It is always a good thing to be concerned about aviation safety. Questioning if the way things are done are as safe as they can be is essential to ensuring a safe aviation industry.

That being said, relying on CADORS can be a bit misleading when looking at the safety of an aerodrome. For example, missed approaches are designed precisely for safety, it's far safer for a pilot to pull up and go around then try and continue an unstable approach or land on a runway that still has an aircraft on it. Unstable approaches can be caused by numerous factors, the vast majority of which have nothing to do with the airport itself.

Weather related issues are also another misleading stat. The Island Airport is not equipped with and ILS landing system as is Pearson. Again, it is a safety conscious decision by a pilot to not attempt to land at the Island when the weather are below the minimum requirements and instead go to Pearson.

The single greatest safety hazard that the Island Airport faces is not the type of operations or the length of the runways - it is the fact that there is no bridge between the Island and the mainland. This is ridiculous. If there ever is an accident at the airport, it will be very interesting to see how much extra time it takes for emergency vehicles to reach the airport by having to take a ferry. This could make a huge difference in the amount of time it takes to get injured people to the hospital.

For regular passengers, taking the ferry is a slight inconvenience when getting to and from their flight and doesn't discourage passengers from using the airport. For a person in an emergency situation, it could mean the difference between life and death.

This is irresponsible politics if you ask me.

Safe Flying,
James Ball