---------------------------------------------------------- AeroElectric-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Sun 07/20/08: 27 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 05:18 AM - Re: The great(?) debate . . . (Eric M. Jones) 2. 07:06 AM - Re: Re: The great(?) debate . . . (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 3. 07:24 AM - Re: More advice sought II (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 4. 07:26 AM - Re: More advice sought II (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 5. 07:34 AM - Re: Z13/8 wiring correction ? (Jeff Page) 6. 07:38 AM - Re: Switches (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 7. 07:44 AM - Newbie Z-21A question (Jorge Rodriguez) 8. 07:53 AM - Re: Z13/8 wiring correction ? (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 9. 08:07 AM - Re: Newbie Z-21A question (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 10. 09:49 AM - RV-6A For Sale (Richard Dudley) 11. 10:36 AM - Re: RV-6A For Sale (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 12. 10:40 AM - Male crimp BNCs (Fergus Kyle) 13. 10:43 AM - Re: Ignition cables (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 14. 10:47 AM - Re: IR to ER alternator mod (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 15. 10:53 AM - Re: Male crimp BNCs (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 16. 11:14 AM - Re: RV-6A For Sale (Richard Dudley) 17. 12:20 PM - "primer-line fuel injection" (raymondj) 18. 01:37 PM - Re: "primer-line fuel injection" (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 19. 02:44 PM - Re: IR to ER alternator mod () 20. 04:25 PM - Re: IR to ER alternator mod () 21. 04:27 PM - Re: Re: IR to ER alternator mod (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 22. 04:32 PM - Re: "primer-line fuel injection" (raymondj) 23. 05:15 PM - Re: Newbie Z-21A question (DaveG601XL) 24. 05:43 PM - Re: The great(?) debate . . . (marcausman) 25. 06:18 PM - Re: Re: Newbie Z-21A question (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 26. 08:01 PM - ignition cables (Fergus Kyle) 27. 08:18 PM - Re: The great(?) debate . . . (Ralph Finch) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 05:18:30 AM PST US Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: The great(?) debate . . . From: "Eric M. Jones" Bob, I'm with you on this. I have only a limited background in programming microprocessors, so I don't feel comfortable in coupling them with a systems or aircraft where everything is tied to a central computer. I certainly do subscribe to distributed microprocessors all over the place--in instruments, clocks, radios, displays, etc. I even like one-wire buses. Some people like computerized check-lists and monitoring the temperature of every cylinder---automation everywhere. But the hair on the back of my neck stood straight up when Lance at NSI showed me his engine where there were computers and backups and backups for the backups for the backups. When has it been said "that the disaster happened because we didn't have enough automation"? (At Chernobyl, they turned OFF the computer safety interlocks.) In my personal aircraft (Glastar 2.00 Turbo Subie N5EJ), It has no central computer, but if I did, I would need a backup central computer or maybe two, and then some switch-over dealy-whomper...and I'd have to kidnap a small IT person for the jumpseat to keep everything in tune. My design uses no central computer(s), and furthermore only uses microprocessors where they really add to the function. Good designers can disagree on this, but I am building an airplane that I will like to fly. Years ago Aviation Consumer ran a series of articles entitled (something like) "What is the perfect airplane?... They concluded that a truly miraculous airplane could be had by this very simple process... 1) Buy a structurally sound but completely flea-bitten woebegone dog held-together-with-duct-tape, unloved...Cessna 182 . The uglier it is the better. 2) Strip it to the bone...every nut, bolt, screw, bracket, tube, pulley, and every piece of plastic. Clean up, straighten and paint everything to better than factory fresh. 3) With the bushels of moneyyou saved, drop in a 1/4" windscreen, the very best seats, instruments, engine and props, flap and gap seals and the best speed mods that LoPresti Speed Merchants (now isn't that a great company name!) can produce. Get the autogas STC too. What will you wind up with?....a magnificent flying machine that will handily outperform any stock C182, will go 200 mph on 7 gallons-per-hour (or so), will lift a full load of solid neutronium (or gold-pressed latinum bricks) off short runways...in quiet comfort, luxury and will sell for three times what you paid. It will be done in six months AND YOU WON'T HAVE TO DO ALL THE WORK. "...Beans for supper tonight, six o'clock. Navy beans cooked in Oklahoma ham... Got to eat 'em with a spoon, raw onions and cornbread; nothing else...." --Will Rogers -------- 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=193896#193896 ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 07:06:07 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: The great(?) debate . . . At 05:14 AM 7/20/2008 -0700, you wrote: > >Bob, I'm with you on this. > >I have only a limited background in programming microprocessors, so I >don't feel comfortable in coupling them with a systems or aircraft where >everything is tied to a central computer. I certainly do subscribe to >distributed microprocessors all over the place--in instruments, clocks, >radios, displays, etc. I even like one-wire buses. Yes, I believe I was instrumental in getting the first CAN-Bus onto a certified aircraft about 10 years ago. We used CAN to interconnect a suite of smart flap actuators on the Eclipse. When I proposed CAN for some projects I've been privileged to work on, it was immediately embraced by the software guys we were teamed with, "Yeah, we've been really happy with that technology, use it all the time." CAN was developed by Bosch with an eye on the ground transportation market. It was sucked into the textile industry big-time as a solution for implementing distributed processing on large looms, and it's been growing like a weed since. It's simple, easy to implement and just about everybody offers one or more microcontrollers with a CAN engine on the chip. >Some people like computerized check-lists and monitoring the temperature >of every cylinder---automation everywhere. But the hair on the back of my >neck stood straight up when Lance at NSI showed me his engine where there >were computers and backups and backups for the backups for the backups. >When has it been said "that the disaster happened because we didn't have >enough automation"? (At Chernobyl, they turned OFF the computer safety >interlocks.) It's easy to get