Revised and Improved Glasgow College Course (Merged)

[opsbod]

Hopefully those enrolled on the course will have received the first two binders of the revised course.

Ops Managers from a number of airlines have been working with the Glasgow College to provide a course more in keeping with our needs.

The college has also listened to the students and their feedback and intends the support mechanisms to be much stronger this time around.

As Kevin Maloney indicated in his letter their will be regular on site clinics, and the tutors are also now more contactable.

So, what do you think of the new format?

[no sig]

Pleased to hear that OpsBod. Now that I'm away from it all, at least for the time being, I'd be interested to know if you've heard from the CAA or the JAA re the requirement to add ICAO FOO/Dispatcher level training to Part D of JAROPS1 airline manuals.

IEM OPS 1.205 Yellow Paper
Training of Flight Operations Officers
(See JAR-OPS 1.205)

If an operator employs Flight Operations Officers in conjunction with a method of Operational Control as defined in JAR OPS 1.195, training for these personnel should be based on relevant parts of ICAO Doc 7192 D3. This training should be described in sub Part D of the Operations Manual. This should not be taken as a requirement for Licensed Flight Dispatchers nor for a flight following system.

[JB007]

Would be very interested to hear some feedback on this new course....

Uncle Cracker - are you guys 'up there' participating???

[opsbod]

I understand that JAA are currently talking to a number of European Organisations with regards to the item in nosig's post. Those involved in the consultation include the training department at Airbus in TLS and IFALDA.

[Uncle Cracker]

Nope. See your pm's.

[Mister Rainbow]

Let's have a balance here, shall we?

Careful, chaps - especially if it's your own money.
Thoughts for the day (applies to any course) - Recognised? Approved? For how long? By whom?

And let’s not forget there are those of us who are still awaiting responses to questions asked of our tutors and Mr Maloney a year ago despite the "support mechanism."

Remember kids, wordy posts are not big and they’re not clever.

[no sig]

Mister Rainbow

Nothwithstanding the issues you may have with the College and Mr K. M, who else is working to support the training needs of UK operational personnel to what will be, one hopes, the European standard. There is nothing else to balance. It appears UKOMA is pulling this around, lets support their efforts. Although I am out of it now, the update from Opsbod is a positive move one would hope.

Sadly, we don't have anything that is 'yet' recognised or approved. Hence the importance of the CAA/JAA regarding the inclusion of ops training to ICAO standards in part D of your ops manual. That, I am afraid, is the closest we are going to get to recognised or approved there is no licence in this at least as far as I can see.

I know most airlines will not be able to meet the ICAO standards by themselves so we need a course such as Glasgow Nautical College are providing and it may be something that will, in the future, be tailored to meet individual airlines needs.

But, the single most important thing that will foster the future of UK ops personnel is a recognised standard of training. If you can go to an interview with a Certificate to that effect in your hand you will stand a better chance of employment.

We've been through all of this before, but lets not pour cold water on this important move in our part of the industry.

[srs what?]

3 times I have requested info on this course from the college and 3 times I've received nothing. Personally I take that as a sign.

[MilOps]

I signed up for this course on it's inception. To say that I was unimpressed by it's quality would be an understatement.

I recently spoke to the College for an update and was assured that the improved version would soon be on the streets. Additionally KM promised to contact me with an outline of the new prospectus..........nothing heard!

At the same time KM explained the options open to me and they are:

a. Plod on with the old books.

b. Start the course anew with new books.

c. A full refund.

As this 'qualification' is still not recognised and therefore is of dubious value, I am asking for a full refund. £1200 is a lot of money to me and the college has failed spectacularly to provide a quality product that I would demand for the price.

I shall instead be concentrating my efforts in the direction of Sheffield and it's FAA Flight dispatchers license.

[no sig]

srs what? and MilOps

I am led to believe the UKOMA group have spoken with the College with regard to these problems, I leave it for OpsBods or someone else from the UKOMA group to comment as I am now out of touch. I think you should email their Principle with your comments, find the address on their website.

But MilOps, the ICAO standard is not of dubious value and particularly, if it is adopted by the JAA as the European standard of training.

[famous grouse]

MilOps

IMHO I should stay well clear of the course and claim you money back until it has been adopted as an acceptable standard by both JAR OPS and the CAA.

Echo your thoughts Mr Rainbow "Recognised? Approved? For how long? By whom? "

I'm sure we've all read the previous posts on this subject and No Sig's efforts, along with Glasgow maybe should be applauded, however UNTIL an acceptable standard for this course has been recognised there is no way forward on this issue. If I hear one more comment about Doc 7192 and Part D of the Ops manual I shall cry :{

MilOps and SRS's comments regarding communication are the most worrying considering the flack Glasgow attracted the first time round. Emails to the Principle, when you have forked out £1200 No Sig, is not the answer.

For £1200 I would, should and did expect positive and prompt replies from the College and these as indicated the first time round on this forum, were and still are by the sound of things, sadly lacking.

I shall continue to sit back and wait for a CAA/JAR approved course.

In my lifetime ? Maybe not

Best regards
FG

[Mister Rainbow]

No Sig

I am not questioning the ICAO standard (sorry FG) and would welcome any course which not only met it, but had actually been approved by ICAO.
That is my whole point. Fact. First time around, the Glasgow course did fall far, far short, both in terms of relevance and quality of content therein. The support given to me by the college was nil and I have received nothing from the college since to change my opinion.
Therefore I too will await a course that is approved by ICAO, not one that merely claims to be produced to it's standard with unsubstantiated promises that it will all be ok this time around.

:*

[opsbod]

Mister Rainbow, I agree that it does appear that the college have not met your requirements the first time round. I and a number of other Ops Managers have tried to steer the college in the right direction and hope we have made considerable progress. UKOMA aims to “provide a means by which the airline operations community can continually improve and evolve” and a number of members feel that at present we will all gain if this course is successful.

There will certainly be a monthly clinic at TangoLand and if this is a more convenient place to meet Kevin and received the support you need then pm me and I will be happy to assist. This offer is not just open to Mister Rainbow, but any student of the course.

If you chose to get your money back and leave the course, this again is your choice; no-one is holding a gun to your head yet.

However, please bear in mind ICAO will not approve this course or any other as meeting any ICAO standards. The FAA dispatch licence course at Sheffield and elsewhere is not and cannot be approved by ICAO since ICAO is not the regulating body, in the US the FAA is, in the UK the CAA is the responsible body. Other European countries are already introducing ICAO 7192 as their training standard and have approved some training orgainisations to deliver such courses, Sweden & France to name a couple.

I know that the college have been speaking to the CAA and will be approaching them in the future for further recognition of the course. Please also remember that the college and its course work are already approved for CAA and JAR pilot training, to my knowledge this is more than any other organisation in the UK currently offering Ops training has.

[no sig]

(sorry OpsBod our posts have crossed in the post/ no sig)

FG

I wouldn't wish to reduce you to tears, but I'm working on the principle that there is a wider audience of our colleagues out there who might not have followed our chats of the past, and I will confess, I think it important to keep this subject alive for the many reasons I've explained in the past.

The issues with the College need resolved by the individuals concerned as I've said many times, and as you'll know from an industry perspective, UKOMA are working with them overall.

Mr Rainbow and FG, ICAO set the basic requirement for the international standard (D7192), they audit the states to see that the ICAO standards are met, it was during such an audit of the UK that the lack of Ops Officer training issue came to light. ICAO will not approve the Glasgow or any other course, whether they would notify it in their materials as a course meeting the ICAO standards is, however, another issue as they already do with other courses.


But, the bottom line in all this is to work towards a UK/JAA standard (ICAO) of training for ops that airlines will recognise. In that event a certificate from a training organisation gives you a 'de facto' Flight Ops Officer licence ( as close as you'll get), and that's something future ops officers can use to demonstrate their competence. It will also raise standards, as I believe, in general, they need to be.

[famous grouse]

No Sig :{ :{

I'm not disputing the requirement for training, I never have done.

What I have objected to all along is being charged £1200 for a sub standard course that has not been approved (or even spell checked and proof read) by anyone.

