Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:34 AM - Re: Battery cables and Firewall Penetrations (Harley)
2. 07:05 AM - Re: Plane Power IR Alternator Implementation in Z-13/8 (Jared Yates)
3. 07:36 AM - New operations model for the AeroElectric Connection (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
4. 07:36 AM - Re: Jasco Alternator and Panel Ground Questions (stearman456)
5. 08:51 AM - Re: Plane Power IR Alternator Implementation in Z-13/8 (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
6. 08:56 AM - Re: New operations model for the AeroElectric Connection (Richard Girard)
7. 09:06 AM - Re: New operations model for the AeroElectric Connection (Roger)
8. 09:35 AM - Re: New operations model for the AeroElectric Connection (James Robinson)
9. 09:44 AM - Re: New operations model for the AeroElectric Connection (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
10. 09:44 AM - Re: New operations model for the AeroElectric Connection (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
11. 09:45 AM - Re: New operations model for the AeroElectric Connection (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
12. 09:52 AM - New operations model for the AeroElectric Connection (Dave)
13. 11:28 AM - Re: Tray Connectors...A Bad Idea. (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
14. 12:02 PM - Re: Tray Connectors...A Bad Idea. (Ralph & Maria Finch)
15. 12:36 PM - Re: Tray Connectors...A Bad Idea. (Bill Mauledriver Watson)
16. 01:59 PM - Tray Connectors...OOPS. (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
17. 02:03 PM - Re: Tray Connectors...A Bad Idea. (BobsV35B@aol.com)
18. 02:11 PM - Lowrance Airmap GPS Updates (David & Elaine Lamphere)
19. 02:16 PM - Re: Tray Connectors...A Bad Idea. (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
20. 02:55 PM - Aircraft radios of yesteryear (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
21. 03:48 PM - Re: Aircraft radios of yesteryear (BobsV35B@aol.com)
22. 04:35 PM - Re: Aircraft radios of yesteryear (Bruce B. Bell)
23. 06:53 PM - Re: Vertex VXA700 information needed (rparigoris)
24. 07:44 PM - Re: New operations model for the AeroElectric Connection (MLWynn@aol.com)
25. 08:16 PM - Re: Re: Vertex VXA700 information needed (Richard Girard)
26. 10:17 PM - Re: Vertex VXA700 information needed (rparigoris)
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: Battery cables and Firewall Penetrations |
Tim... (if I may interrupt here, Bob...)
Those ACS fittings you are referring to, Tim, are designed to
take grommets inside the holes (except the small one which
already has a rubber backing) to prevent damage to the wire.
From the description on the ACS page:
/Both types of shield ... accommodate rubber grommets up to
outside diameter. Actual hole size in 2 piece shields is slightly
larger than indicated to prevent chafing cable...Use grommets
that fit tightly around the cable or wire to insure a good seal./
Harley
-----------------------------------------------------------------
On 8/21/2010 12:02 AM, Tim Andres wrote:
>
> These:
> http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/appages/firewallshields.php
>
> I like the idea of the 90 bend but have not seen anything close.
>
> Tim
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *From:* owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] *On
> Behalf Of *Robert L. Nuckolls, III
> *Sent:* Friday, August 20, 2010 7:15 PM
> *To:* aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> *Subject:* RE: AeroElectric-List: Battery cables and Firewall
> Penetrations
>
> At 09:06 PM 8/20/2010, you wrote:
>
> Any idea where you can get such a fitting Bob? The ones I see
> at ACS look like they would cut insulation.
> Thanks, Tim
>
>
> Which ACS catalog number are you looking at?
>
> Bob . . .
>
> * *
> * *
> **
> **
> **
> *http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List*
> **
> **
> *http://forums.matronics.com*
> **
> **
> *http://www.matronics.com/contribution*
> * *
>
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> 11:35:00
>
> *
>
>
> *
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: Plane Power IR Alternator Implementation in Z-13/8 |
Bob, thanks for your help! Your answer clarifies many of my questions. I
was surprised by your answer about the test. Did I understand correctly
that there is never a time to intentionally turn off the primary alternator
and battery for the purpose of testing the SD-8 and it's associated
circuitry's ability to supply the Ebus?
On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 3:02 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <
nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com> wrote:
> nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com>
>
>
> At 10:27 AM 8/20/2010, you wrote:
> I'm thinking about using one of these as the belt driven alternator in
> Z-13/8:
>
> http://www.plane-power.com/AL12-EI60.htm
>
> It's their experimental, internally regulated alternator that also comes
> with built in crowbar over voltage protection. I'm not sure that I have a
> full understanding of the OV protection and control issues of IR alternators
> and how they pertain to this unit.
>
> I have 3 primary questions- one for the AEC and two for Plane Power, though
> I welcome any insight about all three from the AEC readers.
>
> So first, is it correct to say that Z24, Z24A, and the associated text on
> page Z-5 apply to IR alternators as they come off of the auto parts shelf,
> and not really to this unit?
>
> Correct . . . The P-P devices are not off-the-shelf
> automotive.
>
>
> Based on their conceptual wiring picture here:
> http://www.plane-power.com/images/AL12_EI60%20Installation.pdf
>
> Primary Question 1: How would I make the wiring connections in Z13/8 with
> this unit? Should their field enable lead go to the 2-3 DC Power Master
> Switch with the 5A crowbar in the same place as Z13/8 depicts it? Also,
> what about that other optional alternator off lead (see 3 below)?
>
> I think I understand that the battery dump issue (described at
> http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Adapting_IR_Alternators_to_Aircraft.pdf)
> is a problem in Z13/8 because we would like to occasionally (preflight,
> first flight of the day, etc?) turn the primary alternator and master off,
> and turn the ebus alternate feed on to test those associated switching
> systems. Is that correct?
>
> No. "Battery Dump" is defined as the sudden reduction
> of heavy alternator loads wherein the major portion
> of that load included battery recharge current and
> it's the BATTERY that's being disconnected. There
> are no operational procedures that call for such
> a "test". Further, the way the Z-figures are drawn,
> such a test could not be conducted for the battery
> is always disconnected AFTER the alternator is shut down.
>
>
> Primary Question 2: Will it do any physical damage to anything to turn off
> the 2-3 DC Power Master Switch while the engine is running (assuming that I
> need to)?
>
> It has been a legacy design goal for all TC aircraft
> to configure the system such that an alternator (or
> generator) may be turned on or off at any time under
> any conditions without hazard to other components
> in the system. An alternator that is controlled
> by breaking the field lead without breaking the
> b-lead MEETS this design goal. So, no . . . the P-P
> alternator may be turned on or off at anytime without
> concern for hazard to any compoent.
>
>
> Primary Question 3: Does opening their Alternator Field Enable Switch fully
> shut down the alternator field?
>
>
> Yes
>
> If the crowbar protection circuit pops that 5A CB, I should hope that
> opening that switch
>
> "switch"??? Do you mean "breaker"? Yes, opening that
> breaker offers a quiet, orderly and benign disabling
> of the alternator.
