AeroElectric-List Digest Archive

Sun 01/19/14


Total Messages Posted: 5



Today's Message Index:
----------------------
 
     1. 04:11 AM - Re: Re: ELT Antenna (William Schertz)
     2. 06:44 AM - Re: Re: ELT Antenna (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
     3. 07:48 AM - Lancair 235 Accident (user9253)
     4. 01:04 PM - Re: Re: ELT Antenna ()
     5. 11:01 PM - Re: Lancair 235 Accident (mmayfield)
 
 
 


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
    Time: 04:11:46 AM PST US
    From: "William Schertz" <wschertz@comcast.net>
    Subject: Re: ELT Antenna
    My experience indicates that it is not a rumor. When I started testing I found the ELT being triggered by one of my COM's, and solved that by moving the position of the ELT itself, not the ELT antenna. Since repositioning, it has not been a problem Bill Schertz -----Original Message----- From: Robert L. Nuckolls, III Sent: Saturday, January 18, 2014 10:23 AM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: ELT Antenna <nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com> At 07:01 AM 1/16/2014, you wrote: <nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com> I wrote: I've heard the rumor that some ELT's were triggered by local radiation from a comm transmitter . . . but I've not seen any documentation or FMEA that supported the assertion. ---------------------- I was informed by an astute reader that the ACK E-01 series ELTs were demonstrably plagued with a tendency to trigger in response to on-board COMM transmissions. This fact (and perhaps others like it) may have been the foundation for advising installers to add separation between the ELT and ship's COMM antennas. While the 'fix' is valid, the premise under which the fix is exercised assumes that the ELT was properly qualified to be on the airplane in the first place. Any ELT that goes through the lab where I work would have demonstrated immunity to RF interference many times stronger than the ship's transceivers. The consumer has every reason to expect certain levels of performance in their ELT for it has been decreed and . . . it's a matter of practical utility. With better information, a retraction is in order for my assertion that the RF triggering event was a 'rumor'. At the same time I would advise that compromising the installation of your own 'antenna farm' in recognition of the historical fact is unnecessary. If the ELT you have demonstrates such sensitivity, then there is good reason to suspect a defect in design and/or manufacturing that needs attended to . . . defects that may go beyond the sensitivity to RF. If the ELT is the last bastion of defense for your survival, then offer no quarter in your expectations for its performance. Bob . . .


    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
    Time: 06:44:15 AM PST US
    From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com>
    Subject: Re: ELT Antenna
    At 06:10 AM 1/19/2014, you wrote: ><wschertz@comcast.net> > >My experience indicates that it is not a rumor. When I started >testing I found the ELT being triggered by one of my COM's, and >solved that by moving the position of the ELT itself, not the ELT antenna. > >Since repositioning, it has not been a problem What make and model of ELT was this? 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
    Time: 07:48:59 AM PST US
    Subject: Lancair 235 Accident
    From: "user9253" <fransew@gmail.com>
    In the January 2014 issue of Sport Aviation is an article, "What Went Wrong", about an accident involving N235MW, a Lancair 235. http://tinyurl.com/myzgxkv The NTSB probable cause is , "The pilot's decision to operate the airplane with known electrical system problems . . ." Even more significant, in my view, is that the pilot took off without first filling the 11 gallon header tank. The pilot did not build the aircraft. A builder would have known how to repair the electrical system and would have been more familiar with fuel management. There is a more detailed report here: http://tinyurl.com/krf4dk9 It says, " . . .fuel pumps which received their electrical power from the main electrical bus." Since the fuel system was electrically dependent, it would have been prudent to power the fuel pumps directly from the battery or from an E-Bus. Or the main bus should have had two supply paths as in Z-0 (attached). The accident report mentions a corroded wire between the battery and master contactor. But that does not explain why there was power to the starter but not to the main bus. I think there must have been a bad connection between the master contactor and the main bus. Joe -------- Joe Gores Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=417180#417180 Attachments: http://forums.matronics.com//files/simple_elect_system_106.pdf


    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
    Time: 01:04:32 PM PST US
    From: <berkut13@berkut13.com>
    Subject: Re: ELT Antenna
    I had the same problem with a client's composite aircraft, it was the Ameri-King AK-450 ELT unit that was susceptible to com RF triggering. It could have also been the un-shielded RJ-11 style phone cable used for the remote display. -James -----Original Message----- From: Robert L. Nuckolls, III Sent: Sunday, January 19, 2014 8:42 AM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Re: ELT Antenna <nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com> At 06:10 AM 1/19/2014, you wrote: ><wschertz@comcast.net> > >My experience indicates that it is not a rumor. When I started testing I >found the ELT being triggered by one of my COM's, and solved that by moving >the position of the ELT itself, not the ELT antenna. > >Since repositioning, it has not been a problem What make and model of ELT was this? 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
    Time: 11:01:42 PM PST US
    Subject: Re: Lancair 235 Accident
    From: "mmayfield" <mmayfield@ozemail.com.au>
    The fact that the pilot was not the builder should not be used as an excuse for anything at all. I haven't built any of the aircraft I've flown during 30 years of professional aviation, but I still always knew how their fuel system worked and what their system serviceability status was! -------- Mike Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=417241#417241




    Other Matronics Email List Services

  • Post A New Message
  •   aeroelectric-list@matronics.com
  • UN/SUBSCRIBE
  •   http://www.matronics.com/subscription
  • List FAQ
  •   http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/AeroElectric-List.htm
  • Web Forum Interface To Lists
  •   http://forums.matronics.com
  • Matronics List Wiki
  •   http://wiki.matronics.com
  • 7-Day List Browse
  •   http://www.matronics.com/browse/aeroelectric-list
  • Browse AeroElectric-List Digests
  •   http://www.matronics.com/digest/aeroelectric-list
  • Browse Other Lists
  •   http://www.matronics.com/browse
  • Live Online Chat!
  •   http://www.matronics.com/chat
  • Archive Downloading
  •   http://www.matronics.com/archives
  • Photo Share
  •   http://www.matronics.com/photoshare
  • Other Email Lists
  •   http://www.matronics.com/emaillists
  • Contributions
  •   http://www.matronics.com/contribution

    These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.

    -- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --