Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:50 AM - Re: Grand Rapids EIS 4000 MAP sensor (caspainhower@aep.com)
2. 06:04 AM - Re: Loran Antenna Pre Amp (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
3. 06:04 AM - SNIMTA_SPAM Re (Dave Morris)
4. 06:06 AM - Re: Why Loran (BobsV35B@aol.com)
5. 06:17 AM - Re: Why Loran (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
6. 06:56 AM - Re: Grand Rapids EIS 4000 MAP sensor (LarryRobertHelming)
7. 07:22 AM - Re: Why Loran (James E. Clark)
8. 07:35 AM - Re: Grand Rapids EIS 4000 MAP sensor (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
9. 08:45 AM - big switch (Troy Scott)
10. 10:11 AM - Garmin GMA 340 audio panel music input (Jeff Hildebrand)
11. 10:22 AM - Re: Garmin GMA 340 audio panel music input (Richard Dudley)
12. 10:57 AM - Re: big switch (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
13. 11:05 AM - Intercom hiss (Scott Bilinski)
14. 11:26 AM - Re: Garmin GMA 340 audio panel music input (Jeff Hildebrand)
15. 11:30 AM - Re: Intercom hiss (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
16. 12:54 PM - Unprotected fuel pump wires on battery bus. ()
17. 01:02 PM - Mounting the OV Contactor (RSamuelson@aol.com)
18. 01:22 PM - Main DC Power Master Switch (Letempt, Jeffrey CW4)
19. 01:33 PM - Re: Why Loran (BobsV35B@aol.com)
20. 01:58 PM - Re: Grand Rapids EIS 4000 MAP sensor (Jim Jewell)
21. 02:55 PM - Re: Main DC Power Master Switch (LarryRobertHelming)
22. 03:27 PM - Re: Unprotected fuel pump wires on battery bus. (Werner Schneider)
23. 07:43 PM - Re: Unprotected fuel pump wires on battery (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
24. 07:56 PM - A Battery is you best filter (Don Boardman)
25. 07:59 PM - Re: Why Loran (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
26. 08:01 PM - Re: Grand Rapids EIS 4000 MAP sensor (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
27. 08:07 PM - Re: Main DC Power Master Switch (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
28. 09:16 PM - Bench Test Power Supply Size (Rick Fogerson)
29. 10:33 PM - Re: Loran Antenna Pre Amp (Neal A. Dillman)
30. 10:43 PM - Re: Loran Antenna Pre Amp (BobsV35B@aol.com)
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: | Re: Grand Rapids EIS 4000 MAP sensor |
01/15/2004 07:49:37 AM
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: caspainhower@aep.com
> I think I got the copper
> idea from Tony Bengelis's book. If it's coiled/supported/etc properly,
> it should be good.
I have to agree with Larry concerning the use of copper. Copper has been
used on air conditioning compressors for many years and the equipment I
maintain uses miles of copper on thousands of components, subjected to
various degrees of vibration. In 16 years I have never seen a vibration
induced failure that did not occur either at an improperly supported
connection or a point where the copper was allowed to rub against another
metal surface. If you are really concerned about embrittlement you can
always replace the tubing every 5 or 10 years. I believe some certified
aircraft use copper tubing in their static systems as well.
Do not archive
Craig S.
Zenith 601XS
This e-mail message and all attachments transmitted with it from the
Nuclear Generation Group of American Electric Power are for the sole
use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and
privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or
distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please
contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original
message.
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Loran Antenna Pre Amp |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 10:50 PM 1/14/2004 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Don Boardman <dboardm3@twcny.rr.com>
>
>Hi Bob,
>
>I am installing a Apollo 612C (3-1/8 round) Loran for back up navigation.
>The antenna uses an A-6 Bulkhead Pre Amp... BNC on both ends. My question,
>as I can no longer put my hands on the manual, is whether the pre amp is
>mounted close to the roof mounted antenna or close to the Loran unit? Or
>doesn't it matter?
It depends on what the pre-amp expects to see at its input. The additional
capacity of coax feeder between antenna and pre-amp may upset the designer's
intentions. I think it's safe to mount it as close to the antenna as
practical.
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: Dave Morris <dave@davemorris.com>
That's good to know! My point of reference is amateur radio and satellite
tracking, where we pump hundreds of watts through the transmission line and
listen for very faint signals, and a 3:1 SWR or an insertion loss of 3dB
would be intolerable. I suppose in this application it's not so bad.
Dave
At 10:40 PM 1/14/2004 -0600, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
><bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
>
>At 09:28 PM 1/14/2004 -0600, you wrote:
> >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Dave Morris <dave@davemorris.com>
> >
> >
> >Hmmm... I don't think you can use a headphone jack in an RF application
> >like that without introducing a huge impedance bump in the system. I would
> >sure put an SWR bridge on the whole thing and see what happens. VHF
> >circuits are very sensitive to discontinuity in the line and only
> >connectors that maintain the 50 Ohm impedance should be used. I think I
> >would go for Plan A.
> >
> >Dave Morris
>
> I did run out to the lab and put this rig on the test
> equipment . . . you can see the "bump" but it isn't
> all that bad. Given that VSWR on a comm antenna over
> the range of interest can be 3:1 or so, the little
> discontinuity offered by the jack was no big deal . . .
