Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net> (Marvin Kaye)
To: lml
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2003 23:11:27 -0400
Message-ID: <redirect-2471485@logan.com>
From: VTAILJEFF@aol.com
Subject: Re: Airworthiness
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Shannon, 

First of all you need to review FAR 91.205 to see what equipment is required 
for certain kinds of operations (ie. generator or alternator of adequate 
capacity). 

Second, "comfort" has nothing to do with this discussion. RISK taking or Risk 
management is the issue. You cannot say with aboslute certainty that if you 
suffered an electrical problem in flight you could tell exactly what has 
happened and press on. I have had not one but two electrical fires in an aircraft 
and a total electrical failure shortly after takeoff  IMC in an A-6 (no vacuum 
system). So to say that you could design an electrical system that could allow 
you to press on to a destination is just whistling in the dark. Boeing can't 
do it and I don't believe neither can we. 

Just for the fun of it, say you did as you proposed and you pressed on 
towards the destination after the alternator failed. You have to shed load because 
your #2 alternator or battery can't handle all the bells and whistles. The 
weather turns crummy and you press on  IFR.  If you end up on the rocks-- how 
would you expalin your decision making to a) your wife sitting next to you and b) 
the FAA ? 

The second alternator or standby alternator in this case is designed to get 
you on the ground quickly and safely-- not to fly halfway across the country. I 
also have standby elctrical gyro -- but it is not there to get me into 
instrument condtions when the primary has failed, but to get me out of instrument 
condtions. The only time I would press on would be to get to VMC conditions-- 
and land.

Jeff Edwards
2003 National Flight Instructor of the Year
LIVP N619SJ