Taiwan presses China for flight safety talks on new Xiamen Xiang’an airport

Why Xiamen Xiang’an is stirring aviation safety worries

Taiwan’s Civil Aviation Administration says China has not shared key details about Xiamen Xiang’an International Airport, which is nearing completion a short distance from Kinmen. The closest point between the new site and Taiwan controlled Kinmen islands is about 3 km, and the gap between the new airport and Kinmen airport is less than 10 km. This proximity, Taiwan argues, requires early and detailed coordination to keep flight operations safe.

Construction work on Dadeng Island is visible and audible from Kinmen. Cranes, floodlights, and dredging have transformed the shoreline opposite the islets. With work accelerating toward a planned opening as early as 2026, Taiwanese regulators say they still do not have the minimum data needed to assess risk, design deconfliction procedures, or update pilot information.

Once operating, Xiang’an is slated to become the main airport serving Xiamen, replacing Xiamen Gaoqi. Planning documents describe multiple long runways suitable for widebody aircraft and a large terminal that can handle tens of millions of passengers a year by 2030. The site sits on reclaimed land facing Kinmen and Quanzhou Bay, placing a busy hub beside a sensitive frontier.

Kinmen airport, by contrast, is a compact facility that mainly serves domestic routes to Taipei, Taichung, and Kaohsiung, plus occasional international charters. Its traffic peaks during weekends and holidays when visitors cross by ferry from Xiamen and transfer to flights within Taiwan. Even at current volumes, any unplanned change in airspace or scheduling next door would be felt quickly in Kinmen tower and radar control.

Taipei says it has asked Beijing through existing civil aviation liaison channels to share operational plans and convene working level safety talks. Chinese authorities, including the Civil Aviation Administration of China and the Taiwan Affairs Office, have not responded to those requests, according to Taiwan’s aviation regulator.

How close are the two airports and why it matters

Based on public descriptions of the project and Kinmen’s known procedures, aviation specialists estimate that a large portion of controlled airspace around the two fields overlaps. Unofficial assessments place the overlap at roughly 70 percent when both airports use their standard arrival and departure paths. The two runway systems are reported to be similarly aligned, which increases the need to choreograph traffic that climbs or descends along comparable tracks.

Airports that sit this close often share a terminal control area, with coordinated instrument procedures that keep aircraft separated by altitude and distance. If both fields launch departures into the same climb corridor or turn arrivals across each other’s final approach, controllers must stack or sequence flights with very little margin. That margin tightens in poor weather, during go arounds, or when pilots deviate for safety.

The standard way to manage that complexity is a detailed letter of agreement between the two air traffic control units, plus harmonized charts, published procedures, and realtime communication. Taiwan says none of that has been possible so far without basic planning data from the mainland side.

What Taiwan is asking for

Taiwan’s Civil Aviation Administration is pressing for a technical exchange that covers how Xiang’an will operate and how it will affect Kinmen. Regulators want to analyze runway use plans, arrival and departure routes, holding patterns, missed approach paths, altitude floors, and any temporary flight restrictions expected during the build up and initial operations. With that information, Kinmen can adjust its own charts, staffing, and equipment to keep safety margins intact.

Information Taiwan seeks

A standard package for coordination between neighboring airports would include several core elements. Taiwan has asked for planning material through established channels and says it has received none to date.

• Runway headings, number of runways to be active on opening, and expected runway use by direction and time of day
• Instrument approach procedures, including ILS or RNP details, step down altitudes, and missed approach instructions
• Standard instrument departures and standard terminal arrivals, with initial climb gradients, waypoint sequences, and speed or altitude constraints
• Holding fixes and protected airspace volumes for delays and diversions
• Terminal control area design, sector boundaries, and control transfer points between units
• Planned traffic volumes by hour, seasonal peaks, and slot management rules
• Low visibility and fog procedures, runway visual range thresholds, and lighting categories
• Noise abatement procedures that may alter climb or descent paths
• Emergency plans for runway closure, bird strikes, ground incidents, and search and rescue coordination
• Primary and backup communication lines, including a direct hotline and a draft letter of agreement

This information allows Kinmen controllers and dispatchers to validate separation standards, run simulations, and publish or amend Aeronautical Information Publication entries and Notices to Airmen in a timely way. It also enables airlines to train crews on changes that will appear in onboard navigation databases before day one.

How coordination would work

Once data is shared, the two sides can build a shared traffic picture. Teams would test procedure packages in fast time simulations, conduct dry runs, and schedule initial operations with conservative buffers before increasing capacity. During the first months, joint flow management and a 24 hour coordination cell would help resolve unplanned conflicts quickly.

China’s response and political backdrop

Beijing has not publicly addressed Taipei’s requests for information, and the aviation channel remains quiet. Official contact between Chinese agencies and President Lai Ching te’s administration is frozen. That political freeze has spilled into technical fields before, even when the subject is safety.

Kinmen sits only a short boat ride from Xiamen. The islands have been under Taipei’s control since 1949, yet their economy is closely tied to the mainland. Proposals promoted by Chinese officials, such as a bridge from Xiamen to Kinmen and expanded utilities links, are framed as development. Taiwanese officials view them through a security lens, given the risk of dependence.

Analysts in Taipei warn that a large new hub across the water could tilt visitor flows and trade further toward Xiamen. Taiwan’s Mainland Affairs Council has pushed back on projects it sees as leverage, while Kinmen’s local leaders regularly highlight the promise of jobs and tourism. The new airport sits in the middle of this debate.

Past air route disputes in the Taiwan Strait

Flight paths across the strait have been contested for years. In 2015 China announced the M503 north south airway on the mainland side of the median line. Taipei objected that the route was too close to the boundary of the Taipei Flight Information Region. China later added east west connectors, known as W122 and W123, which Taiwan said increased risk without consultation.

In early 2024 Chinese regulators moved to cancel an offset that had kept M503 farther from the median line. Taiwan protested, saying the shift reduced buffers and was executed unilaterally. Airlines operating in the area had to adjust routings and prepare for tighter air traffic control handoffs.

These episodes showed how quickly a technical change can become a political argument. They also underscored why advance coordination helps pilots, dispatchers, and controllers handle change with fewer surprises.

The proximity of Xiang’an and Kinmen adds a local dimension to that pattern. Here the issue is not a high level airway but two sets of takeoffs and landings in almost the same neighborhood.

What are the safety risks in practical terms

When two airports sit within a few kilometers, the most sensitive moments are the final approach, missed approach, and the first minutes after takeoff. If one field sends a jet on a sidestep or a go around while the other launches a departure that turns the same way, the aircraft can converge. Good design keeps those procedures separated in space or time.

Wake turbulence is another factor. Heavy aircraft departing Xiamen could create wake that lingers along shared corridors. Light turboprops and regional jets that serve Kinmen are more affected by wake, so designers plan different altitudes and turn points to avoid it.

Weather can complicate both sides of the channel. The region sees fog and low cloud that trigger low visibility operations. Pilots rely on instrument landing systems or satellite based procedures. During those periods, yards of lateral difference and hundreds of feet of vertical clearance matter, and controllers need clear playbooks to manage a surge of go arounds or holds.

Communication remains a human factor risk. Crews switch frequencies as they cross control boundaries. Without a direct hotline and standardized coordination phrases between the two towers and approach units, seconds can be lost resolving conflicts that should have been prevented upstream.

Immediate measures available

Even before full data sharing, there are steps each side can take to reduce risk during the transition to operations at Xiang’an.

• Vertical segmentation that assigns Kinmen departures and arrivals to one altitude band and Xiamen traffic to another until well clear
• Time based metering that schedules Kinmen’s peak banks in windows when Xiamen launches fewer departures toward the islands
• Dedicated corridors that keep initial turns to different bearings or over water reference points that are easy to identify
• A joint traffic management unit with a direct line between supervisors and a shared incident reporting protocol
• Use of shared situational awareness tools, such as ADS B tracks and multilateration feeds, so both sides view the same traffic picture

Longer term solutions

Longer term, the two sides could redesign the terminal control area, publish performance based navigation procedures that route flows cleanly on both sides, and invest in surface movement radars, approach radars, and recording systems with synchronized time stamps. Joint simulations and periodic drills would keep skills current as demand grows.

Economic stakes and Kinmen’s strategic role

Beyond safety, the new airport carries economic weight. Xiamen already supplies a major share of visitors who pass through Kinmen, many of whom arrive by ferry. A large new hub with strong domestic and international links could shift more travelers to fly into Xiamen first, then cross to Kinmen for onward trips to cities in Taiwan.

Kinmen has long been a test bed for limited links across the strait. Water is already piped from the mainland. Proposals to extend electricity and gas, and to build a bridge, are often paired with visions of a single living circle that binds Xiamen and Kinmen. Policy analysts in Taipei view these steps as part of a wider influence campaign aimed at shaping local preferences through infrastructure and convenience.

Xiang’an fits into that picture. If airlines consolidate services at the new hub and market easy transfers into Kinmen, the island could become more dependent on flows that originate in the mainland. Advocates argue that deeper integration would lift business and tourism. Skeptics worry that Beijing could use flows, permits, and schedules to pressure local authorities.

Many residents support better transport but want clarity on who controls what, how safety is guaranteed, and what contingency plans exist if links are restricted. Clear rules on cross border operations, equal treatment for carriers, and an open information policy would reduce friction.

What happens next

Before a planned opening, new airports typically complete calibration flights for navigation aids, publish final procedures in aeronautical information updates, and stage emergency response drills. Airlines test load sheets and obtain approvals for instrument procedures. Nearby airports update their manuals and training. Each of those steps benefits from cross border coordination.

If communication remains limited, Taiwan can still adjust Kinmen operations to preserve safety. Options include temporary altitude bands that keep traffic separated, specific hours when certain procedures are suspended, and warnings to pilots that detail hotspots for vigilance. None of those measures is as effective as a joint plan, yet they can reduce risk.

Airlines and travelers will watch for schedule filings and guidance in the months ahead. Residents on both sides are likely to measure the new airport by its day to day effects, from noise and light to traffic patterns on the water.

Key Points

• Taiwan’s aviation regulator says China has not shared planning data for the new Xiamen Xiang’an airport near Kinmen
• The site is about 3 km from Kinmen islands and less than 10 km from Kinmen airport
• Large airspace overlap and similar runway orientations heighten the need for tight coordination
• Taiwan has requested detailed procedures, traffic forecasts, and a coordination hotline but reports no response
• Political ties remain frozen, and prior disputes over routes such as M503 shape current distrust
• Key safety risks include converging procedures, wake turbulence, fog, and communication gaps
• Mitigation requires letters of agreement, shared realtime tools, and aligned procedures
• The project could shift travel and trade patterns in Kinmen, increasing reliance on links through Xiamen
• Calibrations, procedure publications, and emergency drills lie ahead as the opening date approaches