What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Individual Circuit Breakers vs Electronic Circuit Breaker System

Status
Not open for further replies.

Saville

Well Known Member
Hi all,

These days one can buy Electronic Circuit Breaker (ECB) systems which can replace a panel full of individual breakers (ICB).

I'd like to start a thread which discusses the pros and cons of ICBvs ECB.
There are some obvious comparisons like simplified wiring and added information (e.g. a bulb went out) of ECB's vs much cheaper ICB systems.

What I'm most interested in is finding out of ECB's have proven to be a good reliable ICB replacement. But I'm sure there are other considerations I am unaware of.

In the future I'll be replacing my ICB setup and the more info I have the better choices I can make.

Thanks
 
My $0.02 -

I love the idea of electronic circuit breakers but balked at putting one complex software-controlled device like the Vertical Power system in the middle of all my power runs. If ECBs were available in a more modular and individually-controllable form, I'd have been more interested in using them when I designed my electrical system.

Not bashing the VP system, I think it's a great product and my friends who have it, love it. It just didn't fit into my particular cost/risk/reward math.

HTH

Dave
 
Last edited:
Popcorn popped and buttered. :cool:

Actually I have just over 1300 hours of trouble-free service from my VPX, and I love it. Here are my plusses:

- Way easier wiring, including the runs to/from the switches, which only require the smallest gauge of wiring to the switch and a local ground (saves weight).

- Configurable, then reconfigurable.

- Opens the circuit for more than just an over-amperage. It detects short circuits, over-current faults, open circuits, and a stuck switch. Then it tells you why it opened a circuit.

- Allows device switching/operation from the VPX page in my HDX even if the component's normal switch failed.

- Dual buss setup. You can assign a circuit to one, the other, or both internal busses.

- Lighting/wig wag control, including a speed switch-over point for solid vs wig-wag lighting. Below 90 KIAS, my landing and taxi lights switch from coordinated wig-wag to solid.

- Pitch trim speed switch. Above 100 KIAS, my pitch trim motor runs as half voltage. This allows more precise pitch trim control at higher cruise speeds.

- EFIS Integration. I call up the VPX page to see exactly how my alternator, battery, and VPX power, voltage, amperage levels are doing.

And many more. Hey, I'm a fan!

https://verticalpower.com/index.php/products/vp-x
 
Last edited:
My $0.02 -

I love the idea of electronic circuit breakers but balked at putting one complex software-controlled device like the Vertical Power system in the middle of all my power runs. If ECBs were available in a more modular and individually-controllable form, I'd have been more interested in using them when I designed my electrical system.

Not bashing the VP system, I think it's a great product and my friends who have the system love it. It just didn't fit into my particular risk/reward math.

HTH

Dave

What Dave said, plus I don't like to put all my eggs in one basket.
 
Before buying into "way easier wiring", obtain a copy of Marc Ausman's book, which fairly illustrates both approaches with wiring diagrams. Marc created the VPX.

There is a tendency to conflate electronic circuit breakers with software switching devices like the VPX. One is a device, while the other is a system which happens to incorporate the device. I too would be delighted to install price competitive individual ECBs, but I'll pass on the black box system. The functionalities are not worth the AOG risk.
 
There is a tendency to conflate electronic circuit breakers with software switching devices like the VPX. One is a device, while the other is a system which happens to incorporate the device.

To be clear, when I write "ECB" I'm speaking of boxes like (but not limited to) the Vertical Power VP-X box.

The system.

Thanks for your views on the topic.
 
All just my look at it...

The system I found easiest to install, & actually liked the best, was the Advanced Control Module. You have to work closely with them to get the appropriate prebuilt harnesses for your selected equipment but installation practically turns into a plug & play avionics/electrical system.

The VPX for an overall power control system comes in close but involves requiring a greater understanding of how it all works, and in my view, a bit more complicated to install & electrical control.

Switch/circuit breaker panels such as the ExpBus, Composite Design, MGL boards, etc., I found their pre-packaged approach never fit the equipment/circuit needs of panels I was building. Inevitably I would have to change the circuit assignments (re-labeling not easy!) or was required to add more circuits (& breakers) for unique equipment (not 2 panels were ever the same...). If you decide on one of these panels, do your research on which breaker technology that mfgr employed, not all are desirable.

