ASIA/PACIFIC REGION ATS ROUTE CATALOGUE

INTERNATIONAL CIVIL AVIATION ORGANIZATION

ASIA/PACIFIC REGIONAL OFFICE

VERSION 23.1

October 2023

2 
 
Table of Contents 
 
Table of Contents ........................................................................................................... 2 
Foreword ........................................................................................................................ 4 
Amendment Record ....................................................................................................... 6 
Chapter 1: South Asia .................................................................................................... 8 
HIMALAYA 02 ......................................................................................................... 9 
IND 07 (N877 Extension) ........................................................................................ 13 
BOB 01 .................................................................................................................... 15 
BOB 02 .................................................................................................................... 19 
Chapter 2: Southeast Asia ............................................................................................ 21 
SCS 01 ..................................................................................................................... 22 
SCS 02 ..................................................................................................................... 24 
SCS 11 ..................................................................................................................... 26 
SCS 14 ..................................................................................................................... 28 
SCS 15 ..................................................................................................................... 29 
SCS 16 ..................................................................................................................... 30 
SCS 18 ..................................................................................................................... 31 
SEA 12 ..................................................................................................................... 32 
VIET NAM 02 ......................................................................................................... 33 
SCS19 ...................................................................................................................... 35 
SCS20 ...................................................................................................................... 36 
SCS21 ...................................................................................................................... 37 
SCS22 ...................................................................................................................... 38 
SCS23 ...................................................................................................................... 39 
MEKONG 01 ........................................................................................................... 40 
Chapter 3: East Asia..................................................................................................... 41 
CHA 01 .................................................................................................................... 42 
CHA 02 .................................................................................................................... 43 
CHA 12 .................................................................................................................... 44 
IATA 02 ................................................................................................................... 45 
SCS 08 ..................................................................................................................... 46 
TPE 01 ..................................................................................................................... 48 
Chapter 4: Trans-Regional (South Asia)...................................................................... 50 
AFG 01..................................................................................................................... 51 
AFG 02..................................................................................................................... 54 
MID 02 (a) ............................................................................................................... 55 
Chapter 5: Trans-Regional (East Asia) ........................................................................ 56 
FE0008 / RDGE 15.003 / APAC RUS 5 ................................................................. 57 
FE0021 / RDGE 13.028 / APAC RUS 4 ................................................................. 58 
FE0049 / RDGE 20.010 ........................................................................................... 59 
FE0050 / RDGE 20.011 ........................................................................................... 60 
FE0051 / RDGE 20.012 ........................................................................................... 61 
FE0052 / RDGE 20.013 ........................................................................................... 62 
FE0053 / RDGE 20.014 ........................................................................................... 63 
FE0054 / RDGE 20.015 ........................................................................................... 64 
FE0055 / RDGE 20.016 ........................................................................................... 65 
FE0056 / RDGE 20.017 ........................................................................................... 66 
Chapter 6: Pacific ......................................................................................................... 67 

WPC 01 .................................................................................................................... 68

Foreword

1.1 The Air Navigation Plan – Asia and Pacific Regions (Doc 9673) has been

superseded, in electronic form by the electronic Air Navigation Plan (eANP), which contains a

table of regional ATS routes in Volume II (Table ATM II- APAC- 1 – Asia and Pacific Regions

ATS Routes).

1.2 The Fourteenth Meeting of the Asia/Pacific Air Navigation Planning and

Implementation Regional Group (APANPIRG/14, August 2004) under Conclusion 14/5

established the ATS Route Network Review Task Force (ARNR/TF) to review the Asia and

Pacific ATS route network to determine present and future route requirements. To facilitate

the amendment process and keep track of route implementation and future requirements, and

with the objective of providing more up to date information on route developments, ARNR/TF

prepared the draft Asia/Pacific Region ATS Route Catalogue.

1.3 APANPIRG/16 (August 2005, Bangkok), recognizing the value of a consolidated

reference document for the regional ATS routes and future route requirements of States and

airspace users, accepted the Asia/Pacific Region ATS Route Catalogue under Decision 16/9.

The ATS Route Catalogue is intended to be a living document, supplementing the eANP and

maintained by the ICAO Asia and Pacific (APAC) Regional Sub-Office on behalf of the ICAO

Asia and Pacific Office. Communication related to the ATS Route Catalogue should be made

via email to [email protected]t.

1.4 A Contracting State or qualifying International Organization identifying a need for

a new route requirement to be included in the eANP or to change an existing route contained

in the eANP, may submit an amendment proposal to the ICAO APAC Regional Office in

accordance with established procedures summarized below and the template provided on the

ICAO APAC website.

1.5 Appropriately presented and documented proposals to amend the eANP are

submitted to the ICAO Secretary General through the Regional Office and circulated to States

and International Organizations for comment. If, in reply to the ICAO Regional Office’s

inquiry, no objection is raised to the proposal by a specified date, it will be deemed that a

regional agreement (involving the relevant PIRG) on the subject has been reached. The

Regional Office will inform States and International Organizations concerned of the approval

and the eANP will be amended accordingly.

1.6 If, in reply to the ICAO Regional Office’s inquiry, any objection is raised, and if

objection remains after further consultation, the matter will be documented for discussion by

APANPIRG and, ultimately for formal consideration by the Air Navigation Commission, if it

remains unresolved. If the Commission concludes that the amendment is acceptable in its

original or other form, it will present appropriate recommendations to the Council.

1.7 The APAC Regional Sub-Office, which is responsible for maintaining the ATS

Route Catalogue, will update the ATS Route Catalogue from time to time as amendment

proposals are presented, progressed and agreed or not agreed. The revision number and date

shown on the cover page of the Catalogue. The Asia/Pacific Region ATS Route Catalogue is

posted on the ICAO APAC website at (https://www.icao.int/APAC/Pages/default.aspx).

1.8 The Asia/Pacific Region ATS Route Catalogue is now as follows: Chapter 1:

South Asia; Chapter 2: Southeast Asia; Chapter 3: East Asia; Chapter 4: Trans-Regional (South

Asia); Chapter 5: Trans-Regional (East Asia); and Chapter 6: Pacific.

1.9 Regional ATS route proposals affecting Asia/Pacific airspace should be presented

as part of a paper to ATM coordination groups or other suitable bodies, and then may be entered

into the Asia/Pacific Region ATS Route Catalogue by the Regional Office. The APAC

Regional Office or Regional Sub-Office will periodically present to appropriate ATM

coordination groups or other suitable bodies the proposals within their geographical area of

interest for review.

1.10 The Asia/Pacific Region ATS Route Catalogue contained proposals for route

changes that had not yet been agreed and implemented.

1.11 States in APAC were required to reclassify the routes as:

• Priority A – Short Term i.e. it could be implemented within 12 months;

• Priority B – Medium Term i.e. it could be implemented within 13 to 36

months;

• Priority C – Long term i.e. more than 36 months; and

• Priority D – Cannot be implemented (reasons to be provided).

As some States were not represented, these routes were classified as Priority

C and will be updated when more information becomes available.

1.12 IATA has also prioritised the routes in terms of efficiency and environmental

benefits as:

• HIGH – one of top priorities for airlines; or

• MEDIUM – has significant benefits but can wait until high priority proposals

are implemented; or

• LOW – the route proposal may be deleted if the State cannot implement

within 36 months.

1.13 After review, the Asia/Pacific Region ATS Route Catalogue may be updated by:

• deletion of the proposal when the proposal has been agreed and entered into

the eANP; or

• deletion of the proposal when it has been decided that there is no possibility

of implementation in the foreseeable future [i.e.: the proposal has had no

progress in the past five years, or it is a Priority C or D (more than 36 months)

by States and is assigned a LOW priority by IATA]; or

• amendment with the addition of supplementary information; or

• addition of a new ATS route proposal.

Amendment Record

Version

Date

Amended by

Comments

0.1

14 February 2005

ARNR/TF/2 developed draft version.

0.2

5 May 2005

ARNR/TF/3

Finalized format following contribution

from members.

0.3

29 July 2005

ATM/AIS/SAR/SG/15

Sub-Group concluded the Catalogue be

adopted (Draft Conclusion 15/3).

26 August 2005

APANPIRG/16

APANPIRG/16 decided that the

Catalogue be accepted (Decision 16/9).

24 January 2006

BBACG/17

Reviewed and updated the Catalogue.

19 May 2006

SEACG/13

Reviewed and updated the Catalogue.

26 January 2007

BBACG/18

Reviewed and updated the Catalogue.

23 May 2008

SEACG/15

Reviewed and updated the Catalogue.

15 May 2009

SEACG/16

Reviewed and updated the Catalogue.

27 May 2010

SEACG/17

Reviewed and updated the Catalogue.

10 March 2011

BBACG/21

Reviewed and updated the Catalogue.

6 May 2011

SEACG/18

Reviewed and updated the Catalogue.

22 September

2011

SAIOACG/1

Reviewed and updated the Catalogue.

22 June 2012

ATM/AIS/SAR/SG/22

APANPIRG/23

Reviewed, reformatted, and updated the

Catalogue, approved by

APANPIRG/23.

26 June 2013

SAIOACG/SEACG,

ATM/SG

Reviewed, reformatted, and updated the

Catalogue, approved by

APANPIRG/24.

11 September

2014

SAIOACG/SEACG,

ATM/SG

APANPIRG/25

Reviewed subsequent to Easter Island

being transferred out of the Region;

added trans-regional proposals

September 2015

SAIOACG/SEACG,

ATM/SG

APANPIRG/26

Removal of Chapter A (BANP routes).

September 2016

SAIOACG/SEACG,

ATM/SG

APANPIRG/27

Reviewed and updated the Catalogue.

August 2017

SAIOACG/SEACG,

ATM/SG

Reviewed and updated the Catalogue.

September 2018

SAIOACG/SEACG,

ATM/SG

Reviewed and updated the Catalogue,

incorporated IATA inputs, added State

and IATA priority label.

April 2019

SAIOACG/9,

SEACG/26

Reviewed and updated the Catalogue.

September 2019

ATMSG/7,

AIRARD TF/4

Reviewed and updated the Catalogue.

December 2020

ATMSG/8

Reviewed and updated the Catalogue.

November 2021

March 2022,

October 2022

December

SAIOACG/10,

SEACG/27,

ATM/SG/9,

SAIOSEACG/1,

ATM/SG/10

BOBTFRG/4

Reviewed and updated the Catalogue.

March 2023

July 2023

SAIOSEACG/2

SCSTFRG/11

Reviewed and updated the Catalogue.

October 2023

ATMSG/11

Reviewed and updated the Catalogue.

Chapter 1: South Asia

(referred to: SAIOACG, BOBASIO, ASIOACG as

appropriate for review)

ATS Route Name

HIMALAYA 02

State Priority

IATA Priority

HIGH

Requested by (when)

Nepal (01/09/2018)

States/Administrations

Involved

Nepal, India, Myanmar, China (Kathmandu, Kolkata,

Yangon, Kunming FIRs)

Route Description

Kathmandu (KTM) 2740.5N 08521.0E –Bagdogra

(BGD) 264118N 0881934E – Guwahati (GGT)

2606.1N 09135.3E – Silchar (KKU) 2454.8N

09258.9E – Imphal (IIM) 2446.0N 09354.5E –

Kunming (KMG) 2501N 10244E

Alternate proposal by IATA:

Kathmandu (KTM) 2740.5N 08521.0E – Bagdogra

(BGD) 264118N 0881934E – Guwahati (GGT)

2606.1N 09135.3E – Dimapur (DMR) 255251.30N

0934655.29E – Kunming (KMG) 2501N 10244E

Flight Level Band

Benefit (fuel, environmental)

110 NM / 15 minutes, 520 kg fuel, 1640 kg CO

per

flight

Potential to save 19 to 25 minutes per flight and assist

in decongesting A599/Lashio.

Operational Information

(potential airlines, flight

frequency, potential city pairs)

Remarks: IATA North Asia

Office approached China who

have indicated this route will be

considered as part of the overall

China route review – no timeline

was given. China advised that

they would seriously look at the

proposal and would coordinate

with Nepal (ref. para 8.4 of the

SEA-RR/TF/4 report). At

SAIOACG/9: with the

improvement of surveillance

capability, Myanmar would

review this proposal. At

ATMSG/7: Under consideration

by China; and Myanmar

commented this route proposal

would be dependent on the

enhancement of surveillance and

communication coverage in the

area. 26/09/2020: Nepal updated

this route proposal was under

discussion with Myanmar, and

they were optimistic that

communication and surveillance

capabilities would be available in

Yangon FIR in the near future to

support the implementation of

this route. 20/11/2020: China

commented that it was not

possible to establish a new

entry/exit point, and counter-

proposed to re-align IIM – LSO –

LINSO (existing entry/exit point

between Yangon and Kunming

FIRs). At ATM/SG/8: In

response to China’s counter-

proposal, Myanmar provided

their disagreement; and India

commented the existing

established routes in Kolkata FIR

(i.e. W137, W53 and W55) was

for domestic operations only, and

India would need to review the

possibility of opening these

routes for international

operations. India also suggested

that in light of this, and the delay

of more than nine years and the

positions of Myanmar and China,

Nepal may wish to consider a

new proposal. At ATM/SG/9:

IATA commented that based on

detailed re-assessment conducted

by airlines, it confirmed a

‘HIGH’ priority to HIMALAYA

02. In addition, IATA suggested

an alternate proposal which had

potential to save up to 19 to 25

minutes, and would also help to

decongest ATS route

A599/Lashio (LSO) and save

additional 88 NM compared with

IIM – LSO – LINSO route.

IATA also requested India to

consider keeping ATS route J7

(CDR2/3 route between GGT –

DMR) available based on traffic

demand timings. Nepal supported

the alternate proposal as

suggested by IATA, and would

coordinate and hold a

consultation meeting with the

various stakeholders. China

commented that it was not

possible to establish a new

entry/exit point. At

BOBTFRG/3: Myanmar

supported the proposal by IATA;

India expressed its concern in

getting a favourable response

from its military authorities for

the route between Guwahati

(GGT) – Dimapur (DMR) –

Kunming (KMG). According to

India, implementing the route

from Imphal (IIM) to Kunming

(KMG) was more feasible. Given

the fact that China had revised

the priority as “D”, IATA was

requested to consider the position

of China before pursuing the

proposal; and Bangladesh

suggested IATA to consider:

Kathmandu (KTM) – Saidpur

(SDP) – Silchar (KKU) – Imphal

(IIM) – Kunming (KMG).

27/1/2022: Nepal is having in-

house discussion and consultation

with different stakeholders and

planning to coordinate with the

affected States soon.

1/3/2022: IATA may request that

China explores possibility in near

future of opening up additional

entry/exit as this has direct

savings to flights from Nepal and

China.

3/3/2022: China commented there

is no status update.

In August 2022, China

commented that there was no

plan to establish a new entry/exit

point and suggested considering

the route proposal based on the

current existing entry/exit point

LINSO.

BOBTFRG/4: Noting that with

the upgradation of Bangladesh’s

CNS/ATM system, full coverage

of communication in Dhaka FIR

would be available shortly, so

taking consideration of China’s

counter-proposal, Bangladesh

proposed two route options as:

Kathmandu (KTM)- Saidpur

(SDP)-SYT-LSO or,Kathmandu

(KTM)- Saidpur (SDP)-SYT-

Imphal (IIM)-LSO. India

commented that further

meaningful discussion of this

proposal should be based on the

basic agreement between China

and Myanmar.

Before SAIOSEACG/2, Nepal

implied that they would like to

insist on their initial proposal if

IATA's proposal is not acceptable

[Map provided by ICAO]

and pointed out that Nepal would

put further efforts to discuss with

the Chinese Authority to see the

further possibilities without

deviating much from the initial

proposal.

At SAIOSEACG/2

a)Nepal reiterated that they

would like to retain their initial

proposal if IATA's proposal is not

acceptable and pointed out that

Nepal would put further efforts

into discussing with the relevant

States to see the further

possibilities without deviating

much from the initial proposal.

IATA supported.

b)Considering the divergence on

the segment, in terms of FMS

load for track change from KTM

to KMG, Bangladesh requested

IATA to reconsider their proposal

for the segment from: Kathmandu

(KTM)- Saidpur (SDP)- SYT-

Imphal (IIM).

c)Myanmar stated they did not

agree with the road segment from

IIM – LSO – LINSO.

d)China commented that there

was no plan to establish a new

entry/exit point so far.

e)Given that the situation had not

changed for more than 15 years,

India suggested Nepal re-evaluate

this proposal. In response, Nepal

stated that they would re-evaluate

the proposal, and if there would

be a possibility for modification,

they would present a working

paper accordingly in the next

appropriate ICAO forum.

At ATMSG/11

During the meeting, Nepal

suggested that the Hymalaya02

route should remain in this

catalogue. In response, the

Regional Sub-Office will

continueously discuss it within the

ATS route catalogue.

ATS Route Name

IND 07 (N877 Extension)

State Priority

IATA Priority

MEDIUM

Requested by (when)

IATA (01/09/2018)

States/Administrations Involved

India, Pakistan, Afghanistan (Mumbai, Delhi,

Karachi, Kabul FIRs)

Route Description

Pratagarh (PRA) 2401.8N 07445.0E – SERKA

2951.0N 06615.0E – SOKAM 3313.3N 06037.9E

Flight Level Band

28,000 - 46,000 ft

Benefit (fuel, environmental)

51 NM / 7 minutes, 835 kg fuel, 2,630 kg CO

per

flight, 3,387 tonnes fuel, 10,668 tonnes CO

annually

Operational Information

(potential airlines, flight frequency,

potential city pairs)

LH, KL

KUL/SIN – Middle East – East/Europe

Remarks: This proposal predates the

extension of UL333 through Kabul

FIR and has been under consideration

for a number of years. The extension

of UL333 is under utilised against

other Kabul routes largely due the 45

NM ‘penalty’ in track mileage the

current route structure requires. The

route’s primary benefit at this stage

will be westbound and during

BOBCAT traffic flow. Extension

completed SERKA to SOKAM.

Update 08/02/13: PRA – SERKA has

been approved by India after lengthy

consultation with the military,

complementary action from Pakistan

awaited. At SAIOACG/9: Pakistan

commented this route proposal was

very unlikely to be implemented.

Future of this route would be decided

at SAIOACG/10 in 2020. Update

from India on 02/08/2019: Since the

proposal is pending concurrence of

Pakistan for a long time, India need to

renegotiate the proposal with military

after comments from Pakistan.

17/08/2020: The designated

established military areas in Karachi

FIR and route structure (crosser

routes near the boundary with Delhi

and Kabul FIRs) does not allow the

establishment of this route. Pakistan

proposed for deletion. At ATMSG/8:

IATA preferred this route proposal to

be retained in the Catalogue. At

BOBTFRG/3: Pakistan re-affirmed

that the designated established

military areas in Karachi FIR and

route structure (crossing routes near

the boundary with Delhi and Kabul

FIRs) would not permit the

establishment of this route.

1/3/2022:IATA wants this proposal to

be archived and reintroduced if/when

future possibilities permit its success.

BOBTFRG/4: Pakistan reaffirmed

that the proposed route was not

feasible and supported archiving this

proposal for future possibility, and

IATA had no objection.

ATS Route Name

BOB 01

State Priority

IATA Priority

HIGH

Requested by (when)

IATA (05/11/2021: ATM/SG/9)

States/Administrations

Involved

India, Bangladesh, Myanmar (Chennai, Kolkata, Dhaka,

Yangon FIRs)

Route Description

Option 1: SUGAN 152500N 0825045E – New Waypoint

192600N 0920000E (FIR BDRY between Kolkata and

Yangon) – Sittwe (STW) – Mandalay (MDY)

Option 2: Vishakhapatnam (VVZ) 174003.90N

0831510.00E – RUMUN 185805N 0891420E – New

Waypoint 192600N 0920000E (FIR BDRY between

Kolkata and Yangon) – Sittwe (STW) – Mandalay (MDY)

Counter proposal by India:

Eastbound: Q10 - TATUX - DOPID - MDY.

