Fire at Manchester - a/c evacuated

[Wedge]

300 evacuated after fire on Pakistani a/c at Manchester.

[DarkStar]

BBC News 24 saying it was during A/c re-fuelling.....

[AVeight]

News reports say it's a PIA B777. Accident during re-fuelling.

[hobie]

Sky News have this so far ....

http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-1172792,00.html

[GOLF-INDIA BRAVO]

Does not quite make sense that, as incident appears to have happened on taxiway near pier C and blocked most of airport at present.

There have been a large number of aircraft in hold and no movements for about 15 mins due lack of fire cover whilst all fire vehicles were involved in incident

[Wedge]

From the airport spokesman it sounds like the fire started after landing while taxiing to refuel.

[phoenix son]

presumably if it happened just after landing then hot brakes are the number one suspect?

[Rollingthunder]

The Boeing 777 had just landed from Karachi and was taxiing on the runway when fire started in the undercarriage, said an airport spokesman. - BBC.

very confusing so far

[40KTSOFFOG]

Interesting bit of history!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/3791709.stm

[Jordan D]

Not commenting on the history ....

Yesterday's incident is commented on at:

BBC News Online Story (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/4307511.stm)

Jordan

[DH1]

Morning,

Just to give you the true story (some of the reported news is not correct), a PK 777 landed this morning with but was held on a taxiway following a possible undercarriage fire - certainly smoke and steam but didn't see flames. All pax disembarked by chutes and the airport was closed for around 30 mins.

There are still some delays here as the a/c is parked on a critical taxiway.

Some flights will have been cancelled/diverted/delayed as a result of this.

[chippy63]

well, here's CNN's contribution

300 evacuated from Pakistan jet after it catches fire at Manchester Airport, England, wire reports say.

Watch CNN or log on to http://edition.cnn.com for the latest news.

[Jules Meister]

This is the Irish Times latest on this

Fire forces plane evacuation in Manchester
Last updated: 01-03-05, 10:33



More than 340 passengers and 12 were evacuated from a Pakistan International Airlines flight today when it caught fire at Manchester airport.

The Boeing 777 from Toronto landed at Manchester at 9.03am for refuelling on its way to Karachi.

At 9.15am the left side of the main undercarriage caught fire and passengers and crew were rushed off the aircraft.

A small number of people suffered minor injuries and were treated at the scene.

A spokeswoman for Pakistan International Airlines said the flight had come from Karachi and was going on from Manchester to Toronto.

Manchester was the scene of one of the worst UK aviation disasters when a British Airtours plane caught fire in windy conditions on take off in August 1985, and more than 50 people died.

[point5]

Sky News have just reported it was a PIA 737! I'm going along with Sky on this one, as opposed to you lot who think PIA have 777s!

[Hold27Left]

PIA do have 777's. see them all the time..

[jammydonut]

Golly gosh 737 flys Atlantic with 300 passengers

[point5]

...I was being sarcastic!! I know they've got 777s, I control them all the time!!

[stationcalling]

Point5.
Management or ATC?:ok:

[Shake]

Undercarriage 'smoke' reported after landing. Aircraft stopped on the taxyway.

Sky News (they've either got this or the Jackson trail so they're making a meal of it) reported that 'cockpit' indications initiated an evacuation. The 777 has no undercarriage fire indicating system and the only EICAS indication related to such an incident would be the 'Brake Temp'. The check list would have refered the crew to the Performance In-Flight reference table for the recommended brake cooling schedual...no mention of an evac.

MAN is pretty cool this time of year and even at MLW the 777 should not have any problem with braking, even with MAX AUTO.

Brake smoke is not uncommon and perhaps the crew found it prudent to carry out a 'precautionary' evacuation based on external visual observations; they would not have been able to see the smoke from the cockpit themselves.

Pictures show two slides, R1/R2 and stairs at L1 which indicates such a controlled evacuation.

[simonjwt]

Is it not possible that they STILL just don't have the right kind of grease? If memory serves me correctly, this is the 4th PIA 777 undercarriage 'fire' at MAN.

[thegypsy]

Don't blame the grease blame the monkey!!

