Why is the ILS approach not specified?

[Maisk Rotum]

Operating into Hangzhou tonight and the ATIS says 06. Not ILS 06 Z or X or Y. Yeh take your pick. We get cleared for a STAR and ILS 06. No mention of which one. Surely its easy to put that letter on the ATIS. And yeh there are some big differences. Missed approaches go completely the opposite way. This phenomena is not unique to this airport either. Wake up China.

[Phantom Driver]

Welcome to China. Guess you must be new around these parts....

(some nice airports though)

[golfyankeesierra]

Not familiar with Hangzhou but Shanghai is similar. And that is one of the easiest airports I know. When you get cleared for the RNAV arrival (which is always) it's the Z (RNAV) ILS approach, so if it's the non RNAV arrival you'll probably get the non RNAV ILS Y approach. :cool:
That X-approach I don't know..
And when I go to the market the Chinese outsmart me every time:)

[safelife]

Default is Z, priority backwards from there, alphabetically.

[Maisk Rotum]

Welcome to China. Guess you must be new around these parts....

(some nice airports though)

I'll take a wild guess and say that on the balance of probability I have been flying there longer than you. My point is that after 20 years flying there, they still make stupid mistakes like this and have not seen the light.

Another example is that they assume all altitudes are cancelled on a SID or STAR when it would otherwise restrict you when giving an altitude above or below said restrictions. ICAO has made concerted efforts to get a common understanding of this globally but China still makes you pull teeth every time by asking if restrictions are cancelled.

Wake up I say again.

[Maisk Rotum]

Default is Z, priority backwards from there, alphabetically.
I am aware of that convention but that sort of assumption could get you into trouble here. Ponder this then if you havnt been to Hangzhou; 06 is to the left of 07. ILS Z 06 has a missed approach turning right into the path of 07 the takeoff runway!! The 06 Y approach has the missed approach turning left. Which one would you choose considering TEM? Put it in the ATIS like the rest of the world. Simple

[Maisk Rotum]

Not familiar with Hangzhou but Shanghai is similar. And that is one of the easiest airports I know. When you get cleared for the RNAV arrival (which is always) it's the Z (RNAV) ILS approach, so if it's the non RNAV arrival you'll probably get the non RNAV ILS Y approach. :cool:
That X-approach I don't know..
And when I go to the market the Chinese outsmart me every time:)

You said you get cleared for the Z approach. Easy right? Follow what you are cleared. In Hangzhou and elsewhere they never tell you which one it is.

[172_driver]

Another example is that they assume all altitudes are cancelled on a SID or STAR when it would otherwise restrict you when giving an altitude above or below said restrictions.

That one I am not so sure about..... and a real nut to crack everytime you operate out of London.

Ask 10 pilots a question and get 11 different answers.

[fox niner]

In China you are not supposed to make go-arounds. Hence the lack of X/Y/Z in the atis.

[Dan Winterland]

In China you are not supposed to make go-arounds. Hence the lack of X/Y/Z in the atis.

The problem is that the standard of ATC in HGH makes Go-arounds quite likely. Done on myself there in the last month.

[Ragazzo]

This phenomena is not unique to this airport either.

Effectively... try FCO, NCE, RAK, etc...
Basic IFR stuff, study your plates, check your ending point of the STAR which usually links to the IAF. If not happy, query APP or TWR.

And don't call anybody stupid :8

[RudderTrimZero]

6 miles on the ILS into SHA, we are asked to make left orbit "for separation" (traffic in front still 5 miles ahead on TCAS). We're going down on the glide at this point. Whilst we're busy with our "WTFs" for 3 seconds, the instruction is repeated with "expedite". Skipper at the time, pushes to level off and completes the turn in heading. In the debrief we discuss how stupid this was due to uncertainty about obstacles.

60 miles into Nanning, we get asked to reduce speed to 180Kts and make 2 orbits. Flaps go out. After completion of orbits, resume normal speed, retract flaps, fly for another 30 miles then sequence for landing.

At Wenzhou, we get asked to line up with an aircraft on short finals (2-3 miles). We protest, and are met with "aaah ok, hold, hold, confirm holding short!". Two days later exact same thing happens at the same airport.

Cruising at circa 30k, told to hold position. "How long is the delay?", answer: "Undetermined". 30 minutes later, "Undetermined". We asked to go back, "OK, resume course".

[pineteam]

Been flying in China for almost 4 years and I can confirm that: There is no such thing as altitude constraint during a SID or STAR. If they clear you to descend or climb to an altitude, don’t bother asking “ confirm unrestricted?”. You are just wasting your time and jamming the frequency. It’s ALWAYS unrestricted unless specified by ATC.
Most of the airports in China used RNAV STAR/SID. And it’s always ILS Z unless informed otherwise.

For Hangzhou, the ILS “X” is by ATC as written on the chart. The “Y” is conventionnal only and won’t connect to the RNAV Star. = )

[Phantom Driver]

I'll take a wild guess and say that on the balance of probability I have been flying there longer than you. My point is that after 20 years flying there, they still make stupid mistakes like this and have not seen the light.

Thanks for the update , but it begs the question--surely a veteran like yourself should be aware of many of the good points posted above.

Agreed , flying in China has always been a challenge , but it's a darn sight better than it used to be .

[Timmy Tomkins]

Thanks for the update , but it begs the question--surely a veteran like yourself should be aware of many of the good points posted above.

Agreed , flying in China has always been a challenge , but it's a darn sight better than it used to be .

And then there's the Italians......

[Right Hand Thread]

Flew in to Hangzou yesterday, ATIS specified RNAV ILS Z 06.

That said, the controllers are incapable of controlling traffic flow without reducing speeds to 250 knots at 150+nm then incrementally down to 180kts at 40nm. When that didn’t work they had us (and the preceding aircraft) make orbits.

This followed a low and slow flight (their choice, not ours) from Beijing.

:rolleyes:

[Fly26]

A leaf out of Pineteams post sounds about right to me!