Sudbury to shut down tower and become FSS...WTF

[bigfssguy]

What do the users want? Bunch of BS namby pamby "advisory" or actual control of traffic? FSS types are just salivating at the prospect of being important - albeit at a substantial reduced $$$$ - you get what you pay for.

Well the thread was civil...

Come on grimes can't you feel the love...I feel like i'm talking to my dad and he's telling me whata dissapointment i am!!! LOL This thread is Fun!

[the_professor]

Especially with the numbers at an all time high in all three airports and a huge boom going on in SK. The reality is that in the near distant future both Saskatoon and Regina could require a full time dedicated terminal service. To split the tri-term up is a pretty easy change, but to switch from enroute to terminal... not so easy.

YXE has gotten significantly busier. YQR is a joke and it's numbers have been falling consistently. "All time high", my ass. Look at the numbers.

Sitting all available controllers during the one-two hours of the day where it was actually required, and then otherwise having the three of them rotating through two positions is not unreasonable.

[...]

Honestly, I am Birddog, you've done a good thing here - just put your BS filter on stun - cause stunned is all I've heard so far (well - a few good posts).

Have you ever had your morning eggs with without tabasco sauce?
It isn't the same without it.

I fly airplanes...that's what I do...oh and own a few porn sites but that's neither here nor there. I know nothing of the dealings of NavCanada...I had my eyes open up this past year flying in and out of YYZ. Prior to that...the last 11 years has been barely touching the 'push to talk' and as far as NavCanada goes...a phone call to FSS...barely. Only to file and get weather....when not in front of a computer. The last 2 years I have used both divisions of Navcanada very extensively and all I can say is...WOW. The high level of professionalism from the grunts in the trenches has caught my attention.

You people behind the mic's are the extra crew member in our flight decks. both FSS and ATC...let me say that again;

You people behind the mic's are the extra crew member in our flight decks. both FSS and ATC

I hate seeing people lose their jobs and I hate management that take out the word Human, in Human Resources. Managers have forgotten what it's like being in the trenches....and grunts don't understand what a good manager does for them to make their job easier.

HOWEVER...CEO suits (of large corporations) can go phuck themselves and their bone-asses.

So....both sides have made very prolific points...except the professor...I'm not sure when he will make a good one...we're all cheering for him/her.

So...now what do we do with THIS issue and OTHERS that are creeping up in the dark corners of the corporate induced Nav Canada website?

So now what?


I gotta run...I'm closing a corporate deal on one of my porn sites.
It may happen over dinner...if so....drinks are on me tonight @ "Slaintes" Irish pub in YHM...just don't show up wearing jeans claiming you know me...put on a tie...because image IS everything

[FamilyGuy]

What to do next? Dunno...but:

In the states they don't normally close towers - they privatize the smaller ones - still get positive control -just not from the FAA.

In Canada we do this back door little sneaky slide to FSS+ and I think it's total BS. Nothing pisses me off more than people pretending to be something they are not.
- "I have ways of making suggestions that effectively "control" some pilots..."
- "I technically can't say "radar identified" but there are ways around that..."



That is what is happening at Sudbury and at an airport near you ...SOON.

I think instead of quitting smoking my new years resolution should maybe have been to ignore/report the next wannabe moop that trys to "control" me.

Maybe if pilots stopped this at the front end, we wouldn't need to worry after the fact. Dangerous thought isn't it.

My 2C of rage

Facking moops.

[justplanecrazy]

YXE has gotten significantly busier. YQR is a joke and it's numbers have been falling consistently. "All time high", my ass. Look at the numbers.

Sitting all available controllers during the one-two hours of the day where it was actually required, and then otherwise having the three of them rotating through two positions is not unreasonable.

????

Regina's had a 33% increase in traffic in 3 years, one of the largest in Canada. They had more movements in 2007 than they had in the previous seven years. It looks like they're on track to be near the 100,000's again, within the next 5 years and the majority of their traffic is IFR. SK also had the largest population growth in Canada in 2007 and that growth is virtually all in Saskatoon and Regina. We all know what happened to Ft. Mac and Calgary over the last few years, Regina and Saskatoon are experiencing the exact same thing.

The same thing applies to YSB. To close it down is a knee jerk reaction based on a significant traffic drop over a few years. The unfortunate thing is it has the potential to be right back where it was in another few years. If there was a track record of reopening stations and resplitting up sectors that had their traffic increase to what it was, then I would see nothing wrong with this. Unfortunately there isn't one.

Birddog thanks for the kudos... I hope your porn deal was a sweet or at least a wet one.

