airfields with a tower that doesn't control pilots?

[Cub Driver]

Last week I was in Greenland, at Narsarsuaq, formerly the USAAF and
USAF airfield Bluie West One.

It's a fabulous place, but one aspect of the Narsarsuaq airfield
really astonished me. There is a tower, six days a week during normal
daylight hours, but the tower only gives advice; the pilot is always
in control, and makes his own decisions.

Is this very unusual?



-- all the best, Dan Ford

email (put Cubdriver in subject line)

Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com
the blog: www.danford.net
In Search of Lost Time: www.readingproust.com

[Brad Zeigler]

"Cub Driver" > wrote in message
...
> snipped...
> There is a tower, six days a week during normal
> daylight hours, but the tower only gives advice; the pilot is always
> in control, and makes his own decisions.

Isn't the pilot always in control and have final authority at all towered
airports?

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Brad Zeigler" > wrote in message
...
>
> Isn't the pilot always in control and have final authority at all towered
> airports?

That wouldn't work very well. You could have a pilot using his final
authority to land on runway 18 while another pilot is using his final
authority to land on runway 36.

[Brad Zeigler]

"Steven P. McNicoll" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>
> "Brad Zeigler" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> Isn't the pilot always in control and have final authority at all towered
>> airports?
>
> That wouldn't work very well. You could have a pilot using his final
> authority to land on runway 18 while another pilot is using his final
> authority to land on runway 36.

Have you never flown into a non-towered airport?

[Tauno Voipio]

Cub Driver wrote:
> Last week I was in Greenland, at Narsarsuaq, formerly the USAAF and
> USAF airfield Bluie West One.
>
> It's a fabulous place, but one aspect of the Narsarsuaq airfield
> really astonished me. There is a tower, six days a week during normal
> daylight hours, but the tower only gives advice; the pilot is always
> in control, and makes his own decisions.
>
> Is this very unusual?
>

It seems that you have met AFIS - Aerodrome Flight Information
Service. The guy in the tower is not a qualified ATC controller,
but he's able to provide the minimum information needed for
night or IFR operations.

AFAIK, AFIS is in use on smaller European airports.

--

Tauno Voipio (Piper Turbo Arrow IV at EFHF)
tauno voipio (at) iki fi

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Brad Zeigler" > wrote in message
...
>
> Have you never flown into a non-towered airport?

Many times. Why?

[Stefan]

Tauno Voipio wrote:

> AFAIK, AFIS is in use on smaller European airports.

Pretty common here. What looks like a tower isn't a "tower" in the
technical sense. Look at the chart: You most probably won't find a
"tower" frequency but rather an "info" or "AFIS" frequency.

Stefan

[Paul Tomblin]

In a previous article, said:
>Last week I was in Greenland, at Narsarsuaq, formerly the USAAF and
>USAF airfield Bluie West One.
>
>It's a fabulous place, but one aspect of the Narsarsuaq airfield
>really astonished me. There is a tower, six days a week during normal
>daylight hours, but the tower only gives advice; the pilot is always
>in control, and makes his own decisions.
>
>Is this very unusual?

Several Canadian airports I've been at have a FSS on the field. Their
facility looks like a tower cab, but not up on a tower, and they are the
ones you talk to (you say "St. Catherines Radio" instead of "St.
Catherines Traffic" or they get upset with you), but they tell you the
wind an altimeter settings, tell you if anybody else is in the pattern,
but they don't clear you for anything.

--
Paul Tomblin > http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
To ensure privacy and data integrity this message has been encrypted
using dual rounds of ROT-13 encryption.

[Gene Seibel]

Used to have similar FSS stations at many airports here in the US. I
remeber one day approaching an airport from a ways out and having the
FSS give me a blow-by-blow (excuse the pun) account as a thunderstorm
approached the airport from the other direction. Not a controller, but
very helpful. I lost the race and landed elsewhere.
--
Gene Seibel
Tales of Flight - http://pad39a.com/gene/tales.html
Because I fly, I envy no one.

[john smith]

Paul Tomblin wrote:
> Several Canadian airports I've been at have a FSS on the field. Their
> facility looks like a tower cab, but not up on a tower, and they are the
> ones you talk to (you say "St. Catherines Radio" instead of "St.
> Catherines Traffic" or they get upset with you), but they tell you the
> wind an altimeter settings, tell you if anybody else is in the pattern,
> but they don't clear you for anything.

I was thinking that originally, but then another poster reminded me that
Denmark owns Greenland, hence the European comparison.

[Happy Dog]

"Cub Driver" > wrote in message
> Last week I was in Greenland, at Narsarsuaq, formerly the USAAF and
> USAF airfield Bluie West One.
>
> It's a fabulous place, but one aspect of the Narsarsuaq airfield
> really astonished me. There is a tower, six days a week during normal
> daylight hours, but the tower only gives advice; the pilot is always
> in control, and makes his own decisions.
>
> Is this very unusual?

Unicom. Just a guy giving friendly advice.

There are some private airports which have towers that can give or deny
permission to land at the pilot's discretion. Downsview airport in Toronto
(Bombardier facility and military base) has a tower (in the physical sense)
with an operator that replies "cleared to land at your discretion" if you're
welcome. But it isn't a clearance in the ATC sense of the word.

moo

[Happy Dog]

"Paul Tomblin" > wrote in message

> Several Canadian airports I've been at have a FSS on the field. Their
> facility looks like a tower cab, but not up on a tower, and they are the
> ones you talk to (you say "St. Catherines Radio" instead of "St.
> Catherines Traffic" or they get upset with you), but they tell you the
> wind an altimeter settings, tell you if anybody else is in the pattern,
> but they don't clear you for anything.

You only talk to Flight Service Centre or Flight Service Station at airports
with a Mandatory Frequency. Airports that have a MF require that you
contact the appropriate Remote Aerodrome Advisory Service on the MF. That
will be a an FSS or FIC who will then advise traffic and field conditions.
Subsequent calls are sort of made to local traffic and the RAAS. (ie.
London Radio N-XXX is turning final Muskoka".) Note that the RAAS / FSS
isn't usually anywhere near the field.

http://www.tc.gc.ca/CivilAviation/Regserv/Affairs/cars/PART6/602.htm#602_98

moo

[Stefan]

Happy Dog wrote:

> (Bombardier facility and military base) has a tower (in the physical sense)
> with an operator that replies "cleared to land at your discretion"

This is a contradiction in itself. This operator musn't give any
clearances and hence musn't use the "cleared". It is very important to
understand this.

Stefan

[LWG]

Yes, I think Gatineau airport, near Ottawa, is the same. It's a nice
system.

Les

"Paul Tomblin" > wrote in message
...
> In a previous article, said:
>>Last week I was in Greenland, at Narsarsuaq, formerly the USAAF and
>>USAF airfield Bluie West One.
>>
>>It's a fabulous place, but one aspect of the Narsarsuaq airfield
>>really astonished me. There is a tower, six days a week during normal
>>daylight hours, but the tower only gives advice; the pilot is always
>>in control, and makes his own decisions.
>>
>>Is this very unusual?
>
> Several Canadian airports I've been at have a FSS on the field. Their
> facility looks like a tower cab, but not up on a tower, and they are the
> ones you talk to (you say "St. Catherines Radio" instead of "St.
> Catherines Traffic" or they get upset with you), but they tell you the
> wind an altimeter settings, tell you if anybody else is in the pattern,
> but they don't clear you for anything.
>
> --
> Paul Tomblin > http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
> To ensure privacy and data integrity this message has been encrypted
> using dual rounds of ROT-13 encryption.

[Happy Dog]

"Stefan" >

>> (Bombardier facility and military base) has a tower (in the physical
>> sense) with an operator that replies "cleared to land at your discretion"
>
> This is a contradiction in itself. This operator musn't give any
> clearances and hence musn't use the "cleared". It is very important to
> understand this.

