rparigor@suffolk.lib.ny.us wrote:
> Frans as far as having two separate systems as you have,
> if the cockpit filled with smoke thought to be electrical in nature, which
> system would you turn off?
The one with the wrong Amp-reading. In Europa's, everything is usually
low-power. The biggest power hog in my machine is the strobe power
supply, good for almost 5 Amp's. Now, even with 5 Amp's, it is difficult
to generate much smoke. If there is smoke, you can be pretty sure that
one of the systems show an amp-reading that is way out of limit. Knowing
what is normal for your machine is helpfull either. ;-) Apart from that,
I have everything fused. I have no problem short-cutting any wire in my
aircraft, there is nothing that is not fused, everything is safe here
(except for the starter, but as it is not used during flight, it can not
generate much smoke.)
> There is
> nothing wrong with having a dual system as you have, just to make second
> side nice and worthwhile you need a second battery that is heavier
> than I care for.
My two batteries are together lighter than many single system batteries.
The point is: with a dual alternator setup, you don't need batteries
during flight, only for starting. The batteries are not part of my
back-up scenario. If the alternator dies, I always have another
electrical bus, with a running alternator. (Unless the engine quits, but
in that scenario you don't need power for very long, a small battery
will be sufficient because you probably won't stay aloft very long. ;-)
) So, the batteries can be fairly small and light.
> My approach is stone simple for
> smoke in cockpit thought to be electrical in nature, shut down everything,
> run one pump on a separate battery if feasible and land.
It is not much different. You see, you only lack a dual battery, but
actually you have already a separate battery, except that you need to
plug it in manually.
--
Frans Veldman
|