Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:30 AM - Re: Knock Sensor Frequency-Mazda Rotary (Harley)
2. 05:08 AM - Re: CH products stick grip (Fiveonepw@aol.com)
3. 05:12 AM - Re: PTT wiring (Brian Lloyd)
4. 05:23 AM - Re: Knock Sensor Frequency-Mazda Rotary (Mark Steitle)
5. 05:25 AM - Re: Knock Sensor Frequency-Mazda Rotary (Mark Steitle)
6. 05:28 AM - Systems analysis and unintended consequences (Brian Lloyd)
7. 06:35 AM - Re: CH products stick grip (Joel Jacobs)
8. 07:57 AM - Coax vs. shielded wire on Lightspeed systems (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
9. 07:59 AM - Re: CH products stick grip (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
10. 08:24 AM - Warning light on SD-8 installation (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
11. 08:31 AM - Re: tapping a 24v battery to get 12v (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
12. 09:01 AM - Re: Starting Power (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
13. 09:05 AM - Re: single antenna for Narco 140 (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
14. 10:13 AM - GPS Antennas (sjhdcl@kingston.net)
15. 10:36 AM - Re: Starting Power (Matt Jurotich)
16. 10:38 AM - Re: Re: tapping a 24v battery to get 12v (Brian Lloyd)
17. 10:47 AM - Re: single antenna for Narco 140 (Brian Lloyd)
18. 10:48 AM - Re: CH products stick grip (Richard Tasker)
19. 10:48 AM - Re: Knock Sensor Frequency-Mazda Rotary (John Slade)
20. 11:43 AM - Re: Re: tapping a 24v battery to get 12v (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
21. 11:50 AM - Re: GPS Antennas (Brian Lloyd)
22. 11:55 AM - 3-way connectors (Larry McFarland)
23. 01:03 PM - Re: Re: tapping a 24v battery to get 12v (Brian Lloyd)
24. 01:38 PM - Re: 3-way connectors (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
25. 01:58 PM - Re: Garmin series 400 installation manual ? (Thesee Gilles)
26. 02:16 PM - Trim relays (Mickey Coggins)
27. 02:25 PM - Re: Coax vs. shielded wire on Lightspeed systems (ericruttan@chartermi.net)
28. 02:25 PM - Re: Coax vs. shielded wire on Lightspeed systems (ericruttan@chartermi.net)
29. 03:47 PM - Re: 3-way connectors (Larry McFarland)
30. 04:34 PM - Re: Knock Sensor Frequency-Mazda Rotary (Dale Alexander)
31. 05:40 PM - Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish! (John Slade)
32. 05:42 PM - Re: Coax vs. shielded wire on Lightspeed systems (William Slaughter)
33. 06:07 PM - Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish! (Ron Koyich)
34. 06:07 PM - Re: Coax vs. shielded wire on Lightspeed systems (Ozarkseller2@aol.com)
35. 06:53 PM - Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish! (Carlos Sa)
36. 07:06 PM - Re: Starting Power (William Slaughter)
37. 07:09 PM - Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish! (Cory Emberson)
38. 07:16 PM - Re: Coax vs. shielded wire on Lightspeed systems (William Slaughter)
39. 07:49 PM - Re: Coax vs. shielded wire on Lightspeed systems (erie)
40. 08:12 PM - Re: Garmin series 400 installation manual ? (Tailgummer@aol.com)
41. 08:40 PM - Re: Systems analysis and unintended consequences (Richard Sipp)
42. 09:03 PM - Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish! (Ernest Christley)
43. 09:09 PM - Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish! (BobsV35B@aol.com)
44. 10:49 PM - Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish! (Matt Prather)
45. 10:56 PM - Re: Starting Power (George Braly)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Knock Sensor Frequency-Mazda Rotary |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Harley <harley@agelesswings.com>
They can indeed knock...and when they do, can shatter the apex seals.
Has happened with the RX-7...not sure if anyone has reported it yet with
the RX-8, but seems to be more susceptible to knock when turbocharged.
Anyway...Paul Lamar's Rotary Engine group have a knock sensor design for
these engines...
Go here for the knock sensor:
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/lm386.gif
And here for the "home" page where you can search all the topics:
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/
Harley Dixon
Long EZ N28EZ
John D. Heath wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "John D. Heath" <alto_q@direcway.com>
>
>I don't see how a Wankle could knock. If it can A Mazda dealer is sure to
>have a knock sensor for it.
>
> John D.
>
>
>
>
>>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dale Alexander"
>>Dalexan48@dslextreme.com
>>
>>
>>>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Mark Steitle
>>><msteitle@mail.utexas.edu>
>>>
>>>
>======================================================
>
>
>DO NOT ARCHIVE
>
>
>
>
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: CH products stick grip |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Fiveonepw@aol.com
In a message dated 8/18/04 8:04:51 PM Central Daylight Time,
rwayne@gamewood.net writes:
> I just got a CH Products stick grip. Its got a good feel and is
> ambidextrous. It has 4 momentary switches and a coolie hat. I was surprised
> to see "Permissible Load: 1mA 5VDC min, (resistive load). Is this enough to
> allow a direct connection to my MAC servo relays and radio PTT?
>>>>>>>>>>
My CH stick easily controls the small relays (Z217-ND from Digi-key):
http://rocky.digikey.com/WebLib/Omron%20Web%20Data/G8P.pdf
for the servo and directly for the PTT(Microair 760). The relay coils are
rated for 77mA and have worked perfectly for over 100 hours. Not sure where the
1mA came from- is this in the literature with the stick? Kevin Williamson at
CH assured me they were plenty robust for the application- I'm pretty sure he
said the sticks he sells to us are upgraded from the game sticks in several
ways- maybe the 1mA is spec for the game version. Cool stick, huh? I love
pointing the nose right at the tower and squeezing off a volley: "51PW is right
downwind for one-nine, number 3 behind the Mitsubishi" while adding flaps with
throttle hand thumb & trimming with the hat switch, then waxing the Moo-Too
with a "cleared to land one-nine!" What fun! 8-)
FromThe PossumWorks in TN
Mark
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: Brian Lloyd <brianl@lloyd.com>
On Aug 18, 2004, at 3:46 PM, Steve Sampson wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Steve Sampson"
> <SSampson.SLN21@london.edu>
>
> Bob in most microphone wiring documentation including:
>
> .....................\Aeroelectric\AeroElectric Connection - Aircraft
> Microphone Jack Wiring.htm
> the PTT is wired to the microphone jack plug.
>
> In my layout I would much prefer the PTT was wired directly to the
> radio. Is
> there any disadvantage in this approach?
On the surface, no, but do consider that most people choose to have a
voice-operated intercom in their aircraft. The PTT is not only used to
key the transmitter but to also indicate to the intercom which mic is
being used to transmit so that the intercom can cut off the audio from
the other microphones connected to the intercom.
So if you have an intercom with separate pilot and copilot inputs, you
need to wire the PTT on your stick/yoke to the appropriate PTT input on
the intercom. Also, you want the PTT line wired to the mic jack so
that, should your headset fail, you can plug in an old hand mic and
still have its PTT button work. Given all that, the simplest thing is
to route the PTT line from the stick/yoke to the appropriate mic jack
and then on to the corresponding input on the intercom. The PTT output
from the intercom then drives the audio panel's PTT input or the PTT
input of the radio should you not have an audio panel.
