 |
Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
nuckollsr(at)cox.net
Guest
|
 Posted: Thu Aug 24, 2006 3:50 pm Post subject: Paul |
 |
|
From: "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com>
To: <aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com>
Subject: Re: Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 31 Msgs -
08/23/06
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 12:55:14 -0700
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869
Sender: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
Reply-To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
X-Antivirus: AVG for E-mail 7.1.394 [268.11.3/423]
Interesting that this message (from Michael) never arrived at my computer.
And no you are not (building rocket launchers) but if there had been a
transorb on the aircraft bus (different application than the relay, but
another one of the Paul vs. Bob arguments (where Paul; says there is a
transient and Bob: says no because I have never seen one) . . .
Correction: never been able to "capture" a starter induced
transient in spite of years of specific tests to see if such
animals exist . . . It wasn't as if I were standing around
waiting for one to walk by.
. . . where the alternator was damaged by the defectively designed OV
crow bar, dozens of pilots would not have had to replace the alternator and
remove the faulty OV device.
You know, it's difficult to "fix" anything when the people
having problems don't talk to the supplier of the "problem"
device. Out of about 4 thousand crowbar ov systems now in service
both OBAM and TC, we've been made aware of and fixed about
a dozen cases in the past 20 years. Two of the situations
revealed new data that prompted changes to the design.
I recently posted a pix of a repeatable transient that 100% of the time
tripped the OV device falsely in my own testing.
Yeah, some fuzzy scope traces with no test setup data
and no description of the test procedure. No definition
of the OV device in question. Obviously no contact with
the original designer in any spirit of curiosity or
helpful transfer of useful data. How am I or anyone else
to interpret what you've shared? How do we make use of
this data to improve on any design?
As you may recall Vans strongly asked builders to REMOVE the OV device as
it was damaging the alternators with false trips. Told to me by the GM at
Vans at the time.
This was discussed at length a couple of years ago so there is no need to
recycle it now.
You have just recycled it yourself, not as a point of
useful information but as a hammer with an intent to
injure . . .
My point is on other lists a simple " yes a transorb as Eric suggests is a
safer way to go and a better solution". No need to get into a thrashing
session etc. That is as technical as it ever needed to get.
Hmmmm "safer" . . . does it also ward of evil demons and
bird flu?
That sir is an excellent example of your lack of understanding
and re-enforces the notion I've long suspected that your
participation in this discussion has little to do with
the art and science of building airplanes and a much to
do with attempts to discredit me. Since you can't win
with logic and good science, you're now reduced to dragging
out old canards.
The alternators in question were failed due to load-dump
effected by b-lead disconnection for one of TWO reasons.
(1) the pilot operated the alternator ON-OFF switch
while the alternator was under load . . .
-OR-
(2) the ov system tripped for what-ever reason and
opened the b-lead contactor.
These events would have taken place irrespective of
the technology behind the OV sensing and control. If
it had been a simple zener-comparator that was overexcited
and had dumped the relay, the end result would have been
the same. You have, and continue to denigrate my work
with exaggeration and hyperbole and never offered to
assist in chasing out any bugs, real or imagined.
So the "fix" was to bury heads in the sand and state
our internally regulated alternators never fail in an
runaway condition so we'll take that pesky control system
off.
Vans (like your mythical disgruntled AeroElectric
Connection customers) never bothered to contact me about
their problems whereupon they would have been greeted
with instant cooperative and enthusiastic assistance or
at least a refund of their money. It's this kind of
communication and cooperation that makes things BETTER.
Instead, I hear about the problems from you when you
wave the news around to re-enforce your obviously
dismal opinions of me.
Permit me to offer a calm and well considered opinion
based on years of observations (and dodging your
mudballs). Hmmmm . . . I wonder if you remember your
very first phone call to me a long time ago where
I got a very agitated claim that you'd tried to order
my book several times and you were tired of being
ignored. As I recall, I could not find your order(s)
in the system but shipped you a free book anyhow.
