Georgealbert

To answer your original question about smoke detectors, the answer for life safety will always have to be yes. Any risk in your home has to be looked at in two ways, fire prevention and fire protection. NFPA 855, is a good, detailed guide, but maybe will be over the top in some parts with your set up. Fire prevention, is based on quality of products, quality of installation, certification, regular maintenance and inspections, automatic isolation devices, the control and management of other combustible materials/storage, using everything correctly, and no cutting corners if any problems occur. Fire protection, has 2 elements, life safety and property protection. Life safety needs, Containment - what you can do to stop the fire spreading from the room/point of origin, how you construct or enclose the packs, Detection - install suitable fire detection. Communication - how the detection will alert everyone, at all times. Means of escape - how everyone can get out when alerted to a fire, plus a secondary route. Home safety plan. Suppression - suitable extinguishment for dealing with a minor fire, but as the saying goes, “if in doubt get out”. Property protection - suitable insurance to cover all losses, would be a good idea to have details of your system to give to local responders in Thai. Commercial premises will use air sampling detection systems (such as Vesda) and suitable shut down protection devices and fixed firefighting system, which is not going be installed in most, if any, homes. Data indicates that fires related to solar systems are relatively rare, but worse case planning will protect your family, because how ever good your systems are, you are never going to reduce the fire risk to zero. Link to free access to NFPA 855, without have to sign up. <Edited to remove live link to copyright document, copy and paste into your browser> https://www.sandiegocounty.gov/content/dam/sdc/pds/ceqa/JVR/AdminRecord/IBR/326a NFPA 2020.pdf

From Thai media, for the waste at Lor Loha Thai Metal Co., Ltd. in Bangkok “Today (29 April 2024) Assoc. Prof. Tavida Kamonvej, Deputy Governor of Bangkok, along with Mr. Jirat Mawai, Assistant Secretary to the Governor of Bangkok. Went to the factory of Thai Metal Co., Ltd., Bang Sue District, to monitor the loading of cadmium sludge onto trailers and the sealing of vehicles. Before moving together to the meeting point, to join up with, the cadmium sludge transport truck coming from Samut Sakhon Province. Then to move cadmium sludge back to the factory landfill in Tak province, which will be carried out this evening. Deputy Governor of Bangkok has instructed the Bang Sue District Director to strictly follow up on safety procedures that were practiced yesterday, especially the double sealing of each bag, sealing the trucks after loading the bag into the vehicle. and covering with canvas. Emphasis is placed on vacuuming vehicle wheels before leaving the factory. and testing to measure contamination on the wheels and around every transport vehicle, is at safe level before leaving. For the movement to the meeting point, it will pass through the area of Nonthaburi Province. The Deputy Governor of Bangkok has therefore coordinated with the Deputy Governor of Nonthaburi Province, along with notifying Ministry of Industry officials in the factory area to coordinate the route. From the factory area to the meeting point, Bangkok has arranged for chemical response team officials (HAZMAT: Hazardous Materials Team) to travel with the trucks as well. Then the Pollution Control Department will supervisor/safeguard the rest of the transport, to ensure there is no contamination on the full route.”

From the Rayong Province Public Relations Department, “Police Commander of Rayong Province leads police officers to examine evidence. and investigators to collect evidence to find the cause of fire. 20 witnesses have been questioned , while the factory owner still cannot be traced for questioning, claiming to be busy outside the area. At 3:30 p.m. on April 28, 2024, reporters reported on progress in the case of a fire. A backhoe was sent to remove a pile of chemicals from warehouse no. 5, where the fire started. Officer driving the backhoe had to retreat in a hurry so responders could spray water to extinguish the fire exposed. In the area of Warehouse 5 there is still smoke in some areas. which officials brought in with backhoes to help remove. Meanwhile, at Warehouse 3, officials used sodium bicarbonate to cover the hole where smoke was found escaping. This is to hasten extinguishment of the fire, as In some places there is still smoke coming out. Pol. Maj. Gen. Pongphan Wongmaneethet, commander of Rayong Provincial Police, Pol. Col. Sarawut Nuchanart, superintendent of Ban Khai Police Station. Pol. Lt. Col. Wirat Techanan, Deputy Superintendent (Investigation), Ban Khai Police Station, Pol. Lt. Col. Wirat Pol. Col. Parichat Unteng, scientist (S.B. 4), forensics, Rayong Province, led police officers to examine evidence. They inspected the scene using drones to collect evidence. Pol. Maj. Gen. Pongphan Wongmaneethet, commander of Rayong Provincial Police, said police officers will check evidence at the scene as soon as possible. and fully support relevant agencies, after being confident that the area is safe 20 witnesses have now been interviewed, including 5 factory employees and security guards, while the rest are members of the public who live near the factory.“

From an aviation safety site, “El Al flight 1862 departed New York-JFK Airport for a cargo flight to Tel Aviv, Israel via Amsterdam, the Netherlands. The aircraft, a Boeing 747-258F, arrived at Amsterdam-Schiphol Airport at 14:40 hours local time for a crew change, cargo processing and refueling. The total amount of cargo was 114.7 tons, gross weight of the aircraft 338.3 tons which was 21 tons below the maximum allowable. The aircraft taxied out to runway 01L at 18:14 and started the takeoff roll at 18:21. At 18:28:30, as the aircraft was climbing through 6500 feet, the no. 3 engine and pylon separated from the wing in an outward and rearward movement, colliding with the no. 4 engine causing this engine and pylon to separate as well. An emergency was declared and the crew acknowledged their intention to return to Schiphol Airport and reported that they had a no. 3 engine failure and a loss of engine thrust of both no. 3 and 4 engine. At 18:28:57 the Amsterdam Radar controller informed the crew that runway 06 was in use with wind from 40 degrees at 21 knots. The crew however requested runway 27 for landing. A straight in approach to runway 27 was not possible because of airplane altitude (5000 feet) and distance to the runway (7 miles). The Amsterdam Arrival controller then instructed the crew to turn right heading 360 degrees and descend to 2000 feet. During this descending turn the flight crew reported that the no. 3 and 4 engine were out and that they were having flap problems. Final clearance was given to turn right heading 270 to intercept the final approach course. When it became apparent that the aircraft was going to overshoot the localizer, the controller informed the crew accordingly and directed them to turn to heading 290 to try and intercept the final approach path again. A further instruction was given for a 310 degree heading change and descent clearance for 1500 feet. These instructions were acknowledged and the crew added that they were experiencing control problems. While reducing speed in preparation for the final approach, control was lost and the aircraft crashed into an eleven-floor apartment building the Bijlmermeer suburb of Amsterdam. PROBABLE CAUSE: "The design and certification of the B747 pylon was found to be inadequate to provide the required level of safety. Furthermore the system to ensure structural integrity by inspection failed. This ultimately caused - probably initiated by fatigue in the inboard midspar fuse-pin - the no. 3 pylon and engine to separate from the wing in such a way that the no. 4 pylon and engine were torn off, part of the leading edge of the wing was damaged and the use of several systems was lost or limited. This subsequently left the flight crew with very limited control of the airplane. Because of the marginal controllability a safe landing became highly improbable, if not virtually impossible.” Full investigation report by The Netherlands Aviation Safety Board (Raad voor de Luchtvaart) https://reports.aviation-safety.net/1992/19921004-2_B742_4X-AXG.pdf

Local Thai report from Rayong said it was a short visit. My translation of the details. “The Prime Minister visited the area to monitor the fire situation at the Win Process industrial chemical storage factory, to order relevant agencies to expedite control of the fire situation. and prepare a compensation plan for the people. At 2:00 p.m. on April 27 , reporters reported that Mr. Settha Thavisin, Prime Minister, along with Ms. Pimpattra Wichaikul, Minister of Industry, and Dr. Chonnan Srikaew, Minister Ministry of Public Health traveled to follow up on the fire situation at the industrial chemical waste storage factory, with Mr. Traipop Wongtrairat, Governor of Rayong Province, the incident commander, for a summary of the overall situation. The Prime Minister said that the government is concerned about the people living near the factory. So he ordered, by asking, the Ministry of Interior, the Department of Disaster Prevention and Mitigation and related agencies to take care of controlling the fire outbreak. and returning the situation to normal, and to prepare a compensation plan for the people affected by the incident. The Prime Minister received a letter of complaint from the Rayong Province Environmental Protection Volunteer Network and people in the affected areas, before getting into a van and leaving the scene. There was a group of citizens waiting at the factory exit. holding signs, protesting the factory and wanting to ask the Prime Minister to expedite the removal of the chemicals, but the Prime Minister's car didn't stop to look at it at all.”

Thailand has plenty of laws and regulations currently. These are issued by The Ministry of Industry, Ministry of Natural Resources, and the Environment and Department of Pollution Control, The idea that creating new legislation is going to change anything, seems to be, just a deflection. The problem is the enforcement, inspections, corruption, and suitable legal action/penalties, at both local and national levels. Below is one example of current regulations, from the, Hazardous Substances Act and Regulations Issued under the Hazardous Substances Act. https://www.jetro.go.jp/thailand/e_survey/hazardousact.html#hazardact It is not the regulations that are the problems, it is the officials/enforcers that need to be at the centre of attention.

Please share your knowledge that makes you think that? I think you will find that arson of “20 million baht” yachts’ at sea is not common. A review of the owner/boat history, were there details of non-payments, many debts, poor maintenance records, boat up for sale for some time, information from other owner/local companies, would form some part of any investigation. It is reported by the captain that he and the 2 technicians took the boat out to test after repairs were completed. When at sea it was noticed flames were coming from the exhaust pipe from the engine. Insurance is unlikely to pay if it is suspected there was negligence/defective workmanship, evidence of arson, suspected fraud or false/fake statements made to authorities.

Can you access any of these links, both are shorter version of the Fortune story. https://au.news.yahoo.com/finance/news/boeing-dead-whistleblower-warned-safety-210114034.html https://www.bbc.com/news/68907597

Can't really see this being used again!

The Boeing whistleblower, John Barnett, testified for 12 hours before his suicide. Here’s what he saw at the plane maker that alarmed him. https://fortune.com/2024/04/24/exclusive-the-boeing-whistleblower-testified-for-12-hours-before-his-suicide-heres-what-he-saw-at-the-planemaker-that-alarmed-him/

Video of incident posted yesterday. Have asked for my thread to be closed. Local media stated about 20 million baht, new, price tag on this boat. At least there was plenty of water for firefighting.

April 26, yacht fire at sea off Na Jomtien, Sattahip District. When rescue boats arrived they found that the boat was fully ablaze. There was a cloud of smoke and three crew members on the boat. . Officials used the boats to spray water in an attempt to extinguish, taking more than half an hour, but the final damage was extensive. The crew members on board were rescued, with no reported injuries. Yacht is named Coco, it was reported it was being tested after repairs.

Deleted

The Data Protection and Digital Information Bill, which will give the DWP these powers, is still at the House of Laws report stage. Given when a general election is called, this bill may be passed or not in time. https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3430

Agree with your comments, but I think the airline and airport, will not make this a reportable incident, under ICAO annex 13, definitions. “Incident. An occurrence, other than an accident, associated with the operation of an aircraft which affects or could affect the safety of operation. Serious incident. An incident involving circumstances indicating that an accident nearly occurred.” Do I would be surprised to see any further details appearing, even on aviation safety sites.

Have you a link to those who are switching to Airbus? Neither Airbus or Boeing will ever be able to supply the aviation needs alone. Airlines are limited for choices, so the Boeing order book will continue to grow, here are links recent orders the American Airlines order and a 20 777X aircraft order from an undisclosed customer. https://edition.cnn.com/2024/04/09/business/boeing-orders-deliveries?cid=external-feeds_iluminar_yahoo https://www.airdatanews.com/boeing-wins-order-for-20-777x-jets-from-undisclosed-customer/

That would be the Lockheed L-1011 TriStar, the last one left the factory in 1984, after which Lockheed withdrew from the commercial aircraft business due to its poor sales and losing out to the McDonnell Douglas DC-10, for airline business. Only one TriStar is still flying, the Stargazer, built in 1974, modified in 1994 and used by Orbital Sciences (now part of Northrop Grumman) as a mother ship launch pad for the Pegasus launch vehicle. https://avgeekery.com/stargazer-the-lone-tristar/

Sorry my post is correct, Thai Airways pre ordered the A380s in 2004. The A380s were delivered between 2012 & 2013, after some delays. https://web.archive.org/web/20110927145118/http://events.airbus.com/A380/prevArticleDetail.aspx?artId=327&dispBack=0

This reported in Thai media. “Chemical leak in a factory on Soi Rama 2, Chom Thong area. Officials and disaster relief volunteers rushed to use water for dilution. At 2:22 a.m. on April 25, 2024, reported a fire at a chemical factory, Soi Rama II Soi 20 (Soi Chan Phring), Rama II Road, Bang Mot Subdistrict, Chom Thong District, Bangkok. Dao Khanong Fire and Rescue Station staff arrived at the scene and preliminary investigation found that there was a large amount of smoke coming from the factory. At 2:49 a.m., it was found there was a chemical leak inside the factory (not a factory fire). Chemical response team of the Public Disaster Prevention and Mitigation Office supported the scene. and coordinate the environmental department of the district office to participate in the operation. At 3:03 a.m., officials used water to dilute the chemical release and the smoke plume decreased. Officials also removed 12 additional chemical drums to the outside. 3:12 a.m. At this time, there is no chemical smoke. and officials started to inspect the building” Seems to be a single drum leak, which was quickly dealt with.

June 2021 a lawsuit was filed against the company, and persons must have been named at that time. “Nong Phawa villagers sue Win Process company demanding environmental restoration and compensation for agricultural losses” ”a lawsuit against Win Process Company Limited and two associated authority figures in the company.” https://www.earththailand.org/en/article/717 There must also be company registration details available. https://www.matchlink.asia/business/page/Thailand/RAYONG/99253-win-process-co-ltd.html

Think the plane is justing showing it’s age.

The picture showing them sold, is from Thai Airways and the story is reported on aviation sites, this week. https://www.ch-aviation.com/news/139499-thai-airways-says-its-a380s-are-sold An auction was held on September 12, 2023, for the six that have been retired, four of them are stored at Suvarnabhumi Airport and the other two in U-Tapao Airport. The aircraft with registrations HS-TUA, HS-TUB, HS-TUC, HUB-TUE, and HS-TUF were stored between the period of March and April 2020. https://travelradar.aero/what-actually-occurred-with-the-a380-aircraft-of-thai-airways/# Is there any link to the story of the court action preventing the sell? There was a rumour in 2022 that “the airline is closely examining the cost-effectiveness of recovering the aircraft, but has not yet made a decision”, but that never happened and it was the airline that posted news of the sell. https://domesticflightsthailand.com/news/thai-airways-may-restore-shelved-airbus-a380s

Ecological Alert and Recovery - Thailand (EARTH) says that the Prime Minister Srettha Thavisin will visit the site on Saturday. The Pollution Control Department informed people living near the warehouse that they could return to their homes because the air quality is now good enough, but EARTH's testing showed that the level of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) is still around 100-400 within a 3-kilometre radius of the warehouses, which is an acceptable indoor VOC level. However, the readings for the concentration of PM 1 (particulate pollutants smaller than 1 micrometers) PM 2.5, PM 4(4 micrometers), and PM 10 (10 micrometers) particles remain high and could be hazardous to people. https://www.earththailand.org/en/

Sorry, but this was absolutely nothing to do with Boeing. It was an Airbus aircraft, but again nothing to do with the factory, as this aircraft is over 12 years old, and this seems more to be an airline maintenance/parts problem. Full aircraft details below.

Thai Airways have also announced their have already sold all six of its A380 planes, that it purchased in 2004 and which the company put up for sale in August 2023. The original purchase price in 2004, ranged from 445 to 500 million US dollars each. It was not declared who the buyers are and what selling price was achieved.