Athabasca Oil Sands (YMM) update

Cod Father · Post by **Cod Father** » Thu Jan 18, 2007 9:55 pm

Has anyone heard anything on the status of re-opening the tower in YMM?
Has the airport authority completed the runway extention to 7500 feet?

What about an area controller due to the volume of traffic going to McMurray, Mildred Lake, Horizon, and the newly planned runway east of Kearl Lake?

looproll · Post by **looproll** » Fri Jan 19, 2007 1:25 am

NavCanada is thinking about putting ATC in place, a virtual tower, adding a Terminal control, or just keeping it a FSS (and god knows what else). Who knows when plans will be solid.

A runway extension has been completed but 6000ft seems to ring a bell.

It's getting busy!

Smitty · Post by **Smitty** » Fri Jan 19, 2007 7:46 am

YMM is up to 7000 ft now. Hopefully a tower is not far behind.

MUSKEG · Post by **MUSKEG** » Fri Jan 19, 2007 8:18 am

Yup they will reopen the tower just in time for the next major economic correction when it is no longer needed. Typical government run business(ya I know it's private), study this and study that and procrastinate and posture. The only reason the managers at navcan have their jobs is because they are to lazy to really work and to dumb to have their own business.

Cod Father · Post by **Cod Father** » Fri Jan 19, 2007 6:25 pm

I see Synenco plans to use the new Kearl Lake Airstrip.

Forestdump · Post by **Forestdump** » Sat Jan 20, 2007 3:09 pm

Where is Kearl Lake?

ahramin · Post by **ahramin** » Sat Jan 20, 2007 5:37 pm

NavCanada is looking into banning aircraft without transponders from the McMurray controlled airspace. If this will affect you reply to this survey.

As per the attachments to this email, NAV CANADA is, on an urgent basis, evaluating a proposal to designate specific airspace in the vicinity of Fort McMurray, AB as “TRANSPONDER AIRSPACE”. A diagram of the Fort McMurray airspace has been attached along with a copy of the questionnaire sent to commercial aircraft operators.

We are in the process of soliciting comments from air operators known to operate within this airspace and offer you the same opportunity to bring to our attention any issues or concerns you may have and whether your organization would support this proposal.

A response may be forwarded by which ever means is most convenient to you:

Reply or Forward email to: wrightl@navcanada.ca

FAX to: (780) 413 5465

Phone to: (780) 413 5455 or (780) 413 5460

Your input is important to us in meeting the needs of air transportation in the Fort McMurray area.

Brian Stockall

Manager

Level of Service and Aeronautical Studies-West

Tel: (780) 413-5468

Fax: (780) 413-5465

Email: stockab@navcanada.ca

Fort McMurray Transponder Airspace Proposal

NAV CANADA is embarking upon a series of airspace reviews for northern Alberta in the area commonly referred to as the “Oil Patch”.

Immediate attention is being given to safety concerns related to the rapid growth of air traffic volume and complexity in the vicinity of Fort McMurray.

To address these safety concerns, NAV CANADA is considering a proposal which will designate all existing Fort McMurray Class “E” airspace to be “Transponder Airspace”. This will include:

5nm Fort McMurray Class “E” CZ (SFC to 4200’ASL)
*15nm Fort McMurray Transition Area (TA) above 700’AGL
*25nm Fort McMurray Control Area Extension (CAE) above 2200’AGL

*NOTE

The 15nm TA and 25nm CAE Class “E” airspace between 10,000’ASL and 12,500’ASL and their associated Class “B” above 12,500’ASL is already “Transponder Airspace” as is the 50nm Fort McMurray Class “B” CAE above 12,500’ASL.

If this proposal is to be considered, it is important that we fully understand the impact on your operations of designating this airspace “Transponder Airspace”.

Would you please provide the following information?

• The impact on your operations of designating this airspace “Transponder Airspace”

• Percentage of your aircraft that are/will soon be transponder equipped.

• Percentage of your aircraft that are/will soon be TCAS equipped.

• Do you support the proposal to designate the existing Fort McMurray Class “E” airspace to be “Transponder Airspace”?

Your early response, as per our cover email, will be most appreciated and allow for a comprehensive, orderly, yet timely assessment of the proposal.

Brian Stockall
Manager, Level of Service and Aeronautical Studies-West
Tel: (780) 413-5468
Fax: (780) 413-5465
Email: stockab@navcanada.ca

Kariboo Kid · Post by **Kariboo Kid** » Sat Jan 20, 2007 5:42 pm

Forestdump wrote:Where is Kearl Lake?

I think about 50nm east of Horizon.

Forestdump · Post by **Forestdump** » Sat Jan 20, 2007 10:04 pm

Thank you K.K. Found it.

co-joe · Post by **co-joe** » Sun Jan 21, 2007 3:01 am

Now that CNRL is charging almost $ 600 to land at Horizon you don't have to worry abut too much traffic going there anymore...

the_professor · Post by **the_professor** » Sun Jan 21, 2007 5:36 am

looproll wrote:NavCanada is thinking about putting ATC in place, a virtual tower, adding a Terminal control, or just keeping it a FSS (and god knows what else). Who knows when plans will be solid.

A runway extension has been completed but 6000ft seems to ring a bell.

It's getting busy!

What is a "virtual tower"? I hope it doesn't involve a controller wandering around a room with a giant helmet-type device on his head?

hydro · Post by **hydro** » Sun Jan 21, 2007 4:29 pm

About a year ago I heard that a virtual tower might use cameras in different quadrants and then displayed in a way that's similar to the 360 sim at NCTI. Don't know if that info is still current or not.

looproll · Post by **looproll** » Mon Jan 22, 2007 1:44 am

that's the jist of it

Kariboo Kid · Post by **Kariboo Kid** » Mon Jan 22, 2007 4:49 am

co-joe wrote:Now that CNRL is charging almost $ 600 to land at Horizon you don't have to worry abut too much traffic going there anymore...

Yea, I'm sure that a $10b project will hinge on the fee to land there...