A surge protector will 'stop' what kilometers of sky could
not? Victims of ineffective protector myths (such as Mike
Tomlinson) who promote these half truths. (Mike will reply
with insults to prove his technical superiority).

It is routine to suffer direct strikes without damage even
in regions that have more serious lightning storms. But the
basic concepts must be understood. Plug-in protectors avoid
all discussion about the most critical function in protection
to sell their ineffective but so profitable products.

Scientists measure direct lightning strikes to a
communication tower atop Hoher Peissenberg in Southern
Germany. Why are those CMOS devices, rated only for tens of
volts, not damaged by million volt lightning strikes? Simple
They use the same concepts demonstrated by Franklin in 1752.

How effective protectors work is summarized in a previous
discussion:
"Pull the wall plug or not?" in nz.comp on 7 Sept 2004 at
http://tinyurl.com/5ttwl

Do not confuse the protector with protection. They are
separate devices of a protection system. A protector is only
effective when connected short to protection. That protection
is earth ground. An effective protector never stops, blocks,
or absorbs surges. Concepts detailed in that previous
discussion.

A surge protector is only as effective as its earth ground.
Same concept that makes Franklin lightning rods effective.
Effective 'whole house' protector typically costs about £1 per
protected appliance. Ineffective protectors cost more -
trying to stop or absorb surges.

Dave Stanton wrote:
And how is a mains surge arrestor going to stop a large pulse
coming down the phone line. I, personally think they are all
a waste of money, but you pays your money etc....

Dave