X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Sat, 16 Jan 2010 08:28:35 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from imr-mb02.mx.aol.com ([64.12.207.163] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.3.1) with ESMTP id 4084246 for lml@lancaironline.net; Fri, 15 Jan 2010 14:59:22 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.12.207.163; envelope-from=VTAILJEFF@aol.com Received: from imo-da01.mx.aol.com (imo-da01.mx.aol.com [205.188.169.199]) by imr-mb02.mx.aol.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id o0FJwZ5Z013031 for ; Fri, 15 Jan 2010 14:58:35 -0500 Received: from VTAILJEFF@aol.com by imo-da01.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v42.5.) id q.c65.626b3bf8 (55732) for ; Fri, 15 Jan 2010 14:58:32 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtprly-dc02.mx.aol.com (smtprly-dc02.mx.aol.com [205.188.170.2]) by cia-md03.mx.aol.com (v127.7) with ESMTP id MAILCIAMD037-d2f44b50c8df2; Fri, 15 Jan 2010 14:58:31 -0500 Received: from webmail-stg-d12 (webmail-stg-d12.sim.aol.com [205.188.185.227]) by smtprly-dc02.mx.aol.com (v127.7) with ESMTP id MAILSMTPRLYDC023-d2f44b50c8df2; Fri, 15 Jan 2010 14:58:23 -0500 References: X-Original-To: lml@lancaironline.net Subject: Re: [LML] Re: In Flight Engine Fire Extinguishers X-Original-Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2010 14:58:23 -0500 X-AOL-IP: 166.217.221.243 In-Reply-To: X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI MIME-Version: 1.0 From: vtailjeff@aol.com X-MB-Message-Type: User Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--------MB_8CC64343A6AB28A_D34_67E2_webmail-stg-d12.sysops.aol.com" X-Mailer: AOL Webmail 30462-STANDARD Received: from 166.217.221.243 by webmail-stg-d12.sysops.aol.com (205.188.185.227) with HTTP (WebMailUI); Fri, 15 Jan 2010 14:58:23 -0500 X-Original-Message-Id: <8CC64343A5ECBA5-D34-326B@webmail-stg-d12.sysops.aol.com> X-Spam-Flag:NO X-AOL-SENDER: VTAILJEFF@aol.com ----------MB_8CC64343A6AB28A_D34_67E2_webmail-stg-d12.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" take a look at the 360 that burned up on the ground or the Lionheart fire-= - epoxy burns very well.=20 -----Original Message----- From: GT Phantom To: lml@lancaironline.net Sent: Fri, Jan 15, 2010 12:07 pm Subject: [LML] Re: In Flight Engine Fire Extinguishers Yep - the best protection is to have and TEST a fuel cutoff valve. No fue= l =3D no fire, and fiberglass doesn't burn well on it's own. If you have good engine gages, you should be able to detect a fire by "unu= sual readings" (not to mention smoke). However, you can install temperatu= re senders to sense unusually high temps and report it as "fire." Military systems require that you cut off the fuel first and then "blow th= e bottle." Because of the high air flow, it takes a large bottle (heavy,= bulky) and it must blow all at once to "snuff" the fire. Cheers, Bill Lancair wrote:=20 Valin, =20 I discussed the application with an engineer at a fire estinguisher compan= y. He said that this kind of equipment would work fine in a boat because= the Halon would be contained below deck. In an aircraft at 150kt+ and a= fire under a cowling that was purposly designed to transit a lot of air,= the Halon would be blown overboard and likely do no good. It would work= if you could get the plane onto the ground before blowing the bottle.=20 =20 Robert M. Simon ES-P N301ES From: Valin & Allyson Thorn [mailto:thorn@starflight.aero]=20 Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2010 8:19 AM To: lml@lancaironline.net Subject: In Flight Engine Fire Extinguishers As part of our risk management strategy, we want to install an engine fire= extinguishing system in our Legacy under construction. We=E2=80=99ve zer= oed in on this Halon 1301 based system from Safecraft. See screen shot fr= om Aircraft Spruce=E2=80=99s website:=20 We=E2=80=99d appreciate comments and advice from the community regarding= choice of systems and installation recommendations. Some specific questi= ons are: =C2=B7 Would a single 5 lb bottle provide enoug= h Halon concentration to extinguish an in-flight fire? =C2=B7 Do we need to route discharge lines to the cowling inlets= to ensure we=E2=80=99re getting the Halon throughout the compartment when= discharged for a fire? =C2=B7 Has anyone had an engine fire that was successfully extingu= ished in flight? =C2=B7 We=E2=80=99re trying to eliminate mechanical connections to= the instrument panel to make it easy to remove for maintenance (eg. No pu= sh pull cables, etc.). Anyone have experience with setting up for electri= cally actuating a system? =C2=B7 Etc. =20 -- For archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.htm= l ----------MB_8CC64343A6AB28A_D34_67E2_webmail-stg-d12.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" take a look at the 360 that burned up on the ground or= the Lionheart fire-- epoxy burns very well.



-----Original Message-----
From: GT Phantom <gt_phantom@hotmail.com>
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Sent: Fri, Jan 15, 2010 12:07 pm
Subject: [LML] Re: In Flight Engine Fire Extinguishers

Yep - the best= protection is to have and TEST a fuel cutoff valve.  No fuel =3D no= fire, and fiberglass doesn't burn well on it's own.

If you have good engine gages, you should be able to detect a fire by "unu= sual readings" (not to mention smoke).  However, you can install temp= erature senders to sense unusually high temps and report it as "fire."

Military systems require that you cut off the fuel first and then "blow th= e bottle."  Because of the high air flow, it takes a large bottle (he= avy, bulky) and it must blow all at once to "snuff" the fire.

Cheers,

Bill

Lancair wrote:=20