A330 takes out Gulfstream at VLVT

[Koan]

A Thai Airways A330-300 has nearly ripped the tail off a Gulfstream IV private jet during a taxiing accident in Vientiane, Laos.The accident occurred in darkness on 9 March as the A330 (HS-TEU) prepared to operate flight TG575 on the Vientiane-Bangkok Suvarnabhumi route, according to Thai Airways.“When the pilot took the plane out to the taxiway, its wing collided with the tail of a small personal plane.” Images on social media show that the outboard leading edge of the A330’s left wing suffered damage.As for the private jet, M-YWAY, the entire tail plane was nearly torn off, coming to rest on the right-side horizontal stabilizer. The front landing gear also appears to have been severely twisted in its mounting. The Thai aircraft was carrying 79 passengers and 13 crew, all of whom are safe, says the airline. Cirium fleets data indicates that HS-TEU is managed by Thai and was delivered in March 2010, though it only entered service in June 2011.
https://www.flightglobal.com/safety/...137157.article

Spoiler

 

 

Spoiler

 

 

A Thai Airways A330-300 has nearly ripped the tail off a Gulfstream IV private jet during a taxiing accident in Vientiane, Laos.The accident occurred in darkness on 9 March as the A330 (HS-TEU) prepared to operate flight TG575 on the Vientiane-Bangkok Suvarnabhumi route, according to Thai Airways.“When the pilot took the plane out to the taxiway, its wing collided with the tail of a small personal plane.” Images on social media show that the outboard leading edge of the A330’s left wing suffered damage.As for the private jet, M-YWAY, the entire tail plane was nearly torn off, coming to rest on the right-side horizontal stabilizer.



You should see the other guy..

[Longtimer]

The most telling thing re this report is that the A330-300 was only carrying 79 passengers..... vs a full load over 400

[Gauges and Dials]

"Small personal plane". G4.

[ATC Watcher]

the 330 having apparently from the photo has relatively little visible damage , and aircraft was taxing out , so most probably at low speed, how can this cause the 90 deg cut off of a G4 vertical stab ? are the vertical stab so weak to lateral forces by design,?

[marchino61]

Originally Posted by ATC Watcher

the 330 having apparently from the photo has relatively little visible damage , and aircraft was taxing out , so most probably at low speed, how can this cause the 90 deg cut off of a G4 vertical stab ? are the vertical stab so weak to lateral forces by design,?

Momentum.....

[MechEngr]

Originally Posted by ATC Watcher

the 330 having apparently from the photo has relatively little visible damage , and aircraft was taxing out , so most probably at low speed, how can this cause the 90 deg cut off of a G4 vertical stab ? are the vertical stab so weak to lateral forces by design,?

The mention suggests that the nose gear on the G4 was damaged; It may be that more than a little leverage was involved.

It would not surprise me if the little jet was set onto one wingtip and the nose gear and lifted off the main gear during the event.

[jmmoric]

Originally Posted by marchino61

Momentum.....

Agreed, as with everything else when you work with things weithing over a 100 tonnes....

[fox niner]

Nice registration. M-YWAY.
perhaps the airbus was in a right turn, which would give the wingtip an extra kick?

[golfyankeesierra]

In more then one way a costly flight..

The Thai aircraft was carrying 79 passengers and 13 crew

[Lord Bracken]

Dearie me. The reason big widebodies are operated in Asia is not always due to expected pax loads...have you seen the state of some of the road haulage in that part of the world?

[Wonderworld]

Originally Posted by Longtimer

The most telling thing re this report is that the A330-300 was only carrying 79 passengers..... vs a full load over 400

Since when do TG 333’s take over 400 pax?

[ZFT]

Originally Posted by Wonderworld

Since when do TG 333’s take over 400 pax?

Never..........

[Longtimer]

Originally Posted by Wonderworld

Since when do TG 333’s take over 400 pax?

the number posted was for an all economy 330 and of course was inaccurate for Thai. sorry but still not much of a load

[No longer ATC]

Originally Posted by fox niner

Nice registration. M-YWAY.
perhaps the airbus was in a right turn, which would give the wingtip an extra kick?

"Thai did it Myyyyy waaayyyyyy ................... I'll get me coat.

[WingNut60]

Originally Posted by Lord Bracken

Dearie me. The reason big widebodies are operated in Asia is not always due to expected pax loads...have you seen the state of some of the road haulage in that part of the world?

I most certainly have.

For the most part Thailand is way ahead of its neighbours.

[deja vu]

Originally Posted by Longtimer

the number posted was for an all economy 330 and of course was inaccurate for Thai. sorry but still not much of a load

You can only judge the load from the ZFW, which we don't know. My former company operated many 333 flights to one destination and return with <50 pax but at Max ZFW in that part of the world.

Air Inter ( now defunct) were the only A330 operator I know of with an all economy config of close to 400. Maybe others I guess.

No, what is telling is that this was not even close to missing the Gulfstream. We seem to be a bit short on info regarding who strayed where in this almost unforgivable event.

[Pugilistic Animus]

Reminds me of that AF A380 did the same thing to an ERJ

[Pugilistic Animus]

[QUOTE=deja vu;10713200]You can only judge the load from the ZFW, which we don't know. My former company operated many 333 flights to one destination and return with <50 pax but at Max ZFW in that part of the world.[/QUOTE/
​​​​​​What jet hits MZFW with just 50 punters?

[deja vu]

​​​​​​What jet hits MZFW with just 50 punters?[/QUOTE]

Early A330-300 for starters

[megan]

What jet hits MZFW with just 50 punters

In conversation a non airline pilot commented on a 777 flight where they had similar number of pax and was told it was maxed out due to a belly load of fish. Possible?