REFLECTOR: Fire Retardant Paint
Chuck Harbert
c.harbert at comcast.net
Fri Apr 13 15:53:07 CDT 2007
Hiroo, I got mine a long time ago from AC Spruce, but they don't sell it
anymore. There's a company ( Intl Fire Resistant Systems in N. CA
http://www.firefree.com/customer1.htm ) that makes fire retardant
(intumescent) paint called FF88 that sells for $63/gal + shpg. Normally they
sell in 5 gal pail, but sometimes they have 1 gal cans. It's FM and UL
approved and can be sprayed or brushed on to most everything incl fiberglas.
-------------------------------
Where did you get your fire-retardant paint? Do they need to be sprayed on?
Or can they brushed on?
----- Original Message -----
From: <reflector-request at tvbf.org>
To: <reflector at tvbf.org>
Sent: Friday, April 13, 2007 9:52 AM
Subject: Reflector Digest, Vol 35, Issue 45
> Send Reflector mailing list submissions to
> reflector at tvbf.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://www.tvbf.org/mailman/listinfo/reflector
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> reflector-request at tvbf.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> reflector-owner at tvbf.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Reflector digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. SuperSwitch starter control (Chuck Harbert)
> 2. Re: Turbo heat shielding and fires (Scott Derrick)
> 3. Re: Turbo heat shielding and fires (Hiroo Umeno)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2007 08:20:21 -0700
> From: "Chuck Harbert" <c.harbert at comcast.net>
> Subject: REFLECTOR: SuperSwitch starter control
> To: <reflector at tvbf.org>
> Message-ID: <028501c77ddf$421af370$656da843 at 9B6B411>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> reply-type=original
>
> Anybody know anything about the new Lamar Technologies (
> http://www.lamartech.com/ ) Master Control Switch called SuperSwitch? I
> saw
> an ad GA News. It's all solid state and is smaller/lighter that a std AC
> starter solenoid. It is also programable for max current and resets
> automatically. It is for the experimental market, and is sold thru std AC
> parts distributors. Don't know cost. They also make lightweight starters
> and
> electrical parts for the big jets.
>
> This might handle the concern Dave had about a massive short to ground.
>
> ----------------------------------------
>>
>> My theory is that I can turn off the battery contactor (in the nose, near
>> the batteries) if the #2 wire should short to ground somewhere between
>> the
>> battery and the starter.
>>
>> Dave Scharfenberg
>>
>>
>> On Jan 29, 2007, at 10:37 AM, Scott Derrick wrote:
>>
>> Terry,
>>
>> This conversation about protecting the "big" wire that runs to the rear
>> of
>> the plane to power the starter and to provide for the alternators charge
>> circuit got me interested in possibly protecting it with a big fuse or
>> breaker. 200 Amp or so... Starters draw a huge current.
>>
>> I'm not talking about protection for the alternator, this being the short
>> #10/8 or so wire that connects the alternators charge circuit(B lead) to
>> the
>> supply side of the main starter relay(big wire from main relay to starter
>> relay). That small wire should have a fuse or resettable breaker. I
>> think
>> a
>> fuse would be the right choice.
>>
>> I searched the Aero-Electric list and found this... Its not for a canard
>> but
>> it is about a battery lead from the rear of a tractor style airplane to
>> the
>> firewall. Similar application..
>>
>>>
>>>Bob and everyone else ...
>>>When considering a ground fault, what is best used to protect a #4 cable
>>>run, from the rear battery, in an RV, while powering a bus?
>>>
>>>What is best used to protect this same #4 cable, when it is in parallel
>> with
>>>the front battery and charging current is flowing to the rear batt?
>>>Thanks ...
>>>Jerry Grimmonpre'
>>
>> Fat wires in light aircraft are not, as a rule, "protected".
>> If you study the wiring diagrams for light airplanes going
>> back to the first generator and battery installations
>> (mid 40's), things like fuses and circuit breakers do not
>> appear in the fat feeders. Let's see what the certified guys
>> design to by reading from FAR23.
>>
>> Sec. 23.1357 Circuit protective devices.
>>
>> First, keep in mind that I quote this document only as a means
>> of illustrating thought processes for crafting the most trouble
>> free system . . . and in no way am I suggesting that these
>> words be treated as a "requirement" that should flow down into
>> the OBAM aircraft community.
>>
>> (a) Protective devices, such as fuses or circuit breakers, must be
>> installed in all electrical circuits other than--
>>
>> (1) Main circuits of starter motors used during starting only; and
>>
>> (2) Circuits in which no hazard is presented by their omission.
>>
>> I can tell you that these paragraphs describe the portion of the
>> architecture you are asking about. Fat feeders in light aircraft
>> are seldom if ever involved in a hard fault situation because of
>> the extra care we take in securing such wires and thoughtfulness
>> for installation to keep them clear of moving parts that might
>> pose a threat.
>>
>> When a fat feeder suffers compromised insulation, it's generally
>> against thin sheet metal and the fault tends to be "self clearing",
>> i.e., it take a lot of force designed to drive the faulted conductor
>> to ground such that the conductor is now at-risk for catastrophic
>> failure due to high currents. Relatively light, passing contacts
>> tend to burn open with little or no effect on the rest of the system.
>>
>> (b) A protective device for a circuit essential to flight safety may not
>> be
>> used to protect any other circuit.
>>
>> Common sense. A fuse or breaker for every accessory. Don't stack
>> multiple accessories on a single breaker/fuse whether "essential"
>> or not. Of course, this begs for a definition of "essential" which
>> is a topic for a who chapter. The government position on aviation
>> is to build ever more goodies into the essential category . . .
>>
>> As I've described in Chapter 17 . . . it's up to YOU to decide
>> what's "essential" based on your understanding of personal
>> and mechanical limits based on proposed missions.
>>
>>
>> (c) Each resettable circuit protective device ("trip free" device in
>> which
>> the tripping mechanism cannot be overridden by the operating control)
>> must
>> be
>> designed so that--
>>
>> (1) A manual operation is required to restore service after tripping; and
>>
>> (2) If an overload or circuit fault exists, the device will open the
>> circuit regardless of the position of the operating control.
>>
>> Common sense.
>>
>> (d) If the ability to reset a circuit breaker or replace a fuse is
>> essential to safety in flight, that circuit breaker or fuse must be so
>> located and identified that it can be readily reset or replaced in
>> flight.
>>
>> Yup, good thing to do. Now, I've suggested for years that there's
>> no good reason for ANY single piece of equipment to become so
>> "essential" that it qualifies for special treatment of access to
>> fuses or breakers. There are hundreds more things that cause
>> an accessory to fail that DOES NOT open a fuse compared to
>> failures that DO open a fuse. Focusing on the ability to restore
>> a fuse or breaker circuit is non-productive. These are
>> a tiny proportion of all failures and likelihood of getting
>> a system back by replacing the fuse is nil.
>>
>> It stands to reason then that if any one SYSTEM is so
>> desirable, then there had better be a backup SYSTEM.
>> Once this condition is achieved, there is no reason for
>> making ANY fuse or breaker accessible in flight.
>>
>> (e) For fuses identified as replaceable in flight--
>>
>> (1) There must be one spare of each rating or 50 percent
>> spare fuses of each rating, whichever is greater; and
>>
>> (2) The spare fuse(s) must be readily accessible to any
>> required pilot.
>>
>> As thoughtful designers and users of OBAM aircraft, we're
>> able to craft flight systems that completely negate any
>> reason to observe this requirement . . . we can design
>> so that there is no need to reach any fuse/breaker because
>> there are no singular, "essential" systems likely to be
>> resurrected by replacing a fuse or resetting a breaker.
>>
>> This is the general answer on circuit protection . . . the
>> short answer to your specific question is that experience
>> and common sense have shown that there is no value in
>> adding "protection" to long battery feeders (other than
>> the locally situated battery contactor). This includes
>> the generally smaller but still quite robust feeder from
>> the cranking circuit to the main bus.
>>
>> Bob. . .
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> -
>> The only security of all is in a free press. The force of public opinion
>> cannot be resisted when permitted freely to be expressed. The agitation
>> it
>> produces must be submitted to. It is necessary, to keep the waters pure.
>>
>> Thomas Jefferson to Lafayette, 1823. ME 15:491
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> To change your email address, visit
>> http://www.tvbf.org/mailman/listinfo/reflector
>>
>> Visit the gallery! www.tvbf.org/gallery
>> user:pw = tvbf:jamaicangoose
>> Check new archives: www.tvbf.org/pipermail
>> Check old archives: http://www.tvbf.org/archives/velocity/maillist.html
>>
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL:
>> http://www.tvbf.org/mailman/private/reflector/attachments/20070412/3c74b14a/attachment.html
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Visit the gallery! tvbf:jamaicangoose
>>
>> End of Reflector Digest, Vol 35, Issue 42
>> *****************************************
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2007 10:49:59 -0600
> From: Scott Derrick <scott at tnstaafl.net>
> Subject: Re: REFLECTOR: Turbo heat shielding and fires
> To: Velocity Aircraft Owners and Builders list <reflector at tvbf.org>
> Message-ID: <461FB4B7.1070702 at tnstaafl.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
> http://www.tvbf.org/mailman/private/reflector/attachments/20070413/cbdbd7bc/attachment.htm
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2007 09:53:02 -0700
> From: Hiroo Umeno <humeno at microsoft.com>
> Subject: Re: REFLECTOR: Turbo heat shielding and fires
> To: Velocity Aircraft Owners and Builders list <reflector at tvbf.org>
> Message-ID:
> <9F59E90E6E525B40BB7B59BD72271CF752DAD1252D at NA-EXMSG-C103.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> Chuck,
>
> Where did you get your fire-retardant paint? Do they need to be sprayed
> on? Or can they brushed on?
>
> It seems like I'll need to buid myself a little "fire alarm" just in
> case...
>
> Thanks.
>
> Hiroo
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: reflector-bounces at tvbf.org [mailto:reflector-bounces at tvbf.org] On
> Behalf Of Chuck Harbert
> Sent: Friday, April 13, 2007 8:25 AM
> To: reflector at tvbf.org
> Subject: REFLECTOR: Turbo heat shielding and fires
>
>
>
>
> Like Sid, I also had an engine fire (actually 2) that lead to emergency
> landings. In both cases, I had an engine oil cooler that failed. The
> cooler located below the engine (turbo Mazda 20B) sprayed oil on the hot
> exhaust.
> Fortunately, they both were at takeoff and the controller told me I had
> smoke coming out the back. On the first, the engine continued to run, so I
> landed after a quick course reversal (9K' runway), but on the second, the
> engine quit just after gear up and I was on crosswind. I was able to turn
> back to the field, but not get my main gear down, so I did a partial belly
> landing (it takes awhile to get that main gear down and you sink rate
> triples). In both cases, the fire went out when the engine quit (oil pump
> quit).
>
> What prevented the plane from burning up was the fire retardant paint I
> put on the inside of the cowl and in the wing root. I now have a temp
> alarm near the exit of the cowl. I have considered also installing a small
> video camera that looks into the engine compartment or at the cowl exit
> (preferred). I understand they're cheap and light, but I don't know how
> they would stand up to the vibration. I also bot some small mirrors and
> considered putting one in the inboard side of the winglet, but it has to
> be big to see it from the cockpit.
>
> I also spent some time dealing with turbo heat which I think you really
> can't simulate under ground run conditions. The turbo and exhaust pipe
> were ceramic coated, but I also had to construct a stainless steel shroud
> (1/2 inch away from turbo) cover to keep from blistering the fire
> retardant paint on the cowls (about 250F, I think). Radiant (line of
> sight) heat from even a normalized engine (atmospheric) can really heat up
> the surrounding materials. I also put a flat SS shield on the inboard side
> of the turbo to prevent radiant heat transfer to the compressor side. And
> finally, I directed outside air onto the turbo and exhaust pipe, so that
> it would exit the cowl quickly. During idle and taxi, and after landing,
> the cowls got very warm (too hot to keep your hand on), so I had to put in
> top vents.
> Turbos are designed for up to 2,000F temps which is red/white hot, so you
> better make sure you have this kind of temp under control.
>
> I'm going to try to use the insulated turbo shields that strap onto the
> turbo on my current installation which I think should also work. You can
> buy these for almost any turbo at the speed shops or mfgs.
>
> Someone told me a couple years ago of a Velocity that was flying up the
> west coast that had a fire that burned quite awhile unknown to the pilot.
> I believe he said the crashed when the spar/wing root failed. I guess
> since I fireproofed the firewall, cowls, and wing roots, I'd leave the
> engine running until I was sure of a safe landing. Another story was of a
> hot oil leak that sent fumes into the cabin thru the floor oil/wire duct
> that cause a fatal crash. I think if you seal the openings from the engine
> compartment, you shouldn't get smoke/fire into the cabin which is more
> important than the fire.
>
> Hope you all learned something from my bad experiences.
>
> Chuck H
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <reflector-request at tvbf.org>
> To: <reflector at tvbf.org>
> Sent: Friday, April 13, 2007 7:34 AM
> Subject: Reflector Digest, Vol 35, Issue 43
>
>
>> Send Reflector mailing list submissions to reflector at tvbf.org
>>
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>> http://www.tvbf.org/mailman/listinfo/reflector
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>> reflector-request at tvbf.org
>>
>> You can reach the person managing the list at reflector-owner at tvbf.org
>>
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> than "Re: Contents of Reflector digest..."
>>
>>
>> Today's Topics:
>>
>> 1. Re: Panel Changes (Craig and Denise Woolston)
>> 2. oil temp problems solved (Tom)
>> 3. Re: oil temp problems solved (Douglas Holub)
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2007 05:51:12 -0800
>> From: "Craig and Denise Woolston" <cdwoolston at sbcglobal.net>
>> Subject: Re: REFLECTOR: Panel Changes
>> To: "'Velocity Aircraft Owners and Builders list'"
>> <reflector at tvbf.org>
>> Message-ID: <200704131255.l3DCtJWF006216 at dax.awpi.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>>
>> Not sure what Scott B reason is but mine would be #2 allows you to
>> quickly tell what attitude instrument is no good. With only two, you
>> have to guess, with three it's a democracy.
>>
>>
>>
>> Craig
>>
>>
>>
>> _____
>>
>> From: reflector-bounces at tvbf.org [mailto:reflector-bounces at tvbf.org]
>> On Behalf Of Scott Derrick
>> Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2007 5:56 PM
>> To: Velocity Aircraft Owners and Builders list
>> Subject: Re: REFLECTOR: Panel Changes
>>
>>
>>
>> Scott,
>>
>> thanks for your input. Can you say why #2 over #1?
>>
>> A wrinkle in the equation is that the ILS CDI can not be used by the GPS.
>> They don't speak the same language. I really hate this widespread use
>> of proprietary buss's in the aviation world. If desktop computers
>> did that, they would still cost $10,000, which come to think about
>> it, thats what aviation computers cost!
>>
>> thanks, Scott D
>>
>> Scott Baker wrote:
>>
>> For IFR ops, I think I would vote for Possibility #2.
>> Put the CDI on an A:B switch for Nav 1<>Nav #2 (unless the Dynon EFIS
>> can display one of the Nav's).
>> SB
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Scott Derrick" <mailto:scott at tnstaafl.net>
>> <scott at tnstaafl.net>
>> To: "Velocity Aircraft Owners and Builders list"
>> <mailto:reflector at tvbf.org> <reflector at tvbf.org>
>> Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2007 12:17 PM
>> Subject: REFLECTOR: Panel Changes
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> I'm going to be installing two Dynon instruments. One an EFIS an the
>> other an EMS(Engine Monitor System). I have 8 3.125 instruments in an
>> extended
>> 6 pack configuration. The standard 6 pack plus two CDI's to the
>> right, one for the GPS the other for the VOR/ILS. Two rows of 4
>> instruments.
>> Because of the size of the Dynon units the easiest place to install
>> them is where the CDI units are.
>>
>> So I now have 8 holes and 10 instruments. 2 have to go. I'm looking
>> for input as to which two instruments to ditch and why you think so...
>>
>> First some info on the existing instruments.
>> 1.) The AI & DG are integral to my auto pilot so for now they must stay.
>> This also gives me redundancy for gyro instruments, one set vacuum the
>> other electric.
>> 2.) The GPS course will be displayed on the Dynon when the EFIS or EMS
>> is in HSI mode, but they don't have a course indicator when it is in
>> AI mode.. Not sure when they expect to get that added.
>> 3.) The VOR/ILS can not be displayed on the Dynon, incompatible
>> interface.
>>
>> I have attached an image of what the panel looks like and possible
>> layouts I have come up with. I welcome any comments..
>>
>> thanks, Scott
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> -
>> The only security of all is in a free press. The force of public
>> opinion cannot be resisted when permitted freely to be expressed. The
>> agitation it produces must be submitted to. It is necessary, to keep
>> the waters pure.
>>
>> Thomas Jefferson to Lafayette, 1823. ME 15:491
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> ------
>> ----
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> To change your email address, visit
>> http://www.tvbf.org/mailman/listinfo/reflector
>>
>> Visit the gallery! www.tvbf.org/gallery user:pw = tvbf:jamaicangoose
>> Check new archives: www.tvbf.org/pipermail Check old archives:
>> http://www.tvbf.org/archives/velocity/maillist.html
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> To change your email address, visit
>> http://www.tvbf.org/mailman/listinfo/reflector
>>
>> Visit the gallery! www.tvbf.org/gallery user:pw = tvbf:jamaicangoose
>> Check new archives: www.tvbf.org/pipermail Check old archives:
>> http://www.tvbf.org/archives/velocity/maillist.html
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> -
>> The most effectual engines for [pacifying a nation] are the public
>> papers... [A despotic] government always [keeps] a kind of standing
>> army of newswriters who, without any regard to truth or to what should
>> be like truth, [invent] and put into the papers whatever might serve
>> the ministers.
>>
>> Thomas Jefferson to G. K. van Hogendorp
>> Oct. 13, 1785. (*) ME 5:181, Papers 8:632
>> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was
>> scrubbed...
>> URL:
>> http://www.tvbf.org/mailman/private/reflector/attachments/20070413/d92
>> 9084e/attachment.htm
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 2
>> Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2007 09:34:56 -0400
>> From: Tom <tomcat05 at comcast.net>
>> Subject: REFLECTOR: oil temp problems solved
>> To: reflector at tvbf.org
>> Message-ID: <461F8700.4060005 at comcast.net>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
>>
>> After several attempts at making the one oil cooler scenario work, I
>> gave up and added a 2nd cooler-steady temps dropped from 240 to 195. I
>> placed the 2nd cooler on the upper engine baffle (strongly braced). I
>> made a 3" tee (45 degree) out of aluminum tubing and share the ram air
>> for the induction with the duct for the new cooler. Flew plane this
>> morning and the manifold pressure appears to be the same, guess the
>> ram air was a bit of overkill in stock configuration. I do believe
>> that the vernatherm is the main issue in causing higher temps. The
>> extra plumbing intrinsic to the Velocity design increases oil pressure
>> and at cruise speed keeps the vernatherm partially open. When you pull
>> power and the pressure decreases you can see an immediate drop in
>> temps. Although I did install a new vernatherm I've saved the old one
>> to modify for testing. While I was at it, I sealed up the baffling and
>> the CHTs dropped from 375 to 320. Life is good! Now I can start
>> playing with the avionics (after Sun-N-Fun).
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 3
>> Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2007 09:34:41 -0500
>> From: "Douglas Holub" <doug.holub at tx.rr.com>
>> Subject: Re: REFLECTOR: oil temp problems solved
>> To: "Velocity Aircraft Owners and Builders list" <reflector at tvbf.org>
>> Message-ID: <00c801c77dd8$df4a1290$6a01a8c0 at Workshop>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
>> reply-type=original
>>
>> I would love to see a picture of your ram air scoop, so that I don't
>> make mine too big, also.
>>
>> Doug Holub
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Tom" <tomcat05 at comcast.net>
>> To: <reflector at tvbf.org>
>> Sent: Friday, April 13, 2007 8:34 AM
>> Subject: REFLECTOR: oil temp problems solved
>>
>>
>>> After several attempts at making the one oil cooler scenario work, I
>>> gave up and added a 2nd cooler-steady temps dropped from 240 to 195.
>>> I placed the 2nd cooler on the upper engine baffle (strongly braced).
>>> I made a 3" tee (45 degree) out of aluminum tubing and share the ram
>>> air for the induction with the duct for the new cooler. Flew plane
>>> this morning and the manifold pressure appears to be the same, guess
>>> the ram air was a bit of overkill in stock configuration. I do
>>> believe that the vernatherm is the main issue in causing higher
>>> temps. The extra plumbing intrinsic to the Velocity design increases
>>> oil pressure and at cruise speed keeps the vernatherm partially open.
>>> When you pull power and the pressure decreases you can see an
>>> immediate drop in temps. Although I did install a new vernatherm I've
>>> saved the old one to modify for testing. While I was at it, I sealed
>>> up the baffling and the CHTs dropped from 375 to 320. Life is good!
>>> Now I can start playing with the avionics (after Sun-N-Fun).
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> To change your email address, visit
>>> http://www.tvbf.org/mailman/listinfo/reflector
>>>
>>> Visit the gallery! www.tvbf.org/gallery user:pw = tvbf:jamaicangoose
>>> Check new archives: www.tvbf.org/pipermail Check old archives:
>>> http://www.tvbf.org/archives/velocity/maillist.html
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Visit the gallery! tvbf:jamaicangoose
>>
>> End of Reflector Digest, Vol 35, Issue 43
>> *****************************************
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> To change your email address, visit
> http://www.tvbf.org/mailman/listinfo/reflector
>
> Visit the gallery! www.tvbf.org/gallery user:pw = tvbf:jamaicangoose
> Check new archives: www.tvbf.org/pipermail Check old archives:
> http://www.tvbf.org/archives/velocity/maillist.html
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Visit the gallery! tvbf:jamaicangoose
>
> End of Reflector Digest, Vol 35, Issue 45
> *****************************************
More information about the Reflector
mailing list