---------------------------------------------------------- AeroElectric-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Fri 05/04/07: 19 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 12:42 AM - Ray Allen servo (luigit@freemail.it) 2. 05:18 AM - Re: BASIC DUAL INDEPENDENT POWER SUPPLY (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 3. 07:18 AM - Rear-Battery version of Z-19 (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 4. 11:04 AM - Electrical joint grease? (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 5. 11:16 AM - Two Txrs on one antenna (Fergus Kyle) 6. 12:17 PM - Stuck looking for a switch (Alan K. Adamson) 7. 12:31 PM - Re: Stuck looking for a switch (john@ballofshame.com) 8. 12:49 PM - Re: Stuck looking for a switch (Alan Adamson) 9. 01:09 PM - Re: Stuck looking for a switch (Ron Quillin) 10. 01:40 PM - Re: Stuck looking for a switch (JOHN TIPTON) 11. 01:52 PM - Re: Stuck looking for a switch (Alan Adamson) 12. 02:15 PM - Re: BASIC DUAL INDEPENDENT POWER SUPPLY (Peter Harris) 13. 03:13 PM - Re: Stuck looking for a switch (john@ballofshame.com) 14. 05:49 PM - Re: Stuck looking for a switch (Kevin Horton) 15. 06:18 PM - Re: Stuck looking for a switch (Bret Smith) 16. 06:57 PM - Re: BASIC DUAL INDEPENDENT POWER SUPPLY (Peter Harris) 17. 08:30 PM - Re: Stuck looking for a switch (Alan Adamson) 18. 08:30 PM - Re: Stuck looking for a switch (Alan Adamson) 19. 08:46 PM - Re: Stuck looking for a switch (Sam Chambers) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 12:42:01 AM PST US From: luigit@freemail.it Subject: AeroElectric-List: Ray Allen servo --- MIME Errors - No Plain-Text Section Found --- A message with no text/plain MIME section was received. The entire body of the message was removed. Please resend the email using Plain Text formatting. HOTMAIL is notorious for only including an HTML section in their client's default configuration. If you're using HOTMAIL, please see your email application's settings and switch to a default mail option that uses "Plain Text". --- MIME Errors No Plain-Text Section Found --- ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 05:18:03 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: BASIC DUAL INDEPENDENT POWER SUPPLY At 10:51 AM 5/4/2007 +1000, you wrote: Bob, The aircraft will be used only for VFR day. It is equipped with a compass and a GPS for nav and the usual engine instruments all of which are fused off the main bus. For ignition it has a single electronic ignition module and a single magneto. I also have a Ray Allen T2-7A servo for aileron reflex which is non essential. No wing leveler or other electricals. No pneumatics . For monitoring the electrical system I have a dual voltmeter/ampmeter also an alternator no charge warning light. I have ordered the OVM crowbar module and have the parts to do the self excitation as in Z-25. The jab regulator looks like it is in the same family as the PMR 1-14. >From the ebus I plan to supply an EFI system including an ECU, Fuel pump and two injectors as well as the EI module. Total load is expected to be less than 8A. I would use LED s to indicate each of the dual sources active and would operate with both sources normally active. Hmmm . . . that's a lot of snort to keep the engine running. Okay, over the terrain you expect to fly, what's the general availability of alternate landing sites? How much ENDURANCE do you expect to plan for? Servicing an 8A engine requirement for 3+ hours doesn't seem like a really useful philosophy. It would make you carry around a LOT of lead having a low-probability of ever being needed. Also, I'm skeptical of the 8A figure. Do you know anyone flying this engine from whom you might get some real, operating measurements? Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 07:18:01 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: AeroElectric-List: Rear-Battery version of Z-19 At the request of several builders, I've posted a rear-battery version of Z-19 at: http://aeroelectric.com/PPS/Adobe_Architecture_Pdfs/Z19RB_A_1.pdf http://aeroelectric.com/PPS/Adobe_Architecture_Pdfs/Z19RB_A_2.pdf The major differences between the front and rear-battery versions is moving main bus feed from battery contactor to starter contactor. Adding e-bus alternate feed relay to the main battery bus. If you have an internally regulated alternator that is not a Plane Power (built in OVP and absolute pilot control) then install the interim Z-24 as described below. Later this year, you'll already have hardware in place to upgrade the OVP/Control system shown in. http://aeroelectric.com/articles/Adapting_IR_Alternators_to_Aircraft.pdf Bob . . . ---------------------------------------- ( IF one aspires to be "world class", ) ( what ever you do must be exercised ) ( EVERY day . . . ) ( R. L. Nuckolls III ) ---------------------------------------- ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 11:04:36 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: AeroElectric-List: Electrical joint grease? >Questions: Hi Bob, >Regarding your article on using the airframe for grounding the battery, my >battery is in the tailcone on a Murphy Rebel. Should I apply electrical >grease to the tab before rivetting it to the air frame, to ensure good >conductivity. I'd go for clean, bright metal before riveting and forget the grease. If you get the proper pressures built up between the conducting metals, then a gas-tight joint exists and any grease that might have been in the joint is extruded out. Now, if you lived in a salt-air or high humidity environment, putting grease in the joint might have a beneficial effect of sealing the gaps where gas-tightness