Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
eamondzhang
Posts: 1803
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 8:23 am

Re: Ethiopian B77F on fire at PVG

Thu Jul 23, 2020 1:58 am

AntonioMartin wrote:
The airline says per this: https://www.flightglobal.com/ethiopian- ... 23.article that it was on a Brussels-Shanghai-Sao Paulo-Santiago routing...thats a long routing on a flight that according to what they said didnt even touch Addis Ababa...

PVG-GRU sector cannot be done non-stop by any currently available plane on this planet; it is via ADD.

Michael
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 15112
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Ethiopian B77F on fire at PVG

Thu Jul 23, 2020 2:01 am

alasizon wrote:

Agreed, but there is a video on AvHerald that shows what is (appears to be) the initial response and there does not appear to be a loader up to the aircraft still which would be typical if it was the loader that caught fire as nobody wants to hang around with it on fire.


If a ground equipment catches fire I think they will try and isolate it. If I recall correctly this happened to an AA 77W at HKG.

The aircraft at PVG had the rear cargo door open, it is very unusual to have that door open without a loader next to it. It also appeared to me that the fire department then attached their stairs there to gain internal access to attack the fire.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
strfyr51
Posts: 4989
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 5:04 pm

Re: Ethiopian B77F on fire at PVG

Thu Jul 23, 2020 3:38 am

GCT64 wrote:
No one's asked yet: "Do you think it's a write off?"

Seriously, I hope no one was hurt and that it's just a loss of material things not any lives

the airframe? Yes but I have seen fire damage repaired. It depends on the Owners Hull Loss insurance. But in this case? Salvage what you can and call it a day.
 
AntonioMartin
Posts: 691
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2017 11:58 am

Re: Ethiopian B77F on fire at PVG

Thu Jul 23, 2020 7:45 am

eamondzhang wrote:
AntonioMartin wrote:
The airline says per this: https://www.flightglobal.com/ethiopian- ... 23.article that it was on a Brussels-Shanghai-Sao Paulo-Santiago routing...thats a long routing on a flight that according to what they said didnt even touch Addis Ababa...

PVG-GRU sector cannot be done non-stop by any currently available plane on this planet; it is via ADD.

Michael

I was seriously wondering what I fread on the article...thanks for the clarification, Michael!
 
eamondzhang
Posts: 1803
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 8:23 am

Re: Ethiopian B77F on fire at PVG

Thu Jul 23, 2020 7:52 am

AntonioMartin wrote:
eamondzhang wrote:
AntonioMartin wrote:
The airline says per this: https://www.flightglobal.com/ethiopian- ... 23.article that it was on a Brussels-Shanghai-Sao Paulo-Santiago routing...thats a long routing on a flight that according to what they said didnt even touch Addis Ababa...

PVG-GRU sector cannot be done non-stop by any currently available plane on this planet; it is via ADD.

Michael

I was seriously wondering what I fread on the article...thanks for the clarification, Michael!

I know, you also almost freaked me out! Lol

They do have some strange routings tho - I've seen them flying Liege - HKG - BOM. Utilising fifth freedom wisely!

Cheers,
Michael
 
sandyb123
Posts: 964
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 9:29 pm

Re: Ethiopian B77F on fire at PVG

Thu Jul 23, 2020 9:25 am

strfyr51 wrote:
GCT64 wrote:
No one's asked yet: "Do you think it's a write off?"

Seriously, I hope no one was hurt and that it's just a loss of material things not any lives

the airframe? Yes but I have seen fire damage repaired. It depends on the Owners Hull Loss insurance. But in this case? Salvage what you can and call it a day.


The damage looks extensive and has probably compromised the rear pressure bulkhead. I am no expect but I would be amazed if that plane flew again. Valuable parts will be removed and reused and the rest will be recycled.

Sandyb123
Member of the mile high club
 
rbavfan
Posts: 3620
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 5:53 am

Re: Ethiopian B77F on fire at PVG

Thu Jul 23, 2020 11:20 am

chonetsao wrote:
Anyone remembers the B787 caught on fire in LHR few years back? I mention this is because the location of the fire is extremely similar, near the rear left door, on B787 it is L4 door galley. On this B777, it seems to be in a similar location.

Yes I am sure the B777 is a entirely different circumstances for the fire. But the similarity of the location of fire is very interesting and the B787 LHR incident comes to my mind as soon as I see this photo of B777.



