Jump to content
MalaysianWings - Malaysia's Premier Aviation Portal

zamim

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    208

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by zamim

  4. Posted · Report reply

    I hope they handled the delay well...Reading reviews, MAS employees seem clueless as to the procedures involved in a delay. Perhaps it stems from poor english?

    The passengers ground handling procedures including long delays are well documented. The processes introduced in MAS are compatible with other operators, however, the implementation is much desired. The biggest handicap is lackadaisical attitude shown by employees and management team.

  11. Posted · Report reply

    There are ATB, RTB, RTC and other terms used by different operators and authorities.

    Examples:-

    Air turn back (ATB) is usually associated for aircraft returning to point of departure, whereas, return to base (RTB) is also associated for aircraft returning to point of departure but normally if the point of departure is the home base for that particular operator, eg KLIA is home base for MAS, thus, if an aircraft returns to KUL after departure then it can be classified as RTB also.

    Return to chocks (RTC) is when an aircraft returns to gate or bay whilst still on the ground. In USA, normally, it is called return to ramp (RTR)



    Fuel vaporises as it falls. So the higher the plane is the more complete the vaporisation is, so can dump at faster rate, and none should reach the ground to impact the environment. That's why the MH2 guy said:

    "MH2: The higher they go the faster they dump. The higher they dump, it will not affect our country."

     

    As far as I knew, there is nothing mentioned in FCOM that the higher you are the better the rate of jettisoning. The altitude recommended of 6000ft as example is correct for fuel vaporisation if jettison over populated areas. But over the sea, it could be jettisoned at any altitude.

    I have flown Airbus, Douglas and Boeings aircraft, the rate of jettison depends upon number of jettison pumps in used.

    For, DC10, the rate is consistent since all jettison pumps are used. but for B747 Classic, the jettison rate depends on the number of pumps and depends also on the amount of fuel to be jettisoned.

  12. Posted · Report reply

    I also don't get it and what kind of help did MH2 provide except cluttered the radio.

    1. Why MH2 and ATC communicated in bahasa

    2. Fuel dump or jettison can de accomplished at any height over water except a minimum height of 6000ft over land or populated areas. Also not allowed in clouds

    3. Where was KL810, was it out of radio contact

    4. KLIA ATC is familiar with fuel jettison and have enough experience to handle without MH2 inputs

  13. Posted · Report reply

    British Airways flight asks for push back clearance from terminal.

    Control Tower replies: 'And where is the world's most experienced airline going today without filing a flight plan ??'

    -----------------------

    ATC: "Al Italia 345 continue taxi to 26L South via Tango - check for workers along taxiway."

    Al Italia 345: " Roger, Taxi 26 Left a via Tango. Workers checked - all are working."

     

    -----------------------

    Lost student pilot: "Unknown airport with Cessna 150 circling overhead, please identify yourself."

    -----------------------

    Frankfurt Control: 'AF1733, You are on an eight mile final for 27R. You have a UH-1 three miles ahead of you on final; reduce speed to 130 knots.'

    Pilot: 'Roger, Frankfurt. We're bringing this big bird back to one-hundred and thirty knots fer ya.'

    Control: (a few moments later): 'AF33, helicopter traffic at 90 knots now 11/2 miles ahead of you; reduce speed further to 110 knots.'

    Pilot: 'AF thirty-three reining this here bird back further to 110 knots'

    Control: 'AF33, you are three miles to touchdown, helicopter traffic now 1 mile ahead of you; reduce speed to 90 knots.'

    Pilot (a little miffed): 'Sir, do you know what the stall speed of this here C-130 is ??'

    Control: 'No, but if you ask your co-pilot, he can probably tell you.'

    --------------------------

    ATC: 'Cessna 123, What are your intentions?

    Cessna: 'To get my Commercial Pilots License and Instrument Rating.'

    ATC: 'I meant in the next five minutes not years.'

    --------------------------

    Controller: AF123, say call sign of your wingman.

    Pilot: Uh ... approach, we're a single ship.

    Controller: Oh, Oh, **** !! You have traffic !!

    ---------------------

    O'Hare Approach: USA212, cleared ILS runway 32L approach, maintain 250 knots.

