---------------------------------------------------------- AeroElectric-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Wed 07/23/08: 9 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 06:42 AM - Re: Sportair electrical workshop? (kkinney) 2. 09:27 AM - Re: Sportair electrical workshop? (DaveG601XL) 3. 09:35 AM - Re: The great(?) debate . . . (Bill Boyd) 4. 09:53 AM - Re: The great(?) debate . . . (marcausman) 5. 10:17 AM - Re: Sportair electrical workshop? (mikef) 6. 04:20 PM - antenna ground plane (Janet Amtmann) 7. 04:43 PM - Re: antenna ground plane (Bill Boyd) 8. 05:42 PM - Re: antenna ground plane (Robert Feldtman) 9. 06:32 PM - antenna position (Janet Amtmann) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 06:42:15 AM PST US Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Sportair electrical workshop? From: "kkinney" It's just my crusty, old, poorly considered opinion, but I have been to both Bob's & Sportairs electric workshops. Given a choice, I prefer Bob's workshop. I realize there are probably many different instructors (I'm told Bob even taught Sportair once...) so your mileage is certain to vary. Speaking entirely for myself, the instructor I had was an A&P interested in restoring aircraft. He wrinkled his nose at quick connects and didn't really care a fig for homebuilt aircraft. Soldering was the only way to go and nothing else would do. Old school AC 43-13 all the way. If you've started down the AEC electrical path, you're probably more knowledgeable than the average Sportair attendee. If you own a copy of AEC (and have read it) you may not find anything new. With that said, if you're not able to attend one of Bobs workshops, Sportair is a decent way to go. What it WILL do is give you some good hands-on experience. Must my .02 worth, (actual value may be far less) Kevin Kinney Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=194519#194519 ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 09:27:50 AM PST US Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Sportair electrical workshop? From: "DaveG601XL" Mike, I will give you my Sport Air Workshop experience to slightly counter balance my buddy Kevin's words. I have not been to one of Bob's seminars and there were none in my area so when Sport Air came to Columbus, OH last fall I jumped on board. The instructor I had was Dick Koeller who writes articles for Sport Aviation and won the Bingellis award last year. He was not the crusty A&P that Kevin had. We did cover soldering, but not as the only way to connect two wires together. The most practical skill I got out of the class was making an intercom harness and a BNC connection. It seems embarrassingly simple to me now, but prior to the class, both were a little intimidating to me. Even though I have an A&P ticket (not exercised in 20+ years) and had done some car stereo installs in my youth, I still got a lot out of the class. Unless you have a real grasp of all things electrical and were looking for something more advanced, I would take the class. Just the discussions we had in-between class sessions was worth the price of admission. I came with a partial set of electrical schematics for my airplane, gleaned from Bob's Z diagrams, and much to my benefit, we critiqued it in class. Good luck, -------- David Gallagher 601 XL, ready to fly. Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=194550#194550 ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 09:35:16 AM PST US From: "Bill Boyd" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: The great(?) debate . . . Only a 4# increase in basic empty weight?! If I were building again, I'd consider an extra 6 kilo$ outlay to _shave_ 4# from my next RV. They couldn't pay me to _add_ the weight ;-) Fly one for awhile and you'll see how much performance difference added weight makes. A huge part of the appeal of glass over steam gauges, at least to me, is weight savings. This seems like a backwards move on that basis alone. Bill RV-6A 700 hrs. On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 11:52 PM, Ralph Finch wrote: > rgf@dcn.davis.ca.us> > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert > L. > Nuckolls, III > Sent: Monday, July 21, 2008 6:52 AM > To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com > Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: The great(?) debate . . . > > 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? > > At first, sure, it was old gages. But then the "new", or rebuilt, gages > started acting wonky too. I'm just not seeing any remarkable reliability > from this stuff. Maybe because anything affordable is now made in China, > even altimeters and such. I'm sure eventually they will make good stuff, > as > we once did, but it's not there now. > > 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'll take those one at a time. So far they don't add to "compelling", but > at least to "interesting". > > 1. Weight > >From Vertical Power's website, the specs for their model VP-200 ("for > advanced VFR and IFR-capable aircraft") > > Control Unit: 2.5 lbs > Display Unit: 1.8 lbs > Switch Panel: 0.9 lbs > > For a total of 5.2 lbs. Let's say you save 1.0 lbs in switches and wires, > net increase, 4.2 lbs. A non-issue. > > 2. Cost > The same VP-200 is $6,495. That's a chunk of money, and I'm guessing that > at the moment there is no discount pricing. > > They have a pricing worksheet for items saved > (http://www.verticalpower.com/docs/Pricing_Analysis.pdf). I haven't gone > through it in