---------------------------------------------------------- AeroElectric-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Sun 01/15/06: 29 ---------------------------------------------------------- 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 _____________________________________ Time: 02:39:51 AM PST US From: Subject: AeroElectric-List: Need some advice here, guys- alternator for RV --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: 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 _____________________________________ Time: 03:02:30 AM PST US From: Rick R Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Wire Conduit --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Rick R 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 _____________________________________ Time: 05:22:50 AM PST US Subject: This is a test with the List MIME turned off. From: "Matt Dralle" 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 _____________________________________ Time: 05:34:31 AM PST US Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Wire Conduit From: James H Nelson --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: James H Nelson 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 _____________________________________ Time: 05:43:32 AM PST US From: "Mitchell Goodrich" Subject: AeroElectric-List: EFIS --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Mitchell Goodrich" 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 _____________________________________ Time: 06:16:33 AM PST US Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: EFIS Comparisons From: "George Braly" --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "George Braly" 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" 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" 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" 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 _____________________________________ Time: 06:48:40 AM PST US From: "Alex Peterson" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Wire Conduit --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Alex Peterson" > > 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 _____________________________________ Time: 06:57:55 AM PST US From: BobsV35B@aol.com 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. ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 07:08:39 AM PST US From: rd2@evenlink.com Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: 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 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 ____________________________________ Time: 07:10:08 AM PST US From: "Glen Matejcek" Subject: AeroElectric-List: Wire Conduit --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Glen Matejcek" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 08:01:23 AM PST US From: PJ Seipel Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Wire Conduit --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: PJ Seipel 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" > > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 08:26:07 AM PST US From: Subject: AeroElectric-List: "Light" IFR??? --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: 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 ____________________________________ Time: 08:48:04 AM PST US From: MLWynn@aol.com Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: 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 ____________________________________ Time: 09:21:42 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Alternator for RV --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 10:05:54 AM PST US From: "Bruce McGregor" Subject: AeroElectric-List: IFR GPS Display --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bruce McGregor" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 10:13:11 AM PST US From: Matt Prather Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Solder Station & Solder vs Crimp --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Matt Prather 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 ____________________________________ Time: 10:23:31 AM PST US From: Richard Riley Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: "Light" IFR??? --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Richard Riley At 08:24 AM 1/15/06, you wrote: >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: > >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 ____________________________________ Time: 10:33:30 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Solder Station & Solder vs Crimp --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 11:34:21 AM PST US From: "Malcolm Thomson" Subject: AeroElectric-List: Jabiru 3300 --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Malcolm Thomson" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 12:20:00 PM PST US From: "Bruce Gray" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: EFIS Comparisons --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bruce Gray" 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" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 01:41:26 PM PST US Subject: AeroElectric-List: Dimmer circuit for +12v switched items From: adam@validationpartners.com --> 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 ____________________________________ Time: 04:14:08 PM PST US Subject: AeroElectric-List: EFIS Companies From: irampil@notes.cc.sunysb.edu --> 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 ____________________________________ Time: 04:17:41 PM PST US From: "Bruce Gray" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Dimmer circuit for +12v switched items --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bruce Gray" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 05:34:00 PM PST US From: rv-9a-online Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Dimmer circuit for +12v switched items --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: rv-9a-online 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" > >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 ____________________________________ Time: 06:16:41 PM PST US From: Fiveonepw@aol.com Subject: AeroElectric-List: 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 ____________________________________ Time: 08:33:23 PM PST US From: "Mike" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: EFIS Comparisons --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Mike" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 08:36:12 PM PST US From: "Mike" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: GPS CDI (was: EFIS Comparisons) --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Mike" 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 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 ____________________________________ Time: 08:38:47 PM PST US From: "Mike" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: IFR GPS Display --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Mike" 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" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 09:56:59 PM PST US From: "DEAN PSIROPOULOS" Subject: AeroElectric-List: Instrument install/annunciator lights --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "DEAN PSIROPOULOS" 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!!!