Releasing floating lanterns near Thai airports may be punishable by death

[Nepsydaz]

What happens every other year when these sky lanterns are released? I cannot remember it being a large aviation issue previously, but i stand to be corrected.

I guess two quotes would answer your question.

1. Prevention is better than the cure.

2. Better late than never.

Extreme as it is but it will surely help reducing such risks.....

[balford]

These floating lanterns could be just as dangerous as the lasers that are also mentioned. Why have the floating lanterns in Bangkok or south of the northern provinces anyway? It isn't part of the culture there, whereas in the north it is.

Despite it being part of the culture there are times when common sense should prevail and these activities could ideally take place southwest of the centres and with prevailing northeasterly winds.

But, the use of the lasers is also highly dangerous and anyone caught using them against aircraft severely dealt with - there have been some nasty incidents on Australia (and no doubt elsewhere) as a result of idiots using them.

Bob A. Relaxed in Lampang

[hawker9000]

Its going quite far of course.. however I feel that floating lanterns near an airport is a real dangerous thing. If an airplane crashes because of one many lives are lost. Making a threat with a big stick might prevent this from happening.

The lanterns are not capable of brining down a turbine or turbo prop aircraft. They are flimsy and even engine ingestion is unlikely to result in damage. They are a hazard to navigation in large numbers. Pilots would, I am sure, much prefer that they are kept from departure and approach paths. In the 8 years we have lived here I can no trecall a reported incident.

Drack the impaler might agree with the proposed sanctions. I can not.

Have to raise the BS pennant on that: "ingestion is unlikely to result in damage". A small screw or bolt or washer sucked up into a turbine engine is certainly enough to damage them, and the damage can be, but is not necessarily always, catastrophic. Carrier crews do walkdowns (flight deck crew line up literally shoulder to shoulder and walk the length of the flight deck, heads down, looking for & collecting any and every "foreign object" they find) before every flight ops cycle, day & night. It actually takes incredibly little to damage a turbine engine if sucked up into one while it's running, and yes, it's happened to me. I've seen plenty but haven't handled one of these lanterns and am not too familiar with their construction, but if there's any wire or metal involved, they're definitely a FOD hazard. Even wood. Even a candle. The blading in the engines is manufactured and installed to very tight specs, and very intolerant of any impact damage. Spinning at very high speed it's not impossible for most any solid object sucked up in the intake (the suction is more powerful than some realize) to knock one loose, and if that happens, it sails back through the remaining compressor stages, and then into the turbine stages, knocking off other blades & stuff as it goes. With blades knocked off, the spinning rotors immediately become unbalanced and, well, it's like knocking one blade off of a propeller while it's running...

Not saying every encounter's going to result in a crash or explosion or engine fire or something catastrophic. The degree of damage is rather unpredictable, and can range from the unnoticed to loss of power to an overheat condition to complete engine failure or fire to an explosion. I'd compare it to bird strikes (like the ones that silenced Sullenberger's engines causing him to have to ditch in the Hudson - he lost power in both engines). In my case I just got a Fire light and had to shutdown one engine and land. The engine was pulled & replaced.

Edited November 5, 2014 by hawker9000

[Dukeleto]

Surely this should read:

Selling floating lanterns near airports may be punishable by death.

How the hell are tourists going to be up to speed on the latest crack downs threatening the death sentence. Unless of course there will be an announcement at the end of the flight arriving into LOS...be aware that the releasing of lanterns near airports is punishable by death and so are drug offences etc etc.

Why are they not threatening the sellers of lanterns near airports??? Oh sorry they are Thai and must be allowed to sell the lanterns to tourists who then bare the whole responsibility for not lighting it and disposing of it safely. Ludicrous to the nth degree!

[kamahele]

While this activity is dangerous and not just to aircraft, the death penalty will not be applied unless it is proven that someone was killed. Of course, this is Thailand and who knows but I think this was an overreaction or perhaps a translation error maybe.

[mojorison]

Personally, this is a great initiative on the general's behalf. It's in everyone's best interests without doubt. I think though he could have, and probably should have gone harder and cancelled the whole thing. I mean seriously... what's the point anyway? It endangers all and sundry, and let's face it, it is just another party. Any thoughts on new years eve? Cancel or not? Discuss.

[Shamrock 1234]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

It happens every other year when these sky lanterns are released? I cannot remember it being a large aviation issue previously, but i stand to be corrected.

It has certainly been an issue on Koh Samui. Hotels were asked to inform guests to stop releasing lanterns anywhere near the airport. I am told it is illegal, but they are still being sold and released, so evidently the law is not being enforced.

[wabothai]

Since when can a police general threaten with death penalty?

[Interman]

Simple answer for the simpletons, this was not such a big problem 10-12 years ago as flights were few. But now flights are plenty and have been cancelled and monetary losses pile up, hence government looking out for big business again. Do one not get this in the day of social media?

[wabothai]

May be tourism spenditure is up when there are no flights for a particular night. The aircrew can take a holiday, more hotel nights, less worries, more parties, more hapiness for the people. What the f...do you guys want?

Stop airtrafic for one or 2 nights and stop threatening with the deathpenalty.

[spermwhale]

Are they just making laws ad hoc or is he talking out of his ass? Changes to the law like that can't be done without a bill going through Parliament.

[soalbundy]

ban air flights during the festival

sorted

you don't have shares in an airline company do you

[chooka]

Just saw a Thai tourism commercial on T.V in Melbourne promoting Thailand with thousands of these lanterns being released by ladies in Thai Airways uniforms.

[finnomick]

Releasing floating lanterns near airports may be punishable by death

and or a 500baht fine

......200 baht if you don't want a receipt

[soalbundy]

Are they just making laws ad hoc or is he talking out of his ass? Changes to the law like that can't be done without a bill going through Parliament.

you have parliament, i have M16

[finnomick]

The maximum penalty would seriously impact upon the 900+ already on death row the latest of which is the railway employee who raped and murdered a 13 year old girl on an overnight sleeper train whilst he was under the influence of drugs. Maybe they'd actually have to start carrying out the sentences to accommodate the sudden influx of people facing the death penalty for releasing a lantern -- there'd be tens of thousands in the queue. But of course, T.I.T.

[evadgib]

Statistically speaking, you have a greater chance of being hit by a bird which can cause problems to an aircraft than a lantern.

...unless you're taking off or landing at an airport with a temple and/or water within a 5km radius of the flight path during the hours of darkness @ Nov full moon.

"Look Mum, Those fire flies are enormous!"

[finnomick]

ban air flights during the festival

sorted

Ban water at Song Khran-----ban tourists to save death and rape-------ban suspect pilots-----

Thailand, the land of bans -- and hubs -- and graft -- whatever next ?

[toooa]

Don't tell ISIS the big secret, they'll have floating lanterns up to try and knock down warplanes coming over to bomb them...

[jethro69]

Releasing floating lanterns near airports may be punishable by death

and or a 500baht fine

What happens if you don't have the 500 bath handy?? You got shot twice???

[toooa]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

If one day an airliner goes down and kill every passenger onboard, I think everybody's opinions will change whether punishment is too harsh or not.

I'd like to propose a little wager then...

[f0xxee]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

What happens every other year when these sky lanterns are released? I cannot remember it being a large aviation issue previously, but i stand to be corrected.

---deleted----

Its going quite far of course.. however I feel that floating lanterns near an airport is a real dangerous thing. If an airplane crashes because of one many lives are lost. Making a threat with a big stick might prevent this from happening.

Just how many aircraft have crashed during the large number of years that Loy Krathong and air travel have co existed? What is the problem with doing exactly as has happened in the last few years like rescheduling flights etc? Could it be that with the junta in control, the various airlines have decided to chance their arm and are lobbying furiously so that we now end up with these knee jerk reactions?

So you want to wait for one to get sucked into a turbine and then say "Typical Thailand, they should ban the balloons around airports?" Just because it hasn't happened, doesn't mean it can't or won't. This story is probably more relevant to Chiang Mai, where the Airport is in the city, and there have been issues over the last few years. From memory they banned balloon launching for a few hours during peak flight times.

The lasers around airports are also an issue.

This is why I love Thai-Visa, no matter what point is put across, the negative swine always manage to find something to whine about.

[Fat Haggis]

How would they know which lantern was yours to execute you ?

[SGD]

Sensationalist headline to flog crap from the owners and puppets of Thai Visa.

Shame on your once good board.

[MILT]

After reading this I wouldn't be caught dead lighting and releasing a balloon!

[MILT]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Sensationalist headline to flog crap from the owners and puppets of Thai Visa.

Shame on your once good board.

Who's a muppet?

[MILT]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Sensationalist headline to flog crap from the owners and puppets of Thai Visa.

Shame on your once good board.

I'm a Muppet not a Puppet!

[55Jay]

Obviously passenger safety is a high priority but this announcement only serves to create dis-information and the frankly stupid notion that a paper lantern which ways a few hundred grams could bring down a passenger airliner weighing several hundred tons.

Just remember that passenger engines are tested in the following ways before being certified safe for use;

1) have over 4.5 tons of water are sprayed into the engine in 1 minute

2) 3/4 of a ton a hail is sprayed into an engine in 1 minute

3) the infamous frozen chicken gun - A frozen chicken is fired into a engine

4) designed to withstand the worst of a lightening strike (if that is at all possible)

All these test need to be passed repeatedly over a test period which averages at least 2 years (probably more) before the engines are used.

As a previous poster mentioned birds are more dangerous than paper lanterns to aircraft.

While I don't disagree with the content of your engine testing information, I think you are missing the point.

To not regulate the release of floating, or other flying things, into the controlled airspace near airports, really does "fly" in the face of modern day common sense and aviation safety standards. Wouldn't you agree?

Remember the threats by the residents around Swampy, upset about aircraft noise? Think it was around 2007/08 or so.

Competently agree that flying things require regulation especially around an airport . I disagree with the idea that they are 'highly dangerous' to aircraft.

Excellent. You included the word "competently" so I would ask you further, why is it that flying things, including balloons, kites and lantern releases, need to be regulated and controlled in these types of areas?

[jamiesilver]

its very dangerous not just for aviation but for wooden houses and dry grass - as beautiful as they look i think its rather a stupid and selfish idea to let a flame loose into the sky.
I also think its very dangerous because it doesnt matter where they are releases they will drift and travel for many killometers.
They have wire mesh inside and if that gets sucked into a jet engine, i think it will do more damage than a pigeon.

[happysanook]

---- deleted ------

Its going quite far of course.. however I feel that floating lanterns near an airport is a real dangerous thing. If an airplane crashes because of one many lives are lost. Making a threat with a big stick might prevent this from happening.

Just how many aircraft have crashed during the large number of years that Loy Krathong and air travel have co existed? What is the problem with doing exactly as has happened in the last few years like rescheduling flights etc? Could it be that with the junta in control, the various airlines have decided to chance their arm and are lobbying furiously so that we now end up with these knee jerk reactions?

Ah PTP logic.. no planes have crashed so its safe to light laterns around airports. I guess you think driving drunk is ok too. I mean most of the time nothing happens so its ok.

I think its a sensible thing to put a stop to an unsafe practice, the punishment is overkill but could be seen as a deterrent. (i somehow doubt it would ever put in practice )

This would make sense.... If it was actually dangerous.