Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:07 AM - Re: Backup devices - TC vs. attitude gyro (Werner Schneider)
2. 12:10 AM - Re: Re: attitude indicator on E-Buss or Main Buss?? (Werner Schneider)
3. 08:10 AM - Re: Re: attitude indicator on E-Buss or (Charlie Kuss)
4. 12:56 PM - Re: Backup devices - TC vs. attitude gyro ()
5. 01:42 PM - Re: Backup devices - TC vs. attitude gyro (BobsV35B@aol.com)
6. 02:21 PM - Whelen strobe (larry OKeefe)
7. 06:12 PM - T & B vs AI ()
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: Backup devices - TC vs. attitude gyro |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Werner Schneider" <wernerschneider@compuserve.com>
Hello Chad,
have a look at the new TC from trutrak, might be a good option?
http://www.trutrakflightsystems.com/index.html
and is affordable.
Werner
----- Original Message -----
From: "Chad Robinson" <crobinson@rfgonline.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Backup devices - TC vs. attitude gyro
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Chad Robinson
<crobinson@rfgonline.com>
>
> Is there any reason to choose a TC over an attitude gyro as a backup
device
> to, say, a glass panel display? OTHER than cost, which is obvious? I know
the
> TC is considered sufficient for IFR, and I know it's cheaper, but I was
> wondering if there might actually be a preference for it, rather than just
an
> option.
>
> Regards,
> Chad
>
>
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: attitude indicator on E-Buss or Main Buss?? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Werner Schneider" <wernerschneider@compuserve.com>
Hello Greg,
for this reason I have:
a AI on the main bus
a Dynon EFIS on the e-bus
a internal battery in the Dynon (good for 2 h)
So even with power switched of on both busses I would be fine for attitude,
altitude, speed and magnetic referenze.
However, you have to live up to your worst case scenario and design your
system accordingly.
Werner
----- Original Message -----
From: "Greg Puckett" <rv8er@myawai.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: attitude indicator on E-Buss or Main Buss??
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Greg Puckett" <rv8er@myawai.com>
>
>
> Cliff,
>
> I did not mean to imply that the E buss is more likely to fail. It was
> that when it does you would loose a particular instrument AND that
> instruments backup. The E-buss should be less likely to fail due to it
> having more than one feed.
>
> Other than something coming in contact with the Buss itself, there are
> not very many "buss faults" that would take the buss out. In general, I
> would not be concerned too much about them if they are well protected
> from mechanical interference like they would be if you are using the
> fuseblocks with boots on the posts. If the buss itself is a copper bar
> screwed to a row of breakers, say running along the bottom of the panel,
> it's not to hard to imagine scenarios where something could come into
> contact with them.
>
> Greg Puckett
> Elizabeth, CO
> RV-8 80081 (slooooow build)
>
>
> >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "flyv35b"
> <flyv35b@ashcreekwireless.com
> <mailto:flyv35b@ashcreekwireless.com?subject=Re:%20Re:%20attitude%20indi
> cator%20on%20E-Buss%20or%20Main%20Buss??&replyto=200404100226.i3A2QsU235
> 46@matronics.com> >
> >
> >I realize the odds are very remote but, the E-buss is a common
> >> failure point.
>
> >Just curious, would you care to elaborate about this. Why would the
> E-buss
> >be any more prone to failure than the main buss for instance. And what
> >would be the failure mode? Blown fuse, failed switch or circuit
> breaker,
> >etc.?
>
> >Cliff
> ----- Original Message -----
> >From: <Greg.Puckett@united.com
> <mailto:Greg.Puckett@united.com?subject=Re:%20Re:%20attitude%20indicator
> %20on%20E-Buss%20or%20Main%20Buss??&replyto=200404100226.i3A2QsU23546@ma
> tronics.com> >
> >To: <AeroElectric-List@matronics.com
> <mailto:AeroElectric-List@matronics.com?subject=Re:%20Re:%20attitude%20i
> ndicator%20on%20E-Buss%20or%20Main%20Buss??&replyto=200404100226.i3A2QsU
> 23546@matronics.com> >
> >Subject: Re: attitude indicator on E-Buss or Main Buss??
>
>
> > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Greg.Puckett@united.com
> <mailto:Greg.Puckett@united.com?subject=Re:%20Re:%20attitude%20indicator
> %20on%20E-Buss%20or%20Main%20Buss??&replyto=200404100226.i3A2QsU23546@ma
> tronics.com>
> >
> > >you wrote:
> >
> > >Would it also be a good idea not to put the attitude indicator and
> turn
> > coordinator
> > >on the same fuse=3F=3F - I would think one would want both on the
> > e-buss=3F=3F
> >
> > >I'd like NOT to have another switch - how can I avoid one for the
> > attitude indicator.
> >
> > >I'm of the understanding that I ask myself "is it essential for the
> > completion
> > >of the flight" if so I put it on the e-buss. Well then I would
> think
> > instrument
> > >lights, radios, gps, electric booster pump, attitude indicator, would
> > all go
> > >on the e-buss - am I right here=3F=3F
> >
> > There are, of course, many opinions on how "essential" equipment
> should
> > be powered. Personally, I'm not a big fan of putting everything I deem
> > "essential" on the same buss, fuse, switch ... I would never want
> > equipment I've already deemed essential to share any common failure
> > point.
> >
> > IMHO, do NOT even consider putting the two of the best pieces of
> > equipment you have for keeping the greasy side down on the same fuse.
> I
> > would not even put them on the same buss. The idea is to keep any
> single
> > failure from causing you to loose items that have no backup for and
> that
> > the loss of will cause you to "break a sweat" getting back on the
> ground
> > safely. I realize the odds are very remote but, the E-buss is a common
> > failure point. Maybe our working definition of "essential" needs to be
> > clarified. If I've deemed a piece of equipment essential for safe
> flight
> > in the planned scenario, it must have a backup. That backup should not
> > share any recourses with the equipment it is backing up. So, both
> pieces
> > are not essential. One OR the other is essential.
> >
> >
> > Greg
> >
> >
>
>
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: attitude indicator on E-Buss or |
Main Buss??
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Charlie Kuss <chaskuss@bellsouth.net>
Mickey,
I've got a rear battery and I placed my battery fuse block (aka bus) in the rear,
near the battery. I mounted it to a 3/16" thick Delrin sheet mounted between
the right side F-888 and F-889 longerons. I've got photos for anyone interested.
Charlie Kuss
RV-8A wiring
Boca Raton, Fl.
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics@rv8.ch>
>
>I agree, and I don't believe anyone was saying
>that the e-bus is not reliable.
>
>Smoke in the cockpit is the only scenario I
>can see where one would need to turn it off.
>
>Somewhat related question - batteries in
>the back, which means battery contactors
>in the back. If you want to have a battery bus,
>doesn't this mean you have to run a long wire
>up to the panel that can't be shut off? Doesn't
>this cause problems with shorting in the event
>of an off field landing?
>
>Mickey
>
>At 20:03 10-04-04, LarryRobertHelming wrote:
>-----Start of Original Message-----
>>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming@sigecom.net>
>>
>>I disagree that the e-buss in a common failure point. It has a backup
>>source of power! That is twice as good as the old way of wiring. I think
>>the E-buss can be expected to be about as dependable as the battery buss and
>>the switch that activates the e-buss which is about as good as the battery
>>and the wiring. Everything has potential for failure so we cannot eliminate
>>failure. We live with risk but manage it. I like having a secondary way of
>>powering the things on the e-buss. If you still do not feel comfortable,
>>look for more backup in something like a second battery and/or second
>>alternator.
>>
>>Indiana Larry, RV7 TipUp
>>TMX-O-360 ACS2002 Dynon CNS430 Digitrak
>>JeffRose Flightline Interiors
>>Firewall Forward, Wiring w/Nuckoll's Knowledge
>>
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "Mickey Coggins" <mick-matronics@rv8.ch>
>>To: <aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>
>>Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: attitude indicator on E-Buss or Main
>>Buss??
>>
>>
>>> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Mickey Coggins
>><mick-matronics@rv8.ch>
>>>
>>> I read this as "if the e-bus fails, several things go
>>> down with it" not that it fails often.
>>>
>>> Mickey
>>>
>>> At 05:24 10-04-04, flyv35b wrote:
>>> -----Start of Original Message-----
>>> >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "flyv35b"
>><flyv35b@ashcreekwireless.com>
>>> >
>>> >I realize the odds are very remote but, the E-buss is a common
>>> >> failure point.
>>> >
>>> >Just curious, would you care to elaborate about this. Why would the
>>E-buss
>>> >be any more prone to failure than the main buss for instance. And what
>>> >would be the failure mode? Blown fuse, failed switch or circuit breaker,
>>> >etc.?
>-----End of Original Message-----
>
>--
>Mickey Coggins
>http://www.rv8.ch/
>#82007 QB Wings/Fuselage
>
>
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: Backup devices - TC vs. attitude gyro |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: <jimk36@comcast.net>
Hi Bob, and Chad--
Another FWIW.
I know that all of us who are instrument rated have had to learn and
demonstrate that we can keep the airplane right side up using only the T&B,
airspeed and altimeter. And Lindberg flew all the way to Paris in a lot of
IMC with no more than that. But-- a lot of pretty good pilots have lost the
airplane in the confusion and transition when the AI quit. In my humble
opinion, nothing beats a standby AI on the e-bus or battery bus.
Really ole Jim
----- Original Message -----
From: <BobsV35B@aol.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Backup devices - TC vs. attitude gyro
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: BobsV35B@aol.com
>
> In a message dated 4/10/04 12:29:31 PM Central Daylight Time,
> crobinson@rfgonline.com writes:
> TC is considered sufficient for IFR, and I know it's cheaper, but I was
> wondering if there might actually be a preference for it, rather than just
an
> option.
