YYC's loved "F" word

[Airborne28]

So is it just me, or is Calgary becoming the only airport in Canada to schedule/implement daily 'Flow Control'.... Even on screaming clear sunny afternoons? I understand it's to help with bad wx/high traffic volumes, but I can't count how many times I've been ground delayed, 'flowed' into YYC, switch over to Arrival, and there's only 3 airplanes on frequency!! What gives Calgary???

[parrot_head]

A "screaming clear sunny afternoon" doesn't negate the fact that aircraft landing rwys 16/34 will have crossing arrival/departure traffic from rwys 10/28, and that the airport is also used for departures. VFR or IFR, two aircraft cannot occupy that intersection at the same time and the majority of the airlines these days will not accept a hold short clearance with crossing traffic or a take-off/landing clearance if they know there is traffic to hold short of their arrival/departure runway.

As for the amount of arrivals on your frequency at the same time, YC Terminal has two arrival frequencies that are regularly in use so you may not hear all the other traffic that is out there. The in-trail requirement for arrivals is specified by the tower and is measured from the intersection. So if 6 mile spacing is required for arrivals with aircraft landing 34/28, there could potentially be 12 miles between the two 34 arrivals as a 28 arrival is being spaced 6 miles behind the first 34 arrival, with the 2nd 34 arrival 6 in trail of the 28 arrival. This spacing is needed because the tower needs room to get departures out and to ensure that the arrivals don't tangle at the intersection.

This may not seem like alot, but in this case, the 3 aircraft you hear on your frequency could take up 24 miles of airspace. Now add that to the 3-4 aircraft on the other arrival frequency, the departures, the VFRs, and a couple go-arounds, and you can quickly run out of room, even on a sunny day.

[Airborne28]

Well written parrot_head, thanks for your reply!

[yeah yeah]

So you arrive into YYC airspace and you're number 3 in sequence. No airborne delays, burning fuel in a hold. Sounds like a flow control system that is working properly.

[IFRATC]

I don't work in YYC. I am in YYZ.

Yeah yeah,
Sometimes we don't get bedpost crossing times from the flow desk until it is too late. Hence the reason you would not get an enroute speed reduction in cruise. Our only alternative is to hold at the bedposts and achieve the crossing time that way. If we are at or just below flow capacity whatever that rate may be it only takes one go around for whatever reason to exceed capacity at that time. The variables are always changing when we are close to max rate. Many factors will dictate the rate even if it is clear and sunny out. Our workload goes up tenfold when any type of metering or extra in trail spacing is in effect. We don't want to be stuck working it as much as you want to be holding. The fact of the matter is when the phone rings beside me and I see the flow desk light up, whatever the rate becomes at that moment, by luck you may be 100 miles out or by shitty luck, 60 miles out stuck as number 4 in a train of 10 on decent at 300kts assigned. Guess what? You are going to get some kind of delay. It sucks for you and it sucks for us. Scrambling to issue crossing times and altitudes to 12 aircraft after you worked your ass off to get minimum spacing into terminal is not fun. Too then monitor the holds using vectors as guys leave on there times and others enter the hold increases workload to the max. Here is a little secret...We don't like working like that for long periods!!! But thats the way it goes. I am surprised more YEG centre guys aren't on here complaining how hard they have to work!!!!

IFRATC

[proper]

laguardia... DCA god they can move em'.

[cyeg66]

Thank you for that insightful post.

[Airborne28]

IFRATC, thanks for your reply. Assuming from what you said, you work center. I agree with your comments and understand the additional workload when issuing holds or flow/ground delay times for an area controller.

I guess my question would be more specific to YYC arrival/tower. I understand 'true' max capacity and the complications with an additional go-around/emergency.... but that's not the continual case in YYC. Almost daily, flow is 'scheduled' from 13:00 - 20:00 (or whatever the actual time are). I can't count how many times I've waited on the ground in YEG for my flow time, arrive at YYC, and I can see on the TCAS there's no more than 5 planes in a 30 mile radius?! Heck, most of the ATIS's in Western Canada broadcast "Flow delay into Calgary, contact....."...

The YYC arrival/twr guys are great to work with, and I feel they do a good job of controlling, however it feels like they're 'Working to rule', or artificially limiting the amount of traffic. I didn't want to bring up the rumor of 'justifying the creation/cost of a dual runway', but might as well throw that into the mix...

Thoughts?

A28

[HeadingAltitudeSpeed]

I guess my question would be more specific to YYC arrival/tower. I understand 'true' max capacity and the complications with an additional go-around/emergency.... but that's not the continual case in YYC. Almost daily, flow is 'scheduled' from 13:00 - 20:00 (or whatever the actual time are). I can't count how many times I've waited on the ground in YEG for my flow time, arrive at YYC, and I can see on the TCAS there's no more than 5 planes in a 30 mile radius?! Heck, most of the ATIS's in Western Canada broadcast "Flow delay into Calgary, contact....."...

The YYC arrival/twr guys are great to work with, and I feel they do a good job of controlling, however it feels like they're 'Working to rule', or artificially limiting the amount of traffic. I didn't want to bring up the rumor of 'justifying the creation/cost of a dual runway', but might as well throw that into the mix...

Thoughts?

A28

The "scheduled" flow is a result of the system users. It seems that they don't like surprises so would rather have a blanket flow program instead of a more accurate description of when the delays will actualy occur. Just because there is a flow program in effect during set hours does not mean delays are being issued.

5 planes in 30 miles, makes perfect sense if on a single runway and 6 mile spacing required by tower. Strung out on final that extends to your 30 mile radius. Ooops you didn't take into account the compression factor. The guy 6 miles back from the threshold is doing 160 kts and the #5 guy who is 24 miles behind him on final definitely doesn't want to be doing the same so he is more like 210-250 kts. Suddenly the math doesn't work so good. So instead of already being on final he is in a position that he can fly a reasonably normal profile and turn final within about 12-15 miles from threshold. Depending where you are entering the terminal from there will be no delays to touchdown. Flow did it's job. I guess we could say screw it and let the airline schedules do it for us. 14 arrivals all wanting to land in the same 5 minute window. Lots of low level vectors and level flight. Really it's your call; after all, the customer is always right.

See on TCAS... please don't get me started. How far are you looking? The entire TCU (FL250 to the ground) plus what is about to enter? Does your TCAS magically filter out over flights, VFR, departures?

Artificially limiting traffic? We strive to maximize airport capacity. This does include departures as well. I can run arrivals in all day long with 2-3 miles spacing (depending on the rules I can apply) but there won't be anyone leaving on a jet plane.

Working to rule? Please! For what purpose? We are not in contract negotiations and even if we were AND did get to a strike position, this is not within our allowed scope. Any delays imposed only drag my workload out over a longer period of time.

Justifying the extra pavement? What makes you think we have any influence over the YYC Airport Authority? I could go into the history lesson of how we have created tools and procedures to allow them to bridge the building of the second runway. As well as the poor (IMO) choices that were made. But that would take far too long. Needless to say the short version is that when a certain carrier's pilots and union chose to "work to rule" on the subject of LAHSO the airport capacity took a significant hit. LAHSO operations were all that was saving the airport at that time. We developed a work around and expected ground to break on 34R. It never did because bean counters felt it wasn't needed, we had solved the problem. Had they done it then you wouldn't be sitting in YEG but landing on 34R today. I don't care what the Airport Authority decides to do or not do anymore. I just work with what they give me.

[IFRATC]

Headingaltitudespeed,

VERY NICELY SAID......

IFRATC

[Liftdump]

Hi guys or gals good replies from ATS. If I can schedule an exact departure time say from Regina to Calgary
and give 3 or 4 hours notice prior would I get the time I requested? That way we could give our PAX an exact
time to be at and on board the aircraft if they miss the time well they know the consequenses.Having a high power
CEO show up at his plane only to tell him he has to wait 2hrs on the ramp for a 1hr flight makes
my job HELL. There has to be a better way to do this. Ideas.comments Thks

[HeadingAltitudeSpeed]

Hi guys or gals good replies from ATS. If I can schedule an exact departure time say from Regina to Calgary
and give 3 or 4 hours notice prior would I get the time I requested? That way we could give our PAX an exact
time to be at and on board the aircraft if they miss the time well they know the consequenses.Having a high power
CEO show up at his plane only to tell him he has to wait 2hrs on the ramp for a 1hr flight makes
my job HELL. There has to be a better way to do this. Ideas.comments Thks

Short of any extreme weather delays I would generally say yes. The latest program looks to have flight plans in the system 2 hours in advance to better plan the delays. The flow is actualy run from YVR so it is ultimately up to them. If you were to do this at the least you should have a "controlled departure time" that you could then relay to the king. He can spend the extra time in the boardroom bar instead of the hanger. Just don't miss that time or I suspect it will be a long wait for the next one.

The acceptance capacity at YYC can change with the wind (pun intended). There are days when even the best planned flow can result in unexpected delays (usually big). Construction, weather, CRFI, runway cleaning, etc. When nothing changes during the course of a night then the plan you describe should work pretty good. I believe some operators are already doing this and reaping the benefits, while others elect to file last minute and take their chances. Sometimes they win and sometimes they don't.

[Liftdump]

KING thats frickin awsome Im going to call him that(after bonus time). Thanks for the reply

[FOX69]

Serious question, please don't be offended,

How come the Americans can move traffic so quickly? Even at airports with one runway. KFLL is a great example, lots of airliners, lots of GA, several other airports very close (MIA, FXE, etc) and essentially one active runway. And these guys SERIOUSLY PUSH TIN. They make every airport in canada feel like slow motion, except YYZ on a good day.

I can only assume it's a difference in REGS? Procedures? Staffing?

I appreciate the previous responses, however, as a YYC based airline pilot for the last 12 yrs, I feel qualified in my assessment that YYC moves traffic at a slower pace than comparable airports of similar design. Please enlighten.

[NJ]

I can't say anything for how the US moves their traffic as I've never visited a tower there, or flown in there. As far as Calgary is concerned, the speed of the place mostly has to do with the elevation, weather and layout.

KFLL is at 5' ASL, and YYC is over 3500' ASL. The performance is quite a bit different.

If YYC was a simple 34L and 34R with a nice prevailing wind from the NNW, all aircraft could land with visuals to one runway, and all departures could depart off the other one with visual departures (we can use the same procedure the US does there, but it doesn't gain much with YYC's config and traffic), and YYC would be a non-issue airport. But YYC is currently stuck with a crossing runway layout where the primary runway crosses with the other a mile and a half down. With crazy crosswinds and contaminated runways, LAHSO's aren't really a usable option and are only used as a last ditch option. A few more taxiways to allow dual direction taxiing all the way down the east side wouldn't hurt either.

I could wax on forever about this, but the easiest way to see it is to come up to the tower for a tour during a busy period. Just like us doing fam flights opens our eyes, visiting the tower or the ACC does the same for pilots.

[cyeg66]

Please enlighten.

Enlightened yet? NJ's response sums it up pretty well. If someone at this point (there's normally at least one) brings up "Denver is higher" blah blah blah, then have a look at that airfield and tell me how many runways cross.... High altitude plus crossing runways = useless.

Now, about KFLL. Single runway ops? Are we talking about the same airport? The one that has coincidentally had one of the worst on-time performances in recent memory? The one that has parallels, thus allowing most GA to land on 27L and bigger birds on the right? The one with hefty flow in effect if the wind is too stiff out of the North (for example)? It's not a perfect airfield, by any stretch. NIMBY's won't let the airport extend 27L, despite it sorely being needed during peak times. My point is, it doesn't really compare to YYC, in too many ways to discuss. Let's just leave that there.

I would just like one example of a high altitude airport, with a similar layout, with similar annual traffic levels, with a similar mix of traffic (prop/piston ratio to jet) to YYC's and then we can comment accurately. There may be one or two out there in N. America. When we finally get a proper example, then we'll discuss how Transport Canada and certain higher-ups at NavCan tamper... <ahem!>.... implement rules and regulations in the name of bonuses... <cough, cough>... safety that don't allow anything remotely similar to what the FAA stuffs into American controller's quivers (tool boxes, bags of tricks, etc). My sarcasm-laced work here is done.

[HeadingAltitudeSpeed]

Not to mention the in excess of 45 second (ofter closer to 60 second) runway occupancy times. Do the math, touchdown and take 45 seconds to exit. Traffic is on final 5 miles back (groundspeed 150 kts) 2 minutes to touchdown. So as #1 touches down, departure goes to position and waits. As #1 exits departure gets take-off clearance. Guess what? Departure takes at least 45-60 seconds to be airborne. So now when departure is up and it is legal to land #2 is maybe 1/2 mile final and pissed because "that was a little too close". Rinse and Repeat.

Now when someone decides not to play ball and either take the wrong exit (don't like C2 so lets just roll it out for C4), doesn't roll when given take-off clearance (hat on straight, transponder on, cabin announcement done, power up these big boys and lets roll), or just not comply with the speed reduction on final (must meet the on time performance) you get what we all love. Overshoot and now we get to work an extra aircraft back into the sequence. Problem is the flow is full. All landing slots for the next 3 hours are filled. So everyone gets pushed back until we can skinny things back up.

I have talked to crews and they all admit the same thing. They don't fly the same way in YYC as they do at "real" airports. Silk from a sow's ear my friends.

My sarcasm-laced work here is done.

Ditto <tongue back in cheek>

[FOX69]

You're right, FLL does have multiple runways, but in my experience, the secondary ones are rarely used for anything bigger than a Navajo. That being said, I'm not trying to make a direct comparison to YYC.

From the responses, I gather that the root of the problem is 1. The location of the 34/28 intersection, and 2. The American controllers have more tools available due to different regs.

As pilots, we can do our best to make the assigned exit at a reasonable speed, but we do that at all airports.

What about high speed exits? I've often felt that centerline lighting for C2 and C4 would speed up the flow at night. Do visual approaches allow less spacing?

As for flying differently at YYC than "real airports": I think someone was pulling your leg, cuz I ain't never heard that before...

[NJ]

Visuals eliminate the need for radar or wake turbulence spacing. If you're #2 and you have traffic ahead in sight, it turns to the pilot to maintain runway separation and wake turbulence spacing. For a dedicated arrival runway, it makes arrivals able to run very tight.

Centreline lighting would be great. Best way to get the ball rolling is to have your company talk to the airport authority and get the bug out there. But of course, that means another summer of runway closures on 34

101119 CYYC CALGARY INTL
CYYC RWY 16/34 CLSD. AVBL 1 HR PN 403 735 1300
1009180730 TIL 1009180930

101120 CYYC CALGARY INTL
CYYC RWY 10/28 CLSD 1300/2300 DLY
TIL 1009172300

101124 CYYC CALGARY INTL
CYYC RWY 07/25 CLSD
1009181300 TIL 1009181700

[HeadingAltitudeSpeed]

As pilots, we can do our best to make the assigned exit at a reasonable speed, but we do that at all airports.

What about high speed exits? I've often felt that centerline lighting for C2 and C4 would speed up the flow at night. Do visual approaches allow less spacing?

As for flying differently at YYC than "real airports": I think someone was pulling your leg, cuz I ain't never heard that before...

Of course you do, as do most. There are some that don't. Just like there are some that don't listen and landing 28 insist of trying for C when told to roll thru 34 intersection and exit on the west side (gonna be a long taxi, we can make it) but end up too fast for C and slow enough to eat up the built in departure hole. As much as it pains me to say it, it happens (too often some days). The vast majority of crews are very good. Players as we like to call them. Some aren't.

Lighting? By all means. Also during the day. Speak to the CAA. They don't really like to spend money airside tho, all those passengers only rate them on the pretty terminal building. I do believe the intent is to add lighting once 34R opens. But as NJ stated, expect the closure. When 34R opens we will still only have a single N/S runway for another standard Alberta construction year.

Trust me on the "real airport" comment. It is sad but true. How many missed calls do you think ORD puts up with? What happens in LGA when #1 in departure line says they aren't ready yet, waiting on load figures still? Anyone request an out of wind runway in EWR or complain about the runway assignment? Does FLL allow carriers to develop and fly their own procedures that conflict with standard traffic flows?

It is funny because when a US carrier comes in I don't have to try to lead my control instruction. I can issue a turn and expect the aircraft to start that turn immediately and roll out right where I expect him. I wish I coud say the same for most of our Canadian carriers. In fact I tend to turn the US boys a bit late because if I don't I may end up too close (easy to lose the extra mile, hard to stretch once on final). Local boys can be like rolling dice. I have watched what should be a nice 5 mile hole stretch to 12 or so as the heading bug gets cranked into a screaming 1/4 rate turn. Sometimes Otto should leave the flying to the pilots.

Visuals? 99% of the time an aircraft cleared a visual to follow will do so with more space than I would have vectored them to. Why do you think a visual approach in YYC is turn right H310 intercept final cleared visual? A few DH8's will drive it in close, but watch out for the FMS jets, they just fly the full Rnav STAR. I have watched and laughed at fresh meat that think a visual will save them space and work. Sometimes they gotta learn the hard way.

I would vector arrivals down to 2 miles (or less) at touchdown all day long if they let me. But, 1) the rules don't allow for it 2) pilots flying here usually complain about it 3) too many overshoots because buddy didn't/couldn't exit 4) departures tend to back up. I know that 2, 3 and 4 happen because, much like the Matrix, #1 can be bent. There are methods and situations where not only can I get you that close, but not break any rules and be completely legal.

I'm not trying to bash anyone here. I am just giving you a picture as I see it. The OP asked why there was daily flow when the the wx was severe clear. These are the realities of my job. I don't have to like them, just deal with them a best as I can. I don't pull any punches and will give honest responses. What I say may not always be popular (with either side).

[FOX69]

Thanks for the insight. The delays don't really bother me that much, as long as I've already pushed off the gate it's all +$$ anyway. A good hold, plus a red alert can buy my wife some pretty nice shoes.

