Air China CA428 Near-Miss CFIT at take-off in HK
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: HK
Age: 34
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Air China CA428 Near-Miss CFIT at take-off in HK
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Timbuktu
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not the first time in that area: Shenzhen Airlines plane in near miss with Hong Kong's Big Buddha, East Asia News & Top Stories - The Straits Times
I also had flown on a mainland carrier whose FR24 track (after landing, in the dark) put us pretty much on top of the said statue and at a height just a few hundred feet above.
I also had flown on a mainland carrier whose FR24 track (after landing, in the dark) put us pretty much on top of the said statue and at a height just a few hundred feet above.
Way I hear it, Departure gave instruction "Climb FL130" and F/O heard "Fly heading 130" and dialed in the turn.
As you can hear from the recording linked in the original post, CA428's radio was not operating 5-by-5.
As you can hear from the recording linked in the original post, CA428's radio was not operating 5-by-5.
Way I hear it, Departure gave instruction "Climb FL130" and F/O heard "Fly heading 130" and dialed in the turn.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Rainsville
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pegase Driver
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 74
Posts: 3,684
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Humpmedumpme ; in case you do not know ( but my guess is that you do ) Hong Kong ATC ( and CAA) are not operating and trained the same way as mainland PRC and they do not follow the same rules.
The generic R/T exchange you posted is unfortunately reflecting the current sate of affairs in the PRC , where the whole airspace is military . Chinese controllers ,like everywhere else on the globe , have to follow the rules imposed on them , and are as much frustrated as you do having to say " negative " all the time.
I have read t recently that there are intentions to take some airspace away from the military to extend the civil areas of responsibilities, but these are definitively political decisions which are not in the hands of ATC .
The generic R/T exchange you posted is unfortunately reflecting the current sate of affairs in the PRC , where the whole airspace is military . Chinese controllers ,like everywhere else on the globe , have to follow the rules imposed on them , and are as much frustrated as you do having to say " negative " all the time.
I have read t recently that there are intentions to take some airspace away from the military to extend the civil areas of responsibilities, but these are definitively political decisions which are not in the hands of ATC .
Last edited by ATC Watcher; 9th Jun 2017 at 12:46. Reason: typo
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Diego, CA., USA
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I attended a Chinese CAA meeting for foreign carriers addressing the rapid growth in the airline sector. During this meeting a question was asked why various airways are blocked by the military. The CAA representative stated it was not military control of the airways rather it was the lack of English speaking Controllers to service that route.
Pegase Driver
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 74
Posts: 3,684
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
bpp :
That remark is possibly true for expansion ( i.e opening new sectors or routes ) but does not stand when talking about releasing airspace around existing routes to allow proper efficient ATC and address safety related issues like CBs deviations.
The CAA representative stated it was not military control of the airways rather it was the lack of English speaking Controllers to service that route.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: KGRB, but on the road about 1/2 the time.
Age: 61
Posts: 622
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are many routes in China that foreign carriers are not allowed to fly on, because the controllers for those routes are not English speakers.