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, 19:52
  #301 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,558
Received 36 Likes on 16 Posts
Carefully Controlled Fire Event vs GTF Out Now!

Fire events in undamaged aircraft these days have been leaving plenty of time either for fire services to bring the fire under control and evacuate via steps, or for evacuation via slides in their absence

It's all working to plan and we don't have to worry about pax wandering about where they shouldn't.

In many outfits, this state of affairs will continue happily until another airframe is incinerated with pax inside, whereupon the SOPs will be revised.

In the interim, prospective pax deserve to know whether they are expected to remain seated for how long while the fire is doing its unpredictable thing.

Those who post a SOP that anything more than a brake fire (tested during certification) warrants an immediate evacuation might enjoy a well deserved marketing advantage
RatherBeFlying is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2016, 20:22
  #302 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 4,569
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
One can not design and certify an aircraft to do all things. The concept within the measure of mans freedom to exist, provides a means for passengers to minimize specific risk to themselves..

The means is the egress possibilities in a survivable accident/incident.
Some people of less than average abilities may incur a higher risk.

The same goes with many other risks including hypoxia etc. etc.

That,s why they put safety placards in your seat pocket
lomapaseo is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2016, 21:43
  #303 (permalink)  
YRP
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 163
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I have to say, if the captain thought it safer to keep on board with that kind of flame under the wing (and perhaps he had good reasons, maybe judged the risk of fuel/flame spreading to the LHS under the fuselage perhaps), he must be one cool cucumber to sit there while the ARFF did their work.
YRP is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2016, 21:43
  #304 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: australia
Age: 74
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Retherbeflying I agree with your post.

Fire.
Brake fires are not common, these days but should be treated as potentially very dangerous.

Difficult if impossible to extinguish .
The wheel well has hydraulic oil and grease flammable.
If not extinguished quickly, it undoubtedly can get worse fast.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=E4yJpUu6o8o

Last edited by nose,cabin; 29th Jun 2016 at 22:29. Reason: Edit
nose,cabin is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2016, 22:52
  #305 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,558
Received 36 Likes on 16 Posts
Brake fires are not common, these days but should be treated as potentially very dangerous.
Certification RTO tests require five minutes after stop at maximum weight before firefighters can intervene:

https://youtu.be/f4LFErD-yls

Note no extra fuel or engine oil added, nor do I believe there's any certification test of cabin integrity for any duration of a pooled fuel fire.

The 777 RTO video notes a cost of $750K for wheel assembly replacement. Likely it would be considerably more expensive to replace partially melted engine, nacelles, wing and fuselage components from a pooled fuel fire test, but BA has not shared the repair costs of the 777 RTO at Vegas.
RatherBeFlying is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2016, 22:53
  #306 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fairly close to the colonial capitol
Age: 55
Posts: 1,693
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The wheel well has hydraulic oil and grease flammable.
The hydraulic oil used today on the majority of commercial airliners (Skydrol) is fire resistant unless aerosolized.
vapilot2004 is offline  
Old 30th Jun 2016, 00:08
  #307 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Oztrailia
Posts: 2,991
Received 14 Likes on 10 Posts
A question was asked about how long real world evacuations have taken.
CX had a full 744 EVAC at Kai Tak July 1995. Pax all off inside 2 mins, by the time the cockpit crew finished their checks and left the cockpit the Jet was empty.

Fire jet exceeded landing weight | South China Morning Post
ACMS is offline  
Old 30th Jun 2016, 00:32
  #308 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: UK
Age: 58
Posts: 3,478
Received 139 Likes on 76 Posts
Log entry for a sniff check when topping up the oil seems to be the order of the day.
I assume its the result of this mess. Another heat exchanger problem on a 777.
TURIN is online now  
Old 30th Jun 2016, 00:32
  #309 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London UK
Posts: 7,646
Likes: 0
Received 18 Likes on 15 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.
Do not conflate transportation to hospital with serious injuries. In several developed countries now there is a great desire to hike people off to hospital after incidents. Road traffic accident statistics in the UK for "serious" injuries have been distorted by this.


Has anyone knowledge of a genuine total emergency bring completed in the required 90 secs ?
Against this, the tests (which are required to have a representative age range rather than a load of athletes) are done at maximum certified passenger capacity, something from the IT world. But a long-haul major carrier would have little more than about 60% of this number of seats, and furthermore not all would often be sold on many flights. So many evacuations should come in actually under the target.

Did I once read that a manufacturer's evac test offered US$ 100 extra to the first hundred out, to encourage pushing and shoving, as in reality ?
WHBM is offline  
Old 30th Jun 2016, 00:36
  #310 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Cab of a Freight Train
Posts: 1,215
Received 117 Likes on 61 Posts
it was $50USD for the first 25% of people off, and yes, it did happen. "Do whatever you want to get in that 25%, without hurting yourself or someone else" was the suggestion.

