No ILS runway 18 at Winnipeg - What a crock.

ecko_warrior70 · Post by **ecko_warrior70** » Sun Mar 25, 2007 10:23 pm

International Airport? Bullshit.

With the weather this evening, WAA should hang their heads in shame at the supposed "service" they have provided this evening. Wind from the south up to 10 knots: Sorry, no ILS on runway 18. RVRs hovering aroung 1200-1600 feet, sorry CAT II not available on runway 36 until at least Monday afternoon. Story is the part needed has to be shipped up from Detroit. I'm sure the medevac that had to declare and emergency to land below their limits appreciate it, as do the passengers on all the diversions.

Supposedly Air Canada and West Jet have said they don't really want an ILS if it's going to increase charges? Is that for real?

Localizer · Post by **Localizer** » Sun Mar 25, 2007 11:00 pm

Sooooo .... are you new to Winnipeg? .. This is nothing new? ..

From what I understand ... WAA came to Air Canada and asked them how much money they figured they lost in one year due to there not being an ILS on 18. So the number crunchers came up with an amount and presented it to the WAA thinking they were going to put an ILS in, if it was a significant amount. Well instead the WAA said if you give us that money (the amount they lost in the past due to the lack of an ILS) then they would put in an ILS. So needless to they the words "go f*ck your hat" were in order.

Cheers,

Loc

Captain Crunch · Post by **Captain Crunch** » Sun Mar 25, 2007 11:03 pm

ecko_warrior70 wrote:International Airport? Bullshit.

Wind from the south up to 10 knots:

10 knots from the south??? OH DEAR! Surely there is no aviator in Southern Domestic Airspace able to perform an ILS on RWY 13 with those hurricane like conditions. My stars, what a terrible predicament.
Welcome to YWG... Get used to it, or get out.
CC

tripleseven · Post by **tripleseven** » Sun Mar 25, 2007 11:48 pm

Exactly, land on 13 you tard. Or, take the 10 knot tail wind with the cat 2 lights on. If you miss, your are a tard.

TooLowFlap · Post by **TooLowFlap** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 5:23 am

Call me and of alot of other guys and gals tards for missing then at one point or another... I guess you've NEVER missed oh mighty super pilot? Oh yeah "your are a tard" learn to spell TARD.

tripleseven wrote:Exactly, land on 13 you tard. Or, take the 10 knot tail wind with the cat 2 lights on. If you miss, your are a tard.

RFN · Post by **RFN** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 6:58 am

Wow, this took a weird turn.
Yeah the wx here in YWG was pretty crappy alright...
What happened to the LOC/BC 18 that used to be here? Can anyone tell me what has to be done to keep a backcourse up and running? Seems strange to me.
Not that a BC would've been good enough yesterday but still...

Jerricho · Post by **Jerricho** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 7:35 am

.............

ecko_warrior70 · Post by **ecko_warrior70** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 7:55 am

"Exactly, land on 13 you tard. Or, take the 10 knot tail wind with the cat 2 lights on. If you miss, your are a tard."

You moron. Not only do you lack the intelligence to participate in any discussion about the topic, your ignorance and lack of wit are further highlighted by your inability to even insult somebody in a grammatically correct way. "Your" should be "you're". Take your internet penis you are trying to wave in everybody's face and play with it some more. It sounds like you're good at it.

I am not new to Ywg and certainly not new to flying. The Authority love to blow their own horn about the new construction and how they are trying to attract customers. How about the customers that ended up in Saskatoon, Regina and down south? I don't think Jericho is trying to sound as patronizing as he does but the fact is with the weather round here we do see more days where a Cat 2 would be used more than the one on 36. Yet there isn't even an ILS at all. Yxe and Yqt have BCs. As has been asked, what happened to the BC at Ywg?

Maybe we should have a poll. Who thinks there should be an ILS in 18? And if you're going to try to be insulting, at least try to substantiate it with facts.

Disco Stu · Post by **Disco Stu** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 8:26 am

In 6 years of flying in and out of YWG, I can remember exactly ONE day when not having an ILS to 18 was a problem. And it was only a problem because the CRFI combined with the crosswind on 13 was a little sketchy.

I can also count the number of CAT II days on 1 hand.

Just out of curiosity, who was the medevac operator who had to declare an emergency and what was their reason? To go below minimums???

Jerricho · Post by **Jerricho** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 8:35 am

The medevac was SN (I'll remove this if required, but I don't think it's a big secret). Patient was in a very bad way.

tripleseven · Post by **tripleseven** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 11:17 am

I guess I touched a couple of nerves. "Oops" I don't have facts, but how about this:

Disco Stu made a good point regarding how many times the weather made people wish that there was an ILS for R18. Assuming he flew 20 days per month over a six year period, thats 1/(20*12*6)*100%=0.07%. A whopping 0.07% of the time. Wowee.

If I was a bean counter for the WAA, I wouldn't be recommending to the board that we install an ILS for R18 for one day every six years. Come to think of it, that probably explains why they removed the LOC/BC approach for that runway too. Furthermore, even if there was an ILS, the approach ban would have prevented any approaches due to RVR for alot of the day anyway, idiot.

Do you have any idea why most of the ILS approaches on the prairies are oriented on an east-landing direction? You probably don't so I'll tell you. Because when the wind is from the east, you have an upslope flow which causes cooling and therefore condensation, blah, blah. I suspect a southerly flow in Winnipeg is the opposite with the Hudson Bay about 600 miles north, unless 0.07% of the time a freak weather phenomena occurs.

It's all about money and statistics sunshine. Someone who knows alot more than us (especially you) has it all figured out. I'm sure they took into account the relevant maintenance costs over the lifetime of the facility as well.

Sorry about the spelling. I know what its like to go on a tirade about someones spelling, when you don't have anything better to do. If I make another mistake, I'm not about to return to university and take another English course to appease some chump on an pilot forum. And if it really gets your panties in a knot, maybe you should quit wearing panties.

While not so eloquently stated, Ms/Mr Warrior70 does have a point. I've lost count of the number of times in the 3 years I've been here the wind is straight from the south at 20kts+ and the ceiling OVC020 or worse. I've had some varied and interesting responses when on first contact pilots are told NDB or VOR/DME approach.

You've got to be kidding, right?

PS - I don't condone busting minimums or doing stupid stuff while doing approaches, but if you are an ATPL rated pilot and you don't consider landing on R13 or R36 in YWG with 1200 RVR and a wind of 180/10 (assuming your company has the proper ops specs), something is wrong. Maybe common sense is not so common.

Jerricho · Post by **Jerricho** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 11:57 am

WHOOPS! Just realised what I typed there. I meant 200 feet. My bad. My point s that some operators from south of the border do not conduct NDB approaches and get a little twitchy when they hear it advertised on the ATIS..............and that VOR/DME approach sucks.

Personally, I couldn't give a rat's ass what sort of approach you guys want to get you on the ground. Hell, I'll sit there and vector for surveillance approaches all day (been there, done that).

I find it amusing though some of you driver's out there are so keen to jump down a fellow pilot's (that's a guess) throat so quickly and venomously. Great entertainment there.

tripleseven · Post by **tripleseven** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 12:05 pm

A valid point Mr. Jerricho, but that crappy VOR/DME approach (never flew it yet myself) should be no problem, with say a 1000 ft overcast, no?

I hate being one of those people, but sometimes I can't resist.

Jerricho · Post by **Jerricho** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 12:08 pm

Yup, sorry mate. 2000 foot ceiling? *Jerricho slaps himself in the face* I suck. Change that to OVC002

tripleseven · Post by **tripleseven** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 12:12 pm

Now you would have a bit of a problem.

ei ei owe · Post by **ei ei owe** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 12:37 pm

With the new ban in effect too, you'd have to think how many times you'd be allowed to consider the approach if the weather was that crappy. I sure could use an extra 1/8 (or thereabouts) of a mile on my side to shoot an approach.

bobcaygeon · Post by **bobcaygeon** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 2:13 pm

Disco Stu wrote:In 6 years of flying in and out of YWG, I can remember exactly ONE day when not having an ILS to 18 was a problem. And it was only a problem because the CRFI combined with the crosswind on 13 was a little sketchy.

I can also count the number of CAT II days on 1 hand.

That's cause with the girly ass contract that you worked under, you got partially paid to not go flying!!!

Not to mention Medivac crews and FO's on salary

Why would you fly when the WX is the shits???
Might as well sit and drink coffee and tell war stories!!!!

Disco Stu says: There was this one time at band camp.....

giligan · Post by **giligan** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 6:09 pm

Jerrico, I'm guessing you must be really new to Winnipeg. I wouldn't say the YWG weather is known for being bad in the winter, cold yes, but the sun shines 85 percent of the time.

Ecko, that same 85 percent of the time the wind is probably from 330 degrees and 31 is paired with 36 (both with an ILS and 1 CAT II.)

I'm guessing you are pretty new (at least to the area) as the ILS issue for 18 would has been around since before it was called Stevenson field and ILS's were a new invention.

Out of curiosity, can your company even shoot an approach with an RVR value like that and can they do CAT II as well?

The prairie weather in Canada is overall very good in all seasons, If we were talking about St. John's then this would be a different thread.

With the introduction of VNAV approaches and RNP, the cost of installing an ILS is like complaining about there being no NDB in Bloodvein.

There are operators in Canada that can do VNAV RNP approaches down to 250 feet onto RWY 18 in Winnipeg, as more operators realize the cost effectiveness of RNP approaches (operators get refunds from Nav Canada for not using ATC services when flying RNAV arrivals and RNP approaches) and are willing to pay for this approval, the ILS will become obsloete.
The 1 day per year that you can't land on 18 hardly justifies installing an ILS just like it doesn't justify most operators getting certified for Cat II.

Not a rant, just thoughts.
gil

ei ei owe · Post by **ei ei owe** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 6:37 pm

giligan wrote: no NDB in Bloodvein.

Run for the hills..... (to be hummed to Iron Maiden)....wait no hills around here. What are we gonna do?

Disco Stu · Post by **Disco Stu** » Mon Mar 26, 2007 9:37 pm

bobcaygeon wrote:That's cause with the girly ass contract that you worked under, you got partially paid to not go flying!!! Not to mention Medivac crews and FO's on salary Why would you fly when the WX is the shits???
Might as well sit and drink coffee and tell war stories!!!!

Disco Stu says: There was this one time at band camp.....

Listen there old timer no one cares about how you used to make 1.5 cents per mile and you didn't get paid if...blah...blah...blah.

Just because you and your buddies at the time were too scared of BW or TB to fight for what's yours doesn't make it right!

No ILS runway 18 at Winnipeg - What a crock.

No ILS runway 18 at Winnipeg - What a crock.

Re: No ILS runway 18 at Winnipeg - What a crock.