Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 10:35 AM - Re: ELT Access (Glaeser, Dennis A)
2. 11:25 AM - Re: Stall Horn (Olivier Le Carbonnier)
3. 12:01 PM - Re: Stall Horn (Bristolsabre@aol.com)
4. 12:19 PM - Re: Stall Horn (Matt Prather)
5. 12:39 PM - Re: Another bad story (Johnny Johnson)
6. 02:35 PM - Low Voltage Warning Light (Charlie)
7. 02:36 PM - Re: Re: Garmin GPS antenna (DWENSING@aol.com)
8. 02:43 PM - Re: Re: Garmin GPS antenna (Harley)
9. 03:36 PM - Re: Low Voltage Warning Light (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
10. 03:37 PM - Re: Re: ELT Access (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
11. 03:47 PM - Re: Ammeter/Loadmeter (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
12. 03:52 PM - Re: Ammeter/Loadmeter (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
13. 06:34 PM - Grounding (Kingsley Hurst)
14. 08:44 PM - Re: ELT ()
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Glaeser, Dennis A" <dennis.glaeser@eds.com>
A review of FARs 91.205 (Equipment requirements) and 91.207 (ELTs) shows no
requirement for pilot access or control of an ELT. The documents you
mention are, I believe, performance specifications, not regulations.
Dennis Glaeser
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: <bakerocb@cox.net
<mailto:bakerocb@cox.net?subject=Re:%20ELT%20Access&replyto=200411090251.iA9
2pBJ21359@matronics.com> > 11/08/2004 -------------------
Hello Bob Nuckolls and Other Electricals,
I am trying to nail down the regulatory requirement for pilot access to and
control of ELTs from the cockpit while airborne. The ELT TSO-C91a does not
contain the requirement itself, but I have been told that the requirement
can be found in one of these two RTCA documents which are referenced by the
TSO. DO-183, Minimum Operational Performance Standards for Emergency Locator
Transmitters-Automatic Fixed-ELT (AF), Automatic Portable-ELT (AP),
Automatic Deployable-ELT (AD), Survival-ELT (S) Operating on 121.5 and 243.0
Megahertz DO-182, Emergency Locator Transmitter (ELT) Equipment Installation
and Performance. Unfortunately these two documents from the RTCA cost
money. Would anyone have access to these documents and be willing to help me
locate the specific access requirement (if it exists)?
Many thanks.
OC
----------------------------------------------
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Olivier Le Carbonnier" <olcdlm@laposte.net>
why not a AOA ?
Olivier LC
France
ICQ#: 82067330
sanglier@laposte.net
http://sangliervolant.chez.tiscali.fr Van's RV-8 n81939 wings
-----Message d'origine-----
De : owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]De la part de
czechsix@juno.com
Envoy : lundi 8 novembre 2004 19:34
: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com; rv-list@matronics.com
Objet : AeroElectric-List: Stall Horn
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "czechsix@juno.com"
<czechsix@juno.com>
Guys,
Does anyone know of a source for a cheap stall warning horn similar in sound
to what's used on spam cans? I made my own spam-style stall vane/tab that
I'm putting in the LE of the wing. I bought a piezo alarm from Digikey for
something like $1 but it sounds like a fire alarm....it's a bit more shrill
and shocking than I want. Aircraft Spruce sells a Safe Flight stall horn
with light for $740.00. You read that right...$740! That doesn't include
the vane. So anyway, if somebody knows of a non-aircraft source for such a
beastie please let me know...
Thanks,
--Mark Navratil
Cedar Rapids, Iowa
RV-8A N2D wiring...
Sign up for Juno Today at http://www.juno.com!
Look for special offers at Best Buy stores.
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: Bristolsabre@aol.com
My thought too,
but thath was not what the question was.
Also if $740 is a lot of money, $800+ is more
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Matt Prather" <mprather@spro.net>
Not cheap... I have seen them start at $600.
MAP
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Olivier Le Carbonnier"
> <olcdlm@laposte.net>
>
> why not a AOA ?
>
> Olivier LC
> France
> ICQ#: 82067330
> sanglier@laposte.net
> http://sangliervolant.chez.tiscali.fr Van's RV-8 n81939 wings
>
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]De la part de
> czechsix@juno.com
> Envoy : lundi 8 novembre 2004 19:34
> : aeroelectric-list@matronics.com; rv-list@matronics.com
> Objet : AeroElectric-List: Stall Horn
>
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "czechsix@juno.com"
> <czechsix@juno.com>
>
>
> Guys,
>
> Does anyone know of a source for a cheap stall warning horn similar in
> sound to what's used on spam cans? I made my own spam-style stall
> vane/tab that I'm putting in the LE of the wing. I bought a piezo alarm
> from Digikey for something like $1 but it sounds like a fire
> alarm....it's a bit more shrill and shocking than I want. Aircraft
> Spruce sells a Safe Flight stall horn with light for $740.00. You read
> that right...$740! That doesn't include the vane. So anyway, if
> somebody knows of a non-aircraft source for such a beastie please let me
> know...
