TCAS RA between two DH8 at Sudbury

[hydro]

A tower at a place like YSB is not taking control at 200-400 ft (minimums). Certainly there can be efficiency with a tower at ceilings of 1000 ft, and significant ones if the vis/ceilings are high enough to allow auto transfer of control but low enough that a crew doesn't want to depart VFR. (e.g. 3000 ft AGL ceilings) I don't have an FSS MF airport in my area anymore, but I thought the down and off requirement was removed? I'd have to look that one up.

[bobcaygeon]

With the FSS, the approach is limited to one aircraft at a time until complete or positive handoff to center versus lining up the arrivals 5 miles apart and sending them down the chute.

If Jazz doesn't cancel and you want to do the approach you have to wait until they are down and clear which could take 7-10 minutes on the crew.

Same goes for departures. IFR inbound forces crews to take VFR or wait.

Tower would fix that - but again only when weather is below vfr.

S.

Sudbury doesn't have radar coverage below 2000' AGL. They use North Bay's radar. How much of a difference would a tower make with that limitation?

[schnitzel2k3]

I don't know why I am arguing for a tower - because I made a joke that it might help but I don't think Sudbury has any need or budget for a tower.

I can't imagine a tower without some form of low level radar so that would likely be part of the package.

S.