---------------------------------------------------------- AeroElectric-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Tue 03/30/10: 22 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 05:05 AM - Re: Downed EAA Plane (Jay Hyde) 2. 06:41 AM - Re: Schumacher SC-600A (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 3. 06:50 AM - Re: ANL current limiter mount (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 4. 07:00 AM - Re: Downed EAA Plane () 5. 07:11 AM - Re: ANL current limiter mount () 6. 07:25 AM - Re: Downed EAA Plane (Jon Finley) 7. 07:33 AM - Busy! (Bill Bradburry) 8. 07:54 AM - Re: Downed EAA Plane () 9. 10:24 AM - Re: Downed EAA Plane (rampil) 10. 11:40 AM - Re: Re: Downed EAA Plane () 11. 12:36 PM - Re: Re: Downed EAA Plane (Bill Mauledriver Watson) 12. 12:37 PM - Re: Re: Downed EAA Plane (S. Ramirez) 13. 01:23 PM - Re: Downed EAA Plane (Charlie England) 14. 02:16 PM - Re: Downed EAA Plane (Robert L. Nuckolls, III) 15. 05:37 PM - Re: Re: Downed EAA Plane (Robert Sultzbach) 16. 05:37 PM - Re: Downed EAA Plane (paul wilson) 17. 06:14 PM - Re: testing for inoperative wig wag? () 18. 06:47 PM - JFK Jr and all (Richard Girard) 19. 06:54 PM - Re: Re: Downed EAA Plane (Bill Mauledriver Watson) 20. 06:58 PM - Re: JFK Jr and all (RGent1224@aol.com) 21. 08:17 PM - Re: JFK Jr and all (Robert Sultzbach) 22. 09:52 PM - Re: JFK Jr and all (Terry Watson) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 05:05:11 AM PST US From: "Jay Hyde" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Downed EAA Plane An interesting thing about jamb-nuts; if we are thinking of the same thing here. We call them 'half-nuts'; usually people place the full sized nut under the half or jamb nut- I used to as well. However, the correct way is to put the thin nut first - see http://www.boltscience.com/pages/twonuts.htm Jay -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L. Nuckolls, III Sent: 13 March 2010 11:02 PM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Downed EAA Plane Jon followed up later with: Hi all, I have confirmed the cause of my power failure last weekend. Long story short - it was builder error. When you install a locknut on a bolt, you MUST ensure that there is at least a thread or two coming all the way thru the nut. If not, it will eventually vibrate free. I have changed my mounting method and now have nutplates inside this "box". Please; learn from other's mistakes cause you don't have enough time to make them all yourself!! I would like to follow up with the idea that on a TC aircraft, there are NO plain nuts or combinations of plain nuts and lockwashers used. Non-locking, threaded fasteners are often supplied on accessories from the outside world . . . http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Contactors/Kilovac_EV200_contactor.jpg http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Contactors/s701-2.jpg http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Switches/Toggle_Switch_with_Mold-Captured_T erminals.jpg http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Switches/Flap_Switch.jpg Every time the system integrator picks up such devices, there's supposed to be an evaluation of risk due to "loose hardware". If the risks are deemed great enough, non-locking fasteners will be replaced with locking devices -or- doped with Loc-tite on final assembly. The tree-visible-threads rule has much more to do with strength of the assembled fastener (indicates that the screw is long enough) than with anti- loosening. The same rule applies to all threaded fasteners including the locking style nuts and nutplates. Where locking threads are not possible or practical, consider still longer screws with a jamb-nut installed on top of the structural nut. Further, a thread locker that can be easily disassembled can go a long way toward insuring joint integrity. Super-glue works nice. It's thin and wicks into an already assembled set of threads. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 06:41:09 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Schumacher SC-600A At 08:40 AM 3/29/2010, you wrote: Bob, I have a Schumacher SC-600A. It is a switchable 6/12 volt automatic charger/ maintainer with 3 selectable charging rates of 2, 4, or 6 amp output, with a microprocessor control. They recommend using the 2 amp for trickle charge or charging small batteries such as lawn tractor or motorcycle. The 4 amp is for medium charge of automotive batteries, and the 6 amp for fast charge of automotive / light truck batteries. Yeah, I've got one of those too . . . or maybe it's the 2500. Got it at Walmart . . . In your years of experience with charge rates of batteries, do you think the higher rate of 6 amps would even damage a small garden tractor battery? When I look at automotive alternators with 50 amp outputs I wonder what are the limits that will cause damage or shortening of useful life of a battery, provided you don't overcharge? Very astute observations! There's a common faulty assumption that if one connects a monster charger to a 2 a.h. battery that the beastly machine will smoke the little battery. The ratings on any charging system come with two values. Set point voltages and maximum available recharge current. Batteries come with two values, state of charge and internal resistance. The battery's ability to accept recharge energy is what sets how much and how fast it will accept energy from the charging source. As a rule, smaller, completely discharged batteries placed across a rigid bus will initially draw large values of current but it quickly falls to values that are commensurate with the battery's physics and relatively independent of charging system's characteristics. Let's recall that battery performance is a function of chemistry mass which set capacity and surface area of exposed chemistry which sets internal impedance. The greatest performing batteries (Enersys and competing products) have lots of thin plates that are a finely tuned compromise for optimum mass/area ratio. These batteries are also exemplary in their ability to accept charge. In fact, the Genesis series batteries I helped STC onto TC aircraft with B&C have no published limits for rate of recharge. At the other end of spectrum, smaller batteries with fewer, thicker plates may appear to be accepting a charge when their recharge current drops off rapidly while in fact, chemistry on the surface of the plates is what has become recharged and chemistry deeper in the chemical cell-mass (isolated by internal impedance features) are coming along more slowly. If you leave the itty-bitty battery connected to the monster bus long enough, it will eventually get recharged. Damage? During the initial stages of a rushed recharge, energy is being dissipated internally to the battery in its relatively poor connection between and internal to individual chemical cell sites. This warms the battery up and is not good for battery longevity. Hence, the poorer the construction, the more care in recharging is necessary for maximum service life. As a rule, tiny 'back up' batteries in airplanes are not well construction (i.e. like an Enersys). These batteries do benefit from careful maintenance and generally don't have good service lives. This is why ALL of my suggested two-battery systems feature identical batteries with engine cranking abilities. They require a minimum of maintenance and smoothly integrate into a "new battery every year" rotation protocol. Most of this discussion about battery chargers is academic for the manner in which we use batteries. In the auto/aeromotive worlds we depend on batteries to start engines. After that, the well design charging system replaces a few percent of expended battery energy and supports all vehicle loads for the remainder of the operating cycle. We don't routinely deeply discharge our batteries. It's only the deeply discharged battery that will benefit from recharge protocols finely tuned to it's physics. The smaller/cheaper the battery, the more it benefits from fine tuning. So unless your airplane's alternator runs too slow to support ship's loads while taxiing miles to the hangar with all the electro-whizzies turned on, then there's little or no benefit for connecting any kind of charger until the next flight. Even the smallest chargers (.8A Battery Tender) will recharge the largest of our batteries if given sufficient time. Further the time they spend in top-off mode isn't real critical either . . . it just doesn't want to be sustained over many weeks or months while an airplane is being stored or waiting for flying weather to improve. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 06:50:44 AM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: ANL current limiter mount At 08:31 PM 3/29/2010, you wrote: >Has anyone come up with a mount for ANL current limiters that don't >look like they belong on a tractor? The standard ones in use are >either bulky, ugly and unprotected or the ones the boom box crowd >uses are made of plastic, and don't belong forward of an aircraft >firewall, in my opinion. I have two alternators that I need to >protect and could gang the ANLs together, or maybe it's best to use >inline protection as close to alternator as possible. What has >anyone come up with? >Chris Hukill Consider building your own current limiter mounting blocks from phenolic, delrin, etc. Use more compact automotive limiters like http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Fuses/Fuses/ABI_fuses.jpg http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Fuses/Fuses/BF2.jpg http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Fuses/Fuses/all_mega.JPG Use 1/4-28 steel hardware to assemble. Yeah I know, it's not brass. But we're more interested in getting a ring terminal on a wire held in intimate contact with the tab of a current limiter. Use steel and torque it to spec. Counter-bore the back side of the block an pot the hex-head of the bolt into the block with J-B weld. Put a washer against the block on the other side and a nut on top that torqued to spec. Then goes another washer, the limiter, the ring terminal, a third washer, and a LOCK nut. Works good, lasts a long time. I've got the delrin already cut to manufacture a few dozens of these smaller holders but those projects are on the back burner for awhile. Today I've got my laundry room wall opened up to repair and modify some plumbing to accommodate a gas dryer and a new water softener installation. I'm up to my shins in sheet rock debris right now. After that, I've got some cabinets to build. The list goes on . . . Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 07:00:52 AM PST US Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Downed EAA Plane From: Regardless of your ego, it's always good to read 43.13 part 1 & 2 when building an airplane. It's written at a 9th grade level so little things like that should not get by. They make a big deal on exposed threads for studs, bolts etc. How many of you know the formula for how deep a stud needs to be screwed in? It's so simple, if you can't see 2 threads, get a longer bolt. In areas where I can't frequently inspect potential loose nuts, I always use Loctite and if I'm feeling particularly nervous I give the thread and nut a thin coat of epoxy. There's lots of other neat stuff in the 43.13 like max number of washers, 3 and never use a jam nut more than once - toss it. It's your ass in the plane, so do it right. Glenn -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jay Hyde Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2010 8:01 AM Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Downed EAA Plane An interesting thing about jamb-nuts; if we are thinking of the same thing here. We call them 'half-nuts'; usually people place the full sized nut under the half or jamb nut- I used to as well. However, the correct way is to put the thin nut first - see http://www.boltscience.com/pages/twonuts.htm Jay -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L. Nuckolls, III Sent: 13 March 2010 11:02 PM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Downed EAA Plane Jon followed up later with: Hi all, I have confirmed the cause of my power failure last weekend. Long story short - it was builder error. When you install a locknut on a bolt, you MUST ensure that there is at least a thread or two coming all the way thru the nut. If not, it will eventually vibrate free. I have changed my mounting method and now have nutplates inside this "box". Please; learn from other's mistakes cause you don't have enough time to make them all yourself!! I would like to follow up with the idea that on a TC aircraft, there are NO plain nuts or combinations of plain nuts and lockwashers used. Non-locking, threaded fasteners are often supplied on accessories from the outside world . . . http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Contactors/Kilovac_EV200_contactor. jpg http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Contactors/s701-2.jpg http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Switches/Toggle_Switch_with_Mold-Captur ed_T erminals.jpg http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Switches/Flap_Switch.jpg Every time the system integrator picks up such devices, there's supposed to be an evaluation of risk due to "loose hardware". If the risks are deemed great enough, non-locking fasteners will be replaced with locking devices -or- doped with Loc-tite on final assembly. The tree-visible-threads rule has much more to do with strength of the assembled fastener (indicates that the screw is long enough) than with anti- loosening. The same rule applies to all threaded fasteners including the locking style nuts and nutplates. Where locking threads are not possible or practical, consider still longer screws with a jamb-nut installed on top of the structural nut. Further, a thread locker that can be easily disassembled can go a long way toward insuring joint integrity. Super-glue works nice. It's thin and wicks into an already assembled set of threads. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 07:11:55 AM PST US Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: ANL current limiter mount From: Chris, We'll you could buy a different color, but it is what it is. The boom box crowd already has the bling version, so you won't get better than that unless you go to SEMA in Las Vegas and get a custom cover. You could also get the bling version and have the cover air brushed. Perhaps that's what I'll do. The other option is to put the ANL box inside the firewall. My car has a 5 pack of them up high behind the passenger's side of the dashboard. My car has a 110 amp alternator and I've never had to change them for any reason. Glenn -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Chris Hukill Sent: Monday, March 29, 2010 9:32 PM Subject: AeroElectric-List: ANL current limiter mount Has anyone come up with a mount for ANL current limiters that don't look like they belong on a tractor? The standard ones in use are either bulky, ugly and unprotected or the ones the boom box crowd uses are made of plastic, and don't belong forward of an aircraft firewall, in my opinion. I have two alternators that I need to protect and could gang the ANLs together, or maybe it's best to use inline protection as close to alternator as possible. What has anyone come up with? Chris Hukill ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 07:25:28 AM PST US Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Downed EAA Plane From: "Jon Finley" =0AGlenn,=0A =0APlease explain the purpose of your "ego" comment.=0A =0AJon =0ADO NOT ARCHIVE=0A=0A-----Original Message-----=0AFrom: longg@pjm.com=0AS ent: Tuesday, March 30, 2010 7:59am=0ATo: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com =0ASubject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Downed EAA Plane=0A=0A--> AeroElectric-L ist message posted by: =0A=0ARegardless of your ego, it's al ways good to read 43.13 part 1 & 2 when=0Abuilding an airplane. It's writte n at a 9th grade level so little things=0Alike that should not get by. They make a big deal on exposed threads for=0Astuds, bolts etc. How many of you know the formula for how deep a stud=0Aneeds to be screwed in? It's so sim ple, if you can't see 2 threads, get=0Aa longer bolt.=0A=0AIn areas where I can't frequently inspect potential loose nuts, I always=0Ause Loctite and if I'm feeling particularly nervous I give the thread=0Aand nut a thin coat of epoxy. There's lots of other neat stuff in the=0A43.13 like max number of washers, 3 and never use a jam nut more than=0Aonce - toss it.=0A=0AIt's your ass in the plane, so do it right.=0A=0AGlenn=0A=0A-----Original Messa ge-----=0AFrom: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com=0A[mailto:owne r-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jay=0AHyde=0ASent: T uesday, March 30, 2010 8:01 AM=0ATo: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com=0ASubj ect: RE: AeroElectric-List: Downed EAA Plane=0A=0A--> AeroElectric-List mes sage posted by: "Jay Hyde"=0A=0A=0AAn interesting thi ng about jamb-nuts; if we are thinking of the same=0Athing=0Ahere. We call them 'half-nuts'; usually people place the full sized nut=0Aunder the half or jamb nut- I used to as well. However, the correct way=0Ais=0Ato put the thin nut first - see =0Ahttp://www.boltscience.com/pages/twonuts.htm=0A=0AJ ay=0A=0A=0A-----Original Message-----=0AFrom: owner-aeroelectric-list-serve r@matronics.com=0A[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of=0ARobert L.=0ANuckolls, III=0ASent: 13 March 2010 11:02 PM=0ATo: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com=0ASubject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Downed EA III"=0A=0A=0AJon followed up later with:=0A =0AHi all,=0A=0AI have confirmed the cause of my power failure last weekend . Long story=0Ashort - it was builder error. When you install a locknut on a bolt, you=0AMUST ensure that there is at least a thread or two coming all the way=0Athru the nut. If not, it will eventually vibrate free.