I've seen a lot of stupid speculation on here, but this takes the cake: "A sudden fire in the landing gear, taxing toward take-off? Probably a whole lot more to this story than published. Since the fire was only on the right side, wonder if the co-pilot had problems."

Good grief.

Why do people who have NO clue what they're talking about make such an effort to publicly display their lack of knowledge" And of course everything such people can't understand must have some sinister aspect to it, like info deliberately withheld, conspiracy theories, etc.

If you don't know what happened, ask or wait until someone tells you. Don't post drivel that has no value whatsoever Like blaming the co-pilot because he/she sits on the starboard side.

Sometimes brakes can seize and it can happen from a variety of reasons and sometimes seized brakes cause fires. Most aviation accidents are caused by a chain of events, the elimination of any one of which breaks the chain and the accident doesn't happen. That's why accident investigations are held, so the contributing factors can be determined and steps taken to prevent them happening again.

Fortunately, professional accident investigators don't leap to unfounded conclusions and publish them as soon as possible after the event so as to demonstrate their stupidity.

Possibly a quick turnaround with heavy brakes use and idle reverse. Perhaps even residual heat from previous sectors. Brakes warm up significantly again during taxi. Still shouldn’t catch fire but just the smelt plugs should pop. Looking forward to the report.

May we assume the "copilot" "right side" comment was in jest?

Was it just the angle of the photography or was the plane taxiing toward the terminal building while burning with no fire personnel shown in the vicinity?