How serious is a cargo fire?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: mexico
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How serious is a cargo fire?
Accident: Singapore A333 near Bangkok on Apr 22nd 2013, cargo fire
Report regarding the SQ 330 cargo fire.
Wouldnt fire indication + burning smell = immediate evac shortly after to grinding to a halt after landing instead of taxying in and offloading via aerobridge?
Thoughts.
Report regarding the SQ 330 cargo fire.
Wouldnt fire indication + burning smell = immediate evac shortly after to grinding to a halt after landing instead of taxying in and offloading via aerobridge?
Thoughts.
What is the risk of injuring people by doing an emergency evacuation vs waiting the 2-3 minutes to get to a gate and getting the punters off quickly via stairs or aerobridge, given that the holds are certified to contain the fire and have extinguishing systems?
Depends on the length of the flight and a few other things but I reckon you would get as much arm chair criticism, particularly if you hurt someone, if you slammed on the anchors and chucked everyone off via the slides.
Depends on the length of the flight and a few other things but I reckon you would get as much arm chair criticism, particularly if you hurt someone, if you slammed on the anchors and chucked everyone off via the slides.
Join Date: Aug 1998
Location: ...second left, past the lights.
Posts: 1,101
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I'm with you Zapatas.
Cargo fires are desperately serious and are the one thing that has bought down many a plane this last decade, especially with the rechargeable batteries (Lithium-ion/nickel-cadmium) everywhere now.
The risk at the bay is the rush of oxygen exploding any residual, right next to the terminal facilities, when cargo doors open. Firies (and baggage handlers!) to be well notified of course.
It's the one thing you don't mess with in planes.
Happy Landings
Cargo fires are desperately serious and are the one thing that has bought down many a plane this last decade, especially with the rechargeable batteries (Lithium-ion/nickel-cadmium) everywhere now.
The risk at the bay is the rush of oxygen exploding any residual, right next to the terminal facilities, when cargo doors open. Firies (and baggage handlers!) to be well notified of course.
It's the one thing you don't mess with in planes.
Happy Landings
Fortunately these types of events are rather rare these days hence there's not a lot of experience to be thrown around here.
Having said that though we do live in a very litigious world these days so any Capt would be faced with making a tuff decision & that's whether to punch out once the A/C came to a full stop or continue to a more suitable area for a more organized evac, this is the real dilemma.
I would think that under a hypothetical situation not unlike this event that returning to the gate then whilst arranging to offload the pax the plane really starts to melt down & have the potential to make the whole situation far worse by having a burning plane parked up against a terminal possibly full of other people.
In a court of law with the Coroners report in hand (meaning there where deaths resulting from this decision to return to the gate) it would be hard to justify the above decision in the eyes of the law when available to the Capt was an immediate evac on the Rwy especially when there was any doubt as to the status of the fire. The risk of injuries upon slide activation is pretty much an acceptable risk, is returning to the gate with an unknown fire status in the hold acceptable? There in lies the 'burning' question.
All food for thought & a worthwhile discussion.
Wmk2
Having said that though we do live in a very litigious world these days so any Capt would be faced with making a tuff decision & that's whether to punch out once the A/C came to a full stop or continue to a more suitable area for a more organized evac, this is the real dilemma.
I would think that under a hypothetical situation not unlike this event that returning to the gate then whilst arranging to offload the pax the plane really starts to melt down & have the potential to make the whole situation far worse by having a burning plane parked up against a terminal possibly full of other people.
In a court of law with the Coroners report in hand (meaning there where deaths resulting from this decision to return to the gate) it would be hard to justify the above decision in the eyes of the law when available to the Capt was an immediate evac on the Rwy especially when there was any doubt as to the status of the fire. The risk of injuries upon slide activation is pretty much an acceptable risk, is returning to the gate with an unknown fire status in the hold acceptable? There in lies the 'burning' question.
All food for thought & a worthwhile discussion.
