Department of Transportation

This amendment establishes equipment requirements to improve cabin fire protection for passengers.

David D. Evans, David W. Stroup

Recently developed methods to calculate the time required for. ceiling mounted heat and smoke detectors to respond to growing fires are reviewed. A computer program, that calculates activation times for both fixed temperatures and rate of rise heat detectors in response to fires that increase in heat release rate proportionally with the square of time from ignition is given. This program produces equivalent resu1ts to the tables published in Appendix C, Guide for Automatic Fire Detector Spacing, (NFPA 72E, 1984). A separate method and corresponding program are provided to calculate response time for fires having arbitrary heat release rate histories. This method is based on quasi-steady ceiling layer gas flow assumptions. Assuming a constant proportionality between smoke and heat release from burning materials, a method is described to calculate smoke detector response time modeling the smoke detector as a low temperature heat detector in either of the two response time models.

David R. Blake

A total of 23 fire tests were conducted in a 2357-cubic foot simulated class C cargo compartment. Various lining materials, fire sources, loading configurations, and smoke detectors were used to determine the ability of class C cargo compartments to control fires. The simulated class C compartment did not successfully control Bunsen burner test specified in FAR 25,855 does not assure that cargo liners will not burn through when subjected to realistic fires.

C.P. Sarkos, R.G. Hill

The primary objective of this paper is to describe the safety benefits of advanced interior fire test conditions. A secondary objective is to characterize and analyze the hazards affecting occupant survivability in cabin fires.

C.P. Sarkos, R.G. Hill

Realistic full-scale fire tests demonstrated the potential safety benefits of advanced interior panels in transport aircraft, and displayed the characteristics of cabin fire hazards. The tests were conducted in a C-133 airplane, modified to resemble a wide-body interior, under postcrash and in-flight fire scenarios. The safety benefit of the advanced panel ranged from 2-minute delay in the onset of flashover when the cabin fire was initiated by a fuel fire adjacent to a fuselage rupture, to the elimination of flashover when the fuel fire was adjacent to a door opening or when an in-flight fire was started from a seat drenched in gasoline. Analysis of the cabin hazards measured during postcrash fire tests indicated that the greatest threat to passenger survival was cabin flashover, and that toxic gases did not reach hazardous levels unless flashover occurred.