X-Mozilla-Keys:
Mike Wills wrote:
At 01:50 PM 9/1/1999 -0700, you wrote:
Ken Powell wrote:
OK, I have learned much from the previous discussion on electrical
systems. However, this raises another question - assume that the
battery will be replaced yearly:
1. Why not run 2 alternators with only 1 battery? Seems that we
might save 8 - 10 lbs.
2. In this case, your second alternator is your backup, not the
battery. Even if the battery does die, you still have 2 alternators
to get you home. This has a certain appeal due to the high amp loads
that Tracy mentioned (up to 16 - 20 amps).
3. Note that you can get really small alternators (~35 amps) off
Geo's and Suzuki's in the junk yard. I think you could have a
functioning alternator (alternator, mount and belt) for under 8 lbs.
What am I missing here?
Ken Powell
Ive considered this. Since I plan to have my RV equipped essentially the
same as Tracy's I'd sure like to see him jump in here with his total
current requirements. Is 35a enough to run everything in the airplane
assuming day VFR (no lights).
The following is from a message I have archived. This is from Bob Nuckolls
who runs the Aero Electric Connection for homebuilders when he's not at his
regular job as an EE at Raytheon (Beech).
If anyone is interested the very latest and greatest of battery
developments is invited to check out:
http://www.boldertmf.com
If you have dual alternators (full electric panel and one alternator
running vacuum pump pad) and two of these three-pound batteries to
crank engine and stabilize alternator, it's now possible to have an
electrical system (starter, batteries, AND alternators) whos total
weight is LESS than the 24 a.h. battery that most people fly in their
airplanes with an order of magnitude higher flight system reliability.
Mike Wills
The Aircraft Rotary Engine Newsletter. Powered by Linux.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/ http://www.linux.org