SQ flight emergency landing

Charles Babbage

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jun/27/singapore-airlines-plane-catches-fire-while-making-emergency-landing

Camera phones mean these things are increasingly recorded.

PukkaStukka

Hairy enough alright... :eek:

http://www.avherald.com/h?article=49a58209&opt=0

cowboyBuilder

wonder how long before we have video footage on board of an actual crash, when the mobile is recovered from the wreckage?

It will be ghoulish.

lintdrummer

Flabbergasted as to why there was no evacuation from the left side. If I was looking at that scene from the position that person recorded it from, I'd have made my way to the nearest exit on the left, made sure it was armed and opened the door to get the hell out of that death trap!

BZ

lintdrummer wrote: »

Flabbergasted as to why there was no evacuation from the left side. If I was looking at that scene from the position that person recorded it from, I'd have made my way to the nearest exit on the left, made sure it was armed and opened the door to get the hell out of that death trap!

We don't know what outside on the left side was like? What's to say there wasn't a huge pool of fuel on the ground. Sending passengers out into it could of led to far worse situation. No casualties and everyone walked away safely. Right decision was made by the firecrew and crew onboard as they were the ones that knew the full extent of what was going on and wouldn't have kept the passengers onboard without weighing up all the options at hand and possible outcomes.

The King of Dalriada

lintdrummer wrote: »

Flabbergasted as to why there was no evacuation from the left side. If I was looking at that scene from the position that person recorded it from, I'd have made my way to the nearest exit on the left, made sure it was armed and opened the door to get the hell out of that death trap!

The fire was put out, everyone disembarked in an orderly fashion, and no injuries were sustained.
I fail to see how an evacuation would've been a better option.

jimbis

I think the point he's trying to make is put yourself in the passengers position. The fire was clearly well established and if it was me I'd want to be out of that plane asap.
In the end the right decision was made there's no doubting that. But aircraft fires can be difficult to get under control and if this hadve gone the other way and the fire engulfed the cabin you can be sure everyone would be questioning why the evacuation wasn't called.

im sure it was a very tough decision for the crew but their 'gamble' payed off brilliantly.

The King of Dalriada

jimbis wrote: »

I

im sure it was a very tough decision for the crew but their 'gamble' payed off brilliantly.

It's not a gamble, it was experience, knowledge, and professionalism.
Thinking straight, logically and rationally, when under the pressure that this crew was, is what sets them apart from the people down the back who just want to act on survival instincts.
It's a big call, but that's the reality, especially for the one in the left seat with the 4 stripes.

jimbis

The King of Dalriada wrote: »

It's not a gamble, it was experience, knowledge, and professionalism.

Perhaps gamble isn't the correct phrase, and yes it was experience, knowledge and professionalism that let them make the correct decision but there was still a chance, albiet a small chance it could not work out for them. I suppose that's the same with every decision a pilot makes while they have your life in his/her hands.

PukkaStukka

I'm trying to understand how something that could cause low oil pressure (like an oil leak) could result in a whole wing catching fire like that.

The King of Dalriada

PukkaStukka wrote: »

I'm trying to understand how something that could cause low oil pressure (like an oil leak) could result in a whole wing catching fire like that.

It's a puzzling one.
All I can guess at is the leaking oil from the right engine got sprayed onto the underside if the wing, and then ignited somehow.

Pure speculation though.

markpb

PukkaStukka wrote:

I'm trying to understand how something that could cause low oil pressure (like an oil leak) could result in a whole wing catching fire like that.

Someone on AVH speculated that reverse thrusters were deployed on landing and that they sprayed (burning?) oil over the wing which caused the fire. I'm no expert so I've no idea if it's plausible. If true, it would certainly make the fire look worse than it actually was.

lintdrummer

BZ wrote: »

We don't know what outside on the left side was like? What's to say there wasn't a huge pool of fuel on the ground. Sending passengers out into it could of led to far worse situation. No casualties and everyone walked away safely. Right decision was made by the firecrew and crew onboard as they were the ones that knew the full extent of what was going on and wouldn't have kept the passengers onboard without weighing up all the options at hand and possible outcomes.

Pictures of the apparently unaffected by fire left side here: https://www.instagram.com/p/BHJG-odBXMu/?taken-by=hipsterpomadesg and here http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/160627124158-singapore-airlines-plane-fire-7-exlarge-169.jpg
You're basing your view of the events based solely on the outcome. Yes, luckily, everyone walked away unscathed but was it really the best option to leave everyone sitting next to a burning tank with probably 10 tonnes of fuel in it for almost 3 minutes, risking the flames or fumes engulfing the cabin or the tank exploding? If there's one thing anybody should know about fire it's that it spreads fast. No matter how you cut it, not evacuating was a huge risk and it shouldn't have been taken.

The King of Dalriada wrote: »

The fire was put out, everyone disembarked in an orderly fashion and no injuries were sustained. I fail to see how an evacuation would've been a better option.

You fail to see how evacuation would have been the better option? Really? You genuinely think the best thing to do was to leave everybody in the most dangerous place they could be at that moment? Just trust that the fire service would get the fire out and that after they had done that, the intense heat hadn't caused pressure in the tank to build to a point where it might explode?
Lads, ye're mad altogether. Priority number one in this instance should be to get everyone as far away from the danger as possible and I see no evidence here that there was a reason not to do that. Just think for a moment, if the outcome here had been different and things worsened, would we be saying that they had done the right thing by keeping everybody on board for the 3 minutes the fire was being dealt with?

The King of Dalriada

lintdrummer wrote: »

You fail to see how evacuation would have been the better option? Really? You genuinely think the best thing to do was to leave everybody in the most dangerous place they could be at that moment? Just trust that the fire service would get the fire out and that after they had done that, the intense heat hadn't caused pressure in the tank to build to a point where it might explode?

Yes, I do, given the outcome. Now, if they had decided to evacuate, I wouldn't criticise them either. I wasn't there, I don't know what info they had.
As to to the "pressure in the tanks building", do you know what fuel load they had on landing. I don't, but I'd hazard a guess at around 5000kgs per wing. That'd be a good logical load in this scenario. That's about a one sixth full wing tank (c. 30,600kgs capacity per tank) . There's no risk of over pressure there.

lintdrummer wrote: »

Lads, ye're mad altogether. Priority number one in this instance should be to get everyone as far away from the danger as possible and I see no evidence here that there was a reason not to do that. Just think for a moment, if the outcome here had been different and things worsened, would we be saying that they had done the right thing by keeping everybody on board for the 3 minutes the fire was being dealt with?

We're not "mad altogether" . I see scenarios like this in the sim all the time. Lads eager to throw everyone out the slides without sitting back, taking a minute to think, and evaluate the best course of action, given the available information. You start evacuating, then you're guaranteed to cause injuries, probably serious, to some people.
Unless there's rampant smoke filling the cabin, or there's a bomb sitting there ticking away, there's no real hurry.

roundymac

lintdrummer wrote: »

Flabbergasted as to why there was no evacuation from the left side. If I was looking at that scene from the position that person recorded it from, I'd have made my way to the nearest exit on the left, made sure it was armed and opened the door to get the hell out of that death trap!

Panic.:mad:

markpb

lintdrummer wrote: »

Lads, ye're mad altogether. Priority number one in this instance should be to get everyone as far away from the danger as possible and I see no evidence here that there was a reason not to do that.

There are plenty of good reasons why an emergency evacuation could have been a bad idea. Perhaps the emergency services were approaching from that direction and people sliding down in front of them could have put themselves at risk. Perhaps the wind was blowing away from the fire and across the plane, bringing toxic smoke towards the evacuating people. Perhaps the burning oil was leaking under the plane and the captain didn't want people sliding directly into it? Perhaps the flight crew or ES were aware of some other good reason why the evacuation was a bad idea.

Or maybe you're right and the captain went a little cra-cra and kept everyone on board.

Flight procedures have been developed over decades. Every time there's an incident, it's investigated and procedures are changed to learn from it. Flight crews are trained to follow procedure and use their heads even when those about them are losing theirs. Neither you nor I have the full facts available to us.

lintdrummer

Yes, it's true that only those involved directly have the full facts. We'll have to wait for a report to understand fully what happened, but to me it's a simple lesser of two evils decision here. There's a very large fire surrounding a fuel tank. Potential for disaster exists. Get people away with the risk of minor and possibly some serious injuries, but get them away from the greatest risk.