Today's Message Index:
----------------------
0. 12:09 AM - Some Nice Comments... (Matt Dralle)
1. 06:50 AM - Re: OT but electron related, I hate it when that happens! (eschlanser)
2. 07:34 AM - Re: Re: A200 and Flightcom squeal (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
3. 08:16 AM - HF antenna issues (Linda Walker)
4. 09:13 AM - =?utf-8?B?UmU6IEFlcm9FbGVjdHJpYy1MaXN0IERpZ2VzdDogMyBNc2dzIC0gMTEvMjAvMTI=? (=?utf-8?B?YW1leWVyQG1pbC1hbWF4LmNvbQ==?=)
5. 10:26 AM - Re: HF antenna issues (D L Josephson)
6. 10:43 AM - Re: HF antenna issues (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
7. 11:15 AM - Re: Sub-standard Charging (go_lancair)
8. 11:21 AM - Re: Re: HF antenna issues (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
9. 11:28 AM - Re: Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 3 Msgs - 11/20/12 (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
10. 11:32 AM - Re: Re: Sub-standard Charging (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
11. 03:31 PM - Re: A200 and Flightcom squeal (SIDESLIP)
12. 05:15 PM - Re: Re: A200 and Flightcom squeal (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
13. 06:27 PM - Re: A200 and Flightcom squeal (SIDESLIP)
14. 06:31 PM - Re: Re: A200 and Flightcom squeal (Kelly McMullen)
15. 08:03 PM - iPad and circuit design apps (Ralph Finch)
16. 10:24 PM - Re: Re: A200 and Flightcom squeal (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
17. 11:29 PM - Re: Re: A200 and Flightcom squeal (Sacha)
Message 0
| 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: | Some Nice Comments... |
Dear Listers,
I've been getting some very nice comments from Listers along with their List Support
Contributions. I've shared a number of them below. Please read them over
and see what your fellow Listers think of the Lists and Forums.
Please make a Contribution today to support the continued upgrade and operation
of these services.
There are lots of sweet gifts available this year, so please browse the nice selection
and pickup something fun with your qualifying Contribution!
You may use a credit card or your PayPal account here:
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Or feel free to send a personal check to:
Matronics / Matt Dralle
581 Jeannie Way
Livermore CA 94550
Thank you in advance for your generous support! It is very much appreciated!
Best regards,
Matt Dralle
Matronics Email List Administrator
-------------------- What Listers Are Saying About The Lists --------------------
I have been flying my Pietenpol for a month now and am
enjoying the fruits of ten hard years of work. I seriously
doubt it would ever have been finished but for the help,
encouragement and friendships I've received and made through
the Pietenpol list.
Douwe B
Outstanding service to the flying community.
George A
Matt, I look forward to support each others projects,
Glenn B
Great list!!! Thanks for all your efforts!
Roger C
Thank you for keeping up the lists. Without it i would never
have completed my aircraft.
Stan S
Keep up the good work my friend. I don't think I could ever
finish my Pietenpol Air Camper without the help I get from
this List.
Tom S
Thank you for keeping these list alive.
Lee V
The List is invaluable!!
Svein J
Thanks for continuing to provide the list service!
Earl S
You have a really GREAT service. Thankyou so much I've been on
for nearly 30 years and I still check-in every morning.
John B
I rely fully on the lists which govern my every decision. The
flexibility provides the security I seek.
Fergus K
My RV 7 Finally flies... 7 years of Matronics.com certainly
helped.
Martin H
Great service here, thanks! I am just getting back to a
project I dropped for a few years, great to see your site
and all the folks again!
James C
Thanks for the great site.
Robert U
The Rotax list is good and the AeroElectric list outstanding!
Jay H
Thank you for a great resource!
Jack T
Thanks for your great record of outstanding service to the
homebuilding community!
Larry W
This service is invaluable.
Michael W
You're doing a great job Matt.
Robert D
Thanks for all your work, its a great asset to all.
John F
Thank you for your time & effort Matt!
Ted W
Matt, been a follower since 2005 on the -10 list, now
starting an -8. Keep up the great work!
John M
Still my favorite place to hang out.
William W
I'm not a Piet builder, but this is the most informative and
congenial list I've ever run across. Please forgive my
lurking-I learn a LOT here!
Ken M
Many thanks for keeping this alive, keep pushing!
Adrian C
Thanks! Please keep r going!
Rich Z
Many thanks for your hard work.
Robert C
Thanks for the Lists! I probably need to subscribe to a few
more...
John M
Been a quick 14 years. Think I subscribed to the Kolb
List in 1998, when I got my first computer. Thanks for
keeping everything running smoothly for all these years.
John H
Great resource - thank you.
David M
I don't post very much, but get the postings, a lot of really
practical info.
John N
Great job Matt, thanks for all you do.
Roger M
Thanks for ANOTHER great year, Matt! True grassroots
experimental aviation has been pushed aside in many ways.
But the List represents the evolution of this great
tradition of home-building. One man, the plans, the tools,
and the List - that's all you need to build the dream!
Robert B
This message board is a real help to my project and creating
friendships.
John S
Many thanks for your continuing excellent work.
Mike G
Thank you for your work Matt. Your lists have helped me a
great deal during the construction of my plane.
Hal B
Nice List
Van E
These lists are priceless for builders.
Ronald C
Thanks for keeping me in touch with the Pulsar community.
Otto S
Thanks for keeping up this great warbird sight!!
Yak Ron
Thanks for providing all the lists for so many years.
H H
Thanks for all that you do. Your dedication is much appreciated!
Warren H
Best service on the internet!
Owen B
I have learned so much from the "list".
Nick C
Great Service You Are Providing!
Giffen M
Thanks so much for maintaining these great resources.
Dave S
I no longer fly due to age and health problems, but I still
enjoy the reading from other pilots.
Dallas S
This is a wonderful site.
Robert B
Useful service over the last year - thanks.
Om T
-------------------- What Listers Are Saying About The Lists --------------------
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: OT but electron related, I hate it when that happens! |
William,
Those elinks work fine. Thank you for your service
Eric
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=388515#388515
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: A200 and Flightcom squeal |
At 07:24 PM 11/19/2012, you wrote:
>
>Swapped antennas. Just changed the connections at the antennas, and
>was able to transmit from the apron to an in flight aircraft over
>25miles away! The twiggy looking coat hanger style antenna under the
>fuselage works like a charm! The handheld works fine on the antenna
>that the A200 didn't like. Still need to flight test the final
>result, but all appears resolved....... Go figure!
If I understand correctly, the coax feed lines to the
two antennas are long enough and the antennas are
close enough to each other that you could simply swapped
the feed lines?
Refresh my memory . . . what kind of airplane, what
kind of antennas and where are they located on the
airplane?
Did you ever get a look-see at SWR for the 'problem'
antenna?
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: | HF antenna issues |
Bob.
Many thanks for your reply, informative as always.
You're right of course ... if some gauges don't work while transmitting the
n that's not a real problem. And it's highly unlikely that I'll be transmit
ting on vhf and hf at the same time.
But my concern is that while transmitting on hf that the induced field may
cause some more long-term effects in these electrical systems.
And also as the low end hf frequencies are getting closer to microwaves, I'
m a little worried that the foam may get very hot and lose it's structural
properties.
Am I worrying unnecessarily?
Either way, I shall do as you say ... install and test.
Many thanks again.
Patrick Elliott.