To shell out £1200 may be a drop in the ocean to some, but I suspect not for others. People subscribing to this course need to know at the end of the day that it is going to count for something and be recognised by potential employers.

So good luck to UKOMA AND to Glasgow in their approaches to the CAA for this to be " the standard" course for Ops Bods, I just hope it evolves from its initial form into something more workable and dare I say it "relevant".

What you up to these days No Sig, no longer "orange" I assume ?

Regards
FG

[Ikkle!]

Glasgow have a long way to go to regain some credibilty.
Having seen the course work, I came to the conclusion that the books were just Modules 1 and 2 from the ATPL course placed into a binder with "ICAO Operations Officer Training" on the front!!!!!!!

And 1200 quid is not petty cash to anyone......

Is the course going to be more relevant now ???? When I have 20 aircraft infront of me all requiring re-routes/RFI's/engineers etc etc....the colour of an Off-route Waypoint on a Primary Navigation Screen is really useful!!!!!!!

[no sig]

Ikkle

The level of study required for the ICAO FOO licence is not far removed from the ATPL. The College has used existing pilot study materials and tailored them, with airline and UKOMA help - that relationship continues. That was the only way we were going to get a course up and running, Glasgow was the only organisation I could find who would take this on. As an existing JAR CPL/ATPL training school they had a head start which made this course affordable. The development of a course from scratch, if you could find someone to do it, would have cost more than double.

Bear in mind the commercial return vs the number of likely students is low. Despite the teething problems at the start of the course, credit where credit is due, at least the Glasgow College of Nautical Studies took this task on and from what OpsBod tells me stand behind their committment to get the course right. They are a further education college with a long tradition in nautical studies and have on board many of the ex-British Aerospace Flying College PIK trainers.

You need to go back and read my previous posts regarding the basis of the course as I don't want to reopen a debate we've already had on these fora. But, I will say, this course isn't about 'your' job, its about giving a broad range of knowledge that enables you to work in airline ops in any environment so that you have complete appreciation of what is happening in flight, and in that context it is indeed important that you know cockpit instrumentation.

For interest Senior Dispatcher posted this link to the EUFALDA and german Dispatcher training.

http://www.flugdienstberater.org/Assembly03.htm

FG, after 33 years in Ops I've bowed out, gracefully I hope, to do consultancy and some more sailing!

[Normally Aspirated]

I got new notes the other day.

[famous grouse]

Normally Aspirated,

Any comments on the revised notes ;)

best regards
FG

[Normally Aspirated]

They are a bit shorter than the first lot and they seem to be a bit more ops orientated.

I also got a login number for a thing called Blackboard which is the colleges discussion board. Theres a page just for this course. As far as I'm led to believe one of their instructors is going to keep an eye on it to answer any questions we've got about the course.

[famous grouse]

Normally Aspirated

We'll all keep our fingers crossed they got it right this time round then :ok:

I'll still wait for the course to be approved before I give it a second chance - once bitten !!

Thanks for the info NA

Rgds
FG

[FEBA]

Having only one provider of a distance learning course for this subject is un-healthy, in my opinion.
City University and Oxford both expressed an interest in participation and this should be pursued by UKOMA , CAA and participating airlines.
Glasgow's first shot went astray and their follow up may not be much better. The course needs to be run on an OU basis with easy access to tutors and day schools, one per module of the syllabus and a regular system of TMA's.
That said the overall objective makes it compelling for all.
Nosig may I suggest you add this to the agenda of the next UKOMA meeting. Also I've got my yacht master ticket, fancy sailing sometime?
All the best
FEBA

[covec]

Re C&G Certificate in Airline Operations & Flight Despatch via distance learning with AVTECH 2000: any good?

I'm looking to leave the RAF for aviation related pastures new - currently have 3500 hours as rearcrew.

