Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:52 AM - Re: CB Size requirements? (FLYaDIVE@aol.com)
2. 06:07 AM - Re: Disorientation and Old Bob's Eloquence (Mark Sletten)
3. 06:11 AM - Re: Ammeter surge problem (FLYaDIVE@aol.com)
4. 07:03 AM - Re: CB Size requirements? (Ken)
5. 08:23 AM - Re: CB Size requirements? (Jim Corner)
6. 08:38 AM - Re: CB Size requirements? (FLYaDIVE@aol.com)
7. 09:15 AM - T&B (Fergus Kyle)
8. 10:27 AM - Re: T&B (BobsV35B@aol.com)
9. 10:28 AM - Re: PC-680 Revisited (Carlos Trigo)
10. 11:04 AM - Re: Glass Panel Layout (glaesers)
11. 12:42 PM - Re: Panel layout (Dave Thompson)
12. 01:17 PM - Re: Ammeter surge problem ()
13. 02:24 PM - Re: Glass Panel Layout and homemade rate gyro T&B (Ken)
14. 02:55 PM - Re: CB Size requirements? (Jim Oke)
15. 03:31 PM - Re: Re: Glass Panel Layout and homemade rate gyro T&B (OldBob Siegfried)
16. 04:44 PM - Re: Re: Glass Panel Layout and homemade rate gyro T&B (Brian Lloyd)
17. 05:18 PM - Re: Re: Glass Panel Layout and homemade rate gyro T&B (Brian Lloyd)
18. 06:30 PM - Re: Re: Glass Panel Layout and homemade rate gyro T&B (BobsV35B@aol.com)
19. 06:30 PM - Re: CB Size requirements? (europa flugzeug fabrik)
20. 07:50 PM - Re: Re: Glass Panel Layout and homemade rate gyro (Ken)
21. 08:15 PM - Re: Re: Glass Panel Layout and homemade rate gyro T&B (Brian Lloyd)
22. 09:35 PM - Re: Re: Glass Panel Layout and homemade rate gyro T&B (Ed Holyoke)
23. 09:51 PM - AMP CPC connector help (Erich_Weaver@URSCorp.com)
24. 11:47 PM - Re: AMP CPC connector help (Steve Allison)
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: CB Size requirements? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: FLYaDIVE@aol.com
In a message dated 6/24/06 7:21:48 PM Eastern Daylight Time, jcorner@shaw.ca
writes:
> I too will soon be installing a KX 125 and was able to purchase an
> installation manual from AC Spruce.
>
> The manual recommends a 10 amp fuse as deduced below, and shows a max
> transmit power consumption of 6 amps.
>
> It also recommends power wiring to be 2 #18 AWG wires to the circuit
> breaker and also 2 #18 wires to ground. What would be the advantage of
this
> over the 12 and 14 AWG being installed by Barry? More resistance to
breakage or is there another reason?
>
> Jim Corner
==================================
JIm:
Thanks for the post.
This install manual, is it by King or ACS? I would have to really question
that manual. I do not see ANY advantage of using two 18 AWG wires running in
parallel. Maybe it was done for ease of routing and soldering to connectors?
Yes, there is the current carrying capacity but there is also the extra work,
extra weight, extra points to fail ... Now when talking failure points, what
are the possibilities of wire harness failure? Pretty low even on GA aircraft.
Maybe the double runs are for future use? I tend to do double runs for
further expansion. I also will go up one size for expansion or where a voltage
drop might be a problem; such as in alternator and ACU systems.
18 AWG = 10 Amps
16 AWG = 15 Amps
14 AWG = 20 Amps
12 AWG = 30 Amps
This circuit/PROBLEM I'm working on was built by someone else. They used
POP-RIVITS to attach wires to CB'ers. They also tied ALL radios [Xponder, 2 Coms
and Audio Panel] to one 10 AMP CB-Switch. I'm just breaking each item out
with their own wiring and CB.
Barry
"Chop'd Liver"
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: Disorientation and Old Bob's Eloquence |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Mark Sletten" <marknlisa@hometel.com>
Bob,
Don't sell yourself short. Confidence, experience and civility will get you
a lot farther than education and eloquence, at least in my opinion!
Mark
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: Ammeter surge problem |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: FLYaDIVE@aol.com
In a message dated 6/24/06 6:10:34 PM Eastern Daylight Time, gary@liming.org
writes:
> I kind of find it hard to believe that the RF is causing it, but we
> are stumped.
>
> Any ideas?
>
>
> TIA,
>
> Gary Liming
====================
Gary:
A couple of questions:
1 - Is the ammeter digital or mechanical?
I'm guessing DIGITAL!
2 - When you say surge, is it in the positive or negative direction?
3 - The surge, is it a constant reading or does it fluctuate?
Does it fluctuate with modulation of the Com?
4 - How is the coax routed from the Xmiter to the Antenna? Does it go near
EITHER the ammeter or any of its wiring?
To answer your question: " I am guessing that there is a circuit in there to
compensate for a voltage range across the shunt, but I am guessing about that."
EXACTLY ... By definition that is exactly what a shunt does.
Example: It would be very impractical to manufacture an ammeter for EVERY
range of current requested. So an ammeter that reads say 1 amp is made and lets
say you wanted to measure a current of 10 Amps. Well, a SHUNT is used to
shunt, divert the excess current around/away from the 1 amp meter ... 1 Amp goes
through the meter and 9 amps go through the shunt. WHY? Because the shunt
shows a path of least resistance at ratio of 10 : 1.
Try this ... Get a fully charge Hand Held Com, one with a HIGH output. Then
turn on all items on as you had during the surge. Start with the rubber ducky
antenna on the hand held (HH). Transmit, talk and move the HH antenna around
the ammeter ... does the meter surge?
If not then the second thing to try is connect the HH to the coax of the
plane's Com. Transmit with the HH ... Does the ammeter surge?
If it does, then you have verified that it is RF getting into the ammeter.
Yup! That is my bet.
What's the cure? Reroute the wires, keep coax and ammeter wires as far away
as possible IF they have to cross, do them at 90 Deg angles. You could also
consider a shield around the ammeter and its wire.
ALSO!!! If there is a lot of stray RF floating around ... Check the SWR of
the antenna. High SWR causes stray radiation. And lots of radio problems.
Barry
"Chop'd Liver"
Message 4
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: CB Size requirements? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Ken <klehman@albedo.net>
My icomm also has two pins for power (and two for ground) and calls for
those two #18 wires. I assume ;) it is for two reasons. An attempt to
provide some tolerance for bad pins or dirty connections with a separate
wire for each pin... Not more failure points but rather a bit of
redundancy since either wire will carry the load. The first thing that
an avionics tech seems to do is to remove and then reseat the unit to
see if anything changes. So why aren't all pins doubled - my guess is
that the dual power wires help distribute the current between the pins
also for an increase in reliability. With one wire to two pins, the
current would tend to mostly go through the pin with the lowest resistance.
Ken
FLYaDIVE@aol.com wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: FLYaDIVE@aol.com
>
>In a message dated 6/24/06 7:21:48 PM Eastern Daylight Time, jcorner@shaw.ca
>writes:
>
>
>
>>I too will soon be installing a KX 125 and was able to purchase an
>> installation manual from AC Spruce.
>>
>> The manual recommends a 10 amp fuse as deduced below, and shows a max
>> transmit power consumption of 6 amps.
>>
>> It also recommends power wiring to be 2 #18 AWG wires to the circuit
>> breaker and also 2 #18 wires to ground. What would be the advantage of
>>
>>
>this
>
>
>> over the 12 and 14 AWG being installed by Barry? More resistance to
>>
>>
>breakage or is there another reason?
>
>
>>
>> Jim Corner
>>
>>
>==================================
>JIm:
>
>Thanks for the post.
>
>This install manual, is it by King or ACS? I would have to really question
>that manual. I do not see ANY advantage of using two 18 AWG wires running in
>parallel. Maybe it was done for ease of routing and soldering to connectors?
>Yes, there is the current carrying capacity but there is also the extra work,
>extra weight, extra points to fail ... Now when talking failure points, what
>are the possibilities of wire harness failure? Pretty low even on GA aircraft.
> Maybe the double runs are for future use? I tend to do double runs for
>further expansion. I also will go up one size for expansion or where a voltage
>drop might be a problem; such as in alternator and ACU systems.
>
>18 AWG = 10 Amps
>16 AWG = 15 Amps
>14 AWG = 20 Amps
>12 AWG = 30 Amps
>
>This circuit/PROBLEM I'm working on was built by someone else. They used
>POP-RIVITS to attach wires to CB'ers. They also tied ALL radios [Xponder, 2 Coms
>and Audio Panel] to one 10 AMP CB-Switch. I'm just breaking each item out
>with their own wiring and CB.
>
>Barry
>"Chop'd Liver"
>
>
>
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: | Re: CB Size requirements? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Jim Corner <jcorner@shaw.ca>
The manual is by Allied Signal Bendix/King
The drawing shows 13.75 volts to pin 1 and pin A which are tied
together.
Also ground pins 4,5,19 and Z are tied together.
Jim
On Jun 25, 2006, at 5:44 AM, FLYaDIVE@aol.com wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: FLYaDIVE@aol.com
>
> In a message dated 6/24/06 7:21:48 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> jcorner@shaw.ca
> writes:
>
>> I too will soon be installing a KX 125 and was able to purchase an
>> installation manual from AC Spruce.
>>
>> The manual recommends a 10 amp fuse as deduced below, and shows a
>> max
>> transmit power consumption of 6 amps.
>>
>> It also recommends power wiring to be 2 #18 AWG wires to the circuit
>> breaker and also 2 #18 wires to ground. What would be the
>> advantage of
> this
>> over the 12 and 14 AWG being installed by Barry? More resistance to
> breakage or is there another reason?
>>
>> Jim Corner
> ==================================
> JIm:
>
> Thanks for the post.
>
> This install manual, is it by King or ACS? I would have to really
> question
> that manual. I do not see ANY advantage of using two 18 AWG wires
> running in
> parallel. Maybe it was done for ease of routing and soldering to
> connectors?
> Yes, there is the current carrying capacity but there is also the
> extra work,
> extra weight, extra points to fail ... Now when talking failure
> points, what
> are the possibilities of wire harness failure? Pretty low even on
> GA aircraft.
> Maybe the double runs are for future use? I tend to do double
> runs for
> further expansion. I also will go up one size for expansion or
> where a voltage
> drop might be a problem; such as in alternator and ACU systems.
>
> 18 AWG = 10 Amps
> 16 AWG = 15 Amps
> 14 AWG = 20 Amps
> 12 AWG = 30 Amps
>
> This circuit/PROBLEM I'm working on was built by someone else.
> They used
> POP-RIVITS to attach wires to CB'ers. They also tied ALL radios
> [Xponder, 2 Coms
> and Audio Panel] to one 10 AMP CB-Switch. I'm just breaking each
> item out
> with their own wiring and CB.
>
> Barry
> "Chop'd Liver"
>
>
Message 6
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: CB Size requirements? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: FLYaDIVE@aol.com
In a message dated 6/25/06 10:07:48 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
klehman@albedo.net writes:
> My icomm also has two pins for power (and two for ground) and calls for
> those two #18 wires.
====================
One of the questions that has to be addressed is: What kind of connector does
the radio have? Many of the OLD NARCO style radios used edge-card
connectors. The pin size was quite large compared to the size of the pins on the
DB-9,
DB-25, DB-26 or larger computer type connectors of today. So, it does make
better sense to run two wires to two pins sets.
Barry
"Chop'd Liver"
Message 7
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Fergus Kyle" <VE3LVO@rac.ca>
First, let me say, after having flown since 1948, I cannot understand the
argument against the T&B, which I prefer to call "needle, ball". There has
never been in my estimation any valid argument against it. It was the first
instrument used by the Wright brothers ( a piece of string - the ball) and I
used it on the T-33, fifty years later. Try it at altitude where the air is
thin and one cannot see the horizon clearly. Flying on the head of a pin is
almost impossible without either AI or prime contemplation of the Needle,
Ball. It is so basic as to render complaint virtually child-like. Even then,
the AI (or A/H it used to be) doesn't tell you you're properly
trimmed......... ask any pre-laser air-ground attack driver - if the ball
isn't trimmed dead centre, every round will miss.
