Another TFR in Canadian airspace

Transport Canada has agreed to extend the U.S. Superbowl TFR into Canadian airspace. Here’s the NOTAM:

060014 CYQG WINDSOR PART 1 OF 2

CYQG DAH IS AMENDED AS FOLLOWS:

1) CYR540, WINDSOR ON, CLASS F RESTRICTED AIRSPACE IS ESTABLISHED WITHIN THE AREA BOUNDED BY A CIRCLE OF 10 NM RADIUS CENTRED ON 422025N 830243W (FORD FIELD, DETROIT MICHIGAN) OR THE YQG 305 RADIAL 11.1 NM, EXCLUDING US AIRSPACE. SFC TO BUT NOT INCLUDING FL180. NOTE THAT A SIMILAR TEMPO FLT RESTRICTION (TFR) AREA HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED IN ADJACENT US AIRSPACE. SEE US NOTAMS.

NO PERSON SHALL OPR AN ACFT WITHIN THE AREA DESCRIBED EXCEPT FOR STATE ACFT, MIL AND POLICE OPS, REGULAR SKED COMMERCIAL PASSENGER AND CARGO CARRIERS, HUMANITARIAN AND EMERGENCY FLTS SQUAWKING A DISCRETE TRANSPONDER CODE ASSIGNED AND AUTH BY CLEVELAND ACC (440) 774-0510.

WITHIN CYR540, THE RULES OF FLIGHT FOR THE EXISTING AIRSPACE STRUCTURE AND CLASSIFICATION APPLY, WITH THE FOLLOWING EXCEPTIONS.

ASSIGNED DISCRETE CODES SHALL BE SQUAWKED PRIOR TO ENTERING AND AT ALL TIMES WHILE IN CYR540.

ALL ACFT OPR IN CYR540 SHALL REMAIN IN TWO-WAY RADIO COMM AT ALL TIMES WITH ATS AND SHOULD ANTICIPATE POSSIBLE DELAYS.

2) CYR541, WINDSOR ON, CLASS F RESTRICTED AIRSPACE IS ESTABLISHED WITHIN THE AREA BOUNDED BY A CIRCLE OF 30 NM RADIUS CENTRED ON 422025N 830243W (FORD FIELD, DETROIT MICHIGAN) OR THE YQG 305 RADIAL 11.1 NM, EXCLUDING CYR540 AND US AIRSPACE. SFC TO BUT NOT INCLUDING FL180.

NO PERSON SHALL OPR AN ACFT WITHIN THE AREA DESCRIBED EXCEPT FOR STATE ACFT, MIL AND POLICE OPS, REGULARILY SKED COMMERCIAL PASSENGER AND CARGO CARRIERS, HUMANITARIAN AND EMERGENCY FLTS, OR IFR/VFR ACFT ARR OR DEP LOCAL AIRFIELDS WITHIN CYR541 AND TRANSITING CYR541.

Since when are commercial sports games a vital national security interest for either country? This pretty-much shuts down Windsor Airport to general aviation, and places restrictions on several other airports in the area. We faced similar restrictions here in Ottawa when President Bush visited a bit over a year ago, but the president is not even planning to attend the Superbowl.

About these ads

About David Megginson

Scholar, tech guy, Canuck, open-source/data/information zealot, urban pedestrian, language geek, tea drinker, pater familias, red tory, amateur musician, private pilot.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Another TFR in Canadian airspace

  1. Pingback: Flight Nest

  2. Frank Ch. Eigler says:

    I believe the “hazardous condition” is the presence of a large group of warm bodies that might make a spectacular terrorist target, and the perceived ease by which an airborne attacker could harm them. There is a wee bit of logic to it.

  3. Mark says:

    I think it’s rediculous that TFRs are issued for sporting events. GA is the group that suffers the most from these, yet GA aircraft are the ones least likely to be chosen by anyone with nefarious thoughts about using an aircraft for a terrorist/attack purpose.

    For Transport Canada to run lockstep in this was simply a matter avoiding being picked out as the “stubborn neighbour to the north” once again by every media outlet in the USA. We all know that if TC had simply snubbed their nose at the TFR on our side of the airspace, it would be all over the US newspapers in one negative fashion or another the next day.

    Yes, the superbowl does present a nice number of people all comfortably together in a single confined space, which in the greater reality does provide a reasonable “target”…but is a TFR really going to stop someone from acting out their plans regardless, providing they do so before any defensive aircraft arrive on the scene?

    And even if they do, would they shoot down a stray 152 to “protect” the Superbowl?

    If the 152 ended up containing a lost pilot who had accidentally stumbled into the airspare, or who didn’t catch the NOTAM due to lack of preflight planning, what would the stories be in the newspapers then?

    I think it’s all rather silly, myself. For the Prime Minister, or the President, I can understand. For a sporting event, not so much.

    What’s next? Should every Nascar race, Stanley Cup game, etc etc deserve a TFR as well?

  4. Aviatrix says:

    I haven’t seen a NOTAM leaking across the border like that before, sine 2001, and I’m not really comfortable with it. Would the FAA co-operate so handily if we had an event we wanted to keep aircraft away from? What comes to mind is a crime scene: a lurid tabloid-attracting event where the RCMP haul bodies out of a site near the border. Such sites usually are NOTAMed off with virtual yellow police tape below 3000′ to keep the media helicopters out. Would the Americans issue a NOTAM covering their side of the border, or would there be a ‘freedom of the press’ problem?

    And for the sake of the folks who make their livings towing banners, flying airships, and providing aerial media coverage of sporting events: hell no, sports events shouldn’t close airspace.

Comments are closed.