Jump to content
MalaysianWings - Malaysia's Premier Aviation Portal
Mulyadir Fitri

KLM RTB, Needed To Dump Fuel, With A Little Help From MH2

Recommended Posts

Yesterday, 2/10/13, KLM810 requested for RTB and fuel dumping due to a failure in their onboard weather radar. There were a few exchanges between them and the ATC as they were seeking clearance to dump fuel. In the midst of that, MH2 decided to help. Fast forward to 5.04 for that particular part.

 

MH2: Err, diorang tu banyak nak kena buang minyak. Lagi tinggi lagi bagus. Lagi pun banyak minyak nak kena buang tu.

ATC: Lagi tinggi ke lagi rendah minyak nak kena buang tu.

MH2: Lagi tinggi lagi cepat dia buang minyak. Lagi tinggi dia buang minyak lagi, takde effect negeri kita.

ATC: OK, copy. Thank you (Laughing)

ATC: Maksudnya sekarang buang minyak aa on the way ni lah?

MH2:Sekarang dia dah boleh buang minyak

ATC: OK Malaysian 2 terima kasih.

 

(Translation)

MH2: Err, they need to dump a lot of fuel. The higher the better coz they need to dump a lot of fuel.

ATC: So should they go higher or lower to dump?

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

ATC: OK, copy. Thank you (Laughing)

ATC: So should they dump now or on the way later?

MH2: They can dump straightaway now.

ATC: OK Malaysian 2 thank you

 

 

 

Youtube Video Credit to User MASwengs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't get it, in what way did MH2 assist? Relaying ATC calls? Scanning the sky ahead for weather?

Controller needs to brush up on his English a little... and his accent too.

Edited by Newitt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't get it, in what way did MH2 assist? Relaying ATC calls? Scanning the sky ahead for weather?

 

Controller needs to brush up his English a little... and his accent too.

English yes. Accent no. You don't have to be speaking like a Brit to be an effective controller. Enunciation is the key

Edited by Mulyadir Fitri

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been watching Maswengs's videos on YouTube. ATC's English is a bit sad. They need to be clearer, but most of the time you only hear mumbling in strong Malay accent. Even Taiwanese ATC are miles better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

aiyo, bloody hell, KLIA weather radar not working or what? malu lah, asking KLM to use AK weather radar cos control tower is blind

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Been listening to ATC all over the world - ours are pretty good. Try listening to the JFK blokes, or even the Istanbul guys.

 

Btw I think MH2 was unnecessary voice traffic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

aiyo, bloody hell, KLIA weather radar not working or what? malu lah, asking KLM to use AK weather radar cos control tower is blind

This is not the control tower - This is Kuala Lumpur Area Control Centre (ACC) situated behind T3 in Subang. FYI, even Singapore ACC radar controllers are unable to provide weather radar deviation services with the present equipment installed. The use of another aircraft is perfectly fine and has been done on many occasions in the past.

The Tower does indeed have access to Meteorological department doppler weather radar which you would see located abeam the ELITE highway atop a hill - looks life a golf-ball on a tee. However, I believe this is for guidance and awareness only and primarily used by the Met officer to issue trend type forecasts associated with half-hourly METARs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So that must be the KLM B777 I saw at the cargo apron this morning, with a white nose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After a nose job you keep it wrap for awhile.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it true fuel dumping is faster at higher altitudes?

 

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."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Yakushima"? That's a B777-300ER,From what i've checked,since there's a 1:400 scale version of her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

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."

Thanks, just wonder is it the fuel jettison effect or what

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

What about the newer jets? Can you dictate the number of pumps being used or are the jettison rate constant?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about the newer jets? Can you dictate the number of pumps being used or are the jettison rate constant?

 

For B777, the time required for jettison - 2500kg/ min if fuel in centre tank but 1400kg/min if centre tank is empty.

Not sure on A330

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...