HKA runway incursion HKG
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: asia
Posts: 947
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HKA runway incursion HKG
It was alleged on " demise of HKA " thread that the muppets at HKA entered RW07R whilst a CX aircraft was on the T/O roll, can anyone confirm this ?
Seems a little strange that such a serious matter, arguably worse than the taxiway t/off incident, has not hit the headlines
( or at least PPRUNE headlines )
Seems a little strange that such a serious matter, arguably worse than the taxiway t/off incident, has not hit the headlines
( or at least PPRUNE headlines )
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Nirvana
Posts: 472
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Strange isn't it. One would have thought one this close (allegedly), would have got out by now. Perhaps a wind up, but my sources seem to be fairly positive that it did happen. Come on, out with it!
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Jakarta
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It was a minor runway incursion. case closed.
Nut why did you withdraw your post? You realized that you sound like a complete idiot saying that trash? Tenerife would have been a minor incident if they got airbourne a few hundred feet earlier using your logic.
One can only assume that CHEAP LABOUR and the pathetic management (that no other airline will touch) will soon result in something much more serious.
Second officer cadet and washed out below standard Singa Airforce buddy at the controls?
Simon Perry where are you? Expose these jokers.
Last edited by intelligentpilot; 25th Jan 2010 at 01:21.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: AFRICA
Age: 59
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
intelligent vs nuts
there is a function in this forum call "delete message" and i just exercise my right to do it. you can also delete your intelligent message here too! 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Nirvana
Posts: 472
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here comes another HOTSPOT
Oh my gawd! Hong Kong never had any hotspot until these clowns took to the runw...I mean taxiways! The rumour has it thus:-
Apparently a CX aircraft was taking off from 07R and bugalugs was cleared to follow a KA bird taxiing along J, bugalugs was coming from W, went straight into J7 onto the active runway with one rolling instead of making the right turn into J. CX skipper reportedly rejected TO and I believe certain comments, more like expletives were made about the creative taxiing of these clowns.
It begs the question, if it had been a very heavy CX bird doing the departure, there is probably no way he could have stopped before J7, the consequences and ensuring disaster would have been akin to Tenerife. Good work by that Skipper on CX. As for the other clownS, well......you all decide.
Is this another misguided, "I was doing a high speed taxi deal?"
I am amazed that it's managed to stay out of the papers.
Apparently a CX aircraft was taking off from 07R and bugalugs was cleared to follow a KA bird taxiing along J, bugalugs was coming from W, went straight into J7 onto the active runway with one rolling instead of making the right turn into J. CX skipper reportedly rejected TO and I believe certain comments, more like expletives were made about the creative taxiing of these clowns.
It begs the question, if it had been a very heavy CX bird doing the departure, there is probably no way he could have stopped before J7, the consequences and ensuring disaster would have been akin to Tenerife. Good work by that Skipper on CX. As for the other clownS, well......you all decide.
Is this another misguided, "I was doing a high speed taxi deal?"
I am amazed that it's managed to stay out of the papers.
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SCMP full article on runway incursion
The full SCMP article on the runway incursion:
EDT
EDT2 South China Morning Post Simon Parry
2010-01-28Cathay jet in take-off scare at Chek Lap Kok
A Cathay Pacific plane with 243 passengers on board was forced to abort take-off from Chek Lap Kok when another passenger plane took a wrong turn and almost strayed into its path.
The Cathay Pacific Boeing 777 was heading down the runway at 40 knots after being given clearance to take off, when an air traffic controller noticed a Hong Kong Airlines jet heading into the far end of the runway and told the captain to abort.
However, a spokesman for the Civil Aviation Department said there had been no risk of a crash.
The incident on January 13 occurred when the Hong Kong Airlines Boeing 737, taxiing towards a runway for a flight to Hangzhou , missed a turn for a taxiway and ended up on a high-speed exit off the southern runway. The Civil Aviation Department spokesman said it was investigating and had received reports from both airlines.
He said Hong Kong Airlines flight 128 stopped at red ground lights marking the edge of the runway exit and the runway itself. "There was no risk of collision," he said.
The alarm was raised by the air traffic controller at about 8.20pm as the Hong Kong Airlines plane lost its way and moved towards the path of the Cathay plane, which had begun its take-off roll.
The spokesman said: "The air traffic controller had just cleared {hellip} Cathay Pacific CX 468, for take-off on the south runway." With uncertainty over the Hong Kong Airlines plane, the controller gave instructions to the departing Boeing 777 to abandon the take-off.
A spokeswoman for Cathay Pacific said the Taipei-bound flight had been cleared for take-off before air traffic controllers cancelled the clearance. The flight eventually took off after a delay of about 20 minutes.
"The [Cathay Pacific] aircraft was moving along the runway at low speed - 40 knots - and the safety of passengers on board and the aircraft itself was at no time at stake."
Hong Kong Airlines spokeswoman Francisca Chu confirmed in a written response that an internal investigation was under way. She declined to say if the pilot and co-pilot involved in the incident had been suspended. She added: "Flight safety is always of prime concern to Hong Kong Airlines {hellip} we have received no comments from the Civil Aviation Department regarding operational safety, and our air operator's certificate has been renewed just recently." The runway incursion is the second major incident involving Hong Kong Airlines pilots losing their way at Chek Lap Kok. In September 2008, the carrier suspended a pilot and his co-pilot and later sacked them after they tried to take off from a taxiway rather than a runway.
EDT
EDT2 South China Morning Post Simon Parry
2010-01-28Cathay jet in take-off scare at Chek Lap Kok
A Cathay Pacific plane with 243 passengers on board was forced to abort take-off from Chek Lap Kok when another passenger plane took a wrong turn and almost strayed into its path.
The Cathay Pacific Boeing 777 was heading down the runway at 40 knots after being given clearance to take off, when an air traffic controller noticed a Hong Kong Airlines jet heading into the far end of the runway and told the captain to abort.
However, a spokesman for the Civil Aviation Department said there had been no risk of a crash.
The incident on January 13 occurred when the Hong Kong Airlines Boeing 737, taxiing towards a runway for a flight to Hangzhou , missed a turn for a taxiway and ended up on a high-speed exit off the southern runway. The Civil Aviation Department spokesman said it was investigating and had received reports from both airlines.
He said Hong Kong Airlines flight 128 stopped at red ground lights marking the edge of the runway exit and the runway itself. "There was no risk of collision," he said.
The alarm was raised by the air traffic controller at about 8.20pm as the Hong Kong Airlines plane lost its way and moved towards the path of the Cathay plane, which had begun its take-off roll.
The spokesman said: "The air traffic controller had just cleared {hellip} Cathay Pacific CX 468, for take-off on the south runway." With uncertainty over the Hong Kong Airlines plane, the controller gave instructions to the departing Boeing 777 to abandon the take-off.
A spokeswoman for Cathay Pacific said the Taipei-bound flight had been cleared for take-off before air traffic controllers cancelled the clearance. The flight eventually took off after a delay of about 20 minutes.
"The [Cathay Pacific] aircraft was moving along the runway at low speed - 40 knots - and the safety of passengers on board and the aircraft itself was at no time at stake."
Hong Kong Airlines spokeswoman Francisca Chu confirmed in a written response that an internal investigation was under way. She declined to say if the pilot and co-pilot involved in the incident had been suspended. She added: "Flight safety is always of prime concern to Hong Kong Airlines {hellip} we have received no comments from the Civil Aviation Department regarding operational safety, and our air operator's certificate has been renewed just recently." The runway incursion is the second major incident involving Hong Kong Airlines pilots losing their way at Chek Lap Kok. In September 2008, the carrier suspended a pilot and his co-pilot and later sacked them after they tried to take off from a taxiway rather than a runway.
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Hong Kong
Age: 59
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Prime Concern
I could safely suggest that the winner of the "quote of the week" competition can be given to the HKA spokeswoman, Fransica Chu.....
"Flight safety is always of prime concern to Hong Kong Airlines"
Yes i would agree and go so far as to say that "flight safety" at Hong Kong Airlines is of prime concern to every one...........
XOP's ..... The only way to operate.....
"Flight safety is always of prime concern to Hong Kong Airlines"
Yes i would agree and go so far as to say that "flight safety" at Hong Kong Airlines is of prime concern to every one...........
XOP's ..... The only way to operate.....
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: asia
Posts: 947
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you needed any more proof that the HKCAD is rotten with corruption and full of completely inept morons, then the above incident should remove ALL doubt.
I should'nt be surprised by anything that happens in this place and yet every day, I am
I think THIS is the quote of the week Exx 
I guess there was no risk of a crash at Tenerife until fog got added into the mix. I wonder ( retorical ) what the outcome would have been in visibility like today
But lets face it, money talks around here and as long as Hainan and a certain SH are involved it's unlikely they will do anything until there is a smoking hole in the ground, which can't be too far away
I should'nt be surprised by anything that happens in this place and yet every day, I am
However, a spokesman for the Civil Aviation Department said there had been no risk of a crash
I guess there was no risk of a crash at Tenerife until fog got added into the mix. I wonder ( retorical ) what the outcome would have been in visibility like today
But lets face it, money talks around here and as long as Hainan and a certain SH are involved it's unlikely they will do anything until there is a smoking hole in the ground, which can't be too far away
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Out of the pollution.
Posts: 673
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No risk?.
Do the wings of a B777 not extend over the RW onto the high speed taxiway which the HKA muppets were wrongly parked?
I'm writing a reply to SCMP right now.. doubt it will make the editorials as its points out the flaws in the "article"
Do the wings of a B777 not extend over the RW onto the high speed taxiway which the HKA muppets were wrongly parked?
I'm writing a reply to SCMP right now.. doubt it will make the editorials as its points out the flaws in the "article"
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Out of the pollution.
Posts: 673
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sent to news @ scmp .com
I suggest others do the same and get this story right. I highly doubt we will see it published as its accurate, unlike Simon Parry's normal garbage.
"Once again your article regarding aviation in Hong Kong was way off the mark and failed to address the incident in anything
other than alarmist. This is the second time a Hong Kong Airlines aircraft has endangered lives in the past 2 years simply trying to
taxi at HKIA. Should the article not have reflected that? Or the questionably safety record of HKA, or even perhaps how the alert Cathay
Pacific crew averted disaster? Quoting individuals at the Hong Kong CAD saying there is no danger is both misleading and false.
There was very real danger. The wings of the departing aircraft extend over the runway onto the taxiway which the Hong Kong Airlines jet
was wrongly on. There would have been definite contact and there would have been definite loss of life. In 1977 two passenger jets struck
each other in Tenerife and killed 583 people. We came within seconds of that last week here in Hong Kong, for no other reason than the pilots of Hong Kong Airlines being unable to listen to a taxi clearance in English and understand a simple taxi chart. How much longer will the lack of safety and basic airmanship be allowed to endanger the Hong Kong public."
I suggest others do the same and get this story right. I highly doubt we will see it published as its accurate, unlike Simon Parry's normal garbage.
"Once again your article regarding aviation in Hong Kong was way off the mark and failed to address the incident in anything
other than alarmist. This is the second time a Hong Kong Airlines aircraft has endangered lives in the past 2 years simply trying to
taxi at HKIA. Should the article not have reflected that? Or the questionably safety record of HKA, or even perhaps how the alert Cathay
Pacific crew averted disaster? Quoting individuals at the Hong Kong CAD saying there is no danger is both misleading and false.
There was very real danger. The wings of the departing aircraft extend over the runway onto the taxiway which the Hong Kong Airlines jet
was wrongly on. There would have been definite contact and there would have been definite loss of life. In 1977 two passenger jets struck
each other in Tenerife and killed 583 people. We came within seconds of that last week here in Hong Kong, for no other reason than the pilots of Hong Kong Airlines being unable to listen to a taxi clearance in English and understand a simple taxi chart. How much longer will the lack of safety and basic airmanship be allowed to endanger the Hong Kong public."
Last edited by AAIGUY; 28th Jan 2010 at 09:30.
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: swamp
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nutter nutter
Good to see you exercise your right to delete dumb posts as well as exercising your right to be a d!ckhead.
Dear CAD
Why are you waiting for HKA to kill hundreds of people before taking any action?
It has been brought to your attention many times over many incidents including 2 newspaper articles. When will you realise that the HKA funded trips to Sanya for whores and dimsum will only give you rashes on your d!ck? Helping HKA out by sweeping all their F#ck ups under the carpet will only lead to a very embarrasing revelation from an international inquiry as to why these singa clowns were aloud to stay here for so long.
SHUT THEM DOWN BEFORE THEY KILL SOMEONE!
Good to see you exercise your right to delete dumb posts as well as exercising your right to be a d!ckhead.
Dear CAD
Why are you waiting for HKA to kill hundreds of people before taking any action?
It has been brought to your attention many times over many incidents including 2 newspaper articles. When will you realise that the HKA funded trips to Sanya for whores and dimsum will only give you rashes on your d!ck? Helping HKA out by sweeping all their F#ck ups under the carpet will only lead to a very embarrasing revelation from an international inquiry as to why these singa clowns were aloud to stay here for so long.
SHUT THEM DOWN BEFORE THEY KILL SOMEONE!
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: uranus
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Letter to SCMP
Dear Sir/Madam
I wish to refer to your article today 28 January 2010 regarding Hong Kong Airlines runway incursion.
I feel that the article does not portray the seriousness of this incident.
This is the second time HKA has been involved in such serious incidents, and the second time your newspaper has watered down the story and failed to explain to the public how close this airline has come to killing hundreds of people.
I am sure you are aware of the tragedy at Tenerife many years ago which has very similar cirumstances. Had the visibility not been good on the night of the 13th, neither the tower nor the Cathay captain would have any idea that HKA had mistakingly taxied onto the departure runway, and there most certainly would have been a tragedy of Tenerife proportions.
Therefore I would appreciate that the journalist concerned re-write his article with a bit more fore thought and investigation and at the very least portray to the public(who have a right to know) the dangers HKA have put the public in.
As a suggestion perhaps you could ask the CAD why they have done nothing to ensure HKA improve their safety standards (2 similar incidents of the same seriousness is totally unacceptable). Now is it no longer a case of it being dangerous to fly with HKA, but it is dangerous for other airline operators to be near them.
Your consideration is greatly appreciated.
Yours sincerely
I wish to refer to your article today 28 January 2010 regarding Hong Kong Airlines runway incursion.
I feel that the article does not portray the seriousness of this incident.
This is the second time HKA has been involved in such serious incidents, and the second time your newspaper has watered down the story and failed to explain to the public how close this airline has come to killing hundreds of people.
I am sure you are aware of the tragedy at Tenerife many years ago which has very similar cirumstances. Had the visibility not been good on the night of the 13th, neither the tower nor the Cathay captain would have any idea that HKA had mistakingly taxied onto the departure runway, and there most certainly would have been a tragedy of Tenerife proportions.
Therefore I would appreciate that the journalist concerned re-write his article with a bit more fore thought and investigation and at the very least portray to the public(who have a right to know) the dangers HKA have put the public in.
As a suggestion perhaps you could ask the CAD why they have done nothing to ensure HKA improve their safety standards (2 similar incidents of the same seriousness is totally unacceptable). Now is it no longer a case of it being dangerous to fly with HKA, but it is dangerous for other airline operators to be near them.
Your consideration is greatly appreciated.
Yours sincerely
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From: Hong Kong Airlines
To: Fragrant Harbour forum
It has come to our attention that members of this forum has been making negative remarks regarding our airline and employees. Hong Kong Airlines therefore will make the following comments in response.
Regarding the so-called runway incursion, well, did our plane actually went on the runway? No, he stopped before that. If our pilots were so stupid as to actually go on the runway, they deserve to die.
What about the passenger's safety? Well, you are not so naive as to believe we actually care for passenger safety. Let me get one thing straight. The bottom line is always about money and nothing else. So what if this means "cutting corners" on pilot training? If it can save us a few bucks then that's fine with me. And who do you think you are? A bunch of overpaid and glorified bus drivers. I suggest all of you get off your fat lazy aussie arse and do some real flying. We can fire you or cut your wages whenever we like. We are the bosses. Remember that.
And if you whine and bitch so much, go back to down under. Why are you still here? Because you can't cut it in Australia? Well you can join us, we do need some cheap labour.
Best Regards,
Hong Kong Airlines-We can and we will screw you.
P.S-This is a parody.
To: Fragrant Harbour forum
It has come to our attention that members of this forum has been making negative remarks regarding our airline and employees. Hong Kong Airlines therefore will make the following comments in response.
Regarding the so-called runway incursion, well, did our plane actually went on the runway? No, he stopped before that. If our pilots were so stupid as to actually go on the runway, they deserve to die.
What about the passenger's safety? Well, you are not so naive as to believe we actually care for passenger safety. Let me get one thing straight. The bottom line is always about money and nothing else. So what if this means "cutting corners" on pilot training? If it can save us a few bucks then that's fine with me. And who do you think you are? A bunch of overpaid and glorified bus drivers. I suggest all of you get off your fat lazy aussie arse and do some real flying. We can fire you or cut your wages whenever we like. We are the bosses. Remember that.
And if you whine and bitch so much, go back to down under. Why are you still here? Because you can't cut it in Australia? Well you can join us, we do need some cheap labour.
Best Regards,
Hong Kong Airlines-We can and we will screw you.
P.S-This is a parody.