UK Military Experience of Rotary Aircraft Fires and Equipment Provided to Mitigate this Risk Dr Michael J A Trudgill MB BCh MRCGP Dip IMC RCS(Ed) DAvMed DOcc Med FRAeS
Outline Overview of Rotary Aircraft fires UK Military experience Recent UK ensemble testing
Rotary Aircraft Fires All Rotary aircraft Dramatic and frequently tragic Hydraulic Electrical Mechanical Fuel fires UK experience
UK Rotary Accident Fires Data reviewed from 1995-2009 (15 Years) 44 Rotary Accidents 7 Fires (16%) 5 Post crash fires (11.5%) 2 In flight fires (4.5%)
Aircraft Control Measures Crashworthy fuel systems Fuel tanks/seams/crash valves/engineering design Hot surface ignition Anti mist kerosene Inert gases Extinguishers (US Army statistics-heliono reduction in post crash fire)
Personal Protective Equipment Fire proof clothing Reduces rate of tissue heating allowing wearer time to escape Flame resistant shell Insulating layer
Operational Conflicts Non Signature Low thermal burden Integration and Comfort Ground pattern Nomex flight suit Boots Undergarments
Compromise FR CS 95 developed Education Ongoing commitment to develop FR low burden AEA
BTTG BURN TRIALS Burn trials of current operational clothing ensembles to ISO 13506 Clearance of new UBACS Test a range of Head mounted equipment Test a range of trousers- JSFAW
Test Conditions 4 or 5 second burn duration 1200 deg C propane flame from 12 burners Heat Flux 84kW/m2 Behaviour during burn Behaviour post burn Subsequent equipment condition Heat transfer
Measurements 150 thermistors across manikin Measure at 10, 30 60 and 90 seconds Heat flux used to estimate skin burn Takata and Stoll skin model Skin burn results plotted on a dermatome type map
Results
Further Analysis Body divided into regions relating to items of equipment Torso- Survival vest Arms- UBACS Legs-Trousers and long johns Head-Helmets, masks and head over's Small number of thermistors Small number of burns Data susceptible to equipment positioning
Head Protection Effect of flash fire on various helmets Visors Visor covers Masks Face shields Scarf (shemag) Head over
Helmets
Shemag and Head over
Helmets and Headover
Head Protection Predicted Head and Neck Burns 48 43 38 Burn Severity 33 28 23 18 13 HEAD 8 3-2 4B4L+HEADOVER 4B4L+HEADOVER 4B4L+FACEMASK 4B4L+FACEMASK 10R+PQ MASK ALPHA EAGLE+FACEMASK Head and Neck equipment Worn ALPHA EAGLE APACHE HELMET 4A+SHEMAG
Torso Burns Effect of layers Adequacy of minimal ensemble Molle System Jacket functionality Effect on survival aids Fragmentation vest Ballistic plates
Torso TORSO BURN 64 54 44 Burn Score 34 24 Front Back 14 4-6 61M 61M+UBACS 61M+UBACS 61M UBACS TUCKED IN 61M+FRAG VEST 61M+FRAG VEST+CERAMIC PLATES 60M+DYNEMA PLATES+COLLECTOR 60M No plates or survival aids 61M+FRONT AND REAR CERAMIC PLATES
Results More layers better Frag vest good protection Molle system survives Jacket pockets protect survival aids?ammo Dynema Plate undamaged Ceramic plate undamaged! Plate rear cover-cordura Decisions regarding layers on UBACS vest vindicated
Arms Double sleeve Single sleeve Neoprene inserts
Single sleeve vs double
Arms ARM BURNS 44 39 34 29 Burn Severity 24 19 RIGHT ARM LEFT ARM 14 9 4-1 CAM UBACS 1a MK16 FR 2 CAM UBACS 1b CAM UBACS 1c CAM UBACS 4 GROUND UBACS 5 CAM UBACS 6 PECOC 7 no neoprene PECOC 8 plus neoprene Garment Worn
Neoprene Minimal welding to overlying fabric Provides additional protection
Trousers Comparison of various ensembles Kermel viscose FR Rayon 65%,Aramid 25%,Nylon 10% 90% Nomex Kermel and cotton undergarments Repairs and AVTUR
TROUSERS
AVTUR, REPAIRS AND HOMEGROWN
TROUSER BURN 100 90 80 70 Burn Severity 60 50 40 Right leg Left leg 30 20 10 0 KERMEL LONGJOHNS+FR CS95 MK16A+COTTON LONG JOHNS KERMEL LONGJOHNS+FR CS95 KERMEL LONGJOHNS+FR CS95 COTTON LONGJOHNS+FR CS95 ARMY ELEMENT PANT(COLD WEATHER,NO UNDERGARMENT) COTTON LONGJOHNS+FR CS95 AV TUR LEFT LEG COTTON LONGJOHNS+US FR COMBAT TROUSER ANTI MICROBIAL SHORTS+FR CS95 Garment Worn
Questions