    USA212: Roger approach, how long do you need me to maintain that speed?

    O'Hare Approach: All the way to the gate if you can.

    USA212: Ah, OK, but you better warn ground control.

    ----------------------

    ATC: Pan Am 1, descend to 3,000 ft on QNH, altimeter 1019.

    Pan AM 1: Could you give that to me in inches?

    ATC: Pan Am 1, descend to 36,000 inches on QNH, altimeter 1019.

    ------------------------

    Beech Baron: Uh, ATC, verify you want me to taxi in front of the 747.

    ATC: Yeah, it's OK. He's not hungry.

    -------------------------

    Student Pilot: 'I'm lost; I'm over a big lake and heading toward the big "E".

    Controller: 'Make several 90 degree turns so I can identify you on radar.'

    (short pause) ...

    Controller: 'Okay then. That big lake is the Atlantic Ocean. Suggest you turn to the big "W" immediately.'

    -------------------

    Pilot: 'Approach, Acme Flt 202, with you at 12,000' and 40 DME.'

    Approach: 'Acme 202, cross 30 DME at and maintain 8000'.'

    Pilot: 'Approach, 202's unable that descent rate.'

    Approach: 'What's the matter 202 ?? Don't you have speed brakes ??'

    Pilot: 'Yup. But they're for my mistakes. Not yours.'

    -----------------------------

    Tower: 'American ... and for your information, you were slightly to the left of the center line on that approach.'

    American: 'That's correct; and, my First Officer was slightly to the right'

    -----------------------

    Controller: 'USA353 contact Cleveland Center 135.60. (pause)

    Controller: 'USA353 contact Cleveland Center 135.60!' (pause)

    Controller: 'USA353 you're just like my wife you never listen !!'

    Pilot: 'Center, this is USA553, maybe if you called her by the right name you'd get a better response!'

    -----------------------

    BB: 'Barnburner 123, Request 8300 feet.'

    Bay Approach: 'Barnburner 123, say reason for requested altitude.'

    BB: 'Because the last two times I've been at 8500, I've nearly been run over by some bozo at 8500 feet going the wrong way !!'

    Bay Approach: 'That's a good reason. 8300 approved.'

    ------------------------------------

    Controller: 'FAR1234 confirm your type of aircraft. Are you an Airbus 330 or 340?'

    Pilot: 'A340 of course!'

    Controller: 'Then would you mind switching on the two other engines and give me 1000 feet per minute, please ??'

    ---------------------------

    Tower: 'Cessna 123, turn right now and report your heading.'

    Pilot: 'Wilco. 341, 342, 343, 344, 345...'

    ---------------------------------

    Foreign Pilot Trainee: 'Tower, please speak slowly, I am a baby in English and lonely in the cockpit'

    -----------------------

    Controller: 'CRX600, are you on course to SUL?'

    Pilot: 'More or less.'

    Controller: 'So proceed a little bit more to SUL.'

    ----------------------------

    Pilot: 'Good morning, Frankfurt ground, KLM 242 request start up and push back, please.'

    Tower: 'KLM 242 expect start up in two hours.'

    Pilot: 'Please confirm: two hours delay?'

    Tower: 'Affirmative.'

    Pilot: 'In that case, cancel the good morning!'

  19. Posted · Report reply

    KUALA LUMPUR (Aug 20): Malaysia Airlines System Bhd (MAS) said its net

    loss for the second quarter to end-June 2013 narrowed by about 50% to

    RM175.9 million, from a net loss of RM349.2 million in the second quarter of

    2012.

     

    But the national carrier said it posted an operating profit of RM8 million for the

    quarter, compared to an operating loss of RM102 million in the

    corresponding quarter one year ago.

     

    There was also improvement in revenue for the quarter, rising to RM3.8

    billion from RM3.3 billion a year ago.

     

    In a press statement, MAS said the improved result was attributed to the

    strong growth in revenue and the focus on productivity and cost control.

     

    “The group reported stronger year-on-year operational performance with 14%

    increase in revenue and 19% increase in capacity. Overall traffic increased

    29% and seat loads climbed to a 10-year record high of 80%.”

     

    For the first six months of 2013, Malaysia Airlines recorded a 61% reduction

    in operating loss of RM157 million compared to a loss of RM409 million in

    the previous year corresponding period, added the statement.

     

    Net loss for 1H 2013 ended 30 June 2013 was RM454.8 million compared to

    a loss of RM521.0 million one year ago.

     

    Commenting on the financial results, MAS group CEO Ahmad Jauhari Yahya

    said: “We are pleased that we have been able to bring in an operating profit

    in Q2 this year... The strong push to fill our aircraft, optimize our asset

    utilization and preserve shareholder value is gaining good momentum.”

     

    “We are making good progress to pare down our losses with the many

    initiatives to drive revenue, manage costs and improve productivity."

     

    “We remain on track with our business plan to turnaround our group and

    build sustainable profit by end 2014”, added Ahmad Jauhari.

     

    MAS’ business plan, unveiled at the end of 2011, targets profitability in three

    years.

     

    Going forward, Ahmad Jauhari sees a better second half of 2013.

    “Traditionally the second half of the year is better compared to the first half.

    We believe the rest of 2013 will be encouraging,” he said.

     

    Source: The Edge

     

    Normally in the report the CEO will also mention about yield but not this time. The load factor was stressed. Based on previous reports if load factor is high , yield would drop. Why did they omit it?

  22. Posted · Report reply

    Jetstar, Virgin planes in tarmac bingle at Melbourne Airport

    Date

    August 10, 2013 - 3:37PM

    384 reading nowRead later

    Deborah Gough and Matt O'Sullivan

     

    inShare

    Pin Itsubmit to redditEmail articlePrintReprints & permissions

     

    Ads by Google

     

    Coming Economic CollapseWealthDaily.com/Economic_Collapse

    18 Critical Items You Need To Prepare, Tomorrow May Be Too Late

     

    Parts of a plane shown on the tarmac after a collision at Melbourne Airport. Photo: Supplied

    A Virgin Australia plane carrying 175 passengers reversed into a Jetstar aircraft at Melbourne Airport on Saturday morning, causing up to $3 million damage to the two jets.

     

    The incident occurred when a Virgin jet, bound for Maroochydore, was being pushed back on the tarmac in preparation for take-off about 9.30am.

     

    Paul Cousins, the president of the engineers' union, said the Virgin aircraft was pushed back to such an extent that the end of its left-hand wing had cut off the tail cone of the Jetstar A320.

     

     

    The damaged rear of the Jetstar plane following a collision at Melbourne Airport. Photo: Supplied

    A Jetstar statement said its aircraft was stationary when the collision occurred. This contradicted Virgins initialreport that both planes were moving.

     

    Advertisement

    Mr Cousins estimated the damage bill to be up to $3 million.

    "They were very lucky that the [Virgin plane's] winglet did not go into the auxillary power unit, which is a small jet engine that runs in the back of the aircraft, Mr Cousins said.

    Damage to a Virgin plane after a collision on the tarmac at Melbourne Airport. Photo: Supplied

    "It could have caused that engine to rupture ... bits and pieces could have come out it and gone flying everywhere."

    The Jetstar aircraft, which had just landed from Sydney, had pulled up just short of the terminal gate. It is understood it only had flight crew on board.

    Virgin Australia spokesman Nathan Scholz confirmed that engineers were assessing damage to its Boeing 737-800, which appeared to have sustained "minor damage" to its wing tip. He said the damage bill would not be known until the plane was moved to a hangar for assessment by engineers.

    The flight had 175 passengers, four cabin and two pilot crew on board at the time.

    No one was injured in the accident, with passengers expected to board a replacement flight early on Saturday afternoon.

    Mr Cousins said the damage to the Jetstar aircraft was significant, and it was likely to be grounded for several days.

    "In conservative terms, at the moment we are talking $2 to $3 million for both aircraft," he said.

    The Australian Transport Safety Bureau, Melbourne Airport, Virgin Australia and Jetstar are all investigating the crash.

    The collision occurred in an area between the domestic and international terminals. Melbourne Airport said the two gates where the accident occurred were temporarily closed while investigations were carried out.

×
×
  • Create New...