Since our dysfunctional Congress has been tossing FAA privatization around for awhile, I would love to hear a discussion with our Canadian members as to how NavCanada works for aircraft less than 3 tons (tonnes in Canadian), especially the back country operators.

I have flown in the NavCanada system and paid the, in my mind, very reasonable $17/quarter fee for flight services while operating there.

I am sure our the owners of our Congress, big business, major airlines, unions etc., would find a way to screw the General Aviation community. While NavCanada seems to have struck a good middle ground.

Look forward to an informative discussion.

TD

I don't mind paying the $75/year. But I wish we have the digital sectional choices like you guys have. Sure we have foreflight now, and fltplango. So it is getting better. One way you guys have it way better is that TFRs are plotted on the sectionals for you. Up here they give us plot points and we have to plot them all. Major PIA.

So Foreflight doesn't show the TFRs on its Canadian charts? It was that way in the US when FF first came out, but for a long time now, they've been pretty good with all but the last minute pop-ups such as for fire suppression.

Cary

It works okay for me. The fee is reasonable. I fly out of the same airstrip all the time and the only involvement I have with Nav Canada is when I file or close my flight plan, communicate with the local CARS station, or get their weather from the internet.

When I'm in the back-country I access their services via sat-phone, but only to the degree necessary for safety.

Cary wrote:So Foreflight doesn't show the TFRs on its Canadian charts? It was that way in the US when FF first came out, but for a long time now, they've been pretty good with all but the last minute pop-ups such as for fire suppression.

Cary

No it doesn't. You either have to search through all the Notams to find what you are looking for, or just call and ask if there is any on your route. I just call. But if there is any they can only give me the points to plot. In talking with them, they have no plans to change it in the future. But hoping that will change!!

Like NunavutPa12 I really have little to do with them. The odd phone call when I'm going on a longer trip, and paying my bill.

Nav Canada seems to have it figured out. I don't mind the fee...it's less that the cost of a tank of gas. The service is good and it seems to be improving all the time. I like that they still have a phone number you can call and talk to a specialist...they have not replaced people with technology and I'm grateful for that...accessing a weather website from a sat phone or a pay phone at a small airport doesn't work well

There was a bit of a painful transition for the employees when they shifted from "government workers" to "private sector workers". There was, understandably, some concern and animosity within the employee group and it occasionally manifested itself in service quality. That was a long time ago and I would suggest that it has not been an issue for years...but it could be an issue for the FAA if they decided to go the "privatization route".

My only complaint is with their billing system. I have had some issues (including getting a bill this year for a plane that I sold 20 years ago). The few billing issues I have had have been solved quickly and politely by the Nav Canada staff.

I understand that Nav Canada has a whole separate business that develops technology and a another one that provides consulting type work for Air Traffic Service Providers in other countries...shows they must be doing something right.

Positive: My experience with Nav Canada "controllers" has been real positive. Like ATC in Alaska, Nav Canada controllers seem genuinely interested in helping. Our Lower 48 ATC could learn a lot from both Alaska and Nav Canada ATC.

Annoying:
Billing. Seems to be in a pre-Internet world as I have never been able to find a way to pay online, or by phone for that matter. Have to mail in the payment (credit card or check).

Annoying:
TFRs. Certainly Canada doesn't use TFRs the way (as frequently for as many things) as the U.S. does, which may explain why there is no online location to see where TFRs are and get a visual representation of them. On my way up to Alaska this year there was a big TFR in Alberta for fire fighting just north of one of the airports I stopped at. All Nav Canada could do was provide Lat/Long coordinates, not very helpful without a chartroom to plot it out. Top was 7000' msl so I flew 90 degrees to my intended route until I got high enough to go over the top. As I was doing that I heard over the radio a lot of other pilots "busting" the TFR.

I think that Nav Canada does an excellent job of providing air traffic services in Canada. My experience of the services provided by the FAA is limited to about 12 days of VFR flying south of the border so you can take my opinion with a grain of salt but I noticed a couple differences that are worth examining when talking about privatising air traffic control.

