Singapore Airlines Cargo Hold Fire
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: anytown
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have to agree with G&T - compliance may look costly to the beancounters, but non-compliance is more costly. Penny-wise and pound-foolish. Fixing and checking an airframe after an accident like that plus the lost revenue due to downtime is more expensive. DG that gets handled 'by the book' is ok, cuz I know EXACTLY what it contains. Also the pro's know better than to mess around with regs ( authorities in this 'ere location come down on you like a ton of bricks if you do ) - it's the rickety outfits and privates that give me the willies. I reckon that everybody involved in baggage/cargo handling has tales to tell about stuff that males your hair stand on end...
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Manchester
Age: 45
Posts: 615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DG done properly and checked properly is probably safer than PAX luggage.Where I worked everyone knew the "rogue" agents who'd try and slip one through under "Consol", just to save a few quid. Always got them. Then oddly enough thir next few imports would be snaggeed by customs, shame 
When I flew for SIA the Captain was presented with a cargo advice sheet at check-in, be it a Freighter or Pax.a/c ( for those goods that were allowed on pax a/c ) so we knew what we were carrying and therefore the best way to handle it and / or adv. fire crews if there was a problem anywhere.
I doubt that has changed, at least in intent if not application.
'course, the loading staff had to rely on what the agents sending packed containers told them, I guess.
I doubt that has changed, at least in intent if not application.
'course, the loading staff had to rely on what the agents sending packed containers told them, I guess.
Join Date: May 2012
Location: London, UK
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote:
needed more than 2 hours to control the situation
Why such a long time? Seems they could dowse the pallet(s) and drag them out quicker than that.
needed more than 2 hours to control the situation
Why such a long time? Seems they could dowse the pallet(s) and drag them out quicker than that.
All passengers and crew had disembarked, so there was no continuing risk to life, except if anyone (incl. Fire-persons) subsequently entered (or get too close to) the aircraft. So they would deal with it at arms-length rather than getting up-close-and-personal with hot things and cramped spaces.
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,094
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agree with 2dpilot, also, the fire suppression system was probably allowed to run it's full course, really depends on the indications, if the warning had gone out there is no rush and the cooler the better.
ExSpeedBird:--- yes all carriers present NOTOC's to the Captain advising the location of all dangerous goods and the drill codes etc.
Required for Pax and Cargo Aircraft, nothing new at all.
From what I've read in here both the Cockpit crew AND the Fire crew did exactly as they are trained to do. Well done to all on a safe outcome.
Required for Pax and Cargo Aircraft, nothing new at all.
From what I've read in here both the Cockpit crew AND the Fire crew did exactly as they are trained to do. Well done to all on a safe outcome.
Last edited by nitpicker330; 28th Apr 2013 at 11:35.
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: anytown
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...and the drill codes are on the NOTOC as well - by far the most important piece of information for the flight crew - the other stuff is more important for the response teams at destination or alternate in case of emergency. Startin 2014, NOTOC needs also to be in the hand of dispatchers and/or flight controllers...
As per IATA DG-Regs do not mention drill codes as mandatory - but not including them in the NOTOC would kinda defeat the purpose of it...
As per IATA DG-Regs do not mention drill codes as mandatory - but not including them in the NOTOC would kinda defeat the purpose of it...
Nope WRONG.
Our company NOTOC's have the drill code letters ( eg 9L ) on them as per ICAO and the IATA recommended document standard.
Notification to Captain (NOTOC)
General Information The ANO stipulates that information provided to the Commander/PIC in respect of Dangerous Goods is in accordance with the ICAO Technical Instructions. The ICAO Technical Instructions require that “the operator of an aircraft on which Dangerous Goods are carried shall provide the Commander/PIC, as early as practical before departure of the aircraft, with accurate and legible written or printed information concerning any Dangerous Goods that are carried as cargo.” The Notification to Captain (NOTOC) used by *** is an IATA recommended document. The Notification to Captain (NOTOC), fulfils the requirements of the Air Navigation Order and ICAO Technical Instructions to notify the Commander/PIC of the carriage of Dangerous Goods or other Special Loads. The Shipping Name, Drill Code, Risk, Quantity and Location are specified on the NOTOC
Our company NOTOC's have the drill code letters ( eg 9L ) on them as per ICAO and the IATA recommended document standard.
Notification to Captain (NOTOC)
General Information The ANO stipulates that information provided to the Commander/PIC in respect of Dangerous Goods is in accordance with the ICAO Technical Instructions. The ICAO Technical Instructions require that “the operator of an aircraft on which Dangerous Goods are carried shall provide the Commander/PIC, as early as practical before departure of the aircraft, with accurate and legible written or printed information concerning any Dangerous Goods that are carried as cargo.” The Notification to Captain (NOTOC) used by *** is an IATA recommended document. The Notification to Captain (NOTOC), fulfils the requirements of the Air Navigation Order and ICAO Technical Instructions to notify the Commander/PIC of the carriage of Dangerous Goods or other Special Loads. The Shipping Name, Drill Code, Risk, Quantity and Location are specified on the NOTOC
Last edited by nitpicker330; 30th Apr 2013 at 01:12.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: KGRB, but on the road about 1/2 the time.
