Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 01:12 AM - Re: ELT Access (GMC)
2. 02:13 AM - Re: Stall Horn (Olivier Le Carbonnier)
3. 02:53 AM - The List Fund Raiser - Great Gifts! (Matt Dralle)
4. 04:41 AM - Re: Grounding (LarryRobertHelming)
5. 05:42 AM - Hall Effect Sensor and JPI EDM 900 (MikeEasley@aol.com)
6. 05:46 AM - Re: Keep warm circuit for Landing/Taxi lights (Eric M. Jones)
7. 06:17 AM - Re: Re: Keep warm circuit for Landing/Taxi (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
8. 07:48 AM - Re: ELT Access (Glaeser, Dennis A)
9. 08:36 AM - Strobe power supply grounding (Mickey Coggins)
10. 08:54 AM - Re: Grounding (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
11. 10:39 AM - Re: Strobe power supply grounding (Larry Bowen)
12. 11:22 AM - Re: Strobe power supply grounding (Mickey Coggins)
13. 11:57 AM - Re: Strobe power supply grounding (Larry Bowen)
14. 12:31 PM - ELT Access ()
15. 12:49 PM - Re: The List Fund Raiser - Great Gifts! (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
16. 12:50 PM - Fw : Understanding strange LVWM behaviour (Gilles Thesee)
17. 01:03 PM - ELT Access ()
18. 01:21 PM - CH Products Control Stick Switches Electrical Specifications (Richard Tasker)
19. 01:33 PM - Re: Fw : Understanding strange LVWM (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
20. 01:53 PM - Re: CH Products Control Stick Switches Electrical Specific... (Fiveonepw@aol.com)
21. 02:02 PM - Antenna Ground Planes on Carbon Fiber (Giffen A. Marr)
22. 02:17 PM - Re: Fw : Understanding strange LVWM behaviour (Gilles Thesee)
23. 02:28 PM - 406 Mhz GPS ELT ()
24. 03:00 PM - Re: 406 Mhz GPS ELT (Bruce Gray)
25. 03:18 PM - Re: 406 Mhz GPS ELT ()
26. 03:21 PM - Strobe Ground Circuit Question (Kingsley Hurst)
27. 04:28 PM - Re: Keep warm circuit for Landing/Taxi lights (glaesers)
28. 05:30 PM - Re: Strobe power supply grounding (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
29. 07:07 PM - Re: Strobe power supply grounding (Larry Bowen)
30. 07:54 PM - Re: Keep warm circuit for Landing/Taxi lights (Eric M. Jones)
31. 11:48 PM - Re: 406 Mhz GPS ELT (Mickey Coggins)
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: GMC <gmcnutt@shaw.ca>
---------------------------------big snip ---------------------
I have no disagreement with what you write there, but for new ELT
installations after June 21, 1995 cockpit control and access of the ELT
while airborne may be a regulatory requirement and Id like to absolutely
confirm or deny that fact by reading the pertinent RTCA documents.
It was never my intent to get sidetracked into semantical discussions
regarding regulatory requirements in general and I apologize to readers for
proceeding down that rabbit trail above. It is just not in my nature to
accept hearsay, gossip, rumor, speculation, opinion, and beliefs when I am
looking for facts and I know that the facts do exist.
OC
-------------------------------------------
OC - You have aroused my curiosity - just what would be the useful purpose
of requiring or having access to the ELT while airborne? The only reason I
can think of would be for ditching on a oceanic flight, and in that case you
should probably have a PLB or water activated ELT stowed in your life raft.
George in Langley
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>
yes but the answer from man from AngleOffAttack is:
------------------------------
The difference is that our AOA works. If you think about it, the advantage
of the under wing pitot tube is that the airflow is always flowing about
parallel to the under side of the wing. Because of this the airspeed
indication (IAS) is accurate no matter what the angle of attack (AOA).
Conversely, the under wing is a lousy place for an AOA sensor. This is
because the air changes direction way before it reaches the wing and when
it reaches the wing the airflow is about parallel to the wing surface no
matter what the AOA.
Now, if you try to fix this by moving the pitot tube further from the wing
to get into undisturbed air, you may improve the AOA sensing ability
somewhat but the IAS now has errors with changes in AOA. Did you ever
wonder why the AOA probes on Airbus airliners are way ahead of the wing on
the nose of the fuselage? They actually have to be one and one half chord
ahead of the wing to get into undisturbed air.
The beauty of our system is that it senses pressures on the top and bottom
of the wing (aerodynamic sensing) and divides that differential pressure by
the dynamic pressure producing a Cl (coefficient of lift). Those familiar
in the art know that coefficient of lift and AOA vary uniquely with each
other. We avoid the pit falls of both pressure on probe sensing systems
and vane systems. Also you have some redundancy.
Consequently, we sell more AOAs than all the other AOA folks combined. If
you want an AOA that works, let us know. Our AOA is based on sound
aerodynamic principle . Any other would only be a glorified IAS indicator.
----------------------------------------------------
Olivier
-----Message d'origine-----
De : owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]De la part de Matt
Prather
Envoy : mercredi 10 novembre 2004 16:33
: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
Objet : RE: AeroElectric-List: Stall Horn
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Matt Prather" <mprather@spro.net>
I'll take this opportunity to correct myself a bit.. Aircraft spruce has a
vane style unit for $545 here:
http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/inpages/aoartangle.php
It seems they pretty much go up from there. Another option, depending
on how much cool stuff you are going to put in the panel is the Dynon
EFIS. They are having some teething trouble, but I think they'll sort it
out. They offer an AOA pitot probe for $200 (only works with their
EFIS). The total cost would be about $2600 which while a pretty good
value is not cheap.
http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/avpages/efisd10.php
Matt-
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Olivier Le Carbonnier"
> <olcdlm@laposte.net>
>
> where ?
