Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 07:41 AM - Re: headset - bad mike test proc needed (eedetail)
2. 07:47 AM - Speaking of duplexers (Nathan Ulrich)
3. 08:58 AM - Re: Re: headset - bad mike test proc needed (Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis))
4. 09:43 AM - Re: intercom (Matt Jurotich)
5. 10:02 AM - Re: headset (Mauri Morin)
6. 10:02 AM - Re: Snap Bushing Through Thick Material (6440 Auto Parts)
7. 10:08 AM - Re: Speaking of duplexers (Mauri Morin)
8. 10:09 AM - Re: intercom (Earl_Schroeder)
9. 10:33 AM - Re: Circuit needed (John Burnaby)
10. 10:36 AM - Re: Re: headset (Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis))
11. 10:38 AM - Re: Snap Bushing Through Thick Material (Matt Prather)
12. 10:51 AM - Re: Re: Circuit needed (john@ballofshame.com)
13. 11:04 AM - Re: Snap Bushing Through Thick Material (Harold)
14. 11:49 AM - Re: Snap Bushing Through Thick Material (6440 Auto Parts)
15. 12:39 PM - Re: intercom (Jim Wier, RST) (Mitchell Faatz)
16. 01:28 PM - Re: intercom (Jim Wier, RST) (Matt Prather)
17. 02:33 PM - Re: intercom (Jim Wier, RST) (C Smith)
18. 03:17 PM - Re: intercom (Jim Wier, RST) (Gilles Thesee)
19. 03:24 PM - Re: intercom (Jim Wier, RST) (Earl_Schroeder)
20. 03:51 PM - Protection For Auxillary Power Jacks (Bill Denton)
21. 04:04 PM - Re: intercom (Jim Wier, RST) ()
22. 04:11 PM - Receive-only COM? (Bill Denton)
23. 04:37 PM - Ground blocks for RV's (brownrj)
24. 04:50 PM - Re: Protection For Auxillary Power Jacks (Matt Prather)
25. 04:50 PM - Re: Protection For Auxillary Power Jacks (Kevin Horton)
26. 04:59 PM - 3.7 pound 600 amp starting battery (Bill Dube)
27. 05:56 PM - Re: Receive-only COM? (Jeffery J. Morgan)
28. 06:13 PM - Re: Snap Bushing Through Thick Material (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
29. 06:23 PM - Re: Speaking of duplexers (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
30. 06:35 PM - Re: Re: Circuit needed (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
31. 06:44 PM - Re: Protection For Auxillary Power Jacks (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
32. 06:46 PM - Re: Ground blocks for RV's (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
33. 07:52 PM - Re: Sharing ship's COMM antenna with the hand-held (Robert Feldtman)
34. 08:13 PM - Re: Snap Bushing Through Thick Material (raymondj)
35. 08:49 PM - Re: Receive-only COM? ()
36. 09:15 PM - Aviation Activism (DEAN PSIROPOULOS)
37. 09:31 PM - Re: Ground blocks for RV's (jdalton77)
38. 09:36 PM - Re: Aviation Activism (jdalton77)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: headset - bad mike test proc needed |
Folks,
Thanks for the good info. I was looking for a way to test my headset without getting
to the airport, but I had not really mentioned that important fact. Best
way to test them is in the air anyway. Not sure what went wrong, but the one
mike is definately dead. Definatly gonna get David Clark this time.
TimE
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=92958#92958
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: | Speaking of duplexers |
Interesting discussion on antenna splitters, etc. I have one of the older
King versions of the ANT-SB mounted in my panel. I haven't inspected the
internals of it, not sure if it's superior to the Icom product. I don't
think it's available any longer.
I looked into splitters/duplexers for transceivers a few months ago and ran
across this:
http://www.comant.com/pdfs/[ci%20601]5-05.pdf
Unfortunately it's many hundreds of dollars. I have a Bendix/King KFM-985
VHF-FM transceiver in my plane (used to communicate with the Coast Guard)
and it has two transceivers. I mounted one VHF-FM antenna on the belly of my
plane, but couldn't justify mounting two, one for each transceiver. It would
be nice to use the full capabilities of the radio. There's a company that
will modify the internals of the radio to use one antenna--doesn't seem too
hard, you can only broadcast on one transceiver at once, so it's just a
matter of protecting the other one--but they want over $1,000 to do it.
Anyone have an easier (read: cheaper) solution? Not a high priority for me,
but every time I look at the radio I feel like I'm wasting half of it <g>.
Nathan
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: headset - bad mike test proc needed |
-----Original Message-----
From:
Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 8:48 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: headset - bad mike test proc needed
Speaking of headsets, Have you tried any of the "in ear" models. We in
the RV community (manely LOUD airplanes) just love the Halo tube model.
I was sceptical but you couldn't pry it from my cold dead fingers now!
It weighs nothing and has the best noise attenuation of any headset by
far..And that includes the Bose high end models.
Not for everyone but if you think you can stand earplugs well worth a
try and you can return them for a full refund in 30 days.
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
eedetail
Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 7:39 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: headset - bad mike test proc needed
Folks,
Thanks for the good info. I was looking for a way to test my headset
without getting to the airport, but I had not really mentioned that
important fact. Best way to test them is in the air anyway. Not sure
what went wrong, but the one mike is definately dead. Definatly gonna
get David Clark this time.
TimE
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=92958#92958
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 |
|
I asked Jim Wier a question on a newslist. His answer was
essentially what an ignorant loser question. Others helped me with a
good explanation.He made a presentation of a really good new product
award at Oskosh and I lost the name of the product. I asked him
about it on the newslist, SAME response. Once again others stepped
in and helped. I am glad others had a more positive experience. I
would not do business with him period.
