X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 13:45:11 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from mta11.charter.net ([216.33.127.80] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.4.2) with ESMTP id 5310808 for lml@lancaironline.net; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 10:29:26 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=216.33.127.80; envelope-from=troneill@charter.net Received: from imp10 ([10.20.200.15]) by mta11.charter.net (InterMail vM.8.01.05.02 201-2260-151-103-20110920) with ESMTP id <20111219152850.KITX4059.mta11.charter.net@imp10> for ; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 10:28:50 -0500 Received: from [192.168.1.100] ([75.132.241.174]) by imp10 with smtp.charter.net id B3Uq1i00B3mUFT7053UqBG; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 10:28:50 -0500 X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.1 cv=wN5/OdS/7hl3aRTPTViGy5XHc1tS8JMPaEhPXqaRdh8= c=1 sm=1 a=Ww5npoe0Pq8A:10 a=yUnIBFQkZM0A:10 a=VxlS/kh5Y2KhHY/Xui1ATg==:17 a=Ia-xEzejAAAA:8 a=WYHlblE5AAAA:8 a=biznXsr5AAAA:8 a=66foXGg0s5HRJ28eG_0A:9 a=_K08U2zYuEEw08sw-4wA:7 a=pILNOxqGKmIA:10 a=24SHd_aZoT4A:10 a=8seVuQscZSgA:10 a=EzXvWhQp4_cA:10 a=tIoSZPUmmIYA:10 a=amP8cGQ10gkA:10 a=2dvvPx_nB1hMQc1s:21 a=DlPtCDyKwB-t7ull:21 a=rmOuJaGfVZOL_BEuDfYA:9 a=f6EI5IKzZ45suZiWoI0A:7 a=VxlS/kh5Y2KhHY/Xui1ATg==:117 From: Terrence O'Neill Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-503-256462032 Subject: Re: [LML] Re: MGL back up instrumentr X-Original-Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 09:28:49 -0600 In-Reply-To: X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" References: X-Original-Message-Id: <3F9D7863-5B62-4B38-BA9A-59265DC628E1@charter.net> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) --Apple-Mail-503-256462032 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Lurking, might one quietly suggest that the ultimate backup would be a = simple, mechanical AOA vane on the wing? That's all you need to keep from stalling, as you can see the ground. Terrence L235/320 N211AL On Dec 19, 2011, at 9:00 AM, John Barrett wrote: > Good question, Jeff. Some more naturally follow: > =20 > 1. Are you stating my backup instruments are unreliable? > 2. If so, what do you find unreliable about them? > 3. Assuming they are unreliable, what would you replace them = with? > =20 > I guess the real question is what instrument that gives airspeed or = altitude will never fail to provide needed information under any = circumstance? > =20 > =20 > From: Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of = Jeff Edwards > Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2011 6:30 AM > To: lml@lancaironline.net > Subject: [LML] Re: MGL back up instrumentr > =20 > Why have unreliable backups?=20 >=20 > AvSafe=20 > Jeff Edwards > 314.308.6719 mobile > 636.532.5638 office > Jeff.edwards@avsafe.com >=20 > On Dec 16, 2011, at 8:44 AM, "John Barrett" = wrote: >=20 > Infinity line MGL instruments =96 they are intriguing as back up = gauges.=20 > =20 > Looks like the altimeter is Baro sensitive for input but needs = electrons for output. I spoke with Matt at their US distributor center = and learned that it uses pitot static inputs to pressure sensors that = generate output data for microprocessor to turn into altitude readout.=20= > =20 > Without electricity the gauge does not function, losing the = microprocessing component as well as the LCD display output. Does this = mean that in order to have good backup one would need to have a totally = mechanical altimeter? > =20 > Have found that two of my cheap 2.25=94 gauges are failed with case = leaks. Have had them awhile but as far as I know they haven=92t been = mishandled. I know the airspeed gauge is UMA. I suspect the altimeter = is the same brand. These are the two failed instruments. > =20 > Advice welcome. > =20 > John Barrett > =20 > =20 > =20 > =20 > =20 > Regards, > =20 > John Barrett, CEO > Leading Edge Composites > PO Box 428 > Port Hadlock, WA 98339 > =20 > www.carbinge.com > =20 --Apple-Mail-503-256462032 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Lurking, might one quietly suggest that the = ultimate backup would be a simple, mechanical AOA vane on the = wing?
That's all you need to keep from stalling, as you can see the = ground.

Terrence
L235/320 = N211AL


On Dec 19, 2011, at 9:00 = AM, John Barrett wrote:

Good question, Jeff.  Some = more naturally follow:
 
       Are you stating my backup instruments are = unreliable?
2. If so, what do you find unreliable about = them?
3. Assuming they are unreliable, what would you replace = them with?
I = guess the real question is what instrument that gives airspeed or = altitude will never fail to provide needed information under any = circumstance?
 
From: Lancair Mailing List = [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Jeff = Edwards
Sent: Sunday, December 18, 2011 = 6:30 AM
To:  [LML] Re: MGL back up = instrumentr
Why have = unreliable backups? 

Jeff = Edwards
314.308.6719 = mobile
636.532.5638 = office
Infinity line MGL = instruments =96 they are intriguing as back up = gauges. 
Looks like the altimeter is = Baro sensitive for input but needs electrons for output.  I spoke = with Matt at their US distributor center and learned that it uses pitot = static inputs to pressure sensors that generate output data for = microprocessor to turn into altitude readout. 
 
Without electricity the = gauge does not function, losing the microprocessing component as well as = the LCD display output.  Does this mean that in order to have good = backup one would need to have a totally  mechanical = altimeter?
 
Have found that two of my cheap 2.25=94 gauges are = failed with case leaks.  Have had them awhile but as far as I know = they haven=92t been mishandled.  I know the airspeed gauge is = UMA.  I suspect the altimeter is the same  brand.  These = are the  two failed instruments.
 
Advice = welcome.
 
John Barrett
 
 
 
Regards,
John Barrett, = CEO
Leading Edge Composites
PO Box 428
Port Hadlock, = WA 98339