SQ bird on fire at Changi

[9V-SPL]

The plane probably stopped right in front or close to the Airport Fire Station right next RWY20C/02C.

[SQKevin]

I believe the fire engines would have been activated at the same time as air traffic control that the aircraft was heading back to Changi for an emergency landing. So the fire engines would have been waiting on standby by the side of the runway waiting to speed to the scene the moment the aircraft landed.

[9V-SPL]

9V-SWF is ferrying the passengers to MXP as SQ368D. It departed Changi at 1059 this morning.

[alian]

First of all, it was not leaking fuel, it was leaking engine oil, two very different liquids. And the fire happen after landing, not during the flight. As what actually happen, i do not know but will try to find out what actually happen.

For emergency landings they still dump fuel regardless of fault for safety reasons. Being an over 10 hr flight I'm sure she was carrying heaps of it and it would make an emergency landing hard and risky

[CarbonMan]

I believe the fire engines would have been activated at the same time as air traffic control that the aircraft was heading back to Changi for an emergency landing. So the fire engines would have been waiting on standby by the side of the runway waiting to speed to the scene the moment the aircraft landed.

From one of the videos, you can see the fire trucks rushing to the plane before it came to a halt. Took them another 15-20 seconds for them to go around to a taxi way to get to the front of the plane. Passengers within the plane thought it took 2-3 minutes for the trucks to get to the plane but they wouldn't have seen them as they at the nose end.

Was on this same flight just last month. Am glad my holiday wasn't disrupted.

[Stratoliner777]

So glad everyone got off ok, injury free. Not going to second guess the pilots or fire crews or FAs, need more specific facts and timeline.

There's some speculation on Airliners.net about the level of damage to the wing. Just found a Bloomberg.com photo of 9V-SWB being towed away, you can see the blackened wing and flaps here:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articl...anding#media-1

There have been a number of relatively high-profile 777 engine fires lately. One of the most vivid was BA 2276, a 777-200ER which had an engine fire on takeoff in Sept 2015 at LAS and was fully evacuated -- after some major repairs is back in service. More recently, KE 2708, a 777-300 also had an engine fire prior to takeoff in May 2016 at HND and was fully evacuated. That plane is back in service already.

I'm curious whether the fact that the SQ 368's engine caught fire after landing is just happenstance or that it is more likely that the conflagration will erupt once on the ground and not moving at high speed?

[banx007]

So reports by news website such as CNA is wrong?

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/...e/2907544.html

If it was fuel, the whole plane would have burned down within a few minutes as fuel and fuel vapours are highly flammable, for example look at TWA 747 incident where the empty center fuel tank but filled with with fuel vapours exploded due to a spark. And anyway, SIA has already come out with a statement that the aircraft turned back due to Engine Oil warning indication. It was not a fuel warning.

[ek&sq]

With such extensive damage to the wing, the cost of repairs (if even possible) will likely be exorbitant. It'd be a shame if SWB is the first 77W to be scrapped.

[webbyboy]

With such extensive damage to the wing, the cost of repairs (if even possible) will likely be exorbitant. It'd be a shame if SWB is the first 77W to be scrapped.

Don't worry, they are welled insured and insurers will assess it accordingly

[loldude333]

Woah! I flew SWB up to LHR 2.5 weeks back! Glad to know that everyone is safe and sound!

[shikhargpt]

Suppose SWB is a write-off, does it mean we might see SND?

[SilverKrisSRG]

9V-SWF is ferrying the passengers to MXP as SQ368D. It departed Changi at 1059 this morning.

wondering if the same set of crew flying and serving SQ368D...

[FSJZ]

I think it was a wise decision on the pilot's part to not evacuate the passengers. If the engine did burst into flames, wouldn't it be safer in the fuselage, which is built to withstand a certain amount of heat, rather than evacuate the passengers and risk getting them injured if the engine did explode and debris went flying everywhere?

[SQ380]

wondering if the same set of crew flying and serving SQ368D...

No, it will have been a new set of air crew - technical and cabin crew

[Sethor]

If it was fuel, the whole plane would have burned down within a few minutes as fuel and fuel vapours are highly flammable, for example look at TWA 747 incident where the empty center fuel tank but filled with with fuel vapours exploded due to a spark. And anyway, SIA has already come out with a statement that the aircraft turned back due to Engine Oil warning indication. It was not a fuel warning.

Doubt it would have burned down in minutes, especially with fire crew nearby. The TWA accident was a completely different situation & there would have been no chance of a flash over like Air Canada 797 as the cabin was not filled with volatile gases/fumes.