---------------------------------------------------------- TeamGrumman-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Tue 09/25/12: 40 ---------------------------------------------------------- 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 _____________________________________ Time: 12:15:26 AM PST US Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Melted wire From: FLYaDIVE Beltz: Which make and model meter did you use? Barry On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 10:27 PM, beltz6 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 _____________________________________ Time: 12:59:58 AM PST US From: Mel Beckman Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Melted wire 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 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 >> 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 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 wrote: >> >>> on that subject, why is it (the magneto P-Lead shields) grounded at both ends? >>> >>> From: "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 _____________________________________ Time: 01:18:22 AM PST US Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Melted wire From: FLYaDIVE 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 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 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 > *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 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 wrote: > > on that subject, why is it (the magneto P-Lead shields) grounded at both > ends? > > ------------------------------ > *From:* "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 _____________________________________ Time: 06:50:29 AM PST US From: flyv35b 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 5 _____________________________________ Time: 07:03:58 AM PST US From: Dan Schmitz Subject: RE: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Melted wire > -----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 _____________________________________ Time: 07:21:37 AM PST US Subject: RE: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Melted wire From: "Hosler, John" 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 _____________________________________ Time: 07:22:44 AM PST US From: flyv35b Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Melted wire 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 _____________________________________ Time: 07:24:57 AM PST US From: n76lima@mindspring.com Subject: TeamGrumman-List: 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 _____________________________________ Time: 07:27:01 AM PST US From: 923TE <923te@att.net> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Melted wire 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 ____________________________________ Time: 07:50:18 AM PST US Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master Solenoid? From: 923TE <923te@att.net> 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 ____________________________________ Time: 08:02:00 AM PST US From: flyv35b Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 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 ____________________________________ Time: 08:11:53 AM PST US From: Bob Steward Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 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. --Bob Steward Birmingham, AL ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 08:12:23 AM PST US Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master Solenoid? From: 923TE <923te@att.net> 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 ____________________________________ Time: 08:15:40 AM PST US Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master Solenoid? From: 923TE <923te@att.net> 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 ____________________________________ Time: 08:16:10 AM PST US From: flyv35b Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 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 ____________________________________ Time: 08:16:36 AM PST US From: Bob Steward Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 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 ____________________________________ Time: 09:38:28 AM PST US Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master Solenoid? From: "beltz6" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 09:49:49 AM PST US Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Melted wire From: "beltz6" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 10:46:45 AM PST US Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master Solenoid? From: "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" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 10:56:40 AM PST US From: Bob Steward Subject: TeamGrumman-List: 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. --Bob Steward ________________________________ Message 21 ____________________________________ Time: 10:57:53 AM PST US Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master Solenoid? From: "Brian Hausknecht" 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" 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" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 11:21:29 AM PST US From: "Mel Beckman" Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 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" wrote: > > > 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" > Sender: owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com > Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 10:41:01 > To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com >TeamGrumman-List: 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" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 11:23:00 AM PST US Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Too many toys in the cockpit From: Scott Trejo 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 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. > > --Bob Steward > > > > ________________________________ Message 24 ____________________________________ Time: 11:23:34 AM PST US From: Gary Vogt Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Melted wire 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 =0ATo: teamgrumman-list@mat ronics.com =0ASent: Tuesday, September 25, 2012 7:22 AM=0ASubject: Re: Team flyv35b =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 ____________________________________ Time: 11:27:19 AM PST US Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master Solenoid? From: "Brian Hausknecht" 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" 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" wrote: > > > 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" > Sender: owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com > Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 10:41:01 > To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com >TeamGrumman-List: 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" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 11:29:06 AM PST US From: "Mel Beckman" Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 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 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 > MD11 Capt. > AA5B owner > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Sep 25, 2012, at 12:56 PM, Bob Steward >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. >> >> --Bob Steward >> >> >> >> > > > > > ________________________________ Message 27 ____________________________________ Time: 11:29:07 AM PST US From: Gary Vogt Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 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 =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 ____________________________________ Time: 11:32:05 AM PST US From: Gary Vogt Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 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 =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 =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 ____________________________________ Time: 11:33:20 AM PST US From: Gary Vogt Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 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 =0ATo: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com =0ASent: T uesday, September 25, 2012 10:56 AM=0ASubject: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Too ma eward =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 ____________________________________ Time: 11:35:17 AM PST US Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Too many toys in the cockpit From: "Brian Hausknecht" 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" 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 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 > MD11 Capt. > AA5B owner > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Sep 25, 2012, at 12:56 PM, Bob Steward >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. >> >> --Bob Steward >> >> >> >> > > > > > ________________________________ Message 31 ____________________________________ Time: 11:35:39 AM PST US From: "Mel Beckman" Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 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" wrote: > > > 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" > Sender: owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com > Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 11:19:21 > To: >TeamGrumman-List: 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" wrote: >> >> >> 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" >> Sender: owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com >> Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 10:41:01 >> To: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com >>TeamGrumman-List: 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" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 11:43:41 AM PST US From: Bob Steward Subject: TeamGrumman-List: 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 ____________________________________ Time: 11:50:31 AM PST US From: Gary Vogt Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 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 =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" =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" =0ASender: owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com=0ADat e: Tue, 25 Sep 2012 10:41:01 =0ATo: teamgrumman-list@matronics.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" =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 ____________________________________ Time: 11:54:30 AM PST US Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Too many toys in the cockpit From: "beltz6" 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 ____________________________________ Time: 12:03:15 PM PST US Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Too many toys in the cockpit From: Scott Trejo 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 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 ____________________________________ Time: 12:52:22 PM PST US Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master Solenoid? From: Dj Merrill 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 ____________________________________ Time: 12:59:41 PM PST US Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master Solenoid? From: Mel Beckman 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 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 ____________________________________ Time: 01:07:37 PM PST US Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Re: Melted wire -- emergency bypass of the Master Solenoid? From: Dj Merrill 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 ____________________________________ Time: 01:08:59 PM PST US From: Andrew Kuzyk Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 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 > 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? > > > 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 ____________________________________ Time: 04:15:29 PM PST US From: 923TE <923te@att.net> Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: 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 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Post A New Message teamgrumman-list@matronics.com UN/SUBSCRIBE http://www.matronics.com/subscription List FAQ http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/TeamGrumman-List.htm Web Forum Interface To Lists http://forums.matronics.com Matronics List Wiki http://wiki.matronics.com Full Archive Search Engine http://www.matronics.com/search 7-Day List Browse http://www.matronics.com/browse/teamgrumman-list Browse Digests http://www.matronics.com/digest/teamgrumman-list Browse Other Lists http://www.matronics.com/browse Live Online Chat! http://www.matronics.com/chat Archive Downloading http://www.matronics.com/archives Photo Share http://www.matronics.com/photoshare Other Email Lists http://www.matronics.com/emaillists Contributions http://www.matronics.com/contribution ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.