Langley Airport Manager Closes Runways to Departures

[AirFrame]

As their latest escalation in the dispute between the APM and NavCanada, the APM at Langley has NOTAM'd closed all runways during tower hours until EOD today. NOTAM was issued on Tuesday around Noon.

https://www.langleyadvancetimes.com/new ... nd-family/

[Donald]

If it's truly a "mercy" flight, declare it as such and depart at your discretion.

[Rooster69]

What is going on over there? Is it a dispute over noise?

[digits_]

Weird that a manager would close his own airport. I would understand it better if ATC closed the airport to screw over the airport manager.

[linecrew]

The article says it's a dispute between the federal regulator and the airport. That's TC not NAV CANADA. I wonder if it has to do with the new airport TP312 attestation requirements.

[digits_]

Okay, fair enough. Still, why would you close your own airport to get back at TC?

[AirFrame]

It's not between TC and the APM, TC has been mediating discussions between NavCanada and the APM all month.

This is an ongoing dispute between the APM and the tower at YNJ. NavCanada at YNJ reports five times the number of CADORS of any of the other small airports in the lower mainland... ZBB, YPK, YXX. In the case of ZBB, it's five times the CADORS and something like one third the number of movements (ie. YNJ has one third the movements of ZBB). This has been highlighted to TC, and word is spreading in the community beyond the pilots to the general public that there's something going on here that may be worth looking into. If YNJ is that much more dangerous, it could result in closure. If it's not, and YNJ is just logging every time someone farts "because they can", and other airports aren't, then why would they do it? It's been speculated that there are bonuses involved that are related to the number of CADORs filed.

In an attempt to stop some of the CADORs, the APM added markings to some of the taxiways to help communicate to pilots and aircraft owners where the controlled areas are, where people can and can't drive their cars when coming out to work on their planes, etc. A number of these markings were non-standard airport markings, and have caused a lot of confusion, and in fact, increased the number of CADORs. This has led the tower to strictly interpret their operations manual, and that's resulted in a run-up bay becoming unusable because of its proximity to the adjacent runway and taxiway. Without that runup bay, people are using the helipads for run-ups instead, and that blocks helicopter movements, and the APM is getting a lot of money from the helicopter companies on the field... So that had to stop somehow.

It's a huge p*ssing contest to see who can reach highest on the wall. Unfortunately the local GA fixed wing pilots are the wall.

Oh, and the NOTAM has been extended to Friday 19th. Hopefully this doesn't become a forever-extending NOTAM like runway 03 at Victoria.

[pelmet]

Why don’t they try some different thinking. In my experience it is busy enough for a tower but is ground really of much use at this airport. They just tell you to do what you were going to do anyways.

How about making YNJ an uncontrolled airport for ground movements(tower can remind each landing aircraft to taxi well clear of 19). NavCanada can save some money and pilots can save the hassle of being micromanaged.

[photofly]

... that's resulted in a run-up bay becoming unusable because of its proximity to the adjacent runway and taxiway. Without that runup bay, people are using the helipads for run-ups instead, and that blocks helicopter movements, and the APM is getting a lot of money from the helicopter companies on the field... So that had to stop somehow.

ATC only has control of the manoeuvring area: runways and taxiways. Other parts of the movement area are uncontrolled. They have no power to stop anyone using a run up area unless it's actually part of a taxiway.

[CpnCrunch]

Sounds like management took a perceived problem and successfully turned it into an actual problem.

[stabilizedapproach]

It's not between TC and the APM, TC has been mediating discussions between NavCanada and the APM all month.

…

If YNJ is that much more dangerous, it could result in closure.  If it's not, and YNJ is just logging every time someone farts "because they can", and other airports aren't, then why would they do it?  It's been speculated that there are bonuses involved that are related to the number of CADORs filed.

I think it was just an uninformed journalist who threw around the word “regulator” and caused confusion as to who and what TC and NAV are.

The number of CADORS coming out of Langley still amazes me. It's the smallest towered airport producing the largest number of CADORs, kind of like a baby making waste... always a surprise how much a baby can make. Maybe it’s the lack of traffic that allows them time to write up every minor infraction… but unless there is a secret deal between TC and YNJ controllers, I can assure you no bonuses are handed out for write ups… some just take the responsibility of reporting quite (too) seriously. In fairness, not everything they write up is ridiculous but they do seem to get a lot of things other airports don’t get, like a higher number of NORDO aircraft. But knowing the Langley reputation, maybe it’s better to just pretend you’re NORDO instead of getting yelled at for non-compliance and then still getting written up after.

On a lighter note, Langley can’t write up anyone if no one flies… just very unfortunate that the first day of closures happened to be the day many GA pilots rallied together to help flood victims. I know it grounded quite a few out of Langley who wanted to help.

[AirFrame]

... that's resulted in a run-up bay becoming unusable because of its proximity to the adjacent runway and taxiway. Without that runup bay, people are using the helipads for run-ups instead, and that blocks helicopter movements, and the APM is getting a lot of money from the helicopter companies on the field... So that had to stop somehow.

ATC only has control of the manoeuvring area: runways and taxiways. Other parts of the movement area are uncontrolled. They have no power to stop anyone using a run up area unless it's actually part of a taxiway.

Aye, and there's the rub: They made the run-up bay part of the taxiway.

[photofly]

I know I’m missing something big, and this is about more than just a runup bay, but why not run up somewhere else? Only takes a few seconds, if you’re quick.

[CpnCrunch]

Most airports don't have any "run up bay" and you just use whatever taxiway or apron seems appropriate.

Searching for runup or run-up in the cadors I only see only about 12 since the beginning of time, so I can't see why this is a major issue. A handful of cases of pilots doing a runup on a taxiway without getting clearance, or going to a taxiway they haven't been cleared to after their runup. If it was 12 a day it would be an issue. But 12 in 20 years ... is this really worth having a tantrum over?

If pilots aren't realising they are entering a taxiway, perhaps they need to rethink their signage.

[photofly]

Safe, orderly and, er, expeditious… :whistle:

[AirFrame]

I know I’m missing something big, and this is about more than just a runup bay, but why not run up somewhere else? Only takes a few seconds, if you’re quick.

Yep. Would seem to be a perfectly reasonable solution, wouldn't it?

[AirFrame]

Searching for runup or run-up in the cadors I only see only about 12 since the beginning of time, so I can't see why this is a major issue. A handful of cases of pilots doing a runup on a taxiway without getting clearance, or going to a taxiway they haven't been cleared to after their runup. If it was 12 a day it would be an issue. But 12 in 20 years ... is this really worth having a tantrum over?

Runups don't even scratch the surface of CADORs at YNJ. They report five times the CADORs of any of the other small airports in the region, and on a fraction of the movements. For anything from not calling ground immediately on leaving the runway, to NORDO traffic clipping the edge of the zone.

If pilots aren't realising they are entering a taxiway, perhaps they need to rethink their signage.

That was the focus of a recent safety survey done of the airport by the airport and reviewed by TC. The markings that have evolved at YNJ over the last few years don't conform to standard requirements and as such are causing confusion with licensed pilots and students alike. Students learn the non-standard stuff at YNJ and then get yelled at when they go to another airport and do something that to them seems "normal."

[stabilizedapproach]

The markings that have evolved at YNJ over the last few years don't conform to standard requirements and as such are causing confusion with licensed pilots and students alike.

I’ve never seen them but can you give an example for what’s non-standard? Curious now

[AirFrame]

I’ve never seen them but can you give an example for what’s non-standard? Curious now

The one that comes to mind is the two foot wide red and white checkerboard bar across a taxiway to delineate a division between a controlled vs non-controlled taxiway. This replaced a single yellow line. I believe the checkerboard may have been painted out to be replaced with... I'm not sure yet.

[CpnCrunch]

The one that comes to mind is the two foot wide red and white checkerboard bar across a taxiway to delineate a division between a controlled vs non-controlled taxiway. This replaced a single yellow line. I believe the checkerboard may have been painted out to be replaced with... I'm not sure yet.

That's ridiculous! Here is how to do it:

https://www.google.ca/maps/place/Victor ... 23.4288217