Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 02:39 AM - Need some advice here, guys- alternator for RV ()
2. 03:02 AM - Re: Wire Conduit (Rick R)
3. 05:22 AM - This is a test with the List MIME turned off. (Matt Dralle)
4. 05:34 AM - Re: Wire Conduit (James H Nelson)
5. 05:43 AM - EFIS (Mitchell Goodrich)
6. 06:16 AM - Re: EFIS Comparisons (George Braly)
7. 06:48 AM - Re: Wire Conduit (Alex Peterson)
8. 06:57 AM - Re: EFIS Comparisons (BobsV35B@aol.com)
9. 07:08 AM - Re: KI208/209 not in agreement (rd2@evenlink.com)
10. 07:10 AM - Wire Conduit (Glen Matejcek)
11. 08:01 AM - Re: Wire Conduit (PJ Seipel)
12. 08:26 AM - "Light" IFR??? ()
13. 08:48 AM - Re: Solder Station & Solder vs Crimp (MLWynn@aol.com)
14. 09:21 AM - Re: Alternator for RV (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
15. 10:05 AM - IFR GPS Display (Bruce McGregor)
16. 10:13 AM - Re: Solder Station & Solder vs Crimp (Matt Prather)
17. 10:23 AM - Re: "Light" IFR??? (Richard Riley)
18. 10:33 AM - Re: Solder Station & Solder vs Crimp (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
19. 11:34 AM - Jabiru 3300 (Malcolm Thomson)
20. 12:20 PM - Re: EFIS Comparisons (Bruce Gray)
21. 01:41 PM - Dimmer circuit for +12v switched items (adam@validationpartners.com)
22. 04:14 PM - EFIS Companies (irampil@notes.cc.sunysb.edu)
23. 04:17 PM - Re: Dimmer circuit for +12v switched items (Bruce Gray)
24. 05:34 PM - Re: Dimmer circuit for +12v switched items (rv-9a-online)
25. 06:16 PM - Formation Attenuator (Fiveonepw@aol.com)
26. 08:33 PM - Re: EFIS Comparisons (Mike)
27. 08:36 PM - Re: GPS CDI (was: EFIS Comparisons) (Mike)
28. 08:38 PM - Re: IFR GPS Display (Mike)
29. 09:56 PM - Instrument install/annunciator lights (DEAN PSIROPOULOS)
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: | Need some advice here, guys- alternator for RV |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: <gmcjetpilot@yahoo.com>
I am very interested in helping you fit the Lester 13353, ND
alternator. I'm helping another RV-6'er in using this or another
high powered ND unit just like it.
>It seems (Lester 13353) to weigh about 11 lbs on the
>bathroom scales. Already I'm thinking this might be more of
>a fire-breathing machine than I should bolt to my RV, even if
>it's a physical fit, which I think it will be. (MAY BE)
That is up to you. WHAT do you NEED? If you need it you
need it. Add up all your items that could be on continuously
with (realistic) intermediate items as a worse case and add
about 25% to 55% margin to that and that is a good ball park
of the alternator capacity you need.
Basically you are looking at typically 6.8 to 9.0 amps per lb.
The lightest ND alternator is the 40-45 amp alternator at about
6 lbs. (popular with RV'ers, like me). The next popular is a 55
amp unit and weighs about a lb more. Than there's the 60 amp
unit that, that weighs about 8.5 lbs, also popular with the
RV'ers. They are all compact and have been fit on RV's many
times with ease. They also come with V-groove pulleys out the
box.
The weights of larger ND alternators are about 11-12 lbs with
output of 75-140 amps (like the Lester 13353). It will likely
fit, but you MAY need to make your own bracket (a stock
Lycoming alternator bracket may work). You will need to
remove the pulley serpentine pulley and replace it with a V-
grove pulley. The ND alternators with external regulators (like
the 13353) are typically for a Dodge application in the late 90's
early 00's and has a mounting flange or lugs that are about .70"
further out than the next physical size down. I think it will fit. I
am working with a guy in Arizona who needs 80 amps on a RV
and we are looking at this unit or a 90 amp unit with internal
regulator. The later unit has a tighter mount fitting lug and is
know to fit. The 90 amp weighs about the same as what you are
looking at.
Now here is the question, would you rather have a 40-45 amp
or 55 amps or 60 amps that will bolt up using Van's brackets
and has the V-pulley already? Is that enough power for you?