G-LGEZ
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: | =?utf-8?B?UmU6IEFlcm9FbGVjdHJpYy1MaXN0IERpZ2VzdDogMyBNc2dzIC0gMTEvMjAvMTI=? |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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: HF antenna issues |
As Bob mentions, it is very likely that your HF installation will create
disturbances in other aircraft systems. Every transmission will be a
test, it's your responsibility to explore all frequencies you will be
using against all aircraft systems -- it's a large matrix. Changes of a
few kHz may cause huge differences in behavior as you excite one or
another tuned conductive element. Having designed and debugged a few of
these in light twins, I can offer some comments. First of all, you will
not be able to "shield" everything because the shields cannot enclose
the entire victim system. Near-field RF energy will couple into
everything conductive, and every "shield" will be some kind of antenna
for RF. Second, behavior will be very different at different operating
frequencies. You may find no disturbance at all at some frequencies and
significant disruption at others. There is no such thing as a "common
ground" here because all wires will have significant reactance at the
frequencies in use.
The most common HF radio systems for light aircraft for many years was
(may still be) Sunair. Their library of legacy product manuals is online
at www.sunairhf.com. Check out their older manuals for antenna tuning
units for good hints on how to do this. Try all the frequency bands
you'll be using, to see what disturbance is created to which systems.
You will be trying a new approach using the driven element in one wing
and the "counterpoise" in the other. Frankly this sounds like trouble,
especially in a fiberglass airplane with fuel tanks in the same wing.
There is little difference between something you call a counterpoise,
and for instance the nav light wiring, they all return to the ground
point of the antenna tuner. You will have high voltages at some points
on the driven element, and lots of opportunity for discharge through the
fiberglass in the vicinity of the tank. There can also be high voltage
nodes on the "counterpoise" and on every other conductive part of the
aircraft, because *all* parts of the aircraft will be part of the
antenna. In a Navajo I worked on, we had arcing around one of the flap
hinges at certain frequencies.
At the very least be sure there is a low inductance conductive path
completely enclosing the fuel tank (copper tape strips for instance)
that is bonded to the antenna tuner output (which will be the reference
ground point for the HF system.) At HF it doesn't have to be a solid
shield, but the openings in the mesh that you make need to be no more
than about 1/20 of a wavelength.
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: HF antenna issues |
At 10:15 AM 11/21/2012, you wrote:
>Bob.
>Many thanks for your reply, informative as always.
>
>You're right of course ... if some gauges don't work while
>transmitting then that's not a real problem. And it's highly
>unlikely that I'll be transmitting on vhf and hf at the same time.
>
>But my concern is that while transmitting on hf that the induced
>field may cause some more long-term effects in these electrical systems.
I've got no reason to believe this is likely.
It's VERY difficult to conduct significant energy
levels by radiation to cause damage to surrounding
components.
I remember one case at Boeing back about 1961 when
a B52 across the ramp from one I was working on radiated
the nose radar for a short period of time . . . that
took out the mixer diode in the radar receiver on the
airplane I was working on . . . or at least that was
the theory. The mixer diode was inop on a newly installed
TRX and the airplane opposite had the chin shield (harpex
lined) down for other maintenance issues. Never did really
find out for sure.
But that was 50KW pulses focused with narrow look-angle
antennas across a distance of perhaps 100 yards.
>And also as the low end hf frequencies are getting closer to
>microwaves, I'm a little worried that the foam may get very hot and
>lose it's structural properties.
>Am I worrying unnecessarily?
Yeah. 99.99% of system integration grief is
limited to effects of one system degrading
performance of another system. The majority
of those don't present a hazard except for
interference with runway approach radios,
autopilots and electronic controlled fuel
injection/ignition systems.
It's probably unlikely that you'll be yakking
it up on 20m while on an coupled approach to a field
at minimums.
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: | Re: Sub-standard Charging |
All - thanks for the replies. Sorry, just getting back to responding.
"What's the field voltage while in flight?" 12.5
Bob - Thanks for the tip and Reference to the Ford Regulator.
Did you ever get that AEC9004 as depicted on Figure Z-24A of the AppZ_Rev12A?
For reference my system is setup as shown on page 34, Figure Z-24 (Interim) of
the AppZ_Rev12A. The contactor as depicted is recommended for isolation by AeroSport
Power.
I have not compared the voltage of the e-bus under endurance with the SD-8 yet.
