YYC Rant.

[Johnny#5]

Why is it when there's light flurries or wind over 20 knots all hell breaks loose in Calgary and they can't handle anything and there are ridiculous crossing times and flows and delays, etc...??????????????????

I've heard that its not Edmonton, its Calgary tower who's always behind the 8-ball.

Unless its SKC, the airport is bit of a disaster.

[Donald]

Not really news, check the current notam for YYC.

[C172-B744]

If i'm not mistaken I believe YYC is one of the busiest airports in the world that does not have a parallel runway and the runway layout also limits land and hold short operations for many types.

If your trying to get in between 430 and 7 local time it can be a pain

[PW123]

Stop Bitchin! Come to Kabul and you'll get a whole new meaning to the word DELAY.

[loopa]

Stop Bitchin! Come to Kabul and you'll get a whole new meaning to the word DELAY.

It's human nature. You will consider what is "tough" in comparison to what you see. To a person in Kabul, the meaning of delay is different than to the person in Calgary.

[tripleseven]

If i'm not mistaken I believe YYC is one of the busiest airports in the world that does not have a parallel runway and the runway layout also limits land and hold short operations for many types.

If your trying to get in between 430 and 7 local time it can be a pain

I'm sorry, but you must be kidding. Ever been to LaGuardia and seen what they can do without a parallel runway? Part of it has to do with Canadian air traffic rules, I'm sure, but holy.

[_dwj_]

Only having a cat I ILS probably doesn't help matters.

[iflyforpie]

Why is it when there's light flurries or wind over 20 knots all hell breaks loose in Calgary and they can't handle anything and there are ridiculous crossing times and flows and delays, etc...??????????????????

At least the airport matches the rest of the town...

[arctic navigator]

Why is it when there's light flurries or wind over 20 knots all hell breaks loose in Calgary and they can't handle anything and there are ridiculous crossing times and flows and delays, etc...??????????????????

At least the airport matches the rest of the town...

HAHAHA... Oh so true... I was told once when calling for departure slot back to YYC that on a clear blue sunny day YYC can land 30 planes an hour, but if it was nasty out they will only land 20... Not quite sure what their separation requirements are but I think I would feel pretty safe if there was an aircraft rolling into the intersection of 28/34 when I was either touching down or starting to roll... Theirs also no reason 90% of the aircraft operating out of that airport couldn't be safely restricted to land 34 and hold short of 28... We all must love politics because they need a reason to build that second runway and delay's would be the only one good enough I'm sure...

[moreccsplease]

I second the LaGuardia statement, you should see how they move traffic, that airport is 10 times busier than YYC and the airspace is as well with JFK, EWR and TEB just to name three right there. They'll be running some planes 2 miles in trail for landing, crossing aircraft across the active runway with a plane 1.5 mile final, and departing in between that. YYC is a joke! I blame TC and NavCan for their ultra restrictive rules.

[FlaplessDork]

Could be a combo of the Rockies, Springbank Airspace, and LAHSO requirements.

[Freeride]

YYC has now restricted the amount of movements to 28 per hour. They say that this will not change until the new parallel runway is built. There also seems to be problems with communication between the TMU and the Area control center.

[genetic jack hammer]

I second the LaGuardia statement, you should see how they move traffic, that airport is 10 times busier than YYC and the airspace is as well with JFK, EWR and TEB just to name three right there. They'll be running some planes 2 miles in trail for landing, crossing aircraft across the active runway with a plane 1.5 mile final, and departing in between that. YYC is a joke! I blame TC and NavCan for their ultra restrictive rules.

I third the KLGA statement. Last week, we taxiied out and were #32 for dep. Considering the w/x, winds, time of day (late afternoon, early evening), they had us up in 43 minutes. Not too bad. As for the "YYC is a joke!" comment. Have you flown out of CYYZ. THAT's a joke. Ready for an immediate dep off RWY 24R. Advise tower of such. Asked to wait. Waited, asked again, asked to wait again. THEN, a 320 checks in, 9 miles back, cleared to land, and you guessed it, we're asked to wait for landing traffic.

As for efficient airports, Atlanta takes the cake. That "V" taxi loop, pure work of genius.

[cyeg66]

Ahhhh, spoken like a bunch of people who don't know what's going on. It's kind of entertaining, really. Part TC rules, part tower interpretation of those rules(uber-restrictive), part weather conditions (Let's see Laguardia do that with 50 knot crosswinds + 0 vis), part airport configuration (runways need to be mint for LAHSO), and part airport elevation (lollygagging reduced power takeoffs---exhorbitant runway occupancy times), part ATC tools (and no, I don't mean we're the 'tools', well, some of us are, but I mean CRDA which is the crossing runway display aid, essentially a small box that a plane has to be vectored into). Many more small details to list but those don't need to be included to validate the argument.

movements 2008:
LGA---379 414
YYC---246 370
---not quite 10X busier but almost....

