 |
Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
gmcjetpilot
Joined: 04 Nov 2006
Posts: 170
|
 Posted: Tue May 15, 2007 10:56 am Post subject: Avionics Master (to be or not to be) |
 |
|
Greg if you want a avionic master switch
by golly PUT ONE IN, and be proud and
happy, because it will work just like you
think it will and know you like.
After you plow thru all the required reading
and "data" which is really an elaborate opinion
dressed up with a bunch of gobbly-gook,
bottom line its your choice and yours alone.
Bob has good points, but there not all
quintessential or relevant. For examples
some modern avionics, like the very popular
excellent Icom A200 com radio needs to be
OFF during start! So does my old Collins
transponder. You can use the little volume/off
switch or mode switch and turn them on and
off individually, but it's a pain. Bob may call
for Icom's head and berate them for their
design, but he is not going to buy you a new
Icom when it fries. If you insist on leaving
avionics on during start it could happen. By
the way the ICOM A200 is an awesome
radio and a super value, recommend.
One big fat beautiful avionics master
switch is nice. You can of course avoid
single point failure several ways. I
think the e-bus will do it, or two
switches in parallel, even a single
throw, double pole switch would do it.
Chance is the master switch will never
fail, and once you throw that switch on
its not going to fail, my opinion. Are
you flying IFR at 18,000 ft or day/night
vfr. Just use good old common sense.
I sometimes disagree with Bob and this is
one of them. This is one of those topics
Bob has a very strong opinion on, emphasis
on opinion, but don't let any one tell you what
to do when it comes down to preference,
which this is.
All you have to know is there is NOT a good
reason for leaving an avionics master switch
out of your panel. If that is what you want, it's
very simple, you want it, put it in. It's common
and useful even today.
Is opinion & preference not safety, end of story.
Here is another professional opinion:
http://avionicswest.com/articles.htm
Scroll to the bottom, "Avionics Master
Switch" article
Good Luck, and don't over think it and
use the KISS principle.
George ATP/CFI-II-ME/MSME
| Quote: | All,
I'm working on my panel and I'm trying
to decide if I should put an Avionics
Master switch. In my experience with
rental planes this was nice to have
since there was one switch to turn
everything on or off during engine start
or shutdown.
Is there any reason not to add this
feature? I'm planning an E-Bus and
Main Bus configuration similar to the Z-
13/8 design.
|
Food fight? Enjoy some healthy debate
in the Yahoo! Answers Food & Drink Q&A. [quote][b]
| | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
cjensen(at)dts9000.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue May 15, 2007 11:31 am Post subject: Avionics Master (to be or not to be) |
|
|
George,
Very interesting take on things. Quoting from the source you quoted (Air West Avionics):
"Try starting the engine with the avionics on today and there’s a good chance you will damage your avionics. The damage may not show up immediately, but nevertheless, the damage has been done."
Ah yes, the ole "insidious damage problem". Very convenient. You probably suffered damage, even though you can't see it and, of course, you can prove you didn't suffer damage because you can't see it. There must be a double negative or Gordian knot in there somewhere!
The most valuable quote from the article comes in light of your castigating Bob for espousing "opinions", and I quote from your definitive reference:
In summary, if you have modern avionics such as KX-155s, Loran, DMEs, GPS, fuel flows and sorts, then in my opinion an avionics master is a must. (emphasis and underline, mine).
If I understand correctly, you are casting aspersions on Bob's opinion....with another opinion; from someone who we don't know and have no understanding of their CV, if any. Very interesting.
Chuck Jensen --
| | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bill Denton
Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 97
Location: Chicago, IL USA
|
| Posted: Tue May 15, 2007 3:58 pm Post subject: Avionics Master (to be or not to be) |
|
|
For the life of me I can’t remember which piece of equipment it was, but…
There was some piece of avionics, which I think was a nav/com, that would maintain “state” if turned off via an avionics master, but would not if turned off via the power switch.
In other words, if you turned it off via an avionics master, when you turned it back on it would still be set to the same active and standby frequencies, and perhaps some other settings.
But if you turned it off with the power switch, when you turned it back on if would wake up with some type of “default” settings.
To me, this would be a good reason for including an avionics master switch.
Does anyone else remember which piece of equipment offered a function like this? I think it was something fairly recent by Garmin, but I’m not sure…
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of gmcjetpilot(at)yahoo.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2007 1:55 PM
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com; gmvouga(at)hotmail.com
Subject: Re: Avionics Master (to be or not to be)
Greg if you want a avionic master switch
by golly PUT ONE IN, and be proud and
happy, because it will work just like you
think it will and know you like.
After you plow thru all the required reading
and "data" which is really an elaborate opinion
dressed up with a bunch of gobbly-gook,
bottom line its your choice and yours alone.
Bob has good points, but there not all
quintessential or relevant. For examples
some modern avionics, like the very popular
excellent Icom A200 com radio needs to be
OFF during start! So does my old Collins
transponder. You can use the little volume/off
switch or mode switch and turn them on and
off individually, but it's a pain. Bob may call
for Icom's head and berate them for their
design, but he is not going to buy you a new
Icom when it fries. If you insist on leaving
avionics on during start it could happen. By
the way the ICOM A200 is an awesome
radio and a super value, recommend.
One big fat beautiful avionics master
switch is nice. You can of course avoid
single point failure several ways. I
think the e-bus will do it, or two
switches in parallel, even a single
throw, double pole switch would do it.
Chance is the master switch will never
fail, and once you throw that switch on
its not going to fail, my opinion. Are
you flying IFR at 18,000 ft or day/night
vfr. Just use good old common sense.
I sometimes disagree with Bob and this is
one of them. This is one of those topics
Bob has a very strong opinion on, emphasis
on opinion, but don't let any one tell you what
to do when it comes down to preference,
which this is.
All you have to know is there is NOT a good
reason for leaving an avionics master switch
out of your panel. If that is what you want, it's
very simple, you want it, put it in. It's common
and useful even today.
Is opinion & preference not safety, end of story.
Here is another professional opinion:
http://avionicswest.com/articles.htm
Scroll to the bottom, "Avionics Master
Switch" article
Good Luck, and don't over think it and
use the KISS principle.
George ATP/CFI-II-ME/MSME
>From: "Greg Vouga" <gmvouga(at)hotmail.com (gmvouga(at)hotmail.com)>
>Subject: Avionics Master
>
>I'm working on my panel and I'm trying
>to decide if I should put an Avionics
>Master switch. In my experience with
>rental planes this was nice to have
>since there was one switch to turn
>everything on or off during engine start
>or shutdown.
>
>Is there any reason not to add this
>feature? I'm planning an E-Bus and
>Main Bus configuration similar to the Z-
>13/8 design.
Food fight? Enjoy some healthy debate
in the Yahoo! Answers Food & Drink Q&A. | Quote: | | http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
01234
[quote][b]
| | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nuckollsr(at)cox.net
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed May 16, 2007 6:04 am Post subject: Avionics Master (to be or not to be) |
|
|
| Quote: |
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
gmcjetpilot(at)yahoo.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2007 1:55 PM
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com; gmvouga(at)hotmail.com
Subject: Re: Avionics Master (to be or not to be)
Greg if you want a avionic master switch
by golly PUT ONE IN, and be proud and
happy, because it will work just like you
think it will and know you like.
After you plow thru all the required reading
and "data" which is really an elaborate opinion
dressed up with a bunch of gobbly-gook,
bottom line its your choice and yours alone.
|
"Required"??? What's required of anyone
and who has taken it upon themselves to
levy such requirements? Please define
"gobbly-gook", is that a scientific term?
| Quote: | Bob has good points, but there not all
quintessential or relevant. For examples
some modern avionics, like the very popular
excellent Icom A200 com radio needs to be
OFF during start! So does my old Collins
transponder. You can use the little volume/off
switch or mode switch and turn them on and
off individually, but it's a pain. Bob may call
for Icom's head and berate them for their
design, but he is not going to buy you a new
Icom when it fries. If you insist on leaving
avionics on during start it could happen. By
the way the ICOM A200 is an awesome
radio and a super value, recommend.
|
Who has called for anyone's head? You
mis-represent or have mis-understood what
I've suggested. Are you asserting that
an Icom subjected to the normal, documented
and expected voltage excursions associated
with starting an engine is at risk for a
failure that generates a maintenance event?