Matthew M. Jurotich
e-mail mail to: <mjurotich@hst.nasa.gov>
phone : 301-286-5919
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 |
|
Frank,
Not familiar with this headset. How about more details, ie; make, model
and cost, etc
Mauri
> just love the Halo tube model.
I was sceptical but you couldn't pry it from my cold dead fingers now!<
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: Snap Bushing Through Thick Material |
Where can I purchase some E6000 ?
Randy
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2007 6:13 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Snap Bushing Through Thick Material
> <nuckollsr@cox.net>
>
> At 05:36 PM 2/4/2007 -0500, you wrote:
>
>><LarryRosen@comcast.net>
>>
>>I want to install a snap bushing through a thick piece of aluminum. The
>>metal is too thick for the metal. Do I remove the snaps and glue it in
>>place with E6000?
>
> That works. Anything you do to line the hole with
> materials more friendly to wire bundles than aluminum
> is a good thing to do. E6000 is pretty tenacious stuff.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
> ----------------------------------------
> ( IF one aspires to be "world class", )
> ( what ever you do must be exercised )
> ( EVERY day . . . )
> ( R. L. Nuckolls III )
> ----------------------------------------
>
>
>
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: Speaking of duplexers |
Nathan, check out:
Bob Archer's
SA-010 - T/R Switch- Allows reception on two transceivers
simultaneously and on transmit the signal goes directly through the
switch to a single good antenna.
Mauri
----- Original Message -----
From: Nathan Ulrich
To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 8:45 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Speaking of duplexers
<nulrich@technq.com>
Interesting discussion on antenna splitters, etc. I have one of the
older
King versions of the ANT-SB mounted in my panel. I haven't inspected
the
internals of it, not sure if it's superior to the Icom product. I
don't
think it's available any longer.
I looked into splitters/duplexers for transceivers a few months ago
and ran
across this:
http://www.comant.com/pdfs/[ci%20601]5-05.pdf
Unfortunately it's many hundreds of dollars. I have a Bendix/King
KFM-985
VHF-FM transceiver in my plane (used to communicate with the Coast
Guard)
and it has two transceivers. I mounted one VHF-FM antenna on the belly
of my
plane, but couldn't justify mounting two, one for each transceiver. It
would
be nice to use the full capabilities of the radio. There's a company
that
will modify the internals of the radio to use one antenna--doesn't
seem too
hard, you can only broadcast on one transceiver at once, so it's just
a
matter of protecting the other one--but they want over $1,000 to do
it.
Anyone have an easier (read: cheaper) solution? Not a high priority
for me,
but every time I look at the radio I feel like I'm wasting half of it
<g>.
Nathan
--
2/2/2007
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 |
|
Matt, hmmm, I wonder what list? I didn't see it on
rec.aviation.homebuilt that he monitors. I look forward to seeing Jim
each Oshkosh [he didn't make it last year..] and find it really
difficult to believe you were treated like an 'ignorant loser'. Not the
Jim I know. I've built nearly all his kits, visited his place in Grass
Valley and known him for more years than I'd admit in public... Earl
Matt Jurotich wrote:
> <mjurotich@hst.nasa.gov>
>
> I asked Jim Wier a question on a newslist. His answer was essentially
> what an ignorant loser question. Others helped me with a good
> explanation.He made a presentation of a really good new product award
> at Oskosh and I lost the name of the product. I asked him about it on
> the newslist, SAME response. Once again others stepped in and
> helped. I am glad others had a more positive experience. I would not
> do business with him period.
>
> Matthew M. Jurotich
>
> e-mail mail to: <mjurotich@hst.nasa.gov>
> phone : 301-286-5919
>
>
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | RE: Circuit needed |
EXACTLY!John Okay, I think I got it. Here's a cartoon of the concept.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Schematics/Fuel_Pump_Controller.pdf
Moving switch from OFF to ON puts power on a 555 timer
arranged to flash an LED but the pump remains un-powered.
Holding the switch in the (ON) position applies power to
pump and biases the flasher to "stick" in the steady-on
state. If pressure comes up sufficiently to close the
pressure switch, then the pump will continue to run, the
light will stay steady after the switch is released. When
pressure drops below set point on switch, power is removed
from the pump and the flasher is allowed to resume its
transitions between states.
This begs for a microcontroller to allow use of either
a normally open or normally closed switch. Further, while
holding the switch in the (ON) position, the light should
not be allowed to stop flashing UNLESS pressure comes up
indicating that the system will stay in the fuel transfer
mode after the switch is released.
Keep in mind that this is a simplified diagram intended
to speak to operating concept. It needs to be fleshed out
for parts values and system interface details . . .
Do I have it right?
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 |
|
Check this out http://www.quiettechnologies.com/
Us RV drivers bouth the "Halo" model, about $400 I think.
Just awesome, radio comms are clear and sharp. Hard to describe what a
night and day difference it was compared to may old headset which
thought was pretty good.
Most of us the supplied ear buds, my preference is the silicone ear
plugs. The trick is to get a perfect seal between the earplug and your
ear canal.
The only slightly gross problem is plugging the hole in the earplug with
wax!...Do not share your earplugs!...:)
Frank
________________________________
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mauri
Morin
Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 9:59 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: headset
Frank,
Not familiar with this headset. How about more details, ie; make, model
and cost, etc
Mauri
> just love the Halo tube model.
I was sceptical but you couldn't pry it from my cold dead fingers now!<
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Snap Bushing Through Thick Material |
AKA "Shoe Goo"
Ebay item number: 190024050461
Matt-
> <sales@6440autoparts.com>
>
> Where can I purchase some E6000 ?
>
> Randy
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
> To: <aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2007 6:13 PM
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Snap Bushing Through Thick Material
>
>
>> <nuckollsr@cox.net>
>>
>> At 05:36 PM 2/4/2007 -0500, you wrote:
>>
>>><LarryRosen@comcast.net>
>>>
>>>I want to install a snap bushing through a thick piece of aluminum. The
>>>metal is too thick for the metal. Do I remove the snaps and glue it in
>>>place with E6000?
>>
>> That works. Anything you do to line the hole with
>> materials more friendly to wire bundles than aluminum
>> is a good thing to do. E6000 is pretty tenacious stuff.
>>
>>
>>
>> Bob . . .
>>
>> ----------------------------------------
>> ( IF one aspires to be "world class", )
>> ( what ever you do must be exercised )
>> ( EVERY day . . . )
>> ( R. L. Nuckolls III )
>> ----------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: RE: Circuit needed |
re: computer control. Interesting you should mention that. I've been
fiddling around with the BASIC Stamp processors lately.
http://www.hobbyengineering.com/SectionBS.html#IX1024
These things ROCK and are very simple to program. They're perfectly
suited to doing things like simple logic, monitoring, flashing LED's, etc
etc.
They run on 9V so you need a regulator or transformer of some sort. You
will also have to build in some simple protection from spikes and maybe
low voltage. I've been collecting a list of tons of different
applications for these things. Everything from solid state interlocks to
annunciators.
Neat stuff and not too expensive.
-John
www.ballofshame.com
> EXACTLY!John Okay, I think I got it. Here's a cartoon of the concept.
>
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Schematics/Fuel_Pump_Controller.pdf
>
> Moving switch from OFF to ON puts power on a 555 timer
> arranged to flash an LED but the pump remains un-powered.
> Holding the switch in the (ON) position applies power to
> pump and biases the flasher to "stick" in the steady-on
> state. If pressure comes up sufficiently to close the
> pressure switch, then the pump will continue to run, the
> light will stay steady after the switch is released. When
> pressure drops below set point on switch, power is removed
> from the pump and the flasher is allowed to resume its
> transitions between states.
>
> This begs for a microcontroller to allow use of either
> a normally open or normally closed switch. Further, while
> holding the switch in the (ON) position, the light should
> not be allowed to stop flashing UNLESS pressure comes up
> indicating that the system will stay in the fuel transfer
> mode after the switch is released.
>
> Keep in mind that this is a simplified diagram intended
> to speak to operating concept. It needs to be fleshed out
> for parts values and system interface details . . .
>
> Do I have it right?
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: Snap Bushing Through Thick Material |
Hi Randy,
I've used E6000 and Goop from Home Depot, they seem to be the same thing.
Goop comes in many different tubes, I've used plunbers, and RV both again
seem the same. As a glue, fantastic, and for potting ala Bob's
cartoons...super. give it a try
Harold, RV9A fuselage
----- Original Message -----
From: "6440 Auto Parts" <sales@6440autoparts.com>
Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 1:01 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Snap Bushing Through Thick Material
> <sales@6440autoparts.com>
>
> Where can I purchase some E6000 ?
>
> Randy
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
> To: <aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2007 6:13 PM
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Snap Bushing Through Thick Material
>
>
>> <nuckollsr@cox.net>
>>
>> At 05:36 PM 2/4/2007 -0500, you wrote:
>>
>>><LarryRosen@comcast.net>
>>>
>>>I want to install a snap bushing through a thick piece of aluminum. The
>>>metal is too thick for the metal. Do I remove the snaps and glue it in
>>>place with E6000?
>>
>> That works. Anything you do to line the hole with
>> materials more friendly to wire bundles than aluminum
>> is a good thing to do. E6000 is pretty tenacious stuff.
>>
>>
>>
>> Bob . . .
>>
>> ----------------------------------------
>> ( IF one aspires to be "world class", )
>> ( what ever you do must be exercised )
>> ( EVERY day . . . )
>> ( R. L. Nuckolls III )
>> ----------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
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: Snap Bushing Through Thick Material |
Thanks I was hoping I could get it or something as good locally.
Randy
----- Original Message -----
From: "Harold" <kayce33@earthlink.net>
Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 1:01 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Snap Bushing Through Thick Material
>
> Hi Randy,
> I've used E6000 and Goop from Home Depot, they seem to be the same thing.
> Goop comes in many different tubes, I've used plunbers, and RV both again
> seem the same. As a glue, fantastic, and for potting ala Bob's
> cartoons...super. give it a try
> Harold, RV9A fuselage
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "6440 Auto Parts" <sales@6440autoparts.com>
> To: <aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>
> Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 1:01 PM
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Snap Bushing Through Thick Material
>
>
>> <sales@6440autoparts.com>
>>
>> Where can I purchase some E6000 ?
>>
>> Randy
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
>> To: <aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>
>> Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2007 6:13 PM
>> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Snap Bushing Through Thick Material
>>
>>
>>> <nuckollsr@cox.net>
>>>
>>> At 05:36 PM 2/4/2007 -0500, you wrote:
>>>
>>>><LarryRosen@comcast.net>
>>>>
>>>>I want to install a snap bushing through a thick piece of aluminum. The
>>>>metal is too thick for the metal. Do I remove the snaps and glue it in
>>>>place with E6000?
>>>
>>> That works. Anything you do to line the hole with
>>> materials more friendly to wire bundles than aluminum
>>> is a good thing to do. E6000 is pretty tenacious stuff.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Bob . . .
