A closed runway wasn't properly marked.
One runway light was broken, and another wasn't bright enough.
The closed runway did not have a big cross marked on it to warn pilots not to use it for takeoff.
These are some of the findings of a 400-page report on the Oct. 31 crash of Singapore Airlines flight SQ006, in which the pilots of the ill-fated flight attempted to take off from a runway closed for repairs and cluttered with construction equipment. Eighty-three of the 179 passengers on board lost their lives.
Although aviation officials yesterday stopped short of assigning blame to the pilots or to CKS International Airport, the report does say the airport's aging facilities weren't completely up to international levels.
"There are some areas that did not meet international standards," said Yong Kay (
"The airport was built up in 1979 and is an old airport ... Some lights, signs and markings regarding the design and administration of the airport had not been timely modified to meet the requirements of the International Civil Aviation Organization."
Yong spoke yesterday at a press conference to announce the findings of the council's fact-finding report, and added that a final report could be ready by December.
The safety council in its report yesterday highlighted several problems at CKS that may have been factors in the crash.
Specifically, Yong said that of three guiding lights to help direct planes to the correct runway, one was not working and another was too dim.
The lights were located at the point where the pilots mistakenly turned onto the wrong runway, parallel to the one they were supposed to use.
In addition, Yong said, the airport lacked guard lights to help pilots navigate from the taxiway to the proper runway during times of low visibility. Flight SQ006 attempted to take off at night while a nearby typhoon was battering the island.
Another issue, Yong said, was that there was a line painted on the taxiway leading to the closed runway, but no line directing planes to the correct runway. "According to international standards, where there are lights, there should be a line," Yong said.
International standards also call for a large cross on the tarmac of a closed runway, but there was none on the 05R runway from which the pilots took off. Part of the runway had been left open for use by taxiing planes.
"It is still controversial whether the marking should have been there for that runway, which was partly used for taxiing purposes," Yong said.
Yesterday's report also said that the closed runway might have been improperly illuminated, leading the pilots to believe it was open.
Tests on a runway edge light that was destroyed in the crash show that electricity was passing through the wiring at the time the accident, suggesting that the lights may have been on.
Chang Kuo-cheng (張國政), deputy director of the Civil Aeronautics Administration, said yesterday that when CKS airport was opened in 1979, its facilities conformed with international standards. "But I can't say if there were changes in the guidelines that we did not know about," Chang said.
RSS