> but it IS a tad flimsy . . . 1/4" jack would probably
> be more reliable.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
Dave Morris
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: BobsV35B@aol.com
In a message dated 1/15/04 12:14:12 AM Central Standard Time,
dboardm3@twcny.rr.com writes:
AND REALLY LIKING THE WAY IT LOOKS, IT'S IN THE
PANEL.
Good Morning Don,
Now that is a reason I can really identify with!
No more reason is needed by any of us.
Incidentally, my son and I jointly own a Piper Pacer in which we recently
deactivated a Loran.
When we installed it fifteen or more years ago, we used two identical
antennas. One for the King comm unit and one for the Apollo Loran. It is my
recollection that we mounted some sort of amplifier directly alongside the Loran
antenna in the wing. When we deactivated the Loran, the antenna was connected
via
a new length of coax so that a handheld could easily be used with it in the
cockpit. We had an electronics technician make the change. I am not certain he
removed the amplifier, but I do know it was removed from the circuit.
The aircraft is regularly flown IFR. We did want a bit of a back up in case
of primary comm failure.
A Garmin 196 is currently being used as a back up to the Terra NAV equipment,
but we do have plans to install an IFR approved Trimble TNL 2000 Approach
Plus in place of the panel mounted Apollo Loran. One of the airports into which
the Pacer is regularly operated has no IFR approaches other than two GPSs.
On top of that, I just like the looks of the Trimble unit!
Happy Skies,
Old 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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 01:11 AM 1/15/2004 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Don Boardman <dboardm3@twcny.rr.com>
>
<snip>
> > I can see where you may feel that the GPS could be compromised by terrorist
> > action or even by some misguided interference by the US Military,
>
>NO NOT A CONCERN
>
>
> > but LORAN, at
> > it's very best, can't hold a candle to a one hundred dollar handheld
> GPS when
> > it comes to accuracy or routine reliability.
>
>FLOWN MANY A HAPPY HOUR WITH LORAN. WEATHER EFFECTS ON RARE OCASION.
>
> > The Loran antenna is generally bigger and draggier than a GPS antenna.
>
>ISN'T BIGGER BETTER,... JUST KIDDING.
>
> > The Loran will undoubtedly weigh more than a current production
> handheld GPS
>
>IN MOST CASES I'D RATHER NOT FIDDLE WITH A HANDHELD IN THE COCKPIT.
>
> > and probably no more than an older, low cost, used, panel mount GPS
> > Even if I had the 612C on my shelf, I don't think I would spend the time it
> > took to install it in an airplane.
>
>OLD BOB, YOU HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD. ON THE SELF! I SPENT $1400 IN 1988
>FOR IT TO INSTALL IN A MOTORGLIDER. NEVER GOT INSTALLED. SO HAVING HAD GOOD
>EXPERIENCES WITH LORAN AND REALLY LIKING THE WAY IT LOOKS, IT'S IN THE
>PANEL. EMPHISIS REALLY LIKING THE WAY IT LOOKS.
LORAN, in spite of it's age is still a very capable nav system
and it's really hard to beat the return on investment compared
to what the gvmt paid for the VOR, ADF and GPS systems over the
years. Neat thing about LORAN is that it's not affected by sunspot
activity and tougher to jam but is affected by thunderstorms and
on-board noise sources. GPS on the other hand is relatively unaffected
by thunderstorms.
Given the dirt cheap chip-sets for receiving/decoding both
signals, it's always mystified me as to why folks didn't offer
dual receivers . . . with software to integrate the two signals
together into a nav package with a very high order of accuracy
and reliability. It's a certainty that the dollars to maintain
the few transmitters in the LORAN chains is a small fraction of
that required to maintain VOR/ADF facilities and COULD be an
excellent substitute while augmenting GPS. A dual LORAN/GPS
package need be no larger than either as a stand-alone system.
Software for integrating multiple nav signals for improved
accuracy and reliability is old hat.
Of course, folks-who-know-more-about-aviation-than-we-do
STILL can't find their fannies with both hands to get
wide area GPS error transmission systems up and running
for aircraft. In the mean time, folks-who-know-more-about-boats-
than-we-do have been doing it for decades. I guess we'd
better not suggest too many ideas outside the box until
after they find their box.
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: Grand Rapids EIS 4000 MAP sensor |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming@sigecom.net>
You should use something like the stainless braided hoses for connection
from engine to firewall. The pressure is not great but the vibration is the
concern. Vans Aircraft sells a kit for connecting the MAP from the engine
to the cockpit side of the firewall where you would then jury rig whatever
you need to do to get into your engine monitor. This is how I did it with
my ACS2002 system. You might give Vans a call. Here is their web site to
get you started. www.vansaircraft.com
Best Wishes.
Indiana Larry, RV7 Tip-up TMX-O-360 ACS2002 Dynon CNS430 Digitrak
On Finish Kit
----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry Bowen" <Larry@BowenAero.com>
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Grand Rapids EIS 4000 MAP sensor
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Larry Bowen"
<Larry@BowenAero.com>
>
> What's recommended then? Name your source. I think I got the copper
> idea from Tony Bengelis's book. If it's coiled/supported/etc properly,
> it should be good.
>
> Thanks,
>
> -
> Larry Bowen
> Larry@BowenAero.com
> http://BowenAero.com
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: AI Nut [mailto:ainut@earthlink.net]
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 10:05 PM
> > To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Grand Rapids EIS 4000 MAP sensor
> >
> >
> > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "AI Nut"
> > <ainut@earthlink.net>
> >
> > Many people discourage the use of copper tubing as it will
> > leak and break over time. Apparently, copper can't stand up
> > to the relatively high vibration environment.
