Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:12 AM - Re: Aircraft receivers (Harley)
2. 05:56 AM - Re: Re: Re: Re; Electrical Education (Eric M. Jones)
3. 05:56 AM - P-static blew my VM1000, autopilot and trim indicator (Dan & Kari Olsen)
4. 07:48 AM - Re: Re: Re: Re: Re; Electrical Education (Richard Tasker)
5. 07:49 AM - Alternator question (Paul)
6. 08:35 AM - Starter guard ID (Richard Riley)
7. 09:14 AM - Re: P-static blew my VM1000, autopilot and trim indicator (David Carter)
8. 10:26 AM - Re: P-static blew my VM1000, autopilot and (Mickey Coggins)
9. 11:46 AM - Re: Aircraft receivers (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
10. 11:51 AM - Re: Starter guard ID (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
11. 12:09 PM - Re: Aircraft receivers (Harley)
12. 12:50 PM - Re: P-static blew my VM1000, (echristley@nc.rr.com.autopilot.and.trim.indicator)
13. 02:05 PM - Re: Aircraft receivers (Franz Fux)
14. 03:10 PM - Re: P-static blew my VM1000, autopilot and trim indicator (David Carter)
15. 03:54 PM - Re: Electrical Education (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
16. 03:55 PM - Re: Aircraft receivers (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
17. 03:58 PM - Re: Alternator question (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
18. 04:36 PM - Re: (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
19. 04:48 PM - Re: Re: Electrical Education (Richard Tasker)
20. 05:07 PM - Re: AMP crimp tool info (Paul Messinger)
21. 06:48 PM - Re: P-static blew my VM1000, autopilot and trim indicator (Richard McCraw)
22. 07:04 PM - Re: P-static blew my VM1000, autopilot and trim indicator (David Carter)
23. 07:15 PM - Re: P-static blew my VM1000, autopilot and trim indicator (Ron Koyich)
24. 07:27 PM - Re: Starter guard ID (Richard Riley)
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: Aircraft receivers |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Harley <harley@agelesswings.com>
Morning, Franz...
They didn't have much information on the intercom on the Microair
website, but I found this page at another distributor...it's a PS
engineering Intercom...here's the manual in pdf format:
http://www.ps-engineering.com/docs/PM501PilotGuide.pdf
Harley
Franz Fux wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Franz Fux" <franz@lastfrontierheli.com>
>
>Hi Harley,
>could you tell me what kind of intercom is included in the package,
>Franz
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Harley
>To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Aircraft receivers
>
>
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Harley <harley@agelesswings.com>
>
>I had considered that model...but just received my Microair M760 yesterday!
>
>The Xcom does look like it has some better features, but I was as much
>concerned with price...and Microair had the best deal (IMHO) with their
>combo package that included everything including the transponder,
>transceiver, VOX intercom, encoder and cables and antenna for $2700 US.
>That's a considerable discount from Micrtoir's individual prices, with
>an additional 5% from OxAero in Mississippi where I bought it.
>
>http://www.oxaero.com/Microair-ComboKits.asp
>
>And with the fine reputation that Microair has acheived in the field, I
>didn't want to take a chance with the new kid on the block...it may be
>better, but I didn't want to be the one to find out that it isn't.
>
>Harley Dixon
>
>www.agelesswings.com
>
>
>James Foerster wrote:
>
>
>
>>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "James Foerster"
>>
>>
><jmfpublic@comcast.net>
>
>
>>Does anyone have any experience with the XCOM 760, available from
>>Aircraft Spruce? It is made by Micheal Coates out of Australia, and
>>seems to be loosely based on the Micro Air 760. It seems to have
>>advantages, in that it has a VOX circuit rather than 'hot mike' that
>>Micro Air uses. It is priced just under $1000 now, as is the iCom
>>ic-A200. The iCom looks nice, but I recall at least one negative
>>comment about ignition noise--which may be very antenna and plane
>>specific. Any comments?
>>
>>The web page comparing the XCOM to others is
>>http://www.mcp.com.au/xcom760/comparison/comparison.html
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>---
>
>---
>
>
>
>
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Re: Re: Re; Electrical Education |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones@charter.net>
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Richard E. Tasker" >
>Sorry, Eric, but David is correct on this one.
Richard, I stick with my wild blathering....
>An incandescent light does indeed follow Ohm's law.
Only if you use Brian's busted calculator....
>What it doesn't do is remain the same resistance as it heats up -
Then it does not follow Ohm's Law.
>but that doesn't mean that ohms law doesn't hold at any given resistance.
Yes it does.
>Ohm's law doesn't say anything about linearity of a load -
Ohm's Law is a "Linear" equation in a non-linear problem.
>only that at any particular set of R, I and E they will follow the
equation.
As I mentioned.....perhaps at an instant in time (derivative t of a more
complex equation.)
Here are three aids to explain what is happening:
1) Physics is not math. This usually takes some kind of undergraduate Zen
epiphany to understand. If you think that the process of doing algebra and
balancing the equation on a particular set of E, I, and R means
something...then you do not yet understand grasshopper.
2) The Stephan-Boltzmann law "Radiation is proportional to the forth power
of temperature", correctly describes the E/I characteristics of filament
lamps. Google this stuff if you dare. So do the S-B Law and Ohm's Law
describe the same Physics?
3) A real-world approach---Imagine having a filament lamp on your experiment
bench. Can you set the power supply voltage, measure the cold lamp
resistance, and use Ohm's Law to calculate the current you will get when you
turn on the light? Try it--if you succeed then Ohms' Law might apply to the
situation.
Some will say, "...Yes, but Ohm's Law states that the current through the
circuit is directly proportional to the applied voltage and inversely
proportional to the resistance of the circuit and at any particular time
this is certainly true."
And one should answer, "...Yes, but Ohm's Law does not state that the
current through the circuit is directly proportional to the applied voltage
and inversely proportional to the resistance of the circuit for one set of
data. It presumes to descibe a relationship between ALL the data. That's why
they call it Ohm's Law instead of Ohm's Pretty-Good-Rule-of-Thumb." Don't
panic! Ohm's Law is not "wrong".....it just doesn't apply to certain things,
like diodes, inductors, capacitors, mosfets, arc lamps, cookies, shoes,
ships, sealing wax, cabbages, kings and filament lamps.
That's enough blathering from me,
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge MA 01550-2705
Phone (508) 764-2072
Email: emjones@charter.net
"Mankind faces a cross-roads.
One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness.
The other, to total extinction.
Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly."
--Woody Allen
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: | P-static blew my VM1000, autopilot and trim indicator |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dan & Kari Olsen" <olsen25@comcast.net>
Greetings,
I am new to this group and was referred here by some fellow Lancair
builders from the Lancair Mailing List.
Last Friday I was happily flying my Lancair 320 from Colorado to the
Lancair factory fly-in when I entered actual IMC. I encountered a few
light snow showers in the clouds when the P-static started in. The
usual cracking and buzzing in the headsets, hair standing on end, etc.
The encounters lasted only 30-60 seconds or so. On the first encounter
my TruTrak DigiFlight II autopilot disengaged. When I looked at it the
display was blank but the circuit breaker had not blown. I cycled power
to the autopilot and only the LCD backlight would come on. At this time
I discovered that the VM1000 engine instrumentation system had frozen.
The display was showing all the parameters as they had been but nothing
would move or react to changes. Cycled power to this and it worked
again.
A couple minutes later another P-static encounter. This time the VM1000
started displaying garbage and then blank. Power cycle to the VM1000
did nothing - it was dead. The Jim Frantz AOA also started going nuts
and then just quit. I also discovered that the Ray Allen pitch trim
indicator (LED type) quit, although the trim servo still worked.
All through this the UPS Apollo transponder, GPS/COM and NAV/COM kept
working flawlessly. I quickly contacted center for a 180 out of the IMC
and amended flight plan to get me back in the clear and on the ground.
A few minutes after back in the clear and the AOA began working again
but everything else that had died remained dead.
So, now I have a couple problems:
1) get the broken equipment fixed; and
2) figure out how to prevent this from happening again
I talked with Jim Younkin at TruTrak and he has a good idea of what the
problem is with the autopilot (discrete part that they have recently
discovered is not meeting spec in terms of rapid rising voltage
transients). It's already on its way to Jim. The folks at VisionMicro
don't work on Fridays, so I have no answer there yet.
What concerns me the most is the prevention part of this. Because my
plane is made of e-glass, static wicks are not an option. Can any of
you give me pointers on what I might do to protect the sensitive
electronic gear in the future, besides avoid flying through snow?
Better grounding? Chokes inline with some of the lines? Zener diodes?
It is interesting to me that some of the equipment worked like a charm
through this all. The avionics stack and LCD clock/OAT/volts.
Basically, all of the "certified" gear worked flawlessly and the
"experimental" equipment crapped out.
I am also very interested in the experience others have had in IMC. I
have only had my 320 in IMC twice. Once in warm, wet clouds and rain
with no problems or static at all. This time in cold, snowy clouds.
Unless I can put my finger on something that can protect the gear, I
will have almost no confidence to take it in any IMC - warm or cold.
I look forward to your replies.
Best Regards,
Dan Olsen
Lancair 320, N320DK
Fort Collins, CO
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: Re: Re: Re; Electrical Education |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Richard Tasker <retasker@optonline.net>
Just because the resistive element is non-linear doesn't mean that ohm's
law doesn't apply. It just means that you cannot apply it exactly like
you can apply it to a linear element (which doesn't actually exist in
the real world).
If we use your logic, then ohm's law only applies to theoretical
elements. Any resistive element that I have ever come across in real
life has a temperature coefficient. If we apply a voltage to it, it
will dissipate some power which will change its temperature and
therefore its resistance. This means, according to your logic, that
ohm's law does not apply to it. If so, then where and when does it
apply? Where do you draw the line?
My contention is that ohm's law applies to any resistive load - linear
or non-linear. The results are just complicated by the fact that you
cannot take a measurement at any one temperature and expect it to give
you the same answer at some other temperature - whether that temperature
be externally generated or internally generated.
Dick Tasker
Eric M. Jones wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones@charter.net>
>
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Richard E. Tasker" >
>
>
>
>>Sorry, Eric, but David is correct on this one.
>>
>>
>
>Richard, I stick with my wild blathering....
>
>
>
>>An incandescent light does indeed follow Ohm's law.
>>
>>
>
>Only if you use Brian's busted calculator....
>
>
>
>>What it doesn't do is remain the same resistance as it heats up -
>>
>>
>
>Then it does not follow Ohm's Law.
>
>
>
>>but that doesn't mean that ohms law doesn't hold at any given resistance.
>>
>>
>
>Yes it does.
>
> >Ohm's law doesn't say anything about linearity of a load -
>
>Ohm's Law is a "Linear" equation in a non-linear problem.
>
>
>
>>only that at any particular set of R, I and E they will follow the
>>
>>
>equation.
>
>As I mentioned.....perhaps at an instant in time (derivative t of a more
>complex equation.)
>
>Here are three aids to explain what is happening:
>
>1) Physics is not math. This usually takes some kind of undergraduate Zen
>epiphany to understand. If you think that the process of doing algebra and
>balancing the equation on a particular set of E, I, and R means
>something...then you do not yet understand grasshopper.
>
>2) The Stephan-Boltzmann law "Radiation is proportional to the forth power
>of temperature", correctly describes the E/I characteristics of filament
>lamps. Google this stuff if you dare. So do the S-B Law and Ohm's Law
>describe the same Physics?
>
>3) A real-world approach---Imagine having a filament lamp on your experiment
>bench. Can you set the power supply voltage, measure the cold lamp
>resistance, and use Ohm's Law to calculate the current you will get when you
>turn on the light? Try it--if you succeed then Ohms' Law might apply to the
>situation.
>
>Some will say, "...Yes, but Ohm's Law states that the current through the
>circuit is directly proportional to the applied voltage and inversely
>proportional to the resistance of the circuit and at any particular time
>this is certainly true."
>
>And one should answer, "...Yes, but Ohm's Law does not state that the
>current through the circuit is directly proportional to the applied voltage
>and inversely proportional to the resistance of the circuit for one set of
>data. It presumes to descibe a relationship between ALL the data. That's why
>they call it Ohm's Law instead of Ohm's Pretty-Good-Rule-of-Thumb." Don't
>panic! Ohm's Law is not "wrong".....it just doesn't apply to certain things,
>like diodes, inductors, capacitors, mosfets, arc lamps, cookies, shoes,
>ships, sealing wax, cabbages, kings and filament lamps.
>
>That's enough blathering from me,
>Eric M. Jones
>www.PerihelionDesign.com
>113 Brentwood Drive
>Southbridge MA 01550-2705
>Phone (508) 764-2072
>Email: emjones@charter.net
>
>"Mankind faces a cross-roads.
> One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness.
>The other, to total extinction.
>Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly."
>
>--Woody Allen
>
>
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: | Alternator question |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Paul <pwilson@climber.org>
I have a '96 Ford truck and took the alternator to a repair shop where the unit
was installed on a test console. Result high volts and worn brushes. I watched
the guy do the service. The regulator is a small module that screws on the
back of the alternator.
Is this what the talk is all about when refering to the internal regulator on
Ford alternators? If so is this style a candidate for an external regulator?
Thanks, Paul
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: | Starter guard ID |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Richard Riley <richard@riley.net>
Does anyone know the ID of the starter button guards? I'm going to machine
one into my instrument panel, but don't have one handy.
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: P-static blew my VM1000, autopilot and trim indicator |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "David Carter" <dcarter@datarecall.net>
"Because my plane is made of e-glass, static wicks are not an option." I
don't understand why wicks won't work.
Perhaps composite (non-metal) aircraft have a problem with built-up static
electricity not flowing aft to where the wicks are normally located. If the
static just sits and builds in various places until it gets to a really high
voltage and starts arcing into your on-board equipment, then it would seem
you really need some way to strategically place some wire mesh or wires,
that are linked and run aft to discharge wicks. In other words, seems like
there should be a "ground system" that will bleed static away from your
electronics racks and aft to the wick(s).
- Anecdote: The A-7D had a severe P static problem that rendered our
UHF communications unusable, usually in dry cirrus clouds around 20,000'.
DRY is the key word - ice crystals (snow in your case). Static electricity
build up (& fires during ground refueling, for example) is always worse in
cold, dry conditions. Humid conditions, on the other hand, provide a
natural environment for bleed off of static.
. . . . . -- The solution to the A-7D problem was to add grounding/bonding
straps between certain aluminum skin panels - even though it was an aluminum
plane, the extensive anti-corrosion painting of most parts did not allow
good metal-to-metal bonding, so static would build up on a panel until it
could jump the air gap between panels (causing the P static noice in our
receivers). It was especially bad in the vertical stabilizer where some of
our comm antennas were located up on top. When the fleet was modified, we
never had another case of radio noise from static.
. . . . .-- It would seem that some "bonding" scheme could be done in your
airplane to bleed static elec away from criticl areas - hopefull to be
dumped overboard with static wicks.
Getting the manufacturers of the offending equipment to "fix" them is a good
objective, if they will. Sounds like another DO-160 design issue. 'Lectric
Bob advocates leaning on such manufacturers to "get it right".
David
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dan & Kari Olsen" <olsen25@comcast.net>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: P-static blew my VM1000, autopilot and trim
indicator
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dan & Kari Olsen"
<olsen25@comcast.net>
>
> Greetings,
>
> I am new to this group and was referred here by some fellow Lancair
> builders from the Lancair Mailing List.
>
> Last Friday I was happily flying my Lancair 320 from Colorado to the
> Lancair factory fly-in when I entered actual IMC. I encountered a few
> light snow showers in the clouds when the P-static started in. The
> usual cracking and buzzing in the headsets, hair standing on end, etc.
> The encounters lasted only 30-60 seconds or so. On the first encounter
> my TruTrak DigiFlight II autopilot disengaged. When I looked at it the
> display was blank but the circuit breaker had not blown. I cycled power
> to the autopilot and only the LCD backlight would come on. At this time
> I discovered that the VM1000 engine instrumentation system had frozen.
> The display was showing all the parameters as they had been but nothing
> would move or react to changes. Cycled power to this and it worked
> again.
>
> A couple minutes later another P-static encounter. This time the VM1000
> started displaying garbage and then blank. Power cycle to the VM1000
> did nothing - it was dead. The Jim Frantz AOA also started going nuts
> and then just quit. I also discovered that the Ray Allen pitch trim
> indicator (LED type) quit, although the trim servo still worked.
>
> All through this the UPS Apollo transponder, GPS/COM and NAV/COM kept
> working flawlessly. I quickly contacted center for a 180 out of the IMC
> and amended flight plan to get me back in the clear and on the ground.
> A few minutes after back in the clear and the AOA began working again
> but everything else that had died remained dead.
>
> So, now I have a couple problems:
> 1) get the broken equipment fixed; and
> 2) figure out how to prevent this from happening again
>
> I talked with Jim Younkin at TruTrak and he has a good idea of what the
> problem is with the autopilot (discrete part that they have recently
> discovered is not meeting spec in terms of rapid rising voltage
> transients). It's already on its way to Jim. The folks at VisionMicro
> don't work on Fridays, so I have no answer there yet.
>
> What concerns me the most is the prevention part of this. Because my
> plane is made of e-glass, static wicks are not an option. Can any of
> you give me pointers on what I might do to protect the sensitive
> electronic gear in the future, besides avoid flying through snow?
> Better grounding? Chokes inline with some of the lines? Zener diodes?
>
> It is interesting to me that some of the equipment worked like a charm
> through this all. The avionics stack and LCD clock/OAT/volts.
> Basically, all of the "certified" gear worked flawlessly and the
> "experimental" equipment crapped out.
>
> I am also very interested in the experience others have had in IMC. I
> have only had my 320 in IMC twice. Once in warm, wet clouds and rain
> with no problems or static at all. This time in cold, snowy clouds.
> Unless I can put my finger on something that can protect the gear, I
> will have almost no confidence to take it in any IMC - warm or cold.
>
> I look forward to your replies.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Dan Olsen
> Lancair 320, N320DK
> Fort Collins, CO
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: P-static blew my VM1000, autopilot and |
trim indicator
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics@rv8.ch>
trim indicator
Quick question - for us VFR only slackers, do we need to worry
about precipitation static or any other type of static?
Thanks,
Mickey
--
Mickey Coggins
http://www.rv8.ch/
#82007 QB Wings/Fuselage
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: Aircraft receivers |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 07:11 AM 9/7/2004 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Harley <harley@agelesswings.com>
>
>Morning, Franz...
>
>They didn't have much information on the intercom on the Microair
>website, but I found this page at another distributor...it's a PS
>engineering Intercom...here's the manual in pdf format:
>
>http://www.ps-engineering.com/docs/PM501PilotGuide.pdf
I used to sell the Microair and did a better installation
manual. You can download it at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/avionics/760imB.pdf
The Microair has a ptt intercom . . . sometimes called
a "hot mic" intercom. I prefer this style for noisy
airplanes. No vox adjustment hence no "pecking" of the
audio gate on ambient noise . . . no clipping of first
word.
Bob . . .
---
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Starter guard ID |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 08:35 AM 9/7/2004 -0700, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Richard Riley <richard@riley.net>
>
>Does anyone know the ID of the starter button guards? I'm going to machine
>one into my instrument panel, but don't have one handy.
If you're referring to the deep bezel that screws to the
mounting bushing of the pushbutton, see lower left corner
of last page of:
http://www.hmcs.com.cn/Grayhill/Series_30_button.pdf
B&C stocks this guard and a n.o. 30 series push-button
to go with it.
Bob . . .
---
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: Aircraft receivers |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Harley <harley@agelesswings.com>
Bob...
I just ordered a Microair combo kit from OxAero...actually drop shipped
from Microair in Australia......it includes the VOX intercom that I sent
the pdf file for...
Here's the link to OxAero...MicroAir has the same listing on their
site...it was just a little cheaper from Jim...
http://www.oxaero.com/Microair-ComboKits.asp
Harley
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
>
>At 07:11 AM 9/7/2004 -0500, you wrote:
>
>
>
>>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Harley <harley@agelesswings.com>
>>
>>Morning, Franz...
>>
>>They didn't have much information on the intercom on the Microair
>>website, but I found this page at another distributor...it's a PS
>>engineering Intercom...here's the manual in pdf format:
>>
>>http://www.ps-engineering.com/docs/PM501PilotGuide.pdf
>>
>>
>
> I used to sell the Microair and did a better installation
> manual. You can download it at:
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/avionics/760imB.pdf
>
> The Microair has a ptt intercom . . . sometimes called
> a "hot mic" intercom. I prefer this style for noisy
> airplanes. No vox adjustment hence no "pecking" of the
> audio gate on ambient noise . . . no clipping of first
> word.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
>---
>
>
>
>
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: P-static blew my VM1000, |
autopilot and trim indicator
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: echristley@nc.rr.com autopilot and trim
indicator
----- Original Message -----
From: David Carter <dcarter@datarecall.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: P-static blew my
VM1000, autopilot and trim indicator
> . . . . .-- It would seem that some "bonding"
scheme could be done
> in your
> airplane to bleed static elec away from criticl
areas - hopefull to be
> dumped overboard with static wicks.
>
There are conductive epoxies. Would it be prudent
to use some such as a final barrier layer in a
composite plane? How about some graphite added to
the final leveling slurry?
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: | Aircraft receivers |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Franz Fux" <franz@lastfrontierheli.com>
Thanks,
it sounds like its quality equipment and worth the consideration,
Franz
-----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: Aircraft receivers
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
<b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 07:11 AM 9/7/2004 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Harley <harley@agelesswings.com>
>
>Morning, Franz...
>
>They didn't have much information on the intercom on the Microair
>website, but I found this page at another distributor...it's a PS
>engineering Intercom...here's the manual in pdf format:
>
>http://www.ps-engineering.com/docs/PM501PilotGuide.pdf
I used to sell the Microair and did a better installation
manual. You can download it at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Catalog/avionics/760imB.pdf
The Microair has a ptt intercom . . . sometimes called
a "hot mic" intercom. I prefer this style for noisy
airplanes. No vox adjustment hence no "pecking" of the
audio gate on ambient noise . . . no clipping of first
word.
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: P-static blew my VM1000, autopilot and trim indicator |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "David Carter" <dcarter@datarecall.net>
No need to worry for VFR.
David
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mickey Coggins" <mick-matronics@rv8.ch>; ;
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: P-static blew my VM1000, autopilot and trim
indicator
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Mickey Coggins
<mick-matronics@rv8.ch> trim indicator
>
> Quick question - for us VFR only slackers, do we need to worry
> about precipitation static or any other type of static?
>
> Thanks,
> Mickey
>
>
> --
> Mickey Coggins
> http://www.rv8.ch/
> #82007 QB Wings/Fuselage
>
>
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: Electrical Education |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
>Hello Bob Nuckolls,
>The slide switch at this URL
> http://ottoeng.com/control/slideswitch.htm
>has these listed electrical ratings at 28 V DC:
>
>Resistive: 5 Amp. Inductive: 3 Amp. Lamp: 1 Amp. Low level: 10 mAmp @30mv.
>
>Can you please help me better understand the significance of these
>ratings? The following questions come to my mind:
>
>1) Wouldnt an incandescent lamp (assumed) be a resistive load and have the
>same rating as given for the resistive circuit load?
A lamp IS a pure resistance (i.e., exhibits only very small capacitive or
inductive reactance components) however, lamp filaments have
a room temperature resistance that is a small fraction that of its
normal operating current. For example, a #327 lamp that draws .040A at
28v (700 ohms operating) has a room temperature resistance of about 70
ohms. This means that the instant contacts controlling this lamp close,
inrush current will be right at 10x or 400 mA. It falls to 40 mA in a
matter of milliseconds but the inrush is real, measurable and
demonstrable more stressful than a purely resistive load of 400 mA. This
particular manufacturer had de-rated his product by 5:1 for lamp loads .
. . some are more conservative and would de-rate 10:1.
>2) I understand the concept of higher initial inrush current affecting the
>lamp current rating, but wouldnt that apply to any resistive load and not
>just the lamp?
If it's a pure resistor . . . of say 700 ohms, then make, carry and
break currents are constant at 40 mA irrespective of the measurement in
time.
Pitot heaters are another example of thermodynamics of some "resistors".
A 100W pitot tube draws rated power at operating temperature (about 7.4
Amps at 100-125C). However, when you first turn it on, the low
temperature resistance can be half the operating resistance for an
inrush current of 15 amps. We're dealing with a low reactance, nearly
pure resistance under all conditions . . . it's just a resistance value
that doesn't sit still!
>3) Why would the switch need a low level rating? If it can handle the
>larger current loads couldnt it easily handle any small current load?
Some manufacturers will clad their silver alloy switch contacts with
gold. Gold does not tarnish with age and environment and is a superior
contact material when currents are low (less than 100 ma). However, if
you expect to use a gold clad switch for small signal switching, do not
test it at the full current ratings. We had a batch of gold-clad relays
pass a receiving inspection test at max loads only to have them fail
when used in small signal applications at a later time. The high test
current burns off the gold and turns the relay into a power only device.
In this case, gold contacts are optional for using the switch at very
low power levels.
Examples of low signal applications include audio and navigation
signals. Suppose this switch were used to drive inputs to a solid state
trim controller where contact currents never exceeded a few milliamps .
. . you'd definitely want gold cladding on the contacts to insure
predictable operation over the life of the switch. However, if one
purchases a working used switch with hopes of using it in a low-level
application, you want to ask how the switch was used in its first
life . . . the gold may be gone by now.
Another example of unique combinations of load versus contact
behavior is illustrated here. A subminature switch is used
to sense full travel of a mechanism and light a pair of lamps.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/sm_switch_cutaway.jpg
With as few as 200 hours on the airframe, these contacts
in series with the switch would go open and the lights would
not come on. Here you see the "failed" contacts.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/openckt.jpg
Turns out that there was not enough energy flowing through
these contacts to keep them clean (0.08A) but the lamp inrush
current was too high (1.0A) for gold contacts. So
we wired up this little series circuit as a "contact saver".
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/ContactSaver.jpg
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/ContactSaver_2.jpg
Changing contacts to gold and installing the "contact saver"
produced the following changes to system operation:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/ContactSaver_1.jpg
Note that contacts are closed and stable before the
contact saver triggers. The contacts don't have to
switch the 1A inrush of the pair of lamps and the gold
plating insures contact performance in spite of
low operating currents.
This is a case where failure of a $2 switch wasn't
really a "failure" but a mis-application of hardware.
None-the-less, it triggers a kilodollar maintenance
event on an airplane that takes the airplane out of
service for at least half a day. Clearly the cost-benefit
ratio of adding the contact saver and modifying switch
material was attractive.
>4) Is the inductive circuit current rating lower than the resistive
>circuit rating because of the voltage spike caused by opening the
switch?
Yes, although this is easily mitigated as you suggest
below . . .
>5) Couldn't that inductive circuit current rating for the switch be higher
>if one used a diode connected to ground across the inductive coil in the
>circuit?
You betcha . . . An inductive load with a spike catcher is about the
easiest load there is for set of contacts to control. Inductors have a
delayed build up of current so contacts have a chance to stop bouncing
before currents reach max load. A spike catcher diode eliminates 95% of
arcing on contact opening. See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/spikecatcher.pdf
>6) Would those current load ratings improve, be less, or the same if the
>switch were used in a 12 V DC circuit instead of a 28 V DC circuit?
Slightly improved but not enough to make much difference to you. Keep in
mind that all ratings for switches and relays are predicated on
laboratory tests where expected "life" of the contacts are given tens of
thousands of operations. If you're selecting a switch for a tool of some
kind, then maintenance issues have a significant return-on-investment
calculation predicated on cost of replacement, replacement labor and
downtime costs for the tool. These are useful exercises when designing
air transport category and military aircraft. Switches in your airplane
are going to die of environmental and effects of age before they'll
succumb to service stresses.
See: http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/swtchrat.pdf
>
>Many thanks for your help from an electrical neophyte.
>
My pleasure sir.
I've been jousting with switch and relay contact issues at RAC for
several years. I've run across a number of useful documents on the 'net
that I'll recommend for others
Applying Precision Switches
http://content.honeywell.com/sensing/prodinfo/basicswitches/technical/010172.pdf
Low Energy Switching
http://content.honeywell.com/sensing/prodinfo/basicswitches/technical/001008_3.pdf
Here's a fairly lucid description of switch/relay operation and a
description of various contact materials. There are a few errors in
this piece but nothing serious . . .
http://www.naisweb.com/e/relaye/mech_eng/mech_eng_rtia/idapm4w.html
Bob . . .
---
Message 16
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Aircraft receivers |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 02:04 PM 9/7/2004 -0700, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Franz Fux"
><franz@lastfrontierheli.com>
>
>Thanks,
>it sounds like its quality equipment and worth the consideration,
>Franz
By the way, I found a Microair 760 harness and installation manual
kit left over from that marketing effort. It's available first come,
first serve for half price: $27.50
Bob . . .
---
Message 17
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Alternator question |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 08:39 AM 9/7/2004 -0600, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Paul <pwilson@climber.org>
>
> I have a '96 Ford truck and took the alternator to a repair shop where
> the unit was installed on a test console. Result high volts and worn
> brushes. I watched the guy do the service. The regulator is a small
> module that screws on the back of the alternator.
> Is this what the talk is all about when refering to the internal
> regulator on Ford alternators? If so is this style a candidate for an
> external regulator?
> Thanks, Paul
If, when the "built on" regulator is dismounted, there are exposed terminals
that might accept extended wires, you can probably use a remotely mounted
regulator. You'll need to be sure that the regulator matches the field
wiring for the alternator. Some field terminals pull up to bus for max
output, others pull to ground. All "aircraft" style regulators pull
up to bus.
Bob . . .
---
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 09:30 AM 9/4/2004 -0700, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: david caswell
><davidbcaswell@yahoo.com>
>
>I am in process of installing International Electronics iInstruments and
>am connecting wiring to the panel mounted warning lights (B&C) from the
>instruments (EGT/CHT and Fuel). The installation instructions specify
>that current be no higher that 1/10 amp on the FUEL, and 2/10 amp on the
>EGT. The signal from both instruments creates a ground. What is the best
>way to limit the current from the buss to these lights? A resistor in
>series? And is the R=E/I the way to calculate the size of this resistor?
>(14/.020=700) ? 700 ohm resistor? I am also wiring a "starter engaged"
>warning light from the starter "I" terminal. Does this lead need a
>resistor before it gets to the warning light?
>Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.
No, just select lamps that do not exceed the 100 mA and 200 mA limits
cited. In this case, the #330 lamp will fit the B&C fixtures and
draws 80 milliamperes.
Bob . . .
---
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: | Re: RE: Electrical Education |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Richard Tasker <retasker@optonline.net>
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> >1) Wouldnt an incandescent lamp (assumed) be a resistive load and have the
> >same rating as given for the resistive circuit load?
>
> A lamp IS a pure resistance (i.e., exhibits only very small capacitive or
> inductive reactance components) however, lamp filaments have
> a room temperature resistance that is a small fraction that of its
> normal operating current. For example, a #327 lamp that draws .040A at
> 28v (700 ohms operating) has a room temperature resistance of about 70
> ohms. This means that the instant contacts controlling this lamp close,
> inrush current will be right at 10x or 400 mA. It falls to 40 mA in a
> matter of milliseconds but the inrush is real, measurable and
> demonstrable more stressful than a purely resistive load of 400 mA.
>
I think you meant to say "than a purely resistive load of 40 mA" in the
last sentence, not "400 ma". A load of 400 mA that is resistive is the
same as any other 400 mA resistive load, but the load that starts at 400
mA and goes down to 40 mA is a whole lot harder on a switch than one
that starts and stays at 40 mA (as you said). Otherwise right on.
> This
> particular manufacturer had de-rated his product by 5:1 for lamp loads .
> . . some are more conservative and would de-rate 10:1.
>
>
Dick Tasker
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: AMP crimp tool info |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Paul Messinger" <paulm@olypen.com>
The tools I have are as following;
PIDG 10-12 AMP# 59239-4-M (3 levels of insulation crimp adjustment)
PIDG 14-16 & PIDG 18-22 AMP #59250 (dual head and 4 levels of insulation
adjustment)
The typical Blue or Red insulated terminals.
PIDG 20-24 & PIDG 22-26 AMP #59275 (dual head and 4 levels of insulation
adjustment)
This one also only works with the much smaller terminals Typically with
White or the smaller Yellow (not as common but DigiKey has had some in the
past as I needed for special applications).
Go to www.amp.com and input the above tool numbers for detailed info.
Using the#59250 tool as an example:
The die crimp closed dims is hard to measure (there is a terminal locating
lever in the way of my calipers) but 0.121 is close for the center of the
wire side of the die when fully closed. The width of the die is 0.210 and
this constrains the terminal during crimping to force compression on all
four sides.
The wire dies are formed in an arc ( , the insulation dies are different
and look like -
-.
Only one side shown and one rotated 90 deg from the other example to allow
typeing examples.
Measurments for the insulation part of the die is the same for the width and
as follows for the height fully closed.
Position #1 0.085"
Position #2 0.097"
Position #3 0.124"
Position #4 0.146"
As you can see there is quite a range of insulation thicknesses allowed for.
After crimping a #22 wire the following measurements were made.
Uncrimped terminal insulation diameter 0.193"
Wire outer diameter with insulation 0.052"
Crimped with insulation die set to #1.
Width of wire crimp 0.198"
Height of wire crimp 0.121"
Width of insulation crimp 0.235"
Height of insulation crimp 0.135"
Inner metal sleeve crimped to wire insulation contact 360deg. like -O-
Width of insulation crimp 0.227"
Height of insulation crimp 0.152"
Inner metal sleeve NOT well formed around insulation and no real contact or
support.
But this setting is for much thicker insulation on wire nad not expecte3d to
result in a proper crimp.
ALL the above info is quick and dirty and subject to mis reading and or mis
typing.
My point is care is needed to be sure you are getting a good crimp
regardless of the tool used.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Messinger" <paulm@olypen.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Cleveland Crimp Tool Mystery Solved .NOT .
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Paul Messinger"
<paulm@olypen.com>
>
> On the insulation grip side of the AMP tool its not the one dimension its
> the overall shape of the die.
>
> You get =O= vs around the insulation.
>
> On the wire side of the crimper, Dies that are designed for the common
vinyl
> insulated terminals have a larger min die opening vs the Nylon PIDG
terminal
> tools as the Nylon insulation is thinner. (not the only difference but one
> that is simple to see just by looking). The copper part of the terminal is
> very different between the common and the PIDG types.
>
> Also the AMP tools hold the terminal on all 4 sides so not only is there a
> top to bottom clamping but the sides are supported (to prevent the
otherwise
> resulting increase in width) so you get copper compression all around.
This
> is a feature not found on any of the lower cost Tools I have seen. This
> results in a very controlled squeeze that insures a HI quality result.
Just
> what you could expect from a $500 to $600 tool.
>
> As Bob has suggested its possible for a reliable result from a much lower
> cost tool.
>
> I will look next time I am in my hanger and provide the AMP part numbers
for
> the tools I have. The AMP web site has the specs on these tools. Each Tool
> has the applicable PIDG terminal sizes the dies were designed for so its
> easy to get the right tool.
>
> Paul
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "DAVID REEL" <dreel@cox.net>
> To: <aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Cleveland Crimp Tool Mystery Solved .NOT .
>
>
> > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "DAVID REEL" <dreel@cox.net>
> >
> > Concerning the insulation grip of the asymetrical die tools, I went back
> to the dial caliper and measured the minimum die opening on the insulation
> grip side. Here's the results:
> >
> > Loose grip Cleveland tool: .159
> > Replacement tight grip tool: .149
> > Ideal crimper with 30-579 die .125
> >
> > Looks like the Cleveland tool's insulation grip on the 22awg wire is
> somewhat loose compared to the ideal dies. I'm real curious what the
minimu
> m gaps are on your $600 AMP crimper Bob.
> >
> > Dave Reel
> >
> >
>
>
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: | P-static blew my VM1000, autopilot and trim indicator |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Richard McCraw" <rmccraw@wcvt.com>
Hmm -- so flying through light snow, light enough that conditions are still
VFR, couldn't trigger the same problems?
Rick
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of David
Carter
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: P-static blew my VM1000, autopilot and trim
indicator
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "David Carter"
<dcarter@datarecall.net>
No need to worry for VFR.
David
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mickey Coggins" <mick-matronics@rv8.ch>; ;
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: P-static blew my VM1000, autopilot and trim
indicator
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Mickey Coggins
<mick-matronics@rv8.ch> trim indicator
>
> Quick question - for us VFR only slackers, do we need to worry
> about precipitation static or any other type of static?
>
> Thanks,
> Mickey
>
>
> --
> Mickey Coggins
> http://www.rv8.ch/
> #82007 QB Wings/Fuselage
>
>
Message 22
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: P-static blew my VM1000, autopilot and trim indicator |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "David Carter" <dcarter@datarecall.net>
Hmmm, sounds like "VFR/scud running" to me. (grins) Dry and cold and ice
crystals are the magic ingrediant. They and the electrons don't care what
you call it, VFR, IFR, MVFR, . . .
David
----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard McCraw" <rmccraw@wcvt.com>
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: P-static blew my VM1000, autopilot and trim
indicator
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Richard McCraw"
<rmccraw@wcvt.com>
>
> Hmm -- so flying through light snow, light enough that conditions are
still
> VFR, couldn't trigger the same problems?
>
> Rick
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of David
> Carter
> To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: P-static blew my VM1000, autopilot and
trim
> indicator
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "David Carter"
> <dcarter@datarecall.net>
>
> No need to worry for VFR.
>
> David
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mickey Coggins" <mick-matronics@rv8.ch>; ;
> To: <aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: P-static blew my VM1000, autopilot and
trim
> indicator
>
>
> > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Mickey Coggins
> <mick-matronics@rv8.ch> trim indicator
> >
> > Quick question - for us VFR only slackers, do we need to worry
> > about precipitation static or any other type of static?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Mickey
> >
> >
> > --
> > Mickey Coggins
> > http://www.rv8.ch/
> > #82007 QB Wings/Fuselage
> >
> >
>
>
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: | P-static blew my VM1000, autopilot and trim indicator |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Ron Koyich" <Ron@Koyich.com>
Re: >>No need to worry for VFR.
David<<
Well, yes, and no - flying in VFR conditions - 1000 and 3 with cold,
dry, snow can produce static of the same sort.
If, by VFR, you're referring to being completely clear of cloud and snow
- no particular need to worry.
The potential for P-Static problems in composite aircraft was raised
early on in their genesis - and, silly me assumed, the problems had
been dealt with somehow.
Seems not.
Ron
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: Starter guard ID |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Richard Riley <richard@riley.net>
At 11:51 AM 9/7/04, you wrote:
> If you're referring to the deep bezel that screws to the
> mounting bushing of the pushbutton, see lower left corner
> of last page of:
>
> http://www.hmcs.com.cn/Grayhill/Series_30_button.pdf
That's the one. Any idea how I can get to page D-31 of that catalog to see
the dimensions? I want to know how big to make the cup, so my finger will
fit in it. I know, I can just measure my finger, but I figure if there's a
standard I might as well find out what it is.
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! --
|