Turkish Airlines B777 Emergency Evacuation at LTBA
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,501
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't know what you are flying Bergie, but in my 737 the cabin crew can't see what is going on in the cargo holds any more than I can.
I can tell you for sure that I don't have to explain anything to my chief pilot when I follow Boeing and my companys procedures.
Who says the THY pilots are looking stupid? Not me.
I can tell you for sure that I don't have to explain anything to my chief pilot when I follow Boeing and my companys procedures.
Who says the THY pilots are looking stupid? Not me.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: 3rd rock
Age: 59
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Who says the THY pilots are looking stupid? Not me.
So a fire in one of your 73 holds barely 6 feet from the passengers backsides is going to go unnoticed?? I think not. It has been a while since I have flown 738's but I can assure you that the air circulates between the holds and the cabin and it wouldn't take very long for the smoke to enter the cabin.
Are you sure you are a pilot?
And pray tell what airline you fly for that says you must evacuate based on a cargo fire cockpit warning only -You gotta be kidding me right
Had the Turkish pilots received better training in this regard they wouldn't be looking so stupid right now. I certainly wouldn't like to face my chief pilot for cold tea on a Monday had it been me.
I don't know what you are flying Bergie, but in my 737 the cabin crew can't see what is going on in the cargo holds any more than I can. I can tell you for sure that I don't have to explain anything to my chief pilot when I follow Boeing and my companys procedures.
If there are, why would the CC not have a light/indicator at one of the CC stations?
Did Boeing consider such a provision and deem it an overly redundant design, or a too likely source of false positive indications?
I can see both sides of that on the design decision process ...
EDIT -- Based on a few inquires already, I am curious as to what the conventional wisdom is on what constitutes a secondary indication, other than the obvious presence of smoke in the passenger cabin ...
Last edited by Lonewolf_50; 16th Dec 2010 at 12:34.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: 3rd rock
Age: 59
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm getting bored with this thread. I tell you what ManaAdwhatever, if you ever get a cargo fire warning in your 737, set the parkbrake, fire the bottles, call a mayday, blow the chutes and evacuate. Because you can never be too sure can you. End of discussion - you are right. 
Last edited by Bergie; 16th Dec 2010 at 12:41.
when I follow Boeing and my companys procedures.
I would be very interested if you could quote which Boeing procedures state you MUST evacuate for a cargo fire warning with no other indication.
Where are the good old experienced barnstormers when you need them... (strange, how they only appear on Airbus incident related threads 
)
Good airmanship includes the ability to quickly tell the difference between a real warning and a false positive. Sensor faults are an everyday occurrence, if all pilots would follow worst case scenario procedures, half of the flights would never make it accross the Atlantic (ok, that was an exaggeration...
). In this case IF there was no other indication of fire, then I concur the evacuation was a rather costly overreaction. However early on the thread there was a comment or two, yet unconfirmed, that the cabin crew did report smelling smoke in the back (whether real or perceived is a different story...), in which case the evacuation order would have been perfectly justified.
It all boils down to an often discussed theme: some crews are capable of evaluating a situation and making a decision based on sound assessment of risks, and some take a go by the book, CYA attitude. Same happens in every profession. Can you blame the latter ? By the rules, no. Is the first course of action more professional ... ?
)Good airmanship includes the ability to quickly tell the difference between a real warning and a false positive. Sensor faults are an everyday occurrence, if all pilots would follow worst case scenario procedures, half of the flights would never make it accross the Atlantic (ok, that was an exaggeration...
). In this case IF there was no other indication of fire, then I concur the evacuation was a rather costly overreaction. However early on the thread there was a comment or two, yet unconfirmed, that the cabin crew did report smelling smoke in the back (whether real or perceived is a different story...), in which case the evacuation order would have been perfectly justified.It all boils down to an often discussed theme: some crews are capable of evaluating a situation and making a decision based on sound assessment of risks, and some take a go by the book, CYA attitude. Same happens in every profession. Can you blame the latter ? By the rules, no. Is the first course of action more professional ... ?
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes it's a CO Bulletin, but they are issued with consultation from Boeing, often on Boeing's recommendation- I'd be surprised if most B777 operators don't have the same Bulletin (or at least similar) as anomalous fire warnings are a problem with the aircraft
Were there really no other indications of fire in the Saudia incident?
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,501
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Top of page two, this tread, Wiz.
What other indications are you looking for from a Class C cargo hold? Smoke?
You have no way of knowing if the indication is correct or not. It is as simple as that. Remember EK over Chennai?
What will you do if you get a cargo fire indication in the air. Just ignore it? As NSEU says, false cargo fire warnings on the 777 will only make the decision harder.
