Nov 13 southern ontario airspace changes

[howard40]

I now hear Nov 13 they drop all vor's (most?) in southern ontario. anyonehave the scoop? seen a map? what does it mean to all of us with a vor, and a vor ils in the panel?
seems kinda quiet here about that one?

[FenderManDan]

The word on the street is that some will be shut down. I forget which ones. The other ones are sure to follow next year. I liked to practice around simcoe vor. I am equiped with waas unit so ok for a while. I just have to figure out what to do with the secondary vor.

[Pop n Fresh]

Vor is soon going to be like that am radio unit without the hockey games.

[sstaurus]

No one is concerned about having a good backup to the GPS? In the soup it's nice to have an alternative to the black box...

[Pop n Fresh]

Loran?

[Pratt X 3]

Significant Airspace Changes Coming Nov. 13 Across the U.S., Canada

Oct. 9, 2014

Following rollouts earlier this year of procedure and routing changes in airspace over Texas, an unprecedented series of optimizations will begin next month as the FAA proceeds with extensive changes to airspace nationwide. Perhaps the most significant change is the Windsor/Toronto/Montreal (WTM)/Northeast U.S. Airspace Redesign, a collaboration between the FAA and Nav Canada, with the latter entity leading the project.

"The FAA understandably prefers to roll out these changes in line with charting cycles, so as a result we have a lot of major changes coming on Nov. 13," said NBAA Air Traffic Services specialist John Kosak.

In all, these changes encompass skies controlled by eight air route traffic control centers (ARTCC), with the most significant changes occurring in U.S. and Canadian airspace encompassing Toronto, Windsor and Montreal, Canada; Boston, MA; Washington, DC; and New York. Routes as far south as Tennessee and South Carolina will also be affected.

"Just in ZOB (Cleveland ARTCC) alone, we're looking at 17 amended jet routes, 20 deleted jet routes, 21 brand new 'Q' routes, nine amended Q routes and four deleted Q routes," Kosak added. "In all, the changes will affect more than 400 pref routes, and all coded departure routes and playbook routes related to those."

As seen in previous airspace changes enacted over Houston and Dallas, TX, these new procedures emphasize the elimination of "stair-step" climbs and descents in favor of area navigation standard instrument departures (RNAV SID) and standard terminal arrival routes (STAR).

Despite the enormity of these changes, Kosak emphasized that the ultimate impact to operators should be relatively minimal. "Nav Canada is quick to point out that any new routings developed under this plan don't represent any major changes to existing traffic flows," he explained. "The biggest changes involve the ongoing move from ground-based navigation to a NextGen structure.

"That said, flight crews must understand that if they have an equipment issue that doesn't allow them to accept an RNAV routing, they must note that inability to meet those requirements on their flight plan," Kosak said.

Additional changes coming Nov. 13 include a transition that will affect more than 80 procedures in Boston Center (ZBW) airspace. These will include 12 new and 17 amended Q routes, 14 amended jet routes, and 28 route deletions effective Nov. 13.

On the same date, Washington Center (ZDC) will see five new SIDs and STARs between Baltimore-Washington International (BWI), Dulles International (IAD) and a satellite airport.

http://www.navcanada.ca/EN/products-and ... ace-EN.pdf

http://tfmlearning.fly.faa.gov/Route_Tr ... book_R.pdf

[photofly]

It doesn't sound like any navCanada VORs are being withdrawn - only US ones.

ps - some time ago - at least a year - NavCanada announced a public consultation on the proposed withdrawal of the Localiser at CYOO on the grounds of saving money. (Did anyone else respond apart from me?) Nothing has happened yet, as far as I can tell. I'd be astonished if they do something with much greater impact - such as withdrawing VORs from service - without a similar consultation.

[Broken Slinky]

Word on the street is the Windsor VOR is going to be decommissioned in 2015. Nothing in writing that I've seen but...

