Jump to content

Gasping For Air: Thai Passengers React to Engine Mishap


webfact

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
26 minutes ago, sungod said:

Fly on a cheap crap airline and then complain about crap service.

Would be lucky if anyone complained here. More likely, people just sat there with their donut. Looks like someone did take a video though, probably without comment.

Edited by JimTripper
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

Planes have 3 engines 2 of which can fail and the plane can still fly but yes if both main engines fail your time is more than likely up depending where it happens. They do have pretty good glide time so if a landing is possible so is survival.

I think flying on your 3rd engine the APU could be a bit difficult, may be like flying a bin lid,

Going down rapidly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, webfact said:

image.jpeg


On a Nok Air flight from Bangkok to Songkhla province, passengers found themselves gasping for air due to an engine failure. The experience was shared by a Thai woman on her TikTok account, Milkyway.mkw.

 

The incident on May 4 saw passengers using airline brochures as fans amidst the heat while waiting on the runway.

 

The plane's engine failed during takeoff. Despite the pilot's effort to restart it, it wasn't successful. Adding to the discomfort, the plane's air conditioning system was also not working. However, attempts to provide relief by serving cold water proved to be insufficient.

 

After being towed back to its original parking spot after an hour, passengers waited in the terminal. When they reboarded the same plane, another engine failure further agitated them. Passengers expressed frustration and safety concerns. 

 

Nok Air offered to change planes and provided a donut and a bottle of water as compensation. The flight, which was scheduled for departure at 1.20pm, finally took off at 6.05pm. 

 

Numerous passengers expressing their ordeal on social media criticized the airline's mishandling of the situation. They have demanded an explanation and proper compensation from Nok Air, which is yet to respond officially.

 

videoscreenshot via TikTok/ @milkyway.mkw

 

news-logo-btm.jpg

-- 2024-05-08

Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

 

 

For a Donut and some cold water....😩

I hope passengers will get a good compensation🥴

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, stix40 said:

1 donut 🍩 

And a bottle of water 💦 

These people don't know there born 

When I grew up 127 of us lived in shoebox 

Got up 4 o'clock int morning licked road clean 

A sucked on a damp cloth 

Before going to school 

1 donut 

1 bottle of water 

You're lucky 

 

 

You were lucky. You had a shoebox. And a cloth. We had to lick dew off plants.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Nok was the only airline flying to a destination I wanted to go to, I probably wouldn't go. I've had several issues with them over the years and now avoid them. Just for amusement, when I'm at Don Mueang airport I like to look at the departure board and count how many of their flights are cancelled. There are always several. Always.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, cowellandrew said:

Let's not get pedantic yes some planes have 2 engines plus the APU,

Some planes have 4 engines and the APU,

 

The B52 has eight engines!

The last gun fighter has only 1

F8 Vought Crusader 

We are talking passenger jets are we not. Airbus A340 and A380 and the few 747's still flying with 4 main engines apart from that it's 2 + APU.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, RobU said:

Boeing aircraft have more safety and maintenance issues because the initial build was sloppy. That especially includes wiring looms with wires that have been joined in many places instead of a single length (which is against build regulations ). The joins fail and electrical issues like this ensue. 

But then again probably not the issue

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

 

You are assuming that a 'normal' engine start-up on push back was ever done.

 

You are also assuming that the APU "could" be started.

 

But it's also highly likely that the whole chain of events has been misinterpreted and misreported by local media. I reckon that's a safe assumption.

Normal engine start-up on push back wasn't achieved, hence the tech problem, it was eventually pulled back to the gate after the Captain tried to re-start but failed.
If the APU could not be started the aircraft would be grounded anyway.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Bangkok Barry said:

 

You were lucky. You had a shoebox. And a cloth. We had to lick dew off plants.

We used to have to get up half an hour before we went to bed. 

 

Drink tea out of a rolled up newspaper

 

Work down mill day in day out

 

And when we got home, dad would slice us in two with bread knife

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, SAFETY FIRST said:

Has Songkhla got an airport?

 

I've always had to fly from Bangkok to HatYai, then drive to Songkhla. 

 

 

Hat Yai is in Songkhla ...province.  I always hoped they'd reactivate the military airstrip in Songkhla town itself to save that white knuckle drive from Hat Yai to town.  Our company didn't allow employees to fly into HDY after dark, because of the dangerous drive into SKL.

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some posts denigrating the News Team have been removed, any problems with the text or headlines should be reported and we can put them right but criticizing news stories as some people like to do is trolling and must stop.

 

Please take note of the following forum rule

 

17. The ASEAN NOW news team collects news articles from various recognized and reputable news sources. The articles  may be consolidated from different sources and rewritten with AI assistance These news items are shared in our forums for members to stay informed and engaged. Our dedicated news team puts in the effort to deliver quality content, and we ask for your respect in return. Any disrespectful comments about our news articles or the content itself, such as calling it "clickbait" or “slow news day”, criticizing grammatical errors, will not be tolerated and appropriate action will be taken. Please note that republished articles may contain errors or opinions that do not reflect the views of ASEAN NOW.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, oldestswinger said:

So its 10-yearly service is due!

All aircraft have maintenance check periods and for the 737 I believe is as follows:

 

A check – every 500 FH.(flight hours) Now known as a P1 check.

 

B check – every 6 months. For modern aircraft this is now incorporated into A or C checks.

 

C check – every 4-6,000 FH / 2-3 years. Now P8, P10 or P12 checks.

 

D check – every 24-40,000 FH / 9-12 years. Typically a P48 check.

 

D Checks involves comprehensive inspections and repairs of the entire aircraft. Technicians basically dismantle the airplane and put it back together. This check can take about three to six weeks and costs several millions of dollars.

 

The aircraft in this minor incident, is leased, and the maintenance schedules, will be part of that lease agreement.

 

https://wtruib.ru/boeing_737/amm/FLIGHT_CONTROLS/

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Georgealbert said:

This is the thread from Monday, which shows CAAT (Civil Aviation Authority of Thailand) asking about this flight.

 

 

All old aircraft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, dinsdale said:

Having an APU malfunction isn't a big mishap especially before take off. Even having an engine fail mid-air is no biggie. Serious yes but not fatal.

Treating your passengers as cattle is a biggie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JoePai said:

Fortunately not in this case as Boeing do not make engines 

But they do make the electrical wiring looms that go from the cockpit controls to the engine management system. Which as I said before those looms are often illegally cobbled together with joined up wiring scraps, the joins fail and the electrical issues ensue including engine failure 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, sungod said:

Fly on a cheap crap airline and then complain about crap service.

 

 

Normally I'd agree with you about the absurdity of paying as little as possible and then complaining that it doesn't meet standards.   This matter falls into a different category, however.      

 

Maintenance of an aircraft is  essential.    Inadequate maintenance is not the same as deleting olives in the food service salad.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, RobU said:

Boeing aircraft have more safety and maintenance issues because the initial build was sloppy. That especially includes wiring looms with wires that have been joined in many places instead of a single length (which is against build regulations ). The joins fail and electrical issues like this ensue. 

Fully agree that currently Boeing’s reputation is in pieces, but we are currently seeing that every event involving a Boeing aircraft hits social media and the news immediately, and sometimes without considered opinion or expert insight, Boeing are blamed, even if is human error, airlines faults, maintenance issues. This incident was minor, with a short delay and the aircraft completed the flight after corrective action.
 

FAA (Federal Aviation Administration) issues Airworthiness Directives, to all aircraft types. These are legally enforceable rules issued by in accordance with 14 CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) part 39 to correct an unsafe condition in a product. 14 CFR part 39 defines a product as an aircraft, aircraft engine, propeller, or appliance.

 

A full searchable list of these directives can be found here.

 

https://drs.faa.gov/browse

 

The International Air Transport Association (IATA) recently stated that “ Flying is the safest mode of transport, with one accident for every 1.26 million flights. At this level of safety, on average a person would have to travel by air every day for 103,239 years to experience a fatal accident.”

 

In 2023 there was only a single fatal accident involving a turboprop aircraft, which resulted in 72 fatalities. Yeti Airlines Flight 691, from Kathmandu to Pokhara in Nepal, on 15 January 2023, an ATR 72, from an Franco-Italian aircraft manufacturer

 

For comparison’s sake, 158 people died in aviation accidents in 2022, with more than 65,000 dying on roads in the UK, US and EU in the same year.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.







×
×
  • Create New...