Multiple runway takeoff position errors at Adelaide Airport

No fatalities • Adelaide Airport, South Australia

Thirteen aircraft departures from the incorrect runway position were identified at Adelaide Airport during temporary taxiway construction works in early 2025.

What happened

Between 31 March and 20 May 2025, taxiway construction at Adelaide Airport, South Australia, necessitated a temporary displacement of the runway 23 take-off start of take-off (SOT) position. To accommodate the works, the SOT was moved 65 and 508 meters beyond its normal location, creating a new temporary threshold. During this period, 13 occurrences were identified where aircraft began their take-off from the displaced threshold rather than the intended SOT position. This error created a significant safety risk, as flight crews were utilizing takeoff performance data calculated for the shorter, intended runway length. While some incidents were prevented by air traffic control (ATC) or pilot inquiries, several aircraft departed from the incorrect location during both day and night operations.

The investigation

The ATSB examined the effectiveness of the information provided to flight crews, including the NOTAM, ATIS, and physical airfield markings. The investigation found that while crews were aware of the construction and the existence of a displaced threshold, the visual cues for the new SOT position were highly ambiguous. During daylight, the white arrows and threshold lights—which were more prominent than the SOT line—unintentionally signaled pilots to continue forward. At night, the transition from green taxiway lighting to red edge lighting was not distinct enough to clearly mark the new start point. Furthermore, the red edge lights, intended to warn landing aircraft, did not intuitively signal a takeoff start point to departing pilots. The investigation also noted that the ATIS lacked specific details regarding the SOT location, and the initial NOTAM used inconsistent terminology and failed to mention the specific white line marking the SOT.

Findings

  • The primary cause of the errors was the misidentification of the runway 23 start position due to confusing temporary markings and lighting.
  • The initial NOTAM contained inconsistent terminology and failed to reference the white line marking the SOT position.
  • Red runway edge lights were not easily visible to pilots during daylight hours.
  • In one instance, an air traffic controller failed to correct two incorrect readbacks regarding the runway end, which likely contributed to the error.
  • There is a lack of standardized guidance in the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations Part 139 Manual of Standards for visual aids to highlight a displaced takeoff position when it does not coincide with a taxiway or runway intersection.

Safety message

  • Proactive measures by aircraft operators to emphasize the correct takeoff position and the use of specific intersection data helped mitigate the number of incidents.
  • ATC interventions and pilot queries to confirm takeoff positions were effective in preventing further occurrences.

Probable cause

Flight crews misidentified the takeoff start position for runway 23 because the temporary airfield markings and lighting were ambiguous, compounded by inconsistent information in the NOTAM and ATIS.

All Airbus A350-900 accidents →

Frequently asked questions

What happened in the 2025-04-11 Airbus A350 accident near Adelaide Airport, South Australia?

Thirteen aircraft departures from the incorrect runway position were identified at Adelaide Airport during temporary taxiway construction works in early 2025.

Were there any fatalities in the 2025-04-11 Airbus A350 accident?

No fatalities were recorded in this accident.

What aircraft was involved and where did it happen?

The accident on 2025-04-11 involved a Airbus A350, registration A7-AMH, operated by Qatar Airways Company, at Adelaide Airport, South Australia.

What was the probable cause of the accident?

Flight crews misidentified the takeoff start position for runway 23 because the temporary airfield markings and lighting were ambiguous, compounded by inconsistent information in the NOTAM and ATIS.

Loading the flight search…