Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 03:21 AM - RV 8 roll Trio roll servo install (luckymacy@comcast.net (lucky))
2. 06:45 AM - Re: Grounding (William Yamokoski)
3. 07:15 AM - Re: Grounding (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
4. 07:20 AM - Re: Strobe Ground Circuit Question (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
5. 07:55 AM - Re: 406 Mhz GPS ELT (Eric M. Jones)
6. 08:05 AM - ELT Access ()
7. 08:12 AM - Re: Grounding (William Yamokoski)
8. 09:18 AM - Re: Re: 406 Mhz GPS ELT (SportAV8R@aol.com)
9. 09:33 AM - Re: Re: 406 Mhz GPS ELT (Brian Lloyd)
10. 09:58 AM - Re: Re: 406 Mhz GPS ELT (Richard Riley)
11. 10:44 AM - Re: Re: 406 Mhz GPS ELT (Brian Lloyd)
12. 01:46 PM - Re: Strobe power supply grounding (Mickey Coggins)
13. 06:00 PM - Re: Keep warm circuit for Landing/Taxi lights (D Fritz)
14. 07:09 PM - Re: Keep warm circuit for Landing/Taxi lights (glaesers)
15. 07:29 PM - Re: Re: 406 Mhz GPS ELT (Gregory Young)
16. 07:55 PM - 406 Mhz GPS ELT cost issues (Jim Stone)
17. 08:23 PM - Re: Re: Keep warm circuit for Landing/Taxi lights (Richard E. Tasker)
18. 11:04 PM - 914 second alternator? (Ronald J. Parigoris)
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: | RV 8 roll Trio roll servo install |
0.01 RCVD_DOUBLE_IP_LOOSE Received: by and from look like IP addresses
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: luckymacy@comcast.net (lucky)
you guys with the tru track servos have it made. Seems the Trio/Air Nav roll
servo's possible arm orientations and sheer overall size won't allow for installation
in there.
The only place I see it will fit without modifying the floor panels is up front
of the spar on the right side.
Anyone else able to fit the Trio servo where Larry but his Try Track servo?
> --> 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 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: "William Yamokoski" <yamokosk@lakemichigancollege.edu>
Hi Folks,
In my Glastar, I have two batteries about 10' aft of the firewall. I have
each separately connected to the firewall ground stud, the other side of which
connects to the engine via a grounding strap. Other than weight reduction,
is there any advantage to moving those battery (-) fat wire ground points off
the common ground stud and further aft, to the cage itself. I can't think of
any electrical advantage, but that's why I ask the experts. Thanks for any
input.
Bill Yamokoski, N4970Y
415 hrs on the EggenSoob
still getting intermittent reports that my radio is unreadable, still wondering
why
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: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 09:44 AM 11/12/2004 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "William Yamokoski"
><yamokosk@lakemichigancollege.edu>
>
>Hi Folks,
> In my Glastar, I have two batteries about 10' aft of the firewall. I
> have each separately connected to the firewall ground stud, the other
> side of which connects to the engine via a grounding strap. Other than
> weight reduction, is there any advantage to moving those battery (-) fat
> wire ground points off the common ground stud and further aft, to the
> cage itself. I can't think of any electrical advantage, but that's why
> I ask the experts.
No, what you have is the best from an electrical perspective.
> Thanks for any input.
>Bill Yamokoski, N4970Y
>415 hrs on the EggenSoob
>still getting intermittent reports that my radio is unreadable, still
>wondering why
I'm assuming you've checked antenna SWR. What kind of antenna and
were installed. Intermittent complaints can be associated with
"holes" in radiation pattern for the antenna. See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Antenna_Pattern.gif
A pilot trying to talk on this antenna might get a lot of
otherwise unexplainable complaints. Does your radio
have a "sidetone" . . . can you hear yourself and do you
always hear yourself well in the headsets?
Next time ask about "unreadable" Do they mean strong signal
but distorted audio or weak signal -AND- audio?
Bob . . .
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Strobe Ground Circuit Question |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 09:21 AM 11/12/2004 +1000, you wrote:
>--> 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 !
They're simply quoting Kirchoff's law that says for every
electron going into the system, there'a a companion electron
exiting the system . . . I.e. same current in both supply
and ground return lines. What you quoted from the instruction
manual is a lousy attempt to explain something . . . I wonder
if the writer really understands what he's trying to write about.
For the composite airplane, you'll need both power and ground return
lines to the strobe. Take your (-) power lead from strobe to
on of the mounting bolts for the case then come off that same
bolt with the ground lead to your single point ground. Run ground
and plus leads together for as far as practical before they separate
to route to switch and ground stud.
If you have a noise problem after doing this, then a filter
AT the STROBE supply is called for . . . let's cross that
bridge as we come to it.
Bob . . .
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: 406 Mhz GPS ELT |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones@charter.net>
The reality of the 121.5/243 ELT system is that they will begin to degrade
in 2006 (the Russians aren't launching anymore of these satellites). The old
system is OFFLINE Feb 2009.
Does anyone have a clear description of what is required in OBAM aircraft as
far as 406 MHz Emergency Locator Thingies (or whatever)?
My guess is not much.
There are many more nautical 406 MHz locators. The ACR GlobalFix 406 EPIRB
http://store.yahoo.com/landfallnav/globalfix.html can be bought for under
$850 in quantity of one. It is possibly to internet together a Buyer's Club
to purchase a pallet of these if they are suitable for OBAM aircraft use.
Let's see what the price might be and any technical issues before
proceeding.
Regards,
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge MA 01550-2705
Phone (508) 764-2072
Email: emjones@charter.net
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: <bakerocb@cox.net>
AeroElectric-List message previously posted by: GMC <gmcnutt@shaw.ca>
<<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>>
11/12/2004
Hello George, Thanks for your question. Now for a round about answer.
I have a very low regard for the investment to return benefit ratio of our presently
required ELT's. I felt that they were unwisely forced upon us by the US
Congress in a knee jerk reaction to the loss of one of their members in a plane
crash in Alaska. So as I was building my airplane I wanted minimal ELT impact.
I had my professionally built instrument panel built with no remote ELT control
panel.
After I purchased my ELT, which included a remote control panel, and got ready
to install the ELT without the control panel, I decided to find out if this would
be acceptable to the FAA. My research generated a whole bunch of hearsay,
gossip, rumor, speculation, opinions, beliefs, etc. indicating that the remote
control panel was required, but I could not nail down the specifics of that requirement.
So I made a last minute install of the control panel in a manner that was acceptable
to me, but I wasn't entirely happy because the remote panel installation
was not part of my overall design concept.
Came the time of my very first test flight and I could not fly because every time
I keyed my number one VHF communication radio the ELT was activated. I was
able to shut down the ELT with the remote panel switch and taxi back to my hangar.
I disconnected the ELT and flew without it (this is legal) for that flight.
Before my second flight I moved the ELT antenna a bit further away from the
number one VHF communication antenna and rotated the ELT antenna ninety degrees.
This solved that inadvertant ELT activation problem.
Several weeks later I was returning to the airport and using my number two VHF
communication radio for the very first time (it had been off to Garmin for repair).
My ELT was activated when I made my very first transmission on tower frequency.
This was very disruptive, but I was able to shut my ELT down very quickly
with the remote panel switch. This particular activation scenario has never
happened again.
When I performed my first annual inspection of the ELT (required by FAR Sec 91.207
(d)) I found the remote switch to be pretty useful.
One of our local Lancair 360 builders had inadvertant ELT activiation that he attributed
to VHF communication wiring being in proximity to some ELT wiring. His
remote ELT control switch was useful in shutting down his ELT.
So I am a convert -- if one must have an ELT then the current regulatory requirement
(I believe that requirement exists even though I have not yet seen it with
my own eyes) for pilot access and control from the cockpit is a good thing.
I hope this answers your question.
OC
PS: I am not philosophically opposed to an ELT that would justify the return on
the investment. I think that a compatible (with our 12 volt airplanes), practical,
affordable, 406 Mhz ELT, preferably with GPS location capability, would
be a great thing. If it exists, I can't find it.
PPS: In anticipation of a forced landing (crash) and survival situation (been there, done that) one should always have with them a portable handheld VHF radio with fresh / unused batteries (don't depend upon old rechargeable batteries). Some may find great comfort in also carrying a 406 Mhz EPIRB. See <<http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/marcomms/gmdss/epirb.htm>>
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: "William Yamokoski" <yamokosk@lakemichigancollege.edu>
>
>Hi Folks,
> I can't think of any electrical advantage, but that's why
> I ask the experts.
