Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
F-16 Accident Always Involve Hydro Zine?  
User currently offlineSkyman From Germany, joined May 2006, 494 posts, RR: 0
Posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 15239 times:

If an F-16 crashes does this always involve the special emergency crew to take care of the Hydro zine from the Emergency power unit?

20 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineSkyman From Germany, joined May 2006, 494 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 15021 times:

Does nobody have any Idea  Sad

User currently offlinePtrjong From Netherlands, joined Mar 2005, 3906 posts, RR: 19
Reply 2, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 15014 times:

Well. As far as I know, the F-16 still uses hydrazine as emergency fuel and it's dangerous stuff apparently. In the old days, whenever a Dutch F-16 crashed there was talk of the hydrazine. You don't hear much of it now, but I guess it would still be a matter of concern.

Peter



The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
User currently offlineGrandTheftAero From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 254 posts, RR: 5
Reply 3, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 15005 times:

Wow... I had no idea there was hydrazine on the F-16.

It's usually used as monopropellant for rocket thrusters and is also found on the Space Shuttle APU. It's HIGHLY toxic. When the shuttle lands you see it followed by large fans to blow away any residual hydrazine.

Anyone have anymore info regarding hydrazine use on the F-16?


User currently offlinePtrjong From Netherlands, joined Mar 2005, 3906 posts, RR: 19
Reply 4, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 14988 times:

Found some info (in Dutch) on a Belgian website: http://users.telenet.be/lode.stevens/cma/Hydrazine.htm
The F-16 Emergency Power Unit (EPU) uses 'H70' which is 70% hydrazine and 30% water. A tank for approx 25 litres of H70 is situated on the RH side of the fuselage near the wing. When used, the EPU's exhaust gasses smell of ammonia and are believed to still contain hydrazine.
The article continues to sum up all the nasty hazards of hydrazine, I guess that's easy enough to find in your own language if you're interested.

After the recent Dutch F-16 crash at Volkel AFB firemen were seen in protective clothing as a precaution against a possible hydrazine leak.

It seems that the F-16 is about the only aircraft to use this stuff, together with the Space Shuttle - and the Messerschmitt Me 163 rocket fighter.

Peter



The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
User currently offlineSkyman From Germany, joined May 2006, 494 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 14936 times:

Ok thanks, so I gues that every F-16 crash has to have a hydrazinecrew there. I was just curious because some weeks ago there was a controlled crash of a USAF F-16 in the Pfalz about 300 meters away from a village and the people got really angry when they found out that they were so close to a crash zone. I don´t think they ever heard about hydrazine.

Quoting Ptrjong (Reply 4):
Messerschmitt Me 163 rocket fighter.

Really the Komet used it too? Very interesting thanks.


User currently offlineHawaiianHobo From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 149 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 14906 times:

In short, Yes.

H70 (hydrazine) is some of the most dangerous stuff I've ever worked with. In the US Air Force, Fuel Systems Mechanics are responsible for the H70 system upto the EPU itself. After that, it becomes E&E's job. EPU exhaust comes out of the F-16 at +1300?°F. Any time an F-16 comes in with an EPU activation, the only people allowed near the jet are the fire department and a hydrazine response crew (wearing Level B contamination suits with full air supplied respirator) from the fuel shop. The pilot isn't even allowed out of the cockpit until EPU contamination is contained or determined non-existant.

We were performing maintenance on a hydrazine bottle a few weeks ago, and despite all our precautions depressurizing the bottle and what not, about half a tablespoon of H70 leaked out of the nipple as we were changing it. That little bit of hydrazine spilled onto the bottle itself and was enough to send the bottle smoking for about 4 minutes. The toxic smoke could have sent me and my partner to the hospital faster than you could say "Fighting Falcon" but thankfully we were wearing chemsuits with respirators.

And that is my lil'H70 rant.  Smile

-J



...
User currently offlinePtrjong From Netherlands, joined Mar 2005, 3906 posts, RR: 19
Reply 7, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 14895 times:

How do other fighters (other aircraft) manage? Another propellant?
Ram air turbine? No emergency power at all?

