Thai Lion Air flight aborts landing in 12-knot winds

[snoop1130]

Thai Lion Air flight aborts landing in 12-knot winds

By The Nation

 

Image Via Google

 

Thai Lion Air’s Flight SL620 aborted a landing at Ubon Ratchathani International Airport on Tuesday morning apparently because of strong winds.

 

The flight left Don Mueang Airport at 7.55am and was scheduled to land at 8.55am.

 

Airport officials said the flight flied in two circles before returning to Don Mueang.

 

Ubon Ratchathani airport director Kittichai Sajjalak said the wind speed at the airport was about 12 knots on Tuesday morning, which did not exceed safety levels. He added that other airlines had landed at the airport but that decision depended on the decision of a pilot whether to abort a landing.

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/breakingnews/30330493

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2017-10-31

[InMyShadow]

Something lost in translation surely. If every pilot stopping flying in 13 kt winds and assuming its cross wind there would be very few flights in commercial or GA

[Nemesis7]

well shouldnt regret than having a crush landing.

[retiredaamt]

Two friend of mine were scheduled to depart Ubon for Swampy at 12:55pm yesterday.  Because of high winds, as stated by Thai Smile, they did not depart until after 7pm.  I was at the airport to see them off and did not think the winds were that strong.

[InMyShadow]

Two friend of mine were scheduled to depart Ubon for Swampy at 12:55pm yesterday.  Because of high winds, as stated by Thai Smile, they did not depart until after 7pm.  I was at the airport to see them off and did not think the winds were that strong.

You want to see professional well trained pilots there are plenty of you tube vids of even old 747's coming in sideways in horrendous conditions

Thailand barely even gets a bit of a sea Breeze

[nauseus]

12kts is an intermediate breeze! If this story is true then the pilot shouldn't even be in the seat.

[jimcarr65]

Unbelievable, feel for the passengers not getting to their destination. If the 12knots were directly down the runway, no excuse other than to land. Tailwind?, go around and land in the other direction. 12kt crosswind, I have landed in those conditions in a Cessna 152, 172 and a Dash-8 200 with very little correction with no problems. If these pilots can't land in these light winds they need to get in the Simulator with a check airman and get some training. 

[farcanell]

A pilots decision with how many ever lives on board, shouldn’t really be questioned... better safe than dead

 

if he deemed a landing to be unsafe, and took appropriate action (landing safely elsewhere), then good on him for not bowing to any (perceived) corporate pressure

[Ulic]

The 12 knots listed has to be some kind of a typo. If you cant land in a 12 knot wind (even if it

is a crosswind), you just can't fly.

[InMyShadow]

A pilots decision with how many ever lives on board, shouldn’t really be questioned... better safe than dead

 

if he deemed a landing to be unsafe, and took appropriate action (landing safely elsewhere), then good on him for not bowing to any (perceived) corporate pressure

He should be investigated and demote back to first officer if it's no typo. There is zero excuse for not making that landing, he very well may need a lot more Training with a

More experienced captain

All modern airlines whether turbo prop or jet are are rated from 20 to 35 kts with the wind at 90 degrees

 

Sounds like he had a panic attack or something very strange happened

 

 

 

[Happyman58]

11 hours ago, nauseus said:

12kts is an intermediate breeze! If this story is true then the pilot shouldn't even be in the seat.

Agree How would they go landing Wellington in NZ Always windy there and more than 12 knots i might add Shows you difference in well trained pilots and lesser trained pilots who work for these budget airways Of coarse much lesser paid also 

[Michael Hare]

13 hours ago, farcanell said:

A pilots decision with how many ever lives on board, shouldn’t really be questioned... better safe than dead

 

if he deemed a landing to be unsafe, and took appropriate action (landing safely elsewhere), then good on him for not bowing to any (perceived) corporate pressure

Good on the pilot for turning back. No lives were lost. Maybe there is more in the story than just the 12 knot winds.  I still remember very clearly the Lao plane crash near Pakse into the Mekong river 4 years ago. Pilot error.  49 people died.

 

  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lao_Airlines_Flight_301

[tigermoth]

I suspect the 12 knt wind is a misquote. I have landed cessna150, 172, 180, various pipers, moonee and other light aircraft in cross winds considerably stronger than 12 knots, more like up to almost 20 knt. The pilot's decision must be respected but if 12 knt is true then he definitely needs xome check time.

[PAIBKK]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beaufort_scale

[farcanell]

12 hours ago, InMyShadow said:

He should be investigated and demote back to first officer if it's no typo. There is zero excuse for not making that landing, he very well may need a lot more Training with a

More experienced captain

All modern airlines whether turbo prop or jet are are rated from 20 to 35 kts with the wind at 90 degrees

 

Sounds like he had a panic attack or something very strange happened

 

 

 

Sounds like your jumping to conclusions... maybe today’s edition will explain all

 

erring on the side of safety, for whatever reason,mshould be applauded... there is already enough idiots out there trying to kill me, I hardly need a plane dropping out of the sky too.

 

thai Lion has a dubious record with safety as it is, so let’s not encourage pilots, via the use of internet abuse, to act in a manner they (as person in charge) deem unsafe

 

and let’s not forget, some Thai officials are less than truthful with the facts

 

when in doubt.....     .....      ...... don’t do it

[Michael Hare]

I wonder how Lion Air would cope flying into Queenstown New Zealand.

 

 

 

 

[InMyShadow]

Sounds like your jumping to conclusions... maybe today’s edition will explain all

 

erring on the side of safety, for whatever reason,mshould be applauded... there is already enough idiots out there trying to kill me, I hardly need a plane dropping out of the sky too.

 

thai Lion has a dubious record with safety as it is, so let’s not encourage pilots, via the use of internet abuse, to act in a manner they (as person in charge) deem unsafe

 

and let’s not forget, some Thai officials are less than truthful with the facts

 

when in doubt.....     .....      ...... don’t do it

I guarantee we won't encouraging any air line pilots to act manlier via TV lol

 

On the contrary I wouldn't want to be a passenger with pilot that poorly trained that he couldn't manage it, how is he gonna handle a real emergency if the pressure of making a simple landing was to much for him?

 

I've made hundreds of landings in GA aircraft in cross winds and, 13 kts Is a walk in the park.

 

We are commenting on the article and not jumping to conclusions

 

Now if another article comes out then we will comment again but I don't see any thing further on Google

 

That's what speculation is [emoji3]

 

[InMyShadow]

Now see how the guns do it in wild weather would be gusting double and probably 30kts in compared to the 12 kts of lion air , you can hear it in the mic.

 

 

 

[tso310]

Lets not forget One-Two-GO 269. 

[InMyShadow]

Lets not forget One-Two-GO 269. 

Nothing to do with a cross wind landing. But totally incompetent crew

Go arounds are made countless times a day and they couldn't do it! Nobody was flying the plane!
Read this extract, passengers never stood a chance

 "Both reports found that the Captain and First Officer had worked hours vastly in excess of the legal flight limits; that the first officer attempted to transfer control to the captain during the go-around; that neither pilot initiated a go-around and that the training and safety programs at the airline were deficient.

Corruption within One-Two-GO Airlines and the Thai Department of Civil Aviation was a factor for crash investigators.

[farcanell]

45 minutes ago, InMyShadow said:

I guarantee we won't encouraging any air line pilots to act manlier via TV lol

You must have missed the many threads of upswing in government response due to netizen activity.

 

if speculating, it would be more appropriate to speculate that the pilot in control had safety concerns about landing, and deemed it safer to land elsewhere.

 

concerns, as you must know, due to your own self proclaimed experience, include more factors than wind speed or direction

 

there is more to this than an airport official stating that there was 12 Kt ground speeds winds

 

consistent crosswinds are not really a big issue ( obviously dependent on speed), but inconsistent high crosswind gusts are, which may not have been present when other planes landed

 

again, erring on the side of caution is laudable

 

the alternative could have been a botched landing... and then what would we be saying?

 

[Patriot]

5 hours ago, Michael Hare said:

Good on the pilot for turning back. No lives were lost. Maybe there is more in the story than just the 12 knot winds.  I still remember very clearly the Lao plane crash near Pakse into the Mekong river 4 years ago. Pilot error.  49 people died.

 

  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lao_Airlines_Flight_301

Agreed. Another factor is that the quoted wind speed may have been mean/average. It was very gusty in UR on the day in question

[InMyShadow]

You must have missed the many threads of upswing in government response due to netizen activity.

 

if speculating, it would be more appropriate to speculate that the pilot in control had safety concerns about landing, and deemed it safer to land elsewhere.

 

concerns, as you must know, due to your own self proclaimed experience, include more factors than wind speed or direction

 

there is more to this than an airport official stating that there was 12 Kt ground speeds winds

 

consistent crosswinds are not really a big issue ( obviously dependent on speed), but inconsistent high crosswind gusts are, which may not have been present when other planes landed

 

again, erring on the side of caution is laudable

 

the alternative could have been a botched landing... and then what would we be saying?

 

Nonsense your trying to talk about wind sheer.. At 12 kts not a hope and there would be multiple diversions but you knew that right ! No need for my perceived experience.

 

We can only speculate on the report or the would be no need to discuss it.

 

Now had they mentioned something like a massive storm cell with strong wind sheer .. But they didn't.. Or a fire in the cockpit.. But they didn't... I could go on but we would get off topic as usual on TV

 

Let's just stick with topic on the report 12 k crosswind

[InMyShadow]

Agreed. Another factor is that the quoted wind speed may have been mean/average. It was very gusty in UR on the day in question

Did you read the report. That crew needs to be de briefed to find out why they could not land in a breeze  

Of course other planes had no problem. What a massive inconvenience and fuel burn costs because of what appears to be incompetence. Applauded for going back? They shouldn't even be in the air and that's the problem with low cost carriers.. You get the fight crew you pay for and it's not much

 

' Ratchathani airport director Kittichai Sajjalak said the wind speed at the airport was about 12 knots on Tuesday morning, which did not exceed safety levels. He added that other airlines had landed at the airport but that decision depended on the decision of a pilot whether to abort a landing."

 

 

 

[farcanell]

37 minutes ago, InMyShadow said:

Nonsense your trying to talk about wind sheer.. At 12 kts not a hope and there would be multiple diversions but you knew that right ! No need for my perceived experience.

 

We can only speculate on the report or the would be no need to discuss it.

 

Now had they mentioned something like a massive storm cell with strong wind sheer .. But they didn't.. Or a fire in the cockpit.. But they didn't... I could go on but we would get off topic as usual on TV

 

Let's just stick with topic on the report 12 k crosswind

If I had meant wind sheer, I would have said wind sheer... but I did not. I said inconsistent high crosswind gusts. As in gusts of wind, verse a consistent wind.

 

But... as you want to bring up windsheer, isn’t there monsoonal activity in the east? Perhaps as the one controlling the plane, the pilot could feel these

 

The topic is about a reported aborted landing.... in a 12 kt wind... I see no mention of crosswind speeds ( per your claim that the topic is about 12kt crosswinds in your last post attached)

 

so far, all that’s been said is that there was a 12 kt ground wind, this by the airport official on the ground, who also acknowledged that landing was at the pilots discretion.... and who may or may not be telling the whole story

 

he (the pilot) used his discretion, and did not land

 

why try to pillories him for making a safety judgement?

 

i wish everyone in Thailand would consider safety, a little more, when making judgements. 

 

And... even if the landing could have been made safely... so what, he erred on the side of caution. Surely this is always better

 

im not really sure what the point your trying to make is, but I assume its about inexperienced pilots (???).... and if that’s the case, then once again, he made the correct decision according to his experience.

 

your beef should be with lion air... but good luck there, because we already know that they have a poor safety record

 

Or perhaps your beef should be with the Thai government, who may require Thai pilots on Thai lion (speculation there too)

 

but again.... the pilot is in the right. He chose, for safety reasons (speculation?) to abort the landing and landed safely elsewhere.... everyone lived... always a good outcome.

 

anyway, it appears that we will have to just agree to disagree about wether or not the pilot, (who landed safely), was right or wrong, to make a judgement call whilst in command.

[InMyShadow]

49 minutes ago, farcanell said:

If I had meant wind sheer, I would have said wind sheer... but I did not. I said inconsistent high crosswind gusts. As in gusts of wind, verse a consistent wind.

 

But... as you want to bring up windsheer, isn’t there monsoonal activity in the east? Perhaps as the one controlling the plane, the pilot could feel these

 

The topic is about a reported aborted landing.... in a 12 kt wind... I see no mention of crosswind speeds ( per your claim that the topic is about 12kt crosswinds in your last post attached)

 

so far, all that’s been said is that there was a 12 kt ground wind, this by the airport official on the ground, who also acknowledged that landing was at the pilots discretion.... and who may or may not be telling the whole story

 

he (the pilot) used his discretion, and did not land

 

why try to pillories him for making a safety judgement?

 

i wish everyone in Thailand would consider safety, a little more, when making judgements. 

 

And... even if the landing could have been made safely... so what, he erred on the side of caution. Surely this is always better

 

im not really sure what the point your trying to make is, but I assume its about inexperienced pilots (???).... and if that’s the case, then once again, he made the correct decision according to his experience.

 

your beef should be with lion air... but good luck there, because we already know that they have a poor safety record

 

Or perhaps your beef should be with the Thai government, who may require Thai pilots on Thai lion (speculation there too)

 

but again.... the pilot is in the right. He chose, for safety reasons (speculation?) to abort the landing and landed safely elsewhere.... everyone lived... always a good outcome.

 

anyway, it appears that we will have to just agree to disagree about wether or not the pilot, (who landed safely), was right or wrong, to make a judgement call whilst in command.

Your way way  out of your depth if  it wasn't a cross wind then it could have only been a headwind which is absolutely ideal, doesn't get any better than that. And really the director is going to fib about the wind, that's completely nonsensical and kind of cringe worthy 

 

I'm not  going to continue. Discussions with people who don't understand aerodynamics yet are passionate with silly theories 

 

12 kt head wind is perfect landing conditions, go do some research.. 

Hopefully he will be sacked if that's the case 

 

If there was a technical issue and he would have absolutely landed there and not  turned back. 

 

 

over and out captain ?

Edited November 1, 2017 by InMyShadow

[farcanell]

52 minutes ago, InMyShadow said:

Your way way  out of your depth if  it wasn't a cross wind then it could have only been a headwind which is absolutely ideal, doesn't get any better than that. And really the director is going to fib about the wind, that's completely nonsensical and kind of cringe worthy 

 

I'm not  going to continue. Discussions with people who don't understand aerodynamics yet are passionate with silly theories 

 

You can expect up to a 30 degree variation in a gust... the wind veers... look it up.

 

anyway... and again... this is about a pilot taking a decision to abort a flight, for reasons NOT reported.

 

you want him fired for making the decision to abort... I want him, and others, to be congratulated for choosing to use their judgement when it comes to the safety of their passengers.

 

it is for the airlines chief pilot to determine wether this was a right or wrong decision (technically)... and for him to prescribe any actions in regards to the decision made by the pilot in command.

 

i find it absolutely bizarre that anyone would condemn a pilot from choosing to err on the side of safety, for whatever reason... especially another pilot

 

i fully appreciate some people have larger balls than others, but I do not appreciate that the size of those, should influence decisions on safety

 

”fibs”, as you will find, are a way of life in Thailand... for example “my brakes failed!” ( there is also a thing called lying by omission to consider)

 

anyway... this is verging on bickering, as I will continue to maintain that the pilot acted correctly in aborting a landing that he had concerns about, whilst you seem determined to insist he should have landed, despite having concerns... bizarre.

 

so... no more, before the mods decide no more... enjoy the rest of your evening

 

 

Edited November 1, 2017 by farcanell

[InMyShadow]

You can expect up to a 30 degree variation in a gust... the wind veers... look it up.   anyway... and again... this is about a pilot taking a decision to abort a flight, for reasons NOT reported.

 

you want him fired for making the decision to abort... I want him, and others, to be congratulated for choosing to use their judgement when it comes to the safety of their passengers.

 

it is for the airlines chief pilot to determine wether this was a right or wrong decision (technically)... and for him to prescribe any actions in regards to the decision made by the pilot in command.

 

i find it absolutely bizarre that anyone would condemn a pilot from choosing to err on the side of safety, for whatever reason... especially another pilot

 

i fully appreciate some people have larger balls than others, but I do not appreciate that the size of those, should influence decisions on safety

 

”fibs”, as you will find, are a way of life in Thailand... for example “my brakes failed!” ( there is also a thing called lying by omission to consider)

 

anyway... this is verging on bickering, as I will continue to maintain that the pilot acted correctly in aborting a landing that he had concerns about, whilst you seem determined to insist he should have landed, despite having concerns... bizarre.

 

so... no more, before the mods decide no more... enjoy the rest of your evening

 

 

 

 

Ughh I have to correct you. I never once said he must land because he didn't have the skill to land in a breeze. If you don't want to land then you don't want to

 

Should he have, in a breeze? Absolutely but he chose not to. Captains choice.

 

 Every body else did and the directors report can be verified by metorigocal reports and the 100 other flights and he has no motive and this is why your so far out of your depth, it's not the tuk Tuk mafia lol

 

I'm saying he needs to be debriefed and demoted untill has the skills

 

Before he kills 200 people in a real emergency

 

Hopefully you won't be on that flight

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[chickenslegs]

After reading this topic - now I know how these guys felt ...

 

 

Edited November 1, 2017 by chickenslegs

[farcanell]

 

23 minutes ago, InMyShadow said:

I'm saying he needs to be debriefed and demoted untill has the skills

 

Before he kills 200 people in a real emergency

 

Hopefully you won't be on that flight

 

 

Excellent... we are on the same page then. .. almost

 

he (pilot) needs to be debriefed... then maybe commended... maybe demoted... maybe fired ( depending on wether or not his skills or judgement are deemed lacking)

 

but debriefed before being pilloried by us or the media, is proper

 

hopefully, for consumer confidence, the airline will publish something to follow up on this story. (Admittedly, holding ones breath whilst waiting, would be I’ll advised)

 

between now and then... choose wisely... lol... use another carrier. (Ergo I won’t be on that particular carriers crash, if it were to happen... but I might disappear on a Malaysian mystery flight)