---------------------------------------------------------- Avionics-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Fri 12/02/05: 6 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 12:06 AM - Re: Aviation wire (Marcos Della) 2. 05:13 AM - Re: Avionics-List Digest: 4 Msgs - 12/01/05 (N395V) 3. 07:40 AM - Re: Aviation wire (Brinker) 4. 08:27 AM - Re: Aviation wire (Matthew Mucker) 5. 02:10 PM - Required FAA Paperwork () 6. 06:16 PM - Garmin 300XL and Database intent () ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 12:06:06 AM PST US Subject: RE: Avionics-List: Aviation wire From: "Marcos Della" --> Avionics-List message posted by: "Marcos Della" There are many reasons to go with regulation wire and crimps, connectors, etc. I'm assuming that you've already looked over Bob's site at http://www.aeroelectric.com/ for various articles and suggestions... For me, I use the MS22759/16 for all my single conductor stuff and the MS27500 for all multi conductor/shielded wire. Since you can basically buy things like 22 guage wire for around $0.15/ft or less if you buy in bulk, its hard not to purchase. You're only going to go up to 20 or 18 gauge for power lines or things that need the lower resistance/higher current rating. Almost all my avionics wire is either 22 or 24 gauge for things like the CDIs, annunciators, etc. For any audio, its always the three strand shielded (even if two strand will work, the third strand is always needed *after* you pulled the wire through the plane :-) like my stereo headsets and the RS-232 to the new altutide encoder). All your breakers are selected based on the "wire" that they are protecting. You're not really doing much for the equipment itself. Your mostly trying to prevent issues with the wire. Lastly, if you've ever taked "hardware store" wire or something similar and shorted it across a large amperage battery (don't do this, danger danger will robinson) the insulation will basically melt into a slag and your "wire" is now shorted to the frame that its mounted on. MUCH better to pop the fuse/breaker/whatever. Also better to only have it warm up rather than melt down (different in the MilSpec coating vs PVC or whatever you're using). I'm only a layman, but most of my experience is in electronics, not avionics. But I've now learned enough lessons to know that why bother saving a few pennies. P.S. I just received in the mail today another 300ft of M22759/16-22-9 (22gauge white) and 100ft of M27500-22TG3T14 (three conductor shielded) for my instrument panel. Only thing I do a little differently is I use black for ground wires and red for power wires. White for everything else :-) Marcos -----Original Message----- From: owner-avionics-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-avionics-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Richard E. Tasker Subject: Re: Avionics-List: Aviation wire --> Avionics-List message posted by: "Richard E. Tasker" --> I don't know if there are any specific FAA regulations about the wire. I believe in a homebuilt you can do virtually anything you want and can probably get it approved. On the other hand, how much are you really going to save? The tefzel wire in my RV9A will probably still be in good shape long after I am gone. It cost a few bucks more than commercial wire, but it is far superior in its qualities. All the aircraft wire I have bought is 19 strand - much more flexible and resistant to damage from flexing than commercial wire which is typically seven strand. The tefzel insulation and/or jacket is far superior to most commercial insulations - much better temperature ratings, impervious to soldering temperatures and very abrasion resistant. Considering how much money I have in my RV9A, the extra $50-100 or so in wire costs was well worth it for my peace of mind. Also, if you ever decide you want or need to sell the plane it will be much more sales-worthy with regulation wire. Dick Tasker Brinker wrote: >--> Avionics-List message posted by: "Brinker" >--> > > Is it nessessary for a homebuilt to use aviation grade wire >(m27500 or >22759/16 etc.) Or I should reword this and ask if it is advised to use it ? >I have called my local electrical supply and can get shielded wire a >lot cheaper, have'nt looked at it but salesman told me it was riser >type. Is the FAA just overly anal about the mil spec in certified planes ? > >Randy > > -- Please Note: No trees were destroyed in the sending of this message. We do concede, however, that a significant number of electrons may have been temporarily inconvenienced. -- -- -- ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 05:13:16 AM PST US From: N395V Subject: Avionics-List: Re: Avionics-List Digest: 4 Msgs - 12/01/05 --> Avionics-List message posted by: N395V re: aviation grade wire. I used automotive wire once for a quick temporary project. It shorted, caught fire, damn near killed me. Spend the $. Go with aviation grade. Milt ----- Original Message ----- From: Avionics-List Digest Server To: Avionics-List Digest List Sent: Friday, December 02, 2005 1:55 AM Subject: Avionics-List Digest: 4 Msgs - 12/01/05 * Online Versions of Today's List Digest Archive Today's complete Avionics-List Digest can also be found in either of the two Web Links listed below. The .html file includes the Digest formatted in HTML for viewing with a web browser and features Hyperlinked Indexes and Message Navigation. The .txt file includes the plain ASCII version of the Avionics-List Digest and can be viewed with a generic text editor such as Notepad or with a web browser. HTML Version: http://www.matronics.com/digest/avionics-list/Digest.Avionics-List.2005-12-01.html Text Version: http://www.matronics.com/digest/avionics-list/Digest.Avionics-List.2005-12-01.txt EMail Version of Today's List Digest Archive Avionics-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Thu 12/01/05: 4 Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 02:40 PM - cell phone adapter (gary.stiffler@kroger.com 12/01/2005 17) 2. 02:41 PM - Aviation wire (Brinker) 3. 06:50 PM - Re: Aviation wire (Richard E. Tasker) 4. 11:34 PM - Official Usage Guideline [Please Read] [Monthly Posting] (dralle@matronics.com) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 02:40:53 PM PST US Subject: Avionics-List: cell phone adapter From: "gary.stiffler@kroger.com 12/01/2005 17":36:55@roxy.matronics.com, Serialize complete at 12/01/2005 17:36:55@roxy.matronics.com --> Avionics-List message posted by: gary.stiffler@kroger.com 12/01/2005 17:36:55, Serialize complete at 12/01/2005 17:36:55 Does anyone know of an inexpensive cell phone adapter that I can put in line with my David Clark head set? Or a plan to build one? Thanks: Gary ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 02:41:16 PM PST US From: "Brinker" Subject: Avionics-List: Aviation wire --> Avionics-List message posted by: "Brinker" Is it nessessary for a homebuilt to use aviation grade wire (m27500 or 22759/16 etc.) Or I should reword this and ask if it is advised to use it ? I have called my local electrical supply and can get shielded wire a lot cheaper, have'nt looked at it but salesman told me it was riser type. Is the FAA just overly anal about the mil spec in certified planes ? Randy ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 06:50:51 PM PST US From: "Richard E. Tasker" Subject: Re: Avionics-List: Aviation wire --> Avionics-List message posted by: "Richard E. Tasker" I don't know if there are any specific FAA regulations about the wire. I believe in a homebuilt you can do virtually anything you want and can probably get it approved. On the other hand, how much are you really going to save? The tefzel wire in my RV9A will probably still be in good shape long after I am gone. It cost a few bucks more than commercial wire, but it is far superior in its qualities. All the aircraft wire I have bought is 19 strand - much more flexible and resistant to damage from flexing than commercial wire which is typically seven strand. The tefzel insulation and/or jacket is far superior to most commercial insulations - much better temperature ratings, impervious to soldering temperatures and very abrasion resistant. Considering how much money I have in my RV9A, the extra $50-100 or so in wire costs was well worth it for my peace of mind. Also, if you ever decide you want or need to sell the plane it will be much more sales-worthy with regulation wire. Dick Tasker Brinker wrote: >--> Avionics-List message posted by: "Brinker" > > Is it nessessary for a homebuilt to use aviation grade wire (m27500 or >22759/16 etc.) Or I should reword this and ask if it is advised to use it ? >I have called my local electrical supply and can get shielded wire a lot >cheaper, have'nt looked at it but salesman told me it was riser type. Is the >FAA just overly anal about the mil spec in certified planes ? > >Randy > > -- Please Note: No trees were destroyed in the sending of this message. We do concede, however, that a significant number of electrons may have been temporarily inconvenienced. -- ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 11:34:36 PM PST US From: dralle@matronics.com Subject: Avionics-List: Official Usage Guideline [Please Read] [Monthly Posting] DNA: do not archive --> Avionics-List message posted by: dralle@matronics.com Dear Lister, Please read over the Avionics-List Usage Guidelines below. The complete Avionics-List FAQ including these Usage Guidelines can be found at the following URL: http://www.matronics.com/FAQs/Avionics-List.FAQ.html Thank you, Matt Dralle Matronics Email List Administrator ****************************************************************************** Avionics-List Usage Guidelines ****************************************************************************** The following details the official Usage Guidelines for the Avionics-List. You are encouraged to read it carefully, and to abide by the rules therein. Failure to use the Avionics-List in the manner described below may result in the removal of the subscribers from the List. Avionics-List Policy Statement The purpose of the Avionics-List is to provide a forum of discussion for things related to this particular discussion group. The List's goals are to serve as an information resource to its members; to deliver