|
Engine Mount, Gear Legs |
Electrical & Avionics
OK, so I am trying to figure how to wire this darn thing for position lights, try the book out out by Bob Nuckuls in ICT.In the back section is one that works great fer the ROCKET.The book is AERO CONNECTION I think,he is listed in some ones "links" section.It has AWG sizes and neat stuff.I`m going thru that installation now contact me off site if you want to talk about the electrical,maybe my stumbles and trials will be of some help!! Bill #32 1/2 Kendall, Your an on the right track. Before wiring you must decide on lots of things because the wires that feed them are all part of the equation. You must know at least... 1. the type of rudder light/strobe to be used. 2. The type of wingtip light/strobe. where will the strobe power supply(S) mount? 3. The number of landing lights. 4. The wattage of the landing lights.(amps) 5. how much your pitot heat might draw. 6. what flavor battery solenoid you will use (ground to "on" or 12V to "ON") 7. how big of battery cable you want. (depends on local WX) 8. whether you will run a ground wire back to the battery. 9. what type of autopilot/servos you might install and where they will mount. 10. what type of ELT you will use. 11. where you might put a GPS antenna.(front,back, glareshield under sloping W/S) 12. What brand intercom you will use and it's cabling type. 13. what size of battery you will install. 14. What type of nav/com antennas you will be installing VOR,ADF,GS, COM GPS etc. 15. how you are going to get all those amps through the firewall to the starter. 16. Whether or not you will be using a starter solenoid. (depends on starter type) 17. Will you have an ammeter/shunt somewhere? 18. where your electrical load center will be located? 19. how are you going to route those wires/static hoses through the spar? 20. IFR? Need dual busses for EFIS/ignition etc? Obviously there are more considerations, but my point is, you must have a pretty good idea what you are going to be finished with before can run even the first wire. If you don't at least have a good idea to the above questions, then more research is needed before you start wiring. I'd stay away from any prefab kits as once you get going, it isn't that hard, and will save you big $$ due to less waste. Remember, the most expensive piece of wire is the one that is 6" too short. The wiring itself is very simple. Buy Bob Nuckols (Aero electric connection) book as a start. I'll be glad to offer any help I can. Regards, Bob Gross Hey guys, we just finished wiring the new F-1, and it should fly in a week or I've seen several Rockets with rudder and/or aileron trim installed. Are either useful and worth the added work? Aileron trim is a must-have. A slight fuel imbalance will make for a heavy wing. I made my electric aileron trim system on my RV by mating the manual spring-bias system with an elevator trim motor...maybe added 1/4 lb. to the whole installation. I've been considering putting in electric rudder trim in my airplane. Haven't made my mind up yet. There are a few RV-8's with 540's in them in my area, and those guys say they like having the electric trim on the rudder. Bob #80 Well, I don't know if it's a MUST have -- the stick pressure will remind the most thick-headed pilot to switch tanks on a regular basis. Of course, I refer to myself....duh... I recommend that you set your ship up so it is right wing heavy Van's RV-8 system works fine, and is easily adapted. Position this to avoid the heel buckets, roll servo, back seat air ducting, wiring... Cheers I recommend that you set your ship up so it is right wing heavy Well, where did the rest of that go? Any way, set it up rt wing heavy so if you need to go max range (run a tank dry), you will end up on final approach with all your fuel (5 gals or so) in one tank (the left one in this case), not 2-3 gals in each. Mark Are there any suggestions for dealing with the narrower space in the F1 when installing the RV8 Trim module? Shorter springs? New brackets? Thanks Bob W Jim, If you are just starting, you might want to consider making your jig a little longer than called for in the plans. I made mine 104" long, and tonight discovered that 106" would have let me put both elevators in the jig at the same time, to assist in alignment relative to each other. I used 2" square tube steel for the main uprights and horizontal members, with a second horizontal beam 37" above and parallel to the first (the extra height is very helpful when the elevator/rudder tips are installed). I then placed 1" square tubes vertically at strategic places between the two horizontal beams. With screw threads tapped into the 1" tubes (like the alternative jig design in the plans), it was easy to move the 1" tubes around and screw the screws in or out for the various jig settings. Dave Yeah, Return it and get the RV-4 aileron trim kit from Vans. It fits perfectly, is much easier to install, and will save you about $60. Unfortunately, Vans will clip you for about $10 for restocking etc. Guess how I know! When you do install the RV-4 kit, get rid of the cotter pins that come with it, and substitute a couple of 470-5 rivets with the shop ends drilled for the springs instead. (I think I used a -10 or -11 length) Don't squeeze them, let them turn free just as the cotter pins are supposed to. I put a couple of washers under the heads just for good measure. It works well and is very clean, and won't tear up your ankles. Scott Roth I think I have figured out the RV8 trim install but I like your rivet idea. I could not find the RV4 trim kit in the catalog. Does it mount above the floor? Thanks Bob W The RV-4 kit mounts on the front stick socket, and is controlled by a lever that is in front of, and parallel to the stick. You can operate it with your little finger. It is shown on pg 44 of Vans catalog, and is p/n AIL-T43. Cost--$12.50. It really is a lot easier to install than the RV-8 kit, and requires no mods whatsoever. A real bolt-on. Scott Thanks again Scott, I thought I had it figured but I then ran into the flap angles. I have the blue mountain autopilot servo taking up a lot of room and am giving up on the RV8 Trim. On to the RV4 trim. Saves a lot of dough too. Bob Alternator A fellow in my EAA chapter was one of the engineers that designed the first internally-regulated alternator for GM. One of the other guys in our chapter owns an alternator shop, and jumped in the discussion. Based on these and other conversations here's what I've figured out: 1. The reason why they changed to internally reguated is because for every wire in a car the manufacturers figure it cost them a dollar to put it in. 2. Internally regulated alternators have a thermistor in the regulator circut, to vary the outpult voltage with alternator temperature. Cold batteries take more juice to charge. 3. Because the regulator/alternator is designed and tested as a system, it is more reliable as a system. 4. One reason why the aviation folks have not liked internally regulated alternators is because some alternators are designed to be connected to the battery at all times (as opposed to airplanes where the battery is disconnected after shut-down), and can self-destruct if disconnected. Another reason is some alternators will not shut themselves down if the field voltage is removed. On some cars the EFI computer delays switching the alternator online until the bus voltages stablizes after the car starts, designed to be 'once turned on, always turned on.' There was no need to shut down the alternator, so that capablility was never built in, unless you stop it and remove the key. Those are the alternators we don't want; I believe that is the type of alternator that Van's sells. 5. I have been flying with a Denso alternator that is controlled thru the field wire...in other words I can shut the thing off in-flight by switching off the field connection. If it wouldn't respond to that I could easily pull the 40a breaker in the panel, and I see no reason why an airplane needs current limiters if you're running #2 wire. No need for any external contactors or OV modules since it has OV protection built in. Part # is denso 18504-1620, used in the Toyota Camry 1994+. I believe this is similar to the Suzuki Samurai alternator. Supposedly it is the same alternator as the B&C without the guts removed. Its the same thing that Niagara airparts sells new for $225. The niagara people told me the only return they've had was from one that looked like it had been dropped. You can pick one up at Autozone for $150 and have a lifetime warranty. This altern! ator has no reported problems like wanting to fry itself after being disconnected from the battery while running, will shut down via the field wire, and have been very reliable in my experience with them. I installed one after going thru two externally-regulated alternators in 200 hours, haven't had a bit of trouble since. If you believe in the KISS principle, and spend money on gas rather than overhyped, overpriced airplane parts which add additional unwarranted complexity to your airplane, I think using the denso internally regulated alternator is the way to go. Worrying about overvoltage is like worrying about getting struck by lightning. Regards Bob
I have one of the Worldclass(?) alternator/regulators that Mark sells. Since Get thyself to the local auto graveyard, and gettest thou a plug from the same type of alt. If you find a secondary source, let us know! The terminals are arrange in a "Pi" shape...and I think Bob Gross has the wiring figured out. The low voltage light is a good thing -- keeps you from leaving the master on (I used one of those 12V neon 'dot' bulbs). Cheers Mark
Dave, good idea on the #4 from the alternator right to the starter. If you have a three-prong starter solenoid an external solenoid isn't necessary; and if you're doing that then the wire to the starter is always hot so now it can serve double duty carrying the alternator current as well as handling the starter. Just remove the jumper on the starter and connect the terminal to your starter switch. Probably 3-4 lbs saved right there, #2 wire is pretty darn heavy, esp. if it is welding cable.Yesterday I flew the RV and messed around with shutting off the alternator thru the switch and by pulling the breaker, no problems. Not sure how you would test for OV without rigging up the alternator to run away. An inrush current limiter does help you in an overvoltage situation, since the voltage produced is irrespective of current draw. Current limiters are designed for things like industrial motor wiring where the inrush current puts a strain on the wiring, like when you first start the motor.I have a suspicion (no proof) that the ND alternators use the same regulators, so if it is of recent vintage then they probably should be good to use in airplanes.Regards, Bob
Hey Guys, does anyone have a source for true airspeed indicators marked for the F1??? Mark doesn't sell these... tx Bob #80 Bob, Aircraft Spruce will make one up for the F-1. They charge $90 extra for custom markings, but its worth it. I had mine lined as follows: White line (flaps)-------55 MPH to 110 Hey Jim: They practically GIVE those things away! Dave Williams is looking into a bulk purchase, if any others are interested....please respond off list. Maybe we can get UMA to make a run for us? I could be all wet, but...isn't the top o' the green supposed to be maneuvering speed? If so, that would be 150MPH or so. 225 would give you + 200% over max G!! DOH!! It would be fun while it lasted. ;-) .... Cheers Mark
, but UMA instruments are Chinese-made junk. They're throw-away instruments--if you need to fix one your only choice is to buy a new one. I believe IFR is the brand that Van's sells that is good quality and reasonable in price. Bob Last time I visited - they didn't look like Chinese working in the shop. UMA claims their instruments are made in Dayton Virginia. Have things changed? My experience with UMA has been good - although most of their flight instruments are non-TSO'd, an important consideration for those planning an IFR panel. Interesting comment regarding TSO. I'm under the impression that TSO is for certificated aircraft and that is not required for the experimental category. I realize there are other requirements, such as flight test, that may be required, but TSO is not applicable to us. Mark S. I just talked to my local FDSO inspector about IRF flight and TSO'd > (Type Standard Order) instruments. He was quite candid and stated "If he were > inspecting an experimental aircraft, he would not issue a certificate for IRF > flight without TSO'd instruments" (limited to certain critical > flight/navigation insturments)--" but couldn't (wouldn't) say what other > inspectors might do." > > Sounds like a typical CYA government response and may untimatley depend on the > proclivity of the individual FSDO. Perhpas a review of the regs is in order - as every old time experimental type has learned, EVERY FISDO does things differently. If you ask the question, and put them on the spot, you gotta live with the answer. Jim If you read part 91, the only TSO requirements mentioned are for the transponder equipment. So, if your FAA guy says it needs TSO'ed instruments, ask him to show you where in the regulations it says that instruments have to be TSO'ed in an experimental aircraft operating IFR. If the FAA guy doesn't agree, then it would be wise to hire a DAR to do your inspection that sees things the way you do. But generally the FSDO's have their own unwritten policies on how they do things, and the inspectors tend to do things in the same manner. Here in Indy they seem pretty liberal and enjoy inspecting the homebuilts. I lucked out and had a super inspector when I had my RV inspected...he even signed me off for my A&P ticket. So it all boils down to the luck of the draw on the inspector you get, and what he/she thinks is appropriate. It shouldn't be that way but that a fact of life for us. Check the RV-List archives, I know there's tons of stuff on this subject there. If you remember your flight training Va or maneuvering speed isn't marked on the airspeed indicator. It changes with the weight of the aircraft. If you look in any POH for a certified aircraft the Va will be a specific speed for a certain weight. Jon I received the new Wick's Catalog in the mail yesterday and I remember seeing stick-on markers as I paged through it. That would work, but I'd rather have the instrument face marked, rather than the glass. I'd be interested in ordering one. I'm a little curious about Jim's marking though. The specs Mark advertises has a top speed of 250. How do we get to 275? Mark S. Vne, as determined by the computer analysis accomplished in the design phase of the F-1, was 275 MPH. Mark and I discussed this in detail when I was at the airspeed indicator marking stage. Max speed as depicted by the F-1 brouchure is 253 MPH---a totally different animal. When I look at how Ken Fowler flies his HR ll 275 Vne seems responsible to me, expecially when you consider the F-1 is a much stronger airframe than the HR in every way. Jim Gents, Hey Bill: Bob, I have talked to several people about the wingtip antennas and will be using By the way I have the flat VOR antenna in the wing tip and it works great. IMO the comm will not work Vince, I have a BA Nav antenna in the wing tip, and it works great for Nav as Nav signals are horizontally polarized. Com antennas need to be vertically polarized, and you aren't going to fit that in the wing tip. Probably will not work to will on the windscreen either for same reason and too much metal in the way. Putting antennas in the slider would be unreliable due to the motion of the canopy open and closing. I recommend a standard comm. on the belly of the plane. Drag? sure there is some, but its not really going to be something you can measure with the airspeed indicator, lets get real. Greg Nelson, 144X
What are folks using for a glideslope antenna out there? I guess my options are to install one in the tip of the I used a Bob Archer antenna in my RV-6. Looked for a certified splitter and the cost was > $100. Found a style Terry, Have you or anyone else, using the Bob Archer VOR/Glideslope wing tip mounted antenna, experienced Randy, I've got Bob Archer's antennas in my wingtips on my -6. I've got a splitter on the VOR antenna utilizing I am using a splitter on a VOR antinna mounted in the vertical stablizer. Jack #70 Do you guys have a good part number for the splitter and source? Terry: how about the one you are using, any A splitter used with the VOR antennae should work fine for the glideslope. Loren Harmon s/n 76 Luis, This is a differ antenna. The vertical fin antenna is a likely a standard VOR/Glideslope "cat whiskers" Thank you Randy. You don't happen to know if Bob Archer has a web site, do you? He doesn't. You can reach him at: BOB ARCHER 310-316-8796 bobsantennas@earthlink.net ANTENNAE FOR Can someone verify the Bob Archer's wing tip antenna model number? What antenna set up do you recommend He doesn't have a model number. You have to tell him what antenna you want and in what orientation you He also makes a marker beacon antennae and sells a low profile black (to be mounted under the windscreen) I have two of Bob Archer's antenna's in my RV-6. I have a comm antenna in one wingtip and the VOR antenna in Thanks Randy. The Aircraft Spruce folks are selling some of those too. See: Try this website, too. http://www.chiefaircraft.com/cgi-bin/hazel.cgi?action=serve Electric Bob has diagrams in his book on how to build these antennas. I think I have a whopping $2.00 in
The TruTrak Digitrak has a price of $1495 'till sept 1, then it goes to $1795. I ordered two of them (one for me, and one for a bud with a RV-6) a few days ago, and got a "bulk discount" of $1395. If a few of you guys want them, get in touch with eachother, and then talk to TruTrak, and see what you can work out. But hurry! Scott Roth Scott is correct...hurry....and when you call, talk to Jim Younkin. Here is a link in case yall want to see it. http://www.trutrakflightsystems.com/ttfsdigiflightslick.html Luis 21 I'd be interested to know what the trutrak wing servo does to control feel. The stepper motor and geartrain is always engaged, even when the unit is off, unlike the navaid. I don't know how much friction this will introduce, but it will it will introduce some nonetheless. BTW, I know *somebody* who is working on a new autopilot that will be much less expensive but will have more features and an altitude hold...my lips are sealed so don't ask. Should be available in about two years. Bob #80 Bob, you definitely want to specify type aircraft. The RV-6 comes with a wing tip mount. We require the RV-4 mount which is located under the right fuselage floorbvoard near the stick. Jim Bob, that was my first question too. The answer is very little. And, it has breakaway bolts in case of some unusual binding problem. The aileron torque tube rotates very little and that is what you hook up to. You can barely feel a little ratchet if you move the stick very slowly. With normal stick movement you don't feel a thing. The size of the servo motor is minimized to keep the torque down, and you program the torque. On a scale of 1 to 10 it looks like I will need around a three to provide necessary torque to run the system. The programming is done from the head---system is totally digital. I had the Navaid on my RV-6, and this digital system is the next level. One other point---order directly from TruTrak and you can save $500 over the Van price. Bob, I would suggest you cnx the Van order and call Andrew or Jim at TruTrak (479) 751-0250. Jim Now, is this fwd of the spar or aft of the spar? thx Mark Aft of the spar about six inches. The cutout for the short pushrod that attaches from the servo arm to the aileron torque tube actually runs into the aileron cutout in the stringer. I had to move mine forward a bit to clear the small housing supporting the electronic trim aileron spring on the right side. A picture is worth a thousand words---will get you one soon. Mark, you and I had discussed mounting the servo on the left side---can't do it on mine because of the flap motor and electric aileron servo. The right side works great. Jim Hi Mark, I removed the "G" meter which is in the upper left of my panel and placed the head there. I may eventually find someone who will lend me a good hole cutter and reinstall the "G" meter. DigiTrak can send you either a 2 1/4'' or 3 1/8'' head depending on your need. The servo mounts easily on the F-1 compared to the RV-6 for example. I have Van's electric aileron trim kit installed, and that made it a little more difficult but it did fit. I would say that everything is easier before you put the wing on, but very doable. By the way, I cut a new panel for my airplane and increased the top to bottom distance by two inches---gave me lots more room with no problem leg comfort wise. I have two friends who just flew with the TruTrak (RV-6 and T-18), and they both rave about it. One removed a Navaid to install it---no comparison. Jim Tip: For those who are planning on a TruTrak auto pilot and have not built the floor buckets... Make the buckets abt an inch narrower than the plans (Vans), from the inboard side, ie, and then the servo will fit much more accessibly in the right-hand bay a-beam the torque tube; otherwise you will find yourself in yet another bad mood at the end of the day and a couple of days behind. Bob Oh Crap! I built the buckets that came with the kit a few days ago, and the TruTrak should be coming in the mail in the next day or so. The buckets are about 6" wide--is this too much even if I install them as far outboard as possible? What does Vans call for? How much room do you need between the floor joists--er, I mean seat ribs, and the buckets? Is the TruTrak pretty easy to adapt from the RV-4 to the F-1? Thanks, Scott Roth There is some flexibility in placing the roll servo (i.e. fwd or aft) on stringer. Just make sure that when installed it does not hit servo or bracket. The a/p comes with instructions and bracket for F1. No problem to install. If you have aileron trim unit from van's, it makes spacing a little more interesting, but it can all fit. Tom Hall Hey Guys, I flew the F-1 for the first time today with the new TruTrak Hi Jim, I just installed mine too--except I probably won't try it out for a couple of years :-) If anyone is planning on putting the pitch servo in, you will need to move or install the ELT differently, Bob, Very timely advice for me. Would you mount the tray differently or just the ELT in the tray? Randy #95 Hi fellows, Unless they have changed the mounting bracket since I got mine, the pitch servo mounts aft of the Randy If the tray can go aft, better. But I'd mount the ELT up-right if I were doing it again. Put the servo in first, I found a great source for batteries. These are late production 35AH AGM (Absorbtive Glass Mat) batteries. They fit the rocket perfectly, weigh 25 lbs. Much better than a gel cell. Cost was $39 each. Search the web for AGM batteries and educate yourself. You'll like it! They had 500 in stock. I bought 4. Sunn Battery Company Jacksonville, FL 904-354-4508 P/N PTU135 $32.95 + $6.00 S/H Battery Size U1 Regards, Bob Gross Hey Guys, What size battery is needed to crank the IO-540? Ie., how many CCA's are required. Looks like the Odessy battery would be a great choice--small and light. Any experience with this unit? Thanks, Scott Roth 93 I have a buddy (Grand Champ Hatz Biplane) that uses the Odessey....... he has been very pleased. Long shelf life, great CCA, and oh yeah...... It charges back just fine after you leave the master switch on all night (ooooops). Not sure what CCA you'll need. Check out the Iwantarocket site for his mounting of the odessy (slick!). Chuck Nuffer s/n 82 Fellows be careful about using a light battery here. These airplanes are nose heavy when flown solo with full fuel. The wheels on a F1 have moved forward but the C of G in the air will be pretty close to a HRII. If you are considering a three blade prop than I would highly recommend against using a light battery. Time may prove that we can save some weight with batteries but for now I am sticking with a Concorde XL battery. Perhaps Jim Cash has some comments regarding his airplane? Tom Martin Fellas: Please be careful about using this lighter, better battery. I suspect you'll be better off with a larger version, to keep the CG where it should be. I'd personally use no less than a 25lb battery. While it might be OK to move a lighter batt aft to hold the CG, you will also increase the polar moment of the ship (more weight at both ends), reducing the time to recover from a spin. However, all these planes say EXPERIMENTAL somewhere on the airframe..... Cheers Mark I'm using an AGM 35 Amp Hour 25 pound battery. size is U-1. It fits the rocket well and cranks the IO-540-C4B5 with 9.3:1 pistons (p/n lw-15357) fine. Cost me $36 new from an outfit in Jacksonville, FL. Regards, Bob Gross I do agree Tom. I use the Concorde 25 XL, and coupled with the B&C lightweight starter it really turns the 540 with 10-1 comp pistons. Someone commented the other day that I could fly the airplane on the battery.(HA) I finished up with 60 pounds on the tail, but I had done several other things to move weight aft. Guys, I highly recommend you stay with the standard battery box and the Concorde 25 XL or an equivalent. Regardless of what you might read on the Matronics list, you definitely want to shoot for 50-60 pounds (level attitude) on the tail. When I first started on Blackjack (Jan '00) Avenco would not insure the Harmon Rocket because of the noseover problem (most had 35 pounds or less on the tail---downhill, brake and guess what). Jim Cash Hey Guys, A while back I found the 17ah batteries in a Digikey catalog, and ordered one thinking it would have enough capacity to crank the engine. Apparantly some other people are on the same wavelength and have installed the $40.00 battery in RV's with success. Check out: http://home.hiwaay.net/~sbuc/journal/battery.htm An interesting note is he is spinning one of the old Prestolite starters, which I understand draw a bunch more current than the newer-generation lightweight starters like the B&C. So I don't think it would have a problem cranking a 540. The spec sheet says this battery weighs 14.34 lbs. It also says 14.5-14.9 volts is the charging voltage for this battery, so an adjustable regulator is required. If any of you guys flying could supply some detailed W&B information, I'd love to have it to determine the feasibility of putting this battery in the center area just forward of the stick. Bob #80 If any of you guys flying could supply some detailed W&B information, I'd > love to have it to determine the feasibility of putting this battery in the > center area just forward of the stick. > > Bob > #80 Bob, the standard battery arrangement (in back) was set up to give you 50 pounds tail weight in level flight attitude. This was a big problem with earlier Harmon Rockets because most were around 35 pounds or less. Because of several noseovers, Avemco was not insuring the HR ll when I began construction of Blackjack. I would suggest putting the battery and ELT behind the rear seat as planned. Also, I guess it is "whatever lights your Rocket" (pun intended) but I have tried most of these cheap, light battery ideas that I am reading about. Advice from personal failure incorporated---stay with a standard commercial aviation battery like Gill or Concord. If you get caught out in the boonies with a weak battery, trying to prop an I0-540 with a 3-blade prop will ruin your whole day. I use the Concorde RG 25 XL with great results. It has a three year warranty and cost less that $100 thru Van's. Jim Cash C'mon Mark, don't say no till the fat lady sings! I always carry some tools and spare parts, and am going to make some sort of permenant place for them in the baggage area where the elt is supposed to go. I imagine the toolkit I carry around all the time is at least 6-8 lbs. I'm putting the strobe, the ELT in the tailcone. Will have a pound or two on the rudder with the rudder trim stuff. Two bladed prop, no inverted stuff, etc. Aluminum smoke oil tank where battery used to be. Yes, I've RTFM. So where does it say something about the CG difference between a two blade and three blade prop??? HUH??? It's gotta be at least a 20lb difference...needless to say I have a two-blade Hartzell. Add it all up. I'll still be in the right tail-weight range, according to my preliminary calcs. Bob Bob, let me answer for Mark---Its an experimental. You just put that battery anywhere your heart desires. Jim Cash If folks want to stay with the aviation batteries, they are sure welcome to do so. Heck, a lot of folks make the argument for auto gas in airplanes but I won't touch the stuff in my bird. But Bob is right, battery technology has changed a bunch in the lst 5 years. I bought one of the smaller batteries from Digikey, but it is larger than the one Sam used in his web site link. ($50.75) Most battery failures occur because folks don't bother to service or otherwise pay attention to their battery until it starts to act up. I think that Aeroelectric Bob professes to treat your battery as you would any other consumable in your airplane. Irregardless of the fact it is working fine, you should replace it when it's useful life expires. I intend to toss my battery every other annual. So for the same money as a RG-25, I'll have a new battery every two years and likely, no battery problems that crop up unexpectedly either. Randy #95 Always here with my $.02 worth... yo bobby j.... Check out this site and get that battery for $16. I'm going to try one and I'll let you know how it spins the big 540. No problem I imagine. I'll keep a six pack of Bud in the tail to make up for the weight! http://www.meci.com/default.asp?featured=true&partno=140-0094&mode=Search Regards, Bob Gross Nogga...nogga...not gonna work here.... Have a look at V2.22 P492 for a very good W&B diagram (RTFM!!). Keep 50+ lbs on the tailwheel.... Cheers Mark Hey Guys, A while back we discussed batteries and I made a recommendation on using the Panasonic batteries from Digikey (17aH). I've learned a little bit since then about battery specs and found out the Panasonic batteries have a somewhat higher internal resistance. Internal resistance is inversely proportional to cranking power. So, the lower the internal resistance the better the battery will crank over. The odyssey batteries rule in this regard. An RV-3 friend replaced his Concorde RG-25 with one of these and he says it has more power. batteries4everything.com sells the Odyssey PC680 batteries for $62.55 + shipping. I got two for $130-something inc. shipping (I'm only using one in the rocket.) You can buy 'em from Van's, however they're more expensive. Regards, Bob Hey Bob: Run the CG numbers before you do this -- might need some ballast... Mark I've got my smoke oil tank going in back, and I'm moving some other stuff further back. I've done the cg calcs and everything seems to agree. Regards, Bob www.batteries4everything.com click on the product list link at the bottom, then click on odyssey/hawker, then PC680. They're $30 cheaper than Vans. Same thing. Picked up my Indy mount this evening, man that guy does nice work. He had some sprint car frames in there, and they are easily ten times more complicated than our mounts. Hopefully I'll get my airplane on the gear this week. later Bob
Bob, Did you route the battery cable under the floor and through the wing spar, or along the cockpit sides? Thanks. Mark S. Mark, I routed my cables/static hose under the floor along the right side, thru the spar opening on the right side of the stick. There is gobs of room for cables etc. next to the spar. This allows the wings to be removed without de-wiring the airplane. I used black plastic snap in bushings to put the cables in. I have three sets of cables runnning side by side under the floor thru three sets of bushings in each former. Looks good, cheap, easy to pull new wires, and cables are quite secure. I attached a picture showing the spar passthru. The big bundle has the wires for the ELT control, battery solenoid control, Hot batt bus, big batt cable, rear position light, elev trim, landing light, wing nav lts, strobe lights and static pressure hose. You can see the flap wires and rear seat intercom cable joing the group as they enter the spar pass thru. The little white plastic cable mount that is attahced to the fuse former at the spar opening is available from http://terminaltown.com/Pages/Page65.html . Regards, Bob Gross Emergency Locator Transmitter (ELT) Although expensive, you might want to consider a 406 MHz ELT (although I'm not far enough along to have researched any brands). SARSAT/COSPAS will phase out 121.5/243.0 by Feb 2009. That seems like a long time from now, but it will be here before you know it. Check out this web site: http://www.sarsat.noaa.gov/ . Mark S. (#31) Definitely NOT Ameri-King. Cheap trash with absolutely no support. There was recently a good thread on this on the rv-list. Go read the archives if you are interested. Eric The RV listers were bashing the Ameriking stuff mercilessly about a week ago. You might check the RV list archives. Ack Elts were OK, IIRC. I had one of them in my RV and it seemed OK, and inexpensive too. If any builders are planning to use the Infinity (or other) grips and are Could someone check real quick on something. I seemed to have lost my wiring diagram for the MAC servo Randy, depends on how you are going to switch the servo. Send me your address and I will email you the Randy, on all the installations the white wires go to the servo. Be careful not to touch ground or short each Randy, Yep the white wires are the motor leads and the orange/green/blue are the pot. Jim, I have the wiring diagram for the relay decks. Since I am using the MAC grip, these are SPDT switches Randy, You can hook it up without a relay deck as the switches will handle the servo current. The deck is only Can't you just wire the switches in parallel? Also, is there any need for setting the trim to operate as a Hey guys, seems that trim wiring is the latest interest area. For what its worth we have completed two F-1s
I'm starting to design my electrical system. Has anyone had experience with Control Vision's Exp-BUS DC load center with backup battery circuitry? I've read Bob Nuckolls "AeroElectric" and could build similar board from components but the Control Vision product would appear to be a real time saver. I have installed it on two F-1's and will soon begin a third. Its great. Suggest you bypass the built-in relay and use a standard starter and master solenoid. Other than that everything is positive. Jim I can only second Jim's words. Rebuilt an RV-4 a few years ago. Used the Exp Bus. I also did as Jim suggests and bypassed the relay. After seeing mine, several other builders at our airport have also used it. The Control Vision group will also make the bus to order if you know what you want. I also have used the Control Vision GPS. for the last 3 years. I have mine. my wife has her independent system in the back. . I am a Most satisfied customer, Guys, I think this is compressed enough it should not tie you up too much. The As matter of fact I wired around the relay on mine, and had them remove it on Chuck's. They give a warning in
Hi all, Today I was able to crank my engine (without a prop). This might not seem like that big of a deal but... Several months ago, there was a disscussion on this list about anodized skins, and ground path flow. It was found that some aircraft had problems starting because the ground return current wasn't making it back to the battery well enough. The solution was to run another heavy cable (2 + pounds)from the engine mount to the negative terminal of the battery. As I built this rocket and blundered thru the electrical system, I took the following steps hoping to eliminate the need for a heavy second cable (It seems to have worked). Used #2 cable for the main feed from the battery to the starter. Eliminated the starter solenoid. (and its pound of weight) Removed all powder coating from the aft side of the engine mount pads so they would have good contact with the firewall. Removed all annodizing/primer from the areas on the lower surface of the battery tray where it contacts the floor beams and longeron. This is real important as good conductivity here can spread the current flow out over many areas, all of which improve the grounds' performance. Made sure all places where the battery negative cable connects to the battery tray were shiney raw metal when assembled. Pay attention to all contact areas near the battery tray. There are many possible points of high resistance here. Used a short #2 cable to connect the engine case to the engine mount. The result was impressive. Using a Skytec starter with a $30 gell cell, the engine cranks fast even with high compression pistons in it. The big #2 cables get nice and warm quickly, proof positive the amps are flowing. I haven't found any hot spots in the airframe yet. Judging by the way it spins, I won't. Hope this helps, your mileage may vary. Regards, Bob Gross Bob, uh, how do you get by without a starter solenoid? You must have one big honkin starter switch (more like a 220 volt disconnect). Bob The skytec unit has a solenoid built into it. It acts as both a contactor as well as a big solenoid to throw the pinion fwd into the ring gear.. Regards, Bob Gross One of my lineman friends gave me a 12 oz squeeze bottle of Penetrox antioxidant goop that they use on their aluminum connections. If you're really concerned about electrical connections you might want to investigate using something similar between your connections to the airframe. On bare aluminum connections, even if you scrape everything clean and shiny, you will eventually get an aluminum oxide layer (normal oxidation) that will degrade the electrical connection. Might take a looooongg time or happen relatively quickly depending on the environment. YMMV! I have also heard oldtimers say that you should provide a replacable tab whenever you ground something to aluminum. That way if you get any electrically induced (galvanic?) corrosion you can replace the tab instead of an airframe part. Anyone else heard this? Ahhhhhh, just something else to worry about. Hmmmmmm, I wonder if I chose the right primer? Ack!!! LOL And to think that I didn't worry about any of this crap on my RV-4. And it flew! Ignorance is bliss! Vince Frazier > Yep -- this stuff is good! Available in the FAA-PMA Aircraft Electrical aisle in our local Home Depot...could have a different brand, but it's the same stuff. Cheers! Mark I have 5/16" at the top and 7/16" at the bottom. This is needed to leave room for the air scoop to escape. You'll see what I mean when you try to install/remove the air scoop wtihout enuf room at the bottom. Happy Thanksgiving to all! Warmest Regards, Bob Gross I ran the #2 ground cable from the battery to the firewall, then through the firewall with a brass bolt, then with a flex cable to the engine.. Cant get more direct than that.. Larry I ran a cable from the battery to the upper 3/4" angle long. above it and then from that a cable through the firewall to the engine. that is a single piece of alum angle and should be a good conductor. Make sure that you use a heavy cable as mine was hard to crank when it was new. Jack #70 Same here, I use airframe as ground to firewall and cleaned off the coatings like Bob said. I have no starting problems. #2 cable to starter. Greg Nelson SNIP I ran a cable from the battery to the upper 3/4" angle long. above it and I ran welding cable for both connections forward to the firewall. The welding cable is a OK fellow rocketeers ..............? I personally have a problem with running "hot" wires into the stick, so I made all wires in Infinity grip grounds to complete circuit. For high amp draw apps, I used relays. Auto type relays (available in PMA aisle at RADIO Shack ) work fine. If you are using Infinity on both sticks, then you will need relays for trim. As an safety factor, so that unruly GIB cannot use switches if I desire, I put ground kill switch on panel that interupts ground to aft stick. I used only wires that came with Infinity. Tom Hall #15 Can you tell me Uh...I think about 30 on the bottom, and 100 on the top, with a green range at 70 to 90. Consult your Lyc manual here
Cheers Mark All, I'm getting ready to custom order my airspeed indicator with the proper markings. In looking at the archives on Bill Tew's site, I've found conflicting information on this. When I convert the MPH to KTS, I don't get the same numbers that are quoted for KTS. Here is what I "think" are the correct ranges. Someone please correct me if these are not right: White Arc: 56 KTS to 95 KTS Green Arc: 60 KTS to 160 KTS Yellow Arc: 161 KTS to 239 KTS Red Line: 240 KTS Randy #95 The white arc goes much lower, around 44-48 knots depending on weight. Bottom of the green is about 4 knots higher. This is why we built F1's instead of 70 knots lancairs. That extra 25 knots REALLY_HURTS when you hit a tree in a field after the only engine quits. Someone was asking about oil pressure. I was told that 55 PSI is the lower redline. Warmest Regards, Bob Gross New lyc's from the factory have a 115psi redline. A while back there was discussion on turning up the pressure in regards to the #5 cyl. not getting enough oil due to the galley design. If lycoming is cranking up the pressure then we should take note of that. Regards, Bob Its 115psi if you take pressure off the front, 125psi if you take it off the back of the engine. See http://www.airplanebroker.com/MARV.HTM for the details. Regards, Bob Here is what I "think" are the correct ranges. Someone please correct me if these are not right: Hey Randy: Considering the possible pitot-static errors, I'd say you are in the ballpark. I had mine marked exactly as you note above. Works OK! Mark The 56 kts and the 60 kts, discussed here are very close to the indicated airspeed numbers on all three of my rockets. I did not calibrate my instruments as I use the airspeed indicator for what it is, a relative indication of speed. Based on consistent load,temperature, and power settings, it stalls at the same numbers. Static ports have been located in the aft fuselage with the exception of my blue plane where I also had a static port in the pitot tube. The airspeed indications were similar with both locations. I have not tried Mark`s forward, #2 bulkhead spot, I would certainly trade some accuracy for ease of installation, if the numbers are consistent. Tom Martin
Correct, and I talked to the fellas who wrote the article. They noted that the increased oil press was to help with increasing the flow, which was to help with cooling the heads....which we don't really need if our head temps run cooler than 370-380F, according to the writers. The older Lycs still use a lower upper limit: 95PSI is noted in this manual, with 55PSI as the min (in cruise) and 25PSI as min idling. In addition (newer versions), the pressure pick-off is at the front of the engine, so line pressure would be considerably higher. The turbo 540 that Mooney was running actually had extra oil lines to each head, to keep it cool enough to survive -- looked like 2 injection systems. Oddly enough, a different design lifter -- with a higher leak-down rate, somewhat newer than the 1937 Caddilac design in use in most Lycomings, would obviate the necessity for higher pressures. But we're still running magnetos, so I doubt the lifters will be updated. Cheers Mark
Seems to me that the fwd location on Ole 84 is a bit more accurate when compared to MY aft installation, if I can work the IAS/CAS/GS equations correctly. YMMV of course. Mark
Its actually a 1929 Cadillac lifter and the new lifter design (if you wan to call it that) is in the O-320-H2AD. There's a 172 that lives just behind my house that has 2800 hrs. smoh, still running strong, and I believe it is due to the superior lifter design of the H2AD. Anyway, I can't see any thing that would be hurt by cranking up the oil pressure...?
\Regards, Bob I think we all might be saying the same thing. Bob said that his bird stalls flaps down at 44-46 kts. Flaps up stall is 4 kts more. Mark said that he stalls at 60 MPH. Now, if that speed is flaps up stall speed, the the conversion to knots is 52 kts. That's only a couple of knots off of Bob's speed of 48-50 kts. The Rocket homepage says that the stall speed is 54 mph. Converting that to knots is 46 kts. If that speed is with the flaps extended, then it is the same as Bob. Also, when researching other posts on the subject, I found quite a range of answers, which led me to my original post. Mark, I think you need to clear this up. It would be nice to see flaps down and flaps up stall speeds, in either MPH or KTS, and have this information match what is on the Team Rocket web site. So far, here are the range markings that I have: White Arc: 46 kts to 95 kts Green Arc: 52 kts to 160 kts Yellow Arc: 161 kts to 239 kts Red Line: 240 kts Randy #95 In a message dated 11/18/2003 5:26:44 PM Central Standard Time, rpgross@bellsouth.net writes: So what sayeth thee Mark. Typo on the web page or instrument error, voodoo/black magic or what? We used the CAFE data from John Harmon's testing. I seriously doubt the testing was done at gross weight -- probably as light as possible, actually. In addition, they use 15"MP/1500RPM in the test, which is about run-up power on our birds -- quite a bit, if you ask me. Typical stall on my ship shows about 60MPH if you're working it carefully, and about 85MPH if you're doing wifferdills and pulling some amount of G. I didn't test at any higher G loadings. If your ship indicates a 44KT stall, we still have to do some side-by-side flying to see what the heck is going on! Not that it's not possible, mind you, but I'd sure like to see it. Carry on! Mark At any rate 54 MPH is only 47 knots so 44 seem pretty reasonable (i can live with a three knot error). I'm sure our ships are within a fraction of a knot of each other at stall speed at similar weights This thread boils down to "accepted practice" of marking the airspeed indicator with the "real" speeds, or marking it at the point where the stall/flap limit/VNE actually occurs. The latter would be a bitch to do unless you flew first with a blank indicator and then removed it to add arcs. One of my concerns was how to come up with an accurate 240 knots reference( don't want to peel any parts off you know) . Still haven't been able to do anything but generate a bunch of empirical data. It's would be pretty scary to think you were going 240 knots when you were really going 260 knots..yikes! It seems the best we can do on this issue is guess, as the bird would not go 240 KIAS except in a screaming dive, giving little GPS data to validate. My F1 with rear static ports read about 12 knots low at 210 KIAS and estimated to read 16-17knots low at 240 KIAS. As modern pilots only understand the bizarre concept of GPS ground speed, maybe the traditional airspeed indicator needs to be replaced with an unmarked dial with only green and yellow arcs with little red radial lines marking warning points? No numbers at all! Not realy a bad idea considering the way GPS has revolutionized aviation. At any rate, for you efis guys, the accurate calibration is do-able, for the steam gauge guys, you have to live with instruments that tell you little more than lie. So why spend money putting on marks that will likey mean nothing? FWIW, I imposed a 220 knot VNE on my ship. Why? Because 220 knots is going like hell. The only way to get there is to dive it. The main reason to dive it is to show off ( I out grew pathetec 220 knot show off dives years ago). The only place we show off at is down near the surface. The ride near the surface is VERY VERY bumpy at 220 knots even in the morning. Who ya gonna impress with 20 more knots? Not me, I've landed an airliner with 3 kitchens and full of people at higher speeds than that. Lets not forget all the GLF's that have blown off did so at 220 knots. Be safe, wanna go really fast, get an ejection seat or ride there in a 500 knot airliner. Warmest Regards, Bob Gross
