YXL -

flyinhigh · Post by **flyinhigh** » Mon Mar 13, 2006 3:20 pm

Quit asking if we have the atis.
Even if we don't have it we'll get it. Some times when we call up were 15 min out, lots of time. I personally can think of numerous times that I've been asked and say yeah, even if I don't, If I say no you'll say can you get it, congesting up the radio.

Zatopec · Post by **Zatopec** » Mon Mar 13, 2006 3:41 pm

If on initial contact you tell the FSS/ tower controller you have the ATIS , it will shorten the advisory, especially when there are RSC, NOTAMS, PIREPS and the likes on it. If you don't mention it, he/she will most likely ask you to get it unless you are the only aircraft in the MF and he/she chooses to give you all the infos. The ATIS is there to help relieve congestion on the frequency, thus improve services.

The worst is when you provide the infos and at the end the pilot says "roger, we had Bravo".

grimey · Post by **grimey** » Mon Mar 13, 2006 6:07 pm

Zatopec wrote:The worst is when you provide the infos and at the end the pilot says "roger, we had Bravo".

No, the worst is when they say the have Bravo, get the reduced advisory, and then ask for info that's in Bravo, because they didn't actually have Bravo.

/doesn't seem to happen as much as it used to.

Doc · Post by **Doc** » Mon Mar 13, 2006 8:59 pm

News Flash......when an aircraft calls a px, we can actually hear them! You dont need to repeat everything another a/c transmits? Why do it? YXL is probably the most dangerous place in the north. We are going to have an accident there....just a matter of who, and when. Want to make it a safe place? Lock the doors to FSS and toss the keys into Bigwood!

FamilyGuy · Post by **FamilyGuy** » Tue Mar 14, 2006 1:33 am

Whaaaat. You mean you guys don't get the latest info data linked right to the cockpit?

lilfssister · Post by **lilfssister** » Tue Mar 14, 2006 5:35 pm

Doc wrote:News Flash......when an aircraft calls a px, we can actually hear them! You dont need to repeat everything another a/c transmits? Why do it?

Well then, push the transmit button and say :" Radio, ABC has the traffic in sight", or "Radio, ABC copies the traffic, and we're looking for him/her". Our manual requires us to ensure that you are aware of the traffic, and assist you in locating it, until there is no conflict. THAT's why we do it.

split s · Post by **split s** » Tue Mar 14, 2006 9:32 pm

Just so you know that Doc is not the voice of most, YXL are a good group at Flight service, no complaints. We all know the problems with IFR days in Sioux Lookout, I like the method of not arriving until "time over fix" when everyone arrives at the same time on an IFR day. That airport needs some kind of radar or transponder based survaillance. Also if we could all agree to let all other types get in ahead of king air traffic that would be awsome!!!

cpl_atc,
What are your thoughts and comments on YXL.

Doc · Post by **Doc** » Tue Mar 14, 2006 9:46 pm

SplitS...it's not about who gets in first...it's the constant babble on the radio that's the complaint here...and you know it. You hear someone call in with a px, then you get handed the same infor by FSS....so, you've heard the same thing twice....then you are given traffic, taxing, traffic on final, traffic clearing, all while you're ten north. None of it is a conflict. Might as well give me traffic that's picking up a clearance next Tuesday, for all the good it does.

Cap'n P8 · Post by **Cap'n P8** » Thu Mar 16, 2006 1:14 pm

cpl_atc,

I'm not sure I follow you. Why do you need a tower/terminal combination to make use of radar from the ground up? If the aircraft can be immediately positively controlled then there is going to be a time savings of at least two minutes per departure. Then there is the ability to cycle more aircraft through approaches without having to issue holding clearances.

...or is there a manops side to this that I'm not aware of?

FREEFALL · Post by **FREEFALL** » Thu Mar 16, 2006 5:08 pm

What kind or RADAR coverage is there in the YXL area? If any.

Cap'n P8 · Post by **Cap'n P8** » Thu Mar 16, 2006 7:00 pm

I think the radar is based in Dryden, but provides coverage over sioux lookout as well. Unfortunately, Winnipeg Center is only able to get you above about 2300 feet which means procedural departures and only one aircraft on approach at any given time.

Pygmie · Post by **Pygmie** » Thu Mar 16, 2006 7:20 pm

You are correct, the radar is at Dryden. But even if there was radar to the ground, only one aircraft can be cleared for the approach at a time. A tower is required to be able to give multiple aircraft the approach at the same time (a terminal is not required). Also, all departures from every airport are procedural regardless of radar coverage to the ground, tower, terminal, etc.

charlie_g · Post by **charlie_g** » Thu Mar 16, 2006 10:58 pm

bad key press

pokaroo · Post by **pokaroo** » Fri Mar 17, 2006 8:52 am

You do not need a tower or a terminal to have more than one on approach. You do need radar to the ground though. If you have a tower the first guy has to be established final...that's it. If there is a FSS on site the first guy still has to be on final but the weather must also be VMC. This doesn't involve an interpretation of Manops it's black and white it's in there.

As far as departures go.....you can get guys off WAY faster using non radar sep as opposed to radar.

The airspace I work deals with a wide array of getting aircraft on the ground and in the air. I have a tower serving an airport with radar through about 2500, a FSS at an airport with radar to the ground and a FSS at an airport non radar below 10,000.

I would love to have radar to 4,000. You can still vector for an approach, sequence, climb etc... Having a tower though would help like you wouldn't believe. Straight arr or straight dep is easy it's the mix that causes delays. With a tower there is a whole new set of tools available that move traffic way faster.

PC12flyer · Post by **PC12flyer** » Fri Mar 17, 2006 1:01 pm

So why doesn't Sioux Lookout qualify to have a tower?

I know of one tower which basically is underserviced. In Sault Ste. Marie, the majority of the traffic in and out of there is from the college. The major IFR traffic is 5 Jazz flights a day and a handfull of Bearskin flights and a few medivacs. No where near the demand put on Sioux Lookout everyday.

How can Sault Ste. Marie support a tower and Sioux Lookout, a place that desparately needs a tower, cannot.

Pygmie · Post by **Pygmie** » Fri Mar 17, 2006 3:11 pm

Uhhhhh, not under the interpretation of manops that we work with in YWG.

Right now, there is nowhere in YWG that has a tower w/o a terminal (expect for a very short time in the morning), so no one has the opertunity to work enroute with a tower. It is my understanding that when(if) QR terminal goes over to enroute they will be able to have multiple aircraft on the approach, which is why the new courses coming though are being taught how to use a tower to it's full advantage, including multiple arrivals as well as tighter arrival vs. departure procedures.

Yes, there are MANY things an enroute controller cannot do that a terminal controller can (i.e. discontinuing vertical separation between arriving aircraft before established on final, the ability to use MVAs, etc.) but multiple arrivals and departures aren't one of them.

pokaroo · Post by **pokaroo** » Fri Mar 17, 2006 3:34 pm

Yes, there are MANY things an enroute controller cannot do that a terminal controller can (i.e. discontinuing vertical separation between arriving aircraft before established on final, the ability to use MVAs, etc.) but multiple arrivals and departures aren't one of them.

We use MVA's in a non terminal environment daily.

Pygmie · Post by **Pygmie** » Fri Mar 17, 2006 3:47 pm

We use MVA's in a non terminal environment daily.

Yep, I stand corrected.

Cap'n P8 · Post by **Cap'n P8** » Sat Mar 18, 2006 12:29 pm

Didn't mean to imply that the departures wouldn't be procedural based...just a lot quicker to get the next aircraft a clearance valid if the proceeding aircraft was under radar control immediately after becoming airborne, ie. not having to wait for him to climb through 4000' etc.

jonathan_tcu · Post by **jonathan_tcu** » Mon Mar 20, 2006 7:19 pm

I occasionally tune to YXL via Live ATC and it's just like listening to YTS and YYB radio with their own 'rules' for their aerodome. Sometimes the YTS guys may not update the ATIS for whatever reason it is. Here's a question, if a special goes out for IFR conditions and shortly after, VFR conditions prevail, why wait for the top of the hour to update? Why not throw out another special for VFR conditions?