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

SQ-368 (engine & wing on fire) final report out

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

SQ-368 (engine & wing on fire) final report out

Old 29th Jun 2016, 09:47
  #281 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: England
Posts: 401
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Some posters here have said that as pax in such a situation, they would have opened a door and fled without waiting for a call to evacuate (even suggesting that they'd assault cabin crew in order to do so - #268, I hope he was trying to be ironic).

Someone on an earlier page already cited the Airbus that ditched in the Hudson, where a panicing passenger opened a rear door, endangering everyone on board.

Have there been cases of aircraft fires where passengers initiated evacuation uncommanded? If so with what results - positive or negative?
OldLurker is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2016, 09:52
  #282 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 133
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I guess the escape stairs are good if they arrive instantly, the aircraft is not on the grass / at an unusual attitude due to gear failure etc and the slides are not activated when the door opens. . . It's a lot of if's
Jetstream67 is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2016, 10:09
  #283 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Sweden
Age: 47
Posts: 443
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Little snippet from Singapore (?) TV with some experts speculating about what may have happened to the engine and where the fire came from.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g9zAUpEyVxs

I still don't understand completely why they did not evac. Learning about all those past fires with untimely evacuations where people died for no good reason makes me question this, very sorry about that.

One thing I find peculiar is that the BA Heathrow crash, the Asiana cartwheel and the BA Vegas engine fire shows that the 777 is built like a tank with capabilities we, the flying public, didn't really know an airplane could have. Is this confidence in the airplane maybe maybe turning a little tiny bit towards arrogance up in the cockpit for some carriers? As in "well, they made it just fine in Vegas, the airplane will save us, no need to worry"?

Oldlurker
There have been several passenger initiated evacuations. The one I have ingrained in my brain is the horrible horrible crash of an ASA plane in the US - I don't remember the flight number or the year it happened. It was a small commuter plane that crashed in a meadow outside nowhere. The FO survived the crash but almost died in the fire. I remember his words about trying to break the cockpit window with a fireaxe that was soooo bad it broke! He was saved by a passenger and a police officer who came to the scene later, they managed to break the glass.

Many survived the initial crash that time, but there was a big fire and people died before they could get out. Cabin crew were in disarray and everyone was left to fend for themselves.

Another example of passenger initiated evacuation was the Air Inter crash in France.

But, did you only mean evacuations due to engine fire while still on the runway? In that case I can't think of any right now.
MrSnuggles is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2016, 10:47
  #284 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Posts: 108
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Are there any recordings of the radio communications of this flight?
aviator's_anonymous is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2016, 10:49
  #285 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The only fact is it is mere luck no one died.

Rest is somewhere between total ignorance to total incompetence.

There are so many actions by everyone, individually each action is within SOP limits, collectively it would have been a disaster.

Few more seconds delay in response (or) stars are not aligned properly we would be having a different discussion.

Pure conjuncture on my part, Yes.
notapilot15 is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2016, 11:22
  #286 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Florida and wherever my laptop is
Posts: 1,350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by faheel
well said gatbusdriver.
And when the report comes out and proves that most of what was posted here was complete drivel will this lot apologise for deriding and villifying the crews actions ?
Pprune stopped being a professional pilots forum a very long time ago,all it now is is a place for the uneducated ...at least in aviation to say how they would do it better!!!
Someone a very long time ago proposed that only actual real pro pilots be permitted to post, unfortunately that never came to pass.
The result is what pprune has become, nowhere more evident than in this thread
I presume you are referring to the 'professional' pilots who are misusing the emergency frequencies? (see the thread below this). You are part of a No True Scotsman fallacy
Ian W is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2016, 11:30
  #287 (permalink)  
Trash du Blanc
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: KBHM
Posts: 1,185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The one I have ingrained in my brain is the horrible horrible crash of an ASA plane in the US - I don't remember the flight number or the year it happened. It was a small commuter plane that crashed in a meadow outside nowhere. The FO survived the crash but almost died in the fire. I remember his words about trying to break the cockpit window with a fireaxe that was soooo bad it broke! He was saved by a passenger and a police officer who came to the scene later, they managed to break the glass.
ASA 7529, Carrolton Georgia. I was working there, and flying Brasilias then.

The copilot survived and, after many surgeries, is an RJ captain today.

The captain perished.
Huck is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2016, 12:53
  #288 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Age: 66
Posts: 854
Received 47 Likes on 24 Posts
Originally Posted by underfire
Videos from inside the ac show that the passengers were screaming and begging to get out. Other parts of the video show a significant amount of fire....

http://yahoo7g-a.akamaihd.net/237698...8409403001.mp4
perfect video - strong wind is blowing flames and smoke AWAY from cabin (good) once 777 stopped.

another video shows the fire developing on the roll out and taking huge hold as it stops - the fire was not happening prior to landing but happened during the landing it seems.

ATC would/should surely in the roll out have said to FD ''your right wing/engine has large flames'' - THINK Concorde CDG T/O
until that point and in the APP and T/D the crew were obviously relaxed in their manner prior to T/D as they had not called for the AFS to meet them and were seen confident on R/T all would be OK by negating assistance.


crew Must have got a call from ATC during the landing they were on fire -- As they then rolled to a full stop and did not turn off (thankfully, think MAN KT 737) AND the AFS was half way to the 777 during the landing roll having been ordered there
thus shut ENG down should have been immediate having already been told you have large flames right side and call should be CC told EVAC LHS doors only.

aircraft would have been EVAC'D all OK from all L side doors and pax getting off by the time the first AFS vehicles were getting into position and spraying first foam.

(and dont give me this crap about how do we define L or R? - L1 is an L1 door and R1 is R1 door in 'our speak' so do you expect me to believe an airline prof or ground crew could mess that up? NOT UGH)

OK I am fully are of the Eastern hierarchy culture that has existed and still does and did that play a part here in some or all areas of comms? FD CC ATC and even AFS??

the photos on a post above of the PWA B737 wreck that burned on landing are remarkably similar to the KT B737 that burned out at MAN in 1985

Last edited by rog747; 29th Jun 2016 at 14:07.
rog747 is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2016, 13:31
  #289 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Age: 66
Posts: 854
Received 47 Likes on 24 Posts
further to my post above

this clear video does show a QR from the AFS
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hf-QLDGgORk

and this is shot at a head on angle https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rYyh10HA7VY

at 10s in of the top mentioned video
the 777 is slowing to a final stop on fire in RH ENG and the fire trucks are half way to the a/c

by 30s the fire is immense and now pooling under what looks like the RH ENG.

by 1m 6s the first truck is spraying on target - others getting in position

at 1m 20s
a pair of rapid access air stairs are on their way BUT by this time the 777 using the LHS chutes many pax could be out of the a/c had EVAC been called

at 3m in the rapid airstairs have still not been positioned at the fwd door - -by this time all pax and crew could have been off the plane (who are still on board at this time)
whats the point of these steps???

240 pax and crew with 4 or 5 double width doors fitted with uber big dual lane slides could have been off PDQ

Last edited by rog747; 29th Jun 2016 at 14:36.
rog747 is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2016, 13:36
  #290 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
still looked as if they could have got there quicker by going off tarmac and direct - but Godf knows what the ground conditions were
Heathrow Harry is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2016, 14:26
  #291 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: here and there
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
All planes are tested and certified to evacuate a full load of pax in 90 seconds using only half of the cabin doors.
So it could have been done easy on the LHS only.

I am repeating this, CC are very well trained to evaluate the outside conditions and respond to commands. They were already in state of alert. A command to evacuate on the LHS would have been perfectly understood as they were all aware of the RHS fire.

Stop discrediting cabin crew's abilities, decision making and training. Unless you know very well what a cabin crew training is like in a major airline you would better refrain.....
skytrax is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2016, 14:32
  #292 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Age: 66
Posts: 854
Received 47 Likes on 24 Posts
skytrax, totally agree to that,

to whom is ''you'' that you refer to please?

i cannot see any recent post where any CC are getting slagged off #justsaying

ta
rog747 is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2016, 15:09
  #293 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The Smaller Antipode
Age: 89
Posts: 31
Received 22 Likes on 14 Posts
All planes are tested and certified to evacuate a full load of pax in 90 seconds using only half of the cabin doors.
So it could have been done easy on the LHS only.
But as has already been stated, this test is done with "passengers" not stopping to block the aisles whilst they unload the overhead bins to claim all their cr*p, and .... they were 'staff ' loaded for this purpose, so they were pre-warned AND there was no fire for the test.

