What IBEC to buy?
02-17-2014, 05:12 PM
#76
Have been looking at installing an IBEC in a Golden Eagle Talon and came across this thread. After two years are people still satisfied with their Ultra IBEC unit.
Any issues, install tips, etc that have come up?
I plan on using either Duralite A123 packs or A123 from another vendor like Hangtime in a dual configuration.
Thanks,
Pete
Any issues, install tips, etc that have come up?
I plan on using either Duralite A123 packs or A123 from another vendor like Hangtime in a dual configuration.
Thanks,
Pete
02-17-2014, 05:23 PM
#77
I have been using the Tech-Aero IBEC in 2 planes. One for 2 years now. Not a glitch. Very satisfied.
I really like having ONE switch on the side of my plane plus a LED that shows me the ignition is armed.
I really like having ONE switch on the side of my plane plus a LED that shows me the ignition is armed.
Last edited by Speedy-Gonzales; 02-17-2014 at 06:05 PM.
02-18-2014, 05:18 AM
#84
I'm not sure if that is an AMA requirement or not but the IBEC takes it's voltage from the RX so in case of emergency just hit the only switch on the airplane and it will disrupt voltage to the ignition ( ar least in my case, Smart Fly Turbo Reg with smart switch ). Set your radio systems fail safe so that even if the RX power has been accidentally turned on, the system will go into fail safe with the ignition power off. I also plan to assign the IBEC switch on the TX as the side slider on the throttle side and off will be in the down position. This will hopefully prompt me to make sure that the throttle stick and side slider are in the down position before powering up. IMO no matter how you look at it, if used correctly this device adds a great deal of safety.
02-18-2014, 06:02 AM
#85
My Feedback: (5)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: San Tan Valley,
AZ
Posts: 5,768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As this thread points out, an IBEC is just a source of trouble. If reliability is what you are looking for, just put in the battery the ignition system is designed for- a NICD.
02-18-2014, 06:13 AM
#86
The AMA does not require a manual kill but the IMAA does require one. From the IMAA Safety Code
5.0: EMERGENCY ENGINE SHUT OFF (Kill Switch)
5.1 Magneto spark ignition engines must have a coil-grounding switch on the aircraft to stop the engine. This will also prevent accidental starting of the engine. This switch shall be readily available to both pilot and spotter/helper. This switch is to be operated manually and without the use of the Radio System.
5.2 Engines with battery powered ignition systems must have a switch to turn off the power from the battery pack to disable the engine from firing. This will also prevent accidental starting of the engine. This switch shall be readily available to both pilot and spotter/helper. This switch shall be operated manually and without the use of the Radio System.
5.3 There must also be a means to stop the engine from the transmitter. The most common method is to close the carburetor throat completely using throttle trim, however other methods are acceptable. This requirement applies to all glow/gas ignition engines regardless of size.
Again this thread is not to debate the use of IBEC's. I do want to use one but also want the hard kill on the fuse as an extra safety measure and to keep me IMAA compliant.
From what I can see you can plug the switch into the Rx channel for the kill switch then the IBEC into the switch so the LED will be off until the switch is on.
Pete
5.0: EMERGENCY ENGINE SHUT OFF (Kill Switch)
5.1 Magneto spark ignition engines must have a coil-grounding switch on the aircraft to stop the engine. This will also prevent accidental starting of the engine. This switch shall be readily available to both pilot and spotter/helper. This switch is to be operated manually and without the use of the Radio System.
5.2 Engines with battery powered ignition systems must have a switch to turn off the power from the battery pack to disable the engine from firing. This will also prevent accidental starting of the engine. This switch shall be readily available to both pilot and spotter/helper. This switch shall be operated manually and without the use of the Radio System.
5.3 There must also be a means to stop the engine from the transmitter. The most common method is to close the carburetor throat completely using throttle trim, however other methods are acceptable. This requirement applies to all glow/gas ignition engines regardless of size.
Again this thread is not to debate the use of IBEC's. I do want to use one but also want the hard kill on the fuse as an extra safety measure and to keep me IMAA compliant.
From what I can see you can plug the switch into the Rx channel for the kill switch then the IBEC into the switch so the LED will be off until the switch is on.
Pete
02-18-2014, 07:44 AM
#87
Senior Member
If any IBEC was to be used, perhaps it might be problematic.
BUT if the Tech Aero unit was used, knowing for a fact how these are tested, I doubt you would have any problems. I have all of my planes set-up on the IBEC and they all are working as they should for years now. There are only two connections necessary in the plane, one to the RX and the other to the CDI. The connection to the RX is in any open channel. I use the retract channel because it's convenient and simple and easy to set-up Fail Safe, but any other slider or toggle will do the trick as well.
