Evacuate! or, not?

[chuks]

I had a recent sim session with an aborted T/O below V1 (engine fire) when the preferred scenario was, after doing the usual stuff, to wait ten seconds after hitting the firewall shutoff switch for the fire to go out, fire one bottle, wait 30 seconds for the fire to go out, fire the second bottle, wait ten seconds for the fire to go out, and then, and only then, to order an evacuation.

The scenario used to be to just hit the firewall shutoff switch, fire both bottles and evacuate with no particular attention paid to whether the fire had gone out or not.

What is the preferred scenario among other operators, please? I don't have a lot of big airplane experience, coming from a light aircraft, single-pilot background.

My intuition is to just get away from the aircraft and watch from a distance, along with the passengers and crew, of course, to see if it wants to either just sit there or else go up in flames. But, of course, I could be wrong.

[Miserlou]

Evacuate!

Sitting in the cockpit you can only tell if there's a fire warning. There may still be a fire.

[Bealzebub]

or of course it may just be a warning ! As with all these scenarios it is wise not to get into one mindset. Remember your passengers are not all 20 and 30 somethings. Some will be old , young and some in ill health. A number are likely to be hurt in an evacuation. It is not something to be taken lightly.

On the other hand the consequences of delay might be worse in some situations. that is why they pay you big bucks to assimilate all the available information in a given situation and let you make the judgment call.

[witchdoctor]

Presumably if you're already stationary on the runway, you could always open the window and eyeball the situation for yourself after completing the shutdown drills. After all you do know exactly which engine has caused the problem.

[chuks]

Hmm, so that makes one `for,´one `against´ (sort of) and one, `take a look out the window.´ Well, due to design factors we can forget the last one, since the windows seem to be screwed and glued into place, plus which you can't really get much of a look at the engines out to the sides.

The part I can really look forward to is being second-guessed after such a scenario, of course! Hopefully while still alive to receive this valuable input, of course.

[redsnail]

The decision to evacuate isn't to be made lightly.

Assuming the aircraft has pod underwing engines then the fire should be contained for some time. If you can get confirmation from the FA's and ATC about the state of the fire then that's useful. If the fire is a relatively simple one then the fire fighters will prefer the pax to stay on the aircraft. They are safer there than on a taxi way/run way with fire units driving around and of course, other aircraft around.

An evacuation will result in some injuries as Bealzebub has said.

In short, if the fire can be contained and has fire fighters in attendance then it is best to keep the pax on board where you know where they are. If you can't ascertain the severity of the fire and it's in a position that can't be easily contained, then evacuate.

[FWA NATCA]

Chuks,

Hmm, your company policy is to fire one bottle, wait, fire second bottle, wait, then if necessary evacuate.

I can understand their reasoning, first of all firing both bottles at once may not put out a fire, but discharging one after the other may. It also is a bad idea to have passengers going out the overwing exits if an engine is still on fire or smoldering, and they don't want passengers roaming around a runway with fire trucks racing to your aircraft, etc.

When you broadcast over the PA that we have an engine fire and to evacuate the aircraft in a calm and orderly way, via the front exits, how many passengers are going to listen beyond the words fire, and evacuate?

In a real life situation you make the decisions, if this situation occurs and everyone gets out of the aircraft without injuries, and the aircraft burns, no one will question your judgement. But if passengers are injured, killed, or burned, then every Tom, Dick and Harry will question your actions or lack of.

You have to make the best decisons based upon your training, experience, and gut feeling. Also in this situation don't hesitate to ask the tower if they see fire or smoke coming from the aircraft.

Mike

[Miserlou]

Chuks,

What aircraft type are you talking about?
Maybe be similar type-rated replies will get you closer to a reasonable plan.

[fireflybob]

Perhaps, if you pardon the pun, I could through a little more fuel on the fire by suggesting that if you so not adhere to the manufacturers fire drill you are opening yourself up to a liability action.

I know it makes common sense to fire off both bottles straightaway in this situation but if the fire drill says wait 30 seconds before firing the second bottle then perhaps we should do so!

As regards pax evac then as has already been said it all depends on the situation. Some airports in the world do not have a huge amount of fire-cover and I would not like to bet too much on how long it might take for an appliance to reach the scene.

The first step in the solution of any problem is the acquisition of the correct information and, in the case of a fire, seconds may count. However, the consequences of a hasty decision to evacuate the pax may also be costly. It's just one of those decisions which captains are paid to make anf then face the music (and hopefully dance!).

[chuks]

Thanks to all for the input. One complicating factor is that where I operate it has been known for the fire cover to be grossly deficient. Let's just say that the country has a lot of troubles which impact all areas of society, including the fire services, who do the best they can under the circumstances. That said, you just can´t expect a response equivalent to what you might get in a First World country.

Another thing is yes, getting people to sit around and wait for me to come to some decision, when even 50 seconds can seem like a very long time. Again, the society results in people being very mistrustful of authority, often with good reason.

An interesting double-bind is that I was told that my aircraft has a demonstrated evacuation time of 90 seconds. I would bet that was with a load of lightly-clad, highly disciplined and motivated, fit young men wearing running shoes. Not with the usual load of stroppy types who ignored the briefing, grannies, pregnant ladies in high-heeled shoes toting babies, etc. etc.

Then on the other hand I was told to expect some injuries in case of an evacuation, so that it's best to wait and evaluate the situation. Okay, but does that mean I can still count on getting my particular load of pax out the exits in 90 seconds? These two statements would seem to be self-contradictory.

Too, I was assured that the fire could be safely contained and extinguished by the aircraft structure and systems. This sounds like the briefing I got for my first parachute jump, the one where I was told the main was sure to open but if it didn't I had a reserve that was really, really sure to open....

On the whole I am indisposed to wait around trusting to the kindness of strangers, the cleverness of designers, etc. But I take the point about not letting a load of pax loose in the path of some fire engines, say. I'm still thinking this one over. Thanks again for the input.

[PaperTiger]

Then on the other hand I was told to expect some injuries in case of an evacuation, so that it's best to wait and evaluate the situation. Okay, but does that mean I can still count on getting my particular load of pax out the exits in 90 seconds? These two statements would seem to be self-contradictory.

As you rightly surmise, the 90 seconds is a demonstratable requirement for certification purposes. The 90 seconds starts when the order is given, so if you thought about it for half a minute first, then in theory everyone could be off 120 seconds after the incident. In theory. There have been large aircraft evacuated in less time, but it's going to depend on the passenger mix and state of mind.

Input from external witnesses (AFD, ATC) is very useful of course but it's your decision. And a tough one. Pretty much guarantee some broken bones going down the slides but that's better than succumbing to smoke inhalation.

The Canadian NTSB did a report in 1995 which covered many of the concerns from a regulatory viepoint.

[Anthony Carn]

Procedures vary from Company to Company, it would seem.

My philosophy is to do what your Company trains you to do. If you're unsure, ask your own Training Captains and only Training Captains, for clarification until you are sure.

You'll get interesting replies here, plus some not so. You'll get some very useful ideas. What you won't get is your Company procedures and philosophies.

Aircraft type may also have a bearing, but the above covers that.

[chuks]

Thanks again for the input. I'm off on Saturday to Africa, where I won't have access to this forum, so that pretty much concludes my gathering the thoughts of other on this.

Part of the problem is that area that is unwritten and follows from the opinions of individual Training Captains when it comes to `what to do?´ SOPs can't cover everything.

That aside, having been in various temporarily elevated positions myself, I don't get hugely impressed by some pearl of wisdom from someone with a title but perhaps much less specific experience. I still have to evaluate each bit of gen for duffness or not.

[Johnman]

There seem to be a confusion between Eng fire on ground and Eng fire in flight procedure. On the ground there is no waiting between discharging the agents or before as you would do inflight .

[BlueEagle]

That would depend on the aircraft in question johnman.

On the B747-400, for example, the procedure is identical, in the air or on the ground:
THRUST LEVER..........................................CLOSE

FUEL CONTROL SWITCH..........................CUTOFF

ENGINE FIRE SWITCH...................................PULL

If FIRE ENG message remains displayed:

ENGINE FIRE SWITCH...............................ROTATE
Rotate to the stop and hold for 1 second.

After 30 seconds, if FIRE ENG message remains
displayed,

ENGINE FIRE SWITCH......ROTATE TO OTHER BOTTLE
Rotate to the stop and hold for 1 second.

From Boeing QRH, FIRE ENGINE, SEVERE DAMAGE,
OR SEPARATION

When an evacuation then takes place the other three engines have their fire handles pulled, as does the APU, after the fire drill on the burning engine.

Or have I totally missed your point?

[RatherBeFlying]

It's one thing to be up front with crew escape ropes just ahead of the two front doors; quite another to be in the back ten rows away from the nearest exit.

This chicken SLF will look out the window (both sides if possible) and get the F*&^ out if there's any smoke.

I have a feeling that SOPs vary depending on the latest major claim -- either injuries from hindsightedly unnecessary evacuation or fatalities from delayed evacuation.

[HugMonster]

I disagree very strongly.

1) What appears to be smoke may not be smoke at all. If it is smoke, you have no idea at all what is happening. It could be vapour from wet, hot brakes. It could be fuel vapour from an engine that has been shut down too rapidly. It could be anything. You have no idea at all if you're in danger or not.

2) While the seatbelt sign is on, and until an evacuation has been ordered, you should be sitting down with your seat belt fastened. As soon as passengers decide to do their own thing, chaos ensues. That is when people start dying. You want to be the cause of that?

3) You don't have a quarter of the information the guys up front have available to them, from other crew, from ATC, from ground vehicles/handlers etc. You have no right whatsoever to decide you are going to initiate your own little evacuation. If an evacuation is about to be ordered, you will be distracting the cabin staff quite significantly from their duties in getting people off in as orderly a manner as they can.

4) Even assuming that you can sidestep the cabin crew, open an exit, blowing the slide, possibly with the aircraft in motion at time, you don't know what vehicles are around you. Are you about to get mown down by a firetruck? Or are you about to cause one to swerve into the path of another, thus taking out two truck that were about to assist at the scene of a fire at which all assistance is needed?

5) If you're really that nervous, you can always ask for an exit row on checking in. If your behaviour is what it's likely to be based on that last post, an exit row is the last place I would want you sitting.

[BlueEagle]

I have to agree with everything that Hugmonster has said there.

If passengers start to initiate their own evacuation based on a sighting of smoke, (which could be coming from anywhere), then chaos will ensue and deaths and serious injuries will result.

What had all the potential for being a safe and well managed operation by the crew, who practice for such events and know what they are doing, could easily turn into mass hysteria for no good reason at all and what may have been a minor incident could become a disaster.

[RatherBeFlying]

BE and HM: Have a look at PaperTiger's link to the Canadian Transportation Safety Board study of evacuations if you want to see a sample of the usual confusion and poor communications.

Interestingly there was a successful evacuation in YYC initiated by the passengers where the aircraft burned to the ground.

Don't worry, I'm strapped in until it's stopped and can tell the difference between increasing smoke and dissipating vapor.

And I won't be running in front of a fire truck. I'll be helping others off.

[Hwel]

Of course if the pax had self evacuated in the Saudi L1011 Fire they wouldent have all died waiting for an order that never came.