Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

BA incident at Logan

Wikiposts
Search

Notices
Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

BA incident at Logan

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 16th November 2004 | 02:58
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
From: The Hub of the Universe
BA incident at Logan

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.
downthebay is offline  
Old 16th November 2004 | 03:40
  #2 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
From: By the Sea
Fortunately, no big deal.

According to the video available at NECN 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--
ElectroVlasic is offline  
Old 16th November 2004 | 05:14
  #3 (permalink)  
25 Anniversary
 
Joined: Aug 2000
Aviation Qualifications: Spotter
Posts: 2,143
Likes: 4
From: EGGW
Angry

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".
Mr @ Spotty M is offline  
Old 16th November 2004 | 06:01
  #4 (permalink)  
Final 3 Greens
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
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 16th November 2004 | 07:13
  #5 (permalink)  
25 Anniversary
 
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 763
Likes: 1
From: Monrovia / Liberia
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 ?!
Old King Coal is offline  
Old 16th November 2004 | 07:38
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
From: UK
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.
eal401 is offline  
Old 16th November 2004 | 08:37
  #7 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
From: Australia/UK
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?
bizflyer is offline  
Old 16th November 2004 | 22:00
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
From: 53.27N
If it was an onboard fire, looks like the fire service have used halon extinguishers without using any respiratory protection! Not recommended!!
AFFF is offline  
Old 17th November 2004 | 00:23
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 357
Likes: 0
From: FL, USA
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?
RRAAMJET is offline  
Old 17th November 2004 | 17:17
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 0
From: West Country
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.
Jet II is offline  
Old 18th November 2004 | 00:08
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 357
Likes: 0
From: FL, USA
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...
RRAAMJET is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.