> >
> > AI Nut
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Larry Bowen" <Larry@BowenAero.com>
> > To: <aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>
> > Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Grand Rapids EIS 4000 MAP sensor
> >
> >
> > > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Larry Bowen"
> > <Larry@BowenAero.com>
> > >
> > > I plan to do the same with copper tubing.....
> > >
> > > -
> > > Larry Bowen
> > > Larry@BowenAero.com
> > > http://BowenAero.com
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Leonard Garceau [mailto:lhgcpg@westriv.com]
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2004 1:38 PM
> > > > To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> > > > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Grand Rapids EIS 4000 MAP sensor
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Leonard Garceau"
> > > > --> <lhgcpg@westriv.com>
> > > >
> > > > I used a small steel tubing to go from the engine thru
> > the firewall
> > > > then used rubber hose to connect to the MAP.
> > > >
> > > > Leonard
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Rick Fogerson" <rickf@cableone.net>
> > > > To: <aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>; "RV List"
> > > > <rv-list@matronics.com>
> > > > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Grand Rapids EIS 4000 MAP sensor
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Rick Fogerson"
> > > > <rickf@cableone.net>
> > > > >
> > > > > Grand Rapids recommends placing the MAP sensor in the
> > > > cockpit because
> > > > > it
> > > > uses a plastic case. I'm not going to because I've gone
> > to a lot of
> > > > effort and some $'s to protect the cockpit from engine fires.
> > > > Placing the sensor in the cockpit means you would have to bring a
> > > > manifold pressure hose through the firewall. Has anyone
> > else had any
> > > > good or bad experience with this sensor in the engine compartment.
> > > > > thanks,
> > > > > Rick Fogerson
> > > > > Boise, ID
> > > > > RV3 wiring
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> >
> >
> > ============
> > Matronics Forums.
> > ============
> > ============
> > http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/AeroElectric-List.htm
> > Search Engine: http://www.matronics.com/search
> > ============
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
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: "James E. Clark" <james@nextupventures.com>
Bob,
I think Northstar did in fact try this approach. I think the model number
was the M2 (or was it the 600?)
The problem, I think, is that it was not a market success and the mindset of
current buyers is probably one that would not pay more for a unit that has
the "Loran backup feature". Most people would probably view the offering as
"old technology" and shy away from it ... a double whammy.
In any case, it **seems** that in their efforts to try to do this, they lost
ground and the GPS only crowd got ahead of them. Pity. I have used a
Northstar M1 Loran, in conjunction with a handheld GPS, in my Piper for the
10 years I have had it. Being panel mounted has advantages and having knobs
that can be turned in turbulent weather has advantages as well.
Recently I have been trying to convince a friend who still has one of the
OLD TI lorans in his Cessna to at least replace it with one of the M1s I
have in "storage". :-) <He does though have a Garmin 195>.
James
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Robert
> L. Nuckolls, III
> Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2004 9:17 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Why Loran
>[SNIP]
>
> Given the dirt cheap chip-sets for receiving/decoding both
> signals, it's always mystified me as to why folks didn't offer
---------> dual receivers . . . with software to integrate the two
signals
> together into a nav package with a very high order of accuracy
> and reliability. It's a certainty that the dollars to maintain
> the few transmitters in the LORAN chains is a small fraction of
> that required to maintain VOR/ADF facilities and COULD be an
> excellent substitute while augmenting GPS. A dual LORAN/GPS
> package need be no larger than either as a stand-alone system.
> Software for integrating multiple nav signals for improved
> accuracy and reliability is old hat.
> [SNIP]
> 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: | Re: Grand Rapids EIS 4000 MAP sensor |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 08:59 AM 1/15/2004 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "LarryRobertHelming"
><lhelming@sigecom.net>
>
>You should use something like the stainless braided hoses for connection
>from engine to firewall. The pressure is not great but the vibration is the
>concern. Vans Aircraft sells a kit for connecting the MAP from the engine
>to the cockpit side of the firewall where you would then jury rig whatever
>you need to do to get into your engine monitor. This is how I did it with
>my ACS2002 system. You might give Vans a call. Here is their web site to
>get you started. www.vansaircraft.com
We're getting wrapped around some pretty big axles here . . .
First, a MAP sensor looks at manifold pressure . . . which
is never greater than atmospheric unless you're super-charged.
Second, given the amount of air that runs into the engine at
full throttle, the amount of air that gets in should the
MAP sensor line become completely disconnected is VERY
small by comparison. Loss of this line is immediately
observable on the instrument and zero risk to the engine.
A copper line to convey pressure in a very low viscosity
fluid (air) can be quite small in cross section and
has a lot of cross section in walls compared to
the bore . . . these are not especially vulnerable
to vibration stress cracking. Taking this line through
the firewall in metal fittings is a firewall integrity
issue . . . easy and cheap to do. If this is an automotive
MAP sensor, I'd consider mounting it to some point low on
right on the engine or at least on the firewall and avoid
penetrating the firewall at all. If one decided to bring
the sensor inside the cabin, it's not a big deal.
Jacketed lines, stainless hardware, etc. etc. are certainly
capable of doing the job . . . but I'll suggest they're
not necessary.
Bob . . .
