 | This articleneeds additional citations forverification. Please helpimprove this article byadding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. Find sources: "China Airlines Flight 605" – news ·newspapers ·books ·scholar ·JSTOR(May 2020) (Learn how and when to remove this message) |
 B-165 after the vertical stabilizer was removed soon after the accident | |
| Accident | |
|---|---|
| Date | 4 November 1993 (1993-11-04) |
| Summary | Runway overrun due tounstable approach caused bypilot error inbad weather |
| Site | Kai Tak Airport, Hong Kong 22°19′06″N114°11′51″E / 22.3183°N 114.1976°E /22.3183; 114.1976 |
 | |
| Aircraft | |
 B-165, the aircraft involved in the accident. | |
| Aircraft type | Boeing 747-409[a] |
| Operator | China Airlines |
| IATA flight No. | CI605 |
| ICAO flight No. | CAL605 |
| Call sign | DYNASTY 605 |
| Registration | B-165 |
| Flight origin | Chiang Kai-shek International Airport,Taipei, Taiwan |
| Destination | Kai Tak Airport, Hong Kong |
| Occupants | 296 |
| Passengers | 274 |
| Crew | 22 |
| Fatalities | 0 |
| Injuries | 23 |
| Survivors | 296 |
China Airlines Flight 605 was a daily non-stop flight departing fromTaipei,Taiwan toHong Kong, then a British colony. On 4 November 1993, the aircraft operating the flightwent off the runway when attempting to land during a storm.[1] It was the firsthull loss of aBoeing 747-400.[2][3]
The aircraft involved,registered as B-165, was a 5-month-oldBoeing 747-400 manufactured in June 1993. It was powered by fourPratt & Whitney PW4056 turbofan engines and had only logged 1,969 flight hours in 359 takeoff and landing cycles at the time of the accident.[3]: 11–17
The 47-year-oldcaptain had previously served with theRepublic of China Air Force and joined China Airlines in 1984. He started flying the 747 (the older -200 variant) in 1988 and was upgraded to a captain of the 747-400 in 1990. At the time of the accident, the captain had logged a total of 12,469 flight hours, including 3,559 hours on the Boeing 747. The 37-year-old first officer joined the airline in 1992, having previously served with theRepublic of China Army. He had logged 5,705 hours, though only 953 of them were on the Boeing 747.[3]: 8–9
ABritish Airways pilot had refused to make the approach to Kai Tak runway 13 minutes before the CAL 605 captain decided to attempt it.
At 11:36 am local time, flight 605 touched down more than 2,100 feet (640 m) past therunway'sdisplaced threshold, at a speed of 150 knots (278 km/h; 173 mph), following anIGS runway 13 approach.Typhoon Ira was generating 20-knot (37 km/h; 23 mph)crosswinds on that runway, gusting to 38 knots (70 km/h; 44 mph), from a heading of 070 degrees.[2][4]
The pilots received several computer-generatedwind shear andglide slope deviation warnings, and observed severeairspeed fluctuations, during the last mile before touchdown. The captain, who was the pilot flying, disconnected theauto-pilot and began flying the plane manually. He also disconnected theauto-throttle as he was dissatisfied with its performance. After the aircraft landed, the first officer took control of the plane and attempted to keep the aircraft on the centerline (of the runway). However, his inputs were too severe and the captain was forced to aid him. Meanwhile, the captain inadvertently increased engine power rather than activating thethrust reversers. Theauto-brakes were set at only the number two level and then were turned off seconds after touchdown due to the increase in power. Thespeedbrakes were extended briefly, but then retracted, also due to the power increase. This caused the plane to "float", making the brakes ineffective until the speed brakes were extended again. When the First Officer finally noticed that the auto-brakes were disarmed and the thrust reversers had not deployed, the captain immediately applied manual braking andthrust reversal.
The captain deliberately turned the plane to the left when he realized the plane would overrun the runway and hit theapproach lighting system (ALS) for runway 31. That action caused a "ground loop", making the plane slide off the left side of therunway intoVictoria Harbour. The plane came to rest in shallow water, with a heading of almost 180 degrees out from the direction of runway 13.
The flight crew did not warn the cabin crew that the plane was about to overrun the runway. After the aircraft came to rest in the water, the cabin crew performed an unplanned ditching of the aircraft. Communication was hindered as the PA system was damaged and not functional; additionally, megaphones were not used. The captain and first officer performed the emergency checks from memory but did not use a written checklist. Crew members ensured that all passengers donnedlife jackets, and after permission from the captain, evacuated out of eight of the ten main deck emergency exits. These exits (as on all 747s) are equipped with inflatable evacuation slide/rafts forditching emergencies. The passenger cabin remained completely above water during the evacuation, although eventually sinking tail-first. Additional damage to the nose and first-class cabin was noted. There were 23 minor injuries among passengers and crew.[3]
| This sectionrelies largely or entirely on asingle source. Relevant discussion may be found on thetalk page. Please helpimprove this article byintroducing citations to additional sources. Find sources: "China Airlines Flight 605" – news ·newspapers ·books ·scholar ·JSTOR(October 2025) |
One passenger in seat 55J was determined to have not worn their seat belt during the crash and was standing up, causing them to be thrown forward into the seat of 54J and the left side of seat 54K. This resulted the passenger in 54K being seriously injured, with a dislocated left shoulder and subsequent hospitalisation (for five days). The seat and seatbelt in 55J was found to be undamaged, but 54J and 54K were partially damaged. The passenger in 55J suffered minor leg injuries. Several other minor injuries across the plane were reported, including injuries caused by luggage bins opening during the crash.[3]
The airport fire service was on standby due to the increased wind conditions. After an alarm was raised by the control tower, they immediately responded. The first rescue vehicle arrived within one minute of the plane crashing. Ladders were placed along the seawall, and inflatable life-rafts alongside divers were deployed. Rescue was aided by several nearby vessels including a tugboat, several small private motorised boats, and vessels from theMarine Department andMarine Police (Region). The rescue operation was completed within 30 minutes without any major difficulty.[3]
_Boeing_747-409_B-165_(23222709894).jpg)
The aircraft was written off as a total hull loss. Since the aircraft'svertical stabilizer interfered with the accuracy of theinstrument landing system signals for runway 31 – which allowed aircraft to make safe ILS approaches whenever the wind patterns mandated the use of runway 31 (the reciprocal direction of runway 13) – the vertical stabilizer was removed with dynamite shortly after the crash. The China Airlines lettering and the Chinese characters were removed, as was part of the livery on the fuselage, to conceal the identity of the aircraft as belonging to China Airlines. After the accident, the aircraft was stored near theHAECO building for use infirefighting practice.
The investigation indicated that the accident was caused by the captain's failure to initiate the mandatorymissed approach procedure when he observed the severe airspeed fluctuations, combined with the wind shear and glide slope deviation alerts. The first officer was also found to not have enough experience to handle the aircraft while landing in crosswind conditions. China Airlines was also criticized for not having a clear crosswind landing procedure in their manuals to aid pilots. The investigation recommended that the airline revise its manuals andflight training.
