Airfield-style fire trucks were put aboard carriers, each carrying AFFF and dry powder (PKP-potassium bicarbonate powder). Flush deck nozzles were installed to dispense AFFF on demand to deal with pooled area fuel fires. As a result, aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF) was introduced as an effective replacement for protein foam, and it became the primary agent in fighting flight deck fires. Fighting fires aboard carriers, while always challenging, had become more so in the age of jet aircraft, which carried ten times as much fuel and ten times the weight of explosives as had predecessor aircraft in World War II. In the late 1960s, a series of aircraft carrier fires incident to Vietnam War operations triggered a search for more effective ways to fight massive flight deck fires. The emphasis in fire fighting was to attack fires directly with men manning hoses dispensing solid water streams or fog, and this remained the accepted approach during the immediate postwar years. Steam smothering systems were available in some ships to handle engine room bilge fires. Hand-held CO 2 extinguishers were widely used, and overhead water sprinklers were also employed in confined spaces and aircraft carrier hangar decks. Continuing this tradition of evolutionary improvement to meet changing needs, halon was introduced into the Navy as a principal fire extinguishing agent in recognition of its extraordinary fire extinguishing capabilities.įires aboard ship in World War II were fought by damage control teams applying water and protein foam. Over the years the Navy has sought ways to improve fire fighting capabilities as ships have been required to handle increasing quantities of munitions and volatile aircraft fuels, and have been equipped with propulsion systems requiring high-pressure, easily atomized fuels. In ships, on the other hand, the requirement to cope with accidental fires, particularly in machinery spaces, has led the way to developing more effective fire extinguishing systems. In recent years the need to prevent loss of aircraft damaged by enemy guns and missiles has been a driver in efforts to develop and install fire extinguishing systems in aircraft. A Class B fire, for example, ranks at the top of the critical list and can lead very quickly to loss of an aircraft if unchecked on a ship the possibility of immediate loss of the vessel is less, but loss of life can be considerable if such a fire is not brought under control in short order. The frequency of occurrence and seriousness of a class of fire and the impact on occupants vary considerably between ships and aircraft. The Navy follows the general practice of categorizing fires by type of fuel-Class A for paper, wood, and general combustibles, B for flammable liquids, C for electrical, and D for metals. Understandably then, fire prevention and fire fighting readiness are major concerns of captains and pilots as well as senior commanders. And crews of ships and aircraft share a common threat from fires-the potential for loss of life. Extinguishing fires at sea has always been a matter of priority throughout maritime history, particularly for navies, which are faced with the dual challenge of putting out fires caused by both accidental ignition and enemy action.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |