Date: 201707
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZGSZ.Airport, FO
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Widebody Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Cargo / Freight / Delivery
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground ZGSZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Confusion; Situational Awareness; Distraction
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Airport; Human Factors
Primary problem: Airport

Narrative: After landing on Runway 16 at Baoan (Shenzhen; China) and exiting onto Taxiway E7; we were told by tower to turn left (north) onto Taxiway E and contact ground. Ground control instructed us to 'Taxi; echo; romeo; hold short of romeo1'. Near the location where Taxiway E7 intersects Taxiway E (the north-south parallel); there are four perpendicular (east-west) taxiways which all intersect Taxiway E. It is a known 'hot-spot' and we briefed it as such prior to landing. As we approached these four taxiways; I was a bit confused as to which one was taxiway 'R'. I asked the captain to stop the aircraft and I called ground and asked for clarification. They said something to the effect of 'turn right now'. At this point; we were nearly abeam Taxiway R. The Captain started taxiing straight ahead. I initially assumed he was letting the nose of the aircraft track past the turn point as is standard when making a 90 degree turn. When he failed to turn; I asked him where he was going. He indicated he felt the controller meant turn at the next taxiway and pointed to the pavement markings ahead of us. On the pavement; leading away from the Taxiway E centerline was a lead-off line for the next perpendicular taxiway. Next to this lead-off line was the letter 'R' with an arrow clearly indicating a right turn (for taxiway R). In addition; there were taxiway identification signs very close to this (perpendicular) taxiway indicating that it was Taxiway R. I'd have stopped the aircraft; but in the two or three seconds I had to make a decision; the pavement markings and signage were enough to convince me that we were turning onto Taxiway R. As we continued; ground control instructed us to hold position. They informed us that we'd passed Taxiway R and were approaching Taxiway Q. They then instructed us to taxi via Taxiways Q; Z; R; and hold short of R1. We complied and the rest of the flight was uneventful.Shenzhen has a well-deserved reputation for non-standard and; in some cases; incorrect airport markings and signage. I'd been told by several pilots that the markings and signage had improved recently but were still not quite right. The expectation that the airport markings and signage had been improved may have contributed to my reliance on them during this incident. In addition; think it's quite a bit easier when landing on runway 34 and approaching this taxiway intersection from the north. The signage seems much more intuitive when viewed heading south. A pilot also has much more time to assess the situation; identify the taxiways in question by referencing ramp locations; etc. When landing to the south; you typically exit right at this intersection; making the situation much more difficult. I think the signage and pavement markings need to be brought up to ICAO standards at this airport.




Synopsis: Air carrier First Officer reported a taxi deviation at the Shenzhen Bao'an International Airport (ZGSZ). He attributed the error to several ambiguous taxiway markings at this airport.