CYBW a dangerous place to fly???

scrambled_legs · Post by **scrambled_legs** » Sat Sep 13, 2008 5:01 pm

A friend of mine works at CYBW and was telling me that this past while there has been a rash of crashes and close calls. I was bored so I did a quick check through the Cadors and came up with 24 collisions or loss of control in a little over a year and some of the other Cadors are even scarier....

http://www.tc.gc.ca/Aviation/applicatio ... Position=7

http://www.tc.gc.ca/Aviation/applicatio ... osition=16

http://www.tc.gc.ca/Aviation/applicatio ... osition=23

http://www.tc.gc.ca/Aviation/applicatio ... osition=30

http://www.tc.gc.ca/Aviation/applicatio ... osition=35

http://www.tc.gc.ca/Aviation/applicatio ... osition=45

http://www.tc.gc.ca/Aviation/applicatio ... osition=46

http://www.tc.gc.ca/Aviation/applicatio ... osition=49

http://www.tc.gc.ca/Aviation/applicatio ... osition=52

http://www.tc.gc.ca/Aviation/applicatio ... osition=53

http://www.tc.gc.ca/Aviation/applicatio ... osition=55

http://www.tc.gc.ca/Aviation/applicatio ... osition=57

http://www.tc.gc.ca/Aviation/applicatio ... osition=58

http://www.tc.gc.ca/Aviation/applicatio ... osition=60

http://www.tc.gc.ca/Aviation/applicatio ... osition=82

http://www.tc.gc.ca/Aviation/applicatio ... osition=84

http://www.tc.gc.ca/Aviation/applicatio ... osition=89

http://www.tc.gc.ca/Aviation/applicatio ... osition=94

http://www.tc.gc.ca/Aviation/applicatio ... osition=94

http://www.tc.gc.ca/Aviation/applicatio ... osition=97

http://www.tc.gc.ca/Aviation/applicatio ... sition=117

http://www.tc.gc.ca/Aviation/applicatio ... sition=118

http://www.tc.gc.ca/Aviation/applicatio ... sition=119

http://www.tc.gc.ca/Aviation/applicatio ... sition=120

For the field that I work at, this is unheard of. I thought this might just be operation normal at large volume training fields but CZBB during the same time period only had 3. Is it something in the water, or what is causing this?

Duncan Idaho · Post by **Duncan Idaho** » Sat Sep 13, 2008 5:12 pm

Unforunately all the links display the following message:

INTERNAL SERVER ERROR

The Web server is incapable of performing the request. Please try your request again later. Please contact the Web server's administrator if this problem persists.

MyMeowCat · Post by **MyMeowCat** » Sat Sep 13, 2008 11:19 pm

Yeah---the poster before me said there's an internal server error...looks like TC is doing some maintenance stuuf over the weekend and hopes to have things running during "prime time" week day office hours. I haven't read those CADORS links but I hear what you are saying.

I have my own business and work part-time as a contractor with this one oil company and the President asked me to do more hours and work full time and to give up flight training. I initially refused but came back and accepted --- he asked me "why ?" and ONE of my many reasons was that is dangerous. There were many other reasons (search my posts if interested). I told him: "I bet before the end of Summer 2008 that someone at CYBW will die" --- sure enough somebody did die (although he was flying an experimental homebuilt) --- this was not I was thinking (I was thinking Cessna or Diamond on training lesson) -- so this didn't really count in my book.

Anyways --- I quit flight training (hoping to wait out the instructor shortage thing, etc) ... but yeah --- CYBW is just "too" busy. In my Ground School many of the students described it as being a gong-show.

I haven't flown at CYBW for quite a whil enow -- but I stay awake some nights wondering wht it is like these days --- can someone comment how CYBW is doing ?

Shep · Post by **Shep** » Sun Sep 14, 2008 9:33 am

Its still as bad as ever.

Shep · Post by **Shep** » Sun Sep 14, 2008 10:33 am

I hate to make generalizations but the fact you fly out of cybw "all the time" may indicate your experience level. Its only a matter of time before they have a major AVOIDABLE accident there.

Rudder Bug · Post by **Rudder Bug** » Sun Sep 14, 2008 11:07 am

CYBW = Springbank

The Springbank airport is located 10 kilometres west of Calgary City, slightly north of the Trans-Canada Highway #1.

Dave T · Post by **Dave T** » Sun Sep 14, 2008 11:37 am

I wouldn't go as far as some in this thread saying that it is dangerous but I will say that it has gotten to the point where it isn't the good training airport it used to be.

There is just to much traffic mixed together with student pilots and private pilots. Back in the day it was very good for training because it was mainly a training airport where pilots also got used to being controlled and talking to controllers. These days there are a lot more commercial operators going in combined with tons of training aircraft as well. I think the controllers do a great job with what they have to work with and most of the student pilots are used to the busy airspace and can usually handle it.

I agree that when you have 5 airplanes with student pilots in the circuit, another 5 airplanes trying to come in from other flights and then a King Air or jet trying to land it gets a little hairy. This is when a student pilot making a mistake can turn really bad really fast.

I don't have a solution for the problem, maybe restricting training flights or having some kind of a slot system just to avoid the busy gong show situations that occur. I'm interested to hear what people flying the on a regular basis think.

wxguy · Post by **wxguy** » Sun Sep 14, 2008 11:47 am

Keep in mind it is one of the top 5 busiest airports in Canada, and that almost all of the traffic is condensed into day VFR conditions.

scrambled_legs · Post by **scrambled_legs** » Mon Sep 15, 2008 5:00 pm

Boundary Bay pushes more numbers than Springbank with even more training schools, less commercial traffic and less VFR days. Like I said in the original post, they've only had 3 collisions or loss of control over the same time period that Springbank has had 24. None of the incidents at Springbank appeared to be due to the traffic volume. Most appeared to be bad landings, with the nosewheel collapsing, or running off the runway etc. Two of them involved fatalities. A number of them were homebuilt aircraft. Is it a bunch of cowboys getting their licence too soon and jumping in planes built in the barn, or what would cause this.

There are a number of other close calls with students not listening to ATC in the CADORS, but those were not the ones that I was referring too. That's a whole different topic and not one that I want to be involved with. Pandora's watching with her box...

scrambled_legs · Post by **scrambled_legs** » Tue Sep 16, 2008 7:56 am

I guess the links still aren't working. I'm not sure how to post them so here's the Cador's numbers, you can search for them if you want or someone more computer literate can make the links.

2007C1126
2007C1552
2007C1806
2007C1929
2007C1930
2007C2127
2007C2456
2007C2462
2007C2917
2007C3032
2007C3086
2007C3473
2007C3568
2008C0081
2008C0326
2008C0759
2008C1370
2008C1402
2008C1493
2008C1825
2008C1977
2008C3004
2008C3069
2008C3140
2008C3346

Widow · Post by **Widow** » Tue Sep 16, 2008 8:25 am

The CADORs system does not allow a direct link to a specific CADORs record.

Shiny Side Up · Post by **Shiny Side Up** » Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:44 am

Is Springbank a dangerous place? Hardly. It is a busy place and a growing place though. I have some complaints about it being a bit poorly planned, especially with its continually growing maze of hangars.

There are lots of points to consider when viewing the "accident prone" nature it may be percieved to be having right now. There are lots of "new" pilots to the airport in recent years, both having moved to the area and a big surge in interests in flight training. It sits at a lot higher field elevation than most airports in Canada (4000' ASL) and has a close proximity to the Rocky Mountains. Construction in expansion and a constantly changing aerodrome enviornment also contribute. One could also probably bring the current Albertan socio-economic level into the equation as well.

None of these are excuses for smashing up airplanes though.

privateer · Post by **privateer** » Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:51 am

scrambled_legs says: Boundary Bay pushes more numbers than Springbank with even more training schools, less commercial traffic and less VFR days. Like I said in the original post, they've only had 3 collisions or loss of control over the same time period that Springbank has had 24. None of the incidents at Springbank appeared to be due to the traffic volume. Most appeared to be bad landings, with the nosewheel collapsing, or running off the runway etc. Two of them involved fatalities. A number of them were homebuilt aircraft. Is it a bunch of cowboys getting their licence too soon and jumping in planes built in the barn, or what would cause this.

There are a number of other close calls with students not listening to ATC in the CADORS, but those were not the ones that I was referring too. That's a whole different topic and not one that I want to be involved with. Pandora's watching with her box...

I have to agree CZBB is far worse than Springbank could be. Just look at whats around that airport, 1500' class C airspace, YVR next door, high traffic Corridors, class G airfield 1 1/2 miles from the rwy, and USA just south. Talk about a GONG SHOW!

scrambled_legs · Post by **scrambled_legs** » Tue Sep 16, 2008 12:21 pm

Here's a little bit of an idea of what I'm referring to:

Aug 16, 2008 - The pilot of a Cessna 206 owned by **** reported inbound to Springbank with a nose gear problem (due to running into a set of power lines). He conducted a low pass and Tower confirmed that the gear was turned 90 degrees. The aircraft subsequently landed safely with no damage.

