Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:17 AM - Lightspeed III & DPS smart Tach, signal issue help? ()
2. 06:42 AM - Lightspeed III & DPS smart Tach, signal issue help? (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
3. 06:43 AM - Re: Re: Brownout Battery System P.S. (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
4. 06:51 AM - Re: ELT Antenna for Fiberglass aircraft (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
5. 07:15 AM - Re: ELT Antenna for Fiberglass aircraft (Bill Denton)
6. 08:19 AM - Subject: Re: Re: Brownout Battery System P.S. (Terry Frazier)
7. 09:14 AM - A36 wiring diagram (Greg Young)
8. 10:27 AM - Re: Brownout Battery System P.S. (Nick Gautier)
9. 11:27 AM - Re: Subject: Re: Re: Brownout Battery System P.S. (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
10. 11:27 AM - Re: A36 wiring diagram (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
11. 02:26 PM - Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 25 Msgs - 04/22/08 (CardinalNSB@aol.com)
12. 04:06 PM - Re: Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 25 Msgs - 04/22/08 (BobsV35B@aol.com)
13. 04:42 PM - Re: Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 25 Msgs - 04/22/08 (Hinde, Frank George (Corvallis))
14. 05:24 PM - Re: Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 25 Msgs - 04/22/08 (Matt Prather)
15. 06:36 PM - Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 28 Msgs - 04/21/08 (Lee Logan)
16. 08:15 PM - Hope someone can point me in the right direction for troubleshooting. (Bill Bradburry)
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: | Lightspeed III & DPS smart Tach, signal issue help? |
Does any one have experience getting a DSP smart tach to work with a LS Plasma
III?
I am helping a guy out with his new Lightspeed III ignition. My analysis the
LS signal is not compatible in stock form to drive the DPS tach.
He wants to use his DPS smart tach (they are out of business BTW). Here is the
issue.
The new ignition LS Plasma III has a tach signal of a square tooth wave from
0 volt to +10 volts amplitude with a duration of 1.5ms. It fires two times per
revolution. OK its a hall effect signal a digital OFF/ON.
Here is the issue, the tach was triggered with a sensor in the access hole of
a magneto. It detected the internal rotating magnet in the magneto. Unlike a
typical magnetic inductive signal (alternating) it states in the installation
manual, voltage sits at a constant +5 volts and when the magnet passes the sensor,
the voltage momentary drops to 0.70 volts. How it looks on a scope I don't
know, probably rounded or spike.
I need to go from the LS's positive square wave signal to a volt drop signal
that is not so square wave, basically inverting the wave.
Is there some easy circuit off the top of your head to convert these two wave
forms, condition the signal? I'm thinking an Op amp, diode and a cap and R or
two.
I'm drawing a blank. The DSP tach does have selection of pulse per rotation.
Taking the tach apart to mod it is not on the table (yet). Access to the schematics
is not likely. May be it is time he bought a new tach?
Thanks George
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
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: | Lightspeed III & DPS smart Tach, signal issue help? |
At 12:12 AM 4/23/2008 -0700, you wrote:
><?xml:namespace prefix = mailto />Does any one have experience getting a
>DSP smart tach to work with a LS Plasma III?
>
>I am helping a guy out with his new Lightspeed III ignition. My analysis
>the LS signal is not compatible in stock form to drive the DPS tach.
>
>He wants to use his DPS smart tach (they are out of business BTW). Here is
>the issue.
>
>The new ignition LS Plasma III has a tach signal of a square tooth wave
>from 0 volt to +10 volts amplitude with a duration of 1.5ms. It fires two
>times per revolution. OK its a hall effect signal a digital OFF/ON.
>
>Here is the issue, the tach was triggered with a sensor in the access hole
>of a magneto. It detected the internal rotating magnet in the magneto.
>Unlike a typical magnetic inductive signal (alternating) it states in the
>installation manual, voltage sits at a constant +5 volts and when the
>magnet passes the sensor, the voltage momentary drops to 0.70 volts. How
>it looks on a scope I don't know, probably rounded or spike.
>
>I need to go from the LS's positive square wave signal to a volt drop
>signal that is not so square wave, basically inverting the wave.
Was the original DSP sensor a two-wire or three-wire device?