Thanks,

Peter



The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
User currently offlineHawaiianHobo From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 149 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 14835 times:

I can't speak for all aircraft, but in the USAF, only our single jet engine aircraft have an EPU system. The reason for this is because if the single engine fails, electrical and hydraulic failure is imminent. The EPU takes over and generates the required power for the electrical and hydro for about 10-15 minutes while the pilot glides his/her aircraft to a safe location and possibly bail out. With twin engine aircraft (or more) the chance of multiple engine failure is so small, that an EPU isn't necessary.

Now the EPU also comes on for other failures as well but I don't know them well enough.



...
User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29791 posts, RR: 58
Reply 9, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 14825 times:

Quoting Skyman (Reply 5):
Quoting Ptrjong (Reply 4):
Messerschmitt Me 163 rocket fighter.

Really the Komet used it too? Very interesting thanks.

I thought the Komet used T-Stoff, which was Hydrogen Peroxide and some other chemical....a nitrite if I remember correctly.



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineJwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 18
Reply 10, posted (7 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 14804 times:

Hydrazine was not used in WW2 AFAIK. Don't think it had been synthasised yet  Wink
T-Stoff was nasty enough as it is, and not the nastiest stuff thought up as fuel either.



I wish I were flying
User currently offlinePtrjong From Netherlands, joined Mar 2005, 3906 posts, RR: 19
Reply 11, posted (7 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 14768 times:

With due respect, Jeroen, I'm quoting David Mondey's Consise Guide to Axis Aircraft of World War II on the Me 163:

The fuel was a mixture of 80 per cent hydrogen peroxide with oxyquinoline or phosphate (T-Stoff) and an aqueous solution of calcium permanganate (Z-Stoff). An imbalance of these fuels in the combustion chamber could cause an explosion and occasionally did; a replacement for Z-Stoff using a different catalyst (30 per cent hydrazine hydrate solution in methanol) was called C-Stoff and was developed for use in the (...) later Me 163B.



The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29791 posts, RR: 58
Reply 12, posted (7 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 14764 times:

Quoting Ptrjong (Reply 11):
calcium permanganate

Correct me if I am wrong, but if you add water to Calcium Permangante, you get Actelyene?

Quoting Ptrjong (Reply 11):
(30 per cent hydrazine hydrate solution in methanol) was called C-Stoff and was developed for use in the (...) later Me 163B.

Ok, but the question is did it make service by the wars end.

It is amazing how close the germans got to some concepts and chemicals right before the end.



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlinePtrjong From Netherlands, joined Mar 2005, 3906 posts, RR: 19
Reply 13, posted (7 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 14759 times:

Quoting L-188 (Reply 12):
Correct me if I am wrong,

Not me. I'm totally ignorant about chemistry. innocent 

Quoting L-188 (Reply 12):
Ok, but the question is did it make service by the wars end.

Apparently, yes. I shouldn't have left a bit out:

...was called C-Stoff and was developed for use in the Walter RII-211, which, in its production form for the later Me 163B, was the HWK-109-509A

And the same source quotes the Walter HWK-109-509A as the engine for the Me 163B-1, which was the service model.



The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
User currently offlineSkyman From Germany, joined May 2006, 494 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (7 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 14750 times:

Quoting Ptrjong (Reply 13):
And the same source quotes the Walter HWK-109-509A as the engine for the Me 163B-1, which was the service model

I can confirm that. The Me-163B-1 was the service model and about 300 were built.


User currently offlineCTR From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 303 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (7 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 14722 times:

Quoting Ptrjong (Reply 7):
How do other fighters (other aircraft) manage? Another propellant?
Ram air turbine? No emergency power at all?

The F-16 is not only single engine it is also fly by wire and dynamically unstable. So when the cockpit goes black, even for a second, the aircraft can turn into a Frisbee. This is not the case with dynamically stable single engine hydro-mechanical control fighters like the A-4, F-5 and A-7s. Note these aircraft have accumulators to maintain hydraulic power for a (very) limited time.

Have fun,

CTR



Aircraft design is just one big compromise,,,
User currently offlineBoeing4ever From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (7 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 14710 times:

So question...

Will the F-35 feature a hydrazine EPU? It is after all a single engine fighter, though I'm not sure if it's dynamically stable. Alas, I'm an AE student, so it's not like I can eyeball a plane and tell if it's stable or not...yet.  Wink

 airplane B4e-Forever New Frontiers airplane 


User currently offlinePtrjong From Netherlands, joined Mar 2005, 3906 posts, RR: 19
Reply 17, posted (7 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 14673 times:

Aren't all new fighters dynamically unstable?
Most happen to be twins, but what about emergency power for the Gripen?



The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
User currently offlineCTR From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 303 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (7 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 14555 times:

Quoting Boeing4ever (Reply 16):
So question...

Will the F-35 feature a hydrazine EPU?

I wondered the same myself, so I spoke to a friend at Lockheed Fort Worth. In the F-35, should the engine fail, the aircraft computers shed as much power as possible while the aircraft batteries maintain power to the flight controls until the IPP (Integrated Power Package similar to APU) gets up to full power.

Have fun,

CTR



Aircraft design is just one big compromise,,,
User currently offlineHawaiianHobo From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 149 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (7 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 14528 times:

Quoting CTR (Reply 18):
In the F-35, should the engine fail, the aircraft computers shed as much power as possible while the aircraft batteries maintain power to the flight controls until the IPP (Integrated Power Package similar to APU) gets up to full power.

I wonder how the hydraulics will remain active on just battery power...? I know from working on current fighters that battery power alone doesn't do jack for the plane aside from running a few gauges and a DC fuel pump or two. And if you run battery power alone on a C-130 for more than 10 minutes alone, you kill the damn thing, and its got 2 batteries!  Smile
This IPP you speak of sounds intriguing. I suppose the hydraulic system could be tied into DC but I just can't imagine it punching out 3000PSI for very long. At least not the 15 minutes the hydrazine and EPU system keeps the F-16 and U-2 up there.

-J



...
User currently offlineCTR From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 303 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (7 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 14524 times:

Quoting HawaiianHobo (Reply 19):
I wonder how the hydraulics will remain active on just battery power...?

The primary flight controls on the F-35 are EHAs (Electro-Hydraulic Actuators) that are powered by 270 VDC in place of traditional hydraulic power. So hydraulics are not critical imediately following engine failure, but electrical power demand is very high.

Have fun,

CTR



Aircraft design is just one big compromise,,,
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic F-16 Accident Always Involve Hydro Zine?
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Military aviation related posts only!
  • Not military related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Looking For The Red Flag Accident Video posted Fri Oct 20 2006 21:35:14 by RichardPrice
Whats Going On With Dutch F-16's? posted Fri Sep 22 2006 13:36:45 by MauriceB
Dutch F-16 Down In Afghanistan posted Fri Sep 1 2006 11:18:07 by Ptrjong
F-16 Vs F/A-18 posted Thu Aug 10 2006 03:25:49 by Da man
Turkey Wants 30 F-16 Block 52 Plus posted Tue Aug 1 2006 19:02:31 by TK787
Diary Of An Israeli F-16 Pilot posted Tue Jul 18 2006 21:05:55 by FireFly
Farnborough: Taiwan Might Buy 66 New F-16's... posted Tue Jul 18 2006 20:19:46 by AirRyan
Details Of Latest F-16 Offer To Pakistan... posted Fri Jul 7 2006 22:05:32 by AirRyan
Marine One - Always Decoy? posted Wed Jun 21 2006 16:42:25 by Flybulldog
Belgium AF F-16 "White Falcon" posted Sun Jun 11 2006 19:32:52 by Dl757md
Wisconsin ANG F-16 Crash posted Tue Jun 7 2011 14:34:29 by akelley728
Cool Video Of Solo TURK, Turkish F-16 Team posted Fri Apr 15 2011 15:18:05 by TK787

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format