Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 01:46 AM - Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 23 Msgs - 02/13/04 (Steve Hunt)
2. 03:22 AM - Re: Z12 e-bus questions (Steve Sampson)
3. 05:04 AM - Re: FS: SL70 Transponder (BUCSDDS@aol.com)
4. 06:29 AM - Re: Locating Switches (Eric M. Jones)
5. 06:33 AM - Fw: [f-AA] request for help (Cy Galley)
6. 08:48 AM - Re: Load dump issues (George Braly)
7. 09:48 AM - Re: Load dump issues (Jerzy Krasinski)
8. 10:36 AM - Re: Re: Locating Switches (Dale Martin)
9. 04:33 PM - Sequential turn signals...OFF TOPIC (Chris Adkins)
10. 05:48 PM - headset noise (Lowell Fitt)
11. 10:59 PM - special progressive (Troy Scott)
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: AeroElectric-List Digest: 23 Msgs - 02/13/04 |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Steve Hunt" <stephen.hunt19@btinternet.com>
Magnetic/true heading/track. There`s no mystery guys. If ATC give you a
heading they expect you to steer a magnetic heading. That is, steer the
numbers which would show on an old fashioned compass. This is universally
the case.
rgds
----- Original Message -----
From: "AeroElectric-List Digest Server"
<aeroelectric-list-digest@matronics.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List Digest: 23 Msgs - 02/13/04
> *
>
> ==================================================
> Online Versions of Today's List Digest Archive
> ==================================================
>
> Today's complete AeroElectric-List Digest can be also be found in either
> of the two Web Links listed below. The .html file includes the Digest
> formatted in HTML for viewing with a web browser and features Hyperlinked
> Indexes and Message Navigation. The .txt file includes the plain ASCII
> version of the AeroElectric-List Digest and can be viewed with a generic
> text editor such as Notepad or with a web browser.
>
> HTML Version:
>
>
http://www.matronics.com/digest/aeroelectric-list/Digest.AeroElectric-List.2004-02-13.html
>
> Text Version:
>
>
http://www.matronics.com/digest/aeroelectric-list/Digest.AeroElectric-List.2004-02-13.txt
>
>
> ================================================
> EMail Version of Today's List Digest Archive
> ================================================
>
>
> AeroElectric-List Digest Archive
> ---
> Total Messages Posted Fri 02/13/04: 23
>
>
> Today's Message Index:
> ----------------------
>
> 1. 06:47 AM - Re: Re: Compass shielding (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
> 2. 06:52 AM - Electrical current needs (Fergus Kyle)
> 3. 07:16 AM - Re:Re: For Bob, Comment? (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
> 4. 07:40 AM - Re: Re: Compass shielding (Alex Peterson)
> 5. 08:28 AM - Re: Bus Load Analysis .. An Idea (John Schroeder)
> 6. 08:28 AM - Compass shielding (Glen Matejcek)
> 7. 08:42 AM - Re: Re: Compass shielding (Dale Martin)
> 8. 08:44 AM - Re: Re: Compass shielding (Dj Merrill)
> 9. 09:29 AM - Re: Re: Compass shielding (Mike Nellis)
> 10. 09:33 AM - Re: Dynon and EMI (Jeff Point)
> 11. 09:58 AM - Re: Bus Load Analysis .. An Idea (Walter Tondu)
> 12. 01:15 PM - Locating Switches (Dale Martin)
> 13. 03:06 PM - Re: Locating Switches (I-Blackler, Wayne R)
> 14. 03:43 PM - Off line for a week . . . (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
> 15. 04:38 PM - Re: Off line for a week . . . (Dave Morris)
> 16. 04:57 PM - FS: SL70 Transponder (richard@riley.net)
> 17. 05:15 PM - round transponder recommendations (AI Nut)
> 18. 05:20 PM - Re: Off line for a week . . . (mprather)
> 19. 05:40 PM - alternator switch (klehman@albedo.net)
> 20. 06:17 PM - Re: Re: Compass shielding (Alex Peterson)
> 21. 06:30 PM - Re: round transponder recommendations
(richard@riley.net)
> 22. 07:38 PM - Re: FS: SL70 Transponder (Richard E. Tasker)
> 23. 08:40 PM - Re: Locating Switches (flmike)
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 1
_____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 06:47:29 AM PST US
> From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Compass shielding
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
<bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
>
> At 02:29 AM 2/13/2004 -0500, you wrote:
> >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Benford2@aol.com
> >
> >In a message dated 2/12/2004 10:07:57 PM Mountain Standard Time,
> >Speedy11@aol.com writes:
> >
> >
> > >
> > > It is easiest - I certainly use it - but if you are being vectored by
ATC,
> > > using GPS ground track is not what they are expecting of you. In many
> > parts
> > > of
> > > the USA, true heading and mag heading will be the same number, but
they
> > will
> > >
> > > rarely match the GPS track. Am I splitting hairs - Yup. But, when
ATC
> > > assigns a heading, they are expecting you to fly mag heading.
>
> If strictly true, then GPS is useless for complying
> with ATC instructions. GPS doesn't display heading (direction
> airplane is pointed) but course (direction airplane is going).
> Depending on winds, the difference between the two can be
> 10 degrees or more depending on speed of your airplane.
>
> An ATC controller used to live on our airport and I asked
> him about the "fly heading xx degrees" instruction. Since
> his radar display was based on course, not heading, does
> he do the mental gymnastics to account for winds. He said
> no. When I give you a "heading" of 90 degrees, I'm pointing
> you off into airspace well clear of other aircraft. If you
> in fact give me a course of 80 or 100 degrees, it mostly
> doesn't matter. If I don't get enough of an effect for my
> instructions, I may follow up with come right 10 degrees
> or a new heading of 100 degrees. It's like painting a portrait
> with a 4" brush. He opined that flying GPS course in response
> to an ATC instruction would probably make every controller
> happy . . . even if your magnetically slaved DG displayed
> something different due to winds. That should be a MAGNETIC course
> which is, I believe, available from most GPS receivers.
>
>
> >so ya just set your DG on your take off roll. Runway heading is as close
as a
> > magnetic compass reading. Probably closer. Stan is right about the Mag
> >variation though. Here in Jackson Hole Wy the difference is 15 degrees,
>
> My GPS receivers will optionally display either magnetic or
> true. They contain a look-up table of variations that does
> the calculation for you. I fly with them set for Magnetic
> course display.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
> -----------------------------------------
> ( Experience and common sense cannot be )
> ( replaced with policy and procedures. )
> ( R. L. Nuckolls III )
> -----------------------------------------
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 2
_____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 06:52:43 AM PST US
> From: "Fergus Kyle" <VE3LVO@rac.ca>
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Electrical current needs
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Fergus Kyle" <VE3LVO@rac.ca>
>
> "Excellent Idea! How about a spreadsheet with know values for some of
> the standard equipment out there. I'll even volunteer to manage it.
> This would be a huge timesaver for current and future builders who aspire
> to follow the Mr. K route of electronics design. Perhaps those of you
> who have completed their system analysis could forward their information
> we could compile the list in short order. Walter Tondu
> http://www.tondu.com/rv7"
>
> I seem to recall a site on the web where someone has compiled a
list
> of units and their current requirements.....
> Perhaps a reader on this net might remember and display the site?
> Ferg
> Europa A064 monowheel 914
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 3
_____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 07:16:47 AM PST US
> From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
> Subject: Re:Re: AeroElectric-List: For Bob, Comment?
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
<bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
>
>
> >
> > >
> > > STC is EXACTLY what those-who-know-more-about-airplanes-than-
> > > we-do like. Treat every installation like it's never been done
> > > before and test the hell out of it. This keeps those who
> > > don't understand what's happening from having to think or
> > > learn anything. It makes sure that some wheels get invented
> > > over and over again. The STC route is relatively low risk
> > > but also expensive because common sense approaches are
> > > neither encouraged or allowed. Everyone is expected to
> > > read and respond to a rule book. Whether or not he/she
> > > understands the system to which the rules are applied
> > > no longer matters.
> > >
> > >
> >
> >I'm betting you are not a big fan of the Approved Model List STC for
> >the Apollo CNX-80 Integrated Avionics System. That STC allows
> >installation on pretty much every light single or twin just by using
> >the Installation Manual. There doesn't seem to be any requirement to
> >do any engineering analysis or specific testing.
> >
> >Approved Model List:
> >http://www.garminat.com/dwnlds/cnxdoc/CNX80_AML.pdf
> >
> >STC docs, etc:
> >http://www.garminat.com/cnx_docs.shtml
>
> This is a great example of how absurd the certification
> process has become. A type certificate is issued against
> a particular airframe to encompass all of the characteristics
> unique to that airframe. Anything which might affect performance
> must be scientifically considered and accounted for.
>
> When the first comm transceiver was attached to an airplane,
> it was well understood that the radio added to the empty
> weight of the airplane, had an electrical load requirement
> to be satisfied and MIGHT have some structural issues with
> respect to where you poked a hole in the skin for an antenna.
> Of course, the customer had an intense interest in achieving
> certain performance goals from the radio after installation.
> An AI, mechanic and customer worked together to see that
> these simple requirements were met. A logbook entry or
> at most a 337 form filled the regulatory requirements.
>
> The thrust of an STC is to amend the TC of an airplane
> to account for any ways in which installation of an accessory
> or new feature does not adversely affect the performance
> of the airplane. The installation of a GPS receiver has
> no greater potential for impact on the airframe than did
> the comm radios of 60 years ago.
>
> The documents cited above IMPLY that each of those
> airframes was evaluated for effects on performance
> based upon installation of the product per the instruction
> manual. I'll bet that the instruction manuals never
> address variability by citing something to be done
> or avoided on any particular aircraft based on model
> or type certificate.
>
> Instructions that don't speak to specific variability
> between models to avoid altering airframe performance
> are a demonstration of how the STC process was corrupted . . .
> They threw an appearance of valuable process
> at an installation for which the process was neither
> necessary nor did it add value to the final installation.
>
> The radio manufacturer pulled of a real coup in acquiring
> the documents . . . that probably couldn't have been
> achieved in other FAA regions. Instead of one piece of
> paper covering hundreds of aircraft, the manufacturer
> would need single pieces of paper for all TC's . . .
> but in neither case would the STC activity have added
> value.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 4
_____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 07:40:09 AM PST US
> From: "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson@usjet.net>
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Compass shielding
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Alex Peterson"
<alexpeterson@usjet.net>
>
> > > > rarely match the GPS track. Am I splitting hairs - Yup.
> > But, when
> > > > ATC assigns a heading, they are expecting you to fly mag heading.
>
> Ok, ok. If one reads what I originally posted, to which the above was a
> reply, I said to use GPS to SET the DG, not to fly tracks. I was
> stating that I can't imagine using a magnetic compass anymore to set my
> DG. I prefer to use runway heading or the mag track output of my gps
> while taxiing to set the DG.
>
> Alex Peterson
> Maple Grove, MN
> RV6-A N66AP 437 hours
> www.usfamily.net/web/alexpeterson
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 5
_____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 08:28:10 AM PST US
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Bus Load Analysis .. An Idea
> From: John Schroeder <jschroeder@perigee.net>
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: John Schroeder
<jschroeder@perigee.net>
>
> Walter -
>
> I hope this rather long posting is taken as constructive and not in any
> way denigrating the effort, or your most generous offer to compile the
> list. I have agonized long hours over the same problems as we designed our
> system and chose the equipment to install.
>
> I think you will be getting too rigid and complicated with this much
> information. For example:
>
> 1. Why put buss in there? That will depend on the Z diagram being used,
> the aircraft, its mission etc.
>
> 2. Why "Wire gauge/Volts"? Again, that is influenced by a lot of other
> variables and choices - especially where the equipment will be located in
> the aircraft and what type. For example, we calculated a 44 foot round
> trip in a glass aircraft for the pitot tube. Others are shorter, some may
> be longer. Using Bob's formula in his paper on Wire Size Selection, one
> has to check their initial calculations on wire size to keep the % voltage
> drop under 5%. That could nullify any figure appended to a device sent in
> for the database. What about the heat dissipation if one chooses to run a
> wire in a bundle?
>
> 3. Why specify the size of the fuse? Often, the manufacturer specifies it
> and it has no relation whatsoever to the wire size you calculate. If you
> want to put the fuse size, it should only be the size recommended by the
> mfg. You could put an M after the size to denote this.
