Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:10 AM - Common Grounding -Forest of tabs (Kingsley Hurst)
2. 05:02 AM - Re: Revised Load Analysis (LarryRobertHelming)
3. 05:30 AM - Re: Common Grounding -Forest of tabs (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
4. 06:24 AM - Re: Re: ELT (Jerry Grimmonpre)
5. 06:31 AM - Re: Re: ELT (Brian Lloyd)
6. 06:38 AM - Re: AOA audio Input To Intercom (Karen and Robert Brown)
7. 06:47 AM - Re: AOA audio Input To Intercom (Bill Denton)
8. 06:49 AM - Common Grounding -Forest of tabs (With Link Correction) (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
9. 06:49 AM - Re: Re: ELT Antenna Length (Tinne maha)
10. 06:58 AM - Re: Re: ELT (RV Builder (Michael Sausen))
11. 06:58 AM - Re: Re: ELT (Matt Prather)
12. 08:21 AM - Common Grounding (richard titsworth)
13. 09:38 AM - Beta Test - MasterMinder and Courtesy Switch products (Dan Beadle)
14. 09:59 AM - Z-13 questions (Erich_Weaver@URSCorp.com)
15. 09:59 AM - Re: Beta Test - MasterMinder and Courtesy Switch products (Bill Denton)
16. 10:23 AM - Re: ELT Antenna radials (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
17. 10:45 AM - Re: Common Grounding (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
18. 10:49 AM - Buzzing Buttons.... (Eric M. Jones)
19. 12:07 PM - Re: Common Grounding -Forest of tabs (Kingsley Hurst)
20. 03:11 PM - Re: IFR GPS ()
21. 05:04 PM - Re: Common Grounding (Fiveonepw@aol.com)
22. 06:36 PM - Re: Revised Load Analysis (Dennis Johnson)
23. 06:42 PM - Re: Load Analysis (Dennis Johnson)
24. 07:12 PM - Re: Re: Revised Load Analysis (Bret Smith)
25. 07:14 PM - Re: Buzzing Buttons.... (Fiveonepw@aol.com)
26. 07:27 PM - Re: Load Analysis (Bret Smith)
27. 07:42 PM - Re: Buzzing Buttons.... (B Tomm)
28. 07:48 PM - Re: Load Analysis (Dj Merrill)
29. 10:35 PM - Oil Pressure warning light and hobbs driver? ()
30. 10:40 PM - Runway / pattern pilot aid? ()
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: | Common Grounding -Forest of tabs |
Message-ID: <001301c61686$7bdd3080$082210ac@taroom.local>
Reply-To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Kingsley Hurst" <khurst@taroom.qld.gov.au>
Dear Bob N,
Because I have a removable instrument panel, it seems to me that it
might be a good idea to have a forest of ground tabs on the engine side
of the firewall and the other set affixed to the instrument panel proper
with a heavy connecting wire between them.
If I used say a 10 awg wire to join the two over a distance of about
300mm, would this be likely to give rise to the dreaded ground loop ? I
imagine not but I am not really sure hence my call for confirmation or
otherwise.
Your assistance is much appreciated as always.
Kingsley Hurst in Oz
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: Revised Load Analysis |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming@sigecom.net>
I would put the Avionics cooling fan and Chelton display 2 on the main bus
to reduce e-bus load.
"Please use the information and opinions I express with responsibility, and
at your own risk."
L R Helming
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dennis Johnson" <pinetownd@volcano.net>
Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2006 7:27 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Revised Load Analysis
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dennis Johnson"
> <pinetownd@volcano.net>
>
> Greetings,
>
> I'm hoping that the formatting survives this time!
>
> This month is wiring month for my Lancair Legacy. My preliminary load
> analysis
> for each electrical bus is presented for review and comment. Composite
> airplane,
> engine in front, 75 amp main alternator, SD-8 aux alternator, single
> battery,
> Z-13/8 all electric on a budget with overweight E-Bus. Chelton Sport
> glass
> cockpit with backups for airspeed, altimeter, and electric attitude
> indicator
> (TruTrak ADI). IFR and night flights anticipated. The "Typ Amps"
> represents
> the typical continuous current in cruise flight.
>
> I'm curious if anyone has comments regarding which components are on each
> bus.
>
> Battery Bus:
>
> Baggage area dome light 1-2 amps
> Clock -
> Panel flood lights .5
> Map lights .5
> Electronic ignition 2
> Alternate feed to E-Bus -
> Total battery bus loads 4-5 amps
>
>
> E-Bus:
>
> Elevator trim servo -
> Roll & yaw trim servos -
> Transponder & altitude encoder 1.5
> Audio panel & headsets .4
> Gear down lights & O2 regulators -
> Engine info system (GRT) .2
> Com radio .3 (3.2 max)
> Autopilot .5 (2.5 max,
> including servos)
> Instrument panel lights .2
> Chelton display #1 2.5
> Chelton display #2 2.5
> Attitude heading reference sys .2
> Total E-Bus loads 9 (14 max)
>
>
> Main Bus:
>
> Angle of attack indicator .2
> Fuel boost pump -
> VOR receiver 1
> Wingtip position lights (LEDs) ?
