Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:55 AM - [PLEASE READ!] "What's my Contribution used for?" (Matt Dralle)
2. 05:56 AM - Props and EI ()
3. 06:16 AM - Re: Odyssey battery (Gary Liming)
4. 07:32 AM - Re: Props and EI (James E. Clark)
5. 07:59 AM - Re: Props and EI (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
6. 08:21 AM - Re: Props and EI (Dj Merrill)
7. 08:24 AM - Re: Magneto Relpacements (Dj Merrill)
8. 09:11 AM - Re: Best place to order Honeywell MicroSwitch's (Bob Bittner)
9. 10:16 AM - Re: Magneto Relpacements (Dan Branstrom)
10. 10:40 AM - Trim servo wiring (Steve Sampson)
11. 12:36 PM - Re: Magneto Relpacements (Charlie & Tupper England)
12. 12:45 PM - Re: Magneto Relpacements (BobsV35B@aol.com)
13. 02:46 PM - Re: Magneto Relpacements (Jim Sower)
14. 03:37 PM - Magneto Relpacements (David.vonLinsowe)
15. 04:06 PM - Re: Magneto Relpacements (Jon Finley)
16. 05:52 PM - Re: Bob, need info on microair com/xpdr (Jerry Latimer)
17. 06:40 PM - Re: Trim servo wiring (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
18. 08:20 PM - Re: Magneto Replacements (George Braly)
19. 09:12 PM - Re: Magneto Replacements (Dave Morris)
20. 09:28 PM - Re: Magneto Replacements (Jerzy Krasinski)
21. 09:37 PM - Battery/Alt switch differences (sdcmills@att.net)
22. 10:18 PM - Re: Magneto Replacements (George Braly)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | [PLEASE READ!] "What's my Contribution used for?" |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Matt Dralle <dralle@matronics.com>
Dear Listers,
A few Listers have asked me recently, "What's my Contribution used for?",
and that's a valid question. Here are just a few examples of what your
direct List support enables... It provides for the expensive,
business-class, high-speed Internet connection used on the List, insuring
maximum performance and minimal contention when accessing List
services. It pays for the regular system hardware and software upgrades
enabling the highest performance possible for services such as the Archive
Search Engine and List Browser. It pays for 15+ years worth of on line
archive data available for instant random access. And, it offsets the many
hours spent writing, developing, and maintaining the custom applications
that power this List Service such as the List Browse, Search Engine, and
Photoshare.
But most importantly, your List Contribution enables a forum where you and
your peers can communicate freely in an environment that is free from
moderation, censorship, advertising, commercialism, SPAM, and computer
viruses. How many places on the Internet can you make all those statements
about these days? I will venture to say - next to none...
It is YOUR CONTRIBUTION that directly enables these many desirable aspects
of this most valuable List service. Please support it today with your List
Contribution. Its the best investment you can make in your Sport - BAR NONE!
Email List Contribution Web Site:
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Thank you for your support!
Matt Dralle
Email List Administrator
Matt G Dralle | Matronics | PO Box 347 | Livermore | CA | 94551
925-606-1001 V | 925-606-6281 F | dralle@matronics.com Email
http://www.matronics.com/ WWW | Featuring Products For Aircraft
do not archive
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: <jimk36@comcast.net>
Gentlemen--
Thank you. I stand corrected. However, I was not aware that this problem even existed
until this recent thread on the AEC. I have not seen this serious safety
question reported in any of the major publications and therefor assumed the
manufacturers had not disseminated test data and limitations to the press. Perhaps
I missed it.
Jim
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: Odyssey battery |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Gary Liming <gary@liming.org>
At 11:46 PM 11/23/2003 -0600, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Greg Milner" <tldrgred@execpc.com>
>
>I`m using a dry cell Odyssey 680 battery as was recommended by an EAA T.C.
>who`s been using one. It`s small and kicks the engine over well.
>sunbattery.com is the supplier.They won`t freeze and last long time.
Greg, what engine and length prop is this battery turning - just curious as
I will be using one, too.
Gary Liming
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "James E. Clark" <james@nextupventures.com>
You are welcome Jim.
A value of forums like this is the ability to have such a dialogue. And even
though there is the potential for misinformation to be spread via forums,
they really shine when a matter can be cleared up within a few hours and
many more people informed of a particular matter.
If I were the companies, I would not have wanted a mass communication per se
(because it involves complexity that the mass media might skip over).
Instead, a focussed effort with the engine Manufacturers and OEMs, along
with the electronic ignition and FADEC providers would be the most
impactful. Not that I would want to try to hide anything ... just get it out
to the relevant people.
And oh, if someone called wanting to buy one of my props, I would **SURELY**
tell them about the limitations and then let them decide if they wanted to
"stay" with me.
James
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of
> jimk36@comcast.net
> Sent: Monday, November 24, 2003 8:55 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Props and EI
>
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: <jimk36@comcast.net>
>
> Gentlemen--
>
> Thank you. I stand corrected. However, I was not aware that this
> problem even existed until this recent thread on the AEC. I have
> not seen this serious safety question reported in any of the
> major publications and therefor assumed the manufacturers had not
> disseminated test data and limitations to the press. Perhaps I missed it.
>
> Jim
>
>
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: Props and EI |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 08:54 AM 11/24/2003 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: <jimk36@comcast.net>
>
>Gentlemen--
>
>Thank you. I stand corrected. However, I was not aware that this problem
>even existed until this recent thread on the AEC. I have not seen this
>serious safety question reported in any of the major publications and
>therefor assumed the manufacturers had not disseminated test data and
>limitations to the press. Perhaps I missed it.
>
>Jim
I've missed it too. EI has been flying on a lot of airplanes
for a long time. I'm not arguing with anyone who has observed
and measured deleterious effects of switching to electronic
ignition . . . but like all such information, it's useless
until shared. Further, it would be stronger still if the
repeatable experiment that measured the effect were described
in some published work. I'm just a little mystified by what
what appears to be a disconnect between the hysterical-theoretical
and practical-demonstrable sides of the issue. Someplace in
the middle lies the truth. I recommend respectful and curious
skepticism until someone publishes the simple-ideas and
measured data that will make it clear to all who care to
read it. Of course, it would also be useful to offer
mitigating alternatives.
Reading the paper published on Vans site at:
http://www.vansaircraft.com/pdf/Hartzell_c2yk.pdf
we see recommended operational limits that probably
describe current normal operations for most OBAM
aircraft. I don't cruise at redline and I don't
use power settings below 2250 either. So maybe
our practical-demonstrable experience simply
stumbled into an acceptable operating regime for
the few airplanes that use this particular engine/
propeller combination.
If there are concerns for this combination, there
are probably similar concerns for other combinations
as well. I like to believe the LASAR and FADEC folks
are investigating this . . . what a kick in the head
to find that your 21st century upgrade won't safely
upgrade some combinations of 20th century propeller and
engine!
Folks objected to my use the work "prohibition" . . . not
mine but contained in numerous rumors that are running
in the wild. George, here's an opportunity for an article
in Sport Aviation that could stand head-and-shoulders above
those that show us how to press our own grommet shields
out of scrap stainless . . .
Bob . . .
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: Props and EI |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Dj Merrill <deej@thayer.dartmouth.edu>
On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 jimk36@comcast.net wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: <jimk36@comcast.net>
> Gentlemen--
> Thank you. I stand corrected. However, I was not aware that this problem even
existed until this recent thread on the AEC. I have not seen this serious safety
question reported in any of the major publications and therefor assumed the
manufacturers had not disseminated test data and limitations to the press. Perhaps
I missed it.
> Jim
The first I heard about it was on a Glasair mailing list.
One of the builders was considering EI and a Hartzell prop, and was
told about the possible vibration issues when they called Hartzell.
-Dj
--
Dj Merrill Thayer School of Engineering
ThUG Sr. Unix Systems Administrator 8000 Cummings Hall
deej@thayer.dartmouth.edu - N1JOV Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH 03755
"On the side of the software box, in the 'System Requirements' section,
it said 'Requires Windows 95 or better'. So I installed Linux." -Anonymous
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: Magneto Relpacements |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Dj Merrill <deej@thayer.dartmouth.edu>
On Sun, 23 Nov 2003, Dan Branstrom wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dan Branstrom" <danbranstrom@verizon.net>
>
> The solution? Wood props. ;
> )
> Do not archive
> Dan Branstrom
Have wood props been shown to be immune from this problem?
