I was the pilot of a PA-28 that had a fuel spill when being refuelled at NZDN (DUD when it happened). It took the big yellow truck less than 2 minutes from the time of the spill to arrive. They then followed me to the runway and all this was for a spill of less than 5 litres by my estimate.
@@braveworld2707I used to work in the operating theatre of a major hospital very near Auckland airport. Whenever a flight gets into trouble, other than life and limb threatened patients and urgent c-sections, we finish the surgeries we are doing and go onto stand by until we know that flight has landed with no casualties in the unlikely event we end up with casualties in the OR. 💛
As an ATR pilot, it is comforting to see the crew following the right procedures. Also, it is a great way to see unlikely but realistic scenarios play out, so I can anticipate a situation like that myself. Every time an ATR is involved in an incident/accident, there is something important to be learned.
Good explanation Magnar. We, as you’d be well aware, trained this situation in the simulator on initial Type Rating and periodically on recurrent training and checking detail in the simulator. From my view point this situation ran as trained and well managed. Thanks for producing this video to explain the situation to your audience.
There are some legitimate reasons to grab it in a situation like that such as asthma or similar illnesses that need immediate medication and have a high likelihood to be triggered by smoke or other events likely in an evacuation but otherwise I agree completely.
@@Taladar2003 no, there isn’t. Outside you have emergency medical services with access to all medications that could be required for a plane crash, including possible smoke inhalation and training on how to manage this. Inside you have a situation that the pilot has deemed is more dangerous than a 1.5 metre jump to the ground and requires an evacuation faster than an orderly exit through the main doors. Your medication might save your life in 5 minutes, when you’ll be able to get medical attention and replacement medicine. Leaving your bag will save your life - and those behind you - _now_.
@@Taladar2003That is true. I prefer the situation in Singapore when the QANTAS A380 with the blown engine, during evacuation an idiot was towing a roller bag passed the Chief Steward. When told he could not take the bag responded with who can stop me. The Chief replied ME and then picked up the bag and tossed it to the other aisle. I personally hope there was something fragile in the bag. That's just me dealing with idiots.
I work 2 minutes away from the airport and somehow missed this news. Glad everyone was safe and thank you for the breakdown! Shame on those passengers who grabbed their bags tbh
Yes I agree, everything looked textbook but the passengers left to their own devices looked a bit ugly. I would have thought somebody in the support vehicle's could have directed them to a safe area away from the aircraft.
@@deano392 I think around 5:35 the bloke who runs from the car does something like that on one side, shortly after the passengers start to slowly drift towards the side of the runway.
@@scollyutubeThey were hardly waiting for it to land. They responded the second the alarm was raised, which was a few seconds before landing. As was also clearly mentioned in this video, the engine fire did not occur in an earlier stage of flight.
@inoperative_ pretty sure the pilots reported the low oil pressure caution, then engine fault and associated fire warnings just prior to landing.....i.e they declared a mayday, and landed in that order. Have to hear the ATC tapes to see the timeframes.
No indication of fire at all in the video yet passengers shared pictures of small flames coming from aircraft exhaust in flight. Looks like we are watching the engine fire being extinguished here. This aircraft type have a history of fuel nozzle problems creating leaks and fires
By April 2018, the ATR fleet was flying more than 5,000 times per day and had operated 30 million flight hours.[3] By the end of June 2018, Leonardo had shipped the 1,500th ATR fuselage while nearly 1,700 airliners had been ordered; ATR reportedly led the turboprop regional airliner market since 2010 with a 75% share. The company's aircraft were being operated in nearly 100 countries by 200 airlines and 30 million flights has been completed; it was also claimed that an ATR airliner takes off or lands every 8 seconds.[25
Thank you very much for this very informative statistics!🙂👍 - I think there´re meanwhile round about 1750 ATR´s delivered. Since the Dash 8 are out of production the ATR increases its domination of the Turboprop-Market.
If you look closely at the original footage there's a flame from the exhaust the whole time between the two bursts of smoke. My guess is internal oil leak and the smoke is when it wasn't burning cleanly.
thanks magnar, do airplane in general have a procedure in which side we should evacuate? like this video actually, its kinda dangerous to evacuate to the left side where the engine failure happened
"Emergency Evacuation ( *On Ground* ) - one of the most enjoyed jokes of a weird ATR checklist... We always LOL during training! The evacuation, by the way, was almost a catastrophe!
Mentor pilot just made a video about the Saudi tristar who made a full stop but didn't evacuate asap, gave me flashbacks 💀..... I'm glad everybody is fine ❤
Fortunately the big difference being that the ATR here potentially had a small fire in the engine area while the Saudi TriStar had a massive fire inside the fuselage. The pilots of the ATR had the time they took before evacuating - the Saudi pilots didn't have it but still decided to take it - with the known fatal consequences. 😞
Aircraft manufacturers should develop a mechanical system that locks the overhead bins to prevent passengers from taking their bags during emergency evacuation
My 2 cents worth: 1) the aircraft stopped on the runway more or less opposite the RFS, which resulted in the fire trucks having a short distance to travel and get there quicker, 2) SOMETHING MUST be done about carry on bags. Once again people have been more worried about taking their carry on with them than evacuating the aircraft - arrrrrgh.
Knowing the muster time of the fire department, the pilot must have noted a discrepancy on the gauges during flight and advised ATC. Timing was perfect!
One and a half meters is actually quite a lot to jump from if you are old or have a physical handicap. Don't the ATR planes have a smaller escape hatch that is triggered like the larger jets have?
No point sitting and waiting for the crew to get it right. Passengers were getting out with hand luggage, then they were walking under the engine that was blowing smoke. How does that work?
Simple. There are 2 attendants and 2 pilots. The pilots are doing checklists, and the attendants are busy evacuating the aircraft. If there is a fire, they aren't gonna police the hand luggage they are gonna get people off the plane ASAP. In short. There aren't enough people for one to stand near the engine to get people away, and they aren't going to waste time forcing people to put their stuff back.
Great explanation. I'm not sure how many people are inside a fire truck, but I can imagine with an aircraft like the ATR it could save some broken ankles if a few of those firemen would guide people down from their jump from the exits.
Airport fire trucks usually don't carry a lot of personnel. They carry tons of water, foam agent and a lot of engine power to propulsion and pump. Depending on the fire brigade, it's usually 2-3 people per engine. One driver, one operator for the water cannon(s), potentially one extra. The tactics are completely different from what a city fire brigade would do, just due to the nature of a full-blown aircraft fire let's say after a crash landing.
@@julieharris8562 well that's why I mentioned how many people are in a truck. There are 2 vehicles two trucks and no fire. Not that hard to get two man on each side so people don't break a leg. It's not exactly the fire brigade let your family and dog die if your house is on fire.. nah, they evacuate people as well as you might now.
Can you explain the work of flaps during takeoff and landing😢 plz I found some videos about the flaps during landing the flaps with the high settings that will increase the lift and also so that's why it will reduces the stall speed so it is quite enough but I just confused because during the landing the lift the force is increasing but it is an upward force so that will affect the landing or not
It's hard to tell with a telephoto lens, but yeah it looks like some are walking right under it. I was looking to see if anyone banged their head on the prop!
I don't know anything about flying so this might be a stupid suggestion. The smoke only started just before landing, at that point the wheels are down, could it be a split hydraulic hose for the undercarriage spraying onto the motor?
My bet is on hydraulic oil leak ... oil smoke is white. The smoke seemed to stop when reverse thrust was active, and then resumed aftwerwards. ... so my suspicion is that the issue is connected to the hydraulics of the propeller pitch control.
I don't think so. There are no hydraulic lines in the LH engine bay. The only hydraulic line to an engine on the ATR is the RH engine prop brake for Hotel mode. Propellor pitch is controlled by engine oil. There are photos showing flame emanating from inside the exhaust. As the smoke stopped when reverse was commanded, I suspect a turbine labyrinth seal which wasn't performing at low power setting then pressured up when reverse power was selected - you will notice the smoke stopped during the reverse phase then restarted once the engine went back to ground idle.
@@nzmarty Is it not possible that oil spraying at several thousand psi could reach a point of ingestion to the engine? (think pressure washer, as you might use to clean your driveway)
@@JoeBlow-zr2ru no. Engine intake is well forward of the landing gear and the landing gear is contained within the fairings at the bottom of the aeroplane.
Same question applies to taller aircraft with slides. It's not like you can just coast down an emergency slide in a wheelchair. Just hope that there is someone to help...
Hello Captain. Engine fire on short final, so after FAF/Gate, you continue to land and solve it on the ground. How about engine flame out on short final? Do you continue and land or apply the procedure for engine flameout. And also what about engine flame out at an intermediate altitude (for example downwind of a traffic pattern) And which procedure do you apply? Engine flame out in flight or engine flame out at take off (due to the fact that you have gear down and pwr management in Take off position). Thank you in advance, really enjoying your videos.
Letting pax out the entry door at rear left seems mad. It was the left engine that smoked. What if the issue was continuing inside the engine. Same for popping the emergency exits front left. Your allowing pax to be near the engine that may have continued to have internal issues and may be still on fire internally. I heard that the first the pilots knew of the smoke was when WLG_TWR told them! And the left engine was 2 days old when it smoked!
While many comment on the passengers taking their luggage, remember an evacuation can be a VERY stressful event. Under stress people can do some odd things. As Magnar said, usually people in this situation find that their perception of time gets distorted and their recollection of events can be hazy. He commented on the passenger’s clear recalling of events.
I am wondering if the pilots had any indication of something potentially being wrong and requested emergency services on standby, which would also explain why they were so quick to be there. I looked at the map of the airport, and if I interpret the video right, they landed on RWY 34. The fire station however is closer to the 16 end of the runway, but they did approach the aircraft from the side instead of from ahead. Normal SOP (at least for places I am familiar with, I have unfortunately never been to Wellington) is that requested standby happens near the end of the runway where the plane lands and then they go with the landing aircraft. Which makes sense, as this is a lot easier to do than to go the opposite direction and then potentially turn around when the aircraft stops later. This is just speculation from a former firefighter, so don't take this as me knowing anything about this incident beyond what Captain Magnar explains in the video.
@@einarbolstad8150 from the time we see the smoke, they certainly didn't have time to request standby. No doubt there. But maybe at some earlier stage of the flight, long before the video started, if there was any kind of indication that something isn't right with that engine. I'm sure there are numerous things pilots can see that would make them request emergency standby.
Initial reports suggest the engine fire warning went off as they passed through 300 feet above the runway, so they had about a minute from when the warning went off until the plane was stopped on the runway. The fire station is on the eastern apron abeam taxiway A5, almost in the centre of the runway, and the plane stopped between A5 and A6.
the Fire Station is basically right at the middle of the runway. It actually faces southwest - when you stand in the doors you look directly towards the 34 threshold.
@@magpiefrogfrom2556 more likely a rubber seal started burning than the oil smoke took over... CO2 would leave a very transparent smoke in this case, not the thick white stuff increasing and decreasing as the engine wound down...
Just bad timing. A while back, when flying C130s, we had already performed a precautionary engine shutdown for an oil leak. On landing, the loadmaster informed us of sparks coming from another engine. We shut it down too along with the other two. In our case, however, we pulled off the runway before shutting down all of the engines. That way, we weren't blocking the runway and preventing it's continued use. Another comment on this situation. I feel that using the side emergency exit was totally unnecessary. There was no active fire and untrained civilians climbing out these exits (while taking their bags 🤦♂)was risky.
I remember seeing years ago an aircraft with an engine fire pulled off the runway, but the wind then blew the fire directly at the fuselage - I think the a/c was destroyed and people killed 😞
@kkiwi54 refers to British Airtours flight 28M at Manchester on 22/08/1985. Had the Captain of that aircraft stopped on the runway and assessed the situation more passengers may have survived. Regarding the decision to order an emergency evacuation, it is likely to have been based on information available to the crew such as whether an ongoing fire indication existed, and whether there was smoke in the cabin. We’ve heard a passenger report that smoke had started to enter the cabin by the time the evacuation began. Another option available on aircraft with built in stairs when away from the stand is sometimes referred to as a precautionary or rapid disembarkation. In this case only the main door would be used but obviously wouldn’t be completed anywhere near as swiftly as an emergency evacuation. I think most Captains would elect to get people out of the aircraft as quickly as possible at the risk of injury rather than a slower disembarkation if smoke is present or there was other indications of fire.
But evacuating on the left, where the engine is that is on fire. (although shortly after landing no fire visible it can still burn on the inside) seems not correct? And you see passengers walk to that same engine. There is always a risk of some kind of explosion from that engine. And strange enough the firemen do nothing for quite some time, just sitting in their trucks. But we miss the radio conversations that might explain why they handled this way. Most important: no one got injured!
It was a good decision to stay put and just observe. Fire truck was ready to quickly lay foam if the situation escalated. Its a tad unexpected though, that the crew decided to evac on the left hand side at L1 and L2. Since the passengers could've become cannonfodder if a blaze started, that required a laydown of foam. Maybe the wider evac was caused by smoke in the cabin, which is a big health concern. You live and learn.
@@Trevor_Austin The fire that had been there. Typically in case of a fire, it's best to evacuate on the other side. Fortunately in this case, the fire did not start again.
it’s very surprising to me that passengers are expected to jump one and a half meters to evacuate the airplane. For any elderly person with bone deterioration, that is a recipe for a broken leg, broken, hip, broken pelvis, or worse. It surprises me that that is certified.
I'm sure anyone who is physically unable can go to the main door. Or, since the passengers in the exit row are supposed to be able bodied, they can assist others getting out the emergency exits after they exit first.
If you think that is bad see what happens when an elderly person goes down a slide from any widebody. Any Captain that initiates an evacuation from any public transport aircraft should be aware of the high risk of severe injury, and possibly even death. There’s no safe way to get even close to the certificated passenger load off most aircraft in a very short time. In certification demonstrations it’s done in a darkened hangar with half the exits unavailable and must be complete in 90 seconds. They use fit volunteers and sometimes even they get injured.
I’ll guess a seal failed in the prop and oil from the propeller pitch change system was ejected into the engine intake. I’ll also guess that there was no fire indication. Would I have evacuated? Most unlikely. Why? No flames. No smoke. No leaking fuel. Fire trucks just outside. Greater chance of passenger injury.
We don’t t know what information the crew had from the cabin. The risk to pax in a “precautionary “ evacuation is c negligible compared to the scenario if the cabin is rapidly filled with smoke. The two pilots can only go on what the see in front of them and don’t have the luxury of being able to see what’s happening behind them. My view for any fire/smoke event is to evacuate…at least you can discuss the rights and wrongs of your decision afterwards.
@@FlightcontrailsEach have our own opinion on this. Personally, I would prefer not to risk passenger death and injury by ordering a “precautionary” evacuation. And I also can discuss the rights and wrongs but absolutely none of my passengers would be hurt. None.
@@WairoakidNo I didn’t. I’ll agree that flames and smoke from a jet pipe are not normal but they went out with the engine. With fire trucks metres away capable of killing any likely fire my passengers would be safer inside than out.
@@Trevor_Austin When I said "he" I didn't mean you. I meant Magnar . However not being a pilot I aren't qualified to offer an opinion on the actions of the pilots in this case. I was just pointing out there we flames albeit it appears to be when it was in the air.
The wind was coming from the right so actually would put the fire upwind of the fuselage. And yes that is a standard procedure for engine fire on ground, you turn the aircraft into the wind. CM2 sets the heading for CM1 to stop the aircraft in the wind direction
You want it pointed directly into the wind if possible, so the air passes by in a streamlined manner. If it's broadside you'll get turbulent flow around the fuselage and eddies that'll make the smoke hang around and "stick" to it.
What i noticed was that the prop rpm of both engines didn't seem to change or differ until on the ground, so no feathering before stopping. Smoke in the cabin should mean it was either an internal problem or smoke got sucked into the turbine intake (which means it was still turning after stopping), is that correct? Too bad Atr is having bad luck lately.
It would be very bad to feather the propeller on short final. That could cause a crash. After landing, the pilots do not immediately feather because they are using reverse thrust to help stop the airplane. Reverse thrust could have pulled some smoke forward into the engine intake. Or the smoke could have been produced in the compressor section of the engine, and got into the cabin that way.
The most important thing to do is nothing - quickly. With a fire on short finals continue, land and stop. Tell the passengers to remain seated. Then work out the problem. Then take action as appropriate.
I think the air intake on those engines is too small, and you got all the propeller blades swooshing past it all the time. So if a birdstrike occurs, it would hit the propeller and the Seagull Nuggets would get flung away form the engine core.
Hello, Magnar-If I may ask, why were passengers allowed to evacuate on the left side where the fire had occurred? And how many emergency exits does an ATR typically have? I think I only saw two doors open. Thank you!
You'd think that ATR could come up with something that didn't require a 5ft or 1.5m jump. A folding ladder, or at least something. For the young and fit that's not a bad jump, but for others, they could end up in a ball on the ground, and then in everyone else's way. That's not a good design.
small airport and the fire station is right next to A5, roughly at the center of the runway, roughly 120m from the runway :) You can even see a yellow sign in the video saying "A5"
@@anibaldamiao Looking at a map, unless the angle through the telephoto lens distorts too much, the plane stopped quite a bit away from the fire station. But maybe the pilots had the indication that something could be wrong and requested emergency services on standby.
It was just over two minutes from the propellers stopping until the evacuation began. With the fire apparently stopped, the pilots took some time to assess and coordinate with the cabin and ground crews. That seems reasonable to me.
It’s extremely important to ensure that all checklist actions are executed before ordering an evacuation, and only ordering it if it really is necessary. In certain cases Cabin crew can initiate an evacuation without an instruction from the flight deck, in cases such as they hear tearing metal, there is a very unusual cabin attitude or there is uncontrolled fire/smoke inside the cabin. As the passenger states smoke had started entering the cabin ‘by the time’ the evacuation commenced, suggesting it wasn’t present when the engines were shut down. It may be the case that but for that smoke entering the cabin there wouldn’t have been an evacuation. But it appeared that they had completed the necessary checklist(s) down to the ‘evacuation (PA)…………Initiate’ item so that they were ready. As Magnar said smoke in the cabin is a reason to evacuate. An engine that has been secured with no ongoing fire indication generally isn’t.
There is several reasons. checklists to get completed the situation needs to be assessed and understood properly, afterall the passengers might actually be safer staying within the aircraft rather than evacuating. The other reason is. With any evacuation there is a high risk of injury to passengers, which in itself the crew try to avoid unless situation is severe enough the passengers are in danger staying where are and the risk of injury is less than the risk of staying where they are. Also once an Evacuation has been ordered / initiated, it cannot and will not be stopped.
Hello Sir. I want to know the vzlue of - NL / NH / - quantity of Oil from last daily check OIL PRESS / OIL TAMPERATURE in this moment in order to decide faulty According tto the given picture and passenger infos there are two suspected things - over oil servicing more then Full. - AIR SEPARATION PUMP IS FAULTY . - BEARING 2/3 + METALIC O RING BETWEEN HP COMPRESSOR AND DIFFUSER PIPES. AND MAYBE OTHER THING IN OIL CIRCUIT. BECAUSE THE FLAME WAS COMMING FROM INSIDE CENTER OF EXHAUST PIPE !! AND NOT GREAT FLOW IF ITS FUEL IT WILL TAJE TIME TO SHUT AND ALSO COLLAPSE ON REAR BODY ALSO GREY GAS INSIDE CABINE + ITSIN LOW ENGINE PWR = LOW USE OF OIL + LOW FLOW OF EXHAUST GAS WITH HIGH TAMP. MAYBE... FLIGHT INTENDS WAS DOING FATAL MISTAKES TO EVACUATE UN FZULTY SIDE!!!! ALL DOORS IN FIRE SIDE MUST BEEN CLOSED. - I BLAMR ON ATR TO NOT USE MINI TOBBOGANS THERE WILL BE OLD / LOW MOBILITY PAX
Humbly - I don’t think this is an “ATR issue”, like the numerous Boeing happenings aren’t purely technical or even single-point human errors (too many failed secondary checks…). I just ask; If e.g. logistics, planning, levels of knowledge, workmanship or available time all deteriorate _at the same time_ across multiple sectors - can we really explain all of them as ‘individual’ failures? My take is that all such issues - *if* they emerge “all at once” over a just few years - are connected to societal and economic change. Meaning, that causal elements are also found _outside_ the “issue” itself. This is of course NOT a technical argument - just a human meta-approach to how things may not work the same as a few years ago. I’m very relieved that this ended well - from a mere human standpoint. Thanks to the staff on duty, and again to Magnar for sharing his broad experience!
By April 2018, the ATR fleet was flying more than 5,000 times per day and had operated 30 million flight hours. By the end of June 2018, Leonardo had shipped the 1,500th ATR fuselage while nearly 1,700 airliners had been ordered; ATR reportedly led the turboprop regional airliner market since 2010 with a 75% share. The company's aircraft were being operated in nearly 100 countries by 200 airlines and 30 million flights has been completed; it was also claimed that an ATR airliner takes off or lands every 8 seconds.
Nothing. But when there is a fatal accident, you're more likely to hear about other incidents in the same type of aircraft in the news and social media afterward.
C'mon the evacuation was a shambles! they also evacuated from the side where there was a fire, and then people actually walked underneath an engine that was on fire earlier on. I mean come on guys. right side emergency exits only and instruct the to quickly walk onto the green stuff. I can't say anything about the actual aviation related handling of this, I mean there is actually a pilot talking about it, but the actual evacuation was terrible.
You couldnt blame the brand of ATR OR DAH ...BECAUSE THIS ENGINE FAULT WHICH IS PRATT AND WHITNEY ITS NOT ROLS ROYCE.AND I AFGURME ITD RELATIVE TO MAINTENANCE FAULTY AND LITTEL BIT TO CREW ALSO IF THEY SUDDENLY REDUCE POWER IN APPROACH OR MAKING POSITION WERE WIND WILL BACK ENGINE .
I noticed people are jumping out of the plane on the right, and the people on the left are using the stairs. I mean wth is going on..? Glad they are all ok.
When you evacuate you use all doors available. While normal boarding is done via the rear left door on the ATR there are emergency evacuation doors at the front.
All due respect to Mr. Magnar and all ATR crews. I live near the passaredo one and the engine sound still haunts me. I've flown the atr multiple times, but let's be real... This thing is a death trap and i really hope he can transition to another type ASAP. This aerocoffin is killing the regional turboprop reputation! There is a reason why us locals used to call Passaredo (now voepass) "passa medo"
I don't think the ATR is particularly unsafe. Like all aircraft, it must be operated correctly according to procedure. Assuming there was no mechanical failure in the recent Voepass accident, it looks like pilot error.
May I respectfully suggest that you don’t have a clue what you are talking about. These things have flown millions of hours and every day that goes past cements this aircraft’s reputation as one of the safest aircraft flying. You can call the aircraft whatever you want but its statistics speak for themselves.
The internet is a wonderful thing. It gives people who have absolutely no idea of what they are talking about the opportunity to voluntarily broadcast their 'thoughts' to the entire world for them to read and say to themselves 'this here person is a dunce' . . .
You do realize that everyone was able to safely get out and the airport fire department didn't even have to spray a single drop of foam? So why is the ATR a death trap?
I do NOT recommend to fly with any ATR airplanes. Theese terrible planes just made from a piece of shit. The only reason the airlines still use them is because they are cheap and consume less fuel. Their bug-ridden designs, which have not been fixed for 30 years, are a much bigger problem than the 737MAX's. The policy of the airlines that fly them is this: Let's set up a fleet of them and fly them, if a few of them crash, the insurance will cover the damage anyway. Even if it were up to us to cover the damage, we would have already gained several times the damage we would have incurred by the time a few of them crashed. I'd rather fly on a 50 year old Antonov than ride on one of these. Air transportation is safe, except for those with ATR 42/72 series aircraft.
Why??? There are a huge number of these planes in operation. When you consider that, I don't think the number of crashes/incidents is much different to other aircraft, is it?
Thanks Magnar - I really like what you did with my video and I learned a lot.. Great work
EPIC! ❤
Thankyou for sharing your video.
WFL rule!
World famous Kev, and not just in NZ anymore...lol
Great stuff !
Well Done Wellington ARFF - I am retired Firefighter (France ), & Never saw such rapid response. Amazing !!
I was the pilot of a PA-28 that had a fuel spill when being refuelled at NZDN (DUD when it happened). It took the big yellow truck less than 2 minutes from the time of the spill to arrive. They then followed me to the runway and all this was for a spill of less than 5 litres by my estimate.
@@braveworld2707I used to work in the operating theatre of a major hospital very near Auckland airport. Whenever a flight gets into trouble, other than life and limb threatened patients and urgent c-sections, we finish the surgeries we are doing and go onto stand by until we know that flight has landed with no casualties in the unlikely event we end up with casualties in the OR. 💛
P.S. Thank you Captain, and a well done to all, except the passengers who took their carry on bags off with them.
Well handled by pilots, crew, and fire department. And we’ll explained!
As an ATR pilot, it is comforting to see the crew following the right procedures. Also, it is a great way to see unlikely but realistic scenarios play out, so I can anticipate a situation like that myself. Every time an ATR is involved in an incident/accident, there is something important to be learned.
Thank you for this amazing explanation. :)
Good explanation Magnar. We, as you’d be well aware, trained this situation in the simulator on initial Type Rating and periodically on recurrent training and checking detail in the simulator. From my view point this situation ran as trained and well managed.
Thanks for producing this video to explain the situation to your audience.
Anyone who is caught with luggage after an evacuation should be heavily fined!
There are some legitimate reasons to grab it in a situation like that such as asthma or similar illnesses that need immediate medication and have a high likelihood to be triggered by smoke or other events likely in an evacuation but otherwise I agree completely.
@@Taladar2003 no, there isn’t.
Outside you have emergency medical services with access to all medications that could be required for a plane crash, including possible smoke inhalation and training on how to manage this.
Inside you have a situation that the pilot has deemed is more dangerous than a 1.5 metre jump to the ground and requires an evacuation faster than an orderly exit through the main doors.
Your medication might save your life in 5 minutes, when you’ll be able to get medical attention and replacement medicine. Leaving your bag will save your life - and those behind you - _now_.
Its extremely selfish, they are stopping people from getting out.
@@Taladar2003That is true.
I prefer the situation in Singapore when the QANTAS A380 with the blown engine, during evacuation an idiot was towing a roller bag passed the Chief Steward. When told he could not take the bag responded with who can stop me. The Chief replied ME and then picked up the bag and tossed it to the other aisle.
I personally hope there was something fragile in the bag. That's just me dealing with idiots.
and fat people too!
I work 2 minutes away from the airport and somehow missed this news. Glad everyone was safe and thank you for the breakdown! Shame on those passengers who grabbed their bags tbh
Thanks, that was an interesting perspective.
Passengers left to mill about after evacuating was a bad mistake.
Cheers from NZ
Yes I agree, everything looked textbook but the passengers left to their own devices looked a bit ugly. I would have thought somebody in the support vehicle's could have directed them to a safe area away from the aircraft.
@@deano392 I think around 5:35 the bloke who runs from the car does something like that on one side, shortly after the passengers start to slowly drift towards the side of the runway.
i love how u analysis detail methodical and u state facts
ARFF response was top notch, looked like 45 seconds. incredible 👌💪👍
It was. It was also helped by the fact the fire station at WLG is probably 100m from where it stopped. 😂
They were waiting for it to land, so is pretty standard. They only had to drive a couple of hundred metres......
I was watching WFL when this happened. It was good to hear your analysis, and I learned a lot. Thank you!
@@scollyutubeThey were hardly waiting for it to land. They responded the second the alarm was raised, which was a few seconds before landing. As was also clearly mentioned in this video, the engine fire did not occur in an earlier stage of flight.
@inoperative_ pretty sure the pilots reported the low oil pressure caution, then engine fault and associated fire warnings just prior to landing.....i.e they declared a mayday, and landed in that order.
Have to hear the ATC tapes to see the timeframes.
Incredible response time by emergency services 👏
No indication of fire at all in the video yet passengers shared pictures of small flames coming from aircraft exhaust in flight. Looks like we are watching the engine fire being extinguished here. This aircraft type have a history of fuel nozzle problems creating leaks and fires
Thank you Magnar for great indepth video. Please let me share them.
Sure, every video can be shared.
Interesting review Captain Mangar. Well done.
Thank you very much for this thorough and very informative debrief of this Incident!🙂👍
very calmly explained the incident . thanks
Great video, even it is an ATR-72 the principles apply for most of the airplanes which fly in the airlines. THANKS Capt. Magnar
Holy smoke glad people are safe though
By April 2018, the ATR fleet was flying more than 5,000 times per day and had operated 30 million flight hours.[3] By the end of June 2018, Leonardo had shipped the 1,500th ATR fuselage while nearly 1,700 airliners had been ordered; ATR reportedly led the turboprop regional airliner market since 2010 with a 75% share. The company's aircraft were being operated in nearly 100 countries by 200 airlines and 30 million flights has been completed; it was also claimed that an ATR airliner takes off or lands every 8 seconds.[25
Thank you very much for this very informative statistics!🙂👍 - I think there´re meanwhile round about 1750 ATR´s delivered. Since the Dash 8 are out of production the ATR increases its domination of the Turboprop-Market.
A great explanation, thank you
i recently flew on this exact aircraft as NZ5104
If you look closely at the original footage there's a flame from the exhaust the whole time between the two bursts of smoke. My guess is internal oil leak and the smoke is when it wasn't burning cleanly.
Agree, white smoke is clear sign to oil leak to engine,
Thank you!
thanks magnar, do airplane in general have a procedure in which side we should evacuate? like this video actually, its kinda dangerous to evacuate to the left side where the engine failure happened
"Emergency Evacuation ( *On Ground* ) - one of the most enjoyed jokes of a weird ATR checklist... We always LOL during training! The evacuation, by the way, was almost a catastrophe!
Yes, there was a bit of wandering about going on. Not good.
Mentor pilot just made a video about the Saudi tristar who made a full stop but didn't evacuate asap, gave me flashbacks 💀..... I'm glad everybody is fine ❤
Yeah. I watched that one this morning. What a contrast!
Fortunately the big difference being that the ATR here potentially had a small fire in the engine area while the Saudi TriStar had a massive fire inside the fuselage. The pilots of the ATR had the time they took before evacuating - the Saudi pilots didn't have it but still decided to take it - with the known fatal consequences. 😞
@@moi01887 Indeed.
Aircraft manufacturers should develop a mechanical system that locks the overhead bins to prevent passengers from taking their bags during emergency evacuation
What about under seat bags tho'?
The evacuation was triggered because of smoke in the cabin, well done to the crew.
My 2 cents worth: 1) the aircraft stopped on the runway more or less opposite the RFS, which resulted in the fire trucks having a short distance to travel and get there quicker, 2) SOMETHING MUST be done about carry on bags. Once again people have been more worried about taking their carry on with them than evacuating the aircraft - arrrrrgh.
it made me giggle a bit when i realised where the plane had stopped, no kidding they were quick they were basically already there!
Wellington is a pretty small airport, trucks wouldn't have far to travel.
About 30 seconds from heavy smoke to full stop. Guess the guys had an enormous workload….
Knowing the muster time of the fire department, the pilot must have noted a discrepancy on the gauges during flight and advised ATC. Timing was perfect!
where the aircraft stopped is basically right across the taxiway from where the fire department is, basically the ideal spot lol!
Lol kiwi here, the first thing I thought about after this happened was "what will Magnar have to say"
Well its great to have his insight here in little ole New Zealand! This is extremely rare to happen over here and to be caught on video too.
Another great video Captain! Can you explain why there was more smoke after they feathered the props and prior to complete shutdown?
One and a half meters is actually quite a lot to jump from if you are old or have a physical handicap. Don't the ATR planes have a smaller escape hatch that is triggered like the larger jets have?
If you're referring to evacuation slides, then no, the ATRs aren't equipped with these
If you're referring to evacuation slides, then no, the ATRs aren't equipped with these
I work in Wellington Airport, and I heard about it.
No point sitting and waiting for the crew to get it right. Passengers were getting out with hand luggage, then they were walking under the engine that was blowing smoke. How does that work?
Engine was stopped and the smoke had dispersed.
Simple. There are 2 attendants and 2 pilots. The pilots are doing checklists, and the attendants are busy evacuating the aircraft. If there is a fire, they aren't gonna police the hand luggage they are gonna get people off the plane ASAP. In short. There aren't enough people for one to stand near the engine to get people away, and they aren't going to waste time forcing people to put their stuff back.
Great explanation. I'm not sure how many people are inside a fire truck, but I can imagine with an aircraft like the ATR it could save some broken ankles if a few of those firemen would guide people down from their jump from the exits.
Airport fire trucks usually don't carry a lot of personnel. They carry tons of water, foam agent and a lot of engine power to propulsion and pump. Depending on the fire brigade, it's usually 2-3 people per engine. One driver, one operator for the water cannon(s), potentially one extra. The tactics are completely different from what a city fire brigade would do, just due to the nature of a full-blown aircraft fire let's say after a crash landing.
I was thinking the same. It seemed other passengers took it upon themselves to help others
They already have jobs to do
They can't be help Joe with his luggage if a fire breaks out
So if the fire crew helps people out, what happens if the plane catches fire
@@julieharris8562 well that's why I mentioned how many people are in a truck. There are 2 vehicles two trucks and no fire. Not that hard to get two man on each side so people don't break a leg. It's not exactly the fire brigade let your family and dog die if your house is on fire.. nah, they evacuate people as well as you might now.
Can you explain the work of flaps during takeoff and landing😢 plz I found some videos about the flaps during landing the flaps with the high settings that will increase the lift and also so that's why it will reduces the stall speed so it is quite enough but I just confused because during the landing the lift the force is increasing but it is an upward force so that will affect the landing or not
If during take off one engine flame out what check list to do ? After paking break on
Naughty Kiwis bringing their bags as well 😅. Caught on film!
why were passengers exacuated on same side as engine fire?
I'm supposed to be flying next month, videos like these freak me out so much .. lol
Ok, is it me, or are the pax on the left side debarking & heading toward the engine with the fire issue?
It's hard to tell with a telephoto lens, but yeah it looks like some are walking right under it. I was looking to see if anyone banged their head on the prop!
@@brandyballoon Or if they were taking selfies under the engine ...
I don't know anything about flying so this might be a stupid suggestion. The smoke only started just before landing, at that point the wheels are down, could it be a split hydraulic hose for the undercarriage spraying onto the motor?
No, the undercarriage is attached to the fuselage. There are no hydraulic lines in the left-hand engine nacelle.
@@FlywithMagnar Cheers well that kills that theory :)
Looks to me an internal engine oil seal failure.
My bet is on hydraulic oil leak ... oil smoke is white. The smoke seemed to stop when reverse thrust was active, and then resumed aftwerwards. ... so my suspicion is that the issue is connected to the hydraulics of the propeller pitch control.
exactly what I was thinking.
I don't think so. There are no hydraulic lines in the LH engine bay. The only hydraulic line to an engine on the ATR is the RH engine prop brake for Hotel mode. Propellor pitch is controlled by engine oil. There are photos showing flame emanating from inside the exhaust. As the smoke stopped when reverse was commanded, I suspect a turbine labyrinth seal which wasn't performing at low power setting then pressured up when reverse power was selected - you will notice the smoke stopped during the reverse phase then restarted once the engine went back to ground idle.
@@nzmarty Is it not possible that oil spraying at several thousand psi could reach a point of ingestion to the engine? (think pressure washer, as you might use to clean your driveway)
@@JoeBlow-zr2ru no. Engine intake is well forward of the landing gear and the landing gear is contained within the fairings at the bottom of the aeroplane.
How are wheelchair users or other passengers with disabilities evacuated in a situation like this?
Also physically unfit persons in general.
Someone would have to help them down the main stairs, or out the emergency exit.
Slowly. That’s why they are not sat by emergency exits.
Same question applies to taller aircraft with slides. It's not like you can just coast down an emergency slide in a wheelchair.
Just hope that there is someone to help...
We throw them down the slides. What other option is available, especially when expedience is required due to smoke/fire in the cabin.
Hello Captain. Engine fire on short final, so after FAF/Gate, you continue to land and solve it on the ground. How about engine flame out on short final? Do you continue and land or apply the procedure for engine flameout. And also what about engine flame out at an intermediate altitude (for example downwind of a traffic pattern) And which procedure do you apply? Engine flame out in flight or engine flame out at take off (due to the fact that you have gear down and pwr management in Take off position). Thank you in advance, really enjoying your videos.
Short final - Continue and land. Intermediate altitude - all things being equal, take your time and enjoy your emergency.
Letting pax out the entry door at rear left seems mad.
It was the left engine that smoked. What if the issue was continuing inside the engine.
Same for popping the emergency exits front left.
Your allowing pax to be near the engine that may have continued to have internal issues and may be still on fire internally.
I heard that the first the pilots knew of the smoke was when WLG_TWR told them!
And the left engine was 2 days old when it smoked!
Whats funny is the Lucy Macleod is my RE teacher at st pats
Internal oil in the engine smoke.
While many comment on the passengers taking their luggage, remember an evacuation can be a VERY stressful event. Under stress people can do some odd things. As Magnar said, usually people in this situation find that their perception of time gets distorted and their recollection of events can be hazy. He commented on the passenger’s clear recalling of events.
evacuating on side of the possible fire ????
Pulled up fast and straight, so they still had good power in that engine.
Aa someone from India.. I approve of the thumbnail😅😁😄
Now off to watching the actual video.
As the emergency was dealt in an efficient manner, the pax may have had permission to take their in-flight bag with them.
I am wondering if the pilots had any indication of something potentially being wrong and requested emergency services on standby, which would also explain why they were so quick to be there.
I looked at the map of the airport, and if I interpret the video right, they landed on RWY 34. The fire station however is closer to the 16 end of the runway, but they did approach the aircraft from the side instead of from ahead. Normal SOP (at least for places I am familiar with, I have unfortunately never been to Wellington) is that requested standby happens near the end of the runway where the plane lands and then they go with the landing aircraft. Which makes sense, as this is a lot easier to do than to go the opposite direction and then potentially turn around when the aircraft stops later.
This is just speculation from a former firefighter, so don't take this as me knowing anything about this incident beyond what Captain Magnar explains in the video.
I doubt if they had time to put them on standby. I'm pretty sure they responded directly from the station to the aircraft.
@@einarbolstad8150 from the time we see the smoke, they certainly didn't have time to request standby. No doubt there.
But maybe at some earlier stage of the flight, long before the video started, if there was any kind of indication that something isn't right with that engine. I'm sure there are numerous things pilots can see that would make them request emergency standby.
Initial reports suggest the engine fire warning went off as they passed through 300 feet above the runway, so they had about a minute from when the warning went off until the plane was stopped on the runway. The fire station is on the eastern apron abeam taxiway A5, almost in the centre of the runway, and the plane stopped between A5 and A6.
the Fire Station is basically right at the middle of the runway. It actually faces southwest - when you stand in the doors you look directly towards the 34 threshold.
saludos aviator
smoke looks whiteish gray, like oil or hydraulic liquid...wrong color for fuel, at least by the video visual...
Yeah fuel would be black, hydraulics can be bluish (even though it's often red or yellow), engine oil tends to burn white
Maybe a labyrinth seal?
@@magpiefrogfrom2556 more likely a rubber seal started burning than the oil smoke took over... CO2 would leave a very transparent smoke in this case, not the thick white stuff increasing and decreasing as the engine wound down...
@@magpiefrogfrom2556 Except that the fire bottles aren't CO₂. They're Halotron.
Wellington's average wind speed is the highest of the world's capital cities.
Cause was a bearing, apparently.
Just bad timing. A while back, when flying C130s, we had already performed a precautionary engine shutdown for an oil leak. On landing, the loadmaster informed us of sparks coming from another engine. We shut it down too along with the other two.
In our case, however, we pulled off the runway before shutting down all of the engines. That way, we weren't blocking the runway and preventing it's continued use.
Another comment on this situation. I feel that using the side emergency exit was totally unnecessary. There was no active fire and untrained civilians climbing out these exits (while taking their bags 🤦♂)was risky.
I remember seeing years ago an aircraft with an engine fire pulled off the runway, but the wind then blew the fire directly at the fuselage - I think the a/c was destroyed and people killed 😞
@kkiwi54 refers to British Airtours flight 28M at Manchester on 22/08/1985. Had the Captain of that aircraft stopped on the runway and assessed the situation more passengers may have survived.
Regarding the decision to order an emergency evacuation, it is likely to have been based on information available to the crew such as whether an ongoing fire indication existed, and whether there was smoke in the cabin. We’ve heard a passenger report that smoke had started to enter the cabin by the time the evacuation began. Another option available on aircraft with built in stairs when away from the stand is sometimes referred to as a precautionary or rapid disembarkation. In this case only the main door would be used but obviously wouldn’t be completed anywhere near as swiftly as an emergency evacuation. I think most Captains would elect to get people out of the aircraft as quickly as possible at the risk of injury rather than a slower disembarkation if smoke is present or there was other indications of fire.
Voepass Preliminarily report was released
But evacuating on the left, where the engine is that is on fire. (although shortly after landing no fire visible it can still burn on the inside) seems not correct? And you see passengers walk to that same engine. There is always a risk of some kind of explosion from that engine. And strange enough the firemen do nothing for quite some time, just sitting in their trucks. But we miss the radio conversations that might explain why they handled this way. Most important: no one got injured!
Yeah, it's a bit risky to evacuate on the side of the fire.
@@bbgun061What fire?
It was a good decision to stay put and just observe. Fire truck was ready to quickly lay foam if the situation escalated.
Its a tad unexpected though, that the crew decided to evac on the left hand side at L1 and L2. Since the passengers could've become cannonfodder if a blaze started, that required a laydown of foam. Maybe the wider evac was caused by smoke in the cabin, which is a big health concern.
You live and learn.
@@Trevor_Austin The fire that had been there. Typically in case of a fire, it's best to evacuate on the other side. Fortunately in this case, the fire did not start again.
"Smoking or non-smoking?"
it’s very surprising to me that passengers are expected to jump one and a half meters to evacuate the airplane. For any elderly person with bone deterioration, that is a recipe for a broken leg, broken, hip, broken pelvis, or worse. It surprises me that that is certified.
I'm sure anyone who is physically unable can go to the main door. Or, since the passengers in the exit row are supposed to be able bodied, they can assist others getting out the emergency exits after they exit first.
If you think that is bad see what happens when an elderly person goes down a slide from any widebody. Any Captain that initiates an evacuation from any public transport aircraft should be aware of the high risk of severe injury, and possibly even death. There’s no safe way to get even close to the certificated passenger load off most aircraft in a very short time. In certification demonstrations it’s done in a darkened hangar with half the exits unavailable and must be complete in 90 seconds. They use fit volunteers and sometimes even they get injured.
@@Embraermanif I remember correctly, when Airbus were demonstrating the emergency evacuation for the certification, there were several broken bones.
Persons vith reduced mobility (PRM) are seated near the main cabin door.
I’ll guess a seal failed in the prop and oil from the propeller pitch change system was ejected into the engine intake. I’ll also guess that there was no fire indication. Would I have evacuated? Most unlikely. Why? No flames. No smoke. No leaking fuel. Fire trucks just outside. Greater chance of passenger injury.
We don’t t know what information the crew had from the cabin. The risk to pax in a “precautionary “ evacuation is c
negligible compared to the scenario if the cabin is rapidly filled with smoke. The two pilots can only go on what the see in front of them and don’t have the luxury of being able to see what’s happening behind them. My view for any fire/smoke event is to evacuate…at least you can discuss the rights and wrongs of your decision afterwards.
There were flames. He skipped over the picture taken by a passenger of flames in the engine. See 6:29.
@@FlightcontrailsEach have our own opinion on this. Personally, I would prefer not to risk passenger death and injury by ordering a “precautionary” evacuation. And I also can discuss the rights and wrongs but absolutely none of my passengers would be hurt. None.
@@WairoakidNo I didn’t. I’ll agree that flames and smoke from a jet pipe are not normal but they went out with the engine. With fire trucks metres away capable of killing any likely fire my passengers would be safer inside than out.
@@Trevor_Austin When I said "he" I didn't mean you. I meant Magnar . However not being a pilot I aren't qualified to offer an opinion on the actions of the pilots in this case. I was just pointing out there we flames albeit it appears to be when it was in the air.
Surprised they did not turn the plane to the left when stopping, so the burning engine was downwind of the cabin.
That could move the fire from the engine to the wing and catch the fuel on fire and that will be very bad .
The wind was coming from the right so actually would put the fire upwind of the fuselage. And yes that is a standard procedure for engine fire on ground, you turn the aircraft into the wind. CM2 sets the heading for CM1 to stop the aircraft in the wind direction
You want it pointed directly into the wind if possible, so the air passes by in a streamlined manner. If it's broadside you'll get turbulent flow around the fuselage and eddies that'll make the smoke hang around and "stick" to it.
What i noticed was that the prop rpm of both engines didn't seem to change or differ until on the ground, so no feathering before stopping. Smoke in the cabin should mean it was either an internal problem or smoke got sucked into the turbine intake (which means it was still turning after stopping), is that correct? Too bad Atr is having bad luck lately.
It would be very bad to feather the propeller on short final. That could cause a crash. After landing, the pilots do not immediately feather because they are using reverse thrust to help stop the airplane. Reverse thrust could have pulled some smoke forward into the engine intake. Or the smoke could have been produced in the compressor section of the engine, and got into the cabin that way.
The most important thing to do is nothing - quickly. With a fire on short finals continue, land and stop. Tell the passengers to remain seated. Then work out the problem. Then take action as appropriate.
It happened at 200 feet.
ATR again, what's happening.
Pratt & Whitney Canada again, what's happening.
@@FlywithMagnar I suppose, yeah
What would happen if the engine ingested a seagull on late finals? The ocean is right there, and seagulls flock there.
I think the air intake on those engines is too small, and you got all the propeller blades swooshing past it all the time. So if a birdstrike occurs, it would hit the propeller and the Seagull Nuggets would get flung away form the engine core.
in those wind conditions there is not much chance of a seagull being anywhere near the approach. Bird strikes are quite rare at WLG
Birds can be invested into the engine. I know about two occurences. In both cases, the result was a terrible smell of dead bird in the cabin.
@@FlywithMagnar mmm roast chicken :)
Hello, Magnar-If I may ask, why were passengers allowed to evacuate on the left side where the fire had occurred? And how many emergency exits does an ATR typically have? I think I only saw two doors open. Thank you!
No expert but if it were a car i'd say it was a hose/seal or similar failure
You'd think that ATR could come up with something that didn't require a 5ft or 1.5m jump. A folding ladder, or at least something. For the young and fit that's not a bad jump, but for others, they could end up in a ball on the ground, and then in everyone else's way. That's not a good design.
Okay. I'm now sure how that did that, but the trucks got there in 1 minute and a few seconds ish ..😮!!!!!
small airport and the fire station is right next to A5, roughly at the center of the runway, roughly 120m from the runway :) You can even see a yellow sign in the video saying "A5"
@@anibaldamiao Looking at a map, unless the angle through the telephoto lens distorts too much, the plane stopped quite a bit away from the fire station. But maybe the pilots had the indication that something could be wrong and requested emergency services on standby.
I still don't understand why evacuation was not performed immediately.
It was just over two minutes from the propellers stopping until the evacuation began. With the fire apparently stopped, the pilots took some time to assess and coordinate with the cabin and ground crews. That seems reasonable to me.
It’s extremely important to ensure that all checklist actions are executed before ordering an evacuation, and only ordering it if it really is necessary. In certain cases Cabin crew can initiate an evacuation without an instruction from the flight deck, in cases such as they hear tearing metal, there is a very unusual cabin attitude or there is uncontrolled fire/smoke inside the cabin.
As the passenger states smoke had started entering the cabin ‘by the time’ the evacuation commenced, suggesting it wasn’t present when the engines were shut down. It may be the case that but for that smoke entering the cabin there wouldn’t have been an evacuation. But it appeared that they had completed the necessary checklist(s) down to the ‘evacuation (PA)…………Initiate’ item so that they were ready.
