Flight TG669 skids off runway at Suvarnabhumi Airport

[GentlemanJim]

Hi,

Glad all onboard are safe.

Speculation is inevitable, particularly on websites around the globe. No real problem with that as the facts will be known in due course.

Birds activity is a know threat at this airport. Bad weather is a threat at any airport. Technical issues are a threat to any aircraft. Fatigue is a threat to any operation. Lots of potential factors can spoil your day as both a crew member and passenger.

Directional control can occur for many reasons, and can be a challenge on both take off and landing. It may be caused by asymmetric reverse thrust, tyre, brake or gear failure, engine failure or excessive control inputs.

Modern aircraft are however generally very reliable and system failure happens fairly infrequently.

Weather exists and changes on a daily basis and therefore poses some major challenges to a crew. Wet runway surfaces are generally not a problem in day to day operations and the landing distance required when compared to a dry runway are virtually identical if the correct techniques are employed. The problems arise when the runway surface becomes contaminated and that is a real threat on both take off and landing as 3 types of aquaplaning can occur which all have an effect on directional control.

The preferred runway for landing in Bangkok Is either 01L or 19R. The runway surface is grooved so it makes sense to land here if you have a contaminated runway surface. The safest course of action however is to delay the approach if the threat negatively affects flight safety.

The problems the crew will face are numerous, but major issues include getting an accurate depth of contaminant on the runway surface and getting a reliable braking action report as its impossible for a vehicle on the ground to replicate the landing speeds used by large aircraft. A good source of information if available would be a pilot report from a preceding landing aircraft of comparable aircraft type.

Pitch attitude on landing can be affected by flap setting which may result in nose wheel contact with the runway first which is obviously undesirable. It may well have been a training flight which again can cause potential problems if intervention is not carried out in a timely manner.

And after all your blah, what do you say now!

How about......"Well done Captain, Brilliant job...........shame about the PR team and "why are the two guys that changed the nose wheel assembly last, both nowhere to be found?" (That last bit is a joke by the way )

Edited September 9, 2013 by GentlemanJim

[EyesWideOpen]

Hi,

Glad all onboard are safe.

Speculation is inevitable, particularly on websites around the globe. No real problem with that as the facts will be known in due course.

Birds activity is a know threat at this airport. Bad weather is a threat at any airport. Technical issues are a threat to any aircraft. Fatigue is a threat to any operation. Lots of potential factors can spoil your day as both a crew member and passenger.

Directional control can occur for many reasons, and can be a challenge on both take off and landing. It may be caused by asymmetric reverse thrust, tyre, brake or gear failure, engine failure or excessive control inputs.

Modern aircraft are however generally very reliable and system failure happens fairly infrequently.

Weather exists and changes on a daily basis and therefore poses some major challenges to a crew. Wet runway surfaces are generally not a problem in day to day operations and the landing distance required when compared to a dry runway are virtually identical if the correct techniques are employed. The problems arise when the runway surface becomes contaminated and that is a real threat on both take off and landing as 3 types of aquaplaning can occur which all have an effect on directional control.

The preferred runway for landing in Bangkok Is either 01L or 19R. The runway surface is grooved so it makes sense to land here if you have a contaminated runway surface. The safest course of action however is to delay the approach if the threat negatively affects flight safety.

The problems the crew will face are numerous, but major issues include getting an accurate depth of contaminant on the runway surface and getting a reliable braking action report as its impossible for a vehicle on the ground to replicate the landing speeds used by large aircraft. A good source of information if available would be a pilot report from a preceding landing aircraft of comparable aircraft type.

Pitch attitude on landing can be affected by flap setting which may result in nose wheel contact with the runway first which is obviously undesirable. It may well have been a training flight which again can cause potential problems if intervention is not carried out in a timely manner.

And after all your blah, what do you say now!

How about......"Well done Captain, Brilliant job...........shame about the PR team and "why are the two guys that changed the nose wheel assembly last, both nowhere to be found?" (That last bit is a joke by the way )

That is an astonishing level of damage to the runway. I would have thought that the runway of an international airport would be the highest quality of concrete possible.

And the principle parts of a landing gear would be either aluminum or magnesium, with the exception of the main piston which of course would be steel. I would think that dragging aluminum or magnesium down a runway would not affect it all all. So would these grooves be created by the nose gear or the main gear ?? I am getting so confused by all the stories being spun out by Thai airways...

[wooloomooloo]

What's is happening with Thai Airways? Last time it was at Hong Kong.

That was awful. The Captain purposely flew into heavy turbulence to injure as many as possible. Probably only wanted to injure economy class passengers at that.

Are you serious, nachiket? And do you peruse the detail of these events or just spout ill-informed bilge.

[NanLaew]

Hi,

Glad all onboard are safe.

Speculation is inevitable, particularly on websites around the globe. No real problem with that as the facts will be known in due course.

Birds activity is a know threat at this airport. Bad weather is a threat at any airport. Technical issues are a threat to any aircraft. Fatigue is a threat to any operation. Lots of potential factors can spoil your day as both a crew member and passenger.

Directional control can occur for many reasons, and can be a challenge on both take off and landing. It may be caused by asymmetric reverse thrust, tyre, brake or gear failure, engine failure or excessive control inputs.

Modern aircraft are however generally very reliable and system failure happens fairly infrequently.

Weather exists and changes on a daily basis and therefore poses some major challenges to a crew. Wet runway surfaces are generally not a problem in day to day operations and the landing distance required when compared to a dry runway are virtually identical if the correct techniques are employed. The problems arise when the runway surface becomes contaminated and that is a real threat on both take off and landing as 3 types of aquaplaning can occur which all have an effect on directional control.

The preferred runway for landing in Bangkok Is either 01L or 19R. The runway surface is grooved so it makes sense to land here if you have a contaminated runway surface. The safest course of action however is to delay the approach if the threat negatively affects flight safety.

The problems the crew will face are numerous, but major issues include getting an accurate depth of contaminant on the runway surface and getting a reliable braking action report as its impossible for a vehicle on the ground to replicate the landing speeds used by large aircraft. A good source of information if available would be a pilot report from a preceding landing aircraft of comparable aircraft type.

Pitch attitude on landing can be affected by flap setting which may result in nose wheel contact with the runway first which is obviously undesirable. It may well have been a training flight which again can cause potential problems if intervention is not carried out in a timely manner.

And after all your blah, what do you say now!

How about......"Well done Captain, Brilliant job...........shame about the PR team and "why are the two guys that changed the nose wheel assembly last, both nowhere to be found?" (That last bit is a joke by the way )

That is an astonishing level of damage to the runway. I would have thought that the runway of an international airport would be the highest quality of concrete possible.

And the principle parts of a landing gear would be either aluminum or magnesium, with the exception of the main piston which of course would be steel. I would think that dragging aluminum or magnesium down a runway would not affect it all all. So would these grooves be created by the nose gear or the main gear ?? I am getting so confused by all the stories being spun out by Thai airways...

Looks like starboard main gear caused that damage. You can just about see the runway center line dashes to the LEFT. So starboard gear had either a catastrophic blow out or collapse and the drag brought the plane off to the right where ALL gear sunk in the turf, causing the starboard engine (lowest) to ground out first, ingesting dirt and momentarily igniting.

Thanks for your attention.

Good night.

[Thai at Heart]

The engine fire was caused by the plane leaving the runway with enough force that the nose gear failed.

Photo here......

http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20130908-0

That's a quality link ... thanks for that ...

So it veered off the runway. Fantastic

[kannot]

AVIATION

A THAI flight slides off Bangkok runway Sunday night, 13 injured

Photo : Wing Magazine (Twitter)

BANGKOK: -- THAI International Airways is investigation into an accident in which its TG 679 skidded off the runway while landing at Suvarnabhumi Airport on Sunday night.

Sorajak Kasemsuvan, THAI president said thirteen passengers suffered minor injuries from the accident that took place at 11.20pm.

The Airbus A330-300 left Guangzhou at 9.25pm local time with 288 passengers and 14 crew member on board.

Sorajak said while the flight was landing and touching the runaway whthe landing gear, making it skid off the runaway.

During the incident, there was some sparks at the base of the right wheel, making it caught fire.

Sorajak said Captain of the flight then managed to control the airplane and ordered evacuation of the passengers through emergency exit.

Any more information, please contact at 02-545-3181.

The Airbus A330-300 involved in the incident was delivered to Thai Airways in March of 1995.

-- The Nation 2013-09-09

If you are going to write in English as a profession, please try to check your work.

"Sorajak said while the flight was landing and touching the runaway whthe landing gear, making it skid off the runaway." and " making it caught fire. "

So, the flight was landing with the landing gear and that caused it to skid off the runaway. May I ask what other equipment they would have used to land?

"seat of pants"?

[GentlemanJim]

And after all your blah, what do you say now!

How about......"Well done Captain, Brilliant job...........shame about the PR team and "why are the two guys that changed the nose wheel assembly last, both nowhere to be found?" (That last bit is a joke by the way )

That is an astonishing level of damage to the runway. I would have thought that the runway of an international airport would be the highest quality of concrete possible.

And the principle parts of a landing gear would be either aluminum or magnesium, with the exception of the main piston which of course would be steel. I would think that dragging aluminum or magnesium down a runway would not affect it all all. So would these grooves be created by the nose gear or the main gear ?? I am getting so confused by all the stories being spun out by Thai airways...

Looks like starboard main gear caused that damage. You can just about see the runway center line dashes to the LEFT. So starboard gear had either a catastrophic blow out or collapse and the drag brought the plane off to the right where ALL gear sunk in the turf, causing the starboard engine (lowest) to ground out first, ingesting dirt and momentarily igniting.

Thanks for your attention.

Good night.

Well all the accounts are nose wheel! It looks like nose wheel to me. You seem to be making some assumptions in that he landed with the nose wheel exactly on the center line, and that you are observing the grove in the photo from the beginning. What happened to his direction control down the runway as the nose wheel assembly was departing?

Thanks for your attention

Good Night.

[wooloomooloo]

Does the same photo have to be copied four times on page 10 alone? We get the drift.

[EyesWideOpen]

Does the same photo have to be copied four times on page 10 alone? We get the drift.

Haha I would glad to remove the photo from my post, but unfortunately TV locks down a post after a

few minutes so you can no longer edit the post. Seems odd, must be some sort of fear of losing

content....

[kannot]

Said it before and I will say it again, I am scared to travel in Thailand anymore no matter the method of transport.

Must be what is keeping you here.

Imagine being one of the many foreigners here who wanted to leave Thailand because it is so dangerous, and also being too afraid to travel to the airport because of the dangers of travel here. Talk about Groundhog Day and Catch 22 !

Not surprised there are so many resident Thai bashers putting the boot into our national airline, the name does contain the word "Thai" after all.

When I think about it, after reading so many dumb and lame posts condemning the airline, I am glad I fly with them regularly. The fact that these posters do not fly Thai has raised the standard of my fellow passengers by miles !

Have done four flights between Thailand and Australia so far this year, and about six domestic flights and have nothing but good things to say about them.

A test of any company is not how it works when things are going well, but how it works when things are going badly.

[wooloomooloo]

Haha I would glad to remove the photo from my post, but unfortunately TV locks down a post after a

few minutes...

Half an hour if memory serves me right.

[GentlemanJim]

Haha I would glad to remove the photo from my post, but unfortunately TV locks down a post after a

few minutes...

Half an hour if memory serves me right.

I think it serves you wrong

[wooloomooloo]

It's hardly minutes is it.

[vegasphl]

Would not have happened if they bought Boeing Aircraft.

[DrDweeb]

"After the accident and evacuation of passengers by slide, the airline moved in maintenance crews who immediately began work that partly covered up the Thai Airways International logo on the tail of the aircraft. (Photo by Panumas Sanguanwong)"

I dont think we will ever see the end of this ridiculous act of saving face.

I would suggest you look at about 100 random crash site photos from the last 30 years and count how many "tailfin paintjobs" there are. It has been (and for most airlines probably still is) SOP to cover the logos after an incident.

This has nothing to do with the airline being Thai.

You guys need to get out more often.

Oh, and judging by the massive damage to the runway, BEFORE the aircraft veered into the weeds, a failure in the nose landing gear was experienced on touchdown, causing everything else that followed (engine damage, fire, evacuation etc. etce)

[GentlemanJim]

Would not have happened if they bought Boeing Aircraft.

July 22 2013 Boeing 737-700. Same same, only slightly different!

[DrDweeb]

Hmm...12 people injured, some due to smoke inhalation..they do not sound "safe" to me.

Most likely, the injured parties were uncouth Chinese passengers, who had opened their seatbelts and trying to collect their carry-on luggage from the overhead storage immediately after the plane touched down....... that is the usual scenario on most Chinese flights.

while pushing and shoving everyone else out of the way , once the seatbelt off signal is given.

Then of course the increasingly assertive THAI crew tell them to SIT DOWN! Although interestingly, this scenario is becoming a little less common than just a couple of years ago, especially on THAI's Kunming flights. Indian flights are even worse though - the commotion in the cabin is something that needs to be seen to be believed.

I am reminded of a witty AA stewardess who, when the punters started milling around the cabin before the aircraft reached the gate announced,

"Passengers who are standing, will have an excellent view of the illuminated fasten seat belts sign. Please return to your seats immediately, fasten your seat belts and remain seated until the captain has switched off the aforementioned fasten seat belts sign"

This was cause for merriment, and embarrassment for the bozos standing while the aircraft was still taxiing. I laughed because for an American, she showed a remarkably good (for an American) command of the English language, and a touch of wry wit.

[DrDweeb]

You found ONE.....although not blocked out in one of the pictures! When I do a Google search, it is hard to find evidence that this is "common practice".

A strange practice though! To me.....it sends out the message "cover up"......understand "face" and all that but just a strange practice IMO.

Anyway....back on topic.

Wow. Let.....me.....speak.....slowly...... The......top......part......of......the......picture.......is.......the

.......before......photo. And......the.......bottom......part.....is.......after.......the......logo......was......painted

........out.

Yeah yeah got that....you are saying it is "common practice" to do this....it is quite evident that IT IS NOT! All I have seen is a pic from 1999 (above) and another equally historic picture. Not exactly 'common practice"! Why don't you just do a Google search for "Airline Crash" and see how many of the 100's of crash photo's have the logo's covered up! "Common practice"????

Not the majority but a small minority!

I work in the industry as well, and you would be wrong.

Get over it, and that goes for all the Thai bashers here using this idiotic "they're saving face by painting out the logo bullshit".

You are all so pathetic it hurts.

[sustento]

How many of the people posting on this thread have first hand knowledge or are personally involved in the aviation industry? If you could raise your hands we'd know whose posts to ignore and whose to give credence to.

[DrDweeb]

Said it before and I will say it again, I am scared to travel in Thailand anymore no matter the method of transport.

Must be what is keeping you here.

Imagine being one of the many foreigners here who wanted to leave Thailand because it is so dangerous, and also being too afraid to travel to the airport because of the dangers of travel here. Talk about Groundhog Day and Catch 22 !

Not surprised there are so many resident Thai bashers putting the boot into our national airline, the name does contain the word "Thai" after all.

When I think about it, after reading so many dumb and lame posts condemning the airline, I am glad I fly with them regularly. The fact that these posters do not fly Thai has raised the standard of my fellow passengers by miles !

Have done four flights between Thailand and Australia so far this year, and about six domestic flights and have nothing but good things to say about them.

I carry a TG Gold Card and usually mange 70-80 odd thousand miles a year with them. I have very few complaints, other than that they recently raised the Gold card threshold and the lack of fast track for Gold Card holders at BKK (something of an embarrassment IMHO - but possibly not something TG can affect)

Anyway, I will be on one of the 777-300ERs tomorrow, which was why I came to read this thread, just to see what the state of play was.

All I have found so far is about 95% lame ignorance.

[DrDweeb]

Whoops !Interesting comment on Pprune

Quote:

A Thai Airways official, Smud Poom-on, said that blurring the logo after an accident was a recommendation from Star Alliance known as the "crisis communication rule", meant to protect the image of both the airline and other members of Star Alliance.

Well it has not worked as most newspapers are now using this event as part of the story and Thai Airways features in all the headlines.

Indeed it hasn't.The Times (UK) has a frontpage story about the incident, specifically regarding the blacking out of the TG logo.It says "How not to handle a corporate crsis:lesson number one".

Sorry can't link because of paywall.

Incidentally the moronic TG spokesman who put this idiocy down to Star Alliance policy is either a liar or devoid of all commonsense.Star Alliance members include serious airlines like SQ,ANZ, Lufthansa and United - none of which would makle fools of themselves (crappy landing apart) in this all too typical and revealing Thai Inter way

Well, if you had bothered to look at the previous posted pictures, you would have seen the SK aircraft that crash landed in Sweden some years ago, completely devoid of the SAS logo.

Facts 1 : You 0

[Cleveland]

Hmm...12 people injured, some due to smoke inhalation..they do not sound "safe" to me.

Most likely, the injured parties were uncouth Chinese passengers, who had opened their seatbelts and trying to collect their carry-on luggage from the overhead storage immediately after the plane touched down....... that is the usual scenario on most Chinese flights.

while pushing and shoving everyone else out of the way , once the seatbelt off signal is given.

You really think they wait for the seatbelt sign to be turned of?? ROFLMAO!

I have seen them get up while the plane is still in reverse thrust mode and the poor staff screaming at them to sit down.

[Pimay1]

Said it before and I will say it again, I am scared to travel in Thailand anymore no matter the method of transport.

Must be what is keeping you here.

Imagine being one of the many foreigners here who wanted to leave Thailand because it is so dangerous, and also being too afraid to travel to the airport because of the dangers of travel here. Talk about Groundhog Day and Catch 22 !

Not surprised there are so many resident Thai bashers putting the boot into our national airline, the name does contain the word "Thai" after all.

When I think about it, after reading so many dumb and lame posts condemning the airline, I am glad I fly with them regularly. The fact that these posters do not fly Thai has raised the standard of my fellow passengers by miles !

Have done four flights between Thailand and Australia so far this year, and about six domestic flights and have nothing but good things to say about them.

I carry a TG Gold Card and usually mange 70-80 odd thousand miles a year with them. I have very few complaints, other than that they recently raised the Gold card threshold and the lack of fast track for Gold Card holders at BKK (something of an embarrassment IMHO - but possibly not something TG can affect)

Anyway, I will be on one of the 777-300ERs tomorrow, which was why I came to read this thread, just to see what the state of play was.

All I have found so far is about 95% lame ignorance.

Before I retired I flew Thai about twice a month domestic and international. Probably 95% of the flights were ok and the other 5% were minor things. Nothing to get excited about. I only turned in one complaint form stating people who do not eat off the inflight menu should not be served first. After this on international flights I was always approched by a flight attendant before the flight took off and asked my menu preference and then would be served first which was not my intention but at least they took action on my complaint.

[DrDweeb]

Wow, just caught this on Fox News. The anchor said that upon the accident, teams of employees rushed to the plane........to try and cover up the logos on the tail with spay paint. Not to rescue or help passengers, but to try to hide the plane's identity. How dumb a you get? The anchor said to possibly protect the dignity of the company.

Typical Thailand!

First you post a quarter billion dollar loss and now you continue to have accidents and attempt to save face? Come on!!

Fox News - one of the great oxymorons of modern times.

[cloudhopper]

Looks like starboard main gear caused that damage. You can just about see the runway center line dashes to the LEFT. So starboard gear had either a catastrophic blow out or collapse and the drag brought the plane off to the right where ALL gear sunk in the turf, causing the starboard engine (lowest) to ground out first, ingesting dirt and momentarily igniting.

Thanks for your attention.

Good night.

Well all the accounts are nose wheel! It looks like nose wheel to me. You seem to be making some assumptions in that he landed with the nose wheel exactly on the center line, and that you are observing the grove in the photo from the beginning. What happened to his direction control down the runway as the nose wheel assembly was departing?

Thanks for your attention

Good Night.

I concur with NL 100% on this scenario.

[DrDweeb]

Hi,

Glad all onboard are safe.

Speculation is inevitable, particularly on websites around the globe. No real problem with that as the facts will be known in due course.

Birds activity is a know threat at this airport. Bad weather is a threat at any airport. Technical issues are a threat to any aircraft. Fatigue is a threat to any operation. Lots of potential factors can spoil your day as both a crew member and passenger.

Directional control can occur for many reasons, and can be a challenge on both take off and landing. It may be caused by asymmetric reverse thrust, tyre, brake or gear failure, engine failure or excessive control inputs.

Modern aircraft are however generally very reliable and system failure happens fairly infrequently.

Weather exists and changes on a daily basis and therefore poses some major challenges to a crew. Wet runway surfaces are generally not a problem in day to day operations and the landing distance required when compared to a dry runway are virtually identical if the correct techniques are employed. The problems arise when the runway surface becomes contaminated and that is a real threat on both take off and landing as 3 types of aquaplaning can occur which all have an effect on directional control.

The preferred runway for landing in Bangkok Is either 01L or 19R. The runway surface is grooved so it makes sense to land here if you have a contaminated runway surface. The safest course of action however is to delay the approach if the threat negatively affects flight safety.

The problems the crew will face are numerous, but major issues include getting an accurate depth of contaminant on the runway surface and getting a reliable braking action report as its impossible for a vehicle on the ground to replicate the landing speeds used by large aircraft. A good source of information if available would be a pilot report from a preceding landing aircraft of comparable aircraft type.

Pitch attitude on landing can be affected by flap setting which may result in nose wheel contact with the runway first which is obviously undesirable. It may well have been a training flight which again can cause potential problems if intervention is not carried out in a timely manner.

And after all your blah, what do you say now!

How about......"Well done Captain, Brilliant job...........shame about the PR team and "why are the two guys that changed the nose wheel assembly last, both nowhere to be found?" (That last bit is a joke by the way )

That is an astonishing level of damage to the runway. I would have thought that the runway of an international airport would be the highest quality of concrete possible.

And the principle parts of a landing gear would be either aluminum or magnesium, with the exception of the main piston which of course would be steel. I would think that dragging aluminum or magnesium down a runway would not affect it all all. So would these grooves be created by the nose gear or the main gear ?? I am getting so confused by all the stories being spun out by Thai airways...

Magnesium?????

Have you ever seen a magnesium fire, or know the characteristics of one?

I would think that magnesium is the very last metal you would want to be using, however if you can cite a reference I would be happy to read it

[Cleveland]

Looks like the PR boys have done a great job in the UK press. Not.

It's a cover-up! Thai Airways blacks out plane's logo to 'protect image' after it skidded off runway at Bangkok airport. The Mail Nothing to see here: Thai Airways jet skids off runway... then logo is blacked out The Independant Thai jet's logo blacked out after skid The Guardian

Pay rises all round?

[bubba]

Now CNN have it on their front page:

Airline blacks out logos on plane after runway accident

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/09/09/travel/thai-accident-logos-blurred/index.html?hpt=hp_t3

And from the story:

"The Star Alliance crisis communications policy does not state that logos are to covered," in the event of an accident, a spokesman for the airline group, Markus Ruediger, told CNN.

Thai Airways later issued a statement "clarifying" its policy. "Though Thai generally practices the de-identifying of an aircraft after an incident ... the company also clarifies that this is not a Star Alliance policy."

---

​This after Thai Airways official Smud Poom-On told the AP that “blurring the logo” was an action undertaken at the recommendation of the Star Alliance, under the “crisis communication rule,” designed to protect the reputation of the airline and other members of the alliance. Of course K. Smud's statement was false. Unfortunately, Star Alliance took a lot of criticism between the time that Thai Airways lied about the "crisis communication rule" and Thai's later clarification that blacking out the logo was in fact not Star Alliance policy. But did you see an apology for Thai's misstatement of fact, which of course reflected poorly on all the other Star Alliance airlines? I don't think so.

Edited September 9, 2013 by bubba

[Thai at Heart]

Now CNN have it on their front page:

Airline blacks out logos on plane after runway accident

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/09/09/travel/thai-accident-logos-blurred/index.html?hpt=hp_t3

And from the story:

"The Star Alliance crisis communications policy does not state that logos are to covered," in the event of an accident, a spokesman for the airline group, Markus Ruediger, told CNN.

Thai Airways later issued a statement "clarifying" its policy. "Though Thai generally practices the de-identifying of an aircraft after an incident ... the company also clarifies that this is not a Star Alliance policy."

---

​This after Thai Airways official Smud Poom-On told the AP that blurring the logo was an action undertaken at the recommendation of the Star Alliance, under the crisis communication rule, designed to protect the reputation of the airline and other members of the alliance. Of course K. Smud's statement was false. Unfortunately, Star Alliance took a lot of criticism between the time that Thai Airways lied about the "crisis communication rule" and Thai's later clarification that blacking out the logo was in fact not Star Alliance policy. But did you see an apology for Thai's misstatement of fact, which of course reflected poorly on all the other Star Alliance airlines? I don't think so.

Oh my god, Thai airways had a crisis....

Are these numpties so dumb to think they can send somchai with a bucket of black paint and make the story go away?

[razorramone]

Said it before and I will say it again, I am scared to travel in Thailand anymore no matter the method of transport.

Must be what is keeping you here.

Imagine being one of the many foreigners here who wanted to leave Thailand because it is so dangerous, and also being too afraid to travel to the airport because of the dangers of travel here. Talk about Groundhog Day and Catch 22 !

Not surprised there are so many resident Thai bashers putting the boot into our national airline, the name does contain the word "Thai" after all.

When I think about it, after reading so many dumb and lame posts condemning the airline, I am glad I fly with them regularly. The fact that these posters do not fly Thai has raised the standard of my fellow passengers by miles !

Have done four flights between Thailand and Australia so far this year, and about six domestic flights and have nothing but good things to say about them.

"our"

ps. This story is in the Economist now.

http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulliver/2013/09/thai-airways-0

"

The trouble with that explanation is that it does not seem to be correct. A Star Alliance spokesman has pointed out that it does not require this logo-covering. "The [Thai Airways] official is misinformed," he said. Thai had its story sorted out by this afternoon, though, and issued an official statement to clarify that "de-identifying an aircraft after an incident" is the company's policy, and not that of Star Alliance.

That's all well and good, but I'm still unsure why an airline would cover the logo of a crashed plane. Is it really something to do with brand protection? After all, plenty of images are available of the crippled plane before the fancy black paint job was applied to its logos. And it's hardly a secret that this is a Thai Airways service. Perhaps it just seems less embarrassing this way."

Edited September 10, 2013 by razorramone