DA 42 accident

wrote in message ...
A battery pack backup for the FADEC itself independant of
the aircraft systems would be trivial technically.

A bigger problem may be how much power does it take to
actually control something with the FADEC?

That is, while the FADEC itself probably doesn't require much
in the way of power, how much power does it take to manipulate
the throttle, mixture, and prop?

The answers to those kind of questions seem to be missing from the public
record, and even the public discussion. I was asking just that when I
inquired about any "Limp Home" capability of this fully FADEC system. I'm
hoping a Mike Busch media type will attend one of the $4k three day Thielert
maintenance seminars down in Texas and write some details.

Thielert comes to aviation from the automotive industry's custom engine
design and engineering world. And their ability to Design, Produce and STC
the 4.0 diesel in a v8 block in a 2 year window shows they got that part of
their business down. I just hope the Failure Analysis guys or the second
contingency curmudgeons weren't asked to leave the design/production
meetings. When those guys are ignored, they often make excellent "reluctant"
witnesses for the Plaintiff.

As much as I like the Thielert concept (with some healthy concerns), the SMA
guys seem to be walking a much different road technology wise. They have
designed their turbo diesel as an air cooled horiz opposed mostly mechanical
controlled system. When I talked in detail to one of their engineers at SNF
two years ago I walked away thinking that their design was pretty bullet
proof. But, even though I haven't heard of any tech problems, SMA can't seem
to get off the ground.