Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 06:22 AM - Ignition cables (Fergus Kyle)
2. 07:11 AM - More sought advice... electrics (Fergus Kyle)
3. 08:34 AM - Re: The great(?) debate . . . (Ralph Finch)
4. 09:16 AM - Re: More sought advice... electrics (Ron Shannon)
5. 09:24 AM - IR to ER alternator mod (ROGER & JEAN CURTIS)
6. 11:51 AM - Re: More sought advice... electrics (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
7. 01:21 PM - OFF TOPIC (raymondj)
8. 01:45 PM - Re: Standards for switch colors? (Eric M. Jones)
9. 03:41 PM - Re: The great(?) debate . . . (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
10. 03:48 PM - Re: S700 switch pin positions (Erich_Weaver@URSCorp.com)
11. 04:03 PM - Re: Re: Cabbages and kings . . . (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
12. 04:08 PM - Re: Re: S700 switch pin positions (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
13. 05:37 PM - Switches (frequent flyer)
14. 07:50 PM - More advice sought II (Fergus Kyle)
15. 08:14 PM - Re: OFF TOPIC (Robert Feldtman)
16. 08:26 PM - Re: More advice sought II (Ron Shannon)
17. 09:24 PM - Re: More advice sought II (Ron Quillin)
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 |
|
Bob N:
I have a Rotax 914, which among other things reveals a pair of
ignition wires terminated in female bullet connectors. I have read
discussions regarding Radio Magnetic Interference and must route these to
switches such that I can disconnect them at the firewall for instrument
panel removal and engine removal both.
In view of the engine bullet connections, I opted to relay the wires
in RG400, using BNC connectors at both sides of the firewall - two double
female BNC bulkhead, on 1/32" stainless steel mini-panel through the
firewall. The choice then became which BNC males would I use for the f/w
contacts. I opted for male BNC crimp connectors - for ease of installation
on RG400 and easy disconnect either side. Using solder models seemed a
painful exercise in view of the fidgety steps required, (ham radio
experience here). The cabin side will continue in RG400 to Ignition switches
on the instrument panel.
The Europa instrument panel is minimal and proper distance 'twixt
ignition wires and others dictated a thorough braid grounding, at the bullet
end to the engine casting and (following manufacturer's instructions) at the
earthing end of the ignition switches to achieve proper shorting for safety.
All connectors will be buttressed by heatshrink for security and to
forestall unprogrammed shorts or broken wires - both of which are safety
considerations.
Never having had connection problems with BNCs over 30 years, I
thought I had chosen well, but I'm a flyer not a builder so beg confirmation
that my thinking is correct.
Should I box in the switches electrically to continue shielding all
the way to the finger point, or is the interference minimal at that point in
your estimation? I hesitate to add another last minute mod to the many
already waiting to spring..........
Your sage guidance ( and perhaps of others) greatly appreciated -
when you have time...
Cheers, Ferg
Europa A064
Wiring wiring wiring
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: | More sought advice... electrics |
Hello again,
Once more I seek advice - mainly from hams or electronic experience
regarding BNC connectors:
I have opted to connect RG400 coax to BNC male crimp connectors,
mainly for what I thought to be ease of installation....! BUTR where do I
find the correct coax cuttings for the ordinary male crimp BNCs for RG400
(presume also for RG58)? The dimensions seem to escape my
Googlating........or is it Googlizing?.
Thanks, Ferg
Europa A064
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: | The great(?) debate . . . |
Actually, I would much appreciate your thoughts on VerticalPower and its
concept. If you've shared them before I'll search the archives....
Ralph Finch
RV-9A QB build
-----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, July 18, 2008 3:27 PM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: The great(?) debate . . .
http://www.verticalpower.com/
This is for information only and not intended to start a new thread. Before
there are schematics and/or hardware to evaluate, there's nothing worthy of
our $time$ to discuss at length.
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: | Re: More sought advice... electrics |
Ferg,
You can get these via B&C (http://bandc.biz) or Steinair
(http://steinair.com) among other sources. At least B&C (maybe Stein)
also offers the proper hex crimp tool.
Ron
On Sat, Jul 19, 2008 at 7:07 AM, Fergus Kyle <VE3LVO@rac.ca> wrote:
....
> BUTR where do I
> find the correct coax cuttings for the ordinary male crimp BNCs for RG400
> (presume also for RG58)? The dimensions seem to escape my
> Googlating........or is it Googlizing?.
> Thanks, Ferg
> Europa A064
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: | IR to ER alternator mod |
Bob,
Here is another IR to ER alternator mod.
I would appreciate your evaluation and comments as I may use this method.
Thanks,
Roger
http://www.falco.co.nz/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=86&Itemi
d=72
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: More sought advice... electrics |
At 10:07 AM 7/19/2008 -0400, you wrote:
>
>Hello again,
> Once more I seek advice - mainly from hams or electronic experience
>regarding BNC connectors:
> I have opted to connect RG400 coax to BNC male crimp connectors,
>mainly for what I thought to be ease of installation....! BUTR where do I
>find the correct coax cuttings for the ordinary male crimp BNCs for RG400
>(presume also for RG58)? The dimensions seem to escape my
>Googlating........or is it Googlizing?.
Anything that fits RG-58 fits 142 or 400. The connectors
are available from a host of sources not the least of
which are B&C. You can get them from these folks as well:
http://www.mpja.com/prodinfo.asp?number=5401+RC
http://tinyurl.com/5n25gv
the tool that installs these needs to have two dies,
.068" for the pin, .213" for the ferule. If you
can find a tool with AMP or MOLEX dies in it, you're
off and running. El-cheeso tools tend to be undersized
on the .213 die. So if a tad (and I'm talking .0005")
the ferule flashes out a tad into the gap between
the dies.
The safest approach for el-cheeso tools is the
Radio Shack 278-238
http://www.radioshack.com/product/index.jsp?productId 62636
This tool doesn't have ratchet handles. If the crimps
tend to be too tight, you can manually relax the grip
before the tool bottoms out and you'll get a nice, smooth
hex on the ferule.
http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/bnccrimp.pdf
You'll also find a three-blade stripper to be really
handy. This tool . . .
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Tools/Wire_Strippers/Three-Blade_Stripper.jpg
. . . can be had off Ebay for really cheap.
http://tinyurl.com/6g444g
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 |
|
do not archive
This is directed to anyone involved in erecting antennas. I have a 100 ft
free standing triangular "antenna" and I'm looking for any references to
help me design the base to erect it on. Please reply off list to spare the
other listers.
Thanks,
Raymond Julian
Kettle River, MN
"Hope for the best,
but prepare for the worst."
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: Standards for switch colors? |
I have actually seen such proposed "Standards", but I don't think they stuck. But
the FAA wants a paddle on the flap switch/lever, and a wheel on the landing
gear switch/lever. They were headed in the right direction.
Sec. 23.781 Cockpit control knob shape.
(a) Flap and landing gear control knobs must conform to the general shapes (but
not necessarily the exact sizes or specific proportions) in the following figure:
Flap Control Knob, Landing Gear Control Knob see for particulars.
(b) Powerplant control knobs must conform to the general shapes (but not necessarily
the exact sizes or specific proportions) in the following figure:
Power (Thrust) Control Knob, RPM Control Knob, Mixture Control Knob,
Carb Heat or Alternate Air Control Knob, Supercharger Control Knob
Fuel Selectors must be red, and there are some other minor callouts for colors
such as the pitot heat lights, but not much.
I am unhappy with red warnings because I can't see them. Rather than plain color
switches, the military likes striped controls. Nightlights make colors a difficult
problem for everybody. Putting in Jules Verne knobs with crystal pommels
would suit me fine, or beer-tap handles for the really important stuff. My cockpit
(...if ever...) will not be very standard. Experimental builders have some
great ideas.
I also want to again point out that some of the best articles on panel design were
published by Ricardo A. Price, in Kitplanes Dec95 and Jan96 and Feb96. They
deserve a place of honor:
http://www.kitplanes.com/magazine/avionics_electronics/7273-1.phtml
http://www.kitplanes.com/magazine/avionics_electronics/7272-1.phtml
http://www.kitplanes.com/magazine/avionics_electronics/7271-1.phtml
I also attached a DRAFT of my panel design write-up, just notes basically.... I
may have even have some pirated stuff there that I dropped in cut-and-paste as
reference notes.
--------
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=193812#193812
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/instrument_panels_201.pdf
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: | The great(?) debate . . . |
At 08:28 AM 7/19/2008 -0700, you wrote:
>
>Actually, I would much appreciate your thoughts on VerticalPower and its
>concept. If you've shared them before I'll search the archives....
>
>Ralph Finch
>RV-9A QB build
Vertical Power . . . and competitors offer a high
degree of integration for monitoring, automatic controls,
display of parameters of interest, some degree of
plug-n-play architecture and perhaps some computer
driven features that can be accessed by the user. These
might include check-lists and data gathering on some aspects
of system performance.
When compared with the breaker/fuse,-switch-wire-contactors
approach common to most of GA light-planes, it's an entirely
new world with design goals never considered until the
technology and manufacturing evolved. Certainly there have
been huge advancements in the capabilities we have to
"go solid state" or "enhance pilot ability to exert
a high degree of command and control with a reduced
workload." And, of course, we'll see the words "safety"
and "reliability" pop up in the advertisements as well.
I'm not sure there is value in trying to compare $300 worth
of wire, switches, fuses or breakers and the occasional
contactor with these new kids on the block. For years
I witnessed demonstrations at OSH by entrepreneurial
hopefuls for controlling the airplane over serial busses
"for the purpose of reducing wire weight."
The first question that comes to mind is what degree of
complexity has been added (along with vulnerabilities
to RF and lightning) in order to take perhaps 2 pounds
out of the empty weight of an RV? The earliest manifestations
of this trend were not very exciting because the part
counts went up. Further, maintenance spares were not the
kinds of parts you can buy at Aircraft Spruce, Steinair or B&C.
Over the years, the size and power of the proposed
computers grew as prices for those computers and their
design tools went down. Now we could begin to think
about doing things that the $300 lot of hardware cited
above cannot nor were ever intended to do. You can
"program" these things to exercise some intelligence,
display on LCD screens, take input from touch-screens, etc.
Now you have an entirely different product. It's
a flight management system that also happens to
replace $300 worth of hardware. Lighter than the
$300 system? Probably not. Sexier than the $300
system, you betcha!
The decision to incorporate this technology into
your airplane goes WWAAaayyy beyond the thought
processes we used to buy $300 worth of stuff
from B&C. This is because the new idea can do much
more than turn things on and off and keep wires from
burning up if faulted.
Now we find ourselves considering software driven
fault detection and clearing, software driven
on/off control, solid state switches replacing
every toggle, entering and displaying checklists,
recording clearances, etc. etc.
It's like stepping up from a 6-cyl, stick-shift,
chevy with nothing on it to a Lexus with everything
on it. Both vehicles take fuel and time to get you
from point A to point B. The differences to be
considered now become very personal. Some pilots
among you take some personal pride in designing,
crafting, understanding, operating and maintaining
the system built from $300 worth of parts. They
also do not feel intimidated about the thought
processes and actions necessary to deal with
a malfunction of a component in that system.
On the other hand, if the owner is especially
fond of the notion of automating these processes
and turning responsibility over to a suite of
components that he doesn't understand and cannot
service, then there are folks ready to offer systems
that addresses that desire.
The easiest targets for the latest-and-greatest
are those who do not understand the $300 system
and easily transition to not understanding
the multi-killobuck system as well. Probably
driven by some idea that if all the necessary
things for operating the system are taken
care of in software, then the owner/pilot need
not be concerned with such matters.
The decision to take advantage of highly
integrated, bells-and-whistles products is more
a matter of personal preferences than one of
utility and especially safety. Your airplane
isn't gong to fly any faster. It's not going to
be any lighter. The volume of stuff behind the
panel will be higher. And yes, one can be
relieved of having to deal with the occasional
but usually non-threatening failure of a
component . . . assuming the $300 worth of stuff
was crafted into a failure tolerant system.
My personal preference is driven by my professional
understanding of the components and architectures
available to me. Toss in the admittedly dated
"Mother! I want to do it myself!" attitude handed
down to me by my predecessors. A sort of "The Right
Stuff" approach to minimizing complexity where
it fails to increase the efficiency of the machine
or reduce cost of ownership. When I'm looking for
the ultimate convenience of operation, speed,
comfort, and lowest cost of ownership I buy
a ticket on a big iron bird. If I owned an OBAM
aircraft (or de-certified factory machine) it would
not be for the purpose of elevating its function
to level of a flying Lexus.
