Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Oxygen - equipment, getting refills, refill hoses, safety, etc

AIUI the 18k cannula limitation is driven by the AFMS for fitted oxygen systems. For portable systems, there is no such limitation.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom
Fly safely
Various UK. Operate throughout Europe and Middle East, United Kingdom

They have put their own interpretation on 23.1447. This is common…

Here is the actual wording:

( My bold above )

So, it revolves around what one thinks is meant by “installed”. I think, reading the whole lot, and noting the words “certification” and some other expressions, that the context is an installed oxygen system, and the FAA is de facto laying down what the AFMS should say.

Note also that – I have this from a US aviation lawyer – the FAA normally chooses its words carefully. If they want compliance with something, they will put that in there. Ambiguities tend to be left in areas where they have decided regulation may have unwanted side effects, etc. So if something is not specifically mentioned, then it is not mentioned Restrictive FAA regs should be read as they have been written.

BTW I used Precise Oxygen stuff for some years and had quite some “dealings” with that company regarding their demand regulators, and the experience was less than edifying… Dec 2009 update here.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

OK, but if you try cannulas from a number of manufacturers (Aerox is one example), they all state that their cannulas are limited to 18000ft. https://aerox.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/4D-Portable-oxygen-system.pdf

Fly safely
Various UK. Operate throughout Europe and Middle East, United Kingdom

Posting on this thread, as I was not able to find a better one.

I am now in process of getting the MH system myself, but I was wondering about the cylinders: my ideal solution would be CFFC-048 carbon fiber cylinder from MH, but it cannot be serviced in Finland (DOT is not approved here). Basically the regulations restrict even filling it in any official shops, but I did find a place that would do it.

However I started to wonder if there are any other alternatives for the cylinders, preferably that are approved in EU? What cylinders are you guys using? Any issues getting MH cylinders checked some place other than in US?

I am also contemplating between the DIN477-9 vs CGA540. According to one dive shop, either is not directly compatible to their system, but adapter should be easy to make to either one of those.

I must say CFFC-048 is a very appealing in terms of gas it holds and size/weight.

Also European MH resellers would be nice to know – or feedback who works the best. MH webpage has a list, but that seems to be a bit outdated already judging from the responsoes for quotation :)

Flying Finn living in Switzerland.
LSZL LOcarno, Switzerland

If it was me, I would not care less if the cylinder was approved in the EU. This is a portable kit, not a mandatory-required system for passengers, etc. Do you care whether your lawn mower is approved in the EU?

The CFFC-48, AFAIK, needs a test every 5 years, and the manufacturer permits only 2 tests, so if you do test it every 5 years it has to be scrapped at 15 years.

I have two of these I bought them direct from the US. There are some European stockists, I think.

The general consensus from the past is that the DIN fitting is easier for Europe for scuba shop refills, but if you do your own refills it doesn’t matter at all.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

@Pehu I have the DIN fitting and have found it to work relatively well in various places throughout Europe – often an adapter is needed though so arguably something bridging from CGA would work just as well.

Sorry for bringing this up again but I just can’t seem to get my O2 saturation readings about 90-91% at any altitude on the normal D5/D10 setting (using flare-tip canulas). @Peter, i know you have a similar set-up. You state above that you get ~95% using canulas? Your article here seems to state you also got values around 90% on various tests though. There are multiple online references of saturations using the MH O2D2 system well above 95% though.

I’d like to isolate the source here. Is it my physiology / the pulse oximeter / the MH O2D2? To make sure my pulse oximeter isn’t rubbish (PULOX PO-200) – does anyone have a recommended one that works for them? I’ll buy it and try it on the way down to EDNY this week.

Last Edited by TimR at 09 Apr 12:24
EGSX

I think the 90% figure in that article was the target figure and we measured the gas flow required to achieve that, for the different systems. That was the only practical way to compare different systems. We could not measure/plot the gas flow against % O2 level, for example, while flying at FL180 in a turbo Saratoga

I normally see 95% when flying.

It could be the oxymeter. I have not found significant variations, but the cheap ones tend to stop working and end up in the bin.

Do you smoke? How high are you flying?

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Nope don’t smoke and am generally healthy (I think) so there should be no real reason for depressed readings. Any recommendations for an oxymeter that I can try?

Peter wrote:

How high are you flying?

Normally around 14-17k feet.

Last Edited by TimR at 09 Apr 12:40
EGSX

The Nonin ones have a good reputation and are quite cheap nowadays, on Amazon etc.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top