No, what you have is the best from an electrical perspective.
Thanks very much.
I'm assuming you've checked antenna SWR.
That was one of the first things checked a couple of years ago
What kind of antenna and
were installed. Intermittent complaints can be associated with
"holes" in radiation pattern for the antenna. See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Antenna_Pattern.gif
A pilot trying to talk on this antenna might get a lot of
otherwise unexplainable complaints.
I have a copper strip dipole mounted in the vertical stabilizer. The strip is
not exactly vertical....it pretty much parallels the slope of the leading edge
of the vertical stabilizer
Does your radio
have a "sidetone" . . . can you hear yourself and do you
always hear yourself well in the headsets?
MicroAir 760. It does have a sidetone, which I have turned down to the point where
I can hear myself consistently and well in the headsets. At the factory
setting there was a strong "echo" effect in the headsets. This went away when
I turned the sidetone down a bit.
Next time ask about "unreadable" Do they mean strong signal
but distorted audio or weak signal -AND- audio?
The signal is strong but distorted
Would there be much point in trying a different antenna?
Thanks for all the help
Bill Yamokoski
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: RE: 406 Mhz GPS ELT |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: SportAV8R@aol.com
Eric_ we'd probably want to work out an impact-activation feature for the ELT (rather
than water immersion or manual "on" only, right?
-Bill B
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: RE: 406 Mhz GPS ELT |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brianl@lloyd.com>
On Nov 12, 2004, at 11:57 AM, Eric M. Jones wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Eric M. Jones"
> <emjones@charter.net>
>
> The reality of the 121.5/243 ELT system is that they will begin to
> degrade
> in 2006 (the Russians aren't launching anymore of these satellites).
> The old
> system is OFFLINE Feb 2009.
>
> Does anyone have a clear description of what is required in OBAM
> aircraft as
> far as 406 MHz Emergency Locator Thingies (or whatever)?
The real problem is not whether a 406MHz EPIRB would be suitable and
would help people to find you should you go down. That they do very
well and certainly meet the spirit of the law. The problem is whether
or not they meet the letter of the law which, as we know, has nothing
to do with actually getting the job done.
The 121.5MHz/243MHz ELT which does such a poor job of helping people
find you meets the letter of the law and makes FAA types happy whether
or not it actually performs the desired function. I don't know whether
any of the very fine and inexpensive 406MHz EPIRBs available from
various sources for somewhat reasonable prices also would. Guessing
from experience with the FAA I would have to guess that they do not
since they cost way too little to have the FAA certification surcharge
built into their price.
So, if it doesn't cost wildly too much, it probably does not have FAA
approval.
And, yes, I am jaded.
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 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: 406 Mhz GPS ELT |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Richard Riley <richard@riley.net>
At 09:32 AM 11/12/04, you wrote:
>The 121.5MHz/243MHz ELT which does such a poor job of helping people
>find you meets the letter of the law and makes FAA types happy whether
>or not it actually performs the desired function. I don't know whether
>any of the very fine and inexpensive 406MHz EPIRBs available from
>various sources for somewhat reasonable prices also would. Guessing
>from experience with the FAA I would have to guess that they do not
>since they cost way too little to have the FAA certification surcharge
>built into their price.
So, you buy an inexpensive 406 MHz EPIRB with built in GPS, and two cheap
121.5 ELT's off EBAY.
Put new batteries in on of the ELT and mount it in the airplane. Salvage
the impact switch from the second, hack it into the manual "on" switch of
the EPIRB. Tuck it in a box that just happens to be the right size to
hold it.
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: RE: 406 Mhz GPS ELT |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brianl@lloyd.com>
On Nov 12, 2004, at 1:57 PM, Richard Riley wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Richard Riley
> <richard@riley.net>
>
> At 09:32 AM 11/12/04, you wrote:
>> The 121.5MHz/243MHz ELT which does such a poor job of helping people
>> find you meets the letter of the law and makes FAA types happy whether
>> or not it actually performs the desired function. I don't know
>> whether
>> any of the very fine and inexpensive 406MHz EPIRBs available from
>> various sources for somewhat reasonable prices also would. Guessing
>> from experience with the FAA I would have to guess that they do not
>> since they cost way too little to have the FAA certification surcharge
>> built into their price.
>
> So, you buy an inexpensive 406 MHz EPIRB with built in GPS, and two
> cheap
> 121.5 ELT's off EBAY.
>
> Put new batteries in on of the ELT and mount it in the airplane.
> Salvage
> the impact switch from the second, hack it into the manual "on" switch
> of
> the EPIRB. Tuck it in a box that just happens to be the right size
> to
> hold it.
That seems like quite a sensible approach! OTOH, I would tend to want
to disable the "operational" ELT to keep it from generating false
alerts. The remote control switch on the panel that has positions
"off/arm/on" might prove to be useful for that purpose.
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 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: Strobe power supply grounding |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics@rv8.ch>
Thanks a lot for the clarification.
I'm just starting my wiring, and it is coming along
well, mainly thanks to all I've learned from your
book and the list. I'm really enjoying it.
Best regards,
Mickey
--
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 |
|
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
s=s1024; d=yahoo.com;
b=YyVgDmZaNVrvg7P+8Pp4siUvND57e4ryYX3qO6RN37/8v1Wk7b0IKw9eHjzGr2qny2XuLdILrm/boVJWQuEZiYWhLgYRRRCWmmJDPjHAV2Oq5+FqhMxH6EDQQvxQiRmjH5o4ao7mNLmXDfcH0eKz86ZWiRotADQnNNN9FyCuj5s=
;
| Subject: | Re: Keep warm circuit for Landing/Taxi lights |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: D Fritz <dfritzj@yahoo.com>
Quick question about Halogens: How well do they survive in a wig-wag setup? is
the constant on and off a problem for these bulbs?
On a related note, has anyone looked at using clear UltraBrite LEDs as recognition
lights? Do these do well with a wig-wag setup? This site is marketing a
"taxi" light combined with a strobe that may prove interesting in recognition:
https://ssl.perfora.net/gs-air.com/sess/utn;jsessionid=1541956839198eb/shopdata/index.shopscript
Dan Fritz
---------------------------------
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Keep warm circuit for Landing/Taxi lights |
clamav-milter version 0.80j
on pop-7.dnv.wideopenwest.com
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "glaesers" <glaesers@wideopenwest.com>
What the heck, lets get a bit technical (I'm an Aero Engr - so you may have
to take it slow ;-)
You seem to have selected thermistors rated for about twice the amperage for
the light.
Based on that, for a 75W bulb I'd use the KC022L. Now since it won't be
operating at I-max, the resistance won't be the min value (.02 ohms). So
for argument's sake, lets use .03 ohms. That means a voltage drop of .39 (I
used 13V for all calculations). 3% doesn't seem so bad.
Regarding the inrush current - As the thermistor rated current goes up the
initial resistance goes down (some dumb law of physics no doubt). The
KC022L's resistance (0.7 ohms) is less than half the bulb's (about 2 ohms).
So the bigger the bulb the higher the initial current. How much initial
resistance is enough? I guess anything is better than nothing.
I'm thinking that limiting the inrush current is as much about being kind to
the whole electrical system as it is about bulb life - am I out in left
field on that? Anyway, they're cheap enough to try.
It's wierd to think of something getting hot and going down in resistance -
kind of like nichrome wire in an inverse universe!
Thanks for your help,
Dennis
------------------------
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
---------------------------
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: 406 Mhz GPS ELT |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Gregory Young" <gyoung@cs-sol.com>
Seems like it would make sense to certify an impact sensor that could
activate the locator of your choice. Then the low volume switch would be the
only piece subject to aviation prices and the locator could take advantage
of the economies of scale and technical improvements that non-aviation
markets enjoy. But no, that would never work. Never mind...
Greg
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On
> Behalf Of SportAV8R@aol.com
> Sent: Friday, November 12, 2004 11:18 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: RE: 406 Mhz GPS ELT
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: SportAV8R@aol.com
>
> Eric_ we'd probably want to work out an impact-activation
> feature for the ELT (rather than water immersion or manual
> "on" only, right?
>
> -Bill B
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: | 406 Mhz GPS ELT cost issues |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Jim Stone" <jsto1@tampabay.rr.com>
As both a pilot and boater in Florida, I suggest that anyone interested
in acquiring a 406 MHz ELT or EPIRB pay special attention to the cost of
replacing the battery. I have carried a Litton Marine 406 MHz portable
EPIRB for the last 8 years, and had the "joy" of getting a replacement
battery. At $600 installed, it was a shock even to my certified
airplane parts budget. The new ones will obviously be less expensive,
but my queries to vendors a Oshkosh and boat shows indicated most
dealers haven't the foggiest what the battery replacement procedure or
cost will be.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bruce
Gray
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: 406 Mhz GPS ELT
--> 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 17
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Keep warm circuit for Landing/Taxi lights |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Richard E. Tasker" <retasker@optonline.net>
Actually, if you look at the specific data sheet for these parts:
Using 75W @ 13V gives us 5.77A - which is close enough to 50% of the 12A
rating. Looking at the data sheet, one finds that the resistance at
this current is 0.06 ohms which gives us a voltage drop of 0.35 V. So,
your 3% calculation is not far off - although I have no idea what you
did to get your numbers. Remember, E=I*R, I=E/R, R=E/I :-) .
Actually, based on the vendors data sheet, I would probably choose the
next lower size that is rated for 8A max. Using this one, the starting
resistance is 1.3 ohms vs 0.7 ohms for the 12A device. The resistance
at the operating current is essentially the same so the voltage drop
would be the same.
As far as your further comments about the 0.7 ohms adding to the bulb's
resistance, you are correct that it adds, but your value for the bulb's
resistance at start is way off. Your estimate of two ohms is basically
correct when the bulb is operating (R=13V/5.77A=2.25ohms). However,
before the bulb warms up, its resistance is less than 0.5 ohm (probably
much less but I do not have a milliohmeter to measure it accurately).
That means that you are reducing the inrush current by a factor of (0.7
+ 0.5) /0.5 or almost 2.5 times - probably more if we knew the actual
start resistance. So we are limiting the inrush current to
approximately: I = 13V / 1.2 ohms = 10.8A Much better than: I = 13V /
0.5 ohms = 26A! Or, if you use the next lower rated limiter you can
limit the current to: I = 13V / (1.3 + 0.7) ohms = 6.5A Not much more
than the steady state current of 5.77A.
The reason for using current limiters is, as you suggested, as much to
be gentle on your electrical system (not to good to use a 15A switch to
turn on a bulb with a 26A surge, but fine for a 10.8A surge) as to
increase the life of your bulb by limiting the shock of turning it on.
Dick Tasker
glaesers wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "glaesers" <glaesers@wideopenwest.com>
>
>What the heck, lets get a bit technical (I'm an Aero Engr - so you may have
>to take it slow ;-)
>
>You seem to have selected thermistors rated for about twice the amperage for
>the light.
>Based on that, for a 75W bulb I'd use the KC022L. Now since it won't be
>operating at I-max, the resistance won't be the min value (.02 ohms). So
>for argument's sake, lets use .03 ohms. That means a voltage drop of .39 (I
>used 13V for all calculations). 3% doesn't seem so bad.
>
>Regarding the inrush current - As the thermistor rated current goes up the
>initial resistance goes down (some dumb law of physics no doubt). The
>KC022L's resistance (0.7 ohms) is less than half the bulb's (about 2 ohms).
>So the bigger the bulb the higher the initial current. How much initial
>resistance is enough? I guess anything is better than nothing.
>
>I'm thinking that limiting the inrush current is as much about being kind to
>the whole electrical system as it is about bulb life - am I out in left
>field on that? Anyway, they're cheap enough to try.
>
>It's wierd to think of something getting hot and going down in resistance -
>kind of like nichrome wire in an inverse universe!
>
>Thanks for your help,
>
> Dennis
>
>------------------------
>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
>---------------------------
>
>
>
>
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: | 914 second alternator? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Ronald J. Parigoris" <rparigor@suffolk.lib.ny.us>
I was looking through aircraft spruce tonight and saw a 8 amp permanent magnet
alternator.
http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/eppages/sdaltreg.php
Would this work on a vacuum pad on a rotax 914 and put out rated amps?
If I were to run second fuel pump from this and a 2 amp strobe power supply, what
sort of
battery would be needed? Could you get away with no battery?
If not any other ideas?
This is for a Europa XS.
Thx.
Ron Parigoris
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! --
|