A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Home Built
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Homebuilts and radios!



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 23rd 04, 02:43 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Homebuilts and radios!

Hi, I am finishing the construction of a J-3. I intend to have the
following in the aircraft and would like to know if you can give me any
hints or suggestions on the type, location and mounting of the antenna
farm. I would either like to hide the antennas or build them from
scratch or kit. I am not sure what the uv protection on the fabric
would do to the signals if I use hidden antennas. The wing spars and ribs
are wood, and I plan to use Polyfiber to cover it.

I will have one of each of the following;

Microaire Comm
Microaire Transponder
PDA GPS System ( Would prefer built in system, but they are not in the
price range)
ELT
2-meter ham unit
Amateur TV Transmitter

Thanks


  #2  
Old September 23rd 04, 02:13 PM
Stealth Pilot
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 21:43:17 -0400, wrote:

Hi, I am finishing the construction of a J-3. I intend to have the
following in the aircraft and would like to know if you can give me any
hints or suggestions on the type, location and mounting of the antenna
farm. I would either like to hide the antennas or build them from
scratch or kit. I am not sure what the uv protection on the fabric
would do to the signals if I use hidden antennas. The wing spars and ribs
are wood, and I plan to use Polyfiber to cover it.

I will have one of each of the following;

Microaire Comm
Microaire Transponder
PDA GPS System ( Would prefer built in system, but they are not in the
price range)
ELT
2-meter ham unit
Amateur TV Transmitter

Thanks


what no twin overhead foxtails?
:-)
Stealth Pilot
  #3  
Old September 23rd 04, 02:45 PM
sidk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I can offer a word of advice regards the Microaire Comm: I have one
in my Starduster that now works quite well but initially I was plagued
with howling in the transmit audio due to rf getting back into the
radio because of two deficiencies in my installation:
1) non-optimum match to the transmit antenna.
2) insufficient shielding of audio wiring.

After I did it right, it works great.

Sid Knox

Velocity N199RS
Starduster N666SK
KR2 N24TC
W7QJQ

Hi, I am finishing the construction of a J-3. I intend to have the
following in the aircraft and would like to know if you can give me any
hints or suggestions on the type, location and mounting of the antenna
farm. ;

Microaire Comm
Microaire Transponder
PDA GPS System ( Would prefer built in system, but they are not in the
price range)
ELT
2-meter ham unit
Amateur TV Transmitter

  #4  
Old September 23rd 04, 08:42 PM
Craig
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

wrote in message ...
I will have one of each of the following;

Microaire Comm
Microaire Transponder
PDA GPS System ( Would prefer built in system, but they are not in the
price range)
ELT
2-meter ham unit
Amateur TV Transmitter



Ahhh...small but not insignificant question here.....have you taken
the time to do a power loading analysis? Most Cubs that I know of
don't have either the battery or generator capacity to that much of a
load for any length of time.
Just for a data point, my Motorola VHF rig is 45 watt minimum, but
requires a 30 amp breaker.

Craig C.

  #5  
Old September 24th 04, 02:26 AM
UltraJohn
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Ahhh...small but not insignificant question here.....have you taken
the time to do a power loading analysis? Most Cubs that I know of
don't have either the battery or generator capacity to that much of a
load for any length of time.
Just for a data point, my Motorola VHF rig is 45 watt minimum, but
requires a 30 amp breaker.

Craig C.



What is it a tube type final? 45 watt should only require about 60 watt
input for the final plus maybe another 20 watt for the rest of the rig
including drivers (if it's transistor). That's less than 7 amps give it at
least 50% cushion would be around 10 amps so why 3 times the current for
the breaker?
John

  #6  
Old September 27th 04, 06:43 PM
Craig
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

UltraJohn wrote in message nk.net...



What is it a tube type final? 45 watt should only require about 60 watt
input for the final plus maybe another 20 watt for the rest of the rig
including drivers (if it's transistor). That's less than 7 amps give it at
least 50% cushion would be around 10 amps so why 3 times the current for
the breaker?


Sorry for taking so long but I've had all the systems down due to some
ISP induced problems for the last few days.

Doubt it's a tube final (Motorola MCX1000), but I did take a better
look at the power cord this morning as I was getting ready to fab a
new mount for the van for it. Has a 3 amp control line and a 15 amp
main power line. The 30 amp line was a feed for some other gear for
the truck and just happened to be laying on the wire bundle when I
looked at it last week,

Craig C.

  #7  
Old September 28th 04, 08:39 AM
John
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Craig wrote:

UltraJohn wrote in message
nk.net...



What is it a tube type final? 45 watt should only require about 60 watt
input for the final plus maybe another 20 watt for the rest of the rig
including drivers (if it's transistor). That's less than 7 amps give it
at least 50% cushion would be around 10 amps so why 3 times the current
for the breaker?


Sorry for taking so long but I've had all the systems down due to some
ISP induced problems for the last few days.

Doubt it's a tube final (Motorola MCX1000), but I did take a better
look at the power cord this morning as I was getting ready to fab a
new mount for the van for it. Has a 3 amp control line and a 15 amp
main power line. The 30 amp line was a feed for some other gear for
the truck and just happened to be laying on the wire bundle when I
looked at it last week,

Craig C.

I can accept that a lot easier ;-) Still quite a bit overkill so trying to
figure out what kind of electrical system capacity to power it along with
all the other gear in the plane I think you could figure a lot less.
Have a great day
John
kc5vb (but mostly inactive (got into it to tinker with electronics which is
both my hobby and profession!))

  #8  
Old September 29th 04, 12:48 PM
Robert Bonomi
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
John wrote:
Craig wrote:

UltraJohn wrote in message
nk.net...



What is it a tube type final? 45 watt should only require about 60 watt
input for the final plus maybe another 20 watt for the rest of the rig
including drivers (if it's transistor). That's less than 7 amps give it
at least 50% cushion would be around 10 amps so why 3 times the current
for the breaker?


Sorry for taking so long but I've had all the systems down due to some
ISP induced problems for the last few days.

Doubt it's a tube final (Motorola MCX1000), but I did take a better
look at the power cord this morning as I was getting ready to fab a
new mount for the van for it. Has a 3 amp control line and a 15 amp
main power line. The 30 amp line was a feed for some other gear for
the truck and just happened to be laying on the wire bundle when I
looked at it last week,

Craig C.

I can accept that a lot easier ;-) Still quite a bit overkill so trying to
figure out what kind of electrical system capacity to power it along with
all the other gear in the plane I think you could figure a lot less.
Have a great day
John
kc5vb (but mostly inactive (got into it to tinker with electronics which is
both my hobby and profession!))


Part of it is probably due to the fact that Motorola rigs are well known
for actual RF output _well_ above the 'nominal' output. I used to use a
nominal 30 watt VHF hi-band unit where the actual RF out was just over 47
watts. Every time I took it into the radio shop to have the cavities tweaked,
they insisted on doing a TX test. *Despite* my warning them about the output
level, they'd blow the attenuator on the test instrument every time. After
the puff of smoke, the urge to say "I told you so" was nearly overwhelming.


  #9  
Old October 1st 04, 05:46 AM
sidk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

John wrote:
Craig wrote:


Part of it is probably due to the fact that Motorola rigs are well known
for actual RF output _well_ above the 'nominal' output. I used to use a
nominal 30 watt VHF hi-band unit where the actual RF out was just over 47
watts. Every time I took it into the radio shop to have the cavities tweaked,
they insisted on doing a TX test. *Despite* my warning them about the output
level, they'd blow the attenuator on the test instrument every time. After
the puff of smoke, the urge to say "I told you so" was nearly overwhelming.


Uhh, John... 47 Watts is barely 2 dB greater power than 30 Watts.
Are you saying that they had a piece of equipment that could not
handle a 2 dB overload and would "...blow the attenuator on the test
instrument every time." ???
Further, an attenuator designed for a nominal 30 Watts would have a
fairly substantial mass or a lot of forced-air cooling. An additional
2 dB would make it go up in a "...puff of smoke.." ???

Sid Knox

Velocity N199RS
Starduster N666SK
KR2 N24TC
W7QJQ
  #10  
Old October 1st 04, 08:24 AM
John
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

First Sid
Look closer at the post I was not the one making the post about the
attenuator. I made the post about the amps/power consumption of the unit.
The original poster made the att. comments. These threads can be confusing
at times!
;-)

That being said your answer is YES it could. Especially if the unit was run
for too long a time the equipment could be designed to handle continuous
power of 30 watts but the 47 watts would cause thermal runaway and
eventually burn it up. Also with a 50 ohm circuit and 47 watts the output
would be 48 volts rf, with 30 watts it would have 30 volts. I the unit had
voltage sensitive devices in it between those two voltages it could very
well pop it immediately.
So Craig could be giving you the correct skinny (or he could be blowing
smoke (pun intended)) you really would have to know the spec's of the
equipment to know for sure.
John





sidk wrote:

John wrote:
Craig wrote:


Part of it is probably due to the fact that Motorola rigs are well known
for actual RF output _well_ above the 'nominal' output. I used to use a
nominal 30 watt VHF hi-band unit where the actual RF out was just over 47
watts. Every time I took it into the radio shop to have the cavities
tweaked,
they insisted on doing a TX test. *Despite* my warning them about the
output
level, they'd blow the attenuator on the test instrument every time.
After the puff of smoke, the urge to say "I told you so" was nearly
overwhelming.


Uhh, John... 47 Watts is barely 2 dB greater power than 30 Watts.
Are you saying that they had a piece of equipment that could not
handle a 2 dB overload and would "...blow the attenuator on the test
instrument every time." ???
Further, an attenuator designed for a nominal 30 Watts would have a
fairly substantial mass or a lot of forced-air cooling. An additional
2 dB would make it go up in a "...puff of smoke.." ???

Sid Knox

Velocity N199RS
Starduster N666SK
KR2 N24TC
W7QJQ


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Nav/Comm for homebuilts question(s) Dave Gribble Home Built 3 August 29th 03 08:57 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:32 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.