Narrative:

We landed normally and during taxi-in, after the engine cool light came on, I instructed the first officer to shutdown #2 engine. He did so and we parked at the gate, performed the shutdown checklist, and prepared to depart the airplane. As we were saying goodbye to the passenger, ground personnel came onto the aircraft and at first said that there was a bag fire in the rear of the airplane. Then they stated that it was an APU fire. One of the first officer's and I ran into the cockpit, and the first officer began to shutdown the APU. Then someone said the #2 engine was on fire and to blow the fire bottle, so the first officer pulled the fire handle and discharged one bottle. At this point, a mechanic came onto the airplane and said that there was a tailpipe fire. Luckily, he was able to catch the APU before it shutdown and was able to spin the engine and blow out the fire. The fire department was alerted and responded, but there was nothing for them to do when they arrived. There was a problem with communication from the ground personnel, and we had no indication onboard the aircraft that anything was wrong. The early statement that a bag was on fire, and then the APU cost us some time in combating what turned out to be a simple tailpipe fire. Fortunately, we were able to restore the APU and extinguish it. I suggest that perhaps the ground personnel should be briefed to be more specific in just what is on fire, although I do understand that they have limited system knowledge, and I am sure that they were somewhat excited. Supplemental 590421: a ground agent said what we understood to be 'a bag's on fire, shutdown the APU!' we weren't sure what he meant, but thought that possibly a bag being unloaded from the rear bulk baggage bin was somehow on fire, and the hot exhaust from the APU overhead the conveyor belt was a problem. The APU and engine fire lights were out, and the instruments were dimmed as per shutdown procedures. Someone else hurriedly advised that the #2 engine was on fire. This really confused us since the center engine had been shutdown prior to entering the ramp and a fire didn't seem to be a possibility. The left fire bottle was discharged as a precaution. At about the same time, a mechanic from another aircraft came up and advised us that indeed the #2 engine had a tailpipe fire. Everyone was trying to do the 'right thing,' however, a major communication lapse occurred. Apparently, the first individual was actually saying 'the back (of the airplane) is on fire.' a considerable period of time had occurred from engine shutdown until we were notified. This time lapse made the communication of the event even more unbelievable and confusing to us. The mechanic was the 'hero' of the day. He arrived with factual information and had a radio to communication with the ramp and the tower. Another possible confusing issue was the lack of instrument indications due to our 'dimming' the computer displays to reduce heat and prolong display life. If any erroneous indications were present, they had disappeared by the time we had once again had time to return the displays to bright. Supplemental 591217: a ramp agent arrived and stated 'the back is on fire!' I asked, 'what was on fire? The APU, the aircraft, what was on fire?' he said 'I don't know, but shutdown everything.' I returned to the cabin to try to get more information when another ramp agent came on the aircraft and said, 'the engine on the tail is on fire!' I returned to the cabin when a mechanic arrived and said, 'you have a tailpipe fire!' he motored the engine for 5 mins while in direct contact with a mechanic outside, who confirmed the fire was extinguished.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN MD11 PARKED ON GATE DECLARED AN EMER DUE TO CONFLICTING GND RPTS OF BAG ON FIRE, APU FIRE, AND #2 ENG FIRE CAUSED BY #2 ENG TAILPIPE FIRE.

Narrative: WE LANDED NORMALLY AND DURING TAXI-IN, AFTER THE ENG COOL LIGHT CAME ON, I INSTRUCTED THE FO TO SHUTDOWN #2 ENG. HE DID SO AND WE PARKED AT THE GATE, PERFORMED THE SHUTDOWN CHKLIST, AND PREPARED TO DEPART THE AIRPLANE. AS WE WERE SAYING GOODBYE TO THE PAX, GND PERSONNEL CAME ONTO THE ACFT AND AT FIRST SAID THAT THERE WAS A BAG FIRE IN THE REAR OF THE AIRPLANE. THEN THEY STATED THAT IT WAS AN APU FIRE. ONE OF THE FO'S AND I RAN INTO THE COCKPIT, AND THE FO BEGAN TO SHUTDOWN THE APU. THEN SOMEONE SAID THE #2 ENG WAS ON FIRE AND TO BLOW THE FIRE BOTTLE, SO THE FO PULLED THE FIRE HANDLE AND DISCHARGED ONE BOTTLE. AT THIS POINT, A MECH CAME ONTO THE AIRPLANE AND SAID THAT THERE WAS A TAILPIPE FIRE. LUCKILY, HE WAS ABLE TO CATCH THE APU BEFORE IT SHUTDOWN AND WAS ABLE TO SPIN THE ENG AND BLOW OUT THE FIRE. THE FIRE DEPARTMENT WAS ALERTED AND RESPONDED, BUT THERE WAS NOTHING FOR THEM TO DO WHEN THEY ARRIVED. THERE WAS A PROB WITH COM FROM THE GND PERSONNEL, AND WE HAD NO INDICATION ONBOARD THE ACFT THAT ANYTHING WAS WRONG. THE EARLY STATEMENT THAT A BAG WAS ON FIRE, AND THEN THE APU COST US SOME TIME IN COMBATING WHAT TURNED OUT TO BE A SIMPLE TAILPIPE FIRE. FORTUNATELY, WE WERE ABLE TO RESTORE THE APU AND EXTINGUISH IT. I SUGGEST THAT PERHAPS THE GND PERSONNEL SHOULD BE BRIEFED TO BE MORE SPECIFIC IN JUST WHAT IS ON FIRE, ALTHOUGH I DO UNDERSTAND THAT THEY HAVE LIMITED SYS KNOWLEDGE, AND I AM SURE THAT THEY WERE SOMEWHAT EXCITED. SUPPLEMENTAL 590421: A GND AGENT SAID WHAT WE UNDERSTOOD TO BE 'A BAG'S ON FIRE, SHUTDOWN THE APU!' WE WEREN'T SURE WHAT HE MEANT, BUT THOUGHT THAT POSSIBLY A BAG BEING UNLOADED FROM THE REAR BULK BAGGAGE BIN WAS SOMEHOW ON FIRE, AND THE HOT EXHAUST FROM THE APU OVERHEAD THE CONVEYOR BELT WAS A PROB. THE APU AND ENG FIRE LIGHTS WERE OUT, AND THE INSTS WERE DIMMED AS PER SHUTDOWN PROCS. SOMEONE ELSE HURRIEDLY ADVISED THAT THE #2 ENG WAS ON FIRE. THIS REALLY CONFUSED US SINCE THE CTR ENG HAD BEEN SHUTDOWN PRIOR TO ENTERING THE RAMP AND A FIRE DIDN'T SEEM TO BE A POSSIBILITY. THE L FIRE BOTTLE WAS DISCHARGED AS A PRECAUTION. AT ABOUT THE SAME TIME, A MECH FROM ANOTHER ACFT CAME UP AND ADVISED US THAT INDEED THE #2 ENG HAD A TAILPIPE FIRE. EVERYONE WAS TRYING TO DO THE 'RIGHT THING,' HOWEVER, A MAJOR COM LAPSE OCCURRED. APPARENTLY, THE FIRST INDIVIDUAL WAS ACTUALLY SAYING 'THE BACK (OF THE AIRPLANE) IS ON FIRE.' A CONSIDERABLE PERIOD OF TIME HAD OCCURRED FROM ENG SHUTDOWN UNTIL WE WERE NOTIFIED. THIS TIME LAPSE MADE THE COM OF THE EVENT EVEN MORE UNBELIEVABLE AND CONFUSING TO US. THE MECH WAS THE 'HERO' OF THE DAY. HE ARRIVED WITH FACTUAL INFO AND HAD A RADIO TO COM WITH THE RAMP AND THE TWR. ANOTHER POSSIBLE CONFUSING ISSUE WAS THE LACK OF INST INDICATIONS DUE TO OUR 'DIMMING' THE COMPUTER DISPLAYS TO REDUCE HEAT AND PROLONG DISPLAY LIFE. IF ANY ERRONEOUS INDICATIONS WERE PRESENT, THEY HAD DISAPPEARED BY THE TIME WE HAD ONCE AGAIN HAD TIME TO RETURN THE DISPLAYS TO BRIGHT. SUPPLEMENTAL 591217: A RAMP AGENT ARRIVED AND STATED 'THE BACK IS ON FIRE!' I ASKED, 'WHAT WAS ON FIRE? THE APU, THE ACFT, WHAT WAS ON FIRE?' HE SAID 'I DON'T KNOW, BUT SHUTDOWN EVERYTHING.' I RETURNED TO THE CABIN TO TRY TO GET MORE INFO WHEN ANOTHER RAMP AGENT CAME ON THE ACFT AND SAID, 'THE ENG ON THE TAIL IS ON FIRE!' I RETURNED TO THE CABIN WHEN A MECH ARRIVED AND SAID, 'YOU HAVE A TAILPIPE FIRE!' HE MOTORED THE ENG FOR 5 MINS WHILE IN DIRECT CONTACT WITH A MECH OUTSIDE, WHO CONFIRMED THE FIRE WAS EXTINGUISHED.

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.