>
> Regards,
> Chad
>
>
> Good Afternoon Chad,
>
> For What It Is Worth.
>
> For many varied reasons, I much prefer a Classic Turn And Bank
> rather than the more modern Turn Coordinator.
>
> In any case, I would consider a TC to be my second choice of a
> last ditch instrument. Both the T&B and the TC are cheaper, lighter
> and more reliable than an attitude indicator.
>
> Happy Skies,
>
> Old Bob
> AKA
> Bob Siegfried
> Ancient Aviator
> Stearman N3977A
> Brookeridge Airpark LL22
> Downers Grove, IL 60516
> 630 985-8502
>
>
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Backup devices - TC vs. attitude gyro |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: BobsV35B@aol.com
In a message dated 4/11/04 2:57:24 PM Central Daylight Time,
jimk36@comcast.net writes:
I know that all of us who are instrument rated have had to learn and
demonstrate that we can keep the airplane right side up using only the T&B,
airspeed and altimeter. And Lindberg flew all the way to Paris in a lot of
IMC with no more than that. But-- a lot of pretty good pilots have lost the
airplane in the confusion and transition when the AI quit. In my humble
opinion, nothing beats a standby AI on the e-bus or battery bus.
Really ole Jim
Good Afternoon Really ole Jim,
My concern with using an attitude gyro as a back up has to do with the
confusion that can arise as to which instrument is really working and what it is
saying. It is my totally unproven theory that many of the accidents that have
occurred have happened because there was too much for the pilot to look at and
that confusion then prevailed.
If you have two horizons and one gets lazy, how do you decide which one is
working?
The only way I know how do that is to look at a performance or rate
instrument to see if the deviation is supported by those instruments.
The air carriers all use a third attitude gyro theses days and no longer have
any rate of turn instrumentation at all. However, they have two pilots and
there is a a capability of at least comparing three attitude gyros. With three
instruments to observe and two pilots to make an evaluation, it isn't real
difficult to decide which instrument is telling the truth. If all you have is
two attitude gyros, a vote has to be taken. Since most of we GA pilots will
only have two attitude instruments, not three, we have to use supporting
instrumentation to determine which one has failed. Since we are going to use that
supporting information as our check on the attitude gyro, why not just use it to
start with.
My preference for using a T&B in lieu of a TC has to do with emphasis in our
(read my) feeble brain. When things are going to a bad place in a handbasket,
the less I have to think about the better. The main thing is to make sure
the airplane is not turning. If it does not turn, you will survive.
A turn needle doesn't look anything at all like anything else on the
instrument panel. It doesn't tell you about a roll or pitch change. All it tells
you
is whether or not the aircraft is turning.
Once again, stop the turn and you will survive. The rest is a piece of cake.
Failure modes of the TC and T&B are pretty easy to recognize. They don't get
lazy and fall to the side. They just quit working!
I have two T&Bs on my panel. One is airdriven, the other is electric. I try
to include at least one of them in every scan of the panel. I tell myself
that I really need to know what the rate of turn is even though I realize that
we have not done timed turns for the last half century. It forces me to look
at my rate instrument all of the time. Hopefully, that will help me catch it,
if it ever fails.
Voting between the two of them is simple. The one that is wiggling is
working!
A standby attitude instrument on another panel is, in my not so humble
opinion, worthless unless it is accompanied by a full set of instruments so that
one
can fly the aircraft entirely by utilizing that other panel. Cross the
cockpit flying is not all that hard as long as you don't try to switch back and
forth. I rather think that was what led to the demise of the Carnahans. He flew
that airplane for quite sometime following his first report of difficulty.
It appears that he did have quite a few options left when he finally lost it.
Isn't it possible that if he had just gone to his needle ball and airspeed he
may well have made it comfortably to Jefferson City?
The idea is to get it to a point where even the dumbest of us can handle the
situation with what we have left. In that vein, I like the idea of keeping it
as simple as possible. You can recover from a spin with a T&B if you just
have confidence in what it is telling you. Jump around and keep changing your
mind and you won't have a chance
I think Jim Younkin's TC has a lot of things going for it. I would like it
even better if it didn't look so much like an attitude gyro!
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Airpark LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8502
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "larry OKeefe" <okeefel@adelphia.net>
I'm thinking of putting the Whelen stobe power supply
under the baggage compartment floor in my RV7A and am concerned if there would
be enough cooling air there for it.
There would be about 1/2" spacing below it
between the exterior skin and about 1/2 " above it between the baggage floor.
There are not a lot of air holes around the floor ribs in this area, so air
fow is somewhat limited.
It is the Whelen model HDACF.
Thanks Larry RV7A, fuselage
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: <jimk36@comcast.net>
Bob--
Point well taken. In my C33A I have the vacuum driven AI, an electric driven backup
AI, and a vacuum T & B, all in close proximity on the primary panel. In the
all-electric plane I'm building [read that as trying to build], I'll re-think
the value of a backup electric AI.
Jim
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! --
|