Quote:
Originally Posted by redpoint5
Yeah, but increased O2 concentration at lower pressure presents less fire hazard. Not sure exactly how that works out. Maybe at 40k ft, you'd need 100% O2. Not even sure if that is a viable solution.
Too complex though because adjusting the O2 concentration down as the plane descends is probably a bigger issue than simply pressurizing the cabin.
Still, air freight is going to become more and more important in an increasingly industrialized and global economy. Seems the low hanging fruit of improving efficiency would be a flying wing with a non-pressurized cargo hold.
...seems like most engineering problems would be solvable if carbon nanotubes were easy to implement.
|
1% over normal atmospheric oxygen is considered enriched and is a fire hazard. It appears to be considered as dangerous as lower explosive limit for flammable gases.
__________________
1984 chevy suburban, custom made 6.5L diesel turbocharged with a Garrett T76 and Holset HE351VE, 22:1 compression 13psi of intercooled boost.
1989 firebird mostly stock. Aside from the 6-speed manual trans, corvette gen 5 front brakes, 1LE drive shaft, 4th Gen disc brake fbody rear end.
2011 leaf SL, white, portable 240v CHAdeMO, trailer hitch, new batt as of 2014.
|