Farewell, Oshawa Localizer

[photofly]

We loved you.

http://www.navcanada.ca/EN/products-and ... omm-EN.pdf

[whistlerboy02]

"NAV CANADA, the country's provider of civil air navigation services, completed an aeronautical
study to review the requirement for the localizer approach system"
I wonder what that study entails?...... interviewing people who live around the airport asking if they would like to see less traffic?
Where do you train on a Loc approach if you live anywhere between Kingston and Kitchener?
Buttonville till its gone, Trenton, Toronto Pearson, and Toronto Island all have better things to do with their airspace.

[photofly]

Where do you train on a Loc approach if you live anywhere between Kingston and Kitchener?

Hamilton, Kitchener.


This was my email to NavCanada on 14 November 2013:

I'd like to see the LOC approach retained, specifically for the LOC(BC) RWY 30 approach. ... We need to train pilots for a variety of different instrument approaches. There aren't many back course approaches in Canada perhaps but they're still in use worldwide. I believe this one at CYOO is the last in service anywhere near the GTA.

thank you for the consideration

And this was the reply:

Thank you for contacting NAV CANADA.

Your comments have been forwarded to Marcel Pinon, Manager of Level of Service and Aeronautical Studies for consideration.

Regards,

John Michael (J.M.) Fleming
NAV CANADA

Perhaps if some of you other lazy f*ckers had emailed too, they might have kept it. Doubtful, but possible.

[Oxi]

Yes it is great to fly a variety of approaches in training, real world do you think a private pilot is going to fly the LOC BC 30? Probably an RNAV, ILS or visual.

[Rookie50]

Maybe it's better that NavCan got the lead out and put LPV's in while I'm still alive.

http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/hea ... Canada.pdf

See from this list -- from FAA -- there is progress, anyway.......timmins, Sudbury.

[photofly]

Yes it is great to fly a variety of approaches in training, real world do you think a private pilot is going to fly the LOC BC 30? Probably an RNAV, ILS or visual.

They got rid of the localizer completely, so no chance of an ILS there now. Oshawa now has an NDB approach (strictly two, but they're the same with and without DME) and 4 RNAV approaches.

Maybe it's better that NavCan got the lead out and put LPV's in while I'm still alive.

The word from the NavCanada man with responsibility for this is that the timescale is set by the airport operators themselves: to have and maintain LPV minima the airport authority has to commission and pay for a detailed geographical survey just like they would for an ILS. They also have to commit to maintaining the survey. Any airport which is prepared to pay for all that gets the approach quickly.

[Rookie50]

Yes it is great to fly a variety of approaches in training, real world do you think a private pilot is going to fly the LOC BC 30? Probably an RNAV, ILS or visual.

They got rid of the localizer completely, so no chance of an ILS there now. Oshawa now has an NDB approach (strictly two, but they're the same with and without DME) and 4 RNAV approaches.

Maybe it's better that NavCan got the lead out and put LPV's in while I'm still alive.

The word from the NavCanada man with responsibility for this is that the timescale is set by the airport operators themselves: to have and maintain LPV minima the airport authority has to commission and pay for a detailed geographical survey just like they would for an ILS. They also have to commit to maintaining the survey. Any airport which is prepared to pay for all that gets the approach quickly.

Understand. Not necessarily to have 4 -- like Sudbury got -- even 1 would be a big improvement for some of these to a different runway than than their ILS

[photofly]

I imagine that once you've paid for the very expensive local survey, you can probably have as many as you like at no further cost.

[wan2fly99]

That sucks.

When I was flying more (last year) , always rented from DFC and practiced the LOC and BC approaches all the time to stay current.
I remember some of the vehicles did even have a GPS in there.

When renting there twin Atzec , it had a GPS but not certified.

Very dis-appointed now. When they shot down the ILS idea, that was another mistake.

So now when your satellite systems goes down yu do an NDB approach? Do people still remember how to do those?

[goingnowherefast]

That sucks.

When I was flying more (last year) , always rented from DFC and practiced the LOC and BC approaches all the time to stay current.
I remember some of the vehicles did even have a GPS in there.

When renting there twin Atzec , it had a GPS but not certified.

Very dis-appointed now. When they shot down the ILS idea, that was another mistake.

Surely it's time to upgrade to this millennium, put in a KLN89 . They go for dirt cheap on the used market because it's ancient technology, from before colours were discovered. How do you even fly around down there IFR without a GPS? Aren't they using T-routes that require some form of area nav?

So now when your satellite systems goes down yu do an NDB approach? Do people still remember how to do those?

Same thing you'd do when the GPS unit dies. Use use the other nav radio to fly an ILS, VOR, etc., maybe even at a different airport! If you do know how to fly an NDB still, then wonderful, most people don't anymore.

[photofly]

Surely it's time to upgrade to this millennium, put in a KLN89 . They go for dirt cheap on the used market because it's ancient technology,

Sounds like you only fly other people's airplanes! I'd have them all installed with GPS too as long as long as someone else pays. Sure the unit might be $1500 on eBay, but the certified IFR approved install with CDi interface, annunciatiors, flight test and paperwork and so on is still going to cost you $15k, just as it does for the latest Garmin unit.

[goingnowherefast]

I fly the plane my boss pays me to fly. Your correct, I don't pay for the plane.

Installation is in the area of 7-8 grand, so you could have a KLN89 flying for 10 grand (no waas). Older Garmin units are a bit more for a 430w/530w at 15-18 grand installed, and that's with WAAS for the LPV approaches.

With all the new T-routes in SW Ontario, ability to now fly direct, availability of RNAV approaches often with much lower minima, I'd say it's a good investment. If you can afford to feed the engines on an Aztec, and the annual bills too, then you can afford a 10 year old GPS unit.

As for the flight training world, I'd seriously question the quality of training if they don't teach you how to use an IFR GPS.

IFR approaches are dirt cheap (relatively speaking) to traditional approaches, so they're popping up everywhere. NDBs, localizers, and even some ILSs are disappearing in favour of GPS approaches. A standard LNAV is about 15-20 grand, an LPV approach is about 60 grand, where an ILS can be upwards of a million, plus all the maintenance and power requirements. Guess what airport operators are doing. Time to keep up with the times.

[Rookie50]

KLN 89......(shudders)

[Rockie]

In the States there are 3 times as many LPV approaches as there are ILS's most of which are 250 ft limits, but over 800 of them are 200 ft 1/2 sm. Compare that to a little over 1200 ILS approaches with virtually all of the effort focused on WAAS enabled LPV approach development and you begin to see which way this is going. And that doesn't even count GLS development which is a whole new world altogether.

TC and NavCanada are painfully slow catching on, but they are beginning to see Jesus when it comes to GNSS.

It's very unlikely they will spare a localizer approach, especially a back course, just for the sake of training exposure unless someone else is willing to chip in on the expense.