On Mon, Apr 23, 2001 at 05:19:57PM +0200, Eugene Leitl wrote:
> I wonder why they didn't have hardware self-destruct (cases lined with
> thin plastique sheets, nonvolatile storage mounted in thermite boxes),
> and had to resort to archaic (pick-axe) destruction methods.
Because it's not fail-safe.
An axe and a live crewman are not going to accidentally toast all your
avionics and set fire to the airframe if there's a short in the detonator
electronics.
And if there's a fire on board, you don't want equipment racks adding
to the !fun by exploding around the crew who're trying to control it.
On the other hand, much of the equipment will have been custom-designed.
Surely it'd be possible to wire a couple of rails inside the equipment
racks to opposite poles of a 415 volt three-phase supply, separated by
something low-tech like a knife switch locked behind a panel saying IN
EMERGENCY BREAK GLASS? It's amazing what a few kilowatts will do to
delicate electronics -- without requiring high explosives inside a
pressurised cabin.
-- Charlie
I are sigfile disease!!
All your quote are belong to us.
Copy us every "sig"!
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:59:55 MDT