Flight OG269: At Least 88 Bodies Found At Phuket Airport Crash Site

[macduff]

The captain is ultimately responsible for his or her actions. It's purely common sense. And i say this in general not just on this occasion.

[Scott]

But the pilot has to base his decisions on accurate information. He may also believe that the information comes from up-to-date equipment which is operating.

[UnknownPoster]

How many more screwups will happen before the Thais decide to maintain their airports?

Below are quotes regarding a similar fiasco years ago in Sutrat Thani.

"Equipment to allow aircraft to land safely in bad weather was removed from the airport here six months before a Thai Airways plane crashed Friday killing 101 people"

"A Thai air force pilot who had just flown into the airport Sunday said that the removal of the system meant pilots had to use a less accurate radio navigation system that relies on a visual sighting of the runway once the aircraft has descended to 500 feet (152 meters)."

"Survivors of the crash said the pilot had complained of poor visibility, had twice failed to land and was trying a third time when the aircraft crashed"

"The plane crashed into nearby swampland and burst into flames, but forty-five people on board survived."

"Asked Sunday if navigation systems at Surat Thani were up to international standards, the president of Thai Airways Thamnoon Wangle told reporters: ``I do believe so.''

"Airport officials said the landing aid equipment at Surat Thani had been ``operating perfectly'' Friday."

[JonnyF]

for the sake of the Thai economy I really hope that the extent of safety issues in Thailand does not become a major talking point within the international media. To be honest, I don't think that it will.

In hopes that another 89 or more people don't have to die, I certainly hope it will become a major talking point.

I am certainly not implying that safety should not be addressed as a number one priority, in fact as I fly this route at least every 4 weeks it is clearly in my interests for safety standards to be as high as possible.

I was simply saying that I hope that the international media do not latch onto this tragedy and start some sort of sensationalist campaign that implies that anyone foolhardy enough to enter the kingdom is taking their life in their hands. That would serve no-ones interests.

[taxexile]

from the uk daily mail.

Phuket air crash pilot 'would fall asleep at the controls'

'None of this should have happened' says former pilot

By RICHARD SHEARS - More by this author »

Last updated at 17:09pm on 19th September 2007

A damning report alleging a serious disregard of safety standards in the company operating the doomed Phuket jet has been made public by a former pilot.

Listing a catalogue of incidents that suggested many pilots were little more than cowboys in the sky, the whistleblower said passengers and crew on board flight OG 269 should never have died.

The captain at the controls, he claimed, was an Indonesian who had failed his medical earlier this year and had been grounded for two months because he would fall asleep at the controls.

The anonymous pilot, unleashing his anger at the alleged neglect through an internet chat line for professional pilots, said: "Of course, a company culture combined with crew members willing to disregard safety standards made this crash predictable."

He claimed One Two Go airline disregards all duty and flight time limitations, required maintenance inspections and weather conditions.

"Again, none of this can happen unless pilots are culpable and the controlling authority looks the other way."

Nine Britons, including a newly-wed couple and their two friends who were witnesses at their Bangkok wedding, died when the jet slammed into the runway at Phuket airport in heavy rain and strong winds on Sunday.

The former pilot, an American who was with One Two Go for two years, revealed his frustration as he wrote of his efforts to instill in novice pilots some of his expertise. He conceded he had failed and he was not sure that he will now ever forgive himself.

A former pilot has claimed Mulyadi would fall asleep while flying

The former airline employee told pilots around the world in his letter in a pilots' internet chatroom that the Chief Pilot on the One Two Go jet had not only failed his medical but if he fell asleep while at the controls it would usually be in the afternoon. The crash occurred around 3.40pm.

Describing an earlier incident in Afghanistan, the US pilot said it had been documented that the Indonesian captain had become "spatially disorientated" with the Afghan Prime Minister on board while on an approach to Kabul.

Admitting that his next claim was heresay, the pilot said that First Officers had shared stories that they had to take control of the aircraft when the Indonesian was on the flight deck.

There was a certainty, said the former pilot, that fatigue was "clearly a factor in this crash. Both Captain and First Officer exceeded flight time limitations the previous two days of the crash. They had flown 19+ hours in a 48-hour period."

Repeating his feelings of helplessness on learning of the crash – "I am both angry and sad" – the former pilot asked: "Windshear, compressor stall…or just plain fatigue and lack of experience with an inept Captain: who knows?"

But in a grim forecast he added: "Compounding this tragedy is the underlying feeling that this will not be their last… I can say that this was predicted by most of us who worked there and were eventually looking for safer pastures."

He feared the authorities will not take the hard decisions to force the airline to follow safety practices used throughout the industry.

An official at the Bangkok offices of One Two Go said there was no-one in authority available to comment on the claims.

"This is something we would have to study before anything could be said about it." said the official.

and another posting on pprune

Sad this has to happen....

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

I worked for OX on the B752 during furlough from my current job. It's with great sadness and anger that I read about this accident for it did hit close to home...

I have been telling friends intending to travel to the Far East not to fly on the low-cost carriers (except those affliated with the national carriers such as Tiger and Nok-Air), especially on OX 747s and MD-80s. For those of us who have worked at OX, this accident seemed inevitable with their "management" culture. Their attitude was to save money at all cost and ask the crew to do something illegal - if the crew do it and get caught, that's their own problem. Fortunately for me all the B752 pilots were western trained (Americans, Canucks, Aussies, Kiwis, and Brit) so we did follow FOMs and SOPs. I personally overheard a conversation in which the "management" person told another pilot that all the TROUBLEMAKERS in the company were the American pilots on the B752. I assume he meant that we were troublemakers because we followed rules as well as refused aircraft for maintenance issues.

With my experience at OX, I could confirm most of what was in shiftpattern's post #123.( the letter quoted in the daily mail article above) I do not know the pilots involved (may they RIP) for the MD-80s arrived just when I quit OX and I am sure those initial MD-80 pilots no longer worked there. IMHO, Udom and his "management" is at fault and DCA is also to blame for looking the other way. Unfortunately I don't think much of the story about exceeding duty limitations and maintence issues would ever come out (so on one could loose face).

As the scheduler, I had a disagreement later with that same "management" person mentioned above regarding duty limitations. OX added seasonal service from HKT to HKG on the B752 in Aug '05. I had wanted the pilots to layover in HKG (BKK-HKT-HKG, layover and do the reverse next day) but he wanted the layover be in HKT. Quoting him, "it's easier to get hotels in HKT and his boys on the B747 really like the HKT layover." I gave in to that so we flew BKK-HKT-HKG-HKT, but realized within the first week that it was not legal (out of the first 4 flights, the fastest was 8.1 hrs flight time and the average was 8.3 hrs). When I complained that this was illegal for it exceed the domestic limit of 8 hrs, the answer was that it followed international limit of 10 hrs. Since there was an obvious disagreement over our interpretations of the FOM, I asked him to go to the DCA to clarify whether BKK-HKT-HKG-HKT should be considered domestic or international. The initial answer was that he was too busy and had no time to do that. When I persisted, his answer was that he did ask and DCA's answer was that it was up to OX to decide so it is international. I then ask him to put that in writing in the FOM or a memo but that request was just ignored. These flights concluded just about then and the isssue never came up again during my remaining 3 months at OX. Of course now I deeply regret not forcing the issure more. With Thai pilots, I could easily see they simply do whatever they are asked to do even if it was illegal according to the FOM.

With the exception of the stress from dealing with "management", I enjoyed my experience at OX - worked with good people, formed great friendships, and learned much from flying to locations I would never see at the major airline I work for. RIP to those who perished and my prayers to the recovery of those injured.

Let's just hope this doesn't happen again...

[cdnvic]

Between the lines it's hard not to notice the sad resignation to the fact that making sure nobody loses face will be more important than making sure nobody else dies.

