PRE-FLIGHT

• The Life of a Flight Plan
• COPA Corner: Border-Crossing Procedures Revisited
• The HAC Column: The Emerging Duty of Care for Helicopter Operators
• CBAA Column: How Safety Management Systems Apply to the Small Operator
• Night Fright

---

The Life of a Flight Plan

by the Safety Management Planning and Analysis Division, Operational Support, NAV CANADA

A flight plan(or itinerary) serves two main purposes. First, it provides information to NAV CANADA, which facilitates planning for the provision of air traffic control(ATC) services. Second, and most important, it is the basis on which alerting service is provided to pilots.

A host of air traffic service(ATS) units are involved in the provision of alerting service, including flight service stations(FSS), flight information centres(FIC), control towers, and area control centres(ACC). Community aerodrome radio stations(CARS), which are not ATS units, are also involved in the provision of alerting service.

The transfer of information between these units is seamless to pilots. But to ATS, it is vitally important to know which unit is responsible for providing alerting service at a given point in time. Just as pilots have procedures for the safe transfer of control of the aircraft between crew members("I have control" or "you have control"), ATS has procedures for ensuring that one unit has responsibility for alerting service.

The purpose of this article is to provide pilots with an overview of what happens to their flight plan at each stage of its life. Understanding how the system works can help pilots make it work better for them! ¹

Over the course of its life, a flight plan can be filed, amended, cancelled, activated, changed(IFRvs.VFR), updated, closed, or it can become overdue.

Filed
To facilitate planning by ATS, pilots are requested to file their flight plan at least 30min prior to their proposed departure time.

Once filed, flight plan messages are transmitted via the aeronautical fixed telecommunications network(AFTN) to units that will be providing advisory, control and alerting services. The AFTN interconnects Canadian ACCs, control towers, FSSs and FICs and other aeronautical facilities around the world.

IFR flight plans are transmitted to the ACC in the flight information region(FIR) where the departure aerodrome is located, so that the ACC can provide control and alerting services. They are then transmitted from one ACC to the next as the flight progresses, and each new ACC assumes responsibility for alerting service.

VFR flight plans are held by the FIC in the area of responsibility where the departure aerodrome is located, so that the FIC can provide alerting service. Then, when activated, they are transmitted to the FIC in the area of responsibility where the destination aerodrome is located. The receiving FIC assumes responsibility for alerting service when the activated flight plan is received.

When filing a flight plan electronically, it is expected that the person filing will be contactable by phone for 30 min after NAVCANADA receives the flight plan, in order to clarify any information.

Amended or cancelled
In Canada, a VFR flight plan is activated automatically at the proposed departure time or actual departure time when reported to an ATS unit, whichever is earlier. To avoid an unnecessary search, it is very important for pilots to notify ATS when their proposed flight is delayed or cancelled. This is particularly true at aerodromes where no ATS or CARS service is provided, as there is no way for ATS to know if the aircraft has departed.

Flight plans filed through a computer system(e.g. NAVCANADA’s Internet Flight Planning System, or the Direct User Access Terminal System[DUATS]) can only be cancelled or amended by phone call to or radio contact with an ATS unit.

Activated
As stated above, in Canada, a VFR flight plan is activated automatically at the proposed departure time unless ATS knows that the aircraft has not departed. It is good practice, however, for VFR pilots to contact the appropriate ATS unit and request that their flight plan be activated. An accurate departure time facilitates planning of ATS and ensures more timely alerting service, if required.

As things work a little bit differently in the U.S., pilots flying VFR from the U.S. to Canada should be aware that they must contact an American automated flight service station(AFSS) to have their flight plan activated.

Federal Aviation Administration(FAA) control towers and air route traffic control centers(ARTCC) do not pass VFR departure times or position reports on to the AFSS. Many VFR pilots have unwittingly violated the Canadian Aviation Regulations(CARs) by crossing the border without an active flight plan. In the U.S., filing a VFR flight plan does not mean it has been activated!

