747 Runway Excursion Kills Two in Car Hit by the Plane

A Boeing 747 Cargo aircraft ended up in the ocean after hitting a vehicle while landing at Hong Kong International Airport on Sunday. The 747-481, operated by Turkish cargo carrier Airline ACT, was on a flight from Dubai and landed about 3:50 a.m. local time. Two security workers were in the vehicle, which also ended up in the water. They were rescued but died later in hospital. Four crew members on the plane survived and were taken to hospital. Their conditions have not been reported. Images show the aircraft broken into several pieces and resting near the rock tidal wall on the airport perimeter.

The aircraft apparently went off the runway and hit the security vehicle before both ended up in the water. Reuters is reporting the vehicle was not on the runway and was in its normal operating area when the aircraft veered left and the vehicle was on its path to the ocean. The crew of the plane did not report any anomalies and the landing appeared to be routine. Weather was reported to be partly cloudy with moderate northeasterly winds. The accident occurred on Runway 07L.

Russ Niles
Russ Niles
Russ Niles is Editor-in-Chief of AvBrief.com. He has been a pilot for 30 years and an aviation journalist since 2003. He and his wife Marni live in southern British Columbia where they also operate a small winery.

SIGN UP FOR OUR NEWSLETTER

Latest
00:06:37
Related

3 COMMENTS

Subscribe to this comment thread
Notify of
guest
3 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Marc R Roy
Marc R Roy
5 months ago

Actually, there WAS an incursion: that of the aircraft into the vehicle. The teaser is a bit ambiguous.

roger m anderson
roger m anderson
Reply to  Marc R Roy
5 months ago

An assumed runway incursion, assuming the vehicle was on the runway and not just hit after the aircraft’s excursion off the runway, caused the vehicle to be hit. Kinda a needless long way to say what the teaser already creates. My opinion.

rpstrong
rpstrong
5 months ago

Minor correction; the operator is :”Air ACT’, not ‘Airline ACT’.