There is always an argument for a good old fashioned breaker (or fuse) & switch. But it's also so easy to talk yourself into the absolute need for a big control box, just add lots of bucks.
 
Last edited:
FUSES

What is wrong with fuses? Over 600 RV-12s are flying, all with fuses.
Fuses are light weight, inexpensive, easy to troubleshoot and replace by anyone. There is no "black box" to fail and ground the aircraft. Fuses are not any harder to wire than any other circuit protection method. The hard part of aircraft wiring is not the power circuits, it is the interface between various avionics. Electronic circuit breakers will not help with that. Save thousands. Use fuses.
 
You can add ATO Style Circuit Breakers (manually resettable) to the list of options if you do not like fuses.

I initially looked at going with a VPX and ended up using a 24 circuit Eaton ATO fuse panel with 3 separate power busses (Buss A, Essential Buss B, Avionics) with ATO fuses that light up when blown for my RV-12. Eliminating single point failures on critical items and KISS ended up being the deciding factors.

Waytek is a great place to see what is available for 12/24V vehicle power distribution, protection, and control in both Electro-Mechanical and Solid State versions.

John Salak
Rv-12 N896HS
 
I rarely join in on these popcorn discussions, but just an observation to keep the debate on equal terms….I often hear folks who have gone with an electronic bus control system (ECB system) say that it is “much easier to install” - but unless you have installed both types, you really can’t make this claim. It might be - but the only folks who can say that with certainty is those with experience on both sides.

I have installed many traditional systems, and can say that they aren’t terribly complex to do - every wire has two ends. I can’t speak to the electronic systems because I haven’t installed one.

Paul
 
Last edited:
I have...

I have installed traditional circuit breakers and now a VPX Pro. I can't necessarily say that one is "easier" to install than the other, that would really depend on what you are wiring.

In my -10, I used every available circuit in the VPX. The box was mounted and wired, and it works as advertised and I have had ZERO issues with it.

You will, for certain, have the "Use circuit breakers because that is how it's always been done" crowd. The good news is joining that club is optional.

Build what you want, want what you build...and have fun...
 
Like Paul, I'm a bit hesitant to stick my head into the mouth of this alligator, but unfortunately can't resist:)

Full disclosure, I have never installed a VPX or similar. This is entirely my opinion based on many years a Bell Labs electrical engineer with lots of experience in power electronics as well as software products and development.

I have conventional (Klixon, pull-able) breakers, and my neighbor has the VP-X in his RV10. On one hand he talks about the ease of changing things and adding loads, on the other he's several times talked about having to call the VP-X folks with problems, questions on configuration, something strange happening, like a bunch of loads being switched off for no apparent reason, etc. On the Van's forum, folks are all nuts about it, but I don't get it:

- Adds software and semiconductors and licensing and data configuration in a path that for simplicity and reliability sake in my opinion is best served by a wire going through a breaker whose state you can passively see.
- Keep hearing of strange behavior that folk are calling the company about, and some cases of unit failure! That doesn't happen summarily with a breaker array!
- In terms of installation simplicity on one hand you have power input to a box and units connecting their power wires to that box; on the other hand you have power input to a bus with breakers, and unit wires going to the breakers. What's the big difference in terms of wiring?
- In terms of future system mods, yes, for breakers you may need to add, move/replace wires, re-label. Big deal.

Just say'in!!!

Reinhard Metz
 
So...

So, it amounts to Build what you want, want what you build...

The VPX has been in service long enough for people to make their own decisions on it's reliability and operational difficulty...it isn't a "New" product...
 
Before buying into "way easier wiring", obtain a copy of Marc Ausman's book, which fairly illustrates both approaches with wiring diagrams. Marc created the VPX.
+1 on Marc's book, well worth the $ even with the VPX sales pitch. It's like the "Aeroelectric Connection" but with a much higher signal-to-noise ratio. ;)
You can add ATO Style Circuit Breakers (manually resettable) to the list of options if you do not like fuses.
Wow...I didn't know these things existed! Not to draw the thread too far off topic, but I'd like to hear from anyone who's used these.

ds
 
Last edited:
So, it amounts to Build what you want, want what you build...

The VPX has been in service long enough for people to make their own decisions on it's reliability and operational difficulty...it isn't a "New" product...

I don't have any information on the VPX reliability nor do I know about other such systems......

That's one reason I opened the topic.
 
Vpx

Yes, I get that. Hopefully you can get some info from folks that have direct experience with both legacy breakers and the vpx.
 
I was wondering whether to use a small switch or an optical sensor for the canopy lock light on my RV-3B. A well-qualified friend said that the switch is MUCH easier to troubleshoot if there's a problem.

A good lesson and it may apply here, too. Make it easy to maintain.

Dave
 
The VPX is painted red. Sweet!:cool:

The Advanced is fire engine red too...

In my day I've done 1 Advanced, 2 VPX, 1 ExpBus, 2 Comp Design, & probably 5 or so conventional breaker or fuse buss panels. The big boxes were for customers & they seemed to like the results. My preference for my personal planes has been conventional, because they were simple, easy & cheap(er).
 
Sometimes simple ain’t simple

From Richard’s post above,


- Keep hearing of strange behavior that folk are calling the company about, and some cases of unit failure! That doesn't happen summarily with a breaker array!

Um…I’m pretty new here, but I don’t think I’m outa line to assume that any search like “strange electrical behavior” on VAF will net a LOT of posts asking for help with their conventional electrical system that is acting strangely. I imagine most of the time strange behavior is just the delta between intended, designed and installed logic. Maybe the verbiage should read “that doesn’t happen summarily with a properly designed, installed and operated breaker array.”
More importantly to the OP: I don’t have the product specific data (MTBF?) but the OSH21 VPX rep claim was 1 failure in 500k+ flight hours. (I don’t know the nature of that failure…full vs partial). Hard data would add greatly to the discussion. Anyone?

I do appreciate the specific cons Richard (and others) brought up in his full post. Specifics are super helpful. There is limited value in generic statements about preferred eggs-to-basket ratios.
 
While reading with a mouth-full of popcorn, I have just three words to add to the discussion:

Single. Point. Failure.
 
...and

...and, if one drills down far enough, one will always find a single. point. failure.

It is all about risk mitigation; there has never been, and will never be, a perfect system...
 
Uh oh, it's mighty dark inside the mouth of this alligator! :)

I'll start by saying I am not a fan of black box power control. I participated in the design, marketing and installation of just such a box for military aircraft applications. The comments about adding semiconductors and software to what essentially is a hardware function are right on the money. Unless there's some very specific benefit one absolutely has to have from electronic control of power switching, generally the added complexity and higher inherent cost and lower MTBF of black box power controllers makes more traditional switching and circuit protection a wiser choice.

Now I'll also say I've spent a lot of years upside down under instrument panels in everything from attack helicopters to heavy transport aircraft. From those years of experience I will share the following thoughts.

1) The capacity to confirm power settings both visually and by touch put switches and breakers MILES ahead of any black box. When the cockpit goes black dark on a moonless night, running one's fingers over the breakers and switches is a huge advantage, particularly when one is also supposed to be keeping the airplane right side up!

2) Switches and breakers DO FAIL. I've replaced enough of them to say that the combined breaker-switches tend to be the least reliable of the gang. The typical Klixon pullable breakers (7277 or similar series) are generally reliable UNLESS somebody has been trying to use the breaker as a switch. Just don't do it!!!! MS-style switches have terrific reliability. Many switches I've seen in amateur-built aircraft are not of high quality, particularly the ones which have been chosen because they feature Fast-On terminals for wire connection. Again, spend the $$ and the time to get good switches and connect your wires to the switches using AMP PIDG ring tongue terminals and screws. You can't get more reliable than this, period.

3) Since switches and breakers do fail, one important pilot skill we should all develop is the ability to detect the warning signs of impending failure. In switches we sometimes feel the switch getting "gritty" before it dies. We also feel the cam-over point changing or becoming less defined. These are signs of mechanical wear-out. Circuit breakers often become somewhat resistive before failing. Running a finger over the panel surrounding the breaker can sometimes alert you to a breaker that's running warm - if it's warm there's something wrong. If a breaker suddenly becomes easy to pull, get a new one, quick, because it's going to fail soon!

4) Never, ever use the slot-head screws that come with some Klixon breakers. Toss 'em and install Phillips head screws. You'll thank me later!

5) If you can find flexible bus cables rather than solid bus bars, use 'em. They make replacement of a failed breaker much easier. HINT: Some business jets and regional airliners which are being retired are good places to source these bus cables.

6) Almost universally, the failure of a breaker or switch effects a single system, the system for which the breaker or switch is controlling power. Failure of a "black box" power controller can (and does) effect everything it controls.

7) A local builder used Poly-fuses in his aircraft - so far they have performed flawlessly. They are tiny compared to a traditional breaker but that tiny package does make for some challenges in connecting to them and installing/isolating them in the aircraft.

8) If using automotive blade-style fuses, the LED failure indicating ones are absolutely the bees knees. They make troubleshooting almost as easy as feeling which CB has popped.

9) If there's any way you can do it, install a spare circuit breaker and wire it to a spare switch. This makes addition of any equipment, even just for a quick test, a zero-fuss affair.

A few years ago I was asked to help troubleshoot two electrical faults in the same week. Two different airplanes. Two different sets of symptoms. In both cases it was a Klixon circuit breaker which had failed. In one instance the aircraft was to dispatch the next morning for its annual pilgrimage to Oshkosh, so it had to get fixed. The CB had simply failed open-circuit even though its plunger was fully pressed into place. It took me longer to get under the panel than it did to troubleshoot the problem. I briefed the owner that I would move the wire from the dead breaker to a spare breaker and that he would have to label the spare breaker. Problem fixed in a few minutes. In the other aircraft it only took a few minutes to discover that when I put my finger on the head of the breaker's plunger the VHF radio would blink out. Hmmm, that was easy! Luckily I had a spare breaker in my toolbox - a few minutes work and then we had to perform the obligatory post-maintenance test flight. Yippee!

Now compare these break-fix experiences with some of the challenges we've read about in these forums when the black box controllers go awry. Thanks, I'll take stone-age simple any day of the week.
 
Fuses ... if it pops, you do without it until it's FIXED. Rather that than having a black box trying to restore a system that's trying to fail.

I have a friend with a -10 that's tolerating a degraded Nav/Strobe light switching problem controlled by VPX, that no one can seem to figure out. It might be a wiring/switch problem or it might be a VPX problem ... but the VPX seems to be the "unknown" that makes the troubleshooting difficult. That's not ok in my book.

Build in redundancy and KISS.

Another 2 cents ...
 
The alligator might take my leg on this one....

I was a real proponent of the solid-state breaker box systems, especially when integrated into the glass panel cockpit. Get to play First Officer Spock on the Enterprise looking in his screen to see exactly what is going on with the whole electrical system. Not to mention they free up of panel space normally taken by breakers. Similar to Canadian Joy who posted above I have experience as an aerospace engineer specializing in vehicle design and an electrical engineer on aerospace systems designs (two different disciplines). The customizable discreet inputs were irresistible to add personalized annunciations on the G3X screen. Welcome to the future and all that.

Alas I swore off VPX (Pro in this case) when we had a complete electrical system failure out of the blue in an RV-8 in flight. We worked with VPX on the phone and emails over a few days and even plugged into the VPX with a laptop to troubleshoot. Nothing made sense and we weren't getting anywhere and bird was grounded. It was about then while I was sitting the cockpit I pulled the drug store quality phone charge cord out of the USB power port in the panel to declutter the cockpit and woola! Everything went back to normal. Turned out it was the corner store quality charge cord that was worn and chaffed/shorted. The panel USB power port was fed by a dedicated VPX circuit and the charge cord short brought down every circuit controlled by VPX. The whole dang thing. But not in a typical mechanical failure sense. It was like gremlins jumping around as in the aforementioned USB power cord. That was illogical from a schematic point to point component circuit stand point. VPX is cool and neat and all that but I can't fathom having my digital flight deck and associated electrical system go completely down over a cheap phone cord, caused by some mystery like a fatal blip in the software. The system should be smarter than a Walgreens phone charger cord.

I was shocked and disappointed. That RV-8 still has the VPX installed and it troops along with a new Apple certified charge cord and is flown with a guarded approach to the electrical system. Meanwhile I have decided to stick with legacy electrical busses with mechanical switches and breakers for the foreseeable future. That's not easy to swallow as I am usually an early adopter type when it comes to technology. But not with respect to flight safety. Burt Rutan had a famous quote, "Never put an experimental engine in an experimental aircraft". I'd like to steal that and replace the word "engine" with "solid state bus box". When have you heard somebody asking a fellow aircraft owner what firmware version they are running in their Klixon circuit breaker? Never. They either work or don't but they won't take down the whole works in the process.
 
I am curious - what was VP’s response/solution/explanation after discovering the failure mode? Also, was it repeatable with the crappy cord? I am installing a VPX Pro and this failure mode interests me.
 
The alligator might take my leg on this one....

I was a real proponent of the solid-state breaker box systems, especially when integrated into the glass panel cockpit. Get to play First Officer Spock on the Enterprise looking in his screen to see exactly what is going on with the whole electrical system. Not to mention they free up of panel space normally taken by breakers. Similar to Canadian Joy who posted above I have experience as an aerospace engineer specializing in vehicle design and an electrical engineer on aerospace systems designs (two different disciplines). The customizable discreet inputs were irresistible to add personalized annunciations on the G3X screen. Welcome to the future and all that.

Alas I swore off VPX (Pro in this case) when we had a complete electrical system failure out of the blue in an RV-8 in flight. We worked with VPX on the phone and emails over a few days and even plugged into the VPX with a laptop to troubleshoot. Nothing made sense and we weren't getting anywhere and bird was grounded. It was about then while I was sitting the cockpit I pulled the drug store quality phone charge cord out of the USB power port in the panel to declutter the cockpit and woola! Everything went back to normal. Turned out it was the corner store quality charge cord that was worn and chaffed/shorted. The panel USB power port was fed by a dedicated VPX circuit and the charge cord short brought down every circuit controlled by VPX. The whole dang thing. But not in a typical mechanical failure sense. It was like gremlins jumping around as in the aforementioned USB power cord. That was illogical from a schematic point to point component circuit stand point. VPX is cool and neat and all that but I can't fathom having my digital flight deck and associated electrical system go completely down over a cheap phone cord, caused by some mystery like a fatal blip in the software. The system should be smarter than a Walgreens phone charger cord.

I was shocked and disappointed. That RV-8 still has the VPX installed and it troops along with a new Apple certified charge cord and is flown with a guarded approach to the electrical system. Meanwhile I have decided to stick with legacy electrical busses with mechanical switches and breakers for the foreseeable future. That's not easy to swallow as I am usually an early adopter type when it comes to technology. But not with respect to flight safety. Burt Rutan had a famous quote, "Never put an experimental engine in an experimental aircraft". I'd like to steal that and replace the word "engine" with "solid state bus box". When have you heard somebody asking a fellow aircraft owner what firmware version they are running in their Klixon circuit breaker? Never. They either work or don't but they won't take down the whole works in the process.

Just curious how long ago this happened? I've heard VP had some growing pains several years ago but others have said issues are very rare now. Planning my panel now and trying to choose which route to take.
 
...and, if one drills down far enough, one will always find a single. point. failure.

It is all about risk mitigation; there has never been, and will never be, a perfect system...

Sure, we have single-string components. That is not really justification to add another one.
 
I'll add a few comments based on a bunch of installations I have done over the years. For the record, I have installed six VPX systems and a bunch of ICB systems, which include regular ICBs as well as car fuse boxes.
Remember, this is only my opinion!
The VPX systems are nice, but they are expensive, fairly heavy and bulky, with connectors coming out of both ends, which can make them thought provoking to install and still have room for future maintenance. For the computer challenged folks, they will be difficult to plan and set up, but they do provide several features like flap and trim controllers, wig-wag light capability and the ability to control fuse settings and warnings on an EFIS, albeit at the expense of hooking up with a lap top to set up most things. Out of the six installs three of them had to go back to the factory to be reset.
ICBs are straightforward, mechanical, easy to read and accessible, assuming they aren't mounted in an awkward location.
Car fuse blocks are also easy to install and a fuse block allows the installation of a bank of fuses in a small area. They are the least expensive of the three but not the prettiest if you want to mount them on the panel or a sub-panel.
ICBs and fuses; however, mean that you will need to address Wig-Wag, flap and trim systems with separate controllers or relays. I typically use individual panel mounted relays to roll my own systems, since they are cheap and easy to replace if one goes bad. I mount these under the floor or any hidden area, as long as there is access. Once you figure how to wire them they are really straightforward. There are several diagrams available online (Infinity and RC Allen provide them) to show you how to do it.
Helping folks fix wiring issues, I have seen some real spaghetti factories, regardless of which method was used, so planning and routing of wires is important. My first question to everyone is, do you have a wiring diagram? Its a rare occasion to actually have one to work with, so my biggest suggestion is...Before you install a single wire, make a wiring diagram to follow. As you work, make changes as required and then make a final rendition when you are finished. Even though you may think everything will work first time, you will likely have to troubleshoot systems initially, or in the future, and you will be glad you, or a future owner or technician, have something to refer to.
Good luck.
 
Just curious how long ago this happened? I've heard VP had some growing pains several years ago but others have said issues are very rare now. Planning my panel now and trying to choose which route to take.

Two years ago.
 
I am curious - what was VP’s response/solution/explanation after discovering the failure mode? Also, was it repeatable with the crappy cord? I am installing a VPX Pro and this failure mode interests me.

Great questions. The shorted phone cord would cause failure when re-inserted into the USB power port. It was like flicking an on and off switch. VPX was fairly responsive on the front end but didn't seem to pursue things once it was determined to be a bad charge cord. My hangar mate is one of my best friends and owns the RV-8 and was the customer of record and he enlisted me to help. So to be fair let me review the final disposition with him. I am the sparky and he is a brilliant fellow who built his 8 but he doesn't own a laptop or do systems. So I would have been in the middle of any further troubleshooting were there any. The VPX Pro was installed by a very reputable shop that is one of the best during a G3X pqnel update about 18 months prior. And it worked perfect before and after the charge cord event.
 
I've had lots of customers request a VPX with their new panel install, my answer is simple... take it somewhere else if you want the VPX.

My goal with every panel install is to keep things as simple and reliable as possible.
(I won't install cool looking rocker switches either due to their poor terminals)

Canadian Joy pretty much nailed it. (he and I have similar backgrounds and experiences from years in the field working on this stuff).
 
Last edited:
The starting point has to be a list of features the electrical system must have. If that includes no single failure will take down the whole system then single black or red boxes controlling the whole electrical system won't make it past the initial down select. We should all be aware of the risks we take with the component selections and should research each major item to be comfortable it will provide value for money. To my mind a single box that does all the circuit control and protection (for $1000+) does not offer value for money.

I use my aeroplane for travelling every now and again. It uses circuit breakers and fuses to protect the electrical circuits as I don't want to be stuck somewhere because one part has fallen over. I flew my previous aeroplane IFR so it had a split electrical bus for maximum endurance following alternator failure - which happened on more than one occasion.

I never found wiring up a fuse/cb system to be particularly difficult. The wires have to run to the service no matter what is providing the circuit protection. Inserting a switch into the run is not that difficult.

Pete
 
I want to thank everyone for the info presented, in an uncontroversial way, so far. The alligators have gone hungry. Very informative.

Canadian_Joy:

Tons of useful information in your post. Thanks for taking the time to write all that.


Steve Formhals:

Your comment "..... fairly heavy and bulky, with connectors coming out of both ends, which can make them thought provoking to install.." is much appreciated.


I think that when someone wants to comment on a VPX (or similar box) failure posting the dates (if known) is vital as the failure may have led to fixes.

One reason I was considering a single box is all the space taken up by the CB's in my plane (RV-8). And some of them are in the worst possible location - the fixed section on the right of the instrument panel. When installing my GDL-82, I had to get at those breakers and it was nigh unto impossible.

See attached thumbnail.

I really hated that, though I got it done.

So I thought that a single, programmable box might alleviate some of the difficulty. But I can see issues with that, based upon what I'm reading here.. I am leaning towards the Klixon Individual Circuit Breaker solution.

But they HAVE to be moved. Where those breakers are now is just impossible.
So I have two problems:

1) Where will the new breaker location be?
- Thinking of something like the Steinair angled, multi-level CB panel located to my right just aft of the gear tower. Hinged at the bottom so that I can get to the breaker backs easily. But not settled.

2) Once I remove the breakers from their present location in the thumbnail, how can I re-use that panel space? I'm thinking that I would need to remove
all of the Swiss Cheese - leaving a flange around the perimeter, install nutplates around the perimeter, and fashion a cover plate with whatever I want to install there.

I really would prefer NOT to drill out the rivets. from outside the fuselage, for that panel section and install a new one. Though it might come down to that. I have to ask Vans how much of a structural purpose that section provides and if my proposed solution is sufficiently strong.

Anyway please keep the conversation going. It's been of high quality, I've learned a lot, and no alligators seem to be appearing.
 

Attachments

  • Right_Breaker_Panel.jpg
    Right_Breaker_Panel.jpg
    224.6 KB · Views: 156
One reason I was considering a single box is all the space taken up by the CB's in my plane (RV-8).

FWIW, my RV-8 has one pullable circuit breaker, for the alternator field. Buss fuse blocks for all else. They swing down from under the panel for easy access, which so far has been only when I want to add something.

A risk of the integrated system approach is the risk of being orphaned.

I recall a thread where folks were complaining about there not being enough VPX loaner units to keep all the AOG aircraft flying. It's here somewhere.
 
Last edited:
FWIW, my RV-8 has one pullable circuit breaker, for the alternator field. Buss fuse blocks for all else. They swing down from under the panel for easy access, which so far has been only when I want to add something.

Thanks to this thread, fuse blocks are a consideration.
 
SNIP…I am leaning towards the Klixon Individual Circuit Breaker solution.

But they HAVE to be moved. Where those breakers are now is just impossible.
So I have two problems:

1) Where will the new breaker location be?
- Thinking of something like the Steinair angled, multi-level CB panel located to my right just aft of the gear tower. Hinged at the bottom so that I can get to the breaker backs easily. But not settled.

2) Once I remove the breakers from their present location in the thumbnail, how can I re-use that panel space? I'm thinking that I would need to remove
all of the Swiss Cheese - leaving a flange around the perimeter, install nutplates around the perimeter, and fashion a cover plate with whatever I want to install there.

I really would prefer NOT to drill out the rivets. from outside the fuselage, for that panel section and install a new one. Though it might come down to that. I have to ask Vans how much of a structural purpose that section provides and if my proposed solution is sufficiently strong.

Anyway please keep the conversation going. It's been of high quality, I've learned a lot, and no alligators seem to be appearing.

Gregg,

Send me a PM with your email and I’ll go over how we updated my original 8A to full glass - changing the panel wings without drilling out rivets.

Carl
 
Last edited:
Plenty of room in the RV8 for breakers.
 

Attachments

  • RV8 panel.jpg
    RV8 panel.jpg
    100.3 KB · Views: 270
one data point

I had the EXP Bus2 in my -6. Worked fine for 9 years (other than 2 rocker switch failures - they were easily replaced). And then it didn't. When it died, all the electrics went down with it. Non-serviceable but you can buy a new one.

Pulled it out and put in toggle switches with a fuse block.

If I were to do another new build, I'd put in toggle switches and circuit breakers.
 
Plenty of room in the RV8 for breakers.

Right now, I do not want the breakers anywhere on the instrument panel because they are the very bear to get at if you have to.

Presently I'm thinking of a door on the right - just aft of the gear tower, hinged on the bottom, with two angled rows of breakers
 
Last edited:
Right now, I do not want the breakers anywhere on the instrument panel because they are the very bear to get at if you have to.

Not hard at all to make this easy.

The wings are a great place to put all the breakers and such that stay in the plane when you pull the center panel out. For example, for a dual screen SkyView install the wing breakers include:
- Both EFIS
- Comm #2 (Dynon remote radio)
- SkyView XPDR
- Auto pilot
- pMag
- Trim
- Flaps
- ADS-B receiver

The only breaker I have on the center panel feed those things that come out with the center panel:
- GTN-650 comm
- GTN-650 Nav
- PS engineering audio panel
The power and ground for this breakers comes from a single molex that gets disconnected when the center panel comes out.

The EFIS displays get power from the D connector cable that stays in the plane when the panel is pulled.

This leaves plenty of room on the side wings for switches:
- Left and right ignition
- Left and right avionics
- Left and right masters

All “non-vital” loads like nav lights, strobes, pitot heat, boost pump, landing lights, USB, alternator regulator, etc. are mounted on the side breaker panel.

Carl
 
Right now, I do not want the breakers anywhere on the instrument panel because they are the very bear to get at if you have to.

Presently I'm thinking of a door on the right - just aft of the gear tower, hinged on the bottom, with two angled rows of breakers

Actually in the pic I posted above access is super easy, take the screen out and the G5 and they are sitting right there, can work sitting in the seat :)
The nice part about breakers is you'll be working on them like never...
 
Actually in the pic I posted above access is super easy, take the screen out and the G5 and they are sitting right there, can work sitting in the seat :)
The nice part about breakers is you'll be working on them like never...

Well....except that I had to work on them when I added my ADS-B out circuitry. And it was the easiest breaker in the panel wings - lowest, inboard.

And it was a bear getting a screw through the ring terminal and started. I had to unscrew the entire row of breakers to get any access at all - to even SEE the screw head. And even then I was half twisted and my arms had limited range (My stick is not easily removable).

I could not imagine working on the upper outboard breaker. It would be just impossible. I'd have to unscrew every breaker and push them out of the panel and rotate the lot - stressing the wires.

For any change I make, I generally plan for increasing maintainability. Even with things like breakers where you might not have to fuss with them often.

Now on your install, yes you have a slightly easier time since you have your breaker section inboard of the panel wing, and you can remove the screen and G5.

But still - what would you do if you had to replace the outboard breaker in the top row? You can't see the screws while seated in the seat. How do you handle that?

One option that does allow me to put the breakers in the main center panel is to hinge the entire center panel along the bottom so that it can be rotated down into my lap as I'm seated in the seat. THAT would make everything very accessible and having the breakers where you have them would be convenient because after rotating the panel downward, I'd be looking at the back of the breakers.

Another option would be to mount the breakers as you have them but on their own door which swings down or to one side.

It's my fault this thread has drifted away from the original topic. Maybe I should move this to another thread in the Electrical forum
 
Last edited:
Saville,

As a side note. If you suffer from noise in your avionics it might be due to that USB power adapter in the 12V cigarette style power port. Those things have a bad reputation when it comes to lack of shielding and transformer noise. I have had 3 instances of friends with bad radio noise and comm squelch issues, sometimes on only certain frequencies, that cleared right up after pulling out one of those USB adapters from the power socket. If you don't have any noise issues just keep on truckin'.

Jim
 
Saville,

As a side note. If you suffer from noise in your avionics it might be due to that USB power adapter in the 12V cigarette style power port. Those things have a bad reputation when it comes to lack of shielding and transformer noise. I have had 3 instances of friends with bad radio noise and comm squelch issues, sometimes on only certain frequencies, that cleared right up after pulling out one of those USB adapters from the power socket. If you don't have any noise issues just keep on truckin'.

Jim

Thanks, Jim. That's an old picture
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top