Received-SPF: pass
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=75.180.132.120; envelope-from=eanderson@carolina.rr.com
Message-ID: <002401c8a261$92e18600$2402a8c0@edward2>
From: "Ed Anderson" <eanderson@carolina.rr.com>
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
References: <list-2863387@logan.com>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Remoted EFISM Display
Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2008 17:08:53 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="Windows-1252";
	reply-type=response
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ernest Christley" <echristley@nc.rr.com>
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Saturday, April 19, 2008 5:03 PM
Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Remoted EFISM Display


> Ed Anderson wrote:
>>   I was certain that it could as the microchip driving it is much faster 
>> than the display, however, nothing like proving it.  Here is the display 
>> remoted 4" from the board (8-10" should be no problem
>>
> Ed, did you try cycling through the aviation bands with a radio?  Digital 
> signals going down a ribbon cable that long could be spewing a lot of 
> noise.  4" shouldn't be bad, but a length in the teens would have it 
> starting to resonate in the aviation bands.
>


No, Ernest, I did not.  Good suggestion, but not having the equipment to do 
so in my workshop sort of precludes readily checking for that type of 
interference.  Good reason to keep the length as short as possible - that is 
if anyone ever does remote the display {:>)

Ed