Overall, the service I received in the USA was very good, controllers and flight service folks were helpful and seemed genuinely interested in making my life easier. The services provided by Nav Canada do seem to be a little better integrated though. From weather briefing, to flight planning, to air and ground control, dealing with air traffic services in the USA feels like passing through a number of little empires while in Canada it feels more like going through a more streamlined and organized system. When I file a VFR flight plan every ATS unit I deal with along the way knows who I am and where I'm going. I believe that this is because all air traffic services are provided under one roof in Canada. I find the online weather briefing products that Nav Canada puts out to be easier to use than those put out in the USA and Nav Canada's flight service specialists tend to have better local knowledge than their counterparts at Lockheed Martin FSS. When I called Lockheed Martin FSS I always felt like the briefer was just reading me the stuff I could find online anyway, rather than giving me the insight and interpretation that is the norm when dealing with a Nav Canada specialist (again, a limited amount of flying in the USA = a limited number of weather briefings to base this on).

As far as the fees go, I find Nav Canada's fees to be very reasonable for the level of service provided and their fee structure is such that the heaviest users of the system (the airlines) pay the heaviest fees, as it should be. Nav Canada is structured as a not-for-profit corporation and its board of directors is composed mostly of those elected by stakeholder groups (air carriers, the federal government, general aviation, and unions are all represented on the board). Nav Canada's fees have not increased since 2007, when they were actually reduced because Nav Canada was bringing in more revenue than it needed to run and improve Canada's air traffic system. We are going to see a small, temporary reduction in rates for 2017 because the law under which Nav Canada was created requires that they only charge the amount required to cover operations based on reasonable projections of expenses and revenue for the next year.

I've read a fair bit of the rhetoric surrounding the potential privatisation of air traffic services in the USA, and frankly it pisses me off when I read garbage like "If we privatise we'll wind up like Canada!" Like that's a bad thing, we receive excellent air traffic services here for a very reasonable fee (I'd venture a guess that we actually pay less for air traffic services than the USA does, the fees are just hidden in taxes south of the border). I'm not saying that privatising air traffic services is the right or wrong thing to do in the USA, but it seems to work well for us here in Canada. I think that the reason it works well is that it's well governed. We didn't just drop it in the lap of a for-profit corporation, we created a corporation for the sole purpose of providing air traffic services and made it illegal for them to turn a profit on providing a necessary service. Is Nav Canada a perfect air traffic service utopia? Nope. There is always room for improvement but I think it's a pretty good model for privatisation to follow if the USA decides to go down that road.

Barnstormer wrote:Annoying:
Billing. Seems to be in a pre-Internet world as I have never been able to find a way to pay online, or by phone for that matter. Have to mail in the payment (credit card or check).

This is my current beef with Nav Canada. I'm 32 years old, I've never written a cheque (or even had a chequing account) and I almost never send anything by mail. Sending my payment to Nav Canada is a massive pain in the ass compared with almost every other organisation that allows me to simply pay online.

I just call the phone # on my bills and pay with my credit card. I didn't know this was an issue.

I prefer paying for ATC and access to airports via the gas tax as in the US and some states. Those who fly more pay more, it's easy to and very inexpensive to collect, no new systems are required, I have yet to see a gas tax bill for a plane I sold "20 years ago". In Washington State we have an annual registration fee (aka "tax")... About 60% of the toal revenue from registration is scked off in overhead and never makes it to actually supporting aviation systems or infrastructure. Given the antiquated services and billing methods NAVCanada uses as described by others in this thread I speculate the ROI for user GA fees collected in Canada are equally poor.

PapernSissors said:

I prefer paying for ATC and access to airports via the gas tax as in the US and some states

With the cost of avgas in Canada, I am guessing some of that is tax that goes back into aviation. Comments?

TomD wrote:PapernSissors said:

I prefer paying for ATC and access to airports via the gas tax as in the US and some states

With the cost of avgas in Canada, I am guessing some of that is tax that goes back into aviation. Comments?

Not that I know of. All of our gas is more expensive up here, avgas and moGas. I doubt much if any of the federal tax goes back to aviation. If it did it would be through transport Canada and not nav Canada.

I have a little experience with NavCanada, and quite a bit with the US flavor. I could certainly live with a system similar to NavCanada's here in the US.

But, here's the rub: It's called the Congress of the United States of America.....bought and paid for by "special interests", specifically in this case, the airlines.

So, in this country, a system such as the one in Canada would likely cost the average GA aviator $10,000 a year after all was said and done.

After all, all those private pilots are swimming in money, right?

Don't ever underestimate how much our Congress is capable of screwing up a functioning system....

MTV

Yep, MTV !

Most frightening phrase in the USA "I'm from the government and here to help you."