Changed(IFR vs. VFR)
ACCs provide alerting services to all IFR aircraft and to the VFR aircraft for which they are responsible. FICs provide alerting services for all other VFR aircraft.

In Canada, when an aircraft "cancels IFR," it means cancelling IFR control service. It does not automatically cancel alerting services. The controller or specialist should inquire whether the pilot also intends to close the flight plan. If so, the pilot will be advised, "alerting services terminated," and the flight plan will be closed.

If the pilot wishes to keep the flight plan(and associated alerting services) open, the ACC will retain alerting services. Pilots should be reminded that an arrival report would then be required to close their flight plan.

In general, when cancellingIFR, it is advisable to keep the flight plan open to take advantage of alerting services-just don’t forget to file an arrival report!

This is another example of where things work a little differently in the U.S. If IFR is cancelled in the U.S., or in Canadian airspace delegated to the FAA, alerting service may not follow the pilot into Canada. In such circumstances, the pilot is required to file a new VFR flight plan before crossing the border in order to comply with the regulations and to ensure that alerting service continues to be provided.

Aircraft on composite flight plans(e.g. part VFR, partIFR) have their alerting service managed by different units during the various parts of their flights. The ACC is responsible for the IFR portion, while the FIC is responsible for the VFR portion.

What this means for pilots is that, in circumstances where the flight is terminating with a VFR portion, they should be sure to keep the FIC advised of any delays or revised arrival times. In accordance with VFR procedures, pilots should also be sure to file an arrival report with the appropriate ATS unit.

The above also applies to aircraft flying controlled
VFR(CVFR)(VFR in ClassBairspace). While a flight plan and departure message is sent to the appropriate ACC to allow control service to be provided, alerting service is provided in the same way as for a VFR flight. This means that updates and arrival reports should be provided to the appropriate ATS unit.

Updated
Since alerting service is based on information provided by the pilot, it is critically important for pilots to keep the ATS unit or CARS up to date regarding changes to their flight plan. Section RAC3.7 of the Transport Canada Aeronautical Information Manual(TC AIM) outlines the specific CARs requirements for updating a flight plan.

Pilots can certainly understand the importance of providing an update whenever there is a change to when, or where, they expect somebody to come looking for them!

Closed
With the exception of pilots arriving IFR at aerodromes served by an ATS unit, pilots are required to file arrival reports in order to close a flight plan. Pilots arriving VFR at aerodromes served by an ATS unit should not assume that their flight plan will be closed. They may request that the unit close their flight plan. Otherwise, a phone call to or radio contact with the FIC at the remote communications outlet(RCO) after landing will save unnecessary search and rescue(SAR) action.

Overdue
The specific time an aircraft becomes overdue will depend on whether the aircraft is IFR or VFR, whether it is on a flight plan or itinerary, and whether a SAR time has been indicated on the flight plan.

If an aircraft is overdue, the responsible ATS unit will initiate alerting service. This process will begin with a communications search-contacting ATS units, aerodromes and CARS along the proposed route of flight to see if they have communicated with the aircraft, and calling the contacts provided on the flight plan. This process will culminate with the notification of the joint rescue coordination centre(JRCC), which will dispatch the appropriate SAR resources.

Conclusion
We hope this article has provided a better understanding of how flight plans make their way through the system. For pilots, the message is simple: ensure your flight plan is complete and up to date and, particularly when flying VFR, ensure your flight plan is activated, updated as required, and closed with ATS!

---

COPA Corner: Border-Crossing Procedures Revisited

by John Quarterman, Manager, Member Assistance and Programs, Canadian Owners and Pilots Association(COPA)

Canadians like to travel, and according to Statistics Canada, we like to travel as much to the United States as we do to some provinces in Canada. The number of trips to New York State, for example, is listed on the Statistics Canada Web site as 1968000 in 2007, as opposed to some 911000 trips to Prince Edward Island in 2004(the most recent statistics available) ¹. The next most popular U.S. destination, Florida, is a close second with 2485000trips, and Washington is third with 1995000 trips. Wisconsin(Oshkosh) is not in the top 15destinations for regular Canadians, but it surely is number one or two for general aviation pilots. In fact, the Experimental Aircraft Association(EAA) regularly announces that Canadians and their aircraft are the number one international visitors to the annual July AirVenture event in Oshkosh. The 2008 data shows that Canadians constituted about one-quarter of all international visitors, and our off-the-cuff estimate is that approximately 1000Canadian private aircraft attend each year ².

Photo: EAA

The EAA says Canadians and their aircraft are the number one international visitors to the annual July AirVenture event in Oshkosh.

Transport Canada does not report private aircraft general aviation trips to the USA, and statistics were not available from the U.S. Transportation Security Administration(TSA) or NAVCANADA at the time of publication. Nevertheless, it is clear that most Canadian general aviation pilots eventually fly a private aircraft to, or through, the USA at some point in their flying travels. Thus, every pilot should at least have a working knowledge of the procedures and rules for crossing the border. The same is equally true for American pilots entering Canada. The Canada Border Services Agency(CBSA) kindly supplied statistics for aircraft entering Canada from the USA, and the number of private flights is surprising-59490 in the 12months preceding May2008.

Canadian Aviation Regulation (CAR) 602.73 and U.S. Federal Aviation Regulation(FAR)91.707 have for several years(since 1999 and 1996 respectively) mirrored each country’s requirement to file a flight plan to cross the border. This requirement applies to flights from and to every airport, aerodrome and farmer’s field, including those peculiar examples such as DelBonita/Whetstone International, Alta., and others such as Coutts/Ross International, Alta., and Dunseith/International Peace Garden, Man., that actually straddle or closely abut the U.S./Canada border. Regional TransportCanada Enforcement and U.S. Federal Aviation Administration(FAA) Flight Standards District Office(FSDO) authorities recently reiterated that no exceptions can be made to this mandatory flight plan rule for any aerodrome, including Del Bonita and others like it. Aviators must file a flight plan; flight itineraries are not permissible in either direction.

Since 9/11, homeland security has been a top priority; understanding the border rules and considerations on that side of the border is important before travelling to the USA. On the Canadian side, we too have an increasing concern for security, which has meant some 21^st century changes compared to last century’s rules. One of the most important changes came about in US NOTAM special notice FDC2/5319(www.faa.gov/ats/aat/IFIM/FDC20025319.htm) on Sept11,2002, which added two new border-crossing rules to the existing flight plan requirement. These are:

1. The pilot is in communication with the governing ATC facility at the time of the boundary crossing.
2. The aircraft is squawking an air traffic control assigned discrete beacon(transponder) code.

The rules allow for special exceptions, but for this a transponder waiver is required. The waiver can be obtained as a printable form from the following Web site: www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/2003/tsa_waiver_canada.pdf

Another longstanding requirement is to advise the destination country’s customs agency or department when planning to cross the border to land in a private aircraft. This brings us to the subject of ADCUS(advise customs). One of the most misunderstood and misused procedures in Canada/U.S. border crossings is ADCUS. This facility had been available for many years as a mechanism to painlessly and easily notify the other country’s customs that a private aircraft was incoming across the border. By simply ticking off a check box on the flight plan, pilots could ensure this requirement of prior notice was met.

ADCUS was convenient, but was never 100percent reliable in either direction. Sometimes flight plans were lost or delayed, and customs failed to be advised in accordance with the regulations. In today’s security climate, this failing is not acceptable. It is the pilot’s responsibility to ensure that prior notice is given in a timely manner. Given the failings of ADCUS, Canada dropped it for private aircraft flights to Canada some years ago. Today, the CBSA requires that all private aircraft entering Canada preface their trip by a telephone call to the CBSA Telephone Reporting Centre(TRC) at 1-888-226-7277 at least 2hr, and no more than 48 hr, prior to crossing the border. This is the only practical legal method of returning to Canada. Many American flight service station(FSS) briefers apparently do not know this rule, and every year some Americans fail to comply when they come to Canada in their own private aircraft. Travelling to the USA using the ADCUS procedure to advise the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Agency(CBP) is soon to be discontinued(according to information given to COPA by CBP representatives). While ADCUS may still be legally available at the time of publication, Canadian aircraft should avoid it and instead follow the advice of the Transport Canada Aeronautical Information Manual(TCAIM)(TP14371), which states in part in FAL2.3.2:

"...ADCUS is still accepted on flight plans to the U.S.; however, the ADCUS remark in the flight plan may not be sufficient notice for some U.S. airports. At least 1hr advance notice of arrival must be provided. The aircraft operator is solely responsible for ensuring that customs receives the notification. It may be preferable to contact the customs office by telephone to advise them directly of the ETA..."

COPA has strenuously endeavoured to educate members and pilots on both sides of the border that ADCUS is nowadays de-facto inoperable, and at the very least-risky. To enforce this understanding, we have created the "Did You Know" section on our Web site and we regularly giveseminars.

U.S. special arrival requirements

Border-crossing punctuality
The CBP expects all pilots to obey a rule requiring the estimated time of arrival(ETA) be accurate within plus or minus 15min. They may enforce a fine of US$5,000 for any pilot failing to meet this requirement. The COPA border-crossing guide explains that all crossings of the border should be done in short hops to the first available port of entry. This keeps the effect of winds and weather to a manageable risk, and allows the aircraft to return to Canada if the ETA in the USA is missed.(The CBP US$5,000 fine for missing the ETA by more than 15 min does not apply if the aircraft does not land.)

CBP 178 form
The CBP expects pilots to print and fill out the Private Aircraft Enforcement System Arrival Report
form(CBP178) to enter the USA. The form can be found at http://forms.cbp.gov/pdf/CBP_Form_178.pdf. Some ports prefer that pilots fax this form ahead of time. Regardless, this form should be completed in advance and handed to the CBP on arrival.(Note: CBP 178 is being phased out by the implementation of the Electronic Advance Passenger Information System [eAPIS], which is discussed further below).

New border-crossing rules anticipated
Rules are constantly changing as security issues dictate. The CBP released a final rule, effective December 18, 2008, which requires pilots to complete and submit a detailed electronic passenger manifest using eAPIS, a web-portal to enter the data and receive an e-mail confirmation. Although this rule is now in effect, the CBP will not enforce the rule and penalize pilots until May 18, 2009.

Effective May 18, 2009, CBP will enforce the new rule, and pilots must submit their manifest to CBP through eAPIS prior to their flight. eAPIS collects manifest information for travel in and out of the USA and replaces form CBP 178. We strongly recommend that you go to https://eapis.cbp.dhs.gov/ and take the eAPIS online tutorial. The penalty(on a first offence) for failing to file the eAPIS manifest after May 18, 2009, is a US$5,000 fine against the pilot-in-command.

Other future security requirements for aircraft over 12500lbs are presently being discussed on both sides of the border by each country’s security agencies.

CBP decal
The CBP requires all private aircraft to carry a customs decal to enter the USA. This decal, which is renewed annually, is usually affixed to the doorpost on the pilot’s side of the aircraft, and according to the CBP:

"The user fee decal for private aircraft and private vessels is to be affixed on the outside of the conveyance within 18in. of the normal boarding area, where it is visible when doors/hatches are open."

Decals may be ordered from: www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/travel/pleasure_boats/user_fee/user_fee_decal.xml and cost US$27.50(2008price). Do not assume decals can be bought from the inspectors; check with the port of entry first.

Radiation screening
Since February 2008, customs personnel have been using a handheld screening device to screen all aircraft entering the USA for nuclear hazards. The passengers and pilot are screened as well. Items that may cause concern are very old aircraft instruments that use radium for dial illumination and recent nuclear medicine tests given to the pilot or passengers. Prior notice must be given to the CBP if these specific or other radiation sources are on board the aircraft.

Washington DC air defence identification zone(ADIZ)
All pilots transiting or operating into or out of the Washington DC ADIZ in the new year(startingFebruary9,2009) must have taken and passed an FAA on-line test(in accordance with FAR91.161), which is available at: https://www.faasafety.gov/login/reg/Register.aspx. The course is described below:

NAVIGATING THE NEW DC ADIZ
This course explains the requirements and procedures for operating in the reconfigured Washington DC Air Defense Identification Zone(DC ADIZ). Successful completion satisfies the regulatory requirement mandated by 14CFR Part91.161, "Special Awareness" training for any pilot who flies under VFR within a 60nautical mile radius of the DCA VOR.

This requirement applies to all foreign pilots, including Canadians, as well as American pilots. COPA has requested, through TC, that the FAA make this on-line course and test accessible to all Canadians with Canadian addresses(it currently requires a U.S. zip code be entered). In the meantime, TC has explained that the FAA requests that foreign pilots select "non Airman" as the licence classification and use the zip code 33811. This issue should hopefully be fixed by the time this article goes to press.

Staying aware of border-crossing rules and future changes
COPA prides itself on its track record of educating Canadian pilots about the border and the safe and legal way to cross it. In addition to providing free advice and resources to visiting American pilots, COPA maintains member-access resources and a 153-page guide to cross-border operations for crossing the U.S./Canada border and for flying in the United States. COPA strongly suggests that Canadian recreational pilots regularly review the latest material in this guide, as it is constantly updated when new information becomes available. For further information on this topic, contact John Quarterman at JohnQPublic@rogers.com, or consult the relevant border-crossing material available from the members-only section of the COPA Web site at www.copanational.org.

---

The HAC Column: The Emerging Duty of Care for Helicopter Operators

by Fred Jones, President and Chief Executive Officer, Helicopter Association of Canada(HAC)

It used to be that air operators could proudly proclaim to the world, "We are in full compliance with TransportCanada regulations." What is emerging in the aviation community is a standard that supersedes strict regulatory compliance and extends that responsibility to include industry best practices-what the legal community refers to as due diligence. In other words, what would a prudent operator do under similar circumstances? What are industry best practices in this type of operation? How do other operators deal with these risks?

In many sectors of the aviation community, customers recognize the inadequacy of regulations that prescribe every type of activity. Customers are incorporating special requirements into the terms of contracts with operators that may include special flight crew, operational and even maintenance requirements. In fact, they are enlisting the support of independent third-party auditors to examine operations and ensure that operators live up to those requirements-whether the operator believes they are reasonable or not.

The question for the operational community is, "Who is in the best position to establish an industry standard?" We all know that industry safety standards and norms evolve with time, and so does the due diligence standard. We have all seen the movement toward a higher level of personal protective equipment for employees, for example, and an analysis of the risks they are exposed to in the work environment. The due diligence standard for any type of operation should be developed and agreed upon by a representative sample of operators who are actively engaged in the operation under discussion. Only then can we claim that the standard is truly representative. Only then can it be promoted by the industry segment to its customers and to the regulator.

The cornerstones of any industry best practice are experience and the collection and sharing of safety information-the good, the bad, and the ugly-not only within your own company, but also between companies and between industry stakeholders in an open non-punitive forum. A number of our committees at the Helicopter Association of Canada are actively engaged in this discussion, and we believe that it is the key to industry-driven safety enhancements and greater efficiency. I challenge you, as helicopter operators and stakeholders in the larger aviation community, to engage with us as we move forward to develop these standards.

