Tiger Air Singapore seeks emergency landing at Suvarnabhumi airport

[webfact]

Tiger Air Singapore seeks emergency landing at Suvarnabhumi airport

BANGKOK: -- Tiger Air Singapore plane made an emergency landing at Suvarnabhumi airport this morning after one Singaporean passenger died while on the flight from Chiang Mai to Singapore.

The 58-year-old Singaporean man was taking his family of five back home from Chiang Mai with his Thai wife on Flight PR 2177.

His Thai wife told airport officials at Suvarnabhumi airport that her husband has personal chronic sickness.

While on the plane, her husband succumbed to his chronic sickness, forcing the pilot to seek emergency landing at Suvarnabhumi airport for medical help.

But he died on the plane.

His body was later taken out for autopsy at the Police General Hospital.

Source: http://englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/tiger-air-singapore-seeks-emergency-landing-at-suvarnabhumi-airport

-- Thai PBS 2016-01-13

[webfact]

Passenger Death Forces Tigerair to Land at BKK
By Sasiwan Mokkhasen
Staff Reporter


Tigerair 2177 heading from Chiang Mai to Singapore made an emergency landing Tuesday at Suvarnabhumi Airport.

BANGKOK — A Tigerair flight out of Chiang Mai had to make an emergency landing Tuesday evening after a passenger died on board.

After departing at 4:36pm, flight TR2177 was forced to land at Suvarnabhumi Airport at 6pm after Singaporean national Seet Ngow Chai died en route to returning home to Singapore.

Full story: http://www.khaosodenglish.com/detail.php?newsid=1452661501


-- Khaosod English 2016-01-13

[Toknarok]

It's estimated that at any one time half a million people are travelling by air. It's not surprising therefore that this happens. What is strange in this case is that the pilot decided to divert, usually they don't, certainly when the person is sick but not when deceased. https://www.yahoo.com/travel/what-happens-when-someone-dies-on-a-plane-9829169

[WhizBang]

Not really sure why they had to divert to Bangkok. Since the man was already dead, would proceeding to Singapore not have been the better choice? If he was not dead at the time, but in serious trouble, then I do see diverting, so maybe that was the case. As with all Thai reporting, the devil is in the details (or lack thereof).

Edited January 13, 2016 by WhizBang

[Pimay1]

Not really sure why they had to divert to Bangkok. Since the man was already dead, would proceeding to Singapore not have been the better choice? If he was not dead at the time, but in serious trouble, then I do see diverting, so maybe that was the case. As with all Thai reporting, the devil is in the details (or lack thereof).

Maybe they diverted to Bangkok because the plane was still in Thailand airspace. There may be a rule concerning this. Or maybe not.

[outsider]

Not really sure why they had to divert to Bangkok. Since the man was already dead, would proceeding to Singapore not have been the better choice? If he was not dead at the time, but in serious trouble, then I do see diverting, so maybe that was the case. As with all Thai reporting, the devil is in the details (or lack thereof).

Maybe they diverted to Bangkok because the plane was still in Thailand airspace. There may be a rule concerning this. Or maybe not.

How about the fact that most people would not like to fly around or share the same space with a dead body (with all due respect to the deceased, RIP). I mean, it will certainly be quite unpleasant if it happened on a flight I am in.

Then again, I'm just guessing. Maybe pilots, airline stafffers or avaiation professionals in TVF can shed more light on this.

[scorecard]

Not really sure why they had to divert to Bangkok. Since the man was already dead, would proceeding to Singapore not have been the better choice? If he was not dead at the time, but in serious trouble, then I do see diverting, so maybe that was the case. As with all Thai reporting, the devil is in the details (or lack thereof).

Maybe they diverted to Bangkok because the plane was still in Thailand airspace. There may be a rule concerning this. Or maybe not.

Thirty years ago I was on an Alitalia flight Melbourne to Bangkok. Halfway across Australia the pilot asked if there was a doctor on board. There was and they moved the sick passenger (an Italian national returning from a holiday in Australia) to a crew area.

Just before leaving Australian air space the doctor declared death. The aircrraft did a big U turn and headed back to Melbourne (estimate 4 hours).

The pilot explained carefully and very clearly in Italian and good English that he had no choice because of Australian and international law other than to return to Melbourne.

Lots of formalities completed in Melbourne and 3 hours later resumed the flight to Bangkok. Other passengers not allowed to disembark, had to just sit it out on the plane, no refreshments served.

[hstamm]

Not really sure why they had to divert to Bangkok. Since the man was already dead, would proceeding to Singapore not have been the better choice? If he was not dead at the time, but in serious trouble, then I do see diverting, so maybe that was the case. As with all Thai reporting, the devil is in the details (or lack thereof).

You need permission to overfly a (any) country with a dead body.

[impulse]

Who is legally authorized to declare the victim dead in Thailand?

If nobody on the scene (or in the plane), I imagine they have to be treated as viable, or there is huge liability- civil and criminal.

[springheeled jack]

not a great age to succumb to a chronic illness I suffered from ibs I am sure most of you know what ibs is long haul flights were the worst it got so bad I had to stop travelling with this chap it could be anything .

[biplanebluey]

Who is legally authorized to declare the victim dead in Thailand?

If nobody on the scene (or in the plane), I imagine they have to be treated as viable, or there is huge liability- civil and criminal.

Surely if he was dead it would be obvious---- secondly if no'one was there to give him any sort of resussitation then there is no chance of his revival---- thirdly I always thought the pilot was in complete control and so If he said to carry on to Singy thats what they would give him clearance for------- all these rules were laid down years ago

[Prbkk]

It's not the healthiest environment, particularly for someone with a chronic illness. Pressurised at about 5,000 feet ( maybe a bit less?), not great for someone with cardiovascular or pulmonary issues. A calculated risk.

[titanio82]

Not really sure why they had to divert to Bangkok. Since the man was already dead, would proceeding to Singapore not have been the better choice? If he was not dead at the time, but in serious trouble, then I do see diverting, so maybe that was the case. As with all Thai reporting, the devil is in the details (or lack thereof).

Maybe they diverted to Bangkok because the plane was still in Thailand airspace. There may be a rule concerning this. Or maybe not.

Hopefully no rules for that as a forced landing in Irak or Afganistan would not so mch be preferred.

[beano2274]

the pilot did not seek to make an emergency landing, he made an emergency landing.

[SOTIRIOS]

.....R.I.P.......

...'chronic illness'.....

[NeverSure]

Would the pilots and crew have the ability/authority to pronounce someone dead, or would their job be to rush to medical aid?

[Basil B]

Would the pilots and crew have the ability/authority to pronounce someone dead, or would their job be to rush to medical aid?

It does happen a lot, maybe he was unwell and the pilots diverted, by the time the plane had landed he was dead...

I my opinion, preferable a doctor should be the person to confirm death, but there again no doctor present then the pilots or purser should be in a position to assume death following certain guidelines, and in IMHO that should be only after 20 mins of no pulse and CPR should be administered wherever possible.