Aug 20 - A private Piper PA-18 Cub ground looped upon landing on Runway 16 at Springbank and the landing gear collapsed; there were no injuries to the two occupants. Minimal impact on airport operations.

Aug 25 - The pilot of a private Mooney 20 was doing circuits at Springbank and on the third takeoff, the engine sputtered and the pilot rejected the takeoff. It was reported that the left main brake grabbed and the pilot lost control of the aircraft, which struck two taxiway signs and the airport wind sock. The pilot was not injured but the aircraft received substantial damage. TSB report to follow.

Sep 10 - The pilot of a private Diamond DA-40 was doing circuits at Springbank and while conducting a touch and go on Runway 25, the aircraft touched down, exited the runway surface, returned to the runway and departed. The aircraft returned to land without further incident. There was no reported damage.

Sep 11 - A private Cessna 150 was inbound to Springbank after a flight from Airdrie and was on final for Runway 34 when the pilot declared an emergency due to engine failure. The aircraft landed in a field approximately 1/2 mile south of the threshold of Runway 34. There were no reported injuries or damage. TSB report to follow

All this in less than a month?

imarai · Post by **imarai** » Tue Sep 16, 2008 1:18 pm

For the month of June 2008, Boundary Bay ranked 4th in Canada for total movements, and Springbank ranked 12th. Boundary Bay recorded 7,754 total movements, and Springbank recorded 6,004. Boundary Bay had 1,510 private aircraft movements, and Springbank had 1,804. Averaged out, Boundary Bay had approximately 3 to 4 more aircraft movements an hour than Springbank. Springbank has a VOR, DME and an ILS for training purposes, Boundary Bay does not.

SierraPoppa · Post by **SierraPoppa** » Tue Sep 16, 2008 1:19 pm

scrambled_legs wrote:Here's a little bit of an idea of what I'm referring to:

Aug 16, 2008 - The pilot of a Cessna 206 owned by **** reported inbound to Springbank with a nose gear problem (due to running into a set of power lines). He conducted a low pass and Tower confirmed that the gear was turned 90 degrees. The aircraft subsequently landed safely with no damage.

Aug 20 - A private Piper PA-18 Cub ground looped upon landing on Runway 16 at Springbank and the landing gear collapsed; there were no injuries to the two occupants. Minimal impact on airport operations.

Aug 25 - The pilot of a private Mooney 20 was doing circuits at Springbank and on the third takeoff, the engine sputtered and the pilot rejected the takeoff. It was reported that the left main brake grabbed and the pilot lost control of the aircraft, which struck two taxiway signs and the airport wind sock. The pilot was not injured but the aircraft received substantial damage. TSB report to follow.

Sep 10 - The pilot of a private Diamond DA-40 was doing circuits at Springbank and while conducting a touch and go on Runway 25, the aircraft touched down, exited the runway surface, returned to the runway and departed. The aircraft returned to land without further incident. There was no reported damage.

Sep 11 - A private Cessna 150 was inbound to Springbank after a flight from Airdrie and was on final for Runway 34 when the pilot declared an emergency due to engine failure. The aircraft landed in a field approximately 1/2 mile south of the threshold of Runway 34. There were no reported injuries or damage. TSB report to follow
All this in less than a month?

..and all of these equate to CYBW being dangerous, how?

Very poor choice of thread title.

SierraPoppa · Post by **SierraPoppa** » Tue Sep 16, 2008 1:37 pm

imarai wrote:For the month of June 2008, Boundary Bay ranked 4th in Canada for total movements, and Springbank ranked 12th. Boundary Bay recorded 7,754 total movements, and Springbank recorded 6,004. Boundary Bay had 1,510 private aircraft movements, and Springbank had 1,804. Averaged out, Boundary Bay had approximately 3 to 4 more aircraft movements an hour than Springbank. Springbank has a VOR, DME and an ILS for training purposes, Boundary Bay does not.

Wow talk about a mish-mash of numbers.

The rankings you quote are for total movements.

But you are not actually quoting "total movements" here, but only "itinerant movements".

What is the relevance of the private aircraft movements numbers, these are meaningless.

How do you calculate the movements per hour from any these numbers?

scrambled_legs · Post by **scrambled_legs** » Tue Sep 16, 2008 2:30 pm

SierraPoppa wrote:
..and all of these equate to CYBW being dangerous, how?

Very poor choice of thread title.

That's exactly the reason why there are three ??? behind the title. I don't know what to call it or why there are 24 accidents in a little over a year, but I'm sure that is way above average and probably the worst accident rate for any field in Canada. I just had it pointed out to me by a friend and thought I'd pass it on. I personally don't think Springbank is a dangerous place to fly but the numbers definitely say something different.

I was looking through the CADORS for loss of control or collisions from June 2007 till Sep 2008. During that time period there were:
3 incidents in Boundary Bay (190,000 movements last year)
4 in Buttonville (170,000 movements last year)
3 in Kitchener (100,000 movements last year)
3 in Pitt Meadows (100,000 movements last year)
and 24 in Springbank including 2 fatalities. (180,000 movements last year)

I'm no statistician but that seems like a pretty significant number in comparison to similar airports. Do you have a better thread title to sum up that point?

wxguy · Post by **wxguy** » Tue Sep 16, 2008 2:36 pm

Which two fatalities are you referring to? The fatality in December 2007 was not at the airport.

SierraPoppa · Post by **SierraPoppa** » Tue Sep 16, 2008 2:43 pm

scrambled_legs wrote:Do you have a better thread title to sum up that point?

Something along the lines of "Springbank 24 accidents or incidents in one year...why?"

scrambled_legs · Post by **scrambled_legs** » Tue Sep 16, 2008 2:45 pm

wxguy, I was referring to all Cadors under CYBW as well as all Cadors filed under the other airports. I believe that was the only one that didn't take place on the field but was still filed under CYBW due to its proximity to and relevance to CYBW.

wxguy · Post by **wxguy** » Tue Sep 16, 2008 4:23 pm

scrambled_legs wrote: I believe that was the only one that didn't take place on the field but was still filed under CYBW due to its proximity to and relevance to CYBW.

Ah ok.

The only reason I can think of the high number of CADORS, is instructor turnover. Is there a higher rate in Alberta than in other areas?

SierraPoppa · Post by **SierraPoppa** » Tue Sep 16, 2008 4:38 pm

scrambled_legs wrote:wxguy, I was referring to all Cadors under CYBW as well as all Cadors filed under the other airports. I believe that was the only one that didn't take place on the field but was still filed under CYBW due to its proximity to and relevance to CYBW.

It could also be questioned as to whether or not the controllers at YBW are being more diligent in their reporting of some of these incidents than staff at other airports may be.

Although that being said it shouldn't explain these particular occurrences, some of the other CADORS can be explained that way but not these.

scrambled_legs · Post by **scrambled_legs** » Wed Sep 17, 2008 9:54 am

I kind of doubt that CYBW reports more than other the other fields. During the same time period, the number of CADORS that were filed, minus the ones already mentioned, were:

145 Boundary Bay (190k movements)
85 CYBW (180k movements)
136 Buttonville (170k movements)
107 Pitt Meadows (100k movements)
87 Kitchener/Waterloo (100k movements)

SierraPoppa · Post by **SierraPoppa** » Wed Sep 17, 2008 10:09 am

scrambled_legs wrote:I kind of doubt that CYBW reports more than other the other fields. During the same time period, the number of CADORS that were filed, minus the ones already mentioned, were:

145 Boundary Bay (190k movements)
85 CYBW (180k movements)
136 Buttonville (170k movements)
107 Pitt Meadows (100k movements)
87 Kitchener/Waterloo (100k movements)

I'm curious, all these CADORS reports are quite new to me, is this NavCanada policy or something?

I've read a few and they seem quite petty, for example, a guy enters the zone without clearance you file a CADORS? In my day you'd have a little chat with him over a coffee when he got down, and everyone was happy.

Now you file a complaint against the guy and enforcement have a word with him, that makes a lot of sense...NOT.

If this is the new way of doing things I'm glad I'm no longer involved.

CYBW a dangerous place to fly???

CYBW a dangerous place to fly???

Re: CYBW a dangerous place to fly???

Re: CYBW a dangerous place to fly???

Re: CYBW a dangerous place to fly???

Re: CYBW a dangerous place to fly???

Re: CYBW a dangerous place to fly???

Re: CYBW a dangerous place to fly???

Re: CYBW a dangerous place to fly???

Re: CYBW a dangerous place to fly???

Re: CYBW a dangerous place to fly???

Re: CYBW a dangerous place to fly???

Re: CYBW a dangerous place to fly???

Re: CYBW a dangerous place to fly???

Re: CYBW a dangerous place to fly???

Re: CYBW a dangerous place to fly???

Re: CYBW a dangerous place to fly???

Re: CYBW a dangerous place to fly???

Re: CYBW a dangerous place to fly???

Re: CYBW a dangerous place to fly???

Springbank 24 accidents or incidents in one year...why?

Re: CYBW a dangerous place to fly???

Re: CYBW a dangerous place to fly???

Re: CYBW a dangerous place to fly???

Re: CYBW a dangerous place to fly???

Re: CYBW a dangerous place to fly???