July 08, 2003 - June 20, 2004
I don't pretend to be a RF guru, but your problem sounds to me to be caused by
either a shorted antenna cable or a bad connection at the radio end of the RF
cable. I suggest you check the RF power output with a Watt-meter and/or having
the cable checked wit a SWR-meter. Borrow both instruments from the local radio
amateur league or the avionics shop.
Villi H. Seemann
Sen. Eng. BSEE
Phone (+45) 3333 2101
Cell ph. (+45) 2220 7690
FAX (+45) 3333 1130
|From: ||"Leo J. Corbalis" <leocorbalis(at)sbcglobal.net>|
Examine your schematics. Replace any or all switches in the microphone
circuit. If you have a push to talk relay, clean the contacts, if that works
replace the relay as the trouble will come back soon. This is the easy end
|Subject: ||Re: Radio transmission problem...help!|
Please see the attached zip file for details.
|From: ||"Bill Reed" <bill(at)ncf.ca>|
Thank you very much for the Gray code translations table. Now I can
check my encoder to ensure it has been calibrated.
Have a good day,
|Subject: ||Re: Grey code for altitude encoders|
Hello Fellow Builders, I am interested in knowing the definitive word on
whether or not an ELT installed in a general aviation airplane (type certificated
or amateur built) must be able to be controlled by the pilot while in flight.
By controlled I mean able to turn OFF or ON, or from an UNARMED state to an
ARMED state. Further, must the pilot be automatically informed (by lights or
other means) by the ELT when it is transmitting?
There seems to be a general presumption that there is a requirement for in
flight control capability and some ELT's being sold have remote cable extensions
that permit this control. Some also provide a warning light when transmitting.
But there is nothing in FAR Sec. 91.207 that states those requirements. There
is nothing in TSO-C91a that states those requirements, but this TSO like so
many others is a very superficial document and the meat of the TSO's
requirements are found in the references to the TSO.
TSO-91a references Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics (RTCA) Document
No. DO-183, "Minimum Operational Performance Standards for Emergency Locator
Transmitters; Automatic Fixed - ELT (AF), Automatic Portable - ELT (AP),
Automatic Deployable - ELT (AD), Survival - ELT (S); Operating on 121.5 and 243.0
Megahertz," Section 2.0, dated May 13, 1983, but I don't have access to this
I am interested in people's experience and opinions on this subject, but
please don't make any definitive pronouncements unless you also provide specific
I am currently flying a type certificated Diamond Aircraft DA20-C1 composite
airplane that has an EBC (Emergency Beacon Corp.) EBC 502 ELT installed.**
This ELT is mounted back in the baggage compartment behind the right seat
occupant's right shoulder. It is within view of the pilot, but beyond his reach
during flight. It has no remote control arrangement of any kind or any warning
light when activated. It does have a separate battery that is supposed to provide
power to an audible warning when the ELT is transmitting, but I don't know if
this audible warning can be heard over the ambient cockpit noise and through
headset sound protection.
If this arrangement is legal / acceptable I don't see why one would need to
install the remote control / warning light capability that comes with an ELT
like the ACK ELT-01 in their amateur built experimental aircraft unless there is
some requirement that I am not aware of.
Can anybody clear this up? Many thanks.
'OC' Baker, Builder of KIS TR-1 #116 4/14/97 - ?/?/?
PS: This ELT has one puny little thin vertical wire antenna sticking up out
of the top of it. No fancy coil in the antenna wire, no ground plane of any
kind. Makes one wonder about all the fuss about installing radiating strips of
metal foil in order to provide a ground plane as is commonly suggested for ELT
|Subject: ||ELT Control Requirements|
I have installed this Garmin GNC300XL and everything is working but there is a
slight background noise which I don't know if there should be total silence with
no transmission or not. The slight white noise is coming from the radio and
not the Flightcom intercom. It is not as loud as the unsquelched position,
cannot be adjusted by the noise pot., squelch pot. It almost sounds as if you
are monitoring a frequency at about 1/4 volume. Turning the volume down all
the way does not eliminate this noise. Turning the radio off does eliminate the
noise. Any suggestions?
