X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([75.180.132.123] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2.14) with ESMTP id 3745104 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sat, 04 Jul 2009 17:14:22 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=75.180.132.123; envelope-from=eanderson@carolina.rr.com Received: from computername ([75.191.186.236]) by cdptpa-omta04.mail.rr.com with ESMTP id <20090704211344514.RJYZ2041@cdptpa-omta04.mail.rr.com> for ; Sat, 4 Jul 2009 21:13:44 +0000 From: "Ed Anderson" To: "'Rotary motors in aircraft'" Subject: HALTECH and other EFIs [FlyRotary] Re: Corruption of EC settings Date: Sat, 4 Jul 2009 17:13:47 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0017_01C9FCCA.CB48D0B0" X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579 In-Reply-To: Thread-Index: Acn83GXvmklVCJDlSM63ubvDyQZ8TAADzEjw Message-Id: <20090704211344514.RJYZ2041@cdptpa-omta04.mail.rr.com> This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0017_01C9FCCA.CB48D0B0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I've run with the HALTECH F3 and Real World Solutions EC2, the HALTECH died after 160 hours - fortunately during a ground run up - no redundancy. I read over the specs and did not see any redundancy listed for the ViPec-88 - did I miss it? I personally have never had any issued with the EC2, but then my electrical set up is fairly simply and straight forward - and I DO like the fact that the EC2 has a separate CPU for backup redundancy. I'm certain the other systems are fine systems and may be of interest to some, but for aircraft application I value the backup capability - especially after having the HALTECH go south on me. Ed Ed Anderson Rv-6A N494BW Rotary Powered Matthews, NC eanderson@carolina.rr.com http://www.andersonee.com http://www.dmack.net/mazda/index.html http://www.flyrotary.com/ http://members.cox.net/rogersda/rotary/configs.htm#N494BW http://www.rotaryaviation.com/Rotorhead%20Truth.htm _____ From: Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Al Wick Sent: Saturday, July 04, 2009 3:19 PM To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Corruption of EC settings I've installed Megasquirt, Haltech, and now Vi-Pec ECU's (not rotary installs). Most impressed with the Vi-Pec so far. The others had various issues. Vi-Pec V88 is highly flexible. No special wiring for various injectors. Lot's of extra sensors and outputs available. One of the few to be able to handle unusual crank signals (not applicable to rotary). Very good documentation, the others were fair at best. I have two on my plane for genuine redundancy. I'd give it strong consideration. Guess I'd describe it as sophisticated, robust, yet friendly. FWIW -al wick ----- Original Message ----- From: Ernest Christley To: Rotary motors in aircraft Sent: Saturday, July 04, 2009 11:19 AM Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Corruption of EC settings Al Gietzen wrote: > > Al, > > Do you know of any alternatives out there now that might be worth a look? > > Bryan > > Preparing to commit $$$ to EC > > Bryan; > > I haven't looked any further since prior to the final stages of > getting my EC2 working. The basic issue (besides cost) is always that > the systems are set up for automotive use, and although they may be > noise tolerant, have complexities that make them awkward for aviation > use. And there is the issue of redundancy. Tracy had good reason for > developing his own. > > Al > __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 3267 (20080714) __________ The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.com ------=_NextPart_000_0017_01C9FCCA.CB48D0B0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I’ve run with the HALTECH F3 = and Real World Solutions EC2, the HALTECH died after 160 hours - fortunately = during a ground run up – no redundancy.  I read over the specs and did = not see any redundancy  listed for the ViPec-88 – did I miss = it?   I personally have never had any issued with the EC2, but then my electrical set up is fairly = simply and straight forward – and I DO like the fact that the EC2 has a = separate CPU for backup redundancy.

 

I’m certain the other systems = are fine systems  and may be of interest to some, but for aircraft = application I value the backup capability – especially after having the HALTECH go = south on me.

 

Ed  =

 

From: = Rotary motors in aircraft [mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Al Wick
Sent: Saturday, July 04, = 2009 3:19 PM
To: Rotary motors in = aircraft
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Corruption of EC settings

 

I've installed Megasquirt, Haltech, and now Vi-Pec = ECU's (not rotary installs). Most impressed with the Vi-Pec so far. The others = had various issues.

 

Vi-Pec V88 is highly flexible. No special wiring = for various injectors. Lot's of extra = sensors and outputs available. One of the few to be able to handle unusual = crank signals (not applicable to rotary). Very good documentation, the others = were fair at best. I have two on my plane for genuine redundancy. I'd give it = strong consideration. Guess I'd describe it as sophisticated, robust, yet = friendly.

 

FWIW

 

-al wick

 

 

----- Original Message ----- =

Sent: = Saturday, July 04, 2009 11:19 AM

Subject: = [FlyRotary] Re: Corruption of EC settings

 

Al Gietzen wrote:
>
> Al,
>
> Do you know of any alternatives out there now that might be worth a = look?
>
> Bryan
>
> Preparing to commit $$$ to EC
>
> Bryan;
>
> I haven’t looked any further since prior to the final stages = of
> getting my EC2 working. The basic issue (besides cost) is always = that
> the systems are set up for automotive use, and although they may be =
> noise tolerant, have complexities that make them awkward for = aviation
> use. And there is the issue of redundancy. Tracy had good reason for
> developing his own.
>
> Al
>



__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus = signature database 3267 (20080714) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com

------=_NextPart_000_0017_01C9FCCA.CB48D0B0--