Guest Contribution by Sebastiaan Menger

March 2026

Over the years, legendary airports were constructed, flourished and sometimes also vanished. Though, an airport is more than its terminal, airside or runway apparent at first sight. More specifically, each airport features its dedicated airspace infrastructure. In some cases, even after an airport has closed and its traces fading, parts of this airspace structure remain in use - quietly preserving a reminder of its aviation past.

​This 2nd part of the series 'The Airspace Heritage of Kai Tak' aims to clarify and explain some previously uncovered topics related to what remains of the Kai Tak airspace, even nowadays in early 2026.

Today's article features the following topics and structure:

• Main takeaways from the 1st article (link)
• Remaining approach lighting
• Remaining airspace fixes and airways
• Beacon Hill
• Checkerboard Hill
• Comparable approaches at other airports
• Kai Tak airspace background & common misconceptions​

A Boeing 747 Classic variant of Korean Air Cargo executing the IGS approach towards RWY 13. The famous checkerboard for visual reference can be seen in the background. Image courtesy of Daryl Chapman Photography, 1995.

---

Hong Kong Kai Tak Airspace: Conclusions from Part 1

In July 2024, we finished part 1 of this series with the following major conclusions (part 1 can be read here):

# 1. Famous Cheung Chau ('CH') VOR-DME served as an airspace ‘initial approach fix’ (IAF) for the Kai Tak IGS approach to RWY 13. However, effective December 2023 it has been completely decommissioned and replaced by a navigation waypoint/fix (generally for satellite navigation) with designator ‘BIGEX’.

Depiction of Cheung Chau navaid in 2023 (left) and its replacement fix/waypoint in 2026 (right). Image courtesy of the Hong Kong Civil Aviation Department eAIP 2023-11 and 2026-01. Edited by the author for clarity.

# 2. Furthermore, Tung Lung ('TD') VOR-DME navaid served as an (alternative) IAF for the famous Kai Tak airport (when aforementioned 'CH' VOR-DME was unserviceable). Fast forward to 2024, 'TD' VOR-DME is still present and serves to define several STAR (standard terminal arrival routes) for the present Chek Lap Kok airport. It is also an IAF for multiple approach procedures for both operating directions 25 and 07, while also serving a role in missed approach procedures of the new airport*. Moreover, in 2024, the respective 'TD' VOR-DME also serves as a navaid for enroute traffic**.
​
* As per Hong Kong Civil Aviation Department eAIP 2023-11/12, sections AD 2-VHHH-AC-ARR, AD 2-VHHH-STAR and AD 2-VHHH-IAC.
** As per Hong Kong Civil Aviation Department eAIP 2023-11/12, section ENR 4.1.

(Click to enlarge) 'TD' VOR-DME as in place for Kai Tak (left) and in place nowadays (right) for one of multiple approach procedures of Chek Lap Kok (example ILS RWY 25L). Left image courtesy of SAS Airlines Flight Support Department and Bertil Gullmar, September 1997. Edited by the author (changed colours for clarity). Right image courtesy of Jeppesen, 2024 (top) and (bottom) by Yu Sing Lam, 2024.

However, time is unforgiving. More specifically:

• Nowadays (2026), 'TD' VOR-DME is still present, though as of charts dated November 2024 (only 4 months after the publication of the 1st part of this article series), it no longer serves a function in the STAR and approach procedures of the present Chek Lap Kok airport (with one exception, elaborated below)*.
  
  
• Nowadays, the respective navaid only serves in a “contingency procedure” for Chek Lap Kok, more specifically the RNP Y (AR) RWY 07R approach. This procedure is only used “when bad weather or other unforeseen circumstances block the flight path to the southwest of the airport”. Apart from that, it can only be flown by airlines having the training and approval from the Hong Kong Civil Aviation Department (due to being an 'RNP-AR' procedure)**.
  
  
• In practice, nowadays 'TD' VOR-DME is hence only used as a navaid for enroute traffic***. Whether its final days are approaching, remains unknown.

​* As per Hong Kong Civil Aviation Department eAIP 2026-01, sections AD 2-VHHH-AC-ARR, AD 2-VHHH-STAR and AD 2-VHHH-IAC
** As per Hong Kong Civil Aviation Department eAIP 2026-01, sections AD 2-VHHH-IAC-02A and AD 2-VHHH-IAC-01G
*** As per Hong Kong Civil Aviation Department eAIP 2026-01, section ENR 4.1

'TD' VOR-DME serving as IAF in the RNP AR RWY 07R approach procedure. Image courtesy of Hong Kong Civil Aviation Department eAIP 2026-01, edited by the author for clarity.

---

Part 2: What Else Remains of the Kai Tak Airspace?

Today for part 2 of this article series, lets try a final quest into what really remains of the Kai Tak airspace and even serves a purpose at the beginning of 2026.

---

Remaining (Approach) Lighting

Given the high terrain directly adjacent to the former Hong Kong Kai Tak Airport, closely adhering to the prescribed track towards or from the runway was very essential. Therefore, the navaids (introduced in part 1) were in place, but apart from that, also a wide variety of lights were installed to visually mark the required track.

During the early days, the approach towards RWY 13 was flown either visually along a sequence of lights, or using several non-directional beacons (NDBs - as covered in part 1), also known as the ‘Stonecutters’ approach. However, even with the introduction of the famous instrument guidance system (IGS) in 1974, the lights remained a substantial guidance*.

Therefore, the aforementioned lights require some further attention. More specifically, there were white, red and some yellow ones. The white lights were generally in place at the centreline of the prescribed track to be flown, while the red ones were in place at the extremities of the flight ‘corridor’, allowing the cockpit crews to judge how much on track they were in addition to the NDB/IGS navigation.

* As per Owen Zupp and retired Qantas captain Ken Sargeant, published on key.aero "Kai Tak from the Cockpit: Pilot Insights and Memories of an Iconic Airport", June 2023.

Hong Kong Kai Tak Lighting Chart. Image courtesy of Jeppesen, 1990. Note the “Hong Kong, BCC” designation, short for ‘British Crown Colony’. Although the UK introduced the broader legal category ‘British Dependent Territories’ in the 1980s, this functioned mainly as an umbrella classification. Hong Kong fell under this category by definition, but its constitutional and administrative status did not change; it continued to operate as a British Crown Colony. For this reason, it is denoted as such on the 1990 chart.

According to feedback obtained from local experts with the publication of article part 1, some of these previous (approach) lights of Kai Tak are nowadays in use for maritime purposes. With reference to the chart depicted above:

• Position number 6: 'Cape Collinson directional flashing red light' on Hong Kong Island
  Given the orientation of this light, it seemed in place to support Kai Tak ILS RWY 31 approach (not the famous IGS 13). It is likely that this light was in place to clearly delineate the high peaks of Hong Kong Island during and before the ILS localiser intercept.
  
  
• Position number 7: 'Cape Collinson directional flashing red light' on Hong Kong Island
  Light #7 probably served some function for the missed approach of the IGS RWY 13, again for purposes of clearly delineating the high terrain of Hong Kong Island for aircraft climbing out on the missed approach segment towards 'TH' VOR (which as discussed in part 1, is no longer present).

When investigating the location of lights 6+7 on Cape Collinson, Hong Kong Island, it is likely (!) that the base infrastructure remains in use, just nowadays as a lighthouse for maritime purposes. Some impressions have been included below.

(Click to enlarge) Lighthouse on Cape Collinson, Hong Kong Island. Images courtesy of Ken Wong, 2018 (left) and Chun Yan Ho, 2020 (right).

• Position number 13: 'Tathong continuous orange light' on Tun Lung Chau Island
  Similar to positions 6 and 7, after ~30 years have passed, it can not be stated with 100% certainty, but the location from the chart still features a lighthouse nowadays, directly next to the old demolished 'TH' VOR site (covered in article part 1). An impression of this light(house) has been included below.

Apparently, more lights depicted on the Kai Tak 1990 Jeppesen Lighting Chart are still in operation today (but then repurposed for maritime purposes). However, during the research for this article, those could not be retrieved, or only with an unacceptable degree of uncertainty. In any case, what remains of the old Kai Tak (approach) lighting system remains a bit of a treasure hunt ;-)

Tathong Point N92 Lighthouse. Image courtesy of William Tong, 2025.

---

Remaining ‘Fixes’ and Airways

Another topic keeping the airspace heritage of Kai Tak alive concerns so-called 'fixes' or 'waypoints' (points in space instead of navaids used for aircraft navigation). Furthermore, also certain airways dating back to Kai Tak times are still in use nowadays. Airways and fixes are of course 'invisible' to the human eye and only exist in aircraft flight management computers (FMC), but those from Kai Tak times are still used for navigation nowadays.

In terms of navigation fixes originally in place for Kai Tak and still present, are:

• 'BEKOL'
• 'MAGOG'
• And (likely) more!

With regard to airways dating back to Kai Tak times and still flown nowadays, are:

• A461
• And (likely) more!

The aforementioned fix/waypoint 'BEKOL' used to define the Kai Tak standard instrument departure (SID) ‘BEKOL 2C’. This SID connected RWY 31 with airway A461 where aircraft continued the enroute phase of their flight. 'BEKOL' is still in use nowadays to define various SIDs from the new Hong Kong Chek Lap Kok airport, as depicted below. Note that the shown SID from Chek Lap Kok airport no longer overflies urban areas (which the BEKOL SID from Kai Tak did), due to much more noise awareness and abatement nowadays.

(Click to enlarge) 'BEKOL' SIDs from both Kai Tak and the new Chek Lap Kok airports. Left image courtesy of SAS Airlines Flight Support Department and Bertil Gullmar, September 1997. Edited by the author (changed colours for clarity). Right images courtesy of HK eAIP, 2026-01.

---

Beacon Hill

Terrain played a major role in the definition of instrument flight procedures such as the aforementioned 'BEKOL 2C' SID from Kai Tak. When looking at the respective SID, we see an immediate left turn to Stonecutters ‘SC’ NDB after takeoff (refer to image above).

This was to prevent flying into the high peaks of ‘Beacon Hill’, further north of the respective NDB and RWY 31. In fact, Stonecutters was nicknamed “Throatcutters” with the British military crews since if you messed it up there, it could kill you due to the respective terrain*.

To make the SID even more challenging and again given the terrain, even 'minimum’ bank angles were required, ensuring aircraft really cleared the terrain in time.​ Now as concluded in part 1 of this article series, the respective NDB (‘SC’ in previous image/chart) is obviously no longer in operation. However, aforementioned ‘Beacon Hill’ being the reason for all these special procedures is obviously still there. Similar to past times, it also still features radar stations (nowadays as secondary surveillance radar - SSR, instead of primary radar of the past).

* As per Linton Chilcott, First Officer from 1996-1998 at Cathay Pacific, as published in PILOT Magazine, edition April 2000, "Flying the B747 Classic".

(Click to enlarge) Hong Kong Kowloon and Beacon Hill with its radar stations (location marked in red), images courtesy of Google Maps, 2026.

---

Checkerboard Hill

A further component strongly associated with the famous Kai Tak IGS approach towards RWY 13 is a landmark known as the 'checkerboard'. As a matter of fact, it has actually been restored around 2021. Newer pictures from 2025 show the west side of the checkerboard being in less good shape, though the southern pattern is very recognisable again.

Checkerboard Hill, image courtesy of Chung Ho, 2025.

Enjoying this article?

Sign up to our e-mail newsletter to know when new content goes online!

Approaches Comparable to the Kai Tak IGS RWY 13

Since the IGS approach towards RWY 13 at Kai Tak was so unique, the question comes to mind whether there are very similar approaches, even in use today?

As far as the research of the author is concerned, there are only 4 airports nowadays with technically comparable approaches:

• Macau Airport (MFM/VMMC) - LOC DME approach RWY 16
• Tokyo Haneda Airport (HND/RJTT) - LDA approach RWY 22 & LDA approach RWY 23
• Reggio Calabria Airport (REG/LICR) - LOC approach RWY 33
• Petersburg James A Johnson Airport (PSG/PAPG) - LDA approach RWY 23

These all have 'offset localiser' approaches and require visual turns of approx. 45-65 degrees to align with the runway, very similar to Kai Tak in both the technology as well as the procedure.

At first sight, quite some more airports seem to have an approach similar to the Kai Tak IGS. However, when looking closer, that often does not compare, since:

• At other airports with circling approaches, the turn to final is often much less than the 47 degrees as was the case at Kai Tak, or a full visual circuit/traffic pattern is flown;
• Or, a ‘general’ navaid like a VOR is used for the approach, such as the Canarsie ('CRI') VOR approach into New York JFK RWYs 13L/R. Whereas in Kai Tak, Tokyo Haneda, Macau and Reggio Calabria airports, the localiser is/was specifically positioned for that specific RWY/approach only;
• Or, the (circling) approach uses a navaid for another RWY (e.g. Amsterdam Airport Schiphol RWY27 circling approach to RWY 22 or RWY 24) ;
• Or, the approach is a visual flight rules (VFR) procedure (potentially even unpublished).

Apart from (circling) approaches listed above, procedures with spectacular turns towards short final can also come in other forms, like in Paro (Bhutan). But again, those are defined through RNAV/RNP (AR), i.e. satellite navigation instead of an offset LOC navaid. Again, this can technically not be compared to the Kai Tak IGS RWY 13 approach. That leaves only Macau, Tokyo Haneda and Reggio Calabria airports with technically comparable approaches - though still with some minor differences, as explained per case below.

Macau Airport (Approach: 'LOC-DME RWY 16')
Directly opposite Hong Kong, on the western side of the Pearl River Delta, lies Macau International Airport. Constructed in 1995 during the final years of Portuguese administration, this airport is well worth a closer look thanks to the spectacular LOC-DME approach towards RWY 16, which feels strikingly similar to Kai Tak's IGS RWY 13.

The respective approach has been depicted below through the Jeppesen approach plate (1) as well as some recordings of the approach relatively close along the skylines of Zhuhai and Macau (2).

Macau (VMMC/MFM) LOC-DME approach RWY 16 with the offset LOC on a mountain peak and the pertaining visual turn to align with the RWY. Image courtesy of Jeppesen, 2026.

(Click to enlarge) Impressions of the Macau LOC-DME RWY 16 approach closely along the Zhuhai and Macau skylines and bridges. Images courtesy of Le Alfista YouTube Channel, 2024.

Basically speaking, in both the Kai Tak and Macau cases, we have a considerably offset localiser antenna and a significant visual turn (of 54 degrees in the case of Macau) towards the runway on short final.

Apart from that, strict missed-approach procedures were/are in place to make sure aircraft do not follow the localiser past the missed approach point, since else ending up in a mountain peak. The only difference worth mentioning is the fact that the Kai Tak IGS had a localiser (LOC) as well as glideslope antenna (GP) in addition to distance measuring equipment (DME) installed, while the referred Macau approach for RWY 16 features a LOC and DME, though no GP antenna.

In terms of the history of this approach into Macau, it is likely that this type of approach has been in use since the opening of Macau Airport in 1995. Satellite imagery dates back as far as 2003, which shows the platform for the (offset) LOC antenna was already there in the early 2000s. In fact, even an upgraded platform (slightly towards the north-east) was under construction in 2003. Nowadays only the newer platform and LOC-DME remain present, the old platform is more and more reclaimed by nature.

