Yea.. I believe it was an L-1011.. but the problem was the uncontained engine failure caused the breach of all 3 engine driven hydraulic systems. When you route all 3 lines in the same path.. well..
 
There IS a limit to the amount of redundancy you can have.. and how much you can "armor" fluid lines and cable paths..

You can put enough redundant and protected systems into your craft that it would be named "The Dodo Bird" because it would be too damn heavy to fly.
 
Dave

Jim Sower wrote:

<... You do not have to have more than one level of redundancy to basically eliminate any chance of total failure of the system with failures in the 1000 hour range ...>
You might want to talk to the crew of that 757 or L1011 or whatever it was that crashed in Souix City(?) a few years back because it lost ONE of THREE engines and immediately went ballistic.

The devil made me say that :o) ... Jim S.


WALTER B KERR wrote:

Ian I would think that in the case of airliners they have so many redundant systems that if one goes down they have two or three others to continue with, so there is no emergency situation in there case. Georges -------------------------------------------------------------------------   You do not have to have more than one level of redundancy to basically eliminate any chance of total failure of the system with failures in the 1000 hour range such as fuses as long as the pilot has time to try the backup system? I will take reduncancy ever day of the week compared to a single CB circuit albeit it I have parallel master switch circuit breaker's but I do not intend to reset one as long as the other is working :>)   I know we are not changing anyone's veiws on CB vs fuses, but it has been an interesting dialogue.   Bernie

>>  Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/

>>  Archive:   http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html