=0A=0A=0A=0AI have changed my mounting method and now have nutplates inside thi s=0A"box".=0A=0APlease; learn from other's mistakes cause you don't have en ough time to=0Amake them all yourself!!=0A=0AI would like to follow up with the idea that=0Aon a TC aircraft, there are NO plain nuts or=0Acombination s of plain nuts and lockwashers used.=0ANon-locking, threaded fasteners are often supplied=0Aon accessories from the outside world . . .=0A=0Ahttp://w ww.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Contactors/Kilovac_EV200_contactor.=0Ajpg=0A =0Ahttp://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Contactors/s701-2.jpg=0A=0Ahttp://a eroelectric.com/Pictures/Switches/Toggle_Switch_with_Mold-Captur=0Aed_T=0Ae rminals.jpg=0A=0Ahttp://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Switches/Flap_Switch.jpg =0A=0AEvery time the system integrator picks up such=0Adevices, there's sup posed to be an evaluation of=0Arisk due to "loose hardware". If the risks a re=0Adeemed great enough, non-locking fasteners will=0Abe replaced with loc king devices -or- doped with=0ALoc-tite on final assembly.=0A=0AThe tree-vi sible-threads rule has much more to do=0Awith strength of the assembled fas tener (indicates=0Athat the screw is long enough) than with anti-=0Alooseni ng. The same rule applies to all threaded=0Afasteners including the locking style nuts and=0Anutplates.=0A=0AWhere locking threads are not possible or practical,=0Aconsider still longer screws with a jamb-nut installed=0Aon t op of the structural nut. Further, a thread locker=0Athat can be easily dis assembled can go a long way=0Atoward insuring joint integrity. Super-glue w orks=0Anice. It's thin and wicks into an already assembled=0Aset of threads .=0A=0ABob . . .=0A ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 07:33:17 AM PST US From: "Bill Bradburry" Subject: AeroElectric-List: Busy! I've got the delrin already cut to manufacture a few dozens of these smaller holders but those projects are on the back burner for awhile. Today I've got my laundry room wall opened up to repair and modify some plumbing to accommodate a gas dryer and a new water softener installation. I'm up to my shins in sheet rock debris right now. After that, I've got some cabinets to build. The list goes on . . . Bob, I have often wondered how a retired person ever had the time to work! :>) Bill B ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 07:54:27 AM PST US Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Downed EAA Plane From: Jon, Ego may imply I know better than the book, or jeez, I'd have to walk all the way back to the shop for a longer bolt - I'll put it in on next time. Just like in flying, the macho attitude (John Kennedy) will get you into as much trouble as the resignation attitude. Build it and fly it by the book, then we have the right to complain to someone else. Glenn -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jon Finley Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2010 10:22 AM Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Downed EAA Plane Glenn, Please explain the purpose of your "ego" comment. Jon DO NOT ARCHIVE -----Original Message----- From: longg@pjm.com Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2010 7:59am Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Downed EAA Plane Regardless of your ego, it's always good to read 43.13 part 1 & 2 when building an airplane. It's written at a 9th grade level so little things like that should not get by. They make a big deal on exposed threads for studs, bolts etc. How many of you know the formula for how deep a stud needs to be screwed in? It's so simple, if you can't see 2 threads, get a longer bolt. In areas where I can't frequently inspect potential loose nuts, I always use Loctite and if I'm feeling particularly nervous I give the thread and nut a thin coat of epoxy. There's lots of other neat stuff in the 43.13 like max number of washers, 3 and never use a jam nut more than once - toss it. It's your ass in the plane, so do it right. Glenn -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jay Hyde Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2010 8:01 AM Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Downed EAA Plane An interesting thing about jamb-nuts; if we are thinking of the same thing here. We call them 'half-nuts'; usually people place the full sized nut under the half or jamb nut- I used to as well. However, the correct way is to put the thin nut first - see http://www.boltscience.com/pages/twonuts.htm Jay -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L. Nuckolls, III Sent: 13 March 2010 11:02 PM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Downed EAA Plane Jon followed up later with: Hi all, I have confirmed the cause of my power failure last weekend. Long story short - it was builder error. When you install a locknut on a bolt, you MUST ensure that there is at least a thread or two coming all the way thru the nut. If not, it will eventually vibrate free. I have changed my mounting method and now have nutplates inside this "box". Please; learn from other's mistakes cause you don't have enough time to make them all yourself!! I would like to follow up with the idea that on a TC aircraft, there are NO plain nuts or combinations of plain nuts and lockwashers used. Non-locking, threaded fasteners are often supplied on accessories from the outside world . . . http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Contactors/Kilovac_EV200_contactor. jpg http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Contactors/s701-2.jpg http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Switches/Toggle_Switch_with_Mold-Captur ed_T erminals.jpg http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Switches/Flap_Switch.jpg Every time the system integrator picks up such devices, there's supposed to be an evaluation of risk due to "loose hardware". If the risks are deemed great enough, non-locking fasteners will be replaced with locking devices -or- doped with Loc-tite on final assembly. The tree-visible-threads rule has much more to do with strength of the assembled fastener (indicates that the screw is long enough) than with anti- loosening. The same rule applies to all threaded fasteners including the locking style nuts and nutplates. Where locking threads are not possible or practical, consider still longer screws with a jamb-nut installed on top of the structural nut. Further, a thread locker that can be easily disassembled can go a long way toward insuring joint integrity. Super-glue works nice. It's thin and wicks into an already assembled set of threads. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 10:24:13 AM PST US Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Downed EAA Plane From: "rampil" Glenn, Before you insult old ghosts, maybe you should read the 14 page (if I recall correctly) NTSB report on John-Johns accident. His flying endeavors were marked, in my opinion, by always trying hard to do the right thing. I don't think he was cavalier or ego-driven at all, just unlucky. He may not have had the aptitude for instrument flight, but he tried hard, and attended the best IFR flight school in the country at the time http://ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief2.asp?ev_id 001212X19354&ntsbno=NYC99MA178&akey=1 It was his sister-in-law's fault! I am not now, nor have I ever been a fan of the Kennedy dynasty, tho I did admire Jack and Bobby! -------- Ira N224XS Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=292377#292377 ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 11:40:23 AM PST US Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: Downed EAA Plane From: You're joking right? His head was bigger than the airplane. That was his MO. He was all about driving that thing out into the dark on his own. As you may remember he turned down the offer of the CFI going along with him. What he did was let one small mistake build up into a giant one - especially with family on board. Get-there-itis got him. If he had flown by the book and did what he learned at the best IFR schools at first entry into IMC or simply darkness he would have turned right around and gone back inland. He is now the butt of every CFI example of what happens to a pilot when orientation is lost. Sure one can be unlucky, but I don't buy that in his case. I suppose we'll never really know. Glenn -----Original Message----- From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of rampil Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2010 1:22 PM Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Downed EAA Plane Glenn, Before you insult old ghosts, maybe you should read the 14 page (if I recall correctly) NTSB report on John-Johns accident. His flying endeavors were marked, in my opinion, by always trying hard to do the right thing. I don't think he was cavalier or ego-driven at all, just unlucky. He may not have had the aptitude for instrument flight, but he tried hard, and attended the best IFR flight school in the country at the time http://ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief2.asp?ev_id 001212X19354&ntsbno=NYC99MA178&a key=1 It was his sister-in-law's fault! I am not now, nor have I ever been a fan of the Kennedy dynasty, tho I did admire Jack and Bobby! -------- Ira N224XS Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=292377#292377 ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 12:36:55 PM PST US From: Bill Mauledriver Watson Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Downed EAA Plane You must be joking. I've read the report and analysis of the report several times. Lot's to learn there but I never got enough info to know that his "head was bigger than the airplanes" or "that was his MO". He screwed up and I've caught myself with a dismissive smile while describing the incident to others. I'll try harder to check myself in the future. There but for the grace of whoever, goes I. Thinking I'll never be subject to a simliar set of circumstances takes a pretty big head. I agree, we'll never know, Bill Watson longg@pjm.com wrote: > > You're joking right? His head was bigger than the airplane. That was his > MO. He was all about driving that thing out into the dark on his own. As > you may remember he turned down the offer of the CFI going along with > him. > > What he did was let one small mistake build up into a giant one - > especially with family on board. Get-there-itis got him. If he had flown > by the book and did what he learned at the best IFR schools at first > entry into IMC or simply darkness he would have turned right around and > gone back inland. > > He is now the butt of every CFI example of what happens to a pilot when > orientation is lost. Sure one can be unlucky, but I don't buy that in > his case. > > I suppose we'll never really know. > > Glenn > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of > rampil > Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2010 1:22 PM > To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Downed EAA Plane > > > Glenn, > > Before you insult old ghosts, maybe you should read the 14 page > (if I recall correctly) NTSB report on John-Johns accident. > His flying endeavors were marked, in my opinion, by always trying > hard to do the right thing. I don't think he was cavalier or ego-driven > at all, just unlucky. He may not have had the aptitude for instrument > flight, but he tried hard, and attended the best IFR flight school in > the > country at the time > > http://ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief2.asp?ev_id 001212X19354&ntsbno=NYC99MA178&a > key=1 > > It was his sister-in-law's fault! > > > I am not now, nor have I ever been a fan of the Kennedy dynasty, tho > I did admire Jack and Bobby! > > -------- > Ira N224XS > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=292377#292377 > > > ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 12:37:34 PM PST US From: "S. Ramirez" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Downed EAA Plane Glen and Ira, What I've always wondered about with the fatal John-John flight was "why didn't he turn on the autopilot and let it fly him in IMC to his destination?" Didn't his Saratoga have autopilot? He must have been distracted by the two passengers on board, who had a lot to talk about. I've flown into dark areas before I had my instrument rating, and it scared the holy hel out of me-enough to fly back into VMC. I've never been a fan of the Kennedy dynasty either. I have a t-shirt with a picture of Ted Kennedy and O.J. Simpson on it. Below it, it says "Vodka and OJ." Simon Ramirez Do Not Archive On 3/30/2010 2:34 PM, longg@pjm.com wrote: > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: > > You're joking right? His head was bigger than the airplane. That was his > MO. He was all about driving that thing out into the dark on his own. As > you may remember he turned down the offer of the CFI going along with > him. > > What he did was let one small mistake build up into a giant one - > especially with family on board. Get-there-itis got him. If he had flown > by the book and did what he learned at the best IFR schools at first > entry into IMC or simply darkness he would have turned right around and > gone back inland. > > He is now the butt of every CFI example of what happens to a pilot when > orientation is lost. Sure one can be unlucky, but I don't buy that in > his case. > > I suppose we'll never really know. > > Glenn > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of > rampil > Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2010 1:22 PM > To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com > Subject: AeroElectric-List: Re: Downed EAA Plane > > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "rampil" > > Glenn, > > Before you insult old ghosts, maybe you should read the 14 page > (if I recall correctly) NTSB report on John-Johns accident. > His flying endeavors were marked, in my opinion, by always trying > hard to do the right thing. I don't think he was cavalier or ego-driven > at all, just unlucky. He may not have had the aptitude for instrument > flight, but he tried hard, and attended the best IFR flight school in > the > country at the time > > http://ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief2.asp?ev_id 001212X19354&ntsbno=NYC99MA178&a > key=1 > > It was his sister-in-law's fault! > > > I am not now, nor have I ever been a fan of the Kennedy dynasty, tho > I did admire Jack and Bobby! > > -------- > Ira N224XS > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=292377#292377 > > > ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 01:23:47 PM PST US From: Charlie England Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Downed EAA Plane I'm no engineer, & don't even plan to stay in *any* motel at S&F, but it will take more than a web site to convince me those instructions are correct. If I'm following their instructions correctly, the preload on the bolt will only be 25-50% of design (could easily wind up being even less) & the only spot with 100% of the preload will be the threads between the nuts. The deal on that bridge will need to be a lot better to get my attention. :-) Charlie On 3/30/2010 7:01 AM, Jay Hyde wrote: > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Jay Hyde" > > An interesting thing about jamb-nuts; if we are thinking of the same thing > here. We call them 'half-nuts'; usually people place the full sized nut > under the half or jamb nut- I used to as well. However, the correct way is > to put the thin nut first - see > http://www.boltscience.com/pages/twonuts.htm > > Jay > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L. > Nuckolls, III > Sent: 13 March 2010 11:02 PM > To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com > Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Downed EAA Plane > > --> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" > > > Jon followed up later with: > > Hi all, > > I have confirmed the cause of my power failure last weekend. Long story > short - it was builder error. When you install a locknut on a bolt, you > MUST ensure that there is at least a thread or two coming all the way > thru the nut. If not, it will eventually vibrate free. > > > > I have changed my mounting method and now have nutplates inside this "box". > > Please; learn from other's mistakes cause you don't have enough time to > make them all yourself!! > > I would like to follow up with the idea that > on a TC aircraft, there are NO plain nuts or > combinations of plain nuts and lockwashers used. > Non-locking, threaded fasteners are often supplied > on accessories from the outside world . . . > > http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Contactors/Kilovac_EV200_contactor.jpg > > http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Contactors/s701-2.jpg > > http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Switches/Toggle_Switch_with_Mold-Captured_T > erminals.jpg > > http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Switches/Flap_Switch.jpg > > Every time the system integrator picks up such > devices, there's supposed to be an evaluation of > risk due to "loose hardware". If the risks are > deemed great enough, non-locking fasteners will > be replaced with locking devices -or- doped with > Loc-tite on final assembly. > > The tree-visible-threads rule has much more to do > with strength of the assembled fastener (indicates > that the screw is long enough) than with anti- > loosening. The same rule applies to all threaded > fasteners including the locking style nuts and > nutplates. > > Where locking threads are not possible or practical, > consider still longer screws with a jamb-nut installed > on top of the structural nut. Further, a thread locker > that can be easily