----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2010 8:01
AM
Subject: [LML] Re: In Flight Engine
Fire Extinguishers
CO2 would be just as ineffective in
the cowling as Halon. Dry Chemical will tend to stick (somewhat) to the
surfaces it encounters. It will especially stick to wetted surfaces; i.e.;
fuel and oil. The biggest weakness I see with dry chemical is that it will
be difficult to get it distributed to all of the surfaces under
cowl.
This is a difficult area to adequately
protect.
In race cars, we used to use Halon under hood
and in the cockpit. It was good to get the fire down for half a minute
or so to give the driver time to get his belts released and crawl out or the
track crew to get there with additional capabilities. There was never any
guarantee that the Halon system would fully extinguish the fire, it
might or might not, but it would buy some time.
In a turbojet application, I suspect there is
MUCH less airflow between the nacelle and the engine. (Not educated here,
just rationalizing) In this instance, Halon would have longer residence time
in the fire area and could make sense.
Rob
In a message dated 01/13/10 16:08:36 Eastern Standard Time,
colyncase@earthlink.net writes: