Received: from ma103.mailarmory.com (postfix@ma103.mailarmory.com [216.17.128.131]) by mail.datarecall.net (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id LAA25625 for ; Tue, 21 Oct 2003 11:03:44 -0500 (CDT) Received: from filter (localhost.frii.com [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.mailarmory.com (MailArmory) with ESMTP id 355AA81C41 for ; Tue, 21 Oct 2003 10:03:42 -0600 (MDT) Received: from logan.com (lancaironline.net [207.170.160.169]) by ma103.mailarmory.com (MailArmory) with ESMTP id 58A2181C99 for ; Tue, 21 Oct 2003 10:03:36 -0600 (MDT) X-ListServer: CommuniGate Pro LIST 4.1.5 List-Unsubscribe: List-ID: List-Archive: Message-ID: Reply-To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" Sender: "Rotary motors in aircraft" To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" Precedence: list From: "Russell Duffy" <13brv3@bellsouth.net> Subject: [FlyRotary] Re: Fire extinguishers Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 11:03:34 -0500 X-Original-Message-ID: <00b401c397ec$e1b18750$6001a8c0@rad> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00B5_01C397C2.F8DB7F50" X-UIDL: 2297e58c0e98e19ed502ec2ed249adac This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_00B5_01C397C2.F8DB7F50 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable As far as too much airflow to be effective, consider jet = engines. Much more airflow than we have and yet it works instantly, however it = also releases the entire extinguisher contents instantly. S. Todd Bartrim=20 =20 You also have to wonder if you're plane could get off the ground with = the size canister it would take to put out a fire like this :-) =20 Seriously, the other thing I would worry about is the short term effect = of the Halon. Say you spring an oil leak, it sprays on the red hot turbo, = and catches fire. You instantly shut off the engine, fuel pumps, etc, then = fire the Halon. The Halon snuffs the fire, then dissipates with airflow. Unfortunately, the turbo is still red hot, and still covered with oil, = so it's gonna flame right back up. For these reasons, I actually like the = dry chemical idea better. =20 Cheers, Rusty (MRI's never catch fire, well almost never)=20 ------=_NextPart_000_00B5_01C397C2.F8DB7F50 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message

        As far as=20 too much airflow to be effective, consider jet engines. Much more = airflow than=20 we have and yet it works instantly, however it also releases the entire=20 extinguisher contents instantly.

S. Todd Bartrim 
 

You also have=20 to wonder if you're plane could get off the ground with the size = canister it=20 would take to put out a fire like this = :-)  

Seriously,=20 the other thing I would worry about is the short term effect of the = Halon.  Say you spring an oil leak, it sprays on the red hot = turbo,=20 and catches fire.  You instantly shut off the engine, fuel = pumps, etc,=20 then fire the Halon.  The Halon snuffs the fire,  then = dissipates=20 with airflow.  Unfortunately, the turbo is still red hot, and still = covered=20 with oil, so it's gonna flame right back up.  For these reasons, I = actually=20 like the dry chemical idea better.  

Cheers,
Rusty=20 (MRI's never catch fire, well almost=20 never) 
------=_NextPart_000_00B5_01C397C2.F8DB7F50--