Nelson,

 

As you're correct, the group hasn't answered your question, how about we arm
you with some tools to get yourself over the line.  Being an application guy
you're probably not so interested in the hardware required to provide an
expected outcome J

 

We have started with one known - expected duration.

 

Now let's let you ponder a few unknowns:

1.       Total/Max "hourly" current draw of all instrumentation, radio's,
Flarm,  aircraft systems(electronic dump valves for example)

.         You will have to research this and arrive at a number specific to
your machine - which accounts for "duty cycles" of use for Radio, i.e. The
radio uses X amount of power but you only use it for a total of 10 mins for
the entire flight. 

2.       Level of redundancy in Power supply/delivery that "your" happy
with.  A common enterprise IT statement is N+1 - simply put enough battery
capacity for the entire load plus 100% in reserve. So you should probably
equate this in amp/hour instead of lumps of plastic and lead.  How you
arrive at the +1 can be different to the original supply.

.         What will you do if one battery fails should there be a delivery
issue - flaky main fuse/switch comes to mind here.

3.       How much do you want to spend?

4.       How much weight penalty can you afford? - max non lifting weight of
fuse etc.

.         Battery weight.

5.       How much space do you have left to fit/jam stuff in to?

.         Battery sizing - both physical and amps/hour rating

6.       Battery supply system - This is a system design consideration. If
in multiples; will your systems (computers) restart if when changing over
batteries (in flight) the interval is larger than reset time for the
avionics?  Hence the redundancy and number of batteries and system switching
is also linked to design and requirements - not just duration.  This also
includes powered equipment (computers, loggers).  Most equipment has a
standby battery, either internally or external to allow for these small
supply fluctuations.

 

Now this all seems like a lot of effort, however if you want to get it right
and not carry excess weight around the country side it's worth the time if
you're serious.

 

That being said, batteries really only come in a couple of glider consumable
sizes and 2-3 will probably suffice if they are of the 9-15amp/hour capacity
- depending on your system, redundancy requirements, total load etc.

 

If you require 2 batteries to run the endurance required but take a 3rd as a
spare and if the systems are wired separately, 2 batts in one supply and 1
in the other, the single battery will probably power your system (without
shedding load - turning stuff off) for half the time - really inconvenient
if you need those little computers and electric vario whilst grovelling
around far from home.

 

Hopefully you will have a think about this and decide how to proceed.  If
your machine has been designed well then the question really is about
capacity vs duration of flight for task planning.

 

Regards

John

 

 

From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Nelson
Handcock
Sent: Saturday, 27 November 2010 5:12 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Aus-soaring Digest, Vol 86, Issue 47

 

Thanks - I read this through a few days ago and gather this document
focusses on the cost not justifying the relatively low incident rate.
However, (as some have pointed out on this forum) the more situational
awareness that can be acheived the better, so it appears there is some
support for the instrument. I note some discussion taking place about how to
fit the instrument display in a small panel and the impracticalities facing
balloon, HG & parasailers.

My query relating to Task planning is not answered - is it a realistic
consideration or not? (I'm relatively new to the sport so please excuse my
ignorance)

Nelson

On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 4:30 PM,
<[email protected]> wrote:

Send Aus-soaring mailing list submissions to
       [email protected]

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
       http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
       [email protected]

You can reach the person managing the list at
       [email protected]

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Aus-soaring digest..."


Today's Topics:

  1. Re: Aus-soaring Digest, Vol 86, Issue 42 (John Welsh)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2010 14:30:10 +0800
From: "John Welsh" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Aus-soaring Digest, Vol 86, Issue 42
To: "'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.'"
       <[email protected]>
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Hi Nelson,



Suggest you read this in detail:

http://2009.gfa.org.au/Docs/CASA/ASAC_DP1001AS_Response.pdf



Cheers,

John Welsh



From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Nelson
Handcock
Sent: Saturday, 27 November 2010 2:10 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] Aus-soaring Digest, Vol 86, Issue 42



Excuse what might appear a dumb question, but apart from the cost of
installing & maintaining the instruments, what is the issue for gliding
here?

I take it an extra battery would be required - so I guess this has to be
factored into task planning - how many do we need to ensure the instrument
has power for the duration....?

Say I wanted to do a XC task and I expected to be flying for 3-4 hours -
will I need 1 or more 12 volt battery? Does weight become an issue?

What else is the concern here?


Thanks!

On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 7:16 PM,
<[email protected]> wrote:

Send Aus-soaring mailing list submissions to
      [email protected]

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
      http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
      [email protected]

You can reach the person managing the list at
      [email protected]

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Aus-soaring digest..."


Today's Topics:

 1. Re: ADSB in gliders and sport aviation (John Welsh)
 2. Re: ADSB in gliders and sport aviation (Mark Fisher)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2010 17:02:39 +0800
From: "John Welsh" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] ADSB in gliders and sport aviation
To: "'Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia.'"
      <[email protected]>
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

PowerFLARM doesn't appear to provide ADSB Out only ADSB In.



From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Simon
Hackett
Sent: Friday, 26 November 2010 4:02 PM
To: Mal Bruce; AUS Soaring
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] ADSB in gliders and sport aviation



Hello Mal (et al),



That device already exists. Its called a "PowerFLARM":



http://www.butterfly.aero/powerflarm/fly/



and/or



http://www.lxavionics.co.uk/traffic-monitor.htm



This looks like its just about to go into full production.



Note that its quoted as being able to run for 8 hours on six AA batteries
(or from a glider battery, obviously, as an alternative).



i.e. presumably the current draw isn't unreasonable.



That doesn't magically solve the economic question, but it does suggest that
the actual technology you require here (along with a Mode-S transponder, I
guess) is certainly available (or nearly so).



I must say that I find the notion of a combination Flarm and ADS-B to be
highly appealing as a safety tool. Its eye-opening (literally) to see the
thing the ADS-B in my Cirrus picks up before I see them out of the window.



Regards,

Simon



On 26/11/2010, at 6:00 PM, Mal Bruce wrote:







Could flarm and ADSB run on a single unit I recall having discussion with
Nigel about this how about your expert opinion?



Personally I 100% support technology being used for collision avoidance the
cost of the units and current battery technology is minimal and the shared
cost per aircraft far out weighs the cost of one life.



I am sure that negotiated properly some costs could be shared by GFA and the
federal government CASA after all they want "safe sky's for all"!



Mal






CASA Discussion Paper Response - Urgent Action Required




To: GFA Members, Gliding Clubs and Regional Gliding Associations



Urgent Action Required



See the response by
<http://GFA.informz.net/z/cjUucD9taT0yOTU5MTQmcD0xJnU9NTAxNzk0NzQ5JmxpPTEzNT
<http://GFA.informz.net/z/cjUucD9taT0yOTU5MTQmcD0xJnU9NTAxNzk0NzQ5JmxpPTEzNT
<http://GFA.informz.net/z/cjUucD9taT0yOTU5MTQmcD0xJnU9NTAxNzk0NzQ5JmxpPTEzNT
%0A%0AEzMTk/index.html> 
%0AEzMTk/index.html>
EzMTk/index.html> ASAC to CASA relating to
<http://GFA.informz.net/z/cjUucD9taT0yOTU5MTQmcD0xJnU9NTAxNzk0NzQ5JmxpPTEzNT
<http://GFA.informz.net/z/cjUucD9taT0yOTU5MTQmcD0xJnU9NTAxNzk0NzQ5JmxpPTEzNT
<http://GFA.informz.net/z/cjUucD9taT0yOTU5MTQmcD0xJnU9NTAxNzk0NzQ5JmxpPTEzNT
%0A%0AEzMjA/index.html> 
%0AEzMjA/index.html>
EzMjA/index.html> Discussion Paper 1006AS    In a nutshell, it proposes to
mandate universal fitting of ADSB and Mode S to all aircraft for use in all
classifications of airspace.  This is completely unacceptable to sport
aviation generally and gliding particularly.



The GFA will be submitting a response which will express similar views to
those of ASAC.



It is important that as many responses as possible are submitted expressing
concerns about the proposal and at the very least expressing strong support
for the ASAC submission.



Submissions can be made easily by individuals and club representatives via
CASA website "
<http://GFA.informz.net/z/cjUucD9taT0yOTU5MTQmcD0xJnU9NTAxNzk0NzQ5JmxpPTEzNT
<http://GFA.informz.net/z/cjUucD9taT0yOTU5MTQmcD0xJnU9NTAxNzk0NzQ5JmxpPTEzNT
<http://GFA.informz.net/z/cjUucD9taT0yOTU5MTQmcD0xJnU9NTAxNzk0NzQ5JmxpPTEzNT
%0A%0AEzMjE/index.html> 
%0AEzMjE/index.html>
EzMjE/index.html> Response to Regulatory Change Proposal".

Detailed individual responses would be preferred but a response which just
expresses dissatisfaction with CASA's consultation and then notes for each
item that changes would make it acceptable, with a final comment supporting
the ASAC paper will at least get the message across.



It would greatly assist our position if each organisation can ensure a
response on their behalf before 30 November and encourage all individual
members to do the same.  Apologies for the short notice.



Phil McCann

President

<ATT00001..txt>



 _____

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1170 / Virus Database: 426/3278 - Release Date: 11/25/10

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/private/aus-soaring/attachments/20101
<http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/private/aus-soaring/attachments/20101
%0A126/50bf5657/attachment.html> 
126/50bf5657/attachment.html>

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2010 20:16:23 +1100
From: Mark Fisher <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Aus-soaring] ADSB in gliders and sport aviation
To: "Discussion of issues relating to Soaring in Australia."
      <[email protected]>
Message-ID:
      <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"

Guys,
Swift Avionics will be the Australian agent for PowerFlarm.
Will advertise when it's ready to sell.
Cheers
Mark

On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 8:02 PM, John Welsh <[email protected]> wrote:

> PowerFLARM doesn?t appear to provide ADSB Out only ADSB In.
>
>
>
> *From:* [email protected] [mailto:
> [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Simon Hackett
> *Sent:* Friday, 26 November 2010 4:02 PM
> *To:* Mal Bruce; AUS Soaring
> *Subject:* Re: [Aus-soaring] ADSB in gliders and sport aviation
>
>
>
> Hello Mal (et al),
>
>
>
> That device already exists. Its called a "PowerFLARM":
>
>
>
> http://www.butterfly.aero/powerflarm/fly/
>
>
>
> and/or
>
>
>
> http://www.lxavionics.co.uk/traffic-monitor.htm
>
>
>
> This looks like its just about to go into full production.
>
>
>
> Note that its quoted as being able to run for 8 hours on six AA batteries
> (or from a glider battery, obviously, as an alternative).
>
>
>
> i.e. presumably the current draw isn't unreasonable.
>
>
>
> That doesn't magically solve the economic question, but it does suggest
> that the actual technology you require here (along with a Mode-S
> transponder, I guess) is certainly available (or nearly so).
>
>
>
> I must say that I find the notion of a combination Flarm and ADS-B to be
> highly appealing as a safety tool. Its eye-opening (literally) to see the
> thing the ADS-B in my Cirrus picks up before I see them out of the window.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Simon
>
>
>
> On 26/11/2010, at 6:00 PM, Mal Bruce wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> Could flarm and ADSB run on a single unit I recall having discussion with
> Nigel about this how about your expert opinion?
>
>
>
> Personally I 100% support technology being used for collision avoidance
the
> cost of the units and current battery technology is minimal and the shared
> cost per aircraft far out weighs the cost of one life.
>
>
>
> I am sure that negotiated properly some costs could be shared by GFA and
> the federal government CASA after all they want ?safe sky?s for all?!
>
>
>
> Mal
>
>
>
>
>
> *CASA Discussion Paper Response - Urgent Action Required*
>
>
>
> To: GFA Members, Gliding Clubs and Regional Gliding Associations
>
>
>
> *Urgent Action Required*
>
>
>
> See the response by *ASAC to
CASA*<http://GFA.informz.net/z/cjUucD9taT0yOTU5MTQmcD0xJnU9NTAxNzk0NzQ5JmxpP
<http://GFA.informz.net/z/cjUucD9taT0yOTU5MTQmcD0xJnU9NTAxNzk0NzQ5JmxpP%0ATE
zNTEzMTk/index.html> 
TEzNTEzMTk/index.html>relating to
> *Discussion Paper
1006AS*<http://GFA.informz.net/z/cjUucD9taT0yOTU5MTQmcD0xJnU9NTAxNzk0NzQ5Jmx
<http://GFA.informz.net/z/cjUucD9taT0yOTU5MTQmcD0xJnU9NTAxNzk0NzQ5Jmx%0ApPTE
zNTEzMjA/index.html> 
pPTEzNTEzMjA/index.html>
> * *   In a nutshell, it proposes to mandate universal fitting of ADSB and
> Mode S to all aircraft for use in all classifications of airspace.  This
is
> completely unacceptable to sport aviation generally and gliding
> particularly.
>
>
>
> The GFA will be submitting a response which will express similar views to
> those of ASAC.
>
>
>
> It is important that as many responses as possible are submitted
expressing
> concerns about the proposal and at the very least expressing strong
support
> for the ASAC submission.
>
>
>
> Submissions can be made easily by individuals and club representatives via
> CASA website *"**Response to Regulatory Change
Proposal*<http://GFA.informz.net/z/cjUucD9taT0yOTU5MTQmcD0xJnU9NTAxNzk0NzQ5J
<http://GFA.informz.net/z/cjUucD9taT0yOTU5MTQmcD0xJnU9NTAxNzk0NzQ5J%0AmxpPTE
zNTEzMjE/index.html> 
mxpPTEzNTEzMjE/index.html>
> *"*.
>
> Detailed individual responses would be preferred but a response which just
> expresses dissatisfaction with CASA's consultation and then notes for each
> item that changes would make it acceptable, with a final comment
supporting
> the ASAC paper will at least get the message across.
>
>
>
> It would greatly assist our position if each organisation can ensure a
> response on their behalf before 30 November and encourage all individual
> members to do the same.  Apologies for the short notice.
>
>
>
> Phil McCann
>
> President
>
> <ATT00001..txt>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 10.0.1170 / Virus Database: 426/3278 - Release Date: 11/25/10
>
> _______________________________________________
> Aus-soaring mailing list
> [email protected]
> To check or change subscription details, visit:
> http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring
>



--
Mark Fisher
Managing Director
Swift Performance Equipment
PO Box 726, Lismore, NSW
Australia
Ph: +61 2 66221666
Fax: +61 2 66221633
www.spe.com.au
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/private/aus-soaring/attachments/20101
<http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/private/aus-soaring/attachments/20101
%0A126/b7e46f4b/attachment.html> 
126/b7e46f4b/attachment.html>

------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Aus-soaring mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

End of Aus-soaring Digest, Vol 86, Issue 42
*******************************************




--
Nelson Handcock
0409 149919

http://www.linkedin.com/in/nelsonhandcockaustralia

 _____

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1170 / Virus Database: 426/3282 - Release Date: 11/26/10

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/private/aus-soaring/attachments/20101
127/43ef0e6b/attachment.html>

------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Aus-soaring mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

End of Aus-soaring Digest, Vol 86, Issue 47
*******************************************




-- 
Nelson Handcock
0409 149919

http://www.linkedin.com/in/nelsonhandcockaustralia

_______________________________________________
Aus-soaring mailing list
[email protected]
To check or change subscription details, visit:
http://lists.internode.on.net/mailman/listinfo/aus-soaring

Reply via email to