Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
AI 747 Catches Fire At Mumbai  
User currently offlineLongHaul67 From Norway, joined Jan 2007, 242 posts, RR: 1
Posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 16848 times:

According to a Norwegian newspaper an Air India 747 caught fire at Mumbai International Airport today.
The plane with 228 pax on board was taxiing towards the runway when one of the engines caught fire. All pax and crew evacuated safely.


Link (only in Norwegian):
http://www.dagbladet.no/2009/09/04/nyheter/fly/flyulykke/7949978/

34 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineBlackProjects From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2007, 756 posts, RR: 4
Reply 1, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 16840 times:

English Version.

http://www.richmarksentinel.com/rs_headlines.asp?recid=1627


User currently offlineSYDAircargo From Australia, joined Jun 2008, 242 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 16723 times:

picture in a German online news magazine.

Big version: Width: 465 Height: 349 File size: 27kb


User currently offlineKappel From Suriname, joined Jul 2005, 3533 posts, RR: 17
Reply 3, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 16711 times:

Why did they evacuate on the side of the engine fire? Isn't that again procedures?


L1011,733,734,73G,738,743,744,752,763,772,77W,DC855,DC863,DC930,DC950,MD11,MD88,306,319,320,321,343,346,ARJ85,CR7,E195
User currently offlineArniePie From Belgium, joined Aug 2005, 1265 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 16662 times:

Seems to be a nasty fire too.


[edit post]
User currently offlinePilot21 From Ireland, joined Oct 1999, 1384 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 16611 times:



Quoting Kappel (Reply 3):
Why did they evacuate on the side of the engine fire? Isn't that again procedures?

Looks to be only the Upper deck and No.5 door on the Port side that were opened on the engine fire side. Perhaps they were opened but never used?
The black smoke damage around the wing/engine looks serious, glad everybody is ok

Pilot21



Aircraft I've flown: A300/A310/A320/A321/A330/A340/B727/B732/B733/B734/B735/B738/B741/B742/B744/DC10/MD80/IL62/Bae146/AR
User currently offlineWILCO737 From Greenland, joined Jun 2004, 8895 posts, RR: 76
Reply 6, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 16612 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD MODERATOR



Quoting Kappel (Reply 3):
Why did they evacuate on the side of the engine fire? Isn't that again procedures?

No. It is not again procedures, but the cabin crew needs to decide if it is safe to evacuate in that direction.
here it looks like it was engine #1 and the slides are stopping near eng #2, so quite some distance between them.
I personally would prefer to evacuate to the other site, but if the only way to get out to me is in that direction, I'd go  Smile

wilco737



It it's not Boeing, I am not going.
User currently offlineArniePie From Belgium, joined Aug 2005, 1265 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 16513 times:

seems to be about halfway down the runway , so possibly also RTO at considerable speed?


[edit post]
User currently offlineKappel From Suriname, joined Jul 2005, 3533 posts, RR: 17
Reply 8, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 16379 times:



Quoting WILCO737 (Reply 6):
No. It is not again procedures, but the cabin crew needs to decide if it is safe to evacuate in that direction.
here it looks like it was engine #1 and the slides are stopping near eng #2, so quite some distance between them.
I personally would prefer to evacuate to the other site, but if the only way to get out to me is in that direction, I'd go

OK thanks. Well, the slides do indeed stop at engine #2, but you still have to get away from the fire. And IMHO, being that close to a burning engine can only cause panic. But the angle of the picture can also make it seem that the doors are closer to the engine than they actually are. Either way, everybody got out ok, that's what counts!

That's two fire incidents today... weird!! (B6 at NAS).



L1011,733,734,73G,738,743,744,752,763,772,77W,DC855,DC863,DC930,DC950,MD11,MD88,306,319,320,321,343,346,ARJ85,CR7,E195
User currently offlineWILCO737 From Greenland, joined Jun 2004, 8895 posts, RR: 76
Reply 9, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 16346 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD MODERATOR



Quoting Kappel (Reply 8):
Well, the slides do indeed stop at engine #2, but you still have to get away from the fire. And IMHO, being that close to a burning engine can only cause panic.

As I said, I'd prefer the other side myself. But the 744 is pretty long and there is still a bit of space until you get to the engine. but the view is for sure not good if you slide down towards the burning engine.
The other thing which is important as well is that all engines are OFF... if they are still running, even at idle, can be dangerous for the people who slide behind the wings...
The procedure in the cockpit says that you shut down the engines ASAP during an evacuation to prevent that...

wilco737



It it's not Boeing, I am not going.
User currently offlineRFields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7345 posts, RR: 32
Reply 10, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 16057 times:



Quoting Kappel (Reply 8):
OK thanks. Well, the slides do indeed stop at engine #2, but you still have to get away from the fire. And IMHO, being that close to a burning engine can only cause panic. But the angle of the picture can also make it seem that the doors are closer to the engine than they actually are. Either way, everybody got out ok, that's what counts!

The simple math will tell you that evacuating on only one side will at least double the amount of time it takes to get everyone off the aircraft.

A crew priority was probably to prevent passengers from opening the overwing exits on the fire side.

Evacuation routes and fire outside the aircraft are things which have to be decided on the scene on a case by case basis. The presence, or lack of presence of AARF when the evacuation makes a big difference in those type decisions.

Lastly, I wonder how much my grandchildren would pay to be able to go down the slides from the upper deck - looks to be quite a ride.


User currently offlineAzjubilee From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 3799 posts, RR: 28
Reply 11, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 15991 times:

An evacuation isn't always necessary. I bet more injuries occurred evacuating than if they had just secured the engine and had the fire brigade assist in containing and assessing the situation. And typically... the Captain makes the decision to evacuate. However in extenuating circumstances if no indication is made by the flight deck (incapacitation or being on a 744, the flight deck is so far removed from the rest of the plane) and the cabin crew deem it necessary, they can command an evacuation.

User currently offlineWILCO737 From Greenland, joined Jun 2004, 8895 posts, RR: 76
Reply 12, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 15900 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD MODERATOR



Quoting RFields5421 (Reply 10):
The simple math will tell you that evacuating on only one side will at least double the amount of time it takes to get everyone off the aircraft.

The certification requirements say: all passengers with half of the exits blocked within 80 seconds...
Of course it is faster with all the exits available.

wilco737



It it's not Boeing, I am not going.
User currently offlineZANL188 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 3433 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 15844 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Kappel (Reply 3):
Why did they evacuate on the side of the engine fire? Isn't that again procedures?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TEf96_WK0Hg

This video seems to indicate that the slide in question was deployed after the fire was out...

Good to see firefighters were on scene quickly



Legal considerations provided by: Dewey, Cheatum, and Howe
User currently offlineMk777 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 1193 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 15647 times:

So glad that the fire started on ground and not after TO...the end result could have been quite disastrous then.

What is the registration of the 747 in question?

Hopefully they will be able to put a new engine on it and keep it flying.

From the news video, it seems there was fuel leaking from the tanks because the maintenance work by the engineer was not performed and he/she has been de-rostered!!! How come engine # 2 didn't catch fire.

I want to assume there was already some problem with engine #1 and maybe fuel was leaking from it that caused the blaze and not leaking from the tank!!

Can anyone tell me if its the engineer's responsibility to check for leaks or the person that fills fuel???

Nonetheless, good job by the fire crew to put out the blaze quickly. A relief for pax for sure.



come fly with me
User currently offlineS.P.A.S. From Liechtenstein, joined Mar 2001, 962 posts, RR: 2
Reply 15, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 15602 times:



Quoting ArniePie (Reply 7):
seems to be about halfway down the runway , so possibly also RTO at considerable speed?

From what it looks it is not parked on the runway, but on a taxi-way, news are sketchy right now, but I would offer it was taxing towards runway 27 when the fire started.



Congrats to the fire crew and AI crew who managed to save everyone aboard.

Cheers
RS



"ad astra per aspera"
User currently offlineZANL188 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 3433 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 15550 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Mk777 (Reply 14):
From the news video, it seems there was fuel leaking from the tanks because the maintenance work by the engineer was not performed and he/she has been de-rostered!!! How come engine # 2 didn't catch fire.

Lots of "instant" analysis on that video - I'd recommend taking it with a grain of salt...



Legal considerations provided by: Dewey, Cheatum, and Howe
User currently offlineBorism From Estonia, joined Oct 2006, 431 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 15498 times:

Seems to have been quite a fire. Check how charred wing is above the engine.

User currently offlineKappel From Suriname, joined Jul 2005, 3533 posts, RR: 17
Reply 18, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 15201 times:



Quoting RFields5421 (Reply 10):
The simple math will tell you that evacuating on only one side will at least double the amount of time it takes to get everyone off the aircraft.

Of course, but as mentioned, the slides deployed on one side should be enough. Like it was for the AF a343 in Canada.

Quoting RFields5421 (Reply 10):
much my grandchildren

I wouldn't mind it either!!  bigthumbsup 

Quoting ZANL188 (Reply 13):
This video seems to indicate that the slide in question was deployed after the fire was out...

That would make more sense I guess.



L1011,733,734,73G,738,743,744,752,763,772,77W,DC855,DC863,DC930,DC950,MD11,MD88,306,319,320,321,343,346,ARJ85,CR7,E195
User currently offlineManfredj From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 1132 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 14858 times:

Although dangerous, I have to admit this is quite interesting to see. Rarely do we get to see slides deployed on such a big aircraft. Were all the slides deployed on the aircraft? I can't quite see the right side of the A/C as the camera angle blocks it Do they have to deploy all slides after everyone has evacuated safely for some reason?


757: The last of the best
User currently offlineRFields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7345 posts, RR: 32
Reply 20, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 14266 times:



Quoting Mk777 (Reply 14):
How come engine # 2 didn't catch fire.

It is very difficult for a fire to spread on the outer skin of an aircraft without a fuel or other flammable material pathway.

