"w_tom" wrote in message
...
Well lets see. The Boeing 707 was an entire 'faraday cage'
of aluminum. And inside that aluminum 'faraday cage' was a
completely enclosed fuel tank - another faraday cage. How did
lightning get through two faraday cages to explode the fuel
tank on that Boeing 707? And why was the correction to
install more grounds inside that 'faraday cage'? Could it be
that no sufficient 'faraday cage' exists? Yep.

If you'd read my previous post I already said exactly that.

Ron, when you get some real world experience with 'faraday
cages', then come back and share your experiences. In the
meantime, grounding inside that 'faraday cage' is essential
for safe airline operations - so that lightning will pass
through the inside of that 'faraday cage' without doing
damage. Lightning caused damage inside that 'faraday cage'
over Elkton MD.

No, inside a discontinuous Faraday cage....get a clue.

Ron Reaugh wrote:
"w_tom" wrote in message
...
Transmitted an incomplete post. Sorry for the mistake.
Now for that airplane. Notice earth ground is the tail
section:
http://bm6aak.myweb.hinet.net/file/456.gif

OH, cool but of course it simply proves my points.

Of course this airplane ground is completely beyond the
scope of the current discussion.

You mean beyond you.

Airplanes are more difficult to ground.

No, airplanes are impossible to proactively ground while in
flight(save a high energy beam) and much more importantly the
is no need to ground an airplane in flight. There is just a
need to have a good continuous Faraday Cage. Damn, how did
anyone ever survive when planes were made of wood or paper(or
are they non-conductors)?

A Pan Am 707 was destroyed by lightning over
Elkland MD because internal grounding was not sufficient.

Oh, you mean the Faraday Cage was discontinuous or flawed
or maybe it was a super bolt of the kind that has punched
holes in heavy gauge steel petroleum tanks. In any case I'll
bet that the cockpit radio was undamaged at least until
impact.

An airplane must be grounded so that any part can become
an earth ground; making airplane design more challenging.

HUH?

We, on the other hand, are having enough trouble discussing
simple structural earthing - a well proven 1930 technology.
Why then complicate it with airplanes and other irerelevant
questions?

Because device/PC protection design has little to do with
earth grounding.