If the airport won't listen to ATC with regards to center line lighting at the high speeds, they won't listen to us either. Not anytime soon anyway.

Visuals: interesting points made. At our shop, we aren't exactly discouraged from accepting visuals, however, with the advent of RNP approaches, we are encouraged to maintain the FMS route onto final, especially when a short gate is available. This keeps things predictable from a flight crews perspective (read stable) so, if cleared the visual, I often just keep it in LNAV. BUT, if cleared the visual and asked to" keep it tight", or "cleared visual, turn base now" I'll gladly take 2 mile spacing with a smile.

What about the departure side of the equation? I often wonder why we are not put to position until the lander is almost at taxi speed. If we are put to position as he touches down, we can have the checks done (hat on straight as someone mentioned earlier) and engines spooled, ready for an immediate brake release the second his tail crosses the hold line.

If crews really do comment that they fly differently at "real airports" I'll take your word for it. I just feel sorry for the FO who tells me that speed assignments from ATC don't count cuz it's YYC and not a real airport. There would be some "coaching" involved.

[avfun]

On the departure end of things, the controller is likely waiting to make sure the lander ahead of you is going to make the planned exit.

When spacing between arrivals is minimal -- and it sounds like it usually is in Calgary -- then I would not put you to position until I was sure the aircraft rolling out was going to make the exit I need them to make. If you go to position as soon as the lander passes you, and they roll it past the exit point, then there's likely no time to get you moving and airborne before the next arrival crosses the threshold -- which means the next arrival is going around (and he's cursing the controller who put the a/c onto the runway, not the arrival who wasn't able to get the exit .)

[HeadingAltitudeSpeed]

Hi guys or gals good replies from ATS. If I can schedule an exact departure time say from Regina to Calgary
and give 3 or 4 hours notice prior would I get the time I requested? That way we could give our PAX an exact
time to be at and on board the aircraft if they miss the time well they know the consequenses.Having a high power
CEO show up at his plane only to tell him he has to wait 2hrs on the ramp for a 1hr flight makes
my job HELL. There has to be a better way to do this. Ideas.comments Thks

Short of any extreme weather delays I would generally say yes. The latest program looks to have flight plans in the system 2 hours in advance to better plan the delays. The flow is actualy run from YVR so it is ultimately up to them. If you were to do this at the least you should have a "controlled departure time" that you could then relay to the king. He can spend the extra time in the boardroom bar instead of the hanger. Just don't miss that time or I suspect it will be a long wait for the next one.

The acceptance capacity at YYC can change with the wind (pun intended). There are days when even the best planned flow can result in unexpected delays (usually big). Construction, weather, CRFI, runway cleaning, etc. When nothing changes during the course of a night then the plan you describe should work pretty good. I believe some operators are already doing this and reaping the benefits, while others elect to file last minute and take their chances. Sometimes they win and sometimes they don't.

101168 CYYC CALGARY INTL
CYYC IN SUPPORT OF CYYC GROUND DLA PROGRAM
ALL IFR ACFT ARR IN CYYC ARE REQUIRED TO:
1. FILE FLT PLAN MNM 120 MIN IN ADVANCE ETD
2. UPDATE PROPOSED ETD
3. CHECK WITH THE NEAREST TWR, FSS, FIC OR ACC A MNM OF 30 MIN
PRIOR TO ETD TO OBTAIN CONTROLLED TIME OF DEP.
4. ADHERE TO THE CONTROLLED TIME OF DEP BY PLUS OR MINUS 5 MIN,
OR CALL FOR A NEW TIME. DEP TIMES MUST BE OBTAINED FM ONE OF
THE ABV STATED UNITS.
FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE ABV WILL RESULT IN EXTENDED DLA
OR REQUIRE TO LAND AT ALTERNATE AP.
1009202030 TIL 1009210500

Just the NOTAM to support the suggested procedure.

[Liftdump]

This happened Fri Oct 1. We flew from CYYZ to CYVR,landed YVR at 11:36 local time
we called the TMU at 11:45 to check the status of flow control to CYYC our next leg at 16:00 local.
The person on the phone from the TMU said there will be no flow into CYYC today, having been burnt
many times we called back at 13:00 to check about flow,told again no flow.Called FSS at 14:30 again no flow.
Fire up the APU at 15:15 get the latest ATIS no mention of flow,contact clearance del inquire about flow and were told
no flow,passenger shows up,start engines request taxi,and low and behold FLOW. Nav Canada your system that we are
paying big dollars to use is F#@KED.

[TreeBlender]

liftdump and Airborne28, are you able to land/depart CYBW? Would your company switch teams if there was a descent FBO there?