>
> . . . would completely shut down the alternator field too. If so, then
> what does that other "optional alternator off" lead do?
>
> That's not a control, it's an indicator light which
> has some limited ability to annunciate alternator failure
> and has been used in cars for decades. However, active
> notification of low voltage by an independent sensing
> system is the legacy approach to watching for and
> announcing alternator failure.
>
>
> Would I need to hook it up at all, and/or would I need to still hook it up
> with a switch in the line? Is there a failure mode in the other circuit
> that would require me to turn off a switch in the second line to shut the
> alternator off?
>
> You can drop the P-P product directly into any
> of the z-figures by simply eliminating any illustrated
> external regulators and/or crowbar ov protection
> modules.
>
> I was going to call plane power to ask them a few of these questions but I
> need to make sure that I know what to ask about. Thanks in advance.
>
> I've discussed Plane-Power design philosophy with
> them at length. It's a certainty that their answers
> will be along the same lines as that which I've offered
> above.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
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 |
|
Subject: | New operations model for the AeroElectric Connection |
Last year we made the decision to make the 'Connection more
utilitarian and accessible by
offering electronic versions. This was not done without some
considerations of risk.
In the Internet age, a popular/useful file "released into the wild"
may suddenly propagate with
amazing speed. Such is the case with the AeroElectric Connection. The
.pdf version has been
picked up on a host of file-sharing services and now enjoys
circulation numbers in the tens of
thousands of copies.
There's an obvious down-side. This means that the publication side of
the AeroElectric Connection ceases
to be as strong source of revenue. The up-side is that the
simple-ideas and recipes for success described
therein enjoy much wider circulation to the benefit of the OBAM
aviation community as a whole.
Coincidentally, I have just read a book called "The Future of a
Radical Price - Free" wherein
the author describes economic and marketing models that exploit
giving certain value away in
order to promote the exchange of other value. This business model
has been operating on the
Internet for years and continues to grow . . . which demonstrates its
value. Consideration of his
advice combined with previous events cited marks a milestone in my
own experiences and
prompts a new modus operandi for the AeroElectric Connection.
Beginning immediately, the printed copy price of the 'Connection will
drop to $23 postage
paid (media mail) in the us. $30 overseas (priority mail). Buying
the printed book will be
more convenient and probably less expensive than printing 300+ pages
on your own printer.
The PDF file has been loaded to the website for download at no charge.
The Revision 13 to the 'Connection will offer a complete update and
re-formatting of the book.
Most chapters including the Z-figures will make direct references to
a range of products and services
offered by the AeroElectric Connection. There are big plans for
expanding our design, manufacturing
and consulting services on behalf of the OBAM aviation community. We
will probably bring Appendix C
(catalog and source-book of products) back.
Anyone who has recently purchased a book or CD at current prices who
feels short changed by the
price reduction is encouraged to drop us a line. Our warranty offers
a guarantee of perceived
value for the lifetime of any product. Drop us a note and we'll make
it right with you. All of
our dealers will be getting shipments of additional books equal to
1/2 their present inventory
to adjust their return on investment for having purchased quantities
of the book.
Bob . . .
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: Jasco Alternator and Panel Ground Questions |
Thanks, Bob. Your book sure takes alot of the mystery out of the wiring process
- I'm already on my second highlighter!
Dan
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=309623#309623
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: Plane Power IR Alternator Implementation in Z-13/8 |
At 09:02 AM 8/21/2010, you wrote:
>Bob, thanks for your help! Your answer clarifies many of my
>questions. I was surprised by your answer about the test. Did I
>understand correctly that there is never a time to intentionally
>turn off the primary alternator and battery for the purpose of
>testing the SD-8 and it's associated circuitry's ability to supply the Ebus?
Sure, you can do that. BATTERY DUMP is dependent upon
sequences of events. First you have to have a heavily
loaded alternator (engine rpm high, discharged battery
that is demanding and receiving most of the alternator's
output). Then you unhook the battery while leaving the
alternator on line. The effect is much like the tug of
war game where one of the opposing sides suddenly releases
their grip on the rope when the other side is concentrating
on a max effort. There's no way that the other side can
keep from falling on their butts.
The folks who design regulators must strive for a magic
compromise between stability (SLOW response) and
and accuracy (HIGH gain). In engineering-speak this
is often referred to as "damping ratio". See:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Curves/damping_ratio.gif
Here you see the time versus temperature plots for
various servo-systems tailored to hold a mass at
some constant temperature. Raising the temperature
of a large mass takes a lot of watts. But the device
controlling the heater has to be fitted with some
anticipatory features. If you're pouting out kilojoules
of heat into kilograms of mass, you'd better start
throttling things back as the system approaches
the desired temperature.
You can slow things way down and have an "over damped"
system that is free of oscillations and overshoot.
On the other hand, a high gain/ fast response characteristic
may bring the temperature to the set point faster
and with more accuracy, but tendency to overshoot
and "wiggle" about the set-point is greater. This
system is said to be "under damped".
Now, imagine a controller that is optimally damped
(middle curve). Consider what happens if the heater
is turned on but sometime along the temperature rise
cycle, you suddenly reduce the mass being heated
by say 90%. What's a poor controller to do? Now
unable to detect the loss of mass, the probability
for overshoot and oscillation is huge.
The battery is electrical "mass" which your
regulator expects to be in place all the time.
Hence the design goal that calls for alternators
not to be switched on/off without a battery being
on line too.
If you study what happens while sitting at
the controls and flipping switches, there's no
way you can produce that sudden reduction of "mass".
Alternators are never switched on/off without
a battery being tied to the bus.
Hence the design goals are satisfied and risks
to the system are reduced to insignificance.
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: New operations model for the AeroElectric Connection |
If you don't mind a suggestion. Look at the Rotax model for distributing its
engine manuals. They are free, but they are locked. You cannot cut or copy
text out of them. If you want to send some significant point to someone, you
have to re-type it. I think it assures that the manuals will not be
corrupted either by accident or malicious intent. Just a thought.
Rick Girard
On Sat, Aug 21, 2010 at 9:35 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <
nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com> wrote:
> *Last year we made the decision to make the 'Connection more utilitarian
> and accessible by
> offering electronic versions. This was not done without some considerations
> of risk.
>
> In the Internet age, a popular/useful file "released into the wild" may
> suddenly propagate with
> amazing speed. Such is the case with the AeroElectric Connection. The .pdf
> version has been
> picked up on a host of file-sharing services and now enjoys circulation
> numbers in the tens of
> thousands of copies.
>
> There's an obvious down-side. This means that the publication side of the
> AeroElectric Connection ceases
> to be as strong source of revenue. The up-side is that the simple-ideas and
> recipes for success described
> therein enjoy much wider circulation to the benefit of the OBAM aviation
> community as a whole.
