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

[bigfssguy]

Okay i think people are getting excited about all this....."bombarded by suggestions" now come on. I do use suggestions but it is rarely and only if the pilot doesn't advise me of his intrentions to miss the other person. Normally the pilot will have a plan that suits the situation and they will tell us there intentions. We don't give suggestions for every ove of the airplane. If you are getting suggestions for everything you do well then yet again time to buck up and say something rather than complain of it on here.

Near every FSS i know or have ran into have said they are more than happy when a pilot gives feedback. There is no definative way to do our job, how we do our job is an amalgamation of the people we have worked with and what pilots tell us they like. If you sit down with an FSS and discuss what you liek and what you don't i highly doubt anyone is going to take offense to it.

Another thing i would like to point out. FSS are not like controllers we are certified instead of licensed meaning that we are covered by the company. If we make a mistake the comapny is fined not us directly. But the assumption that since we don't have any direct control (which we do with vehicles by the way) that we don't have any responibility is ludicrus. This comes back to not knowing who or what FSS are, we have every bit as much responsibility as a controller the difference is that they are directly controlling the planes and we do airport advisory. We both have the responsibility to ensure the planes don't run into one another and turn into a flying fireball. If this happens we are just as responsible, we can be sued we can fired we can be hunted down by one of the victims like the poor chap in europe.

Not to mention the stress and grief we would experience from that, FSS are just as prone to PTSD as a controller. One thing that could be worse is that a controller will give the proper instructions 99.9999999999999999999999% of the time and things are fine. We FSS could give an advisory update the planes as neccessary and see a situation develop. We would advisae the A/C of it and maybe request an action if it is appropriate. Say it is one of the pilots on this thread that is bashing FSS, you say to yourself " I'm not listening to some a$$hole FSS, he's not no controller" and you carry on and ignore us. BANG you run into someone and there is a bunch of people dead. Now the FSS is not dead but imagine what could be running through his mind and what will haunt him for years to come. Now take the flip side of that and no suggestions were made and FSS just updated and updated each other until they went boom.

Now that is an oversimplified scenario and i'm sure there are flaws and other things that would happen but when it comes down to it, it can happen. I know people here have said that FSS have developed to point that is untenable. I say we have become more safe. If we can create rules and methods that allow us to help A/C in our area to operate more safely then i think that is a good thing. My only concern when i do my job isn't ego (either mine or the pilots) my concern is safety, and if there is any way i can accomplish that so that you and your passengers can safely make it down and go home to your family. Well regardless if you liek ti or not i'm going to do it!

[the_professor]

????

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.

Those numbers regarding YQR are a crock, and I have found the Stats Can data to refute them. Will post as soon as I get them compiled.

YQR is not busy, and there are busier airports without terminals. You can check the links for yourself once I have time for a proper post.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

If you think Sudbury and all the rest of Canada is bad for FSS and tower and all that stuff you guys need to spend some time in places like Luanda Angola.

[justplanecrazy]

Those numbers regarding YQR are a crock, and I have found the Stats Can data to refute them. Will post as soon as I get them compiled.

YQR is not busy, and there are busier airports without terminals. You can check the links for yourself once I have time for a proper post.

How about I save you the trouble,
The annual reports for aircraft movements to 2006, are at the following link:
http://www.tc.gc.ca/pol/en/report/TP577/tp577.htm
2007 hasn't been compiled yet but if you add up the monthly reports at the following link, you'll get the number.
http://www.tc.gc.ca/pol/en/report/TP141e/tp141.htm
I say again, 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.

Professor don't you wonder sometimes why you're always the guy standing alone arguing against everyone else?

[justplanecrazy]

This comes back to not knowing who or what FSS are, we have every bit as much responsibility as a controller the difference is that they are directly controlling the planes and we do airport advisory. We both have the responsibility to ensure the planes don't run into one another and turn into a flying fireball. If this happens we are just as responsible, we can be sued we can fired we can be hunted down by one of the victims like the poor chap in europe.

bigfssguy it's pretty clear that FSS are not supposed to provide control suggested or otherwise. It's also pretty clear that you do not have any responsiblity in ensuring the planes are seperated.
Here's a job description from a recruitment posting:

flight service specialists provide airport advisory services to landing and departing aircraft. However, they are not involved in actively managing and separating air traffic.

Here's a definition from Wikipedia:

A Flight Service Station (FSS) is an air traffic facility that provides information and services to aircraft pilots before, during, and after flights, but unlike air traffic control, is not responsible for giving instructions or clearances or providing separation.

Here's some quotes from the AIM:

At certain FSS locations, air traffic information may also be based on radar display (see RAC 1.5.8 for details on the use of radar by an FSS). A pilot remains responsible for avoidance of traffic in Class E airspace, and should not inform an FSS about its TCAS traffic, as it is useless information for the flight service specialist.
1.5.8
Although radar is used at these FSS’s, it must be emphasized that flight service specialists do not provide control services such as vectors or conflict resolution. Accordingly, pilots are responsible to watch for and provide their own separation from other aircraft, terrain and obstacles.

Sure you don't want to see two planes come together and I don't fault you for sticking your neck out to prevent it but save that for when two planes ARE going to come together, not everytime a pilot doesn't tell you what he's going to do or doesn't see his traffic. The company will not back you up for operating outside of the rules. You seem to think that some mention about being proactive somehow says you should be providing a suggested control service, but the above references aren't vague in any way. They state that you shall not provide conflict resolution or aircraft seperation. Pilots are responsible to provide their own seperation. You are responsible for keeping the pilots in the picture and that is all. Go beyond that and the company will wipe their hands of you and the lawyers will have your balls in a vice, well maybe not lilfss... but your big balls for sure.

[bigfssguy]

The company will not back you up for operating outside of the rules. You seem to think that some mention about being proactive somehow says you should be providing a suggested control service, but the above references aren't vague in any way. They state that you shall not provide conflict resolution or aircraft seperation. Pilots are responsible to provide their own seperation. You are responsible for keeping the pilots in the picture and that is all. Go beyond that and the company will wipe their hands of you and the lawyers will have your balls in a vice, well maybe not lilfss... but your big balls for sure.

I hate defending my posts but i will. I'm wondering JPC where in my post you found the words that i will "go outside the rules". I never once made mention of that. I've only been FSS for 6 years but i have never broke the rules, well never broke the "though shall not control rule", i do make mistakes after all since i'm only human after all. Your absolutely right though that if you do try and control other planes and something happens the company won't have a leg to stand on and neither will we. But i also made the point that FSS, aside from the odd anomoly(eg:someone dumb) does not attempt to control planes, we leave that for the controllers. Also i mention as well that though i do use the suggestion method that it is rare because most times pilots already have an idea how to miss the other planes so it is not required.

The suggestion method is only a tool, the same as radar, strips and my pen. We use them as neccesary and for the bulk of my days and weeks they are not neccesary. These suggestions are not in any way control either, we use them so that once both pilots agree to them i can concentrate on other conflicts or other duties. It saves my time since i don't constantly have to update both aircraft over and over. It cleans up frequency congestion, 2 or 3 transmissions is much better than 5 or 6 or more, since i remember a thread from a year or so ago i know this one is near and dear to a lot of pilots hearts. lastly it gives the FSS peace of mind as well the pilot that they are not going to run into the other plane and allows the pilot to manage his cockpit workload too since they have a lot going on too.

You are absolutely right though that i am only there to keep the pilots in the picture. That is what i'm accomplishing every single day. The pilot has no requirement to follow my requests and a lot of times they don't. If they have a better idea or even another one they say "naah i'm goign to do this" fair enough, there professionals they know what there doing and as long as they don;t go bump in the night i can go home to my wife and soon to be born son with a clear mind and a smile on my face. Remember these are just tools that were using and the vast majority of pilots i know are okay with it becasue they understand that it is what it is. Cheers!

