Originally Posted by
QRC3288
They know what they're doing.
I absolutely disagree that CX knows what they are doing. But again - it may not be relevant in this case.
Originally Posted by
QRC3288
Your point about assume they're lying is definitely correct.
I am surprised you actually agree with this...
Originally Posted by
QRC3288
Runways were operating at half capacity (240 second intervals) for part of the day, ground staff was prevented from servicing planes on many occasions due to weather (including my own, incidentally a long haul bird servicing a short haul route, leading to the 2+ hour delay of the following JFK flight), etc.
I am not contending the severe weather. But the weather impacted Hong Kong the most beginning the afternoon of April 20. OP's friend's flight was scheduled for arrival during the early morning of April 20. I checked the HKG's arrival situation. While it is true that short-haul were affected, with 2 CX/KA flights delayed for 2+ hours during 4-6 am, CX 138 was the only long-haul flight that was delayed significantly (the another delayed long-haul was CX 845 for 38 minutes).
So yes - it does raise some questions when CX claimed HKG ATC.
OT - the idea of the 3rd runway is so stupid that when the existing runways are only ILS Cat. I/II.