Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 11:26 AM - Re: Incompatibility of Skytec PM with ElectroAir (923te@att.net)
2. 03:32 PM - Re: Incompatibility of Skytec PM with ElectroAir (Gary Vogt)
3. 06:48 PM - Re: Incompatibility of Skytec PM with ElectroAir (FLYaDIVE)
4. 06:59 PM - Re: Incompatibility of Skytec PM with ElectroAir (FLYaDIVE)
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 |
If Mike can accomplish it and package it as a separate box I'd buy one and p
uty Horizon tach back in
On Dec 22, 2012, at 8:19 PM, "Dean White" <dmwhite@e3ra.com> wrote:
The stock Electroair unit puts out a square wave that many electronic tachs c
an process. However, the Horizon P1000 is looking for the induced spike on t
he 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 fo
r Mike but hopefully one that will get done soon. Unfortunately, the Horizo
n guys have been unwilling to tell us the amplitude and duration of the spik
e 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 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
==========================
========
ctric.com
>www.buildersbooks.com
uilthelp.com
matronics.com/contribution
==========================
========
t">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List
==========================
========
cs.com
==========================
========
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 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 |
That's the quote. =C2-I knew it went something like that.=0A=0A=0A_______
_________________________=0A From: 923TE <923te@att.net>=0ATo: "teamgrumman
-list@matronics.com" <teamgrumman-list@matronics.com> =0ASent: Saturday, De
cember 22, 2012 11:32 AM=0ASubject: Re: TeamGrumman-List: Incompatibility o
f Skytec PM with ElectroAir=0A =0A=0AIs this it?=0A=0A=0A=0A=9CPeople
who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.
=9D=C2-=0A-=C2-George Bernard Shaw=0A=0A=0AFrom=0A=0Ahttp://
www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/5217.George_Bernard_Shaw=0A=0AOr from Old C
hinese Proverb according to:=0Ahttp://paws.kettering.edu/~jhuggins/humor/qu
otes.html=0A=0AOn Dec 21, 2012, at 10:23 PM, Gary Vogt <teamgrumman@yahoo.c
om> wrote:=0A=0A=0AThere 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.
=C2-=0A=0ALet's ask Dean and Larry what they think. =C2-They both have
light weight starters, one 24 volt, one 12 volt. =C2-I installed them bot
h.=C2-=0A=0AUnless the battery is dead or near dead, I can't think of a r
eason to worry about it. =C2-Come to think of it, if the battery is low a
nd the ElectroAir is not putting out enough juice, the plane will still sta
rt just fine on the left mag if the engine cranks. =C2-=0A=0AGary=0A=0A
=0A________________________________=0A From: "923te@att.net" <923te@att.net
>=0ATo: "teamgrumman-list@matronics.com" <teamgrumman-list@matronics.com>
=0ASent: Friday, December 21, 2012 6:45 PM=0ASubject: TeamGrumman-List: Inc
ompatibility of Skytec PM with ElectroAir=0A =0A--> TeamGrumman-List messag
e posted by: 923te@att.net=0A=0AGary,=0AThis was posted on the other list b
y a fellow Tiger owner. What do you think about what they told him? =0ANed
=0A=0AFWIW, the ElectroAir installation instructions recommends against any
permanent magnet light weight starter and specifies the SkyTek as incompat
ible 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 jus
t don't get to start with the electronic ignition energized. I kept the imp
ulse mag so starts are just like always on the Left mag and turn on the ele
ctronic after startup.=0Awww.aeroelectric.==C2- =C2- * HomebuiltHELP
========================
============0Aoelectric.com >www.buildersbooks.com ui
lthelp.com matronics.com/contribution=0A===========
======================== t"
>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?TeamGrumman-List=0A======
==== cs.com ==================
======
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 |
Ned:
I missed that posting - I don't see why the PM starter would cause any
problems. It may draw more current during start up. The other starters
range from 1.6 to 4 bHP. That is from 108.5 to 135.63 Amps. But, the
electronic ignition only requires 1 or 2 Amps Max. And that is nothing
when compared to the current draw of a starter. Les posts 2.4 bHP for a
starter at 11 VDC. That equates to 162.76 Amps. So 1 or 2 Amps to run the
ignition system is nothing in comparison. Starting with your rotating
beacon on draws that much.
Barry
"Chop'd Liver"
===================================
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 9:45 PM, <923te@att.net> wrote:
>
> 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
> 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 on the Left mag and
> turn on the electronic after startup.
>
>
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 |
Ned:
I am catching up on my reading... I have been off-line for 5 days. I see
it is not a current draw that is the issue with the electronic ignition.
Well, not in a current sense. As Les points out it is the drop in buss
voltage which causes the electronic ignition to go crazy.
Barry
=================================
On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 9:45 PM, <923te@att.net> wrote:
>
> 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
> 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 on the Left mag and
> turn on the electronic after startup.
>
>
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! --
|