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Troy Scott" <tscott1217@bellsouth.net>
>Original message:
>
> >Gentlemen,
> >
> >Does anyone have a source for a progressive off-on-on DPDT switch rated
for
> >20amps? It needs to look about like the panel switches from B&C.
>
> Why 20A?
>
> Bob . . .
>
>Bob,
>
>I KNEW you'd catch that. Just can't slip anything past you, can I? :-)
>I'm thinking of a way to simplify Z-14 by eliminating the battery contactor
>on the "#2" side of the setup. I wouldn't do this unless I could put the
>battery very close to the switch, like behind the instrument panel, on the
>aft side of the firewall. OK, shoot holes in this, please.
What are you doing about a cross-feed connection? Do you plan
to use the aux battery for cranking? Cranking currents are
a LOT bigger than 20A
Bob . . .
Bob,
My electrical system(s) architecture is in the planning (evolving) stage.
What I'm thinking NOW is a system much like Z-14, except eliminating the
charging system on the secondary bus and replacing the cross feed contactor
with a big diode. I would put the EFIS One and one electronic ignition on
the secondary system, with the electronic ignition on the battery bus. This
secondary system should provide relatively steady, clean power to the
electronic ignition and the EFIS One during engine starting. On the primary
bus, I would interlock the starter button with the switch for the other
electronic ignition, such that the electronic ignition on the same battery
as the starter will necessarily be OFF during starting. Hopefully, this
will avoid the occasional kickback (or other) starting problems that happen
because the electronic ignition either goes off-line or (worse) gets
confused.
Because I'm NOT (at this stage of my planning) thinking of having much other
than the EFIS One, one electronic ignition, the electric fuel pump and four
voyager lights on the secondary system, I think probably using a hefty
switch instead of a contactor on this secondary battery might be sufficient;
That is, if the wire from the battery to the switch is relatively short
and/or well protected at the battery end. Thoughts?
Regards,
Troy Scott
tscott1217@bellsouth.net
P.S. I can't take full credit for the system architecture I've described.
It's a variation on an idea given to me by Glen Matejcek.
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: | Garmin GMA 340 audio panel music input |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Jeff Hildebrand" <jhildebrand@crownequip.com>
I am wiring a CD player to my Garmin GMA 340 audio panel. In the
installation guide it shows 3 pins for Music 1 input.
Music 1 L In
Music 1 R In
Music 1 Return
What is the Music 1 Return pin for?
Thanks,
Jeff Hildebrand
Lancair Super ES
http://lancair.northstartraffic.ca <http://lancair.northstartraffic.ca/>
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: Garmin GMA 340 audio panel music input |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Richard Dudley <rhdudley@att.net>
Jeff,
The return is the completion of the two circuits rather than using
airframe ground, isolating the audio from noise and stray currents in
the ground. So, the body of the jack is isolated from airfram ground.
Richard Dudley
-6A final details
Jeff Hildebrand wrote:
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Jeff Hildebrand" <jhildebrand@crownequip.com>
>
> I am wiring a CD player to my Garmin GMA 340 audio panel. In the
> installation guide it shows 3 pins for Music 1 input.
>
> Music 1 L In
>
> Music 1 R In
>
> Music 1 Return
>
> What is the Music 1 Return pin for?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jeff Hildebrand
>
> Lancair Super ES
>
> http://lancair.northstartraffic.ca <http://lancair.northstartraffic.ca/>
>
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 10:44 AM 1/15/2004 -0600, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Troy Scott"
><tscott1217@bellsouth.net>
>
> >Original message:
> >
> > >Gentlemen,
> > >
> > >Does anyone have a source for a progressive off-on-on DPDT switch rated
>for
> > >20amps? It needs to look about like the panel switches from B&C.
> >
> > Why 20A?
> >
> > Bob . . .
> >
> >Bob,
> >
> >I KNEW you'd catch that. Just can't slip anything past you, can I? :-)
> >I'm thinking of a way to simplify Z-14 by eliminating the battery contactor
> >on the "#2" side of the setup. I wouldn't do this unless I could put the
> >battery very close to the switch, like behind the instrument panel, on the
> >aft side of the firewall. OK, shoot holes in this, please.
>
> What are you doing about a cross-feed connection? Do you plan
> to use the aux battery for cranking? Cranking currents are
> a LOT bigger than 20A
>
> Bob . . .
>
>Bob,
>
>My electrical system(s) architecture is in the planning (evolving) stage.
>What I'm thinking NOW is a system much like Z-14, except eliminating the
>charging system on the secondary bus and replacing the cross feed contactor
>with a big diode. I would put the EFIS One and one electronic ignition on
>the secondary system, with the electronic ignition on the battery bus. This
>secondary system should provide relatively steady, clean power to the
>electronic ignition and the EFIS One during engine starting. On the primary
>bus, I would interlock the starter button with the switch for the other
>electronic ignition, such that the electronic ignition on the same battery
>as the starter will necessarily be OFF during starting. Hopefully, this
>will avoid the occasional kickback (or other) starting problems that happen
>because the electronic ignition either goes off-line or (worse) gets
>confused.
>
>Because I'm NOT (at this stage of my planning) thinking of having much other
>than the EFIS One, one electronic ignition, the electric fuel pump and four
>voyager lights on the secondary system, I think probably using a hefty
>switch instead of a contactor on this secondary battery might be sufficient;
>That is, if the wire from the battery to the switch is relatively short
>and/or well protected at the battery end. Thoughts?
What are voyager lights?
