Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 10:07 AM - 52- pneumatic diagram (Bill1200)
2. 10:54 AM - Re: Re: Interference Becker 4201 radio (Bitterlich, Mark G CIV Det Cherry Point, MALS-14 64E)
3. 11:40 AM - Re: 52- pneumatic diagram (keithmckinley)
4. 12:03 PM - Re: 52- pneumatic diagram (Bill1200)
5. 12:15 PM - Re: 52- pneumatic diagram (keithmckinley)
6. 03:20 PM - Re: Re: 52- pneumatic diagram (Tom Elliott)
7. 03:52 PM - check list (Aviatre)
8. 04:53 PM - Nanchang shopping, sales tax question (Pete Fowler)
9. 06:30 PM - Re: 52- pneumatic diagram (keithmckinley)
10. 06:41 PM - Re: check list (Byron M. Fox)
11. 09:06 PM - Original Yak 50 Exhaust Metal Type TI or Stainless? (rsdie_1@yahoo.com)
12. 11:43 PM - Re: Original Yak 50 Exhaust Metal Type TI or Stainless? (Jan Mevis)
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: | 52- pneumatic diagram |
Saw a nice color schematic couple of months back, now I can't find it. Anyone have
a reference, thanks
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=251960#251960
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: Interference Becker 4201 radio |
Craig,
I ran into this noise problem first with a Becker installed in a SU-26.
Then an SU-31. Since then, at least two others. There seems to be a
pattern developing here.
Anyway, we are now moving into an area that I am qualified to talk
about.
I do not agree with what the Becker "Tech" told you. Of course, to be
honest, does anyone really expect a representative from any company that
makes a product to come right out and say: "Yeah, well we really screwed
up the design on that radio, don't buy it". Umm.. Not likely. In all
other respects it seems to be a great radio... It just seems to be very
susceptible to noise from on-board sources that normally do not effect
other radios in the same frequency range.
TSO means Technical Standard Order, and while there are more than one,
the typical one used for radios of this type is: TSO-C169a. You can also
look at TSO-C37/38 series. The 37/38 series is older and I am pretty
certain that is what it meets. Let me check... Yep.. That is what it
meets.
In order to meet these Technical Standard Orders, certain "things" of
the radio must be checked. No need for me to list every one of them
here as it would get very boring very quickly.
That said... Guess what? Resistance to noise coming in from the power
wiring is not checked at all and is not part of the TSO in any way.
"FAA Specs" do not in any way call for testing to determine any immunity
to noise coming in on the power wires. Also, they do not test for noise
immunity in any way really.... Even coming in from the antenna. They do
check for selectivity, sensitivity, power output, and a whole bunch of
other stuff, but not what we are talking about here. Not really.
Saying that the RF receive section of the radio is "too sensitive" is
horse manure. These radios are designed to have the very best
sensitivity possible. There is no such thing as "too much" per se. The
receivers on these radios ARE tested IAW the TSO and they are checked
for being on freq. and from adjacent channel interference as well as
sensitivity. Please note, in aircraft receiver testing, there is no
such thing as "too much sensitivity". Radios on the bench are ALWAYS
tuned for best sensitivity. Becker's spec on this radio is: 1.5 uV for
6 d (S+N)/N This is pretty darn good. Not freaking amazing mind you,
but pretty good. Real old radios were about 2.5 uV, and anything under
2.0 uV is pretty much normal for modern radios. Under the TSO, these
radios are normally only tested to be audible with 24 uv at 30%
modulation.
Make no mistake though.... DE-TUNING a radio to make it LESS sensitive
will indeed help you to get rid of noise of this type. So will turning
it off. DE-TUNING is in fact turning the receiver OFF... Just a little
bit at a time.
If you want to check out what the tech said yourself, it is pretty darn
easy. All you need is a good signal generator with a step attenuator
built in. Simply connect the sig-gen to the antenna connector and turn
the squelch on the radio off. Put both on the same freq. Set for AM
modulation with a 1 Khz tone modulated at 80%. Turn the sig-gen output
down until you can just barely hear the tone in your headset. Record
the reading. Now do the same thing again with your other radio...
Record THAT reading. Compare which receiver is more sensitive and by
how much. If you connect right at the radio, the readings will probably
be within 1 or 2 dB of each other. Any radio repair shop can do this
for you .. And it should not cost very much. It will only take about 10
minutes. If you have even a WHIFF of suspicion that the KA-39 might be
causing noise, just replace it with a little lantern battery for a few
minutes. The radio in receive mode only draw around 70-100 mills, or
say about 1/10th of an amp. Not much. See if your noise goes away. It
would be a very interesting test to hear about really.
Bottom line, I could honestly talk for hours about how noise like this
can get into a radio. The first test is ALWAYS to remove the antenna
completely and see if the noise goes away completely. If it does, then
it obviously is noise that is getting into the radio via the antenna or
coax. The approach to fixing the problem ALWAYS starts with knowing the
answer to that question first.
If it is indeed noise that is getting into the radio from the antenna,
then it does not always have to be noise that is RECEIVED in the normal
fashion. It can be noise that is getting by the front end first
bandpass filter by cross coupling between stages for example. This
comes down to DESIGN. Not something being "too good for your airplane",
like "too much sensitivity". If the SL30 had just SOME noise... Even
just a little... And the Becker had MORE noise.... I would not be so
sure about this. But, you have stated that the SL30 is dead quiet.
This goes along with what I have seen too.
But again.... if the SL30 has NONE... I mean NONE AT ALL (and the SL30
is a darn good radio) and the Becker is overwhelmed with noise, AND it
is for sure coming in the antenna, AND you have swapped antennas.... It
comes down to the Beckers design and is next to impossible to cure,
unless you try very hard to eliminate the noise at it's source. That
then becomes a matter of tracing the noise down to the source, and then
taking steps that hopefully will keep it from radiating. This can be a
royal pain in the tail. But it can be done. If your noise is coming in
from the antenna, that is pretty much what you are left with.
Nothing wrong with sending the radio back though.
Note: At 13,000 feet, I can talk to ATC 100 miles away with the stock
Russian radios. I talk to New Bern tower from Norfolk all the time.
The most important things to get range out of ANY radio is short coax,
good coax, good antenna, and lots of altitude.
Mark Bitterlich
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Craig
Winkelmann
Sent: Monday, July 06, 2009 3:56 PM
Subject: Yak-List: Re: Interference Becker 4201 radio
I contacted Becker USA today at lunch and spoke with a tech for about 30
minutes on my noise issue. Two things he mentioned to me. First, the
radio is TSOed so it was required to meet FAA specs. many of the other
small radios are not TSOed so the Becker seems to be the better choice
from an environmental standpoint. Second, the radio was indeed designed
for gliders first. Then modified for the FAA TSO requirements.
The tech is perplexed because my Garmin SL-30 has not one bit of noise
and the power for the Becker is coming from a King KA-39 downconverter
and this is the only thing on the converter. The antenna for the SL30
and the Becker were swapped and the noise persisted. His thought is
that the RF section of the Becker is too sensitive and that it is
picking up engine noise on the antenna. He said the Becker is set up so
that you can hear ATC from about 100 miles away (hence very sensitive).
He has asked me to remove the radio and send it back to them for RF
interference testing.
Craig
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: 52- pneumatic diagram |
is this it?
--------
Keith McKinley
700 HS
KFIT
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=251977#251977
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/cj_pneumatic_system_schematic_diagram_835.bmp
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: 52- pneumatic diagram |
That would be it,thanks, I'll make several copies this time :D
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=251984#251984
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: 52- pneumatic diagram |
you can blow it up to about 16x20 without loosing too much definition. Bring it
to Staples, have them print and laminate for your hangar
--------
Keith McKinley
700 HS
KFIT
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=251990#251990
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 52- pneumatic diagram |
Very good diagram But it is for a CJ-6
Tom Elliott
CJ-6A NX63727
702-595-2680
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of keithmckinley
Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 11:40 AM
Subject: Yak-List: Re: 52- pneumatic diagram
--> <keith.mckinley@townisp.com>
is this it?
--------
Keith McKinley
700 HS
KFIT
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=251977#251977
Attachments:
http://forums.matronics.com//files/cj_pneumatic_system_schematic_diagram_835
.bmp
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 |
|
I am looking for a copy of the annual condition inspection check list for my CJ.
Could someone please be so kind as to email it to me.
Thanx
Aviatre@aol.com
A/C Heating & Refrigeration By Frank Surfas
Quality Service and installations since 1977
www.surfascooling.com
(530) 644-0272
fax (530) 344-7129
Cell (530) 391-9760
Ca contractors license #354595
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: | Nanchang shopping, sales tax question |
I can't figure out from the sources...I'm in California. If I buy a plane outside
of California from a private party, do I pay sales tax in either/both states
if I just take the plane out of the state I buy it in?
I know I pay use tax in California for sure but the sales tax thing is confusing.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=252038#252038
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: 52- pneumatic diagram |
sorry about that!
--------
Keith McKinley
700 HS
KFIT
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=252051#252051
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Annual inspection cheklist is available in the RPA's
online store ...Blitz
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 7, 2009, at 3:47 PM, Aviatre <aviatre@aol.com> wrote:
> I am looking for a copy of the annual condition inspection check
> list for my CJ. Could someone please be so kind as to email it to me.
> Thanx
> Aviatre@aol.com
>
> A/C Heating & Refrigeration By Frank Surfas
> Quality Service and installations since 1977
> www.surfascooling.com
> (530) 644-0272
> fax (530) 344-7129
> Cell (530) 391-9760
> Ca contractors license #354595
>
>
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Original Yak 50 Exhaust Metal Type TI or Stainless? |
Wish to confirm that the original exhaust on the 50 is Titainium. Found mine is
cracked around the nipple fitting for the smoke system. Took a small piece to
a welder that tried to weld it to stainless with his TIG, he said it won't stick
and is not stainless. Had a 52 before, and that had a stainless exhaust for
sure. So did the 50's have Titanium, like I'm told the Sukhoi does?
Thanks all
Scott Dierolf
N5203V
Y-50
Message 12
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Original Yak 50 Exhaust Metal Type TI or Stainless? |
Yes, the original exhaust on the Yak 50 is titanium.
Jan
YK50 RA2005K
From: owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-yak-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of rsdie_1@yahoo.com
Sent: woensdag 8 juli 2009 6:01
Subject: Yak-List: Original Yak 50 Exhaust Metal Type TI or Stainless?
Wish to confirm that the original exhaust on the 50 is Titainium. Found mine
is cracked around the nipple fitting for the smoke system. Took a small
piece to a welder that tried to weld it to stainless with his TIG, he said
it won't stick and is not stainless. Had a 52 before, and that had a
stainless exhaust for sure. So did the 50's have Titanium, like I'm told the
Sukhoi does?
Thanks all
Scott Dierolf
N5203V
Y-50
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! --
|