Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 05:26 AM - Re: Some Thoughts on Z101 (Matthew S. Whiting)
2. 10:38 AM - Re: Some Thoughts on Z101 (Sebastien)
3. 11:38 AM - Re: Some Thoughts on Z101 (Matthew S. Whiting)
4. 11:54 AM - Re: Some Thoughts on Z101 (Sebastien)
5. 01:06 PM - Re: Some Thoughts on Z101 (Rick Beebe)
6. 01:28 PM - Re: Some Thoughts on Z101 (Kelly McMullen)
7. 02:12 PM - Re: Some Thoughts on Z101 (Charlie England)
8. 06:26 PM - Re: Some Thoughts on Z101 (Eric Page)
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: Some Thoughts on Z101 |
When I was flying IFR regularly in my younger days, I rarely found this to b
e necessary and only at large airports like Philly, Boston, etc. At my home
field, ELM, it would take the engine longer to warm up than it took me to g
et my IFR clearance and taxi clearance. So, I fired up the engine and then u
sed the warm-up time to contact clearance delivery and ground and begin taxi
.
At larger airports where you may have to wait 5-10 minutes for clearance, ha
ving one radio on a separate bus makes sense. Much depends on where you fly
more often.
Matt
Sent from my iPad
> On Jan 27, 2021, at 10:27 PM, Sebastien <cluros@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> =EF=BB
> Bob I think a clearance delivery bus with brownout protection is an import
ant design goal for any IFR OBAM aircraft. The ability to get the clearance,
program it, and then start the engine rather than doing it all with the eng
ine running is almost a necessity in my mind.
>
> I may have enough equipment here that you could unload the testing portion
onto me. If this interests you please get in touch and I will order the par
ts and assemble and test a system to your specs.
>
>> On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 7:02 PM Robert L. Nuckolls, III <nuckolls.bob@aer
oelectric.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Attachments:
>>>
>>> http://forums.matronics.com//files/simplified_boost_topology_619.jpg
>>
>> A full schematic of the proposed boost
>> system would make it easier to 'grok'.
>>
>> Bob . . .
>>
>> Un impeachable logic: George Carlin asked, "If black boxes
>> survive crashes, why don't they make the whole airplane
>> out of that stuff?"
>>
==========================
==========================
==========================
-=========================
==========================
-=========================
==========================
==========================
====================
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: Some Thoughts on Z101 |
Matthew I suspect your younger days were a long time ago :). Were you
programming routes into a navigation system? Setting up SIDs?
On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 5:32 AM Matthew S. Whiting <m.whiting@frontier.com>
wrote:
> When I was flying IFR regularly in my younger days, I rarely found this t
o
> be necessary and only at large airports like Philly, Boston, etc. At my
> home field, ELM, it would take the engine longer to warm up than it took
me
> to get my IFR clearance and taxi clearance. So, I fired up the engine an
d
> then used the warm-up time to contact clearance delivery and ground and
> begin taxi.
>
> At larger airports where you may have to wait 5-10 minutes for clearance,
> having one radio on a separate bus makes sense. Much depends on where yo
u
> fly more often.
>
> Matt
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Jan 27, 2021, at 10:27 PM, Sebastien <cluros@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> =EF=BB
> Bob I think a clearance delivery bus with brownout protection is an
> important design goal for any IFR OBAM aircraft. The ability to get the
> clearance, program it, and then start the engine rather than doing it all
> with the engine running is almost a necessity in my mind.
>
> I may have enough equipment here that you could unload the testing portio
n
> onto me. If this interests you please get in touch and I will order the
> parts and assemble and test a system to your specs.
>
> On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 7:02 PM Robert L. Nuckolls, III <
> nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Attachments:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com//files/simplified_boost_topology_619.jpg
>>
>>
>> A full schematic of the proposed boost
>> system would make it easier to 'grok'.
>>
>> Bob . . .
