Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:50 AM - Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 9 Msgs - 01/12/13 (Scott Klemptner)
2. 02:03 AM - Bob's HF off-center-fed dipole (Linda Walker)
3. 02:09 AM - Re: Low Cost ELT Antenna (David & Elaine Lamphere)
4. 04:07 AM - Re: Ground connector (was Anderson PowerPole connectors) (James Kilford)
5. 06:13 AM - Re: Bob's HF off-center-fed dipole (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
6. 06:39 AM - Re: Ground connector (was Anderson PowerPole connectors) (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
7. 07:10 AM - Re: Lithium batteries redux (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
8. 07:40 AM - Re: Low Cost ELT Antenna (Kelly McMullen)
9. 08:06 AM - Re: Low Cost ELT Antenna (Harley)
10. 08:48 AM - Re: Low Cost ELT Antenna (Kelly McMullen)
11. 08:50 AM - Re: Ground connector (was Anderson PowerPole connectors) (Gilles Thesee)
12. 08:55 AM - Re: Ground connector (was Anderson PowerPole connectors) (Gilles Thesee)
13. 09:01 AM - Re: Lithium batteries redux (Jan de Jong)
14. 10:38 AM - Re: Ground connector (was Anderson PowerPole connectors) (Jared Yates)
15. 12:41 PM - Re: Low Cost ELT Antenna (David & Elaine Lamphere)
16. 05:13 PM - Re: Ground connector (was Anderson PowerPole connectors) (James Kilford)
17. 07:06 PM - Re: Aeroled wiring (rwtalbot)
18. 07:07 PM - Anderson PowerPole connectors (Paul Millner)
19. 08:35 PM - Re: Resurrecting a battery (rayj)
20. 08:47 PM - parallel batteries on maintainer (rayj)
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: AeroElectric-List Digest: 9 Msgs - 01/12/13 |
piper meridians come from the factory with an anderson connector for chargi
ng the main battery =0A=0A=0Abatteryminder sells a model of their charger s
pecifically for the meridian with a mating anderson connector=0A=0Ai have u
sed the meridian as data to get the faa to approve similar installations on
type certified aircraft, =0A=0A=0Asimilarly, i have used beech a36s using
anl current limiters as data to install anls in type certified aircraft, el
iminating the expensive and large alternator circuit breaker from the instr
ument panel when rewiring older aircraft or replacing a failed alternator c
ircuit breaker=0A=0A=0Ascott=0A=0A-=0AScott A Klemptner=0Abmwr606 on Yaho
o IM=0A=0AThe difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has it
s limits- Anonymous=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A=0A>________________________________
=0A>=0A>Time: 11:42:08 AM PST US=0A>From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckol
ls.bob@aeroelectric.com>=0A>Subject: AeroElectric-List: Anderson PowerPole
connectors=0A>=0A>=0A>I don't know if we've talked about these folks=0A>on
the List before . . . but I ran across an current=0A>application where thes
e connectors appear a great=0A>alternative to knife-splices and perhaps eve
n the=0A>Molex/Tyco-Amp white nylon connectors.=0A>=0A>I've uploaded a data
package for the Anderson PowerPole=0A>connectors to this page on my websit
e:=0A>=0A>http://tinyurl.com/cbe2t87=0A>=0A>On that page you will also find
installation instructions,=0A>tools, and a link to the factory outlet wher
e you can=0A>buy any quantity of housings, pins and accessories=0A>at reaso
nable prices.=0A>=0A>Do a Google on Anderson Powerpole and you'll no doubt
=0A>discover many other sources for this unique product=0A>line.=0A>=0A>=0A
>- Bob . . . =0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>
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: | Bob's HF off-center-fed dipole |
Bob.
I'd be interested in reading more about your off-center-fed dipole when you
get around to doing it, please.
Good luck with some fair weather!
Patrick Elliott.
G-LGEZ
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------
Time: 12:41:12 PM PST US
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com>
Subject: RE: AeroElectric-List: Anderson PowerPole connectors
At 02:10 PM 1/12/2013, you wrote:
>
>
>We ham radio guys love them.- If you put a set on your radios you
>can pretty much show up anywhere and plug in and get power for your gear!
>
>----Jeff-
- - Yeah, I've been seeing them for years but never
- - really sat down and studied the products and their
- - technology. Pretty slick.
- - I think B&C has been using them in their SD-8
- - installation kits for years. In fact, it was
- - a ham radio application that prompted me to revisit
- - this product.
- - I inherited a Kenwood TS440 in great shape from
- - a old friend who was upgrading his station. Got
- - a longwire with tuner put up which is marginally
- - serviceable. Planning an off-center-fed dipole
- - as soon as the weather warms up and roof-crawling
- - is not so unfriendly.
- - Been honing up the CW skills. Haven't been on HF
- - in over 40 years but I've got some grand-children
- - who should see what this ham radio stuff is all
- - about.
---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: | Re: Low Cost ELT Antenna |
The Cygnet is an experimental homebuilt - I don't believe there is any
restrictions as to what he installs.
There used to be do-it-yourself plans in several places including the
aeroelectric site if you wanted to do that. There are also (in my
opinion) affordable stub antennas you can buy. You'll probably have to
mount it on an aluminum panel or equivalent ground plane. On my
Tailwind I mounted my xpdr antenna on a belly pan.
Dave
On Jan 12, 2013, at 11:04 PM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
> >
>
> Hate to tell you this, but it is illegal to install an original type
> ELT in any aircraft as a new install. If it had a Narco about 20
> years ago, before they were made obsolete by regulation, you could
> still replace with same model legally, but you can't use one as a
> new install. The ELT10 is a first generation, designed in the early
> 70's, and does not meet current requirements, so only old
> installations are grandfathered. You are going to need a second
> generation ELT, such as the Artex, ACK, or Ameriking. The cheapest
> new are a little under 200. You also have to use the antenna it
> comes with.
> If your aircraft requires an ELT, it must be a TSO ELT of the second
> generation or newer, and the TSO requires using the antenna with
> which TSO was granted
>
> On 1/12/2013 8:48 PM, Jerald Folkerts wrote:
>>
>> Im several weeks away from completing my Cygnet project. The
>> aircraft has no electrical system, and Ive installed an older
>> Narco ELT 10 as it is theoretically a two seat aircraft. However, I
>> dont have an antenna or a plan for one. What would be the simplest
>> and least expensive way to go? The Cygnet is steel tube and fabric
>> with a wood/fabric covered wing.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Jerry Folkerts
>>
>> *
>>
>>
>> *
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>
>
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: Ground connector (was Anderson PowerPole connectors) |
Gilles,
I went for the Piper style connector for my Jodel D150 project.
Unfortunately, it's not very light, nor, I suppose, aerodynamically clean,
but it does have a sprung cover to keep mud, etc. out. As for small,
that's subjective. It needs a 2" hole, with two 21/64" holes at 2-15/16"
centres.
See http://www.aircraftspruce.com/pdf/2013Individual/Cat13519.pdf for
details.
Despite its downsides, I'm hoping that its ubiquity will be its saving
grace.
James
On 12 January 2013 20:53, Gilles Thesee <Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr>wrote
:
> Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr>
>
> Robert L. Nuckolls, III a =C3=A9crit :
>
>>
>> Yeah, I've been seeing them for years but never
>> really sat down and studied the products and their
>> technology. Pretty slick.
>>
>
> Bob and all,
>
> Your messages about PowerPole connectors prompted a question :
> What type of ground connector would you recommend to easily connect our
> Optimate charger to the ship's batteries through the aircraft skin (witho
ut
> opening the baggage door) ?
> Among goals we are aiming at :
> - Lightweight
> - Small footprint
> - Resistance/protection from water, mud, etc.
> - As aerodynamically clean as possible
>
> Any ideas ?
> Thanks for any input,
> Best regards,
> --
> Gilles
> http://contrails.free.fr
>
>
=====**===================
===========**=
/www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List>
=====**===================
===========**=
=====**===================
===========**=
com/contribution>
=====**===================
===========**=
>
>
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: Bob's HF off-center-fed dipole |
At 04:02 AM 1/13/2013, you wrote:
>Bob.
>I'd be interested in reading more about your off-center-fed dipole
>when you get around to doing it, please.
>Good luck with some fair weather!
>Patrick Elliott.
>G-LGEZ
Do a google search on OCF dipole
You will get a bunch of hits that speak to this
class of antenna. Here's one example
http://tinyurl.com/cjb4tlj
I purchased a 4:1 balun off ebay for $30 postage paid
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: Ground connector (was Anderson PowerPole connectors) |
Bob and all,
Your messages about PowerPole connectors prompted a question :
What type of ground connector would you recommend to easily connect
our Optimate charger to the ship's batteries through the aircraft
skin (without opening the baggage door) ?
Among goals we are aiming at :
- Lightweight
- Small footprint
- Resistance/protection from water, mud, etc.
- As aerodynamically clean as possible
Any ideas ?
Thanks for any input,
Best regards,
--
Gilles
How much current does your charger
produce? Is the airplane metal or
composite?
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: Lithium batteries redux |
>
>I would like to know in the meantime what level of battery
>monitoring is done on the accident Cessnas and Dreamliners...
I cannot speak to specifics of the battery controls
and monitoring systems in either airplane. However,
I can speak to the qualification process for getting
these batteries approved for installation.
A number of AIRPLANE companies, not battery companies,
have launched into breathtakingly expensive programs
to gain some form of approval for use of lithium batteries
on their products. These include Cessna, Boeing, Grumman
and others.
All players in the lithium game are intently aware
of the unique risks offered by lithium batteries.
They are also aware of the widely publicized litany
of events involving lithium battery catastrophic
failures.
The testing of batteries is a legacy skill finely
honed by over a century of field experience and
lessons learned.
See: http://tinyurl.com/akvhxv6 also
http://tinyurl.com/b4f89jh
The two airplanes you asked about enjoy a very
high degrees of electronic systems management
not the least of which are the batteries. Given
the intense scrutiny and qualification expense
associated with getting Li-Ion products onto
both airplanes, it's a pretty sure bet that
everyone believed that they'd touched all the
bases.
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: Low Cost ELT Antenna |
The ELT requirement applies to ALL aircraft that have to have one.
Experimental have to use an ELT meeting the TSO requirements, which you
are unlikely to be able to meet without actual testing. It is not an
area to go cheap. The first generation ELTs had rampant false alarms and
frequent failure to activate in crashes.
Given the under $200 price of a new, compliant ELT, trying to go cheap
with a non-compliant ELT is pennywise, pound foolish, as well as being
illegal.
You have a different situation with a transponder antenna, in that there
is test equipment, used in your certification and bi-annual tests that
shows your transponder system, including antenna meets the TSO requirement.
On 1/13/2013 3:09 AM, David & Elaine Lamphere wrote:
> <dalamphere@comcast.net>
>
> The Cygnet is an experimental homebuilt - I don't believe there is any
> restrictions as to what he installs.
>
> There used to be do-it-yourself plans in several places including the
> aeroelectric site if you wanted to do that. There are also (in my
> opinion) affordable stub antennas you can buy. You'll probably have to
> mount it on an aluminum panel or equivalent ground plane. On my
> Tailwind I mounted my xpdr antenna on a belly pan.
>
> Dave
>
> On Jan 12, 2013, at 11:04 PM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
>
>> <kellym@aviating.com>
>>
>> Hate to tell you this, but it is illegal to install an original type
>> ELT in any aircraft as a new install. If it had a Narco about 20
>> years ago, before they were made obsolete by regulation, you could
>> still replace with same model legally, but you can't use one as a new
>> install. The ELT10 is a first generation, designed in the early 70's,
>> and does not meet current requirements, so only old installations are
>> grandfathered. You are going to need a second generation ELT, such as
>> the Artex, ACK, or Ameriking. The cheapest new are a little under
>> 200. You also have to use the antenna it comes with.
>> If your aircraft requires an ELT, it must be a TSO ELT of the second
>> generation or newer, and the TSO requires using the antenna with
>> which TSO was granted
>>
>> On 1/12/2013 8:48 PM, Jerald Folkerts wrote:
>>>
>>> Im several weeks away from completing my Cygnet project. The
>>> aircraft has no electrical system, and Ive installed an older Narco
>>> ELT 10 as it is theoretically a two seat aircraft. However, I dont
>>> have an antenna or a plan for one. What would be the simplest and
>>> least expensive way to go? The Cygnet is steel tube and fabric with
>>> a wood/fabric covered wing.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Jerry Folkerts
>>>
>>> *
>>>
>>>
>>> *
>>
>>
>>
>> -----
>> No virus found in this message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
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: Low Cost ELT Antenna |
Haven't seen another point addressed yet. Or else I missed it.
But, these new multi frequency ELTs that go for around $200-$300
are usually portable units and don't trigger automatically in a
crash situation. Are these allowable in experimental aircraft?
Do we need to install something that triggers by itself if need
be, or are those that have to be manually activated after the
"landing" sufficient for the FAA?
Harley
-----------------------------------------------------------------
On 1/13/2013 10:39 AM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
> The ELT requirement applies to ALL aircraft that have to have
> one. Experimental have to use an ELT meeting the TSO
> requirements, which you are unlikely to be able to meet without
> actual testing. It is not an area to go cheap. The first
> generation ELTs had rampant false alarms and frequent failure
> to activate in crashes.
> Given the under $200 price of a new, compliant ELT, trying to
> go cheap with a non-compliant ELT is pennywise, pound foolish,
> as well as being illegal.
> You have a different situation with a transponder antenna, in
> that there is test equipment, used in your certification and
> bi-annual tests that shows your transponder system, including
> antenna meets the TSO requirement.
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: Low Cost ELT Antenna |
The second generation ELTs are TSO-C91A compliant. They must be
"installed", but some are removable for portable use. Example Ameri-king
AK-450 for ~$190. They are Not PLBs, and they are only 121.5/243.0mhz
units. To get a legal 406mhz ELT you are looking at ~$600 minimum such
as ACK E-04.
On 1/13/2013 9:05 AM, Harley wrote:
> Haven't seen another point addressed yet. Or else I missed it. But,
> these new multi frequency ELTs that go for around $200-$300 are
> usually portable units and don't trigger automatically in a crash
> situation. Are these allowable in experimental aircraft? Do we need
> to install something that triggers by itself if need be, or are those
> that have to be manually activated after the "landing" sufficient for
> the FAA?
>
> Harley
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
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: Ground connector (was Anderson PowerPole connectors) |
James Kilford a crit :
>
> I went for the Piper style connector for my Jodel D150 project.
> Unfortunately, it's not very light, nor, I suppose, aerodynamically
> clean, but it does have a sprung cover to keep mud, etc. out. As for
> small, that's subjective. It needs a 2" hole, with two 21/64" holes
> at 2-15/16" centres.
James,
Thank you for responding. Unfortunately the Piper style ground connector
is way too bulky, heavy etc. for our airplane.
We only need a 0.8-1 amp capacity, and our four-seater empty weight and
dimensions are less than those of your Jodel Mascaret, so we're trying
to keep weight and drag under strict control.
Thanks anyway for the input.
Best regards,
--
Gilles
http://contrails.free.fr
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: Ground connector (was Anderson PowerPole connectors) |
Robert L. Nuckolls, III a crit :
>
> How much current does your charger
> produce? Is the airplane metal or
> composite?
Bob,
Thank you for your response.
The current needed is only that supplied by our little charger, of the
order of 0.8-1 amp.
The aircraft skin and structure are carbon fiber.
The idea is to facilitate recharging when in a 'foreign' hangar, without
having to leave the door/canopy ajar.
Thank you,
Best regards,
--
Gilles
http://contrails.free.fr
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: Lithium batteries redux |
Thank you Bob, very interesting.
As a follow-on I found this:
http://www.gsyuasa-lp.com/aviation-lithium-ion-markets
with this:
http://www.s399157097.onlinehome.us/SpecSheets/LVP10-65.pdf
So - not LiFePO4, not LMO either but LCO - the cathode type for the high
energy density but with the bad reputation:
http://www.mpoweruk.com/lithium_failures.htm
(sorry about the graph without numbers or provenance).
