Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 05:00 AM - Garmin GNS430 Nav board repaired twice ()
2. 05:09 AM - Re: Re: Pitot Current Draw (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
3. 05:12 AM - Conversion to Experimental (Chuck Jensen)
4. 05:17 AM - Re: Jabiru Starter contactor and solenoid (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
5. 05:40 AM - Re: Conversion to Experimental (John W. Cox)
6. 06:02 AM - Re: Conversion to Experimental (N395V)
7. 06:26 AM - Re: Conversion to Experimental (rtitsworth)
8. 06:29 AM - Re: Conversion to Experimental (C Smith)
9. 06:41 AM - Re: Conversion to Experimental (Chuck Jensen)
10. 06:44 AM - Re: Re: Conversion to Experimental (OldBob Siegfried)
11. 06:56 AM - Re: Conversion to Experimental (Lloyd, Daniel R.)
12. 07:20 AM - Re: Conversion to Experimental (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
13. 07:23 AM - Re: Re: Conversion to Experimental (Lloyd, Daniel R.)
14. 07:35 AM - Re: DYMO RhinoPRO3000 label writer (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Mich=E8le_Delsol?=)
15. 07:55 AM - Re: Conversion to Experimental (Earl_Schroeder)
16. 08:05 AM - Re: New Topic! Wire label-making machines (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Mich=E8le_Delsol?=)
17. 08:44 AM - Re: Conversion to Experimental (Mike)
18. 09:16 AM - Re: Garmin GNS430 Nav board repaired twice (=?windows-1252?Q?Andr=E9_Beusch?=)
19. 10:27 AM - Re: Re: Conversion to Experimental (John W. Cox)
20. 10:42 AM - Re: Re: Firewall penetration (Cleones)
21. 11:02 AM - Re: Re: Firewall penetration (Gilles Thesee)
22. 11:04 AM - Re: Re: Firewall penetration (Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis))
23. 01:25 PM - Re: Re: Conversion to Experimental (Kelly McMullen)
24. 03:10 PM - Safe cabin heater (Cleones)
25. 03:32 PM - Re: Safe cabin heater (Earl_Schroeder)
26. 03:51 PM - quiet (Rob Wright)
27. 05:02 PM - Re: DYMO RhinoPRO3000 label writer (sarg314)
28. 06:24 PM - Re: Conversion to Experimental (Kevin Horton)
29. 06:34 PM - Re: Conversion to Experimental (Bob McCallum)
30. 06:38 PM - Re: quiet (Rich Dodson)
31. 08:13 PM - Re: Re: Conversion to Experimental (Ernest Christley)
32. 08:22 PM - Re: Safe cabin heater (Richard E. Tasker)
33. 09:05 PM - Re: Safe cabin heater (Sean Stephens)
34. 09:27 PM - Re: Re: Conversion to Experimental (David M.)
35. 09:27 PM - Re: Safe cabin heater (Richard Riley)
36. 10:45 PM - Re: Safe cabin heater (B Tomm)
37. 10:46 PM - Re: Re: Conversion to Experimental (Richard Riley)
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: | Garmin GNS430 Nav board repaired twice |
12/12/2006
Hello Andre, I am trying to better understand your antenna connections.
You wrote: "The comm is connected to a dipole antenna in the vertical
stabilizer,
the nav is connected directly (no splitter) to the dipole antenna in the
horizontal stabilizer."
The GNS 430 box has two separate inputs for VHF nav and glide slope. As you
say this is frequently done by using one VHF nav antenna and then splitting
that input just before it enters the GNS 430 box.
When you say that your nav is connected directly (no splitter) to the
antenna does that mean that you are also feeding the glide slope input
directly from some separate glide slope antenna?
What is the status of the unit now? You have it back repaired and are not
using it for concern over damaging it again with comm transmissions or ---?
Comant industries has a wide array of couplers that you might consider using
to combine and or split inputs to your GNS 430 from nav / glide slope
antennas in order to protect the input stages from excessive comm
transmission inputs.
http://www.comant.com/home.cgi?ua=sgroup&crit=Couplers/Diplexers/Combiners
OC
> Time: 01:45:56 PM PST US
> From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Andr=E9_Beusch?= <andre.beusch@bluewin.ch>
> Subject: Avionics-List: Garmin GNS430 Nav board repaired twice
>
>
> I have a Garmin GNS430 in my Glasair Super II.
> The comm is connected to a dipole antenna in the vertical stabilizer,
> the nav is connected directly (no splitter) to the dipole antenna in the
> horizontal stabilizer.
> Both are the antennas that were provided by Stoddard Hamilton, the kit
> manufacturer, and were installed as per the instruction manual. The
> antennas perform well.
> Both times, the VOR/LOC lost 30 dB of sensitivity, apparently the input
> stage was destroyed.
> The first repair cost me about $1000, the second was warranty.
> I wonder if someone had this problem with any kind of nav receiver.
> Garmin said that it could have been overloaded by the comm transmission
> because the antennas are to close to each other.
> (they don't say anything about this in the installation manual)
> Many people use a splitter for NAV/glideslope, so their receiver gets
> less signal and would perhaps not be exposed to this problem.
> As an electronics engineer, I'd like to understand this and will make a
> measurement of the power that actually gets in the Nav receiver. I have
> a 250 MHz oscilloscope for that.
> This nav receiver should pass RTCA DO-196, if someone has these
> documents handy, I'd be interested to see what the damage input power
> should be.
> I also consider putting a 6dB attenuator or an RF limitter on the Nav
> antenna input.
>
> Any opinions?
>
>
> Thanks, --Andre Beusch
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: Pitot Current Draw |
At 06:16 PM 12/10/2006 -0500, you wrote:
>
>Geeez, I guess that's why I ask electrical questions. Now that I think
>about it, it makes sense...size does matter.
