All good points Bugsmasher.



I believe they relied a lot on the information they had, including reports from the Fire Fighters who were on the spot and could see just what was happening.
Good and bad luck can enter any situation. Try this scenario, one of our 'heros', on this thread, who have said they would not have waited for any instructions or information but would have opened a Left door and gone. 'Hero' probably makes it down the slide as it catches fire and gets away, remaining 221 pax not so lucky, a burnt slide that, as the top end burns, will probably introduce fire into the cabin. Pax only options, either jump or open a Right door and trust their luck. Inevitably many serious injuries and possible deaths. The bad luck is having an 'Hero' on board who, despite knowing nothing, thinks they know enough to commence an evacuation that precipitates the injury and deaths of many. The good luck was that no such 'hero' was on board.

I am not qualified to comment on the go/no-go decision to evacuate but having been SLF in and out of Changi hundreds of times I can state one thing with absolute clarity.

Changi is in a tropical/monsoonal climatic region. When it rains there you are not left in any doubt that rain has commenced. The volume of water is immense. Accordingly everywhere around Singapore has large and deep concrete culverts to carry the water away, Changi Airport is no exception. In fact the main channels around Changi are probably 10m wide and 4m deep.

Any fire response truck that went off-piste would probably never be useable again. I doubt you could get a main battle tank around the 'off-road' areas of Changi without an attendant Corp of army bridging engineers.

It just annoys me to read all of the ignorant tripe on here.

I have long held the view that opinions are like a..eholes - everyone has one, but they are generally only useful for one thing.

Note to self, stop reading this tripe !

Agree, it's like a drug, isn't it? Fuselage's going to be breached after a minute, Geez, lucky the wind was blowing that way, why aren't those idiots driving straight across the grass, surely they would have seen the fire on the screens (no, they were watching Harry Potter on the DVD)... I'm hooked, give me more!

i'm mindful of the fact the under body cameras would not have been on during the landing and thanks for the heads up on that to the chap above for reminding me - but ATC would have def told them they are on fire before they had stopped so we do not know if they then switched them on but so much would have been going on who knows

i do not think many of the posts on this incident have been tripe apart from discussing crew not knowing the left/right door issue -

for once most Ppruners like me and my fellow old FD and CC crew friends have been quite shocked but kept calm about this one and we are eager to see what reports come out of it - a huge learning exercise and the videos are clearly quite gob smacking

Oh come on fellas.......if I suspected a fuel leak or Eng Fire in any Aircraft fitted with a GMCS ( Ground Manoeuvre Camera system ) of course I will switch it on ASAP after landing and most likely have had a really close look at it in flight too.

It is SOP on the 777 ( 300 300ER ) to select it on the PF's ND after landing anyway for the taxy in. It would take precisely 2 seconds to select and is a vital tool to help the decision making process for anything effecting that part of the Aircraft at any time.

A fire tender rolled over at Gatwick 20 or so years ago when, at night, the truck inadvertently went into a drainage ditch between apron and runway.

Mickjoebill

This is common practise but not universal. There may only be blue lights.

Off-road in the tropics
 

There are two points to the seemingly-popular "Dukes of Hazzard" approach:

1. Off tarmac at Changi at any time of the year is likely to get you into a lot of trouble - 6 x 6, 8 x 8 or whatever.
I've seen bigger machines with much lower ground bearing pressure than those fire tenders bogged to the a...hole in similar circumstances.

2. Any time-saving realised from heading off-road on the diagonal is likely to be absolutely minimal, at best. Or worse, negative advantage. And worst scenario, no-show.

I think those guys made a SAFE decision when choosing their route - probably exactly as they were trained to do.

There is ONE button to press!!!

Tdracer:--- ever flown the 777? The use of the camera is very very familiar and as said above is only ONE push of a button.

I will guarantee you unless it was INOP they used it.

If they didn't then ..........

Potential.....
 

After multiple posts it would seem that the majority of professional crew are in accord that there was the potential for an unmitigated disaster in this event. Bursting fuel and hydraulic lines coupled with exploding tyres could have seen this over in a flash... literally. Better out than in.
This is a rumor network and as such is open to opinions at all ends of the spectrum. But it be open only to professional aircrew. In my opinion I have trouble envisaging the reasons why the crew didn't put the aeroplane down at the nearest suitable airport. Period. Talk about the consequences later. And why they didn't prepare for a possible problem on arrival is mystifying. I have had 2 situations where I arranged for DD services to be available at SIN...... just in case.... suspected blown tyre and a flight control problem. Landed on 02L and 20 R respectively. Both no problem in the end but the services where there ready to do the job they train for. Mystifying.

Don't know exactly what they use, but AFFF is excellent for controlling fires involving pools of flammable liquid (where it can act true to name and form a film that smothers the flame and contains the vapour), and about as effective as water when it comes to fighting a fire within a structure. With the right equipment and provided conditions aren't too unfavourable, it can be launched over a considerable distance, which is a definite bonus when approaching a pool of burning jet fuel. A fire within a structure is always going to be a challenge, as the structure prevents the extinguishing agent from cooling or smothering what's actually burning. Off-hand, I can't think of any other agent that would have worked better in that set of circumstances.

Dunno if anyone has posted this one but I haven't seen it before.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D5B8QrpudpA

Absolutely! Great job and perfect outcome.

What is striking in the above 2015 Ft. Lauderdale evacuation video is that the PAX are all over the taxiway, directly in the way of the fast moving fire rescue trucks, and at great risk of being hit or run-over.

Separately, at about 2 min 06 sec in the video, the fire truck arriving on the LH side of the screen, does not seem to be very effective, as its foam jet doesn't appear to reach the aircraft. Any insight on this?

Wild blue yonder
Simple answer. The first hint of a problem was an engine oil warning. The fire started when the airplane was on the verge of touching down, or had already touched down (informations are a bit unclear on this). On multiple occasions I have concluded that from total stop until first dousing of engine it took about 50 sec. Obviously the crew had demanded some aid.

There is an ATC snippet in one of these posts where the crew does not seem overly concerned. However, if you follow their path, you can conclude that this exchange took place around the time they decided to turn back. Obviously, again, more information could arrive at the flight deck during the flight back to base. We have NOT heard any ATC conversation between airplane and tower/ground/rescue services yet.

The only thing that is really really puzzling is why the #€%&" there was no evacuation. From several cabin shots, the latest provided by Capt Ecureuil, it is clearly obvious that the fire was plain and easy for all cabin crew to see and there could be no doubts that an emergency was unfolding. Unfortunately the link from Capt Ecureuil ends just when the PA announcement starts. I really hope someone has caught that announcement on another video!

I don't agree

There is no evidence other than in your speculation that a majority of professional crew were in accord.

There is the usual the "sky will fall" judgements of those who post most often in this forum amid a much smaller cadre of others waiting for facts and debriefing of the actual crew.

Capt Ecureuil's link to a new video from inside the aircraft is very disturbing...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D5B8QrpudpA

It starts out by a shouting FA saying "we need to move", later that same person says "leave your luggage and move straight up ????"

You can clearly see a FA blocking the way to an exit where the fire is raging and I have to assume she was probably the one giving commands to the passengers.

What I can't understand is why it is pitch black in the aircraft?

Why were the lights or even the emergency lights not turned on?

Although it is pitch black, the entertainment systems are still operational leaving me to believe there was some AC power on the aircraft, why?

Near the end of the video as the person moves forward, is that the left hand engine that we hear?

And it almost seems to me that a door must be open to hear in that way, so was one of the left hand side doors opened at some point?

Why would that engine still be running? Is that a B777-300 emergency check list requirement?

I find this incident and the way the crew responded to it very unusual and disturbing and it leaves more questions to be answered.

Although I'm glad no one got hurt or died from it I think there was a lot of luck involved.

Hoping that all the facts will be forthcoming soon.

Ok, more information for those in need:

Fire in engine:

http://www.flight.org/r/2015/09/540/...-checklist.jpg

And evacuation:

http://www.flight.org/r/2015/09/540/...-checklist.jpg

Both checklists found from the Vegas incident. Obviously the evacuation checklist wasn't used here.

Wouldn't be more prudent in this case to have shut down both engines and started the EVAC Check list?