Jump to content
MalaysianWings - Malaysia's Premier Aviation Portal
Robert

AK5342 emergency landing

Recommended Posts

Just had an SMS from a friend who took AK5342 LGK-SIN today. It seems the plane took a nosedive and has made an emergency landing at KUL. They are off the plane and awaiting info.

 

How to find out more detailed info?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't think this is real as otherwise the news will be circulating by now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry not been on line much.

 

The people on board were told that the emerrgency was due to an "air conditioning" issue.

 

It happened but perhaps wasnt an emergency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what happened from a passenger's point of view. This is the letter I sent to AirAsia

 

Dear Sir, Madam,

 

I was with my family on board AK5342 on the 17th of august from Langkawi to Singapore. The complaint I have is about the lack of information from the cockpitcrew about the things that happened during this flight. After taxi out we were standing near the runway at Langkawi for at least 20 minutes. Then the captain informed the passengers that due to airport congestion we still had to wait another 10 minutes. This was somewhat difficult to believe. We were not the only ones thinking that this was not true. Shortly after reaching cruising altitude the aircraft started to descent again with speedbrakes. All the way to low altitude, I suppose 10.000 ft. By this time I told my wife we were going to divert, the captain informed the passengers a few minutes later that due to a technical problem we had to divert to Kuala Lumpur. He mentioned nothing about what kind of failure, to me it was clear that it was a pressurization problem. Later the temperature in the cabin became hot, we heard the airconditioning surge a few times. During the further descent to the airport of KL we felt more than normal pressure on the ears, it was clear that the pressurization of the aircraft was no longer working. During taxi after landing the first officer apologized for the inconvenience of the diversion and the airconditioning problems.

 

Please inform me about the real problems of this flight, as the captain was not telling the whole story. We were not the only ones who had big question marks. It even crossed my mind that the cockpit crew was very busy before departure trying to solve a problem but I will not accuse anybody of something which I cannot prove. But the lack of information makes me think so. A failure or problem can happen. A diversion is inconvenient but so be it. But I like to be taken seriously as a passenger, I have a right to. For your information I know what I am talking about, I am an airline-pilot myself.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are an airline pilot, you are aware that they were doing emergency descend so what else you don't know there? I'm confused...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are an airline pilot, you are aware that they were doing emergency descend so what else you don't know there? I'm confused...

 

If it isn't already obvious to you, he was not the only passenger on the flight.

 

I'm sure you can do the rest of the math...if not, just stay confused.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what happened from a passenger's point of view. This is the letter I sent to AirAsia

 

Dear Sir, Madam,

 

I was with my family on board AK5342 on the 17th of august from Langkawi to Singapore. The complaint I have is about the lack of information from the cockpitcrew about the things that happened during this flight. After taxi out we were standing near the runway at Langkawi for at least 20 minutes. Then the captain informed the passengers that due to airport congestion we still had to wait another 10 minutes. This was somewhat difficult to believe. We were not the only ones thinking that this was not true. Shortly after reaching cruising altitude the aircraft started to descent again with speedbrakes. All the way to low altitude, I suppose 10.000 ft. By this time I told my wife we were going to divert, the captain informed the passengers a few minutes later that due to a technical problem we had to divert to Kuala Lumpur. He mentioned nothing about what kind of failure, to me it was clear that it was a pressurization problem. Later the temperature in the cabin became hot, we heard the airconditioning surge a few times. During the further descent to the airport of KL we felt more than normal pressure on the ears, it was clear that the pressurization of the aircraft was no longer working. During taxi after landing the first officer apologized for the inconvenience of the diversion and the airconditioning problems.

Please inform me about the real problems of this flight, as the captain was not telling the whole story. We were not the only ones who had big question marks. It even crossed my mind that the cockpit crew was very busy before departure trying to solve a problem but I will not accuse anybody of something which I cannot prove. But the lack of information makes me think so. A failure or problem can happen. A diversion is inconvenient but so be it. But I like to be taken seriously as a passenger, I have a right to. For your information I know what I am talking about, I am an airline-pilot myself.

 

Not clear still?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what happened from a passenger's point of view. This is the letter I sent to AirAsia

 

Dear Sir, Madam,

 

I was with my family on board AK5342 on the 17th of august from Langkawi to Singapore. The complaint I have is about the lack of information from the cockpitcrew about the things that happened during this flight. After taxi out we were standing near the runway at Langkawi for at least 20 minutes. Then the captain informed the passengers that due to airport congestion we still had to wait another 10 minutes. This was somewhat difficult to believe. We were not the only ones thinking that this was not true. Shortly after reaching cruising altitude the aircraft started to descent again with speedbrakes. All the way to low altitude, I suppose 10.000 ft. By this time I told my wife we were going to divert, the captain informed the passengers a few minutes later that due to a technical problem we had to divert to Kuala Lumpur. He mentioned nothing about what kind of failure, to me it was clear that it was a pressurization problem. Later the temperature in the cabin became hot, we heard the airconditioning surge a few times. During the further descent to the airport of KL we felt more than normal pressure on the ears, it was clear that the pressurization of the aircraft was no longer working. During taxi after landing the first officer apologized for the inconvenience of the diversion and the airconditioning problems.

 

Please inform me about the real problems of this flight, as the captain was not telling the whole story. We were not the only ones who had big question marks. It even crossed my mind that the cockpit crew was very busy before departure trying to solve a problem but I will not accuse anybody of something which I cannot prove. But the lack of information makes me think so. A failure or problem can happen. A diversion is inconvenient but so be it. But I like to be taken seriously as a passenger, I have a right to. For your information I know what I am talking about, I am an airline-pilot myself.

 

since you already know what system has failed , why the email to AirAsia ?

 

if you were traveling on a school bus, and one of the tyres got punctured, certainly the driver wouldn't have to explain : tyre manufacture date, last re-pressurization, road conditions and then load it all onto a visually pleasing "recreated simulation". As long as you get from A to B at the agreed fare, I would think AK fulfilled their obligation to you as a carrier.

 

besides, what solace would it bring you to find that compressor C2, failed at 5327feet after take off @ 215 IAS due to a malfunctioning capacitor T2378SAD and pressure system had to shut down as per airbus procedure section 5.67 revision 2 . :p :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry I sent the e-mail. I won't bother you anymore.

 

Goodbye

 

:blink: ...... sulking?

 

No offence but isn't that kinda childish coming from an "airline-pilot"? I believe you mentioned that you are married, aren't you? Maybe I misunderstood, do correct me if I am wrong but that last statement does give me that perception.

Edited by Adrian T

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(note: I mean to put this in the last post but suddenly I "did not have permission" to edit. You only can modify your post once?)

 

Just out of curiousity, are pilots obliged to give passengers the cold hard facts when emergency situation arises or just give what he thinks is appropriate? Maybe Capt Radzi can answer this one...?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what happened from a passenger's point of view. This is the letter I sent to AirAsia

 

Dear Sir, Madam,

 

I was with my family on board AK5342 on the 17th of august from Langkawi to Singapore. The complaint I have is about the lack of information from the cockpitcrew about the things that happened during this flight. After taxi out we were standing near the runway at Langkawi for at least 20 minutes. Then the captain informed the passengers that due to airport congestion we still had to wait another 10 minutes. This was somewhat difficult to believe. We were not the only ones thinking that this was not true. Shortly after reaching cruising altitude the aircraft started to descent again with speedbrakes. All the way to low altitude, I suppose 10.000 ft. By this time I told my wife we were going to divert, the captain informed the passengers a few minutes later that due to a technical problem we had to divert to Kuala Lumpur. He mentioned nothing about what kind of failure, to me it was clear that it was a pressurization problem. Later the temperature in the cabin became hot, we heard the airconditioning surge a few times. During the further descent to the airport of KL we felt more than normal pressure on the ears, it was clear that the pressurization of the aircraft was no longer working. During taxi after landing the first officer apologized for the inconvenience of the diversion and the airconditioning problems.

 

Please inform me about the real problems of this flight, as the captain was not telling the whole story. We were not the only ones who had big question marks. It even crossed my mind that the cockpit crew was very busy before departure trying to solve a problem but I will not accuse anybody of something which I cannot prove. But the lack of information makes me think so. A failure or problem can happen. A diversion is inconvenient but so be it. But I like to be taken seriously as a passenger, I have a right to. For your information I know what I am talking about, I am an airline-pilot myself.

 

Not quite sure what are you trying to prove, Jan. You come in, posted this, then could not take negative comments and sulk. It really baffles me. So are you trying to tell us that you know a lot about airplanes or are you just trying to tell us that you are a pilot? Honestly, if I were in Airasia, I wouldn't know how to answer your email. What do you expect the captain to tell you? Bear in mind, not every passenger in the plane is aircraft savvy and most would just suffice by the explanation given i.e. "airconditioning problem". Why give them all the technical details and scare them even more? I am not belittling your post in any way but just trying to understand....

 

Now....where's my flame retardent suit.... :p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...

Now....where's my flame retardent suit.... :p

 

I thot you were teflon-coated oredi, bro. :D

 

Yes, funny that 'jan' registered just to post that 'letter', then 'adios'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thot you were teflon-coated oredi, bro. :D

 

Yes, funny that 'jan' registered just to post that 'letter', then 'adios'.

 

Which is stronger, teflon or the flame retardant suit? :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You need another one(kevlar) and mix it all together. hahaha...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would've never expected that , from an airline pilot .

 

Would you have preferred the following ?

 

We are having a problem with Pack #2 , we started the APU , but we're unable to engage the APU bleed for some reason , cross bleed isn't working out for us either . Technically speaking we can fly with one pack , ble bla bla abla bla ... Why would passengers need to know this?

 

Next time on your airline flight , quote the FCOM , the MEL , and everything lah , as to why you wanna divert !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would've never expected that , from an airline pilot .

 

Would you have preferred the following ?

 

We are having a problem with Pack #2 , we started the APU , but we're unable to engage the APU bleed for some reason , cross bleed isn't working out for us either . Technically speaking we can fly with one pack , ble bla bla abla bla ... Why would passengers need to know this?

 

Next time on your airline flight , quote the FCOM , the MEL , and everything lah , as to why you wanna divert !

 

I would be even more blur. Oh my God! We're gonna crash. Everyone, crash position! :p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Smart decision on behalf of the tech crew not to divulge everything and cause unnecessary panic in the cabin.

:good: As long as the pilot did everything correct and landed the plane safely, what else do you need to know about?

 

I am not a pilot and if I know it was caused by the malfunctioning of the air conditioning, I am happy enough with this reasoning. I won't want to know what Airbus page of Airbus procedure they followed which is deemed too much info. for me. Flexing the pilot muscles won't work and people won't give you a reason JUST because of that. As a pilot, I believe you have to observe and maintain the professional manner and responsibility, which including a respect to your peers (other pilots). After all they were the ones who made sure everyone, incl. yourself, were safe and sound.

 

I hope you get a response from Air Asia, if not, don't be surprised or upset. :D

Edited by S V Choong
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sigh...it's a good thing the likes of him do not represent all pilots, geez...

 

Hey Jan, if you're reading this, chill out man....it's nothing personal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:good: As long as the pilot did everything correct and landed the plane safely, what else do you need to know about?

 

I am not a pilot and if I know it was caused by the malfunctioning of the air conditioning, I am happy enough with this reasoning. I won't want to know what Airbus page of Airbus procedure they followed which is deemed too much info. for me. Flexing the pilot muscles won't work and people won't give you a reason JUST because of that. As a pilot, I believe you have to observe and maintain the professional manner and responsibility, which including a respect to your peers (other pilots). After all they were the ones who made sure everyone, incl. yourself, were safe and sound.

 

I hope you get a response from Air Asia, if not, don't be surprised or upset. :D

 

Well said SV.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

one thing is that Air Asia have been very good at keeping any news reports on its aircraft incidents even in the past. However in this instance, its still unknown whether it is really indeed an air-condtioning problem that resulted in this diversion to KUL instead of proceeding to SIN; or is it a Depressurisation problem - as a loss of pressurisation would be considered a fairly serious incident.

 

one thing is that Air Asia have been very good at keeping any news reports on its aircraft incidents even in the past. However in this instance, its still unknown whether it is really indeed an air-condtioning problem that resulted in this diversion to KUL instead of proceeding to SIN; or is it a Depressurisation problem - as a loss of pressurisation would be considered a fairly serious incident.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...