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 18th May 2017, 12:01   #1 (permalink)
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: London
Posts: 386
LCY Remote Tower

I hear LCY is to get the first digital tower in the UK in 2019. Manned from Swanwick and providing significant benefits and efficiencies. I suppose NATS will save a bit on London Weighting...
Reverserbucket is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th May 2017, 12:08   #2 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: River Thames & Surrey
Age: 68
Posts: 6,418
Actually it will cost more for personnel IF this is true.
City is a 'Band 2 ' unit while Swanwick is 'Band 5' so the controller's salaries will be considerably more.
chevvron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th May 2017, 12:58   #3 (permalink)
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: London
Posts: 386
Interesting chevvron, I assumed it would be cheaper. Saab's got the tech contract I'm told.
Reverserbucket is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th May 2017, 13:50   #4 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Scotland
Posts: 42
They won't get band 5 money for nothing. I bet they either stay on their current band or they get band 5 if they volunteer to validate on a radar sector at TC. I say volunteer because I'm not sure if nats can move them and make them validate on radar, especially if they don't have an approach ticket.
GASA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th May 2017, 14:17   #5 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Rapunzel's tower
Posts: 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by GASA View Post
They won't get band 5 money for nothing. I bet they either stay on their current band or they get band 5 if they volunteer to validate on a radar sector at TC. I say volunteer because I'm not sure if nats can move them and make them validate on radar, especially if they don't have an approach ticket.
Such an offer, I have no doubt, would interest controllers...given the lack of opportunity to do radar at any of the main London airports.
(In the mists of time) I'm sure there used to be an agreement about being able to do radar training after a period of time being valid at a tower-only unit...
good egg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th May 2017, 14:53   #6 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: not the W.P.
Age: 63
Posts: 41
As I remember, there was an agreement that prevented having different banding on the same Unit. However, if the service was provided from the CTC, as is Western Radar, then the pay scale would be much lower.
middles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th May 2017, 15:00   #7 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The foot of Mt. Belzoni.
Posts: 1,739
Where is the approach function for EGLC carried out from at present, and is there a list published of the significant benefits and efficiencies?
ZOOKER is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th May 2017, 15:58   #8 (permalink)

 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 38
Posts: 4,128
Zooker, devils advocate, perhaps one (the only?) hypothetical benefit would be 'because the airport wants one'.
Gonzo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th May 2017, 16:37   #9 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The foot of Mt. Belzoni.
Posts: 1,739
Good answer as always, Gonzo.
ZOOKER is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th May 2017, 17:35   #10 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 193
Having visited EGLC a couple of times, the airport is hugely constrained for space. Removing the tower from the apron area could free some up. Any extra cost could easily be offset by the airport by having an extra parking space, or another lounge, or both.
hangten is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th May 2017, 17:41   #11 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Scotland
Posts: 42
EGLC approach is done from TC so I suppose nats could try to move them there and get them dual valid. Maybe then train the approach controllers to do tower, more efficient use of staff. That would then make the contract very difficult to lose. Maybe a route they could go with other airports to safeguard contracts...

I believe the airport wants to get rid of the tower and use the space for something else.
GASA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th May 2017, 17:45   #12 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: River Thames & Surrey
Age: 68
Posts: 6,418
Quote:
Originally Posted by Islandlad View Post
Who will work in the tower while the other watch is training on the telly? Even with recordings they will have to go live at some point. Can't be in two places at once.

I'm sure they have a plan....

Double up with half a set of non-NATS Controllers then move, then radar, then ....
Not just controllers
I believe NATS only supply controllers to LCY, the assistants being employed by the airport, so if they went to CTC (for instance) they would need support staff too.
chevvron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th May 2017, 18:07   #13 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Rapunzel's tower
Posts: 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by chevvron View Post
Not just controllers
I believe NATS only supply controllers to LCY, the assistants being employed by the airport, so if they went to CTC (for instance) they would need support staff too.
What pish you talk! (Or, more PC, your beliefs are half-truths)
good egg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th May 2017, 18:28   #14 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Rapunzel's tower
Posts: 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by Islandlad View Post
to make it easy you could set it up locally - get it up and running in parallel ... with the new 'tower' two doors down the street ... then throw the switch and move west to Swanwick in IT 'tower' 2 in 2019. It only needs a 'room' - the rest is IT.
Aye, sounds dead easy setting up 2 "digital towers", with all facilities available at both, including the display equipment, remote switching capability, and redundancies for both.
Perhaps it'd be best to leave it to "Bodie & Doyle" rather than come up with such "innovative" schemes...
good egg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th May 2017, 18:54   #15 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Rapunzel's tower
Posts: 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by Islandlad View Post
Which one are you? Bodie or Doyle? I think the "innovative" scheme is doing it at all. I was just considering the how. I'm sure it will make great TV as a project to follow - training all those FISOs
Now I'm really confused...what FISOs?!?
good egg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th May 2017, 19:24   #16 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Rapunzel's tower
Posts: 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by Islandlad View Post
Just pulling your chain.

You clearly work at City. It would be interesting if you are able to tell us a little about the project. It is a first afterall. 2019 is not far away if that really is the move date.
Yanking of chain accepted.

It's not my place to reveal details, I'm sure a co-ordinated release of information will be forthcoming in the public domain in the not too distant future...should the rumour be correct.

Rumour networks are great in certain aspects - like the open sharing and generation of thought-provoking ideas and concepts - but these are based on conjecture.
However there are also downsides to such discussions, particularly for those people whose work might be affected...uncertainty, upheaval, etc.
It's not for me to be a moderator to anyone's thoughts, that is up to each poster. I'd merely suggest that before typing people ought to consider the people involved - no matter what the subject is.
I try to. I may not always be as understanding of people issues as, perhaps, I should be, but at least I try.
good egg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th May 2017, 21:12   #17 (permalink)

 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 38
Posts: 4,128
I most certainly agree good egg.

The problem is that those who are involved in this sort of project are not going to answer questions about it, and that leaves the door open for those who think they have the measure of the situation.

Making blanket statements about what will happen doesn't help.
Gonzo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th May 2017, 00:05   #18 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Isle of Man
Posts: 139
Quote:
Originally Posted by good egg View Post
Yanking of chain accepted.

It's not my place to reveal details, I'm sure a co-ordinated release of information will be forthcoming in the public domain in the not too distant future...should the rumour be correct.

Rumour networks are great in certain aspects - like the open sharing and generation of thought-provoking ideas and concepts - but these are based on conjecture.
However there are also downsides to such discussions, particularly for those people whose work might be affected...uncertainty, upheaval, etc.
It's not for me to be a moderator to anyone's thoughts, that is up to each poster. I'd merely suggest that before typing people ought to consider the people involved - no matter what the subject is.
I try to. I may not always be as understanding of people issues as, perhaps, I should be, but at least I try.
All noted - which is why I deleted my posts.(Thursday)

As of 0700 Friday the BBC has taken an interest in the project. The fact that the equipment is installed and up and running more than 2 years in advance is going to be a big cost: well in advance of any cost saving - if that was ever the aim.

In an interview there was reference to the end 2019 as the final start date while running in parallel.

Last edited by Islandlad; 19th May 2017 at 07:52.
Islandlad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th May 2017, 12:31   #19 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 36
Posts: 5,915
This is a very busy and very particular and demanding piece of airspace. Seems a very strange place to pilot this.
Btw what happens if NATS and LCY part company. LCY can't outsource a control tower they don't have. Is this NATS power playing to keep the money rolling in? GIP owned EDI and LGW have both left NATS and given ATC out to third parties recently. Same owner as LCY.
Skipness One Echo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th May 2017, 13:04   #20 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: by the seaside
Posts: 69
Remote air traffic control preparing for takeoff at London City airport

https://www.theguardian.com/business...n-city-airport


The sounds of the airport are also played over speakers, to make this virtual world more realistic - potentially noisier, in fact, than some insulated control rooms - after trials showed it helped controllers. “It sounds a bit silly pumping noise into a control room but it’s something they need to do the job,” Anderson added.


What a "genius" must have thought that having a noisier environment is going to make ATC performance better. Why do they think towers have sound-proofing?


"At night, the contours of the runway can be highlighted with graphics. In low light, visibility can be improved. And should cameras detect anything that is not authorised traffic – any four-pixel moving dot that could be anything from a passing helicopter to a drone – the system can automatically zoom in and track it, with a pop-up inset window on the video cityscape."


Yeah, assuming the cameras work of course.. that the video system does not fail.
Satellite Man 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 02:12.


1996-2012 The Professional Pilots Rumour Network

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1