Singapore B773 enroute on Jun 27th 2016, engine oil leak

[gustind]

A Singapore Airlines Boeing 777-300, registration 9V-SWB performing flight SQ-368 from Singapore (Singapore) to Milan Malpensa (Italy) with 222 passengers and 19 crew, was enroute at FL300 over the Andaman Sea about 2 hours into the flight when the crew decided to descend the aircraft to FL170 and return to Singapore due to an oil leak at the right hand engine (GE90). The aircraft landed safely on Singapore's runway 20C about 2:20 hours later and slowed down. While passengers broke into clapping and cheering and the aircraft turned off the runway, a spark was seen at the right hand side causing the right hand engine and wing to catch fire, the aircraft stopped on the taxiway, emergency services sprung into action and extinguished the fire, the crew kept the passengers on board while firefighters doused the fire. The passengers subsequently disembarked via stairs. There were no injuries, the aircraft sustained substantial damage to right engine and right wing.

The airline reported the aircraft returned due to an engine oil warning light, the right hand engine caught fire after the aircraft touched down, the fire was put out by airport emergency services. The passengers disembarked via stairs and were bussed to the terminal.

A replacement Boeing 777-300 registration 9V-SWF is estimated to reach Milan with a delay of 9 hours.

[pelmet]

Looks like a good reason to evacuate to me.

[Changes in Latitudes]

Looks like a good reason to evacuate to me.

I was thinking that as well. You'd have to give me a pretty damn good reason to keep everyone seated to watch that. However, it's a safe assumption that this crew, in this particular instance, had better information than me sitting at my desk. Benefit of the doubt given, but I would love to know the reasoning.

[Elliot Moose]

Holy crap on a cracker! I can't imagine any scenario where an aircraft is on the ground at a major airport, on FIRE (and not just a little bit) and everybody just sits there at the direction of the CREW instead of bailing out. Did ATC not let them know that the whole wing was going up? What about the FA's? Where I work, I would expect them to let me know about a fire that big and probably initiate the evac even if I was dithering about whether or not to bail out. Maybe it is the pilot in me talking, but I think as a passenger I would be bowling over the FA's to bail myself if needed with a fire running the length of a wing.

[GRK2]

Yeah, and thereby causing unrestrained panic, as well as, more than likely, going down a slide right in front of a still running 777 engine..

[Rockie]

Cabin crew are permitted, and expected, to initiate an evacuation if they deem it necessary and no direction is coming from the cockpit in a timely manner. In this incident I'm surprised they didn't, but there are a lot of questions one can think of starting with why the engine wasn't shut down to begin with knowing they had an oil starvation problem.

It'll be interesting to read this report when it comes out.

[Bede]

Correct Rockie, but in this case I believe they were commanded to remain seated. The caveat for an uncommanded evacuation is usually when you here nothing.

Regardless, I'm really surprised they didn't bail. I'm usually more of a fan of keeping people on board but in this case, I'd be getting everyone out ASAP.

[cgzro]

Apart from when still moving under what circumstances do the 777 emergency procedures recommend not evacuating at first indication of an open fire? What do AC 777 emergency procedures say?

[Rockie]

Apart from when still moving under what circumstances do the 777 emergency procedures recommend not evacuating at first indication of an open fire? What do AC 777 emergency procedures say?

B777 evacuation criteria and procedures are the same as any other aircraft.

Correct Rockie, but in this case I believe they were commanded to remain seated. The caveat for an uncommanded evacuation is usually when you here nothing.

I didn't see a command to remain seated, but as you likely know "Remain Seated - Remain Seated" at every airline I've worked for in Canada is not actually a command to remain seated for the cabin crew. It informs the cabin crew that there is a problem and acts as a trigger for certain actions in preparation for a possible evacuation. However I have no idea what they do in Singapore.

On hearing a PA from the F/D to "Remain Seated" at a Canadian carrier the cabin crew would in fact stand up out of their seat and:

- Assess outside conditions at their designated exit doors
- Remain on high alert, and:
- Await further instructions from the F/D and/or initiate evacuation based on prevailing circumstances.

Any member of the cabin crew may initiate evacuation in:
- Any life threatening situation, or
- Catastrophic break-up of the fuselage

Before initiating the evacuation the cabin crew must;
- Advise the flight crew if possible
- Ensure the aircraft is not moving, and
- Ensure the engines are off.


In the video the engine was burning significantly as the aircraft rolled out on the runway and really took off once it was stopped to engulf the entire wing - full of fuel. It took 50 seconds from the time the plane stopped to first application of foam which must have felt like an eternity. Very surprised there was no evacuation.

[Eric Janson]

Procedures at my Airline are very similar to what Rockie has posted above.

Having had a look at the videos - that's an Evacuation in my book.

I'd be very interested to hear the reasoning behind not evacuating in this situation.

[valleyboy]

That's the fine line we walk between becoming an idiot or a hero. It would appear that this incident is the sort of material that should be in every airlines' class room.

[Eric Janson]

This also looks like a fuel fire not an oil fire - looks like both the leading and trailing edges were covered in fuel. Be interesting to see how that happened.

[co-joe]

Are there any legal provisions for a passenger to initiate their own evacuation? If I was seated by the emerge exit on the opposite side of that fire I'd be seriously considering getting the F out with or without the order. Assumption of crew incapacitation maybe?

[GyvAir]

I read somewhere (don't have a link, sorry) that a "no evacuation" order was issued to the cabin crew, due to the belief that fuel was spilling on the tarmac and the worry that the fire would spread around the slides during an evacuation attempt.

[av8ts]

Staying aboard with burning fuel outside may not always be a good idea

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/British ... Flight_28M

[GyvAir]

Staying aboard with burning fuel outside may not always be a good idea

Certainly not. If they knew there was fuel potentially flooding the tarmac beneath them, waiting the 50 seconds for the foam trucks to arrive before deploying the chutes doesn't seem unreasonable to me, though. The several minutes after arrival of the foam trucks with still no evacuation... well, as said before, none of us were there.

[Rockie]

When an evacuation order is commanded the cabin crew are trained to evaluate the environment outside their exit. In this case the fire would have been easy to see and the evacuation would have taken place out the left side of the airplane. Every second means more people off and away from danger. They were VERY lucky the fuel in the wing did not ignite.

[GyvAir]

What are they trained to do in a scenario where there happens to be fire on both sides of the aircraft and they've been given an evacuation order?

[Nark]

Use their best judgement. Chances are pretty slim an engine/wing fire would block both (multiple) forward and aft exits.

Also, if we call "flight attendant stations" which is their que to plan to evacuate, and they don't hear anything from us, they are instructed to initiate an evacuation.

Like others have said, not sure I'd do the same as these guys did.