Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:43 AM - Re: IPod connectivity (Brian Lloyd)
2. 06:50 AM - It's Just a Matter of Time... (Eric M. Jones)
3. 07:49 AM - Re: Figure Z-16 (Matt Prather)
4. 07:50 AM - Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 32 Msgs - 10/25/04 (Giffen A. Marr)
5. 08:21 AM - Re: It's Just a Matter of Time... (Mickey Coggins)
6. 09:00 AM - Re: It's Just a Matter of Time... (CFrank@edony.com)
7. 09:39 AM - Re: Figure Z-16 (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
8. 10:13 AM - Re: IPod connectivity (Werner Schneider)
9. 10:28 AM - Re: Re: Bendix King Skyforce IIIC GPS battery (kurt schrader)
10. 11:27 AM - Re: airworthiness (Eric Ruttan)
11. 01:17 PM - Re: airworthiness (cgalley)
12. 02:57 PM - Re: airworthiness (Eric Ruttan)
13. 04:28 PM - E-Mags (Frankhsmit@wmconnect.com)
14. 04:39 PM - Re: E-Mags (dsvs@comcast.net)
15. 05:05 PM - Re: E-Mags (Matt Prather)
16. 05:41 PM - Re: Figure Z-16 (Kingsley Hurst)
17. 05:43 PM - Re: E-Mags (Robert McCallum)
18. 07:21 PM - airworthiness ()
19. 07:36 PM - Re: airworthiness (cgalley)
20. 07:36 PM - Re: airworthiness (Tom Brusehaver)
21. 08:07 PM - Re: E-Mags (Gert)
22. 08:24 PM - Re: E-Mags (Boddicker)
23. 08:29 PM - Re: airworthiness (Eric Ruttan)
24. 09:37 PM - Re: E-Mags (Robert McCallum)
25. 11:04 PM - Soldering Stations (Guy Buchanan)
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: IPod connectivity |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brianl@lloyd.com>
On Oct 25, 2004, at 5:26 PM, Werner Schneider wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Werner Schneider"
> <glastar@gmx.net>
>
> It just happend, that I've got a brand new ipod. Now the big question
> where
> to get an adapter cable to wire it to my GMA 340 Audio Panel and where
> to
> get the power adapter for wiring directly to the 12V source of my ship?
> I've seen a Belkin Car Adapter but nothing for the Audio connection.
I would consider the stereo adapter docking base.
I tried both the headphone jack and the stereo output jacks into my
home stereo. To my ears the quality of the sound seemed better in the
stereo output as opposed to the headphone output. This is a fixed
level (no volume control).
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 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: | It's Just a Matter of Time... |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones@charter.net>
So the question...soon...will be: Can you really fly your airplane with
what's on your wrist?
I am a watch buff. This seems to be common among pilots. Tom Wolfe in The
Right Stuff says of test
pilots..."... the pathetic-looking civilian suits and the enormous
wristwatches. The
wristwatches had about two thousand calibrations on them and dials for
recording everything...."
I only own one decent watch, but soon I will have to buy the Casio Solar
Atomic...WWV atomic time and solar powered, under $100...barely believable.
It has
several other features of course. Each feature seems to add ten dollars to
the price. But what features! There are wristwatches that have altimeters,
GPS locations (!), thermometers, barometers, internet connections, digital
compasses, depth gauges, pulse meters, cameras, E6B's, databanks, radios,
translators, calendars, lap timers, tides, lunar phases, and oh yes, they
tell time.
Not to mention the $4,400 to $32,000 Breitling Emergency Locator
Transmitter 121.5 MHz Watch for which the FCC had to issue special
exemptions. If the rescue team discovered me with a broken back and wearing
a $32,000 Breitling wristwatch....hmmmmm. A friend bought a $3,000 Bell &
Ross Hydromax
diver's dress watch good to 11100 METERS in saltwater...oil filled you
betcha. I
blinked my eyes and squinted but it still said 11100 METERS.......jeezzz...!
Regards,
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge MA 01550-2705
Phone (508) 764-2072
Email: emjones@charter.net
.