detail, but I'd guess I'd save $500 to perhaps $1000, mainly > because of functionality in the -200 I wouldn't need to buy separately, > such > as trim indicators, runaway trim protection and trim speed, etc. Let's say > $695 for convenience; that means a net extra cost of $5800. Still a lot of > money. Nevertheless, while an important consideration, it would not be my > biggest factor. > > 3. Parts count. > I would argue that the parts count lessens with the VP technology. Less > connections, mechanical contacts, breakers/fuses, and separate instruments. > But I think with "parts count" maybe you meant "reliability"? That's my > segue into two concerns of mine. > > 4. Reliability (Routine and Critical). > What is the reliability of VP compared to traditional systems? I want to > consider what I'll call Routine Reliability, by which I mean does > everything > work routinely, day after day, flight after flight; and Critical > Reliability, can something fail which is critical to flight safety? > > The VP-200 system has 3 components: the display unit (panel), the switch > panel, and the control unit. I understand that if the display unit fails, > everything keeps working, you just don't see what is going on. That could > be disconcerting if you've got it programmed to do things during different > phases of flight. I would for sure want to land soon and get it fixed, but > it would not be critical. > > The switch panel has the mag switches (hardwired to mags with sensors so > the > VP knows what position they're in), master switch, emergency switch, and 3 > user switches. Seems this device is closer to traditional switches so I'll > say that just like a traditional mag or master switch could fail, so could > this. That could be critical, just like traditional switches, so equal > probability of failure and equal consequences. > > The control box is a "black box" device (actually red) which runs things in > real-time: taking in data from sensors, running a program, and activating > solid-state switches according to sensor data and user preferences. > Apparently if this nearly completely fails the solid-state switches remain > in whatever position they were in. If a bullet goes through it then you > lose all electrical I guess. Complete failure of this gadget would be like > a complete electrical failure: probably not critical unless you're in IMC. > Since I won't be (not IFR rated) to me it would be a concern, nothing more. > > > Many years ago I made a flight an hour away, and back, with the alternator > not charging the system. Upon realizing what was happening I simply turned > off the master switch until my destination, where I turned it back on and > made CTAF calls on battery power. Likewise the return trip. No big deal > day VFR. > > VP has backup/fail-safe provisions. They describe > (http://www.verticalpower.com/docs/Backup_Wiring.pdf) how to wire backup, > traditional switches for whatever devices you feel critical: EFIS, GPS, > Boost pump, Starter (though EFIS and GPS nowadays have their own battery > backup). > > Proponents and skeptics can make all the hand-waving arguments each way > they > want, lacking empirical reliability data. That would be hard to come by > for > several reasons. But reliable solid-state devices are certainly possible, > we all have them in our cars. I have a 1989 Mazda and a 2000 Toyota. Both > have an engine computer and neither has had a failure of that in a > collective 27 years and 300,000 miles. If I assume that the VP devices are > built to the same standards as automobile engine computers, we can say they > would be very reliable, more than electromechanical switches. I would like > to see VP address their design and manufacturing standards more, comparing > them to auto computers. > > 5. User Interface > This may be my biggest concern. The traditional six-pack gage display > pattern is well-known to all pilots now, and it will take me some time to > adjust to an EFIS. But adjust I will. A bigger adjustment will be > actuating functions not with real switches but with "soft" keys on a > display. It's sort of like mousing around with Windows. A real switch is > always in the same place and always there; a soft key has to be arrived at > with several key presses. That's something that again, I would like to see > VP talk about more. What do pilots say about it? How long to adjust? > What > about reactions in emergency situations? > > I've said enough for now. A few last comments to your comments and I'm > done. > > 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. > > Funny you mention water supply....I'm a water resources engineer that does > numerical modeling of estuaries. As a matter of fact, behind the scenes, > water supply has enjoyed some benefit from computers and could enjoy more. > All but the most trivial water systems now are designed on PCs with > specialized software that balances flows and pressures, solving very large > sets of equations, so pipes can be better sized, saving material cost and > ensuring more reliable water delivery. My employer, the California Dept. > of > Water Resources, has a SCADA system on hundreds of miles of aqueduct, > pumps, > etc. Large urban systems have large control facilities to balance supply > and demand. If the computers were destroyed with a high-altitude EMP, we'd > be screwed. Things would eventually operate again but quite inefficiently. > > 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 . . . > > Exactly! And I do have those gadgets: a backup