> >Originally, I decided for redundancy because I wanted to make the >certification people happy, but thinking of it, redundancy is also an >answer to real life problems in aviation: bad luck, and failure to notice >trouble in the making. >Serge Vidal ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
When it comes to redundancy, we must all weigh the benifits of backup to the penalities of weight, space, complexity, etc. and the consequences of not having the backup. We then determine a risk factor that we agree to accept or not. To some, the act of getting in to an airplane is a greater risk than they are willing to accept. During my building process I decided the penality of weight for a backup system to power my electric fuel pumps in a no-gravity feed system was outweighted by the reduction in the risk factor. That decission saved my bacon at twelve hours into the test flight phase when I lost my main electrical buss to a bad connection. I was able to continue the flight and troubleshoot and repair the problem on the ground. The price I pay on each flight since then for 150+ hours carrying the weight of that system still seems like a bargin to me. I tried to plan ahead to make the safest airplane possible, within reason, and now try to forget about all the "what ifs" when I go out to fly and just try to relax and have a good time. I guess I could worry about the hangar falling in on me during preflight but hey, you gotta' cut it off somewere. Larry Flesner
