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 . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Bruce Uvanni <buvanni(at)us.ibm.com> |
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
________________________________________________________________________________
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> |
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 |
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.
________________________________________________________________________________
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
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
>
>
>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 |
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
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
>
>
>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 . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
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 . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
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> |
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
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | Kevin Horton <khorto1537(at)rogers.com> |
>
>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 |
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
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
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.
________________________________________________________________________________
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 |
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 . . .
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
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 . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
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 . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
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 |
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
________________________________________________________________________________
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 . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
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 . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
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 |
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 |
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 |
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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________________________________________________________________________________
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 |
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 |
| 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> |
"
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 |
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
________________________________________________________________________________
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 . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
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 |
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
---
________________________________________________________________________________
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 . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
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 )
--------------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
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? |
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 . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
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 )
--------------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
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
>
>
> _-
> _-
> _-
> _-
> ======================================================================
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
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
________________________________________________________________________________
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
>
>
> _-
> _-
> _-
> _-
> ======================================================================
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
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
________________________________________________________________________________
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
________________________________________________________________________________
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
________________________________________________________________________________
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. |
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 |
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 |
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
________________________________________________________________________________
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 . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
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
________________________________________________________________________________
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 |
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> |
>> 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
________________________________________________________________________________
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
________________________________________________________________________________
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 |
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
________________________________________________________________________________
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 . . . |
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,
________________________________________________________________________________
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 . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
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)
>
>
> _-
> _-
> _-
> _-
> ======================================================================
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
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 . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
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 . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
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 |
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
________________________________________________________________________________
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
________________________________________________________________________________
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 |
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 |
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)
________________________________________________________________________________
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. . .
________________________________________________________________________________
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 |
>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 |
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
________________________________________________________________________________
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
________________________________________________________________________________
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 . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
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 . . .
>
>
> _-
> _-
> _-
> _-
> ======================================================================
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
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 . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
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 . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
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 |
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 |
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
________________________________________________________________________________
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> |
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 |
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> |
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 |
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 |
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 |
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 |
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 |
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
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
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 |
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
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
>
>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 . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
>
>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- |
|---------------------------------------------------|
________________________________________________________________________________
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> |
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
======================================================================
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
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: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
>
>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> |
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 |
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: | 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 |
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.
________________________________________________________________________________
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 |
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> |
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> |
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 |
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> |
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
________________________________________________________________________________
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
________________________________________________________________________________
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 )
--------------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | richard(at)riley.net |
>- 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.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
>
>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 . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
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 . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
>
>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 |
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 |
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 |
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
________________________________________________________________________________
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 |
>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 |
From: | "David.vonLinsowe" <David.vonLinsowe(at)delphi.com> |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________________________________________________________________________________
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 |
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> |
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: | "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 )
--------------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
>
> > >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 |
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.
________________________________________________________________________________
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 |
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 |
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 )
--------------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
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 |
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
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
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.
________________________________________________________________________________
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 |
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 |
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
________________________________________________________________________________
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 |
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: | "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 |
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 |
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
________________________________________________________________________________
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
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
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?? |
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 |
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 |
* 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 |
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 |
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 |
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
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
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 . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
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 . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
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
________________________________________________________________________________
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 |
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
________________________________________________________________________________
Subject: | Re: Garmin/UPS merger |
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 |
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> |
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> |
>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?? |
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?? |
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
________________________________________________________________________________
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> |
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... "
________________________________________________________________________________
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 )
--------------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | drew.schumann(at)us.army.mil |
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 |
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> |
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
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
>
>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 . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
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> |
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
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
>
>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 . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
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 . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
>
>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 . . .
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
>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>
> 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
________________________________________________________________________________
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 . . .
>
>
>
>
________________________________________________________________________________
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> |
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> |
Please see the attached file for details.
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | F1Rocket(at)comcast.net |
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... |
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> |
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) |
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
________________________________________________________________________________
From: | "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls(at)cox.net> |
>
>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 )
--------------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________________
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)
________________________________________________________________________________
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... |
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.
________________________________________________________________________________
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) |
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. |
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 |
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 |
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. |
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. |
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. |
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 |
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
________________________________________________________________________________
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.
________________________________________________________________________________
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. |
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.
________________________________________________________________________________
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
________________________________________________________________________________
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
________________________________________________________________________________
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. |
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 |
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 |
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