Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 12:15 AM - Re: Re: Melted wire (FLYaDIVE)
2. 12:59 AM - Re: Re: Melted wire (Mel Beckman)
3. 01:18 AM - Re: Re: Melted wire (FLYaDIVE)
4. 06:50 AM - Re: Re: Melted wire (flyv35b)
5. 07:03 AM - Re: Re: Melted wire (Dan Schmitz)
6. 07:21 AM - Re: Re: Melted wire (Hosler, John)
7. 07:22 AM - Re: Re: Melted wire (flyv35b)
8. 07:24 AM - Re: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master Solenoid? (n76lima@mindspring.com)
9. 07:27 AM - Re: Re: Melted wire (923TE)
10. 07:50 AM - Re: Re: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master Solenoid? (923TE)
11. 08:02 AM - Re: Re: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master Solenoid? (flyv35b)
12. 08:11 AM - Re: Re: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master Solenoid? (Bob Steward)
13. 08:12 AM - Re: Re: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master Solenoid? (923TE)
14. 08:15 AM - Re: Re: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master Solenoid? (923TE)
15. 08:16 AM - Re: Re: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master Solenoid? (flyv35b)
16. 08:16 AM - Re: Re: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master Solenoid? (Bob Steward)
17. 09:38 AM - Re: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master Solenoid? (beltz6)
18. 09:49 AM - Re: Melted wire (beltz6)
19. 10:46 AM - Re: Re: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master Solenoid? (mel@becknet.com)
20. 10:56 AM - Re: Too many toys in the cockpit (Bob Steward)
21. 10:57 AM - Re: Re: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master Solenoid? (Brian Hausknecht)
22. 11:21 AM - Re: Re: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master Solenoid? (Mel Beckman)
23. 11:23 AM - Re: Re: Too many toys in the cockpit (Scott Trejo)
24. 11:23 AM - Re: Re: Melted wire (Gary Vogt)
25. 11:27 AM - Re: Re: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master Solenoid? (Brian Hausknecht)
26. 11:29 AM - Re: Re: Too many toys in the cockpit (Mel Beckman)
27. 11:29 AM - Re: Re: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master Solenoid? (Gary Vogt)
28. 11:32 AM - Re: Re: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master Solenoid? (Gary Vogt)
29. 11:33 AM - Re: Re: Too many toys in the cockpit (Gary Vogt)
30. 11:35 AM - Re: Re: Too many toys in the cockpit (Brian Hausknecht)
31. 11:35 AM - Re: Re: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master Solenoid? (Mel Beckman)
32. 11:43 AM - Re: Too many toys in the cockpit (Bob Steward)
33. 11:50 AM - Re: Re: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master Solenoid? (Gary Vogt)
34. 11:54 AM - Re: Too many toys in the cockpit (beltz6)
35. 12:03 PM - Re: Re: Too many toys in the cockpit (Scott Trejo)
36. 12:52 PM - Re: Re: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master Solenoid? (Dj Merrill)
37. 12:59 PM - Re: Re: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master Solenoid? (Mel Beckman)
38. 01:07 PM - Re: Re: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master Solenoid? (Dj Merrill)
39. 01:08 PM - Re: Re: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master Solenoid? (Andrew Kuzyk)
40. 04:15 PM - Re: Re: Too many toys in the cockpit (923TE)
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 |
|
Beltz:
Which make and model meter did you use?
Barry
On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 10:27 PM, beltz6 <beltz6@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Just for reassurance, I went out to the plane today, kicked on the master
> switch, and measured .67 amps running down the 5PA3 wire that Gary recently
> replaced. I used one of those wrap-around meters, which probably aren't
> that accurate, but it's about the same as what Gary measured in the shop
> with a real ammeter. And in the ballpark of what Bob mentioned it ought to
> be several posts ago (consistent with an internal resistance in the master
> relay of 15 ohms). If I understand correctly, that probably means the
> appropriate relay is installed (i.e., not a starter relay).
>
> Also, no discernible heat in said wire - as expected for that amperage.
>
> So the only thing I have to watch for now is if there is an -intermittent-
> short in the relay that only appears when I'm at 8500 feet, at night, not
> near any suitable landing sites :-/
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=383940#383940
>
>
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 |
|
Actually, in the case if an aviation radio, I got the source backwards. The s
ource is the antenna, not the radio, so you would ground the coax shield at t
he antenna end. But you would still just ground one end.
-mel via cell
On Sep 24, 2012, at 1:33 PM, Mel Beckman <mel@becknet.com> wrote:
> Gary,
>
> I have to disagree. In GA applications, you do not ground RF antenna cabl
es at both ends. If you review any avionics installation guide, you'll see t
hat they invariably caution that only one end of the cable be grounded (the t
ransmitter end), even if this means cutting the ground path at the antenna e
nd (which I always do, because even so-called "insulated" antenna mounts oft
en manage to conduct somehow).
>
> The fact that COAX is unbalanced is the reason why you ground at only one e
nd. Balanced conductors (such as twisted pairs) have intrinsic shielding due
to an inverse of the original signal being imposed on one conductor, creati
ng an evenly balanced EMF (hence the term "balanced"). It relies on a sum an
d difference principal, where sum and difference is the combining (summing) o
f two signals that are out of phase from each other. Whatever doesn=99
t cancel out is noise that can be rejected at the receiving end.
>
> Coax, being unbalanced, requires a shield. To function at the frequencies p
resent in GA aircraft, that shield has to be grounded at only one end. As an
A&P, Ham radio operator, and electrical engineer, I've had to deal with man
y gnarly RFI problems. 99% of the time the cause is double-ended grounding.
>
> The grounding practice for aircraft shielded cables is well specified as s
ingle-ended in almost all cases. The only exception would be RF emitters at
well above 1 GHz, in which shielded antenna cables are grounded at both end
s. These have limited application in aircraft (mostly radar systems), but fo
r completeness I'll explain the difference.
>
> Shielding effectiveness at low frequencies is a function of the impedance o
f the cable shield compared to the impedance of the shielded circuit. When g
rounded at both ends, not only does external RFI readily pass through the sh
ield, the shield itself becomes an emitter as a result of any potential diff
erence between the two ends of the cable -- the so-called "ground loop". One
motive of grounding at one end is to break that loop to eliminate a shield-
induced magnetic field coupling into the conductor. It doesn't make any diff
erence if you're trying to contain the shielded cable's signal or protect it
from outside RFI.
>
> At high frequencies, the coupling mode is via an electric rather than magn
etic field. As I mentioned earlier, we're talking here about frequencies wel
l above 1 GHz (so transponders, operating right at 1GHz, aren't included). V
oltage on the shield then couples to the circuit within the cable based upon
the capacitance between the shield and the wire inside. In GA aircraft you c
an see this on remotely mounted radar antennas, although most manufacturers t
ry to put the radio right behind the antenna to keep the cable length short.
In this scenario, you want to minimize the voltage on the shield. Terminati
ng the shield at both ends and at each point where the cable penetrates a bu
lkhead is the best practice here, but it's seldom done on GA aircraft, due t
o the short cable lengths. In large aircraft that's the recommended practice
, though (see "Aircraft and Avionics Cabling E3 Shield Termination Recommend
ations, http://www.bmpcoe.org/library/books/navso%20p-3181/53.html).
>
> In GA, at least until we start operating microwave transmitters, the gener
al rule is ground at one end. Unless, of course the manufacturer says otherw
ise. ;)
>
> -mel
>
> On Sep 24, 2012, at 12:39 PM, Gary Vogt wrote:
>
>> Thanks Barry. That was very well said and even I understood it. I've al
ways wondered why both ends were grounded.
>>
>> From: FLYaDIVE <flyadive@gmail.com>
>> To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
>> Sent: Monday, September 24, 2012 12:18 PM
>> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Melted wire
>>
>> Mel:
>>
>> In response to your email... It depends on what you want to accomplish.
>>
>> Example:
>>
>> In an RF (Radio Frequency) transmitter where there is shielding involved y
ou ground at both ends. An example of this would be a simple COAX cable goi
ng to an antenna. COAX is an unbalanced medium and by grounding at both end
s (Radio & Antenna) you trap the signal and send it to ground via the shorte
st path.
>>
>> In an AF (Audio Frequency) intercom where you want to shield a transmitte
d signal such as a RF transmission, you ground the shield (COAXIAL Shield ar
ound the twisted pair of audio lines) at one end. The end you ground is at t
he intercom, which is known as The Source <-- I know CRAZY since the source o
f the interference is the RF. I don't know why they depict it that way.