[justplanecrazy]

You are breaking the rules, you are operating outside of the scope of your responsibilities. You are providing conflict resolution and seperating aircraft through suggestions. Both which are very clear thou shall nots. Take your helicopter example. If you suggest for someone to stay at an altitude do low flying helicopter through the approach and he doesn't without telling you and they go bump, you'll be fried. You were relying on him to obey your suggested control instruction and didn't do your job of keeping them both in the picture. Now if you passed traffic and they go bump, you are clean, it was the pilots responsibility. If you have an aircraft on final overtaking the one ahead and you suggest he do a right 360 back onto final behind an aircraft behind him on final and they go bump, you're fried, as you were providing conflict resolution. But if you told him you're overtaking your traffic and he continues to overtake him and they go bump, or he says he'll do a 360 and you tell him there's further traffic behind you on final and they go bump, then you're clean. There's nothing anyone can say against you in both cases it would be 100% pilot error.

You making suggestions makes about as much sense as CARs operator providing conflict resolution through suggested control. It is very clear that neither of you are responsible for conflict resolution and neither of you have been trained or qualified from a program that proves you are capable of seperating aircraft. I don't want to tell you how to do your job but believe me a lawyer would prove to a jury in 5 minutes that you're an authority figure and making a suggestion is both providing conflict resolution and seperating planes through control suggested or otherwise. Even if you're suggestion would've solved the conflict but the pilot misunderstood it, it'd still be 100% your fault. If you can't sleep because some dumb ass pilot ran into a plane that you kept telling him is right in front of him, how would you feel if he ran into a plane after misunderstanding your suggestion or worse yet giving him a bad suggestion. If you're really worried about your family, I'd stay within the scope of your job duties cause right now you could easily face civil and criminal court if one of your suggestions causes a bang.

[furious george]

JPC,
I love how you think we pilots are idiots and seem to want to crash into each other. Nice to see that's the view of ATC.

I can only speak for myself, but I appreciate suggestions made by FSS, and I know that they are only suggestions and not ATC clearances or directives. I have, on a couple occasions received some rather asinine suggestions from FSS, after which I continued flying (despite being bombarded with suggestions ) informed FSS of what I was doing and went merrily on my way.

Cheers

[Hedley]

Ignore FSS "suggestions" at your own peril. I can't
think of a clearer violation of CAR 602.01 - reckless
and/or negligent.

Negligence is defined by Tribunal case law as doing
something that a "prudent" pilot would not do.

You would be in a very bad position if Transport's
lawyer at the Tribunal asserted that a prudent pilot
would not ignore an FSS "suggestion".

Presto, get ready for a year's licence revocation.

I have been to the Tribunal many times and this
one is clearly a slam-dunk for Transport.

[justplanecrazy]

Every ATC worth a grain of salt looks at each pilot as being the lowest common denominator of the gene pool. We look at each plane and think, what's the dumbest thing this guy could do right now, and plan for it. The moment you put faith into pilots and start thinking, well he'd never do that, is the moment that they do and catch you with your pants down. Just so we're clear, I'm a pilot myself and would expect my co-workers to treat me with the same distrust as every other pilot when I'm on the other side of the mic.

George you're obviously experienced enough to discern between a good and bad suggestion and aren't intimidated to follow them. What about the new pilot that is. I'm not arguing whether suggestions are a good or a bad thing but simply that FSS are risking financial and criminal liability everytime they make one. They are providing conflict resolution which they are not qualified to do and the company will not back them.

Hedley, how TC can revoke a licence for disobeying an FSS suggestion, is beyond me.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Hedley, how TC can revoke a licence for disobeying an FSS suggestion, is beyond me.

You obviously are truly ignorant of what TC can and will do.

TC is a rogue government body without any accountability, TC can and does not only operate in total disregard for the rule of law they also get away with it.

With all the rest of the well known tyrants who have ruled through history you should feel proud as a Canadian you have your very own ...Merlin Preuss.

Remember that next time you think you have rights in aviation in Canada.

[justplanecrazy]

hahaha... cat, I figure you're probably not looking at half the threads but whenever TC is mentioned boo there you are. You're like a demon conjured up from the depths whenever the initials TC are spoken on the board.

If they've actually followed through with this action, that is really scary. If you fear for losing your licence for not obeying an FSS suggestion, then why not just call it a control instruction and call them controllers with no training. Sounds like pilots are damned if they do and damned if they don't. I guess it'll just take a suggestion causing a mid air and a good lawyer and it'll suddenly be the FSS and NC that's damned if they do.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

hahaha... cat, I figure you're probably not looking at half the threads but whenever TC is mentioned boo there you are. You're like a demon conjured up from the depths whenever the initials TC are spoken on the board.

Yup, I never miss an opportunity to point out how corrupt TCCA is under the present regime.......

...you should be fearful...very fearful...

Because if what I allege were untrue do you not think that Preuss would have the Department of Justice lawyers all over me?

Oooh... maybe Preuss and the Justice Department don't know what I write??

Now if you believe that..that is funny.

The last time I met with the DGTC here in Nanaimo we had this very same discussion after the meeting in an off the record conversation...I was telling the Director General about my wanting to go to Ottawa and kick one of the DOJ lawyers right in the nuts for being such an officious arrogant prick to try and reason with.....the Director General told me that he was personally trying to resolve the issues I had with Preuss because the DOJ wanted no part of the whole mess....

Even though the lawyers in the DOJ may not be bright enough to make a living in the real world collectively thay have the IQ to know they would lose if they tried to defend Preuss with what I have for the news media....fu.k I dream at night that in the morning that moron Preuss would have a writ delivered to my home so I could defend my allegations, but it ain't going to happen...sadly....

[furious george]

Hedley,
I'm not sure I said I ever ignored an FSS suggestion, even when the FSS wanted me to turn towards a large piece of cumulus granite despite the suggestion made. Simply turning in the correct direction and advising FSS was all that was required. I don't see how one could ever get violated for that (Cat's paranoia aside)

Cheers

[Chuck Ellsworth]

(Cat's paranoia aside)

Yeh, thats it I'm paranoid.....maybe you would like to pay me back all the money I spent on legal fees etc trying to defend myself from TC's unlawful actions George?

[Hedley]

I don't see how one could ever get violated for that

ummmmm .... how many times have you been to the Tribunal?

Cat's paranoia aside

Paranoia? I am banned for life from ever performing at another
airshow in Canada, despite my perfect safety record. Is that
paranoia?

If you don't believe me, phone up your local Transport
office and tell them you are putting on an airshow, and
you would like to have these guys on your SFOC:

http://www.pittspecials.com

Years of experience, impeccable qualifications, perfect
safety record. But "banned for life" from ever performing
at another airshow in Canada. Transport will never, ever
issue an airshow SFOC with our names on it, because
they claim it is "not in the public's interest" (snort - see
Aeronautics Act below which empowers them to do this).

Is that legal? Am I being paranoid?

Imagine if Transport "banned" you for life, from ever
working as a pilot in Canada. How would that feel?

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Hedley, TC has also used their power to prevent me from flying in Canada....that is a fact...

I also have a perfect record as a pilot for 55 years and I am without any doubt one of the most experienced pilots in aviation.

Those who deny that TC is corrupt and think that if you end up having your right to earn a living in Canada as a pilot taken away from you without due cause or due process are deluding them self's .....period.

Ignorance is bliss and these people who think you and I are paranoid are just plain ignorant...

[stef]

Thank you to bigfssguy for using some common sense and trying to keep airplanes from running into each other, rather than worrying about what lawyers would do and providing less safe service as a result.

[bigfssguy]

Thank you to bigfssguy for using some common sense and trying to keep airplanes from running into each other, rather than worrying about what lawyers would do and providing less safe service as a result.

Actually stef, i'm as worried of lawyers as anyone else. I'm really only excuting my job with the tools that are available. Though some people have issues with FSS requesting something, making it out to be something illegal. It is well with within our rules and is taught to trainees during training. But thanks for the nice words, Like i said at the end of the day i just want everyone to be able to go home to there families...period!

[it'sme]

Well thank you to the FSS folks who do a good job with requests and suggestions when required. There are some airports in the east that if you didn't, would have some real issues lately.

[lilfssister]

LAST damned suggestion I made, that the inbound of my outbound flight to ultimately sun and fun NOT do a missed approach, was totally ignored

[...]

9 pages....wow. Seems like this is a "sensitive issue".

I'm not that smart...but from an outsider looking in...there is clear line drawn in the sand.

There's a great quote in one of the A.A. drunk steps for rehab or what ever they do..."admitting you have an issue is the first step to recovery" or something like that...it actually maybe a quote from a Tide detergent commercial.

I think this thread got more than it bargained for.

Seems like YSB is a lost case due to suits being suits...I still call bullshit but there is so much 1 person can do...I'm not Martin Luther King jr. but I still do have a dream that one day FSS will get along with ATC...their children are allowed to play in unity without the constraints of tower envy!!!

I have a dream.

Until then....there are other issues creeping up on Navcanada's website which will be cutting more services. This will affect the weekend warrior. Private pilot buddy that takes his Piper Warrior out for a boot on a beautiful sunday afternoon only to be denied flight in certain areas because upper management execs keep going unchecked.

I will keep you all posted. It's up to you..."The User" if you wish to voice your opinion in a group voice for the next issue.

For the folks @ YSB...I'm sorry I wish I would have known earlier. Good luck to everyone @ the tower. It was, and until July 2008, it will be a pleasure working with you.

I bid you all...."a dieu"


IABD

[MUSKEG]

With the rash of long winded replys on here it's no wonder we can't get a word in edge wise on the radio. As I pilot I tell fss my intentions and go. They need to tell me information pertanant to what I'm doing, nothing more. One would think from the responses and posturing on here that your head is for holding your ears apart.

[the_professor]

Private pilot buddy that takes his Piper Warrior out for a boot on a beautiful sunday afternoon only to be denied flight in certain areas because upper management execs keep going unchecked.

Give me a break. Have you ever talked to any Europeans or Americans who have flown up here? They are blown away by the amount of uncontrolled airspace, and the lack of ATC requirements in 99% of the country -- including areas along the 49th/southern Ontario.

If VFR flight is denied within a few miles of the country's busiest airport, I'm not going to shed any tears. There's plenty of sky out there, and it's not written anywhere that every person shall have access to every square mile of it.

Birddog, if this was truly a big issue, you'd have pilots organizing and protesting (or maybe COPA would actually do something -- wouldn't that be shocking coming from that pointless group). Well they're not, because any of those sorts of restrictions would only affect a handful of people.

Go find some other issue that you can use to turn a molehill into a mountain.

[GilletteNorth]

BIGFSSGUY:

It is well with within our rules and is taught to trainees during training.

Manops 414.9 You may assist pilots in coordinating aircraft movement to facilitate the safe, orderly and expeditious flow of traffic provided it is clear that you do not control aircraft movement.
414.9 Phraseology (Traffic update) CAN YOU (Proposed course of action)?

414.9 Example TRAFFIC, SAAB ON FINAL, CAN YOU EXTEND DOWNWIND? or TRAFFIC ON FINAL, CAN YOU EXPEDITE YOUR BACKTRACK? or TRAFFIC LANDING RUNWAY TWO FIVE, CAN YOU STOP BEFORE THE INTERSECTION OF RUNWAY TWO FIVE?

FSS do not (and cannot) control.
FSS may (and do) issue 'suggestions'.
therefore FSS DO provide conflict resolution through suggestions although the pilot is still responsible and therefore can reasonably and legally ignore the suggestion(s) at their discretion.