The "operator" can't give the kind of "clearance" ATC gives. But they can
grant permission to land and I don't know of any regulation that makes it
illegal for them to use the word "cleared" when doing so. I've never heard
them say "cleared" without following it with "at your discretion". They're
talking to pilots who are required to know that a Unicom is not an ATC
facility. And sometimes they can give or refuse permission to land (private
facility) and sometimes they can't (public one).

moo

[Happy Dog]

"LWG" > wrote in message
...
> Yes, I think Gatineau airport, near Ottawa, is the same. It's a nice
> system.

Question:

This is a very common COMM situation in Canada. Is there a US equivalent?

moo


>
> Les
>
> "Paul Tomblin" > wrote in message
> ...
>> In a previous article, said:
>>>Last week I was in Greenland, at Narsarsuaq, formerly the USAAF and
>>>USAF airfield Bluie West One.
>>>
>>>It's a fabulous place, but one aspect of the Narsarsuaq airfield
>>>really astonished me. There is a tower, six days a week during normal
>>>daylight hours, but the tower only gives advice; the pilot is always
>>>in control, and makes his own decisions.
>>>
>>>Is this very unusual?
>>
>> Several Canadian airports I've been at have a FSS on the field. Their
>> facility looks like a tower cab, but not up on a tower, and they are the
>> ones you talk to (you say "St. Catherines Radio" instead of "St.
>> Catherines Traffic" or they get upset with you), but they tell you the
>> wind an altimeter settings, tell you if anybody else is in the pattern,
>> but they don't clear you for anything.
>>
>> --
>> Paul Tomblin > http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
>> To ensure privacy and data integrity this message has been encrypted
>> using dual rounds of ROT-13 encryption.
>
>

[Andrew Gideon]

Happy Dog wrote:

> There are some private airports which have towers that can give or deny
> permission to land at the pilot's discretion.

How does one deny permission at the pilot's discretion? "... cleared to not
land at pilot's discretion"?

- Andrew

[Happy Dog]

"Andrew Gideon" > wrote in message
> Happy Dog wrote:
>
>> There are some private airports which have towers that can give or deny
>> permission to land at the pilot's discretion.
>
> How does one deny permission at the pilot's discretion? "... cleared to
> not
> land at pilot's discretion"?

hehe

"Not cleared to land at your discretion." Or, maybe, simply "go away".

moo

[Jackal24]

"Gene Seibel" > wrote in news:1125241136.247571.221510
@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

> Used to have similar FSS stations at many airports here in the US.

Still do up here in AK. Then again, we still have NDB airways too.

[Stefan]

Happy Dog wrote:

> The "operator" can't give the kind of "clearance" ATC gives. But they can
> grant permission to land and I don't know of any regulation that makes it
> illegal for them to use the word "cleared" when doing so. I've never heard
> them say "cleared" without following it with "at your discretion".

In ICAO terminology, the word "cleared" is reserved for ATC clearances
and it is most confusing and dangerous if the term is used carelessly by
other persons. At uncontrolled fields, AFIS just says "land at your
discretion" or simply "welcome", but without any clearance.

> And sometimes they can give or refuse permission to land (private
> facility) and sometimes they can't (public one).

Of course, they can always refuse the premission to land (except on
emergencies, of course). In this case, they simply say "you're not
allowed to land".

Stefan

[Cub Driver]

On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 12:26:19 GMT, Tauno Voipio
> wrote:

>It seems that you have met AFIS - Aerodrome Flight Information
>Service. The guy in the tower is not a qualified ATC controller,
>but he's able to provide the minimum information needed for
>night or IFR operations.
>
>AFAIK, AFIS is in use on smaller European airports.

Thanks! I'm glad to know it has a name.

Narsarsuaq's airport is open six days a week and only during broad
daylight. Interestingly, the requirements for an IFR approach are
higher than for a VFR approach at home -- as I recall, 6,000 ft
ceiling and four miles viz.

