Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 06:46 AM - Re: Drilling Switch holes in aluminum? (n801bh@netzero.com)
2. 08:12 AM - Re: Re: Bridge Diodes use (Ernest Christley)
3. 09:00 AM - Re: Creation Of Wiring Diagram (tsts4)
4. 09:31 AM - Re: Re: Bridge Diodes use (Richard Dudley)
5. 03:39 PM - Re: Loran to VHF (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
6. 04:18 PM - Re: Re: Bridge Diodes use (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
7. 04:25 PM - Re: Re: Bridge Diodes use (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
8. 04:36 PM - Re: Problem with Turbo CAD (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
9. 04:54 PM - Re: Re: Bridge Diodes use (Matt Prather)
10. 06:23 PM - Re: Boost pumps (Joe)
11. 07:10 PM - DB25 tap adapter (Alan Adamson)
12. 07:42 PM - Re: Loran to VHF (B Tomm)
13. 08:12 PM - Re: Boost pumps (Dennis Jones)
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: Drilling Switch holes in aluminum? |
I also used a unibit.. Worked perfect for me.
do not archive
Ben Haas
N801BH
www.haaspowerair.com
-- Kevin Horton <khorton01@rogers.com> wrote:
On 11 Jun 2008, at 14:38, Ron Shannon wrote:On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 10:0
0 AM, Robert Feldtman <bobf@feldtman.com> wrote:
wouldn't the 1/2 inch do? 15/32 is only slightly smaller, I bet it would
work fine. ....
Actually, the S700 series switches are already a bit loose in the mfgr.'
s recommended 15/32" hole. Consequently, I would prefer to follow the ve
ndor's recommendation and not mount them even more loosely.
I used a Unibit step drill that had a 15/32 step. It did an excellent j
ob - the switches fit very well.
--Kevin HortonRV-8 (FInal Assembly)Ottawa, Canadahttp://www.kilohotel.co
m/rv8
========================
========================
========================
========================
========================
========================
=======
____________________________________________________________
Click now and invest wisely with these mutual fund resources!
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2241/fc/Ioyw6i4ujza1iQQNV1n6oUjE5
deQtqoqDvjAfNa0rd05n3Qkv7H0jX/
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: Bridge Diodes use |
ptrotter@optonline.net wrote:
> Yes, you can parallel the diode with a switch as a direct E-bus feed, but I
don't want that voltage drop in normal operations either.
>
Why? I can understand you being bothered by the idea that something is
just wasting power. Great. Fix that. That's what's beautiful about
getting away from the FAA that would dictate what you can do. But after
swapping out the FWB, don't bother giving a big sigh of relief and
proclaiming that you just saved someone's life. All you did was scratch
and itch, not cure world hunger.
> Just because something has worked well for years does not mean that newer products
that perform better are not available today. While the FWB is a nice package
for mounting and wiring, it is no longer the best product for the application.
If we were to continue to think this way, there would be no innovation
and we would all be running steam gauges rather than EFIS systems. In all these
discussions, I have never seen anybody make a statement that a plain diode
is the best solution, only that it is adequate. Adequate in not good enough
for me if a better solution is available. It is somewhat contradictory to install
a 21st centrury flight instument system connected to a 1950's technology
power system.
>
You'll need to define "best". The BEST I know how to do would be to
save up $10K to have someone else paint my airplane. That would be the
BEST. But it ain't gonna happen. I'll be painting it in my garage,
with my $50 Harbor Freight HVLP gun, and with chemicals that are not
guaranteed to kill my family and neighbors. That is adequate.
Sufficient. Gets the job done. Then I'll go flying. (The $50 gun did
an excellent job with the Polyfiber chemicals on my airplanes belly and
control surfaces, BTW. The only problem was the MEK destroyed the can's
seal.)
The requirement for change isn't to prove the old method inadequate.
The requirement is to prove the new method superior. "Superior"
includes not just minor esoteric operating benefits, but acquisition,
build complexity, cost, and whatever else someone might be concerned
about. I say the EFIS is better because it is lighter, more reliable,
easier to build into the plane, easier to source (one piece vs several)
and cheaper. I'll be buying a Dynon very soon now (I've installed their
mounting fixture, but I've been waiting till the last minute to buy the
actual unit). Whether you agree with my analysis or not, I have defined
what I consider to be "better".