I will do so over the weekend and report back.
In my testing I used a document from Plane Power (I believe they sell the alternator
to Aerosport - Don't hold me to the fire on that 1).
In that document they request the validation of the voltage from all points electric
on the ship. I even tested my wife's voltage which appeared higher than
usual today.
http://www.plane-power.com/troubleshooting.htm (pick 1 from the Exp Area with IR)
In any event each point in the test came out the same, 11.8 (or very close). The
essential bus side of the diode was 11.4 (expected lower). Note: the 11.8 value
reflects my battery
receiving an insufficient charge.
In some respects, my review of the system has improved my lot. My voltage is up
to 13.8 (better), but I cannot explain why. Perhaps 1 of you with whom has as
a better
relationship to electrons can explain?
A bit of history: When I started flying my ship (12/2010) I cooked the wire between
the alt. Field CB/Swtich (see Figure 24) and the contactor/field. After extracting
the melted plastic
from my wiring harness, I decided to simply run a jumper wire between the hot side
(batt contactor) of the alternator contactor and the switch (+). This of course
provided for activating the alternator contactor
when the main bus switch was turned on (position 1). No harm done, but I essentially
removed the ability to isolate the alternator without turning off the main
DC power switch.
So, from that day forward my system ran/charged at 12.5 volts. As an FYI, my battery
was always 11.8 when I went out to start.
Last weekend I reviewed the drawing and decided to reunite the connection between
the switch/5 amp breaker, the field wire and the contactor.
Bling! - my voltage jumped up to 13.8. Makes no sense to me? The only difference
being the contactor was already open when the alt field was activated.
I'm sure someone else can explain.
As for getting an even higher, 14.1+, I'm up for suggestions. Given that my system
has climbed to 13.8, I have to assume the alternator (80 amp) is putting out.
BTW - Max Amp demand on my ship is about 10. Normal load is between 5-8. Don't
even ask. I bought the 80 amp because at the time I thought more was better :)
Bob Borger - Saw your note: Perhaps this and a more knowledgeable reply from our
tutors will assist your situation.
Thanks and Have a great Thanksgiving!,
Glenn Long
KLOM
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=388546#388546
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: HF antenna issues |
>You will be trying a new approach using the driven element in one
>wing and the "counterpoise" in the other. Frankly this sounds like
>trouble, especially in a fiberglass airplane with fuel tanks in the
>same wing. There is little difference between something you call a
>counterpoise, and for instance the nav light wiring, they all return
>to the ground point of the antenna tuner. You will have high
>voltages at some points on the driven element, and lots of
>opportunity for discharge through the fiberglass in the vicinity of
>the tank. There can also be high voltage nodes on the "counterpoise"
>and on every other conductive part of the aircraft, because *all*
>parts of the aircraft will be part of the antenna. In a Navajo I
>worked on, we had arcing around one of the flap hinges at certain frequencies.
D.L.'s misgivings stand on 80 years experience
and experiments to optimize HF performance on
airplanes while minimizing deleterious effects
to systems on board. A contemporary example presented
to your's truly about 8 years ago where an HF transceiver
installed on a Hawker 800 presented mysterious, inconsistent,
wildly variable problems that ranged from interference with
fuel level readings to total shutdown of all engine driven
power sources (including APU) while transmitting.
[]
The problem was 'mysterious' because this same configuration
of transmitter and receiver had been installed years gone
by with a tiny fraction of the problems.
The difference was a new antenna concept that abandoned
the older low current, high voltage wire antennas. Owners
begrudgingly tolerated those ugly wires so as to enjoy over-water
H.F. performance on their airplanes.
Needless to say, ALL were willing to pay killobux to have
an antenna integrated into the aircraft's structure. This
called for insulating the leading edge structure of the
vertical fin, grounding it to structure at the top and
exciting it with a very agile antenna tuner at the bottom.
Then the problems started. Bottom line was that aircraft
structure coated with primer and assembled with rivets
was never designed to be part of an antenna ground system.
Airplane to airplane variations produced an constellation
of effects that seldom repeated. Radiation levels in the
hell-hole were often high (200+ volts per meter) and
varied widely in terms of position within the hell-hole
and the excitation frequency.
I got to spend a week in the delivery center just before
xmas 2005 trying to keep the generators on-line on three
airplanes otherwise slated for delivery (before end of
year).
Discovered that legacy generator controllers were never
qualified to work in this new interference environment that
had not existed before the antenna change.
Managed to craft "special connectors"
Emacs!
From RadioShack capacitors and Walmart epoxy that kept
huge levels of hell-hole RF from getting into the generator
controllers.
Didn't fix the original problem (which was never going to
be fixed) but it did get those airplanes flown away before
Dec 31.
I mention this to illustrate what appears to be an arcane
sifting of cause/effect to deduce the effective band-aid.
You won't know what the problems are until you test and
a really elegant solution may be unattainable.
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: AeroElectric-List Digest: 3 Msgs - 11/20/12 |
>
>A great resource might be looking back to see what Rodie Rodewald
>did on his Long-EZ (N1344T) back in '82 when he flew from Hawaii to
>Oshkosh... I now own the airplane, but his article in the canards
>pusher covered his HD radio issues. I unfortunately am lacking many
>of the specifics, but the article does talk about it at length. Drop
>me an email if you can't find it.
I found some mentions on the airplane/pilot/flight but
no details on his radio installations. 1982 was a bit
before my 'new beginnings' in OBAM aircraft (OSH 1986).
I'd like to read more.
I do recall a gentleman who live in Brazil and flew
his Long to OSH every year. He had a compact HF transceiver
in the cockpit but I don't recall his antenna installation
either. Seems that the engine presents the greatest potential
for an RF 'mass' against which a voltage fed antenna might
be driven.
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: Sub-standard Charging |
At 01:14 PM 11/21/2012, you wrote:
>
>All - thanks for the replies. Sorry, just getting back to responding.
>
>"What's the field voltage while in flight?" 12.5
That says the regulator is flogging an alternator
incapable of delivering power to the bus. I.e.
dead or disconnected. Average field voltage in flight
for a belt driven alternator is less than
3 volts.
>Bling! - my voltage jumped up to 13.8. Makes no sense to me? The
>only difference being the contactor was already open when the alt
>field was activated.
Yup . . . getting the contactor closed can make
a BIG difference.
>I'm sure someone else can explain.
>
>As for getting an even higher, 14.1+, I'm up for suggestions. Given
>that my system has climbed to 13.8, I have to assume the alternator
>(80 amp) is putting out.
>BTW - Max Amp demand on my ship is about 10. Normal load is between
>5-8. Don't even ask. I bought the 80 amp because at the time I
>thought more was better :)
13.8 will probably suffice. When the regulator
is built in, what you see is what you get.
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: A200 and Flightcom squeal |
Bob;
It's a Zodiac 601XL-B. One antenna is right behind pilots head, other right below.
The coax is long enough on each to swap connections AT the antennas. I never
got a look at the SWR for the antennas. I can't believe the range I get now.
20 miles from sitting on the apron at the airport talking to an aircraft flying
THAT far away! Unreal! With an antenna UNDER the airframe none the less! Did
some taxi tests today, and tower was very happy with my clarity etc. 5/5. The
handheld also works on the problem antenna with no issues. My theory.......
The A200 puts out just a little too much power to be so close to the actual pilots
head. Within 2 feet of headset. When I moved my head forward, the squeal
almost completely disappeared.
Puzzled...... But happy with result.
Chad
--------
C-GYXQ. 912ULS. 601XL-B
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=388561#388561
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: | Re: A200 and Flightcom squeal |
The A200 puts out just a little too much power to be so close to the
actual pilots head. Within 2 feet of headset. When I moved my head
forward, the squeal almost completely disappeared.
Puzzled.....