disassembled can go a long way > toward insuring joint integrity. Super-glue works > nice. It's thin and wicks into an already assembled > set of threads. > > Bob . . . > > > ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 02:16:58 PM PST US From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Downed EAA Plane At 03:16 PM 3/30/2010, you wrote: I'm no engineer, & don't even plan to stay in *any* motel at S&F, but it will take more than a web site to convince me those instructions are correct. If I'm following their instructions correctly, the preload on the bolt will only be 25-50% of design (could easily wind up being even less) & the only spot with 100% of the preload will be the threads between the nuts. I read the article with interest and a sense of mystery. Slicing and dicing distribution of total loads between two nuts, one of which ISN'T INTENDED TO BE STRUCTURAL gives one pause to ponder. Consider the host of anti-loosening technologies including toothed lock washers, winged lock washers keyed to a shaft and bent up to capture flats of the installed nut, distorted diameters designed to multiply friction between nut and bolt, locking goos and gunks, plastic or fiber inserts on the nuts or even the bolts, cotter keys through drilled or castellated nuts, and finally the lowly hunk of safety wire. The laws of physics including a study of basic machines, coefficients of friction and sliding forces tending to move down an inclined plane will show that no threaded fastener torqued to design values will rotate on its mate unless for some reason tension on the bolt is relaxed or strong but transient forces vibrations) tend to overcome the breaking coefficient of friction in the threads is overcome. None of the cited prophylactics against inadvertent loosening of a threaded couple take any part whatsoever in the structural task assigned to the threaded fasteners. Hence I find it curious that one takes the time to put up such an explanation about some seemingly critical function of jam nuts on the structural integrity of the joint. I've never seen a jamb nut installed anywhere but on top of the nut it is intended to restrain. Further, I'll bet that installation torque values are a tiny fraction of that assigned to the structural nut. This is because the friction forces normal to the structural nut are being opposed by addition of the jam nut. Depending on how much slop there is in the threads, total release of tension on the could result in total loss of "jamb" between the two nuts. As a class of anti-rotation device, I think the jamb nut is the least capable of them all. I think I'd consider all the alternatives before stacking a jamb nut on top of a joint with any responsibility for keeping the airplane and its accessories whole. Bob . . . ________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________ Time: 05:37:00 PM PST US From: Robert Sultzbach Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Downed EAA Plane Boy oh boy, You know, aside from the whole celebrity mirage our country seems to have either fallen in love with, or to resent, you can't lose sight of the fact these are just people. So now we have jousted with the ghosts of celebrity in John Jr's instance and one projected his belief's about him on to him, probably because of jealousy, plain and simple. I had a best friend in college who actually went on to have business dealings personally with JFK, Jr. He told me when I asked that JFK, Jr. was a really nice person as was Caroline. He told me their mom did a great job raising them after their dad was murdered. So, put your People Magazine away and realize a pilot, who was a great guy from my insider info, succumbed to the same errors many pilots have and learn from the facts. Enough said. Bob Sultzbach Sent from my iPhone On Mar 31, 2010, at 1:22, "rampil" wrote: Glenn, Before you insult old ghosts, maybe you should read the 14 page (if I recall correctly) NTSB report on John-Johns accident. His flying endeavors were marked, in my opinion, by always trying hard to do the right thing. I don't think he was cavalier or ego-driven at all, just unlucky. He may not have had the aptitude for instrument flight, but he tried hard, and attended the best IFR flight school in the country at the time http://ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief2.asp?ev_id 001212X19354&ntsbno=NYC99MA178&akey=1 It was his sister-in-law's fault! I am not now, nor have I ever been a fan of the Kennedy dynasty, tho I did admire Jack and Bobby! -------- Ira N224XS Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=292377#292377 ________________________________ Message 16 ____________________________________ Time: 05:37:02 PM PST US From: paul wilson Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Downed EAA Plane Bob, You are correct. The application of a jam nut for locking is only applicable when one cannot wrench on the other end of the bolt. And never in a critical application. An example that comes to mind is a big relay where the bolt is molded into the plastic. Its interesting that some tend to focus on how many threads are showing instead of "is the thing torqued with a locking feature nut". Mechanical locking nuts are favored (some call Pinch nuts). The castellated nut does not have my favor since the holes seldom meet my needs. Safe enough if torqued properly. The nylon nuts (called elastic stop nuts) are applicable for non critical places with no heat. Otherwise loctite in cool environs is also good and comes in several degrees of anti rotation sticky ness. Paul ========= At 02:15 PM 3/30/2010, Robert L. Nuckolls, III" wrote: >As a class of anti-rotation device, I think the > jamb nut is the least capable of them all. I think > I'd consider all the alternatives before stacking > a jamb nut on top of a joint with any responsibility > for keeping the airplane and its accessories whole. > > Bob . ________________________________ Message 17 ____________________________________ Time: 