OTOH, I see no measurable benefit to the Schottky diode for this
application. The argument is that it conserves power in use, but that
power consumption doesn't rank worthy of merit. I also see having to
purchase from a seperate source being an additional headache. I see the
more complex build requirements being more of a headache. While the
extra expense is marginal, it is also pointless. The Schottky diode
does not meet my criteria for being better. If the Schottky were widely
available in a package like the FWB it might be different, but with the
information I have I declare the FWB is most definitely the best product
for the application.
If you feel the arguments presented for Schottky diodes make it a better
solution, GREAT!! Go buy you a bagful if it suits you. But realize
that many of us don't see it that way, and declaring that we should
consider doubling our life insurance is fearmongering, disingenuous
bull. There are NO safety issues with the FWB solution.
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: Creation Of Wiring Diagram |
I used Excel.
--------
Todd Stovall
728TT (reserved)
RV-10 Empacone
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=187601#187601
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/wiring_diagram_205.xls
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: Bridge Diodes use |
Hear Hear!! Ernest.
There is an old expression: "Perfection is the enemy of good enough". Though
one man's perfection is another's absurd extravagance.
Regards,
Richard Dudley
RV-6A flying with Z-11
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ernest Christley" <echristley@nc.rr.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2008 11:08 AM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Bridge Diodes use
> <echristley@nc.rr.com>
>
> ptrotter@optonline.net wrote:
>> Yes, you can parallel the diode with a switch as a direct E-bus feed,
>> but I don't want that voltage drop in normal operations either.
>>
> Why? I can understand you being bothered by the idea that something is
> just wasting power. Great. Fix that. That's what's beautiful about
> getting away from the FAA that would dictate what you can do. But after
> swapping out the FWB, don't bother giving a big sigh of relief and
> proclaiming that you just saved someone's life. All you did was scratch
> and itch, not cure world hunger.
>> Just because something has worked well for years does not mean that newer
>> products that perform better are not available today. While the FWB is a
>> nice package for mounting and wiring, it is no longer the best product
>> for the application. If we were to continue to think this way, there
>> would be no innovation and we would all be running steam gauges rather
>> than EFIS systems. In all these discussions, I have never seen anybody
>> make a statement that a plain diode is the best solution, only that it is
>> adequate. Adequate in not good enough for me if a better solution is
>> available. It is somewhat contradictory to install a 21st centrury
>> flight instument system connected to a 1950's technology power system.
>>
> You'll need to define "best". The BEST I know how to do would be to save
> up $10K to have someone else paint my airplane. That would be the BEST.
> But it ain't gonna happen. I'll be painting it in my garage, with my $50
> Harbor Freight HVLP gun, and with chemicals that are not guaranteed to
> kill my family and neighbors. That is adequate. Sufficient. Gets the
> job done. Then I'll go flying. (The $50 gun did an excellent job with
> the Polyfiber chemicals on my airplanes belly and control surfaces, BTW.
> The only problem was the MEK destroyed the can's seal.)
>
> The requirement for change isn't to prove the old method inadequate. The
> requirement is to prove the new method superior. "Superior" includes not
> just minor esoteric operating benefits, but acquisition, build complexity,
> cost, and whatever else someone might be concerned about. I say the EFIS
> is better because it is lighter, more reliable, easier to build into the
> plane, easier to source (one piece vs several) and cheaper. I'll be
> buying a Dynon very soon now (I've installed their mounting fixture, but
> I've been waiting till the last minute to buy the actual unit). Whether
> you agree with my analysis or not, I have defined what I consider to be
> "better".
>
> OTOH, I see no measurable benefit to the Schottky diode for this
> application. The argument is that it conserves power in use, but that
> power consumption doesn't rank worthy of merit. I also see having to
> purchase from a seperate source being an additional headache. I see the
> more complex build requirements being more of a headache. While the extra
> expense is marginal, it is also pointless. The Schottky diode does not
> meet my criteria for being better. If the Schottky were widely available
> in a package like the FWB it might be different, but with the information
> I have I declare the FWB is most definitely the best product for the
> application.
>
> If you feel the arguments presented for Schottky diodes make it a better
> solution, GREAT!! Go buy you a bagful if it suits you. But realize that
> many of us don't see it that way, and declaring that we should consider
> doubling our life insurance is fearmongering, disingenuous bull. There
> are NO safety issues with the FWB solution.
>
>
>
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: Loran to VHF |
At 09:12 AM 6/11/2008 -0700, you wrote:
>
>
>Bob,
>
>Can a Loran antenna (CI 121 SP) be converted/trimmed into a VHF Comm.
>antenna?
>
>Thanks
Probably not. LORAN is a low frequency (100 KHz) facility
that could NEVER benefit from a tuned antenna on a vehicle. Just
too long. So these antennas tend to be like those used
on another low frequency (550 to 1700 KHz) system, AM
entertainment radio. The "coaxial" cable is really a very
low capacitance, shielded cable designed to minimially
load a short, e-field antenna that delivers a relatively
weak signal due to it's Lilliputian dimensions.
Certainly you can adjust the length of the LORAN antenna
to make it resonant at VHF comm frequencies but the
coaxial cable associated with the antenna may very well
be the low-capacity wire I described. My sense is that you'll
spend so much time modifying the antenna and then proving
that you did a good thing that you're $time$ ahead just
to put a real VHF antenna in from the get-go.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
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: Bridge Diodes use |
At 06:28 PM 6/10/2008 +0200, you wrote:
>> >On B & C Diode Installation sheet they state that "Heatsink must
>> dissipate 0.6 X Amps = Watts. Example For 20 Amp Essential Bus, 0.6 X 20
>> = 12 Watt Heatsink".
>
>In my experience, I have never come across a 12W heatsink. Nor a 1W or
>1000W heatsink.
>
>A heatsink is chosen appropriate to the temperature rise above ambient the
>casing of the device can tolerate, or what the spec-sheet says. A single
>machined-bolt head can dissipate 12W without any additional cooling,
>however only when it reaches 200 degrees C (thumbsuck). If you can only
>tolerate a 1degC increase in temperature, the heatsink required to
>dissipate 12W will be the size of a large desk.
>
>So, a specsheet specifies the heatsinking requirements in [degrees above
>ambient]/[Watt], or specifies the maximum allowable temperature. So
>consider an ambient of 23degC, a maximum of 100degC, and we have
>calculated that the device will need to dissipate 10W. That gives us a
>requirement for a 7.7deg/Watt heatsink, which can be ordered accordingly.
>
>I understand the calculations relating to dissipation of heat, and IIRC a
>Schottky diode, with a forward bias voltage of 0.2V rather than the
>0.6~0.7V of a regular diode, dissipates 1/3 the energy for a given
>current. However, there are always other considerations that have not been
>touched in this discussion (such as thermal robustness, vibration
>tolerance, ease of mounting), some of which are the same for both Schottky
>diodes and for normal ones, and others which will draw very clear lines in
>the sand precluding one or both from certain applications.
Very good! You have nailed the physics of heat-sink
sizing. Any size heatsink will dissipate the energies of
ANY size heat source . . . the question to be asked and
answered is "hot hot does it get" over and above ambient
while being stoked at that energy level -AND- environmental
temperature.
B&C's advice was ill worded but I don't work for them
any more. At the same time, I was hoping someone
to rise to the task of illuminating the physics of
the matter. As I write these words, there's a Schottky
device in the chamber getting it's thermal portrait
taken on the same heatsink that gave us a portrait of
a common power rectifier earlier this week. I'll have
comparable DATA to share in the not too distant future.
My hat's off to you sir.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
Message 7
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Bridge Diodes use |
At 06:05 PM 6/10/2008 -0600, you wrote:
>
>Eric,
>
>Am loath to get between you and Bob when discussing electrons but don't
>understand what you said about bridge diode heat dissipation. If one
>diode is running 20 amps with a forward voltage of 0.6 then it generates
>0.6 x 20 = 12 watts of heat.
>If two diodes in parallel are carrying the same 20 amps then the current
>is split between the two diodes, with each having more or less half the
>load with a total of 20 amps between them. So each diode is generating
>about half of 12 watts with a total generation of still only 12 watts not 24.
>
>What am I missing?
You'll never be 'stuck' between us my friend.
Your question is very much on point because until
a posting pointed out a little detail about
"thermal resistance" ratings of heat dissipation
systems, there was no way that anyone should be
expected understand what was correct and/or incorrect
about any of the advice.