If as descriped it was a fuel leak and not a punctured tank, the fire was outside the aircraft wing/ tanks and would not be likely to breach them for several minutes. It would have to burn long enough and hot enough to induce the metal to distort shape. The metal does not have to melt, only get hot enough for heat and gravity to cause the metal to bend even when contrailed by rivets, screws, etc.

Fuel can and often does leak from lines, vents and such without providing a back source for flames to enter the tank. Acutally full tanks are the best scenario because all the pressure is pushing the fuel out of the tank.

Where you see catastrophic aircraft fires is when the fuel tanks are punctured and fuel streams out in large enough quantities to allow the backflash into the tanks.

Even such an extreme incident as the Concord - the fire stayed outside the aircraft and tanks for a long time.


User currently offlineWindowSeat From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 1311 posts, RR: 58
Reply 21, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 13761 times:

Just watched the youtube video...Indian media is so dramatic about the whole issue. At one point you can hear the guys saying, "what you're seeing is simply horrific" and " it was found that fuel had seeped through the tanks and caught fire, obviously, the maintenance work was not done properly" Another one goes "the Air India Management will have a lot to answer for" WTF?!?! what do they know at this point what happened and who was to blame?? I hate the fact that there is no regulation on the TV news medium to censor speculative and incorrect comments which are published as facts. If this were the print media, they would've been told off for printing rubbish!

It seems the Indian media has not learnt its lessons from the Mumbai terrorist attacks.

cheers,
WindowSeat



I'm all in favour of keeping dangerous weapons out of the hands of fools. Let's start with keyboards.
User currently offlineSpacecadet From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3517 posts, RR: 12
Reply 22, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 13680 times:



Quoting ZANL188 (Reply 13):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TEf96_WK0Hg

Wow, now that's what I call an engine fire.

I watched with the sound off but even so a couple things annoyed me about the news coverage: a) the channel graphics obscured what was going on! Their graphics take up like 1/2 the total screen area, completely ridiculous, and b) Fire was "due to fuel leak, not technical problem" - uhhhh, what's a fuel leak classified as then, pilot error??



I'm tired of being a wanna-be league bowler. I wanna be a league bowler!
User currently offlineMSPNWA From United States of America, joined Apr 2009, 1824 posts, RR: 2
Reply 23, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 13361 times:

Good to hear everybody will be OK. If you're going to have an engine fire, that wasn't a bad time for it.

User currently offlineQantas744ER From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1280 posts, RR: 4
Reply 24, posted (4 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 13180 times:

To clear some things up:

The fire started during pushback and on the pylon (around the fuel shutofff valve) not on the engine itself.

Leo



Happiness is V1 in Lagos
25 Andz : What's the point?
26 EVAAIRBR076 : Pfff that is really a big engine fire, is there anybody who know the registration number? And is such damage to the wing repairable or will this airpl
27 Post contains links and images Plainplane : Someone got it and it made the front page: View Large View MediumPhoto © Sean D'Silva According to the description the reg is VT-ESM.
28 A380900 : Is the plane a write-off?
29 C5LOAD : I don't know how old AI's 744s are, but it's going to take a lot to plane the airplane airworthy again. I wouldn't be surprised if it is written off.
30 WestWing : As opposed to our US media who are calm, thoughtful, reasoned, restrained and report only the facts. At the dried plum site, someone has posted that
31 474218 : It really depends on how hot the wing plank got. Excessive heat can cause aluminum to lose strength. Conductivity and hardness test will be used to d
32 NA : Looks like minor damage to me. Not even a flap is bent.
33 LTBEWR : How old and how many cycles and hours are on this a/c? Depending on the degree of severity of potential damage to the wing, along with the age/cycles/
34 HAWK21M : Evacuation was from the RH side only.The LH slides were later on deployed when the Fire fighters opened the doors after the fire was put out to venti
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Saudia 747 On Fire At Landing In Bangladesh posted Tue Mar 25 2008 09:21:28 by Biman
Aircraft Overrun And Catches Fire At Stord! posted Tue Oct 10 2006 11:31:11 by Spruit
Plane Catches Fire At CAI posted Tue Aug 9 2005 22:13:55 by Soups
EgyptAir A300 Catches Fire At Johannesburg posted Sat Apr 13 2002 09:51:07 by Singapore_Air
BA 777 Catches Fire At DEN During Refueling posted Thu Sep 6 2001 02:31:33 by Brick
JAL 747 Catches Fire posted Thu Dec 21 2000 22:23:29 by Singapore_Air
AI Plane Rams Into Aerobridge At Mumbai Airport posted Tue May 5 2009 19:32:26 by VT977
Another AI 747 Incident (Bird Strike At LHR) posted Mon Oct 16 2006 07:54:27 by Deaphen
JetBlue Airplane Catches On Fire At JFK posted Tue Aug 16 2005 15:50:31 by CactusTECH
AI 747-200s At Mojave posted Thu May 3 2001 20:35:11 by Gobind