---------------------------------------------------------- AeroElectric-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Sat 12/31/05: 19 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 07:36 AM - Re: IFR Requirements/Ambiguity () 2. 07:36 AM - Re: Switch Washers/ugly hole (Ron) 3. 08:08 AM - Re: Copy of my letter to Niagara Airparts. (Dww0708@aol.com) 4. 08:27 AM - Re: Re: Switch Washers/ugly hole (Bruce Gray) 5. 08:35 AM - Re: Wiring Diagrams (Ken) 6. 09:22 AM - Eyeball Light Question (Dwight Frye) 7. 10:47 AM - Re: Wiring Diagrams (Bill Schlatterer) 8. 10:49 AM - Re: Copy of my letter to Niagara Airparts. (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 9. 11:31 AM - Re: Eyeball Light Question (Matt Prather) 10. 11:44 AM - Re: Copy of my letter to Niagara Airparts. (Mickey Coggins) 11. 11:55 AM - Re: Eyeball Light Question (Craig Payne) 12. 02:55 PM - Re: Eyeball Light Question (Dwight Frye) 13. 03:06 PM - Re: Re: Eyeball Light Question (Craig Payne) 14. 03:23 PM - Re: Copy of my letter to Niagara Airparts. (richard cannella) 15. 03:31 PM - Annunciator light sizing? (Richard Riley) 16. 03:43 PM - Re: Re: Eyeball Light Question (Dwight Frye) 17. 04:04 PM - Re: Re: Eyeball Light Question (Harley) 18. 04:30 PM - Re: Re: Eyeball Light Question (Harley) 19. 07:06 PM - Re: Wiring Diagrams (Ken) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 07:36:56 AM PST US From: Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: IFR Requirements/Ambiguity INNOCENT GLOBAL 0.4620 1.0000 0.0000 --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: 12/31/2005 Hello Ken Thomas (Virken), Thank you for a very interesting email (copied below). I will attempt to answer in pieces, but let me start with a summary answer: "As long as your amateur built experimental aircraft is in compliance with its Operating Limitations (which includes references to complying with FAR's) and the instructions in the current version of the AIM you are legal to fly IFR with no further aircraft approval or paperwork from the FAA." <<1) You wrote: "In reading the airworthiness certificate and the airframe sign-off from the FSDO, I see no verbiage like you listed below in "Operating Limitations". The signoff simply says the FSDO issued an "...experimental Airworthiness Certificate in the Amateur Built category, in accordance with FAR 21.191(g)..." So I'm wondering...1. is something missing, or am I "good to go" as you indicated below that a specific signoff for IFR is unnecessary">> Something may be missing. By "airframe sign-off" do you mean the entry in the aircraft log book that is made by the inspector at the time of the initial inspection? If that is all that you have in addition to the pink original FAA Form 8130-7 Special Airworthiness Certificate then you are missing the Operating Limitations portion of the Special Airworthiness Certificate that should have accompanied the original Form 8130-7 certificate when it was issued. If in fact the Operating Limitations for your aircraft is missing you should try to obtain a copy from either the person you bought the airplane from or the FSDO that issued the orginal airworthiness certificate. Both the Form 8130-7 Certificate and the Operating Limitations, which is considered part of the certificate, are to be carried in the aircraft at all times. If you have the Operating Limitations, but paragraph 7 regarding "day VFR only unless appropriately equipped in accordance with 91.205" is missing then I don't see any prohibition against IFR flight for your aircraft if it is properly equipped. I say this because the FARs are written in prohibition form "...no person may unless xxxxxx" rather than permissable form. If something is not prohibited then its OK to do it. A specific "IFR signoff" for your amateur built experimental aircraft is not required. <<2) You wrote: "2. there's also ambiguity around whether an "IFR Approach Certified GPS" is required for GPS approaches; I read the statement from the EAA and it wasn't explicit, and it also noted that none of the equipment needs to be TSO'd. Well, if that's the case, then why would you need a TSO'd IFR GPS (which I believe is the only way they make them). Do you know the answer here?">> You are beginning to mix together different issues above. Let me try to sort them out. <<"there's also ambiguity around whether an "IFR Approach Certified GPS" is required for GPS approaches;">> This issue is not related to whether the aircraft involved is type certificated or an amateur built experimental. You can go to paragraph 1-1-19. d. of the current version of the AIM on the FAA web site and read the requirements for yourself. No need to depend upon hearsay, rumor, or gossip. <<"I read the statement from the EAA and it wasn't explicit, and it also noted that none of the equipment needs to be TSO'd.">> Yes and no. Since there are no published certification standards for amateur built experimental aircraft there is no need for installed equipment, instruments, or avionics to meet FAA TSO requirements. That is true of most items on an amateur built experimental aircraft, but, and this is a huge but, there are certain items in any aircraft, type certificated or amateur built experimental, that must interface with other aircraft or other parts of the ATC system. Some examples are transponders, ELTs, communication radios, and GPS. One is permitted to have non FAA TSO'd equipment for these kinds of items, but the regulations, the TSO itself, or AIM say in some cases that certain items must comply with FAA TSO requirements. That means that you could go build your own, but the FAA has the right to ask you to prove that it meets the FAA TSO requirements. Since that would be a very demanding thing to do the logical path for most people is to just buy and install a FAA TSO'd item for those items that are specifically required to meet FAA TSO requirements. A careful reading of the FARs or the AIM may be required to determine which items fall into that category. <<"Well, if that's the case, then why would you need a TSO'd IFR GPS (which I believe is the only way they make them). Do you know the answer here?">> You need an FAA TSO'd IFR GPS, or a GPS that you can prove meets that FAA TSO requirements for any aircraft, type certificated or amateur built experimental, in order to fly IFR GPS because the AIM says that you do. "AIM 1-1-19. d. General Requirements 1. Authorization to conduct any GPS operation under IFR requires that: (a) GPS navigation equipment used must be approved in accordance with the requirements specified in Technical Standard Order (TSO) TSO-C129, or equivalent............." OC PS: What is a Virken? Sounds like it might be related to the Gherkin pickle. ----- Original Message ----- From: "ken thomas" Subject: IFR Requirements/Ambiguity > Hello OC, > > I read with interest your post (reproduced below) re. equipping an > experimental aircraft for IFR application, and I'm hoping you can help to > resolve some remaining ambiguity. Thank you for giving it a shot :) > > I purchased a completed Glastar experimental aircraft equipped with a > navcom and indicator making it suitable for vor/localizer approaches, and > I added marker beacons/audio panel, a 2nd navcom, and a Lowrance GPS. It > also has a full compliment of steam gauges and other systems required for > IFR flight. > > In reading the airworthiness certificate and the airframe sign-off from > the FSDO, I see no verbiage like you listed below in "Operating > Limitations". The signoff simply says the FSDO issued an "...experimental > Airworthiness Certificate in the Amateur Built category, in accordance > with FAR 21.191(g)..." > > So I'm wondering... > 1. is something missing, or am I "good to go" as you indicated below that > a specific signoff for IFR is unnecessary > > 2. there's also ambiguity around whether an "IFR Approach Certified GPS" > is required for GPS approaches; I read the statement from the EAA and it > wasn't explicit, and it also noted that none of the equipment needs to be > TSO'd. Well, if that's the case, then why would you need a TSO'd IFR GPS > (which I believe is the only way they make them). Do you know the answer > here? > > Thank you in advance for any clarity you can provide. > > Virken ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 07:36:56 AM PST US From: "Ron" Subject: AeroElectric-List: RE: Switch Washers/ugly hole --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Ron" I have a suggestion that works for me and wanted to pass it on to the list. I did not want to drill a 1/8" hole above the Switch hole for cosmetic reasons. What I suggest is to sharpen to a small point the part of the washer that is against the back of your panel with just enough of a point to press into the back of the panel. This will keep all things from turning and you won't have the exposed hole. I used carbon fibre sheet for the panel and it works fine, should work with any other material also. Ron Triano http://bld01.ipowerweb.com/contentmanagement/websites/rtrianoc/page10.html -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L. Nuckolls, III Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Circuit Breaker v. Fuse --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" At 07:28 PM 12/29/2005 -0500, you wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Eric M. Jones" > >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Rogers, Bob J." BRogers@fdic.gov > >...snip... > >My question is this. If I use 18 awg wire > >with a 10 amp fuse from the power bus up to the 5 amp circuit breaker, > >will the 5 amp breaker trip before the 10 amp fuse blows in the event of > >a dead short in the wire, such as from a Crowbar OV Module? > > >I do not want the fuse at the power bus to blow before the circuit > >breaker pops, > >The expectation is that a smaller CB is faster than a bigger one. But be >very careful. You could be wrong. > > >Somewhere, I read that fuses react faster than circuit breakers, so I am > >asking how many more amps does the fuse have to carry > >before I can be sure that it will not blow before the 5 amp CB pops. > >In general, fuses depend on thermal heating to break and this has some time >lags. Circuit breakes usually do too, but breakers can be magnetic or >electronic and can operate at any speed. > > >the alternator cannot be reset in flight from a nuisance trip. > >Google " AeroElectric nuisance OR false trips " then decide. > > >Any advice will be appreciated. > >My advice is don't use a crowbar, then none of this will be an issue. How is this useful? I did Google the phrases you suggested and got the full dump of most of the threads on the topic that were posted on this list server. There has never been an argument that some combinations of the AeroElectric/B&C ov protection systems needed tweaking. Much has been made of a handful of individuals who CLAIM to have had a lot of trouble but declined to take us up on our 100% satisfaction guarantee for refund on materials unsuited to the buyer's wants/needs. I made an offer right here on the list to refund the purchase price of any crowbar ov product purchased from me along with a bonus of $50. Gee, you'd think that at least one unhappy customer would come forward to claim his $85 prize. I spent hours of research for hard data to back up the engineering choices on our product and received nothing back but blue smoke and mud balls. Nothing is mentioned about failures in the Van's alternator installations being just as susceptible to the load-dump damage irrespective of what type of ov protection is offered . . . but lots