Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:43 AM - Re: Fw: Re: Interior lighting (Frank & Dorothy)
2. 05:34 AM - Re: off-topic - leather seat covers (Jim Butcher)
3. 05:51 AM - Re: finishing up FWF (sarg314)
4. 06:09 AM - Re: "Harley" regulator/rectifier for a (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
5. 06:10 AM - LASAR/elecr ign (Charles Heathco)
6. 06:25 AM - Re: Battery Jumpers (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
7. 06:42 AM - Lamer LVM-1 (Vern W.)
8. 07:44 AM - Re: Re: off-topic - leather seat covers (rd2@evenlink.com)
9. 08:27 AM - Battery hard failures (Paul Messinger)
10. 09:08 AM - Re: Battery hard failures (Vern W.)
11. 09:28 AM - Re: Fw: Re: Interior lighting (John Schroeder)
12. 10:09 AM - Re: Battery hard failures (Ken)
13. 11:04 AM - Re: Battery hard failures (Paul Messinger)
14. 11:09 AM - Noise in the headset. (Steve Sampson)
15. 11:38 AM - Re: Noise in the headset. (Dj Merrill)
16. 12:23 PM - Re: off-topic - leather seat covers (Charlie England)
17. 03:57 PM - Re: Fw: Re: Interior lighting (Richard Tasker)
18. 04:02 PM - Re: Battery hard failures (Wayne Sweet)
19. 04:32 PM - Re: Battery hard failures (Paul Messinger)
20. 05:45 PM - Re: LASAR/elecr ign (Dww0708@aol.com)
21. 06:17 PM - FW: RV-List: LASAR/elecr ign (Alex Peterson)
22. 06:43 PM - Re: off-topic - leather seat covers (John Schroeder)
23. 08:07 PM - Re: Battery hard failures (Earl_Schroeder)
24. 08:48 PM - Re: Battery hard failures (Dick Fisher)
25. 09:47 PM - Re: Re: Battery Jumpers (sarg314)
26. 09:49 PM - Re: LASAR/elecr ign (Werner Schneider)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Interior lighting |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Frank & Dorothy <frankvdh@xtra.co.nz>
John Schroeder wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "John Schroeder" <jschroeder@perigee.net>
>
>Frank -
>
>Do you have more details on the circuitry for this? For example, does it
>require the bias resistors for the LED's?
>
>
http://www.siliconchip.com.au/cms/A_102195/article.html has an article
on using the LM3914. It looks like you still need a 1K current-limiting
resistor for each LED.
Googling for LM3914 turns up dozens of examples of using this chip.
Frank
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: off-topic - leather seat covers |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Jim Butcher" <europa@triton.net>
You might check out Oregon Aero. We're very happy with their service. Web
site is www.OregonAero.com or 800-888-6910. Gail is the seat person.
Jim & Heather Butcher
Europa N241BW
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: | Re: finishing up FWF |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: sarg314 <sarg314@comcast.net>
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
>
>At 08:30 AM 3/9/2005 -0700, you wrote:
>
>
>
>
> But what are the coupling modes with respect to vibration?
> Being able to pre-set the shape may mitigate stresses in terminals
> and posts as-installed . . . but the stuff is still pretty
> rigid. It's the vibration that kills the hardware.
>
> If you're pleased with the results then so be it. I try
> to avoid materials that are process sensitive with respect
> to performance. This is why gluing and soldering are reduced
> to a minimum on any production line. I cannot offer 2AWG
> Tefzel with any degree of certainty that the neophyte builder
> will achieve the desired end results . . . but in this case,
> 2 or even 4AWG welding cable takes all the guesswork out of
> making battery posts and terminal flags last under vibration.
>
> Bob . . .
>
Bob:
You have convinced me to use welding cable from the firewall to the
engine. The vibration there would be hard on a stiff cable. But
shouldn't the connection from the battery to the contactor should have
orders of magnitude less vibration (both are on the cabin side of the
firewall in my plane)?
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: "Harley" regulator/rectifier for a |
Rotax 914??
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
Rotax 914??
At 02:06 PM 3/9/2005 -0600, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: D Wysong <hdwysong@gmail.com>
>
>Hi Bob -
>
>A while back someone mentioned using a motorcycle PM voltage
>regulator/rectifier (e.g. - COMPU-FIRE from www.customchrome.com) as a
>replacement for the stock Ducati unit that's shipped with the Rotax 914.
>
>Did you reach a verdict? Thanks in advance for the educated insight!
I wrote to the supplier but did not receive a response. I suspct
I'll need to simply purchase some hardware and test it. But at
the moment, I have nothing useful to report/recommend.
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Charles Heathco" <cheathco@comcast.net>
I have been going thru archives to try to evaluate elecronic ignition. I have an
A&P friend who swears by LASAR, but I have found several posts re problems with
this system, but the posts are not very current. I find hardly any problems
posted re LSI, or E/P-mags. I imagine e-mags are so new that not a lot is known
about them yet. My research has me leaning toward the e/p-mag sys for lower
cost/simplicity. Lead times it seems are out there tho. Any LASAR defenders/happy
users? Charlie Heathco
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: Battery Jumpers |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
At 06:50 AM 3/10/2005 -0700, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: sarg314 <sarg314@comcast.net>
>
>
>Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
> >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
> <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
> >
> >At 08:30 AM 3/9/2005 -0700, you wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > But what are the coupling modes with respect to vibration?
> > Being able to pre-set the shape may mitigate stresses in terminals
> > and posts as-installed . . . but the stuff is still pretty
> > rigid. It's the vibration that kills the hardware.
> >
> > If you're pleased with the results then so be it. I try
> > to avoid materials that are process sensitive with respect
> > to performance. This is why gluing and soldering are reduced
> > to a minimum on any production line. I cannot offer 2AWG
> > Tefzel with any degree of certainty that the neophyte builder
> > will achieve the desired end results . . . but in this case,
> > 2 or even 4AWG welding cable takes all the guesswork out of
> > making battery posts and terminal flags last under vibration.
> >
> > Bob . . .
> >
>Bob:
> You have convinced me to use welding cable from the firewall to the
>engine. The vibration there would be hard on a stiff cable. But
>shouldn't the connection from the battery to the contactor should have
>orders of magnitude less vibration (both are on the cabin side of the
>firewall in my plane)?
Perhaps . . . but we're still speaking in non-quantitative
terms. I have no way to put my hands on and/or instrument
every variation on a theme. Therefore, I must err on the side of
always applying the best I know how to do. If the battery has
brass, female threaded bosses for terminal connections, it's
not much of an issue . . . but the notion of attaching anything
but the softest, most compliant wires I can find to lead battery
terminals opens questions for which there are no 'hard'
answers without turning it into a science project.
The only gross failures of SVLA batteries I've been privy
to in the OBAM aircraft market have been separation of lead
terminal posts from the battery because of stresses induced
by stiff and/or heavy connections.
Bob . . .
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: "Vern W." <vernw@ev1.net>
Hey guys,
I just bought a new "Lamar LVM-1" off of Ebay. I didn't spend that much
(under $50) but while I can find other Lamar LVM products at Aircraft
Spruce, I can't find any reference to this particular monitor.
This is it here:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=4532691233&rd=1&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT
It seems to be perfectly suited for it's purpose so I grabbed it, but I'm
wondering if anyone knows about this particular product and how well it
works.
Thanks,
Vern
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: off-topic - leather seat covers |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: rd2@evenlink.com
_____________________Original message __________________________
(received from Jim Butcher; Date: 08:34 AM 03/10/05
-0500)
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Jim Butcher" <europa@triton.net>
You might check out Oregon Aero. We're very happy with their service. Web
site is www.OregonAero.com or 800-888-6910. Gail is the seat person.
Jim & Heather Butcher
Europa N241BW
---------------------------------------------
Tx.
do not archive
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: | Battery hard failures |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Paul Messinger" <paulm@olypen.com>
Couple of years ago we had (in the span of a year)
Hard cell open internal failures in the Concord RG25. One in flight in a
MK20 at 12 months of service and 100 hours flight time.
I had one fail in 6 months on my bench waiting for install. Same failure
mode as in an open (internal) cell.
Specifically will not take charge nor deliver any current but "no load
terminal" voltage in a ""normal range""
The MK20 owner went back to flooded cell Gill as he had replaced one that
was gong fine after 6 years based on my suggestion. The RG replacement cost
(under warranty) in shipping was more than the cost of a new Gill delivered
so he went with a new Gill. Now 3 years old and going fine.
For those not familiar with the aircraft the battery is forward of the
firewall.
Two out of two and no one around here will buy or install a Concord given
this experience.
I am sure its rare but it sure got pilots attention around here.
The MK20 had gone on a XC and after a fuel stop the battery had no cranking
power. It was returned and I checked it and found an apparent internal open.
My Concord failure was identical in symptom. Seemed ok but needed topping
off charge and was unable to get a charging current and failed quick load
test as no real current could be delivered.
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Battery Jumpers
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
> <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
>
> The only gross failures of SVLA batteries I've been privy
> to in the OBAM aircraft market have been separation of lead
> terminal posts from the battery because of stresses induced
> by stiff and/or heavy connections.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
>
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Battery hard failures |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Vern W." <vernw@ev1.net>
Interesting info Paul, but let's play the "Scenario" game.
If, for instance, with either of those two batteries that failed the way
they did, would the alternator have been able to continue to supply power
until the aircraft landed? Or would the batteries failing in the way they
did bring the whole system down?
I'm wondering if even though the batteries failed, if they would have still
served well enough as an exciter and a big capacitor to allow either the
primary or backup alternators to run the system.
And more specifically, would a failure of those types have brought down the
"Z-13" system, or any other system that relies on a single battery?
Vern
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Messinger" <paulm@olypen.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Battery hard failures
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Paul Messinger"
<paulm@olypen.com>
>
> Couple of years ago we had (in the span of a year)
>
> Hard cell open internal failures in the Concord RG25. One in flight in a
> MK20 at 12 months of service and 100 hours flight time.
>
> I had one fail in 6 months on my bench waiting for install. Same failure
> mode as in an open (internal) cell.
>
> Specifically will not take charge nor deliver any current but "no load
> terminal" voltage in a ""normal range""
>
> The MK20 owner went back to flooded cell Gill as he had replaced one that
> was gong fine after 6 years based on my suggestion. The RG replacement
cost
> (under warranty) in shipping was more than the cost of a new Gill
delivered
> so he went with a new Gill. Now 3 years old and going fine.
>
> For those not familiar with the aircraft the battery is forward of the
> firewall.
>
> Two out of two and no one around here will buy or install a Concord given
> this experience.
>
> I am sure its rare but it sure got pilots attention around here.
>
> The MK20 had gone on a XC and after a fuel stop the battery had no
cranking
> power. It was returned and I checked it and found an apparent internal
open.
>
> My Concord failure was identical in symptom. Seemed ok but needed topping
> off charge and was unable to get a charging current and failed quick load
> test as no real current could be delivered.
>
> Paul
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
> To: <aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Battery Jumpers
>
>
> > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
> > <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
> >
>
> > The only gross failures of SVLA batteries I've been privy
> > to in the OBAM aircraft market have been separation of lead
> > terminal posts from the battery because of stresses induced
> > by stiff and/or heavy connections.
> >
> > Bob . . .
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Interior lighting |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "John Schroeder" <jschroeder@perigee.net>
Frank-
Thanks for the info. I downloaded the datasheet in .pdf form from DigiKey.
The General Description section says that since the current can be set, no
bias resistor is needed. The 1 k's shown in the article must be associated
with the project they describe. Pretty neat chip.
John
>> Frank -
>>
>> Do you have more details on the circuitry for this? For example, does it
>> require the bias resistors for the LED's?
>>
>>
> http://www.siliconchip.com.au/cms/A_102195/article.html has an article
> on using the LM3914. It looks like you still need a 1K current-limiting
> resistor for each LED.
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: Battery hard failures |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Ken <klehman@albedo.net>
Well I've have a couple of identical failures in cars of wet cell
automotive batteries. These were mid to upper quality batteries over a
several year period, but all from the same manufacturer. Anyway after a
boost to start them all were driven home with no secondary damage.
While I suspect they failed during the start attempt, I'm quite sure I
would not have noticed if they failed on the road.
Ken
Vern W. wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Vern W." <vernw@ev1.net>
>
>Interesting info Paul, but let's play the "Scenario" game.
>
>If, for instance, with either of those two batteries that failed the way
>they did, would the alternator have been able to continue to supply power
>until the aircraft landed? Or would the batteries failing in the way they
>did bring the whole system down?
>
>I'm wondering if even though the batteries failed, if they would have still
>served well enough as an exciter and a big capacitor to allow either the
>primary or backup alternators to run the system.
>And more specifically, would a failure of those types have brought down the
>"Z-13" system, or any other system that relies on a single battery?
>
>Vern
>
>
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: | Re: Battery hard failures |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Paul Messinger" <paulm@olypen.com>
Its all in the ability of the alternator to provide reasonable regulation
when the battery is essentially open circuit.
My testing has shown that use of an OVP set at 16.2V as Bob recommends will
trip under large load dumps like turning off landing lights IF the rest of
the electrical system load is low. I have not tried to define this exactly
as there are too many variables with alternators/regulators etc. Adding a
25,000 mfd cap helped but still tripped the OVP.
Thus I would recommend any intending to run without the battery in a limp
mode verify that ant installed OVP will not trip.
Anyone know where the trip setting of 16.2 +/- comes from? Sure its above
any working alternator but higher sat 17+ or 18V will also seem to be just
as safe.
However in the case of an alternator failure and a bad battery there is no
juce available to run the ENGINE?? :-) if it is required.
In any event My point is even gold plated batteries (proces a Concord RG
lately) can and do fail at times. Having a failure rate of one in 10,000
means nothing if you are the one.
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: "Vern W." <vernw@ev1.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Battery hard failures
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Vern W." <vernw@ev1.net>
>
> Interesting info Paul, but let's play the "Scenario" game.
>
> If, for instance, with either of those two batteries that failed the way
> they did, would the alternator have been able to continue to supply power
> until the aircraft landed? Or would the batteries failing in the way they
> did bring the whole system down?
>
> I'm wondering if even though the batteries failed, if they would have
> still
> served well enough as an exciter and a big capacitor to allow either the
> primary or backup alternators to run the system.
> And more specifically, would a failure of those types have brought down
> the
> "Z-13" system, or any other system that relies on a single battery?
>
> Vern
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Paul Messinger" <paulm@olypen.com>
> To: <aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Battery hard failures
>
>
>> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Paul Messinger"
> <paulm@olypen.com>
>>
>> Couple of years ago we had (in the span of a year)
>>
>> Hard cell open internal failures in the Concord RG25. One in flight in a
>> MK20 at 12 months of service and 100 hours flight time.
>>
>> I had one fail in 6 months on my bench waiting for install. Same failure
>> mode as in an open (internal) cell.
>>
>> Specifically will not take charge nor deliver any current but "no load
>> terminal" voltage in a ""normal range""
>>
>> The MK20 owner went back to flooded cell Gill as he had replaced one that
>> was gong fine after 6 years based on my suggestion. The RG replacement
> cost
>> (under warranty) in shipping was more than the cost of a new Gill
> delivered
>> so he went with a new Gill. Now 3 years old and going fine.
>>
>> For those not familiar with the aircraft the battery is forward of the
>> firewall.
>>
>> Two out of two and no one around here will buy or install a Concord given
>> this experience.
>>
>> I am sure its rare but it sure got pilots attention around here.
>>
>> The MK20 had gone on a XC and after a fuel stop the battery had no
> cranking
>> power. It was returned and I checked it and found an apparent internal
> open.
>>
>> My Concord failure was identical in symptom. Seemed ok but needed topping
>> off charge and was unable to get a charging current and failed quick load
>> test as no real current could be delivered.