Or only certain wood props? I'm curious because I do have a wooden prop,
and if I have to replace a mag I'd like to replace it with an EI.
Thanks,
-Dj
--
Dj Merrill Thayer School of Engineering
ThUG Sr. Unix Systems Administrator 8000 Cummings Hall
deej@thayer.dartmouth.edu - N1JOV Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH 03755
"On the side of the software box, in the 'System Requirements' section,
it said 'Requires Windows 95 or better'. So I installed Linux." -Anonymous
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: | Re: Best place to order Honeywell MicroSwitch's |
11/24/2003 11:10:30 AM,
Serialize complete at 11/24/2003 11:10:30 AM
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Bob Bittner <rbittner@us.ibm.com>
I just placed an order from them directly via their website.. was able to
get just what I wanted and the prices were less than Newark but a little
more than Allied.
http://content.honeywell.com/sensing/prodinfo/environment/
When you get to a catalog page for a given switch, click "Where to buy"
Bob Bittner, RHCE
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: Magneto Relpacements |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dan Branstrom" <danbranstrom@verizon.net>
It's my (limited) understanding that wood props are, to a great extent, self
damping and have an infinite life as far as vibration cycles. They are
still capable of resonance problems, but it is much more unlikely.
There are a number of wood props on pusher canards that have lasted for over
20 years, (this is one of the worst environments for a prop), and much of
the time they have been running on electronic ignitions. Pusher props,
located behind the wing and exhaust are subject to increased torsional
stresses over tractor props because the angle of attack of the air it sees
changes many times in each rotation. Going past the left wing, it sees one
angle of attack, and past the right wing, one from a completely different
direction. It is for that reason that wood props were recommended by Burt
Rutan and other designers of canards.
Ironically, the further behind the wing that the prop is located, the more
efficient and less stressed it is, but a prop extension introduces different
stresses to the engine.
It is my understanding that the internal histerisis (pardon my spelling)
introduced by the flexing of the pusher props generates a significant amount
of heat that has caused some all-composite props to delaminate on that type
of plane. There are many composite covered props that have wood cores, and
that seems to address this problem adequately.
Dan Branstrom
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dj Merrill" <deej@thayer.dartmouth.edu>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Magneto Relpacements
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Dj Merrill
<deej@thayer.dartmouth.edu>
>
> On Sun, 23 Nov 2003, Dan Branstrom wrote:
>
> > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dan Branstrom"
<danbranstrom@verizon.net>
> >
> > The solution? Wood props. ;
> > )
> > Do not archive
> > Dan Branstrom
>
> Have wood props been shown to be immune from this problem?
> Or only certain wood props? I'm curious because I do have a wooden prop,
> and if I have to replace a mag I'd like to replace it with an EI.
>
> Thanks,
>
> -Dj
>
> --
> Dj Merrill Thayer School of Engineering
> ThUG Sr. Unix Systems Administrator 8000 Cummings Hall
> deej@thayer.dartmouth.edu - N1JOV Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH 03755
>
> "On the side of the software box, in the 'System Requirements' section,
> it said 'Requires Windows 95 or better'. So I installed Linux." -Anonymous
>
>
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: | Trim servo wiring |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Steve Sampson" <SSampson.SLN21@london.edu>
Bob - I want to drive a Mac servo from either a Ray Allen stick grip or the
Ray Allen (DPDT?) rocker switch in the panel where either pilot can get to
it.
The rocker normally holds both outgoing wires to the servo to earth unless
the rocker is activated. I propose to put a S704-1 in both lines so that by
pressing the stick button the line will switch, so that instead of passing
any signal straight through, the line to the servo will go to +12. The stick
button will activate by grounding the actuation signal.
Two questions:
1) If the rocker and a stick button were pressed together, or two stick
buttons both lines to the servo could go '+'. I see no problem however.
2) The S704 will be 'live' and the activation cct 'made' by grounding at the
stick. Runaway if a fault develops?
Any bad practice in here? Sorry for trivia. Thanks, Steve.
PS Is it worth putting diodes in the circuit or are the motors just too
small?
---
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: Magneto Relpacements |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Charlie & Tupper England <cengland@netdoor.com>
George Braly wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: George Braly <gwbraly@gami.com>
>
>
><... from the data we see with strain gages mounted up on crank shafts
>during
>certification tests ... the concern about the electronic ignition ... is
>legitimate ...>
>I am amazed and chagrined. It is incredible to me that something that makes
>the
>engine run so much smoother could cause/aggravate damaging
>vibration/harmonics.
>I asked for credible evidence and I got it.
>I stand corrected ... Jim S.
>
>
>Think of the troops doing double time across the wooden bridge.
>
>If they all trot along in pure cadence - - ah... it sounds so smooth.
>
>Of course, if the cadence happens to be near the resonant frequency of the
>bridge - -
>
>
>Regards, George
>
>PS. Sometimes the enemy of good is a misguided attempt at better!
>
But here you aren't changing the pace, just stomping about 5% harder.
Interesting how close to the edge a/c engines really are....
Charlie
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: Magneto Relpacements |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: BobsV35B@aol.com
In a message dated 11/24/03 2:37:40 PM Central Standard Time,
cengland@netdoor.com writes:
>Think of the troops doing double time across the wooden bridge.
>
>If they all trot along in pure cadence - - ah... it sounds so smooth.
>
>Of course, if the cadence happens to be near the resonant frequency of the
>bridge - -
>
>
>Regards, George
>
>PS. Sometimes the enemy of good is a misguided attempt at better!
>
But here you aren't changing the pace, just stomping about 5% harder.
Interesting how close to the edge a/c engines really are....
Good Afternoon Charlie,
Just a wandering thought.
Do you suppose the thing that is causing the problem is the fact that all of
the combustion events are coming right together instead of being distributed a
little before, right on and a little after they would with magneto ignition?
Maybe the act of making them so perfect is what is causing the bridge to
vibrate harmonically with the soldiers foot steps. Same deal for us.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Magneto Relpacements |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Jim Sower <canarder@frontiernet.net>
<... But here you aren't changing the pace, just stomping about 5% harder.
Interesting how close to the edge a/c engines really are ...>
In 1935 when all the technology in these engines "matured", EVERYTHING was close
to the edge. An auto engine was good for maybe 50k mi. Cars have advanced. Lyc
pretty much hasn't.
<... the thing that is causing the problem is the fact that all of the combustion
events are coming right together instead of being distributed a little before,
right on and a little after they would with magneto ignition ...>
Now there's a thought :o) Now the manufacturers have to make a decision. Are
we
to continue to pamper these antique engines by replicating antique ignition
systems, or should we move the engine itself out of the 30s and 40s into the
current century to where it will withstand uniform, consistent ignition? Let's
see here -- Which way should we go ... :o) I know!! Let's emulate Ford and GM.
Let's stonewall and say it can't be done until the Japanese do it and steal half
our market and THEN start thinking about upgrades and product improvement.
What a concept ... Jim S.
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: | Magneto Relpacements |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "David.vonLinsowe" <David.vonLinsowe@delphi.com>
More thoughts on the engine/prop combination topic.
Just because you haven't heard of the vibratory problems with other C/S props,
other than Hartzell, doesn't necessarily mean that they don't have issues too,
it may mean that they haven't tested as thoroughly as Hartzell...
If you want less vibratory issues with the 4 cylinder Lycoming, use the counter
weighted crank.
One of the main drives behind Hartzell's new "Blended Airfoil" prop was to reduce
vibratory concerns.
Dave Anders holds the title of having the world's fastest RV. 260+ mph with a
IO-360 powered RV-4 with dual E.I. and high compression pistons. The prop is
Hartzell that has been clipped smaller than Hartzell's limits, 70.5" vs. 72 min.
dia. The blades have been retwisted to improve the pitch distribution at high
speed. He runs at 3000 rpm. This in no way recommends or endorses what Dave
has done.
Dave
RV-6
Prop performance testing
Standard Hartzell
MT 3 Blade
MT new 2 Blade
Hartzell "Blended Airfoil"
From: George Braly <gwbraly@gami.com>
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Magneto Relpacements
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: George Braly <gwbraly@gami.com>
<... from the data we see with strain gages mounted up on crank shafts
during
certification tests ... the concern about the electronic ignition ... is
legitimate ...>
I am amazed and chagrined. It is incredible to me that something that makes
the
engine run so much smoother could cause/aggravate damaging
vibration/harmonics.
I asked for credible evidence and I got it.
I stand corrected ... Jim S.
Think of the troops doing double time across the wooden bridge.
If they all trot along in pure cadence - - ah... it sounds so smooth.
Of course, if the cadence happens to be near the resonant frequency of the
bridge - -
Regards, George
PS. Sometimes the enemy of good is a misguided attempt at better!
****************************************************************************************
Note: The information contained in this message may be privileged and confidential
and thus protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the
intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this
message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by
replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. Thank you.
****************************************************************************************
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: | Re: Magneto Relpacements |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Jon Finley" <Jon@finleyweb.net>
Hey, your almost there Jim! Now, complete your journey to the dark side - put
a MODERN Subaru in that plane of yours! :-)
Jon Finley
N90MG Q2 - Subaru EJ-22 DD - 461 Hrs. TT
Apple Valley, Minnesota
http://www.FinleyWeb.net/Q2Subaru
---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: Jim Sower <canarder@frontiernet.net>
>Now there's a thought :o) Now the manufacturers have to make a decision. Are
we
>to continue to pamper these antique engines by replicating antique ignition
>systems, or should we move the engine itself out of the 30s and 40s into the
>current century to where it will withstand uniform, consistent ignition? Let's
>see here -- Which way should we go ... :o) I know!! Let's emulate Ford and GM.
>Let's stonewall and say it can't be done until the Japanese do it and steal half
>our market and THEN start thinking about upgrades and product improvement.
>
>What a concept ... Jim S.
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: | Bob, need info on microair com/xpdr |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Jerry Latimer" <jlatimer1@cox.net>
It's available on the internet at the Microair homepage.
Jerry
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Rick
Fogerson
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Bob, need info on microair com/xpdr
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Rick Fogerson"
<rickf@cableone.net>
Do Not Archive
I did not receive an operations manual with the MicroAir T2000 xpdr. Does
anyone know if one is available on the internet or if a hard copy is
available from someone.
Thanks, Rick Fogerson
RV3 wiring
Boise, ID
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Bob, need info on microair com/xpdr
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
<bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
>
> At 05:10 PM 11/17/2003 -0700, you wrote:
> >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Rick Fogerson"
<rickf@cableone.net>
> >
> >Hi Bob,
> >I bought wiring harnesses from you some time back but just getting around
> >to installing. I'm building an RV3 so no need for intercom or co-pilot
> >stuff. No wiring diagram sent so I need to know what they connect to.
>
> Blue jacket shielded wire is reply beep out that can optionally be
> routed to your audio distribution amplifier. I'm not sure as to the
> exact function of this feature, manual should be more helpful.
>
>
=================
>
>
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: Trim servo wiring |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 06:40 PM 11/24/2003 +0000, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Steve Sampson"
><SSampson.SLN21@london.edu>
>
>Bob - I want to drive a Mac servo from either a Ray Allen stick grip or the
>Ray Allen (DPDT?) rocker switch in the panel where either pilot can get to
>it.
>
>The rocker normally holds both outgoing wires to the servo to earth unless
>the rocker is activated. I propose to put a S704-1 in both lines so that by
>pressing the stick button the line will switch, so that instead of passing
>any signal straight through, the line to the servo will go to +12. The stick
>button will activate by grounding the actuation signal.
>
>Two questions:
>1) If the rocker and a stick button were pressed together, or two stick
>buttons both lines to the servo could go '+'. I see no problem however.
>2) The S704 will be 'live' and the activation cct 'made' by grounding at the
>stick. Runaway if a fault develops?
Yup, about every OBAM aircraft flying has the potential for
trim runaway due to either stuck switches or faulted wires.
