Runways 1 & 2 Have No Cracks , 3 Has Cracks On Purpose !

[kalaminsa]

Suvarnabhumi Chapter 6

“Cracks” along a runway at Suvarnabhumi Airport

“Cracks” along a runway at Suvarnabhumi Airport “The truth” to be told!

Being an acceptably modern and high standard safety airport is more than being equipped with high technology instruments. The quality of the runway is very important.

Suvarnabhumi International Airport aims to be an aviation hub. It is built to be the biggest international airport but there are suspicions about “Cracks” along a runway.

What is the fact?

In the early stage of the opening of Suvarnabhumi International Airport, there are two runways- the east runway, 60 meters wide and 4,000 meters long, and the west runway, 60 meters wide and 3,700 meters long. These two parallel runways are 2,200 meters apart so the big commercial aircrafts could take off or land on each runway at the same time.

The news about “cracks” along the runways is true but it is not these two runways but the third runway which is planned for future use. Anyway there will be four runways in total for Suvarnabhumi International Airport.

The point is “Why it cracks?” Is it because the construction or the materials used were below standard? To understand this situation, we have to pay attention to Suvarnabhumi International Airport “Runway building techniques”.

The airport designer decided to build it with no pile.

The civil engineers didn’t implement the pile foundation technique on construction of the runways because, in Suvarnabhumi case, the piles won’t prove very much helpful. At the end of the day the soft clay will subside around the piles, causing a swelling runway which will cause some troubles when the aircrafts land.

The engineers and contactors then employed Pre Fabricated Vertical Drain (PVD) technique to improve the soft clay beneath the runways. The PVD process will consolidate the soft clay and improve the cohesive soil. Even there would be a subsidence, say, 2 or 3 centimeters per year, it could not cause any damage to the runways

Technically, the civil engineers buried 10-metered vertical drainage paths every 80 square/centimeters before refilling the surface with load of sand. They then laid the mesh of permeable drainage part all over the place, and preloaded the area by refilling piles of stone (4.5-meter height) in order to excess pore water. The PVD process permitted accelerated consolidation of soft clay by offering a highly permeable drainage path for excess 80 per cent of water. The particular technique can firm up the soil in 11 months, rather than 30 years of natural process, and secured the soil for the runway.

Once the PVD process is completed, the preloading stones are removed from the surface. Then they lay two layers of Cement Treated Base and Asphalt Concrete on both runways.

Speaking of the crack in question, the contractor admitted that the crack was technically on purpose. The answer then leads to the next question: What exactly is that particular crack? It’s all about the construction of the third runway.

The third runway is a part of future expansion, but the Airport of Thailand decided to build it soon after the initial phase is completed with two parallel runways. If not, the construction in later days will cause too much trouble. The sea of dust, for example, will reduce the visibility and cause trouble on landing and taking off the aircrafts.

Additionally, the AOT also built up the tarmac technically called Enabling Work” for the aircrafts to taxi from the third runway to the concourse buildings via the first and second runways.

Like the first two runways, the engineers employed the PVD technique to improve the soil for the third runway and the enabling work of tarmac, and here it leads to the crack in question aside the first and second runways.

The crack was actually caused by the soil improvement, or PVD, process, when the soft clay aside the completed runways was consolidated and subsided. The crack somehow brought worry to public before the contractor revealed that it was a “technical crack” in purpose.

The engineer confirmed that the technical crack in question was part of soil improvement, and it could do no damage to the runway. When the soft clay is completely firmed up, the contractor can quickly fix the crack.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Source , Airport Authority of Thailand....

http://www2.airportthai.co.th/faq/en6.htm

[cclub75]

The engineer confirmed that the technical crack in question was part of soil improvement, and it could do no damage to the runway.

Source , Airport Authority of Thailand....

I must confess : i'm impressed by their incredible imagination. I mean : respect !

Day after day, they are challenging themselves to push the limits, beyond, way beyond.

Far, far away.

Edited March 6, 2007 by cclub75

[cdnvic]

Ok, the explanation does make some sense. However, I'd feel better if this came from an independent source. It's in AOT's interest to dispel any fears as this airport's troubles are news items all over the world.

[ThaiGoon]

[SoiSong]

OK. for all those who think the runway is unsafe.stray home or go to Angles city via Nino Aquino INt'l in MNL...Have a go at the place...I guess the nai bobos are back at BKK already!

