Blackout Threatens Hub Status Of Suvarnabhumi

[Flashermac]

Bangkok's reputation as a key regional air hub could face a major threat following Thursday's breakdown of an airport control tower which affected nearly 50 flights.

 

The simultaneous breakdown of both the main and back-up power supplies paralysed the radar system which guides flights through Suvarnabhumi International Airport for an hour.

 

A total of 49 aircraft were affected - 21 take-offs and 15 landings were delayed, while 13 flights were rerouted or returned to their departure point.

 

The radar breakdown may be the longest in the world for 45 years, and airline executives and pilots yesterday called the incident "inexcusable".

 

"Our reputation has been tainted and trust in the reliability of the Thai system has diminished to a certain extent," said Marisa Pongpattanapun, chairwoman of Airline Operators Committee (AOC), a coalition of global airline managers at Suvarnabhumi.

 

A senior Thai Airways (THAI) pilot with 36 years of international experience and more than 20,000 flight hours said rival airports in the region could benefit from the malfunction, which lasted from 6.14pm to 7.12pm.

 

He said passengers affected by Thursday's delays may well choose to travel to or through different airports in future.

 

The senior THAI pilot said he had experienced radar system breakdowns elsewhere in the world, but that the disruptions caused by those incidents only lasted a matter of minutes.

 

Ms Marisa said airlines are counting the cost of the incident, which frustrated thousands of passengers.

 

She said the airlines will seek compensation from Aeronautical Radio of Thailand Ltd (Aerothai), the air navigation service provider operating under the Transport Ministry.

 

The Board of Airline Representatives Business Association, also known as Bar, will act on the behalf of its affected member airlines to seek compensation from Aerothai, Ms Marisa said.

 

Costs incurred by the delays include the use of extra fuel by flights held up in-air and accommodating affected passengers.

 

The incident further inconvenienced international carriers which have been struggling since June 11 to lessen the impacts of the 60-day maintenance shutdown of one of Suvarnabhumi's two runways.

 

Aerothai president Prajak Sajjasophon said yesterday the company has yet to receive any claims for compensation from affected parties.

 

"I think they understand the case and we can discuss the whole matter with them," he said.

 

Mr Prajak played down suggestions that Thailand's reputation would be spoiled by the incident, saying Aerothai has done everything possible to lessen the impacts on visitors and most importantly ensuring maximum safety for air traffic during the blackout period.

 

He noted that Aerothai successfully employed radio communication during the radar down-time period to direct five aircraft to safe landings at Suvarnabhumi.

 

Mr Prajak insisted that the company has followed inspection and maintenance guidelines.

 

"Things happened unexpectedly," he said.

 

Aerothai's current power supply system has been in use for six years of its seven-year lifespan.

 

A 20-million-baht upgrade is set to be put into operation from August of this year.

 

The upgrade will be an additional uninterruptible power supply (UPS) system that will be independent of the existing UPS source.

 

This should ensure a secondary power source should a similar failure occur again.

 

Asked why aircraft approaching a Suvarnabhumi landing were diverted to alternate airports as far away as Kuala Lumpur in Malaysia and Siem Reap in Cambodia and not sent to Bangkok's Don Mueang domestic airport, Mr Prajack said Don Mueang relies on the same radar system Aerothai provides for Suvarnabhumi.

 

The Transport Ministry yesterday ordered the creation of a committee, headed by permanent secretary Silapachai Jarukasemrat, to complete an investigation into the incident within 15 days.

 

Suvarnabhumi International Airport, code-named BKK, is among the five busiest airports in the Asia-Pacific region.

 

When it opened in September 2006, it was designed to handle 45 million passengers a year, but last year it processed 47.2 million.

 

Passenger numbers are expected to soar further to 51 million this year.

 

My link

 

 

[radioman]

I flew home Thursday evening. Flight was due to land at 19:20 but was held up until 20:00. Pilot said it was because of a problem with the weather radar, yeah right is what I thought, was rather obvious it was ATC radar and they switched to Proc-con.

 

I was involved in a number of sub-systems that went in to Suvarnabhumi, most were 10-15 years out of date when they were purchased and the design methodology even older.

[Flashermac]

But Thaksin paid top dollar! You mean he was buying old equipment? Maybe he bought an old runway too.

[Coss]

simultaneous breakdown of both the main and back-up power supplies

What are the odds? The whole point of a back up is that it's supposed to be immune from the primary system's problems. Perhaps the back up depended to the primary system's power to run?

He noted that Aerothai successfully employed radio communication

And if that'd failed, they have some flags in the desk drawer.

Passenger numbers are expected to soar further to 51 million this year.

Not after this debacle.

[Flashermac]

And Thaksin dreamed of Swampypoom becoming the hub for Southeast Asia, taking over from Singapore.

[radioman]

But Thaksin paid top dollar! You mean he was buying old equipment? Maybe he bought an old runway too.

 

He did, but that was because they wrote the specs so as to preclude the best state of the art equipment and design, actually demanding that suppliers provide essentially outdated hardware, over engineered (expensive) in some areas and under engineered in others. Not to mention more expensive to manufacture. The radio system in particular is a bit of a joke (and I should know )

 

Very often the UPS parts of the project were let to local Thai companies and some of the supplied equipment is so close to the limits of both capability and safety that it's just scary. I think some were actually replaced a couple of years ago because they were so failure prone.

 

 

A few years back in the UAE, the main area control centre in Abu Dhabi experienced a total communication failure. IIRC after maintenance work was carried out on the standby UPS system it had been left in a bypass state with the batteries eventually running down. Come the day of a main UPS failure and this fact became quite evident.

 

When the replacement was built they made 2 of everything in separate buildings with integrated RCMS, still not ideal as they are on the same site but somewhat better than before. And they do have other on line alternatives as well.

[Gadfly]

He did, but that was because they wrote the specs so as to preclude the best state of the art equipment and design, actually demanding that suppliers provide essentially outdated hardware, over engineered (expensive) in some areas and under engineered in others. Not to mention more expensive to manufacture. The radio system in particular is a bit of a joke (and I should know )

 

Very often the UPS parts of the project were let to local Thai companies and some of the supplied equipment is so close to the limits of both capability and safety that it's just scary. I think some were actually replaced a couple of years ago because they were so failure prone.

 

A few years back in the UAE, the main area control centre in Abu Dhabi experienced a total communication failure. IIRC after maintenance work was carried out on the standby UPS system it had been left in a bypass state with the batteries eventually running down. Come the day of a main UPS failure and this fact became quite evident.

 

When the replacement was built they made 2 of everything in separate buildings with integrated RCMS, still not ideal as they are on the same site but somewhat better than before. And they do have other on line alternatives as well.

 

"Very often the UPS parts of the project were let to local Thai companies and some of the supplied equipment is so close to the limits of both capability and safety that it's just scary. I think some were actually replaced a couple of years ago because they were so failure prone." This a common practice in other Thai government projects (irrespective of which party or group is in control), so I guess I shouldn't be surprised. I am no engineer, but not having an independent back-up for something this critical is surprising even by Thai standards. Well, maybe not...

 

Wasn't there a Thai tourism promotional campaign awhile back called "Unseen Thailand"? Maybe they should re-start that campaign, and include an inside look at the Government's procurement process this time? They could start with a look at the "unusual wealth" of Thailand's former permanent secretary for transport Supoj Saplom. It doesn't seem like they will really take any action against him. Just like they never even tried to prosecute the former Governor General of the TAT who allegedly received US1.6 million in kickbacks. Have to use that word even though the Americans who paid bribes were not only convicted on FCPA charges in the U.S., but have already completed their (albeit short) prison sentences. To butcher a quote from a famous American General, "Corrupt Thai politicians and officials never go to jail, they just fade away..."

[Horneytorney]

unbelievable and scary!

but is anybody really surprised about Thai officials buying substandard equipment at inflated prices. There is a long list of incidents like this and that is only the visible tip of the iceberg...or should we say the tip of the dungheap...

[radioman]

not having an independent back-up for something this critical is surprising even by Thai standards. Well, maybe not...

 

Wasn't there a Thai tourism promotional campaign awhile back called "Unseen Thailand"? Maybe they should re-start that campaign, and include an inside look at the Government's procurement process this time?

 

I don't know exactly what happened yet, but I will find out for sure in the next couple of weeks.

 

One thought. UPS systems rely on (usually) a large number of heavy duty batteries, they have a specified life and must be replaced if the system is to function correctly. Not sure what it would be in this case but I can pretty much guarantee that they would be allowed to go beyond their end of life date. Whilst there is often excess cash that gets spent on projects there is rarely sufficient, or indeed any, for regular scheduled maintenance.

[gobbledonk]

Thank God they havent completely abandoned DM - it might be an old relic, but I dont recall my flight being turned around and told to return to its last port of call .....