>
> Olivier
>
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]De la part de Matt
> Prather
> Envoy : mardi 9 novembre 2004 21:19
> : aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> Objet : RE: AeroElectric-List: Stall Horn
>
>
> --> 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 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | The List Fund Raiser - Great Gifts! |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Matt Dralle <dralle@matronics.com>
Dear Listers,
Just a reminder that we're well into this year's Email List Fund
Raiser! Response has been great so far and there has been a lot of
interest in the Gift options. Speaking of those Gifts, if you haven't
already checked out the nice selection you owe it to yourself to check them
out. They are once again provided by Andy Gold of the Builder's Bookstore
www.buildersbooks.com. The gifts this year include the following items:
* List Archive CD
* Aircraft Fuel Tester
* Builder's Logbook
* Mechanic's Toolbox CDROM
* 24 Years of the RVator
* Powerplant Video
* Jeppesen VFR Kneeboard
Won't you make a Contribution today to support the these valuable Email
List Services? Please remember that its YOUR generosity that entirely
supports the continued operation and upgrade of the Lists. That's it - no
ads, no banners, no SPAM, no virus, no pop-up ads - just good clean
fun! Well, that is, with your support of course!
Please take a moment and make a generous Contribution today. It only takes
a minute using the Contribution Web Site where you can use either a Credit
Card, PayPal, or a Personal Check to make your donation.
The URL for the SSL Secure Contribution web site can be found below and
also includes a complete description of this year's awesome gifts:
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
I'd like to say a special "thank you!" to everyone one who has made
Contribution so far this year!! I really appreciate your generosity!
Best regards,
Matt Dralle
Email List Administrator
Matt G Dralle | Matronics | PO Box 347 | Livermore | CA | 94551
925-606-1001 V | 925-606-6281 F | dralle@matronics.com Email
http://www.matronics.com/ WWW | Featuring Products For Aircraft
do not archive
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: "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming@sigecom.net>
>
> #4 wire is entirely sufficient for all fat wires in your
> installation. A single braided strap from crankcase to
> firewall ground stud is sufficient. A single 4AWG connection
> between battery (-) and firwall ground stud is next. These
> two wires take care of your fat-wire portion of the ground system.
> Consider use of #4 welding cable for battery (-) and battery (+)
> connections irrespective of what type of wire is choosen for the
> rest of the system.........
>
> You are more at-risk for loss of battery due overly robust
> terminal connections than from connections that are too
> few or too light.
>
> Bob . . .
>
Bob: When making one's own #4 welding cables for + and - battery
post connections, what do you recommend for shrink down or cover material
that is heat and fire rated for covering the cable located on the engine
side of the FW?
Larry
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: | Hall Effect Sensor and JPI EDM 900 |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: MikeEasley@aol.com
I installed my EDM900 in my Lancair. Continental IO-550N, 12V system. My
left mag came with a Hall effect sensor already installed. I snipped off the
connector and used a Molex connector to connect to the wires coming from the JPI
tach feed. At high RPMs, sometimes, not all the time, I get a fluctuating
RPM reading, all the way from 3500 to 0, and then back to normal. JPI
recommended replacing the sensor that came with my engine with the one that came
with
the unit, no surprise there! Replacing the sensor means retiming the mag, and
I'd rather avoid that if it's not the sensor. Could it be the Hall effect
sensor? Or do I have a bad wiring connection somewhere?
Mike Easley
Colorado Springs
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: Keep warm circuit for Landing/Taxi lights |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones@charter.net>
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "glaesers"
<glaesers@wideopenwest.com>
I would like to suggest that Keep-Alive circuits should probably be
rethought or abandoned. Here's my thinking:
1) These waste energy--typically a couple dozen watts. For reduction of
input surge, using a thermistor or a soft start circuit is easy to do and
wastes no energy.
2) If shock and vibration is the problem--maybe addressing the shock and
vibration mechanically is a better approach.
3) Does anybody have data that says these actually help? I would guess that
for long filament lamps they do... but for halogens--I'm from Missouri.
Get rid of your filament lamps.
Let's discuss this on the list.
Regards,
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge MA 01550-2705
Phone (508) 764-2072
Email: emjones@charter.net
"I want to die peacefully in my sleep like my father did....
Not screaming in terror like the passengers in his airplane."
--anonymous
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: Keep warm circuit for Landing/Taxi |
lights
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
lights
At 08:49 AM 11/11/2004 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones@charter.net>
>
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "glaesers"
><glaesers@wideopenwest.com>
>
>I would like to suggest that Keep-Alive circuits should probably be
>rethought or abandoned. Here's my thinking:
>
>1) These waste energy--typically a couple dozen watts. For reduction of
>input surge, using a thermistor or a soft start circuit is easy to do and
>wastes no energy.
How is energy expended to add value to a system a "waste"?
Further, if the system is implemented with dc/dc converters,
the entire drain on the system is under 5 watts and is present
only when the alternator is running (keep alive runs from main
bus only).
>2) If shock and vibration is the problem--maybe addressing the shock and
>vibration mechanically is a better approach.
>3) Does anybody have data that says these actually help? I would guess that
>for long filament lamps they do... but for halogens--I'm from Missouri.
>
> Get rid of your filament lamps.
>
>Let's discuss this on the list.
When the lighting chapter was written (about 10 years ago)
the popular incandescent lamps for OBAM aircraft favored
the classic aircraft and some automotive sealed beam lamps.
The idea for a keep-alive system was derived from laboratory
data I'd seen on lamps wherein maintaining a lamp's OFF temperature
above the brittle/ductile transition temperature provided a 5x
to 20x increase in filament life due to vibration in during
the OFF state.
Modern sealed beams (which use capsuled halogens) and automotive
headlamps using cartridge lamps are already many times more robust
than their ancestors. Due to their very low cost and long life,
no value is added with the $time$ it takes to add a keep-alive
system. Nav light bulbs, particularly the reflector style lamps
were aircraft unique and $20 each retail at the time. Obviously,
those have been eclipsed by modern lamps as well.
We don't talk about Narco Super-Homers . . .
(see http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/P1012780.JPG )
. . . . in the certified world
journals and texts any more, non-halogen "aircraft" lamps need
to disappear from tomorrow's texts as well. The next revision
to the lighting chapter will not discuss keep alive systems.
LED nav lights and halogen automotive derivative lamps
for landing and recognition are the value leaders today.
If the HID lamps get to where they can offer similar
visibility, operating speeds, and pricing as the lowly
incandescent lamp, then they may become next year's
value technology.
Now, on might still consider inrush-limiters but not
for the reasons you might suspect. We discovered a transient
noise generation problem on the Bonanzas a couple of years
ago that was triggering the OVM crowbar system in the
B&C regulators when the landing/taxi light systems were
cycled on together. This turns out to be a combination
of long wires to the wings, super heavy contacts of
an "aircraft quality" switch/breaker . . .
( see http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/W31_1.jpg )
. . . with contacts that bounce like a golf ball and
generated some amazing noises while working to raise
a cold lamp filament up to operating temperatures.
It was easier to "fix" the regulator to ward of this
new antagonist than to add inrush limiters to calm
the antagonist.
I'll suggest it's a bit early to write off the incandescent
lamp entirely. One of those $5 halogen cartridges has
a strong probability of lasting for as long as anyone
owns their airplane and they don't need pampering.
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 |
|
0.00 CELL_PHONE_IMPROVE BODY: Talks about cell-phone signal improvement
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Glaeser, Dennis A" <dennis.glaeser@eds.com>
OC,
The folks who write regulations should be forced to pass a logic test! I
think the bottom line is that ELTs are required to have a cockpit control as
part of their design to comply with the TSO, but the equipment requirements
in the FARs do not specificlly require it be installed (were probably
written before the TSO changed). Since the equipment is there, why not just
install it? I'd still argue that you couldn't be denied an airworthiness
certificate if it is not there, but if the inspector feels otherwise it
would be more hassle than I'd be willing to endure to press the issue.
Discussing regs is often a passionate activity, since they are SO logical
;-)
Dennis
-----Original Message-----
From: bakerocb@cox.net [mailto:bakerocb@cox.net]
Subject: ELT Access
From: "Glaeser, Dennis A" <dennis.glaeser@eds.com>
aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
Subject: RE: ELT Access
11/10/2004
Hello Dennis, Thank you for your response. It is very passionate, but a bit
shy on logic and facts. I'll comment in pieces below:
<>
We don't know that yet because we have not seen the pertinent documents
referenced by TSO-C91a.
<<If your inspector says that control of the ELT in the cockpit is required
by regulation, ask him (or her) to show you that regulation!>>
Not every regulatory requirement is spelled out in detail in the FAR's
themselves. Something can be a regulatory requirement because it appears in
an approval document for a piece of equipment that is required by
regulation to be approved.
<<(and a TSO is NOT a regulation)>>
You are right. A TSO itself is not a regulation, but if a regulation
requires an approved piece of equipment and you are using a TSO'd item to
show that your item is indeed approved, then that TSO is fulfilling a
regulatory requirement.
Here is FAR Sec 21.601 (b) (4) QUOTE: An article manufactured under a TSO
authorization, an FAA letter of acceptance as described in 21.603(b), or an
appliance manufactured under a letter of TSO design approval described in
21.617 is an approved article or appliance for the purpose of meeting the
regulations of this chapter that require the article to be approved.
UNQUOTE. Does this leave any doubt in anyone's mind regarding the
regulatory status of a TSO'd piece of equipment that is fulfilling a
regulatory approval requirement?
<<Any references to cockpit controls in a TSO would be to specify the
performance requirements of such a device, but does not require that it
exists. The TSO may have specs for lots of options (i.e. portable
antenna, microphone, indicator lights, ...) but that does not mean that they
are required by regulation. If your unit is TSO'd, it's legal. If you want
optional stuff, it has to be covered by the TSO as well, but it is still
optional.>>
That is your opinion, not fact, and it is not shared by someone at AOPA who
wrote on this subject. Here is an extract from an email that I received from
AOPA. QUOTE: One of the major changes the FAA made in going from TSO C91 to
TSO C91a was to require a cockpit mounted remote switch to allow the pilot
to manually activate the ELT and as a visual monitor of when the ELT is
active. The requirement is outlined in RTCA/DO-183, Section 2.1.12 and
DO-204, Section 2.2.6.UNQUOTE
Unfortunately the person at AOPA who sent me the email was not the original
author of that extract. He had extracted it from some TSO material that he
found at AOPA while searching for an answer to my ELT access question. AOPA
does not have the RTCA documents so they are unable to confirm what the
documents say.
<<The FARs cited specify what is required - and cockpit controls are not
there, so they are not required!>>
Just stating an opinion vehemently does not make it fact.
<<Go out to the flight line of your local FBO and see how many certified
airplanes have a cockpit control for the ELT- I'll bet it will be very few,
if any!>>
The reason for the many aircraft that will be found without cockpit control
and access of their ELT is that those installations were made prior to June
21, 1995. See FAR Sec 91.207 (a) (1). We know that cockpit control and
access were not required prior to that date.
<<Cockpit controls are a convenience for testing (2 sweeps during the first
5 minutes after the hour), and occasionally re-setting after a 'firm
arrival', without having to open up access panels to get to the actual unit.
Dennis Glaeser>>
I have no disagreement with what you write there, but for new ELT
installations after June 21, 1995 cockpit control and access of the ELT
while airborne may be a regulatory requirement and I'd like to absolutely
confirm or deny that fact by reading the pertinent RTCA documents.
It was never my intent to get sidetracked into semantical discussions
regarding regulatory requirements in general and I apologize to readers for
proceeding down that rabbit trail above. It is just not in my nature to
accept hearsay, gossip, rumor, speculation, opinion, and beliefs when I am
looking for facts and I know that the facts do exist.
OC
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: | Strobe power supply grounding |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics@rv8.ch>
I'm installing a Nova Electronics Superpak 906
strobe power supply in my RV, and the installation
instructions say, with emphasis:
Note: The power supply baseplate must be connected to
chassis ground (GND) to reduce radio interference.
Since there is also a ground wire with the power wire,
wouldn't it actually cause *more* noise to do this, since
the device would be grounded in two different places?
Seems to me like it would it be better to electrically
isolate the baseplate, and run a ground wire from it
back to the airplane common ground. Am I missing
something here?
Thanks for your advice.
--
Mickey Coggins
http://www.rv8.ch/
#82007 QB Wings/Fuselage
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 06:41 AM 11/11/2004 -0600, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "LarryRobertHelming"
><lhelming@sigecom.net>
>
>
> >
> > #4 wire is entirely sufficient for all fat wires in your
> > installation. A single braided strap from crankcase to
> > firewall ground stud is sufficient. A single 4AWG connection
> > between battery (-) and firwall ground stud is next. These
> > two wires take care of your fat-wire portion of the ground system.
> > Consider use of #4 welding cable for battery (-) and battery (+)
> > connections irrespective of what type of wire is choosen for the
> > rest of the system.........
> >
> > You are more at-risk for loss of battery due overly robust
> > terminal connections than from connections that are too
> > few or too light.
> >
> > Bob . . .
> >
> Bob: When making one's own #4 welding cables for + and - battery
>post connections, what do you recommend for shrink down or cover material
>that is heat and fire rated for covering the cable located on the engine
>side of the FW?
There are no "heat and fire rated" materials for this task.
There are materials called out on the type certificate for
a particular airplane that become "approved" because they're
on the bill of materials for that airplane . . . this says
nothing about how the materials were selected or what ratings
were deemed significant when the material was selected.
For your OBAM aircraft, I recommend a double-wall, self-sealing
heat shrink by Alpha or 3M. You may be able to buy single chunks
of this material (1/2" original size) from a local electrical contractor
supply house. This stuff is pretty nice because it is mechanically
very rigid when it sets (mimics the insulation support feature of
a PIDG terminal) and it seals the joint at the same time (better
than a PIDG terminal).
See EPS-300 and EPS-200 materials at:
http://dkc3.digikey.com/PDF/T043/1202.pdf
Now, suppose you've got some 1/2" regular heatshrink available
and you don't want to order a $7.00 + shipping piece of
internal melting wall tubing just to use 3" of the 4'
on your airplane. Two layers of plain vanilla heatshrink
will dress up the joints nicely. Make the second layer
1/4" to 1/2" longer than first layer and center it on the
first layer so that it totally covers. They'll still be
working just fine the day your airplane is scrapped.
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: | Strobe power supply grounding |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Larry Bowen" <Larry@BowenAero.com>
I have the same power supply. I followed the directions and have no noise.
That's all I can offer.
-
Larry Bowen, RV-8 23.5 hrs.
Larry@BowenAero.com
http://BowenAero.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mickey Coggins [mailto:mick-matronics@rv8.ch]
> Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 9:31 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Strobe power supply grounding
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Mickey Coggins
> --> <mick-matronics@rv8.ch>
>
> I'm installing a Nova Electronics Superpak 906 strobe power
> supply in my RV, and the installation instructions say, with emphasis:
>
> Note: The power supply baseplate must be connected to chassis
> ground (GND) to reduce radio interference.
>
> Since there is also a ground wire with the power wire,
> wouldn't it actually cause *more* noise to do this, since the
> device would be grounded in two different places?
>
> Seems to me like it would it be better to electrically
> isolate the baseplate, and run a ground wire from it back to
> the airplane common ground. Am I missing something here?
>
> Thanks for your advice.
>
>
> --
> Mickey Coggins
> http://www.rv8.ch/
> #82007 QB Wings/Fuselage
>
>
> =========
> =========
> Matronics Forums.
> =========
> http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/AeroElectric-List.htm
> =========
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: | Strobe power supply grounding |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics@rv8.ch>
Hi Larry,
That's good info. I searched for 'strobe' on your site
but didn't find anything. Can you tell me where you
mounted your strobe power supply, and where you put
your "central" ground?
Best regards,
Mickey
At 20:02 11-11-04, Larry Bowen wrote:
-----Start of Original Message-----
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Larry Bowen" <Larry@BowenAero.com>
>
>I have the same power supply. I followed the directions and have no noise.
>That's all I can offer.
>
>-
>Larry Bowen, RV-8 23.5 hrs.
>Larry@BowenAero.com
>http://BowenAero.com
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Mickey Coggins [mailto:mick-matronics@rv8.ch]
>> Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 9:31 AM
>> To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Strobe power supply grounding
>>
>> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Mickey Coggins
>> --> <mick-matronics@rv8.ch>
>>
>> I'm installing a Nova Electronics Superpak 906 strobe power
>> supply in my RV, and the installation instructions say, with emphasis:
>>
>> Note: The power supply baseplate must be connected to chassis
>> ground (GND) to reduce radio interference.
>>
>> Since there is also a ground wire with the power wire,
>> wouldn't it actually cause *more* noise to do this, since the
>> device would be grounded in two different places?
>>
>> Seems to me like it would it be better to electrically
>> isolate the baseplate, and run a ground wire from it back to
>> the airplane common ground. Am I missing something here?
>>
>> Thanks for your advice.
>>
-----End of Original Message-----
--
Mickey Coggins
http://www.rv8.ch/
#82007 QB Wings/Fuselage
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: | Strobe power supply grounding |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Larry Bowen" <Larry@BowenAero.com>
I can't find it on my site either!
It's mounted behind the rear baggage area. I used some .063 plate to make a
platform to go from the middle rib across to the lower longeron. The power
supply bolts to that platform. The bare wires from the three strobe cables
are braided together and crimped with a ring connector. It's secured to one
of the bolts holding the plate down.
I thought I took a picture. I'll try to find it.
-
Larry Bowen
Larry@BowenAero.com
http://BowenAero.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mickey Coggins [mailto:mick-matronics@rv8.ch]
> Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 2:22 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Strobe power supply grounding
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Mickey Coggins
> --> <mick-matronics@rv8.ch>
>
> Hi Larry,
>
> That's good info. I searched for 'strobe' on your site but
> didn't find anything. Can you tell me where you mounted your
> strobe power supply, and where you put your "central" ground?
>
> Best regards,
> Mickey
>
> At 20:02 11-11-04, Larry Bowen wrote:
> -----Start of Original Message-----
> >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Larry Bowen"
> >--> <Larry@BowenAero.com>
> >
> >I have the same power supply. I followed the directions and
> have no noise.
> >That's all I can offer.
> >
> >-
> >Larry Bowen, RV-8 23.5 hrs.
> >Larry@BowenAero.com
> >http://BowenAero.com
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Mickey Coggins [mailto:mick-matronics@rv8.ch]
> >> Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 9:31 AM
> >> To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> >> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Strobe power supply grounding
> >>
> >> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Mickey Coggins
> >> --> <mick-matronics@rv8.ch>
> >>
> >> I'm installing a Nova Electronics Superpak 906 strobe
> power supply in
> >> my RV, and the installation instructions say, with emphasis:
> >>
> >> Note: The power supply baseplate must be connected to
> chassis ground
> >> (GND) to reduce radio interference.
> >>
> >> Since there is also a ground wire with the power wire, wouldn't it
> >> actually cause *more* noise to do this, since the device would be
> >> grounded in two different places?
> >>
> >> Seems to me like it would it be better to electrically isolate the
> >> baseplate, and run a ground wire from it back to the
> airplane common
> >> ground. Am I missing something here?
> >>
> >> Thanks for your advice.
> >>
> -----End of Original Message-----
>
> --
> Mickey Coggins
> http://www.rv8.ch/
> #82007 QB Wings/Fuselage
>
>
> =========
> =========
> Matronics Forums.
> =========
> http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/AeroElectric-List.htm
> =========
>
>
>
>
>
>
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>
AeroElectric-List message previously posted by: "Glen Matejcek" <aerobubba@earthlink.net>
<<Hi OC- FWIW, the EDMO wesite says: A remote panel control switch with visual
activation monitor, previously an optional accessory, is now required in
all (AF) automatic fixed installations and many of the (AP) automatic
portable installations, is now included in the complete kits.
My installation manual from Ameri- King says: NOTE: The Remote Unit is
Required by C91a. It is not optional.
My local fed says: Where is the remote control for the ELT? You know
that's required now...
If you still must see the source document (DO-183), it is available from
RTCA for $48, plus shipping and handling. Glen Matejcek>>
11/11/2004
Hello Glen, Thanks for your input. My experience has been similar to yours -- many
sources pretty sure of the requirement, but none of them able to identify
or produce the specific source of that requirement.
I know the documents are available from RTCA for cash, but there are three possible
documents in play, DO-182, DO-183, and DO-204. I didn't want to pay for all
three -- much rather spend the cash for beer and avgas -- not necessarily in
that order and definitely not in combination. Hence my request to this group
for a free look.
OC
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: The List Fund Raiser - Great Gifts! |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 02:30 AM 11/11/2004 -0800, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Matt Dralle <dralle@matronics.com>
Matt, do you have a Paypal account? If not, I can have you ding my business
credit card. What's your pleasure?
Bob . . .
Message 16
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Fw : Understanding strange LVWM behaviour |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Gilles Thesee" <Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr>
Bob,
Hope you won't mind my posting a copy of my previous message about my LVWM
mystery, as it may have got through unnoticed.
Any suggestions as to where to direct the investigation ?
If necessary I can resend the diagram pictures.
Thanks in advance
Best regards,
Gilles
===================================================
Hi Bob,
This is off-list because of the attachment.
We started our engine last week. Everything electric worked beautifully
thanks to your help and knowledge.
There is only one minor bug I'm unable to fix.
The engine is a Rotax 914. The circuit is wired as per figure Z 16 with an
auxiliary battery, an auxiliary battery management module from Eric Jones,
and a low voltage warning module AEC 9005-201 for the aux battery.
The low voltage warning module is controlled by a small relay to avoid
constant illumination of the annunciator when the power is off.
For reasons unknown to me I can't seem to have this aux battery Low Volts
light work as expected (the module works OK on the bench).