>
>Chuck Jensen
>
>
>Bob W. wrote...
>
>Shorten the element if you would like MORE heat, lesson I learned as a
>teenager. I had a piece of nichrome wire that I wanted to get red hot.
>(I have no memory of what I was trying to do other than that.) I
>stretched the wire out and clamped on an electric cord I could plug into
>the wall. It got a little hotter than I wanted. Well, I knew ohms law
>and I knew P=I^2*R so the obvious solution was to cut R in half to get
>half power. When I plugged it in, that sucker got white hot so fast I
>didn't have time to blink. Haven't had much trouble keeping ohms law
>straight since. :)
Pitot tube heaters are not like those used in your toaster.
See:
http://tinyurl.com/yyuted
The heater wires are wound on a flexible mandrel contained within
the "tube" visible in these pictures. The winding pitch is varied so
as to put optimized heat sources at various places throughout the
pitot-tube structure. Lots of heat in the probe, not so much around
the corner, lots more in the mast.
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 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: | Conversion to Experimental |
In reading about conversion of six-packs and upgrading panels in older
planes, et al, if a person wants to upgrade to a glass panel, is there a
reason more people don't just slap an "Experimental" label on the
certified plane and put in a non-certified panel, such as GRT, TruTrak,
et al. It's understood that the plane is devalued by making it
"Experimental" but then, the value is also increased with the upgraded
panel. And, with the difference between a certified glass panel and a
very good, but non-certified glass panel, you can stick the difference
($30,000 - $50,000?) in your pocket and buy a lot of gas.
Since it doesn't seem to be done by many people, I must be missing
something?
Chuck Jensen
Do Not Archive
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Jabiru Starter contactor and solenoid |
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Jabiru Starter contactor and solenoid
I have a Jabiru 3300 and have a 702-1 starter contactor from B&C. Looking
at Z-20, from aeroelectric, they are running the 4 AWG wire to the starter
solenoid. It looks like the "solenoid" supplied by Jabiru is really just
another contactor. It is wired and works the same as the 702-1 but with
out the diode. If I hook it up as depicted in Z-20 all I will be doing is
to energize the coil on the Jabiru supplied solenoid with the 4 AWG wire
from the 702-1. It sure looks to me that all I will be doing is putting
two contactors in series. I am not sure of the value in this. I am
considering just leaving off the Jabiru solenoid and connecting the 702-1
directly to the starter.
Is this smart or is there something I am missing?
First, the Z-figures are ARCHITECTURE drawings and not intended
to dictate wire sizes, breaker/fuse sizes, or equipment choices.
They are simply foundations upon which your own system details
are laid.
The apparent "dual starter contactors" anomaly you've cited
is discussed in the article at:
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/strtctr.pdf
Depending on what features are specific to the starter supplied
with your Jabiru, the specifics illustrated in Z-20 may not
apply.
If your existing starter is fitted with the hi-inrush, pinion
engagement mechanism typical of B&C starters, then the "dual
contactor" philosophy -or- the Starter Boost relay shown
in Z-22 is recommended to enhance the service life of your
starter push button or switch.
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: | Conversion to Experimental |
Mike Dennis of Oregon Aero did exactly that with one of his two Pilatus
PC-12s. No small chunk of change. Kind of reminds me of Malcolm Forbes
corporate jet. Mike wanted IR forward looking video. Almost lives in
the plane, growing his business. The plane is beautiful and his IA did
not have a problem doing the Annual Inspection on a Certified Aircraft
with a Leading Edge electronic device installed under the "Experimental"
tag. At some point the equipment can come out of the increase in value
is greater being back to Certified. Commercial use is the stumbling
block with an "Experimental" tag.
John Cox
________________________________
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chuck
Jensen
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 5:13 AM
To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Conversion to Experimental
In reading about conversion of six-packs and upgrading panels in
older planes, et al, if a person wants to upgrade to a glass panel, is
there a reason more people don't just slap an "Experimental" label on
the certified plane and put in a non-certified panel, such as GRT,
TruTrak, et al. It's understood that the plane is devalued by making it
"Experimental" but then, the value is also increased with the upgraded
panel. And, with the difference between a certified glass panel and a
very good, but non-certified glass panel, you can stick the difference
($30,000 - $50,000?) in your pocket and buy a lot of gas.
Since it doesn't seem to be done by many people, I must be
missing something?
Chuck Jensen
Do Not Archive
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: Conversion to Experimental |
All right I am confused.
It is my impression that you can put non certified equipment in a panel if it is
not there to replace a required item. It is also my impresion tht this requires
a 337?
I am not aware of a reg that allows you to just slap a unit in a plane and tag
it experimental.
I also no of no regs that allow you to convert a production plane to experimental
with out severe restrictions that would render the plane useless for most
purposes.
Am I incorrect?
Do not archive
--------
Milt
N395V
F1 Rocket
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p992#80992
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: | Conversion to Experimental |
Chuck asked.In reading about conversion of six-packs and upgrading panels in
older planes, et al, if a person wants to upgrade to a glass panel, is there
a reason more people don't just slap an "Experimental" label on the
certified plane and put in a non-certified panel, such as GRT, TruTrak, et
al..
Some investigation of the FARs will show that it is not nearly that simple
(rather it is nearly impossible). To begin with, an airplane's experimental
status is granted by the FAA via it's airworthiness certificate (it is not
created by an owner adding an "experimental" label/placard). Changing an
A/W cert is not easy to get the FAA to do. Furthermore, there are different
types of "experimental" airworthiness certificates and rules/limitations
that apply to each (such as experimental - amateur built, experimental -
research and development, experimental - exhibition, etc.) For reference,
see documents at:
http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/air_cert/airworthiness_certification/sp_awcert/e
xperiment/
http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/air_cert/airworthiness_certification/sp_awcert/s
p_awcert_regs/
In (gross) summary.
An "experimental amateur built" plane needs to be built for educational and
recreational purposes and the builder has to show he/she did more than 51%
of the work.
An "experimental - research and development" airplane is typically limited
to test flights (very limited distance and flight conditions).
An "experimental - exhibition" airplane is typically limited to specific
events (i.e. only flight to/from and at pre-specified airshows).
None of those typically apply and/or are very appealing.
The FAA has two processes that allow alteration of a type certificated
aircraft (in addition to the AD process which might mandate it). The first
is a STC (supplemental type certificate which is approval granted to a
specific alteration for a specific make/model (usually granted to the
manufacturer of the modified part). The second is the field alteration
process (typically called a 337 based on the associated FAA form) which
allows owners to have mechanics alter (add avionics, etc) to a type
certificated airplane. 337 alterations are approved by the local FAA FSDO
(field standards district office). Ref:
http://forms.faa.gov/forms/faa337.pdf
Rick
_____
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chuck
Jensen
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 8:13 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Conversion to Experimental
It's understood that the plane is devalued by making it "Experimental" but
then, the value is also increased with the upgraded panel. And, with the
difference between a certified glass panel and a very good, but
non-certified glass panel, you can stick the difference ($30,000 - $50,000?)
in your pocket and buy a lot of gas.
Since it doesn't seem to be done by many people, I must be missing
something?
Chuck Jensen
Do Not Archive
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: | Conversion to Experimental |
I've been told by aircraft sales people that a certified aircraft gone
experimental is the equivalent of aeronautical leprosy. They say the value
is severely impacted, and the aircraft can not be used for any commercial
purpose (flight training, aerial photography, SAR, CAP, etc.). In addition,
restoring one to certified status is supposed to be tough. Now whether you
buy those arguments or not, is up to you, but the FARs are pretty clear
about the commercial use thing. It may just be another excuse to say your
airplane is worthless so they can steal it from you at a fraction of it's
worth. I don't trust sales people anymore.
CS
_____
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chuck
Jensen
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 8:13 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Conversion to Experimental
In reading about conversion of six-packs and upgrading panels in older
planes, et al, if a person wants to upgrade to a glass panel, is there a
reason more people don't just slap an "Experimental" label on the certified
plane and put in a non-certified panel, such as GRT, TruTrak, et al. It's
understood that the plane is devalued by making it "Experimental" but then,
the value is also increased with the upgraded panel. And, with the
difference between a certified glass panel and a very good, but
non-certified glass panel, you can stick the difference ($30,000 - $50,000?)
in your pocket and buy a lot of gas.
Since it doesn't seem to be done by many people, I must be missing
something?
Chuck Jensen
Do Not Archive
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Conversion to Experimental |
Rick,
Oh. Maybe that's why its not done more!! That's kind of a shame.
Chuck Jensen
Do Not Archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
rtitsworth
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 9:25 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Conversion to Experimental
Chuck asked...In reading about conversion of six-packs and upgrading
panels in older planes, et al, if a person wants to upgrade to a glass
panel, is there a reason more people don't just slap an "Experimental"
label on the certified plane and put in a non-certified panel, such as
GRT, TruTrak, et al....
Some investigation of the FARs will show that it is not nearly that
simple (rather it is nearly impossible). To begin with, an airplane's
experimental status is granted by the FAA via it's airworthiness
certificate (it is not created by an owner adding an "experimental"
label/placard). Changing an A/W cert is not easy to get the FAA to do.
Furthermore, there are different types of "experimental" airworthiness
certificates and rules/limitations that apply to each (such as
experimental - amateur built, experimental - research and development,
experimental - exhibition, etc.) For reference, see documents at:
http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/air_cert/airworthiness_certification/sp_awce
rt/experiment/
http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/air_cert/airworthiness_certification/sp_awce
rt/sp_awcert_regs/
In (gross) summary...
An "experimental amateur built" plane needs to be built for educational
and recreational purposes and the builder has to show he/she did more
than 51% of the work.
An "experimental - research and development" airplane is typically
limited to test flights (very limited distance and flight conditions).
An "experimental - exhibition" airplane is typically limited to specific
events (i.e. only flight to/from and at pre-specified airshows).
None of those typically apply and/or are very appealing.
The FAA has two processes that allow alteration of a type certificated
aircraft (in addition to the AD process which might mandate it). The
first is a STC (supplemental type certificate which is approval granted
to a specific alteration for a specific make/model (usually granted to
the manufacturer of the modified part). The second is the field
alteration process (typically called a 337 based on the associated FAA
form) which allows owners to have mechanics alter (add avionics, etc) to
a type certificated airplane. 337 alterations are approved by the local
FAA FSDO (field standards district office). Ref:
http://forms.faa.gov/forms/faa337.pdf
Rick
________________________________
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chuck
Jensen
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 8:13 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Conversion to Experimental
It's understood that the plane is devalued by making it "Experimental"
but then, the value is also increased with the upgraded panel. And,
with the difference between a certified glass panel and a very good, but
non-certified glass panel, you can stick the difference ($30,000 -
$50,000?) in your pocket and buy a lot of gas.
Since it doesn't seem to be done by many people, I must be missing
something?
Chuck Jensen
Do Not Archive
www.aeroelectric.com
www.kitlog.com
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
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: Conversion to Experimental |
Good Morning Milt,
Your interpretation of the rules matches mine.
Having said that, I guess we have to admit that each
Experimental Certification is an individual
negotiation between the applicant and the responsible
FAA inspector who issues the certificate.
The primary exception is for those aircraft which meet
the amateur built sub provision of experimental
certification.
There are other provisions which are somewhat
restrictive that apply to various other special
conditions.