[leonbrumsack]

I thought something really serious had happened, based on the headline and picture below, courtesey of Yahoo.co.uk

http://www.leonbrumsack.dsl.pipex.com/yahoo.jpg

Accurate reporting, good choice of picture :yuk:

[stagger]

That reporting by Yahoo is an absolute disgrace. Can you imagine how a relative might feel if they stumbled across that news page?

It looks to me like they just did a Google search for "burning plane" and chose the pic with the most flames.

The headline has changed from "Passengers Flee Burning Plane" to "Hundreds in burning plane horror"

[fritzi]

stagger,

Im afraid to say thats exactly what they did...

After a search for "burning plane", the exact same pic (although scaled) showed up a few lines down the page.

http://images.google.com/images?q=%22burning%20plane%22&hl=en&lr=&sa=N&tab=wi

Then here you will find the picture:

http://www.parkerstephens.com/clients/luceforward/plane.asp

:ouch:

[wiggy]

I don't believe it.
This thread is already over two hours old and the "experts" haven't started second guessing/ slagging off the Flight Crew.........
bet it doesn't last:)

[JamesT73J]

The BBC has it's usual bulletin of other source's headlines. I have to say, it's an utter disgrace how irresponsible some of these sites are. The headlines suggest some kind of catastrophe.

[Beanbag]

If I were PIA I'd have Messrs Sue, Grabbit and Runne writing a strong letter to Yahoo about that picture. It's the only language these people understand, guv.

[Crappy A380]

Yes, the Yahoo! photo was a very stupid choice! First of all, it looks like a 707???

Anyway, worried relatives or friends would have been shocked to see that!:rolleyes:

[Doors to Automatic]

I saw the yahoo picture and thought that a serious incident had occured. What a crazy choice of picture. Whoever's responsible should be fired. What if it was one of their relatives on the plane? :mad:

[halas]

Have a look at the headlines in this Google news search of the topic.

http://news.google.com/news?ned=au&hl=en&ncl=http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1109682010858_142/%3Fhub%3DTopStories

halas

[Plastique]

Some B777 brakes are a little prone to very slight hydraulic leakage that generates smoke without fire.
Wouldn't be the first time that fire services were called due to smoke billowing from a brake, but this is the first time I've heard of a full scale evac.

[763 jock]

Yahoo. "Hundreds in burning plane horror"...............:yuk: :yuk: :yuk: :yuk: :yuk: :yuk: :yuk: :yuk:

[Taildragger67]

I've never used Yahoo as a news source to date and after this, I'm less likely to than ever.

They're probably wondering why punters have switched to Google...

[Ian_Wannabe]

Talk about being picky of the facts. There are actually two stories on the same Yahoo page up there that contradict eachother, one saying it was ablaze, the other saying the fire didnt even start.

Morons

[tescoapp]

h'mm How about.

777 is taxing in. Plane behind reports to ground the 777's left main gear are on fire just as it comes throught the intersection in front of L1

Ground asks 777 to hold and wait on Fire service.

Fire service turn up.

777 asked to shut down left engine. And go to fire freq

Fire service then recommends to evac to starboard while fire crew deal with the offending gear.

Pax are all bused away, no panic, no running, a well preplanned operation operated by proffesionals . Fire service and leaders etc etc all working together to get the taxiway opened up with minimal fuss. And not fogetting the others who then have to deal with 6 bus loads of international (possible none english speaking) pax who have just jumped down a slide surrounded by blue lights and fire hoses.

While this is all happening, the ground controller in a very cool calm voice keeps everyone informed.

Bet they won't write anything like that in the papers.

tescoapp

[chippy63]

Good old Irish Times.
First, they say that the aircraft was doing YYz-MAN-KHI, then they quote PK as saying that the routing was KHI-MAN-YYZ
:confused:

[Fly Ginger]

The media never fail to amaze me. Why do things have to be sensationalized to such a degree of not just distorting the truth but of, quite frankly, making it up as they go along. Have just tried to send yahoo a snot-o-gram, can't find an address, anyone help?

cheers

p.s. nice post tescoapp

[hobie]

quote ....

"Good old Irish Times.
First, they say that the aircraft was doing YYz-MAN-KHI, then they quote PK as saying that the routing was KHI-MAN-YYZ"

But, Sky News had it going in one direction ..... BBC News had it going in another direction and the poor old "Irish Times" playing safe has it going in both directions :{

well at least the Times had it 50% correct :p

[timstours]

The latest from Sky.

"The Pakistan International Boeing 777! landed at Manchester from Karachi for refuelling before it was due to go onto Toronto.

At first it was believed the aircraft had caught fire after a plane behind had spotted smoke coming from the undercarriage, but an airport spokesman said the fire brigade attended but there was no evidence that a fire had actually started, although it is believed overheating may have occured in the undercarriage."

Apparently the airport was closed for 15 minutes.

Cheers. :cool:

[Doodles]

Can anyone confirm regn or MSN of the aircraft involved this morning at MAN?

Thanks

[LFC RED]

yahoo want a kick up the a ----- for publishing such a photo
and comments. i was there this morning

[Belgique]

"Grease is the Word"

LINK (http://www.iasa.com.au/folders/Safety_Issues/others/ease-in-the-Grease.html)

I believe some knowledgeable PIA frequent fliers were heard singing

"Grease is the Word"

as they slid down the chutes.

[Topslide6]

LFC RED,

Wholeheartedly agree :mad:

That report is an absolute disgrace. Unbelieveably, although they've changed the photograph the report is still there now complete with this headline: Hundreds In Burning Plane Horror

I've looked for an e-mail address to complain to them about it but they don't seem to have one. Typical :yuk:

This is the best I can find although it's certainly not what's required...

http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/writeus/suggest.html

[Flying Guy]

I have a picture if someone will tell me how to post it here.

[fastjet2k]

Quote from Yahoo report:

Buses took the passengers to the Terminal 2 building, where paramedics treated the wounded

How many people got off that aircraft and could honestly claim to be wounded??? Unless you can call a small friction burn to your @rse a wound?! It makes it sound like people were maimed getting off that aircraft...

Irresponsible reporting, yes - but did anybody expect anything less? :mad:

[Jordan D]

At 1720Z these are the 'From other Sites' headlines off BBC:

Mirror 300 Flee In Manchester Jet Fire Scare - 2 hrs ago
CNN Smoke forces jet evacuation - 2 hrs ago
Independent Passengers taken off plane in runway emergency - 4 hrs ago
Daily Express 300 Passengers In Plane Alert - 5 hrs ago
Daily Mail News: Hundreds flee aircraft blaze in Manchester - 5 hrs ago

You've got to wonder about the standards of journalism. Shocking. Absolutely Shocking.

Jordan

[Final 3 Greens]

I saw the Yahoo! story and was shocked, until I noticed the "eyebrow" windows and realised that 300 would not fit on a 73.

What a disgraceful use of library pix, without a prominent caption.

[Irish Steve]

How many people got off that aircraft and could honestly claim to be wounded??? Unless you can call a small friction burn to your @rse a wound?! It makes it sound like people were maimed getting off that aircraft...

From memory, and it's a little rusty at the moment, I seem to recall that the "expected" injury rate when using evacutaion slides is about 3%. On that basis, if there were 300 on board, there could be 9 people with things like sprained ankles, or wrists, or even possibly in extreme cases, fractures, as not all passengers have the mobility, flexibility or speed of response to cope with exiting via a slide.

There will also be shock, and disortientation, and other issues that need to be checked out, so it's appropriate to be safe rather than sorry in this case.

[G-SP0T]

I watched the hole event unfold from our office on B-pier. Very well handled by all concerned. All very calm and professional.

:ok:

[Rollingthunder]

I never blame pilots. It will be a sad day when pax can dictate the procedure of a flight (see other thread about my home town). But was this the grease - again.....again? Let's see, if so, blame purchasing idiots, purchasing management idiots or terribly sloppy mechs?

[master slug]

Its just like Groundhog day.........

Every day you go to work, and the PK 777 undercarriage is on fire.


Plus if Sky News says its a 737 then its a 737.

I remember a recent incident at Man, And Sky said it happened at LHR.


God bless SKY... I think not..


So says the slug................

[spannersatcx]

But was this the grease - again

Nope correct grease now in use, fault was a leaking brake unit.



blame purchasing idiots, purchasing management idiots or terribly sloppy mechs? :mad:

[TURIN]

Nope correct grease now in use, fault was a leaking brake unit.

Nice try spanners, but utterly wrong!! Wait for the report after tomorrows taxi tests!!!!:uhoh:

[GF-A330]

The PIA B777 brake assys are from Goodrich and have the special procedure to fill in the grease while refurbished/repacked in the shop.

Earlier it was blamed on the wrong type of grease used which was NYCO (European brand of grease usually for Airbus), after a couple incidents of brake fire, PIA started using the right type of grease Aeroshell 22 (American brand of grease meant for use on Boeings), but unfortunately that was not the problem. The actual facts are somewhat different than using the wrong and then right types of greases. One of the difference is the flash point of the two greases.

One relief flight took the passengers from Man. to YYZ . The aircraft AP-BGL is still in Man. They are working on it to get it airworthy.

I would like to add here one more thing, there are only 12 incidents of similar nature on B777s , out of which 6 were with PIA. Goodrich is the boeing approved manufacturer for B777s brake assemblies.

The result of a minor mistake cost PIA a fortune, Slide rafts, Engine fire extinguishers, brake assy, wheels, down-time of the aircraft, and top of everything unsatisfied customers.

[Ignition Override]

Pprune's resident expert on anything aeronautical seems to be keeping a low profile :8 .

That burning 707 might have been the result of testing the polyester seat fabrics? Just one burning seat can fill the area with deadly smoke. Nice ad for a US law firm, the type which 'chases ambulances', like a dog barking at a jogger?

And Fritzi: would you also bestellen us spaetzle instead of pommes frites (prefer to stay a bit schlank-and my wife hides the chips)? Thanks :) .

[dghob]

Google: "More than 300 passengers of a Pakistan International Airways (PIA) flight escaped through emergency parachutes after the plane caught fire at Manchester Airport in northwestern England on Tuesday, Xinhua reports."

Where do they keep the parachutes for pax? How come they never mention that "your emergency parachute is under your seat" during the F/A safety briefing? Does this incident mean all pax will now have to wear parachutes as a matter of course? Isn't it a bit risky jumping from an aircraft that's on the ground hoping your parachute will open in time? Google really does need to address these issues if they want to be taken seriously.

dghob

[747fanatic]

GF-A330

You have copy pasted material directly from another source.If you need to do that, then please give credit to the relevant author & forum.

[lomapaseo]

GF-A330

You have copy pasted material directly from another source.If you need to do that, then please give credit to the relevant author & forum.



Do you mean to say that this is not GF-A320 own writing?

bad show for tricking us GF :*

[Hippy]

dghobGoogle really does need to address these issues if they want to be taken seriously.
Google does not write news. Google News is a search engine that presents news from many sources.

I believe the Indo-Asian News Service (http://www.htcricket.com/news/181_1262716,00050003.htm) should be the real target of your comments.

[Dr. Red]

Yahoo! UK Ltd
10 Ebury Bridge Road
London
SW1W 8PZ

tel 020 7808 4200
fax 020 7808 4203

What's the bet they don't even bother to reply to complaints?

[EFP058]

Here are two pictures of this incident. Looks like is has been handled in a very calm and professional way (as expected, I might add).

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/790244/L/

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/790243/L/

[Swatters]

A colleague who had witnessed the events was shocked to return to his desk 30 minutes after the event and see Yahoos home page showing a blazing 707 !! Incensed, he searched the website for contact details and eventually came across a number. After being passed from reception to the PR dept, then from PR to Press Room, he was eventually put through to the News Manager. He tried to fob him off with the excuse that all news comes to Yahoo through a feed from Reuters.

My colleague, even more incensed at the added Bulls**t factor, tore into the guy about the vulgar and disgusting item. The News Manager apologised and said that he would look into and have the picture removed. Eventually, at around 1330 local, the picture changed to an actual shot of the 777 at MAN.

His new home page has changed since !!

[Jerricho]

Swatters, can you please buy your mate a beer for me and give him a huge pat on the back :ok:

[TheShadow]

Probe into fifth PIA wheel fire
First published: 30 Mar 2005
THE chief engineer at Pakistani International Airlines has blamed Boeing for the fires that have broken out on their 777 planes when they landed at Manchester Airport.
The latest saw over 300 passengers sliding down emergency chutes as firemen doused a blaze in the planes port-side wheel.
Air accident experts who investigated four earlier fires at Manchester concluded PIA were using too much of the wrong grease when replacing wheel assemblies on the passenger aircraft.
Officials of the Air Accident Branch (AAIB) of the Department of Transport said that the grease overheated and caught fire endangering the plane.
But after the latest fire on 1 March PIA's chief engineer has been quoted as saying: "This is the fifth incident with our Boeing 777 and the matter was reported to the manufacturer.
"They changed the lubricant quality and quantity but even then this happened."
Almost a year ago PIA replaced its Boeing 747 with the new 777 model.
The latest fire occurred as one 777 from Karachi en-route to Toronto, landed at Manchester for re-fueling.
The pilot was breaking hard after touchdown when the crew of another plane noticed black smoke billowing from the wheel.
Emergency fire crews were scrambled and quickly doused the blaze. But 333 passengers made an emergency evacuation.
Thirty-three suffered minor injuries, mostly to their ankles and wrists when they slipped on to the tarmac at the bottom of the chutes.
The rest of the passengers were held in a transit lounge until a replacement aircraft was drafted in and they were flown to their final destination.

http://www.theasiannews.co.uk/news/index/11629.html

[whauet]

Not bashing the previous poster, just the content...

So, as I read it, apparently there should be a 'special' grease applied to all Manchester bound triple-sevens? !?!

I just want to be sure so that I don't find myself on an aircraft bursting into flames dependent on which airport I'm flying into -- dear God, I have to be in Dallas later on tomorrow, perhaps I should call Boeing to ensure that the grease is appropriate for that airport... :rolleyes:

[B Fraser]

So the story goes........ There were a lot of rather "large" women on board wearing saris.

Now.....

Saris are made from silk

Silk is a material with relatively low friction.

v squared = twice 9.8 x the height of a 777 slide minus not a lot of friction.

Would anyone like to calculate the speed achieved at the bottom of the slide :}

energy = 0.5 x mass x v squared :8

Our firemen don't get paid enough :ouch:

[TheShadow]

CAA finds PIA staff guilty of negligence


KARACHI: Investigations carried out by the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) — the watchdog for aviation activities in the country - have proved that the incompetence and inefficiency of the engineering staff of the Pakistan International Airlines (PIA) was behind the numerous incidents of fire in the brakes of newly introduced Boeing 777 planes. The mishaps not only put the life of passengers on board in danger on six different occasions but also tarnished the image of the national flag carrier among international flyers. A PIA spokesperson acknowledged the report and claimed that human error was the cause and that action had been taken against the person responsible.

After the induction of these new 777 planes in March 2004, there have been six accidents of the same nature : fire erupting in the brake assemblies. Out of these six accidents, four took place at Manchester airport alone, while one occured at Lahore airport and another at Toronto, Canada.

The last accident took place on March 1, 2005 at the Manchester airport. Flight PK789, a Boeing 777 from Karachi, landed in Manchester at 9.03am for refuelling on its way to Toronto. As it was taxiing along the runway, the pilot of the aircraft directly behind reported smoke coming from its left undercarriage.

Fire-fighters were called and the 302 passengers and 12 crew on board were evacuated from the aircraft using inflatable emergency slides. The entire operations at Manchester airport were suspended for 15 minutes. Later, the airport was reopened but one runway remained closed.

About eight people were injured and were taken to the hospital. They hurt their ankles and wrists during the rescue operation. "As all the incidents have occurred on newly installed wheel assemblies, therefore it is established that there is a flaw in shop maintenance procedures," the CAA investigation report said.

During the investigations, it came to light that the staff deployed for handling B-777 planes was not properly trained and there was no record available for their training on assembly of B-777 wheel shop, the report said.

There were two main causes for the fires, the CAA report said. The most serious one was not using the appropriate solvent for the service of brake assemblies in the proper way. "The solvent being used for cleaning of bearing and heat shield is carrier-2 while the demanded solvent is P-D-680. Even the solvent P-D-680 is in category I type while the recommended solvent for B-777 ER are category II and III type," the report said.

"The justification for use of carrier-2 solvent provided by the concerned chief engineer, power plant, was non-availability of P-D-680 and his considering carrier-2 as its equivalent," the report said.

