首页> 外文期刊>Aviation, space, and environmental medicine. >Crash-resistant fuel system effectiveness in civil helicopter crashes.
【24h】

Crash-resistant fuel system effectiveness in civil helicopter crashes.

机译:抗撞击的燃油系统在民用直升机坠毁中的有效性。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

BACKGROUND: Crash-resistant fuel systems (CRFS) have demonstrated close to 100% effectiveness in survivable crashes of Army helicopters, but the technology has been slow to transfer into the civil helicopter arena. Federal standards for civil helicopter CRFS are less stringent than those for military helicopters. A reduction in standards for CRFS in military helicopters is being considered. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to determine whether crashes of civil helicopters with CRFS are less likely to result in post-crash fire than crashes of those without. METHOD: Crashes of civil helicopters during 1982-2004 were analyzed, comparing Bell 206 helicopters manufactured with CRFS with Aerospatial 350 helicopters manufactured during the same period (post-1981), but lacking CRFS. Bell 206 helicopters with CRFS were also compared with earlier models without CRFS. RESULTS: The highest proportion of crashes with post-crash fires (11.3%) was in AS-350s manufactured after 1981 (non-CRFS), and the lowest (3.7%) was in Bell 206s (with CRFS) [unadjusted risk ratio (RR) = 3.3, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.04, 10.50; adjusted for light and weather, RR = 2.81, Cl = 0.82, 9.69]. Earlier models of Bell 206s without CRFS had higher risk of post-crash fire than post-1981 models with CRFS (7.4% vs. 3.7%; adjusted RR = 2.11, Cl = 0.82, 5.45). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest a better performance, in terms of post-crash fire prevention, of CRFS-equipped civil helicopters as compared with those without CRFS. It is possible that CRFS in civil helicopters have not achieved the same degree of effectiveness as CRFS in military helicopters. CRFS should be used more widely in civil helicopters. The more stringent CRFS requirements for military helicopters should not be reduced without further research.
机译:背景:抗撞击燃油系统(CRFS)在可承受的军用直升机坠毁中已证明接近100%的有效性,但该技术转移到民用直升机领域的速度很慢。民用直升机CRFS的联邦标准不如军用直升机严格。正在考虑降低军用直升机的CRFS标准。目的:本研究的目的是确定具有CRFS的民用直升机的坠毁是否比没有CRFS的民用直升机的坠毁更容易导致坠毁。方法:分析了1982-2004年间民用直升机的坠毁情况,将使用CRFS制造的Bell 206直升机与同期(1981年后)制造但没有CRFS的Aerospatial 350直升机进行了比较。带有CRFS的Bell 206直升机也与没有CRFS的早期型号进行了比较。结果:发生碰撞后失火的事故比例最高(11.3%)是在1981年以后生产的AS-350(非CRFS)中,发生事故的比例最低(3.7%)是在Bell 206s(具有CRFS)中[未调整风险比( RR)= 3.3,95%置信区间(CI)= 1.04,10.50;根据光线和天气情况进行调整,RR = 2.81,Cl = 0.82,9.69]。没有CRFS的Bell 206s早期模型比具有CRFS的1981年以后的模型具有更高的崩溃后着火风险(7.4%比3.7%;调整后的RR = 2.11,Cl = 0.82,5.45)。结论:这项研究的结果表明,配备CRFS的民用直升机与未配备CRFS的民用直升机相比,在碰撞后防火方面具有更好的性能。民用直升机的CRFS可能无法达到与军用直升机的CRFS相同程度的有效性。 CRFS应该在民用直升机中更广泛地使用。未经进一步研究,不应减少对军用直升机更为严格的CRFS要求。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号