Enola-gay

I've read some rubbish posts on here but yours takes the biscuit. You don't seem to have a clue what you're talking about and your post doesn't warrant discussion

WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED
 

The aircraft braked in a normal manner, well as normal as it ever is at BLK, (autobrake 3) Tower advised the crew that lots of white smoke was coming from the area of the undercarriage, they crashed the Fire Crew, FIRE CHIEF ADVISED THAT THE CAPTAIN EVACUATE THE AIRCRAFT. It's a brave Captain that goes against the advice of the Fire Chief, ( At the subsequent board of enquiry, blah blah blah ) The smoke was caused by a loose union in a hydraulic pipe, non- flammable fluid dripped onto the hot brakes following the landing run those are the facts so can we please stop all this rubbish speculation. The Crew and especially the Captain acted in a thoroughly professional manner, and .....NOONE WAS HURT !!!!

Dogsbreath
 

Thank you for the concise description of the events, posts #18, 21 & 33 had already raised this as being the most likely chain of events but it is always helpfull to get the precise detail.

However the posts from some above seem to prove that some are incapable of reading and understanding a safety card, let alone the technical issues described by the wiser contributors to this thread.

A job well done by the flight crew, cabin crew and fire service in my opinion.

I was under the impression that Skydrol was flammable. . . . .

Going back to my post #21, I do not see any response from our resident skygods as to how they would have handled the situation as described by 'dogsbreath'. We understand from the brethren that the method of evacuation chosen was 'wrong' or 'inappropriate', so it would be useful for all of us to know the way you SGs would have handled it so we can offer our learned opinions and possibly learn a better way.

Listening.................?

Captplaystation
 

Skydrol will burn if in contact with a flame or heat but won't it's Self support combustion, hence in this case a vapour that appeared to the observers to be smoke but no fire.

The fire crew apparently deemed an evacuation a suitable action.

There was an aircraft many years ago (cant recall the detail, but featured in Naked Pilot HF book) where an in flight fire was followed by a safe emergency landing. The captain decided not to evacuate and sadly, everyone perished on board due to sudden smoke inhalation.

It is so easy to judge based on hindsight, but at the end of the day....no one was majorly hurt in this incident, and the aircraft is still intact.
Lessons can be learned. UK aviation should be proud of its just culture. Some of you speculators that are apportioning blame......that blame culture is an unwelcome thing of the past!

:cool:

Windsheer -

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudia_Flight_163

An evacuation is a serious incident that nearly always results in injury, i Would go with Fire 1 recommendation every time. It will be interesting to see what the problem was with the R1 door slide, the picture seems to show the door only partially open I assume a door handling problem rather than a defect, but a useful reminder that things don't always work as described in the cabin simulator, a lose hydraulic union is just one of those things.

All well handled by the crew and Blackpool fire service. :ok:

Fire Chief on scene recommended evacuation, Capt. elected to evacuate the cabin using the main doors only. Good call in my opinion. To any detractors or the habitual Jet2.com 'Knockers', I'll say it was the safest decision, professionally executed with excellent support from the Airport Services.

Well done to all.:D

That the smoke was later found to have been caused by a loose union in a hydraulic pipe, non-flammable fluid dripping on hot brakes etc. is immaterial to the decision made on the spot. The decision re evacuation had to take place quickly, well before those facts were known to either the PIC or the Fire Chief. They could not wait for a lab analysis of the fluids involved.

Smoke from fluid dropping on hot brakes can turn nasty very quickly:
I agree with rmiller774:

That China Airlines incident was caused by fuel leaking onto a hot engine exhaust.

A & C - trust me. Skydrol WILL burn. I've seen first hand the resultant fire caused by hydraulic fluid leaking onto hot brakes. I should know I attended the award presentation today to the colleague of mine who spotted the smoke on CCTV and crashed the Fire Crews.

What followed the white smoke was an approximately 12 foot fireball when it ignited followed by a sustained fire until the fire crews could mobilise and knock down the fire.


And whilst, yes, the firemen do spend a lot of their time training they dont just go "Oooo flames. Must. Squirt. Water..." They train for a wide range of scenarios using real incidents and shared experience to inform their training. Many of those guys could tell you more about a fire spreads and the flammability of your aircraft than you. Bear in mind also that many of the airport firefighters were highly experienced local authority firefighters and have fought more real fires than you can imagine.

Trossie, it's a good idea to make sure your example is relevant before you post it - the Okinawa fire was a massive fuel leak onto the engine, not a small hyd leak onto warm brakes, and resulted in an immediate large fire, not some smoke. Saying that fluid leaks lead to fireballs is ridiculous. Stretching the logic, are you going to evacuate because someone sees fluid dripping from the engine pylon during a turnaround? Chances are it's just condensation from cold soaking. Check first, then react accordingly...

I agree that that crew had no option but to evacuate after being so advised by the fire crew to do so - that recommendation put the aircrew in a very narrow and compromised situation, raking away their options. Frankly, I think the fire crew were overzealous and should have informed the captain that there was smoke but no fire and monitored the situation. With the appliances on site, they could have contained any fire that did erupt and then reported that for the captain to then order an evacuation. I think it's wrong that external agents make decisions for the pilots rather than just give them the information that is needed in what was an urgent, not emergency situation. Had this been a taller aircraft, more serious injuries would have occurred, all unnecessarily.

Burnie5204
 

Skydrol may burn if exposed to a very hot surface but take the heat away and it will not continue to burn.

You mean a hot surface like a set of hot brakes just after landing...


Basically what I'm saying the Fire Crews were there, looking at the situation, knowing what the possible scenarios are (is this fluid oil, is it fuel) and have correctly assessed that the fluid dripping onto the hot brakes and vaporising represents a significant fire risk and have given their advice. They were there, they had all the facts and trying to armchair quarterback a decision made by someone who is an expert in their field (a field which, I would postulate, you know little [namely firefighting and fire development]) is not helpful when a decision was made in the interests of securing immediate safety for the passengers.

So far, I have never needed the airport fire services chasing me down the runway, and hopefully never will.
But a relative of mine is a firefighter for one of our busy airports, and I'm really impressed with the way its all planned and trained for.
I have a lot of faith/respect in the guys and girls who are coming towards a potential inferno when we are doing our best to get away from it:D

OWE instructions
 

The last time I flew as SLF seated at a OWE the cabin attendant gave an instruction in how to operate the door adding that I shouldn't open it on my own initiative but wait for an evacuation order from the CC unless there was heavy smoke and/or flames in the cabin AND: Take a look through the window and make an assessment of the situation outside before actually opening the door. "You don't want to exit onto a wing that's on fire" were pretty much the exact words she gave.

Nothing wrong with that surely?