[no sig]

FEBA

If City University and Oxford are interested, that’s great. But, their interest may wane when they realise the commercial returns are limited. This was/is the problem I came up against when I first set out to find an institution to take this project on. But, I hope I'm wrong, as I think we're all agreed, the objective is to establish a single standard of Ops officer training in the UK and hopefully under the CAA/JAA. The more courses the better. As I said in my previous post, credit to Glasgow for taking this on and from what Opsbods is telling me the re-issued materials are a major improvement and we seem now to be back on track with the GCNS ICAO course.

FEBA, your point about an OU style approach is valid, and having watched my wife do one last year I agree, from what I'm hearing the College are moving that direction, but frankly I doubt it would match the OU, that’s a hard act to follow. It is perhaps relevant to note here that there are many ATPL students out there who are doing an equivalent course this way and getting through their licence exams, if you're committed, I have no doubt the materials from Glasgow will be more than adequate to get you through this course. Distance learning, as you'll know, requires dedication and self-motivation and this course is no different. I've watched many ops officers get through their ATPL's the same way, but it takes work, and support for sure.

FG, I trust you read my previous post regarding 'approval' of the course. The most significant approval this course is going to have is industry recognition and UKOMA have taken that on board, OpsBod perhaps can update on UKOMA activities.

I'd say to anyone that for European JAROPS this is the material to be studying. Where the FAA Dispatch ticket is a valuable licence if you want to work under the FAR's, remember that much of the learning comes with the airline you work with, after you have your licence, and it does not include JAROPS and ICAO weather. With the ICAO course you'll cover those subjects on the course.

Covec, I'd recommend you read the past postings on the subject above, I'd advise you to do the above rather than the C&G, particularly if you can apply for RAF Re-settlement support to pay for the course. The UK CAA and the JAA have have notified the intent to adopt the ICAO 7192 training syllabus as the basis for Ops Officer training ( see previous posts). Check out the Glasgow College of nautical Studies website and also the IAFALDA.org website has information on the job and the ICAO course working group.

[FEBA]

Nosig
Many thanks for your reply. Here's a thought that may have some potential. How about approaching the OU to support this syllabus? I'm not sure I agree with you regarding the commercial viability of the course from a college perspective, in my opinion the whole of Europe is available to these guys as a market. Now that's got to be enticing, it certainly interested Oxford when I spoke to them about it. Who knows, maybe the guys at Milton Keynes may be interested, once they've got over the Beagle disaster !
Rainbow , you know a thing or two about OU. Let's have your thoughts please.
Cheers
FEBA

[Mister Rainbow]

I agree completely - having only one provider for such a course isn't good. A bit of competition should ensure higher standards for all concerned.
Re the OU - you've got the wrong man, officer! (Really, I have never had anything to do with it.)

[FEBA]

Sorry MR, I've confused you with some one else
Rgds
FEBA

[covec]

no sig

Thanks for the info.

Must admit, as an outsider / newcomer: I'm very surprised that there is no industry standard for what obviously can be a stressful & flight safety critical job!

All the best.

PS Like the OU idea.......having gone through the ATPLs I know that the "established" schools ain't cheap! However, comparing any ground school cost against the cost of an IR......the costs pale!

[famous grouse]

I must say I concur with FEBA and Mr R, having only one provider for such a course is limiting, to open it out to competition would benefit us all.

Having said that I also agree with No Sig (for a change), it all comes down to commercial viability in the end, if there is not a large enough potential audience for such a course (and a suitable return for the effort involved) then the OU and Oxford wouldn't be interested, I'm sure there are more wanna be pilots for Oxford than wanna be Ops Controllers ......... ??

I did an OU course, god a number of years ago now, probably 10 or more. The material quality, tutor support, content etc were spot on, but the resources of the OU are vast. The efforts of UKOMA and No Sig should be applauded in getting "somebody" to take on the task, however their efforts were marred by the capability and failure of the GCNS to provide not only quality materials, but student support. I state again that I sincerely hope the revised version is better than the first, otherwise steer clear.

If Oxford or the OU could be brought on board I would sign up again tomorrow, but for now I'll sit back and wait.

No Sig, I did see the post reference approvals, a shame that we can't get an approval from the CAA, it would help a lot of people and steer them in the right direction if they really are wanna be Ops Controllers. People like Covec need sound advice on what they should do and to know they are not wasting their time/effort/finances in learning something they don't need. At least C&G (which I have done) and GCNS (The first version I have seen and was appalled) give potential employers an indication of skills learnt, which can then be developed. So from that point of view the GCNS is better than nothing, alas somewhat expensive for what it attempts to provide. C&G is good (or was 15 years ago) but doesn't go quite far enough, GCNS goes a little too far, a middle ground would be nice, maybe GCNS has now found that middle ground, I haven't seen version 2 so I can make no further comment.

Best regards
FG

[FEBA]

FG
If Oxford or the OU could be brought on board I would sign up again tomorrow, but for now I'll sit back and wait.
I'm not sure that any of us can afford to be complacent. If the trade is to be given the professional status that common sense demands it have (like that of our colleagues in the USA) then a collective effort needs to be made. Having spoken with the CAA Flight Ops inspectorate i found general concensus of opinion for certification of operations controllers, in light of the reducing numbers of drivers on the flight deck and ever increasing workloads in busy airspace, it makes sense.
I am convinced that a European push in this direction will win the day fairly quickly, so we all must start the ball rolling.
Assuming that JAA ratifies Ops Controller licensing and training then your concerns re a market for the training course providers will disappear. I think now is a good time to start an effective campaign with international support (IFALDA at all) to lobby the JAA and CAA, commercial support would be welcomed too. I hope you do, too :ok:

Covec
Are you still working for Mrs Windsor aviation? If so, and are planning to resume civilian status shortly, I may have something of interest to you.
Brgds
FEBA

[covec]

FEBA

Always interested, thank you. I have 2 years left "to do" though.

I prefer to keep my email address discrete......just in case the Desk Officer gets to know too much!

[famous grouse]

I wouldn't say I was being complacent, but if the JAA does decide to "licence" or "approve" Operations Controllers (and I hope it does), then we MUST have an acceptable standard of course materials and content as per DOC7192. The OU or Oxford would be a far better bet than the previous version of the GCNS course. If version 2 is closer to the mark then that's better.

I for one am not prepared to fork out £1200 on another sub standard course, so my comment ref sitting back is purely in this context, I will sit back and wait for a decent training course, which if we are to be licenced, must precede leglislation.

Good luck
Rgds
FG

[FEBA]

Covec
Are you based in Lincs?
FEBA

[no sig]

Sorry, but if you read back the CAA and the JAA have specifically ruled out the licencing of ops staff in their papers. That doesn't mean however, that course completion and the passing of a set of exams to gain accreditdation/certification of a ICAO flight ops standard isn't worth anything, on the contrary, it is in all ways a de facto licence and most worthwhile for the airline and the individual. The requirement to licence brings in a whole raft of legislation and regulation and, as far as I can see is very unlikely at the present.

Although a convert to the FAR dispatch system, I can also see that we can 'up' the European/UK ops position to a much more professional status provided we have a 'standard of training and accredidation or certification. And most importantly in all this, is the requirement to have ops officer training standards included in the Ops Manual Part D, this brings us side by side with our aircrew colleauges and acknowledges the important role we play.

[FEBA]

Nosig
No arguement with your post, I think everyone supports the notion that Ops people in Europe should be trained certified to strictly controlled standards by the JAA and their local CAA.
However;
" the CAA and the JAA have specifically ruled out the licencing of ops staff in their papers"

This is true but they said the same of CRM, now it's a mandatory part of crew training. I think our arguement for certification, licensing and formalised training on a pan Euro basis, is far stronger than that of CRM.

We need to orchestrate our appeal to the authorities so as to speak with one voice. This should start with UKOMA and then some sort of congress formed. What do you think?

FEBA

[homelesssid]

Nice to see a sensible interesting debate on this site for once. If UKOMA is to be the voice of UK Airlines of witch I think it is becoming, then if a standard training syllabus is adopted by them and used by its members then its only a mater of time until the authorities adopt it and recommend its use. Any standardisation is a great step forward.

[opsbod]

Homelesssid,

The thing JAR and CAA are both saying is that Airlines should train their staff in accordance with ICAO Doc 7192-D3 standards.

As you say this can only be good for everyone since 7192 defines what theoretical knowledge operations staff should have. However, as much as nosig, I, and others are pushing this matter forwards, there will be a requirement the operations officers to want to improve themselves.

Training to 7192 requires an extensive amount of study time, no UK carrier will be able to release each and every operations staff member to complete the training so there will be a requirement for Ops officers to want study in their own time and develop themselves, the result should be a better career path for those of you that do.

Whilst UKOMA will continue to push for recognition of operation's part within the industry the operations officers will also have to do their part.

[no sig]

FEBA

I do agree with you and in fact you make a very good point about training being mandatory. If our CAA and the JAA require Ops Officers to be trained per our Ops Manual Part D, which needs to meet ICAO, then there is no getting away from it- training is mandatory.

If you can demonstrate that you have completed a 'recognised or approved' course then you save any potential employer the need to train you, it follows that is a saving to a company and makes you more attractive. Your course completion certificate then becomes job currency. Job adverts will start to specify that 'applicants must posses the ICAO Flight OPS certificate....etc etc.

Opsbod makes the point well, few companies are prepared to release you from the Ops room for the time required to complete the course. Therefore, individuals need to recognise that, just as most pilots have to do when they do their licence preparation, you will need to study! Even if you've been in Ops for years and think you already know it all. Just the same if you wanted to go an work under FAR, you need that ticket.

And if I may, it brings us back full circle to the reasons we went for a distance learning course like the Glasgow College to make it accessible, practical and affordable for your average Ops officer.

OpsBod can you give us an update on the GCNS new notes release?

[FEBA]

Nosig
I think we need a tete a tete, I'm not sure how many contributers to this forum there are with our experience of FAR and FAA dispatch, we need a get together with all of them.
The reasons, as I see it, for regulated dispatch/operations control in Europe are complex and need to be fully exposed and documented to form part of convincing case. Here's a few to start with
1) Hapag Lloyd A310
2) Avianca B707 JFK
3) FAR 121. ? (memory fails me) domestic carrier or domestic sector fuel reserves burn plus 45 minutes (no alternate fuel) providing wx forecast at destination 2hr prior and 1hr after planned arrival is vis 3 miles cb 2000 ft. I haven't got the book and its a long time since I did it, you may wish to correct me. However if JAA adopted this principle on the basis that a flight following system of qualified ground based personnel must be in force, think of the fuel savings for the bucket and spade operators to the Med in summer. A future polution tax on airliners may well sharpen some folks interest in this :cool:

[MilOps]

Lots of interesting views. I am an RAF Flight Operations Manager about to make the leap into civvy strasse, exit date is Dec this year. I enrolled on the course at its inception and like many was disappointed with the quality et al. I have received module one of the new batch and feel a bit more comfortable with the content.

Now then, in addition to all the points listed above, for me the point of enrolling was to expand my RAF operations knowledge and understand better the complexities of the subject as a whole and develop an awareness of the way it is done in the real world to prepare me for when I leave.

If anyone is feeling generous and want's to post any hints and tips I will be most grateful. I live south of Norwich so Stansted is less than 1 hr and EGSH is about 20 mins. Anything considered.

[no sig]

I'd ask around, you might find one or two airlines who would be prepared to offer you a day or two's observing in their Ops rooms. I have always found that ex RAF movements or ops bods have caught on very quickly and the transition is not too difficult. Civil regs, JAROPS1 need understood and our operations manuals follow a , more or less, common format under JAR.

The content of the ICAO course is the technical fundementals of the trade, much of which you'll be familiar with I am sure. Getting familiar with the commercial aspects of the job come in time as will crew flight time limits etc.

Good luck.

[FEBA]

MilOps
Send me a PM I'll be happy to help out in any way I can
Cheers
FEBA

[MilOps]

FEBA

Check your PMs, and thanks.

[FEBA]

All you guys out there in dispatcher land, some suggestions as to how you think we should procede with this cause please.
FEBA

[capital1]

The silence is deafening :bored:

[no sig]

Just taking a breather Captital1, it's an issue that won't be going away.