BA 777 on fire in Las Vegas
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: SW France
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
looking at that photo - likely structural integrity lost in crucial area of airframe/wing fixing zone
I'm no engineer and I'm happy to be schooled by some professionals
but, I'd speculate a write off by Mr Airline boss and the Loss adjuster??
I'm no engineer and I'm happy to be schooled by some professionals
but, I'd speculate a write off by Mr Airline boss and the Loss adjuster??
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: The Burrow, N53:48:02 W1:48:57, The Tin Tent - EGBS, EGBO
Posts: 2,297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First of all well done everyone involved. 
I'm curious as to why you think a special pouch would be necessary. I have a small 10 x 15cms(approx.) very slim bag/pouch which I hang around my neck. It's just big enough to hold my passport and credit card and small enough to drop inside my blouse/Tshirt/jumper so that it wouldn't become snagged in an emergency. I bought it in ESheds market in Fremantle but similar things are available in plenty of other locations.
If tests are successful, suitable pouches could then be sold at airport terminals, and the evacuation rules slightly relaxed to allow passengers to exit with just this small item.
I find it very hard to understand the stupidity of people who think that criminal prosecutions of pax who evacuate with luggage would change people's behavior in a future evacuation.
Many pax don't even watch the safety demonstration, yet you think they are going to read, study and inwardly digest obscure legal decisions in a foreign country which would have happened long before. And that they will stop and remember all of that in the middle of a life threatening crisis. Laughable.
Many pax don't even watch the safety demonstration, yet you think they are going to read, study and inwardly digest obscure legal decisions in a foreign country which would have happened long before. And that they will stop and remember all of that in the middle of a life threatening crisis. Laughable.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Ipswich UK
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What do we make of the damage on the starboard side visible in the picture in post 14. Is that just smoke/fire damage to the skin of the fuselage at the wing root, or is that possibly mechanical damage? Could the port engine have thrown something that has "made a bit of a mess" on the port side but then gone right though the fuselage just at the forward wing root? Clearly not the front fan, and that must imply it could not have been any complete turbine disc.
Any pictures on the inboard side of the port engine?
Any pictures on the inboard side of the port engine?
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do we think fixable, or is the aircraft likely to be a write off?
btw: 3rd operational hull loss for BA in 7 years (2nd 777), but NONE of them was fatal !
Also on an earlier post someone commented that fan blade failure can/must be contained but disc failure cannot be. Is that an absolute because the engineering cannot contain the energy or is it economics of not having a ring of titanium 'armour' around the more vulnerable higher energy hot components?
It would appear the failure was uncontained to a certain degree given the cowl and ancilliaries damage but I haven't seen images to determine whether it blew through the wing. The WTB fairing damage is clearly heat rather than penetration, presumably the fuel source was damaged fuel system at the point of exit for whatever exited. The positioning you can see does initially appear to be relatively forward suggesting IP or HP compressor rather than turbine.
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: ALandDownUnder
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
btw: 3rd operational hull loss for BA in 7 years (2nd 777), but NONE of them was fatal !
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: UK
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Non-Driver:
It would appear the failure was uncontained to a certain degree given the cowl and ancilliaries damage but I haven't seen images to determine whether it blew through the wing.
It would appear the failure was uncontained to a certain degree given the cowl and ancilliaries damage but I haven't seen images to determine whether it blew through the wing.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Luton
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
a close to 17 year old well used 777, that is owned outright by the airline (so no lessor to pressure) with substantial heat damage, would not be close to economically repairable.
The engine alone is probably $20m for a suitable second hand example (although arguably the part that failed is not covered by insurance and there would be considerable betterment in a fresh out of check engine) the rest of the damage will mean BA is alas a 777 down in their fleet for some time.
There will however be a good amount of salvage, BA are likely to do a deal on that depending upon which interior this 777 has (update, it has an old interior so probably of little value to anyone), otherwise BA will see their money from insurers in the next week and the loss adjusters will go off and get offers for the remaining salvage.
The engine alone is probably $20m for a suitable second hand example (although arguably the part that failed is not covered by insurance and there would be considerable betterment in a fresh out of check engine) the rest of the damage will mean BA is alas a 777 down in their fleet for some time.
There will however be a good amount of salvage, BA are likely to do a deal on that depending upon which interior this 777 has (update, it has an old interior so probably of little value to anyone), otherwise BA will see their money from insurers in the next week and the loss adjusters will go off and get offers for the remaining salvage.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: here and there
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
cabin luggage
I don't normally post on here, but I have to say I seriously can't believe how blinkered some of you condoning pax taking their luggage off with them.
For those who say they would have done the same (ie. taking luggage off), or it's ok to try grab your hand luggage, why don't you imagine for a moment being a passenger in a burning aircraft in the area where the fire is, in desperation trying to get off and away from the fire and smoke, but ahead of you, hindering your escape, are selfish individuals (who are nearer exits away from the fire and fumes - and consequently escape is more likely assured) blocking these escape routes standing in the way taking their possessions out of the overhead lockers. I would be curious to know how many of those pax sitting in the area of the fire stopped to take their hand luggage en route to the evacuation slides?
How would you feel if it were one of your loved ones in this situation and did not make it due to not evacuating quickly enough? It only takes the photo posted above to realise how quickly the fire must have escalated and therefore how lucky those pax were sitting in this area that they made it out in one piece with no serious injuries / fatalities.
When evacuation is as a result of fire and / or smoke, forget passports, medication, valuables. It's about simply getting out alive. Anyone who thinks otherwise is simply deluded and selfish in my opinion.
For those who say they would have done the same (ie. taking luggage off), or it's ok to try grab your hand luggage, why don't you imagine for a moment being a passenger in a burning aircraft in the area where the fire is, in desperation trying to get off and away from the fire and smoke, but ahead of you, hindering your escape, are selfish individuals (who are nearer exits away from the fire and fumes - and consequently escape is more likely assured) blocking these escape routes standing in the way taking their possessions out of the overhead lockers. I would be curious to know how many of those pax sitting in the area of the fire stopped to take their hand luggage en route to the evacuation slides?
How would you feel if it were one of your loved ones in this situation and did not make it due to not evacuating quickly enough? It only takes the photo posted above to realise how quickly the fire must have escalated and therefore how lucky those pax were sitting in this area that they made it out in one piece with no serious injuries / fatalities.
When evacuation is as a result of fire and / or smoke, forget passports, medication, valuables. It's about simply getting out alive. Anyone who thinks otherwise is simply deluded and selfish in my opinion.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: UK NE Scotland
Age: 59
Posts: 117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd like to see minimal cabin baggage implemented - you want to see how quickly 90 North Sea bears can be loaded and unloaded from a 146 with no cabin baggage when the only thing between them and the pub is the flight. Yes it's a bit tongue in cheek, but it really does show the difference between regular pax who want minimal inconvenience and normal domestic pax who want all their creature comforts with them while extracting every penny of value for their ticket price.
As for the airports encouraging multiple bags of duty free, that's another rant altogether.
Well done to all involved, good outcome to something that could have gone horribly wrong.
As for the airports encouraging multiple bags of duty free, that's another rant altogether.
Well done to all involved, good outcome to something that could have gone horribly wrong.
Tourist, to pick nits, the heat exchanger that was blocked with ice is considered to be part of the engine (i.e. a fuel/engine oil heat exchanger). So yes, it can certainly be considered an "engine problem".
I'll be curious to hear if the wing fuel tank was penetrated, or if the fire was fed purely with "engine fuel". On a 777, shutting down the engine (either with the fuel switch or the fire handle) will close the spar valve. However, the spar valve takes a few seconds to close so if the fuel line is compromised the boost pumps can push a lot of fuel out in those few seconds (plus whatever crew reaction time there was).
In response to a previous post regarding containing disc failures - it simply isn't practical. There is way too much energy involved - even armor plate would be easily penetrated (while doing a rotor burst analysis on the 777, someone asked the question of "where would a 1/3 fan disc go" - the answer was "wherever it wants to"
).
I'll be curious to hear if the wing fuel tank was penetrated, or if the fire was fed purely with "engine fuel". On a 777, shutting down the engine (either with the fuel switch or the fire handle) will close the spar valve. However, the spar valve takes a few seconds to close so if the fuel line is compromised the boost pumps can push a lot of fuel out in those few seconds (plus whatever crew reaction time there was).
In response to a previous post regarding containing disc failures - it simply isn't practical. There is way too much energy involved - even armor plate would be easily penetrated (while doing a rotor burst analysis on the 777, someone asked the question of "where would a 1/3 fan disc go" - the answer was "wherever it wants to"
).
Join Date: May 2013
Location: UK
Age: 56
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With regard to the passengers carrying luggage off the aircraft, we see this every time there is a crash - when was the last time it has adversely affected the outcome? Of course, it does slow things down, and it does make it more likely, but when has it actually happened?
Passengers around the world will be seeing pictures of yet another 'plane crash' with a successful evacuation, and passengers taking their belongings with them.
Probably far more relevant, is that from the passenger figures published, the plane was only half full.
Passengers around the world will be seeing pictures of yet another 'plane crash' with a successful evacuation, and passengers taking their belongings with them.
Probably far more relevant, is that from the passenger figures published, the plane was only half full.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: At home
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some factbits
Flightradar24 has released their raw data, here.
The data samples suggest that take-off power was applied at around 23:12:43 UTC as the aircraft had turned onto heading 090 (presumably the actual heading of 07L?) with a speed of 20 knots.
Six seconds later it had reached 46 knots and fourteen seconds later at 23:12:57 its maximum speed of 78 knots. From there it decelerated in 9 seconds to 2 knots, its heading essentially unchanged at 086 degrees.
As a guesstimate, the fault happened somewhere at the 46 knots point and it took a few seconds before the crew was ready to cut power and hit the brakes, airplane still accelerating. That would imply alarm-to-full-stop in approx 16-20 seconds. Pretty quick reactions and decision making I'd say?
The data samples suggest that take-off power was applied at around 23:12:43 UTC as the aircraft had turned onto heading 090 (presumably the actual heading of 07L?) with a speed of 20 knots.
Six seconds later it had reached 46 knots and fourteen seconds later at 23:12:57 its maximum speed of 78 knots. From there it decelerated in 9 seconds to 2 knots, its heading essentially unchanged at 086 degrees.
As a guesstimate, the fault happened somewhere at the 46 knots point and it took a few seconds before the crew was ready to cut power and hit the brakes, airplane still accelerating. That would imply alarm-to-full-stop in approx 16-20 seconds. Pretty quick reactions and decision making I'd say?
Great job by the crew all round - especially the FA at door L2. 
Some have commented that it's a good job it didn't happen after V1 - and I agree, much better to be dealing with problems stationary on the ground. But not because of the fuselage damage that resulted.
I think that the damage to the fuselage only happened because it was stationary on the ground. They were taking off on 07L and the wind was 360 at 5. The prevailing wind was blowing the fire from the left engine directly against the fuselage. If they were airborne, the fire would be streaming aft, along, through and behind the engine. You wouldn't have the same fuselage damage, if any at all. Of course they would probably have a different set of problems to deal with, particularly if the fire was uncontained.
Some have commented that it's a good job it didn't happen after V1 - and I agree, much better to be dealing with problems stationary on the ground. But not because of the fuselage damage that resulted.
I think that the damage to the fuselage only happened because it was stationary on the ground. They were taking off on 07L and the wind was 360 at 5. The prevailing wind was blowing the fire from the left engine directly against the fuselage. If they were airborne, the fire would be streaming aft, along, through and behind the engine. You wouldn't have the same fuselage damage, if any at all. Of course they would probably have a different set of problems to deal with, particularly if the fire was uncontained.
I'm also curious as to whether a fuel tank was ruptured. As has already been stated, when a disk fails it's an absolute lottery as to where it'll go. If ram air on a Concorde departure can't put out a fuel fire, it certainly won't on a tripler
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re luggage carrying idiots.
Hopefully either BA or the authorities can identify them and (a) prosecute them for endangering the lives of fellow passengers and crew and (b) banning them from all airlines. For life.
Hopefully either BA or the authorities can identify them and (a) prosecute them for endangering the lives of fellow passengers and crew and (b) banning them from all airlines. For life.
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: London
Age: 85
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA777 on fire in Las Vegas
Possibly a simple quick, cheap, fix might be to propagate the idea, via in-flight announcements and other avenues [ ?? at check-in] for passengers to keep passports cash and items of crucial importance on their person at all times.
"Sir, Madam, we insist you keep your vital "stuff" on your person at all times during the flight as, in an emergency, access to the overhead lockers is not permitted/prohibited/unavailable etc".....
I wonder if those scrambling for hand-baggage aren't often just grabbing their vital stuff?
Being stuck anywhere in the States without a passport is a nightmare.
"Sir, Madam, we insist you keep your vital "stuff" on your person at all times during the flight as, in an emergency, access to the overhead lockers is not permitted/prohibited/unavailable etc".....
I wonder if those scrambling for hand-baggage aren't often just grabbing their vital stuff?
Being stuck anywhere in the States without a passport is a nightmare.