Narrative:

On descent with ZOB into msn. We received fire indication master warning. Captain flew aircraft and declared emergency while I performed the abnormal/emergency checklist procedures for fire indication in right (#2) engine captain verified all procedure and right engine was shut down and both fire bottles were used to extinguish the fire. Uneventful single engine approach and landing (emergency) accomplished with fire light still on. Normal crash and company response followed as aircraft stopped on runway 18. Crash ground crews reported 'no fire indications on right engine.' approximately 5 min later crash crew reported 'fire on right side of aircraft.' captain began 'evacuation of aircraft' procedure as second report from crash crew came saying 'disregard, no fire, no fire!' captain stopped evacuation before any passenger evacuate/evacuationed, but confusion was evident. We reconfirmed 'no fire' with ground crew and informed passenger all was okay and we would attempt to deplane at the gate normally. This was not possible because the brakes had locked up (right brake) and aircraft would not move. Passenger deplaned normally through front airstairs and were bused to msn terminal. This emergency was not serious or hazardous until ground crash crews incorrectly reported 'fire.' my concern is response by crash crews that do not know what they are looking for in an engine fire emergency. Unnessary evacuations often are the only cause of injury!

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: DC9 HAS INFLT ENG FIRE. DECLARE EMER, SHUT DOWN ENG.

Narrative: ON DSCNT WITH ZOB INTO MSN. WE RECEIVED FIRE INDICATION MASTER WARNING. CAPT FLEW ACFT AND DECLARED EMER WHILE I PERFORMED THE ABNORMAL/EMER CHKLIST PROCS FOR FIRE INDICATION IN R (#2) ENG CAPT VERIFIED ALL PROC AND R ENG WAS SHUT DOWN AND BOTH FIRE BOTTLES WERE USED TO EXTINGUISH THE FIRE. UNEVENTFUL SINGLE ENG APCH AND LNDG (EMER) ACCOMPLISHED WITH FIRE LIGHT STILL ON. NORMAL CRASH AND COMPANY RESPONSE FOLLOWED AS ACFT STOPPED ON RWY 18. CRASH GND CREWS RPTED 'NO FIRE INDICATIONS ON R ENG.' APPROX 5 MIN LATER CRASH CREW RPTED 'FIRE ON R SIDE OF ACFT.' CAPT BEGAN 'EVACUATION OF ACFT' PROC AS SECOND RPT FROM CRASH CREW CAME SAYING 'DISREGARD, NO FIRE, NO FIRE!' CAPT STOPPED EVACUATION BEFORE ANY PAX EVACED, BUT CONFUSION WAS EVIDENT. WE RECONFIRMED 'NO FIRE' WITH GND CREW AND INFORMED PAX ALL WAS OKAY AND WE WOULD ATTEMPT TO DEPLANE AT THE GATE NORMALLY. THIS WAS NOT POSSIBLE BECAUSE THE BRAKES HAD LOCKED UP (R BRAKE) AND ACFT WOULD NOT MOVE. PAX DEPLANED NORMALLY THROUGH FRONT AIRSTAIRS AND WERE BUSED TO MSN TERMINAL. THIS EMER WAS NOT SERIOUS OR HAZARDOUS UNTIL GND CRASH CREWS INCORRECTLY RPTED 'FIRE.' MY CONCERN IS RESPONSE BY CRASH CREWS THAT DO NOT KNOW WHAT THEY ARE LOOKING FOR IN AN ENG FIRE EMER. UNNESSARY EVACUATIONS OFTEN ARE THE ONLY CAUSE OF INJURY!

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.