>>
>> Paul
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
>> To: <aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>
>> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Battery Jumpers
>>
>>
>> > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
>> > <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
>> >
>>
>> > The only gross failures of SVLA batteries I've been privy
>> > to in the OBAM aircraft market have been separation of lead
>> > terminal posts from the battery because of stresses induced
>> > by stiff and/or heavy connections.
>> >
>> > Bob . . .
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>
>
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: | Noise in the headset. |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Steve Sampson" <SSampson.SLN21@london.edu>
Bob - I have recently fired up my installation and have a few problems.
Nothing major, but irritating.
Its broadly Z11, with a VANS altenator, PC680 battery, Microair radio, Nova
606 strobe pack (in the stbd wing) and Navaid servo in the port one.
The problems are these:
1) I can hear the strobes (primarily the bulbs firing) in the
radio/headset. It will become irritating on long flights.
2) The strobe makes the Navaid servo 'grumble' just slight twitches, not
aileron roles, but with the strobe off, it goes quiescent on the ground.
3) The radio can effect the trim indicator when I key the mike, though not
the trim itself. Its the standard Ray Mac system used by VANS.
Powering the strobes from a different battery completely cures problems 1)
and 2), which leads me to believe the fix is to put a capacitor / inductor
filter on the supply to the strobe. Do you agree? Can you suggest the
components I should use? The spec indicates it draws about 5.5 amps.
Presumably it is best to put the filter by the strobe power unit. It would
be much easier to locate it near the fuseblock.
Thoughts on item 3?
Thanks for the help, Steve.
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
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: Noise in the headset. |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Dj Merrill <deej@thayer.dartmouth.edu>
Steve Sampson wrote:
> 1) I can hear the strobes (primarily the bulbs firing) in the
> radio/headset. It will become irritating on long flights.
Hi Steve,
I too had noise in my headsets, and fixed it with
a Radio Shack filter recommended by Bob.
Here is a copy of the e-mail I sent to the list awhile
back about my solution - hope it helps:
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Dj Merrill
<deej@thayer.dartmouth.edu>
Mickey Coggins wrote:
>> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Mickey Coggins
<mick-matronics@rv8.ch>
>>
>> Hi Dj,
>>
>> Are these filters between the power supply and
>> the 12v input or the ground? Where did you
>> have them grounded when you had the noise?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Mickey
These are installed in a Glasair (fiberglass
airplane), so no metal wings. The noise filters
have 4 wires, a 12v and ground for the input side connected
to the 12v aircraft power source and the ground wire
going back to the aircraft common ground point, and a 12v and ground
on the output side connected to the 12v and ground
on the strobe power supply. The instructions on the
package show the proper way to install the filter.
http://www.radioshack.com/product.asp?catalog%5Fname=CTLG&product%5Fid=270-051
When I had noise, the strobe power supply was
connected to the same 12v aircraft power and ground wires.
I essentially added the filter in-line to the existing
wired connections.
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: | Re: off-topic - leather seat covers |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Charlie England <ceengland@bellsouth.net>
You can buy hides with the FAA stamp of approval. A friend just had a
local upholstery shop sew an interior for his C-182 using 'approved'
hides. They just used the old upholstery as patterns.
If you want, I'll get the source for the hides for you.
Charlie
rd2@evenlink.com wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: rd2@evenlink.com
>
>Thanks George. I just gave Abby a call, very nice lady. Unfortunately we
>couldn't do business because she needs the plane (she is in WI and I am in
>PA). She referred me to Airtex (they are nearby), but I am not aware that
>they do leather - will check that out now.
>
>cgalley (sorry, couldn't find no name), thanks for the input, if so, this
>would be very nice, I'll verify it with local FSDO.
>
>Rumen
>
>do not archive
>
>_____________________Original message __________________________
> (received from cgalley; Date: 12:24 PM 03/09/05 -0600)
>
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "cgalley" <cgalley@qcbc.org>
>
>I think leather automatically meets FAA Fire regs.
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "George Neal E Capt AU/CCP" <Neal.George@maxwell.af.mil>
>To: <aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: off-topic - leather seat covers
>
>
>
>
>>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: George Neal E Capt AU/CCP
>><Neal.George@MAXWELL.AF.MIL>
>>
>>If you have the old covers, send them to Abby Erdman
>>http://my.execpc.com/~erdmannb/contact.htm
>>.
>>
>>73... Neal
>>
>>Do Not Archive
>>
>>
>>Hi all,
>>Does anyone know a good source for mail order cessna 172 leather seat
>>covers, color selection, reasonably priced, with FAA fire approval?
>>
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: Interior lighting |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Richard Tasker <retasker@optonline.net>
You do NOT need individual limiting resistors to drive up to 10 LEDs.
The LM3914 controls the individual LED currents and can be programmed
for 2-30mA per LED.
Dick Tasker
Frank & Dorothy wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Frank & Dorothy <frankvdh@xtra.co.nz>
>
>John Schroeder wrote:
>
>
>
>>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "John Schroeder" <jschroeder@perigee.net>
>>
>>Frank -
>>
>>Do you have more details on the circuitry for this? For example, does it
>>require the bias resistors for the LED's?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>http://www.siliconchip.com.au/cms/A_102195/article.html has an article
>on using the LM3914. It looks like you still need a 1K current-limiting
>resistor for each LED.
>
>Googling for LM3914 turns up dozens of examples of using this chip.
>
>Frank
>
>
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: | Re: Battery hard failures |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Wayne Sweet" <w_sweet@comcast.net>
I would say it is more an indictment of Concord than of RG technology. I
have had two B&C RG batteries, one lasting 6 years and was still going fine.
The Concord flooded cell my experimental started service with lasted 12
months.
Wayne
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Messinger" <paulm@olypen.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Battery hard failures
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Paul Messinger"
> <paulm@olypen.com>
>
> Couple of years ago we had (in the span of a year)
>
> Hard cell open internal failures in the Concord RG25. One in flight in a
> MK20 at 12 months of service and 100 hours flight time.
>
> I had one fail in 6 months on my bench waiting for install. Same failure
> mode as in an open (internal) cell.
>
> Specifically will not take charge nor deliver any current but "no load
> terminal" voltage in a ""normal range""
>
> The MK20 owner went back to flooded cell Gill as he had replaced one that
> was gong fine after 6 years based on my suggestion. The RG replacement
> cost
> (under warranty) in shipping was more than the cost of a new Gill
> delivered
> so he went with a new Gill. Now 3 years old and going fine.
>
> For those not familiar with the aircraft the battery is forward of the
> firewall.
>
> Two out of two and no one around here will buy or install a Concord given
> this experience.
>
> I am sure its rare but it sure got pilots attention around here.
>
> The MK20 had gone on a XC and after a fuel stop the battery had no
> cranking
> power. It was returned and I checked it and found an apparent internal
> open.
>
> My Concord failure was identical in symptom. Seemed ok but needed topping
> off charge and was unable to get a charging current and failed quick load
> test as no real current could be delivered.
>
> Paul
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
> To: <aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Battery Jumpers
>
>
>> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
>> <b.nuckolls@cox.net>
>>
>
>> The only gross failures of SVLA batteries I've been privy
>> to in the OBAM aircraft market have been separation of lead
>> terminal posts from the battery because of stresses induced
>> by stiff and/or heavy connections.
>>
>> Bob . . .
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
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: Battery hard failures |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Paul Messinger" <paulm@olypen.com>
Agree but I have had great success with PC-625 batteries with amp hours like
new after 4 years.
But Both Concords has very swelled cases (One at removal from the aircraft).
The PC-625's are like new physically and electrically.
With PC-625 and PC-680 available under $60 plus shipping why even consider
Panasonic for $45 plus shipping.
As I have said its critical to check your battery AH capacity often if you
need electrons to keep the prop spinning. With the availability of a simple
reasonable cost AH checker keeping a good battery for several years can be
reasonable and cost effective.
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: "Wayne Sweet" <w_sweet@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Battery hard failures
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Wayne Sweet"
> <w_sweet@comcast.net>
>
> I would say it is more an indictment of Concord than of RG technology. I
> have had two B&C RG batteries, one lasting 6 years and was still going
> fine.
> The Concord flooded cell my experimental started service with lasted 12
> months.
> Wayne
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: LASAR/elecr ign |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Dww0708@aol.com
I have installed the LASAR on PA 32 300 Aircraft. It is what it says it is.
Limited authority spark regulator. It advances spark up to 25 degrees at
power settings below 75 percent. I personally think it saves spark plugs but
requires a logic type breakout box to set/check timing. So at altitude you
can benefit from a lesser fuel flow because timing is advanced automatically
so a more efficient fuel/temperature management can be achieved. A engine
monitor would help realize the true savings. Also you can do away the impulse
coupling if you want because the secondary is excited during start switch
position given a good electrical source. So all my data is pertaining to
conventional mags though. I love to key in on the discussions. David
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: | FW: RV-List: LASAR/elecr ign |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson@earthlink.net>
Resent to the Aeroelectric list also:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alex Peterson [mailto:alexpeterson@earthlink.net]
> Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2005 8:14 PM
> To: 'rv-list@matronics.com'
> Subject: RE: RV-List: LASAR/elecr ign
>
>
>
> > My advice is to install your LASAR on a breaker switch near
> > the master
> > switch so it can be turned off. The simply fact is that your
> > engine will run
> > hotter with LASAR because it's buring the fuel/air charge
> > more efficiently
> > in the combustion chamber, not in the exhaust system.
> > Therefore you need to
> > be aware of it. On my RV-8 I learned to turn the system off
> > for a long
> > climbout on a hot day, then switch it back on once leveled
> > off. Now my RV-8
>
> I have 584 hours on my Lasar system now over the last 3.5
> years, and here are some thoughts: Regarding what Randy has
> written above, the system does not advance past the baseline
> 25 degrees for the first 15 minutes of operation, allowing
> for a pretty good taxi and climbout for an RV. I don't
> believe any of the other EI's do this, and I can't say how
> much difference it really makes. One does need to be aware
> of this, as fine tuning mixture settings for cruise should
> wait until this period is expired.
>
> Reliability wise I have had two failures. At 342 hours, the
> left mag died. It was detected by a higher than normal EGT
> noted during a 40 minute flight, and the mag check on the
> return showed that the left mag was sick (not dead, but not
> good either). Unison sent another mag free of charge next
> day to me, excellent service. I left for the west coast the
> next day, and was thinking about that new mag when over the
> Rocky Mountains.... At 569 hours, during cruise flight, the
> engine hesitated (this tends to get one's attention) for
> perhaps 1/4 second, then recovered. The fault light was on
> indicating the system was in backup mode (mags running).
> Once over an airport, I checked the L/R mags, and the left
> was completely dead (one tends to move the switch back quite
> rapidly when the engine completely stops firing). Once
> again, Unison replaced it with a brand new one free of
> charge, although this took a couple weeks this time. I
> suspect if I had been on the road, they would have
> overnighted one. I never did learn what the failure was on
> the first mag, but the recent failure was caused by a broken rotor.
>
> So, overall, Unison really sticks behind their product, but
> two failures of two different left mags is a little
> troubling. Ignition systems are not yet trouble free -
> anyone's. One person here had to rebuild a lot of his cowl
> and baffling when an encoder wheel came off inside his
> Electroair during startup. Others have had problems with
> Lightspeed. It is impossible to say with any accuracy what
> anyone's system's reliability is.
>
> Given the performance afforded by EI, mainly fuel economy, I
> would not be interested in running my plane on standard mags.
>
> Alex Peterson
> RV6-A 584 hours
> Maple Grove, MN
>
> http://www.home.earthlink.net/~alexpeterson/
>
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: off-topic - leather seat covers |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "John Schroeder" <jschroeder@perigee.net>
Charlie -
I'd appreciate getting the contact for the hides.
> You can buy hides with the FAA stamp of approval. A friend just had a
> local upholstery shop sew an interior for his C-182 using 'approved'
> hides. They just used the old upholstery as patterns.
> If you want, I'll get the source for the hides for you.
>
> Charlie
Message 23
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Battery hard failures |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Earl_Schroeder <Earl_Schroeder@juno.com>
Please let us know where these can be purchased for 'under $60'. The
best price I found was $69.95 plus $7.77 UPS. Thanks, Earl
Paul Messinger wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Paul Messinger" <paulm@olypen.com>
>
>Agree but I have had great success with PC-625 batteries with amp hours like
>new after 4 years.
>
>But Both Concords has very swelled cases (One at removal from the aircraft).
>The PC-625's are like new physically and electrically.
>
>With PC-625 and PC-680 available under $60 plus shipping why even consider
>Panasonic for $45 plus shipping.
>
>As I have said its critical to check your battery AH capacity often if you
>need electrons to keep the prop spinning. With the availability of a simple
>reasonable cost AH checker keeping a good battery for several years can be
>reasonable and cost effective.
>
>Paul
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Wayne Sweet" <w_sweet@comcast.net>
>To: <aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Battery hard failures
>
>
>
>
>>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Wayne Sweet"
>><w_sweet@comcast.net>
>>
>>I would say it is more an indictment of Concord than of RG technology. I
>>have had two B&C RG batteries, one lasting 6 years and was still going
>>fine.
>>The Concord flooded cell my experimental started service with lasted 12
>>months.
>>Wayne
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
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 |
|
| Subject: | Re: Battery hard failures |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dick Fisher" <sonex76@velocity.net>
Check out the following web site..
https://www.batteries4everything.com/index.html
Cost is $57.32 + shipping
Dick Fisher
sonex76@velocity.net
> Please let us know where these can be purchased for 'under $60'. The
> best price I found was $69.95 plus $7.77 UPS. Thanks, Earl
Message 25
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Battery Jumpers |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: sarg314 <sarg314@comcast.net>
>>Bob:
>> You have convinced me to use welding cable from the firewall to the
>>engine. The vibration there would be hard on a stiff cable. But
>>shouldn't the connection from the battery to the contactor should have
>>orders of magnitude less vibration (both are on the cabin side of the
>>firewall in my plane)?
>>
>>
>
> Perhaps . . . but we're still speaking in non-quantitative
> terms. I have no way to put my hands on and/or instrument
> every variation on a theme. Therefore, I must err on the side of
> always applying the best I know how to do. If the battery has
> brass, female threaded bosses for terminal connections, it's
> not much of an issue . . . but the notion of attaching anything
> but the softest, most compliant wires I can find to lead battery
> terminals opens questions for which there are no 'hard'
> answers without turning it into a science project.
>
>
I didn't realize we were talking about soft lead terminals. My battery
is an RG with brass terminals.
--
Tom Sargent, RV-6A
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: | Re: LASAR/elecr ign |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Werner Schneider" <glastar@gmx.net>
I have a Lasar on my O-320 in my Glastar (90hrs), I like two things, the
easy to start and you can really lean the engine to save fuel, spark plugs
do not show any deposit as well as the exhaust pipe is always clean. For
leaning you need an engine monitor, as the engine does not start coughing as
with standard magnetos and the cylinder which is peaking is not always the
same.
I love it however I can not compare with other systems then standard
magnetos.
Werner
----- Original Message -----
From: <Dww0708@aol.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: LASAR/elecr ign
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Dww0708@aol.com
>
> I have installed the LASAR on PA 32 300 Aircraft. It is what it says it
is.
> Limited authority spark regulator. It advances spark up to 25 degrees
at
> power settings below 75 percent. I personally think it saves spark plugs
but
> requires a logic type breakout box to set/check timing. So at altitude
you
> can benefit from a lesser fuel flow because timing is advanced
automatically
> so a more efficient fuel/temperature management can be achieved. A engine
> monitor would help realize the true savings. Also you can do away the
impulse
> coupling if you want because the secondary is excited during start switch
> position given a good electrical source. So all my data is pertaining
to
> conventional mags though. I love to key in on the discussions. David
>
>
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! --
|