X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from tomcat.al.noaa.gov ([140.172.240.2] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.3c5) with ESMTP id 922431 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Mon, 02 May 2005 12:32:02 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=140.172.240.2; envelope-from=bdube@al.noaa.gov Received: from mungo.al.noaa.gov (mungo.al.noaa.gov [140.172.241.126]) by tomcat.al.noaa.gov (8.12.11/8.12.0) with ESMTP id j42GVHBs020147 for ; Mon, 2 May 2005 10:31:17 -0600 (MDT) Message-Id: <6.2.1.2.0.20050502090455.046d0c28@mailsrvr.al.noaa.gov> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.1.2 Date: Mon, 02 May 2005 10:30:47 -0600 To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" From: Bill Dube Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] To Fuse or not to Fuse In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed > >Here is Bob K's and his well reasoned argument FOR fuses > >http://www.aeroelectric.com/articles/Rev9/ch10-9.pdf > > The keystone of Bob's endorsement of fuses: When the failure manifests itself by opening the breaker or fuse likelihood of recovering the system by replacing a fuse or pushing in a breaker is very, very small. Beneath it all, this is what all the fuse versus circuit breaker discussions hinge on. It is an incorrect assumption, in my experience. A very large percentage (but by no means all) of electrical problems in vehicles are intermittent in nature. You can very often reset the breaker and restore the critical system long enough to safely land the aircraft. A fuse does not give you this option, at least not in a timely manner.