Arming Switch --and the need thereof

[Ted Temer]

This message from "Ted Temer" <temer@c-zone.net> brought to you by EFLIGHT!

Good People:

One of our local hobby shops talked me out of a Jeti ESC for an AXI and into
a Castle Creations Phoenix 35, "cause it has neat programmability and 'one
can use your computer to program it' ." And of course, it is the current
"in" brand.

After getting it, I don't really see where it's programming makes it a
better match to the AXI 2808 that I bought it for, than the Jeti would have
been. There was no mention of using a computer to assist in the process.
Turns out, this requires the purchase of an interface that only comes with
an USB cord for some twenty odd bucks. You buy the USB cord whether you need
it or not--I've got USB cords lying all over the place. Then--to add insult
to injury--you have to download the software. It is NOT included with the
"kit".

After watching the demo in the hobby shop, I don't see where it's all that
big a deal--especially for an operation that you usually would do only one
time. Programming by counting the "beeps" doesn't seem all that hard.
Besides, it would appear that the ESC will work with the intended AXI just
the way it comes.

The disappointing part was that this overpriced--at least in comparison to
it's competition--ESC did NOT even include an arming switch. They do a lot
of bragging about the safety of their built in arming sequence but no
switch. Apparently you are expected to insert the flight battery and then
carry your ship through the pits and out to the runway--including any
delays--in a "hot" condition. Depending solely on the sequence described
above and keeping one's pinkie away from the throttle. Yes--I understand the
theory of inserting the battery out on the runway but this is often had to
do with the more scale-like ships that often have the battery pack buried.

This so-called arming sequence appears to be no different than the same
thing on a Great Plains C-30 ESC except that Great Plains also includes an
arming switch for safety redundancy. When it comes to safety, I like a
little redundancy.

So the question before the house is this:

Am I just paranoid here--or is Castle Creations being perhaps, a little
cheap??
I know the Jeti they talked me out of, comes with a switch and so did EVERY
other ESC I have ever bought, (with the exception of a little 2 amp thing
from GWS). They were all much less expensive than the Castle Creations ESC
and they could afford to include a switch. I would sure feel more
comfortable if the Castle Creations ESC had included one as well. So--Guess
which brand I intend to buy next time.

SIDE NOTE: In an effort to support my local hobby shop here in Redding, CA I
bought the AXI motor from them about two weeks ago instead of from David at
Aircraft World where I had intended to buy it. Had I bought it from David, I
would have had the motor long ago. But buying it locally from the hobby
shop, I'm still waiting. They say, "Maybe next week".

[sigh]
Ted Temer AMA 86837
Anderson Park Flyers
Temercraft Designs Redding, CA
temer@c-zone.net
www.temercraft.com/novels/
www.andersonparkflyers.org




*** Any complaints or problems? Send an email to monitor@ezonemag.com
*** For help with list commands go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailhelp.htm
*** For the list rules go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailrule.htm

[Shell M. Shrader]

This message from "Shell M. Shrader" <shell@shellware.com> brought to you by EFLIGHT!

Hi Ted!

You touch on a number of issues that drove me away from my local hobby shops. In so much, that I now deal exclusively with folks like David at aircraft-world, Randy from MAE, and Tony at eflightpacks.com. I've actually built quite a portfolio of online RC resellers/wholesalers.

The "hobby shop mentality" typically observes these characteristics:

Dealer knows very little about RC aircraft. He usually claims he wishes he knew more about it, but his business is driven primarily by the "car" enthusiasts.

Dealer makes recommendations based on information he received exclusively through marketing materials.

Dealer makes no recommendations whatsoever and leaves you to decide for yourself.

With the exception of a handful of Futaba and Hitec transmitters, and Aerobird / GWS replacement parts, everything you want has to be ordered through their dealer network, which easily adds 1-2 weeks time for fulfillment. This completely defeats the purpose of working with a local hobby shop IMO, as the whole reason why I would go local is because I want it today.

Local Hobby shops tend to mark up items, in some cases (particularly with batteries) you end up paying two to three times as much when you go local. And it completely drives me crazy when they insist on selling you "matched" cells. I blame this on the car guys and their need to gain the leading edge in those little round and squirrelly race tracks they run on. This also speaks to their ignorance of your flying needs.

As far as the USB accessible ESC goes, I'm fine with my tone sequences. Until I can hook up and download telemetry data such as altitude, airspeed, rpm, etc, I'll probably steer clear of anything of this nature.

I'd probably feel a little bit of guilt if my local shops really were focusing on me. Unfortunately that isn't the case in most scenarios.... especially when the first thing they tell me is that they don't cater to "Air" RC because their business is primarily driven by "cars".

Shell



From: Ted Temer
Sent: Sun 10/17/2004 12:31 PM
To: eflight@ezonemag.com
Subject: [EFLT] Arming Switch --and the need thereof


This message from "Ted Temer" <temer@c-zone.net> brought to you by EFLIGHT!

Good People:

One of our local hobby shops talked me out of a Jeti ESC for an AXI and into
a Castle Creations Phoenix 35, "cause it has neat programmability and 'one
can use your computer to program it' ." And of course, it is the current
"in" brand.

After getting it, I don't really see where it's programming makes it a
better match to the AXI 2808 that I bought it for, than the Jeti would have
been. There was no mention of using a computer to assist in the process.
Turns out, this requires the purchase of an interface that only comes with
an USB cord for some twenty odd bucks. You buy the USB cord whether you need
it or not--I've got USB cords lying all over the place. Then--to add insult
to injury--you have to download the software. It is NOT included with the
"kit".

After watching the demo in the hobby shop, I don't see where it's all that
big a deal--especially for an operation that you usually would do only one
time. Programming by counting the "beeps" doesn't seem all that hard.
Besides, it would appear that the ESC will work with the intended AXI just
the way it comes.

The disappointing part was that this overpriced--at least in comparison to
it's competition--ESC did NOT even include an arming switch. They do a lot
of bragging about the safety of their built in arming sequence but no
switch. Apparently you are expected to insert the flight battery and then
carry your ship through the pits and out to the runway--including any
delays--in a "hot" condition. Depending solely on the sequence described
above and keeping one's pinkie away from the throttle. Yes--I understand the
theory of inserting the battery out on the runway but this is often had to
do with the more scale-like ships that often have the battery pack buried.

This so-called arming sequence appears to be no different than the same
thing on a Great Plains C-30 ESC except that Great Plains also includes an
arming switch for safety redundancy. When it comes to safety, I like a
little redundancy.

So the question before the house is this:

Am I just paranoid here--or is Castle Creations being perhaps, a little
cheap??
I know the Jeti they talked me out of, comes with a switch and so did EVERY
other ESC I have ever bought, (with the exception of a little 2 amp thing
from GWS). They were all much less expensive than the Castle Creations ESC
and they could afford to include a switch. I would sure feel more
comfortable if the Castle Creations ESC had included one as well. So--Guess
which brand I intend to buy next time.

SIDE NOTE: In an effort to support my local hobby shop here in Redding, CA I
bought the AXI motor from them about two weeks ago instead of from David at
Aircraft World where I had intended to buy it. Had I bought it from David, I
would have had the motor long ago. But buying it locally from the hobby
shop, I'm still waiting. They say, "Maybe next week".

[sigh]
Ted Temer AMA 86837
Anderson Park Flyers
Temercraft Designs Redding, CA
temer@c-zone.net
www.temercraft.com/novels/
www.andersonparkflyers.org




*** Any complaints or problems? Send an email to monitor@ezonemag.com
*** For help with list commands go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailhelp.htm
*** For the list rules go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailrule.htm


This message has been scanned by GroupShield 6.0


--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
text/plain (text body -- kept)
text/html
---

*** Any complaints or problems? Send an email to monitor@ezonemag.com
*** For help with list commands go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailhelp.htm
*** For the list rules go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailrule.htm

[Ryan]

This message from Ryan <ryanpsu21@att.net> brought to you by EFLIGHT!

I dislike the lack of arming switch as well. For CC brushless
controllers I don't plug in the battery until I'm at the fence and ready
to taxi out. Then I do a quick check to make sure the deflections are
correct direction and a quick range check. I don't plug anything in
that I have to walk through the flight line with.

As far as CC goes. I have 2 brushless controllers that I have no
problem with. I don't have the PC interface and do programming by
beeps. It's not that hard. I have one brushed controller that I
absolutely hate. Relative to the Jeti brushed controller I have it
sucks for lack of better words. I can put it in the same plane and same
mounting location and it will glitch while the Jeti doesn't. I've had
to send it back once for replacement as the first one smoked up on me
during initial setup.

We have one decent local hobby shop in this area and by decent I mean
they carry a lot of hardware and miscelaneous items. They are good for
balsa and glue and miscelaneous parts. For battery packs or motors I
order online. Cheapbatterypacks.dot come is in Oregon and from the time
I order a pack it arrives in 3 days at the longest in Michigan. That
is for custom packs.

Ryan



Shell M. Shrader wrote:

>This message from "Shell M. Shrader" <shell@shellware.com> brought to you by EFLIGHT!
>
>Hi Ted!
>
>You touch on a number of issues that drove me away from my local hobby shops. In so much, that I now deal exclusively with folks like David at aircraft-world, Randy from MAE, and Tony at eflightpacks.com. I've actually built quite a portfolio of online RC resellers/wholesalers.
>
>The "hobby shop mentality" typically observes these characteristics:
>
>Dealer knows very little about RC aircraft. He usually claims he wishes he knew more about it, but his business is driven primarily by the "car" enthusiasts.
>
>Dealer makes recommendations based on information he received exclusively through marketing materials.
>
>Dealer makes no recommendations whatsoever and leaves you to decide for yourself.
>
>With the exception of a handful of Futaba and Hitec transmitters, and Aerobird / GWS replacement parts, everything you want has to be ordered through their dealer network, which easily adds 1-2 weeks time for fulfillment. This completely defeats the purpose of working with a local hobby shop IMO, as the whole reason why I would go local is because I want it today.
>
>Local Hobby shops tend to mark up items, in some cases (particularly with batteries) you end up paying two to three times as much when you go local. And it completely drives me crazy when they insist on selling you "matched" cells. I blame this on the car guys and their need to gain the leading edge in those little round and squirrelly race tracks they run on. This also speaks to their ignorance of your flying needs.
>
>As far as the USB accessible ESC goes, I'm fine with my tone sequences. Until I can hook up and download telemetry data such as altitude, airspeed, rpm, etc, I'll probably steer clear of anything of this nature.
>
>I'd probably feel a little bit of guilt if my local shops really were focusing on me. Unfortunately that isn't the case in most scenarios.... especially when the first thing they tell me is that they don't cater to "Air" RC because their business is primarily driven by "cars".
>
>Shell
>
>
>
>From: Ted Temer
>Sent: Sun 10/17/2004 12:31 PM
>To: eflight@ezonemag.com
>Subject: [EFLT] Arming Switch --and the need thereof
>
>
>This message from "Ted Temer" <temer@c-zone.net> brought to you by EFLIGHT!
>
>Good People:
>
>One of our local hobby shops talked me out of a Jeti ESC for an AXI and into
>a Castle Creations Phoenix 35, "cause it has neat programmability and 'one
>can use your computer to program it' ." And of course, it is the current
>"in" brand.
>
>After getting it, I don't really see where it's programming makes it a
>better match to the AXI 2808 that I bought it for, than the Jeti would have
>been. There was no mention of using a computer to assist in the process.
>Turns out, this requires the purchase of an interface that only comes with
>an USB cord for some twenty odd bucks. You buy the USB cord whether you need
>it or not--I've got USB cords lying all over the place. Then--to add insult
>to injury--you have to download the software. It is NOT included with the
>"kit".
>
>After watching the demo in the hobby shop, I don't see where it's all that
>big a deal--especially for an operation that you usually would do only one
>time. Programming by counting the "beeps" doesn't seem all that hard.
>Besides, it would appear that the ESC will work with the intended AXI just
>the way it comes.
>
>The disappointing part was that this overpriced--at least in comparison to
>it's competition--ESC did NOT even include an arming switch. They do a lot
>of bragging about the safety of their built in arming sequence but no
>switch. Apparently you are expected to insert the flight battery and then
>carry your ship through the pits and out to the runway--including any
>delays--in a "hot" condition. Depending solely on the sequence described
>above and keeping one's pinkie away from the throttle. Yes--I understand the
>theory of inserting the battery out on the runway but this is often had to
>do with the more scale-like ships that often have the battery pack buried.
>
>This so-called arming sequence appears to be no different than the same
>thing on a Great Plains C-30 ESC except that Great Plains also includes an
>arming switch for safety redundancy. When it comes to safety, I like a
>little redundancy.
>
>So the question before the house is this:
>
>Am I just paranoid here--or is Castle Creations being perhaps, a little
>cheap??
>I know the Jeti they talked me out of, comes with a switch and so did EVERY
>other ESC I have ever bought, (with the exception of a little 2 amp thing
>from GWS). They were all much less expensive than the Castle Creations ESC
>and they could afford to include a switch. I would sure feel more
>comfortable if the Castle Creations ESC had included one as well. So--Guess
>which brand I intend to buy next time.
>
>SIDE NOTE: In an effort to support my local hobby shop here in Redding, CA I
>bought the AXI motor from them about two weeks ago instead of from David at
>Aircraft World where I had intended to buy it. Had I bought it from David, I
>would have had the motor long ago. But buying it locally from the hobby
>shop, I'm still waiting. They say, "Maybe next week".
>
>[sigh]
>Ted Temer AMA 86837
>Anderson Park Flyers
>Temercraft Designs Redding, CA
>temer@c-zone.net
>www.temercraft.com/novels/
>www.andersonparkflyers.org
>
>
>
>
>*** Any complaints or problems? Send an email to monitor@ezonemag.com
>*** For help with list commands go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailhelp.htm
>*** For the list rules go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailrule.htm
>
>
>This message has been scanned by GroupShield 6.0
>
>
>--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
>multipart/alternative
> text/plain (text body -- kept)
> text/html
>---
>
>*** Any complaints or problems? Send an email to monitor@ezonemag.com
>*** For help with list commands go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailhelp.htm
>*** For the list rules go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailrule.htm
>




*** Any complaints or problems? Send an email to monitor@ezonemag.com
*** For help with list commands go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailhelp.htm
*** For the list rules go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailrule.htm

[Shell M. Shrader]

This message from "Shell M. Shrader" <shell@shellware.com> brought to you by EFLIGHT!

I completely missed Ted's original question in my response ... when it was my initial intent to reply directly to it :) I apologize for getting side-tracked... and digging up an old topic.

I'm okay with the absence of an arming switch on the CC controllers... It forces me to use the tried and tested method of hooking up the battery when I'm ready to go and not a second before that.

There is some redundancy built into the process. I like how they will not arm until there is a signal from the transmitter. Also, most newer digital transmitters won't transmit if they're turned on with the throttle in a position other than off. However, I wouldn't recommend turning on your receiver/esc prior to your transmitter, especially since every piece of published information tells us to do the exact opposite.





From: Ryan
Sent: Sun 10/17/2004 2:49 PM
To: eflight@ezonemag.com
Subject: Re: [EFLT] Arming Switch --and the need thereof


This message from Ryan <ryanpsu21@att.net> brought to you by EFLIGHT!

I dislike the lack of arming switch as well. For CC brushless
controllers I don't plug in the battery until I'm at the fence and ready
to taxi out. Then I do a quick check to make sure the deflections are
correct direction and a quick range check. I don't plug anything in
that I have to walk through the flight line with.

As far as CC goes. I have 2 brushless controllers that I have no
problem with. I don't have the PC interface and do programming by
beeps. It's not that hard. I have one brushed controller that I
absolutely hate. Relative to the Jeti brushed controller I have it
sucks for lack of better words. I can put it in the same plane and same
mounting location and it will glitch while the Jeti doesn't. I've had
to send it back once for replacement as the first one smoked up on me
during initial setup.

We have one decent local hobby shop in this area and by decent I mean
they carry a lot of hardware and miscelaneous items. They are good for
balsa and glue and miscelaneous parts. For battery packs or motors I
order online. Cheapbatterypacks.dot come is in Oregon and from the time
I order a pack it arrives in 3 days at the longest in Michigan. That
is for custom packs.

Ryan



Shell M. Shrader wrote:

>This message from "Shell M. Shrader" <shell@shellware.com> brought to you by EFLIGHT!
>
>Hi Ted!
>
>You touch on a number of issues that drove me away from my local hobby shops. In so much, that I now deal exclusively with folks like David at aircraft-world, Randy from MAE, and Tony at eflightpacks.com. I've actually built quite a portfolio of online RC resellers/wholesalers.
>
>The "hobby shop mentality" typically observes these characteristics:
>
>Dealer knows very little about RC aircraft. He usually claims he wishes he knew more about it, but his business is driven primarily by the "car" enthusiasts.
>
>Dealer makes recommendations based on information he received exclusively through marketing materials.
>
>Dealer makes no recommendations whatsoever and leaves you to decide for yourself.
>
>With the exception of a handful of Futaba and Hitec transmitters, and Aerobird / GWS replacement parts, everything you want has to be ordered through their dealer network, which easily adds 1-2 weeks time for fulfillment. This completely defeats the purpose of working with a local hobby shop IMO, as the whole reason why I would go local is because I want it today.
>
>Local Hobby shops tend to mark up items, in some cases (particularly with batteries) you end up paying two to three times as much when you go local. And it completely drives me crazy when they insist on selling you "matched" cells. I blame this on the car guys and their need to gain the leading edge in those little round and squirrelly race tracks they run on. This also speaks to their ignorance of your flying needs.
>
>As far as the USB accessible ESC goes, I'm fine with my tone sequences. Until I can hook up and download telemetry data such as altitude, airspeed, rpm, etc, I'll probably steer clear of anything of this nature.
>
>I'd probably feel a little bit of guilt if my local shops really were focusing on me. Unfortunately that isn't the case in most scenarios.... especially when the first thing they tell me is that they don't cater to "Air" RC because their business is primarily driven by "cars".
>
>Shell
>
>
>
>From: Ted Temer
>Sent: Sun 10/17/2004 12:31 PM
>To: eflight@ezonemag.com
>Subject: [EFLT] Arming Switch --and the need thereof
>
>
>This message from "Ted Temer" <temer@c-zone.net> brought to you by EFLIGHT!
>
>Good People:
>
>One of our local hobby shops talked me out of a Jeti ESC for an AXI and into
>a Castle Creations Phoenix 35, "cause it has neat programmability and 'one
>can use your computer to program it' ." And of course, it is the current
>"in" brand.
>
>After getting it, I don't really see where it's programming makes it a
>better match to the AXI 2808 that I bought it for, than the Jeti would have
>been. There was no mention of using a computer to assist in the process.
>Turns out, this requires the purchase of an interface that only comes with
>an USB cord for some twenty odd bucks. You buy the USB cord whether you need
>it or not--I've got USB cords lying all over the place. Then--to add insult
>to injury--you have to download the software. It is NOT included with the
>"kit".
>
>After watching the demo in the hobby shop, I don't see where it's all that
>big a deal--especially for an operation that you usually would do only one
>time. Programming by counting the "beeps" doesn't seem all that hard.
>Besides, it would appear that the ESC will work with the intended AXI just
>the way it comes.
>
>The disappointing part was that this overpriced--at least in comparison to
>it's competition--ESC did NOT even include an arming switch. They do a lot
>of bragging about the safety of their built in arming sequence but no
>switch. Apparently you are expected to insert the flight battery and then
>carry your ship through the pits and out to the runway--including any
>delays--in a "hot" condition. Depending solely on the sequence described
>above and keeping one's pinkie away from the throttle. Yes--I understand the
>theory of inserting the battery out on the runway but this is often had to
>do with the more scale-like ships that often have the battery pack buried.
>
>This so-called arming sequence appears to be no different than the same
>thing on a Great Plains C-30 ESC except that Great Plains also includes an
>arming switch for safety redundancy. When it comes to safety, I like a
>little redundancy.
>
>So the question before the house is this:
>
>Am I just paranoid here--or is Castle Creations being perhaps, a little
>cheap??
>I know the Jeti they talked me out of, comes with a switch and so did EVERY
>other ESC I have ever bought, (with the exception of a little 2 amp thing
>from GWS). They were all much less expensive than the Castle Creations ESC
>and they could afford to include a switch. I would sure feel more
>comfortable if the Castle Creations ESC had included one as well. So--Guess
>which brand I intend to buy next time.
>
>SIDE NOTE: In an effort to support my local hobby shop here in Redding, CA I
>bought the AXI motor from them about two weeks ago instead of from David at
>Aircraft World where I had intended to buy it. Had I bought it from David, I
>would have had the motor long ago. But buying it locally from the hobby
>shop, I'm still waiting. They say, "Maybe next week".
>
>[sigh]
>Ted Temer AMA 86837
>Anderson Park Flyers
>Temercraft Designs Redding, CA
>temer@c-zone.net
>www.temercraft.com/novels/
>www.andersonparkflyers.org
>
>
>
>
>*** Any complaints or problems? Send an email to monitor@ezonemag.com
>*** For help with list commands go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailhelp.htm
>*** For the list rules go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailrule.htm
>
>
>This message has been scanned by GroupShield 6.0
>
>
>--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
>multipart/alternative
> text/plain (text body -- kept)
> text/html
>---
>
>*** Any complaints or problems? Send an email to monitor@ezonemag.com
>*** For help with list commands go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailhelp.htm
>*** For the list rules go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailrule.htm
>




*** Any complaints or problems? Send an email to monitor@ezonemag.com
*** For help with list commands go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailhelp.htm
*** For the list rules go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailrule.htm


This message has been scanned by GroupShield 6.0


--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
text/plain (text body -- kept)
text/html
---

*** Any complaints or problems? Send an email to monitor@ezonemag.com
*** For help with list commands go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailhelp.htm
*** For the list rules go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailrule.htm

[Brian Chan]

This message from Brian Chan <bhchan@mail.arc.nasa.gov> brought to you by EFLIGHT!


Ted, and ...

The little switch that came with the Jeti is NOT AN ARMING switch. It
just turn on the BEC(battery eliminating Circuit) power to the
receiver. Once you connected the battery to the esc(electronic speed
controller), the motor can (and will) come on if it "see" a signal,
regardless it is real or not. The arming switch as we usually refer
to is a switch between the battery and esc to dissconnect the battery
from the ESC. To satisfy your quest, the newer Phoenix esc(as least
the Phn-60 I just purchased) came with a short extension chord that
has a switch built -in, so if you see a need to use a switch, it is
there.

The CC Phoenix is a more complex esc than the Jeti esc. It can give
you more flexibility compare to the Jeti. May be you don't need it
now, but you might appreciate it later. Able to set the voltage cut
off is a benefit for the Lipo battery. As far as local HS, some of
them might not have the knowledge to pass as experts in the field
electric component, that is why places like this forum or the E-zone
@rcgroup come into play. You can ask questions there. Of course you
have to know who to listen to but you can figure it out pretty
quickly.

For the Phn-Link at 25.00, the price is not bad. An USB cable can be
from 5.00 to 20.00. As far as software goes, downloading it get you
the latest version available. Even Bill Gates does not give you a
manuel now a date, they tell you to print your own.

So you can pick you own poison and see which one suits your need.
There is always better and worst products than the one you choose.

Brian

*** Any complaints or problems? Send an email to monitor@ezonemag.com
*** For help with list commands go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailhelp.htm
*** For the list rules go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailrule.htm

[HrvyAar@aol.com]

This message from HrvyAar@aol.com brought to you by EFLIGHT!

Ted: Well said. Thanks. -- Aaron
Jax.,Fl


--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
text/plain (text body -- kept)
text/html
---

*** Any complaints or problems? Send an email to monitor@ezonemag.com
*** For help with list commands go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailhelp.htm
*** For the list rules go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailrule.htm

[Jim Lilly]

This message from Jim Lilly <a1pcfixer@comcast.net> brought to you by EFLIGHT!

Brian,

> The little switch that came with the Jeti is NOT AN ARMING switch. It
> just turn on the BEC(battery eliminating Circuit) power to the
> receiver. Once you connected the battery to the esc(electronic speed
> controller), the motor can (and will) come on if it "see" a signal,
> regardless it is real or not. The arming switch as we usually refer
> to is a switch between the battery and esc to dissconnect the battery
> from the ESC.
>

Exactly right!

As to the term 'arming switch' that feature is built into CC's ESC's.
You turn on the Tx, then set your throttle to any position BUT off, plug
in the battery & motor will not run.....until throttle is set to off.
Only then does their ESC 'arm'.
--

Jim Lilly - Team Z
http://www.zonelabs.com/store/content/company/teamzBios.jsp
Using - Virtual Access(OLR), ZAP 5.1, & WinXP Pro w/SP2
http://www.virtual-access.org




*** Any complaints or problems? Send an email to monitor@ezonemag.com
*** For help with list commands go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailhelp.htm
*** For the list rules go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailrule.htm

[Dickmr@aol.com]

This message from Dickmr@aol.com brought to you by EFLIGHT!


Hi Ted
You can add a " arming switch like the Jeti" in the red wire to the RX. As
has been mentioned , its not an arming switch .Ive done this on E gliders that
the batteries have to be loaded with the wing off. It might make you feel
better. But treat it like its still hot.

Dick Roberts




In a message dated 10/17/2004 10:33:08 AM Mountain Daylight Time,
temer@c-zone.net writes:

The disappointing part was that this overpriced--at least in comparison to
it's competition--ESC did NOT even include an arming switch. They do a lot
of bragging about the safety of their built in arming sequence but no
switch. Apparently you are expected to insert the flight battery and then
carry your ship through the pits and out to the runway--including any
delays--in a "hot" condition.





--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
text/plain (text body -- kept)
text/html
---

*** Any complaints or problems? Send an email to monitor@ezonemag.com
*** For help with list commands go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailhelp.htm
*** For the list rules go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailrule.htm

[Rick Page]

This message from Rick Page <rick-page@shaw.ca> brought to you by EFLIGHT!

>You can add a " arming switch like the Jeti"
Well, the switch arms the servos, but the motor is potentially hot as soon
as the battery is plugged in.
These kinds of switches, fuses and the such add a number of failure points
but there is no greater security than not plugging the battery in until it
is safe to turn on the motor. Even worse, having switches tends to give
people a false sense of security because they think the switch is off and
are careless around props. A switch requires a human to operate it and
people are notoriously unreliable.
A disconnection in the battery line is the only one I would consider a
safety device. Most current brushless ESC's have fairly strict requirements
for the arming sequence and won't spring to life accidentally. But this is
personal preference, along the lines of the BEC or receiver pack debate.

To Ted's original concern: "Apparently you are expected to insert the
flight battery and then
carry your ship out to the runway in a "hot" condition."
Yes, just like a glow ship. Most clubs require engines to be started in the
pits, not on the runway. And of course, you do that with the radio switch
turned on and the prop turning. I don't see this as an unusual problem.
Personally, I prefer to connect the battery wires just before launch, and to
disconnect on landing, before carrying the model, if club rules allow.

The lack of a switch is no reason to reject one ESC over another but the CC
USB cord has the great advantage of allowing software upgrades without
sending the ESC back. And you can always share one with friends. I don't
think Jeti has an upgrade capability at all.

Rick.


*** Any complaints or problems? Send an email to monitor@ezonemag.com
*** For help with list commands go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailhelp.htm
*** For the list rules go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailrule.htm

[Wim Hanssens]

This message from "Wim Hanssens" <wim.hanssens@village.uunet.be> brought to you by EFLIGHT!


> These kinds of switches, fuses and the such add a number of failure
> points

Not necessarily, the TMM switch makes the controller on in the off
position, meaing is till works if the switch fails...

.. Even worse, having switches tends to
> give
> people a false sense of security because they think the switch is off
> and
> are careless around props.

Very true!


> USB cord has the great advantage of allowing software upgrades
> without
> sending the ESC back. And you can always share one with friends. I
> don't
> think Jeti has an upgrade capability at all.
>
> Rick.


true. Or, like my MPX dealer, you dealer could "lend" you his.....

The new Hackers (also Jeti's) now alos have a controller box, but no
upgrade capabilities....

Wim


*** Any complaints or problems? Send an email to monitor@ezonemag.com
*** For help with list commands go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailhelp.htm
*** For the list rules go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailrule.htm

[Scott Schroeder]

This message from Scott Schroeder <sschroeder@sbcglobal.net> brought to you by EFLIGHT!

Wim Hanssens wrote:
> This message from "Wim Hanssens" <wim.hanssens@village.uunet.be> brought
> to you by EFLIGHT!
>
>
>> These kinds of switches, fuses and the such add a number of failure
>> points
>
>
> Not necessarily, the TMM switch makes the controller on in the off
> position, meaing is till works if the switch fails...
>


Please define 'works' - if the switch failing turns the power off to the
RX you could have the airplane go dead in the air and crash, if failing
leaves the power off then the supposed 'safe' model isn't safe.

I don't like the switches they don't cut the power to the motor, just
the RX. Treating the airplane like it has a large meat slicer attached
to it until the battery is disconnected is in my opinion the only safe
way to handle an electric airplane in my opinion.

Scott


*** Any complaints or problems? Send an email to monitor@ezonemag.com
*** For help with list commands go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailhelp.htm
*** For the list rules go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailrule.htm

[Wim Hanssens]

This message from "Wim Hanssens" <wim.hanssens@village.uunet.be> brought to you by EFLIGHT!

>..still works if the switch fails...
>>
>
>
> Please define 'works' - if the switch failing turns the power off to
> the RX

It does not , that's the beuty of the system

> if
> failing leaves the power off then the supposed 'safe' model isn't
> safe.

A failing TMM switch leaves the power ON, not safe, but at least you
controller still responds. I already stated I do not consider switches
safety items...

> Treating the airplane like it has a large meat slicer attached
> to it until the battery is disconnected is in my opinion the only
> safe
> way to handle an electric airplane in my opinion.
>
> Scott

Correct. So even with a switch , you do not need to change you
behaviour...

Wim


*** Any complaints or problems? Send an email to monitor@ezonemag.com
*** For help with list commands go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailhelp.htm
*** For the list rules go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailrule.htm

[jwjuechter]

This message from "jwjuechter" <jwjuechter@cox.net> brought to you by EFLIGHT!

Jim,

This comment has me stumped. If I understand what you are saying, if I have
the battery and motor connected to the ESC, even though the receiver is off,
the motor may run?

I've never encountered this. I have had motors run when I turned on the
receiver before turning on the transmitter, but never without power to the
receiver. What type of ESC have you encountered this problem with?

Castle Creations "throttle must be off to arm" sounds good, but if you are
flying a number of planes with various manufacturer's equipment in them, I
think it's probably logical that making certain the throttle is closed
before you turn on the receiver is a good safety practice. Unfortunately,
that voids CC's safety procedure.

I believe strongly in having a switch in the lead between the ESC and the
receiver. It won't keep my battery from running down long-term, but it does
assure me that my plane is not going to do something unexpected if I have my
battery connected and someone else turns on a transmitter on that frequency.

Jack Juechter
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Lilly" <a1pcfixer@comcast.net>
To: <eflight@ezonemag.com>
Sent: Sunday, October 17, 2004 10:14 PM
Subject: Re: [EFLT] Arming Switch --and the need thereof


> This message from Jim Lilly <a1pcfixer@comcast.net> brought to you by
> EFLIGHT!
>
> Brian,
>
>> The little switch that came with the Jeti is NOT AN ARMING switch. It
>> just turn on the BEC(battery eliminating Circuit) power to the
>> receiver. Once you connected the battery to the esc(electronic speed
>> controller), the motor can (and will) come on if it "see" a signal,
>> regardless it is real or not. The arming switch as we usually refer
>> to is a switch between the battery and esc to dissconnect the battery
>> from the ESC.
>>
>
> Exactly right!
>
> As to the term 'arming switch' that feature is built into CC's ESC's.
> You turn on the Tx, then set your throttle to any position BUT off, plug
> in the battery & motor will not run.....until throttle is set to off.
> Only then does their ESC 'arm'.
> --
>
> Jim Lilly - Team Z
> http://www.zonelabs.com/store/content/company/teamzBios.jsp
> Using - Virtual Access(OLR), ZAP 5.1, & WinXP Pro w/SP2
> http://www.virtual-access.org
>
>
>
>
> *** Any complaints or problems? Send an email to monitor@ezonemag.com
> *** For help with list commands go to
> http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailhelp.htm
> *** For the list rules go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailrule.htm
>



*** Any complaints or problems? Send an email to monitor@ezonemag.com
*** For help with list commands go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailhelp.htm
*** For the list rules go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailrule.htm

[AZSPYDR@aol.com]

This message from AZSPYDR@aol.com brought to you by EFLIGHT!

In a message dated 10/17/2004 10:33:08 AM Mountain Standard Time,
temer@c-zone.net writes:
from GWS). They were all much less expensive than the Castle Creations ESC
and they could afford to include a switch. I would sure feel more
comfortable if the Castle Creations ESC had included one as well. So--Guess
which brand I intend to buy next time.
Hi Ted, aside from your technical points, I would like to report the
unworldly customer service from Castle. Twice I sent the Castle 45 back, explaining
that 1, a. severe crash might have caused its trouble, and 2, that a heavy
bench test proceedure and/or stupidity may be the problem. Both times they sent a
replacement within a week at no charge. To assuage my guilt feeling I sent a
check for $25 to 'cover mailing" which they returned. I was and am astounded.
Ted (back in AZ-after sojourn in CA)


--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
text/plain (text body -- kept)
text/html
---

*** Any complaints or problems? Send an email to monitor@ezonemag.com
*** For help with list commands go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailhelp.htm
*** For the list rules go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailrule.htm

[B12Boy@aol.com]

This message from B12Boy@aol.com brought to you by EFLIGHT!

I've sent back three pixie 7's, all burned to a crisp due to crashes ect, all
three were replaced no charge.

Yhey may have cost more new, but that one replacement under warrenty has made
them cheaper.


Dean in Milwaukee


--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
text/plain (text body -- kept)
text/html
---

*** Any complaints or problems? Send an email to monitor@ezonemag.com
*** For help with list commands go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailhelp.htm
*** For the list rules go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailrule.htm

[Brian Chan]

This message from Brian Chan <bhchan@mail.arc.nasa.gov> brought to you by EFLIGHT!

>This message from "jwjuechter" <jwjuechter@cox.net> brought to you by EFLIGHT!
>
>Jim,
>
>This comment has me stumped. If I understand what you are saying, if
>I have the battery and motor connected to the ESC, even though the
>receiver is off, the motor may run?

Jack,

The esc can pick up any transmission or noise, and the decoder thinks
it might be a signal and turn the esc. Or the FET in it might fail
and shorting the output, thus motor comes on.

>
>I believe strongly in having a switch in the lead between the ESC
>and the receiver. It won't keep my battery from running down
>long-term, but it does assure me that my plane is not going to do
>something unexpected if I have my battery connected and someone else
>turns on a transmitter on that frequency.


It is NOT a good practice to have the battery connected when you are
not ready to fly. I only connect the battery just before I am ready
to go, with frequency pin in hand. Don't connect the battery and then
go get the frequency pin and left the plane unattended. And
disconnect the battery the first chance I have after I landed. Also,
I am sure you heard this before, treat the plane as a live bomb when
the battery is connected, stay clear of the propeller. Never stand in
front of the plane.

Brian
--
Brian Chan,
An Electric Airplane Junkie @ San Mateo.Ca.USA

*** Any complaints or problems? Send an email to monitor@ezonemag.com
*** For help with list commands go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailhelp.htm
*** For the list rules go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailrule.htm

[Don Stackhouse @ DJ Aerotech]

This message from "Don Stackhouse @ DJ Aerotech" <djaerotech@erinet.com> brought to you by EFLIGHT!

Ted writes:

>The disappointing part was that this ... ESC did NOT even include an
>arming switch...

Personally I prefer the Castle Creations method of software checks and no
arming switch. I suspect that overall it's probably safer than the hardware
arming switch method.

As some of you may recall, one of the more tedious tasks I did a lot of in
my previous job as an engineer in the aerospace industry, before my present
job of trying to make it on my own as a "toymaker for grownups", was
FMECA's, or "Failure Mode and Effects Criticality Analysis". That's where
we take every component failure and reasonable combination of component
failures in a given system and predict their probability of failure, the
effects and severity of that failure on the aircraft and the people in it
and under it, etc., and compare that to the allowable probability for that
severity of failure.

For example, any single failure or combination failures in the
"Catastrophic" category (i.e.: potential loss of the aircraft) had to have
a probability of less than once per billion flight hours, which was long
enough that it was unlikely to occur within the lifetime of the entire
fleet of that aircraft or subsystem.

The analysis could get quite involved. For example, one FMECA report I did
for a transport category constant speed prop and its control system ran
through more than 67 pages of 7 point print. It's a wonder I have any
eyesight left at all.

One thing that became intensely obvious after doing a whole bunch of these
analyses was that any time you add parts, you hurt reliability. It may be
necessary to do so to convert a "Catastrophic" category failure into a
"Minor" one, but in the process of eliminating catastrophic failures by
that means, the overall system reliability gets worse. If there's more
things there that can fail, then the number of ways for the system to fail
and the probability of having some kind of failure increases.

Charles Lindbergh understood this in 1927 when he decided to fly a
single-engined airplane across the Atlantic. The 2 and 3-motored planes of
that day did not have the performance to make it the rest of the way across
on the remaining engines if one engine failed over the middle of the ocean
(particularly since the feathering propeller had not yet been perfected).
Thus, having more engines just increased the chances of any one of those
engines failing, and therefore actually reduced safety. Contrary to popular
belief, the original reason for making multi-engined airplanes was not for
safety through redundancy, it was because it took more than one of the
engines of that period to power the size of the planes that folks wanted to
build then.

Looking at the arming switch question, the typical switches we use in R/C
systems often have pretty pathetic failure rates. Just about anyone with
enough R/C experience to know what tends to break the most often will point
to switch harnesses, cables and connectors as some of the worst offenders.
We have to have a connector between the battery and the rest of the system,
but any switches or connectors other than that one simply add additional
failure points to the system.

Also, any system that has the battery plugged in can potentially fail and
turn on, whether it has an "arming switch" or not. Arming switches can and
do occasionally fail "on". In addition, they have the added failure mode of
potentially failing "off" in flight, and the wiring and connections to them
add to the already not-too-encouraging failure rate of the switch itself.
The net result is a system design with a false sense of security and a
reduced overall reliability, particularly with regard to in-flight failures.

The solution to not accidentally having the prop start up while carrying
the plane past the pit area and out to the flight line is to not plug in
the battery until you're actually ready to fly. If you can't do that
conveniently, then the problem is with your plane's airframe design and
access, not with the electrical system.


Don Stackhouse @ DJ Aerotech
djaerotech@erinet.com
http://www.djaerotech.com/


*** Any complaints or problems? Send an email to monitor@ezonemag.com
*** For help with list commands go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailhelp.htm
*** For the list rules go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailrule.htm

[Don Stackhouse @ DJ Aerotech]

This message from "Don Stackhouse @ DJ Aerotech" <djaerotech@erinet.com> brought to you by EFLIGHT!

Jack writes:

>This comment has me stumped. If I understand what you are saying, if I have
>the battery and motor connected to the ESC, even though the receiver is off,
>the motor may run?

Any electrical circuit that has electric power supplied to it can fail into
the "on" condition.

>I've never encountered this...

....Yet. The key word is "Yet". But it's still possible.

The other really nasty thing about probability and statistics that far too
many folks don't realize is that the probability of something occurring
just establishes how many times over the entire history of that product a
certain thing is going to happen. If you have something that has a
probability of occurring only once per billion flight hours, that does NOT
mean that you have to accumulate a billion flight hours before that event
can happen; it just means that some time within that period the event will
happen once. ANY time within those one billion hours. It could happen the
first flight hour, or the tenth, or the five-hundredth, or the
ten-thousandth. The odds of the event occurring during any particular
flight hour within that set of one billion are all exactly equal to each other.

>Castle Creations "throttle must be off to arm" sounds good, but if you are
>flying a number of planes with various manufacturer's equipment in them, I
>think it's probably logical that making certain the throttle is closed
>before you turn on the receiver is a good safety practice. Unfortunately,
>that voids CC's safety procedure.

Not in actual practice. Besides refusing to allow power to the motor until
it detects a valid "low throttle" condition for 1 1/2 seconds from the
receiver, it also "sings to you" with a brief series of beeps when it has
successfully detected that condition for the necessary time period and has
decided to arm. I check that the transmitter is on, the throttle stick is
all the way down, then plug in the battery to the ESC. It beeps at me with
that special code, and also flashes some lights, and tells me that the
whole system is tested, active and ready to fly.

>I believe strongly in having a switch in the lead between the ESC and the
>receiver.

Which means that if that switch fails "open" in flight (a common type of
switch failure), you lose the function of the entire radio if you're using
a BEC. If you're using a separate battery for the radio, then you lose
motor function, which, depending on location relative to the runway,
altitude, terrain and weather, could be a dangerous condition.

> It won't keep my battery from running down long-term, but it does
>assure me that my plane is not going to do something unexpected if I have my
>battery connected and someone else turns on a transmitter on that frequency.

But simply unplugging the battery from the entire system accomplishes the
same thing, only more reliably and with fewer potential failure points in
the system.

The other thing to remind ourselves about here is that we should all ALWAYS
assume the system is live and that the prop could start. It's the same as
the philosophy they use in gun safety, always assume the thing could fire,
even when (perhaps "especially when") you're absolutely certain there is no
possible way that it could.

One book I have on full-scale props talks about propeller "incidents" and
propeller "accidents". An "incident" generally involves a prop that was
expected to turn, and usually involves severe injury. A propeller
"accident" generally involves a prop that was NOT expected to turn, and
generally results in death. Always treat that veg-o-matic attached to the
shaft of your motor as if it could start up at any time.


Don Stackhouse @ DJ Aerotech
djaerotech@erinet.com
http://www.djaerotech.com/


*** Any complaints or problems? Send an email to monitor@ezonemag.com
*** For help with list commands go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailhelp.htm
*** For the list rules go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailrule.htm

[Doug Ingraham]

This message from Doug Ingraham <dpi@rapidnet.com> brought to you by EFLIGHT!

On Mon, 18 Oct 2004, jwjuechter wrote:

> This comment has me stumped. If I understand what you are saying, if I
> have the battery and motor connected to the ESC, even though the
> receiver is off, the motor may run?

Yes it could happen. With a brushed motor controller there are several
ways to make this happen. I have seen a speed control start when the
transmitter antenna of an operating transmitter was placed close to the
speed control with the receiver turned off. The rf was inducing enough
voltage into the fet drive electronics to turn on the power mosfets. I
have fets that were destroyed by static electricity. The typical failure
mode in this case is to short which causes the motor to run. All that
happens with a brushless controller is the prop would bump and then most
likely several fets release their smoke.


Doug Ingraham
Rapid City, SD USA


*** Any complaints or problems? Send an email to monitor@ezonemag.com
*** For help with list commands go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailhelp.htm
*** For the list rules go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailrule.htm

[Jim Porter]

This message from "Jim Porter" <airportr@pjsnet.de> brought to you by EFLIGHT!

> ...Yet. The key word is "Yet". But it's still possible.
>
> But simply unplugging the battery from the entire system accomplishes the
> same thing, only more reliably and with fewer potential failure points in
> the system.
>
> The other thing to remind ourselves about here is that we should all
ALWAYS
> assume the system is live and that the prop could start. It's the same as
> the philosophy they use in gun safety, always assume the thing could fire,
> even when (perhaps "especially when") you're absolutely certain there is
no
> possible way that it could.
>
> Always treat that veg-o-matic attached to the
> shaft of your motor as if it could start up at any time.

And yet once again the 'Voice of Reason' comes out of the darkness to
attempt to quell the stupidity that seems to run rampant in the world today.

Well written Don.

Thanks for your continuing efforts to educate those who seem not to think -
and maybe save someone on the sidelines.

Jim Porter, soon to be Johnston Iowa
Neckargemund-Dilsberg
Germany

Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity.

OR

Education rarely overpowers innate stupidity.


*** Any complaints or problems? Send an email to monitor@ezonemag.com
*** For help with list commands go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailhelp.htm
*** For the list rules go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailrule.htm

[Gofli@aol.com]

This message from Gofli@aol.com brought to you by EFLIGHT!

<<Castle Creations "throttle must be off to arm" sounds good, but if you are
flying a number of planes with various manufacturer's equipment in them, I
think it's probably logical that making certain the throttle is closed
before you turn on the receiver is a good safety practice. Unfortunately,
that voids CC's safety procedure>>


You are missing the point of castle's arming sequence...it is there to make that if you DON'T close the throttle before plugging the battery in, it won't start the motor at that throttle setting. It's not saying you should open the throttle b4 plugging in at all:D I use only castle and some jeti esc's, and the jeti's I have have had the switches removed...I dont use the switch because it is just another possible failure point, as several members have already pointed out.. the only way to be sure is disconnect the pack.

