News Forum - An Azur Air flight circles Phuket for hours, then aborts

[Thaiger]

An Azur Air flight never made it to Russia, instead circling for hours before returning to Phuket and no one is saying why. The flight took off heading towards Novosibirsk, after having already been delayed for 5 and a half hours. Instead, it never made it past the Andaman Sea and ended up back in Phuket leaving about 200 passengers stranded. Azur Air flight ZF3750 was supposed to depart at 3.50pm yesterday heading to Russia. Instead, it departed at 9.20pm and went into three different circling patterns for two and a half hours before eventually returning back to Phuket. It […]

The story An Azur Air flight circles Phuket for hours, then aborts as seen on Thaiger News.

Read the full story

[Guest1]

it departed at 9.20pm and went into three different circling patterns for two and a half hours before eventually returning back to Phuket.

No fuel dump? 

[Pinetree]

The explanation may be simple.  The Russian aviation industry is a basket case due to sanctions, short of spares and even aircraft.  Its only a matter of time before one of the wrecks they are now forced to use has a major malfunction. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SrTrpwzVt4g

 

[palooka]

1 hour ago, Guest1 said:

No fuel dump? 

Generally, this means no problem with the aircraft. 

Fuel is only dumped if likely hood of a possible serious malfunction in landing.

Think the answer lies at the destination.

[Grumpish]

3 hours ago, Guest1 said:

it departed at 9.20pm and went into three different circling patterns for two and a half hours before eventually returning back to Phuket.

No fuel dump? 

Fuel dump is not universal these days - some have no fuel dump fitted at all, some it is an order option, and some still have it as standard.

[Vigo]

4 hours ago, Guest1 said:

it departed at 9.20pm and went into three different circling patterns for two and a half hours before eventually returning back to Phuket.

No fuel dump? 

Not all aircraft have fuel jettison capability. This is early model of B767.

Perhaps;

-HKT did not authorize aircraft to land because airport did not have the landing slot availability, orfacilities available;

- Airline did not have funds available to care for pax and pay for delay;

- Security Verifications were  taking longer than expected

-Airline was trying to fix a  flight bug before continuing to destination and could not.

Honestly, I don't care about the inconvenience of some Russian tourists. I wouldn't be surprised if the plane was carrying some war criminal rapists or looters on R&R from the Ukraine killing fields.

[Henry]

13 hours ago, Pinetree said:

The explanation may be simple.  The Russian aviation industry is a basket case due to sanctions, short of spares and even aircraft.  Its only a matter of time before one of the wrecks they are now forced to use has a major malfunction. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SrTrpwzVt4g

A very interesting video which helps explain some of the reasons behind untypical pricing patterns of late.

Thanks for linking.

 

Henry

[Rookiescot]

Could have been a technical issue with the aircraft and the holding pattern was to burn off enough fuel so they were not above their maximum landing weight. 

[Viggen840]

23 minutes ago, Rookiescot said:

Could have been a technical issue with the aircraft and the holding pattern was to burn off enough fuel so they were not above their maximum landing weight. 

In which case they would have initiated a fuel dump and been down to landing weight a lot sooner

[Pinetree]

14 hours ago, palooka said:

Generally, this means no problem with the aircraft. 

Fuel is only dumped if likely hood of a possible serious malfunction in landing.

Think the answer lies at the destination.

Not necessarily.  I'm not sure what type this aircraft was, as I don't think it was in the report, , but the B757, and the earlier B767s, which this airline uses, do not have a fuel dump capability, as the maximum landing weight is close to the maximum take off weight. 

[Viggen840]

3 minutes ago, Pinetree said:

Not necessarily.  I'm not sure what type this aircraft was, as I don't think it was in the report, , but the B757, and the earlier B767s, which this airline uses, do not have a fuel dump capability, as the maximum landing weight is close to the maximum take off weight. 

In which case, fuel weight would not have been the problem. Sounds more like a landing restriction concern.

[Rookiescot]

32 minutes ago, Viggen840 said:

In which case, fuel weight would not have been the problem. Sounds more like a landing restriction concern.

Aircraft is a 767 - 300. Potentially needed to burn off 60 000 lbs of fuel before landing.

http://www.flugzeuginfo.net/acdata_php/acdata_7673_en.php

[HolyCowCm]

Everytime I see the article headline and the name, it brings me back to thinking Ghostbusters and it is air (A)zuul.