Second, I fully agree with Old Bob in everything he has said on the topic.
The difference is just that he says it so much better than I.
Third, the discussion regarding John and his spiral to the sea is correctly
diagnosed as Complacency - not as the author wrote 'in the cockpit', but
complacency in attitude to training to fly. It was his instructor's offhand
coverage of THE most critical control - going where you are pointing - that
was the basic cause (or perhaps John's lack of respect for what he had
learned).
Third, until you are going where you are pointing (forget intentional
mis-control of rudder), you are not in control. The attempt at comparing an
Artificial Horizon to Needle,Ball is gratuitous and is not the topic. The TC
is simply a combination indicator for cruising, built to save cost. Just
carrying out the taxi test of left turn, right turn should convince everyone
of the folly of a banked wing indicator when none is present.
Fourth, if ever an instrument should be twinned it is the Needle,Ball. I'll
have two, please.
I'll shut up now.
Ferg Kyle
Europa A064 914 Classic
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 |
|
In a message dated 6/25/2006 11:17:11 A.M. Central Standard Time,
VE3LVO@rac.ca writes:
Fourth, if ever an instrument should be twinned it is the Needle,Ball. I'll
have two, please.
I'll shut up now.
Ferg Kyle
Europa A064 914 Classic
Good Afternoon Ferg,
It is a pleasure to be in such august company as you and Mark.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
Do Not Archive
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: PC-680 Revisited |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Carlos Trigo" <trigo@mail.telepac.pt>
As usual from Brian, a very good description of batteries, easy to
understand and learn.
Now I know everything I need about that important part of my airplane,
thanks to this group and specially Brian Lloyd
Carlos
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2006 2:57 AM
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
>
> On Jun 24, 2006, at 8:32 PM, Charles Brame wrote:
>
>> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Charles Brame
>> <chasb@satx.rr.com>
>>
>> My Odyssey PC-680 has been in my non-flying RV for about three years -
>> most of the time uncharged. It keeps a charge for months, and after
>> topping off, it started a new, cold engine repeatedly with no problems.
>> I'm impressed
>>
>> The nomenclature that came with the PC-680 battery says it as a Dry
>> Cell. I remember an AeroElectric discussion a few years back about lead
>> acid, sealed lead acid, gel cell, and recombinant gas batteries.
>> According to the archives that I found, the PC-680 is described as a
>> Recombinant Gas and/or Sealed Lead Acid battery. I wonder if it really
>> is a dry cell or if that is just a manufacturer's line?
>>
>> I recently bought one of the BB17-12 el-cheapo batteries to power an
>> electric gate. It is the same size and shape as the PC-680 but it is
>> labeled as a valve-regulated, sealed lead acid, rechargeable battery.
>> It seems to work flawlessly, though I don't think I would trust it in my
>> airplane.
>
> There are a lot of words used to describe these batteries. Here is some
> nomenclature that might help this make sense:
>
> Lead-acid -- describes the chemistry. Electrical energy is stored as a
> chemical change in lead plates using a sulphuric acid electrolyte. All of
> the batteries we use in our airplanes are lead-acid unless they are NiCd.
>
> sealed lead-acid -- you can't add water to it.
>
> AGM -- absorbed glass mat. The liquid acid electrolyte is held between
> the plates by capillary action in a thin fiberglass mat so you don't need
> a lot of electrolyte. Since there is no free electrolyte to slosh around
> you can use it in any position. (Imagine water held in a paper towel if
> you want to get an idea of what I mean.)
>
> starved electrolyte -- AGM.
>
> "Dry" lead-acid or "dry cell" -- starved electrolyte or AGM.
>
> Gel-cell -- the sulphuric acid electrolyte is mixed with a binder that
> turns it into something like Jello. This keeps it between the plates and
> it can't slosh around. You can use these in any position.
>
> Recombinant gas or RG -- this means that the excess hydrogen and oxygen
> that would be allowed to bubble away at the end of the charge cycle are
> made to recombine back into water at the plate. This keeps you from
> having to add water as it doesn't escape into the atmosphere like a
> typical "wet" battery but stays in the battery. Both AGM and Gel-cell
> batteries are RG batteries.
>
> Valve regulated, valve regulated lead-acid, or VRLA -- If you overcharge
> an RG battery it will produce H2 and O2 faster than they can recombine.
> The result is excess gas trapped in the cell. If the overcharge is
> removed and the battery left to its own devices the H2 and O2 will
> eventually recombine. If the overcharge is allowed to continue the
> pressure in the cell continues to rise. Each cell has a pop-off valve
> that will relieve the pressure before the case bursts. The only problem
> is, if this happens the water that is needed inside the battery escapes
> into the atmosphere and now you have shortened the life and capacity of
> the battery. As far as I have been able to learn, all AGM and gel-cell
> batteries are VRLA batteries.
>
> There are two big differences between AGM and gel-cell batteries:
>
> 1. They need different charging and float voltages. Gel-cells like about
> 13.8V for charge and about 13.4V for float (charger applied all the time
> to keep the battery maintained at full charge). Flooded cell batteries
> and AGMs like about 14.2V for charge but only about 13.2V for float.
> (These numbers are for a temperature of 20C. The voltages need to be
> decreased as the temperature rises or increased if the temps are cold.)
>
> 2. AGMs are *great* for delivering a LOT of current from a relatively
> small cell. This makes them great for starting engines. Gel-cells are not
> as good for delivering a lot of current but will give you more
> charge/discharge cycles in deep cycle usage. In all probability you want
> an AGM battery for your airplane but only if you are taking care to
> prevent overcharge.
>
> So you want to know whether the battery is AGM or gel-cell. Just having
> someone tell you VRLA or "sealed" doesn't tell you much.
>
> With regard to overcharge: neither AGMs nor gel-cells will tolerate
> overcharge very well. It kills them pretty quickly. One interesting thing
> is that you can split the difference between charge and float voltages on
> a gel-cell and still get good service but need only one voltage. You
> can't do that very well with an AGM battery.
>
> OTOH flooded cells handle overcharge pretty well. It just makes them
> bubble and give off H2 and O2 gas. As long as you don't overheat the
> battery with a gross overcharge you fix the overcharge by adding more
> water.
>
> So the "el-cheapo" battery you have and the PC-680 are both "valve
> regulated, sealed lead-acid, rechargeable" batteries. In all probability
> both are AGMs as well. I am sure your "el-cheap" battery would work just
> fine in your airplane too.
>
>
> 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
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: Glass Panel Layout |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "glaesers" <glaesers@wideopenwest.com>
I think you're on the right track. You might want to consider TruTrak's
Pictoral Pilot or ADI Pilot instead of the Digitrack. They give you both an
instrument and AP in one unit, and both are IMHO easier to use than either a
T&B or TC.
You'd have to query Dynon/GRT/TruTrak about their take on failure modes. I
don't think there is enough operational experience with any of these units
to know what failure modes they will present. Murphy's Law hasn't been
repealed, so having to 'arbitrate truth' is always a possibility.
I'm planning on a GRT Sport, 2 axis ADI Pilot, ASI, Altimeter, and compass.
If the Sport and ADI disagree, I figure the Altimeter, ASI and Compass will
help me decide which is correct. Chances of both failing on one flight are
so slim I'm not even bothering with a third unit (same philosophy as a
traditional six-pack). If you stick with the 2.25 T&B, you'll have a tie
breaker.
That's my 2 cents...
Dennis Glaeser
RV7A - Fuselage
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Paul McAllister"
Hi all,
Reading the posting on T&B's vs. TC has prompted me to seek a bit of input
on my panel. I have a Europa with a vacuum powered standard 6 pack. It had
always been my intention to upgrade to a glass panel once I thought that the
technology was mature. Well at 450 hours my vacuum pump is making sad
noises so I have to think about doing something soon.
My current setup has a vacuum warning light and a Navaids in place of a TC.
My initial thought was to purchase either a Grand Rapids or Dynon EFIS D100
and add to my panel a T&B, ASI, Altimeter and a TruTrack wing leveler, but
now I am starting to think of being a bit more conventional.
My current thinking is to have a standard 6 pac layout with a Dynon D10 in
the place of the AH, a 2.25 T&B, a Digitrack in the place of the DG. The
ASI, altimeter, and VSI's would be in the conventional places.
Design thoughts:
- Ebus feeding the D10 & T&B
- Dynon battery back up in case a total power failure
- TruTrack in case of a D10 failure
- T&B, compass in case of failure of the TruTrack
- Conventional /familiar panel layout for IMC work
Open items:
- Is there any failure modes of the D10 that other than "blank screen"
- Same for the TruTrack
- Is there a failure mode that would force me to arbitrate who is "telling
the truth"
I know that my thoughts and questions require speculative answers, but I
would appreciate some input from the forum
Paul
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: Panel layout |
Bob & the other Guys,
Thank you all for your suggestions. That is exactly why I posted the
original question. I agree with the ideas of using glass panels. That is
what I really want. However, with my limited funding, I would rather spend
the $1k on a good carburetor which will allow safer flying. I need to be
frugal with the parts I use and GET IN THE AIR. At the same time I do not
want to skimp on the quality. That is why I plan to make removable panels
that can be redesigned, upgraded and replaced at a later date.
Thank you Barry, the page on AS is exactly what I was looking for. (Page
377, 2003/2004 catalog) I will be going to the Corona AS store next week and
will get an updated catalog.
I have gotten a response from someone who might host my panel layout Visio
templates for download. If anyone is interested, we will post when
available.
Bob,
You did not miss read my post; I did not fully explain my self. Also, I
know, I know, the instruments are 3-1/8 inch, not 3-3/8 in. That was a typo
error :).
Dave Thompson
dave.thompson@verizon.net
Message 12
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Ammeter surge problem |
>posted by: Gary Liming <gary@liming.org>
>I am helping a friend with his RV and he is experiencing a strange
>problem.
Take a deep breath, it is no big deal.
Let me guess you have a Van's ammeter?
Make sure the ammeter wires are ROUTED away from the
COM radio wiring and COAX. (also intercom wire separation).
Also make sure the shunt is isolated for other wires.
Consider twisting the wire PAIR between the shunt and ammeter.
You can also consider a shielded pair cable and ground one
end of the shield (either end, does not matter).
CHECK the Com radios antenna. It must be grounded
and check to make sure the coax and connectors are
good. Good means good connections and good antenna
ground.
Consider shielding the back of the gauge or relocating it.
Shield with copper tape or make a metal box or cover.
Van's knows about this and you can ask, but last I heard
they said it was normal. In deed many just ignore it and
live with it, getting use to it.
Good luck.
---------------------------------
Next-gen email? Have it all with the all-new Yahoo! Mail Beta.
Message 13
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Glass Panel Layout and homemade rate gyro T&B |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Ken <klehman@albedo.net>
The compass may not help as a tie-breaker if a wing leveller goes wonky.
I picked up a used 28 volt T&B for $20. Had planned to rig up a power
supply but it seems to work fine on 12 volts. I had hoped that someone
would market a cheap solid state T&B or publish some plans for such. Has
anyone played with rate gyros or have a feel for what it would take? An
analog meter display is all I'm after. Yup I've got two T&B's too but
I am willing to play with a simple light alternative if only for an
educational venture. Could such a thing be done easilly?
Ken
glaesers wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "glaesers" <glaesers@wideopenwest.com>
>
>I think you're on the right track. You might want to consider TruTrak's
>Pictoral Pilot or ADI Pilot instead of the Digitrack. They give you both an
>instrument and AP in one unit, and both are IMHO easier to use than either a
>T&B or TC.
>
>You'd have to query Dynon/GRT/TruTrak about their take on failure modes. I
>don't think there is enough operational experience with any of these units
>to know what failure modes they will present. Murphy's Law hasn't been
>repealed, so having to 'arbitrate truth' is always a possibility.
>
>I'm planning on a GRT Sport, 2 axis ADI Pilot, ASI, Altimeter, and compass.
>If the Sport and ADI disagree, I figure the Altimeter, ASI and Compass will
>help me decide which is correct. Chances of both failing on one flight are
>so slim I'm not even bothering with a third unit (same philosophy as a
>traditional six-pack). If you stick with the 2.25 T&B, you'll have a tie
>breaker.
>
>That's my 2 cents...
>
>Dennis Glaeser
>RV7A - Fuselage
>
>
Message 14
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: CB Size requirements? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Jim Oke <wjoke@shaw.ca>
I cannot say for sure for a KX125, but some members of the King
equipment line use an edge connector which slides onto a main circuit
board. I have been told the thin copper foil on a typical circuit board
is marginal to take the full supply current at a single point of contact
and so provision is made to transfer the power through two pins of the
edge connector. This is to enhance reliability over the long term by
avoiding "burning" the PC land.
The circuit diagrams will show two pins "bridged" together for this
purpose. Same thing applies for the ground as the same amount of current
has to "return" though the ground eventually. Whether a single large
conductor (connected to two pins) or a pair of small wires (each going
to one pin) is used is as much a matter of manufacturing and
installation convenience as anything else.
Jim Oke
Wpg., MB
RV-6A C-GKGZ
Jim Corner wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Jim Corner <jcorner@shaw.ca>
>
> I too will soon be installing a KX 125 and was able to purchase an
> installation manual
> from AC Spruce.
>
> The manual recommends a 10 amp fuse as deduced below, and shows a max
> transmit
> power consumption of 6 amps.
>
> It also recommends power wiring to be 2 #18 AWG wires to the circuit
> breaker
> and also 2 #18 wires to ground. What would be the advantage of this
> over the 12 and 14 AWG
> being installed by Barry? More resistance to breakage or is there
> another reason?
>
> Jim Corner
>
> Kitfox 5 under construction.
> Kitfox 2 flying
>
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: Glass Panel Layout and homemade rate gyro T&B |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: OldBob Siegfried <oldbob@beechowners.com>
Good Afternoon Ken,
You will want to be a bit careful when using the
twenty-eight volt unit at a lower voltage. The
sensitivity is drastically reduced. One needle width
will result in a much higher rate of turn than the
standard three degrees per second.
Incidentally, is the one you purchased equipped with a
single dog house in the center or is there an
additional doghouse on each side of the one in the
center?
When using the ones with a single doghouse in the
center, the rate of turn should be three degrees per
second when the moving needle is just barely touching
the side of the single dog house. That was referred to
as a one needle width turn. The more modern T&Bs were
equipped with an additional dog house off to each side
of the center doghouse. Lining up the needle with
either side dog house should provide a standard rated
turn.
For What It Is Worth, back in the days when there was
a lot of uncontrolled airspace available in the good
old USA, we used twenty-eight volt T&Bs in our
gliders.
By powering them with twelve volts, or a little less,
the sensitivity was reduced sufficiently such that we
could use the T&B to thermal in cloud.
We would get below a building cumulonimbus, get the
core centered, then continue circling as we enjoyed
the high speed lift up to eighteen or twenty thousand
feet. At that point, we would center the needle and
shoot out the side of the cloud.. What a blast.
I think a solid state T&B would be great, though the
presentation doesn't have to be in the same form as
the T&B. Personally, I think anything that makes your
mind think of turn would do the job. It is my belief
that trying to get the wings level is what is
confusing folks.
There is no doubt that when the wings are level and
the ball is in the middle, you are not likely to be
turning, but it is very hard to believe that little
wings level instrument when your mind tells you it is
all wrong.
It is my totally unproven hypothesis that our minds
are better able to deal with stopping the turn than
with putting the wing where it is telling us it does
not belong.
That is true regardless of which way we think is up.
That is why I believe the T&B to be an advantage over
the TC. There is absolutely no doubt that an
artificial horizon is easier to use than either a TC
or a T&B. The problem is that they do tumble. It has
also not yet been determined just how well the glass
panel units could be used for unusual attitude
recovery. When you are in a spin, or even a grave yard
spiral, it gets very confusing trying to recover using
an artificial horizon, mechanical or electronic.
Stopping the turn is most likely to be the action that
will initiate recovery.
A turn can be stopped by using a TC, but not as
positively. The TC shows both roll and yaw. That makes
it difficult to use in a spin recovery.
If you are going to design a new instrument that will
tell us when we are turning, why don't you make it
show a picture of an airplane as if you were looking
down on the top of that airplane?
If our airplane is flying straight ahead, the little
airplane on instrument should have it's nose pointed
at the top of the instrument. If our airplane is
turning, the little airplane in the instrument should
show the nose over toward the side toward which we are
turning.
Once again, it is my totally unproven thought that our
mind will accept that sort of an indication when it
will fight us as to whether or not the wings are
level.
We didn't start to have all of these horrible crashes
following a primary instrument failure before the TC
came on the scene. It may have just been a
coincidence, but I think the emphasis on keeping the
wings level rather than stopping the turn is what
precipitated all of the problems.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
Do Not Archive
--- Ken <klehman@albedo.net> wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Ken
> <klehman@albedo.net>
>
> The compass may not help as a tie-breaker if a wing
> leveller goes wonky.
> I picked up a used 28 volt T&B for $20. Had planned
> to rig up a power
> supply but it seems to work fine on 12 volts. I had
> hoped that someone
> would market a cheap solid state T&B or publish some
> plans for such. Has
> anyone played with rate gyros or have a feel for
> what it would take? An
> analog meter display is all I'm after. Yup I've
> got two T&B's too but
> I am willing to play with a simple light alternative
> if only for an
> educational venture. Could such a thing be done
> easilly?
