Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 06:20 AM - Stobes (Eric M. Jones)
2. 09:42 AM - Re: Annunciator lights (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
3. 11:11 AM - Re: ELT Antenna (Noel Loveys)
4. 11:53 AM - Re: Re: wingtip vor antenna - SWR Meter (Noel Loveys)
5. 12:05 PM - Re: Stobes (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
6. 12:14 PM - Re: Annunciator lights (Noel Loveys)
7. 02:44 PM - Re: Annunciator lights (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
8. 02:48 PM - Re: Re: wingtip vor antenna - SWR Meter (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
9. 04:39 PM - Re: ELT Antenna (Kelly McMullen)
10. 06:30 PM - Re: ELT Antenna (Tim Andres)
11. 06:36 PM - Re: ELT Antenna (Noel Loveys)
12. 08:05 PM - Fw: Portable Transponder ()
13. 08:35 PM - Re: ELT Antenna (BobsV35B@aol.com)
14. 09:47 PM - Re: ELT Antenna (The Kuffels)
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 |
|
Here's more work for Bob to do in his "free" time.
I have seen many questions on how to quiet strobes and would like to make the following
observation:
Having a central strobe power pack and running long wires to the wingtips (or to
the rim of your flying saucer) is a recipe for RFI/EMI. A much more sensible
design is to have the capacitors and trigger coil, located at the strobe tube.
Strobe synchronization is simple to achieve. Noise would be gone.
Whelen actually makes remote power packs, but at a price that is affordable only
to Wall Street hedge fund managers. So a DIY version of a lighter weight "distributed"
replacement for the standard Whelen strobe power pack would be a good
solution to noise. Estimated weight savings 2 pounds. Not trivial.
I have designed LED strobes in this fashion. Only position-light power wiring
to the wingtip is required. This design merely pulses the synchronization to fire
the strobes.
--------
Eric M. Jones
www.PerihelionDesign.com
113 Brentwood Drive
Southbridge, MA 01550
(508) 764-2072
emjones(at)charter.net
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=369131#369131
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: Annunciator lights |
>Thanks Bob! I'll have to check if its the resistors that failed next
>time I get to the hangar but I noticed some of the on-line
>LED/resistor calculators call for a 1/2 w resistor and the ones
>installed in the fixtures look like 1/8w. I'll report back but have
>already bought new LEDs to fix them with and in fact found some
>blinking ones to boot that I'll use on my OP light.
One caveat on blinking LEDs . . . they're not
very bright. When you're designing annunciators
for airplanes, your dynamic range for ambient
lighting is huge . . . especially for a bubble
canopy airplane.
I've used blinking LEDs in SERIES with high
intensity devices with some success. But the
most elegant approach for attention getting is
to have a dedicated hardware flasher for the
LED. It can be pretty simple:
Emacs!
This little flasher board made with surface
mount components can be as small as .4" on
a side, maybe even smaller.
If you find that you need to over-drive an
LED to meet your illumination design goals (e.g. say
50mA from a 14v source) the series resistor
would be something on the order of
10/.05 or 200 ohms. 10 Volts dropped
at 50 mA is 500 milliwatts . . . so
using a 1W resistor would not be a bad
idea for keeping surface temperatures
down.
If you've had failures of the COTS components
then it doesn't much matter whether it was
due to resistor or lamp failure . . . the
events demand evaluation and modification
of the design to achieve a useful level
of confidence.
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 |
|
In that case if even on an OBAM aircraft the ELT and transponder must be
installed or signed off by a certified AME (Canada) or A&P (U.S.)
Noel
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kelly
McMullen
Sent: March 21, 2012 8:26 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: ELT Antenna
The minimum for use of ELTs is to demonstrate that the complete system meets
the TSO. Good luck with doing that with a roll your own antenna of unknown
impedance and SWR. ELTs and transponders are two items on OBAM aircraft that
must comply with the TSO.
Noel wrote:
It sure would be... but for amateur aircraft you might be able to use your
own antenna.
Noel
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ed
Holyoke
Sent: March 20, 2012 10:18 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: ELT Antenna
Have to look at your ELT installation instructions. The ELT is TSOed and
might require that you use their antenna.
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: wingtip vor antenna - SWR Meter |
Reading the page on this meter I assume it is not a good meter for use on RF
below 100mHz.
Noel
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Robert L.