---

CBAA Column: How Safety Management Systems Apply to the Small Operator

by Tim Weynerowski, Certification Specialist, Canadian Business Aviation Association(CBAA)

Some smaller operators may view a safety management system(SMS) as an unnecessary hurdle designed to manage the complexities of a larger organization. In reality, an SMS is an effective risk mitigation tool applicable to all sizes of organizations. What varies between small and large organizations is the level of complexity of the SMS. What remains the same is what’s at stake.

Whether a large operation or simply an owner/operator running a one-man show, the need to take a comprehensive look at potential hazards and associated risks is not something that should be taken lightly. Technical, environmental, and human factors are just a few of the areas that require consideration. Due to the unique nature of each operation, modeling policies and procedures after another organization simply to expedite the process is unwise, and is not a good demonstration of due diligence. What may be suitable for one organization may not be appropriate for another.

Being able to recognize the value of an SMS is essential. This may be difficult for some new operators who are intent on getting their recently acquired aircraft in the sky quickly. Ironically, the most resistance to SMS often comes from small operators-potentially the highest risk group.

An example is a private owner/operator who has upgraded to an entry level turbine-powered, pressurized aircraft and is suddenly faced with the challenges of adhering to a new and more complex set of standards. The operator must establish an organization, incorporating systems and processes that were not previously required. SMS training is useful in the development of a sound and effective operation and may help the operator generate the enthusiasm and appreciate the value of engaging in the creation of a performance‑based SMS.

An important part of risk mitigation involves good planning, such as setting operational limitations built around industry best practices. Although some areas of concern(such as fatigue management) have prescribed standards, other issues(such as the compound effect of pushing multiple flight limitations to their limit) require careful consideration. Well-developed policies and procedures built around a strong safety culture are essential in maintaining acceptable levels of risk. Outside pressures can obscure good judgment and may be mitigated by establishing thresholds that require deviation to pre-established contingency plans. Arriving late-but alive-is always better than not arriving at all.

For an SMS to be effective, periodic re-evaluation of the system is a must. Some small operators feel this process is onerous and unnecessary due to the simplistic nature of their operation. However, taking the time to examine what is working well and what is problematic enhances the operator’s situational awareness and helps to keep flight operations safe and enjoyable.

---

Night Fright

by Garth Wallace

Melville Passmore was a private pilot working on a night rating. The lack of a written test on the course appealed to the young farm boy. He was slow on book learning, but good at things practical.

The school’s Piper Cherokee 140s were stable platforms for instrument training. Melville handled that part of the course well. He was steady on the controls and had good hand/eye coordination.

The Cherokees sank more rapidly than most light planes on the approach. It could be difficult to land them at night smoothly, especially with power off, but Melville was soon greasing the airplane on. It didn’t matter if the landing light was on or off or the flaps were up or down, he nailed each touch-and-go.

The farmer-student was soon ready for the last dual lesson on the night rating course: the cross-country flight. I already knew that he could navigate at night on local lessons, so my challenge was to find something useful to do with him. He always needed radio work, so I planned to fly from our base in Southwestern Ontario, through the Toronto terminal control area(TCA) to the Toronto City Centre Airport, and back. That would give him lots of communication practice.

"When we go to Toronto," he asked excitedly, "will I be talking to the same controllers as the airline pilots?"

"Yes, you will."

"Do I call them ‘sir’?"

"No, you talk to them just like you’re an airline pilot."

"Wow!"

Melville’s problem on the radio was he needed a wind-up before saying anything into the microphone. Each time he keyed the mic, he took a deep breath, licked his lips, pulled in his tongue, looked both ways and then spoke. The dead airtime was okay at our local airport; the controllers knew his voice and would wait through his pauses.

I wrote down everything that I thought Melville would need to say and what he should hear in response when talking to the Toronto controllers. We practised on the ground before the trip. Melville read his part and I played the air traffic controller.

We reviewed the script on the evening of our flight and filed a round-robin flight plan to Toronto City Centre. Melville checked his equipment: two flashlights, two pencils, a map, a kneeboard and the script. We did the pre-flight inspection together and climbed in.

Melville went through the checklist, started the engine and picked up the microphone for taxi instructions. He keyed the mic, took a deep breath, looked both ways, licked his lips, pulled in his tongue and spoke from his boots, "Ground control, this is Cherokee Lima Oscar Whiskey November?"

"Hi, Melville," the local controller replied. "I see you’re on a flight plan to Toronto. Taxi for Runway 24, wind calm, altimeter 30.03. Call me on the tower frequency when you’re ready to take off."

So much for radio procedure training.

"Okay, thanks," Melville replied. Then he saw my frown. "I mean, Oscar Whiskey November, roger."

We took off and headed for Toronto. The controller bid us a "good flight" when we cleared his zone. It was a calm, clear night. We cruised at 3500 ft. Melville eagerly followed along the map with a stubby finger identifying each group of lights below. He selected the frequency for the tape-recorded terminal information service as we approached Toronto, and printed the numbers on his kneeboard. Then he changed to Toronto terminal control. It was busy.

"Air Canada now cleared to twelve thousand, break, break, United turn right to zero six zero."

The controller was working both IFR and VFR traffic around Toronto. We couldn’t hear the airline replies on the IFR frequencies.

"Delta over to the tower now, one eighteen four.
"12 Bravo Charlie, one more turn for the localizer, keep your speed up, there’s a 747 behind you."

The radio work was rapid and continuous. I looked at Melville. His eyes were wide.

"You just have to jump in when he’s not talking, Melville," I said. "He can listen to two pilots at once. Just say exactly what we practised. Start with initial contact."

He stared at his kneeboard, keyed the microphone, took a deep breath, licked his lips, pulled in his tongue, looked both ways and spoke, "Toronto terminal, this is Cherokee Lima Oscar Whiskey November?" He said it as a question. He looked at me; I nodded; he released the mic button.

"West Jet, radar contact, now cleared to 12000."

Melville gave me a blank stare. The tongue was at full hang.

"Just wait, if he heard you, he’ll call back."

"Tango Charlie Golf over to City Centre tower now."

"Tango Charlie Golf."

"Is that Lima Oscar Whiskey November calling VFR?"

Melville looked at me and did nothing.

"Say ‘affirmative’," I said.

He pushed the mic button, breathed in, licked his lips, pulled in his tongue, looked around and said, "Affirmative."

"Air Transat, cleared to flight level two five zero, contact centre now."

Melville gave me a deer-in-the-headlights look.

"He’ll call you, just wait."

"12 Bravo Charlie, right turn to 200degrees to intercept the localizer for 24Right, you’re cleared for the approach.

"Lima Oscar Whiskey November," the controller said, "squawk ident."

Melville was paralyzed. I pushed the identification button on the transponder.

"British Airways, radar contact. You’re number two for
24Right behind a King Air intercepting the localizer."

"Radar contact Oscar Whiskey November. Are you going City Centre?

"Say ‘affirmative’."

Mic on, breath in, lick lips, tongue in, look and, "Affirmative."

"Down to 2000, Oscar Whiskey November, stay along the lakeshore and call me by the four stacks. Do you know where that is?"

Melville looked down at the now unnecessary script and then at me.

"Say ‘affirmative’."

He keyed the microphone, took a breath, pulled his tongue in-without licking his lips-looked around and spoke, "Affirmative."

That was progress, I said to myself.

Melville continued to hold the microphone in front of hisface.

"What did he ask you to do, Melville?"

"Descend to 2000?"

"That’s correct and stay along the lakeshore, so hang up the mic, start down, find the four stacks landmark on your map and navigate to it."

He did.

The terminal controller called us before Melville could call him.

"Oscar Whiskey November, you are coming up to the four stacks. Over to City Centre tower now."

I pointed to the reply on the radio script. Melville keyed the microphone, took a breath, pulled his tongue in and spoke, "Oscar Whiskey November."

He looked at me; I nodded; he released the transmit button.

"OK, continue on the list."

Melville got to work. He wrote down the numbers from the City Centre automatic terminal information service(ATIS), changed to the tower frequency, picked up the microphone and looked at me. There was no traffic on the radio. I nodded.

Mic on, breath in, tongue in, "City Centre, this is Cherokee Lima Oscar Whiskey November?"

"Cherokee Lima Oscar Whiskey November, CityCentre."

Melville looked down at his kneeboard where his finger marked the next line. "Ah, Oscar Whiskey November by the four stacks at 2000 with information Papa, VFR from Homestead, landing City Centre." He released the mic button without looking for a nod from me.

"Oscar Whiskey November cleared to the left downwind Runway 26, wind240 at five, callestablished."

Breath, tongue, mic on, "Oscar Whiskey November."

I gave him a thumbs-up.

Melville was doing well. There had been less radio work than I had anticipated, but there would be more on the return flight.

A moment later, the lights in the cockpit went out. I could feel Melville staring at me in the dark. I was staring back.

"Where’s your flashlight, Melville?"

He dug in the map pocket on his side of the airplane. I took the microphone from him, punched the transmit button and released. There was no "click" sound on the radio. I checked the squelch: nothing. The engine continued to buzz along. The landing light had stopped working. We had lost our electrical system.

Communicating at night isn’t that much different than during the day-it’s only a different environment.

Melville turned on his flashlight.

"Shine it on the engine instruments," I said.

He did. The alternator output gauge read zero. So did the fuel quantity gauges in the same instrument cluster.

"We’re out of gas?" Melville asked. There was more doubt than panic in his voice.

The fuel gauges were electric. Having no electrics over downtown Toronto at night was bad, but not life threatening. I was determined to make it a learning experience for Melville.

"What should we do?" I asked.

"Declare an emergency?"

"Were the tanks full before we took off?"

"Yes."

"Is the engine running?"

"Yes."

"Are we out of gas?"

He scratched his head. "No."

"What drives the fuel gauges?"

He shone the light on them. "Electricity?" He looked at the panel again. "The alternator isn’t working?"

"What should we do?" I asked.

"Inform ATC and land as soon as possible."

"Does our radio work?"

Melville turned the squelch knob up on the radio. There was no background noise.

"No."

"Now what?"

"Squawk 7600 on the transponder and land at the nearest suitable airport?"

"Go ahead. I’ll fly the airplane."

I took over control. While talking, we had been flying along the lakeshore. The City Centre Airport was less than five miles ahead. I could see one red navigation light moving on a base leg for Runway26. I set up adescent.

Melville shone his light on the radar transponder and gingerly tuned it to 7600.

"Does it work?" I asked.

There were no flashes indicating interrogation. He turned the transponder selector to test. The light didn’t come on.

"No."

He scratched his head again. "If the alternator is off, all the electrics are dead?"

"Now you’re getting warm," I said. "What about thebattery?"

"It should carry some electrics for a while."

"But it didn’t. What should we do?"

While Melville thought, I joined the left downwind leg of the circuit. The other aircraft was touching down. The bright lights of the high-rise office towers loomed on our left, while the cold, black nothingness of Lake Ontario stretched out to our right.

"We should land as soon as possible?" Melville asked.

"How would we get a landing clearance?"

He suddenly turned and looked down at the controltower.

"Hey, they’re shining a green light at us!"

"What does that mean?"

"Ah, we’re cleared to land?"

"That’s correct. You have control."

He landed. It was a good one. The steady green from the tower began flashing. We were cleared to taxi to the ramp.

I began thinking about how we were going to get home.

Melville parked the Cherokee and shut down theengine.

"That was kind of neat," he exclaimed. "How did you arrange it?"

Garth Wallace is a former flying instructor who lives near Ottawa, Ont. He has written eleven aviation books published by Happy Landings(www.happylandings.com). The latest is The Smile High Club. He can be contacted via e-mail: garth@happylandings.com.

Click on image above to enlarge