I'm not surprised that there's not much information on the Internet for something on a date that's still a year in the future.

The Aviation Herald is writing that the Emergency Services found no nothing and the Aircraft returned 12.5 hours later to service. Thank you very much for picking this incident up!👍

How were you able to get the radio recordings from this?? I have been trying to listen in on Landvetter as I live in Sweden and see the planes every day, but I can never find any radio feed 😢

I was working that day in the airport and got information from the pilot. There was an electical fault causing the fire engine warning to turn on. There was never any mechanical problems or any fire in the engine. Pure electrical failure.

Something like that, yes.

sounds about. Keep going while your aircraft on fire....

To be fair I was more annoyed with how poor of a communicator the pilot was.

@RomatifaRoma you win the internet sir

Others say that they already evacuated the runway many hours ago

"8AR, if you evacuate the aircraft could you ask the passengers to push the smoldering hulk onto delta..."

She was telling him to evacate run way even though he said there was a problem ,till he said mayday mayday mayday, she had told him I see smoke from right side ,then said can you confirm its right side. She even said you may evacuate. TO the atc controller I know you're trying yo hrlp but the crew whose been flying the plane know better what situation is at thst time, you can only see from a distance ,a fire burning undetected thet maybe hasent set off alarms, as there on ground csn quickly get out of hand, her job was to hrlp pilot as much as posdible, get engines there and ambulances, eith them using chutes, and airport officials , I know your in charge of active runways hut crew bedtbprople to deal eith whatever is occuring

​@@bunglejoy3645 The pilot was asking ATC what she saw

Even though I have an RAF pilot’s past, can I pass as one such person since I am no longer able to fly due to becoming disabled. (Is it still called “disabled” these days or am I now “ability challenged” having moved from the Royal Air Force to the Wheelchair Force?) On a slightly more serious note, I think it’s real great that there are folks like you who take an interest in the aviation world and I’m glad that we get to share these snippets of radio chatter between flights and ATC. I’m really happy to know there are such people like yourself out there.

🫡

Love it. Non aviator but Im always impressed by the skills, professionalism and clarity of communication all under pressure. These folks are all real pros. Kudos to them.

I am your kind of people. Too bad you’re not a woman !

@@TheGreyAreaBetweenthanks for your service mate

Indeed, exactly!😃👍 - But probably exactly therefore: Nobody is assuming here that the other one on the Radio is an English Native Speaker and all Participants are knowing that they´re speaking very different Native Languages and need to find a way to understand each other.

I beg to differ to a certain point. The mastery of English both by the pilot and ATC was shaky at best. Hard to understand and causing delays in intervention.

@@MrPomelo555I agree with you. 5:08 is a perfect example

@@Walmarts1- spelling out MAXIV isn’t a demonstration of poor English language, if that’s what you’re pointing out. The pilot needs to type it into the FMC, and if they type MAXEV, and go direct to, then they’ll be off to Dublin.

@@EdOeuna Indeed, exactly. And the English both by the pilot and ATC was far away from being shaky, maybe for an English Native Speaker who has few experience with Non-English Accents.

Only one runway so airport closure would be necessary

Landvetter is tiny so there's only one runway and it's a little tricky to divert.

In situations like that it doesn’t matter how many runways there are, pilot reports stopping you just say roger and informed them to advise when able if they need assistance.

Hole in a taxi way from a fire is a lot easier to repair then a fire hole in the middle of a runway

​@@davidkavanagh189That doesn't really matter in that case tho, if the fire brigade is busy/not available for any other aircraft, nobody will land or take off.

This demonstration is hilarious and awesome :D Must love scandinavian humour.

Fancy digital systems are all well and good but you still need an old fashioned VHF radio to speak directly with the aircraft. It's too inefficient and error prone to use ATC as an intermediary.

​@@johnopalko5223The nice part with digital is that you can combine it so you can relay analog from it. So no need for two radios. You can connect the units needed without disturbing other operations and you can have lets say one person relaying to from analog.

LOL! Bullshit marketing for people who don't understand how noise cancellation works. I used to do military comms, and I've flown with good quality noise cancelling headsets. Digital has nothing to do with it. The headsets we developed, and bought in, for BOWMAN were so good that we had to add back side-tone so that people could hear that they were speaking. We then digitized the analog signal and passed that on a digital network, but that had nothing to do with the noise cancellation. That was all about high quality electret mikes and phase inverted noise signals added to the speakers. We stood between the exhausts of a Challenger tank one day and were talking about where we were going to take it, while it was warming up. The only way we knew it was running was that we could feel it in our chest and through the ground. Even back in 1983 when I was flying on XX105 the military headsets were so good that we couldn't even hear wind noise over the cockpit, take them off and there was 400Hz noise from the experimental electronics and you could hear the engines and wind noise. With the headsets on you were in silence. Digital transmission is better, but that has been in cell phones since the 90s. Spread spectrum is better again. Nothing to do with having a CODEC. Every digital voice system has "a CODEC", it just means Coder-Decoder. Having an instant mixer is also a nice trick. Look up A-law and Mu-law companding and you'll see that digital CODECs have been in telephony since at least the 70s. Part of the problem with land lines is that they are still trying to compress calls into a few kbps when there hasn't been a need to conserve audio bandwidth in the last 20 years. In the 1990s, for the military, we had 64kbps for every voice channel. Whether it was over the Combat Net Radios or over the fiber Local Area SubSystem the voice channels sounded like you were right next to the caller in an empty and silent room.

Does that mean that the airport ops vehicles can't directly communicate with the aircraft? If not, then ATC radios should still have been able to pick up on the analog component of the radio transmission unless it was an incredibly weak signal being transmitted in the first place, right? I have some knowledge of how radios work, I do know that a normal analog radio can't understand digital data based voice radios, but for the aircraft to hear the firefighting vehicle's radios without needing the tower to act as an intermediary would require them to also simultaneously transmit VHF analog voice radio on a frequency the aircraft is capable of tuning to. Point is, sure this digital radio stuff might make your voice sound better for NORMAL (non airport) firefighting operations, but it's useless in AIRPORT firefighting operations because the aircraft that might have an issue won't be able to communicate with the firefighting vehicle using that digital radio system since it lacks the proper equipment.

have you seen those giant wheels on most firefighting trucks? They can easily go off TWY onto the grass.

No, they really can’t.

@@maki19942207 NOBODY wants to drive off paved surfaces, because then you have to clean FOD from the treads. I mean actually doing it, and some of those trucks have 8 wheels, and pebbels and mud get stuck in them, and will take a while. I agree, PIC should have been a bit more decisive. But I wasnt there, and not sure of the totality of circumstances. At least he didnt push the AC onto the taxiway completely and said thats it. We stop here and evac.

@@RipRoaringGarageI highly doubt the reason that any fire truck would not drive off a taxiway or paved surface is for cleaning. If they’ll have to spend a few hours to clean the truck at the cost of saving hundreds of lives, you best believe they’ll take the ‘sacrifice’

@@Walmarts1 Were not talking about a fire, or crash where the runway will be closed for days. But this is beaten into us daily. Keychains for every vehicle have FOD tools for treads. Youre supposed to stop when entering the apron, check all the tires, then roll up and check the hidden spot. Its a big thing, so when you have a plane with no signs of smoke, training kicks in like instinct. Dont drive off paved surfaces. Even when there is a crash, think of the last time you saw anything on grass. Not since the 80s. Its a habit and it takes something truly horrible to make you say screw it, the runway is trashed anyway, so FOD is the least of the worries. I thikn it was after the Concorde crash that FOD has been really stressed, and nobdoy wants to be that guy that tracks a bolt, or a peddle that takes out an engine or tire.

3:04 hahahha

They've just got out of an aviation, don't know why they'd launch into another one 😝

This was not a very well handled response by the controller. Pilot is saying we have fire on board and she's tell him to vacate the runway. Even AFTER the MAYDAY call, she's tell him to vacate if "he'd like." No awareness of the issue, no urgency.

@@jrod_pilot_miami She clearly wanted to get the Aircraft off the Runway - Gothenburg Landvetter is a small Airport with only one Runway - if the Runway is occupied by a crippled Aircraft the Airport is shutted down.

​@@NicolaW72well better shut down than others witnessing a situation if it turned horrible,e plus traffic could land elsewhere small aitport ATC had thrir hands full with that incident, I'd say yo all atc back in 1987 ish we had a plane disaster in uk , on the runway snd a number of prople killed it was at manchester

This is the actual Radio Communication, not a later Report.

If the number one engine is gone then the other engine is left, right? ;-)

My brother is a turf cutter. He cuts it and I pileit....😂

You have very good reason. A whole aircraft full of people died from just the fumes one time because the stinking captain didn't stop and get everyone out ASAP. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudia_Flight_163

Lithium. Batteries.

@@cageordie Indeed.

@@cageordie Have you seen the CVR transcriptions? The whole situation was completely absurd, I can't believe the crew would be allowed to pilot any aircraft with the skills they showed on that accident.

The Aviation Herald stated that the Emergency Services found no nothing, that the Aircraft taxied 20 minutes later to the Apron and that it returned 12.5 hours later to service. So probably a minor issue or a false indication. But this is the actual Radio Communication which happened during the event, not a later Report.

ah - that makes more sense ... reopening the airport 40 minutes after a taxiway evacuation sounded improbable!

The aircraft can probably be dispatched, under the MEL, with failed fire detection systems, or removed slides.

Hahahaha you got that right. 😅😅😂

😂

Im pretty sure, that when ATC hears the word fire, she calls the fire brigade. Otherwise, the moment the ac calls mayday, she presses the big red button for sure.

@@GyrisCapat my airport we only call them if the aircraft is still in the air and not too close to the field. otherwise instant the red button

Fire crews will hesitate to get close to an engine that is running. The intake could suck up personnel or equipment extremely efficiently.

@@unbekannt4637 Yeah that’s basically what I meant, and what i would have expected. I sit on the other side of the conversation, and i would have informed ATC of the exact indications that was illuminating, but its easy to sit behind a keyboard and say what should have been done. It’s different when you are actually in the situation and have to try and analyse what the hell is actually going on. Like Sully said, there is also a human factor involved. In what country is your airport located if i can ask?

@@daveluttinen2547 that's what I thought. I just wasn't sure how long the delay might have been. Obviously the crews first concern is everyone's safety so I assumed the plan would be immediate shutdown of all engines and evacuations begin

That’s because the Lufthansa was sequenced closely behind.

Everyone was very professional and on point.

The irony that a professional airline like Ryanair is comedic fodder in the US, while the US on an almost daily basis has runway incursions, aircraft departing from close runways, and a national aircraft manufacturer in crisis mode. 😂

Ryanair for its size and about 3000 flights per day has one of the world's best safety records to put out so I don't get the jokes. They are known for having very strict (and many many) SOPs even going further than Boeing's SOPs

@@PN_48not irony, just math. The U.S. has more aircraft operating at any time than any other country. The fact that Ryanair is fodder is Ryanair’s fault.

@@SeligTilesI’m an ATC at a big center in Europe. I have yet to find one unprofessional Ryanair pilot, whereas I can guarantee you that we take the piss amongst us about almost every single American pilot that comes on our frequency, as they struggle to sometimes even readback points that we spell out for them, and they spell them back wrong. We have to adjust our rate of speech the same way we do with Chinese pilots just cause it seems like they don’t have a clue about what’s going on.

I believe it was determined that there was no fire and the aircraft was towed to stand without evacuating.

09:20Z

Welcome to Scandinavia lol.

@@Welshy98 I don't know if I I should be impressed or concerned 🤔

@@franharwood3439 Be impressed. Scandinavian ATC is some of the best in the world. The American hyper ATC talking might sound impressive but it's rarely needed and often cause problems and confusion.

​@@davidkavanagh189agreed. They sound like they talk with a sock in their mouth.

You realise that English isn’t their first language?

"It stopped flying."

Unfortunately there is a lot less coverage in Europe; these recordings are from enthusiasts who live near airports with their own equipment who provide a live feed to liveatc. In countries where English is not the native language, there will be a lot less interest in English language ATC recordings. Also, it is illegal to do this in some places. Some countries, most notably the UK, prohibit recording ATC frequencies.

It was towed to stand with engines off. When the captain understood there was no real fire, they pushed the aircraft into stand.

Probably not

More action and less talk i Europe. The Fire brigade was there in just a few seconds.

Parking space for aeroplanes, usually one not directly attached to a terminal, and therefore requiring air stairs and a bus to get people to and from the terminal. So Tower is saying to go to parking space 21, using the route taxiway Y, taxiway K.

Parking position

Parking position, as others including VASAviation have mentioned. This term is used across Europe, and I believe here in Canada as well.

@@rupertboyce-bown6650 Thanks so much for this thorough and clear explanation! I'm not a pilot, but I have never heard it on this channel before. Your explanation makes it really clear.

It's probably a good sign if you're not seeing much content from Europe. Not many dangerous or concerning incidents. However, if the government regulators and European-based airlines are going to push for DEI, like in America, then you'll definitely see an uptick of videos coming out of Europe.

Unfortunately there’s a lot less radio coverage in Europe

@@seanmcnally5560There´re simply a couple of European Countries where it is strictly forbidden to publish Radio Communication between Pilots and ATC. E.G. in Germany it is a Crime, called "Violation of the Data Protection Law". And if you have Bad Luck the Attorneyship will make a "Dangerous Impact on Air Traffic" out of it. You can be prosecuted and sentenced to Jail if you do so. Therefore you will never see any publication of any radio communication between Pilots and ATC in Germany on this channel or any similar ones. That doesn´t mean that nothing happens in the German Airspace or at German Airports. There´re a few Countries in Europe with more liberal regulations in this regard: the Netherlands, Portugal, Ireland, Hungary, Poland, Serbia and Sweden. So it´s no coincidence that Events from Europe, which are covered here, are coming usually from one of these Countries.

@@seanmcnally5560 Not necessarily. Some countries in Europe take a more paternalistic view of their citizens and recording ATC traffic is a crime there. In others, English is not the native language so there isn't nearly as much interest in English ATC recordings.

It's just MAXIV, a waypoint

It's "MAXIV and" that you're hearing as "max seven". Read as "maksivənd". i and e are close enough to be misheard.

It is MAXIV, max-eev with an accent. MAXIV is a holding point to the north of Gothenberg airport.

MAXIV is a holding waypoint. You can see planes circling it at the end of the video prior to be vectored back to the airport for landing.

Oof, yeah, I, too, would have needed a phonetic spelling on that one!

Cool? No, Hot!

Why?

Airliner engines have fire suppression systems built in. They're not supposed to just turn off the engines, that'd be likely to lose the entire aircraft and put more people in danger. There's a checklist that they need to work through. Mentor pilot has at least 1 video talking about this stuff.

@@nolanwhite1971wrong.. the pilots can shut engines down if they deem necessary.. there’s no checklist required to shut an engine n the ground. Plus the fire suppression systems are NOT automatic. The pilots have to activate them. Please don’t make comments on things that you don’t know.

The evacuation checklist directs to shut down both engines. The memory items directs to secure only the affected engine.

Airport radio is used, a TETRA system, and since they already vacated, what else is there to do?

Yer, thats not good, Instead large airports would send a pilot to a dedicated fire freq and allow them to talk directly to the fire service who then can answer questions directly and report things directly. At small airfields, fire service would be on the twr freq and talk directly, This cuts out ATC who can listen and interject, By the time the fire service is there all important questions to answer should be on the fire freq ATC becomes a little redundant at that important stage in terms of relaying info. Because they can't offer anything and not in the best position to help. By the end of the video they pilot still wasn't fully aware of the status of the outside of the aircraft, It works very well across the world. So there's plenty more to do, vacated or not, In this case it hadn't vacated. The TETRA system is more likely just going to be between ATC and the fire service at best. They need to polish up there response and comms.

Virtually all UK airports have the same dedicated frequency for talking to the Airport Fire Service. It drives me mad that AMS, where I operate, refuses to even consider implementing this, even after incidents where the inability to communicate directly with the Fire Service was an issue.

​@@AirspotterUKThis is not the UK. Here the Fire Brigade was there in just a few seconds. What you are talking about could very well have been set up. But inside the time frame here they probably relayed info via Tower. Time is crucial and the procedures you are talking about are time consuming and takes time from both pilots and Fire Brigade doing their jobs. Here the pilots got the answers they needed from Tower ultra fast. I doubt any Airport in the UK could have done it faster because they could have been stuck in frequency changes and communication misunderstandongs instead.

​@@AirspotterUKIts the result that counts. You are stuck in procedures thinking. On contrary to what you are saying the pilots got all the information they need. And most Important they did NOT need to change frequency. The Tower had contact with the Fire brigade and could relay information as you very well heard.

The Lufthansa had not understood the Waypoint to which they should fly - so questioning for it was the only way to "go ahead".

@@NicolaW72 Ok, interesting....

They did

They did

​@@VASAviationa whole 3 mins after the mayday still didn't

They shut off the right engine pretty immediately. They had not shut off the left engine, because doing so would render the aircraft immobile for quite a while, as the engines usually need to cool down before being restarted. And they had not received report of fire from the left side.

They appear to have detected a fire in the right engine, so they shut down the right engine as part of their memory items / non-normal checklist. No doubt they’ll start the APU and then shut down the other engine too.

Meanwhile there´s something.

Who cares about the mayday paperwork when this could turn into a life threatening situation.

Bullshit

No approval requested

I wouldn't say that, seemed like a lot of confusion going on

@@kevingraham2733x where was the confusion? The pilots would be busy doing stuff and the tower would have to show some patience in getting through to them. Part of the scenario for something like an engine fire would be to collect information from outside sources, so speak to the cabin crew (what can they see?), speak to ATC (what can they see?), and then make an informed decision to evacuate. It is perfectly conceivable to not evacuate and have the fire brigade douse the fire(s). This might be the safer option.

@@EdOeuna And i can promise you that at the same second the plane said "fire", the big red button was pushed and within maximum of 30 seconds the fire crew was in the trucks rolling out the doors. A LOT happens that we never hear.

@@Xanthopteryx 100%.

Definitely not

You mean "Spontaneous combustion due to Ryanair" I guess ;D

Cost saving measure, dropping off passengers on the runway avoids fees for using the gate.

​@@NelsonBrownThey most often don't use them anyway for cost saving measures ;)

🤣🤣🤣

that was my first thought as well lmao

When you have a possible fire, that gets ALL of your attention. Vacate if convenient or logical for another reason. Otherwise stop on the runway and evacuate. Another reason for not wanting to vacate is it might cause the fire to be blown towards the cabin by the change in relative wind direction after turning. Look up 1985 Manchester Airport Disaster. It may also be the airline SOP to stop on the runway.

That's priority number last.

I think she was trying to say "evacuate". Language barrier.

@@VASAviation I hope that’s the case and you’re probably right. ATC are usually on it and often responsible for playing the part in the saving of many lives in how they react so well.

@@VASAviation No, definetely not. Her first priority was clearly to get the Aircraft off the Runway. Gothenburg Landvetter is a small Airport with only one Runway, so it is understandable why. But nevertheless.

I think the same aswell

No, she meant "clear the runway" when she said VACATE. She only said EVACUATE _after_ the pilot reported that they may need to do so.

Controller will not be telling them if or where to evacuate.

@@davidkavanagh189 listen again. She _clearly_ told them that they could evacuate where they were if they wanted.

No, she wanted to get the Aircraft off the Runway. Understandable when you know that Gothenburg Landvetter is a small Airport with only one Runway, but nevertheless.

You don’t hear the static when you’re actually tuned into the frequency

I think it's just you.

How did i get the opposite conclusion from the same audio?! To me the crew sounded confused and hesitant and the atc was pushing them to evacuate!

@@ss-xy2im The wording from the controller left a lot to be desired. "You can vacate" is more like an instruction to get off the runway than a green light to evacuate. That's bound to confuse the pilot.

@@alexmiller7721 except no, because pilots understand that the ultimate authority of evacuating their passengers falls with them, wherever they are.

@@Bisonrulz16 I understand that, but being under the impression you've just been told to vacate a runway right after announcing your plane is on fire... Well, it's not exactly what you want (or expect) to hear.

​@@ss-xy2imATC was saying "you may VACATE" not evacuate. So basically "could you get off the runway please"

I think she was trying to say evacuate

She was clearly very concerned that the Aircraft would block the Runway and wanted him to get away from it. This was clearly her first priority. For understanding it should be added that Gothenburg Landvetter is a small Airport with only one Runway, so a crippled Aircraft on the Runway would shut down the whole Airport.

@@NicolaW72 so what? When a controller hears “fire on board” from any aircraft they are controlling, providing them assistance is the priority. Clearing the runway so another aircraft can land should be her last concern. Smartly, she told the incoming aircraft to go-around. That’s her second priority. She can request her colleagues assistance to divert other aircraft on final. But once an aircraft under their control has declared and emergency, that aircraft is almost exclusively their responsibility to coordinate in providing assistance. But then even after declaring an emergency, she yet again insists the pilot vacate the runway diverting their attention from the real emergency.