BA fire in Las Vegas

duskyjoe · 09-09-2015 03:17PM

I'd say the airframe is going to be a write off.

eatmyshorts · 09-09-2015 06:18PM

View Profile wrote: »

Yeah looks to me like a fire in the air con packs rather than the engine. Lucky with a centre tank full of fuel!

The centre tank wouldn't be anywhere near full. Maybe less than 10 tonnes.

The Black Oil · 09-09-2015 06:24PM

How are frail passengers promptly evacuated in situations like this? Glad there were no fatalities.

eatmyshorts · 09-09-2015 06:29PM

fear le solas wrote: »

Initial reports say it was an engine fire although it looks more like the aircon system from the photo..I wonder if it's related to previous fires on different Boeing aircraft where the aircon overheated and this heat affected empty fuel tanks (full of vapour) causing an explosion?
The 777 has been unlucky when it comes to fires, especially the battery fault they had problems with.
Glad everyone was ok in the end.

You're mixing things up an wrong on so many levels that I don't even know where to even start.

PinOnTheRight · 09-09-2015 06:33PM

eatmyshorts wrote: »

The centre tank wouldn't be anywhere near full. Maybe less than 10 tonnes.

How much would the wings hold on a -200ER?

09-09-2015 06:52PM

PinOnTheRight wrote: »

How much would the wings hold on a -200ER?

30t per wing give or take

eatmyshorts · 09-09-2015 06:53PM

PinOnTheRight wrote: »

How much would the wings hold on a -200ER?

29,100kgs in each wing tank and 79,300kgs in the centre tank.

lintdrummer · 09-09-2015 07:08PM

eatmyshorts wrote: »

29,100kgs in each wing tank and 79,300kgs in the centre tank.

79.3 tonnes in the centre tank!!!??? Are they filling the cabin with fuel instead of pax? :pac:

Tenger · 09-09-2015 07:30PM

fear le solas wrote: »

........I wonder if it's related to previous fires on different Boeing aircraft where the aircon overheated and this heat affected empty fuel tanks (full of vapour) causing an explosion?
The 777 has been unlucky when it comes to fires, especially the battery fault they had problems with..........

You are referring to a problem that caused one catastrophic hull loss and which has since been discovered and rectified by all manufacturer's.

Im not sure what B777 fire's you are referring to...perhaps you are mixing it up with the cutting edge B787?

cml387 · 09-09-2015 07:39PM

Tenger wrote: »

You are referring to a problem that caused one catastrophic hull loss and which has since been discovered and rectified by all manufacturer's.

Im not sure what B777 fire's you are referring to...perhaps you are mixing it up with the cutting edge B787?

There was a fire caused by electrical arcing in the wheel well of a 777 at Heathrow, I remember reading. It happened after pushback but before taxiing.

sunnysoutheast · 09-09-2015 07:46PM

The Black Oil wrote: »

How are frail passengers promptly evacuated in situations like this? Glad there were no fatalities.

I'd hazard a guess they are helped along by their fellow passengers and lashed down the slides?!

09-09-2015 08:47PM

cml387 wrote: »

There was a fire caused by electrical arcing in the wheel well of a 777 at Heathrow, I remember reading. It happened after pushback but before taxiing.

https://assets.digital.cabinet-office.gov.uk/media/542303bced915d1374000bbb/AAR_2-2009_N786UA.pdf

The Black Oil · 09-09-2015 08:49PM

Captain due to retire next week - Guardian.

ProfessorPlum · 09-09-2015 08:51PM

The Black Oil wrote: »

Captain due to retire next week - Guardian.

Is that what you'd call 'going out in a blaze of glory'?

(Looking at the picture in the Guardian, I hope they got his age wrong! I know flying isn't good for you, but.....)

January · 09-09-2015 09:14PM

ProfessorPlum wrote: »

Is that what you'd call 'going out in a blaze of glory'?

(Looking at the picture in the Guardian, I hope they got his age wrong! I know flying isn't good for you, but.....)

Apparently he was disfigured in a car accident years ago, according to his friend.

Growler!!! · 09-09-2015 09:14PM

ProfessorPlum wrote: »

(Looking at the picture in the Guardian, I hope they got his age wrong! I know flying isn't good for you, but.....)

63 years of age. 42 years flying:eek:

cml387 · 09-09-2015 09:22PM

I wouldn't advise flying as a career for anyone, really

Not alone do you fly for over 50 years without a single incident and get thoroughly bored.

When something does happen your actions get questioned by thousands of "experts" on the internet, and then your looks get criticised.:rolleyes:

ProfessorPlum · 09-09-2015 09:37PM

Growler!!! wrote: »

63 years of age. 42 years flying:eek:

Ah - misread as '42 year old veteran'!

(And I'm not criticising anyone's looks - he looks older, not ugly or disfigured, or whatever)

jimbis · 09-09-2015 09:37PM

ATC conversation in case anyone hasn't heard.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eay6kU2lIkA

09-09-2015 09:40PM

cml387 wrote: »

I wouldn't advise flying as a career for anyone, really

Not alone do you fly for over 50 years without a single incident and get thoroughly bored.

When something does happen your actions get questioned by thousands of "experts" on the internet, and then your looks get criticised.:rolleyes:

Who's questioning his actions ?

elastico · 09-09-2015 09:45PM

jimbis wrote: »

ATC conversation in case anyone hasn't heard.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eay6kU2lIkA

Sounds like pilot had the fire out pretty quick themselves before fire services got there?

Stheno · 09-09-2015 09:49PM

jimbis wrote: »

ATC conversation in case anyone hasn't heard.

All credit to them, very calm throughout

Irish Steve · 09-09-2015 09:52PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Who's questioning his actions ?

No one here as far as I've seen, but there have been some pretty unhelpful comments from supposed professionals on Pprune, but that doesn't altogether surprise me.

The crew did everything they should have, and the result was about as good as it can get. The outcome of this incident could have been much much worst, the Airtours Manchester 737 accident is a similar event with a much worse outcome.

markpb · 09-09-2015 09:54PM

Stheno wrote: »

All credit to them, very calm throughout

Cucumbers!

FortySeven · 09-09-2015 09:55PM

Tenger wrote: »

The baggage issue is always going to be there.
People don't think straight in an evacuation. For many people an evacuation is an unreal situation.
Passengers are almost programmed into going for their bags when getting off a plane......in an evacuation its almost like muscle memory, "stand up, open bin, walk to door"

There is the selfish mindset but there is also the automaton mindset at play here.
!

There are also those that didn't. It's easy to make excuses for people, I was horrified to see those people with luggage, there is no excuse. I have been in 3 house fires and plenty other emergency situations and acted in an emergency fashion in every single one. Those people should be shamed lest they go through life without realising what utter shameful actions they took this day. Only 177 people on board?

Only 177 dead because one needed ones bag. Doesn't have the same ring to it, does it?

FortySeven · 09-09-2015 09:59PM

Tenger wrote: »

Hope we have all gotten the issues of hand luggage during an evacuation out of our system. All agree that it should't be done, aviation training says that it will happen anyway.
Lets try to discuss the incident itself rather than our possible personal actions towards our luggage in a theoretical evacuation

Sorry, just saw this.

fr336 · 09-09-2015 11:00PM

elastico wrote: »

Sounds like pilot had the fire out pretty quick themselves before fire services got there?

No, the person who transcribed the audio didn't get the pilot's words right. They said "we have a fire, we are evacuating" rather than "we have the fire out, we are evacuating", it was just the way people's speech crosses sometimes if you listen carefully I'm pretty sure.

jimbis · 10-09-2015 12:02AM

fr336 wrote: »

No, the person who transcribed the audio didn't get the pilot's words right. They said "we have a fire, we are evacuating" rather than "we have the fire out, we are evacuating", it was just the way people's speech crosses sometimes if you listen carefully I'm pretty sure.

Correct, the words highlighted kinda ran into each other which would easily be heard differently.

eatmyshorts · 10-09-2015 02:48AM

lintdrummer wrote: »

79.3 tonnes in the centre tank!!!??? Are they filling the cabin with fuel instead of pax? :pac:

The -300ER, -200LR and -200F can hold 31,300 kgs in each wing tank and 82,900 kgs in the centre tank.

The centre tank is about to same size as your living room! We can put more fuel mass in there than the Max Take Off Weight of an A320.
It only holds fuel after the wing tanks are full. You can put up to 1325kgs in the centre without the wings being full, but that fuel then has to be considered as payload and subtracted from the Max Zero Fuel Weight. This fuel is then transferred out over the course of a specified time into the wing tanks via scavenge pumps.

smurfjed · 10-09-2015 06:50AM

From the online photos, the fire damage appears to be at the wing and one side of the undercarriage, does this look like a fuel tank fire?

BA fire in Las Vegas

Comments