high-quality content; to provide moral support; to foster camaraderie among its members; and to support safe operation. Reaching these goals requires the participation and cooperation of each and every member of the List. To this end, the following guidelines have been established: - Please keep all posts related to the List at some level. Do not submit posts concerning computer viruses, urban legends, random humor, long lost buddies' phone numbers, etc. etc. - THINK carefully before you write. Ask yourself if your post will be relevant to everyone. If you have to wonder about that, DON'T send it. - Remember that your post will be included for posterity in an archive that is growing in size at an extraordinary rate. Try to be concise and terse in your posts. Avoid overly wordy and lengthy posts and responses. - Keep your signature brief. Please include your name, email address, aircraft type/tail number, and geographic location. A short line about where you are in the building process is also nice. Avoid bulky signatures with character graphics; they consume unnecessary space in the archive. - DON'T post requests to the List for information when that info is easily obtainable from other widely available sources. Consult the web page or FAQ first. - If you want to respond to a post, DO keep the "Subject:" line of your response the same as that of the original post. This makes it easy to find threads in the archive. - When responding, NEVER quote the *entire* original post in your response. DO use lines from the original post to help "tune in" the reader to the topic at hand, but be selective. The impact that quoting the entire original post has on the size of the archive can not be overstated! - When the poster asks you to respond to him/her personally, DO NOT then go ahead and reply to the List. Be aware that clicking the "reply" button on your mail package does not necessarily send your response to the original poster. You might have to actively address your response with the original poster's email address. - DO NOT use the List to respond to a post unless you have something to add that is relevant and has a broad appeal. "Way to go!", "I agree", and "Congratulations" are all responses that are better sent to the original poster directly, rather than to the List at large. - When responding to others' posts, avoid the feeling that you need to comment on every last point in their posts, unless you can truly contribute something valuable. - Feel free to disagree with other viewpoints, BUT keep your tone polite and respectful. Don't make snide comments, personally attack other listers, or take the moral high ground on an obviously controversial issue. This will only cause a pointless debate that will hurt feelings, waste bandwidth and resolve nothing. - Occassional posts by vendors or individuals who are regularyly subscribed to a given List are considered acceptable. Posts by List members promoting their respective products or items for sale should be of a friendly, informal nature, and should not resemble a typical SPAM message. The List isn't about commercialism, but is about sharing information and knowledge. This applies to everyone, including those who provide products to the entire community. Informal presentation and moderation should be the operatives with respect to advertising on the Lists. ------- [This is an automated posting.] ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 07:40:57 AM PST US From: "Brinker" Subject: Re: Avionics-List: Aviation wire --> Avionics-List message posted by: "Brinker" Thanks for all the response's. I surely do not want to cause any problems after spending good money on avionics. I understand a little bit about wiring insulation and the differences between the flexibility in the multiple strands. But this is my first experience with wiring an airplane. Sorry I did not make myself clear. Since the FAA generally goes overboard on everthing I figured there was a comparable readily available wire that could be bought at the local electrical supply that would be as good as the aviation grade. Randy ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brinker" Subject: Avionics-List: Aviation wire > --> Avionics-List message posted by: "Brinker" > > Is it nessessary for a homebuilt to use aviation grade wire (m27500 > or > 22759/16 etc.) Or I should reword this and ask if it is advised to use it > ? > I have called my local electrical supply and can get shielded wire a lot > cheaper, have'nt looked at it but salesman told me it was riser type. Is > the > FAA just overly anal about the mil spec in certified planes ? > > Randy > > > ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 08:27:34 AM PST US From: "Matthew Mucker" Subject: RE: Avionics-List: Aviation wire --> Avionics-List message posted by: "Matthew Mucker" I am by no means an expert, but I believe two of the primary concerns involving 'aviation' wire are the flamability of the insulation, and the amount of smoke/toxic gases that the insulation would emit in the case of a fire. These are greater concerns than the flexibility of the wire, I believe. > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-avionics-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-avionics-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Brinker > Sent: Friday, December 02, 2005 9:40 AM > To: avionics-list@matronics.com > Subject: Re: Avionics-List: Aviation wire > > --> Avionics-List message posted by: "Brinker" > > > Thanks for all the response's. I surely do not want to > cause any > problems after spending good money on avionics. I understand > a little bit > about wiring insulation and the differences between the > flexibility in the > multiple strands. But this is my first experience with > wiring an airplane. > Sorry I did not make myself clear. > Since the FAA generally goes overboard on everthing I > figured there > was a comparable readily available wire that could be bought > at the local > electrical supply that would be as good as the aviation grade. > > Randy > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Brinker" > To: > Subject: Avionics-List: Aviation wire > > > > --> Avionics-List message posted by: "Brinker" > > > > > Is it nessessary for a homebuilt to use aviation grade > wire (m27500 > > or > > 22759/16 etc.) Or I should reword this and ask if it is > advised to use it > > ? > > I have called my local electrical supply and can get > shielded wire a lot > > cheaper, have'nt looked at it but salesman told me it was > riser type. Is > > the > > FAA just overly anal about the mil spec in certified planes ? > > > > Randy > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 02:10:58 PM PST US From: Subject: Avionics-List: Required FAA Paperwork --> Avionics-List message posted by: Responding to AeroElectric-List message copied below and previously posted by: John Markey markeypilot@yahoo.com <> 12/2/2005 Hello John, Short answer first. No, your friend does not have to file any additional IFR approval paperwork with the FAA for the installation of a Garmin 430 GPS in his Glasair amateur built experimental airplane. To explain: 1) Your friend did not need and did not have any specific ".....orginal signoff for IFR in his operating limitations." He did not need, and should not have attempted to obtain, any such subsequent FAA approved sign off. 2) His Operating Limitations, which were part of his original special airworthiness certificate issued by either an FAA or DAR inspector, should contain words like the following from the then current version of FAA Order 8130.2_: "After completion of phase I flight testing, unless appropriately equipped for night and/or instrument flight in accordance with 91.205, this aircraft is to be operated under VFR, day only." "Aircraft instruments and equipment installed and used under 91.205 must be inspected and maintained in accordance with the requirements of part 91. Any maintenance or inspection of this equipment must be recorded in the aircraft maintenance records." 3) Those sentences are the grand sum total of IFR approval for his aircraft. There are some other instructions in his Operating Limitations that would apply when operating the aircraft IFR such as: "In addition, this aircraft must be operated in accordance with applicable air traffic and general operating rules of part 91and all additional limitations herein prescribed under the provisions of 91.319(e)." "When filing instrument flight rules (IFR), the experimental nature of this aircraft must be listed in the remarks section of the flight plan." As long as his aircraft is in compliance with his Operating Limitations and the instructions in the current version of the AIM he is legal to fly IFR with no further aircraft approval or paperwork from the FAA. 4) I might point out that included in the AIM for IFR GPS operations are the requirements that the pilot comply with instructions in his AFM and AFM supplement and pilot guides. Since your friend is in control of what is in, or not in, his planes AFM and supplement that should present no problem. Since the pilot guide for his Garmin GPS is published by Garmin, complying with that guide should be no problem. 5) Common sense would require that the pilot follow some installation guidance such as that provided in AC 20-138A and a perform a healthy dose of VFR / VMC flight testing before attempting any IFR operations. Please let me know if I can be of further help. OC ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 06:16:03 PM PST US From: Subject: Avionics-List: Garmin 300XL and Database intent INNOCENT GLOBAL 0.0003 1.0000 -4.4871 --> Avionics-List message posted by: Responding to an AeroElectric-List message previously posted by: "Mark & Lisa" and copied below. 