Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 05:55 PM - Re: New garmin traffic system was announced (johngoodman)
2. 05:57 PM - Re: Window Write-Up (johngoodman)
3. 06:16 PM - Re: Re: New garmin traffic system was announced (David McNeill)
4. 06:24 PM - Re: Re: New garmin traffic system was announced (Tim Olson)
5. 07:08 PM - Re: Re: New garmin traffic system was announced (Tim Olson)
6. 08:36 PM - Re: Window Write-Up (Dave Leikam)
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: New garmin traffic system was announced |
I spoke to the NavWorx guys at Sun 'n fun, and got the impression that two antennas
are required. I have gotten conflicting answers on where they need to be.
I've heard one on top & one on bottom, and I've heard two on bottom. The shark
fin is supposedly specified only because it can work in the upper "DME" range,
but so can a lot of dipole "sticks."
I'd really like to see a flat-out answer.
John
--------
#40572 QB Fuselage, wings finished. Finish Kit progressing. Engine & Panel
delivery soon.
N711JG reserved
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=261957#261957
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: Window Write-Up |
Carl,
I'm not versed on the Scotch product, but I can guarantee you that I will never
use Weld On again. Nastiest product I have used in a long time.
John
--------
#40572 QB Fuselage, wings finished. Finish Kit progressing. Engine & Panel
delivery soon.
N711JG reserved
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=261958#261958
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: New garmin traffic system was announced |
The two antennas required I believe are the GPS and the fin DME/transponder
antenna My understanding was that the extra DME antenna was for top/bottom
coverage. As a former MRX user and Zaon XRX tester; I found that sometimes
the transponder antennas on the bottom of an aircraft prevented the system
from "seeing" the traffic
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of johngoodman
Sent: Monday, September 07, 2009 5:54 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Re: New garmin traffic system was announced
--> <johngoodman@earthlink.net>
I spoke to the NavWorx guys at Sun 'n fun, and got the impression that two
antennas are required. I have gotten conflicting answers on where they need
to be. I've heard one on top & one on bottom, and I've heard two on bottom.
The shark fin is supposedly specified only because it can work in the upper
"DME" range, but so can a lot of dipole "sticks."
I'd really like to see a flat-out answer.
John
--------
#40572 QB Fuselage, wings finished. Finish Kit progressing. Engine &
Panel delivery soon.
N711JG reserved
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=261957#261957
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: New garmin traffic system was announced |
John, it depends a little on what you do with your system, what
antennas are required and where you mount them.
First, you do definitely need a shark fin type Transponder/DME
blade on the belly. This is for receiving the ADS-B Ground
station signal, and later if you add the transmitter board
it will be for transmitting your information to the stations.
I wouldn't choose any other antenna then a shark fin blade
because of the frequency requirements.
Next, many people will want to mount a GPS antenna somewhere
on the top. On mine, since this one isn't critical for
navigation, I actually mounted mine under the very front of
my Vertical/Horizontal Stabilizer fiberglass fairing. If it
were a navigational antenna that wouldn't have cut the mustard
for me, but for this use I'm fine with it. Mounted there,
it makes the ideal location for mounting the avionics box
to be in the tail somewhere.
There also is the possibility of feeding in a GPS signal from
a properly configured and equipped panel mount GPS. The
specs on what is required for a GPS signal are fairly
high, and most common handhelds and other GPS's won't meet
the needs. I think the GNS480 does with the current new
software, and I'd hope that a 430W meets it too. But, to
make it easier and not have to worry about integrating a
GPS and hoping it is wired right and works, I just did the
built-in GPS.
So those are the 2 antennas required. It's not like
active traffic where you will want 1/2/4 antennas mounted
in various places for getting good signals from the other
aircraft...so it's a little simpler to install.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD
johngoodman wrote:
> <johngoodman@earthlink.net>
>
> I spoke to the NavWorx guys at Sun 'n fun, and got the impression
> that two antennas are required. I have gotten conflicting answers on
> where they need to be. I've heard one on top & one on bottom, and
> I've heard two on bottom. The shark fin is supposedly specified only
> because it can work in the upper "DME" range, but so can a lot of
> dipole "sticks." I'd really like to see a flat-out answer. John
>
> -------- #40572 QB Fuselage, wings finished. Finish Kit progressing.
> Engine & Panel delivery soon. N711JG reserved
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=261957#261957
>
>
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: New garmin traffic system was announced |
In this case, the transponder antennas aren't interrogating other
transponders. They're just for ground stations, and there is
no "extra" DME antenna. There are only 2 RF plug ports on the
box.....one for the GPS and one for the UAT.
Tim Olson - RV-10 N104CD
do not archive
David McNeill wrote:
>
> The two antennas required I believe are the GPS and the fin DME/transponder
> antenna My understanding was that the extra DME antenna was for top/bottom
> coverage. As a former MRX user and Zaon XRX tester; I found that sometimes
> the transponder antennas on the bottom of an aircraft prevented the system
> from "seeing" the traffic
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of johngoodman
> Sent: Monday, September 07, 2009 5:54 PM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RV10-List: Re: New garmin traffic system was announced
>
> --> <johngoodman@earthlink.net>
>
> I spoke to the NavWorx guys at Sun 'n fun, and got the impression that two
> antennas are required. I have gotten conflicting answers on where they need
> to be. I've heard one on top & one on bottom, and I've heard two on bottom.
> The shark fin is supposedly specified only because it can work in the upper
> "DME" range, but so can a lot of dipole "sticks."
> I'd really like to see a flat-out answer.
> John
>
> --------
> #40572 QB Fuselage, wings finished. Finish Kit progressing. Engine &
> Panel delivery soon.
> N711JG reserved
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=261957#261957
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: Window Write-Up |
Any crazing? Is one cartridge enough for one window?
Dave Leikam
RV-10 #40496
N89DA
Muskego, WI
----- Original Message -----
nough bFrom: "Geoff" <g.combs@cartridge aerosportmodeling.com>
Sent: Thursday, September 03, 2009 11:40 AM
Subject: Re: RV10-List: Window Write-Up
> Sorry guys the material I used was 7545 a/c. The 7542 is the same
> material but a little thinner and greenish tan in color. The 7545 has a
> higher viscosity and does not run. They have different cure times as
> well.
> They have a 7545 a/e which is slower yet.
>
> Geoff
>
> Sent from my iPhone Geoff
>
>
> On Sep 3, 2009, at 11:48 AM, Geoff <g.combs@aerosportmodeling.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> I used Lord 7542 urethane adhesive
>>
>> Geoff
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone Geoff
>>
>>
>> On Sep 3, 2009, at 11:19 AM, Werner Schneider <glastar@gmx.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Geoff any brand/type of urethan you've used?
>>>
>>> br Werner
>>>
>>> Geoff Combs wrote:
>>>> <g.combs@aerosportmodeling.com
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> Jeff I used a urethane adhesive to install my windows. It had a 20 min
>>>> working time and was easy to clean up and it did not run like weld- on.
>>>> I
>>>> also did a test against weld-on and this held better. I am not flying
>>>> the
>>>> airplane yet but it was a much easier task then the weld-on. The other
>>>> nice
>>>> thing about it was that you can clean the inside edges very good with
>>>> a PPG
>>>> reducer DT870. It is for urethane paints and will not hurt the window
>>>> in any
>>>> way but does clean the urethane very easily. This material is off
>>>> white and
>>>> can be tinted if needed. You would need to use a urethane base tint.
>>>> It is a
>>>> little more flexible than the Weld-on which
>>>> Should be an advantage for the different substrates that are being
>>>> glued
>>>> together. Time will tell how it will hold up but so far it has worked
>>>> out
>>>> great. My airplane is painted and a month or so from flying. I used
>>>> this on
>>>> all windows. Give me a call if you would like to discuss further. As
>>>> far as
>>>> I am concerned this is the best solutions for gluing the windows in. I
>>>> know
>>>> one thing is that they will not come out. This urethane has a
>>>> incredible
>>>> bond. We just used it on some samples for a project to butt glue 1/2"
>>>> acrylic to each other. We tried to break it and could not.