If you've studied the mechanical limits to trim authority
for your project and determined that trim-stuck-in-a-limit
presents no special hazard, then what you propose is no
worse than most airplanes flying.
>Any bad practice in here? Sorry for trivia. Thanks, Steve.
If studies of runaway trim situations present more excitement
than you'd like to experience, then a two-switch trim
system is in order. Most high performance aircraft have
either a push-to-enable IN ADDITION to trim-up/down switches
-OR- a wheel master disconnect button that disengages ALL
electrically driven flight control surfaces wether driven
by trim actuators or autopilot servos.
I designed a two-pole, double-throw, (on)-off-(on) switch
for the Piaggio GP-180 that was two, parallel paddles
that mounted on the center console. Pressing both paddles
together would produce the desired trim action . . . failure
of one switch would not carry across to the other switch.
A similar dual-actuator trim switch can be found on King Airs.
I believe both of these airplanes also have a wheel master
disconnect system.
It all hinges on your evaluation of how bad a trim runaway
can be and what lengths to which you'll go to prevent it.
Bob . . .
>PS Is it worth putting diodes in the circuit or are the motors just too
>small?
PM motors do not behave like relay and contactor coils. No diodes
are necessary. They're useful on any relays, contactors and solenoids
that are employed in your system.
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: | Magneto Replacements |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: George Braly <gwbraly@gami.com>
<... the thing that is causing the problem is the fact that all of the
combustion
events are coming right together instead of being distributed a little
before,
right on and a little after they would with magneto ignition ...>
Now there's a thought :o) Now the manufacturers have to make a decision.
Are we
to continue to pamper these antique engines by replicating antique ignition
systems, or should we move the engine itself out of the 30s and 40s into the
current century to where it will withstand uniform, consistent ignition?
Let's
see here -- Which way should we go ... :o) I know!! Let's emulate Ford and
GM.
Let's stonewall and say it can't be done until the Japanese do it and steal
half
our market and THEN start thinking about upgrades and product improvement.
What a concept ... Jim S.<<
***********************************************
Jim,
A little dose of reality, please?
Can you name me one automotive engine that can operate continuously at 90%
of max rated horsepower for 1800 hours ?
Can you name me one automotive engine that can operate at 90% of rated max
horsepower for 1800 hours and do so at a BSFC of < 0.385 lbs/hour/hp ???
How about the Japanese? Have you seen the "wonderful" "modern" little
Honda-TCM engine? It weighs more NOW (by admission) than the engine it is
supposed to replace. It is claimed to have 220 Hp instead of only 200 for
the engine it is supposed to replace, but on a Hp/installed pound comparison
- - it isn't any better - - even assuming it meets all of its currently
claimed future goals.
After 40 years (since the 200 Hp Lycoming IO-360 first arrived) you would
think they could do a little better with all of the "modern" improvements.
Regards, George
PS. Oh! BTW, the word floating around among one or more former TCM
employees with knowledge of the situation is that the Honda engine has
already broken three crankshafts.
PPS in about 1918 or so, one Navy Admiral made the observation that water
cooling an aircraft engine made about as much sense as air cooling a
submarine.
---
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: | Magneto Replacements |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Dave Morris <dave@davemorris.com>
At 10:21 PM 11/24/2003 -0600, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: George Braly <gwbraly@gami.com>
>
>
>PPS in about 1918 or so, one Navy Admiral made the observation that water
>cooling an aircraft engine made about as much sense as air cooling a
>submarine.
2 years later, the New York Times sarcastically dismissed Dr. Robert
Goddard's notion that a rocket could function in a vacuum, too.
Dave Morris
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: | Re: Magneto Replacements |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Jerzy Krasinski <krasinski@direcway.com>
George Braly wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: George Braly <gwbraly@gami.com>
>
>
>....................................................................Are we
>to continue to pamper these antique engines by replicating antique ignition
>systems, or should we move the engine itself out of the 30s and 40s into the
>current century to where it will withstand uniform, consistent ignition?
>....................
>
> ***********************************************
>
>Jim,
>
>A little dose of reality, please?
>
>Can you name me one automotive engine that can operate continuously at 90%
>of max rated horsepower for 1800 hours ?
>
>Can you name me one automotive engine that can operate at 90% of rated max
>horsepower for 1800 hours and do so at a BSFC of < 0.385 lbs/hour/hp ???
>
>How about the Japanese? Have you seen the "wonderful" "modern" little
>Honda-TCM engine? It weighs more NOW (by admission) than the engine it is
>supposed to replace. It is claimed to have 220 Hp instead of only 200 for
>the engine it is supposed to replace, but on a Hp/installed pound comparison
>- - it isn't any better - - even assuming it meets all of its currently
>claimed future goals.
>
>After 40 years (since the 200 Hp Lycoming IO-360 first arrived) you would
>think they could do a little better with all of the "modern" improvements.
>
>Regards, George
>
>PS. Oh! BTW, the word floating around among one or more former TCM
>employees with knowledge of the situation is that the Honda engine has
>already broken three crankshafts.
>
>PPS in about 1918 or so, one Navy Admiral made the observation that water
>cooling an aircraft engine made about as much sense as air cooling a
>submarine.
>
>---
>
Paul Lamar might be right claiming that the rotary engine is the answer.
Try to brake the crankshaft of a rotary. Doesn't the rotary engine look
like a modern improvement?
Jerzy
>
>
>
>
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: | Battery/Alt switch differences |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: sdcmills@att.net
My question pertains to the Z-11 drawing and a difference between it and the
drawings supplied with the article about the OVM. In the Z-11 drawing the
battery/alt switch is a standard 2-10.
In the drawing attached with the Crowbar article a standard two pole single
throw switch is used. On this drawing there is a note, however, that states:
Important Battery and Alternator should come on and off together.
What is the reasoning for this note? Why the difference between the two
drawings? I realize that Z-13 is using the B & C regulator and the other
drawing is dealing with a generic regulator. However, I can see some
usefulness in being able to shut the alternator field off and keeping the
battery contactor energized. I would surely appreciate an explanation.
Thanks,
Scott Mills
N339A
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: | Magneto Replacements |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: George Braly <gwbraly@gami.com>
Rotary engine ... the BSFC's are worse than the worst that Japan
incorporated can now builds - - and even their best is worse than we
already have in 40 year old aircraft engines.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Jerzy
Krasinski
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Magneto Replacements
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Jerzy Krasinski
<krasinski@direcway.com>
George Braly wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: George Braly <gwbraly@gami.com>
>
>
>....................................................................Are we
>to continue to pamper these antique engines by replicating antique ignition
>systems, or should we move the engine itself out of the 30s and 40s into
the
>current century to where it will withstand uniform, consistent ignition?
>....................
>
> ***********************************************
>
>Jim,
>
>A little dose of reality, please?
>
>Can you name me one automotive engine that can operate continuously at 90%
>of max rated horsepower for 1800 hours ?
>
>Can you name me one automotive engine that can operate at 90% of rated max
>horsepower for 1800 hours and do so at a BSFC of < 0.385 lbs/hour/hp ???
>
>How about the Japanese? Have you seen the "wonderful" "modern" little
>Honda-TCM engine? It weighs more NOW (by admission) than the engine it is
>supposed to replace. It is claimed to have 220 Hp instead of only 200 for
>the engine it is supposed to replace, but on a Hp/installed pound
comparison
>- - it isn't any better - - even assuming it meets all of its currently
>claimed future goals.
>
>After 40 years (since the 200 Hp Lycoming IO-360 first arrived) you would
>think they could do a little better with all of the "modern" improvements.
>
>Regards, George
>
>PS. Oh! BTW, the word floating around among one or more former TCM
>employees with knowledge of the situation is that the Honda engine has
>already broken three crankshafts.
>
>PPS in about 1918 or so, one Navy Admiral made the observation that water
>cooling an aircraft engine made about as much sense as air cooling a
>submarine.
>
>---
>
Paul Lamar might be right claiming that the rotary engine is the answer.
Try to brake the crankshaft of a rotary. Doesn't the rotary engine look
like a modern improvement?
Jerzy
>
>
>
>
---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
---
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! --
|