Off-set in Chineese Airspace

[El Peligroso]

Anyone know why the Chineese require off-sets in their airspace? Have often been up to 6nm right of track - which is effectively off the airway.

[Siu Mo To]

Not sure, perhaps wake turbulence but I got a feeling that they don't like to see two radar blips too close together. I know it sounds stupid but many times if someone is on top or below us they make one guy to offset 3 more miles.

[WYOMINGPILOT]

It allows them to keep more airplanes in the air with the offset. In China the military controls ALL of the airspace so you must fly established airways. You rarely, hardly ever get direct routing in China. By doing the 3 mile right offset they can add about 1/3 more flights to the airspace.

[The Dominican]

Just feel good about the fact that you are doing your part in increasing the efficiency of the Chinese military radar tracking capabilities and don't worry if you are on the airway or not. yeah, that is what is about!

[Siu Mo To]

I wish it is true they do offest to increase capacity; I fly in PRC almost everyday but my experience tells me the opposite. With offset the lateral seperation is still the same. They will not let another guy flying parallel to you with only a few miles apart at the same altitude. It is more like 3 mins seperation one after another for the same level.
If you guys are not convinced I can ask some controllers there.

[B737NG]

Simply they do not trust the RVSM system. If all fly 3 / 6 NM right of track then the wake turbulence can hit you still, SLOP is something diffrent.

It is true that China is far behind the rest of the World, directs, shortcuts no possible. I had a discussion once with the Controller, (poor Guy) because the Squall Line was not conform with the Military requirements. My only option was either right by 60 Degrees or 180 Degrees back, STBY was the answer, a CB does not wait longer as the Shanghai Frequency was jammed as usual and the chatter is almost 24/7.

Another problem you face usually in Chinese Airspace is the early descent when you fly to a Chinese destination, 200 NM before to of descent with 2000 ft per min or greater. Standart, maybe that is the only English phrase they know in some cases. When I compare flying first time over 10 Years ago in the Chinese Airspace and today I can see some improvements, but far away what would be required.

I am just wondering when the Airlines are starting to calculate the higer fuel burn for that waste of energy and .... do they have no Children or Grandchildren who need to breathe fresh air in the future? Pollution is high, early descends are contributing to it as well. Just a though.

When you fly from Mongolia towards Quingdao is a Airway available (W12) but 1 out of 100 cases only used, why ? because the Airline could save 5 -6 min flight time and the Chinese are asking for more Airway Fee. Therefore we fly Southbound to CG and then Eastbound instead of cutting the Corner.

Just some of the insight discussions when you talk to them. In US / CA Airspace you get directs and all are beneficaries.... Time to think about the future and a clean Air.

Fly safe and land Happy

NG

[alvega]

Simply they do not trust the RVSM system. If all fly 3 / 6 NM right of track then the wake turbulence can hit you still, SLOP is something diffrent.

Spot on!

It is true that China is far behind the rest of the World, directs, shortcuts no possible. I had a discussion once with the Controller, (poor Guy) because the Squall Line was not conform with the Military requirements. My only option was either right by 60 Degrees or 180 Degrees back, STBY was the answer, a CB does not wait longer as the Shanghai Frequency was jammed as usual and the chatter is almost 24/7.

I only ask twice, the third time I informing them of my new heading until clear of weather (sometimes this triggers some very interesting exchanges on the frequency).

Another problem you face usually in Chinese Airspace is the early descent when you fly to a Chinese destination, 200 NM before to of descent with 2000 ft per min or greater

I never accept rates of descent and I tell them so. If everybody did the same, they would have stopped this stupidity by now.

[Slasher]

Absolutely true about Chinese offsets 737NG.

I am just wondering when the Airlines are starting to calculate the higer fuel burn...

I add 300 kg for the early descent alone, plus another 400kg
for those huge wide enroute R/Vs I cop from time to time for
"arrival separation" esp into PUD, and CAN from the North.

So there's 700kgs extra on top of CFP fuel before I even start
looking at anything else.

I only ask twice, the third time I informing them of my new heading until clear of weather (sometimes this triggers some very interesting exchanges on the frequency).

I do too. Check your TCAS next time the babbling starts -
and then watch where your following traffic starts going....

[AGNES]

The off-set procedure was simply to avoid overlapping of radar blips, nothing to do with wake turbulence, separation or traffic capacity. Hong Kong is not using this procedure but they will keep the traffic off-set into Hong Kong's airspace without coordination!

Because of weather, the traffic may be miles off track, Hong Kong had already agreed to accept that, i.e., no need to resume track when clear of weather, but on many occasions, they insisted to put the traffic back on track by the airspace boundary. That ended up a sharp turn in order to intercept the waypoint. You never know their thinking.

If you fly to some destinations such as ZSHC or ZSNB, the highest level you can get is normally F266. Why? Because you will call for descent before the traffic going to ZSPD or some places further away. By leaving you at F266, the descent through problem is solved!

There are two cross-strait airways, F290 and F310 are the levels to be used on these airways. To solve the crossing traffic problem, they simply block these two levels on airway A470 "forever" without considering the real traffic situation. That ends up the traffic from VMMC and VHHH struggles to F330 everyday.

This is how they manage traffic.

[alvega]

This is how they manage traffic.

I would say, this is how they mismanage traffic.

[Khaosai]

Hi,

i am pretty sure the airways in China vary in width, maybe ranging from 4nm wide up to 80 nm wide.

Give me an offset in every airspace i fly in, great idea i think.

Rgds.

[Slasher]

I would say, this is how they mismanage traffic.

Yup.

An offset in the real world is either for avoiding the wake turb
of aircraft (depending on the current winds experienced) or to
avoid weather such as paralleling a squall. On rare occasions
it will be temporary notam'd for short-term ATC purposes.

If early descents for crossing traffic etc are the norm it should
be promulgated in local AIPs. To date I've never seen any.

[eddie shoestring]

China OPs

When flying in China, there are of course a few things to remember. I will limit it to ten…..

1) It's military airspace, controlled by military (yes mostly incompetent) ,military controllers operating old military equipment.
2) Sector controllers do not talk to each other, so treat each sector as a singular unit.
3) Controllers speak limited English, so keep any requests simple or expect to be ignored.
4) Due to the military airspace, civilian aircraft are graciously allowed to occupy their military airspace and fly to their destination via narrow corridors. Thus in order to maximise the number of aircraft in any corridor, they stack them up left, right and anywhere they can. So yes expect 3, 5 or sometimes 12nm right of track. You should consider yourself lucky to be airborne in the first place, so don't complain about a lateral off-set, even if it might put you legally "off track". This is also the main reason for the intolerable undetermined departure slots, called flow control, which inevitably your flight will suffers from on numerous occasions.
5) As WYOMINGPILOT eluded to before, they want you to descend NOW and at at least 1500 fpm to get rid of you, using the usual excuse of "due separation" You have no way of verifying this so as frustrating as it is, you have very few options here. Also SID/STAR altitude and speed restrictions are not relevant in China, nor are you expected to adhere to them. Forget VNAV/Managed descends, the military controllers will manage you, so coupled with a healthy dose of experience/situational awareness and TCAS, you’ll be right mate.
6) Sector controllers don't give a rats if you want a higher level "due weather" or just to get some respectable fuel economy. They expect you to lie about the reason for your (quite possibly legitimate) request for a higher level.
7) Expect to negotiate CB circumvention as they want to keep you in their corridor. Heaven forbid you might be lying about that CB and just wanted a shortcut.... Often they will refuse you to divert left or right and you have no option but to request a 180 turn. Friendly persistence helps though.
7) Again due to the narrow corridors, if the sector controller determines that there is just too much weather along the track they will close the airspace and you will be told you cannot carry on to your destination, even if the latest Atis tells you it’s cavok.
8) At many airports the, ATC, Ground, Ramp and Delivery do not talk to each other. ATC is military and ramp etc is airport authority. There is very little or no co-ordination between them, so while you may be cleared to push and start, when it comes to taxiing, you may incur a further delays.
While taxiing, a “more than normal” vigilant lookout is essential here. You might be happily trundling along a taxiway having been told to taxi and hold short of the runway, only to find that an aircraft emerges from the ramp area and turning onto the same taxiway in front of you. You, nor him have been told about each other and no-one has been told who’s no1.
9) Safety concepts are not well understood in China. I could write a whole epistle about this alone….Suffice to say, BEWARE and never ASS-U-ME.
10) …and finally I wanted to make special mention of emergency descents.
PLEASE DO NOT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES START AN EMERGECY DESCENT WITHOUT PERMISSION FROM THE CONTROLERS !!
As strange and contradictory as this may sound, again due to the narrow corridors we all fly trough, starting an emergency descent without permission could very well lead to multiple aircraft being taken our during the plummet to terra-firma.
You should hopefully have a copy of the expected procedures, but basically they expect you to:
a) Declare the Mayday to ATC and request emergency descent.
b) MAINTAIN you altitude and track 10km (5.4nm) right of track.
c) Once on the offset and with permission from ATC, you can start the descent.
d) Above all else, it is imperative that this manoeuvre is co-ordinated with ATC.

Hope this helps and keeps the stress levels down

Ed

[GlueBall]

No communist regulated system is consumer efficient, so expect air traffic inefficiency in PRC. The archaic civil aviation infrastructure will remain until the centralized, micro managed political system implodes. Western carriers have factored the inefficiency and cost based their fares accordingly.

[alvega]

eddie shoestring, GlueBall,

Very well put. To sum it all, when we're flying in China, we're in the jungle, so expect the unexpected all the time.

Two things, though:
1 - For weather avoidance, as I said before, I only ask twice. After that I'm telling them where I'm turning.

2 - Concerning an emergency descent, if it happens to me (knock on wood) I will start it immediately.

And remember, a reasonable amount of extra fuel keeps your heartbeat at a normal rate and leaves room for several options when things start going south.

[Panama Jack]

I am surprised there are so many negative comments about ATC-mandate SLOP in Chinese airspace. I actually have been a fan of it and use SLOP on a routine basis in airspace where I am permitted to do so.

I believe one reason why ATC enforces it is because of the increased complexity of Chinese RVSM. We fly metric levels however this needs to be converted to feet altitude levels for most aircraft (according to the tables) and then flown in feet to guarantee 1000' separation between aircraft. Therein lies the hazard-- one crew applying the wrong conversion.

With GPS navigation giving lateral accuracy within a few meters compared to previous navigation systems, "randomness" has decreased. I like SLOP because instead of exactly 1000 feet (or slightly less) separation between somebody's fin and my belly, I am now looking at several 1000 feet of separation (lateral x vertical). In the case of China, we can be talking about more than 4 miles of separation between opposite direction traffic in the enroute structure and 2000 feet separation between same-direction traffic. In general, I really like that!

[Slasher]

Yeh PJ but what is the point? It may increase your comfort
level but in pragmatic terms offsets don't do zip. Besides I
keep getting the bloody crap knock out of me during Winter
by heavy wake in strong Westerlies, whenever I'm flying a
northerly track and offset right, by a wide body 4 or 6 miles
to my left. Coffee gets spilt all over the flight plan so damn
often I just request up to a further 10nm offset sometimes
depending on the wind. This does not happen anywhere else
as everyone's on track.

And I've never encountered any aircraft flying off their levels.
Even lousy rotten outfits that I could easily name have their
crews prepared for China's SLOPpy RVSM procedures.