skymstr02 wrote :
Quote:
Without a static wick, there is noplace for the charge to dissapate to
I was just wondering who is clueless here because this is not true.
The purpose of a static wick is to lower the level at which the discharges will happen , this will result in less radio "noise" and therefore improves the radiocommunications. There are a million fast high altitude planes out there without wicks who doesn't create a spark when they touch down.
skymstr02 wrote :
Quote:
Without static wicks, I'm not sure if there is any advantage of having bonding straps anyway
You are probably right if :
- you look at a static electricity point of view
- you don't use the airframe as negative ground for your taillight
- you don't have an orginal radio set from WW2.
The first bonding straps were introduced because normally all equipment ( incl startermotors ) used the airframe as negative ground. Using bolts and nuts only was not enough.
Later the first radio equipment were installed in aircraft. These first radios were very sensitive and the total electrical airframe capacity ( mass ) influenced it's tuning. So if an aileron intermittently "connected" to the airframe the radio would de-tune. This is when they started connecting all the metal parts with bonding straps.
Static electricity shouldn't be a problem for a Harvard / AT-6 in normal conditions but I can imagine that in the cold winters of Canada they found out that it was and to be sure added more bonding straps.
_________________
Pim Pouw
Early Birds Foundation
www.vroegevogels.org/
the Netherlands
Fokker G1 replica project
www.fokker-g1.nl