"As per supervising staff, the cleaning process at manufacturer premises is automated while there is no such facility at the PIA. The mechanics involved in cleaning are not trained and use conventional way of dipping the parts in solvents/kerosene oil. Due to dipping of heat shield covers the solvent gets entrapped inside the covers and glass wool sheet inside the covers gets wet/moisturized with solvent contents. The contents, when they get heated during the braking process, emerge as fumes and catch fire," the CAA findings said.

The CAA also found that the staff working on the service of brake assemblies also did not have the required approvals and the authorities have provided approval in the form of back-dating to the CAA investigators.

Manchester was the scene of one of the worst UK aviation disasters when a British Airtours plane caught fire in windy conditions on take-off in August 1985 and more than 50 people died.

Due to the fire just below the fuel tanks, the same accident could have been repeated but it was nature that saved the life of the passengers and crew. After the rescue operations, the investigators in Pakistan and the UK have started their investigations to find the real cause. The repetition of the same type of accidents in the new 777 planes stunned the Boeing company and provided a golden opportunity to its arch rival Airbus for a media trial that has alleged that Boeing aircraft are not safer for passengers.

The Accidents Investigation Branch (AIB) of the UK, after inquiries into the accident on June 8, mentioned the main cause for the accidents was the use of low category grease that was not advised for the 777 planes.

The PIA was using NYCO 22 type grease. But the Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM) specifies the use of general purpose wide temperature grease with the specification MIL-PRF-81322 for the wheel assembly. It specifically mentions three types: Mobil 28, Aeroshell 22 and Mobil Aviation Grease SHC 100.

On the recommendations of the AIB, PIA assured the usage of specified grease but an accident again took place. Now, the CAA investigators have found another loophole in the service of the brake assemblies.

Contrary to the AMM, the PIA engineering staff has been dipping the brake assemblies in the solvent during the service. This solvent is inflammable. There is insulation between the two assemblies that soak up the solvent and it catches fire when heated during the application of brakes at high speed.

The common factor in all the six accidents was that all of these flights were the first flights after the servicing of the brakes at the engineering shop of PIA in Karachi, a senior official of the CAA pointed out. It seems strange that the PIA engineering staff is not using the AMM, he said and added that the carelessness of the PIA management places a question mark on the safety of passengers.

The PIA spokesperson, Samina Pervez, when asked for comments on the CAA reports, accepted that it was human error on the part of PIA staff. "They did not dry the solvent in a proper way," she said and added that it was the basic cause of the accidents that had now been removed.

Replying to a question regarding punitive action against responsible persons, she said that PIA had removed the responsible technician from his place. She denied that there was a chance of fire in the fuel tanks and disagreed that the passengers’ lives were at risk.

The Shadow's Comment:

The AMM can be an over-awing document for foreign companies.
Many experienced technicians would be deeply mired in the philosophy of "we've always done it this way".

I bet Airbus wouldn't have allowed this fiasco tto happen in the field.

a. Boeing would do themselves a favour if they wrote an FSR Team into the new-type introduction process for the first three months

b. Boeing should enlarge the concept and scope of FSR duties in the field to encopmpass OJT and shop-level oversight (instead of their present aloof administrative paper-shuffling and processing stance).

c. Airline operators seeking to avoid this kind of adverse publicity should be able to find a contractual million bucks (or two) to cover that "blame-sharing and risk-averse" approach to avoiding fiascos.

d. Insurance actuaries and syndicates should make it compulsory.

e. You can't help but wonder what else they're quietly getting wrong.....

[Rollingthunder]

Let's see, if so, blame purchasing idiots, purchasing management idiots or terribly sloppy mechs?


Hey, that guy seems to have been right.

[mutt]

Due to the fire just below the fuel tanks, the same accident could have been repeated but it was nature that saved the life of the passengers and crew.

Utter tripe! Guess that the reporter has never seen video footage of the B777 brake fire testing! Under FAR25 the brakes have to be left alone for 5 minutes.

One wonders what are the requirements to be an "aviation journalist"....

Mutt.

[TURIN]

e. You can't help but wonder what else they're quietly getting wrong.....

Don't go there, just don't!:\ :hmm: :eek:

[Groundgripper]

Looking at that second photo, it would appear that a significant number of passengers are carrying briefcases - should that surprise me?