Thailand risks flight safety blacklist!
There is a lot wrong with the flight safety of Thai airlines. The ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organization) recently sounded the alarm about the safety of aviation in Thailand, with the result that there may be restrictions on (new) international flights. That would be a major setback for the ailing THAI Airways, Thailand's national airline.
The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) assessment that aviation in Thailand poses a 'significant security risk' has not been made public, but the United Nations explained the decision to the government last week. Kwak Young-Pil, an official from South Korea's Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport, told several newspapers that ICAO made the decision on March 20.
In response to that announcement, Japan's aviation authority has decided not to allow new flights by Thai airlines from Thailand. South Korea is reportedly considering a similar measure. The existing flights between the two countries and Thailand will not be affected by the decision, but the new flights that Thai AirAsiaX, NokScoot, Asia Atlantic Airline and THAI Airways wanted to start this summer will not take place.
Prime Minister Prayuth has informed the Thai press that he has instructed the foreign minister to discuss the imposed ban with his Japanese counterpart. An urgent reorganization of the aviation authorities is also needed, he believes. After all, the measures come at a bad time, just before Songkran the Thai New Year, the most important tourist event.
A spokesman for THAI Airways, Jarumporn Chotikasathein, said the airline would have to cancel about five charter flights scheduled for the April holiday season. He said THAI Airways and other Thai airlines will have to undergo additional inspections in other countries as a result of the International Civil Aviation Organisation's decision. There is a chance that other countries will follow Japan's example and airlines from Thailand will be blacklisted. In that case, a landing ban will be imposed.
Thailand received ICAO inspectors in January, about ten years after the last assessment in 2005. Their task was to assess how the country's aviation authorities monitor flight safety. Among other things, the licenses of the personnel, training, certification and the way in which the investigation of accidents is done, were under scrutiny. Reportedly, only 21 of the nearly 100 test items were satisfactory.
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk/Thailands-airlines-face-significant-safety-concerns
Does this also apply to domestic flights?
If there is something wrong with the supervision of Thai airlines, which apparently jeopardizes flight safety, this naturally also applies to domestic flights.
And where does Prayuth think he will get the extra manpower to check the fleet and procedures of the various Thai companies. Because whether or not you have Article 44 power, you cannot solve this apparently major problem in a short time.
It is easy to pass this off to previous governments (so both Yingluck's and Abhisit's), but the relevant supervisor has of course also been asleep.
No, this does not apply to domestic flights at all, for the time being only to flights of Thai airlines that fly from Thailand to South Korea, Japan and today China has also been added.
Peter, this is about the supervision of airlines and flight safety. Of course other countries cannot declare a flight ban for domestic flights or the like, but the doubts about safety also apply to domestic flights.
Peter,
What reality do you live in? If Japan, South Korea and China state that they will not accept extra flights from Thai airlines because ICAO has doubts about safety/maintenance/procedures etc. of Thai airlines, do you think there are no (potential) problems regarding Thai domestic flights?
Of course, the countries mentioned cannot judge/decide on domestic (Thailand) flights. But if ICAO has problems with how Thai airlines operate, you can bet that this also applies to domestic flights. Only for this purpose: even if Thailand wants to keep poorly maintained aircraft/airlines that do not operate in accordance with procedures in the (domestic) air, “go ahead”.
And Prayuth (mr. Article 44) cannot change that, even if he gives the Minister of Foreign Affairs all sorts of instructions.
Speaking of the devil…Orient Thai made an emergency landing in China last Saturday after an engine failure (and possible decompression. There was talk of a dive and the failure of an engine alone is not a reason, decompression is).
Doesn't seem like a fun experience to me, especially after the recent tragedy in the Alps.
http://bangkok.coconuts.co/2015/03/31/orient-thai-plunges-sky-after-engine-fails
According to the professional aviation incident site below, there was decompression (the loss of cabin pressure) as a result of a problem with the so-called airbleed function of one of the engines. There is no indication that the engine has failed. This involves an emergency descent to reach an altitude where there is sufficient oxygen as quickly as possible. It is conceivable that this will cause some panic among the passengers. The landing in Kunming - which is at an altitude of 2100 meters - was not an emergency landing, but simply a premature landing because further flying without the cabin being pressurized is not permitted.
http://avherald.com/h?article=483fc32e&opt=0
Oh I think you should see this not only for the Thai airlines and airspace, but that this applies to 90% of SE Asia. Or did you sometimes think that it is better in Indonesia and the Philippines etc. There are simply more accidents there than in Western Europe and North America.
I think the only airlines that can really compete with the top in SE Asia are Singapore airline and Cathay, they also come from the most prosperous areas.
Those 90% of you are just so out of the blue I suppose. Yes, Garuda from Indonesia has also been on the blacklist for a long time and was no longer allowed to enter Europe. Improvements have ensured that they are now off the blacklist.
It is not about the quality of the airlines, but about the supervision of aviation authorities.
Read,
If oversight is weak/non-existent, who guarantees that Thai airlines adhere to maintenance and procedures? She herself?
That would be like the butcher inspecting his own meat.
The first action lies with the government. Great opportunity for Paryuth to apply Article 44 constructively.
Incidentally, it will take a number of years to get off the blacklist once you end up on it.
In the news last week. AirCanada A320 crashes next to runway in Halifax. @ Turkish Airlines aircraft grounded due to bomb threat. NokAir canceled flight due to defect with 1 or other non-closing door, passengers were transferred to another aircraft. Orient Thai Airlines already reported above by others. These are just the cases that made the news. Not a problem when I drive a car.
It certainly doesn't bother you when you drive a car. Whether it is safer in your car is another matter.
Most car accidents usually no longer make the news, because they are no longer considered “news”.
I find that comparing airplanes to driving a car out of all proportion, I see no connection between sitting waiting to die in a pressurized aluminum coffin at 38000ft with driving on Terra Firma where I'm not like a stone, screaming in fear, fall from the sky. Having said that, you usually cause a car accident yourself, contrary to an airplane accident. Also, there are no jihad screaming hijackers walking around in my car with machine guns. Aloha Airlines 243 where the passengers overpowered the pilot who screamed Jihad and also wanted to take such a suicide action. There have been 11 (eleven) cases of pilot suicide actions with fatal consequences for passengers. Comparing this between air and car traffic is brainwashing advertising from airlines. EgyptAir, whose pilot also committed suicide, is still dismissed as a 'mechanical problem' by them, do not admit it.
The soup will probably not be eaten as hot as it is served.
Having worked for KLM for almost 20 years, I know how such audits, in this case of the ICAO, work. The aforementioned result says nothing about the condition or safety of the aircraft used for flying, but is more about whether the procedures (also on the ground) are in order. If anything does not go according to protocol, this will already lead to a “finding”
The article indicates that the last audit dates from 2005, I wonder what the outcome was at the time. In addition, this is now 10 years ago and to my knowledge there have not been more incidents in these past 10 years than with other (western) companies.