Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:03 AM - Re: Grounding Question (LarryRobertHelming)
2. 06:30 AM - Re: Grounding Question (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
3. 07:48 AM - alternator trouble shooting (Ernest Christley)
4. 07:48 AM - Re: 90 degree BNC (Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta))
5. 07:57 AM - Re: 90 degree BNC (Jim Michael)
6. 08:41 AM - Strategies for survival (Glen Matejcek)
7. 10:48 AM - Re: Strategies for survival (Mickey Coggins)
8. 01:54 PM - Re: Strategies for survival (Brian Lloyd)
9. 02:50 PM - Re: Strategies for survival (Mickey Coggins)
10. 02:51 PM - L-40 Alternator Output (Mark Neubauer)
11. 03:28 PM - Re: 90 degree BNC (JTORTHO@aol.com)
12. 03:31 PM - Re: L-40 Alternator Output (Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta))
13. 03:49 PM - Re: 90 degree BNC (Craig Payne)
14. 07:49 PM - Re: L-40 Alternator Output (Mark Carey)
15. 10:50 PM - Re: Strategies for survival (Matt Prather)
16. 11:25 PM - Re: alternator trouble shooting (Greg Grigson)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Grounding Question |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming@sigecom.net>
----- Original Message -----
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Larry E. James"
> <larry@ncproto.com>
>
> Bob,
> I appreciate your sentiments to the effect that our
> focus needs to be to "get light under the wheels" .....
> boy do I agree !!
> But you went over my head. Is the short version that
> one big Ground wire the same size as the main Positive
> lead (2awg) should run forward to a combo
> thru-the-firewall-lug / Gound "forest" ?? In other
> words; one ground wire to one ground block and
> continuing to the starter?? I'm after just the simple
> answer :-)
> --
> Larry E. James
> Bellevue, WA HR2
>
> --
Larry, you have it right except for the grounding of the starter. The
starter is grounded/connected to the engine block. You need to
ground/connect the engine to the forest of ground tabs. I used a 3/8" brass
bolt for this that passes through the FW. The engine ground should be
flexible due to the engine vibrating and the FW not. I found a convenient
bolt on the rear of the engine for this connection. You do not want to
ground the engine to the engine mount. Larry in Indiana
>
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Grounding Question |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 02:44 PM 5/29/2006 -0700, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Larry E. James" <larry@ncproto.com>
>
>Bob,
>I appreciate your sentiments to the effect that our
>focus needs to be to "get light under the wheels" .....
>boy do I agree !!
>But you went over my head. Is the short version that
>one big Ground wire the same size as the main Positive
>lead (2awg) should run forward to a combo
>thru-the-firewall-lug / Gound "forest" ?? In other
>words; one ground wire to one ground block and
>continuing to the starter?? I'm after just the simple
>answer :-)
Yes, the ground lead should be the same size as the
(+) lead and 2AWG is a good size for a remotely
mounted battery.
2AWG other than nice, soft welding cable should
not be bolted directly to a battery. If you run
22759 or copper clad aluminum wire from batteries
to the firewall ground stud, I'd recommend
a short (6") 4AWG welding cable jumper be used to
make the leap from battery(-) to the end of the
battery ground feeder.
You could bolt the two wires together with ring
terminals and cover with heatshrink.
For local airframe grounding of batteries, I've
published a new Shop Notes at:
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/Battery_Grounds/Battery_Grounds.html
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: | alternator trouble shooting |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Ernest Christley <echristley@nc.rr.com>
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
On May 29, 2006, at 9:56 AM, Greg Grigson wrote:
>> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Greg Grigson
>> <iflyhawaii2@yahoo.com>
>>
>> Wow. I replaced the first Van's alternator at 10 hours due to amps
>> jumping from + 32 amps to - 32 amps. I would hate to just replace
>> the second alternator. Is there a way to test it on the plane?
>
>
Yes. Put it under some kind of load and look at the output with an
oscilloscope. Just connect the o-scope to the main distribution bus
where the alternator B-lead connects. Do you have a 12VDC power jack
for your GPS? That will work too and it is very easy to get to.
An alternator with all three phases working will have almost ripple-
free output. An alternator that has lost a diode will lose the phase
associated with that diode. The result will be greatly increased
ripple in the bus voltage. (That ripple is what you are hearing in
your comm radio.) Some automotive test meters have an "alternator
test" scale that just measures the amount of ripple and gives you a
"good/bad" reading which accomplishes essentially the same thing.
Brian Lloyd 361 Catterline Way
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-Exupry
Another tactic is to use a digital volt meter, one of those $3 Harbor Freight jobs,
and read the bus voltage on the AC scale. AC volts will be zero on the battery,
starts increasing when the alternator is brought online and slowly gets
progressively worse as the loading increase. It takes a big jump when a diode
goes out.
--
,|"|"|, Ernest Christley |
----===<{{(oQo)}}>===---- Dyke Delta Builder |
o| d |o www.ernest.isa-geek.org |
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" <mstewart@iss.net>
Well I went to 2 Rat shacks and the trays holding my parts were empty in
both stores.
ARGH!
I think all you Aerolectric guys went out and scoffed em up!
Going to have to wait for restocking.
Whilst perusing my bins of bnc connectors, I ran across one and took a
crappy picture from my phone.
Here is exactly what I am looking for. I need about 4 more.
Who knows where to fine em?
www.mstewart.net/deletesoon/bncscrew.jpg
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)
Sent: Friday, May 26, 2006 11:14 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: 90 degree BNC
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Stewart, Michael (ISS
Atlanta)" <mstewart@iss.net>
Thanks for the offer bob.
A friend said this thing, with the relief off, has what im looking for.
Im going after work today to see what it looks like.
http://www.radioshack.com/product/index.jsp?productId=2103434&tab=summar
y
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Robert L. Nuckolls, III
Sent: Friday, May 26, 2006 10:11 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: 90 degree BNC
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
<nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 08:25 AM 5/26/2006 -0400, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Stewart, Michael (ISS
Atlanta)"
><mstewart@iss.net>
>
>Yes bob I believe that would work, albeit a little tougher to
fabricate.
>Whats the square u tube made of?
Square brass tube stock. Probably the best thing to do is
assemble this for you. You need to use a connector with Teflon
insulation (see the plastic oozing from holes in the pix?).
If you tell me how long a coax you need, I can put the connector
on one end for you.
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 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Jim Michael" <jm@10squaredcorp.com>
Perhaps try searching DigiKey? http://www.digikey.com
On Tue, 30 May 2006 10:42:42 -0400, Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta) wrote
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Stewart, Michael (ISS
> Atlanta)" <mstewart@iss.net>
>
> Well I went to 2 Rat shacks and the trays holding my parts were
> empty in both stores. ARGH! I think all you Aerolectric guys went
> out and scoffed em up! Going to have to wait for restocking. Whilst
> perusing my bins of bnc connectors, I ran across one and took a
> crappy picture from my phone. Here is exactly what I am looking for.
> I need about 4 more. Who knows where to fine em?
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Strategies for survival |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Glen Matejcek" <aerobubba@earthlink.net>
Hi All-
On the operational side of this, I'd just like to restate that loss of
radar contact during flight following ops does not trigger SAR. Loss of
radar contact and com together triggers notification of the supervisor, who
notifies the operations desk for the ARTCC. Initiation of SAR is
discretionary and will depend upon circumstances. The operations desk here
in Indy told me just yesterday that most of VFR flight following lost
contact cases turn up at their destinations. To me, this implies that
folks using flight following will occasionally decide to just 'screw it',
squawk 1200, and change freqs. If this is indeed the case, we are our own
worst enemies, and are in essence crying wolf.
VFR flight following can be initiated within radar coverage, but you can
also make position reports with FSS in non-radar areas when on a VFR flight
plan. Obviously, contact with the FSS must be available.
And now, what you've all been waiting for, the political hour!
ATC is short staffed and about broke. One of the solutions they came up
with is to use less people when things are slow. As I understand the
system, in the enroute centers each of the 4 strata of a given sector was
intended to be staffed by 3 people. When things are slow, like the dead of
night in the middle of nowhere, those different strata and even different
sectors can be combined such that one person is covering all the positions.
Hence, one bleary eyed controller might be responsible for airspace that
was covered by a dozen or more people earlier in the day. To a point, this
is a good procedure. Unfortunately, it got pushed too far and operational
errors increased. The response was to go back to full staffing all the
time, so there is now typically more likelihood of getting flight
following. Of course there is a lot more overtime being made now at the
broke agency. The new contract will include a 'B' scale for new people
that greatly mitigates their career earning potential in an effort to cut
expenditures. This isn't going to help recruitment of new controllers, and
a quarter of the controllers currently on staff will be eligible to retire
within the next year. The short sighted politicos have trashed the
situation (starting with rolling all the discrete funding schemes into the
general fund lo those many years ago), can't seem to solve it, and want to
make the whole stink go away by dumping user fees / privatization on us.
Not that I have an opinion on the subject....
Glen Matejcek
aerobubba@earthlink.net
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: Strategies for survival |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics@rv8.ch>
> To me, this implies that
> folks using flight following will occasionally decide to just 'screw it',
> squawk 1200, and change freqs. If this is indeed the case, we are our own
> worst enemies, and are in essence crying wolf.
Well, sometimes if the ATC people are *really* busy, it's kind
of hard to get their attention to cancel flight following.
I suspect that may be why some people fail to do so. Not
a good excuse, but I'll bet it happens.
> ...The short sighted politicos have trashed the
> situation (starting with rolling all the discrete funding schemes into the
> general fund lo those many years ago), can't seem to solve it, and want to
> make the whole stink go away by dumping user fees / privatization on us.
>
> Not that I have an opinion on the subject....
>
> Glen Matejcek
...and it seems to exactly match mine, BTW.
--
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: Strategies for survival |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
Mickey Coggins wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics@rv8.ch>
>
>> To me, this implies that
>> folks using flight following will occasionally decide to just 'screw it',
>> squawk 1200, and change freqs. If this is indeed the case, we are our own
>> worst enemies, and are in essence crying wolf.
>
> Well, sometimes if the ATC people are *really* busy, it's kind
> of hard to get their attention to cancel flight following.
> I suspect that may be why some people fail to do so. Not
> a good excuse, but I'll bet it happens.
And I think that just about anyone who uses flight following regularly
has been faced with this problem and forced into this solution.
>> ...The short sighted politicos have trashed the
>> situation (starting with rolling all the discrete funding schemes into the
>> general fund lo those many years ago), can't seem to solve it, and want to
>> make the whole stink go away by dumping user fees / privatization on us.
>>
>> Not that I have an opinion on the subject....
>>
>> Glen Matejcek
>
> ...and it seems to exactly match mine, BTW.
It has been said that politics is the art of unequal and unfair
redistribution of resources.
I am of two minds. The selfish me wants these services for free but the
rational me knows that there ain't no such thing as a free lunch. Is
this the best way to spend our tax dollars? Still, the money has been
taken from us in the form of use taxes on avgas so it strikes me that it
should be spent for aviation-related activities such as maintenance of
our facilities (airports, navaids, and services). But then I remember
the part about unequal and unfair redistribution of resources. <sigh>
Brian
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: Strategies for survival |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Mickey Coggins <mick-matronics@rv8.ch>
> I am of two minds. The selfish me wants these services for free but the
> rational me knows that there ain't no such thing as a free lunch. Is
> this the best way to spend our tax dollars?
No, but there are so many worse ways they could be spent. Let's
focus on those, first.
> Still, the money has been
> taken from us in the form of use taxes on avgas so it strikes me that it
> should be spent for aviation-related activities such as maintenance of
> our facilities (airports, navaids, and services). But then I remember
> the part about unequal and unfair redistribution of resources. <sigh>
People that grew up and live in NYC can't figure out why the government
builds highways that people can drive on for "free". Just because they
don't choose to drive a car on the interstate highway system doesn't
mean they don't derive any benefit from it. Same deal with the ATC
system. Besides, GA is like a fly riding on an elephant's back. If
there were no airlines, there would be no need for an ATC system,
and it would not exist.
--
Mickey Coggins
http://www.rv8.ch/
#82007 finishing
do not archive
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: | L-40 Alternator Output |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Mark Neubauer" <markn@fuse.net>
I am using B&C's L-40 alternator and have just completed the 40 hour Phase 1
flight testing. Now that I am considering night flight, I have begun testing
my lighting system.
I noticed that turning all electrical equipment (Nav, landing, panel lights,
pitot heat and radios) puts a draw of about -15 amps on the ammeter at 1500
RPM. I did a load analysis earlier and I calculated full system load is 34
amps.
Is this just a simple case of alternator overload or could there be
something else? I put in the alt field test point as The Aeroelectric
Connection suggests. At full load, the field voltage is changing between 11
and 12 volts. I would conclude from this that the alternator is putting out
everything it has but I'm still at a deficit.
Is this alternator really able to put out the full 40 amps as advertised, or
am I just drawing more power than calculated?
Any suggestions on a 60-80 amp automotive alternator with external
regulation?
Mark Neubauer
(513) 583-1222
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 90 degree BNC |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: JTORTHO@aol.com
Try radio shack on line, just order the part.
Our local radio shack just went "consumer Only" and has very few parts.
Do not Archive
Jim
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: | L-40 Alternator Output |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" <mstewart@iss.net>
Mark hows your system voltage while at a cruise rpm?
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark
Neubauer
Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2006 5:50 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: L-40 Alternator Output
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Mark Neubauer"
<markn@fuse.net>
I am using B&C's L-40 alternator and have just completed the 40 hour
Phase 1
flight testing. Now that I am considering night flight, I have begun
testing
my lighting system.
I noticed that turning all electrical equipment (Nav, landing, panel
lights,
pitot heat and radios) puts a draw of about -15 amps on the ammeter at
1500
RPM. I did a load analysis earlier and I calculated full system load is
34
amps.
Is this just a simple case of alternator overload or could there be
something else? I put in the alt field test point as The Aeroelectric
Connection suggests. At full load, the field voltage is changing between
11
and 12 volts. I would conclude from this that the alternator is putting
out
everything it has but I'm still at a deficit.
Is this alternator really able to put out the full 40 amps as
advertised, or
am I just drawing more power than calculated?
Any suggestions on a 60-80 amp automotive alternator with external
regulation?
Mark Neubauer
(513) 583-1222
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Craig Payne" <craig@craigandjean.com>
If you are going to mail order both B&C and Stein Air carry BNC connectors
along with other specialized aircraft parts and wire.
www.bandc.biz
www.steinair.com
The photo you supplied looked to me like a straight male BNC connector. B&C
has these but not a 90 one. Stein Air does (#SA-1010R).
-- Craig
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: | L-40 Alternator Output |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Mark Carey" <markacarey@msn.com>
>From what I understand there is a considerable variation with RPM. For
instance the 20 AMP B&C only puts out 12 amps at 2000 but it generates 18 at
2500. My approach is to install the 40 as a primary and use the 20 in place
of the vacuum pump for night approaches if needed (or rely on the battery
for a short time). The pitot is a big draw that is likely a rare need at
night.
>From: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" <mstewart@iss.net>
>To: <aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>
>Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: L-40 Alternator Output
>Date: Tue, 30 May 2006 18:05:40 -0400
>
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)"
><mstewart@iss.net>
>
>Mark hows your system voltage while at a cruise rpm?
>Mike
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mark
>Neubauer
>Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2006 5:50 PM
>To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
>Subject: AeroElectric-List: L-40 Alternator Output
>
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Mark Neubauer"
><markn@fuse.net>
>
>I am using B&C's L-40 alternator and have just completed the 40 hour
>Phase 1
>flight testing. Now that I am considering night flight, I have begun
>testing
>my lighting system.
>
>I noticed that turning all electrical equipment (Nav, landing, panel
>lights,
>pitot heat and radios) puts a draw of about -15 amps on the ammeter at
>1500
>RPM. I did a load analysis earlier and I calculated full system load is
>34
>amps.
>
>Is this just a simple case of alternator overload or could there be
>something else? I put in the alt field test point as The Aeroelectric
>Connection suggests. At full load, the field voltage is changing between
>11
>and 12 volts. I would conclude from this that the alternator is putting
>out
>everything it has but I'm still at a deficit.
>
>Is this alternator really able to put out the full 40 amps as
>advertised, or
>am I just drawing more power than calculated?
>
>Any suggestions on a 60-80 amp automotive alternator with external
>regulation?
>
>Mark Neubauer
>(513) 583-1222
>
>
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: Strategies for survival |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Matt Prather" <mprather@spro.net>
If I were a controller and on one radar sweep an airplane went from
sqwaking the assigned code to, on the next, sqwaking 1200, I'd assume a
different outcome than if an airplane goes from sqwaking the assigned code
to nothing.. And, that would depend on how low the airplane had been
flying compared to the minimum coverage altitude.
Here in Idaho, there are big patches of real estate on IFR airways where
radar coverage isn't available below 12000MSL.
ATC is usually very cooperative wherever I go. Even in places where radar
coverage is spotty, as long as they aren't too busy, they'll try to keep
you on, and handed off to the next sector. Nice to be able to talk to
somebody, even if you aren't actually visible on their scope..
Regards,
Matt-
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Mickey Coggins
> <mick-matronics@rv8.ch>
>
>> To me, this implies that
>> folks using flight following will occasionally decide to just 'screw
>> it', squawk 1200, and change freqs. If this is indeed the case, we
>> are our own worst enemies, and are in essence crying wolf.
>
> Well, sometimes if the ATC people are *really* busy, it's kind
> of hard to get their attention to cancel flight following.
> I suspect that may be why some people fail to do so. Not
> a good excuse, but I'll bet it happens.
>
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: alternator trouble shooting |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Greg Grigson <iflyhawaii2@yahoo.com>
OK Good advice. I'll test the alternator and get back to you.
Thanks.
Greg
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. PC-to-Phone calls for ridiculously low rates.
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! --
|