Professor I highlighted the important numbers... I hope that helped. So far you've lost your house and now your ass. When is that wheel going to start turning? Maybe birddog should set you up with a pornstar, that should get the juices flowing... in some areas at least. It might mean an end to Birddog's porn dynasty though. A girl doesn't get over a traumatic event like that very easily and for some strange reason I picture you as being uber fugly.

[justplanecrazy]

Where did you get those stats from?

They're straight from TP whatever with the aircraft movement statistics posted by TC. 2004 they had 48,000 movements in 2007 they had 64,000. They used to push high 90's out of there not that long ago and the way things are booming its bound to happen again real soon.

I used to watch that scope a fair bit too and they're feast or famine. They'll have severe boredom and then a rush of 4 military aircraft doing approaches, local training and a bunch of commercial traffic. Try working in a few military approaches in hawks at 300kts with a 3mile protected halo of airspace on crossing and opposite end rwys. It doesn't take more than 3 planes before its a pretty complex picture, but you wouldn't know that unless you worked it. Since tri-term shut down, the military and local IFR training now has to be co-ordinated prior to flight. We all know its damn near impossible to judge your traffic an hour in advance so they'll authorize the training, the pilots will brief, fire up the engines, do a run-up then get told they're unable to accomodate. Also the training approaches that are allowed are very restrictive. Just a great f*#$'n system if you ask me and the greatest part is they're actually paying more in enroute fees for the extra 35nm then they were for a full time terminal service charge. The companies and military are absolutely furious but nothing will change and they've been told that outright. The users have no say... well other than AC and WJ.

[sigmet77]

Justplanecrazy, don't apologize, there is nothing like a good ol' verbal war to make me smile over my morning coffee.
Like if I were to say FSS suck, someone would respond and be all made, or I can say ATC suck and draw in someone else. Hell, let's go with all pilots suck just because. I'm going to go grab the stats myself so I can add my two cents, but for now, have at er.

[Hedley]

re: FSS vs TWR

It's probably just me, but say during a x/c, for a
refueling stop, given the choice of two nearly identical
airports, one with MF/TWR, and another uncontrolled,
I'll take the uncontrolled every time, thanks.

Young guys like to talk on the radio all the time (like a
bloody bunch of women with cellphones) but as you get
older, it's sure nice to turn the damned radio off while you're
enroute, and just tune in an AWOS/ATF when you start to
descend for the landing.

Not too long ago, I was in Florida, flying up the coast VFR,
and a tower wouldn't answer. Had current pubs, checked
the freq, hours of op, checked my radio with the other aircraft
in the formation. Nope, tower just didn't want to answer.

So, I had to divert the formation 5 miles out over the ocean,
because I couldn't enter class D without contact, and I couldn't
top it because of the ceiling. Thanks a lot for the help, ATC.
If it was an uncontrolled airport, I wouldn't have had to divert
out over the water

[justplanecrazy]

If it was busy enough that ATC had to keep you clear of the zone, then I think you should be thankful that it was controlled and you were kept clear. Entering an uncoordinated uncontrolled airshow with 20 aircraft inside of 5 miles isn't usually a place where a sane person would generally want to be. Some pilots have zero clue what's going on outside of their tiny cockpit and no appreciation for saturated airspace... you're welcome

[CD]

Actually, I get the impression from Hedley's description that no one responded to the calls - as in, the controller was asleep or taking a pee break and left the frequency unattended. It's been known to happen in the US...

Planes wait while controller takes potty break

[2milefinal]

that sound you hear is the sound of a thread going off the track.

[Hedley]

Indeed, no one responded, so legally I could not enter
the class D, so out over the ocean we went. The zone
was deserted as far as I could tell from the inactivity
on the freq, but in this case, I don't think anyone could
argue that this airport being controlled airspace clearly
resulted in a lower level of safety.

This recent experience of mine simply illustrates why I
personally prefer uncontrolled airports, given the choice.
I believe that I am legally entitled to hold that opinion.
The technology of cell phones allows anyone to get
the IFR clearance in the taxi out (or cancel IFR on the
taxi in) so there is no disadvantage to an ATF.

[JigglyBus]

Well Hedley, there are of course many possibilities as to why you didn't get a response from the tower.

Freq change Notam? Error in Publications? Misread freq? Tower freq U/S on ATIS? There are really a million reasonable possibilities.

In this case I think it's much safer that it was a Class D. Because of this rule you didn't enter, and weren't endangered, nor endangered someone else.

Imagine if you had the freq wrong, just because of a little mistake, in a Class E, and entered the zone and broadcasted your intentions (which were heard by noone, as wrong freq) and ran into one of the other 10 a/c in the zone, who were on the right freq. I realize this could really happen at any E, but you can see that it shouldn't really happen in a D or C, as you would have steered clear if you didn't get a response.