>>>
>>> ----------------------------------------
>>> ( IF one aspires to be "world class", )
>>> ( what ever you do must be exercised )
>>> ( EVERY day . . . )
>>> ( R. L. Nuckolls III )
>>> ----------------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
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: intercom (Jim Wier, RST) |
Matt Jurotich wrote:
> <mjurotich@hst.nasa.gov>
>
> I asked Jim Wier a question on a newslist. His answer was essentially
> what an ignorant loser question. Others helped me with a good
> explanation.He made a presentation of a really good new product award
> at Oskosh and I lost the name of the product. I asked him about it on
> the newslist, SAME response. Once again others stepped in and
> helped. I am glad others had a more positive experience. I would not
> do business with him period.
>
> Matthew M. Jurotich
I had pretty much the same experience as a Marker Beacon Kit customer.
Any question I asked was answered in an extremely abrasive and
condescending manner.
Message 16
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: intercom (Jim Wier, RST) |
Would the real Jim Weir (Wier) please stand up??
I notice some people spell the name Jim Weir, and others spell it Jim
Wier. Are there two? Sometimes spelling is important..
Matt-
do not archive
> <mitch@skybound.com>
>
> Matt Jurotich wrote:
>> <mjurotich@hst.nasa.gov>
>>
>> I asked Jim Wier a question on a newslist. His answer was essentially
>> what an ignorant loser question. Others helped me with a good
>> explanation.He made a presentation of a really good new product award
>> at Oskosh and I lost the name of the product. I asked him about it on
>> the newslist, SAME response. Once again others stepped in and
>> helped. I am glad others had a more positive experience. I would not
>> do business with him period.
>>
>> Matthew M. Jurotich
> I had pretty much the same experience as a Marker Beacon Kit customer.
> Any question I asked was answered in an extremely abrasive and
> condescending manner.
>
>
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: | intercom (Jim Wier, RST) |
Who the heck is Jim Weir (Wier)????
What does he do besides p*****g people off?
Inquiring minds want to know.. ;-)
Craig Smith
Do not archive
Message 18
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: intercom (Jim Wier, RST) |
C Smith a crit :
>
> Who the heck is Jim Weir (Wier)????
> What does he do besides p*****g people off?
>
Jim Weir owns RST Engineering, and writes articles in Kitplane and other
homebuilt magazines. Interesting stuff, but he is not a teacher like Bob.
He also posts on forums, and yes he sometimes ruffles some feathers ;-)
Regards,
Gilles
http://contrails.free.fr
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: intercom (Jim Wier, RST) |
Jim's web site: http://www.rst-engr.com/
C Smith wrote:
>
> Who the heck is Jim Weir (Wier)????
> What does he do besides p*****g people off?
> Inquiring minds want to know.. ;-)
> Craig Smith
> Do not archive
>
>
>
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: | Protection For Auxillary Power Jacks |
Assume that one wanted to install four "cigarette lighter" auxillary power jacks
in an airplane, with two on the panel and two in the rear passenger area. Anywhere
from none to all four might be used at any given time.
Would it be acceptable practice to put all of these on a single breaker?
Would it be acceptable to have more than one on a single breaker?
Or, should each jack have a separate breaker?
Thanks!
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=93067#93067
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: intercom (Jim Wier, RST) |
I can echo that experience and warning as well.
My recommendation - Avoid if possible, but if you do business with RST, be
careful. Expect zero user and technical support on his products. If you
make a mistake, there will be no help troubleshooting, repairing, testing,
or tuning the devices. Jim wishes to only pump product, not deal with the
hassles of dealing with customers.
If all you want is raw materials and some good books on antennas, great.
Anything other than that...well...you have been warned. I wish I had been.
Anyone want to buy a next to worthless RST marker beacon unit...slightly
used (only to look pretty)? ;-)
James Redmon
Berkut #013 N97TX
http://www.berkut13.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mitchell Faatz" <mitch@skybound.com>
Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 2:38 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: intercom (Jim Wier, RST)
> <mitch@skybound.com>
>
> Matt Jurotich wrote:
>> <mjurotich@hst.nasa.gov>
>>
>> I asked Jim Wier a question on a newslist. His answer was essentially
>> what an ignorant loser question. Others helped me with a good
>> explanation.He made a presentation of a really good new product award at
>> Oskosh and I lost the name of the product. I asked him about it on the
>> newslist, SAME response. Once again others stepped in and helped. I am
>> glad others had a more positive experience. I would not do business with
>> him period.
>>
>> Matthew M. Jurotich
> I had pretty much the same experience as a Marker Beacon Kit customer.
> Any question I asked was answered in an extremely abrasive and
> condescending manner.
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: | Receive-only COM? |
Does anyone know of anybody who produces a receive-only aircraft COM unit?
Preferably something that could be panel mounted...
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=93070#93070
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: | Ground blocks for RV's |
Is there any reason not to use copper as a ground plane or attachment point as
opposed to the brass plate sold by B&C Specialties?
Thanks
Ron
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=93074#93074
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: | Re: Protection For Auxillary Power Jacks |
My preference (bias)? No breakers - just fuses..
Either way, (as has been said) the cigarette lighter connection isn't all
that spiffy except that lots of portable electronics are designed to use
them. I've seen up to about 5A run through one with good success. Maybe
it's safe to run more than that through them. Need to research that some
more.
Whatever, as is the case when choosing wire and circuit protection for any
other application, the breaker/fuse must be small enough to protect the
skinniest wire/component being used in the circuit.
So, I don't see a way to provide protection for the plug and the wire if
you gang them, assuming you want to support the max capability of the
plug. If you assume the plug will support 5A, you put a 5A breaker/fuse
on the circuit. If you gang multiple plugs onto the same breaker then 5A
is still the largest circuit protection you can select. However, if you
don't mind imposing a total power budget on your users - not letting them
use more than 5A total, then by all means put them all on one breaker.
If it were mine, depending on where my breaker/fuse panel is and how
accessible it is in flight, I'd split the load into at least two chunks.
If one of the devices craps out (shorts its power supply), or your kid
tries to drive two laptops into one plug (adapter on top of adapter), only
half the cig buss will be dead. I would probably build it with one per
adapter. Or maybe two fuses for the front and one to cover the pair in
the rear - 3 total.
I think one big thing to consider is whether the adapters will be used for
mission-convenient/comfortable appliances. I don't say mission-critical
because I kind of think cigarette adapters aren't appropriate for
mission-critical power sources. My handheld GPS probably isn't mission
critical, but I'd like it's power source to be very stable none the less.
Regards,
Matt-
> <bdenton@bdenton.com>
>
> Assume that one wanted to install four "cigarette lighter" auxillary power
> jacks in an airplane, with two on the panel and two in the rear passenger
> area. Anywhere from none to all four might be used at any given time.
>
> Would it be acceptable practice to put all of these on a single breaker?
>
> Would it be acceptable to have more than one on a single breaker?
>
> Or, should each jack have a separate breaker?
>
> Thanks!
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=93067#93067
>
>
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: Protection For Auxillary Power Jacks |
On 5 Feb 2007, at 18:50, Bill Denton wrote:
> <bdenton@bdenton.com>
>
> Assume that one wanted to install four "cigarette lighter"
> auxillary power jacks in an airplane, with two on the panel and two
> in the rear passenger area. Anywhere from none to all four might be
> used at any given time.
>
> Would it be acceptable practice to put all of these on a single
> breaker?
>
> Would it be acceptable to have more than one on a single breaker?
>
> Or, should each jack have a separate breaker?
>
> Thanks!
>
No problem with all on one breaker. But, that breaker must be large
enough to handle the total possible load. And, all wiring must be
sized so that it wouldn't overheat if current up to the breaker size
was going through it. E.g., let's say you except no more than 2.5
amps per circuit. The breaker must be able to handle 10 amps,
without opening. You need some margin, so you decide to use a 15 amp
breaker. Now you need to make sure all wiring is large enough to
handle up to 15 amps, because a short would put that much current in
the wire before the breaker popped.
If you use 4 separate breakers, then the breaker size can be smaller,
and that will allow the use of smaller wires.
Total weight, complication, and cost are probably lowest by putting
all four through one breaker, unless the wire runs would be quite
long. If the wire runs are long enough, it might be lighter to go
with four breakers.
Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
Ottawa, Canada
http://www.kilohotel.com/rv8
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: | 3.7 pound 600 amp starting battery |
Well, I said I was going to do it and we finally got the prototype built.
We just built a 600 cranking amp, 11.5 A-hr, battery that weighs just
3.7 pounds. I've been testing it in my GMC van for the past week here in
the Denver Winter. It snaps the van right over every morning without a
problem. The van cranks faster than it did with the standard lead-acid
battery.
It is smaller than the Odyssey 680 so it fit in the the same battery box
with a couple of foam blocks for spacers.
The battery has four status LEDs that tell you the cell balancing
electronics are working OK. We are using A123 Systems M1 cells with our
own custom battery management electronics. The A123 Systems cells are
proven to be the safest Li-Ion cells on the market. No problems with
fires (like laptop cells) because the chemistry they use is completely
different.
The battery can be damaged by running it completely flat (like leaving
the master on) and holding the battery below 8 volts for a long time. It
can also be damaged by charging it over 15.0 volts. It will likely still
function after such abuse, but it won't be nearly as good as it was
originally. If you don't abuse it, it should last you for many years.
I think we will be in production in about a month, maybe two.
Specs:
3.7 lbs
600 cranking amps
11.5 amp-hr
Approximate dimensions: 3" wide, 5" long, 7" tall (including terminals)
Charging voltage = 13.8 to 15.0 volts (anywhere in this range is OK)
Nominal voltage = 13.2 volts (Just a touch higher than your typical
lead-acid, so it spins the starter a touch faster.)
Cell cycle life rated at 2000 cycles (80% DOD, 90% capacity remaining)
10,000 cycles (80% DOD with 50% capacity remaining) @25 C
Cell specs: http://www.a123systems.com/html/products/ANR26650M1specs.pdf
Maintenance free
No heavy metals (iron-phosphate type cells)
At this time, we estimate the retail price will be $595.
We have been racing these cells in the KillaCycle for about a year, so
we know _all_ about them.
http://www.KillaCycle.com (Be sure to watch the movie clip.)
I'll put up some pictures of the prototype battery in a day or two on
the photos page.
Bill Dube'
bike@KillaCycle.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: | Receive-only COM? |
I am curious why you would want a receive only unit?
Not a panel mount, but Radio Shack and Sportys have units that are air
band scanners. The later can even use aircraft power.
Thanks
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bill
Denton
Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 6:11 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Receive-only COM?
<bdenton@bdenton.com>
Does anyone know of anybody who produces a receive-only aircraft COM
unit?
Preferably something that could be panel mounted...
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=93070#93070
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: Snap Bushing Through Thick Material |
At 11:37 AM 2/5/2007 -0700, you wrote:
>
>AKA "Shoe Goo"
>
>Ebay item number: 190024050461
This is a pretty amazing product for it's
shear and peel strengths. I tested it for functionality
as an adhesive to attach the 'bond studs' we used to
sell . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Materials/Bond_Stud_B.jpg
At the time, I was buying it as "Shoe Goo" but
later identified it as a re-branding of E-6000
http://www.eclecticproducts.com/e6000Industrial.htm
Here are some more details for usage of E-6000
and close cousins . . .
http://www.eclecticproducts.com/E6000IndusDirections.htm
The product is now widely distributed. I find it
in hardware and craft stores. The best prices lately
have been at Hobby Lobby and Walmart's crafts
section.
Bob . . .
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: Speaking of duplexers |
At 10:45 AM 2/5/2007 -0500, you wrote:
>
>Interesting discussion on antenna splitters, etc. I have one of the older
>King versions of the ANT-SB mounted in my panel. I haven't inspected the
>internals of it, not sure if it's superior to the Icom product. I don't
>think it's available any longer.
>
>I looked into splitters/duplexers for transceivers a few months ago and ran
>across this:
>
>http://www.comant.com/pdfs/[ci%20601]5-05.pdf
>
>Unfortunately it's many hundreds of dollars. I have a Bendix/King KFM-985
>VHF-FM transceiver in my plane (used to communicate with the Coast Guard)
>and it has two transceivers. I mounted one VHF-FM antenna on the belly of my
>plane, but couldn't justify mounting two, one for each transceiver. It would
>be nice to use the full capabilities of the radio. There's a company that
>will modify the internals of the radio to use one antenna--doesn't seem too
>hard, you can only broadcast on one transceiver at once, so it's just a
>matter of protecting the other one--but they want over $1,000 to do it.
>
>Anyone have an easier (read: cheaper) solution? Not a high priority for me,
>but every time I look at the radio I feel like I'm wasting half of it <g>.
Actually, there IS a way to have two radios share one antenna
where in the non-transmitting mode, the two receivers get antenna
signals through a low gain but highly overload-resistant
pre-amp that offsets the loss of signal when power from the
receive antenna is routed simultaneously to separate receivers.
PTT for each transmitter is routed through the antenna adapter
such that the non-transmitting transceiver is isolated from the
antenna BEFORE the desired transmitter is brought up to talk. At
the same time, input to the non-talking transceiver is grounded
and the audio output muted. This takes a couple of transistors,
a handful of components and some high quality miniature relays.
Now, I've rejected this for having a hand-held share
the antenna because the whole idea for the hand-held is to be
able to communicate even when the ship's electrical system is
down. The adapter I've described needs power to do the hat-dance.
I suppose one could assume that battery bus is always going to
be available with enough power to operated an itty-bitty relay.
Hmmmm . . . maybe this is a product we should consider.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------
( IF one aspires to be "world class", )
( what ever you do must be exercised )
( EVERY day . . . )
( R. L. Nuckolls III )
----------------------------------------
Message 30
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: RE: Circuit needed |
At 10:51 AM 2/5/2007 -0800, you wrote:
>
>re: computer control. Interesting you should mention that. I've been
>fiddling around with the BASIC Stamp processors lately.
>
>http://www.hobbyengineering.com/SectionBS.html#IX1024
>
>These things ROCK and are very simple to program. They're perfectly
>suited to doing things like simple logic, monitoring, flashing LED's, etc
>etc.
>
>They run on 9V so you need a regulator or transformer of some sort. You
>will also have to build in some simple protection from spikes and maybe
>low voltage. I've been collecting a list of tons of different
>applications for these things. Everything from solid state interlocks to
>annunciators.
>
>Neat stuff and not too expensive.
That works. Right now we're working with one of the Stamp's little
brothers, he PIC12F683. My software guy is getting really talented
with this chip (costs just over $1 in hundreds) and has a lot
of features for the cost. Programmers are dirt-cheap too.
Of the ones we've tried so far, the PICkit-II is our favorite
http://www.digikey.com/scripts/DkSearch/dksus.dll?Detail?Ref=272536&Row=688347&Site=US
It comes with an editor-assembler-debugger package for under
$40. This chip is the core of our AEC9011 and about a dozen
other products in the development pipe.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------
( IF one aspires to be "world class", )
( what ever you do must be exercised )
( EVERY day . . . )
( R. L. Nuckolls III )
----------------------------------------
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: Protection For Auxillary Power Jacks |
At 03:50 PM 2/5/2007 -0800, you wrote:
>
>Assume that one wanted to install four "cigarette lighter" auxillary power
>jacks in an airplane, with two on the panel and two in the rear passenger
>area. Anywhere from none to all four might be used at any given time.
>
>Would it be acceptable practice to put all of these on a single breaker?
Problem with one breaker/fuse does all is that a fault in one
system takes down all systems. If you don't use fuse blocks with
the necessary spares, then suggest in-line fuse holders with
one fuse for each accessory.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Fuses/ifh-2.jpg
Cigarette lighter jacks are about the poorest excuse for a connector
without being completely worthless. For use in aircaft, consider
these devices from Radio Shack.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Connectors/274-010.jpg
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Connectors/274-013.jpg
These are REAL connectors. They're more compact than the cigar
lighter and have a positive locking feature that prevents the
plug from being inadvertently dislodged.
Bob . . .
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------
( IF one aspires to be "world class", )
( what ever you do must be exercised )
( EVERY day . . . )
( R. L. Nuckolls III )
----------------------------------------
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: Ground blocks for RV's |
At 04:36 PM 2/5/2007 -0800, you wrote:
>
>Is there any reason not to use copper as a ground plane or attachment
>point as opposed to the brass plate sold by B&C Specialties?
