Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:40 AM - Latest figure Z16 ? (Gilles Thesee)
2. 03:41 AM - solder (bob noffs)
3. 04:16 AM - Re: Avionics cooler (Gilles Thesee)
4. 04:38 AM - Re: Re: "Broken and Garbled" (Additional data) (David M.)
5. 06:04 AM - Re: solder (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
6. 06:07 AM - Re: Re: Avionics cooler (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
7. 06:11 AM - Re: Re: "Broken and Garbled" (Additional data) (RV Builder (Michael Sausen))
8. 06:13 AM - Re: solder (William Slaughter)
9. 08:04 AM - smaller crimp-on spade terminals? (Bill Boyd)
10. 08:13 AM - Re: smaller crimp-on spade terminals? ()
11. 08:14 AM - filter cap (Bill and Marsha)
12. 08:58 AM - Re: filter cap (Matt Prather)
13. 09:15 AM - Re: Re: "Broken and Garbled" (Additional data) (Jerry Grimmonpre)
14. 09:25 AM - Re: Re: "Broken and Garbled" (Additional data) (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
15. 09:36 AM - Re: smaller crimp-on spade terminals? (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
16. 09:40 AM - Re: filter cap (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
17. 12:11 PM - Re: Re: "Broken and Garbled" (Additional data) (David M.)
18. 12:11 PM - Slow turning Vacumn Pump drive. (John Burnaby)
19. 02:55 PM - Re: What Are The Odds - Problem Solved (I think) (Sally Kilishek)
20. 03:24 PM - Re: filter cap (Bill and Marsha)
21. 03:32 PM - Re: filter cap (Gilles Thesee)
22. 04:14 PM - Re: filter cap (Matt Prather)
23. 05:07 PM - Battery AND Starter Contactor? (jdalton77)
24. 05:11 PM - Re: filter cap ()
25. 05:47 PM - Re: Battery AND Starter Contactor? (Matt Prather)
26. 08:57 PM - Re: 91.205 (WAAS) ()
27. 09:04 PM - Re: Re: "Broken and Garbled" (Additional data) (Fiveonepw@aol.com)
28. 10:11 PM - Re: Re: 91.205 (WAAS) (Dan Beadle)
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: | Latest figure Z16 ? |
Hi Bob,
Hope you won't mind my posting again on the subject :
"In the latest revision J of appendix Z, the Rotax figure Z16 Revision L
(6-22-06) displays a new OV connection principle.
In my opinion this newer version is an improvement, as the Rotax-Ducati
regulator goes wild when the sense "C" wire is disconnected.
Here are my questions :
- Is there any chance to see this latest version appear in the .dwg
drawings ? (I would like to use this newer version for some buddies'
wiring diagram)
- Is there any risk of over voltage if the pilot happens to open or
close the master switch in flight ?
Thanks in advance,
Best wishes for the New Year,"
Regards,
Gilles
http://contrails.free.fr
Message 2
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
hi all, i understand the advantages of a 63/37 blend of solder . is
60/40 ''almost as good'' or is there some reason that makes is a much
poorer choice? it is easily available while 63/37 is quite a bit less
frequent on the store shelves.
bob noffs
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: Avionics cooler |
> (Fait-il beaucoup de froid Grenoble?)
>
> My system is based on the ExpBus, which in case you don't know, is a
> premanufactured electric buss system (which, by the way, 'letric Bob
> doesn't recommend).
> But since my system has a Main Battery buss and an Aux Battery buss, I
> will connect it to the Main, therefore it will also be OFF in case of
> an electric emergency.
Hi Carlos,
Winter is not really there in Grenoble, and most ski resorts are still
closed due to the lack of snow. Are you located in Portugal ?
I've heard about the ExpBus. The Aux Battery bus may play the same role
as an E-bus.
Best regards,
Gilles
http://contrails.free.fr
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: "Broken and Garbled" (Additional data) |
GMRS is not license free. It's $75 for 5 years if you use those
frequencies.
David M.
Speedy11@aol.com wrote:
> Very cool info. I wasn't aware of those radios. I ordered a pair as
> soon as I saw your posting. Thanks.
> Stan Sutterfield
> Do not archive
>
>
> GMRS, FRS and a few other handy acronyms are used to describe a
> variety
> of license free or easy license use of the radio spectrum for
> personal communications.
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
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 |
|
At 05:38 AM 1/3/2007 -0600, you wrote:
>hi all, i understand the advantages of a 63/37 blend of solder . is 60/40
>''almost as good'' or is there some reason that makes is a much poorer
>choice? it is easily available while 63/37 is quite a bit less frequent on
>the store shelves.
60/40 is an adequate substitute for 63/37 and as you've
noted, is much easier to find. It will be just fine
for your purposes.
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: Avionics cooler |
At 12:37 AM 1/3/2007 +0000, you wrote:
><trigo@mail.telepac.pt>
>
>Tom S., James H., Charlie E., Bob N.
>
>Thanks for your input. I will try to measure the panel back temperature
>with all the avionics paraphernalia already working (which will only
>happen, very conveniently, in the next summer) and I'll decide accordingly.