- When the master is ON (engine OFF), the Main Bat light works, but the Aux
Bat light doesn't. I was expecting to have both lights illuminate when their
respective battery voltage is below 13 V.
- When the E-Bus switch is ON and the Master OFF, the Aux Bat light
illuminates but not the Main Bat light, which is normal.
- During the tests I noticed the Aux Bat light illuminates briefly when I
switch the Master OFF.
What am I missing ?
Thanks for your help
Regards,
Gilles Thesee
Grenoble, France
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: <bakerocb@cox.net>
AeroElectric-List message previously posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.
nuckolls@cox.net>
<<....skip....If you have a list of RTCA documents you'd like to see,
post it and I'll see if I can put my hands on them. Bob>>
11/11/2004
Hello Bob Nuckolls, Thanks for the offer -- that was the object of my original
request. I am led to believe that the ELT access requirement would be found in
DO-182, DO-183, or DO-204. Thanks for your help.
OC
Message 18
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | CH Products Control Stick Switches Electrical Specifications |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Richard Tasker <retasker@optonline.net>
There has been discussions about the CH Products control sticks (http://www.chproducts.com/retail/aircraft.html) on the newsgroups lately. I have two of them, but there was a question about what the switch ratings were. I contacted Kevin Williamson of CH
Products and he was kind enough to supply me with a set of sample switches (from
Omron) and the part numbers thereof.
I downloaded the complete data sheet from the web, reviewed the specifications
and then called the Omron factory representative. There are a few minor errors
in the datasheet available on the web, so the rep emailed me the revised (corrected)
sheets. I
also discussed with him the specifications listed and got clarification, although
it turned out that when I received the revised data sheets, the specification
is very clear now.
The bottom line is that the electrical rating for all three different switches
is: 1-50mA, at 5-24V.
The explanation for the ratings is:
1. The lower values (1 mA at 5V) are to make sure that the switch sees enough energy
when switching to keep the contacts clean. Any lower values would not guarantee
that the contacts will always make proper contact over the life of the
switch. If for
some reason the load being switched is too low, a resistor could be added in parallel
with the load to increase the current to at least 1 mA.
2. The higher values (50 mA at 24V) are the maximum values that should be switched
that will not damage the switch. Switching any higher loads will risk damaging
the contacts - either welding them shut or warping them or causing excessive
arc damage - and
will certainly shorten the life of the switch.
3. These ratings are for a resistive load, so if they are to be used with a relay
or motor the contacts MUST be protected with a diode or other type of snubber
network!
Of course, the manufacturer always has a margin in the design so if one chooses
to switch 55mA at 14V (for instance), the switch will probably still have a reasonable
life. However, pushing them to 100 mA or more will definitely shorten
the life and may
result in a catastrophic failure at some point.
These switches are rated for a lot of actuations so their use in an airplane should
be no problem. The hat switches are rated for 300,000 operations (minimum),
the switches on the top face of the stick are rated for 100,000 operations
(minimum) and the
trigger (typically used for push-to-talk) is rated for 1,000,000 operations (minimum).
To put these numbers in perspective, let's assume you make one flight every day
for ten years. For each flight you could use the hat switch to trim the airplane
82 times in each direction, you could actuate the flaps (assuming that is
what you use the two
gray switches on the top of the stick for) 27 times each up and down and you could
push-to-talk 274 times.
I am satisfied that the switches used are as robust as you will find and the ratings
are adequate for the task. Just don't go overboard on what you connect
direct to the switches and your CH Products control stick will have a long and
happy life!
Dick Tasker
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: Fw : Understanding strange LVWM |
behaviour
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
behaviour
>Bob,
>
>Hope you won't mind my posting a copy of my previous message about my LVWM
>mystery, as it may have got through unnoticed.
>Any suggestions as to where to direct the investigation ?
>If necessary I can resend the diagram pictures.
>
>Thanks in advance
>Best regards,
>Gilles
No problem.
>===================================================
>We started our engine last week. Everything electric worked beautifully
>thanks to your help and knowledge.
>
>There is only one minor bug I'm unable to fix.
>
>The engine is a Rotax 914. The circuit is wired as per figure Z 16 with an
>auxiliary battery, an auxiliary battery management module from Eric Jones,
>and a low voltage warning module AEC 9005-201 for the aux battery.
>The low voltage warning module is controlled by a small relay to avoid
>constant illumination of the annunciator when the power is off.
I'm lost. I don't understand why you have a second auxiliary battery
management module installed along with the low voltage warning module.
Aux battery management is built into the AEC9005 product.
>For reasons unknown to me I can't seem to have this aux battery Low Volts
>light work as expected (the module works OK on the bench).
>
>- When the master is ON (engine OFF), the Main Bat light works, but the Aux
>Bat light doesn't. I was expecting to have both lights illuminate when their
>respective battery voltage is below 13 V.
I'm not sure I'm visualizing your wiring correctly. If you
tried to send me some attachements in a direct e-mail, I don't
see them in either my old in-files or trash-files. Try sending
them again to the b.nuckolls_at_cox.net account.
>- When the E-Bus switch is ON and the Master OFF, the Aux Bat light
>illuminates but not the Main Bat light, which is normal.
>
>- During the tests I noticed the Aux Bat light illuminates briefly when I
>switch the Master OFF.
I'll have to see your schematics to be of any real assistance.
Bob . . .
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: CH Products Control Stick Switches Electrical Specific... |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Fiveonepw@aol.com
>>>>>
I'd like to publicly thank Dick for doing all the legwork in checking this
out- I will mash my buttons with utter abandon!
Thanks again-
Mark Phillips do not archive
Message 21
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Antenna Ground Planes on Carbon Fiber |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Giffen A. Marr" <GAMarr@Charter.Net>
I am getting ready to install the ground plane for my transponder antenna
mounted on the bottom outside on a Lancair IV-P. The manual calls for a 12
inch round ground plane installed on the inside of the aircraft, between the
gear legs. A week or so ago, there was a post that said that the ground
plane for the transponder should be 5.2 inches in diameter. I have two
questions:
Is there anything to be gained by going to a 12 inch ground plane as
opposed to the 5.2 inch diameter specified in the post and does it make any
difference on a carbon fiber aircraft whether the ground plane is located on
the inside or outside of the skin?
Giff Marr
LIV-P/20B 28%
Message 22
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Fw : Understanding strange LVWM behaviour |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Gilles Thesee" <Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr>
Bob,
Thank you for your help.
...... a low voltage warning module AEC 9005-201 for the aux battery.
> >The low voltage warning module is controlled by a small relay to avoid
> >constant illumination of the annunciator when the power is off.
>
> I'm lost. I don't understand why you have a second auxiliary battery
> management module installed along with the low voltage warning module.
> Aux battery management is built into the AEC9005 product.
There is only one battery management module, and it works as expected.
The AEC 9005-201 doesn't have a battery management capablility but only a
low voltage warning feature capable of switching an annunciator.
I'd like to have it monitor the aux battery voltage.
......... Try sending
> them again to the b.nuckolls_at_cox.net account.
>
I'm sending them again.
Best regards,
Gilles
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: <bakerocb@cox.net>
AeroElectric-List message previously posted by: Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics@rv8.ch>
<<Hi Bob, Can you point me to a model? I'm in the market for one,
and can only find the portable units. Thanks, Mickey
> ... For my money, if I wanted an ELT that REALLY
> works, I'd go for the GPS aided location option as well.
> This ELT broadcasts your exact location which has a lot
> better resolution than satellite based locator system.>>
11/1/2004
Hello Mickey, I don't think that a practical, affordable, GPS reporting, TSO-C126
approved, 406 Mhz ELT compatible with a 12 volt airplane exists. I'd love to
be proved wrong. Let us know what you find.
You can start your search here <<http://www.cospas-sarsat.org/Beacons/typeApprovedListByManufacturer.htm>> and move on to the various manufacturers listed.
Be very precise / meticulous in your search -- you are entering a swamp with many
diverting alligators. Realize that you are looking for an ELT, not just a beacon.
OC
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: "Bruce Gray" <Bruce@glasair.org>
Try http://www.artex.net/3_freq_beacons.html, bring your wallet.
Bruce
www.glasair.org
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
bakerocb@cox.net
Subject: AeroElectric-List: 406 Mhz GPS ELT
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: <bakerocb@cox.net>
AeroElectric-List message previously posted by: Mickey Coggins
<mick-matronics@rv8.ch>
<<Hi Bob, Can you point me to a model? I'm in the market for one,
and can only find the portable units. Thanks, Mickey
> ... For my money, if I wanted an ELT that REALLY
> works, I'd go for the GPS aided location option as well.
> This ELT broadcasts your exact location which has a lot
> better resolution than satellite based locator system.>>
11/1/2004
Hello Mickey, I don't think that a practical, affordable, GPS reporting,
TSO-C126 approved, 406 Mhz ELT compatible with a 12 volt airplane
exists. I'd love to be proved wrong. Let us know what you find.
You can start your search here
<<http://www.cospas-sarsat.org/Beacons/typeApprovedListByManufacturer.ht
m>> and move on to the various manufacturers listed.
Be very precise / meticulous in your search -- you are entering a swamp
with many diverting alligators. Realize that you are looking for an ELT,
not just a beacon.
OC
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: <beecho@beecho.org>
I found the worthless harness and will send it. I did not get any jacks
from you because I told you that I had already installed them and would not
need more.
Tom
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
bakerocb@cox.net
Subject: AeroElectric-List: 406 Mhz GPS ELT
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: <bakerocb@cox.net>
AeroElectric-List message previously posted by: Mickey Coggins
<mick-matronics@rv8.ch>
<<Hi Bob, Can you point me to a model? I'm in the market for one,
and can only find the portable units. Thanks, Mickey
> ... For my money, if I wanted an ELT that REALLY
> works, I'd go for the GPS aided location option as well.
> This ELT broadcasts your exact location which has a lot
> better resolution than satellite based locator system.>>
11/1/2004
Hello Mickey, I don't think that a practical, affordable, GPS reporting,
TSO-C126 approved, 406 Mhz ELT compatible with a 12 volt airplane exists.
I'd love to be proved wrong. Let us know what you find.
You can start your search here
<<http://www.cospas-sarsat.org/Beacons/typeApprovedListByManufacturer.htm>>
and move on to the various manufacturers listed.
Be very precise / meticulous in your search -- you are entering a swamp with
many diverting alligators. Realize that you are looking for an ELT, not just
a beacon.
OC
Message 26
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Strobe Ground Circuit Question |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Kingsley Hurst" <khurst@taroom.qld.gov.au>
Bob et al
I have a Kuntzleman Strobe and in reading the 'Noise Trouble Shooting
Guide' supplied with the kit, it says QUOTE "The ground path is very,
very important. The strobe circuit draws high current through the
ground circuit." END QUOTE
Since I have always understood the current is the same in both the feed
and ground circuits, could someone please enlighten me as to what is
meant by the 'high current through the ground circuit'. I don't have
the unit completely installed yet so don't have any noise problems, just
trying to understand !
Thanks all
Kingsley Hurst
Europa Mono Classic 281 in Oz.
Message 27
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Keep warm circuit for Landing/Taxi lights |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "glaesers" <glaesers@wideopenwest.com>
Eric and Bob,
Thanks for the responses. The Taxi and Landing lights are the only filament
bulbs I plan to have, and they will be halogen. The good news is that they
are cheap and do seem to last a long time. I can't remember the last time I
replaced one on a car. The hassle of replacing it is worse than the part
cost. So scratch the keep warm circuit.
Minimizing inrush current seems like a good idea, so I'll look into
thermistors and soft start circuits - any pointers would be welcomed of
course!
Dennis Glaeser
Message 28
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Strobe power supply grounding |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 03:31 PM 11/11/2004 +0100, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Mickey Coggins
><mick-matronics@rv8.ch>
>
>I'm installing a Nova Electronics Superpak 906
>strobe power supply in my RV, and the installation
>instructions say, with emphasis:
>
>Note: The power supply baseplate must be connected to
>chassis ground (GND) to reduce radio interference.
>
>Since there is also a ground wire with the power wire,
>wouldn't it actually cause *more* noise to do this, since
>the device would be grounded in two different places?
>
>Seems to me like it would it be better to electrically
>isolate the baseplate, and run a ground wire from it
>back to the airplane common ground. Am I missing
>something here?
>
>Thanks for your advice.
Many electronic devices for aircraft have separate
power and chassis ground connections. The chassis
ground is for RFI/Shielding and the power ground is
separated so that the designer can utilize a remote
power ground IF the system calls for it. In this
case, the case gets grounded to airframe in a metal
airplane and, as we've already discussed, it's okay
to get your power ground remotely for the strobes,
pitot heat, landing, taxi and nav lights. Where
major benefits are realized is for single point,
firewall grounding of potential victims (mostly
panel mounted stuff).
Take the strobe supply ground to one of the same
bolts that holds the strobe to the airplane.
Bob . . .
Message 29
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Strobe power supply grounding |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Larry Bowen" <Larry@BowenAero.com>
Mickey,
Here is a pic of the strobe power pak.
http://bowenaero.com/mt3/archives/2003/01/ap_servo_strobe.html
-
Larry Bowen
Larry@BowenAero.com
http://BowenAero.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mickey Coggins [mailto:mick-matronics@rv8.ch]
> Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 2:22 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Strobe power supply grounding
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Mickey Coggins
> --> <mick-matronics@rv8.ch>
>
> Hi Larry,
>
> That's good info. I searched for 'strobe' on your site but
> didn't find anything. Can you tell me where you mounted your
> strobe power supply, and where you put your "central" ground?
>
> Best regards,
> Mickey
>
> At 20:02 11-11-04, Larry Bowen wrote:
> -----Start of Original Message-----
> >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Larry Bowen"
> >--> <Larry@BowenAero.com>
> >
> >I have the same power supply. I followed the directions and
> have no noise.
> >That's all I can offer.
> >
> >-
> >Larry Bowen, RV-8 23.5 hrs.
> >Larry@BowenAero.com
> >http://BowenAero.com
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Mickey Coggins [mailto:mick-matronics@rv8.ch]
> >> Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 9:31 AM
> >> To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> >> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Strobe power supply grounding
> >>
> >> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Mickey Coggins
> >> --> <mick-matronics@rv8.ch>
> >>
> >> I'm installing a Nova Electronics Superpak 906 strobe
> power supply in
> >> my RV, and the installation instructions say, with emphasis:
> >>
> >> Note: The power supply baseplate must be connected to
> chassis ground
> >> (GND) to reduce radio interference.
> >>
> >> Since there is also a ground wire with the power wire, wouldn't it
> >> actually cause *more* noise to do this, since the device would be
> >> grounded in two different places?
> >>
> >> Seems to me like it would it be better to electrically isolate the
> >> baseplate, and run a ground wire from it back to the
> airplane common
> >> ground. Am I missing something here?
> >>
> >> Thanks for your advice.
> >>
> -----End of Original Message-----
>
> --
> Mickey Coggins
> http://www.rv8.ch/
> #82007 QB Wings/Fuselage
>
>
> =========
> =========
> Matronics Forums.
> =========
> http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/AeroElectric-List.htm
> =========
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 30
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Keep warm circuit for Landing/Taxi lights |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones@charter.net>
>From: glaesers (glaesers@wideopenwest.com)
>Minimizing inrush current seems like a good idea, so I'll look into
>thermistors and soft start circuits - any pointers would be welcomed of
>course! Dennis Glaeser
The standard method of limiting current inrush is with a Thermometrics
Inrush Current Limiters.
Digikey stocks these in a variety of forms.
There are particulars like how much you want to limit the current and how
much reduction in current you can accept (there will be some).
If you don't want to get too technical: For a 35W lamp--use Digikey KC004L,
for a 50W use a KC003L.
Remember that these get hot and are supposed to get hot. Don't try to cool
them off!--in fact they should be protected from cooling.
Regards,
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge MA 01550-2705
Phone (508) 764-2072
Email: emjones@charter.net
"Everything you've learned in school as "obvious" becomes
less and less obvious as you begin to study the universe.
For example, there are no solids in the universe. There's
not even a suggestion of a solid. There are no absolute con-
tinuums. There are no surfaces. There are no straight lines."
- R. Buckminster Fuller
Message 31
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics@rv8.ch>
Ouch! Looks like I'll be installing a regular ELT,
and buying a "handheld" 406 Mhz device. Sure hope
these come down in price soon.
>Try http://www.artex.net/3_freq_beacons.html, bring your wallet.
--
Mickey Coggins
http://www.rv8.ch/
#82007 QB Wings/Fuselage
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! --
|