[cdnvic]

OK. for all those who think the runway is unsafe.stray home or go to Angles city via Nino Aquino INt'l in MNL...Have a go at the place...I guess the nai bobos are back at BKK already!

Once again in English?

[grtaylor]

Just my feeling - if the runways were actually unsafe, there isn't a responsible pilot in the world who would be risking his neck and those of his passengers by landing here.

G

[cdnvic]

When the Sampoong Department Store collapsed in Seoul in 1995, killing over 500 people, an engineer admitted that he knew the structure was in danger of imminent collapse yet he stayed quiet because he "did not want to upset the store's owner".

This sense of not wanting to be the bearer of bad news permeates many professionals throughout Asia, which is why I prefer to see an outside assessment on the alleged cracks that come from someone with no face to save if it goes wrong, and no political advantage to gain if it turns out to be good news.

A pilot whizzing down the runway at 180kts may not be in the best position to give the runway a detailed examination.

[womble]

This sense of not wanting to be the bearer of bad news permeates many professionals throughout Asia, which is why I prefer to see an outside assessment on the alleged cracks that come from someone with no face to save if it goes wrong, and no political advantage to gain if it turns out to be good news.

I doubt they would allow an independant team of foriegn investigators in to do a full study.

[cdnvic]

And for that reason there will always be doubts.

[jetjock]

Just my feeling - if the runways were actually unsafe, there isn't a responsible pilot in the world who would be risking his neck and those of his passengers by landing here.

G

I have spent almost all my life as an airline pilot flying the jumbo jets and can assure you that I know nothing about runway construction techniques. Unless a runway is obviously unsafe for some reason, most of us pilots depend on our companies and the authorities to alert us to the problems and the safety of the runway construction. Keep the info coming on runway construction as I am still learning everyday.

[wrecker]

The engineer confirmed that the technical crack in question was part of soil improvement, and it could do no damage to the runway.

Source , Airport Authority of Thailand....

I must confess : i'm impressed by their incredible imagination. I mean : respect !

Day after day, they are challenging themselves to push the limits, beyond, way beyond.

Far, far away.

unfortunately for you, it is indeed the reason, the Japanese and Western Designers already explained this more than two years ago. But people are too busy finding a reason to screw thaksin.

[gummy]

You have to understand that all the "experts" who categorically suggest that the runway cracks are serious, or those that disparage credible engineering reports, are generally venting their opinions due to extreme cases of flactulance.

Unless any of them have had access to all the preliminary core samples, post construction core samples, detailed engineering caluclations relating to all the specific areas in question and post construction survey reports then to most of us they just continue to prove what most of us already suspect, they like the sound of their own voice, or in this case their words, and will not let any figment of fact impact upon their words of fiction.

[cdnvic]

Unless any of them have had access to all the preliminary core samples, post construction core samples, detailed engineering caluclations relating to all the specific areas in question and post construction survey reports then to most of us they just continue to prove what most of us already suspect, they like the sound of their own voice, or in this case their words, and will not let any figment of fact impact upon their words of fiction.

Well, if we actually saw evidence such as this rather than proclamations flying around everywhere then it would put a few minds at rest.

[gummy]

Unless any of them have had access to all the preliminary core samples, post construction core samples, detailed engineering caluclations relating to all the specific areas in question and post construction survey reports then to most of us they just continue to prove what most of us already suspect, they like the sound of their own voice, or in this case their words, and will not let any figment of fact impact upon their words of fiction.

Well, if we actually saw evidence such as this rather than proclamations flying around everywhere then it would put a few minds at rest.

My point proven I think unless that is you care to share with us all your Civil Engineering qualifications and specific airport runway construction experiences ?

[cdnvic]

Ok inspector, I'll type s-l-o-w-l-y so you understand me this time.

There have been NO reports by independent, qualified engineers that prove the existence of, or lack of, a problem with cracking. We have press releases, statements, and reports from parties who have a vested interest in making things all look good. We have several opinions by engineers who have not actually been on the site.

So no officer, I don't have my engineering papers on me, but I deal with them daily and can tell you that we cannot get away with simply reporting that our engineers say everything is fine. That's why they have independent inspectors without vested interests.

So, as you say your point is proven, can you point to the report by qualified and independent engineers doing so, or does that level of scrutiny not apply to your point of view?

[new farang]

Ok inspector, I'll type s-l-o-w-l-y so you understand me this time.

There have been NO reports by independent, qualified engineers that prove the existence of, or lack of, a problem with cracking. We have press releases, statements, and reports from parties who have a vested interest in making things all look good. We have several opinions by engineers who have not actually been on the site.

So no officer, I don't have my engineering papers on me, but I deal with them daily and can tell you that we cannot get away with simply reporting that our engineers say everything is fine. That's why they have independent inspectors without vested interests.

So, as you say your point is proven, can you point to the report by qualified and independent engineers doing so, or does that level of scrutiny not apply to your point of view?

cdnvic, well put. Should said authorities really want to put people's fears to rest, they'd be happy to invite outside specialists without a vested interest to do thorough analyzation of the situation.

I also agree to what others have written; there are either those who'd suffer if the mentioned problems truly present a safety concern, and there are those who gain from promoting the idea that there are concerns with the construction and whatever corners may have been cut in the process. Either someone has something to lose or something to gain (thus parties on both sides of the situation who'd rather keep the details vague) until a more thorough independant study is conducted. Until then, I'm hoping all is safe as there have been enough hits to tourism lately - a driving force in Thailand's economy - and I'll be popping through there several times in the coming months myself!

[thaimat]

Suvarnabhumi Chapter 6

"Cracks" along a runway at Suvarnabhumi Airport

"Cracks" along a runway at Suvarnabhumi Airport "The truth" to be told!

Being an acceptably modern and high standard safety airport is more than being equipped with high technology instruments. The quality of the runway is very important.

Suvarnabhumi International Airport aims to be an aviation hub. It is built to be the biggest international airport but there are suspicions about "Cracks" along a runway.

What is the fact?

In the early stage of the opening of Suvarnabhumi International Airport, there are two runways- the east runway, 60 meters wide and 4,000 meters long, and the west runway, 60 meters wide and 3,700 meters long. These two parallel runways are 2,200 meters apart so the big commercial aircrafts could take off or land on each runway at the same time.

The news about "cracks" along the runways is true but it is not these two runways but the third runway which is planned for future use. Anyway there will be four runways in total for Suvarnabhumi International Airport.

The point is "Why it cracks?" Is it because the construction or the materials used were below standard? To understand this situation, we have to pay attention to Suvarnabhumi International Airport "Runway building techniques".

The airport designer decided to build it with no pile.

The civil engineers didn't implement the pile foundation technique on construction of the runways because, in Suvarnabhumi case, the piles won't prove very much helpful. At the end of the day the soft clay will subside around the piles, causing a swelling runway which will cause some troubles when the aircrafts land.

The engineers and contactors then employed Pre Fabricated Vertical Drain (PVD) technique to improve the soft clay beneath the runways. The PVD process will consolidate the soft clay and improve the cohesive soil. Even there would be a subsidence, say, 2 or 3 centimeters per year, it could not cause any damage to the runways

Technically, the civil engineers buried 10-metered vertical drainage paths every 80 square/centimeters before refilling the surface with load of sand. They then laid the mesh of permeable drainage part all over the place, and preloaded the area by refilling piles of stone (4.5-meter height) in order to excess pore water. The PVD process permitted accelerated consolidation of soft clay by offering a highly permeable drainage path for excess 80 per cent of water. The particular technique can firm up the soil in 11 months, rather than 30 years of natural process, and secured the soil for the runway.

Once the PVD process is completed, the preloading stones are removed from the surface. Then they lay two layers of Cement Treated Base and Asphalt Concrete on both runways.

Speaking of the crack in question, the contractor admitted that the crack was technically on purpose. The answer then leads to the next question: What exactly is that particular crack? It's all about the construction of the third runway.

The third runway is a part of future expansion, but the Airport of Thailand decided to build it soon after the initial phase is completed with two parallel runways. If not, the construction in later days will cause too much trouble. The sea of dust, for example, will reduce the visibility and cause trouble on landing and taking off the aircrafts.

Additionally, the AOT also built up the tarmac technically called Enabling Work" for the aircrafts to taxi from the third runway to the concourse buildings via the first and second runways.

Like the first two runways, the engineers employed the PVD technique to improve the soil for the third runway and the enabling work of tarmac, and here it leads to the crack in question aside the first and second runways.

The crack was actually caused by the soil improvement, or PVD, process, when the soft clay aside the completed runways was consolidated and subsided. The crack somehow brought worry to public before the contractor revealed that it was a "technical crack" in purpose.

The engineer confirmed that the technical crack in question was part of soil improvement, and it could do no damage to the runway. When the soft clay is completely firmed up, the contractor can quickly fix the crack.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Source , Airport Authority of Thailand....

http://www2.airportthai.co.th/faq/en6.htm

Sounds like a small piece of ass covering tissue, given that so many have said the cracks are serious. But if they're all part of the plan, why are Airlines moving to Don Muang? Why did my Suvarnabhumi to Chiang Mai ticket, on Air Asia, just cost me an additional 1000 baht each way, not including airport tax, booked direct wit Air Asia? A 600 baht ticket with 1000 baht tax seems strange, but I assumed it was to help pay for fixing the problems at Suvarnabhumi. Amazing Thailand...

Edited March 12, 2007 by thaimat

[gummy]

Ok inspector, I'll type s-l-o-w-l-y so you understand me this time.

There have been NO reports by independent, qualified engineers that prove the existence of, or lack of, a problem with cracking. We have press releases, statements, and reports from parties who have a vested interest in making things all look good. We have several opinions by engineers who have not actually been on the site.

So no officer, I don't have my engineering papers on me, but I deal with them daily and can tell you that we cannot get away with simply reporting that our engineers say everything is fine. That's why they have independent inspectors without vested interests.

So, as you say your point is proven, can you point to the report by qualified and independent engineers doing so, or does that level of scrutiny not apply to your point of view?

So as you admit you are not qualified either to make an assessment, rather your preferences are to belive in conjecture that reflects a negative viewpoint. For me I find it absurd that a few people prefer to go down this route. Guess so many millions would never have flown from the re-built LHR SW runway had they perceived that the slight subsidance at that time was due to the T4 underground extension, which of course it turned out not to be. BAA ( whom were not privatised at that time ) took the conventional course and accepted the designers and constructors technical argument rather than going for an international opinion as you and many advocate here. Which of course it turned out not to be, but that was a few years back. I can only assume therefore that you do not go in an elevator without first veiwing the inspection and maintainace records, and the list goes on and on.

I would suspect that by this time next year, doubts about the safety integrity of the runways will have taken its natural course and fizzled out and probably by then some other folk will have come up with another issue to enable the "bandwagon" to roll again. Who knows might be a resurrection of the other issue of trolleys on the escalators. Be safe and never drive to the airport, the perceived risks for you must be far too great.

[cdnvic]

Oi! You really can't read can you? Ok, go get an adult to come to the computer and read my posts and then they'll explain to you that:

I am not making an assesment of the runways' condition.

I am not saying that the runway is dangerous, cracked, or otherwise.

I am not saying that the runway is fine, and no problems exist.

I am saying that an independent examination is needed to prove which of the above is true. Someone with nothing to lose regardless of the outcome.

If you still don't get it I'll try to draw you some pictures but it may take some time as I am not qualified to do that either.

Edited March 12, 2007 by cdnvic

[dwwin]

I have spent almost all my life as an airline pilot flying the jumbo jets and can assure you that I know nothing about runway construction techniques. Unless a runway is obviously unsafe for some reason, most of us pilots depend on our companies and the authorities to alert us to the problems and the safety of the runway construction. Keep the info coming on runway construction as I am still learning everyday.

And there wouldn't be too many pilots willing to start the topic as there are others already waiting in line. That's an assumption but sounds reasonable to me.

Now a bit more about PVD. It's used worldwide and the description of "Thai engineers buried" couldn't be any further off the real process. It's been used along the Bkk-Chonburi motorway too. However with questionable results.

It's a machine commonly called 'needler' cos that's the way it looks. A crawler with a huge needle guided by a pipe column on it. The process is time consuming a bit expensive cos of the drainage hose, which is a bit pricey and the pockets that have to be fit on the hose each time, that gets simply pushed into the ground by this needle. Needle pulls out, hose gets cut off above the ground.

In countries with dry and hot summers those hoses are simply left open and the sun does the rest. LOS isn't one of those countries. That the ground subsides is true too cos of it's own weight and the water taken out it compacts itself.

Now just don't tell me that it is hot and dry for a longer period of time, like the 11 month stated, in LOS.

Actually my only question would be what they do with the water that comes out of those hoses. If they don't drain it away it will go in circles. The sun doesn't do it here. It's early afternoon and the humidity here is 65%. Nothing much evaporates in this sort of clime.

[gummy]

Oi! You really can't read can you? Ok, go get an adult to come to the computer and read my posts and then they'll explain to you that:

I am not making an assesment of the runways' condition.

I am not saying that the runway is dangerous, cracked, or otherwise.

I am not saying that the runway is fine, and no problems exist.

I am saying that an independent examination is needed to prove which of the above is true. Someone with nothing to lose regardless of the outcome.

If you still don't get it I'll try to draw you some pictures but it may take some time as I am not qualified to do that either.

No but when you are mature enough to understand and not believe in comic story's than I look forward to receiving your pictures, but I won't hold my breath.

[cdnvic]

No but when you are mature enough to understand and not believe in comic story's than I look forward to receiving your pictures, but I won't hold my breath.

I give up. Some people are just too thick to understand.

[dwwin]

No but when you are mature enough to understand and not believe in comic story's than I look forward to receiving your pictures, but I won't hold my breath.

As soon as you are mature enough to stop believing in Santa Claus and the the Easter Bunny you might realise that the cracks in the airport building, the leaking roof and the falling apart doors are all on purpose. You might also find the time to read the original engineering report again. There you will see that they have temporary turned off gravity out there or are pumping the water that comes to the surface to...where actually? The Gulf, where it promptly comes back?

The fact remains that a bunch of corrupt crooks have built a piece of c*** using my money cos I pay tax here, if you don't, keep sleeping.

[khaosai]

Hi,

just spent the last few days operating in and out of the new airport. During this time i operated from both of the southerly runways. There was some work going on repairing taxiways, but it did not seem to cause any real disruption during my time there.

Rgds.

[gummy]

No but when you are mature enough to understand and not believe in comic story's than I look forward to receiving your pictures, but I won't hold my breath.

As soon as you are mature enough to stop believing in Santa Claus and the the Easter Bunny you might realise that the cracks in the airport building, the leaking roof and the falling apart doors are all on purpose. You might also find the time to read the original engineering report again. There you will see that they have temporary turned off gravity out there or are pumping the water that comes to the surface to...where actually? The Gulf, where it promptly comes back?

The fact remains that a bunch of corrupt crooks have built a piece of c*** using my money cos I pay tax here, if you don't, keep sleeping.

Well I would suspect that as I have been here 20 years and together with the business that my wife and our family operate , I suspect that we have probably contributed more to the Thai revenue then you ever will many times over. That aside you have made some very strong allegations that some or part of the construction, you do not define which, had been built by a bunch of corrupt crooks in your own words. What evidence do you have to support this rather serious statement ? Or is it perhaps, like many, problems associated with the new airports construction, has been blown out of all proportion to purposely and unneccesarily defame the Thai airport operators and those construction companies whom were involved ? I suspect that you like a few others are just jumping on the "lets knock Thailand" bandwagon and most of your problems are associated with your dreams - possibly wet ones judging by your intentional flaming.

Edited March 16, 2007 by gummy

[kalaminsa]

gummy ,

you have obviously been in Thailand too long.

You seem to actually beleive what you are saying.

Perhaps you would like to inform us as to why DM is reopening ?

[gummy]

gummy ,

you have obviously been in Thailand too long.

You seem to actually beleive what you are saying.

Perhaps you would like to inform us as to why DM is reopening ?

2 Reasons - One, because it will have lower operating costs for budget airlines that will see a rapid expansion of business in the Asia Pacific region in the coming years and ,

Two - It is more convenient for myself and associates

[dwwin]

Well I would suspect that as I have been here 20 years and together with the business that my wife and our family operate , I suspect that we have probably contributed more to the Thai revenue then you ever will many times over. That aside you have made some very strong allegations that some or part of the construction, you do not define which, had been built by a bunch of corrupt crooks in your own words. What evidence do you have to support this rather serious statement ? Or is it perhaps, like many, problems associated with the new airports construction, has been blown out of all proportion to purposely and unneccesarily defame the Thai airport operators and those construction companies whom were involved ? I suspect that you like a few others are just jumping on the "lets knock Thailand" bandwagon and most of your problems are associated with your dreams - possibly wet ones judging by your intentional flaming.