>
> Coincidentally, I have just read a book called "The Future of a Radical
> Price - Free" wherein
> the author describes economic and marketing models that exploit giving
> certain value away in
> order to promote the exchange of other value. This business model has been
> operating on the
> Internet for years and continues to grow . . . which demonstrates its
> value. Consideration of his
> advice combined with previous events cited marks a milestone in my own
> experiences and
> prompts a new modus operandi for the AeroElectric Connection.
>
> Beginning immediately, the printed copy price of the 'Connection will drop
> to $23 postage
> paid (media mail) in the us. $30 overseas (priority mail). Buying the
> printed book will be
> more convenient and probably less expensive than printing 300+ pages on
> your own printer.
> The PDF file has been loaded to the website for download at no charge.
>
> The Revision 13 to the 'Connection will offer a complete update and
> re-formatting of the book.
> Most chapters including the Z-figures will make direct references to a
> range of products and services
> offered by the AeroElectric Connection. There are big plans for expanding
> our design, manufacturing
> and consulting services on behalf of the OBAM aviation community. We will
> probably bring Appendix C
> (catalog and source-book of products) back.
>
> Anyone who has recently purchased a book or CD at current prices who feels
> short changed by the
> price reduction is encouraged to drop us a line. Our warranty offers a
> guarantee of perceived
> value for the lifetime of any product. Drop us a note and we'll make it
> right with you. All of
> our dealers will be getting shipments of additional books equal to 1/2
> their present inventory
> to adjust their return on investment for having purchased quantities of the
> book.
>
>
> Bob . . .
> *
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
--
Zulu Delta
Kolb Mk IIIC
582 Gray head
4.00 C gearbox
3 blade WD
Thanks, Homer GBYM
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: New operations model for the AeroElectric Connection |
Anyone who has recently purchased a book or CD at current prices who
feels short changed by the
price reduction is encouraged to drop us a line. Our warranty offers a
guarantee of perceived
value for the lifetime of any product. Drop us a note and we'll make it
right with you
Bob . . .
As I recall, I paid $35 for my book, which is a $12 difference from
todays price. I feel that I have gotten at least an order of magnitude
more in value from this forum and the Aeroelectric website, so... lets
call it even.
What you do is much appreciated, hope you stay with us for a long time
to come.
Roger
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: New operations model for the AeroElectric Connection |
Bob
I just wanted to pass on my thanks for all you do for our community. I followed
your diagrams and ideas on my Glasair and the electrical has been a non issue
for the years I have been flying. Exactly what I wanted. The info and
assistance I recieved was worth far more than the cost of your book.
Thanks again
Jim
James Robinson
Glasair lll N79R
Spanish Fork UT U77
________________________________
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com>
Sent: Sat, August 21, 2010 8:35:25 AM
Subject: AeroElectric-List: New operations model for the AeroElectric Connection
Last year we made the decision to make the 'Connection more utilitarian and
accessible by
offering electronic versions. This was not done without some considerations of
risk.
In the Internet age, a popular/useful file "released into the wild" may suddenly
propagate with
amazing speed. Such is the case with the AeroElectric Connection. The .pdf
version has been
picked up on a host of file-sharing services and now enjoys circulation numbers
in the tens of
thousands of copies.
There's an obvious down-side. This means that the publication side of the
AeroElectric Connection ceases
to be as strong source of revenue. The up-side is that the simple-ideas and
recipes for success described
therein enjoy much wider circulation to the benefit of the OBAM aviation
community as a whole.
Coincidentally, I have just read a book called "The Future of a Radical Price -
Free" wherein
the author describes economic and marketing models that exploit giving certain
value away in
order to promote the exchange of other value. This business model has been
operating on the
Internet for years and continues to grow . . . which demonstrates its value.
Consideration of his
advice combined with previous events cited marks a milestone in my own
experiences and
prompts a new modus operandi for the AeroElectric Connection.
Beginning immediately, the printed copy price of the 'Connection will drop to
$23 postage
paid (media mail) in the us. $30 overseas (priority mail). Buying the printed
book will be
more convenient and probably less expensive than printing 300+ pages on your
own printer.
The PDF file has been loaded to the website for download at no charge.
The Revision 13 to the 'Connection will offer a complete update and
re-formatting of the book.
Most chapters including the Z-figures will make direct references to a range of
products and services
offered by the AeroElectric Connection. There are big plans for expanding our
design, manufacturing
and consulting services on behalf of the OBAM aviation community. We will
probably bring Appendix C
(catalog and source-book of products) back.
Anyone who has recently purchased a book or CD at current prices who feels short
changed by the
price reduction is encouraged to drop us a line. Our warranty offers a guarantee
of perceived
value for the lifetime of any product. Drop us a note and we'll make it right
with you. All of
our dealers will be getting shipments of additional books equal to 1/2 their
present inventory
to adjust their return on investment for having purchased quantities of the
book.
Bob . . .
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: New operations model for the AeroElectric Connection |
At 10:55 AM 8/21/2010, you wrote:
>If you don't mind a suggestion. Look at the Rotax model for
>distributing its engine manuals. They are free, but they are locked.
>You cannot cut or copy text out of them. If you want to send some
>significant point to someone, you have to re-type it. I think it
>assures that the manuals will not be corrupted either by accident
>or malicious intent. Just a thought.
Yeah, I'll be doing that. But by the next time a new revision
hits the www, there will be uncountable opportunities for
accidental or malicious adventure for what's already out there.
Such is the risk of being an inhabitant of our planet!
Interestingly enough, I had several experiences at OSH many
years ago where somebody walked up to the booth with a binder
that contained a 'Connection that was obviously copied.
Many of the pages were not "square". I never bothered to
inquire and it really didn't matter. Knowing the circumstances
would not have altered the reality. Best thing was to move
on and build good airplanes.
Bob . . .
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: New operations model for the AeroElectric Connection |
At 11:05 AM 8/21/2010, you wrote:
>Anyone who has recently purchased a book or CD at current prices who
>feels short changed by the
>price reduction is encouraged to drop us a line. Our warranty offers
>a guarantee of perceived
>value for the lifetime of any product. Drop us a note and we'll make
>it right with you
>
>Bob . . .
>
>As I recall, I paid $35 for my book, which is a $12 difference from
>todays price. I feel that I have gotten at least an order of
>magnitude more in value from this forum and the Aeroelectric
>website, so... lets call it even.
>
>What you do is much appreciated, hope you stay with us for a long
>time to come.
Thank you my friend. That's the plan.
Bob . . .
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: New operations model for the AeroElectric Connection |
At 11:34 AM 8/21/2010, you wrote:
>Bob
>I just wanted to pass on my thanks for all you do for our
>community. I followed your diagrams and ideas on my Glasair and the
>electrical has been a non issue for the years I have been
>flying. Exactly what I wanted. The info and assistance I recieved
>was worth far more than the cost of your book.
>Thanks again
Thank YOU! I'm pleased that the work is
useful.
Bob . . .
Message 12
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 |
|
Subject: | New operations model for the AeroElectric Connection |
Bob,
I purchased your book a few years back for 35 dollars. I am currently
updated through rev 12 (I think). I appreciate what you do for the OBAM
community so much that I will probably
buy your new format and rev 13 book just to do my part in helping keep
the revenue stream flowing.
Thanks for everything
Dave
Message 13
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: Tray Connectors...A Bad Idea. |
At 07:44 AM 8/18/2010, you wrote:
>
>I am sure the notion of sliding a piece of electronics into a tray
>with the connector on the back has some informative design history,
>but it is a horrible idea for aircraft (and even cars). In general
>you should avoid it and replace the connector with a hanging one
>where the connections aren't attached to two separately moving bodies.
It's true that connectors at the rear of
slide-in accessories mating with connectors
on captive trays have extra-ordinary design
requirements. And there were a few radios
wherein the designers had to learn the
weaknesses in the worst way - field experience.
Many of the first radios for GA aircraft didn't
even mount on the panel. Take this cute little
feller . . .
http://tinyurl.com/29sfmdd
This radio was battery powered and not intended
to be mounted solidly to the airplane. See the
leather carrying handle? One sat it in the seat,
plugged in an antenna, headphones and mic and voila!
You had an airborne radio communications system.
The antenna was in fact, a device adapted from a
car radio installation. You talked on a VHF frequency
determined by which crystal you plugged into the
panel (see slots for two other frequencies)
and listened for the ground facility to
reply over the local radio range, LF beacon
or marker transmitter.
Not too many years after, folks began to find
ways to mount these new fangled devices to the
panel and it didn't take long to realize that
it was MUCH easier to do installation and maintenance
if the mounting tray and harness was captive
to the airplane and the radio simply slides into
the tray. Exemplar radios included this device.
http://tinyurl.com/29hm578
You can see the head of the radio-to-tray
jackscrew at the upper edge of the LF receiver
bezel.
http://tinyurl.com/2c5hu4w
The other end of the jackscrew can be seen
here along with the Cinch-Jones connectors
that mated with connectors captive to the
tray. These connectors are still in production.
http://tinyurl.com/yhm37ow
At the same time, other manufacturers elected
not to participate in that adventure. As I
recall, this radio's installation tray
http://tinyurl.com/3xklhct
did not capture the mating connectors. The
maintenance person had to crawl under the
panel to mate/de-mate harnesses with the
radio.
Even today, the installed size and wire-count
of some radios . . .
http://tinyurl.com/2u58jrb
doesn't offer practical tray designs and
their mating harness connectors are captive
directly to the radio chassis.
Aircraft radios did suffer a sort of "dark
ages" when connectors intended to engage card-
edge fingers were pressed into service on
new designs. King radio (and others) built a
LOT of devices that used this genre' of wire
to board connector:
Emacs!
That accepted pins looking like this:
Emacs!
At Cessna in 1963 or so, we did an audio distribution
board that mounted some relays and provided a sort
of junction box for integrating a stack of radios
into the single-engine product line.
The card-edge connector was imply not designed to
perform well in the aircraft environment. The
in-house experiment only lasted a few years. Recall
that good connection science calls for low surface
area, high-pressure contact between pin and socket.
The thin, gold-plated fingers of soft copper and the
wide, low pressure springs in the pins simply did
not rise to the task. Further, these connectors are
probably the most fragile interconnect devices
ever. They are entirely suited for SOME limited
applications and are still made . . . but you won't
(or at least shouldn't) find them in a product
destined for use in an airplane.
These connectors are not well contained. Dust
laden with moisture, oils, and grit can accumulate
over time. There's no wire support to keep harness
wiggles from "working" the pins in their housings.
I'd venture a guess that 90+ percent of my
observations of "connector grief" with panel mounted
radios in light aircraft have involved a variant
of a card-edge-to-wire product.
Having said that, I'm not sure I'd recommend a
great migration to modifying any radio that's still
in service utilizing this connector style. It
would probably be useful to install new pins in
all the holes. Clean the card edge fingers
with a solvent wetted swab (resist any
temptation to buff with ANY form of abrasive),
that gold plating is VERY thin! Then provide
bundle support for the wires close to where
they exit the connector housing.
Beyond this example of mis-applied technologies,
I think the researcher will find that tray
mounted harness connectors have enjoyed secure,
happy and long lived associations with their
radio mounted mates. The design has been widely
practiced over the full range of avionics from
the present day descendant of the Mitchell Airboy up
to and including electro-whizzies in military
and spacecraft.
The magic happens when the connector pin-socket
combinations are truly crafted to the task,
harnesses don't hang from the pin's insulation
grip, housings do a good job of shielding pins
from the environmental crud, and finally, the
radio is properly captive in the tray by proper
tightening of the retaining hardware.
By the way, if any of you are interested in a
little museum trip down Avionics Lane, I'll invite
you to look over the collection of pictures here:
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Radios/
Some of us grey beards have had the pleasure
of cranking on a few of these very same knobs.
My first flying lesson in a rudder-pedal fitted
included a how-to session on one of these:
http://tinyurl.com/3xklhct
Bob . . .
Message 14
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 |
|
Subject: | Tray Connectors...A Bad Idea. |
Bob-you are the man. Your knowledge and *understanding* of both electrical
issues and their history of development is truly remarkable and seldom seen
nowadays in any field. Old School of the best kind.
A tip-of-the-hat from
Ralph Finch
Davis, California, USA
RV-9A QB-SA
Message 15
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: Tray Connectors...A Bad Idea. |
I knew when this was posted it would generate an interesting dialog but
didn't expect an avionics history lesson. Great stuff! Thanks Bob and
Eric.
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
> At 07:44 AM 8/18/2010, you wrote:
>> <emjones@charter.net>
>>
>> I am sure the notion of sliding a piece of electronics into a tray
>> with the connector on the back has some informative design history,
>> but it is a horrible idea for aircraft (and even cars). In general
>> you should avoid it and replace the connector with a hanging one
>> where the connections aren't attached to two separately moving bodies.
>
> It's true that connectors at the rear of
> slide-in accessories mating with connectors
> on captive trays have extra-ordinary design
> requirements. And there were a few radios
> wherein the designers had to learn the
> weaknesses in the worst way - field experience.
>
> Many of the first radios for GA aircraft didn't
> even mount on the panel. Take this cute little
> feller . . .
>
> * http://tinyurl.com/29sfmdd*
>
> This radio was battery powered and not intended
>
snippety snip
Message 16
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 |
|
Subject: | Tray Connectors...OOPS. |
Somehow the image for the card-edge-finger pin
got replace by a second housing image. Here's
the corrected piece.
B . . .
>I am sure the notion of sliding a piece of electronics into a tray
>with the connector on the back has some informative design history,
>but it is a horrible idea for aircraft (and even cars). In general
>you should avoid it and replace the connector with a hanging one
>where the connections aren't attached to two separately moving bodies.
It's true that connectors at the rear of
slide-in accessories mating with connectors
on captive trays have extra-ordinary design
requirements. And there were a few radios
wherein the designers had to learn the
weaknesses in the worst way - field experience.
Many of the first radios for GA aircraft didn't
even mount on the panel. Take this cute little
feller . . .
http://tinyurl.com/29sfmdd
This radio was battery powered and not intended
to be mounted solidly to the airplane. See the
leather carrying handle? One sat it in the seat,
plugged in an antenna, headphones and mic and voila!
You had an airborne radio communications system.
The antenna was in fact, a device adapted from a
car radio installation. You talked on a VHF frequency
determined by which crystal you plugged into the
panel (see slots for two other frequencies)
and listened for the ground facility to
reply over the local radio range, LF beacon
or marker transmitter.
Not too many years after, folks began to find
ways to mount these new fangled devices to the
panel and it didn't take long to realize that
it was MUCH easier to do installation and maintenance
if the mounting tray and harness was captive
to the airplane and the radio simply slides into
the tray. Exemplar radios included this device.
http://tinyurl.com/29hm578
You can see the head of the radio-to-tray
jackscrew at the upper edge of the LF receiver
bezel.
http://tinyurl.com/2c5hu4w
The other end of the jackscrew can be seen
here along with the Cinch-Jones connectors
that mated with connectors captive to the
tray. These connectors are still in production.
http://tinyurl.com/yhm37ow
At the same time, other manufacturers elected
not to participate in that adventure. As I
recall, this radio's installation tray
http://tinyurl.com/3xklhct
did not capture the mating connectors. The
maintenance person had to crawl under the
panel to mate/de-mate harnesses with the
radio.
Even today, the installed size and wire-count
of some radios . . .
http://tinyurl.com/2u58jrb
doesn't offer practical tray designs and
their mating harness connectors are captive
directly to the radio chassis.
Aircraft radios did suffer a sort of "dark
ages" when connectors intended to engage card-
edge fingers were pressed into service on
new designs. King radio (and others) built a
LOT of devices that used this genre' of wire
to board connector:
[]
That accepted pins looking like this:
[]
At Cessna in 1963 or so, we did an audio distribution
board that mounted some relays and provided a sort
of junction box for integrating a stack of radios
into the single-engine product line.
The card-edge connector was imply not designed to
perform well in the aircraft environment. The
in-house experiment only lasted a few years. Recall
that good connection science calls for low surface
area, high-pressure contact between pin and socket.
The thin, gold-plated fingers of soft copper and the
wide, low pressure springs in the pins simply did
not rise to the task. Further, these connectors are
probably the most fragile interconnect devices
ever. They are entirely suited for SOME limited
applications and are still made . . . but you won't
(or at least shouldn't) find them in a product
destined for use in an airplane.
These connectors are not well contained. Dust
laden with moisture, oils, and grit can accumulate
over time. There's no wire support to keep harness
wiggles from "working" the pins in their housings.
I'd venture a guess that 90+ percent of my
observations of "connector grief" with panel mounted
radios in light aircraft have involved a variant
of a card-edge-to-wire product.
Having said that, I'm not sure I'd recommend a
great migration to modifying any radio that's still
in service utilizing this connector style. It
would probably be useful to install new pins in
all the holes. Clean the card edge fingers
with a solvent wetted swab (resist any
temptation to buff with ANY form of abrasive),
that gold plating is VERY thin! Then provide
bundle support for the wires close to where
they exit the connector housing.
Beyond this example of mis-applied technologies,
I think the researcher will find that tray
mounted harness connectors have enjoyed secure,
happy and long lived associations with their
radio mounted mates. The design has been widely
practiced over the full range of avionics from
the present day descendant of the Mitchell Airboy up
to and including electro-whizzies in military
and spacecraft.
The magic happens when the connector pin-socket
combinations are truly crafted to the task,
harnesses don't hang from the pin's insulation
grip, housings do a good job of shielding pins
from the environmental crud, and finally, the
radio is properly captive in the tray by proper
tightening of the retaining hardware.
By the way, if any of you are interested in a
little museum trip down Avionics Lane, I'll invite
you to look over the collection of pictures here:
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Radios/
Some of us grey beards have had the pleasure
of cranking on a few of these very same knobs.
My first flying lesson in a rudder-pedal fitted
included a how-to session on one of these:
http://tinyurl.com/3xklhct
Bob . . .
Message 17
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: Tray Connectors...A Bad Idea. |
Good Afternoon 'Lectric Bob.
And prior to that ultra modern Mitchel VHF set, we used Bill Lear's
portable in a small suitcase which transmitted on 3105kc and allowed us to
receive the "Beam" on low frequency. It even had a built in loop antenna. We
could rotate the whole radio and get a bearing to or from the station. With a
little judicious maneuvering, we could figure out whether the station was
ahead or behind us in a as little as ten minutes or so.
The biggest problem with it was finding a long wire antenna. With such an
antenna, we could talk to a tower from as far as fifteen miles away. Great
stuff.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
In a message dated 8/21/2010 1:29:29 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com writes:
At 07:44 AM 8/18/2010, you wrote:
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Eric M. Jones"
<emjones@charter.net>
I am sure the notion of sliding a piece of electronics into a tray with
the connector on the back has some informative design history, but it is a
horrible idea for aircraft (and even cars). In general you should avoid it
and replace the connector with a hanging one where the connections aren't
attached to two separately moving bodies.
It's true that connectors at the rear of
slide-in accessories mating with connectors
on captive trays have extra-ordinary design
requirements. And there were a few radios
wherein the designers had to learn the
weaknesses in the worst way - field experience.
Many of the first radios for GA aircraft didn't
even mount on the panel. Take this cute little
feller . . .
_http://tinyurl.com/29sfmdd_ (http://tinyurl.com/29sfmdd)
This radio was battery powered and not intended
to be mounted solidly to the airplane. See the
leather carrying handle? One sat it in the seat,
plugged in an antenna, headphones and mic and voila!
You had an airborne radio communications system.
The antenna was in fact, a device adapted from a
car radio installation. You talked on a VHF frequency
determined by which crystal you plugged into the
panel (see slots for two other frequencies)
and listened for the ground facility to
reply over the local radio range, LF beacon
or marker transmitter.
Not too many years after, folks began to find
ways to mount these new fangled devices to the
panel and it didn't take long to realize that
it was MUCH easier to do installation and maintenance
if the mounting tray and harness was captive
to the airplane and the radio simply slides into
the tray. Exemplar radios included this device.
_http://tinyurl.com/29hm578_ (http://tinyurl.com/29hm578)
You can see the head of the radio-to-tray
jackscrew at the upper edge of the LF receiver
bezel.
_http://tinyurl.com/2c5hu4w_ (http://tinyurl.com/2c5hu4w)
The other end of the jackscrew can be seen
here along with the Cinch-Jones connectors
that mated with connectors captive to the
tray. These connectors are still in production.
_http://tinyurl.com/yhm37ow_ (http://tinyurl.com/yhm37ow)
At the same time, other manufacturers elected
not to participate in that adventure. As I
recall, this radio's installation tray
_http://tinyurl.com/3xklhct_ (http://tinyurl.com/3xklhct)
did not capture the mating connectors. The
maintenance person had to crawl under the
panel to mate/de-mate harnesses with the
radio.
Even today, the installed size and wire-count
of some radios . . .
_http://tinyurl.com/2u58jrb_ (http://tinyurl.com/2u58jrb)
doesn't offer practical tray designs and
their mating harness connectors are captive
directly to the radio chassis.
Aircraft radios did suffer a sort of "dark
ages" when connectors intended to engage card-
edge fingers were pressed into service on
new designs. King radio (and others) built a
LOT of devices that used this genre' of wire
to board connector:
That accepted pins looking like this:
At Cessna in 1963 or so, we did an audio distribution
board that mounted some relays and provided a sort
of junction box for integrating a stack of radios
into the single-engine product line.
The card-edge connector was imply not designed to
perform well in the aircraft environment. The
in-house experiment only lasted a few years. Recall
that good connection science calls for low surface
area, high-pressure contact between pin and socket.
The thin, gold-plated fingers of soft copper and the
wide, low pressure springs in the pins simply did
not rise to the task. Further, these connectors are
probably the most fragile interconnect devices
ever. They are entirely suited for SOME limited
applications and are still made . . . but you won't
(or at least shouldn't) find them in a product
destined for use in an airplane.
These connectors are not well contained. Dust
laden with moisture, oils, and grit can accumulate
over time. There's no wire support to keep harness
wiggles from "working" the pins in their housings.
I'd venture a guess that 90+ percent of my
observations of "connector grief" with panel mounted
radios in light aircraft have involved a variant
of a card-edge-to-wire product.
Having said that, I'm not sure I'd recommend a
great migration to modifying any radio that's still
in service utilizing this connector style. It
would probably be useful to install new pins in
all the holes. Clean the card edge fingers
with a solvent wetted swab (resist any
temptation to buff with ANY form of abrasive),
that gold plating is VERY thin! Then provide
bundle support for the wires close to where
they exit the connector housing.
Beyond this example of mis-applied technologies,
I think the researcher will find that tray
mounted harness connectors have enjoyed secure,
happy and long lived associations with their
radio mounted mates. The design has been widely
practiced over the full range of avionics from
the present day descendant of the Mitchell Airboy up
to and including electro-whizzies in military
and spacecraft.
The magic happens when the connector pin-socket
combinations are truly crafted to the task,
harnesses don't hang from the pin's insulation
grip, housings do a good job of shielding pins
from the environmental crud, and finally, the
radio is properly captive in the tray by proper
tightening of the retaining hardware.
By the way, if any of you are interested in a
little museum trip down Avionics Lane, I'll invite
you to look over the collection of pictures here:
_http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Radios/
_ (http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Radios/) Some of us grey beards have
had the pleasure
of cranking on a few of these very same knobs.
My first flying lesson in a rudder-pedal fitted
included a how-to session on one of these:
_http://tinyurl.com/3xklhct_ (http://tinyurl.com/3xklhct)
Bob . . .
Message 18
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 |
|
Subject: | Lowrance Airmap GPS Updates |
I was asked to forward this information on in case you guys hadn't
heard....
Please be advised - not only does Lowrance NOT make/sell any more
Aviation GPS units, you cannot get
a Jeppeson navdata update for them either! I just looked at the LEI site
- no updates since April.
I then sent a note to Jeppeson to see if they would supply any data
updates for Lowrance units.
Below is the query and dismal answer:
========
Subject: Data updates
It appears that Lowrance no longer supplies the Jepp updates for their
1000 and 2000C GPS units.
Will these updates be supplied by you for downloading?
========
Their response:
Thank you for contacting us. We apologize for the long delay in
responding to you
Unfortunately, we have stopped all support on all Lowrance Units
Lowrance has shut down there Aviation Group and we have no further word
if they will continue!
When they shut down, we stopped all Navdata Production for those units.
I myself, have the Airmap 2000c and now it's a good paperweight!
I'm forced to buy a Garmin
Sorry Sir
=======================
Message 19
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 |
|
Subject: | Tray Connectors...A Bad Idea. |
At 02:01 PM 8/21/2010, you wrote:
><ralphmariafinch@gmail.com>
>
>Bob-you are the man. Your knowledge and *understanding* of both electrical
>issues and their history of development is truly remarkable and seldom seen
>nowadays in any field. Old School of the best kind.
Thank you Ralph. Unfortunately, it just may be
'old school'. Now that I'm "out in the wild" myself
I'm observing what might just be a cultural shift
in the reverence for history. Most folks exposures
to the study of history involves the memorization
of names, places, dates and events.
I've benefited from the study of practical history.
What recipes for success have been demonstrated in
the past . . . and what can we glean from those stories
for (1) not having to re-invent the wheel, (2) discovery
of those timeless, simple-ideas that are equally
applicable but perhaps in a different recipe? A sort
of connect-the-dots exercise that improves upon one's
situational awareness.
To forsake an understanding the past leads
to a sort of intellectual entropy. Even as the
magnitude of activity increases, so does the
quantity of smoke and steam. Smoke from by-products
of combustion, steam as a manifestation of energy
needed to convert water to vapor. Both byproducts
representing value expended never to be recovered.
Sharing of practical history amongst folks on this
and similar lists goes a long way to the reduction
of smoke and steam while maximizing the value of
what happens in our workshops. It's my pleasure
to exercise these talents but without the list,
that exercise is at risk of becoming only more
smoke and steam. I thank you all for being there.
Bob . . .
Message 20
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 |
|
Subject: | Aircraft radios of yesteryear |
At 04:02 PM 8/21/2010, you wrote:
>Good Afternoon 'Lectric Bob.
>
>And prior to that ultra modern Mitchel VHF set, we used Bill Lear's
>portable in a small suitcase which transmitted on 3105kc and allowed
>us to receive the "Beam" on low frequency. It even had a built in
>loop antenna. We could rotate the whole radio and get a bearing to
>or from the station. With a little judicious maneuvering, we could
>figure out whether the station was ahead or behind us in a as little
>as ten minutes or so.
If you ever run across any pictures, literature or
stories about that era, I'd be pleased to get
links/sources.
>
>The biggest problem with it was finding a long wire antenna. With
>such an antenna, we could talk to a tower from as far as fifteen
>miles away. Great stuff.
Yeah, I wrote and illustrated an Accessory Kit for
Cessna to put a Sun H.F. transceiver . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Radios/Sun_Air_2.jpg
in the Military 185 (U17) aircraft at the Pawnee Plant.
We had a fixed wire that ran from cabin top to vertical
fin and then out to the right wing tip. Then a trailing
wire in the tailcone. For folks interested in such things
you can see the kit instructions at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Reference_Docs/Misc_PDF/AK-U-17-3B.pdf
I'd forgotten about a ground adjustable loading
coil installation behind the baggage compartment
for making the fixed wire match the various installed
crystals. Of course, if one was flying in a situation
that allowed use of the trailing wire, you could run
it out and tune it by watching the panel mounted antenna
ammeter. Pretty heady stuff for HF in a small
airplane in 1968.