(Click to enlarge) Platform for the offset LOC-DME antenna at the Taipa Pequena mountain peak in Macau. Image courtesy of Google Earth, 2003 (left) and Esri Arcgis World Imagery Wayback, 2025 (right).

With this short background covered, then the only question for the Macau comparison case study remains: "how often is the LOC-DME RWY 16 approach procedure used?"

Flight tracking data for approx. 3 weeks show that RWY 16 was never used for landings during this timeframe, only for the occasional takeoff (to prevent noise over the city a departure on RWY 16 can be beneficial - i.e. then routing over the sea).

The aforementioned 3 weeks concerned January 2026 hence this does not constitute any 'definite' statement, however it gives some indication of how seldom an approach (not takeoff!) onto RWY 16 is flown (unfortunately!). This is further confirmed when checking airport weather data (METAR) and the Jeppesen Airport Briefing for the respective airport, which states along the lines of “RWY 34 is preferred over RWY 16 even with a 10 kts tailwind component”.

Hence, RWY 16 will only be used (for approaches) in case of southerly wind above 10 kts, which is seldom. According to the same source, the prevailing wind is only southerly in June to August, though the prevailing windspeed constitutes only 7kts in the respective timeframe. Again making an approach onto RWY 16 unlikely. Even if required from a meteorological perspective, nowadays the respective procedure is probably only a backup, for those few airlines/flight crews not certified/trained for the alternative RNAV/RNP approach into RWY 16.

Tokyo Haneda Airport (Approach: 'LDA RWY 22' and 'LDA RWY 23')
The second airport which has approaches very similar to the Kai Tak IGS, is Tokyo Haneda in Japan. There are 2 so-called 'LDA' (localiser directional aid) approaches, applicable to RWY 22 and 23. The respective runways have both standard ILS as well as LDA approaches, of which the LDA procedures seem to have been implemented relatively recently, around 2010.

(Click to enlarge) Tokyo Haneda offset LOC antenna for LDA approaches (example towards RWY 23) as of ~2010. Images courtesy of Google Earth 2007 and 2010. Note that the LOC is located in the vicinity of RWY 22, but it serves the LDA towards RWY 23.

Similar to the Kai Tak IGS RWY 13, the LDA procedures of Tokyo Haneda feature a significantly offset localiser (including DME, though no glidepath antenna). More precisely, the LOC for the LDA RWY 22 procedure is located on an island further away from the actual airport. Flight crews would lock onto the LOC and on short final fly a visual left turn of 55 degrees to align with the runway. Some impressions have been included below.

Tokyo Haneda LDA RWY 22 approach procedure and pertaining (offset) LOC infrastructure. Image courtesy of Lido Charts Lufthansa Systems, 2025 (top) and Google Maps, 2025 (satellite images below).

Traffic analysis for both 2025 and 2026 shows that when operating direction 22 / 23 is in use and visibility conditions allow, the LDA approaches are preferred over the standard ILS approach, as they concentrate noise over the bay rather than over the city (which the standard ILS approaches would do). In other words, the LDA approaches at Tokyo Haneda are still used regularly, also nowadays.

Tokyo Haneda arrival traffic depiction for a full day (2025-07-18). LDA approaches towards RWYs 22 and 23 are marked with text labels, as well as the visual turn towards each RWY (marked in red). Image created using adsb.lol ADS-B aircraft position data and kepler.gl charting.

Reggio Calabria Airport (Approach: 'LOC RWY 33')
In Europe, a comparable approach retrieved in the author's research pertains to Reggio Calabria airport, Italy. ​It is characterised by:

• A considerably offset LOC (though no DME and no GP either), situated next to olive (?) tree farmland
• 3 'mini checkerboards' for further visual orientation/on-track judgement
• Sequenced flashing lead-in lights
• A visual turn to (short) final featuring an approx. 45 degree turn

Similar to the Macau and Tokyo Haneda cases, this approach also seems infrequently used given the RNP approach to RWY 33 also being available, making this LOC procedure likely a backup only. Nevertheless, a brief visual overview of the respective approach and navaids has been included in the image composition below.

(Click to enlarge) Reggio Calabria LOC RWY 33 approach and pertaining infrastructure (LOC antenna and 3 small checkerboards marked in red). Image courtesy of Jeppesen, 2025 (left) and Google Maps, 2025 (right).

Petersburg James A Johnson Airport (Approach: 'LDA RWY 23')
The final comparable approach concerns the 'LDA' (localiser directional aid) approach at Petersburg Airport in Alaska, USA. Though technically this approach is RWY independent (it can be used for circling approaches to both RWY 23 and 05), it is similar to Kai Tak IGS RWY 13 when applied for RWY 23. More precisely, it is characterised by:

• A considerably offset LOC (including DME, though no glidepath antenna)
• A visual turn to (short) final featuring a 66 degrees turn as per the published procedure

Similar to the Macau and Reggio Calabria cases, based on several ADS-B traffic studies, this approach seems infrequently used given the availability of RNAV approach alternatives (which can be flown to lower visibility minima among others benefits). The respective LDA procedure is therefore likely a backup only. Nevertheless, given its similarity with the Kai Tak IGS 13 approach, some visual impressions have been included in the image composition below.

(Click to enlarge) Petersburg LDA approach and pertaining infrastructure (offset LOC antenna). Image courtesy of Jeppesen, 2025 (left) and Esri Arcgis World Imagery Wayback, 2025 (right).

---

Kai Tak Airspace Background & Common IGS RWY 13 Misconceptions

To close this 2nd part of the article series into the Kai Tak airspace heritage, I want to provide some background into the famous Kai Tak IGS RWY 13 approach and clarify some common misconceptions.

The instrument guidance system (IGS) towards RWY 13 was in place since a normal instrument landing system (ILS) for a 'straight-in approach' onto the respective runway was not feasible, again due to terrain in the form of Beacon Hill, covered earlier on in today's article.

Beacon Hill in close vicinity of the old Kai Tak airport side, blocking a conventional ILS solution. Image courtesy of Google Maps, 2025, highlighted previous RWY 13 for clarity.

As elaborated before, the IGS became operational in 1974 and constituted a more precise approach compared to the previous 'Stonecutters approach' which was an NDB-based approach. The new IGS featured an (offset) glideslope and (offset) localiser. Technically speaking though, the IGS was no 'precision approach' either, but still a 'non-precision approach' given its famous 47 degree visual (!) turn to final. Nevertheless, it allowed for more precise approaches compared to the NDB or visual flight rules (VFR) alternatives*.

The planning for the IGS of RWY 13 must have started much earlier than 1974, given certification, stakeholder alignment, coordination, approvals, among the many aspects to consider for instrument flight procedure design. It is likely that the planning phase started in the 1960s though this could not be fully confirmed. It would however match with the advent of more and bigger jet aircraft, which could not fly the confined visual circuit which propeller aircraft (due to their lower speeds) could. Apart from that, an approach based on newer navaids (localiser, glidepath instead of NDBs) makes sense for a region where weather and visibility can be challenging.

* As per Owen Zupp and retired Qantas captain Ken Sargeant, as published on key.aero "Kai Tak from the Cockpit: Pilot Insights and Memories of an Iconic Airport", June 2023.

Approach chart depicting the famous IGS approach into Kai Tak RWY 13. Image courtesy of Hong Kong's Civil Aviation Department - Accident Investigation Division, 1995.

Many people believe the LOC and GP antennas pertaining to the IGS RWY 13 were located at the checkerboard (hill). This is however only partially true. Based on historic documents and photos, the glideslope antenna was indeed at the checkboard, likely shown by the marked antenna in the image below.

Some debate among consulted CNS experts remains given the fact that a GP normally needs flat ground in front, which this one does not have. It was likely though an ‘M-type capture-effect’ GP antenna, which is less dependent on ground-plate clearance and hence much more suitable for the respective terrain.

Checkerboard Hill with (likely) glideslope antenna (marked) on the west-facing checkerboard pattern. Image source contested, various photographers with unverifiable accounts claim the image. Date unknown.

Contrary to popular belief, the localiser (LOC) on the other hand was not positioned at the checkerboard. Based on historic documents, photos as well as video recordings, the LOC-DME was positioned at Kowloon Tsai Park, in the Bauhinia Garden*. Curiously, it was actually located close to a swimming pool and 3 soccer fields. Obviously the LOC has long been removed, but the aforementioned garden, sports fields and pool are are still there nowadays.

* As per documentation of the Hong Kong's Civil Aviation Department - Accident Investigation Division, 1990 and imagery of Hardy Heinlin, 1998.

(Click to enlarge) The Kai Tak IGS RWY 13 localiser antenna in Bauhinia Garden, as seen from the checkerboard looking towards the south/south-east. Photographs courtesy of Hardy Heinlin, 1998 and chart courtesy of Hong Kong's Civil Aviation Department - Accident Investigation Division, 1990.

A further interesting aspect is that nowadays, glidepath and localiser antennas at airports are ‘heavily protected’, but in the past at Kai Tak, this was much less the case, situated just next to parks with people standing and walking by closely. Some impressions have been included below.

(Click to enlarge) People in Lok Fu Service Reservoir Rest Garden close to the glidepath antenna (at checkerboard hill) on a rainy day (left), people directly next to the glidepath antenna (center image), images courtesy of Hardy Heinlin, 1998, and people at checkerboard hill (right), image courtesy of Max Media Asia, 1998.

---

​Conclusion

The aim of this article was to shed light on the airspace heritage originating from the Kai Tak era that remains operational today. In the first part of the series, we established that the 'TD' VOR-DME is still present and in use. Although its functions have been reduced compared to 2024, this remains the case as of 2026.

In addition, several navigation fixes and airways originating from the Kai Tak airspace structure are still in place and continue to be used in the instrument flight procedures of the new Chek Lap Kok airport today.

Famous landmarks such as the Checkerboard and Beacon Hill also remain visible today. Parts of the former Kai Tak approach lighting system appear to have survived as well, having been repurposed for maritime use and now serving as lighthouses.

Furthermore, it became apparent that four airports (two in Asia, one in Europe, and one in the USA) feature approaches that are technically very comparable to the Kai Tak IGS RWY 13 approach and remain available today. However, except for the Haneda LDA approaches, the other case studies are flown only rarely nowadays.

In conclusion, various elements of the former Kai Tak airspace infrastructure continue to preserve the heritage of this legendary airport, even in 2026.

Thank you for reading!

---

​About the Author

Sebastiaan Menger is an airspace capacity and configuration expert. Nicknamed “Mr Airspace” by his colleagues, he lives and breathes airspace, ranging from functional airspace planning, pertaining capacity as well as operational aspects like aircraft performance. He aims to publish the ‘Airspace Capacity Bible’, starting with volume 1 by 2027. For questions, comments or feedback, he can be contacted via LinkedIn - https://de.linkedin.com/in/sebastiaanmenger

---

​Credits

The author would like to thank the following experts for their input and guidance:

• Marnix Groot, Leading airport expert and publisher of Momberger Airport Information
• Fay Cheung, Hong Kong Kai Tak expert
• Vincent Lambercy, Publisher of Global Airspace Radar and founder of FoxATM
• Stanley Lau, Principal consultant EGIS UK and former ATM Standards Officer and Senior Electronics Engineer at the Hong Kong Civil Aviation Department
• Tony Brown, CNS Safeguarding Engineer at Airport CNS Safeguarding Consult Ltd.
• Tak Man Shum, former Kai Tak air traffic controller (ATCO)
• K. Leung, Hong Kong Kai Tak expert

---

Image Credits & Technical Sources

Credits to the authors of the images used in this research article have been provided per image above, however for reference a list with image credits and technical sources has also been included below:

• The AirportHistory.org collection.
• SAS Airlines Flight Support Department and Bertil Gullmar, September 1997. Available at: Airport briefing package only.
• Daryl Chapman Photography, 1995. Available at: Boeing, 747-2B5F, HL7452, "Korean Air Cargo", VHHH, Kai Ta… | Flickr
• Hong Kong's Civil Aviation Department - Accident Investigation Division, 1968. Available at: 19670630-1_S210_HS-TGI.pdf (aviation-safety.net)
• ​​Hong Kong's Civil Aviation Department - Accident Investigation Division, 1990. Available at: 19880831-1_TRID_B-2218.pdf (aviation-safety.net)
• Hong Kong's Civil Aviation Department - Accident Investigation Division, 1995. Available at: 19931104-0_B744_B-165.pdf (aviation-safety.net)
• Hong Kong Civil Aviation Department, 2019-2026. Available at: Hong Kong Aeronautical Information Services (ais.gov.hk)
• Jeppesen, a Boeing Company, 2024, 2025 and 2026. Available at: Navigraph Charts
• Key.aero, Owen Zupp and retired Qantas captain Ken Sargeant. Kai Tak from the Cockpit: Pilot Insights and Memories of an Iconic Airport, June 2023. Available at: Key.Aero
• Yu Sing Lam, 2024-10, published on Google Maps
• Hong Kong Civil Aviation Department eAIP 2023-11/12, section ENR 6-1
• Hong Kong Civil Aviation Department eAIP 2026-01, section ENR 6-1
• Hong Kong Civil Aviation Department eAIP 2026-01, sections AD 2-VHHH-AC-ARR, AD 2-VHHH-STAR and AD 2-VHHH-IAC
• Hong Kong Civil Aviation Department eAIP 2026-01, section AD 2-VHHH-IAC-02A
• Hong Kong Civil Aviation Department eAIP 2026-01, section ENR 4.1
• Hong Kong Civil Aviation Department eAIP 2023-11/12, sections AD 2-VHHH-AC-ARR, AD 2-VHHH-STAR and AD 2-VHHH-IAC
• Hong Kong Civil Aviation Department eAIP 2023-11/12, section ENR 4.1
• Hong Kong Civil Aviation Department eAIP 2026-01, section AD 2-VHHH-IAC-01G
• Jeppesen, 1990. Hong Kong Kai Tak Lighting Chart
• Ken Wong, 2018-03, published on Google Maps
• Chun Yan Ho, 2020-12, published on Google Maps
• William Tong, 2025-10, published on Google Maps
• Linton Chilcott, First Officer from 1996-1998 at Cathay Pacific, published in PILOT Magazine, edition April 2000, "Flying the B747 Classic"
• Google Maps, 2025 and 2026
• Chung Ho, 2025-03, published on Google Maps
• Le Alfista YouTube Channel, uploaded 2024-07
• Jeppesen Airport Briefing for VMMC, 2026
• Google Earth, 2003, 2007 and 2010
• Esri Arcgis World Imagery Wayback, 2014 and 2025
• Lido Charts Lufthansa Systems, 2025, available via AviaPlanner
• Hardy Heinlin, 1998 - Kai Tak Sitting on the Checkerboard 1998, uploaded 2023-11, available at YouTube
• Max Media Asia - Plane Spotters Kai Tak Hong Kong Airport 1998, available at YouTube
• ADSB.LOL Globe History 2025-07-18 data and kepler.gl charting

---

---

We hope you enjoyed this tribute to the airspace of Hong Kong Kai Tak! Be sure check out our Photo Special on Kai Tak Airport in the 1960s here.

Did you travel through Hong Kong Kai Tak in the past, or were involved in its airspace? Share your experience in the comments below!

For more airport articles: click here​

Thanks for reading! Before you go...​

​​- Follow us on social to get the best of airport history right in your news feed!
​
- Sign up to our newsletter below to know when new content goes online!

- And comment below 👇 to join the conversation and share your comments!