Phuket Air - passenger action.

[Memetic]

BBC News 24 are talking about passenger "panic" grounding a Phuket Air flight after 3 "attempts to take off" .

A few online sources have the strory:

http://www.smh.com.au/news/World/Frightened-passengers-ground-fuelspill-flight/2005/04/04/1112489376951.html?oneclick=true

So was there really a leak or is it just a case of letting everyone calm down?

[etrang]

Memetic, your link requires registration. This is the same story

http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=4348203

[Paraffin Budgie]

And this one from The Telegraph on-line:

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/04/04/wplane04.xml&sSheet=/news/2005/04/04/ixworld.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/04/04/wplane04.xml&sSheet=/news/2005/04/04/ixworld.html)

[ironbutt57]

Doens't really matter what it was, if that many pax saw something, they needed to be advised what the situation was by a knowledgeable crew member...good for them they "stood up" for themselves

[Kaptin M]

A Phuket Air spokesman told the newspaper: “One of the engines appeared to catch fire, but it was burning off excess fuel. Is this a new procedure we haven't been informed of yet?....."burning off excess fuel" - literally!! :mad:

[Few Cloudy]

There once was a Jumbo from Phuket,
Which spilt fuel like a leaky old bucket,
The company liar,
Said it hadn't caught fire,
But the passengers jibbed and said "fancy that"!

[Jordan D]

BBC Online has the article:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4407767.stm

Jordan

[ALLDAYDELI]

Picture on BBC TV this am shows ex-KLM B743.

[bob-morris]

Could this just have been fuel venting from the tank vent system - just as it is designed to do when the cold fuel warms up?

After all, your average non-aviator eyewitness is a pretty unreliable source of info in these cases. Any kind of vapour is usually "smoke".

As for "won't get back on the aeroplane" - it's funny how the same people will get back in their cars after they have been fixed!

[chobecat]

this was on the front page of the Gulf-News this morning....'different' viewpoint etc etc Ha ! Ha !

Gulf News - 4/4/05

Fuel leak stalls airline's onward journey to UK

By Sunita Menon, Staff Reporter

Dubai: What could have been a major air incident has been averted after a passenger who saw fuel gushing from one of the wings alerted the cabin crew.

A Phuket Airlines Boeing 747-300 with 358 passengers on board was on its way to Gatwick Airport in London from Bangkok. It landed at Sharjah International Airport for refuelling at 3.30am yesterday.

"They overfilled the fuel tank," said Matthew Cripps, a British passenger.

"As a result, steps were taken to remove the excess fuel. Finally, when we thought that everything had been settled and that we would finally take off, I saw fuel gushing out on to the runway. It looked as if someone had turned a tap on.

"I told the stewardess: 'This aircraft can't take off'. To which she replied: 'It was normal'. I just told her: 'No, lady, this does not normally happen'. Then one of the flight engineers came over and sat near where I was. When he saw what was happening his face went white."

All passengers on board the aircraft, which is at least 15 years old, disembarked and were taken to the airport transit lounge and later checked into five hotels in Sharjah.

"There was a technical problem," said Fidol Puangsuwan, assistant special manager, Phuket Airlines.

"When we realised there was a fuel leak we immediately ordered the pilot not to take off. We are still investigating why this happened. The pilot was not able to detect the fuel leakage because it did not show up in the cockpit system. We are not sure when we will be able to take off," he said.

"There is a regular Bangkok to London flight tomorrow, but we are trying our best to arrange for an emergency extra flight for today. For that we need to get permission from India to fly over their air space. The airline is covering the food and accommodation expenses for all the passengers," he said.

[lomapaseo]

Spilled and pooled fuel for any reason, near running engines is very unsafe.

Not a very big deal in the air as it is on the ground.

Also a problem on the ground for any following aircraft if not cleaned up.

[Massey1Bravo]

Airplanes do leak fuel, like this BA 777:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/3939455.stm

[Joyce Tick]

Latest reports say that it was a damp morning and that the fuel swirled off both wingtips in a spiral.....

[No comment]

Remember hearing that a Phuket 747 was checked over at LGW early on in their longhaul life because the whole operation looked a little unprofessional. A shabby substitute aircraft turned up and the loading wasn't satisfactory amongst other things.

