Nav Canada Service Charges

[TA/RA]

What it all comes down to is that pilots are paying an exorbitant fee to utilize NavCanada's services, and NavCanada is denying the use of airspace to pilots.

We are also expected to regularly purchase publications, like the CFS every 56 days, at $20 per, along with VTAs, VNCs, etc, also all $20 each. This quickly adds up, and needless to say NavCanada isn't hurting financially.

I'd say the solution would be to boycott the airspace for a while, and get the numbers well down, putting a pinch on NavCanada, but then again damn near every part of the Lower Mainland is either controlled, or controlled above 2500 feet...

I've only gone over to Vancouver Island twice since I started flying in 2011, and the terminal restrictions, and the general attitude of terminal controllers towards GA aircraft, are certainly contributing factors.

Is $100/year really an exorbinant fee? The denial of use of certain parts of airspace is not as common as this thread may make it seem. The nav fees also go to providing wx briefings, maintaining naiads etc... Compare that to a commercial flight from YVR to YYZ who pays in excess of $3000 in a single flight for nav fees.

Boycotting would make matters worse. Staffing would theoretically be reduced to match traffic levels and then when you are finished making your point and want to use the airspace again then the restrictions would be worse do to reduced staffing as a result of your boycott.

I am a regular user of the Lower mainland airspace and am a thorough believer of working with ATC towards a common goal. Sometimes the pilots can't give the controllers everything they want and vice versa. But the service provided in the busy airspace is well worth my annual fee. How much would a midair cost you? Im guessing it would be over $100.


7EAC - If you are uncomfortable flying to the island because of dealing with terminal please message me. I will happily do the flight with you in my plane or yours and demonstrate how it can be a very enjoyable and mutually positive experience with ATC. The key is clear communication and knowledge of the airspace and VFR routes all of which are published. (I am serious about my offer with all due respect)

[7ECA]

So what you are saying is, that we should all be happy with piss poor service?

[TA/RA]

"Piss poor service" is in the eye of the beholder. Is your expectation to have a free for all in the airspace surrounding YVR-YYJ or any other busy airspace for that matter.

What would a model of exceptional service look like to you?

[7ECA]

I never once suggested that a free for all, would be a solution. But, if we are expected to pay for NavCanada's services, we should be able to take advantage of those services, where, and when we require them.

It would be nice if NavCanada could get their act together, and properly staff all TCA positions in the Lower Mainland, to avoid these BS restrictions. That would be a model of reasonable service.

[Big Pistons Forever]

There is a bigger issue here. There is no question that commercial operators get preferential treatment when it comes to VFR access to Class C airspace. To pretend otherwise is to frankly insult my intelligence.

However I am not blind to the commercial realities that drive Navcanada decisions. They have to take care of the people that pay most of the bills and that is not Joe Q Public in his C 172 flying VFR across the water.

The government moved ATC from a purely public service model to a self funding monopoly corporate model. The good news is Canada has, from a taxpayer perspective, the lowest cost ATC system in the world. The bad news is that GA uses more service than it pays for and so there is going to continue to be a pressure to reduce service to the GA sector.

This is the system now and no amount of whinging from GA is going to change it. However at the individual level you have a choice on how you interact with ATC. Make the effort to sound professional and you will often get what you want. Sound like Gomer Pyle and well.....don't be surprised when it is busy you just get blown off. You can make the effort to be efficient and effective on the radio or not, it is your choice......

[Bflats]

BPF nailed it pretty head on. I agree that the system is set up and works that way, I don't think there is much of a secret about that.

I can't believe how much complaining there is about the fees for the GA pilot. Really? Chances are your plane burns about that much in fuel costs in an hour or two. Frankly, I'd rather have the system as it is, warts included, than nothing, especially for the annual cost. No doubt it isn't perfect, but is it really that bad?

7ECA, I can't believe a guy who has 200 hrs and no flying job can have such a strong opinion. I've flown VFR back between the island and the mainland more times than I can possibly count, been rarely delayed, and if I couldn't get exactly what I wanted, terminal was always able to accommodate me in some other manner that worked just fine. All I can think is that you must be doing something wrong. BFP alludes to that.

Oh and another thing, if this forum didn't exist, I wouldn't have known that so many pilots are just a bunch of loud mouthed frigging jerk offs. I wouldn't doubt that I have flown with a few people who post here over the years, and I'm sure that a lot of you are a lot more polite to me face to face. However I suppose I probably am too!

[Shiny Side Up]

I don't know about that BPF. I do my utmost to cooperate with Navcan, nevermind the fact that as a commercial operator, I'm paying more than my fair share. Our clients include the City of Calgary, Alberta Transportation, and the CAA, and a few times I've had to have them weigh in on my behalf to get any cooperation. And that's after jumping through all the hoops. But I do this sorts of work not just in the Calgary area, and cooperation depends seemingly at the whim of individual controllers. To the point where I can recognize voices and immediately know what to expect, and in some cases that I'm going to have an imminent transponder "failure".

Some of the controller's just hate little airplanes. He'll, when someone in the big iron flubs something up they don't suddenly need to be vectored all over hell's half acre, and definitely don't get refused service.

It's about time they revised their thinking that GA ain't just rich kids playing with the system for a hobby. And if they are, well they're paying more tax dollars to do it.

[AirFrame]

It may also be advisable to check the NOTAMS prior to the flight. If there is a restriction...

In the Lower Mainland, there's no need to check NOTAMs for Terminal Class C airspace to determine if it's restricted. It would be more informative if the NOTAM identified the small percentage of weekends when Class C is *NOT* restricted. Restricted is the *default* condition here.

To be fair, my exposure to this restriction is restricted to Saturdays and Sundays when the weather is nice. You might be right, commercial flights could be held down too sometimes, but it hasn't happened on frequency when i've been flying. Ever. I notice that the Beavers that fly between Victoria and Vancouver usually *want* to fly lower, they're sometimes down at 1500. But they have floats in case something goes sideways.

1. "Terminal this is CGABC 4 north of Nanaimo at 2500 requesting 4500 to Gower if able"
vs.
2. "Terminal this is CGABC at 2500 climbing to 4500 we will be proceeding via Gower and Point Atkinson"

Option 1 demonstrates that you have done your preflight and are aware of the possible restriction and will be flexible in working with ATC
Option 2 demonstrates a lack of planning and a sense of entitlement to use the airspace and a general sense of expecting traffic to move around you.

I disagree. I have heard Option 1 replied to with "unable". You even give them the option of saying it when you ask! I've had a lot better success with Option 2, where you are *informing* them of your intentions, not *asking permission* to do something. In both cases they can deny you, but in the first case you make it easier psychologically for them to do it. It's social engineering, making the flow of the conversation work for you.

YJ & VR Terminal are required to provide service to allow aircraft to safely cross the straight.

On that, we agree.

[TA/RA]

I do not agree about the default being that it is restricted. This may be true for Vancouver Terminal but rarely for Victoria Terminal. Like I said before restricted doesn't mean it's closed it just means that some traffic management and patience may be required.

Would it be any different if a Class C tower instructed you to hold outside of the zone due to traffic levels in the zone until they could accommodate you?

[cyeg66]

To the point where I can recognize voices and immediately know what to expect, and in some cases that I'm going to have an imminent transponder "failure".

Some of the controller's just hate little airplanes. He'll, when someone in the big iron flubs something up they don't suddenly need to be vectored all over hell's half acre, and definitely don't get refused service.

I know what you're saying, and I've said it before, don't let a couple (that's exactly what it is) bad apples ruin it for the other 23 guys. We're in a bad staffing situation now but we're trying hard as hell not to restrict ops around YYC, and frankly when they are put it, I think it's overkill. (Gasp) Insubordination! I should be given a good talking to! Am I one of the few guys that realizes our jobs rely on providing a service, and that it shouldn't be optional, no matter how much it makes my job more difficult? Everyone's got their limit, I suppose, just lower pain thresholds on some people.

[Old Dog Flying]

TA/RA: Great "Quote" skills but both transmissions were made by me..and not two separate examples. I was a controller for more than 49 years and at the same time a flight instructor for 40 years. I know the system very well and I know Bull S@@t when I hear it.

It would be very interesting to see the results of an inquiry into so called "sick time" in relation to baseball games, sailing, golf and other therapeutic reasons for restricting the Staits of Geargia airspace.

[CpnCrunch]

"Piss poor service" is in the eye of the beholder. Is your expectation to have a free for all in the airspace surrounding YVR-YYJ or any other busy airspace for that matter.

What is wrong with a 'free for all' as you put it? As pointed out my myself and Airframe above, the airspace over the strait of Georgia doesn't appear to be very congested. You basically have the floatplanes down low, dash-8s that have TCAS, and occasional other private or other commercial flight. Traffic in the Comox class E seems a lot more busy.

The issue seems to be that you have a massive chunk of airspace that is controlled by too few people. The sensible solution - if you can't control it all - would be to change some parts of it to class E. West and south of the Vancouver outer control zone would seem to be good candidates for class E.

I can see that perhaps the lower mainland is more busy and requires class C. However even there I think you're probably just concentrating all the VFR traffic into a smaller area, and not really reducing the risk of mid-air collision. If you're concerned about reducing mid-air collisions between VFR traffic there are other ways of achieving that: ADS-B for example.

[Braun]

"Piss poor service" is in the eye of the beholder. Is your expectation to have a free for all in the airspace surrounding YVR-YYJ or any other busy airspace for that matter.

What is wrong with a 'free for all' as you put it? As pointed out my myself and Airframe above, the airspace over the strait of Georgia doesn't appear to be very congested. You basically have the floatplanes down low, dash-8s that have TCAS, and occasional other private or other commercial flight. Traffic in the Comox class E seems a lot more busy.

The issue seems to be that you have a massive chunk of airspace that is controlled by too few people. The sensible solution - if you can't control it all - would be to change some parts of it to class E. West and south of the Vancouver outer control zone would seem to be good candidates for class E.

I can see that perhaps the lower mainland is more busy and requires class C. However even there I think you're probably just concentrating all the VFR traffic into a smaller area, and not really reducing the risk of mid-air collision. If you're concerned about reducing mid-air collisions between VFR traffic there are other ways of achieving that: ADS-B for example.

To be honest, I couldn't care less whether the airspace is E A B C D, my goal is to be as safe expeditious and orderly as possible and if the pilot community feels it is safe to have E airspace every around a major airport be my guest. Maybe you are right, maybe the airspace is too big and too controlled. ATC don't make airspace classifications, we can request changes but at the end of the day it isn't our call.

And for the record the airlines are the ones who would be concerned about mid-airs, all I need to do is follow the various rules given the airspace the planes are in and my job is done. I can't and won't start separating planes in class E to whom I am not talking to. Your responsibility. I'm sure as a VFR pilot you'll agree but I doubt the carriers like the idea much...but hey what do I know i'm just a piss poor controller

[CpnCrunch]

To be honest, I couldn't care less whether the airspace is E A B C D, my goal is to be as safe expeditious and orderly as possible and if the pilot community feels it is safe to have E airspace every around a major airport be my guest. Maybe you are right, maybe the airspace is too big and too controlled. ATC don't make airspace classifications, we can request changes but at the end of the day it isn't our call.

I know it's not you personally who creates the airspace. However it is you personally who is in the middle of this shitty situation. So you can either put up with your crappy working conditions and the fact that you're delivering a shitty service (which is not your fault), or you can do something to try and change it.

And for the record the airlines are the ones who would be concerned about mid-airs, all I need to do is follow the various rules given the airspace the planes are in and my job is done. I can't and won't start separating planes in class E to whom I am not talking to. Your responsibility. I'm sure as a VFR pilot you'll agree but I doubt the carriers like the idea much...but hey what do I know i'm just a piss poor controller

Mid-airs aren't an issue in mode-C class E for airlines, as you have ATC giving traffic advisories to the IFR traffic and you have TCAS. It works very well around Nanaimo and in the Comox MTCA. I'd suggest you try flying into Nanaimo on a sunny weekend and see how many planes FSS can juggle in a 5nm radius. If anything, I'd say that Nanaimo is in more need of class C than the strait of Georgia.

Anyway, I don't have anything against individual controllers, it's more Nav Canada management who is the cause of all the problems by creating all this airspace and not providing adequate resources to control it.

[Big Pistons Forever]

I don't know about that BPF. I do my utmost to cooperate with Navcan, nevermind the fact that as a commercial operator, I'm paying more than my fair share. Our clients include the City of Calgary, Alberta Transportation, and the CAA, and a few times I've had to have them weigh in on my behalf to get any cooperation. And that's after jumping through all the hoops. But I do this sorts of work not just in the Calgary area, and cooperation depends seemingly at the whim of individual controllers. To the point where I can recognize voices and immediately know what to expect, and in some cases that I'm going to have an imminent transponder "failure".

Some of the controller's just hate little airplanes. He'll, when someone in the big iron flubs something up they don't suddenly need to be vectored all over hell's half acre, and definitely don't get refused service.

It's about time they revised their thinking that GA ain't just rich kids playing with the system for a hobby. And if they are, well they're paying more tax dollars to do it.

From my POV the big discriminator on who gets the service is your call sign. If it is Acme 123 you get your clearance into Class C every time, if it is GABC then maybe yes, maybe no even if you are doing purely commercial ops.

[Braun]

To be honest, I couldn't care less whether the airspace is E A B C D, my goal is to be as safe expeditious and orderly as possible and if the pilot community feels it is safe to have E airspace every around a major airport be my guest. Maybe you are right, maybe the airspace is too big and too controlled. ATC don't make airspace classifications, we can request changes but at the end of the day it isn't our call.

I know it's not you personally who creates the airspace. However it is you personally who is in the middle of this shitty situation. So you can either put up with your crappy working conditions and the fact that you're delivering a shitty service (which is not your fault), or you can do something to try and change it.

And for the record the airlines are the ones who would be concerned about mid-airs, all I need to do is follow the various rules given the airspace the planes are in and my job is done. I can't and won't start separating planes in class E to whom I am not talking to. Your responsibility. I'm sure as a VFR pilot you'll agree but I doubt the carriers like the idea much...but hey what do I know i'm just a piss poor controller

Mid-airs aren't an issue in mode-C class E for airlines, as you have ATC giving traffic advisories to the IFR traffic and you have TCAS. It works very well around Nanaimo and in the Comox MTCA. I'd suggest you try flying into Nanaimo on a sunny weekend and see how many planes FSS can juggle in a 5nm radius. If anything, I'd say that Nanaimo is in more need of class C than the strait of Georgia.

Anyway, I don't have anything against individual controllers, it's more Nav Canada management who is the cause of all the problems by creating all this airspace and not providing adequate resources to control it.

First of all that is assuming the mode C is functioning and correct. There is always a possbility in class E that the mode C is not transmitting the proper altitude and even with a TCAS there is a risk. That is why we are obligated to pass unidentified trafic even if you are at 15000' and the target I pass is showing 3500' unverified. Class C and D helps reduce the risk of this. Like I said before I am not in YVR ACC so I have no idea on the airspace and it's flow so I can't comment on that specific area.

So if I take a look at this thread and the general feeling is that there is room for improvement in that sector why not ask for your local associations to set up a meeting with Nav Canada management and try and figure out a way, together, to make the situation less restrictive for the VFR users who seem to be having problems and maybe you might find common ground. We did this a lot with the local VFR entities and we have a fairly good set up in all three of our terminals and very rarely restrict access to D or C airspace and when we do no one complains because they know what's going on. We even just had a controller tour all the flight schools/clubs/association and presenting how the airspace works on our end and I know for a fact a lot of questions were answered.

[Shiny Side Up]

I know what you're saying, and I've said it before, don't let a couple (that's exactly what it is) bad apples ruin it for the other 23 guys. We're in a bad staffing situation now but we're trying hard as hell not to restrict ops around YYC, and frankly when they are put it, I think it's overkill. (Gasp) Insubordination! I should be given a good talking to! Am I one of the few guys that realizes our jobs rely on providing a service, and that it shouldn't be optional, no matter how much it makes my job more difficult? Everyone's got their limit, I suppose, just lower pain thresholds on some people.

I must say that I do appreciate it greatly and most of atc are very helpful, and to be honest, I can live with the odd restriction. I know we ask sometimes for difficult stuff. To be honest we just say no to a lot of the work since it is unreasonable.