> Wingtip strobe lights ?
> Wing flaps motor -
> Taxi light -
> Landing light -
> Pitot heat - (11 when in use)
> Avionics cooling fan .5
> Backup electric attitude indicator ?
> Normal feed to E-Bus 9 (14 max)
> Total Main Bus 16 (42 max)
>
> Other:
>
> Hydraulic pump for landing gear - (40 amp ANL fuse)
>
>
> Thanks,
> Dennis Johnson
> Legacy #257, wiring this month
>
>
>
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: Common Grounding -Forest of tabs |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 06:10 PM 1/11/2006 +1000, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Kingsley Hurst"
><khurst@taroom.qld.gov.au>
>
>Dear Bob N,
>
>Because I have a removable instrument panel, it seems to me that it
>might be a good idea to have a forest of ground tabs on the engine side
>of the firewall and the other set affixed to the instrument panel proper
>with a heavy connecting wire between them.
>
>If I used say a 10 awg wire to join the two over a distance of about
>300mm, would this be likely to give rise to the dreaded ground loop ? I
>imagine not but I am not really sure hence my call for confirmation or
>otherwise.
>
>Your assistance is much appreciated as always.
Have you looked over the Avionics (panel) ground
bus architecture proposed in the latest revision
to the 'Connection?
This gathering of all panel grounds into a simpler,
lower wire count extension to the firewall sounds
like what you're wanting to do. See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Grounding/AVG_RA.jpg
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Grounding/Avionics_Bus_3.jpg
Page 18-12 in
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/Rev11/18Audio_R11.pdf
and Z-figures in
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Grounding/Avionics_Bus_3.jpg
Bob . . .
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Jerry Grimmonpre" <jerry@mc.net>
Dave ...
The Lancair list has a World map locating everyone who wants to post their
position. I'd like to see the RV community expand into something similar.
Jerry Grimmonpre'
RV8A Electrical
Do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave Morris "BigD"" <BigD@DaveMorris.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2006 11:19 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: ELT
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dave Morris \"BigD\""
> <BigD@DaveMorris.com>
>
> Re: ELTs. Something to look at...
>
> Someday aviation will catch up to ham radio, where we've already developed
> a system that displays the current location of everybody who wants to
> participate. You can call it Big Brother, but it's voluntary and we built
> it for ourselves, and in aviation it sure might come in handy if you have
> a
> 7700 situation. Here's what Texas looks like right now in real time:
>
> http://www.findu.com/cgi-bin/dmap.cgi?map=txstate.mp&last=24&maplist=master.txt&width=640&height=480
>
> Dave Morris
>
>
>
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
Dave Morris "BigD" wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dave Morris \"BigD\"" <BigD@DaveMorris.com>
>
> Re: ELTs. Something to look at...
>
> Someday aviation will catch up to ham radio, where we've already developed
> a system that displays the current location of everybody who wants to
> participate.
Aviation already has it. It is called ADS-B.
--
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 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: AOA audio Input To Intercom |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Karen and Robert Brown" <bkbrown@ashcreekwireless.com>
I was advised by Rob to wire to the unswitched audio pin on my audio panel, he
advised against wiring it direct to the headset jack. My recommendation is to
look over the pin diagram for your unit and call Rob with that in hand.
Bob Brown
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: | AOA audio Input To Intercom |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bill Denton" <bdenton@bdenton.com>
The point seems to have been missed that the OP did not have an audio panel,
and had no desire to install one.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Karen
and Robert Brown
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2006 8:37 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: AOA audio Input To Intercom
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Karen and Robert Brown"
<bkbrown@ashcreekwireless.com>
I was advised by Rob to wire to the unswitched audio pin on my audio panel,
he advised against wiring it direct to the headset jack. My recommendation
is to look over the pin diagram for your unit and call Rob with that in
hand.
Bob Brown
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: | Common Grounding -Forest of tabs (With Link Correction) |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
>Dear Bob N,
>
>Because I have a removable instrument panel, it seems to me that it
>might be a good idea to have a forest of ground tabs on the engine side
>of the firewall and the other set affixed to the instrument panel proper
>with a heavy connecting wire between them.
>
>If I used say a 10 awg wire to join the two over a distance of about
>300mm, would this be likely to give rise to the dreaded ground loop ? I
>imagine not but I am not really sure hence my call for confirmation or
>otherwise.
>
>Your assistance is much appreciated as always.
Have you looked over the Avionics (panel) ground
bus architecture proposed in the latest revision
to the 'Connection?
This gathering of all panel grounds into a simpler,
lower wire count extension to the firewall sounds
like what you're wanting to do. See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Grounding/AVG_RA.jpg
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Grounding/Avionics_Bus_3.jpg
Page 18-12 in
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/Rev11/18Audio_R11.pdf
and Z-figures in
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/Rev11/AppZ_R11E.pdf
Bob . . .
--
Bob . . .
--------------------------------------------------------
< Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition >
< of man. Advances which permit this norm to be >
< exceeded -- here and there, now and then -- are the >
< work of an extremely small minority, frequently >
< despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed >
< by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny >
< minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes >
< happens) is driven out of a society, the people >
< then slip back into abject poverty. >
< >
< This is known as "bad luck". >
< -Lazarus Long- >
<------------------------------------------------------>
http://www.aeroelectric.com
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Tinne maha" <tinnemaha@hotmail.com>
Bob & list,
Thank You all for the many helpful suggestions. I feel sorta silly not to
have thought of some of them myself, so thanks for your patience &
willingness to point out what may seem obvious to you.
As for installing the radials, one to the front will be easy & off to one
side will be short (maybe 2.5 inches) but there is no room to the other side
or back, at least if I want to stay in the same 'plane' as the base of the
antenna, which I believe is important. Is there a way to incorporate the
'silver spray' portion of the polyfiber finishing system into the antenna?
The 'silver spray' is basically a thin sheet of aluminum used to protect the
fabric from UV rays.
Thanks again for all the help. This list is a GREAT resource.
Grant
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: ELT Antenna Length
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
<nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 08:46 AM 1/10/2006 -0800, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Tinne maha"
><tinnemaha@hotmail.com>
>
>Bob et al,
>
>I'm trying to mount the antenna inside the airfoiled section of my vertical
>stabilizer, just above my ELT. The wood ribs on the vertical stabilizer
>are
>oriented horizontally. It is a tube & fabric airplane with the vertical
>stabilizer already covered. The fuselage is not yet covered. I want to
>mount the base of the antenna in the fuselage & extend the antenna up into
>the already covered portion of the vert stab.
>The antenna that came with my ELT has a ~3" high rubber cone at the base
>out
>of which extends about 18 more inches of small diameter metal rod. I
>drilled small holes in the bottom two ribs of the stabilizer, but the third
>one I can't reach with a drill bit. So I got the hair brained idea of just
>cutting off ~1.5 inches of the antenna.
>I'm open to any suggestions, but moving the location of the antenna is
>highly UN desirable to me
>I read the post about using a 'rubber ducky' antenna, but have no idea what
>one is & can't find any reference in the A/C Spruce catalog.
>
>Thanks for the attention already given,
Are you planning any kind of ground plane under the
antenna? You'd like to see a some "radials" like those
illustrated in the 'Conection on page 13-10. Even if
two or three (one going forward and two to either side
on the stabilizer?).
Getting the antenna portion shortened a tad is not
a big deal . . . but you need some radials too. Got
any ideas how to make this happen?
Bob . . .
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "RV Builder (Michael Sausen)" <rvbuilder@sausen.net>
RV-10 list also has this:
http://www.frappr.com/rv10snorthamerica
But I think the discussion is more around real-time display for ELT position.
Michael Sausen
-10 #352 Fuselage
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jerry Grimmonpre
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2006 8:23 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: ELT
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Jerry Grimmonpre"
--> <jerry@mc.net>
Dave ...
The Lancair list has a World map locating everyone who wants to post their position.
I'd like to see the RV community expand into something similar.
Jerry Grimmonpre'
RV8A Electrical
Do not archive
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave Morris "BigD"" <BigD@DaveMorris.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2006 11:19 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: ELT
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dave Morris \"BigD\""
> <BigD@DaveMorris.com>
>
> Re: ELTs. Something to look at...
>
> Someday aviation will catch up to ham radio, where we've already developed
> a system that displays the current location of everybody who wants to
> participate. You can call it Big Brother, but it's voluntary and we built
> it for ourselves, and in aviation it sure might come in handy if you have
> a
> 7700 situation. Here's what Texas looks like right now in real time:
>
> http://www.findu.com/cgi-bin/dmap.cgi?map=3Dtxstate.mp&last=3D24&maplist=3Dmaster.txt&width=3D640&height=3D480
>
> Dave Morris
>
>
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Matt Prather" <mprather@spro.net>
That might be useful if you're engine quits over your house.. :)
However, I think what the hams have is more useful. It shows where you
actually are (or where your radio is anyway) in real time. Nice for
x-country over sparsely populated ares. Joe Dubner, a Long EZ driver that
I know is set up for real time ham gps tracking. Pretty slick.
Matt-
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Jerry Grimmonpre"
> <jerry@mc.net>
>
> Dave ...
> The Lancair list has a World map locating everyone who wants to post
> their position. I'd like to see the RV community expand into something
> similar. Jerry Grimmonpre'
> RV8A Electrical
> Do not archive
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dave Morris "BigD"" <BigD@DaveMorris.com>
> To: <aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2006 11:19 PM
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: ELT
>
>
>> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dave Morris \"BigD\""
>> <BigD@DaveMorris.com>
>>
>> Re: ELTs. Something to look at...
>>
>> Someday aviation will catch up to ham radio, where we've already
>> developed a system that displays the current location of everybody who
>> wants to participate. You can call it Big Brother, but it's voluntary
>> and we built it for ourselves, and in aviation it sure might come in
>> handy if you have a
>> 7700 situation. Here's what Texas looks like right now in real time:
>>
>> http://www.findu.com/cgi-bin/dmap.cgi?map=txstate.mp&last=24&maplist=master.txt&width=640&height=480
>>
>> Dave Morris
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
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: | Common Grounding |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "richard titsworth" <rtitsworth@mindspring.com>
Bob, etal,
Ok, here comes perhaps a silly/stupid question (flamesuit in place)...
I'm building a composite airplane with AFT batteries (Lancair ES).
This would normally result in two large wires/cables running from the aft
batteries/contactors up to the firewall/engine (alt and starter) - one live
(+) and one ground (-).
If it were a metal aircraft the airframe itself would/could provide the
return ground circuit - hence only 1 "wire".
Q: Why not incorporate/embed a "solid" electrical conductor (ground) which
runs the length of the fuselage. For example, this could be an
appropriately sized aluminum bar/rod/strap. It could be properly
fabricated/shaped and molded/bonded to the fuselage to reduce/remove
vibrational stresses/hardening. The ends could be fabricated/welded to
interface/bolt directly with the contactors (aft) and ground buss (fwd) to
minimize connections. This might save a few lbs, $, and wire ties (andel
clamps). If nothing else, it would/could be a very "clean" looking
installation with no added risk/cost/weight/etc.
If properly designed/routed, it could perhaps also be used as the ground for
a few other (not ground loop sensitive) devices/circuits which might lie
along its path (flap motor, boost pump, seat heaters, etc). Thus,
economizing on some ground wiring.
Risk/concern: failure of the insulation on the +wire could result in a short
if contact is made - same risk as with a metal aircraft. Routing proximity
could reduce this risk and/or the rod/bar/strap could be covered with a thin
layer of glass/epoxy.
Risk/concern: durability/corrosion - My 30yr old aluminum Cessna still looks
brand new under the inspection panels. Epoxy/glass and/or
paint/zinc-chromate to environmentally protect it.
Risk/concern: serviceability/inspection - 1-2 bid E-glass and epoxy is
nearly transparent. I could see it's condition (something impossible inside
wire insulation)
Risk/concern: if it gets too hot/melts it might damage the fuselage due to
the proximity (bolded in). Must be properly sized. Best if it is routed
away from sensitive stuff if possible (wing spar, fuel lines, etc). Similar
risk with cable (at the extreme), but the wire/cable insulation provides
some teat transfer resistance/insulation. .
Insanity continued.
If it works for the ground, why not do the same with the main live (+)
wire/cable. Since I'm early in the build process, this "big" electrical
conduit (wire/cable) doesn't need to be "flexible". I can shape it and
build the plane around it.
Thoughts? (Commence firing)!
Rick
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: | Beta Test - MasterMinder and Courtesy Switch products |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dan Beadle" <Dan.Beadle@hq.InclineSoftworks.com>
I am building two products for experimental aircraft. I am looking for a
couple people to test the units.
- MasterMinder. This unit will sit past the contactor and
monitor a switched bus. It has a SonAlert to indicate loss of
Alternator and to remind if you leave the master on. It has a mute
switch to allow the beeper to be turned off for a period of time, like
for service. Normal operation is a single beep as the master is turned
on. This indicates that the system is armed. After starting, it
monitors the bus voltage. If the bus falls below about 13.4 Volts, the
system beeps once, then again (and more annoyingly) every minute.
Pushing the optional mute button mutes it for 1,2,5,10, or 30 minutes.
On shutdown you get a single beep as the engine winds down. But then you
get periodic beeps every minute after shutdown, indicating you left the
master on. It has an optional voltage display and / or idiot light
outputs.
- Smart Accessory Switch. For planes with lights or other
accessories on the hot buss, it is always annoying to find that some
load has been left on far longer than you want. In my plane, I have a
passenger light that kids play with and leave on. It is hard to detect
during the day. So I build the smart switch. It monitors buss voltage.
If the alternator is on, the switch is dumb - just an on-off. However,
if the buss voltage drops, the smart switch starts a timer to power off
the load after a pre-set time. In my case, I have the switch auto-power
off after 10 minutes. This lets me deplane with light, but catches the
case where the light is left on. If the unit powers off too soon, you
just toggle the switch off then back on, restarting the timer.
I would appreciate any thoughts about the functionality of these devices
(They are software based - so features can change)
I am also looking for a couple testers who will fly the devices and give
me user feedback from packaging to installation to usability. Devices
will be free to the testers. Expected pricing is under $100.
Message 14
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Erich_Weaver@URSCorp.com
Greetings
Im beginning to get up to speed in preparation for installation of my
RV-7's electrical system, but have some remaining questions. Regarding
Bob's Z-13 architecture:
(1) I see no protection built in for the wire between the battery contactor
and the main bus. Why would this be? In my case,, this wire will need to
run from the front of the firewall to somewhere on my subpanel, so the wire
length isnt entirely trivial.
(2) Im confused about the wire between the connection terminal for the
main bus and the DC power master switch. Why have a wire with a fusible
link coming off the bus connection terminal when you could just have the
wire hooked up to the bus with a standard fuse like the other circuits? I
know Im missing something...
Thanks. How did people wire planes before the list?
Erich Weaver
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: | Beta Test - MasterMinder and Courtesy Switch products |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bill Denton" <bdenton@bdenton.com>
Just a thought, but since a large number of pilots wear headphones, many
with active noise reduction, you might consider adding some sort of tone
generator, and provide an audio output which could be fed to the aircraft's
audio panel...
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Dan
Beadle
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2006 11:37 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Beta Test - MasterMinder and Courtesy Switch
products
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dan Beadle"
<Dan.Beadle@hq.InclineSoftworks.com>
I am building two products for experimental aircraft. I am looking for a
couple people to test the units.
- MasterMinder. This unit will sit past the contactor and
monitor a switched bus. It has a SonAlert to indicate loss of
Alternator and to remind if you leave the master on. It has a mute
switch to allow the beeper to be turned off for a period of time, like
for service. Normal operation is a single beep as the master is turned
on. This indicates that the system is armed. After starting, it
monitors the bus voltage. If the bus falls below about 13.4 Volts, the
system beeps once, then again (and more annoyingly) every minute.
Pushing the optional mute button mutes it for 1,2,5,10, or 30 minutes.
On shutdown you get a single beep as the engine winds down. But then you
get periodic beeps every minute after shutdown, indicating you left the
master on. It has an optional voltage display and / or idiot light
outputs.
- Smart Accessory Switch. For planes with lights or other
accessories on the hot buss, it is always annoying to find that some
load has been left on far longer than you want. In my plane, I have a
passenger light that kids play with and leave on. It is hard to detect
during the day. So I build the smart switch. It monitors buss voltage.
If the alternator is on, the switch is dumb - just an on-off. However,
if the buss voltage drops, the smart switch starts a timer to power off
the load after a pre-set time. In my case, I have the switch auto-power
off after 10 minutes. This lets me deplane with light, but catches the
case where the light is left on. If the unit powers off too soon, you
just toggle the switch off then back on, restarting the timer.
I would appreciate any thoughts about the functionality of these devices
(They are software based - so features can change)
I am also looking for a couple testers who will fly the devices and give
me user feedback from packaging to installation to usability. Devices
will be free to the testers. Expected pricing is under $100.
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: ELT Antenna radials |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 06:49 AM 1/11/2006 -0800, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Tinne maha" <tinnemaha@hotmail.com>
>
>Bob & list,
>
>Thank You all for the many helpful suggestions. I feel sorta silly not to
>have thought of some of them myself, so thanks for your patience &
>willingness to point out what may seem obvious to you.
>
>As for installing the radials, one to the front will be easy & off to one
>side will be short (maybe 2.5 inches) but there is no room to the other side
>or back, at least if I want to stay in the same 'plane' as the base of the
>antenna, which I believe is important. Is there a way to incorporate the
>'silver spray' portion of the polyfiber finishing system into the antenna?
>The 'silver spray' is basically a thin sheet of aluminum used to protect the
>fabric from UV rays.
>
>Thanks again for all the help. This list is a GREAT resource.
The full length radial to the front is 99% of your radial
effectiveness . . . short ones like 2.5" is of no practical value
at 121.5 Mhz. Conductive sprays are useful for attenuating
outside interference on non-conductive cases . . . it is
extremely difficult to make a long-lived, low-resistance
connection to conductive film on a resilient substrate. Been
there, tried that, didn't work.
Run the single, full length, radial forward. Make it as WIDE
as practical . . . perhaps wrap it down each side of the
structure.
Bob . . .
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: Common Grounding |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 11:19 AM 1/11/2006 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "richard titsworth"
><rtitsworth@mindspring.com>
>
>Bob, etal,
>
>
>Ok, here comes perhaps a silly/stupid question (flamesuit in place)...
>
>
>I'm building a composite airplane with AFT batteries (Lancair ES).
>
>This would normally result in two large wires/cables running from the aft
>batteries/contactors up to the firewall/engine (alt and starter) - one live
>(+) and one ground (-).
>
>
>If it were a metal aircraft the airframe itself would/could provide the
>return ground circuit - hence only 1 "wire".
>
>
>Q: Why not incorporate/embed a "solid" electrical conductor (ground) which
>runs the length of the fuselage. For example, this could be an
>appropriately sized aluminum bar/rod/strap. It could be properly
>fabricated/shaped and molded/bonded to the fuselage to reduce/remove
>vibrational stresses/hardening. The ends could be fabricated/welded to
>interface/bolt directly with the contactors (aft) and ground buss (fwd) to
>minimize connections. This might save a few lbs, $, and wire ties (andel
>clamps). If nothing else, it would/could be a very "clean" looking
>installation with no added risk/cost/weight/etc.
Depends on how much time you want to spend on it. 2AWG copper is
4 oz per foot. Assuming 8' of cable from battery to firewall
gives you 2# of installed weight.
2AWG is about .25" diameter or .05 square-in of cross section.
