How we know that is disconnected? OSHA requirement. Lockout/tag out <br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 10:44 PM Peter Vogel <<a href="mailto:vogel.peter@gmail.com">vogel.peter@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div><div>That's not in the rule proposal <br><br><div>Sent from <a href="http://taps.io/outlookmobile" target="_blank">Outlook</a></div><br></div></div><div><br><br><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 7:50 PM -0700, "Vicente Bortone" <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:vincebrc@gmail.com" target="_blank">vincebrc@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="3D"ltr"">
Agree 100%. I will add that the physical disconnect needs to be easily visible. I guess that canopy has to be off the plane in order to demonstrate the physical disconnect. <br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 9:41 PM Peter Vogel via NSRCA-discussion <<a href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" target="_blank">nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a>> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div><div>And, once again, the requirement is not for an arming plug, but for a physical disconnect from power when the plane is unattended or unrestrained. </div><div><br></div><div>Peter+<br><br><div>Sent from <a href="http://taps.io/outlookmobile" target="_blank">Outlook</a></div><br></div></div><div><br><br><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 6:10 PM -0700, "Dave Lockhart via NSRCA-discussion" <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" target="_blank">nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="3D"ltr"">
<div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">John,<u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">My point was simply that “safe” is a relative term. Adding an arming plug requirement, or a physical disconnect requirement does not make a plane “safe”. Safer in some instances, but with an additional failure point. Most of the safety concerns / accidents / near misses, etc, I have witnessed would not have been any different if an arming plug was in use.<u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">So far as failsafe, it also won’t make an airplane “safe”, but, from my experience, if fail safe checks were implemented, that would do more to make the airplanes safe than adding an arming plug.<u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">Regards,<u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">Dave<u></u><u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p><div><div style="border:none;border-top:solid #b5c4df 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in"><p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:windowtext">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:windowtext"> John Gayer [mailto:<a href="mailto:jgghome@comcast.net" target="_blank">jgghome@comcast.net</a>] <br><b>Sent:</b> Sunday, May 17, 2015 11:48 PM<br><b>To:</b> Dave Lockhart; General pattern discussion<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Arming device<u></u><u></u></span></p></div></div><p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt">So...since no safety rule can totally prevent accidents, we should have none?<br>I suppose you are against seatbelts, airbags and helmets because they don't prevent all vehicle deaths?<br><br>I don't see the point in conjuring up ridiculous rule possibilities to put down reasonable safety rules.<br>Failsafe checks are intended to be educational rather than punitive so where's the harm?<br>Also, there is no rule being proposed that mandates any arming system at all but you must demonstrate a physical disconnect of the motor battery. I consider an arming plug/connection to be by far the easiest and safest way to satisfy the proposed rule.<br><br>John<u></u><u></u></p><div><p class="MsoNormal">On 5/17/2015 11:47 AM, Dave Lockhart via NSRCA-discussion wrote:<u></u><u></u></p></div><blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">So…..if we mandate arming systems….our airplanes will no longer be capable of causing carnage?</span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"> </span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">Maybe we should require all planes have an impact absorbing foam spinner and a shroud around the prop to make sure the spinning thing on front can’t cut anyone? Of course the kinetic energy of the moving plane will still be substantial enough to cause carnage….so maybe a combination of speed and weight limit to restrict the kinetic energy level to a point that it is deemed “safe”?</span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"> </span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">Accidents are accidents….and more likely to happen when safe procedures are not followed. Our airplanes will always be dangerous and capable of causing carnage….just like the cars we drive to the field in.</span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"> </span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">Requiring the fail safe be demonstrated is a far better idea….but it still won’t protect against someone bumping the throttle stick of an airplane that passes a fail safe check and has an arming system in it. To my recollection, I’d say about 20% of the fail safe checks at the 2011 WC were not successful on the first attempt….and a surprising number of the pilots needed assistance programming there radio to make the failsafe work.</span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"> </span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">Regards,</span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"> </span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">Dave</span><u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"> </span><u></u><u></u></p><div><div style="border:none;border-top:solid #b5c4df 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in"><p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""> NSRCA-discussion [<a href="mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org" target="_blank">mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org</a>] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Ronald Van Putte via NSRCA-discussion<br><b>Sent:</b> Sunday, May 17, 2015 1:09 PM<br><b>To:</b> General pattern discussion<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Arming device</span><u></u><u></u></p></div></div><p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p><p class="MsoNormal">Yeah! Even if we are capable of causing carnage with our unsafe airplane, it’s nobody else’s business. Don’t mess with my airplane! <u></u><u></u></p><div><p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p></div><div><p class="MsoNormal">Ron (with tongue in cheek)<u></u><u></u></p></div><div><p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p><div><blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt"><div><p class="MsoNormal">On May 17, 2015, at 11:30 AM, Keith Hoard via NSRCA-discussion <<a href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" target="_blank">nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a>> wrote:<u></u><u></u></p></div><p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p><div><div><div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Pattern is turning into a box checking, over-regulated government operation.<br><br>-Keith Hoard<br>-Sent from my Windows Phone</span><u></u><u></u></p></div></div><div><div class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:ArialMS"><hr size="3" width="100%" align="center"></span></div><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">From:<span> </span></span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><a href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" target="_blank">Vicente Bortone via NSRCA-discussion</a></span><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:ArialMS"><br></span><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Sent:<span> </span></span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">5/17/2015 9:04</span><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:ArialMS"><br></span><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">To:<span> </span></span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><a href="mailto:k6xyz@sbcglobal.net" target="_blank">David Harmon</a>;<span> </span><a href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" target="_blank">General pattern discussion</a></span><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:ArialMS"><br></span><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Subject:<span> </span></span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">[NSRCA-discussion] Arming device</span><u></u><u></u></p></div><div><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:ArialMS">TAG IN.....<br><br>Hi Dave,<br><br>I started to do that in my contest in Kansas City last year. This year in pilot meeting I said. " If you don't do it the first round will be zeroed. Well I think worked well"<br><br>John F.<br><br>You just made my day. I do more or less the same you do. I review a lot of projects. Clearly will all here analyzed the system and we know the steps could be used to mitigate a possible situation. That is the end of discussion in cases like this. Just give me a real possibility of tag in and tag out.<br><br>Jon,<br><br>Good research. Now you have to find what is the code that applies to model airplanes. I knew that there is no one specific code. However existing codes applies for similar systems. If all if them arrives to the same conclusion we will be in better shape if we just follow the intent of all codes you can find. Now try to find the specifics for a system similar to the one we have. I already know the answer so I don't need to ask our friend Google.<br><br>TAG OUT<span> </span></span><u></u><u></u></p><div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:ArialMS"><br><br>On Saturday, May 16, 2015, David Harmon via NSRCA-discussion <<a href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" target="_blank">nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a>> wrote:</span><u></u><u></u></p></div><div><blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #cccccc 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:ArialMS">With as much talk that has gone on and on andonandonandonandon about this<br>arming device......puff..puff....not much percentage.<br>Especially when it is so easy to check.....<br>Before the first takeoff of each pilot on the first round....the helper<br>holds the plane off the ground and the pilot turns off the transmitter.<br>The judges can verify that the motor does not start.<br>Easy....no drama.<br><br>Oh wait....this was never done with glow....but I HAVE seen several guys<br>chawed up by a howling YS.<br>One time a guys airplane chased him in a circle as he was trying to catch<br>it...he had one leg in front of one wing and for an old guy he moved pretty<br>quick.<br>I can't describe how long I laughed about that incident.<br><br>In the end....my opinion is checking the fail-safe function should be a must<br>at each contest.<br><br>David Harmon<br>Sperry, OK<br><br>-----Original Message-----</span><u></u><u></u></p></blockquote></div><div><blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #cccccc 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:ArialMS">From: NSRCA-discussion [<a href="mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org" target="_blank">mailto:</a><a href="mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org" target="_blank">nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org</a>] On</span><u></u><u></u></p></blockquote></div><div><blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #cccccc 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:ArialMS">Behalf Of Ron Van Putte via NSRCA-discussion<br>Sent: Saturday, May 16, 2015 4:58 PM</span><u></u><u></u></p></blockquote></div><div><blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #cccccc 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt"><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:ArialMS"><br>To: General pattern discussion<br>Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Arming device</span><u></u><u></u></p></blockquote></div><div><blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #cccccc 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:ArialMS">I have seen too many situations where an ID10T error caused serious damage<br>that would have been precluded by the use of a shorting plug.<br><br>What percentage of pilots’ transmitters would fail the fail safe test?<br>Anybody?<br><br>Ron Van Putte<br><br>On May 16, 2015, at 4:08 PM, Whodaddy Whodaddy via NSRCA-discussion<br><<a href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" target="_blank">nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a>> wrote:<br><br>> Seems like we have to many people with to much time on their hands sitting<br>around fantasizing about what might happen if .... Really.... if u cant<br>control the aircraft in all aspects then u prolly shouldn't have one... Let<br>alone legislate what i need to be doing with mine...<br>><br>><br>> Gary<br>></span><u></u><u></u></p></blockquote></div><div><blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #cccccc 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:ArialMS">> Sent from my iPhone<br>></span><u></u><u></u></p></blockquote></div><div><blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #cccccc 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:ArialMS"> </span><u></u><u></u></p></blockquote></div><div><blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #cccccc 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:ArialMS">>> On May 16, 2015, at 3:58 PM, Jon Lowe via NSRCA-discussion</span><u></u><u></u></p></blockquote></div><div><blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #cccccc 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt"><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:ArialMS"><<a href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" target="_blank">nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a>> wrote:<br>>><br>>> Code doesn't apply to model airplanes. Cars do not disconnect the<br>battery, except on race cars with a disconnect switch in case of a wreck.<br>Normal road cars do not, and modern cars leave a lot of things connected<br>when the ignition is off. A lot of cars have underhood fans that run for<br>awhile after the car is shut off.<br>>><br>>> If this was a big issue, AMA would address it with all model aircraft,<br>not just pattern. Electric is common in helis, controline, etc. We are over<br>killing this something awful.<br>>><br>>> Jon<br>>><br>>>> On May 16, 2015 2:11 PM, Vicente Bortone via NSRCA-discussion<br><<a href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" target="_blank">nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a>> wrote:<br>>>><br>>>> the ignition switch.<br>>>><br>>>>> On Saturday, May 16, 2015, Vicente Bortone <<a href="mailto:vincebrc@gmail.com" target="_blank">vincebrc@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>>>>><br>>>>><br>>>>><br>>>>>> On Saturday, May 16, 2015, Del R via NSRCA-discussion<br><<a href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" target="_blank">nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a>> wrote:<br>>>>>><br>>>>>> The nice thing about being brought up around GUNS.. It teaches<br>>>>>> people to respect it always as though it is loaded and cocked<br>>>>>> ready to deliver its physical life altering energy!!!.. < tic ><br>>>>>><br>>>>>><br>>>>>>><br>>>>>>> ----- Original Message -----<br>>>>>>> From: David Cook via NSRCA-discussion<br>>>>>>> To: Jim Woodward ; General pattern discussion<br>>>>>>> Sent: Saturday, May 16, 2015 10:48 AM<br>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Arming device<br>>>>>>><br>>>>>>> Just to open the can of worms from the other end.<br>>>>>>> Now that I have seen the damage a runaway can do to a pool table even<br>with an external arming device, I have begun to make it a common practice to<br>remove the prop from the electric planes any time I am not at the field<br>flying. Store the ammunition and the pin under two different locks. How easy<br>is it to be careless in the shop or transporting a plane. This thread could<br>just explode with stories of mishaps we have made or come way too close to.<br>>>>>>> You just can't be too carful with these things!!!<br>>>>>>> DC<br>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>> On Sat, May 16, 2015 at 10:21 AM, Jim Woodward via NSRCA-discussion<br><<a href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" target="_blank">nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a>> wrote:<br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>> ... Going electric induces a mental physchosis that requires<br>>>>>>>> everyone else to switch, then go and change the rules for glow<br>>>>>>>> :)<br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone<br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>>> On May 16, 2015, at 9:38 AM, Keith Hoard via NSRCA-discussion<br><<a href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" target="_blank">nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a>> wrote:<br>>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>>> I think the YS guys should have their caller remove the fuel tank<br>and glow plug before picking up the plane and exiting the runway . . .<br>>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>>> From: NSRCA-discussion<br>>>>>>>>> [<a href="mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org" target="_blank">mailto:</a><a href="mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org" target="_blank">nsrca-discussion-bounces@lists.nsrca.org</a>] On Behalf Of<br>>>>>>>>> precisionaero via NSRCA-discussion<br>>>>>>>>> Sent: Saturday, May 16, 2015 8:38 AM<br>>>>>>>>> To: General pattern discussion<br>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Arming device<br>>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>>> I think we should reconfigure a YS engine to drive a generator to<br>supply electricity to the electric motor.<br>>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>>> Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S™ III, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone<br>>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>>> -------- Original message --------<br>>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>>> From: Peter Vogel via NSRCA-discussion<br>>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>>> Date:05/16/2015 09:31 (GMT-05:00)<br>>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>>> To: General pattern discussion ,<span> </span><a href="mailto:ronlock@comcast.net" target="_blank">ronlock@comcast.net</a>, David<br>>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] Arming device<br>>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>>> I think we're all in agreement, which is why the rules proposal we<br>put forth requires a *physical* break in the circuit!<br>>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>>> Sent from Outlook<br>>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, May 16, 2015 at 6:16 AM -0700, "ronlock--- via<br>NSRCA-discussion" <<a href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" target="_blank">nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a>> wrote:<br>>>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>>>> I'm in agreement.<br>>>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>>>> Ron Lockhart<br>>>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>>>> ________________________________<br>>>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>>>> From: "David via NSRCA-discussion"<br>>>>>>>>>> <<a href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" target="_blank">nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a>><br>>>>>>>>>> To:<span> </span><a href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" target="_blank">nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><br>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Saturday, May 16, 2015 1:14:21 AM<br>>>>>>>>>> Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] Arming device<br>>>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>>>> I'm not trying to bring up a sore subject but this has been<br>bugging me since it was up a while back. I am the senior electronics<br>technician in the plasma physics department at the University of Wisconsin.<br>About a third of what I do is make interlock circuits for the Madison<br>Symmetric Torus. I know that the best way of keeping things safe is to<br>remove the potential energy from a circuit to keep bad things from<br>happening. The problem with depending on a circuit such as the emcotec type<br>of disconnect or to just relying solely on the radio and ESC to keep things<br>safe is failure modes. You can plan for all different failure types but to<br>make it a circuit that isn't a lead brick being added to the plane there are<br>compromises that have to be made. This leads to designing systems that may<br>deal with only the most common types of failures. For example most common<br>diodes and tantalum capacitors usually fail in a shorted mode, but not<br>always. Many carbon resistors will decrease in résistance just prior to<br>opening up. You get the idea, there are just so many possibilities and<br>combinations that in my opinion the only real way to safe a power system is<br>to disconnect the energy source. Ok, now I feel better that I said<br>something.<br>>>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>>>> David<br>>>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________<br>>>>>>>>>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list<br>>>>>>>>>><span> </span><a href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" target="_blank">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><br>>>>>>>>>><span> </span><a href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion" target="_blank">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a><br>>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________<br>>>>>>>>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list<br>>>>>>>>><span> </span><a href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" target="_blank">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><br>>>>>>>>><span> </span><a href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion" target="_blank">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a><br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>><br>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________<br>>>>>>>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list<br>>>>>>>><span> </span><a href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" target="_blank">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><br>>>>>>>><span> </span><a href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion" target="_blank">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a><br>>>>>>><br>>>>>>><br>>>>>>> ________________________________<br>>>>>>><br>>>>>>> _______________________________________________<br>>>>>>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list<br>>>>>>><span> </span><a href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" target="_blank">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><br>>>>>>><span> </span><a href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion" target="_blank">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a><br>>>>><br>>>>><br>>>>><br>>>>> --<br>>>>> Vicente "Vince" Bortone<br>>>><br>>>><br>>>><br>>>> --<br>>>> Vicente "Vince" Bortone<br>>> _______________________________________________<br>>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list<br>>><span> </span><a href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" target="_blank">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><br>>><span> </span><a href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion" target="_blank">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a><br>> _______________________________________________<br>> NSRCA-discussion mailing list<br>><span> </span><a href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" target="_blank">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><br>><span> </span><a href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion" target="_blank">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a><br><br>_______________________________________________<br>NSRCA-discussion mailing list<br><a href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" target="_blank">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><br><a href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion" target="_blank">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a><br><br>_______________________________________________<br>NSRCA-discussion mailing list<br><a href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" target="_blank">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><br><a href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion" target="_blank">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a></span><u></u><u></u></p></blockquote></div></div><p class="MsoNormal"><Mail Attachment.txt><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:ArialMS">_______________________________________________<br>NSRCA-discussion mailing list<br></span><a href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:ArialMS">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</span></a><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:ArialMS"><br></span><a href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion" target="_blank"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:ArialMS">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</span></a><u></u><u></u></p></div></blockquote></div><p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p></div><p class="MsoNormal"><br><br><br><u></u><u></u></p><pre>_______________________________________________<u></u><u></u></pre><pre>NSRCA-discussion mailing list<u></u><u></u></pre><pre><a href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" target="_blank">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><u></u><u></u></pre><pre><a href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion" target="_blank">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a><u></u><u></u></pre></blockquote><p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p></div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>_______________________________________________<br>
NSRCA-discussion mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" target="_blank">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion" target="_blank">http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</a></blockquote></div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div></blockquote></div>