NAV Canada services

[Liquid_Charlie]

Mostly this is about their online information and how out dated their web site is. The format really sucks and graphical FA;s, now that is a joke. Hand painted and divided by provincial borders. Jeezus give right testicle to get a look at the full wx picture. Possibly animation, which should be expected in this day and age. It makes me wonder if they are inching towards paid subscription. They certainly are not spending any money on improving their site and drag into the present century, which is almost 25% over.

I will touch on FSS stations and yes they are shrinking but at the end of the day are they really supplying an essential service. They have locked their doors and expect you to call the 800 number for briefings and flight plans. I know they offer an electronic filing service but that ain't exactly 100% reliable. Airports function very well without them and if you get an over enthusiastic FSS operator what a pain in the ass that is. It only adds to useless chatter and ironically reduction in safety. To bad they couldn't be restricted to IFR clearances and releases. Life would be a lot easier. FSS as we know it is also becoming old tech and needs an upgrade.

Pretty ironic that we can get better service through a subscription from american sources.

Most level 2 and a lot of level 3 carriers do not use FFS services other that dealing with them on the radio. FSS is geared up to and dealing with general aviation and smaller carriers. Any company with a dispatch system is paying for services never rendered directly. I know they supply wx information but there are more unmanned stations and wx obs and data base is not an excuse to keep FSS stations as we know them today.

Why is aviation always behind the tech curve.

[David MacRay]

I suppose I should admit, my meteorological abilities were stunted when I was flying places, because in the mid 1990s you could wander over to the FSS and get an actual briefing from a person who understood what parts were important. I suspect there were a few less qualified folks. I was ignorant enough to not notice.

My abilities are still not great but certainly have improved plenty in the last few years just because I have decided to try. I like the graphical FAs but don’t understand why they can’t keep up with at least an update or two, when it gets very obvious the 6 hour prediction is going to be wrong.

I hope this is not defending them but... the US subscription sources certainly are going to have a better budget.

I usually prefer public services but in this case they do seem to need an overhaul that might not even be possible.

[Squaretail]

I can’t really say I have had any issues with the Canadian FSS service. It’s always been reasonable on the phone, filing flight plans, or on the radio.

I’m not a fan of the Lidus service provided in the U.S. it’s really awkward and it’s two separate systems. If you are VFR you might as well not exist. Lots of weird transmit and receive stuff like listening on your VOR and what not. Don’t get me started about the ads you are forced to sit through, for better subscribed service that don’t disappear when you subscribe....

I do wish though that our AWWS site was improved, some of the American graphical tools are really handy, though are less so north of the border since we have a paucity of weather stations. I also miss the actual meteorologists and human weather observers that used to be more common here. Canada’s reliance on automated weather data gathering leads to a pretty poor service. Be nice if there were more weather reporting points with more human observers.

[David MacRay]

My experience over several flying days in the US, around 1995 was just getting a briefing on the phone via 1-800-WX-BRIEF, then if it sounded good filing a flight plan.

Going to a FSS in Canada was usually more fun because they would show you their drawings.

The FBOs down there were often quite helpful though. They usually knew where the semi affordable hotel/motels were and sometimes gave you a ride to get lunch.

[CpnCrunch]

I've always found the GFA and LGFs to be very useful for VFR and IFR flight planning. I saw a few years ago the US was moving to graphical forecasts, but looking at their product it doesn't really seem to be all that useful:

https://www.aviationweather.gov/gfa

You can see winds, or ceilings up to 2000ft, or icing at any particular level, or the weather systems, but you can't see the whole shebang in one nice chart like we have in our GFAs. I would find it difficult and tedious figuring out if the weather is really suitable for my flight from all of those separate charts, unless I'm missing something.

[Squaretail]

Use the zoom out on the METAR and TAF pages then the time scale slider and you get a good look at what the weather will be for any flights. Really useful for planning destinations and alternates. Took me a bit to figure that out, but now I really like it. It helps with the larger density of reporting stations they have. You can use it north of the border, but the lack of stations makes it somewhat less useful. Helps as well if you are more familiar with the old circle and fletching representation. On the same page you can adjust for altitude to get an idea of the upper flow.

I only say that since I used to think the same way. I will say it seems more intuitive in the iPad manipulating the map.

[Squaretail]

My experience over several flying days in the US, around 1995 was just getting a briefing on the phone via 1-800-WX-BRIEF, then if it sounded good filing a flight plan.

It was like that, now you phone that number and you get routed through a bunch of prompts which all take the time to remind you that faster service is pay to play. Then when you fill in your online form and let them know whether you prefer boxers or briefs, you get a few less prompts thanking you for your subscription. It is neat that it can be tied to your phone number, so they know the pilot tied to the plane, but the opportunity seems to be missed for a more streamlined service. By comparison it takes me about a third of the time to file with navcan on average.

[David MacRay]

I can’t go there so, I have to complain about the system I have access to. I will try to wait until I have something specific. BRB..

[Liquid_Charlie]

There are 2 issues here with NAV CAN - the information side and the flight service station side. The information is on their site but in my mind poorly organised and presentation is outdated. I like the graphical concept but I think we need a Canada wide presentation rather that divided at provicial borders. Try and live and fly in one of these zones and it is a real pain in the ass. The big picture with zoom in and zoom out animation would be a perfect tool.

I still go to the surface analysis but that hasn't changed much in the last 50 years and update times are stupid. Have a one stop automation map with local METAR/TAF right on the same map. I still like to check sequences with forecasts to get a handle if the time line is the same.

Automated wx is a fact of life and is here to stay. FSS is closing their doors and will not give wx briefings anymore. The 800 number can be busy and if you are in a "special" event like a large fire event you can be on the fone and on ignore for considerable time. I found myself in this situation once and I would actually call just before bed and file about 6 IFR flight plans for the next day time line and then do a reroute once airborne. I had no idea where I would be going but I would just pull destinations and alternates out of my ass. It actually worked pretty good. Once you were launched on your 1st flight just adjust future departure times. Playing the system -- haha

I do however find that many radio experiences for traffic and advisories and depending on the specialist were very painful, inefficient and just plain stupidity ruled the day. There are very good specialists and do a great job and a pleasure to work with but it seems that almost every station I ever worked with always had at least one complete asshole and a certified tool. That really added to the workload in IMC/VFR mix. Uncontrolled airports usually are far easier to work with but as anything else the lowest common denominator rules the day and anything can turn into a shit show.

[David MacRay]

You got me LC.

I can’t look at the GFA now without wanting it to show the entire country instead of just Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba.