Van's Air Force
Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.
2 comms...
- Thread starter Jimzim
- Start date
pierre smith
Well Known Member
Jim, a good spot that's often used and away from ferrite interference is on a tray, suspended from the upper framework, just behind the baggage area.
It's also easily accessible by simply removing just the upper half of the baggage wall.
Best,
It's also easily accessible by simply removing just the upper half of the baggage wall.
Best,
WingsOnWheels
Well Known Member
Unless of course you have a slider and want to have it open when you power-up. I am putting mine on the aft side of F-607 just above the floor.
CFI1513840
Well Known Member
Shelf in aft fuselage
This worked for me...
This worked for me...
The shelf depicted above is very common as is the aft deck, but I would recommend greatly simplifying the pitot/static connections and hookups. There are extra joints in that particular setup as shown for leaks to eventually develop. Not flaming the install, just saying it could be simper from a plumbing perspecting - and simpler is almost always better when it comes to pitot/static plumbing.
And yes, the other folks are right...one antenna for each comm radio.
Cheers,
Stein
And yes, the other folks are right...one antenna for each comm radio.
Cheers,
Stein
N941WR
Legacy Member
Make sure to put the ADAHRS at least one bulkhead aft of the baggage compartment. That way you won't have to worry about what is in the baggage compartment.
You can check out this thread for pictures of my install.
One builder I spoke to said he was putting his in the wing, which is still within the box called out in the SkyView manual.
You can check out this thread for pictures of my install.
One builder I spoke to said he was putting his in the wing, which is still within the box called out in the SkyView manual.
Walt
Well Known Member
I'll have nightmares tonight from just looking at it.
On the other hand, I make a living fixing leaks... so it's not all bad
Thanks very much for all the feedback! I'll have to think it through a bit further, but now I have some good options...Can't wait to get over the hump with all the avionics/wiring and get back to the more mechanical side of things. Much more in my comfort zone there, but I guess that's why it's both "recreational and educational!!
Thanks, Jim
Thanks, Jim
CFI1513840
Well Known Member
Stein, I'm not real happy with the ADAHRS plumbing either. One of the problems was having to connect the two units in parallel using the bulky connectors you see in the picture. If I had it to do over again knowing what I know now, it would probably be different. Having already passed the pitot/static check, I'll leave well enough alone for now, but I'd like to talk to you at some point to get your recommendations for improvement before my next pitot/static check.
Last edited:
Roy Thoma
Well Known Member
2 comm radio's with a single antenna
Jim -- it is possible to use a single comm antenna with two comm radio's. Bob Archer offers a "SA-010 - T/R Switch" for $175. I'm using a SA-010 with my GNS430W and my SL-30. I'm also aware of several local Lacair Legacy's that use the SA-010. Comant also makes the CI 601 that does the same function as the Bob Archer SA-010, for about $900.
See the bottom of http://sportcraftantennas.wordpress.com/shop/ for a short description of the SA-010. A web search will find more information about the SA-010.
See http://www.avionicsinternational.com/Images/AdditionalInfo/CI601.pdf for more info on the CI 601.
Both of these "switches" have some limitations. They add a single point of failure for the otherwise independent dual comms. They add at least 3db loss to the comm signal. They prevent using "split mode" features of audio panels (pilot and co-pilot simultaneously transmitting on separate comm radios).
Jim -- it is possible to use a single comm antenna with two comm radio's. Bob Archer offers a "SA-010 - T/R Switch" for $175. I'm using a SA-010 with my GNS430W and my SL-30. I'm also aware of several local Lacair Legacy's that use the SA-010. Comant also makes the CI 601 that does the same function as the Bob Archer SA-010, for about $900.
See the bottom of http://sportcraftantennas.wordpress.com/shop/ for a short description of the SA-010. A web search will find more information about the SA-010.
See http://www.avionicsinternational.com/Images/AdditionalInfo/CI601.pdf for more info on the CI 601.
Both of these "switches" have some limitations. They add a single point of failure for the otherwise independent dual comms. They add at least 3db loss to the comm signal. They prevent using "split mode" features of audio panels (pilot and co-pilot simultaneously transmitting on separate comm radios).
I guess I don't get it. How are there extra joints in that setup? He has one tee in each line. How can you reduce it any further?
Look carefully...there is at least 2 extra tube joints and a section of tube that don't need to be there, then the routing of the lines (straights where 90's would be better), etc.. Overall could be a lot cleaner. Not flaming anyone because he used what he had and reports that it obviously is working, but if you're starting from scratch you could clean it up quite a bit (also using far superior and much less bulky fittings). In reality, the truth is that the pictured install is still pretty good compared to a lot of older certified airplanes (ask Walt, we both can tell you some horror stories)!
Cheers,
Stein
Look carefully...there is at least 2 extra tube joints and a section of tube that don't need to be there, then the routing of the lines (straights where 90's would be better), etc.. Overall could be a lot cleaner. Not flaming anyone because he used what he had and reports that it obviously is working, but if you're starting from scratch you could clean it up quite a bit (also using far superior and much less bulky fittings). In reality, the truth is that the pictured install is still pretty good compared to a lot of older certified airplanes (ask Walt, we both can tell you some horror stories)!
Cheers,
Stein
I see the extension now, thanks. It's easy to miss in the picture. And I agree with respect to the 90 degree fitting comment and the bend radius.
You say other fittings are superior? I redid my plane with them and the avionics guy who inspected and did the paperwork said he didn't like them as they were leak prone. I believe he liked the brass ferrel versions, but not 100% sure.
I don't mean this sarcastically, but you need to find an avionics guy that isn't scared of change and can educate himself on modern equipment as it and it's related technology develops. I know shops and technicians that still insist on using hard aluminum lines for all pitot/static connections because "everything else is prone to leaks". The reality is that statement and thought process just isn't a credible one. Things do change, and occasionally this "modern wizardry" can be better.
Done correctly many types of connectors will work just fine, but done incorrectly EVERY type of connection can and will leak. This is similar to the same shops that won't do a Pitot Static check for your plane unless it has a certified altimeter in it. There is lots of misinformation out there, and though it is difficult to keep up with things, it's not that hard either.
Cheers,
Stein