I've seen through-the-housing aircraft magneto tach sensors
in both formats. The three wire devices are always hall effect
sensors that output a digital friendly, square waveform. If
it was a two-wire device, then it's probably a variable reluctance
sensor . . . a coil of wire wound on a central bias magnet.
The the output from these devices is a digitally unfriendly,
one-cycle per event ground referenced waveform not unlike that
illustrated in Figure 2 of this document.
http://cache.national.com/ds/LM/LM1815.pdf
Usually, the input circuitry for a device expecting a
variable reluctance input signal are capable of
properly responding to a single pulse having
nicely squared edges. But there may be a DC bias
issue presents an offset issue.
Put a 1K resistor across the input to the tach and
then look at DC voltage on both ends of the
resistor. If there is no obvious DC common mode
voltage, then check resistance of each end of
resistor to ground. Hopefully, one end is tied to
ground. If so, then the OTHER end is your real
signal input lead. If there is a measurable
DC voltage and/or neither end of the sensor input
runs at ground, then there's a possibility that
the tachometer expects a floating signal sensor
with some DC continuity and that unlike the
tach chip described above, needs to be spoofed
into believing that the ground referenced, digital
pulse from LS ignition is a variable reluctance
sensor.
The easiest way to craft an interface box is
on the bench. Set up a signal generator to
emulate the output of the LS ignition.
The 555 timer based r/c servo tester is also
suitable. See page 7 of:
http://www.princeton.edu/~mae412/TEXT/NTRAK2002/292-302.pdf
. . . except in this case, you want to vary
the period of the timing pulses (Adjust R3 in
diagram) as opposed to adjusting pulse width
(R2).
>
>Is there some easy circuit off the top of your head to convert these two
>wave forms, condition the signal? I'm thinking an Op amp, diode and a cap
>and R or two.
If the DSP tach expects a dc-continuity through
a sensor with floating ground, you might experiment
with transformer coupling a buffered version
of the LS tach signal. Something like the top sketch
at . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/_temp/LS-DSP_Interface.pdf
. . . offers a foundation for a working solution.
If all it needs is an inverter, then the lower
sketch is a starting point.
>
>I'm drawing a blank. The DSP tach does have selection of pulse per
>rotation. Taking the tach apart to mod it is not on the table (yet).
>Access to the schematics is not likely. May be it is time he bought a new tach?
That is probably the least expensive in terms of
$time$. Even after you solve the electronic problem,
there are issues of packaging, installation and
the specter of unanticipated future issues with respect
to EMC, etc.
It's up to all the participants involved to put
value on their $time$ and to assess return on
investment.
Bob . . .
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: Brownout Battery System P.S. |
At 09:02 PM 4/22/2008 -0700, you wrote:
>> If you have an SD-8 in addition to the ship's main alternator,
>> then you essentially enjoy unlimited e-bus endurance irrespective
>> of the capacity of the ship's battery.
>>
>> Z-13 lets you run a battery until it doesn't crank the engine
>> any more. Battery only endurance is not part of the "plan-B".
>>
>> Bob . . .
>
>Understood. Per other thread, I do have an SD-20S for backup ALT, so the
>plan C,D,E... AUX battery addition here is not compelling, as you suggest.
>
>However, if I do have to go to the E-bus, perhaps due to a stuck starter,
??? how do you get a stuck starter contactor in flight?
> . . .requiring shutdown of the main contactor even with an alternator
> still available, then battery endurance may be an issue, even if not a
> worry. Other than that, I might want independent capacity for ground ops
> (light, audio, radios, gizmos...) in the boonies with this mini bush
> plane. Those are probably the only things that would lead me to commit 6
> lbs. (+/-) to an AUX battery system.
Agreed.
Bob . . .
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: | ELT Antenna for Fiberglass aircraft |
At 10:43 PM 4/22/2008 -0400, you wrote:
>
>Thanks for the feedback. I found two options at
>http://www.wingsandwheels.com/page14.htm One option is to attach a
>surface mount BNC connector, add a simple ground plane over the top and
>stick on a rubber duck. The fancy option is $108.00
>
>Glenn
A rubber duck for VHF hand held is optimized for
VHF and has no specified/controlled performance at
406 Mhz. One can only guess at the Artex ELT product
but one would like to believe that a qualified ELT
product includes a multi-frequency antenna.
If you're willing to go the VHF comm antenna route,
then consider the Morris loop described at:
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/Morris_Com_Loop_Antenna.pdf
This will out-perform a 125 Mhz optimized rubber duck
at all frequencies of interest for ELT performance.
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: | ELT Antenna for Fiberglass aircraft |
JFTR: The Artex 406mHz ELT TSO requires the use of one of the Artex
antennas.
You might want to keep this in mind before deviating...
Thanks!
Bill Denton
bdenton@bdenton.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L.
Nuckolls, III
Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2008 8:48 AM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: ELT Antenna for Fiberglass aircraft
<nuckolls.bob@cox.net>
At 10:43 PM 4/22/2008 -0400, you wrote:
>
>Thanks for the feedback. I found two options at
>http://www.wingsandwheels.com/page14.htm One option is to attach a
>surface mount BNC connector, add a simple ground plane over the top and
>stick on a rubber duck. The fancy option is $108.00
>
>Glenn
A rubber duck for VHF hand held is optimized for
VHF and has no specified/controlled performance at
406 Mhz. One can only guess at the Artex ELT product
but one would like to believe that a qualified ELT
product includes a multi-frequency antenna.
If you're willing to go the VHF comm antenna route,
then consider the Morris loop described at:
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/Morris_Com_Loop_Antenna.pdf
This will out-perform a 125 Mhz optimized rubber duck
at all frequencies of interest for ELT performance.
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: Brownout Battery System P.S. |
I'm building a 7A with a somewhat modified z19 system. I'll probably use
both 16ah batteries to start, so I am concerned about EFIS (GRT) brownout
too. I've been thinking for some time that the brownout situation might be
solved with a large capacitor wired to feed the EFIS for a short time. I
see very large capacitors (1 Farad for $40) advertised for the car stereo
crowd. I think they use them to limit voltage variations while they are
trying to blow out everyone's eardrums...
What do you think?
Terry
Message 7
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | A36 wiring diagram |
Does anyone have a wiring diagram for an A36 Bonanza? I've got a FWF from a
1997 A36 and am putting it in my Navion (STC for the engine/prop). It comes
with the 5 engine instruments which all have unique stamped numbers on their
harnesses. They were cut when removed and I need to identify those numbers.
Aside from reconnecting them to the sensors I need to add them to my wiring
diagram. I only need the page or pages that deal with the engine instruments
(MP, RPM, Oil Temp/Press, Fuel Flow & EGT/CHT). Any help is appreciated.
Regards,
Greg Young
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: Brownout Battery System P.S. |
Bob,
I looked at your Z13-8B(BrownOutBattery).pdf. It seems to me
that the only reason not to hook a battery like the Panasonic LC-R127R2P
directly to the endurance bus and do away with the brown-out
battery relay, alternate feed relay and the E-bus alternate feed switch
is that the battery won't charge properly through the diode
connecting the main bus to the endurance bus. However, what if you use
a shottky diode for the main bus/endurance bus connection?
The power shottky on the Perihelion Design site apparently has about
0.2v forward drop. The Panasonic spec sheet you pointed to says, if I
read it right, that the battery needs 13.6-13.8 v terminal voltage to trickle
charge. So the brown-out battery should stay charged OK if the alternator
is regulated to supply more than 14.0 v, which I understand it has to do to
keep the main battery charged.
Am I missing something simple (or subtle) that makes this not work or
a bad idea?
Nick Gautier
RV-10, in progress
At 06:59:06 AM PST US 4/22/2008 you wrote:
> I've been pondering this discussion for the last day or so and
> I wasn't pleased with the lack of elegance. It seemed that your
> design goals were not well served with the present suite of hardware
> (too heavy).
~snip~
> So what's a reasonable middle ground? Take a peek at:
>
> Take a peek at this drawing I did last night:
>http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Adobe_Architecture_Pdfs/Z13-8A(BrownOutBattery).pdf
> Here I've suggested that you dump the #2 fat battery and
> the fat contactors associated with #2 master and crossfeed.
> Install a much smaller (7.2 AH, 5.5# 0.04 ohm) "brownout
> battery" and a pair of cube power relays wired such that
> the e-bus is supported ONLY by the brownout battery during
> engine cranking and only while the main bus is loaded so
> heavily that it cannot keep the EFIS from resetting.
~snip~
> P.S. Here's an exemplar battery that seems well suited to
> this task:
>http://aeroelectric.com/Mfgr_Data/Batteries/Panasonic/LC-R127R2P.pdf
> Bob . . .
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: Brownout Battery System P.S. |
At 08:14 AM 4/23/2008 -0700, you wrote:
><fraziernv@earthlink.net>
>
>I'm building a 7A with a somewhat modified z19 system. I'll probably use
>both 16ah batteries to start, so I am concerned about EFIS (GRT) brownout
>too. I've been thinking for some time that the brownout situation might be
>solved with a large capacitor wired to feed the EFIS for a short time. I
>see very large capacitors (1 Farad for $40) advertised for the car stereo
>crowd. I think they use them to limit voltage variations while they are
>trying to blow out everyone's eardrums...
>
>What do you think?
A 1F capacitor impressed with 1A of current flow changes
voltage at 1 volt / second. Okay, supporting an EFIS system
that draws say 5A from brownout works out to this kind
of scenario:
Capacitor charge start point 12.5V
EFIS barfs at say 9V so assume .5 volt of headroom
and we don't want voltage to fall below 9.5 volts
for an allowable delta of 3 volts.
With a 5 volt per second decay on the support capacitor
(5A and 1F) we have 3/5 or 0.6 seconds to get the
supply voltage back above 9.5v + 0.7v (diode
isolation) = 10.2 volts. Probably not an unreasonable
thing to do electrically.
The other consideration is weight and volume of
the installed capacitor and associated switchgear.
A battery is probably smaller and lighter but has
a cost of ownership in maintenance.
Consider this. What's the real downside for cranking
the engine before you start up the EFIS system? The
corollary to that question is what's the hazard to
hardware or operation of the system by having the
EFIS system reboot?
This is an excellent illustration of the gyrations
that system designers go through in sifting all
the combinations of simple-ideas in search of the
elegant solution. You define "elegant" any way
you like.
Now, here's another combination of simple-ideas:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Schematics/Brown-Out_Protection_1.pdf
I built this device to protect a Unisom electronic
ignition system about 10 years ago. It's a simple boost
supply that you put in series with the protected system
that operates only while the engine is cranking. It's
boosts battery-only supply voltage by approximately 3
volts and becomes a passive 0.7 volt constant drop
when the engine is not cranking.
Let's say you're protecting a 5A load again. This
means the power supply is tailored for 15 watts
of load. It can be fabricated in less than 3 cubic
inches of volume and under 5 ounces. Since it's
active only while the engine is cranking, all the
DO-160 issues with respect to EMC go away.
Perhaps this fits the definition of elegant solution
for a variety of projects.
Bob . . .
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: A36 wiring diagram |
At 11:09 AM 4/23/2008 -0500, you wrote:
>Does anyone have a wiring diagram for an A36 Bonanza? I've got a FWF from
>a 1997 A36 and am putting it in my Navion (STC for the engine/prop). It
>comes with the 5 engine instruments which all have unique stamped numbers
>on their harnesses. They were cut when removed and I need to identify
>those numbers. Aside from reconnecting them to the sensors I need to add
>them to my wiring diagram. I only need the page or pages that deal with
>the engine instruments (MP, RPM, Oil Temp/Press, Fuel Flow & EGT/CHT). Any
>help is appreciated.
>
I can probably get them. They're on the Hawker-Beech
dealer data website. In fact, I'm not sure I don't
have the a36 drawings in a project file I compiled during
a development program some years ago. Let me thrash around
and see what I can find.
Bob . . .
Message 11
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 25 Msgs - 04/22/08 |
...B) Decide that violation of 91.217 is an acceptable risk and feed the
transponder from the non TSO'd altitude encoder contained in the Dynon
unit.....
Well, how does one decide that the real physical risk of a non-TSO's over a
TSO product is acceptable? How could I, even if I understood all the tso
testing and general electronics manufacturing business, make fact based
assessments as to the reliability of any electronic equipment unless I had a lab
and
testing lab essentially?
I'm sure there is anecdotal evidence of the Dynon's reliability. And I
understand we might want to behave in ways that mitigate against a single failure
ruining my day. But in a pinch, what tells me to trust one instrument over
another in a serious moment, especially when the error is not so great to be
obvious? Skip
**************Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car
listings at AOL Autos.
(http://autos.aol.com/used?NCID=aolcmp00300000002851)
Message 12
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 25 Msgs - 04/22/08 |
Good Evening Skip,
Do you intend to have only the Dynon for altitude information?
I will not be flying IFR without having a standard altimeter for reference,
but that is part of my risk assessment.
Here is my thought trail.
What harm will befall me if the Dynon sends false information to the
transponder?
Or, --- What harm will befall me if the Dynon does not send any data to the
transponder?
When I have had a transponder send bad data (From fully certified and TSO'd
equipment by the way) to the FEDs, they have told me about it and asked that
I turn off the altitude function.
So far, that has seemed to be within the acceptable risk that I am willing
to take.
Whadda Ya think?
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
628 West 86th Street
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8502
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
In a message dated 4/23/2008 4:28:31 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
CardinalNSB@aol.com writes:
...B) Decide that violation of 91.217 is an acceptable risk and feed the
transponder from the non TSO'd altitude encoder contained in the Dynon
unit.....
Well, how does one decide that the real physical risk of a non-TSO's over a
TSO product is acceptable? How could I, even if I understood all the tso
testing and general electronics manufacturing business, make fact based
assessments as to the reliability of any electronic equipment unless I had a lab
and
testing lab essentially?
I'm sure there is anecdotal evidence of the Dynon's reliability. And I
understand we might want to behave in ways that mitigate against a single failure
ruining my day. But in a pinch, what tells me to trust one instrument over
another in a serious moment, especially when the error is not so great to be
obvious? Skip
**************Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car
listings at AOL Autos.
(http://autos.aol.com/used?NCID=aolcmp00300000002851)
Message 13
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 25 Msgs - 04/22/08 |
works for me...But so far my Dynon has been flawless...
Frank RV7a IFR
________________________________
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectr
ic-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of BobsV35B@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2008 4:01 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 25 Msgs - 04/
22/08
Good Evening Skip,
Do you intend to have only the Dynon for altitude information?
I will not be flying IFR without having a standard altimeter for reference,
but that is part of my risk assessment.
Here is my thought trail.
What harm will befall me if the Dynon sends false information to the transp
onder?
Or, --- What harm will befall me if the Dynon does not send any data to the
transponder?
When I have had a transponder send bad data (From fully certified and TSO'd
equipment by the way) to the FEDs, they have told me about it and asked th
at I turn off the altitude function.
So far, that has seemed to be within the acceptable risk that I am willing
to take.
Whadda Ya think?
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
AKA
Bob Siegfried
Ancient Aviator
628 West 86th Street
Downers Grove, IL 60516
630 985-8502
Stearman N3977A
Brookeridge Air Park LL22
In a message dated 4/23/2008 4:28:31 P.M. Central Daylight Time, CardinalNS
B@aol.com writes:
...B) Decide that violation of 91.217 is an acceptable risk and feed the
transponder from the non TSO'd altitude encoder contained in the Dynon unit
.....
Well, how does one decide that the real physical risk of a non-TSO's over a
TSO product is acceptable? How could I, even if I understood all the tso
testing and general electronics manufacturing business, make fact based ass
essments as to the reliability of any electronic equipment unless I had a l
ab and testing lab essentially?
I'm sure there is anecdotal evidence of the Dynon's reliability. And I und
erstand we might want to behave in ways that mitigate against a single fail
ure ruining my day. But in a pinch, what tells me to trust one instrument
over another in a serious moment, especially when the error is not so great
to be obvious? Skip
________________________________
Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car listings at A
OL Autos<http://autos.aol.com/used?NCID=aolcmp00300000002851>.
Message 14
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 25 Msgs - 04/22/08 |
Right on, Bob..
I would argue that using the Dynon as the Txp encoder lowers overall risk
as compared to having a standalone encoder. Even if the baro sensor in
the Dynon isn't "as good" as the one from AmeriKing (yeah right..). For
one thing, should the Dynon display provide the primary altitude
information to the pilot, if the altitude readout gets weird, the pilot
will know it fairly quickly under most circumstances. If the airplane has
a backup Kohlsmann.
With the vast majority of standalone encoders feeding their output only to
the Txp, the pilot won't know there's a problem unless ATC complains.