The safety and convenience of this gizmo are the greatest benefit to me since my knees just don't bend like they used to. The bright LED tells you when the unit is armed. It's hard for me to get down to the plane and hunt for the switch to turn off the CDI. Not to mention that for a 10-15 pound airplane, the weight savings ( no second battery to feed and maintain, and no second switch) is considerable. I use a 2S LiPo with about 2000ma capacity (regulated down to 6.4 volts) to run 5 high performance servos plus a smaller throttle servo plus the IBEC/CDI. I get 75 minutes flying time with batery showing 7.5 volts where I shut it down for the day. If you don't think 75 minutes is enough, use a battery with more capacity. For me, it is the best I can do in any one outing.
One other thing that's important to know for all who are on the fence regarding use or non-use of the TA IBEC, is it's RFI filtering section. I still have the original prototype unit in a plane currently (it's winter so I'm not flying it today, of course) and it has the original design filtering. The current device is at least 3 generations of improvement removed from my prototype (BTW the original PT IBEC still functions as well today as the day Ed and I first installed it, going on 5 years now). The current device has improved filtering; If your equipment is reasonably sound and is installed reasonably well, RFI will not get into the RX.
My comments are based on years of experience with the device. I'm not one to throw out opinions of conjecture or hyperbole. I use hard facts from experience
BUT if the Tech Aero unit was used, knowing for a fact how these are tested, I doubt you would have any problems. I have all of my planes set-up on the IBEC and they all are working as they should for years now. There are only two connections necessary in the plane, one to the RX and the other to the CDI. The connection to the RX is in any open channel. I use the retract channel because it's convenient and simple and easy to set-up Fail Safe, but any other slider or toggle will do the trick as well.
The safety and convenience of this gizmo are the greatest benefit to me since my knees just don't bend like they used to. The bright LED tells you when the unit is armed. It's hard for me to get down to the plane and hunt for the switch to turn off the CDI. Not to mention that for a 10-15 pound airplane, the weight savings ( no second battery to feed and maintain, and no second switch) is considerable. I use a 2S LiPo with about 2000ma capacity (regulated down to 6.4 volts) to run 5 high performance servos plus a smaller throttle servo plus the IBEC/CDI. I get 75 minutes flying time with batery showing 7.5 volts where I shut it down for the day. If you don't think 75 minutes is enough, use a battery with more capacity. For me, it is the best I can do in any one outing.
One other thing that's important to know for all who are on the fence regarding use or non-use of the TA IBEC, is it's RFI filtering section. I still have the original prototype unit in a plane currently (it's winter so I'm not flying it today, of course) and it has the original design filtering. The current device is at least 3 generations of improvement removed from my prototype (BTW the original PT IBEC still functions as well today as the day Ed and I first installed it, going on 5 years now). The current device has improved filtering; If your equipment is reasonably sound and is installed reasonably well, RFI will not get into the RX.
My comments are based on years of experience with the device. I'm not one to throw out opinions of conjecture or hyperbole. I use hard facts from experience
Last edited by MTK; 02-18-2014 at 12:35 PM.
02-18-2014, 09:42 AM
#89
My Feedback: (19)
When using an IBEC, adding an additional switch would just be adding an additional fail point. The receiver switch qualifies as a positive means for cutting power to the entire airplane including the ignition. Has been accepted in any IMAA test I have ever seen.
Dirtybird: Like you I put down the IBEC for a long time until I finally tried the Tech-Aero product. I watched the various other brands have problems but none of these problems have appeared with the Tech-Aero. As ignition batteries have aged and required replacement or in new installations, until convinced otherwise, I'm IBEC 100% now.
Dirtybird: Like you I put down the IBEC for a long time until I finally tried the Tech-Aero product. I watched the various other brands have problems but none of these problems have appeared with the Tech-Aero. As ignition batteries have aged and required replacement or in new installations, until convinced otherwise, I'm IBEC 100% now.
02-18-2014, 12:51 PM
#90
My Feedback: (5)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: San Tan Valley,
AZ
Posts: 5,768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But its just an extra piece of equipment that can fail. It could cost you an airplane.
Why not get the battery the ignition was designed for or get a high voltage ignition?
Also its a resistance in the line that will lower the voltage and could make your engine hard to state.
02-18-2014, 01:15 PM
#91
My Feedback: (5)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: San Tan Valley,
AZ
Posts: 5,768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When using an IBEC, adding an additional switch would just be adding an additional fail point. The receiver switch qualifies as a positive means for cutting power to the entire airplane including the ignition. Has been accepted in any IMAA test I have ever seen.
Dirtybird: Like you I put down the IBEC for a long time until I finally tried the Tech-Aero product. I watched the various other brands have problems but none of these problems have appeared with the Tech-Aero. As ignition batteries have aged and required replacement or in new installations, until convinced otherwise, I'm IBEC 100% now.
