Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:15 PM - Garmin 430 to GRT EFIS (Charlie England)
2. 04:48 PM - RG393 coax (Fred Klein)
3. 07:20 PM - King Electronics (Scot)
4. 10:16 PM - Re: RG393 coax (Charlie England)
5. 10:32 PM - Re: RG393 coax (Kelly McMullen)
6. 11:10 PM - Re: RG393 coax (Todd Bristol)
7. 11:19 PM - Re: RG393 coax (Bill Maxwell)
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: | Garmin 430 to GRT EFIS |
Anyone have a wiring diagram for a 430 to a GRT Sport? I could have sworn
that I've seen one, but can't find one now. Does it require an optional
arinc module to display course/glideslope info, from either the GPS or the
ILS receiver?
Thanks,
Charlie
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 |
|
All,
In my as-yet-non-airworthy Europa, I=92m about to replace the RG58 coax
originally installed for COM and XPNDR antennas. Both my newly purchased
COM and (mode =93S=94) XPNDR are part of the Dynon SkyView suite. Dynon
sez the RG58=85though perhaps adequate for the COM...will be very
unsatisfactory for the XPNDR, and the folks there refer me to =93Antenna
Cable=94, p. 230, (chap 11-p.12) in the SkyView installation guide where
various coax cables are considered.
(I cannot seem to include a link to the SkyView Installation Guide)
On p. 231, (chap.11-p.13) there is a chart which appears to state that
RG400 (M17/128) is fine IF its length is less than 8=92-4=94. I find
that this M17/128 is the spec. for the RG400 sold by suppliers like
Aircraft Spruce, SteinAir, and B & C.
The chart also lists an RG304 for lengths up to 12=926=94, and RG393 for
lengths up to 17=92-3=94.
There is also a link below the chart to manufacturer=92s data which is
more specific=85there is clearly a special realm reserved for coax
cables.
I=92ve located a source for the RG393 where I can buy a minimum of 100
feet at $6.89/ft=85and I=92m having trouble swallowing.
I=92m skeptical of the notion that SkyView customers are using coax
other than the widely available RG400 (M17-128), and I=92m VERY
reluctant to spring for this RG393. I do intend to replace ALL of my
RG58.
Can someone who has some keen knowledge on this subject give me some
guidance?
=85with appreciation,
Fred
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: | King Electronics |
Does anyone have a manual for a Kings Electronic condenser cap. tester, specifically
model 603?
Thanks in advance for your time.
Scott
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=431927#431927
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 |
|
I'd ask myself if the new xponder operates at a different frequency,
impedance, & power level from the old one. If it's the same......
Charlie
On Oct 15, 2014 6:54 PM, "Fred Klein" <fklein@orcasonline.com> wrote:
> All,
>
> In my as-yet-non-airworthy Europa, I=99m about to replace the RG58
coax
> originally installed for COM and XPNDR antennas. Both my newly purchased
> COM and (mode =9CS=9D) XPNDR are part of the Dynon SkyView su
ite. Dynon sez the
> RG58though perhaps adequate for the COM...will be very unsatisfa
ctory for
> the XPNDR, and the folks there refer me to =9CAntenna Cable
=9D, p. 230, (chap
> 11-p.12) in the SkyView installation guide where various coax cables are
> considered.
>
> (I cannot seem to include a link to the SkyView Installation Guide)
>
> On p. 231, (chap.11-p.13) there is a chart which appears to state that
> RG400 (M17/128) is fine IF its length is less than 8=99-4=9D.
I find that this
> M17/128 is the spec. for the RG400 sold by suppliers like Aircraft Spruce
,
> SteinAir, and B & C.
>
> The chart also lists an RG304 for lengths up to 12=996=9D, an
d RG393 for
> lengths up to 17=99-3=9D.
>
> There is also a link below the chart to manufacturer=99s data which
is more
> specificthere is clearly a special realm reserved for coax cable
s.
>
> I=99ve located a source for the RG393 where I can buy a minimum of
100 feet
> at $6.89/ftand I=99m having trouble swallowing.
