Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:47 AM - Com antenna ground plane (Dan O'Brien)
2. 05:43 AM - Re: tach output converter (Ian)
3. 06:16 AM - Re: Ray Allen (and other) Stick Grips and Servos (Eric M. Jones)
4. 06:42 AM - Dead mike (Curtis Jaussi)
5. 07:57 AM - Installation manuals (Wayne Berg)
6. 08:48 AM - Re: Com antenna ground plane (Dave Morris)
7. 09:11 AM - Re: Re: Transponder coax choice (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
8. 09:20 AM - Loadmeter Wiring (Ross Mickey)
9. 09:44 AM - Re: Loadmeter Wiring (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
10. 10:04 AM - Re: Loadmeter Wiring (Ross Mickey)
11. 10:35 AM - Re: Com antenna ground plane (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
12. 11:05 AM - Re: Com antenna ground plane (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
13. 11:33 AM - Re: Ray Allen Stick Grips (Gilles.Thesee)
14. 11:43 AM - Re: Com antenna ground plane (John Schroeder)
15. 11:43 AM - Re: Com antenna ground plane (Gilles.Thesee)
16. 12:33 PM - Re: Who knows the TRANSORB 33V ? (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
17. 02:06 PM - USPAT/GarminAT Built-in Intercoms (Fred Stucklen)
18. 05:19 PM - Stereo (not really) intercoms (Larry Bowen)
19. 07:02 PM - Re: Stereo (not really) intercoms (James E. Clark)
20. 08:53 PM - Re: Stereo (not really) intercoms (Larry Bowen)
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: | Com antenna ground plane |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dan O'Brien" <danobrien@cox.net>
>Ideally, the ground plane should be at a 90 degree or larger angle
>to the radiating element. If the angle is less, it will change the
>impedance and thus the SWR. It's not catastrophic, but may affect
>the range you get and in an extreme case, might reduce the power
>output, if the transmitter has high SWR protection. Better to
>reduce 4 ground plane foils down to 3 rather than to fold the one
>4th one back onto the whip.
Dave, thanks for the response. A couple questions. If I were to run one
strip **up** the side of the fuselage, it would be at more than 90 degrees
to the antenna. Would this be better than leaving it off?
Also, for we lay people, what does SWR refer to? Something about range?
Thanks,
Dan O'Brien
Lancair ES
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | tach output converter |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Ian " <jabiru22@yahoo.com.au>
Not an expert here, but a Autronic engine management computer will run
everything form a lawn mower to a v12. maybe worth having a look at.
(mate has one in his Subaru WRX 2L 350Hp)
Ian
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark
Means
Subject: AeroElectric-List: tach output converter
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Mark Means"
--> <rgvelocity@lmf.net>
Gentlemen,
As I seem to have exhausted the knowledge or willingness of the
manufacturers to help me I am throwing this out to you:
I have a V8 autoconversion (LS1) which has individual coils for each
cylinder driven by two aftermarket Haltech computers (one per 4
cylinders). There is a "tach output" from the computer which is 5V
square wave. This apparently has been a problem as new generations of
these computers have a 5/12v option (which mine does not ). The Grand
Rapids engine monitor will not read the 5v signal and the owner tells me
it needs to be 12v.
What I am looking for is a simple circuit to convert this 5v pulsed
signal to 12v with the same pulses. I have built a few simple Radio
Shack circuits but really don't have a good background in electronics.
Soooo, if someone knows how to solve make a circuit as described please
don't just say "yea, no problem, just use a xxxx12002" cuz I won't know
what you're talking about. If you can send me a schematic or detailed
description or a place to look that would be great.
I realize that there are "tach adaptors" out there. Autometer makes one
but it has to be spliced into a coil wiring and they weren't sure it
would work)
I also have heard about inductive pickups to put on a spark plug wire
but can't find a source. This would be the simple solution if anyone
knows where I can get one. Thanks.
Mark Means
=
==
direct advertising on the Matronics Forums.
==
==
==
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: Ray Allen (and other) Stick Grips and Servos |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones@charter.net>
We live in a world where product design can evolve at lightning speed if the
market exists. Joysticks have gotten the design boost by the interest in
computer flight games. About three years ago I started to speculate whether
or not computer joysticks could be used instead of the "real kind". Now some
of the make-believe kind are almost certainly better than the "real kind".
See this for good reason to make a trip to Best Buy today:
http://www.saitekusa.com/usa/prod/cyborg_gold.htm (or many other Saitek
joysticks...but I have my heart set on these beauties!)
Several months ago Thrustmaster (PC game joysticks) introduced a metal,
extremely high quality copy of the F-16 HOTAS system for $799.00. You can
now buy them for FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS CHEAPER! In perusing the industrial
joysticks I now see more and more "Rugged ABS construction". You really have
to believe plastic is a better choice for a joystick anyway (or wood).
The very least one should do to the Ray Allen stick and others is to use
environmentally-sealed gold contact switches. Watch the current ratings too.
Regarding the Ray Allen MAC8--please see my write-up on this device.
www.periheliondesign.com/mac8trim.zip
Regards,
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge MA 01550-2705
Phone (508) 764-2072
Email: emjones@charter.net
"Everything you've learned in school as "obvious" becomes
less and less obvious as you begin to study the universe.
For example, there are no solids in the universe. There's
not even a suggestion of a solid. There are no absolute con-
tinuums. There are no surfaces. There are no straight lines."
- R. Buckminster Fuller
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: Curtis Jaussi <jaussi@direcway.com>
I have installed a Garmin 350XL with a PS Engineering CD/Intercom. The intercom
works OK--the Comm works OK to receive. When I trigger the mike, signal is
transmitted out, but the mike goes completely dead. It does not transmit anything
on the comm or the intercom. Any ideas on where to begin looking?
Curtis Jaussi Europa XL tri-gear.
jaussi@direcway.com
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: | Installation manuals |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Wayne Berg" <wfberg@msn.com>
Does anyone out there have or have access to installation manuals for KLN-94 and
KMA-28.
Thanks for any help, Wayne Berg
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: Com antenna ground plane |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Dave Morris <dave@davemorris.com>
How many ground plane radials do you have? It is typical to have 3 or 4,
and if you have to run one of them upward at more than a 90 degree angle to
the center whip, it won't matter that much. Some people use a screen as a
ground plane, and that screen can be bent around to accomodate the fuselage
and other objects. You just don' t want it to be folded back near the
radiating element too closely.
SWR is standing wave ratio, and refers to a measurement of the difference
between the impedance of the antenna versus that if the coax. If the
antenna is not tuned properly, is too close to other metal objects, or has
other problems, it can cause a mismatch that can produce all sorts of weird
symptoms, not the least of which is a reduction of your transmitted
signal. A quick check on Google shows several articles on SWR. For
instance: http://www.nancymoon.com/swr_soapbox.htm
Dave Morris
At 06:46 AM 12/13/2003, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dan O'Brien" <danobrien@cox.net>
>
>
> >Ideally, the ground plane should be at a 90 degree or larger angle
>
> >to the radiating element. If the angle is less, it will change the
>
> >impedance and thus the SWR. It's not catastrophic, but may affect
>
> >the range you get and in an extreme case, might reduce the power
>
> >output, if the transmitter has high SWR protection. Better to
>
> >reduce 4 ground plane foils down to 3 rather than to fold the one
>
> >4th one back onto the whip.
>
>
>Dave, thanks for the response. A couple questions. If I were to run one
>strip **up** the side of the fuselage, it would be at more than 90 degrees
>to the antenna. Would this be better than leaving it off?
>
>Also, for we lay people, what does SWR refer to? Something about range?
>
>
>Thanks,
>
>Dan O'Brien
>
>Lancair ES
>
>
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: Transponder coax choice |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 08:01 AM 12/12/2003 -0800, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: f1rocket@telus.net
>
>Would the RG-400 or RG-142B(I'm guessing B because you mention FEP) good for
>the VHF (nav/comm) as well?
>Jeff
Yes, ANY modern coax with reasonable performance at 1 GHz+
(transponder and GPS) frequencies will also do well at
lower (GS/COM/NAV/MB) frequencies.
