Reducing Circuit Breaker Count

[BobTurner]

Originally Posted by salty

...assuming the total draw for all of them on at once will be less than 5 amps...

Uh, if you have 4 things, each of which draws 1/2 amp, isn’t 4 x 1/2 less than 5?

[salty]

Originally Posted by BobTurner

Uh, if you have 4 things, each of which draws 1/2 amp, isn’t 4 x 1/2 less than 5?

Agree. I was just spelling it out. The list was kind of arbitrary, so it may not have been clear.

[Mich48041]

If the fuse blows, how do you know which wire or load caused it?
Troubleshooting intermittent problems can be very frustrating.
Make it easier by having one fuse for each load.

[Larry DeCamp]

I have read on this forum :
* Why would you reset a breaker in the air ? It is telling you something is not good and it did its job. Go land if you can't do without that function and troubleshoot.
* Fuses are to protect the wire, so something is probably really wrong if you blow a properly sized fuse..

B&C advise a 5A breaker for the ALT Field because transients (not faults) can blow a properly sized fuse.

I added a breaker for the electric flaps, anticipating some binding or peak transients that may not be flight terminating.

I am sure the more seasoned pilots on here can add some value for your decisions.

[rocketman1988]

It is not possible to create a perfect system; if you drill down far enough, you will ALWAYS find a failure mode.

It is about risk mitigation, which is different for everyone.

You want to use 35 circuit breakers? Do it.

You want to use a $5, made in China fuse block? Go for it.

You want to use an expensive vpx? Your choice.

There is NO perfect system and there is NO one size fits all solution...

[salty]

I had a breaker trip, I reset it, and it never tripped again for about 250 hours now, under the same conditions.

Just a data point. Nothing more.

[PilotjohnS]

So i am making the following updates based on all this wonderful feed back (thank you all).
1) things that are not important for continued flight, like cabin lights, USB power, defrost fans, etc are going on fuses.
2) I am adding an extra fuse to allow me to power up the panel, with an external power supply,without closing the battery contactor (master switch); mainly for data loading and software updates.
3) Most of the things that have switches, I am putting on fuses
4) I am using breakers for things that I want to reset in flight and try again, like the alt field , fuel pump and flaps.
5) I am using breakers for things i want to turn off in flight if they fail, like trim power, each G3X box, etc.
6) added separate fuses for left and right landing lights: what is the chance both will blow at night, on a near minimum approach, 5 minutes before the tower closes, and I have to go pee?

7)I did not move the ELT up because I think i need to change batteries every year, but I might still.
8) added three spare fuses spots and three spare circuit breaker holes so the panel will never look "done".

[DRMA]

A couple of minor thoughts on your updates:

2) Any quality external regulated power supply will have built-in over current protection, so you may not need this fuse, unless you have a long wire running to the power supply that is left in place and you want to protect that wire in case of a fault.

8) You can find plastic hole plugs for the empty future breaker holes. You can either paint them to match the panel, or use black plugs. That's what I did for the future breaker spaces on my panel and they keep the panel looking finished (no open holes).

Cheers

[N49ex]

Originally Posted by AlpineYoda

What are people's experiences with vertical power and similar devices?

Replacing all the circuit breakers with a single point of failure seems like a design flaw to me, but maybe I'm missing something. The ability to pull a circuit breaker when something goes wrong is an idea that goes back to George Westinghouse. Replacing all your breakers with something that depends on software and microchips seems like we are introducing another point of failure, and one that will catastrophically affect everything in the plane.

Don't get me wrong - I love the idea of elegant solutions. Aveo wingtips will replace a bunch of individual lights on my plane. G3x and G5 will replace six packs, vacuum tubes, and standby instruments. But replacing the ultimate safety device in the event of a short, electrical fire, or other emergency with a black box that kills every circuit in the plane when it fails seems wrong to me.

What am I missing?

I'm not on a campaign to malign VPower, but just my opinion:

I'm well past this decision in my plane, as it was built with Klixon pull-able breakers. But as a "senior" and electrical engineer, I wouldn't have it any other way. Ability to pull individual circuits easily, electro-mechanically, and reset as well (not hunting around in menus and screens). While the Vertical Power approach seems to be so popular in the RV world, the idea of having software and silicon (that often enough would just as soon head back to the beach) involved in my power paths turns me off (pardon the pun). And a friend with an RV-10 across the hanger from me is often enough on the phone with the VP guys with some kind of problem. I'll take breakers (and fuses in selected circuits, as mentioned) any day.

[Fenderbean]

Since this was something I was going to ask in my own thread I will ask here since its on topic. I was going to using something like the VPX in my build vs the traditional setup but then I saw the cost. The VPX kind of compares the cost of items it replaces but that doesnt add up to the 2100$ and 1500$ cost of the VPX Pro/VPX power system. My question is this, when you remove the fact it replaces some items and the time spent wiring does is this a worth while product?