Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 07:50 AM - Re: Incompatibility of Skytec PM with ElectroAir (boxereighty@AOL.COM)
2. 08:48 AM - Re: Incompatibility of Skytec PM with ElectroAir (923TE)
3. 10:48 AM - Re: Incompatibility of Skytec PM with ElectroAir (Gary Vogt)
4. 10:52 AM - Re: Incompatibility of Skytec PM with ElectroAir (Gary Vogt)
5. 11:32 AM - Re: Incompatibility of Skytec PM with ElectroAir (923TE)
6. 04:36 PM - Re: Incompatibility of Skytec PM with ElectroAir (Dean White)
7. 05:14 PM - Re: Incompatibility of Skytec PM with ElectroAir (923TE)
8. 06:19 PM - Re: Incompatibility of Skytec PM with ElectroAir (Dean White)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Incompatibility of Skytec PM with ElectroAir |
FWIW, the ElectroAir installation instructions recommends against any
permanent magnet light weight starter and specifies the SkyTek as
incompatible with starting with their electronic ignition energized because
of the high current draw. The later version is OK but I have the PM version
.
I just don't get to start with the electronic ignition energized. I kept th
e
impulse mag so starts are just likealways.
________
There is a clever saying about telling someone not to do something that
can't be done while he's doing it, but it slips my mind.?
Let's ask Dean and Larry what they think.? They both have light weight
starters, one 24 volt, one 12 volt.? I installed them both.
Unless the battery is dead or near dead, I can't think of a reason to worry
about it.? Come to think of it, if the battery is low and the ElectroAir is
not putting out enough juice, the plane will still start just fine on the
left mag if the engine cranks.?
Gary
________
I'm the one who posted the info on PM SkyTek incompatibility.Someone on the
GG wanted advice on which SkyTek starter to chose. Thiswasn't "told" to me
by Electroair personnel, it is found onpage 1.5 of the FAA installation ma
nual, revision 7, dated Nov 2012 andis available right now on the ElectroAi
r website under "Tech Support". This same warning was also in revision 5 da
ted April 2012 pg1.4 and this is the version of the manual that came with m
y unit. Thereason for the caveats about the PM starters in ElectroAirinstal
lations are very clearly spelled out in that text and should befamiliar to
anyone having an ElectroAir ignition installed on a Tiger. I haveone of the
PM starters and I'm not about to replace it but I standforewarned of the e
ffects of the PM starter/ElectroAir combination ifmy battery is the least b
it low. Forewarned is forearmed. However, if I were replacing one of the OE
M"boat anchor" starters today I would chose the non-PM version SkyTekoffers
and that is what prompted my comment on GG to the guy wantingadvice on whi
ch to purchase.
Other than changing my starter cable tohigher gauge and simply starting as
I have for 18 years on the leftimpulsed coupled mag I haven't had any real
problems/changes with mycurrent PM starter ElectroAir combo.? Starting the
two Tigers I've owned since 1988 has never been aproblem whether hot or col
d, hand propping or starter assisted (OEM orSkyTek). Improved starting capa
bility was simply NOT the reason I paidfor the ElectroAir unit installation
to begin with. However a completeknowledge of how these STC's interact is
important for the pilot on theline and good to know for those in the market
for a new starter.
Brent Smith
N28386/1N1
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Incompatibility of Skytec PM with ElectroAir |
All I can say is that the LASAR made starting my Tiger very very quick. The T
iger came from the factory with the Skytec PM starter. It almost always star
ts on the first of three blades passing my view, that is immediately. If I t
urn the LASAR off then it starts like it used to within a couple revolutions
. Point is, the electronic ignition makes for much less wear and battery dra
in on starting so why not use it?
The Powerflow guys said their exhaust was not compatible with the LASAR, tha
t they had negative feed back from the field that this was based on. I told t
hem at the time, about 4 years ago, that I had been flying it that way for a
bout 4 years with no problems.
I think sometimes these small companies take the easy way out for liability a
nd ease of use reasons.
On Dec 22, 2012, at 9:50 AM, boxereighty@AOL.COM wrote:
FWIW, the ElectroAir installation instructions recommends against any
permanent magnet light weight starter and specifies the SkyTek as
incompatible with starting with their electronic ignition energized because
of the high current draw. The later version is OK but I have the PM version.
