AeroElectric-List Digest Archive

Tue 01/19/10


Total Messages Posted: 11



Today's Message Index:
----------------------
 
     1. 06:20 AM - Encoder Certification ()
     2. 06:33 AM - Altitude encoder ()
     3. 06:49 AM - Re: Encoder Certification (Steve Thomas)
     4. 07:45 AM - Re: no xpdr ops, was Encoder Certification (glen matejcek)
     5. 07:45 AM - Re: Encoder Certification (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
     6. 09:20 AM - Re: KX-125 Installation Manual? (estebane)
     7. 10:05 AM - Re: Re: KX-125 Installation Manual? (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
     8. 10:10 AM - Re: Re: KX-125 Installation Manual? (Werner Schneider)
     9. 10:27 AM - Re: Through-panel ATO fuses (John Burnaby)
    10. 11:15 AM - Re: KX-125 Installation Manual? (estebane)
    11. 11:50 AM - Re: Encoder Certification (Ed Holyoke)
 
 
 


Message 1


  • INDEX
  • Back to Main INDEX
  • NEXT
  • Skip to NEXT Message
  • LIST
  • Reply to LIST Regarding this Message
  • SENDER
  • Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message
    Time: 06:20:32 AM PST US
    From: <bakerocb@cox.net>
    Subject: Encoder Certification
    1/19/2010 Hello Jon Finley, Many thanks for your input and raising this point again. You wrote: 1) "Everything noted so far in this thread assumes controlled airspace." I did not make this assumption. 2) "If I missed where that was stated in this thread then ignore my comments." Here is my wording: "It would not be reasonable to expect permission to perform the entire Phase one testing without a transponder unless you were able to do the testing in airspace that did not require a transponder." This specifically raises the point that there is indeed airspace that does not require a transponder. I also point out that 14 CFR 91.215 (b) (1) through (b) (5) and 91.215 (c) identifies the airspace where you must have a transponder. If one is not flying in the airspace identified then there is no requirement for a transponder. 3) "If you read the full text of 14 CFR 91.215 (b),........" Absolutely on point. Up on my soap box now: I have been working on people sized airplanes (as opposed to models) since 1950 and flying since 1958 -- all that time I was planning and gathering information with the intent of building my own airplane some day. When that day came and I started to build and the internet allowed me to see what other builders were thinking and writing I was appalled at the ignorance and assumptions regarding applicable regulations displayed by my fellow builders. Here we had the greatest opportunity on our planet to do this wonderful homebuilding and flying thing and there were many builders so willing to operate on hearsay, gossip, and rumor and possibly violate regulations rather than educate themselves. Each notorious violation bringing us closer to the day when we could lose the opportunity to homebuild and fly. So my mission in life became to educate my fellow homebuilders and pilots regarding what the regulations actually say with the hope and belief that education would encourage compliance. That is why many of my postings read the way they do. 4) "Additionally, 91.215 (c), does not apply as almost all of our airspace is uncontrolled." Let's see what 14 CFR definitions says: "Controlled airspace means an airspace of defined dimensions within which air traffic control service is provided to IFR flights and to VFR flights in accordance with the airspace classification. Note: Controlled airspace is a generic term that covers Class A, Class B, Class C, Class D, and Class E airspace." So as long as one is flying outside of the airspace identified in 91.215 (b) (1) through (5) and outside the definition of controlled airspace then one indeed does not need to have or operate a transponder. 'OC' Says: "The best investment we can make is the effort to gather and understand knowledge." ================================================== Time: 07:10:22 PM PST US From: "Jon Finley" <jon@finleyweb.net> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Encoder Certification Bakerocb, Everything noted so far in this thread assumes controlled airspace. If I missed where that was stated in this thread then ignore my comments. No doubt that what has been said is applicable given the right environment (controlled airspace). If you read the full text of 14 CFR 91.215 (b), you will find that folks living in a place like me (middle of nowhere in New Mexico) can fly for hours and hours in most any direction and NOT come upon ANY of the airspace listed in (b)(1) through (b)(5). Additionally, 91.215 (c), does not apply as almost all of our airspace is uncontrolled. So, given MY environment, I can fly without a transponder and/or without it turned on. There are huge expanses of this country where this is true. If someone can prove the above wrong, I would be interested in hearing. Jon