>>>>
>>>> Geoff
>>>>
>>>> Geoff Combs
>>>> President
>>>> Aerosport Modeling & Design
>>>> 8090 Howe Industrial Parkway Canal Winchester, Ohio 43110
>>>> 614-834-5227p
>>>> 614-834-5230f
>>>> www.aerosportmodeling.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
>>>> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Jeff
>>>> Carpenter
>>>> Sent: Thursday, September 03, 2009 2:35 AM
>>>> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
>>>> Subject: RV10-List: Window Write-Up
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> As you may know, I attempted to install my left side door window last
>>>> week with somewhat disastrous results. As best I can tell, my shop
>>>> was too hot (about 85 degrees) and the Weld-on 10 set up too quickly.
>>>> The bond to the fiberglass was perfect, but I had voids between the
>>>> window and the dried Weld-on 10 in over half of the bonding area. I
>>>> had also failed to remove the masking tape from the inside of the
>>>> window soon enough and had a fair amount of masking tape trapped by
>>>> the Weld-on bead.
>>>>
>>>> My initial thought was to try to save the window by injecting epoxy
>>>> into the gaps (as some have done with apparent success), but after
>>>> discussions with Vans, the window manufacturer and tech support by the
>>>> makers of Weld-on 10, I decided to route out the window and start
>>>> over. There are some things I learned from these discussions that are
>>>> worth sharing.
>>>>
>>>> Vans was not willing to say that the injected epoxy approach would
>>>> work and referred me to the window manufacturer, Jeff from Airplane
>>>> Plastics in Ohio. Jeff spent a good deal of time with me on the
>>>> phone. He initially thought the injected epoxy idea might work and
>>>> suggested I use Scotch Weld 2216 to accomplish the task. As we
>>>> discussed the situation further, I was able to communicate that what
>>>> we were really trying to do in this case was bond the window to the
>>>> dried Weld-on 10... not the window to the fiberglass. He thought that
>>>> could still work... as long as I could scuff up the Weld-on 10!
>>>>
>>>> So, I was back to square one. We started to discuss alternatives to
>>>> Weld-on 10 for window installation. He confessed that it had been a
>>>> long time since he had actually installed a window... then recollected
>>>> that the windows would pop out during the structural roll over test on
>>>> the RV-10 until Vans switched to Weld-on 10 to bond them in. With
>>>> Weld-on 10, the window would break before the bond would. As I
>>>> understood the conversation, Weld-on 10 was an important component of
>>>> the plane passing the test. This made my decision to start over again
>>>> certain.
>>>>
>>>> With that, Jeff suggested I route it out with an Onsrud carbide double
>>>> flute 1/2" x 1/2" bit (I wound up using a similar bit I had in my
>>>> router and it worked well), I said good bye and ponied up the $150 to
>>>> Vans for another window.
>>>>
>>>> I also made a call to tech support at IPS, the makers of Weld-on 10,
>>>> hoping to find another product that would stay open longer. Here's
>>>> what I learned:
>>>>
>>>> Weld-on 10 stays open the longest of any product they have for this
>>>> application
>>>> At 70 degrees, there should be 15-20 minutes of time to get the job
>>>> done (I had about 5 minutes at 85 degrees)
>>>> Be certain you are using product less than one year from the
>>>> manufacture date as the working time decreases with age
>>>> They do make a dispensing gun that mixes while dispensing for $300-
>>>> $400. Weld-on 10 is packed in to a cartridge for this purpose and
>>>> called Weld-on 811.
>>>>
>>>> I've also combed through the archives and had I done that sooner might
>>>> have avoided some of these problems. Both Lew Gallagher and John
>>>> Gonzalez had very useful posts (hindsight is 20/20) in early January
>>>> of this year.
>>>>
>>>> I'm going to wait until the fires in our local mountains have stopped
>>>> burning and I'm able to keep the temperature in the shop at or below
>>>> 70 degrees before I try again. I'll get a second set of hands to
>>>> spread the Weld-on 10 more quickly and be sure to pull up the masking
>>>> tape once the window is down securely. The gun seems a bit pricey and
>>>> I imagine I can find a way to spread the Weld-on 10 quickly and
>>>> accurately without too much effort or expense.
>>>>
>>>> Jeff Carpenter
>>>> 40304
>>>> one step forward... two steps back
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
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! --
|