Originally Posted by
WillowRun 6-3
Got a question (and quietly hoping it's not a dumb one - the constant reluctance of SLF/attorney status here).
When the local controller says, "you got [at] Kilo?" -- does that not sound and read in reports like a question to UA 384, and not permission to taxi onto Kilo, just a question about location - but then the aviators respond by turning onto Kilo?
The question I'm teeing up here seems to follow from the CA reportedly stating he lost Situational Awareness.
nailed it. WR 6-3.
In the absence of that comment, the flight crew would likely have rolled to the end of the runway, and then remained clear of 4L. With that comment, the crew appear to have responded as it being a proposition, and have taken the exit, and that has compressed the time for comms and clearances to follow. It was not a clearance however, but it set up a temporal condition that did not help the crew and messed up the guys on approach of 4L. There is a desire to vacate a runway promptly, for the next flight, 4L & 4R are poorly arranged runways on a good day. The intersections around the taxiways off 4R, to 4L, and intersecting 8L and the taxiways to the north of 8L have been a hotspot for 40+ years. There is a point where perhaps the airport needs to review their setup, as it is contributing to a latent risk factor, that pops up too often.
HNL would have problems meeting the ICAO Doc 9157 aerodrome design manual criteria, as would KLAX and KSFO to name a few, and of course that bastion of brilliant design, KJFK, the first glimpse of the new world.... We continue to have issues that have potential for echoes of Tenerife, and not much is being done. The crew are involved in these events, as is ATC, as is the poor status of the aids as in Texas recently, which is unfortunate for the worlds most affluent country.