I just don't get to start with the electronic ignition energized. I kept the
impulse mag so starts are just like always.
________
There is a clever saying about telling someone not to do something that
can't be done while he's doing it, but it slips my mind.
Let's ask Dean and Larry what they think. They both have light weight
starters, one 24 volt, one 12 volt. I installed them both.
Unless the battery is dead or near dead, I can't think of a reason to worry
about it. Come to think of it, if the battery is low and the ElectroAir is
not putting out enough juice, the plane will still start just fine on the
left mag if the engine cranks.
Gary
________
I'm the one who posted the info on PM SkyTek incompatibility. Someone on the
GG wanted advice on which SkyTek starter to chose. This wasn't "told" to me
by Electroair personnel, it is found on page 1.5 of the FAA installation ma
nual, revision 7, dated Nov 2012 and is available right now on the ElectroAi
r website under "Tech Support". This same warning was also in revision 5 dat
ed April 2012 pg 1.4 and this is the version of the manual that came with my
unit. The reason for the caveats about the PM starters in ElectroAir instal
lations are very clearly spelled out in that text and should be familiar to a
nyone having an ElectroAir ignition installed on a Tiger. I have one of the P
M starters and I'm not about to replace it but I stand forewarned of the eff
ects of the PM starter/ElectroAir combination if my battery is the least bit
low. Forewarned is forearmed. However, if I were replacing one of the OEM "
boat anchor" starters today I would chose the non-PM version SkyTek offers a
nd that is what prompted my comment on GG to the guy wanting advice on which
to purchase.
Other than changing my starter cable to higher gauge and simply starting as I
have for 18 years on the left impulsed coupled mag I haven't had any real p
roblems/changes with my current PM starter ElectroAir combo. Starting the t
wo Tigers I've owned since 1988 has never been a problem whether hot or cold
, hand propping or starter assisted (OEM or SkyTek). Improved starting capab
ility was simply NOT the reason I paid for the ElectroAir unit installation t
o begin with. However a complete knowledge of how these STC's interact is im
portant for the pilot on the line and good to know for those in the market f
or a new starter.
Brent Smith
N28386/1N1
==========================
========
==========================
========
==========================
========
==========================
========
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Incompatibility of Skytec PM with ElectroAir |
Thanks for writing Brent. -=0A=0AThe first plane I did was a 77 Tiger wit
h the PM starter. -I was amazed how easily it started on both mags. -Li
ke starting a car. -The only problem we encountered was not using a separ
ate switch to turn the ignition on or off. -Dean and I talked about insta
lling two separate mag switches like on a Citabria. -He may have already
done that. -=0A=0AIt's a neat system. -I just wish they had incorporate
d the manifold pressure unit into the main unit. -Save a bunch of wiring.
=0A=0AGary=0A=0A=0A________________________________=0A From: "boxereighty@A
OL.COM" <boxereighty@AOL.COM>=0ATo: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com =0ASent:
Saturday, December 22, 2012 7:50 AM=0ASubject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Incom
patibility of Skytec PM with ElectroAir=0A =0A=0A=0A=0AFWIW, the ElectroAir
installation instructions recommends against any =0Apermanent magnet light
weight starter and specifies the SkyTek as =0Aincompatible with starting w
ith their electronic ignition energized because =0Aof the high current draw
. The later version is OK but I have the PM version. =0AI just don't get to
start with the electronic ignition energized. I kept the =0Aimpulse mag so
starts are just like=0Aalways.=0A=0A________=0A=0A=0AThere is a clever say
ing about telling someone not to do something that =0Acan't be done while h
e's doing it, but it slips my mind.- =0A=0ALet's ask Dean and Larry what
they think.- They both have light weight =0Astarters, one 24 volt, one 12
volt.- I installed them both. =0A=0AUnless the battery is dead or near d
ead, I can't think of a reason to worry =0Aabout it.- Come to think of it
, if the battery is low and the ElectroAir is =0Anot putting out enough jui
ce, the plane will still start just fine on the =0Aleft mag if the engine c
ranks.- =0A=0AGary =0A=0A________ =0A=0A=0AI'm the one who posted the inf
o on PM SkyTek incompatibility.=0ASomeone on the GG wanted advice on which
SkyTek starter to chose. This=0Awasn't "told" to me by Electroair personnel
, it is found on=0Apage 1.5 of the FAA installation manual, revision 7, dat
ed Nov 2012 and=0Ais available right now on the ElectroAir website under "T