They're pulling BKK-LGW anyway at the end of this month in favour of AMS it seems. Not sure how long they'll last longhaul...

[akerosid]

I saw a Ceefax report this evening which suggested that Phuket Air is threatening to sue passengers for causing a panic!

[sammypilot]

M.O.L. part of their management team?

That should look good in court. The defence of refusing to allow the airline to kill them would appear a sound basis for their actions.

[gas path]

There's a couple of things that'll cause fuel venting on the 74 classic, one is on refuel, cold fuel into the tanks (especially the reserves that will be full) will expand in the heat and vent, another is someone pulling the vol fill fuse (and forgetting to refit it:hmm: ) to get round a tank shutting off early, and the other is a broken vent float valve in one of the tanks allowing fuel into the vent system and from there into the surge tank and overboard.

[View From The Ground]

I think that AMS will be in addition to their LGW service, I am told by some friends who work as cabin crew for Phuket....As for what happened who really knows apart from to say that pax do not always make the most reliable witnesses.

There does seem to have been something wrong, because I guess that it is unlikely the flight would have been cancelled/delayed just on the basis of unsubstantiated passenger action. Anybody know who does their engineering in either UAE or Gatwick..I guess the only way to tie this one down will be for someone who has access to the tech log to share its contents with us.

[No comment]

View from the ground:

Definately no more LGW services in Summer 2005 from 26th April onwards. Theres talk of them returning in Winter 05 but can't see it happening.

(edited to mention LGW in the text!)

[View From The Ground]

Thanks for that No Comment...is that quite a recent development?they did not mention that last time I saw them in LGW...guess that will mean a trip to AMS to see my friends...no bad thing, give me AMS over Crawley anytime :D

[No comment]

Only heard about them pulling out about 3 weeks ago so a pretty quick development.

Sorry to take this slightly off-topic though!

[Khaosai]

Can someone advise on the reason they drop into SHJ. I was under the impression the classic would go to the UK with a full load. Rgds.

[HotDog]

Not from the heat of a BKK departure.

[rsoman]

There was a a similiar incident in India towards the end of 2003 , soon after Air Deccan started operations. One of their inaugral flights from Hyderabad with an ATR full of passengers had a venting incident on start up. Unfortunately the then Minister of Civil Aviation was sight seeing out of the window and promptly came to the "heroic rescue" of his fellow passengers (most of who were fellow politicians - such an invaluable national asset) by screaming FIRE and exiting the aircraft post haste! The minister then went on to enjoy his ten minutes of glory by speaking to every media channel within reach about his heroic act, much to the glee of the full service competitors of Air Deccan like Jet and Sahara whose officials for months afterwards never forgot to whisper to willing and unwilling ears about the risks of flying a low cost airline pointing to the above "accident". All the time, the Air Deccan guys had to grin their teeth and bear it !!

Fortunately the bureaucrats under the honourable minister had enough sense to keep quiet and not encourage the minister to do anything drastic (unlike a previous bloke who prompty grounded the Indian Airlines A320s without any sort of investigation after the tragic accident at Bangalore). As I understand in the case of Air Deccan , the same aircraft flew the next day (not sure whether the VIPs were on board!).

[Paraffin Budgie]

The saga continues. From The Times on-line today:


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1556670,00.html

[sky9]

Re The Times article.

i.e. The tanks were late shutting off and the fuel was in the surge tanks and vented out of the venturi air inlet.
I'm only surprised that Phuket Air didn't leave them in Sharjah.

[Rainboe]

So passenger Cripps has elected himself some sort of aviation expert and obviously taken over as leader and spokesman of the group. They took over and decided what the aeroplane was to do. I hope Phuket Air washes its hands of them, and even charges them for the disruption! And to read in the newspapers comments about the 'Brits with spirit taking the initiative'.....purrlease!