Now here we are, 12-15 years later and you're still
accusing me of disrespect, incompetence, dishonorable
behavior, and any number of evil traits.
A couple of years ago you (and Eric as I recall) went
off to do some tests. I was delighted with the notion that
kindred spirits with an interest in promoting OBAM
aviation had the tools and time to get some badly needed
data for the purposes of improving upon the best-we-know-
how-to-do. At least here on the List, nothing came out
of those tests but ammunition for attacking what had gone
before . . . and contributed nothing to what could go
on in the future.
So now we come to it. You are not a teacher sir, you
explain nothing. Your factual contributions to the list
have been limited and punctuated with reports (which
I will now call fabricated) of how unhappy or abused my
customers are. You've never offered critical review
of my work based on your own knowledge and understanding.
You've supported your version of "science" with references
to the work of others and never with work of your own.
Your demonstrated behavior is the engineering manager's
worst nightmare: lot's of noise, manufactured discontent
and and zero work-product that one would be proud to pass
along to a paying customer. Your conduct here on the List
is demonstrably contrary to the spirit and intent of those
who gather here to learn, to be of assistance to others
and to advance the state of our art and science.
On behalf of my customers to spend their $time$ to exploit
my $time$, talent and resources . . . and for myself
now weary of the joust . . . I will ask in what I assure
you is a very calm and most polite tone to please vacate
the AeroElectric-List.
Bob . . .
| | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
brucebell74(at)sbcglobal.
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 24, 2006 4:24 pm Post subject: Paul |
|
|
Hi Bob,
I second that!
Regards,
Bruce Bell
Lubbock, Texas
RV-4 N23BB (FLYING)
DO NOT ARCHIVE!!
| | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kayce33(at)earthlink.net
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 24, 2006 4:33 pm Post subject: Paul |
|
|
Bravo, Well said
Harold
---
| | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rhdudley1(at)bellsouth.ne
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 24, 2006 4:47 pm Post subject: Paul |
|
|
Hey Bob,
Well said - again. However, the receiver has a tin ear
You have my vote!!!!!!
RHDudley
Robert L. Nuckolls, III wrote:
| Quote: |
<nuckollsr(at)cox.net>
From: "Paul Messinger" <paulm(at)olypen.com>
To: <aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com>
Subject: Re: Re: AeroElectric-List Digest: 31 Msgs
- 08/23/06
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 12:55:14 -0700
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869
Sender: owner-aeroelectric-list-server(at)matronics.com
Reply-To: aeroelectric-list(at)matronics.com
X-Antivirus: AVG for E-mail 7.1.394 [268.11.3/423]
Interesting that this message (from Michael) never arrived at my
computer.
And no you are not (building rocket launchers) but if there had been a
transorb on the aircraft bus (different application than the relay,
but another one of the Paul vs. Bob arguments (where Paul; says there
is a transient and Bob: says no because I have never seen one) . . .
Correction: never been able to "capture" a starter induced
transient in spite of years of specific tests to see if such
animals exist . . . It wasn't as if I were standing around
waiting for one to walk by.
. . . where the alternator was damaged by the defectively designed OV
crow bar, dozens of pilots would not have had to replace the
alternator and remove the faulty OV device.
You know, it's difficult to "fix" anything when the people
having problems don't talk to the supplier of the "problem"
device. Out of about 4 thousand crowbar ov systems now in service
both OBAM and TC, we've been made aware of and fixed about
a dozen cases in the past 20 years. Two of the situations
revealed new data that prompted changes to the design.
I recently posted a pix of a repeatable transient that 100% of the
time tripped the OV device falsely in my own testing.
Yeah, some fuzzy scope traces with no test setup data
and no description of the test procedure. No definition
of the OV device in question. Obviously no contact with
the original designer in any spirit of curiosity or
helpful transfer of useful data. How am I or anyone else
to interpret what you've shared? How do we make use of
this data to improve on any design?
As you may recall Vans strongly asked builders to REMOVE the OV device
as it was damaging the alternators with false trips. Told to me by the
GM at Vans at the time.
This was discussed at length a couple of years ago so there is no need
to recycle it now.
You have just recycled it yourself, not as a point of
useful information but as a hammer with an intent to
injure . . .
My point is on other lists a simple " yes a transorb as Eric suggests
is a safer way to go and a better solution". No need to get into a
thrashing session etc. That is as technical as it ever needed to get.
Hmmmm "safer" . . . does it also ward of evil demons and
bird flu?
That sir is an excellent example of your lack of understanding
and re-enforces the notion I've long suspected that your
participation in this discussion has little to do with
the art and science of building airplanes and a much to
do with attempts to discredit me. Since you can't win
with logic and good science, you're now reduced to dragging
out old canards.
The alternators in question were failed due to load-dump
effected by b-lead disconnection for one of TWO reasons.
(1) the pilot operated the alternator ON-OFF switch
while the alternator was under load . . .
-OR-
(2) the ov system tripped for what-ever reason and
opened the b-lead contactor.
These events would have taken place irrespective of
the technology behind the OV sensing and control. If
it had been a simple zener-comparator that was overexcited
and had dumped the relay, the end result would have been
the same. You have, and continue to denigrate my work
with exaggeration and hyperbole and never offered to
assist in chasing out any bugs, real or imagined.
So the "fix" was to bury heads in the sand and state
our internally regulated alternators never fail in an
runaway condition so we'll take that pesky control system
off.
Vans (like your mythical disgruntled AeroElectric
Connection customers) never bothered to contact me about
their problems whereupon they would have been greeted
with instant cooperative and enthusiastic assistance or
at least a refund of their money. It's this kind of
communication and cooperation that makes things BETTER.
Instead, I hear about the problems from you when you
wave the news around to re-enforce your obviously
dismal opinions of me.
Permit me to offer a calm and well considered opinion
based on years of observations (and dodging your
mudballs). Hmmmm . . . I wonder if you remember your
very first phone call to me a long time ago where
I got a very agitated claim that you'd tried to order
my book several times and you were tired of being
ignored. As I recall, I could not find your order(s)
in the system but shipped you a free book anyhow.
Now here we are, 12-15 years later and you're still
accusing me of disrespect, incompetence, dishonorable
behavior, and any number of evil traits.
A couple of years ago you (and Eric as I recall) went
off to do some tests. I was delighted with the notion that
kindred spirits with an interest in promoting OBAM
aviation had the tools and time to get some badly needed
data for the purposes of improving upon the best-we-know-
how-to-do. At least here on the List, nothing came out
of those tests but ammunition for attacking what had gone
before . . . and contributed nothing to what could go
on in the future.
So now we come to it. You are not a teacher sir, you
explain nothing. Your factual contributions to the list
have been limited and punctuated with reports (which
I will now call fabricated) of how unhappy or abused my
customers are. You've never offered critical review
of my work based on your own knowledge and understanding.
You've supported your version of "science" with references
to the work of others and never with work of your own.
Your demonstrated behavior is the engineering manager's
worst nightmare: lot's of noise, manufactured discontent
and and zero work-product that one would be proud to pass
along to a paying customer. Your conduct here on the List
is demonstrably contrary to the spirit and intent of those
who gather here to learn, to be of assistance to others
and to advance the state of our art and science.
On behalf of my customers to spend their $time$ to exploit
my $time$, talent and resources . . . and for myself
now weary of the joust . . . I will ask in what I assure
you is a very calm and most polite tone to please vacate
the AeroElectric-List.
Bob . . .
|
| | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
paulm(at)olypen.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 24, 2006 5:20 pm Post subject: Paul |
|
|
It was not a starter but a simple relay 10 amp on off load but I am sorry I
have pulled your chain.
By By
Paul
---
| | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
Get Email Distribution Too!
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