12/02/2005 Hello Mark and Lisa, I read your posting below with great interest and found myself mostly in agreement. But a few points puzzled me -- can we pursue them? 1) <> If we are talking amateur built experimental aircraft here the point is moot because the builder can write his AFM and AFM supplement to say, or not say, what he chooses as long as it is not in direct conflict with the FAR's, the GPS manufacturer's "pilot guide", or the AIM. If we are talking type certificated aircraft here then it would appear that the actual wording contained in the AFM supplement that was approved by the FAA for that aircraft would control. If the supplement was written back when AC 20-138 was current and the supplement contains the sample wording provided by that AC one has considerable data substitution leeway as described by Old Bob in his quotes from that version of the AC. If the supplement was written after AC 20-138A became effective and it contains the wording from the sample in that version of the AC then one is forced into splitting much finer hairs regarding the FAA's intent in my opinion . 3) You wrote: "I've never received (from the FAA) a notice telling me to change the information in the FAA-approved supplement, so I believe I'm still legal in using it, as approved." I presume here that you are referring to a type certificated aircraft with AFM supplement wording following the sample wording provided in AC 20-138. I would agree with your position. 4) You wrote: "I update my database at the beginning of the update cycle, such that my database is dated later than the date of the chart system's first update cycle. Now I know all changed data on the update cards apply to my database." You lost me here unless you mean that you put in a new chip, card, or software that officially updates the entire navigation database. It is not important that I understand, but I'll provide the following from TSO C129a regarding Class A equipment. "a. (3) (x) 1. The equipment shall provide an appropriately updatable navigation data base containing at least the following location information in terms of latitude and longitude with a resolution of 0.01 minute or better for the area(s) in which IFR operations are to be approved: all airports, VORs (and VORTACs), NDBs, and all named waypoints and intersections shown on en route and terminal area charts, Standard Instrument Departures (SIDs) and Standard Terminal Arrival Routes (STARs). NOTE: Manual entry/update of navigation data base data shall not be possible. (This requirement does not preclude the storage of "user defined data" within the equipment.)" Since I am not sure what you are doing I don't know if this pertains or not. 5) You wrote: "Prior to flight, I check all the data I plan to use. By carrying this list in-flight I can quickly and accurately assess the validity of data I hadn't planned to use. If data I need for a particular route is out of date, I simply request a different route, or use the VOR. So far (3 years), I've never NOT been able to complete a flight due to out-of-date data." This seems very conservative and safe to me. 6) You wrote: "I'm meeting the intent of both the FAA and equipment manufacturer -- and my own fairly stringent common-sense and safety requirements. And I believe I'm making Old Bob smile, because this is exactly the result he was shooting for!" Anything that makes Old Bob smile is OK with me. OC < So it appears to me that you are correct > if one is following AC20-138, but > that AC20-138A has a specific limitation > wording recommendation that the > ".... database must be installed and > contain current data." I interpret that > to mean that all of the data in the > data base must be current. My interpretation is if SOME of the data is current, then the database contains current data and meets the intent of the AC. It's up to me to determine of the data is current before use. This allows me (and everyone else in my situation) to continue to use my GX60 following the guidance contained in the supplement approved when the unit was installed. I've never received (from the FAA) a notice telling me to change the information in the FAA-approved supplement, so I believe I'm still legal in using it, as approved. > As a practical matter it would be > very difficult for a pilot flying IFR > in IMC who was taken off his planned > route to confirm that all of the data > points on his new routing were in fact > accurately portrayed in his out dated > data base. Actually data currency is very easily determined in a number of ways. I use Howie Keefe's Air Chart system. I receive a cycle update every 28 days listing all the information that's changed since the last cycle. The list is cumulative; all changes since the first cycle of the year are on the list. I update my database at the beginning of the update cycle, such that my database is dated later than the date of the chart system's first update cycle. Now I know all changed data on the update cards apply to my database. Prior to flight, I check all the data I plan to use. By carrying this list in-flight I can quickly and accurately assess the validity of data I hadn't planned to use. If data I need for a particular route is out of date, I simply request a different route, or use the VOR. So far (3 years), I've never NOT been able to complete a flight due to out-of-date data. I'm meeting the intent of both the FAA and equipment manufacturer -- and my own fairly stringent common-sense and safety requirements. And I believe I'm making Old Bob smile, because this is exactly the result he was shooting for! Mark & Lisa Sletten Legacy FG N828LM http://www.legacyfgbuilder.com