Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 07:27 AM - Re: Electric fuel valves (Cy Galley)
2. 08:58 AM - Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 23 Msgs - 01/24/03 (Towertoy@aol.com)
3. 09:08 AM - Re: Electric fuel valves (Jon Finley)
4. 11:30 AM - Re: SEC: UNCLASSIFIED - STROBE LIGHTS (Boyd C. Braem)
5. 12:56 PM - Howto d-sub machined pins (Werner Schneider)
6. 02:32 PM - Re: Electric fuel valves (czechsix@juno.com)
7. 04:31 PM - Re: be nice, please (Rick D.)
8. 06:16 PM - wiring switches (Robert Dickson)
9. 07:46 PM - Re: Electric fuel valves (Rino)
10. 08:07 PM - Re: Re: be nice, please (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
Message 1
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Electric fuel valves |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Cy Galley" <cgalley@qcbc.org>
The one out of Cedar Rapids Iowa
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Rourke" <jrourke@allied-computer.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Electric fuel valves
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: John Rourke
<jrourke@allied-computer.com>
>
> Which Grand Champ Long EZ (there have been many)? Tail number? I'm
> considering putting one on myself, so I'd like to know the details.
>
> Thanks,
> -John R.
>
>
> Cy Galley wrote:
> > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Cy Galley" <cgalley@qcbc.org>
> >
> > The Grand Champ Long Ez had electric fuel valves and he crashed with gas
> > because they failed him.
> >
> > Cy Galley
> > Editor, EAA Safety Programs
> > cgalley@qcbc.org or experimenter@eaa.org
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "KeithHallsten" <KeithHallsten@quiknet.com>
> > To: <aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>
> > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Electric fuel valves
> >
> >
> >
> >>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "KeithHallsten"
> >
> > <KeithHallsten@quiknet.com>
> >
> >>I'm building a Velocity, and I'm considering adding a couple of fuel
> >
> > shut-off valves between the main strake fuel tanks and the small center
sump
> > tank. Because the fuel system is entirely in the back of the airplane,
it
> > is not very convenient to use manual or mechanical valves. So I'm
looking
> > for some reliable 3/8" electric valves.
> >
> >>The usual concept would probably be to use normally-open solenoid
valves,
> >
> > but I can imagine some (admittedly unlikely) conditions under which I
might
> > want to close them and then shut down the electrical system. Is anyone
> > aware of a source of some suitable motorized valves which would stay in
the
> > last-ordered position upon loss of electrical power?
> >
> >>Keith Hallsten
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 23 Msgs - 01/24/03 |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Towertoy@aol.com
Original message.
>>>>>A Mac friendly day/night VFR RV-6A wiring diagram (based on many of
Bob's concepts but using a key switch), is posted at <
TITLE="http://iavbbs.com/jgh/jghplane.htm>" TARGET="_blank">http://iavbbs.com/jgh/jghplane.htm>.
It was done using Appleworks and
the accompanying instrument panel layout was done in Photoshop but jpeg
files are also posted and you can view the diagram and panel without
using an Apple computer. Constructive criticism would be appreciated
before I order the remainder of the wiring materials and my wife would
like to know if the site does not work properly.
Jack
RV-6A>>>>>
Hi Jack, (can't say that at the airport)
I did not make a detailed analysis of your wiring diagram, but I did notice
a couple of things that may be improvements.
1) There is no circuit breaker for the OV module. My understanding of the
module is to short to ground the field circuit, in order to pop the breaker,
to stop the field circuit feed, which shuts down the alternator. Thus the over
voltage condition is now replaced by a failed condition that does not destroy
electronics, etc. (See figure Z-23).
2) You have the turn coordinator on the main bus. My opinion would be to
put it on the essential bus. You might need it after an alternator failure.
Unless of course you feel a turn coordinator is not as good as a turn & bank (ha
ha).
Dave Toy
In the "thinking about building" stage.
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Electric fuel valves |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Jon Finley" <Jon@finleyweb.net>
The plane was written up in Sport Aviation, had a Star Trek theme (10-forward),
and a gorgeous blue trim paint job. I heard that they repaired the plane. I
think it was OSH 98 or so.
Jon Finley
do not archive
---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: "Cy Galley" <cgalley@qcbc.org>
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Cy Galley" <cgalley@qcbc.org>
>
>The one out of Cedar Rapids Iowa
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "John Rourke" <jrourke@allied-computer.com>
>To: <aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Electric fuel valves
>
>
>> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: John Rourke
><jrourke@allied-computer.com>
>>
>> Which Grand Champ Long EZ (there have been many)? Tail number? I'm
>> considering putting one on myself, so I'd like to know the details.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> -John R.
