Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 06:14 AM - electric fuel valve (Brian Lloyd)
2. 06:58 AM - Inrange check/downwind check etc. (Fergus Kyle)
3. 10:34 AM - EMags (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
4. 02:44 PM - Airworthiness Directives ()
5. 03:20 PM - Re: Airworthiness Directives (Mickey Coggins)
6. 04:29 PM - Re: Airworthiness Directives (Joel Harding)
7. 06:43 PM - Re: electric fuel valve (Charlie England)
8. 07:01 PM - Re: Airworthiness Directives (cgalley)
9. 07:27 PM - Re: Airworthiness Directives (Bobby Hester)
10. 09:07 PM - Re: Inrange check/downwind check etc. (Brian Lloyd)
11. 09:26 PM - Re: EMags (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
12. 09:30 PM - Re: Re: Crimpers - lead rod for testing (Guy Buchanan)
13. 09:31 PM - Advance release of new Rev 11 Z-figure. (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
14. 10:43 PM - Re: Re: Bendix King Skyforce IIIC GPS battery (kurt schrader)
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: | electric fuel valve |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brianl@lloyd.com>
On Oct 23, 2004, at 6:58 PM, Rick Girard wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Rick Girard
> <fly.ez@verizon.net>
>
> The RV (the kind that roll not the kind that fly) industry has
> electrically operated fuel valves. Here are two from JC Whitney:
>
> http://www.jcwhitney.com/autoparts/ProductDisplay/s-10101/p-1103/c
> -10107
Thanks. Interesting but I was looking for a two-port on/off type valve.
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl@lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
Antoine de Saint-Exupry
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: | Inrange check/downwind check etc. |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Fergus Kyle" <VE3LVO@rac.ca>
Brian,
Quite right. I realise there are several versions of the 'universal
catch-all' type of check, but recently have run into instructors so hung up
on Cessnas that any other check is 'illegal', even when errors are pointed
out. So I reverted to nostalgia.
As Senior Course, we cadets patrolled the barracks at Lights Out,
and 30 minutes later. I strolled quietly thriugh a Junior ward when the
floorboard creaked. The nearest tad sat up, eyes wide open, and sang,
"Harness, Hood, Hydraulics, Trim, Tension, Temps, Mixture, Pitch, Fuel,
Flaps, Gills, Gyros, Switches!" and promptly lay down again. No one else
stirred.
Ferg
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 |
|
0.00 FORGED_RCVD_HELO Received: contains a forged HELO
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 10:13 PM 10/23/2004 -0500, you wrote:
Looked at them but no experience. Do you have any ideas about the quality,
design, etc. Are you suggesting using one of them with the Lasar system or
two of them.
Since they're bolt on replacements for mags, how about
running one mag and one EMag? Once you have a track record
on the EMag, run the mag until it craps and replace it with
an EMag too.
If using two, I read it to say they generate enough power to
run the airplane and the alt becomes the backup at xxx rpm.
No, built in power is for electronics in the ignition.
How can they be getting enough power out of the PM generators to
power the rest of the panel?
They don't. Internally generated power is for ignition only.
Is the failure mode on these just to revert to normal mag function?
No, these always operated in the electronic mode. If you
use the self powered versions, they generate enough power
to function while the engine is running . . . NOT enough
provide ignition for STARTING an engine.
Above all else I was looking for a safe reliable system with a failure mode
that would still leave me flying. My engine is a month or two off so I
could still switch and I like the system but wonder about it's "newness".
You opinion would be appreciated.
I've talked with these folks at length. I plan to visit
their facility next spring. Based on what I know of
them right now, I would have no problem replacing one
mag with them right now . . . and I'm confident that by
the time I need to replace the mag, there will be enough
of a field history on them to justify using a pair
of EMags.
Going the EMag route lets you completely separate engine
ignition issues from the rest of your system design. EMags
are the elegant companions to a Figure Z-13 airplane. There's
no way I'd put a Lasar system on an OBAM aircraft. The value
is just not there.
Electro-Air and Lightspeed systems offer much more value
than Lasar but they are multiple boxes, extra wiring,
external timing sensors, etc. The EMag is, except for
power and manifold pressure connections, a drop-in
replacement for a magneto . . . further, the price
is about the same as for a magneto. These are about
the greatest thing since sliced bread.
Bob . . .
---
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 |
|
<kisbuilders@angus.mystery.com>
| Subject: | Airworthiness Directives |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: <bakerocb@cox.net>
10/24/2004
Hello Fellow Builders, The issue of whether or not Airworthiness Directives apply
to amateur built experimental aircraft came up again recently. Kent Pyle sent
me a copy of a memorandum written by some FAA legal type in the New England
Region that said ADs most certainly did apply to type certificated engines and
propellers installed on amateur built aircraft.
I sent a copy of that memo to my contact at the EAA and got the following response.
OC, Charlie passed your letter over to me for a response. Thank you for the copy of the New England Region Acting Counsel statement, you never know what surprises you may get from a government office. However, in this case EAA is aware of this statement and it is our understanding that the statement was officially withdrawn. I will follow up again to verify that this memorandum was officially withdrawn. In discussion with the FAA Chief Council last year he agreed that EAA's interpretations of the applicability of AD's is correct and that the referenced memorandum would be withdrawn. (The EAA position statement is on the members only web site under advocacy http://members.eaa.org/home/govt/issues/airworthy.asp)
As further evidence that AD's do not apply the FAA published an AD applicability
chart with the release of the Sport Pilot Light Sport Aircraft rule which clearly
states AD's do not apply to amateur-built
aircraft, see attached file. I will follow up though to make sure the FAA did withdraw
the memorandum. Earl
I made an extract of the applicability chart that Earl referred to and if anyone
would like a copy of that extract just email me direct and I will sent you a
copy attached to an email. Attachments will not go through the list system.
OC
PS: If we dont guard our freedoms the bureaucratic weenies will surely take them
away one by one.
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: Airworthiness Directives |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics@rv8.ch>
> PS: If we dont guard our freedoms the bureaucratic weenies will surely take them
away one by one.
I couldn't agree more.
--
Mickey Coggins
http://www.rv8.ch/
#82007 QB Wings/Fuselage
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: | Re: Airworthiness Directives |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Joel Harding <cajole76@ispwest.com>
OC, please send me a copy of the chart. When I had my inspection done
a few weeks ago the guy said that if my engine had been certified
instead of experimental, because of the high compression pistons, that
the AD"s would have applied. It looks like he was wrong.
Thanks,
Joel Harding
On Oct 24, 2004, at 3:40 PM, <bakerocb@cox.net> wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: <bakerocb@cox.net>
>
> 10/24/2004
>
> Hello Fellow Builders, The issue of whether or not Airworthiness
> Directives apply to amateur built experimental aircraft came up again
> recently. Kent Pyle sent me a copy of a memorandum written by some FAA
> legal type in the New England Region that said ADs most certainly did
> apply to type certificated engines and propellers installed on amateur
> built aircraft.
>
> I sent a copy of that memo to my contact at the EAA and got the
> following response.
>
> OC, Charlie passed your letter over to me for a response. Thank you
> for the copy of the New England Region Acting Counsel statement, you
> never know what surprises you may get from a government office.
> However, in this case EAA is aware of this statement and it is our
> understanding that the statement was officially withdrawn. I will
> follow up again to verify that this memorandum was officially
> withdrawn. In discussion with the FAA Chief Council last year he
> agreed that EAA's interpretations of the applicability of AD's is
> correct and that the referenced memorandum would be withdrawn. (The
> EAA position statement is on the members only web site under advocacy
> http://members.eaa.org/home/govt/issues/airworthy.asp)
> As further evidence that AD's do not apply the FAA published an AD
> applicability chart with the release of the Sport Pilot Light Sport
> Aircraft rule which clearly states AD's do not apply to amateur-built
> aircraft, see attached file. I will follow up though to make sure the
> FAA did withdraw the memorandum. Earl
>
> I made an extract of the applicability chart that Earl referred to and
> if anyone would like a copy of that extract just email me direct and I
> will sent you a copy attached to an email. Attachments will not go
> through the list system.
>
> OC
>
> PS: If we dont guard our freedoms the bureaucratic weenies will surely
> take them away one by one.
>
>
> _-
> =======================================================================
> _-
> =======================================================================
> _-
> =======================================================================
> _-
> =======================================================================
> >
>
>
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: electric fuel valve |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Charlie England <ceengland@bellsouth.net>
Brian Lloyd wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brianl@lloyd.com>
>
>
>On Oct 23, 2004, at 6:58 PM, Rick Girard wrote:
>
>
>
>>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Rick Girard
>><fly.ez@verizon.net>
>>
>>The RV (the kind that roll not the kind that fly) industry has
>>electrically operated fuel valves. Here are two from JC Whitney:
>>
>>http://www.jcwhitney.com/autoparts/ProductDisplay/s-10101/p-1103/c
>>-10107
>>
>>
>
>Thanks. Interesting but I was looking for a two-port on/off type valve.
>
>Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
>brianl@lloyd.com Suite 201
>+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
>
There's always the option to cap the 3rd port, but what does it weigh?
Also, I believe that an award winning plane went down a few years ago &
the crash was attributed to the failure of an electrically actuated fuel
valve. I wouldn't write off using one based on one failure, but I would
like to know more about why it failed.
I'm considering fuel injection that requires a return line. Does anyone
know how difficult it would be to remove the motor & actuate these
valves manually?
Charlie
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: Airworthiness Directives |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "cgalley" <cgalley@qcbc.org>
This is from the FAA
http://www.faa.gov/avr/arm/rulemaking/SportPilotRule7_19.doc page 28 You can
easily fill in the type airplane - First column is ultralights Last two are
certified. Middle yes column is factory built LSA
Airworth-iness
Directives
None
None issued against ELSA
Yes Type certificated TC/STC/PMA/TSO-approved products, if installed
None issued against amateur-built aircraft
Yes
Yes
Cy Galley
EAA Safety Programs Editor
Always looking for ideas and articles for EAA Sport Pilot
----- Original Message -----
From: "Joel Harding" <cajole76@ispwest.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Airworthiness Directives
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Joel Harding
<cajole76@ispwest.com>
>
> OC, please send me a copy of the chart. When I had my inspection done
> a few weeks ago the guy said that if my engine had been certified
> instead of experimental, because of the high compression pistons, that
> the AD"s would have applied. It looks like he was wrong.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Joel Harding
>
>
> On Oct 24, 2004, at 3:40 PM, <bakerocb@cox.net> wrote:
>
> > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: <bakerocb@cox.net>
> >
> > 10/24/2004
> >
> > Hello Fellow Builders, The issue of whether or not Airworthiness
> > Directives apply to amateur built experimental aircraft came up again
> > recently. Kent Pyle sent me a copy of a memorandum written by some FAA
> > legal type in the New England Region that said ADs most certainly did
> > apply to type certificated engines and propellers installed on amateur
> > built aircraft.
> >
> > I sent a copy of that memo to my contact at the EAA and got the
> > following response.
> >
> > OC, Charlie passed your letter over to me for a response. Thank you
> > for the copy of the New England Region Acting Counsel statement, you
> > never know what surprises you may get from a government office.
> > However, in this case EAA is aware of this statement and it is our
> > understanding that the statement was officially withdrawn. I will
> > follow up again to verify that this memorandum was officially
> > withdrawn. In discussion with the FAA Chief Council last year he
> > agreed that EAA's interpretations of the applicability of AD's is
> > correct and that the referenced memorandum would be withdrawn. (The
> > EAA position statement is on the members only web site under advocacy
> > http://members.eaa.org/home/govt/issues/airworthy.asp)
> > As further evidence that AD's do not apply the FAA published an AD
> > applicability chart with the release of the Sport Pilot Light Sport
> > Aircraft rule which clearly states AD's do not apply to amateur-built
> > aircraft, see attached file. I will follow up though to make sure the
> > FAA did withdraw the memorandum. Earl
> >
> > I made an extract of the applicability chart that Earl referred to and
> > if anyone would like a copy of that extract just email me direct and I
> > will sent you a copy attached to an email. Attachments will not go
> > through the list system.
> >
> > OC
> >
> > PS: If we dont guard our freedoms the bureaucratic weenies will surely
> > take them away one by one.