[photofly]

Actually looks like YWT might be for the chop. None of the others.
http://www.navcanada.ca/EN/products-and ... udies.aspx

[photofly]

By the way: if you (any of you) have an opinion on the proposed reviews then you had bloody well better email NavCanada and tell then what you think. Don't sit on here like sheep bleating about how nobody asked you and you were all kept in the dark. Educate yourselves about the proposals and speak up.

[howard40]

I would be very happy to comment, but I cannot figuire out the affect , without seeing the new map? anyone have an "advance copy " . Waterloo needs to have one of everything as it is one of the best places for training and testing in southern ontario. I am more worried about having a backup, Most of us ga types have one gps on board.

[DanWEC]

With less planes with functioning adfs's and now reducing the VOR's, I worry a bit about reliance on GPS. Also, what about the IFR requirement to have non-gps approaches at an alternate? That would obviously have to be rescinded at some point.

[Illya Kuryakin]

Let's say goodbye to both the NDB and the VOR! The sooner, the better.
Illya

[Pop n Fresh]

But that's the one for listening to the Hockey with.

[KK7]

In the airspace affected, radar coverage is ubiquitous. In the unlikely event that GPS goes down system wide, although I'm sure it would be a very high workload for controllers, radar vectors can get you on your way to the next approach. Nobody is using the VORs anymore except for training purposes, it doesn't make a lot of sense to pay for the up keep and testing of them as a redundant back up. If you need to practice using them in training, use a simulator.

[Liquid Charlie]

As silly as this sounds I cannot remember the last time I tracked to a VOR (except on rides and in the sim) using vhf nav aids -- that was true even before GPS - with good omega/loran we flew area nav as opposed to vhf nav ---

[nightbird]

No one is concerned about having a good backup to the GPS? In the soup it's nice to have an alternative to the black box...

A second GPS?

[davecessna]

I'm almost 100% positive the fear of a GPS-centric IFR navigation world in the present day is identical to the fear of having a VOR-centric one in the NDB days.

[New_PIC]

So, if an IFR-curious recreational PPL is shopping cheap older airplanes, is it still useful to consider one with VOR and NDB nav?

They're still used in the current IFR training, aren't they? They'll be around for a few more years at least, right? I'm thinking IFR rated GPS navigation is nice too if a guy can afford all the toys but some basic ground radio nav would let someone into the game. Or am I missing parts of the bigger picture?

*IFR-curious = currently night rated and wondering about VFR-OTT training as one piece of an ongoing skill building progression.

[Pop n Fresh]

I'm crazy so keep that in mind if you continue reading but..

I would try to get the best airframe possible. Hopefully with just a basic radio. If that means it has lots of avionics so be it. I would consider finding a buyer for any extras I don't want.

Figure out the avionics you can afford and want, get them installed and forget you ever had the money you spent on that stuff because it's gone. Enjoy your plane.

[KK7]

I'm thinking IFR rated GPS navigation is nice too if a guy can afford all the toys but some basic ground radio nav would let someone into the game. Or am I missing parts of the bigger picture?

To fly IFR nowadays, I wouldn't consider a GPS as a 'toy', but part of essential equipment. NDBs are surely outdated and have been for some time. Yes they still exist but are few and far between, and with few people actually using them they are quickly disappearing. There is no point in wasting money on an ADF.

[photofly]

It's very hard to find an alternate approach without an NDB as the IAF. Impossible, away from the south. ADF's have their uses.

[oldtimer]

I read in an well respected avaition magazine that the ILS is here to stay for many more years, especially at airports with "challenging" approaches and those with CAT 2 and CAT 3 approaches.
Also, either making a come back or as a supplement, is MLS to compliment GPS based approaches, or as a substitute for LAAS. All are supposed to compliment ILS. What is very quickly ending up in the trash can is the LOC/BC approaches which is not an ICAO recognised approach procedure.

[oldtimer]

What we need is the type of Nav Aid proposed by Ace McCool in Downeast International. He proposed YMN with a RAT approach.


Wait fot it.......


The YAY Method of Navigation whereby you hold up a wet finger and pick a heading of YAY, followed by by the same finger pointing forward and saying the airport is Rat About There.

[Rookie50]

Need many more lpv approaches.