Rivet42 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 818 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (6 years 7 months 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 19150 times:
... I'm not quite sure what the issue is here. More than likely, if this passenger's plane landed after the One-Two-Go one, then she may have observed the aftermath of the crash, rather than the actual crash itself. It's easy for people to be less than precise with their accounts in the stressful moments after such an incident, and for the attending press to misquote everyone in sight (not necessairly in order to 'get a good story', but more likely because at that time the details are far from clear).
Maybe her plane was indeed in an approach circuit, and the fire would have been pretty obvious from the air, even in heavy rain. Why doubt her account? What difference does it make anyway?
M404 From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 2220 posts, RR: 5
Reply 6, posted (6 years 7 months 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 17322 times:
If she was, as the story states, behind the MD-82 then I'm to assume it was also in the landing pattern and not waiting for takeoff. Holding for T/O certainly would have given a runway view. In the landing pattern she could have had several possible sights like a right angle on base leg and straight by the sight on what certainly would have been an aborted landing.
Less sarcasm and more thought equal better understanding
YVRtoYYZ From Canada, joined Mar 2004, 646 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (6 years 7 months 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 17152 times:
However, the airport issued a station notam indicating that the 09/27 at VTSP was "closed due to disabled aircraft." Therefore, any enroute aircraft would have been forced to go to their alternate and any departing aircraft would have been impacted by the closure.
Woodentom From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 96 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (6 years 7 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 11440 times:
i flew into phuket last year and you could see the airport from quite a distance. We flew in from bangkok so came in from the north over the Phang Nga marine park to the NE of phuket and from the right hand side of the plane, you could see where the airport was.
it was very good weather though
i would imagine a fireball could be seen from quite a way but i don't think she would have actually seen the plane land.
RFields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7345 posts, RR: 32
Reply 13, posted (6 years 7 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 10085 times:
Quoting BeechNut (Reply 11): I would assume she was sitting on the right side of the plane and may have seen the immediate aftermath in the go-around,
That was my assumption also - and her aircraft would have either returned to origin, or landed at an alternate if it was in the air since the runway appears to be fouled in the photos.
However, she could very well have been in an aircraft planning to takeoff after the landing which became a crash - because to many people an aircraft at the head of the runway would be "behind" a just landed aircraft.
OHLHD From Finland, joined Dec 2004, 3962 posts, RR: 25
Reply 14, posted (6 years 7 months 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 9829 times:
Quoting EI321 (Reply 1): Her plane might have been turning towards the runway, and had not lined up yet.
I am guessing here right now but: If the weather was really bad I assume the pilot of the MD-82 had a low visibility furthermore if the aircraft in which this woman was sitting had not lined up yet I assume they were away quite some distance ( up to a few miles). So how could she see it then? The only possibility what I think could be that they were in approach and made a go-around with a quick left or right turn and then she saw it.
Copter808 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 993 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (6 years 7 months 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 9592 times:
Quoting Rivet42 (Reply 4): More than likely, if this passenger's plane landed after the One-Two-Go one, then she may have observed the aftermath of the crash
I doubt she either landed or departed after the crash, she might have flown by though.
Often a commercial airport is closed when the fire equipment is not available, and the equipment would not have been available if needed since it was dealing with the crash. Also, once the crash happened, the airport became a "crash scene" and evidence could be disturbed by additional traffic.
Ssflyboy25 From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 18 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (6 years 7 months 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 7300 times:
I didn't look into this further (on my way to work to go flying ) but perhaps there are parallel approaches at this airport... that might give her and anyone on that side of the plane a good view.... just a thought.