Page 21 - 2017-Issue1

“ I think sometimes many of us

lose sight of how critically
important it is to create and
grow institutions like IFALPA
”
that allow us all to come
together and act together.

In Canada many of these improvements have large distances to alternates and challenging There are 55 differences on weather
their origins in the Moshansky Inquiry which weather but still suffer from a lack of precision services. In some cases, Canada attempts to
made a number of key recommendations approaches. Many of our northern airports are meet a SARP in a different way but in others
stemming from an accident in 1988 involving built on very challenging terrain, making they just do not comply. Again, this makes it
an Air Ontario Fokker F-28. extending runway length and/or incorporation difficult for visiting pilots who may expect
Another significant improvement in of Runway End Safety Area (RESA) a very certain services to be available. Some services
aviation infrastructure has been the establish- expensive if not a technically impossible that are available at international airports in
ment of many LNAV and LPV approaches that proposition. Canada are not available at a much larger
has increased reliable access to many airports ow mIghT hArmonIzATIon number of non-international airports
around the country especially in some of our HwITh IcAo STAndArdS ImProve particularly in the north.
more remote regions. The SITuATIon regArdIng Phraseology and procedural differences in
A key infrastructure improvement that is TerrAIn, unuSuAL weATher air traffic control can pose significant
coming soon is the deployment of space based PhenomenA, And AIr TrAFFIc challenges to visiting pilots. For example, when
conTroL dIFFIcuLTIeS?
ADS-B which will result in radar coverage in following controller altitude instructions on
the vast Canadian Arctic regions and the Canada has filed several differences with STAR procedures, there is a difference between
North Atlantic and ultimately the entire planet. ICAO SARPs (see GEN 1.7 of Canada’s AIP Canada and the US as to whether or not pilots
This is being done by Aireon, a company that http://www.navcanada.ca/EN/products-and- must continue to adhere to the chart altitudes.
is jointly owned by Nav Canada (the not for services/Documents/AIP/Current/part_1_ Although this difference will be eliminated in
profit Company that administers our ATS gen/1gen_eng_1.pdf . Some differences are due 2017, it illustrates that differences from ICAO
system) Iridium and other partners. The first to unique challenges, such as our remote exist and cause inconsistencies and potential
satellites are scheduled to be launched by the northern regions, where Canada either tries to safety issues.
time this issue of InterPilot goes to press. comply but does not quite get there or they do
not comply at all. For example, Canada
An you dIScuSS Some hAzArdS currently is non-compliant with ICAO
C ThAT Are unIque To your Standards and Recommended Practices
regIon? (SARPs) in Annex 4 Chapter 5, Annex 6 Part I Would you like to be featured in
Canada is no different than many other Chapter 6 and Annex 15 Chapter 10 regarding Voice of the Regions?
countries in terms of geographical, terrain avoidance and although recent Do you have any suggestions
meteorological and other hazards and at this amendments to our regulations will require regarding this series?
time of the year the winter weather extremes GPWS and other equipment in some smaller Please do let us know.
are a reality of operating in Canada. With most aircraft, several types will continue to be Email [email protected]
of our population located within 200 miles of non-compliant. Also, Canada has implemented
our southern border, many of the airports in terrain charting standards differently, making
our vast, sparsely settled northern region have it potentially difficult for visiting pilots to find
or interpret the information.

interpilot | the safety and technical Journal of iFAlpA issUe 1 | 2017