Bill Dube <bdube@al.noaa.gov> wrote:
(in response to:)
>> Interesting article, Mark. I think it supports use of
>> fuses, and redundancy in critical circuits.
> The word "fuse" appears nowhere in the article.
True enough, but the implication is there.
Q: What do you call a current-sensitive protective device
for an electric circuit, that may not be restored "on the
fly"?
A: A fuse.
The article did make an excellent case for Bob Nuckolls'
basic premises: redundancy in all flight-critical systems;
fly the airplane, don't do in-flight electrical troubleshooting if you don't need to; simple, robust,
redundant systems make it far less likely to need to.
Regards,
Dale R.
(mobile computing today -
sending this from the parking lot of the Payson Del Taco.)
Interesting article, Mark. I think it supports use of fuses, and
redundancy in critical circuits.
The word
"fuse" appears nowhere in the article.
>> Homepage: http://www.flyrotary.com/
>> Archive: http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html
|