Many VFR pilots never talk to ATC, but often their airplanes are equipped
and hence must operate transponders squawking altitude. If the encoder
fails the day after they leave the radio shop, they'll fly two years
reporting the wrong altitude to ATC and TCAS boxes before the problem is
detected.. It happens, and apparently it's not generally terribly
hazardous.
My preference would be a Dynon (or something similar) driving the Txp and
a GPS unit that displays altitude data. I realize they won't line up very
closely due to temperature issues, but I'm not worried about being +/-300
ft.
Another idea (which is likely not new/unique) is to have the EFIS compare
the GPS altitude against baro altitude (calculating/compensating for
measured temperature) and flash a warning any time there's a noteworthy
discrepancy. Easy to implement, and will help keep me from forgetting to
enter the proper baro setting into the EFIS (either at flight start or
after having flown several hours - through weather systems). And it
should catch rare cases where the EFIS's baro sensor has gone south -
keeping the Txp data clean.
Regards,
Matt-
> Good Evening Skip,
>
>
> Do you intend to have only the Dynon for altitude information?
>
>
> I will not be flying IFR without having a standard altimeter for
> reference,
> but that is part of my risk assessment.
>
> Here is my thought trail.
>
>
> What harm will befall me if the Dynon sends false information to the
> transponder?
>
> Or, --- What harm will befall me if the Dynon does not send any data to
> the
> transponder?
>
> When I have had a transponder send bad data (From fully certified and
> TSO'd
> equipment by the way) to the FEDs, they have told me about it and asked
> that
> I turn off the altitude function.
>
> So far, that has seemed to be within the acceptable risk that I am willing
> to take.
>
> Whadda Ya think?
>
> Happy Skies,
>
> Old Bob
> AKA
> Bob Siegfried
> Ancient Aviator
> 628 West 86th Street
> Downers Grove, IL 60516
> 630 985-8502
> Stearman N3977A
> Brookeridge Air Park LL22
>
>
> In a message dated 4/23/2008 4:28:31 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
> CardinalNSB@aol.com writes:
>
>
> ...B) Decide that violation of 91.217 is an acceptable risk and feed the
> transponder from the non TSO'd altitude encoder contained in the Dynon
> unit.....
>
>
> Well, how does one decide that the real physical risk of a non-TSO's over
> a
> TSO product is acceptable? How could I, even if I understood all the tso
> testing and general electronics manufacturing business, make fact based
> assessments as to the reliability of any electronic equipment unless I
> had a lab and
> testing lab essentially?
>
> I'm sure there is anecdotal evidence of the Dynon's reliability. And I
> understand we might want to behave in ways that mitigate against a single
> failure
> ruining my day. But in a pinch, what tells me to trust one instrument
> over
> another in a serious moment, especially when the error is not so great to
> be
> obvious? Skip
>
>
> **************Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used
> car
> listings at AOL Autos.
> (http://autos.aol.com/used?NCID=aolcmp00300000002851)
>
Message 15
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 28 Msgs - 04/21/08 |
Great responses to my inquiry on the utility of a battery bus (or not);
thanks to all who contributed. Confirms my suspicions. I don't believe I
have any "keep alive" requirements and I have a hot wired "pig tail" routed
where I can readily charge the battery and/or power the avionics for
extended periods on the ground, if need be. No dome light in a slider
canopy, etc. etc.
Thanks again for the help...
Lee...
Message 16
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Hope someone can point me in the right direction for |
troubleshooting.
I have come upon a problem. My plane is wired per Z-19 with two batteries.
Everything has been working fine. A couple of days ago, I started the
installation of my radios. To do so, I had to lean my panel forward to gain
access to the back.
When I next started the engine, I could hear what sounded like a loose strap
blowing and hitting against the bottom of the plane. I have since found
that this sound is caused by one of the solenoids making a clicking noise.
This sound would go away if I turned the alternator off, but the alternator
was outputting power when it was on. The next day, I found that I could not
get the alternator to output power at all. But.the clicking sound was gone!
I removed both the alternator and voltage regulator and had them checked.
Both are working.Just not on my plane!
I am suspicious that I either have a hot wire loose or a ground has come
off. Does it sound to any of you like this could be the problem?
I will check for that tomorrow, but then I will be completely out of ideas
as to what to try.
Maybe someone can help here?
Bill B
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! --
|