Hartstoc
Well Known Member
One of the hats I wear is that of a home automation specialist. In home automation we still use individual resettable breakers, but in many respects the Vertical Power VP-X resembles a home automation controller. ?Switches? installed do not actually switch anything at all, they simple change the state of a yes/no function withing the VP-X, and it exececutes whatever switching tasks it has been programmed to perform in response. This can be very powerful. (In my home a keypad button by my bedside has programmed as a ?good night? button, which dutifully turns off any lights left on on all five buildings on my property, brings up a seasonally appropriate set of outdoor lighting, arms the security system, and closes all blinds. Doing all that with conventional switches would be impossible.)
The VP-X also provides a good deal of information about the health of the electrical system, and it eliminates a plethora of potential failure points associated with all the crimp connectors and load-carrying switches it eliminates, so the thought of installing one with my upcoming all-Garmin panel upgrade is pretty suductive.
Yet somehow, I?m having trouble pulling the trigger. My panel is being designed with redundancy and failure tolerance in IFR scenarios as a high priority, and there are aspects of the VP-X that may be contrary to this goal. First, access to and control of the VP-X requires a functioning EFIS, a G3X Touch in my case. While it is true that even with an EFIS failure, the Vp-X should continue doing its job after an EFIS failure, the thought of this is a bit unsettling. If the failure involves other components, how can you investigate? Another concern is that the VP-X is software/firmware dependent, and a problem there could bring down the whole shooting match without recourse. That is why I use software-free lightspeed ignitions instead ofthe other choices. Although the VP-X would eliminate a large number of failure points, few if any of those would be very disabling by themselves. These concerns make the already-installed switches and breakers in my panel look a lot more attractive.
So, even though my home-automation experience draws me toward the VP-X, I find myself leaning the other way at the moment. Any insights or opinions out there would be much appreciated, and would surely help with the final decision.- Otis
The VP-X also provides a good deal of information about the health of the electrical system, and it eliminates a plethora of potential failure points associated with all the crimp connectors and load-carrying switches it eliminates, so the thought of installing one with my upcoming all-Garmin panel upgrade is pretty suductive.
Yet somehow, I?m having trouble pulling the trigger. My panel is being designed with redundancy and failure tolerance in IFR scenarios as a high priority, and there are aspects of the VP-X that may be contrary to this goal. First, access to and control of the VP-X requires a functioning EFIS, a G3X Touch in my case. While it is true that even with an EFIS failure, the Vp-X should continue doing its job after an EFIS failure, the thought of this is a bit unsettling. If the failure involves other components, how can you investigate? Another concern is that the VP-X is software/firmware dependent, and a problem there could bring down the whole shooting match without recourse. That is why I use software-free lightspeed ignitions instead ofthe other choices. Although the VP-X would eliminate a large number of failure points, few if any of those would be very disabling by themselves. These concerns make the already-installed switches and breakers in my panel look a lot more attractive.
So, even though my home-automation experience draws me toward the VP-X, I find myself leaning the other way at the moment. Any insights or opinions out there would be much appreciated, and would surely help with the final decision.- Otis