I am still not sure whether in operation they do monitor each individual
cell (volts, temperature?) before aggregating the result into a status
for a whole series chain. The 787 APU starter battery uses 8 cells in
series for 32 V no-load (nominal cell voltage 3.7 V vs. about 3.2 V for
LiFePO4).
Jan de Jong
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: Ground connector (was Anderson PowerPole connectors) |
Is there an air inlet at the bottom of the cowling? I wonder if you
could use a pigtail of wire with a 2-pin connector like the one that
comes on most trickle chargers. You could make a fastening system out
of velcro to hold it up out of the breeze when you don't need it. I
suppose this strategy could apply to any number of other air outlets,
depending on which is closest to your battery.
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 11:55 AM, Gilles Thesee
<Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr> wrote:
> <Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr>
>
> Robert L. Nuckolls, III a crit :
>>
>>
>> How much current does your charger
>> produce? Is the airplane metal or
>> composite?
>
>
> Bob,
>
> Thank you for your response.
> The current needed is only that supplied by our little charger, of the order
> of 0.8-1 amp.
> The aircraft skin and structure are carbon fiber.
> The idea is to facilitate recharging when in a 'foreign' hangar, without
> having to leave the door/canopy ajar.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Best regards,
> --
> Gilles
> http://contrails.free.fr
>
>
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: Low Cost ELT Antenna |
Yes, the ELT has to meet requirements - I was talking about the
Transponder antenna - don't know why I didn't see "ELT" - Oh well... I
agree <$200 is a reason to go with a new ELT. Not to mention, the new
ones can used multiple "D" cell batteries - a big cost savings over
time.
Dave
On Jan 13, 2013, at 10:39 AM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
> >
>
> The ELT requirement applies to ALL aircraft that have to have one.
> Experimental have to use an ELT meeting the TSO requirements, which
> you are unlikely to be able to meet without actual testing. It is
> not an area to go cheap. The first generation ELTs had rampant false
> alarms and frequent failure to activate in crashes.
> Given the under $200 price of a new, compliant ELT, trying to go
> cheap with a non-compliant ELT is pennywise, pound foolish, as well
> as being illegal.
> You have a different situation with a transponder antenna, in that
> there is test equipment, used in your certification and bi-annual
> tests that shows your transponder system, including antenna meets
> the TSO requirement.
>
> On 1/13/2013 3:09 AM, David & Elaine Lamphere wrote:
>> >
>>
>> The Cygnet is an experimental homebuilt - I don't believe there is
>> any restrictions as to what he installs.
>>
>> There used to be do-it-yourself plans in several places including
>> the aeroelectric site if you wanted to do that. There are also (in
>> my opinion) affordable stub antennas you can buy. You'll probably
>> have to mount it on an aluminum panel or equivalent ground plane.
>> On my Tailwind I mounted my xpdr antenna on a belly pan.
>>
>> Dave
>>
>> On Jan 12, 2013, at 11:04 PM, Kelly McMullen wrote:
>>
>>> >
>>>
>>> Hate to tell you this, but it is illegal to install an original
>>> type ELT in any aircraft as a new install. If it had a Narco about
>>> 20 years ago, before they were made obsolete by regulation, you
>>> could still replace with same model legally, but you can't use one
>>> as a new install. The ELT10 is a first generation, designed in the
>>> early 70's, and does not meet current requirements, so only old
>>> installations are grandfathered. You are going to need a second
>>> generation ELT, such as the Artex, ACK, or Ameriking. The cheapest
>>> new are a little under 200. You also have to use the antenna it
>>> comes with.
>>> If your aircraft requires an ELT, it must be a TSO ELT of the
>>> second generation or newer, and the TSO requires using the antenna
>>> with which TSO was granted
>>>
>>> On 1/12/2013 8:48 PM, Jerald Folkerts wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Im several weeks away from completing my Cygnet project. The
>>>> aircraft has no electrical system, and Ive installed an older
>>>> Narco ELT 10 as it is theoretically a two seat aircraft. However,
>>>> I dont have an antenna or a plan for one. What would be the
>>>> simplest and least expensive way to go? The Cygnet is steel tube
>>>> and fabric with a wood/fabric covered wing.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Jerry Folkerts
>>>>
>>>> *
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----
>>> No virus found in this message.