Dirtybird: Like you I put down the IBEC for a long time until I finally tried the Tech-Aero product. I watched the various other brands have problems but none of these problems have appeared with the Tech-Aero. As ignition batteries have aged and required replacement or in new installations, until convinced otherwise, I'm IBEC 100% now.
02-18-2014, 02:21 PM
#92
Yes it cannot interfere with 2.4.
But its just an extra piece of equipment that can fail. It could cost you an airplane.
Why not get the battery the ignition was designed for or get a high voltage ignition?
Also its a resistance in the line that will lower the voltage and could make your engine hard to state.
But its just an extra piece of equipment that can fail. It could cost you an airplane.
Why not get the battery the ignition was designed for or get a high voltage ignition?
Also its a resistance in the line that will lower the voltage and could make your engine hard to state.
I'm sure Ed will correct me if I'm wrong but the IBEC also acts as a voltage regulator. As long as the input voltage is 6V the output is 5.5 no matter what the current draw from the ignition. With nicad and switch, I would expect to see maybe .5V drop from idle to full throttle. We all know that the ignition current draw is not a constant.
02-18-2014, 02:59 PM
#96
Senior Member
The latest generation of the TA IBEC features SMT circuit boards built by automated robot. This takes hand soldering electronic components out of it. The leads are the only things I think Ed still solders by hand just before testing each unit.
But enuff selling of the virtues. I really don't have a problem with your approach (use (care,feeding and maintenance) of a second battery system, go for it!!) and I am stopping any further argument to convince you that your thought process on this particular IBEC is flawed.
Same argument you use against the IBEC can be used against the battery charger you will use to feed and care for the second battery. But I didn't say that....the sky might fall!
02-18-2014, 05:03 PM
#98
My Feedback: (5)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: San Tan Valley,
AZ
Posts: 5,768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That logic implies that electronic gizmos will likely fail before the battery does. Well, I suggest that you rethink your logic. Billions of man-hours spent using battery operated electronic stuff of all kinds, not just our radios, prove otherwise.....
The latest generation of the TA IBEC features SMT circuit boards built by automated robot. This takes hand soldering electronic components out of it. The leads are the only things I think Ed still solders by hand just before testing each unit.
But enuff selling of the virtues. I really don't have a problem with your approach (use (care,feeding and maintenance) of a second battery system, go for it!!) and I am stopping any further argument to convince you that your thought process on this particular IBEC is flawed.
No matter what circuit you use, single or dual batteries you do not need the regulator. No matter how well made its just and extra part to fail.
If you are comparing a regulator to a battery, the regulator has to be less reliable simply because it has so many parts.
A charger is not in the picture when you are flying. Surely you can understand that.
Same argument you use against the IBEC can be used against the battery charger you will use to feed and care for the second battery. But I didn't say that....the sky might fall!
The latest generation of the TA IBEC features SMT circuit boards built by automated robot. This takes hand soldering electronic components out of it. The leads are the only things I think Ed still solders by hand just before testing each unit.
But enuff selling of the virtues. I really don't have a problem with your approach (use (care,feeding and maintenance) of a second battery system, go for it!!) and I am stopping any further argument to convince you that your thought process on this particular IBEC is flawed.
No matter what circuit you use, single or dual batteries you do not need the regulator. No matter how well made its just and extra part to fail.
If you are comparing a regulator to a battery, the regulator has to be less reliable simply because it has so many parts.
A charger is not in the picture when you are flying. Surely you can understand that.
Same argument you use against the IBEC can be used against the battery charger you will use to feed and care for the second battery. But I didn't say that....the sky might fall!
If you are comparing a regulator to a battery, the regulator has to be less reliable simply because it has so many parts.
A charger is not in the picture when you are flying. Surely you can understand that
02-18-2014, 07:58 PM
#99
Member
My Feedback: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Nampa,
ID
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So what's up with 42% Products. I have a "Zeus" that has not failed ( yet ). I must be dodging the bullet with it. I have read so much about it failing and burning up ignition modules. They don't sell the "Zeus" anymore and have substituted with the "Thor" and there is also the "Mini-Thor". Are these all junk too? Should I be looking at an actual IBEC by Tech-Aero Designs?
Who makes the most reliable IBEC ignition battery eliminator?
I certainly don't want to lose 2 years of labor and my plane to a junk IBEC.
SPEEDY
Who makes the most reliable IBEC ignition battery eliminator?
I certainly don't want to lose 2 years of labor and my plane to a junk IBEC.
SPEEDY
Tech Aero for the win!
02-18-2014, 11:49 PM
#100
I've been using 42% and Tech-Aero IBEC's in my patternships for 2-3 years since i bought my first YS 170cdi. Hundreds of flights and neither brand has failed or given any problems at all.
Any weight saving at all in a patternship is a good thing.