Releasing floating lanterns near Thai airports may be punishable by death

[SOTIRIOS]

...as for all other crimes..........

[daveAustin]

What next, floating krathongs near ferry ports punishable by 10 years hard labour?

[vogie]

how close is "near"?

5km, 10km, the parking lot??

Try it and see

[Time Traveller]

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.

If an airline goes down because of a floating paper lantern, I think the blame needs to lie with the airline manufacturer, not the lantern flyer. But what do I know, I'm just a trained engineer.

This story really sounds like the government is about to catch someone they want silenced in the coming days under the cover of "national security".

[Time Traveller]

Personally, I'm more worried that thousands of yellow shirt protestors will overwhelm the poor airport security in Bangkok and take control of the place allowing any terrorist to do whatever the want to jeopordise aircraft than I am about floating lanterns.

Edited November 5, 2014 by Time Traveller

[F4UCorsair]

Very few lanterns ever reach a height that would be remotely dangerous to an aeroplane and even if an aeroplane did hit one I cannot imagine there would be any serious consequences. These are flimsy constructions with a candle for propulsion. Are we seriously expected to believe that a 747 can be brought down by a candle?

Come to think of it I am now concerned about flying at any time if that is the case.

Death penalty my rump.

Not a 4 engined aircraft, but a two engined aircraft such as a 737.

Non pilots don't realize that if one engine fails, in a twin engined aircraft, that about 85% of climb capability is lost, and that could translate to as little as a few hundred feet per minute. If it happened at low level, the crew must fly the aircraft very, very accurately. The difference between climbing and descending, at maximum weight, can be as little as 1 degree in pitch. Pitch up by more than a degree, speed washes off so fast it's frightening, and you risk a stall; let the pitch fall by a degree and you are descending. It's that critical.

As pilots know, the back end of the lift/drag curve is a very dangerous place to be, and to recover lost speed can chew up a lot of miles, so if terrain is a factor, what seems almost harmless, the launching of a paper lantern, takes on a whole new perspective.

Edited November 5, 2014 by F4UCorsair

[Businessman]

As long as they are dishing out the death penalty ... why don't we add to the list of offences...

corruption

dangerous driving

overstay....

[flyingdoc]

Logical but clearly overkill ! Who advises the Junta on elementary psychology?

[Dannyboy666]

BS, 500 baht Fine...

[Bluespunk]

"According to Acting Provincial Police Chief Region 1 Pol. Maj. Gen. Amnuay Nimmano, such action is deemed very dangerous to the safety of aircraft and is a violation of the Act on Certain Offenses Against Air Navigation B.E. 2521 (1978)."

Soon to be former " Acting Provincial Police Chief Region 1" if he makes any more pronouncements like this.

Maybe he should be recognized for common sense and bringing this to the attention of people who clearly think it cannot pose a risk to launch things in the sky around an airport.

Never fly sky lanterns within 5 miles of an airport.

http://www.skylanterns.us/Sky-Lantern-Safety-and-Usage-s/83.htm

Sanya, the city in China where paper lanterns were first created, put a stop to lantern lighting, after flights at a nearby http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/feb/19/sky-lanterns-raise-safety-issue-they-go-up-then-co/#ixzz3IB2ee0uw

Sky lanterns when released into the air, besides being a fire hazard, can pose a hazard to aircraft operating in the vicinity... For safety of air navigation, the release of sky lanterns into the air is not allowed within 5 kilometres of Seletar Airport or Changi Airport

http://www.caas.gov.sg/caas/en/Regulations/Airspace_Management/Air_Navigation_Hazard_x_Obstruction_Policies/Release_Sky_Lantern.html

In Great Britain the use of sky lanterns is not illegal, but notification requirements by the Civil Aviation Authority are set out in CAP 736, and endangering an aircraft is punishable with up to 2 years imprisonment and a £5,000 fine.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sky_lantern#Legal_status

True, mind don't notice the death penalty mentioned anywhere. How slack these foreign countries are.

Ok sarcasm aside, I do see that releasing lanterns near airports is stupid and should be stopped.

However ludicrous threats are not the way to go about it.

Education and organising events in safe zones might be better.

Fining anyone breaking the restrictions no matter how few lanterns they release near airports and effective policing around the exclusion zone would be better than the heavy stick approach.

Either that or just ban the whole event.

Edited November 5, 2014 by Bluespunk

[riclag]

Is this another one of those Thailand is switching over to driving on the right side of the road,converting steering wheels to the left side and raising the retirement age up from 50 to 55 posts? J C

[JOC]

Logical but clearly overkill ! Who advises the Junta on elementary psychology?

Chalerm??