Has anyone knowledge of a genuine total emergency bring completed in the required 90 secs ?

Just sayin'.
ExSp33db1rd is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2016, 15:19
  #294 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: London, UK
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
But as has already been stated, this test is done with "passengers" not stopping to block the aisles whilst they unload the overhead bins to claim all their cr*p, and .... they were 'staff ' loaded for this purpose, so they were pre-warned AND there was no fire for the test.

Has anyone knowledge of a genuine total emergency bring completed in the required 90 secs ?
All of these caveats would apply equally to the 'rapid access stairs'. The point isn't the absolute achievability of a magic number of 90 secs, it's that, in the real world as in the test environment, the slides would be much faster than the stairs. And that's before you consider risks like the Bethnal Green tube disaster.
Beanbag is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2016, 15:56
  #295 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: se england
Posts: 1,588
Likes: 0
Received 49 Likes on 22 Posts
I think the AF 340 crash in Toronto saw the cabin Crew do a great job and get every one off in close to 90 secs. No fire tho'-that would have been a horror story landing long and running into a huge ditch leaking fuel everywhere which then ignites-doesnt bear thinking about, But the point about the tests being done with pre warned staff no frail old people, young babies, pregnant mums, mobility impaired, panic, fire, smoke etc etc remains very valid
pax britanica is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2016, 17:11
  #296 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Age: 66
Posts: 854
Received 47 Likes on 24 Posts
air France A340 YYZ

Pax Britannica

The AF A340-300 over run at YYZ resulted in a prompt post large out of control crash fire that caused the a/c to burn out within minutes
http://www.cnt-f.org/subrp/IMG/jpg/a...589f07abaf38c0

the pax had to escape into pools of fuel and dodge fires and broken metal in a ditch and many slides were inop or failed
https://www.thestar.com/content/dam/...atpearson.jpeg


an amazing evacuation in such circumstances which was much heralded to the fantastic cabin crew

Last edited by rog747; 29th Jun 2016 at 17:33.
rog747 is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2016, 17:22
  #297 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Denver, Colorado, USA
Posts: 197
Received 10 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by ExSp33db1rd
But as has already been stated, this test is done with "passengers" not stopping to block the aisles whilst they unload the overhead bins to claim all their cr*p, and .... they were 'staff ' loaded for this purpose, so they were pre-warned AND there was no fire for the test.

Has anyone knowledge of a genuine total emergency bring completed in the required 90 secs ?

Just sayin'.
Appendix J to Part 25—Emergency Evacuation
The following test criteria and procedures must be used for showing compliance with §25.803:

(a) The emergency evacuation must be conducted with exterior ambient light levels of no greater than 0.3 foot-candles prior to the activation of the airplane emergency lighting system. ...

(b) The airplane must be in a normal attitude with landing gear extended.

(c) Unless the airplane is equipped with an off-wing descent means, stands or ramps may be used for descent from the wing to the ground. Safety equipment such as mats or inverted life rafts may be placed on the floor or ground to protect participants. No other equipment that is not part of the emergency evacuation equipment of the airplane may be used to aid the participants in reaching the ground.

(d) Except as provided in paragraph (a) of this appendix, only the airplane's emergency lighting system may provide illumination.

(e) All emergency equipment required for the planned operation of the airplane must be installed.

(f) Each internal door or curtain must be in the takeoff configuration.

(g) Each crewmember must be seated in the normally assigned seat for takeoff and must remain in the seat until receiving the signal for commencement of the demonstration. Each crewmember must be a person having knowledge of the operation of exits and emergency equipment and, if compliance with §121.291 is also being demonstrated, each flight attendant must be a member of a regularly scheduled line crew.

(h) A representative passenger load of persons in normal health must be used as follows:

(1) At least 40 percent of the passenger load must be female.

(2) At least 35 percent of the passenger load must be over 50 years of age.

(3) At least 15 percent of the passenger load must be female and over 50 years of age.

(4) Three life-size dolls, not included as part of the total passenger load, must be carried by passengers to simulate live infants 2 years old or younger.

(5) Crewmembers, mechanics, and training personnel, who maintain or operate the airplane in the normal course of their duties, may not be used as passengers.

(i) No passenger may be assigned a specific seat except as the Administrator may require. Except as required by subparagraph (g) of this paragraph, no employee of the applicant may be seated next to an emergency exit.

(j) Seat belts and shoulder harnesses (as required) must be fastened.

(k) Before the start of the demonstration, approximately one-half of the total average amount of carry-on baggage, blankets, pillows, and other similar articles must be distributed at several locations in aisles and emergency exit access ways to create minor obstructions.

(l) No prior indication may be given to any crewmember or passenger of the particular exits to be used in the demonstration.

(m) The applicant may not practice, rehearse, or describe the demonstration for the participants nor may any participant have taken part in this type of demonstration within the preceding 6 months.

(n) Prior to entering the demonstration aircraft, the passengers may also be advised to follow directions of crewmembers but may not be instructed on the procedures to be followed in the demonstration, except with respect to safety procedures in place for the demonstration or which have to do with the demonstration site. Prior to the start of the demonstration, the pre-takeoff passenger briefing required by §121.571 may be given. Flight attendants may assign demonstration subjects to assist persons from the bottom of a slide, consistent with their approved training program.

(o) The airplane must be configured to prevent disclosure of the active emergency exits to demonstration participants in the airplane until the start of the demonstration.

(p) Exits used in the demonstration must consist of one exit from each exit pair. The demonstration may be conducted with the escape slides, if provided, inflated and the exits open at the beginning of the demonstration. In this case, all exits must be configured such that the active exits are not disclosed to the occupants. If this method is used, the exit preparation time for each exit utilized must be accounted for, and exits that are not to be used in the demonstration must not be indicated before the demonstration has started. The exits to be used must be representative of all of the emergency exits on the airplane and must be designated by the applicant, subject to approval by the Administrator. At least one floor level exit must be used.

(q) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, all evacuees must leave the airplane by a means provided as part of the airplane's equipment.

(r) The applicant's approved procedures must be fully utilized, except the flightcrew must take no active role in assisting others inside the cabin during the demonstration.

(s) The evacuation time period is completed when the last occupant has evacuated the airplane and is on the ground. Provided that the acceptance rate of the stand or ramp is no greater than the acceptance rate of the means available on the airplane for descent from the wing during an actual crash situation, evacuees using stands or ramps allowed by paragraph (c) of this appendix are considered to be on the ground when they are on the stand or ramp.
Well, short of just grabbing xxx people off the street and burning the aircraft, this good start.
mnttech is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2016, 18:44
  #298 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,833
Received 208 Likes on 96 Posts
Originally Posted by ExSp33db1rd
But as has already been stated, this test is done with "passengers" not stopping to block the aisles whilst they unload the overhead bins to claim all their cr*p, and .... they were 'staff ' loaded for this purpose, so they were pre-warned AND there was no fire for the test.

Has anyone knowledge of a genuine total emergency bring completed in the required 90 secs ?
Of course exit certification is based on the assumption that the manufacturers will fill their evacuation test aircraft with (mostly) young, fit, healthy participants. You can't realistically expect them to do otherwise.

But that doesn't invalidate the principle, it just means that allowances have to be made for the factors you describe in any real-life situation.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2016, 18:48
  #299 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The 767 at KFLL last year had a 20+ % casualty rate coming down the slides with one engine alight. On hard tarmac and went "well" according to 1st hand witnesses. Just under 100 souls, ~ 20 were transported to hospitals. On video you can see one chap was blown off the slide by jet wash, and didn't look so active upon landing...
pumpkin53 is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2016, 19:27
  #300 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,833
Received 208 Likes on 96 Posts
Originally Posted by pumpkin53
The 767 at KFLL last year had a 20+ % casualty rate coming down the slides with one engine alight. On hard tarmac and went "well" according to 1st hand witnesses. Just under 100 souls, ~ 20 were transported to hospitals. On video you can see one chap was blown off the slide by jet wash, and didn't look so active upon landing...
Media reports at the time suggested that the sole serious injury was to a passenger who had successfully negotiated the slide and who then tripped and fell, hitting his head, while running from the aircraft.

But however it happened, a 1 in 100 chance of serious injury sounds like pretty good odds to me, compared to the alternative.
DaveReidUK is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

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

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.