Just checked it out. This is the same thing that's coming to the automotive world. PDMs (power distribution modules) are replacing typical circuits as a central way to manage power to different systems. Can get quite pricey for what is a relatively cheap and simple circuit to build, but I'm more of a DIY person anyway (and have a decent amount of experience building electronics). I haven't looked into it with enough details to give pros or cons but it seems like a good way to simplify electrical systems and you get a ton of options like electronic control and monitoring and automatic resetting of circuits with specific conditions. There are a ton of RUclips videos addressing the PDMs and the pros and cons.
When I first ran across VPX maybe 5 years ago I was enthralled (i love technology like this). But eventually, I asked myself what, other than making the build easier, were the actual benefits for the pilot / owner. For me there is not enough benefit to justify adding yet another single point of failure to the electrical system. It takes a very simple system function (circuit breakers or fuses) with distributed risk, adds the complexity of microprocessor/ firmware control, and bundles that risk into one (expensive) black (red) box. The box fails, you lose your electrical system, until you buy a new box. Professional panel builders love it because it reduces their labor and improves profit margin. There’s a prominent cautionary statement in the AFS ACM manual that provides a dose of reality (paraphrasing): DO NOT route power for electronic ignitions, electronic fuel injection, or fuel pumps through this device! But, to each his own!
Midwest Panel Builders has a comprehensive video presentation of Vertical Power's Electronic Circuit Breaker System. We're going with the VP-X Sport coupled with the Primary Power System (PPS) on our RV-14 project. I want to have as clean and uncluttered an instrument panel as possible. I'm not going with electronic circuit breakers (ECBs) to save panel space to make room for something else. I'm all about simplicity.
@@CheckSixAviation well… it IS a cool thing. You’ll find this is one of those never-ending debates, with one side arguing for the simplicity, support, and ease of build, and the other which is horrified that you’d consider anything that doesn’t provide quadruple lines of redundancy. 😉 There’s lots of discussion online. Personally, I definitely would use one of these or AFS’ product if I were currently building. Wishing you well on your build.
My understanding is that AFS system is indeed technically at the core the same but it's designed as a plug and play solution for their own lines of flight displays plus various auxiliary devices. If you run one of the group's Dynon or AF EFIS it's a great choice and cuts down on tons of wiring work since it also covers the communication pathways. But it won't work with a G3X afaik.
Good info, @@experimental_av! I am planning on going with the G3X, unless @GarminAviation comes out with something better when it comes time for avionics.
![[DRAGON BALL LEGENDS REVEALS ＆ STUFF] LEGENDS FESTIVAL 2024 Special Edition Part 2](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/af0phKxitX8/mqdefault.jpg)
Just checked it out. This is the same thing that's coming to the automotive world. PDMs (power distribution modules) are replacing typical circuits as a central way to manage power to different systems. Can get quite pricey for what is a relatively cheap and simple circuit to build, but I'm more of a DIY person anyway (and have a decent amount of experience building electronics).
I haven't looked into it with enough details to give pros or cons but it seems like a good way to simplify electrical systems and you get a ton of options like electronic control and monitoring and automatic resetting of circuits with specific conditions. There are a ton of RUclips videos addressing the PDMs and the pros and cons.
Dude you are a natural
Thank you, brother! I appreciate it.
When I first ran across VPX maybe 5 years ago I was enthralled (i love technology like this). But eventually, I asked myself what, other than making the build easier, were the actual benefits for the pilot / owner. For me there is not enough benefit to justify adding yet another single point of failure to the electrical system. It takes a very simple system function (circuit breakers or fuses) with distributed risk, adds the complexity of microprocessor/ firmware control, and bundles that risk into one (expensive) black (red) box. The box fails, you lose your electrical system, until you buy a new box. Professional panel builders love it because it reduces their labor and improves profit margin. There’s a prominent cautionary statement in the AFS ACM manual that provides a dose of reality (paraphrasing): DO NOT route power for electronic ignitions, electronic fuel injection, or fuel pumps through this device! But, to each his own!
Thanks for your input.
Midwest Panel Builders has a comprehensive video presentation of Vertical Power's Electronic Circuit Breaker System. We're going with the VP-X Sport coupled with the Primary Power System (PPS) on our RV-14 project. I want to have as clean and uncluttered an instrument panel as possible. I'm not going with electronic circuit breakers (ECBs) to save panel space to make room for something else. I'm all about simplicity.
Thanks for the info!
Curious… has VP done something new to their product line here? Vertical Power has been around for quite awhile. AFS has a similar (better?) product.
I’m a new builder and just found out about VP.
@@CheckSixAviation well… it IS a cool thing. You’ll find this is one of those never-ending debates, with one side arguing for the simplicity, support, and ease of build, and the other which is horrified that you’d consider anything that doesn’t provide quadruple lines of redundancy. 😉 There’s lots of discussion online. Personally, I definitely would use one of these or AFS’ product if I were currently building. Wishing you well on your build.
@@joesmythe8232 Thank you, kind sir! Blessings and blue skies to you as well.
My understanding is that AFS system is indeed technically at the core the same but it's designed as a plug and play solution for their own lines of flight displays plus various auxiliary devices. If you run one of the group's Dynon or AF EFIS it's a great choice and cuts down on tons of wiring work since it also covers the communication pathways. But it won't work with a G3X afaik.
Good info, @@experimental_av!
I am planning on going with the G3X, unless @GarminAviation comes out with something better when it comes time for avionics.