>
> 4. The various phases of flight? Again, these are subjective and will
> vary a lot with the aircraft and mission. Also, emergency is a very loose
> category. There are too many to list and each may or may not have an
> effect on the amperage total at the bottom of each sheet. It varies also
> with the Z diagram and any variation one chooses to make. One fellow
> remarked a long time ago that one should add a night and day category for
> all of the phases of flight because lighting becomes a major
> consideration. Bottom line on this is that your database would not be very
> helpful and be too big.
>
> 5. The elements of the database should be: Accessory, Manufacturer, Model
> #, Amps and Fuse. From there one can tailor the rest of the data based on
> their design, aircraft, missions and plain old preferences.
>
> There would be 3 codes to add to the data. Two would be for the amps and
> one for the fuse.
>
> One would add an "M" after the amps to denote actual measured load taken
> by the builder when the accessory is on. For a radio, there should be two
> lines of data: one for receive and one for transmit. Same for a fuel boost
> pump, if there is a high and a low mode. For something like a pitot tube,
> there would be two lines: one for steady state and one for surge during
> warmup.
>
> The second code for the amps would be an "S" to denote that it is a
> manufacturer's spec figure. If they have several figures, there should be
> one line per figure.
>
> The third code would be for the CB/fuzing. An "S" would be appended to
> denote a manufacturer's recommended size. If someone actually experimented
> to fine where a device nuisance tripped, they could add a figure and
> append an "M"
>
> The absence of a code in the amps cell would indicate caution to anyone
> using that figure. I would think that once the list is initially compiled
> and available to the community, there will be a refinement process and the
> end point would most likely be M's or S's after each amperage. That is the
> key figure we all need to make the calculations and do the design.
>
> I would also ask that anyone furnishing a line or lines of data for a
> device to state the source. I know that Panel Planner has some data and I
> would not want to rely on that in my calculations. There are also a lot of
> WAG's out there.
>
> Again, I hope this has been helpful. Drop me an email if you would like to
> discuss anything here. The idea is a wonderful one and the need is
> certainly there. Thank you for volunteering.
>
> Cheers,
>
> John Schroeder
> Lancair ES & Z-14
>
>
> On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 18:54:36 -0500, Walter Tondu <walter@tondu.com> wrote:
>
> > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Walter Tondu <walter@tondu.com>
> >
> > On 02/12 1:53, Dale Martin wrote:
> >
> > > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dale Martin"
> > <niceez@cableone.net>
> > >
> > > Walt,
> > >
> > > It will be WIRE GAUGE / VOLTAGE. I use much smaller wire then the 14
> > volt
> > > folks and there are others using 28 volt equipment.
> >
> > Right you are!
> >
> > BUS, ACCESSORY, VENDOR, MODEL #, WIRE-GUAGE/VOLTS, FUSE, PRE-FLIGHT,
> > PRE-TAXI,
> > TAKEOFF/CLIMB, VFR-CRUISE, IFR-CRUISE, APPRCH/LNDG, EMERG
> >
> >
>
>
> --
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 6
_____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 08:28:51 AM PST US
> From: "Glen Matejcek" <aerobubba@earthlink.net>
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Compass shielding
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Glen Matejcek"
<aerobubba@earthlink.net>
>
> Hi Jerzy-
>
> Thanks for the amplification. It makes a lot of sense. I got back with
> the source of my info, and he stood by it although in a less adamant way.
> Sooo, I called a friend that does avionics development for uncle Sam, and
> he agrees with you. I now sit corrected!
>
> With regard to the inside out zoo reference, there are a couple of
> aquariums (aquaria?) that are basically one big tank that you traverse by
> walking along the bottom inside a lexan tube. Pretty cool! (insert grin
> thingy here)
>
> Glen MAtejcek
> aerobubba@earthlink.net
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 7
_____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 08:42:34 AM PST US
> From: "Dale Martin" <niceez@cableone.net>
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Compass shielding
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dale Martin"
<niceez@cableone.net>
>
> Alex has it right and is doing the right thing trying to shield his
compass.
>
> Runway headings change with the earth magnetic field and runways headings
> are permitted to be off as much as 5. I mean if divisions for runway
> headings are every 10 there has to be some room for error. For one I
don't
> like Speedy11's method and it doesn't comply with regs for VFR or IFR
> flight. I won't quote FAR Part 91 as looking it up ourselves is a part of
> continuing education we all need and if I were to tell you - you wouldn't
> remember it (As now?).
>
> All Gyro's precess and need correction including Slaved units. Relying on
> GPS for sole navigation 100% of the time is nuts and illegal in some
cases.
>
> Further to use the "system" you are required to have the appropriate
> equipment on board. I recall an airliner which had the Mag compass behind
> both pilots but centered in the airplane and facing forward (not kidding)
> and to use it would look up at a mirror to see it.
>
> We had a similar discussion on the Canard-Aviators group last month about
> GPS ground track verses mag heading and the current and ex-ATC controls in
> the group spoke up and said if you turned to a heading and the controller
> didn't like he would add more correction to your course and if it upset
> him/her you would here - "Flight advisories/following is canceled - squawk
> VFR - Good day"
>
> Alex - You must have a forward hinged canopy on that RV-6A
>
> Dale Martin
> Lewiston, ID
> LEZ-235
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson@usjet.net>
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Compass shielding
>
>
> > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Alex Peterson"
> <alexpeterson@usjet.net>
> >
> > > > > rarely match the GPS track. Am I splitting hairs - Yup.
> > > But, when
> > > > > ATC assigns a heading, they are expecting you to fly mag heading.
> >
> > Ok, ok. If one reads what I originally posted, to which the above was a
> > reply, I said to use GPS to SET the DG, not to fly tracks. I was
> > stating that I can't imagine using a magnetic compass anymore to set my
> > DG. I prefer to use runway heading or the mag track output of my gps
> > while taxiing to set the DG.
> >
> > Alex Peterson
> > Maple Grove, MN
> > RV6-A N66AP 437 hours
> > www.usfamily.net/web/alexpeterson
> >
> >
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 8
_____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 08:44:16 AM PST US
> From: Dj Merrill <deej@thayer.dartmouth.edu>
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Compass shielding
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Dj Merrill
<deej@thayer.dartmouth.edu>
>
> Alex Peterson wrote:
>
> > Ok, ok. If one reads what I originally posted, to which the above was a
> > reply, I said to use GPS to SET the DG, not to fly tracks. I was
> > stating that I can't imagine using a magnetic compass anymore to set my
> > DG. I prefer to use runway heading or the mag track output of my gps
> > while taxiing to set the DG.
>
> What about precession in your DG after flying for awhile?
> How do you check it in flight to make sure it is correct?
> I'm just curious, not trying to start anything... :-)
>
> -Dj
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 9
_____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 09:29:02 AM PST US
> From: "Mike Nellis" <mike@bmnellis.com>
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Compass shielding
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Mike Nellis" <mike@bmnellis.com>
>
> I don't know about anyone else, but my DG needs to be "reset" many time
> during a 2 hour flight. To set it once on the runway heading and then
> fly out to some airport without resetting the DG for two hours isn't
> going to work. Sure, I can just follow the GPS and adjust my track to
> get me there but then all the other functions of the GPS don't work
> without an accurate DG (wind direction, TAS etc.)
>
> Am I missing something here? Is there another way to accurately adjust
> your DG other than with a compass?
>
> Mike Nellis
> RV-6 Fuselage N699BM
> 1947 Stinson 108-2 NC9666K
> http://bmnellis.com
>
> *** Ok, ok. If one reads what I originally posted, to which
> *** the above was a
> *** reply, I said to use GPS to SET the DG, not to fly tracks. I was
> *** stating that I can't imagine using a magnetic compass
> *** anymore to set my
> *** DG. I prefer to use runway heading or the mag track output
> *** of my gps
> *** while taxiing to set the DG.
> ***
> *** Alex Peterson
> *** Maple Grove, MN
> *** RV6-A N66AP 437 hours
> *** www.usfamily.net/web/alexpeterson
> ***
> ***
> *** ==============
> *** ==============
> *** ==============
> *** http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/AeroElectric-*** List.htm
> *** Search Engine:
> *** http://www.matronics.com/search
> *** *** http://www.matronics.com/browse/aeroelectric-*** list
> ***
> *** Browse Digests:
> *** http://www.matronics.com/digest/aeroelectric-list
> *** ==============
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 10
____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 09:33:12 AM PST US
> From: Jeff Point <jpoint@mindspring.com>
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Dynon and EMI
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Jeff Point
<jpoint@mindspring.com>
>
> Jim Rodrian wrote:
>
> >Since Jeff Point is geographically close to me, I am willing to look at
his
> >installation to evaluate the situation.
> >
> >Jim
> >Grafton, WI
> >Defiant
> >
> Hi Jim,
>
> You're welcome to come over and have a look at my installation if you
> wish, but I believe I have solved the problem. Or more, accurately,
> there never was any problem, I just removed the artificial condition
> (low bus voltage) which was causing the appearance of a problem. I
> finally got my replacement mixture cable, and so have been able to test
> with the engine running. At 14.1 bus voltage, there is no discernable
> noise from the Dynon, strobes or any other source. I did use shielded
> cable for the remote compass module, located in the tail, which was run
> back there via a path all its own, away from any other wires.
>
> When Dynon comes out with their "solution" for the EMI problem, I will
> try it just for experimentation's sake, but I am quite happy with the
> installation as it is now.
>
> Jeff Point
> RV-6 getting close
> Milwaukee WI
> learning more about 'lectrics every day.
>
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 11
____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 09:58:12 AM PST US
> From: Walter Tondu <walter@tondu.com>
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Bus Load Analysis .. An Idea
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Walter Tondu <walter@tondu.com>
>
> On 02/13 11:27, John Schroeder wrote:
>
> > I hope this rather long posting is taken as constructive and not in any
> > way denigrating the effort, or your most generous offer to compile the
> > list. I have agonized long hours over the same problems as we designed
our
> > system and chose the equipment to install.
>
> Thanks for taking the time to really think this out. But I think we
> can come to an agreement that this project doesn't need to be this
> complicated. What we *Really* want to get out of this is the amperage
> draw for popular equipment during different phases of startup, taxi,
> flight and shutdown. Not all of the columns are 'required'.
>
> > I think you will be getting too rigid and complicated with this much
> > information. For example:
> >
> > 1. Why put buss in there? That will depend on the Z diagram being
used,
> > the aircraft, its mission etc.
>
> Again, voluntary. Main, E-Bus, Battery are common. Any others noted and
> you can pretty much tell which Z-diagram they're using. Remember, the
> Z-diagrams are just a starting point, each builders makeing subtle
changes.
>
> > 2. Why "Wire gauge/Volts"? Again, that is influenced by a lot of other
> > variables and choices - especially where the equipment will be located
in
> > the aircraft and what type. For example, we calculated a 44 foot round
> > trip in a glass aircraft for the pitot tube. Others are shorter, some
may
> > be longer. Using Bob's formula in his paper on Wire Size Selection, one
> > has to check their initial calculations on wire size to keep the %
voltage
> > drop under 5%. That could nullify any figure appended to a device sent
in
> > for the database. What about the heat dissipation if one chooses to run
a
> > wire in a bundle?
>
> Most of the equipment that will be listed in the document is common to
> many aircraft, eg. in almost all cases the GPS will be on the panel and
> the wiring length won't vary too much, probably not enought to warrant
> a different guage. Volts used to indicate 12 or 24.
>
> > 3. Why specify the size of the fuse? Often, the manufacturer specifies
it
> > and it has no relation whatsoever to the wire size you calculate. If
you
> > want to put the fuse size, it should only be the size recommended by
the
> > mfg. You could put an M after the size to denote this.
>
> I disagree. I'm not putting a fuse in there to protect the equipment
> which already has internal protection. I'm putting it in there to
> protect wiring.
>
> > 4. The various phases of flight? Again, these are subjective and will
> > vary a lot with the aircraft and mission. Also, emergency is a very
loose
> > category. There are too many to list and each may or may not have an
> > effect on the amperage total at the bottom of each sheet. It varies
also
> > with the Z diagram and any variation one chooses to make. One fellow
> > remarked a long time ago that one should add a night and day category
for
> > all of the phases of flight because lighting becomes a major
> > consideration. Bottom line on this is that your database would not be
very
> > helpful and be too big.
>
> Remember, this is about the accessories we put in the plane. Some may
> have differing amperage draws during different phases of flight.
>
> > 5. The elements of the database should be: Accessory, Manufacturer,
Model
> > #, Amps and Fuse. From there one can tailor the rest of the data based
on
> > their design, aircraft, missions and plain old preferences.
>
> Again, I'm going to compile per Bob's document. I think it is well
> thought-out.
>
> > There would be 3 codes to add to the data. Two would be for the amps
and
> > one for the fuse.
> >
> > One would add an "M" after the amps to denote actual measured load
taken
> > by the builder when the accessory is on. For a radio, there should be
two
> > lines of data: one for receive and one for transmit. Same for a fuel
boost
> > pump, if there is a high and a low mode. For something like a pitot
tube,
> > there would be two lines: one for steady state and one for surge during
> > warmup.
> >
> > The second code for the amps would be an "S" to denote that it is a
> > manufacturer's spec figure. If they have several figures, there should
be
> > one line per figure.
> >
> > The third code would be for the CB/fuzing. An "S" would be appended to
> > denote a manufacturer's recommended size. If someone actually
experimented
> > to fine where a device nuisance tripped, they could add a figure and
> > append an "M"
> >
> > The absence of a code in the amps cell would indicate caution to anyone
> > using that figure. I would think that once the list is initially
compiled
> > and available to the community, there will be a refinement process and
the
> > end point would most likely be M's or S's after each amperage. That is
the
> > key figure we all need to make the calculations and do the design.
> >
> > I would also ask that anyone furnishing a line or lines of data for a
> > device to state the source. I know that Panel Planner has some data and
I
> > would not want to rely on that in my calculations. There are also a lot
of
> > WAG's out there.
> >
> > Again, I hope this has been helpful. Drop me an email if you would like
to
> > discuss anything here. The idea is a wonderful one and the need is
> > certainly there. Thank you for volunteering.
>
> I like the idea of the codes. But for those builders who have already
> completed their analysis I doubt they will want to go back and re-do it.
> I don't expect all the information received by builders to be
> homogenious. I do hope that information provided helps others save time.
>
> > Cheers,
> >
> > John Schroeder
> > Lancair ES & Z-14
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 18:54:36 -0500, Walter Tondu <walter@tondu.com>
wrote:
> >
> > > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Walter Tondu
<walter@tondu.com>
> > >
> > > On 02/12 1:53, Dale Martin wrote:
> > >
> > > > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dale Martin"
> > > <niceez@cableone.net>
> > > >
> > > > Walt,
> > > >
> > > > It will be WIRE GAUGE / VOLTAGE. I use much smaller wire then the
14
> > > volt
> > > > folks and there are others using 28 volt equipment.
> > >
> > > Right you are!
> > >
> > > BUS, ACCESSORY, VENDOR, MODEL #, WIRE-GUAGE/VOLTS, FUSE, PRE-FLIGHT,
> > > PRE-TAXI,
> > > TAKEOFF/CLIMB, VFR-CRUISE, IFR-CRUISE, APPRCH/LNDG, EMERG
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> Walter Tondu
> http://www.tondu.com/rv7
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 12
____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 01:15:31 PM PST US
> From: "Dale Martin" <niceez@cableone.net>
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Locating Switches
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dale Martin"
<niceez@cableone.net>
>
> Team,
>
>
> Need a favor.....
> I am looking for a good source for a Locking Lever Switch. The SPST type
> with ON-OFF positions. Full size - no mini's.
>
> Have one that says UR on the side. The top comes to more of a cone shape
> rather then the round dome shape that the micoswitch company makes.
>
> If you need a picture of the one I have I'll email the picture.
>
> Thanks in Advance,
>
> Dale Martin
> Lewiston, ID
> LEZ-235
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 13
____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 03:06:58 PM PST US
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Locating Switches
> From: "I-Blackler, Wayne R" <wayne.r.blackler@boeing.com>
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "I-Blackler, Wayne R"
<wayne.r.blackler@boeing.com>
>
> The only variety I'm aware of is the MS24659 series (-21A) from
>
> Flame Enterprises
> 20945 Osborne St
> Canoga Park, CA 91304
> (818) 700-2905
>
> The locking detents are available in a variety of positions. Check
http://content.honeywell.com/sensing/prodinfo/environment/catalog/379.pdf
>
> These are not cheap, but really good for Ignition switches IMO.
>
> - Wayne Blackler
> IO-360 Long EZ
> Seattle, WA
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dale Martin [mailto:niceez@cableone.net]
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Locating Switches
>
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dale Martin"
<niceez@cableone.net>
>
> Team,
>
>
> Need a favor.....
> I am looking for a good source for a Locking Lever Switch. The SPST type
> with ON-OFF positions. Full size - no mini's.
>
> Have one that says UR on the side. The top comes to more of a cone shape
> rather then the round dome shape that the micoswitch company makes.
>
> If you need a picture of the one I have I'll email the picture.
>
> Thanks in Advance,
>
> Dale Martin
> Lewiston, ID
> LEZ-235
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 14
____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 03:43:24 PM PST US
> From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Off line for a week . . .
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
<bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
>
> Bob and almost-a-doctor Dee are off to the sunny beaches
> of Puerto Rico for a week. My old boss from RAC Missiles
> group has a condo there and has been inviting me down
> every winter for the past ten years . . . difference this
> year was that Dee heard the invitation too. The next
> question was, "Well, why not THIS year, dear?"
>
> Why not indeed.
>
> See you all on the 22nd.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
> -----------------------------------------
> ( Experience and common sense cannot be )
> ( replaced with policy and procedures. )
> ( R. L. Nuckolls III )
> -----------------------------------------
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 15
____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 04:38:11 PM PST US
> From: Dave Morris <dave@davemorris.com>
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Off line for a week . . .
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Dave Morris <dave@davemorris.com>
>
> Have fun! I'm envious!
>
> Dave Morris
>
> At 05:43 PM 2/13/2004, you wrote:
>
> >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
> ><bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
> >
> >Bob and almost-a-doctor Dee are off to the sunny beaches
> >of Puerto Rico for a week. My old boss from RAC Missiles
> >group has a condo there and has been inviting me down
> >every winter for the past ten years . . . difference this
> >year was that Dee heard the invitation too. The next
> >question was, "Well, why not THIS year, dear?"
> >
> >Why not indeed.
> >
> >See you all on the 22nd.
> >
> >
> > Bob . . .
> >
> > -----------------------------------------
> > ( Experience and common sense cannot be )
> > ( replaced with policy and procedures. )
> > ( R. L. Nuckolls III )
> > -----------------------------------------
> >
> >
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 16
____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 04:57:34 PM PST US
> From: richard@riley.net
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: FS: SL70 Transponder
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: richard@riley.net
>
> I have one last piece of UPS avionics left - an SL-70 transponder. New
and
> un-installed, full warrantee, full install kit. $1750
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 17
____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 05:15:13 PM PST US
> From: "AI Nut" <ainut@earthlink.net>
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: round transponder recommendations
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "AI Nut" <ainut@earthlink.net>
>
> Anyone have a recommendation for a round transponder to fit into the
panel?
> Cheap is good!
> I've heard some bad news about the one from Austraila.
>
> Thanks,
> David
> price is always a consideration
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 18
____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 05:20:50 PM PST US
> From: mprather <mprather@spro.net>
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Off line for a week . . .
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: mprather <mprather@spro.net>
>
> You poor thing... :)
>
> Have fun!!
>
> Do not archive
>
> Matt-
> N34RD
>
> Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
> >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
<bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
> >
> >Bob and almost-a-doctor Dee are off to the sunny beaches
> >of Puerto Rico for a week. My old boss from RAC Missiles
> >group has a condo there and has been inviting me down
> >every winter for the past ten years . . . difference this
> >year was that Dee heard the invitation too. The next
> >question was, "Well, why not THIS year, dear?"
> >
> >Why not indeed.
> >
> >See you all on the 22nd.
> >
> >
> > Bob . . .
> >
> > -----------------------------------------
> > ( Experience and common sense cannot be )
> > ( replaced with policy and procedures. )
> > ( R. L. Nuckolls III )
> > -----------------------------------------
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 19
____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 05:40:09 PM PST US
> From: klehman@albedo.net
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: alternator switch
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: klehman@albedo.net
>
> Yes that makes a lot of sense. I think I was given some duff info on
> this. It's a John Deere unit like the one shown here.
>
>
http://flyboybob.com/web_pages/kr2/electrical%20and%20instrument/dynamo2.htm
>
> Just from looking at the fin area and 280 watts of DC output, I think it
> indeed has to be a series-pass unit.
>
> thanks
> Ken
>
> > Not sure what kind of PM alternator you have . . . if it's
> > an SD-8, that system uses a series-pass regulator that does
> > not waste unused energy from the alternator. Not sure
> > about other manufacturers but I think Ducati regulators
> > for Rotax are series-pass also. There's no good reason
> > to run a parallel-shunt regulator any more.
> >
> > Bob . . .
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 20
____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 06:17:17 PM PST US
> From: "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson@usjet.net>
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Compass shielding
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Alex Peterson"
<alexpeterson@usjet.net>
>
>
> >
> > What about precession in your DG after flying for
> > awhile? How do you check it in flight to make sure it is
> > correct? I'm just curious, not trying to start anything... :-)
> >
>
> Dj, good question - I'm fortunate in that my HSI doesn't precess much,
> maybe 5 degrees in two hours. Obviously, one can compare it to the
> magnetic compass, it is just that in my case, the errors in reading the
> compass, particularly in rough air, are more than the precession of the
> DG.
>
> Dale, I'm not the one shielding anything, whoever started this thread
> is.
>
> Alex Peterson
> Maple Grove, MN
> RV6-A N66AP 437 hours
> www.usfamily.net/web/alexpeterson
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 21
____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 06:30:51 PM PST US
> From: richard@riley.net
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: round transponder recommendations
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: richard@riley.net
>
> At 07:15 PM 2/13/04 -0600, AI Nut wrote:
> >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "AI Nut" <ainut@earthlink.net>
> >
> >Anyone have a recommendation for a round transponder to fit into the
panel?
> >Cheap is good!
> >I've heard some bad news about the one from Austraila.
>
> The only other one is the Becker.
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 22
____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 07:38:56 PM PST US
> From: "Richard E. Tasker" <retasker@optonline.net>
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: FS: SL70 Transponder
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Richard E. Tasker"
<retasker@optonline.net>
>
> Geez! Why didn't you say so two weeks ago? I just bought one from ACS
> for $1790 :-( .
>
> Dick Tasker
>
> Do not archive
>
> richard@riley.net wrote:
>
> >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: richard@riley.net
> >
> >I have one last piece of UPS avionics left - an SL-70 transponder. New
and
> >un-installed, full warrantee, full install kit. $1750
> >
> >
>
>
> ________________________________ Message 23
____________________________________
>
>
> Time: 08:40:29 PM PST US
> From: flmike <flmike2001@yahoo.com>
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: RE: Locating Switches
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: flmike <flmike2001@yahoo.com>
>
> NKK has a locking version, but it only comes with
> solder lugs. Mouser carries them, about $10 ea. I
> stumbled across the NKK part while looking for
> something else the other day. There are probably
> others out there as well.
>
> http://www.nkkswitches.com/pdf/stogglesmedcap.pdf
>
> http://www.mouser.com/catalog/617/857.pdf
>
> __________________________________
> http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
>
>
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: | Z12 e-bus questions |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Steve Sampson" <SSampson.SLN21@london.edu>
The thing that I never understand about this sort of analysis is why is it
assumed that the transmit switch will not be activated in this example. I
dont know the NAV/COM unit in the example below, but surely it will
significantly increase the demand on the ebus and blow any associated
fuse/breaker?
Steve
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Robert
L. Nuckolls, III
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Z12 e-bus questions
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
<bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 10:45 AM 2/9/2004 -0800, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: f1rocket@telus.net
>
>Hi all (Bob),
>
>I'm planning on using a Z-12 type system on my Rocket. One battery, two
>alternators.
>
>I notice the e-bus alternate feed is through a 7 A (fuse?) via a 16 AWG
wire.
>
>Two questions: For peace of mind would a breaker be the best way to go
>here?
>I'm thinking that I can easily overload the 7 amps just with the e-bus as
>described in Z-11. The plane will be outfitted for night flying, and needs
a
>fuel booster pump. So if I end up with more than 7 A (which either I will
>have, or be very close to) when I loose the main power (assuming two dead
>alternators), and throw the switch, at least I can get smart, shed load and
>reset the breaker. For the most part though, I plan on using fuses,
>because I
>too have never reset a breaker were there wasn't a problem that resetting
the
>breaker actually helped, and I plan on having each circuit with it's own
fuse.
>
>Second question: Why only 7 amp protection device off the batter bus? The
>wire should be able to handle 12 amps? So why not use the protection
>device to
>protect the wire, since each of the devices coming off the e-bus will be
>protected on it's own?
>
>Thanks in advance, and also for all the past advice.
The Z-figures are intended to define the ART of system
design. This is where you pick through the big box of
Erector-Set, Tinker-Toy, and Lego parts to see how they
best fit together in a system that supports your project's
mission. The Z-figures should NOT be taken as verbatim
of the SCIENCE which dictates component selection.
When you "assuming two dead alternators", you're
getting ready to address a REALLY bad day. The likelihood
of dual failures in any single tank of fuel is extremely
remote. Any piece of wire more than 6" long taking a feed
from a bus with high fault current capability (your battery
may well deliver upwards of 500-1000 amps in a hard fault),
then we say it needs protection. If you're e-bus, e-bus
alternate feed and battery bus can be all wired up with
6" pieces of wire, you don't need any fuse or fusible link.
If the wires are longer, then . . . well, shucks. Now,
if you need an e-bus alternate feed exceeding 5A from
the battery (or battery bus) then using a relay as shown
in:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/temp/E-BusFatFeed.gif
seems prudent. This architecture provides a low power
version of a battery contactor to provide at-the-battery
control of a feeder. The same caveat exists for all
feeders from the battery whether e-bus alternate feed
or feeders to goodies that support an electrically
dependent engine. You mentioned a fuel pump . . . I
wouldn't drive this from the e-bus but directly from
the battery bus via it's 5A or less fuse and no relay
or a 7A+ fuse and a relay.
The VERY FIRST documents you need to craft in your
electrical system design are a tabular listing of each
feeder that comes off each bus. The system that feeder
supplies, the size of protection be it a Lego fuse or
Tinker-Toy breaker, size of the wire, then draw 7 columns
where you're going to deduce and add up the current draw
on each feeder under the following headers, (1) preflight,
(2) taxi, (3) takeoff/climb, (4) vfr cruise, (5) ifr cruise,
(6) approach to landing and (7) alternator-out.
Go get this document:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/temp/LoadAnalysisHandOut.pdf
The first page is an example of how to start this task.
The second page is blank so you can fill in what fits for
your project. You need one page for each bus.
Note that this document becomes a list of all the goodies
in your airplane, how much energy each combination takes
for operation. It can also be an index for your page-per-system
documents that will ultimately record how your airplane
is wired.
Bob . . .
---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
---
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: FS: SL70 Transponder |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: BUCSDDS@aol.com
Richard,
If the transponder (SL-70 transponder) is still available, I'll take it off
your hands.
Marwin Goff
bucsdds@aol.com
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Locating Switches |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones@charter.net>
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dale Martin" <niceez@cableone.net>
Of course you can use whatever switches you like but in my humble opinion,
locking lever switches invite problems---
Here's why---standard toggle switch guards like MS25224 reliably prevent
actuation and visually signal that the switch has been operated. Locking
toggle-type switches can be and are broken by ham-fisted pilots, especially
by someone not familiar with them. NOW you have a problem. The switch is
broken AND you don't know if it has been actuated or not--and you can't do
anything about it. Not good...!
By the way--I used to sell F-16 V-max toggle switch guards on my website. I
was buying them at $3.00 each. Then the wholesale price went to $40 each
with a minimum buy of 50 pcs. One piece wholesale price $130. They hand
paint them in France...I was told. M'aidez!
By the way2--I had in my hands an actual real genuine (titanium) Space
Shuttle Switch Guard, thanks to Historic Space Systems (www.space1.com) and
with the magic of CNC and the original Rockwell blueprints they are on my
website too (in hard anodized aluminum).
Regards,
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge MA 01550-2705
Phone (508) 764-2072
Email: emjones@charter.net
"When they say it's not about money, it's about money.
When they say it's not about sex, it's about sex."
--Dale Bumpers
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: | Fw: [f-AA] request for help |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Cy Galley" <cgalley@qcbc.org>
Help for this forwarded message.
Cy Galley, TC - Chair, Emergency Aircraft Repair, Oshkosh
Editor, EAA Safety Programs
cgalley@qcbc.org or experimenter@eaa.org
Always looking for articles for the Experimenter soon to be Sport Pilot
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Rodkey" <rodkey@westmont.edu>
Subject: [f-AA] request for help
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 22:42:47 -0500
> From: Richard Dover <rdover@springmail.com>
> To: aeronca-owner@westmont.edu
> Subject: Messages
>
> John
>
> I have tried twice to send this message to the list, it never made it. Can
you help?
>
>
> Rick Dover
>
> > A friend is completing a Marquart Charger and ask me the following
> question.
> > I told him I would pose the question to the knowledgeable people on this
> > great list. This is not about an Aeronca but is close (has wings).
> >
> > Rick (N2453E) which is a Champ
> >
> >
> > Rick,
> > Could you post the following question on the aviation website that you
> > were referring to the other night. Thanks.
> >
> > Pat
> >
> >
> > I recently purchased a rebuilt Lycoming O320 for my soon-to-be-completed
> > Marquart Charger. The paperwork with the engine refers to the "new
model
> > 20 alternator" but no other info is provided. I can not find a
> manufacture
> > name on the alternator and cannot find info on the alternator locally.
My
> > problem is that I cannot figure out how to wire the alternator. It has
a
> > lug on the lower right that is designated "B" (No problem there) and
what
> > appears to be another lug at the upper right which has a notched
insulator
> > attached (not sure what this is for) and then it has an attachment for a
> > three-connector socket (did not come with the engine). The tree prongs
> are
> > labeled "F" (I am assuming this is the field attachment point), "E" and
> "N"
> > (I am not familiar with these designations). Does anyone have any info
> > that can solve my wiring dilemma. It would be greatly appreciated.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Aeronca mailing list
> Aeronca@mail.westmont.edu
> http://mail.westmont.edu/mailman/listinfo/aeronca
>
>
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: | Load dump issues |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: George Braly <gwbraly@gami.com>
Bob,
I have done a fair amount of testing a couple of years ago, working with the
TVS devices, including the larger sized versions.
In my experience, they have not been adequate, alone, to prevent over
voltage spikes on load dumps, even from smaller alternators.
They help. But I have blown some of them on load dumps.
Regards, George
---
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: Load dump issues |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Jerzy Krasinski <krasinski@direcway.com>
George Braly wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: George Braly <gwbraly@gami.com>
>
>
>Bob,
>
>I have done a fair amount of testing a couple of years ago, working with the
>TVS devices, including the larger sized versions.
>
>In my experience, they have not been adequate, alone, to prevent over
>voltage spikes on load dumps, even from smaller alternators.
>
>They help. But I have blown some of them on load dumps.
>
>Regards, George
>
>
>
>
I am not surprised. Looking at the data for 1500W devices we find the maximum pulse
is 1ms at half peak value current. That is much shorter than the expected
alternator pulse.
The non repeatable surge current is listed as 200A for 50 ms. Probably more likely
peak current would be around 50A, so that would allow some extension of the
pulse length. But that is for a nonrepeatable event.
That shows that for the alternator full current application they are beaten at
the the surge limits.
Connecting TVS devices in parallel is a waste. Their characteristics differ enough
so most of the current will go through one TVS, while others will just hang
there. Maybe measuring them and selecting them in very similar bunches would
work, but that requires building a nonstandard curve tracer for operation at
rather high currents. Probably it can be done in a crude way discharging a capacitor
through a few of them in parallel and observing the currents on a multichannel
scope.
One can easy increase the power to 3000W by connecting in series two 6.8V devices.
Unfortunately, 6.8V is the lowest voltage TVS I found, and that increases
power only by a factor of two. But if in your experiments they failed only sometimes,
that factor of two might be everything we need.
Jerzy
>
>
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: Locating Switches |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dale Martin" <niceez@cableone.net>
Eric,
Thanks for you words and research. In this pilots case they are used for
Magneto and Electronic Ignition switches. Everyone has there opinions about
what to and what not use. I'm no exception. I have flown in air that was
so ruff it took me over a minute to change radio frequencies and all I had
to do was push the Flip-Flop button. Since I am changing my instrument
panel (same plane -LEZ) and doing away with the side console where all the
switches and C/B's were located this means all the switches will be on the
left side of the panel. If I every experience that kind of turbulence
again - I would rather the Locking lever feature prevent the unintended
action of grounding the magneto or de-energizing the E.I. system. I have
guarded switches on the head rest so the back seat person can shut both
systems if I become unable to for any reason. However on the instrument
panel they are bulky and for my pleasure, unwanted. Since I have flown 550+
hours using the key switch for the mag and the Locking switch for the E.I.
without any damage the choice will be to stick with what has worked.
Secondly, I don't let others that are ham-fisted fly the airplane and in
1000+ hours someone as PIC has only occur on one flight.
Thirdly. If the switch breaks I reach into my helmet bag and pull out a new
ON-OFF switch. Never hurts to carry one spare. I just may install the
spare on the panel and run wires to a terminal block... Thanks Eric for
stirring the pot, you've given me a great idea.
Dale Martin
Lewiston, ID
LEZ-235
----- Original Message -----
From: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones@charter.net>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Locating Switches
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Eric M. Jones"
<emjones@charter.net>
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dale Martin"
<niceez@cableone.net>
>
> Of course you can use whatever switches you like but in my humble opinion,
> locking lever switches invite problems---
>
> Here's why---standard toggle switch guards like MS25224 reliably prevent
> actuation and visually signal that the switch has been operated. Locking
> toggle-type switches can be and are broken by ham-fisted pilots,
especially
> by someone not familiar with them. NOW you have a problem. The switch is
> broken AND you don't know if it has been actuated or not--and you can't do
> anything about it. Not good...!
>
> By the way--I used to sell F-16 V-max toggle switch guards on my website.
I
> was buying them at $3.00 each. Then the wholesale price went to $40 each
> with a minimum buy of 50 pcs. One piece wholesale price $130. They hand
> paint them in France...I was told. M'aidez!
>
> By the way2--I had in my hands an actual real genuine (titanium) Space
> Shuttle Switch Guard, thanks to Historic Space Systems (www.space1.com)
and
> with the magic of CNC and the original Rockwell blueprints they are on my
> website too (in hard anodized aluminum).
>
> Regards,
> Eric M. Jones
> www.PerihelionDesign.com
> 113 Brentwood Drive
> Southbridge MA 01550-2705
> Phone (508) 764-2072
> Email: emjones@charter.net
>
> "When they say it's not about money, it's about money.
> When they say it's not about sex, it's about sex."
> --Dale Bumpers
>
>
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: | Sequential turn signals...OFF TOPIC |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Chris Adkins" <ccadkins@adelphia.net>
I know, I know...this is TOTALLY off subject...BUT...
What are all the "kiddies" using to pull off the "sequential turn
signals" trick on their cars? I can remember the days when the only way
to do it was with a geared dc motor driving a little cam which depressed
some reed switches. I'm sure it's much more elegant than that NOW, and
I'm just wondering if any of you guys know how it's done! (BTW, I have
selfish reasons too...I want them on my '88 Buick Reatta, but don't
wanna' pay $59 for the kit on Ebay).
Chris
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Lowell Fitt" <lcfitt@inreach.com>
I am new to this list and would like to ask a question.
I have mounted a video camera on my airplane with a fully articulated mount.
Previously, for audio, I led a microphone from the earcup of my headset to
the audio inpuut of the camera. This microphone was powered by a 1.5 v.
battery and I have had trouble remembering to turn it on. - dead audio. I
tried the checklist idea and it didn't work in this application. I have now
an impedence compensating set-up - Aircraft Spruce and a pretty rough item,
I think - that hard wires the headset audio to the audio input of the
camcorder. Now instead of getting the muffled roar of the engine, I get a
quite noticable alternator whine. Any ideas as to how to filter this out.
I don't hear it in the headset.
Loewll
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: | special progressive |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Troy Scott" <tscott1217@bellsouth.net>
Gentlemen,
Is there a three-position progressive switch made so the upper two positions
are progressive, but the bottom position is only on when the switch is in
the bottom position? Like this:
Top Position: middle and upper positions on
Middle position: only the middle position is on
Bottom position: only the bottom position is on
Thanks!
Troy
tscott1217@bellsouth.net
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! --
|