Unsafe ILS in Prince George......

[ils09]

So as some of you may know the ILS Rwy15 was offline for all of November and the beginning of December. We were told that it would be put online after NavCan flight checks the system due to the extended period that it was turned off.

Then one afternoon it was back online with no notice. We have been using it for the past 2 weeks to minimums with no problems.

Today Nav Canada's Challenger was up doing a flight check on the ILS and found that the Glidepath failed to meet the standards and was therefor NOTAMed offline.

I find it a but un-nerving that we were shooting ILS approaches to minimums for 2 weeks on a glidepath that was deemed unsafe after it was put back online without a flight check.

[Splatm]

What was the NOTAM saying it was out of service? Was there a cancelling NOTAM?

[Jeremy]

Ouch that's not good. I'd be chocked for sure. Wonder why they did that with all the construction going on. Maybe they thought the g/s shack was far enough away that it wouldn't be affected. The g/s errors probably had a lot to do with it being off-line last month as the temperatures changed rather than the construction. Either way a flight-check prior to switching it on just makes sense. Are you going to follow-up on this with Nav Can?

Tomorrow will be my first hop into YXS in a few weeks..hope the wx is good enough for the loc.

[ils09]

Hmm... follow this up with Nav Can? Any ideas. I dont want to stir the pot id just like some answers. Its just a bit discearning knowing that we were shooting a faulty glideslope for a few weeks. No who is to say whether it is outside of limits on the safe side or otherwise.

[tesox2]

So as some of you may know the ILS Rwy15 was offline for all of November and the beginning of December. We were told that it would be put online after NavCan flight checks the system due to the extended period that it was turned off.

Then one afternoon it was back online with no notice. We have been using it for the past 2 weeks to minimums with no problems.

Dont you think if you knew it was off and needed to be flight checked that you wouldnt be using it until you knew it was checked? Man, that seems quite irresponsible to me.

[ils09]

Irresponsible on my part? I dont think so. I would think that if Nav Canada says that it is safe and turns it online then it is safe to be online. I dont question every Minimum Vectoring altitude I get from Nav Canada that isnt on my chart.

I think that at some point there is a division in responsibilities. I am responsible for the safe operation of the flight and NavCan is responsible for traffic separation and upkeep of their equipment.

Im open to hear your opinion,

[freakonature]

I think a call to navcanada would have been apropriate. If it doesn't seem right it probably isn't.

[lilfssister]

Couple of questions spring to mind:

Was the ILS still NOTAMd unservicable during this period or was the NOTAM cancelled?

If it was still NOTAMd, was it amended to read something like "radiating for test purposes only, do not use for navigation"?

[justplanecrazy]

Irresponsible on my part? I dont think so. I would think that if Nav Canada says that it is safe and turns it online then it is safe to be online. I dont question every Minimum Vectoring altitude I get from Nav Canada that isnt on my chart.

I think that at some point there is a division in responsibilities. I am responsible for the safe operation of the flight and NavCan is responsible for traffic separation and upkeep of their equipment.

Im open to hear your opinion,

I'd suggest you ask Nav Can for an explanation. You obviously don't have all the facts and neither does anyone here. Spouting about it on here before you do is irresponsible. If they don't respond or have no explanation, then flame away.

[ils09]

There was no NOTAM pertaining to to ILS for the period between it being put online and now. Ans all of my info is from a brief exchange with the Vancouver Center Controller.

[lilfssister]

Interesting....

[altiplano]

If it was notam'd U/S what do you expect...

[the_professor]

I find it a but un-nerving that we were shooting ILS approaches to minimums for 2 weeks on a glidepath that was deemed unsafe after it was put back online without a flight check.

Hold on.

First: Do you know for a fact that the ILS was put back online without a flight check? I don't know what the standards are, but my experience has been that an ILS is always flight checked after any maintenance.

Second: ILS's are electronically monitored 24/7. Any unservicable condition indicated by an electronic source will normally immediately lead to a NOTAM U/S until further investigation can be completed. You cannot assume the ILS was unservicable at any point during those two weeks, within those electronic parameters. The flight check may have revealed new and unrelated issues with respect to the maintenance that happened two weeks ago and that fall outside of the specific electronic parameters/tolerances (i.e. "I think we should have those trees looked at.") If there is any doubt as to the reliablity of the device, it will be considered U/S. That is why flight checks are routinely conducted year-round on all Navaids around the country.

[twotterflogger]

So as some of you may know the ILS Rwy15 was offline for all of November and the beginning of December. We were told that it would be put online after NavCan flight checks the system due to the extended period that it was turned off.

Then one afternoon it was back online with no notice. We have been using it for the past 2 weeks to minimums with no problems.

Today Nav Canada's Challenger was up doing a flight check on the ILS and found that the Glidepath failed to meet the standards and was therefor NOTAMed offline.

I find it a but un-nerving that we were shooting ILS approaches to minimums for 2 weeks on a glidepath that was deemed unsafe after it was put back online without a flight check.

Ok, so you guys knew that it was U/S and used it prior to any Cancelling NOTAM was issued? Why? ''Because it ''seemed'' to work fine???
Either I miss read your post, or you guys knowingly used a U/S ILS because ''we thought'' it worked....

I hope I read that wrong... please tell me I did?!!!

[ils09]

yes you read it wrong!

The ILS was notamed U/S until xxxx date. On xxxx date the notam was extended for a week. Before that week was up there was a cancelling notam that put the ils back online. We used it as did Westjet and Jazz.
.
here is a bit of background info.....

While the ILS was NOTAM'd u/s we visited the tower and the controller told us that they couldnt put it online until it was flight checked. Then one day we were flying and we were told by centre that the ILS15 is back online. However i know for a fact that no flight check was conducted.

Then today NAVCAN flight checked the ILS15 and centre told us that it failed the flight check and had been notam'd as gp unservicable. That is all the info i have.

If centre tells me that the ILS is back online and clears me fo that approach i would assume that it is infact certified accurate and online since they are working for the same agency that ensures system accuracy.

[tesox2]

If you are being cleared for an approach by a controller, then(thanks freak) that approach should be serviceable. I think you should "stir the pot", if this instance is as you describe, there sounds to be a miscommunication somewhere that could lead to a very dangerous condition. I suggest you pursue this.

[swede]

Have you ever driven downtown in PG? The whole place is a wreck - the infrastructure is a dilapidated mess, even tho there seems to be no end of money for new retail buildings. The mayor and council are purported to be totally corrupt, into bribes and blackmail and who knows what else, and they run YXS. So connect the dots, don't be surprised at anything and don't trust anything you are told around that dump.

[Go Guns]

As far as Prince George and infrastructure, it's way better here "than" (with special thanks to freakonature) Kelowna. Somebody actually did some city planning here, as opposed to just letting the population increase without adding roads and what not.

Now the PGAA, I'm with you on that one.

[freakonature]

Hey, Go Gun's, why don't you see if you can trade your THEN for tesox2's THAN?

[Go Guns]

Ahh, the grammar police. I'll talk to tesox2 and see what we can work out.

[tesox2]

Thanks freakonature, Im quite attached to my than, so its not for trade. I appreciate getting grammar lessons from a person who has incorrectly spelled words on 7 of their 13 total posts

call to navcanada would have been apropriate

How would that same senario play out if it was a tower

When it was anounced that fss was taking

daily,and do apreciate the work

etc........

You appear to have trouble knowing when to double a letter in your spelling, since I am not interested in merely bashing you, I would also like to help educate you! This is an area where lots of good spellers are unsure.
So, let's look at the problem.

If, for example, we want to write the word plan + ing,
is it planing or planning?
Do we leave the base word alone or do we double the n?
Are we planing a trip to China or planning a trip?

Luckily there's a very useful pattern to help us.
It might sound complicated at first but it's
one of the most useful patterns to know about.

If the base word has:
one syllable
one short vowel
(the short vowels are ham, bed, lip, rot, gun)
one consonant at the end
you double the final consonant when you add a vowel suffix

Sounds complicated doesn't it? But some examples will help:
slip has one syllable, one short vowel (i) and one consonant (p) at the end so:

slip + ed = slipped (double p) and:
bed + ing = bedding, flat + est = flattest
fun + y = funny hot + er = hotter

When you add a consonant suffix, the base word doesn't change:
bag + ful = bagful, wet + ness = wetness

Cheers,
T

[V1 Rotate]

The 1CD DME in CYCD (Nanaimo) has been having similar issues. The NOTAMC date getting pushed back every time it's supposed to be back online, then once online the signal is intermittent. Back off line. But if that gets my company to put a decent GPS unit in my machine I'm all for it.

[freakonature]

Thank's T

So in a sentence it would be, I slipped a bagful of wetness in your bedding?


Freak

[tesox2]

EXCELLENT freak!!! You are well on your way to mastering the utilization of double letters. Next lesson we will learn the polite utilization of slipping bagfuls of wetness into other mens bedding!

haha

[trey kule]

You mentioned the problem was with the glidepath. And you did not know if it was on the safe side or not.

The question that I am wondering is when you went over the beacon on your glidepath, what did the altitude show? Was it correct or which way was it out?

Seems to me that if it was out for "a few weeks", you should have seen some sort of error when you checked your altitude at beacon passage. After all, is that not one of the reasons that it is there.

Better check all your facts before you talk to nav Canada. Like "shooting to minimums for the last few weeks"

Just my thoughts.