X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com X-SpamCatcher-Score: 2 [X] Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2007 22:19:49 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from elasmtp-masked.atl.sa.earthlink.net ([209.86.89.68] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.1.7) with ESMTP id 1939933 for lml@lancaironline.net; Fri, 23 Mar 2007 21:10:58 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.86.89.68; envelope-from=colyncase@earthlink.net DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=BjHehmB/a9Y4OoOpJ1A//yYILXUOlgiL4yHMcqmjRX8hOYxCSuGibm2li9vIJ/mz; h=Received:Message-ID:From:To:References:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Received: from [216.57.118.220] (helo=ccaselt) by elasmtp-masked.atl.sa.earthlink.net with asmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1HUulp-0001fW-Og for lml@lancaironline.net; Fri, 23 Mar 2007 21:10:14 -0400 X-Original-Message-ID: <011001c76db1$2d0045a0$2512020a@nvidia.com> From: "colyncase on earthlink" X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" References: Subject: Re: [LML] Re: batteries. X-Original-Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2007 18:10:12 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_010D_01C76D76.7FED11C0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3028 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3028 X-ELNK-Trace: 63d5d3452847f8b1d6dd28457998182d7e972de0d01da94085e547cb17339d9568435b01f356076c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 216.57.118.220 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_010D_01C76D76.7FED11C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Nope. Your sophisticated computation is in error. the two batteries I was referring to are main battery and backup battery = not the two halves of one of those. My point was, if you have two virtual batteries isn't that good enough = redundancy without further being able to scrounge the good half of one = of them (effectively making 3 power busses). re: the alternators I meant lower mtbf than battery. sorry. but in = practice if the alternator fails, you go to the battery. So the battery = is what counts in terms of keeping you from SOL. Therefore, you could = ignore the alternator MTBF. ....or at least the improvement for having = a "3rd" battery is unaffected by the alternator MTBF. Colyn ------=_NextPart_000_010D_01C76D76.7FED11C0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Nope. Your sophisticated computation is in = error.

the two batteries I was referring to are main battery and backup = battery=20 not the two halves of one of those.

My point was, if you have two virtual batteries isn't that good = enough=20 redundancy without further being able to scrounge the good half of one = of them=20 (effectively making 3 power busses).

re: the alternators I meant lower mtbf than battery. =20 sorry. but in practice if the alternator fails, you go to = the=20 battery. So the battery is what counts in terms of keeping you = from=20 SOL. Therefore, you could ignore the alternator = MTBF. =20 ....or at least the improvement for having a "3rd" battery is unaffected = by the=20 alternator MTBF.

Colyn

------=_NextPart_000_010D_01C76D76.7FED11C0--