Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

Military policy on cycling CB's

Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

Military policy on cycling CB's

Old 7th Mar 2019, 14:01
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 593
I think it's fair to say that going back several years there was a - erm - lets say experience based pragmatic approach to the "management" of CBs by aircrew which did vary aircraft to aircraft. I am not aware it is encouraged any more!
Chris Kebab is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2019, 15:20
  #22 (permalink)  
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 76
Posts: 16,569
Originally Posted by Radley View Post
OAP, more so these days but back in the day when out in the Atlantic trying to keep hold of a slippery Akula you did what was necessary, safely and with knowledge, to get the job done.🤓
On Ops you do everything possible to get the kit working. Even fuse changes and resetting CB on nuclear weapons control systems was SOP. If necessary you would hold the CB in if it meant it worked. If a fuse blew, try a bigger fuse if the difference was success or mission failure. In modern ops, with so few aircraft and mass delivery of weapons, the whole ethos now is to preserve the aircraft and not press on to the target.

Prosecuting an SSN falls in to the bracket where you need to hang in there.
Pontius Navigator is offline  
Old 7th Mar 2019, 22:45
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 15,768
The mighty Cessna 152 actually has a self resetting CB in the field circuit, it works on a bimetallic plate and trips and resets itself.
NutLoose is offline  
Old 8th Mar 2019, 01:59
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Washington.
Age: 69
Posts: 462
Circuit Protection

In spite of common practice and years ago even part of design and approved procedures, there is a safety objective behind avoiding excessive cycling of circuit breakers. It weakens them over time and diminishes their protective capabilities. FAA requires switches and controls be used instead of CBs for routine on/off purposes.
GlobalNav is offline  
Old 8th Mar 2019, 11:01
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
Posts: 25,369
Even fuse changes and resetting CB on nuclear weapons control systems was SOP. If necessary you would hold the CB in if it meant it worked. If a fuse blew, try a bigger fuse if the difference was success or mission failure.
So whilst chasing some 'slippery Akula', you would hold in a tripping CB? What utterly crass folly which could have led to a fire, loss of aircraft and crew.....
BEagle is offline  
Old 8th Mar 2019, 11:14
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Dundee
Posts: 75
Originally Posted by GlobalNav View Post
In spite of common practice and years ago even part of design and approved procedures, there is a safety objective behind avoiding excessive cycling of circuit breakers. It weakens them over time and diminishes their protective capabilities. FAA requires switches and controls be used instead of CBs for routine on/off purposes.
Yes. 40 odd years of tripping white area cb's certainly proved that point.

On ops with a.c. armed, tripping and resetting certain cb's is about the only thing you can do to clear a fault without getting the a.c. downloaded...
weemonkey is offline  
Old 8th Mar 2019, 12:38
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 15,768
FAA requires switches and controls be used instead of CBs for routine on/off purposes.
Most modern light stuff combines the two as shown in the example below, the toggle switches also incorporate a built in CB as denoted by the value on the end of the toggle and trips the switch into the off position.





NutLoose is offline  
Old 8th Mar 2019, 14:28
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: cardiff
Posts: 361
Originally Posted by Vendee View Post
I'm reminded of the A340 ground incident at Toulouse during a high power engine run when the engineer pulled a CB to silence a noisy config warning. Unfortunately, the CB in question (ground proximity sensor) corrected the config error by putting the aircraft in a flight configuration, which meant releasing the parking brake. No chocks were fitted and the aircraft was destroyed.

Think it was not the engineer actually in charge of the run that pulled the cb, but someone else who was in a party of observers from the customer.

And as for holding tripped CB's In, if they keep tripping, well you can if you just want to exercise your fingers, for many years they have had to be trip free ( IE if tripped, and the condition that caused it is still present, will stay tripped internally even if one keeps a pudgy finger on it) in aviation applications.

Ttfn

Ttfn
ivor toolbox is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.