Hmmm . . . how about Figure Z-13 with a second battery (Z-30).
Run the electronic ignition and EFIS from small aux battery
but don't close the aux battery contactor until after the
engine starts.
I'm really confused. If you don't plan to have two alternators,
then you don't have a "secondary system". Let's back up
and see what the requirments are:
List each bus you plan to incorporate.
List each item on the bus and how much continuous current
it draws.
Cite any needs to protect products that can't live in real
world such as EFIS, electronic ignition, etc.
Then, let's see what kind of architecture fits your
needs.
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Scott Bilinski <bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
I consider myself very lucky. The only noise in the headsets is only a very
faint whine of the alt. But I do have a question about intercom hiss/white
noise. What causes this?
Scott Bilinski
Eng dept 305
Phone (858) 657-2536
Pager (858) 502-5190
do not archive
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: | Garmin GMA 340 audio panel music input |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Jeff Hildebrand" <jhildebrand@crownequip.com>
Sorry, but I don't understand. I am connecting an in dash automotive cd
player straight to my GMA 340, does this mean that I connect the return
to ground?
Jeff
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Richard Dudley
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Garmin GMA 340 audio panel music input
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Richard Dudley
<rhdudley@att.net>
Jeff,
The return is the completion of the two circuits rather than using
airframe ground, isolating the audio from noise and stray currents in
the ground. So, the body of the jack is isolated from airfram ground.
Richard Dudley
-6A final details
Jeff Hildebrand wrote:
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Jeff Hildebrand"
<jhildebrand@crownequip.com>
>
> I am wiring a CD player to my Garmin GMA 340 audio panel. In the
> installation guide it shows 3 pins for Music 1 input.
>
> Music 1 L In
>
> Music 1 R In
>
> Music 1 Return
>
> What is the Music 1 Return pin for?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jeff Hildebrand
>
> Lancair Super ES
>
> http://lancair.northstartraffic.ca
<http://lancair.northstartraffic.ca/>
>
==
==
==
==
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: Intercom hiss |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 11:04 AM 1/15/2004 -0800, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Scott Bilinski
><bilinski@kyocera-wireless.com>
>
>I consider myself very lucky. The only noise in the headsets is only a very
>faint whine of the alt. But I do have a question about intercom hiss/white
>noise. What causes this?
It's the rushing noise of electrons over the various pieces
and parts. Once you've eliminated external noise sources,
turning up the gain may let you hear the heartbeat of the
solid state devices that make up the system.
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: | Unprotected fuel pump wires on battery bus. |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: <danobrien@cox.net>
Two philosophies discussed on the list raise the following dilemma. Philosophy
1 says to put the boost pump on the battery bus because it may be necessary for
continued operation of the engine in situations where it makes sense to open
the master switch. Philosophy 2 says to avoid having always-hot feeders protected
at more than 5 amps for crash safety reasons. My boost pump is to be protected
at 10 amps, and the battery bus will be in the rear of the airplane.
What's the best course given this dilemma?
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: | Mounting the OV Contactor |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: RSamuelson@aol.com
Building a RV7A with Van's internally regulated Alternator, Odyssey battery
set up with the master relay, starter contactor, ANL and gascolator mounted
below the battery on the right side, Lycoming O-360 engine (not here yet).
Where is the best place to mount the S701-1 Alternator OV Disconnect
Contactor?
Above the Gascolator on the right side? On the left side where the Concord
battery would be?
Thanks for the advice,
Roy Samuelson
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: | Main DC Power Master Switch |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Letempt, Jeffrey CW4" <jeffrey.letempt@us.army.mil>
Bob,
Let me first say thank you for the OUTSTANDING seminar last week at
Jefferson City, MO!!! I am sure posts like this happen all the time, but if
you are on the fence about attending a weekend seminar - you GOTTA do it.
The best $150 I have spent in a long time.
I will be using a modified Z-11 for my plane. I will be using an internally
regulated alternator and will be adding OV protection and a low voltage
monitoring system (not using the LR-3). Now for the question....Why is a
700-2-10 switch required for the "Main DC Power Master Switch"? It looks to
me like a S700-2-3 would do the same thing. Maybe I am not reading the
schematic correctly.
Additionally, why is there a 7 amp fuse inline coming off the main battery
bus to the E-Bus for the essential bus alternate feed circuit? Aren't those
circuits already protected on the essential bus with their own fuses.
Unless I am missing something, this means that if I have a problem that
would require me to turn off the master switch that power would be routed to
the essential bus from the main battery bus to power the flight critical
stuff. Now what happens if I have a problem with my NAV/COMM that also has
a 7 amp fuse and the fuse on the main battery bus blows instead of the fuse
on the essential bus protecting the radio? I would loose all the power to
the essential bus and I would only have power to the main battery bus.
Thanks,
Jeff
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: BobsV35B@aol.com
In a message dated 1/15/04 8:18:28 AM Central Standard Time,
bob.nuckolls@cox.net writes:
Given the dirt cheap chip-sets for receiving/decoding both
signals, it's always mystified me as to why folks didn't offer
dual receivers . . . with software to integrate the two signals
together into a nav package with a very high order of accuracy
and reliability. It's a certainty that the dollars to maintain
the few transmitters in the LORAN chains is a small fraction of
that required to maintain VOR/ADF facilities and COULD be an
excellent substitute while augmenting GPS. A dual LORAN/GPS
package need be no larger than either as a stand-alone system.
