China ATC issues

[carl baker]

What is going on with the delays in Beijing and Shanghai? It would seem to the layman that there is more to it than meets the eye.

Is it due to an outdated airspace management system, ATC procedures that are ridiculous if a CB is within 50NM of the airport, lack of airspace due military "restriction", or discriminating in favour of local operators? The phrase - "delay not determined" is plainly a cop out.

How about a transparent flow control system which honours slots for arrival and departure?

The delays are just illogical, and I hope a PEK or PVG ATC operator can please explain?

[caucatc]

Yes ,you are right ,restriction ,we can not change that ,so we have to obey it .

[welliewanger]

Yes, but "delay not determined" suggests that ATC don't know what's causing the delay. Quid pro quo, they don't know what's going on. Does Chinese ATC really have that little authority / awareness? If so, maybe it's time for the powers that be in China to re-think their policy. Otherwise the centralized, secretive, overbearing control system will become swamped.

It seems that the above model is used in all walks of life in China where "the workers" just do as they're told. This may work in old Chinese culture, but as China's ties with the West grow I can see potential friction between such cultures.

/rant

[carl baker]

Thanks for the responses - not to the pathetic pea brain attempt at infantile humour though. Get a life.

So of all the delays are 'restriction' how can it be changed or improved. What does China ATC do to make representation? What can we do to make it better for the foreign carriers who seem to come off worst?

Is China Atc getting any progress to more airways and better traffic management for slots on arrival/ departure?

[Farrell]

Wow! Sense of humour failure!

Sorry about that!

[caucatc]

A lot of things are in progress at the moment ,need to be patient ,just think about you delayed ,we can not off from work also ,you think we do not wanna change that ? But it needs time ,different rules different cultures ,do not think that in your own way.

[Tower Ranger]

Maybe you should delete it Farrell as it wasn`t remotely funny.

[Farrell]

I thought it was but I guess majority rules.

Post deleted.

[watchyourairspeed]

Don't know too much about the CAAC but I want to believe the chinese ATC officers are competent, qualified and professional. But there are a some issues that have to be adressed ... and WTF looks like everyone is scratching their heads with a oblivious face of dispair. - Does anyone care !

The lack of coordination or cross-talking bettween ATC areas is one of the matters. For instance, in a flight from VHHH to ZBAA and while in cruise, controller will instruct you to fly a NW heading due to traffic activity for unditermined time. Humnnnn :ugh:

Other times exist, they will ask you to slow down for MN.75, and as soon as you are handed over to the other station, contoller will ask you accelerate. Humnnnnnnnnn :ugh:

Other times exist, controller will ask you to descent well in advance (30NM prior TOD) with a ROD of 3000'ft/minute. We can allways switch ON the after-burners and descend faster. Humnnnnnnn :ugh:

Majority of the times you can load the FMGC and brief the approach (STAR and RWY) that you are ONLY expecting, I believe that it will all change (around 15.000'ft) when the next controller assigns you with a different landing Rwy, new altitude to descend to, and heading to fly to and intercept the LOC. Humnnnn :ugh:

ZBAA is a very nice airport. With 3 operating rwy's all ILS equipped. Yet, majority of the times you can average a 20 to 55 minutes time delay from the moment you start taxiing and lign up in the departing rwy. Humnn :ugh:

I guess the rapid growth of PRC's economy (cargo and passenger transport) didn't accompany the reform of the chinese ATC airspace.

"-Does it have anything to do with lost of face ?" :*

WYA

[welliewanger]

^^^^ What he said * 2 ^^^^

The idea of issueing cruising speeds seems to be to do with flow control so that not everyone arrives at the same time (erm, if you know what I mean :}) However, I'd much prefer it if in stead of saying "Fly at M0.77" or giving headings they just said "Arrive at point XXX (a long way down route) at time 13:47" This way we could slow down by a small ammount for 2 hours in stead of by a large ammount for 30 mins, therefore saving fuel.

Don't get me onto early descents. :ugh:

@Farrell: Thanks for deleting the post. A bit too close to the bone I think.

So of all the delays are 'restriction' how can it be changed or improved. What does China ATC do to make representation? What can we do to make it better for the foreign carriers who seem to come off worst?


The first (and simplest) thing would be to say what is causing the restriction. E.g. "There's thunderstorms downroute causing congestion, you're number 3 in the queue." In stead of "Negative due to restriction." Sounds like (particularly to a stressed out late flight deck crew) "We won't let you go and we won't say why. You're just going to have to sit there until we feel like it."

The only other cause for a restriction I can think of would be military activity or VIP flights, which seems to cause all sorts of restrictions around China. Although, I've never seen any of this activity, I'm frequetly restricted by it. China's air force must be enormous and have excellent cloaking devices as there have been many times when I have been denied climb above RVSM due to military activity which I can't see going on. I think what is actually happening is that the military tells ATC which airspace is available (as opposed to which is unavailable). This denies ATC the opportunity to think out of the box. All aircraft must stay within this RVSM band (we can actually go up to FL510) and must stay on these airways. In the case of my aircraft, how many others are up above FL410? Very few. However we are denied any shortcuts due to the aforementioned "restrictions".

[carl baker]

Thanks all for your considered input, to Caucatc for trying to pass information, however very limited it is and Farrell for correcting a mistake.

However Caucatc, you cannot use the statement 'different cultures' as an explanation to how things work - with ATC.

China is a signatory to ICAO, as well as many other International organistaions. This means you [U]should[Uhave certain obligations to the operation of your airspace system, and not accept that this is just the way it is.

RVSM was approved as a means to increase the numbers of aircraft/slots in the available airspace. This is not a Chinese system, and is a modern approach to improving traffic flow. However, it is applied on an old airways system (fly between navaids on a two way air-route - not good). It leads to problems when traffic need diversions due Weather etc.

Yes there are lots of shiny NEW airports that China should be rightly proud of. To operate to their MAXIMUM efficiency, they need a MODERN, state of the art, Airspace Management System. At the Airports, have SLOT times for arrival and Departure. On the airways, have one way air-routes and better seperation so that aircraft are not flying head to head leading to the "make ROD 3,000 fpm or more" situation and descent at 200NM from the airport etc.

We all know that this is due to Military "restriction", but their definitely needs to be some rationalistaion of the airspace. Look at the UK - lots of VERY busy airports close together in LONDON, and lots of military flying, but none of the hassles with flights and "restictions" that exist in China.

The hardest part is to accept there is a problem and acknowledge it can't continue.

[veloo maniam]

Hi all...just my 2 cents
Why not organisations like IATA,OAA etc 'help' my fellow Ctlers in these two Centres/Towers.
Sit down with them and help sort out problems faced by the Ctlers.
In Malaysia, we often sort out problems faced by each other by either discussing face to face or through an airline forum set up by Malaysia Airlines.
I think the Chinese Ctlers are overworked. It has helped bothways tremendously. :ok:

[welliewanger]

Veloo,
You're absolutely right. I think CaucATC has made previous threads in an effort to acheive a similar goal. But I think a more structured consultation / investigation would be very useful where more developed countries ATC, China ATC and pilots get together would be very productive.

Now who's going to organize that?

[carl baker]

Thanks to ALL for your constructive replies and farrell for your consideration.

The 'different rules, different cultures' statement is a cop out to be honest. China is a signatory to ICAO, and has made good use of International best practice systems such as RVSM, however applying it to it's archaic airspace system is 'papering over the crack', or a quick fix if you like.

China has some of the most modern airports in the world that it should be rightly proud of, but is let down by the airspace mangement (slot times and sequence for departure, airways routes that are too congested in limited airspace causing the "decend 3,00 feet per minute" when 200NM from the destination), or closing airports when some storms around too prematurely. You can have 3 runways, but it does not increase the traffic flow for China right?

This also does not fix the 'delay not determined' situation. You need a SLOT system for ARRIVAL and DEPARTURE that is fair and honest. ALL carriers, Chinese and Foriegn get it at other countries airports, so the different rules , different cultures is being disrespectful and just plain wrong. This creats a bad impression for China, and one that a proud, emerging country should correct.

We know that the 'restriction' is caused by military, but they need to face up to what is best for China. The UK also has very busy airports, such as the London area (Heathrow, Luton, Stanstead), with very busy military flying, but there is NO big impediments as caused by the China 'differnet culture, different system' way.

Time to accept there is a problem and address it?

[Farrell]

OK - serious post.

I was involved with Chinese controllers indirectly a few years ago, mostly around the ICAO Language Proficiency requirements.

To answer watchyourairspeed, Chinese controllers are for the most part highly capable, but just like where I am now, they are constantly hindered by a management system above their own management level, that do not communicate with each other in time.

Things that get decided months before from top tier management - along with a deadline, get sent down to the shop-floor with a very short notice of the implementation, that leaves everyone playing catch-up.

Couple the above with a seemingly infallible military, and you have a series of events that can and mostly does end up with a manic outcome, and unfortunately, a culture of saving face then means you get the lacklustre excuses and explanations that were mentioned earlier.

As carl baker rightly says, it leaves a potential black-mark on China's image, however, just like here in the Middle East, where ATC departments have to run everything back through a centralized management hub and then up to the Ministry, across to another one and then back down the chain, it leaves it very difficult for the folks on the front line to deal with the mess they are left with.

Speaking out about, or nit-picking even minor flaws about the ATC system or anything else in China, can come at a very high price, and until people are allowed to do so without fearing retribution from those above them who feel exposed, you can expect the situation to remain unchanged.

Farrell

[AGNES]

I agree with you carl baker and veloo. It's time for the international organizations ICAO and IATA to act because the situation is getting worse everyday. Hong Kong ATC suffers a lot, not because of the busy traffic but because of the "RESTRICTIONS".

Hong Kong has to deal with the "restrictions" everyday which put a lot of pressure on us. We are not afraid of "restrictions" but those are illogical and unreasonable. They will give you the "restrictions" suddenly without any warning. They will shout to you through the intercom that "traffic going to ZSPD 20 minutes flow" , "FL330 not available, all traffic must be FL350 or above and 20 minutes flow", etc, etc, etc. Without any warning, some traffic already in the air! Can the traffic accept FL350? These are some examples that we have to deal with everyday not to mention others.

Hong Kong departures to ZBAA 20 minutes flow is a standard practice for a long time. Traffic going to ZSPD suffers from 8 minutes to 1 hour flow everyday. Traffic going to Europe suffers delay up to 20 minutes to 1 hour everyday.

During a regional meeting not a very long time ago, Hong Kong was blamed by the regional states that how come Hong Kong caused so much delay. Hmmmmmmmm?

About a year ago, in a quiet morning, the airspace in the South China Sea was suddenly closed by Sanya Control, again, without any warning or NOTAM. Hong Kong tried very hard to negotiate with Manila to have the traffic diverted into its airspace. Could you imagine how was the situation that day?

If you want some more examples, I can give you more.

China has the best hardwares in the world but the management is crap. Yes, I have to say that.

One last question, why the military actviity has to carry out on international airways?

[On the beach]

carl baker

What many people don't realise about Mainland China and it's capacity problems is that they are still functioning and increasing their traffic movements by something in the order of 13% a year. In 2009 Beijing Capital was the 10th. busiest airport in the world in terms of traffic movements, still a long way behind Atlanta in number one position, but catching up rapidly.

This growth is only sustainable if the air traffic capacity is increased at the same rate and this translates into 13% more airways, 13% more levels, 13% more runway capacity etc. With that 13% expansion you still can only appear to handle the same amount of traffic. To solve the current delays the air traffic capacity needs to expand over and above 13%.

It also has to be remembered that Mainland China has only a very short history of Civil Aviation development as opposed to the rest of the world and as such they should be commended for the achievements that have been made in such a short space of time. However, this development has to be continued and with the increase in air traffic movements in the Asian region it has to develop ahead of the increase in traffic if it is to cope in the future.

I think the Beijing Olympics perhaps curtailed capacity development for a year and now the problem is catching up on that lost year of development. Consider, for example, if Atlanta or Paris were to see their movements increased by 13% in one year. I'm sure there would be delays whilst the airspace, procedures and airport infrastructure were improved to cope with this increase.

The problem for Asia is that these delays are starting to spread outside Mainland China now and are impacting traffic flows in the surrounding airspace and this is leading to the Mainland being perceived to be the "weak link" in Asia and the system as a whole is only as good as the weakest link in the chain.

I'm sure the capacity constraints currently being suffered by airspace users in Asia will be solved but these things do take time to implement. It would be helpful if the CAAC published details of the steps being taken to increase capacity and the time-frame for these enhancements so that operators had an idea of what was being undertaken and its likely implementation dates. At the moment the military seem to be taking the blame for all the delays, but a 13% growth rate in air traffic movements is far more likely to be the main contributor to delays.

Perhaps caucatc could let us know on this forum what improvements we are likely to see in the next few years.

[caucatc]

AGNES ,there are several things that you can not ask why .
On the beach,thanks for understanding us ,most things you said were true ,after Olympic Games ,the flowment still increasing ,but the capacity of route have not been enhanced ,that is why we have the flowment control.Furthermore ,if the weather en-route is not good , we normally give that restriction to reduce stress of controller ,I found another post here to complain the delay in Beijing ,I think the reason is most because of bad weather rencently .