> >
> >
> > _-
> > =======================================================================
> > _-
> > =======================================================================
> > _-
> > =======================================================================
> > _-
> > =======================================================================
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
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: Airworthiness Directives |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Bobby Hester <bhester@hopkinsville.net>
Joel Harding wrote:
> <>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Joel Harding
> <cajole76@ispwest.com>
>
> OC, please send me a copy of the chart. When I had my inspection done
> a few weeks ago the guy said that if my engine had been certified
> instead of experimental, because of the high compression pistons, that
> the AD"s would have applied. It looks like he was wrong.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Joel Harding
>
If your engine was certified and an AD came out on it and you did not
comply with the AD then won't that now make your engine uncertified -
experimental?
--
Surfing the Web from Hopkinsville, KY
Visit my web site at: http://www.geocities.com/hester-hoptown/RVSite/
RV7A Slowbuild wings-QB Fuse :-)
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: Inrange check/downwind check etc. |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brianl@lloyd.com>
On Oct 24, 2004, at 9:57 AM, Fergus Kyle wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Fergus Kyle" <VE3LVO@rac.ca>
>
> Brian,
> Quite right. I realise there are several versions of the
> 'universal
> catch-all' type of check, but recently have run into instructors so
> hung up
> on Cessnas that any other check is 'illegal', even when errors are
> pointed
> out. So I reverted to nostalgia.
Oh, horse hockey. I suggest that my students make up their own
checklists since we often find things that are not on the "official"
check list, mostly having to do with installed equipment and how the
student thinks about things. It doesn't matter which one you use so
long as you use one and it covers everything.
> As Senior Course, we cadets patrolled the barracks at Lights
> Out,
> and 30 minutes later. I strolled quietly thriugh a Junior ward when the
> floorboard creaked. The nearest tad sat up, eyes wide open, and sang,
> "Harness, Hood, Hydraulics, Trim, Tension, Temps, Mixture, Pitch, Fuel,
> Flaps, Gills, Gyros, Switches!" and promptly lay down again. No one
> else
> stirred.
I like that. Gills, eh? I got used to that term when flying and
instructing in the CJ6A and Yak-52.
Brian Lloyd 6501 Red Hook Plaza
brianl@lloyd.com Suite 201
+1.340.998.9447 St. Thomas, VI 00802
There is a time to laud one's country and a time to protest. A good
citizen is prepared to do either as the need arises.
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 |
|
>
0.00 LOW_PRICE BODY: Lowest Price
0.00 FORGED_RCVD_HELO Received: contains a forged HELO
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 04:31 PM 10/24/2004 -0500, you wrote:
>Thanks for the reply, I obviously didn't understand enough but no surprise.
>I am actually putting on a Lightspeed Plasma III with the continuous shower
>spark system and I feel pretty good about getting the benefits of the
>variable advance and keeping the straight mag as a backup. I understand
>that the EMag runs in normal mag mode which does not vary timing if you are
>running it alongside a normal mag which is switch adjustable to electronic
>on the ground but not in the air.
Not sure why one would want to run it in the "traditional mag mode"
with fixed timing. Hundreds if not thousands of OBAM aircraft are flying
with one fully featured, advanced timing, electronic ignition system
along side
a traditional magneto. When operating at high altitude (low manifold
pressures) the electronic ignition advances while the magneto does
not. You get most of the benefits of better fuel consumption from the
electronic ignition in spite of the fact that the magneto is firing
the same cylinders "late".
> Other that a more consistent firing mode
>and hotter longer spark, is there any other advantage if it just fires at 25
>like the other mag. I am not sure if it has to be in normal mag mode but
>the web site will lead you this way. I think I will try to call them
>Monday.
Please do that . . . and let me know what they say.
>As Klaus explained his system to me, the continuous spark system fires
>before and through the mag firing point thus increasing both the intensity
>and duration of the firing cycle. I am thinking that I will get better fuel
>and efficiency at cruise, better starting ability on the ground, and better
>ignition and reliability down low even though the advance doesn't happen
>except at nearly full power cruise at altitude.
That's what I've come to understand about both Lightspeed and
Electro-Air systems over the years. There may be some marketing hype
differences between them concerning length of spark, multi-sparks, etc.
etc.
but I suspect the benefits derived from these features are small
compared to the benefit of having a hotter, single spark that rivals
a magneto -AND- advances to compensate for low manifold pressures too
-AND- is hotter for cranking -AND- runs self powered after the engine
is running -AND- won't barf during starter motor brownout -AND-
costs about the same as a "first generation" system.