If it were my airplane, RG400 would be used throughout
the aircraft.
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: | Loadmeter Wiring |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Ross Mickey" <rmickey@ix.netcom.com>
Bob,
Is there any chance that the wiring diagram that came with my loadmeter is
incorrect? The reason I ask is this.
The wiring diagram shows the Voltmeter hooked up to pins 4 and 5 and the
loadmeter to pins 1 and 3. When I put a ammeter accross pins 4 and 5 the
loadmeter needle moves and when I put the ammeter accross pins 4 and 5 the
voltmeter needle moves. This seems oppisite from the wiring diagram I have.
Ross
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: Loadmeter Wiring |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 09:20 AM 12/13/2003 -0800, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Ross Mickey" <rmickey@ix.netcom.com>
>
>Bob,
>
>Is there any chance that the wiring diagram that came with my loadmeter is
>incorrect? The reason I ask is this.
>
>The wiring diagram shows the Voltmeter hooked up to pins 4 and 5 and the
>loadmeter to pins 1 and 3. When I put a ammeter . . .
do you mean ohmmeter?
> . . . accross pins 4 and 5 the
>loadmeter needle moves and when I put the ammeter accross pins 4 and 5 the
>voltmeter needle moves. This seems oppisite from the wiring diagram I have.
>
>Ross
Hmmmm . . . It appears that your instrument may be internally wired
backwards
but I'm mystified as to how it left our shop in this condition. The
instrument
would have been tested with the companion scaling module for calibration and
we should have seen the problem before it got out of here.
Are you sure you're not confusing the needles? See
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/loadvolt.jpg
Notice that the needle extending from the right side of the instrument
face points to the left-had LOAD% scale, the needle extending from
the left side points to the right-hand VOLTS scale. I suspect you're
seeing the right-hand needle move and associating it with the
"VOLTS" nomenclature printed on the scale plate right under the
needle . . . which would account for a reversed perception
of needle function.
Bob . . .
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: Loadmeter Wiring |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Ross Mickey" <rmickey@ix.netcom.com>
> do you mean ohmmeter?
Yes.
> Are you sure you're not confusing the needles? See
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/loadvolt.jpg
>
No, I am not confusing the needles. The needle located on the right that
indicates load on the left moves when I put the ohmmeter accross pins 4 and
5. I did this about 6 times because I know it didn't look right. The only
reason I checked it is because I have gone over all of my wiring 4-5 times
and can't find anything wrong. When I installed it as per the wiring
diagram, the voltmeter appears to work but the loadmeter doesn't move.
Could this occur if the instrument is wired backward internally?
Ross
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: Com antenna ground plane |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
<snip>
>SWR is standing wave ratio, and refers to a measurement of the difference
>between the impedance of the antenna versus that if the coax. If the
>antenna is not tuned properly, is too close to other metal objects, or has
>other problems, it can cause a mismatch that can produce all sorts of weird
>symptoms, not the least of which is a reduction of your transmitted
>signal. A quick check on Google shows several articles on SWR. For
>instance: http://www.nancymoon.com/swr_soapbox.htm
Not a terrible article but not very useful either. See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Antennas/Popular_Antenna_Lore.pdf
Bob . . .
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: Com antenna ground plane |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 08:01 PM 12/12/2003 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dan O'Brien" <danobrien@cox.net>
>
>I have an external Comant com antenna that I originally thought would go on
>the outside of my Lancair ES (fiberglass). I'd like to put it inside for
>asthetics. I have a little shelf on the side of fuselage aft of the
>baggage compartment that would be a convenient place to mount it. Can I
>mount it there and have the ground plane (say strips of copper tape) on one
>side of the antenna run up or down the side of the fuselage? Or does it
>need to be mounted closer to the center line of the tail so that the ground
>plane is to parallel with mother earth on all sides of the antenna?
What you propose will probably work fine. Run ground plane strips
out horizontally as far as practical and then bend them up or down
the side/bottom of fuselage as practical. It's better to go down
than up with ground plane tips. In final analysis, you'll probably
see no difference in performance from either ground plane
shape or symmetry around the base of the antenna. Wouldn't hurt
to "scan" the antenna's electrical performance with an analyzer
after installation.