Nuckolls, III
Sent: March 21, 2012 9:38 PM
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Re: wingtip vor antenna - SWR Meter
At 05:42 PM 3/21/2012, you wrote:
Yes, it is a problem the diodes in this meter are not nearly fast enough to
break the RF (Radio Frequency) of VHF into digital segments needed to
measure SWR. This unit is usable for frequencies 30 mHz and below.
You may find a serviceable meter on eBay. If you buy a Bird Wattmeter make
sure the element for 100-250 mHz comes with it.
The Bird products are the gold standard for
RF wattmeters. A few months ago we had some
discussion on the List about the HF SWR
meters common to CB radio frequencies and
below. These are not suited to VHF as their
sampled transmission line is too long with
respect to a wavelength at the frequencies
of interest for VHF. They tend to give 'good'
readings to poor antennas.
We also had some discussions about this device:
Emacs!
Which you can get off eBay for about $60 postage paid.
http://tinyurl.com/7cl4bba
I purchased one of these and found it a quite good
value. Reasonably accurate for power readings down
into the 100 milliwatt range.
The one I have here on my bench is spoken for and
will be out of here next week . . . but the folks
offering it on eBay have plenty more. Be sure to
get two N-Male/BNC-Female adapters.
Emacs!
http://tinyurl.com/6m7ujmw
These are about $2.50 each postage paid.
Bob . . .
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 |
|
At 08:18 AM 3/22/2012, you wrote:
>
>Here's more work for Bob to do in his "free" time.
>
>I have seen many questions on how to quiet strobes and would like to
>make the following observation:
>
>Having a central strobe power pack and running long wires to the
>wingtips (or to the rim of your flying saucer) is a recipe for
>RFI/EMI. A much more sensible design is to have the capacitors and
>trigger coil, located at the strobe tube. Strobe synchronization is
>simple to achieve. Noise would be gone.
As you've noted, there are several designs qualified
for TC aircraft where the power conditioning is adjacent
to the strobe tube. But I would offer that centralized
supplies are also qualified, i.e. have passed DO-160
conducted and radiated emissions. So if installed with
attention to good practice for treatment of shields,
they should present no greater noise problem in an
OBAM aircraft than they do in a TC aircraft.
>Whelen actually makes remote power packs, but at a price that is
>affordable only to Wall Street hedge fund managers. So a DIY version
>of a lighter weight "distributed" replacement for the standard
>Whelen strobe power pack would be a good solution to noise.
>Estimated weight savings 2 pounds. Not trivial.
Those are slick . . . but they're a relatively low
volume product in comparison with the central supply
configuration and they take up more room in what
might be a more crowded space. Hence the higher cost
that is not well tolerated in the SE propeller driven
market.
All the strobes on turbine aircraft have local power
supplies but as you've noted, these are breathtakingly
expensive.
>I have designed LED strobes in this fashion. Only position-light
>power wiring to the wingtip is required. This design merely pulses
>the synchronization to fire the strobes.
What kind of voltages/currents and duty cycles
are involved? I've seen some LED anti-collision
protects offered to HBC while I was still there but
folks who showed them to me were unable or reluctant
to discuss design details.
What's the architecture for wiring up large arrays
of LED's. The tail strobe I saw had about 36 leds
in it. The guy thought it was 4 strings of 9 each.
At 4 volts per led in an overdriven pulse mode,
one comes to believe that a pulsed, 36 volt constant
current supply is used. What approach has been most
attractive in your experience?
EMC issues for these supplies is a bit simpler. There's
little probability of 'output noise' due to flashing
and the operating frequency of the switchmode power
supply is generally much higher . . . hence easier
to filter . . . assuming the designer recognizes
the need for a filter. We discovered this lower
level design goal in the Luxeon power supplies that
folks have been using in their wingtips. I've sold
perhaps 50 filtered supplies over the past 4-5 years
and perhaps half that number of filter boards for
folks who already had supply modules.
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: | Annunciator lights |
Bob:
The specs say 240Kmcd@300m=8BA . What exactly is a Kmcd? I have
some ideas but none seems to fit unless this lamp will blister paint at
ten feet..
Noel
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
Robert L. Nuckolls, III
Sent: March 21, 2012 10:17 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Annunciator lights
At 03:55 PM 3/21/2012, you wrote:
<tim2542@sbcglobal.net>
Hey gang!
I built an annunciator panel using these LED's:
http://tinyurl.com/85r8duf
Now that Im flying I find they are failing almost weekly. I need to
replace them or fix the problem. They incorporate an integral resistor
and are rated at 12V. I'm looking for a more durable replacement, maybe
something that could be retrofitted into the existing lens as the led
and resistor will slide out the back side.
What colors are you needing? Can you send me one
of these fixtures . . . or at least take some good
pix of the disassembled hardware as supplied.
LEDs are not generally very fragile. Are you sure it's
the LED that's failing and not the resistor? Some years
ago we had some discussion about LED fragility and life
vs. intensity here on the List. I took issue with a few
readers who cited 'not to exceed' ratings for LEDs lest
they depart for the happy glowing ground.
I took a 10mm LED rated at 30 mA and wired it to a wall-wart
biased up at about 4x that rating. I plugged it into an
outlet in my garage and left it. You could see rather
well in a darkened garage from the emitted light.
Over a year later, I took it off the wall still illuminated.
I didn't measure it's light output to see if it degraded
but it certainly didn't go into gross failure.
For use in annunciators where the lights are OFF most
of the time, it might be a good idea to over-drive the
LEDs in the interest of sun-light viewable performance.
There are some honk'n LEDs available. I bought some 10mm
reds and greens from this guy for a courtroom, table-top
demonstrator . . .
http://tinyurl.com/7jlgymk
Very adequate for getting one's attention in a well lit
courtroom. This seller
http://tinyurl.com/7n75xu2
has some killer whites rated at 1W. These might do
what you want depending on the ability of your caps
to set the color when illuminated with white led.
This much power in an LED probably calls for some
heat-sinking . . . but you may find that you can
run them a lot cooler and still get the necessary
light.
Bob . . .
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: | Annunciator lights |
At 02:12 PM 3/22/2012, you wrote:
>Bob:
>
>
>The specs say 240Kmcd@300m=8BA .=C2 What exactly
>is a Kmcd?=C2 I have some ideas but none seems to
>fit unless this lamp will blister paint at ten feet..
>
>
It's a bit of silliness . . . an mCd is a milli-candella. Or
1/1000th of one candella
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Candela
240,000 mCandelas reduces down
to 240 Candelas, the "K" and "m"
wipe each other out.
Bob . . .
Message 8
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: wingtip vor antenna - SWR Meter |
At 01:52 PM 3/22/2012, you wrote:
>Reading the page on this meter I assume it is not a good meter for
>use on RF below 100mHz.
It's accuracy will degrade as you depart the
manufacturer's specified range of performance.
If you buy a 'slug' for a Bird wattmeter
Emacs!
It is characterized for a power level and a
range of frequencies for which it will meet
the manufacturer's specs for accuracy.
The 'Red Dot' SWR meter is simply a power
meter with a 'fixed slug'.
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 |
|
Who installs it has nothing to do whether it complies. It simply must be
installed in compliance with the manufacturer's instructions, which
ensure TSO compliance. In theory the DAR inspecting the aircraft should
check that, but are not likely to look too closely. The person doing the
condition inspection annually must also ensure compliance with the test
requirements in Part 91.
On 3/22/2012 11:09 AM, Noel Loveys wrote:
>
> In that case if even on an OBAM aircraft the ELT and transponder must
> be installed or signed off by a certified AME (Canada) or A&P (U.S.)
>
> Noel
>
> *From:*owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] *On Behalf Of
> *Kelly McMullen
> *Sent:* March 21, 2012 8:26 PM
> *To:* aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> *Subject:* RE: AeroElectric-List: ELT Antenna
>
> The minimum for use of ELTs is to demonstrate that the complete system
> meets the TSO. Good luck with doing that with a roll your own antenna
> of unknown impedance and SWR. ELTs and transponders are two items on
> OBAM aircraft that must comply with the TSO.
>
> Noel wrote:
>
> It sure would be... but for amateur aircraft you might be able to use
> your own antenna.
>
> Noel
>
> *From:*owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
> <mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com>
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
> <mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com>] *On Behalf Of
> *Ed Holyoke
> *Sent:* March 20, 2012 10:18 PM
> *To:* aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> <mailto:aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>
> *Subject:* Re: AeroElectric-List: ELT Antenna
>
> Have to look at your ELT installation instructions. The ELT is TSOed
> and might require that you use their antenna.
>
> * *
> * *
> **
> **
> **
> **
> **
> *http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List*
> **
> **
> *http://forums.matronics.com*
> **
> **
> **
> *http://www.matronics.com/contribution*
> **
> * *
> *
>
>
> *
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 |
|
I just had mine inspected by the FAA for A/W cert. and the issue never came u
p at all and I do have a non TSO 'd antenna on the transponder. FWIW, I thin
k that's about the norm . I know of several others with the same experience.
