Air crash kills three in Nakon Phanom - leading provincial figure among dead

[ChrisY1]

There's a lot of uninformed comment in this thread about flying from what can only be non pilots, or very ignorant pilots.

If you don't know what you're talking about, don't become google rated. Wait for an informed person to post.

Flying seems a little lile tapping a keg............ everybody thinks he's an expert, even if they've never done it.

Non pilot.....yes uninformed......but did the research both here and in Australia......Thailand fails badly...!

If you're an informed person, then it would be so beneficial to us non fliers, so please enlighten us prospective fliers on the right path to take in Thailand........

Edited June 2, 2016 by ChrisY1

[swerver]

A twin engine plane, most people learn in a single engine such as the Cessna

Which Cessna??? 120 - 140 - 150??? All trainer planes.

In my days we started flight trainign in a J3Cup. And when having succesfully mastered takeoffs, spotlanding and spin recovery we moved on to the Cessna 120. Wow Cessna 120 that had an electric starter motor instead of the J3Cup having to swing the prop to start the engine. These were the real days of learning flying, nothing like that today anymore.

[wvavin]

Ummm.......so nothing on faulty brakes this time.

[Brer Fox]

Isn't there a morning flight by Air Asia flight out of Nakon Phanom to Don Mueang? Was he that important that he couldn't catch that flight.

[ableguy]

A twin engine plane, most people learn in a single engine such as the Cessna

They were not training anyone if you can read.

This aircraft was used for pilots with a single engine rating to get his multi engine rating.

[flyingdoc]

Let's wait for some real facts. There is a lot of idle uninformed speculation being bandied around here! RIP all 3 !

[Dumbastheycome]

Worked at a MRO in Tijuana a ways back. New big hangar then, state of the art. Half the bolts in the roof joists were missing ( sold off by building contractor) causing sagging in the structure to where none of the personel doors in the building would close. Witnessed some frightening "repairs" on those commercial passenger aircraft. Thailand reminds me a lot of Mexico. Just sayin.

Valuejet was under FAA jurisdiction, as was a little heard of cargo feeder to FedEx called Tahoma air.

Chilling reading the Tahoma air crash, cockpit voice recording, that left three dead in a cornfield.

They flew old Convairs. The crashed one ( one of two crashes for Tahoma) was just out of C check, the horizontal trim was rigged backwArds.

Paperwork pencil whipped. Again, in America.

Here? Forget about it.

So a contractor in Mexico scammed on the construction of a building.Did that contractor have anything to do with aircraft servicing? Anywhere? Thailand?

Negative speculation is usually the product of those Honest Johns with negative motivation.

[OccamsRazor]

A twin engine plane, most people learn in a single engine such as the Cessna

Which Cessna??? 120 - 140 - 150??? All trainer planes.

In my days we started flight trainign in a J3Cup. And when having succesfully mastered takeoffs, spotlanding and spin recovery we moved on to the Cessna 120. Wow Cessna 120 that had an electric starter motor instead of the J3Cup having to swing the prop to start the engine. These were the real days of learning flying, nothing like that today anymore.

Never heard of a J3Cup, now a Piper J3 Cub I have.

[Dumbastheycome]

There's a lot of uninformed comment in this thread about flying from what can only be non pilots, or very ignorant pilots.

If you don't know what you're talking about, don't become google rated. Wait for an informed person to post.

Flying seems a little lile tapping a keg............ everybody thinks he's an expert, even if they've never done it.

Non pilot.....yes uninformed......but did the research both here and in Australia......Thailand fails badly...!

If you're an informed person, then it would be so beneficial to us non fliers, so please enlighten us prospective fliers on the right path to take in Thailand........

Thailand fails? Or Private Flying Clubs and Schools? Any worse than elsewhere? Internet research?

It is possible I could use internet research to confirm the fact that the majority of people are at dire risk of death from a rare organism that rips the fundamentals out of the fundamentals and quote internet chapter and verse in support. And I am definately not an expert in fundamental ripping.

[Grusa]

There's a lot of uninformed comment in this thread about flying from what can only be non pilots, or very ignorant pilots.

If you don't know what you're talking about, don't become google rated. Wait for an informed person to post.

Flying seems a little lile tapping a keg............ everybody thinks he's an expert, even if they've never done it.

Non pilot.....yes uninformed......but did the research both here and in Australia......Thailand fails badly...!

If you're an informed person, then it would be so beneficial to us non fliers, so please enlighten us prospective fliers on the right path to take in Thailand........

I have a lot to say on this topic, mostly unacceptable to the Thai authorities and to Thai trained pilots.

1. There is alot to be learned from the published photographs, even without any background information:

The left propellor has one undamaged blade, which is fully feathered. This indicates thatbthe engine was not rotating at the time of impact, and the feathering indicates that the automatic systems had detected an engine failure and shut it down in flight. The automatic feathering is to reduce drag, probably this automatic shut down, it seems there was no time for pilot input.

2. The right propellor, in a photo which shows a part of the spinner and a blade root, shows the blade sheared off, in a non-feathered position. This shows that engine was running at time of impact.

3. The nose gear strut is extended, and there is part of the left landing gear also extended. This indicates that the landing gear had not been retracted after take-off. This is normally done very soon after take-off, to reduce drag. So, no time to do it!

4. There are no signs of a landing skid through the field. The impact was entirely vertical. The aircraft must therefore have stalled at some height and dropped in vertically. This is supported by the fact that all the wreckage is in a confined area, with no spread whatsoever. The distance from the airfield, as reported, would support this conclusion.

5. The damage shows practically no damage to the canopy and upper fuselage, and major disruption of lower fuselage, engine nacelles, wings, empennage (tailplane parts)- one wing has completely delaminated, the other broken, with auxilliary fuel tank exposed. - the desult of vertical, not horizontal, impact. The restraint system in these aircraft is of the inertial reel system, like a car, which offers some protection against sudden horizontal deceleration, but none against vertical impact. Not relevant, except that if the aircraft had experienced a controlled forced landing it would be entirely surviveable.

6. There is no sign whatsoever of fire. No charring, no smoke stains. Not to say there could not have been a false, or even valid, fire warning.

IMHO, there was an unexpected (they all are!) failure of the left engine after take-off, a situation all pilots are supposed to be trained to cope with. To fly a multi-engine plane, extra training and ratings (to which I do not aspire) are required - note well, REQUIRED. This aircraft is well able to continue to fly after take-off with only one engine, IF PROPERLY HANDLED, and the bad engine will shut down and feather automatically.....no panic! Even if both engines fail, (or in a single engine plane, the only one fails), pilots are trained to land straight ahead....even if the plane is wrecked, and mostly they are not, the occupants survive, with minimal damage to third parties persons and property. Obviously the bigger the aeroplane, the greater them potential for damages. A properly handled aircraft - even an Airbus, never mind a well respected light aircraft - will never stall into the ground, with our without engines. According to the report, this aircraft crashed near the PTT gas station, this is close to the airfield, but well left of the runway heading, so a left hand turn out - perfectly normal procedure, or a desperate attempt to find an emergency field for landing.

The cause of the engine failure is not obvious, the nature of the aviation environment here is such that it will never be known beyond doubt. The nature of the sequelae makes it obvious that errors were made in handling the emergency, with fatal consequences. Maybe fatalities would have ocurred even if it had been appropriately handled. What is entirely sure is that the authorities here are incapable of investigating such an accident competently, no blame will be attached to the root cause: corrupt management of training, competency, licencing, and aircraft maintenance. Blame will be shifted to those least likely to be responsible, and they do not have indigenous propensities.

[bbbbooboo]

Private aircrafts, aero-clubs and Thailand. A mix I would never, ever try.

+1

[mike324]

its bad enough that the bigger airlines cant even maintain their aircraft with qualified aircraft engineers & technicians... Any light aircraft or private jets here you would be seriously dicing with death if you can trust that they did service the aircraft properly...RIP another sad case of Thailand not being able to apply laws or rules or have any insight as to what health and safety regulation and responsibilities are actually for... Mai pen Rai syndrome!

Nonsense. Big airlines are controlled by the international aviation authorities. If they violate the safety regulations, they are blacklisted and banned. Also valid for Thai operators.

THAI airways violated a couple last year and was not banned after they made some changes....they were not following the international aviation procedures for many years

[F4UCorsair]

A twin engine plane, most people learn in a single engine such as the Cessna

Which Cessna??? 120 - 140 - 150??? All trainer planes.

In my days we started flight trainign in a J3Cup. And when having succesfully mastered takeoffs, spotlanding and spin recovery we moved on to the Cessna 120. Wow Cessna 120 that had an electric starter motor instead of the J3Cup having to swing the prop to start the engine. These were the real days of learning flying, nothing like that today anymore.

Why would swinging a prop be "the real days of learning flying"??? I don't understand.

I often hear reference to "the good old days", and in my opinion, there is no such thing. Times just get better and better, and we're seeing huge improvements/gains in every field of endeavour. Why the heck would anybody want to return to what now seems primitive??

[F4UCorsair]

its bad enough that the bigger airlines cant even maintain their aircraft with qualified aircraft engineers & technicians... Any light aircraft or private jets here you would be seriously dicing with death if you can trust that they did service the aircraft properly...RIP another sad case of Thailand not being able to apply laws or rules or have any insight as to what health and safety regulation and responsibilities are actually for... Mai pen Rai syndrome!

Nonsense. Big airlines are controlled by the international aviation authorities. If they violate the safety regulations, they are blacklisted and banned. Also valid for Thai operators.

Large airlines are not controlled by 'international aviation authorities'. In most countries, large airlines 'self regulate' and that self regulation is overseen by the aviation authority in the country in which the airline is based. Smaller airlines, and private flying, are regulated by the individual country's Civil Aviation Authority.

Airlines do violate from time to time, but they are generally the ones who advise the local authority of the violation, and they work together to see what lessons can be learned, and what procedures can be improved to avoid repeating the stuff ups. The authority then often changes procedures for all airlines under its control if seen to be required.

[sanukjim]

its bad enough that the bigger airlines cant even maintain their aircraft with qualified aircraft engineers & technicians... Any light aircraft or private jets here you would be seriously dicing with death if you can trust that they did service the aircraft properly...RIP another sad case of Thailand not being able to apply laws or rules or have any insight as to what health and safety regulation and responsibilities are actually for... Mai pen Rai syndrome!

Nonsense. Big airlines are controlled by the international aviation authorities. If they violate the safety regulations, they are blacklisted and banned. Also valid for Thai operators.

THAI airways violated a couple last year and was not banned after they made some changes....they were not following the international aviation procedures for many years

Thai Airlines is banned as of now from creating any more routs into The US until they show an improvement in their safety and maintenance program.They can continue to fly their route into California..Many of the small airlines in Thailand and other parts of Asia are banned from flying in US and EU air spaces.When The EU lifted the restrictions of Thai Airlines ,many had thoughts that there was an exchange of money somewhere..

Edited June 3, 2016 by sanukjim

[Basil B]

Many questions to be answered.

My thought come to the fact that this is the second accident in as nearly the same number of months, certainly for an engine fire I would be looking at the maintenance records and more importantly those doing the maintenance, given the problems of the Thai big jet operators over the last year or so over the qualifications and ability of their ground engineers.

My second thought goes to the qualifications of the two pilots, PPL (Private) , CPL (Commercial) or ATPL (Air Transport)?

I would be not be very surprised if it turns out the Pilot Flying was a student under instruction with a paying pax in the rear.

Given the amount of accidents involving boats and ferries in Thai waters what makes one think the standards and adherence to the rules would be any better for aviation?

(or more alarmingly the way Thai's drive cars, pick ups, bikes, Lorries or any other vehicle.)

Edited June 3, 2016 by Basil B

[F4UCorsair]

3 pax + some luggage and maybe full tanks would make it very difficult to control on one engine that close take off. Terrible bad luck for these 3 RIP

Those things don't cause engine fires....although you may be correct to a certain extent.

Of course they dont however shutting down the engine or the wrong engine just after takeoff caused control issues and that was my point. Also taking into account the hot and humid air conditions and gross take off weight and you all of a sudden may have a plane struggling to maintain straight and level flight let alone maintaining any sort of climb

Light twins are only required to show a positive rate of climb at sea level in the 'standard atmosphere' at AUW for certification.

An aircraft a few years old, not as straight as it was new, at an elevation above sea level, and not at ISA, is never going to climb on one enhine, even if expertly handled.

Are you a pilot mcfish? I ask because the conditions you quote wouldn't make it 'terribly difficult to control'.....difficult for it to climb maybe, but quite controllable.

Edited June 5, 2016 by F4UCorsair

[F4UCorsair]

mcfish.....where are you? Are you going to answer my question?

[No1]

A twin engine plane, most people learn in a single engine such as the Cessna

Another post with lack of knowledge and/or experience--------- any decent flying school will have twin engines to graduate to

I have a Diamond Katana (DA40) parked at the Thai Flying Club in Bang Phra (a small town on the highway between bkk and pattaya). The is also a Beechcraft twin Bonanza but it has to be flown in from Sattahip, if required for training purposes.

It is a DA40, the Katana is a DA20.

Despite the questions regarding load and weather conditions and the resulting flight characteristics of a DA42, we can safely say that the conditions were not that bad that the impact had to be deadly. We can also safely say that 5 reported accidents from the same flight academy, only 3 of them in the last 8 months, say something about the academy and I leave it up to the interested reader to draw their own conclusions.