X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Tue, 06 Apr 2010 07:59:12 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from mail-pv0-f180.google.com ([74.125.83.180] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.3.5) with ESMTP id 4210504 for lml@lancaironline.net; Mon, 05 Apr 2010 12:57:06 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=74.125.83.180; envelope-from=keith.smith@gmail.com Received: by pvc22 with SMTP id 22so1799656pvc.25 for ; Mon, 05 Apr 2010 09:56:32 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=GLX3SzXGLlZjhywNi9CWliOv7rck3cXsYK0/ttBZqFT+e1G5P/VQZdavsR2llRXmru cx6Z/Tud4YHvnntx+dz2iB7L40wDUeJ8sglRiAOY9WAjfIbcXHKlgQtaWzXUQSQ/VSff 7SAyT2pQEuiz09r9F6LsM2M0yEag2uvJQaOfo= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.231.202.2 with HTTP; Mon, 5 Apr 2010 09:56:31 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: X-Original-Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2010 12:56:31 -0400 Received: by 10.141.131.15 with SMTP id i15mr3822267rvn.18.1270486591920; Mon, 05 Apr 2010 09:56:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-Message-ID: Subject: Re: [LML] Re: GPS reception issue From: Keith Smith X-Original-To: Lancair Mailing List Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=00032556491600dcc90483803693 --00032556491600dcc90483803693 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Thank you for all of the replies, gents. The shop pulled out the antenna cable and gave it a thorough inspection. They weren't happy with the connectors, which appeared to have been attached with an incorrect crimping tool, and the length of the cable (too long). They shortened the cable (it is RG400 from what I understand) and affixed 2 new connectors. It appears to have solved the problem, the GPS reception was rock solid on the 1hr flight that followed. The working theory is that the antenna cable was somewhat dodgy. The interference caused by the presence of some piece of hardware associated with the canopy was enough to degrade the signal to the point of failure. I had ruled out com radio interference by testing the system with the other com radio completely switched off. So far, so good! Keith --00032556491600dcc90483803693 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Thank you for all of the replies, gents.

The shop pulled out the ant= enna cable and gave it a thorough inspection.=A0 They weren't happy wit= h the connectors, which appeared to have been attached with an incorrect cr= imping tool, and the length of the cable (too long).=A0

They shortened the cable (it is RG400 from what I understand) and affix= ed 2 new connectors.=A0 It appears to have solved the problem, the GPS rece= ption was rock solid on the 1hr flight that followed.

The working th= eory is that the antenna cable was somewhat dodgy.=A0 The interference caus= ed by the presence of some piece of hardware associated with the canopy was= enough to degrade the signal to the point of failure.

I had ruled out com radio interference by testing the system with the o= ther com radio completely switched off.

So far, so good!

Keit= h
--00032556491600dcc90483803693--