The preliminary report released on Feb 23 by crash investigators makes no judgments as to the causes of the crash of flight SQ006, but its findings raise deeply troubling questions over standards at Taiwan's premier airport.

It also detailed the actions of the crew of the Boeing 747-400 before the airliner's fatal run into the construction site that was Runway 05 Right, where its belly was torn open by concrete blocks and mechanical diggers and its body broken into three flaming pieces.

Kay Yong, head of Taiwan's Aviation Safety Council, said the design and management of some of the lights, markers and signs at Chiang Kai-shek International Airport had not kept pace with worldwide requirements since it opened in 1979.

"Some areas did not meet international standards," Mr Yong said.

Some of the most troubling shortcomings in the report concern the taxiway that SQ006 should have followed on its way to Runway 05 Left as it prepared to take off in stormy weather on the night of October 31.

The taxiway lacked a painted line and one of its lights was broken while the next was dim. By contrast, a line and functioning lights led to the parallel - but closed - Runway 05 Right.

Questions remain about whether the edge lights of Runway 05 Right were off, as they should have been. Control tower and flight crew accounts have differed and investigators have yet to find conclusive evidence either way, but wires leading to one edge light found among the wreckage of the crash show that it was on when it was destroyed.

Public safety concerns are all too familiar in Taiwan, which has struggled to shake off a reputation for poor management of its transport infrastructure.

However, investigators agree that signs identifying Runway 05 Right were in place on the night of the crash.

Captain C.K. Foong, 41, a Malaysian pilot with 11,235 hours in the air, knew that 05 Right was closed but remembers seeing nothing outside to suggest he had lost his way.

Transcripts from the cockpit voice recorder show that the crew, all of whom survived, noticed that the Boeing's para-visual display (PVD), a device that assists take-off in poor visibility, was not functioning - it would have been had they been on the correct runway.

Tragically, however, Mr Foong decided to proceed anyway because visibility, though poor enough to hide the construction work further down the runway, was good enough to make use of the PVD unnecessary.

In a final irony, the report reveals that SQ006 had been scheduled to use a completely different runway with which Singapore Airline pilots were more familiar, but Mr Foong requested 05 Left because its better equipment and greater length meant it would be safer