No Sig, by popular demand (you splitter) I thought I WOULD respond to your last.
As you say lets not degenerate the forum, but we will continue to agree to disagree.
Let me re-state and summarise what I consider we have established so far:
1/ ICAO have produced a document that gives a guideline for Ops/Dispatching
2/ The CAA have Advised this is a sound basis for a level companies need to teach there staff
3/ GCNS have produced a course that in their interpretation follows the ICAO Doc 7192
4/ The course has been issued to students at a cost of £1200 pounds
I don’t think any of the above can be argued against.
As I have stated all along I welcome a “standard” to which all Ops/Dispatchers can work to and a broad based course that should be supplemented by the airlines individual requirements. As we also agree it would be impossible to produce a course to meet ALL requirtements, hence the need for supplementary in house training.
Now lets summarise my compalints:
1/ The course has been issued at said cost and DOES contain errors, for which I understand are teething problems BUT – a little more care taken before sending this out (proof reading) would have alleviated this fault. As previously mentioned I can list further faults but I don’t intend to do so any further on this forum.
2/ As you already agree there is some overkill in the systems element of the course, I won’t go into this again. Modules 2 and 3 I understand will also be trimmed down by the moderators. I would however like to quote your last thread:
As you said in your last, ' I would much prefer the course to allocate twice the time on meteorology and subjects that I consider (yes subjectively) important'. What would say to the student out there who said, 'I would much prefer the course to allocate twice the time on 'aircraft systems' and subjects that I consider (yes subjectively) important'. I'm sure you can see the difficulty anyone who is preparing a course has.
Yes, but I would argue that anyone who needed twice the amount of instruction on aircraft systems would be best suited to a job as an engineer not an operations dispatcher. I certainly wouldn’t argue about the information required on the subjects you quoted in your last, I would deem those vital:
Pneumatic systems:
Planning - take off mass restrictions
In-flight – air conditioning and pressurisation problems
Requirements for alternative power sources
Possible requirements to descend to a lower altitude
Increased runway length requirements
But lets get the aircraft systems etc into the perspective of operational “performance” and not a lesson in engineering principles. Lets leave the engineers to do their job.
3/ The quality of reproduction of the documents for the price is of poor standard. I am going to ask you to look at the Met manual again, as an example the diagrams on pages 1.2 /3.3 and 4.2. These are very poor quality reproductions. In fact the diagram on page 4.2 should have been left out, its pointless and it loses everything its trying to convey because its quite obviously a colour diagram in black and white !! I could go on but I won’t.
4/ We are being asked to be proof readers and point out errors to the College.
5/ We are left in a position now where we have to study for 255 hours, knowing not all of it is required and trying to decide which is the chaff and which is the wheat.
All of the above points begs the question that a moderated and slimmed down version of this course should also have a slimmed down price !!!
As previosuly stated and Iin my opinion, a novice would have difficuly understanding some of this material and the price tag considering my complaints is a hefty one. I’m sure Easyjet can afford to shell out 20 x £1200 for this course and not even bat an eyelid, but what about the poor individual, longing for a job in airline operations who finds himself £1200 short for a course that isn’t quite right yet.
I still maintain module one should now be withdrawn until it has been moderated in a similar fashion to your plans for module 2 and 3 and then re-issued to the poor souls who have spent a great deal of their hard earned cash !!
Rgds
FG