ech Support". This same warning was also in revision 5 dated April 2012 pg
=0A1.4 and this is the version of the manual that came with my unit. The=0A
reason for the caveats about the PM starters in ElectroAir=0Ainstallations
are very clearly spelled out in that text and should be=0Afamiliar to anyon
e having an ElectroAir ignition installed on a Tiger. I have=0Aone of the P
M starters and I'm not about to replace it but I stand=0Aforewarned of the
effects of the PM starter/ElectroAir combination if=0Amy battery is the lea
st bit low. Forewarned is forearmed. However, if I were replacing one of th
e OEM=0A"boat anchor" starters today I would chose the non-PM version SkyTe
k=0Aoffers and that is what prompted my comment on GG to the guy wanting=0A
advice on which to purchase. =0A=0AOther than changing my starter cable to
=0Ahigher gauge and simply starting as I have for 18 years on the left=0Aim
pulsed coupled mag I haven't had any real problems/changes with my=0Acurren
t PM starter ElectroAir combo.- Starting the two Tigers I've owned since
1988 has never been a=0Aproblem whether hot or cold, hand propping or start
er assisted (OEM or=0ASkyTek). Improved starting capability was simply NOT
the reason I paid=0Afor the ElectroAir unit installation to begin with. How
ever a complete=0Aknowledge of how these STC's interact is important for th
e pilot on the=0Aline and good to know for those in the market for a new st
=====
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Incompatibility of Skytec PM with ElectroAir |
Oh, and I would like the EA ignition to have a usable RPM signal. -=0A=0A
=0A________________________________=0A From: "boxereighty@AOL.COM" <boxerei
ghty@AOL.COM>=0ATo: teamgrumman-list@matronics.com =0ASent: Saturday, Decem
ber 22, 2012 7:50 AM=0ASubject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Incompatibility of Sk
ytec PM with ElectroAir=0A =0A=0A=0A=0AFWIW, the ElectroAir installation in
structions recommends against any =0Apermanent magnet light weight starter
and specifies the SkyTek as =0Aincompatible with starting with their electr
onic ignition energized because =0Aof the high current draw. The later vers
ion is OK but I have the PM version. =0AI just don't get to start with the
electronic ignition energized. I kept the =0Aimpulse mag so starts are just
like=0Aalways.=0A=0A________=0A=0A=0AThere is a clever saying about tellin
g someone not to do something that =0Acan't be done while he's doing it, bu
t it slips my mind.- =0A=0ALet's ask Dean and Larry what they think.- T
hey both have light weight =0Astarters, one 24 volt, one 12 volt.- I inst
alled them both. =0A=0AUnless the battery is dead or near dead, I can't thi
nk of a reason to worry =0Aabout it.- Come to think of it, if the battery
is low and the ElectroAir is =0Anot putting out enough juice, the plane wi
ll still start just fine on the =0Aleft mag if the engine cranks.- =0A=0A
Gary =0A=0A________ =0A=0A=0AI'm the one who posted the info on PM SkyTek i
ncompatibility.=0ASomeone on the GG wanted advice on which SkyTek starter t
o chose. This=0Awasn't "told" to me by Electroair personnel, it is found on
=0Apage 1.5 of the FAA installation manual, revision 7, dated Nov 2012 and
=0Ais available right now on the ElectroAir website under "Tech Support". T
his same warning was also in revision 5 dated April 2012 pg=0A1.4 and this
is the version of the manual that came with my unit. The=0Areason for the c
aveats about the PM starters in ElectroAir=0Ainstallations are very clearly
spelled out in that text and should be=0Afamiliar to anyone having an Elec
troAir ignition installed on a Tiger. I have=0Aone of the PM starters and I
'm not about to replace it but I stand=0Aforewarned of the effects of the P
M starter/ElectroAir combination if=0Amy battery is the least bit low. Fore
warned is forearmed. However, if I were replacing one of the OEM=0A"boat an
chor" starters today I would chose the non-PM version SkyTek=0Aoffers and t
hat is what prompted my comment on GG to the guy wanting=0Aadvice on which
to purchase. =0A=0AOther than changing my starter cable to=0Ahigher gauge a
nd simply starting as I have for 18 years on the left=0Aimpulsed coupled ma
g I haven't had any real problems/changes with my=0Acurrent PM starter Elec
troAir combo.- Starting the two Tigers I've owned since 1988 has never be
en a=0Aproblem whether hot or cold, hand propping or starter assisted (OEM
or=0ASkyTek). Improved starting capability was simply NOT the reason I paid
=0Afor the ElectroAir unit installation to begin with. However a complete
=0Aknowledge of how these STC's interact is important for the pilot on the
=0Aline and good to know for those in the market for a new starter.=0A=0ABr
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Incompatibility of Skytec PM with ElectroAir |
Is this it?
