Free Flight, Free Speech

Just read it!!

Wow
These guys have no time to spare! :O

As I understand it the captain has the final call to evacuate, but I'm wondering why he or she did not in this instance. Were the pilots unaware of the huge fire? Or did they think it was safer to keep the passengers in a burning tube full of fuel / fuel vapor? Weird.

Also, they could've landed at Sepang in Malaysia but chose to go further back to Singapore. Again, weird decision. Perhaps the fire didn't start until after landing.

Oh, by the way, this was put in the wrong forum, SQ368 isn't missing

HJ1an wrote:As I understand it the captain has the final call to evacuate, but I'm wondering why he or she did not in this instance. Were the pilots unaware of the huge fire? Or did they think it was safer to keep the passengers in a burning tube full of fuel / fuel vapor? Weird.

Evacuation was delayed by 1 mins and 10 secs because there was a strong crosswind from the right at the time of fire and there was a chance of the fire extending to ENG 1. Also remember that emergency services were in stand by for this landing already, we can safely assume that fire fighters observed the aircraft and gave their recommendations to the crew of how to proceed, and this recommendation may well have been to not evacuate.

The decision to evacuate is grave. People will get hurt, some badly. Deaths are a possibility. Imagine 80 year olds going down those slides. Handicapped passengers. Idiots with their carry ons. There is a real risk that someone will open an exit on the side that is on fire. There are reports of fuel fumes in the cabin. The Crash Fire Rescue Crews will be taken away from fire fighting and forced to deal with confused, panicked passengers.

Also, they could've landed at Sepang in Malaysia but chose to go further back to Singapore. Again, weird decision. Perhaps the fire didn't start until after landing.

The fire started only after the landing.
There is a EICAS warning and caution for a Tailpipe Fire. The exact text is : FIRE ENG TAILPIPE L, R. So definitely they would've known about it.

And WSSS being the central hub of SIA, they might have thought it would be easier to arrange for alternative flight.

Oh, by the way, this was put in the wrong forum, SQ368 isn't missing

True. Maybe we could ask Israel to move it to perhaps Real Aviation

SHM wrote:Evacuation was delayed by 1 mins and 10 secs because there was a strong crosswind from the right at the time of fire and there was a chance of the fire extending to ENG 1. Also remember that emergency services were in stand by for this landing already, we can safely assume that fire fighters observed the aircraft and gave their recommendations to the crew of how to proceed, and this recommendation may well have been to not evacuate.

The decision to evacuate is grave. People will get hurt, some badly. Deaths are a possibility. Imagine 80 year olds going down those slides. Handicapped passengers. Idiots with their carry ons. There is a real risk that someone will open an exit on the side that is on fire. There are reports of fuel fumes in the cabin. The Crash Fire Rescue Crews will be taken away from fire fighting and forced to deal with confused, panicked passengers.

Which makes it all the more weird that in another instance of a Southwest 737 whose main landing gear caught fire and the captain called for an evacuation almost immediately. And a gear fire is one of those things planes are tested to withstand for 5+minutes. They don't test wing fires, for example.. where all the fuel is.

However, I don't doubt the SIA people though, they are one of the best.

Very simple ...

you have a gear fire, all that really burns is a little hydraulic oil and tires and most of the flames even blaze into the wheel well. Means there is no risk, the flames will be suddenly blown by strong wind to the emergency slides and grill passengers while leaving the plane. There is also no immediate risk of an explosion. So you can evacuate.

you have one engine in flames, tanks full of fumes and strong wind threatening to blow the flames also over to the other side. No area to bring out safely emergency slides till the fire fighters lay a foam carpet or contain the fire and if things go really bad, the only little bit of cover, people have is actually inside the fuselage. So you can't really evacuate.

Given the different circumstances, both pilots appear to have made the right calls.

jwocky wrote:Very simple ...

you have a gear fire, all that really burns is a little hydraulic oil and tires and most of the flames even blaze into the wheel well. Means there is no risk, the flames will be suddenly blown by strong wind to the emergency slides and grill passengers while leaving the plane. There is also no immediate risk of an explosion. So you can evacuate.

While true, in the case of a main gear fire I would hold evacuation and then just wait till the eergency vehicles come put out the flames and let passengers wait and disembark off those mobile stairs when done. It would be less costly repairs to the company to reset all those equipment.

......... then again, having given second thoughts about it, maybe the pilots were taking an opportunity to deploy the slides and go "weeeee".

Similarly, the incidents of both B777s from Asiana and BA. Both crashed during landing, the BA pilot evacuated the plane immediately. The Asiana faired the worse of the landings and withheld evacuations until he learned that there was a fire going on.

I'm seeing a bit of inconsistency here. It's not such a big issue, just an observation.

jwocky wrote:Given the different circumstances, both pilots appear to have made the right calls.

If i'm in that situation I'm more concerned the whole plane going up in flames suddenly at any moment. It's the right call in hindsight, but it could just as easily go all wrong any point in time and then it would a 'bad judgement' all over the news. Just my opinion, as usual.

It's always the same thing, you are in a situation, you need to decide, you decide the best you can on what you know, what you remember from training maybe and often your gut instinct in this very second. Whether you are right you will only know hours, days, maybe even weeks later.
But of course, a pilot is maybe more aware of fire separations in the plane, he flies all the time and thus will easier make a bet on the plane instead of against it. Our brains maybe hold more images of exploding planes from Hollywood movies than simulator sessions with burning engines. For a pilot it's maybe vice versa?

There is a difference between a fire contained within an engine fed by a leaking pipe, and a fire heating up your wing tanks big time. In the latter case the tanks will explode within minutes. After that you can be sure the fire penetrates the cabin and you will loose passengers. This flight crew took a huge risk in gambling that they would be saved in time. Do we say of someone who won the lottery that he made the right calls?

- The wings of this plane were fried for at least 3 minutes: no explosion yet.
- The wings of the BA at Las Vegas were done for about 4 minutes: no-explosion yet, but smoke entered the the cabin through molten windows.
- The wings of the China Airlines at the Okinawa parking stand were done for 3 minutes when the first explosion occurred.
- The fire of the British Airtours at Manchester penetrated the cabin almost immediately, within half a minute.

No, one should not gamble with a wing fire, no matter how close by the fire trucks seem to be. Order an evacuation at the doors that are not near the fire, even if that means you use only one door. The Cabin Crew is trained to asses whether they can open a door (well at least they are supposed to be trained for that).

Kind regards, Vincent