You take up your Initial Point directly over the airport and at 5,800
feet. Then you fly west on a 5.x degree descent for 8 miles. Then you
make a U turn near a 2,500? ft mountain and fly back east on the same
pitch. The air is so clear in Greenland that the ridgeline looked a
couple hundred feet off the starboard wingtip, though it was in fact
about half a mile away.

Altogether, the most fun I've ever had as a passenger in a jet.

(And that doesn't begin to take into account the lissome Faroese
stewardesses. The Faroes -- Iceland -- Greenland, omigod the women! As
Christopher Buckley wrote recently, it's the result of Nordic DNA, six
centuries of keeping strangers out, and eating raw fish for dinner.)



-- all the best, Dan Ford

email (put Cubdriver in subject line)

Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com
the blog: www.danford.net
In Search of Lost Time: www.readingproust.com

[Cub Driver]

On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 15:39:23 GMT, john smith > wrote:

>I was thinking that originally, but then another poster reminded me that
>Denmark owns Greenland, hence the European comparison.

Yeah, it;s the last colony. Greenland has 55,000 people of whom 8,000
are Danes, including most of the high school teachers and 75 out of
its 85 doctors. Danish kroner is the legal currency.

But it's technically in North America.

The U.S. Army splits the different. The west coast of Greenland is in
NORTHCOM. The east coast is in EURCOM (whatever the name).

If you ever get a chance to go to Greenland, grab it. It's a fabulous
country. Going on an expense account would be even better: a beer is
six bucks. Not only is the bottle imported from Denmark, but it is
sent back to Denmark for recycling.

Diesel however is as cheap as in the U.S.--the Danes subsidise it or
anyhow don't tax it in order to encourage Greenlandic fisheries etc.
Dunno about gasoline. There are effectively no roads, hence no gas
stations. You can buy it at the airport though.


-- all the best, Dan Ford

email (put Cubdriver in subject line)

Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com
the blog: www.danford.net
In Search of Lost Time: www.readingproust.com

[Cub Driver]

On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 17:41:20 -0400, "Happy Dog"
> wrote:

>> Is this very unusual?
>
>Unicom. Just a guy giving friendly advice.

No, it's not Unicom. The airfield tower is a very serious matter. If
you want to fly outside of tower hours, you pay $800 to bring the
"controller" (whatever he is called) out, and to man the fire station.

It's merely that the pilot and not the controller makes the decisions.
I appreciate that the pilot is always the ultimate authority, but in
the U.S. he can't go against the wishes of the controller unless he
declares an emergency, right?

Narsarsuaq is a challenging airport in a very severe environment (the
icecap starts just five miles to the east). The pilot needs somebody
in the tower and in the firehouse. It seems to me that the challenge
is so great that the final control authority has been punted from the
tower to the cockpit, and I wondered how common this is.



-- all the best, Dan Ford

email (put Cubdriver in subject line)

Warbird's Forum: www.warbirdforum.com
Piper Cub Forum: www.pipercubforum.com
the blog: www.danford.net
In Search of Lost Time: www.readingproust.com

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Happy Dog" > wrote in message
...
>
> There are some private airports which have towers that can give or deny
> permission to land at the pilot's discretion. Downsview airport in
> Toronto (Bombardier facility and military base) has a tower (in the
> physical sense) with an operator that replies "cleared to land at your
> discretion" if you're welcome. But it isn't a clearance in the ATC sense
> of the word.
>

There is at least one privately owned airport that has a tower that can
issue genuine landing and takeoff clearances. Airborne Airpark near
Wilmington Ohio is owned by DHL.

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Cub Driver" > wrote in message
...
>
> It's merely that the pilot and not the controller makes the decisions.
> I appreciate that the pilot is always the ultimate authority, but in
> the U.S. he can't go against the wishes of the controller unless he
> declares an emergency, right?
>

No, he can't deviate from any rule of Part 91 except in an in-flight
emergency requiring immediate action. He doesn't have to declare the
emergency, he just has to have it.