Software for integrating multiple nav signals for improved
accuracy and reliability is old hat.
Good Afternoon Bob,
Obviously, that has been done by both Northstar and Trimble.
The Trimble TNL 3000 was their first offering of a dual use box. It receives
both Loran and GPS signals. They have a comparator circuit that allows the
set to use whichever is deemed the most accurate by the algorithm used. The
TNL 3000T then came along and it was IFR certified for enroute and terminal use,
but not for approaches. When Trimble went to the approach approval, they
dropped the Loran portion.
There have been many good TNL 3000 and TNL 3000Ts available on Ebay for
anywhere from a hundred bucks to a thousand. Those early Trimbles are built of
only the finest components. Gold Plated contacts throughout and extruded side
rails. Unfortunately, they didn't make the cut in the market place, but I think
the Trimbles are great units if you can get one cheap enough. Same goes for
the Northstar units I suppose, but I have no direct user knowledge concerning
their combo unit.
I did have a TNL 3000 in my Bonanza which was replaced with a 3000T. That
was subsequently replaced with a Trimble 2000 Approach unit. I kinda hated to
give up the Loran as long as it was already installed, but I really wanted the
capability to shoot the GPS approaches. As you know, they never did get any
Loran approaches approved for the general public. There were a few that were
up and running on a test basis, but they were never released for the use of we
vast unwashed masses.
I do miss the Loran, but then again, I thought the four course ranges were
pretty neat as well!
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Airpark LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8502
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: Grand Rapids EIS 4000 MAP sensor |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Jim Jewell" <jjewell@telus.net>
Hi Bob,
Do you see anything against using automotive vacuum tubing in this
application?
A fitting with a short say 3" length of steel tubing on the number three
cylinder head for heat protection would seem to deal with the main heat
related potential failure mode.
Jim in Kelowna
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Grand Rapids EIS 4000 MAP sensor
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
<bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
>
> At 08:59 AM 1/15/2004 -0500, you wrote:
> >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "LarryRobertHelming"
> ><lhelming@sigecom.net>
> >
> >You should use something like the stainless braided hoses for connection
> >from engine to firewall. The pressure is not great but the vibration is
the
> >concern. Vans Aircraft sells a kit for connecting the MAP from the
engine
> >to the cockpit side of the firewall where you would then jury rig
whatever
> >you need to do to get into your engine monitor. This is how I did it
with
> >my ACS2002 system. You might give Vans a call. Here is their web site
to
> >get you started. www.vansaircraft.com
>
> We're getting wrapped around some pretty big axles here . . .
> First, a MAP sensor looks at manifold pressure . . . which
> is never greater than atmospheric unless you're super-charged.
> Second, given the amount of air that runs into the engine at
> full throttle, the amount of air that gets in should the
> MAP sensor line become completely disconnected is VERY
> small by comparison. Loss of this line is immediately
> observable on the instrument and zero risk to the engine.
> A copper line to convey pressure in a very low viscosity
> fluid (air) can be quite small in cross section and
> has a lot of cross section in walls compared to
> the bore . . . these are not especially vulnerable
> to vibration stress cracking. Taking this line through
> the firewall in metal fittings is a firewall integrity
> issue . . . easy and cheap to do. If this is an automotive
> MAP sensor, I'd consider mounting it to some point low on
> right on the engine or at least on the firewall and avoid
> penetrating the firewall at all. If one decided to bring
> the sensor inside the cabin, it's not a big deal.
>
> Jacketed lines, stainless hardware, etc. etc. are certainly
> capable of doing the job . . . but I'll suggest they're
> not necessary.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
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: Main DC Power Master Switch |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming@sigecom.net>
The battery buss has power all the time even when the master switch is off.
The main buss has power ONLY when the master switch is on.
The main buss does not get power from the battery buss -- it gets it from
the battery.
So if a fuse blows on the battery buss, it only affects whatever you have
wired down stream in the current flow from the 7 amp fuse. The main buss
continues to have current if the master switch is on.
Indiana Larry
((((((((((((((_))))))))))))))))))
----- Original Message -----
From: "Letempt, Jeffrey CW4" <jeffrey.letempt@us.army.mil>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Main DC Power Master Switch
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Letempt, Jeffrey CW4"
<jeffrey.letempt@us.army.mil>
>
> Bob,
>
> Let me first say thank you for the OUTSTANDING seminar last week at
> Jefferson City, MO!!! I am sure posts like this happen all the time, but
if
> you are on the fence about attending a weekend seminar - you GOTTA do it.
> The best $150 I have spent in a long time.
>
> I will be using a modified Z-11 for my plane. I will be using an
internally
> regulated alternator and will be adding OV protection and a low voltage
> monitoring system (not using the LR-3). Now for the question....Why is a
> 700-2-10 switch required for the "Main DC Power Master Switch"? It looks
to
> me like a S700-2-3 would do the same thing. Maybe I am not reading the
> schematic correctly.
>
> Additionally, why is there a 7 amp fuse inline coming off the main battery
> bus to the E-Bus for the essential bus alternate feed circuit? Aren't
those
> circuits already protected on the essential bus with their own fuses.
> Unless I am missing something, this means that if I have a problem that
> would require me to turn off the master switch that power would be routed
to
> the essential bus from the main battery bus to power the flight critical
> stuff. Now what happens if I have a problem with my NAV/COMM that also
has
> a 7 amp fuse and the fuse on the main battery bus blows instead of the
fuse
> on the essential bus protecting the radio? I would loose all the power to
> the essential bus and I would only have power to the main battery bus.