>>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>
>
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: Ground connector (was Anderson PowerPole connectors) |
Yes, or could be a socket fixed near to the bottom edge of the firewall.
That would be accessible as you suggest. How about Anderson connectors?
Nice and small, waterproof covers available. There is some info about
them here:
http://www.4wdadventurers.com/archive/index.php/t-568.html
Not too expensive, and there are grab handle accessories, which might make
it easier to connect / disconnect under the cowling.
On 13 January 2013 18:36, Jared Yates <email@jaredyates.com> wrote:
m
> >
>
> Is there an air inlet at the bottom of the cowling? I wonder if you
> could use a pigtail of wire with a 2-pin connector like the one that
> comes on most trickle chargers. You could make a fastening system out
> of velcro to hold it up out of the breeze when you don't need it. I
> suppose this strategy could apply to any number of other air outlets,
> depending on which is closest to your battery.
>
> On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 11:55 AM, Gilles Thesee
> <Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr> wrote:
> > <Gilles.Thesee@ac-grenoble.fr>
> >
> > Robert L. Nuckolls, III a =C3=A9crit :
> >>
> >>
> >> How much current does your charger
> >> produce? Is the airplane metal or
> >> composite?
> >
> >
> > Bob,
> >
> > Thank you for your response.
> > The current needed is only that supplied by our little charger, of the
> order
> > of 0.8-1 amp.
> > The aircraft skin and structure are carbon fiber.
> > The idea is to facilitate recharging when in a 'foreign' hangar, withou
t
> > having to leave the door/canopy ajar.
> >
> > Thank you,
> >
> > Best regards,
> > --
> > Gilles
> > http://contrails.free.fr
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
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: Aeroled wiring |
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect wrote:
> At 08:35 AM 1/8/2013, you wrote:
>
> The 'tick' cited by several writers is probably
> a conducted, fast rise current transient coming
> out on the power lines. This is a very low energy
> event at an audio rate and with imperceptible
> radio frequency components.
>
>
Bob, forgive me for coming into this thread late. I also have been having issues
with an Aeroleds setup in my RV-7A. I used to have the Whelen System 7 that
Vans sold, but the powerpack failed and I decided to install these instead.
The noise I have is characterised by:
1.Noticeable dead spot from signals to the rear (at least prior to sorting out
a ground as indicated below)
2.Noise on all comm frequencies caused by the NAV lights. It does not break squelch
but can be heard when the squelch is disengaged and the navs turned on
3.Reduction in effective range of the Comms over my Whelen System 7. I used to
be able to get the ATIS on my home field from 50nm and 7000. I still can with
the aeroleds turned off. If they are on I get nothing until I turn the lights
off.
4.I can hear Nav and strobe noise in weak comm signals.
5.Navs + Strobe is even worse
6.The whole setup does not compair favourably to Whelen.
I use my aircraft for IFR/night etc and have over 500 hours in four years or so,
so probably fairly aware of how the systems should work.
I spent a few hours in the hanger looking at my Aeroleds on the weekend and some
more yesterday. I came to a few conclusions:
1.I have/had wired them as per the instructions.
2.I did find that the tail light was not properly grounded between the case and
the black ground wire so I fixed that and it did reduce the noise but still not
to where I am happy. (took for a test flight)
3.The wiring scheme suggested by Aeroleds actually looks like it would causes a
ground loop between the airframe and the shield (when grounding both ends of
the shield) . When connected on the Left wing it reduces the pop from the strobe
on right and tail it appears to make no difference.
4.The tail nav is by far the noisiest and virtually impossible to quiet down.
I assume because it has a lot more LEDs in it. I reduced noise by disconnecting
the ground wire entirely (runs to my aft fuselage bulkhead). This seems to
imply that local grounding is required. I may need to look at how I can achieve
that with my rudder.
5.The Green (RHS) nav light is the next noisiest, followed by the red one (LHS).
Both of these are very quiet in comparison.
6.Shortening the ground lead at the light end is not only impractical it makes
little difference.
7.One of these lights causes minimal noise, the combined effect adds up. Worst
case is all three plugged in and nav + strobe.