The 787 was was a passenger models with a sensor with battery backup & had a bad wire. It's also not in the 777 series.
The 777 on fire is a Freighter, not a passenger model and does not have the device that caught the 787 on fire.
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 13164
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

Re: Ethiopian B77F on fire at PVG

Thu Jul 23, 2020 11:55 am

Make it a soft top and put it back into service.
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
 
User avatar
ADent
Posts: 1115
Joined: Fri Dec 22, 2006 12:11 pm

Re: Ethiopian B77F on fire at PVG

Thu Jul 23, 2020 2:58 pm

rbavfan wrote:
The 787 was was a passenger models with a sensor with battery backup & had a bad wire.

The 777 on fire is a Freighter, not a passenger model and does not have the device that caught the 787 on fire.

Freighters don’t have ELTs with batteries?
 
mxaxai
Posts: 1908
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:29 am

Re: Ethiopian B77F on fire at PVG

Thu Jul 23, 2020 3:24 pm

ADent wrote:
rbavfan wrote:
The 787 was was a passenger models with a sensor with battery backup & had a bad wire.

The 777 on fire is a Freighter, not a passenger model and does not have the device that caught the 787 on fire.

Freighters don’t have ELTs with batteries?

The 777 and 787 have different ELT designs.
 
MRYapproach
Posts: 104
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2016 3:10 am

Re: Ethiopian B77F on fire at PVG

Thu Jul 23, 2020 6:07 pm

If the freight on fire was incoming, then it's unlikely to be li-ion batteries. Zero reason to import batteries to China. Purely speculation, but why couldn't the plane be unloaded and loading underway 4 hours after touch down? I'm guessing most flights into China are less than completely full, with the premium on outbound freight.

The risk for any li-ion battery installed in equipment is small to none...depending on the W-Hr capacity. The key risk element is energy density of the pallet, and how well controlled the cells are. IATA and UN38.3 certification require batteries with only 30% charge to minimize density. Batteries inside other equipment have fully redundant control: both the equipment and the battery pack have the ability to shut down the battery. The real concern is a pallet of replacement battery packs. Those are usually not allowed on passenger aircraft for this reason. (nowadays I assume an empty 77W running freight only would also be allowed) Always made me think about how the industry values their cargo pilots. But it's also understandable. Surface transport (boat) isn't always practical (though preferred due to the lower cost, but battery packs are pretty heavy (dense) so the cost delta might not be as big as normal goods. But even boats require UN38.3 certification before they will accept products with li-ion packs...an uncontrolled fire in a container packed low in a stack of containers is almost as deadly as a plane on fire.

The only exception is small lithium primary cells (CR2032 coin cells) shipped within equipment. Those require no special certification and don't even require labelling on the outer carton. The energy density is just too small. CR2032s are only about 100mAh, or 0.3 W-Hr.

As for the 30% charge state requirement, this is regularly violated. This is because the less pre-charge in the pack, the shorter the shelf life of the finished good. 70-90% charge is common to avoid dead batteries when the end customer buys their toy from Amazon.

Worst of all are damaged batteries, for obvious reasons. Say you have a li-ion pack fail and cause an incident overseas? No way to get it back to diagnose the problem. There are services that will transport a failed battery domestically via truck, but nothing exists for overseas, even via boat. Totally understandable, but in nearly every case a failed battery pack has let go of all its energy. With zero remaining energy, the risk of further danger is effectively zero.

As you can imagine...I have LOTS of experience developing consumer products with li-ion batteries.
 
Wacker1000
Posts: 230
Joined: Tue Jan 07, 2014 6:36 pm

Re: Ethiopian B77F on fire at PVG

Thu Jul 23, 2020 6:16 pm

sandyb123 wrote:

The damage looks extensive and has probably compromised the rear pressure bulkhead. I am no expect but I would be amazed if that plane flew again. Valuable parts will be removed and reused and the rest will be recycled.

Sandyb123


The fire completely burned through the crown in several places and you're worried about the aft pressure bulkhead being what writes it off?
 
alasizon
Posts: 2598
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2007 8:57 pm

Re: Ethiopian B77F on fire at PVG

Thu Jul 23, 2020 6:24 pm

MRYapproach wrote:
If the freight on fire was incoming, then it's unlikely to be li-ion batteries. Zero reason to import batteries to China. Purely speculation, but why couldn't the plane be unloaded and loading underway 4 hours after touch down? I'm guessing most flights into China are less than completely full, with the premium on outbound freight.


It was outbound freight being loaded.

MRYapproach wrote:
The risk for any li-ion battery installed in equipment is small to none...depending on the W-Hr capacity. The key risk element is energy density of the pallet, and how well controlled the cells are.


