Have questions for YYZ Tower? Ask them here!

[cossack]

How about west of LINNG, say inbound on YYZ radial 170, for 7000ft over the lake midpoint descending to 2000ft over the shore? (then onwards to city centre along the shoreline). What are the main conflicts with this route?

The departures from 24R turn left and head south then south east or east climbing to 7000 right where you want to be. Take a look at flightaware to get an idea of the traffic flows. Unless its really quiet, just take the shoreline.

[nbinont]

Ok, shoreline it is! Thanks cossack!

[Married a Canadian]

nbinont

Yep....sorry but anything from 4000 and above within 20 miles of YYZ in a single engined low performer....there is nowhere for you to be that is going to lead to anything but confliction.
As arrival can descend to 8000ft in their airspace...it means departure owns up to 7000ft...and when busy we use everything from 3000 up to 7000. Imagine a Porter going to Chicago midway off the island, A Q400 off YYZ going V252, Eastbound heavy jet off 24R and then a V265 jet getting airborne. 4 different tracks...different altitudes...and then a single engine prop at 7000ft in the middle of it who needs descent. The language would be fairly choice I reckon.
On the 24s as Cossack said...anything going V265, V252 and Eastbound will conflict with you when west of Linng.
On the 06s anything that goes V265 and V443 is be turning into your path.
When Porter are descending into the island from their southern destinations they HAVE to be out of the way of YYZ departures before entering the terminal airspace. There is not enough room to vector jets and props all over the sky within 26 miles of the airport to avoid traffic that wants to climb and then descend again AND is not a high performer.

I'm sorry in this scenario that it seems that YYZ is a bit inflexible...but for sure if you get below 4000ft and use the satellite sectors...you will find there are a LOT of good sightseeing routes to be had in and around the terminal airspace...and I am pretty sure that some have been discussed on this website by the flying community.
From my experience back in the UK..YYZ is a LOT more flexible than Heathrow....with their Class A zone and all!
Thankyou for the questions though....it helps both sides understand more what is out there and what can and can't be done so easily.

[Rookie50]

Got possibly a silly question. Starting some hope air flights occsaionally to / from Ytz from points north, filing IFR, SE piston. Is a direct clearance possible right over 33 R or L, if not in use? Would save some time to SSM / sudbury. I would guess likely not for separation, thought I'd throw it out anyway.

[cossack]

Porter doesn't get that route in a Q400, so a non-starter I'm afraid.

[Married a Canadian]

Got possibly a silly question. Starting some hope air flights occsaionally to / from Ytz from points north, filing IFR, SE piston. Is a direct clearance possible right over 33 R or L, if not in use? Would save some time to SSM / sudbury. I would guess likely not for separation, thought I'd throw it out anyway

When Porter first started up their flights to the northern destinations we tried afew combinations of routes when inbound to see if we could make a more "direct" work. The problem was where you/they needed to be descentwise when inbound from the North was always in conflict with YYZ on either E/W configuration (you are in the middle of the arrival box on the 24s...and in the middle of the departure path on the 06s).
IFR over the 33s also means stopping YYZ departures and making a gap in the arrivals...something that won't be done unless it is a priority flight.

Departing YTZ is never a problem...we just climb you over the lake before turning you Northbound. Getting you direct once airborne would be a simple matter of coordinating with the enroute (so long as you have Flight planned something higher than say 16000). It is actually easier to get you climbing and on course there than it would be off YYZ as we have more room to climb you.
Inbound...sorry but direct has been tried and didn't work so well. If you know any "Air Bravo" or Porter guys...they can maybe give you some tips on their best routings.

