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

HKG 07R Runway Incursion 23th Dec 1300Z

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.

HKG 07R Runway Incursion 23th Dec 1300Z

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 25th Dec 2017, 01:59
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Polar Route
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I’ve heard this before elsewhere, and I’ll repeat it here. Perhaps the word “clear(ed)” should only be used for takeoff and landing clearances. Otherwise it’s “push, taxi, cross, hold,...” Thoughts?
cxorcist is offline  
Old 25th Dec 2017, 02:06
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: with the other ex-CX pond scum (a zoologist was once head of Flight Ops)
Posts: 1,852
Received 50 Likes on 21 Posts
How about ‘vacate’ or ‘vacated’ instead of ‘clear’ for the appropriate context?
Captain Dart is offline  
Old 25th Dec 2017, 02:06
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: hong kong
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
etops330

i agree there is a nasty incident coming to Hong Kong. in this latest incident there was a buffer of 3700m. i personally witnessed an incident a few years ago where the buffer was 8 feet! it involved a Cathay 747 holding on j8 as both twy H and J were blocked with tows and taxying aircraft. the tail was over the edge of the runway. duty runway 07R for take off and landings. A departing Cathay 747 for London was cleared for take off and rolled. He had to come off the centreline 8 feet as he rotated to miss the tail of the 747 at j8. the pilot of the departing aircraft would remember the event as he submitted an incident report on arrival London. There was no investigation by CAD.
the time has come for a completely independent investigation department, completely seperate from CAD.
balus man is offline  
Old 25th Dec 2017, 02:21
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: texas
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Is everyone positive the person transmitting with ‘questionable English ’ was part of the CX 071 crew? I’ve looked at the crew list and the accent does not match. Am I missing something?
beefy botham is offline  
Old 25th Dec 2017, 02:23
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Polar Route
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Agree. I noticed the same. Confused...
cxorcist is offline  
Old 25th Dec 2017, 02:26
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Polar Route
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Captain Dart
How about ‘vacate’ or ‘vacated’ instead of ‘clear’ for the appropriate context?
Agree 100%. “Runway vacated” is MUCH more appropriate, but should only be necessary if asked. Otherwise, look out the window!
cxorcist is offline  
Old 25th Dec 2017, 03:26
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
How ironic that a major incident with potentially disastrous consequences was averted by the only one not to receive a Xmas bonus this year. The CX Captain.
checklistcomplete is offline  
Old 25th Dec 2017, 05:40
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It is of course of great concern that this has happened for the second time in a few months. Let's not forget though that even if HKA had continued the take off it would have easily cleared the jumbo by maybe a 1000ft. Even with an engine failure it should have cleared it.
In China I've noticed that crossings tend to be done at the runway ends now following the near miss in SHA in order to reduce the risk when a conflicting clearance is given.
GMEDX is offline  
Old 25th Dec 2017, 05:46
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
GMEDX,

The end result is you get horrible taxi distances and for what? Protecting yourself from your own incompetence and even then do we think that guaranteed 35/15ft at the end of the runway is enough!! If they are not up to doing the job they shouldn't be there .... not making daft mitigations that don't pass scrutiny.
744drv is offline  
Old 25th Dec 2017, 05:55
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
744, horrible taxi distances for what? More EFP that's what, I love PEK 36L and then taxi round the top of 36R, it is a real money spinner.
Also, if HKG ATC is going to keep making mistakes then the risk must be mitigated.
GMEDX is offline  
Old 25th Dec 2017, 06:05
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 448
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
the holes are aligning
CodyBlade is offline  
Old 25th Dec 2017, 06:24
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Location Location
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Does anyone bother looking out of the window nowadays?
I think he/she intended to Google it...


Pass the Swiss cheese, dear.

Last edited by Shutterbug; 25th Dec 2017 at 06:47.
Shutterbug is offline  
Old 25th Dec 2017, 12:42
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Hongkers
Posts: 469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by cxorcist
I’ve heard this before elsewhere, and I’ll repeat it here. Perhaps the word “clear(ed)” should only be used for takeoff and landing clearances. Otherwise it’s “push, taxi, cross, hold,...” Thoughts?
Your suggestion is as per ICAO phraseology cxorcist.

“Cross runway .....at...” is the correct phrase.

On the airfield, “Cleared” shall only be used when issuing landing or takeoff instructions. (Airways Clearance on the blocks excepted)
bekolblockage is offline  
Old 25th Dec 2017, 14:23
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Polar Route
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by GMEDX
It is of course of great concern that this has happened for the second time in a few months. Let's not forget though that even if HKA had continued the take off it would have easily cleared the jumbo by maybe a 1000ft. Even with an engine failure it should have cleared it.
In China I've noticed that crossings tend to be done at the runway ends now following the near miss in SHA in order to reduce the risk when a conflicting clearance is given.
Not ok in any country! Better than a midfield cross? Sure, but not in any instance acceptable. It could easily have been a max weight jumbo taking off.

I notice how some busy airports like ORD and ATL, the crossings are being reduced significantly by running the arriving traffic behind the departures after landing. They are even using intersection departures to facilitate this in some cases.
cxorcist is offline  
Old 25th Dec 2017, 14:40
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: All Over
Posts: 471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by GMEDX
It is of course of great concern that this has happened for the second time in a few months. Let's not forget though that even if HKA had continued the take off it would have easily cleared the jumbo by maybe a 1000ft. Even with an engine failure it should have cleared it.
In China I've noticed that crossings tend to be done at the runway ends now following the near miss in SHA in order to reduce the risk when a conflicting clearance is given.
Woulda, coulda, shoulda.

No telling how this could have turned out. Perhaps the -8 would have cleared before the other jet came roaring by, perhaps the other jet would have tried to abort and collided with the -8 at high speed, perhaps he would have stopped at low speed, perhaps the other jet would have tried to yank the jet off the runway (ala KLM) overrotated and stalled, perhaps he saw the other jet and was delaying his roll a bit until it cleared, perhaps he would have cleared it just fine--you name it. In any case it's a serious incident and runway incursions are a very big deal. US controllers use a great deal of judgment in crossing and landing clearances (which is good and efficient), but no one I know of clears a jet for takeoff until crossing traffic is clear. So it was obviously an error and some quick and positive thinking (with good SA) and unambiguous communication by the -8 skipper prevented a bad situation from developing.

Aircraft need to cross runways at whatever intersection works. And operating efficiently with the concrete you have to work with is important. So this is and will be the deal worldwide. No amount of procedural 'stuff' can account for all contingencies. You can minimize traps, but something will always come up which is outside the box and you don't want to hamstring yourself excessively in making an airport 'work.'

Like I said this is what pilots (and controllers) get paid for and why experience and judgment is WAYYYYYY important. Doing the right thing at the right time. Realizing that mistakes are going to happen and being able to solve situations to mitigate the risk and damage caused by them. And knowing what the right thing and the right time is. And you get what you pay for. Something the bean counters should take note of.
Shep69 is offline  
Old 25th Dec 2017, 16:54
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The last paragraph of that post is the message management needs to hear over and over.

Last edited by Busbuoy; 26th Dec 2017 at 00:13. Reason: “Paragraph” captures the sentiment I intended, “line” does not
Busbuoy is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2017, 03:23
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: hong kong
Posts: 192
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Need to look at originating date of flight at origin dep place, not date in HKG
CYRILJGROOVE is offline  
Old 26th Dec 2017, 04:59
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The voice that tries to communicate that 071 is still on the RWY is the same voice that acknowledges the clearance to cross albeit in a slightly more agitated tone. It sounds European to me which matches the name.
Busbuoy is offline  
Old 27th Dec 2017, 04:18
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Australia
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Is this an issue that only afflicts cargo / GA? How is it going to work when the third runway opens, is 07R/25L going to be given over? I hope ATC can sort themselves out before then.
YeahNahYeah is offline  
Old 4th Jan 2018, 05:15
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: HK
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Doesn't GFS affect it too? Though admittedly less often
FreemaninHK is offline  


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.