THAI makes emergency landing at Suvarnabhumi Airport

[webfact]

THAI makes emergency landing at Suvarnabhumi Airport

By The Nation

 

File photo

 

A Thai Airways International flight heading to Narita airport in Japan had to detour to make an emergency landing at Suvarnabhumi Airport on Monday, THAI announced.

 

In a press statement, THAI said the flight TG676 detoured one hour after it took off from Suvarnabhumi at 8am.

 

After one of the engines malfunctioned, the pilot decided to return to Suvarnabhumi for an emergency landing in line with the “utmost precautionary measures”, the statement said.

 

THAI said passengers were given food coupons and temporary shelter while engineers fixed the problem. The flight resumed at 11:59pm on Monday.

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/breakingnews/30339301

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2018-02-20

[MaxLee]

Okay, 100 years without REAL safety technical Inspections  You see????

[toybits]

Also read somewhere that a Nok Air flight (propeller plane) lost one of its engines and had to land 15 minutes after take off.  No news about that?  Is that a file photo? Doesn't look like Suvarnaphum airport.

Edited February 20, 2018 by toybits

[KhunBENQ]

26 minutes ago, toybits said:

Also read somewhere that a Nok Air flight (propeller plane) lost one of its engines and had to land 15 minutes after take off.  No news about that?  Is that a file photo? Doesn't look like Suvarnaphum airport.

It also puzzles me that the Nok Air event is not found in the English language news sources.

 

File photo: sure, as subtitled.

Quite poor that they didn't find the time to mention that it was an A380(!), the biggest passenger plane.

[KhunBENQ]

The file photo is from a 2014 incident at Khon Kaen airport when an A330 taxied off the runway to the green

[Wilsonandson]

23 minutes ago, KhunBENQ said:

It also puzzles me that the Nok Air event is not found in the English language news sources.

 

File photo: sure, as subtitled.

Quite poor that they didn't find the time to mention that it was an A380(!), the biggest passenger plane.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/around_thailand/30339209

[overherebc]

Must be the first time in the world that a plane has had to return to the airport when the pilot gets a warning that there is a problem with one engine, well, that's going on the reactions from some posters.

I've been on a plane that was almost half way across the Atlantic that turned around and came back to UK. ( and it wasn't Thai airways )

Another half hour and it would have passed the halfway stage and would have continued to Canada. If you can't work that out then it here's a clue. 'It would have been a shorter distance.'

It happens more regularly than you think around the world and in 99.999% of the cases it can be a warning system fault but the pilot has to believe the instruments and not what he thinks.

[bluesofa]

2 hours ago, webfact said:

"THAI said passengers were given food coupons and temporary shelter while engineers fixed the problem"

 

Interesting use of the word "shelter"?

For me it conjures up an image of a destitute group looking for somewhere, in order to survive.

Is that word common usage in an instance like this? I'd just imagine something like seating" or "accommodation".

[thai006]

we need to make a news for that really ?? happend everyday around the world 

[ubonjoe]

3 hours ago, KhunBENQ said:

It also puzzles me that the Nok Air event is not found in the English language news sources.

It was in the news yesterday.

 

[overherebc]

3 minutes ago, ubonjoe said:

It was in the news yesterday.

 

UBJ.

Stop ruining good rants.

?????

[Just Weird]

4 hours ago, MaxLee said:

Okay, 100 years without REAL safety technical Inspections  You see????

"You see???", see what?  Sorry, but what's so hilarious about your remark? 

 

Are you suggesting that other airlines do have inspections and as a result do not have occasional issues?

[Just Weird]

4 hours ago, toybits said:

Also read somewhere that a Nok Air flight (propeller plane) lost one of its engines and had to land 15 minutes after take off.  No news about that?  Is that a file photo? Doesn't look like Suvarnaphum airport.

As it says file photo under the pic the chances are that it's a file photo.

[Just Weird]

3 hours ago, overherebc said:

Must be the first time in the world that a plane has had to return to the airport when the pilot gets a warning that there is a problem with one engine, well, that's going on the reactions from some posters.

I've been on a plane that was almost half way across the Atlantic that turned around and came back to UK. ( and it wasn't Thai airways )

Another half hour and it would have passed the halfway stage and would have continued to Canada. If you can't work that out then it here's a clue. 'It would have been a shorter distance.'