GPS, backup hand radio, > various flashlights and even a chemical light. I can't dream too much of > things to add to the Coupe. But the RV, after all, is > Experimental..."Perchance to Dream". Hey, maybe that's what I'll put on > the > side... > > RF > > ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 09:53:23 AM PST US Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: The great(?) debate . . . From: "marcausman" You'd be surprised how much the switches, circuit breakers, dimmers, key switch, heat sinks, diodes, flap and trim modules, connectors, relays, and extra wire you need adds up on a traditional wiring scheme. It depends on a lot of things, but Vertical Power is about net-neutral or can shave off a few pounds. :D And the VP-100 and VP-50 are even lighter than the numbers shown on the previous post. -------- Marc Ausman http://www.verticalpower.com RV-7 IO-390 Flying Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=194557#194557 ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 10:17:13 AM PST US Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Sportair electrical workshop? From: "mikef" Thanks so far to those replying to my question about the SportAir workshops. I do believe I am pretty far along in my project and understanding about my electrical system. Hell, you should see my right wrist and forearm after all the crimping I've been doing. Popeye's got nothing on me :). But I'm no expert, so I am leaning towards attending if the time allows. If I find out who the instructor is I will post here. Thanks again, Mike Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=194564#194564 ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 04:20:16 PM PST US From: "Janet Amtmann" Subject: AeroElectric-List: antenna ground plane Hello, I can not find an answer to this question in my available material: how symmetrical does the fround plane have to be to the antenna, in this case a COM antenna. The ideal place for my COM antenna in my RV6 is 6" aft of the firewall (plastic cowl) and 6" inboard from the left edge of the fuselage. This leaves only a 90 degree sector of ground plane around the antenna mounting point. This spot was picked to keep the antenna out of the exhaust, keep it far away from the xponder antenna, and keep it fwd of the spar for easier run of the coax. Is this position OK? Regards, Jurgen Amtmann jgamtmann2@gmail.com ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 04:43:37 PM PST US From: "Bill Boyd" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: antenna ground plane Jurgen- I think your antenna will work just fine in that location. Mine is just fwd of the spar, and to one side of centerline, right in the exhaust stream. This has not been an issue at all. The separation from the transponder antenna is also not an issue. These two radio devices don't really interfere with each other as far as I know - they are on widely different frequencies and each transmits only intermittently. I think you'd be hard pressed to damage the receiver front end of either device by co-locating the antennas too closely. In other words, most anywhere on the belly of the plane that allows sturdy mounting and easy coax routing should give excellent results. Bill RV-6A 700 hrs. On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 7:16 PM, Janet Amtmann wrote: > jgamtmann2@gmail.com> > > Hello, I can not find an answer to this question in my available > material: how symmetrical does the fround plane have to be to the > antenna, in this case a COM antenna. The ideal place for my COM > antenna in my RV6 is 6" aft of the firewall (plastic cowl) and 6" > inboard from the left edge of the fuselage. This leaves only a 90 > degree sector of ground plane around the antenna mounting point. This > spot was picked to keep the antenna out of the exhaust, keep it far > away from the xponder antenna, and keep it fwd of the spar for easier > run of the coax. Is this position OK? > > Regards, Jurgen Amtmann jgamtmann2@gmail.com > > ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 05:42:33 PM PST US From: "Robert Feldtman" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: antenna ground plane it will be fine. All our airplanes have a less than omnidirectional radiating pattern - just make sure the SWR is reasonable (less than about 2:1 is great - 3:1 is acceptable). get a ham to loan you an SWR meter. bobf W5RF Glastar On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 6:16 PM, Janet Amtmann wrote: > jgamtmann2@gmail.com> > > Hello, I can not find an answer to this question in my available > material: how symmetrical does the fround plane have to be to the > antenna, in this case a COM antenna. The ideal place for my COM > antenna in my RV6 is 6" aft of the firewall (plastic cowl) and 6" > inboard from the left edge of the fuselage. This leaves only a 90 > degree sector of ground plane around the antenna mounting point. This > spot was picked to keep the antenna out of the exhaust, keep it far > away from the xponder antenna, and keep it fwd of the spar for easier > run of the coax. Is this position OK? > > Regards, Jurgen Amtmann jgamtmann2@gmail.com > > ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 06:32:44 PM PST US From: "Janet Amtmann" Subject: AeroElectric-List: antenna position Thanks for the answers to my question. Since I already had the holes drilled this makes me feel a lot better. Jurgen ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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.