The hazard with batteries installed in the equipment mostly has to do with packaging and design - if the locking mechanism is weak and/or the packaging does not have a high crush tolerance then there is a much higher probability that the battery can be damaged even by a simple/small drop of the pallet.

There was a fire in LAX about 12-15 years ago that was a result of a pallet of camcorders or cameras being dropped about 4-6" from a forklift (the forklift just wasn't all the way down). The pallet caught fire about four hours later. It was later determined that the small drop damaged a handful of the batteries because the packaging was poor and the batteries easily dislodged themselves.
Airport (noun) - A construction site which airplanes tend to frequent
 
berari
Posts: 908
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2016 3:47 pm

Re: Ethiopian B77F on fire at PVG

Thu Jul 23, 2020 6:25 pm

The airline posted an update on their Facebook page stating:

Although proper investigation has been started by the country of occurrence and the country of registration and operation, preliminary information revealed that in the final preparation for taxi out, fire was detected in the main deck. The crew reported to ATC and the handling company and asked for help as per the procedure. Meanwhile, the fire spread in the cabin until the handling company and the airport emergency unit arrived at the scene of the incident. The fire damaged the upper structure of the aircraft before it was brought under control by the airport emergency services.
 
phishphan70
Posts: 222
Joined: Tue Oct 03, 2006 5:23 am

Re: Ethiopian B77F on fire at PVG

Thu Jul 23, 2020 6:55 pm

airboeingbus wrote:
How does the insurance work for airliners? If one is written off like this will the insurer replace the plane, or do airlines just use a liability only cover?

Not sure about this frame, but a lot of major carriers self-insure their frames, meaning they would be footing the bill themselves. With large fleet sizes, there is enough spread of risk to justify not paying the premiums and rather covering any loss themselves.
 
sxf24
Posts: 1001
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2007 12:22 pm

Re: Ethiopian B77F on fire at PVG

Thu Jul 23, 2020 7:30 pm

phishphan70 wrote:
airboeingbus wrote:
How does the insurance work for airliners? If one is written off like this will the insurer replace the plane, or do airlines just use a liability only cover?

Not sure about this frame, but a lot of major carriers self-insure their frames, meaning they would be footing the bill themselves. With large fleet sizes, there is enough spread of risk to justify not paying the premiums and rather covering any loss themselves.


Ethiopian does not self insure.
 
cdaglax
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu May 14, 2020 4:50 pm

Re: Ethiopian B77F on fire at PVG

Thu Jul 23, 2020 8:48 pm

MoKa777 wrote:
Gasp! That is serious!

Because someone has to say it: nah, that'll buff out...


Buff out? No way. This is a job for that really cool aviation tape commonly used for holding wings in place and drunk passengers in their seats.
 
User avatar
klm617
Posts: 5038
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 8:57 pm

Re: Ethiopian B77F on fire at PVG

Thu Jul 23, 2020 10:04 pm

berari wrote:
The airline posted an update on their Facebook page stating:

Although proper investigation has been started by the country of occurrence and the country of registration and operation, preliminary information revealed that in the final preparation for taxi out, fire was detected in the main deck. The crew reported to ATC and the handling company and asked for help as per the procedure. Meanwhile, the fire spread in the cabin until the handling company and the airport emergency unit arrived at the scene of the incident. The fire damaged the upper structure of the aircraft before it was brought under control by the airport emergency services.


How would this explain the rear cargo door being open ? And why open it giving the fire oxygen to fuel the flames.
the truth does matter, guys. too bad it's often quite subjective. the truth is beyond the mere facts and figures. it's beyond good and bad, right and wrong...
 
Flyer732
Posts: 1369
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 1999 6:09 am

Re: Ethiopian B77F on fire at PVG

Thu Jul 23, 2020 10:18 pm

klm617 wrote:
How would this explain the rear cargo door being open ? And why open it giving the fire oxygen to fuel the flames.


The 777F does not have fire fighting abilities on the main deck. Only in the lower. Thus, the only way for the fire department to fight the fire would be by opening the door.
 
User avatar
klm617
Posts: 5038
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 8:57 pm

Re: Ethiopian B77F on fire at PVG

Thu Jul 23, 2020 10:22 pm

Flyer732 wrote:
klm617 wrote:
How would this explain the rear cargo door being open ? And why open it giving the fire oxygen to fuel the flames.


The 777F does not have fire fighting abilities on the main deck. Only in the lower. Thus, the only way for the fire department to fight the fire would be by opening the door.


Yes but the door should remain closed until the fire dept. gets there no ?
the truth does matter, guys. too bad it's often quite subjective. the truth is beyond the mere facts and figures. it's beyond good and bad, right and wrong...
 
