Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 05:54 AM - Re: Instrument Holes in DWF format (BobsV35B@aol.com)
2. 06:33 AM - Re: Instrument Holes in DWF format (Bruce Gray)
3. 06:47 AM - Re: Instrument Holes in DWF format (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
4. 06:49 AM - "P" lead length (Bob C.)
5. 06:55 AM - Z-27 (Jim Stone)
6. 07:13 AM - Re: B&C conversation on operating SD8 (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
7. 07:49 AM - Re: B&C conversation on operating SD8 (Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis))
8. 08:01 AM - Re: 'P' lead length (Matt Prather)
9. 08:08 AM - Re: Z-27 (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
10. 08:10 AM - Physical layout (mark supinski)
11. 08:58 AM - Re: Physical layout (chad-c_sip@stanfordalumni.org)
12. 09:38 AM - Re: Physical layout (Phil Birkelbach)
13. 10:13 AM - Re: Physical layout (mark supinski)
14. 10:51 AM - Re: Z-27 (Jim Stone)
15. 12:33 PM - Re: "P" lead length (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
16. 07:53 PM - Re: KMA20 installation manual or ?? (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
17. 08:07 PM - Re: Re: A question on my crossbar (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
18. 10:50 PM - PTT coiled cord ()
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: Instrument Holes in DWF format |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: BobsV35B@aol.com
Good Morning Marty,
I hope I am not being presumptuous, but have you considered that many
instruments vary in size even though they use a standard 3.125 or 2.5 inch mounting
hole!
It is imperative that you consider the space required behind the panel as
well as the location of the mounting hole.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Airpark LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8502
In a message dated 7/20/2005 2:18:49 A.M. Central Standard Time,
emrath@comcast.net writes:
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Emrath" <emrath@comcast.net>
I recall a recent posting requesting a CAD drawing of an instrument hole. If
anyone has a "symbol" for a standard 3.125 and 2.5" hole cut out, I'd sure
would like it. I'm trying to layout my panel and ensure it all fits.
Appreciate having this if someone has already done this. My version of Turbo
Cad will read DWF files as will AutoCAD. Thanks in advance.
Do not Archive
Marty in Brentwood TN
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: | Instrument Holes in DWF format |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bruce Gray" <Bruce@glasair.org>
I couldn't agree more. When I did my panel in ACAD I miked each gage to be
sure. There was a wide variation. None agreed with the factory drawings. The
one instrument I didn't have was my Davtron clock, I used the factory
drawings for that and went ahead and had the panel laser cut.
You guessed it, the only gage that didn't fit was the clock. The bolt
pattern was 0.10 off. When I called the factory to complain, they said they
knew the drawing was wrong but hadn't corrected it yet. I told them that
their procrastination had just cost me a finished instrument panel, so they
gave me a free clock.
Bruce
www.glasair.org
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: Instrument Holes in DWF format |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 10:42 PM 7/19/2005 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Emrath" <emrath@comcast.net>
>
>I recall a recent posting requesting a CAD drawing of an instrument hole. If
>anyone has a "symbol" for a standard 3.125 and 2.5" hole cut out, I'd sure
>would like it. I'm trying to layout my panel and ensure it all fits.
>Appreciate having this if someone has already done this. My version of Turbo
>Cad will read DWF files as will AutoCAD. Thanks in advance.
>Do not Archive
>Marty in Brentwood TN
don't have .dwf but you can probably import .dxf too. See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Reference_Docs/Panel_Layout
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bob C. " <flyboy.bob@gmail.com>
Are there lengths that should be avoided when installing "P" Leads? In other
words, are there lengths that potentially cause more "transmitted noise" . .
. or is that an issues with shielded "P" leads?
Thanks,
Bob Christensen
RV-8 Builder in SE Iowa
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: "Jim Stone" <jrstone@insightbb.com>
Question concerning Z-27 (one nonimpulse mag and one electronic ign.). I like
the design of this diagram but I think it a bit odd that in the event of an engine
stoppage while airborne and no windmill due to low speed, the pilot would
have to turn the mag switch off to enable the start button. With an engine failure,
especially down low in the pattern, a pilot typically is checking all switches
(ignition particularly) to on.
Am I missing something here?
Thanks,
Jim Stone
HRII
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: | B&C conversation on operating SD8 |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 02:20 PM 7/19/2005 -0700, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)"
><frank.hinde@hp.com>
>
>Interesting,
>
>Here is what I am thinking of doing.
>
>Use the engine monitor to measure the current from the main alternator
>(SD8 will normally be off). Set an alarm at below the normal day VFR
>loads (all electric airplane this will be roughly 5 amps). Use the
>normal OV warning light from the main alt as a digital input to the
>engine monitor. Both of these alarms will be annunciated thru the
>headset.
>
>With this annunciation, shut down the field supply to the main alt and
>the kilovolt contactor...Thus main alt is completely out of circuit.
>
>Switch on SD8 which will be wired directly to the endurance bus.
>
>Those are plans so far.
>
>Frank
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill
>Schlatterer
>To: Aeroelectric List
>Subject: AeroElectric-List: B&C conversation on operating SD8
>
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bill Schlatterer"
>--> <billschlatterer@sbcglobal.net>
>
>Just thought SD8 owners might be interesting in what Tim at B&C had to
>say about the SD8 operating procedures. Might want to read bottom up.
>
>Bill S
>7a Ark fuse panel
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Tim Hedding [mailto:tim@bandc.info]
>To: Bill Schlatterer
>Subject: RE: B&C reply
>
I'll embellish Tim's thoughts a bit . . .
>Bill,
>
>Either procedure will work but the procedure you describe is the most
>efficient use of available energy. In this case load management
>decisions are made in advance by the builder, not left up to the pilot
>and the particular flight conditions. Careful choosing of the items on
>the E-bus is important. Otherwise there may be something over on the
>primary bus you want to get to.
Good thought . . . "Plan-B" isn't a plan until one has
considered and accommodated all of the requirements.
>Having both alternators on shouldn't hurt any thing. One can't
>"back-feed"
>the other. Though I haven't tested this particular scenario, I suspect
>the alternators will not load share proportionally because of different
>overall gain on the alternator/regulator pairs. Depending on regulator
>set-points and gains it might be possible for the SD8 to be fully loaded
>continuously while the L40 is lightly loaded.
Correct
>Also, because of the nature of the regulators, you may find the bus
>noisier with the SD8 ON. It uses a switched full-wave bridge rectifier
>that generates more noise than the L40.
Every bus is VERY noisy . . . how big is "very", Mil-Std-704
tells us to EXPECT alternator trash with pk-pk values up
to 10% of bus voltage. An L-40 or and SD-8 installed per
recommendations and with a battery on line will not exceed
this expectation for either product. The noises inherent
in the design of either alternator are insignificant.
>The SD8 uses two sealed ball bearings. Being spline driven, there are
>insignificant radial bearing loads regardless of output. Net torque
>required at zero output should be only enough to overcome friction. Even
>though the rotor "cogs" around because of the magnets, the energy
>applied to climb the magnetic force at each pole should be equal to the
>energy returned going off the backside of the pole.
>
>As output goes up, driving torque will go up. Horsepower required will
>be 1 Horsepower for each 746 watts x efficiency. If the SD8 is 65%
>efficient, full output will be had for around 1/4 Horsepower.
>
>Masking of primary alternator failure as you describe is possible during
>periods of low bus loads.
Didn't see the conversation that started this thread but
I infer that someone was considering running both the SD-8
and L-40 at the same time . . . I've never recommended this
for exactly this reason. Loss of one alternator can be
masked by proper operation of the other. Happens on light
twins all the time.
Active notification of low voltage is the simplest, most
direct indication of poor alternator performance. There is
no imperative to speedy action when the low voltage light
comes on. If you're in the middle of an approach, ignore
it. If you're in cruising flight, finish your cup of coffee
before reacting to the light. This delay will not affect the
outcome of your flight. Hence, there is no level of safety
offered by automatically switching things. Automating these
functions only drives up parts count and tends to take the
pilot out of the loop for something he needs to know about
and can be handled at a very sedate pace.
>Hope I haven't confused you more.
>
>Tim
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Bill Schlatterer [mailto:billschlatterer@sbcglobal.net]
>To: Tim Hedding
>Subject: RE: B&C reply
>
>Tim, thanks for the reply but it doesn't quite add up to me yet.
>According to Bob, first response to a LV/OV warning would be to 1) shut
>down the main alternator, 2) endurance bus on, 3) master to off to kill
>whatever is on on the primary buss and immediately drop to the endurance
>buss load to extend the battery life. 4) Now SD8 on, hopefully with
>less than 8 amps draw on the endurance bus.
Not "hopefully" but very much planned for . . . you have
absolute command and control over this situation and hope
has nothing to do with it.
> . . The diode is already
>pointed at the E-bus which is without power, not because of a diode
>failure but because you have killed the master bat switch. In this
>case, a diode failure would be the same as turning the master off.
This diode is NOT going to fail open.
>Again, this is using Z13 with your 40amp and LRC13 (LR3C?), so there is an
>always hot bus (yes, the battery bus) then a E-bus switch to the E-bus
> with the diode between the e-bus and the primary/main.
Yes, this is described in detail in Figure 17-2 and the
associated text.
>SD8 goes to the battery side/always hot
>side of the starter switch so it will charge the battery and run the
>always hot and E-buss with the master off..... I think?
Yup. You got it. It's a two layer electrical system.
With the battery master OFF and SD8 ON you have the
same electrical system flying in hundreds of LongEz
and VariEz airplanes. Closing the battery master and
adding an L-40 stacks another system on top of it
for full power, normal operations leaving the smaller
system in stand-by for dealing with the rare but
possible failure of the full-up system. There are other
significant features such as dual power paths to e-bus.
>Couple of points to confirm:
>
>If everything is running fine and I just turn on the SD8, nothing should
>happen except that I get the normal 40A off the main alternator plus
>8-10 from the SD8! True?
Only if the SD-8 regulator is set high enough. It MAY
not pick up ANY load if set lower.
>Being gear driven, the SD8 is always spinning anyway so is there any
>additional wear/load to keep it running?
No.
>I understand that the reason not to leave it running is that it would
>mask a primary alternator failure. Sounds true?
Yes.
>Thanks for your help, the subject is a little confusing to me at this
>point.
Suggest you review chapter 17.
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 |
|
| Subject: | B&C conversation on operating SD8 |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
My hands are trembling at the thought of disagreeing with Bob...Its of a
"David and Goliath" thing..:)
But I'm a little uncomfortable at this statement...
Active notification of low voltage is the simplest, most
direct indication of poor alternator performance. There is
no imperative to speedy action when the low voltage light
comes on. If you're in the middle of an approach, ignore
it. If you're in cruising flight, finish your cup of coffee
before reacting to the light. This delay will not affect the
outcome of your flight. Hence, there is no level of safety
offered by automatically switching things. Automating these
functions only drives up parts count and tends to take the
pilot out of the loop for something he needs to know about
and can be handled at a very sedate pace.
In the world of steam driven guages I would agree that low voltage
notification is the simplest but...
It's a second order issue, in other wods the volts drop because the
alternator has entered boat anchour teritory....The failure you are
detecting is not that the alternator has gone away, but that the battery
volts are dropping because the alt has gone.
Why is this significant?...Probably isn't if you set your trip point at
say 12.5V...Alt will normally make 14.5V and when it goes away the
battery volts will presumably get to below 12.5 pretty quickly.
However...In the modern day of the solid state engine manager you can
set an alarm on any parameter you want. So why not detect the loss of
current from the alternator directly and not wait for the battery volts
to drop?
In other words, put the current shunt in the main alternator line and
set the alarm on low current...If your normal day VFR is say 10amps, set
the alarm at 5.
While your at it also set an alarm on the battery volts as your engine
manager will be monitoring that as well, you can then use this feature
to load manage your SD8...Assuming your not still drinking the
coffee..:).
Just a thought.
Frank
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: 'P' lead length |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Matt Prather" <mprather@spro.net>
Length (within reason) is not an issue with any correctly installed "P"
lead, shielded, or otherwise.
Matt-
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bob C. "
> <flyboy.bob@gmail.com>
>
> Are there lengths that should be avoided when installing "P" Leads? In
> other words, are there lengths that potentially cause more "transmitted
> noise" . . . or is that an issues with shielded "P" leads?
> Thanks,
> Bob Christensen
> RV-8 Builder in SE Iowa
>
>
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 09:54 AM 7/20/2005 -0400, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Jim Stone" <jrstone@insightbb.com>
>
>Question concerning Z-27 (one nonimpulse mag and one electronic ign.). I
>like the design of this diagram but I think it a bit odd that in the event
>of an engine stoppage while airborne and no windmill due to low speed, the
>pilot would have to turn the mag switch off to enable the start button.
>With an engine failure, especially down low in the pattern, a pilot
>typically is checking all switches (ignition particularly) to on.
>Am I missing something here?
No. It is a different paradigm. But consider the following:
At what IAS will your engine stop cold when deprived
of any resource necessary to keep running?
Keep in mind that 99% plus cases of engine stoppage
is due to fuel starvation. Gross failures take up most
of the rest of the cases where a restart will be impossible.
I used to marvel at my instructor's admonitions during
a loss of power diagnosis that he wanted me to fiddle
with the magneto switch. "Hey dude, when that engine
falters, the three considerations in order of importance
are fuel, Fuel and FUEL.
Depending on nature and location of stoppage in the
system, getting fuel flow restored can be nearly
instantaneous or it can take several seconds . . .
(assuming that the root cause is miss-management of
controls.) If it's gross failure in the delivery
system, then you need to make that diagnosis quickly
so that you can shift from role as systems analyst
and get back to your duties as pilot.
If one chooses to use a non-impulse coupled magneto
with a modern alternative like an e-mag, then you
should develop the habit of putting an operating
force on both switches for starter engagement . . .
e-mag ON, junk-mag OFF, even if the junk-mag is
already off. Should you find yourself long on
daydreams and short on attention in the pattern,
this habit will offer some offset in total response
time to get things going again . . . and we all
wish you well. But in the final analysis, this
"quirky" requirement for positioning of switches
is not going to be a significant contributor to
the outcome of the days events.
A step up alternative is to put an impulse coupler
under the mag and the whole issue goes away. Better
yet, hang that buggy whip on the wall to tell your
grand kids about in years hence. Put igntion
systems on your engine that are in step with the
instruments on your panel. See:
http://emagair.com
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: mark supinski <mark.supinski@gmail.com>
Hello All-
After reading the 'connection and pouring over the sample system
layouts, we've selected z-19 as the model which best fits our needs.
The design of the system from the electrical level is clear to me.
What has me scratching my head is the physical layout of the system.
Specifically, where am I mounting things like battery contactors, fuse
blocks, wig-wag flashers, etc? And, how am I mechanically mounting
these elements? The wig-wag flasher is a great example -- It's
intended to be plugged into board. Thus it has no mounting
provisions.
Any pointers on the above appreciated...
Mark
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: Physical layout |
Z-USANET-MsgId: XID243JgTP6z0339X30
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: chad-c_sip@stanfordalumni.org
The obvious answer (but I'll be the first to bite the bullet and say it) is
wherever you can fit things.
Things like batteries are often put in later with an eye on weight and
balance. If you're making a canard pusher they'll often go in the tail.
Depending on the kit you're making there may be lots or almost no room set
aside for running wires through all sorts of places.
As far as good practice in how to mount things, you may take a walkaround your
local air show and look at various ways things are done. Much of that is an
art form as much as a science and everyones got their own way of doing
things.
Good luck!
Chad
Chad Sipperley
Lancair IV-P turbine(under construction)
Phoenix, AZ
------ Original Message ------
From: mark supinski <mark.supinski@gmail.com>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Physical layout
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: mark supinski
<mark.supinski@gmail.com>
>
> Hello All-
>
> After reading the 'connection and pouring over the sample system
> layouts, we've selected z-19 as the model which best fits our needs.
> The design of the system from the electrical level is clear to me.
> What has me scratching my head is the physical layout of the system.
> Specifically, where am I mounting things like battery contactors, fuse
> blocks, wig-wag flashers, etc? And, how am I mechanically mounting
> these elements? The wig-wag flasher is a great example -- It's
> intended to be plugged into board. Thus it has no mounting
> provisions.
>
> Any pointers on the above appreciated...
>
> Mark
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: Physical layout |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Phil Birkelbach <phil@petrasoft.net>
It would be helpful to know what kind of airplane you are building.
Godspeed,
Phil Birkelbach - Houston Texas
RV-7 N727WB - Finishing Up
http://www.myrv7.com
mark supinski wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: mark supinski <mark.supinski@gmail.com>
>
>Hello All-
>
>After reading the 'connection and pouring over the sample system
>layouts, we've selected z-19 as the model which best fits our needs.
>The design of the system from the electrical level is clear to me.
>What has me scratching my head is the physical layout of the system.
>Specifically, where am I mounting things like battery contactors, fuse
>blocks, wig-wag flashers, etc? And, how am I mechanically mounting
>these elements? The wig-wag flasher is a great example -- It's
>intended to be plugged into board. Thus it has no mounting
>provisions.
>
>Any pointers on the above appreciated...
>
>Mark
>
>
>
>
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: Physical layout |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: mark supinski <mark.supinski@gmail.com>
Sorry 'bout that -- we're building a Mustang II. This design has a 25
gallon fuel tank 8 inches forward of the instrument panel. The
challenge being there is little / no internal firewall space to mount
things.
Mark
On 7/20/05, Phil Birkelbach <phil@petrasoft.net> wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Phil Birkelbach <phil@petrasoft.net>
>
> It would be helpful to know what kind of airplane you are building.
>
> Godspeed,
>
> Phil Birkelbach - Houston Texas
> RV-7 N727WB - Finishing Up
> http://www.myrv7.com
>
>
> mark supinski wrote:
>
> >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: mark supinski <mark.supinski@gmail.com>
> >
> >Hello All-
> >
> >After reading the 'connection and pouring over the sample system
> >layouts, we've selected z-19 as the model which best fits our needs.
> >The design of the system from the electrical level is clear to me.
> >What has me scratching my head is the physical layout of the system.
> >Specifically, where am I mounting things like battery contactors, fuse
> >blocks, wig-wag flashers, etc? And, how am I mechanically mounting
> >these elements? The wig-wag flasher is a great example -- It's
> >intended to be plugged into board. Thus it has no mounting
> >provisions.
> >
> >Any pointers on the above appreciated...
> >
> >Mark
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: "Jim Stone" <jrstone@insightbb.com>
Thanks Bob,
Anyone want to buy a pair of SLICK mags?
Jim
do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Z-27
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
> <nuckollsr@cox.net>
>
> At 09:54 AM 7/20/2005 -0400, you wrote:
>
>>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Jim Stone"
>><jrstone@insightbb.com>
>>
>>Question concerning Z-27 (one nonimpulse mag and one electronic ign.). I
>>like the design of this diagram but I think it a bit odd that in the event
>>of an engine stoppage while airborne and no windmill due to low speed, the
>>pilot would have to turn the mag switch off to enable the start button.
>>With an engine failure, especially down low in the pattern, a pilot
>>typically is checking all switches (ignition particularly) to on.
>
>>Am I missing something here?
>
> No. It is a different paradigm. But consider the following:
>
> At what IAS will your engine stop cold when deprived
> of any resource necessary to keep running?
>
> Keep in mind that 99% plus cases of engine stoppage
> is due to fuel starvation. Gross failures take up most
> of the rest of the cases where a restart will be impossible.
>
> I used to marvel at my instructor's admonitions during
> a loss of power diagnosis that he wanted me to fiddle
> with the magneto switch. "Hey dude, when that engine
> falters, the three considerations in order of importance
> are fuel, Fuel and FUEL.
>
> Depending on nature and location of stoppage in the
> system, getting fuel flow restored can be nearly
> instantaneous or it can take several seconds . . .
