Forum: F-16 Design & Construction

Newbie Joined: Jan 23, 2004 - 03:07 PM Posts: 16

It is rather dangerous. The hazards are Carbon Fiber, Hydrazine, the flares cooking off and doing what you saw in the photo. Chances are the fire fighters either didn't read their emergency action checklist or the chemcials have been contained. Once the hazmat crews contain the crash site you can proceed in. There are other hazards but I can't seem to think of the remaining ones right now.

F-16.net Sponsor

Welcome to F-16.net Derwood! Cool

I'm not a pilot or maintainer, or even in the military, but I can tell you that the entire aircraft impact site is a dangerous hazmat site!! Take a look at the "<a href="http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-1046.html">What is so dangerous about releasing flares</a>" thread in the <a href="http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewforum-f-21.html">F-16 procedures section</a> of the forum. I asked the same question in that topic and got some really outstanding information which was backed up with links in the replies to the actual documents given to the civilian first responders who might come in contact with that situation.

Joined: Feb 01, 2007 - 02:38 AM Posts: 0 Status: Offline

srf24rulz wrote:

Quote:

The Space Shuttle Reaction Control System uses Hydrazine, but it's not H70.

Hydrazine is H-70 there is no difference. The same stuff that is in the shuttle is in the F-16, U2, B2 and what other aircraft is out there that has it.

H70 is only 70% Hydrazine and 30% water. The Hydrazine used in the shuttle is almost 100% straight Hydrazine. Just thinking back to my chemistry days, but that is a BIG difference when your talking reactions or combustion.

Any shuttle maintenance guys in the forum Question

Newbie Joined: Jan 23, 2004 - 03:07 PM Posts: 16

Please accept my apology, I should have done some better research. The shuttle does you 100% hyrdazine, and the AF uses H-70 (70% hydrazine-30% water). Please excuse my self so I can remove my foot from my mouth. Take Care

I liked the old F-4 RAT better!! when we would test it, we would tell; the new kids that it was a small prop to propell the aircraft if both engines failed.

That's funny SwedgeII!!! I can picture that big, ugly (and beautiful at the same time), heavy, loud piece of metal being dragged through the sky with just one little propeller!!!

Hi all! Just joined up, I know this topic is aging a little now, but I wanted to dish out some facts about the Shuttle and its Hydrazine bits for you Very Happy

The Shuttle actually has two separate systems with make use of hydrazine.
First there are the Aux Power Units (three) which basically decompose Hydrazine (N2H4) in a gas generator using a catalyst of Shell 405. The resulting hot gas drives a turbine wheel. Each turbine provides shaft power to a hydraulic pump (via a gearbox), these hydraulic pumps provide pressure to the main hydraulic loops. (these hydraulic loops are the only means to drive the aero surfaces, brakes, Main Engine Thrust Vectoring and certain main engine valves).

The other systems which uses hydrazine uses a different type, MMH (monomethyl hydrazine CH3NHNH2) is the Reaction Control System (attitude changes on orbit) and the OMS (Orbital Manuvering System, orbit changes, circularisation etc). Nitrogen Tetroxide is use as an oxidiser in these systems.
The main advantage being that they are hypergolic.

Hydrazine, MMH and N204 are treated with the strictest of safety procedures at all stages of orbiter pre and post processing. There is a special facillity at KSC to deal with the hazards the substances pose. Full hazmat teams greet the shuttle upon landing too to ensure that the area is safe for crew egress.

Phew... big first post, I apologise if its totally not F-16 related but it came up earlier in topic.

Oh, another potential hazard is if the MMH from the OMS or RCS system leaks (very unlikely) during the orbital phase of a mission upon reentry the presence of atmospheric oxygen can cause the leaked MMH to ignite!

Wow, pretty sharp, are you a Shuttle wrench or did you stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night? Welcome aboard, I trade F-16 weapons tech for Shuttle tech anytime. Share knowledge were you can.

I'm not a Shuttle wrench as such, however I've done a bit of advisory work for NASA via USA (United Space Alliance) on a couple of the systems. In ten years of study or so I've kind of memorized the majority of shuttle operations and systems.

I'm hoping to glean some info on the workings of the F-16 since I love to how technical marvels work so I'm always open to some infomation sharing!

Salute all!

Super thread.

I may be only troop here who ever actually fired the EPU. Our understanding at the time was that if the catalytic doofer worked OK, that we'd get ammonia and water vapor. The raw, unused hydrazine was supposed to be the big, bad ugly stuff.

Anyways, Joe Baggodonuts and I were taxiing down to the rwy one day and the steering and brakes quit working. So had to be the LVDT's on rudder pedals, right? FLCS mal? Student studly told me he had lost steeering and so I tried my pedals. No help. So he asks, should I try the EPU?

As we were about to depart the taxiway, I said, "Sure".

We instantly got brakes and steering. Could smell the ammonia and went to 100% oxygen and then turned off on a remote piece of taxiway, waited for trucks to get there and shut down the motor, egressed, etc.

We are both alive today after 20 years, and our children and grandchildren do not have three arms, two heads or ............

Never did hear what the mal was, but the jet was a Block 10 and we had yet to discover all the power supply probs with FLCS computers. As the EPU electricity bypassed many circuits, its power made it to wherever it had to to give us brakes and steering.

later.............

Gums sends

Thanks to everyone for all the great info you have been so kind to share with all of us!!! I never thought I'd learn this much when I started this thread. I figured I'd get a simple response. The knowledge and kindness of the F-16.net community never ceases to amaze me! Gums, I sure am glad the EPU worked as advertised!!! It sounds like you personally tested just about all the emergency scenarios and equipment short of the ejection seat! I'm just glad GD built such a good plane!!!

Quote:

its power made it to wherever it had to to give us brakes and steering.

The EPU powers the B system Hydraulics (I think), anyway all that powers the brakes is the DFLCC when it's operating, that in turn tells the brake control valve to port pressure to the bottles in the engine bay, you get pressure to all six pucks (parking brake) or three pucks each brake (chan 1 or chan 2) and you stop.

IDCrewDawg wrote:

Quote:

its power made it to wherever it had to to give us brakes and steering.

The EPU powers the B system Hydraulics (I think), anyway all that powers the brakes is the DFLCC when it's operating, that in turn tells the brake control valve to port pressure to the bottles in the engine bay, you get pressure to all six pucks (parking brake) or three pucks each brake (chan 1 or chan 2) and you stop.

Does any of you guys have pictures of a hydrazine fuel tank and pictures of its position in the F-16?

I'm making a Powerpoint presentation about F-16 crashes and the hazards coming with it. I was at Kleine Brogel (KB) last week but was not allowed to take any pictures. I saw the tank, I even touched it, but pictures... oh no Sir.

Here's a picture from the F-16.net photo library on which the location of the Hydrazine stainless steel bottle can be seen:

http://www.f-16.net/f-16_photos_album20-photoajv.html

Whity wrote:

Here's a picture from the F-16.net photo library on which the location of the Hydrazine stainless steel bottle can be seen:

http://www.f-16.net/f-16_photos_album20-photoajv.html

Thanks, it is a beginning. But I need more, to make an intresting presentation!
So, keep sending these pictures, on hydrazinefueltanks (F-16).

Forum: F-16 Design & Construction

The EPU - how does it work and why hydrazine?