Today, the ice finally melted enough to open my hanger door. This is the first
time I have been able to open it since my last flight on November 14, 2013.
Yep, you guessed it. I was not intending to fly but the urge was irresistible
and I took to the sky. The Corvair took a little coaxing to sta
http://tugantek.com/cozylinks/NNLS/test/nlFirewall.php
On 15 Mar 2014 12:52, "Kenneth B. Jones" wrote:
>
Snipped...
>
>
> John/Rogelio,
>
> IF certifying under FAR 23, and using other than the listed materials,
then the fire test is required. Who knows? Perhaps .005" stainless over
Fiberfrax is better than .015 stainless.
>
> Ken
I agree. Someone ne
Super cool. pics and videos to follow ??
Jeff york
On Saturday, March 15, 2014 3:16 PM, Mark Jones wrote:
Today, the ice finally melted enough to open my hanger door. This is the first
time I have been able to open it since my last flight on November 14, 2013.
Yep, you guessed it. I was n
.015 in Stainless seem to be the only option...
On 15 Mar 2014 04:14, "Kenneth B. Jones" wrote:
>
>
> On Mar 14, 2014, at 11:18 PM, John Bouyea wrote:
>
> > Anyone
> > make a reference as to what heat level/ temprature and duration is
> > "approved" as a test?
> >
>
>
> 2000 degrees F for 15 min
Great info. I guess my point to the original question/comment was the designed
material was not easily found or within a reasonable price. The drawings still
shows .005 stainless and asbestos on the firewall. Maybe this dialog will
bring about some sort of addendum to the drawings with a safe
We're NOT certifying under Part 23. The info I provided was in response to a
question from John. But, if you want to do the test, you can get some ideas
from http://www.fire.tc.faa.gov/handbook.stm
On Mar 15, 2014, at 9:12 AM, Rogelio Serrano wrote:
> On 15 Mar 2014 12:52, "Kenneth B. Jones"
Fibnrefrax is the heat shield, not the stainless, Virg
On 3/15/2014 8:52 AM, Kenneth B. Jones wrot
>> .015 in Stainless seem to be the only option...
> Thanks for digging up the reference Ken! I'll see what I ca
>> n do.
>>
>> Right off the bat, the existing plans method for constructing
>
>
On Mar 15, 2014, at 7:51 AM, Rogelio Serrano wrote:
> .015 in Stainless seem to be the only option...
On Mar 15, 2014, at 7:39 AM, John Bouyea wrote:
> Thanks for digging up the reference Ken! I'll see what I can do.
>
> Right off the bat, the existing plans method for constructing our
I should probably clarify that the exact type of aluminum doesn't matter
much, given that it all melts at about the same temperature. I'm guessing
Tony recommended 2024-T6 because it's a little stiffer than most others and
would look better, but if you've got any kind of .015" aluminum around,
Ken Jones wrote:
>>IF certifying under FAR 23, and using other than the listed materials,
>>then the fire test is required. Who knows? Perhaps .005" stainless over
>>Fiberfrax is better than .015 stainless.,<<
I bought the .015" thick stainless for my firewall, because I couldn't find
anythin
Thanks for digging up the reference Ken! I'll see what I can do.
Right off the bat, the existing plans method for constructing our aircraft
with .005 stainless doesn't meet Part 23 requirements in any regard...
-Original Message-
From: KRnet [mailto:krnet-bounces at list.krnet.org] On Be
On Mar 14, 2014, at 11:18 PM, John Bouyea wrote:
> Anyone
> make a reference as to what heat level/ temprature and duration is
> "approved" as a test?
>
2000 degrees F for 15 minutes, per part 23.
?23.1191 Firewalls.
(a) Each engine, auxiliary power unit, fuel burning heater, and other
com
13 matches
Mail list logo
