ORIGINAL: fancman
ORIGINAL: AirTech
If I were to have the throttle servo/linkage fail, I have the choice where/when to kill the engine so a controlled landing can be made with no damage to the airframe or the prop for that matter.
This is another good argument for having a redundant system.
Maybe it's just me but in over 25 yrs of flying I've never had a throttle linkage fail. I fail to see how this redundant kill switch question became such an issue. Do we all need a redundant right aileron in case that particular one fails or is it best to build and install every control properly so there is no reasonable chance of it failing. No national RC organization has seen fit to make this kill switch mandatory so what's all the fuss about. Each person decide for themselves and that's the end of it.
Well as they say in golf, "is better to be lucky than good". Since I happen to run low on luck I rather bulletproof my planes as much as I can afford.
Full size airplanes are required to have redundancy in most of their critical systems, but then you are sitting on the plane that is going to take you to the scene of the accident.
So why not buy a little peace of mind when we are spending lots of money on this hobby. When one invest $2500 plus dollars on a plane is foolish to loose it because you saved $15 bucks on a battery switch. A penny wise a dollar foolish is not my idea of sound decision making. I witnessed during the scale aerobatics AMA Nats some years back a 40% plane loosing an elevator half because the servo case broke off around the output shaft. On that occasion the (very skilled) pilot was able to land with the remaining elevator. A lot of skill, a redundant system and a little luck can work together to help you save a lot of cash$$$$$.
I agree whit you that everyone decides by himself. And since my luck is kind of low and my skills mediocre at best I can use all the help I can afford.