Fuel spills are not dangerous. They are a common incident. The 747 frequently vents fuel from the wing overflow piping. As long as the spill is not large, there is absolutely no problem. Jet fuel is really very inert- it doesn't burn at all well unless sprayed. Iomapaseo may be more cautious, but the fuel commonly used in the US is not as safe as the rest of the world. It is so inert I am told you can stand in a puddle of it and drop lighted matches in it, and you will still be around for tea. If this is disputed, I would love to hear of any minor fuel spills that developed into serious incidents! I can think of none.

Those people have brought this upon themselves, and disrupted the operation through ignorance. They would not take the word of the people looking after them. When they come back, they will be here as 'heroes'. They are self appointed busybodies
.

[No comment]

To add to their week of woe Phuket's HS-VAN tried departing LGW this morning and has now returned about an hour later with one engine out. The week just gets better for them doesn't it!

[eal401]

disrupted the operation through ignorance.
An ignorance that could have been corrected, but apparantly wasn't. It certainly appears to be an over-reaction on the part of the pax, but whilst they must shoulder most of the blame, there are other players involved that could have dealt with the situation better. In my own humble opinion, of course.

[EddieHeli]

Rainboe, hope you're not flying the ship next time I 'm travelling with that attitude towards your customers.

The problem with most airlines is that nobody explains anything to anyone outside the system. whilst something might be 'normal' to the pilots, how are the passengers supposed to know that? after all no passengers have ever been flown to their deaths by professional pilots switching off the wrong engine because they couldn't see which one was on fire from the cockpit
have they?

I've seen it many times on the TV prog about easyjet, where passengers have remonstrated about not being let onto the flight although it is still on the ground. I've often thought that if passengers were informed about having to close the plane off to do weight loading and takeoff calcs etc prior to departure, they may be more understanding as to why once the gate is closed they can't be allowed on.

As a pilot (private) myself I understand enough about the airline system and flying to understand why some things which are normal to the crew, appear frightening to passengers, such as windsheer on approach etc. but I think I would also be concerned if I saw fuel venting overboard, as it could have been a problem similar to the BA one with a fuel tank panel missing etc.

If the crew or airline had taken the time to explain what the problem was to the passengers, in sufficient detail to reassure them, not just "oh it's ok its normal", then it may have been a none issue.

It seems a lack of communication was at fault here even if a technical issue wasn't.

[Rainboe]

there are other players involved that could have dealt with the situation better. In my own humble opinion, of course.
That's quite a judgement to make for someone that wasn't there.

Rainboe, hope you're not flying the ship next time I 'm travelling with that attitude towards your customers
Well like it or not, when I explain something, I do it pretty thoroughly, but then you do when you are employed in a full service airline to do so. These people paid to go with a startup foreign airline with old equipment and crews with limited English. I know why they booked there- I have seen the fares offered. They chose an uncertain carrier to save money. Presumably they were aware certain aspects of their handling and backup may be deficient? But suddenly they want full service treatment- put up in hotel and full organisation etc? There is a reason for that saving over the other airlines that operate the route- perhaps they are learning the lesson?

[etrang]

These people paid to go with a startup foreign airline with crews with limited English

That's quite a judgement to make for someone that wasn't there, how do you know what the crew's English was like?

[Rainboe]

(BBC) An engineer was called to sit beside a passenger and see the fuel for himself, he said. When the engineer's face "went white", he said, the plane was stopped. Marcus and Charlotte Walsh, from Manchester, were on the flight returning from their honeymoon.
I would assume from this the crew being foreign and the engineers local, there must have been a language problem otherwise they would have been told 'no problem'. As for 'engineer going white', that is the opinion of someone totally hysterical!

[SLFguy]

Rainboe..I apologise for only being a PAX but...

Did this a/c return to the gate after (a) Fuel spillage was initially observed and crew advised..(ie crew also observed problem and deemed it serious enough to warrant engineering inspection), and (b) same spillage was observed for a 2nd time...

I'm sorry but if I give great credence to the crew so if (a) warranted inspection as far as I'm concerned I'm damn sure (b) did as well.

[cargo_joe]

:sad:
Plenty of good comments here... I'm by no means a pilot, I just work for a freight company... but come on - this airline just looks as dodgy as a bad Thai takeaway. They can keep it. When I fly long haul I try and stick to a real airline.

