Fire at Sabena Technics

sa80_99 · Post by **sa80_99** » 05 May 2006, 15:47

Does someone have anymore pictures to process of the accident

blackhawk · Post by **blackhawk** » 05 May 2006, 16:03

several SN Technics employees will get a temporally contract at the airforce to modernize the C130's. The modernizing will be done at Melsbroek. The army will buy a second hand C-130 to replace the destroyed one.

Edit: business will restart Monday in "Loods 8"

Zorba · Post by **Zorba** » 05 May 2006, 16:35

OMG, that 3rd picture is so shocking! You must be going dead while watching the planes and buildings go up in flames

foxtrot_lima_yankee · Post by **foxtrot_lima_yankee** » 05 May 2006, 16:40

What if the Armavia plane was burned on purpose in order to hide some important evidence to the crash of sveral days before?
In my opinion, it is quite a great coincidence that 2 accidents involving the same airline take place in less than a week of space, certainly when speaking of the same aircraft. One crashed, the other burned in a hangar of the company that maintenanced the first one...
Many maintenance companies use non-original pieces in airplane maintenance. Might that be an explanation to the today s fire? To the crash of 3 days ago?
Sabena Technics personnel should all certainly be interrogated.

By the way, what can cause such a great fire in an iron complex?I m not aware of weither there is a gas pipe underneath this hangar...
The fire prevention equipment was certainly limited in that hangar, which is disappointing for such a great structure.

Never compromise safety.

Oh last thing,
I m reviewing my opinion on the A VS B competition: A320 s aren t better than B737s as Ive allowed myself to post a few days ago.

Ovostar · Post by **Ovostar** » 05 May 2006, 16:55

Airbus_fan wrote:OMG, that 3rd picture is so shocking! You must be going dead while watching the planes and buildings go up in flames

yeah it's awful, because in the 2 first pics the plane is still safe...
you were so close to the flammes wasn't it dangerous ?

@foxtrot_lima_yankee , Armavia had just 2 a320 ?

onlyme · Post by **onlyme** » 05 May 2006, 17:07

foxtrot_lima_yankee wrote:What if the Armavia plane was burned on purpose in order to hide some important evidence to the crash of several days before?

<deleted>
<deleted>
<deleted>

Sorry, I can't find the words to comment on such a stupid "contribution".

Old Nickname - VG · Post by **Old Nickname - VG** » 05 May 2006, 17:11

Airbus_fan wrote:were so close to the flammes wasn't it dangerous ?

Thats A firefighter He's Job

the firefighters were even closer

somebody know how long it has takes ?

because the first picture shows a lot of time but the 3 not

if there was much time awwww

then u know...

And About those documents I hear it was something whit white spirit

(only can say my version)

greetz,
didier

Post by **Bottie** » 05 May 2006, 17:21

onlyme wrote:
foxtrot_lima_yankee wrote:What if the Armavia plane was burned on purpose in order to hide some important evidence to the crash of several days before?

<deleted>
<deleted>
<deleted>

Sorry, I can't find the words to comment on such a stupid "contribution".

We have to respect every opinion/contribution (yes, even the stupid ones).

All I can say is, it's up to the investigators to find the cause (and eventually what's linked with it) and not to us ...

Andries · Post by **Andries** » 05 May 2006, 17:21

foxtrot_lima_yankee wrote:By the way, what can cause such a great fire in an iron complex?I m not aware of weither there is a gas pipe underneath this hangar...
The fire prevention equipment was certainly limited in that hangar, which is disappointing for such a great structure.

Have you never heard of jetfuel and skydrol (hydraulical fluid) ? Both are very flammable and I can assure you you won't put a fire of those out in just a minute ...

foxtrot_lima_yankee wrote:In my opinion, it is quite a great coincidence that 2 accidents involving the same airline take place in less than a week of space, certainly when speaking of the same aircraft. One crashed, the other burned in a hangar of the company that maintenanced the first one...
Many maintenance companies use non-original pieces in airplane maintenance. Might that be an explanation to the today s fire? To the crash of 3 days ago?
Sabena Technics personnel should all certainly be interrogated.

It probably is a great coincidence as Sabena Technics is known for it's good maintenance !

All interrogating the staff would be a bit harsh, don't you think ? Lot's of them will become temporarily unemployed and you can bet on it a part of the staff will be layed off as well in the near future...

foxtrot_lima_yankee wrote:I m reviewing my opinion on the A VS B competition: A320 s aren t better than B737s as Ive allowed myself to post a few days ago.

And what does this have to do with this toppic ?
It's not because there were 3 A320's in the hangar, that it is certain they caused the fire and thereby the 737 is better than the A320 ...
If you wish to start an A vs. B war, go to A.net and you'll find lots of toppics to your likings !

Before making such statements as those above, please think twice ... it won't hurt ! There is no pain at all !

Greetz,

Andries

ehamspotter · Post by **ehamspotter** » 05 May 2006, 17:27

Hello;

Very sad indeed :cry2: :cry2: :cry2: :cry2: :cry2:

Also for Armavia, after there recent crash

rgds:Jeroen

Ozzie1969 · Post by **Ozzie1969** » 05 May 2006, 17:28

Brubiac wrote:Destroyed/damaged aircraft:

BAF C-130 CH-02 according to Luchtzak

Also according to this article (French only) :

http://www.rtl.be/page/rtlinfo/articles ... leid=59362

Atlantis · Post by **Atlantis** » 05 May 2006, 17:38

I have news from the firefighters, I was shocked when I heard it.

The offices above the hangar could be rescued by the firefighters but it was BIAC who said that everything has to burn to the ground, so the firebrigade did what they was told to do.

Second thing: According to the firebrigade it was not an accident, but they said immediately that we never will know what the main cause is.
And according to the former Sabena intervention team the fire at the hangar, 6 or 7 years ago, was also not an accident. This was also an hangar of Sabena Technics.

PS: I will never put this words on this site when I'm not certain about the source. But if this is really true, this is bad, very bad.

Ivan_Eagle · Post by **Ivan_Eagle** » 05 May 2006, 17:43

it give me the feeling, i just lost a part of my live

gona miss it!!

Mike_Nissa · Post by **Mike_Nissa** » 05 May 2006, 18:00

It is a disaster for all of us at Sabena Technics.

We were on the good way.
Hope we will go on satisfying our customers.

fokker_f27 · Post by **fokker_f27** » 05 May 2006, 18:08

6 o'clock news on VRT: 1 C-130 destroyed and 3 out of foren countries. (Armavia visible)

It really scared me. Suddenly my mom tells me "There has been a fire at Sabena Techniks."
Let's hope the company survives. As well as Armavia. 2 aircraft in one week. I hardly have the caurage to go spotting at BRU and see this. 8O It will take long before the damage will be restored...

Bilboone · Post by **Bilboone** » 05 May 2006, 18:23

foxtrot_lima_yankee wrote: By the way, what can cause such a great fire in an iron complex?I m not aware of weither there is a gas pipe underneath this hangar...

First of all , I think the fire started somewhere in the offices, also a part ,they told me 70 % of the spare parts and tools that are stored between hangar 40 and 41 are destroyed, under the hangar 40 and 41 are basements that are connected, and if there are some archives.....

you can clearly see on pictures that the A320 was NOT burning when the roof came down.

Ovostar · Post by **Ovostar** » 05 May 2006, 18:23

Atlantis wrote:I have news from the firefighters, I was shocked when I heard it.

The offices above the hangar could be rescued by the firefighters but it was BIAC who said that everything has to burn to the ground, so the firebrigade did what they was told to do.

Second thing: According to the firebrigade it was not an accident, but they said immediately that we never will know what the main cause is.
And according to the former Sabena intervention team the fire at the hangar, 6 or 7 years ago, was also not an accident. This was also an hangar of Sabena Technics.

PS: I will never put this words on this site when I'm not certain about the source. But if this is really true, this is bad, very bad.

What is BIAC ?

so it's maybe it's the same person who created this fire, and the 1997 sabena one ?

b-west · Post by **b-west** » 05 May 2006, 18:38

Well, maybe it's a good thing that Sabena technics now is part of a bigger group, which might help to deal with the blow and the loss of capacity.

As far as I know, Sabena technics always has had a strong reputation, and people easily forget, so I do hope and wish that they recover from this disaster!

All the best!

b-west · Post by **b-west** » 05 May 2006, 18:43

Ovostar wrote: What is BIAC ?

"Brussels International Airport Company... the airport

www.biac.be

LX-LGX · Post by **LX-LGX** » 05 May 2006, 19:13

The offices - and thus all computers and maintenance programs - are also destroyed, but one of the directors from SN Technics told VRT news there is a back up elsewhere.

- - -

http://www.vtm.be/asx/vtmnieuws/vtmnieuws13uur_Vr.asx

this link will only be available from today till Thursday 11th May: VTM news with images of the fire, followed by an excellent interview with aviation journalist Dewulf.

(sorry, interview ad comment only available in Dutch)

Aviation24.be

Fire at Sabena Technics

Pictures