A DC8 FLC BECAME CONFUSED BY A FOREIGN CTLR'S INSTRUCTIONS. THEY WERE TOLD TO TURN L WHEN THE HDG THEY RECEIVED IN THEIR CLRNC WAS ON THE R. THEN; AS THE CAPT WAS LATER TOLD; THEY WERE INSTRUCTED TO TURN R FOR THE APCH WHEN THEY HAD TURNED L. AFTER LNDG; THE CAPT WAS QUESTIONED BY THE FACILITY'S TRANSLATOR AND HE APOLOGIZED; BUT WAS NEVER CERTAIN OF THE ACTUAL ATC INSTRUCTIONS.

Date: 1996-01 · Aircraft: DC-8 70 · Phase: approach

Anomalies: deviation-track-heading-all-types|deviation-discrepancy-procedural-clearance|other-unspecified

Synopsis

A DC8 FLC BECAME CONFUSED BY A FOREIGN CTLR'S INSTRUCTIONS. THEY WERE TOLD TO TURN L WHEN THE HDG THEY RECEIVED IN THEIR CLRNC WAS ON THE R. THEN; AS THE CAPT WAS LATER TOLD; THEY WERE INSTRUCTED TO TURN R FOR THE APCH WHEN THEY HAD TURNED L. AFTER LNDG; THE CAPT WAS QUESTIONED BY THE FACILITY'S TRANSLATOR AND HE APOLOGIZED; BUT WAS NEVER CERTAIN OF THE ACTUAL ATC INSTRUCTIONS.

Narrative

APCHING SHANGHAI (SHA; ZSSS) ON A FLT FOR A FOREIGN AIRLINE FROM SINGAPORE. CONTRACT ACR; OPERATING A DC8-73 WITH A CREW OF 3. I BELIEVE WE HAD A CTLR IN TRAINING ON OUR APCH TO SHA. WE WERE NOT TOLD WE WERE BEING VECTORED FOR APCH ILS RWY 18 AS SPECIFIED ON ATIS (WE ASKED). HE WAS LATE GETTING US DOWN AND (AS WE EXPECTED) HARD TO UNDERSTAND. HE WAS CONFUSED IN HIS INSTRUCTIONS; IE; TURN L TO A HDG THAT WAS 30 DEGS TO THE R. WE ASKED AND IT WAS CORRECTED TO A TURN R (MAY HAVE A LANGUAGE PROB WITH L AND R; LIKE I HAVE A PROB WITH PORT AND STARBOARD). WE WERE CLRED DOWN TO 2955 FT AND TURNED TO A HDG OF 090 DEGS; ABOUT 6 DME N OF THE ARPT. WE WERE NOT LOOKING FOR A TURN TO INTERCEPT AS WE WERE HIGH AND WERE NOT GIVEN ONE. (GS INTERCEPT ALT WAS 1820 FT.) WE WERE TOLD TO TURN L TO 270 DEGS FROM 090 DEGS. WE DID. WE WERE NOW AT 2955 FT AND IN APCH CONFIGN. WE ASKED; 'DO YOU WANT US TO INTERCEPT THE LOC?' THE ANSWER WAS YES; TURN (NOT SURE) CLRED FOR APCH. WE DID; AND LANDED WITHOUT EVENT. AT THE GATE I WAS ASKED TO COME UP AND TALK TO ATC. I DID; AND THROUGH INTERP WAS TOLD THAT WE WERE TOLD TO TURN R TO 270 DEGS. I APOLOGIZED IF WE MISUNDERSTOOD THEIR INSTRUCTION. I DO NOT KNOW IF THERE WAS A CONFLICT OF TFC OR NOT. I COULD NOT UNDERSTAND THEM. THEY APPEARED TO BE SATISFIED WITH MY EXPLANATION THAT I THOUGHT HE SAID 'L.' I WENT BACK AND ASKED THE CREW WHAT THEY THOUGHT. THEY REMEMBER 'L.' I WROTE THEM A CAPT RPT AND APOLOGIZED IF THERE WAS A MISUNDERSTANDING (WHEN IN CHINA BE ALERT). CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE RPTR HAS BEEN INTO SHANGHAI 12 TIMES SINCE THIS INCIDENT. HE HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY MORE CLRNCS THAT CONFUSE 'L' WITH 'R;' BUT HE REMAINS UNCOMFORTABLE WITH ATC'S VECTORING PROC. DURING VECTORING; THE FLC IS CLRED FOR THE APCH WHEN THEY ARE NOT ON A HDG THAT INTERCEPTS ANY SEGMENT OF THE APCH. THE ACR HAS NEVER BEEN VECTORED CLOSER THAN A 90 DEG LOC INTERCEPT. COMMONLY; THE FLC IS ON A RECIPROCAL HDG DOWNWIND; ABEAM THE OM; WHEN THEY ARE CLRED FOR THE APCH.

Source: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (public domain). Reports are voluntary submissions and are not verified by NASA.