Though some 'tools' in ATC don't consider pilot workload, it's important to consider factors like that when vectoring/cramming at the marker, for instance. By that same token, I think a YYC-based pilot could learn a lot about the stuff YYC tower and TCU have to contend with in bad weather, or even sometimes in good weather (that happens in Calgary?), for that matter, by going for a fam to either or both of the locations for a couple hours. We've had some pilots from different airlines visit the centre when they've had a couple of hours to kill in Edmonton. They leave with a different perspective on things and more appreciation for what we do. Some even inquire as to whether they could/should apply. We just wish more would come check it out.

That's my YYC rant. Planes could be run closer, sure. Using LAHSO's (which commercial carriers typically don't like to do, too much use of brakes, etc), it's possible to land 60+ per hour. You just couldn't depart any. Well, maybe a couple. The 28 "movements" rate someone mentioned is the arrival rate, not the movements per hour rate, and that figure is fully dependent on weather. Under most circumstances, the arrival rate is anywhere b/w 34/hr and 18/hr (or lower). CRDA makes for loooong finals, also. Room to fine tune, I suppose. Not a perfect system but it's all we got until another runway is built. If the CRAA gets their act together, it will be operational b4 2015.

[turbo-prop]

cyeg66 its just hard to believe , as well as tell the pax in the back, that we have to hold for 20mins the weather outside is severe clear and calm, and it does happen a lot in YYC. I don't think anybody here is questioning the diffculty of your guys jobs. It does seem like Nav Canada doesn't staff YYC with enough people for those days. Bad weather days I don't think you will see guys complaining about holds.

[Rotten Apple #1]

Thank you for the information cyeg66, from a CYYC based pilot.

[pilotbzh]

Note that LGA is closed at night...

[flyinhigh]

cyeg66, you are most right. However from a pilot prospective you cannot tell us one thing about needing another runway when we go into other airports, smaller airports that do a much better job of stacking and packing.

HOWEVER, I will say and have said before to some guys I fly with. WE DO NOT HAVE THE BIG PICTURE, we have our picture so yes we/I bitch about it. I am a YYZ based Pilot and Its a joke to, again as much as I bitch, I really don't have the big picture.

The real frustration is TC/Nav canada, they restrict you guys to much, sorry to say if we brought even a control from minniapolis to yyc or yyz and they worked the way they do down there, movements would sky rocket. You don't need another runway there, you need some high ups to get off there high horse and actually change some regs to allow you to move aircraft.

Also, you higher altitude comment, sorry holds no water, been to denver they move lots of traffic off there runways or 1 runway alot more effiecent to here in canada.

[Prairie Chicken]

EG66, thanks for the insight. And I 2nd your call for fam visits/flights. An appreciataion for each others' work environments, limitations, & demands makes us all better at what we do.

I haven't been into YYC for some time. What's the status on the parallel 16/34?

[Longtimer]

Why is it when there's light flurries or wind over 20 knots all hell breaks loose in Calgary and they can't handle anything and there are ridiculous crossing times and flows and delays, etc...??????????????????

I've heard that its not Edmonton, its Calgary tower who's always behind the 8-ball.

Unless its SKC, the airport is bit of a disaster.

Are you driving a heavy or.................. Please be more specific........ as to the problems....... you had..................

[cyeg66]

cyeg66, you are most right. However from a pilot prospective you cannot tell us one thing about needing another runway when we go into other airports, smaller airports that do a much better job of stacking and packing.

The real frustration is TC/Nav canada, they restrict you guys to much, sorry to say if we brought even a control from minniapolis to yyc or yyz and they worked the way they do down there, movements would sky rocket. You don't need another runway there, you need some high ups to get off there high horse and actually change some regs to allow you to move aircraft.

Also, you higher altitude comment, sorry holds no water, been to denver they move lots of traffic off there runways or 1 runway alot more effiecent to here in canada.

Well, where to start?...

First, Transport (no doubt wearing ties a little too tight around the neck sometimes) sets the rules that NavCan must follow. Many, many handcuffs that our american counterparts need not deal with in doing their job. Every so often, you can hear the drums beating all the way from Ottawa about new safety initiatives that must pass 'cause it would seem "our ANS system is so fundamentally unsafe". Someone just trying to get a year-end bonus for bringing sweeping change, perhaps. Sometimes, it's easy to think that TC doesn't give a fark about the flying public and airlines' punctuality.