>>
>> Un impeachable logic: George Carlin asked, "If black boxes
>> survive crashes, why don't they make the whole airplane
>> out of that stuff?"
>>
> ========================
=========== =============
=====================
> ========================
=========== =============
=====================
> ========================
>
>
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: Some Thoughts on Z101 |
I learned to fly in a 150 whose radio could either comm or nav, but not both
at the same time. =F0=9F=98=82
Most of my instrument flying (other than training in a PA-180) was in my C-1
82 that had only a Garmin 150 GPS. So, all procedures were essentially flow
n manually including SIDS and STARs. My 182 did not even have an A/P so I g
ot fairly proficient at single pilot IFR hand flown.
I plan to put a full Garmin digital panel in the S-21 I am currently buildin
g. IFR with today=99s avionics is stupid easy. If you haven=99
t hand flown an NDB approach in moderate turbulence, you really aren=99
t an instrument pilot. =F0=9F=98=82. I actually had to do that on my instru
ment checkride.
Matt
Sent from my iPad
> On Jan 28, 2021, at 2:06 PM, Sebastien <cluros@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> =EF=BB
> Matthew I suspect your younger days were a long time ago :). Were you prog
ramming routes into a navigation system? Setting up SIDs?
>
>> On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 5:32 AM Matthew S. Whiting <m.whiting@frontier.co
m> wrote:
>> When I was flying IFR regularly in my younger days, I rarely found this t
o be necessary and only at large airports like Philly, Boston, etc. At my h
ome field, ELM, it would take the engine longer to warm up than it took me t
o get my IFR clearance and taxi clearance. So, I fired up the engine and th
en used the warm-up time to contact clearance delivery and ground and begin t
axi.
>>
>> At larger airports where you may have to wait 5-10 minutes for clearance,
having one radio on a separate bus makes sense. Much depends on where you f
ly more often.
>>
>> Matt
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>>>> On Jan 27, 2021, at 10:27 PM, Sebastien <cluros@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>> =EF=BB
>>> Bob I think a clearance delivery bus with brownout protection is an impo
rtant design goal for any IFR OBAM aircraft. The ability to get the clearanc
e, program it, and then start the engine rather than doing it all with the e
ngine running is almost a necessity in my mind.
>>>
>>> I may have enough equipment here that you could unload the testing porti
on onto me. If this interests you please get in touch and I will order the p
arts and assemble and test a system to your specs.
>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 7:02 PM Robert L. Nuckolls, III <nuckolls.bob@a
eroelectric.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Attachments:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://forums.matronics.com//files/simplified_boost_topology_619.jpg
>>>>
>>>> A full schematic of the proposed boost
>>>> system would make it easier to 'grok'.
>>>>
>>>> Bob . . .
>>>>
>>>> Un impeachable logic: George Carlin asked, "If black boxes
>>>> survive crashes, why don't they make the whole airplane
>>>> out of that stuff?"
>>>>
>>> ========== ========== ====
====== ========== =========
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: Some Thoughts on Z101 |
If you put a Garmin navigator in it, you'll want that brownout booster.
On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 11:45 AM Matthew S. Whiting <m.whiting@frontier.com
>
wrote:
> I learned to fly in a 150 whose radio could either comm or nav, but not
> both at the same time. =F0=9F=98=82
>
> Most of my instrument flying (other than training in a PA-180) was in my
> C-182 that had only a Garmin 150 GPS. So, all procedures were essentiall
y
> flown manually including SIDS and STARs. My 182 did not even have an A/P
> so I got fairly proficient at single pilot IFR hand flown.
>
> I plan to put a full Garmin digital panel in the S-21 I am currently
> building. IFR with today=99s avionics is stupid easy. If you have
n=99t hand
> flown an NDB approach in moderate turbulence, you really aren=99t a
n
> instrument pilot. =F0=9F=98=82. I actually had to do that on my instrume
nt checkride.
>
> Matt
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Jan 28, 2021, at 2:06 PM, Sebastien <cluros@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> =EF=BB
> Matthew I suspect your younger days were a long time ago :). Were you
> programming routes into a navigation system? Setting up SIDs?
>
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 5:32 AM Matthew S. Whiting <m.whiting@frontier.co
m>
> wrote:
>
>> When I was flying IFR regularly in my younger days, I rarely found this
>> to be necessary and only at large airports like Philly, Boston, etc. At
my
>> home field, ELM, it would take the engine longer to warm up than it took
me
>> to get my IFR clearance and taxi clearance. So, I fired up the engine a
nd
>> then used the warm-up time to contact clearance delivery and ground and
>> begin taxi.
>>
>> At larger airports where you may have to wait 5-10 minutes for clearance
,
>> having one radio on a separate bus makes sense. Much depends on where y
ou
>> fly more often.
>>
>> Matt
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>> On Jan 27, 2021, at 10:27 PM, Sebastien <cluros@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> =EF=BB
>> Bob I think a clearance delivery bus with brownout protection is an
>> important design goal for any IFR OBAM aircraft. The ability to get the
>> clearance, program it, and then start the engine rather than doing it al
l
>> with the engine running is almost a necessity in my mind.
>>
>> I may have enough equipment here that you could unload the testing
>> portion onto me. If this interests you please get in touch and I will or
der
>> the parts and assemble and test a system to your specs.
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 7:02 PM Robert L. Nuckolls, III <
>> nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Attachments:
>>>
>>> http://forums.matronics.com//files/simplified_boost_topology_619.jpg
>>>
>>>
>>> A full schematic of the proposed boost
>>> system would make it easier to 'grok'.
>>>
>>> Bob . . .
>>>
>>> Un impeachable logic: George Carlin asked, "If black boxes
>>> survive crashes, why don't they make the whole airplane
>>> out of that stuff?"
>>>
>> ========== ========== ===
======= ========== =======
==
>>
>>
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: Some Thoughts on Z101 |
Yes. My G3X Touch screen survives engine start but the GTN 750 reboots.
I need to figure out a brownout booster too.
When I was getting my instrument rating I had a Piper Warrior that I
upgraded with a GNS-430. I specifically removed the ADF from that plane
so they wouldn't make me fly any NDB approaches on the checkride. :)
--Rick
On 1/28/2021 2:52 PM, Sebastien wrote:
> If you put a Garmin navigator in it, you'll want that brownout booster.
>
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 11:45 AM Matthew S. Whiting
> <m.whiting@frontier.com <mailto:m.whiting@frontier.com>> wrote:
>
>
> I plan to put a full Garmin digital panel in the S-21 I am
> currently building. IFR with todays avionics is stupid easy. If
> you havent hand flown an NDB approach in moderate turbulence, you
> really arent an instrument pilot. . I actually had to do that
> on my instrument checkride.
>
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: Some Thoughts on Z101 |
The two most common radios for training aircraft in the '70s, at least
before Cessna bought ARC, were the Escort 110 from Narco, and the King
KX145. Both used a single shared receiver for nav and com reception.
The fancier radios like the KX170B were refered to something like a 1
and 1/2 because they had one transmitter and two receivers, so you could
listen to com freq and keep nav signal at same time. And Matt, flying an
NDB was no big deal if you had learned the tricks of the trade. Flying
colored airways was a bigger deal because you were tracking often 50 nm
off one beacon before getting the next. Back then I flew IFR with one
digital nav com and a manually tuned ADF, no transponder, no autopilot
and AN Gyros powered by venturis etc. So you had to do identifying turns
for the controller if picked up anywhere but departing an airport.
Controllers had to do more work too. No strip printers, you had to call
Center and have them issue the clearance, write it on a strip, then
issue to the aircraft. Moving maps and stored procedures do make it much
easier. Thankfully the old AN approaches disappeared a few years before
I started flying.
Kelly
On 1/28/2021 12:37 PM, Matthew S. Whiting wrote:
> I learned to fly in a 150 whose radio could either comm or nav, but not
> both at the same time.
>
> Most of my instrument flying (other than training in a PA-180) was in my
> C-182 that had only a Garmin 150 GPS. So, all procedures were
> essentially flown manually including SIDS and STARs. My 182 did not
> even have an A/P so I got fairly proficient at single pilot IFR hand flown.
>
> I plan to put a full Garmin digital panel in the S-21 I am currently
> building. IFR with todays avionics is stupid easy. If you havent
> hand flown an NDB approach in moderate turbulence, you really arent an
> instrument pilot. . I actually had to do that on my instrument checkride.
>
> Matt
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
>> On Jan 28, 2021, at 2:06 PM, Sebastien <cluros@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Matthew I suspect your younger days were a long time ago :). Were you
>> programming routes into a navigation system? Setting up SIDs?
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 5:32 AM Matthew S. Whiting
>> <m.whiting@frontier.com <mailto:m.whiting@frontier.com>> wrote:
>>
>> When I was flying IFR regularly in my younger days, I rarely found
>> this to be necessary and only at large airports like Philly,
>> Boston, etc. At my home field, ELM, it would take the engine
>> longer to warm up than it took me to get my IFR clearance and taxi
>> clearance. So, I fired up the engine and then used the warm-up
>> time to contact clearance delivery and ground and begin taxi.
>>
>> At larger airports where you may have to wait 5-10 minutes for
>> clearance, having one radio on a separate bus makes sense. Much
>> depends on where you fly more often.
>>
>> Matt
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>>> On Jan 27, 2021, at 10:27 PM, Sebastien <cluros@gmail.com
>>> <mailto:cluros@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Bob I think a clearance delivery bus with brownout protection is
>>> an important design goal for any IFR OBAMaircraft. The ability
>>> to get the clearance, program it, and then start the engine
>>> rather than doing it all with the engine running is almost a
>>> necessity in my mind.
>>>
>>> I may have enough equipment here that you could unload the
>>> testing portion onto me. If this interests you please get in
>>> touch and I will order the parts and assemble and test a system
>>> to your specs.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 7:02 PM Robert L. Nuckolls, III
>>> <nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com
>>> <mailto:nuckolls.bob@aeroelectric.com>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Attachments:
>>>>
>>>> http://forums.matronics.com//files/simplified_boost_topology_619.jpg
>>>> <http://forums.matronics.com//files/simplified_boost_topology_619.jpg>
>>>>
>>>
>>> A full schematic of the proposed boost
>>> system would make it easier to 'grok'.
>>>
>>> __
>>>
>>> __ Bob . . .
>>>
>>> Un impeachable logic: George Carlin asked, "If black boxes
>>> survive crashes, why don't they make the whole airplane
>>> out of that stuff?"
>>>
>>> ========== ========== ========== ========== ==========
>>
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: Some Thoughts on Z101 |
I posted here a few months ago about my brownout solution on my GRT
EFIS. The GRT, like most flight critical electronics these days, has
multiple diode-isolated inputs. I just tapped the power feed wire to the
EFIS, used it to also power a small 4A boost converter (small enough to
fit in a pill bottle) that was set to step up voltage to ~11.5V (minimum
boost to reliably keep the EFIS online). The booster output feeds into
one of the extra power inputs on the EFIS. During cranking, the booster
will keep voltage into the spare power terminal at 12V; in normal
operation, it's powered and its output is the same as bus voltage.
Slight parasitic draw during operation, but extremely simple. One really
cheap device & two wires.
Charlie
On 1/28/2021 3:04 PM, Rick Beebe wrote:
> Yes. My G3X Touch screen survives engine start but the GTN 750
> reboots. I need to figure out a brownout booster too.
