---------------------------------------------------------- AeroElectric-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Mon 07/21/08: 23 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 02:52 AM - Wig Wag and LED's (selwyn) 2. 03:13 AM - fuses, wire sizes (bob noffs) 3. 04:02 AM - Re: Re: S700 switch pin positions (bob noffs) 4. 04:55 AM - Igntion Switches () 5. 06:10 AM - Re: fuses, wire sizes (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 6. 06:55 AM - Re: The great(?) debate . . . (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 7. 07:02 AM - Re: Wig Wag and LED's (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 8. 07:08 AM - Re: ignition cables (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 9. 07:12 AM - Re: Re: S700 switch pin positions (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 10. 07:16 AM - Re: The great(?) debate . . . (Ernest Christley) 11. 08:07 AM - Ground in an all wood airplane (ROGER & JEAN CURTIS) 12. 08:25 AM - Re: The great(?) debate . . . (marcausman) 13. 09:31 AM - Re: Ground in an all wood airplane (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 14. 10:12 AM - Re: Ground in an all wood airplane (ROGER & JEAN CURTIS) 15. 10:18 AM - Re: Re: IR to ER alternator mod (Steve Stearns) 16. 11:26 AM - Re: Problems with multiple emails (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Mich=E8le_B?=) 17. 11:32 AM - Re: Re: IR to ER alternator mod (earl_schroeder@juno.com) 18. 12:43 PM - Re: Re: IR to ER alternator mod (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 19. 04:04 PM - Re: Ground in an all wood airplane (Ken) 20. 04:51 PM - Re: "primer-line fuel injection" (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 21. 07:35 PM - fuses, wire sizes (bob noffs) 22. 09:26 PM - 30 Amp switch? (Ed Holyoke) 23. 09:37 PM - Re: 30 Amp switch? (Don Vs) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 02:52:14 AM PST US Subject: AeroElectric-List: Wig Wag and LED's From: "selwyn" I'm planning the set up of a wig wag flash system on my forward lights using the B&C SSF1 unit. I notice that this unit will switch up to 150 W and that it requires a load on each leg to function. I am wondering what the minimum value for the load is as I am planning on using LEDs of around 4 or 5 W for each light. Will this unit function correctly with loads such as this? Cheers, Selwyn. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=194074#194074 ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 03:13:08 AM PST US From: "bob noffs" Subject: AeroElectric-List: fuses, wire sizes hi all, i am following a schematic for an ov mod and am stumped at the 10 ga wire with 30 amp fuse in the diagram. the fuseholder from b and c for a 30 amp fuse will only allow a 12 ga wire be fitted inside the crimp connection. a fuseholder from NAPA labeled for a 30 amp fuse uses 12 ga wire. this 10 ga wire is used with the 20 amp breaker from 12 volt power to the relay. this is on a 3300 jabiru. what do i do? any help appreciated. bob noffs ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 04:02:49 AM PST US From: "bob noffs" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: S700 switch pin positions i also pulled out a 3 yr old carling 2-10 switch and it matched the diagram of a switch as it was wired as a master in one of the ''z'' schematics. it was correct according to the diagram in the schematic. i didnt compare it to the chapter on switches. i vaguely remember though calling b and c about this issue several years ago and was told a diagram [dont remember which] was backwards. i guess i will double check the z drawing and the other diagram in the book. bob noffs ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Sent: Saturday, July 19, 2008 6:05 PM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: 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 4 _____________________________________ Time: 04:55:29 AM PST US From: Subject: AeroElectric-List: Igntion Switches 7/21/2008 Hello Skip, You wrote: "I saw the referenced ACS Keyed Ignition Switches and a starter switch. What is the benefit in two switches over one?" I am glad you asked. The history of these types of ignition switches: http://www.aircraftspruce.com/search/search.php does not fill one with great confidence. See: http://tinyurl.com/j3m5j They are mechanical devices, of not necessarily the highest quality -- sort of like an old time watch -- with a lot of little bits and pieces inside that can get worn / broken. Actually I'd prefer three switches. A simple, reliable, separate toggle switch for each magneto P lead, and a push button switch with a guard on it for activating the starter contact solenoid. See the postings copied below for other's experience with the ACS / Bendix keyed type switches. 'OC' Says: "The best investment we can make is the effort to gather and understand knowledge." -------------------------------------------- {#} Replies are directed back to kisbuilders@angus.mystery.com {#} To reply to the author, write to Keith.Miller@esa.int OC I started with the standard ACS switch , but junked it after it left one of the mags live after switching off , now I also have 3 seperate switches ( 2 "heavy duty" for the mags and a "push to make" type for the starter ). ----------------------------------------------------------- Message: #19408 From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: ACS switch issues for Rotax 912S > > >Ok, I traced it down to the ACS ignition switch (P/N A-510-2). When I >switch to the left side ("R") it will cut out sometimes. Not very often >but if I do it just right then off she goes. The switch only had been >used about 40 hours when this started showing up. > >It appears that it is grounding, or at least partially grounding, >inadvertently when switched over to that "mag". > >Could it have to do with the diode issue that ACS mentions with regards to >impulse coupled mags? The diode was added to the starter contactor control circuit . . . with totally bogus engineering behind it. See http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/spikecatcher.pdf >FWIW I've wired according to Bob's notes with the shield acting as the >ground. I was very very careful when wiring and so far this is the only >electrical problem I've had. > >I've also wiggled all the wires around behind the switch (and also the >engine) and it doesn't seem to be any of the wires. I'm guessing it's >internal to the switch or something to do with a spike of some sort. > >Any other ideas before I pull the switch out and send it back to ACS? Have you considered getting your money back and putting in toggle switches? In my never humble opinion, key-switches suck. Bob . . . ----------------------------------------- ----- Original Message ----- From: "Skip LaPolice" Sent: Saturday, July 19, 2008 3:26 PM Subject: Re: AW: Replacing Starter > Hi Owen, > I noticed in your reply to JF regarding an ignition > switch that it is better to have " separate magneto > and starters." Please help my understanding. > I'm building a Pulsar with a 2200 Jabiru and I'm > thinking avionics as I mix epoxy. > I saw the referenced ACS Keyed Ignition Switches > and a starter switch. What is the benefit in two switches > over one? My car has one. > Thanks much! > Be well, > Skip/ ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 06:10:37 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: fuses, wire sizes At 05:10 AM 7/21/2008 -0500, you wrote: >hi all, > i am following a schematic for an ov mod and am stumped at the 10 ga > wire with 30 amp fuse in the diagram. the fuseholder from b and c for a > 30 amp fuse will only allow a 12 ga wire be fitted inside the crimp > connection. a fuseholder from NAPA labeled for a 30 amp fuse uses 12 ga > wire. this 10 ga wire is used with the 20 amp breaker from 12 volt power > to the relay. this is on a 3300 jabiru. what do i do? any help appreciated. Who's schematic? Wire sizes versus published recommended protection levels is a VERY broad brush. The "conventions" adopted by most of the aircraft industry are exceedingly conservative too. There are TWO considerations for selecting a size of wire and the protection for that wire. (1) TEMPERATURE rise over ambient as it relates to that particular wire, where it's to be installed and the rating of it's INSULATION for maximum operating temperature. (2) Voltage drop in a wire might degrade performance of the appliance at the other end. To make our jobs easier in the TC aircraft world where the problems to be solved are much greater and more frustrating than wire selection, conventions were adopted that assured the designer of good performance in 99.9% of all instances where wire is used aboard the airplane. Chapter 8 of the 'Connection speaks to these issues. You can download a copy of this chapter published at: http://aeroelectric.com/articles/Rev11/Ch8_R12.pdf where you will find two figures that speak to these conventions where we said that 10C rise is a good target for conservative application of wiring in aircraft and that we choose wire gages to limit voltage drop in wiring to 5% of system voltage. Folks are often worried about burning up wires should they be protected by the wrong size of fuse. I'll refer you to this photo . . . http://aeroelectric.com/articles/Rev11/Ch8_R12.pdf where a 22AWG wire has been loaded to 20 amps for about 15 minutes. The insulation temperature of the wire has settled out at 112C (the wire is rated at 150C). However, at 16 milliohms per foot and a 5% wire drop value of 0.7 volts in a 14v system, the maximum length of a 22AWG conductor in a 20A circuit would be (0.7/20x0.016) 2.2 feet long! Obviously, nobody would WANT to use a 22AWG wire in such a demanding way . . . the point is that it COULD be used without creating an issue with respect to fire hazard. So the short answer to your question is use the 12AWG wire. If this wire in in series with your alternator (rated at 20A I think) then a 30A fuse is appropriate protection for the purpose of preventing nuisance trips . . . and this in no way places your 12AWG wires at risk for immolation. Bob . . . ----------------------------------------) ( . . . a long habit of not thinking ) ( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial ) ( appearance of being right . . . ) ( ) ( -Thomas Paine 1776- ) ---------------------------------------- ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 06:55:02 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: The great(?) debate . . . At 08:15 PM 7/20/2008 -0700, you wrote: > >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. But are the "problems" one of shortcomings in as-new performance? In other words, if this were a factory-new airplane, would you find the instruments as-supplied inadequate to the task? Or are the problems one of maintenance and failure to perform . . . i.e. the puppies are just worn out and/or suffering the effects of age? >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. Sure, and exceedingly easy to do. > 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. Yup, the new kids on the block with no moving parts are a no-brainer selection . . . especially since it's increasingly difficult to even find good useable HARDWARE that promises satisfactory service life and an acceptable cost of ownership. >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. As I had to state in my soliloquy it's certainly a matter of setting one's design goals and then meeting them but hopefully free of the Madison Avenue hammers of safety, reliability and convenience when the new product is clearly more complicated, heavier and expensive. If I have to walk into a planning meeting for the purpose of selling an idea where all the weight, cost and parts count numbers are moving in the wrong direction, there needs to be a really compelling reason for taking the hit to performance of our airplane. >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. I understand. I would only suggest that you divide the thought processes into two categories. Appliance selection where clearly the performance, cost-of-ownership and reliability issues are inarguable. But these appliances only need to communicate with each other on WIRES. The performance, cost-of-ownership and reliability of copper has not changed in thousands of years . . . insulations have just about peaked (I've not seen a quantum jump in wire insulation in 20+ years 22759 is about as "ideal" and we need to be). So consider appliance selection and power distribution/ control as two tasks. Distribution and control is not unlike the water system for your town. Yeah, there some new plastics for pipes and this valve design is longer lived and less expensive because it's assembled by machines . . . but the necessary functionality does not benefit much from the addition of software, touch screen and automated response to stimulus. Sometimes the best way to drive a nail is with a hammer. After sifting and sorting all those marbles you just WANT that kind of system in your airplane, by all means . . . and know that its incorporation does not present a great shift in risk. No matter what's in your panel, these guys should be in your flight bag. http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Misc/Failure_Tolerance.pdf They work in your Aircoupe and will work just as well in your super-whizzy RV! The bottom line is to fly comfortably in either. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 07:02:40 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Wig Wag and LED's At 02:47 AM 7/21/2008 -0700, you wrote: > >I'm planning the set up of a wig wag flash system on my forward lights >using the B&C SSF1 unit. I notice that this unit will switch up to 150 W >and that it requires a load on each leg to function. I am wondering what >the minimum value for the load is as I am planning on using LEDs of around >4 or 5 W for each light. Will this unit function correctly with loads >such as this? > >Cheers, Selwyn. That's a damned good question my friend . . . and I don't know. Those electronic automotive flashers are certainly much less sensitive to load changes than their thermo-mechanical ancestors but I've never explored the necessary minimum load to not affect functionality. Leds are very different than incandescent lamps. An LED biased up with microamps across it drops voltage almost the same as when running full bright. I'm fairly sure that the electronics in that flasher are looking for "nearly ground" through an un-energized filament to function properly. When push comes to shove, you can probably parallel one of the lamps with a resistor that might need to be on the order of 30 ohms (about 3 watts of 'wasted' power) to keep the flasher happy. You can experiment with this on the bench. In any case, the final configuration will still be MUCH less energy needy in spite of the idiosyncrasies of the automotive electronic flasher. Bob . . . ----------------------------------------) ( . . . a long habit of not thinking ) ( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial ) ( appearance of being right . . . ) ( ) ( -Thomas Paine 1776- ) ---------------------------------------- ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 07:08:59 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: ignition cables At 10:57 PM 7/20/2008 -0400, you wrote: > >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. > 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....... Naw . . . there are many recipes for success in every venue and not every chef gets there by the same roads. The nice thing about these activities is the daily opportunity to go to bed tonight knowing something new that we did not wake up with this morning. > 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..... Very good my friend. What you've proposed will certainly function as needed. > 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. Hmmm . . . do I recall having shipped some strippers up to you guys in Toronto . . . or was that somebody else? I think that was right after I did the seminar. Were those 2-blade strippers? Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 07:12:01 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: S700 switch pin positions At 05:58 AM 7/21/2008 -0500, you wrote: > >i also pulled out a 3 yr old carling 2-10 switch and it matched the >diagram of a switch as it was wired as a master in one of the ''z'' >schematics. it was correct according to the diagram in the schematic. i >didnt compare it to the chapter on switches. i vaguely remember though >calling b and c about this issue several years ago and was told a diagram >[dont remember which] was backwards. i guess i will double check the z >drawing and the other diagram in the book. Very good info sir. Your report combined with notes from other folks suggests that Carling converted to the industry wide conventions about 4 years ago. I'm hoping to hear from somebody at Carling but not holding my breath. I've put the switch article in my to-do bin and will update it shortly to reflect this new data. Thank you all for your help in sorting it out. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 07:16:07 AM PST US From: Ernest Christley Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: The great(?) debate . . . Ralph Finch wrote: > 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. > Ralph, the first thing to consider when thinking of the VP (or any other component) is "What am I gonna' do when that thing goes tits up?" Those highly integrated devices want to control everything, but you need some way to access control of the flight critical systems totally independent of the computer, lest you surrender the title of PIC to a computer. Consider this, I'm using a MegaSquirt, a DIY engine controller using open-source software which I will be modifying. It controls both ignition and injectors. I built it myself, and I'm perfectly comfortable with it. How can I be so secure? ...because of HOW it is used. For the ignition, the MegaSquirt drives two Ford EDIS-4 ignition controllers. Both will run independently of the Megasquirt, and either is capable of keeping the engine running (with a static advance). If the MegaSquirt and one of the EDIS modules go south at the same time, I still get sparks. If the generator goes out, one of the EDIS units has a separate generator dedicated to it. For the fuel, the MegaSquirt has total control of the electronics. If it fails, I lose all the injectors. That didn't make me happy, so a second pickup from the tank (the Dyke Delta has only one) will be routed through a valve in order to gravity feed fuel directly to the throttle body. If the MegaSquirt goes stupid on me, I simply switch it off and crack open the valve until the engine runs 'about right'. The DIY engine controller is necessary for smooth starting, taxiing and takeoff. It is inconsequential for cruise or landing. If you can point to the VP as it is installed in your project and know that you will be safe if it blows smoke mid-flight, then move on to consider what neat things it can do for you and if your willing to pay for it. But the first step is always to insure that you are and always will be PIC. This advice carries a "100% satisfaction or double your money back" guarantee. ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 08:07:01 AM PST US From: "ROGER & JEAN CURTIS" Subject: AeroElectric-List: Ground in an all wood airplane Bob, I am building an all wood plane and plan to use dual electronic ignition. A small gnawing issue is grounding. I will have a rear battery with only a single FAT wire ground coming up to the firewall. Even though I will have my 2 ignition systems on separate battery busses this will leave me with a ground, single point of failure. I have been kicking around some other ideas, but am concerned about generating ground loop noise. I would be interested in your take on this. Thanks, as always for your advise, Roger ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 08:25:35 AM PST US Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: The great(?) debate . . . From: "marcausman" If you install an EFIS, you are going to install backup gauges too. The same concept applies for Vertical Power. You can wire backup circuits for those circuits you deem "critical" so that they will continue to operate even if the system goes tango uniform. Take a look at the installation manual here: http://www.verticalpower.com/documents.html and you'll see a section dedicated to backup circuits, and they're fairly easy to wire. How many circuits need a backup is up to you, but we find that most customers have anywhere from zero (where EFIS has its own battery backup) to two backups. -------- Marc Ausman http://www.verticalpower.com RV-7 IO-390 Flying Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=194132#194132 ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 09:31:48 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Ground in an all wood airplane At 11:02 AM 7/21/2008 -0400, you wrote: >Bob, > > >I am building an all wood plane and plan to use dual electronic >ignition. A small gnawing issue is grounding. I will have a rear battery >with only a single FAT wire ground coming up to the firewall. Even though >I will have my 2 ignition systems on separate battery busses this will >leave me with a ground, single point of failure. I have been kicking >around some other ideas, but am concerned about generating ground loop >noise. I would be interested in your take on this. The large wires in your airplane are really robust. The thoughtfully installed ground wire is as reliable as prop bolts. The ground loop issue is addressed with the ground system architectures described in the 'Connection. In the case of a non-conducting airplane, bringing everything to the single point ground location on the firewall will eliminate any concerns for "loops". In fact, you would have to go out of your way to create a ground loop in a non-conducting airplane. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 10:12:53 AM PST US From: "ROGER & JEAN CURTIS" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Ground in an all wood airplane Bob, Thanks! This was basically my thoughts also, but I wanted to make sure I wasn't overlooking something. Roger At 11:02 AM 7/21/2008 -0400, you wrote: >Bob, > > >I am building an all wood plane and plan to use dual electronic >ignition. A small gnawing issue is grounding. I will have a rear battery >with only a single FAT wire ground coming up to the firewall. Even though >I will have my 2 ignition systems on separate battery busses this will >leave me with a ground, single point of failure. I have been kicking >around some other ideas, but am concerned about generating ground loop >noise. I would be interested in your take on this. The large wires in your airplane are really robust. The thoughtfully installed ground wire is as reliable as prop bolts. The ground loop issue is addressed with the ground system architectures described in the 'Connection. In the case of a non-conducting airplane, bringing everything to the single point ground location on the firewall will eliminate any concerns for "loops". In fact, you would have to go out of your way to create a ground loop in a non-conducting airplane. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________ Time: 10:18:49 AM PST US From: Steve Stearns Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: IR to ER alternator mod Bob, Eric, George, JetPilot and the rest of the list: From the perspective of someone who has been following the list for a while and who is not as ignorant as most of things electrical nor of lists supporting the free exchange of ideas and, perhaps most important, someone who is not "tribal" in the least, I respectfully ask that Eric, George, JetPilot NOT go away. I don't have to agree with different viewpoints to appreciate them. As much as we all strive for simple ideas and imagine that correct application of logic will always result in absolute truths, the reality is that there is much variation in our foundation goals, premises etc. that have a great affect on our individual conclusions of what is right for each of us. I, for one, think this list would be greatly enhanced if there was less defensive posturing, bile etc. Responses to ideas found to be objectionable could be concisely communicated as simply as "regarding the idea that ... suffice to say that although there are proponents of this approach I strongly disagree with it for reasons that are well documented in past posts. Please do your homework on this idea and the alternatives before committing to an approach". The 'I'm still right and you're still wrong and since you still don't agree with me let me explain it to you louder (or longer...)', which, by my reading, has been evident in both camps of the great debate seems to me to be not just disrespectful to the involved parties but also to the list-reading public in general. Best wishes to all, Steve Stearns Boulder/Longmont, Colorado CSA,EAA,IAC,AOPA,PE,ARRL,BARC (but ignorant none-the-less) Restoring (since 1/07): N45FC O235 Longeze Cothern/Friling CF1 (~1000 Hrs) Flying (since 9/86): N43732 A65 Taylorcraft BC12D ________________________________ Message 16 ____________________________________ Time: 11:26:43 AM PST US From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Mich=E8le_B?= Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Problems with multiple emails Thanks Matt - but any reason why this should be happening only with the matronics lists ? aeroelectric included ? Michle -----Message d'origine----- De: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] De la part de Matt Dralle Envoy: vendredi 18 juillet 2008 17:49 : aeroelectric-list@matronics.com Objet: RE: AeroElectric-List: Problems with multiple emails Michele, Looks like the problem is at your email server. The Matronics server is getting the follow response from your email server: RPFD:michele.delsol@microsigma.fr MDeferred: Connection timed out with mail.ionfunding.com. This tells the Matronics server that the email was not properly delivered, so after a period of time, it tries to deliver it again. Apparently, the message is actually being delivered, however. This would account for the multiple copies of the same message. I would contact your ISP and ask them about their Internet connectivity. They are probably already aware of connection reliability issues, but it wouldn't hurt to add your complaint. Best regards, Matt Dralle Matronics Network/Email Manager At 11:49 PM 7/17/2008 Thursday, you wrote: > >Steve, > >Negative as this is only happening with matronics emails. The