T.M. Guastavino, F. Fann

In 1982, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Technical Center completed a test and evaluation project on use of handheld extinguishers in transport category aircraft. Some of the tests involved the comparative effectiveness of handheld extinguishers in a specific fire scenario: a triple non-fireblocked aircraft seat ignited with gasoline. The test work included the identification and quantification of effluent gas species produced by the fire and the extinguishing chemicals.

The present study describes the comparative effectiveness of the extinguishers used in the above tests and some newer systems in two distinct fire tests. The first test is the "crib" test used by Underwriters Laboratory, Inc. to rate handheld extinguishers. The second test is the same seat test used in the earlier work.

The tests employed aircraft approved water extinguishers and Halon 1211 extinguishers as benchmarks. New formulations using" surfactants and extinguishing powders in aqueous solutions were tested against the benchmark performance levels. In these tests, certain new solutions were able to meet or exceed the performance of the benchmark agents.

N.R. Keltner

Measurements made in large pool fires with a variety of objects have shown that there is not a one-to-one correspondence between the measured fire temperatures and either the heat flux to the object. The measurements indicate that the heat flux depends on the physical size and characteristics of the object. A large, thermally massive object will heat slowly; the radioactive heat flux to this cold surface is reduced by the thermal interaction between the object and the flames. A numerical model of this interaction is used to help explain the observed results.

The Air Transport Association

The Air Transport Association (ATA) has adopted its 1990 Safety Agenda, identifying specific safety issues the association and its member airliners will address in the coming year.

David Blake

The purpose of this project was to determine the hazards associated with aerosol cans involved in cargo fires. Over the last several years the chlorofluorocarbon propellant used in aerosol cans has been replaced with hydrocarbons such as butane, propane, and isobutene. These flammable gases would normally be prohibited on passenger carrying airplanes but there is an exception for up to 75 ounces per person for medicinal and toilet articles when carried in checked baggage only. Seven fire tests involving aerosol cans were conducted in an 800 cubic foot cargo compartment. The main conclusions of the study were that hydrocarbon propellants in aerosol cans increase the damage potential of luggage fires; the fires in a simulated Class D compartment where aerosol cans ruptured and ignited were not contained; a Class C compartment provides significantly more protection against aerosol can fire threat than does a Class D compartment; an aerosol can rupturing and igniting in a Class D or Class C cargo compartment would eliminate the compartment’s ability to control ventilations and drafts; and aerosol cans would be exposed to elevated temperatures for a longer period of time in a luggage fire in a Class D compartment in a Class C compartment.

J. Nimitz, R. Tapscott, St. Skaggs, H. Beacon

A study of hand-held fire extinguishers aboard civil aviation aircraft involved a detailed survey of the past, current and potential use of hand held extinguishers in civil aviation. A comprehensive literature search was conducted in conjunction with numerous on-site visits to a wide spectrum of users and manufacturers within the United States. Data on pertinent regulations, standards, policy, loss history, and testing were accumulated, reviewed, and analyzed. An evaluation of current practice and of the effectiveness and suitability of various hand-held extinguishers was conducted. Also included was an attempt to quantify the actual national experience of in-flight fires.