Singapore_Air From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2000, 13711 posts, RR: 21 Posted (12 years 5 months 2 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 751 times:
Well It's been over a month. Progress report: Investigators are examing 150 cameras that comprimise the "safe" ground surveillance system. So far, things point to the pilot (more later), map (later) and the centre lights of a runway being on.
Pilot: Veteran Malaysian. Though he was on the wrong runway and was using an out of date map (by one day).
Map: Was 1 day old. Showed 5R as a runway and not as taxiway NC as the map the day after the crash showed. Whoops. Although how this affected this crash is beyond me.
Lights!: Were apparently green and on on 5R. Wouldn't they switch them off.
I am downloading the official preliminary report and will report back condensing it hopefully. So far I've downloaded 612kb of unknown which is incovenient.
Singapore_Air From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2000, 13711 posts, RR: 21 Reply 1, posted (12 years 5 months 2 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 726 times:
UUseless horrible website. Stupid stupid. The first three pages can't be read because of a font conflict or something and the rest are useless facts that aren't relevant (like weather and what the plane did). Don't wanna know that cuz we already do!.
Singapore_Air From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2000, 13711 posts, RR: 21 Reply 2, posted (12 years 5 months 2 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 721 times:
UUseless horrible website. Stupid stupid. The first three pages can't be read because of a font conflict or something and the rest are useless facts that aren't relevant (like weather and what the plane did). Don't wanna know that cuz we already do!.
Chiawei From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 883 posts, RR: 2 Reply 3, posted (12 years 5 months 2 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 717 times:
The light on runway 5R was on as green. runway 5R is still in use as a taxiway. Hence the light must be on.
The map issue is irrelevant, since each pilot should be able to count and know which runway he is on.
G-KIRAN From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2000, 736 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (12 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 671 times:
From what I heard the visibility was 800m(correct?) this should have been enough for the captain see both runways.I tried taxing to the runway using FS2000 with the visibility set at 800m and both runway lights completly on and I got to 5L with no problems.Those of you with FS should try it.
In my opinion most of the blame should be with the SQ6 crew.The taiwanese airport may have confused the pilots but it was the crew that made the mistake.The controller said 5L not 5R,but I have alos heard that the taiwanese controllers cant pronounce their 'l' and 'r' correctly.Is this true?
Jiml1126 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 7, posted (12 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 664 times:
About this one, the one I believe is that the officials from Taiwan's CAA stated that the map that the pilot was looking at is the new one, which the new one is supposed to be effective Nov 1, 2000. (which, it doesn't effect afterward due to some map problems) And it's true that the runway light on both 05L/R were on at the time of the crash, than the tower controllers shut off the light of the runway which closed for 20 years.
In fact, if the SIA pilots takeoff more earlier, the accident can actually avoid, according to a newspaper from Taiwan, or, if that was not a 747 (eg, if its like a 737 or 777), the plane could actually takeoff as soon as possible.
Sponsor Message: 
From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2000, 13711 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 883 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Germany, joined Nov 2000, 397 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
