Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 07:38 AM - encoder approval ()
2. 07:46 AM - GPS Antenna Cable... (Greg Campbell)
3. 08:19 AM - Re: GPS Antenna Cable... (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
4. 08:56 AM - Single Bulb Dimmer Rheostat (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
5. 09:13 AM - Re: encoder approval (Brett Ferrell)
6. 09:26 AM - Re: RC Allen Attitude Indicator wiring pin outs (Charlie Kuss)
7. 10:16 AM - Electric Elevator Trim connector (Stucklen, Frederic W UTPWR)
8. 10:47 AM - Re: Electric Elevator Trim connector (Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis))
9. 10:53 AM - Re: Electric Elevator Trim connector (Charlie Kuss)
10. 11:08 AM - Re: Electric Elevator Trim connector (Charlie Kuss)
11. 11:43 AM - Re: Electric Elevator Trim connector (Ralph E. Capen)
12. 11:43 AM - Re: Electric Elevator Trim connector (Dale Ensing)
13. 12:24 PM - Re: Electric Elevator Trim connector (Fiveonepw@aol.com)
14. 01:23 PM - Re: Electric Elevator Trim connector (Richard Tasker)
15. 02:46 PM - Re: GPS Antenna Cable... (Greg Campbell)
16. 03:15 PM - Re: Electric Elevator Trim connector (Rodney Dunham)
17. 04:12 PM - Re: Electric Elevator Trim connector (Fiveonepw@aol.com)
18. 04:36 PM - Van's Harness Kit (Jeff Moreau)
19. 05:20 PM - Re: Re: GPS Antenna Cable... (RV Builder (Michael Sausen))
20. 05:52 PM - Re: Re: GPS Antenna Cable... (Brian Lloyd)
21. 05:55 PM - Transponder replacement..... (Jim Baker)
22. 06:25 PM - Re: encoder approval (Kevin Horton)
23. 06:27 PM - Re: Van's Harness Kit (LarryRobertHelming)
24. 07:28 PM - Question for Brian Lloyd (Dennis Johnson)
25. 07:47 PM - Re: Question for Brian Lloyd (Bob White)
26. 08:26 PM - Re: Question for Brian Lloyd (Brian Lloyd)
27. 09:34 PM - Re: Van's Harness Kit (Terry Watson)
28. 09:57 PM - Re: GPS Antenna Cable... (Tim Olson)
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: | encoder approval |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: <bakerocb@cox.net>
Responding to a posting from Skip Simpson:
8/10/2006
Hello Skip, The issue on the use of non TSO'd altitude encoders is currently
under review (again) at FAA headquarters. I have been involved in this issue
for some time, but have refrained from posting any information on this
unresolved issue because of the potentially huge adverse impact upon our
amateur built community. I wanted to avoid much controversial and
distracting communications pending the, hopefully favorable, eventual ruling
by FAA on this subject. Here in a fairly brief summary form is the
situation:
1) FAR 91.217 Reads as follows: "Data correspondence between automatically
reported pressure altitude data and the pilot's altitude reference.
No person may operate any automatic pressure altitude reporting equipment
associated with a radar beacon transponder-
(a) When deactivation of that equipment is directed by ATC;
(b) Unless, as installed, that equipment was tested and calibrated to
transmit altitude data corresponding within 125 feet (on a 95 percent
probability basis) of the indicated or calibrated datum of the altimeter
normally used to maintain flight altitude, with that altimeter referenced to
29.92 inches of mercury for altitudes from sea level to the maximum
operating altitude of the aircraft; or
(c) Unless the altimeters and digitizers in that equipment meet the
standards of TSO-C10b and TSO-C88, respectively."
2) It would appear that any aircraft, standard type certificated or
experimentally certificated, whether flying IFR or VFR, and replying with a
mode C transponder altitude read out to ATC, either must comply with 91.217
(b) or be using a TSO-C88 approved altitude encoder.
3) Some companies providing altitude encoders to the amateur built
experimental aircraft community, some of which are incorporated into EFIS,
have been providing non TSO'd altitude encoders. It is not always made clear
by the manufacturing companies whether the altitude encoders within their
EFIS are TSO'd or not.
4) Some of these non TSO'd altitude encoders have better performance than
the TSO calls for both in terms of altitude granularity output and in output
format (serial instead of gray code).
5) There are many of these non TSO'd encoders in aircraft that are currently
flying and many in aircraft under construction.
6) A general presumption in the community was made (at least by those that
thought about it) that if an altimeter - altitude encoder - transponder
installation passed the FAR Part 43 Appendix E and F tests which are
required by FAR 91.411 and 91.413 every two years, that FAR 91.217 (b) was
being complied with.
7) A ruling from FAA headquarters in response to a letter from me said "not
so" to such compliance interpretation in the following fashion:
"Your letter posed the following questions:
1. If an amateur built experimental aircraft has an installed TSO'd ATC
transponder as required by Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
section 91.215, but a non-TSO'd altitude encoder and the installation has
passed the test and inspection requirements of 14 CFR sections 91.411 and
91.413 within the preceding 24 calendar months, does the installation meet
the requirements of 14 CFR section 91.217(b), and therefore make that
installation acceptable for IFR operations?
2. If the answer to question one is No, can you please tell me
why?
The answer to question one is "No." The testing required to show the
transmitted altitude data corresponds within 125 feet (on a 95 percent
probability basis) is more rigorous than the requirements referenced in 14
CFR sections 91.411, 91.413, and 14 CFR, part 43 appendices E and F. The
tests required by 14 CFR part 43 appendix E(c) measure the automatic
pressure altitude at a sufficient number of test points to ensure the
altitude reporting equipment performs its intended function.
Title 14 CFR section 91.217 paragraphs (b) and (c), state that pressure
altitude reporting equipment must be tested and calibrated to transmit
altitude data correspondence within stated specifications; or, the
altimeters and digitizers must meet the standards in TSO-C10B and TSO-C88,
respectively.
Should the owner/operator elect to exhibit compliance with tests and
calibration provided in 14 CFR section 91.217(b), a test method would need
to be developed that
ensures the transmitted data corresponds within 125 feet of the indicated
altitudes from sea level to the maximum operating altitude of the aircraft
on a 95 percent probability basis. This testing also needs to ensure the
performance characteristics of the equipment are not impacted when
subjected to environmental conditions (voltage fluctuations temperature,
vibration, etc.) which may be encountered in airborne operations.
Completed tests and calibration results should be maintained in the
aircraft records.
Thank you for your interest in aviation safety."
8) You can see the tremendous impact that enforcement of such a position
would have on the companies making and selling non TSO'd encoders or EFIS
containing non TSO'd encoders, the airplanes under construction planning to
incorporate those EFIS, and all of those airplanes currently flying with non
TSO'd altitude encoders.
9) I did not accept the FAA's position in 7) above as the final word and am
working through a cooperating local FAA FSDO employee to both educate FAA
headquarters and to get them to adopt a more reasonable position on the use
of non TSO'd altitude encoders.
10) I would encouage our community to not react in an adverse manner to the
FAA's current position and to continue to work the issue on a cooperative
basis. I will post additional information as it becomes available and
attempt to answer any questions that you may have.
OC -- The best investment we will ever make is in gathering knowledge.
<<Time: 09:12:25 PM PST US
From: CardinalNSB@aol.com
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: encoder approval
Is the Rocky Mountain encoder approved for certificated aircraft, the
factory says that "it conforms to c88a", is that enough, or is there more
needed.
Any opinions on the unit. Thanks, Skip Simpson>>
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: | GPS Antenna Cable... |
Does anybody know a source for a GPS antenna cable?
Preferrably near the Washington DC area.
SMA connector on one end, TNC on the other?
Thanks,
Greg
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: GPS Antenna Cable... |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 10:45 AM 8/10/2006 -0400, you wrote:
>Does anybody know a source for a GPS antenna cable?
>Preferrably near the Washington DC area.
>SMA connector on one end, TNC on the other?
RG400 is a suitable material. Connectors are easy
to install with a bit of practice and access to
inexpensive tools.
It sounds like you're looking for a turn-key custom
cable source. You might check with http://steinair.com
and see if they can assemble a cable to your specifications.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------------------------
< What is so wonderful about scientific truth...is that >
< the authority which determines whether there can be >
< debate or not does not reside in some fraternity of >
< scientists; nor is it divine. The authority rests >
< with experiment. >
< --Lawrence M. Krauss >
---------------------------------------------------------
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Single Bulb Dimmer Rheostat |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
We're closing out a single lamp dimmer kit from the
'Connection website. I've reduced the price to $10.00 each
and will give AeroElectric-Listers first crack at them. See:
http://aeroelectric.com/Catalog/AECcatalog.html
I'll but the balance of the kits on Ebay in about a week.
Bob . . .
---------------------------------------------------------
< What is so wonderful about scientific truth...is that >
< the authority which determines whether there can be >
< debate or not does not reside in some fraternity of >
< scientists; nor is it divine. The authority rests >
< with experiment. >
< --Lawrence M. Krauss >
---------------------------------------------------------
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: encoder approval |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brett Ferrell <bferrell@123mail.net>
Have you enlisted the help of EAA on this matter? I would think that thier
involvement would be helpful. They've already weighed in on this matter, in
the other direction, supposedly with FAA input!!
http://members.eaa.org/home/homebuilders/faq/1Equipping%20a%20Homebuilt%20for%20IFR%20operations.html?
(or tiny)
http://tinyurl.com/s5uzc
which says
"What about TSOs?
Another question to be answered is what, if any, of the equipment needs to be
TSOed. In order to address this question, its helpful to understand what a
TSO is. TSO stands for Technical Standard Order, which is defined in 14 CFR
Part 21, section 21.601(b)(1) as .a minimum performance standard for
specified articles (for the purpose of this subpart, articles means materials,
parts, processes, or appliances) used on civil aircraft. As you can see from
this definition, a TSO is actually a performance standard to which an article
can be manufactured.
When someone says an article is TSOed, what they really mean is that the unit
was manufactured under a TSO authorization. Section 21.601(b)(2) says, A TSO
authorization is an FAA design and production approval issued to the
manufacturer of an article which has been found to meet a specific TSO. Youll
note that the TSO and TSO authorization deal specifically with design and
manufacture, and have nothing to do with installation or operation.
Now we have an idea what a TSO is, but we still havent answered the question of
whether or not our instruments and avionics in a homebuilt need to be TSOed.
Our Operating Limitations state that we have to equip the aircraft in
accordance with 91.205, and 91.205 lists the minimum equipment required, but
nowhere is there mention of a requirement for TSOed equipment. Thus, the
answer is NO, the instruments and equipment installed in your homebuilt under
the requirements of 91.205 are not required to be TSOed.
So far, so good, but thats not the whole story. Most builders who plan to equip
their homebuilt for IFR operations dont stop at the minimums, so lets take a
look at some of the other commonly installed equipment and see whats required.
Transponders and related equipment;
One item that will be high on the list of desired equipment will be a
transponder. Its interesting to note that 91.205 does not list a transponder
as required in order to operate under IFR. While this is true, our current
airspace system as well as the advantages for use in both IFR and VFR
operations makes a transponder a popular choice for builders when outfitting
their aircraft.
The requirements for transponder equipment and operation are found in 91.215,
which has this to say:
(a) All airspace: U.S.-registered civil aircraft. For operations not conducted
under part 121 or 135 of this chapter, ATC transponder equipment installed must
meet the performance and environmental requirements of any class of TSO-C74b
(Mode A) or any class of TSO-C74c (Mode A with altitude reporting capability)
as appropriate, or the appropriate class of TSO-C112 (Mode S).
Note that, while it is required that the transponder equipment meet the
performance and environmental requirements of the applicable TSO, it is not
required that the equipment be manufactured under a TSO authorization. In
theory, this means that you could actually build your own transponder, so long
as you can document that it meets the requirements of the applicable TSO.
However, the easiest way to be assured that your transponder meets the
requirements of 91.215(a) is to install one that has been built under a TSO
authorization.
The requirements for altitude reporting equipment associated with the
transponder are called out in 91.217(c), which states that, the altimeters and
digitizers must meet the standards of TSO-C10b and TSO-C88, respectively.
TSO-C10b applies to the sensitive altimeter itself, and TSO-C88 applies to the
automatic altitude reporting equipment. Again the equipment is required to meet
the standards of the applicable TSOs, but not necessarily be produced under a
TSO authorization. But as with the transponder, the easiest way for a builder
to meet this requirement is to install equipment manufactured under a TSO
authorization.
Remember that, in order to legally operate this equipment under IFR, you must
also comply with the maintenance and testing requirements of parts 91.411 (for
altimeter and altitude reporting equipment), and 91.413 (for the transponder).
Note that the requirements of 91.413 apply even if the aircraft is operated
only under VFR."
Brett
Quoting bakerocb@cox.net:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: <bakerocb@cox.net>
>
> Responding to a posting from Skip Simpson:
>
> 8/10/2006
>
> Hello Skip, The issue on the use of non TSO'd altitude encoders is currently
> under review (again) at FAA headquarters. I have been involved in this issue
> for some time, but have refrained from posting any information on this
> 10) I would encouage our community to not react in an adverse manner to the
> FAA's current position and to continue to work the issue on a cooperative
> basis. I will post additional information as it becomes available and
> attempt to answer any questions that you may have.
>
> OC -- The best investment we will ever make is in gathering knowledge.
>
> <<Time: 09:12:25 PM PST US
> From: CardinalNSB@aol.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: encoder approval
>
> Is the Rocky Mountain encoder approved for certificated aircraft, the
> factory says that "it conforms to c88a", is that enough, or is there more
> needed.
>
> Any opinions on the unit. Thanks, Skip Simpson>>
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: | RC Allen Attitude Indicator wiring pin outs |
Re-posted with a change in Subject line to make archive search easier.
Charlie Kuss
>Connector: MS3116E8-4S
>
>Pin A: Gnd
>Pin B: Gnd lights
>Pin C: +14 VDC
>Pin D: 0 - +14 VDC Lights
>
><http://www.kellymfg.com/data/RCA26brochure.pdf>http://www.kellymfg.com/data/RCA26brochure.pdf
>
>Page 2 - upper right corner. The information is also on a sticker
>on the back of my gyro.
>
>HTH,
>
>Carl
>
>--
>ZK-VII - RV 7A QB - finishing? - New Zealand
><http://www.rvproject.gen.nz/>http://www.rvproject.gen.nz/
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Gary
>Sent: Wednesday, 9 August 2006 5:05 a.m.
>To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
>Subject: AeroElectric-List: R/C Attitude ind.
>
>I have an electric r/c allen attitude indicator and there are 4 pins
>in the back A,B,C,D Does anyone know how I should wire this up?
>
>
>Thank you
>
>
>G.
>
>RV8 Wirrrrrrrrrrring
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Electric Elevator Trim connector |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Stucklen, Frederic W UTPWR" <Fred.Stucklen@UTCPower.com>
I'm about to install my Electric Elevator Trim servo in the new RV-7A.
I'm interested in knowing what others have done for electrical
connectors for the servo, and where they have located that
connector (i.e., in the tail area or the fuselage).
So far, most everything I've seen will not allow the elevator to be
removed as the connector will not fit through the hole in the elevator
or the rear spare of the horizontal stab....This includes DB-9
connectors......
Fred Stucklen
RV-7A N924RV
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Electric Elevator Trim connector |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
I used a terminal strip screwd down just behind the empenage front spar.
I don't know for sure but I think the little ring terminals will go thru
the hole.
Frank
RV 7a
Paperwork submitted, final rigging of controls
I'm about to install my Electric Elevator Trim servo in the new RV-7A.
I'm interested in knowing what others have done for electrical
connectors for the servo, and where they have located that connector
(i.e., in the tail area or the fuselage).
So far, most everything I've seen will not allow the elevator to be
removed as the connector will not fit through the hole in the elevator
or the rear spare of the horizontal stab....This includes DB-9
connectors......
Fred Stucklen
RV-7A N924RV
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: Electric Elevator Trim connector |
At 01:15 PM 8/10/2006, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Stucklen, Frederic
>W UTPWR" <Fred.Stucklen@UTCPower.com>
>
>
> I'm about to install my Electric Elevator Trim servo in the new RV-7A.
>I'm interested in knowing what others have done for electrical
>connectors for the servo, and where they have located that
>connector (i.e., in the tail area or the fuselage).
> So far, most everything I've seen will not allow the elevator to be
>removed as the connector will not fit through the hole in the elevator
>or the rear spare of the horizontal stab....This includes DB-9
>connectors......
>
>Fred Stucklen
>RV-7A N924RV
Fred,
The best solution to allow elevator removal is to use Bob Nuckoll's
suggested method. Use D Sub male and female terminals without the S
Sub block. Crimp or solder the male and female terminals to the 5
wires. Slide heat shrink over the wires then connect the terminals.
Use heat to shrink the heat shrink tubing over the connected joint.
This will hold the connection tight and keep it dry.
To remove, simply slice the heat shrink with a razor blade and
disconnect the D Sub pins. It will allow the connector pins to be
withdrawn through the rather small hole in the elevator spar. Stagger
the connectors to ease removal. Bob has or had a photo "how to" page
on his site. I looked quickly, but couldn't locate it.
Charlie Kuss
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: Electric Elevator Trim connector |
At 01:51 PM 8/10/2006, you wrote:
>At 01:15 PM 8/10/2006, you wrote:
>>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Stucklen, Frederic
>>W UTPWR" <Fred.Stucklen@UTCPower.com>
>>
>>
>> I'm about to install my Electric Elevator Trim servo in the new RV-7A.
>>I'm interested in knowing what others have done for electrical
>>connectors for the servo, and where they have located that
>>connector (i.e., in the tail area or the fuselage).
>> So far, most everything I've seen will not allow the elevator to be
>>removed as the connector will not fit through the hole in the elevator
>>or the rear spare of the horizontal stab....This includes DB-9
>>connectors......
>>
>>Fred Stucklen
>>RV-7A N924RV
>
>Fred,
> The best solution to allow elevator removal is to use Bob
> Nuckoll's suggested method. Use D Sub male and female terminals
> without the S Sub block. Crimp or solder the male and female
> terminals to the 5 wires. Slide heat shrink over the wires then
> connect the terminals. Use heat to shrink the heat shrink tubing
> over the connected joint. This will hold the connection tight and keep it dry.
> To remove, simply slice the heat shrink with a razor blade and
> disconnect the D Sub pins. It will allow the connector pins to be
> withdrawn through the rather small hole in the elevator spar.
> Stagger the connectors to ease removal. Bob has or had a photo "how
> to" page on his site. I looked quickly, but couldn't locate it.
>Charlie Kuss
Sorry Fred,
I meant to type D Sub, not S Sub
Charlie
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: Electric Elevator Trim connector |
--- MIME Errors - No Plain-Text Section Found ---
A message with no text/plain MIME section was received.
The entire body of the message was removed. Please
resend the email using Plain Text formatting.
HOTMAIL is notorious for only including an HTML section
in their client's default configuration. If you're using
HOTMAIL, please see your email application's settings
and switch to a default mail option that uses "Plain Text".
--- MIME Errors No Plain-Text Section Found ---
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: Electric Elevator Trim connector |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Dale Ensing" <densing@carolina.rr.com>
Fred,
I used a connector from the radio control world. Check your local hobby shop
or catalogue.
Dale Ensing
----- Original Message -----
From: "Stucklen, Frederic W UTPWR" <Fred.Stucklen@UTCPower.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2006 1:15 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Electric Elevator Trim connector
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Stucklen, Frederic W UTPWR"
<Fred.Stucklen@UTCPower.com>
>
>
> I'm about to install my Electric Elevator Trim servo in the new RV-7A.
> I'm interested in knowing what others have done for electrical
> connectors for the servo, and where they have located that
> connector (i.e., in the tail area or the fuselage).
> So far, most everything I've seen will not allow the elevator to be
> removed as the connector will not fit through the hole in the elevator
> or the rear spare of the horizontal stab....This includes DB-9
> connectors......
>
> Fred Stucklen
> RV-7A N924RV
>
>
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: Electric Elevator Trim connector |
Hi Fred-
I ran across some kits a few years back that had assorted Molex pin & socket
connectors and included the crimping tool and pin removal tool. I got one
each in the .062 and .093 sizes and they have been extremely useful for stuff
like the trim servo connection where you can just crimp pins on the end of the
servo and cable wires, and insert them into the connector bodies and plug
together. When you need to pull the cables back through a hole, such as when
removing your elevator, you simply unplug the connector and remove the pins from
the
connector body with the tool that comes in the kit- it's a good idea to wrap
some tape around the pin bundle to protect them as you pull the cable out.
Called "Cable Connector Designer Kits", Digikey has 'em on page 130 & 131 of
their current catalog:
http://dkc3.digikey.com/PDF/T062/0130.pdf for the .062 pins ($71.24)
http://dkc3.digikey.com/PDF/T062/0131.pdf for the .092 pins ($61.16)
here's Bob's how-to on Molex/AMP connectors:
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/matenlok/matenlok.html
You can also use d-subs and remove the pins- Bob had a how-to on his website
but looks like it's gone- basically just a male & female d-sub glued together
with shoe-goo and covered in shrinkwrap IIRC-
>From The PossumWorks in TN
Mark
http://websites.expercraft.com/n51pw/
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: Electric Elevator Trim connector |
Or go to www.mouser.com and get exactly the same things for less:
http://www.mouser.com/search/ProductDetail.aspx?R=WM-72 @ $48.18
http://www.mouser.com/search/ProductDetail.aspx?R=WM-50 @ $45.38
Dick Tasker
Fiveonepw@aol.com wrote:
> Hi Fred-
>
> I ran across some kits a few years back that had assorted Molex pin &
> socket connectors and included the crimping tool and pin removal
> tool. I got one each in the .062 and .093 sizes and they have been
> extremely useful for stuff like the trim servo connection where you
> can just crimp pins on the end of the servo and cable wires, and
> insert them into the connector bodies and plug together. When you
> need to pull the cables back through a hole, such as when removing
> your elevator, you simply unplug the connector and remove the pins
> from the connector body with the tool that comes in the kit- it's a
> good idea to wrap some tape around the pin bundle to protect them as
> you pull the cable out.
