[buildsjets]

No, they are not. Source: me. Also here’s the applicable EU regulation. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A... Only handheld portable extinguishers are required to be phased out in 2025, and only in locations that are regulated by EASA. The FAA does not give a rip, and neither to the many regulatory bodies around he world who defer tho the FAA. I don’t know what the CAAC is doing. As far as the FAA concerned, compliance with the Montreal Treaty is the Department of State’s problem. Btw, since there is only one company that has certified a non-halon (2-BTP) handheld, they have jacked the retail/list price up to $2630 compared to an equivalent sized Halon 1211 handheld for $475.

Did you know that in the wrong circumstance a 2-BTP extinguisher will feed a fire rather than extinguish it? It’s a phenomenon called subinerting. One manufacturer blew up an FAA lab pretty badly while testing 2-BTP. Here’s a report on the earth-shattering kaboom. I only got to see he wreckage a few weeks later. https://www.nist.gov/publications/chemical-kinetic-mechanism...

Permanently installed Halon firex systems in commercial aircraft will not be phased out until 2040. I have been working, as a part of larger team, to certify a non-halon based firex in cargo and engine compartments for many many years now. It's been slow going. All commercial aircraft from all manufacturers still use Halon for their permanently installed firex and will continue to do so for the near future. We have put non-halon systems into some military aircraft that go thru a commercial certification, for example the KC46 tanker, but there are some good reasons it would not be the best choice for an actual commercial aircraft. https://www.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/740629/kc-46...

If anyone actually gave a rip about ozone depletion, they would ground the F-16 fighter. The F-16 inerts it’s fuel tank ullage space with Halon. Every F-16 flight is a direct injection of pure Halon straight into the stratosphere. Mainline that stuff, feels so good. https://arc.aiaa.org/doi/abs/10.2514/6.1981-1638

[thedrbrian]

>The F-16 inerts it’s fuel tank ullage space with Halon.

why can't they use nitrogen ?

[buildsjets]

Weight, and the small size of the aircraft. F-16s are tiny. It would take a LOT more stored nitrogen gas to dilute the O2 level below the upper explosive limit, than it takes of CF3Br to chemically interfere with combustion. Modern aircraft use continuous nitrogen gas separators that run off engine bleed air to accomplish the task, at the cost of some weight and a ~3-5% increase in fuel burn. There was a study to replace the CF3Br with CF3I back in the 1980s but it was shelved due to technical challenges, which could have been overcome with additional investment.

https://www.nist.gov/system/files/documents/el/fire_research...

[sgerenser]

Thanks for the real world information! Username checks out.