Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Mirage on February 04, 2011, 03:16:40 PM
-
an honest question, how can an empty fual tank catch fire? did most planes not have measures of getting rid of the fumes once the gas was gone?
-
It might have something to do with the fact that fuel itself doesn't burn so well... It's the vapor/air mixture which ignites.
Possibly the fumes burn and the leftover puddles of gas in the tank feed them....
Never put a match near the mouth of an emptied gas can for the same reason.
-
thats what I ment with that last part of my post, did planes not have systems to purge the fumes from their tanks when they were "empty"
-
No. Not just because they're empty. Some pumped CO2 or exhaust fumes or something into tanks to extinguish them but for the most part the protection was to prevent puncture in the first place.
-
I had heard they had rubber bladders so that they contracted around the fuel preventing the build up of vapors.
-
Most of them had rubber linings, some that when they came in contact with the gas itself swelled up. The point was the bullet would puncture the tank, the tank would leak out, the rubber lining would swell up and cut off the leak (or minimize it). Some just had rubber as a way of deflecting the slower bullets (ones that expended their energy punching through the wing or the fuselage already) or flak shrapnel.
they wouldn't swell and shrink per se, not like balloons or anything.
-
so with these measures that we listed in place, would you both not agree that it is very unlikely an empty fuel tank gets ignited?
-
so with these measures that we listed in place, would you both not agree that it is very unlikely an empty fuel tank gets ignited?
depends, the zero didn't have anything other than a metal tank. Also, you could get a fire if a fuel line was hit instead of the tank.
-
im talking stuff from europe, more specificly, a 190A-5
-
No. I think anything on a plane could get ignited. The residue of gas in an empty tank, the liquid coolant could also be highly flamable that keeps the engine running. The electrical system. The O2 system. The rubber in the tires.
I take it you're suggesting that planes in AH should not catch on fire as much?
Well one of the main methods of shooting a plane down in WW2 was to set it on fire. Wing or fuselage or engine or whatever. If you saw smoke it was only a probable kill. If you saw damage it wasn't even that. If you saw flames, it was instantly classified as a kill (for the US, at any rate).
-
No krusty im not suggesting that they shouldn't catch fire as much, I am simply trying to figure out why those fires happen, and learn a little while im at it :)
-
Ah... Well I take the simplistic approach to it...
Usually I'm set on fire immediately before I say something like:
"That rat^!%@#$!@ so-and-so in the %$&^$ plane behind me shot my %$# so fulla lead that I'll be tasting it for a week!"
Usually it's because I got shot up.
(lol, I know, I know, now what you were looking for!)
-
:lol at least you have a good sence of humor :)
-
depends, the zero didn't have anything other than a metal tank. Also, you could get a fire if a fuel line was hit instead of the tank.
Actually it did.. The A6M5 had a CO2 system installed.
-
Didn't stop them from bursting into fire with the 6x50cal firepower :) It only helps "so much"...
-
An empty fuel tank is more likely to catch fire than a full/half-full one. Not sure of the modeling in the game for fuel tanks, or if the self-sealing tanks some birds have work in this game, but I do know that the incendiary rounds would be the only type that would cause a fire.
-
Didn't stop them from bursting into fire with the 6x50cal firepower :) It only helps "so much"...
and sometimes the c02 mechanisms failed so nothing was sprayed to put the fire out...so then the pilot could do only one thing put his head between his legs and kiss his bellybutton goodbye :lol haha
-
An empty fuel tank is more likely to catch fire than a full/half-full one. Not sure of the modeling in the game for fuel tanks, or if the self-sealing tanks some birds have work in this game, but I do know that the incendiary rounds would be the only type that would cause a fire.
There is no such thing as an empty fuel tank on an aircraft. There is always some amount of "unusable" fuel that will remain in the tank. Certainly enough to produce flammable vapors. A partially empty tank with lots of vapors would be more likely to "explode" if the vapors in the tank are ignited, but I can't see where an empty tank would be more likely to burn than a tank with lots of fuel in it -- the full tank has much more fuel for the fire, will have a more productive leak if punctured.
A lot of fires on aircraft can be caused by the aircraft itself once the fuel tank is compromised. Ever notice in the gun camera films how many wing fires you see on B-17s? There are 3 fuel tanks holding 850 gallons in each wing aft of the engines on the Fortress. Behind each engine and aft of the fuel tanks is the exhaust outlet/wastegate/turbocharger outlet. Take a peek at this video showing the exhaust flame (http://www.dalefalk.com/Movies/Bombers/7508037_tS88D#489159635_odj98-A-LB). FYI, this is at a low cruise power setting of 28" MP, 1800 RPM in Auto-lean. I'm guessing that could easily start a fire if the fuel tank was leaking. <G>
-
Either some dude that can only be scientific or just a bumhole...................... .....................
Since you entered the convo....................... Liquid fuel or vapor fuel, what's more likely to start a fire. Go ask your Dad.
There is no such thing as an empty fuel tank on an aircraft. There is always some amount of "unusable" fuel that will remain in the tank. Certainly enough to produce flammable vapors. A partially empty tank with lots of vapors would be more likely to "explode" if the vapors in the tank are ignited, but I can't see where an empty tank would be more likely to burn than a tank with lots of fuel in it -- the full tank has much more fuel for the fire, will have a more productive leak if punctured.
A lot of fires on aircraft can be caused by the aircraft itself once the fuel tank is compromised. Ever notice in the gun camera films how many wing fires you see on B-17s? There are 3 fuel tanks holding 850 gallons in each wing aft of the engines on the Fortress. Behind each engine and aft of the fuel tanks is the exhaust outlet/wastegate/turbocharger outlet. Take a peek at this video showing the exhaust flame (http://www.dalefalk.com/Movies/Bombers/7508037_tS88D#489159635_odj98-A-LB). FYI, this is at a low cruise power setting of 28" MP, 1800 RPM in Auto-lean. I'm guessing that could easily start a fire if the fuel tank was leaking. <G>
-
Either some dude that can only be scientific or just a bumhole...................... .....................
Since you entered the convo....................... Liquid fuel or vapor fuel, what's more likely to start a fire. Go ask your Dad.
Wow. Spent 20 years doing Crash Rescue....I'm pretty much up to speed on aircraft fires.
To answer your question it's the vapor given off by the fuel that burns.
My Dad died 19 years ago....I wish I could ask him questions.
-
Why you gotta make me feel bad for what I wrote ya bum?
But you nailed it on the head, and your Pop would be proud of you sir!!!!!!
:salute
EDIT: oh, cause I was being a jerk to you.... Understood :salute