Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 01:23 AM - Re: Fuel Pump Switch(es) (Gilles Thesee)
2. 06:52 AM - Re: Fuel Pump Switch(es) (Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis))
3. 07:23 AM - Troll Hypervox intercom pinout (Dave N6030X)
4. 07:37 AM - Fawcett Pump Data???? (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
5. 07:45 AM - Fuel Pump Switch(es) (glen matejcek)
6. 07:57 AM - Re: Troll Hypervox intercom pinout (Bill Steer)
7. 08:04 AM - Re: Troll Hypervox intercom pinout (Bill Steer)
8. 08:22 AM - Re: Fawcett Pump Data???? (Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis))
9. 08:27 AM - Re: Fuel Pump Switch(es) (OldBob Siegfried)
10. 08:30 AM - Re: Fuel Pump Switch(es) (Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis))
11. 08:46 AM - Re: Fuel Pump Switch(es) (Brian Lloyd)
12. 08:46 AM - Re: Troll Hypervox intercom pinout (Bill Steer)
13. 08:58 AM - Re: Fuel Pump Switch(es) (Bill Denton)
14. 09:00 AM - Re: Fawcett Pump Data???? (Steve Allison)
15. 09:12 AM - Re: Fuel Pump Switch(es) (Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis))
16. 10:48 AM - Antenna locations in an RV9 (Gerry Filby)
17. 11:14 AM - Re: Antenna locations in an RV9 (Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis))
18. 12:00 PM - Re: Antenna locations in an RV9 (Gerry Filby)
19. 12:53 PM - Re: Antenna locations in an RV9 (Richard Dudley)
20. 01:32 PM - Re: Antenna locations in an RV9 (Gerry Filby)
21. 01:37 PM - Re: Re: Fuel Pump Switch(es) (Brian Lloyd)
22. 01:50 PM - Re: Antenna locations in an RV9 (Richard Dudley)
23. 03:22 PM - Re: Fuel Pump Switch(es) (Marty)
24. 06:03 PM - Whelen Strobes Blowing Fuses (Peter Braswell)
25. 08:10 PM - Re: Fuel Pump Switch(es) (Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis))
Message 1
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Fuel Pump Switch(es) |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Gilles Thesee <Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr>
Hi all,
>>
>> On my electric only system I simply switch pumps to switch tanks...No
>> selector valve...Just a non return valve in each line joining to a tee
>> then up to the standards vans selector that has been plumbed to act as
>> an on-off valve.
I had to design a fuel circuit for an electrically dependant engine :
in order to achieve true redundancy I had to run each pump from a
separate battery. The main pump runs from the main battery, and is on
whenever the mags are "on". The boost pump runs from the auxiliary
battery, and has a switch. The fuel valve works the normal way. For the
pilot, everything works as in a engine with mechanical pump.
No single electric failure can deprive the engine of its fuel supply.
A schematic of my setup can be seen at
http://contrails.free.fr/engine_pierburg.php
(Scroll down to the bottom of the page)
FWIW
Regards,
Gilles Thesee
Grenoble, France
http://contrails.free.fr
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: | Fuel Pump Switch(es) |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
Absolutely correct Brian,
That is the one downside I came up with too. Basically you have to allow a small
reserve in each tank, For normal flying that means 0.5 hours in each tank...For
out in the badlands that might be a bit more...:)
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brian Lloyd
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 12:10 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Fuel Pump Switch(es)
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd
--> <brian-av@lloyd.com>
On Sep 10, 2006, at 7:39 PM, Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis) wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George
> (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
>
> On my electric only system I simply switch pumps to switch tanks...No
> selector valve...Just a non return valve in each line joining to a tee
> then up to the standards vans selector that has been plumbed to act as
> an on-off valve.
My only concern with that would be that a pump failure could render
1/2 your fuel unavailable. Several aircraft have been lost on long
over-water flights when electric transfer pumps have failed thus
rendering necessary fuel unavailable. Something to think about.
Brian Lloyd 361 Catterline Way
brian HYPHEN av 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 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: | Troll Hypervox intercom pinout |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Dave N6030X <N6030X@DaveMorris.com>
Does anyone happen to have the pinout diagram for a Troll Avionics
Hypervox intercom?
Thanks,
Dave Morris
1960 Mooney M20A
N6030X at 52F
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: | Fawcett Pump Data???? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
I spent as much time as I could searching the 'net
for specifications on Fawcett pumps popular with the
OBAM aircraft industry.
Don't have time to search any more today, need to attend
one of those "$1,000 meetings" (ten engineers and
managers sit around table for an hour). If anyone
runs across a source for this data, I'd appreciate
hearing about it.
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: | Fuel Pump Switch(es) |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "glen matejcek" <aerobubba@earthlink.net>
George / Kevin-
George- "... an on/off valve on each
tank introduces problems and complexity..."
Boy, am I glad you wrote that! I completely missed the part about
independent fuel valves. Kevin, besides all the good points George makes,
and as someone pointed out a while back on one of these lists, you will
only find a "BOTH" position on a fuel selector in a high wing single engine
airplane. The low wing planes have left, right, and off. With a high wing
plane, you will sometimes see quite an imbalance develop when drawing fuel
from both tanks simultaneously, even with the head pressure caused by the
tank location. This effect could be much greater in a low wing
installation. If you had the ability to have both tanks plumbed to the
engine at the same time, when one tank emptied you could suck air into the
system. Obviously, this would not be good. I would definitely recommend
against two fuel valves.
Sorry for not catching that sooner-
glen matejcek
aerobubba@earthlink.net
Message 6
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Troll Hypervox intercom pinout |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bill Steer" <steerr@bellsouth.net>
Yes. I'll send it to you off-line.
Bill
> Does anyone happen to have the pinout diagram for a Troll Avionics
> Hypervox intercom?
Message 7
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Troll Hypervox intercom pinout |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bill Steer" <steerr@bellsouth.net>
Your email address was found in a "blacklist database" and my response would
not go through. Do you have another email address where I can send the
document for the intercom?
Bill
Do not archive
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Dave N6030X
> <N6030X@DaveMorris.com>
>
> Does anyone happen to have the pinout diagram for a Troll Avionics
> Hypervox intercom?
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: | Fawcett Pump Data???? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
http://www.facet-purolator.com/mcl/pages/frame_src/appref_frmsrc.html
The solid state cube pumps are the standard for carb'd fuel systems.
They come in various flowrates and pressures both with and without in
built check valves.
I ran these for 400 hours and worked perfectly.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Robert L. Nuckolls, III
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 7:36 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Fawcett Pump Data????
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
--> <nuckollsr@cox.net>
I spent as much time as I could searching the 'net for specifications on
Fawcett pumps popular with the OBAM aircraft industry.
Don't have time to search any more today, need to attend one of those
"$1,000 meetings" (ten engineers and managers sit around table for an
hour). If anyone runs across a source for this data, I'd appreciate
hearing about it.
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 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: | Fuel Pump Switch(es) |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: OldBob Siegfried <oldbob@beechowners.com>
Good Morning Frank,
I've been away for a few days and am just catching up
on my E-mail so I have not yet digested this thread.
However, the following statement piques my curiosity.
"Basically you have to allow a small reserve in each
tank, For normal flying that means 0.5 hours
in each tank...For out in the badlands that might be a
bit more...:)"
Would you mean by this statement that you do not want
to run a tank dry or that you feel it is actually
dangerous to do so?
May I ask what sort of an engine is being fed and why
you feel the need for it to never be allowed to run
dry?
Many light aircraft, both certified and experimental,
have multiple fuel tanks. Some Bonanzas have six
separate fuel tanks. If a half hours worth of fuel is
to be considered unusable in each tank, a lot of
payload and range is being lost.
The vast majority of commonly used light plane engines
are driving a solidly connected propellor that will
windmill quite well following a loss of fuel flow. I
understand that some of the experimental airplanes do
have propellors that will declutch or otherwise not
drive the engine if power is lost, but that is not
true of most.
Running a fuel tank dry is a very viable fuel
management operation if it is done correctly.
Any more information or thoughts you would care to
mention?
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Stearman N3977A
Downers Grove, IL
LL22
--- "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)"
<frank.hinde@hp.com> wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Hinde,
> Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
>
> Absolutely correct Brian,
>
> That is the one downside I came up with too.
> Basically you have to allow a small reserve in each
> tank, For normal flying that means 0.5 hours in each
> tank...For out in the badlands that might be a bit
> more...:)
>
> Frank
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
>
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]
> On Behalf Of Brian Lloyd
> Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 12:10 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Fuel Pump Switch(es)
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd
>
> --> <brian-av@lloyd.com>
>
>
> On Sep 10, 2006, at 7:39 PM, Hinde, Frank George
> (Corvallis) wrote:
>
> > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Hinde,
> Frank George
> > (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
> >
> > On my electric only system I simply switch pumps
> to switch tanks...No
> > selector valve...Just a non return valve in each
> line joining to a tee
> > then up to the standards vans selector that has
> been plumbed to act as
> > an on-off valve.
>
> My only concern with that would be that a pump
> failure could render
> 1/2 your fuel unavailable. Several aircraft have
> been lost on long
> over-water flights when electric transfer pumps have
> failed thus
> rendering necessary fuel unavailable. Something to
> think about.
>
> Brian Lloyd 361 Catterline
> Way
> brian HYPHEN av 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
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> browse
> Subscriptions page,
> FAQ,
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
>
> Web Forums!
>
>
> Admin.
>
>
>
>
>
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: | Fuel Pump Switch(es) |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
Well that depends.
On a carbed engine it does not matter if you run a tank dry with Both
tanks feeding the engine.
The pump that draws air will simply airlock and cease to pump
anything...It can't pump against the other pump that is pumping fuel.
Secondly...even if the pump did pump air it simply gets flushed out of
the float bowl in the carb.
I have proved this over 400 hours in my last airplane.
In my new FI'd airplane, Getting air to the servo would not be great but
I really doubt the pump will pump any air against the 30 psi made by the
other pump...I haven't tried to prove this yet.
The really neat thing about this install is that you can even lose all
the fuel out of one tank on take off, plug a fuel filter etc, and the
engine will still run normaly.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of glen
matejcek
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 7:43 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Fuel Pump Switch(es)
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "glen matejcek"
--> <aerobubba@earthlink.net>
George / Kevin-
George- "... an on/off valve on each
tank introduces problems and complexity..."
Boy, am I glad you wrote that! I completely missed the part about
independent fuel valves. Kevin, besides all the good points George
makes, and as someone pointed out a while back on one of these lists,
you will only find a "BOTH" position on a fuel selector in a high wing
single engine airplane. The low wing planes have left, right, and off.
With a high wing plane, you will sometimes see quite an imbalance
develop when drawing fuel from both tanks simultaneously, even with the
head pressure caused by the tank location. This effect could be much
greater in a low wing installation. If you had the ability to have both
tanks plumbed to the engine at the same time, when one tank emptied you
could suck air into the system. Obviously, this would not be good. I
would definitely recommend against two fuel valves.
Sorry for not catching that sooner-
glen matejcek
aerobubba@earthlink.net
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: Fuel Pump Switch(es) |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-av@lloyd.com>
On Sep 11, 2006, at 7:43 AM, glen matejcek wrote:
> airplane. The low wing planes have left, right, and off. With a
> high wing
> plane, you will sometimes see quite an imbalance develop when
> drawing fuel
> from both tanks simultaneously, even with the head pressure caused
> by the
> tank location. This effect could be much greater in a low wing
> installation.
The Nanchang CJ6A and Yak-52 both are low-wing airplanes with a
single on/off fuel selector. The wing tanks gravity feed to a header
tank at the low point in the fuselage. The header tank feeds the carb
through a manual wobble pump, the firewall fuel shut-off, and the
engine-driven fuel pump. All three tanks share a common vent. The
header tank has small flapper valves to prevent fuel from flowing
back out to a tank.
Many complain of uneven fuel feed but I have found that keeping the
ball in the center solves the problem. And even if you do get a
substantial imbalance, getting the ball back into the center causes
the fuel to feed from the more-full tank. It seems to work pretty well.
Brian Lloyd 361 Catterline Way
brian HYPHEN av 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 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: Troll Hypervox intercom pinout |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bill Steer" <steerr@bellsouth.net>
None of the email addresses you sent are working, Dave. Here's the message
I get:
Attempt to resend, or contact the recipient by alternate means to let
them know about the issue.
Recipient: <N6030X@DaveMorris.com>
Reason: The IP Address of the sender (205.152.59.73) was found in a
DNS blacklist database and was therefore refused.
My other mail is going out ok.
Bill
Do not archive
> Does anyone happen to have the pinout diagram for a Troll Avionics
> Hypervox intercom?
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: Fuel Pump Switch(es) |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Bill Denton" <bdenton@bdenton.com>
aerobubba(at)earthlink.ne wrote:
> George / Kevin-
>
> George- "... an on/off valve on each
> tank introduces problems and complexity..."
>
> Boy, am I glad you wrote that! I completely missed the part about
> independent fuel valves. Kevin, besides all the good points George makes,
> and as someone pointed out a while back on one of these lists, you will
> only find a "BOTH" position on a fuel selector in a high wing single engine
> airplane. The low wing planes have left, right, and off. With a high wing
> plane, you will sometimes see quite an imbalance develop when drawing fuel
> from both tanks simultaneously, even with the head pressure caused by the
> tank location. This effect could be much greater in a low wing
> installation. If you had the ability to have both tanks plumbed to the
> engine at the same time, when one tank emptied you could suck air into the
> system. Obviously, this would not be good. I would definitely recommend
> against two fuel valves.
>
> Sorry for not catching that sooner-
>
> glen matejcek
> aerobubba@earthlink.net
RE: Kevin, besides all the good points George makes,
and as someone pointed out a while back on one of these lists, you will
only find a "BOTH" position on a fuel selector in a high wing single engine
airplane.
JFTR: New Cessna 172's have a Left/Right/Both fuel selector
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=60969#60969
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: Fawcett Pump Data???? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Steve Allison <stevea@svpal.org>
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> If anyone
> runs across a source for this data, I'd appreciate
> hearing about it.
>
>
> Bob . . .
Facet website:
http://www.facet-purolator.com/Default1.html
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: | Fuel Pump Switch(es) |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
See below....
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of OldBob Siegfried
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 8:26 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Fuel Pump Switch(es)
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: OldBob Siegfried
--> <oldbob@beechowners.com>
Good Morning Frank,
I've been away for a few days and am just catching up on my E-mail so I have not
yet digested this thread.
However, the following statement piques my curiosity.
"Basically you have to allow a small reserve in each tank, For normal flying that
means 0.5 hours in each tank...For out in the badlands that might be a bit
more...:)"
Would you mean by this statement that you do not want to run a tank dry or that
you feel it is actually dangerous to do so?
The biggest issue in running a tank dry is that you are now down to a single pump
that can pump fuel...I.e a single point of failure. Certainly on a Carb'd install
there is no issue whatsoever in running a tank dry as far as the engine
is concerned. It will run quite happily...As I posted earlier that airlocked
pump "SHOULD" not pump air against the head of the other pump that is still pumping
fuel...and even if it did the air would be flushed harmlessly through the
float bowl.
On my new FI'd installation The pressure is higher so I seriously doubt any air
would get to the engine but I have not proved this yet...If you did get air there
there might be some spluttering, fixed simply by switching off the empty
tank's pump.
May I ask what sort of an engine is being fed and why you feel the need for it
to never be allowed to run dry?
Engine is an IO360 clone..see above. The roller vane pumps do not like to be run
dry...They rely on the fuel to lubricate them and I am told they will fail if
you run them dry...i don't personally know this for a fact however.
I really need to do the tank dry pumping test...simply because if doing a big slip
in a crosswind with low fuel level you could uncover a tank pick up....AS
I said though, the air pump would have to overcome the pressure made by the opposite
fuel pump...I really don't see that happening.
Many light aircraft, both certified and experimental, have multiple fuel tanks.
Some Bonanzas have six separate fuel tanks. If a half hours worth of fuel is
to be considered unusable in each tank, a lot of payload and range is being lost.
The vast majority of commonly used light plane engines are driving a solidly connected
propellor that will windmill quite well following a loss of fuel flow.
I understand that some of the experimental airplanes do have propellors that
will declutch or otherwise not drive the engine if power is lost, but that is
not true of most.
Running a fuel tank dry is a very viable fuel management operation if it is done
correctly.
Any more information or thoughts you would care to mention?
Sure...No one has asked why I went for 2 electric pumps with no mechanical pump?...Heres
why...Eventually (after engine break in) I want to run Mogas in my Lycoming
clone. Mogas has a higher vapour pressure than avgas and so is less tolerant
of being sucked upon before boiling....If you make the fuel warmer it
will boil with even less provocation (sucking). Now where is the Mechanica fuel
pump?....In front of a HOT firewall sucking a fair distance from the tanks through
pressure drops such as the selector valve and filters. Not normally an
issue because the boost pump is running.
So imagine this scenario...its a 100F day....You rotating on takeoff and your boost
pump quits...Your running mogas, the HOT mechanical pump is now sucking as
hard as it can...Will the fuel boil at the inlet to the pump?....Pretty likely
I think.