[55Jay]

Following a pilot's report of spotting a Bang Fai rocket soaring at 10,000 feet (3,000 meters) above ground without advance warning, the Transport Ministry has expressed concern about the launching of festival rockets.



In at least one area it has created a "red zone" where pilots are urged to take special care in looking out for the rockets at certain times of the year.

The threat to Thai aviation from Bang Fai skyrockets - traditionally launched skywards by Northeastern people during May-June - had prompted agencies to meet on April 24 to campaign against the rockets and highlight the danger they pose to aircraft, people's lives and property, and to the country's image.

Thailand has no regulations or laws directly enforcing control of the Bang Fai so far. It would also be hard for local administration bodies to change people's attitudes to Bang Fai launches as they involve beliefs and traditions.

Nevertheless, the April 24 meeting agreed to: 1) promote mutual understanding and awareness about the Bang Fai rockets' danger to aviation among state agencies, local bodies and residents of targeted areas so the public can observe guidelines and safety measures; 2) find preventive measures to reduce the danger posed by Bang Fai to aviation; 3) create a cooperative network among related agencies with participation from communities and residents in targeted areas to ensure Bang Fai launches are done according to set guidelines; 4) ask people not to light Bang Fai rockets in aviation safety zones where planes land and take-off on or around airports; and 5) limit the size and manner of launch of the rockets to eliminate the danger to aviation.

The resolution was drawn up by the Transport Ministry to promote understanding in northeastern provinces that hold Bang Fai fairs, starting with Ubon Ratchathani.

The ministry, in a recent seminar, said Bang Fai launches in the Northeast provinces of Ubon Ratchathani, Roi Et, Udon Thani, Khon Kaen and Buri Ram from 2010-2012 had led to a Notice to Air Men (NOTAM) announcement for pilots to be extra cautious during that time. In Ubon Ratchathani, there were 247 NOTAMs issued in 2010, 487 NOTAMs in 2011, and 354 NOTAMs in 2012, the ministry said.

The ministry has asked people not to launch large Bang Fai rockets that can reach beyond 5,000 feet (1,500 metres) above ground.

[55Jay]

From around June of last year, 2013:

The Transport Ministry has threatened to invoke the death penalty on anyone who endangers aviation with homemade rockets for bung fai or floating lanterns used in many festivals.

The ministry also sent a stern warning to community radio operators, alleging that some of them are using frequencies used between pilots and air traffic controllers. It did not threaten them with death, however.

The move was due to rising concern about aviation safety during festivals, and because community radio operators have ignored previous ministry warnings.

Pol Gen Wichean Potephosree, former national police chief who now is permanent secretary for transport, on Tuesday reminded launchers of locally made rockets and floating lanterns that the death penalty could be invoked on anyone who "causes danger to aircraft" under the 2008 Aviation Transport Law.

Radio frequency obstruction is subject to 15 years' jail term and a fine up to 30,000 baht, he added.

"Bung Fai, floating lanterns and community radio frequencies are posing problems for air traffic and could cause accidents. We will stiffen law enforcement,'' Pol Gen Wichean said. No accident has so far been reported.

Thailand has 2,000 legally registered community radio stations and another 5,000 stations which operate outside regulations. Most have very local coverage, using low-powered transmitters.

The Department of Civil Aviation claimed that the most serious concern was the illegal radio stations. Some have interfered with air traffic controllers because of their substandard equipment and transmitters, department chief Woradej Harnprasert said.

[culicine]

Releasing floating lanterns near airports may be punishable by death

and or a 500baht fine

AND for poor people OR for rich...gotta love these laws. Does one get a choice?

[Beetlejuice]

I don't believe it........

They are concerned about the safety of the people and posters are mumbling about being over the top and knee jerk reactions.

What does it take to satisfy you people?

I don't think the majority are disputing the safety factors more the penalties, which are waaaaaay OTT but in line with many recent pronouncements from the current incumbents.

So if some idiots let off lighted balloons near to airports negligently and knowingly placing lives at risk then cause a tragic accident by bringing down a plane having catastrophic consequences with the loss of hundreds of lives, would you not classify that as murder?

I am please the hear that the authorities are taking the safety of airline passengers seriously and so should the participants. They know the score, place lives at risk, pay the price perhaps the ultimate price at their own risk and discretion.

[chotthee]

Another out fit for police to scam tourist.

Sell them the lantern, than arrest them for releasing it, unless pocket money is paid.

How do you know if you are near or far from the airport?

[phil2407]

How exactly are they going to arrest people? DNA the lanterns or dust for fingerprints? At least tell us how far we have to be from airport to release them and does the wind direction matter?

[maidee]

1st of april or army boys completly going nuts ??

death penalty ?

thank god for all the rapists, murderers, major drug dealers, human trafficers out there ....

[Commerce]

Very few lanterns ever reach a height that would be remotely dangerous to an aeroplane and even if an aeroplane did hit one I cannot imagine there would be any serious consequences. These are flimsy constructions with a candle for propulsion. Are we seriously expected to believe that a 747 can be brought down by a candle?

Come to think of it I am now concerned about flying at any time if that is the case.

Death penalty my rump.

Not a 4 engined aircraft, but a two engined aircraft such as a 737.

Non pilots don't realize that if one engine fails, in a twin engined aircraft, that about 85% of climb capability is lost, and that could translate to as little as a few hundred feet per minute. If it happened at low level, the crew must fly the aircraft very, very accurately. The difference between climbing and descending, at maximum weight, can be as little as 1 degree in pitch. Pitch up by more than a degree, speed washes off so fast it's frightening, and you risk a stall; let the pitch fall by a degree and you are descending. It's that critical.

As pilots know, the back end of the lift/drag curve is a very dangerous place to be, and to recover lost speed can chew up a lot of miles, so if terrain is a factor, what seems almost harmless, the launching of a paper lantern, takes on a whole new perspective.

Absolutely agreed, and as can be seen, using a single engine makes it difficult to reverse thrust in a straight line; hence, it is seen the pilot follows procedure and uses the grass aside the runway, such as here. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9KhZwsYtNDE

Those who still maintain a bird strike does not affect an engine, after suggesting it cannot, need to think again. As for wire caught up and ingested by an engine thinking it cannot lead to engine failure; you also need to think again.

[Toknarok]

Does anybody think that a paper lantern weighing just a few ounces at most poses a serious threat threat to a modern aircraft weighing several tons whose engines are specifically designed to withstand strikes from large birds? The pointing of laser beams is another matter and should be rigorously stamped out.

[mok199]

these rediculous festivals and all the garbage they generate,is it really worth it...cant thais just enjoy the day without dumping water or floating garbage out to see for the marine life to choke on...its 2014...stop the pollution already....and while we are at it...no more of the worst rock and roll on the planet please stop the music....sawadee no crap

[climbertrev1]

Releasing floating lanterns near airports may be punishable by death

and or a 500baht fine

Depending on who you are and who you are connected with. If you are rich you will not have a problem with the law as with everything else in this country.

[ukrules]

Well this is the country where someone picking a few wild mushrooms can be sentenced by to 30 years in prison for their trouble by a fully educated and probably still serving judge.

[wilcopops]

Why do people feel the need to make fools of themselves in public by making these types of announcements? This from an police force that appearsvto have difficulty in enforcing such mundane offences as drink driving, why make so much of this one particular offence?

Edited November 5, 2014 by wilcopops

[Local Drunk]

It isn't a question of if but when. It's a bit like the Skytrain where there are posted warnings "Do not Lean Against the Doors" but they do so with the same casual ease as when they mindlessly jump in front of a car to cross a six lane highway. Most Thais don't seem to worry about safety of themselves, others or death.

The proposed law seems seems appropriate to me.

[55Jay]

Does anybody think that a paper lantern weighing just a few ounces at most poses a serious threat threat to a modern aircraft weighing several tons whose engines are specifically designed to withstand strikes from large birds? The pointing of laser beams is another matter and should be rigorously stamped out.

You should look back a couple pages, read a post from Hawker9000.

Do you really think a jet engine continues to operate normally after ingesting a large bird?

[Local Drunk]

Well this is the country where someone picking a few wild mushrooms can be sentenced by to 30 years in prison for their trouble by a fully educated and probably still serving judge.

I agree with you about the mushroom pickers... but they weren't going to bring down an A-380 or disrupt traffic at a major airport doing that.

[FrankOff]

Apparently the "no-fly" lantern radius is 18km for Chiang Mai international. In past years during this festival the sky is easily littered with 10's of thousands of lanterns and I often wondered about the aviation safety issues,but I've never heard the topic approached from any official standing.

Now with the threat of "death-pentality" in the air (pun-intended) it will be interesting to see if any heads will roll....ah, the trails and tribulations of a Feudal-society

[Local Drunk]

Does anybody think that a paper lantern weighing just a few ounces at most poses a serious threat threat to a modern aircraft weighing several tons whose engines are specifically designed to withstand strikes from large birds? The pointing of laser beams is another matter and should be rigorously stamped out.

You should look back a couple pages, read a post from Hawker9000.

Do you really think a jet engine continues to operate normally after ingesting a large bird?

@55Jay... Forget it. It's beyond their comprehension. They could google bird hits but they won't. They could think of how the Red Shirt protests 2010 got the army helicopters away from their protest sites. They won't. Aircraft can fly in the most difficult and impossible weather... but they aren't designed to HIT THINGS!