[Flying Bagel]

To be honest, in the first instance, I applaud the pax for standing up and saying something. Afterall, you can say the pax may be amateurs, but the flight attendants are just as clueless. In fact, most of them don't even look out the window on departure, they just chat amongst themselves.

So if someone did see something, better to be safe than sorry, I reckon. At least that way the passengers can be calmed down, and you yourself aren't left wondering.

But then, the crew probably had a duty to explain to the pax why the aircraft was venting fuel. The next couple of attempts, IMO if that was the problem, probably didn't need to happen. However, it could have been the ground engineer's failure to disclose the actual problem (which could be highly likely), or perhaps just pax not understanding proper English.

Pax overreact, that's the general consensus. So what? They pay (well, in this case, not an overly generous amount) to travel from point A to point B, we're paid to make sure they get from point A to point B. If they feel unsure, you either explain exactly what happened so that they understand, or you offload them. That's also our job.

[Capt.KAOS]

I hope Phuket Air washes its hands of them, and even charges them for the disruption! which, of course, would result in another PR disaster... :rolleyes:

[FougaMagister]

Slightly off topic (but related nonetheless): a few years ago, my brother was on a Thai Airways flight from BKK to SIN (if I recall correctly), a 737 EFIS. The take-off run was aborted, and the only "explanation" given by the flight crew was "sorry, engine problem"!

Then, without further ado (not even the usual brake-cooling delay), the aircraft taxied back to the threshold and attempted another take-off - this one successful.

My brother told me that while the Thai nationals onboard seemed totally oblivious to the safety implications, the foreigners (including himself, a VERY experienced and seasoned short- and long-haul traveller) looked quite aghast!

Bottom line: he hasn't flown on Thai Airways since.

Apparently, not only CRM but also PAX information seems to have a different meaning in the Far East... :ooh:

Cheers

[UV]

Allow me to tell you of my Flights with Phuket Air!!

Aircraft arrived 4 hours late at LGW, but departed only 1 hour late.

Some problem after push back. Travelling Spanner came down to look at something out of the other side followed shortly by two pilots. Door opened.

Aircraft continued to taxi slowly with door open. Lots of noise, looking and chin wagging. Door eventually closed at the holding point and take off commenced!

Climbed out towards Manston at numerous different power settings and never felt in balance. Flaps raised some distance past Manston!

All night long (10 hours) flying spanner walked around the cabin with a torch looking in every toilet and along the ducting near the cabin bins!
Arrived BKK and passed numerous PA aircraft in canabialised states!

Home trip. Cancelled. Received a text message saying ring BKK!

Went home a day early.

Overhead reading lights flashed incessently! Couldnt be controlled!

Changed seats, then no audio! Changed again.

Of all the seats I sat in (6) NONE of the seat belts were correctly installed. All buckled ends mounted upside down...

Never Again!!!

ATPL Holder, professional pilot.

UV

[View From The Ground]

There seem to be a great many assumptions about Phuket Air on this topic. Whilst I am happy to listen to anyone who has actually flown with them...some of the people on this post seem to be denigrating the airline..and worse in my opinion their people just on the content of some so called 'news' articles and quoted comments from 'non expert' passengers, without having flown the airline.
As mentioned previously I know and have met on several occasions some of the cabin crew of Phuket Airlines....those same people of whom has been said 'crews with limited English' and 'flight attendants just as clueless'. Whilst Phuket Air does have some new crew without previous experience...it also has crew who have worked for airlines including, JAL, Qantas, Asiana, Royal Brunei, and others. All the crew that I have met spoke good English, luckily since my Thai is severely limited, and some have held senior crew posts in their previous Companys who are not known for scrimping on their crew or training.
So whilst it is fair game perhaps to denigrate the airline, perhaps those without personal knowledge of its people should be careful with their assumptions.

[FougaMagister]

Time for a surprise CAA turnaround inspection then? :E

Cheers

[Compass Call]

The Express quoted one returning passenger as saying:-

"There was a
river of fuel coming out of the wing".

Another stated that the problem was caused by drunk passengers causing hysteria among other passengers.

So if they don't want to fly with Phuket Airlines again then it will be Phuket Airlines gain. I know several friends who have flown with Phuket Airlines and are very happy with them :ok:


CC

[Rollingthunder]

An airline which twice abandoned take-off attempts when passengers said they saw fuel gushing from a plane's wing has suffered another safety scare.
Britons flying with Phuket Air out of the United Arab Emirates on Sunday were left stranded by the halted take-offs.

On Wednesday, a separate Phuket Air Boeing 747 had to return to Gatwick three hours into a flight to Bangkok because of a hydraulics fault.

UK officials have grounded the plane until repairs have been completed.

Engine shut down

It has emerged that an engine had to be shut down while the plane was airborne.

The plane, which had taken off from the Sussex airport at 0830 BST and landed back at 1137 BST, has been grounded by the Department of Transport.

A spokeswoman said it would not be permitted to leave the UK until the damaged engine had been repaired or replaced.

An airline spokeswoman said on Wednesday: "There were 82 people on today's flight, which flew into Gatwick from Sharjah last night and had suffered a hydraulics problem.

"Though it was thought the fault had been corrected, the plane suffered the same problem this morning."

BBC on-line

[etrang]

And another one!

Aircraft makes emergency landing after hydraulics failure
BANGKOK, March 18, (TNA) – Ninety passengers were left stranded at Bangkok’s Don Muang Airport today when a Phuket Air aircraft bound for the southern resort island was forced to make an emergency landing 15 minutes after takeoff.

Captain Surin Songkhram, the craft’s pilot, made the decision to make an emergency landing after discovering a fault in the hydraulic system of the craft’s wings.

The airline said that it was laying on a special flight to transport the stranded passengers to Phuket this evening.

This morning’s flight to Phuket, which was initially due to take off at 10.50 hrs, had already been delayed several times as engineers tried to fix the fault. It eventually left Don Muang at 14.30, returning just 15 minutes later

[Dylsexlic]

I have enjoyed an emergency evacuation of a Charter BAC1-11 some years ago. The aircraft was on stand at LEPA and starting no.1 engine prior to pushback. Fuel then either vented or, more likely a fuel line ruptured, spraying fuel into the jet exhaust.

It caught fire and the crew shut down the engine and ordered an emergency evacuation over the PA. As I was at the rear, I was sent down the rear steps just before the stewardess realised that the flaming fuel was pooling at the bottom.

She grabbed the person behind me by the collar and screamed at them to get away from this exit. I was too far down the steps and had to continue. From about the second step, I had no choice but to leap over the river of flaming fuel. At that moment, the fire truck appeared spraying foam over the whole area, including me - in mid jump. I looked like a snowman.

I can't remember the charter company but the only comfort they offered was to ask me to complete a report form about the incident for the crew. I can remember thinking that the sunset was unusually bright out of the port windows!

Another aircraft was sent and four hours later we were on our way back to the UK. No fuss, no compensation, no nothing. We were a very subdued bunch of holidaymakers though.

I can imagine the Shock! Horror! Compensation! stories that would be all over the papers had that happened recently.

[plane silly]

Also heard the Phuket had no TCAS. Still on the ground at LGW.

[Desertia]

One of the cricket teams from the Chiang Mai Sixes was on the flight that was "leaking" fuel, but I haven't managed to get in touch with them yet. When I do I'll report the horse's mouth here.

However, it doesn't sound as if they did a very good job of reassuring the passengers that all was well. Why did it take 30 hours to get the aircraft in the air again? Sharjah isn't exactly the busiest airport on the planet, after all.

I discussed this at length with a 747 cargo pilot last night, and he did explain that it was not exactly uncommon and not necessarily a safety risk, but even he agreed that the flight deck could have done a better job of explaining it - assuming it *wasn't* a technical problem.

However, here's a more revealing article; the fact that 10 out of 12 aircraft were out of service hardly inspires confidence, does it?

The airline's owner also owns a luxury Dusit resort in Chiang Rai and a dodgy offshore casino in Burmese waters, which is heavily used by senior Thai military officers; he's loaded, but reckons he's losing a packet on Phuket Air. Can't say I'm surprised!

As for them making every effort to put passengers on other airlines, I got plenty of phone calls from returning cricketers in Bangkok to say that this was total garbage. The airline are definitely full of sh*t and I wouldn't trust a word they say. So why trust the flight deck?

Cheers,
Desertia
==============================================

Ministry puts Phuket Air under microscope


BANGKOK (TNA, Gazette): The Ministry of Transport has promised to launch a probe into budget airline Phuket Air following a 24-hour delay in a flight from Bangkok to London which left more than 400 passengers stranded on April 11.

The seriousness with which the ministry is treating the matter was highlighted by the response of Deputy Transport Minister Phumtham Vejjayachai, who immediately convened a meeting of Phuket Air executives and officials from the Department of Aviation.

Speaking after the meeting, K. Phumtham said that he had ordered the department to closely inspect all of the airline’s fleet the same day.

Over the past four weeks, the airline’s planes have malfunctioned – or been thought to have malfunctioned – on five occasions.

On April 2, a Phuket Air Boeing 747-200 from Bangkok’s Don Muang Airport to Gatwick Airport, England made a scheduled refueling stop at Sharjah Airport in the United Arab Emirates (UAE).

On takeoff, passengers noticed fuel spilling from one of the wings and suspected a leak.

There were, according to passengers’ statements, scenes of "screaming panic” on board the aircraft, and the airliner returned twice to the apron while engineers sought to identify the cause of the leak.

The airline later stated that the leak was the automatic release – via a “dump mast” – of excess fuel.

Both this aircraft – which eventually flew from Sharjah Airport to Gatwick, albeit with few passengers on board – and another Phuket Air 747, which had brought the remaining stranded passengers to the UK, were inspected by Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) engineers shortly after their arrivals in the UK.

The CAA inspections, which were requested by the UK Department of Transport, revealed shocking safety failures.

The aircraft that sparked the scare was found to have inoperative evacuation safety lights. Although this aged 747-200 was deemed airworthy, the CAA would not allow it to fly with passengers. It returned to Thailand empty.

The second veteran Boeing airliner, which had flown those stranded in the UAE to the UK, departed Gatwick en-route for Bangkok via Sharjah Airport on April 6. About one hour into the flight, the pilot shut down one of the engines and dumped 50 tons of jet fuel at 35,000 feet before heading back to UK airspace to land back at Gatwick.

CAA engineers found that a faulty gearbox seal – blamed on mechanics at Sharjah Airport – had caused the engine failure, but, perhaps more alarmingly, they established that the airliner’s collision avoidance system was not functioning.

CAA officials grounded the aircraft.

The April 11 incident was blamed on a hydraulics failure, as was an aborted March 18 flight from Bangkok to Phuket when the pilot was forced to return to Don Muang Airport and make an emergency landing some 15 minutes after takeoff.

K. Phumtham said that he had ordered a meeting with representatives from all the nation’s airlines, including budget airlines, for today, at which the airlines will be told to follow safety procedures rigorously.

In addition to these problems, Phuket Air’s deputy chief executive, Capt Chawanit Chiamcharoenvut, said that four aircraft that had been sent for maintenance in Indonesia have not yet been returned, and the airline has another two aircraft that need repair work.

As a result, the airline currently states that it has only two aircraft in working order out of a total of 12 listed on its website (www.phuketairlines.com).

According to a statement issued April 11 and posted on the Phuket Air website, “Phuket Air is now actively working to transfer passengers to other airlines that serve the same [international] destinations.

“As it is currently high season, these other airlines are heavily booked, which means we have not been able to transfer every passenger to an alternate flight.

“Therefore, we have arranged for food and accommodations for the remaining passengers who are waiting for the next available flights. We will also provide refunds to those who have canceled their Phuket Air flights.”

A Gazette staffer, due to fly back from Haad Yai to Phuket on Phuket Air today, was told at the check-in desk at the southern airport that his flight had been canceled. No alternative flight was offered, and when he requested a refund, he was told that he “...should ask his tour agent”. He is now traveling back to Phuket by bus.

The Gazette attempted to call the Phuket Air helplines – 02-5356708 and 02-5356696 – but was unable to get through.

===========================================