JAL A350 collision & fire

Topics related to accidents, incidents & over due aircraft should be placed in this forum.

Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore

cdnavater
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1365
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2021 11:25 am

Re: JAL A350 collision & fire

Post by cdnavater »

BMLtech wrote: Thu Jan 04, 2024 3:01 pm I thought it was interesting that ARFF was unable to knock down this largely composite fire, burned for hours. Looks like they burn similar to EV's once lit.
I’ve never seen a fire hydrant airside, so from that I assume the ARFF are not equipped with enough fluid to extinguish a large fire. I figure they are only trying to slow it down enough for everyone to escape, after that they let her burn.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Eric Janson
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1252
Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 10:44 am

Re: JAL A350 collision & fire

Post by Eric Janson »

cdnavater wrote: Fri Jan 05, 2024 6:34 pm
I’ve never seen a fire hydrant airside, so from that I assume the ARFF are not equipped with enough fluid to extinguish a large fire. I figure they are only trying to slow it down enough for everyone to escape, after that they let her burn.
That makes sense - no point in risking lives once everyone is off the aircraft. There is still a risk of a fuel tank explosion.

The smoke/fumes are probably toxic as well.

Hopefully the final report will provide clarity.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Always fly a stable approach - it's the only stability you'll find in this business
pelmet
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 7175
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 2:48 pm

Re: JAL A350 collision & fire

Post by pelmet »

Eric Janson wrote: Sat Jan 06, 2024 12:36 am
cdnavater wrote: Fri Jan 05, 2024 6:34 pm
I’ve never seen a fire hydrant airside, so from that I assume the ARFF are not equipped with enough fluid to extinguish a large fire. I figure they are only trying to slow it down enough for everyone to escape, after that they let her burn.
That makes sense - no point in risking lives once everyone is off the aircraft. There is still a risk of a fuel tank explosion.

The smoke/fumes are probably toxic as well.

Hopefully the final report will provide clarity.
Perhaps they conserve foam/water in case there is another separate accident. If they get low enough on firefighting capability, airport restrictions can come into effect depending on the firefighting category.
---------- ADS -----------
 
goldeneagle
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1187
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2006 3:28 pm

Re: JAL A350 collision & fire

Post by goldeneagle »

pelmet wrote: Sat Jan 06, 2024 6:50 am Perhaps they conserve foam/water in case there is another separate accident. If they get low enough on firefighting capability, airport restrictions can come into effect depending on the firefighting category.
If they are fighting a fire on the runway, airport is already closed so that wont matter.
---------- ADS -----------
 
pelmet
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 7175
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 2:48 pm

Re: JAL A350 collision & fire

Post by pelmet »

goldeneagle wrote: Sat Jan 06, 2024 9:33 am
pelmet wrote: Sat Jan 06, 2024 6:50 am Perhaps they conserve foam/water in case there is another separate accident. If they get low enough on firefighting capability, airport restrictions can come into effect depending on the firefighting category.
If they are fighting a fire on the runway, airport is already closed so that wont matter.
True, but I don't know how long it takes to get back up to proper levels of foam. The airport would likely open as soon as possible(such as the next day). It would be interesting to hear from an airport firefighter about replenishment times for firefighting capability or what the policy is for firefighting when the aircraft has been completely evacuated.

In addition, the airport could continue to allow aircraft to taxi to the gate or be towed. Accidents do happen with ground ops such as the recent fire on an AC 777 in Montreal with a baggage loader and ground collisions. It might look rather silly if the whole terminal burnt down or a cargo area building because all foam was discharged. In other words, a closed airport is not an airport without activity where a fire could happen.

Fire while taxiing:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nat ... /74808356/

Fire while loading:
https://www.paddleyourownkanoo.com/2023 ... in-flames/

Fire while refueling:
https://twitter.com/OnDisasters/status/ ... 0150135808

APU fire:
https://reports.aviation-safety.net/201 ... UR-CAG.pdf

Fire in the Terminal:
https://www.google.ca/search?q=airport+ ... dy6hxP9iAM
---------- ADS -----------
 
boeingboy
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1520
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2004 2:57 pm
Location: West coast

Re: JAL A350 collision & fire

Post by boeingboy »

pelmet wrote: Sat Jan 06, 2024 11:03 am
goldeneagle wrote: Sat Jan 06, 2024 9:33 am
pelmet wrote: Sat Jan 06, 2024 6:50 am Perhaps they conserve foam/water in case there is another separate accident. If they get low enough on firefighting capability, airport restrictions can come into effect depending on the firefighting category.
If they are fighting a fire on the runway, airport is already closed so that wont matter.
True, but I don't know how long it takes to get back up to proper levels of foam. The airport would likely open as soon as possible(such as the next day). It would be interesting to hear from an airport firefighter about replenishment times for firefighting capability or what the policy is for firefighting when the aircraft has been completely evacuated.

In addition, the airport could continue to allow aircraft to taxi to the gate or be towed. Accidents do happen with ground ops such as the recent fire on an AC 777 in Montreal with a baggage loader and ground collisions. It might look rather silly if the whole terminal burnt down or a cargo area building because all foam was discharged. In other words, a closed airport is not an airport without activity where a fire could happen.

Fire while taxiing:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nat ... /74808356/

Fire while loading:
https://www.paddleyourownkanoo.com/2023 ... in-flames/

Fire while refueling:
https://twitter.com/OnDisasters/status/ ... 0150135808

APU fire:
https://reports.aviation-safety.net/201 ... UR-CAG.pdf

Fire in the Terminal:
https://www.google.ca/search?q=airport+ ... dy6hxP9iAM
All airports I've been to are always backed up by city firefighters, and there is always a staion close by. It's never just left to the airport ARFF
---------- ADS -----------
 
pelmet
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 7175
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 2:48 pm

Re: JAL A350 collision & fire

Post by pelmet »

boeingboy wrote: Sat Jan 06, 2024 2:51 pm
pelmet wrote: Sat Jan 06, 2024 11:03 am
goldeneagle wrote: Sat Jan 06, 2024 9:33 am

If they are fighting a fire on the runway, airport is already closed so that wont matter.
True, but I don't know how long it takes to get back up to proper levels of foam. The airport would likely open as soon as possible(such as the next day). It would be interesting to hear from an airport firefighter about replenishment times for firefighting capability or what the policy is for firefighting when the aircraft has been completely evacuated.

In addition, the airport could continue to allow aircraft to taxi to the gate or be towed. Accidents do happen with ground ops such as the recent fire on an AC 777 in Montreal with a baggage loader and ground collisions. It might look rather silly if the whole terminal burnt down or a cargo area building because all foam was discharged. In other words, a closed airport is not an airport without activity where a fire could happen.

Fire while taxiing:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nat ... /74808356/

Fire while loading:
https://www.paddleyourownkanoo.com/2023 ... in-flames/

Fire while refueling:
https://twitter.com/OnDisasters/status/ ... 0150135808

APU fire:
https://reports.aviation-safety.net/201 ... UR-CAG.pdf

Fire in the Terminal:
https://www.google.ca/search?q=airport+ ... dy6hxP9iAM
All airports I've been to are always backed up by city firefighters, and there is always a staion close by. It's never just left to the airport ARFF
Thanks,

That makes sense. But I suspect that an airport can't get back into operation with only city fire trucks.

If anybody knows an airport firefighter, perhaps they could find out what the details are about all this.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Post Reply

Return to “Accidents, Incidents & Overdue Aircraft”