Thai Airways Flight Declares Emergency Over Gulf of Thailand Due to Passenger Medical Crisis

[Georgealbert]

 

File picture of aircraft involved.

 

A Thai Airways flight issued an emergency signal while flying over the Gulf of Thailand on the evening of 18 February, later revealed to be due to a critical medical emergency involving a passenger.

 

Thai Airways flight TG408, travelling from Singapore’s Changi Airport to Bangkok’s Suvarnabhumi Airport, transmitted a squawk 7700 distress code mid-flight, an alert used to indicate an urgent situation requiring immediate assistance.

 

According to reports from flight tracking service Flightradar24, the emergency signal was sent while the aircraft was over the Gulf of Thailand. Despite the alert, the plane landed safely at Suvarnabhumi Airport at 20:34.

Flightradar24 screenshot.

 

It has now emerged that the distress call was prompted by a medical emergency on board. Reports suggest that a passenger suffered cardiac arrest, prompting the crew to request priority landing in an effort to provide urgent medical attention upon arrival.

 

Aviation sources have indicated that air traffic control (ATC) immediately cleared the flight for direct routing to Suvarnabhumi, bypassing standard arrival procedures to ensure the aircraft could land as quickly as possible.

 

Typically, the journey from Singapore to Bangkok takes approximately on average 1 hour 54 minutes, but TG408 completed the flight in just 1 hour 46 minutes, underscoring the urgency of the situation.

 

Thai Airways and relevant aviation authorities have yet to issue an official statement on the passenger’s condition or any further details regarding the emergency response.

 

-- 2025-02-19

 

[flyingtlger]

8 minutes ago, Georgealbert said:

Typically, the journey from Singapore to Bangkok takes approximately on average 1 hour 54 minutes, but TG408 completed the flight in just 1 hour 46 minutes, underscoring the urgency of the situation.

 

A whopping 8 minutes....

[Briggsy]

Somebody in Thai Airways or CAAT or Bangkok ATC is feeding these stories to the press. I really don't think it is a good idea.

 

Airlines declare emergencies or divert / return for all sorts of reasons. There are very strict laid-out procedures for all manners of situations. In addition, pilots can contact Thai Airways for instructions or advice en route.

 

Without context and background understanding, it could present a distorted image to the public who may understand little more than the phrases 'emergency' and 'Thai Airways'.

[Photoguy21]

6 hours ago, flyingtlger said:

A whopping 8 minutes....

8 minutes can be the difference between life and death

[Georgealbert]

35 minutes ago, Briggsy said:

Somebody in Thai Airways or CAAT or Bangkok ATC is feeding these stories to the press. I really don't think it is a good idea.

 

Airlines declare emergencies or divert / return for all sorts of reasons. There are very strict laid-out procedures for all manners of situations. In addition, pilots can contact Thai Airways for instructions or advice en route.

 

Without context and background understanding, it could present a distorted image to the public who may understand little more than the phrases 'emergency' and 'Thai Airways'.

Any aircraft making a squawk 7700 code, will see it come up as an automatic alert on the Flightradar24 app. and similar.

 

There is a set of 3 squawk codes created by the ICAO that are used when an aircraft is facing safety or emergency concerns. 

 

Squawk 7700, is the emergency squawk code, and indicates that the aircraft is in distress or has an incident onboard and needs priority handling from air traffic control.
 

Squawk 7500: This code indicates that the aircraft is subject to unlawful interference (hijack).

 

Squawk 7600: This code indicates that the aircraft has experienced a radio failure and is unable to transmit or receive messages.

 

So no leaks, just it is in the public domain. That is why most airlines will or should be proactive and issue a statement as soon as possible to clear up and avoid any misunderstandings. 

 

 

 

[ronster]

Why did they not land in samui as it looks closer and has 5 or 6 hospitals plus far less traffic to get through to get to them compared to bkk.

[hotchilli]

7 hours ago, flyingtlger said:

A whopping 8 minutes....

Every second counts

[PumpkinEater]

1 hour ago, ronster said:

Why did they not land in samui as it looks closer and has 5 or 6 hospitals plus far less traffic to get through to get to them compared to bkk.

 

[PumpkinEater]

USM airport runway too short for a 777.

Surat thani would be closer as well but Bangkok Air does not have company equipment to service the emergency and hospitals may be farther from the airport. Also at cruise altitude decent back into BKK would be operationally preferred.

A judgment call from the flight crew per the seriousness of the particular incident.

Usually a full investigation will follow up the incident.

 

Cheers!

[PumpkinEater]

My bad it was Thai Airways.

They do have equipment in Surat.

My guess is the decent profile from cruise altitude it was just as convenient to return to Suvarnabhum 

[Patong2021]

2 hours ago, ronster said:

Why did they not land in samui as it looks closer and has 5 or 6 hospitals plus far less traffic to get through to get to them compared to bkk.

 

A lot depends upon  how critical the patient is. It may not have been a full crisis. The pilot will have spoken with the medical consultant on the ground and been told where to go and what to do

 

Note that the runway length at  Surat Thani is 2100 M

The (posted) recommended minimum airport length for a loaded B777-300ER is 2,701 M

The distance needed is influenced by tarmac conditions (wet or dry, weight of the aircraft and weather conditions)

 

Even if Surat Thani could take the aircraft, it might not have been able to service the  aircraft. This would have been a hard brake with a heavy load so tires might have had to be checked and serviced. The terminal is not set up for a B777-300ER and it would have been a nightmare to try and manage all these people, especially if there was no immigration capability. Passengers would have had to be put up in hotels if the plane was damaged on landing, and Surat Thani can't easily do that.

 

The aircraft was approx. 20 minutes away from an orderly descent into BKK. Had there been a landing at Surat Thani,  additional time would have been needed to  safely descend from 40,000 such that it really would not have made much of a difference.

 

[richard_smith237]

5 hours ago, ronster said:

Why did they not land in samui as it looks closer and has 5 or 6 hospitals plus far less traffic to get through to get to them compared to bkk.

 

You mean put the aircraft into a nose dive ?

 

Consider cruising altitude - the time difference between reducing altitude and circling back to Samui may have been more costly than arrival at the 'Capital Airport' which will have better equipment to handle such emergencies and world class hospitals nearby. 

 

Given the 'options' available to them, I trust that the trained professionals made the best choices based on the merit of all information involved. 

 

As someone else pointed out - every second counts and I hope they were able to 'deplane' the patient straight into an ambulance and off to primary emergency care in the fastest possible time. 

 

I hope the patient is now recovering.

 

 

[Eaglekott]

5 hours ago, ronster said:

Why did they not land in samui as it looks closer and has 5 or 6 hospitals plus far less traffic to get through to get to them compared to bkk.

Maybe because they didn't want to risk the life of all passengers since Samui runway is to short for a 777, also it's not an international airport could have made things much more complicated for everyone onboard the plane,  

[nomad22]

19 minutes ago, Eaglekott said:

Maybe because they didn't want to risk the life of all passengers since Samui runway is to short for a 777, also it's not an international airport could have made things much more complicated for everyone onboard the plane,

 

True that the runway at Samui is too short for a 777, but Samui is an international airport.  Samui has a few International flights.  At least you got half right, better than the average poster here.

[Liverpool Lou]

9 hours ago, Briggsy said:

Without context and background understanding, it could present a distorted image to the public who may understand little more than the phrases 'emergency' and 'Thai Airways'.

Did you read the article?  How much context and background do you want?!...

 

"Thai Airways flight TG408, travelling from Singapore’s Changi Airport to Bangkok’s Suvarnabhumi Airport, transmitted a squawk 7700 distress code mid-flight, an alert used to indicate an urgent situation requiring immediate assistance.

  According to reports from flight tracking service Flightradar24, the emergency signal was sent while the aircraft was over the Gulf of Thailand. Despite the alert, the plane landed safely at Suvarnabhumi Airport at 20:34.

It has now emerged that the distress call was prompted by a medical emergency on board. Reports suggest that a passenger suffered cardiac arrest, prompting the crew to request priority landing in an effort to provide urgent medical attention upon arrival".

[Liverpool Lou]

7 hours ago, PumpkinEater said:

My guess is the decent profile from cruise altitude it was just as convenient to return to Suvarnabhum 

"...the decent profile..."

What has decency got to do with a plane's descent profile?!

[Moonlover]

 

7 hours ago, Patong2021 said:

 

A lot depends upon  how critical the patient is. It may not have been a full crisis. The pilot will have spoken with the medical consultant on the ground and been told where to go and what to do

 

Note that the runway length at  Surat Thani is 2100 M

The (posted) recommended minimum airport length for a loaded B777-300ER is 2,701 M

The distance needed is influenced by tarmac conditions (wet or dry, weight of the aircraft and weather conditions)

 

Even if Surat Thani could take the aircraft, it might not have been able to service the  aircraft. This would have been a hard brake with a heavy load so tires might have had to be checked and serviced. The terminal is not set up for a B777-300ER and it would have been a nightmare to try and manage all these people, especially if there was no immigration capability. Passengers would have had to be put up in hotels if the plane was damaged on landing, and Surat Thani can't easily do that.

 

The aircraft was approx. 20 minutes away from an orderly descent into BKK. Had there been a landing at Surat Thani,  additional time would have been needed to  safely descend from 40,000 such that it really would not have made much of a difference.

 

Plus the fact that the flight was BKK bound anyway. If BKK were able offer a straight in approach, no deviation from route was required and everybody ended up where they should have been, saving one god almighty logistics problem.

[PumpkinEater]

Samui Runway length: 2060M (Too Short for 777)

Sarat Thani Airport: 3000M (Long enough but not logistically feasable)

 

Cheers!

 

[BKKBike09]

On 2/19/2025 at 11:30 AM, Briggsy said:

Somebody in Thai Airways or CAAT or Bangkok ATC is feeding these stories to the press. I really don't think it is a good idea.

 

Airlines declare emergencies or divert / return for all sorts of reasons. There are very strict laid-out procedures for all manners of situations. In addition, pilots can contact Thai Airways for instructions or advice en route.

 

Without context and background understanding, it could present a distorted image to the public who may understand little more than the phrases 'emergency' and 'Thai Airways'.

Yesterday's TG night flight from London (TG917) was diverted to Don Muang to refuel after an aborted landing and an earlier hold. The lucky passengers got to spend the best part of four hours waiting on the tarmac at DMK before being flown back to SVB. 

[richard_smith237]

4 minutes ago, BKKBike09 said:

Yesterday's TG night flight from London (TG917) was diverted to Don Muang to refuel after an aborted landing and an earlier hold. The lucky passengers got to spend the best part of four hours waiting on the tarmac at DMK before being flown back to SVB. 

 

Thats ridiculous... 

 

Surely they could alight the passengers and allow those who want to depart the airport from DMK to do so... and those who need to get to SVB to be bussed there instead of waiting that time. 

 

Seems like terrible decision making, perhaps locked into some ill thought out SOP.