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl@lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
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: Knock Sensor Frequency-Mazda Rotary |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Mark Steitle <msteitle@mail.utexas.edu>
Yes they can knock, destroying the apex seals in the process. Some late
model engines have a boss above the upper spark plug for a knock
sensor. Mine has them, along with knock sensors, but I don't have the
computer that they feed into. I would like to know the frequency so I can
search out, or build a knock sensor for my engine. Good idea on the
oscilloscope. I may have to resort to that.
Mark S.
At 09:13 PM 8/18/2004 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "John D. Heath" <alto_q@direcway.com>
>
>I don't see how a Wankle could knock. If it can A Mazda dealer is sure to
>have a knock sensor for it.
>
> John D.
>
>
> > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dale Alexander"
> > Dalexan48@dslextreme.com
> >>
> >> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Mark Steitle
> >> <msteitle@mail.utexas.edu>
>======================================================
>
>
>DO NOT ARCHIVE
>
>
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: Knock Sensor Frequency-Mazda Rotary |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Mark Steitle <msteitle@mail.utexas.edu>
Hi Harley,
Yes, I'm on Paul's list, but was hoping to get an actual frequency
figure. Yes, I know, that would be too easy.
Mark S.
At 07:30 AM 8/19/2004 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Harley <harley@agelesswings.com>
>
>They can indeed knock...and when they do, can shatter the apex seals.
>Has happened with the RX-7...not sure if anyone has reported it yet with
>the RX-8, but seems to be more susceptible to knock when turbocharged.
>
>Anyway...Paul Lamar's Rotary Engine group have a knock sensor design for
>these engines...
>
>Go here for the knock sensor:
>
>http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/lm386.gif
>
>And here for the "home" page where you can search all the topics:
>
>http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/
>
>Harley Dixon
>Long EZ N28EZ
>
>
>John D. Heath wrote:
>
> >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "John D. Heath"
> <alto_q@direcway.com>
> >
> >I don't see how a Wankle could knock. If it can A Mazda dealer is sure to
> >have a knock sensor for it.
> >
> > John D.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dale Alexander"
> >>Dalexan48@dslextreme.com
> >>
> >>
> >>>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Mark Steitle
> >>><msteitle@mail.utexas.edu>
> >>>
> >>>
> >======================================================
> >
> >
> >DO NOT ARCHIVE
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
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: | Systems analysis and unintended consequences |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brianl@lloyd.com>
Bob's comment on the Unison LASAR ignition system triggered my memory
of a quick-and-dirty analysis I did a couple years back. I was going
to convert one of my airplanes over to the LASAR system but decided to
figure out whether it would be financially advantageous. I used
Unison's projected fuel savings times the cost of fuel plus the cost of
the system itself and compared it to the cost of extra fuel I would use
plus the cost of needing two sets of Slick mags (one set when new and
another at around 1000 hours) to make it to TBO. The costs were about
the same.
So if I am not going to save money in the long run, why would I want to
add complexity to the aircraft and increase the possibility of failure?
Don't get me wrong, I really like the idea of a reliable electronic
ignition system with advance based on RPM and percent of power. I want
to get every ounce of energy out of all that precious fuel especially
with rising prices. But the whole thing has to make financial sense
too.
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl@lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
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: CH products stick grip |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Joel Jacobs" <jj@sdf.lonestar.org>
Looks like that might be a minimum current rating unless that was a typo.
The arcing of switch contacts when they open and close keeps the contacts
clean. Some switches contacts will oxidize and fail if they don't switch
enough current to keep them clean. I see this allot on the tact switches
used on TVs and VCRs that are connected to microprocessor inputs. You get a
symptom that one of the buttons quits working or becomes intermittent. The
usual fix is to remove the switch and connect it to a current limited
supply - about 50ma and actuate it a few times.
Joel
----- Original Message -----
From: "Wayne Williams" <rwayne@gamewood.net>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: CH products stick grip
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Wayne Williams"
<rwayne@gamewood.net>
>
> I just got a CH Products stick grip. Its got a good feel and is
> ambidextrous. It has 4 momentary switches and a coolie hat. I was
surprised
> to see "Permissible Load: 1mA 5VDC min, (resistive load). Is this enough
to
> allow a direct connection to my MAC servo relays and radio PTT? If not,
what
> would I need to do to connect these relays? Thanks!
>
> Wayne
>
>
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: | Coax vs. shielded wire on Lightspeed systems |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
>Bob,
>A while back your site had a download for an alternate to the Lightspeed
>RG58 to coil connection. I have a Lightspeed installed per instructions
>(RG58) and today found the center conductor insulation near the coil
>completely melted away. At 65 hours I was suprised, but I knew what I was
>looking at (thank you for that). I can understand the possible reasons
>for removing this download from your web site. If you can, would you tell
>me if you think your method was a bad idea, or was it removed for other
>reasons?
>Thanks!
I've had several queries about this article. Your note prompted me
to reconsider my position. I've added a narrative to beginning of
the article and re-posted it at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/RG58/RG58.html
Thank you for taking time to share your experience with me.
Bob . . .
-----------------------------------------
( Experience and common sense cannot be )
( replaced with policy and procedures. )
( R. L. Nuckolls III )
-----------------------------------------
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: CH products stick grip |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 09:34 AM 8/19/2004 -0400, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Joel Jacobs" <jj@sdf.lonestar.org>
>
>Looks like that might be a minimum current rating unless that was a typo.
>The arcing of switch contacts when they open and close keeps the contacts
>clean. Some switches contacts will oxidize and fail if they don't switch
>enough current to keep them clean. I see this allot on the tact switches
>used on TVs and VCRs that are connected to microprocessor inputs. You get a
>symptom that one of the buttons quits working or becomes intermittent. The
>usual fix is to remove the switch and connect it to a current limited
>supply - about 50ma and actuate it a few times.
>Joel
Good call Joel. I've been considering the original posting
and I'd pretty much come to the same conclusion you did. There
no mechanically operated switch that isn't capable of handling
a hundred mA or so . . . but there are suggestions for lower
limits as you have described.
The switches described should be just fine driving relays
having coil currents on the order of 40 to 200 mA.
Bob . . .
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Wayne Williams" <rwayne@gamewood.net>
>To: <aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: AeroElectric-List: CH products stick grip
>
>
> > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Wayne Williams"
><rwayne@gamewood.net>
> >
> > I just got a CH Products stick grip. Its got a good feel and is
> > ambidextrous. It has 4 momentary switches and a coolie hat. I was
>surprised
> > to see "Permissible Load: 1mA 5VDC min, (resistive load). Is this enough
>to
> > allow a direct connection to my MAC servo relays and radio PTT? If not,
>what
> > would I need to do to connect these relays? Thanks!
> >
> > Wayne
> >
> >
>
>
Bob . . .
-----------------------------------------
( Experience and common sense cannot be )
( replaced with policy and procedures. )
( R. L. Nuckolls III )
-----------------------------------------
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: | Warning light on SD-8 installation |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
> Hi Bob, I'm buying parts for elec on a budget system. I'v ordered the
> B&C SD-8 with the 504-1 OV module. My question is: if I use a switch for
> the AUX alt and have it off - will the yellow light with the 504-1 be on
> all the time? If I understand the electrical schematic, I would only
> switch the Aux alt on when I had a failure of the primary alt. How do I
> handle this situation? Any suggestions would be appreciated.
> Thanks. P.S. I have your book and practically sleep with it. My wife
> will be glad when I'm finished with the electrical system. Terry Dilley.
Your analysis is correct. The "ALT OFF" light would be
illuminated any time the aux alternator was off . . .
whether due to OV trip -OR- switch in the OFF position.
The light is suggested only for situations where the
SD-8 is the primary alternator like Figure Z-16. Note
that I do not show this light on Figure Z-13 where
the SD-8 is a stand-by alternator and the airplane
is likely to be fitted with voltmeters and/or low-voltage
warning lights.
I will invite you to join us on the AeroElectric List
to continue this and similar discussions. It's useful to
share the information with as many folks as possible.
A further benefit can be realized with membership on
the list. There are lots of technically capable folks
on the list who can offer suggestions too. You can
join at . . .
http://www.matronics.com/subscribe/
Thanks!
Bob . . .
--------------------------------------------
( Knowing about a thing is different than )
( understanding it. One can know a lot )
( and still understand nothing. )
( C.F. Kettering )
--------------------------------------------
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: tapping a 24v battery to get 12v |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 03:20 PM 8/16/2004 -0400, you wrote:
>Sorry to bug you, but would like to know re the question I posed below.
I'm working on it. But in a nutshell, it's been tried many times with
zero success . . .
I'll drop you a note with a link to an article shortly . . .
Bob . . .
> Bob; Have a situation where I have two 12V batteries in
>series for 24V output. However, I need some 12V power for some none
>essential use (blower for an ac unit) and I would like to take the 12V from
>the center point of the battery inter-connection. I know that I will get
>the 12V, but noticed somewhere about a report of their being a problem of
>the batteries maintaining even charge, and in fact one of the battery's
>could actually totally loose charge. Is that an issue? I am having trouble
>understanding the problem and how it develops.
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" <rnuckolls@aeroelectric.com>
At 10:01 PM 8/18/2004 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "George Braly" <gwbraly@gami.com>
>
>Bob,
>
>I have the DO-160 compliance chart for the TCM FADEC. From memory, it
>appears to me to cover most of the bases.
>
>It is in the 2" thick installation manual.
>
>I have not looked at it for a while, but I don't recall seeing the call
>out for the minimal operating voltage... but I will look again, and report
>back.
>
>But... it is true. The installation in the Bonanza requires a second
>battery located under the rear seat to insure starting on cold days with
>difficult starting conditions.
>
>Total system weight is > 35 lbs.
>
>Regards, George
Yup. I spent quite a bit of time working with Lancair to get this
system to run in several factory installations. They couldn't use
the dual-battery cranking feature described in Figure Z-14. The
auto-crossfeed for cranking had to be disabled so that one battery
would support the FADEC while the other battery did ALL the cranking.
One of the nice features of Z-14 was being able to use a pair of LIGHT
batteries. The FADEC system had to be "protected" from going brain-dead
during the inrush transient.
I had a "band-aid" black box that put a 3v boost on FADEC supply
power a few milliseconds before the starter contactor closed. I
brass-boarded the thing on the bench and it would have "solved"
the problem . . . but I never built one. It just rubbed me the wrong
direction to add weight, cost, complexity and reduced reliability to
a system that was already too heavy, too expensive and had too many
parts in it.
I have a hard time figuring out the return on investment for either
Aerosance's FADEC or the Lasar ignition system. They offer only marginally
improved performance for large increases weight, parts count and cost.
On the other hand, Emag's size, weight, and cost promises
performance EXACTLY what we're looking for. It's cheaper, better
performing, and offers seamless system integration. Now if they can
just deliver on the promise. I'll sure offer whatever support I can
to see them realize their goals. Aerosance and Unison were interesting
but in my never humble opinion, marching off in the wrong direction
to the beat of a really big drummer (read FAA).
Bob . . .
---
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: single antenna for Narco 140 |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <rnuckolls@aeroelectric.com>
At 09:05 PM 8/16/2004 -0700, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Jaye and Scott Jackson"
><jayeandscott@telus.net>
>
>Bob:
> Thanks for the thoughtful answers to my previous posts regarding the
> dancing ammeter, et al. I will replace the regulator 12V+ wire with a
> heavier one and let you know how it works when I get the aircraft back
> together enough to run it.
Great. I'll be pleased to hear about what you find.
> I purchased a used Narco 140 ADF without realizing that it came with a
> separate sense antenna as well as the usual "boat hull" for the fuselage
> bottom.
> Is there anyway to get the receiver/indicator to work without
> installing the sense antenna?
>Thanks again,
Hmmm . . . sorry. The sense antenna is a critical component of the
direction finding function. Modern ADF's have sense antennas built
into the loop housing . . . but anecdotal information I'm getting
from other builders in Canada suggests that these radios don't
perform as well as radios of the good ol' days.
It's really too bad that so many of our brothers in Canada are
compelled to install these radios. Even the cheapest GPS receiver
will let you shoot tighter approaches than the best ADF.
Bob . . .
---
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: sjhdcl@kingston.net
Bob,
My IFR setup consists of GNC300XL GPS/COM, GNS430 GPS/COM/NAV. I also have
an iPAQ 5550 using a GPS antenna as well.
So I have 3 GPS antennas! No thanks. My question is can I hook up the
300XL and the 430 to the same GPS antenna. I've tried talking to Garmin
but I frequenctly get conflicting answers. Whats your take on this?
Assuming the various units demand the GPS code in the same format that is.
Steve
Rv7A
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: Starting Power |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Matt Jurotich <mjurotich@hst.nasa.gov>
I recall a long discussion about this with reference to lightspeed
ignitions. One of the solutions proposed was a large capacitor. Did this
require a blocking diode or ?? so the capacitor would last for a few seconds?
By the way, BlueMountain is very clear about needing a second battery to
prevent a reset during starting if you want the engine gauges built into
the EFIS One immediately upon start up. Would this capacitor trick work
with their 3 amp requirement?
Matthew M. Jurotich
e-mail mail to: <mjurotich@hst.nasa.gov>
phone : 301-286-5919
Message 16
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: re: tapping a 24v battery to get 12v |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brianl@lloyd.com>
On Aug 19, 2004, at 11:30 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
> <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
>
> At 03:20 PM 8/16/2004 -0400, you wrote:
>> Sorry to bug you, but would like to know re the question I posed
>> below.
>
> I'm working on it. But in a nutshell, it's been tried many times
> with
> zero success . . .
Bob: you are right that you cannot use the center tap to provide 12V
and expect reasonable battery life. The "upper" battery will
consistently overcharge while the "lower" battery will consistently
undercharge.
OTOH I use this approach now with 100% success. The key is a gadget
called a battery equalizer. It is essentially a switching supply that
keeps the center-tap of the batteries at exactly 1/2 the voltage of the
whole string. It works really well in situations where you
periodically need a lot of amps from the 12V side but most of the time
don't. It wires up like this:
,------+----------> 24V
| |
| B2 (12v)
| |
E------+----------> 12V
| |
| B1 (12V)
| |
`------+----------> gnd
The one I use is an 80A unit from Sure Power. See:
http://www.surepower.com/Products/dc2dc.asp. They make both equalizers
and DC-DC converters. On my boat I use an equalizer as my engines use
12V for starting and I have some 12V lighting and instrumentation. If
I didn't have the big loads I would use a 28V-to-14VDC converter to
power my 12V loads.
>
> I'll drop you a note with a link to an article shortly . . .
>
> Bob . . .
>
>> Bob; Have a situation where I have two 12V batteries in
>> series for 24V output. However, I need some 12V power for some none
>> essential use (blower for an ac unit) and I would like to take the
>> 12V from
>> the center point of the battery inter-connection. I know that I will
>> get
>> the 12V, but noticed somewhere about a report of their being a
>> problem of
>> the batteries maintaining even charge, and in fact one of the
>> battery's
>> could actually totally loose charge. Is that an issue? I am having
>> trouble
>> understanding the problem and how it develops.
>
>
> _-
> =======================================================================
> _-
> =======================================================================
> _-
> =======================================================================
> _-
> =======================================================================
> >
>
>
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl@lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
Message 17
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: single antenna for Narco 140 |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brianl@lloyd.com>
On Aug 19, 2004, at 12:05 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>> Is there anyway to get the receiver/indicator to work without
>> installing the sense antenna?
>> Thanks again,
>
> Hmmm . . . sorry. The sense antenna is a critical component of the
> direction finding function. Modern ADF's have sense antennas built
> into the loop housing . . . but anecdotal information I'm getting
> from other builders in Canada suggests that these radios don't
> perform as well as radios of the good ol' days.
Actually the King KR-87 works really well with the integrated
loop/sense antenna but most people are not willing to pay as much for
an ADF as for a good VFR panel-mount GPS and it has been around for at
least 20 years. The venerable KR-86 works better with the external
wire sense antenna.
> It's really too bad that so many of our brothers in Canada are
> compelled to install these radios. Even the cheapest GPS receiver
> will let you shoot tighter approaches than the best ADF.
True but it is a lot more difficult to navigate with GPS when someone
is jamming the signal. It is a lot harder to jam an ADF and even
harder still to jam LORAN-C.
But don't forget that you can listen to Rush Limbaugh on your ADF.
Let's see you try that with your GPS receiver!
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl@lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
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: | Re: CH products stick grip |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Richard Tasker <retasker@optonline.net>
My two CH sticks came with a printout specifying the current and voltage
limitations - same as your limitations.
I guess I will check with him again to check this out, although when I
received them I asked then.
Dick Tasker
Fiveonepw@aol.com wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Fiveonepw@aol.com
>
>In a message dated 8/18/04 8:04:51 PM Central Daylight Time,
>rwayne@gamewood.net writes:
>
>
>
>>I just got a CH Products stick grip. Its got a good feel and is
>>ambidextrous. It has 4 momentary switches and a coolie hat. I was surprised
>>to see "Permissible Load: 1mA 5VDC min, (resistive load). Is this enough to
>>allow a direct connection to my MAC servo relays and radio PTT?
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>My CH stick easily controls the small relays (Z217-ND from Digi-key):
>
>http://rocky.digikey.com/WebLib/Omron%20Web%20Data/G8P.pdf
>
>for the servo and directly for the PTT(Microair 760). The relay coils are
>rated for 77mA and have worked perfectly for over 100 hours. Not sure where the
>1mA came from- is this in the literature with the stick? Kevin Williamson at
>CH assured me they were plenty robust for the application- I'm pretty sure he
>said the sticks he sells to us are upgraded from the game sticks in several
>ways- maybe the 1mA is spec for the game version. Cool stick, huh? I love
>pointing the nose right at the tower and squeezing off a volley: "51PW is right
>downwind for one-nine, number 3 behind the Mitsubishi" while adding flaps with
>throttle hand thumb & trimming with the hat switch, then waxing the Moo-Too
>with a "cleared to land one-nine!" What fun! 8-)
>
>FromThe PossumWorks in TN
>Mark
>
>
>
>
Message 19
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Knock Sensor Frequency-Mazda Rotary |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "John Slade" <sladerj@bellsouth.net>
Knock sensor amplifier:
>http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/lm386.gif
Thanks, Marc
That brings me back to my original question.
Could someone who understand the squiggles and lines on this diagram tell me
if it matches the squiggles and lines in ck154 amplifier I already have
shown at http://canakit.com/Contents/Divisions/Div_4.asp
or do I need something like the CK008 shown at
http://canakit.com/Contents/Divisions/Div_25.asp
Thanks,
john
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: re: tapping a 24v battery to get 12v |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <rnuckolls@aeroelectric.com>
At 01:38 PM 8/19/2004 -0400, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brianl@lloyd.com>
>
>
>On Aug 19, 2004, at 11:30 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
> > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
> > <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
> >
> > At 03:20 PM 8/16/2004 -0400, you wrote:
> >> Sorry to bug you, but would like to know re the question I posed
> >> below.
> >
> > I'm working on it. But in a nutshell, it's been tried many times
> > with
> > zero success . . .
>
>Bob: you are right that you cannot use the center tap to provide 12V
>and expect reasonable battery life. The "upper" battery will
>consistently overcharge while the "lower" battery will consistently
>undercharge.
>
>OTOH I use this approach now with 100% success. The key is a gadget
>called a battery equalizer. It is essentially a switching supply that
>keeps the center-tap of the batteries at exactly 1/2 the voltage of the
>whole string. It works really well in situations where you
>periodically need a lot of amps from the 12V side but most of the time
>don't. It wires up like this:
>
>
> ,------+----------> 24V
> | |
> | B2 (12v)
> | |
> E------+----------> 12V
> | |
> | B1 (12V)
> | |
> `------+----------> gnd
>
>The one I use is an 80A unit from Sure Power. See:
>http://www.surepower.com/Products/dc2dc.asp. They make both equalizers
>and DC-DC converters. On my boat I use an equalizer as my engines use
>12V for starting and I have some 12V lighting and instrumentation. If
>I didn't have the big loads I would use a 28V-to-14VDC converter to
>power my 12V loads.
I've seen variations on this theme over the years. Certainly
if one is willing to add some kind of electro-whizzy, the
hazards of battery-tapping can be reduced if not eliminated.
Indeed, one might simply add 28 to 14 volt down-converter to
the airplane. One can add a 14v battery to supply momentary
current draw conditions that overload the 14v down-converter.
We installed a similar system in Raython's AGATE Bonanza so that
the certified 14v system and 28v experimental systems could
be supported from a single 28v ground power jack.
Like all add-ons . . . parts-count, weight and occupied volume
in the airplane goes up. A condition that we try to avoid.
Thanks for the heads-up on Surepower . . . wasn't aware of them
before now.
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: GPS Antennas |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brianl@lloyd.com>
On Aug 19, 2004, at 1:12 PM, sjhdcl@kingston.net wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: sjhdcl@kingston.net
>
> Bob,
>
> My IFR setup consists of GNC300XL GPS/COM, GNS430 GPS/COM/NAV. I also
> have
> an iPAQ 5550 using a GPS antenna as well.
>
> So I have 3 GPS antennas! No thanks. My question is can I hook up the
> 300XL and the 430 to the same GPS antenna. I've tried talking to Garmin
> but I frequenctly get conflicting answers. Whats your take on this?
>
> Assuming the various units demand the GPS code in the same format that
> is.
The antenna is just that, an antenna. The signal code is what the
satellites transmit and it is the same for all receivers.
So the trick it to provide the signal to all the receivers. Most
antennas now are "active" in that they have a built-in preamplifier
that requires that DC power be injected on the coax. If you have a
power injector that will get 8VDC on the center conductor of the coax
to power the preamp you should be able to follow that with a 50ohm
splitter that will work at the 1.5 GHz frequency. High-quality
splitters from companies like Mini-Circuits are not cheap when
purchased new. Still, you can find a three-way power divider/combiner
that will work at 1.5 GHz for about $50 on the surplus market. You
will also need capacitive couplers to block the DC from the receiver
and you will need the DC power injector between the splitter and the
antenna.
Also consider that your antenna/splitter/injector combination becomes a
single point of failure for your GPS receivers. If that has a problem
you lose all your GPS info.
So it is certainly possible to do what you want to do but it will take
some doing. You may find that it is just less expensive and easier to
do to have multiple antennas.
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl@lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
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: | 3-way connectors |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Larry McFarland" <larrymc@qconline.com>
Hi guys,
In redoing a wiring schematic for a new dual ignition installation,
I found that I can buy an assortment package of 3-way all metal
connectors that have paired push-tabs and a spade socket
for connecting 3 wires or making a T-connection as needed
by tachometer feeds, ignition switch wires and capacitor connections.
Assuming the proper lash-down,
are these a sturdier means of connecting than "putting two 16-gage
wires into a blue spade socket and connecting a third" which
pretty much describes my current wiring?
Seems they would ease changing components if they hold
up and would be preferrable to what I've got.
Larry McFarland - 601HDS
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: re: tapping a 24v battery to get 12v |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brianl@lloyd.com>
On Aug 19, 2004, at 2:42 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>> OTOH I use this approach now with 100% success. The key is a gadget
>> called a battery equalizer. It is essentially a switching supply that
>> keeps the center-tap of the batteries at exactly 1/2 the voltage of
>> the
>> whole string. It works really well in situations where you
>> periodically need a lot of amps from the 12V side but most of the time
>> don't. It wires up like this:
>>
>>
>> ,------+----------> 24V
>> | |
>> | B2 (12v)
>> | |
>> E------+----------> 12V
>> | |
>> | B1 (12V)
>> | |
>> `------+----------> gnd
>>
>> The one I use is an 80A unit from Sure Power. See:
>> http://www.surepower.com/Products/dc2dc.asp. They make both
>> equalizers
>> and DC-DC converters. On my boat I use an equalizer as my engines use
>> 12V for starting and I have some 12V lighting and instrumentation. If
>> I didn't have the big loads I would use a 28V-to-14VDC converter to
>> power my 12V loads.
>
> Indeed, one might simply add 28 to 14 volt down-converter to
> the airplane. One can add a 14v battery to supply momentary
> current draw conditions that overload the 14v down-converter.
The problem then is ensuring that the battery receive a proper charge
and it requires yet another battery. The equalizer will mirror the
charging voltage (1/2 input voltage) so you still control the charging
voltage from your main VR.
The equalizer is amazingly simple to add. And should the equalizer
fail, the 12V loads will continue to work but the batteries will fail
fairly quickly (months). Still, it fails "soft" and things will keep
working for a flight or two. It isn't a safety-of-flight issue.
> We installed a similar system in Raython's AGATE Bonanza so that
> the certified 14v system and 28v experimental systems could
> be supported from a single 28v ground power jack.
>
> Like all add-ons . . . parts-count, weight and occupied volume
> in the airplane goes up. A condition that we try to avoid.
I agree. These devices are small, lightweight, and operate at
something close to 90% efficiency. Not a lot of heat to get rid of.
My 80A unit is about the size of a KX-155 and weighs just about as
much. I doubt people would need one bigger than about 10A.
> Thanks for the heads-up on Surepower . . . wasn't aware of them
> before now.
Their stuff seems to be quite well made. Their 10A 24V-to-12V
equalizer is only 6.6"L X 4.5"W X 2.7"H. Not a lot of cubic there.
Here is the URL for the brochure on their equalizers and converters:
http://www.surepower.com/pdf/ebr_dcdc.pdf
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl@lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
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: | Re: 3-way connectors |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 01:54 PM 8/19/2004 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Larry McFarland"
><larrymc@qconline.com>
>
>Hi guys,
> In redoing a wiring schematic for a new dual ignition installation,
>I found that I can buy an assortment package of 3-way all metal
>connectors that have paired push-tabs and a spade socket
>for connecting 3 wires or making a T-connection as needed
>by tachometer feeds, ignition switch wires and capacitor connections.
> Assuming the proper lash-down,
>are these a sturdier means of connecting than "putting two 16-gage
>wires into a blue spade socket and connecting a third" which
>pretty much describes my current wiring?
>Seems they would ease changing components if they hold
>up and would be preferrable to what I've got.
>
>
>Larry McFarland - 601HDS
I am cautiously skeptical of these. I just got an e-mail from
a builder that experienced fast-on terminal failure on the tabs
for his electronic ignition coils. I'm going to as if his fast-ons
were bona-fide PIDG terminals. The material from which these critters
are made is critical to their performance. 16AWG wires? What is
it that pushes so much current that these boss-hawg wires are necessary?
Are these shielded wires? If I understand your question right,
you're trying to get three circuits brought into the same blue
fast-on terminal . . . and some of the wires are too fat to fit
into the fast-on. Check out this picture:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Wire_treatment_3.jpg
The lap-soldered joint mimics the now commonplace solder sleeve
splices wherein two wires are simply over-lapped, soldered,
and covered with a heatshrink jacket. Solder sleeve jackets
are pretty stiff so you might put two layers of heatshink over
your poor-mans solder sleeve joints . . .
This would be a very tight way to get these wires into your
fast-on connection using low bulk, very high integrity
joints, and minimal parts count.
Bob . . .
-----------------------------------------
( Experience and common sense cannot be )
( replaced with policy and procedures. )
( R. L. Nuckolls III )
-----------------------------------------
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Garmin series 400 installation manual ? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Thesee Gilles <Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr>
John,
Thank you for responding. I'm afraid this list doesn't allow
attachments.
Regards,
Gilles
---- Messages dorigine ----
De: Tailgummer@aol.com
Objet: Re: AeroElectric-List: Garmin series 400 installation manual ?
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Tailgummer@aol.com
>
> Here are pdfs of the GNS 430 wirebook and install manual. Hope
> this helps.
>
>
>
> John D'Onofrio RV8
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics@rv8.ch>
Hi,
I'm planning on wiring my aileron and elevator trim
servos to a coolie hat on the stick grip.
The Ray Allen Company sells a "Relay Deck" for $35.00
but it seems like I can get the equivalent item from
Radio Shack (part number 275-249) for about $5.29.
Here are the links to the two items:
http://www.radioshack.com/ (enter 275-249 in search box)
http://www.rayallencompany.com/products/accessories.html
Are these two items essentially the same? The basic
goal is to convert a (on)/off/(on) switch to act like a
DPDT switch.
Thanks,
Mickey
--
Mickey Coggins
http://www.rv8.ch/
#82007 QB Wings/Fuselage
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: Coax vs. shielded wire on Lightspeed systems |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "ericruttan@chartermi.net" <ericruttan@chartermi.net>
>>Bob,
>>A while back your site had a download for an alternate to the Lightspeed
>>RG58 to coil connection. I have a Lightspeed installed per instructions
>>(RG58) and today found the center conductor insulation near the coil
>>completely melted away. At 65 hours I was suprised, but I knew what I was
>>looking at (thank you for that). I can understand the possible reasons
>>for removing this download from your web site. If you can, would you tell
>>me if you think your method was a bad idea, or was it removed for other
>>reasons?
>>Thanks!
> I've had several queries about this article. Your note prompted me
> to reconsider my position. I've added a narrative to beginning of
> the article and re-posted it at:
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/RG58/RG58.html
>
> Thank you for taking time to share your experience with me.
> Bob . . .
Bob;
I really appreciate your work on our behalf. You must love what you do,
else I cant see you putting up with the foolishness you do.
http://www.magnecor.com/ is a small company that is to spark plug wires what
you are to OBAM electrical systems. Simple science and experience with no
marketing budget.
Their site is a technical information site discussing the silliness of many
in the electronic ignition marketing arena.
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: | Re: Coax vs. shielded wire on Lightspeed systems |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "ericruttan@chartermi.net" <ericruttan@chartermi.net>
>>Bob,
>>A while back your site had a download for an alternate to the Lightspeed
>>RG58 to coil connection. I have a Lightspeed installed per instructions
>>(RG58) and today found the center conductor insulation near the coil
>>completely melted away. At 65 hours I was suprised, but I knew what I was
>>looking at (thank you for that). I can understand the possible reasons
>>for removing this download from your web site. If you can, would you tell
>>me if you think your method was a bad idea, or was it removed for other
>>reasons?
>>Thanks!
> I've had several queries about this article. Your note prompted me
> to reconsider my position. I've added a narrative to beginning of
> the article and re-posted it at:
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/RG58/RG58.html
>
> Thank you for taking time to share your experience with me.
> Bob . . .
Bob;
I really appreciate your work on our behalf. You must love what you do,
else I cant see you putting up with the foolishness you do.
http://www.magnecor.com/ is a small company that is to spark plug wires what
you are to OBAM electrical systems. Simple science and experience with no
marketing budget.
Their site is a technical information site discussing the silliness of many
in the electronic ignition marketing arena.
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: 3-way connectors |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Larry McFarland" <larrymc@qconline.com>
No Bob,
I was just trying to "double a connector" with these so that
the tachometer wire can join at the negative side of the coil
where the push-tab and spade-grip go together. On the positive
side of the coil, a capacitor, bolted to the control module and a
wire from the selector switch both join the wire at the coil.
Wires are shielded only between the distributor and modules.
Just a T-joint, but then modules could be changed out easier
when one goes south at some remote destination as they are prone
to do.
The tab doublers require a bit of fusable tape, but
I did like the interchange these parts might bring.
I've previously put two wires into a blue socket spade and
16-gage was to overcome the flex-strand breakage potential
for these few wires forward of the firewall. Perhaps this was overkill.
Larry
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
<bob.nuckolls@cox.net>
>
> I am cautiously skeptical of these. I just got an e-mail from
> a builder that experienced fast-on terminal failure on the tabs
> for his electronic ignition coils. I'm going to as if his fast-ons
> were bona-fide PIDG terminals. The material from which these critters
> are made is critical to their performance. 16AWG wires? What is
> it that pushes so much current that these boss-hawg wires are
necessary?
>
> Are these shielded wires? If I understand your question right,
> you're trying to get three circuits brought into the same blue
> fast-on terminal . . . and some of the wires are too fat to fit
> into the fast-on. Check out this picture:
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Wire_treatment_3.jpg
>
> The lap-soldered joint mimics the now commonplace solder sleeve
> splices wherein two wires are simply over-lapped, soldered,
> and covered with a heatshrink jacket. Solder sleeve jackets
> are pretty stiff so you might put two layers of heatshink over
> your poor-mans solder sleeve joints . . .
>
> This would be a very tight way to get these wires into your
> fast-on connection using low bulk, very high integrity
> joints, and minimal parts count.
>
> Bob . . .
>
> -----------------------------------------
> ( Experience and common sense cannot be )
> ( replaced with policy and procedures. )
> ( R. L. Nuckolls III )
> -----------------------------------------
>
>
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: Knock Sensor Frequency-Mazda Rotary |
0.7 RCVD_BY_IP Received by mail server with no name
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dale Alexander" <Dalexan48@dslextreme.com>
Oh, you can believe that the rotary engine will knock, even if you don't
hear it. In order to meet emission requirements and fuel economy, engines
these days are run on the ragged edge of combustion. Compression ratios are
up, engine speeds are up, the only thing that isn't up is fuel quality when
compared to the good old days. But the knock sensor circuit helps to keep
the engine running at that ragged edge where power is. A little leaner or a
little more advance and you have pistons (or rotors) that aren't even good
for ashtrays.
Want to have some fun? Cross the secondary ignition wires on a rotary and
listen to the marbles. Still runs, just noisy as all get out. Amazing motors
within their limitations.
And we don't have any knock sensors at our dealer for a rotary. We have them
for the 2.5L KL engine in the 626 and Millenia though, but that is for a
different issue concerned with water entering the harness and generating a
false code.
Dale Alexander
Velocity 173 Stealth Gullwing
> Time: 07:14:27 PM PST US
> From: "John D. Heath" <alto_q@direcway.com>
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Knock Sensor Frequency-Mazda Rotary
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "John D. Heath"
<alto_q@direcway.com>
>
> I don't see how a Wankle could knock. If it can A Mazda dealer is sure to
> have a knock sensor for it.
>
> John D.
>
>
Message 31
| 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: | So long, and thanks for all the fish! |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "John Slade" <sladerj@bellsouth.net>
Aero electric people.
My plane is now flying. Thanks to Bob's book and ongoing input, all the
electrical gizmos are working and not interfering with each other, and the
smoke is staying in the boxes and wires.
I've asked what I though was a simple electronics question three times and
received no answer. Perhaps I've exhausted either the knowledge or the
patience of this exalted group.
Either way, I've been on this list 5 years and it's time to move on.
So long, and thanks for all the fish.
John Slade
Turbo Rotary Cozy IV
http://canardaviation.com/cozy
Message 32
| 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: | Coax vs. shielded wire on Lightspeed systems |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "William Slaughter" <willslau@alumni.rice.edu>
I'd like to second the endorsement of Magnecor. I have their wires on my
car, and they are truly beautiful. A high percentage of the high dollar
racing teams around the world use their products, yet they answer their
own phones, and shortened one of my leads for me at no cost. Nice guys,
great product, and tremendous customer service.
William Slaughter
200 BHP RV-8
500 BHP 1994 Camaro
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
ericruttan@chartermi.net
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Coax vs. shielded wire on Lightspeed
systems
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "ericruttan@chartermi.net"
--> <ericruttan@chartermi.net>
>>Bob,
>>A while back your site had a download for an alternate to the
>>Lightspeed
>>RG58 to coil connection. I have a Lightspeed installed per
instructions
>>(RG58) and today found the center conductor insulation near the coil
>>completely melted away. At 65 hours I was suprised, but I knew what I
was
>>looking at (thank you for that). I can understand the possible
reasons
>>for removing this download from your web site. If you can, would you
tell
>>me if you think your method was a bad idea, or was it removed for
other
>>reasons?
>>Thanks!
> I've had several queries about this article. Your note prompted me to
> reconsider my position. I've added a narrative to beginning of the
> article and re-posted it at:
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/RG58/RG58.html
>
> Thank you for taking time to share your experience with me.
> Bob . . .
Bob;
I really appreciate your work on our behalf. You must love what you do,
else I cant see you putting up with the foolishness you do.
http://www.magnecor.com/ is a small company that is to spark plug wires
what
you are to OBAM electrical systems. Simple science and experience with
no
marketing budget.
Their site is a technical information site discussing the silliness of
many
in the electronic ignition marketing arena.
==
direct advertising on the Matronics Forums.
==
==
==
Message 33
| 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: | So long, and thanks for all the fish! |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Ron Koyich" <Ron@Koyich.com>
Would you have the energy to type out your simple question again, John,
so we can have one more stab at redeeming ourselves? <g>
Is it the one about the co-ax oxidation?
Ron
Message 34
| 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: Coax vs. shielded wire on Lightspeed systems |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Ozarkseller2@aol.com
In a message dated 8/19/2004 7:42:36 PM Central Daylight Time,
willslau@alumni.rice.edu writes:
> I'd like to second the endorsement of Magnecor. I have their wires on my
> car, and they are truly beautiful. A high percentage of the high dollar
> racing teams around the world use their products, yet they answer their
> own phones, and shortened one of my leads for me at no cost. Nice guys,
> great product, and tremendous customer service.
>
Beautiful on the car, but not good enough for the RV?
How much did the car set cost (web site seems to have a lot of hype, but no
prices)?
Message 35
| 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: | So long, and thanks for all the fish! |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Carlos Sa <carlosfsa@yahoo.com>
--- John Slade <sladerj@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> I've asked what I though was a simple electronics question three times and
> received no answer.
The answer is 42.
but do not archive.
Message 36
| 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: "William Slaughter" <willslau@alumni.rice.edu>
-----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: Starting Power
<snip>
Yup. I spent quite a bit of time working with Lancair to get this
system to run in several factory installations. They couldn't use
the dual-battery cranking feature described in Figure Z-14. The
auto-crossfeed for cranking had to be disabled so that one battery
would support the FADEC while the other battery did ALL the cranking.
One of the nice features of Z-14 was being able to use a pair of
LIGHT
batteries. The FADEC system had to be "protected" from going
brain-dead
during the inrush transient.
I had a "band-aid" black box that put a 3v boost on FADEC supply
power a few milliseconds before the starter contactor closed. I
brass-boarded the thing on the bench and it would have "solved"
the problem . . . but I never built one. It just rubbed me the wrong
direction to add weight, cost, complexity and reduced reliability to
a system that was already too heavy, too expensive and had too many
parts in it.
I have a hard time figuring out the return on investment for either
Aerosance's FADEC or the Lasar ignition system. They offer only
marginally
improved performance for large increases weight, parts count and
cost.
On the other hand, Emag's size, weight, and cost promises
performance EXACTLY what we're looking for. It's cheaper, better
performing, and offers seamless system integration. Now if they can
just deliver on the promise. I'll sure offer whatever support I can
to see them realize their goals. Aerosance and Unison were
interesting
but in my never humble opinion, marching off in the wrong direction
to the beat of a really big drummer (read FAA).
Bob . . .
While I can't argue with the too expensive and too many parts assessment
of Aerosance's FADEC system, there is one crucial element that seems to
be getting overlooked here. Unlike the LASAR, Emag, Lightspeed, et al,
the Aerosance system is not just an ignition system, but a complete
engine management system which incorporates electronic fuel injection.
The more fair comparison is too compare the price of the Aerosance
system to a brand new ignition system of your choice AND a complete
Bendix or Airflow Performance fuel injection system. The Aerosance is
still more expensive, but no longer by orders of magnitude. I did a lot
of number crunching and soul searching before purchasing mine! As far as
I know, pretty much every new car on the planet features digital
electronic engine management, including electronic fuel injection and
spark. I just couldn't bring myself to build a 21st century aircraft
with anything less. Just like the cars, the Aerosance system will
optimize the spark timing and fuel mixture for all conditions and
altitudes. While I certainly agree that it is pure foolishness to need
that second battery in order to start the engine, I'll be running an
SD-8 with a small 5 lb backup battery anyway, so I had to just let the
conceptual frustration go. I have every confidence that a single 17ah
battery will start my IOF-360 just fine, just as the one in my Wal-Mart
jump start pack starts any of my cars. Also, don't forget that the fuel
economy available through automated mixture control and optimized spark
advance represents more than just dollars saved, it represents available
range. I'm sure that there will eventually be much simpler and less
expensive electronic engine management systems available, I just don't
want to wait. In the meantime, I'll be saving some weight by leaving
that pesky mixture control lever out of the plane! The renaissance in
automotive performance made possible by computerized engine management
is what really made a believer out of me. My 1968 Camaro was
spectacularly powerful, but got 8 mpg. By the 1980's, Corvettes were
down to less than 200 bhp. Current high performance street cars can be
had with over 400, 500, even 600 bhp, yet are very civilized, and get
very respectable mileage (if you can keep your foot out of it). The
difference? Computerized engine management.
William Slaughter
IOF-360 RV-8
==
direct advertising on the Matronics Forums.
==
==
==
Message 37
| 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: | So long, and thanks for all the fish! |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Cory Emberson" <bootless@earthlink.net>
You beat me to it!
May I offer you a towel? :-)
DO NOT ARCHIVE
> I've asked what I though was a simple electronics question three times and
> received no answer.
The answer is 42.
but do not archive.
Message 38
| 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: | Coax vs. shielded wire on Lightspeed systems |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "William Slaughter" <willslau@alumni.rice.edu>
I don't recall the exact price, but it was quite competitive with other
aftermarket ignition wire manufacturers. They don't make wires with
aviation spark plug connections. Just thought that those running
automotive spark plugs might be interested, and I make a point of trying
to acknowledge vendors who have treated me well. The lowest priced item
is rarely the best value.
William Slaughter
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Ozarkseller2@aol.com
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Coax vs. shielded wire on Lightspeed
systems
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Ozarkseller2@aol.com
In a message dated 8/19/2004 7:42:36 PM Central Daylight Time,
willslau@alumni.rice.edu writes:
> I'd like to second the endorsement of Magnecor. I have their wires on
> my car, and they are truly beautiful. A high percentage of the high
> dollar racing teams around the world use their products, yet they
> answer their own phones, and shortened one of my leads for me at no
> cost. Nice guys, great product, and tremendous customer service.
>
Beautiful on the car, but not good enough for the RV?
How much did the car set cost (web site seems to have a lot of hype, but
no
prices)?
==
direct advertising on the Matronics Forums.
==
==
==
Message 39
| 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: Coax vs. shielded wire on Lightspeed systems |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: erie <erie@shelbyvilledesign.com>
Interestingly, wires from them for my Audi 200TQ list at $55+-,
OEM Bosch that I replace ever 3 yrs because I put waaay too many miles a
year
on it cost me $85 (wholesale). I'm going to give them a try next wire
change.
erie
William Slaughter wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "William Slaughter" <willslau@alumni.rice.edu>
>
>I don't recall the exact price, but it was quite competitive with other
>aftermarket ignition wire manufacturers. They don't make wires with
>aviation spark plug connections. Just thought that those running
>automotive spark plugs might be interested, and I make a point of trying
>to acknowledge vendors who have treated me well. The lowest priced item
>is rarely the best value.
>
>
>
Message 40
| 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 series 400 installation manual ? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Tailgummer@aol.com
I tried to send them to your e-mail address but it was returned. let me know
off list if I can help you.
John D'Onofrio
Message 41
| 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: Systems analysis and unintended consequences |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Richard Sipp" <rsipp@earthlink.net>
Brian,
I agree completely with your financial analysis of the Lasar system.
There are however, other factors in addition to those relating to cost
return. I particularly like the smooth idle, improved starting and
mechanical backup to ANY type of electrical control failure. The Lasars run
like any other magneto system with the master switch off so I don't see
where there is added chance of failure. True, if the battery is so weak it
will barely crank the engine the mags may not fire the plugs on start up,
but, should you be flying with a battery this low anyway?
The fuel savings at altitude is in the neighborhood of .5 to 1.0 GPH. Flying
with a group of RVs I always use several bucks less fuel than anyone else on
the same leg, (yes, it is an 8.5 to 1.0 compression O-320 in a 4) but I look
at that as gravy on top of the overall improved operating characteristics of
the engine. While any of the electronic systems would no doubt provide the
same operational advantages, the Lasar is the only one I am aware of that
does not require electrical power for backup operation.
My constant speed propeller is probably not cost effective either, but I
sure enjoy the added performance of the airplane as a whole with it.
Dick Sipp
RV4 250DS
RV10 #40065
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Lloyd" <brianl@lloyd.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Systems analysis and unintended consequences
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brianl@lloyd.com>
>
> Bob's comment on the Unison LASAR ignition system triggered my memory
> of a quick-and-dirty analysis I did a couple years back. I was going
> to convert one of my airplanes over to the LASAR system but decided to
> figure out whether it would be financially advantageous. I used
> Unison's projected fuel savings times the cost of fuel plus the cost of
> the system itself and compared it to the cost of extra fuel I would use
> plus the cost of needing two sets of Slick mags (one set when new and
> another at around 1000 hours) to make it to TBO. The costs were about
> the same.
>
> So if I am not going to save money in the long run, why would I want to
> add complexity to the aircraft and increase the possibility of failure?
>
> Don't get me wrong, I really like the idea of a reliable electronic
> ignition system with advance based on RPM and percent of power. I want
> to get every ounce of energy out of all that precious fuel especially
> with rising prices. But the whole thing has to make financial sense
> too.
>
> Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
> brianl@lloyd.com Suite 201
> +1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
>
>
Message 42
| 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: So long, and thanks for all the fish! |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Ernest Christley <echristley@nc.rr.com>
Cory Emberson wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Cory Emberson" <bootless@earthlink.net>
>
> You beat me to it!
>
> May I offer you a towel? :-)
>
> DO NOT ARCHIVE
>
>
Why? Certainly he wouldn't go anywhere without his!
DO NOT ARCHIVE
--
http://www.ernest.isa-geek.org/
"Ignorance is mankinds normal state,
alleviated by information and experience."
Veeduber
Message 43
| 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: So long, and thanks for all the fish! |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: BobsV35B@aol.com
In a message dated 8/19/04 11:04:16 PM Central Daylight Time,
echristley@nc.rr.com writes:
Why? Certainly he wouldn't go anywhere without his!
Good Evening Gentlemen,
Aren't these comments getting close to being personal?
I am with Ron, I wish I knew what his question is.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Airpark LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8502
Message 44
| 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: | So long, and thanks for all the fish! |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Matt Prather" <mprather@spro.net>
John,
Have you heard of peak pressure detection, or megajolt? George
Braly could probably comment more, but basically, max horsepower
is made when the peak cylinder pressure is timed to between
15-20deg after top dead center. Knock sensors can only get you
close to this place because the only start to function when
the timing has been advanced too far.
Megajolt is the name of a roll your own ignition system which is
designed to, in real time, measure when the cylinder pressure
reaches its peak, and allow the timing to be adjusted such that
it happens optimally. Current can be passed through the ionized
gas left in the cylinder during the combustion process - after
the ignition event.
Good luck. Reading about your Cozy project has been exciting.
Regards,
Matt Prather
VE N34RD, C150 N714BK
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "John Slade"
> <sladerj@bellsouth.net>
>
> Aero electric people.
> My plane is now flying. Thanks to Bob's book and ongoing input, all the
> electrical gizmos are working and not interfering with each other, and
> the smoke is staying in the boxes and wires.
>
> I've asked what I though was a simple electronics question three times
> and received no answer. Perhaps I've exhausted either the knowledge or
> the patience of this exalted group.
>
> Either way, I've been on this list 5 years and it's time to move on.
>
> So long, and thanks for all the fish.
>
> John Slade
>
> Turbo Rotary Cozy IV
> http://canardaviation.com/cozy
>
>
Message 45
| 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: "George Braly" <gwbraly@gami.com>
Bob,
What on earth was the starting problem with the 28 volt system???
You can see some rather low voltages during cranking on a 14 volt system, but why
should the 28 volt system have caused that???
Surly the FADEC was not resetting on low voltage with a 28 volt system???
You mention protection from the inrush. I assume you mean after the starter contactor
is released???
Regards, George
-----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: Starting Power
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <rnuckolls@aeroelectric.com>
At 10:01 PM 8/18/2004 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "George Braly" <gwbraly@gami.com>
>
>Bob,
>
>I have the DO-160 compliance chart for the TCM FADEC. From memory, it
>appears to me to cover most of the bases.
>
>It is in the 2" thick installation manual.
>
>I have not looked at it for a while, but I don't recall seeing the call
>out for the minimal operating voltage... but I will look again, and report
>back.
>
>But... it is true. The installation in the Bonanza requires a second
>battery located under the rear seat to insure starting on cold days with
>difficult starting conditions.
>
>Total system weight is > 35 lbs.
>
>Regards, George
Yup. I spent quite a bit of time working with Lancair to get this
system to run in several factory installations. They couldn't use
the dual-battery cranking feature described in Figure Z-14. The
auto-crossfeed for cranking had to be disabled so that one battery
would support the FADEC while the other battery did ALL the cranking.
One of the nice features of Z-14 was being able to use a pair of LIGHT
batteries. The FADEC system had to be "protected" from going brain-dead
during the inrush transient.
I had a "band-aid" black box that put a 3v boost on FADEC supply
power a few milliseconds before the starter contactor closed. I
brass-boarded the thing on the bench and it would have "solved"
the problem . . . but I never built one. It just rubbed me the wrong
direction to add weight, cost, complexity and reduced reliability to
a system that was already too heavy, too expensive and had too many
parts in it.
I have a hard time figuring out the return on investment for either
Aerosance's FADEC or the Lasar ignition system. They offer only marginally
improved performance for large increases weight, parts count and cost.
On the other hand, Emag's size, weight, and cost promises
performance EXACTLY what we're looking for. It's cheaper, better
performing, and offers seamless system integration. Now if they can
just deliver on the promise. I'll sure offer whatever support I can
to see them realize their goals. Aerosance and Unison were interesting
but in my never humble opinion, marching off in the wrong direction
to the beat of a really big drummer (read FAA).
Bob . . .
---
---
---
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! --
|