>
> When I was getting my instrument rating I had a Piper Warrior that I
> upgraded with a GNS-430. I specifically removed the ADF from that
> plane so they wouldn't make me fly any NDB approaches on the checkride. :)
>
> --Rick
>
> On 1/28/2021 2:52 PM, Sebastien wrote:
>> If you put a Garmin navigator in it, you'll want that brownout booster.
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 11:45 AM Matthew S. Whiting
>> <m.whiting@frontier.com <mailto:m.whiting@frontier.com>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> I plan to put a full Garmin digital panel in the S-21 I am
>> currently building. IFR with todays avionics is stupid easy.
>> If you havent hand flown an NDB approach in moderate turbulence,
>> you really arent an instrument pilot. . I actually had to do
>> that on my instrument checkride.
>>
>
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
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: Some Thoughts on Z101 |
Thanks, fellas. I knew my thinking was a bit muddy and this was the best place
for effective filtering. I'll try to answer your questions as best I can.
user9253 wrote:
> Eric, what advantage does your proposal have over Z-101?
A bit of simplification (one less AUX BUS feed path) and the Brown-Out Booster
continuously powered.
> Why eliminate the normal diode feed path to the aux bus?
Not eliminated; replaced with the booster's internal rectifier. Electrons still
come from the same place, but are routed differently.
> You can rewire the brownout booster whether the diode is there or not.
Indeed, but you would end up with duplicate normal feed paths: one through the
diode bridge and one through the booster.
> It is a bad idea to have two fuses in series. Z-101 does not fuse the aux bus.
Yes, I agree. I forgot that the appliances on the AUX BUS would be individually
fused.
> Is a brown out booster really necessary? Doesn't your EFIS have an internal
backup battery?
Internal, no. Dynon sells a separate backup battery of undisclosed chemistry,
which creates a testing/maintenance burden. I would like to wire the plane such
that the EFIS and a few other items share a separate bus (AUX BUS?) that is
redundantly powered. The booster solves the reboot-on-engine-start problem.
With those two features, Dynon's $175 battery isn't needed.
> Why even supply a whole bus with brownout protection?
> Why is a separate aux bus needed?
> Just connect one or two loads to a brownout booster using dual diodes.
OK, I'm beginning to see the wisdom of your questions. I plan to power the EFIS,
GPS antenna, comm radio, landing light and Hobbs (minimum/emergency VFR equipment)
from the AUX BUS. Given that the EFIS, and perhaps the GPS antenna, are
the only things I need to protect against brown-out, I could leave Z101 alone
and just feed them from the AUX BUS through the booster, much as Charlie described
above.
----------
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect wrote:
> Can you elaborate on your design goals?
- Redundant electrical supply for the engine (auto conversion with ECU and electronic
ignition)
- Failure of one alternator or regulator cannot cause a remote AOG (back-country
airplane)
- Redundant electrical supply for minimum/emergency VFR equipment (EFIS, GPS, comm,
landing light, Hobbs)
- Brown-out-proof EFIS installation
> Re brownout booster: I'm pondering a plan-d . . . or are we up to 'e'? There
are dozens of suitable step up devices on the market but I have no knowledge of
their 'spool up' times nor can I personally vouch for their specifications without
putting the device under test on the bench and doing some measurements.
>
> I think I have a way to craft a brown-out booster of KNOWN performance thus avoiding
the risks for incorporating the Chinese unknowns. Watch this space.
>
> A full schematic of the proposed boost system would make it easier to 'grok'.
A schematic for the booster I've been fiddling with is attached. It uses TI's
LM3481: https://tinyurl.com/yy9twn9t+
It will grunt 7A all day. It takes about 12ms for the output to come up into a
2A load when it's powered up from cold, and if it's already powered, output never
falls more than a few mV below 12V when input is cut from 14V to 10V.
It seems to work well but it's never going to be a drop-in, jellybean solution;
it's all SMD, including fine-pitch and leadless components.
Cheers,
Eric
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=500454#500454
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/brown_out_booster_rev_b_168.pdf
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! --
|