[Rookie50]

Got possibly a silly question. Starting some hope air flights occsaionally to / from Ytz from points north, filing IFR, SE piston. Is a direct clearance possible right over 33 R or L, if not in use? Would save some time to SSM / sudbury. I would guess likely not for separation, thought I'd throw it out anyway

When Porter first started up their flights to the northern destinations we tried afew combinations of routes when inbound to see if we could make a more "direct" work. The problem was where you/they needed to be descentwise when inbound from the North was always in conflict with YYZ on either E/W configuration (you are in the middle of the arrival box on the 24s...and in the middle of the departure path on the 06s).
IFR over the 33s also means stopping YYZ departures and making a gap in the arrivals...something that won't be done unless it is a priority flight.

Departing YTZ is never a problem...we just climb you over the lake before turning you Northbound. Getting you direct once airborne would be a simple matter of coordinating with the enroute (so long as you have Flight planned something higher than say 16000). It is actually easier to get you climbing and on course there than it would be off YYZ as we have more room to climb you.
Inbound...sorry but direct has been tried and didn't work so well. If you know any "Air Bravo" or Porter guys...they can maybe give you some tips on their best routings.

Can I get a (GA, SE Piston we're talking) climbout either West close to the lakeshore; or a circling climb reasonably close to YTZ, BPOC?

East Departures from CZBA; they send me over the lake too -- have to moniter that but don't think there's another way while maintaining the MEA and separation. Bear in mind I only usually cruise at 7-8000. I always file IFR for longer CC's.

[Married a Canadian]

Bear in mind I only usually cruise at 7-8000

Unfortunately therein lies the problem if you are departing from YTZ and wanting to go north in a single engine prop.
On either east/west configuration at YYZ the arrivals can descend to 8000ft in their airspace (lower once in the early descent areas and arrival box) and departure can climb to 7000ft under the arrival airspace.

There is no "direct" route on either configuration northbound that wouldn't put you in conflict with either departure or arrival traffic. On the 24s you would be going over the arrival box with the straight in fixes being cleared to 8000 and 7000ft...and you also have the traffic that is being sequenced into the downwind from the North, West and South descending from 8000ft.
On the 06s...departure jets are climbing to 5000ft (unless jet turned) before talking to departure...you would have to be above 5000ft before expecting a turn northbound off the island. It would actually be easier on the 06s than on the 24s though as you don't have to be climbed over the lake.

It is not totally beyond the realms of possibility for 7000-8000ft off the island Northbound IFR to work. I would just say that 9 times out of 10 you would most likely get kept low and routed via KZ before being climbed as this keeps you clear of Pearson traffic.

Regarding your comment about departing ZBA. If you are going West then there should be no problem. If you are going north or north east bound you won't be climbed till north of the YYZ arrival or departure traffic and you will be pointed north to keep clear of Pearson. East or South East....it will be over the lake everytime....climbing along the shoreline puts you in conflict with the traffic mentioned above.
Hope this helps some.

[Rookie50]

Thanks, it does. Not unexpected responses as I'm reasonablly familiar with yyz traffic requirements. Thanks again.

[boogs82]

Is it still possible these days to arrange a tower tour to actually see what goes on in the life of ATS?

[cossack]

Is it still possible these days to arrange a tower tour to actually see what goes on in the life of ATS?

It is, but its preferred if you have a legitimate interest, not just fancy a look see.

[Rookie50]

Cossack,

Why is the ILS 26 at Ytz restricted? There then is no appealing option for a SE piston in low conditions with a strong west wind....except go elsewhere....

[cossack]

Cossack,

Why is the ILS 26 at Ytz restricted? There then is no appealing option for a SE piston in low conditions with a strong west wind....except go elsewhere....

I'm sorry, I have no idea. Having read the other YTZ thread, it seems others don't either.

[photofly]

Cossack,

Why is the ILS 26 at Ytz restricted? There then is no appealing option for a SE piston in low conditions with a strong west wind....except go elsewhere....

I'm sorry, I have no idea. Having read the other YTZ thread, it seems others don't either.

It's too steep to meet the criteria.

The criteria don't give a damn about whether any other options appeal to you.

[ZBBYLW]

With the noise abatement night hour preferential runways favouring 15L (I believe until either 6 or 630am) why is it hardly in use? I often fly the red-eyes home from the west coast and if on the YMS arrival typically we will break it off for 24L or 23. It's not such a big deal really but after being up all night the straight in approach and short taxi to the gate would be awfully nice!

Just curious as in our Jepp binders it indicates the preference of runways should favour 15L. And its usually relatively quiet (an IB South American flight or two, plus a couple of us coming from the west coast) at 5-6 AM.

[cossack]

With the noise abatement night hour preferential runways favouring 15L (I believe until either 6 or 630am) why is it hardly in use? I often fly the red-eyes home from the west coast and if on the YMS arrival typically we will break it off for 24L or 23. It's not such a big deal really but after being up all night the straight in approach and short taxi to the gate would be awfully nice!

Just curious as in our Jepp binders it indicates the preference of runways should favour 15L. And its usually relatively quiet (an IB South American flight or two, plus a couple of us coming from the west coast) at 5-6 AM.

The preferential night arrival runways are indeed 05 and 15L until 6:30. The preferential night departure runways are 33R and 23. There are times when the winds do not permit use of the 05/33R or 15L/23 combinations (especially it seems the latter) but we are obliged to be as close to these combinations as possible using a list of decreasing preference.

If neither 05 nor 15L is available either due wind (surface or upper) or closure then the arrival runways chosen will follow a prescribed order using whats left.

[Married a Canadian]

ZBBYLW

Luck of the draw with the winds really. I was on a midnight shift on Thursday night..and the morning arrivals all got 15L...winds were 180/05.
We really will aim for 05 or 15L for night hour arrivals...but as you well know..the winds at YYZ are a strange beast!

[ZBBYLW]

Married a Canadian,

Yes the winds in YYZ are always good for a laugh. On the particular morning about a week ago the winds were less than 10 kts but they were out of the west, and I suppose while we can accept a small tailwind component, I suppose the SCL/GRU in bounds in their heavy machines may be a little less willing (especially coming from the south it does not help them in the least).

Anyhow thanks to both of you for keeping your eyes on this forum it's a great dialogue.

[cossack]

I don't know what it is with the winds here but just now the north wind was 26009G18 and the south wind was 03010. Then a few minutes later it was 32012G20 and 26012. We're landing 05 and 06L and departing 06L and 33R. The forecast wind FWIW is 36009.

Question for Terminal: On midnights there does seem to be a reluctance from some in the Terminal unit to landing on 15L. An excuse we hear in the tower is the upper winds are 27015. So what? The surface wind is 22010 and we operate all day long with shittier upper winds than that.

[Married a Canadian]

Cossack......good question.....no good answer really.

Some of it is that not many of us in the terminal like vectoring with a tailwind on final....it is tough enough on the 06s when at least sometimes the winds on the ground will favour 05 while blowing 230/25 at 3000ft. On the 15s when you have a tail wind component into a crosswind component...which favors the 24s,...it is easier to sell 23 to the pilots and for us not to worry about catch up on final.

That would be my partial take on it....you know as well as I do that everyone will have their own ideas and opinions on it.
For me on Midnights.....anything from 350 through to 110 I aim for RW 05 (usually we are on that anyway).
120 through 200 ....15L
210 through 340 above 15kts....RW 23
below 15kts...whatever suits you guys the best.

[rxl]

I'm surprised that I have seen no mention of the unique runway configuration being used a week or two ago at YYZ. I appologize if I have missed it somewhere in this thread, but in my almost 40 years of flying out of this airport I have never seen anything like it.

With a wind of 150 at 10ish the arrivals were on 15R wih departures off of 24L AND 06L almost simultaneously. As the 24L departure rotated, the 06L departure was cleared for takeoff. We departed 06L eastbound for YQM I think it was.

Has something recently changed in the ATC MANOPS to allow this?
Wind permitting, are we likely to see more of this?

It was quite busy and the operation seemed to work very well.

Any comments?

[cossack]

Runway 05/23 was closed at the time and we were trying to get as much use out of the runways available. "Shotgunning" or back door departing as I've heard it called elsewhere, was one way to get more departures out quickly.

Usually when 05/23 has been closed (past 3 weekends) the arrivals use two runways 06R and 15R on visuals or 24L and 15L on visuals and the departures only 06L or 24R. Or if the winds aren't favourable, we'll land 06L or 24L and depart 33R.

A couple of weeks ago we were landing on both 15s and departing 24R. That seemed to go down well with some crews too. It was hard work for the arrival tower controller though as you had to be aware of where the departure traffic was at all times in case of a missed approach. Side by side arrivals with a miss and a departure in the mix would have made things interesting, but that's what we're there for. It certainly made a change from the run-of-the-mill configurations.

[rxl]

Another question just came to my old grey head.

I understand that Heathrow has or is going to implement arrivals on the same runway separated by time rather than distance on final approach.

This is helpful in increasing arrival rates with a strong headwind on final since it takes longer at 110 or 120KTS ground speed as opposed to 140 or 150KTS for a following aircraft to cover the 2 1/2 to 3 miles separation that should exist at the threshold behind the preceding aircraft. The required separation at the FAF is based on the runway occupancy time of the preceding landing aircraft rather than distance.

Anyone in YYZ ATC looking at this? Or maybe you are already doing it.
Seems to me it would be beneficial with a strong north west wind.

[cossack]

Another question just came to my old grey head.

I understand that Heathrow has or is going to implement arrivals on the same runway separated by time rather than distance on final approach.

This is helpful in increasing arrival rates with a strong headwind on final since it takes longer at 110 or 120KTS ground speed as opposed to 140 or 150KTS for a following aircraft to cover the 2 1/2 to 3 miles separation that should exist at the threshold behind the preceding aircraft. The required separation at the FAF is based on the runway occupancy time of the preceding landing aircraft rather than distance.

Anyone in YYZ ATC looking at this? Or maybe you are already doing it.
Seems to me it would be beneficial with a strong north west wind.

MaC hasn't got the hang of distance based separations yet. I don't think this is on the agenda here.

[Married a Canadian]

Cossack...tower called down the other day to compliment the arrival spacing and showed surprise when they heard it was me in arrival. I was obviously having a good day.

RXL....no plans to do time based separation in arrivals at YYZ right now because to be honest we have more flexibility available to us than at Heathrow. We have the triple operation available with all 3 east/west runways. On the 33s/15s...in peak arrival flows tower will let us offload on the departure runway depending on demand.
We also have a greater variety of aircraft at YYZ than at LHR...they don't have any turboprops or caravans for example..so time based separation becomes more difficult behind say a DHC8 A that can really slow up inside the marker...or a caravan that is grounding slower anyway. It is easier to judge time when you are running jets all day "a la" LHR rather than the mix at YYZ.
Running a distance based final in a triple op on the 24s in VFR weather gives us a 65 arrival rate...which is pretty good.
On the 33s or 15s....we can usually do about 42 including offloads on the departure runways...which I think is comparable to Heathrow on a land one depart one config.
When the winds are particularly strong when we are on the 24s...we can unofficially ease up on the space a bit even when landing and departing the same runway...for the time reasons you mentioned. Instead of running the required 5 miles....we can get away with 4.5 and even up to 4 with very strong headwinds.

Regarding the "dualling 15s" departing 24R operation that Cossack mentioned. I was working that evening and have to say that was YYZ atc at its best...both tower and terminal. We were able to run a 50 arrival rate on the 15s (unheard of) and there was little to no spinning. That op will only work in visual conditions as you can't run the north west parallels alongside each other without one aircraft being on the visual. There is no ILS monitor for those runways. I believe the aircrews gave it the thumbs up.