Return-Path: Received: from imo29.mx.aol.com ([198.81.17.73]) by truman.olsusa.com (Post.Office MTA v3.5.1 release 219 ID# 0-52269U2500L250S0V35) with ESMTP id com for ; Sun, 14 Feb 1999 13:01:48 -0500 Received: from Fredmoreno@aol.com by imo29.mx.aol.com (IMOv18.1) id IVKRa11033 for ; Sun, 14 Feb 1999 13:03:11 -0500 (EST) From: Fredmoreno@aol.com Message-ID: Date: Sun, 14 Feb 1999 13:03:11 EST To: lancair.list@olsusa.com Subject: Electrical goodies X-Mailing-List: lancair.list@olsusa.com Mime-Version: 1.0 <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> << Lancair Builders' Mail List >> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> Dear John: Lots of interesting ideas. My comments: 1) Bob Nucholls makes a powerful case for avionics switches being no longer necessary given the TSO requirements of modern radios (they must tolerate input spikes) and the widespread of use of diodes around relay coils to trap transient spikes. I believe him. Old traditions die hard. 2) Remember: every additional goodie you add is a potential failure point that will probably fail, but only when you are in deep do-do and really need the juice. If you really want thermostats for pitot tubes and such, I recommend a bypass switch so you can heat the thing when the thermostat decides to take the day off. Goodies are nice, but if it is not installed, it can not fail. Keep thinking about what happens in the event of a failure, and you will migrate to 1) simple is beautiful, and 2) redundant is pretty good looking as well. Failure analysis shows that putting elements in series rapidly increases the probability of a system failure, but putting redundant elements in parallel diminishes the chances of a failure. KISS. (Take it from one who has learned the hard way.) Fred