Poor service

[goingnowherefast]

Canadian ATC is atrocious. This isn’t anything new. Covid aside. The service has been terrible for a long time.

Fly anywhere else on the globe, especially America and this is glaringly obvious.

Remember though. Just be a good Canadian and throw your hands up and say “it is the way it is”. Just like every other useless government agency.

Oh Canada.

Yay

What would you like the individual controllers to do about it? One person can only work so much traffic. We don't have the staffing to double up like the US does when it gets busy. We don't have the staffing to always split sectors when we need. One person can only do so much. Controllers aren't responsible for the short staffing situation that we're in. We're training as much as we can, but it's a slow process.

I don't think anyone is blaming the individual controllers. Same way we don't blame an AC pilot that their airline has poor OTP.

It seems to be a general Canadian trend. Just rolling over and accepting mediocracy. NavCanada offers poor service, denying entry into control zones and other airspace. Canadian pilot pay sucks. Look at how hard WJ management fought their pilots. AC OTP and YYZ. Our health care system.

Why be good, when we can be just good enough. Nurses work their asses off despite poor management. ATC controllers work their asses off despite poor management. WJ pilots operate professionally despite being disrespected by their management. I fully blame the business and political elites for accepting "good enough". We can all want to do an excellent job. I'm sure 99% of controllers want to provide excellent ATC services, but it's impossible when management doesn't provide the adequate resources and staffing.

There's very few Canadian companies and organizations that actually want to be excellent. NavCanada isn't one of them.

[nvcatc]

I appreciate the clarification. Many of the posts here imply that the controllers themselves are the problem. Excluding those who dealt with a rude controller here or there, because there are rude people at every work place, it still suggests that we are the problem when people say "the Americans can do it, why can't you?". I'm friendly on frequency, I try to accommodate all requests, and I'm tired. All the time. The majority of the people I work with are also friendly on frequency and accommodating. Many also tired. So it's really frustrating to do the best with what you have, and be told Canadian ATC are terrible.

[goingnowherefast]

I appreciate the clarification. Many of the posts here imply that the controllers themselves are the problem. Excluding those who dealt with a rude controller here or there, because there are rude people at every work place, it still suggests that we are the problem when people say "the Americans can do it, why can't you?". I'm friendly on frequency, I try to accommodate all requests, and I'm tired. All the time. The majority of the people I work with are also friendly on frequency and accommodating. Many also tired. So it's really frustrating to do the best with what you have, and be told Canadian ATC are terrible.

Canadian ATC is terrible. But it's because you're tired, over worked, under resourced, under staffed.

In Canada, especially Winnipeg FIR, I routinely hear that they can't help is with weather avoidance because your weather radar sucks. In the US, they routinely reroute us and vector us around weather. We don't even have to ask. It's not the Canadian controller's fault their weather radar sucks.

[rookiepilot]

I appreciate the clarification. Many of the posts here imply that the controllers themselves are the problem. Excluding those who dealt with a rude controller here or there, because there are rude people at every work place, it still suggests that we are the problem when people say "the Americans can do it, why can't you?". I'm friendly on frequency, I try to accommodate all requests, and I'm tired. All the time. The majority of the people I work with are also friendly on frequency and accommodating. Many also tired. So it's really frustrating to do the best with what you have, and be told Canadian ATC are terrible.

Canadian ATC is terrible. But it's because you're tired, over worked, under resourced, under staffed.

Canada right here in a nutshell.

This thread has now become offending the feelings of any controller who might read this, instead of the legitimate safety and operational issues it raises. Hopefully with enough attention someone in management will take appropriate and lasting steps. As is said these issues existed long before Covid.

[goingnowherefast]

I dunno, I've been offending the hell out of NavCanada management and execs in this thread.

Offend those who are responsible for the poor service. It isn't the controllers.

[Braun]

People like to blame nav Canada and some of it is warranted. That being said, these so called managers being called out work under the pressure of the board which is made up of airlines and the various representatives of the flying public. Who do you think votes for budgets cuts and reducing costs? It’s not the Nav managers. It’s the airlines.

[goingnowherefast]

People like to blame nav Canada and some of it is warranted. That being said, these so called managers being called out work under the pressure of the board which is made up of airlines and the various representatives of the flying public. Who do you think votes for budgets cuts and reducing costs? It’s not the Nav managers. It’s the airlines.

I found it hard to believe that a NavCanada customer is permitted to have representatives on the BOD. Turns out its true! The conflict of interest is right there, they don't even try to hide it.

I guess that's why YYZ, YUL and YVR towers aren’t the ones with reduced capacity and operating hours. NavCanada cuts and reductions are FTU and GA airports. They're cutting northern Canada airspace capacity during forest fire season.

[Braun]

People like to blame nav Canada and some of it is warranted. That being said, these so called managers being called out work under the pressure of the board which is made up of airlines and the various representatives of the flying public. Who do you think votes for budgets cuts and reducing costs? It’s not the Nav managers. It’s the airlines.

I found it hard to believe that a NavCanada customer is permitted to have representatives on the BOD. Turns out its true! The conflict of interest is right there, they don't even try to hide it.

I guess that's why YYZ, YUL and YVR towers aren’t the ones with reduced capacity and operating hours. NavCanada cuts and reductions are FTU and GA airports. They're cutting northern Canada airspace capacity during forest fire season.

It’s easy to blame Nav Canada, and we do deserve some criticism but the way the law is structured on who we fund ourselves makes it very difficult to manage. Most people (and I mean 99% of the people I work with) want to provide the best service possible.

Another thing to consider vs our southern friends is the amount of controllers per aircraft under control. I remember reading that Canada was one of highest airplanes per controller ratio in the world. This means nothing to the user but it just goes to show we tend to make a lot happen with very little staff.

Like I said, I’m always open to discussion and improving our service but it’s a complex issue and unfortunately although our worlds(pilots and controllers) are intertwined we operate in 2 totally different ways.

[‘Bob’]

Yeah but that number is probably skewed by the number of overflights and transoceanic we handle in area control centres vs how few towered airports and terminal control areas we have.

It's like Canadian highways.. they may not be the widest, but they certainly are the longest!

[Braun]

Yeah but that number is probably skewed by the number of overflights and transoceanic we handle in area control centres vs how few towered airports and terminal control areas we have.

It's like Canadian highways.. they may not be the widest, but they certainly are the longest!

Actually no. The busiest terminals in Canada on a busy day handle similar traffic levels to oceanic. Also, you’d be surprised how little staff some of these busy units are operating at. increasing controller workload by a lot compared to similarly sized US airports.

[Choppermech1986]

Pre-Covid they had their quirks but were generally reasonable with a few experienced folks that would run a squeeze play when they knew it would work. Now they seem like they're all trainees.

I have a few questions that I'd appreciate a serious answer to, is there an e-mail address that NavCanada has for complaints or do we just do what we've done forever and accept that it is what it is?

1. They're not using the North runway to depart aircraft, so they have US departures taxiing from just about the button of 26R across the airport to depart off 26L and land Corporate and south terminal traffic on 26R only to have them taxi across the airport (and an active runway). This simple problem alone adds a huge amount of workload to tower controllers who are also working ground. Last winter I counted 12 aircraft waiting to depart 08R. Can anyone educate me or direct me to the document that outlines why 26R/08L is not used for departures in YVR, I would imagine it's not NavCanada's fault, but surely they can lobby YVR for say 25 departures off the north side a day to help with congestion?

2. Why no visual approaches? Instead of a controller giving multiple vectors and taking up brain capacity, why not just issue a visual approach clearance?

3. Why not combine both tower frequencies and both ground frequencies instead of North Tower/North Ground and South Tower/South Ground?

4. Why no intersection departures? A good controller would be able to read the play a little and get aircraft out when there was an opportunity instead of taking them all the way down an 11,000' runway.

5. Why when flow is active do I switch across to terminal and it's a ghost town?

6. Why does Terminal hold onto traffic until a 6 mile final? Switch them across to tower early and give South Terminal traffic half a chance of getting the sidestep.

7. Have many of these controllers worked other facilities? As an outsider looking in, I feel as though it would be beneficial for them to see how other facilities are run and the opportunities for improvement.

Ultimately, NavCan and YVR could do so much to improve efficiency, why do they seem to do everything differently to the rest of the country???

[nvcatc]

Not a terminal controller so can't answer all your questions.

1. They're not using the North runway to depart aircraft, so they have US departures taxiing from just about the button of 26R across the airport to depart off 26L and land Corporate and south terminal traffic on 26R only to have them taxi across the airport (and an active runway). This simple problem alone adds a huge amount of workload to tower controllers who are also working ground. Last winter I counted 12 aircraft waiting to depart 08R. Can anyone educate me or direct me to the document that outlines why 26R/08L is not used for departures in YVR, I would imagine it's not NavCanada's fault, but surely they can lobby YVR for say 25 departures off the north side a day to help with congestion?

Fairly certain the north runway doesn't get used for departures under normal ops because of noise abatement procedures. Same reason it's shut at night. There might be other reasons too because of the close proximity to the mountains and airspace to protect when running departures and potential missed approaches that reduce efficiency, but not my airspace so I can't answer that.

5. Why when flow is active do I switch across to terminal and it's a ghost town?

Maybe they've split positions and the other one is busier, or there's an arrival bash incoming. Flow isn't just used for volume either, could be a bird strike, emergency, other ops reason, etc. Sometimes flow is put in place not to help with volume in the terminal, but the surrounding enroute sectors.

6. Why does Terminal hold onto traffic until a 6 mile final? Switch them across to tower early and give South Terminal traffic half a chance of getting the sidestep.

Terminal is responsible for spacing/separation, so my guess here is they want to hold onto you to ensure their spacing holds and they don't end up with a go around.

7. Have many of these controllers worked other facilities? As an outsider looking in, I feel as though it would be beneficial for them to see how other facilities are run and the opportunities for improvement.

Ultimately, NavCan and YVR could do so much to improve efficiency, why do they seem to do everything differently to the rest of the country???

If you're not a controller with experience elsewhere and haven't seen what Vancouver terminal deals with, it's hard to criticize what's happening in their airspace. Every airspace has different limitations. Vancouver has mountains to the north, the US to the south, Comox and Victoria terminals to the west/south, various underlying airports, wealthy people who complain and force noise abatement procedures, etc. I would suggest going on a tour and seeing what they're dealing with on their side of the frequency before suggesting that they're not doing their job well enough and should be more like ____. There are discussions regularly about how to make procedures more efficient. They don't want to make life more difficult than it has to be for everyone else, but it can be a very busy airspace and they're doing what they need to ensure safety.

[Braun]

Pre-Covid they had their quirks but were generally reasonable with a few experienced folks that would run a squeeze play when they knew it would work. Now they seem like they're all trainees.

I have a few questions that I'd appreciate a serious answer to, is there an e-mail address that NavCanada has for complaints or do we just do what we've done forever and accept that it is what it is?

1. They're not using the North runway to depart aircraft, so they have US departures taxiing from just about the button of 26R across the airport to depart off 26L and land Corporate and south terminal traffic on 26R only to have them taxi across the airport (and an active runway). This simple problem alone adds a huge amount of workload to tower controllers who are also working ground. Last winter I counted 12 aircraft waiting to depart 08R. Can anyone educate me or direct me to the document that outlines why 26R/08L is not used for departures in YVR, I would imagine it's not NavCanada's fault, but surely they can lobby YVR for say 25 departures off the north side a day to help with congestion?

2. Why no visual approaches? Instead of a controller giving multiple vectors and taking up brain capacity, why not just issue a visual approach clearance?

3. Why not combine both tower frequencies and both ground frequencies instead of North Tower/North Ground and South Tower/South Ground?

4. Why no intersection departures? A good controller would be able to read the play a little and get aircraft out when there was an opportunity instead of taking them all the way down an 11,000' runway.

5. Why when flow is active do I switch across to terminal and it's a ghost town?

6. Why does Terminal hold onto traffic until a 6 mile final? Switch them across to tower early and give South Terminal traffic half a chance of getting the sidestep.

7. Have many of these controllers worked other facilities? As an outsider looking in, I feel as though it would be beneficial for them to see how other facilities are run and the opportunities for improvement.

Ultimately, NavCan and YVR could do so much to improve efficiency, why do they seem to do everything differently to the rest of the country???

I can’t comment on the specifics of their operations as I haven’t worked that airspace but the visual approach situation is a transport canada issue that will be rectified shortly.

There are a lot of trainees, how else are we supposed to staff our units? You can definitely contact Nav with your complaints, as a supervisor i always appreciate dialog with pilots over issues. We have no problem with it. since your questions seem YVR specific i’d suggest contacting the shift manager for YVR ACC and they could set you up with contact details for the appropriate person!

[stabilizedapproach]

Pre-Covid they had their quirks but were generally reasonable with a few experienced folks that would run a squeeze play when they knew it would work. Now they seem like they're all trainees.

I have a few questions that I'd appreciate a serious answer to, is there an e-mail address that NavCanada has for complaints or do we just do what we've done forever and accept that it is what it is?

1. They're not using the North runway to depart aircraft, so they have US departures taxiing from just about the button of 26R across the airport to depart off 26L and land Corporate and south terminal traffic on 26R only to have them taxi across the airport (and an active runway). This simple problem alone adds a huge amount of workload to tower controllers who are also working ground. Last winter I counted 12 aircraft waiting to depart 08R. Can anyone educate me or direct me to the document that outlines why 26R/08L is not used for departures in YVR, I would imagine it's not NavCanada's fault, but surely they can lobby YVR for say 25 departures off the north side a day to help with congestion?

2. Why no visual approaches? Instead of a controller giving multiple vectors and taking up brain capacity, why not just issue a visual approach clearance?

3. Why not combine both tower frequencies and both ground frequencies instead of North Tower/North Ground and South Tower/South Ground?

4. Why no intersection departures? A good controller would be able to read the play a little and get aircraft out when there was an opportunity instead of taking them all the way down an 11,000' runway.

5. Why when flow is active do I switch across to terminal and it's a ghost town?

6. Why does Terminal hold onto traffic until a 6 mile final? Switch them across to tower early and give South Terminal traffic half a chance of getting the sidestep.

7. Have many of these controllers worked other facilities? As an outsider looking in, I feel as though it would be beneficial for them to see how other facilities are run and the opportunities for improvement.

https://www.navcanada.ca/en/contact-us.aspx Here’s a way to get in touch and ask questions. You can also call the ACC as Braun suggested if you want to talk.

1. Correct, not NAV’s fault. North runway was designed and implemented based on strict guidelines seen here https://www.yvr.ca/-/media/yvr/document ... ations.pdf

NAV could lobby YVRAA and they can lobby Transport. It’s not lost upon anyone that there are two good paved surfaces to depart from but the airport sets rules and NAV plays within them. Tomorrow, if YVRAA said no more arrivals on the north side, then we deal with it. Will NAV complain? Probably, but the airport and its pavement belongs to YVRAA and they can decide how it’s used.

As for US departures taxiing around, blame it on poor airport design. Why is the domestic terminal on the south side when the rest of Canada is to the north, and why is US/International on the north side when most of the traffic is from the south?

2. Because visual approaches keep blowing through final and causing problems with parallel traffic. As I understand, Transport took that away and not NAV. Controllers know that it’s less workload intensive to pass some traffic, say cleared for the visual approach, and put that responsibility of separation on the pilot, but if someone blows right through and (almost) hits someone, it’ll still be everyone’s collective problem.

3. Tower/Ground North faces north, Tower/Ground south faces south. Controllers look to see what’s going on. It would be comical to have towers and grounds combined and having controllers criss-crossing the cab to see what’s going on. It would be hard to combine these functions and work it all from one chair; the cab is larger than you think.

4. https://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-repo ... p0073.html Here’s your reason - sad to say it actually happened in Vancouver. Thought it happened elsewhere and Vancouver was just a collateral victim. Also, if Transport had their way, there would be no more intersection departures in Canada at all. You’d know that mitigations in aviation typically happen as a response to something bad happening.

5. Skip - don’t have the background or knowledge to speak to this.

6. I don’t think Tower is allowed to offer a sidestep until the plane is within the tower control zone anyway, which is about 6 mi final.

7. Yes, most of these controllers have worked other units. Things like traffic mix, geography, procedures and staffing challenges are all unique to a unit and these add complexities. I don’t think you can learn ways to deal with geography and staffing just by watching others work.

Respectfully (and I mean it, since you’re looking for serious answers), when the system doesn’t work, it’s easy to just say that it’s NAV/controllers’ fault because they’re the front-line worker pilots deal with on a daily basis, but there are usually underlying reasons for why we can’t do something to make the system more effective. Doing the job daily, you can bet that we all think of ways to make things better but usually, restrictions invalidate our creative thinking.

And as a side note, while “squeeze plays” seem to make the system work more effectively, they are also a calculated risk that take mental capacity to monitor and execute even for experienced folks. If it’s not a calculated risk, it’s probably not a squeeze play.

In a system that is constrained by staffing and a fatigued workforce (I will admit fully that this is 1000% NAV and Transport’s fault), would you rather a controller play it safe and make no mistakes, or be risky and make a few mistakes? As a member of the flying public myself, I think there’s only one correct answer here.

[PostmasterGeneral]

Why isn’t 13/31 used anymore in YVR?

[Adam Oke]

I'm curious why when issued a SID with the clearance, after departure most of the time we are given vectors that parallel the SID? I've always scratched my head with that one, given that it appears leaving us on the SID would be less workload. Thanks to the ATC guys that answer.

[stabilizedapproach]

Why isn’t 13/31 used anymore in YVR?

There are talks that YVR is considering decommissioning this runway altogether. It probably sees action once or twice a year when the winds really pick up from the south.

https://www.yvr.ca/-/media/yvr/document ... .pdf?la=en

In a noise study for 2022, 13/31 use was a total of 0% (not an absolute zero), but so few times in the grand scheme of things. I imagine runway maintenance is quite expensive regardless of use.

I'm curious why when issued a SID with the clearance, after departure most of the time we are given vectors that parallel the SID?

Best guess at what you’re talking about is why the 15 degree turn on departure. At certain airports, an initial 15 degree turn off runway heading is considered separation and allows for aircraft behind to go without waiting for 3mi/1000’ IFR separation. The turn back to runway heading is likely done when IFR separation is achieved and you no longer need to fly the wrong way.

[nvcatc]

Why isn’t 13/31 used anymore in YVR?

It only gets used when the winds are strong enough to warrant it, which isn't often. Several carriers don't want to use it because of equipment, runway length, whatever their operating limitations are, so they want to land on an 8. Aircraft landing 13 cross 8L on approach and the pavement of 8R, so the operation is MUCH less efficient when 13 is in use.

[‘Bob’]

Yeah but that number is probably skewed by the number of overflights and transoceanic we handle in area control centres vs how few towered airports and terminal control areas we have.

It's like Canadian highways.. they may not be the widest, but they certainly are the longest!

Actually no. The busiest terminals in Canada on a busy day handle similar traffic levels to oceanic. Also, you’d be surprised how little staff some of these busy units are operating at. increasing controller workload by a lot compared to similarly sized US airports.

Sending and receiving CPDLC messages for occasional altitude changes oceanic vs doing the verbal zipper merge in terminal.

My point being that most of the aircraft Canada controls are the easiest ones to do so.

[CaptDukeNukem]

Why isn’t 13/31 used anymore in YVR?

It’s used….. as an exit lol.

[Donald]

Departed southern Ontario for the west coast and had Toronto centre hold us at 260 due to staff shortage. It was 100+ miles before we got cleared up to 380. Is this a common thing?

[16SidedOffice]

Why isn’t 13/31 used anymore in YVR?

It's closed by notam, so it's not even an option. YVR and the major Operators understand that Rwy13 ops reduces the arrival and departure rate to less than acceptable levels.

As for North runway departures, even outside of the noise abatement it was tried for some time around the time of the Olympics and was found to again reduce both the arrival and departure rates to less than desirable levels while greatly increasing workload and complexity mainly due to the airport layout as well as airspace constraints.

[skybluetrek]

Departed southern Ontario for the west coast and had Toronto centre hold us at 260 due to staff shortage. It was 100+ miles before we got cleared up to 380. Is this a common thing?

Yup. Early descents too and even final FL capped at 230 for turboprops sometimes. Thanks NavCanada.

[Braun]

Yeah but that number is probably skewed by the number of overflights and transoceanic we handle in area control centres vs how few towered airports and terminal control areas we have.

It's like Canadian highways.. they may not be the widest, but they certainly are the longest!

Actually no. The busiest terminals in Canada on a busy day handle similar traffic levels to oceanic. Also, you’d be surprised how little staff some of these busy units are operating at. increasing controller workload by a lot compared to similarly sized US airports.

Sending and receiving CPDLC messages for occasional altitude changes oceanic vs doing the verbal zipper merge in terminal.

My point being that most of the aircraft Canada controls are the easiest ones to do so.

It’s a very simplistic view and you’re entitled to your opinion even though I disagree with your statement.

[thenoflyzone]

For example.. Numerous times heading into YVR. Area controllers tell me to slow down or speed up, only to switch to arrival and they tell me to do the complete opposite? WTF?

The area controller has his planes to sequence and the TCU then has to integrate that sequence with his own sequence. Hence the speed fluctuations from one sector to the next. That's just the way the system is built. TBO will change all that, but that's not happening anytime soon.

https://www.navcanada.ca/en/our-strateg ... tions.aspx

Overall general flight handling has deteriorated in the last few years. Fly into the US it's a totally different world (they move metal). Why? Wasn't always like this...

...they also come very close to hitting metal lately !

The FAA separates runway incursions by category:

Category A (collision narrowly avoided),
Category B (significant potential for collision),
Category C (ample time or distance to avoid collision),
Category D (no immediate safety consequences).

Here's a list of mostly A's and B's in a span of 3 months last year, some of which were due to lack of proper ATC.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U ... ts_in_2023

In 2023, there were 21 serious (categories A and B) runway incursions or near misses in the US, according to FAA data, the most since 2007.

Bottom line, the FAA has the same issue as us: staffing. They try to backfill with mandatory overtime, and you see the results.

Yes, the situation at YVR is bad. Hopefully it will get better. However, safety needs to come first. End of discussion.