In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice
there is.
-Yogi Berra
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: "Matt Prather" <mprather@spro.net>
Hello Kingsley,
The stock permanent magnet alternator is current limited to 20Amps,
even shorted to ground. If the wire along the path you are talking about
is big enough to handle that load, no need for protection. The real risk
to any of the wires in the system is the battery, which can source hundreds
of amps should a wire get faulted.
Regards,
Matt-
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Kingsley Hurst"
> <khurst@taroom.qld.gov.au>
>
> Bob,
>
> Regarding Figure Z-16 (for rotax) I am unable to understand why the wire
> from the capacitor to the starter contactor thru the OV disconnect relay
> does not have any protection (F.L. ?) at the capacitor end, this being
> the hot end during normal operations when the alternator is charging.
> Can you help please ?
>
> Regards
> Kingsley Hurst
> Europa Mono 281 in Oz.
>
>
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: AeroElectric-List Digest: 32 Msgs - 10/25/04 |
0.44 ITS_LEGAL BODY: Claims to be Legal
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Giffen A. Marr" <GAMarr@Charter.Net>
"Is a data plate required on an experimental engine?
The way I see things, I could build an engine entirely from parts and use
it
as an experimental engine on my experimental airplane. No data plate
included or maybe, I could make one of my own stating that the engine is
experimental.
Now, if I happened to have a "legal" name plate hanging around, it seems to
me that I could buy a bunch of new or rebuilt certified parts and use them
to
repair the engine that was missing from the nameplate.
I would then have a perfectly legal certified engine would I not?
Would I be in violation of any FAR should I do that?
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Airpark LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8502"
In response to Old Bob, If you assembled the engine from parts and attached
a "legitimate" data plate to it you would be in violation of the FAR's. See
Far 45 Subpart B and Far 43. There is a procedure for building from parts
and installation of a data plate. I believe it is covered by AC.
The FAA has a whole section that does nothing other then the investigation
of Bogus and Unapproved Parts. The are several individuals serving Federal
sentences for attempting to circumvent the regulations.
Giff Marr
LIV/20B 27%
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: It's Just a Matter of Time... |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics@rv8.ch>
I'm keeping my eye out for a PLB on a wristwatch.
>Not to mention the $4,400 to $32,000 Breitling Emergency Locator
>Transmitter 121.5 MHz Watch for which the FCC had to issue special
>exemptions. If the rescue team discovered me with a broken back and wearing
>a $32,000 Breitling wristwatch....hmmmmm. ...
--
Mickey Coggins
http://www.rv8.ch/
#82007 QB Wings/Fuselage
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: | It's Just a Matter of Time... |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: CFrank@edony.com
Yes, but can it core a apple?
-----Original Message-----
From: Eric M. Jones [mailto:emjones@charter.net]
Subject: AeroElectric-List: It's Just a Matter of Time...
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Eric M. Jones"
<emjones@charter.net>
So the question...soon...will be: Can you really fly your airplane with
what's on your wrist?
I am a watch buff. This seems to be common among pilots. Tom Wolfe in The
Right Stuff says of test
pilots..."... the pathetic-looking civilian suits and the enormous
wristwatches. The
wristwatches had about two thousand calibrations on them and dials for
recording everything...."
I only own one decent watch, but soon I will have to buy the Casio Solar
Atomic...WWV atomic time and solar powered, under $100...barely believable.
It has
several other features of course. Each feature seems to add ten dollars to
the price. But what features! There are wristwatches that have altimeters,
GPS locations (!), thermometers, barometers, internet connections, digital
compasses, depth gauges, pulse meters, cameras, E6B's, databanks, radios,
translators, calendars, lap timers, tides, lunar phases, and oh yes, they
tell time.
Not to mention the $4,400 to $32,000 Breitling Emergency Locator
Transmitter 121.5 MHz Watch for which the FCC had to issue special
exemptions. If the rescue team discovered me with a broken back and wearing
a $32,000 Breitling wristwatch....hmmmmm. A friend bought a $3,000 Bell &
Ross Hydromax
diver's dress watch good to 11100 METERS in saltwater...oil filled you
betcha. I
blinked my eyes and squinted but it still said 11100 METERS.......jeezzz...!
Regards,
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge MA 01550-2705
Phone (508) 764-2072
Email: emjones@charter.net
.
In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice
there is.
-Yogi Berra
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 08:48 AM 10/26/2004 -0600, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Matt Prather" <mprather@spro.net>
>
>Hello Kingsley,
>
>The stock permanent magnet alternator is current limited to 20Amps,
>even shorted to ground. If the wire along the path you are talking about
>is big enough to handle that load, no need for protection. The real risk
>to any of the wires in the system is the battery, which can source hundreds
>of amps should a wire get faulted.
>
>Regards,
>
>Matt-
Couldn't have said it better myself, thanks Matt.
Bob . . .
---
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: IPod connectivity |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Werner Schneider" <glastar@gmx.net>
Many thanks to all the good tips, I will dig into the two possibilities
(docking station and 3.5mm plug) and especially the boost feature Dan
described!
Thanks for that when done I will let you know!
Werner
----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Lloyd" <brianl@lloyd.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: IPod connectivity
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brianl@lloyd.com>
>
>
> On Oct 25, 2004, at 5:26 PM, Werner Schneider wrote:
>
> > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Werner Schneider"
> > <glastar@gmx.net>
> >
> > It just happend, that I've got a brand new ipod. Now the big question
> > where
> > to get an adapter cable to wire it to my GMA 340 Audio Panel and where
> > to
> > get the power adapter for wiring directly to the 12V source of my ship?
> > I've seen a Belkin Car Adapter but nothing for the Audio connection.
>
> I would consider the stereo adapter docking base.
>
> I tried both the headphone jack and the stereo output jacks into my
> home stereo. To my ears the quality of the sound seemed better in the
> stereo output as opposed to the headphone output. This is a fixed
> level (no volume control).
>
> 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 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: Bendix King Skyforce IIIC GPS battery |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: kurt schrader <smokey_bear_40220@yahoo.com>
Thanks Chuck,
This is just what I need. I am in ABQ this week, so
I'll order one when I get home and have this thing up
and running over $100 cheaper.
I appreciate all the responces,
Kurt S. KitFox S-5/NSI turbo
--- Chuck Jensen <cjensen@dts9000.com> wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Chuck
> Jensen <cjensen@dts9000.com>
>
> For all the DIYs. The disassembly is not difficult
> but as you work your way
> down through the board levels, just remove the
> screws and clips as you go.
> The battery leads are soldered directly onto the
> board. Use a solder-sucker
> to desolder the pigtail joints. Put the new battery
> pigtails in place,
> soldered it (not too many close-by components to be
> heat damaged) and
> reassemble. Plug in, turn on and allow internal
> battery to charge up.
>
> Cycle unit off/on. The database will likely be
> corrupted (it's probably a
> Political Database). If the memory is corrupted, go
> into SETUP and clear
> memory. The code to clear memory is either 3-3-3-3
> or 1-2-3-4. When the
> memory is cleared, your pin number is reset to
> 1-2-3-4. You will lose all
> your saved flight plans and/or waypoints, but that's
> not the end of the
> world!
>
> Kurt, an external battery may get disconnected, or
> not charged; each time
> resulting in loss of your memory and corrupted
> database. Replacing the
> internal battery is a once-every-5-year project and
> takes less than an
> hour...2 hours for the dexterity-challenged. Not a
> big deal.
>
> As to the battery itself, the McMaster-Carr P/N is
> 6951K999 and the
> description is "disposable lithium battery Hawker
> Entercell 3.7V TO6/8AA TCL
> with one wire pigtail each end." Price was $13.46
> with $3.45 shipping.
>
> Chuck
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: airworthiness |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Eric Ruttan" <ericruttan@chartermi.net>
> Why not ask the FAA ? Why did I have to fly 40 hrs off for my Rotax912UL
and
> an identical Zodiac with an O-200 would have to fly only 25 hrs.
