Phuket Air working to meet EU safety standards

BANGKOK: -- A European Union (EU) safety ban on Phuket Air may soon be lifted as the troubled airline had recently overhauled its maintenance system to meet EU requirements, according to the Thai Aviation Department.

The EU on Wednesday banned 92, mostly African-based, airlines from landing at European airports, declaring them unsafe as part of a new blacklist of airlines that failed to meet international safety

standards.

In Asia, the list also included Ariana Afghan Airlines and South Korea's Air Koryo.

Like Phuket Air, all face restrictions on being able to operate flights to Europe until they meet EU safety rules.

Aviation Department director general Chaisak Angkasuwan said his department ordered Phuket Air to improve its maintenance system last year after the airline suffered problems on flights to Britain and the

Netherlands.

In April, the airline twice aborted take-offs from the United Arab Emirates to Britain when passengers saw fuel gushing from a wing.

More than 400 passengers on a flight from Bangkok to Amsterdam were also hit with a 24-hour delay after hydraulic problems forced their flight to be cancelled.

However, Mr. Chaisak said the airline was cooperating well with the department, and had hired specialists from Air France to revamp its maintenance system.

The director general said the EU would send civil aviation experts to Thailand to examine the airline’s improved maintenance system within the next few weeks.

He also said that if the inspectors found that the system met international safety standards, it was likely that the airline would be removed from the EU blacklist.

The airline suspended direct flights to European destinations last year.

--TNA 2006-03-24

In April, the airline twice aborted take-offs from the United Arab Emirates to Britain when passengers saw fuel gushing from a wing.

.....then made them return to the terminal, wait a few hours, get back on the plane, abort another take-off (some passengers in tears), return to the terminal again, wait another few hours, queue for buses, in sweltering middle-eastern heat, wait another couple of hours, taken to sub-standard hotels, with NO BAR, sleep in shared rooms, WITH STRANGERS, alarmed at 6am, to catch the flight, approx 30+ hours late, miss connecting flights and miss 2 days work...........

.............and, not a penny in compensation!!

Do they think anyone is going to get on a Poo Air long haul again!!

they define that saying 'you get what you paid for'

Edited March 24, 200620 yr by game4shame

why did the guy with the fabric scott tape that long?

In April, the airline twice aborted take-offs from the United Arab Emirates to Britain when passengers saw fuel gushing from a wing.

.....then made them return to the terminal, wait a few hours, get back on the plane, abort another take-off (some passengers in tears), return to the terminal again, wait another few hours, queue for buses, in sweltering middle-eastern heat, wait another couple of hours, taken to sub-standard hotels, with NO BAR, sleep in shared rooms, WITH STRANGERS, alarmed at 6am, to catch the flight, approx 30+ hours late, miss connecting flights and miss 2 days work...........

.............and, not a penny in compensation!!

Do they think anyone is going to get on a Poo Air long haul again!!

they define that saying 'you get what you paid for'

why did the guy with the fabric scott tape that long?

?

Leasing old aircrafts flying in the air, repairing the aircraft using re-condition or fake part, it makes me feel nervous flying with plunging air.

Atleast they are _trying_ to get there. Not there yet. Soon they will start being able to land.

Leasing old aircrafts flying in the air, repairing the aircraft using re-condition or fake part, it makes me feel nervous flying with plunging air.

The aircrafts are not that old, and where does it say they are using fake parts, reconditioned is ok as long as it's done by the aircraft manufacturer.

I beleive one of the problems they had was the crew licences.

I thought I read that they were changing their name to "Holiday", normally changing the name is a way to fool the flying public.

I thought I read that they were changing their name to "Holiday", normally changing the name is a way to fool the flying public.

That's possible, but it still doesn't prove that they are unsafe.

Leasing old aircrafts flying in the air, repairing the aircraft using re-condition or fake part, it makes me feel nervous flying with plunging air.

The aircrafts are not that old, and where does it say they are using fake parts, reconditioned is ok as long as it's done by the aircraft manufacturer.

I beleive one of the problems they had was the crew licences.

when they are already nonchalant with such easy-to-arrange items..........