It resulted in people climbing over seats, etc. I have seen the video but can't find it on YouTube. Here is the study that conducted it.
KRviator is offline  
Old 30th Jun 2016, 01:39
  #311 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Uk
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
There has been a few questions asking what the ARFFS response would be to this incident, it is standard sop to stay on the paved surfaces if at all possible, the appliances all have off road capability but at between 32 to 40+ tons the drivers have to be confident that if they go off paved surfaces they will reach the aircraft and be able to produce foam if required at approximately 6000 litres a minute, or if they fail to get to the aircraft, deploy sidelines at 450 litres a minute! Depending on what part of the world this happens, the appliances could be operated by one firefighter, in the uk this doesn't happen at the moment! There has been many comments on evacuate or not, in the event of an aircraft accident/incident it is our aim to create survivable conditions for pax to evacuate, remember we can only produce water/foam for around 2 minutes to 2 minutes 30 at full output from the monitors (turrets). We do communicate with the flight deck and advise the a/c commander of the situation but it is his/her decision to evacuate.

Last edited by Nubian Major; 30th Jun 2016 at 09:11. Reason: Change output figure
Nubian Major is offline  
Old 30th Jun 2016, 02:19
  #312 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: here and there
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by mnttech
Well, short of just grabbing xxx people off the street and burning the aircraft, this good start.
Thank you for that reply. It saved me from looking for the info and posting.
The wikipedia experts are hard to convince.

The big majority of the evacuations carried out by the cabin crew have been successful.
They always did what they had to and most of the time went beyond duty.

Statistically, CC are doing an amazing job at getting ppl out in less than 2 minutes. A huge amount of time is spent on door operation and evacuation during training.

If you see the cabin crew taking no action it is because they know better. Do you think they want to put themselves and you in any danger!?
Always follow their instructions and as long as they are at their stations and not incapacitated, never attempt to take over.

In this case, captain was in charge and everyone was waiting for his/her instructions. Captain's decision was that it was safer inside while RFFT attended the fire......
Even so, CC would have initiated the evacuation would the inside conditions have changed during the firefighting process.

RFFT at Changi are very good. Well trained, good equipment and with solid procedures.
As it has been explained, RFFT will do their best outside and may recommend evacuation via radio or hand signals if radio is inop.
The decision rests with Captain. I personally won't comment on that. I leave it to other Captains.

Last edited by skytrax; 30th Jun 2016 at 03:08.
skytrax is offline  
Old 30th Jun 2016, 02:59
  #313 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: UK/OZ
Posts: 1,886
Received 7 Likes on 4 Posts
Psychologist had panic attack due to fumes

This report about a psychologist onboard the flight.
She says fumes were very bad before the turn back.

Also says fire trucks were waiting as they landed.

Mickjoebill

Most Popular: Singapore Airlines wing fire: Melbourne woman describes 'horrific' flight as fumes filled cabin http://abc.net.au/news/7555376
mickjoebill is offline  
Old 30th Jun 2016, 05:31
  #314 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: SEQ
Age: 54
Posts: 512
Received 24 Likes on 9 Posts
Thanks Nubian Major, that provided some much needed context to the discussion. Strikes me that if it is expected to take up to 90 secs to get all pax and crew off, and the fire fighting capacity is likely to diminish dramatically within 150 seconds of deployment, there isn't a great deal of time to chew on the decision if things go against you. A bold decision to sit tight when there is a ball of flame around a wing with at least some fuel still in the tanks, imo.
spinex is offline  
Old 30th Jun 2016, 05:52
  #315 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Posts: 108
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I think people seem to be down playing the seriousness of the fire... how could you know it wouldn't go out of control?
It will be very interesting to find out the investigation and to hear the actual cockpit voice recordings of this incident... was there any evacuation talk, and who's decision it was to keep people on board..
On a side note - if people want to see how quick a fire can go out of control - china airlines landing in Japan - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-qyZFASOAe0
aviator's_anonymous is offline  
Old 30th Jun 2016, 06:32
  #316 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: everywhere
Posts: 503
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It will be very interesting to find out the investigation and to hear the actual cockpit voice recordings of this incident...
There will be a lot of face saving aspects to this incident and we will probably get a skewed version of events putting 100% blame on the aircraft manufacturer.
flyhardmo is online now  
Old 30th Jun 2016, 09:19
  #317 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: England
Posts: 398
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
There will be a lot of face saving aspects to this incident and we will probably get a skewed version of events putting 100% blame on the aircraft manufacturer.
Regardless of face saving, it's very likely that passengers' lawyers will try to blame the aircraft manufacturer, simply because there's more money to be had from suing a US company (Boeing) in a US court than from suing a Singapore company in Singapore. No doubt SIA's insurers will try it too, to avoid having to pay up.
OldLurker is offline  
Old 30th Jun 2016, 09:54
  #318 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 570
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Still whatever the various theories presented here, for me, there is no excuse whatsoever I can see, for not instigating an immediate evacuation using the slides on the safe side. SQ could well have had to deal with multiple fatalities as a result of this incident, in this case prevented by sheer luck, rather than any action of personnel.
kaikohe76 is offline  
Old 30th Jun 2016, 10:14
  #319 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Sand pit
Age: 54
Posts: 459
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The video posted above showing the China Airlines jet burn up in Okinawa is an eye opener.
It is what I would have expected in Singapore and with 10x the amount of fuel in the wings it could have gotten pretty warm really quick".........I think we can all agree they were very lucky.
casablanca is offline  
Old 30th Jun 2016, 10:55
  #320 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It is still not clear if crew ever suspected a fuel leak. Looks to me this was treated as simple oil leak or a false warning until ATC initiated fire rescue response.
notapilot15 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.