Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:25 AM - Re: Transponder (Dave)
2. 05:26 AM - Re: tuning static port? (FLYaDIVE@aol.com)
3. 05:27 AM - Re: Garmin Stack (FLYaDIVE@aol.com)
4. 06:03 AM - Re: Transponder (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
5. 06:27 AM - Re: Bob, no laptops in OBAMs? (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
6. 06:30 AM - Re: kx 155 remote com and nav (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
7. 07:41 AM - Looking for a switch (Alan K. Adamson)
8. 08:01 AM - Re: Looking for a switch (OldBob Siegfried)
9. 08:18 AM - Re: Looking for a switch (Alan K. Adamson)
10. 08:22 AM - Re: Looking for a switch (Dave N6030X)
11. 08:52 AM - Re: Looking for a switch (Glaeser, Dennis A)
12. 09:11 AM - Re: Looking for a switch (Jim Baker)
13. 09:35 AM - Odd advertisement.... (Jim Baker)
14. 10:22 AM - Re: Looking for a switch (Brian Meyette)
15. 10:49 AM - Re: Looking for a switch (Brian Meyette)
16. 11:46 AM - Re: Re: Looking for a switch (Dave N6030X)
17. 12:16 PM - Re: Looking for a switch (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
18. 12:16 PM - Re: kx 155 remote com and nav (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
19. 12:16 PM - Re: Bob, no laptops in OBAMs? (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
20. 12:16 PM - Re: Transponder (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
21. 12:16 PM - Re: kx 155 remote com and nav (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
22. 12:16 PM - Alternator drive stand is coming home . . . (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
23. 02:56 PM - Re: Looking for a switch (Alan K. Adamson)
24. 05:48 PM - strobe wiring (Tim Juhl)
25. 06:32 PM - Re: strobe wiring (Bob C.)
26. 06:58 PM - Mogas versus 100LL ()
27. 07:19 PM - Re: Looking for a switch (John McMahon)
28. 07:19 PM - Re: Looking for a switch (John McMahon)
29. 08:24 PM - Re: Mogas versus 100LL ()
30. 09:10 PM - Re: Mogas versus 100LL (Fiveonepw@aol.com)
31. 09:18 PM - Re: Can someone share experience tuning static port? (PWilson)
32. 11:07 PM - Re: Mogas versus 100LL (Ed Holyoke)
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Dave <dave@abrahamson.net>
My AK350 would not provide data to my GTX330 until I grounded the pin
the AK350 instructions say to ground for a non-strobed transponder.
Message 2
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: tuning static port? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: FLYaDIVE@aol.com
In a message dated 9/20/06 3:04:56 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
frank.hinde@hp.com writes:
> Why?...Is it certified?.....Turbocharged? High CR?...If you can get your
> CHT's under 350F in normal cruise and a CR of 8.5:1 or lower I can't see
> it would require 100LL?
Why is correct ... They do make 93 & 94 octane MoGas and that works well in
the HC range.
Barry
"Chop'd Liver"
"Show them the first time, correct them the second time, kick them the third
time."
Yamashiada
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: Garmin Stack |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: FLYaDIVE@aol.com
In a message dated 9/20/06 12:21:14 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
sam.marlow@adelphia.net writes:
> Can someone with a Garmin stack give me an idea on how much space I need
> to allow between units, 340, 430, sl30 ect? I'm thinging maybe the racks
> can go metel to metal.
> Thanks,
> Sam Marlow
> RV10 Avionics
========================
Sam:
Nothing is metel to metal, as long as trays are used; you can stack as close
as the trays will allow. For cooling the 340 has a fitting for the cooling
fan hose to connect to. I suspect the other Garmin units do also.
Barry
"Chop'd Liver"
"Show them the first time, correct them the second time, kick them the third
time."
Yamashiada
Message 4
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 07:24 AM 9/21/2006 -0400, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Dave <dave@abrahamson.net>
>
>My AK350 would not provide data to my GTX330 until I grounded the pin the
>AK350 instructions say to ground for a non-strobed transponder.
Thank you for jumping in here Dave! It's been a long
time since I've built a T2000/AK350 harness so when
I went to the instruction manual last night I just
searched the .pdf for "strobe" and the program jumped
to page 24 where I read:
------------------
"The Altitude Reporter AK-350 is remote mounted equipment
that is fully automatic in operation. The companion
ATC transponder normally controls the operation of hte
Altitude Reporter by automatically enabling or disabling
its operation.
This is done by pulling-up to logic LOW (to enable)
or pulling-down to logic HIGH (to disable) the STROBE
(pin 6) line of the Altitude Reporter."
------------------
Hmmm . . . NORMALLY in electro-speak, one pulls a line
DOWN for logic LO and pulls UP for logic HI. I stumbled
over the words in the paragraph and then recalled that
in some interface wiring, inverting buffers are used
between internal electronics and outside world wiring.
Outside the box, logic LO is in fact a higher voltage
than logic HI which is ground.
So, I sailed around what appeared to be a rational
condition. Now, as Dave has suggested, the WIRING
DIAGRAMS earlier in the manual are quite specific for
treatment of the STROBE line when the companion
transponder doesn't need it: the line is firmly attached
to ground.
I do recall now that when I was selling the T2000
MicroAir and associated harness to mate with the AK350,
the pink wire in the harness was paired with the
ground wire to the transponder.
It's always helpful to have more than one head pondering
meanings to at least raise valid questions if not
point out blatant errors. Had I reached past the search
engine and reviewed the wiring diagrams, the error of
my earlier understanding would have been obvious.
This, ladies and gentlemen, is a micro-example of
a good critical design review. Understanding of words,
and ordinary errors can be impediments to progress.
Dave gets the "Atta Boy" nod for the day.
Bob . . .
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: Bob, no laptops in OBAMs? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 01:21 AM 9/21/2006 -0400, you wrote:
>
>Is The Burning Battery Problem Solved?
>
>
>Never Fear... PRBA Is On The Case
>
>
>The Portable Rechargeable Battery Association, or PRBA -- did you even
>know there was such an organization? -- says all the problems with burning
>batteries of late... in their words... most likely relates to aircraft
>charging systems.
Except that batteries have caught fire sitting on tables
at electronic products expos. I've heard of one case (but
haven't located a learned narrative) of a computer "burning"
in the overhead compartment of a passenger transport aircraft.
Now, this might have been another kind of failure that caused
the battery to supply energy to smoke other components in the
computer. Given that the world's attention is focused on
battery failures, every instance of smoke from a computer is
likely to be attributed to "battery failure" . . .
>They describe the risk of using batteries -- even those recalled but not
>yet returned -- is low, and can be further mitigated by either using the
>electronic device on battery power alone, or plugging the device into the
>aircraft power system without the battery installed.
Correct. Documented catastrophic failures of batteries I've read
said the batteries were on-charge at the time.
>Apparently, PRBA told the FAA about the danger of charging batteries
>inflight using an aircraft's electrical system almost 10 years ago. In a
>1997 letter sent to the airlines and the FAA, the association highlighted
>the need for stable voltage and an instantaneous cut-off system in the
>event of an over-heat or over-charge condition.
This pre-supposes that the aircraft energy source for battery
charging (typically 19v DC) is somehow different than the
AC Mains charging source . . .
>Most electronic equipment with rechargeable batteries already employ a
>cut-off system, but they might not work if the user replaces the original
>battery with one not supplied by the manufacturer... so onboard electrical
>systems should have a redundant cut-off capability. They don't.
Not sure what this would be. The AC Mains power supplies for laptops
are little switchmode power supplies that produce some lower level
DC, typically 16-20 volts at a couple of amps. The wires comiing out
of the power supplies on every computer I've owned was a simple (+) and
(-) DC power . . . no third wire to exchange any sort or intelligence
between computer mounted battery and the external power supply.
It's true that most if not all new products are fitted with "smart
batteries" . . . they have a microcontroller in the battery to
track incoming and outgoing power and convert the data to state
of charge information for the computer's on-board power supply and
charging circuits. Hence one will observe that battery packs for
their modern portables have multi-pin conntectors for the purpose
of exchanging both DC power and intelligence about battery management.
>PRBA stresses that even if a battery does catch fire, UK Civil Aviation
>Authority testing has conclusively proven that standard aviation fire
>extinquishers can douse the flames.
That's a comfort. Does anyone carry a "standard aviation fire
extinguisher" in their airplane?
The risks are quite low. The infamous failed batteries are of a unique
Li-Ion technology particularly vulnerable to the failure mode
being examined. I'm working with Concorde and others to evaluate
the potential future of Li-Ion batteries in aircraft. I've proposed
a battery test program (in my van with a 24/7 DAS recording
temperature, input/output current and voltage) to see how hard
it is to 'beat up' a small array of Li-Ion cells.
In the mean time, I'll suggest that use of a lap-top aboard
passenger transport aircraft offers a unique hazard: When
the passenger in front of you reclines the seat, you're
in danger of injury to the diaphragm if not asphyxiation
by crushing. My lap-tops stay in the overhead and I do my
writing with a theme-book and pencil.
Bob . . .
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: kx 155 remote com and nav |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 11:08 PM 9/20/2006 -0400, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Gary G Brock" <kf4hbd@intrstar.net>
>
>I am using the approach system fast stack in my rv9a. I have a kx 155 and
>like to know how to wire the remote nav and com leads to my yoke that has a
>left and right buttom. I have all the wiring from the yoke wired to a
>terminal block. Does the leads have to have power to them. The remote will
>alllow me to flip/flop the nav and com from the yoke. New to the list.
The wiring diagrams for your radios will define how remote switches
are configured. They're generally a momentary grounding signal (push-
button) used to toggle the frequency in use. The MicroAir 760VHF
would step through a memory array of about 10 frequencies in response
to momentary closures of the push button.
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 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: | Looking for a switch |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Alan K. Adamson" <aadamson@highrf.com>
I'm looking for a locking type switch to be used to control 2 positions on a
fuel pump (low boost and high boost). I need the configuration to support
the down position to be off, the middle to be low boost on, and the top
position to be high boost on, with a lockout between low and high boost.
I've done a bit of searching, but so far, haven't been able to find what I
need. Hoping someone here might have seen what I've described. I had
originally thot of using an S700-2-50 as I thought I only needed high boost
for prime. However, in talking with other pilots, it now has come to my
attention that High boost needs to be switchable in the event of engine
driven fuel pump failure and can't simply be momentary. The reason I can't
use a 3 position without lockout, is that low boost is normally switched on
at or above 10K and if you accidentally switched to high boost, you'd drown
the engine.
Any help would be appreciated.... In the morass of switches that exist, even
a good source of a manufacturer and I'll do the leg work would be helpful.
Thanks in advance,
Alan
Message 8
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Looking for a switch |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: OldBob Siegfried <oldbob@beechowners.com>
Good Morning Alan,
Once again, I am probably venturing where my knowledge
is insufficient, but here goes any way!
What engine are you running?