Tim
Sent from my iPad
On Mar 22, 2012, at 11:09 AM, "Noel Loveys" <noelloveys@yahoo.ca> wrote:
> In that case if even on an OBAM aircraft the ELT and transponder must be i
nstalled or signed off by a certified AME (Canada) or A&P (U.S.)
>
> Noel
>
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelect
ric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kelly McMullen
> Sent: March 21, 2012 8:26 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: ELT Antenna
>
> The minimum for use of ELTs is to demonstrate that the complete system mee
ts the TSO. Good luck with doing that with a roll your own antenna of unknow
n impedance and SWR. ELTs and transponders are two items on OBAM aircraft th
at must comply with the TSO.
>
> Noel wrote:
> It sure would be... but for amateur aircraft you might be able to use your
own antenna.
>
> Noel
>
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelect
ric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Ed Holyoke
> Sent: March 20, 2012 10:18 PM
> To: aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: ELT Antenna
>
> Have to look at your ELT installation instructions. The ELT is TSOed and m
ight require that you use their antenna.
>
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
> http://forums.matronics.com
> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
>
>
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
>
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 |
|
In this country any appliance on a certified aircraft with certain
exceptions has to be installed by or checked by a certified AME ( aircraft
maintenance engineer ) and the installation has to be documented in the
airframe log book and noted if there is a separate log book for the
appliance.
One of the things I do not like about the new ELT is that aircraft cannot
borrow another ELT while one is out having scheduled service done. In the
past the AMO I worked for had a "loaner" ELT that we would put in aircraft
so they wouldn't have to fly without one... Which is legal for up to 90
days.
In fact even a licensed AME is not allowed to change the batteries on an ELT
it has to be done by an approved Avionics tech or an approved avionics shop.
Amateur built aircraft are another quintal of fish... They don't even have
to carry an ELT. Mind I don't know anyone who is stupid enough to fly this
land without one.
Noel
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kelly
McMullen
Sent: March 22, 2012 9:06 PM
Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: ELT Antenna
--> <kellym@aviating.com>
Who installs it has nothing to do whether it complies. It simply must be
installed in compliance with the manufacturer's instructions, which ensure
TSO compliance. In theory the DAR inspecting the aircraft should check that,
but are not likely to look too closely. The person doing the condition
inspection annually must also ensure compliance with the test requirements
in Part 91.
On 3/22/2012 11:09 AM, Noel Loveys wrote:
>
> In that case if even on an OBAM aircraft the ELT and transponder must
> be installed or signed off by a certified AME (Canada) or A&P (U.S.)
>
> Noel
>
> *From:*owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com] *On Behalf Of
> *Kelly McMullen
> *Sent:* March 21, 2012 8:26 PM
> *To:* aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> *Subject:* RE: AeroElectric-List: ELT Antenna
>
> The minimum for use of ELTs is to demonstrate that the complete system
> meets the TSO. Good luck with doing that with a roll your own antenna
> of unknown impedance and SWR. ELTs and transponders are two items on
> OBAM aircraft that must comply with the TSO.
>
> Noel wrote:
>
> It sure would be... but for amateur aircraft you might be able to use
> your own antenna.
>
> Noel
>
> *From:*owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
> <mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com>
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com
> <mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server@matronics.com>] *On Behalf Of
> *Ed Holyoke
> *Sent:* March 20, 2012 10:18 PM
> *To:* aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
> <mailto:aeroelectric-list@matronics.com>
> *Subject:* Re: AeroElectric-List: ELT Antenna
>
> Have to look at your ELT installation instructions. The ELT is TSOed
> and might require that you use their antenna.
>
> * *
> * *
> **
> **
> **
> **
> **
> *http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List*
> **
> **
> *http://forums.matronics.com*
> **
> **
> **
> *http://www.matronics.com/contribution*
> **
> * *
> *
>
>
> *
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: | Fw: Portable Transponder |
3/2/2012
Hello John Cammarano, I hope that this helps solve your problem.
'OC' Baker
=================================================================
From: "John Delafield" <john.delafield@lxavionics.co.uk>
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2012 4:15 PM
Subject: RE: Portable Transponder
> Dear Sir,
>
> We assemble the transponder box using a certified TT 21 or 22 which has
> FAA
> approval so no worries there. The entire box is not approved by anyone
> but
> as it is portable I do not think it necessary anyway.
