Pictures from Flightradar24.

 

A Russian airline flight that encountered technical difficulties, was forced to circle above the Andaman Sea for over three hours before successfully landing at Suvarnabhumi Airport.

 

Aeroflot flight SU277, travelling from Phuket to Moscow departed at 16.35, but experienced a mechanical issue shortly after take-off, prompting concerns over its ability to land safely. The aircraft involved was a 6 year old, Boeing 777-300 (ER) with registration Ra-73158.
 

The aircraft choose not to return to Phuket and instead diverted to Suvarnabhumi Airport in Bangkok, where emergency response teams were on standby.

 

Mr. Montchai Tahanod, Director of Phuket International Airport, explained that the flight developed a technical fault involving its front landing gear, which failed to retract properly. As a safety measure, the aircraft needed to perform an emergency landing.

 

Before landing, the aircraft had to burn off fuel to reduce its weight to a safe level, a standard safety procedure aimed at minimising the risk upon touchdown and reducing potential environmental hazards. Suvarnabhumi Airport was chosen over Phuket Airport because of its better-equipped emergency support facilities.

 

 

Officials at Suvarnabhumi Airport confirmed that emergency teams were deployed to ensure a safe landing. Mr. Kittipong Kittikhachorn, Director of Suvarnabhumi Airport, reported that the aircraft landed safely on Runway 01R, at 21.10, with no reported injuries.

 

Thai Airways is now assisting over 300 passengers from flight SU277 in continuing their journey to Moscow.

 

File picture of the aircraft involved.

 

-- 2025-02-11

 

I wonder if sanctions leading to poor maintenance had anything to do with it.

34 minutes ago, Bannoi said:

I wonder if sanctions leading to poor maintenance had anything to do with it.

Very doubtful

34 minutes ago, Bannoi said:

I wonder if sanctions leading to poor maintenance had anything to do with it.

I wonder if Thai maintenance will break sanctions to repair the plane - the US will have read this news as well 😉 ...

46 minutes ago, Georgealbert said:

 

Pictures from Flightradar24.

 

A Russian airline flight that encountered technical difficulties and was forced to circle above the Andaman Sea for over three hours before successfully landing at Suvarnabhumi Airport.

 

Aeroflot flight SU277, travelling from Phuket to Moscow departed at 16.35, but experienced a mechanical issue shortly after take-off, prompting concerns over its ability to land safely. The aircraft involved was a 6 year old, Boeing 777-300 (ER) with registration Ra-73158.
 

The aircraft choose not to return to Phuket and instead diverted to Suvarnabhumi Airport in Bangkok, where emergency response teams were on standby.

 

 

Mr. Montchai Tahanod, Director of Phuket International Airport, explained that the flight developed a technical fault involving its front landing gear, which failed to retract properly. As a safety measure, the aircraft needed to perform an emergency landing.

 

Before landing, the aircraft had to burn off fuel to reduce its weight to a safe level, a standard safety procedure aimed at minimising the risk upon touchdown and reducing potential environmental hazards. Suvarnabhumi Airport was chosen over Phuket Airport because of its better-equipped emergency support facilities.

 

 

Officials at Suvarnabhumi Airport confirmed that emergency teams were deployed to ensure a safe landing. Mr. Kittipong Kittikhachorn, Director of Suvarnabhumi Airport, reported that the aircraft landed safely on Runway 01R, at 21.10, with no reported injuries.

 

Thai Airways is now assisting over 300 passengers from flight SU277 in continuing their journey to Moscow.

 

File picture of the aircraft involved.

 

-- 2025-02-11

 

Amazing what some people will do to not want to leave the "land of scams" 

Someone probably missed the nose gear pin pre departure . Why not jettison fuel rather than fly around for 3 hours ? 😳

Russian Airline Flight Makes Emergency Landing at BKK After Circling for 3 Hours 

 

Why  not Dumping Fuel .

It's was classed as an Emergency , They are Allowed to dump their Fuel 

 

Pretty Stupid to Fly around for3 Hrs  they knew what the problem was.  

 

Yes, pilots in Thailand, like pilots worldwide, will still dump fuel before an emergency landing if necessary to reduce the aircraft's weight and ensure a safer landing, following standard aviation procedures; this practice is especially important when the situation requires a landing at a smaller airport or if there are concerns about the runway length due to the aircraft's weight. 

Key points about fuel dumping in emergency landings:

Safety measure:

Dumping fuel is a crucial safety measure that allows pilots to land an aircraft at a lighter weight, potentially preventing damage to the aircraft and minimizing the risk of injury in an emergency situation. 

Coordination with ATC:

Pilots must coordinate with air traffic control (ATC) to ensure they dump fuel in designated areas, typically over water or sparsely populated regions. 

Decision based on situation:

The decision to dump fuel is based on the specific emergency situation, the aircraft's weight, and the available runway length. 

Forgot the Vodka

Flying with russian airlines is "Russian Roulett"

20 minutes ago, Moriarty said:

Someone probably missed the nose gear pin pre departure . Why not jettison fuel rather than fly around for 3 hours ? 😳

It was an non urgent situation so burning fuel is preferable.  If an airplane needs to get on the ground quickly they will dump fuel.

11 minutes ago, digger70 said:

Russian Airline Flight Makes Emergency Landing at BKK After Circling for 3 Hours 

 

Why  not Dumping Fuel .

It's was classed as an Emergency , They are Allowed to dump their Fuel 

 

Pretty Stupid to Fly around for3 Hrs  they knew what the problem was.  

 

Yes, pilots in Thailand, like pilots worldwide, will still dump fuel before an emergency landing if necessary to reduce the aircraft's weight and ensure a safer landing, following standard aviation procedures; this practice is especially important when the situation requires a landing at a smaller airport or if there are concerns about the runway length due to the aircraft's weight. 

Key points about fuel dumping in emergency landings:

Safety measure:

Dumping fuel is a crucial safety measure that allows pilots to land an aircraft at a lighter weight, potentially preventing damage to the aircraft and minimizing the risk of injury in an emergency situation. 

Coordination with ATC:

Pilots must coordinate with air traffic control (ATC) to ensure they dump fuel in designated areas, typically over water or sparsely populated regions. 

Decision based on situation:

The decision to dump fuel is based on the specific emergency situation, the aircraft's weight, and the available runway length. 

 

Modern aircraft don't even have the capability to dump fuel

9 minutes ago, JoseThailand said:

 

Modern aircraft don't even have the ability to dump fuel

All 777s like this one will have dump capabilities though.

11 minutes ago, JoseThailand said:

 

Modern aircraft don't even have the capability to dump fuel

So  You Say,   

 

FAA (Federal Aviation Administration) requires fuel dumping systems on airplanes where the maximum takeoff weight is significantly higher than the maximum landing weight, meaning that in certain situations, an aircraft might need to jettison fuel mid-flight to reach a safe landing weight, making fuel dumping systems necessary on many large commercial airplanes; however, smaller aircraft designed for shorter flights may not have fuel dumping capabilities. 

Key points about fuel dumping systems:

Purpose:

To allow an aircraft to quickly release fuel in flight to reduce its weight when necessary for a safe landing, typically in emergency situations requiring a return to the departure airport. 

Regulation:

The FAA mandates fuel dumping systems on aircraft where the ratio between maximum takeoff weight and maximum landing weight exceeds a certain limit. 

Not all planes have them:

Smaller aircraft designed for shorter flights often do not have fuel dumping systems as they may not reach a weight requiring fuel jettisoning. 

1 hour ago, hotchilli said:

Very doubtful

Airbus and Boeing Suspend Technical Support For Russian airlines, 2022-03-03 https://www.airnavradar.com/blog/airbus-and-boeing-suspend-technical-support-for-russian-airlines

Thailand allowing this aircraft to enter Thailand airspace is a threat to its national security. 

But think of the value of Russian tourists! Money, money, money.

2 hours ago, Georgealbert said:

prompting concerns over its ability to land safely

Don't understand why not just fly to Russia and your going to have just as many problems as if you were landing in Swampy, just wasted a bunch of fuel and caused the environment in Bangkok even more problems.  Unless the pilots actually agree also that airport/airplane safety in Russia is totally sht.

2 hours ago, hotchilli said:

Very doubtful

Lol! Yeah....sure.... 😆

1 hour ago, D M G said:

Forgot the Vodka

 

12 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

Airbus and Boeing Suspend Technical Support For Russian airlines, 2022-03-03 https://www.airnavradar.com/blog/airbus-and-boeing-suspend-technical-support-for-russian-airlines

Thailand allowing this aircraft to enter Thailand airspace is a threat to its national security. 

But think of the value of Russian tourists! Money, money, money.

Ha certainly forget the vodka. I flew with Aeroflot to London once via Moscow. They didn't serve any alcohol between Bangkok and Moscow and on the Moscow to London they very reluctantly served a glass of wine by a sour faced Russian stewardess and that was it. I would never travel with them again.

Probably wants to pick up a spare part from all the Thai aircrafts parked. 

FWIW

 

The Boeing 777-300ER (registration RA-73158) then climbed to 22,000 ft while pilots had to deal with landing gear issue. According to source, the wheels could be retracted but the gear’s door would not close.

 

Aeroflot Boeing 777-300 to Moscow circled for hours after departure from Phuket

 

https://airlive.net/

3 hours ago, Georgealbert said:

failed to retract properly

 

20 minutes ago, PomPolo said:

Don't understand why not just fly to Russia and your going to have just as many problems as if you were landing in Swampy, just wasted a bunch of fuel and caused the environment in Bangkok even more problems.  Unless the pilots actually agree also that airport/airplane safety in Russia is totally sht.

Fly all the way to Russia with landing gear that hasn't retracted properly? Yeah nope.

Just now, gravity101 said:

 

Fly all the way to Russia with landing gear that hasn't retracted properly? Yeah nope.

Would have been a win win they would have been too scared to fly back to Phuket again

2 minutes ago, gravity101 said:

 

Fly all the way to Russia with landing gear that hasn't retracted properly? Yeah nope.

 

According to airlive.net, the landing gear doors would not close.  That would suck on a flight to Moscow.

 

2 hours ago, hotchilli said:

Very doubtful

YEah, especially since Thailand is vying to be the #1 maintenance hub 

https://aseannow.com/topic/1350817-thailand-targets-chinas-aircraft-maintenance-market-with-new-hub/

 

Haha, i can see a lot of problems arising with aircraft in the future in Asia. With no accountability

50 minutes ago, PomPolo said:

Don't understand why not just fly to Russia and your going to have just as many problems as if you were landing in Swampy, just wasted a bunch of fuel and caused the environment in Bangkok even more problems.  Unless the pilots actually agree also that airport/airplane safety in Russia is totally sht.

if the front landing gear could not be fully retracted as they stated the plane could not reach altitude and could not fly at speed, so reaching Moscow or even Russia would not have been possible.

3 hours ago, Bannoi said:

I wonder if sanctions leading to poor maintenance had anything to do with it.

 

That the aircraft was a Boeing had everything to do with it.

3 hours ago, NatureFilm said:

Flying with russian airlines is "Russian Roulett"

Russian Roulette with a pistol.

1 hour ago, PomPolo said:

Don't understand why not just fly to Russia and your going to have just as many problems as if you were landing in Swampy, just wasted a bunch of fuel and caused the environment in Bangkok even more problems.  Unless the pilots actually agree also that airport/airplane safety in Russia is totally sht.

Unretracted landing gear makes a huge difference to the flying performance of the plane. No pilot will elect to fly thousands of miles with such a problem.

several procedures and aircraft limitations here.

 

Restricted Max speed with all gear and doors not properly retracted and stowed would not allow the aircraft to continue to destination with current fuel load.

 

Fuel dump can take up to 25-30 min depending on the fuel load and operation of all fuel dump pumps and valves.  As well, as local laws.   Fuel dumping can be restricted to certain areas and altitudes, as DAL found out when they dumped prematurely over LAX.

 

Abnormal Procedures can take 15-30 min to coordinate with company maintenance and dispatch personnel to make decision.   Because it wasn't a "get it on the ground now" situation, they had time coordinate a plan.

 

BBK is the better choice for a gear issue.  Longer runways (HKT one runway and would close airport) .  BKK has more medical and emergency response capabilities.   Plus the trip to BKK would burn another 20k-25k lbs fuel due to low altitude and restricted speed.

 

Unfortunately, they had an abnormal situation that could have easily progressed into an emergency.   However, they had plenty of time to deal with all the issues.   Crew ( flight and cabin), company dispatch, maintenance, air traffic control, airport authority and other aircraft in the area all need to coordinate a plan.  Fortunately, they have several hours to do this.

 

Bottom line...everyone was safe.    The aircraft manufacturer and airline have spent years to develop  response to abnormal procedure and emergency procedure, procedures to most every conceivable situation.

4 hours ago, Bannoi said:

I wonder if sanctions leading to poor maintenance had anything to do with it.

There is no way of knowing what condition the aircraft was in, as Russia is cannibalizing Boeing and Airbus aircraft to keep flying.

 

IIRC the Aeroflot fleet has shrunk from 700 passenger jets to 400.

4 hours ago, Georgealbert said:

 

Pictures from Flightradar24.

 

A Russian airline flight that encountered technical difficulties and was forced to circle above the Andaman Sea for over three hours before successfully landing at Suvarnabhumi Airport.

 

Aeroflot flight SU277, travelling from Phuket to Moscow departed at 16.35, but experienced a mechanical issue shortly after take-off, prompting concerns over its ability to land safely. The aircraft involved was a 6 year old, Boeing 777-300 (ER) with registration Ra-73158.
 

The aircraft choose not to return to Phuket and instead diverted to Suvarnabhumi Airport in Bangkok, where emergency response teams were on standby.

 

 

Mr. Montchai Tahanod, Director of Phuket International Airport, explained that the flight developed a technical fault involving its front landing gear, which failed to retract properly. As a safety measure, the aircraft needed to perform an emergency landing.

 

Before landing, the aircraft had to burn off fuel to reduce its weight to a safe level, a standard safety procedure aimed at minimising the risk upon touchdown and reducing potential environmental hazards. Suvarnabhumi Airport was chosen over Phuket Airport because of its better-equipped emergency support facilities.

 

 

Officials at Suvarnabhumi Airport confirmed that emergency teams were deployed to ensure a safe landing. Mr. Kittipong Kittikhachorn, Director of Suvarnabhumi Airport, reported that the aircraft landed safely on Runway 01R, at 21.10, with no reported injuries.

 

Thai Airways is now assisting over 300 passengers from flight SU277 in continuing their journey to Moscow.

 

File picture of the aircraft involved.

 

-- 2025-02-11

 

Again a Boing, probably not serviced/maintained properly.