> Leo Corbalis
Special Airworthiness Certificates have NO Operating limitations.
The FAA does not like this. The FAA puts operating limitations in the
Special Airworthiness certificate when it is issued, unlike all other
aircraft. When you buy a spam can you do not have the 40 hour requirement.
The guidelines for the crafting of these operating limitations specifically
mention that if the aircraft has a prop/engine combination that has a
certificate, anywhere, on any aircraft what so ever, then the Issuer may
reduce the Phase 1 to 25 hours instead of 40.
This cannot mean that the engine or prop is certificated in any way. Since
Special Airworthiness Certificates (OBAM'S are part "g" of those) are
specifically exempted or not included in the governing "certificate"
regulations.
Any part used on any Special Airworthiness Certificate aircraft is not
certificated, by definition. Note the "by definition." Those parts likely
may be returned to certificated status when the applicable requirements are
complied with.
Fun pop quiz: Does anyone know why radios in IFR have to be TSO'd, if the
regulations do not apply to OBAM's?
Eric the entertainer
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: airworthiness |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "cgalley" <cgalley@qcbc.org>
I don't believe that radios must be TSOed in non-commercial use.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Eric Ruttan" <ericruttan@chartermi.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: airworthiness
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Eric Ruttan"
<ericruttan@chartermi.net>
>
> > Why not ask the FAA ? Why did I have to fly 40 hrs off for my Rotax912UL
> and
> > an identical Zodiac with an O-200 would have to fly only 25 hrs.
> > Leo Corbalis
>
> Special Airworthiness Certificates have NO Operating limitations.
> The FAA does not like this. The FAA puts operating limitations in the
> Special Airworthiness certificate when it is issued, unlike all other
> aircraft. When you buy a spam can you do not have the 40 hour
requirement.
>
> The guidelines for the crafting of these operating limitations
specifically
> mention that if the aircraft has a prop/engine combination that has a
> certificate, anywhere, on any aircraft what so ever, then the Issuer may
> reduce the Phase 1 to 25 hours instead of 40.
>
> This cannot mean that the engine or prop is certificated in any way.
Since
> Special Airworthiness Certificates (OBAM'S are part "g" of those) are
> specifically exempted or not included in the governing "certificate"
> regulations.
>
> Any part used on any Special Airworthiness Certificate aircraft is not
> certificated, by definition. Note the "by definition." Those parts
likely
> may be returned to certificated status when the applicable requirements
are
> complied with.
>
> Fun pop quiz: Does anyone know why radios in IFR have to be TSO'd, if the
> regulations do not apply to OBAM's?
>
> Eric the entertainer
>
>
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: airworthiness |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Eric Ruttan" <ericruttan@chartermi.net>
The question was Why? Try again?
Eric the Inquisitor
----- Original Message -----
From: "cgalley"
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: airworthiness
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "cgalley"
>
> I don't believe that radios must be TSOed in non-commercial use.
> ----- Original Message -----
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: airworthiness
> > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Eric Ruttan"
> > Special Airworthiness Certificates have NO Operating limitations.
> > The FAA does not like this. The FAA puts operating limitations in the
> > Special Airworthiness certificate when it is issued, unlike all other
> > aircraft. When you buy a spam can you do not have the 40 hour
> requirement.
> >
> > The guidelines for the crafting of these operating limitations
> specifically
> > mention that if the aircraft has a prop/engine combination that has a
> > certificate, anywhere, on any aircraft what so ever, then the Issuer may
> > reduce the Phase 1 to 25 hours instead of 40.
> >
> > This cannot mean that the engine or prop is certificated in any way.
> Since
> > Special Airworthiness Certificates (OBAM'S are part "g" of those) are
> > specifically exempted or not included in the governing "certificate"
> > regulations.
> >
> > Any part used on any Special Airworthiness Certificate aircraft is not
> > certificated, by definition. Note the "by definition." Those parts
> likely
> > may be returned to certificated status when the applicable requirements
> are
> > complied with.
> >
> > Fun pop quiz: Does anyone know why radios in IFR have to be TSO'd, if
the
> > regulations do not apply to OBAM's?
> >
> > Eric the entertainer
> > > Why not ask the FAA ? Why did I have to fly 40 hrs off for my
Rotax912UL
> > and
> > > an identical Zodiac with an O-200 would have to fly only 25 hrs.
> > > Leo Corbalis
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Frankhsmit@wmconnect.com
Anything that says "Mags
3
Anything that says "Mags" be P-Mags, E Mags, or Lasar mags carries with it
problems of a mechanical device that will fail. As OBAM experimental builders we
can use electronic ignition systems such as the Electroair, or Lightspeed
systems that have a much lower failure rate, have no moving parts, are easy to
install, use automotive plugs and wires, and have great performance. These can
not be used on certified aircraft, but the.Lasar can. Maybe that is why
Unison built a unit that would revert to an ordinary mag on electronic failure
so
that they could get FAA approval. I don't think any certified aircraft come
with Lasar installed. IMO the Electroair or Lightspeed is the way to go. Good
luck to those trying the E-mag. Frank
as OBam
'
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: dsvs@comcast.net
The Emag has none of the failure modes that regular modes have. The one moving
part is a rotation shaft which is very unlikely to fail. The mag in the name
is no reason to bad mouth a product that you know nothing about. Don
-------------- Original message --------------
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Frankhsmit@wmconnect.com
>
> Anything that says "Mags
>
>
> 3
>
>
> Anything that says "Mags" be P-Mags, E Mags, or Lasar mags carries with it
> problems of a mechanical device that will fail. As OBAM experimental builders
we
> can use electronic ignition systems such as the Electroair, or Lightspeed
> systems that have a much lower failure rate, have no moving parts, are easy to
> install, use automotive plugs and wires, and have great performance. These can
> not be used on certified aircraft, but the.Lasar can. Maybe that is why
> Unison built a unit that would revert to an ordinary mag on electronic failure
> so
> that they could get FAA approval. I don't think any certified aircraft come
> with Lasar installed. IMO the Electroair or Lightspeed is the way to go. Good
> luck to those trying the E-mag. Frank
>
>
> as OBam
>
>
> '
>
>
>
>
>
>
The Emag has none of the failure modes that regular modes have. The one moving
part is a rotation shaft which is very unlikely to fail. The mag in the name is
no reason to bad mouth a product that you know nothing about. Don
-------------- Original message --------------
-- AeroElectric-List message posted by: Frankhsmit@wmconnect.com
Anything that says "Mags
3
Anything that says "Mags" be P-Mags, E Mags, or Lasar mags carries with it
problems of a mechanical device that will fail. As OBAM experimental builders
we
can use electronic ignition systems such as the Electroair, or Lightspeed
systems that have a much lower failure rate, have no moving parts, are easy to
install, use automotive plugs and wires, and have great performance. These can
not be used on certified aircraft, but the.Lasar can. Maybe that is why
Unison built a unit that would revert to an ordinary mag on electronic failure
so
that they could get FAA approval. I don't think any certifie
d aircraft come
with Lasar installed. IMO the Electroair or Lightspeed is the way to go. Good
luck to those trying the E-mag. Frank
as OBam
'
n
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Matt Prather" <mprather@spro.net>
Hi Frank,
Others will probably chime in, but E-Mag/P-Mag are not the same
as Lasar. Lasar is a conventional magneto with an electronic ignition
piggy-backed on top of it. While the electronics are working, the plugs
fire when the spark timing advance map says to. If the electronics
die, the magneto circuitry is still there firing the plugs with fixed timing.
Still a dynamo with breaker points and coils and caps and all that stuff.
The P/E-Mag are electronic ignition all the way through. No breaker
points, impulse coupling, etc. The P-Mag, to be self powered uses a
brushless alternator as its standard power source.
The E-Mag seems to use no more mechanical parts than the Electroair
system, or the LSE hall effect pickup (both of which require the magneto
drive gears as a timing reference). The P-Mag has no more wear parts,
though since it is self powered, there must be more load on the magneto
drive gears than with the E-Mag.
