![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
the guy on ebay that has them once in a while is
called firebruiser from Oshawa That is where I got mine. Thanks. I'll keep an eye out for it. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
From the Cars it apears that you can use anything you want.
http://www.tc.gc.ca/aviation/applica...n/1298_Att.htm Personally I think that dry chemical is most effective and that's what I have in my plane. If I remember correctly it's rated 5BC that means an expert could put out a 5 square foot gas fire with it. It weighs about 2lbs. Hello All, This question is regarding Canadian regulatory issue with importing a Halon fire extinguisher. I'm building an RV and am considering fire extinguisher options. Was about to buy a Halon 1211 2lb fire extinguisher on ebay until I looked up the legalities of importing it to Canada. Seems you can't anymore, even if it is recycled Halon. I know of homebuilders who use household CO2 fire extinguishers. However, these devices, if discharged in a closed space will: - decrease or obscure visibility - reduced breathability wrt Halon discharge - by-products can corrode aluminum if not cleaned off promptly (discharge remains in faying aluminum layers. The cheap household brands will self discharge in storage if the compartment gets too hot (e.g. bubble canopy, on the ramp, standing in the sun). Possible replacement for Halon is Sapphi http://www.tyco.com/tyco/press_relea...l.asp?prid=718 however, I have not seen specific applications for aviation. By the way, in Canada we are required by Transport Canada to carry fire extinguishers in homebuilts. What type of fire extinguishing agent to you use or plan to use? Looking for comments and suggestions from Canadians as well as others familiar with this issue. Thanks. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------- References: http://www.cbsa-asfc.gc.ca/E/pub/cm/...d19-7-2-e.html In summary, the above regulations says: 5. The Ozone-Depleting Substances Products Regulations prohibit the importation of: d) any of the following products that contain any chlorofluorcarbon or bromofluorcarbon from a place outside a party to the Montreal Protocol: (3) fire extinguishers; Transport Canada does not recommend replacement of Halon for aircraft: http://www.tc.gc.ca/CivilAviation/co...ars/AC0179.htm "to date none of these agents have been approved as a substitute for Halon hand-held fire extinguishers used on board aircraft." |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Rich S. wrote:
Establishing and maintaining the required concentration of Halon is difficult, if not impossible, in an open space. Even closed environments such as sealed buildings are difficult to permeate. It is likely impossible under an aircraft cowling when the plane is moving. I disagree. Have you ever used a Halon fire extinguisher? Back in the Reagan era when the defense departement had a lot of money and Halon hadn't yet been restriced, we were given training where we used large Halon hand extinguishers to put out diesel fuel fires set in pans outside. If the Halon is removed and there is still a source of ignition, the fire will take up right where it left off. If you've got a cabin fire, that's a horse of a different smell. With a flood system and a relatively closed space it takes a long time for the Halon to disapate. Try lighting a lighter in a space near where halon has been discharged. Of course, much of what you said also applies to CO2. If the CO2 doesn't cool down the metal (which admittedly it has a higher capacity to do than Halon), then you have the same (actually larger) reignition problems. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
the key statement is...
"It is likely impossible under an aircraft cowling when the plane is moving. " For this application it is a waste of weight, money, and time. "Ron Natalie" wrote in message m... Rich S. wrote: Establishing and maintaining the required concentration of Halon is difficult, if not impossible, in an open space. Even closed environments such as sealed buildings are difficult to permeate. It is likely impossible under an aircraft cowling when the plane is moving. I disagree. Have you ever used a Halon fire extinguisher? Back in the Reagan era when the defense departement had a lot of money and Halon hadn't yet been restriced, we were given training where we used large Halon hand extinguishers to put out diesel fuel fires set in pans outside. If the Halon is removed and there is still a source of ignition, the fire will take up right where it left off. If you've got a cabin fire, that's a horse of a different smell. With a flood system and a relatively closed space it takes a long time for the Halon to disapate. Try lighting a lighter in a space near where halon has been discharged. Of course, much of what you said also applies to CO2. If the CO2 doesn't cool down the metal (which admittedly it has a higher capacity to do than Halon), then you have the same (actually larger) reignition problems. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Ron Natalie" wrote in message
m... Have you ever used a Halon fire extinguisher? Yup. I have fought actual aircraft fires using Halon, Dry Chemical (both "Purple K" and "Super K"), Protein foam, CO2, etc., etc. For a picture, see http://temp.corvetteforum.net/c4/elw...mp/oysters.jpg or http://tinyurl.com/csndg . That's me in the middle next to the pilot's seat. All those little black dots are fresh oysters he was bringing back from Canada. The white stuff is Dry Chemical - 1,500 pounds of it. It wouldn't stop the fire until we covered it with foam. Items like the burning tires would reignite the gasoline behind us after we had moved the hose line past. Had to replace my bunking outfit after that one - too many burn holes to repair it. With a flood system and a relatively closed space it takes a long time for the Halon to disapate. Try lighting a lighter in a space near where halon has been discharged. I spent several years inspecting, discharging and signing off fixed Halon system in computer rooms, satellite communications buildings, and one 180,000 sq. ft. building for Boeing that I can't even talk about. There are no areas on a light aircraft which are sealed tightly enough to establish or maintain a proper concentration of Halon. You can "overkill" a simple pan fire with a portable extinguisher, but that won't work on an engine compartment fire when you're in the cockpit. Halon is a wonderful product, for it's purpose. Of course, much of what you said also applies to CO2. If the CO2 doesn't cool down the metal (which admittedly it has a higher capacity to do than Halon), then you have the same (actually larger) reignition problems. Some other factors must be considered with CO2. Being heavier than air, it tends to settle in a low spot - very important in ship fires. Halon diffuses throughout the space. I'm not sure how the Latent Heat of Vaporization compares between Halon and CO2. In either case the cooling capability is a very minor effect when it comes to extinguishment. If you want cooling, use water. If you want to secure the area and prevent reignition, use foam. In a three-dimensional fire such as an aircraft fire, all bets are off. Even foam may not prevent reignition. Trust me - it is scary to be wading in Jet A trying to plug a leaking tank when the stream coming from the tank keeps igniting. Even in a drill. 8-} Rich S. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Rich S. wrote: ... Some other factors must be considered with CO2. Being heavier than air, it tends to settle in a low spot - very important in ship fires. Halon diffuses throughout the space. Recalling Avogodro's law, Isn't Halon also heavier than air? In fact, isn't it heavier than CO2? -- FF |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
wrote in message
oups.com... Recalling Avogodro's law, Isn't Halon also heavier than air? In fact, isn't it heavier than CO2? Well, I don't remember. I know it's typically discharged from the high point in an enclosed space through specially designed diffuser nozzles, so what you say may be correct. I seem to remember that, like air, it is a homogenous mixture of gasses and tends to diffuse throughout the atmosphere. Maybe that's why some are concerned about the "Ozone hole" and Halon affecting that in the upper atmosphere. It's been a long time since I've studied any basic chemistry and I didn't know that much about it then. If different gaseous elements tended to separate out, wouldn't Nitrogen separate from Oxygen in the atmosphere? But we know it doesn't. I don't know enough to hold up my side of a technical discussion based on Avocados. ![]() different heights inside buildings where we were discharging Halon systems and would measure the concentration at all levels. Rich "Getting old is no job for a sissy!" S. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Rich S. wrote: ... It's been a long time since I've studied any basic chemistry and I didn't know that much about it then. If different gaseous elements tended to separate out, wouldn't Nitrogen separate from Oxygen in the atmosphere? Oxygen and Nitrogen are close to having the same MW which minimizes stratification effects. But even relativley heavy molcules like styrene will not stratify measurably over a height of a meter or so, given sufficient time to diffuse through the volume. Diffusion rate rather than desity differences dominate uneven distributions of gasses in most situations. IIRC diffusion rates are inversely proportionate to the square of MW but bouyancy is directly proportionate. -- FF |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
wrote in message
ups.com... Oxygen and Nitrogen are close to having the same MW which minimizes stratification effects. But even relativley heavy molcules like styrene will not stratify measurably over a height of a meter or so, given sufficient time to diffuse through the volume. Diffusion rate rather than desity differences dominate uneven distributions of gasses in most situations. IIRC diffusion rates are inversely proportionate to the square of MW but bouyancy is directly proportionate. Anything you say, Fred. BTW, can I have two slices of lime with that and - don't forget to salt the rim! ![]() Rich S. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Rich S. wrote:
wrote in message ups.com... Oxygen and Nitrogen are close to having the same MW which minimizes stratification effects. But even relativley heavy molcules like styrene will not stratify measurably over a height of a meter or so, given sufficient time to diffuse through the volume. Diffusion rate rather than desity differences dominate uneven distributions of gasses in most situations. IIRC diffusion rates are inversely proportionate to the square of MW but bouyancy is directly proportionate. Anything you say, Fred. BTW, can I have two slices of lime with that and - don't forget to salt the rim! ![]() Rich S. There are a few Aqueous Fire Fighting Foams (AFFF not sure if that is a recognized acronym or just Sales Hype)systems out there now to replace Halon in Auto Racing applications, has anyones heard whether one of these might be a viable alternative? Mike Butler |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions List (FAQ) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 40 | October 3rd 08 03:13 PM |
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 0 | October 1st 04 02:31 PM |
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions List (FAQ) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 0 | September 2nd 04 05:15 AM |
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 0 | May 1st 04 07:29 PM |
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 4 | August 7th 03 05:12 AM |