Anybody here get their private aerodrome in the CFS?

[C-GKNT]

I am considering getting my home heli-pad registered in the Canada Flight Supplement.

Has anybody here had their private strip/heli-pad registered?

Any good reasons for or against doing this?

Should I do it myself or hire a consultant?

Thanks in advance,

Glenn

[blue thunder]

I had my office helipad licensed with TC (CBC6). A bit of red tape, but in the long run I think it was beneficial to do so. I did hire a consultant to help me out, but it wasn't a high cost. Lot's of paperwork, but once you have it, it is easy to keep up.

[Meatservo]

The water aerodrome supplement has all kinds of crazy shit in it. I imagine if some goofy lodge somewhere on some lake in Saskatchewan gets a CFS entry, you should be able to.

[fleet16b]

As someone that has an airstrip, I do not post it in the CFS as I prefer to control who lands there and who does not.
I have actually had people show up drive by 5 no trespassing signs and demand the use of it as if its their right to do so
Putting it I the CFS just invites more of the same IMHO

You should ask yourself:
Why do you want it opened to the public ?
Do I mind complete strangers dropping in on your property.
Is it safe for the general aviation crowd
Is there liability involved if someone comes in and there is an accident
All very valid things to consider

[AirFrame]

I suspect one of the reasons people would want to record it in the CFS is that they believe it makes the aerodrome more legitimate when the neighbours all band together to close it. New legislation is going to *require* public consultation before any new aerodrome is registered, and for that matter, before any significant work is done to an existing aerodrome. Want to build a hangar? Public consultation. Want to pave a taxiway? Public consultation. But airports are under federal jurisdiction, you say? Doesn't matter... The feds don't want to manage it anymore. They've handed the keys to the store over to the NIMBY's instead. Less airports = less headache for government.

@fleet16b, if you have it marked Prior Permission Required, that would catch most of the people flying in. If you've got people driving in from the road side, ignoring No Trespassing signs, listing it or not listing it in the CFS won't change that.

[fleet16b]

I suspect one of the reasons people would want to record it in the CFS is that they believe it makes the aerodrome more legitimate when the neighbours all band together to close it. New legislation is going to *require* public consultation before any new aerodrome is registered, and for that matter, before any significant work is done to an existing aerodrome. Want to build a hangar? Public consultation. Want to pave a taxiway? Public consultation. But airports are under federal jurisdiction, you say? Doesn't matter... The feds don't want to manage it anymore. They've handed the keys to the store over to the NIMBY's instead. Less airports = less headache for government.

@fleet16b, if you have it marked Prior Permission Required, that would catch most of the people flying in. If you've got people driving in from the road side, ignoring No Trespassing signs, listing it or not listing it in the CFS won't change that.

Airframe
All very good points. The Gov is determined to eliminate these small strips and have found a good way to do it without having to dirty their hands anymore
I choose not to list so that few will know that it even exists
Your right about the no trespassing issue . I meant it as an example of the "self entitlement " issues we now see in society.
The "prior permission " option was something I was not aware of
Thanks

[linecrew]

The "prior permission " option was something I was not aware of
Thanks

For aerodromes that have it, it appears under the OPR part right after "Reg". Some places have "PN" (prior notice).

[CpnCrunch]

All very good points. The Gov is determined to eliminate these small strips and have found a good way to do it without having to dirty their hands anymore

I don't think they necessarily want to eliminate the small strips. They just don't really care either way.

I suspect that if you own a small strip in a rural area that has a handful of movements a week, and you're on good terms with your neighbours, it's not going to be a problem.

[C-GKNT]

Thank you everybody for your replies. I would definitively add Prior Permission Required.

Liability is always a concern but I carry 2MM smooth of insurance and have confirmed that my liability coverage extends to my home heliport so I am comfortable with that.

Somebody here hired a consultant and told me it cost him about $4,000. Seems like a lot to me but I don't really know what is involved. Can anybody recommend a consultant for me (by PM if you prefer)?

