Reduction of terminal control service in YQR, YXE and YQT?

Bigskycanada · Post by **Bigskycanada** » Wed Oct 25, 2006 6:26 pm

Any truth to the rumour that the terminal service for Regina which is based in Winnipeg ACC, is to become non-existant, with an enroute speciality taking it over and providing 24/7 service? I've also heard the powers that be want to do the same to Saskatoon and Thunder Bay.
Do the airlines and military know this is going on?

Pygmie · Post by **Pygmie** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 5:07 am

Yes, there is truth to the rumor for QR.

FamilyGuy · Post by **FamilyGuy** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 12:04 pm

Didn't this site have a big debate about that over a year ago???

Still isn't done? Second thoughts or realization of impracticality?

Pygmie · Post by **Pygmie** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 2:22 pm

FamilyGuy wrote:Didn't this site have a big debate about that over a year ago???

Still isn't done? Second thoughts or realization of impracticality?

Can't be completed until CAATS is fully implemented since it will require retraining of the en-route controllers.

killer84 · Post by **killer84** » Fri Oct 27, 2006 7:18 am

I don't think there's any talk of doing away with terminal for yxe and yqt, "yet". Although, there are limited hours of operation (at least in yxe). Terminal usually closes about an hour before the tower now, and they seem to open about the same time.

flyinhigh · Post by **flyinhigh** » Wed Nov 22, 2006 7:57 am

The terminal here in yqt closes at (correct me if I'm wrong guys) 8 pm now, might be 9 pm. Tower does not close till 11.

squibbler · Post by **squibbler** » Thu Nov 23, 2006 6:10 am

flyinhigh wrote:The terminal here in yqt closes at (correct me if I'm wrong guys) 8 pm now, might be 9 pm. Tower does not close till 11.

YQT Terminal closes around 22:30 EST and opens at 6:45ish EST - that's monday to friday. Follows the Tower pretty closely (we're 05:45-23:00).
They close early on a Saturday 20:00ish...haven't worked a Saturday evening in a while so can't be too sure and around 21:00 on a sunday.

Sort of follows the traffic, there's enough going on during the week and at weekends the IFR drops right off.

Jerricho · Post by **Jerricho** » Fri Dec 01, 2006 8:15 pm

Any truth to the rumor a WJA driver was mega pissed off about being delayed for 30 something minutes departing YQR and called the ACC to speak to a manager?

Pygmie · Post by **Pygmie** » Sat Dec 02, 2006 12:05 pm

It was about 25 minutes, and yes, there was a call.

Dust Devil · Post by **Dust Devil** » Sat Dec 02, 2006 3:40 pm

I've heard the plan for yqr is to chase away the remaining general aviation aircraft to moosejaw. Not that their is a pile to begin with anyway. I guess it's too busy with the half dozen or so WJ and AC flights a day

scrambled_legs · Post by **scrambled_legs** » Sat Dec 02, 2006 9:13 pm

Dust Devil, I wish you'd get your facts straight before expressing your opinion. No there is no plan to chase off the GA in CYQR. It wouldn't save any money, so they don't care. However, there does seem to be interest in closing terminal and not providing IFR training practice to anyone.

As far as your half dozen commercial flights comment,

YQR had 2,526 IFR flights in September,
YXE had 3,199
and YQT had 3,708.

That leaves less than 700 movements between the YQR and YXE. If YQR closes successfully, YXE will likely be soon to follow and maybe even YQT. So I guess 2500 IFR movements, most of which occur during the weekdays during peak hours, somehow adds up to your half dozen daily average. Or are you under the opinon that Term only talks to WJ and Jazz? Even then, you'd still have your half a dozen flights in the first 30 min.'s after tower is open. In order to get a true figure on terminals workload, you'd have to add in a number of simulated IFR training flights, skydiving, photo shoots, maitenance flights, flight following etc. onto these numbers as well. Sure the numbers are low for a dedicated terminal but that's why its combined. All changes going ahead despite this:

Regina Int’l Airport - Highest Overall Traffic Increase in Canada

The Regina International Airport saw the highest overall aircraft traffic increase of any airport in Canada through 2005, according to Statistics Canada data released in early February.
The traffic increase (meaning the number of aircraft arriving and departing at the airport) coincides with the increase in passenger traffic of 2005. According to Statistics Canada, overall itinerant movements were up at the nation’s airports, with the largest increase of 14.6% at the Regina International Airport. “The airport is enjoying the benefits of Saskatchewan’s recent economic strength,” says Regina Airport Authority CEO Rob Slinger. “I anticipate that aircraft traffic levels will continue to increase as the city and provincial economy continue to grow.”

Wja isn't the first to complain about dealing with enroute, and they certainly won't be the last, especially with the crossover taking place at that time of year when spray holdover times are common place. If there aren't significant regular delays, I'd be very surprised.

Dust Devil · Post by **Dust Devil** » Sat Dec 02, 2006 9:29 pm

scrambled_legs wrote:Dust Devil, I wish you'd get your facts straight before expressing your opinion. No there is no plan to chase off the GA in CYQR. It wouldn't save any money, so they don't care. However, there does seem to be interest in closing terminal and not providing IFR training practice to anyone.

As far as your half dozen commercial flights comment,

YQR had 2,526 IFR flights in September,
YXE had 3,199
and YQT had 3,708.

That leaves less than 700 movements between the YQR and YXE. If YQR closes successfully, YXE will likely be soon to follow and maybe even YQT. So I guess 2500 IFR movements, most of which occur during the weekdays during peak hours, somehow adds up to your half dozen daily average. Or are you under the opinon that Term only talks to WJ and Jazz? Even then, you'd still have your half a dozen flights in the first 30 min.'s after tower is open. In order to get a true figure on terminals workload, you'd have to add in a number of simulated IFR training flights, skydiving, photo shoots, maitenance flights, flight following etc. onto these numbers as well. Sure the numbers are low for a dedicated terminal but that's why its combined. All changes going ahead despite this:

Regina Int’l Airport - Highest Overall Traffic Increase in Canada

The Regina International Airport saw the highest overall aircraft traffic increase of any airport in Canada through 2005, according to Statistics Canada data released in early February.
The traffic increase (meaning the number of aircraft arriving and departing at the airport) coincides with the increase in passenger traffic of 2005. According to Statistics Canada, overall itinerant movements were up at the nation’s airports, with the largest increase of 14.6% at the Regina International Airport. “The airport is enjoying the benefits of Saskatchewan’s recent economic strength,” says Regina Airport Authority CEO Rob Slinger. “I anticipate that aircraft traffic levels will continue to increase as the city and provincial economy continue to grow.”
Wja isn't the first to complain about dealing with enroute, and they certainly won't be the last, especially with the crossover taking place at that time of year when spray holdover times are common place. If there aren't significant regular delays, I'd be very surprised.

Maybe I didn't get my point across. If the airport authority doesn't do something to retain general aviation all they will have is that half dozen (exagerating but just a little) flights left. YQR used to have aircraft all over the place. Now it's little more then a ghost town. Look behind the hanger line if it wasn't for the RFC and the Govenrnment there would be nothing going on.

scrambled_legs · Post by **scrambled_legs** » Sat Dec 02, 2006 9:41 pm

This post has nothing to do with the RAA, the RAA is fighting to keep terminal in place as they don't want to see delays anymore than the airlines do. The reason YQR has become a ghost town is because it has become very expensive to own an aircraft in the last few years, not because the RAA doesn't hand out free chocolates to the pilots. Back in the day there used to be 1000's of farmers flying their aircraft in to go to town. Now, when a 172 costs 6 figures and gas is more expensive than gold, and when farming has been reduced to a few mega corporations, you tend to see a lot less farmers flying their toys around. All the GA has been moved to Calgary, where the money now is. Just look at Parr's, there's what, one flight out of there a month in order to escape the costly RAA and NC expenses?

Back on track, YQR still has a significant and growing commercial traffic base. To shut down terminal without any consultations beforehand is going to create a number of really pissed off companies.

Alex YCV · Post by **Alex YCV** » Sat Dec 02, 2006 10:05 pm

For those who love reading reports and getting the actual numbers, you can look here:

http://www.tc.gc.ca/pol/en/Report/tp141e/tp141.htm

pretty much all the reports in grand detail.

Dust Devil · Post by **Dust Devil** » Sat Dec 02, 2006 11:34 pm

scrambled_legs wrote:This post has nothing to do with the RAA, the RAA is fighting to keep terminal in place as they don't want to see delays anymore than the airlines do. The reason YQR has become a ghost town is because it has become very expensive to own an aircraft in the last few years, not because the RAA doesn't hand out free chocolates to the pilots. Back in the day there used to be 1000's of farmers flying their aircraft in to go to town. Now, when a 172 costs 6 figures and gas is more expensive than gold, and when farming has been reduced to a few mega corporations, you tend to see a lot less farmers flying their toys around. All the GA has been moved to Calgary, where the money now is. Just look at Parr's, there's what, one flight out of there a month in order to escape the costly RAA and NC expenses?

Back on track, YQR still has a significant and growing commercial traffic base. To shut down terminal without any consultations beforehand is going to create a number of really pissed off companies.

What commercial traffic is expanding in YQR??

Pygmie · Post by **Pygmie** » Sun Dec 03, 2006 12:25 am

Those traffic numbers don't really tell the whole story. . . The thing that makes YQR busy is the fact that all the traffic happens in very busy spurts thoughout the day.

Right away in the morning on a weekday, it's not uncommon to have 10-15 aircraft all take off within minutes of each other, coincidentally at the same time as a few arrivals from YYC and YXE come in.

The same thing happens at a couple of other points, with almost nothing in between. QR can go from nothing at all to VERY busy with little to no warning. I've seen TWO terminal controllers working the QR airspace, trying to deal with the regular traffic plus a ton of MJ trainers, so there is obviously some traffic there. . .

None of the traffic is that busy when there is a terminal, but take away the TCU and that same traffic is almost too much to deal with efficiently. Especially when the same guy who's working those arrivals and departures is also working another 50,000+ square miles of airspace.

the_professor · Post by **the_professor** » Sun Dec 03, 2006 12:04 pm

Pygmie wrote:The same thing happens at a couple of other points, with almost nothing in between. QR can go from nothing at all to VERY busy with little to no warning. I've seen TWO terminal controllers working the QR airspace, trying to deal with the regular traffic plus a ton of MJ trainers, so there is obviously some traffic there. . .

None of the traffic is that busy when there is a terminal, but take away the TCU and that same traffic is almost too much to deal with efficiently. Especially when the same guy who's working those arrivals and departures is also working another 50,000+ square miles of airspace.

There are busy spurts, and then there's the other 90% of the day that the YQR controller sits there doing crosswords, waiting for the one inbound that's 250nm away. It does not merit terminal service.

As for consultations, the "stakeholders" have been kept in the loop on this for well over a year. This has been in the works for much longer than that.

Why was WJA delayed 25minutes?

Pygmie · Post by **Pygmie** » Sun Dec 03, 2006 12:16 pm

the_professor wrote:
Why was WJA delayed 25minutes?

Because enroute controllers cannot provide the same level of service a terminal can during the busy arrival/departure times in QR, especially when they're also working an arrival/departure push in WG at the same time.

FamilyGuy · Post by **FamilyGuy** » Mon Dec 04, 2006 8:26 am

Was this a CAATS related problem...
Can't Always Assure Terminal Service...sry couldn't resist

I've always thought the old phrase "those who can't do - teach" was very apt. Very accurate Avatar....

the_professor · Post by **the_professor** » Mon Dec 04, 2006 11:54 am

Pygmie wrote:
the_professor wrote:
Why was WJA delayed 25minutes?
Because enroute controllers cannot provide the same level of service a terminal can during the busy arrival/departure times in QR, especially when they're also working an arrival/departure push in WG at the same time.

Ok, but it was a 25 minute delay?

Pygmie · Post by **Pygmie** » Mon Dec 04, 2006 11:49 pm

From what I understand WJA was the 5th of 5 aircraft to taxi within about 2 minutes of each other, with a mix of inbounds in between.

It probably could have been less, but the controller was also quite busy dealing with WG arrivals and departures.

the_professor · Post by **the_professor** » Tue Dec 05, 2006 8:16 am

Pygmie wrote:From what I understand WJA was the 5th of 5 aircraft to taxi within about 2 minutes of each other, with a mix of inbounds in between.

It probably could have been less, but the controller was also quite busy dealing with WG arrivals and departures.

In that case, 25 mins is certainly a possibility if other inbounds were involved.

scrambled_legs · Post by **scrambled_legs** » Tue Dec 05, 2006 4:00 pm

I've heard of 20min delays for one aircraft cleared for an approach at 40 miles and one waiting to go. Add on de-ice holdover times and EDCT's and you have a circus. It's a matter of too much going on to be able to run seperation at YQR and the expanse of airspace that enroute controls normally, at the same time. Sure there isn't enough traffic to merit a full time Terminal service, that's why it is and always has been combined with YXE and YQT. The point being the aircraft landing and departing YQR will be receiving a significant decrease in service without any decrease in fees. And no, the airlines or the RAA have not had any say on whether this would happen or not.

CD · Post by CD » Tue Dec 05, 2006 5:00 pm

scrambled_legs wrote:Sure there isn't enough traffic to merit a full time Terminal service, that's why it is and always has been combined with YXE and YQT.

Actually, the terminal units weren't always combined. They moved to the WG ACC on the following dates:

Apr 18 1993 - Kenora Enroute Radar Unit located to WG ACC
Jul 12 1993 - Thunder Bay Terminal Control Unit located to WG ACC
Oct 17 1993 - Regina Terminal Control Unit located to WG ACC
Jan 16 1994 - Saskatoon Terminal Control Unit located to WG ACC

CZWG - Winnipeg Area Control Centre

FamilyGuy · Post by **FamilyGuy** » Tue Dec 05, 2006 6:31 pm

Neat link, didn't know anything like that existed.

For you History buffs who want proof there is nothing new under the sun, while it is true those "outer TCU units" were relocated to the new YWG ACC, did you know that way back when it was the applicable enroute airspace that was located in those outer units with the TCU's???

That's right, they used to control enroute AND the TCU's.... However, even 20 years ago, despite what some rather uniformed sources say now, it was recognized as simply 2 busy and 2 complex to do both - hence the removal of enroute and the creation of the ACC's. Of course the TCU's were always intended to follow, as soon as CAATS was up and running - that project was started in 1986....

As any pilot who's ever worked his way up flying shitcans in or out of little airports for little operators will attest - aviation is cyclical. What is quiet today can be roaring next week. The Prairies are notorious for high highs and low lows - look at Alberta now.

Nothing new under the sun....am I showing my age?