Mil: Controller currency

[Shagster]

I'm curious to know if units are experiencing any difficulties applying the new(ish) rules on controller currency. I am in favour of currency monitoring but find that 21 days (15 if Mon to Fri), is a bit "tight". Especially with trainees occupying seats, mentor requirments, wx effect on movements etc.etc.

Does anyone know why the timescale of 21 days was decided, or was that based on the rule for detached controllers away from their normal environment?

[rej]

Our unit is finding it quite problematic as well. Trying to keep almost 30 controllers current in the 3 "main disciplines" whilst keeping the training system running at full steam is certainly a challenge. Thank heavens for lunch time sessions. Here are just a few areas that cause demands on the system:

Guard Commander
OOA Dets
Sickness
Training
Leave is not too bad now as everyone is reluctant to take 3 weeks off!!
Shiney new aircraft with no engines !!!!!!


I fully agree that we need to have some form of currency. I believe that 28 days (aircrew currency ??)would be more realistic to achieve and maintain while still keeping us able to handle the traffic levels we now encounter.

I've heard a rumour that the 21 days came from "best guess" in order that the ab initios who are replacing the shrinking pool of experience (not that LJAO are too bad off ) have a fighting chance of not finding themselve in an awkward position.

[Shagster]

Thanks Rej, I concur with all that you say. 28 days is much more workable........or maybe a calendar month to tie in with rostering.

What are the rules on currency for our "civvie" friends?

[Chilli Monster]

On the civil side the legal definition is that you have to have exercised the privileges of a licence at least once in ninety days otherwise it is deemed to be suspended.

There is no other 'currency' apart from that laid down. It is becoming more common now for units to stipulate a period away after which you have to be 'screened' before being let lose on your own again. In my units case it's any period over 2 weeks (so normal leave periods tend not to fall into the category).

Bear in mind of course that most civil units may only be staffed for 2 or 3 positions at a time, not the multitude that mil units are established for (ground, tower, approach, director, zone, talkdown etc) so getting seat time isn't as big a problem due to the lower numbers of staff generally involved.

[Matoman]

Shagster, Rej & CM

Whilst I sympathise with the difficulties experienced by units attempting to comply with the rules on controller currency, at least clear guidelines have finally been issued. Back in 1989 I attended the ATC Seminar (sadly these appear to be a thing of the past) held at RAF North Luffenham, at the end of which there was the usual question and answer session to the 'Brains Trust' of the usual suspects: AOC MATO (MH) and assorted Gp Capts (GW, AB, & JL I think). I decided to raise the issue of the lack of any clear directive on controller currency and briefly described why this was urgently needed. At the time I was DSATCO and LEO at an RAFG unit and we had no choice but to continually train in every position, if we wanted to get the staff endorsed. This resulted in those with endorsements complaining to me that they were getting little if any real 'hands-on' time themselves, with all the problems that can entail. The easy solution was to implement a 'NO U/T's' day on Wednesday afternoon, but this took no account of who was on shift and what happened if there was little radar or ADC activity during this period.

The assembled 'Brains Trust', who took great delight in telling me how such a system simply couldn't work, shot down my question in flames. I couldn't take this lying down, particularly from a bunch of individuals so obviously out of touch with the realities of life at the 'coal face'. I made the point that if it was necessary for civil & military pilots and civil ATCO's to maintain a certain specific level of currency, why was this requirement considered unnecessary for military ATCO's? Warming to my theme, I made the point that the root of the problem lay in ATCO tour lengths, which didn't differentiate between inexperienced and experienced commissioned controllers and treated SNCO and WO controllers differently. I went on to tell them, as politely as I could (in retrospect, I probably wasn't all that diplomatic) that in my opinion all controllers should be treated as a common resource and longer tour lengths for all controllers were required if the problem was ever going to be addressed. All I received for my 'spirited' suggestions was more flack from the 'Top Table' - they either simply didn't understand the problem or preferred to bury their collective heads in the sand.

Here we are 15 years later and some of those changes have finally been implemented - and not before time. The same individual at PMA now posts all controllers. Directives on controller currency have actually been issued to units, instead of leaving it to 'local management'. However, the root cause of the problem is still with us. If the problem of controller currency is ever going to be addressed properly, then new policy on tour lengths for all military ATCO's needs to be established. This problem will not go away and sadly, until it is eventually addressed and resolved, we will leave ourselves wide open to a serious incident caused by inaction.

[rej]

Matoman

I fully agree that the "regularization" of controller currency was a long time coming. I remember the days when each unit had certain controllers who, although radar endorsed, were almost permanent tower controllers only on venture to the approach room once every year or so for a day on LARS. Nobody enjoyed it - from the controller to the Supervisor and probably the customers.

[Whipping Boy's SATCO]

Matoman, how the wheel turns slowly. Now call me a bluff old traditionalist, but if we had longer tours, a pragmatic endorsement policy (does every controller REALLY need a Talkdown/Ground ticket?) and used more imagination regarding simulators....................................

Let's talk over a coffee.

[Scott Voigt]

Just for insight;

In the US, the FAA madates that a controller must have at least 16 hours on position every 30 days or they must be recertified. The office folks or supervisors must have 8 hours. But they normally have only one position that they are certified on. For the rest of us, unless we are on a detail, sick or on vacation, it is very easy to remain current.

regards

Scott

[KPax]

'SNCO's & WO's were treated differently'. I accept that we are all posted by the same desk however, as said before with more and more OOA dets and a shortage of multi tourist Officers why haven't we gone the next step and allow WO's to become LEO's. The WO who can't just now can, if he takes the 'Commissioned WO' route. The final step would be to have a WO on the ATCEB. Heresy I hear you all cry. What about 'career development' for the JO? If the system is under duress why can't we use these experienced people to make life a bit better at some of the units that are struggling. Heard the one about the LEO who because of other duties can't find the time to sit with people. I think we can all rerlate to that these days. I realise it is an old chestnut, but it must be worth looking at again.

[Whipping Boy's SATCO]

KPax, not a bad idea. However, in order to spread the load, can we also include the idea that more WO OOA posts should be established. It is my understanding that the only WO OOA commitment at present is one controller in Akrotiri.

[KPax]

WBS I think we would all agree about WO OOA however, WO's have so much to offer with their experience. We need to get our heads out of the sand and work as a team.

[Whipping Boy's SATCO]

KP, we appear to be barking up precisely the same tree.