Chinese Flight Level Chart

Since we’ve been flying quite a lot within the Chinese airspace lately, I think this would be a great thing to share. I’ll now use this whenever I’m flying within the Chinese Mainland (excluding HK, MC, and TW) airspace.
If y’all check on FR24 all aircraft within the Chinese airspace fly at those FLs!



I think we could enforce metric system in IF for Chinese and Russian Territories. If someone wanted to fly into North Korea, they also uses metric system.

1 Like

Isn’t that what this post is about?

It’ll not be realistic because you can’t expect a pilot in IF checks RVSM as well as flying. If it’s enforced, there will be chaos, believe me!

You can always check RVSM on either your radar or LiveFlight

Yes, but you can’t expect all pilots to do this. To avoid chaos, using feet is still the best choice, I think.

Chill man, look people will eventually convert, it takes time.👌

1 Like

Thanks for this. I was looking at charts one day and had to do the conversion. This helps.


Interesting. I didn’t know China, Russia, and North Korea used meters instead of the imperial foot. What a headache for pilots flying in and out of those airspaces.

Also most central Asian states (the “stans”)

1 Like

I mean in real life, it is also a chaos. Say Delta Airlines DL129 Seattle-Beijing. They do get confused sometimes as well, especially when the traffic in PEK is very busy. When they are confused by meters, the tower just instead tell them descend to FL250.

Also, it is a good idea to make it hard, and you as the controller in expert server can ghost more users. In another request, people say the rules in expert server aren’t strict enough. Metric and imperial unit conversion is a good way to kick some of the not-fully-trained pilots back to the training server.


Turning these regions into metre RVSM does make the game more realistic. My point is that it will cause confusion for pilots, and even controllers. Remember, the purpose of ghosting is not punishing, but a lesson for pilots to learn. Strict rules do have benefits, but its disadvantages are obvious as well. I personally don’t agree with changing the unit in certain regions, but I will listen to your advice as well. Thanks for discussing!


Thanks for the info.
Now I understand why Simbrief/FplToIF gave me cruise altitudes 33100 ft and 35100 ft in chinese airspace when doing a flight from London to Hong Kong.


glad to see that many people are starting to convert to a more realistic altitude when flying in the CAAC airspace

1 Like

Interesting! So then the system of flying at odd FL in feet 1 degree to 180 and even FL 181 to 360 goes out with the metric system; or do pilots fly at 10668 mts when they need to be at FL53 for example?

Convert 10668m to ft and compare it to 5300, you’ll eventually get the chart.

No I mean if you are flying toward the east you need to fly at odd FL in cruise. So if one is flying at FL35 is 35000ft then the metric system will ask you to fly at 10668mts

35000’ is FL350 not FL35, but I get you. In CAAC airspace you’ll have to fly an additional 30m or 100ft higher to make it 10700m instead of 10670m. Refer above chart before commenting.

1 Like

So wait, it seems like they are doing it terribly inefficiently. Reading it out in Meters, and converting to feet for all aircraft? They eaven mention how that means aircraft will always be at a sum what inaccurate altitude… 🤔

1 Like