As a gemeral rule of thumb, you can do your temperature tests
at any convenient time and extrapolate for worst case. For example,
if your tests at 25C ambient produces a temperature of 45C at some
point of interest, the same point measured at 35C ambient would
also be 10 degrees higher or 55C.
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: | Re: "Broken and Garbled" (Additional data) |
One comment on these radios, take the advertised range and cut it in
half at best.
Do not archive
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Speedy11@aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2007 8:26 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: "Broken and Garbled" (Additional data)
Very cool info. I wasn't aware of those radios. I ordered a pair as
soon as I saw your posting. Thanks.
Stan Sutterfield
Do not archive
GMRS, FRS and a few other handy acronyms are used to describe a
variety
of license free or easy license use of the radio spectrum for
personal communications.
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 |
|
Yes, it's almost as good, but it does have a small temperature range
where
it has a plastic state. If you wiggle even slightly as it cools through
this
range, you'll have a substandard joint. If everthing is up on the bench
and
solidly held, it wouldn't be a problem. Obviously lots of things get
successfully soldered with the 60/40, but I just ordered a one pound
spool
of 63/37 from Digikey when I couldn't find any locally. Unless I
drastically
increase my soldering, it'll last me the rest of my life and then some,
and
it maximizes my chances of each joint being as it should be.
William Slaughter
RV-8 QB
Almost finished enough sheetmetal to be able to run a wire for a change!
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of bob
noffs
Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2007 5:39 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: solder
hi all, i understand the advantages of a 63/37 blend of solder . is
60/40
''almost as good'' or is there some reason that makes is a much poorer
choice? it is easily available while 63/37 is quite a bit less frequent
on
the store shelves.
bob noffs
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: | smaller crimp-on spade terminals? |
I was inspecting my Infinity Aerospace trim & flap relay board last
night, pondering how and where I was going to mount it in the plane,
and noticed that one row of contacts, for the wire bundle from the
joystick, was smaller than a standard terminal block, with narrower
spacing - I'm guessing .187 versus .250 - so, is there a crimp-on
spade lug for terminating wires on a terminal block this size, or
should I just slip the wires in and tighten down? Vendor suggestion?
TIA,
Bill B.
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: smaller crimp-on spade terminals? |
Bill,
I had a similar problem with a different device. I used ring terminals for #4
screws. They are available from Allied and probably Mouser and Digikey. Hope
this helps. Don
---- Bill Boyd <sportav8r@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I was inspecting my Infinity Aerospace trim & flap relay board last
> night, pondering how and where I was going to mount it in the plane,
> and noticed that one row of contacts, for the wire bundle from the
> joystick, was smaller than a standard terminal block, with narrower
> spacing - I'm guessing .187 versus .250 - so, is there a crimp-on
> spade lug for terminating wires on a terminal block this size, or
> should I just slip the wires in and tighten down? Vendor suggestion?
>
> TIA,
>
> Bill B.
>
>
>
>
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 |
|
Can anyone give me a part # and mfgr. for a 22000MFD 25v 105c
filter cap? or what ever is better. ( Must have screw terminals.)
Thanks Bill S.
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 |
|
Screw terminals are generally a pain. But... 338-1252-ND from digikey
gets everything you want except the temperature spec - 95C instead of
105C. If you aren't installing it in a certified harsh environment 95C
might be fine.
Matt-
> Can anyone give me a part # and mfgr. for a 22000MFD 25v 105c filter
> cap? or what ever is better. ( Must have screw terminals.)
> Thanks Bill S.
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: "Broken and Garbled" (Additional data) |
Do Not Archive
David ...
Who do you pay the fee to and how do they know if you are still
transmitting and not paying the fee?
Jerry Grimmonpre'
----- Original Message -----
From: David M.
To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2007 6:37 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: "Broken and Garbled" (Additional
data)
GMRS is not license free. It's $75 for 5 years if you use those
frequencies.
David M.
Speedy11@aol.com wrote:
Very cool info. I wasn't aware of those radios. I ordered a pair
as soon as I saw your posting. Thanks.
Stan Sutterfield
Do not archive
GMRS, FRS and a few other handy acronyms are used to describe a
variety
of license free or easy license use of the radio spectrum for
personal communications.
href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List">http://www.
matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
Message 14
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: "Broken and Garbled" (Additional data) |
At 08:10 AM 1/3/2007 -0600, you wrote:
>One comment on these radios, take the advertised range and cut it in half
>at best.
Yeah, the itty-bitty hand-helds are victims of way too
much marketing hype. I've used them vehicle to vehicle
solid out to 1/2 mile and open line-of-sight to about a
mile. One pair I had was good to a couple hundred yards
vehicle to vehicle.
However, for the tasks to which I've applied these radios
a range of a few feet has been sufficient.
Bob . . .
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: smaller crimp-on spade terminals? |
At 11:02 AM 1/3/2007 -0500, you wrote:
>
>I was inspecting my Infinity Aerospace trim & flap relay board last
>night, pondering how and where I was going to mount it in the plane,
>and noticed that one row of contacts, for the wire bundle from the
>joystick, was smaller than a standard terminal block, with narrower
>spacing - I'm guessing .187 versus .250 - so, is there a crimp-on
>spade lug for terminating wires on a terminal block this size, or
>should I just slip the wires in and tighten down? Vendor suggestion?
See http://dkc3.digikey.com/PDF/T071/0295.pdf
http://dkc3.digikey.com/PDF/T071/0296.pdf
for a complete range of PIDG terminals. Get out
your callipers and see what size will really fit
your terminal block.
Bob . . .
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 |
|
At 09:57 AM 1/3/2007 -0700, you wrote:
>
>Screw terminals are generally a pain. But... 338-1252-ND from digikey
>gets everything you want except the temperature spec - 95C instead of
>105C. If you aren't installing it in a certified harsh environment 95C
>might be fine.
I agree. This part number will be fine. However, avoid
any ideas about substituting a wired device of the same
ratings over the screw-terminal devices. Their internal
construction is not as well suited for high-ripple current
filtering that we're looking for in this application.
It's that "computer grade" thing that makes the difference
and all these puppies come with 10-32 screw terminals.
Bob . . .
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: "Broken and Garbled" (Additional data) |
check fcc.gov.
If a business complains to the FCC then the freq police are obligated to
investigate. If they find you they fine you or jail you.
David M.
Jerry Grimmonpre wrote:
> Do Not Archive
> David ...
> Who do you pay the fee to and how do they know if you are still
> transmitting and not paying the fee?
> Jerry Grimmonpre'
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: David M. <mailto:ainut@hiwaay.net>
> To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> <mailto:aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2007 6:37 AM
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: "Broken and Garbled"
> (Additional data)
>
> GMRS is not license free. It's $75 for 5 years if you use those
> frequencies.
>
> David M.
>
>
> Speedy11@aol.com wrote:
>
>> Very cool info. I wasn't aware of those radios. I ordered a
>> pair as soon as I saw your posting. Thanks.
>> Stan Sutterfield
>> Do not archive
>>
>>
>> GMRS, FRS and a few other handy acronyms are used to describe
>> a variety
>> of license free or easy license use of the radio spectrum for
>> personal communications.
>>
>>
>>
>> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
>>
>>
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
>href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
Message 18
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Slow turning Vacumn Pump drive. |
I have an all electric setup and a free vacumn pad on which I'd like to
put a direct-drive alternator, ala SD 20.
Problem is the Franklin drive turns at 80% of engine speed. Is there a
reasonable size D-D alt that will put out 20 A @ 1900 rpm?
Searched the archives and found the GAMI Supplenator, but GAMI only
sells the package system, with lots of bells and whistles, for $4K.
Thanks,
John
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: What Are The Odds - Problem Solved (I think) |
Bob:
As usual, your intuition (in this case about faulty
ground connections) is right on target.
I replaced the alternator ground wire, which had run
to a nearby engine bolt, with a piece of #18 wire
going directly to the regulator case.
All aberrant behavior stopped at once. Bus voltage is
now mostly 14.6 to 14.8 volts, with infrequent
excursions to 14.4 or 15.0 volts.
Dont know why this worked, since the original ground
connection tested fine on the multimeter (showed zero
ohms to airframe ground), but who am I to question
success?
Ill put some additional flight test time on the
system when the weather improves, but Im feeling
pretty confident that the problem is solved. I know
that a 14.8V bus voltage will put more stress on the
battery than 13.8 volts would, but I think we can
probably live with that. I dont think that this will
hurt the avionics.
In answer to your questions:
My ground system is as follows. The voltage regulator
is bolted to the stainless steel firewall. The
landing light and strobes are grounded to the wing
structure. The PTT switches are grounded to
convenient points near the control sticks. Everything
else is grounded at a single accessible point behind
the instrument panel.
With the exception of the 60A alternator B lead
breaker (which is a push to reset thermal breaker) all
circuit breakers are Polyswitch PTC current limiters
with indicator lights for each circuit.
I know that I speak for many others when I express my
sincere gratitude to you for monitoring this list and
for steering dummies like me away from despair. God
bless you.
George Kilishek
---------------------------------------
/snip/
>The fact that the voltage the regulator sees is a few
>tenths of a volt lower than the actual bus
voltage
>probably indicates a problem with the wiring
between
>the regulator and the alternator breaker. This
is
>about 6 feet of #18 wire from the regulator to
the
>alternator switch and about 2 feet of #18 wire
from
>the switch to the breaker (Faston connectors
>throughout).
>
>Do you have any suggestions?
Keep in mind that "wiring" includes ALL
conductor
pathways including ground. These simple
regulators
use case ground as the negative side sense
lead
for voltage regulation. /snip/
__________________________________________________
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 |
|
Matt Thanks for the quick reply. What do you mean by, generally a
pain? What problems can I expect to incounter with screw terminals? Bill
S.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Matt Prather" <mprather@spro.net>
Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2007 10:57 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: filter cap
> <mprather@spro.net>
>
> Screw terminals are generally a pain. But... 338-1252-ND from digikey
> gets everything you want except the temperature spec - 95C instead of
> 105C. If you aren't installing it in a certified harsh environment 95C
> might be fine.
>
>
> Matt-
>
>> Can anyone give me a part # and mfgr. for a 22000MFD 25v 105c filter
>> cap? or what ever is better. ( Must have screw terminals.)
>> Thanks Bill S.
>
>
>
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 |
|
> What do you mean by, generally a pain? What problems can I expect
> to incounter with screw terminals?
Bill, Matt and all,
FWIW, I installed such a screw terminal capacitor in our airplane three
years ago, and we have been flying for two years now, without any problem.
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 |
|
Ahhh.. I just gripe because screw terminals seem unnecessairly fiddly.
Electrical components are often mounted in places where access/vision is
limited. Threading small screws through lugs crimped to springy wire can
be a test of dexterity and patience. No big deal, but I like to have
things built for quick serviceability.
As a possible alternative, I remember seeing threaded lug to spade
adapters on the tops of the older Bosch (at least) automotive ignition
coils. A threaded stud sticks out of the top of the coil. Captured by a
nut threaded onto the stud is a piece of tinned metal. The end of that
piece of metal is properly sized/formed to accept female spade terminals.
I did a quick online search and couldn't find what I was looking for...
Maybe somebody knows what these things are actually called..
What I am talking about is depicted here:
http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/thumb/2/27/200px-Igncoil.jpg
or here:
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://specialtauto.com/delorean-parts/images/ignition-coil-blaster_small.jpg&imgrefurl=http://specialtauto.com/delorean-parts/engine-tuneup.html&h=155&w=150&sz=3&hl=en&sig2=JP9z4J26Tyw9NHdBBJn8jw&start=64&tbnid=M4N61qRrCiDkHM:&tbnh=97&tbnw=94&ei=_0WcRYWOL8zI6gH2pM3dDA&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dignition%2Bcoil%26start%3D60%26ndsp%3D20%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26safe%3Dactive%26sa%3DN
or here:
http://content.performanceproducts.com/main/101089/boschigcoil.jpg
It should be pretty easy to make such a thing.
Regards,
Matt-
> <docyukon@ptcnet.net>
>
> Matt Thanks for the quick reply. What do you mean by, generally a
> pain? What problems can I expect to incounter with screw terminals?
> Bill
> S.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Matt Prather" <mprather@spro.net>
> To: <aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2007 10:57 AM
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: filter cap
>
>
>> <mprather@spro.net>
>>
>> Screw terminals are generally a pain. But... 338-1252-ND from digikey
>> gets everything you want except the temperature spec - 95C instead of
>> 105C. If you aren't installing it in a certified harsh environment 95C
>> might be fine.
>>
>>
>> Matt-
>>
>>> Can anyone give me a part # and mfgr. for a 22000MFD 25v 105c
>>> filter
>>> cap? or what ever is better. ( Must have screw terminals.)
>>> Thanks Bill S.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
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: | Battery AND Starter Contactor? |
Hello,
I'm new to the list, and just getting started on the wings of an RV-10,
having finished the tail kit last month. I've read Bob's book, but as
I'm starting to design my electrical system I have (at least for now) a
question.
The schematic in "the book" shows the main battery pos wire connected to
the battery contactor and then from there to the starter contactor. I
just viewed the HomebuiltHelper Video on wiring a homebuilt and they
showed the battery connected directly to the "starter solenoid" which I
think is meant to be called the starter contactor (at least it looks
like one).
So my newbie questions are:
1. Are both of these approaches correct?
2. Is the "starter contactor" any different than the "batter contactor?"
3. Am I correct in that the device in the video is not called a
"solenoid?" From reading Bob's book, I'm guessing this is the "close
but no cigar" example.
Thanks and please be gentle.
Jeff Dalton
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 |
|
Steinair has faston adapters for use on terminal strips that could be cut in half
and used. Don
---- Matt Prather <mprather@spro.net> wrote:
>
> Ahhh.. I just gripe because screw terminals seem unnecessairly fiddly.
> Electrical components are often mounted in places where access/vision is
> limited. Threading small screws through lugs crimped to springy wire can
> be a test of dexterity and patience. No big deal, but I like to have
> things built for quick serviceability.
>
> As a possible alternative, I remember seeing threaded lug to spade
> adapters on the tops of the older Bosch (at least) automotive ignition
> coils. A threaded stud sticks out of the top of the coil. Captured by a
> nut threaded onto the stud is a piece of tinned metal. The end of that
> piece of metal is properly sized/formed to accept female spade terminals.
> I did a quick online search and couldn't find what I was looking for...
> Maybe somebody knows what these things are actually called..
>
> What I am talking about is depicted here:
>
> http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/thumb/2/27/200px-Igncoil.jpg
>
> or here:
>
> http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://specialtauto.com/delorean-parts/images/ignition-coil-blaster_small.jpg&imgrefurl=http://specialtauto.com/delorean-parts/engine-tuneup.html&h=155&w=150&sz=3&hl=en&sig2=JP9z4J26Tyw9NHdBBJn8jw&start=64&tbnid=M4N61qRrCiDkHM:&tbnh=97&tbnw=94&ei=_0WcRYWOL8zI6gH2pM3dDA&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dignition%2Bcoil%26start%3D60%26ndsp%3D20%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26safe%3Dactive%26sa%3DN
>
> or here:
>
> http://content.performanceproducts.com/main/101089/boschigcoil.jpg
>
> It should be pretty easy to make such a thing.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Matt-
>
>
> > <docyukon@ptcnet.net>
> >
> > Matt Thanks for the quick reply. What do you mean by, generally a
> > pain? What problems can I expect to incounter with screw terminals?
