Return-Path: Received: from smtp13.bellglobal.com ([204.101.251.52]) by truman.olsusa.com (Post.Office MTA v3.5.1 release 219 ID# 0-52269U2500L250S0V35) with ESMTP id com for ; Sun, 25 Jul 1999 00:58:59 -0400 Received: from grodgers (ppp4462.on.bellglobal.com [206.172.211.46]) by smtp13.bellglobal.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id BAA26819 for ; Sun, 25 Jul 1999 01:03:52 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <000b01bed65a$feb49200$2ed3acce@grodgers> From: "Gary Rodgers" To: "Lancair List" Subject: Sandel/S-Tec Date: Sun, 25 Jul 1999 01:03:09 -0400 Organization: Laurentian Industries X-Mailing-List: lancair.list@olsusa.com Mime-Version: 1.0 <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> << Lancair Builders' Mail List >> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> Just a word of warning, I've learned from talking to a rep at S-Tec that they don't like the Sandel combination.. I just put together a panel with the 430, Sandel HSI and S-Tec 55. So far everything seems to work great. Anyone know of anything I should look for as far as discrepancies? Thanks<< Problem seems to be with the interface between the S-tecs gyro and the Sandel HSI. Seems they are not totally compatible. My avionics shop wanted to use the S-Tec gyro but both Sandel and S-Tec recommended against the combination. Using King instead. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> LML homepage: http://www.olsusa.com/Users/Mkaye/maillist.html