User avatar
seat55a
Posts: 233
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 7:18 pm

Re: Ethiopian B77F on fire at PVG

Thu Jul 23, 2020 10:33 pm

Flyer732 wrote:
The 777F does not have fire fighting abilities on the main deck. Only in the lower. Thus, the only way for the fire department to fight the fire would be by opening the door.

What about skin piercing appliances? But if the skin already burned through it's moot.
 
787SIN
Posts: 62
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2017 6:00 am

Re: Ethiopian B77F on fire at PVG

Thu Jul 23, 2020 11:18 pm

[/quote]Not sure about this frame, but a lot of major carriers self-insure their frames, meaning they would be footing the bill themselves. With large fleet sizes, there is enough spread of risk to justify not paying the premiums and rather covering any loss themselves.[/quote]

Very few, if any airlines would self insure unless perhaps the fleet is basically worthless. The reason for doing so is not just about the aircraft itself its also about potential liabilities. The passenger liabilities for a major accident could far exceed any claim for the aircraft. Plus if you lease/mortgage an aircraft a normal condition of the contact is that the airline is required to take out suitable insurance coverage.
 
MRYapproach
Posts: 104
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2016 3:10 am

Re: Ethiopian B77F on fire at PVG

Fri Jul 24, 2020 1:23 am

alasizon wrote:
MRYapproach wrote:
If the freight on fire was incoming, then it's unlikely to be li-ion batteries. Zero reason to import batteries to China. Purely speculation, but why couldn't the plane be unloaded and loading underway 4 hours after touch down? I'm guessing most flights into China are less than completely full, with the premium on outbound freight.


It was outbound freight being loaded.

MRYapproach wrote:
The risk for any li-ion battery installed in equipment is small to none...depending on the W-Hr capacity. The key risk element is energy density of the pallet, and how well controlled the cells are.


The hazard with batteries installed in the equipment mostly has to do with packaging and design - if the locking mechanism is weak and/or the packaging does not have a high crush tolerance then there is a much higher probability that the battery can be damaged even by a simple/small drop of the pallet.

There was a fire in LAX about 12-15 years ago that was a result of a pallet of camcorders or cameras being dropped about 4-6" from a forklift (the forklift just wasn't all the way down). The pallet caught fire about four hours later. It was later determined that the small drop damaged a handful of the batteries because the packaging was poor and the batteries easily dislodged themselves.


UN38.3 requires a 1m drop test. The master carton of product is dropped 1m to confirm no damage to either the individual unit packaging or the master carton. So nothing being shipped via air cargo these days would catch fire from a simple drop from a loader unless it was 1.5m or more. Again, all bets are off when you have a pallet of replacement battery packs.

The biggest worry with li-ion batteries is piercing. There is a normal test of driving a nail straight through a pack to see if that will cause ignition. The test has the nail moving pretty slowly with not too much force. In the real world, an accidental puncture of a pallet by a loader fork would greatly exceed this and lead to internal shorts. Game over at that point.
 
alasizon
Posts: 2598
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2007 8:57 pm

Re: Ethiopian B77F on fire at PVG

Fri Jul 24, 2020 3:26 am

MRYapproach wrote:
alasizon wrote:
MRYapproach wrote:
If the freight on fire was incoming, then it's unlikely to be li-ion batteries. Zero reason to import batteries to China. Purely speculation, but why couldn't the plane be unloaded and loading underway 4 hours after touch down? I'm guessing most flights into China are less than completely full, with the premium on outbound freight.


It was outbound freight being loaded.

MRYapproach wrote:
The risk for any li-ion battery installed in equipment is small to none...depending on the W-Hr capacity. The key risk element is energy density of the pallet, and how well controlled the cells are.


The hazard with batteries installed in the equipment mostly has to do with packaging and design - if the locking mechanism is weak and/or the packaging does not have a high crush tolerance then there is a much higher probability that the battery can be damaged even by a simple/small drop of the pallet.

There was a fire in LAX about 12-15 years ago that was a result of a pallet of camcorders or cameras being dropped about 4-6" from a forklift (the forklift just wasn't all the way down). The pallet caught fire about four hours later. It was later determined that the small drop damaged a handful of the batteries because the packaging was poor and the batteries easily dislodged themselves.


UN38.3 requires a 1m drop test. The master carton of product is dropped 1m to confirm no damage to either the individual unit packaging or the master carton. So nothing being shipped via air cargo these days would catch fire from a simple drop from a loader unless it was 1.5m or more. Again, all bets are off when you have a pallet of replacement battery packs.

The biggest worry with li-ion batteries is piercing. There is a normal test of driving a nail straight through a pack to see if that will cause ignition. The test has the nail moving pretty slowly with not too much force. In the real world, an accidental puncture of a pallet by a loader fork would greatly exceed this and lead to internal shorts. Game over at that point.


The specifications certainly call for being able to sustain a 1m drop but yet there are DG battery fires every year because people don't actually package it correctly or they cheap out on the cardboard.
Airport (noun) - A construction site which airplanes tend to frequent
 
Flyer732
Posts: 1369
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 1999 6:09 am

Re: Ethiopian B77F on fire at PVG

Fri Jul 24, 2020 3:12 pm

klm617 wrote:
Flyer732 wrote:
klm617 wrote:
How would this explain the rear cargo door being open ? And why open it giving the fire oxygen to fuel the flames.


The 777F does not have fire fighting abilities on the main deck. Only in the lower. Thus, the only way for the fire department to fight the fire would be by opening the door.


Yes but the door should remain closed until the fire dept. gets there no ?


The QRH states “on the ground cargo door may be opened once all passengers and crew have exited the aircraft.”
 
bennett123
Posts: 9742
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2004 12:49 am

Re: Ethiopian B77F on fire at PVG

Fri Jul 24, 2020 3:49 pm

That is 'may be' not 'must be'.

Surely unless the door was already open before the fire started, then best to leave it shut.
 
Flyer732
Posts: 1369
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 1999 6:09 am

Re: Ethiopian B77F on fire at PVG

Fri Jul 24, 2020 3:55 pm

bennett123 wrote:
That is 'may be' not 'must be'.

Surely unless the door was already open before the fire started, then best to leave it shut.


I was typing from memory, the actual wording is "Warning! Inform ground personnel NOT to open any cargo door until all supernumeraries and crew have exited the airplane and firefighting equipment is enroute or nearby"
 
alasizon
Posts: 2598
Joined: Sat Apr 28, 2007 8:57 pm

Re: Ethiopian B77F on fire at PVG

Fri Jul 24, 2020 4:23 pm

bennett123 wrote:
That is 'may be' not 'must be'.

Surely unless the door was already open before the fire started, then best to leave it shut.


Leaving the door closed doesn't actually help because while it helps reduce the amount of oxygen temporarily, a metal/battery fire can't be extinguished using water. It requires dry powder on a small scale or foam on a larger scale. Most snozzles (the piercing nozzle on an ARFF truck) don't work as well with foam (if they are even and they don't get the same level of coverage compared to a wider nozzle. Likewise, opening the door, while adding oxygen gives firefighters a visiual of what they are dealing with.
Airport (noun) - A construction site which airplanes tend to frequent
 
bennett123
Posts: 9742
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2004 12:49 am

Re: Ethiopian B77F on fire at PVG

Fri Jul 24, 2020 4:44 pm

I think that we are all in agreement on this.

Depends how soon fire crew will reach the scene, also if other combustible material nearby.
 
INFINITI329
Posts: 2520
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 12:53 am

Re: Ethiopian B77F on fire at PVG

Sat Jul 25, 2020 12:07 pm

bennett123 wrote:
I think that we are all in agreement on this.

Depends how soon fire crew will reach the scene, also if other combustible material nearby.


In United States the requirement is 4 minutes, however, I am not sure whether that mirrors the international standard or not.
 
VSMUT
Posts: 4484
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 11:40 am

Re: Ethiopian B77F on fire at PVG

Sat Jul 25, 2020 1:24 pm

INFINITI329 wrote:
bennett123 wrote:
I think that we are all in agreement on this.

Depends how soon fire crew will reach the scene, also if other combustible material nearby.


In United States the requirement is 4 minutes, however, I am not sure whether that mirrors the international standard or not.


Surely it's 4 minutes to the runways? 4 minutes to any part of the airfield is going to be difficult at some major airports.
 
TEBfan
Posts: 7
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2015 8:49 pm

Re: Ethiopian B77F on fire at PVG

Sat Jul 25, 2020 2:16 pm

The regulation for ARFF response is 3 minutes to the furthest midpoint of the airfield. Water needs to be sprayed within that 3 minutes. The second apparatus has 4 minutes to arrive and spray. This is a regulation for testing only, rules go out the window in an emergency since every situation is unique.
 
PlymSpotter
Posts: 10730
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2004 7:32 am

Re: Ethiopian B77F on fire at PVG

Sat Jul 25, 2020 2:28 pm

VSMUT wrote:
INFINITI329 wrote:
bennett123 wrote:
I think that we are all in agreement on this.

Depends how soon fire crew will reach the scene, also if other combustible material nearby.


In United States the requirement is 4 minutes, however, I am not sure whether that mirrors the international standard or not.


Surely it's 4 minutes to the runways? 4 minutes to any part of the airfield is going to be difficult at some major airports.


RFFS response time should be no more than 3 minutes to any part of an active runway or runway strip. The clock starts ticking from the time the call is received to when the discharge of foam reaches 50% of the requirement for that aircraft type. If it requires two RFFS units to achieve this, the clock doesn't stop until they are both in place and discharging. This is the requirement in optimum daylight conditions, however the guidance is that a target of under 2 minutes should be actually used for planning. For all other active areas of the airport, the response time is under 3 minutes - again, in optimum daylight conditions.

This is guidance from ICAO regulations.
...love is just a camouflage for what resembles rage again...
 
smartplane
Posts: 1509
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2018 9:23 pm

Re: Ethiopian B77F on fire at PVG

Sat Jul 25, 2020 8:26 pm

sxf24 wrote:
phishphan70 wrote:
airboeingbus wrote:
How does the insurance work for airliners? If one is written off like this will the insurer replace the plane, or do airlines just use a liability only cover?

Not sure about this frame, but a lot of major carriers self-insure their frames, meaning they would be footing the bill themselves. With large fleet sizes, there is enough spread of risk to justify not paying the premiums and rather covering any loss themselves.


Ethiopian does not self insure.

Correct. There are 5 components of commercial aircraft insurance. Airlines may self-insure certain elements, like hull on ground during maintenance or storage, but...

IATA will not permit airlines to self-insure passenger liability on international flights. Most countries permitting international over flying and operations prohibit self-insuring of all cover. Some unions prohibit employers self-insuring.

Main driver these days is financiers - if the aircraft is financed, leased, or has a charge on it of any type, self-insurance is not permitted. It's a pretty much universal covenant breach. Even the calculation of the excess / deductible is capped.
 
rltycheck
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2016 8:52 pm

Re: Ethiopian B77F on fire at PVG

Sat Jul 25, 2020 11:18 pm

I with the crew that says it was internal. A GSE Fire would have scored more of the lower outside.

What is scary is how long a fire can smolder with limited oxygen inside a ULD before a rupture delivers, and then takes off with the new air supply. ‘Ve seen some good suppression systems for ULDs, and also fire proof ULDs, but no one is flying them. I’m not convinced any of the onboard solutions are all that effective.
 
phishphan70
Posts: 222
Joined: Tue Oct 03, 2006 5:23 am

Re: Ethiopian B77F on fire at PVG

Tue Jul 28, 2020 8:08 pm

smartplane wrote:
sxf24 wrote:
phishphan70 wrote:
Not sure about this frame, but a lot of major carriers self-insure their frames, meaning they would be footing the bill themselves. With large fleet sizes, there is enough spread of risk to justify not paying the premiums and rather covering any loss themselves.


Ethiopian does not self insure.

Correct. There are 5 components of commercial aircraft insurance. Airlines may self-insure certain elements, like hull on ground during maintenance or storage, but...

IATA will not permit airlines to self-insure passenger liability on international flights. Most countries permitting international over flying and operations prohibit self-insuring of all cover. Some unions prohibit employers self-insuring.

Main driver these days is financiers - if the aircraft is financed, leased, or has a charge on it of any type, self-insurance is not permitted. It's a pretty much universal covenant breach. Even the calculation of the excess / deductible is capped.

Thanks! This is incredibly insightful, and I appreciate you taking the time to break this out! I learned something today!
 
dcs921
Posts: 83
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 4:40 pm

Re: Ethiopian B77F on fire at PVG

Wed Jul 29, 2020 11:33 am

rltycheck wrote:
I with the crew that says it was internal. A GSE Fire would have scored more of the lower outside.

What is scary is how long a fire can smolder with limited oxygen inside a ULD before a rupture delivers, and then takes off with the new air supply. ‘Ve seen some good suppression systems for ULDs, and also fire proof ULDs, but no one is flying them. I’m not convinced any of the onboard solutions are all that effective.


Agreed. They are some really good solutions for ULDs out there and most of the major ULD manufacturers offer fire proof ULD or fire suppression solution now. Some airlines are starting to adopt them as I'm starting seeing more of the fire proof ULDs. I do think that not enough of them are being utilized.