sucked into the notion that since computers can do so much more than the humble gray matter and do it faster, that we can do ourselves a service by letting them take on more and more of our responsibilities. But they are just tools. Unthinking, unfeeling, unimaginative tools that are not self healing and not educable. They do not learn from their mistakes and they break. I've used and proposed a lot of them in new products to reduce parts count, improve on capability of the appliance to help humans own, operate and maintain their machines. But I'm exceedingly cautious of handing off any form of essential responsibility to them. Our colleagues are equally skeptical, hence the evolution of DO-178 software development and testing rules. I am equally cautious of using them to ADD to the ability to do things that we've not found necessary or useful to do in the 100 year history of airplanes. By the same line of reasoning, I'm not automatically on the wagon with those who imagine, develop and market do-everything products just because they can. Once the product exists they're saddled with a need to market that product. When there no convincing operational and cost-of-ownership incentives arise for folks considering the product, they must resort to the oldest selling hammers in the book. Capitalize on the ignorance and fears of the consumer by invoking the gods of safety, reliability and of course convenience. >In my personal aircraft (Glastar 2.00 Turbo Subie N5EJ), It has no central >computer, but if I did, I would need a backup central computer or maybe >two, and then some switch-over dealy-whomper...and I'd have to kidnap a >small IT person for the jumpseat to keep everything in tune. My design >uses no central computer(s), and furthermore only uses microprocessors >where they really add to the function. Good designers can disagree on >this, but I am building an airplane that I will like to fly. When I saw NSI's fully redundant, twin EFI system schematics, I was similarly disposed to avoid getting involved in the program. I suggested that having ONE really capable EFI system backed up with a stone simple, non-electronic way to keep the engine running was preferable, less expensive, lighter, etc, etc. Some years back, a few folks installed my suggested "primer-line fuel injection" on their airplanes to back up the carburetor. One reader wrote later that he used it to get back on the ground comfortably after a fuel selector valve froze up. http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Schematics/All-Elect-Fuel.jpg My personal design goals call for the back up system to be simpler, stand-alone alternatives to the bells-and-whistles that are interdependent on each other . . . things that break. http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Misc/Failure_Tolerance.pdf >Years ago Aviation Consumer ran a series of articles entitled (something >like) "What is the perfect airplane?... They concluded that a truly >miraculous airplane could be had by this very simple process... > >1) Buy a structurally sound but completely flea-bitten woebegone >dog held-together-with-duct-tape, unloved...Cessna 182 . The uglier it >is the better. I know a guy in Harper that owns that airplane! He makes a ton of money with it photographing field conditions for the department of agriculture. Airplane looks like crap but flies hundreds of hours a year at a very reasonable cost of ownership. >2) Strip it to the bone...every nut, bolt, screw, bracket, tube, pulley, >and every piece of plastic. Clean up, straighten and paint everything to >better than factory fresh. > >3) With the bushels of moneyyou saved, drop in a 1/4" windscreen, the very >best seats, instruments, engine and props, flap and gap seals and the best >speed mods that LoPresti Speed Merchants (now isn't that a great company >name!) can produce. Get the autogas STC too. > >What will you wind up with?....a magnificent flying machine that will >handily outperform any stock C182, will go 200 mph on 7 gallons-per-hour >(or so), will lift a full load of solid neutronium (or gold-pressed >latinum bricks) off short runways...in quiet comfort, luxury and will sell >for three times what you paid. It will be done in six months AND YOU WON'T >HAVE TO DO ALL THE WORK. Exactly. I think the vast majority of small airplane owners possess these money-pits because of the opportunity it affords to DO SOMETHING that very few others choose to do. If somebody offered me an airplane that you climb into, program a destination and push the go-button, I wouldn't be the least interested at any price. I would prefer that Pacer because it's a product of my imagination and efforts to achieve a degree of utility and freedom that few experience and enjoy. There are folks that look at me with a skeptical expression and ask, "You ENJOY getting into that uncomfortable, noisy, expensive, un-forgiving machine and going somewhere?" Yes I do. Others get off on sky diving, snow boarding, speed boats, etc. But I like airplanes. About 15 years ago there was a company that made a pretty good business out of buying up select models of Cherokee, stripping them down to the structure. Re-prime, repaint, new seats, new panel, fresh engine. They could offer an as-new machine with modern electrics for a fraction of the cost of a new one and it flew just as good. > "...Beans for supper tonight, six o'clock. > Navy beans cooked in Oklahoma ham... > Got to eat 'em with a spoon, raw onions > and cornbread; nothing else...." > --Will Rogers A couple of nicely pickled jalapenos would be nice . . . but as Mr Rogers would no doubt observe, not essential. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 07:24:28 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: More advice sought II At 10:47 PM 7/19/2008 -0400, 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. . . . or I need to clean my glasses! Here: http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Connectors/Coax/RG400_BNC_Trim.jpg The exposures for shield, inner insulation and center conductor are 8mm, 4mm, 3mm respectively. These are set for you automatically by the three-blade strippers cited earlier but you can do it with an sharp Swiss Army knife too! Bob . . . ----------------------------------------) ( . . . a long habit of not thinking ) ( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial ) ( appearance of being right . . . ) ( ) ( -Thomas Paine 1776- ) ---------------------------------------- ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 07:26:46 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: More advice sought II At 08:23 PM 7/19/2008 -0700, you wrote: > >See http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/bnccrimp.pdf I need to update that article. When I was doing it all by hand, I choose to trim the excess braid after the