If you want the 40-45 amp, that is harder to buy at auto stores
because they are for industrial applications, forklifts and
tractors. They don't usually have Lester #'s. The advantage of
getting these units is they are made NEW from Nipponndenso
with all genuine ND parts, verses rebuilds. I suggest the
Niagara Air parts kit. It has everything, brackets, hardware and
of course a new ND alternator. Only you know if that will
work. If you add up all your load, as suggested and you are
under 30-33 amps you will be fine. It's internally regulated.
If you want the 55 amp unit, try Lester numbers: 14684, 12184
(available at auto stores).
If you want a 60 amp alternator: Lester # 14457, 14668 13398,
13492 (available at auto stores)
The only thing is all of the above alternators, 40-60 amp units,
are all internally regulated, vs. the 13353 which is for external
Voltage regulation.
>My quest for a VR-166 Ford regulator also ended with a
>substitute, the Sorensen VR-301. I'm not sure the electronic
>regulator will necessarily "handle" it, but not sure why it
>wouldn't.............because the field happens to want near that
>amount (no idea how linear the field current vs. output curve
>might be, so no way to know field current at closer
If you do decide to go with the external Voltage regulation,
here is a better FORD regulator, V1200 or V1300:
http://195.125.241.148/Catalog/Images/V1200.jpg
Voltage Set Point: 14.2 V (adjustable)
Regulation: B-Circuit
-Voyager Series Regulator
-Adjustable Voltage (13.0-16.0 Volts)
-Precise Digital Regulation (digital!!!!)
-Short Circuit Protected
-High Current Capability
-Over Voltage protection!!!!!!!!!
-Ignition or Light circuit activated with High Side Reg
-Protected Against Loss of Ground and Under Voltage
-LED'S for Easy Troubleshooting
-Fault Detection Indicators
Cost? I think less than $80!!!!!
http://195.125.241.148/Catalog/Images/V1200.jpg
If you have any problems finding the above or have question
Contact me off line. Try me at gmcjetpilot@yahoo.com.
George
---------------------------------
Photo Books. You design it and well bind it!
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: Wire Conduit |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Rick R <rick@n701rr.com>
Hi Jim,
In my 701, I too used CPVC. I used 1 ". And for routing around the fuel tanks,
etc., I used, (don't laugh), 1" washing machine flex drain hose..the white
stuff. It mates perfect with the 1: CPVC. My tech inspector loved it...
Do not archive
Rick
Orlando, FL. USA
http://www.n701rr.com
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: | test with the List MIME turned off. |
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2006 23:03:17 -0800
Roxy RT [tmp] ==> cat sailplane.msg.before | formail -c -I ""
Testing, 1 2 3.
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: Wire Conduit |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: James H Nelson <rv9jim@juno.com>
Jim,
Try going to the local builders supply and getting a roll of
sprinkler supply tubing. Mine is black and the wall is thin and light.
I'm using it to run to the wing tips for lighting and pitot tubing. If
you need to make a break in the middle do it at an inspection plate.
Jim Nelson
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: "Mitchell Goodrich" <mgoodrich@tampabay.rr.com>
Hi Harley,
I appreciated you meeting and opening up your hangar. For my standards,
it was Surely COLD!!
OK it was just a little snow.
The new Engine Management System, "Auracle" is progressing very well. I
should have the unit
Installed sometime in February, and will be at Sun n Fun with the plane,
for everyone to see.
It is an Amazing, Very well thought out system to view and keep track of
all your vital engine
functions. The display is incredibly bright in the direct sunlight,
which all of Rutan Eze drivers
will enjoy. I can't Wait to fly with it.
Mitchell Goodrich
N60P VariEze
Tampa, FL
813-356-9758
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: | EFIS Comparisons |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "George Braly" <gwbraly@gami.com>
There are persistent reports that some of the certified "five tube"
Honeywell displays in one of the high end turbo props are going "dark" -
- simultaneously. One pilot reported three such events on different
trips over a period of months, for which he was present, and two other
events in the same airframe when others were flying.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bruce
Gray
Sent: Saturday, January 14, 2006 9:46 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: EFIS Comparisons
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bruce Gray"
<Bruce@glasair.org>
OK, I can understand that.
I hope you've been following the EFIS discussion on this list. Let me
beat
my drum one more time.
These low cost EFIS displays (Pick your favorite) are hypnotic and
compelling, if cross checks start to disagree, the pilot is going to
want to
keep on flying that pretty EFIS unless you hit him over the head. We
don't
know all their failure modes and their software (with the exception of
Chelton) remains untested to the extent necessary to pass DO 178, their
hardware is not DO 160 certified. That means you're the beta tester. Do
you
want to bet your life in that situation? Mark my words, we're going to
have
some experimental airplanes equipped with low cost EFIS systems get into
some serious fatal trouble. That body count is going to raise the level
of
visibility of this issue with the FAA and soon big brother will be
breathing
down our necks.
Low cost, noncertified EFIS system are OK for VFR airplanes. But stay
out of
IFR conditions.
Bruce
www.glasair.org
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chuck
Jensen
Sent: Saturday, January 14, 2006 10:13 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: EFIS Comparisons
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Chuck Jensen"
<cjensen@dts9000.com>
Nope. Not wrong, just expensive. OBAM aircraft are probably somewhat
more interested in something a little more pedestrian (and affordable
than) than "dual independent EFIS with an electronic comparator/alerter
and a third gyro
(tie breaker)." Heck, I'm still trying to figure out the nuances of the
discussion on wiring the master switch.
Our mission profile requires a craft a bit less teched-out than a Part
121 airplane, but for anyone that it trips-their-trigger, then by all
means......
Chuck Jensen
Do Not Archive
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bruce Gray"
<Bruce@glasair.org>
Well then I guess all those Part 121 airplanes flying around out there
with
dual independent EFIS with an electronic comparator/alerter and a third
gyro
(tie breaker) are all wrong.
Bruce
www.glasair.org
Message 7
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Alex Peterson" <alexpeterson@earthlink.net>
> > CPVC water piping. Inexpensive and light.
For what I feel is a better alternative, try:
http://www.usplastic.com/catalog/product.asp?catalog%5Fname=USPlastic&catego
ry%5Fname=78&product%5Fid=4905
If that doesn't work, go to www.usplastic.com and search for Tenite Butyrate
tubing.
It is the thinnest wall rigid tubing I've found, and it is available in many
sizes.
Alex Peterson
RV6-A N66AP 704 hours
Maple Grove, MN
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: EFIS Comparisons |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: BobsV35B@aol.com
Good Morning George,
Another reason to keep a standard old fashioned, needle type, Turn and Bank
instrument on the panel. It is the cheapest reliable instrument that can be
purchased by most of us.
I hope to be able to move to glass when it is proven, but, in the meantime,
when I am IFR, I want something reliable to fall back on. I know that many
folks are promoting an artificial horizon for such back up duty. They are MUCH
more expensive, heavier, and for the ones in our price range, less reliable.
Just because it is ancient doesn't make it bad.
I have no data, but it seems the incidence of loss of control accidents has
increased drastically in the days since the use of the T&B has been
de-emphasized.
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 1/15/2006 8:18:24 A.M. Central Standard Time,
gwbraly@gami.com writes:
There are persistent reports that some of the certified "five tube"
Honeywell displays in one of the high end turbo props are going "dark" -
- simultaneously. One pilot reported three such events on different
trips over a period of months, for which he was present, and two other
events in the same airframe when others were flying.
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: KI208/209 not in agreement |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: rd2@evenlink.com
Thanks a lot, Brian, this is exactly the info I needed.
Rumen
do not archive
_____________________Original message __________________________
(received from Brian Lloyd; Date: 11:07 PM 1/14/2006
-0800)
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
rd2@evenlink.com wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: rd2@evenlink.com
>
> Hi all,
> I have 2 indicators - KI209 and KI208. Sometimes the CDI difference between
> the two, when set on the same OBS, is more than 4 degrees. Does anyone know
> how to get them to agree? Is this done from the radios or the indicator?
The KI-208 and KI-209 contain the VOR/LOC converter. Adjustments are
accomplished inside the indicator, not in the radio. GS adjustments are
inside the radio as the GS converter is part of the GS module in the radio.
The KX-165 has the internal VOR/LOC converter. The KX-155 does not.
--
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 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: "Glen Matejcek" <aerobubba@earthlink.net>
Hi Jim-
Re: I'm looking for a lightweight conduit...probably 1/2 inch ID...Best
I've seen is
the slit convoluted stuff...Anyone got better suggestions?
Van's aircraft sells the same stuff, only without being slit. IIRC, it is
about 7/8 dia. When I installed mine, I took a handy scrap of 3/8 dowel
about 2 inches long, rounded it's shoulders, drilled a transverse hole
through it, and tied a length of heavy kite string to it. The string is
just over double the length of the conduit. I used my blow gun to launch
the dowel segment down the conduit. I had reservations about the dowel
passing through the corrugated, ill fitting, flexible (read: not quite
straight) tube, but figured worst case, I could pull it back out with the
string.
Well. The dowel, with the string in tow, shot through the conduit, out
the other end, across the shop, and bounced off the far wall. For the
second attempt, I held the free end of the string ; - ) and all was well.
I then installed another toggle / dowel on the free end of the string.
This allows me to tape a wire to the string near it's mid point and pull it
through the conduit. I plan to leave the strings and toggles in the
various conduits for future use as fish tapes.
Perhaps not a perfectly elegant solution, but entirely effective and of
negligible weight!
Glen Matejcek
aerobubba@earthlink.net
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: Wire Conduit |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: PJ Seipel <seipel@seznam.cz>
A similar approach to the dowel is to tie the string around a cotton
ball and suck it through the conduit with your shop vac. Make sure you
tie off the end of the string or you'll have to get it out of the shop
vac and try again. Works with all sizes of conduit and you don't have
to worry about shooting hard wooden objects around the shop ;)
PJ
RV-10 #40032
Do not archive
Glen Matejcek wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Glen Matejcek" <aerobubba@earthlink.net>
>
> Van's aircraft sells the same stuff, only without being slit. IIRC, it is
> about 7/8 dia. When I installed mine, I took a handy scrap of 3/8 dowel
> about 2 inches long, rounded it's shoulders, drilled a transverse hole
> through it, and tied a length of heavy kite string to it. The string is
> just over double the length of the conduit. I used my blow gun to launch
> the dowel segment down the conduit. I had reservations about the dowel
> passing through the corrugated, ill fitting, flexible (read: not quite
> straight) tube, but figured worst case, I could pull it back out with the
> string.
>
> Well. The dowel, with the string in tow, shot through the conduit, out
> the other end, across the shop, and bounced off the far wall. For the
> second attempt, I held the free end of the string ; - ) and all was well.
> I then installed another toggle / dowel on the free end of the string.
> This allows me to tape a wire to the string near it's mid point and pull it
> through the conduit. I plan to leave the strings and toggles in the
> various conduits for future use as fish tapes.
>
> Perhaps not a perfectly elegant solution, but entirely effective and of
> negligible weight!
>
> Glen Matejcek
> aerobubba@earthlink.net
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: <psiegel@fuse.net>
The concept of "light IFR" should be put to rest once and for all.
Once you fly into the clouds, the distinction of light or heavy IFR is GONE! IMC
is IMC! (Let's not even consider ice and/or thunderstorms for this discussion.)
Once IMC, you are essentially at the mercy of the controllers from that point
on!
When in IMC, you better plan on the possibility AND be prepared for any eventuality
including an ILS approach down to minimums! Design you panel accordingly!
Consider radios and an autopilot to which you can literally trust you life!
Why do I feel so strongly about this? One flight in my log book stands out: I
was making a trip from Cincinnati Lunken to Detroit City Airport. Because my
light twin was in for maintenance, I decided to make the trip in my Long EZ.
Detroit was supposed to be marginal VFR. To be conservative I filed an IFR
flight plan (with the concept of "light IFR" in mind.) Got into the soup over
Dayton and never saw the ground again until after one missed and finally a second
successful approach close to minimums into Detroit. The concept of "kissing
the ground" upon deplaning took on a whole new meaning after that experience!
PLEASE keep this in mind when designing your panel!
Paul Siegel
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: Solder Station & Solder vs Crimp |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: MLWynn@aol.com
Hi guys
I took a quick look at Metcals online. Looks like there are quite a number
of models available. What do you recommend? As a sub-question, I wonder if
one is better off crimping connections or soldering. Where do you use which?
I have always thought of soldered joints as more electrically reliable.
However, there is a stiff part where the solder runs up the wire. That would
seem to be more prone to vibrational damage than a properly crimped joint.
Thoughts?
Michael Wynn
RV 8
San Ramon
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: | Re: Alternator for RV |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 07:50 PM 1/14/2006 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: sportav8r@aol.com
>
>Armed with info gleaned from the AeroElectric list and elsewhere on the
>web, I went alternator-shopping at the local auto parts stores today, to
>see how close I could get to the recommended 70 A machine that goes by
>part number Lester 13353 or NipponDenso 121000-346. If I had not had the
>additional tidbit that it fits a '93 Dodge Ramcharger 5.2 liter pickup, I
>think the parts counter clerks would have been helpless to assist me. The
>choices that came up "in stock" were limited to one: the Dodge's optional
>90 amp externally-regulated machine (reman) with a serpentine pulley, in a
>125mm case. My quest for a VR-166 Ford regulator also ended with a
>substitute, the Sorensen VR-301.
>
>The alternator comes with its own computer-generated test output graph and
>data table, indicating it is capable of 126 amps at 6000 rpm, and draws
>5.72 amps of field current at that output.
The plain-vanilla regulators are generally set up
for 3A fields. I don't know if VR-166 style regulators
will handle this load but it would be easy to test for.
Since they're switching regulators, the added heat dissipation
may well be within SOME regulator's capabilities but some
caution is called for.
> It seems to weigh about 11 lbs on the bathroom scales. Already I'm
> thinking this might be more of a fire-breathing machine than I should
> bolt to my RV, even if it's a physical fit, which I think it will
> be. I'm not sure the electronic regulator will necessarily "handle" it,
> but not sure why it wouldn't. I don't need anywhere near the output this
> alternator is capable of, and I don't want my 5 amp field breaker
> nuisance-tripping because the field happens to want near that amount (no
> idea how linear the field current vs output curve might be, so no way to
> know field current at closer to 50-60 amps, for example.)
>
>Finally, I'm unsure how easily the V-pulley from my original Van's 35 A
>machine will slip onto the shaft of the new alternator. Any takers on
>that one? When I make the swap, I'd like to have everything go smoothly
>with a minimum of downtime. Basically, I'd like some reassurance that
>this is worth trying. I can always take it back and order the Dodge 70
>amp alternator; same physical size, and ironically more money.
The question that comes to mind is do you NEED that
much snort? There are tens of thousands of certified
singles flying around with 60A alternators that are
greatly oversized to the task . . . not too big a deal
if volume driven cost is the decision driver (Cessna
used the same alternator on C150 through C210 for
a period of time).
However, if size and weight are drivers, then there
are lighter and less expensive alternatives that
may well provide all the snort you need. Better yet,
they're easier to find and there's a variety of
sources for mounting brackets that will fit your engine.
Bob . . .
Message 15
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bruce McGregor" <bruceflys@comcast.net>
AC 20-138A, Airworthiness Approval Of Global Navigation Satellite System
Equipment, sets the requirements for IFR GPS units. Para 18d , Navigation
Display,. requires that the horizontal and vertical deviation display(s) and
failure annunciation be within the pilot's primary field of view. Primary
field is defined as within 15 degrees of straight ahead of the pilot. Other
displays may be anywhere from the airspeed indicator on the left in a
standard six pack to and including an avionics center stack on the right.
One method of compliance is to place an IFR GPS receiver that displays
CDI/VDI, such as the GNS 480, within the primary field of view and eliminate
the requirement for an external display. The geometry of my GlaStar gives a
12" wide zone in the panel for the GPS' display. Placing a Dynon or GRT PFD
above or below the GPS would result in a lot of flight/navigation info
directly
in front of the pilot.
Regards, Bruce McGregor
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: Solder Station & Solder vs Crimp |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Matt Prather <mprather@spro.net>
The issue of crimp or solder has been discussed at length on this list
in the past. If you are interested, I recommend a perusal of the
archives. The short answer is that either technology can be used
successfully, with few exceptions, as long as it is done in a
craftsmanlike manner. Both technologies require the use of appropriate
strain relief, and physical support against vibrational damage. In
general, if wire leading to a hardpoint (be it a crimped, or soldered
joint, or some other rigid, constraining interface) is allowed to wiggle
around, work hardening of the conductor will take place, and that will
lead to broken wire.
Regards,
Matt-
MLWynn@aol.com wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: MLWynn@aol.com
>
>Hi guys
>
>I took a quick look at Metcals online. Looks like there are quite a number
>of models available. What do you recommend? As a sub-question, I wonder if
>one is better off crimping connections or soldering. Where do you use which?
>
>I have always thought of soldered joints as more electrically reliable.
>However, there is a stiff part where the solder runs up the wire. That would
>seem to be more prone to vibrational damage than a properly crimped joint.
>Thoughts?
>
>Michael Wynn
>RV 8
>San Ramon
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: "Light" IFR??? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Richard Riley <richard@riley.net>
At 08:24 AM 1/15/06, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: <psiegel@fuse.net>
>
>The concept of "light IFR" should be put to rest once and for all.
>
>Once you fly into the clouds, the distinction of light or heavy IFR
>is GONE! IMC is IMC! (Let's not even consider ice and/or
>thunderstorms for this discussion.)
In southern California airports close to the coast - like Santa
Monica, Torrance, Long Beach, Orange County, Palomar, Oxnard, Santa
Barbara - get "early morning and late night overcast." It's a pretty
thin layer, 2 to 500 feet thick, that can last till early
afternoon. It extends some mile inland. And it sits. It's stable,
it doesn't change quickly or much. It burns off fairly predictably.
If you can't get through it sometimes you'll sit on the ground from
March till July.
It's what I consider light IMC. No rain, no fog, just 30 seconds on
instruments. If I'm flying back in and it deteriorates, I divert
inland where - 5 miles away - it's 20 miles vis and clear.
I understand that in the midwest it's another thing altogether,
things change quickly. But in my climate, light IFR is a reality.
OTOH, my idea of a panel for light IFR is a Bluemountain EFIS 1,
Garmin 480, EHSI, and backup electric AI and T&S, airspeed and altitude.
--
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: Solder Station & Solder vs Crimp |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 11:47 AM 1/15/2006 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: MLWynn@aol.com
>
>Hi guys
>
>I took a quick look at Metcals online. Looks like there are quite a number
>of models available. What do you recommend?
Cheap ones. Buy off Ebay . . . See Ebay items:
7579854071
7580532665
7580702004
and others under "metcal" search term
> As a sub-question, I wonder if
>one is better off crimping connections or soldering. Where do you use which?
They are for all practical purposes interchangeable
technologies. One is more expensive and less process
sensitive but either can produce long-lived joints.
>
>I have always thought of soldered joints as more electrically reliable.
>However, there is a stiff part where the solder runs up the wire. That
>would
>seem to be more prone to vibrational damage than a properly crimped joint.
>Thoughts?
Much of what's circulated as fact is indeed myth. See:
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/rules/review.html
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/big_term.pdf
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/CrimpTools/crimptools.html
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Malcolm Thomson" <mthomson@showmeproductions.com>
Has anyone made up a wirebook which incorporate the wiring for a Jabiru
3300? Would you be willing to email to me? Looking for some ideas and
specifically how to handle the built in alternator. The engine comes with a
"Kubato RP201-53710" voltage reg and I can't find any spec on this regulator
and not sure if it has OV protection etc. The alternator has two white
wires coming out it that connects to the voltage reg. Any info on the Kubato
reg or alternatives would be great.
Thanks for the help.
--
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 Comparisons |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bruce Gray" <Bruce@glasair.org>
That must be a confidence building experience.
Bruce
www.glasair.org
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of George
Braly
Sent: Sunday, January 15, 2006 9:20 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: EFIS Comparisons
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "George Braly" <gwbraly@gami.com>
There are persistent reports that some of the certified "five tube"
Honeywell displays in one of the high end turbo props are going "dark" -
- simultaneously. One pilot reported three such events on different
trips over a period of months, for which he was present, and two other
events in the same airframe when others were flying.
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: | Dimmer circuit for +12v switched items |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: adam@validationpartners.com
Some circuits, such as the two-speed boost pump and voltage regulator
power are switched to +12v rather than ground. In these cases, you can
have an indicator bulb, but you can't connect it to the dimmer bus. How do
you handle this situation?
Thanks,
Adam Molny
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: irampil@notes.cc.sunysb.edu
Greg,
I have been flying with a Blue Mountain E/1 for almost two years.
In that time the software has received major feature upgrades nearly
every quarter, all free after purchase. Only recently, and only because
they switched to Jeppeson who insisted, has BMA begun enforcing the
subscription payment for database updates.
I have always found the company easy to deal with and very
straightforward.
While it seems a few shipped systems had bugs, most of what one see
complaints
about on their unmoderated Board concerns builders or installers who have
trouble with the sometimes telegraphically brief install manuals or with
poor grounding discipline in their wiring harnesses.
I have a great deal of respect for both Bob N. and Greg R. My A/C wiring
is a slightly modified version of Bob's All-Electric, including a LVBM
module controlling the power to the EFIS. In my opinion, Greg made some
good points in his treatise on electrical system design also. We can all
learn from looking at both. Like Bob said, you should infer nothing
about Greg's company business practices from their design flap.
You should probably wander around SnF or Oshkosh and do some of your
own assessment of the people and equipment involved. Its a very personal
choice.
Ira N224XS
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: | Dimmer circuit for +12v switched items |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bruce Gray" <Bruce@glasair.org>
Handle the indicator bulb by switching the ground of the bulb to the dimmer.
This can be quite useful. I switch the grounds of the bulbs into and out of
my dimmers with a double pole instrument light switch. Hi intensity when
switch off (daylight), switched to dimmer when on (night time).
Bruce
www.glasair.org
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
adam@validationpartners.com
Sent: Sunday, January 15, 2006 4:37 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Dimmer circuit for +12v switched items
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: adam@validationpartners.com
Some circuits, such as the two-speed boost pump and voltage regulator
power are switched to +12v rather than ground. In these cases, you can
have an indicator bulb, but you can't connect it to the dimmer bus. How do
you handle this situation?
Thanks,
Adam Molny
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: Dimmer circuit for +12v switched items |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: rv-9a-online <rv-9a-online@telus.net>
This is a common problem. At this web site
http://vx-aviation.com/page_2.html, you'll see a product called the
IL-4A that solves this problem by converting all positively switches
circuits to ground-switched, thus allowing for simple dimming.
The schematic is published in the datasheet, so you can either make your
own or buy the one I offer.
Vern Little
Bruce Gray wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bruce Gray" <Bruce@glasair.org>
>
>Handle the indicator bulb by switching the ground of the bulb to the dimmer.
>This can be quite useful. I switch the grounds of the bulbs into and out of
>my dimmers with a double pole instrument light switch. Hi intensity when
>switch off (daylight), switched to dimmer when on (night time).
>
>Bruce
>www.glasair.org
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
>adam@validationpartners.com
>Sent: Sunday, January 15, 2006 4:37 PM
>To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
>Subject: AeroElectric-List: Dimmer circuit for +12v switched items
>
>
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: adam@validationpartners.com
>
>Some circuits, such as the two-speed boost pump and voltage regulator
>power are switched to +12v rather than ground. In these cases, you can
>have an indicator bulb, but you can't connect it to the dimmer bus. How do
>you handle this situation?
>
>Thanks,
>Adam Molny
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: | Formation Attenuator |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Fiveonepw@aol.com
Howdy A-list-
FYI, tested initial install of Bob's attenuator switch/circuit and pleased to
report it works as advertised on my Microair 760 (check archives for recent
"attenuator" posts if not familiar). I originally installed a 680 ohm resistor
for the "choke" (for lack of better name) and got close to two different
planes today. A definate improvement on close reception when switched on, but
still a bit garbled- will try with a 1.5K resistor next to see if better and will
report...
Mark Phillips N51PW
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: | EFIS Comparisons |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Mike" <mlas@cox.net>
Bob,
I do not agree with what you have to say about the T&B vs. a back up
attitude indicator. Yes it costs more and may weigh a few ounces more,
but what is your life worth. As far as reliability, the back up
attitude indicator isn't the problem with failure. The vacuum system
that most people use to power it is the common point of failure. It is
my 25+ years of active flying and teaching that supports my position
that the average general aviation pilot can not fly needle and ball well
enough to stake their life on it. As far as when will "glass prove"
itself. Well I have been flying behind glass since 1988 and have not
had an undetectable failure yet. When glass fails (very uncommon
compared to the old fashioned stuff.) it quits, no slow roll over or
false info. Now I'll admit that some of these new cheap EFIS system may
not offer the same level of fault protection as the higher priced stuff
I normally use. But I would bet the newer EFIS systems are better then
the 1960 Edo air attitude indicator found in most old Pipers and
Cessnas.
Mike Larkin
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
BobsV35B@aol.com
Sent: Sunday, January 15, 2006 7:57 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: EFIS Comparisons
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: BobsV35B@aol.com
Good Morning George,
Another reason to keep a standard old fashioned, needle type, Turn and
Bank
instrument on the panel. It is the cheapest reliable instrument that
can be
purchased by most of us.
I hope to be able to move to glass when it is proven, but, in the
meantime,
when I am IFR, I want something reliable to fall back on. I know that
many
folks are promoting an artificial horizon for such back up duty. They
are MUCH
more expensive, heavier, and for the ones in our price range, less
reliable.
Just because it is ancient doesn't make it bad.
I have no data, but it seems the incidence of loss of control accidents
has
increased drastically in the days since the use of the T&B has been
de-emphasized.
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 1/15/2006 8:18:24 A.M. Central Standard Time,
gwbraly@gami.com writes:
There are persistent reports that some of the certified "five tube"
Honeywell displays in one of the high end turbo props are going "dark"
-
- simultaneously. One pilot reported three such events on different
trips over a period of months, for which he was present, and two other
events in the same airframe when others were flying.
--
1/14/2006
--
1/14/2006
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: | GPS CDI (was: EFIS Comparisons) |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Mike" <mlas@cox.net>
The BM EFIS-1 has a CDI display built into it, therefore a second one is
not required.
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brian
Lloyd
Sent: Sunday, January 15, 2006 12:01 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: GPS CDI (was: EFIS Comparisons)
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd
<brian-yak@lloyd.com>
BobsV35B@aol.com wrote:
> Good Morning Bob,
>
> Do you intend to use the 430 IFR or VFR?
>
> Do you want to execute full ILS approaches?
A set of ILS needles is required for this. This does not need to be a
TSO display tho. You do not need TSO on any of the avionics except for
the IFR-certified GPS.
> For VFR, there is no question that a CDI is not needed.
>
> For IFR, things get a bit stickier. Beyond that, it makes a
difference if
> the aircraft is experimental or normal category.
As I interpret TSO-129.whatever (for IFR GPS), the doc states that there
must be a CDI in the normal visual scan of the pilot. I would consider
the CDI display on the unit when mounted in a center-stack for radios to
be within the pilot's normal visual scan. This therefore does not
require a separate CDI.
OTOH, some inspectors at the FSDO did insist on one. I don't think that
TSO for it is required so something like the BM EFIS-1 should suffice.
Again, my interpretation.
Also, as I recall, didn't they change the requirements for installing an
IFR GPS such that it no longer requires a sign-off by and inspector at
the FSDO?
--
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
--
1/12/2006
--
1/14/2006
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Mike" <mlas@cox.net>
AC 20-138A is not regulatory for experimental aircraft unless You
incorporated this into your limitations.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bruce
McGregor
Sent: Sunday, January 15, 2006 11:05 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: IFR GPS Display
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bruce McGregor"
<bruceflys@comcast.net>
AC 20-138A, Airworthiness Approval Of Global Navigation Satellite
System
Equipment, sets the requirements for IFR GPS units. Para 18d ,
Navigation
Display,. requires that the horizontal and vertical deviation display(s)
and
failure annunciation be within the pilot's primary field of view.
Primary
field is defined as within 15 degrees of straight ahead of the pilot.
Other
displays may be anywhere from the airspeed indicator on the left in a
standard six pack to and including an avionics center stack on the
right.
One method of compliance is to place an IFR GPS receiver that displays
CDI/VDI, such as the GNS 480, within the primary field of view and
eliminate
the requirement for an external display. The geometry of my GlaStar
gives a
12" wide zone in the panel for the GPS' display. Placing a Dynon or GRT
PFD
above or below the GPS would result in a lot of flight/navigation info
directly
in front of the pilot.
Regards, Bruce McGregor
--
1/14/2006
--
1/14/2006
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: | Instrument install/annunciator lights |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "DEAN PSIROPOULOS" <dean.psiropoulos@verizon.net>
Those who have been here already...when you put the steam gauges in your
panel, how do you fit the ones with the knobs sticking out of one corner?
For the (United Instruments) altimeter it looks like I won't have a choice
and will have to hog out some of the corner of the panel where the knob goes
(big bump in the case under the knob). However, for the MD200 OBS (VOR/ILS
indicator) and the 2 inch G meter (Falcon Gauge) the knobs have small posts
that would likely fit through the screw hole if the knob were removed before
installing the gauge. Can the knobs on these gauges be removed prior to
installing the gauge and then re-attached afterwords? Or am I just going to
have to make a small slot between the cutout and the screw hole? Also, what
exactly is the bit size used to drill these screw holes? #6 screws???
Annunciator lights, I'd like to find some square ones with the colored
plastic and engraved text that shows what subsystem is having a problem
(commercial airline pilots know them well). I have had some great input
from an RV-6A pilot who rolled his own. I've perused the web quite a while
and haven't found much that might work for my application (mostly round
lampholders with colored lenses but you couldn't really engrave them with
text like I'm wanting). Any suggestions on this one? The only other option
I can see is to use the round lampholders and have engraved text underneath
each one with the subsystem being annunciated. Not the optimum solution but
given what I've found so far, looking more and more viable all the time
(probably simpler and quicker too). Thanks.
Dean Psiropoulos
RV-6A N197DM
Gonna fly this spring!!!
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! --
|