The P/E-Mag system allows the use of automotive plug wires and plugs.
The P/E-Mag appears to be easy to install - one low tension wire set for
the on/off control. I have an LSE system on my airplane and it required some
amount of bracket fabrication to make it work, plus quite a bit of wiring.
You might actually find it interesting to read the documentation...
Matt-
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Frankhsmit@wmconnect.com
>
> Anything that says "Mags
>
>
> 3
>
>
> Anything that says "Mags" be P-Mags, E Mags, or Lasar mags carries with
> it problems of a mechanical device that will fail. As OBAM experimental
> builders we can use electronic ignition systems such as the Electroair,
> or Lightspeed systems that have a much lower failure rate, have no
> moving parts, are easy to install, use automotive plugs and wires, and
> have great performance. These can not be used on certified aircraft,
> but the.Lasar can. Maybe that is why Unison built a unit that would
> revert to an ordinary mag on electronic failure so that they could get
> FAA approval. I don't think any certified aircraft come with Lasar
> installed. IMO the Electroair or Lightspeed is the way to go. Good
> luck to those trying the E-mag. Frank
>
>
> as OBam
>
>
> '
>
>
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Kingsley Hurst" <khurst@taroom.qld.gov.au>
Matt, Bob
> If the wire along the path you are talking about
is big enough to handle that load, no need for protection.
Thank you, I can now relax on this one !
I may have another question or two to come yet so watch this space !
Regards
Kingsley
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Robert McCallum <robert.mccallum2@sympatico.ca>
Thanks Matt;
Sounds interesting , but where exactly, would one find this documentation???
Bob McC
do not archive
Matt Prather wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Matt Prather" <mprather@spro.net>
>
>
>Hi Frank,
>
>Others will probably chime in, but E-Mag/P-Mag are not the same
>as Lasar.
>You might actually find it interesting to read the documentation...
>
>Matt-
>
>
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: <bakerocb@cox.net>
AeroElectric-List message previously posted by: "Leo J. Corbalis"
<leocorbalis@sbcglobal.net>
<<Why not ask the FAA ? Why did I have to fly 40 hrs off for my
Rotax912UL and an identical Zodiac with an O-200 would have to fly only 25 hrs.
Leo Corbalis>>
10/26/2004
Hello Leo, There is no mystery about this and no need to ask the FAA. It is standard
FAA policy which is contained in FAA Order 8130.2D AIRWORTHINESS CERTIFICATION
OF AIRCRAFT AND RELATED PRODUCTS.
Here is an extract from that order in the section dealing with amateur built experimental
aircraft. You can find the entire order on the FAA web site.
QUOTE NOTE: FAA requires a minimum of 25 hours of flight testing for an aircraft
with a type
certificated engine and propeller installed or a minimum of 40 hours for a non-type
certificate engine and/or propeller. Inspectors may assign longer test hours when
it is
determined necessary to determine compliance with 91.319(b). UNQUOTE
OC
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: airworthiness |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "cgalley" <cgalley@qcbc.org>
If they don't have to be TSOed, then there is no reason for WHY!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Eric Ruttan" <ericruttan@chartermi.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: airworthiness
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Eric Ruttan"
<ericruttan@chartermi.net>
>
> The question was Why? Try again?
>
> Eric the Inquisitor
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "cgalley"
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: airworthiness
> > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "cgalley"
> >
> > I don't believe that radios must be TSOed in non-commercial use.
>
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: airworthiness
> > > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Eric Ruttan"
> > > Special Airworthiness Certificates have NO Operating limitations.
> > > The FAA does not like this. The FAA puts operating limitations in the
> > > Special Airworthiness certificate when it is issued, unlike all other
> > > aircraft. When you buy a spam can you do not have the 40 hour
> > requirement.
> > >
> > > The guidelines for the crafting of these operating limitations
> > specifically
> > > mention that if the aircraft has a prop/engine combination that has a
> > > certificate, anywhere, on any aircraft what so ever, then the Issuer
may
> > > reduce the Phase 1 to 25 hours instead of 40.
