Jump to content
MalaysianWings - Malaysia's Premier Aviation Portal
Sign in to follow this  
michgyver

MAB Pilot Questioned Flight Path MH132 AKL-KUL

Recommended Posts

The pilot on flight MH132 raised concerns eight minutes after take-off when his Airbus A330 was instructed to fly further south than usual.

 

The plane, which left at 2.23am Christmas Day (7.23am Malaysian time) was heading towards Melbourne rather than a more direct flight path to Kuala Lumpur.

 

 

 

The Auckland Oceanic control centre informed him that the flight plan had been given to Airways, which managed air traffic control for New Zealand and South Pacific.

NZ Herald reported that Airways would be probing into the matter. However, the passengers were unaware of the changes.

 

The flight plan the airline filed with us was going to Kuala Lumpur but via a slightly different route than the pilot was expecting, an Airways spokesman was quoted as saying.

 

Airways will work closely with Malaysia Airlines to find out how the confusion came about.

 

New Zealand aviation commentator Peter Clark praised the pilot for his actions.

 

The pilot has done a very good job by noticing it, querying it and not just blindly flying off and ending up in the Southern Ocean, he told NZ Herald.

 

Flights on the route often travel around the bottom of Australia to avoid bad weather or headwinds, Clark said.

 

WeatherWatch head analyst Philip Duncan was quoted as saying that the weather between New Zealand and Kuala Lumpur was fairly calm, but thunderstorms across northern Australia and Papua New Guinea might have influenced the flight path.

 

- See more at: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/we-flying-to-kl-or-melbourne-asks-mas-pilot-after-kiwi-mix-up#sthash.U84Vcj6S.dpuf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The pilot on flight MH132 raised concerns eight minutes after take-off when his Airbus A330 was instructed to fly further south than usual.

 

The plane, which left at 2.23am Christmas Day (7.23am Malaysian time) was heading towards Melbourne rather than a more direct flight path to Kuala Lumpur.

 

 

 

The Auckland Oceanic control centre informed him that the flight plan had been given to Airways, which managed air traffic control for New Zealand and South Pacific.

NZ Herald reported that Airways would be probing into the matter. However, the passengers were unaware of the changes.

 

The flight plan the airline filed with us was going to Kuala Lumpur but via a slightly different route than the pilot was expecting, an Airways spokesman was quoted as saying.

 

Airways will work closely with Malaysia Airlines to find out how the confusion came about.

 

New Zealand aviation commentator Peter Clark praised the pilot for his actions.

 

The pilot has done a very good job by noticing it, querying it and not just blindly flying off and ending up in the Southern Ocean, he told NZ Herald.

 

Flights on the route often travel around the bottom of Australia to avoid bad weather or headwinds, Clark said.

 

WeatherWatch head analyst Philip Duncan was quoted as saying that the weather between New Zealand and Kuala Lumpur was fairly calm, but thunderstorms across northern Australia and Papua New Guinea might have influenced the flight path.

 

- See more at: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/we-flying-to-kl-or-melbourne-asks-mas-pilot-after-kiwi-mix-up#sthash.U84Vcj6S.dpuf

 

I once travelled between AKL-SIN on SQ in 2007, our flight flew past Melbourne rather than Sydney or Brisbane due to bad weather. The pilot told us before our flight took off.

 

Not a biggie I presume.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Understandably so - cos they are under the microscope. Any incident, no matter how small, will be picked up by the media and blown out of all proportion. Social media will also make it worse.

 

That was why I advocated that the newco should have a 100% fresh start with new name, logo, code, callsign, etc. It hard to shake off those two disasters last year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like how they say 'much maligned airline' .... MAS was one of the safest airlines in the world before their unlucky year in 2014. Such biased reporting doesn't help their situation at all. Poor MAB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no idea what proper procedures there are in place, but I would have thought the people at front end of the plane should be made aware beforehand, before leaving terra firma, of the pathway that has been approved for them to make their way to 'point B' ?! :blink:

 

And if you want a piece that has really sauced it up, here it is

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3374909/Malaysia-Airline-flew-wrong-direction-pilot-didn-t-know.html

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no idea what proper procedures there are in place, but I would have thought the people at front end of the plane should be made aware beforehand, before leaving terra firma, of the pathway that has been approved for them to make their way to 'point B' ?! :blink:

 

And if you want a piece that has really sauced it up, here it is

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3374909/Malaysia-Airline-flew-wrong-direction-pilot-didn-t-know.html

:)

 

Of all my flights I took between AKL-SIN or AKL-KUL of the 18 years of my life in NZ, I have never been routed all the way up to Papua New Guinea as show on the tabloid/ newspaper's route map.

 

It had always been Brisbane, Gold Coast, Mackay or Rockhamption (rare), Sydney or Melbourne (rare).

 

Auckland to Melbourne isn't Southward, more like Westward.

Edited by S V Choong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not surprising if many among us ave. Joes would think straight line from say, Hong Kong to New York passes right over the Pacific. My school friend didn't believe me when I told him shortest distance from Equator to some points in northern hemisphere passes North pole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no idea what proper procedures there are in place, but I would have thought the people at front end of the plane should be made aware beforehand, before leaving terra firma, of the pathway that has been approved for them to make their way to 'point B' ?! :blink:

 

And if you want a piece that has really sauced it up, here it is

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3374909/Malaysia-Airline-flew-wrong-direction-pilot-didn-t-know.html

:)

Now THAT title is a mouthful! Among the many terms used to report this incident were 'spooked' or 'baffled' but this one menang toto already lah! But one thing I don't really understand is why do they keep emphasizing the fact that the passengers weren't informed of the route change? I don't believe many would actually care how they get to KL as long as they get to KL. Unless of course there were some sharp-eyed passengers on board who might have noticed the unusual routing on the flight information screen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol. Don't the pilots review the flight route before leaving the ground? Isn't there supposed to be a briefing etc etc as per BC Tam's post?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The pilot did well.

The A333 doesn't have the range of the 772.

Continuing with a westward/southward heading (with headwind) would have stretched the A333's legs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My thought of this incident:

 

1. If the aircraft was being vectored away from the plight-planned route, then the pilot should ask the reason from ATC.

2. If the southerly route is as per the flight plan, then the pilot should just follow it, unless there is other reason to request for a route change.

3. The route selected by the dispatcher is usually the best route available in term of time and fuel, as well as avoidance of weather

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Capt, does the dispatcher work for the airline or for the airport authorities?

The dispatcher works for the airline. They are the ones who plan the routes and send the flight plan to the ATC. They will make sure the route complies with all the regulations, otherwise the plight plan will not be accepted by ATC. One feature of the flight plan is the minimum fuel required to the flight, therefore if the pilots took at least minimum fuel and follow the flight plan they should have enough fuel to reach their destination.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Somebody's going to get fired...

 

MAS said in a statement yesterday that the pilot of MH132 was given the latest flight plan by the airline’s Operations Dispatch Centre while Auckland’s Air Traffic Control was given an earlier flight plan.

 

“The two routes were following an approved flight path and the aircraft had enough fuel for both,” it said.

 

http://www.thestar.com.my/news/nation/2015/12/28/flight-plans-led-pilot-to-clarify-with-traffic-control/

Edited by Mohd Suhaimi Fariz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Either way the current buzz online that worse, seems to make it like a pilot error is horribly blown out of proportion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unbelievable and this actually makes news. Must be a dry day for the news fellas

Are you implying this sort of things happen more often than we would like to believe ? :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On Monday, Malaysia Airlines confirmed it had "inadvertently" given different flight plans to the air crew and Auckland's Air Traffic Control Centre.

"Our flight MH132 from Auckland to Kuala Lumpur was given the latest flight plan by the airline's Operations Dispatch Centre (ODC), while Auckland's Air Traffic Control (ATC) was inadvertently given an earlier flight plan," Malaysia Airlines said in a statement.

-Malaysiakini

 

Looks like somebody forgot to cross-check the paper flight plan vs the ATC flight plan... oops! :pardon:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you implying this sort of things happen more often than we would like to believe ? :)

Apparently it is - based on a post on the Airliners thread on this

 

Maybe but this is not an uncommon problem. Thousands of duplicate flight plan are sent every day. The reason is that the same system to adjust the release is the same one to file flight plans and and it is easy to forget to inhibit the ATC filing when a change to the release is made.

 

Also, failures in both dispatch and ATC systems that file and accept flight plans are common as well. It could very well be that the dispatcher followed SOP but there was an issue with the software either on his side or ATC side. Both are very common issues.

 

Edited by Mohd Suhaimi Fariz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Malaysia Airlines launches investigation after pilot queries flight path

10:07 AM Monday Dec 28, 2015

 

Malaysia Airlines has launched its own investigation after a flight plan bungle saw a pilot flying out of Auckland on Christmas Day being surprised by the direction he started flying in.

NZME revealed yesterday that the pilot of Kuala Lumpur-bound flight MH132 queried why his Airbus A330 was heading so far south just minutes after take-off.

He wondered why the plane was heading towards Melbourne and not taking a more direct flight path to the Malaysian capital.

During discussions with air traffic controllers at the Auckland Oceanic control centre, the pilot was informed of the flight plan his airline had given to Airways, which manages air traffic control for New Zealand and South Pacific.

He then continued across the Tasman Sea before heading northwest to Kuala Lumpur.
Malaysia Airlines today admitted the mix-up.

It said the pilot was given its flight plan by the airline's Operations Dispatch Centre (ODC).

However, Auckland's air traffic control centre was "inadvertently given an earlier flight plan".

"Both routes were following an approved flight path and the aircraft had enough fuel for both routes," a Malaysia Airlines statement said.

"The safety of both passengers and crew were never compromised at any time.

"Malaysia Airlines is currently conducting its investigation in the flight plan submission.

"Safety is of the utmost priority for Malaysia Airlines and it adheres very strictly to all safety procedures and processes."

It is understood passengers on board the flight, which left at 2.23am Christmas Day, were not alerted to the mix-up.

Airways' internal safety team is also investigating.

"The flight plan the airline filed with us was going to Kuala Lumpur but via a slightly different route than the pilot was expecting," a spokeswoman said.

Airways will "work closely" with the carrier to find out how the confusion came about, the spokeswoman said.

Last year, 577 crew and passengers lost their lives on two separate Malaysia Airlines flights. Flight MH370 disappeared between Kuala Lumpur and Beijing for unknown reasons in March and MH17 was shot down by a Russian-made missile over Ukraine in July.

- NZME.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11566747

Edited by xtemujin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Are you implying this sort of things happen more often than we would like to believe ? :)

Refer to capt radzi s post. That pretty much sums it up. Before you shoot the pilot, atc does make mistakes too. Anyway even its the wrong flight plan, its not that difficult to re route inflight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Small issue but extremely bad publicity, something they don't deserve and definitely don't need now. CM.. What the hell? Can you please keep everything together? One step forwards, two steps back. I hope his decision to discontinue FRA, AMS and CDG don't come back and bite MH in the ass. Precious slots lost, lots of business also down the drain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...