>Thanks
>Ron
>
> Brass was chosen for its solderability in attaching the
rows of fast-on tabs. Copper works too, just harder to
drill really round holes. Use a step-drill.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------
( IF one aspires to be "world class", )
( what ever you do must be exercised )
( EVERY day . . . )
( R. L. Nuckolls III )
----------------------------------------
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: Sharing ship's COMM antenna with the hand-held |
I gotta respond finally - resistance has nothing to do with impedance.
To try to measure the "resistance" of the output circuit might give you
anything from a dead short to infinity! Depends on the output
circuit.... Invest in a copy of the ARRL antenna handbook (www.arrl.org)
and learn about antennas the right way - the way we hams do.... Like
OBAM guys built and fly airplanes, amateurs build and test radios and
antennas. You'll learn all about duplexers, dipoles, etc.
bobf
(Glastar) and W5RF amateur extra class.
John Coloccia wrote:
> <john@ballofshame.com>
>
> Has anyone taken a radio, say an SL-30, and measured the resistance of
> the antenna input when the radio is off? If it's anywhere near 50
> ohms, this problem is trivial to solve with a T coax fitting and a 50
> ohm terminator.
>
> -John
> www.ballofshame.com
>
> Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>> <nuckollsr@cox.net>
>>
>> At 12:09 PM 2/4/2007 +0000, you wrote:
>>
>>> <trigo@mail.telepac.pt>
>>>
>>> With so many different opinions about that little ICOM mixer box,
>>> and Bob N.'s new bad opinion about his own box, I am glad to have
>>> decided to install 2 antennas: one in the upper fuselage skin,
>>> exclusively dedicated to my panel mounted COMM, and the other in the
>>> belly, exclusively for the hand held.
>>> And it's not so obvious that my solution is heavier than the
>>> sole-antenna-with-mixer-and-adapters one ... After all, I needed
>>> some weight behind the baggage compartment ...
>>> OK, there's also the aesthetic and aerodynamics issues of two sticks
>>> protruding from the bird ...
>>
>> A dedicated antenna is ALWAYS the simplest, most reliable
>> means for making sure your hand held is not crippled along
>> with the panel mount because something common to both radios
>> in the antenna system came unhooked. This scenario is exceedingly
>> unlikely . . . after all, how many parts are shared and how
>> vulnerable are they to failure?
>>
>> I'm not sure I've read a cogent opinion about the
>> ICOM box yet. One individual opined as to the choice of
>> connectors but offered nothing about real performance
>> losses or longevity in the a/c.
>>
>> The jury is still out on this folks . . . and even
>> if we do craft something perceived to be a cut above
>> the present technologies, that doesn't necessarily make
>> the current offerings "bad" . . . they're simply
>> candidates for improvement. If someone could identify
>> a 3.5mm jack that's more robust than the Radio Shack part
>> I used in the original article, that would be an attractive
>> step up. I've got some ICOM boxes coming. Let's tear one open
>> and see what they look like.
>>
>> Bob . . .
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
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: | Snap Bushing Through Thick Material |
Just bought a small tube tonight at Menards.
Raymond Julian
Kettle River, MN.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of 6440
Auto Parts
Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 12:02 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Snap Bushing Through Thick Material
<sales@6440autoparts.com>
Where can I purchase some E6000 ?
Randy
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr@cox.net>
Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2007 6:13 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Snap Bushing Through Thick Material
> <nuckollsr@cox.net>
>
> At 05:36 PM 2/4/2007 -0500, you wrote:
>
>><LarryRosen@comcast.net>
>>
>>I want to install a snap bushing through a thick piece of aluminum. The
>>metal is too thick for the metal. Do I remove the snaps and glue it in
>>place with E6000?
>
> That works. Anything you do to line the hole with
> materials more friendly to wire bundles than aluminum
> is a good thing to do. E6000 is pretty tenacious stuff.
>
>
> Bob . . .
>
> ----------------------------------------
> ( IF one aspires to be "world class", )
> ( what ever you do must be exercised )
> ( EVERY day . . . )
> ( R. L. Nuckolls III )
> ----------------------------------------
>
>
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: Receive-only COM? |
Ha! Yeah...it's called a MicroAir 760. Wanna buy mine so I can order a
Becker?
James Redmon
Berkut #013 N97TX
http://www.berkut13.com
> <bdenton@bdenton.com>
>
> Does anyone know of anybody who produces a receive-only aircraft COM
> unit?
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: | Aviation Activism |
I'm sorry you feel that way Walter. While you desire to ignore the
important issues of our time, the politicians are hard at work trying to
take away what's left our precious freedoms and liberties that the founding
fathers (Bob is referring to) worked so hard to establish and preserve (and
there aint many left). Two shining examples of that in the last two days
have been presidential hopeful John Edwards saying he's going to raise taxes
to pay for a huge new socialized medicine program that he'll enact if he's
president (this from an ambulance chaser lawyer who just moved into a 26000,
yes twenty six thousand, square foot mansion built from money that he
obtained through private enterprise). The other example happened just a few
hours ago on an interview with New York Senator Charles Schumer. This
little power hungry career politician lawyer was bragging about how he would
be taking away all property rights from those evil folks that would pollute
the land, air and water (great you may say but in the end it will be your
and my property rights that he'll be taking, because his party does not
believe that the average person is responsible enough or capable enough to
tend to his own affairs or take care of his own personal possessions).