was not completely achieved. This might forestall corrosion problems in the future but if your airplane lives in such an environment, increasing the service life of an electrical joint is probably very low on your worries for maintenance and cost of ownership for the airplane! The grease wouldn't hurt but it's messy and not likely to help much if any. This stuff makes more sense on power poles and boats. Bob . . . ---------------------------------------- ( IF one wishes to be "world class" at ) ( anything, what ever you do must be ) ( exercised EVERY day . . . ) ( R. L. Nuckolls III ) ---------------------------------------- Bob . . . ---------------------------------------- ( IF one aspires to be "world class", ) ( what ever you do must be exercised ) ( EVERY day . . . ) ( R. L. Nuckolls III ) ---------------------------------------- ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 11:16:47 AM PST US From: "Fergus Kyle" Subject: AeroElectric-List: Two Txrs on one antenna I've been following the discussion regarding running two transceivers on one coax line......... some very enlightening opinions! Wouldn't a 12vDC coaxial relay do the job? See any local ham over forty for details...... Ferg Kyle Europa A064 914 Classic ----- Original Message ----- From: "AeroElectric-List Digest Server" Sent: Tuesday, 06 February 2007 3 55 Subject: AeroElectric-List Digest: 38 Msgs - 02/05/07 > * > > ================================================= > Online Versions of Today's List Digest Archive > ================================================= > > Today's complete AeroElectric-List Digest can also be found in either of > the > two Web Links listed below. The .html file includes the Digest formatted > in HTML for viewing with a web browser and features Hyperlinked Indexes > and Message Navigation. The .txt file includes the plain ASCII version > of the AeroElectric-List Digest and can be viewed with a generic text > editor > such as Notepad or with a web browser. > > HTML Version: > > > http://www.matronics.com/digest/digestview.php?Style=82701&View=html&Chapter 07-02-05&Archive=AeroElectric > > Text Version: > > > http://www.matronics.com/digest/digestview.php?Style=82701&View=txt&Chapter 07-02-05&Archive=AeroElectric > > > =============================================== > EMail Version of Today's List Digest Archive > =============================================== > > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > AeroElectric-List Digest Archive > --- > Total Messages Posted Mon 02/05/07: 38 > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > > 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 > _____________________________________ > > > Time: 07:41:57 AM PST US > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: headset - bad mike test proc needed > From: "eedetail" > > > 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 > _____________________________________ > > > Time: 07:47:09 AM PST US > From: "Nathan Ulrich" > Subject: AeroElectric-List: 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 . > > Nathan > > > ________________________________ Message 3 > _____________________________________ > > > Time: 08:58:52 AM PST US > Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: headset - bad mike test proc needed > From: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" > > > -----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 > _____________________________________ > > > Time: 09:43:02 AM PST US > From: Matt Jurotich > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: intercom > > > 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: > phone : 301-286-5919 > > > ________________________________ Message 5 > _____________________________________ > > > Time: 10:02:22 AM PST US > From: "Mauri Morin" > 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 6 > _____________________________________ > > > Time: 10:02:52 AM PST US > From: "6440 Auto Parts" > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Snap Bushing Through Thick Material > > > Where can I purchase some E6000 ? > > Randy > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" > Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2007 6:13 PM > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Snap Bushing Through Thick Material > > >> >> >> At 05:36 PM 2/4/2007 -0500, you wrote: >> >>> >>> >>>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 > _____________________________________ > > > Time: 10:08:13 AM PST US > From: "Mauri Morin" > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: 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 > > > > > 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 > . > > Nathan > > > -- > 2/2/2007 > > > ________________________________ Message 8 > _____________________________________ > > > Time: 10:09:37 AM PST US > From: Earl_Schroeder > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: intercom > > > 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: >> >> >> 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: >> phone : 301-286-5919 >> >> > > > ________________________________ Message 9 > _____________________________________ > > > Time: 10:33:58 AM PST US > From: "John Burnaby" > Subject: AeroElectric-List: 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 > ____________________________________ > > > Time: 10:36:19 AM PST US > Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: headset > From: "Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis)" > > 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 > ____________________________________ > > > Time: 10:38:24 AM PST US > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Snap Bushing Through Thick Material > From: "Matt Prather" > > > AKA "Shoe Goo" > > Ebay item number: 190024050461 > > > Matt- > >> >> >> Where can I purchase some E6000 ? >> >> Randy >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" >> To: >> Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2007 6:13 PM >> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Snap Bushing Through Thick Material >> >> >>> >>> >>> At 05:36 PM 2/4/2007 -0500, you wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>>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 > ____________________________________ > > > Time: 10:51:56 AM PST US > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: RE: Circuit needed > From: john@ballofshame.com > > > 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 > ____________________________________ > > > Time: 11:04:30 AM PST US > From: "Harold" > 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" > Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 1:01 PM > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Snap Bushing Through Thick Material > > >> >> >> Where can I purchase some E6000 ? >> >> Randy >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" >> To: >> Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2007 6:13 PM >> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Snap Bushing Through Thick Material >> >> >>> >>> >>> At 05:36 PM 2/4/2007 -0500, you wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>>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 > ____________________________________ > > > Time: 11:49:11 AM PST US > From: "6440 Auto Parts" > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Snap Bushing Through Thick Material > > > Thanks I was hoping I could get it or something as good locally. > > Randy > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Harold" > 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" >> To: >> Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 1:01 PM >> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Snap Bushing Through Thick Material >> >> >>> >>> >>> Where can I purchase some E6000 ? >>> >>> Randy >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" >>> To: >>> Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2007 6:13 PM >>> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Snap Bushing Through Thick Material >>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> At 05:36 PM 2/4/2007 -0500, you wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>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 > ____________________________________ > > > Time: 12:39:13 PM PST US > From: Mitchell Faatz > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: intercom (Jim Wier, RST) > > > Matt Jurotich wrote: >> >> >> 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 > ____________________________________ > > > Time: 01:28:57 PM PST US > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: intercom (Jim Wier, RST) > From: "Matt Prather" > > > 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 > >> >> >> Matt Jurotich wrote: >>> >>> >>> 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 > ____________________________________ > > > Time: 02:33:12 PM PST US > From: "C Smith" > Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: 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 > ____________________________________ > > > Time: 03:17:51 PM PST US > From: Gilles Thesee > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: 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 > ____________________________________ > > > Time: 03:24:30 PM PST US > From: Earl_Schroeder > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: 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 > ____________________________________ > > > Time: 03:51:53 PM PST US > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Protection For Auxillary Power Jacks > From: "Bill Denton" > > > 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 > ____________________________________ > > > Time: 04:04:22 PM PST US > From: > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: 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" > Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 2:38 PM > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: intercom (Jim Wier, RST) > > >> >> >> Matt Jurotich wrote: >>> >>> >>> 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 > ____________________________________ > > > Time: 04:11:07 PM PST US > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Receive-only COM? > From: "Bill Denton" > > > 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 > ____________________________________ > > > Time: 04:37:26 PM PST US > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Ground blocks for RV's > From: "brownrj" > > > 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 > ____________________________________ > > > Time: 04:50:13 PM PST US > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Protection For Auxillary Power Jacks > From: "Matt Prather" > > > 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- > > >> >> >> 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 > ____________________________________ > > > Time: 04:50:13 PM PST US > From: Kevin Horton > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Protection For Auxillary Power Jacks > > > On 5 Feb 2007, at 18:50, Bill Denton 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? >> >> 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 > ____________________________________ > > > Time: 04:59:19 PM PST US > From: Bill Dube > Subject: AeroElectric-List: 