>
> I=99m skeptical of the notion that SkyView customers are using coax
other
> than the widely available RG400 (M17-128), and I=99m VERY reluctant
to spring
> for this RG393. I do intend to replace ALL of my RG58.
>
> Can someone who has some keen knowledge on this subject give me some
> guidance?
>
> with appreciation,
>
> Fred
>
> *
>
===========
www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List>
===========
===========
om/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 |
|
The Skyview transponder sold for US market is 250 wats, mode S, using
the standard 1030 and 1090 Mhz frequencies that all Mode A and C
transponders use. In other words the difference is in the pulsed
message, not the frequency or power.
It is difficult to see why more than 8 ft of cable would be needed for a
2 place aircraft, unless the antenna needs to be in an unusual location.
Also difficult to see why the com radio would need better than RG-58
cable unless it has less noise rejection than the radios designed 30
years ago that worked just fine at ranges as far as 120 nm with
sufficient altitude.
On 10/15/2014 10:14 PM, Charlie England wrote:
>
> I'd ask myself if the new xponder operates at a different frequency,
> impedance, & power level from the old one. If it's the same......
>
> Charlie
>
> On Oct 15, 2014 6:54 PM, "Fred Klein" <fklein@orcasonline.com
> <mailto:fklein@orcasonline.com>> wrote:
>
> All,
>
> In my as-yet-non-airworthy Europa, Im about to replace the RG58
> coax originally installed for COM and XPNDR antennas. Both my
> newly purchased COM and (mode S) XPNDR are part of the Dynon
> SkyView suite. Dynon sez the RG58though perhaps adequate for the
> COM...will be very unsatisfactory for the XPNDR, and the folks
> there refer me to Antenna Cable, p. 230, (chap 11-p.12) in the
> SkyView installation guide where various coax cables are considered.
>
> (I cannot seem to include a link to the SkyView Installation Guide)
>
> On p. 231, (chap.11-p.13) there is a chart which appears to state
> that RG400 (M17/128) is fine IF its length is less than 8-4. I
> find that this M17/128 is the spec. for the RG400 sold by
> suppliers like Aircraft Spruce, SteinAir, and B & C.
>
> The chart also lists an RG304 for lengths up to 126, and RG393
> for lengths up to 17-3.
>
> There is also a link below the chart to manufacturers data which
> is more specificthere is clearly a special realm reserved for
> coax cables.
>
> Ive located a source for the RG393 where I can buy a minimum of
> 100 feet at $6.89/ftand Im having trouble swallowing.
>
> Im skeptical of the notion that SkyView customers are using coax
> other than the widely available RG400 (M17-128), and Im VERY
> reluctant to spring for this RG393. I do intend to replace ALL of
> my RG58.
>
> Can someone who has some keen knowledge on this subject give me
> some guidance?
>
> with appreciation,
>
> Fred
>
> *
>
> ist" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
> tp://forums.matronics.com
> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
> *
>
> *
>
>
> *
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 |
|
What makes the RG400 better/different than the RG58 for the transponder use
?=0A =0ATodd Bristol=0A=0A =0A=0A=0AOn Wednesday, October 15, 2014 10:14 PM
, Charlie England <ceengland7@gmail.com> wrote:=0A =0A=0A=0AI'd ask myself
if the new xponder operates at a different frequency, impedance, & power le
vel from the old one. If it's the same......=0ACharlie=0AOn Oct 15, 2014 6:
54 PM, "Fred Klein" <fklein@orcasonline.com> wrote:=0A=0AAll,=0A>=0A>=0A>In
my as-yet-non-airworthy Europa, I=99m about to replace the RG58 coax
originally installed for COM and XPNDR antennas. Both my newly purchased C
OM and (mode =9CS=9D) XPNDR are part of the Dynon SkyView suite
. Dynon sez the RG58though perhaps adequate for the COM...will be
very unsatisfactory for the XPNDR, and the folks there refer me to
=9CAntenna Cable=9D, p. 230, (chap 11-p.12) in the SkyView installati
on guide where various coax cables are considered.=0A>=0A>(I cannot seem to
include a link to the SkyView Installation Guide)=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>On p. 231
, (chap.11-p.13) there is a chart which appears to state that RG400 (M17/12
8) is fine IF its length is less than 8=99-4=9D. I find that th
is M17/128 is the spec. for the RG400 sold by suppliers like Aircraft Spruc
e, SteinAir, and B & C.=0A>=0A>=0A>The chart also lists an RG304 for length
s up to 12=996=9D, and RG393 for lengths up to 17=99-3
=9D.=0A>=0A>=0A>There is also a link below the chart to manufacturer
=99s data which is more specificthere is clearly a special real
m reserved for coax cables. =0A>=0A>=0A>I=99ve located a source for t
he RG393 where I can buy a minimum of 100 feet at $6.89/ftand I
=99m having trouble swallowing. =0A>=0A>=0A>I=99m skeptical of the
notion that SkyView customers are using coax other than the widely availab
le RG400 (M17-128), and I=99m VERY reluctant to spring for this RG393
. I do intend to replace ALL of my RG58.=0A>=0A>=0A>Can someone who has som
e keen knowledge on this subject give me some guidance?=0A>=0A>=0A>
with appreciation,=0A>=0A>=0A>Fred=0A>ist" target="_blank">http://www.
matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List=0Atp://forums.matronics.com=0A_bl
=======
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 |
|
It has lower loss, which becomes more critical as you go up in
frequency. Waht is OK at VHF, frequently isn't once you start working at
microwave frequencies.
Bill
On 16/10/2014 5:08 PM, Todd Bristol wrote:
> What makes the RG400 better/different than the RG58 for the
> transponder use?
> Todd Bristol
>
>
> On Wednesday, October 15, 2014 10:14 PM, Charlie England
> <ceengland7@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> I'd ask myself if the new xponder operates at a different frequency,
> impedance, & power level from the old one. If it's the same......
> Charlie
> On Oct 15, 2014 6:54 PM, "Fred Klein" <fklein@orcasonline.com
> <mailto:fklein@orcasonline.com>> wrote:
>
> All,
>
> In my as-yet-non-airworthy Europa, Im about to replace the RG58
> coax originally installed for COM and XPNDR antennas. Both my
> newly purchased COM and (mode S) XPNDR are part of the Dynon
> SkyView suite. Dynon sez the RG58though perhaps adequate for the
> COM...will be very unsatisfactory for the XPNDR, and the folks
> there refer me to Antenna Cable, p. 230, (chap 11-p.12) in the
> SkyView installation guide where various coax cables are considered.
>
> (I cannot seem to include a link to the SkyView Installation Guide)
>
> On p. 231, (chap.11-p.13) there is a chart which appears to state
> that RG400 (M17/128) is fine IF its length is less than 8-4. I
> find that this M17/128 is the spec. for the RG400 sold by
> suppliers like Aircraft Spruce, SteinAir, and B & C.
>
> The chart also lists an RG304 for lengths up to 126, and RG393
> for lengths up to 17-3.
>
> There is also a link below the chart to manufacturers data which
> is more specificthere is clearly a special realm reserved for
> coax cables.
>
> Ive located a source for the RG393 where I can buy a minimum of
> 100 feet at $6.89/ftand Im having trouble swallowing.
>
> Im skeptical of the notion that SkyView customers are using coax
> other than the widely available RG400 (M17-128), and Im VERY
> reluctant to spring for this RG393. I do intend to replace ALL of
> my RG58.
>
> Can someone who has some keen knowledge on this subject give me
> some guidance?
>
> with appreciation,
>
> Fred
>
> *
>
> ist" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List
> tp://forums.matronics.com
> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
> *
>
> * -->http://www.matronics.com/con===============
>
> <http://forums.matronhref=>*
>
>
> <http://forums.matronhref=>
> <http://forums.matronhref=>
> <http://forums.matronhref=>
> <http://forums.matronhref=>
> <http://forums.matronhref=>
> <http://forums.matronhref=>
> *
>
>
> *
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! --
|