So let's just think about this for a moment.
There is nothing fundamentally wrong or shameful about an Apron Management Service. It's a service recognised by ICAO and has been for some 30 years. It's implemented at many major aerodromes throughout the world. If the service is provided within the bounds of the declared apron, everything is legitimate. Whether it is an appropriate service or the most efficient way to manage traffic at MAD is a matter of opinion.
Originally Posted by Lssar
They are not suposed to issue control instructions, only information. It is the pilot who is responsible of own separation with other ACFT´s/vehicles.
I'm stunned, how can this be allowed to happen?! But hang on a second, isn't that the case everywhere? And I don't mean the "The pilot is always ultimately responsible for the aircraft" stuff, according to the rules (Annex 11) ATC - if that is the alternative - doesn't provide any control or separation service on an apron either.
There are no internationally required qualifications or training for those providing Apron Management Services and so the arrangements at MAD are probably legitimate also. Whether just five or six weeks of training is adequate to prepare someone to provide services on the apron of major aerodrome is debatable, particularly if something untoward happens; however, a lot will depend on the previous experience of those undertaking the training and subsequently doing the job.
So far, so good - or, at least, legitimate and legal. But there are lots of other rules, some specifically applicable in Europe, nowadays. The ANSP that previously provided some sort of service on the apron must, presumably, have conducted a safety assessment of the change to their systems by introducing the Apron Management Service. Even if the ANSP were to claim that they did not make the change or introduce the new service, the rules still require safety assessment to be carried out. There are also rules related to the competence of staff providing air navigation services – and I think the apron management service technically falls within this definition.
There are one or two other rules which spring to mind originating from all of the Single European Sky regulations that we now have to comply with in Europe but I won't try and tease out individual requirements which may, or may not, apply to this particular situation. However, all of these rules also require the National Supervisory Authority to supervise the correct application of the rules and to audit safety related changes to air navigation services.
I've mentioned all of this before, but I am known for being boring, so I'll do it again.....
I have heard lots of complaints about the way the Spanish air traffic controllers are being treated, I've seen the videos put on YouTube ostensibly by these controllers and I can only describe what I see as totally unprofessional but apparently very real. I don't know the rights and wrongs of the Spanish situation but if a fraction of what has been reported in the media is true, some controllers were extracting the urine over working hours and overtime in a way which could never continue, and now as is so often the case, everybody suffers because of it.
But I haven't heard anything about the NSA and what it is doing to ensure that the appropriate rules are being followed, and in particular, ensuring that the services are safe. It's not that I love rules and want lots more of them – in fact, the current set of SES rules with which we are blessed seem to me to do little other than create work – but if I have to do a whole pile of work because of these rules, I would feel mighty upset if, in some other country, all the rules were ignored.
Rant over.