UK ATC Worst in Europe

[ORAC]

Sunday Times - August 25:

Insight: Air traffic control in UK worst in Europe

BRITAIN’S new £620m air traffic control centre has been branded the worst in Europe, causing more than half of all air traffic hold-ups.

An official report by Eurocontrol, which manages European air space, shows the centre is responsible for more delays than all the other 30 national air traffic agencies put together.

It also emerged this weekend that despite the huge investment in technology, passengers are suffering record delays even though the centre, at Swanwick in Hampshire, is handling fewer planes than the old “low tech” system it replaced.

There has been a doubling in the level of delays during this summer’s peak holiday season compared with the same period last year. The failings have also led Eurocontrol to issue a number of warnings to foreign pilots to avoid UK air space unless they have to land in Britain. At the worst times this summer Britons have been three times more likely to be delayed when flying to Mediterranean destinations than German or French travellers. At Gatwick 35% of planes were delayed, with more than 4,000 flights having an average delay of 20 minutes.

The revelations are certain to reignite the row over the centre. John Prescott and Stephen Byers, then transport secretary, pressed ahead with the launch of the system in January and pushed through part-privatisation of the National Air Traffic Services (Nats) despite opposition from backbench Labour MPs.

The poor performance of the centre in its first six months of operation is also a serious setback for Nats, which failed to remove all of the system flaws or ensure there were enough controllers to run it before it opened.

---------------------------------

Insight: Hi-tech shambles of Britain’s airspace

IT HAS been a disaster more than 10 years in the making. Britain’s new air traffic control centre has turned the country’s airspace into the bottleneck of Europe..........

The most damaging indictment is provided by Eurocontrol, the agency that manages airspace capacity. John Byrom, of Eurocontrol, said the UK had accounted for 51% of air traffic delays in Europe since January, compared with less than 15% for the whole of 2001.

In July, the peak holiday month, a 26-page document from Eurocontrol shows that 43% of air traffic delays were caused by Britain..................

The problems are so severe that Eurocontrol has issued bulletins advising pilots to avoid Britain at the worst periods. One on July 25 said: “If routes can be found avoiding UK airspace . . . then rerouting is strongly recommended.”........................

[mattpilot]

i'm just curious

If over 50% of airtraffic world wide (according to AOPA), is taking place in the USA, then how come the USA isn't having nearly as much problems as countries like the UK?


Here in the US i can take a small plane and fly to the next big airport (say Dallas Class B), and they wouldn't care that i'm flying there - and land - and of course never even ask for prior permission. But from what i'm reading, not in this post - but others, European ATC has trouble handling a half a dozen of planes (exaggeration - i hope so at least :))

Just my 2 cents though

:cool:

[Nogbad the Bad]

ALL THIS stems from NATS Management (not including the present incumbent Chief Executive), who went ahead with the opening of Swanwick because no-one was prepared to stand up and be counted, and admit that NATS didn't - and doesn't - have enough staff to properly man the new centre.


:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

[Direct HALIFAX]

The operational staff have been saying for years that due to the T and P requirement for more staff, Swanwick would cause delays. NATS mangement did not convey this to the airlines. They said the new centre would shift more planes.

LIES !!

Let's hope the NATS Mgt team who did not, and still do not, tell the truth are sacked.

And it will only get worse - there is no short-term fix. LISTEN to us - we know what we are talking about. Next year the staffing situation will be worse than this year due to the numbers of controllers retiring.

[BEXIL160]

The article should more correctly be entitled:

The Worst Managed ATC in Europe

The few actual operational staff at the sharp end (ATCOs/ ATSAs/ ATEs) are among the best anywhere. Those few are also very peed off with "the management" not taking responsibility for this mess, which they were warned about and took no action to rectify.

-----------------------------------------------

mattpilot.....

Lots of reasons that it's more difficult in Europe.

The USA is largely a sparsely populated area, at least in comparison to Europe, with a lot of BIG airports (How many in the DFW area alone for instance?).

The weather is generally better in the USA

There is only ONE national ATC service provider in the USA (the FAA), in Europe we have lots and lots, many with their own languages and in some cases, agendas.

Watch out for the big cloud on your horizon though. It's called PRIVATISATION, and will, as it has in the UK, completely F## , sorry, mess up, the situation. Oh, and you're also gonna be very short of controllers as well. Same as us in the UK!

Best rgds
BEX

[canberra]

im really going to walk in to the lions den here. what is wrong with privatised atc? or do you mean a privatised national system ie the airways? how many towers in the uk are run by private companies? are those controllers any worse than nats controllers, i dont think so! and before anyone starts on about the railtrack fiasco dont forget that until 1947 the railways were under private ownership. so to really **** up a transport system put it in state hands!

[BALIX]

Canberra

You've got a point - NATS was in a mess before privatisation as well. It is not privatisation per se that is the problem, it is what we have ended up with following a rather botched attempt by Blair and his chums to bring it in, combined with the global downturn in traffic caused firstly by airlines overstretching themselves and secondly by Bin Laden.

NATS controllers were against privatisation mainly as they felt it might impinge on their pay and working conditions. Sure, they had saftey concerns and the like but had privatisation come with the promise of a 10% pay hike and five extra days leave a year, I guess we could have got over them :)

What we have, though, is NATS in a worse mess than it was before and privatisation is one of the reasons.

[Minesapint]

The biggest delay is the one concerning the sacking of a great many nats managers!:mad: :mad: :mad:

[ferris]

Balix- You claim your problems are partly caused by downturn in traffic. Isn't that article claiming you can't handle the traffic you have, let alone any more?

Are you confusing finance with controller numbers/atc systems? It's an easy mistake to make- lots of managers do.

[dontshootme]

canberra makes a good point. There's nothing wrong with privatisation if it's done properly, after all the airlines don't cut corners with safety and they're not state owned. Perhaps everything would have worked better if the government had done a full privatisation.

One big mistake was leaving so much of the old management structure in place. NATS still has the old working practices in place where most operational staff don't work their conditioned hours. It's difficult for those senior managers who used to benefit from these dodgy practices to turn round and put a stop to them.
As I've said in another topic here, sort out the working practices and you'll free up a lot of staff to move to Swanwick and cut the delays.

[tug3]

Perhaps its because I'm from Yorkshire, but it seems to me that money, be it £,$ or €, and political will are the root cause of the problems in NATS. ('Management', and I use the term loosely, aside that is).

Labour went ahead with PPP because 'Pa Broon' said the Tories had carved the sale in stone and who were Labour to do anything different from the Tories? He also wanted the projected £800 mil for sweetners in the run-up to the last general election.

Underfunding and the DELIBERATE mis-handling of large scale programmes led to a situation where the government could throw its hands up in the air and cry out for private capital and expertise to come and sort out the mess which they themselves had both created and compounded.

It all boils down to cash - The lack of will to allow NATS to raise money outwith the PSBR and the desire for a few more quid to splash out on NHS Administrators and Classroom Assistants.

As a result, NATS is now a private company who instead of making a profit to pass on to shareholders makes a profit to manage its debt. (The shareholder dividends now being paid out in the form of loan repayments on behalf of the Airline Group to its lenders).

There may be nothing wrong with privatised ATC in the true not-for-profit sense. But NATS is being forced to make money at the expense of countless other things, including some would argue safety, just to keep the banks, rather than the shareholders, sweet.

Newsflash y'awl - IT DOESN'T AND NEVER WILL WORK!!!

Rgds
T3

[FWA NATCA]

mattpilot,

The reason that the US air traffic control system isn't in shambles is because:

1. It is still managed and operated by the Federal Goverment (FAA)

2. NATCA holds SAFETY to the highest level possible, we work together with the FAA to develop new equipment and procedures. We take our message to our elected representatives who have learned that NATCA Does Not cry Wolf, we state the Facts and back them up with solid documentation.

Could what is happening in Canada, and the UK happen in the US, yes it could if Congress should ever decide to sell us out to the lowest bidder.

Mike

[mattpilot]

thanks! i guess that answers my question

[Scott Voigt]

BEXIL;

West of the Mississipi River, things are more sparse, but we still have busy areas... The east coast for the most part is pretty dense and if you look at the TSD at any time, you will see that we have a butt load of traffic <G> there at any given moment. In fact, if you look at the traffic in the UK compared to the eastern seaboard, you will find it is a little less dense in the UK. We get to look at it in near real time every day...

As to the DFW area, we have a bit over a hundred airports in the approach control area which covers about the same amount of area as metro London and outskirts I believe, maybe a bit more. These are controlled and uncontrolled airports, both paved and grass strips. Lots of VFR's that no one talks too, but also a lot of folks (GA) who are transiting around class B and some even through it. But, you've been over here to watch it from time to time...

regards

[BEXIL160]

Scott...

My post lost something mid-atlantic methinks!

You know that I know (!) how busy it can be out east, and certainly in the DFW Area and many others in the USA. But then there are a lot of airports for those aeroplanes to fly into. Europe ain't so lucky, where we have quite a few aircraft in a small geographic area but rather fewer runways for them to use. Hence the complexity, which isn't always a function of how many aircraft are in the sky.

By relatively sparsely populated , I meant with people and urban areas, not aircraft or airports.

Best rgds

BEX :)

[BALIX]

Ferris

I wasn't confusing the issue, merely saying that privatisation and the way it has been don has been a contributing factor to the mess that NATS finds itself in and not the sole reason.

Had privatisation not occured, NATS would still have the problems of undermanning at Swanwick (a problem that should have been solved well before privatisation) and the problems of reduced income due to 911 and the global downturn.

What privatisation has done is made the situation worse as NATS now has not only to deal with the above mentioned problems but also has to service an £800 million loan taken out just to fill the exchequers coffers. :mad: :mad: :mad:

[ferris]

This phenomenon is happening in lots of places- not just NATS, and not just in ATC.

The problem is, whilst it may be ok (?) to make your clerks, meter readers, customer service officers etc. etc. etc. work 4 times harder than they used to, there are some areas that just should not have a financial imperitive driving them. Invariably these involve life and limb. I'm talking about nurses/healthcare, police etc. AND ATC. If you make cash the king in these things, they go horribly wrong. Humanistly speaking. (Witness the US health system- ever tried being poor and sick in the US?)

And to me that is the rub. You are philosophically moving towards the point where money is more important than people. And that sucks.

[Findo]

There's nothing wrong with privatisation if it's done properly, after all the airlines don't cut corners with safety and they're not state owned. Perhaps everything would have worked better if the government had done a full privatisation.

Privatisation isn't dangerous ? Of course nobody goes to work and thinks .. I'll drive down another couple of safety standards today and see what happens But look at the post from the pilots section about the ATP which had a second engine shutdown in 5 days

BA do not fly any ATP's. They are operated by BACitiExpress which is a wholly owned subsiduary of BA. As for the engineering report, perhaps if you had just been told that you will be getting a £6000 per annum pay cut, working hours increased and your annual holidays including bank holidays cut down to 16/year, your mind may be a little distracted when certifying log books.

Before I get shot at, I do not know the circumstances of either incident nor the individuals involved. However I am very hacked off and know from first hand experience that mistakes are made when ones mind is distracted in this way.

There for the grace of.............

That's what happens when you focus on cost and not value. :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[Ayr_Man]

Which planet are you from buddy?!!

Obviously not planet Earth .

:eek: :eek: :eek:

[Nogbad the Bad]

This thread is NOT a discussion on the pro's and con's of Privatisation......it's a discussion of how poorly managed NATS is......and was.......and will be unless the heads of those responsible ROLL !!!!!!!!!!!!

[BEXIL160]

Suggestions for top management?

Jane Garvey

Another American Lady who got the job done and did not suffer fools (suits), gladly.

The recent (and current) NATS management couldn't hit the backside of a cow with a banjo.

rgds BEX

[Scott Voigt]

BEX;

You guys offer her the right amount of money and she might come over <G>. She is between jobs right now...

To give all of you a hint of how most of the operational work force felt about her. She is the ONLY administrator who has come to any of our conventions and not only was listened to intently by the controllers there, but was also given numerous standing ovations...

regards

[250 kts]

And that's the reason she's between jobs. If anyone goes against the norm and speaks sense they are instantly moved aside as being a potential trouble maker.

I understand a female manager from BA was offered the job of DGM at Swanwick but turned down the offer. I suppose she was worried about losing her concessions:( :( -now if NATS staff were to be offered them as well??????:D :D :D

[2 six 4]

canberra - I'm pretty amazed that after all the debate in the last decade people are still confusing the issue of private companies and privatisation of the ATC service.

The problem is not the structure or ownership of the operating company but the nature of what they are asked to do. Private companies working in ATC do so under contract. A price for the job with a built in profit margin. Pretty straightforward. If traffic increases during the contract and you need more staff you re-negotiate the costs for the remaining part of the contract. You also have the flexibility to be part of a bigger group of contracts or companies and can cross subsidise to your heart's content.

NATS is a one income source company. All its income comes from ATC and the vast majority of that is from en route services which are heavily regulated (unlike any of the private ATC companies). It is not allowed to cross subsidise any parts of it's regulated and unregulated business. It is entirely vulnerable to the sort of fluctuations we saw in the Gulf war period and post September 11th. It has no way of protecting itself against these fluctuations because if it makes excessive profits :D the Regulator will order a reduction in charges so it cannot build up enough reserves to finance a huge reduction in income like this year. Well over 80% of NATS costs are staff and the training period for most of them means you cannot reduce staff temporarily as the airlines have done.

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

Er... I thought we got travel concessions through UKATTS and the NATS travel service?

[Iron City]

Not sure that the NATS is the worst managed ATC in Europe, at least you haven't run any aluminium together, though that is more a function of the very capable folks on the pointy end and some degree of good fortune.

Trying to divorce poor management from the corporate ownership/governance structure is ultimately, I think, futile. They feed on each other. While a purely public agency (like FAA) can be badly managed either in toto or locally it does not have the must make a profit or return on investment mentality of a private company and that is a big difference. The public service orientation of a civil service or similar government agency is one of those unquantifiables that the management consultants do not understand very well. Unfortunately, a public agency also must labor under the governance of elected "leadership" further up the food chain. This generally results in limited or bizare capital investment and very constrained operations budgets for PAY and similar expenses. The FAA, for example is about $100M in the hole in the operations appropriation to pay for all the overtime from September 11, 2001 and the controller pay raise. Some more money may be provided by Congress when they get back to town after campaigning, but at least some will be taken from capital investment.

The privatized structure has the benefit of being run like a business and if there is more traffic there is more revenue and more resources for people, gadgets etc. It also has the drawback of being run like a business and needing to make a profit to pay back the people who risk capital and pay the expenses along the way. When a government privatizes anything there are always the political and economic opportunists and a semiprivatized operation like NATS seems to combine many of the disadvantages of public management/ownership with the problems of private corporate ownership. Ther ecertainly wasn't enough capital budgeted when the PPP happened. Mostly they want to skim the cream for their own businesses and let the government continue to pay for the areas that lose money. Some of them are giant Ponzi schemes The Canadian one for example, that is structured as a non-stock company with all the money to do it borrowed from large banks who took this great risk because the loans are backed by the credit of the Canadian government. Some privatization.

It is also inaccurate to call a situatiuon where a government contracts with a company to provide ATC services as privatization, because it isn't really. It is just the government contracting for a service much like trash hauling or grass cutting or whatever. This doesn't mean that the company providing ATC services necessarily makes any capital investment or any long term commitment to providing anything. All they have to do is fulfill the contract terms for the period of performance and they have done their job, collect their money and go home. It doesn't mean that they are really managing or running an ATC system any more than the trash contractor decides how many collections per week or where the stuff will be tipped.


Where NATS and the UK aviation in general are taking it in the shorts is with a government that doesn't want to make investment in aviation to do it right, just collect the maximum fees and taxes from it for the minimum expenditure, combined with TAG believeing their own press releases that they would keep growing and growing and making more money forever. Well, the goose that lays the platinum eggs died, TAG revenue is down, the government is busy distancing itself from the NATS like an ugly stepchild and the NATS workforce and air operators and their customers are left holding the bag. Same thing is happening in the US and other places ecept the Congress is kind of stuck with the ATC system because they can not sell privatization based on the examples of previous "successes". I know it is not a bright side for people in NATS but if the PPP does nothing else it serves as an excellent example to help keep other countries from doing the same thing.


Doubt if Ms Garvey would take NATS on a silver platter, she has had her share (5 years) of hell.

[terrain safe]

Sorry to appear extremely stupuid, but doesn't Jane Garvey work on Radio 5? I realise that you are talking about someone completely different and it would appear that she is way too good to work for NATS. Please can we just have some leadership. Anything would be better than the slopey shouldered non-entities we have now.

[250 kts]

Blimey Rescue3, which side of the bed did you get out of? The comment was made tongue in cheek.;) ;)-I haven't seen you on "airline" have I??
Mind you I'm sure ATC are not the only travellers who ask for upgrades are they??
And bearing in mind that 7 airlines have a major stake in NATS and can't afford to pay a decent pay rise then this may be one of the ways that T&C could be improved with no major cost to the airlines.

[BEXIL160]

Here is a quick bio of Ms. Garvey, until recently FAA Administrator:

http://www.faa.gov/apa/bios/garvey.htm

If you like, she's a younger version of our own Ms. Dunwoody, except that Ms. Garvey was in charge at FAA and often made "the suits" shift uncomfortably in their seats.

Now imagine our Gwyneth in charge at NATS. Brings a smile to the face does it not? :D

Rgds BEX

[Capt Pit Bull]

I would like to reiterate the points made in several other posts pointing out the difference between 'worst ATC' and 'worst managed ATC'.

As a 'consumer' of the UK ATC system I would like to offer my on-going support to the controllers at the sharp end, in whose capabilities I have the utmost confidence.

I consider newspaper headlines saying 'UK ATC Worst in Europe' to be an undeserved slur against a group of trusted colleagues.

CPB

[Loki]

Thank you Capt Pit Bull

Unfortunately your views aren`t universally shared if the captains remarks about ATC were anything to go by (Midland 006 to Glasgow this PM).

You never know who is listening down the back!

[250 kts]

Go on-spill the beans on BMA006. We may find out if this is just a one off or a general feeling.

[Scott Voigt]

250 knots;

Actually Mrs. Garvey is at the end of a five year term. She was brought in by a democrat and a republican is now in office. I'll let you do the math on that one <G>...


regards

[BillyBoy]

Go on Loki, don't leave us all in suspense. What did the Midland driver have to say about ATC?????:D :D :D :D

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

Maybe we ought to start a thread on who we consider to be the worst crews...... :-) Wow! That would sure get things boiling!!!

[Lon More]

So what's new?

It was the same when we were Min. of Aggravation, continued under the Campaign Against Aviation and is now being fine tuned by No Aircraft Tp Support. Sir Humphrey Appleby et al - Yes Minister - reign supreme.

In the past there was the alledged "West Raynham" vs "West Drayton" mix up.

The Linesman-Mediator farce; also rejected in the States. As for the idea of putting the centre of the nation's air defence in a large building in the middle of a crappy housing estate 5nm N of Heathrow, well you wouldn't have to win any awards as a nav/bomb aimer to find it.:eek:

As long as management posts are a convenient alternative for those who cannot/will not hack it in the Ops Room, or who are on a power/ego trip this will continue. In the long run it will probably be better to take "professional" managers and educate them, rather than promote from within.

Blair and Co. by following the policies initiated by the previous administration betrayed their roots and supporters.

Before anyone jumps down my throat, the UK is not alone in this; at one time the Head of our Operations Division was reputedly a Mason: had it not been pitiable it would have been hilarious to watch all the wannabe managers falling over each other as they tried to out do one another in silly handshakes and rolling up of trousers.

Keep the faith, it can only get better.