|From: ||"Dave Ford" <dford(at)michweb.net>|
|From: ||"Dennis O'Connor" <doconnor(at)chartermi.net>|
Could be a ground loop in your audio panel, or could be a noisy audio amp
stage in the Garmin... I can't tell from your description... Did you get
the radio from a local source? Can you pull it out of the rack and take it
to the dealer/whatever and have him power it up and see if it is noisy on
the bench? Does anyone you know have a Garmin in their plane where you can
plug your unit into their rack and see if it is noisy there? Or, is there a
plug on the back of the Garmin where you can put your headset without going
through the airplanes audio panel?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave Ford" <dford(at)michweb.net>
Subject: Avionics-List: Garmin GNC300XL
> I have installed this Garmin GNC300XL and everything is working but there
is a slight background noise which I don't know if there should be total
silence with no transmission or not. The slight white noise is coming from
the radio and not the Flightcom intercom. It is not as loud as the
unsquelched position, cannot be adjusted by the noise pot., squelch pot. It
almost sounds as if you are monitoring a frequency at about 1/4 volume.
Turning the volume down all the way does not eliminate this noise. Turning
the radio off does eliminate the noise. Any suggestions?
> Dave Ford
|Subject: ||Re: Garmin GNC300XL|
Good morning friends!
I am new to this list and own a Pulsar kitplane. I a planed redesign of the cockpit
panel I want to use modern electronic EFIS and EIS instead of the conventional
clock type instruments. Of course at affordable prices. Any suggsstions
regarding productsources is highly appreciated
|From: ||"Herbert Schmaderer" <herbert.schmaderer(at)aon.at>|
> Good morning friends!
> I am new to this list and own a Pulsar kitplane. I a planed redesign of the
> cockpit panel I want to use modern electronic EFIS and EIS instead of the
> conventional clock type instruments. Of course at affordable prices. Any
> suggsstions regarding productsources is highly appreciated
I can thoroughly recommend the Dynon D-10 EFIS ( I have one). 10 Instruments
in one, Lithium internal emergency Battery (2 Hours).
NO GPS or Engine management for a while yet but at around $2150 US it's a
good deal. That price includes Battery and Flush Mount for Panel (Not
essential as it fits in conventional size 3.125" hole.
Website at: http://www.dynondevelopment.com
There are many others. All seem very good and a wide range of prices.
Grand Rapids have a great Unit coming out with all kinds of features for
AHRS, GPs and Engine.
Blue Mountain another option.
STERN Technologies do a nice Engine System.
Hope that gets you started!
+44 7808 402404
|From: ||Gerry Holland <gnholland(at)onetel.com>|
I'm using the Dynon D10 and Grand Rapids EIS in my panel. I'm well into
the wiring at this point and it should be powered up in the near future.
So far I'm happy with both. However, if I had to do it again, I would
probably go with the ACS engine monitor
2003 - The year of flight!
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Herbert Schmaderer [mailto:herbert.schmaderer(at)aon.at]
> Sent: Sunday, August 03, 2003 5:47 AM
> To: avionics-list(at)matronics.com
> Subject: Avionics-List: EFIS panel
> Good morning friends!
> I am new to this list and own a Pulsar kitplane. I a planed
> redesign of the cockpit panel I want to use modern electronic
> EFIS and EIS instead of the conventional clock type
> instruments. Of course at affordable prices. Any suggsstions
> regarding productsources is highly appreciated Herbert OE-CHS
> Matronics Forums.
> List members.
|From: ||"Larry Bowen" <Larry(at)bowenaero.com>|
Looking for installation manual or pinout information for an Eventide Argus
3000 installed with an Arnav FMS5000
|Subject: ||Argus 3000 install manual|
|From: ||"iflyaa5" <iflyaa5(at)comcast.net>|
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
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!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Barnhart, Larry" <Larry.Barnhart(at)aopa.org>
Subject: Garmin/UPS merger
> AOPA doe snot have a position on the merger of Garmin and UPS. As I am
> 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
> product improvement as long as cost is controlled and the products are
> available at reasonable costs.
> Thank you.
> 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 o
|Subject: ||Re: Garmin/UPS merger|