If the rules, as we interpret them, are followed, any
experimental, other than for an amateur built
aircraft, must delineate the conditions under which it
may be operated so as to prove or disprove the
efficacy of the project being experimented with or to
comply with the special operations that are approved.
I have seen a couple of experimentally licensed
aircraft with operating limitations so loose that the
aircraft could be operated almost as freely as one
that had a standard certificate.
It was my personal opinion that those certificates did
not meet the intent of the regulations, but, until
such time that some FAA official felt the same, the
certificate remains in effect.
I am not sure what was meant by the reference to one's
IA. An A&P holding an Inspection Authorization does
NOT have the power to approve experimental operations.
It really does ---- All Depend!
Do we still agree?
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Downers Grove Illinois
--- N395V <n395v@hughes.net> wrote:
> <n395v@hughes.net>
>
> All right I am confused.
>
> It is my impression that you can put non certified
> equipment in a panel if it is not there to replace a
> required item. It is also my impresion tht this
> requires a 337?
>
> I am not aware of a reg that allows you to just slap
> a unit in a plane and tag it experimental.
>
> I also no of no regs that allow you to convert a
> production plane to experimental with out severe
> restrictions that would render the plane useless
> for most purposes.
>
> Am I incorrect?
>
> Do not archive
>
> --------
> Milt
> N395V
> F1 Rocket
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
>
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p992#80992
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Click on
> about
> provided
> www.buildersbooks.com
> Admin.
>
> browse
> Subscriptions page,
> FAQ,
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
>
>
>
>
>
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: | Conversion to Experimental |
He also changed an air inlet for one of the generators, and is working
with Pilatus to get the mod to everyone. His family lives near 4G1 in
PA, so he is out here all the time. A couple of months ago we had a
Lobster flyin. The FBO coordinated it, and Mike flew the Pilatus to
Maine to get the lobsters, at least they had a sweet ride before they
got the boiling pot!
Dan
_____
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John
W. Cox
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 8:40 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Conversion to Experimental
Mike Dennis of Oregon Aero did exactly that with one of his two Pilatus
PC-12s. No small chunk of change. Kind of reminds me of Malcolm Forbes
corporate jet. Mike wanted IR forward looking video. Almost lives in
the plane, growing his business. The plane is beautiful and his IA did
not have a problem doing the Annual Inspection on a Certified Aircraft
with a Leading Edge electronic device installed under the "Experimental"
tag. At some point the equipment can come out of the increase in value
is greater being back to Certified. Commercial use is the stumbling
block with an "Experimental" tag.
John Cox
_____
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chuck
Jensen
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 5:13 AM
To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Conversion to Experimental
In reading about conversion of six-packs and upgrading panels in
older planes, et al, if a person wants to upgrade to a glass panel, is
there a reason more people don't just slap an "Experimental" label on
the certified plane and put in a non-certified panel, such as GRT,
TruTrak, et al. It's understood that the plane is devalued by making it
"Experimental" but then, the value is also increased with the upgraded
panel. And, with the difference between a certified glass panel and a
very good, but non-certified glass panel, you can stick the difference
($30,000 - $50,000?) in your pocket and buy a lot of gas.
Since it doesn't seem to be done by many people, I must be
missing something?
Chuck Jensen
Do Not Archive
href="http://www.aeroelectric.com">www.aeroelectric.com
href="http://www.buildersbooks.com">www.buildersbooks.com
href="http://www.kitlog.com">www.kitlog.com
href="http://www.homebuilthelp.com">www.homebuilthelp.com
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
h
ref="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List">http://www.m
a
tronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
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: | Conversion to Experimental |
>
>----------
>From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chuck
>Jensen
>Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 5:13 AM
>To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
>Subject: AeroElectric-List: Conversion to Experimental
>In reading about conversion of six-packs and upgrading panels in older
>planes, et al, if a person wants to upgrade to a glass panel, is there a
>reason more people don't just slap an "Experimental" label on the
>certified plane and put in a non-certified panel, such as GRT, TruTrak, et
>al. It's understood that the plane is devalued by making it
>"Experimental" but then, the value is also increased with the upgraded
>panel. And, with the difference between a certified glass panel and a
>very good, but non-certified glass panel, you can stick the difference
>($30,000 - $50,000?) in your pocket and buy a lot of gas.
>
>Since it doesn't seem to be done by many people, I must be missing something?
Yeah, it's called the FAA. I've placed many an x-ticket
on a certified ship for the purpose of conducing engineering
research. But the FAA's stance x-ed TC aircraft for
the purpose of conducing engineering tests and the
airplane cannot be used as a standard TC aircraft until
restored to certified condition. We have a small fleet
of experimental aircraft used for research and development
but these aircraft cannot be used for anything except
company engineering business.
The "experimental" tag on OBAM aircraft gives rise to a lot
of mis-understanding. 99% of the OBAM aircraft flying
are obviously not experimental but Owner Build and/or
Maintained. In Canada, you can de-certify an older out-of-
production aircraft and begin to own, operate, modify and
maintain it as if it were an RV or Kitfox. These
aircraft are far from "experimental" in the engineering
and development sense of the word. The owners are simply
attempting to breath new life into older airplanes by modernizing
some of its features.
Converting an older airplane to a new 6-pack or glass-panel
configuration is often done by qualified shops under a
337. The gentleman who initially inquired about this can
enlist the help of an AI, local flying-fuzz and install any
new gear and panel arrangements that have been used on
other aircraft with no more than the usual bureaucratic
difficulties. It's done all the time.
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 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: Conversion to Experimental |
Yes, you are incorrect, you can take a certified aircraft, and
re-register it from the standard category or whatever it is in and
designate the entire craft experimental. Then you can do what you want
with it, but you will not hold the repairman's certificate unless you
built it, so you would still need an A&P to do the annual. At least this
is how I understand it from talking with the local FSDO.