Glenn

[westcoastwonder]

I have had a private helipad at my home for 12 years. The process was pretty simple, a bit of paperwork. There was a guy that came out and inspected it, no big deal.
I get a notice every couple of years asking if anything has changed. ( phone contacts etc.)
I have never had anyone drop in, either by road or air. I have had a few complaints as the semi rural area has now been built up quite a bit.
Transport Canada has deflected the complaints and called me to tell me exact nature of the complaint. Noise or low flight. We have discussed ways of mitigating the situation that caused the complaint. I would do it again if I move.

[skymarc]

Had to register my private airfield when I decide to get approval for an IFR RNAV approach.
Put in PPR to keep it private.
Most aircraft insurance will give you private airfield insurance for very little cost.
Its easier to fill IFR to your field as now you are in Nav Canada computer.

[dirtdr]

Had to register my private airfield when I decide to get approval for an IFR RNAV approach.
Put in PPR to keep it private.
Most aircraft insurance will give you private airfield insurance for very little cost.
Its easier to fill IFR to your field as now you are in Nav Canada computer.

What all did it require to get you own rnav?

[digits_]

Had to register my private airfield when I decide to get approval for an IFR RNAV approach.

Doesn't that cost a fortune

Very interesting to hear how you accomplished this!

[RatherBeFlying]

TC doesn't seem to care one way or the other about small aerodromes.

Registration does establish a record of use that can come in handy when a developer puts in a rural estate, ranchette, acreage subdivision followed by noise complaints to TC.

Parkland Airport ignited complaints from locals who had the ear of local MPs, whereupon TC has put up regulations about public consultation, the expense of which may exceed the value of the rural land.

Given that Parkland were refugees from Edmonton Downtown who no longer wanted to have any dealings with the Edmonton Airport Authority, it might have been helpful if said public consultation regulations applied to the closing of heavily used airports.

[AirFrame]

The catch-22 is that with the requirement for public consultation now, you can't register an aerodrome without showing that the consultation was done. Good luck getting community approval from most communities, you'll essentially have to be in the middle of nowhere to build new, and if you try to register your backyard strip you're likely to end up shut down completely!

I'm sure the public consultation regulations will apply to the closing of airports... But the pilots and businesses based there will be outnumbered by the residents of the community at any hearing... Closing is easy. Opening is hard.

[skymarc]

Money, thats about it.

Had to register my private airfield when I decide to get approval for an IFR RNAV approach.
Put in PPR to keep it private.
Most aircraft insurance will give you private airfield insurance for very little cost.
Its easier to fill IFR to your field as now you are in Nav Canada computer.

What all did it require to get you own rnav?

[CpnCrunch]

Estimated costs here:

https://www.aopa.org/advocacy/advocacy- ... t-approach

Seems pretty reasonable actually. About the same cost of installing an IFR GPS in your plane.

[Prairie Chicken]

It didn't use to be difficult, and still doesn't look hard enough to warrant a consultant. See here: https://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/ ... 2-1219.htm or contact the regional Aerodrome Safety office of TCCA (or whatever they're calling themselves now).

Do be cognizant of the differences between an airport (licensed by TC) and a registered aerodrome (registered by NC at request of TC). The two are very different with different regulatory requirements. Once registered, there is a regulatory requirement is to ensure the information published is accurate, and continues to be so. Sadly, many aerodrome operators fail to do this.

Has the requirement for public consultation become legislation? If so, I can't comment on that, but the link posted above makes no reference public consultations. An admittedly brief Google search indicates the consultation regs are still in draft, and having quickly read them over, they don't look too onerous. See here: https://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/programs/aerod ... -2981.html

[pelmet]

The CFS is almost as thick as a big city telephone book these days(if telephone books exist anymore). Would it be that difficult to have an east and west version with Manitoba in both(sort of like the CFL).

[Beefitarian]

The CFS is almost as thick as a big city telephone book these days(if telephone books exist anymore). Would it be that difficult to have an east and west version with Manitoba in both(sort of like the CFL).

It will happen soon enough and the best part will be, each edition will be about the same price as the current ones.