B777 catches fire in LA

[red750]

A British Airways Boeing 777 was evacuated at LAX when the aircraft caught fire - Sky News.

 

 

[dutchroll]

Left engine fire on takeoff, rejected takeoff, evacuation.

 

Back to pub. Suspend alcohol-free fitness regime. Do paperwork later.

 

 

 

 

[red750]

 

http://www.skynews.com.au/news/world/nthamerica/2015/09/09/british-airways-plane-catches-fire-on-runway.html

 

 

[facthunter]

I would be interested as to the exact cause, and why would you open the front LH door? Nev

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

It would be some decision to activate the chutes with an active fire like that.......should make for good watching on air crash at some stage in the future.

 

 

[dutchroll]

Why the front LH door? In a ground scenario, once the Captain orders the general evacuation over the PA all the flight attendants go into "automatic" mode. A ground evac is only carried out on orders from the flight deck. Different for a ditching, because it's rather obvious.

 

The door primaries (individual flight attendants allocated primary duty at each door) are trained to open their respective door if the exit path appears clear through the door window. So as long as that path straight out from the door is free of smoke and flames, that door gets opened. It certainly appears to be the case in the photos that the Left 1 door escape path is clear.

 

While the slide is inflating, the door primary is bracing themselves across the door using the handholds either side, and getting a better view of the escape path and checking the slide inflates properly before they stand back out of the way next to the door opening, and start yelling at people to jump and thankyou for flying with us, have a nice day.

 

At any point, the door primary can decide the situation around the escape slide is getting too dicey and declare a "blocked exit" and start shoving people across to join in the queue for the opposite door, or send them forward or backward depending on the flow. But as long as that escape path stays clear at L1, which it seems to have despite the smoke and flames 10 metres away, I would not expect them to do that.

 

You will note that door L2 (left 2, just in front of the engine) stayed closed. That hostie deserves a big pat on the back. Obviously checked through the window, went "oh sh*t", and kept it closed while redirecting passengers across, forward, or backward to the other doors.

 

 

[Roundsounds]

That hostie deserves a big pat on the back. Obviously checked through the window, went "oh sh*t", and kept it closed while redirecting passengers across, forward, or backward to the other doors.

I reckon this will feature in your annual visits to building 148 in a year or so. It's interesting the rear right slide didn't deploy for approx 15 secs after those on the right.

 

 

[ben87r]

I herd the ATC recordings, seemed very professional, and well executed.. Someone should shout their beers Ild reckon. One of the photos I saw showed an un-contained failure.

 

 

[Downunder]

Not all beer and skittles.... http://www.msn.com/en-au/news/world/british-airways-plane-catches-fire-on-las-vegas-runway/ar-AAe5FYv

 

"Initially told to stay seated, then shout of evacuate," he said, adding that the flames had apparently melted some of the jet's windows.

 

"They opened the back door and slide went down and smoke started coming in plane, followed by mad dash to front. A lot of panic," he said.

 

 

[dutchroll]

The result of a "less than ideally contained" engine failure. Have a close look at the engine cowling and its shadow on the ground (there are no bits poking out of a normal jet engine cowling!).

 

 

 

[Rotorwork]

A 777 with Afterburner

 

Also noted a fair number of passengers slid down the emergency chute with their carry on luggage

 

Fly Safe RW

 

 

 

[dutchroll]

Also noted a fair number of passengers slid down the emergency chute with their carry on luggage

Yeah the choices in life: escape from burning plane or take clean socks. They've got it all sorted. Never mind that if they drop their bag in the kerfuffle of getting out, it might block an exit, or block a slide, or throw them off balance down the bottom and cause them to faceplant the tarmac. Let's just ignore the safety demo and do whatever we want.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

so the fuel tank is inline with the engine in a 777?

 

 

[dazza 38]

Bravo for the cabin crew for doing err, their job.

 

 

[Downunder]

Had an engine go in a 146 some years ago at cruise or late climb (I like the idea of 4 engines).

 

The bung engine kept spinning and vibrating. I think the cabin crew were freaking out more than the passengers who were mostly mine workers.

 

We returned to Perth and swapped planes.

 

One young bloke in the cabin crew never made it to the second aircraft....I always remember the look on his face the fact he was white as a sheet....lol.

 

 

[dazza 38]

I was surprised by the photos showing a lot of pax on the tarmac carrying hand luggage. What ever happen to leave your luggage behind and evacuate ?

 

 

[Gnarly Gnu]

I was surprised by the photos showing a lot of pax on the tarmac carrying hand luggage. What ever happen to leave your luggage behind and evacuate ?

Yeah a bit naughty and the crew weren't happy. But I want to know if the crew left all their luggage on board?

 

 

[dutchroll]

I have no doubt whatsoever that the crew left all their luggage on board. During an evacuation the crew have a lot more things to think about and do than grab their bags.

 

so the fuel tank is inline with the engine in a 777?

A lot of the wing is fuel tank. If you think about where the turbine section of a modern pod-mount jet engine is, and that an uncontained failure at takeoff thrust spits 800 deg C shards of that section outwards radially in pretty random directions, some of it is quite possibly going to severe or puncture something carrying a flammable liquid or vapour.

 

 

[facthunter]

Been away yesterday. Good job done by crew aborted at 80-90 knots and evacuated on runway. Only about 1/2 a load of passengers. Uncontained engine failure sort of not supposed to happen. If this had got into the air it would have been another story. Lots of black smoke usually means oil or fuel fed fire. The fire was already underfloor it appears. I still read the thing in the back of the seat and note where the exits are everytime I pax. Nev

 

 

[ben87r]

Out of interest Nev, where have you got your speed figure from? Me and a mate were interested how close to V1 it would have been.

 

 

[dutchroll]

There seem to be a few news reports quoting "90 mph" or thereabouts, though it's not clear where those figures came from. That would make it a relatively low-ish speed abort, but I'd be interested to know if it was fast enough for the autobrakes to be armed.

 

Amendment to my last about the hot end too - it looks like the failure was in the high pressure stages of the compressor, rather than the turbine. But that's still pretty hot. Several 7-8 inch long fragments of the compressor spool were recovered from the runway.

 

Source (on the engine information): NTSB press release.

 

 

[facthunter]

I've lost the link Ben but it seemed to be confirmed by a couple of sources. It would be well below V1 I think though I haven't checked the range of possible V1 speeds. My recollection was the speed suggested was closer to 80 than 90 . I wouldn't want to bet my house on the figure (I only pass it on) but there appeared to be no problem stopping. No deflated tyres etc. You would wonder how the speed information could be obtained so quickly. It would probably be an engine fail indication that becomes a fire warning. (MY speculation, as that is what commonly happens) and the crew informed the tower they were evacuating on the runway and required urgent fire fighting capability.( Cool BA types, good on them). Nev

 

 

[dutchroll]

If that speed it reached is about right, that is well below any possible V1 for a takeoff on a long range flight in that sized aeroplane. Your V1 range will be from something like 110 knots at extremely light weights (not possible if you have enough gas to get from Vegas to Gatwick!) up to about 150 knots at heavy weights, depending on flap setting.

 

 

[Guest Andys@coffs]

Seems to me that we have had quite a few newsworthy uncontained engine failures in the last decade.........Perhaps our expectation that they are built to contain a catastrophic engine failure is at odds with reality? (QA380, coming foremost to mind)

 

I Know that a cone forward and a cone aft can be full of shrapnel in a catastrophic failure but I thought the engine casing itself was supposed to retain all bits.......I remember when working on F111's being shown at the training squadron movies of the F111 TF30 engine failures where some of the blades in the fans where blown off at max speed by the use of an explosive bolt (I think I recall). The resultant catastrophic failure was astounding to see on the high speed video slowed down, the engine casing expanded what seemed to me to be almost double the radius at the point of failure, but nothing penetrated......At the time I thought that the casing may not have been pierced but on the F111 the engine is an internal structure and I don't recall that it had room around the engine to support a momentary doubling in radius, but I digress....... Perhaps military engines are built to be contained in the event of total failure and RPT jets don't have the same requirement......

 

Fortunately these days the vast majority of us can choose where we sit on an RPT aircraft in advance of the flight....I personally try to avoid the seats right next to the engine and those in line or slightly forward of the prop arc if I can..... The Red lines on the engine cowls and the main fuselage marking the various fan sections in the engine and the prop arc are there for a reason!

 

 

[dutchroll]

They still do that testing where the engine is internally destroyed with a small explosive charge while it's running at full power, to check that the containment casing functions properly, and all the variants of the B777 engine have had to pass it. Unfortunately they can't test for every single failure mode, including the "holy crap it's the mother of all booms" one. They might mod the casing after the investigation, or they might decide the odds were so astronomical that it's not worth it. Be interesting to see.

 

This video is the RR Trent (essentially equivalent to the GE90 engine) on the A380.