Probe of Sunday's THAI aircraft accident begins

[Jay Sata]

Anyone want to start taking bets?

Main landing gear failed to get down and locked and pilots didn't get their 3 green lights.

Pilots declared an emergency before landing, which explains the fire trucks being right there.

Bogie beam has malfunctioned due to lack of inspection and maintenance as required in various airworthiness directives.

Plane touches down with right main gear not down and locked.

Plane immediately begins deeply gouging the runway as there are no wheels down and rolling for the right main gear.

This causes the plane to begin to veer to the right and off the runway, into the grass.

This also causes the right engine to drag and catch fire. The plane is sliding on the right engine because it has no wheels down on the right mains.

Fire trucks and people with lifts and black spray paint are at the ready as a result of the declared emergency.

Various foreign agencies and Airbus with a vested interest in this will declare the above to be true, especially the lack of inspection and maintenance.

Thailand will deny any wrongdoing, and blame on someone - anything else.

Any takers?

Whatever the outcome the Thai's will blame everyone and brush this under the carpet in the same way the have never admitted paying a fortune for the explosive detectors sold by a couple of UK conmen that turned out to be $20 golf ball finders.

[GentlemanJim]

He said reports from the Control Tower and the Airports of Thailand (AoT) on the malfunctioning right landing gear and sparks near the area of the landing gear were conflicting.

I would say the control tower would have a better viewpoint advantage than AOT who was probably sitting in their offices.

The Post had a reference saying the ATC had said something about a fire PRIOR to the landing, whereas THAI is saying only sparks once the plane bottomed out on the runway.

But nowhere that I've seen has that issue been followed up on or reconciled.

I understand the captain had already declared an emergency landing to ATC.

You claimed this on one of the other threads and were asked to say where you got that information. You have not done so. I ask you again. Please provide a link to any site that says the Captain declared an emergency landing to ATC. On the other thread you actually say the Captain declared an emergency PRIOR to landing. Now please provide info where it says this and who has said it.

[Shaksey]

From a pilot forum -

"In 2007 an A330 bogie beam broke up during taxiing in Munich caused by internal corrosion.

The damage to the runway in BKK suggest the same (bogie beam failure) happened during touchdown this time.
That issue should have been solved by the according Airworthiness Directive issued January 2008, refined July 2011 and January 2012.
However, according to the AD:

Quote: This condition, if not detected and corrected, could lead to a runway excursion event.

BIG problem for Thai Air if the airworthiness directive has not been followed by their maint teams. Thai Air also have 30 odd other A330's - have these had the AD check applied?

[NeverSure]

I would say the control tower would have a better viewpoint advantage than AOT who was probably sitting in their offices.

The Post had a reference saying the ATC had said something about a fire PRIOR to the landing, whereas THAI is saying only sparks once the plane bottomed out on the runway.

But nowhere that I've seen has that issue been followed up on or reconciled.

I understand the captain had already declared an emergency landing to ATC.

You claimed this on one of the other threads and were asked to say where you got that information. You have not done so. I ask you again. Please provide a link to any site that says the Captain declared an emergency landing to ATC. On the other thread you actually say the Captain declared an emergency PRIOR to landing. Now please provide info where it says this and who has said it.

Please, I also read somewhere that they declared an emergency before landing, but I don't remember where. Everything is still preliminary and some if not most reports are going to be wrong.

Look above at my post "Anyone want to start taking bets?" which is, yes, speculation, but also based on what I see. Always, during these events there are early reports and statements and many times they are wrong.

I got most of my information, as a pilot, just from the severe and long gouge marks in the pavement and general knowledge of that aircraft, and how it would behave if one of the main gear systems failed to get down and locked, or collapsed.

We're still guessing.

[Thai at Heart]

I'd love to see National Geographic's excellent Air Crash Investigates have a go at this one. What the experts would make of the paint job would be fascinating TV!

As for taking years this is a fairly straightforward case, plenty of evidence and no rich, influential persons involved. Even Chalerm could probably come up with the definitive verdict after a few drinkies.

Well, it veered off the runway. Not an expert but there can only be so many explanations.

Mechanical failure, maintenance failure or pilot error. The plane is still completely intact, and they have the recorders. Either the pilot drove it off the runway in error or deliberately (highly unlikely) or something broke either through it failing, or shonky maintenance. I mean they are even reporting that the pilots announced some kind of emergency before it landed, so it is hardly going to make a one hour TV show.

I posted this in the other topic but since there are questions here regarding the why will post it also.

"Thailand's Civil Aviation Authority reported on Tuesday (Sep 10th) that permission to move the aircraft off the runway has been granted, the works to release the runway fully back to service should be completed by midnight to Wednesday local time. The Authority added later in the day that the root cause of the runway excursion has been determined to be the fracture of the right hand main gear bogie beam. The cause of the fracture as well related events including the damage to the engines and engine fire are still being investigated.

On Sep 10th 2013 the airline said initial investigation results suggest that the aircraft had travelled about 1000 meters down the runway following a smooth landing when the right hand bogie beam broke and caused the runway excursion. The aircraft received substantial damage, especially on its right hand side and engine. Following the fracture of the bogie beam the right hand engine scraped along the runway surface causing sparks and some smoke, the actual cause of the following engine fire is still being investigated however.

The airport authority reported the airplane was moved off the runway area in the early morning of Wednesday Sep 11th 2013."

The link NeverSure posted earlier has been updated here - http://avherald.com/...=4681fccd&opt=0

Well it's a simple problem then.

Three options.

1. They should have changed the part by standard requirement and didn't. Highly unlikely.

2. An inspection didn't pick up a potential failure. Not good

3. Pure accident.

There is a reason why it was known why they warned of knowing of a problem to the tower.

Bad inspection is likely the cause....

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

There's a BKK Post story today quoting a THAI Air maintenance VP saying they believe the bogie unit was the reason for the mishap.

The same exec claims that the unit has a 10 year replacement cycle, that the mishap plane had its current unit installed in 2004 (meaning it was near the end of its supposed life cycle). I believe he also said THAI was supposed to inspect the structure every two years, and the last such inspection was early last year.

Needless to say, the exec in the Post article maintained THAI has done everything correctly and followed the pertinent air worthiness directive(s).

That's the news... All I can say is, I'm waiting to see. The history here is of the initial quick pronouncements about accident/mishap causes being wrong, and in the end, other/different factors being identified as the real causes.

There's a lot of reputation and face at stake here.

[cloudhopper]

There's a lot of reputation and face at stake here.

Especially for Airbus. They will investigate everything and the facts will be discovered and reported.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

Here is a link to the U.S. FAA's latest airworthiness directive re Airbus jets and the bogie issue, dated April 10, 2013, and effective May 15, 2013.

https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2013/04/10/2013-08047/airworthiness-directives-airbus-airplanes

Within 26 months after the effective date of this AD or 26 months after the first flight of the airplane, whichever occurs later, but no earlier than 12 months after the first flight of the airplane: Do a detailed inspection for degradation (i.e., loss of chromium plate, loose chromium, sharp edges) of the bogie pivot pins and for any cracks and damage of the pivot pin bushes of the main landing gear, and, as applicable, the central landing gear, in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of the applicable service bulletin specified in paragraph (g)(1), (g)(2), or (g)(3) of this AD. Repeat the inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 26 months. Accomplishment of an overhaul of the landing gear does not substitute the accomplishment of the inspection as required by this paragraph.

The way I read that, airlines under U.S. FAA jurisdiction, for older jets, would still have up to 26 months from May 2013 to perform the detailed inspection as required in the directive.

Reporting Requirement
Submit a one-time report of the findings (both positive and negative) of the inspections required by paragraphs (g) and (i) of this AD to Airbus, Customer Services Directorate, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex France, ATTN: SDC32 Technical Data and Documentation Services; fax (+33) 5 61 93 28 06; email [email protected]; at the applicable time specified in paragraph (l)(1) or (l)(2) of this AD. The report must include the inspection results and a description of any discrepancies found.

(1) If the inspection was done on or after the effective date of this AD: Submit the report within 90 days after the inspection.

(2) If the inspection was done before the effective date of this AD: Submit the report within 90 days after the effective date of this AD.

Jurisdictionally, I'm not sure whether THAI Air would fall under the FAA's jurisdiction for this or EASA's or both or neither. But this is at least what any U.S. carriers with the various affected Airbus models would be required to do.

Edited September 12, 2013 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[skippybangkok]

Whatever the outcome the Thai's will blame everyone and brush this under the carpet in the same way the have never admitted paying a fortune for the explosive detectors sold by a couple of UK conmen that turned out to be $20 golf ball finders.

Time for Thai haters to return home.

[jackr]

A total of 172 arriving and departing flights at Suvarnabhumi Airport were delayed yesterday at 10-20 minutes on average

Due to hundreds of rubberneckers getting in the way.

[GentlemanJim]

I understand the captain had already declared an emergency landing to ATC.

You claimed this on one of the other threads and were asked to say where you got that information. You have not done so. I ask you again. Please provide a link to any site that says the Captain declared an emergency landing to ATC. On the other thread you actually say the Captain declared an emergency PRIOR to landing. Now please provide info where it says this and who has said it.

Please, I also read somewhere that they declared an emergency before landing, but I don't remember where. Everything is still preliminary and some if not most reports are going to be wrong.

Look above at my post "Anyone want to start taking bets?" which is, yes, speculation, but also based on what I see. Always, during these events there are early reports and statements and many times they are wrong.

I got most of my information, as a pilot, just from the severe and long gouge marks in the pavement and general knowledge of that aircraft, and how it would behave if one of the main gear systems failed to get down and locked, or collapsed.

We're still guessing.

Where did you read it and if it were the case it is of such significance then it would be everywhere. If everything is preliminary and if some, maybe most reports are going to be wrong, why state something as significant as the pilot declaring an emergency before landing unless it is confirmed or acknowledged from a reputable source?

Your post "Anyone want to start taking bets" is a nonsense and I treated it as a joke. You now inform us that you are actually serious! You are suggesting that a crew with an aircraft full of pax did not get three greens, did not brief the CC and pax accordingly and just carried on on finals regardless, slipping in an emergency landing call at some point! Are you actually serious? I am also a Pilot and would prefer to get my information when the appropriate information is released both from a technical perspective and a Human Factors perspective. And please if you are a Pilot, then have some respect for your profession, Ground school lesson 1- a plane is an instrument used by carpenters to shave wood or is a common way in which the layman will refer to an aircraft or aeroplane (for US folks airplane).

[nonthaburial]

Message to mods. Perhaps its worth thinking about 'freezing' this topic dues to guessing and speculation. Allow all involved to carry out their investigations. The reputation of the Carrier and Airbus are at risk here.

[Moruya]

There has been plenty of rumour in the news including the emergency landing declaration. ATC apparently reported an engine on fire prior to landing. There were repairs being done to the runway etc.

I hope there will be a thorough investigation by competent personnel with no conflict of interest

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

There has been plenty of rumour in the news including the emergency landing declaration. ATC apparently reported an engine on fire prior to landing. There were repairs being done to the runway etc.

I hope there will be a thorough investigation by competent personnel with no conflict of interest

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

The BKK Post, in their Sept 11 article on THAI Air backtracking on the airplane painting out issue, had a one-sentence reference to air traffic control at the airport reporting the fire broke out before the landing.

I can't link to or quote that reference here under ThaiVisa rules. But the Post article is easy to find and read. Haven't seen much/any public follow-up on that issue, so hard to know what to make of it.

Then the day before, The Nation had this account from former BKK Governor candidate Kosit Suvinitjit, who was a passenger on the plane:

BEFORE LANDING, the pilot announced that the plane would be parked a fair way from the terminal building because the runway was under construction. Everything was normal while landing, then there was a sudden brake.

Kosit Suvinitjit

His account raises the issue about some kind of runway construction announcement being made by the pilot (which also hasn't been subsequently explained AFAIK), but seems to reflect no awareness of any fire issue until after the landing occurred.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/national/Eyewitness-accounts-30214520.html

[Somtamnication]

First thing they gotta probe is the horrible painting job done to the logs.

BTW, can anyone spot the gorilla? 8-)

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

Message to mods. Perhaps its worth thinking about 'freezing' this topic dues to guessing and speculation. Allow all involved to carry out their investigations. The reputation of the Carrier and Airbus are at risk here.

Of course, Thai Air was all over the Bangkok Post today explaining their version of what happened and how everything Thai Air did was correct and by the book, and how the fault rests with a "defective" component manufactured elsewhere. And maybe it does.

But it seems they didn't feel like waiting for "all involved to carry out their investigations" before pronouncing judgment. I'm not saying that's wrong... Just saying, it seems like there's going to be a lot of discussion and developments on this topic as the matter goes along.

Edited September 12, 2013 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[GentlemanJim]

The BKK Post, in their Sept 11 article on THAI Air backtracking on the airplane painting out issue, had a one-sentence reference to air traffic control at the airport reporting the fire broke out before the landing.

I can't link to or quote that reference here under ThaiVisa rules. But the Post article is easy to find and read. Haven't seen much/any public follow-up on that issue, so hard to know what to make of it.

Then the day before, The Nation had this account from former BKK Governor candidate Kosit Suvinitjit, who was a passenger on the plane:

BEFORE LANDING, the pilot announced that the plane would be parked a fair way from the terminal building because the runway was under construction. Everything was normal while landing, then there was a sudden brake.

Kosit Suvinitjit

His account raises the issue about some kind of runway construction announcement being made by the pilot (which also hasn't been subsequently explained AFAIK), but seems to reflect no awareness of any fire issue until after the landing occurred.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/national/Eyewitness-accounts-30214520.html

It is absolutely perfectly NORMAL for a pilot to inform the pax "sorry I am afraid we will be parked away from the main terminal because of............" in this case clearly construction work which must be at the gates or the dispersal/taxi area leading to the gates. It warns the passengers it will be bus time. How would construction work on a runway affect where you will park at the terminal?? It doesn't does it. What is said in no way constitutes an emergency landing call or the declaration of an emergency.

Message to mods. Perhaps its worth thinking about 'freezing' this topic dues to guessing and speculation. Allow all involved to carry out their investigations. The reputation of the Carrier and Airbus are at risk here.

Of course, Thai Air was all over the Bangkok Post today explaining their version of what happened and how everything Thai Air did was correct and by the book, and how the fault rests with a "defective" component manufactured elsewhere. And maybe it does.

But it seems they didn't feel like waiting for "all involved to carry out their investigations" before pronouncing judgment. I'm not saying that's wrong... Just saying, it seems like there's going to be a lot of discussion and developments on this topic as the matter goes along.

You are one of the worst culprits doing it on here. Just stop. Everyone who is desperate to look like a smart ass is just looking like an ass.

It takes years and years of experience to move into Aircraft Accident Investigation, and years of experience after that to be leading a team, please everyone give it a rest. Nobody has died and the reason for the incident has yet to be fully determined. Already on these threads we have had comments that are tantamount to 'crap pilots, crap company, crap technicians, crap maintenance procedures, crap paint job' blah blah blah. We have people rushing over to PPRuNe and quoting info from there but even that is rubbish info as there are now many members on that site who are not Pilots. I have been a member for 15 years and It's success has lead to it's demise and it's complete lack of exclusivity. Can we just stop the rubbish analysis of what is thought to have happened..

[beechguy]

There has been plenty of rumour in the news including the emergency landing declaration. ATC apparently reported an engine on fire prior to landing. There were repairs being done to the runway etc.

I hope there will be a thorough investigation by competent personnel with no conflict of interest

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

The BKK Post, in their Sept 11 article on THAI Air backtracking on the airplane painting out issue, had a one-sentence reference to air traffic control at the airport reporting the fire broke out before the landing.

I can't link to or quote that reference here under ThaiVisa rules. But the Post article is easy to find and read. Haven't seen much/any public follow-up on that issue, so hard to know what to make of it.

Then the day before, The Nation had this account from former BKK Governor candidate Kosit Suvinitjit, who was a passenger on the plane:

BEFORE LANDING, the pilot announced that the plane would be parked a fair way from the terminal building because the runway was under construction. Everything was normal while landing, then there was a sudden brake.

Kosit Suvinitjit

His account raises the issue about some kind of runway construction announcement being made by the pilot (which also hasn't been subsequently explained AFAIK), but seems to reflect no awareness of any fire issue until after the landing occurred.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/national/Eyewitness-accounts-30214520.html

Actually a couple of days ago, Kosit Suvinitjit was praising the flight and cabin crew, so which passenger are you going to listen to in the complaint of the aircraft crew. Him, or the woman that was complaining about no crew available at the bottom of the slide. By the way, I wonder if she bothered to listen to the briefing before take off or bothered to look at the briefing card in the seat pocket in front of her, never mind listening to the instructions during the evacuation.

As to bitching about Thai Air ground crew, did they have their own buses and drivers to lock up people for 20 minutes? Were they granted clearance to just roam up and down the taxi ways, etc on a whim. Gee, do you think the people in the control tower may have had something to say about that?

And once the pax did make it to the terminal, do you think all the peronnel encountered were Thai Air employees?

As to the runway construction remarks, as in GentlemanJim's comments, wouldn't it make more sense to someone that knew about aviation, instead of a bullshitter, PR profesional, that perhaps the term used was ramp, not runway, when dicussing parking etc.

As said, you are a profesional PR guy, apparently knowing what you are talking about has nothing to do with your work.

Edited September 12, 2013 by beechguy

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

Sorry you don't like the news reports that have been made on the accident, and the quoted comments made by the participants, including those I recounted above.

I'm sure those who were on the airplane and ended up in the news media will be happy to have you telling them they're wrong and don't know what they're talking about.

BTW, it was a Thai man (not a woman as you claimed above) who was quoted in the BKK Post complaining that the cabin crew weren't at the bottom of the evacuation slides assisting passengers.

Edited September 12, 2013 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[beechguy]

Sorry you don't like the news reports that have been made on the accident, and the quoted comments made by the participants, including those I recounted above.

I'm sure those who were on the airplane and ended up in the news media will be happy to have you telling them they're wrong and don't know what they're talking about.

Well as they say, the truth hurts. But I guess you PR guys don't really have to worry about that.

[cloudhopper]

Message to mods. Perhaps its worth thinking about 'freezing' this topic dues to guessing and speculation. Allow all involved to carry out their investigations. The reputation of the Carrier and Airbus are at risk here.

Yeah please stop me before I guess and speculate again. Sorry for interfering with the official investigation - no doubt they are monitoring TVF for clues. Please freeze this thread before we wreak unimaginable damage on the aviation industry.

[jackspratt]

Message to mods. Perhaps its worth thinking about 'freezing' this topic dues to guessing and speculation. Allow all involved to carry out their investigations. The reputation of the Carrier and Airbus are at risk here.

Yeah please stop me before I guess and speculate again. Sorry for interfering with the official investigation - no doubt they are monitoring TVF for clues. Please freeze this thread before we wreak unimaginable damage on the aviation industry.

I don't think you need to concern yourself too much. Most readers with an IQ slightly better than their hat size would very quickly recognise that TVF is (overwhelmingly) a cesspit of uninformed, unintelligent, and far-too-often prejudiced comment.

[beechguy]

Message to mods. Perhaps its worth thinking about 'freezing' this topic dues to guessing and speculation. Allow all involved to carry out their investigations. The reputation of the Carrier and Airbus are at risk here.

Yeah please stop me before I guess and speculate again. Sorry for interfering with the official investigation - no doubt they are monitoring TVF for clues. Please freeze this thread before we wreak unimaginable damage on the aviation industry.

Wait, we can't freeze it yet, no one has come along and blamed Thaksin and the RedShirts. Short of UFOs and aliens I can't think of any thing else these guys haven't thrown at it.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

I wrote a couple of posts in the other thread -- Plane's landing gear had history of problems, Thai Airways says

with info and file attachments on some of the various European Aviation Safety Agency AirWorthiness Directives that have been issued on the problematic landing gear structure for Airbus A330s dating back to the 2007-2008 period of time, and quoting their history of how things have transpired.

The two posts are here and here.

This is an issue that's been going on with the Airbus jets for quite some time.

[itchybum]

Message to mods. Perhaps its worth thinking about 'freezing' this topic dues to guessing and speculation. Allow all involved to carry out their investigations. The reputation of the Carrier and Airbus are at risk here.

Get real...you think by stopping the chatter on hear it allows those involved to carry on in peace ?

I think you place too much importance on this gossiping place.