>
> The altitude encoder is built in to the transponder and it meets the new
> 25ft spacing requirement.
>
> I am pretty sure for your application that you would not need the very
> expensive hand made leather case that we normally provide and not having
> this would reduce the price to you by about $200.
>
> Lead time for delivery would be a few weeks.
>
> I very much hope that we can help you,
>
> All the best,
>
> John Delafield
> LX avionics Ltd
> 07850 950349/01865 374125
> www.lxavionics.co.uk
> Company Number 4417407 Registered in England and Wales
> VAT GB 793 1777 86
> Registered address (NOT FOR BUSINESS): 30 St Giles, Oxford
>
======================================================
From: bakerocb@cox.net [mailto:bakerocb@cox.net]
> Sent: 22 March 2012 15:42
> To: johnd@lxavionics.co.uk
> Subject: Portable Transponder
>
> 3/22/2012
>
> Hello John, We are seeking a portable airtraffic radar transponder for use
> in a small homebuilt (no electrical power) fixed wing airplane in the US.
> Your products seen here:
>
> http://www.lxavionics.co.uk/portables.htm
>
> appear to offer a solution.
>
> I have two questions:
>
> 1) How is the information normally provided to a transponder by an
> altitude
> encoder for automatic altitude information transmission by the transponder
> provided for in your products?
>
> 2) Are you aware of any regulatory reason (TSO or inspection requirements)
> that would make your products not be acceptable for use in the United
> States?
>
> Thanks for your help,
>
> 'OC' Baker Says: "The best investment we can make is the time and effort
> to
> gather and understand knowledge."
>
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 |
|
Good Evening Noel,
What country are you discussing?
In the USA, every airline pilot regularly flies without an ELT.
Personally, I would be happy to do so if it were not an FAA requirement. I
do not feel one whit more secure since we were forced to install the ELT.
There are a lot of ways to let folks know when and if you need assistance.
I think each pilot should be able to make that decision himself or herself.
Happy Skies,
Old Bob
In a message dated 3/22/2012 8:36:50 P.M. Central Daylight Time,
noelloveys@yahoo.ca writes:
--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Noel Loveys"
<noelloveys@yahoo.ca>
In this country any appliance on a certified aircraft with certain
exceptions has to be installed by or checked by a certified AME ( aircraft
maintenance engineer ) and the installation has to be documented in the
airframe log book and noted if there is a separate log book for the
appliance.
One of the things I do not like about the new ELT is that aircraft cannot
borrow another ELT while one is out having scheduled service done. In the
past the AMO I worked for had a "loaner" ELT that we would put in aircraft
so they wouldn't have to fly without one... Which is legal for up to 90
days.
In fact even a licensed AME is not allowed to change the batteries on an
ELT
it has to be done by an approved Avionics tech or an approved avionics
shop.
Amateur built aircraft are another quintal of fish... They don't even have
to carry an ELT. Mind I don't know anyone who is stupid enough to fly this
land without one.
Noel
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 |
|
Old Bob says:
<< Noel, .. What country are you discussing? >>
His email address is Canada. His description fits what little I know of
Canada's regulatory environment.
<< I do not feel one whit more secure since we were forced to install
the ELT. >>
This sentiment conflicts with my direct, personal experience. In Alaska
in the 1970s when ELTs were first forced upon us, the false activation
rate (especially in very cold weather) and the failure to activate rate
(mostly due to poor antenna placement) was depressing. Still ELTs
managed to save lives, including mine. The newer GPS augmented 406 MHz
system is much more effective, quickly providing a location measured in
meters.
<< There are a lot of ways to let folks know when and if you need
assistance. >>
Disagree. My Alaska crash occurred about 150 miles from any human
habitation. My Idaho mountain crash was over in 15 sec. In the
meantime, I was a little busy to let anyone know anything. Although I
was flying with two other aircraft, they were unable to get our accurate
location to Search & Rescue. Our cell phone got through to 911 long
enough to let them know there were survivors but not long enough to
provide our accurate location. Our 121.5 MHz ELT gave them a location 5
miles in error. But when they got in the neighborhood the ELT did help
a little in narrowing our location. The moral, I want as many ways as
possible to ask for assistance and help Search & Rescue determine our
location.
<< I think each pilot should be able to make that decision himself or
herself. >>
Of course, this is a political statement not an aviation safety
statement of fact. But given human nature, mandates are not always bad.
Sort of like forced automobile liability insurance.
Tom Kuffel
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! --
|