Planes Clip Wings At Bangkok Airport

[george]

Planes clip wings at Bangkok airport

BANGKOK: -- Investigators are looking into why two passenger planes clipped wings on the tarmac at Bangkok’s international airport, cracking a wing on one of the planes, Thai authorities said today.

No one was injured in the accident, which occurred late yesterday when a Singapore Airlines plane was taxiing to a gate and a Thai Airways plane was travelling to the runway for takeoff, said Surapol Isaragura, director of Thai Airways’ emergency operations.

The accident cracked the wing of the Thai Airways plane, and all its passengers were transferred to another plane. No damage was reported to the Singapore plane.

The air transportation agency ordered the captains of both planes to undergo medical check-ups. If the accident was caused by human error, authorities will revoke the responsible captain’s licence, said Chaisak Angsuwan, the agency’s director general.

--AP / iol.ie 2005-04-20

[eljeque]

Any pilots out there? Shouldn't this be not only the responsibility of the pilots but the control tower as well, or whoever is telling the pilots to move around on the tarmac?

[Humphrey Bear]

That's if they are moving under their own steam.

What about the tractors that pull the planes in and out of their parking slots? Where exactly were the two planes when their wing-tips touched?

[udon]

Any pilots out there?  Shouldn't this be not only the responsibility of the pilots but the control tower as well, or whoever is telling the pilots to move around on the tarmac?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Check www.pprune.com in the forum "rumours & new"

[sprq]

"authorities will revoke the responsible captain’s licence"

Just like that? Even if he's not Thai? Even if he has a perfect record otherwise?

One more silly Thai official statement.

[rodcourt49]

That's if they are moving under their own steam.

What about the tractors that pull the planes in and out of their parking slots? Where exactly were the two planes when their wing-tips touched?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Planes do not run on 'steam'. Why not wait until all the facts are released then you can ooh and aaah!

[fxe1200]

....as long they clip on the ground....

[donbury]

As a private pilot, this incident is of interest to me.

I read "medical checkup" and think "drug/alcohol test"

I am happy not to fly on the supposedly undamaged singapore aircraft just after such an incident.

It sounds like they were traveling in opposite directions. Perhaps one or both planes was/were off the center line of the taxiway.

I've been sobered by recent articles on Phuket Airlines, and their deferral of safety inspections, and learning they have only 13 planes. hmmmmmmmmm.

From the US, I am accustomed to a fairly heavy hand from the FAA, and Thailand is out of their jurisdiction, and I understand different rules and standards apply to different countries.

In the US, I have seen air traffic control literally melt down and lose track of planes approaching Oakland Airport in California in heavy traffic times. Certainly ground control can contribute to a problem, as can language misunderstandings.

I've certainly felt challenged navigating taxiways in new-to-me airports, but I expect commercial pilots are much better prepared and trained.

An incident like this can be healthy, because it wakes everybody up, and nobody was hurt. I can tell you that the FAA in the US posts incident reports and conclusions for all to read, and attempts to learn from every incident or close call. I wonder if the same is true here in Thailand?

Safe flying, and good luck!

[Chiuey]

10 bucks sez thai authorities will try to blame the s'pore airlines pilot before the finding of the results are out. Then the first report done by local authorities will confirm the thai authorities claims, untill s'pore airlines call over the FAA or it's international equivilant to do a second investigation. Which will in turn, over turn the findings to blame the tower control and the pilot of the thai airways plane.

any takers?

Edited April 20, 2005 by Chiuey

[dazdaz]

>The air transportation agency ordered the captains of both planes to undergo

>medical check-ups. If the accident was caused by human error, authorities will

>revoke the responsible captain’s licence, said Chaisak Angsuwan, the agency’s

>director general.

lol, the director is obviously scared and re-acting with emotion than directing with action and conducting a proper investigation. Human error can mean so many things and I suspect will hide something else.

Humans are not robots and people do make mistakes from time to time, not that this is acceptable but the attitude is not from the Director.

Of course he could be lying and putting on a bold public face because of the importance of tourism to Thailand.

[JXXXL]

"Planes do not run on 'steam...."

Really??? Thanks for making that clear for all of us.

[GoodHeart]

Planes do not run on 'steam'.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

And speech doesn't have a figure, does it? Hmm...wonder who it is then that has a figure of speech?

[george]

Update:

Airlines in dispute over airport incident

BANGKOK: -- Thai Airways International Public Company Limited (THAI) and Singapore Airlines were at loggerheads today following an incident yesterday afternoon in which two planes clipped wings at Bangkok’s Don Muang Airport.

There were no injuries in the incident, which occurred when Singapore Airlines' flight SQ68, which was taxiing to a gate, clipped wings with THAI's flight 602, as it travelled to the runway for takeoff.

Singapore Airlines today laid the blame for the incident firmly at the feet of the Thai airliner, a claimed refuted by Mr. Suraphol Isarangura Na Ayutthaya, THAI’s director for operations and emergencies, who accused Singapore Airlines of jumping to a conclusion.

“When incidents of this kind occur, investigators need to look at information from three sides – from both parties in the incident and the air traffic control”, he said.

“The investigation should look at what faults occurred in the system so that we can prevent similar incidents in future. This is better than simply looking for a guilty party”, he added.

According to the THAI pilot, the Singapore airliner had been ordered to park at Gate 54 to allow the Thai plane to pass.

It was, therefore, possible that both parties were at fault.

THAI has already established a committee to investigate the incident, and has pledged to pay compensation if found to be in the wrong.

However, the airline also stressed that the incident was a minor one, noting that neither pilot was aware of what had happened at the time, and said that the press had blown it out of proportion.

Although the wing tip had fallen off the plane, this would not have compromised passenger safety in any way should the plane have continued its flight.

The incident will be investigated by the Department of Aviation, whose Director-General, Mr. Chaisak Angkasuwan, said today that he would order both airlines to send in representatives to explain the case.

Transport Minister Suriya Jungrungreangkit has ordered that both the Department of Aviation and THAI get to the bottom of the incident within two days, and has said that the incident should be used as a lesson to be more cautious in the future.

--TNA 2005-04-20

[Rinrada]

Update:

Airlines in dispute over airport incident

However, the airline also stressed that the incident was a minor one,and the press had blown it out of proportion.

Although the wing tip had fallen off the plane, this would not have compromised passenger safety in any way should the plane have continued its flight.

WHAT..........

[britmaveric]

Hmmm I am flying Thai soon- perhaps I should stow a parachute?

[dezeure]

As a private pilot, this incident is of interest to me. 

I read "medical checkup" and think "drug/alcohol test"

I am happy not to fly on the supposedly undamaged singapore aircraft just after such an incident. 

It sounds like they were traveling in opposite directions.  Perhaps one or both planes was/were off the center line of the taxiway.

I've been sobered by recent articles on Phuket Airlines, and their deferral of safety inspections, and learning they have only 13 planes.  hmmmmmmmmm.

From the US, I am accustomed to a fairly heavy hand from the FAA, and Thailand is out of their jurisdiction, and I understand different rules and standards apply to different countries.

In the US, I have seen air traffic control literally melt down and lose track of planes approaching Oakland Airport in California in heavy traffic times.  Certainly ground control can contribute to a problem, as can language misunderstandings.

I've certainly felt challenged navigating taxiways in new-to-me airports, but I expect commercial pilots are much better prepared and trained.

An incident like this can be healthy, because it wakes everybody up, and nobody was hurt.  I can tell you that the FAA in the US posts incident reports and  conclusions for all to read, and attempts to learn from every incident or close call.  I wonder if the same is true here in Thailand?

Safe flying, and good luck!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

As a Commercial pilot, I must say coming to a new airport and taxiing there for the first time is just as difficult for you and me. Maybe a better view and faster understanding of the taxi instructions but the signs,...,well I have to look for them too.

Clipping wingtips on the tarmac sounds unlikely... or did the two planes hit each others wingtips?. I know that Don Muang has some taxi areas where the extra space on the side is questionable, but still... clipping a wing while taxiing, especially on large planes where the wing tips are reasonably high above the ground is not such an easy thing to do...

Prop strikes on the other hand is something more frequent (on smaller planes)... especially on those large taxi lights on the side that stick out quite high above the ground.

I think they just taxiied and touched wings... small incident...

Let them fight it out who left centerline or who disregarded an order (if any were given)

cheers

Sam

[chuchok]

It will be a cold day in ###### if SQ admit to making a mistake....Sinaporeans do not make mistakes!

[Phil Conners]

In typical Thai style they will blame it on Singapore. "If you had not been in Thailand the accident would not have happened". They use this excuse on the road every day, why should the airport be any different.

ob finding your way around on the rwy's:

Heard at Frankfurt Airport, between an British Airways pilot and the german ground controller...

Speedbird : "Good morning Frankfurt, Speedbird 206 clear of the active."

Ground : "Guten morgan, taxi to your gate.

The BA 747 pulls onto the main taxiway and stops.

Ground : "Speedbird, do you not know where you are going ?!"

Speedbird : "Standby ground, I'm looking up the gate location now.

Ground (with typical German patience): "Speedbird, have you never been to Frankfurt before ?!"

Speedbird (coolly): "Yes, in 1944, but I didn't stop."

[cobra]

Speedbird : "Good morning Frankfurt, Speedbird 206 clear of the active."

Ground : "Guten morgan, taxi to your gate.

The BA 747 pulls onto the main taxiway and stops.

Ground : "Speedbird, do you not know where you are going ?!"

Speedbird : "Standby ground, I'm looking up the gate location now.

Ground (with typical German patience): "Speedbird, have you never been to Frankfurt before ?!"

Speedbird (coolly): "Yes, in 1944, but I didn't stop." [/i]

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[george]

Update:

Thai Airways plane clipped wings with SIA aircraft in Bangkok Airport

SINGAPORE: -- A Singapore Airlines Boeing 777 aircraft was slightly damaged when it clipped wings with a passing Thai Airways aircraft at Bangkok's international airport.

SIA said the ground incident took place around 9pm Singapore time on Tuesday.

Its aircraft, Flight SQ68 from Singapore, had just landed and was stationary on the taxiway when the Thai Airways Airbus A330 struck its left wingtip.

None of the 276 passengers or 16 crew onboard the Singapore Airlines was injured.

The accident cracked the wing of the Thai Airways plane.

As part of the investigation, the pilots of both aircraft will be interviewed by the Thai authorities and the pilot responsible could have his licence revoked.

Stephen Forshaw, VP, Public Affairs, SIA, said: "It appears that the layout of the Bangkok airport has a lot of taxi ways that aren't running necessarily parallel to each other, but have intersections and for widebody aircraft with long wingspan, it appears that in this particular case, two aircraft with long wingspan have contacted."

"From our point of view, we want to understand what has occurred here, we're not happy that one of our aircraft has been damaged and will now be out of service for some days, and we need to work closely with authorities and conduct our own review as to what occurred there."

-- CNA 2005-04-20

[peder.klockmann]

Thai Airways offer a cheap but poor service, and rather like the country gives the impression that they're trying, but somehow just can't seem to make it work. Varying between woefully poor, and just about adequate, it'll get you there, with every ounce of the feeling of Thailand itself.

Its cheap, and fares are normally a little less than many other operators, such as their much more upmarket competitor in the south of the peninsular, Singapore Airways.

This is what a 777 looks like: erm the images aren't working so you have to go the the site http://airreview.members.beeb.net/Thai/Guts.htm

And... this is what the wingtip of a 777 looks like:

Hmmm...

heheh

Edited April 20, 2005 by peder.klockmann

[breconman]

As a private pilot, this incident is of interest to me. 

I read "medical checkup" and think "drug/alcohol test"

I am happy not to fly on the supposedly undamaged singapore aircraft just after such an incident. 

It sounds like they were traveling in opposite directions.  Perhaps one or both planes was/were off the center line of the taxiway.

I've been sobered by recent articles on Phuket Airlines, and their deferral of safety inspections, and learning they have only 13 planes.   hmmmmmmmmm.

From the US, I am accustomed to a fairly heavy hand from the FAA, and Thailand is out of their jurisdiction, and I understand different rules and standards apply to different countries.

In the US, I have seen air traffic control literally melt down and lose track of planes approaching Oakland Airport in California in heavy traffic times.  Certainly ground control can contribute to a problem, as can language misunderstandings.

I've certainly felt challenged navigating taxiways in new-to-me airports, but I expect commercial pilots are much better prepared and trained.

An incident like this can be healthy, because it wakes everybody up, and nobody was hurt.  I can tell you that the FAA in the US posts incident reports and  conclusions for all to read, and attempts to learn from every incident or close call.  I wonder if the same is true here in Thailand?

Safe flying, and good luck!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

As a Commercial pilot, I must say coming to a new airport and taxiing there for the first time is just as difficult for you and me. Maybe a better view and faster understanding of the taxi instructions but the signs,...,well I have to look for them too.

