Today's Message Index:
----------------------
0. 12:29 AM - Wow! A Ton of Comments! (Matt Dralle)
1. 04:31 AM - Re-GPS Antenna Coax Length ()
2. 05:02 AM - Re: Re: Z-12 and Z-13/20 features questions (Peter Laurence)
3. 07:53 AM - Re: Re: Compass Requirements for FAA Inspection (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
4. 08:43 AM - Re: Re: Z-12 and Z-13/20 features questions (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
5. 09:01 AM - Re: Re: Z-12 and Z-13/20 features questions (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
6. 10:36 AM - Re: Z-12 and Z-13/20 features questions (BuckWynd)
7. 10:49 AM - Fusible Links (Eric M. Jones)
8. 10:52 AM - Re: Compass Requirements for FAA Inspection ()
9. 09:55 PM - Re: Re: Compass Requirements for FAA Inspection (Fiveonepw@aol.com)
10. 11:06 PM - Re: Re: Compass Requirements for FAA Inspection (Piper Cherokee)
Message 0
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: | Wow! A Ton of Comments! |
Dear Listers,
I've been getting a ton of great comments from Listers along with their List Support
Contributions lately! I've shared a bunch more below. Please read over
some of them and see what your fellow Listers think of the Lists and Forums.
There are just a couple more days left before the official end of this year's Fund
Raiser. Please make a Contribution today to support the continued upgrade
and operation of these services.
There are still lots of awesome gifts available, so browse the extensive selection
and pickup a nice item along with your qualifying Contribution.
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Thank you in advance for your generous support! It is very much appreciated!
Best regards,
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Administrator
----------- What Listers Are Saying About The Lists -----------
In the big picture, you are most certainly saving lives.
The fact that you do it at a very good level of service,
quality, and simplicity is just icing on the cake. We
all owe you a debt of gratitude.
Bruce M
Can't go a single day without reading my lists. Even
when I am overseas.
Terry W
Best list ever. No comparison.
Johann J
I get the digest for the two lists I subscribe to each
morning -- they go great with my coffee! I can't tell
you how much I've learned from this great service...
Mark S
..great lists, best on the Net!
Robert S
It is very nice to enjoy a SPAM free list.
Ken L
You run a great list. Makes a builder feel like there's
lots of help out there for the asking, and it's
appreciated.
Steve T
The list is a very valuable resource.
Thomas S
You run a good list.
James G
Thanks for a great forum.
Jimmy Y
Thanks for a well-maintained list(s).
Michael M
Great job! Worth every penny!
Stephen T
Helps me learn and think about issues I didn't know I
didn't know.
Martin H
I find the list very useful...
Robert F
What you do provides me with daily contact with a passion
of my life, aviation.
Wendell M
..the list it is very valuable information.
Dwayne H
..a great service to homebuilders.
Andrew H
I have learned quite a lot from reading the Forums. I
have been reading at the forum pages and I like the way
it works.
Ron L
[The List] makes a builder feel like there's lots of
help out there for the asking, and it's appreciated.
Steve T
The list service many purposes, not the least of which is
motivation to join my fellow RVer in completing my project
and getting in the air.
John S
Thanks for running a great site. Its simplicity is its
greatness. Don't know how I would have been successful
without it.
Timothy F
..terrific service to experimental and general aviation.
James F
You have a well run operation. I am happy to support what
you do.
Mark S
A wonderful service to the GA community.
David M
Great list - let's keep it ad-free!
Ben C
They have been of great help, learning and friendship
for all the members Worldwide. Great job of yours, a
little idea that grew really big and wonderful.
Gary G
..a thoroughly enjoyable and informative List.
John W
A GREAT LEARNING TOOL!!
Dwayne Y
This is a very well-run list and it is a valuable resource
for the Pietenpol enthusiast.
Graham H
Thanks for running this great site - helps those of
us on the east of the pond keep in touch.
Malcolm H
Thanks for the major contribution to my continuing
education program.
Oldbob S
I'm just getting started in the building process & find
Matronics to be the most valuable site.
Scott D
Without the information and encouragement from the listers
my project would have been sitting in the corner of my shop
collecting dust long ago. Now it's almost ready for final
assemble and covering.
Edward G
Great List. No Ads, just RV-10 builders. Keep it
going.
Rick E
Wonderful source of info for building & flying...
Graham H
The Yak-list is a superb single source to get answers to
questions on the operation of these aircraft.
Craig W
This list is valuable to everyone and your hard work is
very much appreciated.
Jim S
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-GPS Antenna Coax Length |
11/28/2007
Hello Wayne, I recently had my Garmin 430 upgraded to a 430W.
The Garmin installation manual specifically calls out both the type of cable
to be used (RGU 400 or 142) and the required length of that cable for the
430W installation.
The specific antenna cable length for the 430W installation is there to
provide the desired signal strength between the powered antenna and the
box -- not too strong, not too weak. The cable length that is excess to my
installation needs is just coiled up.
I don't know why the technician that you talked to was either ignorant of or
in violation of the installation manual instructions, but if you have his
name I would call back and ask him to clarify.
Please let us know what you learn.
'OC' Says: "The best investment we can make is the effort to gather and
understand knowledge."
------------------------------------
Time: 03:14:06 PM PST US
From: "Wayne Sweet" <w_sweet@comcast.net>
Subject: Avionics-List: Re-GPS Antenna Coax Length
When in doubt, go to the front end of the horse.
Straight from the "horse's mouth" (Garmin installation tech rep
913-397-8200); there is no requirement for either the GNS430 or GNS530W
minimum or maximum coax cable length.
Wayne
Message 2
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Z-12 and Z-13/20 features questions |
Buck,
I'll put my three cents in here.
Having wired two aiplanes as per Bob's drawings, I 've wonderd whether the E
buss concept was necessary. One wiring project was a velocity with a
B&c 40 amp alt on the vacuum pad, a 60 main with an E buss. It seems that
the only time one will have to use the E buss is 1. failure of the battery
contactor (and that's another issue ) or 2. failure of both alternators.
For that to happen your engine is probably not running!.
If your going to use a dual alternators, split the buses and eliminate the E
buss. Or, use a main buss and eliminate the E buss.
I'm wiring my RV9A and decided that all devices will go on the main buss.
In the event of an alt failure, pull the field breaker and if necessary,
turn off the battery contactor. Have a 50 to 60 amp breaker/switch from the
battery plus to the main buss. You become the E buss and shut down non
essentail devices--It takes about 5 to 10 seconds.
Close the breaker and you have an essential buss. It seems to me that at one
time or another, all these instruments are "essential" to flight.
Peter
>
> Hi Bob,
>
> To answer your questions, I'm considering installing an SD20 because,
> frankly, a). it's available and b). I'm comfortable with a bit of
> "overkill" when it comes to electrical power generation. Cost is simply
> not an issue, and weight-saving, while important to me, is secondary to
> building a robust electrical system. (As an aside, I'm saving over 30
> pounds from a "stock" RV-8 by using a lightweight composite prop and
> lightweight aluminum landing gear. Other improvements will save even more
> weight.)
>
> My airplane will be used for a lot of day VFR, but also some fairly
> regular IFR cross-country, and occassional night flying. It wil be
> highly-electrical dependent, with dual GRT EFIS displays, a backup Dynon
> D-10A, a Garmin 430, a Garmin SL-30, a Garmin 330 transponder, a PMA9000
> audio panel, and a Trutrak Digiflight II VSVG autopilot. Not all of these
> items are on the E-bus, of course, but some are.
>
> My concept of the E-bus (and I do NOT mind calling it an Essential Bus --
> it does not scare me or exude a negative connotation -- it's what every
> sophisticated airplane I've flown in 28 years calls it) is to cover the
> loads of the aircraft's important avionics and some carefully selected
> accessories while I comfortably divert to a suitable airport where
> maintenance can be undertaken. I do not necessarily want to continue to my
> planned destination -- that goes against my personal ideas of safety.
> (That topic is a whole other thread which I do not want to get into
> here...)
>
> So there you have it -- I guess I'm attracted to a 20-amp alternator
> because it exists; because installing one would allow me a margin of
> "comfortable operability" without utilizing my main battery's capacity one
> iota while I'm diverting to a suitable airport; and because cost is not
> part of the equation.
>
> So what remains in the equation are weight, complexity (number of parts,
> wires and connectors), and reliability.
>
> If you need to have a complete list of my E-bus loads, I'll certainly post
> them here in a day or so when I return home and consult my notebook...
>
> Thanks in advance. I truly appreciate all input on this matter.
>
> Buck
>
> --------
> Buck Wyndham
> RV-8 N18XL (working on fuselage & systems)
> Northern Illinois
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=148988#148988
>
>
>
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: Compass Requirements for FAA Inspection |
At 11:02 PM 11/27/2007 -0800, you wrote:
>
>While I agree with a lot of what you say, I must say that I once has a
>total electrical failure and my PAI vertical card compass sure came in
>handy to fly the reciprocal backs to Carson City from the middle of the
>Nevada desert
That's why I fly with dual, $100 hand-held
GPS receivers that do not depend on power
from the ship's electrical system.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Misc/Failure_Tolerance.pdf
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
Message 4
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Z-12 and Z-13/20 features questions |
At 07:58 AM 11/28/2007 -0500, you wrote:
><Dr.Laurence@mbdi.org>
>
>Buck,
>
>I'll put my three cents in here.
>
>Having wired two aiplanes as per Bob's drawings, I 've
>wonderd whether the E buss concept was necessary.
Not if you have design goals that eliminate it . . .
The concept of "necessary" is unique to individual
percepti
> One wiring project was a velocity with a B&c 40 amp alt on the vacuum
> pad, a 60 main with an E buss. It seems that the only time one will have
> to use the E buss is 1. failure of the battery contactor (and that's
> another issue ) or 2. failure of both alternators. For that to happen
> your engine is probably not running!.
Yup, that's figure Z-12 . . .
>If your going to use a dual alternators, split the buses and eliminate the
>E buss. Or, use a main buss and eliminate the E buss.
>I'm wiring my RV9A and decided that all devices will go on the main buss.
>In the event of an alt failure, pull the field breaker . . .
Your alternator field power doesn't go through the
ship's DC PWR MASTER switch?
> and if necessary, turn off the battery contactor.
. . . when would it be necesary? What indications
does the pilot get and how are they interpreted
to drive a decision to open the battery contactor?
>Have a 50 to 60 amp breaker/switch from the battery plus to the main buss.
????
>You become the E buss and shut down non essentail devices--It takes about
>5 to 10 seconds.
>Close the breaker and you have an essential buss. It seems to me that at
>one time or another, all these instruments are "essential" to flight.
The ENDURANCE-Bus is crafted for minimum power
consumption for battery only operations. In no
way is it intended or crafted to make any ESSENTIAL
device unavailable to the pilot. Further, piling
"all these instruments" into the classification
of "essential" suggests that everything on the
panel should have backups . . .
I respectfully suggest that (1) with modern
alternators and (2) artfully maintained RG
batteries that Z-11 offers DC SYSTEM reliability
that far exceeds that which is being flown
in tens of thousands of TC aircraft wired
like a 1970 C-150.
This condition exists irrespective of
the suite of devices installed or
which ones are deemed "essential".
If one does nothing other than to
exploit what modern alternators and
batteries have to offer, SYSTEM
reliability is at least equal to and
probably MUCH better than what's flying
in most light GA aircraft toay.
Exploiting an unused vacuum pump
pad by plugging the hole with something
other than a cover plate is icing on
the cake. An SD-8 alternator offers
ENDURANCE load support for a fist-
full of goodies for en-route operations
while retaining 100% of the well-
maintained battery's capacity for
approach to landing. An approach where EVERY
electro-whizzie in the airplane
is available for comfortable termination
of flight.
Note that all of the above makes no
mention of numbers, kinds or
"criticality" of any particular
piece of equipment. Crafting that
list (and deciding which bus to
drive it from) is driven by anticipate
missions to be flown, panel space and
weight issues and the size of one's
pocketbook.
But in no case, does the artfully
crafted, failure tolerant system
deprive the pilot of any piece of
functional equipment. Once the
alternator(s)/battery decisions are
are made, then it matters very little
what architecture is adopted.
This is where design goals should
strive to minimize weight, parts count
and pilot-duties for perceiving and
reacting to RARE failures of DC
PWR supply equipment.
Bob . . .
Message 5
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Z-12 and Z-13/20 features questions |
>
>Hi Bob,
>
>To answer your questions, I'm considering installing an SD20 because,
>frankly, a). it's available and b). I'm comfortable with a bit of
>"overkill" when it comes to electrical power generation. Cost is simply
>not an issue, and weight-saving, while important to me, is secondary to
>building a robust electrical system. (As an aside, I'm saving over 30
>pounds from a "stock" RV-8 by using a lightweight composite prop and
>lightweight aluminum landing gear. Other improvements will save even more
>weight.)
>
>My airplane will be used for a lot of day VFR, but also some fairly
>regular IFR cross-country, and occassional night flying. It wil be
>highly-electrical dependent, with dual GRT EFIS displays, a backup Dynon
>D-10A, a Garmin 430, a Garmin SL-30, a Garmin 330 transponder, a PMA9000
>audio panel, and a Trutrak Digiflight II VSVG autopilot. Not all of these
>items are on the E-bus, of course, but some are.
>
>My concept of the E-bus (and I do NOT mind calling it an Essential Bus --
>it does not scare me or exude a negative connotation -- it's what every
>sophisticated airplane I've flown in 28 years calls it) is to cover the
>loads of the aircraft's important avionics and some carefully selected
>accessories while I comfortably divert to a suitable airport where
>maintenance can be undertaken. I do not necessarily want to continue to my
>planned destination -- that goes against my personal ideas of safety.
>(That topic is a whole other thread which I do not want to get into here...)
>
>So there you have it -- I guess I'm attracted to a 20-amp alternator
>because it exists; because installing one would allow me a margin of
>"comfortable operability" without utilizing my main battery's capacity one
>iota while I'm diverting to a suitable airport; and because cost is not
>part of the equation.
>
>So what remains in the equation are weight, complexity (number of parts,
>wires and connectors), and reliability.
>
>If you need to have a complete list of my E-bus loads, I'll certainly post
>them here in a day or so when I return home and consult my notebook...
>
>Thanks in advance. I truly appreciate all input on this matter.
First, I'll suggest that your system should
be capable of continued flight to airport
of intended destination. Comfortable
completion of flight with a failed piece
of equipment is dependent upon planing
and understanding which leads to comfortable
decision making.
Yes, taking the family out to McD's with
$1,000 cash in hand assuages any concerns
about paying for the meal, but if you have
to traverse 30 miles of sparsely populated
terrain and have no spare tire, then your
cash comfort is overshadowed by your inability
to deal with an easily anticipated and
planned-for failure.
I'm only suggesting that your willingness
to pile on levels of comfort because you
have all this extra weight carrying ability
is 'easy' but perhaps not the best we know
how to do. I met an RV flyer at an airshow
some years ago with Z-14, dual EFIS (can
fly IFR from either seat) and the guy
said he wasn't instrument rated, didn't
fly with instrument rated passengers but
thought the system would improve on the
resale price of the airplane!
I'm only suggesting that the optimum design
minimizes weight, parts count, cost of
ownership and probability of pilot error
for failure management. Take care that
the "wad of hundreds in the wallet" don't
lull you into a false sense of security
while increasing overall cost of ownership
for your airplane.
Bob . . .
Message 6
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Z-12 and Z-13/20 features questions |
Thanks, Bob, for the information. I agree that money does not buy happiness and
does not cover for poor design or sloppy implementation.
Im back from my trip, and Ive looked up the information on my particular requirements.
My enroute E-Bus loads:
EFIS/MFD 1 1.5 A
EFIS/MFD 2 1.5 A
AHRS/Magnetometer 0.25 A
EIS (Engine Monitor) 0.5 A
Alt Field 1.0 A
TruTrak Autopilot head 0.5 A
A/P servo Roll 1.0 A
A/P servo Pitch 1.0 A
Garmin 430 NAV/GPS 1.65 A
Garmin 330 1.0 A
Flexible map light 0.1 A
TOTAL: 10.0
Wow, you say. I see some stuff that could be moved off the bus. Yes, youre right.
The total is 10 amps, but I could move one of the EFIS displays and the EIS
off the E-bus, for a savings of 2 amps. However, the Garmin 430 draws up to 6
amps (intermittent) when transmitting, so were back up to 14 already. I could
consider the transmit feature of the radio to be off-limits until I get on the
ground. Airplanes can certainly be flown without transmitting on the radio.
I could also delete the autopilot head and servos, and just hand-fly.
These modifications would definitely keep me below 8 amps. However, my stated goal
is to be able to SAFELY and COMFORTABLY fly the airplane IFR to the nearest
suitable place where repairs can be made. Coordinating my divert with ATC and
getting vectors and an approach clearance are part of the safety and comfort
clause, in my opinion. Therefore, I think that both the transponder and radio
should be part of an IFR E-Bus. Similarly, an autopilot is an invaluable tool
in an irregular operation such as this -- a partial electrical failure in IFR
conditions.
By the way, my Dynon D-10A is not listed because it has an internal battery.
So lets say I install a backup 7.2 Ah battery for my EFIS displays, the EIS, and
the AHRS (something Ive been contemplating doing anyway). Were still at over
12 amps when the comm radio is transmitting. See the issue? If I want my alternator
to easily handle the entire E-bus load, not share it with the main battery
at all, an 8A alternator appears to be too small to handle my particular IFR
panel, at least when transmitting.
VFR is a totally different story. I can safely recover a plane VFR (or even IFR
but good VMC) with a zero load on my E-Bus. Its when we get into the clouds that
an 8A alternator appears to be insufficient for my needs.
I dont want to debate what should or should not be on a persons E-bus that discussion
could go on for years (and has). People can justify whatever makes them
comfortable.
Am I wrong in thinking that Id like to save my ENTIRE main battery for the approach
and landing phase of my emergency? If so, then I have no problem with an
8A aux alternator. Somebody slap me around if I need to get off that particular
train of thought.
Finally, Bob, you have recently been talking down the Z-13/20, but mostly without
further comment just that it sucks. Since youre the guy who designed it, Ill
have to take your word for it. But before I abandon all my cool CAD drawings
and start over, it would be helpful to know a bit more about why youve soured
on it does the design have some missing functionality, less-than-optimal reliability,
or a hidden gotcha that a person should know about? Is it that you
disagree with peoples design requirements and that you feel no one should have
a need for more than an 8A endurance load? Is the SD20 not living up to peoples
expectations somehow? I havent seen any of these things addressed here in this
forum.
Whatever the answer is, its just fine with me. I have no particular attachment
to any one design. I just want to get the job done: a 10+ amp E-bus, provided
entirely by a standby alternator.
If the Z-12 is the answer, great.
But how about a little more information for all of us regarding the Z-13/20?
Thanks, as always, for your input!
Buck
--------
Buck Wyndham
RV-8 N18XL (working on fuselage & systems)
Northern Illinois
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=149148#149148
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 |
|
There are occasional questions about fusible links on the Aeroelectric.
Fusible links were common long ago, but lately engineers have eschewed them. I
have seen a demo online regarding what happens when a fusible link blows--the
wire inside vaporizes and the plasma arc blows through the covering. This is
not good in a bundle, or when fuel or flammables or conductive surfaces may be
present.
Usually instructions for making fusible links do include layers of non-flammable
silicone and fiber over-covering. The link covering may not be capable of enclosing
the rupture arc, especially since the rupture arc may occur (probably
will occur) near the ends.
So for those who have puzzled about the fusible link issue, here's my advice: Use
standard fuses/breakers or whatever instead. That's my plan.
"When trouble arises and things look bad,
there is always one individual who perceives
a solution and is willing to take command.
Very often, that individual is crazy.
--Dave Barry"
--------
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge, MA 01550
(508) 764-2072
emjones@charter.net
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=149151#149151
Message 8
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Compass Requirements for FAA Inspection |
Re-post of info per request.
Each item has three categories Day VFR, Night VFR, IFR (day or night). The format
is still messed up but it should go through
MINIMUM INSTRUMENT AND EQUIPMENT REQUIREMENTS
FOR POWERED AMATEUR BUILT EXPERIMENTAL AIRCRAFT
Introduction: The table below is intended to give the builder of amateur built
experimental
aircraft a ready reference for the instrument and equipment requirements for his
aircraft. The
builder should note that some items required by the FAR's are described in the
FAR's as
needing to be approved, but since there are no certification standards established
for amateur built experimental aircraft no formal individual item approval,
such as meeting a TSO (Technical Standard Order) or FAR Part 23, is required.
However certain items must interface properly with ATC (Air Traffic Control),
other aircraft, or other entities external to the aircraft. Transponders, communication
radios, exterior lighting and ELT's (Emergency
Locator Transmitters) are examples of such equipment. Therefore, the builder can
expect that the initial airworthiness inspection of his aircraft will require
evidence that this type of
equipment in the aircraft is acceptable to the FAA.
The Special Airworthiness Certificate issued for each amateur built experimental
aircraft
includes specific Operating Limitations. Per FAA Order 8130.2F the Operating Limitations
state: "After completion of Phase I flight testing, unless appropriately equipped
for night
and/or instrument flight in accordance with 91.205, this aircraft is to be operated
under VFR,
day only." The FAR's, FAA Order 8130.2F, and current FAA policy have been used
in
constructing the below amateur built experimental aircraft configuration requirements
table.
THIS TABLE DOES NOT PROVIDE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR BEST PRACTICES.
INSTALLING ONLY THE MINIMUM REQUIRED ITEMS MAY NOT BE PRUDENT OR
SAFE.
By Owen C. Baker with appreciation to Richard E. Koehler.
MINIMUM INSTRUMENT AND EQUIPMENT REQUIREMENTS
FOR POWERED AMATEUR BUILT EXPERIMENTAL AIRCRAFT
FAR & ITEM DESCRIPTION (See Notes Below Table)
(DAY VFR) (NIGHT VFR) (IFR)
1. 91.205 (b) (1) Airspeed Indicator NR R R
2. 91.205 (b) (2) Altimeter NR R R
3. 91.205 (b) (3) Magnetic Direction Indicator NR R R
4. 91.205 (b) (4) Tachometer for Each Engine NR R R
5. 91.205 (b) (5) Oil Pressure Gauge for Each Engine
Using a Pressure System NR R R
6. 91.205 (b) (6) Temperature Gauge for Each
Liquid Cooled Engine NR R R
7. 91.205 (b) (7) Oil Temperature Gauge for Each
Air Cooled Engine NR R R
8. 91.205 (b) (8) Manifold Pressure Gauge for
Each Altitude Engine NR R R
9. 91.205 (b) (9) Fuel Gauge Indicating Quantity of Fuel
In Each Tank NR R R
10. 91.205 (b) (10) Landing Gear Position Indicator, If Retractable NR R R
11. 91.205 (b) (11) Anti-Collision Light System -
(Small civil airplanes certified after 3/11/96) NR R R
12. 91.205 (b) (13) Approved Safety Belts With Metal to Metal
Buckles for Each Occupant (2 yrs or older) NR R R
13. 91.205 (b) (14) Approved Shoulder Harness for Each Front
Seat - For Small Civil Airplanes Manufactured After 7/18/78 NR R R
14. 91.205 (b) (15) ELT (If required by Sec. 91.207, i.e. >one seat
and >50 miles) AR AR AR
15. 91.205 (b) (16) Approved Shoulder Harness for Each Seat -
Airplanes With 9 or Less Seats Manufactured After 12/12/86 NR R R
16. 91.205 (b) (17) Shoulder Harness for Each Seat For
Rotorcraft - Manufactured After 9/16/92 NR R R
17. 91.205 (c) (2) Approved Position (navigation) Lights NR R R
18. 91.205 (c) (3) Anti-Collision Light System
(Systems installed after 8/11/71- see reference) NR R R