In realife one of my jobs is to design pumoing systems for all kinds of liquids...some
high vapour pressure...Thats where my interest came from to put the pumps
at the source of the fuel...Preferably in the tanks but mine are in the wingroots
of the RV.
Happy Skies,
You too....These RV's are FAST...never flown at anything like these kinds of speeds
before...:)
Frank
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Stearman N3977A
Downers Grove, IL
LL22
--- "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)"
<frank.hinde@hp.com> wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Hinde,
> Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
>
> Absolutely correct Brian,
>
> That is the one downside I came up with too.
> Basically you have to allow a small reserve in each tank, For normal
> flying that means 0.5 hours in each tank...For out in the badlands
> that might be a bit
> more...:)
>
> Frank
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
>
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]
> On Behalf Of Brian Lloyd
> Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 12:10 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Fuel Pump Switch(es)
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd
>
> --> <brian-av@lloyd.com>
>
>
> On Sep 10, 2006, at 7:39 PM, Hinde, Frank George
> (Corvallis) wrote:
>
> > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Hinde,
> Frank George
> > (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
> >
> > On my electric only system I simply switch pumps
> to switch tanks...No
> > selector valve...Just a non return valve in each
> line joining to a tee
> > then up to the standards vans selector that has
> been plumbed to act as
> > an on-off valve.
>
> My only concern with that would be that a pump failure could render
> 1/2 your fuel unavailable. Several aircraft have been lost on long
> over-water flights when electric transfer pumps have failed thus
> rendering necessary fuel unavailable. Something to think about.
>
> Brian Lloyd 361 Catterline
> Way
> brian HYPHEN av 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
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> browse
> Subscriptions page,
> FAQ,
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
>
> Web Forums!
>
>
> Admin.
>
>
>
>
>
Message 16
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Antenna locations in an RV9 |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Gerry Filby <gerf@gerf.com>
I'm getting ready to install my antennas in my RV9 - COM bent
whip and a TPDR blade. I'd like to mount them just forward of
the wing spar outboard edges of the cockpit floor. I think I
can just keep the connections under the foward center section
covers.
I get the sense that most people go behind the wing spar - 2
advantages of mounting forward is that i) you don't have to
pass the wires through the center section and ii) it gets a
little more distance between the antenna cables and the wing
strobe head cables.
Any good reason why I shouldn't mount them forward of the
center section ?
__g__
==========================================================
Gerry Filby gerf@gerf.com
----------------------------------------------------------
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: | Antenna locations in an RV9 |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
Closer to engine noise,
Not much room between the floor and underside of cover...Have to allow
enough bend on the cable...Or use a right angled adaptor.
Frank
7a...flying since Friday
I'm getting ready to install my antennas in my RV9 - COM bent whip and a
TPDR blade. I'd like to mount them just forward of the wing spar
outboard edges of the cockpit floor. I think I can just keep the
connections under the foward center section covers.
I get the sense that most people go behind the wing spar - 2 advantages
of mounting forward is that i) you don't have to pass the wires through
the center section and ii) it gets a little more distance between the
antenna cables and the wing strobe head cables.
Any good reason why I shouldn't mount them forward of the center section
?
__g__
==========================================================
Gerry Filby gerf@gerf.com
----------------------------------------------------------
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: | Antenna locations in an RV9 |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Gerry Filby <gerf@gerf.com>
Yup, right angle adaptor was where I was going ... engine noise
is a very good point ... thx.
g
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George
> (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
>
> Closer to engine noise,
>
> Not much room between the floor and underside of cover...Have to allow
> enough bend on the cable...Or use a right angled adaptor.
>
> Frank
> 7a...flying since Friday
>
>
> I'm getting ready to install my antennas in my RV9 - COM bent whip and a
> TPDR blade. I'd like to mount them just forward of the wing spar
> outboard edges of the cockpit floor. I think I can just keep the
> connections under the foward center section covers.
>
> I get the sense that most people go behind the wing spar - 2 advantages
> of mounting forward is that i) you don't have to pass the wires through
> the center section and ii) it gets a little more distance between the
> antenna cables and the wing strobe head cables.
>
> Any good reason why I shouldn't mount them forward of the center section
> ?
>
> __g__
>
> ==========================================================
> Gerry Filby gerf@gerf.com
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
--
__g__
==========================================================
Gerry Filby gerf@gerf.com
----------------------------------------------------------
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: Antenna locations in an RV9 |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Richard Dudley <rhdudley1@bellsouth.net>
Gerry,
I put my transponder antenna in the center just in front of the spar in
my -6A. Behind the console, there is no need for a right angle adaptor.
My two comm antennas are left and right in front of the landing gear
weldments well outboard of the centerline. There, I used right angle
adaptors. With sound proofing material between the ribs of the floor
about the thickness of the rib height, the adaptors seem adequately
protected. With a carpet over the soundproofing material, the cable lies
between the carpet and soundproofing material. I have about 100 hours on
the aircraft and both transponder and comms work well.
Regards,
Richard Dudley
-6A
Gerry Filby wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Gerry Filby <gerf@gerf.com>
>
>
>I'm getting ready to install my antennas in my RV9 - COM bent
>whip and a TPDR blade. I'd like to mount them just forward of
>the wing spar outboard edges of the cockpit floor. I think I
>can just keep the connections under the foward center section
>covers.
>
>I get the sense that most people go behind the wing spar - 2
>advantages of mounting forward is that i) you don't have to
>pass the wires through the center section and ii) it gets a
>little more distance between the antenna cables and the wing
>strobe head cables.
>
>Any good reason why I shouldn't mount them forward of the
>center section ?
>
>__g__
>
>==========================================================
>Gerry Filby gerf@gerf.com
>----------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
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: Antenna locations in an RV9 |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Gerry Filby <gerf@gerf.com>
Interesting, thanks for the comments. Question - with the
transponder in the center are you seeing any affects of
heat/dirt from the engine exhaust pipes ?
g
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Richard Dudley
> <rhdudley1@bellsouth.net>
>
> Gerry,
>
> I put my transponder antenna in the center just in front of
> the spar in
> my -6A. Behind the console, there is no need for a right angle adaptor.
> My two comm antennas are left and right in front of the landing gear
> weldments well outboard of the centerline. There, I used right angle
> adaptors. With sound proofing material between the ribs of the floor
> about the thickness of the rib height, the adaptors seem adequately
> protected. With a carpet over the soundproofing material, the
> cable lies
> between the carpet and soundproofing material. I have about 100
> hours on
> the aircraft and both transponder and comms work well.
>
> Regards,
>
> Richard Dudley
> -6A
>
> Gerry Filby wrote:
>
> >--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Gerry Filby <gerf@gerf.com>
> >
> >
> >I'm getting ready to install my antennas in my RV9 - COM bent
> >whip and a TPDR blade. I'd like to mount them just forward of
> >the wing spar outboard edges of the cockpit floor. I think I
> >can just keep the connections under the foward center section
> >covers.
> >
> >I get the sense that most people go behind the wing spar - 2
> >advantages of mounting forward is that i) you don't have to
> >pass the wires through the center section and ii) it gets a
> >little more distance between the antenna cables and the wing
> >strobe head cables.
> >
> >Any good reason why I shouldn't mount them forward of the
> >center section ?
> >
> >__g__
> >
> >==========================================================
> >Gerry Filby gerf@gerf.com
> >----------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
--
__g__
==========================================================
Gerry Filby gerf@gerf.com
----------------------------------------------------------
Message 21
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Fuel Pump Switch(es) |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd <brian-av@lloyd.com>
On Mon, 2006-09-11 at 08:57, Bill Denton wrote:
> RE: Kevin, besides all the good points George makes,
> and as someone pointed out a while back on one of these lists, you will
> only find a "BOTH" position on a fuel selector in a high wing single engine
> airplane.
Well, it is probably not safe to use the words "always", "never", and
"only" when describing systems. As I pointed out earlier, both the
Nanchang CJ6A and Yak-52 are low-wing aircraft that have only an on/off
fuel selector at the firewall. There is no way on either of these
aircraft to select a left or right tank. They are always on "both".
Brian Lloyd
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: Antenna locations in an RV9 |
Gerry,
The only effect that I see is some oil accumulation from the breather.
I have not yet eliminated the oil on the undercarriage even though the
breather is immediately above the left exhaust pipe. There has been no
noticible effect on transponder function.
RHDudley
Gerry Filby wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Gerry Filby <gerf@gerf.com>
>
>
>Interesting, thanks for the comments. Question - with the
>transponder in the center are you seeing any affects of
>heat/dirt from the engine exhaust pipes ?
>
>g
>
>
>
>>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Richard Dudley
>><rhdudley1@bellsouth.net>
>>
>>Gerry,
>>
>>I put my transponder antenna in the center just in front of
>>the spar in
>>my -6A. Behind the console, there is no need for a right angle adaptor.
>>My two comm antennas are left and right in front of the landing gear
>>weldments well outboard of the centerline. There, I used right angle
>>adaptors. With sound proofing material between the ribs of the floor
>>about the thickness of the rib height, the adaptors seem adequately
>>protected. With a carpet over the soundproofing material, the
>>cable lies
>>between the carpet and soundproofing material. I have about 100
>>hours on
>>the aircraft and both transponder and comms work well.
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>Richard Dudley
>>-6A
>>
>>Gerry Filby wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Gerry Filby <gerf@gerf.com>
>>>
>>>
>>>I'm getting ready to install my antennas in my RV9 - COM bent
>>>whip and a TPDR blade. I'd like to mount them just forward of
>>>the wing spar outboard edges of the cockpit floor. I think I
>>>can just keep the connections under the foward center section
>>>covers.
>>>
>>>I get the sense that most people go behind the wing spar - 2
>>>advantages of mounting forward is that i) you don't have to
>>>pass the wires through the center section and ii) it gets a
>>>little more distance between the antenna cables and the wing
>>>strobe head cables.
>>>
>>>Any good reason why I shouldn't mount them forward of the
>>>center section ?
>>>
>>>__g__
>>>
>>>==========================================================
>>>Gerry Filby gerf@gerf.com
>>>----------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
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: | Fuel Pump Switch(es) |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Marty" <martorious@charter.net>
Bob, I think the reason he wanted to leave a reserve in each tank is in case
the fuel pump in the opposite tank quit and he was therefore denied access
to the fuel in that tank he would have the reserve fuel in the 'good' tank.
Marty
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of OldBob
Siegfried
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 10:26 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Fuel Pump Switch(es)
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: OldBob Siegfried
<oldbob@beechowners.com>
Good Morning Frank,
I've been away for a few days and am just catching up
on my E-mail so I have not yet digested this thread.
However, the following statement piques my curiosity.
"Basically you have to allow a small reserve in each
tank, For normal flying that means 0.5 hours
in each tank...For out in the badlands that might be a
bit more...:)"
Would you mean by this statement that you do not want
to run a tank dry or that you feel it is actually
dangerous to do so?
May I ask what sort of an engine is being fed and why
you feel the need for it to never be allowed to run
dry?
Many light aircraft, both certified and experimental,
have multiple fuel tanks. Some Bonanzas have six
separate fuel tanks. If a half hours worth of fuel is
to be considered unusable in each tank, a lot of
payload and range is being lost.
The vast majority of commonly used light plane engines
are driving a solidly connected propellor that will
windmill quite well following a loss of fuel flow. I
understand that some of the experimental airplanes do
have propellors that will declutch or otherwise not
drive the engine if power is lost, but that is not
true of most.
Running a fuel tank dry is a very viable fuel
management operation if it is done correctly.
Any more information or thoughts you would care to
mention?
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Stearman N3977A
Downers Grove, IL
LL22
--- "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)"
<frank.hinde@hp.com> wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Hinde,
> Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
>
> Absolutely correct Brian,
>
> That is the one downside I came up with too.
> Basically you have to allow a small reserve in each
> tank, For normal flying that means 0.5 hours in each
> tank...For out in the badlands that might be a bit
> more...:)
>
> Frank
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
>
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]
> On Behalf Of Brian Lloyd
> Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 12:10 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Fuel Pump Switch(es)
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd
>
> --> <brian-av@lloyd.com>
>
>
> On Sep 10, 2006, at 7:39 PM, Hinde, Frank George
> (Corvallis) wrote:
>
> > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Hinde,
> Frank George
> > (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
> >
> > On my electric only system I simply switch pumps
> to switch tanks...No
> > selector valve...Just a non return valve in each
> line joining to a tee
> > then up to the standards vans selector that has
> been plumbed to act as
> > an on-off valve.
>
> My only concern with that would be that a pump
> failure could render
> 1/2 your fuel unavailable. Several aircraft have
> been lost on long
> over-water flights when electric transfer pumps have
> failed thus
> rendering necessary fuel unavailable. Something to
> think about.
>
> Brian Lloyd 361 Catterline
> Way
> brian HYPHEN av 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
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> browse
> Subscriptions page,
> FAQ,
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
>
> Web Forums!
>
>
> Admin.
>
>
>
>
>
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: | Whelen Strobes Blowing Fuses |
Gang,
I've got a problem with my Whelen strobe system blowing a 10 amp fuse.
I'm using a 10 amp mini-blade fuse which is blowing intermittently. The kit
manufacturer as per the instructions, recommends a 10 amp fuse, but of
course they allude to a 10 amp aircraft style reset-able fuse. I can seem
to get the fuse to blow fairly regularly if I turn the strobes on and off in
quick succession. The fuse will blow less reliably if I turn the strobes on
prior to takeoff and just leave them on.
My questions are these: Would there be any difference in a 10 amp blade fuse
vs. the mechanical breaker style fuse as prescribed by the manufacturer?
And the other question is is there such thing as a slow-blow mini blade
style fuse and could this possibly make a difference? And finally perhaps
there is something more insidious at work here?
TIA,
Peter
_______________________________________
Peter J. Braswell
804.934.0300 Office
804.690.5896 Mobile
_______________________________________
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: | Fuel Pump Switch(es) |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
You got it...Now did I religiously adhere to that rule when arriving home from
a long flight....well once or twice in 400 hours would have been a bad time to
loose a pump....:)
Tested high cruise power today (full rich) on a single pump and it still makes
almost full (i.e return valve relief) pressure...I'm pretty confident the pumps
are adequately sized.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Marty
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 3:16 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Fuel Pump Switch(es)
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Marty"
--> <martorious@charter.net>
Bob, I think the reason he wanted to leave a reserve in each tank is in case the
fuel pump in the opposite tank quit and he was therefore denied access to the
fuel in that tank he would have the reserve fuel in the 'good' tank.
Marty
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of OldBob Siegfried
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 10:26 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Fuel Pump Switch(es)
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: OldBob Siegfried
<oldbob@beechowners.com>
Good Morning Frank,
I've been away for a few days and am just catching up on my E-mail so I have not
yet digested this thread.
However, the following statement piques my curiosity.
"Basically you have to allow a small reserve in each tank, For normal flying that
means 0.5 hours in each tank...For out in the badlands that might be a bit
more...:)"
Would you mean by this statement that you do not want to run a tank dry or that
you feel it is actually dangerous to do so?
May I ask what sort of an engine is being fed and why you feel the need for it
to never be allowed to run dry?
Many light aircraft, both certified and experimental, have multiple fuel tanks.
Some Bonanzas have six separate fuel tanks. If a half hours worth of fuel is
to be considered unusable in each tank, a lot of payload and range is being lost.
The vast majority of commonly used light plane engines are driving a solidly connected
propellor that will windmill quite well following a loss of fuel flow.
I understand that some of the experimental airplanes do have propellors that
will declutch or otherwise not drive the engine if power is lost, but that is
not true of most.
Running a fuel tank dry is a very viable fuel management operation if it is done
correctly.
Any more information or thoughts you would care to mention?
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Stearman N3977A
Downers Grove, IL
LL22
--- "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)"
<frank.hinde@hp.com> wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Hinde,
> Frank George (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
>
> Absolutely correct Brian,
>
> That is the one downside I came up with too.
> Basically you have to allow a small reserve in each tank, For normal
> flying that means 0.5 hours in each tank...For out in the badlands
> that might be a bit
> more...:)
>
> Frank
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
>
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]
> On Behalf Of Brian Lloyd
> Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 12:10 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Fuel Pump Switch(es)
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Brian Lloyd
>
> --> <brian-av@lloyd.com>
>
>
> On Sep 10, 2006, at 7:39 PM, Hinde, Frank George
> (Corvallis) wrote:
>
> > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Hinde,
> Frank George
> > (Corvallis)" <frank.hinde@hp.com>
> >
> > On my electric only system I simply switch pumps
> to switch tanks...No
> > selector valve...Just a non return valve in each
> line joining to a tee
> > then up to the standards vans selector that has
> been plumbed to act as
> > an on-off valve.
>
> My only concern with that would be that a pump failure could render
> 1/2 your fuel unavailable. Several aircraft have been lost on long
> over-water flights when electric transfer pumps have failed thus
> rendering necessary fuel unavailable. Something to think about.
>
> Brian Lloyd 361 Catterline
> Way
> brian HYPHEN av 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
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> browse
> Subscriptions page,
> FAQ,
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
>
> Web Forums!
>
>
> Admin.
>
>
>
>
>
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! --
|