>
> Thanks,
>
> --Mark Navratil
> Cedar Rapids, Iowa
> RV-8A N2D wiring...
>
> Sign up for Juno Today at http://www.juno.com!
> Look for special offers at Best Buy stores.
>
>
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: Another bad story |
0.09 YOU_WON BODY: Who really wins?
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Johnny Johnson" <Johnny@wiktel.com>
Hi Brian,
I wasnt trying to pick a fight here, but you got my hackles up a bit so I
ll respond. You say we should keep the discourse public--fine for now to
the rest of you, my apologies.
My point--that I apparently didnt make very well--was simply that deriding
someone in public does no good, and in fact will discourage others from
contributing. That our victim didnt format it in a way that pleased you is
unfortunate, but please give us credit for being smart enough to get the
message. You make several excellent points about the situation, but I
humbly submit, sir, that you are not the only one in this old world with
discernment or insight. IMHO it simply was not necessary to drag this guy
thru the brambles in public--it should have been done privately, if at all.
You have a different God than I do if you believe that He might not be
there that day that preparation beats prayer all hollow that the fates
conspire but thats your right. Ive been shot at--have you? I KNOW that
Im here because of the intervention--on more than one occasion--by Someone
larger than myself, not because of making the right decisions, not because
of luck or beating the odds or having great skill. You can rationalize it
any way you want, lecture me all you want, but you wont change my mind. If
you could have been in the cockpit with me, I think you would look at things
a little differently today--twas single seat or I would have invited you
along :=)
Ive been pretty blunt, on purpose. Please understand that none of this is
intended to be a personal attack on your knowledge or integrity or any of
that good stuff. We disagree on style and apparently on core beliefs Im
simply calling it like I see it, without fluff. I trust it will be taken in
that spirit.
Regards,
Johnny Johnson
Johnny@wiktel.com <mailto:Johnny@wiktel.com>
Time: 07:09:58 AM PST US
From: Brian Lloyd <brianl@lloyd.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: RE:Another bad story
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brianl@lloyd.com>
On Nov 7, 2004, at 12:29 PM, Johnny Johnson wrote:
I am probably beating the dead horse but since I started this, I feel I
should reply.
> Sure, the whole incident could have been avoided... the guy said so.
> Sure
> it was stupid... the guy said so. He thinks prayer helps... so do I...
Preparation beats prayer all hollow. One needs to learn and prepare to
deal with the daily mundane problems and leave to God those times when
the fates conspire to kill you regardless of having done all the right
stuff.
Or another way of looking at it, I *KNOW* that *I* will be in the
cockpit. God might not be my copilot that day.
> if
> you don't, that's your right but please leave it at that. So...
> where's the
> beef?
The beef is simple. When you decide to become a pilot you take
responsibility for the safe operation of your airplane to avoid harm to
yourself and others. More than any other endeavor flying requires you
to make the right decisions. There is no one else there to help you
and no one else to blame. The gentleman's problems were basic and
avoidable, problems that, if I thought one of my students couldn't
handle, I would not let him or her fly in the pattern, let alone go on
a solo cross country. They were all something that I am fairly certain
that he was taught how to deal with when learning to fly. He avoided
common sense.
And, lastly, his stupidity will eventually affect the rest of us by
becoming an accident statistic. That will prompt the insurance
companies to affect us all in the pocket book or, worst case, it will
give the FAA non-flying bureaucrats another nail for the general
aviation coffin.
That, in a nutshell, is my beef.
> C'mon people, all that this drivel accomplishes is to discourage the
> next
> guy from contributing something that may be very helpful. Who among us
> wants to take this sort of balderdash for making a
> confession/comment/whatever that is offered with the sole intention of
> being
> helpful?
What he said wasn't helpful. He didn't offer any sort of mechanism for
recovery. He did not identify a problem for others to avoid besides,
"do what you were taught, believe your instruments, and don't be
stupid." Well, boy howdy, how helpful was that?
> Before starting or perpetuating a negative thread like this,
> please ask yourself what it will accomplish.
Hopefully it will accomplish to scare someone like that from flying
again until they can come up to speed learning to handle their
airplane. It wasn't a mistake, it wasn't a surprise, it wasn't a
combination of things that demonstrated a chain of events that would
lead to an unusual result; it was just plain old stupidity. Sometimes
you have to give someone a dope-slap on the side of the head to get
their attention.
> Flame away... I'm too old to give a rip :=))
Too bad. We need more people who give a rip.
> Please don't clobber the list
> with fire, let's let this thread die... shoot direct at me:
> Johnny@wiktel.com
Well, you made the point in a public forum and the public forum is
where you talk it out. Unfortunately you don't get to have the last
word that way. ;-)
> Johnny Johnson
> Been flying since '62...
> Done lotza stupid things...
> And... God has been there lotza times
> Else... why am I still here?
Perhaps you are here because, ultimately, you made the right decisions
when they were needed.
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 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: | Low Voltage Warning Light |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Charlie <charleyb@earthlink.net>
Bob,
Is there a simple schematic for a low voltage warning light for an
All-Electric on a Budget system with an externally regulated alternator
and a generic (Ford?) voltage regulator? Can't find one in the
Connection or on your site, or at least haven't recoginized it.
Charlie Brame
RV-6A N11CB
San Antonio
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: Garmin GPS antenna |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: DWENSING@aol.com
In a message dated 11/3/04 8:02:31 AM Eastern Standard Time,
harley@AgelessWings.com writes:
Harley,
Thanks again for the info. The new antenna from gpsgeek works great! And it
sure beats the price of the Garmin.
Dale Ensing
> First, it's not just an antenna...it's also an amplifier of sorts. But,
> if it really is faulty, it may be a better choice to get one of these
> units instead of Garmin...I think you'll find they are basically the
> same thing.
>
> http://www.gpsgeek.com/page3.html
>
>
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: Garmin GPS antenna |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Harley <harley@agelesswings.com>
Evenin', Dale...
You're welcome! Glad it worked for you...
Now that you've tested it, I know what to do if I ever run into that
problem! <G>
H.
DWENSING@aol.com wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: DWENSING@aol.com
>
>In a message dated 11/3/04 8:02:31 AM Eastern Standard Time,
>harley@AgelessWings.com writes:
>
>Harley,
>Thanks again for the info. The new antenna from gpsgeek works great! And it
>sure beats the price of the Garmin.
>Dale Ensing
>
>
>
>>First, it's not just an antenna...it's also an amplifier of sorts. But,
>>if it really is faulty, it may be a better choice to get one of these
>>units instead of Garmin...I think you'll find they are basically the
>>same thing.
>>
>>http://www.gpsgeek.com/page3.html
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
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: Low Voltage Warning Light |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 04:33 PM 11/9/2004 -0600, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Charlie <charleyb@earthlink.net>
>
>Bob,
>
>Is there a simple schematic for a low voltage warning light for an
>All-Electric on a Budget system with an externally regulated alternator
>and a generic (Ford?) voltage regulator? Can't find one in the
>Connection or on your site, or at least haven't recoginized it.
Sure. See:
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/lvwarn/LVWarn-ABMM.html
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/lvwarn/9021-620.pdf
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: RE: ELT Access |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 01:33 PM 11/9/2004 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Glaeser, Dennis A"
><dennis.glaeser@eds.com>
>
>A review of FARs 91.205 (Equipment requirements) and 91.207 (ELTs) shows no
>requirement for pilot access or control of an ELT. The documents you
>mention are, I believe, performance specifications, not regulations.
>
> Dennis Glaeser
Thank you sir, I was going to say the same thing but didn't
get to it before you did.
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: Ammeter/Loadmeter |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 04:54 PM 11/8/2004 -0700, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Matt Prather" <mprather@spro.net>
>
>
>My appendix doesn't have a Figure Z-10... Where in the circuit does
>Z-10 have the loadmeter shunt located?
Z-10 (and all latest z-figures are always available at
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Appendix_Z_Drawings
in both ACAD .dwg format and .pdf Adobe format.
Figure Z-10, as do all 'Connection Z-figures, suggests
loadmeters because they're friendly to the recommended
architectures that avoid bringing the alternator b-lead
into the cockpit.
>Is it between the battery and the
>rest of the system (doubt that). Bob likes the architecture where the
>alternator B lead (power output) is wired to a shunt, and then directly to
>the
>battery side of the starter contactor. This allows the somewhat noisy
>alternator output to use the starter wire as its connection to the
>battery, and
>thus to have the lowest resistance path to the best noise filter in the
>airplane.
>A downside of this architecture is that you don't have any visibility (if
>this is
>the only instrumentation) of whether the battery is getting charged (or
>discharged). The shunt will only give an indication of how much current
>the alternator is providing. The loadmeter would only provide a negative
>reading
>if the alternator fails (and shorts somehow). This architecture combined
>with
>a bus voltmeter is perfectly adequate... If the bus voltage is good, and the
>loadmeter is up, everything is okay.
>
>Placing the shunt between the battery and the rest of the system will either
>require a high amperage shunt/ammeter (to handle hundreds of amps of
>cranking current), or you can just live with the ammeter peggin (hard) when
>you crank the starter - plus some heat buildup in the shunt.
Given that voltmeters, and all forms of ammeters are
at best, diagnostic tools, the probability of comfortable
completion of any flight hinges more on knowing when the
alternator quits and knowing how well the battery will
run the system for the remainder of flight are key
data points. Assuming one has active notification of low
voltage, there is no operational "advantage" to be
achieved by installing a minus-0-plus ammeter as opposed
to a loadmeter.
Matt correctly notes that adding a battery ammeter to
any of the z-figures requires a huge shunt and instrument
immune to starter current loads. In my never humble opinion,
increases weight and cost with zero return on investment.
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: Ammeter/Loadmeter |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 06:23 PM 11/8/2004 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: PeterHunt1@aol.com
>
>Bob:
>
>What do you mean when you say "The only limitation on the entire field of
>instrumentation choices is that none of the Z-Figures is friendly to use
>of the
>classic minus-0-plus battery ammeter"? I am wiring to Figure Z-10 and where
>you call for a loadmeter I have installed Van's "classic" -40/0/+40 ammeter.
>Should I change something? I haven't lit the engine yet.
The ammeter you have was originally intended for installation
as a battery-ammeter in the historically popular automotive
electrical system architecture.
You can wire this instrument as an alternator loadmeter
just keep in mind that it will ALWAYS read zero and above.
Not a 'bad' thing, it simply tosses off half of the useful
scale of the instrument. The danger is that some individual
not familiar with how it's used may believe it to be
a battery-ammeter based on it's markings . . . and might
mis-interpret what it's saying. For example, after an hour
of flight, your loadmeter is going to read present load on
the alternator which is always a positive value. Another
pilot might become concerned when what he perceives as
a battery-ammeter never goes to zero indicating the battery
is charged. The important thing is that YOU understand
how it should function so that you can properly interpret
what it tells you.
Bob . . .
Message 13
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Kingsley Hurst" <khurst@taroom.qld.gov.au>
Bob,
I will have my battery forward of the firewall and within 200mm (8") of
the engine ground stud. I will also have a firewall ground kit (B&C) on
the composite firewall no more than 300mm (12") from the battery.
Assuming all cables will be properly restrained, in connecting up the
earth straps which routing method would you prefer?
1) Battery -ive to Firewall Gnd to Engine Gnd
or
2) Battery -ive to Engine Gnd to Firewall Gnd
or
3) Battery -ive to Firewall Gnd and another Battery -ive to Engine Gnd
Left to my own devices I would choose No 2 because I think it is the
most likely way to prevent the smoking behind the panel problem you
cited in the 'connection'. Also, I think I would use a continuous strap
with a third flag terminal somewhere in the middle so that in the event
of the connection at the engine coming loose, I would still have battery
power. I am well aware that losing battery power in my little VFR
aircraft would not really matter, nevertheless, if there is such a thing
as 'best practice' in this regard, I would prefer to adopt it.
Thank you in anticipation
Kingsley Hurst
Europa Mono Classic 281 in Oz.
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: <bakerocb@cox.net>
From: "Giffen A. Marr" <GAMarr@Charter.Net>
Subject: ELT
<<The regulatory requirements are contained in FAR 91.207. If you want to look
at the international standards, ICAO Annex 6 Part I contains the requirements
in Chapter 4, Systems and Equipment. I would be very surprised if the RTCA Document
has any reference to accessibility. It should only contain engineering performance
requirements for the unit.
Giff Marr>>
11/09/2004
Hello Giff, Thanks for your response. My question about the regulatory requirements
for pilot access to or control of the ELT while in flight are not answered
by FAR Sec. 91.207. The audit trail goes like this:
1) FAR Sec. 91.207 (a) (1) says that one must have an *approved* ELT for our operations
(with some exceptions). In FAA parlance that means approved by the FAA
Administrator.
2) There are other ways of having the FAA Administrator (or his authorized representative)
approve things, but the TSO process is the most commonly recognized
way.
3) TSO-C91 is rendered obsolete for new installations after June 21, 1995 by FAR
Sec. 91.207 (a) (1).
4) TSO-C91a is the currently effective TSO for ELTs. One must either have an ELT
that meets TSO-C91a or have an ELT that has been approved by the FAA Administrator
by some other means.
5) TSO-C91a, like so many other TSOs, is a bare shell of a document that provides
no meat within itself, but instead provides references to other documents that
are the real guts of the TSO.
6) Without access to the pertinent referenced documents the answer to my question
is unknown. I am unwilling to accept all the hearsay, gossip, and rumor that
so many people are willing to put forward on this subject. I want to see the
applicable portions of the referenced documents for myself.
OC
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! --
|