19. 91.205 (c) (5) Adequate Source of Electrical Energy for
Installed Equipment NR R R
20. 91.205 (c) (6) One Spare Set of Fuses or Three Fuses
of Each Kind Required, Must be Accessible to Pilot In Flight NR R R
21. 91.205 (d) (2) Two-Way Radio Communication System and
Navigational Equipment Appropriate to Ground Facilities Used NR NR R
22. 91.205 (d) (3) Gyroscopic Rate of Turn Indicator
(Some Exceptions, See Reference) NR NR R
23. 91.205 (d) (4) Slip-Skid Indicator NR NR R
24. 91.205 (d) (5) Sensitive Altimeter Adjustable for
Barometric Pressure, (See FAR 91.411, Altimeter System
Inspection Required Every 24 Calendar Months) NR NR R
25. 91.205 (d) (6) Clock Displaying Hours, Minutes, and Seconds -
Sweep Second Pointer or Digital NR NR R
26. 91.205 (d) (7) Electrical Generator or Alternator
of Adequate Capacity NR NR R
27. 91.205 (d) (8) Gyroscopic Bank and Pitch Indicator
(Artificial Horizon) NR NR R
28. 91.205 (d) (9) Gyroscopic Direction Indicator
(Directional Gyro or Equivalent) NR NR R
29. 91.205 (e) DME Above FL 240 N/A N/A AR
30. 91.215, Transponder in Certain Airspace, (See FAR 91.413,
Inspection Required Every 24 Calendar Months) AR AR AR
Notes:
(1) AR = As Required, NR = Not Required, N/A = Not Applicable, R = Required
(2) A fourth flight operation category, Day (only) Instruments, is not included
above.
ABEA Minimum Inst Requirements 7.doc 11/17/2005
---------------------------------
Get easy, one-click access to your favorites. Make Yahoo! your homepage.
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: Compass Requirements for FAA Inspection |
In a message dated 11/28/2007 12:56:46 PM Central Standard Time,
gmcjetpilot@yahoo.com writes:
Therefore, the builder can expect that the initial airworthiness inspection
of his aircraft will require evidence that this type of
equipment in the aircraft is acceptable to the FAA.
Regurgitating the FARs is most likely deja-vu to most builders. "Evidence"
here is just as open to interpretation as the result of what King James did to
the "Bible". Still best to find out how your DAR reads chapter&verse. You
spent years of your life building the sumbitch, why crash&burn on judgement day?
Mark (Ohhhhmmmmm..........)
**************************************Check out AOL's list of 2007's hottest
products.
(http://money.aol.com/special/hot-products-2007?NCID=aoltop00030000000001)
Message 10
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Compass Requirements for FAA Inspection |
Hi folks
does anyone know how to go about to ***Unsubscribe to this email mailing li
st****** Please help, Thanks
From: Fiveonepw@aol.comDate: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 00:54:01 -0500Subject: Re: Ae
roElectric-List: Re: Compass Requirements for FAA InspectionTo: aeroelectri
c-list@matronics.com
In a message dated 11/28/2007 12:56:46 PM Central Standard Time, gmcjetpilo
t@yahoo.com writes:
Therefore, the builder can expect that the initial airworthiness inspection
of his aircraft will require evidence that this type of equipment in the a
ircraft is acceptable to the FAA.
Regurgitating the FARs is most likely deja-vu to most builders. "Evidence"
here is just as open to interpretation as the result of what King James di
d to the "Bible". Still best to find out how your DAR reads chapter&verse.
You spent years of your life building the sumbitch, why crash&burn on judg
ement day?
Mark (Ohhhhmmmmm..........)
Check out AOL Money & Finance's list of the hottest products and top money
wasters of 2007.
_________________________________________________________________
Put your friends on the big screen with Windows Vista=AE + Windows Live=99.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/shop/specialoffers.mspx?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_C
PC_MediaCtr_bigscreen_102007
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! --
|