I'm not. The electret microphone in your
mic-headset has some electromagic devices
between the actual mic cartridge and the
radio . . . seems our radios would STILL
work fine with a 1940's carbon microphone
connected to them.
That little bit of electronics has to
amplify MICROVOLTS off the microphone up
to several hundreds of millivolts to make
the transmitter happy. What's more, the
electronics is fitted with some rather
efficient antennas on both the goesinta
and goesouta connections. I wish I'd
known that your headset was so exposed to
the antenna . . . that would have raised a
big red flag.
Bob . . .
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: A200 and Flightcom squeal |
Bob;
So then this makes sense to you? Why doesn't the handheld not show similar issues
with that same antenna behind my head? Lower output? Less of a radio over all?
So in the end, it very well could have been the close proximity of the antenna
for the A200?
Chad
--------
C-GYXQ. 912ULS. 601XL-B
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=388567#388567
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: | Re: A200 and Flightcom squeal |
Not Bob,
But yes. 5-8 watts of output very close to headset, vs 150 milliwatt
output of handheld.
I've seen similar effects when headset was close to antenna coax and
coax had bad shield connection.
Kelly
On 11/21/2012 7:26 PM, SIDESLIP wrote:
>
> Bob;
>
> So then this makes sense to you? Why doesn't the handheld not show similar issues
with that same antenna behind my head? Lower output? Less of a radio over
all? So in the end, it very well could have been the close proximity of the antenna
for the A200?
>
>
> Chad
>
> --------
> C-GYXQ. 912ULS. 601XL-B
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=388567#388567
>
>
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
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: | iPad and circuit design apps |
Happy Thanksgiving!
Occasionally in the App Store on my iPad I look at the Genius suggestions.
Today it suggested *iCircuit* (
https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/icircuit/id383359044?mt=8), an electronic
circuit design app. Much more than simple circuit diagramming, the app
simulates the operation of virtual circuits you put together.
I wonder if anybody here has tried this or similar apps, and would they be
useful (along with a basic textbook) to an electronic noobie to learn some
electronic circuit design?
Ralph Finch
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: | Re: A200 and Flightcom squeal |
At 08:30 PM 11/21/2012, you wrote:
>
>Not Bob,
>But yes. 5-8 watts of output very close to headset, vs 150 milliwatt
>output of handheld.
>I've seen similar effects when headset was close to antenna coax and
>coax had bad shield connection.
Agreed. The few times I've encountered high levels
of RF in the cockpit, it proved to be a shield pulled
out of the clamp in an old style BNC connector with
a clamp-nut. This turned the coax into a long-wire
antenna that radiated the interior of the airplane.
In your case, the antenna was for all practical
purposes in the cockpit and no doubt both antenna
and feed line were functioning as advertised.
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: A200 and Flightcom squeal |
So I'm wondering: my Nav antenna is a dipole type which i plan to locate right
above my head stretching from one side of the cockpit to the other (in the same
plane as the wing). So it will be only a foot or two from the headsets. Is this
a bad idea?
Sacha
Kitfox IV
On 22/nov/2012, at 02:14, "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com>
wrote:
>
>
>
> The A200 puts out just a little too much power to be so close to the actual pilots
head. Within 2 feet of headset. When I moved my head forward, the squeal
almost completely disappeared.
>
> Puzzled.....
>
> I'm not. The electret microphone in your
> mic-headset has some electromagic devices
> between the actual mic cartridge and the
> radio . . . seems our radios would STILL
> work fine with a 1940's carbon microphone
> connected to them.
>
> That little bit of electronics has to
> amplify MICROVOLTS off the microphone up
> to several hundreds of millivolts to make
> the transmitter happy. What's more, the
> electronics is fitted with some rather
> efficient antennas on both the goesinta
> and goesouta connections. I wish I'd
> known that your headset was so exposed to
> the antenna . . . that would have raised a
> big red flag.
>
> Bob . . .
>
>
>
>
>
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! --
|