[Stefan]

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:

> No, he can't deviate from any rule of Part 91 except in an in-flight

I wasn't aware that the US FARs are applicable in Greenland.

Stefan

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Stefan" > wrote in message
...
>
> I wasn't aware that the US FARs are applicable in Greenland.
>

They're not. We're not talking about Greenland. We're talking about the
US.

[Jose]

> The airfield tower is a very serious matter. If
> you want to fly outside of tower hours, you pay $800 to bring the
> "controller" (whatever he is called) out, and to man the fire station.

Do you think that this is warranted, given the circumstances and the lay
of the airport, or is this an example of idle road crews? (neutral
question - no preformed opinion)

Jose
--
Quantum Mechanics is like this: God =does= play dice with the universe,
except there's no God, and there's no dice. And maybe there's no universe.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Happy Dog]

"Stefan" >
>> The "operator" can't give the kind of "clearance" ATC gives. But they
>> can grant permission to land and I don't know of any regulation that
>> makes it illegal for them to use the word "cleared" when doing so. I've
>> never heard them say "cleared" without following it with "at your
>> discretion".
>
> In ICAO terminology, the word "cleared" is reserved for ATC clearances and
> it is most confusing and dangerous if the term is used carelessly by other
> persons. At uncontrolled fields, AFIS just says "land at your discretion"
> or simply "welcome", but without any clearance.

They shouldn't use the word "cleared". But they can and do.It doesn't
confuse me. Would anyone here really find it confusing?
>
>> And sometimes they can give or refuse permission to land (private
>> facility) and sometimes they can't (public one).
>
> Of course, they can always refuse the premission to land (except on
> emergencies, of course). In this case, they simply say "you're not allowed
> to land".

Not at a public facility.

moo

[Stefan]

Happy Dog wrote:

> They shouldn't use the word "cleared". But they can and do.

I know, some do. Very bad habit, though.

> It doesn't
> confuse me. Would anyone here really find it confusing?

The point is not whether you or me would find it confusing while sitting
in front of a computer and reading usenet. The point is whether it can
cause confusions in a stressy environment, with maybe even people
involved who can barely understand and speak English. The whole point of
a well defined radio terminology is to try to avoid all possibilities of
confusion. If you read accident reports, a surprising lot of them was
caused by misunderstandings which could have been avoided by the use of
the proper terminology.

>> Of course, they can always refuse the permission to land (except on

> Not at a public facility.

This depends on national laws.

Stefan

[Happy Dog]

"Stefan" >

> The point is not whether you or me would find it confusing while sitting
> in front of a computer and reading usenet. The point is whether it can
> cause confusions in a stressy environment, with maybe even people involved
> who can barely understand and speak English. The whole point of a well
> defined radio terminology is to try to avoid all possibilities of
> confusion. If you read accident reports, a surprising lot of them was
> caused by misunderstandings which could have been avoided by the use of
> the proper terminology.

Agreed.

moo

[Tauno Voipio]

Cub Driver wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 12:26:19 GMT, Tauno Voipio
> > wrote:
>
>
>>It seems that you have met AFIS - Aerodrome Flight Information
>>Service. The guy in the tower is not a qualified ATC controller,
>>but he's able to provide the minimum information needed for
>>night or IFR operations.
>>
>>AFAIK, AFIS is in use on smaller European airports.
>
>
> Thanks! I'm glad to know it has a name.
>
> Narsarsuaq's airport is open six days a week and only during broad
> daylight. Interestingly, the requirements for an IFR approach are
> higher than for a VFR approach at home -- as I recall, 6,000 ft
> ceiling and four miles viz.
>
> You take up your Initial Point directly over the airport and at 5,800
> feet. Then you fly west on a 5.x degree descent for 8 miles. Then you
> make a U turn near a 2,500? ft mountain and fly back east on the same
> pitch. The air is so clear in Greenland that the ridgeline looked a
> couple hundred feet off the starboard wingtip, though it was in fact
> about half a mile away.
>
> Altogether, the most fun I've ever had as a passenger in a jet.
>
> (And that doesn't begin to take into account the lissome Faroese
> stewardesses. The Faroes -- Iceland -- Greenland, omigod the women! As
> Christopher Buckley wrote recently, it's the result of Nordic DNA, six
> centuries of keeping strangers out, and eating raw fish for dinner.)
>

Apropos Faroes Islands:

Try to get the Jeppesen charts about the Vagar (Torshavn) airport
(the only one within 400 NM) and have a look at the approaches.

--

Tauno Voipio
tauno voipio (at) iki fi

[Stefan]

Tauno Voipio wrote:

> Apropos Faroes Islands:
>
> Try to get the Jeppesen charts about the Vagar (Torshavn) airport
> (the only one within 400 NM) and have a look at the approaches.

Not Jeppesen, but the Danish originals:
http://www.slv.dk/Dokumenter/dscgi/ds.py/View/Collection-410

BTW, back to the topic: Note that there's a frequency for "AFIS" on the
charts.

Stefan

[Stefan]

Happy Dog wrote:

> Agreed.

Say again??? Whatever happened to usenet??? :-)

Stefan

[George Patterson]

Stefan wrote:
> Happy Dog wrote:
>
>> Agreed.
>
> Say again??? Whatever happened to usenet??? :-)

Now, there's a man who won't take yes for an answer.

George Patterson
Give a person a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a person to
use the Internet and he won't bother you for weeks.

[Tauno Voipio]

Stefan wrote:
> Tauno Voipio wrote:
>
>> Apropos Faroes Islands:
>>
>> Try to get the Jeppesen charts about the Vagar (Torshavn) airport
>> (the only one within 400 NM) and have a look at the approaches.
>
>
> Not Jeppesen, but the Danish originals:
> http://www.slv.dk/Dokumenter/dscgi/ds.py/View/Collection-410
>
> BTW, back to the topic: Note that there's a frequency for "AFIS" on the
> charts.
>

Thanks for the reference. I have only the Scandinavian Jepp.

A fascinating place - plenty of terrain and no alternatives.

--

Tauno Voipio
tauno voipio (at) iki fi

[Peter Weaver]

Paul Tomblin wrote:
> In a previous article, said:
>...
>> daylight hours, but the tower only gives advice; the pilot is always
>> in control, and makes his own decisions.
>...

St. Catharines, Ontario used to be a controlled airport, but now it is
FSS. On Sunday I had my scanner going while watching the airshow and I
heard 4 different aircraft call the FSS asking about landing. In each
case the FSS informed the pilot that there was the airspace for 5 NM, up
to 10,000 feet was restricted due to the airshow. In each case the FSS
ended with "What are your intentions?" If this was a controlled airspace
then he would have ended with some instructions instead of the question.
I wonder what would have happened if the pilot said "My intentions are
to land at St. Catharines" instead of turning around?


> the ones you talk to (you say "St. Catherines Radio" instead of "St.
> Catherines Traffic" or they get upset with you), but they tell you the
>...

I always say "St. Catharines Radio" and have never had anyone get upset.
But then again I'm flying one of the St. Catharines Flying Club aircraft
so they know that I am a local, but you are probably pronouncing St.
Catharines the way you spell it so they know that you are not from
around the area.

--
Peter Weaver
Weaver Consulting Services Inc.
Canadian VAR for CHARON-VAX
www.weaverconsulting.ca

[Paul Tomblin]

In a previous article, "Peter Weaver" > said:
>Paul Tomblin wrote:
>> the ones you talk to (you say "St. Catherines Radio" instead of "St.
>> Catherines Traffic" or they get upset with you), but they tell you the
>>...
>
>I always say "St. Catharines Radio" and have never had anyone get upset.

Which is exactly what I said.

