News British Airways 777 Flight 2276 Fire at Las Vegas

[Notebook]

Well, that's a lot later than I thought!
Another cruiser in the news yesterday QEII(the human one) has beaten Queen Victoria as longest living UK Monarch. Got a 4-gun salute from HMS Belfast on the Thames.

N.

 

[Urwumpe]

Well, that's a lot later than I thought!
Another cruiser in the news yesterday QEII(the human one) has beaten Queen Victoria as longest living UK Monarch. Got a 4-gun salute from HMS Belfast on the Thames.

N.

Only a four gun salute? How disappointing. Did she do something wrong lately?

 

[Notebook]

Not that I know of.
I don't think Belfast does many salutes. The pictures showed the secondary armament being used. Guess the mains are a bit dodgy in that area. Lot of plate-glass around Tower Bridge.

N.

 

[Urwumpe]

Not that I know of.
I don't think Belfast does many salutes. The pictures showed the secondary armament being used. Guess the mains are a bit dodgy in that area. Lot of plate-glass around Tower Bridge.

N.

I thought the salutes are faked anyway by special effects because the guns had been demilitarized for display... Its a miracle already that you can at least see the old mechanic rangekeeper in it.

 

[Notebook]

I'm sure they are, be far too dangerous to fire those things in the city of London, even dummy charges. They do 21-gun salutes by horse-drawn field guns for various occasions, but that's done in Hyde Park or similar.

btw, urban legend has it that Belfast's guns are ranged on the McDonalds eatery at Toddington Services on the M1 motorway. Don't believe it myself, out of range.

 

[Artlav]

btw, urban legend has it that Belfast's guns are ranged on the McDonalds eatery at Toddington Services on the M1 motorway

Uh, for what purpose?
Where is the rest of the legend?

 

[Notebook]

Well, look at it this way...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=49PLv03Af9U

If they were live rounds, that would really ruin your big fries when they arrived.

 

[Notebook]

This'll get it back on topic:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-34210783

 

[MaverickSawyer]

Hmm... That actually looks like it might be fixable. It'll require Boeing sending out one of their repair crews and at least two months of round-the-clock work... But they've repaired birds in worse shape before.

 

[Ravenous]

Well, at least he went out with a bang......

:tumbleweed:

At least he went out in a blaze of glory......

:lol:
Just a thought - they could probably do with a guy or two like that who've had "it" happen, done exactly what they were told, and got out smiling. I doubt properly trained pilots are particularly fearful at moments like that, but a few past meetings with people who are "living proof" would be a great reassurance...

 

[Notebook]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34213996

More info on the engine.

 

[N_Molson]

Well, it seems that evacuation procedures went nicely. Such a fire could easily have ended into a complete disaster. Congrats to the crew.

 

[MaverickSawyer]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34213996

More info on the engine.

Holy ... the casing was breached by 7-8 inch long parts? Coming off the high-pressure compressor section, those could have easily lanced up through the wing and into the cabin... especially at takeoff power.

Million dollar question now becomes why the compressor broke... they build those tough, so why did it fail with enough force to pierce the compressor casing?

 

[Scav]

Million dollar question now becomes why the compressor broke... they build those tough, so why did it fail with enough force to pierce the compressor casing?

This reminds me, in a way, of United 232 -- which was a very similar failure IIRC.

 

[mojoey]

You have to love how they described what caused it: 'Uncontained Engine/Disc Failure'.

That's a really polite way of saying that the engine just blew up, right?

 

[Evil_Onyx]

Yes and no, its a polite way of saying what part of the engine failed/blew up.

Unfortunately GE have a history of unconditioned engine failures.

Friday 2 June 2006 a AA Boeing 767-223ER had one, 8 December 2002, 22 September 2000 and 7 June 2000 are some examples.

 

[Thunder Chicken]

It doesn't look to me that the engine itself caught fire - looks like engine debris impacted the wing root area and caused the fire.

Dumb luck that no one was killed by flying engine parts.

 

[MaverickSawyer]

This reminds me, in a way, of United 232 -- which was a very similar failure IIRC.

Yes and no, its a polite way of saying what part of the engine failed/blew up.

Unfortunately GE have a history of unconditioned engine failures.

Friday 2 June 2006 a AA Boeing 767-223ER had one, 8 December 2002, 22 September 2000 and 7 June 2000 are some examples.

Huh... I'm sure that a similar dig through will produce a similar rate on Rolls Royce and Pratt & Whitney, too.

---------- Post added at 14:38 ---------- Previous post was at 14:36 ----------

It doesn't look to me that the engine itself caught fire - looks like engine debris impacted the wing root area and caused the fire.

Dumb luck that no one was killed by flying engine parts.

It's rare for the actual engine itself to catch fire... it's the fuel and oil being fed to it that usually burns. And based off the damage I see there, it seems that the fire suppression system wasn't able to compensate for the amount of flammables flowing into the engine. If they severed a fuel line (which is very much a possibility), then that would certainly cause the fire to continue after the fire handles were pulled.

 

[Evil_Onyx]

Huh... I'm sure that a similar dig through will produce a similar rate on Rolls Royce and Pratt & Whitney, too.

Aviation Safety Network - Uncontained engine failure list

Since 2000, engine manufacturers listed are below.

16 listed incidents
4 - Rolls Royce (4 different models )
1 - Pratt & Whitney (a radial on a C-47, may be noted that 1998 had two incidents for P&W)
7 - General Electric (all but the latest where from the CF6 family)
2 - Soloviev (one was almost 500 hours beyond service life)
1 - Garrett / Honeywell
1 - unspecified

I'm just saying that GE have a relativity recent history with this kind of failure.

 

[Thunder Chicken]

It's rare for the actual engine itself to catch fire... it's the fuel and oil being fed to it that usually burns. And based off the damage I see there, it seems that the fire suppression system wasn't able to compensate for the amount of flammables flowing into the engine. If they severed a fuel line (which is very much a possibility), then that would certainly cause the fire to continue after the fire handles were pulled.

Yeah, but what I'm saying is that I haven't seen anything that shows fire damage sourced on the engine nacelle itself. It seems that the engine threw parts into the fuselage which is where the fire actually occurred. All the engine fire suppression in the world won't help if the fire is on the fuselage.

Here's a picture of the damage. Note that the engine nacelle has some damage on the bottom, but was hardly engulfed. In fact, it looks like the nacelle damage was from the fuselage fire.

---------- Post added at 09:26 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:57 PM ----------

The big news outlets are now squawking that the "fire suppression systems didn't work". :facepalm: They're spinning the FUD for eyeballs, but what they are failing to mention is that the fire suppression systems were fully functional - they didn't work because they weren't where the fire was on the aircraft!

The B777 has engine fire suppression, cabin / cargo fire suppression systems. Wing root, not so much.

---------- Post added at 10:23 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:26 PM ----------

:lol:
Just a thought - they could probably do with a guy or two like that who've had "it" happen, done exactly what they were told, and got out smiling. I doubt properly trained pilots are particularly fearful at moments like that, but a few past meetings with people who are "living proof" would be a great reassurance...

Paying some old timers that have been though these things just to come down to the pilot ready room, drink some coffee and tell stories when they felt like it would be money well spent IMO. Sadly the bean counters would only see the paycheck and would therefore disagree.