I just don't understand the refusals sometimes. Individual controller's are paid by the hour aren't they? It's no skin off their back if i'm vfr or ifr, have a cool callsign or an uncool letter combo.

[CpnCrunch]

So if I take a look at this thread and the general feeling is that there is room for improvement in that sector why not ask for your local associations to set up a meeting with Nav Canada management and try and figure out a way, together, to make the situation less restrictive for the VFR users who seem to be having problems and maybe you might find common ground.

Unfortunately there are no local associations that are in any way useful. COPA is a bit of a lame duck right now, and the local flying clubs are even worse.

Probably the best thing to do is for people to email their comments and suggestions to service@navcanada.ca.

[TA/RA]

Old Dog Flying: I am sorry if my mis use of the quote function was offensive.

PIREP: I went flying today multiple legs through the Vancouver Class C while it was restricted. I don't have a fancy call sign just a few lame letters and not once was I refused service intact I was cleared through on my requested routing and altitude every time.

Be careful what you wish for in Nanaimo. Given their traffic levels I wouldn't be surprised if they ceased to be class E in the not so distant future.

[16SidedOffice]

ADS-B for example.

I could see it coming down the road but the push back from the GA users is going to be enormous as again it's another cost to upgrade..

Traffic around Comox seems busier? Sorry, but it doesn't even compare. What you hear on one frequency is just a small portion of what's going on out there.

BPF, you'll hear the IFR's in the Class C every time because they can't deny them. Class C restrictions are put in place for the VFR a/c, the IFR's will be on Controlled Departure times or other flow to limit the number of a/c.

I'm not trying to justify any of the reasons for any of it, just trying to provide some simple answers so don't shoot the messenger.

[TA/RA]

Traffic around Comox seems busier? Sorry, but it doesn't even compare. What you hear on one frequency is just a small portion of what's going on out there.

BPF, you'll hear the IFR's in the Class C every time because they can't deny them. Class C restrictions are put in place for the VFR a/c, the IFR's will be on Controlled Departure times or other flow to limit the number of a/c.

I'm not trying to justify any of the reasons for any of it, just trying to provide some simple answers so don't shoot the messenger.

Correct,


Comox Terminal has 1 Frequency for their entire airspace which they use for IFR & VFR which is fairly expansive and without any "major" airports.
Vancouver Terminal has 1 VFR frequency and 6 IFR frequencies all using the same airspace
Victoria Terminal has 3 VFR frequencies and 4 IFR frequencies all using the same airspace

What you hear on the frequency is just a portion of what is actually going on.

[Old Dog Flying]

TA/RA: Not offended...just amused. That scenario did happen and the flight over to the island was great but the flight home was anything but as the attitude displayed by the VR Term controller really pi@@ed me off. He would not allow a descent until we were east of Langley and ignored my request for traffic. He was showing me who was boss.

I never did hear from the Shift Manager on the tape review but that is nothing new.

[16SidedOffice]

ignored my request for traffic.

Maybe there simply wasn't any that "needed" to be passed which is very common.

[Old Dog Flying]

Then why refuse my request for lower? Other than to be a prick. Thankfully I no longer have to work with people who really do not like their well paying jobs.

[CpnCrunch]

Traffic around Comox seems busier? Sorry, but it doesn't even compare. What you hear on one frequency is just a small portion of what's going on out there.

That comment was based on what I see on planefinder/flightradar24. I believe that shows all airline traffic (mode S). I'm a little unclear if they show all IFR traffic or just some of it as Nav Canada is a bit opaque about what data they share with the FAA. I think some VFR traffic shows up as well.

Anyway, the point is that there never seems to be a large concentration of planes anywhere in the strait of Georgia (apart from inside Vancouver/Victoria control zones). Right now according to planefinder, the only aircraft between 3000 and 8000ft in the strait of Georgia are:

CGYPS (cherokee 140)
CFFEA (Seneca out of ZBB)
CGPET (Cessna 210)
CGDVP (another cherokee)
Caravan
two N regs up by Lasqueti (Comox's class E airspace)

Combined with whatever VFR traffic is talking to Vancouver/Victoria terminal on the VFR frequencies, it certainly doesn't seem a huge amount. Am I missing something? Perhaps there are a bunch of IFR flights that aren't being picked up by the FAA data feed from Nav Canada.