Bob . . .
Message 21
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: Aircraft radios of yesteryear |
Good Evening 'Lectric Bob,
You may have recalled that most of the early straight 35 Bonanzas came from
the factory with an automatically extending and retracting trailing
antenna. It extended at around 100 MPH and retracted at the same speed when
slowing down. It can be seen on some of the advertising copy for the early
machines. It had a small wind sock cone that mounted between the stabilators on
a mast about six inches high. Next time you see a 1947 or 48 Bonanza take a
look back there. Chances are you will see the remnants of the mast where
it was sawed off after the trailing antenna was an abandoned. Unfortunately,
an awful lot of them got ripped off by catching on an airport fence when
folks made their approach just a bit too fast. The FCC did take away our
3105 frequency and designated 3023.5 in lieu thereof. Not sure just when that
was but I think it was about 1948. Back when we were using 3105, the air
carriers were using 6210. When we went to 3023.5 the frequency for air
carriers was changed as well but I have forgotten what that frequency was.
I will see what I can locate in some of my WWII text books.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
In a message dated 8/21/2010 4:55:53 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com writes:
At 04:02 PM 8/21/2010, you wrote:
Good Afternoon 'Lectric Bob.
And prior to that ultra modern Mitchell VHF set, we used Bill Lear's
portable in a small suitcase which transmitted on 3105kc and allowed us to
receive the "Beam" on low frequency. It even had a built in loop antenna. We
could rotate the whole radio and get a bearing to or from the station. With a
little judicious maneuvering, we could figure out whether the station was
ahead or behind us in a as little as ten minutes or so.
If you ever run across any pictures, literature or
stories about that era, I'd be pleased to get
links/sources.
The biggest problem with it was finding a long wire antenna. With such an
antenna, we could talk to a tower from as far as fifteen miles away. Great
stuff.
Yeah, I wrote and illustrated an Accessory Kit for
Cessna to put a Sun H.F. transceiver . . .
_http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Radios/Sun_Air_2.jpg
_ (http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Radios/Sun_Air_2.jpg) in the
Military 185 (U17) aircraft at the Pawnee Plant.
We had a fixed wire that ran from cabin top to vertical
fin and then out to the right wing tip. Then a trailing
wire in the tailcone. For folks interested in such things
you can see the kit instructions at:
_http://www.aeroelectric.com/Reference_Docs/Misc_PDF/AK-U-17-3B.pdf
_ (http://www.aeroelectric.com/Reference_Docs/Misc_PDF/AK-U-17-3B.pdf) I'd
forgotten about a ground adjustable loading
coil installation behind the baggage compartment
for making the fixed wire match the various installed
crystals. Of course, if one was flying in a situation
that allowed use of the trailing wire, you could run
it out and tune it by watching the panel mounted antenna
ammeter. Pretty heady stuff for HF in a small
airplane in 1968.
Bob . . .
(http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List)
(http://www.matronics.com/contribution)
Message 22
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: Aircraft radios of yesteryear |
My A-35 1949 Bonanza (D-1730) had one. Came out the factory door June
1948.
;
From: BobsV35B@aol.com
Sent: Saturday, August 21, 2010 5:47 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Aircraft radios of yesteryear
Good Evening 'Lectric Bob,
You may have recalled that most of the early straight 35 Bonanzas came
from the factory with an automatically extending and retracting trailing
antenna. It extended at around 100 MPH and retracted at the same speed
when slowing down. It can be seen on some of the advertising copy for
the early machines. It had a small wind sock cone that mounted between
the stabilators on a mast about six inches high. Next time you see a
1947 or 48 Bonanza take a look back there. Chances are you will see the
remnants of the mast where it was sawed off after the trailing antenna
was an abandoned. Unfortunately, an awful lot of them got ripped off by
catching on an airport fence when folks made their approach just a bit
too fast. The FCC did take away our 3105 frequency and designated 3023.5
in lieu thereof. Not sure just when that was but I think it was about
1948. Back when we were using 3105, the air carriers were using 6210.
When we went to 3023.5 the frequency for air carriers was changed as
well but I have forgotten what that frequency was.
I will see what I can locate in some of my WWII text books.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
In a message dated 8/21/2010 4:55:53 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com writes:
At 04:02 PM 8/21/2010, you wrote:
Good Afternoon 'Lectric Bob.
And prior to that ultra modern Mitchell VHF set, we used Bill Lear's
portable in a small suitcase which transmitted on 3105kc and allowed us
to receive the "Beam" on low frequency. It even had a built in loop
antenna. We could rotate the whole radio and get a bearing to or from
the station. With a little judicious maneuvering, we could figure out
whether the station was ahead or behind us in a as little as ten minutes
or so.
If you ever run across any pictures, literature or
stories about that era, I'd be pleased to get
links/sources.
The biggest problem with it was finding a long wire antenna. With
such an antenna, we could talk to a tower from as far as fifteen miles
away. Great stuff.
Yeah, I wrote and illustrated an Accessory Kit for
Cessna to put a Sun H.F. transceiver . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Radios/Sun_Air_2.jpg
in the Military 185 (U17) aircraft at the Pawnee Plant.
We had a fixed wire that ran from cabin top to vertical
fin and then out to the right wing tip. Then a trailing
wire in the tailcone. For folks interested in such things
you can see the kit instructions at:
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Reference_Docs/Misc_PDF/AK-U-17-3B.pdf
I'd forgotten about a ground adjustable loading
coil installation behind the baggage compartment
for making the fixed wire match the various installed
crystals. Of course, if one was flying in a situation
that allowed use of the trailing wire, you could run
it out and tune it by watching the panel mounted antenna
ammeter. Pretty heady stuff for HF in a small
airplane in 1968.
Bob . . .
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/contributio
n
Message 23
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: Vertex VXA700 information needed |
Hi Vern
We purchased an adapter cable and an external PTT switch when we purchased our
VXA700.
We ohmed out the harness and it indeed has two separate switches, one connects
mic high when you push PTT, and the other switch grounds PTT high.
I have a schematic for VXA 700 that Vertex support sent us, it does not include
enough information to figure out why the harness would use two switches to do
what they are doing.
After several calls and finally cornered the support guy, he bowed out by saying
Vertex doesn't make the harness and can't comment on it. He said the VXA 700
is not intended to be hooked up to an audio panel.
I know that when we hook up the VXA 700 to our PMA4000 audio panel and use the
harness I have with external PTT switch it works fine.
I talked to PS Engineering and told him I wanted to use the mini DPDT relay as
you can see on the right side near coin on second pic I posted to replicate two
mechanical switches. I asked him if he thought it was OK to supply power to
the coil of relay and have PMA4000 do the grounding when I push the PTT that is
located on sticks and he thought that would be fine.
Someone knows why my harness uses two separate switches to transmit. Vertex support
does not know why. PS Engineering does not know why. I do not know why.