>>
>> Think of it this way: In RF you don't want the signal to escape, you wan
t it to say contained within the shield. In AF you want the shield to act a
s a fishing net and collect the signal and then send it to ground. And as y
ou said: " ... no current can be induced in a conductor entirely at ground p
otential." <-- This is true in 99.9273% of cases. Where it gets foggy is w
hen you are talking WHAT FREQUENCY of RF and HOW LONG A GROUND WIRE. And th
is stuff just starts to become a problem at our VHF frequencies and goes rea
lly crazy at Microwave frequencies.
>>
>> Barry
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 2:49 PM, Mel Beckman <mel@becknet.com> wrote:
>> You never ground radio-frequency interference (RFI) shields at both ends.
The objective of shielding is to absorb RFI, convert it to an electrical cu
rrent, and drain the current to ground. If you ground the shielding at both e
nd it won't work, because no current can be induced in a conductor entirely a
t ground potential. This is true for all RFI shielding, from ancient TV coax
to the newest inter-building shielded Category-6 data cabling.
>>
>> -Mel Beckman
>>
>> On Sep 24, 2012, at 11:40 AM, Gary Vogt <teamgrumman@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> on that subject, why is it (the magneto P-Lead shields) grounded at both
ends?
>>>
>>> From: "n76lima@mindspring.com" <n76lima@mindspring.com>
>>> To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
>>> Sent: Monday, September 24, 2012 8:19 AM
>>> Subject: RE: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Melted wire
>>>
>>>
>>> >From: "Hosler, John"
>>> >The OEM ran the ground wire to the airframe with a sheet metal screw???
? John
>>>
>>> Yes, they did this at several locations. The instrument lights and comp
ass light are grounded to the honeycomb via a ring lug on the wiring and a s
heet metal screw.
>>>
>>> The Magneto Ground at the ignition switch is also connected to the honey
comb via the samhare, and much much ==
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> =========
>>> t">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
>>> =========
>>> cs.com
>>> =========
>>> matronics.com/contribution
>>> =========
>>>
>>
>>
>> st" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
>> tp://forums.matronics.com
>> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.m
atronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
>> href="http://forums.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com
>> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
ontribution
>>
>
>
>
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
==========================
=========
>
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 |
|
Incorrect Mel:
Please read my post on this item. The type of radio does NOT make
any difference. It can be from SLF to SHF the shielding and grounding
remain the same. Even application does not make a difference... AM, FM,
Radios or TV - Aircraft, Car or Fixed Station. No difference. Better Yet!
Go look at the wiring in your plane. If you did have the COAX shield open
at the radio end you will be sending it out for repairs due to a very high
VSWR which will burn up your output transistor.
Barry
SSBSATSOAE
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 3:59 AM, Mel Beckman <mel@becknet.com> wrote:
> Actually, in the case if an aviation radio, I got the source backwards.
> The source is the antenna, not the radio, so you would ground the coax
> shield at the antenna end. But you would still just ground one end.
>
> -mel via cell
>
> On Sep 24, 2012, at 1:33 PM, Mel Beckman <mel@becknet.com> wrote:
>
> Gary,
>
> I have to disagree. In GA applications, you do not ground RF antenna
> cables at both ends. If you review any avionics installation guide, you'l
l
> see that they invariably caution that only one end of the cable be ground
ed
> (the transmitter end), even if this means cutting the ground path at the
> antenna end (which I always do, because even so-called "insulated" antenn
a
> mounts often manage to conduct somehow).
>
> The fact that COAX is unbalanced is the reason why you ground at only one
> end. Balanced conductors (such as twisted pairs) have intrinsic shielding
> due to an inverse of the original signal being imposed on one conductor,
> creating an evenly balanced EMF (hence the term "balanced"). It relies on
a
> sum and difference principal, where sum and difference is the combining
> (summing) of two signals that are out of phase from each other. Whatever
> doesn=92t cancel out is noise that can be rejected at the receiving end.
>
> Coax, being unbalanced, requires a shield. To function at the frequencies
> present in GA aircraft, that shield has to be grounded at only one end. A
s
> an A&P, Ham radio operator, and electrical engineer, I've had to deal wit
h
> many gnarly RFI problems. 99% of the time the cause is double-ended
> grounding.
>
> The grounding practice for aircraft shielded cables is well specified as
> single-ended in almost all cases. The only exception would be RF emitter
s
> at well above 1 GHz, in which shielded antenna cables are grounded at bot
h
> ends. These have limited application in aircraft (mostly radar systems),
> but for completeness I'll explain the difference.
>
> Shielding effectiveness at low frequencies is a function of the impedance
> of the cable shield compared to the impedance of the shielded circuit. Wh
en
> grounded at both ends, not only does external RFI readily pass through th
e
> shield, the shield itself becomes an emitter as a result of any potential
> difference between the two ends of the cable -- the so-called "ground
> loop". One motive of grounding at one end is to break that loop to
> eliminate a shield-induced magnetic field coupling into the conductor. It
> doesn't make any difference if you're trying to contain the shielded
> cable's signal or protect it from outside RFI.
>
> At high frequencies, the coupling mode is via an electric rather than
> magnetic field. As I mentioned earlier, we're talking here about
> frequencies well above 1 GHz (so transponders, operating right at 1GHz,
> aren't included). Voltage on the shield then couples to the circuit withi
n
> the cable based upon the capacitance between the shield and the wire
> inside. In GA aircraft you can see this on remotely mounted radar antenna
s,
> although most manufacturers try to put the radio right behind the antenna
> to keep the cable length short. In this scenario, you want to minimize th
e
> voltage on the shield. Terminating the shield at both ends and at each
> point where the cable penetrates a bulkhead is the best practice here, bu
t
> it's seldom done on GA aircraft, due to the short cable lengths. In large
> aircraft that's the recommended practice, though (see "Aircraft and
> Avionics Cabling E3 Shield Termination Recommendations,
> http://www.bmpcoe.org/library/books/navso%20p-3181/53.html).
>
> In GA, at least until we start operating microwave transmitters, the
> general rule is ground at one end. Unless, of course the manufacturer say
s
> otherwise. ;)
>
> -mel
>
> On Sep 24, 2012, at 12:39 PM, Gary Vogt wrote:
>
> Thanks Barry. That was very well said and even I understood it. I've
> always wondered why both ends were grounded.
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* FLYaDIVE <flyadive@gmail.com>
> *To:* teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
> *Sent:* Monday, September 24, 2012 12:18 PM
> *Subject:* Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Melted wire
>
> Mel:
>
> In response to your email... It depends on what you want to accomplish.
>
> Example:
>
> In an RF (Radio Frequency) transmitter where there is shielding involved
> you ground at both ends. An example of this would be a simple COAX cable
> going to an antenna. COAX is an unbalanced medium and by grounding at bo
th
> ends (Radio & Antenna) you trap the signal and send it to ground via
> the shortest path.
>
> In an AF (Audio Frequency) intercom where you want to shield a transmitte
d
> signal such as a RF transmission, you ground the shield (COAXIAL Shield
> around the twisted pair of audio lines) at one end. The end you ground is
> at the intercom, which is known as The Source <-- I know CRAZY since the
> source of the interference is the RF. I don't know why they depict it th
at
> way.
>
> Think of it this way: In RF you don't want the signal to escape, you wan
t
> it to say contained within the shield. In AF you want the shield to act
as
> a fishing net and collect the signal and then send it to ground. And as
> you said: " ... no current can be induced in a conductor entirely at grou
nd
> potential." <-- This is true in 99.9273% of cases. Where it gets foggy
is
> when you are talking WHAT FREQUENCY of RF and HOW LONG A GROUND WIRE. An
d
> this stuff just starts to become a problem at our VHF frequencies and goe
s
> really crazy at Microwave frequencies.
>
> Barry
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 2:49 PM, Mel Beckman <mel@becknet.com> wrote:
>
> You never ground radio-frequency interference (RFI) shields at both ends.
> The objective of shielding is to absorb RFI, convert it to an electrical
> current, and drain the current to ground. If you ground the shielding at
> both end it won't work, because no current can be induced in a conductor
> entirely at ground potential. This is true for all RFI shielding, from
> ancient TV coax to the newest inter-building shielded Category-6 data
> cabling.
>
> -Mel Beckman
>
> On Sep 24, 2012, at 11:40 AM, Gary Vogt <teamgrumman@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> on that subject, why is it (the magneto P-Lead shields) grounded at both
> ends?
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* "n76lima@mindspring.com" <n76lima@mindspring.com>
> *To:* teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
> *Sent:* Monday, September 24, 2012 8:19 AM
> *Subject:* RE: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Melted wire
>
>
> >From: "Hosler, John"
> >The OEM ran the ground wire to the airframe with a sheet metal screw????