Westbound: MDY - DOPID - KAGUL - Q11.

Counter proposal by Bangladesh:

TATUX-DOPID-Cox's Bazar -CHILA-A599- LSO-LINSO

Flight Level Band

All suitable bi-directional flight levels. Else, at least suitable

eastbound flight levels. (airline operators preferred flight

level would be FL330 as primary and FL310 as secondary)

Benefit (fuel,

environmental)

Option 1:

Narrow body fleet: 94 NM / 12 minutes, 456 kg fuel, 1.5

tonnes CO

per flight, 166 tonnes fuel, 548 tonnes CO

annually

Wide body fleet: 94 NM / 12 minutes, 900 kg fuel, 3.0

tonnes CO

per flight, 329 tonnes fuel, 1095 tonnes CO

annually

Option 2:

Narrow body fleet: 71 NM / 9 minutes, 344 kg fuel, 1.1

tonnes CO

per flight, 126 tonnes fuel, 402 tonnes CO

annually

Wide body fleet: 71 NM / 9 minutes, 679 kg fuel, 2.2 tonnes

per flight, 248 tonnes fuel, 803 tonnes CO

annually

Operational Information

(potential airlines, flight

frequency, potential city

pairs)

About 110 flights per week

Africa/South Asia – Far East, Southern India – East Coast

of the United States

Remarks: The proposed

routes would efficiently

connect South West Bay of

Bengal traffic and Far East.

At BOBTFRG/3: In order to

conduct better assessment,

India requested IATA to

provide the analysis of the

fleet equipage in ADS-

C/CPDLC and PBCS.

IATA provided its analysis

result on fleet readiness of

its members in the

SAIOSEACG/1 meeting

(Mar. 2022).

(8/8/2022)India in its

assessment on BOB01 &

BOB02 commented the

proposed routes are outside

the SUR and VHF coverage

imposing unnecessary

restrictions for all other

cross-cutting routes.

Therefore proposed

alternatives as below:

Eastbound aircraft via Q10:

TATUX - DOPID - MDY.

Westbound aircraft: MDY -

DOPID - KAGUL - Q11.

India stated this would

improve the availability of

getting optimum flight

levels (well covered by

SUR and VHF in Kolkata

FIR) and require the

approval of Bangladesh and

Myanmar.

ATMSG/10: Bangladesh

commented that India’s

counter-proposal overflies

the designated established

military areas, so

Bangladesh needs to consult

with the military authorities.

BOBTFRG/4: Bangladesh

noted that the consultation

with the military authority

was still under process. To

avoid the Danger area, two

more alternative options are

proposed with a connection

to the new DVOR (Cox's

Bazar, CXB), which is

under construction and

Counter-proposal by India:

[Map provided by ICAO]

Counter-proposal by Bangladesh:

[Map provided by ICAO]

Counter-propasal by IATA:

would be available in three

months, detailed as follow:

DOPID-Cox's Bazar (CXB

DVOR)-MDY or,

TATUX-Cox's Bazar (CXB

DVOR)-MDY.

In response to Bangladesh’s

counterproposal, IATA

suggested specifying a new

waypoint at the position of

Cox's Bazar instead of

waiting for the availability

of the new DVOR and

proposed the following

route connecting Cox

Bazar-APAGO-CHILA and

onwards joining ATS Route

A599:

TATUX-DOPID-Cox's

Bazar -APAGO-CHILA-

A599- LSO-LINSO

Before SAIOSEACG/2, all

stakeholders had extensive

discussion on the BOB01.

IATA affirmed its proposal:

A599 – CHILA -

APAGO – CB (Coxs

Bazar) – DOPID –

TATUX - KAGUL Q11.

Bangladesh suggested to

skip the waypoint

“APAGO”.

At the SAIOSEACG/2:

a) India and IATA had no

objection to Bangladesh’s

counter-proposal in

principle.

b) In response to India’s

concern about the handover

separation, Bangladesh

confirmed that they could

accept the transfer

separation from Yangon

FIR.

c) Myanmar suggested to

consider Bangladesh’s

counter proposal: A599 –

CHILA– CB (Coxs Bazar) –

DOPID – TATUX -

KAGUL Q11, and pointed

out that the optimization of

the FLAS operation was the

[Map provided by ICAO]

Counter-propasal by IATA:

[Map provided by ICAO]

Counter-propasal by Bangladesh:

[Map provided by IATA]

major issue which needed to

be addressed before the

establishment of the new

route.

d) Bangladesh suggested the

resolution on the new route

would be finalized

considering the revision of

LOA between Bangladesh-

India and Bangladesh-

Myanmar.

e) IATA suggested

Bangladesh and India to

consider an interim solution

– making BOB 01 an

Eastbound airway,

establishing eastbound air

traffic on present A599 and

B465 airways before

entering into Yangon FIR;

till the time Myanmar raised

FLAS issues are sorted out,

then enabling BOB01 for

Westbound flights.

After SAIOSEACG/2:

ICAO RSO hosted a special

coordination meeting

(Video Teleconference, 11

May 2023), involving

Bangladesh, India and

IATA. The Special

coordination meeting

formally agreed to establish

the BOB01 Route proposal

connecting SURUP -

KAKID – GOLAN -

(WPT1) - (WPT 2) -

Chattogram (CTG). This bi-

directional route option

saves about 55NM,

expected to benefit about

110 weekly flights.

Formally agreed BOB01 Route Proposal (Pink line – Agreed

Direct Route, Red lines – Present routes)

ATS Route Name

BOB 02

State Priority

IATA Priority

HIGH

Requested by (when)

IATA (05/11/2021: ATM/SG/9)

States/Administrations

Involved

India, Bangladesh, Myanmar (Kolkata, Yangon FIRs)

Route Description

KAKID 203833N 0865951E – TEBOV 202504N

0915949E – Mandalay (MDY)

Counter proposal by India:

Eastbound: Q10 - TATUX - DOPID - MDY.

Westbound: MDY - DOPID - KAGUL - Q11.

Flight Level Band

All suitable flight levels

Benefit (fuel, environmental)

Narrow body fleet: 50 NM / 6 minutes, 228 kg fuel, 750

kg CO

per flight, 83 tonnes fuel, 274 tonnes CO

annually

Wide body fleet: 50 NM / 6 minutes, 450 kg fuel, 1.5

tonnes CO

per flight, 164 tonnes fuel, 548 tonnes CO

annually

Operational Information

(potential airlines, flight

frequency, potential city pairs)

About 110 flights per week

Africa/South Asia – Far East, Southern India – East

Coast of the United States

Remarks: The proposed route

would not only provide

efficient connection over Bay

of Bengal, but it would also

help in de-congesting ATS

routes A791, B465, Q19 and

Q20. At BOBTFRG/3: In order

to conduct better assessment,

India requested IATA to

provide the analysis of the fleet

equipage in ADS-C/CPDLC

and PBCS.

(08/08/2022)India in its

assessment on BOB01 &

BOB02 commented the

proposed routes are outside the

SUR and VHF coverage

imposing unnecessary

restrictions for all other cross-

cutting routes. Therefore

proposed alternatives as below:

Eastbound aircraft via Q10:

TATUX - DOPID - MDY.

Westbound aircraft: MDY -

DOPID - KAGUL - Q11. India

stated this would improve the

availability of getting optimum

flight levels (well covered by

SUR and VHF in Kolkata FIR)

and require the approval of

Bangladesh and Myanmar.

Counter-proposal by India vs original proposal by

IATA:

[Map provided by ICAO]

ATMSG/10: Bangladesh

commented that India’s

counter-proposal overflies the

designated established military

areas, so Bangladesh needs to

consult with the military

authorities.

(16/11/2022) In response to

India’s concerns about SUR

and VHF coverage, IATA

suggested that with the issuing

of the ADS/C &CPDLC

mandate, PBCS-equipped

aircraft could operate on this

proposed route. Regarding the

military area, IATA pointed out

that the danger area VGD-31

was permanently removed;

thus, the possible route

connecting DOPID (India

proposed waypoint)-TEBOV is

not affected by the consequent

restrictions(see the Map

provided by IATA).

Considering the complexity of

this airspace, IATA preferred

this route to be retained

separately and discussed in

tandem with BOB01.

BOBTFRG/4: Considering the

complexity and constraints in

the area, Bangladesh and India

wanted to focus on

Bangladesh’s counter-proposes

for BOB 01 in the first place.

Since the SWG has prioritised

the BOB01 as the primary task,

it was proposed by IATA that

BOB02 to be archived for

future possibility.

The SAIOSEACG/2 agreed that

BOB02 be retained in the route

catalogue.

Possible route overflies VGD-31(permanently removed):

[Map provided by IATA]

Chapter 2: Southeast Asia

(referred to SEACG for review)

ATS Route Name

SCS 01

State Priority

IATA Priority

HIGH

Requested by (when)

IATA (01/09/2018)

States/Administrations Involved

Viet Nam, China, Hong Kong China (Ho Chi

Minh, Sanya, Hong Kong FIRs)

Route Description

DAMEL 1358.7N 11130.6E – Cheung Chau (CH)

2213.2N 11401.8E

Flight Level Band

28,000 – 46,000 ft

Benefit (fuel, environmental)

23 NM / 4 minutes, 300 kg fuel per flight, 1,560

tonnes fuel, 4,914 tonnes CO

annually

Operational Information

(potential airlines, flight frequency,

potential city pairs)

CX, KA, MH, SQ

More than 100 flights per week

SIN – Pearl River Delta airports

Remarks: Proposed route shortening

for M771 into the Pearl River Delta

area. During SEACG/19 in WP09

Hong Kong China advised they had

studied the proposal for track

shortening and advised the proposed

change would reduce capacity of

A1/P901. It would also require an

extensive change in the flight route

system and ATC sectors in Hong

Kong FIR. However, Hong Kong

China would continue to study this

proposal for the implementation of

RNP4/2. At SEACG/26: Hong Kong

China commented they would need

to review the integration of this route

proposal with its planned airspace

enhancement projects. Update from

Viet Nam on 22/07/2019: Viet Nam

has no objection, subject to

agreement from China and Hong

Kong China. 23/10/2020: China

commented the proposal was under

consideration. 30/10/2020: Hong

Kong China commented SCS 01 and

SCS 02 were conflicting with each

other (see the red circle in the figure

below). The two routes would create

additional confliction points in the

most congested ATC sector and ATS

route segment in the Hong Kong FIR

(see the red circle and arrow in the

figure below). Therefore, these two

routes were not recommended.

At ATMSG/8: IATA provided

updates on IATA priority;

implementation benefits; and

operational information. 29/09/2021:

China commented SCS 01 would

create conflict with existing ATS

routes A1, L642 and M771, and

therefore not recommended for

implementation. At ATM/SG/9:

IATA provided update on the route

operational information.

ATS Route Name

SCS 02

State Priority

IATA Priority

HIGH

Requested by (when)

IATA (01/09/2018)

States/Administrations Involved

Viet Nam, China, Hong Kong China (Ho Chi

Minh, Sanya, Hong Kong FIRs)

Route Description

VEPAM 1358.0N 11000.0E – Cheung Chau (CH)

2213.2N 11401.8E

Flight Level Band

28,000 – 46,000 ft

Benefit (Environmental)

12 NM / 1 minutes, 200 kg fuel per flight, 2,080

tonnes fuel, 8,580 tonnes CO

annually

Operational Information

(potential airlines, flight frequency,

potential city pairs)

CX, KA, MH, SQ

More than 200 flights per week

SIN – Pearl River Delta airports

Remarks: Proposed route shortening

for L642 out of the Pearl River Delta

area. During SEACG/19 in WP09

Hong Kong China advised they had

studied the proposal for track

shortening and advised the proposed

change would reduce capacity of

A1/P901. It would also require an

extensive change in the flight route

system and ATC sectors in Hong

Kong FIR. However Hong Kong,

China would continue to study this

proposal for the implementation of

RNP4/2. At SEACG/26: Hong Kong

China commented they would need

to review the integration of this route

proposal with its planned airspace

enhancement projects. Update from

Viet Nam on 22/07/2019: Viet Nam

has no objection, subject to

agreement from China and Hong

Kong China. 23/10/2020: China

commented the proposal was under

consideration. 30/10/2020: Hong

Kong China commented SCS 01 and

SCS 02 were conflicting with each

other (see the red circle in the figure

below). The two routes would create

additional confliction points in the

most congested ATC sector and ATS

route segment in the Hong Kong FIR

(see the red circle and arrow in the

figure below). Therefore, these two

routes were not recommended.

At ATMSG/8: IATA provided

updates on implementation benefits;

and operational information.

29/09/2021: China commented SCS

02 would create conflict with

existing ATS routes A1, L642 and

M771, and therefore not

recommended for implementation.

At ATM/SG/9: IATA provided

update on the route operational

information.

ATS Route Name

SCS 11

State Priority

IATA Priority

LOW

Requested by (when)

IATA (10/03/2015: SEACG/22)

States/Administrations Involved

Viet Nam, Singapore, Malaysia (Ho Chi Minh,

Singapore, Kuala Lumpur FIRs)

Route Description

Kuala Terengganu (VKR) 0521.6N 10304.9E –

BITOD 0715.4N 10407.1E

Flight Level Band

Benefit (fuel, environmental)

6 NM / 0 minutes, 23 kg fuel per flight, 167 tonnes

fuel, 527 tonnes CO

annually

Operational Information

(potential airlines, flight frequency,

potential city pairs)

MH, VN

At least 20 flights per week

KUL – HAN/PNH/SGN

Remarks: At SEACG/26: Malaysia,

Singapore and Viet Nam had agreed

in principle the feasibility of the

route proposal. The States concerned

would meet to further discuss the

proposal in due time, and Malaysia

agreed to become the lead

coordinator. Update from Viet Nam

on 22/07/2019: Viet Nam proposed

the following route proposals for

consideration by Malaysia and

Singapore: Uni-directional eastbound

route VKR – BITOD – PQC; and

uni-directional westbound route PQC

– IGARI – LASOB.

At ATMSG/7: Malaysia would lead

the tripartite meeting, expected

during the SCSTFRG/8 in September

2019. At ATMSG/8: This route

proposal was under consideration by

Viet Nam; and IATA provided

updates on IATA priority,

implementation benefits and

operational information. 08/10/2021:

Malaysia commented they would

host the meeting between Malaysia,

Singapore and Viet Nam in Q4 2021

or Q1 2022.

22/2/2022: the tripartite meeting btw

Malaysia, Singapore and Viet Nam

was canceled and will be rescheduled

to report the discussion outcome to

SCSTFRG/10 meeting (scheduled

31/5 – 1/6 2022)

In the tripartite meeting in Sept 2022,

Viet Nam proposed the following

route proposals:

unidirectional Eastbound: VKR-

IPRIX-BITOD-PQU; and

unidirectional Westbound: PQU-

IGARI-LASOB.

Upon agreement by States concerned

(Malaysia and Viet Nam), IATA

proposed an extention from IPRIX to

VIGEN to this proposal for smooth

joining to M765 saving 5-6 NM for

eastbound flights.

Before SAIOSEACG/2, Malaysia

indicated that Malaysia, Singapore

and Vietnam have broadly agreed to

the proposal. Malaysia’s proposal for

the Coordination Procedure has been

agreed by Singapore pending Viet

Nam acknowledgement.

At SAIOSEACG/2, regarding the

additional proposal by IATA to

further line up the IPRIX to VIGEN,

Viet Nam declined based on their

safety and efficiency evaluation.

At SCSTFRG/11, Viet Nam

submitted the IP05 that commented at

the Tripartite Meeting (through a

video teleconference) between

Malaysia, Viet Nam, and Singapore

on the ATS route, and other relevant

issues on 28 July 2022. Viet Nam

principally agreed to the proposal for

the establishment of a new ATS route

as requested by IATA. Viet Nam

suggested a minor adjustment to the

proposal, stating that VKR–IPRIX

should be used instead of VKR–

BITOD to minimize the number of

transfer points at IPRIX and reduce

the workload of ATC. Viet Nam also

suggested RNAV 2/RNP 2 for both

routes. The timeline depends on the

Malaysia and Singapore sides.

Counter-proposal by Viet Nam:

Suggested by IATA:

ATS Route Name

SCS 14

State Priority

IATA Priority

LOW

Requested by (when)

Malaysia (26/03/2018: SAIOACG/8 &

SEACG/25)

States/Administrations Involved

Malaysia, Singapore (Kota Kinabalu, Singapore

FIRs), Indonesia

Route Description

ENREP 045223.88N 1041442.00E – OLKIT

045012.12N 1115118.00E or

ENREP 045223.88N 1041442.00E – TERIX

041520.88N 1093455.92E

Flight Level Band

At or below 29,000 ft

Benefit (fuel, environmental)

107 NM / 12 minutes, 365 kg fuel, 1,153 kg CO

per flight, 266,450 kg fuel, 841,982 kg CO

annually

Operational Information

(potential airlines, flight frequency,

potential city pairs)

BKI – KBR

Remarks: Purpose is to

circumnavigate major confluence of

air traffic at VPK thus providing

better efficiency for flight operating

from/to KBR. Operation at 29,000 ft

and below to avoid crossing traffic

within the South China Sea airspace.

At SEACG/26: Singapore

commented implementation of this

route would be possible with the

implementation of space-based ADS-

B in Singapore FIR, planned by end

of 2019; and IATA would assign its

priority after a comprehensive review

of the Catalogue by its focus group.

15/05/2020: discussion on this route

proposal would be conducted when

the COVID-19 situation improved,

and a face-to-face meeting could be

conducted between Malaysia and

Singapore. At ATMSG/8: Indonesia

commented future discussion on this

route proposal would require their

involvements; and IATA assigned

“LOW” priority and recommended

for deletion. 16/09/2021: Singapore

commented that, as the COVID-19

situation had not improved, the face-

to-face meeting between the States

involved had yet to materialise.

ATS Route Name

SCS 15

State Priority

IATA Priority

LOW

Requested by (when)

Malaysia (26/03/2018: SAIOACG/8 & SEACG/25)

States/Administrations Involved

Malaysia, Singapore (Kota Kinabalu, Singapore

FIRs)

Route Description

ENREP 045223.88N 1041442.00E – KAMIN

023441.88N 1085536.12E

Flight Level Band

At or below 29,000 ft

Benefit (fuel, environmental)

107 NM / 12 minutes, 365 kg fuel, 1,153 kg CO

per

flight, 266,450 kg fuel, 841,982 kg CO

annually

Operational Information

(potential airlines, flight frequency,

potential city pairs)

KCH – KBR

Remarks: Purpose is to

circumnavigate major confluence of

air traffic at VPK thus providing

better efficiency for flight operating

from/to KBR. Operation at 29,000 ft

and below to avoid crossing traffic

within the South China Sea

airspace. At SEACG/26: Singapore

commented implementation of this

route would be possible with the

implementation of space-based

ADS-B in Singapore FIR, planned

by end of 2019; and IATA would

assign its priority after a

comprehensive review of the

Catalogue by its focus group.

15/05/2020: discussion on this route

proposal would be conducted when

the COVID-19 situation improved,

and a face-to-face meeting could be

conducted between Malaysia and

Singapore. At ATMSG/8:

Indonesia commented future

discussion on this route proposal

would require their involvements;

and IATA assigned “LOW” priority

and recommended for deletion.

16/09/2021: Singapore commented

that, as the COVID-19 situation had

not improved, the face-to-face

meeting between the States

involved had yet to materialise.

ATS Route Name

SCS 16

State Priority

IATA Priority

MEDIUM

Requested by (when)

Viet Nam (01/04/2019: SEACG/26)

States/Administrations Involved

Singapore, Viet Nam (Singapore, Ho Chi Minh

FIRs)

Route Description

Implementation of new uni-directional northbound

ATS route:

ENREP 045223.88N 1041442.00E – New Waypoint

(FIR BDRY between Singapore and Ho Chi Minh) –

Tan Son Nhat (TSN) 104859.20N 1063844.10E

Flight Level Band

Benefit (fuel, environmental)

48 NM / 6 minutes, 252 kg fuel, 794 kg CO

per

flight, 576,576 kg fuel, 1,816 tonnes CO

annually

Reduction in Distance/Time/Fuel/CO2 by

19NM/2MIN/600LBS/860KGS per flight with

B744ERF for SIN/SGN portion on the basis of

annual average wind conditions.

Operational Information

(potential airlines, flight frequency,

potential city pairs)

SIN – SGN

Remarks: Update from Viet Nam

on 22/07/2019: Due to crossing

routes, this route proposal would be

possible subject to the enhancement

of surveillance and ATFM

capabilities in the concerned area.

At ATMSG/8: Viet Nam

commented this route proposal was

under consideration; and IATA

assigned “MEDIUM” priority.

11/2/2022: Singapore commented

the concerned area is fully covered

by ADS-B to support the proposal

and ready to discuss on the

implementation.

11/02/2022: Viet Nam commented

they will continue to assess a

necessity of this ATS/PBN route

requirement adding ATS

surveillance (SSR and ADS-B)

capability has been enhanced by

cooperation btw Viet Nam and

Singapore, and new ATM

aoutomation/AFTM capability will

be enhanced with a long-term plan

ATS Route Name

SCS 18

State Priority

IATA Priority

LOW

Requested by (when)

Viet Nam (01/04/2019: SEACG/26)

States/Administrations Involved

Viet Nam, China, Hong Kong China (Ho Chi Minh,

Sanya, Hong Kong FIRs)

Route Description

Phu Cat (PCA) 135726.00N 1090233.60E – IKELA

183942.00N 1121442.00E or

Phu Cat (PCA) 135726.00N 1090233.60E –

LENKO 172456.88N 1101800.00E

Flight Level Band

Benefit (fuel, environmental)

52 NM / 5 minutes, 220 kg fuel per flight, 435

tonnes fuel, 1,370 tonnes CO

annually

Operational Information

(potential airlines, flight frequency,

potential city pairs)

KA, MH

At least 30 flights per week

KUL – SGN – East Asia

Remarks: At ATMSG/7: China

proposed to concentrate on the

implementation of parallel route to

A1 (SCSTFRG Priority Area 1).

This route proposal may not be

needed, if the parallel route to A1 is

implemented. 23/10/2020: No

update (SCSTFRG/9 postponed to

2021). At ATMSG/8: IATA

provided updates on IATA priority;

implementation benefits; and

operational information. At

ATM/SG/9: No update (discussion

on planned implementation of

parallel route to A1 was still

ongoing at the SCSTFRG meeting).

ATS Route Name

SEA 12

State Priority

IATA Priority

HIGH

Requested by (when)

IATA (01/09/2018)

States/Administrations Involved

Thailand, Lao PDR, Viet Nam, China (Bangkok,

Vientiane, Hanoi, Sanya, Guangzhou FIRs)

Route Description

Roiet (ROT) 1607.0N 10346.7E – Huguang (LH)

2107.9N 11020.2E

Flight Level Band

29,000 – 46,000 ft

Benefit (fuel, environmental)

14 NM / 2 minutes, 208 kg fuel, 655 kg CO

per

flight, 1,731 tonnes fuel, 5,451 tonnes CO

annually

Operational Information

(potential airlines, flight frequency,

potential city pairs)

160 flights per week

JKT/KUL/PNH/SIN – HKG/SYX

Remarks: Provide parallel to the

A202 route. At SEACG/26: Viet

Nam proposed to concentrate on

SCSTFRG Priority Area 1: parallel

route to A1 proposal. This route

proposal to be reviewed at a later

stage. 23/10/2020: No update

(SCSTFRG/9 postponed to 2021).

At ATM/SG/9: No update

(discussion on planned

implementation of parallel route to

A1 was still ongoing at the

SCSTFRG meeting).

ATS Route Name

VIET NAM 02

State Priority

IATA Priority

HIGH

Requested by (when)

Viet Nam (01/09/2018)

States/Administrations Involved

Viet Nam, China (Hanoi, Sanya, Guangzhou FIRs)

Route Description

Noi Bai (NOB) 2112.8N 10550.1E – Cat Bi (CBI)

2049.1N 10642.5E – SAMAS 2030.3N 11029.7E or

Noi Bai (NOB) 2112.8N 10550.1E – Cat Bi (CBI)

2049.1N 10642.5E – Huguang (LH) 2107.9N

11020.2E or

Noi Bai (NOB) 2112.8N 10550.1E – Cat Bi (CBI)

2049.1N 10642.5E – Nankang (BHY) 2135.2N

10925.9E

Flight Level Band

28,000 – 46,000 ft

Benefit (fuel, environmental)

48 NM / 6 minutes, 252 kg fuel, 794 kg CO

per

flight, 576,576 kg fuel, 1,816 tonnes CO

annually

For ZGGG-VVNB with B789, Vietnam02 can

reduce the flight distance by 73NM, reduce the

flight time by 9 minutes, and save 700Kg of fuel.

Operational Information

(potential airlines, flight frequency,

potential city pairs)

44 flights per week

Remarks: Because of small traffic

demand and cost/benefit

considerations, this route is

impossible and cannot be

implemented at present. Retain

proposal for long-term planing (Viet

Nam). Retention discussed at

SEACG/22. At SEACG/26: China

commented that this route proposal

was very unlikely to be

implemented, and recommended for

this route proposal to be deleted

from the Catalogue; and Viet Nam

proposed alternate option: Noi Bai

(NOB) 2112.8N 10550.1E – Cat Bi

(CBI) 2049.1N 10642.5E –

Nankang (BHY) 2135.2N 10925.9E

to serve traffic between Ha Noi/Cat

Bi/Van Don (new international

airport in Viet Nam) and

destinations in China and beyond.

23/10/2020: China commented the

proposal was under consideration.

At ATMSG/8: IATA preferred this

route proposal to be retained in the

Catalogue. 29/09/2021: China

commented the proposal was still

under consideration.

1/3/2022:IATA preferred this route

proposal to be retained in the

Catalogue. Despite currently low

traffic due to the epidemic, as traffic

returns this proposed route can give

airlines more flight route options

between China and Vietnam and

beyond.

3/3/2022: China proposed for

deletion due to inconsistency with

overall flight flow.

At SCSTFRG/11, Viet Nam

suggested this route proposal be

retained in the APAC Route

Catalogue and wished that China

would reconsider the feasibility of

this new route. It was also

supported by IATA. In response,

China confirmed that they would

further assess this route proposal

internally and discuss it with Viet

Nam during their upcoming

bilateral meeting.

ATS Route Name

SCS19

State Priority

IATA Priority

HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW

Requested by (when)

Malaysia (20/Mar/2023)

States/Administrations

Involved

Malaysia, Thailand

Route Description

This proposal essentially focuses on extending M757 to

replace the conventional route Y508

Flight Level Band

Benefit (fuel,

environmental)

The implementation of PBN Airspace and to simplify FPL

in Kuala Lumpur FIR.

Operational Information

(potential airlines, flight

frequency)

Remarks:

At SAIOSEACG/2, Thailand

indicated its full support for

the extension of M757.

ATS Route Name

SCS20

State Priority

IATA Priority

HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW

Requested by (when)

Malaysia (20/Mar/2023)

States/Administrations

Involved

Malaysia,Singapore, Indonesia, Viet Nam

Route Description

This proposal essentially focuses on extending M765 to replace the

conventional routes W546 and G468.

Flight Level Band

Benefit (fuel,

environmental)

The implementation of PBN Airspace and to simplify FPL in Kuala Lumpur

FIR.

Operational

Information

(potential airlines, flight

frequency)

Remarks:

At SAIOSEACG/2,

Indonesia expressed its

favourable consideration

on this proposal, further

assessment was needed.

ATS Route Name

SCS21

State Priority

IATA Priority

HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW

Requested by (when)

Malaysia (20/Mar/2023)

States/Administrations

Involved

Malaysia,Singapore, Indonesia

Route Description

This proposal essentially focuses on extending M758 to replace the

conventional routes G582 and R461 (PUGER to MDN).

Flight Level Band

Benefit (fuel,

environmental)

The implementation of PBN Airspace and to simplify FPL in Kuala Lumpur

FIR.

Operational

Information

(potential airlines, flight

frequency)

Remarks:

At SAIOSEACG/2,

Indonesia expressed its

favourable consideration

on this proposal, further

assessment was needed.

ATS Route Name

SCS22

State Priority

IATA Priority

HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW

Requested by (when)

Malaysia (20/Mar/2023)

States/Administrations

Involved

Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia

Route Description

Upgrade a portion of conventional ATS routes G580 (VKG to VJN) to PBN

Route

Flight Level Band

Benefit (fuel,

environmental)

The implementation of PBN Airspace.

Operational

Information

(potential airlines, flight

frequency)

Remarks:

At SAIOSEACG/2,

Indonesia expressed its

favourable consideration

on this proposal, further

assessment was needed.

ATS Route Name

SCS23

State Priority

IATA Priority

HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW

Requested by (when)

Malaysia (20/Mar/2023)

States/Administrations

Involved

Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia

Route Description

Upgrade from conventional ATS routes R223 to PBN Route

Flight Level Band

Benefit (fuel,

environmental)

The implementation of PBN Airspace.

Operational

Information

(potential airlines, flight

frequency)

Remarks:

ATS Route Name

MEKONG 01

State Priority

IATA Priority

MEDIUM

Requested by (when)

Thailand /Vietnam (21/Mar/2023)

States/Administrations

Involved

Thailand, Lao PDR, Vietnam (Bangkok, Vientiane, Hanoi)

Route Description

VINH PHUC (VPH) 211634N 1053604E –

Bangkok/Vientiane FIR BDRY 174842.10N 1042043.51E -

SAKON NAKHON (SKN) 171250.89N 1040812.34E –

ROT-ET (ROT) 160700.59N 1034619.45E

Flight Level Band

Benefit (fuel,

environmental)

Potential to save 12 minutes and 750 kilograms of fuel

per flight (VVNB – VDSR)

Operational Information

(potential airlines, flight

frequency)

Allow flights from Guangzhou FIR and beyond on the

ATS route R474 to fly shorter distance into Bangkok

FIR/VTBS/VDSR

Remarks:

This route was proposed as

Conditional Route (CDR)

to promote international

CDR arrangement among

the Mekong states.

The route availability will

be subject to civil-military

coordination in pre-tactical

and tactical level.

At SAIOSEACG/2, Viet

Nam supported the

initiative by Thailand, and

added that the new route

would be further realigned

with the existing primary

routes within Hanoi FIR.

For the update, the approval

procedure of the route

proposal by its higher

authority is in progress, and

which expected to be

completed soon. It is

suggested that Thailand

organize a tripartite

meeting involving all States

concerned to further discuss

the detail.

Chapter 3: East Asia

(referred to: States or EATMCG as appropriate for review)

ATS Route Name

CHA 01

State Priority

IATA Priority

HIGH

Requested by (when)

IATA (01/09/2018)

States/Administrations Involved

China (Lanzhou, Beijing, Wuhan FIRs)

Route Description

Yinchuan (YHD) 3820.8N 10624.6E – Zhengzhou

(CGO) N3431.1 E11350.6

Flight Level Band

8,400 – 15,000 meters

Benefit (fuel, environmental)

73 NM / 9 minutes, 26,645 kg fuel, 825,995 kg CO

annually

Operational Information

(potential airlines, flight frequency,

potential city pairs)

Europe – Shanghai

Remarks: Original proposal: YHD

– YAV – CGO – ZHO – SB/HFE.

The route segment between CGO –

ZHO – HFE has been implemented

as part of ATS route B208 since

2008. Therefore, the route

description was amended as YHD –

CGO accordingly. At ATMSG/7:

China commented the proposed

route would create numerous

conflicts, and was not consistent

with its planned route network.

23/10/2020: China commented

there was no progress on this

proposal. At ATMSG/8: IATA

preferred this route proposal to be

retained in the Catalogue, and

proposed the route segment

between CGO – ZHO – HFE to be

made available for eastbound too.

In response to IATA’s proposal,

China commented the following

uni-directional routing systems had

been implemented for flight

planning:

(a) eastbound: HFE – FYG –

ZHOU – CGO. (b) westbound:

CGO – W129/KAMDA –

W128/FYG. At SAIOACG/10 and

SEACG/27: China proposed for

deletion.

3/3/2022: China commented how

the current uni-directiona routing

system works in actual operation

(see the Map provided by China)

adding that it could reduce heavy

traffic and conflict over ZHO.

[Map provided by China]

ATS Route Name

CHA 02

State Priority

IATA Priority

HIGH

Requested by (when)

IATA (01/09/2018)

States/Administrations Involved

China (Urumqi, Lanzhou FIRs)

Route Description

Qiuci (XKC) 4140.6N 08250.6E – Jiayuguan

(CHW) 3951.3N 09821.0E

Flight Level Band

8,400 – 15,000 meters

Benefit (fuel, environmental)

93 NM / 12 minutes, 4,426 tonnes fuel, 1,372,202

tonnes CO

annually

Operational Information

(potential airlines, flight frequency,

potential city pairs)

63 flights per week

Middle East/Pakistan – China/Japan/Korea

Remarks: China comment: there

are existing routes between XKC

and CHW. At ATMSG/7: China

commented the proposed route was

not possible for implementation,

and proposed for deletion; and

IATA would provide feedback after

a comprehensive review of the

Catalogue by its focus group,

expected in March 2020.

23/10/2020: China proposed for

deletion. At ATMSG/8: IATA

preferred this route proposal to be

retained in the Catalogue.

ATS Route Name

CHA 12

State Priority

IATA Priority

HIGH

Requested by (when)

IATA (29/08/2018)

States/Administrations Involved

Russia, Mongolia, China (Novosibirsk,

Krasnoyarsk, Ulaanbatar, Beijing FIRs)

Route Description

NOSPI 534912.00N 0865248.00E – New Waypoint

(FIR BDRY between Novosibirsk and Krasnoyarsk)

– New Waypoint (FIR BDRY between Krasnoyarsk

and Ulaanbatar) – New Waypoint (Entry/Exit Point:

FIR BDRY between Ulaanbatar and Beijing) –

Baotou (BAV)

Flight Level Band

28,000 – 46,000 ft

Benefit (fuel, environmental)

5 minutes, 6,090 tonnes fuel, 19,185 tonnes CO

annually

Operational Information

(potential airlines, flight frequency,

potential city pairs)

85 flights per week

Remarks: New route proposal

replacing the previous from

Weixian to Novokuznetsk. At

ATMSG/7: China and Mongolia

commented the proposed route was

not possible for implemention; and

IATA would provide feedback after

a comprehensive review of the

Catalogue by its focus group,

expected in March 2020.

23/10/2020: China proposed for

deletion. At ATMSG/8: IATA

preferred this route proposal to be

retained in the Catalogue.

ATS Route Name

IATA 02

State Priority

IATA Priority

HIGH

Requested by (when)

IATA (01/09/2018)

States/Administrations Involved

China (Kunming, Guangzhou FIRs)

Route Description

OMBON 3321.4N 10416.3E – Sanjiang (SJG)

2546.6N 10936.6E

Flight Level Band

8,400 – 15,000 meters

Benefit (fuel, environmental)

14 minutes, 6,657 tones fuel, 20,636 tonnes CO

annually

Operational Information

(potential airlines, flight frequency,

potential city pairs)

56 flights per week

Europe – Pearl River Delta airports

Remarks: China comments: There

are existing routes between

OMBON and RO. Direct route is

impossible at present. 23/10/2020:

China proposed for deletion. At

ATMSG/8: IATA preferred this

route proposal to be retained in the

Catalogue.

ATS Route Name

SCS 08

State Priority

IATA Priority

HIGH

Requested by (when)

IATA (01/09/2018)

States/Administrations Involved

Hong Kong China, Taibei ACC (Hong Kong,

Taibei FIRs)

Route Description

DULOP 1814.2N 11432.6E – ELATO 2220.0N

11730.0E – A1 or

DULOP 1814.2N 11432.6E – ENVAR 2159.5N

11730.0E – M750 or

DULOP 1814.2N 11432.6E – KAPLI 2110.0N

11730.0E – G86

Flight Level Band

28,000 – 46,000 ft

Benefit (fuel, environmental)

6 minutes, 850 kg fuel, 2,687 kg CO

per flight,

1,863 tonnes fuel, 5,868 tonnes CO

annually

Note: Savings based on DULOP – ENVAR.

Operational Information

(potential airlines, flight frequency,

potential city pairs)

BR, CI

At least 42 flights per week

Southeast Asia – North Asia airports

Remarks: Supports traffic Northeast

Asia – Southeast Asia. Potentially

problematic as will impact South

China Sea’s traffic arrangements

(IATA to review). During SEACG/19

in WP09, Hong Kong China advised

they had studied the proposal for

track shortening and advised that

allowing flights to proceed from

M771 DUMOL to

ELATO/ENVAR/KAPLI will likely

create a bottle neck at these points

and result in flights not getting

optimum levels or increase ground

delay to departures from Hong Kong

and Macao to East Asia. However,

Hong Kong China would continue to

study this proposal. Most preferred:

DULOP – ENVAR. 30/10/2020:

Hong Kong China commented these

two routes are too close to the Hong

Kong and Manila FIR boundary (see

the yellow shaded areas in the figure

below). New confliction points would

be created and the distance/time

available for traffic resolution is not

sufficient. There are safety concerns

and these proposed routes were not

recommended. Therefore, the two

routes are not recommended.

At ATMSG/8: IATA preferred this

route proposal to be retained in the

Catalogue.

ATS Route Name

TPE 01

State Priority

IATA Priority

HIGH

Requested by (when)

IATA (01/09/2018)

States/Administrations Involved

Taibei ACC, Japan (Taibei, Fukuoka FIRs)

Route Description

Anbu (APU) 2510.6N 12131.3E – New Waypoint

(FIR BDRY beween Taibei and Fukuoka) –

MIKES 2935.2N 12544.9E

Flight Level Band

28,000 – 46,000 ft

Benefit (fuel, environmental)

16 NM / 2 minutes, 107 kg fuel, 337 kg CO

per

flight, 1,168 tonnes fuel, 3,680 tonnes CO

annually

Operational Information

(potential airlines, flight frequency,

potential city pairs)

BR, CI

210 flights per week

Southeast Asia/HKG/TPE – Fukuoka

Remarks: Supports traffic between

APU and Japan. Update from Japan

on 29/06/2019: Under consideration.

23/10/2020: Japan commented this

proposal was under consideration.

At ATMSG/8: IATA preferred this

route proposal to be retained in the

Catalogue. 16/09/2021: Based on

information provided by the

IFATCA, the proposed route TPE 01

partially overlaps ATS route Q11

and several other ATS routes that

already existed in the area, and

therefore it was not possible to

implement a new route in Taibei

FIR. Counter-proposal: Northbound

traffic: APU – A1 – DRAKE – Q11

– WP900 – L4 – LIPLO – Y741 –

BOLUT – MIKES.

Southbound traffic: MIKES –

BOLUT – B576 – SALMI – Q11 –

DRAKE – APU.

15/10/2021: Japan commented this

proposal was still under

consideration.

25/2/2022: Japan commented no

progress at this stage, although this

proposal is recognized as one of the

business coordination projects by

both Taibei and Fukuoka ACCs.

23/9/2022: IFATCA, the segment

in the counter-proposal for both

north and south already existing,

the segment btw BOLUT and

MIKES is subject to the Fukuoka

FIR.

Chapter 4: Trans-Regional (South Asia)

(referred to: States or AIRARD TF as appropriate for

review)

ATS Route Name

AFG 01

State Priority

IATA Priority

MEDIUM

Requested by (when)

Afghanistan (03/08/2019: AIRARD TF/4)

States/Administrations Involved

Pakistan, Afghanistan (Lahore, Kabul FIRs)

Route Description

Peshawar (PS) 335841.50N 0713100.90E – SURVI

350606.12N 0702512E

Flight Level Band

Benefit (fuel, environmental)

32 NM / 4 minutes, 400 kg fuel per flight, 957

tonnes fuel, 3,014 tonnes CO

annually

Operational Information

(potential airlines, flight frequency,

potential city pairs)

AI, AY, TG

About 46 flights per week (some operating during

winter season only)

HEL – BKK/SIN

Remarks: This is an alternative

proposal to INDEK-BABEV-

SURVI, which will shorten the

flight distance. Original proposal:

IMTIL – SURVI. At ATMSG/7:

Pakistan counter-proposed for this

route via SURVI – Peshawar (PS).

Pakistan informed the meeting the

proposed route between SURVI and

PS had been submitted to the

relevant authorities of Pakistan for

approval. 17/08/2020: Pakistan

informed this route proposal was

still under consideration by the

relevant authorities. At ATMSG/8:

IATA assigned “MEDIUM”

priority; implementation benefits;

and operational information. IATA

also proposed to review the time

restrictions LAJAK-SULOM (1500-

2359Z) to make proposal beneficial

to more traffic. At SAIOACG/10

and SEACG/27: Pakistan informed

this route proposal was still under

consideration by the military

authority. 15/09/2021: Pakistan

informed that the military authorities

of Pakistan had approved the

following ATS route proposal (bi-

directional), on the request of

Tajikistan and Uzbekistan: SULOM

– Lahore (LA) – INDEK –

Islamabad (BTR) – NONIB –

Peshawar (PS) – 343433N

0710533E (new TOC points

between Afghanistan and Pakistan).

The above route proposal was under

approval process of Pakistan Federal

Government and coordination

process with Afghanistan and

Tajikistan regarding further route

connectivity in Afghanistan airspace

and beyond from the new TOC

points was ongoing.

18/02/2022: Upon approval on a

new RNAV bi-directional int. ATS

route in Lahore FIR by the Federal

Government of Pakistan, Pakistan

requested a new RNAV Route

designator to APAC RO awaiting

the response from Afghanistan for

further connectivity in Kabul FIR

(the last segment from Peshawar

VOR to PAK/AFGHAN new TCP

BIMIS (Lahore FIR)), and saying a

joint PfA will be processed

In April 2022, the segment in

Lahore FIR, Pakistan was

established: SULOM – Lahore VOR

– INDEK - Islamabad VOR (BTR) –

NONIB – Peshawar VOR as the

domestic route T400. Further route

connectivity in Afghanistan airspace

and beyond the new TOC points will

be further discussed according to the

situation in Afghanistan.

BOBTFRG/4: – Pakistan affirmed

that airway T400 starting from point

SULOM (TOC with India) - INDEK

– NONIB – PS - BIMIS was already

operational and available for flights

at this stage after being approved by

the relevant government authorities.

Further connectivity to BIMIS (TOC

with Afghanistan) was subject to the

response from Afghanistan.

At SAIOSEACG/2, Pakistan

preferred that this route proposal

should be retained in the catalogue

and be re-activated according to the

SULOM – Lahore VOR – INDEK – Islamabad

VOR (BTR) – NONIB – Peshawar VOR (PS)

– BIMIS 343433N, 0710533E (Pak/Afghan new

proposed TCP boundary waypoint), Vertical

Limit FL300 – FL410

situation in Afghanistan. Pakistan

also affirmed that airway T400

starting from point SULOM (TOC

with India) - INDEK – NONIB – PS

providing connectivity with P500

(MOTMO-FIRUZ) was already

operational and available for flights.

The portion between PS-BIMIS is

approved but further connectivity

to/from PS-BIMIS (TOC with

Afghanistan) is subject to the

response from Afghanistan.

ATS Route Name

AFG 02

State Priority

IATA Priority

LOW

Requested by (when)

Tajikistan (03/08/2019: AIRARD TF/4)

States/Administrations Involved

Afghanistan, Tajikistan (Kabul, Dushanbe FIRs)

Route Description

TAPIS 343100.12N 0690900E – PINAX 371500N

0690600E

Flight Level Band

Benefit (fuel, environmental)

Operational Information

(potential airlines, flight frequency,

potential city pairs)

Remarks: Afghanistan commented

that waypoint TAPIS is a

converging point for two congested

routes, and would review this

proposal. At ATMSG/8: IATA

assigned “LOW” priority and

recommended for deletion.

Note: continuation of this proposal

is 29.007 “TAPIS-PINAX-SORAM-

TENRO” in RDGE Middle Asia

ATS Route Catalogue.

ATS Route Name

MID 02 (a)

State Priority

IATA Priority

HIGH

Requested by (when)

AIRARD TF/2 (04/05/2018)

States/Administrations Involved

Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan (Tehran, Karachi,

Kabul, Lahore FIRs)

Route Description

Bandar Abbas (BND) 2711.8N 05622.0E –

DAVEP 2742.4N 05720.1E – NABOX 2816.5N

05826.0E – PEKES 2859.5N 05952.3E – DANOV

2914.7N 06023.9E – ULOVI 2919.8N 06034.5E –

PIRAN 2934.1N 06108.1E – OGOGO 3024.9N

06309.1E – LOVIT 3109.1N 06500.4E – PAROD

3129.0N 06554.0E – A453 – HANGU 3329.1N

07100.3E – Penshawar (PS) 3358.7N 07131.0E –

G325 – Gilgit (GT) 3555.2N 07420.1E – G325 –

PURPA 3656.5N 07524.4E

Flight Level Band

Benefit (fuel, environmental)

40 NM / 3 minutes, 600 kg fuel per flight, 1,342

tonnes fuel, 4,262 tonnes CO

annually

Operational Information

(potential airlines, flight frequency,

potential city pairs)

EK, EY, QR

About 43 flights per week

Remarks: High Priority MID 02 (a)

preferred over MID 02 (b) if only

one route is chosen. 17/08/2020: The

proposed entry into Pakistan airspace

allows very minimal response time

(less than two minutes) for traffic de-

confliction at DOBAT and SITAX

and other crosser routes.

Pakistan proposed for deletion. At

ATMSG/8: IATA assigned “HIGH”

priority; implementation benefits;

and operational information. IATA

preferred this route to be retained in

the Catalogue and commented this

route could be used for contingency

and for aircraft with limited oxygen

requirements. At BOBTFRG/3:

Pakistan re-affirmed that the

proposed route was not feasible.

BOBTFRG/4: Pakistan reaffirmed

that the proposed route was not

feasible and supported archiving this

proposal for future possibility and

IATA had no objection.

Chapter 5: Trans-Regional (East Asia)

(referred to: AIRARD/TF, RDGE or EATMCG as

appropriate for review)

ATS Route Name

FE0008 / RDGE 15.003 / APAC RUS 5

State Priority

IATA Priority

MEDIUM

Requested by (when)

Russia, IATA (01/09/2018)

States/Administrations Involved

Russia, Japan (Khabarovsk, Fukuoka FIRs)

Route Description

Implementation of two new bi-directional ATS

routes:

a. SIBIR 432154.00N 1352024.00E – New

Waypoint (FIR BDRY between Khabarovsk and

Fukuoka) – New EKVIK Waypoint

b. ARLAS 425906.00N 1343553.88E– New

Waypoint (FIR BDRY between Khabarovsk and

Fukuoka) – New EKVIK Waypoint

Flight Level Band

Benefit (fuel, environmental)

No fuel gain but could help to reduce ground delays

for HND/KIXNRT operations to Europe.

Operational Information

(potential airlines, flight frequency,

potential city pairs)

AF, BA, KL, LH

Remarks: To improve north-south

traffic flows between Khabarovsk

FIR and Fukuoka FIR, Original

SIBIR – LURED – EKVIK

proposal will be changed due to

new position of EKVIK further east

as a result of the planned airspace

structure change in Japan, when

both new ATS routes will be

implemented, the existing B451

ARLAS – LAKTA – LURED –

IGROD will be withdrawn. Based

on the results from the coordination

meeting between the Russian

Federation and Japan in February

2017, the implementation could not

be progressed as Japan indicated

that no further airspace changes for

the Fukuoka FIR are acceptable

before the 2020 timeframe

(RDGE/27). Russian Federation:

New waypoint needed 404751N

1361021E (FIR Boundary),

coordination with Japan (Fukuoka

FIR) required. Alternative bi-

directional route to EN15.

23/10/2020: Japan commented no

update. At ATMSG/8: IATA

assigned “MEDIUM” priority and

recommended for this route to be

retained in the Catalogue.

15/10/2021: Japan commented no

update.