It happens more regularly than you think around the world and in 99.999% of the cases it can be a warning system fault but the pilot has to believe the instruments and not what he thinks.

C'mon, you're being sensible, that's just going to confuse the Thai bashers.

[toybits]

2 hours ago, Just Weird said:

As it says file photo under the pic the chances are that it's a file photo.

Yes, I see that now. But it is not at Suwannaphum.

[surangw]

recycled parts 

[jacko45k]

17 hours ago, KhunBENQ said:

It also puzzles me that the Nok Air event is not found in the English language news sources.

 

File photo: sure, as subtitled.

Quite poor that they didn't find the time to mention that it was an A380(!), the biggest passenger plane.

And it obviously still had 3 functioning engines then.

[mtls2005]

I think that photo is of an older A330 (HS-TEG) which is no longer currently in service?

 

I think yesterday's incident involved an A380.

 

The Nok Air incident sounded a bit "hairy-er", based on the pax experiences in Thai social media?

 

 

Incident: Thai A388 near Bangkok on Feb 19th 2018, engine shut down in flight

A Thai Airways Airbus A380-800, registration HS-TUA performing flight TG-676 from Bangkok (Thailand) to Tokyo Narita (Japan), was climbing through FL370 out of Bangkok when the crew received indication of one of the engines (Trent 970) overheated and lost power. The crew shut the engine down and decided to return to Bangkok where the aircraft landed safely about 135 minutes after departure.

 

A replacement Boeing 777-300 registration HS-TKQ reached Tokyo with a delay of 17 hours.

 

The occurrence aircraft remained on the ground for about 16 hours before returning to service.

 

[Bob12345]

18 hours ago, webfact said:

The flight resumed at 11:59pm on Monday

16 hour delay but you do get some free food coupons. Great service!

[overherebc]

9 minutes ago, Bob12345 said:

16 hour delay but you do get some free food coupons. Great service!

Yep. They just have all the aircraft sitting in a line like taxis and when they have enough people to fill one it rolls up to the gate. If it gets a flat tyre they just wave the next one in line etc and so on.

So easy that I don't understand the delays either.

?

[ravip]

17 hours ago, overherebc said:

Must be the first time in the world that a plane has had to return to the airport when the pilot gets a warning that there is a problem with one engine, well, that's going on the reactions from some posters.

I've been on a plane that was almost half way across the Atlantic that turned around and came back to UK. ( and it wasn't Thai airways )

Another half hour and it would have passed the halfway stage and would have continued to Canada. If you can't work that out then it here's a clue. 'It would have been a shorter distance.'

It happens more regularly than you think around the world and in 99.999% of the cases it can be a warning system fault but the pilot has to believe the instruments and not what he thinks.

Very true indeed!

It is impossible to comprehend the mind set of some posters herein.

 

Edit

Maybe this site might help some people to understand that aircrafts other than belonging to Thai also has problems, quite often >>> http://www.avherald.com/h?list=&opt=0

Edited February 21, 2018 by ravip

[1337markus]

17 hours ago, KhunBENQ said:

The file photo is from a 2014 incident at Khon Kaen airport when an A330 taxied off the runway to the green

So cruel, but true.

[atyclb]

14 hours ago, Just Weird said:

18 hours ago, MaxLee said:

Okay, 100 years without REAL safety technical Inspections  You see????

"You see???", see what?  Sorry, but what's so hilarious about your remark? 

 

Are you suggesting that other airlines do have inspections and as a result do not have occasional issues?

 

in a case that became infamous thai airways was i the process of selling one of their uneconomical 4 engine jets to a middle eastern billionaire. the wannabe buyer sent a team of engineers to inspect it prior to sale. their inspection included fiberoptic scopes that looked inside the engines. they found that the routine maintenance interval replacement parts had not been replaced even though the maintenance paperwork indicated it had been done.  this is what led to the iata ban on thai airways and need to pass relevant safety checks

[atyclb]

14 hours ago, Just Weird said:

17 hours ago, overherebc said:

Must be the first time in the world that a plane has had to return to the airport when the pilot gets a warning that there is a problem with one engine, well, that's going on the reactions from some posters.

I've been on a plane that was almost half way across the Atlantic that turned around and came back to UK. ( and it wasn't Thai airways )

Another half hour and it would have passed the halfway stage and would have continued to Canada. If you can't work that out then it here's a clue. 'It would have been a shorter distance.'

It happens more regularly than you think around the world and in 99.999% of the cases it can be a warning system fault but the pilot has to believe the instruments and not what he thinks.

C'mon, you're being sensible, that's just going to confuse the Thai bashers.

 

https://www.eturbonews.com/115154/reason-behind-thailand-s-air-safety-problem

 

"Even more important, in the beginning of the negotiations, AvCon had its engineers look at the aircraft using video borescopes it was to make offers on. Two of the aircraft’s engines required an overhaul, and C4 checks had not been done although the airline’s specifications not only did not reveal that information, but went even further indicating the C4 checks had been done.

 

After finding these maintenance discrepancies, AvCon warned Thai Airways as well as the Thai government of this serious issue. Such an oversight could cause the Thai Department of Civil Aviation to downgrade the airline’s CAT 2 status, already at a dismal ranking. Adding to that issue is the fact that the Thai Department of Civil Aviation does not have enough inspectors.

"

 

it seems 2 of the 4 engines required an overhaul that according to paperwork had been done but the engineers discovers the overhaul had not been done.  

Edited February 21, 2018 by atyclb

[Bob12345]

1 hour ago, overherebc said:

Yep. They just have all the aircraft sitting in a line like taxis and when they have enough people to fill one it rolls up to the gate. If it gets a flat tyre they just wave the next one in line etc and so on.

So easy that I don't understand the delays either.

?

If they can't handle the complexity of their own business, they should sell those planes and start a noodle shop. Much easier.

 

Dont quote me on the exact numbers, but in Europe we get 50% of the paid price back in case of 3-4 hours delay, and all money back after like 6 hours delay ( -> and still get your flight; for free).

Add to that some set amounts for food, snacks, and a hotel room.

 

My point is that these people are waiting for a long time, and should be compensated accordingly. 

I don't care what the reason of the delay is, or how complex it is to be an airliner.

[overherebc]

2 minutes ago, Bob12345 said:

If they can't handle the complexity of their own business, they should sell those planes and start a noodle shop. Much easier.

 

Dont quote me on the exact numbers, but in Europe we get 50% of the paid price back in case of 3-4 hours delay, and all money back after like 6 hours delay ( -> and still get your flight; for free).

Add to that some set amounts for food, snacks, and a hotel room.

 

My point is that these people are waiting for a long time, and should be compensated accordingly. 

I don't care what the reason of the delay is, or how complex it is to be an airliner.

Your right.

It's just the way different countries see paying customers.

Some have the 'thank you for being a customer' attitude while others have the 'you should be thankful we are providing this service'

[rossd]

19 hours ago, KhunBENQ said:

It also puzzles me that the Nok Air event is not found in the English language news sources.

 

File photo: sure, as subtitled.

Quite poor that they didn't find the time to mention that it was an A380(!), the biggest passenger plane.

That is not an A380! The designation of HS-TEG shows that this aircraft is an A330-321.

Edited February 21, 2018 by rossd
To show the aircraft was not an A380

[Just Weird]

13 hours ago, toybits said:

Yes, I see that now. But it is not at Suwannaphum.

So?

[Just Weird]

1 hour ago, atyclb said:

 

in a case that became infamous thai airways was i the process of selling one of their uneconomical 4 engine jets to a middle eastern billionaire. the wannabe buyer sent a team of engineers to inspect it prior to sale. their inspection included fiberoptic scopes that looked inside the engines. they found that the routine maintenance interval replacement parts had not been replaced even though the maintenance paperwork indicated it had been done.  this is what led to the iata ban on thai airways and need to pass relevant safety checks

So what?  That's one isolated example of hearsay. 

 

Do you seriously think that that "example" equates to "100 years of no safety inspections"?   Do you also think that THAI has a safety record so bad that it is worthy of the fatuous derision of the poster I was responding to? 

 

 

Edited February 21, 2018 by Just Weird

[Just Weird]

1 hour ago, atyclb said:

https://www.eturbonews.com/115154/reason-behind-thailand-s-air-safety-problem

Yes, yes...you've already pointed out that sole example from 4 years ago in your last comment and that did not affect passenger safety in any way, endanger passengers or cause the aircraft at any time to be subject to a safety alarm and a subsequent emergency landing.  Did it?