> > >
> > > This cannot mean that the engine or prop is certificated in any way.
> > Since
> > > Special Airworthiness Certificates (OBAM'S are part "g" of those) are
> > > specifically exempted or not included in the governing "certificate"
> > > regulations.
> > >
> > > Any part used on any Special Airworthiness Certificate aircraft is not
> > > certificated, by definition. Note the "by definition." Those parts
> > likely
> > > may be returned to certificated status when the applicable
requirements
> > are
> > > complied with.
> > >
> > > Fun pop quiz: Does anyone know why radios in IFR have to be TSO'd, if
> the
> > > regulations do not apply to OBAM's?
> > >
> > > Eric the entertainer
>
> > > > Why not ask the FAA ? Why did I have to fly 40 hrs off for my
> Rotax912UL
> > > and
> > > > an identical Zodiac with an O-200 would have to fly only 25 hrs.
> > > > Leo Corbalis
>
>
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: airworthiness |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Tom Brusehaver <cozytom@mn.rr.com>
A long time ago, I looked all through the FARs. The only
place I found that said anything about TSO is when talking
about transponders and ELTs.
On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 15:16:51 -0500, cgalley <cgalley@qcbc.org> wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "cgalley" <cgalley@qcbc.org>
>
> I don't believe that radios must be TSOed in non-commercial use.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Eric Ruttan" <ericruttan@chartermi.net>
> To: <aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: airworthiness
>
>
>> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Eric Ruttan"
> <ericruttan@chartermi.net>
>>
>> > Why not ask the FAA ? Why did I have to fly 40 hrs off for my
>> Rotax912UL
>> and
>> > an identical Zodiac with an O-200 would have to fly only 25 hrs.
>> > Leo Corbalis
>>
>> Special Airworthiness Certificates have NO Operating limitations.
>> The FAA does not like this. The FAA puts operating limitations in the
>> Special Airworthiness certificate when it is issued, unlike all other
>> aircraft. When you buy a spam can you do not have the 40 hour
> requirement.
>>
>> The guidelines for the crafting of these operating limitations
> specifically
>> mention that if the aircraft has a prop/engine combination that has a
>> certificate, anywhere, on any aircraft what so ever, then the Issuer may
>> reduce the Phase 1 to 25 hours instead of 40.
>>
>> This cannot mean that the engine or prop is certificated in any way.
> Since
>> Special Airworthiness Certificates (OBAM'S are part "g" of those) are
>> specifically exempted or not included in the governing "certificate"
>> regulations.
>>
>> Any part used on any Special Airworthiness Certificate aircraft is not
>> certificated, by definition. Note the "by definition." Those parts
> likely
>> may be returned to certificated status when the applicable requirements
> are
>> complied with.
>>
>> Fun pop quiz: Does anyone know why radios in IFR have to be TSO'd, if
>> the
>> regulations do not apply to OBAM's?
>>
>> Eric the entertainer
>>
>>
>
>
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Gert <gert.v@sbcglobal.net>
Hmmm I know several people with lightspeeds and they carry a spare
ignition coil and/or a spare coax cable.........
Frankhsmit@wmconnect.com wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Frankhsmit@wmconnect.com
>
> Anything that says "Mags
>
>
> 3
>
>
> Anything that says "Mags" be P-Mags, E Mags, or Lasar mags carries with it
> problems of a mechanical device that will fail. As OBAM experimental builders
we
> can use electronic ignition systems such as the Electroair, or Lightspeed
> systems that have a much lower failure rate, have no moving parts, are easy to
> install, use automotive plugs and wires, and have great performance. These can
> not be used on certified aircraft, but the.Lasar can. Maybe that is why
> Unison built a unit that would revert to an ordinary mag on electronic failure
so
> that they could get FAA approval. I don't think any certified aircraft come
> with Lasar installed. IMO the Electroair or Lightspeed is the way to go. Good
> luck to those trying the E-mag. Frank
>
>
> as OBam
>
>
> '
>
>
>
>
>
>
--
is subject to a download and archival fee in the amount of $500
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Boddicker <trumanst@netins.net>
This is their e mail info@emagair.com
I would guess that www.emagair.com is their web site
Kevin
on 10/26/04 7:42 PM, Robert McCallum at robert.mccallum2@sympatico.ca wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Robert McCallum
> <robert.mccallum2@sympatico.ca>
>
>
> Thanks Matt;
> Sounds interesting , but where exactly, would one find this documentation???
