3 minutes ago, harrry said:

runway length is 10007  metres which is still very adequate for almost all aircraft.

 

That would be 10.007 Kilometres or about 6 miles. Freaking long runway. No need for brakes or reverse thrust.

 

4 minutes ago, soi3eddie said:

 

That would be 10.007 Kilometres or about 6 miles. Freaking long runway. No need for brakes or reverse thrust.

 

 

4 minutes ago, soi3eddie said:

 

That would be 10.007 Kilometres or about 6 miles. Freaking long runway. No need for brakes or reverse thrust.

 

OK i did it......I meant to put feet which converts to about 3050 metres by the Jepperson chart for runway 08/26

It seems the standard length that is now used in most major interantional airports and cn handle all traffic though runway density also has to be considered.   

14 minutes ago, harrry said:

runway length is 10007  metres which is still very adequate for almost all aircraft.

10km? More than enough surely. 

Google "Aviationsafety". You'll find all answers. Usually...

2 hours ago, harrry said:

runway length is 10007  metres which is still very adequate for almost all aircraft.

Hey I know it's off topic, but if we're gonna run with this:

 

10007m is longer than the usable landing distance at Spaceshuttle landing fields Whitesands, Edwards AFB the Shuttle landing facility at Kennedy Spaceport. Runway length at Hat Yai is 3050m. Yep, that's 10007ft! A B747-400 at max landing weight could land there safely. The Pavement strength is more than sufficient to support it's weight at Max Take-off Weight. However, the runway is not sufficiently long, so weight would have to be reduced [fuel/payload] to takeoff safely.

Pilot noticed a malfunction and determined that it's safest to return to BKK. That it? Not much of a story really.

8 hours ago, lom said:

The name of the airline which has the IATA code VZ is Thai VietJet Air.

Oh oh.

Bad boys, bad boys whatcha gonna do?
Whatcha gonna do when they come for you?
 

 

If an Airbus, loud bangs and grinding noises are normal ...

1 hour ago, Curt1591 said:

If an Airbus, loud bangs and grinding noises are normal ...

At least they dont fall out of the sky like 737s.

25 minutes ago, colinneil said:

At least they dont fall out of the sky like 737s.

Just a comment, not a competition ...

Hardly high drama. My worst international flight involved a total of 24 hours of delays and 3 engine failures, one of which happened in the air. On domestic flights have experienced 'unable to find airstrip due to sandstorm' (found at 3rd attempt) and finding out the pilot was still under instruction and was following orders from the co-pilot!

If anyone is afraid of flying in Thailand i suggest you go by coach ....????

19 hours ago, soi3eddie said:

 

That would be 10.007 Kilometres or about 6 miles. Freaking long runway. No need for brakes or reverse thrust.

 

Damned non metrics ????

Fought with it just today looking for a mattress.

All in feet and inches.

Can't they enforce 100% metric in this country!!!

20 hours ago, harrry said:

On 4/6/2021 at 3:41 PM, nrasmussen said:

 

With a runway length of 3050 m virtually any aircraft can land at Hat Yai International Airport.

 

20 hours ago, harrry said:

runway length is 10007  metres which is still very adequate for almost all aircraft.

Gentlemen please. The length of Hat Yai's runway is 10,006 feet or 3,050 meters! A fully laden 747 would be pushing it to take off, but it could land.

52 minutes ago, Moonlover said:

 

Gentlemen please. The length of Hat Yai's runway is 10,006 feet or 3,050 meters! A fully laden 747 would be pushing it to take off, but it could land.

 

I'm aware that in aviation archaic measurement units are common, but in a forum like this, with members having backgrounds from all over the world, in order to reduce confusion it would be nice if everyone would simply stick to using SI units.

On 4/6/2021 at 11:18 AM, bdenner said:

The incident hasn't made it to avherald.com yet but you can be assured they will not be backward in coming forward naming the airline.

 

I'm thinking that should read "being raised"?

 

I'm guessing here the pilots had requested a visual inspection of the undercarriage by the tower before attempting the landing.

Good assessment. The 'loud bang' that the passenger referred to could have been the Ram Air Turbine (RAT) being deployed to provide back up hydraulic pressure.

18 minutes ago, nrasmussen said:

 

I'm aware that in aviation archaic measurement units are common, but in a forum like this, with members having backgrounds from all over the world, in order to reduce confusion it would be nice if everyone would simply stick to using SI units.

I fear that won't happen as long as we have Americans on board. ????