I do know that the two switch arrangement works fine. My partner is an EE and thinks
it best we replicate what we do know. His gut feeling is leaving mic connected
all the time may not be a good thing to do. Perhaps someone could speculate
why they may do this? Built into unit is a speaker and mic.
Anyway there's our reasoning how and why we connected the four wire Vertex plug
to our audio panel.
You mention it may be a good idea to install a diode across the relay coil. We
already finished harness and it would be a big effort to open up harness and get
close to relay to install diode.
You can see size of relay against a penny on the right side:
http://www.europaowners.org/forums/gallery2.php?g2_itemId=81445&g2_imageViewsIndex=1
You can enlarge the pic to full size by selecting full size on top right of screen.
The specifics are listed on schematic about the relay we are using. There
is no mA draw of coil on information we have but it is not very much of a draw.
Could get information off the data sheet.
My question to you is what potential problem or problems could be caused by not
using a diode across the coil of this mini relay?
Do you think I should try harness as it is wired and if we experience a problem/s
you describe, then install a diode?
Or perhaps go half way between the two and install a diode about 6" away from the
relay? BTW we are supplying power to the relay coil through a 324 wire that
is about 20# long.
I also have some snapjacks on hand if you think that a better choice.
Ron Parigoris
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=309694#309694
Message 24
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: New operations model for the AeroElectric Connection |
Gee Bob,
I would have to second that. Your book and this web site are worth a lot
more than I paid for it. I would be more inclined to send a donation than
ask for a refund. The service you render here has undoubtedly saved lives
and airframes. I think that referencing back to B & C is a really
reasonable idea.
Regards,
Michael Wynn
RV 8 Finishing
San Ramon, CA
Do Not Archive
In a message dated 8/21/2010 9:07:25 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
mrspudandcompany@verizon.net writes:
Anyone who has recently purchased a book or CD at current prices who feels
short changed by the
price reduction is encouraged to drop us a line. Our warranty offers a
guarantee of perceived
value for the lifetime of any product. Drop us a note and we'll make it
right with you
Bob . . .
As I recall, I paid $35 for my book, which is a $12 difference from todays
price. I feel that I have gotten at least an order of magnitude more in
value from this forum and the Aeroelectric website, so... lets call it even.
What you do is much appreciated, hope you stay with us for a long time to
come.
Roger
(http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List)
(http://www.matronics.com/contribution)
Message 25
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: Vertex VXA700 information needed |
Ron, I don't know why either, exactly, except that the PTT switch that Icom
sold me for my A22 is set up the same way with two switches. Somewhere I got
the idea is that one switch is NC and the other is NO. The NC is connected
to the transmitter, the NO to the reciever. When the button is just sitting
there doin' nothin', the transmitter is grounded and the receiver is open.
Push the switch and the opposite happens the receiver is grounded out and
the transmitter is open. The idea is to prevent the receiver and the
transmitter from forming a feedback loop.
Feel free to tell me I don't know what I'm talking about, there's a good
chance I don't, but I seem to remember someone on this forum 'splainin' it
that way somewhere in the distant past.
Interesting that the VXA 220 uses a single switch in exactly the manner Bob
described when I wrote in asking for help just this last May.
Rick
On Sat, Aug 21, 2010 at 8:52 PM, rparigoris <rparigor@suffolk.lib.ny.us>wrote:
> rparigor@suffolk.lib.ny.us>
>
> Hi Vern
>
> We purchased an adapter cable and an external PTT switch when we purchased
> our VXA700.
>
> We ohmed out the harness and it indeed has two separate switches, one
> connects mic high when you push PTT, and the other switch grounds PTT high.
>
> I have a schematic for VXA 700 that Vertex support sent us, it does not
> include enough information to figure out why the harness would use two
> switches to do what they are doing.
>
> After several calls and finally cornered the support guy, he bowed out by
> saying Vertex doesn't make the harness and can't comment on it. He said the
> VXA 700 is not intended to be hooked up to an audio panel.
>
> I know that when we hook up the VXA 700 to our PMA4000 audio panel and use
> the harness I have with external PTT switch it works fine.
>
> I talked to PS Engineering and told him I wanted to use the mini DPDT relay
> as you can see on the right side near coin on second pic I posted to
> replicate two mechanical switches. I asked him if he thought it was OK to
> supply power to the coil of relay and have PMA4000 do the grounding when I
> push the PTT that is located on sticks and he thought that would be fine.
>
> Someone knows why my harness uses two separate switches to transmit. Vertex
> support does not know why. PS Engineering does not know why. I do not know
> why.
>
> I do know that the two switch arrangement works fine. My partner is an EE
> and thinks it best we replicate what we do know. His gut feeling is leaving
> mic connected all the time may not be a good thing to do. Perhaps someone
> could speculate why they may do this? Built into unit is a speaker and mic.
>
> Anyway there's our reasoning how and why we connected the four wire Vertex
> plug to our audio panel.
>
> You mention it may be a good idea to install a diode across the relay coil.
> We already finished harness and it would be a big effort to open up harness
> and get close to relay to install diode.
>
> You can see size of relay against a penny on the right side:
>
> http://www.europaowners.org/forums/gallery2.php?g2_itemId=81445&g2_imageViewsIndex=1
>
> You can enlarge the pic to full size by selecting full size on top right of
> screen. The specifics are listed on schematic about the relay we are using.
> There is no mA draw of coil on information we have but it is not very much
> of a draw. Could get information off the data sheet.
>
> My question to you is what potential problem or problems could be caused by
> not using a diode across the coil of this mini relay?
>
> Do you think I should try harness as it is wired and if we experience a
> problem/s you describe, then install a diode?
>
> Or perhaps go half way between the two and install a diode about 6" away
> from the relay? BTW we are supplying power to the relay coil through a 324
> wire that is about 20# long.
>
> I also have some snapjacks on hand if you think that a better choice.
>
> Ron Parigoris
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=309694#309694
>
>
--
Zulu Delta
Kolb Mk IIIC
582 Gray head
4.00 C gearbox
3 blade WD
Thanks, Homer GBYM
It is not bigotry to be certain we are right; but it is bigotry to be unable
to imagine how we might possibly have gone wrong.
- G.K. Chesterton
Message 26
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 |
|
Subject: | Re: Vertex VXA700 information needed |
Hi Rick
If your Icom has two switches and is making one connection and breaking another
when you push the PTT, it is different than my Vertex that makes two connections.
On my Vertex VXA700 when you push the PTT one switch connects the mic high to pin
3 (mic high), this is a normal opened switch.
The other switch connects mic low to pin 2 (PTT high), this is a normal opened
switch.
Thus my single relay is a double pole relay that just makes two connections when
the PTT is depressed.
My double pole relay is doing exactly the same thing as pressing the premade harness
PTT I have, when the PTT is depressed, two individual single pole switches
make.
Would you mind taking an ohm meter to your set up and report back if in fact one
switch is making and one breaking?
If it is in fact like my Vertex where both switches make, I will give Icom and
pick their brains!
Ron Parigoris
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=309709#309709
Other Matronics Email List Services
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! --
|