Narrative:

I was awakened from my crew rest break by the relief crew. They told me that dispatch had contacted our flight to advise that our alternate had gone below alternate minimums. [It was] admitted that the dispatcher had failed to notice this and it was caught by the relief dispatcher. The weather at zbaa was near cat 1 minimums; also un-forecasted by [contracted weather information supplier]. Dispatcher wanted to change the alternate (zbtj/tianjin) to a distant one-runway unfamiliar alternate (zbyn/tiayuan). I calculated that we would get there with skimpy fuel if everything were to go perfectly. Of course; in china; that is rarely the case. Just getting the re-route takes time and fuel. Me and my crew advocated a fuel stop in harbin (zyhb); or any suitable alternate. The dispatcher seemed to lack knowledge about the alternates and said he would get with management to discuss it. I told him that we were only 400 miles from zyhb and that time was critical for planning the fuel stop. He then brought in the dispatch manager. The dispatch manager strongly advocated against any fuel stop in china and stated that a fuel divert would be tantamount to an emergency. I argued against this notion; having knowledge of other successful fuel diverts in china in the past. I then suggested other alternatives; such as incheon (rksi). That was discounted as well. The dispatch manager suggested continuing to zbaa and declaring a fuel emergency with approach control to get priority handling. He stated that we would have a big delay getting out of zyhb. I responded that I didn't think planning the flight based on exercising my emergency authority was a good idea when other alternatives were available; if not necessarily expedient. We finally agreed to a landing fuel in zbaa and to monitor the weather for any deterioration that would require an immediate divert. We landed normally at zbaa after shooting a cat 1 minimums approach. Had we been required to divert to our listed alternate; we would have landed with less than adequate fuel.I am concerned about the following:1. Are all china alternates paper alternates? Are they not suitable? If that is the case; how are we able to operate the flight listing unsuitable alternates?2. I am very concerned about the philosophy of ignoring an impending safety threat and planning on use of emergency authority before any threat of an emergency exists. It seemed to me that schedule integrity was being prioritized over safety.3. If dispatch would have informed us about the deteriorating weather in a timely manner we could have avoided this situation.4. If we cannot depend on alternates in china; then perhaps we should carry enough fuel to get to a suitable alternate. A weather divert or a fuel stop should not be an emergency situation.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Air carrier flight crew entering Chinese airspace was advised by Dispatch that the weather minimums at their alternate had gone below minimums. Divert options are discussed since their destination; ZBAA; was also reporting low visibility. Dispatch advises crew it is better to declare fuel emergency than to divert as that would cause a long delay. The crew questions the reason for having alternates that are not even useful if needed.

Narrative: I was awakened from my crew rest break by the relief crew. They told me that dispatch had contacted our flight to advise that our alternate had gone below alternate minimums. [It was] admitted that the dispatcher had failed to notice this and it was caught by the relief dispatcher. The weather at ZBAA was near Cat 1 minimums; also un-forecasted by [contracted weather information supplier]. Dispatcher wanted to change the alternate (ZBTJ/Tianjin) to a distant one-runway unfamiliar alternate (ZBYN/Tiayuan). I calculated that we would get there with skimpy fuel if everything were to go perfectly. Of course; in China; that is rarely the case. Just getting the re-route takes time and fuel. Me and my crew advocated a fuel stop in Harbin (ZYHB); or any suitable alternate. The dispatcher seemed to lack knowledge about the alternates and said he would get with management to discuss it. I told him that we were only 400 miles from ZYHB and that time was critical for planning the fuel stop. He then brought in the Dispatch Manager. The Dispatch Manager strongly advocated against any fuel stop in China and stated that a fuel divert would be tantamount to an emergency. I argued against this notion; having knowledge of other successful fuel diverts in China in the past. I then suggested other alternatives; such as Incheon (RKSI). That was discounted as well. The Dispatch Manager suggested continuing to ZBAA and declaring a fuel emergency with Approach Control to get priority handling. He stated that we would have a big delay getting out of ZYHB. I responded that I didn't think planning the flight based on exercising my emergency authority was a good idea when other alternatives were available; if not necessarily expedient. We finally agreed to a landing fuel in ZBAA and to monitor the weather for any deterioration that would require an immediate divert. We landed normally at ZBAA after shooting a cat 1 minimums approach. Had we been required to divert to our listed alternate; we would have landed with less than adequate fuel.I am concerned about the following:1. Are all China alternates paper alternates? Are they not suitable? If that is the case; how are we able to operate the flight listing unsuitable alternates?2. I am very concerned about the philosophy of ignoring an impending safety threat and planning on use of emergency authority before any threat of an emergency exists. It seemed to me that schedule integrity was being prioritized over safety.3. If dispatch would have informed us about the deteriorating weather in a timely manner we could have avoided this situation.4. If we cannot depend on alternates in China; then perhaps we should carry enough fuel to get to a suitable alternate. A weather divert or a fuel stop should not be an emergency situation.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.