So, when you say "I don't think anyone could argue that this airport being controlled airspace clearly resulted in a lower level of safety." I think you might be wrong. I think the Class D made this instance not only safer, but much safer.

[grimey]

Because of this rule you didn't enter, and weren't endangered, nor endangered someone else.

Depends how far out over the ocean he had to go, at what altitude, and how many engines his aircraft had.

[JigglyBus]

How big is your typical control zone? 5 miles? Was going on the inland side of the zone not an option?

[lilfssister]

Sorry to get you so upset lilfssister.
My post was somewhat sarcastic.
My example of the deice delays is only a small example and one of many that I have come across.
Please do not think I go around hating what FSS does. Most of the time I think we are all in this together.
But I still think closing the twr is the wrong thing to do.
I have been watching NC cut things for along time.
Talking on AVcanada will not change this...

I am in NO way upset. I am staying out of this thread as much as I can, and doing a bit in PM's to explain some things to some people. I don't want to get into a penis measuring contest with ATC or pilots, as I am fairly sure I would lose most of those. I think everything I have posted on this thread is pretty much factual/descriptive, and I am sorry if you got the impression that I was upset with your post. I am just trying to explain (to everybody, not just you) how the things that you might not see or hear work. There is a lot going on behind the scenes at ATS facilities that most pilots never get to see.

Pre 9/11 we could often get to go sit up front if we asked, when travelling by air, so did get a chance to see what goes on at the airline end. And many of us have the opportunity to fly the odd time with locals, if we don't fly ourselves. It's too bad many pilots don't get the opportunity to sit in an ATC or FSS "jumpseat", or ATC and FSS to do inter-job awareness visits

I would hope that ALL of the time we are in this together. If at any time you think you are not being treated as part of the team, all you need to do is call the local Navcanada manager, or the national customer service line, with a date, time and question about the service you received. Those calls seem to get attention from what I have seen.

[lilfssister]

I think instead of quitting smoking my new years resolution should maybe have been to ignore/report the next wannabe moop that trys to "control" me.

You SHOULD report it if you think someone is breaking their "rules of engagement".

If you ignore it and it generates an AOR, then it will be investigated, too.

In either case it would determine if someone was or was not operating outside of their MANOPS.

[grimey]

In Canada we do this back door little sneaky slide to FSS+ and I think it's total BS. Nothing pisses me off more than people pretending to be something they are not.
- "I have ways of making suggestions that effectively "control" some pilots..."
- "I technically can't say "radar identified" but there are ways around that..."

I work at an FSS and have a radar feed. We're required by our ops manual to radar identify aircraft. We're also forbidden by management from saying "radar identified".
FS Manops also instructs FSS to suggest actions to pilots if appropriate. If you have a problem with this, take it up with standards and procedures, it's not my problem that I'm doing my job as directed.

[kevenv]

In Canada we do this back door little sneaky slide to FSS+ and I think it's total BS. Nothing pisses me off more than people pretending to be something they are not.
- "I have ways of making suggestions that effectively "control" some pilots..."
- "I technically can't say "radar identified" but there are ways around that..."

I work at an FSS and have a radar feed. We're required by our ops manual to radar identify aircraft. We're also forbidden by management from saying "radar identified".
FS Manops also instructs FSS to suggest actions to pilots if appropriate. If you have a problem with this, take it up with standards and procedures, it's not my problem that I'm doing my job as directed.

Big difference between "suggest actions if appropriate" and "I have ways of making suggestions that effectively "control" some pilots..."

You may think you are protected from liability while controlling a/c under the guise of "suggesting" but I would bet money that any aviation lawyer would have your ass not to mention your job if something goes wrong. And rest assured that the company would hang you out to dry. And we haven't even touched on the FSS that actually CLEAR a/c to land and take off!

If you want to control airplanes, learn to do it properly, get a license and positively control them with your license on the line. Otherwise stick to the advisory as you're supposed to.

And one last thing: regarding you identifying a/c as per your MANOPS, you are also required (As per a ruling from TC) to tell a/c that you are providing an advisory service only (not only when you have reason to believe they don't know this). Ask the pilots how many times they hear this. I'd wager that it is few and far between.

Rant over, Fire away.

[grimey]

I work at an FSS and have a radar feed. We're required by our ops manual to radar identify aircraft. We're also forbidden by management from saying "radar identified".
FS Manops also instructs FSS to suggest actions to pilots if appropriate. If you have a problem with this, take it up with standards and procedures, it's not my problem that I'm doing my job as directed.

Big difference between "suggest actions if appropriate" and "I have ways of making suggestions that effectively "control" some pilots..."