Hmmm . . . In keeping with your understanding
of how the Icom is designed, should you also
turn it off if you're getting ready to turn
on an air conditioner compressor drive motor or
perhaps lower gear with a hydraulic pump
driven with a PM motor?
Icom is (or in my personal experience
at least was) the acknowledged leader in
operational quality of their radios. But does
this fact give them license to toss off
a rudimentary operating feature that the
vast majority of suppliers to aviation know
about, understand and embrace in the design
of their products? Are you certain that
Icom has assumed that license and chooses
admonish customers to pamper products that
suffer from rudimentary design deficiencies?
| Quote: | One big fat beautiful avionics master
switch is nice. You can of course avoid
single point failure several ways. I
think the e-bus will do it, or two
switches in parallel, even a single
throw, double pole switch would do it.
Chance is the master switch will never
fail, and once you throw that switch on
its not going to fail, my opinion. Are
you flying IFR at 18,000 ft or day/night
vfr. Just use good old common sense.
|
If one has an E-bus with two feed paths,
the issue does not pivot on the probability
of failure for any single switch.
| Quote: | I sometimes disagree with Bob and this is
one of them. This is one of those topics
Bob has a very strong opinion on, emphasis
on opinion, but don't let any one tell you what
to do when it comes down to preference,
which this is.
|
I've told nobody to do anything. I've offered
design goals and backed them up with a recitation
of the underlying simple ideas and 46 years
of first hand design experience, customer service
and observation of the marketplace. You sir have
yet to support any assertions with an understanding
of either physics, fact or experience as a professional
| Quote: | All you have to know is there is NOT a good
reason for leaving an avionics master switch
out of your panel. If that is what you want, it's
very simple, you want it, put it in. It's common
and useful even today.
|
And if you'd properly quoted me you would have
acknowledged the many times I've written as follows:
". . . if one wants an "avionics master" it could be
a switch in series with the diode . . . which prevents
problems from inadvertent switch operation. You still
have a backup from the alternate feed path which can
be used for either loss of main path -OR- provides
power when you've shut the main bus down after an
alternator system failure."
| Quote: | Is opinion & preference not safety, end of story.
Here is another professional opinion:
<http://avionicswest.com/articles.htm>http://avionicswest.com/articles.htm
|
An excellent recitation of dogma supported
by not one citation of fact in the physics
of anyone's design or the willingness of
manufacturer's to sign up to the best we know
how to do. I had lunch with a customer yesterday
to talk about pitch trim and flap actuation
systems for a new airplane. These will be processor
driven and have a lot of new features designed
to increase ride comfort and reduce pilot workload.
Neither of these designs will require operator
intervention to drag it back out of the
weeds or prevent damage due to a brown-out event
whether driven by and engine-start or any other
condition. The addition of these features will be
totally transparent to the pilot and passengers . . .
an expression and production of the best we know
how to do. Achieving this design goal adds less than
1% to cost of bill of materials and about the same to
the software task. I.e, it's easy to do so why not
do it?
| Quote: | Good Luck, and don't over think it and
use the KISS principle.
|
| Quote: | George ATP/CFI-II-ME/MSME
|
Gee George, we wouldn't want to think about
it too much would we? I agree that thinking
without striving for understanding is
a waste of one's time. Hundreds of thousands
of airplanes have been built and flown
without burdening the pilots with a suggestion
that they understand how the electrical system
works . . . and the vast majority of those pilots
lived to a ripe old age. But from time to time,
one of those pilots (and the publisher of some
magazine) believes that a certain amount of
thinking would be useful . . . so we get the
dark-n-stormy night story that adds no understanding
but offers something to think about.
There are, no doubt, forums where dogma is
preached and thinking for understanding is not
promoted . . . that just happens not to be
what goes on in this forum.
Bob . . .
| | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
echristley(at)nc.rr.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed May 16, 2007 7:35 am Post subject: Avionics Master (to be or not to be) |
|
|
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
| Quote: | >
> From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
> gmcjetpilot(at)yahoo.com
>
> After you plow thru all the required reading
> and "data" which is really an elaborate opinion
> dressed up with a bunch of gobbly-gook,
> bottom line its your choice and yours alone.
"Required"??? What's required of anyone
and who has taken it upon themselves to
levy such requirements?
|
Bob, I've seen this sort of response to your writings quite often.
While I think I understand your intent, I think other people really want
some authority to tell them what to do. If all else fails, they will
find one where none exists. I think you should carry a signature along
the lines of, "I strive to be a teacher, not your mother. I only have
suggestions, not directives."
| | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gmcjetpilot
Joined: 04 Nov 2006
Posts: 170
|
| Posted: Thu May 17, 2007 5:17 am Post subject: Avionics Master (to be or not to be) |
|
|
Bob, I have learned my lesson not to debate you. I think
you take different opinions, disagreement too personally. I
am just taking the Pro to your Con. There's nothing personal.
You can make very persuasive rhetoric. To balance it out
some times it takes rhetoric and propaganda of my own to
make the counter point. It's not personal. It's only a tribute
to your well worded doctrine that one must make an effort
to present the other views.
You are entitled to your opinion, and again as well thought
and salient as your opinions are, I'm entitled to mine. In fact
I often and mostly agree with you, even here. I have no
disagreement with your points, but.............
My point is simple, when it comes to preference regarding
a non safety issue, where weight, cost and complexity
are not affect appreciably, than preference trumps all
opinion or reasoning. Its like circuit breakers or internal
v. external regulated alternators. To each his own.
***************************************************************
You want an avionics master put one in, done deal.
***************************************************************
I have no comments on your reply below, but some of its
not accurate or consistent with your past comments.
I will make one comment. In the past you have made it
clear that avionics should be made to the DO-160 spec
or they are not worth a darn as designers. Its moot, I
agree with you. However as an active builder Bob I can
tell you not all things going into homebuilt panels are
are as robust as you might think. Also old legacy radios
are still making their way into homebuilt panels, and my
Icom example, a new radio not to DO-160 specs. The
software type products also hate being on during start.
No damage just nuisance distracting reboots.
Other wise you have nit picked words and taken some
things too seriously, I stand by my original post with no
malice or ill will intended. I am just here to help.
It is clear we really don't disagree technically and most all
about words. You should have been a lawyer. You would
have been a good one. That is a compliment.
Cheers, No hard feelings. George ATP/CFI-II-ME/MSME
do not archive
Time: 07:04:38 AM PST US
From: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
Subject: RE: Re: Avionics Master (to be or not to
be)
| Quote: |
From: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
[mailto:owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of
gmcjetpilot(at)yahoo.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2007 1:55 PM
To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com; gmvouga(at)hotmail.com
Subject: Re: Avionics Master (to be or not to be)
Greg if you want a avionic master switch
by golly PUT ONE IN, and be proud and
happy, because it will work just like you
think it will and know you like.
After you plow thru all the required reading
and "data" which is really an elaborate opinion
dressed up with a bunch of gobbly-gook,
bottom line its your choice and yours alone.
|
"Required"??? What's required of anyone
and who has taken it upon themselves to
levy such requirements? Please define
"gobbly-gook", is that a scientific term?
| Quote: | Bob has good points, but there not all
quintessential or relevant. For examples
some modern avionics, like the very popular
excellent Icom A200 com radio needs to be
OFF during start! So does my old Collins
transponder. You can use the little volume/off
switch or mode switch and turn them on and
off individually, but it's a pain. Bob may call
for Icom's head and berate them for their
design, but he is not going to buy you a new
Icom when it fries. If you insist on leaving
avionics on during start it could happen. By
the way the ICOM A200 is an awesome
radio and a super value, recommend.
|
Who has called for anyone's head? You
mis-represent or have mis-understood what
I've suggested. Are you asserting that
an Icom subjected to the normal, documented
and expected voltage excursions associated
with starting an engine is at risk for a
failure that generates a maintenance event?