> Ken
>
> glaesers wrote:
>
> >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "glaesers"
> <glaesers@wideopenwest.com>
> >
> >I think you're on the right track. You might want
> to consider TruTrak's
> >Pictoral Pilot or ADI Pilot instead of the
> Digitrack. They give you both an
> >instrument and AP in one unit, and both are IMHO
> easier to use than either a
> >T&B or TC.
> >
> >You'd have to query Dynon/GRT/TruTrak about their
> take on failure modes. I
> >don't think there is enough operational experience
> with any of these units
> >to know what failure modes they will present.
> Murphy's Law hasn't been
> >repealed, so having to 'arbitrate truth' is always
> a possibility.
> >
> >I'm planning on a GRT Sport, 2 axis ADI Pilot, ASI,
> Altimeter, and compass.
> >If the Sport and ADI disagree, I figure the
> Altimeter, ASI and Compass will
> >help me decide which is correct. Chances of both
> failing on one flight are
> >so slim I'm not even bothering with a third unit
> (same philosophy as a
> >traditional six-pack). If you stick with the 2.25
> T&B, you'll have a tie
> >breaker.
> >
> >That's my 2 cents...
> >
> >Dennis Glaeser
> >RV7A - Fuselage
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> browse
> Subscriptions page,
> FAQ,
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
>
>
> Admin.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: Glass Panel Layout and homemade rate gyro T&B |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
On Jun 25, 2006, at 5:19 PM, Ken wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Ken <klehman@albedo.net>
>
> The compass may not help as a tie-breaker if a wing leveller goes
> wonky. I picked up a used 28 volt T&B for $20. Had planned to rig
> up a power supply but it seems to work fine on 12 volts. I had
> hoped that someone would market a cheap solid state T&B or publish
> some plans for such. Has anyone played with rate gyros or have a
> feel for what it would take?
The Gyro House in Auburn, CA, built one. I don't know if they are
still selling it.
> An analog meter display is all I'm after. Yup I've got two T&B's
> too but I am willing to play with a simple light alternative if
> only for an educational venture. Could such a thing be done easilly?
Check into the cheap Murata gyros they use to stabilize RC model
helicopters.
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
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: Glass Panel Layout and homemade rate gyro T&B |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
On Jun 25, 2006, at 6:26 PM, OldBob Siegfried wrote:
> There is no doubt that when the wings are level and
> the ball is in the middle, you are not likely to be
> turning,
You can remove the phrase "likely to be" from the previous sentence.
> but it is very hard to believe that little
> wings level instrument when your mind tells you it is
> all wrong.
That is one of the things that you have to learn to deal with when
flying on instruments. You inner-ear isn't suitable.
>
> It is my totally unproven hypothesis that our minds
> are better able to deal with stopping the turn than
> with putting the wing where it is telling us it does
> not belong.
The thinking part of the brain has to be able to override the feeling
part of the brain if you want to stay alive. You just have to do it.
But you do have a good point. When all else fails set the trim to
something rational, set the throttle according to the airspeed trend,
let go of the yoke, and stop the turn with the rudder. It works.
> That is true regardless of which way we think is up.
>
> That is why I believe the T&B to be an advantage over
> the TC. There is absolutely no doubt that an
> artificial horizon is easier to use than either a TC
> or a T&B. The problem is that they do tumble.
Not all tumble. A 360 degree free vertical gyro cannot tumble as
there are no stops. That is what is in virtually every military
aircraft. I used the one in my CJ6 for setting my lines during
aerobatics because I didn't have guide lines on the canopy or a wire
frame on the wing time. It never tumbled, even when doing snaps or
hammerheads. The only problem is if the gyro has some sort of
erection mechanism that causes it to drift when you are not flying
straight and level.
> It has
> also not yet been determined just how well the glass
> panel units could be used for unusual attitude
> recovery. When you are in a spin, or even a grave yard
> spiral, it gets very confusing trying to recover using
> an artificial horizon, mechanical or electronic.
> Stopping the turn is most likely to be the action that
> will initiate recovery.
Fine. I have several ways to tell I am not turning. If the wings are
level I cannot be turning. If the heading indicator isn't changing I
am not turning. If the T&B has the needle in the center I am not
turning. I have to compare these things to make sure one of them
isn't lying to me.
(BTW, I agree with you that the T&B is the simplest and most reliable
gyro instrument in the panel and least likely to lie to you.)
>
> A turn can be stopped by using a TC, but not as
> positively. The TC shows both roll and yaw. That makes
> it difficult to use in a spin recovery.
I agree.
>
> If you are going to design a new instrument that will
> tell us when we are turning, why don't you make it
> show a picture of an airplane as if you were looking
> down on the top of that airplane?
You mean like a heading indicator? That is precisely what it shows.
>
> If our airplane is flying straight ahead, the little
> airplane on instrument should have it's nose pointed
> at the top of the instrument. If our airplane is
> turning, the little airplane in the instrument should
> show the nose over toward the side toward which we are
> turning.
No, it should show the ground turning under us as we are our own
frame of reference. The nose of the airplane is always in front of
me. It never changes. Only the earth's relationship to me changes.
You need that egocentric viewpoint in order to hack seriously unusual
attitudes.
Another way of looking at it is that, if you normally fly aerobatics,
nothing is an unusual attitude. You just want to change from the
attitude you are in to another attitude, one that does not have your
velocity vector intersecting the plane of the earth.
>
> Once again, it is my totally unproven thought that our
> mind will accept that sort of an indication when it
> will fight us as to whether or not the wings are
> level.
When one is suffering from vertigo one's vestibular sense is lying to
them. At that point it doesn't matter what instruments you have, you
have to be able to interpret what they are ALL saying in order to
deduce the proper response. Wings level, nose up or down, rate of
turn, airspeed trend, altitude trend, and heading are all inputs to
the thinking part of the brain which then has to generate appropriate
control inputs regardless of what the vestibular sense says is going
on. Instrument failure -- any instrument failure -- just compounds
the problem. It is really hard to relax and say, "gee, which of these
is making sense," when you think you are going to die.
> We didn't start to have all of these horrible crashes
> following a primary instrument failure before the TC
> came on the scene. It may have just been a
> coincidence, but I think the emphasis on keeping the
> wings level rather than stopping the turn is what
> precipitated all of the problems.
Hmm, maybe. The FAA doesn't want us teaching spins anymore either (I
still do). I make my primary students do their hood work at night
when there are no other visual clues. (I am SOOO mean they tell me.)
I think that it is a lack of practice in recognizing and switching to
partial panel flight. It is a lack of understanding about how the
instruments work and how they fail. Pilots used to be able to
describe all the aircraft's systems and their failure modes. Now it
is hard to find a pilot who can describe the basic fuel or electrical
system in a C-150. Lots of things have changed.
And I suspect we are actually saying many of the same things --
agreeing violently as it were.
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
Message 18
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Glass Panel Layout and homemade rate gyro T&B |
In a message dated 6/25/2006 7:21:11 P.M. Central Standard Time,
brian-yak@lloyd.com writes:
You mean like a heading indicator? That is precisely what it shows.
Good Evening Brian,
No, there would be no heading information at all. It would be strictly a yaw
instrument, just like a T&B, but with a presentation that I hope would be a
little more intuitive to a low time aviator.
As I said before, I have no way of testing it out and I do not have the
technical skills to make a prototype to find out if I am all wet or not.
There are a few T&Bs that have the needle hinged in the center of the
instrument face. If you were to make a full circle to replace the turn needle
and
paint a picture of the airplane on that circle, you would have the
presentation I am thinking of.
Remember, what I want for the instrument is a picture of the top of the
airplane as if we were looking down on it from above, not a head on or tail view
like a horizon.
If the aircraft we were flying was not yawing, the little airplane would be
flying straight toward the top of the instrument. (Not moving, but pointing
that way). If a yaw or turn developed, it would show the airplane pointing to
the left or right just as does a turn needle.
For the test version, I would eliminate the inclinometer from the instrument
and mount one just below the new presentation. If my idea showed merit, it
could be built to include the inclinometer just as is the TC and the T&B.
I think it may be a little easier to learn to use than is the T&B, yet not
as confusing as the TC.
I've been wrong many times before. It would be nothing new if I am wrong on
this one!
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
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: CB Size requirements? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "europa flugzeug fabrik" <n3eu@comcast.net>
FLYaDIVE(at)aol.com wrote:
> Now here is a follow up question. I don't have much experience with radar, but
the Xponder only requires a 5 AMP CB; yet the power output of the unit is 250
Watts. How come such a low CB?
> I'm taking a WAG here, does it have to do with the Duty Cycle of the transmission?
Yes, the duty cycle of the 21 microsecond pulse train, which depends upon the number
of on bits sent. And then figure the number of pulse trains in our reply,
a function of distance and parameters of ATC's ATCRBS interrogator, like sweep
speed, interrogation rate, and antenna design. Finally, the average number
of interrogations we reply to, so the number of ATC sites within range, and
volume of TCAS planes lately talking to us. I reckon a mere 100mA worst case
might come out of all the math. Can't be much, as the capacitor which stores
the typical 1500V so we can put out peak power of 250W+ when an on bit is sent
isn't very big. The do have a warning sticker saying don't touch the wire part
of that puppy so you don't have a Homer Simpson moment.
Fred F.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=43009#43009
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: Glass Panel Layout and homemade rate gyro |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Ken <klehman@albedo.net>
Interesting info on the rate of turn Bob. I never noticed whether mine
has one or three doghouses. The unit was labelled oddly though by a
factor or 2 as I recall. I never knew why until now. However on 12 volts
it seems to be adequate for my purposes.
There is a company selling a portable attitude indicator that just uses
LED's. A search seems to indicate that there are rate gyros available
that would not be difficult to utilize as a T&B. The confusing display
was indeed the primary reason that I didn't like a TC even before I knew
of the tilted gyro issue.
I also always enjoy your postings.
Ken
OldBob Siegfried wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: OldBob Siegfried <oldbob@beechowners.com>
>
>Good Afternoon Ken,
>
>You will want to be a bit careful when using the
>twenty-eight volt unit at a lower voltage. The
>sensitivity is drastically reduced. One needle width
>will result in a much higher rate of turn than the
>standard three degrees per second.
>snip
>
Message 21
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Glass Panel Layout and homemade rate gyro T&B |
On Jun 25, 2006, at 9:23 PM, BobsV35B@aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 6/25/2006 7:21:11 P.M. Central Standard Time,
> brian-yak@lloyd.com writes:
> You mean like a heading indicator? That is precisely what it shows.
> Good Evening Brian,
>
> No, there would be no heading information at all. It would be
> strictly a yaw instrument, just like a T&B, but with a presentation
> that I hope would be a little more intuitive to a low time aviator.
>
> As I said before, I have no way of testing it out and I do not have
> the technical skills to make a prototype to find out if I am all
> wet or not.
And the HI wouldn't work anyway as it *WILL* tumble. I am forever
tumbling my heading gyro even tho' the AI works just peachy.
> There are a few T&Bs that have the needle hinged in the center of
> the instrument face. If you were to make a full circle to replace
> the turn needle and paint a picture of the airplane on that circle,
> you would have the presentation I am thinking of.
>
> Remember, what I want for the instrument is a picture of the top of
> the airplane as if we were looking down on it from above, not a
> head on or tail view like a horizon.
You know, you can train your mind to accept any input. For instance,
the Russian and Chinese AIs are upside-down in that they show pitch
reversed from what we expect. These AIs have the blue on the bottom
and brown on top. The horizon line goes up when you climb putting the
aircraft symbol in the blue and vice-versa. When flying IFR with
these instruments it takes me about 5 minutes to stop reacting
backwards in pitch. Still, my mind adapts pretty quickly and I am
then ready to go fly an ILS with it. It is from this that I don't
worry about the exact presentation as I know *I* can adapt to it with
training.
> If the aircraft we were flying was not yawing, the little airplane
> would be flying straight toward the top of the instrument. (Not
> moving, but pointing that way). If a yaw or turn developed, it
> would show the airplane pointing to the left or right just as does
> a turn needle.
Well, the needle probably works just as well.
Something like a HITS display would probably work best.
>
> For the test version, I would eliminate the inclinometer from the
> instrument and mount one just below the new presentation. If my
> idea showed merit, it could be built to include the inclinometer
> just as is the TC and the T&B.
>
> I think it may be a little easier to learn to use than is the T&B,
> yet not as confusing as the TC.
>
> I've been wrong many times before. It would be nothing new if I am
> wrong on this one!
I see where you are going but I guess that, for me, I am not sure it
would be any better than the T&B. I do agree that the roll
sensitivity of the TC can be annoying but it does give quicker
feedback that you are departing from wings-level. OTOH the T&B is not
so twitchy.
You know what would make a lot of sense? Go do some spiral-dive and
spin recovery under the hood using the T&B and then the TC to see if
one is appreciably easier. Real live test data is probably a lot more
useful than endless conjecture. I know I can recover from a spin
using the T&B but have never tried using a TC. Hmm, maybe I will go
out and do that.
>
> Happy Skies,
>
> Old Bob
> AKA
> Bob Siegfried
> Ancient Aviator
> Stearman N3977A
> Brookeridge Air Park LL22
> Downers Grove, IL 60516
> 630 985-8503
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 . . .
=97 Antoine de Saint-Exup=E9ry
Message 22
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Glass Panel Layout and homemade rate gyro T&B |
Bob et al,
You might take a look at the pictorial turn & bank here:
http://www.trutrakflightsystems.com/ttfsinstruments.html
It's sorta like a turn & bank and a turn co-ord together only the
horizon doesn't act backwards to what the horizon does, and all based on
an electronic gyro. You can get it combined with a one or two axis AP if
you want. See:
http://www.trutrakflightsystems.com/ttfsproducts.html
I haven't flown one and so can't comment on the usability compared to
iron turn & bank.
Pax,
Ed Holyoke
-----Original Message-----
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
BobsV35B@aol.com
Sent: Sunday, June 25, 2006 6:24 PM
gyro T&B
In a message dated 6/25/2006 7:21:11 P.M. Central Standard Time,
brian-yak@lloyd.com writes:
You mean like a heading indicator? That is precisely what it shows.
Good Evening Brian,
No, there would be no heading information at all. It would be strictly a
yaw instrument, just like a T&B, but with a presentation that I hope
would be a little more intuitive to a low time aviator.
As I said before, I have no way of testing it out and I do not have the
technical skills to make a prototype to find out if I am all wet or not.
There are a few T&Bs that have the needle hinged in the center of the
instrument face. If you were to make a full circle to replace the turn
needle and paint a picture of the airplane on that circle, you would
have the presentation I am thinking of.
Remember, what I want for the instrument is a picture of the top of the
airplane as if we were looking down on it from above, not a head on or
tail view like a horizon.
If the aircraft we were flying was not yawing, the little airplane would
be flying straight toward the top of the instrument. (Not moving, but
pointing that way). If a yaw or turn developed, it would show the
airplane pointing to the left or right just as does a turn needle.
For the test version, I would eliminate the inclinometer from the
instrument and mount one just below the new presentation. If my idea
showed merit, it could be built to include the inclinometer just as is
the TC and the T&B.
I think it may be a little easier to learn to use than is the T&B, yet
not as confusing as the TC.
I've been wrong many times before. It would be nothing new if I am wrong
on this one!
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8503
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: | AMP CPC connector help |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Erich_Weaver@URSCorp.com
Im looking around for decent quality connectors to use for the multiple
wires that go to the pitch and roll servos on my autopilot - all 22 or 20
awg wires. After a few hours of intense brow furrowing, I finally started
making sense of the voluminous choices on the Mouser web site, but a few
questions remain. I think I have it narrowed down to either the series 1
or series 2 AMP CPC connectors - see
http://www.mouser.com/catalog/626/957.pdf
Series 1 is described as having "size 16" contacts, while series 2 has
"size 20". Not sure what that means - does it matter? Secondly, which (if
any) of the pins and sockets available for the series 1 or series 2
connectors can be crimped using my B&C d-sub crimping tool?
Could someone familiar with the AMP CPC connectors steer me in the right
direction?
thanks
Erich Weaver
This e-mail and any attachments are confidential. If you receive this
message in error or are not the intended recipient, you should not retain,
distribute, disclose or use any of this information and you should destroy
the e-mail and any attachments or copies.
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: AMP CPC connector help |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Steve Allison <stevea@svpal.org>
Erich_Weaver@URSCorp.com wrote:
> Im looking around for decent quality connectors to use for the multiple
> wires that go to the pitch and roll servos on my autopilot - all 22 or 20
> awg wires.
>
> I think I have it narrowed down to either the series 1
> or series 2 AMP CPC connectors
>
> Series 1 is described as having "size 16" contacts, while series 2 has
> "size 20". Not sure what that means - does it matter?
Looks like the "size 16" contacts are larger than the "size 20"
contacts. Size 20 is described as "high density", meaning more pins per
connector than "standard". More pins per connector means they have to
be smaller. This translates to lower current carrying capacity in high
density connector pins compared connector to standard pins. This may
not be a problem in an autopilot system, since the currents are not
large (given the 20 and 22 awg wires involved). You can find lots more
information by wading through the AMP website, finding the right catalog
section, etc.
> Secondly, which (if
> any) of the pins and sockets available for the series 1 or series 2
> connectors can be crimped using my B&C d-sub crimping tool?
Hard to tell without sifting through the appropriate AMP catalog. I
would be surprised if they were compatible with the d-sub tool (used
mine this weekend...works great). There are as many crimp tools out
there as connector contact styles. Few of them are cross compatible,
and a compatible tool is required to produce good crimps.
Some basic questions: Where in the autopilot system will these
connectors be located? Do you need connectors in the system in addition
to the ones on the servos and controllers? If additional connectors are
required, why not use d-subs? (they are cheap, reliable, and you already
have the crimp tool!! :-) )
Steve
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! --
|