCayUQB+AuMD0hIhAhkX8DIAaQKTI8gRjzNnAzwUHUdWcsYSAB0DAR YARg6SFgdD8XT3MXNgGRKIArBHAdoEgIYGdFWVJWgC05QSAtIEYsYP0hoGEjsSXBGUE4wR+RRCrz CvQgUDM2AUAVoAFAHcFnG2Ac4BB0MTZHkEvST/0FEGcLgAdABdAHkCuQI7A/S9NEJkrkSrELE0rm aS2YMTQ0AUAgUDE4Q4BXDMFPc0XgRgNhOgyDYvkW1CBDHlAzADRRRCVF4JcGYAIwUQdUNwFkYSHB WUMFMTIh0ENxM1SwMOg6MDEP4E1SZ0YAUQeeYTCBIaBLEQUQYy0gUN0ZQEAfYQNgAwBjG5AugVtS aCAwaksRUQdBMIFFdVdmTFfxOgfxJSBR0GHXR9Ee0hqmUz4lUwbwCfD+bx4AR7ALcApANkFNf06K 70o0C7ZEM0vQPlqPBUAHgadM4kKjPLFieVugIlGaCCIgPFehaGNAc18asEsBC3AxYC6BPkQqV98e UCLBQgYo8R/id2dTOhO/JjQeoibUWFVXDwVASUQk/mEt4CUQJDAZASLABBEwEP0aAWcLYB2gG8FC QQGgIsHVJlFkK3FvOQtNGhAhcH89YR5hUZslghvAbFEZAk2/AHBIESQBXIch0RkRRiGw/HdlGYJE JF0mHIoh0HFk/x1kM6AcJBkAA5EPcFIgK/H7IhBtsGQ2QUJUNvZEJFx5zz4WHMBeVBugIEQJ8AQA nyHQQdEyAg9wMBBuJzPR+mwkYWQaEA+gAjAY8S8g/mVEJCSQXcQEIB7gHvAYwn8LgDZgSxEfkmQA BdAxYU71FRBrBvBse+EbwCHydm//d3VEJCZRNEEDoDKDfoglgv5wLjAZ4AnAMwAYoBkCNkH/KdEE IBjCB0ADICtiCeAaJN8EAEQkBuALESTCZXyhGiD7MqFz4GIAkBtgfAYBAACQ+wlwe3FXcUEc4YcB GhB8gh8f8SHxAyAAwAEALXVw/0QkGMI2YCBQAkAushkDfpbde3FKQzIisTyRICFgBIH/GyFxc4Zg f8N3MgVAgIE5df2A1Sc+gGiQIhBjlREwiRD/H5AsYCGwPsAEYC/xH3QYwvoibNFwLrFlEADAGhCC If9s83dCRCQkMC5QGWADIExQ94kiHlIdwXgHcClAd9Mapf4nBCAkMArAM7IugSKAH4CDGeEh0EIm QyBQOJWfHtE5dQfQGeADoChXKUDrD2ApQGE+wEsAcSSAOQv+RmYQM8F/ISHQGMJokJGB/ylAmbEd YAAgFyB2N0BDMgP/hxSQGRkBfiUBkBtgB4ACMP8EIBvAKOI0IASQcUEcUQCQ7G5jpLMesWI8k5Ti HNF/e2IbwkGhj7EwEaL3AMBy+ykAjgMiNmALgGUQkYEZAv9uwDXVIrEjoiZRMgI6UaU2/4qUJkJ/ IQSQRCQyBBoQHxr/QrEpQDAFL7cBoC5COEos0v8ZAjQyXqWRYzICpyOCIZpi7yLAIZIlc3rxcoux HxQ8sq+v8xkBINBEKk8yoWeIkJ8DIJGBGqYeYRYgMCUsSO8rlBzRH5F7cUeX4xkCHML/kVRz4KgG QGEgAAeAD2FYgf9MgQEAFHClYJFUHmFH0R2g/yzjs0khYCXCA2BBoG5DGWD/FgB+FR7hCfAUcFhh o9Mh0P9z4KI8kYEkkD1hNnAAIB+Szx7hsEunIkQkZXgigAiBb6VRKWgIkITzLwWxevlJ/QVAakMy tuAHkS4CGPMbYfcFEBniOQVCLlEpQR5hMpL/NDORY4kTfdOQAY+jCHBuQ//FWAQggiGaEhxBNqJ+ JbkJ/4BCMpIhYB9hD2A8sYZgUiD/CRGFBANgrMAEEB+RB0AEAP8g0Q/gpBNTAR+RCYCDR4CC/lcH QBwBLOMPoAqxIYGJAP4tAMADEHvzwbF68itTFRD/pWC91BkCC2ACQHXCGQFJBf/BsQCQs2EaEIqR BJCnoiIQ9wkAXEEyg2IsYAuATMF7cf/KUpAZMpIBEQkRaqEJcH4lt6VJkvEiwC0ZEBtCZDkL/lkH kCHQkBPNURlQo8FtMOxpYtXBH5Ioh3IkMOGA9x2w1bGFoylzVH6JSQWZSPM+oCVzUE0bFyLhgDEF kX89YZ+zwbEJcKzBd+MEICLzlZDYgWQi0vXZJUJBdvj/JHBycitiQRIiMx7hMgOwJPcG4CUhqWJP HACA8BwB24KPJrAIYUQkKcB0LWFuAP8aEOXxGyUh0OX/KMIcp4IC/xjBGSBDBR7hQ3LZJhxcP8H/ yNK78UPSy3UhcG5RacR+hv+PkSFg62WCIZVS0/V/IWUQ/ylABCAPoLry2PEY9T40bgLfsRWaEpNy rqO5k0wiABSx/y7RqYNEJCOwLJEZUOxThDP9GzQoBbGbIZmxGMSRgR9h9xth48EyASdBoSURvPR+ HX9wUjziLsE1gKPSH/Dvomb/UNEsBFMBYgAgUCQx7HSI8f8WANuhe3EYAXQ1A/oZUX+w/+hxlpN8 4OH4QVL3KiWCLOH7oAP4wy35cmFU/IZ78b1jq/aUJkInENBnbZBlksB/C4Z/oR2AL+QuMe5ye3FP /21BPTMXNeEUJcYdoOH3c1L/wrP3fZXyDrT5siGgHvC+MP/pEgyVTGAKRRcBxYGfgocC/x7isOMP 1LmTZ0C6Fffm54L/QlEiEJoTTGCx2ekhJXPnMf854CQwtsIa9CmgdxP6x3vx/74QPKBtQSLSPKB7 4QKPleP/JRGCEkiBBAJd0UZwheEOgf8oQJiwReAuQZLAGHGH4hxjB4ZELrIbpk5PVEhJ3E5HPoC+ MSgha8i0JbBvPge5UpPQmOAp0vILkW3ftPFSALOjhmCJwGU6gX2h/z4Ta/XpQZqAAPIE4Wmm9+bf TODocLPCBMf5wifpIZLA/6K1PgaNFYrBbiGw8cLBEGEfQBEyRc1ZhvTJIUdPT/5Eh9LAEG4isAK+ MOVVoyf/PkTW8JoxqRLg8DqAJoI+E/8oQspSBVM/EQ0zcFKY4JWQ/7yBc8Br9deQmnG8UWPTF4T/ mMGjsH2hg9HiJLXbiyGL5P94NPbjysFroIZgyTCAUbwyf0xR7qEGEjrWI8RCkehQY/9roEjnjKCd IXvAPoOJU0PD/6AxJBBRsQIQ7ACHAevweITfFAfaoakA+hFlEGbGYLPE/2FUe0FroW0h4gfSoOqg mjH/04LoUHPAByPKwT4j57Hqcq+MsdUi8xRU4zK1207r8P914QICh5Ph96bTbFMkcuhxH8mAjiIX NOH4wbFBTEzvxP/1c8r0yYB6EnGLk4PQM2ORtQFMeWZBMvMoee/g0nZAfSGhQHqns+/AT1d74fTJ MC1TbFxBpPF8wkaryWHjQGm4ADIfsHkF8V/hMpeQQDAiQwbicyhCWf+T8H4lMHSHcqtRXSKbkGOx /yyBZ9ChYYex7jCXcG7AHTD6IdMAU6yAAhCBQm7AfML/MtImoO7HxVJ1gK40N+KyRv/nI9Kg8eAx 0rjhEhCl8EFz1TcEdwXxZ+DwbdeA1RB9bPNhyfR44CdlbiCAgk/cJ0OHsAIQyxF16qGT83/XYQ7Q /CMHI45xH2ROiif/3eZNewOi6yHhhR/C+kKlg/8GtXeBA7KRcK4Qh7A18IjS/+1xrNYjQWB1QnTZ wd+haWP/zRBk0YygtxA1EIbSUmcGtf+UQM0wrvAYUlSaCgVrFTkB/5ZxUTHGoaVB9/DGAI4mNKT2 Lwq2tdtSo8EjUB7i6OH/2YKjkiYhhxOsgjpxmGKl8B/NIJQw4PC3ZmuCMjUs4fPAMC0zMHqCNDvK 0v+pg6UBHyPaYLzxKFOQolMVvicFNPMwFTGTAUARZa7h/0NjRYbjMJ7RlECnI4d0s8H4Mi01GrOl 4SaRFyWmgu/JsesxbiH0UGUmoUKD1vL/0+b/4udhTQAXdTpFgOL1k9/pJBP5eQHNMNLiTUcyP5Tv alL+BacjxjB44QX7YFch/xKAs9QfIqyAXVD9cqcjgHH/D/ACVPXVyMeTMsn08xXzsn/sEUESH6G1 Y5/RQx9EJFL4RVNUROWxFEWGl4G6oAv8WUJlR5LQQVRMWf/oQZuRf7Tqka7wBGM/lQq2/wyl9/Wz 8sDx8kBRo7OwKLD/pUCjoZG0OnHhMMXA78AOcv8uAxdU2bBJQT+UFqYZCWaCP+GhtEASEyPTzELz sEsr/+aIpPLFca3y/XOxxQbEpLE/3wGzsLcQ4zBHQ3LjVEL/ZIDb4DtqXMHn011QwaLSAf9SEujS FjDHkd9AsBA3o+yE/9FANXBe0QZqzVo4pW8W4fjfb7ILkToKt2Y0lT/J9FVw3kg8Yj/EPvDF8HnS kDpA9zhTYFbRICjBsYzz/sLos/+CoSQSKcFGIMN0yfTsooGT/3JgvQHVMUTw8kISUhERz2L/cmAz IFVwc4H+0TNEkRLg8NZE2QBGECmtxkEckhKw/7yRbHa0hDlxCIIRYvnx3OH/wwEGcydHfaPEuI1P UIUGEfGOayA4L5AnoaKQ0guD70yzxLghkj4hckixAIRGEP9ZNOMhs4IpQiQQ0WChoxzD39BBuHOA dBJRRiIo1pA4pf/sQIDg7KL1cO4z2pKhNUJiv80xsIE8U/qpddVVcEZk4v/jQO4xPvUiQ5mxcmDT csVy93QHJBAisC1GadFgJnG1BH/jwNknQBHnkNNxK8Ssxki/kwDMGU5CBwDsANCASXDx/wYF5pZm VDiVpcEhkqdBVeb/LJHhwQq32iEVYG7hHMKmta8kwaDj6qIlVCffgXblcPdbECggLjRyZdJmQnam MfH3jGGRE9BxL9Hh5cGg8k5C/E9OliEu288n8nFvolJ2vi2mUPRS2VECIIWAYwjA93igTLLshHda EyMwW7EOcux1cONxn0AnG8XowW7g39CAAYCwgeciKPBzv6Bi8vcjAAixn0At4bAuMK7R4dH7TRBV cGrzQhJilIG6Eijw/UARdEUhb6HTpZRQhMGkbP5B7VA8cgHgHwHshB9iPEX/sfgzRP85tVI++e7l vFGxkv8fgRhxVXCY8PoQicHUBVZB/w2gd8LHMeXvUcIAomVRIrL/JBElVDNQWvEmILtksPZIsPu/ w2vCYg2hGHFsEoNhdFb/KPBl8k1hScAP8AXgKDE7av5JRuLpcV0wXbRf4ngSinX3HMPPpJ8Acluw vSIB4RJm/8cjruCuYwd2rMafABKwgzL/tFEDsqgQUAKFgTSWlyGZUv+zgRiE2HNsYiMwIrAqZd8g vwFyGrKoQNSAg2HTIkYFE/8RYYKzuYOwgYuhNfDDcO/z/3xzjPMh0YSy/lLylTNx7sH+ZEixsUI8 tE4yx8Em0hIA/Z8AdD4hDjLj0YNguiAsgf99Bzwh2pKYlgeWW7C8MOuz/+OltSMd0pSBtVKftCHQ oaLBleBMRVZBTpMBDiP/eFF11coCGOFRkLOxXRCoov8CiWLA/HOMcUYRlHImtB4Qv0exH2AEwQ4F 4SIlVCK8Qb+yMWxQSLDKUUTQi/IiYGH3BgJXQTMBIkyxXMEJwOZD2yHR4bAtLWGskDrCYS/RH8hF FX8Wg7PxqKJMUy/8UE2gWSu1HDTSM11QL9H/1DMOwngR8pUXhb/UMyDWFe9VcAcyfGSg8md4YNlR 7uH/tTJvojNQvWKJd0KC99UFxP/jpkbSWlFucXfCvmOnoaKg/3NSWvBasMEiTkLu0peDbfUvfALn RXuXPFNOD4BFUv/jkTmShcEe4u5xf4C4c4ln7zkiPrFCMVyRQiuX4jWxwf9dEMxAFnFFIQ0o0nNi klKx/6dB5CBpUmWw18BbsePAaID/eMEe4UQz46KUY0rUxwEZMf9+dHAg2+ENKBmBUSBC8KXB/1QT 4MD68F0QNgKwtFQiFfL/S2HZQTYBihlf4lGQW7GvgP/b4fUySVEAch5DXXHoLNqh/10QB+nEILhk QAGZsGVhjuMZGYFOT1VhrMYyNFb/oFjUdUrUP8PVlbVSwSJXgN9BiUyxLgBf4NlBcL+wyvPh43Fv aG0tuiD/k5OT/m0RoaKgihXC0fA0isDHsf+xs19iGEF4YF3wkTGooq7Q/30xfAH1QD/LtXGBYTYC YoL/dkTXwlQE29TjcU5CQqN7pf4/noJyMNuhK4lKtjrixTT/uiDiN8h1n9M/0WvxcjD+VP/ZQUGo /dmSg+vDqEEOVNOG/6DywSJwwV6xnLES5MhznwD9nOEoqZABgfdQiPHEIF0Q/+WTNgiJwJ12r0C/ oBOBc7J/9EK6pM+gfCjEIUaBTcFQ/+7Ur4I6hV/iyHNsqbIGbrD/jGHjNQyT+NIgIXkgMsJFZP8O BYvywSKoMp4G93uXs2iA/9uixDBg0+MnsVEn5IM2xzH//sGmUG6Q6cMY0KxhdxHuxH12RGaBYIqh MmHwL+a0OuvoOj8gUm4SQ7HAzbGdZeOsxXZEMzUwrjA4sPMS1kOIsbUyUpiFR4uRBzAXsRD4kK0A eHoxNzYwtDQ4hRU4exCA4DRxAGAtNzg5NpPlKPFj3kCxgGVAhcHmoC7ekUYlHXSALnNf6Hb89F8t Pe9233fveP96Dz12VwNAe8rLPyCeokHsUG9FCcAzYcmvcC1ME1EgRZ8BiqD9ygF15VF7OJ6gsdEj AX6x/7HRqDC1MdfRz6DLweahr7H78djb8EP7oamQBzG1Ins47+5xfdPaJMJFJ6MxoqDqIv9Kcq/g t9CZQkIRq5PERXs4/8eT7nHmlAgBtMHUgA2AobH/YaVYYLEA9XFUwX6DpGZ2v2+Mr42/js96/CEt 0CrQV9fGwpDAezhCruB3I/F90t0ZgVUj8bpT3yBiGMCSM//B8VQwmbDRsZ4R9oK6ICdhX/Zxizhc 0J/AxzFTwXFl3xmBltPusJaCYlAm+fEJwP8Z0b1TuHOEC4tPmy+cP51P/4+Pe6F909oAlNK7QUcQ qpLrskJ7OVC+ck2VVBmB5BDffREUUX10HgAWEEAJUYpkA3Poe5NVTi9TVULAU0NSSUJFopIBkGB0 cDovL3SCo/svPTDAYjJBBRCg7X3TRkG+UaKSe8Kmf6eGqcEvfQ+2LgGQpLpTH9EpAUVhAD9WMTXS qo+nlq5Tezk3Lb5EwtGSJKY/p0qT1C+i3+t7OZIlRPZjcxmAsu+nhvf2VLTftepBrnFWsbdxqh// pyyuYruioSqWi7xPp2iXtPuW4qjOU2MBOsDN8K8fvUr7ub97SE+ZB7vUxA+nhtow/+fho6K+aoJr w9+nWWpCgqZ/mi/Pj9Cf0a+ebtNvdet9BVWQANXgAwAQEAAAAAADABEQAAAAAAMAgBD/////QAAH MACX1En8YMMBQAAIMACX1En8YMMBCwAAgAggBgAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAEYAAAAAA4UAAAAAAAADAAKA CCAGAAAAAADAAAAAAAAARgAAAAAQhQAAAAAAAAMABYAIIAYAAAAAAMAAAAAAAABGAAAAAFKFAAC3 DQAAAwAJgAggBgAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAEYAAAAAAYUAAAAAAAAeABOACCAGAAAAAADAAAAAAAAARgAA AABUhQAAAQAAAAQAAAA4LjAACwAXgAggBgAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAEYAAAAADoUAAAAAAAADABiACCAG AAAAAADAAAAAAAAARgAAAAARhQAAAAAAAAMAGoAIIAYAAAAAAMAAAAAAAABGAAAAABiFAAAAAAAA HgApgAggBgAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAEYAAAAANoUAAAEAAAABAAAAAAAAAB4AKoAIIAYAAAAAAMAAAAAA AABGAAAAADeFAAABAAAAAQAAAAAAAAAeACuACCAGAAAAAADAAAAAAAAARgAAAAA4hQAAAQAAAAEA AAAAAAAAHgA9AAEAAAAFAAAAUkU6IAAAAAADAA00/TcAANL5 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 12, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Root Cause of Sky-Tec Starter Solenoid
Failures > >While it has taken a while for me to find the matronics aeroelectric-list I >am nonetheless very glad I was able to do so. > >My name is Rich Chiappe and I am the Manager of Sky-Tec, the Flyweight >Starter manufacturer, and I would be more than happy to address the question >of Sky-Tec starter failures. Denis, if you haven't already sent those >solenoids off for inspection by Mr. Nuckolls, I too would be more than happy >to open your solenoids and photograph the results for all to see on this >board or even our website if you desire. We actually have a tool made-up >for splitting the solenoids. Just please understand I suspect that Mr. >Nuckolls' (who posted previously) motivation for "helping" may be less than >neutral given his proximity to Sky-Tec's nearest competitor, B&C Products of >Newton (Witchita) Kansas. It's spelled "Wichita" . . . and before I am friend to Mr. Bainbridge, I am an engineer and a teacher with an interest in deducing facts and sharing them with anyone who has an interest. >Yes, under extreme vibration (see next paragraph), the solenoids on >Sky-Tec's LS and PM starters can become what we refer to as "pitted". As I >was more than eager to show many of you at our booth at Oshkosh using our >cut-away LS starter, LS and PM starters manufactured before August of 2002 >were manufactured with a mount that enabled the solenoid plunger to be "held >off" its seat when the starter was in the rested position. Looking at the >geometry of our starter(or B&C's for that matter), you'll notice the >solenoid is a long moment away from the centerline of your engine. That >long moment transfers that vibration to the solenoid and in it's "held-off" >position, it is enable to 'wiggle' in it's insulative housing. Over time, >under continued vibration, that solenoid plunger may wiggle itself a "pit" >into the interior wall of its insulation. When the plunger comes to rest in >that pit and an owner goes to fire the starter, in severe cases, the >solenoid may not be strong enough to 'climb out' of this pit resulting in >NOTHING (a click with NO starter activity). An immediately subsequent start >attempt may find the plunger safely away from its 'pit' and the starter >fires as it should and you experience all the GOOD things about a Sky-Tec >starter (fast spin, quick start). But the condition is typically >accompanied by intermittent operation. > >We have addressed this issue by changing one operation of the precision >machining on our mounts which now allows the solenoid to "seat" fully and >resists vibration almost entirely. This change was made in August, 2002. > >Now, a note on vibration. I am not referring to the vibration we ALL >experience with our horizontally opposed Lycomings (yes, I realize they ALL >vibrate - I realize these aren't Ferrari 12 cylinder racing engines). You >should see my Starduster shake on shutdown! So no, I don't think our >expectation is that you can balance a sandbag on the cowling, much less a >quarter as Mr. O'Connor humorously suggested. The severe vibration we're >referring to is an extreme case where an engine has a harmonic or other >imbalance which imparts an abnormal (for a Lycoming engine) level of >vibration to engine accessories including the starter/solenoid. I'm sorry sir, but you don't get any more credit for environmental conditions than does any other manufacturer. The conditions present under the ring gear of a Lycoming engine are what they are. If you perceive an increased risk of failure of your product due to some variables of installation and service, a few words of warning the promotional literature would be nice. >Remember, as we state (all too often probably), Sky-Tec has 25,000-30,000 >starters out there in service. And I (yes, I'm the guy who receives the >repairs) will see only 2-5 come back to the factory each week which failed >(or became intermittent) with a pitted solenoid problem. 100 - 250 returns per year for a repeating problem with an easy solution . . . have you considered a metal liner in the solenoid bore? > Most of these we >will fix under warranty and in so doing will replace the mount with the post >August 2002 machine cut that allows the solenoid to REST fully in the >retracted position which GREATLY reduces the movement of the solenoid >plunger and virtually eliminates the tendency to 'pit' the inside of the >insulation. The remainder of those 20K+ starters are performing as >engineered well past engine TBO's. >So what do we propose as a resolution if you suspect your engine experiences >abnormal vibration or an intermittent Sky-Tec starter? . . . define "abnormal" along with the instrumentation and go/no-go values your customers should apply to make sure their engine is suited for the use of your product . . . it may well be less expensive for them to choose a product with no such limitations. >- Have the prop dynamically balanced (we will try to ask this question of >you only once in future conversations - sorry about that, Denis) >- At annual or other convenient time, send me your starter and I will >replace the mount with one with the post 8/02 machining cut in it. I will >not charge for this. You pay only shipping and any other repair costs (if >any) you wish us to perform while we have the starter. >- For harsh operating environments (including high-vibration applications), >we recommend the Sky-Tec HT (including the new HTI) line of starters. They >do not utilize the same solenoid design and as a result are more >'heavy-duty' and rugged. Remember also that HT/HTI's are the ONLY starter >recommended for Lycoming-powered rotorcraft. If you would like to 'upgrade' >to an HT, we can discuss a 'trade-up' program - just contact me directly for >details. > >Above all, if you ever have a question about our starters - operation or >lack thereof - please do not hesitate to contact me directly or through this >board (I will try to get in a habit of monitoring the digest regularly). > >In all, I think you all will find and the market will continue to prove that >Sky-Tec manufactures a superior starter over any of its heavy or light >weight competitors. . . . define "superior" . . . I think our customers are looking for good value which means low cost of ownership. Cost of ownership has to include purchase price, service life and the inconvenience of dealing with failures no matter what the $cost$ is for putting the system back into service. > From time to time, we anticipate there will be failures >but pledge to address them with unmatchable customer service. We also >pledge to keep our discussions to facts - those being RELEVANT facts too. >For instance, our competitors love to distract with irrelevant facts like >"plastic gears" and "ball bearings". So let me be up-front: Yes we have >"plastic gears" in our LS/PM starters and the LS/PM line does not use ball >bearings in its design - but there are good reasons for both of these which >I will discuss on a separate post if necessary not the least of which is our >starters have NEVER died because of either of these components! Because of >this, clearly discussion of such minutia is a smoke screen used to disctract >us from the core discussion: how do they work, how will they last, and how >will you take care of me if it doesn't. Facts are never irrelevant. You agree that the construction features cited are indeed factual. The relevance of those differences for any of my writings about starters was to point out some of the reasons for price differences between products. Exactly why a designer chooses a particular technology in preference to another may never be obvious to us who watch field histories on the products. From my own experience as a designer, I know one can and should spend a lot of time considering technology and fabrication choices for a brand new product. It's one thing to count on field service history to help you evolve toward a better product. However, unless the first offerings enjoy an exemplary first impression, one may never get a chance to evolve at all . . . B&C's choices of component technologies from the very beginning have represented them well. There have been a number of light-weight wantabe manufacturers that have come and gone. As far as I know, B&C was there first and has the longest track record. They're not the cheapest but there's about 15 years of service history to assist the consumer with his buying choices. This thread was started based on four contactor failures in three years on one airplane. The owner has opined this product to be of poor value. The facts has presented do not dispute his opinion. I'm pleased that you've offered clarification of the problem and company intent with respect to mitigation. >Also, to address another previous post: NO - Sky-Tec 24V starters utilize >24V solenoids - not 12V solenoids. Beyond putting an ohm-meter on them, one >way to confirm this is to look at our prices of 24V starters - see how much >more they are than the 12V starters? That's because of how much it costs me >to have those 24V armatures and solenoids manufactured to our specs - they >are not inexpensive to have made (right). Man, just how do these >innacuracies get started out there anyway? Ol' mechanic's tales, dark-n-stormy night stories, ignorance . . . and now the Internet makes mis-information available to virtually everyone in minutes. B&C has received nasty-grams for failures on starters that weren't even manufactured by B&C! My words have been quoted out of context and attributed with alternative meanings many times. That's what this and dozens of other lists are about, deduce facts and build understanding of how and why things happen. > Please call me if you have other >questions so we can keep things based on the facts and not speculation. > >If there's anything we can do at the factory to support you better, please >feel free to contact me directly: It appears the failure mode for the incident under discussion has been deduced and a fix implemented. I'm pleased to hear it. I'm also pleased to have you join us in the goal of providing hard data that helps folks make informed technology choices for their own design and fabrication challenge of building the finest airplanes to have ever flown. Bob . . . -------------------------------------------- ( Knowing about a thing is different than ) ( understanding it. One can know a lot ) ( and still understand nothing. ) ( C.F. Kettering ) -------------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net>
Subject: OT: Source for dynamic prop balancers
Date: Aug 12, 2003
Going down now for auction on http://www.govliquidation.com/-- LOT (3) CHADWICK HELMUTH MDL 177M-6A BALANCERS w/ CARRYING CASES; PREVIEW AND LOADOUT BY APPOINTMENT ONLY. You'll have to do a little homework. These may be helicopter only. Don't know. Regards, Eric M. Jones www.PerihelionDesign.com 113 Brentwood Drive Southbridge MA 01550-2705 Phone (508) 764-2072 Email: emjones(at)charter.net "The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." -- Thomas Jefferson ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Fergus Kyle" <VE3LVO(at)rac.ca>
Subject: Part 91 aircraft
Date: Aug 12, 2003
| Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Part 91 | | | | Question below .... | | | > | > | > Cheers, | > I am interested in the regulations in USA as | > expect to visit | > and tour with my OBAM as a Canadian. I have also tried to build | > to US and UK | > requirements for safety. My understanding was that OBAM aircraft | > do not have | > the standard 'certified' quality, thus permitting experimentation and....... | | | Not trying to start anything here but do you mean to imply that the planes | we build implicitly have "less" quality?| Just asking ...| James James, No. I just referred to "the standard 'certified' quality". it might be better or worse - it just doesn't equal.. Ferg ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Fergus Kyle" <VE3LVO(at)rac.ca>
Subject: Northern ADFs
Date: Aug 12, 2003
" From: "Garrison Sem" <chasm711(at)msn.com> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Panel Layout -- IFR requirements? VORs and ADFs in very high lattitudes are oriented to true north in the Canadian northern control areas. I dont know about the rest of the world. Paul" I don't think ADFs should be....... I'm for having them face any way they want. Ferg ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "James Foerster" <jmfpublic(at)comcast.net>
Subject: D-sub current limits
Date: Aug 12, 2003
Bob, I've searched the archive but cannot find the reference to current which a D-sub pin can carry. I recall that you suggested paralleling the pins with 6 to 12 inches of #24 wire stubs to balance current distribution if more than 6 amps was needed, but I'm not sure if memory serves here. They are my favorite connector. Jim Foerster ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 12, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: D-sub current limits
> > >Bob, > >I've searched the archive but cannot find the reference to current which a >D-sub pin can carry. I recall that you suggested paralleling the pins >with 6 to 12 inches of #24 wire stubs to balance current distribution if >more than 6 amps was needed, but I'm not sure if memory serves here. They >are my favorite connector. They're rated nominally at 5A. For continuous higher current applications I de-rate them to 4A and parallel at the end of 22AWG wires . . . 6 - 12 inches long. I have some d-subs carrying 40+ amps (10 pins) in a couple of applications that have been through some pretty punishing qualification tests. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 12, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Not to flog a dead horse
>For those OBAM aircraft builders who chose to go the extra mile in >discovering, trying, filtering and sharing ideas . . . I'll avoid the the >word >"quality" but enthusiastically argue that your airplanes are better than >certified. >Bob . . ." > >Bob, > I agree with everything you said (and will defend to the >death.......) HOWEVER: >Because my question was ignored in favour of another diversion altogether, I >must point out the "quality" is still a useful word. I used it instead of >"Quantity", that's all. It has nothing to do with "value". > >Webster's Third International - "Quality": 1a - peculiar and essential >character; 1b - a distinctive and inherent feature. >PS: I agree about the quality of European cars. I've put my foot through the >rusty floor of several. Understand . . . but when you open a dictionary keep in mind that folks who publish them do not SET definitions, they only TRACK them. The dictionary gets new words and definitions to old words every time it is published. Once a word, like "quality" finds its way into tons of advertising hype, and every other politician's stump speech, what understanding is conveyed between us unless I use the word in a narrow context that makes the meaning very clear? Further, if it's necessary to clarify the meaning every time it's used, then I'll suggest the word has lost unique meaning and becomes superfluous to the conversation . . . even "value" (another non-word popular with advertisers and politicians) had to be defined as a cost of ownership and dispatch reliability issue. >I say again. "Powered civil aircraft with standard category U.S. airworthiness >certificates...." > Is that us? >Ferg Close. OBAM aircraft are blessed with an FAA Form 8130-7, SPECIAL AIRWORTHINESS CERTIFICATE. This is the same piece of paper one needs to ferry a "substandard" airplane to a qualified repair facility. See: http://www2.faa.gov/certification/aircraft/images/SpecialAWCertFront.gif You can get a snapshot of the the FAA's view of US amateur built aircraft at http://av-info.faa.gov/dst/amateur/ of particular interest are AC20-27 at: http://av-info.faa.gov/dst/amateur/ac20-27e.pdf and this document at: http://aea.faa.gov/aea200/ea01/Checklist.htm Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Brian & Debi Shannon" <wings(at)theshannons.net>
Subject: Re: RG58 Coax article I promised
Date: Aug 12, 2003
Bob - > > Great article (LSE RG58 Coax...) as usual...Any chance of posting it as a > .pdf file so we can easily save/file it for future use? > > Thanks --- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 12, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: RE: Switches vs relays for lights,
strobes > > >Bob, > >My intention is to use switches rated for the load. Also, the switch >panel has been designed for easy replacement of the switches, from the >pilots seat, with PIDG terminals and enough slack wire to facilitate the job. > >You asked what switches I'm using. For the high current lighting, I have >found an internally lighted Radio Shack 275-0712 unit that is rated for 30 >amps. They do have a spec sheet, which reads: > >Switch (275-0712) Specifications Faxback Doc. # 16582 > >Model #:...........................................................R13-133B >Switching Function (Circuit):................................3P SPSP ON-OFF >Rating:..........................................................30A 12V DC >Contact Resistance:...........................................50 m/ohms Max >Insulation Resistance:...............................DC 500V 100 m/ohms Min >Voltage Breakdown:........................................AC 1500V 1 minute >Lamp Rating:...........................................DC 12V 50 mA +/- 10% > >I bought one and it looks nice with the built-in red indicator. I like >the idea of a lighted switch when I have high drain power running. This >switch mounts in a round hole, and if it fails, replacement is easy. As >you have said, corrosion is more likely to fail a switch than burned >contacts. > >All the other panel switches are also rocker units with FASTON tabs for >PIDG terminals. Sounds like they'll do well for you as long as you don't need any special functions like center-off, progressive transfers, or more than one pole. I suspect that the lamp is wired internally to the terminal you would use as the "output" terminal wherein the lamp illuminates any time the switch is ON. You could use the "output" terminal for power and the lamp would be illuminated all the time to show the whole row of switches. To dim these, you'll need to provide a ground-side dimmer circuit of some kind. Perhaps a fixed-levels, bright-dim circuit that senses position lights and goes to the dim mode when you turn the lights on. Bob . . . Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 12, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: RG58 Coax article I promised
> > >Bob - > > > > Great article (LSE RG58 Coax...) as usual...Any chance of posting it as >a > > .pdf file so we can easily save/file it for future use? Sure. http://216.55.140.222/articles/RG58//LightSpeedRG58.pdf Bob . . . -------------------------------------------- ( Knowing about a thing is different than ) ( understanding it. One can know a lot ) ( and still understand nothing. ) ( C.F. Kettering ) -------------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 12, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: IFR requirements
> > >--- "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" >wrote: > > > > The rule acknowledges that there are multiple > > ways > > to deduce which way you are heading (or > > tracking). > > > >Bob and other Kansans, > >The latest gadget in the marine industry is a GPS >compass. Consists of 2 GPS antennas, a couple feet >apart, aligned with the centerline of the ship. The >relative GPS positions of the two antennas determine >the heading of the ship. Quite expensive now, but I >suspect we'll see them down the road. this would certainly resolve heading at zero velocity, very seldom necessary in an airplane . . . except to verify that you're pointed down the right runway before pouring on the coal. There's probably some relatively low cost GPS engines that could resolve static heading from antennas on two wingtips. I'm not sure I really want to know THAT bad . . . Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ronald Cox" <racox(at)ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Cessna-type panel light dimmer replacement?
Date: Aug 12, 2003
Thanks much, Bob. That wirewound part is exactly what I'm replacing. I bought one of those from you a year or so ago, and it's not working now. I thought I'd bought it on eBay, but as I look at the site and you remind me, yours is the kit I bought. I still have the knob, and bulb setup. Installed the rheostat alone. The 1963 Cessna has a pair of bulbs in the overhead, with red lenses, and sliders for the "map light". The problem is that as soon as I installed it, I could tell that the value wasn't the same as the one I took out. It didn't light at all until almost full rotation, and then went quickly to full bright. The part number isn't exactly the same as the one I removed, either. Now, after only about a year in the panel, it's become intermittent, so it's either burned (burning) up or something else is mechanically wrong. I've checked the connections, but I have to fiddle with it at full rotation to even get the lights on at all. Last flight, I thought it wasn't going to come on at all, but it finally did. It's a bastard to get at, so I'm not looking forward to replacing it again. I'd love to install the dimmer kit, I know it is better, but as you've said here, it ain't been "blessed" by the powers that be. Therefore, in a certified spam-can, I suspect it would be frowned upon by the FAA more than an equivalent resistor if seen sometime after installation. (I have bought 3 of them for my Glasair, and they work great on the bench.) Looks like from that catalog page that one of the Allied CR series resistors would probably do it. With the symptoms I'm seeing with the one I already bought, I think I'll need a smaller value than 75Ohms, since that one didn't go to full brightness until nearly full travel. Does that sound correct? If that doesn't do the trick, maybe I'll have to order the overpriced S.O.B. from Cessna by part number... I just know it won't work any better than the original. Thanks, Ron > >-----Original Message----- > >From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com > >[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of Ronald > >Cox > >To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > >Subject: AeroElectric-List: Cessna-type panel light dimmer replacement? > > > > > > > >If one were to do so, not that I ever would, but if... > > > >What would the appropriate value be for a generic replacement variable > >resistor for use in an older Cessna panel light dimmer be? I'd love to use > >one of Bob's dimmer setups, but it is a certified spam-can. > > > >I recently replaced it with what was supposed to be a cross-referenced part, > >but it wasn't the right value, lights only came on near full on position, > >and now it's already burned out. This is an older ship ('63) with the only > >lights in the overhead, so not much power. Radios, etc., each have their > >own dimming circuits built-in > > > >The value would allow me to check a supposed replacement part for the > >correct resistance range. Yeah, that's it. > > > >What resistance range do (would) I need, and linear or audio taper? > > How many lights are in the overhead? Most of the airplanes > I've worked with had a single, lamp rated at 200 to 250 mA. > The rheostat for this lamp was a special, 75 ohm, 12 watt, > wirewound device with a discontinuity at the max ccw end > so that full left rotation would shut the lamp completely > OFF. These were ordered from Ohmite by the thousands but > were never a catalog item. If you are dimming a single lamp > as described above, you can get a CR-12.5-100 > at http://www.alliedelec.com/catalog/pf.asp?FN=546.pdf > and get reasonable behavior or you can order one of > our SDK-1 dimmer kits at: > > http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/AECcatalog.html > > which contains the rheostat used in the Cessnas. I > found a quantity of these surplus about a year > ago and they are nearly gone. > > Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 12, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Brushes for Aircraft
Received a phone call this evening from a builder worried about "non altitude rated" brushes in his alternator. Dug through the archives and came up with a copy of an article I did for SA about 10 years ago. I've updated it and posted at: http://216.55.140.222/articles/BrushesForAircraft.pdf Bob . . . -------------------------------------------- ( Knowing about a thing is different than ) ( understanding it. One can know a lot ) ( and still understand nothing. ) ( C.F. Kettering ) -------------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 13, 2003
From: drew.schumann(at)us.army.mil
Subject: Re: Root Cause of Sky-Tec Starter Solenoid Failures
It appears that Mr. Nuckolls is too polite to point out the obvious disconnect in this post. Did not the customer in this instance have to put up with repeated bad customer service, unadulterated b.s. by company employees and having to pay for the company's mistakes several times over? It is extremely interesting how good customer service gets once publicity is involved. If Rich is serious about his "100% customer satisfaction" pledge, perhaps a refund of ALL the money paid by the customer for Sky-Tec's shoddy product to be repaired, every time he sent it in, rather than just this ONE TIME, when negative publicity was involved. I am not familiar with this product (Sky-Tec starters) but I, as a former customer service trainer am well-aware of this brand of customer disservice. Have a nice day. Drew ----- Original Message ----- From: Rich Chiappe <richc(at)skytecair.com> Date: Tuesday, August 12, 2003 7:01 pm Subject: AeroElectric-List: Root Cause of Sky-Tec Starter Solenoid Failures > > While it has taken a while for me to find the matronics > aeroelectric-list I > am nonetheless very glad I was able to do so. > > My name is Rich Chiappe and I am the Manager of Sky-Tec, the Flyweight > Starter manufacturer, and I would be more than happy to address > the question > of Sky-Tec starter failures. Denis, if you haven't already sent those > solenoids off for inspection by Mr. Nuckolls, I too would be more > than happy > to open your solenoids and photograph the results for all to see > on this > board or even our website if you desire. We actually have a tool > made-up > for splitting the solenoids. Just please understand I suspect > that Mr. > Nuckolls' (who posted previously) motivation for "helping" may be > less than > neutral given his proximity to Sky-Tec's nearest competitor, B&C > Products of > Newton (Witchita) Kansas. > > First off, for what it's worth, I would like you all to understand the > statements I make here are sincere and based on facts. I will > leave the > marketing "spin" at the door and pledge to you my sincere desire > to offer > you any information positive or negative about our products in the > hopesthat you will be completely and fairly informed about them. > > Our goal at Sky-Tec is 100% customer satisfaction. Given the fact > that we > make a mechanical device that is used in a completely > uncontrollable range > of environments, we understand that some portion of our products will > experience difficulties and/or failures. It just goes with the > territory.But it is our hope that even those unpleasurable > experiences be restored to > satisfaction by our unmatched support and professionalism. As I > mentionedto Mr. Walsh in a separate e-mail, if we fail to succeed > in the latter, then > we simply deserve to lose your business. But understand our > efforts are > sincere and whole-hearted. > > Yes, under extreme vibration (see next paragraph), the solenoids on > Sky-Tec's LS and PM starters can become what we refer to as > "pitted". As I > was more than eager to show many of you at our booth at Oshkosh > using our > cut-away LS starter, LS and PM starters manufactured before August > of 2002 > were manufactured with a mount that enabled the solenoid plunger > to be "held > off" its seat when the starter was in the rested position. > Looking at the > geometry of our starter(or B&C's for that matter), you'll notice the > solenoid is a long moment away from the centerline of your engine. > That > long moment transfers that vibration to the solenoid and in it's > "held-off" > position, it is enable to 'wiggle' in it's insulative housing. > Over time, > under continued vibration, that solenoid plunger may wiggle itself > a "pit" > into the interior wall of its insulation. When the plunger comes > to rest in > that pit and an owner goes to fire the starter, in severe cases, the > solenoid may not be strong enough to 'climb out' of this pit > resulting in > NOTHING (a click with NO starter activity). An immediately > subsequent start > attempt may find the plunger safely away from its 'pit' and the > starterfires as it should and you experience all the GOOD things > about a Sky-Tec > starter (fast spin, quick start). But the condition is typically > accompanied by intermittent operation. > > We have addressed this issue by changing one operation of the > precisionmachining on our mounts which now allows the solenoid to > "seat" fully and > resists vibration almost entirely. This change was made in > August, 2002. > > Now, a note on vibration. I am not referring to the vibration we ALL > experience with our horizontally opposed Lycomings (yes, I realize > they ALL > vibrate - I realize these aren't Ferrari 12 cylinder racing > engines). You > should see my Starduster shake on shutdown! So no, I don't think our > expectation is that you can balance a sandbag on the cowling, much > less a > quarter as Mr. O'Connor humorously suggested. The severe > vibration we're > referring to is an extreme case where an engine has a harmonic or > otherimbalance which imparts an abnormal (for a Lycoming engine) > level of > vibration to engine accessories including the starter/solenoid. > > Remember, as we state (all too often probably), Sky-Tec has 25,000- > 30,000starters out there in service. And I (yes, I'm the guy who > receives the > repairs) will see only 2-5 come back to the factory each week > which failed > (or became intermittent) with a pitted solenoid problem. Most of > these we > will fix under warranty and in so doing will replace the mount > with the post > August 2002 machine cut that allows the solenoid to REST fully in the > retracted position which GREATLY reduces the movement of the solenoid > plunger and virtually eliminates the tendency to 'pit' the inside > of the > insulation. The remainder of those 20K+ starters are performing as > engineered well past engine TBO's. > > So what do we propose as a resolution if you suspect your engine > experiencesabnormal vibration or an intermittent Sky-Tec starter? > - Have the prop dynamically balanced (we will try to ask this > question of > you only once in future conversations - sorry about that, Denis) > - At annual or other convenient time, send me your starter and I will > replace the mount with one with the post 8/02 machining cut in it. > I will > not charge for this. You pay only shipping and any other repair > costs (if > any) you wish us to perform while we have the starter. > - For harsh operating environments (including high-vibration > applications),we recommend the Sky-Tec HT (including the new HTI) > line of starters. They > do not utilize the same solenoid design and as a result are more > 'heavy-duty' and rugged. Remember also that HT/HTI's are the > ONLY starter > recommended for Lycoming-powered rotorcraft. If you would like to > 'upgrade'to an HT, we can discuss a 'trade-up' program - just > contact me directly for > details. > > Above all, if you ever have a question about our starters - > operation or > lack thereof - please do not hesitate to contact me directly or > through this > board (I will try to get in a habit of monitoring the digest > regularly). > In all, I think you all will find and the market will continue to > prove that > Sky-Tec manufactures a superior starter over any of its heavy or light > weight competitors. From time to time, we anticipate there will > be failures > but pledge to address them with unmatchable customer service. We also > pledge to keep our discussions to facts - those being RELEVANT > facts too. > For instance, our competitors love to distract with irrelevant > facts like > "plastic gears" and "ball bearings". So let me be up-front: Yes > we have > "plastic gears" in our LS/PM starters and the LS/PM line does not > use ball > bearings in its design - but there are good reasons for both of > these which > I will discuss on a separate post if necessary not the least of > which is our > starters have NEVER died because of either of these components! > Because of > this, clearly discussion of such minutia is a smoke screen used to > disctractus from the core discussion: how do they work, how will > they last, and how > will you take care of me if it doesn't. > > Also, to address another previous post: NO - Sky-Tec 24V starters > utilize24V solenoids - not 12V solenoids. Beyond putting an ohm- > meter on them, one > way to confirm this is to look at our prices of 24V starters - see > how much > more they are than the 12V starters? That's because of how much > it costs me > to have those 24V armatures and solenoids manufactured to our > specs - they > are not inexpensive to have made (right). Man, just how do these > innacuracies get started out there anyway? Please call me if you > have other > questions so we can keep things based on the facts and not > speculation. > If there's anything we can do at the factory to support you > better, please > feel free to contact me directly: > > - Rich Chiappe > Sky-Tec > 350 Howard Clemons Rd > Granbury, Texas 76048 > (800) 476-7896 > richc(at)skytecair.com > www.skytecair.com > > > _- > _- > _- > _- > ====================================================================== > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 13, 2003
Subject: Re: Root Cause of Sky-Tec Starter Solenoid
Failures
From: Gerry Holland <gnholland(at)onetel.com>
Drew Hi! > It appears that Mr. Nuckolls is too polite to point out the obvious disconnect > in this post. Did not the customer in this instance have to put up with > repeated bad customer service, unadulterated b.s. by company employees and > having to pay for the company's mistakes several times over? It may be that Bob like many of us with a lot of years of 'life' experience tends to at least appreciate a response regardless of what stimulus started it. After many years of dealing with Customers, in fact still doing so there is a maxim I work to as I analyse a poor situation. It tends to be. 'Their story', 'My story' and the 'truth'. Somewhere in that chaos is the problem and then the solution good for all. Sky-Tec may have problems, The Customer may not be blameless to those problems either but there are a fair enough percentage of satisfied Customers to say the product doesnt need slamming, just some dialogue with the Vendor to ensure he is aware of its shortfall. Unfortunately you may have nailed the problem with the word 'employee'. Sometimes the passion and concern felt at the top looses its focus at shop floor level without the Main Man even knowing. > > It is extremely interesting how good customer service gets once publicity is > involved. This is very true in all products and Services. It's a great lever for Customers but is open to abuse too. After a lot of rambling from me of which most is in agreement lets at least acknowledge that Sky-Tec are talking in open forum and at senior level where responsibility to fix things will be made. Sorry it's early morning and I'm having a 'fair minded' day. I leave my more strident attitudes for the politics and politicians of the day!! Back to Panel wiring now! Kind Regards Gerry Gerry Holland Europa 384 G-FIZY +44 7808 402404 gnholland(at)onetel.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 13, 2003
From: drew.schumann(at)us.army.mil
Subject: Re: Root Cause of Sky-Tec Starter Solenoid Failures
Hello Gerry, When I first read the post, my first reaction was "How interesting!" and went about my day. Upon further reflection, I noted the touch of insinuation at the beginning that Bob was being less than fair in this issue. That's what touched my "hot" button. Bob hawks the B&C product, for xyz reasons, and compares it to the Sky-Tec product in specific ways, which may or may not be relevant. Sky-Tec manager dude responds with a "shot across the bow" to open his post. HUGE red flags pop up in the back of my head whenever that happens. Combine that with the nature of the complaint, and shazam! I am in need of a better explanation than the one given. I fully understand your point about the truth lying somewhere in between. I also believe in the "walks like a duck and quacks like a duck" analogy. Peace, Drew ----- Original Message ----- From: Gerry Holland <gnholland(at)onetel.com> Date: Wednesday, August 13, 2003 9:50 am Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Root Cause of Sky-Tec Starter Solenoid Failures > > Drew Hi! > > > It appears that Mr. Nuckolls is too polite to point out the > obvious disconnect > > in this post. Did not the customer in this instance have to put > up with > > repeated bad customer service, unadulterated b.s. by company > employees and > > having to pay for the company's mistakes several times over? > > It may be that Bob like many of us with a lot of years of 'life' > experiencetends to at least appreciate a response regardless of > what stimulus started > it. > > After many years of dealing with Customers, in fact still doing so > there is > a maxim I work to as I analyse a poor situation. > > It tends to be. 'Their story', 'My story' and the 'truth'. > Somewhere in that > chaos is the problem and then the solution good for all. > > Sky-Tec may have problems, The Customer may not be blameless to those > problems either but there are a fair enough percentage of satisfied > Customers to say the product doesnt need slamming, just some > dialogue with > the Vendor to ensure he is aware of its shortfall. > > Unfortunately you may have nailed the problem with the word > 'employee'.Sometimes the passion and concern felt at the top > looses its focus at shop > floor level without the Main Man even knowing. > > > > It is extremely interesting how good customer service gets once > publicity is > > involved. > > This is very true in all products and Services. It's a great lever for > Customers but is open to abuse too. > > After a lot of rambling from me of which most is in agreement lets > at least > acknowledge that Sky-Tec are talking in open forum and at senior > level where > responsibility to fix things will be made. > > Sorry it's early morning and I'm having a 'fair minded' day. I > leave my more > strident attitudes for the politics and politicians of the day!! > > Back to Panel wiring now! > > Kind Regards > > Gerry > > Gerry Holland > Europa 384 > G-FIZY > +44 7808 402404 > gnholland(at)onetel.com > > > _- > _- > _- > _- > ====================================================================== > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 13, 2003
Subject: Re: Root Cause of Sky-Tec Starter Solenoid
Failures
From: Gerry Holland <gnholland(at)onetel.com>
Drew Hi! I guess you're not stateside at this time. I wont ask where you are but I can guess. Spent a few visits to that area in past couple of years. Interesting!! and probably miles from any perceptions held back home! I did my 6 years in the Royal Air Force in the 60's. A not to be missed opportunity as we knew where the enemy was. Just point everything East. It's not so easy now. > I fully understand your point about the truth lying somewhere in between. I > also believe in the "walks like a duck and quacks like a duck" analogy. > Great phrase and I know how you feel when the red 'mist' comes down on issues. I've just bombarded the BBC on a few different topics and there handing in the media. I felt better. They just said my opinion was to strident to publish. Really. Again thanks for reply and peace is a great word. Problem: The translation from English is just not working for some people!! I'm taking liberty of attaching a photo of my project so you can see the easy life that eventually arrives. It's about the only advantage of getting old! Ready for painting next month and should fly before Christmas if I can beat the 'paperwork' mountain. Take care Kind Regards Gerry Gerry Holland Europa 384 G-FIZY +44 7808 402404 gnholland(at)onetel.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 13, 2003
From: Van Caulart <etivc(at)iaw.on.ca>
Subject: Re: Ground loops
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Ground Loops > >Bob & List: > >During a recent addition of an RST audio panel, an ARC ADF, and a 2nd >comm (UPSAT SL30) to our stock '68 C177 I have had my share of >electronic gremlins haunting the job. One is alternator noise and the >other is the beacon noise. Any filter you put on the back of the alternator will have a beneficial effect ONLY on ADF and/or LORAN reception. These are effective in the low frequency radio ranges and have no benefits for AUDIO rate noises (ripple voltage) that is built in to every alternator. OK thats good to know so I'll leave the alt filter in line for the time being. >I have done the obvious things such as fat wire separation and shields >connected only at the source of the noise but now I'm lost. I get a lot of requests like this. It's got to be frustrating to the well intentioned owner/builder who is trying to understand and fix the problem himself . . . it's frustrating for me to figure out a way to describe the full range of troubleshooting techniques and tools in a few paragraphs of a list-server inquiry. Tell you what, order my book. If the chapter on noise mitigation doesn't help you identify and break the chain of victim-propagation-source links, I'll refund your money. Great offer thanks, which tells me that it's got to be simple problem. I do have your book (a great living work BTW). So I'll reread the chapter and employ all the tips and see what happens from there. >Regarding the beacon noise, is there a filter which I can use (make) to >tame this annoyance. Because it pulses, it really is an antagonistic >little devil after several hours flying. Try running the strobe from a pair of 6v lantern batteries located right at the power supply and see if you still hear the noise. If so, then a filter installed right at the power supply will help. I'd try a S251D479 capacitor from B&C which you can buy at http://www.bandc.biz/cgi-bin/ez-catalog/cat_display.cgi?26X358218 A local parts store might be able to supply you with a computer grade, electrolytic with 10,000 uf or more, 16v or more. Wire it right across the power input leads to the strobe power supply. This will probably reduce the noise and maybe eliminate it. At worst, we may have to consider adding some filter inductance in series with the strobe supply too. If the lantern battery experiment doesn't show that noise is getting onto the system via the 14v supply, it's a whole new ball game . . . but one step at a time. Thank you Bob, thank you. With this info and that of Mike Mladejovsky regarding the Cap in the RST audio panel, I'm going to get results. I'll let you know how it turns out. PeterVC ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 13, 2003
From: Van Caulart <etivc(at)iaw.on.ca>
Subject: Re: ADF reversed sensing
I installed an ARC 300 ADF rcvr and indicator which were inspected and taggged servicible. I was also supplied with a serviceable sense antenna, the cables to the loop ant, and the harness/connectors to the rcvr. My part was to hook up the connectors and install the indicator and antennas. I only had to connect power, ground and the audio output. My problem is that the needle of the indicator points in reverse to the station selected. I'm wondering if this couuld be a bad loop antenna or somehow related to my ground loop problems PeterVC ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 13, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: ADF reversed sensing
> >I installed an ARC 300 ADF rcvr and indicator which were inspected and >taggged servicible. I was also supplied with a serviceable sense >antenna, the cables to the loop ant, and the harness/connectors to the >rcvr. My part was to hook up the connectors and install the indicator >and antennas. I only had to connect power, ground and the audio output. > >My problem is that the needle of the indicator points in reverse to the >station selected. I'm wondering if this couuld be a bad loop antenna or >somehow related to my ground loop problems ADF loop antennas were commonly installed on both upper and lower surfaces of the fuselage which forced a rotation select option in the harness . . . there was a pair of wires that needed to be reversed in the harness to set proper direction of rotation of indicator needle with respect to the loop. There's a second set of wires that would control direction of pointing. It's been a VERY long time since I poked through the operating principals of these radios, but I think location of the two antennas with respect to each other and the airplane might produce the anomaly you're observing. The should be covered in detail in the installation manual for the radio along with a chart of pin-connections that describe hookup unique to your installation. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ron Raby" <ronr(at)advanceddesign.com>
Subject: slick mag tack sensor.
Date: Aug 13, 2003
My enjine came with slick mags. One of the mags has a tack sensor lead coming out of it. I have the JPI edm 900. They give you the sensor to go into the slick mags. The only problem is that you have to remove a mag to install the sensor. My question is does anyone know if the slick sensor will work with the EDM system? Not a big deal to remove a mag. Just trying to save some time. Thanks Ron Raby Lancair ES > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: BobsV35B(at)aol.com
Date: Aug 13, 2003
Subject: Re: ADF reversed sensing
In a message dated 8/13/03 7:01:00 AM Central Daylight Time, etivc(at)iaw.on.ca writes: > My problem is that the needle of the indicator points in reverse to the > station selected. I'm wondering if this could be a bad loop antenna or > somehow related to my ground loop problems Good Morning Pete, The ADF antennas were sometimes mounted on the top of the airplane and other times on the bottom. Consequently, there is always some method of setting the unit up for either a top mounted antenna or one that is mounted on the bottom. Check the install manual or talk to an installer who has been around for a while. Nothing wrong with your set! Happy Skies, Old Bob ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Rich Chiappe" <richc(at)skytecair.com>
Subject: Sky-Tec starter mount identification
Date: Aug 13, 2003
Todd wrote: "I purchased a low time Sky-Tec starter (LS) second hand and would like to know how to tell if it has the post August 2002 mount?" Shoot me an e-mail with your starter's serial number and I'll be able to confirm for you. - Rich Chiappe Sky-Tec 350 Howard Clemons Rd Granbury, Texas 76048 (800) 476-7896 richc(at)skytecair.com www.skytecair.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 13, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Root Cause of Sky-Tec Starter Solenoid
Failures > >It may be that Bob like many of us with a lot of years of 'life' experience >tends to at least appreciate a response regardless of what stimulus started >it. True. I wish all suppliers to the OBAM aircraft market would spend more time on the lists. I KNOW that it takes a lot of time but from both the manufacturer's and builder's perspective, I think it's time well spent. I've spent $thousands$ on print ads that produced not a single phone call much less and order. Sky-Tec has a huge advertising budget . . . if they dumped but one print ad to pay for the time some knowledgeable individual with the company charter to "make things right" I'm betting their return on investment will be better than for the ad. >After many years of dealing with Customers, in fact still doing so there is >a maxim I work to as I analyse a poor situation. > >It tends to be. 'Their story', 'My story' and the 'truth'. Somewhere in that >chaos is the problem and then the solution good for all. > >Sky-Tec may have problems, The Customer may not be blameless to those >problems either but there are a fair enough percentage of satisfied >Customers to say the product doesnt need slamming, just some dialogue with >the Vendor to ensure he is aware of its shortfall. For Sky-Tec, Rich is obviously "da man" . . . and he may have others who can take on a role of customer service ombudsman . . . A company can do no better than to conduct these activities out in front of everyone . . . like on a list-server. Had an engineering manager years ago who was fond of handing out "atta-boys" to the point where it was annoying. He was quick to point out that one "aw-s$#t" would wipe out ten "atta-boys." He would hand those out from time to time too. Sky-Tec may indeed have thousands of satisfied customers but it's a sure bet that one "aw-s#$t" will have an adverse effect on more than the business from the one unhappy customer. Rich, or someone in his employ could be tasked with joining every list server they can find . . . and then set up the email client so as to dump all messages not containing the phrase "sky-tec" or the name of the observer. This would reduce the flood of e-mails to a very small number that would serve as an excellent dip-stick into market perceptions of their product. Better yet, it would provide potential for very rapid response to problems before they became an "aw-s#@t." Imagine how a customer might feel if he received a positive response to mitigation of his problem before he even called the factory about it! I can speak with some authority about B&C's products because of my long standing relationship with them. I've also told folks that if they have ANY kind of a problem with a B&C product and don't get immediate resolution of the problem on first contact, let me know. I'll run up to Newton and jump right into Bill's lap. Rich is too far away so we'll have to ask him make arrangements for his own well meaning watch dog. > > > > It is extremely interesting how good customer service gets once > publicity is > > involved. > >This is very true in all products and Services. It's a great lever for >Customers but is open to abuse too. That's another advantage of conducting exchanges about problems in the open forum. The presence of uninvolved observers has calming effect on the discussions along with additional, clear thinking support for analysis of root cause. Rich and Bill are worthy competitors. I'd like to see both of them do well . . . and I think they are doing well. But I'd also like to see customers making their buy decisions based on perceived value and trade-offs of features as opposed to selecting the company with the fewest "aw-s$#t" marks against them. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 13, 2003
From: MikeM <mladejov(at)ced.utah.edu>
Subject: Re: Cessna-type panel light dimmer replacement
> From: "Ronald Cox" <racox(at)ix.netcom.com> > That wirewound part is exactly what I'm replacing. > . . . > The 1963 Cessna has a pair of bulbs in the overhead, with red lenses, and > sliders for the "map light". AFIK, the total current drawn by these two lamps at full brightness is 1.6A. To make these lamps aproximately half bright, you would have to reduce the current to 0.8A, meaning that the rehostat resistance at the mid point would have to be (14-7)/0.8 = 9 Ohms. For this reason, I think that the original rehostat was either 25 or 30 Ohms at maximum. The maximum dissipation in the rehostat takes place at half-brightness, and is 7*0.8 = 5.6W. If you are using a 750 Ohm (or even 75 Ohm) rehostat, then all of that dissipation would be taking place in one or two turns of resistance wire, and I'm not surprised that it burned itself up... Also as I remember it, there was an AD against the Cessnas with the overhead rehostats. Originally, the rehostat was mounted only on the vacuum-formed plastic that covers the overhead lamps. At half brightness, the dissipation in the rehostat got it so hot that it could melt the plastic, and even set it on fire! The AD called for making an aluminum bracket which supported the rehostat shaft, and mounted to the structural aluminum in the roof, providing a method of conducting heat from the rehostat to the outside skin of the airframe (infinite heat sink?). You need to check if this AD was ever complied with on your aircraft. I know of a 172 that has a "field approved" alternate compliance with this AD, where the two lamps where replaced by about 10 High-Brightness LEDs. The LEDs require less that one tenth of the current, thereby eliminating the fire hazard from the dimming rehostat. Mike Mladejovsky Skylane '1MM ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 13, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: The book I wish I'd written . . .
I've been looking for some texts to support an educational activity with some family young folks who have expressed and interest in electronics. I ran across a really nice piece of work in my father-in-law's library and did some Internet research to check availability of more copies. Turns out, Mr. Thomas Floyd has done a lot of books with many current publications offered at over $100 each. The used book market is well stocked with latest and earlier editions for as little as $4. A few weeks ago, there was some discussion about recommended readings in electronics. I'm prepared to enthusiastically recommend "Electronics Fundamentals - Circuits, Device and Applications" by T.L. Floyd . . . I picked up a second edition for $6. The writing style is excellent but the illustrations are superb. For the price, why not check this one out? Bob . . . -------------------------------------------- ( Knowing about a thing is different than ) ( understanding it. One can know a lot ) ( and still understand nothing. ) ( C.F. Kettering ) -------------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dave Grosvenor" <dwg(at)iafrica.com>
Subject: Re: OV Module question for Bob
Date: Aug 13, 2003
Bob, I did a couple of tests this evening before going ahead and shipping this module over to you. I disconnected my starter motor. Now if I hit the start button the starter relay pulls in and the OV breaker does not trip. This I assume means that if there is an OV condition it is being caused by the starter motor itself? Btw, wiring is as per fig 16 for the 912 and my module is built from the current cct diagram on your web site using the two transistors and zener. Is there anyone else on the list with a Rotax 912, wiring per fig.16 and an OV module?? Dave ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: OV Module question for Bob > >Yes Bob, I do. The battery master contacter I purchased from you with the >diode fitted. The starter contacter came with my Rotax 912 engine an >initially I thought it had an internal diode. On first test of the >electrical system I soon found it didn't as it was causing my fuel flow >meter to reset. I then fitted a diode. The odd thing it the OV breaker is >tripping when I push the starter, not when I release it. Contactors bounce like golf balls. The act of "closing" the contactor will produce a multitude of short, interruptions before it finally settles down. I'm not privy to the specific characteristics of the contactor favored by Rotax. However, if it's a cranking issue, why have the alternator switch ON during cranking? If you wait until after the engine starts to put the OVM on-line, perhaps this issue will go away. BTW, the avionics disconnect relay on EXP-Bus products has been known to trip our ov modules too . . . until the recommended diode was added across the coil. > Before fitting the >10uF cap, it was tripping as I switched the master on. >Dave Without having your construction in-hand to test it's dynamic characteristics, I'm unable to explain its behavior. The circuit I publish is different than the circuit we build. The original design calls for a bi-lateral trigger diode that has gone obsolete. B&C did a lifetime buy of these part to support their production for the foreseeable future although one of their products uses the two-transistor+zener network in lieu of the trigger diode. I've been able to troubleshoot and fix several DIY ov modules for builders. If you'd care to send it to me, I'll check it out. Do I recall you are overseas? Mark customs tag as "returned for warranty repair". Some other things to check: Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Light Dimmer
From: John Schroeder <jschroeder(at)perigee.net>
Date: Aug 13, 2003
>> Been looking at some panel lighting pages from several of your wirebooks >> and would like to try rolling my own dimmer for a confidence-builder. A >> few questions about the diagram (SWB0298): >> > The LM338K is used on BOSS HOG dimmer (5A). > Take a look at this data package for > more details on building a smaller device > with all the details on purchasing parts and > assembling. I got almost everything I needed from the file you suggested, but would like to know the brand, model and source for the 1000 ohm pots. Have decided to build two of the smaller, 3 amp "Boss Hogs". > >> Would this be suitable for LED's? > > Maybe . . . depending on how many LEDs are in series, there > is a network of resistor that can be incorporated to make > the LED behave something like the incandescent lamp > with respect to applied voltage. I will be using one branch of one of the dimmers to control a string of about 8 or 10 blue green LED's that will be mounted under the glare shield for panel flood lights. What would the resistor network look like for that? Many thanks, John Schroeder ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 14, 2003
From: drew.schumann(at)us.army.mil
Subject: voltage converter fuse, or??
I've had a recent emergency. Some fine individual fried my 230 to 120 voltage converter's fuse, which appears to have some fine beaded substance in it, I assume an eutectic salt ala Kidde fire detection system. I get blank looks from our electrical people when I ask them. Anyone know where I can get a fuse for it? There is a minimal amount of markings on this little piece of equipment, but if I knew a source and what's available, I'm sure we can come to a solution. Drew ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 14, 2003
From: drew.schumann(at)us.army.mil
Subject: soldering iron question
In my prior post, I expressed the need for a fuse for my voltage converter, when I had an idea. I am using my voltage converter for various things, but one thing I'm using it for is to run a soldering iron. It is a 120V iron and I have 220V supply. Is there a solution that combines voltage conversion and variability of supply? My limited knowledge of electricity leads me to believe that because the iron is a pure resistor, it should be possible to construct a way to both convert voltage and vary the current to provide a way to vary the heat of the iron. Thanks a lot. Drew ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Trampas" <tstern(at)nc.rr.com>
Subject: soldering iron question
Date: Aug 14, 2003
Drew, They make adjustable temperature modules for soldering irons. Most soldering irons are only 10-50W thus a standard 60W light dimmer should work. However if you want to do it your self look in an electronics book for SCR and Triacs, usually one of the standard examples is an AC light dimmer. http://www.discovercircuits.com/L/lite-dimmer.htm Trampas -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of drew.schumann(at)us.army.mil Subject: AeroElectric-List: soldering iron question In my prior post, I expressed the need for a fuse for my voltage converter, when I had an idea. I am using my voltage converter for various things, but one thing I'm using it for is to run a soldering iron. It is a 120V iron and I have 220V supply. Is there a solution that combines voltage conversion and variability of supply? My limited knowledge of electricity leads me to believe that because the iron is a pure resistor, it should be possible to construct a way to both convert voltage and vary the current to provide a way to vary the heat of the iron. Thanks a lot. Drew ________________________________________________________________________________
From: KITFOXZ(at)aol.com
Date: Aug 14, 2003
Subject: Re: soldering iron question
Hello Drew, Radio Shack makes a soldering iron temperature controller that is essentially a rheostat rated for 120 VAC and up to 150 watts. You could use your existing voltage converter to bring your 220 VAC line down to 120 VAC and then use this little jewel to control the heat at your soldering iron tip. It is Radio Shack Cat. No. 64-2054. John P. Marzluf Columbus, Ohio Kitfox Outback (out back in the garage) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net>
Subject: The book I wish I'd written . . .
Date: Aug 14, 2003
I have Thomas L. Floyd's Digital Fundamentals and it is pretty good. It is easy to see he cares greatly about teaching the subject. Maybe even better--see Horowitz and Hill's The Art of Electronics. I want to strongly recommend Paul G. Hewitt's "Conceptual Physics" (and its many versions) as a good basis for an electronics education. Physics is fundamental to all science. This is one of those books you can't put down. Paul G. Hewitt is online and answers his emails. Bob--write your own electronics book. We know you have a lot of free time! Regards, ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 14, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: OV Module question for Bob
> >Bob, I did a couple of tests this evening before going ahead and shipping >this module over to you. I disconnected my starter motor. Now if I hit the >start button the starter relay pulls in and the OV breaker does not trip. >This I assume means that if there is an OV condition it is being caused by >the starter motor itself? Btw, wiring is as per fig 16 for the 912 and my >module is built from the current cct diagram on your web site using the two >transistors and zener. > >Is there anyone else on the list with a Rotax 912, wiring per fig.16 and an >OV module?? It's probably not a true OV condition that's tripping your module. There is a characteristic of silicon controlled rectifiers that makes the device itself sensitive to rapid changes (called dv/dt or change-in-voltage-with- respect-to-time) that can cause the SCR to trigger irrespective of the design intent of the circuit. We had a rash of problems with Bonanzas a couple of years ago that would trigger the OV protection when landing/taxi light switches were operated. In this case, it was the high-inrush current of lamps combined with the bounce characteristics of $high$ switches. The noise wasn't even close to a real OV event in terms of effects . . . it was just the extraordinarily fast rise time of the very low energy switching transient that irritated the SCR. For what is worth, the vast majority of my experience with nuisance tripping of the crowbar SCR has been with Rotax installations and/or EXP-Bus installations. In the EXP-Bus incidents, we added a diode across the coil of their avionics bus disconnect relay. In other cases, the pre-flight procedures were modified to simply not bring the alternator with ov protection on line until after the engine was running. Before you ship me your device, you might consider this alternative . . . It's likely that your project is properly assembled but simply installed in a situation that presses very close to the raggedy-edge of the circuit's capability to ignore certain noises. I'm considering a new design that substitutes a boss-hog MOS-FET for the SCR. Totally free of dv/dt trigger effects. Until a few years ago, FETs that could stand up to the 300A crowbar impulse were expensive. They're getting cheaper all the time. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 14, 2003
From: drew.schumann(at)us.army.mil
Subject: Re: soldering iron question
Thanks! Drew ----- Original Message ----- From: KITFOXZ(at)aol.com Date: Thursday, August 14, 2003 4:05 pm Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: soldering iron question > > Hello Drew, > > Radio Shack makes a soldering iron temperature controller that is > essentially > a rheostat rated for 120 VAC and up to 150 watts. You could use > your > existing voltage converter to bring your 220 VAC line down to 120 > VAC and then use > this little jewel to control the heat at your soldering iron tip. > It is Radio > Shack Cat. No. 64-2054. > > John P. Marzluf > Columbus, Ohio > Kitfox Outback (out back in the garage) > > > _- > _- > _- > _- > ====================================================================== > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 14, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: The book I wish I'd written . . .
> >I have Thomas L. Floyd's Digital Fundamentals and it is pretty good. It is >easy to see he cares greatly about teaching the subject. Maybe even >better--see Horowitz and Hill's The Art of Electronics. >I want to strongly recommend Paul G. Hewitt's "Conceptual Physics" (and >its many versions) as a good basis for an electronics education. Physics >is fundamental to all science. This is one of those books you can't put >down. Paul G. Hewitt is online and answers his emails. I'll look this on up . . . >Bob--write your own electronics book. We know you have a lot of free time! Unless there's a compelling reason to write, I'd rather teach. Books have a distinct advantage for supplying portable, random access information to lots of folk with a minimum of organization . . . but when we find examples of really fine writing and illustrating, why bother? The only reason the 'Connection came into being is because I couldn't find a single publication in the bookstores at OSH that even began to say what needed to be said. Just put in an order for a couple of Floyd's for the nephews. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 14, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: soldering iron question
> >In my prior post, I expressed the need for a fuse for my voltage >converter, when I had an idea. I am using my voltage converter for >various things, but one thing I'm using it for is to run a soldering >iron. It is a 120V iron and I have 220V supply. Is there a solution that >combines voltage conversion and variability of supply? My limited >knowledge of electricity leads me to believe that because the iron is a >pure resistor, it should be possible to construct a way to both convert >voltage and vary the current to provide a way to vary the heat of the iron. > >Thanks a lot. Try a 1A, 600 volt diode in series with the iron. This will feed it with 1/2 the energy it would get if plugged directly into a 220v line and just what it needs to believe it's seeing a 120v source. I use diodes in the line cords of some my "killer" irons to put them into a lower temperature "standby" condition. Without the diode, they get too hot between tasks. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 14, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Light Dimmer
> > > >> Been looking at some panel lighting pages from several of your wirebooks > >> and would like to try rolling my own dimmer for a confidence-builder. A > >> few questions about the diagram (SWB0298): > >> > > The LM338K is used on BOSS HOG dimmer (5A). > > Take a look at this data package for > > more details on building a smaller device > > with all the details on purchasing parts and > > assembling. > > I got almost everything I needed from the file you suggested, but would >like to know the brand, model and source for the 1000 ohm pots. Have >decided to build two of the smaller, 3 amp "Boss Hogs". Any 1000 ohm linear pot will work . . . pots of other sizes are fine too. Adjust values of other resistors proportionately like this: Pot Value R1 R2 1K 160 360 2.5K 390 910 5k 750 1.8K Radio Shack sells a 5K p/n 271-1714 http://support.radioshack.com/support_supplies/doc17/17639.htm Digiky has any value you want . . . nice miniatures are the RV6 series at http://dkc3.digikey.com/PDF/T032/0808.pdf > > > >> Would this be suitable for LED's? > > > > Maybe . . . depending on how many LEDs are in series, there > > is a network of resistor that can be incorporated to make > > the LED behave something like the incandescent lamp > > with respect to applied voltage. > I will be using one branch of one of the dimmers to control a string of >about 8 or 10 blue green LED's that will be mounted under the glare shield >for panel flood lights. What would the resistor network look like for that? > >Many thanks, probably one resistor array per lamp . . . colors other than red run at higher voltages than red. If you want these to track incandescent lamps on the same dimmer, you'll have to do some fiddling with resistor values. By adjusting resistors on the dimmer to set the control range from 4-12, you might be able to hook 10 leds into 5 series strings of 2. For this, the adjustment range of the dimmer would need to be 8-12 volts. You wouldn't need a BIG dimmer for just LEDS. A 0.5A dimmer would be fine and much smaller. It will take some work on the bench to work out the most useful combination of lights/resistors. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Denny" <dennymortensen(at)cableone.net>
Subject: soldering iron question
Date: Aug 14, 2003
This may be to simple of a solution but I think if you just place a 120 volt light bulb in (((SERIES)))) with the soldering iron will work and allow you to plug into your 240 volt source. You could vary the wattage by just using different wattage of light bulbs. Denny dennymortensen(at)cableone.net In my prior post, I expressed the need for a fuse for my voltage converter, when I had an idea. I am using my voltage converter for various things, but one thing I'm using it for is to run a soldering iron. It is a 120V iron and I have 220V supply. Is there a solution that combines voltage conversion and variability of supply? My limited knowledge of electricity leads me to believe that because the iron is a pure resistor, it should be possible to construct a way to both convert voltage and vary the current to provide a way to vary the heat of the iron. Thanks a lot. Drew ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 14, 2003
From: Charles Brame <charleyb(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: Splicing a shielded cable
I bought a professionally wired harness for my intercom (SL-10M/S.) It has a shielded two wire conductor for an external speaker. Unfortunately, the cable is about four feet too short for my application. My fault, as I didn't specify a cable length when ordering the harness. I'm really not interested in cutting into the harness and opening the sealed multi-pin plug to replace the cable. Is there a simple and effective way to splice a shielded two wire cable and retain the shielding protection? Charlie Brame RV-6A N11CB San Antonio ________________________________________________________________________________
From: KITFOXZ(at)aol.com
Date: Aug 14, 2003
Subject: Re: Splicing a shielded cable
In a message dated 8/14/2003 1:34:25 PM Eastern Standard Time, charleyb(at)earthlink.net writes: Is there a simple and effective way to splice a shielded two wire cable and retain the shielding protection? Charlie Brame RV-6A N11CB San Antonio Hello Charlie, As long as this is not a coaxial cable try this method: Cut the cable in the area that you desire to locate your splice. From all ends of wire to be joined remove about 2 inches of the outer jacket (not the shield) and pull the two conductors through the side of the shielding right at the transition of bare shield and outer jacket. Twist the shields of each end into a "thicker third" stranded wire. Cut the ends of the two center conductor wires at odd lengths so that when joined the joints will not be on top of each other. This helps minimize bulk at the splice. Solder the wire ends side by side and don't forget to slip on a piece of heat shrink before soldering. Solder the shield ends together last. You will have a very short section of "unshielded" wire at each joint that will be very negligible in performance considerations. A larger piece of heat shrink over the whole area of each joint makes it neat and not a snag issue. John P. Marzluf Columbus, Ohio Kitfox Outback (out back in the garage) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Trampas" <tstern(at)nc.rr.com>
Subject: OV Module question for Bob
Date: Aug 14, 2003
Bob, Could you not just put an inductor inline with the sense pin. The inductor combined with a capacitor should make a nice second order filter which should snub the voltage spikes but not a true overload. I know that radio shack use to sale hum filters for going in line with car radio power line. If your radio shack still sales them it would be an easy thing to put in there to test with. Trampas -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L. Nuckolls, III Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: OV Module question for Bob > >Bob, I did a couple of tests this evening before going ahead and shipping >this module over to you. I disconnected my starter motor. Now if I hit the >start button the starter relay pulls in and the OV breaker does not trip. >This I assume means that if there is an OV condition it is being caused by >the starter motor itself? Btw, wiring is as per fig 16 for the 912 and my >module is built from the current cct diagram on your web site using the two >transistors and zener. > >Is there anyone else on the list with a Rotax 912, wiring per fig.16 and an >OV module?? It's probably not a true OV condition that's tripping your module. There is a characteristic of silicon controlled rectifiers that makes the device itself sensitive to rapid changes (called dv/dt or change-in-voltage-with- respect-to-time) that can cause the SCR to trigger irrespective of the design intent of the circuit. We had a rash of problems with Bonanzas a couple of years ago that would trigger the OV protection when landing/taxi light switches were operated. In this case, it was the high-inrush current of lamps combined with the bounce characteristics of $high$ switches. The noise wasn't even close to a real OV event in terms of effects . . . it was just the extraordinarily fast rise time of the very low energy switching transient that irritated the SCR. For what is worth, the vast majority of my experience with nuisance tripping of the crowbar SCR has been with Rotax installations and/or EXP-Bus installations. In the EXP-Bus incidents, we added a diode across the coil of their avionics bus disconnect relay. In other cases, the pre-flight procedures were modified to simply not bring the alternator with ov protection on line until after the engine was running. Before you ship me your device, you might consider this alternative . . . It's likely that your project is properly assembled but simply installed in a situation that presses very close to the raggedy-edge of the circuit's capability to ignore certain noises. I'm considering a new design that substitutes a boss-hog MOS-FET for the SCR. Totally free of dv/dt trigger effects. Until a few years ago, FETs that could stand up to the 300A crowbar impulse were expensive. They're getting cheaper all the time. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Trampas" <tstern(at)nc.rr.com>
Subject: Splicing a shielded cable
Date: Aug 14, 2003
I some times take some aluminum foil and wrap around splice before shrinking the heat shrink. Trampas -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of KITFOXZ(at)aol.com Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Splicing a shielded cable In a message dated 8/14/2003 1:34:25 PM Eastern Standard Time, charleyb(at)earthlink.net writes: Is there a simple and effective way to splice a shielded two wire cable and retain the shielding protection? Charlie Brame RV-6A N11CB San Antonio Hello Charlie, As long as this is not a coaxial cable try this method: Cut the cable in the area that you desire to locate your splice. From all ends of wire to be joined remove about 2 inches of the outer jacket (not the shield) and pull the two conductors through the side of the shielding right at the transition of bare shield and outer jacket. Twist the shields of each end into a "thicker third" stranded wire. Cut the ends of the two center conductor wires at odd lengths so that when joined the joints will not be on top of each other. This helps minimize bulk at the splice. Solder the wire ends side by side and don't forget to slip on a piece of heat shrink before soldering. Solder the shield ends together last. You will have a very short section of "unshielded" wire at each joint that will be very negligible in performance considerations. A larger piece of heat shrink over the whole area of each joint makes it neat and not a snag issue. John P. Marzluf Columbus, Ohio Kitfox Outback (out back in the garage) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 14, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Splicing a shielded cable
> > >I bought a professionally wired harness for my intercom (SL-10M/S.) It >has a shielded two wire conductor for an external speaker. >Unfortunately, the cable is about four feet too short for my >application. My fault, as I didn't specify a cable length when ordering >the harness. I'm really not interested in cutting into the harness and >opening the sealed multi-pin plug to replace the cable. > >Is there a simple and effective way to splice a shielded two wire cable >and retain the shielding protection? There's another reply that describes a perfectly acceptable method for splicing shielded wires . . . and I've done a comic book to illustrate the technique at: http://216.55.140.222/articles/Shielded_Wire_Splicing/ . . . . however, there's no good reason to shield speaker wires. Extending with ordinary twisted pair will be fine too. Bob. . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 14, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: PA-20 generator question
>Questions: I have Piper PA 20 with a Delco Remey 20amp Generator.It >recently died.I have a 35amp generator on the way and would like to fitt >it in place of the 20amp.The brackets and hardware will fitt.My main >concern is with any wire size changes and voltage regulator changes that >may be required.I would like to fitt a solid state voltage regulator.CDan >you help.Regards Paul. Current from the generator is controlled by the regulator. There is a fair chance that the 35A machine will work but no better than the 20A machine did. You'll have to upgrade power output wires -AND- the regulator if you want to take advantage of the higher output. If it were my airplane, I'd talk to B&C at 316.283.8000 about a field approval for L-40 alternator installation. Bob . . . -------------------------------------------- ( Knowing about a thing is different than ) ( understanding it. One can know a lot ) ( and still understand nothing. ) ( C.F. Kettering ) -------------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dave Grosvenor" <dwg(at)iafrica.com>
Subject: Re: OV Module question for Bob
Date: Aug 14, 2003
>For what is worth, the vast majority of my experience >with nuisance tripping of the crowbar SCR has been >with Rotax installations and/or EXP-Bus installations. >In the EXP-Bus incidents, we added a diode across the >coil of their avionics bus disconnect relay. In other >cases, the pre-flight procedures were modified to simply >not bring the alternator with ov protection on line until >after the engine was running. Before you ship me your >device, you might consider this alternative . . . Thanks for the help. I have ordered a S700-2-10 from B&C so that I can leave the alternator off for start up. At the moment my master is only an on-on type switch. Dave ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Analog to digital converter
Date: Aug 14, 2003
From: "David.vonLinsowe" <David.vonLinsowe(at)delphi.com>
Bob, It there such a device that will take the analog signal used with a ILS CDI and convert it to the digital output like a GPS outputs? The reason I ask is because Tru Track has setup their Digi Flight II autopilots to be all digital. They're looking to the future when everything will be digital. I would like to be able to use the autopilot with ILS, hence the need/want for the converter. I could upgrade to their unit that handles this, but the extra $3K isn't in my budget... :-) Thank you, and THANKS for sharing the years of electrical wisdom! Dave RV-6 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 14, 2003
From: Charlie & Tupper England <cengland(at)netdoor.com>
Subject: Re: Splicing a shielded cable
Charles Brame wrote: > >I bought a professionally wired harness for my intercom (SL-10M/S.) It >has a shielded two wire conductor for an external speaker. >Unfortunately, the cable is about four feet too short for my >application. My fault, as I didn't specify a cable length when ordering >the harness. I'm really not interested in cutting into the harness and >opening the sealed multi-pin plug to replace the cable. > >Is there a simple and effective way to splice a shielded two wire cable >and retain the shielding protection? > >Charlie Brame >RV-6A N11CB >San Antonio > If it's the speaker output, the source & load impedances are so low that it would take a really wicked RF noise source to affect it even without a shield. Anything from simple soldered or crimped splices to your choice from dozens of different style connectors would work fine. If you want shielded, look at switchcraft.com. If you can get your hands on one of their print catalogs, it will be a lot easier to find a suitable connector. (OOPS, no AN numbers on their stuff. Is that a problem?) Charlie ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 14, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: slick mag tack sensor.
> >My enjine came with slick mags. One of the mags has a tack sensor lead >coming out of it. I have the JPI edm 900. They give you the sensor to go >into the slick mags. The only problem is that you have to remove a mag to >install the sensor. > >My question is does anyone know if the slick sensor will work with the EDM >system? Not a big deal to remove a mag. Just trying to save some time. there's more than one sensor technology for this task. It's quite possible that the sensor in the mag is not compatible with your tach . . . the 100% sure bet is to change it out. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 15, 2003
From: drew.schumann(at)us.army.mil
Subject: Re: soldering iron question
Thanks, Bob (and Denny) If figured that something like that would work, but seemed almost too simple. But, I guess a soldering iron is basically a pure resistor... Drew ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> Date: Thursday, August 14, 2003 8:53 pm Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: soldering iron question > > > > >In my prior post, I expressed the need for a fuse for my voltage > >converter, when I had an idea. I am using my voltage converter > for > >various things, but one thing I'm using it for is to run a > soldering > >iron. It is a 120V iron and I have 220V supply. Is there a > solution that > >combines voltage conversion and variability of supply? My > limited > >knowledge of electricity leads me to believe that because the > iron is a > >pure resistor, it should be possible to construct a way to both > convert > >voltage and vary the current to provide a way to vary the heat of > the iron. > > > >Thanks a lot. > > Try a 1A, 600 volt diode in series with the iron. This will > feed it with 1/2 the energy it would get if plugged directly into > a 220v line and just what it needs to believe it's seeing a > 120v source. > > I use diodes in the line cords of some my "killer" irons > to put them into a lower temperature "standby" condition. > Without the diode, they get too hot between tasks. > > Bob . . . > > > _- > _- > _- > _- > ====================================================================== > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 14, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Analog to digital converter
> > >Bob, > >It there such a device that will take the analog signal used with a ILS >CDI and convert it to the digital output like a GPS outputs? > >The reason I ask is because Tru Track has setup their Digi Flight II >autopilots to be all digital. They're looking to the future when >everything will be digital. I would like to be able to use the >autopilot with ILS, hence the need/want for the converter. > >I could upgrade to their unit that handles this, but the extra $3K isn't >in my budget... :-) > >Thank you, >and THANKS for sharing the years of electrical wisdom! > >Dave >RV-6 It seems possible. There's a ton of jelly-bean processors that could be teamed with an analog-to-digital converter and programmed to convert the left-0-right analog into a digital word. The problem is that we need to know exactly what the autopilot expects in the way of a character string format. A study of section 4 of this document http://vancouver-webpages.com/peter/nmeafaq.txt describes various sentences or character strings that can be expected from various items of navigation equipment. A number of sentences have cross-track error . . . but I think most receivers output as a minimum, sentence RMB (which contains the following information: RMB - Recommended minimum navigation information (sent by nav. receiver when a destination waypoint is active) RMB,A,0.66,L,003,004,4917.24,N,12309.57,W,001.3,052.5,000.5,V*0B A Data status A = OK, V = warning 0.66,L Cross-track error (nautical miles, 9.9 max.), steer Left to correct (or R = right) 003 Origin waypoint ID 004 Destination waypoint ID 4917.24,N Destination waypoint latitude 49 deg. 17.24 min. N 12309.57,W Destination waypoint longitude 123 deg. 09.57 min. W 001.3 Range to destination, nautical miles 052.5 True bearing to destination 000.5 Velocity towards destination, knots V Arrival alarm A = arrived, V = not arrived *0B mandatory checksum Assuming the TruTrack uses this sentence to deduce steering actions, our task would be to "spoof" the autopilot into believing that data were coming from a digital device as opposed to a converter tied to an analog device. I would be easy to generate a string formatted as above wherein the 3rd and 4th values between commas was a digital representation of the analog steering data from your ILS indicator. We would need to know how smart the a/p is. Normally, as you get closer to the signal source in an analog (VOR, ILS, LOC) environment, a fixed DC level represents progressively smaller lateral displacement errors. This is why the VOR needle becomes very twitchy as you approach the the station. A digital nav aid will give cross-track error in constant distance of displacement from desired track irrespective of the range to waypoint. The mathematics an a/p has to accomplish to steer with cross-track error is much simpler than if it were steering on an analog (azimuth error). Autopilots designed to be accommodating of an analog system have to treat any displacement as having the same meaning . . . they end up being sloppy 5 miles out so that sensitivity is optimized at decision height (about half mile off the threshold). If we knew range to waypoint, then we could do the math to convert azimuth-error into cross-track error . . . but since your analog ILS receiver isn't privy to that information, we don't have enough data to present the a/p with a true representation of cross-track error. We would need to know if TruTrack uses range to waypoint as part of the control laws for approach to threshold. If he uses only cross-track error, then a simple converter is possible. It would take some experimentation to set conversion gain so that steering performance is optimized right at decision height just as the analog signal was getting "twitchy" . . . this would translate to the usual compromises 5 miles out with lower cost systems. If he uses range to waypoint, we'd just select some number for the "spoofer" to keep the autopilot thinking it's a half mile off the end of the runway. Short answer is that the hardware is easy and cheap. Telling the hardware how to do it's job is the challenging part and would probably need some cooperation on the part of Mr. Younkin. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 14, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: OV Module question for Bob
> >Bob, > >Could you not just put an inductor inline with the sense pin. The >inductor combined with a capacitor should make a nice second order >filter which should snub the voltage spikes but not a true overload. > >I know that radio shack use to sale hum filters for going in line with >car radio power line. If your radio shack still sales them it would be >an easy thing to put in there to test with. > >Trampas Understand . . . but this inductor would have to be rated for carrying the crowbar-trip current. It can be as high as 300A (4 milliohms loop resistance) for 5 milliseconds or so. Adding the inductor's resistance to the trip path would lower the fault current but lengthen the trip time. Cutting fault current in half would increase trip time to 20 milliseconds. What you're thinking is certainly true but it's a little more complicated than just filtering a low power or signal line . . . the pathway in question has needs to open a breaker very quickly so that things don't overheat. Anything we do that slows things down has a ripple effect through other features of the design. In this case, half current for 4x the time would make his present SCR selection toast. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 14, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: OV Module question for Bob
> > >For what is worth, the vast majority of my experience > >with nuisance tripping of the crowbar SCR has been > >with Rotax installations and/or EXP-Bus installations. > >In the EXP-Bus incidents, we added a diode across the > >coil of their avionics bus disconnect relay. In other > >cases, the pre-flight procedures were modified to simply > >not bring the alternator with ov protection on line until > >after the engine was running. Before you ship me your > >device, you might consider this alternative . . . > > >Thanks for the help. I have ordered a S700-2-10 from B&C so that I can >leave the alternator off for start up. At the moment my master is only an >on-on type switch. Reasonable move. If we're lucky, there are no antagonists that will rear their ugly heads during normal ops and after the alternator is turned on. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: BAKEROCB(at)aol.com
Date: Aug 14, 2003
Subject: New FAA AC On Amateur Built Aircraft
djgeldermann(at)cox.net, Pulsar-Builders(at)caseyk.org, aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com, kisbuilders(at)angus.mystery.com, Drshufly(at)aol.com 8/14/2003 Hello Fellow Builders, The FAA is in the process of updating AC 20-27E, Certification and Operation of Amateur-Built Aircraft, to version AC 20-27F. We have an opportunity to comment on the proposed AC. See the details at the following URL. <<http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/14mar20010800/edocket.access.gpo.gov /2003/pdf/03-20409.pdf>> I urge all interested in this subject to pass this information on and to review and contribute as appropriate to the proposed AC. Thanks. 'OC' Baker, Builder of KIS TR-1 #116 4/14/97 - ?/?/? ________________________________________________________________________________
From: BobsV35B(at)aol.com
Date: Aug 14, 2003
Subject: Re: New FAA AC On Amateur Built Aircraft
In a message dated 8/14/03 8:42:07 PM Central Daylight Time, BAKEROCB(at)aol.com writes: > << > http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/14mar20010800/edocket.access.gpo.gov > /2003/pdf/03-20409.pdf>> > > I urge all interested in this subject to pass this information on and to > review and contribute as appropriate to the proposed AC. > Good Evening OC, All I found at that address was the Federal Register notice. Is there an address where the proposed document can be accessed via the Internet? Happy Skies, Old Bob ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 14, 2003
From: John Rourke <jrourke@allied-computer.com>
Subject: Re: New FAA AC On Amateur Built Aircraft
I just noticed that too - I think the FAA posting of the Draft Circular lags the news quite often... I believe the following URL will direct you to at as soon as it is posted on the website: http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgDAC.nsf/MainFrame?OpenFrameSet or the tiny URL: http://tinyurl.com/k337 I definitely want to know what's in this proposal! -John R. BobsV35B(at)aol.com wrote: > >In a message dated 8/14/03 8:42:07 PM Central Daylight Time, BAKEROCB(at)aol.com >writes: > > > >><< >>http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/14mar20010800/edocket.access.gpo.gov >>/2003/pdf/03-20409.pdf>> >> >>I urge all interested in this subject to pass this information on and to >>review and contribute as appropriate to the proposed AC. >> >> >> >Good Evening OC, > >All I found at that address was the Federal Register notice. Is there an >address where the proposed document can be accessed via the Internet? > >Happy Skies, > >Old Bob > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)BowenAero.com>
Subject: Colored toggles
Date: Aug 15, 2003
Anyone know where I can get colored rubber boots that fit the toggle switches I've purchased from Bob? Thanks, - Larry Bowen, RV-8 systems Larry(at)BowenAero.com http://BowenAero.com 2003 - The year of flight! ________________________________________________________________________________
From: F1Rocket(at)comcast.net
Subject: Re: Colored toggles
Date: Aug 15, 2003
Larry, Go to: http://www.sptpanel.com/index.htm I have them on my panel, pictures on the website in the "Rig/Final Assembly" section if interested. Randy F1 Rocket http://mywebpages.comcast.net/f1rocket/ > > Anyone know where I can get colored rubber boots that fit the toggle > switches I've purchased from Bob? > > Thanks, > > - > Larry Bowen, RV-8 systems > Larry(at)BowenAero.com > http://BowenAero.com > 2003 - The year of flight! > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ted Lemen" <tedlem(at)ecentral.com>
Subject: crimpers
Date: Aug 15, 2003
Bob, can you give me a list of the crimpers that you reccomend and there prices? ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org>
Subject: Re: New FAA AC On Amateur Built Aircraft
Date: Aug 15, 2003
I think part of the problem is the power failure. Cy Galley - Bellanca Champion Club Newsletter Editor & EAA TC www.bellanca-championclub.com Actively supporting Aeroncas every day Quarterly newsletters on time Reasonable document reprints 1-518-731-6800 ----- Original Message ----- From: <BobsV35B(at)aol.com> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: New FAA AC On Amateur Built Aircraft > > In a message dated 8/14/03 8:42:07 PM Central Daylight Time, BAKEROCB(at)aol.com > writes: > > > << > > http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/14mar20010800/edocket.access.gpo.gov > > /2003/pdf/03-20409.pdf>> > > > > I urge all interested in this subject to pass this information on and to > > review and contribute as appropriate to the proposed AC. > > > Good Evening OC, > > All I found at that address was the Federal Register notice. Is there an > address where the proposed document can be accessed via the Internet? > > Happy Skies, > > Old Bob > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Battery (Welding) cable feedback
Date: Aug 15, 2003
From: "Treff, Arthur" <Arthur.Treff(at)Smartm.com>
OBAM listers, Having installed my battery wires in my RV-8 I am now having "buyer's remorse". I purchased 2AWG welding cable to wire the rear mounted battery (and master contactor) to the firewall mounted starter solenoid, as well as running a negative cable to the fast on tabs on the firewall. The cable I purchased is the top of the line from McMaster Carr's catalog: Vu-Tron UL Listed Cables- Jacket is chlorinated polyethylene with Class M #34 AWG copper stranding. Cable resists solvents and is more resistant to other factors than standard cable. Temperature range is -58 to +194 F. MSHA (Mine Safety and Health Administration) approved. CSA certified. Color is orange. I just found out that there's a 'better' quality welding cable, that is tinned copped (mine is not) and the insulation is rated to 125C, mine is rated to 90C, 35C less. According to the chart in the cable specs, at a wire temperature of 90C (195F), the 2AWG can handle a continuous load of 250 amps @600 volts in a 100' run. My run is only 40 feet, the volts are only 12, and the max load is the starter for what, 30 seconds at a whack? I'm also reasoning that at close to an ambient temp of 190F, my blood is about to boil, so I'll have alot larger problems than my battery cable shorting out. So am I splitting hairs in worrying about a 35C difference in insulation and tinned copper wires? The welding cable is used internal to the fuselage, and attached to an RG batt, and it's not a seaplane, so I do not anticipate tons of battery wire internal corrosion. I'm going with Mil spec Tefzel for all FWF applications, however. Where the 10" of 2 AWG welding cable passes the firewall to connect to the starter solenoid, it will be wrapped in firesleeve clamped with SS firesleeve clamps. From there forward, it will be #2 Tefzel. What are your thoughts guys? The 90C welding cable is all cut, ring terms soldered on, shrink tubed, marked, adels clamped, pretty much permanently installed at this point. If it were you, (and you were a fan of using welding cable to begin with) would you yank it out? Art Treff Rv-8 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: BobsV35B(at)aol.com
Date: Aug 15, 2003
Subject: Re: Battery (Welding) cable feedback
In a message dated 8/15/03 9:32:42 AM Central Daylight Time, Arthur.Treff(at)Smartm.com writes: > If it were you, (and you were a fan of using welding cable to begin with) > would you yank it out? > > Art Treff > Rv-8 > Good Morning Art, Go with your gut feeling. If you have doubts now, you will have doubts next year and the following years. Do what feels good to you! Happy Skies, Old Bob ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Cy Galley" <cgalley(at)qcbc.org>
Subject: Re: Battery (Welding) cable feedback
Date: Aug 15, 2003
I feel you are being anal. Many planes have been wired using a lesser cable than you have. Support it well and protect it where it passes thru your structure and forget it. P.S. Don't use your starter for 30 seconds at a time. 5 to 10 seconds should be more than adequate if your engine is in good shape. Plane is less than 20 long. How can you use 40 foot of wire? Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh Editor, EAA Safety Programs cgalley(at)qcbc.org or experimenter(at)eaa.org Always looking for articles for the Experimenter ----- Original Message ----- From: "Treff, Arthur" <Arthur.Treff(at)Smartm.com> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Battery (Welding) cable feedback > > OBAM listers, > > Having installed my battery wires in my RV-8 I am now having "buyer's remorse". I purchased 2AWG welding cable to wire the rear mounted battery (and master contactor) to the firewall mounted starter solenoid, as well as running a negative cable to the fast on tabs on the firewall. The cable I purchased is the top of the line from McMaster Carr's catalog: > Vu-Tron UL Listed Cables- Jacket is chlorinated polyethylene with Class M #34 AWG copper stranding. Cable resists solvents and is more resistant to other factors than standard cable. Temperature range is -58 to +194 F. MSHA (Mine Safety and Health Administration) approved. CSA certified. Color is orange. > I just found out that there's a 'better' quality welding cable, that is tinned copped (mine is not) and the insulation is rated to 125C, mine is rated to 90C, 35C less. According to the chart in the cable specs, at a wire temperature of 90C (195F), the 2AWG can handle a continuous load of 250 amps @600 volts in a 100' run. My run is only 40 feet, the volts are only 12, and the max load is the starter for what, 30 seconds at a whack? I'm also reasoning that at close to an ambient temp of 190F, my blood is about to boil, so I'll have alot larger problems than my battery cable shorting out. > > So am I splitting hairs in worrying about a 35C difference in insulation and tinned copper wires? The welding cable is used internal to the fuselage, and attached to an RG batt, and it's not a seaplane, so I do not anticipate tons of battery wire internal corrosion. I'm going with Mil spec Tefzel for all FWF applications, however. Where the 10" of 2 AWG welding cable passes the firewall to connect to the starter solenoid, it will be wrapped in firesleeve clamped with SS firesleeve clamps. From there forward, it will be #2 Tefzel. What are your thoughts guys? The 90C welding cable is all cut, ring terms soldered on, shrink tubed, marked, adels clamped, pretty much permanently installed at this point. If it were you, (and you were a fan of using welding cable to begin with) would you yank it out? > > Art Treff > Rv-8 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dennis O'Connor" <doconnor(at)chartermi.net>
Subject: Re: Battery (Welding) cable feedback
Date: Aug 15, 2003
Nope... Do not tear it out... Tinned is not better than bare for high current uses... Actually, lead/tin has higher resistance than copper, so what you are doing by tinning is coating the surface of each strand with a resistor (albeit a VERY small resistance)... Bare copper strands all shorted together is what you want for what you are doing.. Take a deep breath and keep on trucking.. Denny ----- Original Message ----- From: "Treff, Arthur" <Arthur.Treff(at)Smartm.com> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Battery (Welding) cable feedback > > OBAM listers, > > Having installed my battery wires in my RV-8 I am now having "buyer's remorse". I purchased 2AWG welding cable to wire the rear mounted battery (and master contactor) to the firewall mounted starter solenoid, as well as running a negative cable to the fast on tabs on the firewall. The cable I purchased is the top of the line from McMaster Carr's catalog: > Vu-Tron UL Listed Cables- Jacket is chlorinated polyethylene with Class M #34 AWG copper stranding. Cable resists solvents and is more resistant to other factors than standard cable. Temperature range is -58 to +194 F. MSHA (Mine Safety and Health Administration) approved. CSA certified. Color is orange. > I just found out that there's a 'better' quality welding cable, that is tinned copped (mine is not) and the insulation is rated to 125C, mine is rated to 90C, 35C less. According to the chart in the cable specs, at a wire temperature of 90C (195F), the 2AWG can handle a continuous load of 250 amps @600 volts in a 100' run. My run is only 40 feet, the volts are only 12, and the max load is the starter for what, 30 seconds at a whack? I'm also reasoning that at close to an ambient temp of 190F, my blood is about to boil, so I'll have alot larger problems than my battery cable shorting out. > > So am I splitting hairs in worrying about a 35C difference in insulation and tinned copper wires? The welding cable is used internal to the fuselage, and attached to an RG batt, and it's not a seaplane, so I do not anticipate tons of battery wire internal corrosion. I'm going with Mil spec Tefzel for all FWF applications, however. Where the 10" of 2 AWG welding cable passes the firewall to connect to the starter solenoid, it will be wrapped in firesleeve clamped with SS firesleeve clamps. From there forward, it will be #2 Tefzel. What are your thoughts guys? The 90C welding cable is all cut, ring terms soldered on, shrink tubed, marked, adels clamped, pretty much permanently installed at this point. If it were you, (and you were a fan of using welding cable to begin with) would you yank it out? > > Art Treff > Rv-8 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 15, 2003
From: John Rourke <jrourke@allied-computer.com>
Subject: Re: Battery (Welding) cable feedback
I did a review of different starter cables several years ago, including the orange Vutron you are using, some "black-rubber generic" welding cable, official av-grade 22759/16 Tefzell-insulated cable, and 3/4" soft copper (for the ground for my canard plane) - I did qualitative tests involving open flame for 60-seconds, and also a 60-second dip test in a solder pot... following that was my quanititative tests (ohms/ft and weight/ft): "The 22759 (I am pretty sure it's Tefzel) produced a little smoke in the flame test, and a very unpleasant odor... but it definitely did not sustain flame and didn't really make much smoke. In the solder pot, it was basically unaffected, except it did soften just a bit. The welding cable did the best of all. The rubber type emitted a smell that was like hot tar, not all that noxious, but refused to burn, even with 60 seconds of open flame on it... it swelled a bit but did not char or burn at all - this was for both the flame test and the dip test. The orange VuTron cable blackened a bit under the flame test, but did not smoke or char or smell at all.... pretty much impervious. Dipping it in the 500-degree solder pot had absolutely no effect (well it tinned the wire....) The VuTron cable is from McMaster-Carr, and according to the catalog the insulation is "chlorinated polyethylene"... all I know is it successfully resisted anything I could throw at it, even better than 22759/16 aviation cable. In the following test, the voltage was measured by taking the voltage between two leads at opposite ends of a sample length of cable, and subtracting the voltage between the two leads when both were at the same end of the cable, to get the Vdrop due only to the lewngth of cable). The Voltage Source was regulated, measured at 11.80 volts, through load of 3.7 Ohms (automotive headlight). Therefore, supply current was approximately 3.2 amps. Cable Length Net Vdrop Ohms/Kft Weight/ft #2 Automotive 9.5(ft) 4.5(mV) .15 .24(lbs) #2 Welding 20.0 9.5 .15 .27 #4 Welding 20.0 14.7 .23 .17 #4 VuTron 20.0 17.4 .27 .24 #4 22759/16-4 43.0 33.7 .24 .14 3/4" I.D. copper 12.25 2.6 .07 .42 tube, .050 walls -John R. P.S.: I had no intention of using the automotive battery cable (PVC insulation) in my aircraft - I only included it for comparison, and it self-destructed rather convincingly - in the open flame test, it burned readily with a large quantity of very noxious black smoke, sustained burning for 20 seconds after the flame was removed, and exhibited a large amount of charring. The dip test was the same except it didn't *quite* catch fire, and didn't make as much smoke (I suspect it would have caught fire if left in the pot another minute or so, but I didn't bother testing further since I already had planeed to elimnate as much PVC as possible from my airplane) Treff, Arthur wrote: > >OBAM listers, > >Having installed my battery wires in my RV-8 I am now having "buyer's remorse". I purchased 2AWG welding cable to wire the rear mounted battery (and master contactor) to the firewall mounted starter solenoid, as well as running a negative cable to the fast on tabs on the firewall. The cable I purchased is the top of the line from McMaster Carr's catalog: >Vu-Tron UL Listed Cables- Jacket is chlorinated polyethylene with Class M #34 AWG copper stranding. Cable resists solvents and is more resistant to other factors than standard cable. Temperature range is -58 to +194 F. MSHA (Mine Safety and Health Administration) approved. CSA certified. Color is orange. >I just found out that there's a 'better' quality welding cable, that is tinned copped (mine is not) and the insulation is rated to 125C, mine is rated to 90C, 35C less. According to the chart in the cable specs, at a wire temperature of 90C (195F), the 2AWG can handle a continuous load of 250 amps @600 volts in a 100' run. My run is only 40 feet, the volts are only 12, and the max load is the starter for what, 30 seconds at a whack? I'm also reasoning that at close to an ambient temp of 190F, my blood is about to boil, so I'll have alot larger problems than my battery cable shorting out. > >So am I splitting hairs in worrying about a 35C difference in insulation and tinned copper wires? The welding cable is used internal to the fuselage, and attached to an RG batt, and it's not a seaplane, so I do not anticipate tons of battery wire internal corrosion. I'm going with Mil spec Tefzel for all FWF applications, however. Where the 10" of 2 AWG welding cable passes the firewall to connect to the starter solenoid, it will be wrapped in firesleeve clamped with SS firesleeve clamps. From there forward, it will be #2 Tefzel. What are your thoughts guys? The 90C welding cable is all cut, ring terms soldered on, shrink tubed, marked, adels clamped, pretty much permanently installed at this point. If it were you, (and you were a fan of using welding cable to begin with) would you yank it out? > >Art Treff >Rv-8 > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ross Mickey" <rmickey(at)ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Colored toggles
Date: Aug 15, 2003
I got mine (white, green, blue) from AC$. Ross ----- Original Message ----- From: "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)BowenAero.com> > Anyone know where I can get colored rubber boots that fit the toggle > switches I've purchased from Bob? > > Thanks, > > - > Larry Bowen, RV-8 systems ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 15, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: crimpers
> >Bob, can you give me a list of the crimpers that you reccomend and there >prices? B&C offers the range of crimpers that address 95+ percent of all your wiring tasks. They can be seen at: http://www.bandc.biz Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 15, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: 10715 Perry
> >Comments/Questions: What is a good alternator to use with the LR3? >Building an AeroCanard. IFR, EFIS etc. As far as I know, the LR3 series regulators have performed well with any alternator designed or modified to run with an external alternator. My personal favorites are the Nipondenso products found on many cars but these will require modification. I will invite you to join us on the AeroElectric List to continue this and similar discussions. It's useful to share the information with as many folks as possible. A further benefit can be realized with membership on the list. There are lots of technically capable folks on the list who can offer suggestions too. You can join at . . . http://www.matronics.com/subscribe/ Thanks! Bob . . . |---------------------------------------------------| | A lie can travel half way around the world while | | the truth is till putting on its shoes . . . | | -Mark Twain- | |---------------------------------------------------| ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 15, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Battery (Welding) cable feedback
> > >OBAM listers, > >Having installed my battery wires in my RV-8 I am now having "buyer's >remorse". I purchased 2AWG welding cable to wire the rear mounted battery >(and master contactor) to the firewall mounted starter solenoid, as well >as running a negative cable to the fast on tabs on the firewall. The >cable I purchased is the top of the line from McMaster Carr's catalog: >Vu-Tron UL Listed Cables- Jacket is chlorinated polyethylene with Class M >#34 AWG copper stranding. Cable resists solvents and is more resistant to >other factors than standard cable. Temperature range is -58 to +194 F. >MSHA (Mine Safety and Health Administration) approved. CSA certified. >Color is orange. >I just found out that there's a 'better' quality welding cable, that is >tinned copped (mine is not) and the insulation is rated to 125C, mine is >rated to 90C, 35C less. According to the chart in the cable specs, at a >wire temperature of 90C (195F), the 2AWG can handle a continuous load of >250 amps @600 volts in a 100' run. My run is only 40 feet, the volts are >only 12, and the max load is the starter for what, 30 seconds at a whack? Is your engine REALLY this hard to get started? > I'm also reasoning that at close to an ambient temp of 190F, my blood > is about to boil, so I'll have alot larger problems than my battery cable > shorting out. >So am I splitting hairs in worrying about a 35C difference in insulation >and tinned copper wires? The welding cable is used internal to the >fuselage, and attached to an RG batt, and it's not a seaplane, so I do not >anticipate tons of battery wire internal corrosion. I'm going with Mil >spec Tefzel for all FWF applications, however. Where the 10" of 2 AWG >welding cable passes the firewall to connect to the starter solenoid, it >will be wrapped in firesleeve clamped with SS firesleeve clamps. From >there forward, it will be #2 Tefzel. What are your thoughts guys? The 90C >welding cable is all cut, ring terms soldered on, shrink tubed, marked, >adels clamped, pretty much permanently installed at this point. If it >were you, (and you were a fan of using welding cable to begin with) would >you yank it out? I'd leave it alone. The idea that you're going to electrically challenge this wire to the point that it smokes is way down in the statistical mud for the list of demonstrated hazards to airplanes. If you've got an active fire, then the performance of this wire's insulation is a very small part of the problems you going to face . . . by the way, when it comes to wire-smoke and toxicity for byproducts thereof, there is not a single product out there about which one could craft a Marlboro-Man like commercial touting the smooth taste and pleasant sensation in the lungs. Those-who-are-paid-to-protect-me-from-myself will torture some rats to death and determine that burning insulation from wire-A is 100x as toxic as wire-B. Then, I look at all the demonstrated reasons people met their demise in airplanes and find their rules/recommendations on wire most unconvincing. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ron Raby" <ronr(at)advanceddesign.com>
Subject: EFIS
Date: Aug 15, 2003
Sorry to open this can of worms again. It is time to buy my panel instruments. I have waited until the last minute hoping that one of the lower cost EFIS panels get up to speed. I have the efis 1 blue mountain designed in as my primary flight display on the pilot side. On the right side I have the dynon designed in as a backup. I do not have any mechanical gyros as a backup. The plane is wired as a duel battery, duel alternator system. One avionics shop said that he would not fly with the blue mountain into hard IFR. I want to be able to do this. Does anyone have this system installed and could make some comments or recomendations? I have panel designs with it or without. I could go either way. Thanks Ron Raby Lancair ES ====================================================================== > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: N823ms(at)aol.com
Date: Aug 15, 2003
Subject: Re: EFIS
Ron: Hi. Ed Silvanic here, Lancair ES N823MS. I have gone through this many times myself. Its frustrating! to say the least. Everyone wants something reliable and the best bang for the buck. I have followed BMA for a long time and have had some great educational conversations with Greg and Malcolm. My kit is a 96 fast build kit that I bought used, (very little was done), so my instrument panel is a little different from the one that is out there now. I took an actual size cut out of the BMA EFIS 1 found out that it eats up a lot of my panel. I say that in respect to the fact that I wanted to put standard steam gauges around it as backup, (very similar looking to the A300 Airbus I fly now), but it was going to require 2 1/4 gauges which where hard to find or costly. So I looked at there EFIS Lite. Wow now that made me feel right at home because now there was plenty of room for backup 3 1/8 gauges. Knowing that I will have a GNS-530/430, I did not need another rolling map. I am installing Electronic International engine gauges, so I did not have to duplicate them as well. So I called the new COO at the time, Mr. Malcolm Thompson and suggested that they duplicate the EFIS Lite unit to project a glass DG/HSI format. This would give you what we call a PFD ND combination. Well, they seemed to have listened, however, their EFIS Lite is around 9,000.00 plus now. Whether you go EFIS One/EFIS Lite, they still recommend some backup. So I began to look at others and finally decided to go with DYNON EFIS D-10. Yes, I have talked to them about making the same size unit as a glass DG/HSI. I should have mine soon. There are pro/cons about both, but for the money, I am going with the Dynon. Hope this helps, my EFIS 10 should be enroute. I am making a rough real size mock up of my panel; If you want some photos, let me know. Regards, Ed Silvanic Lancair ES N823MS P.S. I am now on with Yahoo ES club ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 15, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: EFIS
> >Sorry to open this can of worms again. > >It is time to buy my panel instruments. I have waited until the last minute >hoping that one of the lower cost EFIS panels get up to speed. I have the >efis 1 blue mountain designed in as my primary flight display on the pilot >side. On the right side I have the dynon designed in as a backup. I do not >have any mechanical gyros as a backup. The plane is wired as a duel battery, >duel alternator system. > >One avionics shop said that he would not fly with the blue mountain into >hard IFR. Did he explain why in stone-simple-ideas that were lucid and understandable on their own? >I want to be able to do this. Does anyone have this system installed and >could make some comments or recomendations? Let me echo his sentiments . . . sort of . . . but with explanation. I wouldn't venture into the clouds with a a glass panel system as the ONLY source of aviating data no matter who built it. Quoting from an article I did some years ago . . . Nuckolls' first law of airplane systems design sez: "Things break" The second: "Systems shall be designed so that when things break, no immediate hazard is created." The third: "Things needed for comfortable termination of flight require backup or special consideration to insure operation and availability" The forth: "Upgrading the quality, reliability, longevity, or capability of a part shall be because you're tired of replacing it or want some new feature, not because it damned near got you killed." Are you going to have a wing leveler? Is it GPS aided? Are you going to have two sources of power . . . EITHER one of which can run basic minimum equipment for duration of fuel aboard? People should be able to take advantage of the neat new products coming onto the market but NONE of them are failure-proof. The equipment we've flown for nearly a century is equally subject to failure. So assume that during any single flight, ANYTHING can decide not to function and plan for it. The EFIS systems we put in bizjets cover all the bases with mulitple screens, sensors, computers and reversionary operating modes to tolerate failures. Your task is really easier . . . you just need to decide what's needed to get you out of the clouds in reasonable comfort if the EFIS system is shut off and include that stuff into your system design. Then pick any brand system that tickles your fancy. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ron Raby" <ronr(at)advanceddesign.com>
Subject: Re: EFIS
Date: Aug 15, 2003
Thanks Ed for responding. I would like to see your pictures. I have two autocad layouts of my panels. One of the designs, pretty much is the same as what you describe. I have the standard six pack with the dynon replacing the directional gyro in the middle. If it is the same or close I could plot it full scale for you to have. Can you open autocad? Ron Raby ----- Original Message ----- From: <N823ms(at)aol.com> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: EFIS > > Ron: > > Hi. Ed Silvanic here, Lancair ES N823MS. I have gone through this many > times myself. Its frustrating! to say the least. Everyone wants something > reliable and the best bang for the buck. I have followed BMA for a long time and > have had some great educational conversations with Greg and Malcolm. My kit is > a 96 fast build kit that I bought used, (very little was done), so my > instrument panel is a little different from the one that is out there now. I took an > actual size cut out of the BMA EFIS 1 found out that it eats up a lot of my > panel. I say that in respect to the fact that I wanted to put standard steam > gauges around it as backup, (very similar looking to the A300 Airbus I fly now), > but it was going to require 2 1/4 gauges which where hard to find or costly. > So I looked at there EFIS Lite. Wow now that made me feel right at home because > now there was plenty of room for backup 3 1/8 gauges. > > Knowing that I will have a GNS-530/430, I did not need another rolling > map. I am installing Electronic International engine gauges, so I did not > have to duplicate them as well. So I called the new COO at the time, Mr. Malcolm > Thompson and suggested that they duplicate the EFIS Lite unit to project a > glass DG/HSI format. This would give you what we call a PFD ND combination. Well, > they seemed to have listened, however, their EFIS Lite is around 9,000.00 > plus now. Whether you go EFIS One/EFIS Lite, they still recommend some backup. > > So I began to look at others and finally decided to go with DYNON EFIS > D-10. Yes, I have talked to them about making the same size unit as a glass > DG/HSI. I should have mine soon. There are pro/cons about both, but for the > money, I am going with the Dynon. > > Hope this helps, my EFIS 10 should be enroute. I am making a rough real size > mock up of my panel; If you want some photos, let me know. > > > Regards, > > Ed Silvanic > Lancair ES > N823MS > > P.S. > I am now on with Yahoo ES club > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: BobsV35B(at)aol.com
Date: Aug 15, 2003
Subject: Re: EFIS
In a message dated 8/15/03 2:12:30 PM Central Daylight Time, N823ms(at)aol.com writes: > I took an > actual size cut out of the BMA EFIS 1 found out that it eats up a lot of my > panel. I say that in respect to the fact that I wanted to put standard steam > > gauges around it as backup, Good Afternoon Ed, Did you ever consider just adding a good reliable Turn And Bank? That would only take up one three and an eighth hole. Add to that any current production handheld GPS to give you altitude and you should have everything you need to keep your Lancair under control. In addition, the GPS will allow you to navigate. Keep It Simple still works! Happy Skies, Old Bob ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 15, 2003
From: Van Caulart <etivc(at)iaw.on.ca>
Subject: Re: ADF reversed sensing
Your comments are correct Bob (long remembered or otherwise) re. the sensing in relation to top or bottom mounting of the loop antenna. I was at the radio shop and they said the same thing(I swear they monitor this list). It turns out that the culprit is the rcvr which was tagged servicable. we swapped out loop antennas first and the response was the same so we then put my original loop back on and swapped out another rcvr. Bingo. My "sevicable" rcvr was not. The radio shop is now on the hook to make it right since they said it was OK to go in the first place. One problem down and some ground loops to go. PeterVC > >I installed an ARC 300 ADF rcvr and indicator which were inspected and >taggged servicible. I was also supplied with a serviceable sense >antenna, the cables to the loop ant, and the harness/connectors to the >rcvr. My part was to hook up the connectors and install the indicator >and antennas. I only had to connect power, ground and the audio output. > >My problem is that the needle of the indicator points in reverse to the >station selected. I'm wondering if this couuld be a bad loop antenna or >somehow related to my ground loop problems ADF loop antennas were commonly installed on both upper and lower surfaces of the fuselage which forced a rotation select option in the harness . . . there was a pair of wires that needed to be reversed in the harness to set proper direction of rotation of indicator needle with respect to the loop. There's a second set of wires that would control direction of pointing. It's been a VERY long time since I poked through the operating principals of these radios, but I think location of the two antennas with respect to each other and the airplane might produce the anomaly you're observing. The should be covered in detail in the installation manual for the radio along with a chart of pin-connections that describe hookup unique to your installation. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: BAKEROCB(at)aol.com
Date: Aug 15, 2003
Subject: New FAA AC On Amateur Built Aircraft
AeroElectric-List message previously posted by: BobsV35B(at)aol.com << Good Evening OC, All I found at that address was the Federal Register notice. Is there an address where the proposed document can be accessed via the Internet? Happy Skies, Old Bob >> 8/15/2003 Hello Old Bob, Yes there is. Thanks to John Rourke I was able to find and download a copy at <<http://tinyurl.com/k337>> My phone calls to the number given in the Federal Register (202-267-8361) elicited the following: 1) Being passed on to several very unknowledgeable people. 2) Being told by each that "No, they didn't have a copy of the Federal Register, and, No they didn't know what it said, and, No they didn't know how to get a copy". 3) "No, the phone number in the Federal Register really was not Rodney Watson's phone number". 4) "Rodney Watson's real phone number is 202-267-9540". 5) "Randy is not in and one should call him on Monday to see if he can help me obtain a copy". That is when I said "Thank you" and tried the internet. I am very pleased at your interest and the general response of the group. I know that wading around in the bureacratic world is not the most fun in the world, but if we don't apply some pressure to these people they will stuff us all in their lower right hand desk drawer where we can't possibly bother anyone anywhere, and coincidentally accomplish anything either.** Almost as Old 'OC' Baker, Builder of KIS TR-1 #116 4/14/97 - ?/?/? **PS: Case in point. I am still in the middle of trying to sort this out, but it appears that the legal types at the FAA aircraft registration office in Oklahoma have decided that a "Bill of Sale" for a kit purchased six years ago is no longer adequate for registration purposes of the aircraft built from that kit even though the present AC 20-27E specifically says "kit Bill of Sale" is what is needed by them. AC 20-27E also says that AC Form 8050-2 Aircraft Bill of Sale MAY be used so now they have upped the ante to say that AC Form 8050-2 MUST be used. Their reasoning is that normal Bills of Sale for kits do not contain the sacred "words of transfer" that are used in the sale / transfer of unique legal entities that have titles such as real estate, automobiles, and aircraft. To my knowledge a collection of material called a kit, that may or may not ever become an aircraft of some form, is not a uniquely identifiable legal entity at the time it passes from the kit providers hands to the amateur builder. So "words of transfer" are not applicable nor required. ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: EFIS
Date: Aug 15, 2003
From: "I-Blackler, Wayne R" <wayne.blackler(at)boeing.com>
I'd rather fly into hard IFR with two independent EFIS systems and dual bat/dual alt than the same pwr distribution system and mechanical gyros. I had $4000 worth of brand new, 14V electric, gyros (AH & DG) that failed right out of their respective boxes. I thought that eliminating the vac pump was a major benefit, but eliminating gyros is even more comforting. I wouldn't fly into hard IFR behind this manufacturer's attitude and directional gyros, period... I am however putting in a turn and slip as back up for my Dynon EFIS. Wayne Blackler IO-360 Long EZ Dynon on order Seattle, WA -----Original Message----- From: Ron Raby [mailto:ronr(at)advanceddesign.com] Subject: AeroElectric-List: EFIS Sorry to open this can of worms again. It is time to buy my panel instruments. I have waited until the last minute hoping that one of the lower cost EFIS panels get up to speed. I have the efis 1 blue mountain designed in as my primary flight display on the pilot side. On the right side I have the dynon designed in as a backup. I do not have any mechanical gyros as a backup. The plane is wired as a duel battery, duel alternator system. One avionics shop said that he would not fly with the blue mountain into hard IFR. I want to be able to do this. Does anyone have this system installed and could make some comments or recomendations? I have panel designs with it or without. I could go either way. Thanks Ron Raby Lancair ES ====================================================================== > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: BobsV35B(at)aol.com
Date: Aug 15, 2003
Subject: Re: New FAA AC On Amateur Built Aircraft
In a message dated 8/15/03 3:53:07 PM Central Daylight Time, BAKEROCB(at)aol.com writes: > Yes there is. Thanks to John Rourke I was able to find and > download a copy at <<http://tinyurl.com/k337>> Good Evening OC, Found that and downloaded a copy. Now all I have to do is figure out what it says! Thanks. Happy Skies, Old Bob ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Battery (Welding) cable feedback
From: John Schroeder <jschroeder(at)perigee.net>
Date: Aug 15, 2003
Nope! The 90C welding cable is all cut, ring terms soldered on, shrink tubed, > marked, adels clamped, pretty much permanently installed at this point. > If it were you, (and you were a fan of using welding cable to begin with) > would you yank it out? > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Terry Watson" <terry(at)tcwatson.com>
Subject: EFIS
Date: Aug 15, 2003
I have backups to my backups, and I'm not currently IFR rated. I have on order for delivery in about 3 weeks a Blue Mountain EFIS/one. I am installing a Proprietary Software AoA. I have or have on order 2-1/4" airspeed, altimeter, vertical velocity, and turn and bank. And I have a removable mount for my Garmin 196. I also am installing a removable hand-held radio as a backup. Both the 196 and the Icom handheld radio have their own batteries, and it just occurred to me that maybe the AoA could have. Finding room for everything in my RV-8A was certainly a challenge, especially considering the CPU of the EFIS/one is going right behind the panel on the right side and doesn't leave room for gauges over there. I am still trying to sort out the electrical system and haven't been able to get any response to my questions to this list or to Bob concerning Blue Mountain's requirement to either have the EFIS/one on a separate electrical system from the starter or to be turned off during startup. A local builder who works for Dynon suggested that the Dynon was the ideal backup for the EFIS/one. I think he was right. I have no backups for the engine gauges, other than a couple of warning lights. Terry -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of BobsV35B(at)aol.com Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: EFIS In a message dated 8/15/03 2:12:30 PM Central Daylight Time, N823ms(at)aol.com writes: > I took an > actual size cut out of the BMA EFIS 1 found out that it eats up a lot of my > panel. I say that in respect to the fact that I wanted to put standard steam > > gauges around it as backup, Good Afternoon Ed, Did you ever consider just adding a good reliable Turn And Bank? That would only take up one three and an eighth hole. Add to that any current production handheld GPS to give you altitude and you should have everything you need to keep your Lancair under control. In addition, the GPS will allow you to navigate. Keep It Simple still works! Happy Skies, Old Bob ________________________________________________________________________________
From: CozyGirrrl(at)aol.com
Date: Aug 15, 2003
Subject: Re: EFIS
In a message dated 8/15/2003 4:43:33 PM Central Daylight Time, terry(at)tcwatson.com writes: > I am > still trying to sort out the electrical system and haven't been able to get > any response to my questions to this list or to Bob concerning Blue > Mountain's requirement to either have the EFIS/one on a separate electrical > system from the starter or to be turned off during startup. Check with Greg on that one, I think Wayne Lanza of Composite Design makes a module that should take care of that, it is not on his web page but I saw it at Sun-n-fun. ...Chrissi ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net>
Subject: Battery Cable
Date: Aug 15, 2003
I still intend to sell Copper Clad Aluminum but I have seen little interest. I would hate to get stuck with the mile of this that I have to buy. Anyone interested? Details on my website. Regards, Eric M. Jones www.PerihelionDesign.com 113 Brentwood Drive Southbridge MA 01550-2705 Phone (508) 764-2072 Email: emjones(at)charter.net "I'm not going to buy my kids an encyclopedia. Let them walk to school like I did." --Yogi Berra ________________________________________________________________________________
From: N823ms(at)aol.com
Date: Aug 15, 2003
Subject: Re: EFIS
Ron: I have the auto cad program from aeroelectric that I downloaded. If that works send me some pictures. I will send you some just as soon as I get it installed. I know old Bob is responding to my comments to you and I agree to keep things simple, but I still like my pleasure airplane to have some of the standardization that I have in my professional office. Regards, Ed Silvanic ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 15, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Battery Cable
> >I still intend to sell Copper Clad Aluminum but I have seen little >interest. I would hate to get stuck with the mile of this that I have to >buy. Anyone interested? Details on my website. Oh yeah, forgot about that stuff. Hey folks, I worked with some samples that Eric sent me about a year ago. Unlike the bare, coarse stranded aluminum that was such a disaster in the Piper's and for the first year of the C-177, this is DIFFERENT. Unless you look at end of the strands where the cutoff shows the aluminum core, you'd think you were looking at a copper cable. Individual strands are copper clad so that they SOLDER like copper. Obviously, the cladding has to be thin to maximize the weight savings advantage of aluminum. I'd be curious about the integrity of the copper in the interior of a crimped joint . . . but then, if the cladding is intact up to and for some distance into the joint, then it wouldn't matter if some aluminum were exposed. I'd have no qualms about installing terminals with soldering techniques. I think I recall that Premier I at Raytheon uses some aluminum wire . . . I suspect it's a similar product. I'll inquire and let you all know. It is not as flexible as welding cable or even 2AWG/22759 so it probably not very attractive for short runs. However . . . if you've got an airplane with rear mounted batteries, a canard-pusher with batteries up front, or a sea-plane with those gawd-awful long battery leads, this stuff might save you several pounds. Bob . . . >Regards, >Eric M. Jones >www.PerihelionDesign.com >113 Brentwood Drive >Southbridge MA 01550-2705 >Phone (508) 764-2072 >Email: emjones(at)charter.net > >"I'm not going to buy my kids an encyclopedia. Let them walk to school >like I did." > --Yogi Berra > > Bob . . . -------------------------------------------- ( Knowing about a thing is different than ) ( understanding it. One can know a lot ) ( and still understand nothing. ) ( C.F. Kettering ) -------------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 15, 2003
From: richard(at)riley.net
Subject: Re: EFIS
>- Knowing that I will have a GNS-530/430, I did not need another rolling >map. I am installing Electronic International engine gauges, so I did not >have to duplicate them as well. So I called the new COO at the time, Mr. >Malcolm >Thompson and suggested that they duplicate the EFIS Lite unit to project a >glass DG/HSI format. This would give you what we call a PFD ND >combination. Well, >they seemed to have listened, however, their EFIS Lite is around 9,000.00 >plus now. Whether you go EFIS One/EFIS Lite, they still recommend some >backup. ????? The EFIS Lite is $3500 in it's original configuration, $4500 with HSI and moving map modes. If all you got was the HSI, it would be less than most any other HSI on the market, and WAY less than the Sandel. I have an EFIS 1 and will back it up with 2 1/4 steam guages (AI, ALT, ASI, VSI) only because I already have them and the ALT is one of those incredibly expensive military units. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 15, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: EFIS
> >I have backups to my backups, and I'm not currently IFR rated. I have on >order for delivery in about 3 weeks a Blue Mountain EFIS/one. I am >installing a Proprietary Software AoA. I have or have on order 2-1/4" >airspeed, altimeter, vertical velocity, and turn and bank. And I have a >removable mount for my Garmin 196. I also am installing a removable >hand-held radio as a backup. Both the 196 and the Icom handheld radio have >their own batteries, and it just occurred to me that maybe the AoA could >have. Finding room for everything in my RV-8A was certainly a challenge, >especially considering the CPU of the EFIS/one is going right behind the >panel on the right side and doesn't leave room for gauges over there. I am >still trying to sort out the electrical system and haven't been able to get >any response to my questions to this list or to Bob concerning Blue >Mountain's requirement to either have the EFIS/one on a separate electrical >system from the starter or to be turned off during startup. I'm sorry, didn't know we had something hanging loose. That's easy. Treat it like any other system that can't live in real world of airplanes. Put in two batteries. Crank from main battery and run the e-bus from the aux battery. Run picky FADEC from aux battery bus, run Blue Mountain from the e-bus with alternate feed closed for pre-flight. Don't close the aux battery contactor until after the engine is started and don't open e-bus alternate feed until aux battery contactor is closed. Put new battery in aux battery slot every year, move old aux battery to main position. > A local builder >who works for Dynon suggested that the Dynon was the ideal backup for the >EFIS/one. I think he was right. > >I have no backups for the engine gauges, other than a couple of warning >lights. I've yet to see an airplane come spiraling out of the sky trailing black smoke because you don't know what the oil pressure is. Remember, we're talking the likelihood of multiple failures on one airplane during any three to four hour flight. If you've built a poor product and you're used to seeing problems every other flight, then I would agree that the risk of multiple failures could be pretty high. In over 1500 hours, I've never had a failure that caused the slightest discomfort for continuing that leg and launching on yet another leg after refueling . . . and that in an airplane that can't be a good as the one you're building. That's where the FMEA comes in. What do you do if the VM1000 goes blank? It's 99.999% likely that all the readings before blackout will be exactly the same as when you pull power back for descent to landing. The VM1000 does not need a backup for comfortable completion of the current flight. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 15, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: New FAA AC On Amateur Built Aircraft
>AeroElectric-List message previously posted by: BobsV35B(at)aol.com > > << Good Evening OC, All I found at that address was the Federal Register >notice. Is there an address where the proposed document can be accessed >via the >Internet? > Happy Skies, Old Bob >> I've put a copy up at: http://216.55.140.222/Reference_Docs/AC20-27F_DRAFT.pdf Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 15, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: EFIS
> >In a message dated 8/15/03 2:12:30 PM Central Daylight Time, N823ms(at)aol.com >writes: > > > I took an > > actual size cut out of the BMA EFIS 1 found out that it eats up a lot > of my > > panel. I say that in respect to the fact that I wanted to put standard > steam > > > > gauges around it as backup, > >Good Afternoon Ed, > >Did you ever consider just adding a good reliable Turn And Bank? That would >only take up one three and an eighth hole. and can be as small as 2-1/4" . . . >Add to that any current production handheld GPS to give you altitude and you >should have everything you need to keep your Lancair under control. In >addition, the GPS will allow you to navigate. . . . or if you have a rate-based, GPS aided wing leveler it will do everything you might have done with eyeballs dancing over the gages after the EFIX goes black . . . and might even do it better leaving you to navigate. Given that we'd probably use such a device most of the time while in clouds anyhow, I'll suggest that the EFIS is backup for the wing-leveler and not the other way around . . . Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: BobsV35B(at)aol.com
Date: Aug 15, 2003
Subject: Re: EFIS
In a message dated 8/15/03 8:55:21 PM Central Daylight Time, bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net writes: > >Did you ever consider just adding a good reliable Turn And Bank? That > would > >only take up one three and an eighth hole. > > and can be as small as 2-1/4" . . . Good Evening Bob, That's true, but my experience with the two and a quarter size has been poor. I've had three of them fail in less than two thousand hours. I agree two thousand hours is lot of time, but I have had full size units last for the life of an airplane. I am sure no expert on instruments, but my local guru tells me that the new small instruments currently available just are not very good. The ones made for the military sell for upwards of five grand. Too rich for me. I have gone back to using new production three and one-eighth inch T&Bs. > > > >Add to that any current production handheld GPS to give you altitude and > you > >should have everything you need to keep your Lancair under control. In > >addition, the GPS will allow you to navigate. > > . . . or if you have a rate-based, GPS aided wing leveler it will > do everything you might have done with eyeballs dancing > over the gages after the EFIX goes black . . . and might > even do it better leaving you to navigate. Given that we'd > probably use such a device most of the time while in clouds > anyhow, I'll suggest that the EFIS is backup for the wing-leveler > and not the other way around . . . > > Bob . . . > Right on. I think something like Jim Younkin's unit is the way to go! Fabulous piece of equipment. Thank goodness for guys like Jim catering to the OBAM aircraft. Between you and Jim, we've got it made. Happy Skies, Old Bob ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dave Grosvenor" <dwg(at)iafrica.com>
Subject: Battery voltage on start
Date: Aug 16, 2003
Assuming you have a good battery, how much can you expect the battery voltage to drop when you hit the starter (50 - 60Amps) for a few seconds? ________________________________________________________________________________
From: MikeEasley(at)aol.com
Date: Aug 16, 2003
Subject: Two Voltage Inputs on JPI EDM900
Robert, JPI just told me that the next software update for the EDM900 will allow for a second voltage input so you can monitor both busses. Ask and you shall receive! Mike Easley Lancair ES Colorado Springs ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 16, 2003
From: Charlie Kuss <chaskuss(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Battery Cable
Hi Eric, I am interested in this product. Could you give us some more info? What type of insulation does this wire have? What is the outside diameter of the 0/1 wire? What are the "specs" on the wire's insulation? What type of terminals are recommended? Is the wire "tinned"? Charlie Kuss RV-8A cockpit systems stuff > >I still intend to sell Copper Clad Aluminum but I have seen little interest. I would hate to get stuck with the mile of this that I have to buy. Anyone interested? Details on my website. > >Regards, >Eric M. Jones >www.PerihelionDesign.com >113 Brentwood Drive >Southbridge MA 01550-2705 >Phone (508) 764-2072 >Email: emjones(at)charter.net > >"I'm not going to buy my kids an encyclopedia. Let them walk to school like I did." > --Yogi Berra > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net>
Subject: Re: Battery Cable
Date: Aug 16, 2003
>Hi Eric, >I am interested in this product. Could you give us some more info? What type of >insulation does this wire have? What is the outside diameter of the 0/1 wire? >What are the "specs" on the wire's insulation? What type of terminals are recommended? >Is the wire "tinned"? >Charlie Kuss >RV-8A cockpit systems stuff Copper-clad aluminum differs from ordinary wire in that the copper is not plated on, but consists of a fused-on layer that is 10% of the diameter of the aluminum. So you can solder the wire or use other standard techniques. The wire is not tinned, but this could be added to the spec. Should it be? Right now the cable is only a pending order for raw material on my "to-do" list. So next week I'll crank this adventure up and start the process. Soon there will a half-ton spool of cable where my wife parks her minivan. The 1/0 cable is 0.500" diameter including insulation. The insulation at this time is not specified but we want: good cut resistance, low flammability, low smoke generation, moderate flex, moderate cost. Your suggestions are welcome. More information on my website. http://www.periheliondesign.com/fatwires.htm Regards, Eric M. Jones www.PerihelionDesign.com 113 Brentwood Drive Southbridge MA 01550-2705 Phone (508) 764-2072 Email: emjones(at)charter.net "I only regret my economies." --Reynolds Price ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: Analog to digital converter
Date: Aug 16, 2003
From: "David.vonLinsowe" <David.vonLinsowe(at)delphi.com>
VGltZTogMDY6MTY6NTEgUE0gUFNUIFVTDQpGcm9tOiAiUm9iZXJ0IEwuIE51Y2tvbGxzLCBJSUki IDxib2IubnVja29sbHNAY294Lm5ldD4NClN1YmplY3Q6IFJlOiBBZXJvRWxlY3RyaWMtTGlzdDog QW5hbG9nIHRvIGRpZ2l0YWwgY29udmVydGVyDQoNCi0tPiBBZXJvRWxlY3RyaWMtTGlzdCBtZXNz YWdlIHBvc3RlZCBieTogIlJvYmVydCBMLiBOdWNrb2xscywgSUlJIiBib2IubnVja29sbHNAY294 Lm5ldA0KDQoNCiAgID4+PiBTaG9ydCBhbnN3ZXIgaXMgdGhhdCB0aGUgaGFyZHdhcmUgaXMgZWFz eSBhbmQgY2hlYXAuDQogICAgVGVsbGluZyB0aGUgaGFyZHdhcmUgaG93IHRvIGRvIGl0J3Mgam9i IGlzIHRoZSBjaGFsbGVuZ2luZw0KICAgIHBhcnQgYW5kIHdvdWxkIHByb2JhYmx5IG5lZWQgc29t ZSBjb29wZXJhdGlvbiBvbiB0aGUgcGFydCBvZg0KICAgIE1yLiBZb3Vua2luLg0KDQogICAgQm9i IC4gLiAuDQoNClRoYW5rIHlvdSBCb2IuDQoNCkRhdmUNCg0KRG8gbm90IGFyY2hpdmUNCg0KDQoN Cg== ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 16, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Battery Cable
> > >Hi Eric, > >I am interested in this product. Could you give us some more info? What >type of > >insulation does this wire have? What is the outside diameter of the 0/1 >wire? > >What are the "specs" on the wire's insulation? What type of terminals are >recommended? > >Is the wire "tinned"? > >Charlie Kuss > >RV-8A cockpit systems stuff > >Copper-clad aluminum differs from ordinary wire in that the copper is not >plated on, but consists of a fused-on layer that is 10% of the diameter of >the aluminum. So you can solder the wire or use other standard techniques. > >The wire is not tinned, but this could be added to the spec. Should it be? If we can live with bare strands in welding cable, I suspect the choice would be no less attractive in copper-clad aluminum . . . by what percentage would "tinning" add to cost? Bob . . . -------------------------------------------- ( Knowing about a thing is different than ) ( understanding it. One can know a lot ) ( and still understand nothing. ) ( C.F. Kettering ) -------------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: RE: Battery (Welding) cable
Date: Aug 16, 2003
From: "Treff, Arthur" <Arthur.Treff(at)Smartm.com>
Thanks gang for saving me from my "anal retentive, obsessive-compulsive neurotic self". I will think no more about the battery cables. They are well installed, comfy and cozy. If I had you guys around for the countless other things I re-did due to this disease, I'd be flying by now. Thanks again for all your help! Arthur Treff ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net>
Subject: Battery Cable
Date: Aug 16, 2003
Don't know the cost adder will be for tinning or plating. I will let you know. The insulation will be yellow Radox FX. Really super stuff. Later, Eric M. Jones www.PerihelionDesign.com 113 Brentwood Drive Southbridge MA 01550-2705 Phone (508) 764-2072 Email: emjones(at)charter.net Eric M. Jones When trouble arises and things look bad, there is always one individual who perceives a solution and is willing to take command. Very often, that individual is crazy. --Dave Barry ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 16, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Battery voltage on start
> >Assuming you have a good battery, how much can you expect the battery >voltage to drop when you hit the starter (50 - 60Amps) for a few seconds? Depends on the battery. There is enough ENERGY in a string of d-size flashlight batteries to crank your engine. Problem is that these small cell are limited in the RATE at which energy can be delivered by a quality known as internal resistance or internal impedance. Further, their small size suggests a limited CAPACITY too . . . meaning that even if these cells would deliver useful output at 60A, your engine would need to start in a few revolutions. We bench test new 17 a.h. RG batteries with enough load to drop the terminal voltage to 8.5 volts. A really robust product will put out 600 amps. A 4-volt drop divided by 600 Amps yields a measured internal impedance on the order of 7 milliohms. Your Your hypothetical for 60A would yield 1/10 the voltage drop on the same battery so it might be expected to stay above 12 volts! As battery characteristics degrade with service or manufacturing techniques, you can EXPECT internal impedance to be higher. A really tired 17 a.h. RG battery will show an internal impedance of 20 milliohms (200A draw) and be pretty close to useless at this condition for larger engines. If you can get going with 60A of cranking current, the "tired" battery will still show a terminal voltage of 11.3 volts . . . Bigger batteries tend to have lower impedances. Products with less-than-the-best construction will have higher impedances . . . but for the purposes of discussing your question, about any RG battery from 10-32 a.h. range should start your engine with ease . . . Most aircraft engines crank in the 150-250A range and can be expected to show what the battery is made of. Your cranking requirements are so much lighter that you can expect to get good cranking performance from some relatively small and/or tired batteries. Bob . . . Bob . . . -------------------------------------------- ( Knowing about a thing is different than ) ( understanding it. One can know a lot ) ( and still understand nothing. ) ( C.F. Kettering ) -------------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 16, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: EFIS
> > > >Did you ever consider just adding a good reliable Turn And Bank? That > > would > > >only take up one three and an eighth hole. > > > > and can be as small as 2-1/4" . . . >Good Evening Bob, > >That's true, but my experience with the two and a quarter size has been poor. > I've had three of them fail in less than two thousand hours. I agree two >thousand hours is lot of time, but I have had full size units last for the >life >of an airplane. > >I am sure no expert on instruments, but my local guru tells me that the new >small instruments currently available just are not very good. The ones made >for the military sell for upwards of five grand. Too rich for me. I have >gone >back to using new production three and one-eighth inch T&Bs. Good data point. I think we use 2-1/4" rate indicators on the Beechjet. I'll see if I can probe the service record on these. In any case, 2,000 hours is about 40 years in the life of the average privately owned SE aircraft. If the focus of our concerns is likelihood that a rate instrument will be available to cover the bases for other flight instruments in any single 4-hour flight, even an MTBF of 1,000 hours would give us a pretty good confidence level. If you've got a tandem cockpit aircraft, panel real estate carries a premium price. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "glong2" <glong2(at)netzero.net>
Subject: New FAA AC On Amateur Built Aircraft
Date: Aug 16, 2003
QC: I have the same problem. I finally went to the kit supplier (Lancair) and they filled out the proper form (AC 8050-3) that I hope meets the FAA requirement! As I read the original requirement it did not require the form but said it "could be used". When I applied for the registration the FAA came back and said the original bill of sale was not good enough! Eugene Long Lancair Super ES glong2(at)netzero.net -----Original Message----- **PS: Case in point. I am still in the middle of trying to sort this out, but it appears that the legal types at the FAA aircraft registration office in Oklahoma have decided that a "Bill of Sale" for a kit purchased six years ago is no longer adequate for registration purposes of the aircraft built from that kit even though the present AC 20-27E specifically says "kit Bill of Sale" is what is needed by them. AC 20-27E also says that AC Form 8050-2 Aircraft Bill of Sale MAY be used so now they have upped the ante to say that AC Form 8050-2 MUST be used. Their reasoning is that normal Bills of Sale for kits do not contain the sacred "words of transfer" that are used in the sale / transfer of unique legal entities that have titles such as real estate, automobiles, and aircraft. To my knowledge a collection of material called a kit, that may or may not ever become an aircraft of some form, is not a uniquely identifiable legal entity at the time it passes from the kit providers hands to the amateur builder. So "words of transfer" are not applicable nor required. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 16, 2003
From: "Dan O'Brien" <danobrien(at)cox.net>
Subject: Relying on non-certified EFIS in IFR
Reading the thread on the merits/cautions of the newer non-certified EFIS systems prompts me to describe my own plans, hoping to hear any merits/cautions about my system. I am currently building a relatively low-budget panel for my Lancair ES. I have a dual electric (Z-14) system with standard gauges for everything **except** the attitude indicator, which I replaced with a Dynon EFIS D-10. My rationale for replacing the attitude indicator was the negative reports I've heard/read/experienced with electric AI's. With the Dynon, I've got not only an attitude indicator, but also backups for several instruments (DG, airspeed, altititude, VSI, TC, etc.). I am banking on this combination being a better deal (probably MUCH better) than having an electric AI. I am instrument rated and plan to take my plane into "hard" IFR. Obviously, I am not relying solely on the Dynon for this. I also have the standard DG, TC, and compass in the standard configuration, as well as a TruTrak autopilot and a second TC in the copilot's seat. Even if the Dynon were to fail, I feel like I have a better IFR arrangement than my club's Cardinal, which has vacuum driven gyros, a standby vacuum system, and an electric TC. I don't think I would feel this way if I were overly reliant on the attitude indicator (in my case the Dynon) for flying in IMC. To me, flying in IMC requires a good scan and confidence in your ability to fly partial panel when the AI goes out. Having a great autopilot made obviously adds confidence as well. Any thoughts/concerns appreciated. Dan O'Brien Lancair Super ES ________________________________________________________________________________
From: Speedy11(at)aol.com
Date: Aug 16, 2003
Subject: (no subject)
I have three instruments available for an all-electric panel. They are new and have never been used. I got them with a project I bought and I've decided to install the Blue Mountain EFIS so I no longer need them. All are 14v unlighted. I will pay for insured Fedex shipping. I can send digital photos if desired. Instruments Available: One RC Allen Attitude Indicator model RCA26AK-4 Aircraft Spruce - $1785 Chief (new surplus) - $1675 American - $1695 Gulf Coast - $1895 My Price - $1300 with free shipping & no sales tax One RC Allen Directional Gyro model RCA15AK-2 Aircraft Spruce - $1695 Chief - $1689 American - $1425 Gulf Coast - $1895 My Price - $1100 with free shipping & no sales tax One RC Allen Turn Coordinator model 82A-11 Aircraft Spruce - $483 Chief - $515 American - $495 My Price - $350 with free shipping & no sales tax Buy all three for $2500 and save an additional $250. The prices are a very good value and the instruments are new. Payment is via cashiers check or I will ship COD if the buyer is willing to pay the COD charges. Once the buyer receives the instruments I will accept them back if shipped back within 2 days of delivery. If returned, shipping is at buyers expense and I will deduct my shipping costs from the amount paid. The buyer will need to call me if returning an instrument (s). If all are purchased for $2500, then all must be returned if any is returned. In other words, you can't buy all three and then return only one. Don't respond on Matronics - contact me via email at "Speedy11(at)aol.com" or by phone at 813-318-9074 or 813-732-7369. Stan Sutterfield Tampa, FL RV-8A QB ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dave Grosvenor" <dwg(at)iafrica.com>
Subject: Re: Battery voltage on start
Date: Aug 17, 2003
Thanks Bob. That answers my question. The reason I asked was two fold. With my kit I was supplied with a 16Ah wet motorcycle battery. I know the advantages of using an RG battery, but decided to put this thing in and use it until it died because I have paid for it. I was doing more tests with my OV module glitch and put a recording scope on my bus. When I hit the start button, the battery voltage is dropping right down to 9 volts. The battery cranks the starter with enough enthusiasm to start the engine (Rotax starter draws 50A) but my second problem related to a Rotax engine information system called a FlyDat that I have fitted. It doesn't like the low voltage and resets itself. It takes 30 seconds to go though its initialisation process which means you don't see an oil press reading for at least 30 secs. I was wondering if a 16Ah RG battery will also suffer from the same sort of volt drop. I saw the specs on a Hawker RG battery which say it will deliver 680A for 30 secs before dropping to 7.2 volts but I wanted to know if it will deliver 50A for 10 secs without dropping substantially. Thanks to your reply and looking at the specs again I see the impedance is 7milliohms which will give me a 0.35V drop - I can live with that. Goodbye motorcycle battery! Thanks again Dave ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Battery voltage on start > >Assuming you have a good battery, how much can you expect the battery >voltage to drop when you hit the starter (50 - 60Amps) for a few seconds? Depends on the battery. There is enough ENERGY in a string of d-size flashlight batteries to crank your engine. Problem is that these small cell are limited in the RATE at which energy can be delivered by a quality known as internal resistance or internal impedance. Further, their small size suggests a limited CAPACITY too . . . meaning that even if these cells would deliver useful output at 60A, your engine would need to start in a few revolutions. We bench test new 17 a.h. RG batteries with enough load to drop the terminal voltage to 8.5 volts. A really robust product will put out 600 amps. A 4-volt drop divided by 600 Amps yields a measured internal impedance on the order of 7 milliohms. Your Your hypothetical for 60A would yield 1/10 the voltage drop on the same battery so it might be expected to stay above 12 volts! As battery characteristics degrade with service or manufacturing techniques, you can EXPECT internal impedance to be higher. A really tired 17 a.h. RG battery will show an internal impedance of 20 milliohms (200A draw) and be pretty close to useless at this condition for larger engines. If you can get going with 60A of cranking current, the "tired" battery will still show a terminal voltage of 11.3 volts . . . Bigger batteries tend to have lower impedances. Products with less-than-the-best construction will have higher impedances . . . but for the purposes of discussing your question, about any RG battery from 10-32 a.h. range should start your engine with ease . . . Most aircraft engines crank in the 150-250A range and can be expected to show what the battery is made of. Your cranking requirements are so much lighter that you can expect to get good cranking performance from some relatively small and/or tired batteries. Bob . . . Bob . . . -------------------------------------------- ( Knowing about a thing is different than ) ( understanding it. One can know a lot ) ( and still understand nothing. ) ( C.F. Kettering ) -------------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 17, 2003
From: drew.schumann(at)us.army.mil
Subject: soldering iron wattage
In reading the instructions for building an RST Marker Beacon kit, they call out for a 35-80 watt pencil soldering iron. I have access to a 25 watt iron from Radio Shack. Looking through the kit, I don't see anything so big as to need all that extra wattage. Am I wrong in thinking I could do just as good a job with a 25 watt iron? Thanks, Drew ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jim Jewell" <jjewell(at)telus.net>
Subject: Re: soldering iron wattage
Date: Aug 16, 2003
Hi Drew, I suggest you consider getting a soldering iron of some what better quality than what you suggest is easily available to you. If you don't expect to do any other electronic projects at all, try to borrow a better unit. I built both of the RMI kits. When I started out on them I wasted money on a cheap iron. Fortunately it burned out before I got too far. After thinking about how it performed before it died on me, I decided that a hundred bucks was a small percentage of what the two kits cost. I bought a Weller adustable whattage unit that has electro static discharge protection. Right away I was surprised at how much better my soldering quality came out. Both of the RMI kits worked fine when powered up. I'm not so sure they would have without the better quailty unit. The kits are built and I now have a good soldering station that I find I am using much more than I expected. Have fun building, Jim in Kelowna ----- Original Message ----- From: <drew.schumann(at)us.army.mil> Subject: AeroElectric-List: soldering iron wattage > > In reading the instructions for building an RST Marker Beacon kit, they call out for a 35-80 watt pencil soldering iron. I have access to a 25 watt iron from Radio Shack. Looking through the kit, I don't see anything so big as to need all that extra wattage. Am I wrong in thinking I could do just as good a job with a 25 watt iron? > > Thanks, > > Drew > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 17, 2003
From: "Dan O'Brien" <danobrien(at)cox.net>