Hmmm . . . In keeping with your understanding
of how the Icom is designed, should you also
turn it off if you're getting ready to turn
on an air conditioner compressor drive motor or
perhaps lower gear with a hydraulic pump
driven with a PM motor?
Icom is (or in my personal experience
at least was) the acknowledged leader in
operational quality of their radios. But does
this fact give them license to toss off
a rudimentary operating feature that the
vast majority of suppliers to aviation know
about, understand and embrace in the design
of their products? Are you certain that
Icom has assumed that license and chooses
admonish customers to pamper products that
suffer from rudimentary design deficiencies?
| Quote: | One big fat beautiful avionics master
switch is nice. You can of course avoid
single point failure several ways. I
think the e-bus will do it, or two
switches in parallel, even a single
throw, double pole switch would do it.
Chance is the master switch will never
fail, and once you throw that switch on
its not going to fail, my opinion. Are
you flying IFR at 18,000 ft or day/night
vfr. Just use good old common sense.
|
If one has an E-bus with two feed paths,
the issue does not pivot on the probability
of failure for any single switch.
| Quote: | I sometimes disagree with Bob and this is
one of them. This is one of those topics
Bob has a very strong opinion on, emphasis
on opinion, but don't let any one tell you what
to do when it comes down to preference,
which this is.
|
I've told nobody to do anything. I've offered
design goals and backed them up with a recitation
of the underlying simple ideas and 46 years
of first hand design experience, customer service
and observation of the marketplace. You sir have
yet to support any assertions with an understanding
of either physics, fact or experience as a professional
| Quote: | All you have to know is there is NOT a good
reason for leaving an avionics master switch
out of your panel. If that is what you want, it's
very simple, you want it, put it in. It's common
and useful even today.
|
And if you'd properly quoted me you would have
acknowledged the many times I've written as follows:
". . . if one wants an "avionics master" it could be
a switch in series with the diode . . . which prevents
problems from inadvertent switch operation. You still
have a backup from the alternate feed path which can
be used for either loss of main path -OR- provides
power when you've shut the main bus down after an
alternator system failure."
An excellent recitation of dogma supported
by not one citation of fact in the physics
of anyone's design or the willingness of
manufacturer's to sign up to the best we know
how to do. I had lunch with a customer yesterday
to talk about pitch trim and flap actuation
systems for a new airplane. These will be processor
driven and have a lot of new features designed
to increase ride comfort and reduce pilot workload.
Neither of these designs will require operator
intervention to drag it back out of the
weeds or prevent damage due to a brown-out event
whether driven by and engine-start or any other
condition. The addition of these features will be
totally transparent to the pilot and passengers . . .
an expression and production of the best we know
how to do. Achieving this design goal adds less than
1% to cost of bill of materials and about the same to
the software task. I.e, it's easy to do so why not
do it?
| Quote: | Good Luck, and don't over think it and
use the KISS principle.
|
| Quote: | George ATP/CFI-II-ME/MSME
|
Gee George, we wouldn't want to think about
it too much would we? I agree that thinking
without striving for understanding is
a waste of one's time. Hundreds of thousands
of airplanes have been built and flown
without burdening the pilots with a suggestion
that they understand how the electrical system
works . . . and the vast majority of those pilots
lived to a ripe old age. But from time to time,
one of those pilots (and the publisher of some
magazine) believes that a certain amount of
thinking would be useful . . . so we get the
dark-n-stormy night story that adds no understanding
but offers something to think about.
There are, no doubt, forums where dogma is
preached and thinking for understanding is not
promoted . . . that just happens not to be
what goes on in this forum.
Bob . . .
Be a better Globetrotter. [url=http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=48254/*http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/_ylc=X3oDMTI5MGx2aThyBF9TAzIxMTU1MDAzNTIEX3MDMzk2NTQ1MTAzBHNlYwNCQUJwaWxsYXJfTklfMzYwBHNsawNQcm9kdWN0X3F1ZXN0aW9uX3BhZ2U-?link=list&sid=396545469]Get better travel answers [/url]from someone who knows.
Yahoo! Answers - Check it out. [quote][b]
| | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
Get Email Distribution Too!
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