>
> Thanks,
> Jeff
>
>
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: Unprotected fuel pump wires on battery bus. |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Werner Schneider" <wernerschneider@compuserve.com>
Hello Dan,
did you ever measure your pump in a wet condition? I have a facet std pump,
3A fused, peak draw switch on 1.2 A running with 0.9A. Same with my Aux
pumps, fused 7.5 A, inrush 2.6A running with 2.4A
Werner
----- Original Message -----
From: <danobrien@cox.net>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Unprotected fuel pump wires on battery bus.
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: <danobrien@cox.net>
>
> Two philosophies discussed on the list raise the following dilemma.
Philosophy 1 says to put the boost pump on the battery bus because it may be
necessary for continued operation of the engine in situations where it makes
sense to open the master switch. Philosophy 2 says to avoid having
always-hot feeders protected at more than 5 amps for crash safety reasons.
My boost pump is to be protected at 10 amps, and the battery bus will be in
the rear of the airplane.
>
> What's the best course given this dilemma?
>
>
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Unprotected fuel pump wires on battery |
bus.
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
bus.
At 12:26 AM 1/16/2004 +0100, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Werner Schneider"
><wernerschneider@compuserve.com>
>
>Hello Dan,
>
>did you ever measure your pump in a wet condition? I have a facet std pump,
>3A fused, peak draw switch on 1.2 A running with 0.9A. Same with my Aux
>pumps, fused 7.5 A, inrush 2.6A running with 2.4A
>
>Werner
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: <danobrien@cox.net>
>To: <aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: AeroElectric-List: Unprotected fuel pump wires on battery bus.
>
>
> > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: <danobrien@cox.net>
> >
> > Two philosophies discussed on the list raise the following dilemma.
>Philosophy 1 says to put the boost pump on the battery bus because it may be
>necessary for continued operation of the engine in situations where it makes
>sense to open the master switch. Philosophy 2 says to avoid having
>always-hot feeders protected at more than 5 amps for crash safety reasons.
>My boost pump is to be protected at 10 amps, and the battery bus will be in
>the rear of the airplane.
> >
> > What's the best course given this dilemma?
You can always use a relay mounted at the battery bus
to control the larger than 5A feeder. It would be
like this:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/temp/E-BusFatFeed.gif
except that instead of feeding the e-bus from the battery
bus, you're feeding the fuel pump or any other accessory
fused at more than 5A.
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: | A Battery is you best filter |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Don Boardman <dboardm3@twcny.rr.com>
Hi Bob,
In a previous response you indicated that "a battery is your best filter",
and recommended bringing my #12 SD-8 feed to the SD-8 relay at the battery
instead of feeding the e-bus fuse block behind the panel.
OK, following this recommendation I was originally going to locate the SD-8
relay close to the contactor and connect to the contactor using a sort 4"
length of #16 fuselink. The physical lay out doing this was not ideal and
therefore I have decided to mount the SD-8 relay adjacent to the e-bus feed
relay. The e-bus relay is feed by the battery bus via a fuse and a short 4"
#12 wire. And now the same holds true for the SD-8 relay, it is feed by the
battery bus via a fuse and a short 4" #12 wire. The battery bus is close to
the contactor feed by 5" #12. And yes the battery is only inches from the
contactor.
OK, finally to my question. Am I getting the same degree of "a battery is
your best filter" feeding the SD-8 though the battery bus as I would have
feeding the contactor? Sorry to make you read all of this but I am cureous
about this filtering function of the battery?
Last question for tonight, I promise!
I do not have a electric starter (air start) and therefore no starter
contactor. therefore I was planning to bring the main 50 amp alternator feed
via a 60 ANL to the main distribution bus located behind the panel. I am now
thinking that bringing the alternator feed down under the seat to the
battery contactor (with the 60 ANL close to the contactor) could reduce
possible noise because "a battery is your best filter" The # 6 welding
cable used would then be running in the same raceway as my #4 + & - Fat
wires. This will also be the main conduit for my other wire flowing from the
panel to the fuselage. What say you Bob.
Thanks,
Don B.
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 04:32 PM 1/15/2004 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: BobsV35B@aol.com
>
>In a message dated 1/15/04 8:18:28 AM Central Standard Time,
>bob.nuckolls@cox.net writes:
>Given the dirt cheap chip-sets for receiving/decoding both
> signals, it's always mystified me as to why folks didn't offer
> dual receivers . . . with software to integrate the two signals
> together into a nav package with a very high order of accuracy
> and reliability.
<snip>
>Obviously, that has been done by both Northstar and Trimble.
>
>The Trimble TNL 3000 was their first offering of a dual use box. It receives
>both Loran and GPS signals. They have a comparator circuit that allows the
>set to use whichever is deemed the most accurate by the algorithm used. The
>TNL 3000T then came along and it was IFR certified for enroute and
>terminal use,
>but not for approaches. When Trimble went to the approach approval, they
>dropped the Loran portion.
<snip>
>I do miss the Loran, but then again, I thought the four course ranges were
>pretty neat as well!
>
>Happy Skies,
>
>Old Bob
Shows how much I've kept up with the panel mounted
stuff.
When you think about flying 4-course + airways markers though
weather that's ALWAYS crashing in the headphones . . . geesh!
It's hard enough to be a pilot and keep it right side up. Guess
that's what copilots are for!