Later,
David

*** Any complaints or problems? Send an email to monitor@ezonemag.com
*** For help with list commands go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailhelp.htm
*** For the list rules go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailrule.htm

[jwjuechter]

This message from "jwjuechter" <jwjuechter@cox.net> brought to you by EFLIGHT!

Don,

I'll certainly agree with you that the safest approach is not to connect the
battery until you are on the line ready to fly. However, in my case I have a
number of planes that were converted from engine to electric, and it just
isn't feasible to remove the battery each time to charge it, so it must be
charged in place. As such, it is also impractical to disconnect or reconnect
the battery except when I have a cradle in which to place the fuselage
while working on it.

In such a case, I feel much more confidant with an arming switch than hoping
that my throttle does not get moved to the off position or that someone else
may start a transmitter on my frequency within interfering range.

This latter situation becomes more critical with the proliferation of small
field flying ARFs whose proximity is generally totally unknown.

Jack Juechter
----- Original Message -----
From: "Don Stackhouse @ DJ Aerotech" <djaerotech@erinet.com>
To: <eflight@ezonemag.com>
Cc: <temer@c-zone.net>
Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2004 11:37 AM
Subject: Re: [EFLT] Arming Switch --and the need thereof


> This message from "Don Stackhouse @ DJ Aerotech" <djaerotech@erinet.com>
> brought to you by EFLIGHT!
>
> Ted writes:
>
>>The disappointing part was that this ... ESC did NOT even include an
>>arming switch...
>
> Personally I prefer the Castle Creations method of software checks and no
> arming switch. I suspect that overall it's probably safer than the
> hardware arming switch method.
>
> As some of you may recall, one of the more tedious tasks I did a lot of in
> my previous job as an engineer in the aerospace industry, before my
> present job of trying to make it on my own as a "toymaker for grownups",
> was FMECA's, or "Failure Mode and Effects Criticality Analysis". That's
> where we take every component failure and reasonable combination of
> component failures in a given system and predict their probability of
> failure, the effects and severity of that failure on the aircraft and the
> people in it and under it, etc., and compare that to the allowable
> probability for that severity of failure.
>
> For example, any single failure or combination failures in the
> "Catastrophic" category (i.e.: potential loss of the aircraft) had to have
> a probability of less than once per billion flight hours, which was long
> enough that it was unlikely to occur within the lifetime of the entire
> fleet of that aircraft or subsystem.
>
> The analysis could get quite involved. For example, one FMECA report I did
> for a transport category constant speed prop and its control system ran
> through more than 67 pages of 7 point print. It's a wonder I have any
> eyesight left at all.
>
> One thing that became intensely obvious after doing a whole bunch of these
> analyses was that any time you add parts, you hurt reliability. It may be
> necessary to do so to convert a "Catastrophic" category failure into a
> "Minor" one, but in the process of eliminating catastrophic failures by
> that means, the overall system reliability gets worse. If there's more
> things there that can fail, then the number of ways for the system to fail
> and the probability of having some kind of failure increases.
>
> Charles Lindbergh understood this in 1927 when he decided to fly a
> single-engined airplane across the Atlantic. The 2 and 3-motored planes of
> that day did not have the performance to make it the rest of the way
> across on the remaining engines if one engine failed over the middle of
> the ocean (particularly since the feathering propeller had not yet been
> perfected). Thus, having more engines just increased the chances of any
> one of those engines failing, and therefore actually reduced safety.
> Contrary to popular belief, the original reason for making multi-engined
> airplanes was not for safety through redundancy, it was because it took
> more than one of the engines of that period to power the size of the
> planes that folks wanted to build then.
>
> Looking at the arming switch question, the typical switches we use in R/C
> systems often have pretty pathetic failure rates. Just about anyone with
> enough R/C experience to know what tends to break the most often will
> point to switch harnesses, cables and connectors as some of the worst
> offenders. We have to have a connector between the battery and the rest of
> the system, but any switches or connectors other than that one simply add
> additional failure points to the system.
>
> Also, any system that has the battery plugged in can potentially fail and
> turn on, whether it has an "arming switch" or not. Arming switches can and
> do occasionally fail "on". In addition, they have the added failure mode
> of potentially failing "off" in flight, and the wiring and connections to
> them add to the already not-too-encouraging failure rate of the switch
> itself. The net result is a system design with a false sense of security
> and a reduced overall reliability, particularly with regard to in-flight
> failures.
>
> The solution to not accidentally having the prop start up while carrying
> the plane past the pit area and out to the flight line is to not plug in
> the battery until you're actually ready to fly. If you can't do that
> conveniently, then the problem is with your plane's airframe design and
> access, not with the electrical system.
>
>
> Don Stackhouse @ DJ Aerotech
> djaerotech@erinet.com
> http://www.djaerotech.com/
>
>
> *** Any complaints or problems? Send an email to monitor@ezonemag.com
> *** For help with list commands go to
> http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailhelp.htm
> *** For the list rules go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailrule.htm
>



*** Any complaints or problems? Send an email to monitor@ezonemag.com
*** For help with list commands go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailhelp.htm
*** For the list rules go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailrule.htm

[Ted Temer]

This message from "Ted Temer" <temer@c-zone.net> brought to you by EFLIGHT!

Don, Jack and others:

Sorry to take so long to reply--but the press of my real life often
interferes ...

I wholeheartedly agree with the concept of complexity increasing the rate of
failure. I too am a great advocate of the KISS principle.

HOW-EV-ER:

We as human beings often increase the sophistication, (complexity) of our
tools and toys simply because we WANT to do this. Usually the added
complexity gives us some benefit that we feel that we just can't live
without and we are perfectly willing to cope with the fact that we have
added another feature that might--eventually WILL--fail. There are hundreds
of examples but let me confine this to just a couple or I'll end up writing
a boring book that no one will bother to read.

Both guns and cars were mentioned. Cars used to be very simple things. But
over the years we have added feature after feature because it makes our life
easier. We are told to look behind us instead of using a rear view mirror.
Sure!! But because we are after all, human, we are very aware that the added
complexity of a rear view mirror has saved hundreds of lives, (even if we're
not supposed to use it). But rearview mirrors fail. They fall on the
floor--they get all foggy at the worst possible moment and they are sharp
when you bang you head on one trying to wipe the inside of the windscreen.

It was a lot simpler and more reliable to use a hand crank to start our
auto's engine. After all, electric starters can--and often do--fail. There
are many documented cases of a starter failure causing an engine or drive
train "lock-up" and some have resulted in catastrophic damage, loss of
control and even resulted in injury and death.

Nevertheless, I doubt that many on this list would be willing to give up the
electric starter for their vehicles and failure rate be damned.

In past lives involving military and law enforcement, I have carried a
firearm over a period of several years. I can assure you that though the
decocking lever/safety on a Beretta Model 92 adds complexity and is
certainly capable of failing, I would not dream of removing the safety
features of that well known automatic pistol. Nor would we want to get rid
of the "complex" floating firing pins and dozens of other innovations that
have made firearms safer over the years. But consider that EVERY single one
of those safety additions have increased the chance of failure. Personally I
CHOSE to keep every single one of them.

It should go without saying that we should all operate our models, our
tools, vehicles, guns and every other device we use in a manner that expects
and is prepared for, a failure. You may not draw up a written plan, but
every good driver--in the back of their minds--is constantly looking for
escape routes, etc. in case of brake failure. Every responsible gun handler
treats the weapon as though it was about to go off unexpectedly.

Naturally we should so the same with our planes. But that doesn't mean that
we should give up any and all additional safety features that are developed
for our toys--just because they make it more complex.

Jack has a very good point when he mentions that many aircraft are
constructed in a manner that makes it difficult to unplug the battery pack
out on the runway. Don said that this means the plane was designed wrong.
Well--for any of a hundred reasons, we may want or need to have the plane
built in this manner. Not every model--even electrics--can be a profile or
have a handy hatch. And Jack also has a point that many larger models might
require a cradle.

A lot of verbiage was written over the past couple of days about the safety
of the arming sequence of a Castle Creations ESC. All well and good. But no
one has explained how--once armed--you turn this wonderful creation OFF
without unplugging the battery.

I don't CARE how complex it is--or whether it will outlast my great
grandson. I would FELL a lot better if I had the additional redundant safety
of a switch--just as I feel a lot safer having the decocking lever on a
Beretta 92 or a Walther PPK.

Best wishes
Ted Temer AMA 86837
Anderson Park Flyers
Temercraft Designs Redding, CA
temer@c-zone.net
www.temercraft.com/novels/
www.andersonparkflyers.org


> This message from "jwjuechter" <jwjuechter@cox.net> brought to you by
EFLIGHT!
>
> Don,
>
> I'll certainly agree with you that the safest approach is not to connect
the
> battery until you are on the line ready to fly. However, in my case I have
a
> number of planes that were converted from engine to electric, and it just
> isn't feasible to remove the battery each time to charge it, so it must be
> charged in place. As such, it is also impractical to disconnect or
reconnect
> the battery except when I have a cradle in which to place the fuselage
> while working on it.
>
> In such a case, I feel much more confidant with an arming switch than
hoping
> that my throttle does not get moved to the off position or that someone
else
> may start a transmitter on my frequency within interfering range.
>
> This latter situation becomes more critical with the proliferation of
small
> field flying ARFs whose proximity is generally totally unknown.
>
> Jack Juechter
>
> > This message from "Don Stackhouse @ DJ Aerotech" <djaerotech@erinet.com>
> > brought to you by EFLIGHT!
> >
> > Ted writes:
> >
> >>The disappointing part was that this ... ESC did NOT even include an
> >>arming switch...
> >
> > Personally I prefer the Castle Creations method of software checks and
no
> > arming switch. I suspect that overall it's probably safer than the
> > hardware arming switch method.
> >
>>>>>>SNIP<<<<<<<<



*** Any complaints or problems? Send an email to monitor@ezonemag.com
*** For help with list commands go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailhelp.htm
*** For the list rules go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailrule.htm

[Brian Chan]

This message from Brian Chan <bhchan@mail.arc.nasa.gov> brought to you by EFLIGHT!

>This message from "jwjuechter" <jwjuechter@cox.net> brought to you by EFLIGHT!
>
>Don,
>
>I'll certainly agree with you that the safest approach is not to
>connect the battery until you are on the line ready to fly. However,
>in my case I have a number of planes that were converted from engine
>to electric, and it just isn't feasible to remove the battery each
>time to charge it, so it must be charged in place. As such, it is
>also impractical to disconnect or reconnect the battery except when
>I have a cradle in which to place the fuselage while working on it.
>
>In such a case, I feel much more confidant with an arming switch
>than hoping that my throttle does not get moved to the off position
>or that someone else may start a transmitter on my frequency within
>interfering range.
>
>This latter situation becomes more critical with the proliferation
>of small field flying ARFs whose proximity is generally totally
>unknown.
>
>Jack Juechter

In lieu of an arming switch, you can use a externally mounted
connector, to diconnect the battery pack from the esc. I have a plane
the required me to connect every thing before I mount the wing. I
have two socket mount on the fuselage and I put a jumper to do the
final connection to the battery just before I am going to fly. This
is a scale plane and the jumper is disguised as an fin antenna.

I don't like to charge battery in the plane, you don't know how hot
they are. I have many converted gas power planes. I always find a way
to modify it so the battery pack is easily accessable and removable.

--
Brian Chan,
An Electric Airplane Junkie @ San Mateo.Ca.USA

*** Any complaints or problems? Send an email to monitor@ezonemag.com
*** For help with list commands go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailhelp.htm
*** For the list rules go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailrule.htm

[Don Stackhouse @ DJ Aerotech]

This message from "Don Stackhouse @ DJ Aerotech" <djaerotech@erinet.com> brought to you by EFLIGHT!

Jack writes:

>I'll certainly agree with you that the safest approach is not to connect the
>battery until you are on the line ready to fly. However, in my case I have a
>number of planes that were converted from engine to electric, and ... it
>is ... impractical to disconnect or reconnect the battery except when I
>have a cradle in which to place the fuselage
>while working on it.

This is a perfect example of exactly what I had in mind when I wrote "The
solution to not accidentally having the prop start up while carrying the
plane past the pit area and out to the flight line is to not plug in the
battery until you're actually ready to fly. If you can't do that
conveniently, then the problem is with your plane's airframe design and
access, not with the electrical system."

If you can't reach the battery connector conveniently to plug in the
battery when (and only when) you get to the flight line, and unplug it
immediately after landing, then you need to alter the way you install the
electrical system in the airplane.

For example, it shouldn't be too difficult to install a small door in a
convenient spot on the outside of the fuselage, then locate the battery
connector just inside the door. Open the door, pull the cable ends out,
connect the connectors, then tuck the wires and connection back inside the
door and close it. That's not all that much more difficult than installing
the arming switch in the side of the fuselage, and significantly safer and
more reliable. Another option is to locate the battery connector under an
existing hatch, like the ones many power models have on top of the nose for
access to fuel tanks and such. Some folks don't even bother making it that
elegant, they simply run both connectors out through two holes in the
fuselage side and plug them together outside the airplane. Properly done it
isn't as aerodynamically "dirty" as it sounds, and it makes it very easy to
verify the status of the connection. This is similar to the technique used
on quite a few airplanes that have complex fuel systems that require access
to the fuel line for fueling and/or starting, such as some of the
pressurized fuel systems used on some types of racing engines.

These are just a few of the possibilities, and there are any number of
other options. The important thing is to arrange the installation so that
it's easy to do it simply and safely, rather than re-arranging your safety
priorities to simplify installation. And, like I indicated before, that
"arming switch" is at best a generator of a false sense of security.


Don Stackhouse @ DJ Aerotech
djaerotech@erinet.com
http://www.djaerotech.com/


*** Any complaints or problems? Send an email to monitor@ezonemag.com
*** For help with list commands go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailhelp.htm
*** For the list rules go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailrule.htm

[Shell M. Shrader]

This message from "Shell M. Shrader" <shell@shellware.com> brought to you by EFLIGHT!

FWIW.

You have control over your ability to remove and re-insert your battery in your plane. It may present a number of technical challenges, but ultimately it is something you can change.

On the other hand, you have no control over me and the rest of the small field ARF fliers out there. I do not mean that in a sarcastic manner, its merely the nature of the problem.



From: jwjuechter
Sent: Wed 10/20/2004 10:51 AM
To: eflight@ezonemag.com
Subject: Re: [EFLT] Arming Switch --and the need thereof


This message from "jwjuechter" <jwjuechter@cox.net> brought to you by EFLIGHT!

Don,

I'll certainly agree with you that the safest approach is not to connect the
battery until you are on the line ready to fly. However, in my case I have a
number of planes that were converted from engine to electric, and it just
isn't feasible to remove the battery each time to charge it, so it must be
charged in place. As such, it is also impractical to disconnect or reconnect
the battery except when I have a cradle in which to place the fuselage
while working on it.

In such a case, I feel much more confidant with an arming switch than hoping
that my throttle does not get moved to the off position or that someone else
may start a transmitter on my frequency within interfering range.

This latter situation becomes more critical with the proliferation of small
field flying ARFs whose proximity is generally totally unknown.

Jack Juechter
----- Original Message -----
From: "Don Stackhouse @ DJ Aerotech" <djaerotech@erinet.com>
To: <eflight@ezonemag.com>
Cc: <temer@c-zone.net>
Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2004 11:37 AM
Subject: Re: [EFLT] Arming Switch --and the need thereof


> This message from "Don Stackhouse @ DJ Aerotech" <djaerotech@erinet.com>
> brought to you by EFLIGHT!
>
> Ted writes:
>
>>The disappointing part was that this ... ESC did NOT even include an
>>arming switch...
>
> Personally I prefer the Castle Creations method of software checks and no
> arming switch. I suspect that overall it's probably safer than the
> hardware arming switch method.
>
> As some of you may recall, one of the more tedious tasks I did a lot of in
> my previous job as an engineer in the aerospace industry, before my
> present job of trying to make it on my own as a "toymaker for grownups",
> was FMECA's, or "Failure Mode and Effects Criticality Analysis". That's
> where we take every component failure and reasonable combination of
> component failures in a given system and predict their probability of
> failure, the effects and severity of that failure on the aircraft and the
> people in it and under it, etc., and compare that to the allowable
> probability for that severity of failure.
>
> For example, any single failure or combination failures in the
> "Catastrophic" category (i.e.: potential loss of the aircraft) had to have
> a probability of less than once per billion flight hours, which was long
> enough that it was unlikely to occur within the lifetime of the entire
> fleet of that aircraft or subsystem.
>
> The analysis could get quite involved. For example, one FMECA report I did
> for a transport category constant speed prop and its control system ran
> through more than 67 pages of 7 point print. It's a wonder I have any
> eyesight left at all.
>
> One thing that became intensely obvious after doing a whole bunch of these
> analyses was that any time you add parts, you hurt reliability. It may be
> necessary to do so to convert a "Catastrophic" category failure into a
> "Minor" one, but in the process of eliminating catastrophic failures by
> that means, the overall system reliability gets worse. If there's more
> things there that can fail, then the number of ways for the system to fail
> and the probability of having some kind of failure increases.
>
> Charles Lindbergh understood this in 1927 when he decided to fly a
> single-engined airplane across the Atlantic. The 2 and 3-motored planes of
> that day did not have the performance to make it the rest of the way
> across on the remaining engines if one engine failed over the middle of
> the ocean (particularly since the feathering propeller had not yet been
> perfected). Thus, having more engines just increased the chances of any
> one of those engines failing, and therefore actually reduced safety.
> Contrary to popular belief, the original reason for making multi-engined
> airplanes was not for safety through redundancy, it was because it took
> more than one of the engines of that period to power the size of the
> planes that folks wanted to build then.
>
> Looking at the arming switch question, the typical switches we use in R/C
> systems often have pretty pathetic failure rates. Just about anyone with
> enough R/C experience to know what tends to break the most often will
> point to switch harnesses, cables and connectors as some of the worst
> offenders. We have to have a connector between the battery and the rest of
> the system, but any switches or connectors other than that one simply add
> additional failure points to the system.
>
> Also, any system that has the battery plugged in can potentially fail and
> turn on, whether it has an "arming switch" or not. Arming switches can and
> do occasionally fail "on". In addition, they have the added failure mode
> of potentially failing "off" in flight, and the wiring and connections to
> them add to the already not-too-encouraging failure rate of the switch
> itself. The net result is a system design with a false sense of security
> and a reduced overall reliability, particularly with regard to in-flight
> failures.
>
> The solution to not accidentally having the prop start up while carrying
> the plane past the pit area and out to the flight line is to not plug in
> the battery until you're actually ready to fly. If you can't do that
> conveniently, then the problem is with your plane's airframe design and
> access, not with the electrical system.
>
>
> Don Stackhouse @ DJ Aerotech
> djaerotech@erinet.com
> http://www.djaerotech.com/
>
>
> *** Any complaints or problems? Send an email to monitor@ezonemag.com
> *** For help with list commands go to
> http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailhelp.htm
> *** For the list rules go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailrule.htm
>



*** Any complaints or problems? Send an email to monitor@ezonemag.com
*** For help with list commands go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailhelp.htm
*** For the list rules go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailrule.htm


This message has been scanned by GroupShield 6.0


--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
text/plain (text body -- kept)
text/html
---

*** Any complaints or problems? Send an email to monitor@ezonemag.com
*** For help with list commands go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailhelp.htm
*** For the list rules go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailrule.htm

[JDech@aol.com]

This message from JDech@aol.com brought to you by EFLIGHT!

Milt: As we do.

Cheers, Jack


--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
text/plain (text body -- kept)
text/html
---

*** Any complaints or problems? Send an email to monitor@ezonemag.com
*** For help with list commands go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailhelp.htm
*** For the list rules go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailrule.htm

[AZSPYDR@aol.com]

This message from AZSPYDR@aol.com brought to you by EFLIGHT!

In a message dated 10/19/2004 9:29:56 PM Mountain Standard Time,
Gofli@aol.com writes:
throttle b4 plugging in at all:D I use only castle and some jeti esc's, and
the jeti's I have have had the switches removed...I dont use the switch because
it is just another possible failure point, as several members have already
pointed out.. the only way to be sure is disconnect the pack.
I have inserted a toggle switch (radio shack-about $2) in the 'red' wire of
the CC 45 ESC to receiver lead. Switch (with green colored toggle) is mounted
on fuze. My convention is ; forward is ON, rearward is OFF. On brushed motors,
I have also used same type switch (red colored toggle) in power lead ESC to
motor. Since it is only used on 'cold' circuit, I have never burned on out . The
switches are rated at 10amps, 250 volts AC. Thats 2500 watts. Ted in AZ


--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
text/plain (text body -- kept)
text/html
---

*** Any complaints or problems? Send an email to monitor@ezonemag.com
*** For help with list commands go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailhelp.htm
*** For the list rules go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailrule.htm

[Stefan Vorkoetter]

This message from Stefan Vorkoetter <stefan@capable.ca> brought to you by EFLIGHT!

AZSPYDR@aol.com wrote:

> This message from AZSPYDR@aol.com brought to you by EFLIGHT!
>
> The
> switches are rated at 10amps, 250 volts AC. Thats 2500 watts. Ted in AZ

That's 2500 Watts if you are running your plane on 250 volts AC.

If you are running your plane on 7.2V DC, the switch is still only rated
for 10A.

A switch isn't rated for Watts. It's rated for a maximum current that it
can handle (e.g. 10A), and a maximum voltage that won't jump the contact
gap (e.g. 250V AC). The two ratings aren't related to one another. You
can't, for example, use it to switch 25,000V at 0.1A, or 25V at 100A.

Stefan

*** Any complaints or problems? Send an email to monitor@ezonemag.com
*** For help with list commands go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailhelp.htm
*** For the list rules go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailrule.htm

[Paul Breed]

This message from Paul Breed <Paul@Rasdoc.com> brought to you by EFLIGHT!

Also note that the switches are rated for 10 amps AC!!!!!!

The DC rating of a switch is always lower than the AC rating.

With AC current goes to zero 60 times a second extinguishing
the arc that forms when you open the switch.

With DC this arc does not extinguish, a DC rated switch will have a larger
arc gap and or a magnet
to pull the arc out over a longer travel path.

What this really means is that you can use an AC switch to turn ON a
DC circuit at it's AC rating, but you can not count on the switch to turn
it OFF.

When turning off a DC circuit under load with an AC switch the failure mode
is likely to weld
the AC contacts together so the switch never again turns off.

For an AC switch the current rating is generally set by the contact area of
the switch,
and the voltage is set by the switch gap when it is open.

I used to work as an engineer in a company that built large UPS systems.
The UL rated switches that were rated to break 300A DC and 450V DC
were huge! 3 feet x 2 feet hundreds of pounds and dollars.


Paul






*** Any complaints or problems? Send an email to monitor@ezonemag.com
*** For help with list commands go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailhelp.htm
*** For the list rules go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailrule.htm

[jwjuechter]

This message from "jwjuechter" <jwjuechter@cox.net> brought to you by EFLIGHT!

Stefan,

If I remember correctly, a switch is rated not for the current that it can
carry, but rather for the current it can break for either 10,000 or 100,000
times.

So, while the switch, when it is closed may carry current well in excess of
its rating, since it is not intended to break the current, such excess
current may be well tolerated.

When I have used a toggle switch in such manner, I used either a DPDT or a
DPST switch wired as a SPST switch to double its current-carrying
capability.

Note, however, that paralleling a double-pole switch does not increase its
current-breaking capability. That remains the same as the two poles can not
be expected to break simultaneously.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Stefan Vorkoetter" <stefan@capable.ca>
To: <eflight@ezonemag.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2004 8:01 AM
Subject: Re: [EFLT] Arming Switch --and the need thereof


> This message from Stefan Vorkoetter <stefan@capable.ca> brought to you by
> EFLIGHT!
>
> AZSPYDR@aol.com wrote:
>
>> This message from AZSPYDR@aol.com brought to you by EFLIGHT!
>>
>> The switches are rated at 10amps, 250 volts AC. Thats 2500 watts. Ted in
>> AZ
>
> That's 2500 Watts if you are running your plane on 250 volts AC.
>
> If you are running your plane on 7.2V DC, the switch is still only rated
> for 10A.
>
> A switch isn't rated for Watts. It's rated for a maximum current that it
> can handle (e.g. 10A), and a maximum voltage that won't jump the contact
> gap (e.g. 250V AC). The two ratings aren't related to one another. You
> can't, for example, use it to switch 25,000V at 0.1A, or 25V at 100A.
>
> Stefan
>
> *** Any complaints or problems? Send an email to monitor@ezonemag.com
> *** For help with list commands go to
> http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailhelp.htm
> *** For the list rules go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailrule.htm
>



*** Any complaints or problems? Send an email to monitor@ezonemag.com
*** For help with list commands go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailhelp.htm
*** For the list rules go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailrule.htm

[AZSPYDR@aol.com]

This message from AZSPYDR@aol.com brought to you by EFLIGHT!

This message from AZSPYDR@aol.com brought to you by EFLIGHT!

In a message dated 10/17/2004 10:33:08 AM Mountain Standard Time,
temer@c-zone.net writes:
from GWS). They were all much less expensive than the Castle Creations ESC
and they could afford to include a switch. I would sure feel more
comfortable if the Castle Creations ESC had included one as well. So--Guess
which brand I intend to buy next time.
Hi Ted, aside from your technical points, I would like to report the
unworldly customer service from Castle. Twice I sent the Castle 45 back, explaining
that 1, a. severe crash might have caused its trouble, and 2, that a heavy
bench test proceedure and/or stupidity may be the problem. Both times they sent a
replacement within a week at no charge. To assuage my guilt feeling I sent a
check for $25 to 'cover mailing" which they returned. I was and am astounded.
Ted (back in AZ-after sojourn in CA)


--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
text/plain (text body -- kept)
text/html
---

*** Any complaints or problems? Send an email to monitor@ezonemag.com
*** For help with list commands go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailhelp.htm
*** For the list rules go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailrule.htm

*** Any complaints or problems? Send an email to monitor@ezonemag.com
*** For help with list commands go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailhelp.htm
*** For the list rules go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailrule.htm

[AZSPYDR@aol.com]

This message from AZSPYDR@aol.com brought to you by EFLIGHT!

In a message dated 10/21/2004 6:03:50 AM Mountain Standard Time,
stefan@capable.ca writes:
switch isn't rated for Watts. It's rated for a maximum current that it
can handle (e.g. 10A), and a maximum voltage that won't jump the contact
gap (e.g. 250V AC). The two ratings aren't related to one another. You
can't, for example, use it to switch 25,000V at 0.1A, or 25V at 100A.
Thanks Stephan, learn something every day!. Since it is a cold circuit when I
switch it, it seems to work fine as a 'ultimate' safety. Ted


--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
text/plain (text body -- kept)
text/html
---

*** Any complaints or problems? Send an email to monitor@ezonemag.com
*** For help with list commands go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailhelp.htm
*** For the list rules go to http://www.ezonemag.com/pages/mailrule.htm