[Mid]

There was a certainty, said the former pilot, that fatigue was "clearly a factor in this crash. Both Captain and First Officer exceeded flight time limitations the previous two days of the crash. They had flown 19+ hours in a 48-hour period."

not the first time this has raised it's head ................................................

[mr_hippo]

And in another note: No, 45 minutes to pick up survivors isn't 'ok', no-matter what reasons you can think up. Not all wounds are fully visible externally and chock is a killer.

Shock 'can' be a killer - not shock 'is' a killer. Would you put more lives in possible danger? If I phoned you up later and told you to get enough buses to transport up to 100 PAX to a certain location, how long would it take you? What experience have you had in disaster planning and management?

That's quite unfair. Your asking a rank amateur to devise an evacuation plan on the spot. Is it fair for a rank amateur to criticise professionals?

If you're clever, you'll spot the key phrase "evacuation plan" in the prior sentence. That would be a prearranged plan to get large numbers of casualties stbilized and moved to treatment centers as fast as possible. It's the sort of plan that large facilties such as airports develop and maintain all the time in places where safety and contingency planning are taken seriously. Do you always teach your grandmother to suck eggs?

Even making it up on the spot is not so terribly difficult. Evaluate the ambulatory patients and put those with superficial injuries into taxis two at a time with an airport staff member and drive them to hospital with a police escort. In this incident, 15 cabs at most would have been needed, and that would hardly have made a dent in the number of predatory layabouts who linger around most of Thailand's major airports at arrival times.

Let's talk about these 15 taxis - how you arrive at that figure at the start of the incident is beyond me. HKT is an international airport and as such has two sides - ground side and air side. Ground side is the area open to the general public, airside is a restricted area - arriving and departing passengers, workers in the duty free areas and field workers which include aircraft refuellers, cargo handlers and others. Airside workers need an airside pass and knowledge of safety procedures. In these security conscious times would you allow anyone to dive over the field? Could you spare one worker with an airside pass for every vehicle?

Which hospital are you taking them to? What is the hospital's speciality? How much capacity do they have? Do you have secondary and tertiary destinations lined up? Is the scene OK to allow 'foreign' vehicles to approach? What are your marshalling plans? Do you still think that "making it up on the spot is not so terribly difficult?

Edited September 20, 2007 by mr_hippo

[chinthee]

And in another note: No, 45 minutes to pick up survivors isn't 'ok', no-matter what reasons you can think up. Not all wounds are fully visible externally and chock is a killer.

Shock 'can' be a killer - not shock 'is' a killer. Would you put more lives in possible danger? If I phoned you up later and told you to get enough buses to transport up to 100 PAX to a certain location, how long would it take you? What experience have you had in disaster planning and management?

That's quite unfair. Your asking a rank amateur to devise an evacuation plan on the spot. Is it fair for a rank amateur to criticise professionals?

If you're clever, you'll spot the key phrase "evacuation plan" in the prior sentence. That would be a prearranged plan to get large numbers of casualties stbilized and moved to treatment centers as fast as possible. It's the sort of plan that large facilties such as airports develop and maintain all the time in places where safety and contingency planning are taken seriously. Do you always teach your grandmother to suck eggs?Even making it up on the spot is not so terribly difficult. Evaluate the ambulatory patients and put those with superficial injuries into taxis two at a time with an airport staff member and drive them to hospital with a police escort. In this incident, 15 cabs at most would have been needed, and that would hardly have made a dent in the number of predatory layabouts who linger around most of Thailand's major airports at arrival times.

This whole discussion both pro and con about traumatized passengers making rational decisions during or immediately after a tragic event is silly. In these circumstances, you see the entire range of behaviour. Shock causes some people to freeze and unable to move. Some people jump into action without thinking, smart or not. Going back into a burning plane that could explode at any minute might be heroic to some. To a sole breadwinner and father or mother of young children it might be considered irresponsible. Some are cool. Nobody is predictable.

