Report I've seen quoted mentions main area of fire damage to be around the main-deck cargo door, with sooth traces running all the way forward to around the CL/CR position. This indicates the fire was strongest at the PL (door) position, but it does not necessarily follow that's where the fire started - though it is likely to be the case.
The report states two pallets with DGR, including flammable liquids (Class 3), corrosives (Cl. 8) and Li-Io batteries (Cl. 9), were loaded on MR and PL, but it does not state how the DG was spread over the two. According to IATA separation criteria you can load Cl. 9 with anything, and there's no requirement to keep Cl. 3 and 8 separated. There's a nice 2.2 tons cocktail for you to ponder, and it's worth mentioning that those separation criteria apply equally to pax and cargo aircraft. And while such a thing as "Cargo Aircraft Only" shipment does exist, what makes a particular substance liable to that restriction is governed largely by quantity per package. Thus if you need to ship 200kg of "nasty" you could do it in 2 x 100kg packages and that would be CAO, or you could do 100 x 2kg packages and that would be acceptable on a pax aircraft.
Still, the biggest danger is not the declared DG but all the unknown and nu-declared shyte we're unknowingly carrying. My position has always been that no cargo carrying aircraft, be it full cargo or lower-deck on a slave boat, departs without some kind of nu-declared DG onboard.
Last edited by SMT Member; 28th Sep 2012 at 22:04.