connector was crimped on. The three-blade strippers make this task MUCH faster and neater. Bob . . . ----------------------------------------) ( . . . a long habit of not thinking ) ( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial ) ( appearance of being right . . . ) ( ) ( -Thomas Paine 1776- ) ---------------------------------------- ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 07:34:39 AM PST US From: Jeff Page Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Z13/8 wiring correction ? Bob, Although I can display the document, I cannot save it. I suspect there is a PDF flag that was incorrectly set when you produced the PDF. Jeff Page > I've fixed the error you've cited and published the new drawing at: > http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Adobe_Architecture_Pdfs/Z13-8Q.pdf ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 07:38:59 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Switches At 05:33 PM 7/19/2008 -0700, you wrote: >Hi, i know this has just been a subject but i have some switches that are >not 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 They are either Microswitch-like or Carling-like as illustrated in the figure on page 9 of: http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Switch_Ratings.pdf Put the switch in mid position, keyway up and look for continuity between MIDDLE and LOWER terminals on each side. If the right-side terminals are connected, then those are your 1-2 terminals and the switch operates like a Microswitch. If the left-side terminals are connected, then the switch operates like the older Carlings and the other figure applies. If you purchased the switches recently, then based on what we're hearing from users in the field, the Microswich-like numbering seems the likely answer to your question . . . but a simple ohmmeter check will confirm. Bob . . . ----------------------------------------) ( . . . a long habit of not thinking ) ( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial ) ( appearance of being right . . . ) ( ) ( -Thomas Paine 1776- ) ---------------------------------------- ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 07:44:47 AM PST US From: "Jorge Rodriguez" Subject: AeroElectric-List: Newbie Z-21A question Hi. I'm new to this list and am no electrical expert. I am about to get started on the electrical system for my Jabiru 3300 Sonex, and I've been studying all of the material in the Connection web site. I have the following questions about the Z-21A diagram. In the diagram the wires out of the alternator are wired to a Diode Bridge but nothing is wired to the Power Load (+). What is this Diode Bridge for? Also the Voltage Rectifier/Regulator in my jabiru engine has an extra positive (yellow) wire. Where in this diagram can I connect this wire? In a couple of places I see squigully lines with labeles like 1K, 3w and 3K, 3W, are these resistors? Are they really needed? What for? Thank you all for any help. Regards, Jorge Rodriguez ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 07:53:45 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Z13/8 wiring correction ? At 10:31 AM 7/20/2008 -0400, you wrote: > >Bob, >Although I can display the document, I cannot save it. I suspect >there is a PDF flag that was incorrectly set when you produced the PDF. >Jeff Page > >> I've fixed the error you've cited and published the new drawing at: >> http://www.aeroelectric.com/PPS/Adobe_Architecture_Pdfs/Z13-8Q.pdf > It's the same settings I've used since day-one. The only flags I have to remember to set each time I upload a file to the server is to make them executable by all. My ftp program doesn't do that automatically. I just downloaded the file and saved it both through the browser 'save page as' and Adobe's file save tag. Try right-clicking the link in your browser and telling it where to store the file as opposed to opening directly from the browser. Bob . . . ----------------------------------------) ( . . . a long habit of not thinking ) ( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial ) ( appearance of being right . . . ) ( ) ( -Thomas Paine 1776- ) ---------------------------------------- ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 08:07:22 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Newbie Z-21A question At 10:41 AM 7/20/2008 -0400, you wrote: >Hi. I'm new to this list and am no electrical expert. I am about to get >started on the electrical system for my Jabiru 3300 Sonex, and I've been >studying all of the material in the Connection web site. I have the >following questions about the Z-21A diagram. In the diagram the wires out >of the alternator are wired to a Diode Bridge but nothing is wired to the >Power Load (+). What is this Diode Bridge for? Also the Voltage >Rectifier/Regulator in my jabiru engine has an extra positive (yellow) >wire. Where in this diagram can I connect this wire? In a couple of >places I see squigully lines with labeles like 1K, 3w and 3K, 3W, are >these resistors? Are they really needed? What for? Note 25 of http://aeroelectric.com/articles/Rev11/AppZ_R11M.pdf speaks to this question: -------------------------- Note 25. Making the SD-8 Come-Alive without a battery: Subsequent to some excellent 'skunk werks' efforts on the part of Jim McCulley, the 'Connection is pleased to offer a work-around to older SD-8 alternator installations that encourages this useful product to come on line without benefit of a battery. Adding a pair of diodes and a start-up bias resistor as shown in Z-25, the SD-8 will come up and run as soon as the engine is started. I've suggested the diode bridge rectifier for this application but you can use wired-leaded devices like 1N5400 series devices from Radio Shack and others. The advantage of the diode-bridge is that splices between dynamo and regulator lead wires can happen in the same PIDG terminals used to wire the rectifier. Suitable parts include the following Digikey catalog numbers: 1 each 1GBPC1204/1 Diode Bridge 1 each ALSR3F1.0K 1,000 Ohm/3W 1 each ALSR3F3.0K 3,000 Ohm/3W 2 each 1N5400 3A, 50V Diode Rectifier These parts are chosen more for their mechanical configuration and robustness than for electrical ratings. Many other styles of parts may be substituted. With these added parts, one may connect a voltmeter across the 22,000 uFd filter capacitor. A few seconds after the engine is started, one should observe that the voltage across the capacitor jumps up to about 6 volts at engine idle. The voltage rises with RPM until the regulator takes over to maintain output at about 14.2 volts at cruise RPM. ---------------------- I don't recall now the rationale for applying this technique to the Jabiru drawings. The ability of the PM alternator to come on line without a battery is a function of RECTIFIER/REGULATOR design. We know that regulators supplied with the SD-8 have not exhibit this ability in the past and adding the resistors and diodes cited above are a reasonable approach to making the system work without a battery. However, I don't recall if we had specific information about the rectifier/regulator supplied/recommended for use with Jabiru's PM alternators. For now, leave the parts cited off. See how your particular alternator- rectifier/regulator behaves and then get back with us on the List if you determine that it will not come up without a battery and you would like for it to have that feature. This is not a big deal worthy of your concerns right now, let's take this up in the future after you've slain all the dragons. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 09:49:59 AM PST US From: "Richard Dudley" Subject: AeroElectric-List: RV-6A For Sale Listers, A combination of health and financial factors have forced our decision to sell our beloved airplane. If you are seriously looking for a beautiful, well-equipped and flying RV-6A read the description below. RV-6A FOR SALE Completed 2005 Total time <140 hrs O-320-D1A Total time since new <140 hrs Hartzell C/S Prop total time since new <140 hrs Slider Great paint Garmin GNS 430 nav/com SL-30 nav/com Garmin GTX 327 Transponder Garmin GMA 340 Audio panel Dual CDI IFR panel, heated pitot Dual Duckworks landing/taxi lights with Wig-Wag S-Tech System 20 auto pilot New main tires Always hangared March 2008 annual Asking: :$100K Serious buyers contact me for photos and more details off line at: rhdudley1@bellsouth.net Richard Dudley Orlando, FL ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 10:36:39 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: RV-6A For Sale At 12:45 PM 7/20/2008 -0400, you wrote: >Listers, > >A combination of health and financial factors have forced our decision to >sell our beloved airplane. If you are seriously looking for a beautiful, >well-equipped and flying RV-6A read the description below. Sorry to hear this my friend . . . for two reasons: That you've had to toss in the towel give up on what had to be an exciting and rewarding experience . . . and the reminder that we are all mortals and will have to make similar decisions at some point in our lives. I sure that all of us on the List wish you well and hope that you'll be able to keep at least one foot in OBAM aviation . . . you won't find a better bunch of folks to hang around with. Pass the word guys. Let's see if we can help Richard sell his airplane. Richard, it might be too late or impossible right now . . . but having the airplane on the flight line at OSH with a "for sale" sign on the prop would be a powerful marketplace. Bob . . . ----------------------------------------) ( . . . a long habit of not thinking ) ( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial ) ( appearance of being right . . . ) ( ) ( -Thomas Paine 1776- ) ---------------------------------------- ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 10:40:26 AM PST US From: "Fergus Kyle" Subject: AeroElectric-List: Male crimp BNCs Bob N, I need counseling. I clearly missed your article on the assembly of the subject item.... My apologies for taking your time. As you stated earlier, it's all described in: "Installation of Coax Connectors with RCT2 crimp Tool" Much obliged! Ferg ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 10:43:31 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Ignition cables At 09:19 AM 7/19/2008 -0400, you wrote: > >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... I think you've made this much too complicated my friend. The 914's ignition wiring is no more "ugly" with respect to noise and installation imperatives than our beloved mags . . . and probably even less so. The "bullet" connectors are more problematic than the kind of wire you use. These are large area, low pressure connections not unlike our glass-cartridge fuse holders of yesteryear. Knife splices under heat-shrink are much more aircraft-friendly. You could run an ordinary twisted pair of 20AWG wires to the switches on the panel but at most, ordinary shielded wire treated at the ends with techniques described in http://aeroelectric.com/articles/shldwire/shldwire.html would be entirely sufficient to your task. You could put rings or fast-ons on one end for the switch and knife- splices on the other end to connect to the engine. I'd save that RG400 for those magical radio signals that truly benefit from the capabilities of high quality coaxial cable. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 10:47:58 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: IR to ER alternator mod At 12:21 PM 7/19/2008 -0400, you wrote: > > >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 I'm not in a position to comb it for details but the concept is solid and if the writer has made no errors, it will work as advertised. I'm not hard over on removing the built in regulators. As a rule, these are perfectly satisfactory pieces of electronics. So if your thinking runs more in line with Plane Power's approach to adapting the IR alternator (and as suggested in the earlier mod article) I sure wouldn't have any heartburn over it. Bob . . . ----------------------------------------) ( . . . a long habit of not thinking ) ( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial ) ( appearance of being right . . . ) ( ) ( -Thomas Paine 1776- ) ---------------------------------------- ________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________ Time: 10:53:45 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Male crimp BNCs At 01:38 PM 7/20/2008 -0400, you wrote: > >Bob N, > I need counseling. I clearly missed your article on the assembly of >the subject item.... >My apologies for taking your time. As you stated earlier, it's all described >in: >"Installation of Coax Connectors with RCT2 crimp Tool" > Much obliged! Yeah, sort of. Note the differences between technique proffered in the article and those suggested by the trimming results produced by the three-blade stripper. The article leaves the shield wires too long until after the connector is installed because I found it easier to trim the fuzzies afterward. The 3-blade tool does all the dimensioning in one cut. So there is a difference albeit a minor one. However if you're wrestling with connectors and RG400 for your ignition wiring, I think you may be suffering from a bit of overkill in the application of coax. See my posting of a few minutes ago. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 16 ____________________________________ Time: 11:14:13 AM PST US From: "Richard Dudley" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: RV-6A For Sale Thanks, Bob for your response! It is a heart wrenching decision, but the only reasonable/rational decision for us at this time. Advancing age and financial obligations dictate this. No doubt, there were better times in the not too distant past for selling an aircraft. We'll see how this unfolds. This airplane uses your Z-11 design with only slight modification, one of your versions of Wig-Wag design, your external power design, Aeroelectric or B & C switches, ground forest of tabs, contactors, alternator and regulator, dimmer, fuse blocks and a variety of ideas and recommendations for interconnections, faston tabs, wire labeling and so on. The building and flying this airplane has been a great learning experience and pleasure. This goes for two people: myself and my wife of 52 years who became a competent riveter working both ends of the rivet. Best regards, Richard and Ruth Dudley ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Sent: Sunday, July 20, 2008 1:33 PM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: RV-6A For Sale > > > At 12:45 PM 7/20/2008 -0400, you wrote: > >>Listers, >> >>A combination of health and financial factors have forced our decision to >>sell our beloved airplane. If you are seriously looking for a beautiful, >>well-equipped and flying RV-6A read the description below. > > > Sorry to hear this my friend . . . for two reasons: > > That you've had to toss in the towel give up > on what had to be an exciting and rewarding > experience . . . > > and the reminder that we are all mortals and will > have to make similar decisions at some point in > our lives. > > I sure that all of us on the List wish you well > and hope that you'll be able to keep at least > one foot in OBAM aviation . . . you won't find > a better bunch of folks to hang around with. > > Pass the word guys. Let's see if we can help > Richard sell his airplane. Richard, it might > be too late or impossible right now . . . but > having the airplane on the flight line at > OSH with a "for sale" sign on the prop would be > a powerful marketplace. > > > Bob . . . > > ----------------------------------------) > ( . . . a long habit of not thinking ) > ( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial ) > ( appearance of being right . . . ) > ( ) > ( -Thomas Paine 1776- ) > ---------------------------------------- > > > ________________________________ Message 17 ____________________________________ Time: 12:20:01 PM PST US From: "raymondj" Subject: AeroElectric-List: "primer-line fuel injection" Greetings Bob, I'm very interested in any other info you have available on this system. I have decided to put a primer in my engine even thou the carb I will be using will have an "accelerator" pump. One of my fellow students when I was getting my PP was able to keep his airplane in the air for approx 15 min. by pumping the primer until the primary fuel system started working again. I'm convinced of the value of a primer as a redundant fuel system and yours in the only design I've seen that could be called a system to make use of it. Raymond Julian Kettle River, MN "Hope for the best, but prepare for the worst." ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Sent: Sunday, July 20, 2008 9:00 AM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: The great(?) debate . . . > > Some years back, a few folks > installed my suggested "primer-line fuel injection" > on their airplanes to back up the carburetor. One > reader wrote later that he used it to get back on > the ground comfortably after a fuel selector valve froze up. > > http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Schematics/All-Elect-Fuel.jpg > > My personal design goals call for the back up > system to be simpler, stand-alone alternatives > to the bells-and-whistles that are interdependent > on each other . . . things that break. > > http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Misc/Failure_Tolerance.pdf ________________________________ Message 18 ____________________________________ Time: 01:37:54 PM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: "primer-line fuel injection" At 02:16 PM 7/20/2008 -0500, you wrote: > >Greetings Bob, > > I'm very interested in any other info you have available on this > system. I have decided to put a primer in my engine even thou the carb I > will be using will have an "accelerator" pump. One of my fellow students > when I was getting my PP was able to keep his airplane in the air for > approx 15 min. by pumping the primer until the primary fuel system > started working again. I'm convinced of the value of a primer as a > redundant fuel system and yours in the only design I've seen that could > be called a system to make use of it. I think I published the story behind this idea but it's been some time. It's probably worth repeating. If you consider the "fuel injection" delivery systems offered on GA aircraft engines for 70 years or more, they are little more than precision orifices located outside each intake valves and pressured up with fuel at some value set by the mixture control. The Beech Skipper I learned to fly in had a primer system pressured up by the electric boost pump and controlled by a normally closed electric valve that could be opened by pushing in on the key while cranking the engine. Given that Pug Piper was doing some work for Beech on the Skipper after retiring from Piper, it would not surprise me that this same primer system was first used on some model of Piper. Consider also the numbers of dark-n-stormy night stories we've read over the decades wherein the pilot lives to tell the tale of bringing an airplane to damage-free arrival by stroking a primer pump after the primary fuel delivery system fails . . . for what ever reason. Okay, combine these three demonstrable experiments with the notion that one can fit an engine with a 4-port (or 6 if you have a BIG honker engine) primer system. Assume further that you put a needle valve in an electrically pressurized and controlled fuel source that is adjusted for say 5 GPH of fuel flow (or whatever suits you best). It should probably be a value in the 60% range so that you minimize potential for damaging the engine with a too-lean setting on one cylinder . . . but enough power to keep you airborne. But if you get really serious about this, you could plug your primer port fittings and re-drill them to achieve 1/4 desired fuel flow per port at the pressure setting of your primer pump. Now, if you open up the primer system and pull the mixture to idle cutoff (or the primary fuel supply is cut off for other reasons), the throttle now becomes your mixture control. Adjust throttle for maximum smoothness of engine operation. Now you have a totally redundant way to deliver much desired fuel to a starving engine using a collection of ideas and hardware that have been proven to perform in this task for decades. The sketch I showed you was for an all-electric system that had no