=9CPeople who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are
doing it.=9D
- George Bernard Shaw
From
http://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/5217.George_Bernard_Shaw
Or from Old Chinese Proverb according to:
http://paws.kettering.edu/~jhuggins/humor/quotes.html
On Dec 21, 2012, at 10:23 PM, Gary Vogt <teamgrumman@yahoo.com> wrote:
There is a clever saying about telling someone not to do something that can'
t be done while he's doing it, but it slips my mind.
Let's ask Dean and Larry what they think. They both have light weight start
ers, one 24 volt, one 12 volt. I installed them both.
Unless the battery is dead or near dead, I can't think of a reason to worry a
bout it. Come to think of it, if the battery is low and the ElectroAir is n
ot putting out enough juice, the plane will still start just fine on the lef
t mag if the engine cranks.
Gary
From: "923te@att.net" <923te@att.net>
Sent: Friday, December 21, 2012 6:45 PM
Subject: TeamGrumman-List: Incompatibility of Skytec PM with ElectroAir
Gary,
This was posted on the other list by a fellow Tiger owner. What do you think
about what they told him?
Ned
FWIW, the ElectroAir installation instructions recommends against any perman
ent magnet light weight starter and specifies the SkyTek as incompatible wit
h starting with their electronic ignition energized because of the high curr
ent draw. The later version is OK but I have the PM version. I just don't ge
t to start with the electronic ignition energized. I kept the impulse mag so
starts are just like always on the Left mag and turn on the electronic afte
r startup.
==========================
==========================
==========================
==========================
========================= _
==========================
==========================
====
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Incompatibility of Skytec PM with ElectroAir |
I am still working on this with Mike K at Electroair.
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gary Vogt
Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2012 10:52 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Incompatibility of Skytec PM with ElectroAir
Oh, and I would like the EA ignition to have a usable RPM signal.
_____
From: "boxereighty@AOL.COM" <boxereighty@AOL.COM>
Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2012 7:50 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Incompatibility of Skytec PM with ElectroAir
FWIW, the ElectroAir installation instructions recommends against any
permanent magnet light weight starter and specifies the SkyTek as
incompatible with starting with their electronic ignition energized because
of the high current draw. The later version is OK but I have the PM version.
I just don't get to start with the electronic ignition energized. I kept the
impulse mag so starts are just like always.
________
There is a clever saying about telling someone not to do something that
can't be done while he's doing it, but it slips my mind.
Let's ask Dean and Larry what they think. They both have light weight
starters, one 24 volt, one 12 volt. I installed them both.
Unless the battery is dead or near dead, I can't think of a reason to worry
about it. Come to think of it, if the battery is low and the ElectroAir is
not putting out enough juice, the plane will still start just fine on the
left mag if the engine cranks.
Gary
________
I'm the one who posted the info on PM SkyTek incompatibility. Someone on the
GG wanted advice on which SkyTek starter to chose. This wasn't "told" to me
by Electroair personnel, it is found on page 1.5 of the FAA installation
manual, revision 7, dated Nov 2012 and is available right now on the
ElectroAir website under "Tech Support". This same warning was also in
revision 5 dated April 2012 pg 1.4 and this is the version of the manual
that came with my unit. The reason for the caveats about the PM starters in
ElectroAir installations are very clearly spelled out in that text and
should be familiar to anyone having an ElectroAir ignition installed on a
Tiger. I have one of the PM starters and I'm not about to replace it but I
stand forewarned of the effects of the PM starter/ElectroAir combination if
my battery is the least bit low. Forewarned is forearmed. However, if I were
replacing one of the OEM "boat anchor" starters today I would chose the
non-PM version SkyTek offers and that is what prompted my comment on GG to
the guy wanting advice on which to purchase.
Other than changing my starter cable to higher gauge and simply starting as
I have for 18 years on the left impulsed coupled mag I haven't had any real
problems/changes with my current PM starter ElectroAir combo. Starting the
two Tigers I've owned since 1988 has never been a problem whether hot or
cold, hand propping or starter assisted (OEM or SkyTek). Improved starting
capability was simply NOT the reason I paid for the ElectroAir unit
installation to begin with. However a complete knowledge of how these STC's
interact is important for the pilot on the line and good to know for those
in the market for a new starter.
Brent Smith
N28386/1N1
wwwlow" target="_blank"
href="http://www.buildersbooks.com/">www.buildersb==================
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Incompatibility of Skytec PM with ElectroAir |
I had to change to a Electronics International Tach for the LASAR. EI modifi
es their tach to pick up the signal put out by the LASAR
Maybe theirs would work with the EA?
On Dec 22, 2012, at 6:35 PM, "Dean White" <dmwhite@e3ra.com> wrote:
I am still working on this with Mike K at Electroair.
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-teamgrumman-
list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gary Vogt
Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2012 10:52 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Incompatibility of Skytec PM with ElectroAir
Oh, and I would like the EA ignition to have a usable RPM signal.
From: "boxereighty@AOL.COM" <boxereighty@AOL.COM>
Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2012 7:50 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Incompatibility of Skytec PM with ElectroAir
FWIW, the ElectroAir installation instructions recommends against any
permanent magnet light weight starter and specifies the SkyTek as
incompatible with starting with their electronic ignition energized because
of the high current draw. The later version is OK but I have the PM version.
I just don't get to start with the electronic ignition energized. I kept the
impulse mag so starts are just like always.
________
There is a clever saying about telling someone not to do something that
can't be done while he's doing it, but it slips my mind.
Let's ask Dean and Larry what they think. They both have light weight
starters, one 24 volt, one 12 volt. I installed them both.
Unless the battery is dead or near dead, I can't think of a reason to worry
about it. Come to think of it, if the battery is low and the ElectroAir is
not putting out enough juice, the plane will still start just fine on the
left mag if the engine cranks.
Gary
________
I'm the one who posted the info on PM SkyTek incompatibility. Someone on the
GG wanted advice on which SkyTek starter to chose. This wasn't "told" to me
by Electroair personnel, it is found on page 1.5 of the FAA installation ma
nual, revision 7, dated Nov 2012 and is available right now on the ElectroAi
r website under "Tech Support". This same warning was also in revision 5 dat
ed April 2012 pg 1.4 and this is the version of the manual that came with my
unit. The reason for the caveats about the PM starters in ElectroAir instal
lations are very clearly spelled out in that text and should be familiar to a
nyone having an ElectroAir ignition installed on a Tiger. I have one of the P
M starters and I'm not about to replace it but I stand forewarned of the eff
ects of the PM starter/ElectroAir combination if my battery is the least bit
low. Forewarned is forearmed. However, if I were replacing one of the OEM "
boat anchor" starters today I would chose the non-PM version SkyTek offers a
nd that is what prompted my comment on GG to the guy wanting advice on which
to purchase.
Other than changing my starter cable to higher gauge and simply starting as I
have for 18 years on the left impulsed coupled mag I haven't had any real p
roblems/changes with my current PM starter ElectroAir combo. Starting the t
wo Tigers I've owned since 1988 has never been a problem whether hot or cold
, hand propping or starter assisted (OEM or SkyTek). Improved starting capab
ility was simply NOT the reason I paid for the ElectroAir unit installation t
o begin with. However a complete knowledge of how these STC's interact is im
portant for the pilot on the line and good to know for those in the market f
or a new starter.
Brent Smith
N28386/1N1
wwwlow" target="_blank" href="http://www.buildersbooks.com/">www.builder
sb==================
www.aeroelectric.com
www.buildersbooks.com
www.homebuilthelp.com
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
http://forums.matronics.com
==========================
========
==========================
========
==========================
========
==========================
========
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: | Incompatibility of Skytec PM with ElectroAir |
The stock Electroair unit puts out a square wave that many electronic
tachs can process. However, the Horizon P1000 is looking for the induced
spike on the P-lead. So we are looking at modifying the output from the
Electroair to mimic the induced spike. I don't think that it is a super
high priority for Mike but hopefully one that will get done soon.
Unfortunately, the Horizon guys have been unwilling to tell us the
amplitude and duration of the spike their unit needs to trigger the RPM
count.
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of 923TE
Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2012 5:15 PM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Incompatibility of Skytec PM with
ElectroAir
I had to change to a Electronics International Tach for the LASAR. EI
modifies their tach to pick up the signal put out by the LASAR
Maybe theirs would work with the EA?
On Dec 22, 2012, at 6:35 PM, "Dean White" <dmwhite@e3ra.com> wrote:
I am still working on this with Mike K at Electroair.
From: owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-teamgrumman-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Gary
Vogt
Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2012 10:52 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Incompatibility of Skytec PM with
ElectroAir
Oh, and I would like the EA ignition to have a usable RPM signal.
_____
From: "boxereighty@AOL.COM" <boxereighty@AOL.COM>
Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2012 7:50 AM
Subject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Incompatibility of Skytec PM with
ElectroAir
FWIW, the ElectroAir installation instructions recommends against any
permanent magnet light weight starter and specifies the SkyTek as
incompatible with starting with their electronic ignition energized
because
of the high current draw. The later version is OK but I have the PM
version.
I just don't get to start with the electronic ignition energized. I kept
the
impulse mag so starts are just like always.
________
There is a clever saying about telling someone not to do something that
can't be done while he's doing it, but it slips my mind.
Let's ask Dean and Larry what they think. They both have light weight
starters, one 24 volt, one 12 volt. I installed them both.
Unless the battery is dead or near dead, I can't think of a reason to
worry
about it. Come to think of it, if the battery is low and the ElectroAir
is
not putting out enough juice, the plane will still start just fine on
the
left mag if the engine cranks.
Gary
________
I'm the one who posted the info on PM SkyTek incompatibility. Someone on
the GG wanted advice on which SkyTek starter to chose. This wasn't
"told" to me by Electroair personnel, it is found on page 1.5 of the FAA
installation manual, revision 7, dated Nov 2012 and is available right
now on the ElectroAir website under "Tech Support". This same warning
was also in revision 5 dated April 2012 pg 1.4 and this is the version
of the manual that came with my unit. The reason for the caveats about
the PM starters in ElectroAir installations are very clearly spelled out
in that text and should be familiar to anyone having an ElectroAir
ignition installed on a Tiger. I have one of the PM starters and I'm not
about to replace it but I stand forewarned of the effects of the PM
starter/ElectroAir combination if my battery is the least bit low.
Forewarned is forearmed. However, if I were replacing one of the OEM
"boat anchor" starters today I would chose the non-PM version SkyTek
offers and that is what prompted my comment on GG to the guy wanting
advice on which to purchase.
Other than changing my starter cable to higher gauge and simply starting
as I have for 18 years on the left impulsed coupled mag I haven't had
any real problems/changes with my current PM starter ElectroAir combo.
Starting the two Tigers I've owned since 1988 has never been a problem
whether hot or cold, hand propping or starter assisted (OEM or SkyTek).
Improved starting capability was simply NOT the reason I paid for the
ElectroAir unit installation to begin with. However a complete knowledge
of how these STC's interact is important for the pilot on the line and
good to know for those in the market for a new starter.
Brent Smith
N28386/1N1
wwwlow" target="_blank"
href="http://www.buildersbooks.com/">www.buildersb=======
===========
www.aeroelectric.com
www.buildersbooks.com
www.homebuilthelp.com
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
http://forums.matronics.com
=========
ctric.com
>www.buildersbooks.com
uilthelp.com
matronics.com/contribution
=========
t">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
=========
cs.com
=========
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! --
|