>
> Bob McC
> do not archive
>
> Matt Prather wrote:
>
>> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Matt Prather" <mprather@spro.net>
>>
>>
>> Hi Frank,
>>
>> Others will probably chime in, but E-Mag/P-Mag are not the same
>> as Lasar.
>> You might actually find it interesting to read the documentation...
>>
>> Matt-
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: airworthiness |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Eric Ruttan" <ericruttan@chartermi.net>
How about a nice game of Chess.
You say it is not.
I say it is.
Your move. What will it be?
If you don't know why something is so, then you don't know something is so.
Eric the Philosopher
>
> If they don't have to be TSOed, then there is no reason for WHY!
> >
> > The question was Why? Try again?
> > Eric the Inquisitor
> > >
> > > I don't believe that radios must be TSOed in non-commercial use.
> >
> > > > Special Airworthiness Certificates have NO Operating limitations.
> > > > The FAA does not like this. The FAA puts operating limitations in
the
> > > > Special Airworthiness certificate when it is issued, unlike all
other
> > > > aircraft. When you buy a spam can you do not have the 40 hour
> > > requirement.
> > > >
> > > > The guidelines for the crafting of these operating limitations
> > > specifically
> > > > mention that if the aircraft has a prop/engine combination that has
a
> > > > certificate, anywhere, on any aircraft what so ever, then the Issuer
> may
> > > > reduce the Phase 1 to 25 hours instead of 40.
> > > >
> > > > This cannot mean that the engine or prop is certificated in any way.
> > > Since
> > > > Special Airworthiness Certificates (OBAM'S are part "g" of those)
are
> > > > specifically exempted or not included in the governing "certificate"
> > > > regulations.
> > > >
> > > > Any part used on any Special Airworthiness Certificate aircraft is
not
> > > > certificated, by definition. Note the "by definition." Those parts
> > > likely
> > > > may be returned to certificated status when the applicable
> requirements
> > > are
> > > > complied with.
> > > >
> > > > Fun pop quiz: Does anyone know why radios in IFR have to be TSO'd,
if
> > the
> > > > regulations do not apply to OBAM's?
> > > >
> > > > Eric the entertainer
> >
> > > > > Why not ask the FAA ? Why did I have to fly 40 hrs off for my
> > Rotax912UL
> > > > and
> > > > > an identical Zodiac with an O-200 would have to fly only 25 hrs.
> > > > > Leo Corbalis
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Robert McCallum <robert.mccallum2@sympatico.ca>
Thanks for the link. Looks even more interesting now.
Bob McC
do not archive
Boddicker wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Boddicker <trumanst@netins.net>
>
>This is their e mail info@emagair.com
>I would guess that www.emagair.com is their web site
>Kevin
>
>
>
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: | Soldering Stations |
0.00 FORGED_RCVD_HELO Received: contains a forged HELO
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Guy Buchanan <bnn@nethere.com>
Bob,
I'm returning a Weller digital soldering station that was broken
out of the box and though I'd better do the smart thing and stick with your
Metcal recommendation. There are a couple of SP 200's for sale on Ebay
right now. Unfortunately, I'm unable to determine, from the information
available on the Metcal site, if the 200 or the 800 is the right iron for
sticking wires and connectors. Metcal seems to deal only in board level
soldering. Would you be so kind as to offer a model recommendation for
Metcal for someone that needs to assemble his Kitfox and do other
"recreational" soldering. (And one who hates to "buy twice".)
Thanks,
Guy Buchanan
K-IV 1200 / 582 / 99% done, thanks to Bob Ducar.
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! --
|