Dan Lloyd
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of N395V
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 9:01 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Conversion to Experimental
All right I am confused.
It is my impression that you can put non certified equipment in a panel
if it is not there to replace a required item. It is also my impresion
tht this requires a 337?
I am not aware of a reg that allows you to just slap a unit in a plane
and tag it experimental.
I also no of no regs that allow you to convert a production plane to
experimental with out severe restrictions that would render the plane
useless for most purposes.
Am I incorrect?
Do not archive
--------
Milt
N395V
F1 Rocket
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p992#80992
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: | DYMO RhinoPRO3000 label writer |
I've been using the Rhyno 5000 - I find that I have to be really careful on
printing the labels - many in a single pass so as not to minimize waste. The
yellow heat shrink tubes are really expensive and if not careful, one can go
through them at a pace which makes the labels a significant cost item. For
that matter, it is much like colour printers - cheap printer but you get
whacked on the cartridges. This being said, I find the Rhyno a great product
and time saver.
Michele
RV8 - Finishing
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Fergus
Kyle
Sent: dimanche 10 dcembre 2006 16:06
Subject: AeroElectric-List: DYMO RhinoPRO3000 label writer
I looked it up as suggested and believe it's useful BUT the price of heat
shrink comes out to about $5 a foot, or perhaps 75cents a label (mistakes
excepted). Rolls come in 5 foot lengths. Any- body find better source?
Ferg Kyle
Europa A064 914 Classic
Message 15
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Conversion to Experimental |
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
In Canada, you can de-certify an older out-of-
production aircraft and begin to own, operate, modify and
maintain it as if it were an RV or Kitfox.
I'm wondering if this 'de-certified' aircraft can then be moved to the
US and that designation remains?
If so, perhaps I can take my 'ol C-150 up there for a visit and upgrade??
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: | New Topic! Wire label-making machines |
Affirmative - it does grip 22 with the smallest heat shrink tube they have.
I've done it.
Michele
RV8 - Finishing
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill Boyd
Sent: dimanche 10 dcembre 2006 01:24
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: New Topic! Wire label-making machines
They apparently sell some rather pricey heat shrink for it. 1/2, 3/8
and 1/4 inch flat widths. Is any of that going to grip a 22ga wire
very well?
I'm interested in this technology, but want to know more before I buy
any new toys.
-Bill B
On 12/9/06, sarg314 <sarg314@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> This outfit has the rhinopro 3000 for $65. Says it prints on heat shrink.
>
> >http://www.provantage.com/dymo-15605~7DYMO02H.htm
> >
>
>
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: | Conversion to Experimental |
To all,
Rick was right on the money. If and when you convert an airplane=92s
airworthiness from Standard to Experimental many things change. The
first issue is what type of Experimental Certificate will you apply for
and be approved for? In order to convert an airplane you must have a
new Airworthiness Certificate issued which will be accompanied by a list
of Limitations for operation. The list of limitations are covered by
Advisory Circulars which are generally not regulatory for part 91
operations but the limitations issued with the new airworthiness
certificate will change that. The list of limitations issued are
derived from the AC=92s that cover these types of conversions. There is
some latitude with these limitations but you never know until you do it.
Unless you get an FAA inspector or DAR if authorized to issue an
Experimental Exhibition Certificate (many are not) to cope a previously
issued set of limitations without question, you will be subjected to
their interpretation of the AC=92s in question.
As for valuation, that is very subjective. If you take a new $1,000,000
Baron and are able to convert it to an Experimental certificate I would
think you would loose as much as 75% or more of the original value due
to the new limitations and insurance issues. But if you take an old
Cherokee 140 and upgrade it with a bigger engine, new glass panel, IR
video, ect. The overall selling amount would improve but would most
likely not cover the cost of the improvements and therefore the value
would remain close to the same..
Here is a different view, what if you bought an old Cherokee 140 for
$10,000 with an old panel and run out engine. Your good with you hands
and can do good work that an A&P would like. Let=92s assume that you
were
able to convert the aircraft Certification to Experimental Exhibition
with very relaxed limitations. You and you=92re A&P friend overhaul the
engine, repair cracks, corrosion, broken parts (for example: door
handles, head liners, switches, lighting, seats), up graded the avionics
to a new glass panel, and certify during the condition inspection the
aircraft airworthy. You would be able to do this any way you would like
within the scope of the newly issued limitations. If you had to do this
with a Standard Airworthiness Certificate this could be cost prohibitive
if you had to meet part 43 with a $10,000 airplane that is only worth
$20,000 in good condition with a Standard Certificate. This example
would be one reason I would consider a conversion to Experimental. But
as mentioned above you would have to have a good handle on the
re-certification process or one might find them selves with a 1500 pound
paper weight at the end of the day.
Mike Larkin
--
11/22/2006
--
11/22/2006
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: Garmin GNS430 Nav board repaired twice |
>
> When you say that your nav is connected directly (no splitter) to the
> antenna does that mean that you are also feeding the glide slope input
> directly from some separate glide slope antenna?
Yes, one antenna for VOR in the horizontal stabilizer, and one for the
GS, on the floor behind the
baggage compartment.
>
> What is the status of the unit now? You have it back repaired and are
> not using it for concern over damaging it again with comm
> transmissions or ---?
I have disconnected the VOR antenna. I will install either a 6 dB
attenuator or an rf limiter and hope it will not happen again.
>
>
I have now measured the voltage across a 50 Ohms terminator at the VOR
antenna connector when transmitting with the GNS430 com (no modulation).
The maximum measured voltage in the com frequency range was about 3.5
Vpp (at 123 MHz), which equals to 1.24 Vrms.
That is 14.9 dBm, at 50 Ohms a power of 31mW.
The peak power at 70 % modulation would be 87 mW. (19.4 dBm)
I don't know the spec of the GNS430 nav receiver, but IMO, this level
should not be destructive.
--Andre
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: Conversion to Experimental |
Our ole C-421C with Riley conversion with Lyco turbines (under a STC)
was converted for MaxViz. Just like Mike Dennis did for his PC-12. It
is easy to misunderstand when dealing with Certified and rolling out new
avionics onboard. The bird gets reconstructed under a 337 back to
certified configuration at the end of the trial period. It receives a
new annual and a trip back to the FSDO in hopes that the MIDO doesn't
want more to reissue a Standard Certificate.
John Cox
Do not archive
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Lloyd, Daniel R.
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 7:23 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Conversion to Experimental
<LloydDR@wernerco.com>
Yes, you are incorrect, you can take a certified aircraft, and
re-register it from the standard category or whatever it is in and
designate the entire craft experimental. Then you can do what you want
with it, but you will not hold the repairman's certificate unless you
built it, so you would still need an A&P to do the annual. At least this
is how I understand it from talking with the local FSDO.
Dan Lloyd
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of N395V
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 9:01 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Conversion to Experimental
All right I am confused.
It is my impression that you can put non certified equipment in a panel
if it is not there to replace a required item. It is also my impresion
tht this requires a 337?
I am not aware of a reg that allows you to just slap a unit in a plane
and tag it experimental.
I also no of no regs that allow you to convert a production plane to
experimental with out severe restrictions that would render the plane
useless for most purposes.
Am I incorrect?
Do not archive
--------
Milt
N395V
F1 Rocket
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p992#80992
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: Firewall penetration |
I saw Bob's idea and may adopt some of that, but then I think about
the rather large holes for the rudder bars to the nose wheel steering
and I'm stumped. My plane is a Zenith Zodiac and it looks impossible
to keep a fuel fed fire from blasting right in. Not a pleasant thought.
Cleone
At 12:21 PM 12/9/2006, you wrote:
>
>Thanks Glen - That's perfect - just what I was looking for. :)
>
>Don Owens
>
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p409#80409
>
>
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: Firewall penetration |
>
> I saw Bob's idea and may adopt some of that, but then I think about
> the rather large holes for the rudder bars to the nose wheel steering
> and I'm stumped. My plane is a Zenith Zodiac and it looks impossible
> to keep a fuel fed fire from blasting right in. Not a pleasant thought.
Older airplanes with such big rods did with sliding covers riding on the
rods and sliding against the FWL, or resorted to non-fire "socks", made
of leather for instance. This way movement is allowed without letting
gas or flame pass.
Why not have a try ? We have a Zenith in the hangar, and indeed the
firewall is as gas tight as a sieve...And once we even found the bars
buckled.
For variation on Bob's theme and suitable putty, I gathered some info here :
http://contrails.free.fr/engine_cpf.php
Regards,
Gilles Thesee
Grenoble, France
http://contrails.free.fr
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: Firewall penetration |
On the Zodiac you have two areas like that.
One is the nose wheel rods the other is the throttle rod penetrations,
Neither of them are easy to seal.
Frank
Zodiac 400 hours
RV7a 52hours
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Cleones
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 10:43 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Firewall penetration
I saw Bob's idea and may adopt some of that, but then I think about the
rather large holes for the rudder bars to the nose wheel steering and
I'm stumped. My plane is a Zenith Zodiac and it looks impossible to
keep a fuel fed fire from blasting right in. Not a pleasant thought.
Cleone
Message 23
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Conversion to Experimental |
Hi John,
Let's not confuse the troops too much. There is not an Experimental
category for "I don't want to follow the TC rules and want to do whatever
hits my fancy, with a TC production aircraft" crowd.
The most common available categories, as Bob pointed out are
Experimental, R&D, where you get approval from FSDO for specific
modification development towards 337, STC, TC, etc. with very specific
operating limitations and time limits. Don't get it done in time, beg for
extension at FSDO, but it will never be for unlimited time and uses.
Amateur built...persuade FSDO that you are building 51% of the aircraft,
that just happens to also use portions of a TC aircraft, and then you get
the privileges that go with that category.
Experimental Exhibition, limited to flying to airshows, exhibitions, etc
which have to be reported, may be restricted, no flight over congested
areas, etc. Probably prohibits pax beyond "required" crew as well.
> <johnwcox@pacificnw.com>
>
> Our ole C-421C with Riley conversion with Lyco turbines (under a STC)
> was converted for MaxViz. Just like Mike Dennis did for his PC-12. It
> is easy to misunderstand when dealing with Certified and rolling out new
> avionics onboard. The bird gets reconstructed under a 337 back to
> certified configuration at the end of the trial period. It receives a
> new annual and a trip back to the FSDO in hopes that the MIDO doesn't
> want more to reissue a Standard Certificate.
>
> John Cox
> Do not archive
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> Lloyd, Daniel R.
> Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 7:23 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Conversion to Experimental
>
> <LloydDR@wernerco.com>
>
> Yes, you are incorrect, you can take a certified aircraft, and
> re-register it from the standard category or whatever it is in and
> designate the entire craft experimental. Then you can do what you want
> with it, but you will not hold the repairman's certificate unless you
> built it, so you would still need an A&P to do the annual. At least this
> is how I understand it from talking with the local FSDO.
> Dan Lloyd
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of N395V
> Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 9:01 AM
> To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Conversion to Experimental
>
>
> All right I am confused.
>
> It is my impression that you can put non certified equipment in a panel
> if it is not there to replace a required item. It is also my impresion
> tht this requires a 337?
>
> I am not aware of a reg that allows you to just slap a unit in a plane
> and tag it experimental.
>
> I also no of no regs that allow you to convert a production plane to
> experimental with out severe restrictions that would render the plane
> useless for most purposes.
>
> Am I incorrect?
>
> Do not archive
>
> --------
> Milt
> N395V
> F1 Rocket
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p992#80992
>
>
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: | Safe cabin heater |
>Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2006 12:42:51 -0600
>
>From: Cleone <cleone@rr1.net>
>Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Safe cabin heater?
As Bob said at least once, "people on this list are worried about
everything" or something close to that. In my mail today was an
advertisement about a new advanced quartz infrared portable
heater. It reminded my of a small unit that the office girls were
using in a local office to keep their feet and legs warm. They said
it really worked. This company claims more than I can believe but is
it worth looking into? www.edenpure.com I have survived over
5000 hours of flying exhaust type heaters and like a lot of people
have been concerned.
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: Safe cabin heater |
Cleones wrote:
> This company claims more than I can believe but is it worth looking
> into? www.edenpure.com
>
This is one sponsor of Paul Harvey. I believe it would work fine in a
residence... were you thinking in an aircraft? Earl
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 |
|
I don't normally see so little activity on the list or in my inbox, so
here's a test email. My service has migrated some of its services and I
don't trust it yet.
Rob Wright
RV-10 Fuse
Do not archive
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: DYMO RhinoPRO3000 label writer |
Michele:
Do you have to use a special type of heat shrink, or will any old
type work?
Michle Delsol wrote:
>
>I've been using the Rhyno 5000 - I find that I have to be really careful on
>printing the labels - many in a single pass so as not to minimize waste. The
>yellow heat shrink tubes are really expensive and if not careful, one can go
>through them at a pace which makes the labels a significant cost item. For
>that matter, it is much like colour printers - cheap printer but you get
>whacked on the cartridges. This being said, I find the Rhyno a great product
>and time saver.
>
>Michele
>RV8 - Finishing
>
>
>
>
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: Conversion to Experimental |
On 12 Dec 2006, at 10:53, Earl_Schroeder wrote:
> <Earl_Schroeder@juno.com>
>
> Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
> In Canada, you can de-certify an older out-of-
> production aircraft and begin to own, operate, modify and
> maintain it as if it were an RV or Kitfox.
>
> I'm wondering if this 'de-certified' aircraft can then be moved to
> the US and that designation remains?
>
> If so, perhaps I can take my 'ol C-150 up there for a visit and
> upgrade??
>
Nope, once an aircraft is moved to the Owner Maintenance category,
you can't even cross the border into the US. The Owner Maintenance
category is not recognized by ICAO, so it is not recognized by any
other country.
Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
Ottawa, Canada
http://www.kilohotel.com/rv8
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: Conversion to Experimental |
Bob is correct in his interpretation of Canadian regulation, but in answer
to your question, my understanding is NO! And not only that, but the FAA has
apparently also decided that planes which have followed this procedure are
no longer even allowed to fly into the US at all, even when still registered
in Canada and flown by a Canadian pilot. There are no such exclusions on
Canadian OBAM aircraft which are welcomed across the border with very little
hassle. Go figure. This fact has put a considerable damper on the
desirability of this conversion. Also under Canadian law, once the plane has
been de-certified under this rule it is then ineligible to ever be converted
back into the TC category.
Bob McC
Toronto, Canada
----- Original Message -----
From: "Earl_Schroeder" <Earl_Schroeder@juno.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 10:53 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Conversion to Experimental
<Earl_Schroeder@juno.com>
>
> Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
> In Canada, you can de-certify an older out-of-
> production aircraft and begin to own, operate, modify and
> maintain it as if it were an RV or Kitfox.
>
> I'm wondering if this 'de-certified' aircraft can then be moved to the
> US and that designation remains?
>
> If so, perhaps I can take my 'ol C-150 up there for a visit and upgrade??
>
>
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 |
|
Got your message Rob...too many folks out in their shops building I guess!
Wish I were one of them! LOL!=0A=0A=0A----- Original Message ----=0AFrom:
Rob Wright <armywrights@adelphia.net>=0ATo: rv10-list@matronics.com; Rob Wr
ight <armywrights@adelphia.net>; aeroelectric-list@matronics.com=0ASent: Tu
esday, December 12, 2006 6:50:09 PM=0ASubject: AeroElectric-List: quiet=0A
=0A=0AI don=A2t normally see so little activity on the list or in my inbox,
so here=A2s a test email. My service has migrated some of its services an
d I don=A2t trust it yet.=0A =0ARob Wright=0ARV-10 Fuse=0A =0ADo not archiv
========
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: Conversion to Experimental |
Kelly McMullen wrote:
> Experimental Exhibition, limited to flying to airshows, exhibitions, etc
> which have to be reported, may be restricted, no flight over congested
> areas, etc. Probably prohibits pax beyond "required" crew as well.
>
"Limited" is a subjective term in this case.
First, you're given a practice area that is something line 100 mile
radius or so. The category includes a lot of fast airplanes, and the
pilots really do need a large area to practice for proficiency. This is
actually a good provision.
Then at the beginning of each year, you tell the FAA all the flyins that
you might want to attend. No need to restrict yourself, just tell them
you might want to go to all of 'em. There's also no penalty if you
don't quite make it there and have to stop somewhere short of the
destination.
Finally, for the most part, there is no restriction on passengers just
for it being an exhibition plane.
I've heard that the FAA is cracking down on this category, but
historically the restrictions have been a paper tiger. You can pretty
much do whatever a normal GA pilot would do, you just have to take a
couple more steps to cover your tracks.
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: | Re: Safe cabin heater |
And I live in New Jersey and have a bridge for sale cheap near New York...
Does this "work"? Yes, it puts out heat - the exact same amount any
other electric heater of the same wattage does. It might be safer than
other heaters if it really operates at a lower temperature, but a watt
is a watt.
It wouldn't even "work" in your airplane because it requires 120V, not 12V.
If you want to stay warm, put an Eggenfelllner Subaru engine in your RV
or Glastar or??? Safe, warm, coolant powered in-cabin heater. Not
affiliated with him, just a happy customer.
Do not archive
Dick Tasker
Cleones wrote:
>
>
>> Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2006 12:42:51 -0600
>>
>> From: Cleone <cleone@rr1.net>
>> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Safe cabin heater?
>
>
> As Bob said at least once, "people on this list are worried about
> everything" or something close to that. In my mail today was an
> advertisement about a new advanced quartz infrared portable heater.
> It reminded my of a small unit that the office girls were using in a
> local office to keep their feet and legs warm. They said it really
> worked. This company claims more than I can believe but is it worth
> looking into? www.edenpure.com I have survived over 5000 hours of
> flying exhaust type heaters and like a lot of people have been concerned.
>
>
--
Please Note:
No trees were destroyed in the sending of this message. We do concede, however,
that a significant number of electrons may have been temporarily inconvenienced.
--
Message 33
| 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: Safe cabin heater |
Wow, how did the "Egg" conversation jump over here from the -10 list? :)
Richard E. Tasker wrote:
> <retasker@optonline.net>
>
> And I live in New Jersey and have a bridge for sale cheap near New
> York...
> Does this "work"? Yes, it puts out heat - the exact same amount any
> other electric heater of the same wattage does. It might be safer
> than other heaters if it really operates at a lower temperature, but a
> watt is a watt.
>
> It wouldn't even "work" in your airplane because it requires 120V, not
> 12V.
>
> If you want to stay warm, put an Eggenfelllner Subaru engine in your
> RV or Glastar or??? Safe, warm, coolant powered in-cabin heater. Not
> affiliated with him, just a happy customer.
>
> Do not archive
>
> Dick Tasker
>
> Cleones wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>> Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2006 12:42:51 -0600
>>>
>>> From: Cleone <cleone@rr1.net>
>>> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Safe cabin heater?
>>
>>
>> As Bob said at least once, "people on this list are worried about
>> everything" or something close to that. In my mail today was an
>> advertisement about a new advanced quartz infrared portable heater.
>> It reminded my of a small unit that the office girls were using in a
>> local office to keep their feet and legs warm. They said it really
>> worked. This company claims more than I can believe but is it worth
>> looking into? www.edenpure.com I have survived over 5000 hours
>> of flying exhaust type heaters and like a lot of people have been
>> concerned.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
Message 34
| 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: Conversion to Experimental |
If you're ONLY adding some non-certificated instrumentation, you could
use the loophole that allows us to add non-certificated GPS's without
damaging the craft's certs. You'd still have to keep all the
certificated minimum required instruments though.
David M.
Lloyd, Daniel R. wrote:
>
>Yes, you are incorrect, you can take a certified aircraft, and
>re-register it from the standard category or whatever it is in and
>designate the entire craft experimental. Then you can do what you want
>with it, but you will not hold the repairman's certificate unless you
>built it, so you would still need an A&P to do the annual. At least this
>is how I understand it from talking with the local FSDO.
>Dan Lloyd
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
>[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of N395V
>Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 9:01 AM
>To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
>Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Conversion to Experimental
>
>
>All right I am confused.
>
>It is my impression that you can put non certified equipment in a panel
>if it is not there to replace a required item. It is also my impresion
>tht this requires a 337?
>
>I am not aware of a reg that allows you to just slap a unit in a plane
>and tag it experimental.
>
>I also no of no regs that allow you to convert a production plane to
>experimental with out severe restrictions that would render the plane
>useless for most purposes.
>
>Am I incorrect?
>
>Do not archive
>
>--------
>Milt
>N395V
>F1 Rocket
>
>
>Read this topic online here:
>
>http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p992#80992
>
>
>
>
Message 35
| 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: Safe cabin heater |
At 08:21 PM 12/12/2006, you wrote:
><retasker@optonline.net>
>
>And I live in New Jersey and have a bridge for sale cheap near New York...
>Does this "work"? Yes, it puts out heat - the exact same amount any
>other electric heater of the same wattage does. It might be safer
>than other heaters if it really operates at a lower temperature, but
>a watt is a watt.
>
>It wouldn't even "work" in your airplane because it requires 120V, not 12V.
If you want to stay warm with a 12v electrical system, look into
electric snowmobile pants and jackets.
--
Message 36
| 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: | Safe cabin heater |
Or look at heated seat inserts here
http://www.classicaerodesigns.com/web/public/Products/ProductDetail.asp?Prod
uctID=37&ProductCategory=Accessories&ProductCategoryID=1
Or use motorcycle clothes that plug into 12 volt accessory outlet, very
warm. Very low power consumption because its close to your skin and covered
by your outer clothes.
Bevan
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Richard
Riley
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 9:27 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Safe cabin heater
--> <richard@riley.net>
At 08:21 PM 12/12/2006, you wrote:
><retasker@optonline.net>
>
>And I live in New Jersey and have a bridge for sale cheap near New York...
>Does this "work"? Yes, it puts out heat - the exact same amount any
>other electric heater of the same wattage does. It might be safer than
>other heaters if it really operates at a lower temperature, but a watt
>is a watt.
>
>It wouldn't even "work" in your airplane because it requires 120V, not 12V.
If you want to stay warm with a 12v electrical system, look into electric
snowmobile pants and jackets.
--
Message 37
| 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: Conversion to Experimental |
At 01:09 AM 12/13/2006, you wrote:
>Then at the beginning of each year, you tell the FAA all the flyins
>that you might want to attend. No need to restrict yourself, just
>tell them you might want to go to all of 'em. There's also no
>penalty if you don't quite make it there and have to stop somewhere
>short of the destination.
You can also update your list at any time. Like, for instance, the
night before you fly off across country, you fax them an update to
include your cross country proficiency flight.
--
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! --
|