>so they know that I am a local, but you are probably pronouncing St.
>Catharines the way you spell it so they know that you are not from
>around the area.

Your condescention is misplaced.

Next time, try reading what I actually wrote.

--
Paul Tomblin > http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
"It is a universal truth that the loss of liberty will be charged to
dangers, real or imagined, from abroad." - James Madison

[Peter Weaver]

Paul Tomblin wrote:
>...
> Which is exactly what I said.
>...

Right, I misread what you wrote and forgot to add the :) at the end.
Sorry.

--
Peter Weaver
Weaver Consulting Services Inc.
Canadian VAR for CHARON-VAX
www.weaverconsulting.ca

[LWG]

OK, I'll bite...

How *do* you say "St. Catharine's"?

Les

"Peter Weaver" > wrote in message
...
> Paul Tomblin wrote:
>>...
>> Which is exactly what I said.
>>...
>
> Right, I misread what you wrote and forgot to add the :) at the end.
> Sorry.
>
> --
> Peter Weaver
> Weaver Consulting Services Inc.
> Canadian VAR for CHARON-VAX
> www.weaverconsulting.ca
>
>

[Happy Dog]

"Peter Weaver" >
> Paul Tomblin wrote:
>> the ones you talk to (you say "St. Catherines Radio" instead of "St.
>> Catherines Traffic" or they get upset with you), but they tell you the
>>...
>
> I always say "St. Catharines Radio" and have never had anyone get upset.

Is there a St. Catherines FSS or FIC?

moo

[George Patterson]

Paul Tomblin wrote:
> In a previous article, "LWG" > said:
>
>>How *do* you say "St. Catharine's"?
>
> As if there isn't an "a" between the "th" and the "r".

In other words, the way a southerner would say it.

George Patterson
Give a person a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a person to
use the Internet and he won't bother you for weeks.

[Gene Seibel]

Only way to really "control" pilots is with electrodes and high
voltage. ;)
--
Gene Seibel
Gene & Sue's Aeroplanes - http://pad39a.com/gene/planes.html
Because we fly, we envy no one.

[Robert M. Gary]

I thought that pilots that appear to be controlled by someone else was
one of the warning signs that homeland security wants us to watch for.

-Robert

[Dave Stadt]

"Robert M. Gary" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> I thought that pilots that appear to be controlled by someone else was
> one of the warning signs that homeland security wants us to watch for.
>
> -Robert

Is there a marriage exclusion?

[Peter Weaver]

Happy Dog wrote:
>...
> Is there a St. Catharines FSS or FIC?
>...

AFAIK it is a FSS.

--
Peter Weaver
Weaver Consulting Services Inc.
Canadian VAR for CHARON-VAX
www.weaverconsulting.ca

[Peter Weaver]

Paul Tomblin wrote:
> In a previous article, "LWG" > said:
>> OK, I'll bite...
>>
>> How *do* you say "St. Catharine's"?
>
> As if there isn't an "a" between the "th" and the "r". Or if you're

Right, in casual conversations it is "saint cath-RINES." When talking to
someone who is trying to write down your address the official
pronunciation is "saint cath-A-rines, with an A between the H and the R,
[pause while they mumble something] that's right, two A's and one E
before the final S." But you know when the package or letter arrives it
will have "St. Catherines" on it, unless it was coming from Quebec then
it will say "Saint Catherines" or "Ste. Catherines."

A few years ago when the Ontario government wanted to merge smaller
cities into larger ones some recommended that St. Catharines, Niagara
Falls, Welland and the smaller towns around merge in a new city named
Niagara, the biggest complaint I heard came from people who asked what
will we do with all the free time created by not having to correct
outsiders on how to spell the name.

But to bring this back to an air related post, I could never figure out
why pilots use "St. Catharines" on the radio, when the airport is named
"Niagara District Airport."


--
Peter Weaver
Weaver Consulting Services Inc.
Canadian VAR for CHARON-VAX
www.weaverconsulting.ca