ration is >currently anywhere from 6 to 1 to 10 to 1. > >As to unsubscribe, resubscribe, since I am on several matronics list, I'd >keep this as a last solution. > >Do not archive > >Michle >-----Message d'origine----- >De : owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com >[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] De la part de Steve >Thomas >Envoy : jeudi 17 juillet 2008 15:28 > : aeroelectric-list@matronics.com >Objet : Re: AeroElectric-List: Problems with multiple emails > > >Michle, > >This is not an unusual situation with Outlook. If you are getting >your mail from an Exchange server, the server is resending the >messages to your Outlook because, for some reason, it didn't think >that it was delivered correctly the last time. Talk to your system >administrator. If not Exchange, then the same situation is occurring >where Outlook is not correctly responding to the delivery of the >mail. Try using Thunderbird. > > >On Jul 16, 2008, at 11:52 PM, Michle W wrote: > >> = >> >> Matte, >> >> I've been getting recently aeroelectric duplicates in large numbers. >> Some as >> much as 6 copies of the same email. It's a pain as instead of >> getting 10 >> emails, I get 50. This does not seem to be happening on the other >> matronics >> lists. >> >> Am I alone with this syndrome ? or are others also being hit? >> >> Michle >> RV8 - engine/avionics >> >> -----Message d'origine----- >> De : owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com >> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] De la part de >> Terry >> Watson >> Envoy : mercredi 16 juillet 2008 21:49 >> : aeroelectric-list@matronics.com >> Objet : RE: AeroElectric-List: Sleep well tonight, your government >> is awake. >> >> > >> >> If your foresight was as good as your hindsight, you could have >> prevented >> 9-11 for us. Saddam Hussein's generals thought they had weapons of >> mass >> destruction, as did the intelligence services of all civilized >> countries >> that were interested enough to think about it. Where were you when >> we needed >> you? Look at all the lives and dollars you could have saved if you >> would >> have shown them they were wrong. >> >> Terry >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com >> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Dj >> Merrill >> Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 11:27 AM >> To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com >> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Sleep well tonight, your government is >> awake. >> >> >> simon@synchronousdesign.com wrote: >>> >>> Hmm, Frank, we invaded Afghanistan because of 9-11. We invaded Iraq >>> because they invaded Kuwait. >>> >> >> Plenty of video of Bush saying that we invaded Iraq because Iraq >> had >> Weapons of Mass Destruction that he was afraid were going to be used >> to >> help terrorists. >> Hmmm, where exactly did we find those WMDs again? >> >> -Dj >> do not archive >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > Matt G Dralle | Matronics | PO Box 347 | Livermore | CA | 94551 925-606-1001 V | 925-606-6281 F | dralle@matronics.com Email http://www.matronics.com/ WWW | Featuring Products For Aircraft ________________________________ Message 17 ____________________________________ Time: 11:32:32 AM PST US From: "earl_schroeder@juno.com" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: IR to ER alternator mod -- Steve Stearns wrote: >I don't have to agree with different viewpoints to appreciate them. I, for one, think this list would be greatly enhanced >if there was less defensive posturing, bile etc. I tend to agree with Steve! Especially the above quotes. As long as the sender's name remains available, I can choose which to read..or agree with.. Earl Do not archive ________________________________ Message 18 ____________________________________ Time: 12:43:55 PM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: IR to ER alternator mod At 11:14 AM 7/21/2008 -0600, you wrote: > >Bob, Eric, George, JetPilot and the rest of the list: > > From the perspective of someone who has been following the list for a > while and who is not as ignorant as most of things electrical nor of > lists supporting the free exchange of ideas and, perhaps most important, > someone who is not "tribal" in the least, I respectfully ask that Eric, > George, JetPilot NOT go away. Sorry. This is MY classroom and in this venue, it's not a question of opinion and viewpoints. It's a question of repeatable experiments and good science. >The 'I'm still right and you're still wrong and since you still don't >agree with me let me explain it to you louder (or longer...)', which, by >my reading, has been evident in both camps of the great debate seems to me >to be not just disrespectful to the involved parties but also to the >list-reading public in general. This List is not frequented by the "public in general" and the vast majority of the public in general would receive no benefit from hanging out here. A "can't we all just get along" idea has the effect of leveling the playing field to average . . . mediocracy . . . an environment crafted to upset the least numbers of folks irrespective of their viewpoints and opinions. I'd like to believe that the membership of this List represents the top slice of individuals struggling to build a better