> (assuming that the root cause is miss-management of
> controls.) If it's gross failure in the delivery
> system, then you need to make that diagnosis quickly
> so that you can shift from role as systems analyst
> and get back to your duties as pilot.
>
> If one chooses to use a non-impulse coupled magneto
> with a modern alternative like an e-mag, then you
> should develop the habit of putting an operating
> force on both switches for starter engagement . . .
> e-mag ON, junk-mag OFF, even if the junk-mag is
> already off. Should you find yourself long on
> daydreams and short on attention in the pattern,
> this habit will offer some offset in total response
> time to get things going again . . . and we all
> wish you well. But in the final analysis, this
> "quirky" requirement for positioning of switches
> is not going to be a significant contributor to
> the outcome of the days events.
>
> A step up alternative is to put an impulse coupler
> under the mag and the whole issue goes away. Better
> yet, hang that buggy whip on the wall to tell your
> grand kids about in years hence. Put igntion
> systems on your engine that are in step with the
> instruments on your panel. See:
>
> http://emagair.com
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
>
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: "P" lead length |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 08:48 AM 7/20/2005 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bob C. " <flyboy.bob@gmail.com>
>
>Are there lengths that should be avoided when installing "P" Leads? In other
>words, are there lengths that potentially cause more "transmitted noise" . .
>. or is that an issues with shielded "P" leads?
No length issues. You DO want to ground the shield
at the engine end only . . . and I recommend you use
the shield to PROVIDE ground at the switch end make no
other connections at switch end as suggested in numerous
other texts.
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: | Re: KMA20 installation manual or ?? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 10:25 AM 7/17/2005 -0600, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Greg Puckett" <rv8er@myawai.com>
>
>Hello,
>
>I'm installing a KMA20 and while I have the pin-out from
>aeroelectric.com I need a couple of questions answered.
>
>It appears that the KMA20 has a speaker input and a phone level input
>from each Comm. The TKM radio has a speaker output and a Comm. output.
>I'm assuming that I should not be connecting both of these, but I'm not
>sure.
>
>Does the KMA20 have a speaker level and a phone level input available
>just so you can connect a navcom that may only have one or the other.
>I'm worried that both of these inputs will be summed if I connect them
>both and the overall volume will be twice as loud as it should.
>
>Does anyone have a KMA20 install manual handy that may have the answer
>to this?
did you see my post a couple of days ago for the folks who
offer reprints of old installation manuals?
See:
http://www.avionix.com/manuals.html
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: A question on my crossbar |
overvoltage protection
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
overvoltage protection
At 02:34 PM 7/15/2005 -0400, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Ken <klehman@albedo.net>
>
>Hi Bob
>
>It's obvious that you are a busy man and I thank you for your
>observations. No this is not a 40amp breaker. It's a small automotive
>relay with 40 amp rated contacts. It provides an OV disconnect for a 20
>amp PM alternator. The relay coil draws about 130 ma. The circuit
>breaker that feeds this relay coil, and that the Crowbar OVP trips, is
>a 2 1/2 amp (two and a half amp) breaker.
>
>The OVP is not from B&C. It is homemade according to the revision dated
>4/16/2 and constructed with the recommended Digi-key parts. Since you
>have confirmed that this is unexpected behaviour, I will do some more
>investigation and let you know what I find.
>
>This is on a modified Z-14 and it is not even on the battery that feeds
>the primary systems of my electrically dependant engine. This battery
>and PM alternator feeds the backup engine systems. I'll start by
>investigating whether the OVP for the other alternator behaves similarly
>and perhaps put a scope on the 22 uF capacitor and the SCR. If I don't
>learn anything useful and it is still exhibiting this behaviour, I'll be
>happy to donate it to the cause if you still want to see it but it is
>just a homemade unit.
Yes. Send it to me. First, I'll test it for performance
and then perhaps I'll make some mods and return it to
see if it makes any difference.
Bob . . .
Message 18
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: <jlundberg@cox.net>
Does anyone know where to buy coiled PTT wire. Its the cord that goes from the
PTT switch on the yoke to the mike key terminal on the mic jack.
Thx.
John
Los Angeles, CA
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! --
|