At least one airline is making a commitment to them by purchasing 3,000 FireShield ULDs from Nordisk.

http://www.nordisk-aviation.com/en/news/3000-fireshield-containers-to-large-multinational-airline/
 
trent768
Posts: 144
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2016 5:32 pm

Re: Ethiopian B77F on fire at PVG

Wed Jul 29, 2020 11:50 am

Just wondering, since freighter aircraft are allowed to carries dangerous items, shouldn't the cockpit be equipped with some sort of escape mechanism in case of unrecoverable incident like this happens in flight? Maybe some sort of an escape pod, ejection seats, or at least parachutes? It maybe unpractical to install it to a pax airliner, but surely it make more sense in this case right?
 
User avatar
Phosphorus
Posts: 1014
Joined: Tue May 16, 2017 11:38 am

Re: Ethiopian B77F on fire at PVG

Wed Jul 29, 2020 2:04 pm

trent768 wrote:
Just wondering, since freighter aircraft are allowed to carries dangerous items, shouldn't the cockpit be equipped with some sort of escape mechanism in case of unrecoverable incident like this happens in flight? Maybe some sort of an escape pod, ejection seats, or at least parachutes? It maybe unpractical to install it to a pax airliner, but surely it make more sense in this case right?


It's a can of worms. Basically, the industry prefers to ignore this option. For pax aircraft, it's unethical to allow crew to abandon ship, and allow passengers to perish.
For cargo aircraft, there is a torrent of reasons, why it's believed it's not practical to allow the crew to abandon ship.
A relatively recent discussion on the matter:
viewtopic.php?f=5&t=1408791
AN4 A40 L4T TU3 TU5 IL6 ILW I93 F50 F70 100 146 ARJ AT7 DH4 L10 CRJ ERJ E90 E95 DC-9 MD-8X YK4 YK2 SF3 S20 319 320 321 332 333 343 346 722 732 733 734 735 73G 738 739 744 74M 757 767 777
Ceterum autem censeo, Moscovia esse delendam
 
Flaps
Posts: 1651
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2000 1:11 pm

Re: Ethiopian B77F on fire at PVG

Wed Jul 29, 2020 3:48 pm

trent768 wrote:
Just wondering, since freighter aircraft are allowed to carries dangerous items, shouldn't the cockpit be equipped with some sort of escape mechanism in case of unrecoverable incident like this happens in flight? Maybe some sort of an escape pod, ejection seats, or at least parachutes? It maybe unpractical to install it to a pax airliner, but surely it make more sense in this case right?


And allow the uncontrolled burning aircraft to just fall wherever it may????
 
LTEN11
Posts: 54
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2020 10:09 am

Re: Ethiopian B77F on fire at PVG

Wed Jul 29, 2020 3:54 pm

dcs921 wrote:
rltycheck wrote:
I with the crew that says it was internal. A GSE Fire would have scored more of the lower outside.

What is scary is how long a fire can smolder with limited oxygen inside a ULD before a rupture delivers, and then takes off with the new air supply. ‘Ve seen some good suppression systems for ULDs, and also fire proof ULDs, but no one is flying them. I’m not convinced any of the onboard solutions are all that effective.


Agreed. They are some really good solutions for ULDs out there and most of the major ULD manufacturers offer fire proof ULD or fire suppression solution now. Some airlines are starting to adopt them as I'm starting seeing more of the fire proof ULDs. I do think that not enough of them are being utilized.

At least one airline is making a commitment to them by purchasing 3,000 FireShield ULDs from Nordisk.

http://www.nordisk-aviation.com/en/news/3000-fireshield-containers-to-large-multinational-airline/


Problem is that not all freight is loaded into ULD's that are enclosed. There is a large percentage of freight that is loaded onto aircraft pallets (the large flat metal ones) often shrink wrapped and then netted. They are easy to build up and can be made up for either lower or main deck loading. Shippers like them, as they are easy to build up with forklifts from all sides, rather than just the one entrance and the freight is easily secured to the pallet. Airlines like them, as they don't have to commit staff to building them up and if they do, again they have the advantage of them being easily built up.

The glaring drawback of these pallets though, is that most shippers will cover them in plastic sheet to protect them from the weather, more often than not that plastic is black and thus the airline has no idea what is actually under that plastic sheet, without breaking open the netting/tie downs and removing the plastic. It becomes very much a matter of trust that the shipper/freight forwarder is doing the right thing and not putting undeclared DG's on board and is also labeling the consignment correctly. Air freight is very much a matter of trust that everyone is doing the right thing and it just takes one person to take a short cut and not declare something correctly, package/label something incorrectly and these are the types of incidents that can happen. Again, this crew was extremely lucky and ET should be making a thorough investigation into everything that was on the aircraft, from how it was loaded, labeled, declared and into the forwarders/shippers as well.
 