Alum is 63% conductivity of copper so you'll need about
0.08 square-in of alum. A piece of 0.050" x 1.6" wide fills
the bill. 96" x .05 x 1.6 is 7.7 cu" of aluminum. 0.1 pound
per cubic inch is about 0.8 pounds.
Expected weight savings is about 1.2 pounds. You could bring
the strap up the inside of the firewall and clamp it up to
the firewall ground bus. If you used copper strap, you could
solder it to the ground strap for a really good joint.
>Risk/concern: failure of the insulation on the +wire could result in a short
>if contact is made - same risk as with a metal aircraft. Routing proximity
>could reduce this risk and/or the rod/bar/strap could be covered with a thin
>layer of glass/epoxy.
Not significant . . .
>
>
>Risk/concern: durability/corrosion - My 30yr old aluminum Cessna still looks
>brand new under the inspection panels. Epoxy/glass and/or
>paint/zinc-chromate to environmentally protect it.
Corrosion of the surface of any conductor is not a big
driver for electrical performance. All the important stuff
happens in the gas-tight joints between various components.
>
>
>Risk/concern: serviceability/inspection - 1-2 bid E-glass and epoxy is
>nearly transparent. I could see it's condition (something impossible inside
>wire insulation)
>
>
>Risk/concern: if it gets too hot/melts it might damage the fuselage due to
>the proximity (bolded in). Must be properly sized. Best if it is routed
>away from sensitive stuff if possible (wing spar, fuel lines, etc). Similar
>risk with cable (at the extreme), but the wire/cable insulation provides
>some teat transfer resistance/insulation. .
It's in LESS danger of overheating and melting than a 2AWG
wire. Wire has less surface area and rejects heat poorly
compared to a flat strap.
>If it works for the ground, why not do the same with the main live (+)
>wire/cable. Since I'm early in the build process, this "big" electrical
>conduit (wire/cable) doesn't need to be "flexible". I can shape it and
>build the plane around it.
It's been done. I've had canard pusher builders lay parallel
straps up under a layer of glass in the fuselage. Most of them
used copper for integrity of soldered joints at the ends.
Bob . . .
Message 18
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Buzzing Buttons.... |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Eric M. Jones" <emjones@charter.net>
Ran across this--
>From issue 2533 of New Scientist magazine, 07 January 2006, page 19
Buzzing buttons cancel car noise
"DOZENS of vibrating buttons dotted around cars could give passengers a quieter
ride. Attached to components around the vehicle, the coin-sized buttons will
cancel out the vibrations that cause much of the noise inside a typical car.
Each button contains an accelerometer that detects the vibration frequency of the
component it is attached to, plus a controller unit and a piezoelectric actuator.
Software algorithms built into the controller calculate the frequency necessary
to dampen the vibration. The controller then applies a voltage of this
frequency to the actuator.
A research team, led by Arthur Berkhoff at the Dutch research organisation TNO,
has already built the sensor and actuator. The next step is to miniaturise the
circuitry without it overheating..."
Now I can think of some places to use these guys! Since it uses technology that
was pioneered in the noise cancelling headsets, I can imagine a quieter world
in the very near future.
Eric M. Jones
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=2968#2968
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: | Common Grounding -Forest of tabs |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Kingsley Hurst" <khurst@taroom.qld.gov.au>
> Have you looked over the Avionics (panel) ground
bus architecture proposed in the latest revision
to the 'Connection?
Have to confess I haven't Bob but will do so now.
Many thanks
Kingsley
Do not archive
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 |
|
Cc: <avionics-list@matronics.com>, <aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: <bakerocb@cox.net>
1/11/2006
Hello Wayne, I'll give it a shot. (See Wayne's request copied below).
1) You wrote: "......skip..... the unit must meet the the guidelines per
TSO-C129, however changing they may be."
The current version of TSO-C129 is TSO C129a dated 2/20/1996. It has been
almost 10 years since there have been any changes to that TSO. So any
argument that one tries to make that compliance is difficult because of
changes to the TSO is not very valid.
I also think that it is rather useless for individuals to talk about
compliance with a TSO or equivalent. TSO's are basically shell documents and
the real guts of a TSO lies in all the technical references that a TSO
usually contains. (TSO-C129a is much better than most in that regard -- it
actually has some specific content.) Even if an individual spent all the
money and time to assemble all the references it would then take tremendous
technical, financial, and material resources to attempt to comply with them
and to prove to the FAA that you were complying with them.
The fact of the matter is that individuals either comply with TSO-C129a by
buying a box so labeled or they are not in compliance. It is much more
relevant to be discussing an individual's compliance with the FAR's and the
AIM.
2) You wrote: " We have a fellow who thinks he can use the GPS in a Blue
Mountain EFIS 1 for primary nav in the enroute phase."
3) The Blue Mountain web site FAQ list contains this: "Question: Is EFIS/One
certified for GPS approaches?
Answer: On the advice of our most trusted avionics dealer and partner, we
have decided not to pursue it. For what it will cost to do TSO C129A testing
and certification, we'd have to raise the price of the EFIS by more than the
cost of a high-volume certified unit. We think it's a better deal to have a
reasonably priced glass cockpit, and the interconnect available for those
who want to fly GPS approaches. If you have a certified GPS, you can plug it
in to drive the flight director and autopilot in approach mode."
So that clearly establishes that the Blue Mountain EFIS does not meet the
criteria of TSO-C129a.
4) Your subject line says GPS IFR flight.
AIM paragraph 1-1-19 d. 1. says "Authorization to conduct any GPS operation
under IFR requires that:
(a) "GPS navigation equipment used must be approved in accordance with the
requirements specified in Technical Standard Order (TSO) TSO-C129, or
equivalent,....skip...."
Note 4 to Table 1-1-6 in the AIM says "VFR and hand-held GPS systems are not
authorized for IFR navigation, instrument approaches, or as a primary
instrument flight reference. During IFR operations they may be considered
only an aid to situational awareness."
AIM paragraph 1-1-19 d. 1. (b) says "Aircraft using GPS navigation equipment
under IFR must be equipped with an approved and operational alternate means
of navigation appropriate to the flight."
CFR 14 Sec. 91.205 (d) (2) requires "Two-way radio communications system and
navigational equipment appropriate to the ground facilities to be used."
Seems pretty clear to me that the GPS capability in a Blue Mountain EFIS
cannot be used as a primary means of IFR enroute navigation. If this fellow
has a counter argument I'd like to read it along with the pertinent
references.
5) But there is nothing stopping the fellow from launching off on a VOR
filed IFR flight plan and then working the ATC system to allow him to go as
direct as they and his GPS will allow him to. The gotcha is that he better
be ready to ready at any time to navigate by VOR.
OC
----- Original Message -----
From: "Hicks, Wayne" <wayne.hicks@zeltech.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2006 3:55 PM
Subject: IFR GPS
>I need your insight again. We have a fellow who thinks he can use the GPS
> in a Blue Mountain EFIS 1 for primary nav in the enroute phase.
>
> I thought you and I discussed that the unit must meet the guidelines per
> TSO-C129, however changing they may be. And that the AC 20-138
> installation
> requirements are not regulatory to homebuilts. I think we established
> that
> the only GPS units that currently meet all these requirements are the
> big-boy Garmin, Kings, etc that are currently certified in certified
> aircraft.
>
> I told my buddy that Blue Mountain can't meet these.
>
> ====================
> L. Wayne Hicks
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: Common Grounding |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Fiveonepw@aol.com
In a message dated 01/11/2006 10:28:27 AM Central Standard Time,
rtitsworth@mindspring.com writes:
Thoughts? (Commence firing)!
>>>
Considering all the Risk/concerns you seem to have pretty carefully
considered, seems going conventional just might be preferable to a more "interesting"
approach. Is "interesting and different" the attraction? Don't get me wrong,
I admire deviant behavior (see my plane!) but there is always a point where
cost/benefit/risk/cool factor intersect.
Also don't think you'd save much weight- possibly add more just to implement-
Maybe not relevant, but you asked...
Mark Phillips RV-6A FWIW- my batts up front and airframe is AL so what do I
know?
do not archive
Message 22
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Revised Load Analysis |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dennis Johnson" <pinetownd@volcano.net>
[quote="lhelming(at)sigecom.net"]I would put the Avionics cooling fan and Chelton
display 2 on the main bus
to reduce e-bus load."
Thanks for the thoughts! I agree with the cooling fan on the main bus, but I'm
not sure about the Chelton display #2, which will be my primary navigation source.
I suppose I could engage the autopilot and then switch the Chelton #1 display
to the navigation page and then switch back. On the other hand, the display
has an off switch, so I could manually turn off display #2 until it was
needed.
Good food for thought,
Dennis Johnson
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=3126#3126
Message 23
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Load Analysis |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dennis Johnson" <pinetownd@volcano.net>
Bret Smith wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bret Smith"
>
> Dennis,
>
> Looks good. I plan to put the Fuel Boost Pump on the Battery Bus though. I
> will be putting the Transponder and Encoder and your Chelton display #2 on
> the Main bus and free up some amps on the Endurance bus. The E-Bus should
> only have the basic instruments to help you get safely on the ground.
>
> Just my .02 cents
> Do Not Archive
>
>
>
[/quote]
Hi Bret,
Thanks for commenting on my bus load analysis. I'm curious why you're putting
your fuel boost pump on the battery bus; is your engine dependent upon an electric
fuel pump? My electric fuel pump is backup only.
Another poster also suggested putting the second Chelton display on the main bus.
I need to reconsider that.
Thanks,
Dennis Johnson
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=3130#3130
Message 24
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Revised Load Analysis |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bret Smith" <smithhb@tds.net>
Can't the Chelton "split-screen"? Show the PFD AND the Map page on the #1
display. Turn off #2 until you are within safe distance to an airport. I
would also put your fuel pump on the Battery Bus.
Bret Smith
Mineral Bluff, GA
www.FlightInnovations.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dennis
Johnson
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2006 9:35 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Revised Load Analysis
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dennis Johnson"
--> <pinetownd@volcano.net>
[quote="lhelming(at)sigecom.net"]I would put the Avionics cooling fan and
Chelton display 2 on the main bus to reduce e-bus load."
Thanks for the thoughts! I agree with the cooling fan on the main bus, but
I'm not sure about the Chelton display #2, which will be my primary
navigation source. I suppose I could engage the autopilot and then switch
the Chelton #1 display to the navigation page and then switch back. On the
other hand, the display has an off switch, so I could manually turn off
display #2 until it was needed.
Good food for thought,
Dennis Johnson
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=3126#3126
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: Buzzing Buttons.... |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Fiveonepw@aol.com
In a message dated 01/11/2006 12:50:50 PM Central Standard Time,
emjones@charter.net writes:
Now I can think of some places to use these guys! Since it uses technology
that was pioneered in the noise cancelling headsets, I can imagine a quieter
world in the very near future.
>>>>
But will one fit between her mouth and cel phone?
(ooops!)
do not archive exclamation mark
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bret Smith" <smithhb@tds.net>
Dennis,
I fly/live in the North Georgia mountains and consider the fuel boost pump
"essential" to safe flight. I have always used the FBP during takeoff/climb
then switched off. My "Before Landing" Checklist includes "Fuel Boost Pump-
ON". It may not be essential for others but it reduces the "pucker factor"
for me knowing it is available.
Others may disagree, but I am designing my Load Analysis to keep the juices
flowing.
Bret Smith
Mineral Bluff, GA
www.FlightInnovations.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dennis
Johnson
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2006 9:42 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Load Analysis
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dennis Johnson"
--> <pinetownd@volcano.net>
Bret Smith wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bret Smith"
>
> Dennis,
>
> Looks good. I plan to put the Fuel Boost Pump on the Battery Bus
> though. I will be putting the Transponder and Encoder and your
> Chelton display #2 on the Main bus and free up some amps on the
> Endurance bus. The E-Bus should only have the basic instruments to help
you get safely on the ground.
>
> Just my .02 cents
> Do Not Archive
>
>
>
[/quote]
Hi Bret,
Thanks for commenting on my bus load analysis. I'm curious why you're
putting your fuel boost pump on the battery bus; is your engine dependent
upon an electric fuel pump? My electric fuel pump is backup only.
Another poster also suggested putting the second Chelton display on the main
bus. I need to reconsider that.
Thanks,
Dennis Johnson
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=3130#3130
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: | Buzzing Buttons.... |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "B Tomm" <fvalarm@rapidnet.net>
Better still, can it be connected to the tv's audio output and configured to
eliminate a specific voice in the same room? Call it selective mute?
OOOPS!
Bevan
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Fiveonepw@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2006 7:13 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Buzzing Buttons....
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Fiveonepw@aol.com
In a message dated 01/11/2006 12:50:50 PM Central Standard Time,
emjones@charter.net writes:
Now I can think of some places to use these guys! Since it uses technology
that was pioneered in the noise cancelling headsets, I can imagine a quieter
world in the very near future.
>>>>
But will one fit between her mouth and cel phone?
(ooops!)
do not archive exclamation mark
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: | Re: Load Analysis |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Dj Merrill <deej@deej.net>
Bret Smith wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bret Smith" <smithhb@tds.net>
> I fly/live in the North Georgia mountains and consider the fuel boost pump
> "essential" to safe flight. I have always used the FBP during takeoff/climb
> then switched off. My "Before Landing" Checklist includes "Fuel Boost Pump-
> ON". It may not be essential for others but it reduces the "pucker factor"
> for me knowing it is available.
Hi Bret,
I follow the same procedure for take-off and landing.
However, one thing that I considered is that the boost pump
is really a backup to the main pump (in my case a mechanical
pump), and the "battery" or essential bus is really just a
backup in case the main bus fails. Realistically, what
are the chances that both the main bus AND the main fuel pump
are going to fail at the same time? If you are on the ground, and
one fails, you aren't going to take off (or shouldn't anyway).
If you are flying, and either one fails, you land as soon as
practical, and you should be able to land just fine without
the boost pump since it is just a backup and not really
essential to the plane flying. That's what went through my head
anyways... :-)
The wonderful thing about it is that neither
approach is wrong. :-)
-Dj
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: | Oil Pressure warning light and hobbs driver? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: <rparigor@suffolk.lib.ny.us>
I have a Rotax 914 powering our Europa XS Monowheel. The oil pressure
sender changes from 0 ohms to 200 ohms.
Does any one make a device that that will turn on a light when oil
pressure is low, and turn on a electric hobbs when oil pressure is up?
Or a kit or plans?
thx.
Ron Parigoris
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: | Runway / pattern pilot aid? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: <rparigor@suffolk.lib.ny.us>
A bit off topic, I have been searching for a simple device that has 4
pointers and a compass face. You put 1 leg on runway heading and the other
3 pointers give you crosswind, downwind and base headings. I had one in my
old cessna 170 and found it useful.
Any one know where to get another?
Thx.
Ron Parigoris
Do not arcive
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! --
|