Age: 61
Posts: 622
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What's scariest to me (other than lithium batteries) is the UNDECLARED hazmat that no one knows about, and is not marked in any way...
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hazmat
Your airplanes have Dangerous Goods items as standard fit. Oxygen generators, fire extinguishers, fire extinguisher cartridges, corrosive batteries and radioactive magnetrons in radar avionics to name but a few. You could try putting them on ships too, but you'd be out of a job.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Scotland
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rabina, that is no comparison at all. The difference being that those items you list have been designed and tested for use in aircraft and are as safe as can be made.
Dangerous goods in cargo does not go through the same process.
Now, it should be vetted and deemed safe for flight or not, but that isn't always the case.
Dangerous goods in cargo does not go through the same process.
Now, it should be vetted and deemed safe for flight or not, but that isn't always the case.
Last edited by LiveryMan; 30th Apr 2013 at 09:44.
Undeclared hazmat... like the guy who allegedly, a few years back, tried to take on a bag full of explosives onto a minign charter flight. Apparently he didn't think to declare them as DGs because he handled them every day...
Or the over-zealous mums who used to send care boxes to their kids working away and packing in a tub of Napisan and some booze and why not a couple of spare lighters...
Like you say, the only way is to open and inspect everything. If not, then you have to trust what is written on the dec. Hence, the place I worked at we opened all personal boxes for inspection and wrote up the papers ourselves.
Rabina, aircraft kit has gone through risk assessment process and is fitted in such a way as to minimise any hazards. Can't say the same for the camping stove some idiot tries to pack in his luggage or the hairdresser with a case full of hair dye and bleach....
Or the over-zealous mums who used to send care boxes to their kids working away and packing in a tub of Napisan and some booze and why not a couple of spare lighters...
Like you say, the only way is to open and inspect everything. If not, then you have to trust what is written on the dec. Hence, the place I worked at we opened all personal boxes for inspection and wrote up the papers ourselves.
Rabina, aircraft kit has gone through risk assessment process and is fitted in such a way as to minimise any hazards. Can't say the same for the camping stove some idiot tries to pack in his luggage or the hairdresser with a case full of hair dye and bleach....
radioactive magnetrons
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: europe
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flying Changes..
I am shocked they opened the cargo door vs piercing and injecting agent.
Planes do cost money and alot of aircraft have false cargo fire warnings, the commercial pressure of open cargo door once all pax are off vs bring out the injecting agent, and pierce the dam plane would be huge.
Typhoon650..
Looks like the container did an excellent job of containing the fire to me.
No it didn't it, its just like a beer can, will burn in a fire.
I imagine the 330 has ETOPS approval, one of the certification requirements of ETOPS is fire suppression ie 180min, got to keep the fire from reigniting for 180min or so.
Alot of SOPs have you disembark the pax before opening the cargo door, the halon is still doing its thing while the people get off.
Dangerous goods on the outside of the aircraft is a good idea, flight was going to Bangladesh, have seen people sitting on top of trains in that part of the world, fire on the roof.... QRH = push forward, NEGATIVE G fires off.
I am shocked they opened the cargo door vs piercing and injecting agent.
Planes do cost money and alot of aircraft have false cargo fire warnings, the commercial pressure of open cargo door once all pax are off vs bring out the injecting agent, and pierce the dam plane would be huge.
Typhoon650..
Looks like the container did an excellent job of containing the fire to me.
No it didn't it, its just like a beer can, will burn in a fire.
I imagine the 330 has ETOPS approval, one of the certification requirements of ETOPS is fire suppression ie 180min, got to keep the fire from reigniting for 180min or so.
Alot of SOPs have you disembark the pax before opening the cargo door, the halon is still doing its thing while the people get off.
Dangerous goods on the outside of the aircraft is a good idea, flight was going to Bangladesh, have seen people sitting on top of trains in that part of the world, fire on the roof.... QRH = push forward, NEGATIVE G fires off.
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Not far from a big Lake
Age: 82
Posts: 1,454
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dangerous goods on the outside of the aircraft is a good idea, flight was going to Bangladesh, have seen people sitting on top of trains in that part of the world, fire on the roof.... QRH = push forward, NEGATIVE G fires off.
I don't know that that method of jettison would work too well.
Most aircraft to external store collisions that I have seen involved less than 1 g flight during separation and that seems to be just what you are proposing.
