Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 08:44 AM - Re: Radiated ignition noise? Maybe not. ()
2. 08:51 AM - Re: Grounding (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
3. 09:34 AM - Battery Info (Eric M. Jones)
4. 09:41 AM - Re: System reliability (was: RV-List: Dynon Shipped) (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
5. 10:03 AM - Re: Panel Layout -- IFR requirements? (Charlie & Tupper England)
6. 10:14 AM - Re: Battery Info (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
7. 10:26 AM - Re: Alternator (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
8. 11:09 AM - Starter question (David Teter truetechsyscom)
9. 11:29 AM - Re: Panel Layout -- IFR requirements? (Dennis O'Connor)
10. 11:39 AM - Re: Starter question (Dennis O'Connor)
11. 12:06 PM - Re: Starter question (RVEIGHTA@aol.com)
12. 12:13 PM - Re: Panel Layout -- IFR requirements? (BUCK AND GLORIA BUCHANAN)
13. 12:18 PM - Re: Alternator (Tom Reading)
14. 12:28 PM - Re: Radiated ignition noise? Maybe not. (Duncan McBride)
15. 12:42 PM - OT: Source for Dynamic Prop Balancer? (Jon Finley)
16. 01:10 PM - Panel layout - request for comments (brucem@olypen.com)
17. 01:26 PM - Re: Panel layout - request for comments (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
18. 01:29 PM - Re: Starter question (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
19. 01:42 PM - Re: Panel Layout -- IFR requirements? (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
20. 01:45 PM - RG58 Coax article I promised (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
21. 01:57 PM - Re: Starter question (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
22. 02:00 PM - Re: Starter question (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
23. 02:14 PM - Re: Alternator (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
24. 02:19 PM - Re: Ground Loops (Van Caulart)
25. 02:27 PM - Re: OV Module question for Bob (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
26. 02:29 PM - Re: Panel Layout -- IFR requirements? (BobsV35B@aol.com)
27. 04:13 PM - One of only 158 (Rob Housman)
28. 05:04 PM - Re: Panel Layout -- IFR requirements? (BUCK AND GLORIA BUCHANAN)
29. 05:10 PM - Re: Panel Layout -- IFR requirements? (BobsV35B@aol.com)
30. 05:13 PM - OT: Source for Dynamic Prop Balancer? (Eric M. Jones)
31. 05:29 PM - Re: Panel Layout -- IFR requirements? (Kevin Horton)
32. 05:36 PM - Re: True North, was: -- IFR requirements? (BobsV35B@aol.com)
33. 06:12 PM - Re: Panel Layout -- IFR requirements? (Finn Lassen)
34. 06:23 PM - Six years experience with Sky Tec Starter. (Denis Walsh)
35. 06:39 PM - Re: Track labels up north? (BobsV35B@aol.com)
36. 06:52 PM - Re: Starter question (Cy Galley)
37. 07:32 PM - Re: Panel Layout -- IFR requirements? (Charlie & Tupper England)
38. 07:36 PM - Re: Panel Layout -- IFR requirements? (Pat Hatch)
39. 08:05 PM - Re: Six years experience with Sky Tec (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
40. 08:12 PM - Re: Starter question (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
41. 08:20 PM - Re: Six years experience with Sky Tec Starter. (David Swartzendruber)
42. 09:28 PM - Re: Six years experience with Sky Tec Starter. (Denis Walsh)
43. 09:39 PM - Re: Six years experience with Sky Tec Starter. (Denis Walsh)
44. 09:45 PM - Re: OV Module question for Bob (Dave Grosvenor)
Message 1
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Radiated ignition noise? Maybe not. |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: <racker@rmci.net>
This helped cure my prop/wind noise problems on and old DC H10-30:
http://www.oregonaero.com/p5657_2001.html#installmic
Only $10, but Ed A. did it for considerably cheaper <g...see archives>.
Rob Acker (RV-6 flying)
do not archive
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Duncan McBride"
> <duncanmcbride@comcast.net>
>
> It may be that all this time I've just been picking up a really loud
> exhaust and prop noise coming over my shoulder, and the intercom just
> didn't amplify it as well as the radio. That would be consistent with
> the fact that I would get the same noise on the Microair intercom when
> it was hooked up.
>
> Now I'm wondering if a different microphone for high noise environments
> is the answer.
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 01:42 AM 8/10/2003 -0400, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: TimRhod@aol.com
>
>Thanks I found the updated drawing but the question is why? Im trying to
>learn
A battery terminal is routinely de-mated and re-mated for
maintenance. It's better practice to make up your system
grounds one-time for gas-tight longevity . . . the panel
ground bus has to exist for other system considerations
and is closer to the panel than the battery is. Using
it as a common tie point for a ground as it travels
forward to the battery provides the lowest loop impedance
(ALL major grounds are 2AWG) and minimizes need to disturb
perfectly good connections after they're made up for
final assembly.
Bob . . .
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones@charter.net>
For those who use 9-volt batteries in their intercoms, see the difference in batteries
at:
http://www.zbattery.com/zbattery/batteryinfo.html#
Regards,
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge MA 01550-2705
Phone (508) 764-2072
Email: emjones@charter.net
"Nothing is too wonderful to be true."
- James Clerk Maxwell, discoverer of electromagnetism
"Too much of a good thing can be wonderful."
- Mae West, discoverer of personal magnetism
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: System reliability (was: RV-List: Dynon Shipped) |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 10:28 PM 8/9/2003 -0500, you wrote:
> >
> >>Uhhh, has anyone else had this thought: sounds like an awful lot of
> >>people are building IFR RV's out there with all these Dynons being
> >>ordered. This is a good thing, if true.
> >>
> > Frankly that is the last place I would put one, in an IFR RV.
> > That is a bad thing IMO if true.
> >
> >
>
>I don't know much about Dynon's system. However, I do know a lot about
>component design and system design. There are a lot of dead guys behind
>the evolution of many designs in aviation, airframes and systems. One
>does need to be quite humble to where the certified industry has evolved
>to over the years. It is very easy to chuck rocks at their "antiquated"
>methodology, and jump to new stuff. No problem with VFR, but altogether
>different for IFR.
>
>That being said, I am certainly not saying we should not use new
>technology. I only caution those who do make leaps of technology to be
>very, very aware of how small changes to a design, system, etc., usually
>have unforeseen consequences. These unforeseen consequences can be
>nasty, and I've never seen a design change that didn't have surprises.
>It is quite easy to point to accidents caused by mechanical gyro
>failures and conclude we just need to replace them with something else.
>Keep in mind, in doing this "analysis", that the area under the
>cumulative time in use of vacuum gyros combined with electric TC/TB (for
>example) is huge, while the total time the newcomers (Dynon) have is
>quite limited, probably one millionth as much time.
>
>Something to think about - the temptation to believe that a design
>change will be an overall improvement is overwhelming, but experience
>tells otherwise. Systems like Dynon's are clearly where the future is,
>but expect turbulence and dead guys along the way.
>
>Alex Peterson
>Maple Grove, MN
>RV6-A N66AP 337 hours
>www.usfamily.net/web/alexpeterson
This is yet another, perhaps more compelling reason for one
to conduct and satisfy the FMEA (failure mode effects analysis)
I described earlier on the AeroElectric-List. This same train
of thought supports the discussion we had last week on knock
sensors and choosing a system upon which you and folks you
value will place a degree of trust.
See why arguments for breakers versus fuses are shallow
to the extreme? In some systems, (especially those with
microcircuits and software) there can be thousands of
potential failure points that have nothing to do with
whether or not a breaker/fuse opens or does not open.
By conducting the FMEA and having others review it with
you, you can sort ALL potential failures into two piles
(1) "@#$!@#!!, is that thing broke again! I'm getting
tired of replacing it. I think I'll upgrade to the
high dollar part." and (2) "My momma told me there
might be days like this. Hope I live to tell my
grandchildren about it?"
When a failure falls into pile (2), you have two choices
there as well: (1) never depend on that device as
a source hangar tales fodder . . . like stay out of
clouds even though you do have a full-up panel of gyros
and one vacuum pump or (2) have a truly reliable back-
up for the thing (e.g. adding a third, spill proof
gyro adds no reliability if it's power source is
common to the rest of the gyros).
When you bolt that all-in-one gee-whiz display to your
airplane, consider that it contains thousands of
transistors, an LCD screen that requires an oscillator
to stay alive and keep the crystals shook up, etc. etc.
Ten years and 1000 systems from now, these products may
indeed amass a service record that rivals a B&C L40
alternator . . . or they may not. Are you offering your
airplane and cargo as a "research" tool for the
folks selling the product?
I've had builders worry a lot about landing gear
extension-retraction systems. Weight, dollars and
parts-count driven reliability are sacrificed to improve
the builder's confidence in a perceived level of
reliability through redundancy.
I thought the gear system on the Beech Sierra was pretty
elegant. Hydraulic pressure holds gear up. No doors. Very
few moving parts. Emergency extension involves opening
a door on floor under pilot knees. Open valve. Gear falls down
and locked. With any gross failure of system integrity,
gear falls down and locked.
I'll suggest the handy switch, lights, motor and pump are
the SECONDARY gear operating system optimized for pilot convenience.
The valve on the floor was the PRIMARY gear operating system
guaranteed to work every time.
I think you will find there are similar approaches to
the same order of system reliability for panel instrumentation.
Full-up dual on the order of twin EFIS and a Z-14 electrical
system are obvious solutions but just about assure a doubling
of cost.
An alternative altitude readout, airspeed indicator,
rate-gyro-stabilized and radio-aided wing leveler, hand-helds
in the flight bag, etc. don't add much to your budget or
panel space requirements and may well be the "valve on the floor"
approach to backing up that full-color gee-whiz that works really
nice . . . most of the time. Let's do everything we can to
safely and sanely assist these new kids on the block . . . one
or more of them will architect a piece of aviation's future. At
the same time, here's to having nothing but Harry Potter
adventures to read to the grand-kids for excitement.
Bob . . .
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: | Re: Panel Layout -- IFR requirements? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Charlie & Tupper England <cengland@netdoor.com>
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
>
>At 12:36 PM 8/9/2003 -0500, you wrote:
>
>
>>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Jeffrey W. Skiba" <jskiba@icosa.net>
>>
>>Here is a read from the EAA I got a while back to confirm my thoughts:
>>
>>"The magnetic direction indicator called out in 14 CFR 91.205 is not further
>>defined. As such, any instrument that has the capability of finding
>>magnetic north and transmitting directional info to the pilot based on that
>>finding would be acceptable. There is no strict requirement for a "whiskey
>>compass".
>>
>>
>
> How about a hand-held gps like the GPS310 from Magellan
> set up to give present course in magnetic degrees.
>
> BTW, when I started using these low cost receivers, I bought
> in to the widely distributed notion that one always wanted
> to power them up while in pre-flight so they could get
> locked to signals and figure out where one was before
> you became airborne.
>
> In years since, I've conducted a number of experiments
> with asking the receiver to do a cold start a some distance
> away from shutdown and perhaps at cruising speed. Worst
> case was at 29,000 ft, 500+ MPH and over 1,500 miles
> from where the receiver had been turned off. It took
> the GPS310 less than 1 minute to sort it all out and
> produce a display.
>
> Sooo . . . even hidden away in the flight bag, this
> technology is available on very short notice to
> back up anything else in the cockpit that displays
> the same data.
>
> Bob . . .
>
I normally don't even read discussions of the FAR's too carefully
(interpretation is at the whim of the official you are dealing with at
the moment), but two comments here. A recently deceased airline pilot
aquaintance once told me that crews are not allowed to even carry a nav
device in their flight bags. We are flying safer than the airlines. ;-)
On a slightly (only slightly) more serious note, a gps isn't a
'*magnetic* direction indicator'. Doesn't that mean it can only
indicate north in a no-wind environment? Would it meet the regulatory
requirements even by the EAA's interpretation? Not intended to be a
comment on the usefulness, just the regs.
Charlie
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: Battery Info |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 12:38 PM 8/10/2003 -0400, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones@charter.net>
>
>For those who use 9-volt batteries in their intercoms, see the difference
>in batteries at:
>http://www.zbattery.com/zbattery/batteryinfo.html#
>
>Regards,
>Eric M. Jones
>www.PerihelionDesign.com
>113 Brentwood Drive
>Southbridge MA 01550-2705
>Phone (508) 764-2072
>Email: emjones@charter.net
Thanks for the heads-up Eric. Let's hear it for the
repeatable experiment. Referring to a piece I did
for Sport Aviation a few months ago
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/AA_Bat_Test.pdf
We find that my measured energy values for AA Alkaline
cells run consistently lower than those cited in
the ZBattery post.
This can be accounted for in that the other test uses
a slightly lower cutoff point than I did but most
important, he used 2x the resistance (1/2 the load)
I did. Every power source has an internal impedance
that contributes to power loss while loading the
source. By cutting the discharge current in 1/2, he
dropped the internal resistance losses by approximately
half. This is why electric clocks that draw microamps
get to use up ALL the snort contained in an AA
alkaline cell, digital cameras that drive disks and
screens may get to use half of what an alkaline
cell contains.
I have a digital camera that demands Ni-Cad or Ni-Mh
batteries not because these batteries have more total
snort, they just offer much smaller internal resistance
to the total load allowing one to get better performance
from what is arguably a "smaller" battery.
Bob . . .
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 04:59 PM 8/9/2003 -0700, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Terry Watson" <terry@tcwatson.com>
>
>Tom,
>
>This is an answer Bob gave just a few days ago:
>
>That is exactly what happens in certified ships. Figure Z-12
> is not recommended for new design. It's an easy fix to add a
> second alternator to an existing airplane. This this case, both
> alternators are ON but the aux alternator regulator is set
> for about 1 volt below normal bus voltage. Soooo . . . with
> the main alternator working, the aux alternator relaxes.
>
> If the main alternator quits, the bus voltage sags, the
> aux alternator comes alive automatically. The SB-1 reglator
> is fitted with a circuit to illuminate an "AUX ALT LOADED"
> warning light and flash it if the aux alternator output
> is higher than 20A . . . reduce load until light stops
> flashing.
>
>
>Terry
>
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Tom Reading"
><treading@comcast.net>
>
> I've been trying to understand what would happen if both BC 40amp and BC20
>amp where on at the same time. Would this give you 60 amp capicity or would
>one sleep because the alt 's set point are not ever precisely the same.
> Thanks Tom Reading RV7 wiring
When you parallel alternators with an intent to load them
simultaneously, getting them to share total load is
possible but not trivial and, in my not so humble opinion,
not cost effective.
I would resist the notion that by having both a 40A
and 20A alternator tied together that one has a 60A
total capacity. This is strictly true only in a case of
regulators designed to distribute load properly between
two alternators.
