Wecome to Nav Cans Canada!

[Mac]

How were you able to determine what traffic the controller was working at the time?

[SierraPoppa]

I dont want this to turn into a rant about all the Nav Can folks, most of who do their very best but how the hell can such a jerk be allowed to keep his job? I look forward to some constructive replies and obsevations from others on this subject.

What else do you call it when you title you post "Wecome to Nav Cans Canada!" Maybe a more appropriate title might have been "Some Controllers are assholes".

Simple Mac, First way, the guy sitting next to him, Second way ,using Nav Cans own plots, Third way using a flight tracking system our company pays for, I will not for obvious reasons reveal the centre or the date or type or for that matter any other details, they still have to sit next to each other and my source may well have broken some privacy rules, but believe me there aint much traffic at the time of night we were flying along this particular part of Canada.

If he was so bloody bad file a complaint with Nav Canada, instead of coming on here and starting a rant.

Given that your source seemed to accomodate you you can't really blame the entire company for one asshole, now can you.

[North Shore]

Not necessarily defending NAvCan, but it is possible (seeing as you mentioned that you were flying at night) that the controllers were working more than one sector, and thus really didn't have the time to help you out.

OTOH, it may have been a case of "welcome to the great white north - no spoon-feeding of navigation here."

[Cat Driver]

" If he was so bloody bad file a complaint with Nav Canada, instead of coming on here and starting a rant. "

Would you get better satisfaction from your complaint from NC than from TC?

[Dust Devil]

If he was so bloody bad file a complaint with Nav Canada, instead of coming on here and starting a rant.

This site is all about mindless rants. Keep 'em coming bud!

[water wings]

i too, noticed a bit of a cool breeze North of the border... not that i enjoyed explaining where and what Canada was south of the border, but i digress. I felt like a red carpet was ahead of me during most of my flight from LA to ON... but had the rug yanked from under my wings once past YGK. Oh well, not saying i haven't got a few verbal hugs and handshakes from the voices in my headset lately. Just one bad apple tends to spoil the bunch on both sides... cus i did hear one US controller say to his US plane in disgust about something that had happenned "well, you know how those Canadians are" not knowing i was a wee Canuck in disguise as an N-number.

That being said: 3 cheers for happy hardworking controllers and fssers and such!

and rants are allowed on here BTW, duh...

[greykin]

... cus i did hear one US controller say to his US plane in disgust about something that had happenned "well, you know how those Canadians are" not knowing i was a wee Canuck in disguise as an N-number.

If I had a dime every time we said that about American pilots! Same goes for both sides I guess. Unfortunately some controllers (on both sides, apparently) interpret a lack of understanding of a difference in procedures as a lack of intelligence on the part of the pilot, which is usually not the case. I think I am a little more udnerstanding than some.

Additionally, I think I have only once denied flight following, and it was because I was extremely busy with my IFR traffic.

I have on occassion seen guys deny it when their workload did not merit the denial. I think that's horseshit, and if I were you I would file a complaint with Nav Canada. It will be investigated. (Was this recent? If so, get on it now, as the tapes are only held for 30 days I think -- after that it'll be hard for them to verify the traffic level at the time.)

We are well paid as controllers, and denying flight following out of laziness is crap as far as I'm concerned.

[Switchfoot]

I dont want this to turn into a rant about all the Nav Can folks, most of who do their very best but how the hell can such a jerk be allowed to keep his job? I look forward to some constructive replies and obsevations from others on this subject.

Sorry to hear about your difficulty regarding the flight following (or lack thereof). It's been a while since I've flown south of the border but I do recall how good the service was down there at the time! Too bad we can't share the same attitude towards pilots as they do.

On a different note, I must complain a bit with regards to some of the service Nav Can provides with weather information. Why is that every other day it seems that the radar sites are down when you want to get a weather check? Faulty equipment I guess, but it sure seems to happen frequently! Not one specific individuals fault but a pain nonetheless for all of the flight crews trying to get weather checks for their route. What's up with that?


Switchfoot.

[Pygmie]

On a different note, I must complain a bit with regards to some of the service Nav Can provides with weather information. Why is that every other day it seems that the radar sites are down when you want to get a weather check? Faulty equipment I guess, but it sure seems to happen frequently! Not one specific individuals fault but a pain nonetheless for all of the flight crews trying to get weather checks for their route. What's up with that?


