Narrative:

The flight plan was loaded into the FMC for zgsz Landa9ZA arrival loaded for runway 34. We briefed the approach and arrival and upon entering chinese airspace we were given a heading to fly and runway 33 for landing. We rebriefed and tuned the ILS for runway 33 and aurally identified the morse code for ILS runway 33. While being vectored we were given direct to fix SZ063 and cleared for approach. As we started to turn the final controller asked which runway we were going for and I replied runway 33. At that point we noticed that the FMC had been loaded with runway 34 so captain (pilot flying) turned off autopilot and hand flew to make course correction to join localizer of runway 33. As the raw data was correctly tuned; a slight course correctly was sufficient to get on course as we had about 8 nm from the threshold. Pilot monitoring quickly reloaded approach in the FMC to get a correct picture on the nd. As we made our way back on course; the controller cancelled approach and told us to go around. As the ILS frequency was correctly tuned and altitude about 2;200 ft. We had time to change course to join the localizer for runway 33 but ATC cancelled our approach clearance and told us to fly the published missed. There did not seem to be a conflict with other traffic at the time as the TCAS did not show anyone ahead or behind us for runway 34. We followed their instructions and came back for an uneventful landing. During the radar vectoring for 2nd approach; controller several times called us with wrong callsign. Had to ask him several times to confirm who he was talking to. During this sequence besides from language difficulty; ATC tended to overload us with instructions each time they gave us a clearance. Altitude clearance in meters had to be converted and they would combine 3 or 4 items each clearance and it compounded the situation. We feel that we overlooked the FMC during the runway assignment was partly due to the fact shenzhen presents many challenges with their limited use of standard arrival procedures and excessive vectoring which contributed to increased workload on the crew's part. Captain feels part of the issue was due to him being new to the theater with language barrier plus metric system presented extra variables and may have contributed to us overlooking the FMC.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Captain reported multiple; confusing clearances from ATC that resulted in a missed approach.

Narrative: The flight plan was loaded into the FMC for ZGSZ Landa9ZA arrival loaded for Runway 34. We briefed the approach and arrival and upon entering Chinese airspace we were given a heading to fly and Runway 33 for landing. We rebriefed and tuned the ILS for Runway 33 and aurally identified the morse code for ILS Runway 33. While being vectored we were given direct to fix SZ063 and cleared for approach. As we started to turn the final controller asked which runway we were going for and I replied Runway 33. At that point we noticed that the FMC had been loaded with Runway 34 so Captain (Pilot Flying) turned off autopilot and hand flew to make course correction to join localizer of Runway 33. As the raw data was correctly tuned; a slight course correctly was sufficient to get on course as we had about 8 nm from the threshold. Pilot Monitoring quickly reloaded approach in the FMC to get a correct picture on the ND. As we made our way back on course; the Controller cancelled approach and told us to go around. As the ILS frequency was correctly tuned and altitude about 2;200 ft. we had time to change course to join the localizer for Runway 33 but ATC cancelled our approach clearance and told us to fly the published missed. There did not seem to be a conflict with other traffic at the time as the TCAS did not show anyone ahead or behind us for Runway 34. We followed their instructions and came back for an uneventful landing. During the radar vectoring for 2nd approach; controller several times called us with wrong callsign. Had to ask him several times to confirm who he was talking to. During this sequence besides from language difficulty; ATC tended to overload us with instructions each time they gave us a clearance. Altitude clearance in meters had to be converted and they would combine 3 or 4 items each clearance and it compounded the situation. We feel that we overlooked the FMC during the runway assignment was partly due to the fact Shenzhen presents many challenges with their limited use of standard arrival procedures and excessive vectoring which contributed to increased workload on the crew's part. Captain feels part of the issue was due to him being new to the theater with language barrier plus metric system presented extra variables and may have contributed to us overlooking the FMC.

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.