Jump to content


Thai-panic: AirAsia flight defies disaster over denied landing in India


webfact

Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, CHdiver said:

They just rule as long as they get the permission from Air traffic control. As soon as you do your own thing as a pilot and do what you want, you will get in deep dodo. May even end up with some Military Jets help you along. 

 

Also declaring a false mayday will again get you into trouble. Of course having nearly no fuel left will be an emergency, but only if sertain limits are reached. Do stupid things as a Pilot and you loose your licence faster then you can say but but but I rule the sky... 🤣

Your ability to write ignorant statements has no bounds.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, renaissanc said:

If I had been the pilot, I'd have said something like this to the control tower. "We are going to crash as a result of no fuel left. I want to know each of your names for the plane's voice recorder. The investigation will find out anyway. Then you can all be jailed for life after the crash." I'd have added a few expletives as encouragement.

 

   The pilot would have got into big trouble for making a false claim , declaring  an emergency when there isn't one is a serious matter 

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   The pilot would have got into big trouble for making a false claim , declaring  an emergency when there isn't one is a serious matter 

Oh f88k, you non-pilots know nothing. Stop making claims of fact that you know nothing about. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Gobbler said:

Oh f88k, you non-pilots know nothing. Stop making claims of fact that you know nothing about. 

 

 

 

OK, so what would be the consequences if a pilot made a false claim about an emergency ?

   If a pilot pretended he was going to crash ?

Would everyone just laugh about it ?

If the emergency services were called to be on the runway over a false claim ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, soi3eddie said:

 

What I want to know is how it kept flying with minus 15 minutes of fuel...

 

In a moving object time passes slower according to Einstein's theory of relativity, that's why the plane could fly 45 minutes with only 30 minutes of fuel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

OK, so what would be the consequences if a pilot made a false claim about an emergency ?

   If a pilot pretended he was going to crash ?

Would everyone just laugh about it ?

If the emergency services were called to be on the runway over a false claim ?

 

Thirty minutes of fuel is already an emergency.  If the Captain has no place to land and the ATC is screwing with him, it's an emergency. 

 

ATC can declare an emergency for a pilot.  

 

All these stupid what-if questions are a waste of time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The facts of this event are inconsistent with the story. The Thai Air Asia  flight did not operate on October  26.

It did operate October 27. This is a quick turnaround service meaning that it lands, refuels, is groomed and then  departs one hour later.   So, the reference to only being released on October 27, does not  make sense. The flight 

 

FD 182 Thai AirAsia DMK Bangkok - KTM Kathmandu   Delayed by 40m

Arrival Scheduled  14:00 Actual Arrival 14:40 

 

FD 183  Thai AirAsia   KTM Kathmandu -DMK Bangkok    Delayed by 3h 35m

Departure Scheduled 15:00   Actual  18:46 

 

The flights are late 50% of the time on both portions of the flight, late into KTH at less than 30 minutes, and late into DMK  at less than 60 minutes.  I expect this is much ado about nothing.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Gobbler said:

 

Thirty minutes of fuel is already an emergency.  If the Captain has no place to land and the ATC is screwing with him, it's an emergency. 

 

ATC can declare an emergency for a pilot.  

 

All these stupid what-if questions are a waste of time. 

 

 

No, 30 minutes of fuel is not an emergency, but it is a sign that an emergency could happen if there are any delays:

Minimum fuel
When an aircraft has enough fuel to get to the destination and land, but not enough for delays or route changes, the pilot will declare "minimum fuel". This is not an emergency, but it lets air traffic control (ATC) know that the aircraft can't accept any delays at the destination. ATC will advise the flight crew of any expected delays and coordinate a transfer of control if needed.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

 

No, 30 minutes of fuel is not an emergency, but it is a sign that an emergency could happen if there are any delays:

Minimum fuel
When an aircraft has enough fuel to get to the destination and land, but not enough for delays or route changes, the pilot will declare "minimum fuel". This is not an emergency, but it lets air traffic control (ATC) know that the aircraft can't accept any delays at the destination. ATC will advise the flight crew of any expected delays and coordinate a transfer of control if needed.

 

I don't care about your definitions. A PIC or pilot in command can declare an emergency no matter what the situation. 

 

I tire of you non-pilots promulgating nonsense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Gobbler said:

I don't care about your definitions. A PIC or pilot in command can declare an emergency no matter what the situation. 

 

I tire of you non-pilots promulgating nonsense.

 

  But a professional pilot would only declare an emergency when necessary 

   30 minutes of fuel left really isn't an emergency , but yeah, rogue pilots can declare an emergency if they want 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

  But a professional pilot would only declare an emergency when necessary 

   30 minutes of fuel left really isn't an emergency , but yeah, rogue pilots can declare an emergency if they want 

Off you go. You're on my list. I won't waste time with you again. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, webfact said:

A Thai AirAsia flight found itself in a death-defying situation straight out of a Hollywood blockbuster when it was denied permission to land at an airport in India. Passengers were left fearing for their lives as the aircraft was forced to circle for a staggering 45 minutes with only 30 minutes of fuel remaining in the tank

BS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Gobbler said:

The Captain should be admonished for NOT DECLARING an EMERGENCY. Then he lands where he wants. Air traffic controllers do not RULE the sky. Pilots rule the sky. 

 Air traffic controllers do not RULE the sky. Pilots rule the sky.

 

 I don't think anyone 'rules' the sky, per se. in the airline business. Everyone has his part to do, and just one person slips, the entire aircraft is in danger.

The ATC, Pilot, Engineer and even the the guy who pumps the fuel, plays a critical part in the entire airline safety scenario...IMHO

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Liverpool Lou said:

 

No confusion.  Destination Nepal, running low on fuel so requested landing in India, refused, so, with no other choice, carried on to Nepal.

Again you trying to be #1, but nowhere does it mention an Indian airport, by name, or location. Simara is in Nepal. the flight was never scheduled to land anywhere in India.. you really should stop trying to beat everyone... Even Tribhuvan International Airport, is in Kathmandu... again, Nepal, so unless you can give better information, than is in the article... I await an apology.

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