We often have high and low boost pump positions on our
fuel injected Continental engines. It is true that
high boost will kill an engine being operated at low
power, but if the throttle is wide open and the RPM
good and high, high boost may not even be noticed!
The fuel pressures are not additive. The boost pump
only puts out a bit more pressure than the engine pump
does at high power. In some cases, it is even a bit
less, though still adequate to operate the engine at
full power in the case of an engine driven pump
failure. If you are operating at normal cruise powers
and the high boost is selected, the engine may get a
bit rough, but the power loss will be minimal and the
roughness will get your attention in plenty of time to
take corrective action. Personally, on the Continental
fuel injection system, I see no problem with
nonlocking switches for the boost pump.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Stearman N3977A
Downers Grove, IL
LL22
--- "Alan K. Adamson" <aadamson@highrf.com> wrote:
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Alan K.
> Adamson" <aadamson@highrf.com>
>
> I'm looking for a locking type switch to be used to
> control 2 positions on a
> fuel pump (low boost and high boost). I need the
> configuration to support
> the down position to be off, the middle to be low
> boost on, and the top
> position to be high boost on, with a lockout between
> low and high boost.
>
> I've done a bit of searching, but so far, haven't
> been able to find what I
> need. Hoping someone here might have seen what I've
> described. I had
> originally thot of using an S700-2-50 as I thought I
> only needed high boost
> for prime. However, in talking with other pilots,
> it now has come to my
> attention that High boost needs to be switchable in
> the event of engine
> driven fuel pump failure and can't simply be
> momentary. The reason I can't
> use a 3 position without lockout, is that low boost
> is normally switched on
> at or above 10K and if you accidentally switched to
> high boost, you'd drown
> the engine.
>
> Any help would be appreciated.... In the morass of
> switches that exist, even
> a good source of a manufacturer and I'll do the leg
> work would be helpful.
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Alan
>
>
>
>
>
> browse
> Subscriptions page,
> FAQ,
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
>
> Web Forums!
>
>
> Admin.
>
>
>
>
>
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: | Looking for a switch |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Alan K. Adamson" <aadamson@highrf.com>
In doing some more research, it looks like EATON may have what I need...
Anyone know of a EATON reseller? They make the MilSpec version and a
regular version. The Milspec is an MS27408-4M - the M is the designator for
the right type of lockout. Or the regular version looks like an 8537k14m.
As a reference, here are their switches.
http://aerospace.eaton.com/pdfs/power/Switch_Catalog_With_Cover.pdf
If anyone has any further info, it would be helpful.
Thanks,
Alan
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Alan K.
Adamson
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 10:40 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Looking for a switch
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Alan K. Adamson"
--> <aadamson@highrf.com>
I'm looking for a locking type switch to be used to control 2 positions on a
fuel pump (low boost and high boost). I need the configuration to support
the down position to be off, the middle to be low boost on, and the top
position to be high boost on, with a lockout between low and high boost.
I've done a bit of searching, but so far, haven't been able to find what I
need. Hoping someone here might have seen what I've described. I had
originally thot of using an S700-2-50 as I thought I only needed high boost
for prime. However, in talking with other pilots, it now has come to my
attention that High boost needs to be switchable in the event of engine
driven fuel pump failure and can't simply be momentary. The reason I can't
use a 3 position without lockout, is that low boost is normally switched on
at or above 10K and if you accidentally switched to high boost, you'd drown
the engine.
Any help would be appreciated.... In the morass of switches that exist, even
a good source of a manufacturer and I'll do the leg work would be helpful.
Thanks in advance,
Alan
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: Looking for a switch |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Dave N6030X <N6030X@DaveMorris.com>
How about a 5 position rotary that you have to "accidentally" twist
past 2 unused positions to get to high?
Dave
At 09:40 AM 9/21/2006, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Alan K. Adamson"
><aadamson@highrf.com>
>
>I'm looking for a locking type switch to be used to control 2 positions on a
>fuel pump (low boost and high boost). I need the configuration to support
>the down position to be off, the middle to be low boost on, and the top
>position to be high boost on, with a lockout between low and high boost.
>
>I've done a bit of searching, but so far, haven't been able to find what I
>need. Hoping someone here might have seen what I've described. I had
>originally thot of using an S700-2-50 as I thought I only needed high boost
>for prime. However, in talking with other pilots, it now has come to my
>attention that High boost needs to be switchable in the event of engine
>driven fuel pump failure and can't simply be momentary. The reason I can't
>use a 3 position without lockout, is that low boost is normally switched on
>at or above 10K and if you accidentally switched to high boost, you'd drown
>the engine.
>
>Any help would be appreciated.... In the morass of switches that exist, even
>a good source of a manufacturer and I'll do the leg work would be helpful.
>
>Thanks in advance,
>Alan
>
>
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: Looking for a switch |
The ON-ON-ON type of switch is the toughest to get without $pecial order
- except for the S-10 from B&C which doesn't have locking.
The most reasonably priced (~$12) locking switches I've found are the
NKK S series - available from Digikey and Mouser.
It's not what you want, but if you can live with an On-Off-On locking
switch (S3AL), Digikey has some in stock:
http://www.digikey.com/scripts/DkSearch/dksus.dll?Detail?Ref=162095&Row
136164&Site=US
NKK Datasheet:
http://rocky.digikey.com/WebLib/NKK%20Switches/Web%20Data/SSeriesToggles
MedCap.pdf
I've looked into locking switches a fair amount, and suspect to get
exactly what you want will probably cost north of $40 (probably over
50), and require a few months on a special order. The good news is that
you'd be able to order locking to do what I think you want (no lock from
Off to On - lock from On to Hi).
Dennis Glaeser
RV7A - Finishing kit
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: Looking for a switch |
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (4.41)
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Jim Baker" <jlbaker@msbit.net>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: OldBob Siegfried <oldbob@beechowners.com>
> Personally, on the Continental
> fuel injection system, I see no problem with
> nonlocking switches for the boost pump.
I know my Bellanca Viking doesn't have a locking switch and,
personally, wouldn't want one. Momentary inattention, and then
the sputter of fuel exhaustion, prompts a quick stab at the low
boost switch after switching tanks.
Jim Baker
580.788.2779
Elmore City, OK
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: | Odd advertisement.... |
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (4.41)
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Jim Baker" <jlbaker@msbit.net>
An e-mail advertisement received from Acft Spruce.....
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
"First-Class Travel for Your Plane"
If youre going to fly - look good doing it!
Now, finally available for your personal plane - the same
specialty paint used by major airlines, the Patriot Missile project,
the Space Shuttle Challenger project, the RAM Missile, and the
Stealth Bomber.
Unsurpassed beauty, protection and performance are available
for your plane.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Let's see.....anyone care what paint is used on a missle and just
how long will one have to admire it? The Challenger shuttle?
Duh! And I wonder just how much of that paint was used on the
B-2...either you can't get the exterior "paint" or it's used internally
where you can't see it.
Copy-writers....gotta wonder sometimes.....
Jim Baker
580.788.2779
Elmore City, OK
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: | Looking for a switch |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Brian Meyette" <brianpublic2@starband.net>
I did a lot of looking at switches when I was doing my wiring layout (see
prev emails about Z-19). I found a good selection of Honeywell and Eaton
switches at Allied. http://alliedelec.com I saved the PDF catalogs for
both brands & will send them to you
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Alan K.
Adamson
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 11:18 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Looking for a switch
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Alan K. Adamson"
<aadamson@highrf.com>
In doing some more research, it looks like EATON may have what I need...
Anyone know of a EATON reseller? They make the MilSpec version and a
regular version. The Milspec is an MS27408-4M - the M is the designator for
the right type of lockout. Or the regular version looks like an 8537k14m.
As a reference, here are their switches.
http://aerospace.eaton.com/pdfs/power/Switch_Catalog_With_Cover.pdf
If anyone has any further info, it would be helpful.
Thanks,
Alan
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Alan K.
Adamson
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 10:40 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Looking for a switch
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Alan K. Adamson"
--> <aadamson@highrf.com>
I'm looking for a locking type switch to be used to control 2 positions on a
fuel pump (low boost and high boost). I need the configuration to support
the down position to be off, the middle to be low boost on, and the top
position to be high boost on, with a lockout between low and high boost.
I've done a bit of searching, but so far, haven't been able to find what I
need. Hoping someone here might have seen what I've described. I had
originally thot of using an S700-2-50 as I thought I only needed high boost
for prime. However, in talking with other pilots, it now has come to my
attention that High boost needs to be switchable in the event of engine
driven fuel pump failure and can't simply be momentary. The reason I can't
use a 3 position without lockout, is that low boost is normally switched on
at or above 10K and if you accidentally switched to high boost, you'd drown
the engine.
Any help would be appreciated.... In the morass of switches that exist, even
a good source of a manufacturer and I'll do the leg work would be helpful.
Thanks in advance,
Alan
--
--
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: | Looking for a switch |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Brian Meyette" <brianpublic2@starband.net>
You might also consider a separate switch for the high boost
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Alan K.
Adamson
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 10:40 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Looking for a switch
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Alan K. Adamson"
<aadamson@highrf.com>
I'm looking for a locking type switch to be used to control 2 positions on a
fuel pump (low boost and high boost). I need the configuration to support
the down position to be off, the middle to be low boost on, and the top
position to be high boost on, with a lockout between low and high boost.
I've done a bit of searching, but so far, haven't been able to find what I
need. Hoping someone here might have seen what I've described. I had
originally thot of using an S700-2-50 as I thought I only needed high boost
for prime. However, in talking with other pilots, it now has come to my
attention that High boost needs to be switchable in the event of engine
driven fuel pump failure and can't simply be momentary. The reason I can't
use a 3 position without lockout, is that low boost is normally switched on
at or above 10K and if you accidentally switched to high boost, you'd drown
the engine.
Any help would be appreciated.... In the morass of switches that exist, even
a good source of a manufacturer and I'll do the leg work would be helpful.
Thanks in advance,
Alan
--
--
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: Looking for a switch |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Dave N6030X <N6030X@DaveMorris.com>
Whenever I find myself looking for some kind of rare device, or
putting something into the aircraft that nobody else seems to be
putting in theirs, or looking for a very pricey component, I stop and
ask myself, is this really necessary, or have I just designed
something that is totally overkill? Is there a reason why nobody
else is doing it this way? Am I really this far on the leading edge
or have I made a booboo?
Dave Morris
At 10:50 AM 9/21/2006, you wrote:
>The ON-ON-ON type of switch is the toughest to get without $pecial
>order - except for the S-10 from B&C which doesn't have locking.
>
>The most reasonably priced (~$12) locking switches I've found are
>the NKK S series - available from Digikey and Mouser.
>
>It's not what you want, but if you can live with an On-Off-On
>locking switch (S3AL), Digikey has some in stock:
><http://www.digikey.com/scripts/DkSearch/dksus.dll?Detail?Ref=162095&Row=136164&Site=US>http://www.digikey.com/scripts/DkSearch/dksus.dll?Detail?Ref=162095&Row=136164&Site=US
>
>
>NKK Datasheet:
><http://rocky.digikey.com/WebLib/NKK%20Switches/Web%20Data/SSeriesTogglesMedCap.pdf>http://rocky.digikey.com/WebLib/NKK%20Switches/Web%20Data/SSeriesTogglesMedCap.pdf
>
>
>I've looked into locking switches a fair amount, and suspect to get
>exactly what you want will probably cost north of $40 (probably over
>50), and require a few months on a special order. The good news is
>that you'd be able to order locking to do what I think you want (no
>lock from Off to On - lock from On to Hi).
>
>Dennis Glaeser
>RV7A - Finishing kit
>
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: Looking for a switch |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
Alan,
The functionality you're asking for is provided by a
Microswitch 2TL1-10N or 2TL-10L (either locking option
will work, you just need to re-wire). These translate to
MS27408-4N and MS27408-4L.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Mfgr_Data/Switches/tl_series.pdf
Having said that, I agree with Bob's suggestion that you
investigate the real risks for inadvertent positioning
of the boost pump switch. I've flown a number of aircraft
with OFF-LO-HI boost switches . . . none of them offered
any sort of "lockout" provisions.
These switches will not be easy to find . . . they're not
a common catalog item.
Bob . . .
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: OldBob Siegfried
><oldbob@beechowners.com>
>
>Good Morning Alan,
>
>Once again, I am probably venturing where my knowledge
>is insufficient, but here goes any way!
>
>What engine are you running?
>
>We often have high and low boost pump positions on our
>fuel injected Continental engines. It is true that
>high boost will kill an engine being operated at low
>power, but if the throttle is wide open and the RPM
>good and high, high boost may not even be noticed!
>
>The fuel pressures are not additive. The boost pump
>only puts out a bit more pressure than the engine pump
>does at high power. In some cases, it is even a bit
>less, though still adequate to operate the engine at
>full power in the case of an engine driven pump
>failure. If you are operating at normal cruise powers
>and the high boost is selected, the engine may get a
>bit rough, but the power loss will be minimal and the
>roughness will get your attention in plenty of time to
>take corrective action. Personally, on the Continental
>fuel injection system, I see no problem with
>nonlocking switches for the boost pump.
>
>Happy Skies,
>
>Old Bob
>AKA
>Bob Siegfried
>Stearman N3977A
>Downers Grove, IL
>LL22
>
>--- "Alan K. Adamson" <aadamson@highrf.com> wrote:
>
> > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Alan K.
> > Adamson" <aadamson@highrf.com>
> >
> > I'm looking for a locking type switch to be used to
> > control 2 positions on a
> > fuel pump (low boost and high boost). I need the
> > configuration to support
> > the down position to be off, the middle to be low
> > boost on, and the top
> > position to be high boost on, with a lockout between
> > low and high boost.
> >
> > I've done a bit of searching, but so far, haven't
> > been able to find what I
> > need. Hoping someone here might have seen what I've
> > described. I had
> > originally thot of using an S700-2-50 as I thought I
> > only needed high boost
> > for prime. However, in talking with other pilots,
> > it now has come to my
> > attention that High boost needs to be switchable in
> > the event of engine
> > driven fuel pump failure and can't simply be
> > momentary. The reason I can't
> > use a 3 position without lockout, is that low boost
> > is normally switched on
> > at or above 10K and if you accidentally switched to
> > high boost, you'd drown
> > the engine.
> >
> > Any help would be appreciated.... In the morass of
> > switches that exist, even
> > a good source of a manufacturer and I'll do the leg
> > work would be helpful.
> >
> > Thanks in advance,
> > Alan
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > browse
> > Subscriptions page,
> > FAQ,
> > http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
> >
> > Web Forums!
> >
> >
> > Admin.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>--
>
>
>-- incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
>Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
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 18
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: kx 155 remote com and nav |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 11:08 PM 9/20/2006 -0400, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Gary G Brock" <kf4hbd@intrstar.net>
>
>I am using the approach system fast stack in my rv9a. I have a kx 155 and
>like to know how to wire the remote nav and com leads to my yoke that has a
>left and right buttom. I have all the wiring from the yoke wired to a
>terminal block. Does the leads have to have power to them. The remote will
>alllow me to flip/flop the nav and com from the yoke. New to the list.
>Thanks Gary
I see that my earlier reply was incomplete. When you're dealing
with pre-fab harnesses, what you see is what you get. The
instructions for the Approach System j-box should tell you if
they bring remote switch options out to a connector dedicated
to that purpose.
Bob . . .
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: Bob, no laptops in OBAMs? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 01:21 AM 9/21/2006 -0400, you wrote:
>
>Is The Burning Battery Problem Solved?
>
>
>Never Fear... PRBA Is On The Case
>
>
>The Portable Rechargeable Battery Association, or PRBA -- did you even
>know there was such an organization? -- says all the problems with burning
>batteries of late... in their words... most likely relates to aircraft
>charging systems.
Except that batteries have caught fire sitting on tables
at electronic products expos. I've heard of one case (but
haven't located a learned narrative) of a computer "burning"
in the overhead compartment of a passenger transport aircraft.
Now, this might have been another kind of failure that caused
the battery to supply energy to smoke other components in the
computer. Given that the world's attention is focused on
battery failures, every instance of smoke from a computer is
likely to be attributed to "battery failure" . . .
>They describe the risk of using batteries -- even those recalled but not
>yet returned -- is low, and can be further mitigated by either using the
>electronic device on battery power alone, or plugging the device into the
>aircraft power system without the battery installed.
Correct. Documented catastrophic failures of batteries I've read
said the batteries were on-charge at the time.
>Apparently, PRBA told the FAA about the danger of charging batteries
>inflight using an aircraft's electrical system almost 10 years ago. In a
>1997 letter sent to the airlines and the FAA, the association highlighted
>the need for stable voltage and an instantaneous cut-off system in the
>event of an over-heat or over-charge condition.
This pre-supposes that the aircraft energy source for battery
charging (typically 19v DC) is somehow different than the
AC Mains charging source . . .
>Most electronic equipment with rechargeable batteries already employ a
>cut-off system, but they might not work if the user replaces the original
>battery with one not supplied by the manufacturer... so onboard electrical
>systems should have a redundant cut-off capability. They don't.
Not sure what this would be. The AC Mains power supplies for laptops
are little switchmode power supplies that produce some lower level
DC, typically 16-20 volts at a couple of amps. The wires comiing out
of the power supplies on every computer I've owned was a simple (+) and
(-) DC power . . . no third wire to exchange any sort or intelligence
between computer mounted battery and the external power supply.
It's true that most if not all new products are fitted with "smart
batteries" . . . they have a microcontroller in the battery to
track incoming and outgoing power and convert the data to state
of charge information for the computer's on-board power supply and
charging circuits. Hence one will observe that battery packs for
their modern portables have multi-pin conntectors for the purpose
of exchanging both DC power and intelligence about battery management.
>PRBA stresses that even if a battery does catch fire, UK Civil Aviation
>Authority testing has conclusively proven that standard aviation fire
>extinquishers can douse the flames.
That's a comfort. Does anyone carry a "standard aviation fire
extinguisher" in their airplane?
The risks are quite low. The infamous failed batteries are of a unique
Li-Ion technology particularly vulnerable to the failure mode
being examined. I'm working with Concorde and others to evaluate
the potential future of Li-Ion batteries in aircraft. I've proposed
a battery test program (in my van with a 24/7 DAS recording
temperature, input/output current and voltage) to see how hard
it is to 'beat up' a small array of Li-Ion cells.
In the mean time, I'll suggest that use of a lap-top aboard
passenger transport aircraft offers a unique hazard: When
the passenger in front of you reclines the seat, you're
in danger of injury to the diaphragm if not asphyxiation
by crushing. My lap-tops stay in the overhead and I do my
writing with a theme-book and pencil.
Bob . . .
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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 07:24 AM 9/21/2006 -0400, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: Dave <dave@abrahamson.net>
>
>My AK350 would not provide data to my GTX330 until I grounded the pin the
>AK350 instructions say to ground for a non-strobed transponder.
Thank you for jumping in here Dave! It's been a long
time since I've built a T2000/AK350 harness so when
I went to the instruction manual last night I just
searched the .pdf for "strobe" and the program jumped
to page 24 where I read:
------------------
"The Altitude Reporter AK-350 is remote mounted equipment
that is fully automatic in operation. The companion
ATC transponder normally controls the operation of hte
Altitude Reporter by automatically enabling or disabling
its operation.
This is done by pulling-up to logic LOW (to enable)
or pulling-down to logic HIGH (to disable) the STROBE
(pin 6) line of the Altitude Reporter."
------------------
Hmmm . . . NORMALLY in electro-speak, one pulls a line
DOWN for logic LO and pulls UP for logic HI. I stumbled
over the words in the paragraph and then recalled that
in some interface wiring, inverting buffers are used
between internal electronics and outside world wiring.
Outside the box, logic LO is in fact a higher voltage
than logic HI which is ground.
So, I sailed around what appeared to be a rational
condition. Now, as Dave has suggested, the WIRING
DIAGRAMS earlier in the manual are quite specific for
treatment of the STROBE line when the companion
transponder doesn't need it: the line is firmly attached
to ground.
I do recall now that when I was selling the T2000
MicroAir and associated harness to mate with the AK350,
the pink wire in the harness was paired with the
ground wire to the transponder.
It's always helpful to have more than one head pondering
meanings to at least raise valid questions if not
point out blatant errors. Had I reached past the search
engine and reviewed the wiring diagrams, the error of
my earlier understanding would have been obvious.
This, ladies and gentlemen, is a micro-example of
a good critical design review. Understanding of words,
and ordinary errors can be impediments to progress.
Dave gets the "Atta Boy" nod for the day.
Bob . . .
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: kx 155 remote com and nav |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
At 11:08 PM 9/20/2006 -0400, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Gary G Brock" <kf4hbd@intrstar.net>
>
>I am using the approach system fast stack in my rv9a. I have a kx 155 and
>like to know how to wire the remote nav and com leads to my yoke that has a
>left and right buttom. I have all the wiring from the yoke wired to a
>terminal block. Does the leads have to have power to them. The remote will
>alllow me to flip/flop the nav and com from the yoke. New to the list.
The wiring diagrams for your radios will define how remote switches
are configured. They're generally a momentary grounding signal (push-
button) used to toggle the frequency in use. The MicroAir 760VHF
would step through a memory array of about 10 frequencies in response
to momentary closures of the push button.
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 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: | Alternator drive stand is coming home . . . |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
Unless the present owner determines that the motor supplied
on the drive stand cannot be wired for 208-3ph power, he'll
be loading the ol' beast on a trailer to drop off in my
driveway this coming weekend.
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 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: | Looking for a switch |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Alan K. Adamson" <aadamson@highrf.com>
Thanks Bob, Glad we think alike... I may have described it slightly wrong,
but you were in the ball park.
I'd need either a 2TL1-10M or 2TL1-10P which translate to the MS27408-4M or
-4P.
I actually found one and they are pretty pricy at $65 ea!. However, before
I go there, I'm gonna just try an ON-ON-ON from B&C and see if I can live
with "brain power" lockout. If I have a problem, I'll get the "expensive"
switch.
As to the "why am I doing this this way" question. Most wire two switches,
but in asking around, I could find no other reason for High Boost than
prime, so I was going to go with the ON-ON-(ON). This is on a Cont IO-550
and some suggest that going to high boost on accident will flood out the
engine. But then again, other suggest it wont.
Either way, I went with one switch position instead of two thinking I was
smarter than most and saving the panel space. Perhaps, that bit me in the
bottom....
Oh, well, thanks all for the links, help and suggestions. I believe I've
got a handle on this now.
Alan
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L.
Nuckolls, III
Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2006 3:14 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Looking for a switch
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III"
--> <nuckollsr@cox.net>
Alan,
The functionality you're asking for is provided by a Microswitch 2TL1-10N or
2TL-10L (either locking option will work, you just need to re-wire). These
translate to MS27408-4N and MS27408-4L.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Mfgr_Data/Switches/tl_series.pdf
Having said that, I agree with Bob's suggestion that you investigate the
real risks for inadvertent positioning of the boost pump switch. I've flown
a number of aircraft with OFF-LO-HI boost switches . . . none of them
offered any sort of "lockout" provisions.
These switches will not be easy to find . . . they're not a common catalog
item.
Bob . . .
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: OldBob Siegfried
><oldbob@beechowners.com>
>
>Good Morning Alan,
>
>Once again, I am probably venturing where my knowledge is insufficient,
>but here goes any way!
>
>What engine are you running?
>
>We often have high and low boost pump positions on our fuel injected
>Continental engines. It is true that high boost will kill an engine
>being operated at low power, but if the throttle is wide open and the
>RPM good and high, high boost may not even be noticed!
>
>The fuel pressures are not additive. The boost pump only puts out a bit
>more pressure than the engine pump does at high power. In some cases,
>it is even a bit less, though still adequate to operate the engine at
>full power in the case of an engine driven pump failure. If you are
>operating at normal cruise powers and the high boost is selected, the
>engine may get a bit rough, but the power loss will be minimal and the
>roughness will get your attention in plenty of time to take corrective
>action. Personally, on the Continental fuel injection system, I see no
>problem with nonlocking switches for the boost pump.
>
>Happy Skies,
>
>Old Bob
>AKA
>Bob Siegfried
>Stearman N3977A
>Downers Grove, IL
>LL22
>
>--- "Alan K. Adamson" <aadamson@highrf.com> wrote:
>
> > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Alan K.
> > Adamson" <aadamson@highrf.com>
> >
> > I'm looking for a locking type switch to be used to control 2
> > positions on a fuel pump (low boost and high boost). I need the
> > configuration to support the down position to be off, the middle to
> > be low boost on, and the top position to be high boost on, with a
> > lockout between low and high boost.
> >
> > I've done a bit of searching, but so far, haven't been able to find
> > what I need. Hoping someone here might have seen what I've
> > described. I had originally thot of using an S700-2-50 as I thought
> > I only needed high boost for prime. However, in talking with other
> > pilots, it now has come to my attention that High boost needs to be
> > switchable in the event of engine driven fuel pump failure and can't
> > simply be momentary. The reason I can't use a 3 position without
> > lockout, is that low boost is normally switched on at or above 10K
> > and if you accidentally switched to high boost, you'd drown the
> > engine.
> >
> > Any help would be appreciated.... In the morass of switches that
> > exist, even a good source of a manufacturer and I'll do the leg work
> > would be helpful.
> >
> > Thanks in advance,
> > Alan
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > browse
> > Subscriptions page,
> > FAQ,
> > http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
> >
> > Web Forums!
> >
> >
> > Admin.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>--
>
>
>-- incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
>Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
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 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 |
|
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Tim Juhl" <juhl@avci.net>
I'm mounting the powerpacks for wingtip strobes in the wingtips of my Zodiac XL.
I plan to use shielded wire (grounded at one end.) My question is whether
there is any problem bundling the wires with wires from a capacitance type fuel
sender (0-5v). I wonder if there is any possibility of generating fluctuations
in needle readings when the strobes are operating.
Tim
Do not archive
--------
DO NOT ARCHIVE
______________
CFII
Champ L16A flying
Zodiac XL - Working on Flaps and Ailerons
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=63131#63131
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: strobe wiring |
Tim,
I wouldn't think so, I'm doing the same thing but don't have the
capacitance senders . . . the whole idea of mounting in the wingtips it to
avoid interference . . . there is just 12V running to the power packs?!
Bob in SE Iowa
RV-8 Finishing
On 9/21/06, Tim Juhl <juhl@avci.net> wrote:
>
> --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Tim Juhl" <juhl@avci.net>
>
> I'm mounting the powerpacks for wingtip strobes in the wingtips of my
> Zodiac XL. I plan to use shielded wire (grounded at one end.) My question
> is whether there is any problem bundling the wires with wires from a
> capacitance type fuel sender (0-5v). I wonder if there is any possibility
> of generating fluctuations in needle readings when the strobes are
> operating.
>
> Tim
>
> Do not archive
>
> --------
> DO NOT ARCHIVE
> ______________
> CFII
> Champ L16A flying
> Zodiac XL - Working on Flaps and Ailerons
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=63131#63131
>
>
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: | Mogas versus 100LL |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: <bakerocb@cox.net>
9/21/2006
Hello Fellow Builders, The aeroelectric list digest for 9/20/2006 contained
several postings on the subject of using mogas versus 100 LL.
Most of these messages just focused on the effect the two different fuels
would have on the engine performance.
I suggest that builders keep in mind the possible effects, some very
adverse, that mogas and unknown chemicals mixed into mogas, not just
ethanol, may have on their aircraft's entire fuel system. Seals, hoses,
tanks and elastomers may suffer.
OC -- The best investment we will ever make is in gathering knowledge
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: | Re: Looking for a switch |
Or maybe a 1/2" length of a small brass hinge above the switch that must be
lifted to allow you to select the Hi boost position.... Not elecgant but
not $65 either..... My .02
>
> If anyone has any further info, it would be helpful.
>
> Thanks,
> Alan
>
>
--
John McMahon
Lancair Super ES, N9637M
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: Looking for a switch |
Neither is my spelling!
On 9/21/06, John McMahon <blackoaks@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Or maybe a 1/2" length of a small brass hinge above the switch that must
> be lifted to allow you to select the Hi boost position.... Not elegant but
> not $65 either..... My .02
>
>
> >
> > If anyone has any further info, it would be helpful.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Alan
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> John McMahon
> Lancair Super ES, N9637M
--
John McMahon
Lancair Super ES, N9637M
Message 29
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: Mogas versus 100LL |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: <rparigor@suffolk.lib.ny.us>
Octane rating is not the only thing one needs to be concerned with when it
comes to fuel. I don't know the technocrat term for it, but the speed at
which the fuel burns is a definite concern. On huge displacement engines
turning low RPMs, if you were to use a racing fuel designed for high RPM
engines of the same octane you would most like run into problems. From
what the locals at the airport say, high octane mogas should not be used
in a O-540s because it burns too fast, and since the cylinders are the
same as a O-360??
On the other hand, using 100LL that is a slow burning fuel used in a 73CC
22HP (well over 11K) Yamaha YZ 80 engine that is in my self retrieving
balloon kills performance and probably raises EGT to disheartening levels.
On Rotax 4 strokes you can use 100LL, but it does raise the EGTs because
it burns slower than high octane mogas, and some of that burn makes its
way into the exhaust.
A old timer said on old auto engines that didn't use aluminium pistons,
used to loosen the distributor, and run up the engine and begin retarding
the ignition, he said he would get the exhaust glowing, hence carbon would
be burned off. Slow burning fuel does the same in a engine designed for
fast burning fuel.
Using a fast burning fuel in a engine designed for a slow burning fuel can
cause detonation. Detonation raises temperatures, let it go and God forbid
pre-ignition begins to occur.
Ron Parigoris
Message 30
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: Mogas versus 100LL |
In a message dated 09/21/2006 9:02:17 PM Central Daylight Time,
bakerocb@cox.net writes:
OC -- The best investment we will ever make is in gathering knowledge
>>
Howdy OC- do you subscribe to the RV-list? We usually get punch-drunk on
this one at least once a year and if yer looking for knowledge (good bad or
whatever) on this issue, those archives are REALLY full of it! 8-)
Most respectfully and seriously-
Mark Phillips- on the "uses both" side of the issue and do not archive
Message 31
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: Can someone share experience tuning static port? |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: PWilson <pwmac@sisna.com>
My fluids book uses a static probe for wind tunnel testing that has
multiple holes. This allows the pitot/static unit to operate with
better accuracy at various angles to the wind stream. Like 10 holes.
The book also specifies the diameter. No suggestion for o-ring to be accurate.
Regards. Paul
===============
At 10:22 AM 9/20/2006, you wrote:
>--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: <rparigor@suffolk.lib.ny.us>
>
>I have a Europa XS Monowheel, it has the static port under the wing, it is
>a tube with a closed nylon bullet at the tip, and 2 holes in it a bit aft
>of the lead edge of the bullet, 1 vertical and 1 horizontal.
>
>I heard a while back you can tune this static port by installing a O-Ring,
>think start point was an inch or so behind the holes in the bullet??
>
>Can someone share experience tuning static port?
>
>How did you determine when it was correct?
>
>What distance was neutral point for O-Ring?
>
>Does moving O-Ring forward from neutral increase static pressure?
>
>What size O-Ring did you use, did size make much a difference, what was
>O-Ring made out of and how did you permanent bond in place?
>
>Thx.
>Ron Parigoris
>
>(I posted to Europa group, no replies)
>
>
Message 32
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: | Mogas versus 100LL |
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Ed Holyoke" <bicyclop@pacbell.net>
I was riding across the Arizona desert on I-10 one night some years back
and pulled up alongside a guy riding an old BSA single who's exhaust
pipe was glowing red. I pointed and gestured until he pulled over
whereupon he told me not to worry - he was just running kerosene in it
'cos it was cheaper. He had a small tank with gas in it that he used for
starting and acceleration. I don't know if he messed with the timing to
make it run, but run it did. I decided not to try it in my Z1.
Pax,
Ed Holyoke
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: <rparigor@suffolk.lib.ny.us>
A old timer said on old auto engines that didn't use aluminium pistons,
used to loosen the distributor, and run up the engine and begin
retarding
the ignition, he said he would get the exhaust glowing, hence carbon
would
be burned off. Slow burning fuel does the same in a engine designed for
fast burning fuel.
Using a fast burning fuel in a engine designed for a slow burning fuel
can
cause detonation. Detonation raises temperatures, let it go and God
forbid
pre-ignition begins to occur.
Ron Parigoris
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! --
|