of inferences that figure Z-24 was the root cause of the failures and was to be avoided. I note that Niagra Airparts is offering an ov protection system for their 40A alternator installation. See: http://www.niagaraairparts.com/ASP101-PIT%201.pdf Hmmmm . . . amazing similar to Z-24 . . . do you suppose that an owner/builder could blow up his alternator with this system too? Nothing is said in these threads or other on-line discussions about the thousands of systems flying for nearly 20 years in OBAM aircraft and now probably over 1000 systems flying in type certificated aircraft. The only words speaking to our demonstrated willingness to fix what ever problems do arise came from myself. I only wish some of the multi$kilo$ systems I wrestle with on bizjets had so high a field service record as the crowbar ov system we've sold to GA light aircraft. If you're suggesting that a prudent buying decision can be made based on the search terms you've suggested . . . well . . . the dearth of logic in this advice is self evident. You've ridden this horse to death sir. Give it up. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 08:08:31 AM PST US From: Dww0708@aol.com Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Copy of my letter to Niagara Airparts. --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Dww0708@aol.com Bob, you are a leading edge kind of guy It is nice to be able to listen in on your discussions. I used to acquire additional knowledge while working at the airline but as you might imagine airlines are turning into parts changers (LRU) and some of the depth of understanding is lost. Thanks David ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 08:27:16 AM PST US From: "Bruce Gray" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: RE: Switch Washers/ugly hole --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bruce Gray" Another way is to forget the washer and put a dab of RTV on the back/side of the switch after it's tight. Bruce www.glasair.org -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ron Subject: AeroElectric-List: RE: Switch Washers/ugly hole --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Ron" I have a suggestion that works for me and wanted to pass it on to the list. I did not want to drill a 1/8" hole above the Switch hole for cosmetic reasons. What I suggest is to sharpen to a small point the part of the washer that is against the back of your panel with just enough of a point to press into the back of the panel. This will keep all things from turning and you won't have the exposed hole. I used carbon fibre sheet for the panel and it works fine, should work with any other material also. Ron Triano http://bld01.ipowerweb.com/contentmanagement/websites/rtrianoc/page10.html -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L. Nuckolls, III Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Circuit Breaker v. Fuse --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" At 07:28 PM 12/29/2005 -0500, you wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Eric M. Jones" > >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Rogers, Bob J." BRogers@fdic.gov > >...snip... > >My question is this. If I use 18 awg wire > >with a 10 amp fuse from the power bus up to the 5 amp circuit breaker, > >will the 5 amp breaker trip before the 10 amp fuse blows in the event of > >a dead short in the wire, such as from a Crowbar OV Module? > > >I do not want the fuse at the power bus to blow before the circuit > >breaker pops, > >The expectation is that a smaller CB is faster than a bigger one. But be >very careful. You could be wrong. > > >Somewhere, I read that fuses react faster than circuit breakers, so I am > >asking how many more amps does the fuse have to carry > >before I can be sure that it will not blow before the 5 amp CB pops. > >In general, fuses depend on thermal heating to break and this has some time >lags. Circuit breakes usually do too, but breakers can be magnetic or >electronic and can operate at any speed. > > >the alternator cannot be reset in flight from a nuisance trip. > >Google " AeroElectric nuisance OR false trips " then decide. > > >Any advice will be appreciated. > >My advice is don't use a crowbar, then none of this will be an issue. How is this useful? I did Google the phrases you suggested and got the full dump of most of the threads on the topic that were posted on this list server. There has never been an argument that some combinations of the AeroElectric/B&C ov protection systems needed tweaking. Much has been made of a handful of individuals who CLAIM to have had a lot of trouble but declined to take us up on our 100% satisfaction guarantee for refund on materials unsuited to the buyer's wants/needs. I made an offer right here on the list to refund the purchase price of any crowbar ov product purchased from me along with a bonus of $50. Gee, you'd think that at least one unhappy customer would come forward to claim his $85 prize. I spent hours of research for hard data to back up the engineering choices on our product and received nothing back but blue smoke and mud balls. Nothing is mentioned about failures in the Van's alternator installations being just as susceptible to the load-dump damage irrespective of what type of ov protection is offered . . . but lots of inferences that figure Z-24 was the root cause of the failures and was to be avoided. I note that Niagra Airparts is offering an ov protection system for their 40A alternator installation. See: http://www.niagaraairparts.com/ASP101-PIT%201.pdf Hmmmm . . . amazing similar to Z-24 . . . do you suppose that an owner/builder could blow up his alternator with this system too? Nothing is said in these threads or other on-line discussions about the thousands of systems flying for nearly 20 years in OBAM aircraft and now probably over 1000 systems flying in type certificated aircraft. The only words speaking to our demonstrated willingness to fix what ever problems do arise came from myself. I only wish some of the multi$kilo$ systems I wrestle with on bizjets had so high a field service record as the crowbar ov system we've sold to GA light aircraft. If you're suggesting that a prudent buying decision can be made based on the search terms you've suggested . . . well . . . the dearth of logic in this advice is self evident. You've ridden this horse to death sir. Give it up. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 08:35:33 AM PST US From: Ken Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Wiring Diagrams --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Ken Hi Jeff Thank you for sharing your excel schematics. I was hoping that I could copy entire components in one step but I guess not. The wires don't follow the components when I move them either. Might be my old Excel97 version as the wires do follow when I make up my own diagrams as per the wee tutorial that Bill posted. I'll play some more. Anyway, take a look at your starter engaged light. It looks to be in series with the ground path for the starter solenoid whereas you probably intended to show it in parallel with the starter and then using a separate ground for the solenoid. You wouldn't want the light in series as it would interfere with the solenoid operation. FWIW I also noticed that you spec a 3 position progressive switch for the battery/Alt switch but the diagram seems to show a two position switch. The two position switch is cheaper and will work just fine UNLESS your intention is to be able to disconnect the alternator IGN terminal with the engine running in hopes of shutting off the alternator. If so, you'd certainly want to keep the battery master engaged while doing that, which would be a reason to use a progressive switch there. Ken SMITHBKN@aol.com wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: SMITHBKN@aol.com > >Fellow Listers, > >I was asked by someone on the group to share how I developed my wiring >diagram using Excel rather than one of the software programs dedicated to things >electrical. I use Excel a fair amount at work so I am pretty familiar with >it. Most people think of Excel as a spreadsheet and number cruncher, but it >has some basic graphic/drawing capabilities too. > >I simply used the basic drawing capabilities in Excel, drew up various >components using standard shapes to create an inventory of things like lamps, >relays, switches, etc. and then started to use them in the design of my system >which is patterened off of one of the Z-diagrams so graciously provided by Bob. > >What accompanies the system diagram in my Excel file is a component list, a >wiring spec sheet (shows size, type, and terminations of each wire), a load >analysis, and a few others worksheets for misc. things like switch layout, buss > loads, etc. > >In this manner I have everything electrical for my RV-7A project in one >program and all spreadsheets are linked to one other so that changes get >propogated through the system appropriately. > >I've posted a slimmed down version of my files on the Matronics File/Photo >share site in an attempt to get some peer reviews of my system since I'm >actually a rookie as things electrical. If the files and use of Excel have a >benefit to others in the group .... great. I would like to be able to give >something back to those that have helped me along. > >Jeff Smith >Knoxville, TN >RV-7A .... electrical > > ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 09:22:21 AM PST US From: Dwight Frye Subject: AeroElectric-List: Eyeball Light Question --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Dwight Frye I picked up two little eyeball lights from eBay a few months ago. They came in a set with some eyeball vents (which are what I was really shopping for). I've pondered what I might do with them, and the jury is still out ... but I have some thoughts. What I do *not* want to do is install these without a good idea of the servicability of the lights. I have fiddled with them but am not sure I know how to (a) get them apart or (b) replace the bulb. It is the latter I'm most interested in, and I believe it'll take the former for me to accomplish the replacment. I was told that these were lights that are installed in Beech Barons, and that they were purchased in a bulk surplus buy from Raytheon, but can't swear to the validity of those claims. Can anyone enlighten me? Pictures can be found at : http://www.openweave.org/RV7/question.php Any help will be greatly appreciated. I really don't want to put these in just to find ... years (or months, or weeks) down the road that they are a big pain in the butt to service and that messing with them was a huge mistake. On the other hand, they sure are nice. :) Thanks, in advance, for any help! -- Dwight DO NOT ARCHIVE ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 10:47:06 AM PST US From: "Bill Schlatterer" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Wiring Diagrams --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bill Schlatterer" Ken, not to butt in but Jeff reminded me that you can easily make your own shapes using the group function. You simply put whatever shapes together that you like and then hold down the shift key and right click for the menu, then select "grouping" and then "group". Now you have your own comic book shape for whatever you like. If you want colors and fancy lines, etc, you need to format before you group. I made up a bunch after "borrowing" some of Jeff's. I also put another "wee tutorial" :-) in Photo share on Grouping to show how connecting shapes can be made up. My DPDT switches look like a little box with six small circles inside to indicate the poles. Then wires attach to each pole. Kinda comic book but a little quicker that making a real switch diagram AND it works from all directions. I think for most folks purposes, if someone would put together a "consistent" shape library to match Bobs schematics, Excel would do nicely with little or no learning experience. Have fun! Bill S 7a Ark -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Ken Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Wiring Diagrams --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Ken Hi Jeff Thank you for sharing your excel schematics. I was hoping that I could copy entire components in one step but I guess not. The wires don't follow the components when I move them either. Might be my old Excel97 version as the wires do follow when I make up my own diagrams as per the wee tutorial that Bill posted. I'll play some more. > ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 10:49:27 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Copy of my letter to Niagara Airparts. --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" At 11:07 AM 12/31/2005 -0500, you wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Dww0708@aol.com > >Bob, you are a leading edge kind of guy It is nice to be able to listen >in on your discussions. I used to acquire additional knowledge while >working >at the airline but as you might imagine airlines are turning into parts >changers (LRU) and some of the depth of understanding is lost. Thanks >David The situation you describe is not unique. The factory where I work has perhaps a dozen electron herders capable of digging through all the simple ideas that make our products work. Worse yet, we are all within 10-years of retiring. Worst of all, the company's stated goal is to out-source all but our core competency skills. There are zero opportunities for the few that are left to mentor up any of those who follow. Policy and procedures are squeezing the skills and knowledge out of our gray matter pool. This is what happens when successful companies built by folks who love and understand their craft are taken over by managers who tweak and twist in little experiments to see what improves the bottom line for next quarter. They don't understand that success is based not management's next great idea but upon the ability of folks who buck rivets to produce a desirable product. It starts with designers and simple ideas and carries all the way down to the most lowly of tasks ALL of which are essential to maximizing rate of return on investment. I have a brother-in-law, highly skilled and proven tool maker for precision composite parts. He was hired and moved lock stock and barrel 1500 miles away to build a small composites company. He's become very frustrated in his job. The work ethic and native job skills of locals he can tap for the tasks of learning a craft and delivering a superior product are making it impossible for him to do the build-up his bosses would like. His bosses don't seem to understand their poor choice of locations and would like to place root cause of their misery at my brother-in- law's feet. Successful ventures are a solid mix of talents, resources and financing that deliver desirable product to enthusiastic markets. Any missing pieces of that puzzle causes leaks that may well sink the boat. Nobody wishes success for Niagara Airparts any more than I do. Perhaps I can help by plugging a leak here and there. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 11:31:34 AM PST US Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Eyeball Light Question From: "Matt Prather" --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Matt Prather" Those ARE nice. If you can't find replacement bulbs for them, I suggest that you adapt some Superbright (or Luxeon, or whatever) LEDs to mount in the housings. Then at least you wouldn't have to worry about serviceability - last longer than the airplane. Too clean looking to pass up.. Matt- > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Dwight Frye > > > I picked up two little eyeball lights from eBay a few months ago. They > came in a set with some eyeball vents (which are what I was really > shopping for). I've pondered what I might do with them, and the jury is > still out ... but I have some thoughts. > > What I do *not* want to do is install these without a good idea of the > servicability of the lights. I have fiddled with them but am not sure I > know how to (a) get them apart or (b) replace the bulb. It is the latter > I'm most interested in, and I believe it'll take the former for me to > accomplish the replacment. > > I was told that these were lights that are installed in Beech Barons, > and that they were purchased in a bulk surplus buy from Raytheon, but > can't swear to the validity of those claims. > > Can anyone enlighten me? Pictures can be found at : > > http://www.openweave.org/RV7/question.php > > Any help will be greatly appreciated. I really don't want to put these > in just to find ... years (or months, or weeks) down the road that they > are a big pain in the butt to service and that messing with them was a > huge mistake. > > On the other hand, they sure are nice. :) Thanks, in advance, for any > help! > > -- Dwight > > DO NOT ARCHIVE > > ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 11:44:05 AM PST US From: Mickey Coggins Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Copy of my letter to Niagara Airparts. --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Mickey Coggins > This is what happens when successful companies built by folks > who love and understand their craft are taken over by managers > who tweak and twist in little experiments to see what improves > the bottom line for next quarter. They don't understand that > success is based not management's next great idea but upon > the ability of folks who buck rivets to produce a desirable > product. It starts with designers and simple ideas and carries > all the way down to the most lowly of tasks ALL of which > are essential to maximizing rate of return on investment. Not a shock at all. Look at what the world's business schools teach. Employee A = Employee B = Employee C Labor is just another commodity like aluminum or steel or real estate. Cheaper is better. Our financial systems reward this kind of thinking - next quarter is king, the future is someone else's problem. I look forward to a new renaissance of business thinking. There are a few companies like Google that actually try to hire excellent people, and low and behold, they are doing pretty well. Wait until the current founders retire, and the "suits" take over - they'll outsource the whole operation to the lowest bidder, have a couple of great quarters, take their golden parachutes, and the world will wonder why the company ended up being mediocre, or failed. Happy new year! -- Mickey Coggins http://www.rv8.ch/ #82007 finishing do not archive ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 11:55:17 AM PST US From: "Craig Payne" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Eyeball Light Question --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Craig Payne" Looking at your pictures makes me think that: - When the eyeballs are installed the designer probably assumed that there would be no access to the back. - So the bulbs must be replaceable from the front. - The bulbs look like cartridge bulbs that plug straight-in. - they either have two parallel pins or a flat glass base which the wires wrap around. - I would suggest wrapping the tips of some needle-nose pliers in rubber to get a grip in the bulb. Then gently rock the bulb back and forth as you try to pull it out. Alternatively what happens if you remove the two screws at the back end of the reflector? I expect that if you remove the socket at the back the bulb will fall out the front. You may have to apply a small amount of force to remove the socket to overcome the friction of the bulbs socket in the socket's contacts. -- Craig -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dwight Frye Subject: AeroElectric-List: Eyeball Light Question --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Dwight Frye --> I picked up two little eyeball lights from eBay a few months ago. They came in a set with some eyeball vents (which are what I was really shopping for). I've pondered what I might do with them, and the jury is still out ... but I have some thoughts. What I do *not* want to do is install these without a good idea of the servicability of the lights. I have fiddled with them but am not sure I know how to (a) get them apart or (b) replace the bulb. It is the latter I'm most interested in, and I believe it'll take the former for me to accomplish the replacment. I was told that these were lights that are installed in Beech Barons, and that they were purchased in a bulk surplus buy from Raytheon, but can't swear to the validity of those claims. Can anyone enlighten me? Pictures can be found at : http://www.openweave.org/RV7/question.php Any help will be greatly appreciated. I really don't want to put these in just to find ... years (or months, or weeks) down the road that they are a big pain in the butt to service and that messing with them was a huge mistake. On the other hand, they sure are nice. :) Thanks, in advance, for any help! -- Dwight DO NOT ARCHIVE ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 02:55:38 PM PST US From: Dwight Frye Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Eyeball Light Question --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Dwight Frye I'm gonna top-post this time. :) For the relevent comments go look past the end of my reply immediately below. First to Matt's suggestion ... I had an identical thought. If I couldn't make the lights serviceable as is, I'd put a Luxeon and have the best of both worlds ... a nice aviation-designed eyeball light, with a solid-state lite source. I may _still_ do that. But ..... Craig's comments got me looking more closely at the assembly. I agreed that it was likely it could/should be serviced from the front, and started to fiddle (as suggested) with the bulb. It is not quite a straight-in type of bulb, but is a bayonet style item. A small twist releases it from the base quite nicely. For anyone curious about the details I added a picture (bottom of the page) with the bulb out at : http://www.openweave.org/RV7/question.php I'll still need to find a source for the bulbs themselves, but I assume that should be quite possible (though if I have to buy them from Raytheon I might be required to mortgage my house first). Thanks for the help! -- Dwight DO NOT ARCHIVE >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Matt Prather" >Those ARE nice. If you can't find replacement bulbs for them, I suggest >that you adapt some Superbright (or Luxeon, or whatever) LEDs to mount in >the housings. Then at least you wouldn't have to worry about >serviceability - last longer than the airplane. Too clean looking to pass >up.. > >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Craig Payne" > >Looking at your pictures makes me think that: > >- When the eyeballs are installed the designer probably assumed that there >would be no access to the back. >- So the bulbs must be replaceable from the front. >- The bulbs look like cartridge bulbs that plug straight-in. - they either >have two parallel pins or a flat glass base which the wires wrap around. >- I would suggest wrapping the tips of some needle-nose pliers in rubber to >get a grip in the bulb. Then gently rock the bulb back and forth as you try >to pull it out. > >Alternatively what happens if you remove the two screws at the back end of >the reflector? I expect that if you remove the socket at the back the bulb >will fall out the front. You may have to apply a small amount of force to >remove the socket to overcome the friction of the bulbs socket in the >socket's contacts. ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 03:06:18 PM PST US From: "Craig Payne" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Eyeball Light Question --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Craig Payne" Well I guess I got 1 out of 3 right :-} Any numbers on the bulb itself? -- Craig -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dwight Frye Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Eyeball Light Question --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Dwight Frye --> I'm gonna top-post this time. :) For the relevent comments go look past the end of my reply immediately below. First to Matt's suggestion ... I had an identical thought. If I couldn't make the lights serviceable as is, I'd put a Luxeon and have the best of both worlds ... a nice aviation-designed eyeball light, with a solid-state lite source. I may _still_ do that. But ..... Craig's comments got me looking more closely at the assembly. I agreed that it was likely it could/should be serviced from the front, and started to fiddle (as suggested) with the bulb. It is not quite a straight-in type of bulb, but is a bayonet style item. A small twist releases it from the base quite nicely. For anyone curious about the details I added a picture (bottom of the page) with the bulb out at : http://www.openweave.org/RV7/question.php I'll still need to find a source for the bulbs themselves, but I assume that should be quite possible (though if I have to buy them from Raytheon I might be required to mortgage my house first). Thanks for the help! -- Dwight DO NOT ARCHIVE >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Matt Prather" >--> >Those ARE nice. If you can't find replacement bulbs for them, I >suggest that you adapt some Superbright (or Luxeon, or whatever) LEDs >to mount in the housings. Then at least you wouldn't have to worry >about serviceability - last longer than the airplane. Too clean >looking to pass up.. > >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Craig Payne" >--> > >Looking at your pictures makes me think that: > >- When the eyeballs are installed the designer probably assumed that >there would be no access to the back. >- So the bulbs must be replaceable from the front. >- The bulbs look like cartridge bulbs that plug straight-in. - they >either have two parallel pins or a flat glass base which the wires wrap around. >- I would suggest wrapping the tips of some needle-nose pliers in >rubber to get a grip in the bulb. Then gently rock the bulb back and >forth as you try to pull it out. > >Alternatively what happens if you remove the two screws at the back end >of the reflector? I expect that if you remove the socket at the back >the bulb will fall out the front. You may have to apply a small amount >of force to remove the socket to overcome the friction of the bulbs >socket in the socket's contacts. ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 03:23:22 PM PST US From: richard cannella Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Copy of my letter to Niagara Airparts. --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: richard cannella ....... I have been sitting on these sites for over a year prepping for the experience of building( gotta learn to fly first). This hit a nerve. I work for Lucent in ONG tier 2 tech support( don't hit me if you lost money on the stock.) We started out with about 75 engineers, now we're down to 24. Everything has been moved to India and China. I still have to same number of managers above me even though we've lost about 100,000 employees. None of the customers like the service they're getting, but all I hear about is load rate per engineer and how it reduced over all cost. And our CEO keeps getting bonuses for doing a good job. Go figure. Sorry about my second post with me whining. Ric Do not archive pretty well. Wait until the current founders > retire, and the "suits" take over - they'll > outsource > the whole operation to the lowest bidder, have a > couple > of great quarters, take their golden parachutes, and > the world will wonder why the company ended up being > mediocre, or failed. > > Happy new year! > > -- > Mickey Coggins > http://www.rv8.ch/ > #82007 finishing > > > do not archive > > > > > browse > Subscriptions page, > FAQ, > http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List > > Admin. > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________ http://brand.yahoo.com/cybergivingweek2005/ ________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________ Time: 03:31:28 PM PST US From: Richard Riley Subject: AeroElectric-List: Annunciator light sizing? --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Richard Riley I've just finished cutting my instrument panel, I've left cavities for a lot of annunciator lights. I have the layout of which light goes in which pocket, and what color they are. (red, yellow and green). I'm planning on using LEDs - maybe all white LED's and print a color transparency over them. Does anyone have any experience or practical suggestions for what size - in terms of wattage or lumens - to make an annunciator light? It needs to be bright enough to see in daylight (though not in direct sunlight) but not blinding at night. -- ________________________________ Message 16 ____________________________________ Time: 03:43:02 PM PST US From: Dwight