tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6429311486394377221.post1498088422782648976..comments2024-01-25T19:59:19.744-05:00Comments on COPA Flight 8 Ottawa: Nav Canada Study of Ottawa TCA Airspace UnderwayMichael Shawhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17881160865679740901noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6429311486394377221.post-83970558388856281212013-05-02T19:43:30.062-04:002013-05-02T19:43:30.062-04:00Great!Great!Adam Hunthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02524937335927976607noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6429311486394377221.post-77911232038369170012013-05-02T17:19:55.882-04:002013-05-02T17:19:55.882-04:00Calgary TCA briefing sent to Mike and Kevin.Calgary TCA briefing sent to Mike and Kevin.Dan Dalyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08203094849718626365noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6429311486394377221.post-70170452480842347692013-03-19T10:20:43.571-04:002013-03-19T10:20:43.571-04:00Well it would be nice to see the airspace shrunken...Well it would be nice to see the airspace shrunken here as well. A lot of it hinges on getting ATC to not bring the IFR traffic too low too far out.Adam Hunthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02524937335927976607noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6429311486394377221.post-66999427603175924202013-03-18T21:19:34.204-04:002013-03-18T21:19:34.204-04:00Yes, and the flows in/out from Edmonton, with the ...Yes, and the flows in/out from Edmonton, with the other arrivals from the E-W routes, is as complex as Ottawa...Dan Dalyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08203094849718626365noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6429311486394377221.post-31067626747777189622013-03-18T18:39:35.434-04:002013-03-18T18:39:35.434-04:00Hey anything that results in shrinking the size of...Hey anything that results in shrinking the size of controlled airspace has to be a good thing, doesn't it?Adam Hunthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02524937335927976607noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6429311486394377221.post-76295124272120269732013-03-18T16:57:01.591-04:002013-03-18T16:57:01.591-04:00I saw a NavCanada presentation Saturday in Calgary...I saw a NavCanada presentation Saturday in Calgary on the reorganization of Calgary TCA when they open a parallel runway. They will go from 35 mile to 30 mile TCA, and the remaining 5 goes from Class C to Class E Transponder airspace... They started from scratch. I will try to get a copy and send it to Mike/Kevin. <br /><br />DDDan Dalyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08203094849718626365noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6429311486394377221.post-81911918958545681272013-03-07T09:18:42.196-05:002013-03-07T09:18:42.196-05:00I don't think the system would work if airspac...I don't think the system would work if airspace floors changed with runway usage. That would confuse pilots and controllers and be prone to errors.<br /><br />One problem with changing to Class C is the need for ATC to separate IFR and VFR traffic. If staffing shortages arise they must still follow Class C rules, hence the chance of denied entry rises for VFR flights. Why not leave as Class D and continue to provide Class C service unless resources require dropping to Class D. At least pilots would know to expect Class D rules. I suspect many pilots would not notice the change.<br /><br />Apparently some VFR types have complained when Class D is treated more like Class C. They feel they are being denied their rights by being given ATC instructions limiting their movements. That view smarts of being dead-right! I don't think we should allow this behavior to dictate airspace classifications.<br /><br />More fuel for the flyer...<br /><br />Mike<br /><br />Michael Shawhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17881160865679740901noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6429311486394377221.post-35244613542432959562013-03-06T18:23:33.636-05:002013-03-06T18:23:33.636-05:00It is quite true that not all airspace protected i...It is quite true that not all airspace protected is needed with any one runway in use, but freeing up airspace not needed for runway is very manpower intensive and causes problems when a pilot requests another runway. <br /><br />For instance in the area of Kars the TCA floor could probably be raised to 4000 feet when runway 25 or 07 was in use, but if a pilot requested a landing on 32 then the airspace would have to be quickly lowered. If there are uncontrolled VFR aircraft at say 3500 feet near Kars then how do you let them know? It gets pretty complicated!Adam Hunthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02524937335927976607noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6429311486394377221.post-63639608662571617352013-03-06T10:00:43.279-05:002013-03-06T10:00:43.279-05:00Adam - true, of course, however, having the airspa...Adam - true, of course, however, having the airspace for all runways to be 'shielded' at all times, when the vast majority of IFR flights are approaches to 32, and where the flight tracks show the southernmost portion of the TCA is essentially never used for IFR, mean that some of that airspace is Class C for no reason (I was at the Hq NavCanada consultation where they displayed the tracks). <br /><br />Also, the question of resources is important. My view of public finances indicates that folks like NavCanada will not be getting more people, in fact, more likely less. If resources stay the same, and the controller's tasks (IFR/VFR deconfliction in C, not necessary in D) increase, where will the money come from? User fees? Or will we simply be excluded, causing less safety outside the TCA?Dan Dalyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08203094849718626365noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6429311486394377221.post-46207867427018930192013-03-05T08:02:23.012-05:002013-03-05T08:02:23.012-05:00Dan: Good point!
From comparing the "current...Dan: Good point!<br /><br />From comparing the "current" and "proposed" maps it looks like nothing is changing - the controlled airspace still starts at 2500 feet in the south and 4000 feet in the north. What I think yo are indicating you would like to see is the TCA floor raised to 4000 feet in the south area. <br /><br />My understanding is that the 2500 feet floor is established by MDAs and other procedural altitudes for instrument approaches in that sector which can't be themselves raised to stay in a higher TCA floor. In other words the floor cannot be raised above 2500 feet due to IFR restrictions, no matter how much it would benefit VFR traffic.Adam Hunthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02524937335927976607noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6429311486394377221.post-31723736258886269402013-03-04T22:03:26.884-05:002013-03-04T22:03:26.884-05:00The base of the airspace in the southern TCA is al...The base of the airspace in the southern TCA is all C based at 2500, but in the north, at 4000.<br /><br />For those going south, this compresses E-W traffic between the river and the TCA - not desirable. If it were C/4000, we could transit at a reasonable altitude without VFR compression.<br /><br />In the north, the Gatineau hills make the C based at 4,000 also compress VFR traffic... <br /><br />Don't increase "safety" inside the TCA by decreasing it outside the TCA. As written, this is not a safe plan. Dan Dalyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08203094849718626365noreply@blogger.com