8.Noise can be heard using a portable Airband radio with the squelch disabled.
In some cases the lights will break squelch but not often and not with the wiring
as per the instructions
9.Noise is still present and can be clearly heard in weak signals (like listening
to Sydney Centre on the ground).
10.My tail light gets extremely hot in operation. (burn your hands hot)
I had been of the opinion that the noise was most likely caused by a poorly filtered
switch mode power supply injecting noise back into the power system. That
coupled with the very fast rise time from the strobes when they are turned
on leads to the issues. What surprised me was that with my handheld radio I could
easily receive the signal when I placed the antenna near the lights, and
also when the antenna was placed near my belly mounted Comm antennas.
Getting the wiring correct seems to virtually eliminate the emitted RFI. You must
be very close to the wing light fixtures with the portable antenna. The tail
light is worse but noticably better when grounded.
Being IFR I have a few other issues:
What about VOR, MKR, GPS etc?
How much of this noise could cause issues in electronics such as EFIS?
What are these things doing to the airframe ground and could it play havoc with
my WX-500 storm scope? I have not noticed any strikes detected but it could
perhaps reduce its range or accuracy - especially as the antenna is in the return
path from the tail strobe.
What happens when the grounds become ineffective due to corrosion under the screws
etc?
Richard
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=392225#392225
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: | Anderson PowerPole connectors |
Thanks, Bob.
I've looked at these before. I'm planning to install, from time to
time, an electric air conditioner into the aft baggage compartment. It
has a maximum draw, the manufacturer says, of 50 amps. I was
considering the 75 amp Anderson PowerPole connector, but then saw
mention here that 100% lagniappe above expected current flow is best for
long connector/crimp connection life. Should I be concerned about my
app, or simply accept that, perhaps, I may need to renew these
connectors from time to time... hopefully before they start an inflight
fire?
Paul
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: | Re: Resurrecting a battery |
Greetings,
Here's my report on trying to resurrect "killed" lead acid batteries. No
success. After 48 hours on the high voltage/current limited setup
neither of the lead acid open batteries or a couple of old sealed lead
acid batteries I was experimenting with showed any life.I tested them
for voltage about 24 hrs after the charge attempts and none read as high
as 12V. I used 75W bulb instead of 100 'cause it was the only
incandescent bulb I had and I figured a compact fluorescent wasn't going
to work:>). I assume that that lowered the current limit but still
provided the voltage I was looking for.
Bottomline. It was educational and I have one more trick to try on
marginal batteries.
Thanks to everyone who contributed to the discussion. Sorry I didn't
have any success to share.
Raymond Julian
Kettle River, MN.
"And you know that I could have me a million more friends,
and all I'd have to lose is my point of view." - John Prine
On 09/28/2012 04:42 PM, rayj wrote:
>
> On 09/28/2012 01:12 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
>
>
>> You can put a 100w light bulb in series with a diode
>> bridge rectifier and use this as a current limited source of
>> high voltage to hook to your battery(ies). Watch the voltage across
>> the battery. If the chemistry is coming awake, the voltage
>> should begin to drop and ultimately level off at normal
>> levels expected for a 1 amp constant current charge.
> Here's where my ignorance starts showing. Is this setup using mains
> voltage? Rectified and current limited? 120+ volts DC, current limited
> to 1-2 amps?
>
> Raymond Julian
> Kettle River, MN.
>
> "And you know that I could have me a million more friends,
> and all I'd have to lose is my point of view." - John Prine
>
>
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: | parallel batteries on maintainer |
I am setup to use 1 maintainer to keep 4-5 or more batteries charged
over the winter. How can I tell if I've exceeded the capacity of the
maintainer? Will the voltage drop? How much of the total amperage of
the charger is available for maintaining the batteries? One of my
charger/maintainers is rated 6amps. I can't imagine any reasonable
number of batteries needing that much current to be kept topped up. The
batteries are at outside temp(currently below 0degF). Is this a factor I
need to consider?
Thanks for any information/opinions/warnings.
do not archive
--
Raymond Julian
Kettle River, MN.
"And you know that I could have me a million more friends,
and all I'd have to lose is my point of view." - John Prine
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! --
|