Frye Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Eyeball Light Question --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Dwight Frye Craig, Actually .. you got 2 out of 3 right. You got both "no access from the back" and "bulbs replace from the front". Admittedly one follows pretty obviously from the other .. but .. technically, 2 out of 3. :) There are markings on the base. There is an "X" centered over the number "1495". Nothing else. -- Dwight do not archive On Sat Dec 31 18:05:35 2005, Craig Payne wrote : >Well I guess I got 1 out of 3 right :-} > >Any numbers on the bulb itself? > >-- Craig ________________________________ Message 17 ____________________________________ Time: 04:04:40 PM PST US From: Harley Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Eyeball Light Question --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Harley Dwight... excuse me for stepping in here... >>There is an "X" centered over the number "1495"<< That's all you need! It's a 28 volt, 8.4 watt halogen bulb. You may want to change it to a 14 volt if that's the voltage of your system. But be careful...it's expensive! IN lots of one, it's a whoppin' $0.99! You can find it here among other places: www.bulbs.com/products/product_detail.asp?page=products&inventory=12917 and the compressed version of the URL in case word wrap cut it off... http://tinyurl.com/dk2wx Harley Dixon www.bulbs.com/products/product_detail.asp?page=products&inventory=12917 (http://tinyurl.com/dk2wx) Dwight Frye wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Dwight Frye > >Craig, > >Actually .. you got 2 out of 3 right. You got both "no access from the back" >and "bulbs replace from the front". Admittedly one follows pretty obviously >from the other .. but .. technically, 2 out of 3. :) > >There are markings on the base. There is an "X" centered over the number >"1495". Nothing else. > > -- Dwight > >do not archive > >On Sat Dec 31 18:05:35 2005, Craig Payne wrote : > > >>Well I guess I got 1 out of 3 right :-} >> >>Any numbers on the bulb itself? >> >>-- Craig >> >> > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 18 ____________________________________ Time: 04:30:12 PM PST US From: Harley Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Eyeball Light Question --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Harley And to continue, Craig... (Trying to answer emails while watching football! )... If your application is 14 volt, then I think you can probably use any tubular (T) bulb that is 12-14 volt, miniature bayonet base, size 4-1/2 or smaller. I don't think that a halogen is necessary...for the price these are you can experiment for one that has the best light for your use... Harley Dixon Harley wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Harley > >Dwight... > >excuse me for stepping in here... > > > >>>There is an "X" centered over the number "1495"<< >>> >>> > >That's all you need! > >It's a 28 volt, 8.4 watt halogen bulb. You may want to change it to a 14 volt if that's the voltage of your system. > >But be careful...it's expensive! IN lots of one, it's a whoppin' $0.99! > >You can find it here among other places: > >www.bulbs.com/products/product_detail.asp?page=products&inventory=12917 > >and the compressed version of the URL in case word wrap cut it off... > >http://tinyurl.com/dk2wx > >Harley Dixon > > >www.bulbs.com/products/product_detail.asp?page=products&inventory=12917 >(http://tinyurl.com/dk2wx) > >Dwight Frye wrote: > > > >>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Dwight Frye >> >>Craig, >> >>Actually .. you got 2 out of 3 right. You got both "no access from the back" >>and "bulbs replace from the front". Admittedly one follows pretty obviously >> >> >>from the other .. but .. technically, 2 out of 3. :) > > >>There are markings on the base. There is an "X" centered over the number >>"1495". Nothing else. >> >> -- Dwight >> >>do not archive >> >>On Sat Dec 31 18:05:35 2005, Craig Payne wrote : >> >> >> >> >>>Well I guess I got 1 out of 3 right :-} >>> >>>Any numbers on the bulb itself? >>> >>>-- Craig >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 19 ____________________________________ Time: 07:06:13 PM PST US From: Ken Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Wiring Diagrams --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Ken Thank you Bill. Yes this is fairly intuitive compared to the cad programs that I've played with a bit. A compatible symbol library would indeed make this doable for me. I suspect a basic cad tutorial would get me going with one of the freeware cad programs but they sure aren't easy to wade into without some assistance. Happy New Year to all Ken Bill Schlatterer wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bill Schlatterer" > >Ken, not to butt in but Jeff reminded me that you can easily make your own >shapes using the group function. You simply put whatever shapes together >that you like and then hold down the shift key and right click for the menu, >then select "grouping" and then "group". Now you have your own comic book >shape for whatever you like. If you want colors and fancy lines, etc, you >need to format before you group. I made up a bunch after "borrowing" some >of Jeff's. I also put another "wee tutorial" :-) in Photo share on Grouping >to show how connecting shapes can be made up. > >My DPDT switches look like a little box with six small circles inside to >indicate the poles. Then wires attach to each pole. Kinda comic book but a >little quicker that making a real switch diagram AND it works from all >directions. > >I think for most folks purposes, if someone would put together a >"consistent" shape library to match Bobs schematics, Excel would do nicely >with little or no learning experience. > >Have fun! > >Bill S >7a Ark > >