EPU stuff
Salute!
No problem with my test, Doze. I'll let all know manana. I may be brave and fearless, but not all that brave!
From the Gums' archives.......
GD thot that the hydrazine EPU was a light, compact source of backup electricity and hydraulics. If we lost our motor, then the sucker had to provide at least one of our hydraulic systems and a very reduced amount of electricity. We paved the way for the space shuttle. That sucker used the same hydrazine doofer that we had, but bigger. If you look at the launches you can tell when the sucker starts to move the flight control surfaces and so forth. On landing, you can hear the thing and see the IR images as it puffs out gases, mostly ammonia. Big deal was our EPU only did that for about 5 minutes unless we had the motor still running and it could run off of bleed air. Shuttle was screwed, as it need the hydrazine power for takeoff and landing.
From my perspective, I see a batch of bad batteries or a design problem with the charging/monitoring system.
I do not advocate the hydrazine EPU that we had or that the shuttle used on a normal mission.
I also think that Ni-MH batteries could satisfy the Boeing requirement and have less problems. Look at Toyota and the Prius versus the Tesla and Volt.
I am glad to discuss the battery problem considering my experience in the first "electric jet". We learned a lot and we passed on our lessons to later and greater planes. There's just something about being "the first", and I was honored to be in the cadre of that neat little jet.