Yellow, thanks for your reply. All information I have on EFPS is from Stansted itself or from our Ops.
Absolute rubbish, it's all built to the same spec. The SS KK and LL systems will be identical in the above respect
Ok, that's why I put 'maybe' in there.
So when EFPS gets installed into the new tower, it'll be on exactly the same brand/type computers with exactly the same hardware setup as at SS? If that's the case then I will gladly concede the point.
What about the BAA stand information? Is that all sorted?
Each unit will have this contingency as it is part of the spec and safety case.
Ok. Good. I had been told that this wasn't the case.
And it is a fact that no more blank paper strips have been ordered...'because you won't need them in the new tower'. Maybe someone should tell the person responsible!
the odds on the these both simultaneously failing are as low as everyone giving birth to a ginger baby.
Shame, would improve the world no end!
but I'm bored of hearing people on the unit moan moan and not do anything about it.
I have been, believe me. However, with all due respect to those involved, one operational ATCO (plus Ops ATCO) and the Manager 'Projects' is nowhere near enough people working on Heathrow side. Two people? How many ATCOs did Toronto have working on it prior to introduction? Even though all those involved are making great efforts, the very fact it's a small group means the watches are going to be more resistant, purely because they're not included. Added to the fact that nobody tells us anything, and when I do get some information from Ops about it, then spread it around the watch, I get singled out because what I was told 'wasn't for public consumption'!!!!!!!!!!!!
Jeeez, it's like a whole big secret!!!!!
The onus is put on the operational ATCOs to go to SS on our days off, go down and talk to Ops during our breaks, when I have 101 other things to do, as well as have a break, and if we don't we're told we should stop complaining.
It is symptomatic of the whole relationship between Ops and the coal face over the past few years. In my mind, ATCOS should be able to go to Ops, either in the Tech Com or not, and say 'we need this/this piece of kit needs this function/how can we achieve this?' And Ops should then try and come up with a solution working with the ATCOs. Rather, the answer is now so often: 'impossible, sorry.' Or:
'Here's a new peice of kit, the engineers and designers think it's great, you can do anything you want with it, there are fifteen different ways of carrying out this function!'
'Cool, can it do such and such?'
'No.'
'So can it still do this?'
'Yes but you need to open that menu, and then press that button, and then thids button three times.'
'But it would be really helpful if we could do this with it...'
'No, it can't do that....'
The number of things that have been introduced recently as a 'fait accompli' is ridiculous.
Make no mistake EFPS introduction at EGLL is going to be a difficult process
I couldn't agree with you more, but without the ATCOs on side, it will be a whole lot more difficult. That process should be starting now.
You in on Saturday?