As Magnar said smoke in the cabin is a reason to evacuate. An engine that has been secured with no ongoing fire indication generally isn’t.
Why? Because that is a very, very silly thing to do for a whole variety of reasons.
There is several reasons. checklists to get completed the situation needs to be assessed and understood properly, afterall the passengers might actually be safer staying within the aircraft rather than evacuating. The other reason is. With any evacuation there is a high risk of injury to passengers, which in itself the crew try to avoid unless situation is severe enough the passengers are in danger staying where are and the risk of injury is less than the risk of staying where they are. Also once an Evacuation has been ordered / initiated, it cannot and will not be stopped.
Hello Sir.
I want to know the vzlue of
- NL / NH /
- quantity of Oil from last daily check
OIL PRESS / OIL TAMPERATURE
in this moment in order to decide faulty
According tto the given picture and passenger infos there are two suspected things
- over oil servicing more then Full.
- AIR SEPARATION PUMP IS FAULTY .
- BEARING 2/3 + METALIC O RING BETWEEN HP COMPRESSOR AND DIFFUSER PIPES.
AND MAYBE OTHER THING IN OIL CIRCUIT.
BECAUSE THE FLAME WAS COMMING FROM INSIDE CENTER OF EXHAUST PIPE !! AND NOT GREAT FLOW IF ITS FUEL IT WILL TAJE TIME TO SHUT AND ALSO COLLAPSE ON REAR BODY ALSO
GREY GAS INSIDE CABINE
+ ITSIN LOW ENGINE PWR = LOW USE OF OIL + LOW FLOW OF EXHAUST GAS WITH HIGH TAMP.
MAYBE...
FLIGHT INTENDS WAS DOING FATAL MISTAKES TO EVACUATE UN FZULTY SIDE!!!! ALL DOORS IN FIRE SIDE MUST BEEN CLOSED.
- I BLAMR ON ATR TO NOT USE MINI TOBBOGANS THERE WILL BE OLD / LOW MOBILITY PAX
Why cant people recording just be quiet? You can ruin the video later with a voice over, if thats what you want to do
What's happening to ATRs these days?
Humbly - I don’t think this is an “ATR issue”, like the numerous Boeing happenings aren’t purely technical or even single-point human errors (too many failed secondary checks…).
I just ask; If e.g. logistics, planning, levels of knowledge, workmanship or available time all deteriorate _at the same time_ across multiple sectors - can we really explain all of them as ‘individual’ failures?
My take is that all such issues - *if* they emerge “all at once” over a just few years - are connected to societal and economic change. Meaning, that causal elements are also found _outside_ the “issue” itself.
This is of course NOT a technical argument - just a human meta-approach to how things may not work the same as a few years ago.
I’m very relieved that this ended well - from a mere human standpoint. Thanks to the staff on duty, and again to Magnar for sharing his broad experience!
By April 2018, the ATR fleet was flying more than 5,000 times per day and had operated 30 million flight hours. By the end of June 2018, Leonardo had shipped the 1,500th ATR fuselage while nearly 1,700 airliners had been ordered; ATR reportedly led the turboprop regional airliner market since 2010 with a 75% share. The company's aircraft were being operated in nearly 100 countries by 200 airlines and 30 million flights has been completed; it was also claimed that an ATR airliner takes off or lands every 8 seconds.
Nothing. But when there is a fatal accident, you're more likely to hear about other incidents in the same type of aircraft in the news and social media afterward.
C'mon the evacuation was a shambles! they also evacuated from the side where there was a fire, and then people actually walked underneath an engine that was on fire earlier on. I mean come on guys. right side emergency exits only and instruct the to quickly walk onto the green stuff. I can't say anything about the actual aviation related handling of this, I mean there is actually a pilot talking about it, but the actual evacuation was terrible.
Internal oil leak..burning in the exhaust.
You couldnt blame the brand of ATR OR DAH ...BECAUSE THIS ENGINE FAULT WHICH IS PRATT AND WHITNEY ITS NOT ROLS ROYCE.AND I AFGURME ITD RELATIVE TO MAINTENANCE FAULTY AND LITTEL BIT TO CREW ALSO IF THEY SUDDENLY REDUCE POWER IN APPROACH OR MAKING POSITION WERE WIND WILL BACK ENGINE .
I noticed people are jumping out of the plane on the right, and the people on the left are using the stairs. I mean wth is going on..? Glad they are all ok.
When you evacuate you use all doors available. While normal boarding is done via the rear left door on the ATR there are emergency evacuation doors at the front.
I guess that the flight attendants allowed younger fit people to jump while old people were encouraged to use the stairs at the rear of the plane.
Just like sim
Is it a fire? Looks more like oil or fuel fumes. Faulty fuel-nozzle is more probable.
Bird ingestion maybe…
Bit of a flame out, whats the drama????
Not a fan of the fact of the flight attendands obviously failing to keep the passengers from taking their luggage with them.
Not a fan of passengers ignoring instructions to leave their bags behind.
You must have been mistaken as Mr. Bill Gates many times.
The response from fire fighters was so slow.
All due respect to Mr. Magnar and all ATR crews.
I live near the passaredo one and the engine sound still haunts me. I've flown the atr multiple times, but let's be real... This thing is a death trap and i really hope he can transition to another type ASAP.
This aerocoffin is killing the regional turboprop reputation!
There is a reason why us locals used to call Passaredo (now voepass) "passa medo"
I don't think the ATR is particularly unsafe. Like all aircraft, it must be operated correctly according to procedure. Assuming there was no mechanical failure in the recent Voepass accident, it looks like pilot error.
May I respectfully suggest that you don’t have a clue what you are talking about. These things have flown millions of hours and every day that goes past cements this aircraft’s reputation as one of the safest aircraft flying. You can call the aircraft whatever you want but its statistics speak for themselves.
No one was hurt, the ATR recommended procedures worked.
The internet is a wonderful thing. It gives people who have absolutely no idea of what they are talking about the opportunity to voluntarily broadcast their 'thoughts' to the entire world for them to read and say to themselves 'this here person is a dunce' . . .
You do realize that everyone was able to safely get out and the airport fire department didn't even have to spray a single drop of foam?
So why is the ATR a death trap?
I do NOT recommend to fly with any ATR airplanes. Theese terrible planes just made from a piece of shit. The only reason the airlines still use them is because they are cheap and consume less fuel. Their bug-ridden designs, which have not been fixed for 30 years, are a much bigger problem than the 737MAX's. The policy of the airlines that fly them is this: Let's set up a fleet of them and fly them, if a few of them crash, the insurance will cover the damage anyway. Even if it were up to us to cover the damage, we would have already gained several times the damage we would have incurred by the time a few of them crashed.
I'd rather fly on a 50 year old Antonov than ride on one of these. Air transportation is safe, except for those with ATR 42/72 series aircraft.
No one who loves his life would wander near these planes.
Why??? There are a huge number of these planes in operation. When you consider that, I don't think the number of crashes/incidents is much different to other aircraft, is it?