SQ-368 (engine & wing on fire) final report out
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually damage is not that significant because fire was concentrated on leading and trailing edges of the wing and engine.
On last count SIAEC has 9 different joint ventures for MRO. My take it will be back in service rather quickly.
On last count SIAEC has 9 different joint ventures for MRO. My take it will be back in service rather quickly.
Actually damage is not that significant because fire was concentrated on leading and trailing edges of the wing and engine.
That could be a bit of Monty Python's. Pure comedy gold if it weren't so serious.
Plane at standstill. Fire raging a few feet adjacent to the 1/10 of an Inch Aluminum foil. Instruction: For your own safety stay close to the fire and fasten your seatbelts....
That makes it probably easier to identify the charred remains afterwards if everyone stayed in their seat. Saves you the expensive DNA analysis
Plane at standstill. Fire raging a few feet adjacent to the 1/10 of an Inch Aluminum foil. Instruction: For your own safety stay close to the fire and fasten your seatbelts....
That makes it probably easier to identify the charred remains afterwards if everyone stayed in their seat. Saves you the expensive DNA analysis
ugh beggars belief to me
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 608
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have been reading this thread since it started and would like to comment.
At my company, in our sim checks the process for an on ground evacuation is pretty strait forward. Bring the aircraft to a stop carry out whatever procedure needs to be done and then ASK the RFF services if they still see a fire, or take a look at the Fire PB to see if it is still lit.
The only interaction that we have with the Cabin is to prep them for an evacuation and then to either call an evacuation or tell them to stand down. At no point do we liaise with them.
Therefore with RFF not on the scene and with no fire lights illuminated what should a captain do? And at a company with little thinking outside the box procedure and training rule.
There is still the chance that the CC could call an evacuation and we activate the EVAC command button in the cabin. However, not all airlines do this. And when you are from a country/airline where you blindly trust in your pilots and are told that you are just there to look pretty and serve coffee do you think you'll have the confidence to initiate an evacuation? And can you, when you've been trained all these years to wait for the captain's command.
At my company, in our sim checks the process for an on ground evacuation is pretty strait forward. Bring the aircraft to a stop carry out whatever procedure needs to be done and then ASK the RFF services if they still see a fire, or take a look at the Fire PB to see if it is still lit.
The only interaction that we have with the Cabin is to prep them for an evacuation and then to either call an evacuation or tell them to stand down. At no point do we liaise with them.
Therefore with RFF not on the scene and with no fire lights illuminated what should a captain do? And at a company with little thinking outside the box procedure and training rule.
There is still the chance that the CC could call an evacuation and we activate the EVAC command button in the cabin. However, not all airlines do this. And when you are from a country/airline where you blindly trust in your pilots and are told that you are just there to look pretty and serve coffee do you think you'll have the confidence to initiate an evacuation? And can you, when you've been trained all these years to wait for the captain's command.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Montreal
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Haven't said a word til now, but my first--and persisting--reaction, is the plane should have been evacuated immediately.
These feelings were reinforced by the fact that the pilots, apparently flying on one engine ("FL170"), did not during their two-hour deturn to Changi, land as they may have been required to do, at any of the other suitable airports along the route. To me, this suggested that their wish to save face or please their superiors must have overcome any impulse to divert.
In any case, as a passenger, I couldn't have sat their complacently taking snapshots of the wing burning, anchored to my seat by the faith that the wind would continue blowing in the right direction and all the big guys have everything under control.
These feelings were reinforced by the fact that the pilots, apparently flying on one engine ("FL170"), did not during their two-hour deturn to Changi, land as they may have been required to do, at any of the other suitable airports along the route. To me, this suggested that their wish to save face or please their superiors must have overcome any impulse to divert.
In any case, as a passenger, I couldn't have sat their complacently taking snapshots of the wing burning, anchored to my seat by the faith that the wind would continue blowing in the right direction and all the big guys have everything under control.
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sinister side of me thinks, probably crew are not comfortable on just one engine. We don't know what happened with SQ836 both engine failure non-incident also TransAsia 235 fear, shutdown wrong engine.
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Singapore
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SQ 743 had an engine fire out of MEL long ago and the PR spin from SIN was that the setting sun reflecting on the exhaust can may have LOOKED like a fire. But they returned anyway.
Decision making does not appear to be a strong point in SQ. Take a read of the AAIB report on the 330 cargo fire in BKK.