    Message 2


  • INDEX
  • Back to Main INDEX
  • PREVIOUS
  • Skip to PREVIOUS Message
  • NEXT
  • Skip to NEXT Message
  • LIST
  • Reply to LIST Regarding this Message
  • SENDER
  • Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message
    Time: 06:33:55 AM PST US
    From: <bakerocb@cox.net>
    Subject: Altitude encoder
    1/19/2010 Hello Angier Ames, You wrote: ".....it is my understanding that your IFR equipment must perform to minimum FAA specs, but there is no requirement that the equipment be certified." Why operate on just an understanding when you can go to the regulations and determine the facts? With regard specifically to the altitude encoder here is what 14 CFR says on this subject: "91.217 Data correspondence between automatically reported pressure altitude data and the pilot's altitude reference. No person may operate any automatic pressure altitude reporting equipment associated with a radar beacon transponder- (a) When deactivation of that equipment is directed by ATC; (b) Unless, as installed, that equipment was tested and calibrated to transmit altitude data corresponding within 125 feet (on a 95 percent probability basis) of the indicated or calibrated datum of the altimeter normally used to maintain flight altitude, with that altimeter referenced to 29.92 inches of mercury for altitudes from sea level to the maximum operating altitude of the aircraft; or (c) Unless the altimeters and digitizers in that equipment meet the standards of TSO-C10b and TSO-C88, respectively." So now, instead of just operating on some understanding, I call it hearsay, gossip, and rumor, we can operate on the facts. Also please see the attachment. Please let me know if you want further clarification. 'OC' Says: "The best investment we can make is the effort to gather and understand knowledge." ================================================= Time: 07:00:20 AM PST US From: "Greenbacks, UnLtd." <N4ZQ@comcast.net> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Altitude encoder I built the Rocky Mountain Instrument MicroEncoder from a kit and although I can't say for certain, the altitude encoder portion of this instrument may well be more accurate than a certified unit. Which gets me to my point...., it is my understanding that your IFR equipment must perform to minimum FAA specs, but there is no requirement that the equipment be certified. Angier Ames N4ZQ


    Message 3


  • INDEX
  • Back to Main INDEX
  • PREVIOUS
  • Skip to PREVIOUS Message
  • NEXT
  • Skip to NEXT Message
  • LIST
  • Reply to LIST Regarding this Message
  • SENDER
  • Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message
    Time: 06:49:15 AM PST US
    Subject: Re: Encoder Certification
    From: Steve Thomas <lists@stevet.net>
    OC, As I read the regs. you quote below, it sounds like I am qualified to perform the tests. > "(b) The tests required by paragraph (a) of this section must be conducted by- > > (1) The manufacturer of the airplane, or helicopter, on which the tests and inspections are to be performed; I am the manufacturer of the airplane. Steve Thomas ________________________________________________________________________ On Jan 18, 2010, at 9:11 PM, <bakerocb@cox.net> <bakerocb@cox.net> wrote: > > 1/18/2010 > > Hello Steve Thomas, You wrote: > > 1) "Being able to do my own pitot-static check will also get me a long way to being able to discuss with some authority." > > A) There is no regulatory requirement for a pitot system check, but you may gain some confidence in the accuracy of your airspeed indicator by performing one. > > B) The static pressure system check performed in order to meet the requirements of 14 CFR 91.411 quoted here: > > "Altimeter system and altitude reporting equipment tests and inspections. > > (a) No person may operate an airplane, or helicopter, in controlled airspace under IFR unless- > > (1) Within the preceding 24 calendar months, each static pressure system, each altimeter instrument, and each automatic pressure altitude reporting system has been tested and inspected and found to comply with appendices E and F of part 43 of this chapter;" > > Must be performed in accordance with the portion of 14 CFR 91.411 quoted here: > > "(b) The tests required by paragraph (a) of this section must be conducted by- > > (1) The manufacturer of the airplane, or helicopter, on which the tests and inspections are to be performed; > > (2) A certificated repair station properly equipped to perform those functions and holding- > > (i) An instrument rating, Class I; > > (ii) A limited instrument rating appropriate to the make and model of appliance to be tested; > > (iii) A limited rating appropriate to the test to be performed; > > (iv) An airframe rating appropriate to the airplane, or helicopter, to be tested; or > > (3) A certificated mechanic with an airframe rating (static pressure system tests and inspections only)." > > So only if you hold one of the qualifications listed above, would you be able to perform the regulatory requirement of the static pressure system tests. But otherwise, as you point out, performing the test yourself could help you in your discussions. The equipment and parameters to perform the test are described in 14 CFR Appendix E to Part 43 (a). > > 2) "Being able to calibrate my BMA EFIS ahead of time will be a giant step in the right > direction." > > Good idea. > > 3) "I will report back and detail my experience." > > I would appreciate that -- thank you. > > 'OC' Says: "The best investment we can make is the effort to gather and understand knowledge." > > ============================================== > > Time: 09:36:20 AM PST US > From: Steve Thomas <lists@stevet.net> > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Encoder Certification > > A discussion is already underway. What is most important to me is to > know the facts. You cannot argue with "experts" if you don't know the > facts. Being able to do my own pitot-static check will also get me a > long way to being able to discuss with some authority. Being able to > calibrate my BMA EFIS ahead of time will be a giant step in the right > direction. > > Thanks to all of you for this invaluable help! I will report back and > detail my experience. > > > Steve Thomas > > > >


    Message 4


  • INDEX
  • Back to Main INDEX
  • PREVIOUS
  • Skip to PREVIOUS Message
  • NEXT
  • Skip to NEXT Message
  • LIST
  • Reply to LIST Regarding this Message
  • SENDER
  • Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message
    Time: 07:45:02 AM PST US
    From: "glen matejcek" <aerobubba@earthlink.net>
    Subject: RE: no xpdr ops, was Encoder Certification
    > From: Bill Mauledriver Watson <MauleDriver@nc.rr.com> > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: no xpdr ops, was Encoder Certification > > > Just a tangential data point here- > > I know of a fella who has an experimental with an inop xpdr, based at a > > controlled field under class B airspace. He comes and goes frequently, and > > with no more hassle than to include "negative transponder" at the end of > > his initial contact. ATC has never once had one word on the topic, or the > > slightest discrimination towards him for it. It could not be less of an > > issue for him. > > > > FWIW- > > > Wouldn't it be nice if he'd get it fixed - just for kicks. > > > (I'm guessing there's no issue for ATC to deal with - the controllers at > the destination aren't even looking at radar and he slips under the > bottom of the class B. The people who might object aren't even > contacted. Just a guess though) > Okay, just for kicks, here comes the micrometer. The airport in question is actually just outside the class B, within the veil. The Australian manufacturer made repairing the xpdr the most problematic alternative. As to the guessing, you are one third correct. It is no issue for ATC. The other factors are that the tower has a BRITE set that they use quite admirably, and that the TRACON guys don't object or remotely care about what goes on in the underlaying class D airspace. The craft is a VFR competition aerobatic machine that spends most of it's flying time in the practice area just outside the class D. No guessing involved. glen matejcek aerobubba@earthlink.net


    Message 5


  • INDEX
  • Back to Main INDEX
  • PREVIOUS
  • Skip to PREVIOUS Message
  • NEXT
  • Skip to NEXT Message
  • LIST
  • Reply to LIST Regarding this Message
  • SENDER
  • Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message
    Time: 07:45:35 AM PST US
    From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com>
    Subject: Re: Encoder Certification
    At 08:47 AM 1/19/2010, you wrote: > >OC, > >As I read the regs. you quote below, it sounds like I am qualified >to perform the tests. > > > "(b) The tests required by paragraph (a) of this section must be > conducted by- > > > > (1) The manufacturer of the airplane, or helicopter, on which the > tests and inspections are to be performed; > >I am the manufacturer of the airplane. Only one small caveat . . . manufacturers of type certificated airplanes are expected/commanded to jump lots of hoops not the least of which is calibration traceability, proper equipment, and training of persons tasked with operating the equipment. If one understands the physics, spirit and intent of a pitot-static system check, it can be accomplished with the most rudimentary of pressure measuring devices (including a water manometer you might build up from hardware store materials), a pump (can and often is hand operated) and a calculator or set of charts that converts observed pressures to observed panel readings. Of course, the FIRST (and most common) dragon to slay is leaks. This requires no calibration, only the ability to apply a pressure, stop it off, watch for changes, and then soap the joints looking for bubbles . . . and finally, to see that panel indications do not drift with time faster than what's allowed. In other words, SOME degree of leaking is permitted in some venues. After the system is tight, then you need to worry with the numbers. Not at all difficult if you're interested in educating and equipping yourself to the task . . . but convincing the odd institutionally educated bureaucrat that you KNOW what your doing is . . . well . . . problematic. It would be interesting to hear of your experience in this endeavor. One thing that WOULD help is to document the test procedure you use. If pressures are read with a device subject to calibration, then having a quality assurance or cert document (not more than a year old) for that device would be helpful. Or calibrate it yourself using a water manometer. Fortunately, its EASY to get a measuring tape with some assurance of accuracy. While we may all rightfully claim to be "the manufacturer" of our projects, there may be a price of membership for taking on that title. Bob . . .


    Message 6


  • INDEX
  • Back to Main INDEX
  • PREVIOUS
  • Skip to PREVIOUS Message
  • NEXT
  • Skip to NEXT Message
  • LIST
  • Reply to LIST Regarding this Message
  • SENDER
  • Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message
    Time: 09:20:18 AM PST US
    Subject: Re: KX-125 Installation Manual?
    From: "estebane" <estebanemody@gmail.com>
    Gentle Mens and (I hope) Ladies! It is pleasure to be here with you! I say sorry now, because my English. Today I start to help to reinstall a used kx-125 nav/com, kr-85 adf and kma-20 audio panel in a Cessna 150L. I was looking for documentation since last month but I didn't find anything. If somebody can help me, I will very appreciated! Thanks a lot!!! Esteban = Steve Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=282253#282253


    Message 7


  • INDEX
  • Back to Main INDEX
  • PREVIOUS
  • Skip to PREVIOUS Message
  • NEXT
  • Skip to NEXT Message
  • LIST
  • Reply to LIST Regarding this Message
  • SENDER
  • Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message
    Time: 10:05:16 AM PST US
    From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com>
    Subject: Re: KX-125 Installation Manual?
    At 11:17 AM 1/19/2010, you wrote: > >Gentle Mens and (I hope) Ladies! > It is pleasure to be here with you! > I say sorry now, because my English. > Today I start to help to reinstall a used kx-125 nav/com, kr-85 > adf and kma-20 audio panel in a Cessna 150L. I was looking for > documentation since last month but I didn't find anything. If > somebody can help me, I will very appreciated! > Thanks a lot!!! > Esteban = Steve Yes, see: http://www.aeroelectric.com/Installation_Data/KX125_Inst_Manual_Corrected.pdf Bob. . .


    Message 8


  • INDEX
  • Back to Main INDEX
  • PREVIOUS
  • Skip to PREVIOUS Message
  • NEXT
  • Skip to NEXT Message
  • LIST
  • Reply to LIST Regarding this Message
  • SENDER
  • Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message
    Time: 10:10:28 AM PST US
    From: Werner Schneider <glastar@gmx.net>
    Subject: Re: KX-125 Installation Manual?
    Esteban, check that link, you should find plenty there: <http://www.aeroelectric.com/Installation_Data/> Werner On 19.01.2010 18:17, estebane wrote: > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "estebane"<estebanemody@gmail.com> > > Gentle Mens and (I hope) Ladies! > It is pleasure to be here with you! > I say sorry now, because my English. > Today I start to help to reinstall a used kx-125 nav/com, kr-85 adf and kma-20 audio panel in a Cessna 150L. I was looking for documentation since last month but I didn't find anything. If somebody can help me, I will very appreciated!


    Message 9


  • INDEX
  • Back to Main INDEX
  • PREVIOUS
  • Skip to PREVIOUS Message
  • NEXT
  • Skip to NEXT Message
  • LIST
  • Reply to LIST Regarding this Message
  • SENDER
  • Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message
    Time: 10:27:37 AM PST US
    From: "John Burnaby" <jonlaury@impulse.net>
    Subject: Re: Through-panel ATO fuses
    Loman, I am doing a fuse panel that is visible in the cockpit. One stack is about 6" x 16 fuses. I am running the wires from the fuse holders to two (main and E-bus) bus bars made from vice-squashed 3/8 soft copper tube with 3, .250" x 6 gang brass quick-connect tabs soldered to them, yielding 18 tabs, expandable to 36 by using male/female quick-connects. These are then SS riveted to a hat-shaped non conductive fiberglass stand-off channel and bonded to the side of my glass airplane behind the panel. You could screw or rivet to aluminum in your plane. Using http://www.littelfuse.com/data/en/Data_Sheets/155_153PCMount.pdf http://search.digikey.com/scripts/DkSearch/dksus.dll?Detail&name=A27874 -ND (also in 8,10, 20 tab) John


    Message 10


  • INDEX
  • Back to Main INDEX
  • PREVIOUS
  • Skip to PREVIOUS Message
  • NEXT
  • Skip to NEXT Message
  • LIST
  • Reply to LIST Regarding this Message
  • SENDER
  • Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message
    Time: 11:15:24 AM PST US
    Subject: Re: KX-125 Installation Manual?
    From: "estebane" <estebanemody@gmail.com>
    :D THANK YOU VERY MUCH!!!! Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=282286#282286


    Message 11


  • INDEX
  • Back to Main INDEX
  • PREVIOUS
  • Skip to PREVIOUS Message
  • NEXT
  • Skip to NEXT Message
  • LIST
  • Reply to LIST Regarding this Message
  • SENDER
  • Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message
    Time: 11:50:53 AM PST US
    From: Ed Holyoke <bicyclop@pacbell.net>
    Subject: Re: Encoder Certification
    The original poster said he was in SoCal, if I remember correctly. I don't remember that he specified and airport, though. Hard to find much in the way of un-controlled airspace around here with all the mode C veils. Pax, Ed Holyoke Jon Finley wrote: > > Bakerocb, > > > > Everything noted so far in this thread assumes controlled airspace. > If I missed where that was stated in this thread then ignore my > comments. No doubt that what has been said is applicable given the > right environment (controlled airspace). > > > > If you read the full text of 14 CFR 91.215 (b), you will find that > folks living in a place like me (middle of nowhere in New Mexico) can > fly for hours and hours in most any direction and NOT come upon ANY of > the airspace listed in (b)(1) through (b)(5). Additionally, 91.215 > (c), does not apply as almost all of our airspace is uncontrolled. > > > > So, given MY environment, I can fly without a transponder and/or > without it turned on. There are huge expanses of this country where > this is true. > > > > If someone can prove the above wrong, I would be interested in hearing. > > > > Jon > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner- > > > aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of bakerocb@cox.net > > > Sent: Monday, January 18, 2010 11:19 AM > > > To: avionics-list@matronics.com; aeroelectric-list@matronics.com; > > > sam.hoskins@gmail.com > > > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Encoder Certification > > > > > > > > > > 1/18/2010 > > > > > > Hello Sam Hoskins, You wrote: > > > > > > 1) "Without looking at the regs, I seem to recall that if the aircraft > > > is > > > equipped with an operating transponder, it must be turned on." > > > > > > That is correct. Here is what 14 CFR 91.215 (c) says: > > > > > > "(c) Transponder-on operation. While in the airspace as specified in > > > paragraph (b) of this section or in all controlled airspace, each > > > person > > > operating an aircraft equipped with an operable ATC transponder > > > maintained > > > in accordance with 91.413 of this part shall operate the transponder, > > > including Mode C equipment if installed, and shall reply on the > > > appropriate > > > code or as assigned by ATC." > > > > > > 2) "My simple minded solution would to pull the transponder and stuff > > > it > > > into a flight > > > bag. You could even apply a sticker that says "INOP". Fly to the shop, > > > then > > > install it for the test." > > > > > > That would be a violation of 14 CFR 91.215 which says, in part: > > > > [Jon] ONLY a violation IF flying in controlled airspace. > > > > > > > "(b) All airspace. Unless otherwise authorized or directed by ATC, no > > > person > > > may operate an aircraft in the airspace described in paragraphs (b)(1) > > > through (b)(5) of this section, unless that aircraft is equipped with > > > an > > > operable coded radar beacon transponder having either Mode 3/A 4096 > > > code > > > capability,.............." > > > > > > 91.215 goes on to provide some exceptions to the above requirement such > > > as > > > aircraft originally certified with no electrical system and getting > > > permission from ATC to operate with no transponder. What you describe > > > is not > > > one of the exceptions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 'OC' Says: "The best investment we can make is the effort to gather and > > > understand knowledge." > > > > > > =========== > > > > > > Time: 07:16:01 AM PST US > > > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Encoder Certification > > > From: Sam Hoskins <sam.hoskins@gmail.com> > > > > > > Without looking at the regs, I seem to recall that if the aircraft is > > > equipped with an operating transponder, it must be turned on. My > > > simple > > > minded solution would to pull the transponder and stuff it into a > > > flight > > > bag. You could even apply a sticker that says "INOP". > > > > > > Fly to the shop, then install it for the test. > > > > > > Sam > > > > > > > > > ========== > > AeroElectric-List Email Forum - Navigator to browse Un/Subscription, > Browse, Chat, FAQ, more: > http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List > > > ========== > > > - > > the Web Forums! http://forums.matronics.com > > > ========== > > List Contribution Web Site - support! > > > -Matt Dralle, List Admin. > > http://www.matronics.com/contribution > > > ========== > > > > > > > > > > > > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > > 270.14.149/2630 - Release Date: > > > 01/18/10 07:35:00 > > * > > > *




    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
  • 7-Day List Browse
  •   http://www.matronics.com/browse/aeroelectric-list
  • Browse AeroElectric-List 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.

    -- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --