Return-Path: <lancair.list-request@olsusa.com>
Received: from cdihost.cdicorp.com ([207.79.152.5]) by ns1.olsusa.com
          (Post.Office MTA v3.5.3 release 223 ID# 0-64832U3500L350S0V35)
          with SMTP id com for <lancair.list@olsusa.com>;
          Wed, 26 Jul 2000 11:03:43 -0400
Received: from [172.17.16.37] by cdihost.cdicorp.com
          via smtpd (for ns1.olsusa.com [205.245.9.2]) with SMTP; 26 Jul 2000 15:10:05 UT
Received: from cdim-pts-mail.cdicorp.com (CDIM-PTS-MAIL [172.17.131.3]) by hq-edi.cdicorp.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2650.21)
	id PDLS4PBR; Wed, 26 Jul 2000 11:10:01 -0400
Received: by CDIM-PTS-MAIL with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21)
	id <NLZR1NPW>; Wed, 26 Jul 2000 11:10:01 -0400
Message-ID: <FDD045B6B83FD311A9880090273053E2CF0B32@CDIM-PTS-MAIL>
From: "Rumburg, William" <william.rumburg@cdicorp.com>
To: "'lancair.list@olsusa.com'" <lancair.list@olsusa.com>
Subject: RE: Diode Voltage Drop
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 11:10:00 -0400
X-Mailing-List: lancair.list@olsusa.com
Reply-To: lancair.list@olsusa.com
Mime-Version: 1.0

          <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
          <<  Lancair Builders' Mail List  >>
          <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>
Hamid -
   It was my sincere hope that you would please take my (private) statements
to Earl Schroeder good-naturedly and simply request that I answer your
earlier questions and concerns for the benefit of all. 
However, your stating "...are you trying to be a lawyer who is obliged to
vigorously defend his case regardless of facts?" is poor spirited and not
true. Thank you also for telling me the rules, regulations and spirit of
Experimental aircraft. Every time that I line my Lancair up on the center of
a runway and apply full power, both I and any passenger are aware of and
accept the risk. My simple backup battery power and charging system does not
add to those risks.  
Because of 10-12 hour days here at work, I've not yet been able to address
your earlier comments. What facts have you established? 
For one example, you've stated that my VMS 1000 voltage indication may be
considerably inaccurate 
"When it says "14.0V" the voltage can be somewhat lower or somewhat higher.
By how much?  Could it be that the 14.0V that the VMS is reporting is
actually 13.8V? 13.5V? or even 13.0V?" 
That's a considerable inaccuracy and a lot of VMS owners would be
disappointed in their $ 4,000. purchase. An equivalent inaccuracy in CHT
indication would yield a 400 deg F indication when the actual temperature is
430 degrees. I'll e-mail VMS and clear this. I expect a voltage accuracy of
+/- 0.1 V DC from aviation-grade equipment such as this.
Even without any data (you have to ask VMS & Concord) you have
already decided that you do not have a problem and you need that data to
rebut
the questions?
Concorde told me only that they've determined through testing that a voltage
as low as 13.5 V DC will maintain full charge on a lead-acid battery. You've
questioned the percent full-charge at lower voltages. So, yes, I need to
contact Concorde to ask the percent full-charge projected at lower voltages,
should my system be charging the backup battery at less than 13.5 V DC. 
Please allow me a little more time to answer all of your earlier questions.

Bill Rumburg
N403WR  (Sonic bOOm)
 


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
LML website:   http://www.olsusa.com/Users/Mkaye/maillist.html
LML Builders' Bookstore:   http://www.buildersbooks.com/lancair

Please send your photos and drawings to marvkaye@olsusa.com.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>