> > Bill
> > S.
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Matt Prather" <mprather@spro.net>
> > To: <aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2007 10:57 AM
> > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: filter cap
> >
> >
> >> <mprather@spro.net>
> >>
> >> Screw terminals are generally a pain. But... 338-1252-ND from digikey
> >> gets everything you want except the temperature spec - 95C instead of
> >> 105C. If you aren't installing it in a certified harsh environment 95C
> >> might be fine.
> >>
> >>
> >> Matt-
> >>
> >>> Can anyone give me a part # and mfgr. for a 22000MFD 25v 105c
> >>> filter
> >>> cap? or what ever is better. ( Must have screw terminals.)
> >>> Thanks Bill S.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: Battery AND Starter Contactor? |
Whooo.. This is a recurring topic of questions on the list.. Much
discussion in the archives.
Answers:
1. It depends on your design goals. Probably both designs aren't correct
however. Aircraft electrical systems need a high current battery switch -
either an electrically operated relay, or a big mechanical switch. A
primary reason is so that the whole system can be de-energized by
isolating the battery from the rest of the airplane. The high current
switch needs to be mounted as close as practicably possible to the
battery. The longer the run from the battery to the battery contactor,
the more care in protecting the wire that forms this connection.
2. Starter contactors are typically momentary switches, and can take
quite a bit of power to actuate 10Watts+. This extra current helps make
the switching action more robust - good for controlling currents in the
hundreds of amps. Battery contactors are continuous duty devices. They
consume less power, and won't switch a 200A+ load as robustly as the
starter contactor.
3. Your assessment seems correct.
Regards,
Matt-
> Hello,
>
> I'm new to the list, and just getting started on the wings of an RV-10,
> having finished the tail kit last month. I've read Bob's book, but as I'm
> starting to design my electrical system I have (at least for now) a
> question.
>
> The schematic in "the book" shows the main battery pos wire connected to
> the battery contactor and then from there to the starter contactor. I
> just viewed the HomebuiltHelper Video on wiring a homebuilt and they
> showed the battery connected directly to the "starter solenoid" which I
> think is meant to be called the starter contactor (at least it looks like
> one).
>
> So my newbie questions are:
>
> 1. Are both of these approaches correct?
> 2. Is the "starter contactor" any different than the "batter contactor?"
> 3. Am I correct in that the device in the video is not called a
> "solenoid?" From reading Bob's book, I'm guessing this is the "close but
> no cigar" example.
>
> Thanks and please be gentle.
>
> Jeff Dalton
Message 26
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: 91.205 (WAAS) |
1/3/2007
Hello Wayne, Good to hear from you.
You wrote: "I've heard it said more than once that an amateur-built plane
cannot be flown IFR with just a GPS. It must also have the traditional VOR
and ILS (when needed) receivers on board.
They cite 91.205 and the requirement to have "...equipment on board
appropriate to the ***ground-based*** navaids to be used. Why do you think
experimentals are held to that when the standard certificated aircraft
(Mooneys, Pipers, etc) are now flying with WAAS GPSs
and nothing else? Why must me have the crappy, out-dated stuff on board
when the new avionics suites in the newer planes do not?"
I do not agree with the statement "It (an ABEA (Amateur Built Experimental
Aircraft)) must
also have the traditional VOR and ILS (when needed) receivers on board."
Here is why I do not agree with that statement:
A) "The GNS 400/500 series have earned the FAAs TSO C146a Gamma-3
certification, which enables pilots to fly Lateral-Precision with Vertical
(LPV) guidance approaches and receive GPS navigation via the Wide Area
Augmentation System (WAAS)."
B) "Garmins GNS 400W/500W series meets the FAAs highest level of
certification for WAAS navigation. The units utilize satellite-based navaids
for precise lateral and vertical approach guidance similar to Instrument
Landing System (ILS) operations without the need for ground-based navaids
of any kind."
C) "The WAAS system improves the accuracy, reliability and integrity of the
GPS signal. GPS-WAAS navigators that meet FAAs WAAS regulations may be used
for sole means of navigation* for all phases of flight, including en route
through precision approach at airports."
These paragraph A, B, and C quotes are from a Garmin press release, see copy
below.
D) The WAAS system does involve ground facilities despite what Garmin says
in B above. See http://gps.faa.gov/programs/index.htm for a description of
the WAAS that incorporates both WRS (Wide area Reference Stations) and a WMS
(WAAS Master Station) which are facilities located on the ground.
Therefore an ABEA equipped with either a GNS 400W/500W, but no VHF
navigation equipment would be in compliance with its Operating Limitations
which requires compliance with FAR 91.205 (b), (c), and (d) when operating
IFR. Specifically the WAAS navigation equipment of that aircraft would be in
compliance with 91.205 (d) (2) which requires "navigational equipment
appropriate to the ground facilities to be used."
I intend to upgrade my GNS 430 to 430W configuration, but I certainly don't
intend to fly IFR if my VHF nav equipment is not operating. Obviously when
flying an ILS approach one must have funcioning localizer and glideslope
equipment on board. And similarly when flying a published approach that
requires GPS / WAAS equipment then that equipment must be on board and
functioning.
OC -- The best investment we will ever make is in gathering knowledge.
------------------------ GARMIN PRESS RELEASE FOLLOWS --------------
November 9, 2006
Garmin Receives WAAS Certification for GNS 400W/500W series
OLATHE, Kansas/November 9, 2006/PR Newswire Garmin International, a unit
of Garmin Ltd. (Nasdaq: GRMN), today announced the achievement of a major
aviation milestone at the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) Expo
in Palm Springs, CA. The GNS 400/500 series have earned the FAAs TSO C146a
Gamma-3 certification, which enables pilots to fly Lateral-Precision with
Vertical (LPV) guidance approaches and receive GPS navigation via the Wide
Area Augmentation System (WAAS). The FAA also granted AML (approved model
list) STC approval allowing the 400W/500W equipment to be installed on over
980 popular makes and models of aircraft. The GNS 400/500W series joins the
G1000 and GNS 480 in providing WAAS enabled navigation for aircraft. Garmin
currently offers more WAAS solutions than any other avionics provider.
"This is a great day for Garmin and the aviation industry," said Gary
Kelley, Garmins vice president of marketing. "Since the FAA commissioned
WAAS in 2003, there has been an enormous demand for WAAS certified equipment
in the marketplace. We are pleased to announce that all 75,000 Garmin GNS
400/500 series products currently in the field can upgrade to WAAS. We
expect the number of WAAS equipped aircraft to increase quickly, and pilots
will be able to operate to and from airports that would otherwise be
unavailable to them in marginal weather."
Thanks to the certification and AML STC approval, owners of Garmins popular
GNS 400/500 series panel-mount avionics will be able to upgrade their
products to meet the FAAs WAAS standards* without a field approval**. These
upgrades include 5 Hz position updates, faster map redraws, fully coupled
and guided procedure turns and holding patterns, and increased XM weather
content. Pilots will also experience significantly enhanced functionality
because of the WAAS LPV, LNAV/VNAV, LNAV+V, and LNAV approach capabilities.
Garmins GNS 400W/500W series meets the FAAs highest level of certification
for WAAS navigation. The units utilize satellite-based navaids for precise
lateral and vertical approach guidance similar to Instrument Landing
System (ILS) operations without the need for ground-based navaids of any
kind. The Gamma-3 level of certification lets pilots fly the FAAs new LPV
approaches. The FAA has already published over 600 LPV and 5,500 WAAS
approach procedures.
The WAAS system improves the accuracy, reliability and integrity of the GPS
signal. GPS-WAAS navigators that meet FAAs WAAS regulations may be used for
sole means of navigation* for all phases of flight, including en route
through precision approach at airports. With WAAS LPV approaches, pilots
will have stabilized lateral and vertical navigation and will be able to
navigate as low as 200 feet above the runway end under instrument flight
rules.
Garmins panel mount avionics have been installed on nearly three-fourths of
all U.S. single and twin-engine piston and turbine aircraft retrofitted
since 2000. The company strives continually to raise-the-bar in the avionics
industry, and two years ago at the 2004 AOPA Expo Garmins GNS 480 was the
first GPS navigator in the industry to earn a TSO C146a Gamma-3
certification.
Garmin expects deliveries of the new GNS 430W and GNS 530W to begin in
about 30 days with upgrades beginning in January 2007. Upgrades are
available for a suggested retail price of $1,500. Pilots who do not
currently own Garmin 400/500 series equipment and are in the process of
upgrading their avionics, will be able to purchase new GNS 430W and GNS 530W
units for $10,750 and $16,495, respectively. Visit www.garmin.com for
additional information or a complete list of authorized Garmin dealers.
*Due to the TSO limitation in conjunction with the AFMS limitation, Garmins
GNS 400/500 series navigators will not be certified as a "primary means" of
GPS navigation until after customers install a new software version. Garmin
expects to issue a Service Bulletin in the first quarter of 2007 issuing the
software. The software will be updated via the 400/500W data loader card.
This required software update is expected to be available in the first
quarter of 2007.
**The AML STC data is intended to provide complete FAA approved data for a
large subset of CAR3/FAR23 aircraft; however, if the aircraft does not
pre-qualify for the AML STC standards, additional means of airworthiness
approval will be required.
------------------------ END OF GARMIN PRESS RELEASE ------------------
----- Original Message -----
From: "Hicks, Wayne" <wayne.hicks@zeltech.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2007 3:02 PM
Subject: 91.205
> OC:
>
> Happy New Year to you!
>
> Can you help me to understand something? I've heard it said more than
> once
> that an amateur-built plane cannot be flown IFR with just a GPS. It must
> also have the traditional VOR and ILS (when needed) receivers on board.
> They cite 91.205 and the requirement to have "...equipment on board
> appropriate to the ***ground-based*** navaids to be used."
>
> Why do you think experimentals are held to that when the standard
> certificated aircraft (Mooneys, Pipers, etc) are now flying with WAAS GPSs
> and nothing else? Why must me have the crappy, out-dated stuff on board
> when the new avionics suites in the newer planes do not?
>
> I got asked this question from my Cozy builders group. About the only
> answer I can come up with is (1) the manufacturer proved the nav
> capabilities of the airplane's capabilities as part of its type
> certification process; and (2) The FAA is not in the business of
> certifying
> the on-board nav capabilities of everyone's home-built airplane. So the
> FAA
> makes us use their nav system.
>
> How close am I?
>
> ===================
> L. Wayne Hicks
> Senior Engineer
> Zel Technologies, LLC
> 757-325-1282 phone
> wayne.hicks@zeltech.com
> http://www.zeltech.com
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: "Broken and Garbled" (Additional data) |
In a message dated 01/03/2007 11:28:30 AM Central Standard Time,
nuckollsr@cox.net writes:
However, for the tasks to which I've applied these radios
a range of a few feet has been sufficient.
>>>
Took some PRS radios on a ski trip to Whistler/Blackcomb a few years back and
talked to the kids high on the mountain from the rental unit- maybe 5 or 6
miles, but line-of-sight for sure. These things did work pretty darn well
regardless of where the units were on either mountain. Also recall a couple of
stranded climbers rescued several years ago because they were able to contact
some kid 15 or 20 miles away...
Mark do not archive
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: 91.205 (WAAS) |
The key is the 146 TSO. Without that, GPS is just a backup system. VOR or
NDB must be primary. (We all know, that we fly it the other way around).
In some cases, like flying direct, we can't even use VORs (too high, too
low, too far away). But if we are at vectoring altitudes with radar
coverage, again we can use the non-146 GPS as Secondary (even tho VOR is out
of range.)
With 146 TSO, it is a new ballgame - no underlying VOR required.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
bakerocb@cox.net
Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2007 8:56 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: 91.205 (WAAS)
1/3/2007
Hello Wayne, Good to hear from you.
You wrote: "I've heard it said more than once that an amateur-built plane
cannot be flown IFR with just a GPS. It must also have the traditional VOR
and ILS (when needed) receivers on board.
They cite 91.205 and the requirement to have "...equipment on board
appropriate to the ***ground-based*** navaids to be used. Why do you think
experimentals are held to that when the standard certificated aircraft
(Mooneys, Pipers, etc) are now flying with WAAS GPSs and nothing else? Why
must me have the crappy, out-dated stuff on board when the new avionics
suites in the newer planes do not?"
I do not agree with the statement "It (an ABEA (Amateur Built Experimental
Aircraft)) must
also have the traditional VOR and ILS (when needed) receivers on board."
Here is why I do not agree with that statement:
A) "The GNS 400/500 series have earned the FAA's TSO C146a Gamma-3
certification, which enables pilots to fly Lateral-Precision with Vertical
(LPV) guidance approaches and receive GPS navigation via the Wide Area
Augmentation System (WAAS)."
B) "Garmin's GNS 400W/500W series meets the FAA's highest level of
certification for WAAS navigation. The units utilize satellite-based navaids
for precise lateral and vertical approach guidance - similar to Instrument
Landing System (ILS) operations - without the need for ground-based navaids
of any kind."
C) "The WAAS system improves the accuracy, reliability and integrity of the
GPS signal. GPS-WAAS navigators that meet FAA's WAAS regulations may be used
for sole means of navigation* for all phases of flight, including en route
through precision approach at airports."
These paragraph A, B, and C quotes are from a Garmin press release, see copy
below.
D) The WAAS system does involve ground facilities despite what Garmin says
in B above. See http://gps.faa.gov/programs/index.htm for a description of
the WAAS that incorporates both WRS (Wide area Reference Stations) and a WMS
(WAAS Master Station) which are facilities located on the ground.
Therefore an ABEA equipped with either a GNS 400W/500W, but no VHF
navigation equipment would be in compliance with its Operating Limitations
which requires compliance with FAR 91.205 (b), (c), and (d) when operating
IFR. Specifically the WAAS navigation equipment of that aircraft would be in
compliance with 91.205 (d) (2) which requires "navigational equipment
appropriate to the ground facilities to be used."
I intend to upgrade my GNS 430 to 430W configuration, but I certainly don't
intend to fly IFR if my VHF nav equipment is not operating. Obviously when
flying an ILS approach one must have funcioning localizer and glideslope
equipment on board. And similarly when flying a published approach that
requires GPS / WAAS equipment then that equipment must be on board and
functioning.
OC -- The best investment we will ever make is in gathering knowledge.
