Jump to content

Singapore-KL ties hit by disputes over waters and airspace


StreetFight3r
 Share

Recommended Posts

Surprised that the malaysian transport minister haven't mentioned the noise problem.

 

If I were a resident in the housing estates around pasir gudang (saw a few on maps), I'd definitely find issue with aircraft noise. ILS allows low visibility and night flight operations, disturbing the residents.

should use Osprey.........50m runaway oso can....
↡ Advertisement
Link to post
Share on other sites

sure bor 737 uses Seletar? I live in Wdlands......never gear a squeek of a turbine before but sometime can gear the disrant roar of Pasir Gudang chimney stack burning away excess hydrocarbon gases.

Actually, if you look at the position of Seletar airport runway. Woodlands is about 8 to 10km away. The HDB nearer to the runway will be those near to Yishun Avenue 1, Yishun Avenue 6, Yishun Avenue 8 and Yishun ring road.

Link to post
Share on other sites

sultan and tmj are at loggerheads with 93 over the status of kukup.......one more issue will drive the wedge further. Yesterday tmj posted a referendum and poll in fb about Johore parting ways from MY.......many of his rakyats voted for.

I was actually referring to tdm using this to drive wedge between Singapore and the royals.

He will be waiting to make the issue one of royals choose to support him or Singapore.

Our ministers see amateur compared to tdm at this game of thrones.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The flight path can be updated according the plans of the township, its no doubt we need to fly over msia airspace for a smooth landing into Seletar Airport, end of day if two countries work together there is no reason why they cannot implement a proper flight plan with updated information to ensure safe flights. No one is controlling their development but least share your "development plans", that said I doubt Singapore can restrict from building anything they wanted.

 

P/S In the automated flight route with near buildings in its parth typically have beacons on top to warn the planes, so its not a blanket across the whole sector but a very narrow corridor for flights to land. So saying the entire Pasir Gudang cannot be developed is inaccurate. So happen if the flight path would have future development (building or what) they can reroute the path.

 

"The transmitter buildings and glide path aerial are in close proximity and are usually located approximately 225–380 metres from the approach end and 120–210 metres to the side of the runway centreline."

 

https://www.casa.gov.au/sites/g/files/net351/f/_assets/main/pilots/download/ils.pdf

 

https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/inaccuracies-malaysias-understanding-how-airspace-instrument-work-khaw

 

 

Singapore mistake here was trying to automate/make efficient an antiquated process, Mr Loke is saying rather then come up with a predictable flight path with automated systems pilots should land manually and dodge obstacles as they present themselves. IMO they are using this technicality to beffudle the public into gaining their support.

 

 

If Singapore can Suka Suka declare flight paths which affect height limits in Johor, are you sure that is entirely nothing to do with sovereignty?

So far, haven't seen the Lords in sg counter the height limit issue.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, if you look at the position of Seletar airport runway. Woodlands is about 8 to 10km away. The HDB nearer to the runway will be those near to Yishun Avenue 1, Yishun Avenue 6, Yishun Avenue 8 and Yishun ring road.

8-10km.....sure can hear the engine's roar during landing and take-off. Sometime the roar from Pasir Gudang hydrocarbon stacks can oso hear.....
Link to post
Share on other sites

I was actually referring to tdm using this to drive wedge between Singapore and the royals.

He will be waiting to make the issue one of royals choose to support him or Singapore.

Our ministers see amateur compared to tdm at this game of thrones.

the royals and tdm has a running feud for as long i can remember........i doubt they can be good friends.....royal ego vs egolomaniac. One sure die and most of Johore rakyat sides with their king. If such discourse and hatred turns for the worse i wont be betting the TDM (Royal Armed Forces) PDRM or anything that has Royal in them will want to go against the king. Their loyalty is to the king.....if not can throw away the Di Raja title away.
Link to post
Share on other sites

The flight path can be updated according the plans of the township, its no doubt we need to fly over msia airspace for a smooth landing into Seletar Airport, end of day if two countries work together there is no reason why they cannot implement a proper flight plan with updated information to ensure safe flights. No one is controlling their development but least share your "development plans", that said I doubt Singapore can restrict from building anything they wanted.

 

P/S In the automated flight route with near buildings in its parth typically have beacons on top to warn the planes, so its not a blanket across the whole sector but a very narrow corridor for flights to land. So saying the entire Pasir Gudang cannot be developed is inaccurate. So happen if the flight path would have future development (building or what) they can reroute the path.

 

"The transmitter buildings and glide path aerial are in close proximity and are usually located approximately 225â380 metres from the approach end and 120â210 metres to the side of the runway centreline."

 

https://www.casa.gov.au/sites/g/files/net351/f/_assets/main/pilots/download/ils.pdf

 

https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/inaccuracies-malaysias-understanding-how-airspace-instrument-work-khaw

 

 

Singapore mistake here was trying to automate/make efficient an antiquated process, Mr Loke is saying rather then come up with a predictable flight path with automated systems pilots should land manually and dodge obstacles as they present themselves. IMO they are using this technicality to beffudle the public into gaining their support.

I didn't say the whole of pasir gudang.

 

Even if a small part is affected, isn't sovereignty infringed? If not why now wanna kpkb about some vessels sitting in a small area of disputed sea? Also small area nia.

 

Sg claim of having informed but receiving no response is illogical. If I write you a letter asking if you'll give me your house and you don't reply after a long time, does that mean I can move in?

 

Sometimes no reply is also a reply. And sometimes have to learn to give and take. Right now sg only knows how to take but sadly for us, najib ain't around no more. That fellow can be easily settled with durians (what kind I dunno) but not the new govt.

Edited by Kusje
Link to post
Share on other sites

So in respect to Malaysian sovereignty what is the difference between the flights being landed manually now vs using the ILS system?

 

 

I didn't say the whole of pasir gudang.

Even if a small part is affected, isn't sovereignty infringed? If not why now wanna kpkb about some vessels sitting in a small area of disputed sea? Also small area nia.

Sg claim of having informed but receiving no response is illogical. If I write you a letter asking if you'll give me your house and you don't reply after a long time, does that mean I can move in?

Sometimes no reply is also a reply. And sometimes have to learn to give and take. Right now sg only knows how to take but sadly for us, najib ain't around no more. That fellow can be easily settled with durians (what kind I dunno) but not the new govt.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

So in respect to Malaysian sovereignty what is the difference between the flights being landed manually now vs using the ILS system?

One is formalized and one is not.

 

Under informal system, if I wanna build a taller building in jb now, I'd just do it. Under formal system, maybe it will give you an excuse to kpkb.

 

Anyway, what's your opinion? Does implementing a flight part that restricts MYs ability to build talk buildings infring their sovereignty or not? Yes or no.

Link to post
Share on other sites

To me solid No,

 

Flight plans can changed, unless tall buildings can appear overnight it always can be changed and its not set in stone

 

Given the case what this is stating is allowing Singapore to control the flight routes over Pasir Gudang is infringing their sovereignty. Formal or Informal makes no difference cause essentially both serve the same purpose, otherwise its like saying if I drive across a red light and there is no camera its not breaking the law.

 

One is formalized and one is not.

Under informal system, if I wanna build a taller building in jb now, I'd just do it. Under formal system, maybe it will give you an excuse to kpkb.

Anyway, what's your opinion? Does implementing a flight part that restricts MYs ability to build talk buildings infring their sovereignty or not? Yes or no.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess the sovereignty point is just an excuse to make it easily understood by laymen and local consumption.

 

Basically they are uneasy with SG airport development taking advantage of their airspace but legally no good reason for MY to object. So they trot out the sovereignty thing.

 

It's not true to say that introducing ILS makes "no difference". Flights will increase as turboprop commercial operations move to Seletar. Departure and arrivals can be extended into all hours.

 

So if SG wants to go ahead, the malaysians are waiting to see what will they get out of all this. I think the key is to find out what they want in return and that can only be facilitated by further discussion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

To me solid No,

 

Flight plans can changed, unless tall buildings can appear overnight it always can be changed and its not set in stone

 

Given the case what this is stating is allowing Singapore to control the flight routes over Pasir Gudang is infringing their sovereignty. Formal or Informal makes no difference cause essentially both serve the same purpose, otherwise its like saying if I drive across a red light and there is no camera its not breaking the law.

you are talking about overflight into or onto another country's airspace. That is sovereignty issue.......you just dont say it is okay if the other party dont respond. Flight plan can change but flight directions during take-off and landing is not that simple. Why not those future flights be approached or take off from or towards the direction of Yio Chu Kang and not from Johore.....that will definitely pose other issues but its all within our air space, thus no complsin from across the border. PLAB is moving house..........that route will be clear then.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess the sovereignty point is just an excuse to make it easily understood by laymen and local consumption.

 

Basically they are uneasy with SG airport development taking advantage of their airspace but legally no good reason for MY to object. So they trot out the sovereignty thing.

 

It's not true to say that introducing ILS makes "no difference". Flights will increase as turboprop commercial operations move to Seletar. Departure and arrivals can be extended into all hours.

 

So if SG wants to go ahead, the malaysians are waiting to see what will they get out of all this. I think the key is to find out what they want in return and that can only be facilitated by further discussion.

seletar is preparing to extend the runway to accomodate the 737 series. I dont thing 737 are turbo-prop....
Link to post
Share on other sites

To me solid No,

 

Flight plans can changed, unless tall buildings can appear overnight it always can be changed and its not set in stone

 

Given the case what this is stating is allowing Singapore to control the flight routes over Pasir Gudang is infringing their sovereignty. Formal or Informal makes no difference cause essentially both serve the same purpose, otherwise its like saying if I drive across a red light and there is no camera its not breaking the law.

 

K. At least I know where you come from.

 

If flight plans can change as simply as you say, then SG should change it since MY has raised their objection already. 

  • Praise 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Has anyone watch this video?

 

It is a very clear and logical video. SG govt needs to respond directly to the points brought up instead of just claiming that it is the same flight path as in the past and SG management is for mutual benefit.

 

Should just park a few mobile cranes in johor and ask SG to start operations if we dare land. Then can easily determine if the height restrictions are true or not.

Edited by Kusje
↡ Advertisement
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...