SIA fire
 

I won't bother to log the whole event which can be found here

http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/5...ches-fire.html

Very concerning that the capt did not call for an evacuation

Nor did any of the flight attendants. Would our FAs call for an evacuation if they saw the extent of the fire? I would like to hope that they would.

Wonder if they pulled the engine fire switch (fuel shutoff T-handle) in a timely manner.

It's inconceivable they didn't evacuate.

I am not familiar with CX's SOP.
Mind telling me which manual I should look up?

When will it be CX's turn with its history of engine oil problem with the ERs :E

Thadern , yes the 777 oil pressure issues are a concern , but they are not solely the domain of CX, other carriers have had similar issues .

What I have to question is the Captain telling a plane load of passengers to remain seated whilst the right wing was engulfed in a conflagration

If the engine had been shut down for a couple of hours , how did it ignite on landing ?

And as you asked the manufacturers QRH is the manual to look up . "Engine shut down" , land at nearest suitable airport

Agree, regardless what the cockpit crew was doing, the cabin crew are trained to begin an evac under such conditions. Half the airplane engulfed in fire on a plane fully loaded with fuel is not a situation where you want to sit on your hands.

Also surprised none of the SLF extracted themselves. Especially in SE Asia and other "interesting" locations, I don't know about you, but I'm a bit more on my toes while riding in the back. Was a time that SIA, like CPA, was a pretty safe bet. But I think those days are long gone. Just a matter of time these days.

Tired, overworked and underexperienced crews is the biggest threat today. I've seen that lead to some really interesting judgement calls here at CPA, why should SIA be any different?

I don't consider SIA to have been a particularly 'safe bet' over the years.

Just off the top of my head, I recall a crew turning off all the hydraulic pumps in an A340 ('to balance fuel'), an RTOW error in Auckland leading to a tail strike, APU fire, and a go round off the attempt to land, and of course the dreadful Taipei accident where they took off on a closed runway/taxiway and hit an earthmover. 80+ dead I recall.

Dart is correct. Like CX, SIA enjoys an assumption of safety that is a leftover from the old expat days. The premium product makes it appear that things haven't changed, but nothing could be further from the truth. I would put SIA on par with Eva and China Airlines from a safety perspective... not horrible but nothing to be proud of either.

At least Dynasty did go for the evac when it happened to them.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-qyZFASOAe0&app=desktop

(Evac finishes around 1:30, at 2:00 last crew jumps out of the cockpit window while plane explodes behind him)

Didn't they also have a dual engine fail and restart abeam Hong Kong, after which they just kept trucking to Shanghai?

Not impressed

Or my all time favourite. The 330 that had a double engine failure and then continued to Shanghai. 2015 I think?
Not really having a go at SIA as such but probably a commentary of where we might be heading in terms of cockpit experience levels, training cost cutting and this seemingly over zealous desire to push on to destination when the safest course of action is to park it for the night.

It’s absolutely amazing how pilots around the world are very quickly to “Eat Their Own”. You never see other professions do so on a public forum i.e. Doctor’s, Lawyers, Engineers, Architects, etc. Little or small wonder why pilots don’t get any respect they think they deserve.

It is not surprising the conditions of pilots around the world have diminished over the years, pilots are not very cohesive in nature and will eat their own when it comes to their profession. Many other professions think of the profession first before putting pen to paper are unified in nature and never criticize in public as we follow in “The CPG” Management. Those pilot groups that have unity have much better conditions.

In all the years of industrial dispute at “The CPG” only one has broken our bond on disputes WRT “The CPG” Management and this was only done after an overreaction from the DFO which had him fired. The time before his termination, he was very loyal to “The CPG”.

As for the SIA fire incident: How do you know what happened? Would you see other professions jump to conclusions and so early to criticize ones peers before all the facts are known?

From the evidence we have, there was a fuel leak. What does your checklist ask of you? You run the checklist and you dump fuel and come in to land. Upon landing the aircraft catches fire and extinguished by the fire crew. No one was injured and all are safe. So how do you justify criticizing the Captain when his job was completed in safely getting his passengers off the airplane?

There are many “What If’s”.

The only thing We at “The CPG” would have done differently was to turn the crew around with a second aircraft within 1:10 time and the MLO would ask/pressured the crew into using “Commanders Discretion” to get the job done.

This whole situation is not stressful in our opinion nor is diverting in SYA with smoke in the cockpit, weather at minimums and 10 knots of tailwind. If the “The CPG” crew can take off out of SYA after that situation, there is no reason why the SIA crew could not have taken another aircraft to Milan. Clearly SIA and BA does not have to correct MLO in place. Pilots are trained for this and we believe minimal stress. As in all situations like this “The CPG” MLO liaisons with our Corporate Medical Department to access the mental functions after any stressful minor incidents like this. We have trained our own Corporate Medical personal that we are a “GO” airline. At “The CPG” pilots are unable to access themselves so the MLO and Corporate Medical accesses it for them. Only “The CPG” Management knows what is best for the pilots as per our rostering. Corporate Medical are not accountable in these situations.

In the eyes of “The CPG” FOP Management, The SIA Captain clearly did his job of keeping everyone under control and getting everyone to safety. We clearly know what it is like to keep employee’s under control.

Criticizing a Captain and his crew for getting all the SIA passengers off safely and no injuries clearly demonstrates the unprofessionalism of those who criticize.

To My Bonus
The Management

The Management
 

Spot on. And how quick are we to forget that an aircraft with an actual fire indication flew past Chuchill to return to the departure field.
Let's wait for facts and transcripts before judging or criticising.

Nah, still insane to just sit there with a burning wing, get the pax and crew off already!

as Oasis said...

plus 1

cxtreme,
Both decisions were very questionable, to keep passengers seated when the wing is burning is not a wise course of action .

Just because they were lucky this time it does not make it a good decision.

Hmmm, China Airlines record is not horrible. Are you serious?

And Eva's is nothing to be proud of? They are the exact opposite of each other from what I can see, unless you can give some more info to us?