I lived through the Tsunami and was caught up in it. I saw all these types of reactions in this natural disaster. You see acts of heroism, and cowardice. As we scrambled out of our yard to higher ground, one young woman was frozen on top of the stone wall, unable to move as the huge wave crashed into the wall and threatened to envelope her. We had to physically grab her and forced her to run, wade, and swim with us to save her life.

She is a family member and someone I would characterize as very brave.

[TAWP]

mr_hippo>> When the time noted is 45 minutes I reject the label of 'professional'.

And it's every thinking mans right to critic an event they see as flawed or unnecessary.

[Supaporn]

from the uk daily mail.

Phuket air crash pilot 'would fall asleep at the controls'

'None of this should have happened' says former pilot

By RICHARD SHEARS - More by this author »

Last updated at 17:09pm on 19th September 2007

A damning report alleging a serious disregard of safety standards in the company operating the doomed Phuket jet has been made public by a former pilot.

Listing a catalogue of incidents that suggested many pilots were little more than cowboys in the sky, the whistleblower said passengers and crew on board flight OG 269 should never have died.

The captain at the controls, he claimed, was an Indonesian who had failed his medical earlier this year and had been grounded for two months because he would fall asleep at the controls.

The anonymous pilot, unleashing his anger at the alleged neglect through an internet chat line for professional pilots, said: "Of course, a company culture combined with crew members willing to disregard safety standards made this crash predictable."

He claimed One Two Go airline disregards all duty and flight time limitations, required maintenance inspections and weather conditions.

"Again, none of this can happen unless pilots are culpable and the controlling authority looks the other way."

Nine Britons, including a newly-wed couple and their two friends who were witnesses at their Bangkok wedding, died when the jet slammed into the runway at Phuket airport in heavy rain and strong winds on Sunday.

The former pilot, an American who was with One Two Go for two years, revealed his frustration as he wrote of his efforts to instill in novice pilots some of his expertise. He conceded he had failed and he was not sure that he will now ever forgive himself.

A former pilot has claimed Mulyadi would fall asleep while flying

The former airline employee told pilots around the world in his letter in a pilots' internet chatroom that the Chief Pilot on the One Two Go jet had not only failed his medical but if he fell asleep while at the controls it would usually be in the afternoon. The crash occurred around 3.40pm.

Describing an earlier incident in Afghanistan, the US pilot said it had been documented that the Indonesian captain had become "spatially disorientated" with the Afghan Prime Minister on board while on an approach to Kabul.

Admitting that his next claim was heresay, the pilot said that First Officers had shared stories that they had to take control of the aircraft when the Indonesian was on the flight deck.

There was a certainty, said the former pilot, that fatigue was "clearly a factor in this crash. Both Captain and First Officer exceeded flight time limitations the previous two days of the crash. They had flown 19+ hours in a 48-hour period."

Repeating his feelings of helplessness on learning of the crash – "I am both angry and sad" – the former pilot asked: "Windshear, compressor stall…or just plain fatigue and lack of experience with an inept Captain: who knows?"

But in a grim forecast he added: "Compounding this tragedy is the underlying feeling that this will not be their last… I can say that this was predicted by most of us who worked there and were eventually looking for safer pastures."

He feared the authorities will not take the hard decisions to force the airline to follow safety practices used throughout the industry.

An official at the Bangkok offices of One Two Go said there was no-one in authority available to comment on the claims.

"This is something we would have to study before anything could be said about it." said the official.

and another posting on pprune

Sad this has to happen....

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

I worked for OX on the B752 during furlough from my current job. It's with great sadness and anger that I read about this accident for it did hit close to home...

I have been telling friends intending to travel to the Far East not to fly on the low-cost carriers (except those affliated with the national carriers such as Tiger and Nok-Air), especially on OX 747s and MD-80s. For those of us who have worked at OX, this accident seemed inevitable with their "management" culture. Their attitude was to save money at all cost and ask the crew to do something illegal - if the crew do it and get caught, that's their own problem. Fortunately for me all the B752 pilots were western trained (Americans, Canucks, Aussies, Kiwis, and Brit) so we did follow FOMs and SOPs. I personally overheard a conversation in which the "management" person told another pilot that all the TROUBLEMAKERS in the company were the American pilots on the B752. I assume he meant that we were troublemakers because we followed rules as well as refused aircraft for maintenance issues.

With my experience at OX, I could confirm most of what was in shiftpattern's post #123.( the letter quoted in the daily mail article above) I do not know the pilots involved (may they RIP) for the MD-80s arrived just when I quit OX and I am sure those initial MD-80 pilots no longer worked there. IMHO, Udom and his "management" is at fault and DCA is also to blame for looking the other way. Unfortunately I don't think much of the story about exceeding duty limitations and maintence issues would ever come out (so on one could loose face).

As the scheduler, I had a disagreement later with that same "management" person mentioned above regarding duty limitations. OX added seasonal service from HKT to HKG on the B752 in Aug '05. I had wanted the pilots to layover in HKG (BKK-HKT-HKG, layover and do the reverse next day) but he wanted the layover be in HKT. Quoting him, "it's easier to get hotels in HKT and his boys on the B747 really like the HKT layover." I gave in to that so we flew BKK-HKT-HKG-HKT, but realized within the first week that it was not legal (out of the first 4 flights, the fastest was 8.1 hrs flight time and the average was 8.3 hrs). When I complained that this was illegal for it exceed the domestic limit of 8 hrs, the answer was that it followed international limit of 10 hrs. Since there was an obvious disagreement over our interpretations of the FOM, I asked him to go to the DCA to clarify whether BKK-HKT-HKG-HKT should be considered domestic or international. The initial answer was that he was too busy and had no time to do that. When I persisted, his answer was that he did ask and DCA's answer was that it was up to OX to decide so it is international. I then ask him to put that in writing in the FOM or a memo but that request was just ignored. These flights concluded just about then and the isssue never came up again during my remaining 3 months at OX. Of course now I deeply regret not forcing the issure more. With Thai pilots, I could easily see they simply do whatever they are asked to do even if it was illegal according to the FOM.

With the exception of the stress from dealing with "management", I enjoyed my experience at OX - worked with good people, formed great friendships, and learned much from flying to locations I would never see at the major airline I work for. RIP to those who perished and my prayers to the recovery of those injured.

Let's just hope this doesn't happen again...

Amen and Amen.

I know this pilot personally and am quite familiar with the above situation. It is as he has described - if not worse. Do we blame the pilot? Yes, in an emotional state it is hard not to. Is the pilot atfault- probably. He is the last line of defense in a long series of events that may have broken the chain that would have averted this tragedy. Is he alone in his blame - NO. That should be shared well up the chain- to the top - for the culture that created the attitudes and fears that were ingrained into the employees. That allowed and ENCOURAGED (you can read 'forced' if you like - otherwise they risked being fired) the pilots to fly WELL OVER legal limits on a regular basis and as a general rule. Flight attendants were commonly known to be on an airplane for up to 48 hours - they can sleep in a seat occasionally. I have known pilots at Orient Thai that have been on an airplane for over 24 hours (they got their crew rest in a coach seat).

Where does the blame lie? Start at the DCA... they turned a blind eye (yeah they knew) to forged and doctored tech logs (describing unserviceable parts and systems and the 'repairs' made) and duty violations; to the 'management' of Orient Thai (start at Khun Udom); to the pilots who did not have the balls to say no or possibly the skills to do what they had to do when the crap hit the fan. How ever you slice it - I, IMHO, hand the blame out in a wide swath - where it ought to lie.

[mr_hippo]

mr_hippo>> When the time noted is 45 minutes I reject the label of 'professional'.

And it's every thinking mans right to critic an event they see as flawed or unnecessary. Only after they have thought!

In my previuos post, I pressed 'Add Reply' instead of 'Preview' before I had finished so please read final para. Ok, you think that 45 minutes is too long. I'll put you in charge of an incident, you think that the fire is out so you start evacuating pax using your taxi method. The starboard fuel tank explodes - all taxi drivers and survivors are killed. In your indecent haste, you have killed innocent people. Who do you blame that on?

[NBT TV Phuket]

'A_Traveller' sent message to us as follows:

"Hi,

Know you're busy however, something has come up here which would be most relevant. Looking at web 'compressed' footage it is difficult to ascertain if the undercarriage of the plane was down {ready for landing} or retracted {presumably to allow plane maximum lift to abort landing}, though there may be some wreckage on the grass which could be the ripped off under-cart. Are you able with your on-the-spot information to confirm the position?

Regards

PS For those of use in BKK your timely reports are most valuable, thanks"

Our quick reply, we can share with all readers here, is that without time to look through all previous posts, and even our stock footage of wreckage , we can say the our MiniVDO on http://www.thaisnews.com/news_detail.php?newsid=214770 and photo capture from that clearly showed the left hand wing with the wheel undercarriage open/down.

[TAWP]

mr_hippo>> When the time noted is 45 minutes I reject the label of 'professional'.

And it's every thinking mans right to critic an event they see as flawed or unnecessary. Only after they have thought!

In my previuos post, I pressed 'Add Reply' instead of 'Preview' before I had finished so please read final para. Ok, you think that 45 minutes is too long. I'll put you in charge of an incident, you think that the fire is out so you start evacuating pax using your taxi method. The starboard fuel tank explodes - all taxi drivers and survivors are killed. In your indecent haste, you have killed innocent people. Who do you blame that on?

On you since you just killed all those people. It's your fantasy.

And in other words you say it's better if the survivors and resque personel died in one big* explosion, while waiting for transportation, then some of them being transported away fast. That's an odd position to take.

*: Given the position of the survivors, fairly far away from the airplane, it would have to be one major explosion to destroy any vehicles that would take the route via the main landingstrip. The airplane was NOT on or directly close to the easy accessable strip - the survivors was!

[Mid]

'A_Traveller' sent message to us as follows:

"Hi,

Know you're busy however, something has come up here which would be most relevant. Looking at web 'compressed' footage it is difficult to ascertain if the undercarriage of the plane was down {ready for landing} or retracted {presumably to allow plane maximum lift to abort landing}, though there may be some wreckage on the grass which could be the ripped off under-cart. Are you able with your on-the-spot information to confirm the position?

Regards

PS For those of use in BKK your timely reports are most valuable, thanks"

Our quick reply, we can share with all readers here, is that without time to look through all previous posts, and even our stock footage of wreckage , we can say the our MiniVDO on http://www.thaisnews.com/news_detail.php?newsid=214770 and photo capture from that clearly showed the left hand wing with the wheel undercarriage open/down.

Pilot was 'not ordered to land'

The Aeronautical Radio of Thailand (Aerothai) yesterday dismissed reports that a son of the Indonesian pilot of the fatal One-Two-Go flight said his father was ordered to land at Phuket Airport before the plane crashed.

Published on September 20, 2007

snip

"The landing gear was kept up. That reflects he realised the weather was not suitable for landing. He was a bit slow with his second thoughts," he said.

snip

nationmultimedia.com

Edited September 20, 2007 by Mid

[mr_hippo]

mr_hippo>> When the time noted is 45 minutes I reject the label of 'professional'.

And it's every thinking mans right to critic an event they see as flawed or unnecessary. Only after they have thought!

In my previuos post, I pressed 'Add Reply' instead of 'Preview' before I had finished so please read final para. Ok, you think that 45 minutes is too long. I'll put you in charge of an incident, you think that the fire is out so you start evacuating pax using your taxi method. The starboard fuel tank explodes - all taxi drivers and survivors are killed. In your indecent haste, you have killed innocent people. Who do you blame that on?

On you since you just killed all those people. It's your fantasy.

And in other words you say it's better if the survivors and resque personel died in one big* explosion, while waiting for transportation, then some of them being transported away fast. That's an odd position to take.

*: Given the position of the survivors, fairly far away from the airplane, it would have to be one major explosion to destroy any vehicles that would take the route via the main landingstrip. The airplane was NOT on or directly close to the easy accessable strip - the survivors was!

Oh, please learn to read. YOU are in charge of AN incident. Now what would YOU do? The question does not mention flight OG269 or Phuket, it is purely hypothetical.

[chinthee]

This latest revelation that the landing gear was indeed down, raises the issue of weather again, specifically wind shear detection.

1. If half the detection systems on the plane were down + the systems were not working properly at the airport, then this could indicate both the airport and the airline had faulty equipment which may have led to the proximate cause of the accident.

2. Mid's point is that the airport should have closed during this weather. If the wind shear detection equipment was not working properly and not providing information to the air traffic controllers that conditions were as dangerous as they were, then this may not be blamed on the ATC as far as bad decision not to close the airport, but rather may be blamed partially on failure by the airport to maintain safety equipment.

3. The response time by fire trucks is also under critical review. This appears at first blush not to have been within the 3 minutes.

It appears both the airport and the airline have much to answer.

[Mid]

sake of the Thai economy I really hope that the extent of safety issues in Thailand does not become a major talking point within the international media.

to hel_l with the economy ......................................

SAFTEY FIRST

PAL calls for safety

Thursday, September 20, 2007

PHILIPPINE Airlines yesterday challenged other carriers to submit to a safety audit in the wake of the crash of a Thai budget carrier on Sept. 16 that killed 89 of its 123 passengers.

The passengers were killed after the airline, One-Two-Go, broke into two and burst into flames as it landed in the resort island of Phuket amid heavy rain.

In a statement, PAL said it supports the International Air Transport Association’s campaign to make safety a cornerstone of air travel.

“As a pioneer member of IATA, having joined the organization in 1946, and the only Philippine carrier to pass the IATA Operational Safety Audit, PAL upholds the principle that safety is the bedrock of airline operations,” company president Jaime Bautista said.

“All airlines, especially the so-called low-cost or budget carriers, should submit themselves to the IATA safety audit. The safety of passengers and crew must never be compromised,” he said. Roderick T. dela Cruz

manilastandardtoday.com

[cdnvic]

mr_hippo>> When the time noted is 45 minutes I reject the label of 'professional'.

And it's every thinking mans right to critic an event they see as flawed or unnecessary. Only after they have thought!

In my previuos post, I pressed 'Add Reply' instead of 'Preview' before I had finished so please read final para. Ok, you think that 45 minutes is too long. I'll put you in charge of an incident, you think that the fire is out so you start evacuating pax using your taxi method. The starboard fuel tank explodes - all taxi drivers and survivors are killed. In your indecent haste, you have killed innocent people. Who do you blame that on?

This situation just isn't possible. If you get the people out and away from the aircraft they are pretty much safe as jet fuel won't explode like a bomb (unless it's in a movie). Take a look at the recent China Airlines incident.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=BKNajDu5ySU

Taxis parked 20 meters away would have been perfectly safe.

[TAWP]

mr_hippo>> I'm going to assume you haven't done basic military service or rescue training and therefor aren't aware of how fuel (and not manufactured bombs) explode.

As you should have been able to extrapolate from my post, I would have bussed the survivors out via the landing-strip. But give me an overview map, organisation charts and 30* minutes and I can put together a more detailed plan for you if needed. Deal?

(*: They only had years to come up with a basic contingency plan.)

Added: And thanks cdnvic for the clip that illustrates the point perfectly.

Edited September 20, 2007 by TAWP

[Mid]

Rescue helicopters arrived to airlift “victims” to hospital.

Reporting response times, K. Pornchai said that ambulances from Thalang Hospital, Phuket International Hospital, Bangkok Phuket Hospital and Patong Hospital had all arrived on the scene within 15 minutes.

cite Phuket Airport disaster drill hailed a ‘success’

[TAWP]

Probably not hard when everyone was at standby since the drill had been announced in advanced, right? Kinda ruins the stopwatch-data...

[Mid]

makes a mockery of the drill .................................

[jeebusjones]

The pilot is a pretty convenient scapegoat at the moment, all the more so because he comes from a country with one of the worst safety records in the world.

Uh, if there is a choice between blaming a pilot or blaming authorities or aircraft manufacturers, the long term trend in the aviation world has always been to go with blaming the pilot regardless of country of origin.

I agree, and I'm certainly not trying to say the pilot had no responsibility. As others have pointed out, plane crashes are caused by a multitude of factors. I just hope that all issues are addressed. It would be too easy to just blame the pilot and the not change any of the other major factors that caused this tragedy.

Here are some interesting stats regarding the causes of plane crashes:

An accident survey [1] of 2,147 aircraft accidents from 1950 through 2004 determined the causes to be as follows:

* 45%: Pilot error

* 33%: Undetermined or missing in the record

* 13%: Mechanical failure

* 7%: Weather

* 5%: Sabotage (bombs, hijackings, shoot-downs)

* 4%: Other human error (air traffic controller error, improper loading of aircraft, improper maintenance, fuel contamination, language miscommunication etc.)

* 1%: Other cause

The survey excluded military, private, and charter aircraft.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_disasters#Causes

[mr_hippo]

mr_hippo>> I'm going to assume you haven't done basic military service or rescue training and therefor aren't aware of how fuel (and not manufactured bombs) explode.

As you should have been able to extrapolate from my post, I would have bussed the survivors out via the landing-strip. But give me an overview map, organisation charts and 30* minutes and I can put together a more detailed plan for you if needed. Deal?

(*: They only had years to come up with a basic contingency plan.)

Added: And thanks cdnvic for the clip that illustrates the point perfectly.

There can and have been secondary explosions at crash sites. One example - “There were secondary explosions of jet fuel,” she said. “The plane had magnesium components. It’s an exotic metal, which when you add water to it, intensifies the fire.”

http://forestgrovenewstimes.com/news/story...332826268302100

So you would have bussed survivors out via the landing strip and blocked your primary and secondary access routes?

If you think that it only takes 30 minutes to come up with a detailed plan, please offer your services to all airport authorities.

[cdnvic]

There can and have been secondary explosions at crash sites. One example - “There were secondary explosions of jet fuel,” she said. “The plane had magnesium components. It’s an exotic metal, which when you add water to it, intensifies the fire.”

You are reaching for something that isn't there. You clearly just don't know about these things. Show me an example of a jetliner exploding like a bomb (without an actual bomb).

[taxexile]

what is it that causes these fires ?

is it the fuel spraying around ? , is the emergency oxygen supply in the cabins that explode?, are the seat covers etc. inflammable and toxic ?

and on the video of the china plane on fire , there did seem to be a sizeable explosion.

[cdnvic]

what is it that causes these fires ?

is it the fuel spraying around ? , is the emergency oxygen supply in the cabins that explode?, are the seat covers etc. inflammable and toxic ?

and on the video of the china plane on fire , there did seem to be a sizeable explosion.

The explosion was almost entirely contained within the radius of the aircraft. It's kerosene, not gasoline, and it's liquid, not aerosol.

[mr_hippo]

When did I ever mention 'a jetliner exploding like a bomb'? Are you trying to say that there are no secondary explosions?

[Farma]

I’ve got to agree it takes a bit to get the wheels burning. I’ve seen a few brake fires over the years. The hydraulics catch fire, fuse plugs blow and generally seize the brake unit into the wheel.

If I remember right that flight out of New York a couple of years ago blew due to fuel pumps overheating.

The crashes I’ve been involved with didn’t show signs of secondary explosions. One of them (near Lismore NSW late 1970’s) still had the impact crater full of fuel with acres of scrub around it burnt out.

Edited September 20, 2007 by Farma