That the system is prone to false warnings does in no way mean the warning can't be real.
What other indications are you looking for from a Class C cargo hold? Smoke?
The holds are sealed and pressurized but have no fresh air circulation.
What will you do if you get a cargo fire indication in the air. Just ignore it? As NSEU says, false cargo fire warnings on the 777 will only make the decision harder.
That the system is prone to false warnings does in no way mean the warning can't be real.
Mada,
Nope, neither of those statements mandates an immediate evacuation.
Indeed, they indicate that the cargo compartments will probably contain even a real fire for sufficient time to complete a precautionary disembarkation rather than a full on evacuation.
If you wish to discuss this, I'm happy to. If you are going to make stupid straw-man statements, kindly go about your business safe in the knowledge you are incapable of a reasoned discussion with a colleague.
Of course I wouldn't ignore it- I'd follow the checklist which is basically activate the suppression system and land ASAP. It DOESN'T say "And then evacuate".
We had one recently- Crew landed ASAP, fire service scanned with Thermal Image- no fire- Pax disembarked expeditiously but with no "Jump and sliding",
Job done, zero injuries.
What would YOU do if, having just sprayed the holds with insecticide, you received a Cargo Fire warning on push-back?
Nope, neither of those statements mandates an immediate evacuation.
Indeed, they indicate that the cargo compartments will probably contain even a real fire for sufficient time to complete a precautionary disembarkation rather than a full on evacuation.
What will you do if you get a cargo fire indication in the air.Ignore it?
Of course I wouldn't ignore it- I'd follow the checklist which is basically activate the suppression system and land ASAP. It DOESN'T say "And then evacuate".
We had one recently- Crew landed ASAP, fire service scanned with Thermal Image- no fire- Pax disembarked expeditiously but with no "Jump and sliding",
Job done, zero injuries.
What would YOU do if, having just sprayed the holds with insecticide, you received a Cargo Fire warning on push-back?
Were there really no other indications of fire in the Saudia incident?
There were PLANTY of other indications in the Saudia incident, like flames coming through the floor!
In a real fire serious enough to warrent an evacuation, there almost certainly WILL be other indications.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,501
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wiz, I guess we interpret this statement differently:
To me, a fire warning that continues will be covered by this.
Let discuss this from a different angle. If you are in the sim for your PC and your instructor trigger a cargo fire warning during taxi out. You check with you cabin, no sign of fire or smoke, you check with ATC, but in Dhaka they don't have any thermal imaging equipment. They can't see you through the smoke/haze anyway. You have use a couple of minutes to do this + the time it took to complete the check list. The warning still continues.
What would you do?
To answer your question: If I knew (but in RL I have never known about this, and trust me, I've flown in some odd areas of the world) they had sprayed the cargo holds and I knew that my aircraft was prone to false warnings from this treatment, I would probably call for the fire brigade and have my crew stand by for an evacuation. It's a very tricky situation since the gate manager normally walks off the minute I push, so a return to deplane is not an immediate option, and the QRH tells me to get all passengers off the aircraft before opening the cargo holds. Pulling an aircraft that could be on fire back to stand is not a very smart thing to do either. Thermal imaging, yes, if it is available, if not I would violate the QRH and have the cargo holds opened and checked by the fire brigade.
This is my answer, based on your conditions.
A normal push back on a normal day, cargo fire warning that does not go out, I would set the brake and evacuate.
It must be stressed that for smoke that continues or a fire that cannot be positively confirmed to be completely extinguished, the earliest possible descent, landing, and evacuation must be done.
Let discuss this from a different angle. If you are in the sim for your PC and your instructor trigger a cargo fire warning during taxi out. You check with you cabin, no sign of fire or smoke, you check with ATC, but in Dhaka they don't have any thermal imaging equipment. They can't see you through the smoke/haze anyway. You have use a couple of minutes to do this + the time it took to complete the check list. The warning still continues.
What would you do?
To answer your question: If I knew (but in RL I have never known about this, and trust me, I've flown in some odd areas of the world) they had sprayed the cargo holds and I knew that my aircraft was prone to false warnings from this treatment, I would probably call for the fire brigade and have my crew stand by for an evacuation. It's a very tricky situation since the gate manager normally walks off the minute I push, so a return to deplane is not an immediate option, and the QRH tells me to get all passengers off the aircraft before opening the cargo holds. Pulling an aircraft that could be on fire back to stand is not a very smart thing to do either. Thermal imaging, yes, if it is available, if not I would violate the QRH and have the cargo holds opened and checked by the fire brigade.
This is my answer, based on your conditions.
A normal push back on a normal day, cargo fire warning that does not go out, I would set the brake and evacuate.
Mada,
Yes we interpret it differently. The thrust of that statement is that it was confirmed (through smoke or other means) that you had a fire in the first place, and now do not have confirmation that it has been extinguished.
WRT your scenario, with no other indication of fire, I would have the crew standing at stations, arrange a precautionary disembarkation, and be ready to evacuate at the first confirmation of an actual fire.
We have our holds sprayed regularly in Australia and Africa, and subsequent false Cargo Fire warnings have been dealt with in the manuals of three types (all Boeing) in two airlines I've worked with.
I know you are being honest and reasonable with your answers, so I would encourage you to seek clarification from Boeing through your safety department- simple question for them- does Boeing recommend an evacuation in the event of a cargo fire warning with no other indication present or available?
I have my answer, it's in black and white (well, black and blue!!) in my FCOM.
Yes we interpret it differently. The thrust of that statement is that it was confirmed (through smoke or other means) that you had a fire in the first place, and now do not have confirmation that it has been extinguished.
WRT your scenario, with no other indication of fire, I would have the crew standing at stations, arrange a precautionary disembarkation, and be ready to evacuate at the first confirmation of an actual fire.
We have our holds sprayed regularly in Australia and Africa, and subsequent false Cargo Fire warnings have been dealt with in the manuals of three types (all Boeing) in two airlines I've worked with.
I know you are being honest and reasonable with your answers, so I would encourage you to seek clarification from Boeing through your safety department- simple question for them- does Boeing recommend an evacuation in the event of a cargo fire warning with no other indication present or available?
I have my answer, it's in black and white (well, black and blue!!) in my FCOM.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,501
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boeing will never say yes or no to this, they let us make the decision based on information from our manuals. Information that can be interpreted this way or that, as this tread clearly demonstrates.
This way, the lawyers can fight for years after an accident, and Boeing can hide behind them.
It's a command decision, but I still think if you fail to evacuate and really have a fire, you are basically F...ed.
I'll stay (and err) on the safe side, and I can live happily with little Bertie saying "Boo Hoo, told you so", after an evaq with no fire.
I would just like to add the fact that after 20 years of flying, I have never had a cargo fire warning.
Merry Xmas!
This way, the lawyers can fight for years after an accident, and Boeing can hide behind them.
It's a command decision, but I still think if you fail to evacuate and really have a fire, you are basically F...ed.
I'll stay (and err) on the safe side, and I can live happily with little Bertie saying "Boo Hoo, told you so", after an evaq with no fire.
I would just like to add the fact that after 20 years of flying, I have never had a cargo fire warning.
Merry Xmas!
Last edited by ManaAdaSystem; 18th Dec 2010 at 12:18.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Choroni, sometimes
Posts: 1,974
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BusyB
Well, my impression is even between the mentioned ones, there is a difference. The US guys are very fast to evacuate, maybe it has a legal background!?
As already mentioned, beside the smoke warning, with an actual fire you should have some more valid facts like smoke inside/outside the cabin, cargo hold temperature indication, etc.
Pilots might be ex-BA ex-American
As already mentioned, beside the smoke warning, with an actual fire you should have some more valid facts like smoke inside/outside the cabin, cargo hold temperature indication, etc.
No prob,
Where I disagree is that evacuating is the "Safe" option.
Evacuating is the "Hurt People" option.
Use it as a last resort!
Happy Hanuka!!
Where I disagree is that evacuating is the "Safe" option.
Evacuating is the "Hurt People" option.
Use it as a last resort!
Happy Hanuka!!
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: on the ragged edge
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Smoke Detector who cried Wolf
(Note: Non-777 Dino comments follow. If these upset you, kindly skip down to the next post.)
Nothing's worse than a compartment fire since you can never be sure just how bad it is. We used to get them all the time (cargo fire lights) loading 747 holds on the ground due to dust being stirred up, condensation in the tropics etc. A few times they would recur on the taxi out and we would act very deliberately and slowly, prepare for the possibility that it was real but not evacuate until it went on for some time. As I remember, the door seal height was over 30 feet up in the air for the upper deck and it was common for those using that wicked steep slide to be seriously injured. If the wind was blowing hard like it was with Pan Am in SFO, the slides flip sideways and up into the air, and some of the pax could wind up falling to the ground as in that accident. So evac was not something you rushed into. Ask the cabin crew first if they smell smoke. Ask flights next to you and ATC if they see anything unusual like smoke. (Although this is extremely unlikely to help unless flames are already shooting out somewhere, it eats up the clock (allowing the optical light device to clear), and lets the rest of the airport know you may need assistance.) Call a fire truck first to CYA. At least they can heard the wanderers if it's a false alarm and tape up the broken ankles which are sure to occur if you evac.
On most jets I've operated, on the ground and pressurized, the Lower holds are part of the "pressure vessel" and exchange some air with the main cabin until you or the aircraft deliberately arm them into a fire/smoke mode which shuts off air flow into or out of these compartments. Now in climb, some gradually squeeze off air flow, as the aircraft differential rises in the climb, but on the ground, doesn't the 777 feed air into the lower compartments and discharge it out the ships main outflow valves? Most jets I've flown do that.
Doesn't this mean that the cabin crew might indeed smell lower hold smoke if a fire is really present downstairs? Some jets, like the 74 and the A300 a crewmember can even access the forward lower hold through the hellhole and you will know for sure (except if it's mid/aft.). So I think, Stay cool; don't rush. Cargo fire really means particles obscuring the light beam in the detector.
Right?
Livestock charters were particular susceptible to these false alarms because of the breath and commotion of the animals. As I remember, a trick we used was to go to manual and cycle the outflow valves full open to change the airflow around, and if the cargo fire lights went out, and did not re-illuminate once the cabin pressure re-stabilized in auto, we would press on.
This was not part of a checklist. This was technique and systems knowledge.
In flight fires like Saudia are different altogether and mean get the thing on the ground and evac asap. After the Air Canada MD80 lav fire disaster and Halifax, it's clear you can't guess how bad an inflight fire is, or even rely on the cabin crew's opinion, you must assume it's roaring through the overhead or lower holds unknown to the cabin crew.
At least that's what I think.
CC
..
Nothing's worse than a compartment fire since you can never be sure just how bad it is. We used to get them all the time (cargo fire lights) loading 747 holds on the ground due to dust being stirred up, condensation in the tropics etc. A few times they would recur on the taxi out and we would act very deliberately and slowly, prepare for the possibility that it was real but not evacuate until it went on for some time. As I remember, the door seal height was over 30 feet up in the air for the upper deck and it was common for those using that wicked steep slide to be seriously injured. If the wind was blowing hard like it was with Pan Am in SFO, the slides flip sideways and up into the air, and some of the pax could wind up falling to the ground as in that accident. So evac was not something you rushed into. Ask the cabin crew first if they smell smoke. Ask flights next to you and ATC if they see anything unusual like smoke. (Although this is extremely unlikely to help unless flames are already shooting out somewhere, it eats up the clock (allowing the optical light device to clear), and lets the rest of the airport know you may need assistance.) Call a fire truck first to CYA. At least they can heard the wanderers if it's a false alarm and tape up the broken ankles which are sure to occur if you evac.
On most jets I've operated, on the ground and pressurized, the Lower holds are part of the "pressure vessel" and exchange some air with the main cabin until you or the aircraft deliberately arm them into a fire/smoke mode which shuts off air flow into or out of these compartments. Now in climb, some gradually squeeze off air flow, as the aircraft differential rises in the climb, but on the ground, doesn't the 777 feed air into the lower compartments and discharge it out the ships main outflow valves? Most jets I've flown do that.
Doesn't this mean that the cabin crew might indeed smell lower hold smoke if a fire is really present downstairs? Some jets, like the 74 and the A300 a crewmember can even access the forward lower hold through the hellhole and you will know for sure (except if it's mid/aft.). So I think, Stay cool; don't rush.
Cargo fire really means particles obscuring the light beam in the detector.Right?
Livestock charters were particular susceptible to these false alarms because of the breath and commotion of the animals. As I remember, a trick we used was to go to manual and cycle the outflow valves full open to change the airflow around, and if the cargo fire lights went out, and did not re-illuminate once the cabin pressure re-stabilized in auto, we would press on.
This was not part of a checklist. This was technique and systems knowledge.
In flight fires like Saudia are different altogether and mean get the thing on the ground and evac asap. After the Air Canada MD80 lav fire disaster and Halifax, it's clear you can't guess how bad an inflight fire is, or even rely on the cabin crew's opinion, you must assume it's roaring through the overhead or lower holds unknown to the cabin crew.
At least that's what I think.
CC
..
Last edited by Captain-Crunch; 19th Dec 2010 at 08:17. Reason: better verbage
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Choroni, sometimes
Posts: 1,974
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cargo fire really means particles obscuring the light beam in the detector.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: ISTANBUL
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As far as I heard, they called aft cabin via the interphone system. Cabin told that they smell some smoke. The warning was still on.
These two inputs at that very moment made them give the decision to evac.
Regards,
These two inputs at that very moment made them give the decision to evac.
Regards,