Subject: Z-14 with two rear batteries
Bob, Awhile back you posted a hand-drawn diagram showing the basic electrical configuration for a Z-14 system with two rear-mounted batteries. The figure shows six buses: a fuseblock near each battery in back, a ground bus in back tied in with the panel/firewall ground bus in front, and the main and auxiliary buses in front. I wasn't able to find this diagram on your site. I just want to confirm that this is the configuration you recommend for two rear-mounted batteries. Thanks. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 17, 2003
From: Charlie Kuss <chaskuss(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Battery Cable
Eric, What is the weight per foot of this cable? Charlie Kuss > >Don't know the cost adder will be for tinning or plating. I will let you know. The insulation will be yellow Radox FX. Really super stuff. > >Later, >Eric M. Jones >www.PerihelionDesign.com >113 Brentwood Drive >Southbridge MA 01550-2705 >Phone (508) 764-2072 >Email: emjones(at)charter.net > >Eric M. Jones > >When trouble arises and things look bad, there is always one individual >who perceives a solution and is willing to take command. >Very often, that individual is crazy. > --Dave Barry > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: <mjheinen(at)adelphia.net>
Subject: Re: soldering iron wattage
Date: Aug 17, 2003
I built both RST kits and then some and was complimented on the quality when I sent the audio panel up to be calibrated. I used one of those butane powered units that you can adjust the heat. They are now widely available at places like Lowes and Home Depot.....very portable and I could work in front of the TV ...listen to the wife(counts as quality time...)while working on my units. I believe it is a Weller unit and came with a starter several sizes of soldering tips, a hot knife tip that was great for running up and down both sides of the rivet lines on the aluminum sheet metal skins to remove the plastic protector leaving it on the rest of the skin for protection...and does not mar the surface, and came with a small hot air gun attachment ...great for heat shrink and a small torch....I believe I pad about $50 but have since seen them for about $35 If you need the brand and model let me know. > > From: drew.schumann(at)us.army.mil > Date: 2003/08/17 Sun AM 01:15:43 EDT > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: AeroElectric-List: soldering iron wattage > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net>
Subject: Re: Battery Cable
Date: Aug 17, 2003
All the info is on http://www.periheliondesign.com/fatwiremanual.pdf Note that the weight on the chart is calculated for bare wire. In my hand is a sample of copper-clad-aluminum, Radox insulated #1/0 AWG that weighs 2.4 ounces per foot. #1/0 AWG copper-clad aluminum should be used to replace #2 AWG copper to get the same resistance per foot. Regards, Eric M. Jones www.PerihelionDesign.com 113 Brentwood Drive Southbridge MA 01550-2705 Phone (508) 764-2072 Email: emjones(at)charter.net "It's getting hard to be cynical enough to keep up with reality" --Lily Tomlin ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 17, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Battery voltage on start
> >Thanks Bob. That answers my question. The reason I asked was two fold. >With my kit I was supplied with a 16Ah wet motorcycle battery. I know the >advantages of using an RG battery, but decided to put this thing in and use >it until it died because I have paid for it. Good idea. I've often recommended that folks use any ol' boat, tractor, or car battery and plug-in-the-wall charger to test things. Don't put real battery in your airplane until day before first-flight. Don't know how many folks hauled brand new batteries home from OSH 'cause they were good deals on "show specials" and then had to store/maintain them for a couple of years. Flight battery is among very last things to purchase and install . . . >I was doing more tests with my OV module glitch and put a recording scope on >my bus. When I hit the start button, the battery voltage is dropping right >down to 9 volts. The battery cranks the starter with enough enthusiasm to >start the engine (Rotax starter draws 50A) but my second problem related to >a Rotax engine information system called a FlyDat that I have fitted. It >doesn't like the low voltage and resets itself. It takes 30 seconds to go >though its initialisation process which means you don't see an oil press >reading for at least 30 secs. Aha! yet another product not designed to live in the real world . . . >I was wondering if a 16Ah RG battery will also suffer from the same sort of >volt drop. I saw the specs on a Hawker RG battery which say it will deliver >680A for 30 secs before dropping to 7.2 volts but I wanted to know if it >will deliver 50A for 10 secs without dropping substantially. Thanks to your >reply and looking at the specs again I see the impedance is 7milliohms which >will give me a 0.35V drop - I can live with that. You're question was incomplete . . . you asked about 60A of cranking current. Keep in mind that while a motor is not in motion, its current draw is MUCH higher . . . oft referred to as "locked rotor current" . . . virtually every electrical rotating machine powered with AC or DC has this characteristic. I published some battery voltage plots a few months ago taken from my van during a cranking event. For a few milliseconds while the starter motor was getting into motion, it was pulling perhaps 800-1200 amps! Battery voltage drooped to about 6 volts during this interval. I poked around looking for that .jpg file and couldn't come up with it. I may have to go out and measure it again. In any case, what you may need to do with your picky display is power it through a diode and put a fat electrolytic capacitor downstream of the diode to mitigate the micro-brown-out that upsets it. This capability should have been built into the device. If you ever have any conversation with the manufacturer, you might suggest this change to later models. Feel free to have them contact me for more detailed suggestions. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "iflyaa5" <iflyaa5(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Garmin/UPS merger
Date: Aug 17, 2003
Are you saying that AOPA does not have a position because both manufacturers buy advertising from the AOPA and you're afraid that taking a position will jeopardize that revenue? That's what it sounds like to me! Furthermore, how does consolidation of the industry lead to product improvement and more affordable costs? Please explain. Free enterprise markets don't work that way! Perhaps the AOPA leadership needs to go back and review their Economics textbooks? I find AOPA's position on this as mousey and cowardly. You love to pat yourselves on the back for taking on government entities such as the FAA, TSA, City of Chicago, etc. But when it comes to taking on advertisers you run scared. Is OUR association of Airplane Owners and Pilots just chartered to defend against the actions of non-revenue generating adversaries, or all of them? Think about it. I don't think AOPA's position on this is in the best interest of the membership! Andy Morehouse Bedford, TX AOPA #04175087 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Barnhart, Larry" <Larry.Barnhart(at)aopa.org> Subject: Garmin/UPS merger > Andy, > > AOPA doe snot have a position on the merger of Garmin and UPS. As I am sure > you know both advertise in our magazine and on our web site. For various > reasons AOPA does not place one firm over another. Rather, we do support > what the industry is doing to consolidate manufacturers of equipment and for > product improvement as long as cost is controlled and the products are > available at reasonable costs. > > Thank you. > > Regards, > > Larry Barnhart > Aviation Services Department ----- Original Message ----- From: "ANDY MOREHOUSE" <AMOREH(at)childmed.dallas.tx.us> Subject: Garmin acquisition of UPSAT > I am writing to inquire as to the AOPA's position on the announced > acquisition of UPSAT by Garmin. > > In my view this is nothing more than Garmin's attempt to reduce > competition. In a General Aviation marketplace where prices are already > outrageously expensive for modern technology avionics systems, this will > only drive pricing higher. This merger (if approved) will effectively > eliminating one-fourth to one-third of the competition in this arena. In > addition, it is arguable that this merger will be beneficial to the > advancement of technology since advancements are often driven by > competitive pressures. > > As a member, I encourage the AOPA to strongly oppose this merger, and I > offer my support in doing so. Please advise as to any AOPA actions > underway in this area. Additionally, please provide guidance as to what > government representatives and agencies I should address my concerns. > > Andy Morehouse > Member ID# 04175087 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 17, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: soldering iron wattage
> >In reading the instructions for building an RST Marker Beacon kit, they >call out for a 35-80 watt pencil soldering iron. I have access to a 25 >watt iron from Radio Shack. Looking through the kit, I don't see anything >so big as to need all that extra wattage. Am I wrong in thinking I could >do just as good a job with a 25 watt iron? It's fairly useless to rate and purchase soldering irons based on wattage alone . . . or price either. I've had some rechargeable soldering irons like http://www.starkelectronic.com/wahl.htm that don't even mention wattage in the sales literature . . . if they did, folks might not buy them 'cause at power levels on the order of 12 WATTS, surely they couldn't be very useful. I've purchased 110v irons at Radio Shack for under $10.00 when I need something quick in the field. The irons on my workbench retail for $400+ but I get them off Ebay for a whole lot less. http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2551056976&category=1504 I've got some gas-powered irons in my toolbox (really nice when there's no place to plug in) that can be had for $15 to $50 depending on manufacturer and retailer. All soldering irons have trade offs. The gas irons are really handy in remote service but have lousy temperature control and are not convenient. $5 plug in irons from Radio Shack tend to be adequate for small etched circuit board work but have poor quality tips that erode away and are difficult to get replacement tips for . . . or the tips corrode so badly that you can't get the bad one out to put a new one in. Here's a couple of irons both rated at "50W" http://216.55.140.222/Pictures/soldering_irons.jpg The black one is the business end of my $high$ iron off of Ebay. This has dozens of quickly replaceable tips, some of which are tiny enough to solder .025" spaced leads on surface mount chips. The tip you see here is the largest physical sized tip they offer. I've soldered un-insulated terminals onto 2AWG wires with this iron. The red iron is typical of low cost irons that have been around for over 60 years. See the switch in the cord? Throwing that switch one way puts a diode in series with the iron. When I put this hummer down it eventually gets so hot that the thing glows cherry red in the dark. Putting it into the low-power mode between soldering tasks makes it last a lot longer. So wattage alone is not very significant in the selection of an iron. If you can get all the watts focused at the tip and CONTROLLED, you can do jobs that grandpa's 200W billy-club iron wouldn't do. Soldering is like flying an airplane . . . it's all in your ability to manage energy. Having offered this, if you're buying your first soldering iron, get a cheapy from Radio Shack (or B&C) http://www.bandc.biz/cgi-bin/ez-catalog/cat_display.cgi?9X358218 and have at it. It's reasonable to believe that if an iron is offered by a company that sells lots of other electronic goodies, the thing will have some utility at your proposed task. If you've got one kit to assemble and won't use the iron again for years . . . shucks, you're done. However, as your skills mature so will your tastes in tools. I've probably owned more kinds of soldering tools than for any other task. If you find that soldering is an oft-used technology in your shop, I don't think you can do better than Metcal. When I started buying these, all of my other "temperature controlled" solder stations (some costing much more) got donated to other workshops in the family. I got B&C converted over to them several years ago with Ebay purchases. These are the only soldering irons we use at Raytheon. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "John Perry" <jperryfly(at)earthlink.net>
Subject: LR-3 V/R and Alternators
Date: Aug 17, 2003
Does the LR-3 volt reg from B&C come with directions to dissconnect an internal reg on something like the Nippon-Denso alternators? Is a new alternator availible? I think the Auto Parts stores are going to have rebuilt ones. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Rob W M Shipley" <rob(at)robsglass.com>
Subject: IFR minimum equipment and solid state instruments
Date: Aug 17, 2003
I've been reading the various listers input on this topic with considerable interest. Making the assumption that most of us are designing our electrical systems in accordance with Bob's principles it seems to me that to satisfy the required redundancy in the event of a D10 or EFIS failure a wing leveler and a com radio on the e-bus in conjunction with a hand held GPS for situational awareness would provide a means for staying greasy side down, pointed in the right direction and able to ask for help if necessary. Now please note that I'm building a VFR ship and view the above suggestion as two layer insurance in the event that, God forbid, I should ever stray into IMC. Just my .02 and very willing to hear other ideas. Rob Rob W M Shipley RV9A N919RV (res) Fuselage ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 17, 2003
From: Charlie Kuss <chaskuss(at)bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: Battery Cable
Eric, Thanks for the info. The info I have says that #2 gauge Tefzel Mil-Spec wire weighs 3.7 ounces per foot. So your product only weighs 64% of aircraft wire. Do you expect to add #4 & #6 gauge wire soon? What is the recommended solder for use in attaching lug terminals to this wire? Charlie Kuss RV-8A cockpit systems stuff > >All the info is on http://www.periheliondesign.com/fatwiremanual.pdf > >Note that the weight on the chart is calculated for bare wire. In my hand is a sample of copper-clad-aluminum, Radox insulated #1/0 AWG that weighs 2.4 ounces per foot. #1/0 AWG copper-clad aluminum should be used to replace #2 AWG copper to get the same resistance per foot. > >Regards, >Eric M. Jones >www.PerihelionDesign.com >113 Brentwood Drive >Southbridge MA 01550-2705 >Phone (508) 764-2072 >Email: emjones(at)charter.net > >"It's getting hard to be cynical enough to keep up with reality" >--Lily Tomlin > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 17, 2003
From: richard(at)riley.net
Subject: Re: Garmin/UPS merger
I already have a couple of pools out there on how long Groen Brothers and Eclipse will last before they announce Ch 11. Anyone want in on how long before Garmin shuts down the UPS line? I give it 18 months from closing. A week after that we'll see a 30% increase in the price of Garmin stuff. If you can afford it, buy now. The Avionics Revolution has just ended. > >Are you saying that AOPA does not have a position because both manufacturers >buy advertising from the AOPA and you're afraid that taking a position will >jeopardize that revenue? That's what it sounds like to me! > >Furthermore, how does consolidation of the industry lead to product >improvement and more affordable costs? Please explain. Free enterprise >markets don't work that way! Perhaps the AOPA leadership needs to go back >and review their Economics textbooks? > >I find AOPA's position on this as mousey and cowardly. You love to pat >yourselves on the back for taking on government entities such as the FAA, >TSA, City of Chicago, etc. But when it comes to taking on advertisers you >run scared. > >Is OUR association of Airplane Owners and Pilots just chartered to defend >against the actions of non-revenue generating adversaries, or all of them? >Think about it. I don't think AOPA's position on this is in the best >interest of the membership! > >Andy Morehouse >Bedford, TX >AOPA #04175087 > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Barnhart, Larry" <Larry.Barnhart(at)aopa.org> >To: >Subject: Garmin/UPS merger > > > > Andy, > > > > AOPA doe snot have a position on the merger of Garmin and UPS. As I am >sure > > you know both advertise in our magazine and on our web site. For various > > reasons AOPA does not place one firm over another. Rather, we do support > > what the industry is doing to consolidate manufacturers of equipment and >for > > product improvement as long as cost is controlled and the products are > > available at reasonable costs. > > > > Thank you. > > > > Regards, > > > > Larry Barnhart > > Aviation Services Department > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "ANDY MOREHOUSE" <AMOREH(at)childmed.dallas.tx.us> >To: >Subject: Garmin acquisition of UPSAT > > > > I am writing to inquire as to the AOPA's position on the announced > > acquisition of UPSAT by Garmin. > > > > In my view this is nothing more than Garmin's attempt to reduce > > competition. In a General Aviation marketplace where prices are already > > outrageously expensive for modern technology avionics systems, this will > > only drive pricing higher. This merger (if approved) will effectively > > eliminating one-fourth to one-third of the competition in this arena. In > > addition, it is arguable that this merger will be beneficial to the > > advancement of technology since advancements are often driven by > > competitive pressures. > > > > As a member, I encourage the AOPA to strongly oppose this merger, and I > > offer my support in doing so. Please advise as to any AOPA actions > > underway in this area. Additionally, please provide guidance as to what > > government representatives and agencies I should address my concerns. > > > > Andy Morehouse > > Member ID# 04175087 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jim Cameron" <toucan(at)78055.com>
Subject: Dual COM's, one antenna??
Date: Aug 17, 2003
I'm building a Lancair Legacy now, all carbon fiber, and wondering how to handle 2 COM's without 2 separate, external COM antennas. The Legacy is such a sleek design, I hate to have it end up looking like a hedgehog, antennae bristling out all over it. I've seen the Comant CI 605 "diplexer," but I've heard mixed things about it, and its almost $700 price is a little hard to get around. Any opinions or experience here? Jim Cameron Medina, Texas ________________________________________________________________________________
From: N1deltawhiskey(at)aol.com
Date: Aug 17, 2003
Subject: Re: Battery Cable
In a message dated 8/15/2003 6:31:28 PM Pacific Daylight Time, bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net writes: > Individual strands are copper clad so that they SOLDER like copper. > Obviously, the cladding has to be thin to maximize the weight > savings advantage of aluminum. I'd be curious about the > integrity of the copper in the interior of a crimped joint . . . > but then, if the cladding is intact up to and for some distance > into the joint, then it wouldn't matter if some aluminum were > exposed. Bob & Eric, Will be interested in hearing more about this cable, but need to make a move quickly as I was planning to address this within the next two weeks. One thing that concerns me with respect to possibly crimping this wire is not fracturing of the fused copper, but the propensity for aluminum (possibly limited to certain alloys) to relax or cold flow to relieve the pressure it is under when "tightness" is used as the attach mechanism to achieve the gas free interface. I am aware that several transformer/switchgear aluminum busses were implicated in fires when the aluminum was reported to have relaxed relieving pressure inder the joint thereby increasing the resistance in the connection. I would be much less concerned if this were to be soldered under minimal mechanical pressure. Do you share this concern, or disagree with it? Regards, Doug Windhorn ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Terry Watson" <terry(at)tcwatson.com>
Subject: Re: Garmin/UPS merger
Date: Aug 17, 2003
* AeroElectric-List message posted by: richard(at)riley.net If you can afford it, buy now. The Avionics Revolution has just ended. Why does this remind me of the head of the patent office who wanted to shut it down because everything worthwhile had already been invented - around 1900!. Garmin was founded in 1989. It's a 14 year old company. It's going to take me about half that long to build my kit airplane. Do you really believe that if Garmin and UPS Avionics merge they will decide to stop innovating no one else will come along to unseat them? You could as easily create an empty hole in the ocean as you can in a market. The laws of physics will fill any void in the ocean. The laws of economics will just as predictably fill any void in the market, be it in avionics or lawn chairs or pickup trucks. Garmin and UPS are both excellent companies and I plan to buy from both. If they leave the market it will only be because competitors maybe just as invisible to us now as Garmin was in 1988 make them non-competitive. Translation: someone offers us a better deal. Or I guess we could just shut down the patent office and go home thinking the future will look just like the past. Who needs a telegraph in an airplane anyway? Terry ________________________________________________________________________________
From: BAKEROCB(at)aol.com
Date: Aug 17, 2003
Subject: Bureaucratic Fungus
Responding to an AeroElectric-List message previously posted by: "William" <> 8/17/2003 Hello Bill, You are right, a different box is checked, but on a different form (AC Form 8050-88). But that only points to the fundamental issue -- insidious growth of bureacratic fungus which creates barriers to progress with no commensurate benefit. It goes something like this: 1) FAR Part 21.191 permits issuance of experimental airworthiness certificates for the purpose of "operating an aircraft the major portion of which has been fabricated and assembled by persons who undertook the construction project solely for their own education or recreation". 2) When the aircraft was "built from miscellaneous parts" (See box to check on AC Form 8050-88) by the amateur builder the major portion requirement was usually and obviously met. 3) When kits began to be provided to amateur builders the "major portion" issue became more problematical. 4) So the FAA set up a system whereby a kit provider could have a kit evaluated by the FAA and the FAA would then issue a letter blessing the kit as requiring a major portion effort by the amateur builder. Absolutely no other aspect of the kit was approved by the FAA as they explicitly state in AC 20-139. I quote "This letter SHOULD NOT (sic) be construed to mean the kit or its manufacturer is FAA certified, certficated, or approved, and it is not appropriate to represent it as such." 5) Nevertheless with this "major portion only" FAA approval foot in the door, individual FAA bureaucrats then began to expand their charter on two fronts. 5A) To keeping track of specific individual kits to ensure that they were, in fact, the ones that were "FAA approved". 5B) To ensuring that the amateur builder built the "FAA approved" kit as intended by the kit provider and as "approved" by the FAA. 6) The result of 5A) is the FAA legal types at Oklahoma attempting to treat the original sale of ANY collection of material that was called a "kit" by ANY provider to be potentially built by an amateur builder into an aircraft, as a legal, titleable entity. Examples of these legal entities with titles are: a specific piece of real estate, an automobile, or an existing airplane. Therefore the FAA legal types are requiring for the original kit sale the same administrative and legal titling and transfer of title treatment as the transfer of the title of one of those existing legal entities. (See AC Form 8050-2). A valid bill of sale from the kit provider for the collection of material sold as a kit (which AC 20-27E specifically calls for) which does not contain the sacred "words of transfer" is insufficient in their bureaucratic eyes. 7) The result of 5B) is that we have individual FAA inspectors out in the field asking amateur builders "In building this aircraft did you make any modifications from what the kit provider said you should do?" If the amateur builder answers "Yes" then he starts a process wherein the amateur builder may have to prove to the satisfaction of the inspector that the kit provider has no objections to the modifications that were made to this kit during construction by the amateur builder EVEN THOUGH IT MAY BE A KIT THAT WAS NEVER PREVIOUSLY EVALUATED BY THE FAA IN ANY FASHION WHATEVER such as for a major portion determination. This obviously makes a mockey of the word "experimental" for the amateur builder in creating an amateur built experimental aircraft starting from a kit. Alert citizens standing by the bridge are still needed in this country. 'OC' Baker, Builder of KIS TR-1 #116 4/14/97 - ?/?/? ________________________________________________________________________________
From: PeterHunt1(at)aol.com
Date: Aug 17, 2003
Subject: Use of relay S704-1
Bob, I am using toggle switches from B&C (P/N S700-1-3 and -2-3) mounted on my panel. On my pitot heat with 12 amp draw should I use a S704-1 relay to reduce the amps going through my 1-3 switch? Do I need the relay on a 7 amp landing light or just run the full load through the switch? What about on my master switch to my main bus through which I may run 30 amps with everything powered up and transmitting? I am using a S704-1 on my OVM (Figure Z-13). Where else is an S704-1 appropriate and why? What prolonged amperage can a S700-1-3 switch handle? Thanks. Pete RV-6 Panel ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "James E. Clark" <james(at)nextupventures.com>
Subject: Re: RE: Avionics-List: Re: Garmin/UPS merger
Date: Aug 17, 2003
Andy, Since you put this here on the list, here is another perspective. First, I think that AOPA **implied** position is as stated so to speak. They support it given certain assumptions as mentioned. Second, here is a view as to how this **COULD** be a good thing. ***SPECULATION ON*** (with a few facts thrown in) UPS is getting back to the core business. I was happy to see that a big company like UPS picked up II Morrow but I never saw it as core to their business. In the grand scheme of things, UPSAT was only worth sone items that could go into the UPS planes (equipment and results of maybe the CAPSTONE effort). Glad they did it but it was not to last forever. Garmin has been focussed on the G1000 program and not keeping up with some of the GA stuff that UPSAT engineers were working on and trying to get out the door. Of course they did a better Marketing job of what they did have. Also, what they have, though it may be technically inferior, does for some have a better user interface. . So ... UPS decides it wants out of this business and wants to do it gracefully. They have a ferw options: 1. They can "spin out" the company (the current employees go off and try to raise funds in today's market) If they did this, I suspect they would be worse off. Capital comes with a LOT of strings. 2. They can "spin it in" deeper. Basically say, we are no longer interested in you but if you can survive on your own then have at it. Might work, but with Garmin being so dominant in this space for several of the items, they'd have a tough row to hoe. Ya see, when Garmin came out with the "larger, **COLOR**" units SEVERAL years ago and UPSAT did not respond, UPSAT go left in the competitive dust. Sure they had *some* better products but the hot cales seller was the Garmin 430. 3. They could "shop" the division. If this goes on for more than a few days, you shoot the morale of the whole organization in the foot. Also, future customers won't touch you with a ten foot pole. Once you decide to sell, you need to have a buyer **ALREADY** in mind and be willing to close the deal NOW! 4. They could find a "white/black/blue/green knight" to "take things over and do right by everyone". I am sure there are other options but they seemed to have chosen option #4. Of course, it may have just fallen into their laps. Could have been the result of a casual conversation over lunch somewhere. COuld have been that Garmin really needs the additonal talent represented by UPSAT, especially the engineering (though I would suggest that they try to keep as much of the team as possible over the LONG haul). I for one, am not so worried about Garmin purchasing UPSAT as much as I am worried about what LOGIC they will use over time to "rationalize" the priduct lines. To me THAT is the message we need to get to GARMIN (the parent company of the two future divisions). ***SPECULATION OFF*** <> If it were my decision to make here are the 10 things I would do with the products. [You can make up your own 10 if you disagree] 1. Phase out all the GX stuff as fast as possible (already underway I believe) Non color. Probably no cheaper than a color unit today and the 430 or a cheaper future one would be better. 2. Phase out the SL50/SL60 (slimline GPS/GPSCOM) and SL10/SL15 (intercoms) If you are going GPS these days, you might as well get more display funtionality. You don't need to audio panels/intercoms 3. Merge the 430/530/CNX80 teams into one ... keeping them in current locations for some time though. Establish product line roadmap that they all work to. 4. Improve the user interface of the CNX80. 5. Promote the daylight out of the CNX80 to make the point that I am *not* abandoning it. 6. Jack up the CPU in the MX20. CPU's are now available at 10x the speed (for peanuts!)!! 7. Keep the SL70 transponder (because it can be offered as a remote and is slim) 8. Keep the SL40 Com because it is probably the best value COM available *and* is slim 9. Keep the SL30 because it can fit in the SL40 tray as an upgrade for making your plane IFR 10. Eventually set up a "high end" team (G1000 etc) and a "plane ole GA" team with a subgroup FOCUSSED on Experimental people who get to play with early versions of stuff. After doing this, I would then let the MARKET decide what to keep and expand. If there is not demand, KILL IT! Do something the market wants **or** your other/new competitors will. If they did the above, I would be HAPPY that Garmin bought them because in the long run if UPS has decided to get back to basics ("focus on the core") then UPSAT **might** have become not just a casualty but a fatality in this business. James ... user of products from Garmin, UPSAT **and** Honeywell/King ... planned future user of products from Garmin-UPSAT Division Your Mileage May Vary > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-avionics-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-avionics-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of iflyaa5 > Sent: Sunday, August 17, 2003 3:51 PM > To: "Barnhart, Larry" > Subject: Avionics-List: Re: Garmin/UPS merger > > > --> Avionics-List message posted by: "iflyaa5" > > Are you saying that AOPA does not have a position because both > manufacturers > buy advertising from the AOPA and you're afraid that taking a > position will > jeopardize that revenue? That's what it sounds like to me! > > Furthermore, how does consolidation of the industry lead to product > improvement and more affordable costs? Please explain. Free enterprise > markets don't work that way! Perhaps the AOPA leadership needs to go back > and review their Economics textbooks? > > I find AOPA's position on this as mousey and cowardly. You love to pat > yourselves on the back for taking on government entities such as the FAA, > TSA, City of Chicago, etc. But when it comes to taking on advertisers you > run scared. > > Is OUR association of Airplane Owners and Pilots just chartered to defend > against the actions of non-revenue generating adversaries, or all of them? > Think about it. I don't think AOPA's position on this is in the best > interest of the membership! > > Andy Morehouse > Bedford, TX > AOPA #04175087 > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Barnhart, Larry" <Larry.Barnhart(at)aopa.org> > To: > Subject: Garmin/UPS merger > > > > Andy, > > > > AOPA doe snot have a position on the merger of Garmin and UPS. As I am > sure > > you know both advertise in our magazine and on our web site. For various > > reasons AOPA does not place one firm over another. Rather, we do support > > what the industry is doing to consolidate manufacturers of equipment and > for > > product improvement as long as cost is controlled and the products are > > available at reasonable costs. > > > > Thank you. > > > > Regards, > > > > Larry Barnhart > > Aviation Services Department > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "ANDY MOREHOUSE" <AMOREH(at)childmed.dallas.tx.us> > To: > Subject: Garmin acquisition of UPSAT > > > > I am writing to inquire as to the AOPA's position on the announced > > acquisition of UPSAT by Garmin. > > > > In my view this is nothing more than Garmin's attempt to reduce > > competition. In a General Aviation marketplace where prices are already > > outrageously expensive for modern technology avionics systems, this will > > only drive pricing higher. This merger (if approved) will effectively > > eliminating one-fourth to one-third of the competition in this arena. In > > addition, it is arguable that this merger will be beneficial to the > > advancement of technology since advancements are often driven by > > competitive pressures. > > > > As a member, I encourage the AOPA to strongly oppose this merger, and I > > offer my support in doing so. Please advise as to any AOPA actions > > underway in this area. Additionally, please provide guidance as to what > > government representatives and agencies I should address my concerns. > > > > Andy Morehouse > > Member ID# 04175087 > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 18, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: LR-3 V/R and Alternators
> > >Does the LR-3 volt reg from B&C come with directions to >dissconnect an internal reg on something like the Nippon-Denso >alternators? No . . . >Is a new alternator availible? Yes, they are the B&C L-40, L60 and SD-20 alternators. >I think the Auto Parts stores are going to have rebuilt ones. Probably . . . although you can buy new ND alternators from OEM dealers as spares for their cars . . . and all of those will come with built in regulators. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 18, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Battery Cable
> >In a message dated 8/15/2003 6:31:28 PM Pacific Daylight Time, >bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net writes: > > > Individual strands are copper clad so that they SOLDER like copper. > > Obviously, the cladding has to be thin to maximize the weight > > savings advantage of aluminum. I'd be curious about the > > integrity of the copper in the interior of a crimped joint . . . > > but then, if the cladding is intact up to and for some distance > > into the joint, then it wouldn't matter if some aluminum were > > exposed. > >Bob & Eric, > >Will be interested in hearing more about this cable, but need to make a move >quickly as I was planning to address this within the next two weeks. > >One thing that concerns me with respect to possibly crimping this wire is not >fracturing of the fused copper, but the propensity for aluminum (possibly >limited to certain alloys) to relax or cold flow to relieve the pressure >it is >under when "tightness" is used as the attach mechanism to achieve the gas >free >interface. I am aware that several transformer/switchgear aluminum busses >were >implicated in fires when the aluminum was reported to have relaxed relieving >pressure inder the joint thereby increasing the resistance in the >connection. >I would be much less concerned if this were to be soldered under minimal >mechanical pressure. > >Do you share this concern, or disagree with it? If I were using this material, I think I would solder the joints. Gas-tight with no metal being mashed. Agreed . . . "relaxing" of any metal under pressure is alloy dependent . . . I don't think we worry much about thousands of riveted joints in aluminum structures getting loose due to viscosity of the metal. I'll poke around the AMP application notes and position papers on aluminum conductors. If ANYONE knows all the details, it has to be AMP. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 18, 2003
Subject: Audio panel, of sorts...
From: "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)BowenAero.com>
I have 3 or 4 audio signals I need to capture somehow without a traditional audio panel. For example, nav radio, AOA, traffic detector, etc. I also have an ol' 4-place NAT intercom. I'm wondering if I can run the audio out from these various devices to the otherwise unused MIC pins on the intercom. As an example, passenger 3 will actually be AOA annunciation. Is there any reason why this wouldn't work? - Larry Bowen Larry(at)BowenAero.com http://BowenAero.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 18, 2003
From: richard(at)riley.net
Subject: Re: Garmin/UPS merger
> > >* AeroElectric-List message posted by: richard(at)riley.net > > >If you can afford it, buy now. The Avionics Revolution has just ended. > > >Why does this remind me of the head of the patent office who wanted to shut >it down because everything worthwhile had already been invented - around >1900!. Garmin was founded in 1989. It's a 14 year old company. It's going >to take me about half that long to build my kit airplane. Do you really >believe that if Garmin and UPS Avionics merge they will decide to stop >innovating no one else will come along to unseat them? You could as easily >create an empty hole in the ocean as you can in a market. The laws of >physics will fill any void in the ocean. The laws of economics will just as >predictably fill any void in the market, be it in avionics or lawn chairs or >pickup trucks. Garmin and UPS are both excellent companies and I plan to buy >from both. If they leave the market it will only be because competitors >maybe just as invisible to us now as Garmin was in 1988 make them >non-competitive. Translation: someone offers us a better deal. >Or I guess we could just shut down the patent office and go home thinking >the future will look just like the past. Who needs a telegraph in an >airplane anyway? >Terry There's an enormous barrier to entry in the avionics industry. The investment required is huge, and it's only when the industry leaders have fallen decades behind that it makes sense to go after them - think of what state King was in when Garmin, UPS, Magellin and Trimble appeared. But there's only room for one market leader. It was a natural for Garmin to buy UPS, neither one was making much. At Osh I talked with the Microair guys. I asked if they could do their transponder with the square form factor of the Terra, since there are a lot of orphan Terra customers that would love to change. They said they could - but it would cost $250k to certify it, with just a faceplate change. They'd have to sell a thousand units just to make that certification money back.. So far they've only sold about 1800 transponders. They've recouped maybe a fifth of their development costs. So, yes, if Garmin gets rid of the GX60 and SL30 and CNX 80 (after incorporating the WAAS into the GNS-530) and maybe, if we're lucky, they keep the MX20 going (but I doubt it) and then they do nothing to upgrade their line for 20 or 30 years, there will be a new competitor that appears. I don't know about you, but I'm probably not going to be flying in 20 or 30 years. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net>
Subject: Re: Battery Cable
Date: Aug 18, 2003
Doug, >Will be interested in hearing more about this cable, but need to make a move >quickly as I was planning to address this within the next two weeks. See http://www.periheliondesign.com/fatwiremanual.pdf and http://www.periheliondesign.com/fatwires.htm >One thing that concerns me with respect to possibly crimping this wire is not >fracturing of the fused copper, but the propensity for aluminum (possibly >limited to certain alloys) to relax or cold flow to relieve the pressure it is >under when "tightness" is used as the attach mechanism to achieve the gas free >interface. The final stranding is 1000 (or so) of 0.010" diameter wire. The aluminum is 90% of this diameter and the copper 10%. The aluminum is not going to be extruded under any clamping pressure available on this planet since the wire drawing die pressure is thousands of times what any clamp can exert. >I am aware that several transformer/switchgear aluminum busses were >implicated in fires when the aluminum was reported to have relaxed relieving >pressure under the joint thereby increasing the resistance in the connection. Exactly! The problem with aluminum wiring is that the relaxation induces surface oxide. The copper cladding prevents this. Copper oxide is decently conductive while aluminum oxide is great insulation. But power companies cope with this routinely. Even houses wired in aluminum are fixed without removing the aluminum wiring, they just crimp or wire-nut a short copper wire to the aluminum with some antioxidant goop in the connector. Copper cladding the aluminum makes this unnecessary >I would be much less concerned if this were to be soldered under minimal >mechanical pressure. Not only that, but it's a good practice. CCA solders better than copper because of its lower thermal conductivity. I intend to supply the end connectors and some optional Sn43Pb43Bi14 solder which makes the process even easier. >Do you share this concern, or disagree with it? The reason Copper Clad Aluminum is not used everywhere is just a matter of cost, and because in most application weight is not so critical. But this stuff has been used in commercial and military aircraft for years. Aluminum wiring finds many aircraft applications too. >Regards, Doug Windhorn This cable has another name, "Jesus-Wire"; because when engineers handle this CCA FatWire (tm), they heft it one hand, smile and say "...Jesus!...." Regards, Eric M. Jones www.PerihelionDesign.com 113 Brentwood Drive Southbridge MA 01550-2705 Phone (508) 764-2072 Email: emjones(at)charter.net "An acre of performance is worth the whole world of promise." --James Howell ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Rob Housman" <RobH@hyperion-ef.com>
Subject: Re: Garmin/UPS merger
Date: Aug 18, 2003
In re: consolidation In the case of avionics economics actually favors consolidation. Because of the market size it is in the consumers' best interest to have fewer rather than more manufactures competing for our business. In a very small market, such as the total of around 200,000 general aviation airplanes in the US, products are relatively expensive because the development and certification costs are spread over very few units (even in the unlikely case of every one of those 200,000 airplanes being a "customer"). When compared to things like car audio, where the automobile market in the US is around 15 million cars sold PER YEAR it gets really obvious why something like a simple CD player for that meets a TSO is about 10X the price of a better unit for the car. If Garmin and UPS combine to sell the same total number of units of whatever avionics box, they can actually reduce the unit price to us. I didn't say they would, I said they could, and in the short run they won't because they will still, for example, be selling the UPS CNX80 side by side with the Garmin GNS530. The next generation of these boxes is where the savings can result. While consolidation can have an economic advantage for consumers, lack of innovation may be the price we pay with fewer manufacturers competing. Best regards, Rob Housman Europa XS Tri-Gear A070 Airframe complete Irvine, CA -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com]On Behalf Of iflyaa5 Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Garmin/UPS merger Are you saying that AOPA does not have a position because both manufacturers buy advertising from the AOPA and you're afraid that taking a position will jeopardize that revenue? That's what it sounds like to me! Furthermore, how does consolidation of the industry lead to product improvement and more affordable costs? Please explain. Free enterprise markets don't work that way! Perhaps the AOPA leadership needs to go back and review their Economics textbooks? I find AOPA's position on this as mousey and cowardly. You love to pat yourselves on the back for taking on government entities such as the FAA, TSA, City of Chicago, etc. But when it comes to taking on advertisers you run scared. Is OUR association of Airplane Owners and Pilots just chartered to defend against the actions of non-revenue generating adversaries, or all of them? Think about it. I don't think AOPA's position on this is in the best interest of the membership! Andy Morehouse Bedford, TX AOPA #04175087 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Barnhart, Larry" <Larry.Barnhart(at)aopa.org> Subject: Garmin/UPS merger > Andy, > > AOPA doe snot have a position on the merger of Garmin and UPS. As I am sure > you know both advertise in our magazine and on our web site. For various > reasons AOPA does not place one firm over another. Rather, we do support > what the industry is doing to consolidate manufacturers of equipment and for > product improvement as long as cost is controlled and the products are > available at reasonable costs. > > Thank you. > > Regards, > > Larry Barnhart > Aviation Services Department ----- Original Message ----- From: "ANDY MOREHOUSE" <AMOREH(at)childmed.dallas.tx.us> Subject: Garmin acquisition of UPSAT > I am writing to inquire as to the AOPA's position on the announced > acquisition of UPSAT by Garmin. > > In my view this is nothing more than Garmin's attempt to reduce > competition. In a General Aviation marketplace where prices are already > outrageously expensive for modern technology avionics systems, this will > only drive pricing higher. This merger (if approved) will effectively > eliminating one-fourth to one-third of the competition in this arena. In > addition, it is arguable that this merger will be beneficial to the > advancement of technology since advancements are often driven by > competitive pressures. > > As a member, I encourage the AOPA to strongly oppose this merger, and I > offer my support in doing so. Please advise as to any AOPA actions > underway in this area. Additionally, please provide guidance as to what > government representatives and agencies I should address my concerns. > > Andy Morehouse > Member ID# 04175087 ________________________________________________________________________________
From: F1Rocket(at)comcast.net
Subject: Timer
Date: Aug 18, 2003
I would like to install a simple timer next to my fuel valve. Rather than use some of the chronographs that contain a dozen more functions that what I need, I'd rather go with something much more simpler. Ideally, it would install in a panel rather that get velcroed to the surface, but I'm open. What have others used that works for you? I'm just looking for a simple timer that tells me when to switch tanks. For you electronically capable builders out there, all I need is a timer that would start once the master is on, then activate an alarm or flash a light at 15 minutes, and every 30 minutes after that. A simple push button to reset to the next interval would be great. I don't need any display. Is this simple enough that someone could put this together? I don't have the smarts to do this, but I'd be willing to pay someone who did. Randy F1 Rocket http://mywebpages.comcast.net/f1rocket/ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: <ktlkrn(at)cox.net>
Subject: RV7 panel
Date: Aug 18, 2003
Here is my plan for my all electric RV7 panel. I'd like some input from those with experience with the equipment, specifically the Approach systems wiring block. 1) Garmin 430 2) Garmin 340 audio panel 3) Garmin 327 Transponder 4) Apollo LS 30 Nav/Com 5) Advanced systems engine monitor 6) Approach system stack (integrated wiring junction block) 7) Garmin CDI 8) XBus switch system. Back up altimeter, airspeed and T&B. Darwin N. Barrie Chandler AZ ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones(at)charter.net>
Subject: Urban Rumor
Date: Aug 18, 2003
>Why does this remind me of the head of the patent office who wanted to shut >it down because everything worthwhile had already been invented - around >1900! Never happened. I can supply references for this non-event off-list if interested. Seek truth in all things. Regards, Eric M. Jones www.PerihelionDesign.com 113 Brentwood Drive Southbridge MA 01550-2705 Phone (508) 764-2072 Email: emjones(at)charter.net "When they say it's not about money, it's about money. When they say it's not about sex, it's about sex." --Dale Bumpers ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ed Holyoke" <bicyclop(at)pacbell.net>
Subject: Dual COM's, one antenna??
Date: Aug 18, 2003
Get a hold of Bob Archer. He makes an antenna transmit/receive splitter for that exact purpose. It was $150 a couple of years back. Since it's a glass airplane, you ought to check out his internal antennas too. Bob Archer bobsantennas(at)earthlink.net Ed Holyoke I'm building a Lancair Legacy now, all carbon fiber, and wondering how to handle 2 COM's without 2 separate, external COM antennas. The Legacy is such a sleek design, I hate to have it end up looking like a hedgehog, antennae bristling out all over it. I've seen the Comant CI 605 "diplexer," but I've heard mixed things about it, and its almost $700 price is a little hard to get around. Any opinions or experience here? Jim Cameron Medina, Texas aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jon Finley" <jon(at)finleyweb.net>
Subject: Voltage Filter??
Date: Aug 18, 2003
Hi all, I'm learning a ton from this group but have a very beginner question (another one!). I recently installed an automotive temperature gauge in my plane. The unit runs on internal battery until bus voltage is around 13.5 volts and then switches to external power. When it switches it beeps and flashes. While idling my bus voltage seems to hover right around this range and causes the gauge to flip back and forth between internal and external power. It is VERY annoying. I **thought** I could solve this by installing a capacitor in the external power feed to "smooth" the input. After doing so (with no effect), I realized why this wouldn't work but left me blank as to what the solution might be. Could someone please provide a bit of insight here?? Thanks much! Jon Finley N90MG Q2 - Subaru EJ-22 DD - 455 Hrs. TT - 3 Hrs Engine Apple Valley, Minnesota http://www.FinleyWeb.net/default.asp?id=96 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 18, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Audio panel, of sorts...
> >I have 3 or 4 audio signals I need to capture somehow without a >traditional audio panel. For example, nav radio, AOA, traffic detector, >etc. I also have an ol' 4-place NAT intercom. I'm wondering if I can run >the audio out from these various devices to the otherwise unused MIC pins >on the intercom. As an example, passenger 3 will actually be AOA >annunciation. Is there any reason why this wouldn't work? This might work. You want to use a capacitor to couple audio to these inputs to keep the microphone DC power on these pins from feeding back into or being loaded by the audio sources. Headset audio levels are in the same ballpark as microphone levels so I'd say the odds are in your favor. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)BowenAero.com>
Subject: Mag mystery
Date: Aug 18, 2003
Posting for a friend with mag problems. He has one mag and one lightspeed EI on an O-360A1A with a key switch. Things were running fine until recently. Any ideas on the solution or efficent ways to diagnose? - Larry Bowen Larry(at)BowenAero.com http://BowenAero.com 2003 - The year of flight! "My left mag key position kills the engine. I don't know if I have a bad switch, bad mag or maybe a broken wire... " ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 18, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Voltage Filter??
> >Hi all, > >I'm learning a ton from this group but have a very beginner question >(another one!). > >I recently installed an automotive temperature gauge in my plane. The >unit runs on internal battery until bus voltage is around 13.5 volts and >then switches to external power. When it switches it beeps and flashes. >While idling my bus voltage seems to hover right around this range and >causes the gauge to flip back and forth between internal and external >power. It is VERY annoying. Why do you need internal battery power for a temperature gage? How does the instrument behave if you remove the battery? >I **thought** I could solve this by installing a capacitor in the >external power feed to "smooth" the input. After doing so (with no >effect), I realized why this wouldn't work but left me blank as to what >the solution might be. Could someone please provide a bit of insight >here?? If it's a voltage level decision for switching, a capacitor doesn't help. Caps only mitigate short duration and/or fast rise-time events. This is a static power condition. See how it works with the battery removed. Bob . . . -------------------------------------------- ( Knowing about a thing is different than ) ( understanding it. One can know a lot ) ( and still understand nothing. ) ( C.F. Kettering ) -------------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 19, 2003
From: drew.schumann(at)us.army.mil
Subject: From SWPC list
Sent Tuesday, August 19, 2003 10:15 am To Rod Smith , Short Wing Piper Maillist Cc Bcc Subject SWPC: Electrical failure Saturday night I was practicing my night landings, all flap settings, simulated engine out at different locations in the pattern. I had the Provo airport to myself. I then broke off to fly over the city and climbed up to 8000 for a better view. I then headed back towards the airport and decided to try a simulated engine out to check my skills for a 3500 ft decent to land. I made a radio call telling my position and that I was simulating a engine out. I then turned on my landing light and pulled back on the throttle and started my decent adjusting my glide and watching the airport runway lights then at about 6000 ft I lost all my electrical power. It took me a few seconds to asses what happened then I tried my breakers but no luck there. I then visually checked for other traffic in the area and continued with my decent for landing. I wanted to reach back for my hand held but you know I left it back in the truck. Never again will that happen, I made a smooth landing without the use of a landing light and used my large flash light for a taxi light hanging it out my window. I fixed the problem the next day, can YOU figure out what happened? Blaine PA-22-135 2569A __________________________________ http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Ron Raby" <ronr(at)advanceddesign.com>
Subject: Re: From SWPC list
Date: Aug 19, 2003
loose main ground cable. Ron Raby ----- Original Message ----- From: <drew.schumann(at)us.army.mil> Subject: AeroElectric-List: From SWPC list > > Sent Tuesday, August 19, 2003 10:15 am > To Rod Smith , Short Wing Piper Maillist > Cc > Bcc > Subject SWPC: Electrical failure > > > Saturday night I was practicing my night landings, all > flap settings, simulated engine out at different > locations in the pattern. I had the Provo airport to > myself. I then broke off to fly over the city and > climbed up to 8000 for a better view. I then headed > back towards the airport and decided to try a > simulated engine out to check my skills for a 3500 ft > decent to land. I made a radio call telling my > position and that I was simulating a engine out. I > then turned on my landing light and pulled back on the > throttle and started my decent adjusting my glide and > watching the airport runway lights then at about 6000 > ft I lost all my electrical power. It took me a few > seconds to asses what happened then I tried my > breakers but no luck there. I then visually checked > for other traffic in the area and continued with my > decent for landing. > I wanted to reach back for my hand held but you know I > left it back in the truck. Never again will that > happen, I made a smooth landing without the use of a > landing light and used my large flash light for a taxi > light hanging it out my window. > I fixed the problem the next day, can YOU figure out > what happened? > > Blaine > PA-22-135 > 2569A > > > __________________________________ > http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Jim Butcher" <europa(at)triton.net>
Subject: Connectors
Date: Aug 19, 2003
Bob, In an earlier post you suggested the use of AMP CPC Series I connectors. You suggested low cost tooling is available. I've found the connectors but have not found low cost tooling. Suggestions? Also, looks like these are rated at 13A max. I have a few circuits that are greater - pitot heat, main bus feed etc. Is it better to use the proper size wire and split to multiple contacts or use 2 smaller wires? Lastly, it should be no problem to use LED's for announciator lights such as low volts off the B&C regulator, correct? Just use an appropriate LED and current limiting resister? Thanks Jim Butcher Europa Builder A185 ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 19, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Mag mystery
> >Posting for a friend with mag problems. He has one mag and one >lightspeed EI on an O-360A1A with a key switch. Things were running >fine until recently. Any ideas on the solution or efficent ways to >diagnose? > >- >Larry Bowen >Larry(at)BowenAero.com >http://BowenAero.com >2003 - The year of flight! > > >"My left mag key position kills the engine. I don't know if I have a bad >switch, bad mag or maybe a broken wire... " We're a tad shy on data. I presume he's not getting ignition when in the left-only position on switch. Is this the mag or EI system? Since his switch works to kill a system by grounding, a broken wire (most likely fault) would let the system keep running in left-only position. I'd guess that which ever system is on the left side has gone on vacation. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 19, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: LV Warning project. Bill of Materials Error
>Comments/Questions: Bob, > >In your drawing 9021-620 for the low voltage warning circuit,item R104 >shows a4.7K resistor. The Parts List says this is a 2.49K resistor. Which >is correct? The schematic and assy photos are correct. R104 is 4.7k. I've fixed the document. Thanks for the heads-up . . . You can download the corrected document at: http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/lvwarn/9021-620.pdf Bob . . . -------------------------------------------- ( Knowing about a thing is different than ) ( understanding it. One can know a lot ) ( and still understand nothing. ) ( C.F. Kettering ) -------------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Gary Casey" <glcasey(at)adelphia.net>
Subject: DO-178B
Date: Aug 19, 2003
I'm looking for someone familiar with the documentation requirements of DO-178B to help finish up a project. If there is anyone out there that could help on a contract basis, please contact me off line. Thanks. Gary Casey glcasey(at)adelphia.net ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 19, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: DO-178B
> >I'm looking for someone familiar with the documentation requirements of >DO-178B to help finish up a project. If there is anyone out there that >could help on a contract basis, please contact me off line. Thanks. > >Gary Casey >glcasey(at)adelphia.net My condolences sir . . . if you didn't look at the morass of bureaucratic foo-foo that is the implementation of DO-178 before you launched your project, you're in for a rude awakening. DO-178 is the SINGLE greatest impediment to the advancement of aviation electronics through the use of microprocessors. I am still designing circuits for customers using dozens of discrete components as opposed to a single, $2 processor because the development costs of perhaps a few thousand dollars are dwarfed by the documentation costs running into tens of thousands. Two very innovative new products for airplanes were nearly scuttled recently not because they didn't work well, cost too much or wouldn't last . . . on the contrary, these products stood head-n-shoulders above other options in all respects. DO-178 expenses turned out to be 3 to 10 times what was expected. Just as major costs to acquire products advertised on TV carries the burden of those smiling faces who sold you the product, so it is with processor based products in aircraft. If it's a $high$ product like an all-in-one gps/comm, the gig doesn't seem so bad. But loading the same bureaucratic overhead on a $50 gee-whiz leaves most starry-eyed entrepreneurs with the glassy-eyed stare. Check with your local ACO and ask if they're aware of any software DER's in your area that are qualified to shepherd this hoard of cats through all the hoops ahead. Good luck. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 19, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: What kind of connector on LSE-EI system?
<5.0.0.25.2.20030814085912.011ec610(at)pop.central.cox.net> <5.0.0.25.2.20030815112634.012c12b8(at)pop.central.cox.net> Need some assistance from anyone having an LSE-EI system in hand. Have a builder in TX who reports that the bundle going through the firewall is terminated in a MALE connector. He also reports that this is a 9-pin connector. I've been advised by others on the List that it's a 15-pin connector. I'm getting ready to ship some LSE-EI upgrade kits to folks who asked for them and it would be really nice if I could ship them the right parts. Thanks! Bob . . . >Bob, >Your 10 slot fuse block is nicely installed under the aft cockpit seat of >the Bucker. It is mounted on a stiffened .040 2024 T-3 pan, located under >the seat, out of the rain, but accessable to anybody with a small step >ladder. In fact, one could change fuses in flight, if they don't mind not >seeing what they are doing. The only drawback is the need to be careful of >the seat belts, and not drop them on the belly of the airplane, but this >caution should always apply... You could fabricate a cover. Some builders have used threaded spacers about an inch long as "nuts" to secure the fuseblock to its mounting surface. If mounting screws come up from below and extend less than 1/2" into spacer, then the other end of spacers provide mounting holes for a cover. >I did some checking on the LSE ignition system. It sounds like we replace >the soldered male d-sub connector with a crimped on version, with removable >pins on the end that goes through the firewall, and into the female >receptacle on the hall effect sensor, which is located on the right magneto >mounting pad. Hmmm . . . another builder suggested that we were replacing a female connector. Appreciate the info . . . > Good news, I ordered the MALE pin tool, and guessed correctly >that the plug is male. This must mean that the correct tool was ordered. There's only one tool for both male and female dsub pins. >Bad news, the plug only has nine pins, not fifteen. Do you have the nine >pin d sub connector in stock? If so, I'd like to purchase one from you. It >is also very possible that I am talking about the wrong plug. Please >advise.... Let me post this to the AeroElectric List and get feeback from others who have this system in hand . . . I can provide any connectors you need. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 19, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Connectors
> >Bob, >In an earlier post you suggested the use of AMP CPC Series I >connectors. You suggested low cost tooling is available. I've found the >connectors but have not found low cost tooling. Suggestions? These use either the sheet metal pins which can be applied with B&C's BCT-1 tool or the same pins as a d-sub connector which are installed with the RCT-3 tool. Also, looks like these are rated at 13A max. I have a few circuits that are greater - pitot heat, main bus feed etc. Is it better to use the proper size wire and split to multiple contacts or use 2 smaller wires? Why would you want to run so much current through a connector? What alternator is fitted to your project that supports loads like pitot heat? You CAN parallel multiple pins in a connector by leaving generous pigtails on at least one side before joining the wires. (1) ---------18AWG------------- \ *----------- 12AWG ------- / (2) ---------18AWG------------- Make the 18AWG segments at least 1' long on one side before dropping into a butt-splice. Wouldn't hurt to do this on both sides of a high current pathway . . . >Lastly, it should be no problem to use LED's for announciator lights such >as low volts off the B&C regulator, correct? Just use an appropriate LED >and current limiting resister? See http://216.55.140.222/temp/LV_Led.jpg I know the temptation is strong to make future maintenance more "convenient" with the insertion of connectors in major bundles. If it were my airplane, maintenance would be eased with coiled-slack in bundles with the absolute minimum number of joints . . . especially those added by connectors. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 19, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: grounding
>Below is the result of your inquiry. It was submitted by >Joe Coser (coserj(at)mchsi.com) on Tuesday, August 19, 2003 at 07:48:18 > >Tuesday, August 19, 2003 > >Joe Coser > >, >Email: coserj(at)mchsi.com >Comments/Questions: Great site. >I have a question: > You talk about a single ground point location.. does this mean that > on a metal aircraft that you would run a ground wire from the device > back to the single ground location? >Thank You >Joe Coser building a SONEX I will invite you to join us on the AeroElectric List to continue this and similar discussions. It's useful to share the information with as many folks as possible. A further benefit can be realized with membership on the list. There are lots of technically capable folks on the list who can offer suggestions too. You can join at . . . http://www.matronics.com/subscribe/ Items remote from the cockpit that are not strong potential antagonists and/or victims can be grounded locally. These include position lights, strobe supplies, landing and taxi lights, and pitot heat. I'd take everything else, including battery (-) lead to the fat brass bolt and ground bus on the firewall. Thanks! Bob . . . |---------------------------------------------------| | A lie can travel half way around the world while | | the truth is till putting on its shoes . . . | | -Mark Twain- | |---------------------------------------------------| ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dan Checkoway" <dan(at)rvproject.com>
Subject: Re: What kind of connector on LSE-EI system? <5.0.0.25.2.20030814085912.011ec610(at)pop.central.cox.net>
<5.0.0.25.2.20030815112634.012c12b8(at)pop.central.cox.net>
Date: Aug 19, 2003
> Need some assistance from anyone having an LSE-EI system in hand. > Have a builder in TX who reports that the bundle going through the > firewall is terminated in a MALE connector. He also reports that > this is a 9-pin connector. I've been advised by others on the List > that it's a 15-pin connector. > > I'm getting ready to ship some LSE-EI upgrade kits to folks who asked for > them and it would be really nice if I could ship them the right parts. On my LSE Plasma II system, I used Mouser part #156-1415: http://checkoway.com/url/?s=b4d5cb28 It's a 15-pin female connector, and that particular part is made by DGS (picked it over AMP because it was cheaper). The confusion over 9-pin vs. 15-pin may be because the Hall Effect sensor (which I do not have) does take a 9-pin connector, I believe. I looked at the LSE web site for online schematics but didn't see any. Let me know if you want me to scan the paper manual schematic for you. Happy to help you out in any way I can, it's the least I can do for all the help you've given me! )_( Dan RV-7 N714D http://www.rvproject.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 19, 2003
From: Jeff Point <jpoint(at)mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: What kind of connector on LSE-EI system? <5.0.0.25.2.20030814085912.011ec610(at)pop.central.cox.net>
<5.0.0.25.2.20030815112634.012c12b8(at)pop.central.cox.net> I have the LSE Plasma II with the flywheel mounted sensor. The wire bundle from the sensor terminates in a 15 pin female D-sub connector. The other end is hard wired onto the circuit board, and does not use D-subs like the magneto-hole mounted sensor. Jeff Point Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: > >Need some assistance from anyone having an LSE-EI system in hand. >Have a builder in TX who reports that the bundle going through the >firewall is terminated in a MALE connector. He also reports that >this is a 9-pin connector. I've been advised by others on the List >that it's a 15-pin connector. > >I'm getting ready to ship some LSE-EI upgrade kits to folks who asked for >them and it would be really nice if I could ship them the right parts. > >Thanks! > > Bob . . . > > > > >>Bob, >>Your 10 slot fuse block is nicely installed under the aft cockpit seat of >>the Bucker. It is mounted on a stiffened .040 2024 T-3 pan, located under >>the seat, out of the rain, but accessable to anybody with a small step >>ladder. In fact, one could change fuses in flight, if they don't mind not >>seeing what they are doing. The only drawback is the need to be careful of >>the seat belts, and not drop them on the belly of the airplane, but this >>caution should always apply... >> >> > > You could fabricate a cover. Some builders have used threaded spacers > about an inch long as "nuts" to secure the fuseblock to its mounting > surface. If mounting screws come up from below and extend less than > 1/2" into spacer, then the other end of spacers provide mounting holes > for a cover. > > > >>I did some checking on the LSE ignition system. It sounds like we replace >>the soldered male d-sub connector with a crimped on version, with removable >>pins on the end that goes through the firewall, and into the female >>receptacle on the hall effect sensor, which is located on the right magneto >>mounting pad. >> >> > > Hmmm . . . another builder suggested that we were replacing > a female connector. Appreciate the info . . . > > > >> Good news, I ordered the MALE pin tool, and guessed correctly >>that the plug is male. This must mean that the correct tool was ordered. >> >> > > There's only one tool for both male and female dsub pins. > > > >>Bad news, the plug only has nine pins, not fifteen. Do you have the nine >>pin d sub connector in stock? If so, I'd like to purchase one from you. It >>is also very possible that I am talking about the wrong plug. Please >>advise.... >> >> > > > Let me post this to the AeroElectric List and get feeback > from others who have this system in hand . . . I can > provide any connectors you need. > > Bob . . . > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 19, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: What kind of connector on LSE-EI system?
> > > Need some assistance from anyone having an LSE-EI system in hand. > > Have a builder in TX who reports that the bundle going through the > > firewall is terminated in a MALE connector. He also reports that > > this is a 9-pin connector. I've been advised by others on the List > > that it's a 15-pin connector. > > > > I'm getting ready to ship some LSE-EI upgrade kits to folks who asked for > > them and it would be really nice if I could ship them the right parts. > >On my LSE Plasma II system, I used Mouser part #156-1415: >http://checkoway.com/url/?s=b4d5cb28 It's a 15-pin female connector, and >that particular part is made by DGS (picked it over AMP because it was >cheaper). > >The confusion over 9-pin vs. 15-pin may be because the Hall Effect sensor >(which I do not have) does take a 9-pin connector, I believe. > >I looked at the LSE web site for online schematics but didn't see any. Let >me know if you want me to scan the paper manual schematic for you. Happy to >help you out in any way I can, it's the least I can do for all the help >you've given me! That would be most useful data to have in my files. I'd appreciate it. Sooooo . . . if one plans to put the brain box on the other side of the firewall -AND- one has the magneto-drive trigger option, there are perhaps TWO d-sub connectors to remove and replace? Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "RSwanson" <rswan19(at)comcast.net>
Subject: Metcal
Date: Aug 19, 2003
Bob, Could you enlighted the Metcal ignorant among us with some recommendations for a mid priced unit. I see a new one that's called a STSS-002E. Would that be acceptable for our needs? R ________________________________________________________________________________
From: <DWENSING(at)aol.com>
Subject: Re: Details
Date: Aug 19, 2003
Please see the attached file for details. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: F1Rocket(at)comcast.net
Subject: Relay Question
Date: Aug 19, 2003
I'm trying my best to play an electrical engineer, but I'm not very good at it. I have a relay with both a positive and negative trigger connection on it. I assume that when power is applied to the relay, then the NC and C terminals are energized. After the trigger is energized with a momentary switch, the NO and C terminals are energized. Am I correct so far? If I energize the trigger a second time, does it switch back to the NC and C terminals......or......does it do nothing. What I'm trying to accomplish is to have a relay initially startup with one set of terminals energized and switch to and remain on the other set of terminals regardless of how many times the trigger is hit. Help. Randy F1Rocket ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)BowenAero.com>
Subject: Audio panel, of sorts...
Date: Aug 19, 2003
Thanks Bob. How would I determine the size for the capacitor? - Larry Bowen Larry(at)BowenAero.com http://BowenAero.com 2003 - The year of flight! > -----Original Message----- > From: Robert L. Nuckolls, III [mailto:bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net] > > > >I have 3 or 4 audio signals I need to capture somehow without a > >traditional audio panel. For example, nav radio, AOA, traffic > >detector, etc. I also have an ol' 4-place NAT intercom. > I'm wondering > >if I can run the audio out from these various devices to the > otherwise > >unused MIC pins on the intercom. As an example, passenger 3 will > >actually be AOA annunciation. Is there any reason why this wouldn't > >work? > > This might work. You want to use a capacitor to couple audio to > these inputs to keep the microphone DC power on these pins from > feeding back into or being loaded by the audio sources. Headset > audio levels are in the same ballpark as microphone levels so > I'd say the odds are in your favor. > > Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: Re: soldering iron wattage
From: John Schroeder <jschroeder(at)perigee.net>
Date: Aug 19, 2003
I followed Bob's advice and bid on a Metcal unit on ebay. He suggested buying the tips and wand new, which I did and it is one whale of a soldering machine. didn't know how much of a hazard I was with the low wattage irons, or the big Weller guns, that I had used in the past. That big tip is really awesome. Highly reommend going for ebay. John > I've purchased 110v irons at Radio Shack for under $10.00 > when I need something quick in the field. The irons on > my workbench retail for $400+ but I get them off Ebay for a whole > lot less. > > http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2551056976&category=1504 > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Rick Fogerson" <rickf(at)cableone.net>
Subject: Wiring Harness Troubles (auto pilot)
Date: Aug 19, 2003
Hi Bob and listers, I am having a tough time soldering wires to 9 and 15 pin connectors that connect an autopilot servo (located in the wing to the controller in the panel. I'm using Archer 60/40 (.062) standard rosin core solder, 22 AWG wire, and a small soldering iron I bought from B&C. I finding it very challenging to position the wire, iron, and solder to the solder cup of the connector for the time required to melt the solder. I have melted the plastic body of the connector, gotten globs of solder shorting adjacent pins, and pushed one pin down into the connector body. A real mess! Questions: 1) Is there a technique for doing this that you could explain or should I get different connectors, solder, or iron? 2) Also, the plastic parts for holding the connector and wire are about 1 1/4 inches long but I only have about 3/4 of an inch space. Are there more compact holders? Thanks for any help, Rick Fogerson RV-3 electrical Boise, ID ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 19, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Details
> >Please see the attached file for details. The Matronics list server doesn't pass along attachments of any kind to avoid overload and to avoid propagating virii . . . can you post your attachment to a public access server (your ISP usually provides 5-10 Megabytes of disk space for this kind of activity)? Bob . . . -------------------------------------------- ( Knowing about a thing is different than ) ( understanding it. One can know a lot ) ( and still understand nothing. ) ( C.F. Kettering ) -------------------------------------------- ________________________________________________________________________________
From: KITFOXZ(at)aol.com
Date: Aug 19, 2003
Subject: Re: Wiring Harness Troubles (auto pilot)
In a message dated 8/19/2003 10:00:45 PM Eastern Standard Time, rickf(at)cableone.net writes: Hi Bob and listers, I am having a tough time soldering wires to 9 and 15 pin connectors that connect an autopilot servo (located in the wing to the controller in the panel. I'm using Archer 60/40 (.062) standard rosin core solder, 22 AWG wire, and a small soldering iron I bought from B&C. I finding it very challenging to position the wire, iron, and solder to the solder cup of the connector for the time required to melt the solder. I have melted the plastic body of the connector, gotten globs of solder shorting adjacent pins, and pushed one pin down into the connector body. A real mess! Questions: 1) Is there a technique for doing this that you could explain or should I get different connectors, solder, or iron? 2) Also, the plastic parts for holding the connector and wire are about 1 1/4 inches long but I only have about 3/4 of an inch space. Are there more compact holders? Thanks for any help, Rick Fogerson RV-3 electrical Boise, ID Hello Rick, If you are visually impaired at distances less than two feet from your nose like most of us over 45, you need to work under a lighted magnifier. An iron with a tip small enough that it will fit inside the solder cups of the plug will be a help too. Be sure everything is clean and tarnish free. A pencil eraser works good to burnish the oxidation off a part to be soldered. Flush with alcohol. A little liquid flux applied to the solder cup is a big help to get the solder flowing before the heat builds up too much. Keep your iron clean and tinned. Tin the wires first and cut to length after the insulation shrinks back a bit from the tinning step. I have had good luck filling the cups about 1/2 way with solder first. If you are getting the pins so hot that you are melting the plugs' insulation and causing the pins to sink in, I bet you need to take a good look at cleanliness of all parts and be sure to have a good iron tip that is clean and tinned properly. Good luck! John P. Marzluf Columbus, Ohio Kitfox Outback (out back in the garage) ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 19, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Wiring Harness Troubles (auto pilot)
> >Hi Bob and listers, >I am having a tough time soldering wires to 9 and 15 pin connectors that >connect an autopilot servo (located in the wing to the controller in the >panel. I'm using Archer 60/40 (.062) standard rosin core solder, 22 AWG >wire, and a small soldering iron I bought from B&C. > >I finding it very challenging to position the wire, iron, and solder to >the solder cup of the connector for the time required to melt the >solder. I have melted the plastic body of the connector, gotten globs of >solder shorting adjacent pins, and pushed one pin down into the connector >body. A real mess! > >Questions: > >1) Is there a technique for doing this that you could explain or should I >get different connectors, solder, or iron? Here's a comic book I did on solder d-sub assembly. http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/dsubs/d_solder.html Sounds like your space is tight and awkward. Have you considered crimp on style connectors? >2) Also, the plastic parts for holding the connector and wire are about 1 >1/4 inches long but I only have about 3/4 of an inch space. Are there more >compact holders? I presume you're talking about the backshell. I'm not aware of any especially short ones. You could consider the Shoo-Goo approach to wire support illustrated in http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/macservo/macservo.html This technique works with either crimp or soldered pin connectors. Bob . . . ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Stanley Blanton" <stanb(at)door.net>
Subject: Audio panel, of sorts...
Date: Aug 19, 2003
Bob, How would multiple warning tones into the audio mixer on your web site best be handled? Stan Blanton - Larry Bowen Larry(at)BowenAero.com http://BowenAero.com 2003 - The year of flight! > -----Original Message----- > From: Robert L. Nuckolls, III [mailto:bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net] > > > >I have 3 or 4 audio signals I need to capture somehow without a > >traditional audio panel. For example, nav radio, AOA, traffic > >detector, etc. I also have an ol' 4-place NAT intercom. > I'm wondering > >if I can run the audio out from these various devices to the > otherwise > >unused MIC pins on the intercom. As an example, passenger 3 will > >actually be AOA annunciation. Is there any reason why this wouldn't > >work? > > This might work. You want to use a capacitor to couple audio to > these inputs to keep the microphone DC power on these pins from > feeding back into or being loaded by the audio sources. Headset > audio levels are in the same ballpark as microphone levels so > I'd say the odds are in your favor. > > Bob . . . advertising on the Matronics Forums. Share: Share photos & files with other List members. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 19, 2003
From: Charlie & Tupper England <cengland(at)netdoor.com>
Subject: Re: Wiring Harness Troubles (auto pilot)
Rick Fogerson wrote: > >Hi Bob and listers, >I am having a tough time soldering wires to 9 and 15 pin connectors that connect an autopilot servo (located in the wing to the controller in the panel. I'm using Archer 60/40 (.062) standard rosin core solder, 22 AWG wire, and a small soldering iron I bought from B&C. > >I finding it very challenging to position the wire, iron, and solder to the solder cup of the connector for the time required to melt the solder. I have melted the plastic body of the connector, gotten globs of solder shorting adjacent pins, and pushed one pin down into the connector body. A real mess! > >Questions: > >1) Is there a technique for doing this that you could explain or should I get different connectors, solder, or iron? > > >2) Also, the plastic parts for holding the connector and wire are about 1 1/4 inches long but I only have about 3/4 of an inch space. Are there more compact holders? > >Thanks for any help, >Rick Fogerson >RV-3 electrical >Boise, ID > The best advice is to practice on some scraps first. Be creative & use a couple of 6" pieces of wire lying on your work bench. Think of ways to make the stripped ends overlap each other & not move while you touch them both with your iron. How about a small pair of vise grips holding one wire several inches from the stripped end. maybe another pair of regular pliers holding the other wire, with a rubber band around the handle to transform them into a clamp? The key is to hold both items to be soldered so that they don't move when you apply the iron & solder. Use a damp kitchen sponge or cotton cloth to clean the iron's tip (wipe it quickly on the damp sponge), then lightly 'tin' the tip with solder; just enough to give you a nice shiny tip. This will give you a much more efficient heat transfer. With the freshly tinned tip, apply the tip to the joint to be soldered. Try to touch both wires if you can. After a couple of seconds, gently touch the solder to the joint (NOT the iron). When the joint is hot enough, the solder will flow into the joint smoothly. For small wires, you shouldn't need to heat the joint more than a few seconds. Practice doing this until you can do it reliably, then go back to the connectors. You can be creative in stabilizing the wires coming out of the connector by using something like RTV as a potting compound. Try a Google search for some photo tutorials on soldering. Charlie ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)BowenAero.com>
Subject: Wiring Harness Troubles (auto pilot)
Date: Aug 19, 2003
I've been thrilled with the consistant quality of the crimp pins, versus the hassle of soldering the tiny d-subs. I got all the supplies and tools from Bob's website. - Larry Bowen Larry(at)BowenAero.com http://BowenAero.com 2003 - The year of flight! > -----Original Message----- > From: Rick Fogerson [mailto:rickf(at)cableone.net] > > Hi Bob and listers, > I am having a tough time soldering wires to 9 and 15 pin > connectors that connect an autopilot servo (located in the > wing to the controller in the panel. I'm using Archer 60/40 > (.062) standard rosin core solder, 22 AWG wire, and a small > soldering iron I bought from B&C. > > I finding it very challenging to position the wire, iron, and > solder to the solder cup of the connector for the time > required to melt the solder. I have melted the plastic body > of the connector, gotten globs of solder shorting adjacent > pins, and pushed one pin down into the connector body. A real mess! ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dean Psiropoulos" <deanpsir(at)easystreet.com>
Subject: V-8 Airplane power.
Date: Aug 20, 2003
Interesting that this should come up at this point in time. I'm building an RV-6A and received a solicitation from an outfit that is supposedly going to be offering firewall forward V-8 kits for RVs (albeit at rather high prices). Personally I have some reservations as to why I think this isn't such a great idea and I'm including my response to the solicitor. If you want a REALLY STRONG PSRU, then I think the Fred Geshwender designed unit for V-8 automotive engines is THE one. It uses a HiVo silent chain like the one driving the camshaft in a pushrod V-8 and is very stout. Fred sold the rights to build this unit to a Wisconsin company I believe, you'll need to get in contact with EAA, to find out who the new owner is. Speaking of engines, I'm looking for a good source for one of the new Superior o-360 lycoming work-a-likes. I have talked with Bart Lalond at Aerosport power and was VERY impressed. That was when I lived in Oregon and I now live in Florida so I'm wondering if a shop with Aerosport's reputation can be found in the lower 48. Anyone have suggestions? Thanks. Now...the V-8 vendor for RVs is as follows: www.predatoraviation.com My response to predator aviation is as follows: Interesting Chris but I've been down this road a long time ago and: Decided against the alternative engine for many reasons. Most converted auto engines had some problems which I think were partly due to people trying to save weight by leaving off important things like the harmonic balancer, etc. Also airframes are much lighter and have different resonant frequencies than 2 ton steel cars. That results in vibration in things like alternator brackets and causes them to break (even 1/8 thick steel brackets). I commend you on doing a firewall forward package, that makes an alternate engine setup MUCH more appealing. One of the reasons I chose a Lycoming was because Van's has a firewall forward kit, cowl and motor mount available and I didn't want to spend any more time trying to make those things on my own. Then there was always getting the thing to behave once you got everything installed. Invariably I would hear of many more hours of fiddling with the installation to get it to work satisfactorily. Your setup has two major problems that I see. One is weight and the other is cost. One of the biggest reasons I wanted to do an auto engine setup was because auto engines are extremely cheap (I hated the thought of spending 20 grand on 60 year old engine technology that was basically a Volkswagen on steroids) even with a gearbox. Also auto technology is WAY WAY ahead of 60 year old Lycoming technology and overhauls are simple and cheap. I had second thoughts about doing the Lycoming a couple years ago when I was at the Northwest EAA fly-inn and saw the Subaru engine firewall forward packages being offered by NSI. It looked and sounded great and I talked to a fellow who'd been flying an RV-6 on one for a couple years and had good luck with it. Alas, the kit was 25 grand!!! I could get new Lycoming from Van's for around 20 so why spend more time and effort with something that was relatively unproven? I think that, for half of the people who by a Van's kit, they do it because it is the most bang for the buck and they don't have lots of money to spend. So.asking more money than a Van's Lycoming for your setup is shooting yourself in the foot. If you want lots of customers I would say that you'd have to drop the price down to around 15 grand. Why so low? Because an aircraft engine shop in Kamloops BC Canada (by the name of Aerosport power) will sell you a good overhauled Lycoming 0-320 for around 17 grand (and Bart is unmatched for customer service, I can't say enough good things about the guy). An RV will scoot along just fine on 160 hp, most of us who buy new from Van's get the 0-360 because we're spending a ton of money anyway and it only costs a couple thousand more to get the bigger motor). And now that Bart (and several others) are selling assembled Superior XP360s for about a grand less than a new Lycoming from Van's things are even better. Annnnnnd.. I think the Eggenfellner Subaru setup also proves this point by having sold so many kits (at a low price of 14 grand) as opposed to the NSI package (which I have not heard of that many sold at a relatively high price of 25 grand). Another problem you'll likely have (with the Van's two place aircraft) is that your engine installation is likely to weigh 40% more than a 4 Cylinder Lycoming. I know there are crazies out there who'll do anything and lots of folks love to put more hp on but I think that installation is going to make things just too nose heavy and will reduce useful load and increase stall speed. But...you may be able to sell such a thing to RV-10 builders, maybe even to me when I finish my RV-6 and start on a -10. I like the idea of the V-8 engine sound and prestige and ease of maintenance and familiarity, but, a Lycoming 0-540 flat 6 is also very smooth and also sounds like a V-8 with a cam when idling on the ground (and will also likely be purchasable for around the same money as your less expensive kit). Kudos for going to so much trouble, the 2 place RVs may be the wrong target for mass sales but the 4 place aircraft from ALL kit manufacturers should be good fodder for you. Go for it. Regards, Dean Psiropoulos RV-6A #24907 finish kit ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Dean Psiropoulos" <deanpsir(at)easystreet.com>
Subject: V-8 Airplane power
Date: Aug 20, 2003
Sorry guys, I wanted to post that email to the engines list but have had Bob's excellent advice on my mind lately. If anyone on this list has a suggestion feel free to email me. Thanks. Dean Psiropoulos RV-6A 24907 Finish kit (finally) ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Rob W M Shipley" <rob(at)robsglass.com>
Subject: Intercom as alarm annunciator
Date: Aug 19, 2003
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Audio panel, of sorts... > >I have 3 or 4 audio signals I need to capture somehow without a >traditional audio panel. For example, nav radio, AOA, traffic detector, >etc. I also have an ol' 4-place NAT intercom. I'm wondering if I can run >the audio out from these various devices to the otherwise unused MIC pins >on the intercom. As an example, passenger 3 will actually be AOA >annunciation. Is there any reason why this wouldn't work? This might work. You want to use a capacitor to couple audio to these inputs to keep the microphone DC power on these pins from feeding back into or being loaded by the audio sources. Headset audio levels are in the same ballpark as microphone levels so I'd say the odds are in your favor. Bob . . . I'm not very expert on these matters but don't most intercom give the pilots input priority? If this is so in this case the risk of missing an audio warning whenever using the pilot's mike seems likely. Rob Rob W M Shipley RV9A N919RV (res) Fuselage ________________________________________________________________________________
From: BTomm <fvalarm(at)rapidnet.net>
Subject: V-8 Airplane power.
Date: Aug 19, 2003
If you like auto power but not the weight of a V8, why not a V6 at 230HP and approx. 430lb? I looked at a nice example of this in a RV6A at Arlington. Web info is at http://northwest-aero.com/ Bevan RV7A On Tuesday, August 19, 2003 9:43 PM, Dean Psiropoulos [SMTP:deanpsir(at)easystreet.com] wrote: > > Interesting that this should come up at this point in time. I'm building an > RV-6A and received a solicitation from an outfit that is supposedly going to > be offering firewall forward V-8 kits for RVs (albeit at rather high > prices). Personally I have some reservations as to why I think this isn't > such a great idea and I'm including my response to the solicitor. If you > want a REALLY STRONG PSRU, then I think the Fred Geshwender designed unit > for V-8 automotive engines is THE one. It uses a HiVo silent chain like the > one driving the camshaft in a pushrod V-8 and is very stout. Fred sold the > rights to build this unit to a Wisconsin company I believe, you'll need to > get in contact with EAA, to find out who the new owner is. Speaking of > engines, I'm looking for a good source for one of the new Superior o-360 > lycoming work-a-likes. I have talked with Bart Lalond at Aerosport power > and was VERY impressed. That was when I lived in Oregon and I now live in > Florida so I'm wondering if a shop with Aerosport's reputation can be found > in the lower 48. Anyone have suggestions? Thanks. > > > Now...the V-8 vendor for RVs is as follows: > > www.predatoraviation.com > > > My response to predator aviation is as follows: > > > Interesting Chris but I've been down this road a long time ago and: > > > Decided against the alternative engine for many reasons. Most converted > auto engines had some problems which I think were partly due to people > trying to save weight by leaving off important things like the harmonic > balancer, etc. Also airframes are much lighter and have different resonant > frequencies than 2 ton steel cars. That results in vibration in things like > alternator brackets and causes them to break (even 1/8 thick steel > brackets). I commend you on doing a firewall forward package, that makes an > alternate engine setup MUCH more appealing. One of the reasons I chose a > Lycoming was because Van's has a firewall forward kit, cowl and motor mount > available and I didn't want to spend any more time trying to make those > things on my own. Then there was always getting the thing to behave once > you got everything installed. Invariably I would hear of many more hours of > fiddling with the installation to get it to work satisfactorily. > > > Your setup has two major problems that I see. One is weight and the other > is cost. One of the biggest reasons I wanted to do an auto engine setup was > because auto engines are extremely cheap (I hated the thought of spending 20 > grand on 60 year old engine technology that was basically a Volkswagen on > steroids) even with a gearbox. Also auto technology is WAY WAY ahead of 60 > year old Lycoming technology and overhauls are simple and cheap. I had > second thoughts about doing the Lycoming a couple years ago when I was at > the Northwest EAA fly-inn and saw the Subaru engine firewall forward > packages being offered by NSI. It looked and sounded great and I talked to > a fellow who'd been flying an RV-6 on one for a couple years and had good > luck with it. Alas, the kit was 25 grand!!! I could get new Lycoming from > Van's for around 20 so why spend more time and effort with something that > was relatively unproven? I think that, for half of the people who by a > Van's kit, they do it because it is the most bang for the buck and they > don't have lots of money to spend. So.asking more money than a Van's > Lycoming for your setup is shooting yourself in the foot. If you want lots > of customers I would say that you'd have to drop the price down to around 15 > grand. Why so low? Because an aircraft engine shop in Kamloops BC Canada > (by the name of Aerosport power) will sell you a good overhauled Lycoming > 0-320 for around 17 grand (and Bart is unmatched for customer service, I > can't say enough good things about the guy). An RV will scoot along just > fine on 160 hp, most of us who buy new from Van's get the 0-360 because > we're spending a ton of money anyway and it only costs a couple thousand > more to get the bigger motor). And now that Bart (and several others) are > selling assembled Superior XP360s for about a grand less than a new Lycoming > from Van's things are even better. Annnnnnd.. I think the Eggenfellner > Subaru setup also proves this point by having sold so many kits (at a low > price of 14 grand) as opposed to the NSI package (which I have not heard of > that many sold at a relatively high price of 25 grand). > > > Another problem you'll likely have (with the Van's two place aircraft) is > that your engine installation is likely to weigh 40% more than a 4 Cylinder > Lycoming. I know there are crazies out there who'll do anything and lots of > folks love to put more hp on but I think that installation is going to make > things just too nose heavy and will reduce useful load and increase stall > speed. But...you may be able to sell such a thing to RV-10 builders, maybe > even to me when I finish my RV-6 and start on a -10. I like the idea of the > V-8 engine sound and prestige and ease of maintenance and familiarity, but, > a Lycoming 0-540 flat 6 is also very smooth and also sounds like a V-8 with > a cam when idling on the ground (and will also likely be purchasable for > around the same money as your less expensive kit). Kudos for going to so > much trouble, the 2 place RVs may be the wrong target for mass sales but the > 4 place aircraft from ALL kit manufacturers should be good fodder for you. > Go for it. > > > Regards, > > > Dean Psiropoulos > > RV-6A #24907 finish kit > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Trampas" <tstern(at)nc.rr.com>
Subject: V-8 Airplane power.
Date: Aug 20, 2003
I would consider www.crossflow.com Trampas -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of BTomm Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: V-8 Airplane power. If you like auto power but not the weight of a V8, why not a V6 at 230HP and approx. 430lb? I looked at a nice example of this in a RV6A at Arlington. Web info is at http://northwest-aero.com/ Bevan RV7A On Tuesday, August 19, 2003 9:43 PM, Dean Psiropoulos [SMTP:deanpsir(at)easystreet.com] wrote: > > Interesting that this should come up at this point in time. I'm building an > RV-6A and received a solicitation from an outfit that is supposedly going to > be offering firewall forward V-8 kits for RVs (albeit at rather high > prices). Personally I have some reservations as to why I think this isn't > such a great idea and I'm including my response to the solicitor. If you > want a REALLY STRONG PSRU, then I think the Fred Geshwender designed unit > for V-8 automotive engines is THE one. It uses a HiVo silent chain like the > one driving the camshaft in a pushrod V-8 and is very stout. Fred sold the > rights to build this unit to a Wisconsin company I believe, you'll need to > get in contact with EAA, to find out who the new owner is. Speaking of > engines, I'm looking for a good source for one of the new Superior o-360 > lycoming work-a-likes. I have talked with Bart Lalond at Aerosport power > and was VERY impressed. That was when I lived in Oregon and I now live in > Florida so I'm wondering if a shop with Aerosport's reputation can be found > in the lower 48. Anyone have suggestions? Thanks. > > > Now...the V-8 vendor for RVs is as follows: > > www.predatoraviation.com > > > My response to predator aviation is as follows: > > > Interesting Chris but I've been down this road a long time ago and: > > > Decided against the alternative engine for many reasons. Most converted > auto engines had some problems which I think were partly due to people > trying to save weight by leaving off important things like the harmonic > balancer, etc. Also airframes are much lighter and have different resonant > frequencies than 2 ton steel cars. That results in vibration in things like > alternator brackets and causes them to break (even 1/8 thick steel > brackets). I commend you on doing a firewall forward package, that makes an > alternate engine setup MUCH more appealing. One of the reasons I chose a > Lycoming was because Van's has a firewall forward kit, cowl and motor mount > available and I didn't want to spend any more time trying to make those > things on my own. Then there was always getting the thing to behave once > you got everything installed. Invariably I would hear of many more hours of > fiddling with the installation to get it to work satisfactorily. > > > Your setup has two major problems that I see. One is weight and the other > is cost. One of the biggest reasons I wanted to do an auto engine setup was > because auto engines are extremely cheap (I hated the thought of spending 20 > grand on 60 year old engine technology that was basically a Volkswagen on > steroids) even with a gearbox. Also auto technology is WAY WAY ahead of 60 > year old Lycoming technology and overhauls are simple and cheap. I had > second thoughts about doing the Lycoming a couple years ago when I was at > the Northwest EAA fly-inn and saw the Subaru engine firewall forward > packages being offered by NSI. It looked and sounded great and I talked to > a fellow who'd been flying an RV-6 on one for a couple years and had good > luck with it. Alas, the kit was 25 grand!!! I could get new Lycoming from > Van's for around 20 so why spend more time and effort with something that > was relatively unproven? I think that, for half of the people who by a > Van's kit, they do it because it is the most bang for the buck and they > don't have lots of money to spend. So.asking more money than a Van's > Lycoming for your setup is shooting yourself in the foot. If you want lots > of customers I would say that you'd have to drop the price down to around 15 > grand. Why so low? Because an aircraft engine shop in Kamloops BC Canada > (by the name of Aerosport power) will sell you a good overhauled Lycoming > 0-320 for around 17 grand (and Bart is unmatched for customer service, I > can't say enough good things about the guy). An RV will scoot along just > fine on 160 hp, most of us who buy new from Van's get the 0-360 because > we're spending a ton of money anyway and it only costs a couple thousand > more to get the bigger motor). And now that Bart (and several others) are > selling assembled Superior XP360s for about a grand less than a new Lycoming > from Van's things are even better. Annnnnnd.. I think the Eggenfellner > Subaru setup also proves this point by having sold so many kits (at a low > price of 14 grand) as opposed to the NSI package (which I have not heard of > that many sold at a relatively high price of 25 grand). > > > Another problem you'll likely have (with the Van's two place aircraft) is > that your engine installation is likely to weigh 40% more than a 4 Cylinder > Lycoming. I know there are crazies out there who'll do anything and lots of > folks love to put more hp on but I think that installation is going to make > things just too nose heavy and will reduce useful load and increase stall > speed. But...you may be able to sell such a thing to RV-10 builders, maybe > even to me when I finish my RV-6 and start on a -10. I like the idea of the > V-8 engine sound and prestige and ease of maintenance and familiarity, but, > a Lycoming 0-540 flat 6 is also very smooth and also sounds like a V-8 with > a cam when idling on the ground (and will also likely be purchasable for > around the same money as your less expensive kit). Kudos for going to so > much trouble, the 2 place RVs may be the wrong target for mass sales but the > 4 place aircraft from ALL kit manufacturers should be good fodder for you. > Go for it. > > > Regards, > > > Dean Psiropoulos > > RV-6A #24907 finish kit > > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "William Slaughter" <willslau(at)alumni.rice.edu>
Subject: V-8 Airplane power.
Date: Aug 20, 2003
Go with Aerosport Power. I live in Houston and bought my engine from them with no problems. I don't recall the exact freight charges, but they were not a big deal. The engine arrives well mounted in a large, sturdy wooden box. William Slaughter -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dean Psiropoulos Subject: AeroElectric-List: V-8 Airplane power. --> Interesting that this should come up at this point in time. I'm building an RV-6A and received a solicitation from an outfit that is supposedly going to be offering firewall forward V-8 kits for RVs (albeit at rather high prices). Personally I have some reservations as to why I think this isn't such a great idea and I'm including my response to the solicitor. If you want a REALLY STRONG PSRU, then I think the Fred Geshwender designed unit for V-8 automotive engines is THE one. It uses a HiVo silent chain like the one driving the camshaft in a pushrod V-8 and is very stout. Fred sold the rights to build this unit to a Wisconsin company I believe, you'll need to get in contact with EAA, to find out who the new owner is. Speaking of engines, I'm looking for a good source for one of the new Superior o-360 lycoming work-a-likes. I have talked with Bart Lalond at Aerosport power and was VERY impressed. That was when I lived in Oregon and I now live in Florida so I'm wondering if a shop with Aerosport's reputation can be found in the lower 48. Anyone have suggestions? Thanks. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)BowenAero.com>
Subject: Intercom as alarm annunciator
Date: Aug 20, 2003
Rob - I haven't noticed this feature of intercoms, but maybe I wasn't paying attention. Do you know of a better alternative to capture 3-4 audio signals -- without using a traditional audio panel? Thx, - Larry Bowen Larry(at)BowenAero.com http://BowenAero.com 2003 - The year of flight! > -----Original Message----- > From: Rob W M Shipley [mailto:rob(at)robsglass.com] > >--> > > > >I have 3 or 4 audio signals I need to capture somehow without a > >traditional audio panel. For example, nav radio, AOA, traffic > >detector, etc. I also have an ol' 4-place NAT intercom. > I'm wondering > >if I can run the audio out from these various devices to the > otherwise > >unused MIC pins on the intercom. As an example, passenger 3 will > >actually be AOA annunciation. Is there any reason why this wouldn't > >work? > > This might work. You want to use a capacitor to couple audio to > these inputs to keep the microphone DC power on these pins from > feeding back into or being loaded by the audio sources. Headset > audio levels are in the same ballpark as microphone levels so > I'd say the odds are in your favor. > > Bob . . . > > I'm not very expert on these matters but don't most intercom > give the pilots input priority? If this is so in this case > the risk of missing an audio warning whenever using the > pilot's mike seems likely. > Rob Rob W M Shipley RV9A N919RV > (res) Fuselage ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 20, 2003
From: John Mireley <mireley(at)msu.edu>
Subject: Re: V-8 Airplane power.
Trampas wrote: > > I would consider www.crossflow.com > > Trampas > I wouldn't. A 350 hp Subaru conversion at $35k is a bit steep. > > If you like auto power but not the weight of a V8, why not a V6 at 230HP > > and approx. 430lb? I looked at a nice example of this in a RV6A at > Arlington. Web info is at http://northwest-aero.com/ > > Bevan > RV7A The weigth of the aluminum block LS1 v8 is close to that of V6 (iron block) used in the northwest-aero conversion and puts out 350 hp. ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 20, 2003
Subject: Re: Z-14 with two rear batteries
From: John Schroeder <jschroeder(at)perigee.net>
Dan - I'm about 3/4ths of the way on designing our Z-14 based system on the Lancair ES. I can send you a page for the main power distribution system, one for the battery compartment, one for the power panel on the firewall and one for the regulators on the firewall in PDF format. We put the ground power, both battery and crossfeed contactors in the back next to the batteries, along with the two 6 slot battery busses. They will be on a phenolic panel on the forward side of the bulkhead that separates the tail cone from the rest of the fuselage. Let me know which format. I can also send the equipment list. John Bob, > > Awhile back you posted a hand-drawn diagram showing the basic electrical > configuration for a Z-14 system with two rear-mounted batteries. The > figure shows six buses: a fuseblock near each battery in back, a ground > bus in back tied in with the panel/firewall ground bus in front, and the > main and auxiliary buses in front. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Trampas" <tstern(at)nc.rr.com>
Subject: V-8 Airplane power.
Date: Aug 20, 2003
Out of curiosity how much does an LS1 cost? Who supplies them with ECM sensors, etc? Also how much does an LS1 weigh? Thanks Trampas -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of John Mireley Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: V-8 Airplane power. Trampas wrote: > > I would consider www.crossflow.com > > Trampas > I wouldn't. A 350 hp Subaru conversion at $35k is a bit steep. > > If you like auto power but not the weight of a V8, why not a V6 at 230HP > > and approx. 430lb? I looked at a nice example of this in a RV6A at > Arlington. Web info is at http://northwest-aero.com/ > > Bevan > RV7A The weigth of the aluminum block LS1 v8 is close to that of V6 (iron block) used in the northwest-aero conversion and puts out 350 hp. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: N823ms(at)aol.com
Date: Aug 20, 2003
Subject: Re: Z-14 with two rear batteries
John: I would not mind a copy of that. Do you have any tips on pre fitting the panel. I have taken everything off the panel except the Garmin stack rack. Ed Silvanic N823MS(at)aol.com ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 20, 2003
Subject: Re: Z-14 with two rear batteries
From: John Schroeder <jschroeder(at)perigee.net>
Ed - I haven't a clue as to how to fit the panel. Our bird has been "belly up" for the past 6 weeks getting final on the body work. We hope to turn it over this week and will try to see where the panel fits. Gotta finish the electrical drawing on the cabin side of the firewall and we need to know where we want to install the two main DC busses. Will send the files - PDF or DWG format? John ________________________________________________________________________________
Date: Aug 20, 2003
Subject: V-8 Airplane power.
From: "Matt Prather" <mprather(at)spro.net>
You can buy the LS1 from a Chevy dealer. It can be purchased with all of the accessories to make it run. Here's a dealer that sells complete engines: http://www.sallee-chevrolet.com/sales.html Looks like about $6000 for a 320hp version. Probably too heavy for a BH once everything is put together, as I think the all up weight is about 500lb wet. Regards, Matt- N34RD > > Out of curiosity how much does an LS1 cost? Who supplies them with ECM > sensors, etc? Also how much does an LS1 weigh? > > Thanks > Trampas > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of John > Mireley > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: V-8 Airplane power. > > > Trampas wrote: > >> >> I would consider www.crossflow.com >> >> Trampas >> > > I wouldn't. A 350 hp Subaru conversion at $35k is a bit steep. > > >> >> If you like auto power but not the weight of a V8, why not a V6 at > 230HP >> >> and approx. 430lb? I looked at a nice example of this in a RV6A at >> Arlington. Web info is at http://northwest-aero.com/ >> >> Bevan >> RV7A > > The weigth of the aluminum block LS1 v8 is close to that > of V6 (iron block) used in the northwest-aero conversion and > puts out 350 hp. > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Trampas" <tstern(at)nc.rr.com>
Subject: V-8 Airplane power.
Date: Aug 20, 2003
Thanks that was the information I was looking for! Trampas -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Matt Prather Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: V-8 Airplane power. You can buy the LS1 from a Chevy dealer. It can be purchased with all of the accessories to make it run. Here's a dealer that sells complete engines: http://www.sallee-chevrolet.com/sales.html Looks like about $6000 for a 320hp version. Probably too heavy for a BH once everything is put together, as I think the all up weight is about 500lb wet. Regards, Matt- N34RD > > Out of curiosity how much does an LS1 cost? Who supplies them with ECM > sensors, etc? Also how much does an LS1 weigh? > > Thanks > Trampas > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of John > Mireley > To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: V-8 Airplane power. > > > Trampas wrote: > >> >> I would consider www.crossflow.com >> >> Trampas >> > > I wouldn't. A 350 hp Subaru conversion at $35k is a bit steep. > > >> >> If you like auto power but not the weight of a V8, why not a V6 at > 230HP >> >> and approx. 430lb? I looked at a nice example of this in a RV6A at >> Arlington. Web info is at http://northwest-aero.com/ >> >> Bevan >> RV7A > > The weigth of the aluminum block LS1 v8 is close to that > of V6 (iron block) used in the northwest-aero conversion and > puts out 350 hp. > > ________________________________________________________________________________
From: "Tinne maha" <tinnemaha(at)hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Battery Cable
Date: Aug 20, 2003
If I were using this material, I think I would solder the joints. Gas-tight with no metal being mashed. Agreed . . . "relaxing" of any metal under pressure is alloy dependent . . . I don't think we worry much about thousands of riveted joints in aluminum structures getting loose due to viscosity of the metal. I'll poke around the AMP application notes and position papers on aluminum conductors. If ANYONE knows all the details, it has to be AMP. Bob . . . Bob Eric, I've been following this thread with interest when possible. I'm interested 'cuz I'm building a kitfox with a 28 AH RG battery in the tail to balance a Lyc O-235 engine. The kit came with a 4 AWG copper wire to run from the battery contactor to the starter contactor (about 17 feet!) recommends grounding through the steel frame. Based on The Connection a short discussion with Tim Hedding at BC, I'vedecided to run a separate ground wire but it was tough 'cuz I'm trying everywhere to hold my weight down as much as possible. Iwould really like touse CCA wire but, regardless would like to be sure I'm using wire of sufficient size without over-doing it. I'm running a Sky-Tec Starter (pretty sure it's PM) single electronic ignition with a 28 AH RG battery. It is about 17 feet from master to starter contactor and about another4 or 5 feet to the starter. Assuming copper wire, could you please recommend a minimum wire size for both the positive negative leads? Any other comments are welcome too. Thanks, Grant Krueger ====================================================================== Get MSN 8 and help protect your children with advanced parental controls. ________________________________________________________________________________
From: <danobrien(at)cox.net>
Subject: Re: Z-14 for rear mounted batteries
Date: Aug 20, 2003
John, Thanks for the reply. I am interested in your diagrams. Both pdf and dwg would be nice. Thanks a bunch.


August 11, 2003 - August 20, 2003

AeroElectric-Archive.digest.vol-ci