Bob . . .
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: Ray Allen Stick Grips |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Gilles.Thesee" <Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr>
Hi all,
> This means that the wiring and contacts on the bottom of the grip head can
> come in direct contact with the exposed top of the metal control stick.
I'm not quite sure I clearly understand this one. The main problem with
those Ray Allen stick grips is that there is no reasonnable room provided
for the connections in the grip head. The wires are tightly packed inside
the head, putting the wires and solders at risk of being broken.
I used a multi conductor wire, and there is no bare wire or connections
apart those in the stick heads and those in the connector at the end of the
two foot wire, outside the sticks.
Tossed the tiny wires supplied by Ray Allen.
How did you install your wires ?
Regards,
Gilles
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: Com antenna ground plane |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: John Schroeder <jschroeder@perigee.net>
Dave -
BTW, The owners of this site recently bought Wheeler Express Aircraft
Company. The owner was killed in a crash on the way home from OSH last
summer. Their website is a very interesting place vis a vis antennas.
Do not archive
John
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: Com antenna ground plane |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Gilles.Thesee" <Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr>
Bob,
Got a corrupt file error while trying to open or download the document.
Regards,
Gilles
. See:
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Antennas/Popular_Antenna_Lore.pdf
>
> Bob . . .
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: | Re: Who knows the TRANSORB 33V ? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 08:36 AM 12/12/2003 +0100, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Michel RIAZUELO"
><mt.riazuelo@wanadoo.fr>
>
>Hi all,
>
>I will use MGL Avionics instruments "Smart Single" line (
>http://www.lightflying.com.au/Stratomaster%20Pages/Smart%20Singles.htm ).
>
>Wiring diagram always indicate a Transorb 33V protection device witch
>seems to work like the OVM. See
>http://www.lightflying.com.au/Stratomaster%20Manuals/Transorb%20power%20supply%20surge%20protection.doc
>for details.
>
>Who had heard about that ?
>Does it be redundant with OVM ?
The Transorb is a close cousin to the zener voltage regulator diode
that will go into conduction at some voltage just above its rated
value. There have been numerous articles circulated in the OBAM aircraft
community advocating use of these devices. The one cited by Michel
is typicaL . . .
Quoting from the article:
------------------
Transorbs work by clamping any excessive voltage to a certain limit.
Transorbs available from MGL Avionics clamp at 33V. They do this by
conducting anytime excessive voltage is present between the two terminals.
For a short time, the transorb will absorb almost unbelievable amounts of
power, should this be required. The transorb also reacts within a few
billionth of a second making it far superior to any traditional solution.
In order to protect your electronic equipment correctly, it is required to
install an inline fuse or fused circuit breaker. Choose a trip current that
is sufficient for the supply of all your equipment and do take into account
the current requirements of a radio if you are transmitting.
We recommend that you create a power rail consisting out of DC plus and
minus rails for your electronic equipment and protect this with a single
transorb as shown. You can place the transorb close to your equipment.
Ensure that you use very short wiring here as this will aid the speed at
which your transorb will protect your electronics.
------------------------------------
This is a classic example of a few facts, poorly interpreted
stacked on top of still worse assumptions and supported by
no real engineering data upon which one might make learned
deductions.
First, let me call your attention to the published data for
typical Transorb characteristics which you can download at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Mfgr_Data/Semi/15ke.pdf
I'll call your attention first to part number 1N63284/1.5KE33
which is typical of the part cited in the article. Note that
this device has a "Breakdown Voltage" range of
29.7 to 36.3 volts with a test current of 1.0 mA. It has
a "Standoff Voltage" rating of 26.8 volts. A "Maximum
Clamping Voltage" rating of 47.7 Volts at the "Peak Current"
of 31.4 Amps.
Will take the misapplication of a perfectly good part
as follows:
(1) One selects a Transorb based upon the maximum normal
voltage that might be expected in the system plus a little
bit of headroom. For example, the article cites a 33v device
for a 14v system. Go back to the data sheet and find a
part with a Standoff Voltage rating just above that which
we might expect as a function of system dynamics. In our
case, we have ov protection set for 16 volts and we know that
the major energy source capable of pushing the bus above
16 volts for any period of time is the alternator. Assuming
a regulator failure, we don't want all the Transorbs to go
into conduction at some level below that which we expect the
ov system to handle. Soooo . . . I'd look for parts in hte
range of 18-20 volts (DO-160 suggests that any part worthy
of flight in our airplane should withstand 20v for 1 second).
Okay, it looks like a 1N6280/1.5KE24, 24 volt part
is really a better choice than the 33v device cited in
the article . . . assuming a Transorb of any
voltage rating is called for.
(2) Any source of high voltage energy other than the
alternator MUST be an inductive storage device.
Capacitive devices can deliver no more than SYSTEM
VOLTAGE but at very high peak CURRENTS. Inductors
are the mirror-image of capacitors, they can deliver
no more than excitation CURRENT but at higher-than-
system PEAK VOLTAGES. So, let us survey the airplane
for all inductive components.
These fall into a small group: Relay and contactor coils
are the single most inductive devices but their currents
are limited to no more than 5 amps or so for the meanest
one of the bunch - starter contactors. Motors can draw
a lot more current but their inductive characteristics
are not as wicked as one might think due to the special
way motor coils interact internally.
Further, rudimentary studies of energy transfers from
inductive devices as in:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/spike.pdf
and
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/spikecatcher.pdf
suggest that taming the potential for these devices
to generate spikes is (A) a no-brainer and easy
task and (B) the best reason for adding spike suppression
to a contactor is to increase longevity of the controlling
switch as opposed to "protecting" other system
accessories from the ravages of spiking contactors.
To date, I have yet to receive any data from any
source on a repeatable experiment wherein the
author has actually captured a "killer-spike" in
the wild. I've hunted these rare specimens for
years myself. There have been many papers written (many
by folk who sell spike-catcher products) that speak
to the POTENTIAL for disaster . . . but these same
articles never speak to alternative solutions wherein
the spike is best eliminated at the SINGLE source as opposed
to sprinkling protection on ALL potential victims.
There is a DO-160 test that prescribes hitting your
potential victim with a 300 volt spike from a well-charged
capacitor through a prescribed network. Turns out that a
simple, 10uF electrolytic capacitor across the power input
terminals wipes out the spike quite nicely. Even the
"experts" suggest that spikes to be routinely expected
in aircraft DC power distribution systems are very low
energy and easy to deal with using rudimentary and
common design techniques.
This doesn't mean that Transorbs are not useful in
aircraft system and component design . . . I've used
them in dozens of applications . . . every one involved
going to the lab to see if my product can survive
lightning strikes to the aircraft. This is where those
gawd-awful values for energy dissipation and peak
current ratings begin to make real sense. But designing
a system for lightning survivability is simply outside
the realm of operation for 99.99% of light aircraft
missions . . .
There's an interesting observation about virtually all
articles in OBAM community that propose Transorbs:
They advocate putting a Transorb on every potential
victim device. In a small aircraft where the bus
is located within a few feet of each device, a SINGLE
Transorb on the bus to a low impedance ground would
suffice to protect all devices in the aircraft.
If someone ever produces data on a repeatable
experiment wherein we can identify and justify
the need for such devices in our airplanes, you
can "bet your sweet bippy" that they'll show up
in the Z-Figures in short order. Until that time
folks, please view articles suggesting such devices
with caution . . . let's talk about it first before
you sprinkle your system with flooby-dust.
Bob . . .
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: | USPAT/GarminAT Built-in Intercoms |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Fred Stucklen" <wstucklen1@cox.net>
Has anybody tried to utilize the built-in intercom in one of the
USPAT/GarminAT radios (SL-40, SL-30, etc..) The installation manual
indicates that an input on one of the connectors has to be grounded "to
enable the intercom function". I'm interpreting this to be turning ON
the intercom for use, not opening up the audio through it. I'm assuming
that the internal VOX and Squelch settings will allow it to be used like
an ordinary intercom, once it is enabled...
If this is indeed the way it works, has anybody had problems setting
it up to work correctly (i.e., setting the squelch and audio levels)
What about resetting the settings while in flight????
Fred Stucklen
RV-6A N926RV
111.5 Hrs since Aug 03....
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: | Stereo (not really) intercoms |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Larry Bowen" <Larry@BowenAero.com>
I have a NAT AA80-001 intercom I'm trying to wire to my RV8. It seems
that this intercom (as well as a few others I've researched) accept
stereo input -- but have mono output. What's the point of that?! I
have stereo headsets, jacks, music in, and music source...but mono
coming out of the intercom. Is this a problem, or should I just tie the
L and R together at the headset jack and press on?
Also, if anyone has a soft copy of the owners/installation manual for
the AA80-001, could you forward to me? Thanks.
Thanks.
-
Larry Bowen
Larry@BowenAero.com
http://BowenAero.com
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: | Stereo (not really) intercoms |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "James E. Clark" <james@nextupventures.com>
Not sure if this answers your question but in the **old** days of radio, you
would have a "mono both" option at a stereo station. That way if you had
mono on only ONE channel, you could supply it to both the "left" and "right"
channels. The channels are independent so IF you supplied different signals
to each (stereo) that is what you got out.
James
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Larry
> Bowen
> Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2003 8:17 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Stereo (not really) intercoms
>
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Larry Bowen"
> <Larry@BowenAero.com>
>
> I have a NAT AA80-001 intercom I'm trying to wire to my RV8. It seems
> that this intercom (as well as a few others I've researched) accept
> stereo input -- but have mono output. What's the point of that?! I
> have stereo headsets, jacks, music in, and music source...but mono
> coming out of the intercom. Is this a problem, or should I just tie the
> L and R together at the headset jack and press on?
>
> Also, if anyone has a soft copy of the owners/installation manual for
> the AA80-001, could you forward to me? Thanks.
>
> Thanks.
>
> -
> Larry Bowen
> Larry@BowenAero.com
> http://BowenAero.com
>
>
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: | Stereo (not really) intercoms |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Larry Bowen" <Larry@BowenAero.com>
I think I understand what you are saying. But there is only one line
out for each headset jack. I can supply L and R in at the intercom, but
I guess they are combined on the line out. I'll have to connect that
single out to both L and R at the headset jack....I think....and then I
just have mono.
-
Larry Bowen
Larry@BowenAero.com
http://BowenAero.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: James E. Clark [mailto:james@nextupventures.com]
> Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2003 10:02 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Stereo (not really) intercoms
>
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "James E. Clark"
> --> <james@nextupventures.com>
>
> Not sure if this answers your question but in the **old**
> days of radio, you would have a "mono both" option at a
> stereo station. That way if you had mono on only ONE channel,
> you could supply it to both the "left" and "right" channels.
> The channels are independent so IF you supplied different
> signals to each (stereo) that is what you got out.
>
> James
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
> > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of
> > Larry Bowen
> > Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2003 8:17 PM
> > To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Stereo (not really) intercoms
> >
> >
> > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Larry Bowen"
> > <Larry@BowenAero.com>
> >
> > I have a NAT AA80-001 intercom I'm trying to wire to my
> RV8. It seems
> > that this intercom (as well as a few others I've researched) accept
> > stereo input -- but have mono output. What's the point of
> that?! I
> > have stereo headsets, jacks, music in, and music source...but mono
> > coming out of the intercom. Is this a problem, or should I
> just tie
> > the L and R together at the headset jack and press on?
> >
> > Also, if anyone has a soft copy of the owners/installation
> manual for
> > the AA80-001, could you forward to me? Thanks.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > -
> > Larry Bowen
> > Larry@BowenAero.com
> > http://BowenAero.com
> >
> >
>
>
> ===========
> ============
> Matronics Forums.
> ============
> ============
> http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/AeroElectric-List.htm
> Search Engine: http://www.matronics.com/search
> ============
>
>
>
>
>
>
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! --
|