X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com X-PolluStop: No license found, only first 5 messages were scanned Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 22:18:03 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from imf20aec.mail.bellsouth.net ([205.152.59.68] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.3.4) with ESMTP id 993429 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sun, 12 Jun 2005 19:55:56 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=205.152.59.68; envelope-from=dskeele@bellsouth.net Received: from ibm62aec.bellsouth.net ([205.152.59.160]) by imf20aec.mail.bellsouth.net with ESMTP id <20050612235510.DCAM2220.imf20aec.mail.bellsouth.net@ibm62aec.bellsouth.net> for ; Sun, 12 Jun 2005 19:55:10 -0400 Received: from mail.bellsouth.net ([205.152.59.160]) by ibm62aec.bellsouth.net with SMTP id <20050612235510.FBUX8050.ibm62aec.bellsouth.net@mail.bellsouth.net> for ; Sun, 12 Jun 2005 19:55:10 -0400 X-Mailer: Openwave WebEngine, version 2.8.16.1 (webedge20-101-1106-101-20040924) X-Originating-IP: [70.149.211.186] From: X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" Subject: Re: [LML] Re: S-Tec Autopilots/KX155 Radios X-Original-Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2005 19:55:10 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Original-Message-Id: <20050612235510.FBUX8050.ibm62aec.bellsouth.net@mail.bellsouth.net> Gary, Thanks for your recomendation. I'm still trying to work things out with S-Tec. Will get with your expertise if that fails. Sould know something this next week.. Thx again Don Skeele N320J > > From: "Gary Casey" > Date: 2005/06/12 Sun PM 12:17:42 EDT > To: "Lancair Mailing List" > Subject: [LML] Re: S-Tec Autopilots/KX155 Radios > > < Transducers are very easily influenced by RF, He said to separate the radio > and transducer cables where you can and wrap the transducer in Aluminum Foil > and ground the foil to the cable ground mesh/wire.. > Don Skeele 2235/320>> > > There is a way around this - Use a Chrysler MAP sensor. It makes a > difference which one and I don't have the part number handy, but I can get > it if you like. The sensor has a different pressure port, different > connector and a different mounting, but that's all small stuff for us > experimental types. The Chrysler sensor has a different calibration curve, > but that doesn't seem to bother the S-TEC system at all. It is much more > resistant to EMI and RFI and it will run on the 9 volts that the system > requires. Most 5-volt devices won't do that. I've been using one in my > Cessna for a few years with no problems. > > Gary Casey > > > > -- > For archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net/lists/lml/ >