>
> Called "Cable Connector Designer Kits", Digikey has 'em on page 130 &
> 131 of their current catalog:
> http://dkc3.digikey.com/PDF/T062/0130.pdf for the .062 pins ($71.24)
> http://dkc3.digikey.com/PDF/T062/0131.pdf for the .092 pins ($61.16)
>
> here's Bob's how-to on Molex/AMP connectors:
> http://aeroelectric.com/articles/matenlok/matenlok.html
>
> You can also use d-subs and remove the pins- Bob had a how-to on his
> website but looks like it's gone- basically just a male & female d-sub
> glued together with shoe-goo and covered in shrinkwrap IIRC-
>
> From The PossumWorks in TN
> Mark
> http://websites.expercraft.com/n51pw/
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: GPS Antenna Cable... |
Bob,
Thanks for the link to www.SteinAir.com
I called and they didn't have SMA or TNC connectors.
(But they will have a great deal on eyeball air vents!)
That reason I need this cable is that after a year of waiting,
I'm finally replacing my faulty Crossbow NAV425 AHRS
with the new GADAHRS from www.PinpointInertial.com .
At Oshkosh, it finally changed from "vaporware" to "hardware" status.
The "replacement kit" INCLUDES:
+ Pinpoint Inertial AHRS
+ Magnetic Sense Unit (MSU) (remote mount, make your own bracket)
+ OAT Probe, cable, and plug
+ Comant active GPS antenna
+ Canon plugs, sockets, strain relief clamps
The following parts are NOT INCLUDED:
- GPS Antenna cable with SMA fitting (for the AHRS) and TNC (for the Comant
Antenna)
- Shielded 3 conductor wire for two new runs from the AHRS
- Plumbing tees and connectors needed to tap into your pitot & static lines
(the new AHRS has -4 size AN flare fittings, the Crossbow didn't have
pitot static inputs)
I took care of the last two items, but the GPS antenna cable left me stuck.
The local avionics shop has the parts and will make one in time for my
flight tomorrow - for $240.
www.HyperTechLink.com had great prices, about $5 each for the SMA and TNC
connectors.
Unfortunately they sell them 10 to the bag, so for $120 I can have 10 times
more than I need overnight.
www.GPSgeek.com probably has the best deal. I can order a generic active
GPS antenna for $40 or $60
depending on the gain I want. It comes with my choice of 9' or 16' antenna
cable with SMA connector already attached.
So... if you're eagerly awaiting your Pinpoint Inertial AHRS, you might
want to start lining up
the SMA and TNC connectors and other bits and pieces you'll need to complete
the installation.
Give me another week and I might be able to report how well the new Pinpoint
Inertial AHRS works.
Greg
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: Electric Elevator Trim connector |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Rodney Dunham" <rdunhamtn@hotmail.com>
The URL is
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/Solder_Lap_Splicing/Solder_Lap_Splices.html
do not archive
>From: Charlie Kuss <chaztuna@adelphia.net>
>To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
>Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Electric Elevator Trim connector
>Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 14:05:53 -0400
>
>At 01:51 PM 8/10/2006, you wrote:
>>At 01:15 PM 8/10/2006, you wrote:
>>>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Stucklen, Frederic W
>>>UTPWR" <Fred.Stucklen@UTCPower.com>
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm about to install my Electric Elevator Trim servo in the new RV-7A.
>>>I'm interested in knowing what others have done for electrical
>>>connectors for the servo, and where they have located that
>>>connector (i.e., in the tail area or the fuselage).
>>> So far, most everything I've seen will not allow the elevator to be
>>>removed as the connector will not fit through the hole in the elevator
>>>or the rear spare of the horizontal stab....This includes DB-9
>>>connectors......
>>>
>>>Fred Stucklen
>>>RV-7A N924RV
>>
>>Fred,
>> The best solution to allow elevator removal is to use Bob Nuckoll's
>>suggested method. Use D Sub male and female terminals without the S Sub
>>block. Crimp or solder the male and female terminals to the 5 wires. Slide
>>heat shrink over the wires then connect the terminals. Use heat to shrink
>>the heat shrink tubing over the connected joint. This will hold the
>>connection tight and keep it dry.
>> To remove, simply slice the heat shrink with a razor blade and
>>disconnect the D Sub pins. It will allow the connector pins to be
>>withdrawn through the rather small hole in the elevator spar. Stagger the
>>connectors to ease removal. Bob has or had a photo "how to" page on his
>>site. I looked quickly, but couldn't locate it.
>>Charlie Kuss
>
>Sorry Fred,
> I meant to type D Sub, not S Sub
>Charlie
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: Electric Elevator Trim connector |
Unbelieveable- I spent over an hour digging through the catalogs & website
and never ran across them on Mouser- you da man- and I LOVE a deal ! ! !
8-)
Mark
do not archive
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: | Van's Harness Kit |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Jeff Moreau <jmoreau2@cox.net>
I am curious to find if anyone on the list has started with the Van's
wiring harness kit as the basic start of their wiring.
What kind of extras or modifications did you include if you used it?
Any help or comments would be welcomed.
Thanks
Jeff
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: GPS Antenna Cable... |
These types of connectors are extremely common in the wireless
networking area. Google around for wireless or wifi antennas and you
will get sources. HyperlinkTech used to be a good place for small
orders but they went to minimum orders a couple years ago and jacked up
the prices to get rid of small orders. A couple you can check are:
http://www.antennasystems.com/connectors.html
http://www.wifi-link.com/index.php
http://www.wirelessnetworkproducts.com/
Michael Sausen
-10 #352 Fuselage
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Greg
Campbell
Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2006 4:45 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: GPS Antenna Cable...
Bob,
Thanks for the link to www.SteinAir.com
I called and they didn't have SMA or TNC connectors.
(But they will have a great deal on eyeball air vents!)
That reason I need this cable is that after a year of waiting,
I'm finally replacing my faulty Crossbow NAV425 AHRS
with the new GADAHRS from www.PinpointInertial.com .
At Oshkosh, it finally changed from "vaporware" to "hardware" status.
The "replacement kit" INCLUDES:
+ Pinpoint Inertial AHRS
+ Magnetic Sense Unit (MSU) (remote mount, make your own bracket)
+ OAT Probe, cable, and plug
+ Comant active GPS antenna
+ Canon plugs, sockets, strain relief clamps
The following parts are NOT INCLUDED:
- GPS Antenna cable with SMA fitting (for the AHRS) and TNC (for the
Comant Antenna)
- Shielded 3 conductor wire for two new runs from the AHRS
- Plumbing tees and connectors needed to tap into your pitot & static
lines
(the new AHRS has -4 size AN flare fittings, the Crossbow didn't have
pitot static inputs)
I took care of the last two items, but the GPS antenna cable left me
stuck.
The local avionics shop has the parts and will make one in time for my
flight tomorrow - for $240.
www.HyperTechLink.com had great prices, about $5 each for the SMA and
TNC connectors.
Unfortunately they sell them 10 to the bag, so for $120 I can have 10
times more than I need overnight.
www.GPSgeek.com probably has the best deal. I can order a generic
active GPS antenna for $40 or $60
depending on the gain I want. It comes with my choice of 9' or 16'
antenna cable with SMA connector already attached.
So... if you're eagerly awaiting your Pinpoint Inertial AHRS, you might
want to start lining up
the SMA and TNC connectors and other bits and pieces you'll need to
complete the installation.
Give me another week and I might be able to report how well the new
Pinpoint Inertial AHRS works.
Greg
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: GPS Antenna Cable... |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
On Aug 10, 2006, at 8:17 PM, RV Builder (Michael Sausen) wrote:
> These types of connectors are extremely common in the wireless
> networking area. Google around for wireless or wifi antennas and
> you will get sources. HyperlinkTech used to be a good place for
> small orders but they went to minimum orders a couple years ago and
> jacked up the prices to get rid of small orders. A couple you can
> check are:
Check Fleeman, Anderson, and Bird.
http://www.fab-corp.com/
I use them to supply my WiFi needs. The LMR-195 coax is nice low-loss
stuff.
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 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: | Transponder replacement..... |
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (4.31)
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Jim Baker" <jlbaker@msbit.net>
Just wondering if anyone had any comments concerning the
following issue with Narco transponder units..
http://www.gtwn.net/~keith.peshak/NarcoProblems.htm
My old AT-50A is complaining and was looking for a direct
replacement without re-wiring...til I saw this article. Like to have
a 165 but now I'm not so sure....
Thanks.
Jim Baker
580.788.2779
Elmore City, OK
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: encoder approval |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Kevin Horton <khorton01@rogers.com>
Good luck. I think you are wasting your time, albeit for a good
cause. Granted, you might manage to find some FSDO that doesn't
understand that 95% probability does in fact mean over the full range
of expected conditions (speaking from experience working with the
aircraft cert FARs for many years). But, once Washington finds out
the FSDO has approved something under 91.217(b) without requiring
testing over the full range of conditions, they will probably release
a policy letter that stops you in your tracks.
I'm not saying that things should be like this, but this is the way
they are, like it or not. The only way out, in my opinion, is a
change to 91.217, but reg changes typically take 10 years or more.
Kevin Horton
On 10 Aug 2006, at 10:36, <bakerocb@cox.net> <bakerocb@cox.net> wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: <bakerocb@cox.net>
>
> Responding to a posting from Skip Simpson:
>
> 8/10/2006
>
> Hello Skip, The issue on the use of non TSO'd altitude encoders is
> currently under review (again) at FAA headquarters. I have been
> involved in this issue for some time, but have refrained from
> posting any information on this unresolved issue because of the
> potentially huge adverse impact upon our amateur built community. I
> wanted to avoid much controversial and distracting communications
> pending the, hopefully favorable, eventual ruling by FAA on this
> subject. Here in a fairly brief summary form is the situation:
>
> 1) FAR 91.217 Reads as follows: "Data correspondence between
> automatically reported pressure altitude data and the pilot's
> altitude reference.
>
> No person may operate any automatic pressure altitude reporting
> equipment associated with a radar beacon transponder-
>
> (a) When deactivation of that equipment is directed by ATC;
>
> (b) Unless, as installed, that equipment was tested and calibrated
> to transmit altitude data corresponding within 125 feet (on a 95
> percent probability basis) of the indicated or calibrated datum of
> the altimeter normally used to maintain flight altitude, with that
> altimeter referenced to 29.92 inches of mercury for altitudes from
> sea level to the maximum operating altitude of the aircraft; or
>
> (c) Unless the altimeters and digitizers in that equipment meet the
> standards of TSO-C10b and TSO-C88, respectively."
>
> 2) It would appear that any aircraft, standard type certificated or
> experimentally certificated, whether flying IFR or VFR, and
> replying with a mode C transponder altitude read out to ATC, either
> must comply with 91.217 (b) or be using a TSO-C88 approved altitude
> encoder.
>
> 3) Some companies providing altitude encoders to the amateur built
> experimental aircraft community, some of which are incorporated
> into EFIS, have been providing non TSO'd altitude encoders. It is
> not always made clear by the manufacturing companies whether the
> altitude encoders within their EFIS are TSO'd or not.
>
> 4) Some of these non TSO'd altitude encoders have better
> performance than the TSO calls for both in terms of altitude
> granularity output and in output format (serial instead of gray code).
>
> 5) There are many of these non TSO'd encoders in aircraft that are
> currently flying and many in aircraft under construction.
>
> 6) A general presumption in the community was made (at least by
> those that thought about it) that if an altimeter - altitude
> encoder - transponder installation passed the FAR Part 43 Appendix
> E and F tests which are required by FAR 91.411 and 91.413 every two
> years, that FAR 91.217 (b) was being complied with.
>
> 7) A ruling from FAA headquarters in response to a letter from me
> said "not so" to such compliance interpretation in the following
> fashion:
>
> "Your letter posed the following questions:
>
> 1. If an amateur built experimental aircraft has an installed
> TSO'd ATC
> transponder as required by Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14
> CFR)
> section 91.215, but a non-TSO'd altitude encoder and the
> installation has
> passed the test and inspection requirements of 14 CFR sections
> 91.411 and
> 91.413 within the preceding 24 calendar months, does the
> installation meet
> the requirements of 14 CFR section 91.217(b), and therefore make that
> installation acceptable for IFR operations?
>
> 2. If the answer to question one is No, can you please tell me
> why?
>
> The answer to question one is "No." The testing required to show the
> transmitted altitude data corresponds within 125 feet (on a 95 percent
> probability basis) is more rigorous than the requirements
> referenced in 14
> CFR sections 91.411, 91.413, and 14 CFR, part 43 appendices E and
> F. The
> tests required by 14 CFR part 43 appendix E(c) measure the automatic
> pressure altitude at a sufficient number of test points to ensure the
> altitude reporting equipment performs its intended function.
> Title 14 CFR section 91.217 paragraphs (b) and (c), state that
> pressure
> altitude reporting equipment must be tested and calibrated to transmit
> altitude data correspondence within stated specifications; or, the
> altimeters and digitizers must meet the standards in TSO-C10B and
> TSO-C88,
> respectively.
>
> Should the owner/operator elect to exhibit compliance with tests and
> calibration provided in 14 CFR section 91.217(b), a test method
> would need to be developed that
> ensures the transmitted data corresponds within 125 feet of the
> indicated
> altitudes from sea level to the maximum operating altitude of the
> aircraft
> on a 95 percent probability basis. This testing also needs to
> ensure the
> performance characteristics of the equipment are not impacted when
> subjected to environmental conditions (voltage fluctuations
> temperature,
> vibration, etc.) which may be encountered in airborne operations.
> Completed tests and calibration results should be maintained in the
> aircraft records.
>
> Thank you for your interest in aviation safety."
>
> 8) You can see the tremendous impact that enforcement of such a
> position would have on the companies making and selling non TSO'd
> encoders or EFIS containing non TSO'd encoders, the airplanes under
> construction planning to incorporate those EFIS, and all of those
> airplanes currently flying with non TSO'd altitude encoders.
>
> 9) I did not accept the FAA's position in 7) above as the final
> word and am working through a cooperating local FAA FSDO employee
> to both educate FAA headquarters and to get them to adopt a more
> reasonable position on the use of non TSO'd altitude encoders.
>
> 10) I would encouage our community to not react in an adverse
> manner to the FAA's current position and to continue to work the
> issue on a cooperative basis. I will post additional information as
> it becomes available and attempt to answer any questions that you
> may have.
>
> OC -- The best investment we will ever make is in gathering knowledge.
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: | Re: Van's Harness Kit |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "LarryRobertHelming" <lhelming@sigecom.net>
Sorry I cannot answer all your question. However, I bought the Van's kit
although I had ever intention of wiring using Bob's schematic. It gave me
lots of parts I did not have to otherwise have to buy. I got to see Van's
wiring diagram which helped build my knowledge base. (Needed that at the
beginning.) But I still bought a lot of stuff cause some things were not
the same. The Van's wire harness while well done was mostly worthless using
the fuse bus rather than the CB bus. I valued the wire and disassemble most
of it to use it where I could. If I were doing it again, I would buy the
parts (connectors, wire, switches) from B&C or your local reputable
electrical supplier or Stein and do the whole wire job terminals and all
myself.
The extra and mods needed will depend a lot on the electrical components of
your plane's design. Larry in Indiana
----- Original Message -----
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Jeff Moreau <jmoreau2@cox.net>
>
> I am curious to find if anyone on the list has started with the Van's
> wiring harness kit as the basic start of their wiring.
>
> What kind of extras or modifications did you include if you used it?
>
> Any help or comments would be welcomed.
>
> Thanks
>
> Jeff
>
>
>
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: | Question for Brian Lloyd |
Hi Brian (and others),
A couple of weeks ago you posted a suggestion for connecting a stereo
IPod-type device to a mono audio panel. You said to insert a 100 ohm
resistor in series in each of the left and right channels, at the stereo
jack, before combining the left and right channels together.
I'm now wiring my panel and I have a stereo jack that I'll connect to my
mono audio panel. I was planning to just jumper the left and right
(high) terminals together at the stereo jack so I can listen to my IPod
in flight. Can you expand a little on the need for the resistors? I
actually have two concerns: One is that I'd like to understand the
issue a little bit, and the other is that I've heard that people don't
get enough volume from portable entertainment devices, and the resistors
might make that problem worse.
Thanks so much for your help,
Dennis Johnson
Legacy #257, hoping to fly in three months
Message 25
| 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: Question for Brian Lloyd |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Bob White <bob@bob-white.com>
On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 19:25:59 -0700
"Dennis Johnson" <pinetownd@volcano.net> wrote:
> Hi Brian (and others),
>
> A couple of weeks ago you posted a suggestion for connecting a stereo IPod-type
device to a mono audio panel. You said to insert a 100 ohm resistor in series
in each of the left and right channels, at the stereo jack, before combining
the left and right channels together.
>
> I'm now wiring my panel and I have a stereo jack that I'll connect to my mono
audio panel. I was planning to just jumper the left and right (high) terminals
together at the stereo jack so I can listen to my IPod in flight. Can you
expand a little on the need for the resistors? I actually have two concerns:
One is that I'd like to understand the issue a little bit, and the other is that
I've heard that people don't get enough volume from portable entertainment
devices, and the resistors might make that problem worse.
>
> Thanks so much for your help,
> Dennis Johnson
> Legacy #257, hoping to fly in three months
Hi Dennis,
The resistors are needed to isolate the two outputs from each other.
Basically you want to add the voltages from the left and right
channels. The input to the audio panel will be a high impedance, so
the 100 ohm resistors won't have much effect on the volume.
Bob W.
--
http://www.bob-white.com
N93BD - Rotary Powered BD-4 (first engine start 1/7/06)
Custom Cables for your rotary installation -
http://www.roblinphoto.com/shop/
Message 26
| 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: Question for Brian Lloyd |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-yak@lloyd.com>
On Aug 10, 2006, at 10:25 PM, Dennis Johnson wrote:
> Hi Brian (and others),
>
> A couple of weeks ago you posted a suggestion for connecting a
> stereo IPod-type device to a mono audio panel. You said to insert
> a 100 ohm resistor in series in each of the left and right
> channels, at the stereo jack, before combining the left and right
> channels together.
>
> I'm now wiring my panel and I have a stereo jack that I'll connect
> to my mono audio panel. I was planning to just jumper the left and
> right (high) terminals together at the stereo jack so I can listen
> to my IPod in flight. Can you expand a little on the need for the
> resistors? I actually have two concerns: One is that I'd like to
> understand the issue a little bit, and the other is that I've heard
> that people don't get enough volume from portable entertainment
> devices, and the resistors might make that problem worse.
Well, it gets to the way solid-state audio amplifier output stages
are built. They are designed to have very low output impedance. This
way they can generate a voltage output that isn't much affected by
the thing receiving the voltage (a speaker or earspeaker in this
case). In addition they use negative feedback, i.e. part of the the
output signal is inverted (flipped over) and fed back to the input in
order to cancel out errors (distortion) generated within the amp
itself. This further reduces the output impedance. So if you tie one
output to the other, the output that is NOT generating the signal you
want will look almost like a dead short to the output that is.
Now many of you have tied the left and right outputs together and you
get sound. That is because most of the audio is in-phase and a lot of
the signal is identical in both the left and right channels. You hear
sound. The problem comes when there is something on the left channel
that doesn't appear on the right. The right output will then act as
almost a short to that part of the signal. Very little of what is on
the left channel will make it to your audio panel or intercom.
So we add the 100 ohm resistors. These keep one output from loading
down the other. The two signals, left and right, then mix and you get
the best possible output with less distortion and less load on the
two amplifier outputs.
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 27
| 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: | Van's Harness Kit |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Terry Watson" <terry@tcwatson.com>
I would agree with Larry on every point.
Terry
RV-8A finishing
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
LarryRobertHelming
Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2006 6:08 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Van's Harness Kit
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "LarryRobertHelming"
<lhelming@sigecom.net>
Sorry I cannot answer all your question. However, I bought the Van's kit
although I had ever intention of wiring using Bob's schematic. It gave me
lots of parts I did not have to otherwise have to buy. I got to see Van's
wiring diagram which helped build my knowledge base. (Needed that at the
beginning.) But I still bought a lot of stuff cause some things were not
the same. The Van's wire harness while well done was mostly worthless using
the fuse bus rather than the CB bus. I valued the wire and disassemble most
of it to use it where I could. If I were doing it again, I would buy the
parts (connectors, wire, switches) from B&C or your local reputable
electrical supplier or Stein and do the whole wire job terminals and all
myself.
The extra and mods needed will depend a lot on the electrical components of
your plane's design. Larry in Indiana
----- Original Message -----
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Jeff Moreau <jmoreau2@cox.net>
>
> I am curious to find if anyone on the list has started with the Van's
> wiring harness kit as the basic start of their wiring.
>
> What kind of extras or modifications did you include if you used it?
>
> Any help or comments would be welcomed.
>
> Thanks
>
> Jeff
>
Message 28
| 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: GPS Antenna Cable... |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Tim Olson <Tim@MyRV10.com>
http://www.rfmicrowavecable.com/smamaletotncmale.html#RG-223/U
$29.95 for RG-223 3' (available in qualtities for less)
HD Communications
Ask for craig - 888-588-3800
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD - Flying
Greg Campbell wrote:
> Does anybody know a source for a GPS antenna cable?
> Preferrably near the Washington DC area.
> SMA connector on one end, TNC on the other?
>
> Thanks,
> Greg
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! --
|