than average airplane. When you select a doctor, engineer, lawyer or teacher, do you want one who has been trained in the "everybody is right to some degree" school of thought . . . or is the demonstrable best in their respective fields? George and Paul have demonstrated nothing . . . yet they've wasted a lot of $time$ as we attempted to make nice. Eric has demonstrated a great deal of initiative and creativity. See: http://www.periheliondesign.com/ . . . and he is trying. And I've offered to assist his endeavors right here on this List. I'll leave it up to those who choose to follow the conversation to judge the value of investing the $time$. Please do not mistake confidence and competence with arrogance and conceit. I'm simply exercising control over the decorum and quality of this activity. If your concerns are for making nice (no matter what opinions might be offered) you'll need to find another group that's more concerned with making folks feel better than in helping them do the best we know how to do at a budget they can afford and technologies their skills and $time$ can master. Bob . . . ----------------------------------------) ( . . . a long habit of not thinking ) ( a thing wrong, gives it a superficial ) ( appearance of being right . . . ) ( ) ( -Thomas Paine 1776- ) ---------------------------------------- ________________________________ Message 19 ____________________________________ Time: 04:04:30 PM PST US From: Ken Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Ground in an all wood airplane Two separate ground straps from engine to firewall (or forest of tabs) may be a good idea on an electrically dependent engine though. I like one of those to go to a starter bolt. Ken Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote: > > > At 11:02 AM 7/21/2008 -0400, you wrote: > >> Bob, >> >> >> >> I am building an all wood plane and plan to use dual electronic >> ignition. A small gnawing issue is grounding. I will have a rear >> battery with only a single FAT wire ground coming up to the firewall. >> Even though I will have my 2 ignition systems on separate battery >> busses this will leave me with a ground, single point of failure. I >> have been kicking around some other ideas, but am concerned about >> generating ground loop noise. I would be interested in your take on >> this. > > The large wires in your airplane are really > robust. The thoughtfully installed ground wire > is as reliable as prop bolts. > > The ground loop issue is addressed with the > ground system architectures described in the > 'Connection. In the case of a non-conducting > airplane, bringing everything to the single > point ground location on the firewall will > eliminate any concerns for "loops". In fact, > you would have to go out of your way to > create a ground loop in a non-conducting > airplane. > > Bob . . . > ________________________________ Message 20 ____________________________________ Time: 04:51:26 PM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: "primer-line fuel injection" At 06:28 PM 7/20/2008 -0500, you wrote: > >What can I say? Thanks AGAIN for another valuable bit of education. I've only collected some ideas that have been laying around on the ground for nearly 100 years and considered how they might be combined into yet another recipe for success. Now, if you're considering this combination of ideas as useful to your design goals, then YOU'RE the chef. It will be up to you to search, select, ponder the assembly of and ultimately test the product of your efforts. We can help but YOU are going to be the guy who ultimately brings the concept to fruition. If you choose to photograph the installation . . . and share the problem solved with making it work, then you become the expert and more qualified than I to assist others in doing the same or similar things. Let us know how we may be of assitance! Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 21 ____________________________________ Time: 07:35:42 PM PST US From: "bob noffs" Subject: AeroElectric-List: fuses, wire sizes bob, thanks for the good reply to my question. the schematic is the one supplied by b and c with the ov mod. bob noffs ________________________________ Message 22 ____________________________________ Time: 09:26:58 PM PST US From: Ed Holyoke Subject: AeroElectric-List: 30 Amp switch? I have a setup where I need to switch about 30 amps as a backup power source. Is there such an animal as a toggle switch that will handle that, or do I need to think about a relay? Pax, Ed Holyoke ________________________________ Message 23 ____________________________________ Time: 09:37:24 PM PST US From: "Don Vs" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: 30 Amp switch? Ed, The marine guys use a battery switch that would handle the thirty amps. Problem is it is big and fairly expensive. A relay would probably be better. Don VS -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com]On Behalf Of Ed Holyoke Sent: Monday, July 21, 2008 9:23 PM Subject: AeroElectric-List: 30 Amp switch? I have a setup where I need to switch about 30 amps as a backup power source. Is there such an animal as a toggle switch that will handle that, or do I need to think about a relay? Pax, Ed Holyoke ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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.