Narrative:

Taxied out from gate on 2 engines. A long line preceded us, so I elected to shut down #2 engine. On starting the #2 engine my first officer said the engine was not spooling properly and I stopped the aircraft, set brakes and after a quick look at the problem, my first thought was a hung start. As I turned off the right hydraulic pump I was informed by ground control that there was smoke coming from my right engine. I closed the fuel shut off lever and told the first officer to motor the engine. I called ground to ask if they saw any flames and was told that my right engine was on fire and they were rolling the emergency vehicles. We had no indication of a fire in the cockpit, but with this visual notice of fire I had no choice, but to fire both bottles into the #2 engine and call for the fire on ground checklist. The emergency vehicles arrived and I was told there was no smoke or fire and the engine appeared ok. We taxied back to the gate with the emergency vehicles following. No evacuate/evacuation or other emergency procedures were required. There was no time for me to troubleshoot this problem from the cockpit, but in retrospect I believe that the tower was not able to see the aircraft as we were on taxiway wa between taxiway wd and the runway 15L run-up area. I believe an overzealous pilot behind us saw smoke from the right engine which was either hung or did not light off and assumed we were on fire. If my premise is correct that the aircraft behind us incorrectly told the tower that we were on fire, we might do well to advise pilots to state what they see and be more specific in their assessment of the situation. There is a big difference between sighting smoke and fire. This aircraft was returned to service the next day, so I cannot imagine that we actually had a fire.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN MD80 CREW, UPON STARTING #2 ENG AFTER A TAXI DELAY AT IAH, EXPERIENCED ENG INDICATIONS REMINISCENT WITH A HUNG START. RPTS OF THE ENG BEING ON FIRE SPAWNED FIRE BOTTLE DEPLOYMENT.

Narrative: TAXIED OUT FROM GATE ON 2 ENGS. A LONG LINE PRECEDED US, SO I ELECTED TO SHUT DOWN #2 ENG. ON STARTING THE #2 ENG MY FO SAID THE ENG WAS NOT SPOOLING PROPERLY AND I STOPPED THE ACFT, SET BRAKES AND AFTER A QUICK LOOK AT THE PROB, MY FIRST THOUGHT WAS A HUNG START. AS I TURNED OFF THE R HYD PUMP I WAS INFORMED BY GND CTL THAT THERE WAS SMOKE COMING FROM MY R ENG. I CLOSED THE FUEL SHUT OFF LEVER AND TOLD THE FO TO MOTOR THE ENG. I CALLED GND TO ASK IF THEY SAW ANY FLAMES AND WAS TOLD THAT MY R ENG WAS ON FIRE AND THEY WERE ROLLING THE EMER VEHICLES. WE HAD NO INDICATION OF A FIRE IN THE COCKPIT, BUT WITH THIS VISUAL NOTICE OF FIRE I HAD NO CHOICE, BUT TO FIRE BOTH BOTTLES INTO THE #2 ENG AND CALL FOR THE FIRE ON GND CHKLIST. THE EMER VEHICLES ARRIVED AND I WAS TOLD THERE WAS NO SMOKE OR FIRE AND THE ENG APPEARED OK. WE TAXIED BACK TO THE GATE WITH THE EMER VEHICLES FOLLOWING. NO EVAC OR OTHER EMER PROCS WERE REQUIRED. THERE WAS NO TIME FOR ME TO TROUBLESHOOT THIS PROB FROM THE COCKPIT, BUT IN RETROSPECT I BELIEVE THAT THE TWR WAS NOT ABLE TO SEE THE ACFT AS WE WERE ON TXWY WA BTWN TXWY WD AND THE RWY 15L RUN-UP AREA. I BELIEVE AN OVERZEALOUS PLT BEHIND US SAW SMOKE FROM THE R ENG WHICH WAS EITHER HUNG OR DID NOT LIGHT OFF AND ASSUMED WE WERE ON FIRE. IF MY PREMISE IS CORRECT THAT THE ACFT BEHIND US INCORRECTLY TOLD THE TWR THAT WE WERE ON FIRE, WE MIGHT DO WELL TO ADVISE PLTS TO STATE WHAT THEY SEE AND BE MORE SPECIFIC IN THEIR ASSESSMENT OF THE SIT. THERE IS A BIG DIFFERENCE BTWN SIGHTING SMOKE AND FIRE. THIS ACFT WAS RETURNED TO SVC THE NEXT DAY, SO I CANNOT IMAGINE THAT WE ACTUALLY HAD A FIRE.

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.