My personal "dream machine" is a de-certified
Pacer with Mogas STC. Strip out the back seats
and put in cargo tie-down platform. Strip out
electrical system and put Z13/8. Strip out
that butt-busting bench seat and put in nice
buckets out of an automobile. NOW, for a pittance
in relative costs, a lot of labor, I have
a product of my imagination, $time$ and
talents that I'm willing to suffer in for nine
hours of noise and bumps (NOT counting fuel
stops) to the west coast.
But be cautious of any notions that these
systems are safer or more reliable. Electrical system
malfunctions are very small contributors to
expensive or life threatening accidents. Reliability
has to be defined in terms whether any given failure
is a maintenance or safety issue. Are you striving
for never turning a wrench? Or perhaps maximizing the
numbers of no-sweat arrivals? I personally have no
problem with replacing the occasional inexpensive part
in a failure tolerant system. That's why I would
even choose to own an OBAM aircraft in the first
place. I have no doubt that these do-everything
products function as advertised. Return on investment
will not be known until we have years of marketplace
history.
Those of you considering the make-or-buy decision,
have to build you own case for $time$, design goals
and the satisfaction of getting utility out of the
best YOU know how to do in YOUR dream machine. A
big chunk of that equation considers how much you're
willing to learn and build as opposed to buying it.
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: S700 switch pin positions |
Found an unused Carling 2-10 switch in my electrical supply box today,
so
pulled out my now ragged copy of the Aeroelectric Connection and my che
apo
RS multimeter to confirm what I had previously posted - that the pin
positions were transposed left to right from the diagram in the
'Connection.
They are indeed transposed, assuming a view looking at the back of the
switch with the keyway up. The date code on the side of the switch is
0443.
I am sure that the transposition is not just a single switch anomaly,
because I had more than one of these on my plane, and I remember making
the
wiring correction in multiple places - in my case, two p-mag switches a
nd a
landing lights/wig-wag switch.
regards,
Erich Weaver
This e-mail and any attachments are confidential. If you receive this
message in error or are not the intended recipient, you should not reta
in,
distribute, disclose or use any of this information and you should dest
roy
the e-mail and any attachments or copies.
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: Cabbages and kings . . . |
At 05:53 AM 7/16/2008 -0700, you wrote:
>
>
> > The LT4356 does not seem to be suited for standing
> > off the uncontrolled runway. The schematic proposed
> > does not suggest a means by which an alternator may
> > be controlled . . . I'm presuming that the "new
> > philosophy" is that the artfully designed system
> > of the future does not demand control. I'm not
> > aware of how that might be accomplished.
>
>
>The prototyped device is good to 150V. I admit that this may not be the
>final form, that's why it's called a prototype. The LT4356 doesn't do
>anything that couldn't have been done earlier. It is just far simpler. The
>diagram in my paper is not a schematic. Attached is the schematic of my
>prototype.
>
>As for the kind offer to re-open old subjects like crowbars,
>bi-directional Zeners for coil suppression, battery meters (instead of
>dual batteries), Schottkys, elimination of contactors, etc., etc.--I
>looked in the mirror this morning and nobody had written "STUPID" on my
>forehead, so I guess it won't happen. But if I bump my head REALLY HARD,
>I'll be sure to let you know.
Eric, please allow me to offer a quotation from one
of my personal heros:
" . . . there is a kind of responsibility which
the scientists feel toward each other which can
represent as a kind of morality. What's the right
way and the wrong way to report results? Disinterestedly,
so that the other man is free to understand precisely
what you are saying, and nearly as possible not
covering it with your desires. That is a useful thing
which helps us to understand each other . . ."
"And so there is, if you will, a kind of scientific
morality."
"Advertising, for example, is a scientifically
immoral description of the products. This immorality
is so extensive that one gets so used to it in
ordinary life, that you do not appreciate that
it is a bad thing."
These are excerpts from Richard Feynman's remarks
at the 1964 Galileo Symposium in Italy.
I found these remarks recently while re-reading
a book of Feynman's works which you can see parts
of here. This link takes you right to the page(s)
where the ideas cited above are found:
http://tinyurl.com/5jm7xt
Indeed, let us not re-open old arguments where one
or more of the participants is engaged in the
"immorality of advertising" Feynman describes.
If it suits your purposes better, we need not open
those discussions for any reason because I have
no advertising imperatives. Many of my ideas do
exist in hardware for sale by myself and others
but that isn't what the List should be about.
I wish to craft no tolerance for the mindless
acceptance of advertising here on the List, only
a quest for understanding borne up by simple-ideas as
ingredients that go into recipes for success.
It's the free-market manner in which your version of
"pancakes" might differ in ingredients from my
version of "flapjacks". It's the free market that
can and will pass judgment on our respective
products based on performance, return on
investment, customer service and integrity of
the offerors of such products.
You have laid your list of ingredients out
for all of us here on the list and suggested
a way that they be combined to become a product.
Why? I can only guess. My hope is that you've
opened a door to a discussion. This is an activity
I'm pleased to participate in as long as you're
not depending upon smearing another person's ideas,
products or integrity for the purpose of marketing
your own.
So the experiment: Would you outline for the List
the design goals for the device you've described?
How does it integrate into an OBAM aircraft system
and what functions is it designed to provide? I'd
be willing to participate in a critical design
review not unlike those I enjoyed in my former life.
There are, I am sure, others on the List who have
curiosities to satisfy and ideas to contribute.
You'll be hard pressed to find another group
so willing to contribute to your success for
so low a price!
Bob . . .
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: S700 switch pin positions |
At 06:45 PM 7/19/2008 -0400, you wrote:
>Found an unused Carling 2-10 switch in my electrical supply box today, so
>pulled out my now ragged copy of the Aeroelectric Connection and my cheapo
>RS multimeter to confirm what I had previously posted - that the pin
>positions were transposed left to right from the diagram in the 'Connection.
>
>They are indeed transposed, assuming a view looking at the back of the
>switch with the keyway up. The date code on the side of the switch is 0443.
>
>I am sure that the transposition is not just a single switch anomaly,
>because I had more than one of these on my plane, and I remember making
>the wiring correction in multiple places - in my case, two p-mag switches
>and a landing lights/wig-wag switch.
>
>regards,
>
>Erich Weaver
Excellent hard data! Thank you sir. I've
not heard from Carling yet but it seems likely
that their "odd-man-out" position in the market
place for switches would be a powerful incentive
to swap columns and bring their functionality
into synchronization with the rest of the industry.
I think I'll be revising the switch ratings document
to include a caveat for testing any given switch
to determine it's position in the industry. Carling
is the only company I'm aware of that did not conform
but that doesn't mean there are not others.
It would be really cool if Carling could offer a date
range for the change-over.
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 |
|
Hi, i know this has just been a subject but i have some switches that are n
ot marked the same as Bob's book. no #s on the pins.- I believe they are
10-20 & 10-50 but not sure. there are no pin #s on them and Bob's drawings
are totally different. Help!- Jack, Glasair IIS-FT in AZ
=0A=0A=0A
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: | More advice sought II |
Hey,
Perhaps I should clarify my request:
I have the male BNC crimp connectors and I have the applicable
crimpers. What is missing is the dimensions of the cuts for the centre wire,
the internal insulation, the coaxial shield and the cover. It's the
instructions I need.
Cheers, ferg
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 |
|
go to arrl.org and buy the antenna handbook
bobf
W5RF
BTW - that is a huge, potential dangerous antenna. might be worth some hired
help with it!
On Sat, Jul 19, 2008 at 3:18 PM, raymondj <raymondj@frontiernet.net> wrote:
> raymondj@frontiernet.net>
>
> do not archive
>
> This is directed to anyone involved in erecting antennas. I have a 100 ft
> free standing triangular "antenna" and I'm looking for any references to
> help me design the base to erect it on. Please reply off list to spare the
> other listers.
>
> Thanks,
> Raymond Julian
> Kettle River, MN
>
> "Hope for the best,
> but prepare for the worst."
>
>
Message 16
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: More advice sought II |
See http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/bnccrimp.pdf
On Sat, Jul 19, 2008 at 7:47 PM, Fergus Kyle <VE3LVO@rac.ca> wrote:
...
> It's the
> instructions I need.
> Cheers, ferg
Message 17
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: More advice sought II |
Depending on which connector you have, I've had past success on the
manufacturers' web sites finding that type on information.
Ron Q.
At 19:47 7/19/2008, you wrote:
>Hey,
> Perhaps I should clarify my request:
> I have the male BNC crimp connectors and I have the applicable
>crimpers. What is missing is the dimensions of the cuts for the centre wire,
>the internal insulation, the coaxial shield and the cover. It's the
>instructions I need.
>Cheers, ferg
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! --
|