Plane catches Fire at Manchester….

Grease blamed for planes fire drama

MAINTENANCE failures have been linked to a series of dramatic fires on passenger jets after they landed at Manchester Airport, a report reveals.

Engineers used the wrong kind of grease, and too much, in replacing wheel assemblies on the Pakistan International Airlines (PIA) jets, say investigators.

It resulted in four separate undercarriage fires – three of them at Manchester Airport and one at Toronto in Canada – shortly after the new Boeing 777 planes touched down.

The heat caused by hard braking on landing appears to have caused the grease to catch fire. Each aircraft was carrying more than 300 passengers. No-one was hurt in any of the incidents.

At Manchester, firefighters were scrambled to the scene and used foam to extinguish the fires, which happened within days of each other.

Transport Department investigators were called after the last two fires – on consecutive days – at Manchester on June 8 and 9. The M.E.N. reported at the time how the probe was launched.

Dangerous

Airport chiefs insisted then that there was no risk to passengers or crew. But one source told the M.E.N.: “It had the potential to be dangerous. The aircraft’s fuel tanks in the wings were virtually empty – actually more dangerous than if full.

“Aviation fuel is very difficult to ignite, whereas fumes in an empty tank are actually explosive.”

Another source insisted it was merely a glitch because the airline introduced the 777s only in March. Now PIA has changed to the correct type of grease and engineers have replaced all the wheel assemblies on its fleet of 777s that were originally replaced using the incorrect lubricant.

The airline has also stopped using the old grease on all its other aircraft, including Boeing 747s, while the engineering department, based in Karachi, has agreed to minimise the amount of grease it uses.

The maintenance failures and the airline’s subsequent action are highlighted in a report by the Air Accident Investigation Branch (AAIB) of the Transport Department and seen by the M.E.N.

Nobody at PIA, the largest Manchester-based foreign airline at 29 flights a week, was available for comment.

http://www.manchesteronline.co.uk/news/s/131/131364_grease_blamed_for_planes_fire_drama.html

Grease blamed for planes fire drama

MAINTENANCE failures have been linked to a series of dramatic fires on passenger jets after they landed at Manchester Airport, a report reveals.

Engineers used the wrong kind of grease, and too much, in replacing wheel assemblies on the Pakistan International Airlines (PIA) jets, say investigators.

It resulted in four separate undercarriage fires – three of them at Manchester Airport and one at Toronto in Canada – shortly after the new Boeing 777 planes touched down.

The heat caused by hard braking on landing appears to have caused the grease to catch fire. Each aircraft was carrying more than 300 passengers. No-one was hurt in any of the incidents.

At Manchester, firefighters were scrambled to the scene and used foam to extinguish the fires, which happened within days of each other.

Transport Department investigators were called after the last two fires – on consecutive days – at Manchester on June 8 and 9. The M.E.N. reported at the time how the probe was launched.

Dangerous

Airport chiefs insisted then that there was no risk to passengers or crew. But one source told the M.E.N.: “It had the potential to be dangerous. The aircraft’s fuel tanks in the wings were virtually empty – actually more dangerous than if full.

“Aviation fuel is very difficult to ignite, whereas fumes in an empty tank are actually explosive.”

Another source insisted it was merely a glitch because the airline introduced the 777s only in March. Now PIA has changed to the correct type of grease and engineers have replaced all the wheel assemblies on its fleet of 777s that were originally replaced using the incorrect lubricant.

The airline has also stopped using the old grease on all its other aircraft, including Boeing 747s, while the engineering department, based in Karachi, has agreed to minimise the amount of grease it uses.

The maintenance failures and the airline’s subsequent action are highlighted in a report by the Air Accident Investigation Branch (AAIB) of the Transport Department and seen by the M.E.N.

Nobody at PIA, the largest Manchester-based foreign airline at 29 flights a week, was available for comment.

http://www.manchesteronline.co.uk/news/s/131/131364_grease_blamed_for_planes_fire_drama.html

It wasnt a refuelling fire they have already dropped that line, it was during the taxi.

It wasnt a refuelling fire they have already dropped that line, it was during the taxi.

I doubt there was 300 people on the aircraft if it was a refuelling fire as when te aircraft is refuelling there are strict rules which state no children or disabled passengers can be on board. Sometimes youll see airlines telling passengers with young children they wont have priority boarding because of refueling. As well once on board the able bodied PAX are not allowed fasten their seatbelts.

I doubt there was 300 people on the aircraft if it was a refuelling fire as when te aircraft is refuelling there are strict rules which state no children or disabled passengers can be on board. Sometimes youll see airlines telling passengers with young children they wont have priority boarding because of refueling. As well once on board the able bodied PAX are not allowed fasten their seatbelts.

It is fair to say that these things happen, and I don’t think it is a specific PIA issue. The reason you may feel like you have noticed lots of incidents at MAN is that they are actually quite a large operator there, it is their largest operation outside of Pakistan so more flights increases the chance of incidents.

Kinda disagree there mate, you look at other airlines using man i.e. BA, Monarch and FCA for example, they have a lot more flights ops in a week say then PIA and they don’t have many issues. Just that PIA have had there fair share over the 18 months.

It is fair to say that these things happen, and I don’t think it is a specific PIA issue. The reason you may feel like you have noticed lots of incidents at MAN is that they are actually quite a large operator there, it is their largest operation outside of Pakistan so more flights increases the chance of incidents.

Kinda disagree there mate, you look at other airlines using man i.e. BA, Monarch and FCA for example, they have a lot more flights ops in a week say then PIA and they don’t have many issues. Just that PIA have had there fair share over the 18 months.

PIA seem to have had there fair share of incidents with Aircraft at Man, is this due to there operating procedures or just lack of maintenance with there aircraft? Just that with this incident the aircraft involved surly wouldn’t have been heavy to cause excessive brake heat as it’s just had a 6 hour+ flight.

It is fair to say that these things happen, and I don’t think it is a specific PIA issue. The reason you may feel like you have noticed lots of incidents at MAN is that they are actually quite a large operator there, it is their largest operation outside of Pakistan so more flights increases the chance of incidents.

PIA seem to have had there fair share of incidents with Aircraft at Man, is this due to there operating procedures or just lack of maintenance with there aircraft? Just that with this incident the aircraft involved surly wouldn’t have been heavy to cause excessive brake heat as it’s just had a 6 hour+ flight.

It is fair to say that these things happen, and I don’t think it is a specific PIA issue. The reason you may feel like you have noticed lots of incidents at MAN is that they are actually quite a large operator there, it is their largest operation outside of Pakistan so more flights increases the chance of incidents.

Full Aircraft, probably came in slightly too fast and brakes had a big job slowing it down. Undercarriage brakes overheated too much and whilst taxing off the runway and to stand they catch fire due to the heat.

Based on something similar i saw on tv before involving i think an A340 id guess that they will need new wheels and brake pads etc, assuming no damage to anything else.

Full Aircraft, probably came in slightly too fast and brakes had a big job slowing it down. Undercarriage brakes overheated too much and whilst taxing off the runway and to stand they catch fire due to the heat.

Based on something similar i saw on tv before involving i think an A340 id guess that they will need new wheels and brake pads etc, assuming no damage to anything else.

PIA seem to have had there fair share of incidents with Aircraft at Man, is this due to there operating procedures or just lack of maintenance with there aircraft? Just that with this incident the aircraft involved surly wouldn’t have been heavy to cause excessive brake heat as it’s just had a 6 hour+ flight.

PIA seem to have had there fair share of incidents with Aircraft at Man, is this due to there operating procedures or just lack of maintenance with there aircraft? Just that with this incident the aircraft involved surly wouldn’t have been heavy to cause excessive brake heat as it’s just had a 6 hour+ flight.

I trust the BBC a bit more…their latest..

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/4307511.stm

I trust the BBC a bit more…their latest..

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/4307511.stm

Sky have changed their story… they now reckon there was no fire, that it just overheated. And nowhere do they mention refuelling, except that that was what the aircraft had landed at MAN for.

Sky have changed their story… they now reckon there was no fire, that it just overheated. And nowhere do they mention refuelling, except that that was what the aircraft had landed at MAN for.

Hmmm….never trust the BBC on aviation stories. They are usually wrong all the time.
Wonder what “really” happened!

Hmmm….never trust the BBC on aviation stories. They are usually wrong all the time.
Wonder what “really” happened!