Malaysia Airlines didn’t fly wrong way for 8 minutes out of Auckland
For an example of hysterics in the click bait media, the persistent reports that a Malaysia Airlines jet flew in the opposite direction to that intended for a full eight minutes on its way from Auckland to Kuala Lumpur is hard to pass up.
There remain a few grey areas in the explanations so far forthcoming, but this was a minor incident, to MH132, on 25 December 2015, that had nothing to do with the appalling loss of life on MH370 (239 on board) on 8 March 2014, nor the shoot down of MH17 (298 dead) on 17 July 2014.
The diagram on top of page from Aviation Herald and its report on this incident is the key to understanding what happened, and makes the media reports that continued to be posted in their original, inaccurate, and frankly ridiculous forms on the internet an embarrassment to those that care about accurate journalism.
What we know is that because of adverse forecast headwinds forecast for cruising altitudes over the tropical north of Australia flight planning at Malaysia Airlines chose to use an often used but more southerly track across the great southern land to get to KL.
There seems to have been an earlier flight plan using the more frequently used northerly route.
On departure from Auckland MH132 was given instructions by the tower to take them away from the normal traffic that it has to manage for multiple arrivals and departures prior to picking up its filed flight plan. Such instructions by busy airport towers are about getting a flight away from an airport, influenced not just by traffic but the prevailing winds on the airfield and the runway being used.
Eight minutes seems like a perfectly reasonable period of time in which to achieve this, whereupon the pilots of MH132 were clearly surprised by being given a heading which wasn’t what they expected from their filed flight plan.
What is unclear is whether or not the pilots had studied the latest and correct plan, or an outdated plan. The Aviation Herald report infers that they had expected to fly the northerly route, while the tower directed them on a heading consistent with the newer more southerly route, which was then flown to KL once that confusion was resolved.
However there are aspects of this incident that remain undetermined, and incident investigations often produce surprise findings based on additional information.
Finding out whether the tower was using the right flight plan, and MH132 the wrong one, is important. What went wrong where? MH132 is shown as having flown the southernmost route, but could have flown either without any issues.
It would be interesting to know if Australian ATC was expecting to see MH132 follow the northerly or southerly option, and if it had received only one version of the flight plan.
Stories about how the jet was flying due south toward its possible demise in the southern ocean, or those that made gratuitous constructs seeking to link this incident to possible explanations for the disappearance of MH370 were a load of crap. How much of that crap was invented by the authors of those reports is something a serious news organisation ought to investigate.






Please login below to comment, OR simply register here :
Thank you for registering, we have just sent you a confirmation email, which includes your new password to be entered below.
I was hoping you would pick up on this Ben as the gist of the media story didnt seem right to me either.
Looking at the similar flight track for flights to Singapore, they (789)are currently crossing the Tasman to well north of Brisbane and then across northern Queensland to Indonesia, but just go back 2 weeks to 18/12 and they(388) are much further south to NSW and South Australia.
Robust communications systems are hard. Either you have impenetrably long unique message IDs to check, or some kind of timestamped sequencing, but even then you can get clock drift and potential for fail.
I think this story is more about process fails and their potential to form holes in the cheese grater defence against bad things. How many pilots on how many out-of-date flight plans from how many ATC == problems? Combine this with the mis-position reporting logic in the 787, tired crew, unexpected event + low fuel emergency landing by light plane…
This seems to be an unfortunate consequence of the centralised system of ‘control’ used by airlines. That system has many advantages, but problems inevitably occur when the plans change and one party or another isn’t informed of the change.
Presumably the crew would have been issued with a SID (Standard Instrument Departure) as part of their ATC clearance before departure. That SID would normally link to the route that ATC was expecting the crew to fly to KUL. An alert crew might have spotted that the issued SID didn’t link to the route they were expecting to fly, and could have queried it well before the aircraft got airborne.
Ben – the flight data computers on both sides of the Tasman are just machines, they serve up whatever was sent them. NZ ATC obviously sees this southern route all the time so it was quite logical to them. The airways clearance should have contained the first point en-route as well as the SID so I can only assume the crew missed that cue.
On the Australian side the flight plan would be stored and is not a concern to controllers until coordination is received from the Kiwi side. This is due to the fact that a flight plan is modified as the flight continues. The receiving controller wants to know what the aircraft is actually doing as opposed to what the dispatcher put in the system six hours ago.
Naturally it is far more complicated than that however in simple terms the answer to your question is that the Australian flight plan would be Malaysian’s last filed plan just as it was be in NZ. Why that and the plan loaded in the aircraft were different is what an investigation will discover.
“a serious news organisation”
Are there many of them still about.?
IMO the ‘race-to-the-bottom’ in ‘news’ reporting & sensationalising everything they happen to have a news camera in-place for, began with CNN & 24 hour news channels.
In the old days, news was a pretty-well researched process……
It seems to progressively have more & more factual & grammar errors.?
Maybe grammar isn’t regarded as important anymore,
but you’d imagine facts still would be.?
Dan,
Grandma and auto complete atrocities, as well as my own errors in spelling and usage, are of constant concern. I don’t ever post anything that isn’t flawed by an error that a sub-editor wold have caught, and have just cleaned up some really poor wording on my part in this post.
To that extent, I’m in a glass house hurling rocks, but I agree with you, and cringe at, the other issues of accuracy and context that stories like this one raise. Which on a different level led to the earlier post about Fairfax making the non-upgrade of a reporter into ‘news’, while ignoring the real news.
And we can now add a story about the entitled Russell Crowe firing an angry tweet at Virgin Australia because he hadn’t seen the fairly widespread news regarding the carriage of hoverboards. Unsurprisingly little journalism in that story.
Given the rubbish state of media perhaps you can forgive him for not keeping up with current events.
I’m likewise grateful Ben has reported on what the old media sensationally reported. I think a factor could also be that the A330 has only started operating AKL from September, taking over from the 777. So it’s highly likley that a lot of crews are operating this route for the first time. Route guides, Sim profiles etc. aside nothing beats doing it for real.
That said I’m guilty of having suffered confirmation bias and loaded the wrong flight plan once despite the correct route being listed on the paperwork. My brain was working on an old schedule and ignoring what the paperwork was telling me.
Total non-story, it happens all the time. “Big airways 123, cleared direct xxxx”
“Ahhh centre, that’s not on our flight plan”
“Ok big airways 123, let me just check”
30 seconds later………
“Big airways 123, it seems there is a duplicate plan in the system, cleared direct zzzz”
And that Ben is how it happens, even in congested airspace, of which the Tasman or Oz is not. More poor reporting, what a shame that being a reporter used to be considered a job that was beacon of accuracy and integrity.
If news organisations don’t have accuracy and integrity, then what do they have?
You may as well get your news from Twitter and social media, which is what most people do these days anyway.
In fact, most news organisations get their news from Twitter and social media.
The version I read had htem flying Norhtr instead of West.
Looking at a Map (not on my radar normally) of NZ, Oz and Malaysia it was obvious that N.W. or West was more normal route regardless of great circle routes.
I didn’t see the one going South into never never land.
Significant issue of confusion and hopefully on radar at all times so they knew where it was at.
Should be a very interesting incident report (and good news that’s all it was). Planes not being where they are supposed to for one side or the other is defenitley a bad thing.
Is it just festive season when the kids take over editorial oversight? Another instance you report on elsewhere (‘celebrity’ demands). Today, because the nutter Abetz calls for Abbott to return to Cabinet – the media makes this a mass movement. Heavens help us.
Please login below to comment, OR simply register here :
Thank you for registering, we have just sent you a confirmation email, which includes your new password to be entered below.