incident becomes no incident in hong kong atc

[lazygal]

My friend in Approach told me about something took place last week. An incident happened between a PAC B747 and a CES airbus close to TD. The controller was a check controller who is always scolding everybody else for there poor performances and he had 2,7 NM and 700 feet between the traffics. Everybody expected he got suspended but after many hours of looking at the tape and talking behind closed doors management unexpectedly said there was no incedent at all. Suddenly there was enough separation. My friend said that 2,7 becoming 3,0 NM and 700 ft becomes 1000ft in a second is a true miracle and that we should be happy miracles still take place in this world.

But then: someone else said we have double standards.

[By-stander]

There is no secret in this. Double standard is the management way to perform miracles and they happen more often than you think.

[Sqwak7700]

More important, why does HKG ATC insist on placing both arrivals and departures over the same fix (TD)???

There are miles of open water south of TD for many fixes to be created. I believe 99% of the traffic using VHHH is RNAV equipped and GA is pretty much non-existent. There is no reason you can't just go direct LIMES and pass well south of TD.

It just doesn't make sense relying on 1000' separation over TD when there is so much empty airspace. All it takes is one altitude bust and you have an incident, or even worst.

Not to mention that occasionally you get traffic climbing out like a fart in a tub, disregarding the 1500fpm or less restriction within 1000 of level off. This creates TCAS bumps to the arriving traffic maintaining 8000 over TD. It also leads to controllers repeating their instructions and adding congestion to the frequency due to their apprehension on the climbing aircraft's level off altitude.

Must... step... out... of... the... box... :eek: Get back in there right now!!! :mad:

[RRSM]

Sqwak7700
Changing the procedures to more direct tracks like LIMES will more than likely create new problem areas. Outbound and inbound traffic frequently need to cross each other. The mentioned incident happened because of a controllers incompetence and no procedure could have stopped that from happening.

[mcdude]

There are a number of changes to HK airspace occurring in October as described here (http://www.hkatc.gov.hk/index.html), or more specifically here (http://www.hkatc.gov.hk/HK_AIP/supp/A16-09.pdf).

[CXChildLabour]

No more Manila 1A arrival????? there goes my OT.........

[Bedder believeit]

To SQWAK 7700 (shouldn't that be "SQUAWK"?) one of the maxims of airspace management, is that the more traffic you get, the more things have to be on rails. Sure, if there was only 100 movements a day through the terminal airspace, a bit more flexibility might be OK. With your suggestions, do you even take into account the inbound traffic from the East that needs to be proccessed into Macau, the Macau RWY 34 departures that are pinning down the Hong Kong departures to the East, and yet have to jump over the Hong Kong and Macau arrivals from the East, at the same time missing Shenzen and Guangzhou arrivals from the South. Hong Kong airport is pushed into a very lively corner, the amount of crossovers is not just limited to your perception that TD is all there is to it. Re your comment on traffic tracking direct to LIMES and "pass well South of TD", let me say that the further out that a crossover takes place, the faster the aircraft will be going and the complexity of the crossover then increases.

As for GA, I thought all of the exec jets that operate through here are "GA"! Are they not? However the reality of their operation is that most of them are equal to or more sophisticated than the average airline aircraft. And yes, single engine Cessnas are effectively non existent, so what is your point?

By the way, I think most controllers are more than happy to accept inputs from people like yourself, but when you demean (yourself?) with your closing comments, you lose all of your credibility.

[Sqwak7700]

To SQWAK 7700 (shouldn't that be "SQUAWK"?)

I spell my name that way because the correct spelling was already taken. That often happens with online forums.

As for GA, I thought all of the exec jets that operate through here are "GA"! Are they not? However the reality of their operation is that most of them are equal to or more sophisticated than the average airline aircraft. And yes, single engine Cessnas are effectively non existent, so what is your point?


My point being that since most aircraft flying through HK are Biz-jets (GA) and airliners, most of the new type, just about everybody is equipped with RNAV. this would allow more creative procedures since there would not be any reliance on ground navaids. More flexibility to go direct to points in space like LIMES without needing raw-data. The old CX hands would have a ****t-fit, but I think it is long overdue.

Re your comment on traffic tracking direct to LIMES and "pass well South of TD", let me say that the further out that a crossover takes place, the faster the aircraft will be going and the complexity of the crossover then increases.


Shouldn't it be less cross-overs the further out? wouldn't departures be well above arrivals by then, making a cross-over less of a factor? The reason traffic is conflicting at TD is that aircraft are reaching 7000 right about there, and arrivals are being held up right about there.

I see your point about restricted airspace in HK due to the whole PRD airport system, but my suggestion is to have tracks that are one-way only, reducing the amount of crossover. Surely the airspace can't be that tight to the south of Hongkers. When I go to Manila I talk to HK Control for quite a while before switching frequency.:confused:

[hongkongpilot]

It just doesn't make sense relying on 1000' separation over TD when there is so much empty airspace. All it takes is one altitude bust and you have an incident, or even worst.


I think they should be 9000'/7000' for DEP and FL110 for ARR over TD. There would be almost 2000' between 2 A/Cs. Nothing ATC can do if it is a PILOT ERROR.:ooh:

[Bedder believeit]

As McDude notes, there are changes to HK airspace in late October, however the main routes affected are those from SIERA, SIKOU and IDOSI. Over the last two years there has been a change in slant in traffic, to the extent that these three routes now generate over 36% of the traffic, whereas previously it was 34% (big deal I hear you say). As far as departures to the East, the standard is to climb outbounds to 9000' and hold inbounds at FL110 until passing achieved. This ensures 2000' sep when the QNH is 1013 or greater, and better than 1000' when QNH is lower. IT is expected that in time more HK traffic will be to/from China (so more SIERA) and less East (Taiwan)

[SevenEleven]

hey guys, let's back on track! topic is "incident becomes no incident in hong kong atc"

I think that is a ......... maybe just an on screen font size problem only! Smaller font size may help the separation a bit :P

You know what, in their world, there's only "your problem" and nothing else.

[GlueBall]

lazygal: "My friend in Approach told me about something took place last week."

It's all hearsay until you get your friend to tell the story. :ooh:

[barrold]

Hearsay is acceptable in a court of law if it is a death bed confession.
(always here to help).
:ugh:

[throw a dyce]

If the 2 aircraft were climbing/descending through each other,then it could be a little tight.Aiming for 3 miles and it ends up as 2.7.I would say that's a very skinny 3 miles.:cool:If the aircraft were levelled off,then 700 ft is within SSR mode C tolerance.One could be showing 7100 ft and the other 7800ft for example,and that is separated.
However it isn't a bad incident,more like a possible technical loss of separation.HK was very bad for getting the firing squad out for the slightest mistakes,even go arounds.:=

Everywhere has double standards.The lower you are in the food chain,the heavier the load of bricks on your head.:}

[12255]

Lazy Gal. You said my friend twice in your comments. As glueball says, perhaps your friend should give us the full story.

[ArthurBorges]

LazyGal provides enough detail for her story to hold water, methinks. At all events, why not begin by assuming good faith and minimal accuracy in what folks post here?

If readers here will gracefully allow that much of the discourse is beneath (actually: "above") my personal radar screen, I nonetheless see a cultural issue: society here Out East is about NEVER embarrassing anyone because s/he just might get bitter about it and Everyone will have to live with the consequences.

This is the direct -- and terribly holistic opposite, of the Western mindset.