One might argue that should one alternator become
overloaded, it's output sags so that the remaining
alternator will pick up the difference thus making
the 40+20=60 anyhow. True . . . as long as the current
limit on both alternators is imposed by magnetic limits
of the respective machines. For example, the SD-20 as
installed in the Bonanza is rated at 20A . . . but being
a 40A machine at heart, it WILL put out more if you
load it up. However, COOLING is limited in this
installation and operation above the 20A rating will
put it at risk of letting all its smoke out.
I've encountered VERY few cases where it made sense
to add capacity of two alternators to justify
loading a system to a value greater than either
alternator will support. If you think you really need
to do this, let's discuss the finer details and
make sure you're not going to be disappointed.
Further, be aware that to do it right suggests
a regulator designed to truly parallel two
machines. The Cessna 303 is the only airplane I
am familiar with that had that capability. Lost
the contract on that regulator system by less than
$10 a regulator . . . the one they ended up with
didn't work very well.
Bob . . .
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 |
|
| Subject: | Starter question |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: David Teter truetechsyscom <ezaviator@truetechsys.com>
Group,
I have an IO360 in my Velocity. On a cold start (the first start of the day)
when I push the start button, the starter (a Sky-Tec I think) just clicks.
I'll press the start btn a few times, then the starter will finally start
rotating the ring gear. Is something inherint with this brand of starter, or
could something in the starter system be amiss?
I wasn't the builder, hence my "ignorance" with regard to the brand of
starter. Its a Sky-Tec or a B&C. I'm almost certain its a Sky-Tec though.
Thanks,
Dave
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: Panel Layout -- IFR requirements? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dennis O'Connor" <doconnor@chartermi.net>
A GPS is not a true north magnetic indicator, but it IS a true north TRACK
indicator - which could be a whole lot of help when the brown stuff hits the
fan...
Denny
PS: your heading may vary
----- Original Message ----- > On a slightly (only slightly) more serious
note, a gps isn't a
> '*magnetic* direction indicator'. Doesn't that mean it can only
> indicate north in a no-wind environment? Not intended to be a
> comment on the usefulness, just the regs.
>
> Charlie
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: Starter question |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dennis O'Connor" <doconnor@chartermi.net>
Dave, just wait a while and it won't rotate no matter how many times you
click it... Which is good because then you get to solve the mystery and
repair it..
Of course, if it happens at a little airport, far , far , away from home, it
could be expensive... I suggest that you and your favorite mechanically
inclined person pull the cowl and do a bit of trouble shooting now... From
your description the possibilities are many, ranging from a loose wire,
tired relay, to a sticking bendix... This includes a major misalignment
between the starter and ring gear... A knowledgeable builder <or A&P> can do
a hands on and quickly whittle the possibility pile down to a more
manageable size...
Denny
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Teter truetechsyscom" > I'll press the start btn a few times,
then the starter will finally start
> rotating the ring gear.
Message 11
| 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: Starter question |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: RVEIGHTA@aol.com
I have a Sky-Tec lightweight starter in my RV-8A which crapped out at the
ripe old age of 17 hrs. It too, just clicked when I hit the start button, but
remained "dead."
I sent the unit back to Sky-Tec in Amarillo, TX and they fixed it and sent it
back with the notation that "my engine must be timed incorrectly to cause it
to break (don't remember what broke, probably the bendix gear shaft). I do
have a Rose Ignition electronic ignition system in my bird, maybe it has
something to do with the problem.
Walt Shipley N314TS 21 hours
Message 12
| 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: Panel Layout -- IFR requirements? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "BUCK AND GLORIA BUCHANAN" <glastar@3rivers.net>
I believe it is a magnetic north track indicator.
Buck Buchanan
> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dennis O'Connor"
<doconnor@chartermi.net>
A GPS is not a true north magnetic indicator, but it IS a true north TRACK
indicator - which could be a whole lot of help when the brown stuff hits the
fan...
Denny
PS: your heading may vary
----- Original Message ----- > On a slightly (only slightly) more serious
note, a gps isn't a
> '*magnetic* direction indicator'. Doesn't that mean it can only
> indicate north in a no-wind environment? Not intended to be a
> comment on the usefulness, just the regs.
>
> Charlie
Message 13
| 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: "Tom Reading" <treading@comcast.net>
Thanks Bob for getting back to me. I spent time at Sun and Fun talking to
Bill Bainbridge and thought in my mind that z-12 was just one notch under
the dual system of Z-14.I wired the RV7 as per Z-12 with a 40 and 20 B&C. I
installed two LR-3's for control of the alt's. After wiring it up I thought
why have two under voltage lights off the same buss. I installed a
Electronics International Volt/amp gauge which gave me three under voltage
lights. Not too practical or attractive. I removed the two yellow lights
from BC and installed 5 amp breakers in those holes for both alt fields.
Seems most everyone uses breakers for those functions. Radio Shack had small
red 12 volt leds that I could use if the lights need to stay in the system.
They are not so bright and will still get your attention. I could mount
these right under the circuit breakers. I'm questioning my actions on the
regulators and wondering should I exchange it for a SB-1 reg. and remove the
switch for alternate alternator and have it on all the time. Thanks
Tom
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Robert
L. Nuckolls, III
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Alternator
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
<bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 04:59 PM 8/9/2003 -0700, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Terry Watson"
<terry@tcwatson.com>
>
>Tom,
>
>This is an answer Bob gave just a few days ago:
>
>That is exactly what happens in certified ships. Figure Z-12
> is not recommended for new design. It's an easy fix to add a
> second alternator to an existing airplane. This this case, both
> alternators are ON but the aux alternator regulator is set
> for about 1 volt below normal bus voltage. Soooo . . . with
> the main alternator working, the aux alternator relaxes.
>
> If the main alternator quits, the bus voltage sags, the
> aux alternator comes alive automatically. The SB-1 reglator
> is fitted with a circuit to illuminate an "AUX ALT LOADED"
> warning light and flash it if the aux alternator output
> is higher than 20A . . . reduce load until light stops
> flashing.
>
>
>Terry
>
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Tom Reading"
><treading@comcast.net>
>
> I've been trying to understand what would happen if both BC 40amp and
BC20
>amp where on at the same time. Would this give you 60 amp capicity or would
>one sleep because the alt 's set point are not ever precisely the same.
> Thanks Tom Reading RV7 wiring
When you parallel alternators with an intent to load them
simultaneously, getting them to share total load is
possible but not trivial and, in my not so humble opinion,
not cost effective.
I would resist the notion that by having both a 40A
and 20A alternator tied together that one has a 60A
total capacity. This is strictly true only in a case of
regulators designed to distribute load properly between
two alternators.
One might argue that should one alternator become
overloaded, it's output sags so that the remaining
alternator will pick up the difference thus making
the 40+20=60 anyhow. True . . . as long as the current
limit on both alternators is imposed by magnetic limits
of the respective machines. For example, the SD-20 as
installed in the Bonanza is rated at 20A . . . but being
a 40A machine at heart, it WILL put out more if you
load it up. However, COOLING is limited in this
installation and operation above the 20A rating will
put it at risk of letting all its smoke out.
I've encountered VERY few cases where it made sense
to add capacity of two alternators to justify
loading a system to a value greater than either
alternator will support. If you think you really need
to do this, let's discuss the finer details and
make sure you're not going to be disappointed.
Further, be aware that to do it right suggests
a regulator designed to truly parallel two
machines. The Cessna 303 is the only airplane I
am familiar with that had that capability. Lost
the contract on that regulator system by less than
$10 a regulator . . . the one they ended up with
didn't work very well.
Bob . . .
Message 14
| 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: Radiated ignition noise? Maybe not. |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Duncan McBride" <duncanmcbride@comcast.net>
Sorry, should have mentioned I already had these on both headset mics. Even
with them on there is a lot of noise, I can still pinch the microphone
between my thumb and forefinger and reduce the noise a lot. Of course, it
doesn't pick up my voice very well that way, either...
Thanks,
Duncan
----- Original Message -----
From: <racker@rmci.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Radiated ignition noise? Maybe not.
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: <racker@rmci.net>
>
> This helped cure my prop/wind noise problems on and old DC H10-30:
> http://www.oregonaero.com/p5657_2001.html#installmic
>
> Only $10, but Ed A. did it for considerably cheaper <g...see archives>.
>
> Rob Acker (RV-6 flying)
> do not archive
>
>
> > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Duncan McBride"
> > <duncanmcbride@comcast.net>
> >
> > It may be that all this time I've just been picking up a really loud
> > exhaust and prop noise coming over my shoulder, and the intercom just
> > didn't amplify it as well as the radio. That would be consistent with
> > the fact that I would get the same noise on the Microair intercom when
> > it was hooked up.
> >
> > Now I'm wondering if a different microphone for high noise environments
> > is the answer.
>
>
Message 15
| 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: | OT: Source for Dynamic Prop Balancer? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Jon Finley" <jon@finleyweb.net>
Hi all,
I am preparing to purchase a dynamic prop balancer from a friend who is
a dealer. This is a $2,000 unit and I am looking for alternatives
(cheaper). I have been completely unsuccessful at finding sources for
these things, anybody know of any??
FYI: This is one of those units that measure acceleration forces of the
engine and tells you how much weight to add and where.
Thanks!
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
Message 16
| 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: | Panel layout - request for comments |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: brucem@olypen.com
Pat,
Appreciate your good responses on this subject. The technology is ahead of the
FSDOs and DARs as I get vague or no answers from reps at air shows, etc. Like
you, I am searching for the path to "legal" IFR in my GlaStar while
incorporating some of this good stuff. Beyond the question of safety, about
which I will make up my own mind, I worry about some officious FAA inspector
looking at my panel after seeing me land from an actual approach and citing me
for a 91.205 violation. Maybe I'm just paranoid.
Regards, Bruce
do not
archive
---------------------------------------------
This message was sent using OlyPen's WebMail.
http://www.olypen.com
Message 17
| 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: Panel layout - request for comments |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 08:09 PM 8/10/2003 +0000, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: brucem@olypen.com
>
>Pat,
>
>Appreciate your good responses on this subject. The technology is ahead
>of the
>FSDOs and DARs as I get vague or no answers from reps at air shows,
>etc. Like
>you, I am searching for the path to "legal" IFR in my GlaStar while
>incorporating some of this good stuff. Beyond the question of safety, about
>which I will make up my own mind, I worry about some officious FAA inspector
>looking at my panel after seeing me land from an actual approach and
>citing me
>for a 91.205 violation. Maybe I'm just paranoid.
Do the FMEA, hand him the book. It's easy to point,
gesture, and look disapprovingly at your airplane.
A black and white document has to be studied, understood
and is much easier for you to defend. He lives by
his books. Read them and then write your book that
speaks to everything applicable in his. This is
exactly the kind of approach we take on the
certified side . . .
Without the document, it's easy for him to make
up his mind based on first impressions. Do your
homework and the odds go up decidedly in your
favor.
Bob . . .
Message 18
| 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: Starter question |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 01:10 PM 8/10/2003 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: David Teter truetechsyscom
><ezaviator@truetechsys.com>
>
>Group,
>I have an IO360 in my Velocity. On a cold start (the first start of the day)
>when I push the start button, the starter (a Sky-Tec I think) just clicks.
>I'll press the start btn a few times, then the starter will finally start
>rotating the ring gear. Is something inherint with this brand of starter, or
>could something in the starter system be amiss?
>I wasn't the builder, hence my "ignorance" with regard to the brand of
>starter. Its a Sky-Tec or a B&C. I'm almost certain its a Sky-Tec though.
Are you using the built-in contactor or do you have an
external contactor?
Bob . . .
Message 19
| 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: Panel Layout -- IFR requirements? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
>
>I normally don't even read discussions of the FAR's too carefully
>(interpretation is at the whim of the official you are dealing with at
>the moment), but two comments here. A recently deceased airline pilot
>aquaintance once told me that crews are not allowed to even carry a nav
>device in their flight bags. We are flying safer than the airlines. ;-)
> On a slightly (only slightly) more serious note, a gps isn't a
>'*magnetic* direction indicator'. Doesn't that mean it can only
>indicate north in a no-wind environment? Would it meet the regulatory
>requirements even by the EAA's interpretation? Not intended to be a
>comment on the usefulness, just the regs.
"direction indicator" seems to mean, some device that always points
in a northerly direction based on earth field. GPS knows nothing
about magnetic fields and depends on magnetic variation data
stored in memory for converting true to magnetic.
These discussions always bring the ol' saws out about not being able to
steer a heading when ATC is routing you around. If you steer courses,
then ATC's mental corrections for prevailing winds will be off. In
theory, yes but
in practice no. Every ATC guy I've talked to says he never considers
winds. His radar screen computers obviously display course. Most of the
time and for the vast majority of airplanes he's steering, winds
are so small relative to aircraft speeds that it presents no problem
to him to ignore them. If after a few minutes he doesn't like where
you are going, he's just going to give you an new heading that
improves his picture.
Given the difficulty of producing really smooth, reliable and
accurate magnetic data in an airplane even in smooth air, GPS is
an arguably superior method for steering any course be it
magnetic or true.
Bob . . .
Message 20
| 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: | RG58 Coax article I promised |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/RG58/RG58.html
I have several thousand feet of this wire at $0.50 a foot.
Bob . . .
--------------------------------------------
( Knowing about a thing is different than )
( understanding it. One can know a lot )
( and still understand nothing. )
( C.F. Kettering )
--------------------------------------------
Message 21
| 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: Starter question |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 03:05 PM 8/10/2003 -0400, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: RVEIGHTA@aol.com
>
>I have a Sky-Tec lightweight starter in my RV-8A which crapped out at the
>ripe old age of 17 hrs. It too, just clicked when I hit the start button, but
>remained "dead."
If all you got was a "click" and could not hear the motor
run, then I'm skeptical of their fault diagnosis. Kickbacks
do severe damage to castings and gears and almost never
cause the starter motor not to run when the contactor
closes. If you only heard the contactor close, then it
is more likely that there was something electrically wrong
with the motor.
>I sent the unit back to Sky-Tec in Amarillo, TX and they fixed it and sent it
>back with the notation that "my engine must be timed incorrectly to cause it
>to break (don't remember what broke, probably the bendix gear shaft). I do
>have a Rose Ignition electronic ignition system in my bird, maybe it has
>something to do with the problem.
One electronic ignition or two? Does Jeff tell you to turn
his ignition off to crank the engine? If not, then its
timing must be designed to retard for starting else you
would unlikely to ever start the engine with the
electronic system turned on . . . it would just be a series
of ring gear shredding kick-backs. If you still have one mag
installed, it MIGHT be the source of a kickback if the
impulse coupler is wearing out. But as I outlined above,
I'm suspicious of their cause and effect diagnosis.
My advise to anyone that sends of a high-dollar part to
be repaired by anybody. As for the damaged parts to be
returned to you with the repaired assembly. Makes it a
lot easier to deal with smoke and mirrors.
Bob . . .
--------------------------------------------
( Knowing about a thing is different than )
( understanding it. One can know a lot )
( and still understand nothing. )
( C.F. Kettering )
--------------------------------------------
Message 22
| 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: Starter question |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 02:39 PM 8/10/2003 -0400, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dennis O'Connor"
><doconnor@chartermi.net>
>
>Dave, just wait a while and it won't rotate no matter how many times you
>click it... Which is good because then you get to solve the mystery and
>repair it..
Dave, you said a "click" only, I presume no spinning motor sounds . . .
>Of course, if it happens at a little airport, far , far , away from home, it
>could be expensive... I suggest that you and your favorite mechanically
>inclined person pull the cowl and do a bit of trouble shooting now... From
>your description the possibilities are many, ranging from a loose wire,
yes
>tired relay, to a sticking bendix...
no, you'll hear the motor spin up without engaging the
ring gear . . .
> This includes a major misalignment
>between the starter and ring gear...
Again, if only a click, this one is out too . . .
Do you have a starter-engaged warning light? If it's
coming on the contactor is good and the motor is bad.
If you don't have the light, then something is breaking
the normal power path to the motor windings. This includes
wiring joints, contactor and bad commutator bar on armature.
Bob . . .
Message 23
| 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 L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 03:18 PM 8/10/2003 -0400, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Tom Reading" <treading@comcast.net>
>
>
> Thanks Bob for getting back to me. I spent time at Sun and Fun talking to
>Bill Bainbridge and thought in my mind that z-12 was just one notch under
>the dual system of Z-14.I wired the RV7 as per Z-12 with a 40 and 20 B&C.
That's fine. It will work as advertised. Nothing wrong with it. It's
a simple way to add substantial dual alternator capability to an
existing aircraft. This is how it's done in ALL of B&C's kits to
put the STC'd version into certified ships.
>I installed two LR-3's for control of the alt's. After wiring it up I thought
>why have two under voltage lights off the same buss.
It's better to use an LR3 on the main alternator and an SB1B regulator
on the aux alternator and wired as shown in:
http://www.bandc.biz/14-SB1B.pdf
> I installed a
>Electronics International Volt/amp gauge which gave me three under voltage
>lights. Not too practical or attractive. I removed the two yellow lights
>from BC and installed 5 amp breakers in those holes for both alt fields.
>Seems most everyone uses breakers for those functions.
I hope so. These regulators feature crowbar ov protection that
EXPECTS to open a breaker to shut down a runaway alternator.
Breakers are shown in the field supply of ALL B&C products and
on my wiring diagrams that feature crowbar ov protection.
>Radio Shack had small
>red 12 volt leds that I could use if the lights need to stay in the system.
>They are not so bright and will still get your attention. I could mount
>these right under the circuit breakers. I'm questioning my actions on the
>regulators and wondering should I exchange it for a SB-1 reg. and remove the
>switch for alternate alternator and have it on all the time.
You don't remove the switch, you will note that the wiring diagram
cited above shows a switch in the field supply.
If you've already got the two LR3 regulators installed. Leave them
alone. Fly with only the main alternator on but preflight the
aux alternator. If you get a low voltage, it's no big deal to
turn the main alternator off and the aux alternator on.
I would NOT recommend leaving the aux alternator ON with
the main alternator unless you do change to the SB1
regulator . . . with a pair of LR3's you could have a
main alternator failure and never know it until next preflight.
Bob . . .
Message 24
| 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: Ground Loops |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Van Caulart <etivc@iaw.on.ca>
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.
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.
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.
PeterVC
'68 150hp C177 C-GCPG
Message 25
| 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: OV Module question for Bob |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 09:46 PM 8/9/2003 +0200, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dave Grosvenor" <dwg@iafrica.com>
>
>I have put together an OV module and set it up and tested it as per
>instructions. On the bench it works fine. When installed in the aircraft,
>it was tripping the OV breaker when I switched on the master switch. I
>remember someone else with this problem and the fix was to put a 10uF Tant
>cap across the power leads going into the module. This I did and it stopped
>the breaker tripping when the master went on. However, as soon as I hit the
>start button, it trips again. It can then immediately be reset. Do I put
>in a bigger cap to sort this out or is there possibly another solution.
Do you have diodes on your battery master and starter contactor
coils?
Bob . . .
Message 26
| 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: Panel Layout -- IFR requirements? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: BobsV35B@aol.com
In a message dated 8/10/03 2:14:00 PM Central Daylight Time,
glastar@3rivers.net writes:
> I believe it is a magnetic north track indicator.
>
> Buck Buchanan
>
Good Afternoon Buck,
Most GPS units have the capability of showing either True or Magnetic north
in relation to the track being flown. The actual GPS engine will reference to
True north, but most flight management computers have a database that will
allow the set to correct to magnetic north for the area in which the set is being
operated.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
Message 27
| 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: "Rob Housman" <robh@hyperion-ef.com>
The list of 158 candidates running in the recall election, from this
morning's edition of the LA Times, includes someone (other than a body
builder) that many of us recognize:
Jim Weir
Age: 59
Party: Democrat
Occupation: Electronics technology instructor and small-business owner
Residence: Grass Valley
Family: Married, no children
Education: B.S., physics, math and aerospace, San Diego State, 1967.
Career Highlights: Designed landing radar for the Apollo lunar spacecraft at
Teledyne Ryan. Founder and president of small aircraft electronics company.
Served on Nevada County Board of Supervisors, 1986-94.
Quote: "My motivation is obviously to win, but also to get the maximum
number of people to the polls so that this election is not determined by a
small minority of voters at either end of the spectrum. Transportation and
education are the heart and soul of California; they need to be dealt with
at all costs."
The complete list is at
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-bios10aug10,1,7917121.story
Message 28
| 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: Panel Layout -- IFR requirements? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "BUCK AND GLORIA BUCHANAN" <glastar@3rivers.net>
Hello, Old Bob,
Thanks, I guess I didn't realize that one could select true north as a
reference on the GPS. I assumed...........and I'm sure you know the
derivative of that word...........that since all Victor and Jet airways and
runways and for that matter almost everything in aviation is oriented to
magnetic that GPS's would be also. Does anyone orient them to true?????
Best regards, Buck
In a message dated 8/10/03 2:14:00 PM Central Daylight Time,
glastar@3rivers.net writes:
> I believe it is a magnetic north track indicator.
>
> Buck Buchanan
>
Good Afternoon Buck,
Most GPS units have the capability of showing either True or Magnetic north
in relation to the track being flown. The actual GPS engine will reference
to
True north, but most flight management computers have a database that will
allow the set to correct to magnetic north for the area in which the set is
being
operated.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
Message 29
| 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: Panel Layout -- IFR requirements? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: BobsV35B@aol.com
In a message dated 8/10/03 7:05:31 PM Central Daylight Time,
glastar@3rivers.net writes:
> ...........that since all Victor and Jet airways and
> runways and for that matter almost everything in aviation is oriented to
> magnetic that GPS's would be also. Does anyone orient them to true?????
Good Evening Buck,
Not sure, but it seems to me that I recall that everything north of some very
high latitude is based on true. Since I have never flown a transpolar route,
it is a bit fuzzy in my memory. Some of our respondents whose day job
entails flying over the North pole should have the answer.
Maybe it was just the US Air Force who did something like that. In any case,
it is distant memory!
Happy Skies,
Old (and forgetful) Bob
Message 30
| 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: | OT: Source for Dynamic Prop Balancer? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones@charter.net>
I was blessed to be a friend of Jim Helmuth, who died from smoking cigarettes--pure
and simple. His company (still going strong) is Chadwick-Helmuth, whose Vibrex
prop balancers are the standard of the industry.
I have seen them for sale surplus on eBay and a few months ago eleven brand new (!) in one lot went for short money at http://www.govliquidation.com/
Regards,
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge MA 01550-2705
Phone (508) 764-2072
Email: emjones@charter.net
"People don't appreciate how very difficult it is to be a princess."
Princess Diana
Message 31
| 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: Panel Layout -- IFR requirements? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Kevin Horton <khorto1537@rogers.com>
Airways, VORs, runways etc. are oriented on true in part of northern
Canada - once you get too close to the magnetic north pole magnetic
compasses can't hack it.
Kevin Horton
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "BUCK AND GLORIA BUCHANAN"
><glastar@3rivers.net>
>
>Hello, Old Bob,
>
>Thanks, I guess I didn't realize that one could select true north as a
>reference on the GPS. I assumed...........and I'm sure you know the
>derivative of that word...........that since all Victor and Jet airways and
>runways and for that matter almost everything in aviation is oriented to
>magnetic that GPS's would be also. Does anyone orient them to true?????
>
>Best regards, Buck
>
>
>In a message dated 8/10/03 2:14:00 PM Central Daylight Time,
>glastar@3rivers.net writes:
>
>> I believe it is a magnetic north track indicator.
>>
>> Buck Buchanan
>>
>Good Afternoon Buck,
>
>Most GPS units have the capability of showing either True or Magnetic north
>in relation to the track being flown. The actual GPS engine will reference
>to
>True north, but most flight management computers have a database that will
>allow the set to correct to magnetic north for the area in which the set is
>being
>operated.
>
>Happy Skies,
>
>Old Bob
Message 32
| 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: True North, was: -- IFR requirements? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: BobsV35B@aol.com
In a message dated 8/10/03 7:05:31 PM Central Daylight Time,
glastar@3rivers.net writes:
> Does anyone orient them to true?????
>
> Best regards, Buck
>
Good Evening Once Again Buck,
Number two son just stopped by and I asked him about the true versus magnetic
situation.
I was informed that they use True when they are north of the sixty-seventh
and one half degree latitude line.
He also said that there are a few airports and radio beacons that are close
to that line, but still south of it, that also use true for their runway
headings and associated navigational aids.
He is supposed to be getting me some charts for that area so that I can check
it out for myself. I am not sure how far north my IFR GPS database covers,
but I am going to try it out and see if I can find a route that should be
listed in true. My son has informed me that on their earlier airplanes, they had
a
switch that had to be thrown to change between the two. However, on the
747-400, his current steed, it is done automatically any time they are up there.
It could be different on other types of equipment, but I would bet that
everybody flying up there uses the same basis.
We always learn something, don't we!
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
Message 33
| 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: Panel Layout -- IFR requirements? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Finn Lassen <finnlassen@netzero.net>
Can be set up to be either (at least on the hand held Magellans I own.)
Finn
BUCK AND GLORIA BUCHANAN wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "BUCK AND GLORIA BUCHANAN" <glastar@3rivers.net>
>
>I believe it is a magnetic north track indicator.
>
>Buck Buchanan
>
>
>
>
>>AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dennis O'Connor"
>>
>>
><doconnor@chartermi.net>
>
>A GPS is not a true north magnetic indicator, but it IS a true north TRACK
>indicator - which could be a whole lot of help when the brown stuff hits the
>fan...
>
>
>Denny
>PS: your heading may vary
>
Message 34
| 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: | Six years experience with Sky Tec Starter. |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Denis Walsh <denis.walsh@comcast.net>
With today having two sky tec starter questions I must interject my personal
experience with same. It is a long post. If you don't have a sky tec, God
Bless you and delete now. I have tried to extract my emotions from it, but
have not succeeded very well.
I have been flying with a sky tec in my O-360A1A, and RV-6A. It was
installed with the new engine in 1997, and has been in pretty much constant
use for six plus years, and 1,200 hours. I have a constant speed prop, and
Jeff Rose ignition on one side. The ignition system has been trouble free.
The engine will start on either my impulse coupled magneto, or the Rose
ignition, or both. I frequently try various combinations to verify they
work. I cannot detect any difference in start up using any combination.
Most often I start using both.
I have experienced starter solenoid failure on this unit four times. This
being 2000, 2001, 2002, and last week.
Let me clarify. The sky tec unit has a solenoid mounted on the starter
itself, and that solenoid pulls the starter gear forward into the ring gear,
while it closes the contacts to supply drive power to the starter motor. It
does not have a bendix. Both these contactors go by the name "starter
solenoid" . You may or may not have a firewall mounted "solenoid"
(contactor). If you do use a remote firewall) contactor, you may need a
jumper mounted on the starter mounted solenoid.
Over the years, I have used this unit both with and without the remote
contactor, and with and without the jumper. It seems eager to fail either
way. In its current configuration, I have no firewall contactor and no
jumper.
In all four failure cases it was restored to service by replacing the
starter solenoid.
My first failure occurred after three years and six hundred hours in
service. The second occurred a year later and so on. The average was about
a year, (or 175 hours) after the first failure.
The symptoms were precisely as described in the two incidents on today's
list. You hear the click but no whirly grindy noise and no prop rotation.
At first you can keep clicking for two to twenty times and hope it will go.
It usually will, but eventually fails completely. When it does start
cranking it sounds perfectly normal. This behavior pretty much rules out a
weak battery or starter motor problems.
After the most recent failure, and after assisting several others with the
same exact problem, I returned the unit to sky tec in Texas. The person on
the phone, Katherine, said some of these units had a bad frame or bracket,
causing misalignment of the solenoid. At her suggestion I mailed it to
them. They called and said my "frame" was ok, but diagnosed a scorched
armature, and a solenoid with a loose bolt... I had no idea what these two
things could have to do with my solenoid failures, and expressed my
dissatisfaction.
This got me handed off to another voice, who after my questions identified
himself as "Gene", an engineer who seemed proud of the fact that he had
designed this starter and had 30,000 in the field. He said it was vibration
which killed these wonderful little machines, and asked (three times) if I
had my engine and prop dynamically balanced to each other. It is probably
best if I do not relate the rest of this conversation. In the end I ordered
the starter repaired and returned. It arrived two days later with a new
solenoid and a new armature, and a bill for $115. It is working fine.
There are a lot of anecdotes about sky tec starters in the archives, and sky
tec's denials of problems with it. I have read most of these and heard
several first hand accounts of persons who have got various answers from
representatives of the company. I will not repeat those here, and try to
restrict myself to my own experience and observation.
I do not know what caused the internal failure of these solenoids. I have
several examples on hand if anyone has a method to saw them apart and check
it out, I would be glad to donate. I do not have the last example since my
friend Gene kept it. I was not rational enough to ask for its return.
Sorry Bob. In fact I was borderline incoherent near the end of that talk.
For the last three years I have flown with a spare solenoid in my baggage
compartment. It takes about 10 minutes to change and you don't need to
remove the starter to do it. We have a local source who sells them for $15.
I got my latest one from sky tec for $37.50, plus labor and shipping. I
will let you know if theirs lasts any longer. Based on my experience, I
would recommend to listers who are proud owners of this fine starter which
is OEM equipment on new Lycoming engines, that you acquire a spare and carry
one with you.
When this one fails, I am buying a B&C. Personally I feel like I have done
all the field testing of the sky tec that I am going to do. It is my
experience that you can expect the starter solenoid to fail in service with
a Lycoming O-360, before a few hundred hours service. I don't have a clue
as to whether or not B&C solenoids will fail at a similar rate, but I do
have a feeling it would be properly analyzed and fixed if it did.
Of course, in fairness to sky tec, I may (if I calm down quite a bit) allow
them to fix it one more time, if they will fix it for free, and return the
failed part, with a rational analysis of why it failed.
Sorry for the lengthy post. This is one man's experience. Hope it helps
you all.
Denis Walsh
RV-6A, 1,206 hours
Message 35
| 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: Track labels up north? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: BobsV35B@aol.com
In a message dated 8/10/03 2:14:00 PM Central Daylight Time,
glastar@3rivers.net writes:
> Buck Buchanan
Good Evening Buck,
I just checked the route between Cambridge Bay and Resolute Bay, Canada.
Cambridge Bay is at 69 07.1 N and Resolute is at 74 43.02 N. The chart tells
us to use true while navigating that route. The first portion lists a course
of 24 degrees True and the last half lists a course of 28 degrees True. My
GPS shows the course as being 005 degrees Magnetic so I guess I would have to
manually select True if I were to fly that route segment.
The most northerly airport I have found in my database is CYLT, Alert,
Canada. It is N 82 31.068 and W 62 16.833. The chart notes that the Tacan there
is
oriented to Grid North. It is neither Magnetic nor True!
That's only 2488 Nautical Miles from our home here at Brookeridge (LL22). I
guess I oughta head up there one of these days.
Amazing what these little GPSs can do.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
Message 36
| 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: Starter question |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Cy Galley" <cgalley@qcbc.org>
Could be you tried saving weight and used too small a cable from the battery
to the starter or ground cable. Did you provide jumpers across the rubber
motor mounts?
Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh
Editor, EAA Safety Programs
cgalley@qcbc.org or experimenter@eaa.org
Always looking for articles for the Experimenter
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dennis O'Connor" <doconnor@chartermi.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Starter question
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dennis O'Connor"
<doconnor@chartermi.net>
>
> Dave, just wait a while and it won't rotate no matter how many times you
> click it... Which is good because then you get to solve the mystery and
> repair it..
>
> Of course, if it happens at a little airport, far , far , away from home,
it
> could be expensive... I suggest that you and your favorite mechanically
> inclined person pull the cowl and do a bit of trouble shooting now...
From
> your description the possibilities are many, ranging from a loose wire,
> tired relay, to a sticking bendix... This includes a major misalignment
> between the starter and ring gear... A knowledgeable builder <or A&P> can
do
> a hands on and quickly whittle the possibility pile down to a more
> manageable size...
>
> Denny
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "David Teter truetechsyscom" > I'll press the start btn a few times,
> then the starter will finally start
> > rotating the ring gear.
>
>
Message 37
| 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: Panel Layout -- IFR requirements? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Charlie & Tupper England <cengland@netdoor.com>
Dennis O'Connor wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dennis O'Connor" <doconnor@chartermi.net>
>
>A GPS is not a true north magnetic indicator, but it IS a true north TRACK
>indicator - which could be a whole lot of help when the brown stuff hits the
>fan...
>
>
>Denny
>PS: your heading may vary
>
I think that's what I said. It's not the usefulness of the device vs the
wet compass; it's what the FAA bureacracy will let you get away with
when you ask them to sign off the plane. See below.
Charlie
>----- Original Message ----- > On a slightly (only slightly) more serious
>note, a gps isn't a
>
>
>>'*magnetic* direction indicator'. Doesn't that mean it can only
>>indicate north in a no-wind environment? Not intended to be a
>>comment on the usefulness, just the regs.
>>
>>Charlie
>>
Message 38
| 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: Panel Layout -- IFR requirements? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Pat Hatch" <pat_hatch@msn.com>
Bob,
I can imagine the day when the flux gate will be used only as input to the
FMS or DG during the time that the airplane is not in motion, i.e., parked
on the ramp before takeoff. Once there is appreciable ground speed the FMS
would switch to GPS track information and be oriented to true north. ICAO
and the FAA will have already changed their standard from magnetic headings
to true north tracks for air traffic control. So you might hear, for
instance, "maintain runway track after takeoff until passing 1,500 feet."
Or, " turn left to track 090, reduce to approach speed, intercept the final
GPS course inbound, cleared for the approach." The magnetic compass will
become obsolete (in my imaginary scenario) and the flux gate will only be
necessary to convert magnetic information to true and input it into the FMS
(as a backup to GPS track info) and would be displayed on your Primary
Flight Display (PFD) as true heading when GPS track info was not available.
All runways would have to renamed to true headings, but they would
henceforth never change. Magnetic variation would just be an algorithm in
the software. Jeppesen would be in business for another 100 years
converting all the approach charts, etc, etc.
Probably not in our lifetime, though.
Pat Hatch
RV-4
RV-6
RV-7 QB (Building)
Vero Beach, FL
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Panel Layout -- IFR requirements?
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
<bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
>
>
> >
> >I normally don't even read discussions of the FAR's too carefully
> >(interpretation is at the whim of the official you are dealing with at
> >the moment), but two comments here. A recently deceased airline pilot
> >aquaintance once told me that crews are not allowed to even carry a nav
> >device in their flight bags. We are flying safer than the airlines. ;-)
> > On a slightly (only slightly) more serious note, a gps isn't a
> >'*magnetic* direction indicator'. Doesn't that mean it can only
> >indicate north in a no-wind environment? Would it meet the regulatory
> >requirements even by the EAA's interpretation? Not intended to be a
> >comment on the usefulness, just the regs.
>
> "direction indicator" seems to mean, some device that always points
> in a northerly direction based on earth field. GPS knows nothing
> about magnetic fields and depends on magnetic variation data
> stored in memory for converting true to magnetic.
>
> These discussions always bring the ol' saws out about not being able
to
> steer a heading when ATC is routing you around. If you steer courses,
> then ATC's mental corrections for prevailing winds will be off. In
> theory, yes but
> in practice no. Every ATC guy I've talked to says he never considers
> winds. His radar screen computers obviously display course. Most of
the
> time and for the vast majority of airplanes he's steering, winds
> are so small relative to aircraft speeds that it presents no problem
> to him to ignore them. If after a few minutes he doesn't like where
> you are going, he's just going to give you an new heading that
> improves his picture.
>
> Given the difficulty of producing really smooth, reliable and
> accurate magnetic data in an airplane even in smooth air, GPS is
> an arguably superior method for steering any course be it
> magnetic or true.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
Message 39
| 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: Six years experience with Sky Tec |
Starter.
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 07:22 PM 8/10/2003 -0600, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Denis Walsh <denis.walsh@comcast.net>
>
>
>With today having two sky tec starter questions I must interject my personal
>experience with same. It is a long post. If you don't have a sky tec, God
>Bless you and delete now. I have tried to extract my emotions from it, but
>have not succeeded very well.
>
<snip>
>I do not know what caused the internal failure of these solenoids. I have
>several examples on hand if anyone has a method to saw them apart and check
>it out, I would be glad to donate. I do not have the last example since my
>friend Gene kept it. I was not rational enough to ask for its return.
>Sorry Bob. In fact I was borderline incoherent near the end of that talk.
Understand. I'd be pleased to have the carcasses for
teardown inspection . . . will photograph and if possible,
interpret findings in a document on my website.
>For the last three years I have flown with a spare solenoid in my baggage
>compartment. It takes about 10 minutes to change and you don't need to
>remove the starter to do it. We have a local source who sells them for $15.
>I got my latest one from sky tec for $37.50, plus labor and shipping. I
>will let you know if theirs lasts any longer. Based on my experience, I
>would recommend to listers who are proud owners of this fine starter which
>is OEM equipment on new Lycoming engines, that you acquire a spare and carry
>one with you.
