Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > Fragrant Harbour
Reload this Page >

Which idiot is responsible for HKIA

Wikiposts
Search
Fragrant Harbour A forum for the large number of pilots (expats and locals) based with the various airlines in Hong Kong. Air Traffic Controllers are also warmly welcomed into the forum.

Which idiot is responsible for HKIA

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 30th Jul 2013, 04:29
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Smogsville
Posts: 1,424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Which idiot is responsible for HKIA

As the headline says.

The stupid single taxiway system around the terminal that has planes taxiing from one side to the other and the amount of stand delays due to traffic on the single taxiway is pathetic, it was completely unavoidable you'd think with designing an airport with a clean sheet.

If anyone saw the series BBC Two - Airport Live at one point you hear them talking about how fantastic it is to have the "toaster system" a rectangular terminal, two taxiways, rectangular terminal, taxiway, terminal, taxiway, etc. They make a point on how easy moving A/C from one side of the airfield to the other is and vv.

Yet I see the HK airport in all their wisdom are going to do it all again with the third runway, don't these idiots consult ATC or pilots to discuss the layout of the taxiways and the best way to move A/C from one side of the field to the other, look at the convoluted routing they've created exiting off the new runway.

Future Development - Long-Term Development - Airport Layout Plan - Hong Kong International Airport

At least they didn't follow this idea.




However the benifit would be a new CX city and hotel from a clean sheet which is another well thought out disaster.

Last edited by SMOC; 30th Jul 2013 at 16:41.
SMOC is offline  
Old 30th Jul 2013, 15:39
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Noo Yoik
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The Feng Shui is perfect.
Meccano is offline  
Old 30th Jul 2013, 17:15
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: In the hold
Posts: 182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If I have it correct, that red line is our proposal for the 3rd runway? If so, i suggest you look at the high ground to the South, making any approach / take off impossible. Or did I miss the point?
ByAirMail is offline  
Old 30th Jul 2013, 23:43
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 1,346
Received 22 Likes on 11 Posts
At least they didn't follow this idea.
The last I heard was that the third runway was to be a parallel construction to the North. HKIA & HKCAD seem to be in a constant state of feud. The utilisation of the current runways is very poor.
reynoldsno1 is offline  
Old 30th Jul 2013, 23:48
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 672
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Current runway utilisation is almost at maximum possible as per a study performed by NATS of the UK. The high mix of widebodied aircraft (wake turbulence), long times to vacate by HKIA pilots, terrain, and lack of a north traffic pattern mean that utilisation can never be as much as LHR, although on certain days of the year total movements is not far off the LHR figures.
geh065 is offline  
Old 31st Jul 2013, 12:23
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: HK- A little bit of industrial China in every breath you take.
Posts: 508
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
ByAirMail, A checkerboard might work nicely... But then again we aren't so great at visual segments anymore... It would certainly add to the overwhelming excitement of riding the Nong Ping 360!

I would imagine a wind up alert for the orientation of the third runway as depicted above.
Lowkoon is offline  
Old 31st Jul 2013, 21:22
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: HK MTR
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I don't really see the point of a third RWY, especially on 07. Without using the airspace to the north we are still restricted by the spacing requirements on base therefore the number of aircraft that can land with a third RWY will not be much more than it is now.
Sand Man is offline  
Old 1st Aug 2013, 04:07
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: N. Am.
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
You only get paid when the wheels turn. I'm always happy to see a long lineup holding short. I'm consistently surprised by the number of folks here who don't feel the same.
Will fly for Cash is offline  
Old 1st Aug 2013, 08:10
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,167
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
So how do you keep the wheels turning in flight???
nitpicker330 is offline  
Old 1st Aug 2013, 12:20
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: tsimshatsui
Age: 43
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It must be a parallel runway. To make this plan viable, Tai Mo Shan has to be chopped by couples of hundred feet.....oh yes, Castle Peak as well. Furthermore, they will paint Tai Mo Shan like a checker board and finally rename it as Checker Mountain.
lepsap is offline  
Old 2nd Aug 2013, 05:16
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: N. Am.
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
So how do you keep the wheels turning in flight???

Easy - I fly with the gear down! Lower barber pole = longer sector = more credit for me! Yahoooooooo!
Will fly for Cash is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.