Know that a Bob's Shop Notes is being crafted with
real data that will make the physics clear and give
you the tools with which to make a design decision
about your system. There is nothing inherently evil
or good about either device. Both technologies
have and are producing satisfactory performance when
used in a manner that does not violate their
performance envelopes.
The smoke and mirrors will be dealt with.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
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: | Problem with Turbo CAD |
At 07:07 PM 6/10/2008 -0500, you wrote:
>
>Bob,
>
>I bought one of the "cheap" copies of Turbo CAD 10.2 and it opens the Zxx
>files just fine. Problem is, I can't seem to find any of the tutorials on
>their web site. I suspect they pull them after some number of newer
>versions are released. I'm sure a policy designed to sell more upgrades.
>
>I recently took a little intro CAD course at the local junior college but
>they were using AutoCAD 2008. Little similarity I am afraid (no command
>line in TC) so was looking for some way to learn TC without printing out the
>400 plus page pdf document on the CDROM.
>
>Amy suggestions on learning TC 10.2 other than to just tough it out?
>
>At any rate, thanks for all the wonderful information and drawings.
>Couldn't do this wiring thing without it.
Go to a Borders or similar bookstore and look through the
technical how-to books. It will be a "Turbo-CAD for Dummies"
by a third party author. Then search for instructions on the
use of these commands:
AR, *ARRAY
B, *BLOCK
WB, *WRITEBLOCK
BR, *BREAK
CI, *CIRCLE
C, *CHANGE
CH, *CHAMFER
CO, *COPY
D, *DIMSTYLE
DI, *DIST
DO, *DONUT
DT, *DTEXT
E, *ERASE
ED, *DDEDIT
EL, *ELLIPSE
XT, *EXTEND
EXIT, *QUIT
F, *FILLET
H, *HATCH
I, *INSERT
IP, *ISOPLANE
L, *LINE
LA, *LAYER
LI, *LIST
LT, *LINETYPE
M, *MOVE
MI, *MIRROR
OF, *OFFSET
OS, *OSNAP
P, *PAN
PE, *PEDIT
PL, *PLINE
PG, *POLYGON
P, *PAN
R, *REDRAW
RG, *REGEN
RT, *RECTANGLE
REN *RENAME
RO, *ROTATE
S, *STRETCH
SC, *SCALE
SCR, *SCRIPT
T, *TRIM
V, *VIEW
XP, *EXPLODE
Z, *ZOOM
This is a list of my one and two-stroke command contractions
for AutoCAD. This list covers 95% of everything I ask AutoCAD
to do in my almost daily use for 20+ years. AutoCAD (and TurboCAD)
will do MUCH more but these activities let me produce all of the
illustrations for the 'Connection (and for my clients). Get
up to speed on the same functions in TurboCAD and you can do
just about everything I do.
Some TurboCAD packages come with tutorials. See:
http://www.cadandgraphics.com/tcdlx15.html?gclid=CP6Bm7iI8JMCFQabnAodTgNIWQ
Here are some turbocad tutorials. Perhaps not "up to date"
with your version but the list I gave you above is the
most rudimenatry of CAD functions . . . probably good for
any version mix of books and software.
http://tinyurl.com/4lssx3
http://tinyurl.com/3ueqet
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: Bridge Diodes use |
One final thought about this.. If we keep our E-buses on a diet, the Vf
will be lower, and the heat loss through whatever diode you choose will be
less. These obese E-buses are killing us!! Hah. :)
Matt-
> <emjones@charter.net>
>
>
>> I think this is the point that nobody was making.. Vf is not the knee
>> voltage. Bob White sent me a link to a Fairchild datasheet that showed
>> the I-V curve for one of their devices. Forward biasing conduction got
>> going around 0.6V - 0.7V, but at the rated current the voltage drop was
>> up around 1.0V - 1.1V. Eric, had you mentioned this early in the
>> discussion, I think we could have avoided a bunch of this churning...
>> http://www.fairchildsemi.com/ds/1N/1N4007.pdf
>> I still haven't seen where B&C stated that the voltage drop would be
>> half
>> by running in parallel.. Certainly the voltage drop is reduced by
>> running
>> the diode lower on the I-V curve for a given buss current.. But not by
>> half obviously. Maybe an estimate would be halfway between the published
>> Vf and the knee voltage.
>> Regards, Matt
>
>
> Matt, et al.
>
> See: http://www.bandc.biz/Diode_Installation.pdf
>
> I don't claim that B & C ever stated that diodes' Vf could be summed like
> parallel mosfets (etc.). But I saw the 0.6 Vf on their schematic as a very
> suspicious indicator that somebody thought so, and that this should be
> attended to.
>
> Yes, Matt, maybe I should have clarified some points earlier. But it was
> 100 degrees yesterday, fer chis'sakes. Thanks for your sage input.
> (Ahem...which you should have said earlier....)
>
> --------
> 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=187390#187390
>
>
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 |
|
Jonsey, How many fuel pumps do you have and where are they located? Are
there two batteries with alternate feed paths to the fuel pump(s)? Is
there an engine driven fuel pump? Or is it gravity fed with an electric
boost pump? Joe G.
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: | DB25 tap adapter |
All,
I had the need to create a simple Tap for a DB25 connector. I decided to
try out a new board house and have lots available. These make a great way
to Y into anything that uses a DB25 connector. E.g.GPS, or other signals.
They are very simple to use, you just unconnect your existing db25 and plug
this in-between. Screws and nuts can be picked up easily at Frys or RS.
I will supply them with connectors - either 2 males, 2 females or 1 of each
- your choice. The board presses between the solder cups and then you
solder the connectors to the little board. The board has a tap point for
each pin number and it's only .5 inches wide. The entire connector is only
1.5" wide when assembled. The via's will take up to 20ga wire and should
support anything that we might need.
I'll sell these for $5 each or $8 for a pair (2 full sets) + $2 S/H (usps)
to anywhere in the US (international if needed will be actual postage or a
negotiated rate).
If interested, drop me a note with qty, gender, and I'll provide paypal
information for purchase and get them shipped right out.
I've attached pictures for your reference, if those don't go thru, you can
see them here.
http://www.highrf.com/Rockets/db25/DSCN2109_edited-2.jpg
http://www.highrf.com/Rockets/db25/DSCN2111_edited-2.jpg
http://www.highrf.com/Rockets/db25/DSCN2114_edited-1.jpg
my email is adamson (underscore) alan at hotmail dot com
As a side note, I'm tempted to do the same for db9 and db15 connectors...
we'll see, I suppose if there is enough demand, I could do the big db
connectors too (37 pin is it?).
Alan
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 |
|
Thanks Bob,
I was considering shortening (tuning) a used Loran antenna for use with a
VHF aircraft radio as a base station for a local airshow coming up. The
regular 50 ohm coax would be used to feed it.
Bevan
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L.
Nuckolls, III
Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2008 3:35 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Loran to VHF
--> <nuckolls.bob@cox.net>
At 09:12 AM 6/11/2008 -0700, you wrote:
>--> <fvalarm@rapidnet.net>
>
>
>Bob,
>
>Can a Loran antenna (CI 121 SP) be converted/trimmed into a VHF Comm.
>antenna?
>
>Thanks
Probably not. LORAN is a low frequency (100 KHz) facility
that could NEVER benefit from a tuned antenna on a vehicle. Just
too long. So these antennas tend to be like those used
on another low frequency (550 to 1700 KHz) system, AM
entertainment radio. The "coaxial" cable is really a very
low capacitance, shielded cable designed to minimially
load a short, e-field antenna that delivers a relatively
weak signal due to it's Lilliputian dimensions.
Certainly you can adjust the length of the LORAN antenna
to make it resonant at VHF comm frequencies but the
coaxial cable associated with the antenna may very well
be the low-capacity wire I described. My sense is that you'll
spend so much time modifying the antenna and then proving
that you did a good thing that you're $time$ ahead just
to put a real VHF antenna in from the get-go.
Bob . . .
----------------------------------------)
( . . . a long habit of not thinking )
( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial )
( appearance of being right . . . )
( )
( -Thomas Paine 1776- )
----------------------------------------
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 |
|
One electric backup pump, one battery with one feed. Pump on pump off no
solenoid.
Jonsey
----- Original Message -----
From: Joe
To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2008 8:17 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Boost pumps
Jonsey, How many fuel pumps do you have and where are they located? Are
there two batteries with alternate feed paths to the fuel pump(s)? Is
there an engine driven fuel pump? Or is it gravity fed with an electric
boost pump? Joe G.
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! --
|