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: Grand Rapids EIS 4000 MAP sensor |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 01:57 PM 1/15/2004 -0800, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Jim Jewell" <jjewell@telus.net>
>
>Hi Bob,
>
>Do you see anything against using automotive vacuum tubing in this
>application?
>A fitting with a short say 3" length of steel tubing on the number three
>cylinder head for heat protection would seem to deal with the main heat
>related potential failure mode.
>
>Jim in Kelowna
Whatever results in the fewest parts/joints in the system.
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Main DC Power Master Switch |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 03:21 PM 1/15/2004 -0600, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Letempt, Jeffrey CW4"
><jeffrey.letempt@us.army.mil>
>
>Bob,
>
>Let me first say thank you for the OUTSTANDING seminar last week at
>Jefferson City, MO!!! I am sure posts like this happen all the time, but if
>you are on the fence about attending a weekend seminar - you GOTTA do it.
>The best $150 I have spent in a long time.
Thank you. I hope the effort saves you several times
that amount in dollars and time to get your project
finished.
>I will be using a modified Z-11 for my plane. I will be using an internally
>regulated alternator and will be adding OV protection and a low voltage
>monitoring system (not using the LR-3). Now for the question....Why is a
>700-2-10 switch required for the "Main DC Power Master Switch"? It looks to
>me like a S700-2-3 would do the same thing. Maybe I am not reading the
>schematic correctly.
It would . . . the 2-10 gives you a mid battery-only position which
emulates the popular split-rocker master switch . . . but when you
have crowbar ov protection, you need a breaker in the alternator field
line anyhow . . . make it pullable and you can use a 2-3 switch for
normal ops and pull the breaker any time you're doing battery only ops
on ground or need to shut down a mis-behaving alternator.
>Additionally, why is there a 7 amp fuse inline coming off the main battery
>bus to the E-Bus for the essential bus alternate feed circuit? Aren't those
>circuits already protected on the essential bus with their own fuses.
>Unless I am missing something, this means that if I have a problem that
>would require me to turn off the master switch that power would be routed to
>the essential bus from the main battery bus to power the flight critical
>stuff. Now what happens if I have a problem with my NAV/COMM that also has
>a 7 amp fuse and the fuse on the main battery bus blows instead of the fuse
>on the essential bus protecting the radio? I would loose all the power to
>the essential bus and I would only have power to the main battery bus.
We need to consider the max load on the e-bus and size the
alternate feed fuse accordingly. The battery bus fuse (or
fusible link) should be stout enough to stay put should any
e-bus feeder become faulted. If you need a fat e-bus alternate
feed, consider http://www.aeroelectric.com/temp/E-BusFatFeed.gif
Bob . . .
>Thanks,
>Jeff
>
>
Bob . . .
-----------------------------------------
( Experience and common sense cannot be )
( replaced with policy and procedures. )
( R. L. Nuckolls III )
-----------------------------------------
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: | Bench Test Power Supply Size |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Rick Fogerson" <rickf@cableone.net>
Hi Bob,
I have dual batteries in the rear of the airplane and dual E.I., MicroAir radio
& Xpdr, digitrak auto pilot, RMI encoder, and Grand Rapids EIS 4000 engine monitor,
and F.I. pump for fairly modest electrical requirements.
I was in Radio Shack and they had three power supplies. 1.75, 3, and 10 amps.
Don't know the Volts but the archives mentioned 13.8 volts. What minimum amps
and volts should one get to test the electrical system?
Is the volts adjustable or how important is the voltage?
I assume the power supply should be hooked to the battery leads. I also seem
to remember a discussion by you for setting up the power supply in a certain way
to duplicate what the system would see as if it were running off of the alternator
but can't find in the archives.
Thanks,
Rick Fogerson
RV3 wiring
Boise, ID
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: Loran Antenna Pre Amp |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Neal A. Dillman" <neald@glyph.com>
Don,
Yes, I believe that is correct.
Regards,
Neal
Don Boardman wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Don Boardman <dboardm3@twcny.rr.com>
>
>Hi Neal,
>
>So are you saying that using a "real" Loran Antenna, one of those that was
>designed to look like a Cessna com antenna, the pre amp is not necessary?
>
>
>
>>If I remember correctly, That preamp is designed to work with "long-wire
>>antennas" (ie: an ADF antenna). The unit get's mounted to the fuselage
>>(it needs to see ground) next to the start of the long-wire antenna.
>>
>>Regards,
>>Neal
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
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: | Re: Loran Antenna Pre Amp |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: BobsV35B@aol.com
In a message dated 1/16/04 12:34:28 AM Central Standard Time, neald@glyph.com
writes:
Hi Neal,
>
>So are you saying that using a "real" Loran Antenna, one of those that was
>designed to look like a Cessna com antenna, the pre amp is not necessary?
Good Evening Neal and Don,
If I Recall Correctly, the Loran antenna for my Trimble combo unit had a
built in amplifier in the Loran antenna. The one we used for our Pacer was a
stock com antenna and it needed the addition of the appropriate amplifier. Not
sure "amplifier" is the right word, but it needed something to allow the use of
the stock comm antenna where the specialty antenna from Trimble had no such
need. It is also my understanding that my old Trimble Loran antenna is not a
satisfactory comm antenna due to it's having whatever it is that is required to
match the antenna to the Loran receiver built into the antenna base.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Airpark LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8502
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! --
|