FGITD
Posts: 979
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 1:44 pm

Re: Ethiopian B77F on fire at PVG

Wed Jul 29, 2020 4:52 pm

LTEN11 wrote:
dcs921 wrote:
rltycheck wrote:
I with the crew that says it was internal. A GSE Fire would have scored more of the lower outside.

What is scary is how long a fire can smolder with limited oxygen inside a ULD before a rupture delivers, and then takes off with the new air supply. ‘Ve seen some good suppression systems for ULDs, and also fire proof ULDs, but no one is flying them. I’m not convinced any of the onboard solutions are all that effective.


Agreed. They are some really good solutions for ULDs out there and most of the major ULD manufacturers offer fire proof ULD or fire suppression solution now. Some airlines are starting to adopt them as I'm starting seeing more of the fire proof ULDs. I do think that not enough of them are being utilized.

At least one airline is making a commitment to them by purchasing 3,000 FireShield ULDs from Nordisk.

http://www.nordisk-aviation.com/en/news/3000-fireshield-containers-to-large-multinational-airline/


Problem is that not all freight is loaded into ULD's that are enclosed. There is a large percentage of freight that is loaded onto aircraft pallets (the large flat metal ones) often shrink wrapped and then netted. They are easy to build up and can be made up for either lower or main deck loading. Shippers like them, as they are easy to build up with forklifts from all sides, rather than just the one entrance and the freight is easily secured to the pallet. Airlines like them, as they don't have to commit staff to building them up and if they do, again they have the advantage of them being easily built up.

The glaring drawback of these pallets though, is that most shippers will cover them in plastic sheet to protect them from the weather, more often than not that plastic is black and thus the airline has no idea what is actually under that plastic sheet, without breaking open the netting/tie downs and removing the plastic. It becomes very much a matter of trust that the shipper/freight forwarder is doing the right thing and not putting undeclared DG's on board and is also labeling the consignment correctly. Air freight is very much a matter of trust that everyone is doing the right thing and it just takes one person to take a short cut and not declare something correctly, package/label something incorrectly and these are the types of incidents that can happen. Again, this crew was extremely lucky and ET should be making a thorough investigation into everything that was on the aircraft, from how it was loaded, labeled, declared and into the forwarders/shippers as well.


This is indeed the truth. Air freight is a huge network of trust and assumption. Known shippers have passed the trust part, but you will never quite know for sure about every single individual shipment. And spot checks can only do so much. One of the safety nets however is that the fines for security/customs breaches can be absolutely massive. But unfortunately so too are the risks. It's all part of the reason why many pax airlines no longer allow walk ins to ship on pax flights, even though whatever they send would be screened.

Problem with those fireproof (and I've seen explosion proof as well) ULDs is usually weight. The overwhelming majority of what gets shipped isn't a fire hazard, but you still have to carry that extra weight of the fireproof ULD no matter what. Also to put it simply...ULDs of any sort get treated like crap. They're left outside, get bumped by forklifts, baggage tugs, slide around the ground, stacked up etc etc. If the fireproof abilities depend on the integrity of the ULD, it's going to spend more time in the shop than flying.

Love the pictures on the nordisk site of pmcs stacked perfectly like a deck of cards. Load each of them on one flight and they'll never fit like that again!
 
SYD330
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu May 26, 2016 1:12 am

Re: Ethiopian B77F on fire at PVG

Sat Aug 01, 2020 1:35 pm

Is there any possibility that Ethiopian could acquire the white tail WF287 777F?, the 3 777F's were originally destined for Volga Dnepr.
 
User avatar
Phosphorus
Posts: 1014
Joined: Tue May 16, 2017 11:38 am

Re: Ethiopian B77F on fire at PVG

Sat Aug 01, 2020 6:44 pm

SYD330 wrote:
Is there any possibility that Ethiopian could acquire the white tail WF287 777F?, the 3 777F's were originally destined for Volga Dnepr.

Those three frames already know their future owners. In this market for dedicated cargo, factory-fresh freighters are a hot commodity.
Volga-Dnepr even sued Boeing, to try to get orders reinstated:
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1446941
AN4 A40 L4T TU3 TU5 IL6 ILW I93 F50 F70 100 146 ARJ AT7 DH4 L10 CRJ ERJ E90 E95 DC-9 MD-8X YK4 YK2 SF3 S20 319 320 321 332 333 343 346 722 732 733 734 735 73G 738 739 744 74M 757 767 777
Ceterum autem censeo, Moscovia esse delendam

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos