Jump to content
MalaysianWings - Malaysia's Premier Aviation Portal

Ahmad M

Silver Member
  • Content Count

    322
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Ahmad M


  1. One thing to remember is that although you might get a cockpit visit inflight at the discretion of the flight crew, it is actually a big risk for them. Let's say another passenger (or even any cabin crew) saw that a non crew member enter the cockpit, he/she can rightly question the event and lodge a complaint. Worst case scenario will be a sacking for the tech crew. A Qatar Airways captain was sacked just because a cabin crew reported to the company that the captain was standing at the cockpit entrance with the door unlocked and there was a passenger nearby.


  2. I suppose yes and no, depending on which route youre referring to. I don't believe the 739 can make the 6-9 hour radius destinations....and also, you're short by about 80 seats.

     

    In the case of your employer Radzi if youre referring to A333 flights to CGK and DPS, then i would say yes the 739 would be perfect for these.

     

     

    Not really perfect I don't think. Just to get the -900ER to do those sectors is not really feasible as the whole idea of getting the ER is to go longer anyway. Another thought, on a flight 6 hours or longer, would you fly a wide body, twin aisle aircraft or a narrow body single aisle aircraft? Unless MH is considering new routes and destinations which suits the 737-900ER than they'll probably stick to the -800s for the time being.


  3. ..and the runway in use in WMSA is also dictated by the runway in use in WMKK.. ;)

     

    Not necessarily so as runway 15 is preferred no matter what runway is in used at WMKK. That is unless the the weather especially the tailwind component necessitates a runway change.


  4. It will be interesting to know the traffic information during the time of the incident such as if any other traffic had been holding or diverted. There is a general feeling that AK seem to take a bit more risk when landing in bad weather especially during their early days. There were a few incidents that I recalled, BKI and MYY comes to mind but it is also thought that AK has improved safety wise in the past couple of years. Fortunately there was no fatality in this incident and hopefully it will be a warning and lesson to all that landing in bad weather is a very serious matter. Safety must always come before schedule and $$$.


  5. To be more accurate picture #3 is a Flight Training Device or FTD and has recently been called an APT too (Airbus Flight Trainer). It is used as part of simulator training where concentration is mainly on Standard Procedures and FMGS work. There will be 6 or 7 sessions on the FTD after which the trainees will move on to the Full Flight Simulator. It is located at the former briefing room that faces the conference room in the Flight Crew Training Centre at SZB.


  6. I think we are missing the point here a little bit. Is it MH or the government that is denying AK's requests? MH can say all they want but if the government say otherwise than there's nothing much MH can do. If the government for whatever reason wants to "protect" MH, do you honestly think they"ll refuse? I would say thank you very much myself. We all know the government works in mysterious ways ;).

     

    Another thing, to say that AK has been victimized is also not accurate as history has shown that they have benefited from decisions made by our lawmakers. Just a thought, when AK ordered all those aircrafts did they honestly thought that they will get whatever they were going to ask for? Again knowing our government, that's a pretty reckless assumption unless they had hedged their bets and it is not really paying like they thought it would be...

×
×
  • Create New...