valves. Have a dedicated feed from left tank to primer system. Another dedicated outlet from left tank goes to a transfer pump that feeds the right tank. A dedicated feed from the right tank feeds the engine. No valves, minimize numbers of fittings. No check valves needed other than those already built into the pumps. One could craft a variety of fuel management systems. I proposed one to a builder years ago that we put a low liquid level sensor in the right tank and use it to cross feed fuel to maintain the right tank at 1/2 full. Put low liquid level warning sensors on both tanks when either one drops to say 1/3. When the low fuel warning on left tank comes on, change automatic transfer sensing on right tank from 1/2 full to the low warning level. This will keep the right tank at the 1/3 level until left tank is empty . . . or one might choose to hold the left tank totally in reserve thus keeping the standby fuel delivery system wet at the tank end. There are a variety of variations on this theme but the design goal is to replace mechanical selector valves with solid state pumps that have very few moving parts. Further, failure of any one pump does not put the outcome of the flight at risk because of the dual, albeit crude second delivery system. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 19 ____________________________________ Time: 02:44:02 PM PST US From: Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: IR to ER alternator mod Roger: I have seen that back a few years ago and studied it. I even talked by email to the Gent. He does a great job of documenting with text and pics the mod and explaining background info. I particularly like the "A" version where you control the field on the ground side. The mod is clearly very very easy. The "B" type mod is more involved and I really think the brush holder modification looks a little delicate, but if done carefully it should be reliable. The "A" mod is a thing of beauty, but the down side of the "A" controlled field is the following: If you short out your field wire it will go full tilt boogie. Of course protecting the field wire with insulation and proper routing support is not hard. You can make it almost short proof and reliable. The second drawback is "A" type external voltage regulators are much less common. I found a couple that are in current production. However my favorite external VR is the "B" type Transpo V1200, fully digital OV and fault protected voltage regulator for about $75. (avail by order at most commercial auto elect shops). It is made for heavy duty Ford vehicles like an ambulance. http://www.aeroelectric.com/Mfgr_Data/Regulators/Transpo/V1200_Transpo.pdf Unfortunately the V1200 is a "B" type controller varies the positive side of the field to control the alternator's output. If you want an "A" type, one model off the top of my head os for a SEADOO (yes SEADOO): Voltage Set Point: 14.5 V Regulation: A-Circuit Transpo #: 4229-124 SEADOO #: 27800-1241, 27800-1554 http://www.transpo.de/Catalog/Images/4229124.jpg There are other "A" type but like this one and you could utilize the automotive/sealed connectors. Good luck, personally the internal regulator has thermal protection and an IC micro processor which offers way more protection. Also there are no DIY home-brew solder joints. Keep the internal regulator, supply cooling air to it, never turn the alternator ON/OFF while the engine is running (ie turn it on before start and off after shutdown as it was designed) and your chance of problems will be very low. (PS, no crow bar) There are stock ND's that have well over 1000 hours on them. I do recommend you proactively changing brushes at 750 hours +/- 250 hours. They are cheap and easy to replace. Low humidity at altitude is hard on the brushes verses car use. Also we tend to run more avg output than a car in a hot cowl on a shaking engine, more severe than most cars. Also don't buy lousy rebuilds and lousy clone alternators. There are good vendors and bad ones. If you go with PlanePower or even Van (now they are using a better aftermarket vendor) you should be fine. If you are doing all this because you are worried that your internal regulator will go insane and melt your electical system down, you are worrying too much. That story is way over blown and very rare. In the cases where damage was done the pilot did a few things to make it happen. Most failures of ND type alternator are usually not OV but they just stop working. When they do lose stable voltage regulation they generally top out in the 16-17 volt range. Most modern avionics can work on 10-30 volts all day long. In the event of say an unstable regulator, lower RPM, increase load (landing lights) and ideally you have a pull-able CB in the panel for you B-lead, pull CB, reduce elect load & land. No fear no dark and stormy night. Also IR gives you a LO/Hi volt and fault warning light. Cheers George >From: "ROGER & JEAN CURTIS" >Subject: AeroElectric-List: 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&Itemid=72 ________________________________ Message 20 ____________________________________ Time: 04:25:26 PM PST US From: Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: IR to ER alternator mod I forgot about Chrysler, who do make some "A" type regulators. This one has adjustable voltage. Voltage Set Point: 14.3V; Regulation: A-Circuit Special Heavy Duty Version of C8312 Solid State Circuit Superior Loading Adjustable Voltage For 7A Rotors FOR USE ON: Chrysler Products Transpo part # C8312 CHRYSLER Part #'s (x-reference) 3 438 150 3 755 850 3 755 960 3 874 520 4 091 050 4 111 990 Of course not many external regulators include any over type relay. I recommend power the regulator through one of these (I like it better than the Crow Bar short CB short method.) http://www.periheliondesign.com/lovm.htm All the best. George ________________________________ Message 21 ____________________________________ Time: 04:27:01 PM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: IR to ER alternator mod At 02:39 PM 7/20/2008 -0700, you wrote: >Roger: I have seen that back a few years ago and >studied it. I even talked by email to the Gent. > >If you are doing all this because you are worried that your >internal regulator will go insane and melt your electical >system down, you are worrying too much. That story is >way over blown and very rare. Over blown? Is that between humongous and gargantuan or just under bodacious . . . I forget. But even your words "very rare" says the risk is not zero. > In the cases where damage was >done the pilot did a few things to make it happen. George, go away. You have ZERO evidence of that and your accusation is uncalled for. The evidence contrary to that statement is solid and inarguable which makes your statement tantamount to calling goodly numbers of folks liars. > Most >failures of ND type alternator are usually not OV but >they just stop working. When they do lose stable voltage >regulation they generally top out in the 16-17 volt range. Maybe . . . but again, are you ready to offer 100% coverage insurance for the ones that are not "generally" topping out at 17V? > Most >modern avionics can work on 10-30 volts all day long. But batteries don't. Lights don't. Contactors don't and how many OBAM aircraft are fitted only with "modern" avionics . . . and exactly when does "modern" kick in? 1985? 1996? > >In the event of say an unstable regulator, lower RPM, Okay, a fully fielded ND puts out full rated current at about 4500 shaft RPM. When running at cruise (2500 on engine) the alternator is spinning at about 4x that. So if we want to get the alternator to be current limited to say 20A, we need to get it down to about 1500 RPM which puts the engine at less than idle. What kind of emergency operations procedure is that? > >increase load (landing lights) and ideally you have a >pull-able CB in the panel for you B-lead, pull CB, reduce >elect load & land. No fear no dark and stormy night. But assuming that you can pull a b-lead breaker and bring the power back up, the alternator self- destructs. Your advice is horse-hockey by the bucket-full George. Go away. >Also IR gives you a LO/Hi volt and fault warning light. Which is only a warning light as far as anyone can deduce from the lack of schematics to substantiate any claims to the contrary. It does nothing to actively shut down an alternator being driven by a failed regulator. . . . and oh yes, if the designers included ov warning in their product, could it be that they also believe the risk for their product to malfunction is not zero? . . . or do you think they included that feature just to placate me? Go away George. I will not have you trolling this List for acolytes in the Cult of the Infallible ND. Go start your own List. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 22 ____________________________________ Time: 04:32:03 PM PST US From: "raymondj" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: "primer-line fuel injection" What can I say? Thanks AGAIN for another valuable bit of education. Raymond Julian Kettle River, MN "Hope for the best, but prepare for the worst." do not archive ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Sent: Sunday, July 20, 2008 3:34 PM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: "primer-line fuel injection" > > > At 02:16 PM 7/20/2008 -0500, you wrote: >> >> >>Greetings Bob, >> >> I'm very interested in any other info you have available on this >> system. I have decided to put a primer in my engine even thou the carb I >> will be using will have an "accelerator" pump. One of my fellow students >> when I was getting my PP was able to keep his airplane in the air for >> approx 15 min. by pumping the primer until the primary fuel system >> started working again. I'm convinced of the value of a primer as a >> redundant fuel system and yours in the only design I've seen that could >> be called a system to make use of it. > > I think I published the story behind this idea but > it's been some time. It's probably worth repeating. > > If you consider the "fuel injection" delivery systems > offered on GA aircraft engines for 70 years or more, > they are little more than precision orifices located outside > each intake valves and pressured up with fuel at some > value set by the mixture control. > > The Beech Skipper I learned to fly in had a primer system > pressured up by the electric boost pump and controlled by > a normally closed electric valve that could be opened > by pushing in on the key while cranking the engine. Given > that Pug Piper was doing some work for Beech on the Skipper > after retiring from Piper, it would not surprise me that > this same primer system was first used on some model of > Piper. > > Consider also the numbers of dark-n-stormy night stories > we've read over the decades wherein the pilot lives to tell > the tale of bringing an airplane to damage-free arrival > by stroking a primer pump after the primary fuel delivery > system fails . . . for what ever reason. > > Okay, combine these three demonstrable experiments with > the notion that one can fit an engine with a 4-port > (or 6 if you have a BIG honker engine) primer system. > Assume further that you put a needle valve in an > electrically pressurized and controlled fuel source > that is adjusted for say 5 GPH of fuel flow (or whatever > suits you best). It should probably be a value in the 60% > range so that you minimize potential for damaging the > engine with a too-lean setting on one cylinder . . . but > enough power to keep you airborne. But if you get really > serious about this, you could plug your primer port fittings > and re-drill them to achieve 1/4 desired fuel flow per > port at the pressure setting of your primer pump. > > Now, if you open up the primer system and pull the mixture > to idle cutoff (or the primary fuel supply is cut off > for other reasons), the throttle now becomes your mixture > control. Adjust throttle for maximum smoothness of engine > operation. > > Now you have a totally redundant way to deliver much desired > fuel to a starving engine using a collection of ideas > and hardware that have been proven to perform in this task > for decades. > > The sketch I showed you was for an all-electric system that > had no valves. Have a dedicated feed from left tank to primer > system. Another dedicated outlet from left tank goes to > a transfer pump that feeds the right tank. A dedicated feed > from the right tank feeds the engine. No valves, minimize > numbers of fittings. No check valves needed other than those > already built into the pumps. > > One could craft a variety of fuel management systems. > I proposed one to a builder years ago that we put a low > liquid level sensor in the right tank and use it to > cross feed fuel to maintain the right tank at 1/2 > full. Put low liquid level warning sensors on both > tanks when either one drops to say 1/3. When the low > fuel warning on left tank comes on, change automatic > transfer sensing on right tank from 1/2 full to > the low warning level. This will keep the right tank > at the 1/3 level until left tank is empty . . . or > one might choose to hold the left tank totally in > reserve thus keeping the standby fuel delivery system > wet at the tank end. > > There are a variety of variations on this theme but > the design goal is to replace mechanical selector > valves with solid state pumps that have very few > moving parts. Further, failure of any one pump does > not put the outcome of the flight at risk because > of the dual, albeit crude second delivery system. > > Bob . . . > > > 270.5.2/1562 - Release Date: 7/19/2008 2:01 PM > > > ________________________________ Message 23 ____________________________________ Time: 05:15:39 PM PST US Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Newbie Z-21A question From: "DaveG601XL" Jorge, The yellow wire is a voltage sense line. Tie it in with your red output wire. It needs to see what the output voltage of that line is in order for the regulator to do its job. Good Luck, -------- David Gallagher 601 XL, ready to fly. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=194022#194022 ________________________________ Message 24 ____________________________________ Time: 05:43:26 PM PST US Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: The great(?) debate . . . From: "marcausman" Some people are innovators and some are laggards. Both types are fine, just decide which you are while building your plane. :D -------- Marc Ausman http://www.verticalpower.com RV-7 IO-390 Flying Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=194030#194030 ________________________________ Message 25 ____________________________________ Time: 06:18:01 PM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Newbie Z-21A question At 05:11 PM 7/20/2008 -0700, you wrote: > > >Jorge, > >The yellow wire is a voltage sense line. Tie it in with your red output >wire. It needs to see what the output voltage of that line is in order >for the regulator to do its job. Dave, the last wiring diagram I saw for the 3300 was this thing gleaned from the installation/instruction manual. http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Schematics/Jabiru_3300_Alternator_Wiring.jpg Is there something more up to date available? This first cut at it was exceedingly unhelpful and doesn't have a yellow wire. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 26 ____________________________________ Time: 08:01:08 PM PST US From: "Fergus Kyle" Subject: AeroElectric-List: ignition cables Bob N, As usual you have been right on the money in my instance. First of all, confronted with the bullet connections (hardly metric, for a 914) I presumed that it must be something much more complex and thus my first query. Secondly, I employ a Dynon engine display unit with its multitude of small wires bunched almost exactly where the Mag switch lines were to enter the instrument panel. I imagined the worst. Third, it appears the switches will have to site almost up against my other weakness, a 10inch screen run by a MiniMac for GPS, APRS, navigation etc. All of this left me with the fear that even the slightest ignition RMI would affect the second two, and determined to run it with the securest coax cover I know - the RG400. To realise that your solution, the looping of the centre coax wire out of its shield and termination (a task I have performed perhaps hundreds of time in HF gear) is enough - convinces me I'm in the wrong hobby....... Nevertheless, having today produced a stainless steep panel for twin feed-through BNC females at the firewall and a alu box which houses the back of the two switches, I am committed to completing the fiasco and will probably have the cleanest ignition result in four counties..... Ah well - a purified soul leads to a good night's sleep. Again many thanks for your help and advice. Ferg PS - and because I was trying to use a 2-blade coax stripper, I couldn't fathom the dimensions. ________________________________ Message 27 ____________________________________ Time: 08:18:49 PM PST US From: "Ralph Finch" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: The great(?) debate . . . Bob, thanks for responding to my query with your thoughts on the topic (centralization and control of an aircraft electrical system). I have no experience with electrical systems or homebuilding, just starting my RV-9A QB. But even though I started programming with Fortran and punch cards, I've kept reasonably current with computer usage and trends over the last nearly 35 years. I work with and develop numerical models of estuaries at work. In other words I still enjoy tinkering with PCs. I won't dogmatically put a technology on- or off-limits for a proposed application. Well, true, it would be a hard sell to convince me that anything from Microsoft would be safe aboard an airplane. Furthermore, as I consider my experience over the last few years owning and maintaining a minimal IFR Alon Aircoupe, I observe a number of problems have come up with traditional "steam gage" technology as old as John McCain. So I won't consider an old technology automatically better. Instead, each technology must prove itself again as a competing idea comes along. That forms the basis for the intrigue I feel about Vertical Power and its concept. I've already decided there will be absolutely no vacuum pumps on my -9A. And given the less than excellent reliability of mechanical gyros, I will have an AHRS with at most a single electrical attitude gyro for backup. Given the use of AHRS, that means I can put in an EFIS with, again, a few--very few--traditional round gages for backup. At this point something like VP begins to seem reasonable. When I first heard of it only months ago I was shocked. Trust most of your electrical to a single silicon box? And then allow it to make decisions and actuate switches and things on your behalf?? But as the idea soaked in over the weeks and I read about others' experience with it--admittedly still limited--I found myself warming up to the idea. I'm still a year away from making a final decision to use VP. But I continue to solicit opinions everywhere I can, and again, sincerely appreciate the time you took to write and post yours. Ralph Finch Davis, California -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L. Nuckolls, III Sent: Saturday, July 19, 2008 3:38 PM Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: 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 . . . ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Other Matronics Email List Services ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Post A New Message aeroelectric-list@matronics.com UN/SUBSCRIBE http://www.matronics.com/subscription List FAQ http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/AeroElectric-List.htm Web Forum Interface To Lists http://forums.matronics.com Matronics List Wiki http://wiki.matronics.com Full Archive Search Engine http://www.matronics.com/search 7-Day List Browse http://www.matronics.com/browse/aeroelectric-list Browse Digests http://www.matronics.com/digest/aeroelectric-list Browse Other Lists http://www.matronics.com/browse Live Online Chat! http://www.matronics.com/chat Archive Downloading http://www.matronics.com/archives Photo Share http://www.matronics.com/photoshare Other Email Lists http://www.matronics.com/emaillists Contributions http://www.matronics.com/contribution ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.