> John
>
> Yes, they did this at several locations. The instrument lights and
> compass light are grounded to the honeycomb via a ring lug on the wiring
> and a sheet metal screw.
>
> The Magneto Ground at the ignition switch is also connected to the
> honeycomb via the samhare, and much much ==
>
>
> *
>
> =========
> t">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
> ==========cs.com
> ==========matronics.com/contribution
> =========
> *
>
> *
>
> st" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
tp://forums.matronics.com
> _blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
> *
>
>
> *
>
> *
>
> * *
> * *
> *
>
>
> href="http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List">http://www.m
atronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
> href="http://forums.matronics.com/">http://forums.matronics.com
> href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
ontribution
>
> *
>
>
> *
>
> ========================
> t">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
>
> ========================
===========cs.com
> ========================
===========matronics.com/contribution
> ========================
>
> *
>
> *
>
===========
>
===========
===========
===========
>
> *
>
>
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 |
|
On 9/24/2012 7:27 PM, beltz6 wrote:
> So the only thing I have to watch for now is if there is an -intermittent- short
in the relay that only appears when I'm at 8500 feet, at night, not near any
suitable landing sites :-/
A good reason to have an emergency buss directly off the battery,
bypassing the master switch and relay.
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 |
|
> -----Original Message-----
> > So the only thing I have to watch for now is if there is an
> > -intermittent- short in the relay that only appears when I'm at 8500
> > feet, at night, not near any suitable landing sites :-/
>
> A good reason to have an emergency buss directly off the battery, bypassing
> the master switch and relay.
A flashlight and handheld GPS sounds a lot easier and safer as a backup. Actually,
I assumed fire at night was the concern of the earlier post, not loss of
electrics.
Dan Schmitz
Tiger 4518B
KASH
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 |
|
And two flashlights in your lap.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of
flyv35b
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2012 9:50 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Melted wire
On 9/24/2012 7:27 PM, beltz6 wrote:
> So the only thing I have to watch for now is if there is an
> -intermittent- short in the relay that only appears when I'm at 8500
> feet, at night, not near any suitable landing sites :-/
A good reason to have an emergency buss directly off the battery,
bypassing the master switch and relay.
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 |
|
On 9/25/2012 7:03 AM, Dan Schmitz wrote:
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>>> So the only thing I have to watch for now is if there is an
>>> -intermittent- short in the relay that only appears when I'm at 8500
>>> feet, at night, not near any suitable landing sites :-/
>>
>> A good reason to have an emergency buss directly off the battery, bypassing
>> the master switch and relay.
>
> A flashlight and handheld GPS sounds a lot easier and safer as a backup. Actually,
I assumed fire at night was the concern of the earlier post, not loss of
electrics.
>
> Dan Schmitz
> Tiger 4518B
> KASH
Turn off the master, eliminate the short that was discussed and the
smoke, etc. turn on the emergency buss. Sounds pretty easy to me and
safer if you are in the clouds and need to talk to ATC. You can even
have your AP functioning.
Cliff
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: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master Solenoid? |
>>So the only thing I have to watch for now is if there is an -intermittent- short
in the relay that only appears when I'm at 8500 >>feet, at night, not near
any suitable landing sites :-/
>A good reason to have an emergency buss directly off the battery,
>bypassing the master switch and relay.
Hmmm, would this be a large switch/circuit breaker that was connected by a heavy
gauge wire to the battery? How would one go about protecting such a circuit
from the battery to the panel mounted switch? I'd want it carefully planned
and double insulated, perhaps running through some firesleeve, to prevent any
chafing at the firewall penetration, passing the controls, etc. enroute to the
switch.
Would make a great arc welder should it ever find a ground...
--Bob Steward
Birmingham, AL
Message 9
| 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 |
|
You can tie in a 12v cigar receptacle to the overhead light circuit and have an
always hot source for a light or whatever....
Message 10
| 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: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master |
Solenoid?
A mechanically operated contractor next to the battery that is operated from the
cockpit would make it protected
http://www.flamingriver.com/index.php/products/c0015/s0004/FR1003-2
On Sep 25, 2012, at 9:24 AM, n76lima@mindspring.com wrote:
>
>>> So the only thing I have to watch for now is if there is an -intermittent-
short in the relay that only appears when I'm at 8500 >>feet, at night, not near
any suitable landing sites :-/
>
>> A good reason to have an emergency buss directly off the battery,
>> bypassing the master switch and relay.
>
> Hmmm, would this be a large switch/circuit breaker that was connected by a heavy
gauge wire to the battery? How would one go about protecting such a circuit
from the battery to the panel mounted switch? I'd want it carefully planned
and double insulated, perhaps running through some firesleeve, to prevent any
chafing at the firewall penetration, passing the controls, etc. enroute to the
switch.
>
> Would make a great arc welder should it ever find a ground...
>
> --Bob Steward
> Birmingham, AL
>
>
>
>
Message 11
| 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: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master |
Solenoid?
On 9/25/2012 7:49 AM, 923TE wrote:
>
> A mechanically operated contractor next to the battery that is operated from
the cockpit would make it protected
>
> http://www.flamingriver.com/index.php/products/c0015/s0004/FR1003-2
>
>
> On Sep 25, 2012, at 9:24 AM, n76lima@mindspring.com wrote:
>
>>
>>>> So the only thing I have to watch for now is if there is an -intermittent-
short in the relay that only appears when I'm at 8500 >>feet, at night, not near
any suitable landing sites :-/
>>
>>> A good reason to have an emergency buss directly off the battery,
>>> bypassing the master switch and relay.
>>
>> Hmmm, would this be a large switch/circuit breaker that was connected by a heavy
gauge wire to the battery? How would one go about protecting such a circuit
from the battery to the panel mounted switch? I'd want it carefully planned
and double insulated, perhaps running through some firesleeve, to prevent any
chafing at the firewall penetration, passing the controls, etc. enroute to
the switch.
>>
>> Would make a great arc welder should it ever find a ground...
>>
>> --Bob Steward
>> Birmingham, AL
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Simpler than that. Just mount a fuse close to the battery that is sized
to protect the wire you are running through the firewall to the breaker
switch, which is sized to open BEFORE the fuse blows. Run the wire
through fire sleeve or even through aluminum tubing attached to a
bulkhead fitting in the firewall. The only wire that is unprotected
would be the very short wire from the fuse to the battery or battery
buss bar. The essential items can be supplied from a separate buss
which can be fed from the normal buss through a diode. Check out Bob
Nuckols circuit diagrams.
Cliff
Message 12
| 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: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master |
Solenoid?
>A mechanically operated contractor next to the battery that is
>operated from the cockpit would make it protected
>
>http://www.flamingriver.com/index.php/products/c0015/s0004/FR1003-2
Dual Master solenoids and dual master switches?
What's next? Dual engines? Oh wait, they already have that. <G>
--Bob Steward
Birmingham, AL
Message 13
| 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: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master |
Solenoid?
That's kind of what the wire running from the fuse block next to the battery that
goes to the overhead lights is.....
>>
>>
> Simpler than that. Just mount a fuse close to the battery that is sized to protect
the wire you are running through the firewall to the breaker switch, which
is sized to open BEFORE the fuse blows. Run the wire through fire sleeve
or even through aluminum tubing attached to a bulkhead fitting in the firewall.
The only wire that is unprotected would be the very short wire from the fuse
to the battery or battery buss bar. The essential items can be supplied from
a separate buss which can be fed from the normal buss through a diode. Check
out Bob Nuckols circuit diagrams.
>
> Cliff
>
Message 14
| 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: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master |
Solenoid?
KISS sometimes means going back a 50 years.
Why not replace the starter solenoid while you're at it?
http://www.ebay.com/itm/NEW-1941-63-JEEP-FLOOR-MOUNTED-STARTER-SWITCH-/150886461240?hash=item232188af38&item=150886461240&pt=Vintage_Car_Truck_Parts_Accessories&vxp=mtr
Get all the big power wiring out of the Cockpit. Bob Knuckolls like to do that
too....
Message 15
| 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: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master |
Solenoid?
On 9/25/2012 8:10 AM, 923TE wrote:
>
> That's kind of what the wire running from the fuse block next to the battery
that goes to the overhead lights is.....
>
>>>
>>>
>> Simpler than that. Just mount a fuse close to the battery that is sized to
protect the wire you are running through the firewall to the breaker switch, which
is sized to open BEFORE the fuse blows. Run the wire through fire sleeve
or even through aluminum tubing attached to a bulkhead fitting in the firewall.
The only wire that is unprotected would be the very short wire from the fuse
to the battery or battery buss bar. The essential items can be supplied from
a separate buss which can be fed from the normal buss through a diode. Check
out Bob Nuckols circuit diagrams.
>>
>> Cliff
>>
>
>
Yes, another circuit like that.
Message 16
| 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: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master |
Solenoid?
>Simpler than that. Just mount a fuse close to the battery that is
>sized to protect the wire you are running through the firewall to
>the breaker switch, which is sized to open BEFORE the fuse
>blows. Run the wire through fire sleeve or even through aluminum
>tubing attached to a bulkhead fitting in the firewall. The only
>wire that is unprotected would be the very short wire from the fuse
>to the battery or battery buss bar. The essential items can be
>supplied from a separate buss which can be fed from the normal buss
>through a diode. Check out Bob Nuckols
I've seen Nuckolls' planning, and just have to wonder how complex one
wishes to make what should be simple airplanes.
If the stock bus is ~60A, and you want to run those radios, lights,
fuel pump, etc., you are talking a pretty big fuse, which means a lot
of arcing before it blows.
My initial reply was sort of tongue in cheek, pointing out the
extreme measures needed to provide a backup for loss of electrons due
to failed Master Solenoid circuit.
A handheld Com and a battery backed up portable GPS should suffice
for most flights, with the standard flashlight we all carry...
--Bob Steward
Message 17
| 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: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master Solenoid? |
n76lima(at)mindspring.com wrote:
>
>
> My initial reply was sort of tongue in cheek, pointing out the
> extreme measures needed to provide a backup for loss of electrons due
> to failed Master Solenoid circuit.
>
> A handheld Com and a battery backed up portable GPS should suffice
> for most flights, with the standard flashlight we all carry...
>
> --Bob Steward
I rarely fly at night these days. But this is a good reminder to make sure the
batteries in my GPS and handheld radio are fresh, and to check whether the former
actually useably transmits and receives from the cockpit environment.
Still, it would SUCK bigtime to have such a failure while on an ILS (which one
has to do from time to time at my home airport).
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=383964#383964
Message 18
| 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 |
|
BARRY CHECK 6 wrote:
>
>
> Which make and model meter did you use?
>
>
> Barry
>
>
Barry,
A Fluke Y8100. It outputs a voltage which has to be converted to a current.
I make no claim as to the accuracy of this method.
Picture here: http://i.imgur.com/vN4Ha.jpg
-glenn
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=383966#383966
Message 19
| 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: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master |
Solenoid?
Izit just me, or are new pilots being extremely unwise in their unflinching reliance
on pod&pad things? I had a talk with an IFR student recently who claimed
that he never takes paper charts along, despite his instructor's urgings. He's
got a Garmin in the panel, an iPad, and an iPhone. "Redundancy: check", he brags.
In my experience, these electronic things all seem to run out of juice at the same
time, unless you have fanatical battery management skills. I'm an engineer
working in the computer biz, and still find keeping nav gizmos alive challenging.
-mel beckman
-mel beckman
On Sep 25, 2012, at 9:38 AM, "beltz6" <beltz6@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> n76lima(at)mindspring.com wrote:
>>
>>
>> My initial reply was sort of tongue in cheek, pointing out the
>> extreme measures needed to provide a backup for loss of electrons due
>> to failed Master Solenoid circuit.
>>
>> A handheld Com and a battery backed up portable GPS should suffice
>> for most flights, with the standard flashlight we all carry...
>>
>> --Bob Steward
>
>
> I rarely fly at night these days. But this is a good reminder to make sure the
batteries in my GPS and handheld radio are fresh, and to check whether the
former actually useably transmits and receives from the cockpit environment.
>
> Still, it would SUCK bigtime to have such a failure while on an ILS (which one
has to do from time to time at my home airport).
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=383964#383964
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 20
| 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: Too many toys in the cockpit |
>Izit just me, or are new pilots being extremely unwise in their
>unflinching reliance on pod&pad things? I had a talk with an IFR
>student recently who claimed that he never takes paper charts along,
>despite his instructor's urgings. He's got a Garmin in the panel, an
>iPad, and an iPhone. "Redundancy: check", he brags.
There ought to be a limited license for those that can only navigate with GPS.
Like the "limited to automatic transmission" licenses for drivers in
some states.
If you can't nav by DR, Pilotage, and VORs with paper charts, you
limit in your pilot skill set.
Scares the heck out of me to fly on post maintenance checks with the
owner when they spend all their time head-down punching buttons and
staring at electronics. I often have to ask "Are you going to LOOK
outside?", as I've been the only one checking for traffic during the
flight. <sigh>
--Bob Steward
Message 21
| 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: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master |
Solenoid?
It is just you, Mel. These new devices are very reliable and when on ship's power
the device battery provides far longer backup than the aircraft battery. And
with multiple devices there is potential for much safer contingent operation.
IF the pilot practices with the contingent system. That means finding, starting
and using the backup while flying the plane, all under the hood.
4 course ranges were once the standard. We have moved on. Come join us!
_
Brian Hausknecht
bhauskne@gmail.com
www.brianflys.net
www.brianflys.com
-----Original Message-----
From: "mel@becknet.com" <mel@becknet.com>
Sender: owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com
Izit just me, or are new pilots being extremely unwise in their unflinching reliance
on pod&pad things? I had a talk with an IFR student recently who claimed
that he never takes paper charts along, despite his instructor's urgings. He's
got a Garmin in the panel, an iPad, and an iPhone. "Redundancy: check", he brags.
In my experience, these electronic things all seem to run out of juice at the same
time, unless you have fanatical battery management skills. I'm an engineer
working in the computer biz, and still find keeping nav gizmos alive challenging.
-mel beckman
-mel beckman
On Sep 25, 2012, at 9:38 AM, "beltz6" <beltz6@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> n76lima(at)mindspring.com wrote:
>>
>>
>> My initial reply was sort of tongue in cheek, pointing out the
>> extreme measures needed to provide a backup for loss of electrons due
>> to failed Master Solenoid circuit.
>>
>> A handheld Com and a battery backed up portable GPS should suffice
>> for most flights, with the standard flashlight we all carry...
>>
>> --Bob Steward
>
>
> I rarely fly at night these days. But this is a good reminder to make sure the
batteries in my GPS and handheld radio are fresh, and to check whether the
former actually useably transmits and receives from the cockpit environment.
>
> Still, it would SUCK bigtime to have such a failure while on an ILS (which one
has to do from time to time at my home airport).
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=383964#383964
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 22
| 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: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master |
Solenoid?
Brian,
Whew! That's a relief! Because it would be terrible if other people's
iPads were overheating like mine does all the time.
So you don't carry paper charts, then?
-mel
On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 17:57:37 +0000
"Brian Hausknecht" <bhauskne@gmail.com> wrote:
><bhauskne@gmail.com>
>
> It is just you, Mel. These new devices are very reliable and when
>on ship's power the device battery provides far longer backup than
>the aircraft battery. And with multiple devices there is potential
>for much safer contingent operation. IF the pilot practices with the
>contingent system. That means finding, starting and using the backup
>while flying the plane, all under the hood.
>
> 4 course ranges were once the standard. We have moved on. Come join
>us!
>
> _
> Brian Hausknecht
> bhauskne@gmail.com
> www.brianflys.net
> www.brianflys.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
>From: "mel@becknet.com" <mel@becknet.com>
> Sender: owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com
> Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 10:41:01
> To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com<teamgrumman-list@matronics.com>
>TeamGrumman-List: Re: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master
>Solenoid?
>
><mel@becknet.com>
>
> Izit just me, or are new pilots being extremely unwise in their
>unflinching reliance on pod&pad things? I had a talk with an IFR
>student recently who claimed that he never takes paper charts along,
>despite his instructor's urgings. He's got a Garmin in the panel, an
>iPad, and an iPhone. "Redundancy: check", he brags.
>
> In my experience, these electronic things all seem to run out of
>juice at the same time, unless you have fanatical battery management
>skills. I'm an engineer working in the computer biz, and still find
>keeping nav gizmos alive challenging.
>
> -mel beckman
>
> -mel beckman
>
> On Sep 25, 2012, at 9:38 AM, "beltz6" <beltz6@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> n76lima(at)mindspring.com wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> My initial reply was sort of tongue in cheek, pointing out the
>>> extreme measures needed to provide a backup for loss of electrons
>>>due
>>> to failed Master Solenoid circuit.
>>>
>>> A handheld Com and a battery backed up portable GPS should suffice
>>> for most flights, with the standard flashlight we all carry...
>>>
>>> --Bob Steward
>>
>>
>> I rarely fly at night these days. But this is a good reminder to
>>make sure the batteries in my GPS and handheld radio are fresh, and
>>to check whether the former actually useably transmits and receives
>>from the cockpit environment.
>>
>> Still, it would SUCK bigtime to have such a failure while on an ILS
>>(which one has to do from time to time at my home airport).
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=383964#383964
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 23
| 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: Too many toys in the cockpit |
Bob, I hate to say this but you need to catch up with the times. If you have
a Garmin 430/530 or better that has a current NAV. Card plus an IPad that runs
Foreflight with current plates and charts you are perfectly legal. I have thousands
of flights all over the world with paper less cockpits. I fly my 1970
AA5B the same way. Nothing wrong with it. In fact I have better information
at my finger tips then most Airlines. You should embrace technology it really
works. I'm not saying one should never look outside for traffic, and I'm
sure a believer in dead reckoning when things go bad. Just my thoughts.
Scott
MD11 Capt.
AA5B owner
Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 25, 2012, at 12:56 PM, Bob Steward <n76lima@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>
>> Izit just me, or are new pilots being extremely unwise in their unflinching
reliance on pod&pad things? I had a talk with an IFR student recently who claimed
that he never takes paper charts along, despite his instructor's urgings.
He's got a Garmin in the panel, an iPad, and an iPhone. "Redundancy: check", he
brags.
>
> There ought to be a limited license for those that can only navigate with GPS.
>
> Like the "limited to automatic transmission" licenses for drivers in some states.
>
> If you can't nav by DR, Pilotage, and VORs with paper charts, you limit in your
pilot skill set.
>
> Scares the heck out of me to fly on post maintenance checks with the owner when
they spend all their time head-down punching buttons and staring at electronics.
I often have to ask "Are you going to LOOK outside?", as I've been the
only one checking for traffic during the flight. <sigh>
>
> --Bob Steward
>
>
>
>
Message 24
| 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 |
|
And, what, put the whole system on a 60 amp circuit breaker? -Run #8 wire
? -To me that sounds like the totally wrong approach. -I guess if faile
d grounds from the master to the relay were a common issue, MAYBE. -In th
e same context, you are running every avionics in the plane through one fai
l point. -The plane came with the ability to fail each unit separately wi
thout a single point failure and yet people insist on saving a few seconds
and turning off the Avionics Master. -=0A=0A=0A__________________________
______=0A From: flyv35b <flyv35b@minetfiber.com>=0ATo: teamgrumman-list@mat
ronics.com =0ASent: Tuesday, September 25, 2012 7:22 AM=0ASubject: Re: Team
flyv35b <flyv35b@minetfiber.com>=0A=0AOn 9/25/2012 7:03 AM, Dan Schmitz wr
alix.com>=0A>=0A>> -----Original Message-----=0A>>> So the only thing I hav
e to watch for now is if there is an=0A>>> -intermittent- short in the rela
y that only appears when I'm at 8500=0A>>> feet, at night, not near any sui
table landing sites :-/=0A>>=0A>> A good reason to have an emergency buss d
irectly off the battery, bypassing=0A>> the master switch and relay.=0A>=0A
> A flashlight and handheld GPS sounds a lot easier and safer as a backup.
- Actually, I assumed fire at night was the concern of the earlier post,
not loss of electrics.=0A>=0A> Dan Schmitz=0A> Tiger 4518B=0A> KASH=0A=0ATu
rn off the master, eliminate the short that was discussed and the =0Asmoke,
etc. turn on the emergency buss.- Sounds pretty easy to me and =0Asafer
if you are in the clouds and need to talk to ATC.- You can even =0Ahave y
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -Matt Dralle, List Admi
=====
Message 25
| 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: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master |
Solenoid?
Nope. No ipad either. Poor quality device for the cockpit, shame the airlines were
sucked in. I have two devices. One android, one windows. Both with nav system,
charts, plates. Independent gps receivers too. Likelihood of dual failure
is very remote.
_
Brian Hausknecht
bhauskne@gmail.com
www.brianflys.net
www.brianflys.com
-----Original Message-----
From: "Mel Beckman" <mel@becknet.com>
Sender: owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com
Brian,
Whew! That's a relief! Because it would be terrible if other people's
iPads were overheating like mine does all the time.
So you don't carry paper charts, then?
-mel
On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 17:57:37 +0000
"Brian Hausknecht" <bhauskne@gmail.com> wrote:
><bhauskne@gmail.com>
>
> It is just you, Mel. These new devices are very reliable and when
>on ship's power the device battery provides far longer backup than
>the aircraft battery. And with multiple devices there is potential
>for much safer contingent operation. IF the pilot practices with the
>contingent system. That means finding, starting and using the backup
>while flying the plane, all under the hood.
>
> 4 course ranges were once the standard. We have moved on. Come join
>us!
>
> _
> Brian Hausknecht
> bhauskne@gmail.com
> www.brianflys.net
> www.brianflys.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
>From: "mel@becknet.com" <mel@becknet.com>
> Sender: owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com
> Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 10:41:01
> To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com<teamgrumman-list@matronics.com>
>TeamGrumman-List: Re: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master
>Solenoid?
>
><mel@becknet.com>
>
> Izit just me, or are new pilots being extremely unwise in their
>unflinching reliance on pod&pad things? I had a talk with an IFR
>student recently who claimed that he never takes paper charts along,
>despite his instructor's urgings. He's got a Garmin in the panel, an
>iPad, and an iPhone. "Redundancy: check", he brags.
>
> In my experience, these electronic things all seem to run out of
>juice at the same time, unless you have fanatical battery management
>skills. I'm an engineer working in the computer biz, and still find
>keeping nav gizmos alive challenging.
>
> -mel beckman
>
> -mel beckman
>
> On Sep 25, 2012, at 9:38 AM, "beltz6" <beltz6@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> n76lima(at)mindspring.com wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> My initial reply was sort of tongue in cheek, pointing out the
>>> extreme measures needed to provide a backup for loss of electrons
>>>due
>>> to failed Master Solenoid circuit.
>>>
>>> A handheld Com and a battery backed up portable GPS should suffice
>>> for most flights, with the standard flashlight we all carry...
>>>
>>> --Bob Steward
>>
>>
>> I rarely fly at night these days. But this is a good reminder to
>>make sure the batteries in my GPS and handheld radio are fresh, and
>>to check whether the former actually useably transmits and receives
>>from the cockpit environment.
>>
>> Still, it would SUCK bigtime to have such a failure while on an ILS
>>(which one has to do from time to time at my home airport).
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Read this topic online here:
>>
>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=383964#383964
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 26
| 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: Too many toys in the cockpit |
One of the aircraft I fly has the new Garmin GTN, and I have
Foreflight on my iPad. I use them and love them. But I still carry
paper charts, because all those electronic goodies can go poof.
Yes, you're legal without paper charts. But are you smart?
-mel
On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 13:22:32 -0500
Scott Trejo <md11strejo@yahoo.com> wrote:
><md11strejo@yahoo.com>
>
> Bob, I hate to say this but you need to catch up with the times.
> If you have a Garmin 430/530 or better that has a current NAV. Card
>plus an IPad that runs Foreflight with current plates and charts you
>are perfectly legal. I have thousands of flights all over the world
>with paper less cockpits. I fly my 1970 AA5B the same way. Nothing
>wrong with it. In fact I have better information at my finger tips
>then most Airlines. You should embrace technology it really works.
> I'm not saying one should never look outside for traffic, and I'm
>sure a believer in dead reckoning when things go bad. Just my
> thoughts.
>
> Scott
> MD11 Capt.
> AA5B owner
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Sep 25, 2012, at 12:56 PM, Bob Steward <n76lima@mindspring.com>
>wrote:
>
>><n76lima@mindspring.com>
>>
>>
>>> Izit just me, or are new pilots being extremely unwise in their
>>>unflinching reliance on pod&pad things? I had a talk with an IFR
>>>student recently who claimed that he never takes paper charts along,
>>>despite his instructor's urgings. He's got a Garmin in the panel, an
>>>iPad, and an iPhone. "Redundancy: check", he brags.
>>
>> There ought to be a limited license for those that can only navigate
>>with GPS.
>>
>> Like the "limited to automatic transmission" licenses for drivers in
>>some states.
>>
>> If you can't nav by DR, Pilotage, and VORs with paper charts, you
>>limit in your pilot skill set.
>>
>> Scares the heck out of me to fly on post maintenance checks with the
>>owner when they spend all their time head-down punching buttons and
>>staring at electronics. I often have to ask "Are you going to LOOK
>>outside?", as I've been the only one checking for traffic during the
>>flight. <sigh>
>>
>> --Bob Steward
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 27
| 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: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master |
Solenoid?
Or like the AG5B: -mount about 7 fuses on the firewall and run it to the
main buss. -one for every radio you want to operated separately. -Let's
really complicate the wiring so that we all have the same electrical greml
ins the AG5Bs have. -=0A=0ASeriously. -Is this a big problem? -I don'
t think so. -=0A=0A=0A________________________________=0A From: flyv35b <
flyv35b@minetfiber.com>=0ATo: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com =0ASent: Tuesd
ay, September 25, 2012 8:01 AM=0ASubject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Melted
wire -- emergency bypass of the Master Solenoid?=0A =0A--> TeamGrumman-Lis
t message posted by: flyv35b <flyv35b@minetfiber.com>=0A=0AOn 9/25/2012 7:4
@att.net>=0A>=0A> A mechanically operated contractor next to the battery th
at is operated from the cockpit would make it protected=0A>=0A> http://www.
flamingriver.com/index.php/products/c0015/s0004/FR1003-2=0A>=0A>=0A> On Sep
25, 2012, at 9:24 AM, n76lima@mindspring.com wrote:=0A>=0A>> --> TeamGrumm
an-List message posted by: n76lima@mindspring.com=0A>>=0A>>>> So the only t
hing I have to watch for now is if there is an -intermittent- short in the
relay that only appears when I'm at 8500 >>feet, at night, not near any sui
table landing sites :-/=0A>>=0A>>> A good reason to have an emergency buss
directly off the battery,=0A>>> bypassing the master switch and relay.=0A>>
=0A>> Hmmm, would this be a large switch/circuit breaker that was connected
by a heavy gauge wire to the battery?- How would one go about protecting
such a circuit from the battery to the panel mounted switch?- I'd want i
t carefully planned and double insulated, perhaps running through some fire
sleeve, to prevent any chafing at the firewall penetration, passing the con
trols, etc. enroute to the switch.=0A>>=0A>> Would make a great arc welder
should it ever find a ground...=0A>>=0A>> --Bob Steward=0A>> Birmingham, AL
=0A>>=0A>>=0A>>=0A>>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0ASimpler than that.- Just mount a fuse
close to the battery that is sized =0Ato protect the wire you are running t
hrough the firewall to the breaker =0Aswitch, which is sized to open BEFORE
the fuse blows.- Run the wire =0Athrough fire sleeve or even through alu
minum tubing attached to a =0Abulkhead fitting in the firewall.- The only
wire that is unprotected =0Awould be the very short wire from the fuse to
the battery or battery =0Abuss bar.- The essential items can be supplied
from a separate buss =0Awhich can be fed from the normal buss through a dio
===============
Message 28
| 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: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master |
Solenoid?
a panel mounted Garmin 796 with its own battery would work too. -includes
a standard 6-pack.=0A=0A=0A________________________________=0A From: Bob S
teward <n76lima@mindspring.com>=0ATo: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com =0ASen
t: Tuesday, September 25, 2012 8:16 AM=0ASubject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re:
Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master Solenoid?=0A =0A--> TeamG
rumman-List message posted by: Bob Steward <n76lima@mindspring.com>=0A=0A
=0A> Simpler than that.- Just mount a fuse close to the battery that is s
ized to protect the wire you are running through the firewall to the breake
r switch, which is sized to open BEFORE the fuse blows.- Run the wire thr
ough fire sleeve or even through aluminum tubing attached to a bulkhead fit
ting in the firewall.- The only wire that is unprotected would be the ver
y short wire from the fuse to the battery or battery buss bar.- The essen
tial items can be supplied from a separate buss which can be fed from the n
ormal buss through a diode.- Check out Bob Nuckols=0A=0AI've seen Nuckoll
s' planning, and just have to wonder how complex one wishes to make what sh
ould be simple airplanes.=0A=0AIf the stock bus is ~60A, and you want to ru
n those radios, lights, fuel pump, etc., you are talking a pretty big fuse,
which means a lot of arcing before it blows.=0A=0AMy initial reply was sor
t of tongue in cheek, pointing out the extreme measures needed to provide a
backup for loss of electrons due to failed Master Solenoid circuit.=0A=0AA
handheld Com and a battery backed up portable GPS should suffice for most
flights, with the standard flashlight we all carry...=0A=0A--Bob Steward
==================
Message 29
| 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: Too many toys in the cockpit |
"There ought to be a limited license for those that can only navigate with
GPS."=0A=0A-guilty=0A=0A________________________________=0A From: Bob Stewa
rd <n76lima@mindspring.com>=0ATo: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com =0ASent: T
uesday, September 25, 2012 10:56 AM=0ASubject: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Too ma
eward <n76lima@mindspring.com>=0A=0A=0A> Izit just me, or are new pilots be
ing extremely unwise in their unflinching reliance on pod&pad things? I had
a talk with an IFR student recently who claimed that he never takes paper
charts along, despite his instructor's urgings. He's got a Garmin in the pa
nel, an iPad, and an iPhone. "Redundancy: check", he brags.=0A=0AThere ough
t to be a limited license for those that can only navigate with GPS.=0A=0AL
ike the "limited to automatic transmission" licenses for drivers in some st
ates.=0A=0AIf you can't nav by DR, Pilotage, and VORs with paper charts, yo
u limit in your pilot skill set.=0A=0AScares the heck out of me to fly on p
ost maintenance checks with the owner when they spend all their time head-d
own punching buttons and staring at electronics.- I often have to ask "Ar
e you going to LOOK outside?", as I've been the only one checking for traff
===========
Message 30
| 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: Too many toys in the cockpit |
You are smart to carry whatever you are most comfortable with that meets the regs.
Glad we can have diversity. Cheers!
_
Brian Hausknecht
bhauskne@gmail.com
www.brianflys.net
www.brianflys.com
-----Original Message-----
From: "Mel Beckman" <mel@becknet.com>
Sender: owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com
One of the aircraft I fly has the new Garmin GTN, and I have
Foreflight on my iPad. I use them and love them. But I still carry
paper charts, because all those electronic goodies can go poof.
Yes, you're legal without paper charts. But are you smart?
-mel
On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 13:22:32 -0500
Scott Trejo <md11strejo@yahoo.com> wrote:
><md11strejo@yahoo.com>
>
> Bob, I hate to say this but you need to catch up with the times.
> If you have a Garmin 430/530 or better that has a current NAV. Card
>plus an IPad that runs Foreflight with current plates and charts you
>are perfectly legal. I have thousands of flights all over the world
>with paper less cockpits. I fly my 1970 AA5B the same way. Nothing
>wrong with it. In fact I have better information at my finger tips
>then most Airlines. You should embrace technology it really works.
> I'm not saying one should never look outside for traffic, and I'm
>sure a believer in dead reckoning when things go bad. Just my
> thoughts.
>
> Scott
> MD11 Capt.
> AA5B owner
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Sep 25, 2012, at 12:56 PM, Bob Steward <n76lima@mindspring.com>
>wrote:
>
>><n76lima@mindspring.com>
>>
>>
>>> Izit just me, or are new pilots being extremely unwise in their
>>>unflinching reliance on pod&pad things? I had a talk with an IFR
>>>student recently who claimed that he never takes paper charts along,
>>>despite his instructor's urgings. He's got a Garmin in the panel, an
>>>iPad, and an iPhone. "Redundancy: check", he brags.
>>
>> There ought to be a limited license for those that can only navigate
>>with GPS.
>>
>> Like the "limited to automatic transmission" licenses for drivers in
>>some states.
>>
>> If you can't nav by DR, Pilotage, and VORs with paper charts, you
>>limit in your pilot skill set.
>>
>> Scares the heck out of me to fly on post maintenance checks with the
>>owner when they spend all their time head-down punching buttons and
>>staring at electronics. I often have to ask "Are you going to LOOK
>>outside?", as I've been the only one checking for traffic during the
>>flight. <sigh>
>>
>> --Bob Steward
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 31
| 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: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master |
Solenoid?
I'm a Linux developer, so I would not hang my life on it. I have
several android devices and the software is much less reliable than
iOS. I haven't tried any Android tablet hardware yet, so that may well
beat Apple's finicky iPad. But I still carry paper charts.
There are old pilots, and there are bold pilots, but there are no old
tablet pilots ;)
-mel
On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 18:27:06 +0000
"Brian Hausknecht" <bhauskne@gmail.com> wrote:
><bhauskne@gmail.com>
>
> Nope. No ipad either. Poor quality device for the cockpit, shame the
>airlines were sucked in. I have two devices. One android, one
>windows. Both with nav system, charts, plates. Independent gps
>receivers too. Likelihood of dual failure is very remote.
> _
> Brian Hausknecht
> bhauskne@gmail.com
> www.brianflys.net
> www.brianflys.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
>From: "Mel Beckman" <mel@becknet.com>
> Sender: owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com
> Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 11:19:21
> To: <teamgrumman-list@matronics.com>
>TeamGrumman-List: Re: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master
>Solenoid?
>
><mel@becknet.com>
>
> Brian,
>
> Whew! That's a relief! Because it would be terrible if other
>people's
> iPads were overheating like mine does all the time.
>
> So you don't carry paper charts, then?
>
> -mel
>
> On Tue, 25 Sep 2012 17:57:37 +0000
> "Brian Hausknecht" <bhauskne@gmail.com> wrote:
>><bhauskne@gmail.com>
>>
>> It is just you, Mel. These new devices are very reliable and when
>>on ship's power the device battery provides far longer backup than
>>the aircraft battery. And with multiple devices there is potential
>>for much safer contingent operation. IF the pilot practices with the
>>contingent system. That means finding, starting and using the backup
>>while flying the plane, all under the hood.
>>
>> 4 course ranges were once the standard. We have moved on. Come join
>>us!
>>
>> _
>> Brian Hausknecht
>> bhauskne@gmail.com
>> www.brianflys.net
>> www.brianflys.com
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>>From: "mel@becknet.com" <mel@becknet.com>
>> Sender: owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com
>> Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 10:41:01
>> To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com<teamgrumman-list@matronics.com>
>>TeamGrumman-List: Re: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master
>>Solenoid?
>>
>><mel@becknet.com>
>>
>> Izit just me, or are new pilots being extremely unwise in their
>>unflinching reliance on pod&pad things? I had a talk with an IFR
>>student recently who claimed that he never takes paper charts along,
>>despite his instructor's urgings. He's got a Garmin in the panel, an
>>iPad, and an iPhone. "Redundancy: check", he brags.
>>
>> In my experience, these electronic things all seem to run out of
>>juice at the same time, unless you have fanatical battery management
>>skills. I'm an engineer working in the computer biz, and still find
>>keeping nav gizmos alive challenging.
>>
>> -mel beckman
>>
>> -mel beckman
>>
>> On Sep 25, 2012, at 9:38 AM, "beltz6" <beltz6@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> n76lima(at)mindspring.com wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> My initial reply was sort of tongue in cheek, pointing out the
>>>> extreme measures needed to provide a backup for loss of electrons
>>>>due
>>>> to failed Master Solenoid circuit.
>>>>
>>>> A handheld Com and a battery backed up portable GPS should suffice
>>>> for most flights, with the standard flashlight we all carry...
>>>>
>>>> --Bob Steward
>>>
>>>
>>> I rarely fly at night these days. But this is a good reminder to
>>>make sure the batteries in my GPS and handheld radio are fresh, and
>>>to check whether the former actually useably transmits and receives
>>>from the cockpit environment.
>>>
>>> Still, it would SUCK bigtime to have such a failure while on an ILS
>>>(which one has to do from time to time at my home airport).
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Read this topic online here:
>>>
>>> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=383964#383964
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Message 32
| 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: Too many toys in the cockpit |
>Bob, I hate to say this but you need to catch up with the
>times. If you have a Garmin 430/530 or better that has a current
>NAV. Card plus an IPad that runs Foreflight with current plates and
>charts you are perfectly legal. I have thousands of flights all
>over the world with paper less cockpits. I fly my 1970 AA5B the
>same way. Nothing wrong with it. In fact I have better information
>at my finger tips then most Airlines. You should embrace technology
>it really works. I'm not saying one should never look outside for
>traffic, and I'm sure a believer in dead reckoning when things go
>bad. Just my thoughts.
>Scott
Not opposed to technology, just observing that the use of it, at the
expense of the time proven methods means brain-dead pilots that CAN'T
Nav when the electrons go away. I rather imagine that anyone flying
for the Majors has had enough training in the non-glass environment
to be able to do fine when the lights go out.
If you don't have the fundamentals down (as most every newly minted
pilot with a GPS in his flight bag), then you are limited with your
options in a tight situation.
Not saying that every flight is made with a thumb on the chart
showing current position, but if all you have are the toys, and they
go POOF! then you are in a bad situation as opposed to just being
inconvenienced.
As we know from maintenance, there is Legal, and there is Safe, and
sometimes they are NOT the same thing!
--Bob Steward
Birmingham, AL
Message 33
| 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: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master |
Solenoid?
AN Ranging. -=0A=0AMany, many, years ago my tail-wheel instructor and I w
ere having a conversation about GPS. -He's an old guy (i.e., older than m
e) and he had used AN Ranging. -He was a big proponent of GPS. -I guess
we could go back to bon fires along visual routes and highways to guide pl
anes. -=0A=0AFlying home from Sun River in 1995 I was depending on VORs t
o fly to Salt Lake City. -A VOR I needed was out-of-service. -I used pi
lotage to cover the 100 miles or so. -I bought a Garmin 95 and I removed
the VORs from my Cheetah. -I haven't had one in any of my planes since.
-In 17 years of flying with GPS only, I've only had one time when I lost
satellites: -Near China Lake. -I've flown across the U.S. many times.
-I've flown Victor airways with the GPS. -I've flown through the LAX VF
R corridor being vectored to VOR way points . . -all using a GPS. -=0A
=0AAnd, I don't have any paper charts any more. -WAY TOO easy to zoom to
my current location on an iPad. -No more searching. -No more head-down
trying to draw lines on a paper chart from relevant VORs and watching for t
raffic and checking where I am on the ground at the same time. -With the
sectional as part of my flight path, all the info I need is right at hand.
-=0A=0A=0A________________________________=0A From: Brian Hausknecht <bha
uskne@gmail.com>=0ATo: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com =0ASent: Tuesday, Sep
tember 25, 2012 10:57 AM=0ASubject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Melted wire -
- emergency bypass of the Master Solenoid?=0A =0A--> TeamGrumman-List messa
ge posted by: "Brian Hausknecht" <bhauskne@gmail.com>=0A=0AIt is just you,
Mel.- These new devices are very reliable and when on ship's power the de
vice battery provides far longer backup than the aircraft battery. And with
multiple devices there is potential for much safer contingent operation. I
F the pilot practices with the contingent system.- That means finding, st
arting and using the backup while flying the plane, all under the hood. =0A
=0A4 course ranges were once the standard. We have moved on.- Come join u
s!=0A=0A_=0ABrian Hausknecht=0Abhauskne@gmail.com=0Awww.brianflys.net=0Awww
.brianflys.com=0A=0A-----Original Message-----=0AFrom: "mel@becknet.com" <m
el@becknet.com>=0ASender: owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com=0ADat
e: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 10:41:01 =0ATo: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com<teamgrum
Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master Sol
becknet.com>=0A=0AIzit just me, or are new pilots being extremely unwise in
their unflinching reliance on pod&pad things? I had a talk with an IFR stu
dent recently who claimed that he never takes paper charts along, despite h
is instructor's urgings. He's got a Garmin in the panel, an iPad, and an iP
hone. "Redundancy: check", he brags. =0A=0AIn my experience, these electron
ic things all seem to run out of juice at the same time, unless you have fa
natical battery management skills. I'm an engineer working in the computer
biz, and still find keeping nav gizmos alive challenging. =0A=0A-mel beckma
n=0A=0A-mel beckman=0A=0AOn Sep 25, 2012, at 9:38 AM, "beltz6" <beltz6@yaho
z6@yahoo.com>=0A> =0A> =0A> n76lima(at)mindspring.com wrote:=0A>> =0A>> =0A
>> My initial reply was sort of tongue in cheek, pointing out the =0A>> ext
reme measures needed to provide a backup for loss of electrons due =0A>> to
failed Master Solenoid circuit.=0A>> =0A>> A handheld Com and a battery ba
cked up portable GPS should suffice =0A>> for most flights, with the standa
rd flashlight we all carry...=0A>> =0A>> --Bob Steward=0A> =0A> =0A> I rare
ly fly at night these days.- But this is a good reminder to make sure the
batteries in my GPS and handheld radio are fresh, and to check whether the
former actually useably transmits and receives from the cockpit environmen
t.=0A> =0A> Still, it would SUCK bigtime to have such a failure while on an
ILS (which one has to do from time to time at my home airport).=0A> =0A>
=0A> =0A> =0A> Read this topic online here:=0A> =0A> http://forums.matronic
s.com/viewtopic.php?p=383964#383964=0A> =0A> =0A> =0A> =0A> =0A> =0A> =0A
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -Matt Dralle, List Admi
=====
Message 34
| 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: Too many toys in the cockpit |
teamgrumman(at)yahoo.com wrote:
> "There ought to be a limited license for those that can only navigate with GPS."
>
>
> -guilty
>
Gary and I are having a friendly argument over whether to replace my Narco 122
with a Garmin 430 for my #2 nav position. I'm not caving in on that one.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=383986#383986
Message 35
| 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: Too many toys in the cockpit |
Bob, Your right about new pilots, and even some very old pilots. I was very
reluctant to give up paper charts 6 years ago when I started using an EFB.
As long as you know your limitations and the limitations of the equipment your
using. And yes we have been using EFB's a lot longer then most GA pilots.
Scott
Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 25, 2012, at 1:43 PM, Bob Steward <n76lima@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>
>> Bob, I hate to say this but you need to catch up with the times. If you have
a Garmin 430/530 or better that has a current NAV. Card plus an IPad that runs
Foreflight with current plates and charts you are perfectly legal. I have
thousands of flights all over the world with paper less cockpits. I fly my 1970
AA5B the same way. Nothing wrong with it. In fact I have better information
at my finger tips then most Airlines. You should embrace technology it really
works. I'm not saying one should never look outside for traffic, and I'm
sure a believer in dead reckoning when things go bad. Just my thoughts.
>> Scott
>
> Not opposed to technology, just observing that the use of it, at the expense
of the time proven methods means brain-dead pilots that CAN'T Nav when the electrons
go away. I rather imagine that anyone flying for the Majors has had enough
training in the non-glass environment to be able to do fine when the lights
go out.
>
> If you don't have the fundamentals down (as most every newly minted pilot with
a GPS in his flight bag), then you are limited with your options in a tight
situation.
>
> Not saying that every flight is made with a thumb on the chart showing current
position, but if all you have are the toys, and they go POOF! then you are in
a bad situation as opposed to just being inconvenienced.
>
> As we know from maintenance, there is Legal, and there is Safe, and sometimes
they are NOT the same thing!
>
> --Bob Steward
> Birmingham, AL
>
>
>
>
Message 36
| 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: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master |
Solenoid?
On 09/25/2012 01:41 PM, mel@becknet.com wrote:
>
> He's got a Garmin in the panel, an iPad, and an iPhone. "Redundancy: check",
he brags.
*shrug* He is right. You have a higher chance of that single engine
failing than all three of those electronic devices in the span of a
single flight.
And it is much safer to be able to glance at a display and know exactly
where you are versus having your head down trying to figure out where
you are on a large folding piece of paper, or a book full of paper.
Less heads down time offers more opportunity for you to keep your head
looking outside where it belongs, and enjoy the view.
-Dj
Message 37
| 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: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master |
Solenoid?
Dj,
I'm not saying that Gizmos are not superior to paper; clearly they are, while they're
working. I'm saying that paper seems like a very reasonable back up, because
as unlikely as multiple device failures are, they have been documented to
happen.
Your single-engine analogy is a red herring: carrying a second engine is actually
quite expensive. And demonstrably less safe than many single-engine airplanes
:-)
I'd like to see AOPA conduct a survey on just how many inflight failures have occurred
with tablet devices. It would be great to have hard facts instead of anecdotal
evidence.
-mel via cell
On Sep 25, 2012, at 12:51 PM, Dj Merrill <deej@deej.net> wrote:
>
> On 09/25/2012 01:41 PM, mel@becknet.com wrote:
>>
>> He's got a Garmin in the panel, an iPad, and an iPhone. "Redundancy: check",
he brags.
>
> *shrug* He is right. You have a higher chance of that single engine
> failing than all three of those electronic devices in the span of a
> single flight.
>
> And it is much safer to be able to glance at a display and know exactly
> where you are versus having your head down trying to figure out where
> you are on a large folding piece of paper, or a book full of paper.
>
> Less heads down time offers more opportunity for you to keep your head
> looking outside where it belongs, and enjoy the view.
>
> -Dj
>
>
>
>
Message 38
| 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: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master |
Solenoid?
On 09/25/2012 03:59 PM, Mel Beckman wrote:
> I'm saying that paper seems like a very reasonable back up, because as unlikely
as multiple device failures are, they have been documented to happen.
Yes, I am sure they have happened, but statistically they are far less
likely to happen than having a single critical device fail, like the
engine, or the prop, etc.
If you only had one tablet aboard, I'd agree with you wholeheartedly.
But three separate, and different, devices is a whole different story
altogether.
Really no need for paper anymore if you are going to have triple
electronic redundancy.
-Dj
Message 39
| 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: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master |
Solenoid?
I have an Aera 550, an Ipad and a portable Intercom which all need power
from the cigarette lighter. Has anyone installed multiple power
outlets, where the existing outlet is? I currently use a three outlet
adapter which keeps popping out just enough so as not to charge
anything.
Andrew Kuzyk
On Sep 25, 2012, at 2:29 PM, Gary Vogt wrote:
> Or like the AG5B: mount about 7 fuses on the firewall and run it to
the main buss. one for every radio you want to operated separately.
Let's really complicate the wiring so that we all have the same
electrical gremlins the AG5Bs have.
>
> Seriously. Is this a big problem? I don't think so.
>
> From: flyv35b <flyv35b@minetfiber.com>
> To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com
> Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2012 8:01 AM
> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of
the Master Solenoid?
>
<flyv35b@minetfiber.com>
>
> On 9/25/2012 7:49 AM, 923TE wrote:
> >
> > A mechanically operated contractor next to the battery that is
operated from the cockpit would make it protected
> >
> > http://www.flamingriver.com/index.php/products/c0015/s0004/FR1003-2
> >
> >
> > On Sep 25, 2012, at 9:24 AM, n76lima@mindspring.com wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>>> So the only thing I have to watch for now is if there is an
-intermittent- short in the relay that only appears when I'm at 8500
>>feet, at night, not near any suitable landing sites :-/
> >>
> >>> A good reason to have an emergency buss directly off the battery,
> >>> bypassing the master switch and relay.
> >>
> >> Hmmm, would this be a large switch/circuit breaker that was
connected by a heavy gauge wire to the battery? How would one go about
protecting such a circuit from the battery to the panel mounted switch?
I'd want it carefully planned and double insulated, perhaps running
through some firesleeve, to prevent any chafing at the firewall
penetration, passing the controls, etc. enroute to the switch.
> >>
> >> Would make a great arc welder should it ever find a ground...
> >>
> >> --Bob Steward
> >> Birmingham, AL
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> Simpler than that. Just mount a fuse close to the battery that is
sized
> to protect the wire you are running through the firewall to the
breaker
> switch, which is sized to open BEFORE the fuse blows. Run the wire
> through fire sleeve or even through aluminum tubing attached to a
> bulkhead fitting in the firewall. The only wire that is unprotected
> would be the very short wire from the fuse to the battery or battery
> buss bar. The essential items can be supplied from a separate buss
> which can be fed from the normal buss through a diode. Chp;
&n
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
NOTICE OF CONFIDENTIALITY. This communication, including any information
transmitted with it, is intended only for the use of the addressee(s) and
is confidential. If you are not an intended recipient or responsible for
delivering the message to an intended recipient, any review, disclosure,
conversion to hard copy, dissemination, reproduction or other use of any
part of this communication is strictly prohibited, as is the taking or o
mitting of any action in reliance upon this communication. If you receive
d this communication in error or without authorization please notify us i
mmediately by return e-mail or otherwise and permanently delete the entir
e communication from any computer, disk drive, or other storage medium.
Message 40
| 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: Too many toys in the cockpit |
I guess it depends a bit on whether your IFR or VFR. If your IFR paper chart
s are a distraction. If you lose navigation you rely on ATC to vector you to
a VFR landing. If your VFR paper can be a nice backup unless it causes your
head to be inside the cockpit too much. Knowing a compass heading and what'
s on the ground is even better.
During my instrument check ride the 430's both started flashing INTEG during
the final approach. Luckily I caught the warning and announced to the exami
ner that we would have to go missed approach. He just said continue the appr
oach since we could see it at that point.
Maybe Garmin is referring to VOR or paper charts in there explanation of INT
EG:
For GPS-based approaches, receiver autonomous integrity monitoring (RAIM) wi
ll monitor satellite conditions and alert the pilot using an =98INTEG
=99 or =98WARN=99 annunciation at the bottom left corner of t
he display (see page 15) if protection limits cannot be maintained. If this o
ccurs, the GPS receiver should not be used for primary navigation guidance. R
evert to an alternate navigation source, or select an alternate destination a
irport.
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! --
|