------------------------ GARMIN PRESS RELEASE FOLLOWS --------------
November 9, 2006 GarminR Receives WAAS Certification for GNS 400W/500W
series OLATHE, Kansas/November 9, 2006/PR Newswire - Garmin International, a
unit of Garmin Ltd. (Nasdaq: GRMN), today announced the achievement of a
major aviation milestone at the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association
(AOPA) Expo in Palm Springs, CA. The GNS 400/500 series have earned the
FAA's TSO C146a
Gamma-3 certification, which enables pilots to fly Lateral-Precision with
Vertical (LPV) guidance approaches and receive GPS navigation via the Wide
Area Augmentation System (WAAS). The FAA also granted AML (approved model
list) STC approval allowing the 400W/500W equipment to be installed on over
980 popular makes and models of aircraft. The GNS 400/500W series joins the
G1000 and GNS 480 in providing WAAS enabled navigation for aircraft. Garmin
currently offers more WAAS solutions than any other avionics provider.
"This is a great day for Garmin and the aviation industry," said Gary
Kelley, Garmin's vice president of marketing. "Since the FAA commissioned
WAAS in 2003, there has been an enormous demand for WAAS certified equipment
in the marketplace. We are pleased to announce that all 75,000 Garmin GNS
400/500 series products currently in the field can upgrade to WAAS. We
expect the number of WAAS equipped aircraft to increase quickly, and pilots
will be able to operate to and from airports that would otherwise be
unavailable to them in marginal weather."
Thanks to the certification and AML STC approval, owners of Garmin's popular
GNS 400/500 series panel-mount avionics will be able to upgrade their
products to meet the FAA's WAAS standards* without a field approval**. These
upgrades include 5 Hz position updates, faster map redraws, fully coupled
and guided procedure turns and holding patterns, and increased XM weather
content. Pilots will also experience significantly enhanced functionality
because of the WAAS LPV, LNAV/VNAV, LNAV+V, and LNAV approach capabilities.
Garmin's GNS 400W/500W series meets the FAA's highest level of certification
for WAAS navigation. The units utilize satellite-based navaids for precise
lateral and vertical approach guidance - similar to Instrument Landing
System (ILS) operations - without the need for ground-based navaids of any
kind. The Gamma-3 level of certification lets pilots fly the FAA's new LPV
approaches. The FAA has already published over 600 LPV and 5,500 WAAS
approach procedures.
The WAAS system improves the accuracy, reliability and integrity of the GPS
signal. GPS-WAAS navigators that meet FAA's WAAS regulations may be used for
sole means of navigation* for all phases of flight, including en route
through precision approach at airports. With WAAS LPV approaches, pilots
will have stabilized lateral and vertical navigation and will be able to
navigate as low as 200 feet above the runway end under instrument flight
rules.
Garmin's panel mount avionics have been installed on nearly three-fourths of
all U.S. single and twin-engine piston and turbine aircraft retrofitted
since 2000. The company strives continually to raise-the-bar in the avionics
industry, and two years ago at the 2004 AOPA Expo Garmin's GNS 480T was the
first GPS navigator in the industry to earn a TSO C146a Gamma-3
certification.
Garmin expects deliveries of the new GNS 430WT and GNS 530WT to begin in
about 30 days with upgrades beginning in January 2007. Upgrades are
available for a suggested retail price of $1,500. Pilots who do not
currently own Garmin 400/500 series equipment and are in the process of
upgrading their avionics, will be able to purchase new GNS 430W and GNS 530W
units for $10,750 and $16,495, respectively. Visit www.garmin.com for
additional information or a complete list of authorized Garmin dealers.
*Due to the TSO limitation in conjunction with the AFMS limitation, Garmin's
GNS 400/500 series navigators will not be certified as a "primary means" of
GPS navigation until after customers install a new software version. Garmin
expects to issue a Service Bulletin in the first quarter of 2007 issuing the
software. The software will be updated via the 400/500W data loader card.
This required software update is expected to be available in the first
quarter of 2007.
**The AML STC data is intended to provide complete FAA approved data for a
large subset of CAR3/FAR23 aircraft; however, if the aircraft does not
pre-qualify for the AML STC standards, additional means of airworthiness
approval will be required.
------------------------ END OF GARMIN PRESS RELEASE ------------------
----- Original Message -----
From: "Hicks, Wayne" <wayne.hicks@zeltech.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2007 3:02 PM
Subject: 91.205
> OC:
>
> Happy New Year to you!
>
> Can you help me to understand something? I've heard it said more than
> once
> that an amateur-built plane cannot be flown IFR with just a GPS. It must
> also have the traditional VOR and ILS (when needed) receivers on board.
> They cite 91.205 and the requirement to have "...equipment on board
> appropriate to the ***ground-based*** navaids to be used."
>
> Why do you think experimentals are held to that when the standard
> certificated aircraft (Mooneys, Pipers, etc) are now flying with WAAS GPSs
> and nothing else? Why must me have the crappy, out-dated stuff on board
> when the new avionics suites in the newer planes do not?
>
> I got asked this question from my Cozy builders group. About the only
> answer I can come up with is (1) the manufacturer proved the nav
> capabilities of the airplane's capabilities as part of its type
> certification process; and (2) The FAA is not in the business of
> certifying
> the on-board nav capabilities of everyone's home-built airplane. So the
> FAA
> makes us use their nav system.
>
> How close am I?
>
> ===================
> L. Wayne Hicks
> Senior Engineer
> Zel Technologies, LLC
> 757-325-1282 phone
> wayne.hicks@zeltech.com
> http://www.zeltech.com
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! --
|