Decision making does not appear to be a strong point in SQ. Take a read of the AAIB report on the 330 cargo fire in BKK.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
And, a colleague told me about seeing a sunrise at noon on a 737-200 when he was brand new in the plane doing IOE (now OE). He was starting an engine and somehow the igniters were not on due to breakers out or wrong switch position. The check airman spotted the mistake and announced 'watch and learn!' as he turned on the sparklers. The flight attendants said flame came out of both ends of the fuel soaked JT8D as it lit off and the pax were duly impressed.
The B-727 APU with the exhaust on the right wing caused a lot of pax evacuations, some pax initiated, back in the day. I watched one at DTW years ago as we were taxiing out in another plane.
The NTSB issued this bulletin to address the dangers of a pax initiated evac on the 727 due to APU torching:
http://www.ntsb.gov/safety/safety-re...rs/A93_125.pdf
Obviously, the recent SQ fire was far more serious than momentary APU torching.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: south england
Posts: 393
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It would appear that now more facts are coming to light that this could have been handled better .
I am still disheartened by the fact that so called professionals/colleagues, who I am sure would want to experience a just culture when it comes to their stuff up being put under the microscope by their company/fellow professionals, are so quick to judge without being in receipt of all the facts before condemning this crews actions. None of us go to work with the intention of effing up, we all just want to act professionally and go home to our families. If we do mess up hopefully we all walk away and learn from our mistakes.
Regards,
GBD
I am still disheartened by the fact that so called professionals/colleagues, who I am sure would want to experience a just culture when it comes to their stuff up being put under the microscope by their company/fellow professionals, are so quick to judge without being in receipt of all the facts before condemning this crews actions. None of us go to work with the intention of effing up, we all just want to act professionally and go home to our families. If we do mess up hopefully we all walk away and learn from our mistakes.
Regards,
GBD
Last edited by gatbusdriver; 5th Aug 2016 at 10:59.
@ gatbusdriver... It would appear that now more fact are coming to light that this could have been handled better.
Thank you.
Sad to see people bagging Singaporeans. I flew with them as an ex-pat for ten years, their training is good, their standards are good and they are a nice bunch of guys. On first glance, I would have evacuated, it will be interesting to see the facts and any reason that influenced the decision to 'sit on it'.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,501
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Training and standards are good, but sometimes the aircraft is just bad, lah!
I press and I press, but nothing, lah!
Incident: Singapore B773 at Munich on Nov 3rd 2011, runway excursion
I press and I press, but nothing, lah!
Incident: Singapore B773 at Munich on Nov 3rd 2011, runway excursion
ManaAdaSystem: what does that incident have to do with this one? (Thanks for the link, that was an interesting read).
SQ, 777, OK, but ... what else is in common? No Fire. (And apparently, no damage to the aircraft).
This thread and this incident has to do with a fire involving an aircraft on the ground, and before that a malfunction that the crew determined was important enough that they not proceed to destination but instead return to base.
Absent new information from SQ or investigators, this thread is at risk of becoming an SQ or 777 catch all.
I did a quick search and did not find any new info released by investigators: did anyone come across new information?
SQ, 777, OK, but ... what else is in common? No Fire. (And apparently, no damage to the aircraft).
This thread and this incident has to do with a fire involving an aircraft on the ground, and before that a malfunction that the crew determined was important enough that they not proceed to destination but instead return to base.
Absent new information from SQ or investigators, this thread is at risk of becoming an SQ or 777 catch all.
I did a quick search and did not find any new info released by investigators: did anyone come across new information?
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: the City by the Bay
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Regarding manadasytem's link :
The Triple 7 is an amazing plane ! Can go off road , back to tarmac and off road again with no damage. Tarmac or OffRoad, all good with it's All Wheel Drive .
The Triple 7 is an amazing plane ! Can go off road , back to tarmac and off road again with no damage. Tarmac or OffRoad, all good with it's All Wheel Drive .
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,501
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's about SQ training and standards, and decision making. Or lack of.
What would you do, Lonewolf, if you did an autoland and the aircraft started to bank and drift off to the left?
Sit on your hands and wait for the autopilot to fix itself, or disconnect the autopilot and land yourself/go around?
This incident is why I don't fly with SQ. It's just a slightly polished version of Asiana.
What would you do, Lonewolf, if you did an autoland and the aircraft started to bank and drift off to the left?
Sit on your hands and wait for the autopilot to fix itself, or disconnect the autopilot and land yourself/go around?
This incident is why I don't fly with SQ. It's just a slightly polished version of Asiana.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: the City by the Bay
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts