PPRuNe Forums


ATC Issues A place where pilots may enter the 'lions den' that is Air Traffic Control in complete safety and find out the answers to all those obscure topics which you always wanted to know the answer to but were afraid to ask.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 8th Sep 2016, 09:30   #1 (permalink)
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: 3rd Shelf on the Left
Posts: 13
Vacancies at EGNX

ATCOs wanted at EMA if anyone's interested.

https://career012.successfactors.eu/...Mlxawe8qd7Y%3d

catchy URL !!
5'n'3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th Sep 2016, 19:52   #2 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 408
Preferably they'll only hire people who won't state "remain clear of controlled airspace" before asking for your details, and then mostly deny zone transits to VFR GA every time they are requested and then tell you to squawk 7000 and leave them alone once you've had a basic service that's taken you more than 5 miles away from their CAS...
sapperkenno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th Sep 2016, 13:57   #3 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Out on the bike
Posts: 489
As an ATCO and supervisor at EMA for nearly 30 years I would say that what you are implying is factually incorrect, and a slight upon the controllers who work hard to manage the airspace for all users. Reading this forum, among others, would also indicate that we have a good reputation for integrating transits and our commercial traffic. If you have an issue with the service provided, then please contact us direct, or even better come and visit to discuss your specific concerns.
almost professional is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th Sep 2016, 18:33   #4 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: IoW
Posts: 3
sapperkenno, think you've got yourself confused with Brum. I've been flying through EGNX airspace for over 20 years and very rarely get told to remain outside their airspace, and if on the odd occasion I do, just listening to the R/T on 134.175 or 120.125 tells the story. A simple clue is that if the R/T is busy then perhaps I don't want to be in that bit of airspace. I have heard pilots giving the controller grief for not wanting to turn left or right 10 or 20 degrees. Good basic airmanship is to always have a plan A and a plan B, one for a direct route and the other if its busy. As that ATCO says, talk to them or go and see them at NX, we did a few years ago and we learn't a lot.
Billy Goat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th Sep 2016, 22:42   #5 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 408
From my experience, it seems while everything is integrated and airspace users are managed, it seems CAT is managed more expediently and sometimes GA isn't given the same preferences.

Case in point sitting at S1 on a lovely clear day last summer having been told to hold after calling ready for departure. Meanwhile 2 arrivals with loads of space between them, and 2 CAT departures cleared ahead of us, while barely off the apron taxiing out as we sit there wondering what is going on. Asked again in case we'd been forgotten, without wanting to sound arrogant and pushy wasn't met with any help or idea of delay but just a stern hold position again. 20 minutes later we were cleared takeoff, and the poor chap orbiting on right base finally cleared onto final behind us. Numerous times requesting N/S transits VFR, being given either a route that doesn't do us any favours at all, or told to remain clear.

At EGBB and EGNM this past month have being asked while approaching holds if we'll be ready on reaching, and you get a real sense ATC are out to keep everyone moving and slot you in where they can... East Mid's is pretty much always if you hear any other CAT on frequency, you can add 5 minutes and figure on waiting for them to be dealt with before we get a look in!

No offence meant to any controllers, but surely you have certain local operating rules there that state you give prioriy to the big stuff and let the little guys wait. That's always how it seems when I'm the little guy at East Mid's. And also the view of a lot of others I know that fly small stuff when down that way.
sapperkenno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th Sep 2016, 22:46   #6 (permalink)

Avoid imitations
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 10,979
Quote:
Preferably they'll only hire people who won't state "remain clear of controlled airspace" before asking for your details, and then mostly deny zone transits to VFR GA every time they are requested and then tell you to squawk 7000 and leave them alone once you've had a basic service that's taken you more than 5 miles away from their CAS...
Having been a regular user/crosser of the airspace for many years, I think that's an inaccurate appraisal.
ShyTorque is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th Sep 2016, 19:15   #7 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Unknown
Posts: 12
Unfortunately whilst the majority of GA pilots are very good there are still quite a few that don't understand the requirement for a clearance to enter controlled airspace. I've witnessed many cases where a pilot wrongly believed he could cross controlled airspace simply because they had checked in on the frequency.

This has led many units to use the phrase "remain outside controlled airspace" in an attempt to stop infringements, whilst personally I don't agree with this being used on every transmission you can understand why some controllers do in an attempt to cover themselves.
Under_the_radar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th Sep 2016, 20:28   #8 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The foot of Mt. Belzoni.
Posts: 1,808
'Remain outside controlled airspace.....Airways time check....xxxx'. Magic.
ZOOKER is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th Sep 2016, 20:30   #9 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: jersey
Age: 68
Posts: 904
I spent 38 years in ATC & I very much doubt that East Midlands ATCOS are any less friendly & amenable than any other ATCOS in the UK. I worked in co-ordination with EGNX & I flew in & out of there as a pilot.
kcockayne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th Sep 2016, 20:34   #10 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The foot of Mt. Belzoni.
Posts: 1,808
It's slightly out-of-date now, but EGNX used to produce a pictorial guide for visiting GA pilots. How many ATSUs do that sort of stuff?
ZOOKER is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th Sep 2016, 16:43   #11 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Wherever someone will pay me to do fun stuff
Posts: 868
It is many years ago now, but there was a time when the boss there had a real problem with his controllers providing a radar service outside CAS. Whilst he wasn't completely wrong, he did have a habit of banging on about it at length and at rather inappropriate times. And, I understood, considered it almost a disciplinary offence if any of his controllers deigned to take on such a risky pursuit.
LookingForAJob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th Sep 2016, 16:51   #12 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: jersey
Age: 68
Posts: 904
Quote:
Originally Posted by LookingForAJob View Post
It is many years ago now, but there was a time when the boss there had a real problem with his controllers providing a radar service outside CAS. Whilst he wasn't completely wrong, he did have a habit of banging on about it at length and at rather inappropriate times. And, I understood, considered it almost a disciplinary offence if any of his controllers deigned to take on such a risky pursuit.
I'm not far short of agreeing with him; taking account of what I saw outside of CAS at Coventry ! I have always considered Class G as potentially dangerous - & that proved to be the case with a collision near to EGNX & one on final at EGBE.
kcockayne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th Sep 2016, 17:51   #13 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Wherever someone will pay me to do fun stuff
Posts: 868
Quote:
I'm not far short of agreeing with him; taking account of what I saw outside of CAS at Coventry ! I have always considered Class G as potentially dangerous - & that proved to be the case with a collision near to EGNX & one on final at EGBE.
Apologies in advance for the continuing thread drift, but...

Like I said, he wasn't completely wrong, in large part because the services were not well defined, by the UK rulemakers, who tried to apply a few ICAO rules in a situation for which they were not intended, and then expected all the other rules would fit. Compound this with airspace users who had only a superficial understanding, at best, of the rules and responsibilities of all parties involved, and it is no wonder it was a mess. But at least it was all sorted out when everything got called FIS .

But to be more serious, I can't be sure which accident close to NX you are talking about but I would guess it is the Luscombe and PAC 750XL. If I recall correctly, none of the aircraft involved (and I think there were three which may have played a part) were receiving much of a service from any ATC unit - just the 750XL getting a basic FIS (the real FIS) from someone.

At Coventry it's arguable that if more information available from the radar was provided or used in some way, the accident could have been avoided.

Neither of these accidents support the view, either for or against, that providing pseudo control services using radar to aircraft outside controlled airspace exposes both the controller and ANSP to liabilities because the service cannot be provided with the appropriate duty of care (to use today's parlance) which was the core of SATCO's position.
I did ATSOCAS and RIS and RAS for many years when I was working for a living (and little more than the names have changed since then, it seems). My own view is that provided that the limitations of the services are understood, and that what the pilot actually gets is understood, it can enhance safety - although ATSOCAS/RIS/RAS/FIS (or, if we're completely honest, any other ATC service, for that matter) will never guarantee it. Safety is achieved by everyone in the system understanding their part and making best use of the information available.
LookingForAJob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th Sep 2016, 20:24   #14 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Lestah
Posts: 149
As a PPL based at East Mids for the best part of 18 years now, I think I am pretty well balanced to comment here.

Firstly, I know people in ATC at NX and have been to the tower twice. Some of them are pilots themselves receiving local ATC from their own colleagues, so they know and work both sides of the coin. They are also very welcoming of feedback, so take up the offer afforded to see them. They won't bite.

Most importantly, this is a commercial airfield and an SEP negatively impacting on that is going to be an issue. As based, we all know and accept that. You may wait at S1 if a 737 is joining alpha off the apron. You will wait at S1 if a 737 is at 6 to 8 miles. We have a view on why that is, but the answers are best offered from ATC. Suffice to say, we are comfortable with what we understand to be the reasons.

That doesn't stop you being frustrated time to time, but the bigger picture is understood.

About 3 years ago now, we had an SEP enter the zone and get lost in the zone, crossing the runway low level multiple times. I was held on base for around 25 mins. A waiting queue of commercial held at alpha and the comments made toward the lost individual were not pleasant from those waiting. I imagine the airfield were put under some pressure, thereafter. That lost SEP was a major threat to my basing. Yet, and thankfully, here we are still here today being supported as we were then.

When it comes to services to those in the air. I can't fault them at all. In all my flying hours out of NX, I am struggling to recall any accounts of hearing requests being declined without a genuine reason being offered. Countless times, they've provided me with great support for adhoc requests at short or no notice, integrating me with prevailing commercial traffic.

It's not just NX, Coventry, Brum and I must specifically mention Luton as well.

Superb the lot of them and I for am very grateful for them supporting all of us in our pursuits.
Local Variation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th Sep 2016, 22:17   #15 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: jersey
Age: 68
Posts: 904
Local Variation

Well said ! The "Big Picture" is what it is all about.
kcockayne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th Sep 2016, 18:49   #16 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: LEEDS
Posts: 512
Quote:
Originally Posted by kcockayne View Post
I spent 38 years in ATC & I very much doubt that East Midlands ATCOS are any less friendly & amenable than any other ATCOS in the UK. I worked in co-ordination with EGNX & I flew in & out of there as a pilot.
Leeds Bradford produce an online guide for both VFR and IFR/commercial pilots.
Mooncrest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th Sep 2016, 18:51   #17 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: LEEDS
Posts: 512
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mooncrest View Post
Leeds Bradford produce an online guide for both VFR and IFR/commercial pilots.
The above was intended as a reply to ZOOKER,not kcockayne. Finger trouble !
Mooncrest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th Sep 2016, 20:27   #18 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The foot of Mt. Belzoni.
Posts: 1,808
Great to hear that Mooncrest. I think EGCC may have also produced something similar many years ago, but I believe one of the main 'drivers' has retired
All this stuff is usually done on a voluntary basis by enthusiastic individuals.
ZOOKER is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th Sep 2016, 21:28   #19 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: U.K.
Posts: 319
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZOOKER View Post
Great to hear that Mooncrest. I think EGCC may have also produced something similar many years ago, but I believe one of the main 'drivers' has retired
All this stuff is usually done on a voluntary basis by enthusiastic individuals.
Zooker. You're correct about Manchester. It was me and I retired in 2009. I did however arrange a handover to a younger member of staff who also was a PPL. I've since moved away from the area so have no idea whether it's being amended in any way. I thought they were a damn good idea, even if they weren't housed in the easiest place to find on the 'web'.

Anyway....Back to the topic in hand. Due to health reasons I've had to give up flying but before doing so was based in the East Midlands and transited EGNX controlled airspace pretty regularly. Never had a problem.
Spiney Norman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th Sep 2016, 22:02   #20 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The foot of Mt. Belzoni.
Posts: 1,808
Spiney,
I hope you weren't transiting EGNX CAS in an airship.....With lighting as prescribed in the 1979 edition of the ANO.
Only just made the connection with your name too. Look after yourself.
Dinsdale......Dinsdale.
ZOOKER is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT. The time now is 02:42.


1996-2012 The Professional Pilots Rumour Network

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1