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: SEC: UNCLASSIFIED - STROBE LIGHTS |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Boyd C. Braem" <bcbraem@comcast.net>
Dave--
On a "bubble canopy" airplane like the RV-series, a strobe or position light on
top of the VS
can create some really objectionable cockpit reflections.
Boyd.
"Francis, David CMDR" wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Francis, David CMDR" <David.Francis@defence.gov.au>
>
> Rob, when designing my external lights priority went to low noise, low drag
> and then low cost. My solution is:
>
> a. landing & taxi lights take care of the forward sector, esp in
> terminal areas.
> ***b. One A650 strobe on top of the fin provides 360 degree coverage.***
> c. One A500 tail light with strobe on the bottom of the rudder takes
> care of the aft sector.
> d. One Nova Xpac power supply sits on the shelf at the base of the fin,
> well away from antennas etc, with short high power runs to the strobes.
> e. Standard wing tip red & green lights.
>
> Regards, David Francis, VH-ZEE.
>
> I'm still debating the best way of arranging my lighting. Has anyone tried
> the combination postion/strobe/tail lights, (Whelen A600PG/PR)?
>
> Rob
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Howto d-sub machined pins |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Werner Schneider" <WernerSchneider@compuserve.com>
Hello Bob and others been there done that,
just received tonight the tool for crimping d-sub machined pins. I've
checked on the webpage, but could not find a howto. What I did, I did remove
about 1/8" of insulation, inserted the wire into the pin and crimped it,
therafter I fitted a small thin piece of heatshrink over it to make the
thing mechanical more stable.
Is this correct, or did I do something wrong?
Many thanks for your comment/feedback.
Werner
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Electric fuel valves |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: czechsix@juno.com
Mark et al,
Thanks for the note.
As co-owner or N812SP and primary designer of the electric fuel valve installation,
let me share some facts about our experience with the valves ... so far.
1. The electric fuel valve installation makes a lot of sense because, at least
in a Long-EZ, it means there is no fuel routed in the cabin.
2. Long fuel lines "could" lead to a vapor lock potential. (Notice where most
automobile electric fuel pumps are now located- in or near the tank to pressurize
the lines to the engine.)
3. Originally on N812SP, one solenoid fuel valve is used to switch between tanks
and the other was used to provide fuel shutoff. The fuel shutoff is a Powered
OFF operation (requires power for shutoff). We considered this the safest
arragement. Both fuel solenoid valves are identical (automotive types found
for switching fuel tanks in RV's). The shutoff valve has dual power wiring (2
separate wires providing power), but is single string in terms of operating switch
and valve.
4. N812SP had its engine suddenly quite on Labor Day weekend Sept. 1998. No sputter,
no coughing, just quiet. No windmiling or electric crank starting was
able to get it back. My partner, Randy Hartman, ended up short of the runway
(at Prairie Du Chien, WI) and the aircraft took on substanial damage (main gear
stripped from fuselage, nose spring strut, canopy shattered, delaminations
to wings and fuselage, propeller broken). They didn't have to worry about fuel
lines in the cabin.
Although Randy believes a mechanical/fuel valve failure "may" have caused the loss
of the engine, I think if you were to ask him today, he might be closer to
my view. Here's why-
5. Two weeks after the crash, the fuselage was set up on stands, with a runnable
prop. The insurance company wanted to see if the engine would run as a means
of deteriming possible causes for the engine failure. The engine started
up effortlessly! It was run switching tanks (by electric fuel valve) with no
problems. It was run until one tank went dry. It was also found that the electric
fuel valve used to provide fuel shutoff- Did Not Fully or Totally Shut Off
the Fuel- the engine would still run with it activated!
6. It took 2 years to rebuild/repair the aircraft. It flew again in May 2001.
We made the following changes:
Teflon coated throttle plate and venturii
Ram carburetor airbox (carb heat directly routed to carburetor rather than
thru airfilter)
New diaphram type electric fuel shutoff valve (that actually shuts the
fuel off)
Same type electric solenoid valve for fuel tank switching (as used originally)
7. N812SP now has 220+ hours on it ; approx. 140 hours with the new setup and
so far it's working great
8. This past summer (2002), Randy and a friend flew over to Prairie Du Chien again
(1st time N812SP had returned to this airport since the crash). On takeoff,
the 2nd Long-Ez loss power, declared an emergency and landed. Randy followed
behind and landed. Everything was checked over, run up. all looked normal,
they took off and returned home without incident. N812SP flew through the same
conditions 3 TIMES without a power loss!
Needless to say, we have some questions about the Prairie Du Chien locale which
leads to my explaination of what I think happened in Sept. 98.
I think it was carburetor icing. The humidity and dew point temperatures for the
day of the incident are consistent with the formation of carburetor ice. Prairie
Du Chien is located next to a large body of water- the Mississippi River.
Additionally, N812SP has run auto fuel from it's birth, which is a contributing
factor to a greater possibility of icing (autofuel chills the air more efficiently
when it vaporizes than avgas). The engine and valves worked fine during
the runup just after the incident. This past summer, a similar occurrence
of power loss (on an aircraft with an air intake setup like the original N812SP)
seems to confirm this belief. Additionally, there have been several historical
incidents of Ez's losing power in or near the vicinity of a large body
of water which have been attributed to carburetor/fuel induction icing. So,
my opinion- it's not the electric fuel valves.
PS
If you're looking for a recommendation on valves, I can give you the sources and
technical details.
Bernie Hayes
Mark E Navratil
01/27/2003 11:09 AM
To: Edward B Hayes/CedarRapids/RockwellCollins@RockwellCollins
cc:
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Electric fuel valves
Hey Bernie,
Thought you'd be amused by this. Did you ever decide with any degree of certainty
what happened to the airplane that day?
--MN
Time: 07:36:15 PM PST US
From: "Cy Galley" <cgalley@qcbc.org>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Electric fuel valves
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Cy Galley" <cgalley@qcbc.org>
The Grand Champ Long Ez had electric fuel valves and he crashed with gas
because they failed him.
Cy Galley
Editor, EAA Safety Programs
cgalley@qcbc.org or experimenter@eaa.org
----- Original Message -----
From: "KeithHallsten" <KeithHallsten@quiknet.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Electric fuel valves
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "KeithHallsten"
<KeithHallsten@quiknet.com>
>
> I'm building a Velocity, and I'm considering adding a couple of fuel
shut-off valves between the main strake fuel tanks and the small center sump
tank. Because the fuel system is entirely in the back of the airplane, it
is not very convenient to use manual or mechanical valves. So I'm looking
for some reliable 3/8" electric valves.
>
> The usual concept would probably be to use normally-open solenoid valves,
but I can imagine some (admittedly unlikely) conditions under which I might
want to close them and then shut down the electrical system. Is anyone
aware of a source of some suitable motorized valves which would stay in the
last-ordered position upon loss of electrical power?
>
> Keith Hallsten
>
>
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: be nice, please |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Rick D." <rsdec1@msn.com>
What the heck, we are now getting health and academic reports from all
over, why not some discussion about something that is at least an electrical
component in an airplane. God, we have had all kinds of topics here. At one
point some non-aircraft related software topics dominated days of the list.
Arrogance? GO AHEAD, MAKE MY DAY, SHOW ME WHERE I"M WRONG! Wow, is that
genuine arrogance or what? I could point out hundreds of mistakes made here
on this site and related literature but I don't feel as though I need to rub
anyone's nose in it. Mistakes are made by EVERYONE. This list is frequented
by some of the most arrogant, pompous, know-it-all individuals that I have
ever had the displeasure of reading. It seems as though someone is always
looking for an argument and/or a fight at this list. Simple suggestions or
opinions are met with arrogant, discourteous responses because they have not
been supported and backed up by scienticific fact. Opinions offered by some
individuals here are offered as gospel and to disagree with them or to offer
alternatives only opens one up to more arrogant responses. One only needs to
go back and read some of the past posts to verify this.
Fortunatly, there are still some intelligent, courteous, non-arrogant
and genuine opinions that people such as "Old Bob" can contribute.
And, N919RV, just who DO you think is responsible for the mentioned
pilot differences noted by "Old Bob"? Never mind I don't want your OPINION
unless you can back it up with hard data. I don't think Denny was arrogant
or rude at all, he simply asks a question. He did not state his opinion that
it was "old Bob's" fault. You interpreted Denny's question for him. If Denny
wanted to say he thought it was Bob's fault, he probably would have said
just that.
How about some discussion about some of the solid state gyro's from people
like the Icarus/IPAQ. Will these replace the dreaded T/C and AI?
Lighten up yourself N919RV,
see ya later, ha, ha, ha,
Subject: Re: Be nice!
From: John Schroeder (jschroeder@perigee.net)
Date: Sat Jan 25 - 8:52 PM
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: John Schroeder
<jschroeder@perigee.net>
Folks -
It's time to retire this totally exhausted and heavily flogged subject of TB
vs
TC. Shouldn't have been a subject on this particular forum at all.
Peace
John Schroeder
Do not archive!
1/25/2003 7:28:02 PM, "Rob W M Shipley" <Rob@RobsGlass.com> wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Rob W M Shipley"
<Rob@RobsGlass.com>
>
>Dennis O'Connor wrote to "Old Bob", saying-
>"If your students learning on a TC are not as good as your students who
learned
on a TB, who's fault is that?
>Denny"
>Clearly in your opinion it's his and you aren't entertaining any
possibility
you are mistaken about this. Even if true this is an arrogant, rude and a
completely unnecessary way to treat someone who tries hard to help other
pilots.
We all need to support each and discuss our flying constructively.
>Lighten up Denny. You can give your view and even correct the errors of
others
without being derogatory about their abilities.
>Rob
>Rob W M Shipley
>RV9A N919RV Fuselage.
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert Dickson" <robert@thenews-journal.com>
I'm wiring the toggle switches for my RV-6A and have a question about
whether I'm doing so "acceptably." I'm using switches from B&C with fast-on
connections, and have a row of 14 switches along the bottom left of my
panel.
I've secured the main bundle of wires running to these switches with adel
clamps along the bottom of the bulkhead behind the panel. This makes the
distance from where the wires leave the bundle to the switch connections at
about 6", maybe a little less.
I'm planning on tying the wires in smaller bundles between the clamps and
the switches, but what I really want to know is whether it's ok to have this
kind of setup behind my switches.
I could, with some considerable effort, re-route the main bundle closer to
the rear of the panel, but it would mean somehow actually clamping that
bundle to the panel itself. For removability reasons I'd much prefer not to
do this.
It seems like I'm always thinking about something like this after I've
started do it another way. The way I've got the switches wired now really
looks fine to me just the way they are, but I thought I ought to ask. Just
another reason (besides having to learn *everything*) I'm so darned slow at
building this thing.
I *know* you folks have an opinion.
TIA
Robert Dickson
RV-6A electrical
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Electric fuel valves |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Rino <lacombr@nbnet.nb.ca>
.....BIG SNIP ...
> 8. This past summer (2002), Randy and a friend flew over to Prairie Du Chien
again (1st time N812SP had returned to this airport since the crash). On takeoff,
the 2nd Long-Ez loss power, declared an emergency and landed. Randy followed
behind and landed. Everything was checked over, run up. all looked normal,
they took off and returned home without incident. N812SP flew through the
same conditions 3 TIMES without a power loss!
>
> Needless to say, we have some questions about the Prairie Du Chien locale which
leads to my explaination of what I think happened in Sept. 98.
>
> I think it was carburetor icing. The humidity and dew point temperatures for
the day of the incident are consistent with the formation of carburetor ice.
Prairie Du Chien is located next to a large body of water- the Mississippi River.
Additionally, N812SP has run auto fuel from it's birth, which is a contributing
factor to a greater possibility of icing (autofuel chills the air more
efficiently when it vaporizes than avgas). The engine and valves worked fine
during the runup just after the incident. This past summer, a similar occurrence
of power loss (on an aircraft with an air intake setup like the original
N812SP) seems to confirm this belief. Additionally, there have been several historical
incidents of Ez's losing power in or near the vicinity of a large body
of water which have been attributed to carburetor/fuel induction icing. So,
my opinion- it's not the electric fuel valves.
>
> PS
> If you're looking for a recommendation on valves, I can give you the sources
and technical details.
>
> Bernie Hayes
.....BIG SNIP ...
Very informative description
I know some aircrafts that have been flying for years with similar
electric valves -- no problems
I have electric valves on my Glass Goose
About your explanation of the carb icing problem.
It seems that the Long-Ez is more sensitive to that problem
Is the carb intake situated above the wing thus in a lower pressure area
Lower pressure areas around the aircraft should be a bit colder in
flight because of the de-presurization effect and accentuate the carb
icing problem.
Just a theory
Rino
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: be nice, please |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 07:30 PM 1/27/2003 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Rick D." <rsdec1@msn.com>
>
> What the heck, we are now getting health and academic reports from all
>over, why not some discussion about something that is at least an electrical
>component in an airplane. God, we have had all kinds of topics here. At one
>point some non-aircraft related software topics dominated days of the list.
> Arrogance? GO AHEAD, MAKE MY DAY, SHOW ME WHERE I"M WRONG! Wow, is that
>genuine arrogance or what?
If you understood the meaning of the statement, you would
know that it is a simple and honest request to be called on
errors of fact or reasoning. It is incumbent upon us all as
teachers AND students to share simple ideas of fact and to
work together to assemble what we know into elegant designs.
> I could point out hundreds of mistakes made here
>on this site and related literature but I don't feel as though I need to rub
>anyone's nose in it. Mistakes are made by EVERYONE. This list is frequented
>by some of the most arrogant, pompous, know-it-all individuals that I have
>ever had the displeasure of reading. It seems as though someone is always
>looking for an argument and/or a fight at this list. Simple suggestions or
>opinions are met with arrogant, discourteous responses because they have not
>been supported and backed up by scienticific fact.
. . . but sir, this is what separates propaganda from useful
understanding of how it works is no more a "teacher" than
is a tape playing in a VCR. It is unfortunate that many of
our fellow citizens who call themselves teachers are simply
propagandists. If we are interested in learning, then EVERY
of the supporting simple-ideas.
>Opinions offered by some
>individuals here are offered as gospel and to disagree with them or to offer
>alternatives only opens one up to more arrogant responses. One only needs to
>go back and read some of the past posts to verify this.
Gently, gently my friend. I'd like to believe that the
purpose of discourse here on the list is not to persuade
ANYONE to ANY particular idea. I believe it is our responsibility
to be good students . . . to demand that any idea be explained
in a way that proves it to be sound. By so doing, we all
grow in our ability to be good teachers as well.
Fortunatly, there are still some intelligent, courteous, non-arrogant
>and genuine opinions that people such as "Old Bob" can contribute.
> And, N919RV, just who DO you think is responsible for the mentioned
>pilot differences noted by "Old Bob"? Never mind I don't want your OPINION
>unless you can back it up with hard data. I don't think Denny was arrogant
>or rude at all, he simply asks a question. He did not state his opinion that
>it was "old Bob's" fault. You interpreted Denny's question for him. If Denny
>wanted to say he thought it was Bob's fault, he probably would have said
>just that.
>
>How about some discussion about some of the solid state gyro's from people
>like the Icarus/IPAQ. Will these replace the dreaded T/C and AI?
Sure . . . I've got some ideas that suggest that even these
time-honored methods for keeping airplanes upright in clouds
may have outlived their usefulness. When the time comes to
offer them up, I hope they will be discussed here and elsewhere
with a single goal . . . find out if and where they are wrong and
either fix them or discard them. The important thing is that good ideas
are held up for the benefit of anyone who chooses to take
advantage of them . . . bad ideas are discarded with good
explanations as to why. Further, even if the ideas
are sound, whether or not anyone chooses to USE them is
completely irrelevant . . . if you walk into a hardware
store, there are thousands of choices to make in terms
of what's there to purchase. However, when you walk
out of a GOOD hardware store store, you carry perhaps
a handful of solutions which you sought to acquire by
going there in the first place.
I would hope that this list is a store-of-ideas from which
one may pick and choose to support the task of building
a modern, year 2003 design. I have often advised folks
NOT to accept a single idea from the AeroElectric Connection
unless they understand it and are comfortable with it.
One is better off with a 1960's design for an electrical
system as the devil they know than to blindly accept
a design they don't understand.
But most important, if any idea is found to be faulty
or depicted with errors, I am most pleased to have it
brought to my attention, hence the request, "Go ahead,
make my day, show me where I'm wrong." When I respond
to someone's statement with the question, "Why would
you do that?" it is because (1) I want to know if
my own understanding is flawed and/or (2) if the
person has good reasons which they understand -or-
are simply victim to some propaganda ridden hangar-tale.
It IS difficult to judge the spirit of an offering
when all you see in front of you are the results
of keystokes . . . this is why face-to-face
conversation ALWAYS produces the best student/teacher
relationships. Shortcomings of our printed words
not withstanding, the value of being able to share
via the list-server technology is obvious.
I am reminded of a story circulated around the 'net
about a clerk in a bookstore who is asked by
a customer, "who is that ugly woman over there?"
The question is asked much too loudly and the clerk
is embarrassed. When the woman comes to the counter
later to pay for her books, the clerk apologizes
for the customer's rude remarks. Eleanor
Roosevelt responds by saying, "Don't worry about
it. That man does not have my permission to insult
me."
If we give nobody permission to insult us, then
we can concentrate on the task of seeing what
Bob . . .
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|