Need flyover info

[Gerald A]

At approx 2 or a couple mins past 2pm there was a B777 flyover on the SYD NDB. At the NDB it turned to starboard (Left). Any one know the airline and rego.

[Gerard M]

Hi Gerald,

At about 2pm i saw Malaysian 130 - Auckland-Kuala Lumpur fly over leaving a nice big contrail. Rego was 9M-MRC (http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/photos/9/2/8/1517829.jpg). Could have been the one you were after. No guarantee it was as i was looking at it from the Hills district, north of Syd..
From 16right:
9M-MRC (http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/photos/9/2/8/1517829.jpg) MH0130 15/05/2009 13:58 Malaysian Airlines B777-2H6(ER) Auckland-Kuala Lumpur
There wasn't any other 777s around that time logged on 16right.

Cheers
Gerard

[Noel White]

Indeed it was 9M-MRC - MAS 130 at FL360. Appeared this afternoon at about 1354 lost it at 1416.

[Chris B.]

At approx 2 or a couple mins past 2pm there was a B777 flyover on the SYD NDB. At the NDB it turned to starboard (Left). Any one know the airline and rego.

I think you mean the VOR. Sydney doesn't have an NDB. It could have also been tracking to the Aerodrome Reference Point via GPS. ;)

[Gerald A]

Thanks for the info guys.

[Nigel C]

I think you mean the VOR. Sydney doesn't have an NDB. It could have also been tracking to the Aerodrome Reference Point via GPS. ;)

Here's a useless bit of info for you...the plaque marking the ARP at Sydney says that interfering with it may result in a £30 penalty.
:D

It doesn't sound like much now, but I reckon back when it was installed 30 quid would have been a fair old penalty!

[Chris B.]

Thanks for that Nigel. I'll be sure to tell that to someone on my next flight. :D

[David Ramsay]

At the NDB it turned to starboard (Left).

Really? :p

[Gerald A]

As this message board is about aviation news and movements, why cant people keep to that, instead of being smart asses, so I am making this my last post.

[Matt_L]

Dont blame you at all Gerald.

Unfortunately alot of the senior members on the forums and even those who are not necessarily pilots or experts seem to think its funny to stir the pot so to speak and ridicule those members who may not have the same amount of knowledge.

something I wish we could change and I think it could start by mods sending warnings to those who take topics 'off topic'.

Whilst a joke is a joke- one which is structured like has been here is just downright arrogant.

To those who think its funny to ridicule other members- grow up!

[Nigel C]

Perhaps it was seen as just a slip of the tongue?:confused:

Let's face it, I make mistakes quite often and am happy to be corrected by those who may know more about a topic than I do...it's part of the learning process when it comes to aviation.

That's the beauty of forums like this...there's usually someone else out there who has a better understanding on a particular topic than you do, hence you can learn something nearly every day!

[Matt_L]

Fair enough Nigel.

This wasn't an attack on you- we all know you have a good knowledge of airside activity at Syd amongst other things.
I just think sometimes members who ask questions or may say something wrong for lack of knowledge are unfairly treated.

Back onto topic but and hopefully members just take this onboard

Cheers

[Owen H]

I agree that sometimes posts here go a little bit wayward, and sometimes yes, people do show a lot of arrogance, and it is one of my pet hates. This is a board for people of all experience levels and ages.

I must admit, however, I can't really see on this particular thread where that has happened.

The only posts that I can see that goes close are the comment about there being no NDB, only VOR and the comment about the ARP, and the fact that Starboard is RIGHT, not left as put in by the original poster. If a poster uses technical language in their post, surely they can expect to be corrected if it is not used correctly?

The original poster didn't say that there was a 777 flying over the airport, and turning left... he said that there was a 777 flying over the SYD NDB, and turning Starboard, which is using specific technical language. Surely it is reasonable for someone to correct that technical language if it is indeed incorrect?

Gerald A, I hope that you don't make this your last post, as you'll find that really, all are welcome. It is like everything in life... it is not always perfect, and every now and again someone might be a bit of a smartass. But you just have to not take it personally, and move on.

The other thing I'd say, to all of those without a high level of technical knowledge... don't be afraid to use plain and ordinary language. Most here don't care if you don't know what ILS, VOR, NDB, ARP or SODPROPS are. But if you don't know what they are, then its probably easier if you don't throw them into your posts to sound "technical". I'm certainly not picking on Gerald, but his post makes a good example so I'll use it. I know when I read a post, it is far easier if someone keeps it simple and says

"At 2pm a 777 overflew Sydney, and turned left... does anyone know the rego".

For me, the inclusion of NDB doesn't add anything to the understanding of the question, and starboard just hurts my brain as I try and remember which way starboard is :D

So, once again Gerald, I hope you do stay around, the more the merrier. And the next time you post, I suggest you just use nice and simple language, without the unneeded techincal stuff. It will keep the smartasses at bay (as well as the spelling police :D) and will make it easier for the rest of us to answer your question without a headache from trying to remember back to the good old days which way starboard is :D

Owen.

[phil.l]

Well said Owen, just keep posting Gerald lots of people want your info,cheers.