I have just installed landing lights on my F1. I chose to go with the Bill Vondane lights as they are adjustable and can mount in the wing tip. http://www.creativair.com/ Interference with the nav/strobe unit was a concern but I was able to move the light lower in the tip and the light is almost completely below the strobe unit. It throws an amazing amount of light and even though I have not yet used it in flight I am confident that it will be satisfactory. Pictures can be seen on Chip Gibbons site. http://www.rocketclubhouse.com/member_upload_list_files.asp I had already installed a flasher unit myself but next time I would probably buy a unit from Bill at the same time as I purchased the lights. The flasher function is more important than the light itself for the type of flying that I do. These flashing lights are much more visible than strobes in the day time, especially when I am in the circuit on final and I need to be seen. Tom Martin I've used the same lights in my wingtips. Details and pictures can be found in the "wings" section of the project. http://mywebpages.comcast.net/f1rocket/ Randy #95 AllAn area that has not much info is the manifold pressure pickup and suitable tubiing under the cowl. Aft of the firewall I plan to use 1/8' ID, 1/4" OD tygon. Where exactly is the pickup for the MP? Shall I use the port on the number 1 cylinder with the allen head fitting as supplied from Bart? It is on the left side of any cylinder head as you view the cylinder. What is the acceptable tubing under cowl? Any alternate pickup points? If tygon is acceptable then is fire proof sleeving in order? I have found very little info on this, just "hook up your MP." Much like well just "pop on the motor!" The devil is in the details. BTW Avery sells the covers for tach, adaptors for oil temp sensor too. Thanks to Bob Wahl and Tom Martin for the direction. Best Howard Howard Use the same location as you describe, but on number five, or number six, which ever works best for your installation. I use #4 aluminium line to get to the back of the baffles then a flexible low pressure line back to the firewall. Your hose supplier can make some recommendations regarding the correct hose. Again, you might consider a restrictor fitting at the cylinder the same as you did with the fuel and oil pressure fittings. Tom Martin Were have you guys been mounting the outside ait tempature pick up? Can't put it on the bottom because of exhaust pipes. I am thinking of putting it in the wing root, it should get enough air movement to give a good reading. It sticks out a half inch and has a 7/16 nut so I don't want it on the top or side. Put it in one of the cockpit cooling air inlets.... Cheers Mark It won't reach the one in the left wing and thats the only one I installed. Jack Hey Mark, My OAT probe in the naca vent is pretty inaccurate. Since part of it is in the cabin it picks up the warm air in the cockpit. On the F1 I'm going to put it on the underside of the wing, next to the inspection cover. Bob You will get inaccurate readings here because half the probe in in your cabin picking up the warmer air. If you want an accurate OAT, you're going to have to put it outside the cabin, like in the wing root or the NACA inlet in the wing. Randy #95 Call John Stark @ Stark Avionics in Georgia. Many RV guys buy from him. He charges 5% over cost, and he tells you up front what his cost is. Last I checked a Garmin 430 was $5990, harness was $250, and indicator was $1300-something for the indicator. The digital transponder was $1211. I've bought stuff from him before and highly recommend him. I don't think you'll find anyone who will beat his prices. www.starkavionics.com. Bob #80 Indy Is anyone going to use a tail strobe? Or do you think wingtips are adequate? Looking at the chart in Wicks catalog, which references FAR's, they say if the strobes are located in the tips,ie:F-1, then a tail strobe is required. Looks like a $200-$600 add on depending on which brand you go with. Any comments would be appreciated. Dean Dean, Check out http://strobeguy.safeshopper.com/11/1808.htm?614. I just ordered one myself. Much better than the Whelen power supply at half the cost but same power. Order a set of Whelen strobes and you're in business for a little less $$. Here's a detailed description of the nova power supply: http://www.matronics.com/searching/getmsg_script.cgi?INDEX=120439425?KEYS=nova_& _strobe?LISTNAME=RV?HITNUMBER=1?SERIAL=12293410010?SHOWBUTTONS=YES On the F1 you will have to have a tail strobe, if you use Mark's wingtips, to satisfy the feds. Bob #80 I might put a tail strobe on my new ship; if so, I'll use the Whelen bulb with an Aeroflash power unit. Van seems to have the best prices on the tail position/strobe assys, and the Aeroflash 12V DF power supplies are $84.33. Now, if you don't call 'em anticollision lights, but simply flashing lights, you don't need a tail unit. Go figure. Mark The other day I said I would repost this info. It was put together by our bud Mark Navratil who really did his homework. See, just this post was worth staying on the list, huh. Ok cheapskates, here ya go: I surfed the net far and wide looking for a less expensive strobe power supply equivalent to Whelen's high-powered HDA-CF Cometflash system. The only one I could find is the X-PAK 904, a 4-head power supply built by NOVA Electronics (www.strobe.com). All the info is on their website including links to distributors. I paid $159 for it from Strobes 'n' More. It has a good 5 year warranty, the quality appears to be very good, and the installation directions are outstanding. It uses the exact same AMP connectors as Whelen does, so I also bought some connectors and 30' of cable from Strobes 'n' More bringing my total to $200 including S&H. (note: the cable is nice quality, shielded, looks identical to the "aviation" stuff but it's a fraction of the cost at $0.35 per foot). Then I got some used #A650 Whelen nav/strobe assemblies from White air salvage in KS City, total $140 (they look and work good, just need paint). I already had a white tail nav light that came with my second-hand empennage kit. So I'm out $340 for the complete system which is about half of what the equivalent setup costs from Whelen. Some info on the power supply....it's rated at 90 Watts output or 75 Joules total. The specs are very close to the 3-head Whelen HDA-CF Cometflash system in terms of output power. But the NOVA power supply has several other features that I like, primarily the ability to select multiple flash patterns. I plan to use the Quintuple Flash mode alternating between the two wingtip strobes. This gives a very long, high-powered quintuple burst to each strobe which looks from a distance like a brighter, longer flash. The flash rate of each strobe in this mode appears to be 70 flashes per minute (of course it's actually 70 X 5 bursts but you can't distinguish that unless you're close to it). 70 flashes per minute falls right into the acceptable flash rate for strobes per FAR 23.1401 which says the system "must give an effective flash frequency of not less than 40, nor more than 100, cycles per minute. The effective flash frequency is the frequency at which the airplane's complete anticollision light system is observed from a distance, and applies to each sector of light including any overlaps that exist when the system consists of more than one light source. In overlaps, flash frequencies may exceed 100, but not 180, cycles per minute." So you could also use this system to drive both wingtips simultaneously and a third strobe in the tail, and it would still fall within the regs....that is, you would see a combined wingtip/tail flashrate of 140 per minute. Another selectable feature on this system is a "low power mode" that you can activate with a switch. The advantage to this is twofold: at night, you can use the lower power mode on the ramp so you don't blind yourself and everyone around you; and you could also prolong your flashtube life by using this mode whenever you are on the ground and you don't have the benefit of lots of cooling airflow. In the quintuple flash mode (high power) the heads get very hot very fast in still air. And on that note, I'd also recommend against using Aeroflash strobes with this power supply, since they are not rated to take the same kind of energy the Whelen strobes are. I think you'd burn up the Aeroflash strobes pretty quick in the high power mode. For example, if you are using the quintuple flash mode but only have two of the four strobe outputs connected, each of the two strobes will get 45 W or 37 Joules (which on my airplane is the desired effect : ). It will not hurt the power supply at all to leave two outputs disconnected according to NOVA, but their installation instructions say not to do it because most emergency vehicle strobe heads are only rated to 32 W or 25 Joules, so you'd burn them out very quickly if you connected them this way. Disclaimer: since my airplane isn't flying yet I can't do a side by side comparison from a distance with the Whelen HDA-CF system, but since I'm using the same strobes and the power supplies have comparable specs, I believe they will be too close to tell the difference, except that the NOVA system has the quintuple flash mode (vs. Whelen's quadflash) so the NOVA system might appear to have a slightly longer--hence more visible--flash. NOVA's flashrate is also higher (if I understand Whelen's specs correctly). One thing I can guarantee, the NOVA system is absolutely blinding to look at up close even in daylight, and is certainly MUCH brighter than the strobe systems I've seen from Aeroflash or on the typical spamcan. My last comment is that Nova Electronics has great tech support, I dialogued quite a bit with Eugene Abel at Nova, trying to understand the effects of connecting different combinations of strobes, flashrates and energy delivered, etc....he was very helpful and gave me too much good info to write on the list but if anyone has more specific questions feel free to ask (him or me). This one's for the archives and hopefully will save somebody else the amount of time it's taken me to figure it all out...if money's not an issue I'd recommend just getting the complete Whelen system and save yourself a bit of time/effort. Or, if brightness doesn't matter, go with Aeroflash.....there was debate a while back on the list where some people thought that brighter strobes didn't make any real difference....NOT trying to start that thread again. : ) --Mark Navratil Cedar Rapids, Iowa RV-8A fuselage, O-360-A4A, Sensenich 87", and some pretty bright flashy things on the wingtips. Does an HID recognition light plus a nav light in each wing tip along with a white nav light in the tail conform to FAA requirements? As a practical matter I think the HID will be more visible than strobes. Bob W It might be better, but getting the FAA to agree is like moving a mountain. Stick with the strobes... Cheers mark The aircraft spruce parts catalog has a beautiful explanation as to what lights are needed on aircraft..... What's the general wisdom for (1) a single, centrally located. powerpack driving all three strobes vs. (2)individual powerpacks mounted close to the strobe units(ie.wingtips and tail). The latter would seem preferable if there is a concern over interference with avionics/antennas. etc. from high voltage strobe cables. Is this really a concern with shielded cables? Also - would not a single 360 degree ,600 candlepower, strobe mounted on the top of the vertical stabilizer satisfy the FAA and thus elimiate the need for wingtip strobes? I would think the small added frontal area of the strobe would have negligible effect on aircraft performance. I prefer the central powerpack. You have to run wires out to the wing tips either way, so I don't see where the two packs saves you anything. Radio interference can be eliminated any number of ways. If grounded per the instructions, you should be okay. I always keep strobe wires away from all the other wires. Also, noise/interference is more a reflection of multiple ground loops in your aircraft grounding system than anything else. I follow the folowing rules: 1) Keep fat wires away from skinny wires 2) Use a common gound point inside the fuselage that is tied directly to the battery ground. I avoid "airframe" grounds except out in the wings. 3) Run strobe wires away from other wires, particulary coax. 4) As an extra measure, I run all my intercom and radio wires away from other wire bundles. My RV-6 was totally free of interference noise in the headsets, radio, and intecom. To me, the extra pound of ground wires in the airplane are worth not listening to the strobes "pop" or the "whiz" of the alternator in my headsets. That's not to suggest that there aren't other ways to accomplish the same result, this is just what worked for me. Randy #95 The strobe on top of the tail was my orginal intent until Mark pointed out that it would flash into the cockpit. Jack #70 Does anyone have a good mounting location for a tail strobe pwr supply? I've been considering using a single Nova Stobe power supply with Aeroflash heads and mounting it above or One other thing I forgot to mention was this strobe box has a few neat features that are certainly missing on Mark "we installed one here in the middle of the 019 deck (between the H Stab spars). Should be easy to service there...attach with nutplates" Forgot to mention have a single Whelen pwr supply. I laid my HS on the F-019 deck today for first time and held VF "in place", but didn't seem to have quite enough clearance to remove a single Whelen pwr supply, are you using one like you supply for wing -- and if so can I get one? Dave Bockelman 046 I'm using a single power supply under the ELT tray, with high voltage leads going to the tail and wing tips, and I am lucky enough to have no noise in the radios or intercom. Greg Nelson Hey Dave: Sorry -- I missed this one. I can get you a single supply easily -- $84.32 for the 12V double flash unit. For all you others, we may be on the verge of a new setup. I saw a power supply the other day, purchased by Luis Escobar. Looks like this single unit will power all the strobes, and it's $159 or so. I'll see if I can come up with a price using the Aeroflash tip units and this supply...you'll have to purchase the tail strobe/position yourself, and fab the cables. This setup might be $50 cheaper than the 3 supply system, once it'a all installed, and a few ounces lighter. The problem is still that we would have high tension leads running around the ship. with the greater risk of noise over the intercom/radios. Maybe Bob Japundza can help us out here? Now, if we can come up witha LED setup for all the position lights (the greens are now available), and a cheap enough strobe head to go with it, we might be laughing at the current light vendors! Cheers Mark |
||
| top of page |