Since you're talking about smaller airports that can pack 'em better, allow me to use YEG as an example. Hell yeah, YEG, with its near-perfect configuration (VFR weather) can move more planes than YYC. The runways don't cross!!! Any idea how much work that saves the tower/TCU? This only confirms the fact that YYC needs that other 16/34 sooner than later 'cause the parallels are meant to do just that, reduce rules-based workload, and they do. In times of inclement weather, like we experienced last week in a wicked way, if we had two rwys pointing into the wind, this would ensure that at least one is open at all times. We were closing for 10 mins every hour just so the sweepers could give the single runway a quick once over. CLOSED!

I appreciate the fact that you point out that rules are the biggest obstacle. You are correct. No more to say on that. Though, I would like to see how Minni controllers could do better with YYC's chinook winds, crossing runways (bye bye parallel...), no LAHSO ops, moving airplanes so much more efficiently without having abundant waivers from TC to bend many rules.
--as for DEN, c'mon. Really? How many parallels? How many are less than 2 miles long? How many of them cross? How many are for arrivals only and others for departures only? Bring a stopwatch to see how long their takeoff run is? (esp. compared to YYZ, 6000' lower?)

Again, I would invite you to come for a tour to even begin to understand. PM if you want a shift manager's #...

[yycflyguy]

While we have the attention of an Air Traffic Controller, let me ask you something that is not directly related to the thread. Why are the new Aerodrome Low Visibility Operations laid out in way that ATC does not guide aircraft looking to taxi in Low Vis operations? I was in YOW today in the FZFG and I sat there waiting for the RVR to reach 1200 thinking, why is ATC issuing these taxi clearances fully knowing that these aircrafts were breaking the rules? It is entrapment. It is like asking a cop if it is ok to drive 150km down the 401 and hearing "cleared as requested" and 2 weeks later getting a violation letter. Why isn't ATC clearing the mud and say "unable taxi request until RVR XXX"? How can a US part 121 be able to taxi on something less than a Canadian 705 carrier?

Oh, and as far as LGA contollers. It is amazing how much metal they move considering EWR, TEB, JFK, HPN and FMG in such close proximity. 3 out of those 5 have no parallel runway.

As far as long runway occupation times. I will certainly try to make your "suggested" exit point but it is neither a requirement nor a priority when a pilots priority is safely controlling an aircraft. 5 miles en-trail means approximately 2- 2 1/2 minutes on the runway... when is that ever exceeded?

[cyeg66]

While we have the attention of an Air Traffic Controller, let me ask you something that is not directly related to the thread. Why are the new Aerodrome Low Visibility Operations laid out in way that ATC does not guide aircraft looking to taxi in Low Vis operations? I was in YOW today in the FZFG and I sat there waiting for the RVR to reach 1200 thinking, why is ATC issuing these taxi clearances fully knowing that these aircrafts were breaking the rules? It is entrapment. It is like asking a cop if it is ok to drive 150km down the 401 and hearing "cleared as requested" and 2 weeks later getting a violation letter. Why isn't ATC clearing the mud and say "unable taxi request until RVR XXX"? How can a US part 121 be able to taxi on something less than a Canadian 705 carrier?

Sorry, you'd have to take that up with them. I'm just a knuckleheaded radar guy.

Oh, and as far as LGA contollers. It is amazing how much metal they move considering EWR, TEB, JFK, HPN and FMG in such close proximity. 3 out of those 5 have no parallel runway.

Structure, structure, and more structure. The controllers aren't superhuman, or cowboys, or both. I do agree, however, it's something else to see. Though, make note that when the weather goes in the turlet, so do a lot of flight plans. Makes for lots of hollering from departure lounges, etc. I find it interesting how that airspace can be that congested and cited with awe (as it has been innumerable times in this thread) and when things blow up, people bark about what a dog's breakfast of an airspace it is and how more runways are required to accomodate the demand. NextGen will fix that....

As far as long runway occupation times. I will certainly try to make your "suggested" exit point but it is neither a requirement nor a priority when a pilots priority is safely controlling an aircraft. 5 miles en-trail means approximately 2- 2 1/2 minutes on the runway... when is that ever exceeded?

Again, I'm just a radar knucklehead. I would never dream of suggesting an exit point . If you grease your landing and miss your exit, oh well, it just means that someone else may go around because an a/c is stuck in position on the other runway waiting anxiously for you to clear with another on the flare over Barlow Trail. That comment of yours also brings up another point. Despite there being a note on the approach plates stating HIRO (high intensity runway ops), you get a high proportion of pilots that aren't "players" i.e. are unwilling to comply with making the first available exit. As a controller, it can limit your options sometimes. CRDA spacing, and the tower controller's plan, can be predicated on the aircraft making that first exit. Heck, some even refuse to comply with LAHSO op's, active or passive. D'you ever land in KPHX? They aren't afraid to use the sh?t out of their brakes to get off the runway. Coulda almost used a neck brace...

Anatomy of runway usage:(type dependent, naturally)
Landing and exit: 25-45 secs.
Taxiing to position: (if not simultaneous) 15-30 secs (pray for no required run-up time while in postion)
Clearance for takeoff and wheels up: anywhere from 30 secs to 1 min+.
Traffic on final 1/2 to 1 mile from threshold: 20-40 secs to touchdown.
---even tighter when tower departs 2 in five mile gap (intersection departures, props with a turn)
My point is, sometimes it leaves lots of time, sometimes not. Factoring in ground sorting and pseudo air sorting of arr/dep's, there's lots of active runway crossing.

Example(s): 34/28 mode: 34 taxi from apron, cross 28, cross 25, 2 mile taxi. Landing 28, back on J, cross 34. Add these runway crossing times (esp. since a lot of a/c do so on a single engine, looooong time to cross) and that buffer in the 5 mile in-trail gap gets that much narrower. It's easy to stand from afar and say these guys (and gals) in the tower have it easy and should be pushed harder, but when you're sometimes never more than 5-10 seconds from having to fill paperwork, it can wear you down.

This is where CRDA is inefficient. Tower sets the mode, 34/28, 16/10, 28/25, whatever and then we're given a default in-trail space to a single runway (if no traffic is landing on the crossing runway). Sometimes you can have 10 planes and all want 16 and none want 10. That's a lot of miles on 16 you've got to "build" if you're held to 5 in-trail spacing. It occasionally happens that the tower calls and says they've got very few departures coming out so we can reduce our spacing to minimums. The problem is, this doesn't happen nearly enough (apologies to the tower guys that do and that are trying to help---it's a phenomenon called teamwork, I believe) and so 5,6, even 8 miles in-trail it is all day long.
The situation is what it is. It will be better with another runway (that actually doesn't intersect another--imagine that!) Sorry for the long-winded message. The way it is now, there's no quick fix, and we're powerless to change it because we have no power. Higher ups need to drop the gavel.

[airway]

I understand that we don't see the big picture, but how do you explain this one?

YYC using only 16 for landing. Comming in from the west, landing in YYC today, flight behind us (I think) gets a OPALE crossing time of 1930. I look at the clock, it's 1830. They ask the controller (edmonton center) to confirm that the crossing time is 1 hour from now. Controller checks with someone (arrival?), and yes it is 1 hour from now.

I start reviewing my Jepp chart for our alternate.

Nothing is said to us, we go straight in to the beacon from Bragg Creek for a visual with no delay.

(Times are not exact)

[cyeg66]

I understand that we don't see the big picture, but how do you explain this one?

YYC using only 16 for landing. Comming in from the west, landing in YYC today, flight behind us (I think) gets a OPALE crossing time of 1930. I look at the clock, it's 1830. They ask the controller (edmonton center) to confirm that the crossing time is 1 hour from now. Controller checks with someone (arrival?), and yes it is 1 hour from now.

I start reviewing my Jepp chart for our alternate.

Nothing is said to us, we go straight in to the beacon from Bragg Creek for a visual with no delay.

(Times are not exact)

Have no idea what you're talking about. Of course, if it's a PA46 that's still got 55 mins to get to Opale, then allow me not to worry too much about his hold time. There are winners and losers. Sometimes your plane (certain type with certain performance) is better suited to fill a 'gap' on a certain runway. Sometimes its required to hold one or two planes at the outer fix to reduce the # of planes in the terminal area. Some pilots don't like turning final 34 at High River and slowed to 160.
YYC TCU was mostly responsible for assigning crossing times until a few weeks ago when TMU West took over the job. The new system results in more ground delays being taken (I can almost hear you guys griping about that) but it seems to work pretty well. Still needs fine tuning but it should get better. We're now just the middlemen at both the mercy of the TMU and tower. Would be nice if the friggin' weather would cooperate Global warming, really?!?

sidenote: earlier in the day, only 16 was used for arrivals, 16/10 for departures, but when traffic picked up later on, 10 became available. I remember cutting a few across to Sarcee. You may have been one of them. There wasn't any holding going on then, though (that's an understatement! ZZZZZZZZZZZ)