a door large enough to permit entry into the baggage compartment from the cabin or lavatory but such design is by no means standardized throughout the industry.
The investigation disclosed the fact that the carbon dioxide hand fire extinguishers carried on board the aircraft were used in flight apparently without success. While the circumstances under which they were used in this instance are not known, serious questions have since arisen concerning the effectiveness of carbon dioxide as compared with other available agents. In tests conducted by the Civil Aeronautics Administration, it has been demonstrated that the effectiveness of methyl bromide as a fire extinguishing agent is superior to that of carbon dioxide particularly in gasoline and oil fires. It is common knowledge that smouldering fires in such items as luggage and pillows are more effectively subdued by carbon tetrachloride extinguishers. It is apparent that further consideration needs to be giventhe subject of fire extinguishing agents. The toxicity of the lesser known agents must be determined and their use made contingent upon additional investigation into airflow within the fuselage and its control.
Findings
Upon the basis of all available evidence the Board finds that:
1. The company, aircraft and crew were properly certificated for the flight.
2. Until reporting over Florence, S. C., the flight had been of a routine nature with no unusual circumstances having been observed.
3. Fire was discovered on board the aircraft after having passed Florence.
4. The fire originated in the general area of the right side of the rear cargo compartment and lavatory.
-10-