Clipping wingtips on the tarmac sounds unlikely... or did the two planes hit each others wingtips?. I know that Don Muang has some taxi areas where the extra space on the side is questionable, but still... clipping a wing while taxiing, especially on large planes where the wing tips are reasonably high above the ground is not such an easy thing to do...

Prop strikes on the other hand is something more frequent (on smaller planes)... especially on those large taxi lights on the side that stick out quite high above the ground.

I think they just taxiied and touched wings... small incident...

Let them fight it out who left centerline or who disregarded an order (if any were given)

cheers

Sam

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[sonthaya]

It's so easy to put the blame on the pilots, but to me an retired airline pilot with more than 25000 hours in the logbook, it looks more like the fault of either ground control or the tower, they are supposed to keep traffic moving safely on the ground, they should tell one flight to hold it's possition when the other aircraft is passing, so don't blame the "driver"

Edited April 20, 2005 by sonthaya

[Dakhar]

Clealy someone did not wait and count to 3, before moving forward after the light turned green.

[Rinrada]

[its aircraft, Flight SQ68 from Singapore, had just landed and was stationary on the taxiway when the Thai Airways Airbus A330 struck its left wingtip.

Right when it happened:

Question 1.Was the SIA aircraft stationary.........YES

Question 2.Was the TG aircraft moving.....err.....YES

Conclusion;

Whos fault was it......remember TIT...like in Saudi Arabia when you have a car accident....if you hadnt been there in the first place then it could never have...etc...

or might be something to do with the lady caddy with the BIG smile.......four..

[DaveYo]

Hmmm, yes they can revoke a captains license and have the authority to do so, but when that happens the captain remains grounded till a full inquiry is made and also whatever the Unions do in fighting to keep his job etc.

Now technically most planes do taxi to the gate on their own. If the area around the pushback and tax spots with gates on both sides as it is here in Bangkok a lot of times captains do ask for the pushback truck to tow them in if there is a high chance of an incident. This clears the captain and ground control tower of any wrong doing, and rests squarely on the pushback driver and the guides.

No aircraft is supposed to taxi to the gate under any circumstances without the guides in place to direct the aircraft otherwise.

So in this incident I see nothing reported if the guides were out like they are supposed to be when SQ was going to the gate.

Also those guides would have prevented such incident occuring because they can see those wingtips very well.

In this case it appears based on the transcript as I see here, SQ was stationary and not moving yet also was cleared to taxi to gate, while Thai Airways was moving out, but they did not look around to see if they had clearance to move knowing that SQ was right there and kept moving thus bringing the wing tips to contact. Furthermore the Pilot of Thai Airways cannot see literally the sides at the wing tips so he took an educated guess he had enough clearance to keep moving.

Also the airport configuration at Bangkok is TERRIBLE. It is a TRUE nightmare for the pilots because of limited space leaving almost no room for error.

Now the big question that remains is whether or not Thai Airways captain heard any order from ground control to hold or not or if such was ever given. If none was given from the ground control, then it is ground controls fault. However the Thai Airways Captain should have had better common sense in knowing what he was doing and should have stopped out of experience knowing how the airport layout is configured etc, and should have recognized how dangerously close both planes were at that moment of time.

Another problem the captains face is this----> They cannot see the wings behind them very well unless they really plaster their faces to the window. So I say here that this plane as well as others have a design flaw, in not allowing outside mirrors or some camera view towards the rear outside so the captains can see what is around them and also be able to see the engines whether for emergency or not especially during the taxi phase.

I think this pretty much explains it descriptive wise for some lay person here.

Daveyo

Edited April 20, 2005 by DaveYo

[udon]

Hmmm, yes they can revoke a captains license and have the authority to do so,

Dave, who are you referring to when you say "they"?

[DaveYo]

To answer your question the FAA Investigative Agency has the power to suspend or to revoke if due cause is found that the Pilots are at Fault. If it involved the ground control tower, that person is removed also. Permanent revocation of the Pilots License rests soley on the FAA.

Same with me my friend. If I screw up fixing the 747 and it falls apart, and or people get killed, the FAA can revoke my license at the crack of the whip permanently and I can be suspended or revoked temporary by the Agency till the Inquiry is completed.

Daveyo

[Vulture]

Pilots cannot see behind them you say,

Surely a case here for wing mirrors.

[britmaveric]

Pilots cannot see behind them you say,

Surely a case here for wing mirrors.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Newer models have vid cams installed - A340, not sure if 777 have them, but doubt TA owns any of them.