It's either that you're too lazy to read or simply haven't got a clue about engineering but still feel the urge to talk. If you can be bothered reading the following you might even understand part of it.

BTW I pay tax here, I don't work here and that's been like this for the last 20 years. So your 'probably' is very 'unprobably'.

If you have read and understood it than you'll realise that I've asked the question about the water that comes to the surface before.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2007/03/17...es_30029540.php

Engineers to test success of method over 35-sq-metre area before expanding spill do not cut

In front of TV cameras and amid much fanfare, a backhoe yesterday dug a trench near one of the damaged taxiways at Suvarnabhumi Airport to kick off the much-awaited repair of the damaged tarmac.

After five months of internal and external investigations, international headlines, and resignations of top-level executives, Airports of Thailand (AOT) finally demonstrated remedial action in an attempt to halt the spread of fissures that have resulted in the closing of a section of the airfield.

"It's critical that we discover how to extract this water before the rainy season returns," said AOT senior engineer Surajit Surapolchai. "There are 46 areas in the airfield with water blockage in the sand underneath that caused damage to the pavement surface."

However, the operation yesterday was just an experiment on a small area to test the draining technique, he said. A four-inch-wide steel pipe, 10 metres long, was inserted underneath taxiway T-11 to provide an outlet for the water trapped in the sand.

If engineers observe a decline in the water level by next week, the 35-square-metre test area will be expanded with more pipes to drain water from 150 to 200 more square metres.

But AOT officials were non-committal as to when it was likely to happen and if the process might be extended to the 100,000 square metres damaged to date.

"We have to wait for the result of today's test to determine the long-term treatment," Surajit said.

Ultimately, it is assumed that all three million square metres of Suvarnabhumi will likely need to be drained before ruts and cracks consume the entire airfield, he said.

"The cracks continue to spread. We have no way of knowing the extent of the damage yet but, all the taxiways, taxi lanes and aprons could be affected," said another airport engineer, who asked not to be named.

The excess water is caused by the failure of the airfield's drainage system to move water away from the paved surfaces, and/or a lack of drains under the paved surfaces.

Neither AOT officials nor the international consortia of airport designers and contractors responsible for the airfield's design and construction have been willing to comment on how such an oversight could have happened.

AOT has cited the unfulfilled task of establishing accountability as contributing to their slow response toward repairs.

Surajit said AOT's worry was that all warranty and liability claims could be declared invalid by the contractors should AOT intervene prior to formally pinning responsibility for the problems.

"We have to make sure airport designer groups agree with our drainage measure to avoid future legal disputes about who caused the problem," he said.

Norway-based Norconsult, which designed the subsurface of the airfield, visited Suvarnabhumi two weeks ago and gave the nod to AOT's proposed drainage plan.

The lack of action has not sat well with the Engineering Institute of Thailand (EIT), which first alerted AOT to the need to begin draining water last November.

"If a coma patient keeps bleeding, you don't go looking for what caused it before stopping the bleeding," said Karun Chandrarangsu, EIT president.

Another EIT engineer is troubled that despite AOT's concern to move quickly before the coming rainy season, it is highly unlikely that any major corrective action will be taken before the rains arrive.

Nantiya Tangwisutijit

The Nation

Edited March 17, 2007 by dwwin

[kalaminsa]

gummy ,

you have obviously been in Thailand too long.

You seem to actually beleive what you are saying.

Perhaps you would like to inform us as to why DM is reopening ?

2 Reasons - One, because it will have lower operating costs for budget airlines that will see a rapid expansion of business in the Asia Pacific region in the coming years and ,

Two - It is more convenient for myself and associates

Wonder why the decision to reopen DM was made shortly after planes were circling around Suvarnabhumi due to repairs being made on nonexisting cracks on the runways. ?

If the aim was to have lover operating costs for the budget airlines the why the hel_l were they ever moved to Suvarnabhumi ?

Please ensure that you inform AOT about any relocation that you do so that they can adjust flights accordingly.