Everyone, whether you are 19 years old or 90 needs to check up on what the
people in Washington (and the politicians in your home state) are doing
EVERY WEEK. And, not be afraid to confront them by calling, emailing or
writing their offices and making your views known in their town hall
meetings. Remember these people are supposed to be elected representatives
of the we the people, they are NOT gods or deities of any sort. Alas I'm
afraid that a good many of them are power hungry career politician lawyers
who go there for decades and never retire because they are having too much
fun spending tax money they don't have and writing ever more laws to control
the populace. Remember the old adage, "the only way evil can prevail is for
good people to do nothing". For those of you who think we are out of the
woods now that the Democrat party controls congress think again. The reason
Democrats don't like User Fees is because it takes the power hungry lawyer
politicians out of control of the ATC system. Virginia Democrat congressman
Jay Rockefeller only last week was grilling the TSA chief about why we still
have this "big security loop hole" in general aviation!!! No matter who is
in control in government, they will find excuses to take away our rights
(you notice I said rights not privileges). Bob is right, we aviators are
just a teensy weensy minority in the mass of special interests groups. We
ALL need to be very diligent and very active in politics or the airplane
building and flying that we so dearly love will be regulated and/or taxed
out of existence!
Dean
RV-6A N197DM
Coming up on first flight
>From: "Walter Fellows" <walter.fellows@gmail.com>
>Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: FAA MAY TAKE AWAY PANEL-MOUNT OPTION
>FOR PORTABLE GPS
>I would request anyone who writes a message here about politics
>(Republican, Democrat, Conservative or Liberal) to include the word SPAM in
>the message header so that my spam filter has a chance of catching it and
>if not, I know to delete it without reading it.
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: Ground blocks for RV's |
I used copper - no real problems.
It was hard to solder the tabs - had to use a small torch.
Jeff Dalton
----- Original Message -----
From: "brownrj" <brown_rj@bellsouth.net>
Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 7:36 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Ground blocks for RV's
> <brown_rj@bellsouth.net>
>
> Is there any reason not to use copper as a ground plane or attachment
> point as opposed to the brass plate sold by B&C Specialties?
> Thanks
> Ron
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=93074#93074
>
>
>
Message 38
| 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: Aviation Activism |
In addition to your message, which plainly points out all the mean and evil
Democrats by name, we still have way too many Republicans trying to spend
all your money (while claiming they're fiscal conservatives), create more
laws to restrict our flying (while claiming to preserve freedoms), and
engaging in all kinds illicit behaviors (while claiming to be for ethics
and the common man).
Maybe Walter is right . . . we shouldn't talk politics on this board.
Jeff
----- Original Message -----
From: "DEAN PSIROPOULOS" <dean.psiropoulos@verizon.net>
Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 12:14 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: Aviation Activism
> <dean.psiropoulos@verizon.net>
>
> I'm sorry you feel that way Walter. While you desire to ignore the
> important issues of our time, the politicians are hard at work trying to
> take away what's left our precious freedoms and liberties that the
> founding
> fathers (Bob is referring to) worked so hard to establish and preserve
> (and
> there aint many left). Two shining examples of that in the last two days
> have been presidential hopeful John Edwards saying he's going to raise
> taxes
> to pay for a huge new socialized medicine program that he'll enact if he's
> president (this from an ambulance chaser lawyer who just moved into a
> 26000,
> yes twenty six thousand, square foot mansion built from money that he
> obtained through private enterprise). The other example happened just a
> few
> hours ago on an interview with New York Senator Charles Schumer. This
> little power hungry career politician lawyer was bragging about how he
> would
> be taking away all property rights from those evil folks that would
> pollute
> the land, air and water (great you may say but in the end it will be your
> and my property rights that he'll be taking, because his party does not
> believe that the average person is responsible enough or capable enough to
> tend to his own affairs or take care of his own personal possessions).
>
> Everyone, whether you are 19 years old or 90 needs to check up on what the
> people in Washington (and the politicians in your home state) are doing
> EVERY WEEK. And, not be afraid to confront them by calling, emailing or
> writing their offices and making your views known in their town hall
> meetings. Remember these people are supposed to be elected
> representatives
> of the we the people, they are NOT gods or deities of any sort. Alas I'm
> afraid that a good many of them are power hungry career politician lawyers
> who go there for decades and never retire because they are having too much
> fun spending tax money they don't have and writing ever more laws to
> control
> the populace. Remember the old adage, "the only way evil can prevail is
> for
> good people to do nothing". For those of you who think we are out of the
> woods now that the Democrat party controls congress think again. The
> reason
> Democrats don't like User Fees is because it takes the power hungry lawyer
> politicians out of control of the ATC system. Virginia Democrat
> congressman
> Jay Rockefeller only last week was grilling the TSA chief about why we
> still
> have this "big security loop hole" in general aviation!!! No matter who
> is
> in control in government, they will find excuses to take away our rights
> (you notice I said rights not privileges). Bob is right, we aviators are
> just a teensy weensy minority in the mass of special interests groups. We
> ALL need to be very diligent and very active in politics or the airplane
> building and flying that we so dearly love will be regulated and/or taxed
> out of existence!
>
> Dean
> RV-6A N197DM
> Coming up on first flight
>
>
>>From: "Walter Fellows" <walter.fellows@gmail.com>
>>Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: FAA MAY TAKE AWAY PANEL-MOUNT OPTION
>>FOR PORTABLE GPS
>
>>I would request anyone who writes a message here about politics
>>(Republican, Democrat, Conservative or Liberal) to include the word SPAM
>>in
>>the message header so that my spam filter has a chance of catching it and
>>if not, I know to delete it without reading it.
>
>
>
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! --
|