It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: grey580
I imagine the pucker factor was high that day.
Seeing flames shooting out the back of the engine and the wing on fire would leave a brown stain in ones pants.
originally posted by: BO XIAN
a reply to: Zaphod58
What might be a reason for a delayed evacuation?
Trying to determine better which direction would be least hazardous?
originally posted by: thebozeian
a reply to: charlyv
No the latest report in Flight Global specifically states that the prevailing wind was blowing the flames away from the fuse. My bet is that it was a case of the tech crew not possibly realizing the true extent of the fire because from the cockpit you cannot see it, and cabin crew were probably thought to be exaggerating the size of the fire. And that a rapid response from Changi Airport fire services had them believing that it was safer to leave the passengers on board. And there are plenty of examples of this thinking being correct from other incidents in recent years, including notably at Changi itself.
As for the cause I am leaning more to there being a failure in a fuel to oil heat exchanger. This would explain both the loss of oil and the rapid spread of fire over such a large area. Television footage I just watched showed substantial damage to the LE and TE devices with large sheets of charred carbon fibre flapping in the breeze from the lower wing surfaces at least 20ft outboard of the RH engine.