---------------------------------------------------------- AeroElectric-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Wed 06/28/06: 24 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 02:42 AM - Re: Software in the cockpit (Scott Lewis) 2. 04:47 AM - Alternator failure. Info provided (Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)) 3. 05:48 AM - Re: Wire sizes (Derek K Sington) 4. 07:19 AM - Re: Wire sizes (Fiveonepw@aol.com) 5. 07:29 AM - Re: Software in the cockpit (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 6. 07:45 AM - Re: Alternator failure. Info provided (Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)) 7. 08:40 AM - Re: Alternator failure. Info provided (Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)) 8. 08:50 AM - Re: Alternator failure. Info provided (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 9. 08:55 AM - Re: Alternator failure. Info provided (Fiveonepw@aol.com) 10. 09:19 AM - Re: Avionics Stack - Single Point Grounding... (Hopperdhh@aol.com) 11. 10:14 AM - Re: Alternator failure. Info provided (Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)) 12. 11:14 AM - Re: Software in the cockpit (David M.) 13. 11:16 AM - Re: Alternator failure. Info provided (David M.) 14. 12:05 PM - Re: Alternator failure. Info provided (Brinker) 15. 12:56 PM - Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 16 Msgs - 06/27/06 (Lee Logan) 16. 02:33 PM - Re: regulator per z-13/8 (Frank Stringham) 17. 03:34 PM - Re: regulator per z-13/8 (Fiveonepw@aol.com) 18. 04:52 PM - 3ag panel mount fuse holder (Bill and Marsha) 19. 08:25 PM - Re: Alternator failure. Info provided (Richard Sipp) 20. 08:25 PM - Re: Software in the cockpit (Brian Lloyd) 21. 08:28 PM - Re: Alternator failure. Info provided (Brian Lloyd) 22. 08:56 PM - Re: 3ag panel mount fuse holder (Charlie Kuss) 23. 10:29 PM - Re: Software in the cockpit (Werner Schneider) 24. 11:05 PM - Software in the cockpit (DEAN PSIROPOULOS) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 02:42:13 AM PST US From: Scott Lewis Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Software in the cockpit --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Scott Lewis Brian Lloyd wrote: > Should we shoot/sue Bill Gates? No. He is making the product that people > seem to want. They want features more than they want reliability. Would > I fly behind any box that has a Microsoft product running in it? Not on > your life. I agree completely. You DO realise than the Garmin MX20 runs on a Windows NT Kernel, don't you?! ;-) Have fun, Scott Lewis RV-10 40172 do not archive ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 04:47:03 AM PST US From: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" Subject: AeroElectric-List: Alternator failure. Info provided After 250 hours my 14684 ND alternator finally gave way. Of course I was a thousand miles from home when it did. Went running around the big city of Denver for hours getting a replacement. Best I could come up with was a 14870 for a 1988 Chevy Sprint. Most auto part shops did not even show the 14684 number. Although the mount ears on the 14870 were in a different location, as was the bat post, I was able to finagle washers and new bolts to get her back up and flying for the ride home. The 14684 alternator I bought from Vans for my RV-8 behaves differently than the new 14870 Im now running. The 14684, once the field was excited, would keep charging as long as the pulley was turning. You could turn off the field and it would keep charging. The new 14870 will shut off when the field is off. I have the OV protection on a contactor. Also sometime during the alternator failure, my Lightspeed ignition blew its 3 amp fuse. Klaus said I should have a 5 amp in there anyway. I took the 14684 to an alternator shop for repair when I got home and he said it looked like the stator was cooked, but he could not get any parts for it. So its now a door stop. Information for the group if you happen to be on the road and cant find the 14684 locally. You can get the 14870 to work on your RV and a lyco mount with new bolts and washers to shim for alignment. Best Mike Stewart ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 05:48:09 AM PST US From: "Derek K Sington" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Wire sizes --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Derek K Sington" Hi Larry, As a fellow '7 builder, how much of the 22AWG that you bought was shielded? Many thanks, Derek Sington. -----Original Message----- [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of LarryRobertHelming Sent: 28 June 2006 02:46 --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "LarryRobertHelming" Lee, I can say after having wired and completed my RV7 last year that you will need lots of 22 AWG wire. I suggest you think of the colors you will use. Something like red for power wire, black for ground, and yellow or white for control. You will need some other size wires and 18 is one of them. You will also need some heavier wire but not great lengths. In the starter and alternator and battery cables you will need 2 and 4 awg wire. But you will mostly need 22 AWG. I originally bought several hundred feet and had to buy more. I wish I could tell you exactly how much of each color you need but I can't with any accuracy. Depends a lot on what your instruments and electrical needs are and type of plane. My system is 12V. Best wishes. Larry in Indiana ----- Original Message ----- Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2006 2:58 PM > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: lee.logan@gulfstream.com > > Oldest question in the book and perhaps heresy on this site, but here goes > anyway: Greg Richter "Aircraft Wiring for Smart People" recommends 18 and > 22 guage wire for nearly all requirements but presupposes a 24 volt system > per his recommendations. I'm at work and looking to order some of the > wire > for the next steps in my project and don't know what the equivalents would > be in a 12 volt system. Do I step up one size or two or is there some > other formula that applies? I have The Aeroelectric Connection at the > hangar but I need to order some of this from here at work. Any help? > > Lee... > > Lee Logan > Government Programs and Sales Support > Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation > Savannah, Georgia > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------ > > This e-mail message, including all attachments, is for the sole use of the > intended recipient(s) and may contain legally privileged and confidential > information. If you are not an intended recipient, you are hereby > notified > that you have either received this message in error or through > interception, and that any review, use, distribution, copying or > disclosure > of this message or its attachments is strictly prohibited and is subject > to > criminal and civil penalties. All personal messages express solely the > sender's views and not those of Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation. If you > received this message in error, please contact the sender by reply e-mail > and destroy all copies of the original message. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------ > > > ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 07:19:48 AM PST US From: Fiveonepw@aol.com Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Wire sizes In a message dated 6/28/06 7:54:25 AM Central Daylight Time, derek@sington.net writes: > how much of the 22AWG that you bought was shielded? >>>> Derek, this stuff is great for those runs where you need a feed and return going to the same place and back, such as mic and ptt. by using the shield as the return. I can't think of an application where you might use the shield as a "shield", but there may be. How much you need will depend on location of devices- I might have used less than 50' in my RV-6A. Mark ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 07:29:12 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Software in the cockpit --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" > > >Bob K, I'm going to vehemently disagree with the assertion that we can build >a simple autopilot and have it controlled by PocketPC type device that we >would not rely on. Humans don't work that way. Once it is discovered that >the PocketPC will fly the plane just dandy on a smooth air day, we start to >trust it. Still works in minor turbulence, we trust it a little more. We >take it into IMC and it starts to get the leans . . . an aviate issue >...unfortunately, we trust it >as it flies us into cumulous granite. . . . a navigate issue >. Do not put any software in control of >your airplane unless you trust it completely from the outset. I'm not >saying a autopilot should not be done, I'm saying that software that can not >be fully validated should not be considered. When you're relying on any combination of hardware/software, there needs to be a means by which failure to do the intended task can be monitored and annunciated immediately. For the dual, simple a/p to offer a high order of confidence (meaning that you intend never to touch the controls in clouds) then both a/p are powered up and providing course/steering data but only one motor is energized. You take course data from both autopilots and compare with with course data from a third (panel mounted nav) system. When you say "hold course", a $1.00 processor compares three course data values with the stored value of course-to-make-good and lights a light should any course data value vary from preset by some handy number, like +/-5 degrees. You also light a light when there is disagreement between any two sources by more than 5 degrees and finally, light a light should any signal disappear (the most likely failure mode). This level of software sophistication is easy to validate and separates the aviate task from the navigate task. When you plug much more sophisticated software and hardware in to steer one of the autopilots, the light will come on any time the dish-washer makes a course change whereupon you can hit the button to store a new course-to-make good that is watched by the other two sources on the same $1 jelly-bean processor. The same event light tells you when the autopilot-in-command wanders into the weeds. The segmented, fire-walled approach encourages OBAM aircraft world development of convenience while keeping the important hardware/software free of inevitable variability that pops up in any development program. The policy and procedure protocols for software development in certified aviation have fertilized huge organizations that are prone to unintended consequence just because of their size and complexity. Honeywell has become the "microsoft" of GA software. But devout discipleship at the Altar of Validation doesn't keep them from stepping into the occasional gopher hole. I'm not suggesting that "fully validated" software is a bad or unnecessary goal to strive for . . . but in the OBAM aircraft world, it's unlikely that were going to see a DO-178, Level A qualification on ANY offerings. I'll suggest that building a firewall between simple save-your-life and the more complex but convenient, dish-washing-silver-polishing system is easy, prudent and greatly reduces risks. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 07:45:26 AM PST US From: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Alternator failure. Info provided Yes the new alternator 14870 is a 55amp alternator. So was the old one. It's a ND bought from Autozone in stock, lifetime warrantee whos receipt is now permanently in the plane. The ears were oriented correctly, it was the ear spacing that was off. I run at 12 amps normally. Damn all these alternator problems anyway. In 1800 hours of RV flying in 2 planes, this is my 5th alternator. ARGH! A friend recommended I put the 4" pulley on. Im very tight in the cowl with my 6cyl installation. Not sure if I could get it in there. Mike _____ Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2006 9:46 AM Mike Thanks for the report. Could you tell me what brand or what auto parts store you found your alternator at? Are these the 35 amp or 60 amp models? FYI, you can easily "clock" the two case housing halves to get the ears oriented like your original alternator. Many of the various alternator part numbers differ only in how the case halve are oriented to each other, as required by the auto manufacturer's requirements. I'm a firm believer in using parts which are automotive based and readily available. Your 4 hour ordeal is proof of the wisdom of this. I like the starter shown below. It's off of a Toyota pick up truck. See http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Airboat-Starter-forTextron-Lycoming-Engin es-149tfw-NR_W0QQcmdZViewItemQQcategoryZ26439QQihZ002QQitemZ4580254772QQ tcZphoto FYI for maximum alternator life, your nominal current draw from the alternator shouldn't exceed 60% of it's rated output. Forcing a 35 amp unit to produce 25 amps for long periods is a sure route to short life. The rectifier diodes are heat sensitive. These items are the weak link in most alternators. Cheapo rebuilds use cheapo diodes. Real ND, NAPA or other name brand diodes go a long way to ensuring long life. Charlie Kuss After 250 hours my 14684 ND alternator finally gave way. Of course I was a thousand miles from home when it did. Went running around the big city of Denver for hours getting a replacement. Best I could come up with was a 14870 for a 1988 Chevy Sprint. Most auto part shops did not even show the 14684 number. Although the mount ears on the 14870 were in a different location, as was the bat post, I was able to finagle washers and new bolts to get her back up and flying for the ride home. The 14684 alternator I bought from Vans for my RV-8 behaves differently than the new 14870 Im now running. The 14684, once the field was excited, would keep charging as long as the pulley was turning. You could turn off the field and it would keep charging. The new 14870 will shut off when the field is off. I have the OV protection on a contactor. Also sometime during the alternator failure, my Lightspeed ignition blew its 3 amp fuse. Klaus said I should have a 5 amp in there anyway. I took the 14684 to an alternator shop for repair when I got home and he said it looked like the stator was cooked, but he could not get any parts for it. So its now a door stop. Information for the group if you happen to be on the road and cant find the 14684 locally. You can get the 14870 to work on your RV and a lyco mount with new bolts and washers to shim for alignment. Best Mike Stewart ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 08:40:28 AM PST US From: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Alternator failure. Info provided Uh-oh...I have an Autozone 60A (Toyota Camry) alt on my 7a (not flying yet)...Hope I did'nr make a bad decision here. BTW...Autozone have your name in their computer so they can find you by your phone number if you show up with a dead part a long ways from home. Frank Do not archive ________________________________ [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta) Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2006 7:42 AM Yes the new alternator 14870 is a 55amp alternator. So was the old one. It's a ND bought from Autozone in stock, lifetime warrantee whos receipt is now permanently in the plane. The ears were oriented correctly, it was the ear spacing that was off. I run at 12 amps normally. Damn all these alternator problems anyway. In 1800 hours of RV flying in 2 planes, this is my 5th alternator. ARGH! A friend recommended I put the 4" pulley on. Im very tight in the cowl with my 6cyl installation. Not sure if I could get it in there. Mike ________________________________ Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2006 9:46 AM Mike Thanks for the report. Could you tell me what brand or what auto parts store you found your alternator at? Are these the 35 amp or 60 amp models? FYI, you can easily "clock" the two case housing halves to get the ears oriented like your original alternator. Many of the various alternator part numbers differ only in how the case halve are oriented to each other, as required by the auto manufacturer's requirements. I'm a firm believer in using parts which are automotive based and readily available. Your 4 hour ordeal is proof of the wisdom of this. I like the starter shown below. It's off of a Toyota pick up truck. See http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Airboat-Starter-forTextron-Lycoming-Engin es-149tfw-NR_W0QQcmdZViewItemQQcategoryZ26439QQihZ002QQitemZ4580254772QQ tcZphoto FYI for maximum alternator life, your nominal current draw from the alternator shouldn't exceed 60% of it's rated output. Forcing a 35 amp unit to produce 25 amps for long periods is a sure route to short life. The rectifier diodes are heat sensitive. These items are the weak link in most alternators. Cheapo rebuilds use cheapo diodes. Real ND, NAPA or other name brand diodes go a long way to ensuring long life. Charlie Kuss After 250 hours my 14684 ND alternator finally gave way. Of course I was a thousand miles from home when it did. Went running around the big city of Denver for hours getting a replacement. Best I could come up with was a 14870 for a 1988 Chevy Sprint. Most auto part shops did not even show the 14684 number. Although the mount ears on the 14870 were in a different location, as was the bat post, I was able to finagle washers and new bolts to get her back up and flying for the ride home. The 14684 alternator I bought from Vans for my RV-8 behaves differently than the new 14870 Im now running. The 14684, once the field was excited, would keep charging as long as the pulley was turning. You could turn off the field and it would keep charging. The new 14870 will shut off when the field is off. I have the OV protection on a contactor. Also sometime during the alternator failure, my Lightspeed ignition blew its 3 amp fuse. Klaus said I should have a 5 amp in there anyway. I took the 14684 to an alternator shop for repair when I got home and he said it looked like the stator was cooked, but he could not get any parts for it. So its now a door stop. Information for the group if you happen to be on the road and cant find the 14684 locally. You can get the 14870 to work on your RV and a lyco mount with new bolts and washers to shim for alignment. Best Mike Stewart ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 08:50:33 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Alternator failure. Info provided --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" At 10:42 AM 6/28/2006 -0400, you wrote: >Yes the new alternator 14870 is a 55amp alternator. So was the old one. > >It s a ND bought from Autozone in stock, lifetime warrantee whos receipt >is now permanently in the plane. > >The ears were oriented correctly, it was the ear spacing that was off. I >run at 12 amps normally. > >Damn all these alternator problems anyway. In 1800 hours of RV flying in 2 >planes, this is my 5th alternator. ARGH! > >A friend recommended I put the 4 pulley on. Im very tight in the cowl with >my 6cyl installation. Not sure if I could get it in there. Why the 4" pulley? Running an alternator "fast" bears on mechanical wear rate issues. Aside from B&C's conclusion that "fast" alternators were at-risk for vibration induced bearing failures (for which they elected to carefully balance new alternators) there are no issues I'm aware of that warrant slowing the alternator down with a larger pulley. Alternator speed does not bear on electrical failures unless they are aggravated by heating where turning faster moves more air. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 08:55:42 AM PST US From: Fiveonepw@aol.com Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Alternator failure. Info provided In a message dated 6/28/06 9:54:14 AM Central Daylight Time, mstewart@iss.net writes: > 5th alternator. ARGH! MIke- any B&Cs in this gang of five? Mark do not archive ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 09:19:23 AM PST US From: Hopperdhh@aol.com Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Avionics Stack - Single Point Grounding... John, I think that you are doing the right thing for the wrong reason. The reaso n for connection the UNGROUNDED terminal of a battery first is that if you short your wrench to ground, you won't melt your wrench down or set somethi ng on fire or burn yourself, etc. When the UNGROUNDED terminal is connected, then connect the ground and if you short your wrench to ground, nothing will happen either. If we used positive ground in our airplanes, I would suggest that you connect the negative terminal first. It really doesn't matter if electrons or holes are considered "current." Ben (Franklin) guessed wrong and all the universities still teach positive current flow. Oh well! Dan Hopper (EE -- retired) RV-7A do not archive In a message dated 6/26/2006 11:47:21 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, johnwcox@pacificnw.com writes: I am no EE but in A & P school they were quite clear that electrons come from the negative terminal. That is why the positive is always connected f irst and the negative terminal is connected last. The better the negative (Ground) path =93 =9CPath of least resistance=9D . I know a straight line between two points. The electrons will always chose the lazy way. Still an important idea for high quality ground connections. John Cox - $00.02 ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 10:14:28 AM PST US From: "Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta)" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Alternator failure. Info provided No. First 3 were the old vans 35 amp alt. . 79 Honda Civic was the application as I recall. Next 2 were the 14684 ND ones. Mike _____ [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Fiveonepw@aol.com Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2006 11:53 AM In a message dated 6/28/06 9:54:14 AM Central Daylight Time, mstewart@iss.net writes: 5th alternator. ARGH! MIke- any B&Cs in this gang of five? Mark do not archive ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 11:14:48 AM PST US From: "David M." Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Software in the cockpit --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "David M." Very well said, Robert. David M. software weenie who is writing his own personal version of FADEC, autopilot, highway-in-the-sky, and etc. :) Of course, it's taking me a very long time. Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" > > > >> >> >> Bob K, I'm going to vehemently disagree with the assertion that we can >> build >> a simple autopilot and have it controlled by PocketPC type device that we >> would not rely on. Humans don't work that way. Once it is discovered >> that >> the PocketPC will fly the plane just dandy on a smooth air day, we >> start to >> trust it. Still works in minor turbulence, we trust it a little >> more. We >> take it into IMC and it starts to get the leans > > > . . . an aviate issue > >> ...unfortunately, we trust it >> as it flies us into cumulous granite. > > > . . . a navigate issue > >> . Do not put any software in control of >> your airplane unless you trust it completely from the outset. I'm not >> saying a autopilot should not be done, I'm saying that software that >> can not >> be fully validated should not be considered. > > > When you're relying on any combination of hardware/software, there > needs to be a means by which failure to do the intended task can > be monitored and annunciated immediately. For the dual, simple > a/p to offer a high order of confidence (meaning that you intend > <<>> ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 11:16:11 AM PST US From: "David M." Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Alternator failure. Info provided --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "David M." Over the years, I've have terrible luck with Autozone electrical items, alternators, starters, and etc. I won't put them on my cars now. Autozone does make good on the warranty but I hate having to replace things multiple times. On a plane, the risk is high. Get one from a reputable jobber. Cost is about the same. David M. Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis) wrote: > Uh-oh...I have an Autozone 60A (Toyota Camry) alt on my 7a (not flying > yet)...Hope I did'nr make a bad decision here. > > BTW...Autozone have your name in their computer so they can find you by > your phone number if you show up with a dead part a long ways from home. > > Frank > ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 12:05:58 PM PST US From: "Brinker" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Alternator failure. Info provided --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Brinker" AMEN ----- Original Message ----- Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2006 1:14 PM > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "David M." > > Over the years, I've have terrible luck with Autozone electrical items, > alternators, starters, and etc. I won't put them on my cars now. > Autozone does make good on the warranty but I hate having to replace > things multiple times. On a plane, the risk is high. Get one from a > reputable jobber. Cost is about the same. > > David M. > > > Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis) wrote: > >> Uh-oh...I have an Autozone 60A (Toyota Camry) alt on my 7a (not flying >> yet)...Hope I did'nr make a bad decision here. >> >> BTW...Autozone have your name in their computer so they can find you by >> your phone number if you show up with a dead part a long ways from home. >> >> Frank >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________ Time: 12:56:13 PM PST US From: "Lee Logan" Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 16 Msgs - 06/27/06 You guys have all been a great help. Thanks!! Lee... ________________________________ Message 16 ____________________________________ Time: 02:33:45 PM PST US From: "Frank Stringham" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: regulator per z-13/8 --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Frank Stringham" I am in the electrical install planning stage for an RV7A. I will follow the z-13/8 model. Now for the question???The plan suggests using a Ford regulator (VR166) on the main alternator. What has been the good/bad/ugly of this by those that may have used it. Frank @ sgu and slc.........wiring.......... ________________________________ Message 17 ____________________________________ Time: 03:34:48 PM PST US From: Fiveonepw@aol.com Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: regulator per z-13/8 In a message dated 06/28/2006 4:37:03 PM Central Daylight Time, fstringham@hotmail.com writes: What has been the good/bad/ugly of this by those that may have used it. >>> My $12 VR166 type regulator from Advance Auto Parts has worked perfectly for 3 years and 335 hours on my Z-11 RV-6A with B&C L-40 alternator, separate LVWM and Bob's OVP. You can see the installation here: http://websites.expercraft.com/n51pw/index.php?q=log_entry&log_id=7264 It's mounted on the battery holddown strap so it's near battery temp, and painted in red crinkle paint to match the valve covers- (oooooo!) Mark Phillips N51PW "Mojo" ________________________________ Message 18 ____________________________________ Time: 04:52:58 PM PST US From: "Bill and Marsha" Subject: AeroElectric-List: 3ag panel mount fuse holder Ive been looking for a panel mount fuse holder 3ag that will mount from the rear of the panel like switches do. Any one know of such an animal? Mfgr and or part #? Thanks Bill S ________________________________ Message 19 ____________________________________ Time: 08:25:17 PM PST US From: "Richard Sipp" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Alternator failure. Info provided Mike: Have a look at the new Plane Power alternators. http://www.plane-power.com/ I have one for the 10, nice piece of work and dirt simply to wire as well as a bolt on for the 540. Integrated regulator and overvoltage protection. Frogman ----- Original Message ----- From: Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta) To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2006 7:38 AM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Alternator failure. Info provided After 250 hours my 14684 ND alternator finally gave way. Of course I was a thousand miles from home when it did. Went running around the big city of Denver for hours getting a replacement. Best I could come up with was a 14870 for a 1988 Chevy Sprint. Most auto part shops did not even show the 14684 number. Although the mount ears on the 14870 were in a different location, as was the bat post, I was able to finagle washers and new bolts to get her back up and flying for the ride home. The 14684 alternator I bought from Vans for my RV-8 behaves differently than the new 14870 Im now running. The 14684, once the field was excited, would keep charging as long as the pulley was turning. You could turn off the field and it would keep charging. The new 14870 will shut off when the field is off. I have the OV protection on a contactor. Also sometime during the alternator failure, my Lightspeed ignition blew its 3 amp fuse. Klaus said I should have a 5 amp in there anyway. I took the 14684 to an alternator shop for repair when I got home and he said it looked like the stator was cooked, but he could not get any parts for it. So its now a door stop. Information for the group if you happen to be on the road and cant find the 14684 locally. You can get the 14870 to work on your RV and a lyco mount with new bolts and washers to shim for alignment. Best Mike Stewart ________________________________ Message 20 ____________________________________ Time: 08:25:16 PM PST US From: Brian Lloyd Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Software in the cockpit On Jun 28, 2006, at 5:32 AM, Scott Lewis wrote: > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Scott Lewis > > Brian Lloyd wrote: >> Should we shoot/sue Bill Gates? No. He is making the product that >> people seem to want. They want features more than they want >> reliability. Would I fly behind any box that has a Microsoft >> product running in it? Not on your life. > > I agree completely. > > You DO realise than the Garmin MX20 runs on a Windows NT Kernel, > don't you?! ;-) Damn. No chance of buying one of those then. 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 21 ____________________________________ Time: 08:28:07 PM PST US From: Brian Lloyd Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Alternator failure. Info provided On Jun 28, 2006, at 1:06 PM, Stewart, Michael (ISS Atlanta) wrote: > No. > > First 3 were the old vans 35 amp alt. . 79 Honda Civic was the > application as I recall. > > Next 2 were the 14684 ND ones. So, in terms of time and trouble, do you think that maybe the B&C alternator and controller would be cheaper in the long run? 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 ____________________________________ Time: 08:56:19 PM PST US From: Charlie Kuss Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: 3ag panel mount fuse holder Bill, Check out this new fuse block from Bussman. It is physically the same size as the older 10 fuse units, but holds 20 fuses. It mounts from the rear with 4 #8 screws. All the wiring exits the rear as well. It comes with a nice cover and it is of a "split bus" design, so you can use one block for both main and essential buses. See attached photos for comparison. I bought mine from MIH. He gives you the block, an assortment of connectors and the connector removal tool. Great guy to deal with. http://www.mihdirect.biz/ Charlie Kuss RV-8A cockpit wiring > > Ive been looking for a panel mount fuse holder 3ag that will mount > from the rear of the panel like switches do. Any one know of such > an animal? Mfgr and or part #? Thanks Bill S ________________________________ Message 23 ____________________________________ Time: 10:29:10 PM PST US From: Werner Schneider Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Software in the cockpit --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Werner Schneider It's true, but it is the Windows Kernel only without any gimmicks like Windows and not overloaded with all this 1 million function which have bugs to the end of the road. The kernel (I thinks it's even 3.51) is quite stable as it has only basic functionality and it is tested out also very well as well as used in many other processor driven parts. What is full of bugs is the overhead put on top, so I would (even if I'm not a Gates fan) trust on that product, as well as it was done from Apollo which have a very good reputation. br Werner (however only my 0.02$) Brian Lloyd wrote: > > On Jun 28, 2006, at 5:32 AM, Scott Lewis wrote: > >> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Scott Lewis > > >> >> Brian Lloyd wrote: >> >>> Should we shoot/sue Bill Gates? No. He is making the product that >>> people seem to want. They want features more than they want >>> reliability. Would I fly behind any box that has a Microsoft product >>> running in it? Not on your life. >> >> >> I agree completely. >> >> You DO realise than the Garmin MX20 runs on a Windows NT Kernel, >> don't you?! ;-) > > > Damn. No chance of buying one of those then. > > > 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 24 ____________________________________ Time: 11:05:26 PM PST US From: "DEAN PSIROPOULOS" Subject: AeroElectric-List: Software in the cockpit --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "DEAN PSIROPOULOS" While I agree that software can be made more robust and less "risky" using DO-178B level A style processes, software is still software, there are just too many variables in all but the most simple systems for there not to be defects present when they shoot the engineers and go into production. That doesn't necessarily mean the software is unsafe but it's not like the "good old days" of mechanical analog equipment that could be characterized completely with every nuance documented (software defects crop up over time and it often takes a specific "line up" of the planets before the problem rears its ugly head:-). In the instrument panel I built for my RV-6A I installed a Dynon EFIS D-10 as my primary instrument with old style steam gauge Airspeed, Turn Coordinator and Altimeter for backup and cross check. My philosophy on this panel was to add some basic steam gauges as back-up because I want to be able to fly the bird IFR in a pinch and am not totally comfortable relying on a software driven instrument exclusively. As a software safety engineer with a major aerospace company, I can tell you the kinds of things that go haywire in software systems are numerous. No matter how much attention you pay to development and coding or how much testing you do, things still show up long after certification when you least expect. My boss found that out first hand a few months ago when he turned the key on his Mercedes SLK 320 sports car and the software controlled throttle immediately went to wide open. The car jumped 15 feet and then the computer shut down the whole works, after which the car would not run at all. Luckily it was after hours in the company parking lot and there were no cars or people near by but he just cringes at the thought of this happening on a busy street or a mall parking lot. Needless to say, he traded the car in almost immediately. NEVER, EVER buy a car with a computer controlled throttle. I think the car companies that embrace this set up (likely just for the "Gee Whiz" factor and bragging rights) are going to be very, very sorry, no matter how much DO-178B Level A development they do. Their trial lawyers are going to be very busy defending that decision for decades.) Dean Psiropoulos RV-6A N197DM Wiring the "beast" _________________________Original Message _____________________________ Ernest's points about mission-critical applications (and a PFD is a mission-critical application in my book) are well taken. There are ways to develop software so as to make it more reliable and less prone to undesired interactions between modules. One of the more successful is to ensure that the software is simple enough that you know all the inputs, all the outputs, and all the possible paths through the code. This makes testing a closed-ended process. If you want a new feature, find a way to isolate it from what you already have so that you minimize any possible interaction. Putting it in a separate box with tight controls over what gets in our out is not a bad idea. Brian Lloyd 361 Catterline Way brian-yak AT lloyd DOT com Folsom, CA 95630 +1.916.367.2131 (voice) +1.270.912.0788 (fax)