BA 777 on fire at LAS

[jb747]

Ok, thinking about people taking their luggage with them.....

Have a look at this picture, and remember that the fire crews had pretty much knocked the fire down as the evacuation was finishing.

http://avherald.com/img/baw_b772_g-viio_las_vegas_150908_4.jpg

We're basically looking at what was the centre fuel tank......!@

 

[TheRealTMA]

Ok, thinking about people taking their luggage with them.....

Have a look at this picture, and remember that the fire crews had pretty much knocked the fire down as the evacuation was finishing.

http://avherald.com/img/baw_b772_g-viio_las_vegas_150908_4.jpg

We're basically looking at what was the centre fuel tank......!@

Nope.

[h=1]Forbidden[/h]You don't have permission to access /img/baw_b772_g-viio_las_vegas_150908_4.jpg on this server.

---

Apache/2.2.17 (Unix) mod_ssl/2.2.10 OpenSSL/0.9.8za mod_perl/2.0.4 Perl/v5.10.0 Server at The Aviation Herald Port 80

 

[MEL_Traveller]

Ok, thinking about people taking their luggage with them.....

Have a look at this picture, and remember that the fire crews had pretty much knocked the fire down as the evacuation was finishing.

http://avherald.com/img/baw_b772_g-viio_las_vegas_150908_4.jpg

We're basically looking at what was the centre fuel tank......!@

Wow!

(If anyone else is having difficulty with jb's picture - here is a link direct to the avherald article - scroll down after the videos for the damage: Accident: British Airways B772 at Las Vegas on Sep 8th 2015, rejected takeoff due to engine fire)

 

[TheRealTMA]

Wow!

(If anyone else is having difficulty with jb's picture - here is a link direct to the avherald article - scroll down after the videos for the damage: Accident: British Airways B772 at Las Vegas on Sep 8th 2015, rejected takeoff due to engine fire)

Thanks. Works!

 

[maninblack]

Great to see the professionalism of all the crews involved, ATC, fire, BA. The stories all talk about the engine failure but the photos look like the fire came from the wing root area or under the fuselage, the engine looks intact and not damaged or blackened.

 

[RooFlyer]

Please, not every woman is a princess but yes, if my bag was on my lap or by my feet, I would grab it and as to whats it in, all my ID, mulitple passports and usually quite a few thousand dollars.

Sadly I don't trust the average airport employee to return a big wad of cash, especially in the US.

At least Im being honest in admitting I would most probably grab my handbag, hopefully I will never be in the situation to find out.

So you clearly don't listen to the safety demo, and you clearly choose to ignore cabin crew instructions... It's not up for discussion.. end of story!!

I hope the FAs on the flight were calmer than that reaction. Although I'm a goody-two-shoes when it come to obeying FAs instructions I must admit I would forgive a female pax for clutching her purse to her front as she evacuated, as long as it was already to hand and not in the overhead locker. (I'm OK Jack, being a guy ... wallet in my pants pocket and passport in breast pocket.) I especially don't mind a bit of honesty here and don't think it needs to be jumped upon!!

The aim is to get the passengers off as soon as possible. The front and rear right hand doors were not directly affected, and were, correctly used. There's still plenty of room for the firefighters....

Pulling luggage out of a locker definitely slows things down. Going down a slide with it is likely to cause injury too. Cabin crew will not be polite when they see you with it...they will do anything to hurry up the evacuation, and the outcome for your luggage doesn't rate.

There was a story about a FA at a door during the final evacuation of QF32; he grabbed a bag that a pax was carrying and disposed of it with extreme prejudice. Apocryphal?

 

[jb747]

There was a story about a FA at a door during the final evacuation of QF32; he grabbed a bag that a pax was carrying and disposed of it with extreme prejudice. Apocryphal?

I expect so. QF32 didn't evacuate. They disembarked via stairs....

 

[Bundy Bear]

The 2nd video of the Avherald shown from the terminal shows the escape slide being activated.

A good idea to leave your carry on bag on the plane; but I think I would be taking my wallet, phone and passport, trying to get those things replaced when away from home would be a pain.

 

[TheRealTMA]

The 2nd video of the Avherald shown from the terminal shows the escape slide being activated.

A good idea to leave your carry on bag on the plane; but I think I would be taking my wallet, phone and passport, trying to get those things replaced when away from home would be a pain.

Yes manbag and purse/handbag is fine. Carry-ons, no. I always keep wallet, phone, passport wallet with tickets etc on my person or close by so access to locker or carry-on is not required.

then again internationally I do tend to change into jarmies before takeoff. Maybe I'll moderate that behaviour.

 

[jb747]

Then again internationally I do tend to change into jarmies before takeoff. Maybe I'll moderate that behaviour.

I seem to recall that being discussed in another thread. No shoes and pjs wouldn't be a nice thing to be wearing. I've always considered the change into pjs to be something you reserve for the cruise. I know that they are incredibly reliable, and overall quite amazing machines...but that's what they are - machines...not buildings that shake.

 

[JohnM]

I expect so. QF32 didn't evacuate. They disembarked via stairs....

In RDC's book, without trying to find the specific passage on my Kindle right now, IIRC it said that pax were told to leave all personal items on board, even though they were exiting via stairs. It stated that the pax carrying the item was challenged at the door by the CSM; the pax retorted 'what are you going to do about it?' So the CSM took it and turfed it across the cabin.

 

[dajop]

even though they were exiting via stairs. It stated that the pax carrying the item was challenged at the door by the CSM; the pax retorted 'what are you going to do about it?' So the CSM took it and turfed it across the cabin.

In a slide, time critical evacuation, and if someone's already carrying their handbag, would that be the right approach? Damage is already done by then (in terms of delaying evacuation) , once they're at the door it's probably quicker to either let them proceed or grab it and throw it out the door without the conversation ....

 

[Meggsy]

I was fortunate to have a look over an airport tender a year or so ago, and know that they have thermal imaging cameras. So it is possible they were aiming at the hottest part of the fire before moving up. Might welll have been fuel on the ground.

They would not have been using FLIR on the initial attack but you are right in that the SOP is to sweep the ground fire away from under the aircraft to try and prevent or delay burn through of the hull and give the occupants the greatest time to evacuate in clear conditions.

 

[JohnM]

In RDC's book, without trying to find the specific passage on my Kindle right now, IIRC it said that pax were told to leave all personal items on board, even though they were exiting via stairs. It stated that the pax carrying the item was challenged at the door by the CSM; the pax retorted 'what are you going to do about it?' So the CSM took it and turfed it across the cabin.

Found the passage in RDC's book:

 

[jb747]

Knowing the CSM concerned, I'm not surprised. He'd probably do it to my bag too.

 

[opusman]

then again internationally I do tend to change into jarmies before takeoff. Maybe I'll moderate that behaviour.

I'd rather be in the water in F jarmies than jeans / jacket / shoes

 

[trippin_the_rift]

I welcome governments to issue ridiculously high fines (>$500K+) per bag to people who attempt to take any type of baggage with them in an emergency situation.
Judging by the videos today... it would earn them a fortune too!

 

[jb747]

I'd rather be in the water in F jarmies than jeans / jacket / shoes

In most cases in the water, temperature would be an issue. With a life vest the clothing makes little difference to how well you float, but it makes a lot of difference to the heat loss. The PJs remain a less than ideal choice, but if you happen to have a wet suit then you'd be right.

 

[Captain Halliday]

The PJs remain a less than ideal choice, but if you happen to have a wet suit then you'd be right.

Mick Fanning might disagree.

 

[SeatBackForward]

In most cases in the water, temperature would be an issue. With a life vest the clothing makes little difference to how well you float, but it makes a lot of difference to the heat loss. The PJs remain a less than ideal choice, but if you happen to have a wet suit then you'd be right.

Do F passengers get nicer wet suits?