>Assuming that I run the Lightspeed P III and one mag, would your
>recommendation for dual alt versus dual battery change and would you do it
>different with a pair of E-Mags?
No, figure Z-13 is quite adequate for one magneto and one electronic
ignition irrespective of the brand of electronic ignition. E-Mag Ignitions
offers the self powered P-Mag which makes it unnecessary to add
any kind of redundancy to the electrical system. If you get a P-mag,
then you can run any electrical system architecture you like without
regard to engine operations.
>I found the Z-13 diagram, are you suggesting that I replace the one shown as
>electronic with an E-Mag and run it as a normal mag or electronic mag.
If you want a low cost, failure tolerant system to run an all-electric
panel, then Figure Z-13 should be considered. P-Mags teamed with
Figure Z-13 is a very robust architecture.
>Do you think the technology is more sound than Klaus Plasma III system, more
>reliable, or just a cleaner implementation?
Parts count is lower. Installed weight is probably lower. Prices
are comparable. Ordering a P-Mag first crack out of the box eliminates
any concerns for electrical system faults affecting engine operation.
Note further that the E-Mag/P-Mag series of products are advertised
to gracefully recover from starter-motor, brown-out.
Last, I'm hearing from several builders about power transistors in
Lightspeed's system that bridge a mechanical gap between an etched
circuit board and the housing. Vibration has been known to break transistor
leads and fail the system. I have two builders who have re-mounted
transistors in their Lightspeed boxes to work around failures they've
experienced.
I think the E-Mag/P-Mag series devices are an excellent value
if they live up to their claim as true "second generation"
electronic ignition systems for OBAM aircraft. If it were my
airplane, I'd have to figure out a good reason for NOT installing
E-Mag Ignition's products before opting out to a "first generation"
product.
>Again, your counsel is greatly appreciated.
My pleasure sir.
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: Crimpers - lead rod for testing |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Guy Buchanan <bnn@nethere.com>
Thanks Keith.
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: | Advance release of new Rev 11 Z-figure. |
0.00 FORGED_RCVD_HELO Received: contains a forged HELO
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
I have a builder who wants to use the SD-20 as the vacuum pump driven
alternator in a single battery airplane. Figure Z-12 is the contemporary
approach for an airplane already flying . . . Z-12 mirrors the STC'ed
installation on many single-engine ariplanes.
Figure Z-10 was crafted to support the main-bus/e-bus architecture
of Z-13 and other published drawings. One may download this drawing
for review at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Appendix_Z_Drawings/z10A.pdf
The AutoCAD version is posted there also at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Appendix_Z_Drawings/z10A.dwg
Bob . . .
--------------------------------------------------------
< Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition >
< of man. Advances which permit this norm to be >
< exceeded -- here and there, now and then -- are the >
< work of an extremely small minority, frequently >
< despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed >
< by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny >
< minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes >
< happens) is driven out of a society, the people >
< then slip back into abject poverty. >
< >
< This is known as "bad luck". >
< -Lazarus Long- >
<------------------------------------------------------>
---
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: RE: Bendix King Skyforce IIIC GPS battery |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: kurt schrader <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
Hi Folks,
My name is Kurt Schrader. I have a KitFox 5 that I
just finished building and flight testing. I am
primarily a member of the KitFox matronics list, but I
wonder if anyone here can help me with an electronics
problem.
I have a Bendix/King Skymap IIIC moving map GPS and
the internal battery went dead just before my first
cross country flight. King wants $135 and 2 weeks
just to change this battery. I went to their web site
and they have the battery changing instructions, but
you have to be a dealer to get access.
Does anyone here have experience with this GPS unit,
or access to Bendix King info to pass on about
replacing this battery?
You are supposed to change the battery every 3 years.
I would like to remove the battery and install leads
to an external battery holder, if that is feasable.
This would seem a far better solution than a $135
battery change and 2 weeks down time every 3 years.
Thanks in advance,
Kurt S.
__________________________________
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! --
|