BA incident at Logan

[downthebay]

Boston local news is reporting a BA London-Boston flight (identified as BA239) "caught fire on the tarmac just after landing" and was evacuated. They report the fire is out, with some injuries to firefighters but all pax and crew out OK. They further report that the fire started "in a compartment underneath the baggage compartment".

Video shows a twin (presumably a 777) parked at a jetway, with all of the right side doors closed, no slides in sight, and lots of emergency vehicles. Looks like hopefully a minor incident.

[ElectroVlasic]

Fortunately, no big deal.

According to the video available at NECN (http://www.necn.com) the pilots got an indication of fire in the avionics bay while the plane was on the ground and the passengers were already leaving the plane. No chutes, no injuries, etc. Five firefighters complaining of stinging eyes and sore throats, possibly from hydraulic fluids.

--ev--

[Mr @ Spotty M]

I know it was not a big deal, but someone should tell our press friends, l have seen reports of Fire Fighters hurt "Fighting the Blaze".

[Final 3 Greens]

Blaze = bright flame or fire (Oxford pocket dictionary)

5 firefighters complaining of stinging eyes and sore throats due possible exposure to hazardous chemical.

Seems like a fair piece of reporting to me and a little over sensitivity to criticise it.

If I recall, SR111 started off with relatiely minor symptoms?

[Old King Coal]

Not familiar with the B777 but does it have any sort of E&E / Avionics Bay fire suppression ? If so, and if the pilots released the extinguishing agent (gas) then this might be the cause of the irritation that the fire fighters experienced. That said, surprised that whatever it is / was could pass across a full face mask and breathing apparatus ?!

[eal401]

I know it was not a big deal, but someone should tell our press friends, l have seen reports of Fire Fighters hurt "Fighting the Blaze".
OK, this is getting bloody ridiculous. The press get lambasted for over-reporting incidents. NOW you are moaning because they are under-reporting it!!!!!!

Talk about a rock and a hard place! Make your choice people!

Glad nobody has been killed or seriously hurt.

[bizflyer]

Not a major incident?

I should cocoa, not on this occasion maybe but I would think this is potentially very serious indeed and requires a very close look from the relevant authorities, manufacturer and the airline. I know "what ifs" can be really bloody irritating but what if this had happened an hour earlier?

[AFFF]

If it was an onboard fire, looks like the fire service have used halon extinguishers without using any respiratory protection! Not recommended!!

[RRAAMJET]

777 has no avionics bay fire suppression systems....does have detection (as I recall smoke detectors in the avionics fan exhaust ducting...it's been a while)

Glad nobody was hurt - I'm sure the crew removed all power from the jet as soon as the warning came on.

'Avionics Smoke' I presume was the warning/checklist?

[Jet II]

Fire was from a pin-hole leak in a landing gear hydraulic pipe that sprayed onto the ground power receptacle.

Fire crew may have been affected by Skydrol mist.

[RRAAMJET]

Nasty...

I once had a shorting and subsequent fire in the receptacle of a 757 ( under the belly behind the nose strut ). The damage, although localized, was substantial and required the cutting-out and replacing of the receptacle pressure vessel, bonding strap and door. All after a short, expensive, unpressurized ferry-flight.
Ouch... :ouch: