International Civil Aviation Organization Asia And

INTERNATIONAL CIVIL AVIATION ORGANIZATION

ASIA AND PACIFIC OFFICE

REPORT OF THE THIRTY-SECOND MEETING OF THE RVSM IMPLEMENTATION TASK FORCE (RVSM/TF/32)

BEIJING, CHINA

18 – 21 SEPTEMBER 2007

The views expressed in this Report should be taken as those of the Task Force and not the Organization

Published by the ICAO Asia and Pacific Office, Bangkok

RVSM/TF/32 Table of Contents

Page History of the Meeting

Introduction...... i Attendance ...... i Officers and Secretariat...... i Opening of the Meeting ...... i Documentation and Working Language ...... ii

Report of the RVSM/TF/32

Agenda Item 1: Adoption of Agenda...... 1

Agenda Item 2: Operational Considerations ...... 1

Agenda Item 3: Issues Relating to Airworthiness and Approval of Aircraft ...... 4

Agenda Item 4: Safety and Airspace Monitoring Considerations...... 4

Agenda Item 5: Implementation Management considerations...... 8

Agenda Item 6: Future Work – Meeting Schedule ...... 8

Agenda Item 7: Other Business...... 9

Appendices

Appendix A: List of Participants ...... A-1 Appendix B: List of Papers...... B-1 Appendix C: ATC/WG Agenda...... C-1 Appendix D: SAM/WG Agenda...... D-1 Appendix E: Transition Procedures...... E-1 Appendix F: Proposal for Amendment of Regional Supplementary Procedures...... F-1 Appendix G: Airspace Safety Assessment for the RVSM Implementation in Sovereign Chinese Airspace...... G-1 Appendix H: Task List...... H-1 Appendix I: Transition Arrangement Check List...... I-1 Appendix J: Invitation Letter for China RVSM Briefing Meeting...... J-1 Appendix K: Amendment Proposal to PANS-ATM...... K-1

RVSM/TF/32 i History of the Meeting

1.1 Introduction

1.1.1 The Thirty-second Meeting of the ICAO Reduced Vertical Separation Minimum Implementation Task Force (RVSM/TF/32) was hosted by the Air Traffic Management Bureau (ATMB) of the General Administration of Civil Aviation of China (CAAC) at the King Wing Hotel in Beijing, China from 18 to 21 September 2007.

1.2 Attendance

1.2.1 RVSM/TF/32 was attended by 70 participants from China, Hong Kong China, DPR Korea, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Nepal, Pakistan, Philippines, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, Singapore, Thailand, United States, Viet Nam, IATA, IFALPA and IFATCA. A complete list of participants is at Appendix A to the Report.

1.3 Officers and Secretariat

1.3.1 Mr. Kuah Kong Beng, Chief Air Traffic Control Officer, Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore (CAAS) served as Chairperson of the Task Force. Mr. Kyotaro Harano, Regional Officer ATM, ICAO Asia and Pacific Office served as the Secretary for the meeting, who was assisted by Mr. Rod Graff, Deputy Regional Director, ICAO Asia and Pacific Office.

1.3.2 Mr. Kuah Kong Beng also chaired the ATC/WG. Mr. Paisit Herabat, Engineering Manager, Aeronautical Radio of Thailand Ltd (AEROTHAI) was elected as the Chairman of the SAM/WG as Mr. Napadol Sangngurn will be retiring at the end of September 2007.

1.4 Opening of the RVSM/TF/32

1.4.1 Mr. Harano welcomed the participants to the meeting. He emphasized that RVSM had a significant impact on reducing departure and enroute delays, improving operational efficiency, increasing airspace capacity by enabling aircraft to operate closer to their optimum flight levels and reducing fuel consumption. The implementation of RVSM in metric system in China would bring most possible way to cope with the significant traffic growth expected in China. He took the opportunity to thank China for their warm and generous support in hosting this significant meeting.

1.4.2 Mr. Harano expressed that this meeting was most important because the meeting should review the overall implementation process and ensure that key activities were completed to facilitate the introduction of RVSM on 22 November 2007. Therefore, it was necessary to finalize the operational procedures which should include the flight level allocations and corresponding assignment of cruising levels. In addition, the meeting would have to review the readiness of ATS providers and operators, publication of relevant documents, and the safety assessments to demonstrate that RVSM would be implemented in a safe manner. He urged all concerned to cooperate and work closely so that the critical elements of RVSM could be addressed to allow the implementation of RVSM in Chinese flight information regions (FIRs) in time on 22 November 2007.

1.4.3 Mr. Kuah Kong Beng welcomed the participants and opened the meeting. He said that the Task Force last met July – August 2007 and was now at the last hurdle for RVSM implementation in China airspace. This meeting would determine the RVSM implementation status. He added that RVSM implementation in China airspace was an important milestone for the Asia/Pacific Region as it would mean most of the region will be RVSM airspace. The Task Force had ii RVSM/TF/32 History of the Meeting worked hard to come to this final stage and he hoped that the Task Force could achieve what the Task Force has set out to accomplish, i.e. to assist in the RVSM implementation in China airspace.

1.4.4 Mr. Rod Graff, Deputy Regional Director, ICAO Asia and Pacific Office, on behalf of Mr. L.B. Shah, Regional Director thanked ATMB for their warm and generous support in hosting this significant meeting, and welcomed all the delegates to the meeting. He noted that at the APANPIRG/18 (Bangkok, September 2007) China advised that they had been addressing the issues necessary to support implementation of RVSM in China’s airspace, including coordinating with international organizations, neighboring States, and all stakeholders. This activity had produced noteworthy results and only a few matters remain to be addressed. He assured the meeting of the full support of the ICAO Asia and Pacific Office in their deliberations and wished the meeting every success.

1.4.5 Mr. Su Langen, Director General, ATMB welcomed all the participants on behalf of Mr. Yang Yuanyuan, Minister of CAAC. He also expressed his thanks to ICAO, IATA, IFALPA and all participants from the United States, the Russia Federation and other States for their long-term constant support to Chinese civil aviation development.

1.4.6 Mr. Su reported that all the preparations were greatly assisted, supported and concerted by States and international organizations who had been participating in the meetings. So, he extended his sincere thanks to all officials, experts and friends who had assisted China to implement RVSM, meanwhile, looked forward to much closer cooperation with them in the future.

1.4.7 He welcomed each official, expert and friend to raise valuable suggestions to their preparations. And, he also hoped each guest may leave happy memories to the beautiful Beijing Autumn. Meanwhile, he wished the meeting complete success.

1.5 Documentation and Working Language

1.5.1 The working language of the meeting as well as all documentation was in English. Translation services between English and Russia were undertaken by Kyrgyzstan and the Russian Federation for their delegations.

1.5.2 Eleven (11) Working Papers, six (6) Information Papers and three (3) Flimsies were presented to the meeting. A list of papers is included at Appendix B.

RVSM/TF/32 1 Report of the Meeting

Agenda Item 1: Adoption of Agenda

1.1 The meeting reviewed the provisional agenda for the RVSM/TF/32 proposed by the Chairperson of the Task Force. In the absence of Mr. Yusfandri Gona, the Chairperson of the OPS/AIR/WG, and as there were no outstanding work items, the meeting agreed that the OPS/AIR/WG would not be held and that the aircraft operations and airworthiness matters, if any, could be covered by the plenary. Accordingly, the meeting adopted the following agenda.

Agenda Item 1: Adoption of Agenda Agenda Item 2: Operational Considerations Agenda Item 3: Issues Relating to Airworthiness and Approval of Aircraft Agenda Item 4: Safety and Airspace Monitoring Considerations Agenda Item 5: Implementation Management Considerations Agenda Item 6: Future Work – Meeting Schedule Agenda Item 7: Any Other Business

1.2 The meeting adopted agendas for the ATC/WG and the SAM/WG, as shown in Appendices C and D to this Report, respectively.

Agenda Item 2: Operational Considerations

Review of the RVSM/TF/31

2.1 The meeting reviewed the outcomes of the RVSM/TF/31 meeting (Bangkok, July – August 2007).

Readiness Status

2.2 The meeting reviewed the China’s readiness to implement China RVSM Flight Level Allocation System (FLAS) in the Beijing, Guangzhou, Kunming, Lanzhou, Shanghai, Shenyang, Urumqi and Wuhan FIRs and Sector 01 (airspace over the Hainan Island) of the Sanya FIR on 1600 UTC on 21 November 2007. The oceanic airspace of the Sanya FIR (Sectors 02 and 03) had implemented RVSM with the South China Sea region.

2.3 China reported that they were working to address vital issues such as RVSM flight level allocations, harmonization of flight level and transition, ATC and flight crew training, RVSM airworthiness and operational approval, and most importantly the safety assessment and monitoring to support the application of RVSM in China. China was also enhancing its coordination with ICAO, International Air Transport Association (IATA), International Federation of Air Line Pilots’ Associations (IFALPA), neighboring States and all stakeholders operating in China’s airspace including international airlines.

2.4 The meeting particularly noted that China had completed the Preliminary RVSM Assessment Of Sovereign Chinese Airspace Report with the support of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The report provided the summary of the preliminary readiness and safety assessments, supporting the Go/No-Go decision for the planned RVSM implementation in sovereign Chinese airspace on 21 November 2007. For the completion of the safety assessment, this report presented a comprehensive traffic analysis of the collected TSD. In this regard, information on flight 2 RVSM/TF/32 Report of the Meeting operation statistics, traffic flow characteristics, operator and aircraft profiles, and flight level utilization were provided.

2.5 The Secretariat advised the meeting that the flight level planning procedures around the implementation time of 1600 UTC were not clearly understood by operators and suggested that China publish these procedures in the AIP Supplement and also make them available at forums for operators. IATA agreed with the Secretariat and indicated that RVSM non-approved aircraft should not flight plan into the RVSM airspace if they expected to operate in the airspace after 1600 UTC.

Publication of AIP Supplement/Amendment

2.6 The meeting recalled that the RVSM/TF/31 agreed to China’s proposal to publish AIP Supplements for the RVSM implementation in two stages, as the transition areas and procedures had not been finalized yet. An AIP Supplement, except for the transition procedures, was published by 30 August 2007, and included the policy and general procedures of RVSM in China airspace as discussed during the RVSM/TF/31. The second stage of the AIP Supplement publication, containing the specific detail on the individual transition areas and procedures, would be coordinated by China with the affected States to enable the synchronized publication of respective AIP Supplements at least 42 days before the RVSM implementation, i.e. not later than 11 October 2007.

Transition Arrangements

2.7 China advised the meeting that there would be two different flight level allocations in relation to adjacent FIRs. As a consequence of the China implementation of RVSM, there would be a need for transition procedures for aircraft entering or exiting Chinese airspace. The meeting noted China’s accomplishments on the coordination and signing of LOAs for RVSM transition procedures for China RVSM implementation with neighboring States.

2.8 The draft version of transition procedures was reviewed by the meeting. The final agreed version of the transition procedures is shown in Appendix E and will be available at the ATMB website at www.atmb.net.cn/rvsm.

Switchover Arrangements

2.9 The meeting recommended China adopt the IFALPA guidelines for operators during the transition to China RVSM on 21 November at 1600 UTC as follows:

• All aircraft that operate or are planning to operate in the RVSM levels within the China sovereign airspace at and beyond 1600 UTC on 21 November shall comply with the RVSM requirements in the China AIP.

• All aircraft entering China sovereign airspace between 8 900 m (FL 291) and 12 500 m (FL 411) inclusive, at and beyond 1600 UTC on 21 November will be assigned a level in accordance with the China RVSM level allocation.

• All aircraft departing from China sovereign airspace airports that need to file a level between 8 900 m (FL 291) and 12 500 m (FL 411) inclusive, at and beyond 1600 UTC on 21 November will be assigned a level in accordance with the China RVSM level allocation.

• Aircraft operating within China sovereign airspace at 1600 UTC on 21 November can expect

RVSM/TF/32 3 Report of the Meeting

Implementation Phase on 21 November from 1530 - 1630 UTC

1530 UTC ATC will broadcast: “Attention all aircraft, RVSM operations will begin in 30 minutes.”

1530 – 1545 UTC ATC will accommodate RVSM non-approved aircraft at and below 8 400 m.

1550 UTC ATC will broadcast: “Attention all aircraft, RVSM operations will begin at 1600 UTC.”

1600 – 1630 UTC ATC will clear RVSM approved aircraft to climb or descent to the nearest appropriate RVSM level in accordance with the China RVSM level allocation.

Post-Implementation 1631 UTC onward All aircraft operating in RVSM airspace will be cleared in accordance with the China RVSM level allocation.

Trigger NOTAM

2.10 In light of the impact of the implementation of RVSM in the Chinese FIRs on 21 November 2007, the meeting agreed that China would need to issue a “Trigger NOTAM” in accordance with the ICAO procedures 10 days prior to implementation. The following text was provided as an example for Item E) of the Trigger NOTAM:

E) TRIGGER NOTAM – PERM AIRAC AIP (SUP reference number) EFFECTIVE 1600 UTC 21 NOVEMBER 2007 RVSM WILL BE IMPLEMENTED IN (FIR names) FIRS

2.11 China confirmed that the Trigger NOTAM would be issued on 11 November 2007.

Amendment Proposal to the Regional Supplementary Procedures

2.12 The meeting noted that the Regional Supplementary Procedures (SUPPS, Doc 7030) provided for the regionally applied RVSM approval basis, the minimum aircraft system performance specification (MASPS), the target level of safety (TLS), operation of aircraft not approved for RVSM and height-keeping monitoring as well as the FIRs where RVSM could be applied. In order to introduce RVSM, SUPPS should be amended to add the FIRs where RVSM is applied.

2.13 A proposed amendment was circulated to States and international organizations from the Regional Office with the State letter Ref: T 3/07.10 – AP077/07(ATM) on 10 August 2007 as in the Appendix F to this Report.

2.14 There were nine replies from Australia, Malaysia, Pakistan, Singapore, Thailand, United Kingdom, Uzbekistan, Vietnam and IFALPA. All these replies except for IFALPA indicated no objection to the proposal. IFALPA had been of the view that this matter should be decided after the meeting. However, IFALPA had no objection to the amendment proposal.

4 RVSM/TF/32 Report of the Meeting

Agenda Item 3: Issues Relating to Airworthiness and Approval of Aircraft

3.1 China informed the meeting that they had conducted a side meeting with some MD11 operators. China was informed that the MD11 aircraft can operate in accordance with the requirements of China RVSM FLAS by incorporating minor changes to cockpit procedures.

Agenda Item 4: Safety and Airspace Monitoring Considerations

4.1 The Safety and Airspace Monitoring Work Group (SAM/WG) reviewed the ATMB preliminary readiness and safety assessments supporting the Go/No-Go decision for the planned RVSM implementation in sovereign Chinese airspace on 21 November 2007 (1600 UTC).

4.2 China described the comprehensive activities undertaken to establishment the monitoring authority of the General Administration of Civil Aviation of China (CAAC) which is responsible for sovereign Chinese airspace. China also described the coordination undertaken with the existing Regional Monitoring Authorities (i.e. PARMO and MAAR) for the comprehensive training required to conduct the readiness and safety assessments for the RVSM implementation.

Review of Know Your Airspace (KYA) analysis

4.3 The meeting reviewed the geographical areas of sovereign Chinese airspace included in the readiness and safety assessments. The areas cover nine Chinese FIRs, including the Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou, Wuhan, Shenyang, Lanzhou, Urumqi, Kunming, and Sanya FIR (over the Hainan Island). In turn, the meeting noted that, for the readiness and safety assessment for the RVSM implementation in sovereign Chinese airspace, the following data were collected:

• one-month TSD collected in June 2007;

• State RVSM approval records of operators and aircraft using RVSM airspace; and

• monthly LHD information from January 2006 and July 2007, given that:

o LHD information from incident reports from January 2006 to May 2007, and

o LHD reports collected in June and July 2007

4.4 In addition, based on the collected TSD, the meeting reviewed the flight operation statistics, traffic flow characteristics, operator and aircraft profiles, and flight level utilization used to describe the air traffic environment of the sovereign Chinese airspace.

Readiness Assessment Review

4.5 The meeting reviewed the readiness assessment to support the Go/No-Go decision for the RVSM implementation in China. The meeting noted that, based on the collected TSD and the State RVSM approval records, approximately 88 percent of aircraft operations in the sovereign Chinese airspace where RVSM is to be implemented had been conducted by RVSM airworthiness approved aircraft and 84 percent by State approved operators and aircraft. The CAAC Flight Standard Department has independently verified that approximately 8.5 percent of aircraft operations in the collected TSD were in the process of obtaining the State RVSM approval. This approval process was expected to be completed in October 2007, before the planned RVSM implementation date. Therefore, the meeting noted that the percentage of operations that would be conducted by

RVSM/TF/32 5 Report of the Meeting approved operators and aircraft in the planned RVSM airspace would increase to 92.5 percent by November 2007.

LHD Occurrences Review

4.6 The meeting reviewed the summary of LHD occurrences associated with the RVSM implementation in the sovereign Chinese airspace, given as follows:

• Total of 33 LHD occurred in the sovereign Chinese airspace, account for 52.32 minutes of duration and 9 climbing flight levels crossed and 10 descending flight levels crossed since January 2006.

• 15 of these occurrences which account for 46.05 minutes of duration were due to the negative transfers or incorrect transfers of control responsibilities (Category E) from several FIRs which were adjacent to China, and which have been identified as sources of disproportionately high negative transfer errors in the Asia Pacific region.

• The remaining 18 LHD occurred in the sovereign Chinese airspace account for 6.27 minutes of duration and 9 climbing flight levels crossed and 10 descending flight levels crossed since January 2006.

• 16 LHD occurred in the recent 12 months since August 2006, account for 5.72 minutes of duration and 9 climbing flight levels crossed and 10 descending flight levels crossed.

• Within these 16 LHD occurrences, regarding the LHD duration:

o One LHD occurrence of 0.15 minutes involved the display error of ATC automatic system leading to ATC failing to have right situational awareness (Category M), which account for technical errors.

o Thus, the other occurrences of LHD occurred, account for 5.57 minutes, were subject to the operational errors.

• Within these 16 LHD occurrences, regarding the number of flight levels crossed:

o 9 climbing flight levels crossed and 6 descending flight levels crossed are subject to the operational errors.

4.7 In relation to LHD occurrences due to the negative transfers or incorrect transfers of control responsibilities (Category E) from several FIRs which are adjacent to China, the meeting noted that, with RVSM implementation, China would adopt the RVSM single alternate flight level orientation scheme (FLOS) which is almost the same as these FIRs. As a result, the occurrences of opposite direction operations at the same flight level in the transition zones would decrease. This was expected to significantly reduce the risk associated with these errors.

4.8 In addition, China advised the meeting that several preventive measures for LHD occurrences concerning the coordination error in the ATC-to-ATC transfer of control responsibility as a result of human factors issue (Category E) would be put in place as follows:

6 RVSM/TF/32 Report of the Meeting

• China would participate in RASMAG to improve the situations with regard to these events with LHD of Category E.

• China would enhance the communication with the relevant States. Periodic meetings between the related FIRs would be arranged. Similar events would be notified to each other in time.

• Actions to eliminate these events would be put into the LOA between the related FIRs.

• China would pay special attention to these areas by constantly monitoring the errors and conducting assessments. Results will be reported to RASMAG/8 and RVSM TF/33 meetings.

• More communication and surveillance facilities would be equipped in these transition zones to improve the control ability.

4.9 Furthermore, IFAPLA suggested that another mitigation measure could be for aircraft entering the Chinese airspace to be instructed in the AIP to contact the appropriate Chinese control frequency at a time prior to airspace entry. IFALPA also advised the meeting that their human factors experts had created a conversion table based on the level information provided in the AIP and recommended that this table be used by operators.

Risk Assessment Review

4.10 The meeting noted that the FAA Technical Centre reviewed the ATMB readiness and safety assessment and has independently verified the risk values presented. Specifically, the FAA Technical Centre team:

• Produced readiness estimate values which were virtually identical to the ATMB team’s results which indicate that China’s readiness goal for RVSM implementation would be met.

• Found that the parameter estimation procedures used in the safety assessment were identical to those used in risk estimation processes carried out by PARMO and NAARMO in the Asia and Pacific and North American Regions, respectively. Although the FAA Technical Centre did not have sufficient time to calculate estimates independently, given the identical procedures used, processing the ATMB June TSD should yield the same estimated parameter values.

• Agreed that, after thorough review of the LHD material provided by the ATMB, the proportion of time spent at incorrect flight levels used in estimating operational risk was appropriate.

• Found that the ATMB used the probability of lateral overlap, Py(0), provided by FAA Technical Centre.

• Found that the ATMB used the probability of loss of vertical separation, Pz(0) and Pz(1,000), provided by FAA Technical Centre.

RVSM/TF/32 7 Report of the Meeting

• Found that the ATMB employed software used by the FAA Technical Centre to compute technical and operational risk.

4.11 The meeting reviewed the ATMB risk assessment and agreed that, in light of the mitigation measures described, the LHD occurrences due to the negative transfers or incorrect transfers of control responsibilities (Category E) from several FIRs which are adjacent to China could be excluded from the risk estimate used in deciding whether the TLS for implementation is satisfied. In light of this, the results of the risk assessment for the sovereign Chinese airspace are provided in the table below.

Source of Risk Lower Bound TLS Remarks Risk Estimation Technical Risk 1.162 x 10-11 2.5 x 10-9 Below Technical TLS Operational Risk 1.794 x 10-9 - - Total Risk 1.805 x 10-9 5.0 x 10-9 Below Overall TLS

Risk Estimates for the RVSM Implementation in Sovereign Chinese Airspace

4.12 The trends of collision risk estimates for each month using the appropriate 18-month interval of LHD reports since January 2006 are also demonstrated in the figure below:

Vertical Collision Risk By Type in Sovereign Chinese Airspace

6.00E-09

TLS 5.00E-09 Techinial Risk

Operational Risk

4.00E-09 Overall Risk

3.00E-09

2.00E-09

1.00E-09

0.00E+00

6 6 6 7 0 06 07 7 -06 - - -0 l-07 ar-06 r- y g ct-06 r-07 y-07 n Jan-06 eb-0 Jul-06 ep-0 ov-06 Jan p a u Ju F M Ap Ma Jun-06 Au S O N Dec-06 Feb-0 Mar-07 A M J

Trends of Risk Estimates for the RVSM Implementation in Sovereign Chinese Airspace

4.13 Based on the collision risk estimates from the received TSD and LHD reports, the meeting noted that the technical and overall risk estimates satisfied the agreed TLS value of no more than 2.5 x 10-9 and 5.0 x 10-9 fatal accidents per flight hour due to the loss of a correctly established vertical separation standard of 300 m and to all causes, respectively. Consequently, based on the readiness and safety assessment, the SAM/WG agreed to recommend that RVSM implementation proceed on 21 November 2007.

4.14 A copy of the Airspace Safety Assessment for the RVSM Implementation in Sovereign Chinese Airspace submitted by China is in Appendix G to this Report.

8 RVSM/TF/32 Report of the Meeting

Establishment of RMA and Ongoing Monitoring

4.15 China advised that an agreement had recently been concluded with the FAA to purchase Enhanced GPS Monitoring Unit (EGMU) equipment and software to calculate parameters for height keeping performance. The agreement included training to use this equipment and software. The expectation was that the monitoring equipment and software will be obtained in October 2007, and the training conducted in November 2007. Meanwhile, China requested AEROTHAI to provide ongoing support in relation to airframe height-keeping performance monitoring. In addition, China planned to apply for an APANPIRG RMA status using the normal process developed by RASMAG.

4.16 IATA informed the meeting that it prefers the use of strategically located HMUs, in view of the cost and practical problems associated with the use of GMUs.

Agenda Item 5: Implementation management considerations

Review of the Task List for Implementation of RVSM by China and the Transition Arrangement Check List

5.1 The meeting reviewed the RVSM Implementation Task List in Appendix H and agreed that all tasks associated with the ATC operations were completed. Further, the meeting reviewed the transition arrangement check list in Appendix I and agreed that most of the transition arrangements were completed or near completion.

5.2 Based on the information and the safety assessments provided by China, and subject to finalization of the ongoing LOAs, the meeting agreed that RVSM operations in the Beijing, Guangzhou, Kunming, Lanzhou, Shanghai, Shenyang, Urumqi and Wuhan FIRs and Sector 01 (airspace over the Hainan Island) of the Sanya FIR could be implemented at 1600 UTC on 21 November 2007.

China RVSM Policy and Procedures Briefing Meeting for International Operators

5.3 China informed the meeting that ATMB would hold the China RVSM Policies and Procedures Briefing in Beijing on 12 October 2007 to explain the relevant policies and procedures before the implementation of RVSM in China in November 2007. All international operators are invited to participate in the briefing. The invitation letter for all international operators is attached in Appendix J.

Agenda Item 6: Future Work – Meeting Schedule

6.1 The meeting agreed tentatively on the future work programme of the Task Force as follows:

RVSM/TF/33 (90 days review meeting) 1-4 April 2008 Beijing RVSM/TF/34 (One year review meeting) December 2008 TBD

6.2 The 90-day review meeting will include a review of the safety assessment using TSD collected after RVSM implementation. The month of collection for the TSD after the RVSM implementation would be determined by China.

RVSM/TF/32 9 Report of the Meeting

Agenda Item 7: Other Business

ATC Coordination Meeting among ATMB China, CAB Japan and KCASA Republic of Korea

7.1 China, Japan and the Republic of Korea held a side meeting during RVSM/TF/32 on China RVSM program with fruitful results. With the cooperative spirit, the Republic of Korea agreed that two more flight levels, i.e. FL 300 and FL 310, would be available on A593 for the benefit of traffic operations, which provides positive assistance for China and Japan by revising the current LOAs between Fukuoka ACC and Shanghai ACC, and between Fukuoka ACC and Incheon ACC (Subject: Air Traffic Control and Coordination Procedures). The Republic of Korea reserves FL 410. China, Japan and the Republic of Korea would continue to coordinate and cooperate to discuss on how to increase the capacity of the airspace.

Proposal for the Amendment to PANS-ATM

7.2 A State Letter (Ref.: AN 1312.5-0713) requesting comments on the amendment to the Procedures for Air Navigation Services - Air Traffic Management (PANS-ATM, Doc 4444) was issued on 25 May 2007, as shown in Appendix K. The proposed amendment introduces changes to the ICAO flight plan to meet future needs of aircraft with advanced capabilities and the evolving requirements of automated air traffic management systems, while taking into account compatibility with existing systems, human factors, training, cost and transition aspects. As implementation of this proposed amendment to the PANS-ATM was expected to require substantial time for preparation, it was envisaged for applicability on 18 November 2010.

8. Closing of the Meeting

8.1 On behalf of the ICAO RVSM Implementation Task Force for the Asia Pacific Region, Mr. Kuah Kong Beng expressed sincere appreciation to China and the staff of ATMB for the excellent preparations and conduct of the meeting. He also thanked all delegates, in particular for their commitment, dedication and efforts to enhance the operational efficiency of air traffic services through the implementation of RVSM.

8.2 Mr. Rod Graff, on behalf of ICAO Asia and Pacific Office, expressed his appreciation to ATMB for the excellent arrangement and support provided for the RVSM/TF/32 meeting. He wished China success in the RVSM implementation on 22 November 2007.

8.3 Mr. Kyotaro Harano, thanked all the delegates for the efforts to coordinate and progress the implementation of RVSM in the Chinese flight information regions (FIRs)

……….…………………… RVSM/TF/32 Appendix A to the Report

List of Participants

Name Title/Organization TEL/FAX/E-MAIL 1. CHINA 1. Mr. Su Langen Director General Tel: 86-10-87786661 Air Traffic Management Bureau of CAAC Fax: 86-10-87786810 ATMB Building E-mail: [email protected] 12 Dongsanhuan Road Middle Chaoyang District, Beijing 100022 People's Republic of China 2. Mr. Miao Xuan Director of Air Traffic Control Division Tel: 86-10-87786811 Air Traffic Management Bureau of CAAC Fax: 86-10-87786810 ATMB Building E-mail: [email protected] 12 Dongsanhuan Road Middle Chaoyang District, Beijing 100022 People's Republic of China 3. Mr. Xiao Jing Deputy Director of Air Traffic Control Division Tel: 86-10-87786812 Air Traffic Management Bureau of CAAC Fax: 86-10-87786810 ATMB Building E-mail: [email protected] 12 Dongsanhuan Road Middle Chaoyang District, Beijing 100022 People's Republic of China 4. Ms. Zhang Jing Chairperson of the ATC/WG Tel: 86-10-87786051 Director of International Cooperation Division Fax: 86-10-87786055 Air Traffic Management Bureau of CAAC E-mail: [email protected] ATMB Building 12 Dongsanhuan Road Middle Chaoyang District, Beijing 100022 People's Republic of China

A – 1 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix A to the Report

Name Title/Organization TEL/FAX/E-MAIL 5. Mr. Zhao Dongsheng Deputy Director of Flight Standard Department Tel: 86-10-64091408 General Administration of Civil Aviation of China Fax: 86-10-64092458 155 Dongsi Street West E-mail: [email protected] Beijing 100710 People's Republic of China 6. Mr. Li Bo Deputy Director of Ariworthiness Department Tel: 86-10-64092329 General Administration of Civil Aviation of China Fax: 86-10-64091327 155 Dongsi Street West E-mail: [email protected] Beijing 100710 People's Republic of China 7. Mr. Zhang Yuanchao Assistant, Air Traffic Management Division Tel: 86-10-87786819 Air Traffic Management Bureau of CAAC Fax: 86-10-87786810 ATMB Building E-mail: [email protected] 12 Dongsanhuan Road Middle Chaoyang District, Beijing 100022 People's Republic of China 8. Mr. Tang Jinxiang Assistant, Aviation Data Communication Tel: 86-10-82325050-938 Corporation Fax: 86-10-82325552 Air Traffic Management Bureau of CAAC E-mail: [email protected] ATMB Building 12 Dongsanhuan Road Middle Chaoyang District, Beijing 100022 People's Republic of China 9. Ms. Gu Zhimin Assistant, Aviation Data Communication Tel: 86-10-82325050-937 Corporation Fax: 86-10-82354025 Air Traffic Management Bureau of CAAC E-mail: [email protected] ATMB Building 12 Dongsanhuan Road Middle Chaoyang District, Beijing 100022 People's Republic of China

A – 2 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix A to the Report

Name Title/Organization TEL/FAX/E-MAIL 10. Ms. Wang Rui Assistant, International Co-operation Division Tel: 86-10-87786053 Air Traffic Management Bureau of CAAC Fax: 86-10-87786055 ATMB Building E-mail: [email protected] 12 Dongsanhuan Road Middle Chaoyang District, Beijing 100022 People's Republic of China 11. Ms. Zhao Jun Assistant,Aviation Data Communication Tel: 86-10-82325050-938 Corporation Fax: 86-10-87785055 Air Traffic Management Bureau of CAAC E-mail: [email protected] ATMB Building 12 Dongsanhuan Road Middle Chaoyang District, Beijing 100022 People's Republic of China 12. Mr. Cai Kaiquan Aviation Data Communication Corporation Tel: 86-10-82325050-938 Air Traffic Management Bureau of CAAC Fax: 86-10-87785055 ATMB Building E-mail: [email protected] 12 Dongsanhuan Road Middle Chaoyang District, Beijing 100022 People's Republic of China 2. D.P.R. KOREA 13. Mr. Pak Yong Chol Director, CNS/ATM Bureau Tel: 850-2-18111~999 Ext-8108 General Administration of Civil Aviation Fax: 850-2-3814410 Ext-4625 Sunan District E-mail: [email protected] Pyongyang Democratic People's Republic of Korea 14. Mr. An Kyong Hwa Director, AIS, GACA, D.P.R of Korea Tel: 850-2-18111~999 Ext-8108 General Administration of Civil Aviation Fax: 850-2-3814410 Ext-4625 Sunan District E-mail: [email protected] Pyongyang Democratic People's Republic of Korea

A – 3 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix A to the Report

Name Title/Organization TEL/FAX/E-MAIL 3. HONG KONG, CHINA 15. Mr. Lucius Wai-chuen Fan Senior Safety and Quality Officer (Enroute) Tel: (852) 2910 6448 Air Traffic Management Division Fax: (852) 2910 0186 Civil Aviation Department E-mail: [email protected] 4/F, Air Traffic Control Complex 1 Control Tower Road Hong Kong International Airport Lantau Hong Kong, China 16. Mr. Mike Wai-kan Tam Evaluation Officer Tel: (852) 2910 6451 Air Traffic Management Division Fax: (852) 2910 0186 Civil Aviation Department E-mail: [email protected] 4/F, Air Traffic Control Complex 1 Control Tower Road Hong Kong International Airport Lantau Hong Kong, China 4. JAPAN 17. Mr. Natsuki Ibe Chief, Operations Section Tel: 81-3-5253 8749 ATC Division Fax: 81-3-5253 1664 ATS Department E-mail: [email protected] Civil Aviation Bureau Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport 2-1-3 Kasumigaseki, Chiyoda-ku Tokyo 100 8918, Japan

A – 4 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix A to the Report

Name Title/Organization TEL/FAX/E-MAIL 5. KAZAKHSTAN 18. Mr. Faat Bogdashkin Head of ATM Department Tel: +8 3272 57 36 05, 8 3272 57 37 82 RSE KAZAERONAVIGATSIA Fax: +8 3272 57 2720 38A, Mailina Street E-mail: [email protected] Almaty, 050039 Republic of Kazakhstan 19. Ms. Aliya Iskakova Head of International Department Tel: +8 3272 57 3793, 8 3272 57 37 82 RSE KAZAERONAVIGATSIA Fax: +8 3272 57 2720 38A, Mailina Street E-mail: [email protected] Almaty, 050039 Republic of Kazakhstan 20. Mr. Kondiussov Vitaliy Director of Almaty ATC Center Tel: +8 3272 57 36 05, 8 3272 57 37 82 RSE KAZAERONAVIGATSIA Fax: +8 3272 57 2720 38A, Mailina Street E-mail: [email protected] Almaty, 050039 Republic of Kazakhstan 21. Mr. Gorodnitsky Stanislav Head of Almaty ACC Tel: +8 3272 57 36 05, 8 3272 57 37 82 RSE KAZAERONAVIGATSIA Fax: +8 3272 57 2720 38A, Mailina Street E-mail: [email protected] Almaty, 050039 Republic of Kazakhstan 22. Mr. Kogutenko Valeriy Head of Astana ACC Tel: +8 3272 57 36 05, 8 3272 57 37 82 RSE KAZAERONAVIGATSIA Fax: +8 3272 57 2720 38A, Mailina Street E-mail: [email protected] Almaty, 050039 Republic of Kazakhstan

A – 5 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix A to the Report

Name Title/Organization TEL/FAX/E-MAIL 6. KYRGYZSTAN 23. Mr. Bakyt Djunushaliev Deputy Chief State Inspectorate on Flight Safety Tel/Fax: +996 312 54 21 40 / 41 Civil Aviation Authority E-mail: [email protected];[email protected] Ministry of Transport and Communications 184, Ahumbaev st., Bishkek, 720044 Kyrgyz Republic 7. NEPAL 24. Mr. Purushottam Shakya ATS Manager Tel: +977 (1) 44262326,4472259 Civil Aviation Authority of Nepal Fax: +977 (1) 4262516 Babar Mahal E-mail: [email protected] Kathmandu [email protected] Nepal 25. Mr. Narendra Raj Sayami ATS Manager Tel: +977 (1) 44262326,4472259 Civil Aviation Authority of Nepal Fax: +977 (1) 4262516 Babar Mahal E-mail: [email protected] Kathmandu Nepal 8. PAKISTAN 26. Mr. Syed Yousuf Abbas Director Operations Tel: +92 (21) 9248756 HQCAA Pakistan Fax: +92 (21) 9248758 Terminal-1 E-mail: [email protected] Jinnah International Airport Karachi 75200, Pakistan 27. Mr. Muhammad Arshad Malik Chief Operations Officer Tel: +92 (42) 9240544 AIIAP Lahore Pakistan 28. Mr. Muhammad Iqbal Khan Radar Facility Chief Tel: +92 (42) 9240544 AIIAP Lahore Pakistan

A – 6 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix A to the Report

Name Title/Organization TEL/FAX/E-MAIL 9. PHILIPPINES 29. Mr. Hector L. Catan Airworthiness Inspector Tel: +632-8799 221 Air Transportation Office Fax: +632-8799 218 MIA, Pasay City, Metro Manila E-mail: [email protected] Philippines 10. REPUBLIC OF KOREA 30. Mr. Kim Sang Hee Director General of Air Traffic Center Tel: 82-32-880 0201 Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) E-mail: [email protected] Ministry of Construction and Transportation P.O. Box 26 Incheon Airport Woonseo-dong, Joong-gu Incheon Republic of Korea 31. Mr. Shim Myung Kuk Director of Airspace Division Tel: 82-32-880 0220 Air Traffic Center Fax: 82-32-889 2376 Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) E-mail: [email protected] Ministry of Construction and Transportation P.O. Box 26 Incheon Airport Woonseo-dong, Joong-gu Incheon Republic of Korea 32. Ms. So Eun Jung Assistant Officer of Airspace Division Tel: 82-32-880 0222 Air Traffic Center Fax: 82-32-889 2376 Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) E-mail: [email protected] Ministry of Construction and Transportation P.O. Box 26 Incheon Airport Woonseo-dong, Joong-gu Incheon Republic of Korea

A – 7 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix A to the Report

Name Title/Organization TEL/FAX/E-MAIL 33. Mr. Kim Do Hun Manager Tel: 82-2-2656 6273 Korean Air Fax: 82-2-2656 6289 1370 Gonghang-dong, Gangseo-gu E-mail: [email protected] Seoul Republic of Korea 11. RUSSIAN FEDERATION 34. Mr. Krivonosov Victor Chief of ASM Division Tel: +7 (495)-601-0810 State ATM Corporation Fax: +7 (495)-601-0798 Moscow 125993 E-mail: [email protected] Leningradsky prospect, 37, bld.7 Russian Federation 35. Mr. Sitnikov Igor Deputy Chief of ATM Division Tel: +7 (495)-601-0801 State ATM Corporation Fax: +7 (495)-601-0803 Moscow 125993 E-mail: [email protected] Leningradsky prospect, 37, bld.7 Russian Federation 36. Ms.Motornaya Marina Senior Expert, International Relations Department Tel: +7 (495)-601-0804 State ATM Corporation Fax: +7 (495)-601-0795 Moscow 125993 E-mail: [email protected] Leningradsky prospect, 37, bld.7 Russian Federation 37. Mr. Konstantin Starostin Chief of ATC Division “Far East Air Navigation” Tel: +7 (4212)-319 499 State ATM Corporation Fax: +7 (4212)-32 79 90 Matveevskoye Shosse 28A E-mail: [email protected] Khabarovsk 680031 Russian Federation

A – 8 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix A to the Report

Name Title/Organization TEL/FAX/E-MAIL 12. SINGAPORE 38. Mr. Kuah Kong Beng Chief Air Traffic Control Officer Tel: 65-6541 2405 Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore Fax: 65-6545 6516 Singapore Changi Airport E-mail: [email protected] P.O. Box 1 Singapore 918141 13. THAILAND 39. Mr. Tinnagorn Choowong Director, Air Traffic Management Centre Tel: +66-2-287 8780 Aeronautical Radio of Thailand Ltd Fax: +66-2-287 8424 102 Soi Ngarmduplee E-mail: [email protected] Tungmahamek, Sathorn Bangkok 10120, Thailand 40. Dr. Paisit Herabat Engineering Manager Tel: +66-2-285 9191 Aeronautical Radio of Thailand Ltd Fax: +66-2-285 9716 102 Ngamduplee E-mail: [email protected] Thungmahamek, Sathorn Bangkok 10120, Thailand 41. Mr. Nuttakajorn Yanpirat Executive Officer, Systems Engineering Tel: +66-2-287 8268 Aeronautical Radio of Thailand Ltd Fax: +66-2-285 9716 102 Ngamduplee E-mail: [email protected] Thungmahamek, Sathorn Bangkok 10120, Thailand 42. Capt. Apiluk Permphol Deputy Manager, International Aviation Affairs and Tel: +66-2-545 2665 Development Department Fax: +66-2-545 3849 Operations Support Department E-mail : [email protected] Thai Airways International Public Company Limited 89 Vibhavadi Rangsit Road Bangkok 10900, Thailand

A – 9 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix A to the Report

Name Title/Organization TEL/FAX/E-MAIL 43. Mr. Pairat Wonganan Flight Dispatch Manager Tel: +66-2-3283353 Bangkok Airways Co., Ltd. Mob: +66-089-8070936 99 Mu 14, Vibhavadi Rangsit Road Fax: +66-2-3250664 Chatuchak E-mail : [email protected] Bangkok 10900, Thailand 44. Mr. Pakdee Dangkasan Senior Flight Dispatch Tel: +66-2-3283312 Bangkok Airways Co., Ltd. Fax: +66-2-3283319 999 M.4 BANGNA-TRAT Rd, E-mail : [email protected] Bangchalong, Rangkplee, Samuthpvakarn 10540 Thailand 14. UNITED STATES 45. Mr. Dan Hanlon ATO Representative, Asia and Pacific Region Tel: +65-6543 1466 Federal Aviation Administration Fax: +65-6543 1952 American Embassy Singapore E-mail: [email protected] 27 Napier Road Singapore 258508 46. Mr. Brian Colamosca Manager, Separation Standards Analysis Team Tel: +1 609 485 6603 Federal Aviation Administration Fax: +1 609 485 5117 FAA Technical Centre E-mail: [email protected] Atlantic City, New Jersey 08405 U.S.A. 47. Mr. Sam El-Zoobi ATO Operations Planning, International Tel: +1 202 385 8089 600 Independence Avenue, SW E-mail: [email protected] Washington, D.C. 20202 U.S.A.

A – 10 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix A to the Report

Name Title/Organization TEL/FAX/E-MAIL 15. VIET NAM 48. Mr. Doan Khac Manh Deputy Director Tel: +84-4-8731611 Air Navigation Department Fax: +84-4-8274194 Civil Aviation Administration of Viet Nam E-mail: [email protected] Nguyen Son St., Longbiem Dist. Hanoi, Viet Nam 49. Mr. Nguyen Manh Quang Director ATS-AIS Division Tel: +84-4-8730320 Vietnam Air Traffic Management Fax: +84-4-8725281 Civil Aviation Administration of Viet Nam E-mail: [email protected] Gia Lam Airport Hanoi, Viet Nam 50. Mr. Lam Phuc Anh Ha Deputy Director Tel: +84-4-8865352 Northern Region Air Traffic Services, VATM Fax: +84-4-8866185 Civil Aviation Administration of Viet Nam E-mail: [email protected] Noi Bai International Airport Hanoi, Viet Nam 16. IATA 51. Mr. Soon Boon Hai Assistant Director – Safety, Operations & Tel: 65-6239 7267 Infrastructure – Asia/Pacific Fax: 65-6536 6267 International Air Transport Association E-mail: [email protected] 77 Robinson Road #05-00 SIA Building Singapore 068896 52. Mr. Raymond Au Regional Manager Tel: (852) 2122-8228 Air Traffic Operations S.E. Asia Fax: (852) 2122 8227 United Airlines E-mail: [email protected] Room 5N014, Passenger Terminal Building HK International Airport Hong Kong, China

A – 11 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix A to the Report

Name Title/Organization TEL/FAX/E-MAIL 53. Mr. Kakuya Abe Assistant Manager, Flight Standards Tel: 81-3-5757 4123 All Nippon Airways Co., Ltd. (ANA) Fax: 81-3-5757 5404 3-3-2, Haneda Airport E-mail: [email protected] Ota-ku, Tokyo 144-8515 Japan 54. Mr. Cheng Shixin Manager, Safety Operation&Infrastructure, North Tel: 86-10-8425 2591 Asia International Air Transport Association Fax: 86-10-6429 8684 12/f, Bldg12,Xibaihe Beili, Chaoyang District E-mail: [email protected] Beijing,100028 P.R.China 55. Mr. Julian Fung Assistant Manager Route Development Tel: 852-2747 3818 Cathay Pacific Airways Limited Fax: 852-2141 3818 International Affairs Department E-mail: [email protected] 9th Floor, Central Tower, Cathay Pacific City 8 Scenic Road Hong Kong International Airport Lantau Island Hong Kong, China 56. Capt. Coty Mao Senior Training Supervisor Tel: 886-3-351-5832 EVA Airways Fax: 886-3-351-0015 9th Fl. Hsin-Nan Road E-mail: [email protected] Section 1, Luchu Taoyuan Tiwan 338 Taiwan 57. Mr. Roger Wall Manager, ATM Projects Tel: 1-253-639 2476 Air Traffic Operations Mobile: 1-206-661 2006 Federal Express Fax: 1-253-639 2476 29500 179th PI. S.E. E-mail: [email protected] Kent, WA 98042 U.S.A.

A – 12 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix A to the Report

Name Title/Organization TEL/FAX/E-MAIL 58. Mr. Sachiko Chiba Flight Operations Tel: 81-3-5756 3134 Japan Airlines International Co., Ltd. Fax: 81-3-5756 3527 Terminal 1, 3-3-2, Haneda Airport E-mail: [email protected] 3-chome, Ota-ku Tokyo 144-0041 Japan 59. Mr. Wiedo Mulder Flight Support Manager Tel: 31-20-304-2521 KLM Royal Dutch Airlines Fax: 31-20-304-2529 Piet Quilonartweg 201 E-mail: [email protected] (Building 201/ATM-TACTICAL PLANNING) 1117 ZL Schiphol – East The Netherlands 60. Mr. Yusuke Chaki Assistant Manager Tel: 81-476-34-7728 Nippon Cargo Airlines (NCA) Fax: 81-476-34-7771 ANA SKYCENTER E-mail: [email protected] Narita International Airport Narita-shi, Chiba Japan 61. Mr. Kazuo Nakata Senior Advisor, ATM & Industry Affairs Tel: 81-476-32-7319 Northwest Airlines Inc. Fax: 81-476-32-7429 Passenger Terminal 1 E-mail: [email protected] Narita-city Chiba 282-0011 Japan 62. Capt. Aric Oh Deputy Chief Pilot (Technical) Tel: 65-6540 3694 Singapore Airlines Fax: 65-6542 9564 Flight Operations Technical E-mail: [email protected] (SIN-STC-02A) SIA Training Centre 04-C 720 Upper Changi Road East Singapore 486852

A – 13 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix A to the Report

Name Title/Organization TEL/FAX/E-MAIL 63. Ms. Cynthia Pierson Manager, Automation – Nav & ATC Tel: 1-502-359 5712 United Parcel Service Fax: 1-502-359 5957 825 Lotus Ave E-mail: [email protected] Louisville, KY 40213-2622 U.S.A. 64. Capt. Jon Burrows Assistant Chief Pilot Tel: 1-502-299 2333 United Parcel Service Fax: 1-502-249 6240 16100 Noble Point Drive E-mail: [email protected] Anchorage, AK 99516 U.S.A. 65. Mr. Kevin O’donnell Flight Standards Tel: 1-502-819 1886 United Parcel Service Fax: 1-907-249 6240 3199 Mt. Eden Road E-mail: [email protected] Shelbyville, KY 40065 U.S.A. 17. IFALPA 66. Mr. Miguel Marin Air Traffic Services Committee Chairman Tel: 52 55 5091 5954 IFALPA Fax: 52 55 5202 9160 Palomas 110, Col. Reforma Social E-mail : [email protected] Mexico City, 11650 Mexico 67. Capt. Cheong Kah Seng IFALPA Representative Tel: 65-91392102 ALPA Singapore E-mail : [email protected] 720 Upper Changi Road East SIA Training Centre (SIN-STC-02A) Singapore 486852

A – 14 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix A to the Report

Name Title/Organization TEL/FAX/E-MAIL 18. IFATCA 68. Mr. Cheung David Kwok-wai IFATCA Representative Tel: 852 9303 9921 3C, Tower 3, Hillsborough Court Fax: 852 2868 3868 18 Old Peak Road, Mid-Levels E-mail: [email protected] Hong Kong, China 19. ICAO 69. Mr. Rod Graff Deputy Regional Director Tel: 66-2-5378189 ext 35 ICAO Asia & Pacific Office Fax: 66-2-5378199 252/1 Vibhavadi Rangsit Road E-mail: [email protected] Ladyao, Chatuchak Bangkok 10900 Thailand 70. Mr. Kyotaro Harano Regional Officer, ATM Tel: 66-2-5378189 ext 159 ICAO Asia & Pacific Office Fax: 66-2-5378199 252/1 Vibhavadi Rangsit Road E-mail: [email protected] Ladyao, Chatuchak Bangkok 10900 Thailand

A – 15 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix B to the Report

LIST OF WORKING PAPERS (WPs) AND INFORMATION PAPERS (IPs)

WORKING PAPERS

NUMBER AGENDA WORKING PAPERS PRESENTED BY WP/1 1 Provisional Agenda Secretariat WP/2 1, 2 Provisional Agenda for the ATC Operations Work Group Chairperson of the (ATC/WG) ATC/WG WP/3 1, 3 Provisional Agenda for the Aircraft Operations & Chairperson of the Airworthiness Work Group (OPS/AIR/WG) OPS/AIR/WG WP/4 1, 4 Provisional Agenda for the Safety and Airspace Monitoring Chairperson of the Work Group (SAM/WG) SAM/WG WP/5 2, 3, 4 Review of the 31st Meeting of the RVSM Implementation Secretariat Task Force (RVSM/TF/31) WP/6 5 Origination of a Trigger NOTAM Secretariat WP/7 5 Task List for Implementation of Reduced Vertical Separation Chairperson Minimum (RVSM) by China and the Transition Arrangement Check List WP/8 3 Preliminary Safety Assessment Supporting the Go/No-Go China Decision for the RVSM Implementation in Sovereign Chinese Airspace WP/9 2, 3, 4 Implementation Progress of the Reduced Vertical Separation China Minimum (RVSM) in China Airspace WP/10 2 China RVSM Transition Procedures China WP/11 5 China RVSM Policy and Procedures Briefing Meeting for China International Operators

INFORMATION PAPERS

NUMBER AGENDA INFORMATION PAPERS PRESENTED BY IP/1 - List of Working Papers (WPs) and Information Papers (IPs) Secretariat IP/2 - Terms of Reference of RVSM/TF Secretariat IP/3 - Terms of Reference of RVSM/TF Work Groups Secretariat IP/4 2, 3, 4 Amendment Proposal of the Regional Supplementary Secretariat Procedures (Doc 7030) IP/5 2 Proposal for the Amendment to PANS-ATM Secretariat IP/6 2 Outcomes of FAA Technical Centre Review of Readiness and United States Safety Assessments Conducted in Support of Implementation of the Reduced Vertical Separation Minimum in Sovereign Chinese Airspace

B – 1 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix B to the Report

FLIMSIES

NUMBER AGENDA FLIMSIES PRESENTED BY No. 1 2 Report of the ATC/WG Chairman of the ATC/WG No. 2 4 Report of the SAM/WG Chairman of the SAM/WG No. 3 2 Guidelines for Operators during the Transition to China IFALPA RVSM on November 21st at 1600z

― END ―

B – 2 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix C to the Report

PROVISIONAL AGENDA FOR THE ATC OPERATIONS WORK GROUP (ATC/WG)

Agenda Item 1: Adoption of Proposed Agenda

Agenda Item 2: Finalization of Operational Plan for RVSM Implementation

- RVSM Airspace - Flight Level Orientation Scheme - Band of RVSM Levels - Assignment of RVSM Levels - Transition Procedures - Contingency Procedures (Including Weather Deviation Procedures)

Agenda Item 3: Publication of Documents

- AIC - AIP Supplement - Trigger NOTAM

Agenda Item 4: Implementation Management Issues

- ATC Coordination Procedures - Letters of Agreement

Agenda Item 5: Any Other Business

Agenda Item 6: Future work

………………………….

C – 1 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix D to the Report

PROPOSED AGENDA FOR THE SAFETY AND AIRSPACE MONITORING WORK GROUP (SAM/WG)

(Presented by the Chairperson of the Safety and Airspace Monitoring Work Group)

Agenda Item 1: Agree on Agenda

Agenda Item 2: Review Duties and Responsibilities of the Regional Monitoring Agency (RMA)

Agenda Item 3: Review the Readiness Assessment in the Planned RVSM Airspace

Agenda Item 4: Review the Progress of the Safety Assessments

Agenda Item 5: Review the RVSM/TF Task List

Agenda Item 6: Future SAM Work Program

Agenda Item 7: Any Other Business

......

D – 1 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix E to the Report

Flight Level Transition Procedures between Different FLAS system

附件 E: 不同飞行高度层系统之间的高度转换程序 ATTACHMENT E: Flight Level Transition Procedures between Different FLAS system

1. 2007 年 11 月 21 日 16：00（世界时），北京、 1. There will be two different Flight Level Allocation 广州、昆明、兰州、上海、沈阳、乌鲁木齐和武 Scheme (FLAS). in adjacent FIR when China implements 汉情报区，以及三亚管制区 01 号扇区（岛内空域） RVSM in the Beijing, Guangzhou, Kunming, Lanzhou, 实施缩小垂直间隔后，在中国与相邻国家的飞行 Shanghai, Shenyang, Urumqi and Wuhan FIRs and Sector 01 情报区之内就出现了两种不同的飞行高度系统， (airspace over the island) of the Sanya FIR on 1600UTC on 对于进入和离开中国空域的航空器就需要制定专 21 November 2007. So the transition procedures will be 门的高度层转换程序。 needed for aircraft enter or exit China airspace

（A）中国米制 RVSM 飞行高度层系统与 (A) China Metric RVSM FLAS vs ICAO RVSM FLAS ICAO 英制 RVSM 飞行高度层系统的转换 ICAO RVSM FLAS is implemented in Fukuoka, Hong ICAO 英制 RVSM 飞行高度层系统已经在福 Kong, Incheon FIRs, etc. The transition procedures are 冈、香港和仁川等飞行情报区实施使用。因此， relatively easier and smother than the situation before 相对于实施缩小垂直间隔之前的情况，管制移交 Chinese RVSM implementation. All China RVSM Flight 程序更简单和平顺。中国缩小垂直间隔飞行高度 level in feet is 100 feet above the ICAO RVSM Flight level. 层转换为英尺后的英制高度，比对应的 ICAO 英制 RVSM 飞行高度层系统高 100 英尺。

（B）中国米制 RVSM 飞行高度层系统与常规 (B) China Metric RVSM FLAS vs Metric CVSM FLAS 垂直间隔米制飞行高度层系统的转换 Before RVSM, China need conduct flight level transition 在实施缩小垂直间隔之前，中国与俄罗斯、蒙 with Russia, Mongolia, Kazakhstan and DPRK, etc. Metric 古、哈萨克斯坦和朝鲜等使用常规垂直间隔米制 CVSM FLAS. After China RVSM, China still need conduct 高度层的国家之间需要进行飞行高度层的转换。 flight level transition with Russia, Mongolia and DPRK, etc. 中国实施缩小垂直间隔之后，除非俄罗斯、蒙古 Metric CVSM FLAS unless these countries also implement 和朝鲜等国在其空域内实施缩小垂直间隔，否则 RVSM within their airspace. 中国仍然需要与这些国家之间进行飞行高度层的转换。

2. 签派员和飞行员应当掌握航空器沿航线进/ 2. Dispatchers and pilots shall identify the specific transition 出中国国境时的高度层转换程序和规定的转换区 area and transition procedure for the route into/out of China. 域，特别是进入中国境内 RVSM 空域的航空器应 Special attention shall be given to the moment when the 当何时开始使用高度层公英制对照表。 China meter to feet converse table shall be used for aircraft entering China RVSM airspace: -当进入中国境内空域时，主高度表为英制的 -When entering China Airspace, aircraft with primary 航空器（波音、空客等机型）应当使用英制高度 FEET altimeters (Airbus, Boeing, etc.) shall fly using the feet 表，从管制员首次指令该航空器到一个中国使用 altimeter and use the China RVSM conversion table from the 的米制飞行高度层起，开始使用中国民航缩小垂 initial clearance to a metric FL in the China FLAS. 直间隔公英制高度转换表。

E - 1 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix E to the Report

-当进入中国境内空域时，主高度表为米制的 -When entering China Airspace, aircraft with primary 航空器（Il-96, Il-62, Tu-214, Tu-154 等机型）应当转 METER altimeters (Il-96, Il-62, Tu-214, Tu-154, etc.) shall 换并使用英制高度表，从管制员首次指令该航空 switch and fly using the feet altimeter and use the China 器到一个中国使用的米制飞行高度层起，或者从 RVSM conversion table from the initial clearance to a metric 该航空器进入中国境内空域开始，使用中国民航 FL in the China FLAS; or from the time of entering China 缩小垂直间隔公英制高度转换表。 airspace.

请参考下面的图例。在转换程序图示中，米制 Please refer to the legend of the map (Only for example). 高度层后面带括号的英制高度层，例如“12500m In transition procedures map, a metric FL followed by a （FL411）”，表示当管制员发布一个中国使用的米 bracket such as “12500m (FL411)” means when ATC assign 制高度层时，驾驶员应当使用中国民航缩小垂直 a China metric FL, Pilot shall use the China RVSM 间隔公英制对照表来飞对应的英尺高度。 conversion table to fly in corresponding in FEET.

E - 2 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix E to the Report

Scenario One: China RVSM FLAS vs ICAO RVSM FLAS

Aircraft Entering China Airspace from Airspace Applying ICAO RVSM FLAS (in feet) FIR in China FIR outside of China Metric RVSM FLAS Boundary of FIR ICAO RVSM FLAS rpose ple Pu 12200m(FL401) Exam FL401 nly for 11600m(FL381) O FL380

11000m(FL361) FL360

10400m(FL341) FL340

9800m(FL321) FL320

9200m(FL301) FL300

9200m(FL301) means when ATC assign the 9200m, the pilot shall use the China RVSM conversion table to fly 30100 feet.

Indicates the position where the pilot is expected to receive the FL instruction from ATC for FLAS transition and then begin to use China RVSM conversion table to fly in FEET. Flight level transition shall be conducted in accordance with ATC instruction. In case ATC did not issue the instruction as expected, pilots are to clarify with ATC.

E - 3 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix E to the Report Scenario Two: China RVSM FLAS vs Metric CVSM FLAS

Aircraft Entering China Airspace from Airspace Applying Metric CVSM (Russia, etc)

FIR outside of China FIR in China Metric CVSM FLAS Boundary of FIR Metric RVSM FLAS m (FL411) m (FL401) m m (FL391) m e m (FL371) m pos le Pur xamp for E m Only m (FL341) m m (FL321) m

m m (FL291)

8900m(FL291) means when ATC assign the 8900m, the pilot shall use the China RVSM conversion table to fly 29100 feet.

3. 关于中国实施缩小垂直间隔后与周边国 3. For information concerning China RVSM Transition 家/情报区管制移交程序的有关信息，请参阅后面 Procedures with adjacent countries/FIRs, please refer to 的高度层转换程序。 following Flight level transition procedures.

E - 4 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix E to the Report

E - 5

E - 5 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix E to the Report

Shenyang FIR China and D.P.R.Korea Point 1 (on page E-5)

Transition procedure between Dalian ACC and Pyongyang ACC (TOMUK)

9800m(FL321) means when ATC assign the 9800m, the pilot shall use the China RVSM conversion table to fly 32100 feet.

E - 6 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix E to the Report

China and D.P.R.Korea Point 2 (on page E-5)

Transition procedure between Shenyang ACC and Pyongyang ACC (GOLOT)

9200m(FL301) means when ATC assign the 9200m, the pilot shall use the China RVSM conversion table to fly 30100 feet.

Note: 1. 600m (or more than )vertical separation should be used with opposite flight in protective area. 2. The three group levels of (9800m matching 10100m),(11100m matching 11000m) and (9100m matching 9200m)cannot be used at the same time.

E - 7 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix E to the Report

China and Russia Point 3 (on page E-5)

Transition procedure between Shenyang ACC and Vladivostok ACC (BISUN)

11600m(FL381) means when ATC assign the 11600m, the pilot shall use the China RVSM conversion table to fly 38100 feet.

E - 8 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix E to the Report

China and Russia Point 4 (on page E-5)

Transition procedure between Harbin ACC and Khabarovsk ACC (ARGUK)

9200m(FL301) means when ATC assign the 9200m, the pilot shall use the China RVSM conversion table to fly 30100 feet.

E - 9 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix E to the Report

China and Russia Point 5 (on page E-5)

Transition procedure between Harbin ACC and Blagoveshchensk ACC (SIMLI)

9200m(FL301) means when ATC assign the 9200m, the pilot shall use the China RVSM conversion table to fly 30100 feet.

E - 10 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix E to the Report

China and Russia Point 6 (on page E-5)

Transition procedure between Hailar ACC and Chita ACC (TELOK)

8900m(FL291) means when ATC assign the 8900m, the pilot shall use the China RVSM conversion table to fly 29100 feet.

E - 11 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix E to the Report

Beijing FIR China and Mongolia Point 7 (on page E-5)

Transition procedure between Beijing ACC and Ulaanbaatar ACC (POLOH)

8900m(FL291) means when ATC assign the 8900m, the pilot shall use the China RVSM conversion table to fly 29100 feet.

Note: Ulaanbaatar ACC shall accept Flights coming from Beijing FIR 8400m(FL276). Hohhot ACC shall executed the control below 8400(FL276) inclusive.

E - 12 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix E to the Report

China and Mongolia Point 8 (on page E-5)

Transition procedure between Beijing ACC and Ulaanbaatar ACC (INTIK)

8900m(FL291) means when ATC assign the 8900m, the pilot shall use the China RVSM conversion table to fly 29100 feet.

Note: Ulaanbaatar ACC shall accept Flights coming from Beijing FIR 8400m(FL276). Hohhot ACC shall executed the control below 8400(FL276) inclusive.

E - 13 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix E to the Report

Lanzhou FIR China and Mongolia Point 9 (on page E-5)

Transition procedure between Lanzhou ACC and Ulaanbaatar ACC (MORIT)

10100m(FL331) means when ATC assign the 10100m, the pilot shall use the China RVSM conversion table to fly 33100 feet.

E - 14 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix E to the Report

Xinjiang FIR China and Mongolia Point 10 (on page E-5)

Transition procedure between Urumqi ACC and Ulaanbaatar ACC (TEBUS)

9200m(FL301) means when ATC assign the 9200m, the pilot shall use the China RVSM conversion table to fly 30100 feet.

E - 15 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix E to the Report

China and Russia Point 11 (on page E-5) Transition procedure between Urumqi ACC and Barnaul ACC (GOPTO)

8900m(FL291) means when ATC assign the 8900m, the pilot shall use the China RVSM conversion table to fly 29100 feet.

E - 16 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix E to the Report

China and Kazakhstan Point 12 (on page E-5)

Transition procedure between Urumqi ACC and Semipalatinsk ACC (SARIN)

10100m(FL331) means when ATC assign the 10100m, the pilot shall use the China RVSM conversion table to fly 33100 feet.

E - 17 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix E to the Report

China and Kazakhstan Point 13 (on page E-5)

Transition procedure between Urumqi ACC and Almaty ACC (REVKI)

10100m(FL331) means when ATC assign the 10100m, the pilot shall use the China RVSM conversion table to fly 33100 feet.

E - 18 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix E to the Report

China and Kyrgyzstan Point 14 (on page E-5)

Transition procedure between Urumqi ACC and Bishkek ACC (KAMUD)

To be developed

E - 19 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix E to the Report

China and Pakistan Point 15 (on page E-5)

Transition procedure between Urumqi ACC and Lahore ACC (PURPA)

To be developed

E - 20 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix E to the Report

Kunming FIR China and Nepal Point 16 (on page E-5)

Transition procedure between Lhasa ACC and Kathmandu ACC (NONIM)

To be developed.

E - 21 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix E to the Report

China and Myanmar Point 17 (on page E-5)

Transition procedure between Kunming ACC and Yangon ACC (LINSO)

8900m(FL291) means when ATC assign the 8900m, the pilot shall use the China RVSM conversion table to fly 29100 feet.

E - 22 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix E to the Report

China and Laos Point 18 (on page E-5)

Transition procedure between Kunming ACC and Vientiane ACC (SAGAG)

9200m(FL301) means when ATC assign the 9200m, the pilot shall use the China RVSM conversion table to fly 30100 feet.

E - 23 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix E to the Report

China and Vietnam None Point

Transition procedure between Kunming ACC and Ha Noi ACC ( )

To be developed

E - 24 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix E to the Report

Guangzhou FIR China and Vietnam Point 19 (on page E-5)

Transition procedure between Nanning ACC and Ha Noi ACC (TEBAK)

ATS route: R474

Nanning ACC to Ha Noi ACC: FL200, FL220, FL240, FL260, FL280, FL300, FL320, FL360, FL380, FL400.

Ha Noi ACC to Nanning ACC: FL230, FL250, FL270, FL290, FL310, FL330, FL350, FL370, FL390, FL410.

Sanya FIR

China and Vietnam Point 20 (on page E-5)

Transition procedure between Sanya ACC and Ha Noi ACC (ASSAD)

Route structure as follow:

Within Sanya FIR: ATS route A202: ASSAD – SAMAS Within Ha Noi FIR: ATS route A202: VILAO – ASSAD; ATS route A206: NALAO – ASSAD.

Ha Noi FIR to Sanya FIR–FL290, FL330, FL370, FL 390 and FL410 Sanya FIR to Ha Noi FIR–FL280, FL300, FL340, FL380 and FL400

E - 25 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix E to the Report

Shanghai FIR

China and Japan Point 21 (on page E-5)

Transition procedure between Shanghai ACC and Fukuoka ACC (SADLI)

Assignment of flight levels for the corridor on ATS route A593 shall be: a. Aircrafts from Shanghai ACC to Fukuoka ACC assigned FL250、FL290、FL310 and FL390 without coordination with and approval of Incheon ACC. b. Aircrafts from Fukuoka ACC to Shanghai ACC assigned FL240、FL280、FL300 and FL400 without coordination with and approval of Incheon ACC.

Note: the applicable FLs for each ACC refer to Attachment1. The name of facility Applicable Routes Applicable Flight Levels without coordination and approval of the affected ACCs. Fukuoka ACC Fukue – AKARA corridor, A593 FL240, FL280, FL300, FL400 Shanghai ACC Fukue – AKARA corridor, A593 FL250, FL290, FL310, FL390

E - 26 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix E to the Report

China and Republic of Korea Point 22 (on page E-5)

Transition procedure between Qingdao ACC and Incheon ACC (AGAVO)

From Incheon to Qingdao

9200m(FL301) means when ATC assign the 9200m, the pilot shall use the China RVSM conversion table to fly 30100 feet.

E - 27 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix E to the Report

From Qingdao to Incheon

E - 28 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix F to the Report

Proposal for Amendment of Regional Supplementary Procedures - Doc 7030/4 (Serial No. APAC-S 07/10 - MID/ASIA RAC/1)

a) Regional Supplementary Procedures: MID/ASIA

b) Proposing State(s): China

c) Proposed Amendment: Editorial note: Amendments are arranged to show deleted text using strikeout (text to be deleted), and added text with grey shading (text to be inserted).

On page MID/ASIA/RAC-11 dated 2/6/06

Add “Beijing”, “Guangzhou”, “Kunming”, “Lanzhou”, “Sanya”, “Shanghai”, “Shenyang”, “Urumqi” and “Wuhan” to Paragraph 7.5.1.1.

7.5.1.1 The reduced vertical separation minimum (RVSM) shall be applied for flights within the Amman, Auckland Oceanic, Bahrain, Bali, Bangkok, Beijing, Beirut, Brisbane, Cairo, Chennai, Colombo, Damascus, Delhi, Dhaka, Emirates, Fukuoka, Guangzhou, Hanoi, Ho Chi Minh, Hong Kong, Honiara, Incheon, Jakarta, Jeddah, Karachi, Kathmandu, Kolkata, Kota Kinabalu, Kuala Lumpur, Kunming, Kuwait, Lahore, Lanzhou, Male, Manila, Melbourne, Mumbai, Muscat, Nauru, New Zealand, Phnom Penh, Port Moresby, Sana’a, Sanya, Shanghai, Shenyang, Singapore, Taibei, Teheran, Ujung Pandang, Urumqi, Vientiane, Wuhan and Yangon FIRs.

d) Proposer’s Reason for Amendment: RVSM will be implemented in the Beijing, Guangzhou, Kunming, Lanzhou, Shanghai, Shenyang, Urumiqi and Wuhan FIRs and Sector AR01 of the Sanya FIR (island airspace) on 22 November 2007. Sectors AR02 and AR03 of the Sanya FIR (oceanic airspace) has implemented RVSM along with the South China Sea area.

e) Proposed Implementation Date of the Amendment: 22 November 2007

f) Proposal Afghanistan Cambodia Democratic Circulated to Australia China * People's the following Bahrain (cc: Hong Kong, Republic of States and Bangladesh China) Korea international Bhutan (cc: Macao, Fiji organizations: Brunei Darussalam China) Finland

F – 1 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix F to the Report

France Malaysia Turkmenistan Germany Mongolia United Arab India Myanmar Emirates Indonesia Nepal United Kingdom Iran, Islamic Oman Pakistan United States Republic of Philippines Uzbekistan Israel Republic of Korea Viet Nam Italy Russian Federation IATA Japan Singapore IFALPA Kazakhstan Sri Lanka IFATCA Kyrgyzstan Switzerland Lao People's Tajikistan Democratic Thailand Republic Turkey

* for information

g) Secretariat comments: 1. China plans to implement RVSM on 22 November 2007 in their whole airspace. The introduction of RVSM in Chinese FIRs will serve to increase the availability of fuel and time efficient altitude levels to users, reduce the complexity of the air traffic management task (e.g., enhance the capability to accommodate traffic on intersecting tracks) and enhance airspace capacity.

2. In the Sanya FIR, RVSM has been implemented in the oceanic airspace since 21 February 2002. At the time of the implementation, the Sanya FIR had not been established and the airspace had an Area of Responsibility (AOR) status. The Sanya FIR was established in May 2006 (APAC 05/16-ATS), and the Secretariat has taken this opportunity to include the amendment to paragraph 7.5.1.1.

− End −

F – 2 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix G to the Report

中国民航实施缩小垂直间隔安全评估报告

AIRSPACE SAFETY ASSESSMENT FOR THE RVSM IMPLEMENTATION IN SOVEREIGN CHINESE AIRSPACE

提交给：

Submitted to:

国际民航组织亚太地区办公室

ICAO Asia/Pacific Regional Office 国际民航组织亚太地区实施缩小垂直间隔工作组

ICAO Asia/Pacific RVSM Implementation Task Force

民航总局空中交通管理局

Air Traffic Management Bureau (ATMB)

General Administration of Civil Aviation of China (CAAC)

2007 年 8 月

August 2007

RVSM/TF/32 Appendix G to the Report

PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF SOVEREIGN CHINESE AIRSPACE

摘要...... 3 1. 介绍...... 5 2. 背景...... 5

2.1 实施 RVSM 的航行情报区 ...... 6 2.2 评估所用数据的采集...... 6 3. 空域运行情况分析 ...... 7

3.1 交通流样本...... 7 3.2 收集的交通流数据...... 7 3.3 航班运行统计...... 8 3.4 交通流特征...... 14 3.5 航空公司及航空器特征...... 15 3.6 飞行高度层使用情况...... 16 4. RVSM 航空器准备情况评估...... 16 5. 大高度偏差事件 ...... 18 6. 风险评估及安全监督 ...... 26 6.1 碰撞风险模型参数的计算...... 26 6.2 中国实施 RVSM 的安全监督...... 28 6.3 补充说明...... 29 参考文献 ...... 32 附录 A...... 33 附录 B...... 35 附录 C...... 37

1 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix G to the Report

PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF SOVEREIGN CHINESE AIRSPACE

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...... 3 1. INTRODUCTION ...... 5 2. BACKGROUND ...... 5

2.1 FIRS IMPLEMENTING RVSM ...... 6 2.2 DATA INQUIRY FOR SOVEREIGN CHINESE AIRSPACE RVSM READINESS AND SAFETY ASSESSMENTS ...... 6 3. KNOW YOUR AIRSPACE ANALYSES...... 7

3.1 TRAFFIC SAMPLING ...... 7 3.2 RECEIVED TRAFFIC DATA...... 7 3.3 FLIGHT OPERATION STATISTICS...... 8 3.4 TRAFFIC FLOW CHARACTERISTICS ...... 14 3.5 OPERATOR AND AIRCRAFT PROFILES ...... 15 3.6 FLIGHT LEVEL UTILIZATION ...... 16 4. RVSM READINESS ASSESSMENT ...... 16 5. LARGE HEIGHT DEVIATION OCCURRENCES...... 18 6. RISK ASSESSMENT AND SAFETY OVERSIGHT ...... 26

6.1 ESTIMATE OF THE CRM PARAMETERS ...... 26 6.2 SAFETY OVERSIGHT FOR THE RVSM IMPLEMENTATION IN SOVEREIGN CHINESE AIRSPACE ...... 28 6.3 ADDITIONAL OBSERVATIONS...... 29 REFERENCES ...... 32 APPENDIX A ...... 33 APPENDIX B...... 35 APPENDIX C ...... 37

2 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix G to the Report

PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF SOVEREIGN CHINESE AIRSPACE

摘要

根据国际民航组织实施缩小垂直间隔要求，国家在实施缩小垂直间隔前以及实施缩小垂直间隔后，应当进行安全评估，以确保该国家实施缩小垂直间隔符合国际民航组织规定的安全标准。

此报告对中国民航实施缩小垂直间隔前的空域安全进行了安全评估。

此报告提供了航空器准备情况初次评估和安全风险初次评估的信息汇总，为决定是否按照计划于 2007 年 11 月 21 日（UTC 时间）在中国实施 RVSM 提供支持。为了使安全评估更加完备，此报告根据交通流样本数据对交通流进行了全面的分析。在此之上，给出了航班运行统计，交通流特征，航空公司及航空器特征，以及飞行高度层使用情况。

如报告所示，基于所采集的交通流样本数据，在中国准备实施 RVSM 的空域内运行的所有航班中，大于 88%的航班是由获得了 RVSM 适航许可的航空器承担的，84%的航班是由获得了 RVSM 运行许可的航空公司和航空器承担的。此外，在所采集的交通流样本数据中，大约 8.5%的未获得许可的航班正在进行 RVSM 运行许可的审批；该审批预计在 2007 年 10 月（即：中国计划实施 RVSM 的日期）之前即可完成。因此，预计到 2007 年 11 月之前中国地区通过 RVSM 批准的航空器运行总量将达到 92.5%左右。

在对中国即将实施 RVSM 的空域进行风险计算方面，报告对该空域内从 2006 年 1 月至今发生的大高度偏差事件进行了调查。在收集到的交通流样本数据和大高度偏差数据的基础上，报告中给出了技术风险和总风险的计算结果。在中国境内实施 RVSM 的技术风险在失去 300 米（1000 英尺）垂直间隔条件下每飞行小时为 1.162 x 10-11 次事故率，由技术风险和运行风险相加而构成总风险为每飞行小时 1.794 x 10-9 次事故率，它们分别小于国际民航组织规定的每飞行小时 2.5× 10-9 和 5.0×10-9 次事故率，满足目标安全水平。应当注意的是，从计算结果来看，我国实施 RVSM 的总风险中主要构成是运行风险，因此要十分注意管制员和飞行员操纵失误而导致的运行风险。

另外，此报告还关注了在 ATS 航路 A461 上航路点 AKOMA 和 OBLIK 之间存在的高交通密度的情况，以及在与中国相邻的 FIR 出现的不同程度的高比例忘记移交和交错的现象。在本文的最后对相应的预防措施给出了分析和建议，要求管制单位高度重视与周边国家的管制协调与移交。

中国民航将在实施缩小垂直间隔后继续对中国空域进行安全评估。

3 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix G to the Report

PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF SOVEREIGN CHINESE AIRSPACE

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY According to ICAO requirements of RVSM implementation, the countries which implement RVSM should commit safety assessment before and after RVSM implementation in order to assure that the process of RVSM implementation will meet the safety standards of ICAO.

This report provides the summary of the preliminary readiness and safety assessments, supporting the Go/No-Go decision for the planned RVSM implementation in sovereign Chinese airspace on November 21st, 2007(UTC time). For the completion of the safety assessment, this report presents a comprehensive traffic analysis of the collected traffic sample data (TSD). In this regard, flight operation statistics, traffic flow characteristics, operator and aircraft profiles, and flight level utilization are given.

The report demonstrates that, based on the collected TSD, more than 88% of the aircraft operations in the sovereign Chinese airspace where RVSM is to be implemented have been conducted by RVSM airworthiness approved aircraft and 84% by State approved operators and aircraft. Nonetheless, approximately 8.5% of aircraft operations in the collected TSD are in the process of obtaining the State RVSM approval; the process is expected to be completed in October 2007, before the planned RVSM implementation date. Therefore, it is expected that approximately 92.5% of aircraft operations will be RVSM State approved by November 2007.

In regard to the risk estimation for sovereign Chinese airspace RVSM implementation, the large height deviation (LHD) occurrences in sovereign Chinese airspace since January 2006 were examined. Based on the collected TSD and LHD reports, both technical and total risks were given. The technical risk of collision as a consequence of a loss of vertical separation of 300 m (1000ft) in sovereign Chinese airspace is 1.162 x 10-11 fatal accidents per aircraft flight hour. The total loss of vertical separation is 1.794 x 10-9 fatal accidents per aircraft flight hour. Both technical and total risks were found to satisfy the agreed TLS value of no more than 2.5×10-9 and 5.0×10-9 fatal accidents per flight hour due to the loss of a correctly established vertical separation standard of 300m (1,000ft) and to all causes, respectively. From the result of risk estimate, it is noted that the major contribution of the total risk in sovereign Chinese airspace is operational risk. Therefore, the operational errors as a result of incorrect action by ATC or aircraft crew should deserve more attention

In addition, the report notes the high traffic density on the section between the fixes AKOMA and OBLIK of ATS route A461. And the disproportionately high negative transfers or incorrect transfers of control responsibilities from several Flight Information Regions (FIRs) which are adjacent to China are also addressed. Therefore, the corresponding preventive actions are analyzed and recommended in the final part of the report.

4 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix G to the Report

PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF SOVEREIGN CHINESE AIRSPACE

1. INTRODUCTION

This report provides the summary of preliminary readiness and safety assessment for the RVSM implementation in the sovereign Chinese airspace. The content of the report includes:

4 Background, 4 Summary of Know Your Airspace (KYA) analyses, 4 Result of RVSM readiness assessment, 4 Summary of Large Height Deviation (LHD) occurrences, and 4 Results of RVSM risk assessment

2. BACKGROUND

China plans to implement RVSM between 8,900 meters (29,100 feet) and 12,500 meters (41,100 feet), inclusive, in sovereign airspace at 1600 UTC, November 21st, 2007. According to ICAO Manual on the implementation of a 300 m (1,000 ft) Vertical Separation Minimum Between FL290 and FL410 Inclusive, ICAO Doc 9574, a preliminary safety assessment of airspace where RVSM is to be implemented is required. The Air Traffic Management Bureau (ATMB) of the General Administration of Civil Aviation of China (CAAC) has assumed this responsibility since 2006, and a group of technical specialists was formed to study the RVSM safety assessment methodology and procedures.

China plans to establish a Regional Monitoring Agency (RMA) of CAAC which will be responsible for sovereign Chinese airspace. ATMB has established close coordination with the existing RMAs, the Pacific Approval Registration and Monitoring Organization (PARMO) and the Monitoring Agency for Asia Region (MAAR). The experts from PARMO and MAAR have respectively provided several times of trainings for the technical group of ATMB, regarding to RMA operations, aircraft height-keeping performance monitoring and safety assessment. With the help of the PARMO and the MAAR, the technical group of ATMB has been capable of conducting safety assessment for the RVSM airspace.

Based on the TSD and LHD data collected from sovereign Chinese airspace, ATMB technical group has endeavored to assess the readiness and safety of RVSM implementation in China, utilizing the internationally accepted collision risk methodology. The final readiness and safety assessments of RVSM implementation in sovereign Chinese airspace have been reviewed constructively and checked independently by the PARMO. This report which presents the outcome of the assessments is expected to support the Go/No-Go decision for the Chinese RVSM implementation.

5 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix G to the Report

PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF SOVEREIGN CHINESE AIRSPACE

2.1 FIRs Implementing RVSM

The geographical area included in the readiness and safety assessment is the sovereign Chinese airspace. The FIRs and Area Control Centers (ACCs) included in this airspace are summarized in Table 1. FIR ACC Beijing Beijing Taiyuan Hohhot Shanghai Qingdao Jinan Shanghai Hefei Nanchang Xiamen Guangzhou Guilin Guangzhou Zhanjiang Nanning Changsha Wuhan Wuhan Zhengzhou Shenyang Dalian Shenyang Harbin Hailar Lanzhou Lanzhou Xian Urumqi Urumqi Kunming Chengdu Kunming Lhasa Guiyang Sanya(Island) Sanya

Table 1: FIRs and ACCs in Sovereign Chinese Airspace Implementing RVSM

2.2 Data Inquiry for Sovereign Chinese Airspace RVSM Readiness and Safety Assessments

6 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix G to the Report

PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF SOVEREIGN CHINESE AIRSPACE

The readiness and safety assessments for the RVSM implementation in sovereign Chinese airspace are conducted based on:

4 1-month traffic sample data (TSD) collected in June,2007, 4 State RVSM approval records of operators and aircraft using RVSM airspace, 4 Monthly Large Height Deviation (LHD) reports collected in June and July, 2007 and 4 LHD related Incident reports from January, 2006 to May, 2007.

Both TSD and LHD reports are significant pieces of information for estimating risks from technical and operational errors, which would facilitate the completion of the safety assessment for the sovereign Chinese airspace where RVSM is to be implemented.

3. KNOW YOUR AIRSPACE ANALYSES

3.1 Traffic Sampling

The template used for Traffic Data Sampling is provided in Appendix A. It includes the information requested for an individual traffic movement, or flight.

3.2 Received Traffic Data

Table 2 contains a summary of the traffic data collected from 1 to 30 June 2007 for use in the analysis.

FIR Name FIR Data Collecting Method Status Remarks Code Collected in ACCs Beijing Automatic system Received Data completed Taiyuan - - Included in Beijing ZBPE Beijing ACC Hohhot - - Included in Beijing ACC Shanghai ZSHA Shanghai Automatic system Received Data completed Qingdao Automatic system Received Data completed Jinan Automatic system Received Data completed Xiamen Manual Received Data completed Nanchang - - Included in Shanghai ACC

7 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix G to the Report

PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF SOVEREIGN CHINESE AIRSPACE

Hefei - - Included in Shanghai ACC Guangzhou Automatic system Received Data completed Guilin Automatic system Received Data completed Zhanjiang Automatic system Received Data completed Guangzhou ZGZU Nanning Automatic system Received Data completed Changsha - - Included in Guangzhou ACC Wuhan Automatic system Received Data completed Wuhan ZHWH Zhengzhou Automatic system Received Data completed Shenyang Manual Received Data completed Dalian Manual Received Data completed Shenyang ZYSH Harbin Manual Received Data completed Hailar Manual Received Data completed Lanzhou Manual Received Data completed Lanzhou ZLHW Xian Automatic system Received Data completed Urumqi ZWUQ Urumqi Manual Received Data completed Kunming - - Included in Chengdu ACC Chengdu Automatic system Received Data completed Kunming ZPKM Lhasa Manual Received Data completed Guiyang - - Included in Chengdu ACC Sanya(Island) ZJSA Sanya Automatic system Received Data completed

Table 2: Summary of Traffic Data of June 2007 in Sovereign Chinese Airspace

The results of the KYA analysis of the sovereign Chinese airspace collected TSD received by ATMB of CAAC are presented in the following contents:

4 Flight operation statistics 4 Traffic flow characteristics 4 Operator and aircraft profiles, and 4 Flight level utilization.

3.3 Flight Operation Statistics

The provisional flight operational statistic in the planned RVSM sovereign airspace in China includes: Number of flights by ten days of every FIR (Table 3) Number of flights by FIRs per day (Figure 1.1 to Figure 1.9 for nine FIRs in China)

8 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix G to the Report

PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF SOVEREIGN CHINESE AIRSPACE

Number of flights in sovereign Chinese airspace (Figure 1.10)

Number of Flights FIR Total Number 06/01-06/10 06/11-06/20 06/21-06/30 Beijing 11963 11890 12018 35871 Guangzhou 12882 11562 15350 39794 Kunming 10320 10532 10507 31359 Lanzhou 6790 7104 6989 20883 Sanya(Island) 1331 1277 1435 4043 Shanghai 19430 18032 18462 55924 Shenyang 4535 4468 4729 13732 Urumqi 2019 2010 2125 6154 Wuhan 7633 8648 8989 25270

Table 3: Number of Flights in Nine FIRs Airspace of China from the Collected TSD

After the data merging of nine FIRs, the total number of Flights in China planed RVSM airspace is 128,732 flights in June 2007, and 4,291 flights per day.

Daily Flights in Beijing RVSM Airspace

1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 1 3 5 7 9 11131517192123252729

Figure 1.1: Number of Flights per Day in Beijing FIR

9 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix G to the Report

PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF SOVEREIGN CHINESE AIRSPACE

Daily Flights in Guangzhou RVSM Airspace

1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29

Figure 1.2: Number of Flights per Day in Guangzhou FIR Note: The relatively small numbers of flights on June 2nd, 3rd, 14th, 15th, 16th, 17th, and 27th are due to the malfunction of statistics software used to collect TSD data automatically.

Daily Flights in Kunming RVSM Airspace

1200

1000

800

600

400

200

0 1 3 5 7 9 11131517192123252729

Figure 1.3: Number of Flights per Day in Kunming FIR

10 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix G to the Report

PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF SOVEREIGN CHINESE AIRSPACE

Da i l y Fl i ght s i n Lanzhou RVSM Ai r s pace

800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 1357 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 Figure 1.4: Number of Flights per Day in Lanzhou FIR

Daily Flights in Sanya RVSM Airspace

180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 F igure 1.5: Number of Flights per Day in Sanya FIR

11 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix G to the Report

PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF SOVEREIGN CHINESE AIRSPACE

Daily Flights in Shanghai RVSM Airspace

2500

2000

1500

1000

500

0 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29

Figure 1.6: Number of Flights per Day in Shanghai FIR Note: The relatively small numbers of flights on June 1st, 15th and 16th are due to the malfunction of statistics software used to collect TSD data automatically.

Daily Flights in Shenyang RVSM Airspace

600

500

400

300

200

100

0 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29

Figure 1.7: Number of Flights per Day in Shenyang FIR

12 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix G to the Report

PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF SOVEREIGN CHINESE AIRSPACE

Daily Flights in Urumqi RVSM Airspace

250

200

150

100

0 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29

Figure 1.8: Number of Flights per Day in Urumqi FIR

Daily Flights in Wuhan RVSM Airspace

1200

1000

800

600

400

200

0 1 3 5 7 9 11131517192123252729

Figure 1.9: Number of Flights per Day in Wuhan FIR Note: The relatively small numbers of flights on June 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 15th, and 26th are due to are due to the severe storms in this region.

13 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix G to the Report

PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF SOVEREIGN CHINESE AIRSPACE

Daily Flights in Sovereign Chinese Airspace

5000 4500 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 1 3 5 7 9 11131517192123252729

Figure 1.10: Number of Flights per Day in Sovereign Chinese Airspace

3.4 Traffic Flow Characteristics

The analyzed characteristics of traffic flow in the planned RVSM sovereign airspace in China include:

Top-15 city pairs (Figure 2)

Top 15 City Pairs

2.00% 1.80% 1.60% 1.40% 1.20% 1.00% 0.80% 0.60% 0.40% 0.20% 0.00% VHHH-ZSPD ZBAA-ZSSS ZBAA-ZUUU ZGGG-ZSSS ZGGG-ZBAA ZBAA-ZLXY ZGSZ-ZBAA ZUUU-ZSPD VHHH-VTBS ZBAA-VHHH ZBAA-ZSHC ZBAA-ZSPD ZGSZ-ZUUU ZYHB-ZBAA ZPPP-ZBAA

Figure 2: Top-15 City Pairs (the Y-Axis means the Percent of Total Traffics)

14 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix G to the Report

PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF SOVEREIGN CHINESE AIRSPACE

3.5 Operator and Aircraft Profiles

The information regarding the airspace users for the planned RVSM sovereign airspace in China includes: Top-15 operators (Figure 3) Top-15 aircraft types (Figure 4)

Top 15 Operators

25%

20%

15%

10%

0% CSN CES CCA CHH CSZ CXA CSC CSH HDA KAL CDG CPA AAR CQH JAL

Figure 3: Top-15 Active Operators in the Planned RVSM Airspace of China

Top 15 Aircraft Types

20% 18% 16% 14% 12% 10% 8% 6% 4% 2% 0% B737 A320 A319 B733 B738 B752 A321 B744 B763 A333 B772 B747 MD90 A340 A332

Figure 4: Top-15 Aircraft Types Operated in the Planned RVSM Airspace of China

15 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix G to the Report

PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF SOVEREIGN CHINESE AIRSPACE

It is important to note that the top-15 operators and aircraft types represent more than 80 percent and approximately 85 percent of the operations observed in the TSD.

3.6 Flight Level Utilization

Figure 5 presents the utilization of flight levels (FL) in the current non-RVSM airspace of China. Note that, for the RVSM implementation in China airspace, the Single Alternate Flight Level Orientation Scheme (FLOS) will be applied full band between 8,900 and 12,500 meters.

Flight Level Utilization

25%

20%

15%

10%

0% 8400M 9000M 9600M 10200M 10800M 11400M 12000M 12600M

Figure 5: Flight Level Utilization in the Planned RVSM Airspace of China

4. RVSM READINESS ASSESSMENT

This section provides the results of the readiness assessment using the traffic sample data from 1st to 30th June 2007 within the airspace of China. The criterion China adopted in this readiness assessment as a prerequisite for the RVSM implementations is that 90 percent of operations between 8,900 and 12,500 meters (inclusive) in the collected traffic sample would be conducted by operators and aircraft with RVSM approval after the implementation of RVSM.

Table 4 shows that more than 88 percent of the operations have been conducted by RVSM Airworthiness Approved aircraft in the airspace of China planned for RVSM implementation, and 84 percent by RVSM operationally approved operators and aircraft. The collected TSD were compared to the latest data from the CAAC and other RMAs around the world of: AFI RMA, Atlantic(NATCMA)

16 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix G to the Report

PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF SOVEREIGN CHINESE AIRSPACE

CAAC, Canada, Caribbean and South American Monitoring Agency (CARSAMMA), Eurocontrol, France, Monitoring Agency for Asia Region (MAAR), Middle East Monitoring Agency (MID RMA), Pacific Approval and Registry Monitoring Organization (PARMO), and US MASPS Note that the RVSM approval records provided by China were last updated on Aug 3rd 2007. The list of RVSM approval files provided by PARMO can be founded in the Appendix B.

Number of Operations Percent Of Total Approval Category in Traffic Sample Sample RVSM Airworthiness 100201 88.218% Approved Only RVSM Airworthiness 13382 11.782% Unapproved RVSM Operational-approved 95426 84.0143% Non RVSM 18157 15.987% Operational-approved Total 113583 100% Table 4: Summary of the Readiness of Operators and Aircraft Types Operating in the airspace of China where RVSM is to be implemented (Note: There is a little difference between the total number of operations in traffic sample in Table 4 and the one of TSD in section 3.3, since in Readiness Assessment we deleted the records which includes only Flight Level 8400 meters from the TSD.)

The detailed information regarding the RVSM operationally approved status of operations observed in the collected traffic sample is provided in the Appendix B.

Based on the results of the readiness assessment, it was found that a number of the aircraft currently operating in the airspace of China are in the process of obtaining the RVSM Operational-approval. Table 5 lists the top 15 Non RVSM operationally approved Chinese operator and aircraft types, as well as the number of traffic operations and its proportion (in percent) in the collected traffic sample data. It has been verified independently that all of operators listed in table 5 are seeking RVSM approval for all of their aircraft, and the CAAC has informed the ATMB that the process should be finished before Nov, 2007.

17 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix G to the Report

PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF SOVEREIGN CHINESE AIRSPACE

Total Percent of Total Operator AC Operations Operator Operations ICAO Code Type Observed in in Sample Sample A320 1879 1.654% A319 1303 1.123% Sichuan Airlines CSC A321 798 0.703% E145 378 0.333% Hainan Airlines CHH A319 975 0.858% Spring Airlines CQH A320 958 0.843% B733 892 0.785% Senzhen Airlines CSZ B739 342 0.301% Lucky Air LKE B737 454 0.400% DEER JET DER B733 349 0.307% China Southern Airline CSN E145 364 0.283% China Eastern Airlines CES CRJ2 256 0.225% United Eagle Airlines UEA A319 250 0.220% Eaststar Airlines DXH A319 249 0.219% China United Airlines CUA B737 248 0.218% Table 5: List of TOP 15 Relatively High Proportions of Non-RVSM Approved Chinese Aircraft Operating in the RVSM airspace of China

The approval of these aircraft would increase the percentage of RVSM approval aircraft in the collected traffic sample by approximately 8.47 percents. Based on the given RVSM approval listed aircraft, the percentage of operations that would be conducted by operators and aircraft in the planned RVSM airspace would increase to 92.5 percent. Meanwhile, the process of applying RVSM approval of Non-RVSM Approved aircraft is ongoing, so the final percentages of proportion will be higher than the values given in this report.

5. LARGE HEIGHT DEVIATION OCCURRENCES

This section provides the summary of the large height deviation (LHD) occurrences associated with the RVSM implementation in the sovereign Chinese airspace. The data gathered from the LHD reports are used to estimate risk due to operational errors, which is a very important part in the preliminary safety assessment.

A meeting focused on LHD data collection was convened in May in Haikou, China this year. The attendant supervisors and controllers from all the area control centers around China were

18 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix G to the Report

PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF SOVEREIGN CHINESE AIRSPACE given a detailed introduction and explanation of RVSM, LHD and the way to collect LHD data from their daily work. After the meeting, all these control centers were requested to provide the monthly LHD reports, starting from January 1st 2006 to July 31st, 2007 using the LHD report template distributed during the meeting.

Appendix C demonstrates the LHD report template used to keep the records. While most of the content remained the same as the suggested form recommended in the RMA handbook, some parts were changed for actual requirement. First, the feet-based LHD description was replaced by the metric-based one because of the FL allocation scheme in China. So here we use “90m (300 ft) or more between 8400m and 12500m” instead of “300 ft or more between FL290 and FL410”. Second, two charts were added to the last part of the template to provide further information concerning the descending and climbing phases of LHD occurrences. Both of the paper and electronic copy of this form were distributed to each ACC and all the LHD records were filled in using this template.

The historical records for the information of LHD occurred between January 2006 and May 2007 were dated back. The historical LHD information was mainly from two data resources. One was extracted from the Incident reports resource from ATMB. This resource kept records of those events that lead to airborne conflicts and in-flight incidents, among which some were due to height deviation. This resource is insufficient for LHD because the events that are not serious enough to cause conflicts will not be included. The other data resource was the records from the area control centers which kept records of those events in the past that also had a height deviation equal to or more than 90 meters but not serious enough to cause airborne conflicts.

From 00:00:00 June 1st 2007 UTC time, all the LHD events are directly recorded by the controllers on duty, who wrote down a literal description that provided the required information in the LHD report form when an LHD event occurred. These records were then be submitted to the responsible RVSM data collection group in the ACC for further review.

After receiving all these data, the information was then be reviewed, checked and filled into the LHD report template by supervisors from the RVSM data collection group of each control center and sent to RVSM technical group of ATMB by email at the beginning of every month. The summary of LHD reports submitted by FIRs in the sovereign Chinese airspace is provided in Table 6.

19 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix G to the Report

PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF SOVEREIGN CHINESE AIRSPACE

FIR Name Received Remarks From To Beijing Jan 06 Jul 07 Guangzhou Jan 06 Jul 07 Kunming Jan 06 Jul 07 Lanzhou Jan 06 Jul 07 Sanya Jan 06 Jul 07 Only the LHD events inside Hainan island are included. LHD events occurred in the oceanic area are reported to MAAR Shanghai Jan 06 Jul 07 Shenyang Jan 06 Jul 07 Urumqi Jan 06 Jul 07 Wuhan Jan 06 Jul 07 Table 6: Summary of LHD Reports Received since Jan. 2006 for the Sovereign Chinese Airspace

In this report, the data from all FIRs in China are analyzed. Based on the received LHD reports shown in Table 6, the LHD occurrences in the sovereign Chinese airspace since Jan. 2006 are summarized as follow:

• Number of LHD occurrences and associated LHD duration by month • Number of LHD occurrences by FIR • Number of LHD occurrences by cause

Table 7 and Figure 6&7 summarize the number of LHD occurrences and associated LHD duration and flight levels crossed by month in the sovereign Chinese airspace from January 2006 to July 2007.

Cumulative No. of No. of LHD Cumulative Month- No. of LHD LHD Levels Levels Duration No. of LHD Remarks Year Occurrences Duration Crossed Crossed (minutes) Occurrences (minutes) (Climb) (Descend) 2006 Jan-06 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 Feb-06 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 Mar-06 0 0 0 0.00 0 0 Apr-06 1 0 1 0.00 0 2 May-06 1 0 2 0.00 0 1 Jun-06 0 0 2 0.00 0 0 Jul-06 1+1* 0.55+5* 4 5.55 0 1 See Note* Aug-06 1* 12* 5 17.55 0 0 See Note*

20 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix G to the Report

PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF SOVEREIGN CHINESE AIRSPACE

Sep-06 0 0 5 17.55 0 0 Oct-06 1 2 6 19.55 0 0 Nov-06 1+1* 0+4* 8 23.55 1 0 See Note* Dec-06 0 0 8 23.55 0 0 2007 Jan-07 6* 11.05* 14 34.60 0 0 See Note* Feb-07 1+2* 0+4* 17 38.60 2 0 See Note* Mar-07 2+2* 0+4* 21 42.60 0 1 See Note* Apr-07 0 0 20 42.60 0 0 May-07 1+1* 1+5* 21 48.60 1 0 See Note* Jun-07 4+1* 2.32+1* 26 51.92 0 0 See Note* Jul-07 5 0.40 29 46.77 5 5 Table 7: Summary of LHD Occurrences in the Sovereign Chinese Airspace

Note *: This kind of LHD occurrences were due to the negative transfers or incorrect transfers of control responsibilities from several FIRs which are adjacent to China.

Figure 6.1 summarizes the number of occurrences and duration of LHD events reported in the sovereign Chinese airspace.

Summary of Received LHD Reports in China

14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0

6 7 7 07 -06 -06 -06 -06 -07 -0 l- b-06 n-06 ul-06 p u an u J ec-06 J J Fe Mar-06Apr-0May J Aug-06Se Oct Nov-06D Jan-07Feb Mar-0 Apr-07May Jun-07

No. of LHD Occurences LHD Duration

Figure 6.1: Summary of LHD Occurrences and Duration (by Month) in the Sovereign Chinese Airspace

Figure 6.2 summarizes the number of occurrences and duration of LHD events reported in the sovereign Chinese airspace, without considerations of the disproportionately high LHD events due to the negative transfers or incorrect transfers of control responsibilities from several FIRs which are adjacent to China.

21 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix G to the Report

PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF SOVEREIGN CHINESE AIRSPACE

Summary of Received LHD Reports in China 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0

6 6 6 7 -06 -06 -0 -06 -07 -07 -07 n r-0 n-06 g p-06 ct v-0 b r-0 l p ay-06 Jul-06 u e o an p un-07 Ju Ja Feb-06Mar A M Ju A S O N Dec-06J Fe Mar-07A May-07J

No. of LHD Occurences LHD Duration

Figure 6.2: Summary of LHD Occurrences and Duration (by Month) in the Chinese Sovereign Airspace without the Case of “Note *”

Figure 7 demonstrates the number of flight levels crossed (both climbing and descending included) in the LHD occurrences of China.

Summary of Flight Levels Crossed in the LHD Occurrences of China

12 10 8 6 4 2 0

6 6 06 6 6 6 6 6 6 7 7 07 7 7 -0 -0 - -0 -0 -06 -0 -0 0 -0 - -0 -0 -07 b r r y l t v c- b r-0 r y l a p a un Ju ug-0 c e a p a un Ju Jan-06 Fe M A M J A Sep-06 O No D Jan-07 Fe M A M J

Level Crossed(Climb) Level Crossed(Descend) Total Level Crossed

Figure 7: Summary of Flight Levels Crossed in the LHD Occurrences

Figure 8 demonstrates the occurrences of LHD events in each Flight Information Region in the sovereign Chinese airspace

22 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix G to the Report

PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF SOVEREIGN CHINESE AIRSPACE

Summary of LHD Occurrences by FIR

12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Beijing Guangzhou Kunming Lanzhou Sanya Shanghai Shenyang Urumqi Wuhan

Figure 8: Summary of LHD by FIR in the Sovereign Chinese Airspace

In RASMAG/07, held in June of this year, the proposal for the LHD plain language definition and the revision of LHD categorization were finalized. It was agreed that the LHD plain language definition and the revised LHD categorization should be promoted in Asia Pacific area. Therefore, we adopted these from then on. The analyzing result of the LHD events in this report is based on the latest version of LHD category. Table 8-1 presents the summary of the total number of LHD occurrences by the cause of deviation, using the LHD letter-coding scheme in Table 8-2.

No. of LHD in the Code sovereign Chinese Duration Remarks Airspace A 0 0.00 B 6 2.88 C 4 1.00 D 1 0.00 E 16 48.05 F 0 0.00 G 0 0.00 H 0 0.00 I 2 0.24 J 3 0.00 K 0 0.00 L 0 0.00 M 1 0.15* See Note * SUM 33 52.32 Table 8-1: Cause of LHD Occurrences in the Sovereign Chinese Airspace

23 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix G to the Report

PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF SOVEREIGN CHINESE AIRSPACE

Note *: Category M in this report refers to the display error of ATC automatic system. One LHD Occurrence lasting 0.15 minutes occurred in June 2007 was due to the display error of ATC automatic system which contributes to technical risk.

Deviation Code Cause of Deviation Operational Errors A flight crew failing to climb/descend the aircraft as cleared;

B flight crew climbing/descending without ATC clearance;

C Incorrect operation or interpretation of airborne equipment (e.g. incorrect operation of fully functional FMS, incorrect transcription of ATC clearance or re-clearance, flight plan followed rather than ATC clearance, original clearance followed instead of re-clearances etc); D ATC system loop error; (e.g. ATC issues incorrect clearance or flight crew misunderstands clearance message); E coordination errors in the ATC-to-ATC transfer of control responsibility as a result of human factors issues (e.g. late or non-existent coordination, incorrect time estimate/actual, flight level, ATS route etc not in accordance with agreed parameters); F coordination errors in the ATC-to-ATC transfer of control responsibility as a result of equipment outage or technical issues; Aircraft Contingency Events G aircraft contingency event leading to sudden inability to maintain assigned flight level (e.g. pressurization failure, engine failure); H airborne equipment failure leading to unintentional or undetected change of flight level (e.g. altimetry errors); Deviation due to Meteorological Condition I turbulence or other weather related causes;

Deviation due to TCAS RA J TCAS resolution advisory; flight crew correctly following the resolution advisory; K TCAS resolution advisory; flight crew incorrectly following the resolution advisory Others L An aircraft being provided with RVSM separation is not RVSM approved (e.g. flight plan indicating RSVM approval but aircraft not approved, ATC misinterpretation of flight plan) M Other

Table 8-2: Latest Version of Codes Defining Causes of LHD Occurrences

24 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix G to the Report

PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF SOVEREIGN CHINESE AIRSPACE

Figure 9 summarizes the LHD occurrences by cause based on Table 8-2.

No. of LHD Occurences by Cause

0 ABCDE FGH I J KLM

Figure 9: Summary of LHD Occurrences by Cause Note: The bars with grids illustrate the LHD occurrences contribute to operational risks

In light of the above, the LHD occurrences in the sovereign Chinese airspace are summarized as follow:

• Total of 33 LHD occurred in the sovereign Chinese airspace, account for 52.32 minutes of duration and 9 climbing flight levels crossed and 10 descending flight levels crossed since Jan. 2006. • 15 of these occurrences which account for 46.05 minutes of duration are due to the negative transfers or incorrect transfers of control responsibilities (Category E) from several FIRs which are adjacent to China, and which have been identified as sources of disproportionately high negative transfer errors in the Asia Pacific region. Because cooperative work is underway within the region to remedy the problem, these 15 occurrences will not be included in the risk estimate used in deciding whether the TLS is satisfied or not. • The rest of 18 LHD occurrences are taken into account in the risk assessment in this report. Total of the 18 LHD occurred in the sovereign Chinese airspace, account for 6.27 minutes of duration and 9 climbing flight levels crossed and 10 descending flight levels crossed since Jan. 2006. • 16 LHD occurred in the recent 12 months since Aug. 2006, account for 5.72 minutes of duration and 9 climbing flight levels crossed and 10 descending flight levels crossed (The cumulative LHD duration is only of the latest 12 months). • Within these 16 LHD occurrences, regarding to the LHD duration: o One LHD occurrence of 0.15 minutes involved the display error of ATC automatic system leading to ATC failing to have right situational awareness (Category M), which account for technical errors. o Thus, the other occurrences of LHD occurred, account for 5.57 minutes, are subject to the operational errors.

25 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix G to the Report

PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF SOVEREIGN CHINESE AIRSPACE

• Within these 16 LHD occurrences, regarding to the number of flight levels crossed: o 9 climbing flight levels crossed and 6 descending flight levels crossed are subject to the operational errors.

6. RISK ASSESSMENT AND SAFETY OVERSIGHT

The purpose of this section is to conduct the preliminary risk assessment and to present safety oversight for the RVSM implementation over sovereign Chinese airspace, planned for November 21st, 2007. Accordingly, the internationally accepted collision risk methodology is applied.

As envisioned by the Review of the ICAO General Concept of Separation Panel (RGCSP), introduction of RVSM would be safe if:

4 Collision risk due to all causes does not exceed 5 fatal accidents per 109 flying hours; 4 Collision risk due to aircraft height-keeping systems does not exceed 2.5 fatal accidents per 109 flying hours.

The traffic sample data (TSD) of June 2007 and the continuous LHD reports associated with the China airspace (since Jan 2006) are used to produce the risk estimates presented in this report.

For the safety assessment of the RVSM implementation in the sovereign Chinese airspace, the risk estimation is conducted based on the single alternate flight level orientation scheme (FLOS) applied on the ATS routes structure in China.

6.1 Estimate of the CRM Parameters

Table 9 summarizes the value and source material for estimating values for each of the parameters of the internationally accepted Collision Risk Model (CRM), which is used to conduct the risk assessment and the safety oversight for the RVSM implementation in sovereign Chinese airspace.

Parameter Parameter Parameter Definition Source for Value Symbol Value Annual flight hours 2231306.2 Estimated based on the collected T TSD Same-direction vertical 0.0620 Estimated based on the collected E (same) z occupancies TSD

26 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix G to the Report

PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF SOVEREIGN CHINESE AIRSPACE

Parameter Parameter Parameter Definition Source for Value Symbol Value Opposite-direction vertical 0.3409 Estimated based on the collected E (opposite) z occupancies TSD Annual estimate of crossing 3366240 Estimated based on the collected Crossing pairs pairs in crossing route TSD Longitudinal separation 80Nm Standard value used in overall standard for a region, or airspace S x Length of longitudinal window used to calculate occupancy Planned Horizontal 80Nm Standard value used in overall S h Separation airspace Probability of vertical 0.3899 Estimated by FAA Technical overlap (with planned Center P (0) z vertical separation equal to zero) Prob. that 2 aircraft 2.041×10-10 Estimated by FAA Technical nominally separated by the Center vertical separation PSzz() minimum Sz are in vertical overlap. Probability of Lateral 0.025 Estimated by FAA Technical Overlap Center based on the proportion P (0) y of GPS operations observed in the TSD data collected in China -7 Probability of Horizontal 6.88 ×10 Value used in the Western Ph ()θ Overlap Pacific/South China Sea safety assessment Average relative horizontal 367.4 knots Value used in Western speed during overlap for Pacific/South China Sea safety . h θ )( aircraft pairs on routes with assessment (corresponds to an crossing angle θ (let θ=45°) average aircraft speed of 480 knots) Average absolute relative 2.8 knots Estimated by FAA Technical cross track speed for an Center based on the proportion y & aircraft pair nominally on of GPS operations observed in the same track the TSD data collected in China

27 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix G to the Report

PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF SOVEREIGN CHINESE AIRSPACE

Parameter Parameter Parameter Definition Source for Value Symbol Value Average absolute relative 1.5 knots Value used in NAT RVSM vertical speed of an aircraft safety assessment z & pair that has lost all vertical separation λx Average aircraft length 0.02345Nm Estimated based on the collected TSD λy Average aircraft wingspan 0.02073Nm λz Average aircraft height 0.0070 Nm Diameter of the disk 0.02345Nm representing the shape of an λ h aircraft in the horizontal plane Average relative 52.643knots Estimated based on the collected along-track speed between TSD ΔV aircraft on same direction routes Average absolute aircraft 457.53knots Estimated based on the collected V ground speed TSD

Table 9 Estimate of the Parameters in the CRM

6.2 Safety Oversight for the RVSM implementation in Sovereign Chinese Airspace

This section summarizes the results of the safety assessment for the sovereign Chinese airspace. Table 10 provides the estimates of technical, operational, and total risks for the RVSM implementation in the sovereign Chinese airspace.

Table 10: Risk Estimates for the RVSM Implementation in Sovereign Chinese Airspace

Figure 9 presents the trends of collision risk estimates for each month using the appropriate 18-month interval of LHD reports since January 2006.

28 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix G to the Report

PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF SOVEREIGN CHINESE AIRSPACE

Vertical Collision Risk By Type in Sovereign Chinese Airspace

6.00E-09

TLS 5.00E-09 Techinial Risk

Operational Risk

4.00E-09 Overall Risk

3.00E-09

2.00E-09

1.00E-09

0.00E+00

6 6 6 7 0 06 07 7 -06 - - -0 l-07 ar-06 r- y g ct-06 r-07 y-07 n Jan-06 eb-0 Jul-06 ep-0 ov-06 Jan p a u Ju F M Ap Ma Jun-06 Au S O N Dec-06 Feb-0 Mar-07 A M J

Figure 9: Trends of Risk Estimates for the RVSM Implementation in Sovereign Chinese Airspace

Based on the collision risk estimates from the received TSD and LHD reports, the technical risk for the RVSM implementation in sovereign Chinese airspace is 1.162×10-11 fatal accidents per flight hour. The total risk attributed to all causes is 1.805×10-9. Therefore, the estimates of both technical and total risks from the available TSD and LHD reports satisfy the agreed TLS value of no more than 2.5 x 10-9 and 5.0 x 10-9 fatal accidents per flight hour due to the loss of a correctly established vertical separation standard of 300m and to all causes, respectively.

6.3 Additional Observations In estimating risks for the RVSM implementation in sovereign Chinese airspace, it was observed that the traffic density on the ATS route A461, especially in the section between the fixes AKOMA and OBLIK is relatively high. This is because of the heavy traffic flow between Beijing and Guangzhou which are two of the busiest cities in China. CAAC is planning to establish a parallel route beside A461, and to adopt offset procedures after RVSM implementation. Therefore, it is credible that the risk due to the traffic density of route A461 will be reduced.

Furthermore, in the analysis of LHD occurrences and risk estimation of sovereign Chinese airspace, it was also observed that there were a number of LHD occurrences which were due to the negative transfers or incorrect transfers of control responsibilities (Category E) from several FIRs which are adjacent to China, and which have been identified as sources of disproportionately high negative transfer errors in the Asia Pacific region. Figure 10

29 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix G to the Report

PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF SOVEREIGN CHINESE AIRSPACE demonstrates the corresponding trends of risk estimates with considerations of these LHD occurrences.

1.20E-08

TLS 1.00E-08 Techinial Risk

Operational Risk

8.00E-09 Overall Risk

6.00E-09

4.00E-09

2.00E-09

0.00E+00

6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 7 7 -0 0 0 0 0 -0 0 n - -06 n-07 - n-07 Ja ay un Jul-0 Ja pr ay u Jul-07 Feb-0 Mar-06 Apr- M J Aug-06 Sep-0 Oct- Nov-06 Dec- Feb-07 Mar-07 A M J

Figure 10: Trends of Risk Estimates for the RVSM Implementation in Sovereign Chinese Airspace with Inclusion of the Disproportionately High Negative Transfer Errors

It’s evident that the operational risk presented in Figure 10 is much higher than the one in Figure 9. This kind of LHD occurrences must be hazards to global RVSM operations. Hence, it is strongly recommended that the responsible FIRs take timely actions to mitigate the risk.

Fortunately, after Chinese RVSM implementation, the risk due to this kind of transfer errors will be reduced, since China will adopt the RVSM single Alternate FLOS which is almost the same as these FIRs, and the occurrences of opposite operations in the same flight level in the transition zones will highly decrease.

However, China will still take some more measures as followings to mitigate these risks.

1. China will participate in RASMAG and the associated Scrutiny Group to improve the situations with regard to these events with category E. 2. China will enhance the communication with the relevant states. Periodic meetings between the related FIRs will be arranged. And similar events will be noticed to each other in time. 3. Actions to eliminate these events will be put into the LOA between the related FIRs.

30 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix G to the Report

PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF SOVEREIGN CHINESE AIRSPACE

4. China will pay special attentions to these areas by constantly monitoring the errors and conducting the assessments. 5. More communication and surveillance facilities will be equipped in these transition zones to improve the control ability.

31 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix G to the Report

PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF SOVEREIGN CHINESE AIRSPACE

REFERENCES

1. Airspace Safety assessment for The RVSM Implementation in Japan/republic of Korea domestic airspace, July 2005, ICAO Asia/Pacific RVSM Implementation Task Force26 WP, MAAR

2. Manual on Implementation of a 300 m (1,000 ft) Vertical Separation Minimum Between FL 290 and FL 410 Inclusive, International Civil Aviation Organization, Doc 9574, Montreal, March 1992.

3. Review of the General Concept of Separation Panel, Sixth Meeting, Montreal, 28 November – 15 December 1988, ICAO Doc 9536, RGCSP/6, Volumes 1 and 2.

4. Review of the General Concept of Separation Panel, Seventh Meeting, Montreal, 30 October – 20 November 1990, ICAO Doc 9572, RGCSP/7.

5. Post Implementation Estimate of the Risk Associated with the Domestic Reduced Vertical Separation Minimum (D-RVSM), 1 June 2005, FAA Technical Center

32 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix G to the Report

PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF SOVEREIGN CHINESE AIRSPACE

APPENDIX A

Traffic Sample Data collecting template

The TSD template used in China is as follows, it presents the information requested for an individual traffic movement, or flight, and sometime it is also called “Know Your Airspace (KYA)” analysis.

Item Mandatory/ No. Item Example Required if Available 1 Date (DD/MM/YY format) 01/06/07 Mandatory 2 Aircraft Call Sign CCA968 Mandatory 3 Reg_No 9VSFA Mandatory 4 Aircraft Type A343 Mandatory 5 Origin Aerodrome ZBAA Mandatory 6 Destination Aerodrome ZSPD Mandatory 7 Entry Fix into RVSM Airspace EPGAM Mandatory 8 Time at Entry Fix (UTC) 12:23 Mandatory 9 Flight Level at Entry Fix 10200 Mandatory 10 Airway at Entry Fix A599 Mandatory 11 Exit Fix from RVSM Airspace AKOTO Mandatory 12 Time at Exit Fix (UTC) 01:29 Mandatory 13 Flight Level at Exit Fix 11400 Mandatory 14 Airway at Entry Fix G204 Mandatory 15 Speed 897.289 km/h Optional A1 Fix 1 Within RVSM Airspace after Entry Fix NIRAT Required if Available A2 Time at Fix 1 01:14 Required if Available A3 Flight Level at Fix 1 310 Required if Available A4 Airway at Fix 1 A593 Required if Available B1 Fix 2 Within RVSM Airspace after Fix 1 - Required if Available B2 Time at Fix 2 - Required if Available B3 Flight Level at Fix 2 - Required if Available B4 Airway at Fix 2 - Required if Available (Continue with as many Fix/Time/Flight-Level entries as are required to describe the flight’s movement within RVSM airspace) N1 Fix …N Within RVSM Airspace after Fix N-1 - Required if Available N2 Time at Fix N - Required if Available N3 Flight Level at Fix N - Required if Available N4 Airway at Fix N - Required if Available

33 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix G to the Report

PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF SOVEREIGN CHINESE AIRSPACE

Note: Fix N = Fix before the Exit Fix

Note: (1) We collect TSD from all Fixes in China instead of only the fixes where there is a FL or Route change, thus we assess the safety risk of Chinese airspace more conservatively; (2) The Flight level is recorded in the unit of meter instead of feet; (3) Reg_no information is added for further readiness assessment; (4) Aircraft Ground Speed is also collected but is optional;

34 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix G to the Report

PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF SOVEREIGN CHINESE AIRSPACE

APPENDIX B

RVSM Approval Records of Operator and aircraft Operated in the

sovereign Chinese Airspace based on Collected Traffic Sample Data

(sorted by FLIGHTS)

The RVSM Approval Records of Operator and aircraft table format

Name of Field Field Identifier Explanation 1 No. Serial number 2 OPR Operator Name 3 Type Aircraft Type using ICAO Standard 4 FLIGHTS Number of flights 5 Proportion of Overall Total number of flights divided by FLIGHTS Sample (%) 6 Overall Sample Cumulative Proportion of Field 5 Cumulative (%) 7 AW Only The number of Flights that flied by aircraft having an RVSM airworthiness approval 8 Proportion of AW Only Total number of flights divided by AW Only 9 AW Cumulative (%) Cumulative Proportion of Field 8 10 The number of Flights that flied by aircraft FULL having a RVSM operational approval 11 Proportion of Full Total number of flights divided by FULL 12 Full Cumulative Cumulative Proportion of Field 11

35 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix G to the Report

RVSM Approval Records of Operator and aircraft Operated in the Airspace of sovereign Chinese airspace based on Collected Traffic Sample Data sorted by FLIGHTS

Refer to the separate document “Appendix B”

The Approval Flies used in this readiness assessment:

Approval Approval File (alphabetical) AFIRMA AFIRMA Approvals 09 July 2007.xls Atlantic NATCMA Approvals (15 May 07) QMAS.xls CAAC Approval Data from CAAC Canada RVSM 07 Aug 07 (Canada RVSM DB).xls Carsamma CARSAMMA Approvals (15 Aug 07).xls Euro Euro_Approvals (17 July 2007).xls France DGAC France Approvals_current as of 2007_01_22 .xls Maar MAAR Approvals 21 Aug 2007.xls Mecma MECMA_Approvals (22 May 04).xls Mexico Mexico RVSM (19 Aug 2007).xls MIDRMA MIDRMA_Approvals (10 September 2006).xls PARMO 2007_08_16_APARMOsnapshot.xls US 2007_08_21_US_MASPSsnapshotACI_TrafficScrutiny.xls

36 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix G to the Report

APPENDIX C LARGE HEIGHT DEVIATION REPORT

Name of FIR:

Please complete Section I or II as appropriate: If there were no reports of large altitude deviation, only Section I should be finished. If there were reports of large altitude deviation, please finish both Section I and Section II. If there were more than one report, each report should write a separate piece of Form A..

Section I：

There were no reports of large altitude deviation for the month of

Section II:

There was/were report(s) of an altitude deviation of 90m (300 ft) or more between 8400m and 12500m. Details of the altitude deviation are attached (Form A). (Please use a separate form for each report of large height deviation).

Section III：

When complete, please return to the following email:

E-Mail: [email protected]

37 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix G to the Report

PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF SOVEREIGN CHINESE AIRSPACE

Form A

Report of an Altitude Deviation of 90m (300 ft) or More Between 8400m and 12500m

(Please use a separate form for each report of large height deviation). (1) This is the large height event reported this month.

(2) Reporting Agency

(3) Location of Deviation

• ATS Route: • Fixes (Fixes between the location of deviation):

(4) Date of Occurrence (UTC) (yyyy-mm-dd )

(5) Flight Identification and Type

(6) Flight Level Assigned (record in the picture is also admitted)

(7) Observed/Reported Final Level Mode C/Pilot Report (record in the picture is also admitted)

(8) Cause of Deviation (a few words description of the event)

(9) Other Traffic

(10) Crew Comments (if any, when noted)

(11) Remarks

38 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix G to the Report

PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF SOVEREIGN CHINESE AIRSPACE

(12) Duration at Flight Level

A) Aircraft descended when large height deviation occurred

B) Aircraft ascended when large height deviation occurred

LHD event description:

39 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix H to the Report

SN Activity Completed Start Target Date Present Status Group Responsible 1 Identify Operational Need 2 Agree operational need for Chinese Airspace 12-Mar-07 16-Mar-07 Completed China 3 Safety Assessment 4 Review available summary data (non-compliant aircraft, aberrant aircraft, etc) 12-Mar-07 21-Sep-07 Completed SAM/WG, RMA, RVSM Task Force 5 Examine history of height keeping errors relating to ATC clearances and assess possible RVSM impact 12-Mar-07 21-Sep-07 Completed China, SAM/WG, RMA, RVSM Task Force 6 Confirm RVSM risk model assumptions/parameters are consistent with airspace where RVSM is to be applied 12-Mar-07 21-Sep-07 Completed China, SAM/WG, RMA, RVSM Task Force 7 Conduct analyses to predict occupancy after RVSM implementation 12-Mar-07 21-Sep-07 Completed China, SAM/WG, MAAR, RVSM Task Force 8 Collect weather and turbulence data for analysis 12-Mar-07 1-Jul-07 Completed China, SAM/WG, OPS/AIR/WG, RVSM Task Force 9 Report monthly large height deviations (including operational errors) to the State Jan-06 18-Sep-07 Ongoing China, Users 11 Feasibility Analysis 12 Examine the operational factors and workload associated with RVSM implementation 12-Mar-07 16-Mar-07 Completed China, ATC/WG, RVSM Task Force 13 Determination of Requirements (airborne & ground systems) Assess the impact of RVSM implementation on controller automation systems and plan for 14 upgrades/modifications 12-Mar-07 18-Sep-07 Completed China 15 Aircraft & Operator Approval Requirements 16 Promulgate the operational approval process 12-Mar-07 3-Aug-07 Completed China, OPS/AIR/WG, RVSM Task Force 17 Notify China when significant changes occur to RVSM documentation 12-Mar-07 Ongoing OPS/AIR/WG, RVSM Task Force 18 Perform Rulemaking (if required) 19 Recommend State airspace regulatory documentation Ongoing RVSM Task Force ICAO Regional Office 20 Perform Necessary Industry & International Co-ordination 21 Establish target implementation date 12-Mar-07 16-Mar-07 Completed RVSM Task Force, China 22 Report to ATM/AIS/SAR/SG/17 2-Jul-07 2-Jul-07 Completed RVSM Task Force Chairman 23 Report to ATM/AIS/SAR/SG/18 7-Jun-08 RVSM Task Force Chairman 24 Process Doc 7030 amendment 12-Mar-07 ASAP Ongoing China, ICAO Regional Office (to include China FIRs) 25 Publish advance AIC 12-Mar-07 7-Jun-07 Complete China 26 Publish AIP Supplement containing RVSM policy/procedures 12-Mar-07 25-Aug-07 Completed China 27 Publish AIP Supplement containing transition areas/procedures 11-Oct-07 China and States concerned 28 Review inter-facility coordination procedures 3-Aug-07 18-Sep-07 Completed China 30-Oct-07 29 Finalize changes to Letters of Agreement 3-Aug-07 18-Sep-07 Ongoing China 30 Disseminate information on RVSM policy and procedures through RVSM Website 30-Apr-07 7-Nov-07 Ongoing OPS/AIR/WG, RVSM Task Force 31 Approval of Aircraft & Operators 32 Establish approved operations readiness targets 12-Mar-07 16-Mar-07 Completed ATC/WG, RVSM Task Force 33 Assess operator readiness 12-Mar-07 18-Sep-07 Completed China, OPS/AIR/WG

H - 1 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix H to the Report

SN Activity Completed Start Target Date Present Status Group Responsible 34 Develop Pilot & ATC Procedures 35 Review weather and contingency procedures for applicability under RVSM 12-Mar-07 18-Sep-07 Completed China, RVSM Task Force 36 Publish appropriate Pilot/ATC policy & procedures on RVSM website 30-Apr-07 18-Sep-07 Completed China, RVSM Task Force 37 Identify transition areas and procedures 12-Mar-07 18-Sep-07 Completed China, ATC/WG 38 Conduct simulation modelling to assess impact of RVSM operations 6-Nov-06 6-Nov-06 Completed China 39 Report on simulation activity 12-Mar-07 16-Mar-07 Completed China, RVSM Task Force 40 Coordinate use of ACAS II (TCAS V.7) for RVSM operations 12-Mar-07 10-Oct-07 Completed China, OPS/AIR/WG, RVSM Task Force 41 Develop procedures for handling non-compliant aircraft (inc ferry & mntce) in ATS documentation 12-Mar-07 1-Jul-07 Completed China, OPS/AIR/WG, ATC/WG, RVSM Task Force 42 Develop mutually acceptable ATC procedures for non-approved State acft to transit RVSM airspace 12-Mar-07 17-Sep-07 Completed States concerned, ATC/WG, RVSM Task Force 43 Implement procedures for suspension of RVSM 12-Mar-07 17-Sep-07 Completed States concerned, ATC/WG, RVSM Task Force 44 Liaise with State defense authorities regarding military operations started 17-Sep-07 Completed China 45 Pilot & ATC Training 46 Provide Pilot/ATC training documentation based on past experience 12-Mar-07 18-Sep-07 Completed IATA, IFALPA, IFATCA, RVSM Task Force 47 Conduct local RVSM training for air traffic controllers 7-May-07 18-Sep-07 Completed China 48 Perform System Verificiation 49 Height keeping performance monitoring needed to undertake initial safety analysis started 31-Aug-07 Completed China, RMA, SAM/WG, RVSM Task Force 50 Provide representative traffic movement data to RMA started 31-Aug-07 Completed China 51 Undertake initial safety analysis started 31-Aug-07 Completed China, RMA, SAM/WG, RVSM Task Force 7-Sep-08 52 Prepare/maintain regional status report detailing RVSM implementation plans 3-Sep-07 7-Sep-07 RVSM Task Force 53 Final Implementation Decision RVSM Task Force 54 Review aircraft altitude-keeping performance and operational errors 12-Mar-07 1-Sep-07 Completed China, SAM/WG, OPS/AIR/WG 55 Complete ATS State documentation 3-Aug-07 Aug-07 Completed China 56 Publish Trigger NOTAM 11-Nov-07 China 57 Complete readiness assessment 18-Sep-07 Completed China, RMA, SAM/WG, RVSM Task Force 58 Complete safety analysis 18-Sep-07 Completed China, RMA, SAM/WG, RVSM Task Force 59 Declare Initial Operational Capability China, SAM/WG, RVSM Task Force 60 Monitor System Performance 61 Perform Follow-On Monitoring 21-Sep-07 1-Jul-08 Ongoing China, RMA, OPS/AIR/WG, SAM/WG 62 Adopt Minimum Monitoring Requirements (MMR) 12-Mar-07 Aug-07 Completed China 63 Declare Full Operational Capability 64 Task Force/30 (Bangkok) 12-Mar-07 16-Mar-07 Completed RVSM Task Force China, Mongolia, Russia, Chairpersons, IATA, ICAO 65 Special Coordiantion Meeting (SCM) 16-May-07 18-May-07 Completed Regional Office, Kazakhstan

H - 2 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix H to the Report

SN Activity Completed Start Target Date Present Status Group Responsible 66 Special Coordiantion Meeting (SCM) or Follow-up Mission by the Regional Office 7-Jul-07 7-Jul-07 67 Task Force/31 (Bangkok) 31-Jul-07 3-Aug-07 Completed RVSM Task Force 68 Task Force/32 (Beijing) - Go/No-Go Meeting - 4 days 18-Sep-07 21-Sep-07 Completed RVSM Task Force 69 Task Force/33 (Beijing) - 90 day review China implementation - 3 days Apr-08 Apr-08 RVSM Task Force 70 Task Force/34 (TBD) - one year review China implementation - 3 days Jan-09 Jan-09 RVSM Task Force

H - 3 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix I to the Report

Chinese Adjacent FIRs Airways Transition Process ACC √ when FIRs (boundary) Responsible coordination Airways for Transition completed Beijing Ulaanbaatar B339 (POLHO) China RVSM – 500 Beijing ACC √ B339/M520/ metre CVSM G218 A575 (INTIK) Beijing ACC √ A575 Guangzhou Hanoi R474 (TEBAK) China RVSM – Nanning ACC √ R474 Feet Hong Kong A470 (DOTMI) China RVSM – Guangzhou √ A470 Feet ACC A202 (SIKOU) Hong Kong A202 ACC Kunming Hanoi R471 China RVSM – Kunming ACC Ongoing (KUNHA) Feet Kathmandu B345 (NONIM) China RVSM – Ongoing B345 Feet Vientiane A581 China RVSM – Kunming ACC √ (SAGAG) Feet A581 Yangon A599 (LINSO) China RVSM – Kunming ACC √ A599 Feet Lanzhou Ulaanbaatar B330 (MORIT) China RVSM – 500 Lanzhou/ √ B480/B330 meter CVSM Ulaanbaatar Sanya Hanoi A202 (ASSAD) China RVSM – Sanya ACC √ A202 Feet Ho Chi Minh N/A N/A - Hong Kong N/A N/A - Manila N/A N/A - Shanghai Fukuoka A593 (SADLI) China RVSM – Shanghai ACC A593 Feet Incheon A593 (SADLI) China RVSM – Shanghai ACC A593 Feet G597/A591 Incheon ACC √ (AGAVO) G597/Y64 Taibei N/A N/A - Shenyang Chita A345 (TELOK) China RVSM – 500 Hailar ACC √ A91 meter CVSM Khabarovsk G212 China RVSM – 500 Harbin ACC √ (ARGUK) meter CVSM G212 Pyongyang B332 China RVSM – 500 Shenyang √ (TOMUK) meter CVSM ACC/ B332 Pyongyang ACC A575/A345 Shenyang (GOLOT) ACC/ A345/A575 Pyongyan ACC

I – 1 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix I to the Report

Chinese Adjacent FIRs Airways Transition Process ACC √ when FIRs (boundary) Responsible coordination Airways for Transition completed Vladivostok B451 (BISUN) China RVSM – 500 Shenyang √ B451 meter CVSM ACC/ Vladivostok ACC Blagoveshchen A588 (SIMLI) China RVSM – 500 Harbin ACC √ sk G494 meter CVSM Ulaanbaatar N/A N/A - China RVSM – 500 meter CVSM Urumqi Almaty A460 (REVKI) China RVSM – 500 Almaty ACC/ √ A360/B142 meter CVSM Urumqi ACC Barnaul B206 (GOPTO) China RVSM – 500 Urumqi ACC √ B206 meter CVSM Bishkek A468 Ongoing (KAMUD) UB351/UB357/ UB358 Delhi B215 (PURPA) China RVSM – G325 Feet Dushanbe N/A N/A Kathmandu China RVSM – Feet Lahore B215 (PURPA) China RVSM – Ongoing G325* Feet Osh Semipalatinsk A368 (SARIN) China RVSM – 500 Semipalantinsk √ A368/G155 meter CVSM ACC/ Urumiqi ACC Ulaanbaatar G588 (TEBUS) China RVSM – 500 Ulaanbaatar √ G558 meter CVSM ACC/ Urumiqi ACC

I – 2 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix J to the Report ATTACHMENT

CIVIL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION OF CHINA

China RVSM Policies and Procedures Briefing Meeting

(Beijing, 12 October 2007)

MEETING BULLETIN

1. Place and Timings of Meeting

1.1 The China RVSM Policies and Procedures Briefing Meeting will be held at the King Wing Hotel, Beijing, China. The opening session of the meeting will be at 0900am on Friday, 12 Oct 2007. The King Wing Hotel is located at #17 South Road of East Third Ring Road, Chaoyang District, Beijing. For your information, a map showing King Wing Hotel is at the Annex 2 to this bulletin. King Wing Hotel reservation phone number are +86 10 67668866, Fax number is +86 10 67655969 and E-mail is [email protected].

1.3 The daily order of business will be announced on the first day of the meeting.

2. Registration of participants

2.1 Participants are requested to register at the Registration Desk in the reception area of the King Wing Hotel between 0830am and 0900am on the opening day of the meeting. Participants are also requested to wear the identification badge, which will be issued to them for easy identification

3. Officers and Secretariat Concerned with the Meeting

3.1 Mr. Xiao Jing, Deputy Director, Air Traffic Control Division, Air Traffic Management Bureau (ATMB), General Administration of Civil Aviation of China (CAAC), will conduct the meeting.

3.2 The invitation application and daily conference services are the responsibility of Mr. Zhang Yuanchao from Air Traffic Management Division, ATMB, CAAC. Email: [email protected]. Please note that delegates who participate this meeting should supply details of passport which include information as follow: Name, Nationality, Passport Number, Type of Visa, expires date, Title and Company, Purpose of trip, etc. In order to insurance you can get the visa on time, please be attention to send your details of passport before the date of Sep 25th, 2007.

4. Passport, Visa and Customs

4.1 All foreign nationals entering China must possess valid passports or other valid documents for travel. It is suggested that all participants consider obtaining official visas from China Embassy or Consulate concerned prior to their arrival in China.

4.2 Following items can be brought in duty free:

a) Personal effects such as clothing etc. b) 400 cigarettes, or 500 gms of cigar or tobacco. c) 1.5 litre alcoholic beverages. d) Perfume for personal use.

A - 1

4.3 There are no restrictions on import of foreign currency. However, if the amount exceeds US$5,000 it must be declared on entry. Foreign currencies may be taken out of the country up to the amount imported and declared. (Current exchange rate US$1 = RMB 7.60 approx).

5. Hotel Reservations and Transportation

5.1 Information giving the details of the address, fax number, tariff, etc. of hotels is given in the Annex 1 to this bulletin. Participants should arrange their own hotel accommodations well in advance because of heavy demands. Participants may contact the hotel directly by telephone/fax for reservation.

5.2 Even though we would very much wish to meet participants at the airport on arrival, this will not be possible due to budgetary and staffing limitations. Participants are therefore requested to make their own arrangements for transportation from the airport to the city.

5.2.1 The information on transportation system service of Beijing Capital Airport is available at the Annex 3 to this bulletin.

5.2.2 When departing, the hotel can arrange for transportation to the airport. Taxis, which are less expensive than hotel taxis, are also available. All taxis have a fare meter.

5.3 Participants are requested to ensure that their return bookings are confirmed soon after their arrival in Beijing.

5.4 Participants staying at a hotel are requested to make their own arrangements for transportation from their hotels to the King Wing Hotel for attending the meeting.

6. Other Useful Information

6.1 Time in Beijing is 8 hours ahead of Coordinated Universal Time (UTC+8).

6.2 International credit cards such as American Express, Visa, Master Card, etc. are normally accepted at major hotels and department stores.

6.3 All commercial banks exchange major foreign currencies and are open from 0830 to 1630 from Monday through Sunday. To change traveller’s cheques you are required to show your passport.

6.4 Beijing is generally cool and comfortable in October. Day temperatures range about 18oC-25 oC while at night they remain above 15 oC.

6.5 Light weight and washable cottons will suffice and woollens are not necessary.

6.6 Although the tap water in Beijing is chemically treated, it is recommended that the visitors drink only bottled water and beverages.

*******************

A - 2 ATTACHMENT

Annex 1

LIST OF RECOMMENDED HOTELS

Hotel Room type Net Price in RMB

King Wing Hot Spring Int’l Hotel #17 South Road of East Third Ring Road, Chaoyang District, Standard 460RMB (+ABF) Beijing, 100021. Tel: +86 (10) 67668866 Deluxe Fax: +86 (10) 67655969 560RMB (+ABF) e-mail: [email protected] www.kingwing.com.cn Best Western Beijing (neighbour to King Wing Hotel) #15 South Road of East Third Ring Road, Chaoyang District, Single Standard 580RMB (+ABF) Beijing, 100021. Tel: +86 (10) 67626655 Double Standard 580RMB (+ABF) Fax: +86 (10) 87663993 http://www.bwpremierbj.com.cn/english/eindex.html Beijing Plaza Hotel #100 South Road of East Third Ring Road, Chaoyang District, Standard 588RMB (+ABF) Beijing, 100021. Tel: +86 (10) 67353366 Southern Airlines Hotel #2 Middle Road of East Third Ring Road, Chaoyang District, Beijing, 100022. Standard 528RMB (+ABF) Tel: +86 (10) 65676688 65672209 Fax: +86 (10) 67655969

Note.— The net price given includes all taxes and service charges. If you choose the King Wing Hot Spring International Hotel or Best Western Beijing, please contact Mr. Zhang Yuanchao from Air traffic Management Div., [email protected], so that the booking will be made from him at the discounted rate. For other hotel, please make the booking by yourself.

— — — — — — — —

A - 3 ATTACHMENT

Annex 2 Location of King Wing Hot Spring Int’l Hotel

A - 4 ATTACHMENT

Annex 3

……………………..

A - 5 RVSM/TF/32 Appendix K to the Report

International Organisation Organizaci6n Mewyqy~apoa~an dl&\ & bT\ a 8] Civil Aviation de I'aviation civile de Aviacion Civil opra~n3aunn Organization internationale lnternacional rpawa~c~ofi aenaunll

Tel.: + l (5 14) 954-67 1 1

Ref.: AN 1312.5-07135 25 May 2007

Subject: Proposal for the amendment of the Procedures .for Air Navigation Services -Air TrafJic Management (PANS-ATM, Doc 4444), relating to flight plan provisions

Action Required: Co~n~nentsto reach Montreal by 7 August 2007

1. I have the honour to illforin you that the Air Navigation Commission, at the fourth and fifth meetings of its 175th Session on 1 and 3 May 2007, considered a proposal to amend the flight plan provisions contained in the Procedures for Air Navigation Services - Air Trafjc Munugetrzent (PANS-ATM, Doc 4444), and authorized its trans~nission to Contracting States and appropriate international organizations for comment.

2. The proposed amendments, as modified by the discussions of the Commission, are contained in Attachment A to this letter.

3. The purpose of the proposed amendment is for the ICAO flight plan to meet future needs of aircraft with advanced capabilities and the evolving requirements of automated air traffic management (ATM) systems, while taking into account compatibility with existing systems, human factors. training, cost and transition aspects.

4. During its preli~ni~iaryreview of the proposal, the Commission noted in particular that this would be an interim step towards a future, completely revamped system that would satisfy the i~ifor~nationmanagement requirements that are prerequisite to the realization of the Global ATM Operatio~~alConcept.

5. It is deemed that implementation of this proposal for amendment will require a moderate amount of resources. In order to provide a solid basis for further impact assessment by the Commission, I wo~~ldbe grateful if you co~lldprovide me with an estimate of the financial and other resources required by air navigation services providers and aircraft operators in your State for implementation of the proposal.

999 University Street Tel.: +1 (514) 954-8219 E-mail: [email protected] Montreal. Quebec Fax: +I (514) 954-6077 Sitatex: YULCAYA Canada H3C 5H7 6. In exa~niningthe proposed amendments, you should not feel obliged to co~n~nent011 editorial aspects as si~climatters will be addressed by the Air Navigation Commission during its final review of the draft amendment.

7. May I request that any comments you may wish to make on the proposed amendments be dispatched to reach me not later than 7 August 2007. The Air Navigation Commission has asked me to specifically indicate that comments received after the due date may not be considered by the Commission and the Coi~ncil.I11 this connection, should you anticipate a delay in the receipt of your reply please let me know in advance of the due date.

8. For yoilr information, as i~nplementationof this proposed amendment to the PANS-ATM is expected to require substantial time for preparation, it is envisaged for applicability on 18 November 201 0. Any coni~nentsyou may have thereon would be liighly appreciated.

9. The subsequent work of the Air Navigation Commission and the Council would be greatly facilitated by specific statements on tlie acceptability or otherwise of the proposal. Please note that, for the review of yoilr corninents by tlie Air Navigation Commission and the Council, replies are normally classified as "agreement with or without comments", "disagreement with or without comments" or "no indication of position". If in your reply the expression "no objections" or "110 comments" are used, they will be taken to mean "agreement without comment" and "no indication of position", respectively. In order to facilitate proper classification of your response, a form has been included in Attachment B wliicli may be completed and returned together with your comments, if any, on tlie proposals in Attacliment A.

Accept, SirIMadam, the assurances of my highest co

Enclosures: A - Proposed amendment to tlie PANS-ATM B - Response form ATTACHMENT A to State letter AN 13/2.5-07/35

NOTES ON THE PRESENTATION OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT

The text of the amendment is arranged to show deleted text with a line through it and new text highlighted with grey shading, as shown below:

1. Text to be deleted is shown with a line through it text to be deleted

2. New text to be inserted is highlighted with grey shading new text to be inserted

3. Text to be deleted is shown with a line through it followed new text to replace existing text by the replacement text which is highlighted with grey shading.

A-2 PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE

PROCEDURES FOR AIR NAVIGATION SERVICES — AIR TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT (PANS-ATM, DOC 4444)

CHAPTER 4. GENERAL PROVISIONS FOR AIR TRAFFIC SERVICES

. . .

4.4 FLIGHT PLAN

4.4.1 Flight plan form

Note.— Procedures for the use of repetitive flight plans are contained in Chapter 16, Section 16.4.

. . .

4.4.1.3 Operators and air traffic services units should comply with:

a) the instructions for completion of the flight plan form and the repetitive flight plan listing form given in Appendix 2; and

b) any constraints identified in relevant Aeronautical Information Publications (AIPs).

Note 1.— Failure to adhere to the provisions of Appendix 2 or any constraint identified in relevant AIPs may result in data being rejected, processed incorrectly or lost.

Note 2.— The instructions for completing the flight plan form given in Appendix 2 may be conveniently printed on the inside cover of flight plan form pads, or posted in briefing rooms.

. . .

4.4.2 Submission of a flight plan

4.4.2.1 PRIOR TO DEPARTURE

4.4.2.1.1 Flight plans shall not be submitted more than 144 hours before the estimated off-block time of a flight.

4.4.2.1.12 Except when other arrangements have been made for submission of repetitive flight plans, a flight plan submitted prior to departure should be submitted to the air traffic services reporting office at the departure aerodrome. If no such unit exists at the departure aerodrome, the flight plan should be submitted to the unit serving or designated to serve the departure aerodrome.

4.4.2.1.23 In the event of a delay of 30 minutes in excess of the estimated off-block time for a controlled flight or a delay of one hour for an uncontrolled flight for which a flight plan has been submitted, the flight plan should be amended or a new flight plan submitted and the old flight plan cancelled, whichever is applicable.

A-3

CHAPTER 11. AIR TRAFFIC SERVICES MESSAGES

. . .

11.4 MESSAGE TYPES AND THEIR APPLICATION

. . .

11.4.2 Movement and control messages

. . .

11.4.2.2 FILED FLIGHT PLAN MESSAGES AND ASSOCIATED UPDATE MESSAGES

. . .

11.4.2.2.2 FILED FLIGHT PLAN (FPL) MESSAGES

Note.— Instructions for the transmission of an FPL message are contained in Appendix 2.

. . .

11.4.2.2.2.5 FPL messages shall normally be transmitted immediately after the filing of the flight plan. However, iIf a flight plan is filed more than 24 hours in advance of the estimated off-block time of the flight to which it refers, that flight plan shall be held in abeyance until at most 24 hours before the flight begins so as to avoid the need for the insertion of a date group into that the date of the flight departure shall be inserted in Item 18 of the flight plan. In addition, if a flight plan is filed early and the provisions of 11.4.2.2.2.2 b) or e) or 11.4.2.2.2.3 apply, transmission of the FPL message may be withheld until one hour before the estimated off-block time, provided that this will permit each air traffic services unit concerned to receive the information at least 30 minutes before the time at which the aircraft is estimated to enter its area of responsibility.

. . .

11.4.2.2.4 MODIFICATION (CHG) MESSAGES

A CHG message shall be transmitted when any change is to be made to basic flight plan data contained in previously transmitted FPL or RPL data. The CHG message shall be sent to those recipients of basic flight plan data which are affected by the change. Relevant revised basic flight plan data shall be provided to such affected entities not previously having received this.

Note.— See 11.4.2.3.4 concerning notification of a change to coordination data contained in a previously transmitted current flight plan or estimate message.

. . . A-4 APPENDIX 2. FLIGHT PLAN

. . .

2. Instructions for the completion of the flight plan form . . .

2.2 Instructions for insertion of ATS data

Complete Items 7 to 18 as indicated hereunder.

Complete also Item 19 as indicated hereunder, when so required by the appropriate ATS authority or when otherwise deemed necessary.

Note 1.— Item numbers on the form are not consecutive, as they correspond to Field Type numbers in ATS messages.

Note 2.— Air traffic services data systems may impose communications or processing constraints on information in filed flight plans. Possible constraints may, for example, be limits with regard to item length, number of elements in the route item or total flight plan length. Significant constraints are documented in the relevant Aeronautical Information Publication.

ITEM 7: AIRCRAFT IDENTIFICATION (MAXIMUM 7 CHARACTERS)

INSERT one of the following aircraft identifications, not exceeding 7 characters:

a) the nationality or common mark and registration marking of the aircraft (e.g. EIAKO, 4XBCD, N2567GA), when:

1) in radiotelephony the call sign to be used by the aircraft will consist of this identification alone (e.g. OOTEKCGAJS), or preceded by the ICAO telephony designator for the aircraft operating agency (e.g. SABENA OOTEKBLIZZARD CGAJS);

2) the aircraft is not equipped with radio;

OR b) the ICAO designator for the aircraft operating agency followed by the flight identification (e.g. KLM511, NGA213, JTR25) when in radiotelephony the call sign to be used by the aircraft will consist of the ICAO telephony designator for the operating agency followed by the flight identification (e.g. KLM511, NIGERIA 213, HERBIEJESTER 25).

Note 1.— Standards for nationality, common and registration marks to be used are contained in Annex 7, Chapter 2.

Note 2.— Provisions for the use of radiotelephony call signs are contained in Annex 10, Volume II, Chapter 5. ICAO designators and telephony designators for aircraft operating agencies are contained in Doc 8585 — Designators for Aircraft Operating Agencies, Aeronautical Authorities and Services.

A-5

ITEM 8: FLIGHT RULES AND TYPE OF FLIGHT (ONE OR TWO CHARACTERS)

Flight rules

INSERT one of the following letters to denote the category of flight rules with which the pilot intends to comply:

I if it is intended that the entire flight will be operated under the IFR V if it is intended that the entire flight will be operated under the VFR Y if the flight initially will be operated under the IFR first) and specify in Item 15 the point, followed by one or more subsequent changes of flight rules or Z if the flight initially will be operated under the VFR first), followed by one or more subsequent changes of flight rules

Specify in Item 15 the point or points at which a change of flight rules is planned.

Type of flight

INSERT one of the following letters to denote the type of flight when so required by the appropriate ATS authority:

S if scheduled air service N if non-scheduled air transport operation G if general aviation M if military X if other than any of the defined categories above.

Specify status of a flight following the indicator STS in Item 18, if specific handling by ATS is required.

. . .

ITEM 10: EQUIPMENT AND CAPABILITIES

Capabilities comprise the following elements:

a) presence of relevant serviceable equipment on board the aircraft;

b) equipment and capabilities commensurate with flight crew qualifications; and

c) where applicable, authorization from the appropriate authority. A-6

Radio communication, navigation and approach aid equipment and capabilities

INSERT one letter as follows:

N if no COM/NAV/approach aid equipment for the route to be flown is carried, or the equipment is unserviceable,

OR S if standard COM/NAV/approach aid equipment for the route to be flown is carried and serviceable (see Note 1),

AND/OR

INSERT one or more of the following letters to indicate the serviceable COM/NAV/approach aid equipment and capabilities available and serviceable:

A (Not allocated)GNSS M OmegaCPDLC ATN Augmentation in addition capability (see Note 3) to ABAS (see Note 6) B (Not allocated) O VOR C LORAN C P (Not allocated) D DME Q (Not allocated) E (Not allocated)DME-DME R RNP type certificationPBN with IRU capability (see Note 5) F ADF G (GNSS) ABAS without T TACAN external augmentation H HF RTF U UHF RTF I Inertial Navigation V VHF RTF J (Data Link)CPDLC FANS W RVSM capability 1/A capability (see Note 3) (see Note 3) X MNPS capability

K (MLS) Y when prescribed by ATS L ILS Z Other equipment carried (see Note 2).

Any alphanumeric characters not indicated above are reserved.

Note 1.— If the letter S is used, sStandard equipment is considered to be VHF RTF, ADF, VOR and ILS, unless another combination is prescribed by the appropriate ATS authority.

Note 2.— If the letter Z is used, specify in Item 18 the other equipment carried or other capabilities, preceded by COM/ and/or, NAV/ and/or DAT, as appropriate.

Note 3.— If the letters J or M areis used, specify in Item 18 the equipment carrieddata link capabilities, preceded by DAT/ followed by one or more letters as appropriate. A-7

Note 4.— Information on navigation capability is provided to ATC for clearance and routing purposes.

Note 5.— Inclusion ofIf the letter R is used, the performance based navigation levels that can be met are specified in Item 18 following the indicator PBN/. Guidance material on the application of performance based navigation to a specific indicates that an aircraft meets the RNP type prescribed for the route segment(s), route(s) and/or area concerned is contained in the Manual on Required Navigation Performance (Doc 9613).

Note 6.— If the letter A is used, the type of external GNSS augmentation is specified in Item 18 following the indicator NAV/.

Surveillance equipment and capabilities

INSERT N if no surveillance equipment for the route to be flown is carried, or the equipment is unserviceable,

INSERT one or two of the following letters to describe the serviceable surveillance equipment carried and/or capabilities on board:

SSR equipmentSSR Modes A and C

N Nil A Transponder — Mode A (4 digits — 4 096 codes) C Transponder — Mode A (4 digits — 4 096 codes) and Mode C

SSR Mode S

X Transponder — Mode S without both aircraft identification and pressure-altitude transmission E Transponder — Mode S, including aircraft identification, pressure-altitude and extended squitter (ADS-B) capability H Transponder — Mode S, including aircraft identification, pressure-altitude and enhanced surveillance capability I Transponder — Mode S, including aircraft identification, but no pressure-altitude capability L Transponder — Mode S, including aircraft identification, pressure-altitude, extended squitter (ADS-B) and enhanced surveillance capability P Transponder — Mode S, including pressure-altitude, but no aircraft identification transmissioncapability I Transponder — Mode S, including aircraft identification transmission, but no pressure-altitude transmission S Transponder — Mode S, including both pressure altitude and aircraft identification transmissioncapability X Transponder — Mode S with neither aircraft identification nor pressure-altitude capability

ADS-B

B ADS-B with dedicated 1090 MHz ADS-B capability only U ADS-B capability using UAT V ADS-B capability using VDL Mode 4 A-8

ADS-C

D ADS-C with FANS 1/A capabilities G ADS-C with ATN capabilities

ADS equipment

D ADS capability

Alphanumeric characters not indicated above are reserved.

Note.— Additional surveillance applications are listed in Item 18 following the indicator SUR/.

ITEM 13: DEPARTURE AERODROME AND TIME (8 CHARACTERS)

INSERT the ICAO four-letter location indicator of the departure aerodrome as specified in Doc 7910, Location Indicators,

OR, if no location indicator has been assigned,

INSERT ZZZZ and SPECIFY, in Item 18, the name or location of the aerodrome preceded by DEP/ ,

OR, if the flight plan is received from an aircraft in flight,

INSERT AFIL, and SPECIFY, in Item 18, the ICAO four-letter location indicator of the location of the ATS unit from which supplementary flight plan data can be obtained, preceded by DEP/ .

THEN, WITHOUT A SPACE,

INSERT for a flight plan submitted before departure, the estimated off-block time (EOBT),

OR, for a flight plan received from an aircraft in flight, the actual or estimated time over the first point of the route to which the flight plan applies.

ITEM 15: ROUTE

INSERT the first cruising speed as in (a) and the first cruising level as in (b), without a space between them.

THEN, following the arrow, INSERT the route description as in (c).

(a) Cruising speed (maximum 5 characters)

INSERT the True Air Speed for the first or the whole cruising portion of the flight, in terms of:

Kilometres per hour, expressed as K followed by 4 figures (e.g. K0830), or A-9

Knots, expressed as N followed by 4 figures (e.g. N0485), or

True Mach number, when so prescribed by the appropriate ATS authority, to the nearest hundredth of unit Mach, expressed as M followed by 3 figures (e.g. M082).

(b) Cruising level (maximum 5 characters)

INSERT the planned cruising level for the first or the whole portion of the route to be flown, in terms of:

Flight level, expressed as F followed by 3 figures (e.g. F085; F330), or

*Standard Metric Level in tens of metres, expressed as S followed by 4 figures (e.g. S1130), or

Altitude in hundreds of feet, expressed as A followed by 3 figures (e.g. A045; A100), or

Altitude in tens of metres, expressed as M followed by 4 figures (e.g. M0840), or

for uncontrolled VFR flights, the letters VFR.

*When so prescribed by the appropriate ATS authorities.

Flights along designated ATS routes

INSERT, if the departure aerodrome is located on or connected to the ATS route, the designator of the first ATS route,

OR, if the departure aerodrome is not on or connected to the ATS route, the letters DCT followed by the point of joining the first ATS route, followed by the designator of the ATS route.

THEN

INSERT each point at which either a change of speed and/or level is planned to commence, or a change of ATS route, and/or a change of flight rules is planned,

Note.— When a transition is planned between a lower and upper ATS route and the routes are oriented in the same direction, the point of transition need not be inserted.

FOLLOWED IN EACH CASE

by the designator of the next ATS route segment, even if the same as the previous one, OR by DCT, if the flight to the next point will be outside a designated route, unless both points are defined by geographical coordinates.

Flights outside designated ATS routes

A-10 INSERT points normally not more than 30 minutes flying time or 370 km (200 NM) apart, including each point at which a change of speed or level, a change of track, or a change of flight rules is planned.

OR, when required by appropriate ATS authority(ies),

DEFINE the track of flights operating predominantly in an east-west direction between 70°N and 70°S by reference to significant points formed by the intersections of half or whole degrees of latitude with meridians spaced at intervals of 10 degrees of longitude. For flights operating in areas outside those latitudes the tracks shall be defined by significant points formed by the intersection of parallels of latitude with meridians normally spaced at 20 degrees of longitude. The distance between significant points shall, as far as possible, not exceed one hour’s flight time. Additional significant points shall be established as deemed necessary.

For flights operating predominantly in a north-south direction, define tracks by reference to significant points formed by the intersection of whole degrees of longitude with specified parallels of latitude which are spaced at 5 degrees.

INSERT DCT between successive points unless both points are defined by geographical coordinates or by bearing and distance.

USE ONLY the conventions in (1) to (5) below and SEPARATE each sub-item by a space.

(1) ATS route (2 to 7 characters)

The coded designator assigned to the route or route segment including, where appropriate, the coded designator assigned to the standard departure or arrival route (e.g. BCN1, Bl, R14, UB10, KODAP2A).

Note.— Provisions for the application of route designators are contained in Annex 11, Appendix 1, whilst guidance material on the application of an RNP type to a specific route segment(s), route(s) or area is contained in the Manual on Required Navigation Performance (RNP) (Doc 9613).

(2) Significant point (2 to 11 characters)

The coded designator (2 to 5 characters) assigned to the point (e.g. LN, MAY, HADDY), or, if no coded designator has been assigned, one of the following ways:

— Degrees only (7 characters):

2 figures describing latitude in degrees, followed by “N” (North) or “S” (South), followed by 3 figures describing longitude in degrees, followed by “E” (East) or “W” (West). Make up the correct number of figures, where necessary, by insertion of zeros, e.g. 46N078W.

— Degrees and minutes (11 characters):

4 figures describing latitude in degrees and tens and units of minutes followed by “N” (North) or “S” (South), followed by 5 figures describing longitude in degrees and tens and units of minutes, followed by “E” (East) or “W” (West). Make up the correct number of figures, where necessary, by insertion of zeros, e.g. 4620N07805W.

A-11

— Bearing and distance from a navigation aidsignificant point:

The identification of the navigation aid (normally a VOR)significant point, in the form of 2 or 3 characters, THENfollowed by the bearing from the aidpoint in the form of 3 figures giving degrees magnetic, THENfollowed by the distance from the aidpoint in the form of 3 figures expressing nautical miles. In areas of high latitude where it is determined by the appropriate authority that reference to degrees magnetic is impractical, degrees true may be used. Make up the correct number of figures, where necessary, by insertion of zeros — e.g. a point 180° magnetic at a distance of 40 nautical miles from VOR “DUB” should be expressed as DUB180040.

Change of speed or level (3) (maximum 21 characters)

The point at which a change of speed (5% TAS or 0.01 Mach or more) or a change of level is planned to commence, expressed exactly as in (2) above, followed by an oblique stroke and both the cruising speed and the cruising level, expressed exactly as in (a) and (b) above, without a space between them, even when only one of these quantities will be changed.

Examples: LN/N0284A045 MAY/N0305Fl80 HADDY/N0420F330 4602N07805W/N0500F350 46N078W/M082F330 DUB180040/N0350M0840

Change of flight rules (4) (maximum 3 characters)

The point at which the change of flight rules is planned, expressed exactly as in (2) or (3) above as appropriate, followed by a space and one of the following:

VFR if from IFR to VFR IFR if from VFR to IFR

Examples: LN VFR LN/N0284A050 IFR

(5) Cruise climb (maximum 28 characters)

The letter C followed by an oblique stroke; THEN the point at which cruise climb is planned to start, expressed exactly as in (2) above, followed by an oblique stroke; THEN the speed to be maintained during cruise climb, expressed exactly as in (a) above, followed by the two levels defining the layer to be occupied during cruise climb, each level expressed exactly as in (b) above, or the level above which cruise climb is planned followed by the letters PLUS, without a space between them.

Examples: C/48N050W/M082F290F350 C/48N050W/M082F290PLUS C/52N050W/M220F580F620.

A-12

ITEM 16: DESTINATION AERODROME AND TOTAL ESTIMATED ELAPSED TIME, DESTINATION ALTERNATE AERODROME(S)

Destination aerodrome and total estimated elapsed time (8 characters)

INSERT the ICAO four-letter location indicator of the destination aerodrome followed, without a space, by the total estimated elapsed timeas specified in Doc 7910, Location Indicators,

OR , if no location indicator has been assigned,

INSERT ZZZZ followed, without a space, by the total estimated elapsed time, and SPECIFY in Item 18 the name or location of the aerodrome, preceded by DEST/ .

THEN WITHOUT A SPACE

INSERT the total estimated elapsed time.

Note.— For a flight plan received from an aircraft in flight, the total estimated elapsed time is the estimated time from the first point of the route to which the flight plan applies to the termination point of the flight plan.

Destination aAlternate aerodrome(s) (4 characters)

INSERT the ICAO four-letter location indicator(s) of not more than two destination alternate aerodromes, as specified in Doc 7910, Location Indicators, separated by a space,

OR, if no location indicator has been assigned to the destination alternate aerodrome(s),

INSERT ZZZZ and SPECIFY in Item 18 the name or location of the destination alternate aerodrome(s), preceded by ALTN/ .

ITEM 18: OTHER INFORMATION

Note.— Use of indicators not included under this item may result in data being rejected, processed incorrectly or lost.

Hyphens or oblique strokes should only be used as prescribed below.

INSERT 0 (zero) if no other information,

OR, any other necessary information in the preferred sequence shown hereunder, in the form of the appropriate indicator selected from those defined hereunder or in the Regional Supplementary Procedures (Doc 7030, SUPPS) followed by an oblique stroke and the information to be recorded:

A-13

STS/ Reason for special handling by ATS, e.g. a search and rescue mission, as follows:

ALTRV: for a flight operated in accordance with an altitude reservation; ATFMX: for a flight approved for exemption from ATFM measures by the appropriate ATS authority; FFR: fire-fighting; FLTCK: flight check for calibration of navaids; HAZMAT: for a flight carrying hazardous material; HEAD: a flight with Head of State status; HOSP: for a medical flight declared by medical authorities; HUM: for a flight operating on a humanitarian mission; MARSA: for a flight for which a military entity assumes responsibility for separation of military aircraft; MEDEVAC: for a life critical medical emergency evacuation; NONRVSM: for a non-RVSM capable flight intending to operate in RVSM airspace; SAR: for a flight engaged in a search and rescue mission; and STATE: for a flight engaged in military, customs or police services.

Other reasons for special handling by ATS shall be denoted under the designator RMK/.

PBN/ Indication of RNAV and/or RNP capabilities. Include as many of the descriptors below, as apply to the flight, up to a maximum of 8 entries, i.e. a total of not more than 16 characters.

RNAV SPECIFICATIONS A1 RNP 10

B1 RNAV 5 all permitted sensors B2 RNAV 5 GNSS B3 RNAV 5 DME/DME B4 RNAV 5 VOR/DME B5 RNAV 5 INS or IRS B6 RNAV 5 LORANC

C1 RNAV 2 all permitted sensors C2 RNAV 2 GNSS C3 RNAV 2 DME/DME C4 RNAV 2 DME/DME/IRU

D1 RNAV 1 all permitted sensors D2 RNAV 1 GNSS D3 RNAV 1 DME/DME D4 RNAV 1 DME/DME/IRU

RNP SPECIFICATIONS L1 RNP 4

O1 Basic RNP 1 all permitted sensors O2 Basic RNP 1 GNSS O3 Basic RNP 1 DME/DME O4 Basic RNP 1 DME/DME/IRU A-14

S1 RNP APCH

T1 RNP AR APCH with RF (special authorization required) T2 RNP AR APCH without RF (special authorization required)

Combinations of alphanumeric characters not indicated above are reserved.

EET/ Significant points or FIR boundary designators and accumulated estimated elapsed times to such points or FIR boundaries, when so prescribed on the basis of regional air navigation agreements, or by the appropriate ATS authority.

Examples: EET/CAP0745 XYZ0830 EET/EINN0204

RIF/ The route details to the revised destination aerodrome, followed by the ICAO four-letter location indicator of the aerodrome. The revised route is subject to reclearance in flight.

Examples: RIF/DTA HEC KLAX Examples: RIF/ESP G94 CLA YPPH Examples: RIF/LEMD

REG/ The registration markings of the aircraft, if different from the aircraft identification in Item 7.

SEL/ SELCAL Code, if so prescribed by the appropriate ATS authority.

OPR/ Name of the operator, if not obvious from the aircraft identification in Item 7.

STS/ Reason for special handling by ATS, e.g. hospital aircraft, one engine inoperative, e.g. STS/HOSP, STS/ONE ENG INOP.

TYP/ Type(s) of aircraft, preceded if necessary by number(s) of aircraft, if ZZZZ is inserted in Item 9.

PER/ Aircraft performance data, if so prescribed by the appropriate ATS authority.

COM/ Significant data related to communication equipment as required by the appropriate ATS authority, e.g. COM/UHF only.

DAT/ Significant data related to data link capability, using one or more of the letters S, H, V and M, e.g. DAT/S for satellite data link, DAT/H for HF data link, DAT/V for VHF data link, DAT/M for SSR Mode S data link.

NAV/ Significant data related to navigation equipment, other than specified in PBN/, as required by the appropriate ATS authority. Indicate GNSS augmentation under this indicator, with a space between two or more methods of augmentation, e.g. NAV/GBAS SBAS. COM/ For flights exempted from carriage requirement of a VHF transceiver with 8.33 kHz channel spacing but not RCP capable, insert COM/A. A-15

For RCP capable flights, enter COM/ followed by the characters RCP and 3 numerics, which represent the RCP type to which the aircraft is capable of operating, e.g. COM/RCP120 followed by a space and in alphabetical order, as many of the descriptors below that apply to the flight.

A Flight exempted from carriage requirement of a VHF transceiver with 8.33 kHz channel spacing B CPDLC message subset version number (110 pending finalization) C CPDLC message subset version number (112 pending finalization)

Example: COM/RCP120 AC

Alphanumeric characters not indicated above are reserved.

Note.— Guidance material on the application of an RCP type to a specific route segment, route or area is contained in the Manual on Required Communication Performance (RCP) (Doc 9869).

DAT/ Indicate CPDLC data link transmission medium and other applications using one or more of the letters listed below.

F FIS using VHF data link H CPDLC using HF data link transmission capability

S CPDLC using satellite data link capability

V CPDLC using VHF data link capability

Example: DAT/FHSV

Alphanumeric characters not indicated above are reserved.

SUR/ Include surveillance applications or capabilities by listing as many of the descriptors below that apply to the flight, following SUR/ in alphabetical order.

A TIS-B

B ADS-B Air to Air Surveillance “ADS-B in”

DEP/ Name of departure aerodrome, if ZZZZ is inserted in Item 13, or the ICAO four-letter location indicator of the location of the ATS unit from which supplementary flight plan data can be obtained, if AFIL is inserted in Item 13. For aerodromes not listed in the relevant Aeronautical Information Publication, indicate location

A-16 EITHER in LAT/LONG, as follows:

With 4 figures describing latitude in degrees and tens and units of minutes followed by “N” (North) or “S” (South), followed by 5 figures describing longitude in degrees and tens and units of minutes, followed by “E” (East) or “W” (West). Make up the correct number of figures, where necessary, by insertion of zeros, e.g. 4620N07805W (11 characters).

OR bearing and distance from the nearest significant point, as follows:

The identification of the significant point followed by the bearing from the point in the form of 3 figures giving degrees magnetic, followed by the distance from the point in the form of 3 figures expressing nautical miles. In areas of high latitude where it is determined by the appropriate authority that reference to degrees magnetic is impractical, degrees true may be used. Make up the correct number of figures, where necessary, by insertion of zeros, e.g. a point of 180° magnetic at a distance of 40 nautical miles from VOR “DUB” should be expressed as DUB180040.

DEST/ Name of destination aerodrome, if ZZZZ is inserted in Item 16. For aerodromes not listed in the relevant Aeronautical Information Publication, indicate location in LAT/LONG or bearing and distance from the nearest significant point, as described under DEP/ above.

DOF/ The date of flight departure in a six figure format (YYMMDD, where YY equals the year, MM equals the month and DD equals the day).

REG/ The nationality or common mark and registration mark of the aircraft, if different from the aircraft identification in Item 7.

EET/ Significant points or FIR boundary designators and accumulated estimated elapsed times from take-off to such points or FIR boundaries, when so prescribed on the basis of regional air navigation agreements, or by the appropriate ATS authority.

Examples: EET/CAP0745 XYZ0830 EET/EINN0204

SEL/ SELCAL Code, for aircraft so equipped.

TYP/ Type(s) of aircraft, preceded if necessary by number(s) of aircraft and separated by one space, if ZZZZ is inserted in Item 9.

Example: TYP/2 F15 5 F5 3 B2

ALTN/ Name of destination alternate aerodrome(s), if ZZZZ is inserted in Item 16.

RALT/ Name of en-route alternate aerodrome(s).

CODE/ Aircraft address (expressed in the form of an alphanumerical code of six hexadecimal characters) when required by the appropriate ATS authority. Example: “F00001” is the lowest aircraft address contained in the specific block administered by ICAO.

A-17

DLE/ Enroute delay or holding, insert the significant point(s) on the route where a delay is planned to occur, followed by the length of delay using four figure time in hours and minutes (hhmm).

Example: DLE/MDG0030

OPR/ ICAO designator or name of the aircraft operating agency, if different from the aircraft identification in item 7.

ORGN/ The originator’s 8 letter AFTN address or other appropriate contact details, in cases where the originator of the flight plan may not be readily identified, as required by the appropriate ATS authority.

Note.— In some areas, flight plan reception centres may insert the ORGN/ identifier and originator’s AFTN address automatically.

PER/ Aircraft performance data, indicated by a single letter as specified in the Procedures for Air Navigation Services — Aircraft Operations (PANS-OPS, Doc 8168), Volume I — Flight Procedures, if so prescribed by the appropriate ATS authority.

ALTN/ Name of destination alternate aerodrome(s), if ZZZZ is inserted in Item 16. For aerodromes not listed in the relevant Aeronautical Information Publication, indicate location in LAT/LONG or bearing and distance from the nearest significant point, as described in DEP/ above.

RALT/ ICAO four letter indicator(s) for en-route alternate(s), as specified in Doc 7910, Location Indicators, or name(s) of en-route alternate aerodrome(s), if no indicator is allocated. For aerodromes not listed in the relevant Aeronautical Information Publication, indicate location in LAT/LONG or bearing and distance from the nearest significant point, as described in DEP/ above.

TALT/ ICAO four letter indicator(s) for take-off alternate, as specified in Doc 7910, Location Indicators, or name of take-off alternate aerodrome, if no indicator is allocated. For aerodromes not listed in the relevant Aeronautical Information Publication, indicate location in LAT/LONG or bearing and distance from the nearest significant point, as described in DEP/ above.

RIF/ The route details to the revised destination aerodrome, following by the ICAO four-letter location indicator of the aerodrome. The revised route is subject to reclearance in flight.

Examples: RIF/DTA HEC KLAX RIF/ESP G94 CLA YPPH

RMK/ Any other plain language remarks when required by the appropriate ATS authority or deemed necessary.

ITEM 19: SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION . . .

4. Instructions for the transmission of a supplementary flight plan (SPL) message

Items to be transmitted A-18 Transmit items as indicated hereunder, unless otherwise prescribed:

a) AFTN Priority Indicator, Addressee Indicators <<, Filing Time, Originator Indicator << and, if necessary, specific identification of addressees and/or originator;

b) commencing with << (SPL:

all symbols and data in the unshaded areas of boxes 7, 13, 16 and 18, except that the ‘)’ at the end of box 18 is not to be transmitted, and then the symbols in the unshaded area of box 19 down to and including the )<< of box 19,

additional alignment functions as necessary to prevent the inclusion of more than 69 characters in any line of Items 18 and 19. The alignment function is to be inserted only in lieu of a space, so as not to break up a group of data,

letter shifts and figure shifts (not pre-printed on the form) as necessary;

c) the AFTN Ending, as described below:

End-of-Text Signal

a) one LETTER SHIFT

b) two CARRIAGE RETURNS, one LINE FEED

Page-feed Sequence

Seven LINE FEEDS

End-of-Message Signal

Four of the letter N.

. . .

7. Instructions for the completion of the repetitive flight plan (RPL) listing form

. . .

7.4 Instructions for insertion of RPL data . . .

ITEM G: SUPPLEMENTARY DATA AT

INSERT name and appropriate contact details of contactentity where information normally provided under Item 19 of the FPL is kept readily available and can be supplied without delay.

. . . A-19

APPENDIX 3. AIR TRAFFIC SERVICES MESSAGES

1. Message contents, formats and data conventions

. . .

1.2 The standard types of field

. . .

The standard fields of data permitted in ATS messages are as shown in the following table. The numbers in column 1 correspond with those in the reference table on page A3-30.

Field type Data

3 Message type, number and reference data

5 Description of emergency

7 Aircraft identification and SSR Mode and Code 8 Flight rules and type of flight 9 Number and type of aircraft and wake turbulence category 10 Equipment and capabilities

13 Departure aerodrome and time 14 Estimate data 15 Route 16 Destination aerodrome and total estimated elapsed time, destination alternate aerodrome(s) 17 Arrival aerodrome and time 18 Other information 19 Supplementary information 20 Alerting search and rescue information 21 Radio failure information 22 Amendment

. . . A-20 1.6 Data conventions . . .

1.6.3 The expression of position or route

The following alternative data conventions shall be used for the expression of position or route:

a) from 2 to 7 characters, being the coded designator assigned to an ATS route to be flown;

b) from 2 to 5 characters, being the coded designator assigned to an en-route point;

c) 4 numerics describing latitude in degrees and tens and units of minutes, followed by “N” (meaning “North”) or “S” (South), followed by 5 numerics describing longitude in degrees and tens and units of minutes, followed by “E” (East) or “W” (West). The correct number of numerics is to be made up, where necessary, by the insertion of zeros, e.g. “4620N07805W”;

d) 2 numerics describing latitude in degrees, followed by “N” (North) or “S” (South), followed by 3 numerics describing longitude in degrees, followed by “E” (East) or “W” (West). Again, the correct number of numerics is to be made up, where necessary, by the insertion of zeros, e.g. “46N078W”;

e) 2 or 3to 5 characters being the coded identification of a navigation aid (normally a VOR) significant point, followed by 3 decimal numerics giving the bearing from the point in degrees magnetic followed by 3 decimal numerics giving the distance from the point in nautical miles. The correct number of numerics is to be made up, where necessary, by the insertion of zeros, e.g. a point at 180° magnetic at a distance of 40 nautical miles from VOR “FOJ” would be expressed as “FOJ180040”.

. . .

Field Type 8 — Flight rules and type of flight

* Format:– a b

SINGLE HYPHEN

(a) Flight Rules 1 LETTER as follows: I if IFRit is intended that the entire flight will be operated under the IFR V if VFR it is intended that the entire flight will be operated under the VFR Y if IFR firstthe flight initially will be operated under the IFR, followed by one or more subsequent changes of flight rules Z if VFR firstthe flight initially will be operated under the VFR, followed by one or more subsequent changes of flight rules Note.— If the letter Y or Z is used, the point or points at which a change of flight rules is planned is to be shown as indicated in Field Type 15.

* This field shall be terminated here unless indication of the type of flight is required by the appropriate ATS authority.

. . . A-21

Field Type 10 — Equipment and Capabilities

Format:– a / b

SINGLE HYPHEN

(a) Radio Communication, Navigation and Approach Aid Equipment and Capabilities 1 LETTER as follows: N no COM/NAV/approach aid equipment for the route to be flown is carried, or the equipment is unserviceable OR S Standard COM/NAV/approach aid equipment for the route to be flown is carried and serviceable (See Note 1) AND/OR ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING LETTERS to indicate the serviceable COM/NAV/approach aid equipment serviceableand capabilities

A (Not allocated)GNSS M OmegaCPDLC ATN capability Augmentation in addition to (see Note 3) ABAS (see Note 6) B (Not allocated) O VOR C LORAN C P (Not allocated) D DME Q (Not allocated) E (Not allocated)DME-DME R RNP type certificationPBN with IRU capability (see Note 5) F ADF T TACAN G (GNSS) ABAS without U UHF RTF external augmentation V VHF RTF H HF RTF W whenRVSM capability I Inertial Navigation X MNPS capability J (Data link)CPDLC FANS 1/A Y capability (see Note 3) K (MLS) L ILS prescribedby ATS Z Other equipment carried (see Note 2) Note 1.— Standard equipment is considered to be VHF RTF, ADF, VOR and ILS, unless another combination is prescribed by the appropriate ATS authority.

Note 2.— If the letter Z is used, specify in Item 18, other the equipment carried or other capabilitiesis to be specified in Item 18, preceded by COM/, and/or NAV/, and/or DAT as appropriate.

Note 3.— If the letters J or M, areis used, specify in Item 18 the equipment carrieddata link capabilities, preceded by DAT/followed by one or more letters as appropriate.

Note 4.— Information on navigation capability is provided to ATC for clearance and routing purposes.

A-22 Note 5.— Inclusion ofIf the letter R is used, the performance based navigation levels that can be met are specified in Item 18 following the indicator PBN/. Guidance material on the application of performance based navigation to a specific indicates that an aircraft meets the RNP type prescribed for the route segment(s), route(s) and/or area concerned is contained in the Performance Based Navigation Manual (Doc 9613).

Note 6.— If the letter A is used, the type of external GNSS augmentation is specified in Item 18 following the indicator NAV/.

Note 7.— Guidance material on the application of an RCP type to a specific route segment, route or area is contained in the Manual on Required Communication Performance (RCP) (Doc 9869).

OBLIQUE STROKE

(b) Surveillance Equipment and capabilities

ONE OR TWO LETTERS to describe the serviceable surveillance equipment carriedand/or capabilities on board:

SSR equipmentModes A and C

N Nil A Transponder — Mode A (4 digits — 4 096 codes) C Transponder — Mode A (4 digits — 4 096 codes) and Mode C

SSR Mode S

X Transponder — Mode S without both aircraft identification and pressure- altitude transmission E Transponder — Mode S, including aircraft identification, pressure- altitude and extended squitter (ADS-B) capability H Transponder — Mode S, including aircraft identification, pressure- altitude and enhanced surveillance capability I Transponder — Mode S, including aircraft identification, but no pressure-altitude capability L Transponder — Mode S, including aircraft identification, pressure- altitude, extended squitter (ADS-B) and enhanced surveillance capability P Transponder — Mode S, including pressure-altitude, but no aircraft identification transmissioncapability I Transponder — Mode S, including aircraft identification transmission, but no pressure-altitude transmission

S Transponder — Mode S, including both pressure altitude and aircraft identification transmissioncapability X Transponder — Mode S with neither aircraft identification nor pressure- altitude capability

ADS-B

B ADS-B with dedicated 1090 MHz ADS-B capability only U ADS-B capability using UAT A-23

V ADS-B capability using VDL Mode 4

ADS-C

D ADS-C with FANS 1/A capabilities G ADS-C with ATN capabilities

ADS equipment

D ADS capability

Alphanumeric characters not indicated above are reserved.

Examples: –ZS/A –SCHJ/CD –SAFJ/SD

. . .

Field Type 13 — Departure aerodrome and time

Format:– a b

SINGLE HYPHEN

(a) Departure Aerodrome 4 LETTERS, being the ICAO four-letter location indicator allocated to the departure aerodrome as specified in Doc 7910, Location Indicators, or ZZZZ if no ICAO location indicator has been allocated (see Note 1) or if the departure aerodrome is not known, or

AFIL if the flight plan has been filed in the air (see Note 2).

Note 1.— If ZZZZ is used, the name or location of the departure aerodrome is to be shown in the Other Information Field (see Field Type 18) if this Field Type is contained in the message.

Note 2.— If AFIL is used, the ATS unit from which supplementary flight data can be obtained is to be shown in the Other Information Field (Field Type 18).

* This field shall be terminated here in message types CHG, CNL, ARR, CPL, EST, CDN, ACP and RQS. It shall be terminated here in message type RQP if the estimated off-block time is not known.

A-24 (b) Time

4 NUMERICS giving

the estimated off-block time (EOBT) at the aerodrome in (a) in FPL, CHG, CNL and DLA messages transmitted before departure and in RQP message, if known, or

the actual time of departure from the aerodrome in (a) in ALR, DEP and SPL messages, or

the actual or estimated time of departure from the first point shown in the Route Field (see Field Type 15) in FPL messages derived from flight plans filed in the air, as shown by the letters AFIL in (a).

For correlation purposes EOBT may be included in a modification (CHG) message and/or cancellation (CNL) messge.

Examples: –EHAM0730 –AFIL1625

. . .

Field Type 14 — Estimate data

Format:– a / b c d e

SINGLE HYPHEN

(a) Boundary Point (see Note 1)

The BOUNDARY POINT expressed either by a designator consisting of 2 to 5 characters, in Geographical Coordinates, in Abbreviated Geographical Coordinates, or by bearing and distance from a designatedsignificant point (e.g. a VOR).

Note 1.— This point may be an agreed point located close to, rather than on, the FIR boundary.

Note 2.— See 1.6 for data conventions.

. . . A-25

Field Type 16 — Destination aerodrome and total estimated Field Type 16 — elapsed time, destination alternate aerodrome(s)

* **

Format:– a b (sp) c

See Note in margin on page A3-20.

SINGLE HYPHEN

(a) Destination Aerodrome

4 LETTERS, being

the ICAO four-letter location indicator allocated to the destination aerodrome as specified in Doc 7910, Location Indicators, or

ZZZZ if no ICAO location indicator has been allocated.

Note.— If ZZZZ is used, the name or location of the destination aerodrome is to be shown in the Other Information Field (see Field Type 18).

* This field is to be terminated here in all message types other than ALR, FPL and SPL. . . .

SPACE

the ICAO four-letter location indicator allocated to an Note.— One further element of (c) should be alternate aerodrome, as specified in Doc 7910, Location added, as necessary, preceded by a space Indicators or

ZZZZ if no ICAO location indicator has been allocated.

Note.— If ZZZZ is used, the name or location of the destination alternate aerodrome is to be shown in the Other Information Field (see Field Type 18).

Examples: –EINN0630 –EHAM0645 EBBR –EHAM0645 EBBR EDDL

A-26 Field Type 17 — Arrival aerodrome and time

Format:– a b (sp) c

SINGLE HYPHEN

(a) Arrival Aerodrome

4 LETTERS, being

the ICAO four-letter location indicator allocated to the arrival aerodrome as specified in Doc 7910, Location Indicators, or

ZZZZ if no ICAO location indicator has been allocated.

Note.— If ZZZZ is used, the name or location of the arrival aerodrome is to be shown in the Other Information Field (see Field Type 18).

(b) Time of Arrival

4 NUMERICS, giving

the actual time of arrival.

* This field is to be terminated here if an ICAO location indicator has been allocated to the arrival aerodrome.

Field Type 18 — Other information

Note.— Use of indicators not included under this item may result in data being rejected, processed incorrectly or lost.

Hyphens or oblique strokes should only be used as prescribed below.

Format:– a

Format:– (sp) (sp) * (sp)

(* additional elements as necessary)

A-27

SINGLE HYPHEN

(a) 0 (zero) if no other information,

OR,

Any other necessary information in the preferred sequence shown hereunder, in the form of the appropriate indicator selected from those defined hereunder or in the Regional Supplementary Procedures (Doc 7030, SUPPS) followed by an oblique stroke and the information to be recorded:

STS/ Reason for special handling by ATS, e.g. a search and rescue mission, as follows:

Other reasons for special handling by ATS shall be denoted under the designator RMK/.

PBN/ Indication of RNAV and/or RNP capabilities. Include as many of the descriptors below, as apply to the flight, up to a maximum of 8 entries, i.e. a total of not more than 16 characters.

RNAV SPECIFICATIONS A1 RNP 10

B1 RNAV 5 all permitted sensors B2 RNAV 5 GNSS B3 RNAV 5 DME/DME B4 RNAV 5 VOR/DME B5 RNAV 5 INS or IRS B6 RNAV 5 LORANC

C1 RNAV 2 all permitted sensors C2 RNAV 2 GNSS C3 RNAV 2 DME/DME C4 RNAV 2 DME/DME/IRU

D1 RNAV 1 all permitted sensors D2 RNAV 1 GNSS D3 RNAV 1 DME/DME A-28 D4 RNAV 1 DME/DME/IRU

RNP SPECIFICATIONS L1 RNP 4

O1 Basic RNP 1 all permitted sensors O2 Basic RNP 1 GNSS O3 Basic RNP 1 DME/DME O4 Basic RNP 1 DME/DME/IRU