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 > ____________________________________ > > > Time: 05:56:03 PM PST US > Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Receive-only COM? > From: "Jeffery J. Morgan" > > > 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? > > > > 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 > ____________________________________ > > > Time: 06:13:52 PM PST US > From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: 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 > ____________________________________ > > > Time: 06:23:35 PM PST US > From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: 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 . > > 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 > ____________________________________ > > > Time: 06:35:22 PM PST US > From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: 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 > ____________________________________ > > > Time: 06:44:54 PM PST US > From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: 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 > ____________________________________ > > > Time: 06:46:09 PM PST US > From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: 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 > ____________________________________ > > > Time: 07:52:52 PM PST US > From: Robert Feldtman > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: 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: >> >> >> 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: >>> >>> >>> At 12:09 PM 2/4/2007 +0000, you wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> 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 > ____________________________________ > > > Time: 08:13:50 PM PST US > From: "raymondj" > Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: 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 > > > > > Where can I purchase some E6000 ? > > Randy > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" > Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2007 6:13 PM > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Snap Bushing Through Thick Material > > >> >> >> At 05:36 PM 2/4/2007 -0500, you wrote: >> >>> >>> >>>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 > ____________________________________ > > > Time: 08:49:12 PM PST US > From: > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: 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 > > >> >> >> Does anyone know of anybody who produces a receive-only aircraft COM >> unit? > > > ________________________________ Message 36 > ____________________________________ > > > Time: 09:15:56 PM PST US > From: "DEAN PSIROPOULOS" > Subject: AeroElectric-List: 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" >>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 > ____________________________________ > > > Time: 09:31:14 PM PST US > From: "jdalton77" > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: 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" > Sent: Monday, February 05, 2007 7:36 PM > Subject: AeroElectric-List: 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 38 > ____________________________________ > > > Time: 09:36:23 PM PST US > From: "jdalton77" > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: 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" > Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 12:14 AM > Subject: AeroElectric-List: 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" >>>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 6 _____________________________________ Time: 12:17:08 PM PST US From: "Alan K. Adamson" Subject: AeroElectric-List: Stuck looking for a switch I'd like to use an Off-(ON) type toggle switch for a start switch.... BUT, I'd like to use it with a "Switch Guard". So, ok, that seems pretty straight forward... However, I ordered a switch guard and noticed that it has a tab that mates to the groove in the switch to prevent rotation. The tab is on the bottom of the hole when the switch guard is oriented correctly (flip up to access). Good so far, right.... Wrong, all of the Momentary switches that I've been able to look at have the groove *UP" when positioned so that the momentary position is UP... Exactly opposite of what I need. While the above may not be a very good description, I thought I'd post this to see if anyone had an idea of what switch or other I might utilize to correct this problem. Obviously, I can grind the tab away and use star washers to prevent rotation, but I'd like to keep it locked together with the tab and groove if I can... Thanks in advance, Alan ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 12:31:19 PM PST US Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Stuck looking for a switch From: john@ballofshame.com Well, if you don't mind doing without guard, digikey has a LOT of switch options. There's one that does (On-Mom) with a keylock handle (i.e. you have to pull the handle out to get it to the momentary state). It's just as good as a guard and takes up less space. Probably looks nicer too. Give a look at what they have, anyway. -John www.ballofshame.com > > > I'd like to use an Off-(ON) type toggle switch for a start switch.... BUT, > I'd like to use it with a "Switch Guard". So, ok, that seems pretty > straight forward... However, I ordered a switch guard and noticed that it > has a tab that mates to the groove in the switch to prevent rotation. The > tab is on the bottom of the hole when the switch guard is oriented > correctly > (flip up to access). Good so far, right.... > > Wrong, all of the Momentary switches that I've been able to look at have > the > groove *UP" when positioned so that the momentary position is UP... > Exactly > opposite of what I need. > > While the above may not be a very good description, I thought I'd post > this > to see if anyone had an idea of what switch or other I might utilize to > correct this problem. Obviously, I can grind the tab away and use star > washers to prevent rotation, but I'd like to keep it locked together with > the tab and groove if I can... > > Thanks in advance, > Alan > > ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 12:49:46 PM PST US From: "Alan Adamson" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Stuck looking for a switch John, yep you are right, however the problem with a starter, it doesn't like to be switched on all the time so it needs to be a momentary in the real sense of the word, not lockable. So the guard is used just to make sure it doesn't get lifted when you are reaching around the panel, in the bumps :) Alan -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of john@ballofshame.com Sent: Friday, May 04, 2007 3:31 PM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Stuck looking for a switch Well, if you don't mind doing without guard, digikey has a LOT of switch options. There's one that does (On-Mom) with a keylock handle (i.e. you have to pull the handle out to get it to the momentary state). It's just as good as a guard and takes up less space. Probably looks nicer too. Give a look at what they have, anyway. -John www.ballofshame.com > > > I'd like to use an Off-(ON) type toggle switch for a start switch.... > BUT, I'd like to use it with a "Switch Guard". So, ok, that seems > pretty straight forward... However, I ordered a switch guard and > noticed that it has a tab that mates to the groove in the switch to > prevent rotation. The tab is on the bottom of the hole when the > switch guard is oriented correctly (flip up to access). Good so far, > right.... > > Wrong, all of the Momentary switches that I've been able to look at > have the groove *UP" when positioned so that the momentary position is > UP... > Exactly > opposite of what I need. > > While the above may not be a very good description, I thought I'd post > this to see if anyone had an idea of what switch or other I might > utilize to correct this problem. Obviously, I can grind the tab away > and use star washers to prevent rotation, but I'd like to keep it > locked together with the tab and groove if I can... > > Thanks in advance, > Alan > > ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 01:09:09 PM PST US Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Stuck looking for a switch From: Ron Quillin At 12:15 5/4/2007, you wrote: >Wrong, all of the Momentary switches that I've been able to look at have the >groove *UP" when positioned so that the momentary position is UP... Exactly >opposite of what I need. Without digging through all my notes, I seem to recall the guard was available in either orientation. Might be worth checking a bit further. Ron Q. ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 01:40:24 PM PST US From: "JOHN TIPTON" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Stuck looking for a switch I think Alan has a very valid point, something I am thinking of using also: for anyone who has had an engine failure (due to fuel starvation) to have a starter switch with an 'on' position helps you free up a hand when you are trying to fly the plane with one hand, and try all alternatives to get the thing started again (pump primer, pump the throttle etc) with the other. John ----- Original Message ----- From: "Alan Adamson" Sent: Friday, May 04, 2007 8:48 PM Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Stuck looking for a switch > > > John, yep you are right, however the problem with a starter, it doesn't > like > to be switched on all the time so it needs to be a momentary in the real > sense of the word, not lockable. So the guard is used just to make sure > it > doesn't get lifted when you are reaching around the panel, in the bumps :) > > Alan > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of > john@ballofshame.com > Sent: Friday, May 04, 2007 3:31 PM > To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Stuck looking for a switch > > > Well, if you don't mind doing without guard, digikey has a LOT of switch > options. There's one that does (On-Mom) with a keylock handle (i.e. you > have to pull the handle out to get it to the momentary state). It's just > as > good as a guard and takes up less space. Probably looks nicer too. > > Give a look at what they have, anyway. > > -John > www.ballofshame.com > >> >> >> I'd like to use an Off-(ON) type toggle switch for a start switch.... >> BUT, I'd like to use it with a "Switch Guard". So, ok, that seems >> pretty straight forward... However, I ordered a switch guard and >> noticed that it has a tab that mates to the groove in the switch to >> prevent rotation. The tab is on the bottom of the hole when the >> switch guard is oriented correctly (flip up to access). Good so far, >> right.... >> >> Wrong, all of the Momentary switches that I've been able to look at >> have the groove *UP" when positioned so that the momentary position is >> UP... >> Exactly >> opposite of what I need. >> >> While the above may not be a very good description, I thought I'd post >> this to see if anyone had an idea of what switch or other I might >> utilize to correct this problem. Obviously, I can grind the tab away >> and use star washers to prevent rotation, but I'd like to keep it >> locked together with the tab and groove if I can... >> >> Thanks in advance, >> Alan >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 01:52:29 PM PST US From: "Alan Adamson" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Stuck looking for a switch Ding, ding, ding, you get the prize.... Thanks so much, looks like I need an MS25224-3 instead of a -1 (which I believe I have)... Data here... http://www.eatonelectrical.com/html/VCBU/commcat2/guards.pdf Thanks again, that was a great help! Alan -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ron Quillin Sent: Friday, May 04, 2007 4:07 PM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Stuck looking for a switch --> At 12:15 5/4/2007, you wrote: >Wrong, all of the Momentary switches that I've been able to look at >have the groove *UP" when positioned so that the momentary position is >UP... Exactly opposite of what I need. Without digging through all my notes, I seem to recall the guard was available in either orientation. Might be worth checking a bit further. Ron Q. ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 02:15:33 PM PST US From: "Peter Harris" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: BASIC DUAL INDEPENDENT POWER SUPPLY Bob, The EFI including pump, ECU and injectors together with his main bus radio and instruments is using 4A according to advice from the guy who engineered this simple single body TBI system. (I don't have a figure for the separate ebus draw for the EFI so you would need to discount for radio and instruments)I could also run the electronic ignition module and ignition coil for additional ebus current I guessed 4A but it would probably be less. I am using a Bosch HE coil. Alternative landing sites are up to 1hr apart. The endurance is 41/2HRS. Thanks Peter -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L. Nuckolls, III Sent: Friday, 4 May 2007 11:11 PM Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: BASIC DUAL INDEPENDENT POWER SUPPLY At 10:51 AM 5/4/2007 +1000, you wrote: Bob, The aircraft will be used only for VFR day. It is equipped with a compass and a GPS for nav and the usual engine instruments all of which are fused off the main bus. For ignition it has a single electronic ignition module and a single magneto. I also have a Ray Allen T2-7A servo for aileron reflex which is non essential. No wing leveler or other electricals. No pneumatics . For monitoring the electrical system I have a dual voltmeter/ampmeter also an alternator no charge warning light. I have ordered the OVM crowbar module and have the parts to do the self excitation as in Z-25. The jab regulator looks like it is in the same family as the PMR 1-14. >From the ebus I plan to supply an EFI system including an ECU, Fuel pump and two injectors as well as the EI module. Total load is expected to be less than 8A. I would use LED s to indicate each of the dual sources active and would operate with both sources normally active. Hmmm . . . that's a lot of snort to keep the engine running. Okay, over the terrain you expect to fly, what's the general availability of alternate landing sites? How much ENDURANCE do you expect to plan for? Servicing an 8A engine requirement for 3+ hours doesn't seem like a really useful philosophy. It would make you carry around a LOT of lead having a low-probability of ever being needed. Also, I'm skeptical of the 8A figure. Do you know anyone flying this engine from whom you might get some real, operating measurements? Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 03:13:36 PM PST US Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Stuck looking for a switch From: john@ballofshame.com I see that you found the solution. Just to clear up the switch, though. I believe the switch is momentary...it's just that you have to unlock it to get it in the momentary position. When you let go, it snaps back down and relocks. -John www.ballofshame.com > > > John, yep you are right, however the problem with a starter, it doesn't > like > to be switched on all the time so it needs to be a momentary in the real > sense of the word, not lockable. So the guard is used just to make sure > it > doesn't get lifted when you are reaching around the panel, in the bumps :) > > Alan > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of > john@ballofshame.com > Sent: Friday, May 04, 2007 3:31 PM > To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Stuck looking for a switch > > > Well, if you don't mind doing without guard, digikey has a LOT of switch > options. There's one that does (On-Mom) with a keylock handle (i.e. you > have to pull the handle out to get it to the momentary state). It's just > as > good as a guard and takes up less space. Probably looks nicer too. > > Give a look at what they have, anyway. > > -John > www.ballofshame.com > >> >> >> I'd like to use an Off-(ON) type toggle switch for a start switch.... >> BUT, I'd like to use it with a "Switch Guard". So, ok, that seems >> pretty straight forward... However, I ordered a switch guard and >> noticed that it has a tab that mates to the groove in the switch to >> prevent rotation. The tab is on the bottom of the hole when the >> switch guard is oriented correctly (flip up to access). Good so far, >> right.... >> >> Wrong, all of the Momentary switches that I've been able to look at >> have the groove *UP" when positioned so that the momentary position is >> UP... >> Exactly >> opposite of what I need. >> >> While the above may not be a very good description, I thought I'd post >> this to see if anyone had an idea of what switch or other I might >> utilize to correct this problem. Obviously, I can grind the tab away >> and use star washers to prevent rotation, but I'd like to keep it >> locked together with the tab and groove if I can... >> >> Thanks in advance, >> Alan >> >> >> >> >> >> > > ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 05:49:17 PM PST US From: Kevin Horton Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Stuck looking for a switch I had a similar problem. I couldn't find a quick source to get the correct switch guard, so I filed off the tab on the guard so I could put it on in the other orientation. Then I drilled a small hole through the metal base near the hinge, and bolted it in place on the panel with a 2-56 bolt and nut. That keeps it from rotating, and is not visible when the guard is down. Kevin Horton On 4 May 2007, at 16:51, Alan Adamson wrote: > > > Ding, ding, ding, you get the prize.... Thanks so much, looks like > I need an > MS25224-3 instead of a -1 (which I believe I have)... > > Data here... > > http://www.eatonelectrical.com/html/VCBU/commcat2/guards.pdf > > Thanks again, that was a great help! > Alan > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ron > Quillin > Sent: Friday, May 04, 2007 4:07 PM > To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Stuck looking for a switch > > --> > > At 12:15 5/4/2007, you wrote: >> Wrong, all of the Momentary switches that I've been able to look at >> have the groove *UP" when positioned so that the momentary >> position is >> UP... Exactly opposite of what I need. > > Without digging through all my notes, I seem to recall the guard was > available in either orientation. > Might be worth checking a bit further. > > Ron Q. > ________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________ Time: 06:18:19 PM PST US From: "Bret Smith" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Stuck looking for a switch Alan, I was assuming "UP" would be the logical direction for start... Bret Smith RV-9A (91314) Mineral Bluff, GA www.FlightInnovations.com -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Alan K. Adamson Sent: Friday, May 04, 2007 3:16 PM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Stuck looking for a switch --> I'd like to use an Off-(ON) type toggle switch for a start switch.... BUT, I'd like to use it with a "Switch Guard". So, ok, that seems pretty straight forward... However, I ordered a switch guard and noticed that it has a tab that mates to the groove in the switch to prevent rotation. The tab is on the bottom of the hole when the switch guard is oriented correctly (flip up to access). Good so far, right.... Wrong, all of the Momentary switches that I've been able to look at have the groove *UP" when positioned so that the momentary position is UP... Exactly opposite of what I need. While the above may not be a very good description, I thought I'd post this to see if anyone had an idea of what switch or other I might utilize to correct this problem. Obviously, I can grind the tab away and use star washers to prevent rotation, but I'd like to keep it locked together with the tab and groove if I can... Thanks in advance, Alan ________________________________ Message 16 ____________________________________ Time: 06:57:50 PM PST US From: "Peter Harris" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: BASIC DUAL INDEPENDENT POWER SUPPLY Bob, Just to clarify I do not propose to use Z-19 , only the two diodes dual feed as shown in Z-19 and note 24. What I have in mind is to use Z-25 just as I have shown it in my post ie Z-25 plus the double diode feed from Z-19 Peter -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L. Nuckolls, III Sent: Friday, 4 May 2007 11:11 PM Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: BASIC DUAL INDEPENDENT POWER SUPPLY At 10:51 AM 5/4/2007 +1000, you wrote: Bob, The aircraft will be used only for VFR day. It is equipped with a compass and a GPS for nav and the usual engine instruments all of which are fused off the main bus. For ignition it has a single electronic ignition module and a single magneto. I also have a Ray Allen T2-7A servo for aileron reflex which is non essential. No wing leveler or other electricals. No pneumatics . For monitoring the electrical system I have a dual voltmeter/ampmeter also an alternator no charge warning light. I have ordered the OVM crowbar module and have the parts to do the self excitation as in Z-25. The jab regulator looks like it is in the same family as the PMR 1-14. >From the ebus I plan to supply an EFI system including an ECU, Fuel pump and two injectors as well as the EI module. Total load is expected to be less than 8A. I would use LED s to indicate each of the dual sources active and would operate with both sources normally active. Hmmm . . . that's a lot of snort to keep the engine running. Okay, over the terrain you expect to fly, what's the general availability of alternate landing sites? How much ENDURANCE do you expect to plan for? Servicing an 8A engine requirement for 3+ hours doesn't seem like a really useful philosophy. It would make you carry around a LOT of lead having a low-probability of ever being needed. Also, I'm skeptical of the 8A figure. Do you know anyone flying this engine from whom you might get some real, operating measurements? Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 17 ____________________________________ Time: 08:30:27 PM PST US From: "Alan Adamson" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Stuck looking for a switch Kevin, you read my mind... I may do that exact same thing... We'll see... Alan -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kevin Horton Sent: Friday, May 04, 2007 8:48 PM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Stuck looking for a switch --> I had a similar problem. I couldn't find a quick source to get the correct switch guard, so I filed off the tab on the guard so I could put it on in the other orientation. Then I drilled a small hole through the metal base near the hinge, and bolted it in place on the panel with a 2-56 bolt and nut. That keeps it from rotating, and is not visible when the guard is down. Kevin Horton On 4 May 2007, at 16:51, Alan Adamson wrote: > > > Ding, ding, ding, you get the prize.... Thanks so much, looks like I > need an > MS25224-3 instead of a -1 (which I believe I have)... > > Data here... > > http://www.eatonelectrical.com/html/VCBU/commcat2/guards.pdf > > Thanks again, that was a great help! > Alan > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ron > Quillin > Sent: Friday, May 04, 2007 4:07 PM > To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Stuck looking for a switch > > --> > > At 12:15 5/4/2007, you wrote: >> Wrong, all of the Momentary switches that I've been able to look at >> have the groove *UP" when positioned so that the momentary position >> is UP... Exactly opposite of what I need. > > Without digging through all my notes, I seem to recall the guard was > available in either orientation. > Might be worth checking a bit further. > > Ron Q. > ________________________________ Message 18 ____________________________________ Time: 08:30:32 PM PST US From: "Alan Adamson" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Stuck looking for a switch Yep, that's correct, however with the little tab down to allow the guard to flip up, that is exactly 180 degrees opposite of what you need with the -1 version of the guard. But we've beat this one dead and I know the solution... Actually 2 of them :) Alan -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Bret Smith Sent: Friday, May 04, 2007 9:17 PM Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Stuck looking for a switch Alan, I was assuming "UP" would be the logical direction for start... Bret Smith RV-9A (91314) Mineral Bluff, GA www.FlightInnovations.com -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Alan K. Adamson Sent: Friday, May 04, 2007 3:16 PM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Stuck looking for a switch --> I'd like to use an Off-(ON) type toggle switch for a start switch.... BUT, I'd like to use it with a "Switch Guard". So, ok, that seems pretty straight forward... However, I ordered a switch guard and noticed that it has a tab that mates to the groove in the switch to prevent rotation. The tab is on the bottom of the hole when the switch guard is oriented correctly (flip up to access). Good so far, right.... Wrong, all of the Momentary switches that I've been able to look at have the groove *UP" when positioned so that the momentary position is UP... Exactly opposite of what I need. While the above may not be a very good description, I thought I'd post this to see if anyone had an idea of what switch or other I might utilize to correct this problem. Obviously, I can grind the tab away and use star washers to prevent rotation, but I'd like to keep it locked together with the tab and groove if I can... Thanks in advance, Alan ________________________________ Message 19 ____________________________________ Time: 08:46:06 PM PST US From: "Sam Chambers" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Stuck looking for a switch I had the same issue on a couple of switches, I just milled another slot in the threaded part of the switch 180 degrees from the original. Sam Chambers Glasgow, KY Long-EZ N775AM ----- Original Message ----- From: "Alan K. Adamson" Sent: Friday, May 04, 2007 2:15 PM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Stuck looking for a switch > > > I'd like to use an Off-(ON) type toggle switch for a start switch.... BUT, > I'd like to use it with a "Switch Guard". So, ok, that seems pretty > straight forward... However, I ordered a switch guard and noticed that it > has a tab that mates to the groove in the switch to prevent rotation. The > tab is on the bottom of the hole when the switch guard is oriented > correctly > (flip up to access). Good so far, right.... > > Wrong, all of the Momentary switches that I've been able to look at have > the > groove *UP" when positioned so that the momentary position is UP... > Exactly > opposite of what I need. > > While the above may not be a very good description, I thought I'd post > this > to see if anyone had an idea of what switch or other I might utilize to > correct this problem. Obviously, I can grind the tab away and use star > washers to prevent rotation, but I'd like to keep it locked together with > the tab and groove if I can... > > Thanks in advance, > Alan > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Other Matronics Email List Services ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Post A New Message aeroelectric-list@matronics.com UN/SUBSCRIBE http://www.matronics.com/subscription List FAQ http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/AeroElectric-List.htm Web Forum Interface To Lists http://forums.matronics.com Matronics List Wiki http://wiki.matronics.com Full Archive Search Engine http://www.matronics.com/search 7-Day List Browse http://www.matronics.com/browse/aeroelectric-list Browse Digests http://www.matronics.com/digest/aeroelectric-list Browse Other Lists http://www.matronics.com/browse Live Online Chat! http://www.matronics.com/chat Archive Downloading http://www.matronics.com/archives Photo Share http://www.matronics.com/photoshare Other Email Lists http://www.matronics.com/emaillists Contributions http://www.matronics.com/contribution ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.