Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 02:26 AM - Re: Strange people behavior in debate (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
2. 02:26 AM - "BPA" (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
3. 02:27 AM - Re: Re: Seminar in the South (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
4. 04:38 AM - Continuous duty contactor wiring question (Mickey Coggins)
5. 06:13 AM - Re: Continuous duty contactor wiring question (Paul McAllister)
6. 07:43 AM - Tip Tanks (Fred Stucklen)
7. 07:45 AM - Re: Continuous duty contactor wiring question (Mickey Coggins)
8. 08:13 AM - Re: Continuous duty contactor wiring question (Ken)
9. 08:21 AM - Re: Composite planes, Metallic paint, Antennae (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
10. 08:33 AM - Re: Continuous duty contactor wiring question (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
11. 08:33 AM - Re: Tip Tanks (Alan K. Adamson)
12. 08:39 AM - Re: Composite planes, Metallic paint, Antennae (PTACKABURY@aol.com)
13. 08:45 AM - Re: Composite planes, Metallic paint, Antennae (Alan K. Adamson)
14. 09:37 AM - Re: Composite planes, Metallic paint, Antennae (Alan K. Adamson)
15. 09:38 AM - Re: Backup battery - Lightspeed EI (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
16. 09:52 AM - Re: Composite planes, Metallic paint, and Antennae (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
17. 09:56 AM - Re: Composite planes, Metallic paint, and Antennae (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
18. 10:14 AM - Re: Tip Tanks (Terry Watson)
19. 10:39 AM - Re: Re: Composite planes, Metallic paint, and Antennae (Alan K. Adamson)
20. 12:09 PM - Re: Re: Backup battery - Lightspeed EI ()
21. 07:09 PM - Re: Composite planes, Metallic paint, Antennae (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
22. 07:29 PM - Re: Composite planes, Metallic paint, Antennae (Jim Wickert)
23. 08:17 PM - Re: Composite planes, Metallic paint, Antennae (Alan K. Adamson)
24. 08:19 PM - Re: Re: RV-List: Backup battery - Lightspeed EI (Ken)
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: | Strange people behavior in debate |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 04:55 PM 3/3/2006 -0600, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bill Schlatterer"
><billschlatterer@sbcglobal.net>
>
>Bob, I think this is Allen Barrett from Barrett Performance Aircraft
>Engines. He's almost as "gold" as you :-)
>
>Bill S
>7a wiring
Agreed. I got a direct note from him and I'm impressed.
Hope to meet him sometime as Dr. Dee and I pass through
Tulsa several times a year on our way to see friends in
Sallisaw.
Bob . . .
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
Oops, the note I received was from Allen and he gave me the short
history of the company founded by his father Monty. In any
case, I'm looking forward to meeting the Tulsa crowd and Allen
in particular. I'll plan a visit to their EAA chapter meeting.
Bob . . .
< What is so wonderful about scientific truth...is that >
< the authority which determines whether there can be >
< debate or not does not reside in some fraternity of >
< scientists; nor is it divine. The authority rests >
< with experiment. >
< --Lawrence M. Krauss >
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Seminar in the South |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 07:42 PM 3/3/2006 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Rodney Dunham"
><rdunhamtn@hotmail.com>
>
>Bob,
>
>I live very close to Knoxville, TN.
>
>Even though I've wired one homebuilt according to the 'Connection and I'm
>wiring another one right now, I'd love to attend a seminar. Every project
>teaches me something and sends me back to the 'Connection for a re-read.
>
>I keep tabs on your seminar schedule hoping to catch one in this general
>area. Atlanta is close enough! I'll talk to the guys at EAA Chapter 17 on
>Tuesday to see if there's an interest here in Knoxville. I'd be happy to
>help organize. And of course, there's that cake :o)
There's nothing that says we can't do a presentation anywhere
except minimum participation levels. If you could put a dipstick
into the local enthusiasm level, it would be helpful. Generally
speaking if 10 folks are interested locally, the balance can be
made up from the surrounding area with advertising on my website.
We'd be pleased to meet the builders in Knoxville too!
Bob . . .
< What is so wonderful about scientific truth...is that >
< the authority which determines whether there can be >
< debate or not does not reside in some fraternity of >
< scientists; nor is it divine. The authority rests >
< with experiment. >
< --Lawrence M. Krauss >
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: | Continuous duty contactor wiring question |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics@rv8.ch>
Hi,
I've got a S701-1 contactor I purchased from B&C
http://www.bandc.biz/S701-1.html which I want to
use in a slightly different application.
I want to use it as suggested by Eric with his
OVP module. http://www.periheliondesign.com/LOVM.htm
The wiring for his OVP module requires that I
use the 12v line as the contactor control, not
the ground wire used in the battery contactor
application.
I've read the battery contactor information in
chapter 8 several times, but I still really
don't quite understand the role of the spike
suppression diode, nor whether or not I will
need one.
Should I use the spike suppression diode?
Should it be installed between the two
coil terminals? If so, does it matter
which terminal is (+) and which is (-)?
Thanks for any tips!
Mickey
--
Mickey Coggins
http://www.rv8.ch/
#82007 finishing
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Continuous duty contactor wiring question |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Paul McAllister" <paul.mcallister@qia.net>
Mickey,
It is advisable to put spike suppression across the coil of any relay. It
can be accomplished with a diode connected in the reverse polarity to the
voltage source being used to energize it, or a transorb device with a rating
greater than the voltage being used to energize the coil.
The spike suppression is required to dissipate the voltage generated as a
result of the magnetic field collapsing when the relay is de energized.
I am curious as to the application and wondering if a relay of this size
might be overkill.... it really depends on what your application.
Paul
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Fred Stucklen" <wstucklen1@cox.net>
Has anyone else tried to modify a set of original wing tips into a
pair of tip
tanks? If so, I'd like to hear how you did it, and what kinds of issues
you
have had, if any. I'd also like to know how you made the modifications
and
the type of glass/resin you used..
Jon Johansen's don't appear to be available on Van's web site
anymore.
Fred Stucklen
RV-6A N926RV
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Continuous duty contactor wiring question |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics@rv8.ch>
> It is advisable to put spike suppression across the coil of any relay. It
> can be accomplished with a diode connected in the reverse polarity to the
> voltage source being used to energize it, or a transorb device with a rating
> greater than the voltage being used to energize the coil.
Paul, Thanks for your help.
I've got the diode that was delivered with the contactor, so
I guess that would work. I'm still not clear on which direction
to install the diode. It seems like with the two coil terminals
it doesn't matter which side is positive or negative. Should
the diode restrict flow from (+) to (-) or the other way around?
> The spike suppression is required to dissipate the voltage generated as a
> result of the magnetic field collapsing when the relay is de energized.
I'll trust you on that one, but I don't understand. No biggie.
> I am curious as to the application and wondering if a relay of this size
> might be overkill.... it really depends on what your application.
It is overkill for just a b-lead switch, but to simplify
my wiring, the starter energy also flows through it.
Thanks again,
Mickey
--
Mickey Coggins
http://www.rv8.ch/
#82007 finishing
do not archive
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: Continuous duty contactor wiring question |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Ken <klehman@albedo.net>
Mickey
A diode flows electrons (current) in one direction only exactly like a
one way check valve. That is why the schematic diagram of a diode even
looks like a one way arrow. The pointed end of the arrow is the end of
the diode that is usually marked with a white bar and that end must go
to the positive terminal of the coil. Otherwise the positive battery
current will flow through it to ground which will destroy the diode
and/or blow the fuse. Anytime you have a coil of wire just assume that
the current wants to keep flowing after you turn off the power. So the
diode lets the current keep flowing from the negative side of the coil
back into the positive side of the coil instead of out through other
circuitry where you might not want it to go. As mentioned the decaying
magnetic field can initiate a significant voltage spike so the diode
prevents that and lets the current goes round and round and lowly
dissipate as heat.
(We could debate which way electrons really flow but most of us still
think of electricity as flowing out of the positive battery terminal for
the above explanation.)
Ken
Mickey Coggins wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics@rv8.ch>
>
>
>
>>It is advisable to put spike suppression across the coil of any relay. It
>>can be accomplished with a diode connected in the reverse polarity to the
>>voltage source being used to energize it, or a transorb device with a rating
>>greater than the voltage being used to energize the coil.
>>
>>
>
>Paul, Thanks for your help.
>
>I've got the diode that was delivered with the contactor, so
>I guess that would work. I'm still not clear on which direction
>to install the diode. It seems like with the two coil terminals
>it doesn't matter which side is positive or negative. Should
>the diode restrict flow from (+) to (-) or the other way around?
>
>
>
>>The spike suppression is required to dissipate the voltage generated as a
>>result of the magnetic field collapsing when the relay is de energized.
>>
>>
>
>I'll trust you on that one, but I don't understand. No biggie.
>
>
>
>>I am curious as to the application and wondering if a relay of this size
>>might be overkill.... it really depends on what your application.
>>
>>
>
>It is overkill for just a b-lead switch, but to simplify
>my wiring, the starter energy also flows through it.
>
>Thanks again,
>Mickey
>
>
>
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: Composite planes, Metallic paint, Antennae |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
Antennae
At 03:51 PM 3/3/2006 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: PTACKABURY@aol.com
>
>Bob: I am sure you have answered this one 700 times but please once more
>for the not yet informed: I have a Lancair IV which is carbon
>and fiberglass.
>The aft upper fuse is fiberglass, under which is an antennae farm for com,
>gps, elt, etc. This is all pretty standard, built generally IAW the kit
>guidance. How it is time to select paint and I am considering SW Acry Glo
>metallic Urethane. The question: will metallic urethane on the aft
>upper fuse
>fiberglass section significantly degrade antennae performance?
>thank you,
Surface coatings chosen have no measurable effect on antenna
performance. Since carbon composite materials have a sheet resistance
on the order of 1000 times that of aluminum, they also make poor
ground planes under resonant monopole antennas. The goal is to
achieve a long lived, low resistance path between the antenna's
mounting base and the ground plane . . . which on your airplane
will need to be on the inside surface of the skin.
Make a solderable mounting base plate from brass or copper. They
may be thin. Copper hobby foil or brass shim stock (.010") are good
choices. bond your base plate to the underside of the antennas
mounting surface and then work to get good conductivity between
antenna and base plate via the bolts.
In the figure posted at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Antenna/Antenna_Installation.gif
I've marked the critical conduction points with an (*). Here's
where all the magic happens. All other surfaces may be left as
supplied or as finished for corrosion protection. There's no
value in cleaning the entire surface of the base or large interfacing
surfaces between airframe, antenna and doubler (in this case your
doubler is the copper or brass sheet).
Then you need radials made from shim stock or copper tape. Wider the
better up to 2" or so. Same length as height of antenna. 4 is about
the minimum, no measurable differences beyond 8. They don't have
to lay flat (they might run up and over a doubler or other surface
feature). Solder these to the base plate.
This is described in more detail in the antenna chapter.
Bob . . .
< What is so wonderful about scientific truth...is that >
< the authority which determines whether there can be >
< debate or not does not reside in some fraternity of >
< scientists; nor is it divine. The authority rests >
< with experiment. >
< --Lawrence M. Krauss >
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Continuous duty contactor wiring question |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
question
At 01:32 PM 3/4/2006 +0100, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Mickey Coggins
><mick-matronics@rv8.ch>
>
>Hi,
>
>I've got a S701-1 contactor I purchased from B&C
>http://www.bandc.biz/S701-1.html which I want to
>use in a slightly different application.
>
>I want to use it as suggested by Eric with his
>OVP module. http://www.periheliondesign.com/LOVM.htm
>
>The wiring for his OVP module requires that I
>use the 12v line as the contactor control, not
>the ground wire used in the battery contactor
>application.
Does Eric recommend this contactor for use with
his product? Last I heard, the high-voltage
EV series contactors were his associated product
of choice.
>I've read the battery contactor information in
>chapter 8 several times, but I still really
>don't quite understand the role of the spike
>suppression diode, nor whether or not I will
>need one.
See http://aeroelectric.com/articles/spikecatcher.pdf
>Should I use the spike suppression diode?
>Should it be installed between the two
>coil terminals?
What does Eric's installation drawings/instructions
say? He might have built the spike suppression diode
into the electronics. Perhaps his design does not
benefit from the diode or may even be detrimental
to it's intended function.
Remember folks, questions like this are ALWAYS
best addressed to the designer/manufacturer
of the product. It's risky and sometimes unethical
to inject ourselves into the relationship between
customer and supplier until it's determined
that the supplier simply doesn't know the answer
to your question or in some cases, is simply wrong.
Study the drawings, discuss your uncertainties
with the supplier. If you're not satisfied or
still skeptical, then go to the List for whatever
clarification and assistance may be available.
>If so, does it matter
>which terminal is (+) and which is (-)?
Absolutely. The banded end of the diode
faces the (+) terminal of the contactor.
Reversing the diode may cause serious
fault currents to flow and damage something.
Bob . . .
< What is so wonderful about scientific truth...is that >
< the authority which determines whether there can be >
< debate or not does not reside in some fraternity of >
< scientists; nor is it divine. The authority rests >
< with experiment. >
< --Lawrence M. Krauss >
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Alan K. Adamson" <aadamson@highrf.com>
Uh, might that be a question for the vanairforce.com forum and not an email
list dedicated to "electrical" discussions???
Alan
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Fred
Stucklen
Sent: Saturday, March 04, 2006 10:40 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Tip Tanks
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Fred Stucklen"
--> <wstucklen1@cox.net>
Has anyone else tried to modify a set of original wing tips into a pair
of tip tanks? If so, I'd like to hear how you did it, and what kinds of
issues you have had, if any. I'd also like to know how you made the
modifications and the type of glass/resin you used..
Jon Johansen's don't appear to be available on Van's web site anymore.
Fred Stucklen
RV-6A N926RV
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Composite planes, Metallic paint, Antennae |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: PTACKABURY@aol.com
Bob: Thanks for your prompt response to my question, BUT: I didn't
communicate my concern well and therefore need to retransmit. I am not interested
in a ground plane, I understand that one from your excellent chapter in the
"Connection" and used that info when installing my EXTERIOR antennae. My
concern is the INTERIOR antennae buried in the upper aft sections of the Lancair
IV under the fiberglass skin. Again this is the recommended place for com,
gps, etc and has been used successfully by many builders for years so I am not
concerned about that either. HOWEVER, I am considering a metallic paint and
wonder if the small amounts of metallic in the paint when applied over the
fiberglass will degrade the performance of these buried antennae. I don't
think metallic paints are used on radomes but I wonder if this is really a
concern for my installation. thanks for giving me a second chance, paul
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: | Composite planes, Metallic paint, Antennae |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Alan K. Adamson" <aadamson@highrf.com>
http://www.highrf.com/gallery/Feb-06/DSCN1305
Here is my solution. Couple of notes.
3M makes a copper tape that has acrylic glue on the back and the glue is
conductive. They use it in EMI solutions. I first lined the Comm antenna
indent in the fuselage with said tape, then I ran the 22" radials out from
that area. I then got some copper flashing and made a conductive backing
plate. My original plan was to use some solder paste and put the backing
plate down and "wick" in some solder around the edges.... HOWEVER, I tested
my approach on a sample piece and determined that any soldering iron heat
(and I use a Metcal), would degrade the laminate So I'm going to use a
little conductive copper no-ox compound. Just a little as it goes a long
ways. One other note before I stuck down the radials I did sand down to the
exposed carbon so that at least I'd have some sort of electrical bond
between the radials and the bottom of the fuse.
I later came back and put a 2 bid of 1.7oz glass over each radial just to
provide protection.
That backing plate will be drilled for nutplates and rivets and once it's
down and held in place, I'll come back and drill and countersink a screw
from the outside (flush), and put a nut and washer on the inside. This stud
will then be ran back to the central ground.
Lot of discussion of this approach on the Lancair list. Seems some believe
that the ground plane needs to be on the outside and not inside....Oh, well,
I didn't want to "paint" the groundplane with copper/silver paint as I've
heard it will deteriorate over time... I figured this was next best.
Alan
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L.
Nuckolls, III Antennae
Sent: Saturday, March 04, 2006 11:20 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Composite planes, Metallic paint, Antennae
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
<nuckollsr@cox.net> Antennae
At 03:51 PM 3/3/2006 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: PTACKABURY@aol.com
>
>Bob: I am sure you have answered this one 700 times but please once
>more for the not yet informed: I have a Lancair IV which is carbon and
>fiberglass.
>The aft upper fuse is fiberglass, under which is an antennae farm for
>com, gps, elt, etc. This is all pretty standard, built generally IAW
>the kit guidance. How it is time to select paint and I am considering
>SW Acry Glo metallic Urethane. The question: will metallic urethane
>on the aft upper fuse fiberglass section significantly degrade antennae
>performance?
>thank you,
Surface coatings chosen have no measurable effect on antenna
performance. Since carbon composite materials have a sheet resistance
on the order of 1000 times that of aluminum, they also make poor
ground planes under resonant monopole antennas. The goal is to
achieve a long lived, low resistance path between the antenna's
mounting base and the ground plane . . . which on your airplane
will need to be on the inside surface of the skin.
Make a solderable mounting base plate from brass or copper. They
may be thin. Copper hobby foil or brass shim stock (.010") are good
choices. bond your base plate to the underside of the antennas
mounting surface and then work to get good conductivity between
antenna and base plate via the bolts.
In the figure posted at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Antenna/Antenna_Installation.gif
I've marked the critical conduction points with an (*). Here's
where all the magic happens. All other surfaces may be left as
supplied or as finished for corrosion protection. There's no
value in cleaning the entire surface of the base or large interfacing
surfaces between airframe, antenna and doubler (in this case your
doubler is the copper or brass sheet).
Then you need radials made from shim stock or copper tape. Wider the
better up to 2" or so. Same length as height of antenna. 4 is about
the minimum, no measurable differences beyond 8. They don't have
to lay flat (they might run up and over a doubler or other surface
feature). Solder these to the base plate.
This is described in more detail in the antenna chapter.
Bob . . .
< What is so wonderful about scientific truth...is that >
< the authority which determines whether there can be >
< debate or not does not reside in some fraternity of >
< scientists; nor is it divine. The authority rests >
< with experiment. >
< --Lawrence M. Krauss >
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: | Composite planes, Metallic paint, Antennae |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Alan K. Adamson" <aadamson@highrf.com>
Just one comment, Radar uses a much higher frequency than Comm or Nav, etc.
So while the metal flake paint messes with radar returns due to it's
"reflectivity". I doubt it would do much to the comm antenna
Alan
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
PTACKABURY@aol.com
Sent: Saturday, March 04, 2006 11:38 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Composite planes, Metallic paint, Antennae
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: PTACKABURY@aol.com
Bob: Thanks for your prompt response to my question, BUT: I didn't
communicate my concern well and therefore need to retransmit. I am not
interested in a ground plane, I understand that one from your excellent
chapter in the "Connection" and used that info when installing my EXTERIOR
antennae. My concern is the INTERIOR antennae buried in the upper aft
sections of the Lancair IV under the fiberglass skin. Again this is the
recommended place for com, gps, etc and has been used successfully by many
builders for years so I am not concerned about that either. HOWEVER, I am
considering a metallic paint and wonder if the small amounts of metallic in
the paint when applied over the fiberglass will degrade the performance of
these buried antennae. I don't think metallic paints are used on radomes
but I wonder if this is really a concern for my installation. thanks for
giving me a second chance, paul
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Backup battery - Lightspeed EI |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 07:00 PM 3/2/2006 +0000, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "czechsix@juno.com"
><czechsix@juno.com>
>
>Hi Doug,
>My RV is setup for day/night VFR and I have dual Lightspeeds. I pondered
>the electrical system options extensively. I originally planned to go with
>two alternators and one battery. The thing I kept coming back to is that
>with one battery, you have a single-point failure for the entire
>electrical system. Notwithstanding the opinion of others to the contrary,
>it IS possible to have a battery lead break off or come loose.
The only cases I've seen for this are (1) batteries with lead posts where
the lead wires are much too stiff (e.g. 2AWG 22759 wire). (2) Another
case was where the builder had fabricated a stiff copper strap that bolted
one end to the battery (-) terminal an the other to the firewall. This
was a steel posted battery and it broke the terminal under vibration.
Make your short battery jumpers from 4AWG welding cable IRRESPECTIVE of wire
sizes used elsewhere in the system.
I'm not arguing against multiple battery installations, only suggesting
that risk mitigation for broken battery terminals is a no-brainer.
BTW, a little bird flew by a few days ago and whispered that a well
known supplier of PM alternators just might be bringing a new regulator
out that would be self-exciting. Don't quote me on that. The bird was
speaking in Swahili and the only words of that language I remember clearly
were the favorite expletives of my 8th grade science teacher. We shall
see . . .
Bob . . .
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: Composite planes, Metallic paint, and Antennae |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 11:38 AM 3/4/2006 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: PTACKABURY@aol.com
>
>Bob: Thanks for your prompt response to my question, BUT: I didn't
>communicate my concern well and therefore need to retransmit. I am not
>interested
>in a ground plane, I understand that one from your excellent chapter in the
>"Connection" and used that info when installing my EXTERIOR antennae. My
>concern is the INTERIOR antennae buried in the upper aft sections of the
>Lancair
>IV under the fiberglass skin. Again this is the recommended place for com,
>gps, etc and has been used successfully by many builders for years so I
>am not
>concerned about that either. HOWEVER, I am considering a metallic paint and
>wonder if the small amounts of metallic in the paint when applied over the
>fiberglass will degrade the performance of these buried antennae. I don't
>think metallic paints are used on radomes but I wonder if this is really a
>concern for my installation. thanks for giving me a second chance, paul
No problem. Attenuation effects of the various paints is a crap
shoot. We've studied the effects of various coatings on our
nose radomes on the bizjets and yes, there are some paints
that you don't want to use. The manufacturer of the paint is
unlikely to know and the dealer is almost sure not to know
whether your paint of choice represents a hazard to GPS
performance. Antennas at lower frequencies are less likely
to be affected.
For the most part, paints with metal flecks in them don't seem
to offer much attenuation. Some builders have reported adequate
GPS performance when antennas are under a fabric skin with
several coats of aluminum prep. I don't recall any conversations
about VHF antennas under paint. But these data are all subjective.
The #1, always-works, foolproof method to evaluate your paint
is to set your GPS up for operation with the antenna in the
clear and get a reading on relative signal strengths. Take
a large plastic mixing bowel painted with your proposed coatings
and cover the antenna. Drops of 20% or less are probably not
going to noticeably affect your radio's performance. If the
paint is good for GPS, it's probably fine for other frequencies
too.
The #2, usually-works method is to find someone who has used
the same combination of materials and see what they report. The
risk here is that subjective measures of performance can yield
wildly variable results. In deference to the Repeatable Experiment,
I highly recommend #1.
Bob . . .
Message 17
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | RE: Composite planes, Metallic paint, and Antennae |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 11:42 AM 3/4/2006 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Alan K. Adamson"
><aadamson@highrf.com>
>
>http://www.highrf.com/gallery/Feb-06/DSCN1305
>
>Here is my solution. Couple of notes.
>
>3M makes a copper tape that has acrylic glue on the back and the glue is
>conductive. They use it in EMI solutions. I first lined the Comm antenna
>indent in the fuselage with said tape, then I ran the 22" radials out from
>that area. I then got some copper flashing and made a conductive backing
>plate. My original plan was to use some solder paste and put the backing
>plate down and "wick" in some solder around the edges.... HOWEVER, I tested
>my approach on a sample piece and determined that any soldering iron heat
>(and I use a Metcal), would degrade the laminate So I'm going to use a
>little conductive copper no-ox compound. Just a little as it goes a long
>ways. One other note before I stuck down the radials I did sand down to the
>exposed carbon so that at least I'd have some sort of electrical bond
>between the radials and the bottom of the fuse.
>
>I later came back and put a 2 bid of 1.7oz glass over each radial just to
>provide protection.
>
>That backing plate will be drilled for nutplates and rivets and once it's
>down and held in place, I'll come back and drill and countersink a screw
>from the outside (flush), and put a nut and washer on the inside. This stud
>will then be ran back to the central ground.
No auxiliary grounding of antenna bases is required or recommended.
I've seen some composite aircraft where the interiors had spider-webs
of wire supposedly installed to replace the lack of "grounds" offered
by metallic aircraft. There is no advantage in doing this and may
even make RF interference problems worse. The only things that need to
connect to your ground plane is the base of the antenna and the outer
braid of the coax feedline.
>Lot of discussion of this approach on the Lancair list. Seems some believe
>that the ground plane needs to be on the outside and not inside
Absolutely not. Looks ugly, hard to do, doesn't work any better . . .
>....Oh, well,
>I didn't want to "paint" the groundplane with copper/silver paint as I've
>heard it will deteriorate over time... I figured this was next best.
Aside from the extra ground wire, what you describe should be just fine.
Bob . . .
Message 18
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Terry Watson" <terry@tcwatson.com>
Fred,
Jon Johansen's tip tanks don't show up on his website either.
(http://www.flymore.com.au/)
I have a pair for my RV-8A that I bought a couple of years ago from another
RV builder. I recall that the location of the filler and possibly the vent
is different for a tailwheel aircraft than for a nosewheel one.
Mine have not been installed yet, so I would be glad to take some photos to
send you on how these are made. They are of the earlier wingtip design, and
they have a boss for mounting the surface mounted nav/strobe lights and a
tunnel through the tank for the wiring.
I also have a set of the older style wingtips from Van's that I have had
hanging on my wall as a sculpture for several years now.
Jon's site has a couple of other interesting products for RV's -- a heated
pitot tube and flush fuel tank drains.
Terry
RV-8A #80729
Finishing?
Seattle
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Fred Stucklen"
<wstucklen1@cox.net>
Has anyone else tried to modify a set of original wing tips into a
pair of tip
tanks? If so, I'd like to hear how you did it, and what kinds of issues
you
have had, if any. I'd also like to know how you made the modifications
and
the type of glass/resin you used..
Jon Johansen's don't appear to be available on Van's web site
anymore.
Fred Stucklen
RV-6A N926RV
Message 19
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | RE: Composite planes, Metallic paint, and Antennae |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Alan K. Adamson" <aadamson@highrf.com>
Great, I haven't done that "extra ground" and can always do it later if
deemed necessary... For now, I'll leave it out of the design and try my
current approach (minus the extra ground wire).
Thanks Bob,
Alan
PS for those interested, Mouser carries that tape and It think it's a model
1181 or something like that. Google for 3m copper tape and you'll find it,
there is a smooth version and a "waffled" version. For obvious reasons, I
went with the smooth.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L.
Nuckolls, III
Sent: Saturday, March 04, 2006 12:56 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: RE: Composite planes, Metallic paint, and
Antennae
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
--> <nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 11:42 AM 3/4/2006 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Alan K. Adamson"
><aadamson@highrf.com>
>
>http://www.highrf.com/gallery/Feb-06/DSCN1305
>
>Here is my solution. Couple of notes.
>
>3M makes a copper tape that has acrylic glue on the back and the glue
>is conductive. They use it in EMI solutions. I first lined the Comm
>antenna indent in the fuselage with said tape, then I ran the 22"
>radials out from that area. I then got some copper flashing and made a
>conductive backing plate. My original plan was to use some solder
>paste and put the backing plate down and "wick" in some solder around
>the edges.... HOWEVER, I tested my approach on a sample piece and
>determined that any soldering iron heat (and I use a Metcal), would
>degrade the laminate So I'm going to use a little conductive copper
>no-ox compound. Just a little as it goes a long ways. One other note
>before I stuck down the radials I did sand down to the exposed carbon
>so that at least I'd have some sort of electrical bond between the radials
and the bottom of the fuse.
>
>I later came back and put a 2 bid of 1.7oz glass over each radial just
>to provide protection.
>
>That backing plate will be drilled for nutplates and rivets and once
>it's down and held in place, I'll come back and drill and countersink a
>screw from the outside (flush), and put a nut and washer on the inside.
>This stud will then be ran back to the central ground.
No auxiliary grounding of antenna bases is required or recommended.
I've seen some composite aircraft where the interiors had spider-webs
of wire supposedly installed to replace the lack of "grounds" offered
by metallic aircraft. There is no advantage in doing this and may
even make RF interference problems worse. The only things that need to
connect to your ground plane is the base of the antenna and the outer
braid of the coax feedline.
>Lot of discussion of this approach on the Lancair list. Seems some
>believe that the ground plane needs to be on the outside and not inside
Absolutely not. Looks ugly, hard to do, doesn't work any better . . .
>....Oh, well,
>I didn't want to "paint" the groundplane with copper/silver paint as
>I've heard it will deteriorate over time... I figured this was next best.
Aside from the extra ground wire, what you describe should be just fine.
Bob . . .
Message 20
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Backup battery - Lightspeed EI |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: <rparigor@suffolk.lib.ny.us>
"The thing I kept coming back to is that with one battery, you have a
single-point failure for the entire electrical system"
I am building a Europa with a Rotax 914 turbo. It has 2 fuel pump, 1 needs
to be running to keep the motor running.
I plan on flying Day and Night VFR.
I also have both 27 foot span go fast wings and 48 foot span go pretty
fast glider wings.
On automobiles I have had batteries fail open upon start ups. My wife and
partner have had cars die in the road from a internal open battery. That
said I had a Cessna 170 for 19 years and never had a failure of battery,
but not to say it will not happen. I still feel uneasy bout getting a
battery opening, especial on start up.
I don't like the added weight of a second lead acid battery,especial
something able to help out with starting.
I am introducing a nontraditional demand, trying to start the motor in
air.
Now one may recommend a airstart, and that works, but you are spinning a
cold motor real quick real fast, hard on motor. Best to use starter.
I have a SD-20S as primary alternator and Rotax internal Generator (not
self exciting) as back up. It is wired using Z13/8 as a starting place.
If you tickled the Rotax generator/Ducati regulator/rectifier, I am
confident with our 48K microfarad capacitor it will remain alive and
running a fuel pump.
I used my head which uses the rest behind the right seat passengers head
to make me feel better.
I have a 13 cell GP 2200mA NiMh Battery (1.62 oz ea cell) that can supply
a few hundred amps for short periods, and easily the 50 or 60 amps the
starter requires. It lives nice in the headrest easily accessable by
pilot.
I have 3 inputs it can supply:
If all went to hell, can run aux pump on it (~ 2amp draw, so without test
and very cold battery at minimum I would say 30 minutes) Pulling 60 amps,
this battery will put out 2000mAs and then still be at .9volts per cell!
I can power E-Bus (which it will be diode isolated from to not accept a
charge, but 14.4V) even if it did try to charge would not hurt battery too
much). Now powering E-Bus can allow me to run things when soaring and not
touch main battery, or if my main battery failed upon a start up, could do
a airstart running aux pump from E-Bus, then tickle the rotax generator.
Can also plumb directly in parallel with main battery to help start.
Voltage of pack will be nominal 15.6 volts.
May sound complicated, layout is simple and intuitive. I feel very
comfortable with it.
Smoke or other electrical failure? In 10 seconds I can turn off main
battery switch (Flaming River on rear of headrest), E-Bus aux feed battery
switch (in headrest) and plumb NiMh battery to pump (right in headrest)
and now have a bit of time to think things through.
The panel is recessed in headrest 3/4" and has EL strip to illuminate
headrest panel. There is a mini Blue LED Voltmeter in there as well that
tells either Main or NiMh output.
Normal failure of main alternator, just switch off and turn on Rotax.
Starter solenoid sticks when doing a in flight start, or other failure on
that side of things, turn off main battery switch and select E-Bus
alternate feed and turn on Rotax Generator
If Battery failed opened upon restart, plumb NiMh to E-Bus to run pump and
do a airstart, then tickle Rotax. Although I could probably start on the
NiMh autonomous, best not do it in air.
Battery flat when away from home, parallel main with NiMh. If NiMh failed,
am on ground, so no big deal.
Downside is you can not use a lead acid charging system to charge a NiMh
direct. If not in a hurry a C/10 by 14 to 16 hour charge is best. If in a
hurry a 1C delta peak charge is OK. If in a real hurry or you want to ask
200 amps from battery you want it nice and warm, do a 2 or 3C delta peak
charge.
Since I fly electric models and gliders, and one reason for having a
Europa is to take me to far away soaring sites, I am set up with all the
stuff I need. As a matter of fact when transporting models, future designs
will (you guessed it) be made using 13 cell packs. Chargers run off normal
1 2volt system.
Long winded all right.
Anyway if you have a electrical dependent aeroplane, for not much weight
you can give yourself imn my opinion a versatile alternative.
Ron Parigoris
Oh yea it will power something like this as well:
http://www.yourzagi.com/wagmax.htm
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: | Composite planes, Metallic paint, Antennae |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
Antennae
At 12:35 PM 3/4/2006 -0500, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Alan K. Adamson"
><aadamson@highrf.com>
>
>Just one comment, Radar uses a much higher frequency than Comm or Nav, etc.
>So while the metal flake paint messes with radar returns due to it's
>"reflectivity". I doubt it would do much to the comm antenna
>
>Alan
There are also dielectric loss issues at higher frequencies.
I think we've tested coatings and materials that had no metal
content but offered unacceptable reflections and/or refraction of the
radar signals. Except for these isolated examples I think you're correct
in that the lower frequency systems are less vulnerable
to coatings that might affect microwaves.
Bob . . .
Message 22
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Composite planes, Metallic paint, Antennae |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Jim Wickert <jimw_btg@earthlink.net>
Alan,
Jim Wickert here. It is quite well known that foil internal antennas do function
well under carbon fiber cloth. they do however function very well under glass
substrate. Now with regard to paint. Per a quite an experienced individual
Jim Weir VP RST Engineering group who as published "The Reference Text, The
RST-820 Antenna which deals strictly with copper Tape Antennas, see quote>
"These antennas have worked in glass and fiberglass airplanes with almost every
kind of paint and dope (including the aluminum coat used on fabric as a UV protectant)
that we could find. A couple of times in the past two years there have
been reports that there is a new German metallic paint (sorry, I don't know
the brand) that makes ALL hidden antennas (not just ours) work poorly if at
all."
I know of builder that has his plane flying with a silver metallic paint and he
has no problems. Jims Ref manual is about $5.00 and well worth the price of
admission for any laying out antennas in composite planes
Take care, happy building
Jim Wickert
Vision Vair #159
Some will have it some will not!!
-----Original Message-----
>From: "Alan K. Adamson" <aadamson@highrf.com>
>Sent: Mar 4, 2006 12:35 PM
>To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
>Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Composite planes, Metallic paint, Antennae
>
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Alan K. Adamson" <aadamson@highrf.com>
>
>Just one comment, Radar uses a much higher frequency than Comm or Nav, etc.
>So while the metal flake paint messes with radar returns due to it's
>"reflectivity". I doubt it would do much to the comm antenna
>
>Alan
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
>PTACKABURY@aol.com
>Sent: Saturday, March 04, 2006 11:38 AM
>To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Composite planes, Metallic paint, Antennae
>
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: PTACKABURY@aol.com
>
>Bob: Thanks for your prompt response to my question, BUT: I didn't
>communicate my concern well and therefore need to retransmit. I am not
>interested in a ground plane, I understand that one from your excellent
>chapter in the "Connection" and used that info when installing my EXTERIOR
>antennae. My concern is the INTERIOR antennae buried in the upper aft
>sections of the Lancair IV under the fiberglass skin. Again this is the
>recommended place for com, gps, etc and has been used successfully by many
>builders for years so I am not concerned about that either. HOWEVER, I am
>considering a metallic paint and wonder if the small amounts of metallic in
>the paint when applied over the fiberglass will degrade the performance of
>these buried antennae. I don't think metallic paints are used on radomes
>but I wonder if this is really a concern for my installation. thanks for
>giving me a second chance, paul
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: | Composite planes, Metallic paint, Antennae |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Alan K. Adamson" <aadamson@highrf.com>
Jim, thanks for the post. Can I ask for some clarification? Your quote
... "It is quite well known that foil internal antennas do function well
under carbon fiber cloth." Is that correct, or should there have been a
*NOT* before "function"? Are you trying to say, they do or do not work on
carbon?
Second and a point of clarification. The Lancair actually uses an "outside
antenna". It uses a bent whip from ComAnt. But I wanted to improve the
"ground plane" only, so I added those 4 "radials" of 22" and the base plate
to provide the counterpoise and conductive attach points for the external
antenna.
I know of one other Legacy that is completed this same way and he says his
Comm antenna works very well. I'm cautiously optimistic.
But I think I'll order that $5 book just the same.
Thanks and can ya clear up the opening quote for me?
Alan
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jim
Wickert
Sent: Saturday, March 04, 2006 10:21 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Composite planes, Metallic paint, Antennae
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Jim Wickert
--> <jimw_btg@earthlink.net>
Alan,
Jim Wickert here. It is quite well known that foil internal antennas do
function well under carbon fiber cloth. they do however function very well
under glass substrate. Now with regard to paint. Per a quite an
experienced individual Jim Weir VP RST Engineering group who as published
"The Reference Text, The RST-820 Antenna which deals strictly with copper
Tape Antennas, see quote>
"These antennas have worked in glass and fiberglass airplanes with almost
every kind of paint and dope (including the aluminum coat used on fabric as
a UV protectant) that we could find. A couple of times in the past two
years there have been reports that there is a new German metallic paint
(sorry, I don't know the brand) that makes ALL hidden antennas (not just
ours) work poorly if at all."
I know of builder that has his plane flying with a silver metallic paint and
he has no problems. Jims Ref manual is about $5.00 and well worth the price
of admission for any laying out antennas in composite planes
Take care, happy building
Jim Wickert
Vision Vair #159
Some will have it some will not!!
-----Original Message-----
>From: "Alan K. Adamson" <aadamson@highrf.com>
>Sent: Mar 4, 2006 12:35 PM
>To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
>Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Composite planes, Metallic paint,
Antennae
>
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Alan K. Adamson"
>--> <aadamson@highrf.com>
>
>Just one comment, Radar uses a much higher frequency than Comm or Nav,
etc.
>So while the metal flake paint messes with radar returns due to it's
>"reflectivity". I doubt it would do much to the comm antenna
>
>Alan
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
>PTACKABURY@aol.com
>Sent: Saturday, March 04, 2006 11:38 AM
>To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Composite planes, Metallic paint,
>Antennae
>
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: PTACKABURY@aol.com
>
>Bob: Thanks for your prompt response to my question, BUT: I didn't
>communicate my concern well and therefore need to retransmit. I am
>not interested in a ground plane, I understand that one from your
>excellent chapter in the "Connection" and used that info when
>installing my EXTERIOR antennae. My concern is the INTERIOR antennae
>buried in the upper aft sections of the Lancair IV under the fiberglass
>skin. Again this is the recommended place for com, gps, etc and has
>been used successfully by many builders for years so I am not concerned
>about that either. HOWEVER, I am considering a metallic paint and
>wonder if the small amounts of metallic in the paint when applied over
>the fiberglass will degrade the performance of these buried antennae.
>I don't think metallic paints are used on radomes but I wonder if this
>is really a concern for my installation. thanks for giving me a
>second chance, paul
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: RV-List: Backup battery - Lightspeed EI |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Ken <klehman@albedo.net>
Hi Mark
You sound like you are probably well aware of this but "theoretically"
I'd expect a lot less than 3 hours at 1 amp.
www.power-sonic.com/ps-1229.pdf
These specs indicate that at a 1 amp discharge rate you shouldn't expect
more than 2 hours under ideal conditions or perhaps 1.5 hours for a cold
battery. Apologies for nit-picking.
Ken
snip
> used a PowerSonic 2.9 Ah battery (PS-1229). It's light and relatively cheap (I
think about $25-30...you can Google it and get lots of hits). I plan to change
the battery every two years to ensure that it's reasonably fresh. I know Klaus
says 4.5 Ah but I thought that was overkill (unless you plan to be flying
over some really rugged terrain/ocean with no alternates within an hour or two
of flight). The 2.9 Ah batt is theoretically good for almost 3 hours of run time
on one ignition (drawing ~ 1A at cruise RPM's). In the unlikely event that
I ever find myself operating the engine soley on the backup battery, I will try
to have it on the ground within an hour.
>
snip
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! --
|