You may think you are protected from liability while controlling a/c under the guise of "suggesting" but I would bet money that any aviation lawyer would have your ass not to mention your job if something goes wrong. And rest assured that the company would hang you out to dry. And we haven't even touched on the FSS that actually CLEAR a/c to land and take off!

Yes, I know there's a difference. I never suggested that I attempt to control aircraft. If I ask that they do something, I'll give them a reason, and the pilots here know they're free to ignore my request. Any specialist that issues their own clearances (rather than relaying stuff from the ACC) is an idiot, and deserves whatever hell they get.

If you want to control airplanes, learn to do it properly, get a license and positively control them with your license on the line. Otherwise stick to the advisory as you're supposed to.

I do. My job simply provides me with right to do more things than certain people on here realize, though it provides me with little or no authority over pilots.

And one last thing: regarding you identifying a/c as per your MANOPS, you are also required (As per a ruling from TC) to tell a/c that you are providing an advisory service only (not only when you have reason to believe they don't know this). Ask the pilots how many times they hear this. I'd wager that it is few and far between.

Rant over, Fire away.

I know how to do my job, thanks. When I start telling a controller how to do their job, or a pilot how to do theirs, I'll start listening to controllers and pilots who think they know how to do mine. That's not to say that I won't listen to feedback from them, but just as I haven't been trained to be a controller or pilot, most pilots and controllers haven't been trained as FSS, and are in no position to dictate to me how I should do my job.

...and this wasn't directed at any specific person

[lilfssister]

And one last thing: regarding you identifying a/c as per your MANOPS, you are also required (As per a ruling from TC) to tell a/c that you are providing an advisory service only (not only when you have reason to believe they don't know this). Ask the pilots how many times they hear this. I'd wager that it is few and far between.

Rant over, Fire away.

Incorrect. Our MANOPS says:

451.5
Inform aircraft that airport advisory service is
being provided, if appropriate.

451.5 Note:
An aircraft unfamiliar with the use of radar in AAS
might assume that radar control service is being
provided when requested to squawk ident or to
select a specific SSR code.
451.5 Example:
THIS IS AN AIRPORT ADVISORY SERVICE.

My note: the word "only" was removed years ago

[kevenv]

And one last thing: regarding you identifying a/c as per your MANOPS, you are also required (As per a ruling from TC) to tell a/c that you are providing an advisory service only (not only when you have reason to believe they don't know this). Ask the pilots how many times they hear this. I'd wager that it is few and far between.

Rant over, Fire away.

Incorrect. Our MANOPS says:

451.5
Inform aircraft that airport advisory service is
being provided, if appropriate.

451.5 Note:
An aircraft unfamiliar with the use of radar in AAS
might assume that radar control service is being
provided when requested to squawk ident or to
select a specific SSR code.
451.5 Example:
THIS IS AN AIRPORT ADVISORY SERVICE.

My note: the word "only" was removed years ago

Well I'll have to wait till I go back to work to refute this. We just had a discussion with the UOS over this very issue and they have the ruling from TC that says you will do it because you have no idea what a pilot may think he is receiving. I'll post again with the ruling later this week.

[grimey]

We've (at my site) received no notice of that, and our manuals haven't been updated to reflect it. When they are, or when we get an ops bulletin telling us the procedure has changed, I'll do it. But staff can't be expected to obey rules they haven't been notified about, and so your previous comment about how many FSS actually inform aircraft that no control service is provided is irrelevant. It isn't in our procedures yet.

[kevenv]

We've (at my site) received no notice of that, and our manuals haven't been updated to reflect it. When they are, or when we get an ops bulletin telling us the procedure has changed, I'll do it. But staff can't be expected to obey rules they haven't been notified about, and so your previous comment about how many FSS actually inform aircraft that no control service is provided is irrelevant. It isn't in our procedures yet.

I'll grant you that but answer me this; How many times do you advise a/c that it is advisory only and how do you know whether or not they understand it if you don't?

[grimey]

We've (at my site) received no notice of that, and our manuals haven't been updated to reflect it. When they are, or when we get an ops bulletin telling us the procedure has changed, I'll do it. But staff can't be expected to obey rules they haven't been notified about, and so your previous comment about how many FSS actually inform aircraft that no control service is provided is irrelevant. It isn't in our procedures yet.

I'll grant you that but answer me this; How many times do you advise a/c that it is advisory only and how do you know whether or not they understand it if you don't?

I did it yesterday, with an American who was obviously unfamiliar with uncontrolled airports. Thompson has very little traffic that isn't either based here, or operating a regular sked here. I know the majority of the pilots here personally, I know of most of the others. At any time that it isn't clear they know what the procedures are here, I'll let them know.