Switchfoot.

Nav Canada doesn't have anything to do with weather radar. Environment Canada runs all the weather radar sites and provides Nav Canada with the feeds.

[altiplano]

Nav Canada doesn't have anything to do with weather radar. Environment Canada runs all the weather radar sites and provides Nav Canada with the feeds.

Maybe not weather radar in design but they to operate primary and secondary surveilance radar, the former will pick up precipitation/cells and usually controllers will pass along info...

As to the subject of this post though: Is this the first time a contoller has been a dick to you? Because I have crossed many who were "in a mood" to say the least. Others have put me on some stupid vector to nowhere, been less than helpful or just out to lunch... Others are really good, didn't violate me when I was the one out to lunch or expedited requests to help me get home a bit sooner...

As DD said - rant away - but SFW?

[goldeneagle]

I dont want this to turn into a rant about all the Nav Can folks, most of who do their very best but how the hell can such a jerk be allowed to keep his job? I look forward to some constructive replies and obsevations from others on this subject.

Well, it sounds like in your case, it's a case of 'no flight following', but, at least they let you go where you wanted to go. Very typical occurrance out here on the wet coast goes along this path.

Blast off out of ZBB headed for YWL. It's a severe clear blue skies day, so you think 'lets make it easy for controllers, we'll go vfr today'. Your expectation is on the handoff to terminal you will be sent on the published vfr path over the top of yvr 'over the button' of the active, and once north of the field continue the climb to 12.5 on course. Nope, that's not what happens. What happens is, you get told on the radio 'remain clear of our airspace, no service will be provided'. So, now you are left with a rather ugly choice, stay down under 1500 feet and transit east of the zone, which means flying strait thru the practise areas in an airplane that goes 3 times as fast as all the trainers out there. Once you are past YPK you are in a narrow valley down at 2000 still, and forced to do a max effort climb northbound trying to outclimb terrain, yet, stay under that precious inverted wedding cake of forbidden airpspace. After 50 miles or so of dodging cumulus granite, you finally reach an area where you can climb above the rocks, and go on course. This whole escapade adds sigificantly to the cost of the trip, there's a considerable extra fuel burn and time expense involved. When it's all said and done, NavCan actually has the audacity to send you an invoice for this 'service'.

What I really want to know, is, how can NavCanada legally get away with this. First off, they dont own the airspace, they only mis-manage it on behalf of us, the owners. Second, there are laws in this country that state if you charge somebody for a service that's not provided, it's called fraud, and, is a criminal offense. Third, in the granting of the monopoly on air traffice control/services, the act of parliament that created this so called 'private company' does contain provisions that say the service MUST be provided.

I sure wish I could get away with sending my customers invoices for 'work I should have done, but couldn't be bothered to actually do'. I'd really like for somebody to rationalize why this is a criminal act for any other company, but, it's 'business as usual' for Nav Canada.

The real sad part of it is, you talk to some controllers about the subject, and they honestly believe that telling you on the radio to stay away is actually 'providing a service', and worthy of the fees being charged. They are so out of touch with reality, and so entrenched in thier 'government department' mindset, they dont even comprehend what it means to be a private company, operating a service. They are still in this mindset that the aviation industry should revolve around the controller infrastructure, with no comprehension of the concept that aircraft operators are the customer, and, it's the needs of the customers they are there to provision.

The bottom line is, NavCanada staffing problems have been an excuse we have hear for years and years. The ONLY reason it's not cured, is incomptence in the management. Competent managers would have hired more folks by now, and, they would not be letting everybody take vacations duing the busiest part of the year. There is no reason for a government mandated monopoly to be allowed for a company that has a demonstrated history of being incapable of fulfilling the obligations. If NavCanada is incapable of operating the system in any one of the regions, then ithe contract should be put out for public tender, and get somebody in that can do the job. There is no excuse for maintaining a government mandated incompetent monopoly. I am quite fed up with the added costs of operating an airplane simply because Nav Canada managers in incapable of dealing with human resource issues. They have had a number of years to get the job done, and proven they cant. it's high time another company was put in that role, and NavCanada allowed to go bankrupt the same as any other incompetently managed corporation.

[Cat Driver]

Goldenone, I see not much has changed out here in lotus land with Nav Canada since I quit flying in Canada.

When I find a situation where my safety is being compromized by Nav Canadas inability to provide the service we pay for I refuse to take their lame excuses for refusing me a reasonable request.

When I was still flying here I had to go to Langley one day and requested 4500 feet to cross the water from Nanaimo in my Cessna 150 on wheels.

I was told to remain out of their controlled airspace above 2500 feet.

I immediately keyed the mike and told the controller that I needed 4500 feet for reasons of safety and would he confirm that he was refusing to allow me to fly at a safe altitude and if so please give me a reason for not being able to asign me a safe altitude....

....there was some silence on the frequency and then I was given a squawk code and cleared to 4500 feet direct the coal pile.

You have to corner e'm with logic sometimes.

[lilfssister]

I talked to about 40 different pilots the other day at work and one was an a**hole. Does that mean all pilots are a**holes?

[justplanecrazy]

Goldenone, I see not much has changed out here in lotus land with Nav Canada since I quit flying in Canada.

When I find a situation where my safety is being compromized by Nav Canadas inability to provide the service we pay for I refuse to take their lame excuses for refusing me a reasonable request.

When I was still flying here I had to go to Langley one day and requested 4500 feet to cross the water from Nanaimo in my Cessna 150 on wheels.

I was told to remain out of their controlled airspace above 2500 feet.

I immediately keyed the mike and told the controller that I needed 4500 feet for reasons of safety and would he confirm that he was refusing to allow me to fly at a safe altitude and if so please give me a reason for not being able to asign me a safe altitude....

....there was some silence on the frequency and then I was given a squawk code and cleared to 4500 feet direct the coal pile.

You have to corner e'm with logic sometimes.

I've flown in NYC airspace and been told not above 500'AGL, in LA's and not above 1000'AGL, can't really think of any other confined aispaces that are busier than Vancouver's then those and you're upset you weren't given 4500' AGL right away? I know it's not safe to fly that low out over the great blue but I can't think of an airspace in the world that handles more VFR overflights daily than Vancouver and all they get are complaints? They're right smack in the middle of a VFR corrider and being bound by mountains and many busy airports doesn't help.

Goldeneagle what service fees did you pay Navcanada for that flight? I doubt it was the same as the fees charged if you had filed IFR. If you file IFR they have control of you and preffered routing takes you with the flow of the current as well as mandated seperation. Filing VFR direct generally doesn't help anyone but the pilot when he can be accomodated. Sounds like this time it didn't help you either.

I've been denied flight following several times in the USA, been told to remain clear of the airspace, been taken by NY approach but sat on frequency for over 5min. waiting for him to stop saying break and to start pausing so we could report on frequency. Finally he simply asked if we were there, we replied with our ident affirmative and he kept rattling on. Sure he took us but he was far too busy to provide us with any service. VFR/IFR seperation is workload permitting and it was only a perceived service with planes everywhere and no seperation provided.

Clunnckdriver, as far as your situation, it sounds like you got the shaft from a lazy controller. Most of us will go beyond our call of duty in our daily work but there are always a few out there that do as little as possilble in any field of work. Hopefully after the baby boomers retire and the company catches back up with the training, we'll be back to a respectable service level again, that is until this wave starts to retire.

[Cat Driver]

" I've flown in NYC airspace and been told not above 500'AGL, in LA's and not above 1000'AGL, can't really think of any other confined aispaces that are busier than Vancouver's then those and you're upset you weren't given 4500' AGL right away?

I was not upset because I was not given 4500 feet right away, it was a regular thing with Vancouver ATC to claim they were to busy to handle VRF in their airspace.

If you can't think of a busier airspace than Vancouver on a relatively quiet week day you have not thought to long on it.

So to restate my story, I do understand the Vancouver area traffic problems and am experienced enough to know high density traffic from low, and Nav Canada should maybe rethink their level of service.

Cat

[justplanecrazy]

If you can't think of a busier airspace than Vancouver on a relatively quiet week day you have not thought to long on it.

So to restate my story, I do understand the Vancouver area traffic problems and am experienced enough to know high density traffic from low, and Nav Canada should maybe rethink their level of service.

Cat

You have me stumped, name a busier VFR/IFR corrider in North America. YYZ has less overflights than YVR.

[Cat Driver]

LAX?

[Cat Driver]

justplaincrazy, to avoid a pissing match over this my experience with ATC around the world is that the level of service is far better in say the USA or England in the greater London area or Paris or Most of Euro Control than in Canada.

There must be a reason and maybe starting with the culture in Nav Canadas upper management might be a good place to start.

High density traffic is not something that is only found in Vancouver airspace, it is a world wide thing.

And there is a difference in the levels of service.

[ODDERGUY]

CAT Wrote


Blah Blah Blah My experience this My experience That Im so Good Im the best Im a liberal jerk off. We all know your the best Cat Driver congrats on being the best Pilot ever!!!!

[J31]

CAT Wrote


Blah Blah Blah My experience this My experience That Im so Good Im the best Im a liberal jerk off. We all know your the best Cat Driver congrats on being the best Pilot ever!!!!

Now that is a really classy post……not . CAT puts forward his opinions in a debate but you hide behind a computer making a stupid personal attack. That is sad.

J31

[Cat Driver]

J31, no problem, just read the rest of his contribution to this group.

[justplanecrazy]

justplaincrazy, to avoid a pissing match over this my experience with ATC around the world is that the level of service is far better in say the USA or England in the greater London area or Paris or Most of Euro Control than in Canada.

There must be a reason and maybe starting with the culture in Nav Canadas upper management might be a good place to start.

High density traffic is not something that is only found in Vancouver airspace, it is a world wide thing.

And there is a difference in the levels of service.

Cat, if you look at my post, I said that other than LA and NY there aren't any more congested airspaces involving a mix of VFR/IFR aircraft in North America. In reality, you could probably place that statement across the world as North America seems to be the only place with a large GA community to the best of my knowledge.

YVR and YYJ both have far more overflights than YYZ or YTZ. In reality LAX probably deals with very few overflights. I know when I flew down there, you simply stayed below and outside of their airspace and didn't congest their frequency by talking to them. Heck, even Pittsburgh told me to remain clear and sounded pissed that I even called. Again, how do you make such a statement like the ATC in Canada being far worse than in the USA or Europe. Is it because you had to reduce speed 50kt's 35nm out? Is it because you weren't allowed to jump over to the mainland at 4,500' VFR? In the US you fly quickly to your holding pattern and aren't allowed 500' AGL. I just can't figure out why everyone is so quick to jump all over Canada's ATC. The only time I've been put into a hold or had to sit forever in a huge lineup on the ground or had to diverge large distances to avoid airspace, has been in the US. I have a buddy flying out of YYZ after spending the last 6 years flying in the US and he has no problems with YYZ and he's currently flying internationally into the UK, Germany, Austraulia, Switzerland etc.

There will be some delays due staffing over the next 5-10 years in Canada gauranteed, but that is simply a complete flush of staff from the last baby boomers and is unavoidable and will happen again in 30 years when everyone retires. No this isn't a pissing match, just trying to figure out what you base your judgements on.

[buck82]

Not to stir the pot.. but just a queery. Why did you request 4,500 and not 3,500 or 5,500 for the eastbound?

[niss]

What services do you pay for as an owner in regards to ATC? Is it just operators or do privatly owned a/c get stuck with a bill too? Is it just IFR you need to pay etc. ?

[Cat Driver]

justplanecrazy, my comments are made from personal observations based on levels of service and flexibility with regard to helping out VFR pilots in a friendly manner in controlled airspace in other countries and comparing same to Nav Canada.

I will admit that I have a bias against NC's top management who are retreads from TC still stuck in the Neandrethal era of
human history. If you ever have the missfortune of having to deal with these clowns you most probably would feel as I do toward NC.

I think I used all of aviation for my comparison of ATC service.

"
Cat, if you look at my post, I said that other than LA and NY there aren't any more congested airspaces involving a mix of VFR/IFR aircraft in North America. In reality, you could probably place that statement across the world as North America seems to be the only place with a large GA community to the best of my knowledge. "

Fair enough comment justplanecrazy, I have not flown in Canada for quite a few years and not commercially for eleven years so my opinion may be flawed and maybe NC is now world class for service.

However if you fly in the greater London Airspace you will find about fifteen airports in a fifty mile radius of Heathrow with lots of VFR stuff flying in very narrow corridors and vertical limits, from my recollection of YVR traffic I would opine that Vancouver is a cake walk in comparison to London.

But hey, what the hell I am out of the Aviation quagmire of rules and policies and any flying I may do now will be in my Cub on floats outside of controlled airspace so I will hopefully not have the need to avail myself of NC's services.

Cat