Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 05:55 AM - Re: Niagara Airparts Alternator study. (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
2. 06:20 AM - Re: Re: Niagara Airparts Alternator study. (Mark C. Milgrom)
3. 06:37 AM - Re: Re: The Duplicitous Copy of my letter to Niagara (Frank Stringham)
4. 06:37 AM - Re: Re: what is an engineer, flame suit technology (Frank Stringham)
5. 06:47 AM - Re: Re: Niagara Airparts Alternator study. (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
6. 07:14 AM - Re: Heat sink for Schottky diode (Eric M. Jones)
7. 07:24 AM - Re: Wiring Diagrams Design Software (Speedy11@aol.com)
8. 07:29 AM - Re: Re: what is an engineer, flame suit (Dave Morris \)
9. 07:31 AM - Re: Better List Conduct...Practical Matters (Speedy11@aol.com)
10. 08:00 AM - Re: Instrument Panel Labels (Mark R Steitle)
11. 08:11 AM - Re: Re: what is an engineer, flame suit technology (Bruce Gray)
12. 08:20 AM - Fiberglass instrument panel (Brinker)
13. 08:24 AM - Re: Re: what is an engineer, flame suit (Richard Riley)
14. 08:39 AM - EFIS Backup EFIS? (Bruce McGregor)
15. 08:43 AM - Re: Re: Eyeball Light Question (Lloyd, Daniel R.)
16. 08:50 AM - Re: Re: what is an engineer, flame suit technology (Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis))
17. 08:54 AM - Re: Fiberglass instrument panel (Matt Prather)
18. 09:00 AM - Re: Fiberglass instrument panel (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
19. 09:07 AM - Re: cross feed contactor (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
20. 09:08 AM - Re: EFIS Backup EFIS? (Bryan Hooks)
21. 09:14 AM - Re: Fiberglass instrument panel (Dave Morris \)
22. 09:17 AM - Re: Instrument Panel Labels (Craig Payne)
23. 09:17 AM - Re: Fiberglass instrument panel (SteinAir, Inc.)
24. 09:46 AM - Express PCB/SCH was Wiring Diagrams Design Software (Jerry2DT@aol.com)
25. 09:51 AM - Re: Re: Better List Conduct...Practical Matters (richard titsworth)
26. 09:54 AM - Re: Instrument Panel Labels (Craig Payne)
27. 09:55 AM - Re: EFIS Backup EFIS? (Ken)
28. 09:58 AM - Re: EFIS Backup EFIS? (Bruce Gray)
29. 10:11 AM - Re: Fiberglass instrument panel (Brinker)
30. 10:20 AM - Re: Heat sink for Schottky diode (Eric M. Jones)
31. 10:20 AM - Re: EFIS Backup EFIS? (Werner Schneider)
32. 10:22 AM - Re: Re: Wiring Diagrams Design Software (Nancy Ghertner)
33. 10:27 AM - Re: Fiberglass instrument panel (Bruce Gray)
34. 10:44 AM - Re: Re: Wiring Diagrams Design Software (Dave Morris \)
35. 10:45 AM - Re: Fiberglass instrument panel (Matt Prather)
36. 10:58 AM - Re: Instrument Panel Labels (Harley)
37. 11:07 AM - Re: EFIS Backup EFIS? (Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis))
38. 11:08 AM - Re: EFIS Backup EFIS? (Matt Prather)
39. 11:17 AM - Re: EFIS Backup EFIS? (BobsV35B@aol.com)
40. 11:20 AM - Re: Instrument Panel Labels (Craig Payne)
41. 11:28 AM - Re: Re: what is an engineer, flame suit technology (Harold)
42. 11:32 AM - Re: EFIS Backup EFIS? (BobsV35B@aol.com)
43. 11:40 AM - Re: EFIS Backup EFIS? (Bruce Gray)
44. 11:51 AM - Re: Instrument Panel Labels (Craig Payne)
45. 12:04 PM - Re: EFIS Backup EFIS? (Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis))
46. 12:05 PM - Re: EFIS Backup EFIS? (Chuck Jensen)
47. 12:19 PM - Re: Fiberglass instrument panel (Brinker)
48. 12:25 PM - Re: EFIS Backup EFIS? (BobsV35B@aol.com)
49. 12:30 PM - Re: EFIS Backup EFIS? (Matt Prather)
50. 12:38 PM - Re: EFIS Backup EFIS? (BobsV35B@aol.com)
51. 12:42 PM - Re: EFIS Backup EFIS? (Bruce Gray)
52. 01:02 PM - Re: EFIS Backup EFIS? (Bruce Gray)
53. 01:05 PM - Re: EFIS Backup EFIS? (RV Builder (Michael Sausen))
54. 01:13 PM - Re: EFIS Backup EFIS? (Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis))
55. 01:19 PM - Re: EFIS Backup EFIS? (Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis))
56. 01:27 PM - Re: Fiberglass instrument panel (Brinker)
57. 01:43 PM - Re: Re: what is an engineer, flame suit technology (sportav8r@aol.com)
58. 02:17 PM - Re: formation flight comm attenuator (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
59. 02:24 PM - Re: EFIS Backup EFIS? (BobsV35B@aol.com)
60. 02:45 PM - Re: EFIS Backup EFIS? (Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis))
61. 02:58 PM - Re: EFIS Backup EFIS? (BobsV35B@aol.com)
62. 02:59 PM - Re: Fiberglass instrument panel (Brinker)
63. 03:08 PM - fiberglass panel (bob noffs)
64. 03:13 PM - Re: Re: what is an engineer, flame suit technology (Kevin Horton)
65. 03:24 PM - Re: Fiberglass instrument panel (John Schroeder)
66. 03:27 PM - Re: Fiberglass instrument panel (Brinker)
67. 03:31 PM - Re: Fiberglass instrument panel (Ken)
68. 03:35 PM - Re: fiberglass panel (Brinker)
69. 03:47 PM - Re: Fiberglass instrument panel (Brinker)
70. 03:49 PM - Re: Fiberglass instrument panel (BobsV35B@aol.com)
71. 05:56 PM - Re: Close Proximity Air2Air Comm problem (HELP!) (Brian Lloyd)
72. 06:10 PM - Re: Instrument Panel Labels (Ken)
73. 06:22 PM - Re: Fiberglass instrument panel (Peter Laurence)
74. 06:39 PM - Re: Re: formation flight comm attenuator (sportav8r@aol.com)
75. 07:02 PM - choice of gyros for IFR (Brian Lloyd)
76. 07:25 PM - Re: Re: formation flight comm attenuator (Brian Lloyd)
77. 07:59 PM - THANKY YOU! Re:Formation flight comm attenuator (Fiveonepw@aol.com)
78. 08:16 PM - Re: Close Proximity Air2Air Comm problem (HELP!) (Fiveonepw@aol.com)
79. 08:22 PM - Re: THANKY YOU! Re:Formation flight comm attenuator (Brian Lloyd)
80. 08:36 PM - Re: Fiberglass instrument panel (John Schroeder)
81. 09:18 PM - Re: Close Proximity Air2Air Comm problem (HELP!) (Brian Lloyd)
82. 09:23 PM - Airpath compass bulb & connector. (Rob W M Shipley)
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: Niagara Airparts Alternator study. |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 09:17 PM 1/3/2006 -0800, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: <gmcjetpilot@yahoo.com>
>
>
>The whole NIAGARA letter is really a thinly valid attempt to discredit the
>company, not a quest for knowledge or understanding. To be honest I find
>you writing the competition and posing as a Quote: Hobbyist, to be of
>questionable ethics, since you are associated with B&C.
I have received no fees for service from B&C in over 10 years . . .
My last design task for them was the SB-1 regulator. They
are my friends. I have considerable knowledge of their products
and customer relations policies but no business relationship
other than the fact that they are one of 4 dealers for my book.
>
>WHY? Why do you care? Is an ego thing with you? Give it a break!!
>
Nope. The internally regulated alternator is here to stay.
99.99% of the time, they work as intended. In their off-the-shelf
configuration, they are difficult to integrate into aircraft under
the old design goals. It's my task to figure out a way to
make them work under these goals. Some folks are happy with
the IR alternator as-offered by Vans and others . . . and
if they're happy with their supplier/consumer relationship
then that's great.
>
> STICK TO B&C and internally regulated alternators and just leave the
>internal regulated alternators and Niagara alone.
Why do you choose to ignore my words indicating my goal
of elevating the stature of Niagara's products to a level
equal to or better than their competitors? If the words
in their installation manual can be eliminated without
risk to the reliability of their product, then I'll suggest
it's a good thing to do. Suppose I sold you a lawn mower
and placarded the thing to not operate above 80% throttle
or to use special gasoline when my competitors had no such
restrictions? How motivated would you be to purchase my
product?
Please hear this my friend. It is not and never will be
a behavior of mine to detract from stature of anyone's
product as long as it meets the specs on their sales
literature. In this case, I believe Niagara is unnecessarily
denigrating their own product. I'd be pleased to help them
correct this condition.
>
> FYI: By the way JIM does not work at Niagara anymore, he was a
>consultant. No doubt a dumb engineer. The owner is in Florida for the
>winter, give them a call, I did. No I dont work for them and have no
>affiliation what so ever except I have one of their great alternator kits.
>
Good info. Thank you. If I don't hear from Niagara in a week or
so, I'll call them too. How many fences do I have to mend with them
because you called them first?
>
>When Van made the statement on his site they would not warranty the
>alternators he sold if an OV module was used; Bob acted like a child.
>
> Bob: I AM NOT RECOMMENDING INTERNAL REGULATED
>ALTERNATORS ANY MORE!!! AND TAKING THEM OUT OF MY
>BOOK NEXT REVISION.
Again, you misquoted me . . .
. . . . I took Z-24 out of the book. It proved to be an incomplete
consistent with contemporary design goals. Z-24 WILL go back into the
book after I've satisfied myself that I have a usable risk-free
technique. The figure came out precisely because Van's thought it violated
their warranty position and because I had some questions to
address about it's goof-proofness before I could re-instate it.
> (In retaliation he makes this edict!!! Like Van
>gives a damn what he thinks. They sell 1000s of their alternators and so
>does Niagara, who has sold I-VR ND alternators for almost 10 years
>with NO RETURNS or problems.)
Let's say FEW problems. We have credible reports of IR alternators
suffering regulation failure of one kind or another causing
batteries to puff up and panel equipment to smoke. Their products,
like everyone else's products are perhaps .01% short of 100%
failure proof . . . just enough risk to suggest to some folks
that ov protection and positive, risk-free control under all
conditions is a good thing to do.
<snip>
>
>That is all I have to say about Niagara and Bob.
>
>PS the only reason Niagara offers an OV module it because people who
>listen to Bob ask for it. To please customers they offer this certified
>device
>add on, which cost a fortune. Their recommendation is NOT to use an OV
>module and they dont sell many OV modules. If you want a crow-bar or
>OV module consider using an externally regulated alternator, that is what
>the OV modules are for. Adding the OV module on top of a ND alternator
>with an I-VR is adding weight, parts and complexity at best, potentially
>asking for problems when the I-VR clashes with the OV module at worse.
If a customer installs the OV protection system cited on
their Niagara's website, does it violate their warranty?
The only reason I published my letter in the first place
was to illustrate responsible behavior both as a supplier
and consumer in a free market. I introduced myself, asked some
simple and specific questions to explore the science behind
words in their sales literature. I ended the letter with
words of praise and encouragement for their participation
in fastest growing segment of GA. The letter was not threatening,
belligerent or a cover for some subversive goal. You've
turned it into something entirely different. I can only
assume that since you called them, you've chosen to inject
yourself into my conversation with them. You seem to
know more about Niagara than I do. Can you offer any
answers to my questions?
George, you imply much, infer much and deduce the wrong
things from words I've written. You go further to attack
me personally when to my knowledge, nobody has provoked
you. You're making far to much of this topic and the outcome
of these studies and conversations will show how much of
what you've written is incorrect. Why not wait until the
dust settles on the Niagara thing before you wade in with
the ax swinging? You've rendered a verdict before the
jury was sent out with all the data. Your invectiveness
is a distraction from the very real and useful task before
us.
As an engineer and with customers standing outside the door,
what are your recommendations for implementing positive,
any-time, any-conditions control over an IR alternator
consistent with design goals achieved by contemporary
certified aircraft? This is not a debate as to our
recommendations for implementing the technique. Nor is
it a debate about whether or not OV protection is warranted.
You said Niagara offered the OV protection because customers
asked for it. 100% of certified ships have it. No doubt some
folks in the OBAM aircraft community want it and are willing
to pay for it. The customers are there. They're waving credit
cards. How would you suggest we address their desire? You
suggest I'm unqualified to be a serious designer for such
goals. Okay, what are your recommendations?
I wish I had more time to spend on this. The science is
interesting and value to the OBAM aircraft community will
be significant. The IR alternator has done well so far
and will do BETTER. Why not HELP the OBAM aircraft community
by concentrating on that task? The solutions are simple-ideas
that will stand on their own merits whether embraced by
the exalted academic or lowly bench technician.
Bob . . .
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: Niagara Airparts Alternator study. |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Mark C. Milgrom" <milgrom@earthlink.net>
Bob, please, stop defending yourself. Just stop. You don't NEED to
defend yourself, and your replies simply add more fuel to George's
raging fire. Let's just ignore George, and hopefully he will flame out.
Bob, your experience and your credentials were established a long time
ago with us. You don't need to defend yourself anymore.
Mark Milgrom
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: The Duplicitous Copy of my letter to Niagara |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Frank Stringham" <fstringham@hotmail.com>
delete
don't archive
>From: <gmcjetpilot@yahoo.com>
>Reply-To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
>To: AeroElectric-List@matronics.com
>Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: The Duplicitous Copy of my letter to
>Niagara
>Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 21:17:21 -0800 (PST)
>
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: <gmcjetpilot@yahoo.com>
>
>
>
> The whole NIAGARA letter is really a thinly valid attempt to
>discredit the
>company, not a quest for knowledge or understanding. To be honest I find
>you writing the competition and posing as a Quote: Hobbyist, to be of
>questionable ethics, since you are associated with B&C.
>
>WHY? Why do you care? Is an ego thing with you? Give it a break!!
>
> FOLKS THESE ARE BOBS WORDS:
>http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Alternator_Failures.pdf
>
> *For years and since day-one of my participation in B&Cs development
>and marketing of alternators, we have preached the doctrine of externally
>regulated alternators. Examples of this philosophy are found though out
>early writings and particularly in chapters on alternators in the
>Connection.
>A simple inspection of B&Cs offerings from the beginning will show that
>only externally regulated alternators are offered.*
>
> WORDS like in the beginning and Doctrine sounds like the Bible. Bob I
>think has a complex. Bob goes on to offer up foggy ANECDOTES,
>which is nothing but sensational propaganda with NO FACTS!!!. This is very
>unlike an engineer. Facts not anecdotes. This is the word according to BOB
>and all shall agree or be attacked by the PARADIGM, what ever he means
>by paradigm.
>
> You are being duplicitous when you write Niagara and do not identify
>yourself as a B&C associate. You have NO desire to learn from Niagara
>and only want to mock them. No matter what their reply is you will nit
>pick, attack and criticize, which you already did anyway.
>
> Leave Niagara out of it. WE GET IT. THE WORDS ARE NOT
>Precise. You could write it much better. OK, You win.
>
> STICK TO B&C and internally regulated alternators and just leave the
>internal regulated alternators and Niagara alone.
>
> FYI: By the way JIM does not work at Niagara anymore, he was a
>consultant. No doubt a dumb engineer. The owner is in Florida for the
>winter, give them a call, I did. No I dont work for them and have no
>affiliation what so ever except I have one of their great alternator kits.
>
>HE SAID HE'S WAS AN ENGINEER LETS LYNCH HIM!!!!!
>
>First I NEVER mentioned my degrees to put BOB down. I only
>mentioned it because BOB was making up stuff a while back and coming
>off as an engineer. I thought Bob was and engineer. As an engineer I was
>MYSTIFIED that Bob said what he did, so I asked, Bob do you have a
>degree in engineering. He said no and that he didnt think much of
>Engineers!!!!!!! End of story. But now he is saying he is an engineer. GO
>FIGURE. I have dealt with mechanics and electricians before, 1000s of
>times, and most of the time it is mutual respect, but on occasion you run
>into geniuses like Bob who know everything. Really he does.
>
>I have HUGE respect for most of what Bob has done for the experimental
>community. Sure some one with out a degree could apply engineering
>principles, advanced math to problem solve and invent, but with out the
>judgment combined with the education the results could be in great error.
>This is where Bob gets in trouble by the way. He knows just enough to get
>in trouble.
>
>Bob is arrogant to tell off people with more experience & education
>while refusing to admit his lack of understanding. Adding insult, Bob
>throws out a bunch of big sound engineering words (incorrectly). I am not
>talking about me BTW. Bob gets into pissing matches with everyone in the
>industry and respects NO one (that disagrees) and assumes you're (in his
>words) IGNORANT.
>
> Now what is my problem? The problem I have with Bob is he demeans the
>profession of engineering, implies that math (advanced math) is not useful
>and that some how Votech grads are on par with those of MIT or any other
>full university. This is just stupid and child like. May be Raytheon is not
>the
>place to work and they have a hard time getting people to work there?
>
> It kind of makes me mad. It takes 5 full years of a very demanding
>curriculum to get a Bachelor degree in engineering. People who drop out
>and cant hack it are the ones who are bitter. Bob says he could not go to
>college because he had a family? Sound like a good excuse. I choose not
>to have a family till later and suffer 5 years of poverty as a starving
>college
>student. I was poor and worked in a shipyard as fitter for 1.5 years to pay
>for school and continued to work throughout my undergrad work as a buss
>boy, waiter and mechanic. I paid for 100% of my education, graduating on
>the deans list. A 1year assoc degree in what ever does not compare.
>
>Anyone who drops out of school and than ridicules people with degrees is a
>petty person. I don't think Bob said that but a few of you did, and you
>know
>who you are and should be ashamed of yourself.
>
> In typical hypocritical fashion on one hand Bob puts down engineers in
>general and than adapts or co-ops the title of Engineer. Bob claims to have
>used engineering analysis, but miss uses engineering terms and concepts all
>the time. When pointed out Bob goes into arrogant attack mode. When
>asked for the data he never responds, while demanding PROOF from all
>others. This is extremely frustrating. When cornered Bob uses words like
>paradigm and Failure Effects Analysis. OK, wow impressive! What does
>that mean Bob? Heard that at a meeting once? Lets see your FEA
>analysis/data. Your audience is smart enough to understand it, lets see it.
>
>
>I DON'T WANT TO PLAY, I'M TAKING MY BALL HOME
>
>When Van made the statement on his site they would not warranty the
>alternators he sold if an OV module was used; Bob acted like a child.
>
> Bob: I AM NOT RECOMMENDING INTERNAL REGULATED
>ALTERNATORS ANY MORE!!! AND TAKING THEM OUT OF MY
>BOOK NEXT REVISION. (In retaliation he makes this edict!!! Like Van
>gives a damn what he thinks. They sell 1000s of their alternators and so
>does Niagara, who has sold I-VR ND alternators for almost 10 years
>with NO RETURNS or problems.)
>
> This reminded me of a child taking his ball because he is mad and does
>not
>want to play anymore. Go and take your Book and recommendations and be
>done with it. WE GET IT. DONT USE INTERNALLY REGULATED
>ALTERNATORS. The thing that kills you Bob is people dont listen to your
>every word. I am afraid to say but there will be more I-VR alternators
>flying
>with out Bobs blessing. DONT TELL ME THE FAA WILL NOT certify
>an I-VR. I dont care. First we fly experimental aircrarft second The FAA
>will not certify Bobs hidden fuse box either, so I am good company.
>
>For those who follow the word according to Bob, fine, I think that is
>GREAT!! You will have good results, heavy, complicated results, but good
>results. Like all system designers they loose the big picture. The plane
>has
>to fly and weight, cost, build time are all factors.
>
>
>STICK WITH WHAT YOU KNOW
>
> If Bob would just stick to basic DC circuits (class 101) and the
>Doctrine,
>use externally regulated alternators with crow bars. If you avoid implying
>your engineering credentials, ability to do engineering analysis to support
>your claims, I would be happy.
>
> 75% of your rap is opinion, not fact, which is fine. The other 25% is
>......
>
> That is all. Bob, be the teacher of basic DC circuits 101. Also promote
>the use of B&C products, your BOOK and external regulated alternators
>ONLY. Just be consistant and stop with the smoke and mirrors.
>
>The only problem with external regulated alternators are there are NONE
>available**, while there are fantastic ND alternators with internal VRs to
>be had, which work well. You on the other had have single handily spread
>more rumors and innuendos about I-VR than anyone on the web, while
>bold face saying, WHO ME, no I support internal regulation, some of my
>customers have them. READ your own words (doctrine from the beginning)
>Bob. You don't support I-VR, or do you? MAKE YOUR MIND UP.
>
>** B&C is out of their minds with what they charge.
>
> I dont care if Bob has a degree; you cant do much damage with DC power
>distribution circuits, since this was figured out 150 years ago
>(battery-wire-
>switch-wire-light-ground). Anything he has wrote has been said before, but
>agree his book is very useful text for amateur aircraft builders, even if
>there
>is nothing new there. The crow bar by the way has been done before, which
>Bob admits. The B&C voltage regulator is just the same old same old $10
>VR in a $250 package with a crow bar.
>
>That is all I have to say about Niagara and Bob.
>
>PS the only reason Niagara offers an OV module it because people who
>listen to Bob ask for it. To please customers they offer this certified
>device
>add on, which cost a fortune. Their recommendation is NOT to use an OV
>module and they dont sell many OV modules. If you want a crow-bar or
>OV module consider using an externally regulated alternator, that is what
>the OV modules are for. Adding the OV module on top of a ND alternator
>with an I-VR is adding weight, parts and complexity at best, potentially
>asking for problems when the I-VR clashes with the OV module at worse.
>
>
>---------------------------------
>
>
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: what is an engineer, flame suit technology |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Frank Stringham" <fstringham@hotmail.com>
delete
don't archive
>From: <gmcjetpilot@yahoo.com>
>Reply-To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
>To: AeroElectric-List@matronics.com
>Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: what is an engineer, flame suit technology
>Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 21:24:01 -0800 (PST)
>
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: <gmcjetpilot@yahoo.com>
>
>
> Wow, nice flame job. I had my nomex and asbestos underwear on and
>still
>my short curly hairs got singed. It was more flame than the Space Shuttle
>on re-entry.
>
>
>For those with all the personal attacks and conjecture about me, that says
>more about you than I. Its no doubt typical you run your mouth with out
>knowing any facts. Ironic and hypocritical you do what you claim of me.
>LOL
>
>
>Let me just say I have no desire to defend myself from stupid attacks with
>zero merit, but I will say although I fly for a living now, I get several
>unsolicited calls a year for engineering consulting work, all over the US,
>Europe, Asia and South America. My last full engineering contract was
>about 8 years ago, earning me about $150,000, to sign off a B767 freighter
>modification. It pays to go to school. hahaha So say what you want, I am
>laughing my way to the bank.
>
>
>Let me explain what a PE (professional engineer) is. First the PE license
>is
>really only for engineers in Public works, like buildings and bridges.
>States
>require the PE license to sign off drawings for public works. Also it is
>true
>you can get a PE (professional Engineer license) with out a degree. You do
>that by first taking the EIT exam (Engineer in Training) and having work
>experience. Than take the PE eaxm. Chances of passing the exams with out
>schoolwork, is low. This is like Law school and being a Lawyer. You don't
>need to go to law school to be a lawyer; you only need to pass the Bar
>exam, but without school the chance of passing is nil. Also the chance a
>corporation or law firm will hire you as a Lawyer, with out the sheepskin,
>is
>slim.
>
>
>However in aerospace, working for a corporation a PE license is NOT
>needed, common or required, but large corporations with out exception do
>require a degree in engineering to be hired as an engineer. I only got a PE
>because I do aerospace consulting as an individual, outside the corporate
>umbrella. In fact what ever Bob does at Raytheon is not directly related to
>final approval of the engineering definition of a component. An engineer
>signs off what ever Bob does, one with a degree and likely a DER
>(designated engineer representative). A DER is assigned by the FAA to
>act on their behalf. Bob is not a DER and if he was it would be an oddity.
>
>
>What is an engineer? Let me give you an aerospace example, but this is
>similar to building a bridge, dam, road or skyscraper. The B777 was
>designed by engineers: Mechanical, structural, electrical, chemical,
>aerodynamics, metallurgical, materials, textile, manufacturing and process
>engineers. How do they do their job? By and large the application of
>advance mathematics, science and engineering principles. Of course FAR's
>are involved.
>
>
>The structural engineer uses FEM, finite element analysis. The
>Aerodynamisist uses CFD, computational fluid dynamics/wind tunnel. This
>requires very math intensive calculations. The electrical engineer? Well
>look power distribution systems are OLD news; the leading edge is in
>digital controls and fly by wire. The ART of AC or DC power distribution
>has not changed much since the B707. OK. You don't need to be an
>engineer to figure out a DC or AC system, I will admit.
>
>
>However the electrical engineers are using advance mathematics and a large
>body of knowledge in digital control and feed back to innovate and develop
>new technologies, not just rehashing the same old principles. Obviously the
>EFIS, FMC (Flt management computers), INS (inertial nav system) and fly
>by wire technologies come to mind; however these are not really new
>anymore.
>
>
>What and where will the next innovations come from? ENGINEERS.
>Chance is it will not be a kid from a Votech school that knows the bench as
>Bob says. OK. Not a put down just a fact. We need to admire the academic
>achievement and not scorn and ridicule it. I find the people who do this
>are
>ones who could not cut it in school or are just plan ignorant. Not everyone
>can be a self made man like Bob, no doubt he is much smarter than I am and
>most Engineers or manager at Raytheon.
>
>
>When I was in the field or factory, I worked with 100's of mechanics and
>electricians (spark chasers as they like to be called) and have huge
>respect
>and a great relation with most, but some should not have been within 100
>yard of a dog house much less a jet aircraft or spacecraft.
>
>
>Look the engineers who invented the solid state transistors where college
>(MIT) educated. The level of technology we are at in the world now requires
>advanced degrees, agree or not, that is my opinion. The sad fact is bone
>heads that discount the value of education is one reason the US is loosing
>the
>lead in the world.
>
>
>Now not everyone needs to invent the transistor. Look at Bob, he has not
>invented anything. Everything, including the crow bar, been done before,
>but
>he did put it all in a book, which is handy. Not having a degree takes
>nothing
>away from that. The technical guys who comes up with applications that use
>transistors are also clever and needed just as much at the inventor of the
>transistor itself, but to achieve breakthroughs requires technical chops
>and
>education. We will not achieve technical lead in the world thru the
>Votech's.
>
>
>I hope that clears up what an engineer is. I understand the average person
>does not grasp what an engineer is because of the level of math and
>science.
>Think of engineers as problem solvers or practical physicist/scientist for
>society. Engineers are involved in almost every product you touch every
>day from toaster, car, TV to a package at the grocery store and the machine
>that packed it. Engineers are more than the wiring in your homebuilt.
>
>
>Bob is a special case and his vast experience working on planes is a great
>education equivalent to and much better than a degree. OK I said it Bob's
>great long live the king. Buy his book go to his class you will learn.
>Geeeeeeee
>
>Cheers George
>
>
>---------------------------------
>
>
Message 5
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Niagara Airparts Alternator study. |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 09:18 AM 1/4/2006 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Mark C. Milgrom"
><milgrom@earthlink.net>
>
>Bob, please, stop defending yourself. Just stop. You don't NEED to
>defend yourself, and your replies simply add more fuel to George's
>raging fire. Let's just ignore George, and hopefully he will flame out.
I'm not defending myself. It is, as you've noted, unnecessary.
These "conversations" are as much an exercise for me (you'd
be surprised how often these kinds of discussion arise in
business situations) as they are an illustration of how one
should endeavor to filter out chaff and focus on the simple-ideas,
science and honorable consumer/supplier relationships.
It's as easy for folks to read the wrong things into my activity
as it is for George to create straw-men to attack. Let's
keep focused on the goal of figuring out how to integrate the
IR alternator into airplanes. If I can also illustrate responsible
and helpful actions with respect to suppliers, it's an added bonus.
I'd hope that folks on the list refrain from joining the
conversation except to illuminate MY errors of fact and logic.
I need and appreciate that kind of review. Let me deal with
George and Niagara.
If these posts upset anyone, please delete them. But if
they're interested in the practice and science of aircraft
systems design and value of building good relationships
with responsible participants, then simply observe.
Bob . . .
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: Heat sink for Schottky diode |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones@charter.net>
Re: PowerSchottky
Originally I believed the TO-3 hardware was so common that selling the insulators
made little sense. Customers have asked for a solution so I designed the attached.
I will add these to my website soon. I am now having parts bid, so I don't
know the price but the attached is easy to make.
http://www.periheliondesign.com/downloads/Complete Isolation for the PowerSchottky.pdf
Regards,
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge MA 01550-2705
(508) 764-2072
"Every act of conscious learning requires the willingness to suffer an injury to
one's self-esteem...."
-Thomas Szasz
Message 7
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Wiring Diagrams Design Software |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Speedy11@aol.com
In a message dated 01/04/06 3:00:35 AM Eastern Standard Time,
aeroelectric-list-digest@matronics.com writes:
Matt: here's a complete schematic in ExpressSCH for a typical
aircraft, plus a symbol library that has many of B&C's switches etc.
http://vx-aviation.com/page_3.html
Vern,
When I try to open your symbol library it says it's not an ExpressSCH file.
Stan Sutterfield
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: what is an engineer, flame suit |
technology
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dave Morris \"BigD\"" <BigD@DaveMorris.com>
technology
"What and where will the next innovations come from?"
I think this is where you are wrong. I'll just mention a few examples that
have absolutely SHAKEN the earth and transformed the entire planet over the
past 50 years:
"Ham Radio"
Many modern communications technologies were invented not by engineers, but
by amateurs, working in their shops, trying to come up with a "better way"
than the status quo. Spread spectrum, television, packet radio, and many
other examples exist. Howard Hughes was a ham. So was Robert
Goddard. Both of them were ridiculed for trying to find "a better way"
that was not in keeping with the present-day engineer mindset.
"Bill Gates"
Never graduated. Do we need to mention what he accomplished?
"Steve Jobs".
Do we need to mention what he created in his garage while HP was ridiculing
him for not being an "Engineer"?
Where are all these engineers when it comes to creating OBAM electrical
systems that are fault-tolerant? I don't remember seeing one single one of
them standing up in an EAA meeting to show us a better way. It's the
self-taught guy who has no "old school" to hide behind, the guy who is
thought of as "a bit crazy" who ends up being right all along. A thankless
job, taking all those arrows.
"There is tremendous unease in the "American soul" over the worth of the
dreamer/visionary.
We simultaneously romanticize these peculiar men and women, profit from
them, try to starve them out, and kill them off. It is as if investors,
distrustful of their own ability to tell the difference between an American
dream and an American Pipe Dream, hedge their bets by holding visionaries
to budgets and time lines that are just short of adequate."
- Fred Moody, "The Visionary Position"
Dave Morris
At 11:24 PM 1/3/2006, you wrote:
>What and where will the next innovations come from? ENGINEERS.
>Chance is it will not be a kid from a Votech school that knows the bench as
>Bob says. OK. Not a put down just a fact. We need to admire the academic
>achievement and not scorn and ridicule it. I find the people who do this are
>ones who could not cut it in school or are just plan ignorant. Not everyone
>can be a self made man like Bob, no doubt he is much smarter than I am and
>most Engineers or manager at Raytheon.
>
Message 9
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Better List Conduct...Practical Matters |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Speedy11@aol.com
I agree 100% with Charlie and Eric.
Stan Sutterfield
Do Not Archive
I'm with Eric on this subject. I've learned an enormous amount from Bob. I
have also learned from George. I note that Bob hasn't blown his top at
George. Why? I'm sure it's because he wants George to contribute to the
discussion. (Which he has done in the past). George occasionally is "less
than polite", but he does add to the knowledge on this list.
I try to remind myself that in the past, I've been guilty of boarish
behavior on assorted lists myself. (Usually involved late night drinking)
I've got feet of clay and simply want to learn. Let's keep the discussions
on track. My 2 cents.
FYI GMC in gmcjetpilot relates to George's initials, not his place of
employment. I've contacted George off list a number of times. He was happy
to let me know who he was. His "on list" reticence relates to getting
spammed, which is understandable in my mind.
Charlie Kuss
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: | Instrument Panel Labels |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Mark R Steitle" <mark.steitle@austin.utexas.edu>
Craig,
Cool, 1/2 & 3/4 should be fine. I'll place an order for some of both.
Much Thanks,
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Craig
Payne
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Instrument Panel Labels
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Craig Payne"
<craig@craigandjean.com>
TZ135 is 1/2" white-on-clear, TZ145 is 3/4", I don't see a 1".
You can order from the Brother site below but I don't think their prices
are
the best. If you are in a hurry Staples and OfficeMax stock some.
http://www.advizia.com/brother/Advisor.asp?User=tapesacc&Advisor=Sub&Ctg
ID=&
Rnd=227
-- Craig
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: what is an engineer, flame suit technology |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bruce Gray" <Bruce@glasair.org>
Don't forget Burt Rutan....
Bruce
www.glasair.org
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dave
Morris "BigD" technology
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: what is an engineer, flame suit
technology
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dave Morris \"BigD\""
<BigD@DaveMorris.com> technology
"What and where will the next innovations come from?"
I think this is where you are wrong. I'll just mention a few examples that
have absolutely SHAKEN the earth and transformed the entire planet over the
past 50 years:
"Ham Radio"
Many modern communications technologies were invented not by engineers, but
by amateurs, working in their shops, trying to come up with a "better way"
than the status quo. Spread spectrum, television, packet radio, and many
other examples exist. Howard Hughes was a ham. So was Robert
Goddard. Both of them were ridiculed for trying to find "a better way"
that was not in keeping with the present-day engineer mindset.
"Bill Gates"
Never graduated. Do we need to mention what he accomplished?
"Steve Jobs".
Do we need to mention what he created in his garage while HP was ridiculing
him for not being an "Engineer"?
Where are all these engineers when it comes to creating OBAM electrical
systems that are fault-tolerant? I don't remember seeing one single one of
them standing up in an EAA meeting to show us a better way. It's the
self-taught guy who has no "old school" to hide behind, the guy who is
thought of as "a bit crazy" who ends up being right all along. A thankless
job, taking all those arrows.
"There is tremendous unease in the "American soul" over the worth of the
dreamer/visionary.
We simultaneously romanticize these peculiar men and women, profit from
them, try to starve them out, and kill them off. It is as if investors,
distrustful of their own ability to tell the difference between an American
dream and an American Pipe Dream, hedge their bets by holding visionaries
to budgets and time lines that are just short of adequate."
- Fred Moody, "The Visionary Position"
Dave Morris
At 11:24 PM 1/3/2006, you wrote:
>What and where will the next innovations come from? ENGINEERS.
>Chance is it will not be a kid from a Votech school that knows the bench as
>Bob says. OK. Not a put down just a fact. We need to admire the academic
>achievement and not scorn and ridicule it. I find the people who do this
are
>ones who could not cut it in school or are just plan ignorant. Not everyone
>can be a self made man like Bob, no doubt he is much smarter than I am and
>most Engineers or manager at Raytheon.
>
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: | Fiberglass instrument panel |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Brinker" <brinker@cox-internet.com>
I have a composite airplane Aerocomp 6. The dash panel is
fiberglass. Will the fiberglass alone be strong enough to support the
avionics ? Do I need an overlay of some sort ?
Randy
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: what is an engineer, flame suit |
technology
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Richard Riley <Richard@Riley.net> technology
At 07:28 AM 1/4/06, Dave Morris \"BigD\"" , wrote:
>"What and where will the next innovations come from?"
>
>I think this is where you are wrong. I'll just mention a few examples that
>have absolutely SHAKEN the earth and transformed the entire planet over the
>past 50 years:
>
>"Ham Radio"
>Many modern communications technologies were invented not by engineers, but
>by amateurs, working in their shops, trying to come up with a "better way"
>than the status quo. Spread spectrum...
Invented by Hedy Lamar - actress.
--
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: | EFIS Backup EFIS? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bruce McGregor" <bruceflys@comcast.net>
Experimental EFIS units have matured in recent years to the point where many
of us will use one as a PFD. But has technology and reliability progressed
to where a second EFIS with an independent power source could prudently be
used to backup the PFD? For example, a pair of Dynon D-10A units could
serve in this manner and have the added advantage of a backup PFD
center/right that the co-pilot could see too.
For certificated airplanes the FAA requires (FAR 23.1311) as backups
separate mechanical or electronic airspeed, altimeter and attitude
indicators along with an independent magnetic direction indicator . While
much of FAR 23 is worthy of respect, this provision was written long-ago
(in
technology terms) and may be obsolete. And after all, we build
experimental
airplanes to use newer methods if safe and cost-effective.
My concern is for a failure mode that would take out both EFIS units or
their displays. Could a lightning strike do that? How about a severe
voltage spike? Would transorbs alleviate either? Are three electronic
indicators subject to the same failure?
Any thoughts will be appreciated, and TIA,
Bruce McGregor
GlaStar (panel and electrical system)
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: Eyeball Light Question |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Lloyd, Daniel R." <LloydDR@wernerco.com>
Hey Dwight, I know this is late, but you can go to
http://www.autolumination.com/
They have drop in LED replacements for most bulbs. Maybe one would work
for you?
-----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
<dwight@openweave.org>
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"
<mprather@spro.net>
>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"
<craig@craigandjean.com>
>
>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 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: what is an engineer, flame suit technology |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
Ahh..I see my fellow PE's frustration (of course being British I am A
Ceng and not a PE even though I work in the US). In the UK literally
everyone is an Engineer...maintain a photocopier..and you have the title
Engineer...its very frustrating when your relatives ask you if you "work
on cars?"
One of the reasons I came here in fact. George's point is a good one
when he mentions the working relationships between engineers and
technicians....We are nothing without them, indeed it is a very rare
engineer that anything more than the mechanical dexterity of a gorrilla,
and most of my professional colleages are chained safely to their
computers lest they foul something up in the real world.
I like to think I'm different..."Your building a PLANE?" my bispeckled
colleagues ask, like its akin to brain surgery or something.
OH well...back to my finite element analysis..:)
Frank
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
gmcjetpilot@yahoo.com
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: what is an engineer, flame suit
technology
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: <gmcjetpilot@yahoo.com>
Wow, nice flame job. I had my nomex and asbestos underwear on and still
my short curly hairs got singed. It was more flame than the Space
Shuttle on re-entry.
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: Fiberglass instrument panel |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Matt Prather" <mprather@spro.net>
Not sure, but it sounds like a question for Aerocomp.. My Varieze has the
stock fiberglass sandwich panel, and has the avionics/instruments mounted
directly to it, but the Aerocomp likely has different layup/materials..
However, I think the stock Varieze panel looks kind of cheesy (technical
term)..
Matt-
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Brinker"
> <brinker@cox-internet.com>
>
> I have a composite airplane Aerocomp 6. The dash panel is
> fiberglass. Will the fiberglass alone be strong enough to support the
> avionics ? Do I need an overlay of some sort ?
>
> Randy
>
>
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: Fiberglass instrument panel |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 10:17 AM 1/4/2006 -0600, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Brinker" <brinker@cox-internet.com>
>
> I have a composite airplane Aerocomp 6. The dash panel is
>fiberglass. Will the fiberglass alone be strong enough to support the
>avionics ? Do I need an overlay of some sort ?
A panel with sufficient strength and stiffness can probably
be fabricated from any common structural material. The answer
to your question is not readily provided without knowing
numbers of instruments, weights, overhang moments, etc.
The EASY answer is, if you provide an aluminum overlay equal
to the panel thickness in say, the RV kits, then you WILL
have sufficient structural capability to support the components.
Are you in contact with any folks who have finished and
are flying this airplane? What to the plans call for?
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: cross feed contactor |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 09:44 AM 1/3/2006 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)"
><mstewart@iss.net>
>
>http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Contactors/s701-2.jpg
>
>I have this contactor above for my alternator feed and the crow bar ov
>protector wired to it. I have an internally regulated alternator.
>
>I need a diagram of how to wire the crowbar to it and which studs do
>what.
>As an example, looking at this image above, and numbering the studs left
>to right, 1-4. Is the #1 stud alternator input, #2 coil engage +12, #3
>coil gnd, #4 output +12?
You need to convert this to a bare-bones contactor with
only a coil spike catcher diode. See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Contactors/s701-2.jpg
Remove the lower left and upper right diode assemblies.
The two fat terminals are interchangeable. They go in series
with the alternator b-lead.
The right-hand small stud goes to ground.
The left-hand small stud wires to your alternator control
switch and ov protection system.
Bob . . .
Message 20
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | EFIS Backup EFIS? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bryan Hooks" <bryanhooks@comcast.net>
One thing to consider is what inputs are required to allow the EFIS' to
work. For example, if you have 2 EFIS units (lets say left and right),
both of which are made by the same manufacturer. Let's further suppose
that these units use airspeed as an input to their processor to aid in a
determination of attitude. If both of these units are attached to the
same pitot/static system, what do you suppose would happen with a
clogged pitot?
Gotta have redundant / independent inputs to get redundant / independent
outputs.
Just something that comes to my mind, right or wrong. Worth only what
you paid for it.
Bryan Hooks
RV7A, slowbuild
Knoxville, TN
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bruce
McGregor
Subject: AeroElectric-List: EFIS Backup EFIS?
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bruce McGregor"
<bruceflys@comcast.net>
Experimental EFIS units have matured in recent years to the point where
many
of us will use one as a PFD. But has technology and reliability
progressed
to where a second EFIS with an independent power source could prudently
be
used to backup the PFD? For example, a pair of Dynon D-10A units could
serve in this manner and have the added advantage of a backup PFD
center/right that the co-pilot could see too.
For certificated airplanes the FAA requires (FAR 23.1311) as backups
separate mechanical or electronic airspeed, altimeter and attitude
indicators along with an independent magnetic direction indicator .
While
much of FAR 23 is worthy of respect, this provision was written
long-ago
(in
technology terms) and may be obsolete. And after all, we build
experimental
airplanes to use newer methods if safe and cost-effective.
My concern is for a failure mode that would take out both EFIS units or
their displays. Could a lightning strike do that? How about a severe
voltage spike? Would transorbs alleviate either? Are three electronic
indicators subject to the same failure?
Any thoughts will be appreciated, and TIA,
Bruce McGregor
GlaStar (panel and electrical system)
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: | Re: Fiberglass instrument panel |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dave Morris \"BigD\"" <BigD@DaveMorris.com>
The Dragonfly uses a fiberglass instrument panel that is actually
structural! But there are some really SWEET carbon fiber overlays you can
put on that will spiff them up quite a bit, thanks to the Japanese "tuner"
import crowd. See http://www.robotcombat.com/marketplace_carbonfiber.html
for some colorful carbon fiber overlay sheets. I'm planning to use a red
one on my panel.
Dave Morris
At 10:17 AM 1/4/2006, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Brinker" <brinker@cox-internet.com>
>
> I have a composite airplane Aerocomp 6. The dash panel is
>fiberglass. Will the fiberglass alone be strong enough to support the
>avionics ? Do I need an overlay of some sort ?
>
>Randy
>
>
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: | Instrument Panel Labels |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Craig Payne" <craig@craigandjean.com>
For one, Tiger Direct has them cheaper than the Brother or Staples sites.
There are probably many more cheap sources on the Internet.
http://www.tigerdirect.com/
-- Craig
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark R
Steitle
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Instrument Panel Labels
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Mark R Steitle"
--> <mark.steitle@austin.utexas.edu>
Craig,
Cool, 1/2 & 3/4 should be fine. I'll place an order for some of both.
Much Thanks,
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Craig
Payne
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Instrument Panel Labels
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Craig Payne"
<craig@craigandjean.com>
TZ135 is 1/2" white-on-clear, TZ145 is 3/4", I don't see a 1".
You can order from the Brother site below but I don't think their prices are
the best. If you are in a hurry Staples and OfficeMax stock some.
http://www.advizia.com/brother/Advisor.asp?User=tapesacc&Advisor=Sub&Ctg
ID=&
Rnd=227
-- Craig
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: | Fiberglass instrument panel |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "SteinAir, Inc." <stein@steinair.com>
Hi Randy,
It really depends on the contents of the panel and how you construct it
along with the thickness and type of composite panel. For example, if the
panel is only 3 layers of 3oz. glass, then it won't support anything.
But....if the panel is 5 layers of Carbon then it probably would support
anything you put in it.
Assuming your panel is a moderately stiff glass panel, then if you put the
requisite structural stiffners behind the radio rack and don't hang dual
530's off of it you'll proabably be ok in that area. This too depends on the
units themselves...some avionics are very shallow and light, others are
really deep and heavy.
If you use some of the newer EFIS's like a Dynon or GRT they don't weight
much at all and should be fine in that area. But if you use a conventional
"6 pack" with Vac Gryos then the likelyhood is that after you remove the
glass it won't support the instruments.
The cure for that of course is to cut some aluminum sheets which fit into
the areas you'll be mounting instruments. Unless it's really heavy stuff,
then .040"-.063" should be plenty.
Hope that helps and doesn't confuse too much!
Cheers,
Stein.
do not archive
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of
> Brinker
> Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 10:18 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Fiberglass instrument panel
>
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Brinker"
> <brinker@cox-internet.com>
>
> I have a composite airplane Aerocomp 6. The dash panel is
> fiberglass. Will the fiberglass alone be strong enough to support the
> avionics ? Do I need an overlay of some sort ?
>
> Randy
>
>
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: | Express PCB/SCH was Wiring Diagrams Design Software |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Jerry2DT@aol.com
I use it all the time. very easy to learn, intuitive, free. A few others on
this list are using it, Vern Little for one. Has been discussed before and
recently, but for some reason seems to remain largely unknown. Only downside, it
does not read .dwg files. Yesterday, I changed some of my bus connections
around on the plane, popped into the computer, changed the schematic two
minutes, shazam! done! It is just that easy.
Jerry Cochran
Wilsonville, OR
In a message dated 1/4/2006 12:00:32 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,
aeroelectric-list-digest@matronics.com writes:
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Wiring Diagrams Design Software
From: "Matt Prather" <mprather@spro.net>
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Matt Prather" <mprather@spro.net>
A while back (at university, actually), I used a software package from
Express PCB which did PCB layouts, including autorouting. I see they now
have packaged the PCB software with schematic layout. Has anyone else
looked at it. I haven't run the PCB software in 9 years, by from my
recollection, it was pretty slick. I may test drive this stuff (for
schematics) when I get home.
http://www.expresspcb.com/ExpressPCBHtm/Free_cad_software.htm
Regards,
Matt-
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: Better List Conduct...Practical Matters |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "richard titsworth" <rtitsworth@mindspring.com>
Perhaps we should start another list for those with the time/interest in
debating the value of education-vs-experience, flamethrowing, etc. Seems a
nice feature of this new site would be that each person would only get their
own posts - as it seems it would be filled with folks who like to hear/read
themselves and with messages that are probably best left unsent/unread
anyway.
Then the rest of us (who don't a d---) can get back to discussing valuable
issues.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Speedy11@aol.com
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Better List Conduct...Practical Matters
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Speedy11@aol.com
I agree 100% with Charlie and Eric.
Stan Sutterfield
Do Not Archive
I'm with Eric on this subject. I've learned an enormous amount from Bob. I
have also learned from George. I note that Bob hasn't blown his top at
George. Why? I'm sure it's because he wants George to contribute to the
discussion. (Which he has done in the past). George occasionally is "less
than polite", but he does add to the knowledge on this list.
I try to remind myself that in the past, I've been guilty of boarish
behavior on assorted lists myself. (Usually involved late night drinking)
I've got feet of clay and simply want to learn. Let's keep the discussions
on track. My 2 cents.
FYI GMC in gmcjetpilot relates to George's initials, not his place of
employment. I've contacted George off list a number of times. He was happy
to let me know who he was. His "on list" reticence relates to getting
spammed, which is understandable in my mind.
Charlie Kuss
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: | Instrument Panel Labels |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Craig Payne" <craig@craigandjean.com>
Allow me to amend my previous post. I just learned that Tiger Direct
back-ordered some items on my order until Jan 26th but charged my credit
card for the full amount. I canceled the remaining items in the order and
will never do business with them again.
-- Craig
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Craig
Payne
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Instrument Panel Labels
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Craig Payne"
--> <craig@craigandjean.com>
For one, Tiger Direct has them cheaper than the Brother or Staples sites.
There are probably many more cheap sources on the Internet.
http://www.tigerdirect.com/
-- Craig
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark R
Steitle
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Instrument Panel Labels
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Mark R Steitle"
--> <mark.steitle@austin.utexas.edu>
Craig,
Cool, 1/2 & 3/4 should be fine. I'll place an order for some of both.
Much Thanks,
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Craig
Payne
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Instrument Panel Labels
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Craig Payne"
<craig@craigandjean.com>
TZ135 is 1/2" white-on-clear, TZ145 is 3/4", I don't see a 1".
You can order from the Brother site below but I don't think their prices are
the best. If you are in a hurry Staples and OfficeMax stock some.
http://www.advizia.com/brother/Advisor.asp?User=tapesacc&Advisor=Sub&Ctg
ID=&
Rnd=227
-- Craig
Message 27
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: EFIS Backup EFIS? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Ken <klehman@albedo.net>
I consider your concerns quite valid especially when you consider the
software issues that continue to crop up. However I believe the main
reason for simple basic independant flight instruments on many large
ships is that they will continue to reliably run off the battery even
when everything else such as engines and inverters have gone offline. It
happens. Hopefully this FAR will stay in effect. Even automatically
deployed windmills for emergency hydraulics and AC electrics have their
limitations and do not come on line instantly. And when similar systems
disagree it is nice to have a totally different system as the tie breaker.
Ken
Bruce McGregor wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bruce McGregor" <bruceflys@comcast.net>
>
>
>Experimental EFIS units have matured in recent years to the point where many
> of us will use one as a PFD. But has technology and reliability progressed
> to where a second EFIS with an independent power source could prudently be
> used to backup the PFD? For example, a pair of Dynon D-10A units could
> serve in this manner and have the added advantage of a backup PFD
> center/right that the co-pilot could see too.
>
> For certificated airplanes the FAA requires (FAR 23.1311) as backups
> separate mechanical or electronic airspeed, altimeter and attitude
> indicators along with an independent magnetic direction indicator . While
> much of FAR 23 is worthy of respect, this provision was written long-ago
>(in
> technology terms) and may be obsolete. And after all, we build
>experimental
> airplanes to use newer methods if safe and cost-effective.
>
> My concern is for a failure mode that would take out both EFIS units or
> their displays. Could a lightning strike do that? How about a severe
> voltage spike? Would transorbs alleviate either? Are three electronic
> indicators subject to the same failure?
>
> Any thoughts will be appreciated, and TIA,
>
> Bruce McGregor
>GlaStar (panel and electrical system)
>
>
>
>
Message 28
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | EFIS Backup EFIS? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bruce Gray" <Bruce@glasair.org>
Yep, even the PSS AOA goes out to lunch when pitot pressure is interrupted.
This little flaw caused one crash, if I recall correctly.
The problem with 2 EFIS units are,
1) Are you scanning each to note any discrepancies?
2) If one disagrees with the other which one is right?
Bruce
www.glasair.org
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bryan
Hooks
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: EFIS Backup EFIS?
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bryan Hooks"
<bryanhooks@comcast.net>
One thing to consider is what inputs are required to allow the EFIS' to
work. For example, if you have 2 EFIS units (lets say left and right),
both of which are made by the same manufacturer. Let's further suppose
that these units use airspeed as an input to their processor to aid in a
determination of attitude. If both of these units are attached to the
same pitot/static system, what do you suppose would happen with a
clogged pitot?
Gotta have redundant / independent inputs to get redundant / independent
outputs.
Just something that comes to my mind, right or wrong. Worth only what
you paid for it.
Bryan Hooks
RV7A, slowbuild
Knoxville, TN
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bruce
McGregor
Subject: AeroElectric-List: EFIS Backup EFIS?
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bruce McGregor"
<bruceflys@comcast.net>
Experimental EFIS units have matured in recent years to the point where
many
of us will use one as a PFD. But has technology and reliability
progressed
to where a second EFIS with an independent power source could prudently
be
used to backup the PFD? For example, a pair of Dynon D-10A units could
serve in this manner and have the added advantage of a backup PFD
center/right that the co-pilot could see too.
For certificated airplanes the FAA requires (FAR 23.1311) as backups
separate mechanical or electronic airspeed, altimeter and attitude
indicators along with an independent magnetic direction indicator .
While
much of FAR 23 is worthy of respect, this provision was written
long-ago
(in
technology terms) and may be obsolete. And after all, we build
experimental
airplanes to use newer methods if safe and cost-effective.
My concern is for a failure mode that would take out both EFIS units or
their displays. Could a lightning strike do that? How about a severe
voltage spike? Would transorbs alleviate either? Are three electronic
indicators subject to the same failure?
Any thoughts will be appreciated, and TIA,
Bruce McGregor
GlaStar (panel and electrical system)
Message 29
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Fiberglass instrument panel |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Brinker" <brinker@cox-internet.com>
I have not found a forum for this plane, I suppose there are not
many being built. I am not the original purchaser of the kit so Aerocomp
wants $3000 ( believe it or not) up front to give any builder assistance.
And I have loads of assembly photo's, diagrams etc. but cannot find and
specifics on the panel. Was hoping to find another person building an
Aerocomp in group.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Fiberglass instrument panel
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
> <nuckollsr@cox.net>
>
> At 10:17 AM 1/4/2006 -0600, you wrote:
>
>>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Brinker"
>><brinker@cox-internet.com>
>>
>> I have a composite airplane Aerocomp 6. The dash panel is
>>fiberglass. Will the fiberglass alone be strong enough to support the
>>avionics ? Do I need an overlay of some sort ?
>
> A panel with sufficient strength and stiffness can probably
> be fabricated from any common structural material. The answer
> to your question is not readily provided without knowing
> numbers of instruments, weights, overhang moments, etc.
>
> The EASY answer is, if you provide an aluminum overlay equal
> to the panel thickness in say, the RV kits, then you WILL
> have sufficient structural capability to support the components.
>
> Are you in contact with any folks who have finished and
> are flying this airplane? What to the plans call for?
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
>
Message 30
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | RE: Heat sink for Schottky diode |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones@charter.net>
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Eric M. Jones"
<emjones@charter.net>
Grrrr......
http://www.periheliondesign.com/downloads/CompleteIsolationforthePowerSchottky.pdf
Regards,
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge MA 01550-2705
(508) 764-2072
"I tried being reasonable; I didn't like it."
---Clint Eastwood
Message 31
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: EFIS Backup EFIS? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Werner Schneider <glastar@gmx.net>
Bruce,
FAR 23.1311 point 5 describes mechanical instruments OR independent
electronic instruments.
You will reach that as example with a pair of Dynon's where the primary
has two different power sources and/or an internal backub battery.
Take care
Werner (one Dynon D10A with backup battery plus one uEncoder, no
mechanical instruments, VFR only)
Bruce McGregor wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bruce McGregor" <bruceflys@comcast.net>
>
>
>Experimental EFIS units have matured in recent years to the point where many
> of us will use one as a PFD. But has technology and reliability progressed
> to where a second EFIS with an independent power source could prudently be
> used to backup the PFD? For example, a pair of Dynon D-10A units could
> serve in this manner and have the added advantage of a backup PFD
> center/right that the co-pilot could see too.
>
> For certificated airplanes the FAA requires (FAR 23.1311) as backups
> separate mechanical or electronic airspeed, altimeter and attitude
> indicators along with an independent magnetic direction indicator . While
> much of FAR 23 is worthy of respect, this provision was written long-ago
>(in
> technology terms) and may be obsolete. And after all, we build
>experimental
> airplanes to use newer methods if safe and cost-effective.
>
> My concern is for a failure mode that would take out both EFIS units or
> their displays. Could a lightning strike do that? How about a severe
> voltage spike? Would transorbs alleviate either? Are three electronic
> indicators subject to the same failure?
>
> Any thoughts will be appreciated, and TIA,
>
> Bruce McGregor
>GlaStar (panel and electrical system)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 32
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: Wiring Diagrams Design Software |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Nancy Ghertner <nghertner@verizon.net>
On 1/3/06 2:33 PM, "Steve Thomas" <lists@stevet.net> wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Steve Thomas <lists@stevet.net>
>
> Has anyone tried or used DesignWorks Lite? It is a circuit
> documentation program. The link is:
>
> http://www.capilano.com/html/dwml.html
>
> They have a version for both Mac and Windows and is free for 30 days,
> then $40 to register. I'd like to hear comments from anyone who
> might have used it.
>
I have just tried using this software. It was unable to label the pins on
dsub units which was my first requirement for this type software. After
paying the $39, and communicating with them three times, they have been of
no help. I therefore can't endorse this program. Lory Ghertner
>
> On Jan 3, 2006, at 8:51 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
>> I've had many requests for recommendations on software other
>> than the expensive AutoCAD for editing my drawings. I've just
>> ordered TurboCAD off Ebay (v10.2 for $26 post paid) and I'll
>> test it using the .dwg files off the website as source drawings.
>
>
>
> Steve Thomas
> SteveT.Net
> steve@stevet.net
> 805-569-0336 Office
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 33
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: | Fiberglass instrument panel |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bruce Gray" <Bruce@glasair.org>
The Glasair line of airplanes usually have a FG panel, with a twist. An .062
aluminum insert encompasses the entire flight group (some have gone to
.090). The radio rack is all FG but the secret is that the radio stack is
supported from the back of the rack. This means the panel is only loaded in
shear. All radios, and deep instruments for that matter, should have support
in the back end of the panel. We pull +6 -3 g's with these toys, gotta make
it secure.
Bruce
www.glasair.org
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of SteinAir,
Inc.
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Fiberglass instrument panel
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "SteinAir, Inc."
<stein@steinair.com>
Hi Randy,
It really depends on the contents of the panel and how you construct it
along with the thickness and type of composite panel. For example, if the
panel is only 3 layers of 3oz. glass, then it won't support anything.
But....if the panel is 5 layers of Carbon then it probably would support
anything you put in it.
Assuming your panel is a moderately stiff glass panel, then if you put the
requisite structural stiffners behind the radio rack and don't hang dual
530's off of it you'll proabably be ok in that area. This too depends on the
units themselves...some avionics are very shallow and light, others are
really deep and heavy.
If you use some of the newer EFIS's like a Dynon or GRT they don't weight
much at all and should be fine in that area. But if you use a conventional
"6 pack" with Vac Gryos then the likelyhood is that after you remove the
glass it won't support the instruments.
The cure for that of course is to cut some aluminum sheets which fit into
the areas you'll be mounting instruments. Unless it's really heavy stuff,
then .040"-.063" should be plenty.
Hope that helps and doesn't confuse too much!
Cheers,
Stein.
do not archive
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of
> Brinker
> Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 10:18 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Fiberglass instrument panel
>
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Brinker"
> <brinker@cox-internet.com>
>
> I have a composite airplane Aerocomp 6. The dash panel is
> fiberglass. Will the fiberglass alone be strong enough to support the
> avionics ? Do I need an overlay of some sort ?
>
> Randy
>
>
Message 34
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: Wiring Diagrams Design Software |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dave Morris \"BigD\"" <BigD@DaveMorris.com>
I've had no problem labeling anything with DesignWorks Lite.
You can use up to 4 characters to label any pin on any component by
right-clicking, going to Device Info, and then Pin Info. For anything
longer than 4 characters, just use the text control to add text anywhere.
Example:
http://www.davemorris.com/Photos/Dragonfly%20Electrical/N75UP-Schematic-CenterSwitchPanel.pdf
Note I was able to label all switch pins and all connector pins.
Dave Morris
At 12:21 PM 1/4/2006, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Nancy Ghertner
><nghertner@verizon.net>
>
>On 1/3/06 2:33 PM, "Steve Thomas" <lists@stevet.net> wrote:
>
> > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Steve Thomas <lists@stevet.net>
> >
> > Has anyone tried or used DesignWorks Lite? It is a circuit
> > documentation program. The link is:
> >
> > http://www.capilano.com/html/dwml.html
> >
> > They have a version for both Mac and Windows and is free for 30 days,
> > then $40 to register. I'd like to hear comments from anyone who
> > might have used it.
> >
>
> I have just tried using this software. It was unable to label the pins on
>dsub units which was my first requirement for this type software. After
>paying the $39, and communicating with them three times, they have been of
>no help. I therefore can't endorse this program. Lory Ghertner
> >
> > On Jan 3, 2006, at 8:51 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> >
> >> I've had many requests for recommendations on software other
> >> than the expensive AutoCAD for editing my drawings. I've just
> >> ordered TurboCAD off Ebay (v10.2 for $26 post paid) and I'll
> >> test it using the .dwg files off the website as source drawings.
> >
> >
> >
> > Steve Thomas
> > SteveT.Net
> > steve@stevet.net
> > 805-569-0336 Office
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Message 35
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: Fiberglass instrument panel |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Matt Prather" <mprather@spro.net>
Ouch!! That's a black eye for Aerocomp as far as I am concerned..
Interesting. I don't think that's common in the industry, is it?
Regards,
Matt-
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Brinker"
> <brinker@cox-internet.com>
>
> I have not found a forum for this plane, I suppose there are
> not
> many being built. I am not the original purchaser of the kit so Aerocomp
> wants $3000 ( believe it or not) up front to give any builder
> assistance. And I have loads of assembly photo's, diagrams etc. but
> cannot find and specifics on the panel. Was hoping to find another
> person building an Aerocomp in group.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
> To: <aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Fiberglass instrument panel
>
>
>> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
>> <nuckollsr@cox.net>
>>
>> At 10:17 AM 1/4/2006 -0600, you wrote:
>>
>>>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Brinker"
>>><brinker@cox-internet.com>
>>>
>>> I have a composite airplane Aerocomp 6. The dash panel is
>>>fiberglass. Will the fiberglass alone be strong enough to support the
>>> avionics ? Do I need an overlay of some sort ?
>>
>> A panel with sufficient strength and stiffness can probably
>> be fabricated from any common structural material. The answer
>> to your question is not readily provided without knowing
>> numbers of instruments, weights, overhang moments, etc.
>>
>> The EASY answer is, if you provide an aluminum overlay equal
>> to the panel thickness in say, the RV kits, then you WILL
>> have sufficient structural capability to support the components.
>>
>> Are you in contact with any folks who have finished and
>> are flying this airplane? What to the plans call for?
>>
>> Bob . . .
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Message 36
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 Panel Labels |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Harley <harley@agelesswings.com>
Craig...
I think you are mistaken on Tiger Direct's billing/shipping policy.
I have been dealing with them for years, and they have NEVER billed my
credit card until AFTER the item has shipped. My card has often not
been charged until after I received the item, as well.
If they have to ship in several packages, due to back orders or
whatever, only the FIRST item had the total shipping charges...the other
items were billed just their selling price as they came in.
In fact, the last item I bought from them was back ordered for 7 days (a
plasma TV ... still received it in time for the start of the NFL
season!), and they gave me free shipping as!
A friend of mine recently received a new computer, and when he was
billed, the price was LESS than the add due to a price drop between the
time he ordered and the time it shipped.
From the Tiger Direct website:
"We accept VISA, MasterCard, American Express, Discover Card, personal
checks, cashier's checks, PayPal, wire transfers, Bill Me Later, Tiger
Gift Cards and money orders. We DO NOT CHARGE YOUR ACCOUNT until we have
SHIPPED your order!"
I do not work for them or sell to them. I am just a very satisfied
customer of theirs and want to pass on my satisfaction (as well as that
of my many friends who are also satisfied with them).
Harley Dixon
Craig Payne wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Craig Payne" <craig@craigandjean.com>
>
>Allow me to amend my previous post. I just learned that Tiger Direct
>back-ordered some items on my order until Jan 26th but charged my credit
>card for the full amount. I canceled the remaining items in the order and
>will never do business with them again.
>
>-- Craig
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Craig
>Payne
>To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
>Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Instrument Panel Labels
>
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Craig Payne"
>--> <craig@craigandjean.com>
>
>For one, Tiger Direct has them cheaper than the Brother or Staples sites.
>There are probably many more cheap sources on the Internet.
>
>http://www.tigerdirect.com/
>
>-- Craig
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark R
>Steitle
>To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
>Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Instrument Panel Labels
>
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Mark R Steitle"
>--> <mark.steitle@austin.utexas.edu>
>
>Craig,
>Cool, 1/2 & 3/4 should be fine. I'll place an order for some of both.
>
>Much Thanks,
>Mark
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Craig
>Payne
>To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
>Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Instrument Panel Labels
>
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Craig Payne"
><craig@craigandjean.com>
>
>TZ135 is 1/2" white-on-clear, TZ145 is 3/4", I don't see a 1".
>
>You can order from the Brother site below but I don't think their prices are
>the best. If you are in a hurry Staples and OfficeMax stock some.
>
>http://www.advizia.com/brother/Advisor.asp?User=tapesacc&Advisor=Sub&Ctg
>ID=&
>Rnd=227
>
>-- Craig
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 37
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: | EFIS Backup EFIS? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
My plan is to engage the Autopilot if things get screwy in IFR...Just
hope that's right...:)
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bruce
Gray
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: EFIS Backup EFIS?
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bruce Gray"
--> <Bruce@glasair.org>
Yep, even the PSS AOA goes out to lunch when pitot pressure is
interrupted.
This little flaw caused one crash, if I recall correctly.
The problem with 2 EFIS units are,
1) Are you scanning each to note any discrepancies?
2) If one disagrees with the other which one is right?
Bruce
www.glasair.org
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bryan
Hooks
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: EFIS Backup EFIS?
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bryan Hooks"
<bryanhooks@comcast.net>
One thing to consider is what inputs are required to allow the EFIS' to
work. For example, if you have 2 EFIS units (lets say left and right),
both of which are made by the same manufacturer. Let's further suppose
that these units use airspeed as an input to their processor to aid in a
determination of attitude. If both of these units are attached to the
same pitot/static system, what do you suppose would happen with a
clogged pitot?
Gotta have redundant / independent inputs to get redundant / independent
outputs.
Just something that comes to my mind, right or wrong. Worth only what
you paid for it.
Bryan Hooks
RV7A, slowbuild
Knoxville, TN
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bruce
McGregor
Subject: AeroElectric-List: EFIS Backup EFIS?
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bruce McGregor"
<bruceflys@comcast.net>
Experimental EFIS units have matured in recent years to the point where
many of us will use one as a PFD. But has technology and reliability
progressed to where a second EFIS with an independent power source
could prudently be used to backup the PFD? For example, a pair of
Dynon D-10A units could serve in this manner and have the added
advantage of a backup PFD center/right that the co-pilot could see too.
For certificated airplanes the FAA requires (FAR 23.1311) as backups
separate mechanical or electronic airspeed, altimeter and attitude
indicators along with an independent magnetic direction indicator .
While
much of FAR 23 is worthy of respect, this provision was written
long-ago (in technology terms) and may be obsolete. And after all, we
build experimental airplanes to use newer methods if safe and
cost-effective.
My concern is for a failure mode that would take out both EFIS units or
their displays. Could a lightning strike do that? How about a severe
voltage spike? Would transorbs alleviate either? Are three electronic
indicators subject to the same failure?
Any thoughts will be appreciated, and TIA,
Bruce McGregor
GlaStar (panel and electrical system)
Message 38
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: | EFIS Backup EFIS? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Matt Prather" <mprather@spro.net>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bruce Gray"
> <Bruce@glasair.org>
>
> 2) If one disagrees with the other which one is right?
>
The T&B (you didn't eliminate that, did you?)?? :)
Matt-
Message 39
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: EFIS Backup EFIS? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: BobsV35B@aol.com
In a message dated 1/4/2006 1:10:23 P.M. Central Standard Time,
mprather@spro.net writes:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bruce Gray"
> <Bruce@glasair.org>
>
> 2) If one disagrees with the other which one is right?
>
The T&B (you didn't eliminate that, did you?)?? :)
Matt-
Atta Boy Matt!!
Do Not Archive
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
Message 40
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 Panel Labels |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Craig Payne" <craig@craigandjean.com>
When I first call Tiger Direct to check on the status of my order this was
mentioned in passing. I called support again and asked this specific
question and was told the same thing. The woman I spoke to did not seem at
all surprised when I canceled the remaining portion of the order. When this
transaction and the credit show up on my credit card company's web site I
will confirm this.
-- Craig
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Harley
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Instrument Panel Labels
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Harley
--> <harley@agelesswings.com>
Craig...
I think you are mistaken on Tiger Direct's billing/shipping policy.
I have been dealing with them for years, and they have NEVER billed my
credit card until AFTER the item has shipped. My card has often not been
charged until after I received the item, as well.
If they have to ship in several packages, due to back orders or whatever,
only the FIRST item had the total shipping charges...the other items were
billed just their selling price as they came in.
In fact, the last item I bought from them was back ordered for 7 days (a
plasma TV ... still received it in time for the start of the NFL season!),
and they gave me free shipping as!
A friend of mine recently received a new computer, and when he was billed,
the price was LESS than the add due to a price drop between the time he
ordered and the time it shipped.
From the Tiger Direct website:
"We accept VISA, MasterCard, American Express, Discover Card, personal
checks, cashier's checks, PayPal, wire transfers, Bill Me Later, Tiger Gift
Cards and money orders. We DO NOT CHARGE YOUR ACCOUNT until we have SHIPPED
your order!"
I do not work for them or sell to them. I am just a very satisfied customer
of theirs and want to pass on my satisfaction (as well as that of my many
friends who are also satisfied with them).
Harley Dixon
Craig Payne wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Craig Payne"
>--> <craig@craigandjean.com>
>
>Allow me to amend my previous post. I just learned that Tiger Direct
>back-ordered some items on my order until Jan 26th but charged my
>credit card for the full amount. I canceled the remaining items in the
>order and will never do business with them again.
>
>-- Craig
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
>Craig Payne
>To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
>Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Instrument Panel Labels
>
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Craig Payne"
>--> <craig@craigandjean.com>
>
>For one, Tiger Direct has them cheaper than the Brother or Staples sites.
>There are probably many more cheap sources on the Internet.
>
>http://www.tigerdirect.com/
>
>-- Craig
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark
>R Steitle
>To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
>Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Instrument Panel Labels
>
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Mark R Steitle"
>--> <mark.steitle@austin.utexas.edu>
>
>Craig,
>Cool, 1/2 & 3/4 should be fine. I'll place an order for some of both.
>
>Much Thanks,
>Mark
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
>Craig Payne
>To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
>Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Instrument Panel Labels
>
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Craig Payne"
><craig@craigandjean.com>
>
>TZ135 is 1/2" white-on-clear, TZ145 is 3/4", I don't see a 1".
>
>You can order from the Brother site below but I don't think their
>prices are the best. If you are in a hurry Staples and OfficeMax stock
some.
>
>http://www.advizia.com/brother/Advisor.asp?User=tapesacc&Advisor=Sub&Ct
>g
>ID=&
>Rnd=227
>
>-- Craig
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 41
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: what is an engineer, flame suit technology |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Harold" <kayce33@earthlink.net>
Dear George,
I do believe this forum is for helping, learning, passing info about
mistakes one may have made and also info about success in a particular
venture. I don't care if the individual has an alphabet soup after his name,
how much money he's made consulting, or how much disdain he has for the
uneducated such as I, and possibly a few others...and in particular Bob (
who I've never met but respect ). Why not give us something constructive as
so many others have, instead of satisfying your excessive pride in your
degrees and fragile ego by putting down someone who's doing a worthwhile
service for the homebuilt community. Next time you write, why not try
showing us a new, novel better way of doing something. Just for the heck of
it...look at Bill Gates, no degree and he's not the only successful person
without a degree, probably as many of them as there are PE's.
Nuff said
Harold....HS graduate
Message 42
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: EFIS Backup EFIS? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: BobsV35B@aol.com
Good Afternoon Frank,
I certainly hope that is meant a joke.
I am all for using an autopilot when one is working properly, but if you
really are going to rely on such a device as your last ditch savior, you should
have at least triple redundancy.
I am not at all aware of how things are done these days, but when I was
flying the DC-10 in the seventies, in order to make an automatic approach and
landing, we had to have three operating autopilots each of which was powered
from a separate source. There was a sophisticated comparator circuit which
would not allow the approach to be conducted unless all three autopilots were
agreeing as to what action needed to be taken. Suffice it to say the system was
not in condition to be used very often and my company eventually scrapped
the idea.
The cheapest and lightest method we have available to us today to have a
backup in the case of primary instrument failure is still an independently
powered Turn Indicator either driven by a gyroscope or by solid state
accelerometers.
Just like Matt said, get a Turn and Bank installed, then spend twenty hours
learning how to use it properly. That will be the best money you have ever
spent on providing safety to your flight operation.
It is also possible to use a Turn Coordinator for that purpose. I prefer
the classic T&B or a modern solid state version thereof, but the TC is better
than nothing at all!
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
In a message dated 1/4/2006 1:13:37 P.M. Central Standard Time,
frank.hinde@hp.com writes:
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)"
<frank.hinde@hp.com>
My plan is to engage the Autopilot if things get screwy in IFR...Just
hope that's right...:)
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bruce
Gray
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: EFIS Backup EFIS?
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bruce Gray"
--> <Bruce@glasair.org>
Yep, even the PSS AOA goes out to lunch when pitot pressure is
interrupted.
This little flaw caused one crash, if I recall correctly.
The problem with 2 EFIS units are,
1) Are you scanning each to note any discrepancies?
2) If one disagrees with the other which one is right?
Bruce
www.glasair.org
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
Message 43
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: | EFIS Backup EFIS? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bruce Gray" <Bruce@glasair.org>
Do you really want to resort to needle, ball, and airspeed when you're 400
AGL coming down the ILS? Nope, need 2 independent systems and a third
attitude instrument. Of course, I don't have an EFIS in my GIII, just an
EHSI.
Bruce
www.glasair.org
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
BobsV35B@aol.com
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: EFIS Backup EFIS?
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: BobsV35B@aol.com
In a message dated 1/4/2006 1:10:23 P.M. Central Standard Time,
mprather@spro.net writes:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bruce Gray"
> <Bruce@glasair.org>
>
> 2) If one disagrees with the other which one is right?
>
The T&B (you didn't eliminate that, did you?)?? :)
Matt-
Atta Boy Matt!!
Do Not Archive
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
Message 44
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 Panel Labels |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Craig Payne" <craig@craigandjean.com>
I called Tiger Direct a third time and explained what had happened. They
said that my card had *not* been charged for the full amount and were at a
loss to explain why the two previous support people had told me differently.
You can draw whatever conclusion from this you wish.
-- Craig
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Harley
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Instrument Panel Labels
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Harley
--> <harley@agelesswings.com>
Craig...
I think you are mistaken on Tiger Direct's billing/shipping policy.
I have been dealing with them for years, and they have NEVER billed my
credit card until AFTER the item has shipped. My card has often not been
charged until after I received the item, as well.
If they have to ship in several packages, due to back orders or whatever,
only the FIRST item had the total shipping charges...the other items were
billed just their selling price as they came in.
In fact, the last item I bought from them was back ordered for 7 days (a
plasma TV ... still received it in time for the start of the NFL season!),
and they gave me free shipping as!
A friend of mine recently received a new computer, and when he was billed,
the price was LESS than the add due to a price drop between the time he
ordered and the time it shipped.
From the Tiger Direct website:
"We accept VISA, MasterCard, American Express, Discover Card, personal
checks, cashier's checks, PayPal, wire transfers, Bill Me Later, Tiger Gift
Cards and money orders. We DO NOT CHARGE YOUR ACCOUNT until we have SHIPPED
your order!"
I do not work for them or sell to them. I am just a very satisfied customer
of theirs and want to pass on my satisfaction (as well as that of my many
friends who are also satisfied with them).
Harley Dixon
Craig Payne wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Craig Payne"
>--> <craig@craigandjean.com>
>
>Allow me to amend my previous post. I just learned that Tiger Direct
>back-ordered some items on my order until Jan 26th but charged my
>credit card for the full amount. I canceled the remaining items in the
>order and will never do business with them again.
>
>-- Craig
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
>Craig Payne
>To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
>Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Instrument Panel Labels
>
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Craig Payne"
>--> <craig@craigandjean.com>
>
>For one, Tiger Direct has them cheaper than the Brother or Staples sites.
>There are probably many more cheap sources on the Internet.
>
>http://www.tigerdirect.com/
>
>-- Craig
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark
>R Steitle
>To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
>Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Instrument Panel Labels
>
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Mark R Steitle"
>--> <mark.steitle@austin.utexas.edu>
>
>Craig,
>Cool, 1/2 & 3/4 should be fine. I'll place an order for some of both.
>
>Much Thanks,
>Mark
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
>Craig Payne
>To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
>Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Instrument Panel Labels
>
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Craig Payne"
><craig@craigandjean.com>
>
>TZ135 is 1/2" white-on-clear, TZ145 is 3/4", I don't see a 1".
>
>You can order from the Brother site below but I don't think their
>prices are the best. If you are in a hurry Staples and OfficeMax stock
some.
>
>http://www.advizia.com/brother/Advisor.asp?User=tapesacc&Advisor=Sub&Ct
>g
>ID=&
>Rnd=227
>
>-- Craig
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 45
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: | EFIS Backup EFIS? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
Kinda sorta,
I should have explained further that my A/P is a pictorial pilot from
Truetrack, which has a solid state turn coordinator built into the
display head.
This is a backup to the EFIS which in turn is backed up by internal
battery.
So I have two independent attitude displays (atually 3 if you include
the companion engine monitor that can display the EFIS output, but it is
not a fully redundant backup)
Other backups are the ASI and altimeter steam guages. In addition to the
IFR GPS and Nav/com and backup comm radio.
See any problem with this for "light IFR"?
Cheers
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
BobsV35B@aol.com
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: EFIS Backup EFIS?
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: BobsV35B@aol.com
Good Afternoon Frank,
I certainly hope that is meant a joke.
I am all for using an autopilot when one is working properly, but if you
really are going to rely on such a device as your last ditch savior, you
should have at least triple redundancy.
I am not at all aware of how things are done these days, but when I was
flying the DC-10 in the seventies, in order to make an automatic
approach and landing, we had to have three operating autopilots each of
which was powered from a separate source. There was a sophisticated
comparator circuit which would not allow the approach to be conducted
unless all three autopilots were agreeing as to what action needed to be
taken. Suffice it to say the system was not in condition to be used
very often and my company eventually scrapped the idea.
The cheapest and lightest method we have available to us today to have a
backup in the case of primary instrument failure is still an
independently powered Turn Indicator either driven by a gyroscope or by
solid state accelerometers.
Just like Matt said, get a Turn and Bank installed, then spend twenty
hours learning how to use it properly. That will be the best money you
have ever spent on providing safety to your flight operation.
It is also possible to use a Turn Coordinator for that purpose. I
prefer the classic T&B or a modern solid state version thereof, but the
TC is better than nothing at all!
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
In a message dated 1/4/2006 1:13:37 P.M. Central Standard Time,
frank.hinde@hp.com writes:
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George
(Corvallis)"
<frank.hinde@hp.com>
My plan is to engage the Autopilot if things get screwy in IFR...Just
hope that's right...:)
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Bruce Gray
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: EFIS Backup EFIS?
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bruce Gray"
--> <Bruce@glasair.org>
Yep, even the PSS AOA goes out to lunch when pitot pressure is
interrupted.
This little flaw caused one crash, if I recall correctly.
The problem with 2 EFIS units are,
1) Are you scanning each to note any discrepancies?
2) If one disagrees with the other which one is right?
Bruce
www.glasair.org
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
Message 46
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: | EFIS Backup EFIS? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Chuck Jensen" <cjensen@dts9000.com>
Frank wrote........
My plan is to engage the Autopilot if things get screwy in IFR...Just
hope that's right...:)
Frank,
I think you meant to say, "I'll just make sure I don't disengage the A/P
in IFR if things get screwy."
Chuck
Do Not Archive
Message 47
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: Fiberglass instrument panel |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Brinker" <brinker@cox-internet.com>
Thanks. Nice but rather pricey I guess that if you want to save weight
you have to spend the bucks.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave Morris "BigD"" <BigD@DaveMorris.com>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Fiberglass instrument panel
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dave Morris \"BigD\""
> <BigD@DaveMorris.com>
>
> The Dragonfly uses a fiberglass instrument panel that is actually
> structural! But there are some really SWEET carbon fiber overlays you can
> put on that will spiff them up quite a bit, thanks to the Japanese "tuner"
> import crowd. See http://www.robotcombat.com/marketplace_carbonfiber.html
> for some colorful carbon fiber overlay sheets. I'm planning to use a red
> one on my panel.
>
> Dave Morris
>
>
> At 10:17 AM 1/4/2006, you wrote:
>>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Brinker"
>><brinker@cox-internet.com>
>>
>> I have a composite airplane Aerocomp 6. The dash panel is
>>fiberglass. Will the fiberglass alone be strong enough to support the
>>avionics ? Do I need an overlay of some sort ?
>>
>>Randy
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
Message 48
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: EFIS Backup EFIS? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: BobsV35B@aol.com
Good Afternoon Bruce,
I am glad that you have the wherewithal to purchase a GIII, but just think
about how much you paid for that third attitude gyro. Most of the ones that
are used in current air carrier and high end corporate aircraft cost between
twenty-five and fifty thousand dollars per copy. The better GA versions go
for between four and five thousand dollars.
Now, you may feel that we who cannot afford such equipment have no business
being in the sky, but, fortunately, your views do not prevail. I can buy a
very high quality T&B for five to six hundred dollars. It is at least as
reliable as any standby attitude indicator I could possibly afford, costs one
fourth to one tenth as much and weighs one quarter to one half as much.
If a discrepancy is noted between the primary attitude instrumentation and
any backup attitude instrument available, the T&B will provide the decision
information needed. If I were on a glide path at four hundred feet when I
suddenly had an attitude indication failure. I think I could comfortably make
it
another two hundred feet, or, if I did not feel competent to do that, I
believe I could get the machine back up into the NAS and divert to a place with
reasonable weather available.
Fortunately for folks like me, the US government does NOT determine the
amount of redundancy I must have. That decision is one which I am allowed to
make. Suffice it to say that I am perfectly willing to fly IFR in an airplane
that is no where near as well equipped as is that nice machine you own.
Believe it or not, even the insurance companies appear to endorse the system
as it now exists.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
Do NOT Archive
In a message dated 1/4/2006 1:48:48 P.M. Central Standard Time,
Bruce@glasair.org writes:
Do you really want to resort to needle, ball, and airspeed when you're 400
AGL coming down the ILS? Nope, need 2 independent systems and a third
attitude instrument. Of course, I don't have an EFIS in my GIII, just an
EHSI.
Bruce
www.glasair.org
Message 49
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: | EFIS Backup EFIS? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Matt Prather" <mprather@spro.net>
As I have said in the past, I tend to fly somewhat more precisely (maybe
more deliberately) without the benefit of the AI (needle, ball, airspeed).
I have to admit that the T&B in my airplane works really nicely - smooth,
with very little lag. Also, the airplane I fly is pretty stable in yaw,
which probably helps the instrument keep up - little yaw coupling in
turbulence..
The problem I have with AI's (mechanical or digital) is that it seems like
they head for the weeds with little indication that something is awry (the
low-cost ones, anyway). If I had confidence that the EFIS was going to
positively tell me when it's offline, then I might feel better about
installing 2 of the units (for redundancy). People are talking about low
cost EFIS units as their PFD when we aren't that far from reports of these
units developing the leans. If the failure mode of the device was to
simply turn off (go black), I'd be happier. I don't want to get into a
situation where I have to decide the fate of the flight by determining
which EFIS is wonky.
Finally, I would say that I am having a pretty bad day if my AI fails on a
flight where I have no choice but to fly an ILS to mins. In my book
(non-revenue generating airplane), that's the time to seriously consider
calling the missed, and going to my (hopefully) VFR alternate.. If you
are flying for money, the rules are different, and you may be able to
justify the higher cost EFIS units which have better fail modes.
Regards,
Matt-
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bruce Gray"
> <Bruce@glasair.org>
>
> Do you really want to resort to needle, ball, and airspeed when you're
> 400 AGL coming down the ILS? Nope, need 2 independent systems and a
> third attitude instrument. Of course, I don't have an EFIS in my GIII,
> just an EHSI.
>
> Bruce
> www.glasair.org
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> BobsV35B@aol.com
> To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: EFIS Backup EFIS?
>
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: BobsV35B@aol.com
>
>
> In a message dated 1/4/2006 1:10:23 P.M. Central Standard Time,
> mprather@spro.net writes:
>
>> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bruce Gray"
>> <Bruce@glasair.org>
>>
>> 2) If one disagrees with the other which one is right?
>>
>
> The T&B (you didn't eliminate that, did you?)?? :)
>
>
> Matt-
>
>
> Atta Boy Matt!!
>
> Do Not Archive
>
> Happy Skies,
>
> Old Bob
> AKA
> Bob Siegfried
> Ancient Aviator
> Stearman N3977A
> Brookeridge Air Park LL22
> Downers Grove, IL 60516
> 630 985-8503
>
>
Message 50
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: EFIS Backup EFIS? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: BobsV35B@aol.com
Good Afternoon Frank,
Looks good to me!
The important thing, though, are you comfortable with it?
I have not had a chance to fly Jim's newest instrument, but if it would do
as well as my gyroscopic T&B, I would love it dearly. My hope is to someday
have a solid state T&B or replacement instrument. The one Jim has developed
sure looks good to me.
I always wonder just what is meant when one says "light IFR". Most of us
don't fly in cloud very much, but any IFR is fairly serious stuff. I am happy
shooting low weather approaches with minimum equipment where others may not
care to. What you are proposing seems to be more than adequate for any IFR I
have ever been involved with, but I would want to be comfortable doing that
IFR without the autopilot!
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
In a message dated 1/4/2006 2:10:37 P.M. Central Standard Time,
frank.hinde@hp.com writes:
Other backups are the ASI and altimeter steam guages. In addition to the
IFR GPS and Nav/com and backup comm radio.
See any problem with this for "light IFR"?
Cheers
Frank
Message 51
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: | EFIS Backup EFIS? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bruce Gray" <Bruce@glasair.org>
Light IFR, what's that?
Let's take a look at our flying environment. These pocket rockets we build
are, by most part, neutrally stable. By that I mean that the airplane will
stay where you point it when you let loose of the controls. This is what
makes them so much fun to fly. It also means that they are a handful to hand
fly IFR. Can you, sure - if you have everything at hand, all your charts in
the right order, and your approach plates memorized. Or, you have a
functional autopilot.
The point I'm trying to raise is that even the most trained pilot is going
to have flight path excursions when transitioning from full to partial
panel. You want that transition to be to a true attitude instrument, not a
T&B. This would, at least, minimize the excursions. Can you shoot a needle,
ball, airspeed ILS approach - sure can, if and it's a big if, I had
transitioned to N/B/A before I started the approach. I doubt if I could
transition at mid-approach without major excursions.
The T&B is not a precision attitude instrument. It's sole purpose is to save
your butt long enough to find some VFR conditions.
Bruce
www.glasair.org
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Hinde,
Frank George (Corvallis)
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: EFIS Backup EFIS?
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)"
<frank.hinde@hp.com>
Kinda sorta,
I should have explained further that my A/P is a pictorial pilot from
Truetrack, which has a solid state turn coordinator built into the
display head.
This is a backup to the EFIS which in turn is backed up by internal
battery.
So I have two independent attitude displays (atually 3 if you include
the companion engine monitor that can display the EFIS output, but it is
not a fully redundant backup)
Other backups are the ASI and altimeter steam guages. In addition to the
IFR GPS and Nav/com and backup comm radio.
See any problem with this for "light IFR"?
Cheers
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
BobsV35B@aol.com
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: EFIS Backup EFIS?
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: BobsV35B@aol.com
Good Afternoon Frank,
I certainly hope that is meant a joke.
I am all for using an autopilot when one is working properly, but if you
really are going to rely on such a device as your last ditch savior, you
should have at least triple redundancy.
I am not at all aware of how things are done these days, but when I was
flying the DC-10 in the seventies, in order to make an automatic
approach and landing, we had to have three operating autopilots each of
which was powered from a separate source. There was a sophisticated
comparator circuit which would not allow the approach to be conducted
unless all three autopilots were agreeing as to what action needed to be
taken. Suffice it to say the system was not in condition to be used
very often and my company eventually scrapped the idea.
The cheapest and lightest method we have available to us today to have a
backup in the case of primary instrument failure is still an
independently powered Turn Indicator either driven by a gyroscope or by
solid state accelerometers.
Just like Matt said, get a Turn and Bank installed, then spend twenty
hours learning how to use it properly. That will be the best money you
have ever spent on providing safety to your flight operation.
It is also possible to use a Turn Coordinator for that purpose. I
prefer the classic T&B or a modern solid state version thereof, but the
TC is better than nothing at all!
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
In a message dated 1/4/2006 1:13:37 P.M. Central Standard Time,
frank.hinde@hp.com writes:
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George
(Corvallis)"
<frank.hinde@hp.com>
My plan is to engage the Autopilot if things get screwy in IFR...Just
hope that's right...:)
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Bruce Gray
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: EFIS Backup EFIS?
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bruce Gray"
--> <Bruce@glasair.org>
Yep, even the PSS AOA goes out to lunch when pitot pressure is
interrupted.
This little flaw caused one crash, if I recall correctly.
The problem with 2 EFIS units are,
1) Are you scanning each to note any discrepancies?
2) If one disagrees with the other which one is right?
Bruce
www.glasair.org
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
Message 52
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: | EFIS Backup EFIS? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bruce Gray" <Bruce@glasair.org>
Hi Bob,
I don't have a third attitude gyro, I have a Sandel 3500 EHSI, and a vacuum
powered attitude gyro/FD, I also have a PN101 HSI as my second nav head. My
vacuum system has a backup and a visual/audible alarm. My STEC 55 autopilot
will fly a coupled ILS approach without the attitude gyro. And if all that
fails I still have N/B/A.
Last time I ran a tape, I had around 150k in my Glasair III, not a lot by
today's standards.
You're free to fly with any form of instruments you desire. Charge of into
hard IFR with a Dynon and a T&B. Your choice, just understand the
consequences and limitations. Too many flights end with the pilot saying "OH
SHIT" followed by the sound of ground impact.
Bruce
www.glasair.org
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
BobsV35B@aol.com
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: EFIS Backup EFIS?
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: BobsV35B@aol.com
Good Afternoon Bruce,
I am glad that you have the wherewithal to purchase a GIII, but just think
about how much you paid for that third attitude gyro. Most of the ones
that
are used in current air carrier and high end corporate aircraft cost
between
twenty-five and fifty thousand dollars per copy. The better GA versions go
for between four and five thousand dollars.
Now, you may feel that we who cannot afford such equipment have no business
being in the sky, but, fortunately, your views do not prevail. I can buy a
very high quality T&B for five to six hundred dollars. It is at least as
reliable as any standby attitude indicator I could possibly afford, costs
one
fourth to one tenth as much and weighs one quarter to one half as much.
If a discrepancy is noted between the primary attitude instrumentation and
any backup attitude instrument available, the T&B will provide the decision
information needed. If I were on a glide path at four hundred feet when I
suddenly had an attitude indication failure. I think I could comfortably
make it
another two hundred feet, or, if I did not feel competent to do that, I
believe I could get the machine back up into the NAS and divert to a place
with
reasonable weather available.
Fortunately for folks like me, the US government does NOT determine the
amount of redundancy I must have. That decision is one which I am allowed
to
make. Suffice it to say that I am perfectly willing to fly IFR in an
airplane
that is no where near as well equipped as is that nice machine you own.
Believe it or not, even the insurance companies appear to endorse the
system
as it now exists.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
Do NOT Archive
In a message dated 1/4/2006 1:48:48 P.M. Central Standard Time,
Bruce@glasair.org writes:
Do you really want to resort to needle, ball, and airspeed when you're 400
AGL coming down the ILS? Nope, need 2 independent systems and a third
attitude instrument. Of course, I don't have an EFIS in my GIII, just an
EHSI.
Bruce
www.glasair.org
Message 53
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: | EFIS Backup EFIS? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" <rvbuilder@sausen.net>
One of my many concerns is how to provide adequate backup for instrument conditions
in my RV-10. There really is no substitute for the old mechanical ASI,
T&B, and Alt along with a magnetic compass. However I feel that the likelihood
of a total electric blowout is fairly low not to mention with an electrically
dependant aircraft I will have a bigger issue. So based on that, my current
plan is for something along the line of a modified Z19 but without mechanical
instruments.
I am currently planning on a two screen Chelton with one screen on the main bus
and the other on the ebus. The single Chelton AHARS will be fed from the engine
and main battery buses in a arrangement similar to the ECU and fuel pump
to minimize the chances of a reboot during an electrical failure. I will use
a BMA G3 Lite for the backup instruments powered from the ebus. In an absolute
worse case scenario where everything goes dark I will have my Garmin 196 and
handheld radio for last ditch backup.
This may not be a perfect configuration that caters to 100% of all failure modes
but I feel it will cover 99.9% of them to get me down in one piece.
My $0.02
Michael Sausen
-10 #352 Fuselage
Do not archive
Message 54
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: | EFIS Backup EFIS? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
Hence the Auto pilot!
Frank
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bruce
Gray
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: EFIS Backup EFIS?
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bruce Gray"
--> <Bruce@glasair.org>
Light IFR, what's that?
Let's take a look at our flying environment. These pocket rockets we
build are, by most part, neutrally stable. By that I mean that the
airplane will stay where you point it when you let loose of the
controls. This is what makes them so much fun to fly. It also means that
they are a handful to hand fly IFR. Can you, sure - if you have
everything at hand, all your charts in the right order, and your
approach plates memorized. Or, you have a functional autopilot.
The point I'm trying to raise is that even the most trained pilot is
going to have flight path excursions when transitioning from full to
partial panel. You want that transition to be to a true attitude
instrument, not a T&B. This would, at least, minimize the excursions.
Can you shoot a needle, ball, airspeed ILS approach - sure can, if and
it's a big if, I had transitioned to N/B/A before I started the
approach. I doubt if I could transition at mid-approach without major
excursions.
The T&B is not a precision attitude instrument. It's sole purpose is to
save your butt long enough to find some VFR conditions.
Bruce
www.glasair.org
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: EFIS Backup EFIS?
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George
(Corvallis)"
<frank.hinde@hp.com>
Kinda sorta,
I should have explained further that my A/P is a pictorial pilot from
Truetrack, which has a solid state turn coordinator built into the
display head.
This is a backup to the EFIS which in turn is backed up by internal
battery.
So I have two independent attitude displays (atually 3 if you include
the companion engine monitor that can display the EFIS output, but it is
not a fully redundant backup)
Other backups are the ASI and altimeter steam guages. In addition to the
IFR GPS and Nav/com and backup comm radio.
See any problem with this for "light IFR"?
Cheers
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
BobsV35B@aol.com
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: EFIS Backup EFIS?
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: BobsV35B@aol.com
Good Afternoon Frank,
I certainly hope that is meant a joke.
I am all for using an autopilot when one is working properly, but if you
really are going to rely on such a device as your last ditch savior, you
should have at least triple redundancy.
I am not at all aware of how things are done these days, but when I was
flying the DC-10 in the seventies, in order to make an automatic
approach and landing, we had to have three operating autopilots each of
which was powered from a separate source. There was a sophisticated
comparator circuit which would not allow the approach to be conducted
unless all three autopilots were agreeing as to what action needed to be
taken. Suffice it to say the system was not in condition to be used
very often and my company eventually scrapped the idea.
The cheapest and lightest method we have available to us today to have a
backup in the case of primary instrument failure is still an
independently powered Turn Indicator either driven by a gyroscope or by
solid state accelerometers.
Just like Matt said, get a Turn and Bank installed, then spend twenty
hours learning how to use it properly. That will be the best money you
have ever spent on providing safety to your flight operation.
It is also possible to use a Turn Coordinator for that purpose. I
prefer the classic T&B or a modern solid state version thereof, but the
TC is better than nothing at all!
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
In a message dated 1/4/2006 1:13:37 P.M. Central Standard Time,
frank.hinde@hp.com writes:
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George
(Corvallis)"
<frank.hinde@hp.com>
My plan is to engage the Autopilot if things get screwy in IFR...Just
hope that's right...:)
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Bruce Gray
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: EFIS Backup EFIS?
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bruce Gray"
--> <Bruce@glasair.org>
Yep, even the PSS AOA goes out to lunch when pitot pressure is
interrupted.
This little flaw caused one crash, if I recall correctly.
The problem with 2 EFIS units are,
1) Are you scanning each to note any discrepancies?
2) If one disagrees with the other which one is right?
Bruce
www.glasair.org
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
Message 55
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: | EFIS Backup EFIS? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
Ha....Comfortable with it..hell no, I have ten hours in actual IFR
conditions and a scary flight in the rear seat of a newly minted IFR
jock forgetting to adjust his DG for precession...I mean he adjusted it
like 10 minutes ago...should be fine right...as long as your comfortable
with a 15 degree error it is yes....Piece of junk!
My aim is to get instruction for my instrument ticket in my
RV7A....These maybe famous last words! As I rent a doggy old (but
stable) spam can....:)
Frank
P.s Al Haynes is a fascintaing guy to listen to when it comes to
DC10's...:)
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
BobsV35B@aol.com
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: EFIS Backup EFIS?
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: BobsV35B@aol.com
Good Afternoon Frank,
Looks good to me!
The important thing, though, are you comfortable with it?
I have not had a chance to fly Jim's newest instrument, but if it would
do as well as my gyroscopic T&B, I would love it dearly. My hope is to
someday have a solid state T&B or replacement instrument. The one Jim
has developed sure looks good to me.
I always wonder just what is meant when one says "light IFR". Most of us
don't fly in cloud very much, but any IFR is fairly serious stuff. I am
happy shooting low weather approaches with minimum equipment where
others may not care to. What you are proposing seems to be more than
adequate for any IFR I have ever been involved with, but I would want
to be comfortable doing that IFR without the autopilot!
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
In a message dated 1/4/2006 2:10:37 P.M. Central Standard Time,
frank.hinde@hp.com writes:
Other backups are the ASI and altimeter steam guages. In addition to
the IFR GPS and Nav/com and backup comm radio.
See any problem with this for "light IFR"?
Cheers
Frank
Message 56
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: Fiberglass instrument panel |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Brinker" <brinker@cox-internet.com>
I may have been a little more gunshy about buying this plane if I had
known this before hand. You would think any kit manufacturer would be more
than happy to help out any way they could just to get more of their design's
in the air as advertisement.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Matt Prather" <mprather@spro.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Fiberglass instrument panel
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Matt Prather"
> <mprather@spro.net>
>
>
> Ouch!! That's a black eye for Aerocomp as far as I am concerned..
> Interesting. I don't think that's common in the industry, is it?
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Matt-
>
>
>> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Brinker"
>> <brinker@cox-internet.com>
>>
>> I have not found a forum for this plane, I suppose there are
>> not
>> many being built. I am not the original purchaser of the kit so Aerocomp
>> wants $3000 ( believe it or not) up front to give any builder
>> assistance. And I have loads of assembly photo's, diagrams etc. but
>> cannot find and specifics on the panel. Was hoping to find another
>> person building an Aerocomp in group.
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
>> To: <aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>
>> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Fiberglass instrument panel
>>
>>
>>> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
>>> <nuckollsr@cox.net>
>>>
>>> At 10:17 AM 1/4/2006 -0600, you wrote:
>>>
>>>>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Brinker"
>>>><brinker@cox-internet.com>
>>>>
>>>> I have a composite airplane Aerocomp 6. The dash panel is
>>>>fiberglass. Will the fiberglass alone be strong enough to support the
>>>> avionics ? Do I need an overlay of some sort ?
>>>
>>> A panel with sufficient strength and stiffness can probably
>>> be fabricated from any common structural material. The answer
>>> to your question is not readily provided without knowing
>>> numbers of instruments, weights, overhang moments, etc.
>>>
>>> The EASY answer is, if you provide an aluminum overlay equal
>>> to the panel thickness in say, the RV kits, then you WILL
>>> have sufficient structural capability to support the components.
>>>
>>> Are you in contact with any folks who have finished and
>>> are flying this airplane? What to the plans call for?
>>>
>>> Bob . . .
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
Message 57
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: what is an engineer, flame suit technology |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: sportav8r@aol.com
Dear George,
Read "high-school Harold's" post carefully. Note that the grammar, spelling and
punctuation are all correct. Much like the infinitely patient Bob N., he has
not resorted to shrill hyperbole and ad-hominems.
Don't you wish you could say that for what you "contribute" here?
Not even close.
-Stormy
do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: Harold <kayce33@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: what is an engineer, flame suit technology
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Harold" <kayce33@earthlink.net>
Dear George,
I do believe this forum is for helping, learning, passing info about
mistakes one may have made and also info about success in a particular
venture. I don't care if the individual has an alphabet soup after his name,
how much money he's made consulting, or how much disdain he has for the
uneducated such as I, and possibly a few others...and in particular Bob (
who I've never met but respect ). Why not give us something constructive as
so many others have, instead of satisfying your excessive pride in your
degrees and fragile ego by putting down someone who's doing a worthwhile
service for the homebuilt community. Next time you write, why not try
showing us a new, novel better way of doing something. Just for the heck of
it...look at Bill Gates, no degree and he's not the only successful person
without a degree, probably as many of them as there are PE's.
Nuff said
Harold....HS graduate
Message 58
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: formation flight comm attenuator |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 10:24 AM 1/3/2006 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Fiveonepw@aol.com
>
>Howdy all-
>
>After another frustrating couple of occasions trying to communicate with
>fellow formators I MUST come up with some solution to this problem. Recap-
>whenever closer than 300' (MOL) to other planes, transmissions from other
>planes are
>typically very garbled & unreadable on my Microair 760. They can hear me
>fine & radio works excellent at greater distances. Several listers here have
>suggested BNC attenuators to resolve this, but most I've found are limited to
>less than the output power of the 760 (about 5watts). See:
>
> http://www.smelectronics.us/bnc,fattenuators.htm
>
>A representative for JFW Industries claims to have a 50 ohm/5 watt unit at a
>reasonable price ($45) that he claims will do what I need. Unfortunately, it
>seems installing one of these "should" mitigate the formation problem, but
>longer-range comm will suffer. I asked about a "switchable" unit. The
>rep said
>it's possible, but much pricier (custom job).
You don't need a 5W unit unless you plan to run your transmitter
continuously. Like starter motors that are expected to produce
several hp for seconds at a time, an attenuator for a vhf comm
transmitter can be rated for a relatively small fraction of the
transmitter's output power. Just don't try to read War and Peace
to others in the formation . . . make them get their own entertainment
systems.
I didn't have time to do a comic book on this project but did
get some pictures made and a rough assembly document. See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Attenuator
The "dummy load" portion of this design is good for 2W continuous
and should be fine for transmitters up to 6W or so. Just don't make
long winded transmissions.
I took a peek at this assembly on the super kilodollar network
analyzer and it's entirely adequate to the task and presents a
barely detectable "lump" in the transmission line in the
NORMAL mode and SWR of 1.4:1 or better over comm range.
Bob . . .
Message 59
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: EFIS Backup EFIS? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: BobsV35B@aol.com
Good Afternoon Frank,
Get the rating and file a lot until you do feel very comfortable in cloud.
It takes a while, but the added utility gained is unbelievable. It is kinda
like learning to walk or learning to ride a bike. Takes a bit of practice right
at first, but once the procedures are ingrained, it is just as natural as
walking or riding a bike.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
In a message dated 1/4/2006 3:20:47 P.M. Central Standard Time,
frank.hinde@hp.com writes:
Ha....Comfortable with it..hell no, I have ten hours in actual IFR
conditions and a scary flight in the rear seat of a newly minted IFR
jock forgetting to adjust his DG for precession...I mean he adjusted it
like 10 minutes ago...should be fine right...as long as your comfortable
with a 15 degree error it is yes....Piece of junk!
My aim is to get instruction for my instrument ticket in my
RV7A....These maybe famous last words! As I rent a doggy old (but
stable) spam can....:)
Frank
Message 60
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: | EFIS Backup EFIS? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
Thanks Bob,
I have an excellent CFII who is also building an RV7A so asuming I can
handle learning in a fast airplane it sounds like a match made in
heaven!
Really looking forward to NOT taking the car on long trips because the
weather looks like it might deterirate for the trip home.
Cheers
Frank
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
BobsV35B@aol.com
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: EFIS Backup EFIS?
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: BobsV35B@aol.com
Good Afternoon Frank,
Get the rating and file a lot until you do feel very comfortable in
cloud.
It takes a while, but the added utility gained is unbelievable. It is
kinda like learning to walk or learning to ride a bike. Takes a bit of
practice right at first, but once the procedures are ingrained, it is
just as natural as walking or riding a bike.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
In a message dated 1/4/2006 3:20:47 P.M. Central Standard Time,
frank.hinde@hp.com writes:
Ha....Comfortable with it..hell no, I have ten hours in actual IFR
conditions and a scary flight in the rear seat of a newly minted IFR
jock forgetting to adjust his DG for precession...I mean he adjusted it
like 10 minutes ago...should be fine right...as long as your
comfortable with a 15 degree error it is yes....Piece of junk!
My aim is to get instruction for my instrument ticket in my
RV7A....These maybe famous last words! As I rent a doggy old (but
stable) spam can....:)
Frank
Message 61
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: EFIS Backup EFIS? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: BobsV35B@aol.com
In a message dated 1/4/2006 4:53:17 P.M. Central Standard Time,
frank.hinde@hp.com writes:
I have an excellent CFII who is also building an RV7A so assuming I can
handle learning in a fast airplane it sounds like a match made in
heaven!
Good Evening Frank,
In a lot of ways, flying IFR is easier in a fast airplane than it is in a
slow one. You will do just fine!
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
Do Not Archive
Message 62
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: Fiberglass instrument panel |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Brinker" <brinker@cox-internet.com>
It will not be a problem to support the radio stack from the back on
this plane. Accually I believe I will do that even if I decide to put an
aluminum plate over the FG
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bruce Gray" <Bruce@glasair.org>
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Fiberglass instrument panel
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bruce Gray" <Bruce@glasair.org>
>
> The Glasair line of airplanes usually have a FG panel, with a twist. An
> .062
> aluminum insert encompasses the entire flight group (some have gone to
> .090). The radio rack is all FG but the secret is that the radio stack is
> supported from the back of the rack. This means the panel is only loaded
> in
> shear. All radios, and deep instruments for that matter, should have
> support
> in the back end of the panel. We pull +6 -3 g's with these toys, gotta
> make
> it secure.
>
> Bruce
> www.glasair.org
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> SteinAir,
> Inc.
> To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Fiberglass instrument panel
>
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "SteinAir, Inc."
> <stein@steinair.com>
>
> Hi Randy,
>
> It really depends on the contents of the panel and how you construct it
> along with the thickness and type of composite panel. For example, if the
> panel is only 3 layers of 3oz. glass, then it won't support anything.
> But....if the panel is 5 layers of Carbon then it probably would support
> anything you put in it.
>
> Assuming your panel is a moderately stiff glass panel, then if you put the
> requisite structural stiffners behind the radio rack and don't hang dual
> 530's off of it you'll proabably be ok in that area. This too depends on
> the
> units themselves...some avionics are very shallow and light, others are
> really deep and heavy.
>
> If you use some of the newer EFIS's like a Dynon or GRT they don't weight
> much at all and should be fine in that area. But if you use a
> conventional
> "6 pack" with Vac Gryos then the likelyhood is that after you remove the
> glass it won't support the instruments.
>
> The cure for that of course is to cut some aluminum sheets which fit into
> the areas you'll be mounting instruments. Unless it's really heavy stuff,
> then .040"-.063" should be plenty.
>
> Hope that helps and doesn't confuse too much!
>
> Cheers,
> Stein.
>
> do not archive
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of
>> Brinker
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 10:18 AM
>> To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Fiberglass instrument panel
>>
>>
>> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Brinker"
>> <brinker@cox-internet.com>
>>
>> I have a composite airplane Aerocomp 6. The dash panel is
>> fiberglass. Will the fiberglass alone be strong enough to support the
>> avionics ? Do I need an overlay of some sort ?
>>
>> Randy
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
Message 63
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: | fiberglass panel |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "bob noffs" <icubob@newnorth.net>
brinker,
you may want to consider cutting a good portion of your fiberglass panel out and
replacing it with .062 alum. make a left panel and a right panel. now the
panels are removeable for access to the instruments. will take a little engineering
[ that is a figure of speech only!] to get the strength around the edges
to mount the alum. to but it worked great for me on my dakota hawk. now instead
of a one piece permanent panel i can open up either panel in 2 minutes. there
is more than a little to be said for being able to make your panel with a
drill press and work on it lying on your workbench.
bob noffs... i just cut out the instrument holes today,
tomorrow the toggle switches and the square holes!
Message 64
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: what is an engineer, flame suit technology |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Kevin Horton <khorton01@rogers.com>
According to Burt Rutan's bio on the Scaled Composites web site, he
graduated as an Aeronautical Engineer.
http://www.scaled.com/projects/tierone/press-PDF/burt_rutan_bio.pdf
Kevin Horton
On 4 Jan 2006, at 11:08, Bruce Gray wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bruce Gray"
> <Bruce@glasair.org>
>
> Don't forget Burt Rutan....
>
> Bruce
> www.glasair.org
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> Dave
> Morris "BigD" technology
> To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: what is an engineer, flame suit
> technology
>
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dave Morris \"BigD\""
> <BigD@DaveMorris.com> technology
>
> "What and where will the next innovations come from?"
>
> I think this is where you are wrong. I'll just mention a few
> examples that
> have absolutely SHAKEN the earth and transformed the entire planet
> over the
> past 50 years:
>
> "Ham Radio"
> Many modern communications technologies were invented not by
> engineers, but
> by amateurs, working in their shops, trying to come up with a
> "better way"
> than the status quo. Spread spectrum, television, packet radio,
> and many
> other examples exist. Howard Hughes was a ham. So was Robert
> Goddard. Both of them were ridiculed for trying to find "a better
> way"
> that was not in keeping with the present-day engineer mindset.
>
> "Bill Gates"
> Never graduated. Do we need to mention what he accomplished?
>
> "Steve Jobs".
> Do we need to mention what he created in his garage while HP was
> ridiculing
> him for not being an "Engineer"?
>
> Where are all these engineers when it comes to creating OBAM
> electrical
> systems that are fault-tolerant? I don't remember seeing one
> single one of
> them standing up in an EAA meeting to show us a better way. It's the
> self-taught guy who has no "old school" to hide behind, the guy who is
> thought of as "a bit crazy" who ends up being right all along. A
> thankless
> job, taking all those arrows.
>
> "There is tremendous unease in the "American soul" over the worth
> of the
> dreamer/visionary.
> We simultaneously romanticize these peculiar men and women, profit
> from
> them, try to starve them out, and kill them off. It is as if
> investors,
> distrustful of their own ability to tell the difference between an
> American
> dream and an American Pipe Dream, hedge their bets by holding
> visionaries
> to budgets and time lines that are just short of adequate."
> - Fred Moody, "The Visionary Position"
>
> Dave Morris
>
>
> At 11:24 PM 1/3/2006, you wrote:
>> What and where will the next innovations come from? ENGINEERS.
>> Chance is it will not be a kid from a Votech school that knows the
>> bench as
>> Bob says. OK. Not a put down just a fact. We need to admire the
>> academic
>> achievement and not scorn and ridicule it. I find the people who
>> do this
> are
>> ones who could not cut it in school or are just plan ignorant. Not
>> everyone
>> can be a self made man like Bob, no doubt he is much smarter than
>> I am and
>> most Engineers or manager at Raytheon.
>>
>
>
Message 65
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: Fiberglass instrument panel |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "John Schroeder" <jschroeder@perigee.net>
We installed the trays on pieces of 3/4"x3/4" aluminum angle and the
fastened them to the glass panel.
John
Lancair ES
On Wed, 4 Jan 2006 16:56:56 -0600, Brinker <brinker@cox-internet.com>
wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Brinker"
> <brinker@cox-internet.com>
>
> It will not be a problem to support the radio stack from the
> back on
> this plane. Accually I believe I will do that even if I decide to put an
> aluminum plate over the FG
Message 66
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: Fiberglass instrument panel |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Brinker" <brinker@cox-internet.com>
Thanks Stein, no I'm not really confused but without the experience I
tend to be a little bit slow. Could'nt say for sure of the amount of layers
but it is at least 1/8 thick possibly more, I have yet to cut a hole in it
to find out for sure. It feels solid and looks fairly solid. Although I
think my main concern is vibration pulling the mounting screws through.
Washers I suppose would take care of that problem but would more than likely
look tacky.
I plan on dual GRT's both stacked on the pilot side, with wx8
stormscope, auto pilot and annunciators stacked to the rh, audio panel,
sl30, kln90b, gtx330 radio stack in middle, 3 1/8 asi, alt, & electric adi
to the rh of radio stack. No vaccum instruments. These items are not at
all heavy individually but together with turbulence or G's could be. I
suppose the added weight of the aluminum plate vs. safety factor is minimal.
Thanks to all for your contributions and for helping me make my
mind up and add the aluminum plate.
----- Original Message -----
From: "SteinAir, Inc." <stein@steinair.com>
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Fiberglass instrument panel
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "SteinAir, Inc."
> <stein@steinair.com>
>
> Hi Randy,
>
> It really depends on the contents of the panel and how you construct it
> along with the thickness and type of composite panel. For example, if the
> panel is only 3 layers of 3oz. glass, then it won't support anything.
> But....if the panel is 5 layers of Carbon then it probably would support
> anything you put in it.
>
> Assuming your panel is a moderately stiff glass panel, then if you put the
> requisite structural stiffners behind the radio rack and don't hang dual
> 530's off of it you'll proabably be ok in that area. This too depends on
> the
> units themselves...some avionics are very shallow and light, others are
> really deep and heavy.
>
> If you use some of the newer EFIS's like a Dynon or GRT they don't weight
> much at all and should be fine in that area. But if you use a
> conventional
> "6 pack" with Vac Gryos then the likelyhood is that after you remove the
> glass it won't support the instruments.
>
> The cure for that of course is to cut some aluminum sheets which fit into
> the areas you'll be mounting instruments. Unless it's really heavy stuff,
> then .040"-.063" should be plenty.
>
> Hope that helps and doesn't confuse too much!
>
> Cheers,
> Stein.
>
> do not archive
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
>> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of
>> Brinker
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 10:18 AM
>> To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
>> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Fiberglass instrument panel
>>
>>
>> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Brinker"
>> <brinker@cox-internet.com>
>>
>> I have a composite airplane Aerocomp 6. The dash panel is
>> fiberglass. Will the fiberglass alone be strong enough to support the
>> avionics ? Do I need an overlay of some sort ?
>>
>> Randy
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
Message 67
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: Fiberglass instrument panel |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Ken <klehman@albedo.net>
Off topic Do not archive
As the second owner of a Murphy kit, I can tell you that they expressed
delight to provide me with free support. They just wanted to help get
another of their products airborne. That support included free
replacement and shipping of a large part that I wasn't happy with. They
provided a CD with a newer version of the manual and when I had an
opportunity to visit the factory they spent a couple of hours answering
questions and giving a tour.
OTOH I think most customer support occurs immediately after purchase and
I can be somewhat sympathetic to a reasonable charge to repeat that for
a new owner.
Ken
Matt Prather wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Matt Prather" <mprather@spro.net>
>
>
>Ouch!! That's a black eye for Aerocomp as far as I am concerned..
>Interesting. I don't think that's common in the industry, is it?
>
>
>Regards,
>
>Matt-
>
>
>
>>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Brinker"
>><brinker@cox-internet.com>
>>
>> I have not found a forum for this plane, I suppose there are
>>not
>>many being built. I am not the original purchaser of the kit so Aerocomp
>> wants $3000 ( believe it or not) up front to give any builder
>>assistance. And I have loads of assembly photo's, diagrams etc. but
>>cannot find and specifics on the panel. Was hoping to find another
>>person building an Aerocomp in group.
>>
>>
>>
Message 68
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: fiberglass panel |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Brinker" <brinker@cox-internet.com>
Thanks for the idea I'll definately give it some thought.
----- Original Message -----
From: "bob noffs" <icubob@newnorth.net>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: fiberglass panel
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "bob noffs" <icubob@newnorth.net>
>
> brinker,
> you may want to consider cutting a good portion of your fiberglass panel
> out and replacing it with .062 alum. make a left panel and a right panel.
> now the panels are removeable for access to the instruments. will take a
> little engineering [ that is a figure of speech only!] to get the strength
> around the edges to mount the alum. to but it worked great for me on my
> dakota hawk. now instead of a one piece permanent panel i can open up
> either panel in 2 minutes. there is more than a little to be said for
> being able to make your panel with a drill press and work on it lying on
> your workbench.
> bob noffs... i just cut out the instrument holes
> today, tomorrow the toggle switches and the square holes!
>
>
>
Message 69
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: Fiberglass instrument panel |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Brinker" <brinker@cox-internet.com>
That would definately stiffen the radio stack but what about the
other instruments ?
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Schroeder" <jschroeder@perigee.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Fiberglass instrument panel
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "John Schroeder"
> <jschroeder@perigee.net>
>
> We installed the trays on pieces of 3/4"x3/4" aluminum angle and the
> fastened them to the glass panel.
>
> John
> Lancair ES
>
>
> On Wed, 4 Jan 2006 16:56:56 -0600, Brinker <brinker@cox-internet.com>
> wrote:
>
>> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Brinker"
>> <brinker@cox-internet.com>
>>
>> It will not be a problem to support the radio stack from the
>> back on
>> this plane. Accually I believe I will do that even if I decide to put an
>> aluminum plate over the FG
>
>
>
Message 70
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: Fiberglass instrument panel |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: BobsV35B@aol.com
In a message dated 1/4/2006 5:25:46 P.M. Central Standard Time,
jschroeder@perigee.net writes:
We installed the trays on pieces of 3/4"x3/4" aluminum angle and the
fastened them to the glass panel.
John
Lancair ES
Good Evening John,
You might consider using the RadioRax product (www.radiorax.com) in lieu of
the angle aluminum. Not cheap, but make for very easy changes of equipment.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
Message 71
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: Close Proximity Air2Air Comm problem (HELP!) |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
Fiveonepw@aol.com wrote:
> Microair tech support suggests the following: "The radio's operation is
> normal. What you need is an antenna switch with a lower gain antenna for these
> situations. This should reduce the receiver sensitivity at the front end. When
> you aren't in formation or in close proximity to other aircraft, you should be
> able to switch back to your bent whip for greater sensitivity at the lower
> end."
Mostly this means that the MicroAir receiver front-end is subject to
front-end overload. I noticed and reported this about 5 years ago. I
find it interesting that they have the problem but others don't.
> Possible solution: I have a couple of Rubber Duckie antennas. I could mount
> one of these to a BNC receptacle on the larger side of a dedicated metal box
> (about 3"x3"x1") under my panel with the RD pointed toward the floor. A short
> RG400 patch cord from the 760 to the box, and the belly antenna RG400 to
> another receptacle on the box. A SPDT switch also mounted to the box would simply
> connect either the RD or main antenna to the 760. (Fancier yet, make it a
> DPDT feeding a lamp on my annunciator: "AUX ANT ON") If the proximity of the
RD
> to panel stuff turned out to be a problem, it could be re-located somewhere
> aft via a separate RG400, such as under the transverse seat back brace (RV-6A
> tip-up).
>
> What say ye wise ones?
Well, if you don't care about attenuating your transmit power too (you
probably don't since you are only trying to talk to an airplane 50'
away) then just put a switchable 10db pad in the antenna cable.
Here, do something like this:
o---------------o
/ \
Radio---o s1a s1b o-----Antenna
o--+----R2---+--o
| |
R1 R3
| |
----- -----
--- ---
- -
R1=R3= 96.2 ohm
R2 = 71.2 ohm
For the sake of ease of construction, use 100ohm and 75 ohm respectively.
S1 is a DPDT switch. In the up position the pad is bypassed and full
power/signal goes between the radio and the antenna. In the down
position the resistors attenuate the signal by 10dB.
In this design R1 has to handle about 2/3 of the transmitter's power.
Since most of these radios have a carrier power of about 5W, you need
about a 3W resistor. You could build it up out of 2W resistors in
parallel, say three 2-watt 270 ohm resistors in parallel. R2 and R3 can
safely be 2W resistors. That should handle just about any common
panel-mount VHF comm radio.
> Thanks for any suggestions or critique- I have GOTTA fix this!
--
Brian Lloyd 2243 Cattle Dr.
brian-yak at lloyd dot com Folsom, CA 95630
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery
Message 72
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 Panel Labels |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Ken <klehman@albedo.net>
FWIW I had no need for wider than 1/2" and in fact I printed even that
in double lines and cut it in half for quite a few places.
Ken
Mark R Steitle wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Mark R Steitle" <mark.steitle@austin.utexas.edu>
>
>Craig,
>Cool, 1/2 & 3/4 should be fine. I'll place an order for some of both.
>
>Much Thanks,
>Mark
>
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Craig Payne"
><craig@craigandjean.com>
>
>TZ135 is 1/2" white-on-clear, TZ145 is 3/4", I don't see a 1".
>
>You can order from the Brother site below but I don't think their prices
>are
>the best. If you are in a hurry Staples and OfficeMax stock some.
>
>
Message 73
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: | Fiberglass instrument panel |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Peter Laurence" <PLaurence@the-beach.net>
Randy
We have a composite panel in a Velocity RG XL. It has a full Apollo/UPS
stack in the center, A full compliment of steam flight gauges, a VM1000,
transponder and an array of breakers. We supported it with a couple of
aluminum strips .It is very sturdy.
Peter
I have a composite airplane Aerocomp 6. The dash panel is
fiberglass. Will the fiberglass alone be strong enough to support the
avionics ? Do I need an overlay of some sort ?
Randy
Message 74
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: formation flight comm attenuator |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: sportav8r@aol.com
Bob, this looks like it will do nicely. You're a packaging genius! I'll be rolling
one of these soon.
Brian L., don't forget modulation in your power handling calc's. IIRC, a 5W carrier
AM xmtr will put out 10W at 100% modulation. The 5W figure is only accurate
for FM or PM, or "dead air" on AM. Not sure this makes much practical difference,
but it would be a shame to let the smoke out of one of these puppies
inside the cockpit, especially while your eyes need to be glued on Flight Lead.
-Stormy
-----Original Message-----
From: Robert L. Nuckolls, III <nuckollsr@cox.net>
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: formation flight comm attenuator
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
<nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 10:24 AM 1/3/2006 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Fiveonepw@aol.com
>
>Howdy all-
>
>After another frustrating couple of occasions trying to communicate with
>fellow formators I MUST come up with some solution to this problem. Recap-
>whenever closer than 300' (MOL) to other planes, transmissions from other
>planes are
>typically very garbled & unreadable on my Microair 760. They can hear me
>fine & radio works excellent at greater distances. Several listers here have
>suggested BNC attenuators to resolve this, but most I've found are limited to
>less than the output power of the 760 (about 5watts). See:
>
> http://www.smelectronics.us/bnc,fattenuators.htm
>
>A representative for JFW Industries claims to have a 50 ohm/5 watt unit at a
>reasonable price ($45) that he claims will do what I need. Unfortunately, it
>seems installing one of these "should" mitigate the formation problem, but
>longer-range comm will suffer. I asked about a "switchable" unit. The
>rep said
>it's possible, but much pricier (custom job).
You don't need a 5W unit unless you plan to run your transmitter
continuously. Like starter motors that are expected to produce
several hp for seconds at a time, an attenuator for a vhf comm
transmitter can be rated for a relatively small fraction of the
transmitter's output power. Just don't try to read War and Peace
to others in the formation . . . make them get their own entertainment
systems.
I didn't have time to do a comic book on this project but did
get some pictures made and a rough assembly document. See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Attenuator
The "dummy load" portion of this design is good for 2W continuous
and should be fine for transmitters up to 6W or so. Just don't make
long winded transmissions.
I took a peek at this assembly on the super kilodollar network
analyzer and it's entirely adequate to the task and presents a
barely detectable "lump" in the transmission line in the
NORMAL mode and SWR of 1.4:1 or better over comm range.
Bob . . .
Message 75
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: | choice of gyros for IFR |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
Interesting thread. On one end you have guys who want three attitude
gyros of some form, and on the other you have guys who are happy with
just a needle/ball or turn coordinator as a backup gyro. Both will work
just fine. Given the new crop of hand-held GPS receivers with HSI
displays, you could probably use that as a last-ditch gyro.
But it all depends on your skill level. If you practice you will be able
to fly safely using needle-ball and airspeed. If not you will probably
want a backup attitude indicator. How proficient do you want to be? This
is a case where you can make the decision to trade money for effort and
vice-versa.
(And to those of you getting ready to flame me, I agree that one should
be able to fly partial panel as required by the FAA. But I am addressing
the reality that not everyone who passed flying partial panel on their
check ride is really qualified to fly partial panel in actual IFR
conditions.)
--
Brian Lloyd 2243 Cattle Dr.
brian-yak at lloyd dot com Folsom, CA 95630
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery
Message 76
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: formation flight comm attenuator |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
sportav8r@aol.com wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: sportav8r@aol.com
>
> Bob, this looks like it will do nicely. You're a packaging genius! I'll be
rolling one of these soon.
>
> Brian L., don't forget modulation in your power handling calc's. IIRC, a 5W
carrier AM xmtr will put out 10W at 100% modulation. The 5W figure is only accurate
for FM or PM, or "dead air" on AM. Not sure this makes much practical
difference, but it would be a shame to let the smoke out of one of these puppies
inside the cockpit, especially while your eyes need to be glued on Flight Lead.
Actually it isn't a problem. A 100% modulated AM signal has only 25% of
the power in the sidebands so a transmitter with a 10W carrier is only
radiating 12.5W when 100% modulated. This is why SSB is so much more
efficient. 100% of the power is concentrated in one sideband instead of
12.5% as with an AM signal. But I digress.
BTW, Bob's attenuator, while not as technically pure as mine, will work
just peachy for this application and is easier to build.
--
Brian Lloyd 2243 Cattle Dr.
brian-yak at lloyd dot com Folsom, CA 95630
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery
Message 77
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: | THANKY YOU! re:Formation flight comm attenuator |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Fiveonepw@aol.com
In a message dated 01/04/2006 4:24:17 PM Central Standard Time,
nuckollsr@cox.net writes:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Attenuator
>>>
Another example of why I'm a confirmed Nuckollhead- dangle a real-world
problem in front of someone who doesn't have their nose in the flight levels or
up
the exit end of their alimentary canal and voila': solution! Reminds me of
when Indiana Jones (first movie- the others REALLY stank!) is confronted in some
marketplace (Algiers?) by the black-robed ninja-type dude flingin' the blade
all over the place and Indy just pulls out his revolver and solves the
problem. Quick, simple, efficient.
Just to further my education- why the 50 ohms to gnd when switched on, and
what is rationale for the fancier switch than shown in the foto? Also- any
reason not to do a TPDT switch for an annunciator light?
Thanks AGAIN Bob for another great assist and for just doing what ya do!
Also appreciate the comments and suggestions from other A-listers in the
prosecution of this problem...
From The PossumWorks in TN
Mark Phillips - RV-6A N51PW (no wallpaper but a journeyman certificate and 25
years herding robots, plcs, big automation systems etc.....)
do not archive
Message 78
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: Close Proximity Air2Air Comm problem (HELP!) |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Fiveonepw@aol.com
In a message dated 01/04/2006 7:57:59 PM Central Standard Time,
brian-yak@lloyd.com writes:
Mostly this means that the MicroAir receiver front-end is subject to
front-end overload. I noticed and reported this about 5 years ago. I
find it interesting that they have the problem but others don't.
>>
Hi Brian- thanks so much for the reply!
If you've seen Bob N's reply, it appears you two are suggesting the same
thing (drawing came through a bit rough, but appears to be same circuit as Bob
shows- great minds thinking alike and all that...)
Thanks again & welcome back to the States (I guess- sounds like you were
really roughing it last year!)
Mark do not archive
Message 79
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: THANKY YOU! re:Formation flight comm attenuator |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
Fiveonepw@aol.com wrote:
> Just to further my education- why the 50 ohms to gnd when switched on,
Because that is what the transmitter wants to see. If the resistance
(impedance actually) is different from that by a factor of three or more
the transmitter could either be damaged or, if it has a protection
circuit, it could refuse to transmit.
> and what is rationale for the fancier switch than shown in the foto?
It would do a better job of presenting the aforementioned 50 ohm
impedance. Regardless, at the relatively low frequencies at which VHF
comms operate, Bob's wiring looks darned good and is unlikely to cause a
problem with your radio.
> Also- any reason not to do a TPDT switch for an annunciator light?
None at all.
--
Brian Lloyd 2243 Cattle Dr.
brian-yak at lloyd dot com Folsom, CA 95630
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery
Message 80
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: Fiberglass instrument panel |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "John Schroeder" <jschroeder@perigee.net>
Hello Bob,
We looked at the Radio RAX, but they were a tad on the high side of the
cost curve. Our panel is finished and installed and we need to fly the
bird first.
Thanks for the info,
John
> We installed the trays on pieces of 3/4"x3/4" aluminum angle and the
> fastened them to the glass panel.
>
> John
> Lancair ES
>
>
> Good Evening John,
> You might consider using the RadioRax product (www.radiorax.com) in
> lieu of
> the angle aluminum. Not cheap, but make for very easy changes of
> equipment.
> Happy Skies,
>
> Old Bob
> AKA
> Bob Siegfried
> Ancient Aviator
> Stearman N3977A
> Brookeridge Air Park LL22
> Downers Grove, IL 60516
> 630 985-8503
>
>
--
Message 81
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: Close Proximity Air2Air Comm problem (HELP!) |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
Fiveonepw@aol.com wrote:
> Hi Brian- thanks so much for the reply!
You are welcome.
> If you've seen Bob N's reply, it appears you two are suggesting the same
> thing (drawing came through a bit rough, but appears to be same circuit as Bob
> shows- great minds thinking alike and all that...)
Not a lot of magic there. The problem suggested the solution.
> Thanks again & welcome back to the States (I guess- sounds like you were
> really roughing it last year!)
Well, I was living in the US Virgin Islands for three years. I came back
for a job with a start-up in Sacramento after selling my business in the
USVI. Thanks for the welcome back.
>
> Mark do not archive
--
Brian Lloyd 2243 Cattle Dr.
brian-yak at lloyd dot com Folsom, CA 95630
+1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)
I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things . . .
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery
Message 82
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: | Airpath compass bulb & connector. |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Rob W M Shipley" <rob@robsglass.com>
Many thanks to Harley and all the other listers who so kindly helped to
solve the bulb problem.
Now has anyone any idea where to get the plug for the coaxial socket on the
back ...............?
Rob
Rob W M Shipley
N919RV (res) Fuselage .....still!
La Mesa, CA. (next to San Diego)
do not archive
I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users.
It has removed 10624 spam emails to date.
Paying users do not have this message in their emails.
Try www.SPAMfighter.com for free now!
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! --
|