AeroElectric-List Digest Archive

Sat 04/25/15


Total Messages Posted: 8



Today's Message Index:
----------------------
 
     1. 01:08 AM - Re: Active VOR antenna (ron marks)
     2. 05:38 AM - Re: Active VOR antenna (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
     3. 07:54 AM - Re: Ideas on a "cost effective " ground power ? (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
     4. 10:57 AM - Re: Active VOR antenna ()
     5. 11:18 AM - Re: Ideas on a "cost effective " ground power ? (Jeff Luckey)
     6. 11:19 AM - Ideas on a "cost effective " ground power ? CLARIFICATION (Jeff Luckey)
     7. 12:00 PM - Re: Ideas on a "cost effective " ground power ? CLA 	RIFICATION (Ben)
     8. 02:20 PM - Re: Ideas on a "cost effective " ground power ? CLA 	RIFICATION (Robert L. Nuckolls, III)
 
 
 


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: 01:08:00 AM PST US
    Subject: Re: Active VOR antenna
    From: ron marks <ronmarks@gmail.com>
    Bob, Hope springs eternal.... A wideband RF amp such as this on a tiny antenna, while it may be OK, even great for a rooftop monitor, is not going to be a satisfactory substitute for a tuned VHF nav antenna in an aircraft. Overloading, crosstalk and s/n ratio are some of its inherent deficits. It may seem to be good enough testing in the boonies, but ... Try it. Play with it. But don't proceed in a way that you can't re-do easily. Ron On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 1:55 PM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III < nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com> wrote: > nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com> > > At 15:43 2015-04-24, you wrote: > >> Bob, >> >> Have you been able to assess the active VOR antenna? We=99re abo ut 30 >> days from first flight and really need a retrofit VOR antenna solution f or >> this bird as we discussed. >> >> Thanks, >> James >> > > It's in the que. I've got some boards to order > for another project next week, this board can > piggyback onto the 'scrap end' . . . thanks > for rattling my cage. All the parts are on hand. > > > 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: 05:38:07 AM PST US
    From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com>
    Subject: Re: Active VOR antenna
    At 03:06 2015-04-25, you wrote: >Bob, >Hope springs eternal....=C2 =C2 A wideband RF amp >such as this on a tiny antenna, while it may be >OK, even great=C2 for a rooftop monitor, is not >going to be a satisfactory substitute for a >tuned VHF nav antenna in an aircraft. >Overloading, crosstalk and s/n ratio are some >of=C2 its inherent deficits. It may seem to be >good enough testing in the boonies, but ... >Try it. Play with it. But don't proceed in a way that you can't re-do easily. >Ron There's no 'hope' about it . . . performance of such devices are well known . . . as are their shortcomings. Nobody is talking about a free lunch here. The goal is to explore an option for getting a VOR antenna into a uniquely unfriendly space . . . into a tube buried in a leading edge. There are no promises or expectations for equivalency -OR- resistance to the effects of inter modulation distortion. The expectation is that it will offer serviceable VOR performance under SOME conditions with reservations. It's a certainty that shortcomings will have to be evaluated by the user. I've not fired up a VOR receiver in the last 200-300 hours in the log. The active antenna is a minimum effort, low cost way to squeeze a bit more utility out of a dying technology for this user in one airplane. No warranty implied - it's a "caveat emptor" of the first order. 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: 07:54:41 AM PST US
    From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com>
    Subject: Re: Ideas on a "cost effective " ground power ?
    JeffS, Have you tried a good old fashion battery charger (not a maintainer). There are lots of chargers that are capable of putting out 10-15 amps which should be plenty to keep the avionics & most accessories running. (unless you have some need to run the high-current loads for really long periods of time?) I have an ancient Sears charger that can put out about 15 amps all day long & I use it to float loads when I'm bench testing. A quick goole search found this: Be wary . . . not all 'battery chargers' are the same. When crafting a source of ac mains powered DC for ground ops, the power supply needs to be reasonably well REGULATED and noise levels no greater than an engine driven alternator. Years ago I sold a 25A, 13.8V regulated power supply for this purpose. I think I sold them for about $125. As I recall, we sold about a dozen. Years later, there are even more attractive versions of this approach to ground-power. Here is one such device. http://tinyurl.com/k6gf8gt These have a voltage adjust pot that will probably allow you to turn the 15v output down to 14v. CAUTION: If you plan to have a battery on line, then make sure the battery is fully charged. These are power supplies, not battery chargers. Alternatively, use the power supply 'barefoot' and leave the battery off line. Bob . . .


    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: 10:57:58 AM PST US
    From: <berkut13@berkut13.com>
    Subject: Re: Active VOR antenna
    Kewl beans, Bob! Thanks again for the help. -James -----Original Message----- From: Robert L. Nuckolls, III Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 3:55 PM Subject: Re: AeroElectric-List: Active VOR antenna <nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com> At 15:43 2015-04-24, you wrote: >Bob, > >Have you been able to assess the active VOR antenna? Were about 30 >days from first flight and really need a retrofit VOR antenna solution for >this bird as we discussed. > >Thanks, >James It's in the que. I've got some boards to order for another project next week, this board can piggyback onto the 'scrap end' . . . thanks for rattling my cage. All the parts are on hand.


    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: 11:18:22 AM PST US
    From: Jeff Luckey <jluckey@pacbell.net>
    Subject: Re: Ideas on a "cost effective " ground power ?
    Bob, Be wary . . . not all 'battery chargers' are =C2- =C2- the same. When crafting a source of ac mains =C2- =C2- powered DC for ground ops, the power supply =C2- =C2- needs to be reasonably well REGULATED and =C2- =C2- noise levels no greater than an engine driven =C2- =C2- alternator. Is your concern about regulation or ripple/voltage-spikes? -Jeff On Saturday, April 25, 2015 8:09 AM, "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckol ls.bob@aeroelectric.com> wrote: ls.bob@aeroelectric.com> JeffS, Have you tried a good old fashion battery charger (not a maintainer).=C2- There are lots of chargers that are capable of putting out 10-15 amps which should be plenty to keep the avionics & most accessories running.=C2- (unless you have some need to run the high-current loads for really long periods of time?) I have an ancient Sears charger that can put out about 15 amps all day long & I use it to float loads when I'm bench testing. A quick goole search found this: =C2- =C2- Be wary . . . not all 'battery chargers' are =C2- =C2- the same. When crafting a source of ac mains =C2- =C2- powered DC for ground ops, the power supply =C2- =C2- needs to be reasonably well REGULATED and =C2- =C2- noise levels no greater than an engine driven =C2- =C2- alternator. =C2- =C2- Years ago I sold a 25A, 13.8V regulated =C2- =C2- power supply for this purpose. I think I sold =C2- =C2- them for about $125. As I recall, we sold =C2- =C2- about a dozen. =C2- =C2- Years later, there are even more attractive =C2- =C2- versions of this approach to ground-power. =C2- =C2- Here is one such device. http://tinyurl.com/k6gf8gt =C2- =C2- These have a voltage adjust pot that will =C2- =C2- probably allow you to turn the 15v output =C2- =C2- down to 14v. =C2- =C2- CAUTION: If you plan to have a battery on =C2- =C2- line, then make sure the battery is fully =C2- =C2- charged. These are power supplies, not battery =C2- =C2- chargers. Alternatively, use the power supply =C2- =C2- 'barefoot' and leave the battery off line. =C2- Bob . . . - S - - =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- -Matt Dralle, List Admin.


    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
    Time: 11:19:18 AM PST US
    From: Jeff Luckey <jluckey@pacbell.net>
    Subject: Ideas on a "cost effective " ground power ? CLARIFICATION
    It just occurred to me that my prior recommendation might not have been cle ar.=C2- I think this is what BobN was getting at in his prior post. I recommend using an automotive battery charger IN CONJUNCTION w/ a battery to support electrical loads during construction/electrical system installa tion. I was NOT suggesting the use of that type of battery charger, all by itself , as a power supply. That my not have been clear from my earlier post. -JeffL


    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
    Time: 12:00:30 PM PST US
    From: "Ben" <n801bh@netzero.net>
    Subject: Re: Ideas on a "cost effective " ground power ? CLA
    RIFICATION Jeff and all... That is why I used a new battery to run the devices and a charger to keep the battery topped off.... My assumption is that havin g the large battery in the loop would absorb any spikes, ripples or othe r transient events... Worked perfect for me.... Bob... Am I thinking wr ong on this concept??? Ben Haas N801BH www.haaspowerair.com ---------- Original Message ---------- From: Jeff Luckey <jluckey@pacbell.net> Subject: AeroElectric-List: Ideas on a "cost effective " ground power ? CLARIFICATION It just occurred to me that my prior recommendation might not have been clear. I think this is what BobN was getting at in his prior post. I r ecommend using an automotive battery charger IN CONJUNCTION w/ a battery to support electrical loads during construction/electrical system insta llation. I was NOT suggesting the use of that type of battery charger, a ll by itself, as a power supply. That my not have been clear from my ear ======================== ======================== ======================== ======================== ================== ____________________________________________________________ Old School Yearbook Pics View Class Yearbooks Online Free. Search by School & Year. Look Now! http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL3241/553be408b9f3264081afest03duc


    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
    Time: 02:20:40 PM PST US
    From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com>
    Subject: Re: Ideas on a "cost effective " ground power ? CLA
    RIFICATION At 13:58 2015-04-25, you wrote: >Jeff and all... > >That is why I used a new battery to run the devices and a charger to >keep the battery topped off.... My assumption is that having the >large battery in the loop would absorb any spikes, ripples or other >transient events... Worked perfect for me.... > > >Bob... Am I thinking wrong on this concept??? Not at all, different technique with low risk and performance that proved adequate to your task. Recalling those famous words often uttered by Ootek in Never Cry Wolf, "Good idea". Bob . . .




    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! --