ATS Route Name

FE0021 / RDGE 13.028 / APAC RUS 4

State Priority

IATA Priority

HIGH

Requested by (when)

Russia, IATA (01/09/2018)

States/Administrations Involved

Russia, Japan (Khabarovsk, Fukuoka FIRs)

Route Description

Implementation of new bi-directional ATS route:

AVGOK – Niigata (GTC) 375729.90N

1390653.60E

Flight Level Band

Benefit (fuel, environmental)

20 NM / 4 minutes, 440 kg fuel per flight, 2,400

tonnes fuel, 7,550 tonnes CO

annually

Operational Information

(potential airlines, flight frequency,

potential city pair)

AF, AY, JL, KL, NH

About 105 flights per week

HND/NRT to Europe

Remarks: During a bilateral

meeting between the State ATM

Corporation and the JCAB Japan (in

Tokyo, November 2012), a

difference in coordinates of the

AVGOK waypoint was identified in

the aeronautical information

publications of Russia and Japan.

The incorrect coordinates were

confirmed by Japan and a decision

was made to report this issue to the

appropriate Regional ICAO Offices.

The Russian Federation proposes

the following coordinates (4336N

and 13815E) for the AVGOK

waypoint. Based on the results from

the coordination meeting between

the Russian Federation and Japan in

February 2017, the implementation

of the bi-directional ATS Route

AVGOK – GTC requires further

studies due to the involved military

area. RDGE/27 meeting in 2017:

could become a conditional route.

Further discussion with Japan is

required through the ICAO APAC

Office. To reduce route distance of

13NM as compared to current

routing AVGOK – KADBO – GTC.

23/10/2020: Japan commented no

update. At ATMSG/8: IATA

assigned “HIGH” priority and

recommended for this route to be

retained in the Catalogue.

15/10/2021: Japan commented no

update.

ATS Route Name

FE0049 / RDGE 20.010

State Priority

IATA Priority

Requested by (when)

DPRK, Russia (01/09/2018)

States/Administrations Involved

Russia, DPRK (Khabarovsk, Pyongyang FIRs)

Route Description

Implementation of new uni-directional eastbound

ATS route:

KICHA 404103N 1291140E – ADNUR 421230N

1304810E – Vladivostok (KN) 432303N 1320708E

Flight Level Band

17,000 – 53,000 ft

Benefit (fuel, environmental)

Operational Information

(potential airlines, flight frequency,

potential city pairs)

Remarks: Planned implementation

date as part of project in 2015.

Khabarovsk/Vladivostok airspace

re-organisation project, (in map No.

ATS Route Name

FE0050 / RDGE 20.011

State Priority

IATA Priority

Requested by (when)

DPRK, Russia (01/09/2018)

States/Administrations Involved

Russia, DPRK (Khabarovsk, Pyongyang FIRs)

Route Description

Implementation of new uni-directional westbound

ATS route for B355:

Muraveyka (BG) 435303N 1331511E – VATIS

425143N 1320851E – TERNI 422213N 1314003E

–BUMEP 415350N 1311255E – KICHA 404106N

1291140E

Flight Level Band

18,000 – 51,000 ft

Benefit (fuel, environmental)

Operational Information

(potential airlines, flight frequency,

potential city pairs)

Remarks: Planned implementation

date as part of project in 2015.

Khabarovsk/Vladivostok airspace

re-organisation project, (in map No.

7).

ATS Route Name

FE0051 / RDGE 20.012

State Priority

IATA Priority

Requested by (when)

DPRK, Russia (01/09/2018)

States/Administrations Involved

Russia, DPRK (Khabarovsk, Pyongyang FIRs)

Route Description

Implementation of new uni-directional eastbound

ATS route segment: MESOV 383800N 1302300E –

ADNUR 421230N 1304810E

Flight Level Band

29,000 – 53,000 ft

Benefit (fuel, environmental)

Operational Information

(potential airlines, flight frequency,

potential city pairs)

Remarks: Planned implementation

date as part of project in 2015.

Khabarovsk/Vladivostok airspace

re-organisation project, (in map No.

8). Implementation has not

progressed as the connection/

continuation of this ATS route

(implemented ATS routes end at

FIR border over High Seas) into

Incheon FIR still missing. No

information was received from

DPRK and South Korea (ROK) via

the ICAO APAC Office.

Implementation could not be

progressed as no information from

DPRK at RDGE/28.

ATS Route Name

FE0052 / RDGE 20.013

State Priority

IATA Priority

Requested by (when)

DPRK, Russia (01/09/2018)

States/Administrations Involved

Russia, DPRK (Khabarovsk, Pyongyang FIRs)

Route Description

BUMEP 415350N 1311255E – MESOV 383800N

1302300E

Flight Level Band

28,000 – 51,000 ft

Benefit (fuel, environmental)

Operational Information

(potential airlines, flight frequency,

potential city pairs)

Remarks: Khabarovsk/Vladivostok

airspace re-organisation project, (in

map No. 9). Implementation has not

progressed as the connection/

continuation of this ATS route

(implemented ATS routes end at

FIR border over High Seas) into

Incheon FIR still missing. No

information was received from

South Korea (ROK) via the ICAO

APAC Office. Implementation could

not be progressed as no information

from DPRK at RDGE/28.

ATS Route Name

FE0053 / RDGE 20.014

State Priority

IATA Priority

Requested by (when)

DPRK, Russia (01/09/2018)

States/Administrations Involved

Russia, DPRK (Khabarovsk, Pyongyang FIRs)

Route Description

New G711 BISUN 431400N 1311148E – TERNI

422213N 1314003E – RIVAT 412900N 1321600E

Flight Level Band

21,000 – 53,000 ft

Benefit (fuel, environmental)

Operational Information

(potential airlines, flight frequency,

potential city pairs)

Remarks: Khabarovsk/Vladivostok

airspace re-organisation project, (in

map No. 10).

Note: to verify has this route been

implemented as G705?

ATS Route Name

FE0054 / RDGE 20.015

State Priority

IATA Priority

Requested by (when)

DPRK, Russia (01/09/2018)

States/Administrations Involved

Russia, DPRK (Khabarovsk, Pyongyang FIRs)

Route Description

Implementation of new bi-directional ATS route:

RIVAT 412900N 1321600E – MESOV 383800N

1302300E

Flight Level Band

21,000 – 53,000 ft

Benefit (fuel, environmental)

Operational Information

(potential airlines, flight frequency,

potential city pairs)

Remarks: Khabarovsk/Vladivostok

airspace re-organisation project, (in

map No. 11). Planned

implementation date 11 December

2014.

Note: to verify has this route been

implemented as N513?

ATS Route Name

FE0055 / RDGE 20.016

State Priority

IATA Priority

Requested by (when)

DPRK, Russia (01/09/2018)

States/Administrations Involved

Russia, DPRK (Khabarovsk, Pyongyang FIRs)

Route Description

Implementation of new bi-directional ATS route:

NULAR 405912N 1341100E – MESOV 383800N

1302300

Flight Level Band

28,000 – 53,000 ft

Benefit (fuel, environmental)

Operational Information

(potential airlines, flight frequency,

potential city pairs)

Remarks: Khabarovsk/Vladivostok

airspace re-organisation project, (in

map No. 12). Planned

implementation date 11 December

2014.

Note: to verify has this route been

implemented as L771?

ATS Route Name

FE0056 / RDGE 20.017

State Priority

IATA Priority

Requested by (when)

DPRK, Russia (01/09/2018)

States/Administrations Involved

Russia, DPRK, Japan (Khabarovsk, Pyongyang,

Fukuoka FIRs)

Route Description

Implementation of new bi-directional ATS route

segment:

RIVAT 412900N 1321600E – New Waypoint (FIR

BDRY between Pyongyang and Fukuoka)

Flight Level Band

Benefit (fuel, environmental)

Operational Information

(potential airlines, flight frequency,

potential city pairs)

Remarks: Khabarovsk/Vladivostok

airspace re-organisation project, (in

map No. 13), for further discussion

with JCAB, Japan. Planned

implementation date as part of

project in 2015. Implementation

could not be progressed as no

information from China at

RDGE/28.

Chapter 6: Pacific

(referred to: IPACG, ISPACG as appropriate for review)

ATM/SG/11 − WP_IP/XX

2 – 6/10/2023

Attachment A

ATS Route Name

WPC 01

State Priority

IATA Priority

HIGH

Requested by (when)

IATA (30/07/2018)

States/Administrations Involved

Papua New Guinea, Indonesia, USA, Philippines,

Japan, Taibei ACC (Port Moresby, Ujung Pandang,

Oakland Oceanic, Manila, Fukuoka, Taibei FIR)

Route Description

Port Moresby (PY) 0927.2S 14712.9E – Vanimo

(VNO) 0240.7S 14118.2E – Koror (ROR) 0722.1N

13433.0E – ENDAX 1415.0N 13000.0E – BISIG

2027.0N 12500.0E – TINHO 2421.2N 12201.7E

Flight Level Band

FL250 – FL430

Benefit (fuel, environmental)

163 NM / 15 minutes, 1,604 kg fuel, 5,053 kg CO

5,000 tonnes fuel, 15,700 tonnes CO

annually

Operational Information

(potential airlines, flight frequency,

potential city pairs)

60 flights per week

Taibei and beyond – Australia, New Zealand, and

Papua New Guinea

Remarks: BISIG replaces the

waypoint that was published in the

ICAO route catalogue as that

waypoint no longer exists. May also

be useable as an offload route for

flights between Manila and

Australasia. At ATM/SG/6: PNG

positive, Indonesia positive, Japan

was reviewing, Philippines and

Taibei yet to be discussed. At

ATMSG/7: Under consideration by

Philippines. 17/01/2020: Philippines

supported the implementation of

this route. 23/10/2020: Japan

commented this route proposal was

under consideration. 16/09/2021:

Based on information provided by

the IFATCA, implementation of this

proposed route in Taibei FIR was

not possible because it would cross

ATS routes G581 and Q13, and

traverse restricted area RCR 17.

Proposed for deletion. 15/10/2021:

Japan commented this route

proposal was still under

consideration.

25/2/2022: Japan commented no

discussion, but if necessary it would

be put on the agenda at future

meeting.

23/9/2022: IFATCA, this proposal

requires further coordination with

the military.