X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2007 09:12:48 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from elasmtp-masked.atl.sa.earthlink.net ([209.86.89.68] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2c4) with ESMTP id 2620980 for lml@lancaironline.net; Thu, 27 Dec 2007 07:13:48 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.86.89.68; envelope-from=colyncase@earthlink.net DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=qUyiTidozQMgPdBf4VMVn51i2mMcO9UuaBP/BP5+0nlUOZJU/3u8fkIU5WQv6jUp; h=Received:Message-ID:From:To:References:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Received: from [216.57.118.89] (helo=ccaselt2) by elasmtp-masked.atl.sa.earthlink.net with asmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1J7rbo-0000Xe-6Z for lml@lancaironline.net; Thu, 27 Dec 2007 07:13:08 -0500 X-Original-Message-ID: <05a201c84881$d6d1bdb0$0402a8c0@nvidia.com> From: "Colyn Case on earthlink" X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" References: Subject: Re: [LML] Imagination X-Original-Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2007 23:27:22 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0599_01C84816.DDCE62F0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 X-ELNK-Trace: 63d5d3452847f8b1d6dd28457998182d7e972de0d01da940f69898ec46fb51fea34b13c292882dae350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 216.57.118.89 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0599_01C84816.DDCE62F0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable "Calm down, boys" I think you are right that where you want to live on the risk/reward = continuum is a personal decision. But I don't think you should confuse that issue with the facts about = electronic failure modes. Brent and Hamid, who have tried very hard = to eliminate them, are saying there are some failure modes, which have = significant probability, against which you cannot at reasonable cost = protect an efis. Adding a third one or a redundant supply doesn't = particularly help the situation. =20 Adding a system which doesn't have that particular failure mode = completely changes the probability numbers. =20 If you are content not to change the numbers in your favor, that IS a = personal decision. =20 On the other hand, to hold that an all electronic system has as = favorable probability numbers as electronic plus mechanical backup is = not a matter of personal comfort level. It's just not a correct = statement of the facts. ------=_NextPart_000_0599_01C84816.DDCE62F0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
"Calm down, boys"
 
I think you are right that where you want to live on the = risk/reward=20 continuum is a personal decision.
 
But I don't think you should confuse = that issue=20 with the facts about electronic failure modes.    Brent = and=20 Hamid, who have tried very hard to eliminate them, are saying there are = some=20 failure modes, which have significant probability, against which you = cannot at=20 reasonable cost protect an efis.   Adding a  third one or = a=20 redundant supply doesn't particularly help the situation.  =20
 
Adding a system which doesn't have that = particular=20 failure mode completely changes the probability=20 numbers.  
 
If you are content not to change the = numbers in=20 your favor, that IS a personal decision. 
 
On the other hand, to hold that an = all=20 electronic system has as favorable probability numbers as electronic = plus=20 mechanical backup is not a matter of personal comfort level.  It's = just not=20 a correct statement of the facts.
 
 
 

------=_NextPart_000_0599_01C84816.DDCE62F0--