>
>When this one fails, I am buying a B&C. Personally I feel like I have done
>all the field testing of the sky tec that I am going to do. It is my
>experience that you can expect the starter solenoid to fail in service with
>a Lycoming O-360, before a few hundred hours service. I don't have a clue
>as to whether or not B&C solenoids will fail at a similar rate, but I do
>have a feeling it would be properly analyzed and fixed if it did.
I've seen big crates of B&C starters returned from Robinson
helicopter for overhaul. Robinson insists on a factory overhaul
every 2,000 hours. Starters are pulled and sent back to
B&C for zero-time overhaul. Many of these starters are a sight
to behold externally. They get dripped on, hit, covered in
grease, mud, paint, etc. From the outside, you would expect
these to be casualties of a hard ride.
To the best of my knowledge, nearly all starters returned from
Robinson will bench check okay. Upon teardown, the few
I've looked had plenty of brush length, commutator
was barely grooved, bearings were good. I suspect any
one of them would easily have run another 2,000 hours.
Being the very highly stressed part that starters are,
return rates are much higher than for alternators. But
like the alternators, most returns are owner induced
damage and/or broken castings from a kick-back. A small
fraction of returns are for failures.
>Of course, in fairness to sky tec, I may (if I calm down quite a bit) allow
>them to fix it one more time, if they will fix it for free, and return the
>failed part, with a rational analysis of why it failed.
>
>Sorry for the lengthy post. This is one man's experience. Hope it helps
>you all.
Appreciate your time to share the experience.
Let's open those puppies up and see what made 'em
sick.
Bob . . .
Message 40
| 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: Starter question |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 08:52 PM 8/10/2003 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Cy Galley" <cgalley@qcbc.org>
>
>Could be you tried saving weight and used too small a cable from the battery
>to the starter or ground cable.
. . . it has worked for numerous starts and works okay after
a few hit on the button . . . classic impending failure of
either contactor or a commutator bar . . .
> Did you provide jumpers across the rubber motor mounts?
. . . I hope not. Motor mounts should be used to hold engines
to airplanes and wires should be use to power starters but
never the twain should meet. The crankcase should be wired
to the fat ground bolt on the firewall with jumper strap.
If there are jumpers across the engine mount biscuits,
I would recommend they be removed.
We don't what alternator ground return currents flowing
in the firewall sheet via engine mounts.
Bob . . .
Message 41
| 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: Six years experience with Sky Tec Starter. |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "David Swartzendruber" <dswartzendruber@earthlink.net>
Denis,
I'm curious, is your starter a 12V or 24V. I've heard that Sky-Tec uses a
12V solenoid on their 24V starter and I've wondered how well they held up in
that application.
Dave in Wichita
>
> I have experienced starter solenoid failure on this unit four times. This
> being 2000, 2001, 2002, and last week.
>
Message 42
| 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: Six years experience with Sky Tec Starter. |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Denis Walsh <denis.walsh@comcast.net>
12V.
> From: "David Swartzendruber" <dswartzendruber@earthlink.net>
> Reply-To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2003 22:19:27 -0500
> To: <aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Six years experience with Sky Tec Starter.
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "David Swartzendruber"
> <dswartzendruber@earthlink.net>
>
> Denis,
>
> I'm curious, is your starter a 12V or 24V. I've heard that Sky-Tec uses a
> 12V solenoid on their 24V starter and I've wondered how well they held up in
> that application.
>
> Dave in Wichita
>
>>
>> I have experienced starter solenoid failure on this unit four times. This
>> being 2000, 2001, 2002, and last week.
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 43
| 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: Six years experience with Sky Tec Starter. |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Denis Walsh <denis.walsh@comcast.net>
Dear Bob,
I will ship them within the week, if you will give me the desired address.
I think I have a couple from the last couple years, and can get the other
two on my field which were replaced in the past three weeks.
Thank you for the offer. It is no small thing. One of the problems has
been that like most intermittent failures, these usually bench check ok!
Also since there are two coils inside those dogs, it has been too tough for
me to get a good check on them without teardown. Anyhow, I think that they
(the failed ones) have good electrical continuity in the coils and the main
contacts, but have some mechanical misalignment or blockage which keeps it
from making the final contact consistently. Good luck.
Awaiting address for shipping.
Denis Walsh
4011 S. Magnolia Way
Denver, Co 80237
303 756 6543
>
> Understand. I'd be pleased to have the carcasses for
> teardown inspection . . . will photograph and if possible,
> interpret findings in a document on my website.
>
>
>> For the last three years I have flown with a spare solenoid in my baggage
>> compartment. It takes about 10 minutes to change and you don't need to
>> remove the starter to do it. We have a local source who sells them for $15.
>> I got my latest one from sky tec for $37.50, plus labor and shipping. I
>> will let you know if theirs lasts any longer. Based on my experience, I
>> would recommend to listers who are proud owners of this fine starter which
>> is OEM equipment on new Lycoming engines, that you acquire a spare and carry
>> one with you.
>>
>> When this one fails, I am buying a B&C. Personally I feel like I have done
>> all the field testing of the sky tec that I am going to do. It is my
>> experience that you can expect the starter solenoid to fail in service with
>> a Lycoming O-360, before a few hundred hours service. I don't have a clue
>> as to whether or not B&C solenoids will fail at a similar rate, but I do
>> have a feeling it would be properly analyzed and fixed if it did.
>
> I've seen big crates of B&C starters returned from Robinson
> helicopter for overhaul. Robinson insists on a factory overhaul
> every 2,000 hours. Starters are pulled and sent back to
> B&C for zero-time overhaul. Many of these starters are a sight
> to behold externally. They get dripped on, hit, covered in
> grease, mud, paint, etc. From the outside, you would expect
> these to be casualties of a hard ride.
>
> To the best of my knowledge, nearly all starters returned from
> Robinson will bench check okay. Upon teardown, the few
> I've looked had plenty of brush length, commutator
> was barely grooved, bearings were good. I suspect any
> one of them would easily have run another 2,000 hours.
>
> Being the very highly stressed part that starters are,
> return rates are much higher than for alternators. But
> like the alternators, most returns are owner induced
> damage and/or broken castings from a kick-back. A small
> fraction of returns are for failures.
>
>
>> Of course, in fairness to sky tec, I may (if I calm down quite a bit) allow
>> them to fix it one more time, if they will fix it for free, and return the
>> failed part, with a rational analysis of why it failed.
>>
>> Sorry for the lengthy post. This is one man's experience. Hope it helps
>> you all.
>
> Appreciate your time to share the experience.
> Let's open those puppies up and see what made 'em
> sick.
>
> Bob . . .
>
Message 44
| 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: OV Module question for Bob |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dave Grosvenor" <dwg@iafrica.com>
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. Before fitting the
10uF cap, it was tripping as I switched the master on.
Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: OV Module question for Bob
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
<bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 09:46 PM 8/9/2003 +0200, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dave Grosvenor" <dwg@iafrica.com>
>
>I have put together an OV module and set it up and tested it as per
>instructions. On the bench it works fine. When installed in the aircraft,
>it was tripping the OV breaker when I switched on the master switch. I
>remember someone else with this problem and the fix was to put a 10uF Tant
>cap across the power leads going into the module. This I did and it
stopped
>the breaker tripping when the master went on. However, as soon as I hit
the
>start button, it trips again. It can then immediately be reset. Do I put
>in a bigger cap to sort this out or is there possibly another solution.
Do you have diodes on your battery master and starter contactor
coils?
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! --
|