06:14:08 PM PST US From: Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: testing for inoperative wig wag? Check to make sure you have a good ground connection. It happened to me when I did some wire shortening, new connectors, and forgot I had the ground disconnected. Ron Burnett RV-6A Subaru powered, forever finishing ---- Erich_Weaver@urscorp.com wrote: ============ My landing lights no longer wig-wag and I would like to trouble shoot. My system is per one of the options described on the Aeroelectric Connection website (?), and uses a single three-position switch for the landing lights (off-wigwag-on), a bridge rectifier, and the flasher unit, all wired per instructions. Everything is fine for both the off and on positions, but nothing comes on or flashes at all in the wigwag position, and my ammeter indicates no current is flowing. I pulled the three-position switch and tested it with a multimeter - seems to function fine. That would seem to leave either the flasher or the bridge rectifier as potential culprits. Could just buy both and probably be done, but Im sure there must be a way to trouble shoot these to confirm which has the problem before I order them. Suggestions? thanks Erich ________________________________ Message 18 ____________________________________ Time: 06:47:48 PM PST US Subject: AeroElectric-List: JFK Jr and all From: Richard Girard I'm really not entirely sure what any of this has to do with an electrical system in an airplane and I've no doubt this is of tremendous to those of you discussing it, but would you all mind getting a chat room or another venue where you can whack away at each other without boring the holy crap out of the rest of us. Cheers, Rick Girard ________________________________ Message 19 ____________________________________ Time: 06:54:56 PM PST US From: Bill Mauledriver Watson Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: Downed EAA Plane I like the phrase, "aside from the whole celebrity mirage...". Nice. Bill Robert Sultzbach wrote: > > Boy oh boy, > > You know, aside from the whole celebrity mirage our country seems to have either fallen in love with, or to resent, you can't lose sight of the fact these are just people. So now we have jousted with the ghosts of celebrity in John Jr's instance and one projected his belief's about him on to him, probably because of jealousy, plain and simple. I had a best friend in college who actually went on to have business dealings personally with JFK, Jr. He told me when I asked that JFK, Jr. was a really nice person as was Caroline. He told me their mom did a great job raising them after their dad was murdered. So, put your People Magazine away and realize a pilot, who was a great guy from my insider info, succumbed to the same errors many pilots have and learn from the facts. Enough said. > > Bob Sultzbach > > do not archive ________________________________ Message 20 ____________________________________ Time: 06:58:49 PM PST US From: RGent1224@aol.com Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: JFK Jr and all right on In a message dated 3/30/2010 8:50:35 P.M. Central Daylight Time, aslsa.rng@gmail.com writes: I'm really not entirely sure what any of this has to do with an electrical system in an airplane and I've no doubt this is of tremendous to those of you discussing it, but would you all mind getting a chat room or another venue where you can whack away at each other without boring the holy crap out of the rest of us. Cheers, Rick Girard (http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List) (http://www.matronics.com/contribution) ________________________________ Message 21 ____________________________________ Time: 08:17:00 PM PST US From: Robert Sultzbach Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: JFK Jr and all My feelings precisely. The record needed to be set straight. Now, shall we get back to electro whizzies as Bob N would say. Sent from my iPhone On Mar 31, 2010, at 9:52, RGent1224@aol.com wrote: right on In a message dated 3/30/2010 8:50:35 P.M. Central Daylight Time, aslsa.rng@gmail.com writes: I'm really not entirely sure what any of this has to do with an electrical system in an airplane and I've no doubt this is of tremendous to those of you discussing it, but would you all mind getting a chat room or another venue where you can whack away at each other without boring the holy crap out of the rest of us. Cheers, Rick Girard =================================== List href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List =================================== ms.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com =================================== tp://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution =================================== ________________________________ Message 22 ____________________________________ Time: 09:52:32 PM PST US From: "Terry Watson" Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: JFK Jr and all Delete key. Delete key. Delete key. Let people say what they want. We don't have to read it all, any more than we have to watch everything on TV or listen to everything on the radio or read the entire newspaper. Someone posted a link to the accident report, which changed my mind about what I thought I knew about JFK Jr's accident. Listen selectively, please. Don't censor. This thread too will pass. Terry From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Richard Girard Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2010 6:28 PM Subject: AeroElectric-List: JFK Jr and all I'm really not entirely sure what any of this has to do with an electrical system in an airplane and I've no doubt this is of tremendous to those of you discussing it, but would you all mind getting a chat room or another venue where you can whack away at each other without boring the holy crap out of the rest of us. Cheers, Rick Girard ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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.