Another F.S.S. down the drain...

[Gramps]

Great, here we go again. Pr. George is the lastest airport to lose it's F.S.S. As of 0200 yesterday morning, they packed their bags and pulled up stakes. So now when the tower is closed (2300 to 0600 local) we get to rely on Pacific Radio.

So what gives? I can't be the only one who is concerned about the loss of services that we seem to suffer on a regular basis. What became of actually being able to talk to someone on the ground who has the ability to look out the window and tell you what the fog bank off the north end of the airport is doing? Anyone familiar with PG will know what I'm talking about.

We are rapidly losing the ability to apply any local area knowledge to our decision making. Same thing with Terrace. Was always nice to call Terrace FSS to inquire about the Hermans, vis down the Skeena, Copper Mtn, etc. It was often instrumental in deciding if it was even worth sparking to to "go take a look". Now I have to call the "emergency calls only" number when I want this info. Kinda makes me feel like I'm doing something wrong when I do this. But I don't really care. This whole loss of services is really starting to pi** me off!! It's a gamble when you call the Emerg. number. Sometimes you'll get a very helpful individual on the other end of the phone, and sometimes you don't. Things have sure changed, and often not for the better.

What I want to know is when will all this crap come to an end. What is the logic Nav Canada uses? Here's a good one. Happened to be in Roberval, PQ a couple of years ago. It was a Friday afternoon, nice and sunny, and I couldn't help but notice the fancy new FSS tower (monument) they had that was glistening in the sunlight. We counted 5 guys up the entire time we visited their fine airport. But they needed every one of them to keep up with the intense volume of traffic. In the 6 hours we were at the airport we counted two, yes two aircraft arrive. But of course they had one leave as well. Fabulous use of resources I thought...

Now we have Pr. George. Numerous approaches, intersecting runways, wildlike concerns, etc. And now we get all our info from Pacific Radio. Unbelievable! Why is it that in the REAL world of business if you don't like the service, you can usually protest with the result being some form of satisfaction. But in this wonderful country we fly in we have no recourse. Like it or not the service is dreadful at times, and we just keep diggin' deeper and deeper to pay the bill.

It's a sad day in PG. My hat is off to the men and women who made YXS FSS what it was over the years

You will be missed...

Gramps

[Cat Driver]

Gramps, the most important thing when asking about local weather is talking to a local who knows the area.

However that does not register in the rarified upper level of decision makers in Government.

And Nav Canada is Government, period.

Cat

[gr8gazu]

Unbelievable! I haven't been to YXS in a lot of years now but it is an airport that that needs 24 hour coverage of real life observation and runway condition reporting.

I guess the beaurocrats making the descisions are far enough removed from industry that they have lost touch with it.

[lilfssister]

Perhaps you should post this in the ATS forum, where FSS are really appreciated?

[justplanecrazy]

The post belongs here where pilots will read it. It's up to the users to complain loud enough to keep the services. Most people inside the company disagree with it as well, but our opinion doesn't matter as we're not paying for the services, you are. If they don't hear any complaints from the users, they'll assume the effects are minimal and continue shutting them down.

Lilfss, I appreciate FSS, just not the operators that try and justify replacing towers with FSS without a significant long term drop in traffic numbers. Or the ones that say FSS can safely handle just as much traffic as ATC. Just like I'm sure you wouldn't agree with a CARS operator trying to justify closing PG.

[G.N. Thompson]

See they also closed Dawson by the Creek BC so now you talk to YPE, AB. See they put in an auto wx stn and cameras...this will be handy with a wind farm approved just north the field and NDB on a nasty hill to the east and an OSB plant to the west and the bird pond south. Goblimey.

[Axial Flow]

On my last Air Canada ticket I paid 75 dollars in Navcan surcharges on an A320. Now with what 130 seats they are raping us and for the pilots who use the "SERVICE" there is less and less everyday.

Great post Gramps

[Cat Driver]

Incredible, almost ten thousand dollars for one trip in one airplane.

Like all Government bureaucracies they need more and more money to keep hiring more and more bureaucrats overseeing the few who actuallly provide the service.

Canada is somewhere around the middle of the pile in the banana republic mentality.

[Gramps]

It's like I said earlier, what is their basis for decision making process? They spin a bottle? Pin a tail on a donkey? Dart board with airport ID's instead of numbers? Smoke a little "electric lettuce"?

Here we have a place like Smithers, population of maybe 10,000. Pr. George on the other hand has an area population of over 75,000. Smithers has a FSS and PG doesn't. And Nav Canada's rationale would be??

What about Medevac flights. I've done the odd one (:-)) in BC, and there is a requirement to ascertain runway surface condition prior to landing. So in the middle of the night some snow sets in. At least in Smithers you can call and at least get a rough idea of what's going on. Not so in PG anymore. Got no idea if it's sticking.. melting.. just driftin' around. So...

Why can't the wizards in our health care system, or lack-of-health care system, pull some clout and get Nav Canada to reconsider some STUPID decisions they have make. I hate to say it, and I won't say I-told-you-so, but I have a feeling it will take a disaster of some kind to get things to change for the better. I just hope if it happens, that whoever launches the case has a good enough lawyer to sue the you-know-what off Nav Canada. Yeah, yeah, I know... if they lose the rates will just go higher, but at least the problem will have been brought to the fore front hopefully for all to see. Come on BCAS, you can do it!!!

I just wish there was some way that we pilots could express our disdain for the direction NavCan seems to be taking.

Any thoughts?? I like Capt. James T. Kirk's response to similar situations... "wide angle, deep space". Suits me just fine... PA announcement: "All Nav Canada management please report to the transporter room on deck 19".

To the Mods... could we please leave this thread right where it is for pilots to see??

Gramps

[aileron]

An era on it's way out the door.

I was extremely suprised, and very much happy to find, not the usual mislabeled sign "FSS" (directing wandering pilots through empty airport halls to paper-empty PIKs) but indeed a REAL-LIFE FSS in Inuvik!

My jaw dropped, in fact in disbelief while stupidly scanning the room for the damn PIK, while the FSS specialist asked how he could help.

It had been 8 years since I had last stepped into one, so I embraced the nostalgia and grabbed every bit of service I could muster as indeed like all other FSS this one too will disappear by January.

Thanks to the guys and gals still manning the outposts, they're becoming rare to find and their services (face-to-face) are very much appreciated.

[lilfssister]

The post belongs here where pilots will read it. It's up to the users to complain loud enough to keep the services. Most people inside the company disagree with it as well, but our opinion doesn't matter as we're not paying for the services, you are. If they don't hear any complaints from the users, they'll assume the effects are minimal and continue shutting them down.

Lilfss, I appreciate FSS, just not the operators that try and justify replacing towers with FSS without a significant long term drop in traffic numbers. Or the ones that say FSS can safely handle just as much traffic as ATC. Just like I'm sure you wouldn't agree with a CARS operator trying to justify closing PG.

JPC you should go into politics...seriously! You make up "answers" that have nothing to do with anything you are "responding" to and try to slant things to support your point of view re paying for services.

The plain and simple truth is that the charges NC collects will support a certain level of service at every airport in the country. Where the numbers warrant that will be ATC, FSS, CARS, or ATF. Certainly we could have ATC at every airport with 20-30,000 movements or more per year like 20 years ago when the service was paid for by taxes on all Canadians. However, studies have proven that under 60, 000 movements per year, the FSS/CARS or ATF provide an acceptable level of service. Enhancing FSS ability to cope with increased numbers with tools like radar are increasing that ability to provide a safe service. I'm sure to be 100% safe, controlled airports could be restricted to 1 or 2 aircraft within the airport zone perimeter at the same time...but that's never gonna happen. NC's primary raison d'etre in determining level of service is to determine and mitigate risk at every site they have responsiblilty for. If, in this day of lawsuits and liability, you think that NC has not weighed their exposure in ANY airport in this country, you should sign sign up for a business course (NC provides many online-contact your manager to sign up).

[lilfssister]

An era on it's way out the door.

I was extremely suprised, and very much happy to find, not the usual mislabeled sign "FSS" (directing wandering pilots through empty airport halls to paper-empty PIKs) but indeed a REAL-LIFE FSS in Inuvik!

My jaw dropped, in fact in disbelief while stupidly scanning the room for the damn PIK, while the FSS specialist asked how he could help.

It had been 8 years since I had last stepped into one, so I embraced the nostalgia and grabbed every bit of service I could muster as indeed like all other FSS this one too will disappear by January.

Thanks to the guys and gals still manning the outposts, they're becoming rare to find and their services (face-to-face) are very much appreciated.

Sad, but it may be the last of the "old" Full Service FSS. I miss those days when I knew everything going on wx wise for 3-400 miles,forecasts in effect for half the country and approach or enroute navaid NOTAMS off by heart for 1/2 dozen or more facilities And we actually got face time with pilots we talked to every day!!

[politically_incorrect]

On my last Air Canada ticket I paid 75 dollars in Navcan surcharges on an A320.

Be careful here. Was it strictly Nav Can charges, or were others lumped in? Often it is "ANS/Security fee" and/or others on the same line of the invoice, depending on the carrier. $75 sounds like an awful lot. Where were you flying? I think the last time I flew YWG-YVR I paid something like $13 each way, and that was for both NC and the "security" fee.

Incredible, almost ten thousand dollars for one trip in one airplane.

Nav Canada's on-line fee calculator reports a charge of $2,375.30 for a trip from CYVR to CYYT in an A320. That's just about the longest flight (hence, most expensive) you can make in Canadian airspace with a scheduled A320, as AC does. So give that $10,000 figure some thought.

See for yourself: http://navcanada.ca/NavCanada.asp?Conte ... efault.xml



While I have disagreed with JPC in other threads on this matter, it was for reasons of vagueness. I do agree though, that if people are getting shit service, they should write the company.

It does no good to only complain on here. I doubt Kathy Fox and John Crichton frequent this board. Not that it isn't a good board.

But if enough people stand up, or better yet, band together, your voices will be heard.

WHERE IS COPA ON THESE MATTERS? ARE THEY DEAF MUTES!!!????

[Zatopec]

Happened to be in Roberval, PQ a couple of years ago.

Roberval is also closing, november 23th.

[imarai]

The people observed in the Roberval tower cab may not have been all FSS. Could be Airport Manager, Technicians. Manager, Supervisor, visitors, etc. In Lethbridge, for example, there is ONE FSS on duty between 0545 a.m and 0830, and 1630 to closing at 2245. TWO FSS on between 0830 and 1630, usually..

I've hear the refrain so many times before .."Over-staffed government operation!" CLOSING A STATION?.. darned government operation!"

From what I've seen, NAVCAN is quite lean compared to the old Transport Canada days.

[thatdaveguy]

OK, how many aircraft fly into Prince George a night?

Is it worth keeping a 24 hour flight service station with 6 staff members making approximately $50k/yr plus benefits to do weather observations 15 hours a day, then AAS for the remainder? With no more than 10...probably usually 2 aircraft a night??

Do you really think that running the facility would likely cost over $500,000 a year for 2 aircraft a night is worth it?

Now I'm FSS myself, but some things just are not reasonable. I agree the Level of Service thing is totally screwed up, but this is one decision I believe is correct.

The more reasonable thing to do would be to staff the tower 24/7. Colocated FSS and Towers are silly.

[G.N. Thompson]

OK Dave, but we see Medivacs to and from YXS pretty often at YXJ, what with oil patch, OSB, Site C dam, etc with lots of construction. So I really don't like the "what are the odds" approach to this topic

Likewise, time was when you could say the tech was on his way if the ILS or VOR or BCN crapped out...then they gave themselves 72 hours to respond and we sure didn't see that advertised. Now they are removing techs altogether from YXJ...so shall we just add another 2.6 hours?

One more peeve. Why did we install millions of dollers worth of standby generators at these outer sites and run them religiously every month on load? Because Hydro can and does fail, right? Now we have non-combatant NC managers who have never shot an approach into IMC making the calls such as we will run the generators maybe annually? From a remote location? Please talk to the people who designed these gensets before you respond to this one.

Question: does NC have a bonus check system where these managers collect a portion of the SAVINGS? Can't help wondering>

GNT

[sigmet77]

Dave,
You are right, it is slow overnight at YXS, but so what? 24 FSS operations provide AAS and weather obs, 24 hour towers provide 24 hour control, for more money. Now let's add a 24 hour CWO on top of the control tower and the price keeps going up. Overnight observations are not there just for the hourlys. They are used by MSC for TAF's and GFA's, and those TAF's are used by carriers to determine if they can use YXS as an alternate and save money by carrying less fuel.

"Do you really think that running the facility would likely cost over $500,000 a year for 2 aircraft a night is worth it?"

The decision Nav Can made on this costs a lot more than that. They gave up the option above for the more expensive one.

"The more reasonable thing to do would be to staff the tower 24/7. Colocated FSS and Towers are silly."

How can you say that when you are complaining about spending $500k to run a FSS? An airport with less than 30,000 itinerants per year and you are advocating a 24 hour tower? Plus they need a CWO. Your logic escapes me..........

[thatdaveguy]

5+1 flight service plus associated building costs = $500,000

Add two controllers to make the facility 24/7 = $150,000
CWO Contracts in decent sized town like Prince George (bigger towns pay less) = $50,000

If you are right about the 30,000 movements a year, which I am not familiar enough to be aware of, it should be a 24/7 FSS not a tower.

My sole point is there is no reason for these facilities to coexist on the same airport. Exceptions being the FICs and Yellowknife/Whitehorse.

GN Thompson:

I am not aware of how middle management gets their bonuses, but they do. All NC management get bonuses for saving money or whatever the company deems a good cause.

As for the generator idea, or removing the techs, I dont' agree with those.

I am really NOT a NAV CANADA fan boy. At all. Don't get me wrong.

[grimey]

If you are right about the 30,000 movements a year, which I am not familiar enough to be aware of, it should be a 24/7 FSS not a tower.

30,000 itinerant movements, 62% of them IFR, and 15,000 locals/88's as well. There should be more thought put into whether it's a tower or FSS than simply looking at the number of itinerant movements. Traffic patterns/complexity, peak traffic surges, and the type of operators at the airport should also affect it.

http://www.tc.gc.ca/pol/EN/Report/TP577 ... -Web)1.pdf

[justplanecrazy]

30,000 itinerant movements, 62% of them IFR

Another way to look at it other than simply safety, a tower can provide less delays when working with IFR traffic and thats over 18,000 IFR flights a year.

[G.N. Thompson]

JPC:
Agree with you there, especially with local mills & fog getting worse at PG. Getting the same way at XJ now...70 minutes in the holding pattern and more glycol used than ever before.
GNT

[lilfssister]

Question: does NC have a bonus check system where these managers collect a portion of the SAVINGS? Can't help wondering>

GNT

Yes

[G.N. Thompson]

fsstr,
Then I would like to suggest that only those managers who have actually flown scheduled approaches into IMC, issued Aviation Weather Forecasts with good accuracy, or been accredited IFR Controllers be allowed to make those decisions. The rest are still apprentices.
GNT

[grimey]

fsstr,
Then I would like to suggest that only those managers who have actually flown scheduled approaches into IMC, issued Aviation Weather Forecasts with good accuracy, or been accredited IFR Controllers be allowed to make those decisions. The rest are still apprentices.
GNT

You're living in a dream world, G.N.