Wmk2
What is the risk of injuring people by doing an emergency evacuation vs waiting the 2-3 minutes to get to a gate and getting the punters off quickly via stairs or aerobridge, given that the holds are certified to contain the fire and have extinguishing systems?
Depends on the length of the flight and a few other things but I reckon you would get as much arm chair criticism, particularly if you hurt someone, if you slammed on the anchors and chucked everyone off via the slides.
Depends on the length of the flight and a few other things but I reckon you would get as much arm chair criticism, particularly if you hurt someone, if you slammed on the anchors and chucked everyone off via the slides.
The fire extinguishing systems in cargo holds are to allow you time get the aircraft on the ground, not give you time to taxi to the gate after landing. Remember Saudia 163?
Get down, get stopped, get out.
Like I say it depends on a range of issues, but don't forget that a cargo fire has been determined not to be something that is going to cause the aeroplane to immediately be destroyed. Discussions about cargo fires in freighters don't count in this discussion because they are entirely different beasts with entirely different rules in what can and cannot be carried.
ETOPS certified aeroplanes, like the SQ 330, have been certified to be up to 180 minutes from a suitable diversion field, so for my money a minute or two to get to the gate and then get everyone off safely, uninjured, then open the hold and sort the fire out is something worth considering, would I do it in every circumstance - probably not, but I would not be criticising the crew for not dumping the punters onto the runway or taxiway via the slides.
In this instance it seems to have been the correct decision, I didn't read about any injuries and the aeroplane, according to the report, was ferried back to Singapore, so it can't have been too badly damaged.
ETOPS certified aeroplanes, like the SQ 330, have been certified to be up to 180 minutes from a suitable diversion field, so for my money a minute or two to get to the gate and then get everyone off safely, uninjured, then open the hold and sort the fire out is something worth considering, would I do it in every circumstance - probably not, but I would not be criticising the crew for not dumping the punters onto the runway or taxiway via the slides.
In this instance it seems to have been the correct decision, I didn't read about any injuries and the aeroplane, according to the report, was ferried back to Singapore, so it can't have been too badly damaged.
. Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Stag Lane
Age: 53
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Saudia learnt the hard way - 301 died due smoke inhalation
ASN Aircraft accident Lockheed L-1011 TriStar 200 HZ-AHK Riyadh International Airport (RUH)
Saudia Flight 163 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
ASN Aircraft accident Lockheed L-1011 TriStar 200 HZ-AHK Riyadh International Airport (RUH)
Saudia Flight 163 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Last edited by 4forward8back; 4th Jul 2014 at 04:57.
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Midlands
Posts: 340
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Almost all onboard cargo bay fire systems are NOT Fire extinguishers - they are Fire suppression. Because they dont extinguish fires, merely supress them to give you more time to get the thing on the deck - dont confuse the two. If your fire supression extinguishes the fire then you got lucky.
Get it on the deck, get everyone out and get the Fire crews out. Don't risk the lives of your passengers in the hope that a fire system has managed to exceed it's design specification because there are 2 reasons a fire alert goes away - either the fire/smoke is gone (extinguished) or the fire detector head is gone (destroyed by the fire) and good luck figuring out which one it was at FL380.
Get it on the deck, get everyone out and get the Fire crews out. Don't risk the lives of your passengers in the hope that a fire system has managed to exceed it's design specification because there are 2 reasons a fire alert goes away - either the fire/smoke is gone (extinguished) or the fire detector head is gone (destroyed by the fire) and good luck figuring out which one it was at FL380.
Last edited by Burnie5204; 4th Jul 2014 at 05:52.
Moderator
but don't forget that a cargo fire has been determined not to be something that is going to cause the aeroplane to immediately be destroyed
Maybe not so simple for lithium fires ...
Maybe not so simple for lithium fires ...
At least most here say there's only one decision, get out now.
Am sure the RFF & ATC will let you amble up to the terminal & start unloading after you have made an emergency return due fire indications, NOT!
ALL fires indicated or known on-board a plane whether that be in the cargo hold or in the dunny need to be treated with the utmost urgency to get on the ground & evac as necessary.
'Burnie' is quite correct, (although suppression is the same as removing one of the three sides of the fire triangle albeit temporarily IE: 02) cargo suppression systems buy you time that's all & along the same lines as that Titanic movie "the pumps only buy you minutes not hours". We've all seen what happens when cargo fires overwhelm the suppression system.
Wmk2
Am sure the RFF & ATC will let you amble up to the terminal & start unloading after you have made an emergency return due fire indications, NOT!
ALL fires indicated or known on-board a plane whether that be in the cargo hold or in the dunny need to be treated with the utmost urgency to get on the ground & evac as necessary.
'Burnie' is quite correct, (although suppression is the same as removing one of the three sides of the fire triangle albeit temporarily IE: 02) cargo suppression systems buy you time that's all & along the same lines as that Titanic movie "the pumps only buy you minutes not hours". We've all seen what happens when cargo fires overwhelm the suppression system.
Wmk2
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whilst I wouldn't advocate taxiing to the terminal.
I would advocate, stopping on the runway & taking a deep breath before calling for the Evacuation checklist.
Speak to your training department at your own airline & have a read of the capabilities of ARFFS.
http://www.faa.gov/documentlibrary/m...50_5210_23.doc
In short. As the aircraft is slowing on the runway, ARFFS vehicles will be using infrared detection systems to locate the source of heat and fire.
As you park the brake your aircraft may be subject to a skin piercing probe that penetrates your cargo hold and immediately provides a massive volume of fire suppressant to extinquish the fire.
Meanwhile. It may start raining in the cabin as other probes pierce the aircraft upper fuselage surface & spray water into the cabin to both reduce heat levels, ventilate possible smoke and provide immediate relief from the affects of a possible onboard fire.
So, stop on the runway. Pause & give thought to that fact you may achieve immediate and better relief than directing the punters down the slides.
Have the fire commanders frequency up on comm 2 and consider what assistance may be available seconds after you park the brakes.
(The usual caveats regarding my advice apply)
MC.
I would advocate, stopping on the runway & taking a deep breath before calling for the Evacuation checklist.
Speak to your training department at your own airline & have a read of the capabilities of ARFFS.
http://www.faa.gov/documentlibrary/m...50_5210_23.doc
In short. As the aircraft is slowing on the runway, ARFFS vehicles will be using infrared detection systems to locate the source of heat and fire.
As you park the brake your aircraft may be subject to a skin piercing probe that penetrates your cargo hold and immediately provides a massive volume of fire suppressant to extinquish the fire.
Meanwhile. It may start raining in the cabin as other probes pierce the aircraft upper fuselage surface & spray water into the cabin to both reduce heat levels, ventilate possible smoke and provide immediate relief from the affects of a possible onboard fire.
So, stop on the runway. Pause & give thought to that fact you may achieve immediate and better relief than directing the punters down the slides.
Have the fire commanders frequency up on comm 2 and consider what assistance may be available seconds after you park the brakes.
(The usual caveats regarding my advice apply)
MC.
Air Canada Flight 797 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Broken pax is a much better outcome than charred pax.
Ninety seconds after the plane landed and the doors were opened, the heat of the fire and fresh oxygen from the open exit doors created flashover conditions, and the plane's interior quickly became engulfed in flames, killing 23 passengers who had yet to evacuate the aircraft.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flyhardmo.
I think parking the brakes & calling for an Evacuation is a hangover from the checking days in the Sim. Do you know the Evacuation procedure = pass the check ride.
It gives little thought to opening a door and providing an instant increase in oxygen supply to accelerate a fire and the modern day capability of the ARFFS.
MC
I think parking the brakes & calling for an Evacuation is a hangover from the checking days in the Sim. Do you know the Evacuation procedure = pass the check ride.
It gives little thought to opening a door and providing an instant increase in oxygen supply to accelerate a fire and the modern day capability of the ARFFS.
MC
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Midlands
Posts: 340
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To put it simply ARFFS will not pierce a pax area that still has pax in it otherwise they WILL cause serious injury.
They will however pierce an aircraft that has evacuated.
Cargo holds they can/will pierce, if safe, straight away upon confirmation of any Dangerous Goods onboard
They will however pierce an aircraft that has evacuated.
Cargo holds they can/will pierce, if safe, straight away upon confirmation of any Dangerous Goods onboard
The point I was trying, unsuccessfully, to make was that unless we were there we shouldn't criticise the crew for the decisions they made.
There is no absolute answer in these situations and I don't believe anyone can say, with absolute certainty, that any course of action was the correct one.
The crew, in this instance, got everyone off uninjured, the aeroplane so it seems from the news report was not significantly damaged.
Regardless of what the crew on the day decides someone will arm chair quarterback their decisions and say that they should have done this or done that.
That has to be hard on the crew.
There is no absolute answer in these situations and I don't believe anyone can say, with absolute certainty, that any course of action was the correct one.
The crew, in this instance, got everyone off uninjured, the aeroplane so it seems from the news report was not significantly damaged.
Regardless of what the crew on the day decides someone will arm chair quarterback their decisions and say that they should have done this or done that.
That has to be hard on the crew.
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: nowhere
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MC, are you a firey?
Does Australia's airport RFF have the same capability as the US? If so why are the crews not given different procedures. Does it differ from a/p to a/p? It's a slippery slope.
I will not change from what I've been given without other advice, if what has been done for decades is no longer suitable the changes need to come from top down.
Does Australia's airport RFF have the same capability as the US? If so why are the crews not given different procedures. Does it differ from a/p to a/p? It's a slippery slope.
I will not change from what I've been given without other advice, if what has been done for decades is no longer suitable the changes need to come from top down.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Sydney
Age: 60
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK,
You get a smoke warning, you do the extinguisher/suppression thing and land.
Fire commander says he cannot see any smoke or fire near fuselage. He can see a little smoke near wheels, what do you do?
(A situation with obvious smoke and heat is a different thing!
)
This is actually a current sim exercise.
Evacuating a full passenger load, probably with a few serious injuries/broken bones, possibly elderly fatalities?
I bet the airport is happy with a closed runway for many hours.
Versus, taxi off the runway, evaluate and do a precautionary disembarkation (which can be upgraded at any time to full evacuation) preferably via stairs but perhaps slides, done in an orderly manner. All the time fire services standing by (but NOT opening hold doors until pax off)
You get a smoke warning, you do the extinguisher/suppression thing and land.
Fire commander says he cannot see any smoke or fire near fuselage. He can see a little smoke near wheels, what do you do?
(A situation with obvious smoke and heat is a different thing!
)This is actually a current sim exercise.
Evacuating a full passenger load, probably with a few serious injuries/broken bones, possibly elderly fatalities?
I bet the airport is happy with a closed runway for many hours.
Versus, taxi off the runway, evaluate and do a precautionary disembarkation (which can be upgraded at any time to full evacuation) preferably via stairs but perhaps slides, done in an orderly manner. All the time fire services standing by (but NOT opening hold doors until pax off)
Unfortunately snakecharma, no one on the aircraft has perfect information.
You know there is an indication of fire. There may be a smell.
You have absolutely no way of knowing the severity or likely course of the fire once the aircraft is stationary.
Therefore you MUST invoke the precautionary principle and evacuate.
To put that another way, the situation you describe is exactly analogous to the question about going around: Its better to be asked why you went around rather than why you didn't....
..Speaking as an incinerator of a C172, you have no way of knowing what is going to happen.
You know there is an indication of fire. There may be a smell.
You have absolutely no way of knowing the severity or likely course of the fire once the aircraft is stationary.
Therefore you MUST invoke the precautionary principle and evacuate.
To put that another way, the situation you describe is exactly analogous to the question about going around: Its better to be asked why you went around rather than why you didn't....
..Speaking as an incinerator of a C172, you have no way of knowing what is going to happen.