Military ATC on PPrune

[Flobadob]

Dear Officer Commanding PPrune,

I am really hacked off that we don't have a military ATC page on this site.

Mil ATC boys/girls have to read all that Civvy ATC blah, which frankly is terribly boring and mundane.

The mil aircrew boys get their debating pages, can we have one too?

Thanks awfully old chap.

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

"Military ATC"? Oh, is that what it's called? :-)

[niknak]

Flobadob

Have a look at the military aircrew forum, and you may get an inkling of perhaps why there isn't a military ATC forum.
Its almost exclusive of anything civilian, and anyone who dares to state a civillian perspective gets shot down.

If thats what you want, so be it, but I think it will be a waste of resources as a separate forum, we have a lot to learn from each other, something which your flying coleagues seem unable to accept until they enter the big bad world of airlines.

As a civi' atco I work along side the Mil', and although our working practices are a world apart, we have a lot in common.

Post here and accept the consequences.... :ok:

[Whipping Boy's SATCO]

Aaaaargh. :ugh: Let me guess the hot topics:

Controller Licensing
Terrain clearance responsibilities
Specialist pay
Controller Licensing - again
Duty of Care
Pristina BOI
RPAR
Bl**dy aircrew
Bl**dy Civvis (controllers and aircraft)
Why can't we have civil licenses as 70% of the aircraft we talk to are civvi?
'That' Courts Martial
Fighter controllers :yuk:
TG9 Controller Selection Boards
Organisation formally known as MATO
Controller Licensing

Dear Mods, please don't do it!!!!!

PS. I agree with niknak; maybe we would learn something from each other.

[M609]

Can you brits imagine controllers working with ESARR-5 licences on all the mil airfields in a country? And hey! One set of rules, the same ones as the civies! Nahh, that would be boring! :8 :8

[Scott Voigt]

I didn't think that the British military had enough controllers in it to even fill up a thread <EG>...

Running away before the fire starts <G>

regards

Scott

[Shagster]

Scott.....many a word said in jest. You're not far off the mark!:(

[Flobadob]

Honourable Friends,

You have all highlighted/made enough subjects/comments to make an Mil ATC forum worthwhile.

Thanks for making my point.

[Carbide Finger]

Some of us civvies control quite a lot of mil traffic. Some of us are even interested in a military point of view. I'll continue to read any of the ATC threads be it in Civvy ATC, Mil ATC or Mil Aircrew. Can't we just keep ATC all together?

Rant over, Big smiles all round

CF

:D

[BEXIL160]

Personally I don't see the point in a separate Mil ATC forum.

From a Civil view point I am very interested in how the Mil operate and what their problems and issues are. I hope they are interested in what happens in the civil world.

I would also hope that rather than consdier ourselves to be separate, that we are Controllers first and foremost, albeit with different, but inextricably linked, agendas.

It's worth pointing out that we operate in the same airspace for much of the time. Mil crossers of Airways for example, and the many and varied operations in Class "G" (Which doesn't "belong" to anyone BTW), both Mil and Civil.

Rgds BEX

[PPRuNe Radar]

There is no need for a separate Mil ATC Forum.

The reasons are two fold.

Firstly, there are already 2 Forums where military ATC can be discussed. Either here in the non specific ATC Forum (which welcomes both civil and military input), or in the Military Aircrew Forum whose remit is ''A forum for the professionals who fly the non-civilian hardware, and the backroom boys and girls without whom nothing would leave the ground. Army, Navy and Airforces of the World, all equally welcome here.''

Secondly, there is a constant review on PPRuNe which actually looks at reducing Forums, not increasing them. The addition of a new Forum is only ever done where there is demonstrated need which can not be currently met, along with an indication that there will be sufficient members to meet a critical mass which will provide a lively and robust Forum with lots of debate and input. For example, the NATS Forum is one which always hovers close on being disbanded. It certainly has plenty of registered members - around 400 - and so meets our experience (gained over the years) of the numbers of members needed for a sustained Forum. However, the input is relatively low and it becomes very stagnant at times. PPRuNe doesn't believe that there are that many Mil ATCOs out there, or that the number of daily topics and issues could be sustained for a dedicated Forum.

So, we will continue with the two Forums we have today, which have a wide and varied input from all manner of aviation professionals on both sides of the mike from all over the globe.

Thanks for raising the issue.

[Edited to remove words twice :O ]

[Whipping Boy's SATCO]

Hear Hear. Did you have to say it twice, or was it just finger trouble? :p

[Jerricho]

Heh.

I can just see Radar typing all that out twice :E

[Matoman]

As a Mil ATCO of 30+ years and a frequent visitor and occasional contributer to this forum, I also see no need whatsoever for a separate Mil ATC Forum. I agree completely with the views expressed by Bexil160 and believe both civil and military ATCOs can benefit enormously from reading certain posts that broaden their understanding of each others problems. With the advent of ESARR-5 at long last we are gradually moving towards each other and anything that promotes greater unity m ust be the right way forward.

That said, I wouldn't mind adding my opinions to some of the threads suggested by my old colleage WBS!!!

Matoman

[DK338]

Please whatever you do don't give the mil ATC controlling gits their own forum, it would be a painful thing to behold. I've a better idea, get rid of them altogether. The RAF/FAA is so small now that we could emulate the Kiwis and use civil servants instead in toto.:E

[Widger]

:eek: :} :\ ........:eek: :} :\ .....gulp:eek: :} :\ ......sorry DK388 no bites here!

[Fox3snapshot]

Best sort your facts out.....we had the choice to be in uniform there as well buddy, and if I am not mistaken military is public service as well???

:rolleyes:

[KPax]

Agree with WBS, I have been in for 30+ yrs and we do need to work together. On the last post, your idea worked well at Boscombe?.

[Fox3snapshot]

New Zealands system worked very well. You had the choice to join the Territorials and received a commission based on your job grading or previous military experience (this was appropriate to the RAAF controllers that came over as they were all Flt Looeys).

This gave the RNZAF deployable Controllers in peace time and war if required. Additionally the controllers participated in MAOT courses etc. You could also go flying and participate in all activities synonymous with Air Force life.....ie. Bar-O-Clock :E

Best 2 years of my life....:ok:

Yippe Ki Yi Yay!

[Hippy]

Any Mil ATC forum would have to be limited to 3 replies per thread.

[niknak]

........unless another forum was opened up to take the excess replies...:E ;)

[Flobadob]

Well there you have it.

I still think there is plenty of scope for a Mil ATC forum.

The general opinion is that Mil Conts should stay in with the Mil Aircrew. OK fine. As the ATC forum is mainly geared towards civvy controlling, how about we put this forum into one of the civvy airline pilots forums? Hmmm, somehow I don't think the civvies controllers would like that and maybe they can now see my point of view.

At the end of the day, I still believe we need a Mil forum to discuss things peculiar to the way we have to control. What we don't need is naff interjections from chimps who have never controlled in the mil environment and more importantly in the more interesting places we are operating at the moment.

Endex:\

[Jerricho]

What we don't need is naff interjections from chimps who have never controlled in the mil environment

Just like interjections from chimps who have never controlled in the civil environment either ;) :E

Tongue planted firmly in cheek

Personally, I don't think it's would be a good ida to split into seperate forums. As has been mentioned, we do have a lot to learn from each other.

Carbide puts it best:

Some of us civvies control quite a lot of mil traffic. Some of us are even interested in a military point of view. I'll continue to read any of the ATC threads be it in Civvy ATC, Mil ATC or Mil Aircrew. Can't we just keep ATC all together?

[PPRuNe Radar]

The general opinion is that Mil Conts should stay in with the Mil Aircrew.

That's a hell of an assumption ... show me one (yes, ONE) post which states that.

I read the consensus being that Mil and Civil ATC are adequately served by being in the same Forum (i.e. here) where both disciplines can interract.

Failing that, I am sure you can find a non simian Bulletin Board somewhere on the vast network called the Internet to cater for your needs ;)

[SID East]

Have been keeping an eye on this thread for a while. Personally don't think that a Mil forum would benefit us in the Mil all that much really, some of us control more civvy aircraft than anything else and its always good to get as broad a section of opinion as possible. There is not that many of us Mil controllers anyway in reality – and soon to be less.

In any case we might all end up the same way someday:

Rumour or Fact?

Joint ATC recruitment for Mil / Civil

CATCS to relocate to Scampton - JATCC re-jigged => Civvy Controlling Qualification

Short Service Commissions only for Officers - end of service either PC or go civvy controller having already done some of the common training. Similar for SNCOs I guess.

Possibly due to need for common European Licensing.

Discuss

[Widger]

SIS EAST

I think that is wishful thinking on your part. Most of the comments that come from people like you are in the hope that it will come true and you will get an easy ride into civil ATC. If you are so keen on it...leave and go to Hurn!

:ok:

[SID East]

Widger

Actually you could not be further from the truth, I am Mil through and through but I have the foresight and flexibility (plus a few rumours on the grapevine) to think outside of the box when it comes to issues concerning my professional sphere. In any case the said route is likely to be way into the future and of no affect to people like you or I anyway.

Quite frankly I get the impression that it is your inward thinking and argumentative responses that make the case for NOT having a Mil ATC forum quite apparent. There is not , and should not be an "us and them" divide as you seem to advocate.

To all other readers I hope that such responses do not tarnish all of us Mil ATCOs with the same brush!

SID (not SIS)

[Widger]

SIL East,

If you are military through and through, why do you not spend your time, talking up your branch/service rather than doom-mongering and speculating. There is plenty of evidence that what you have stated will not happen.


I am very much "joined up" when it comes to military/civil co-operation but I agree with those that state there is no need for a Mil ATC forum. For one, most of the chat on the ATC forum is of a civil nature anyway.


:ok:

[Carbide Finger]

For one, most of the chat on the ATC forum is of a civil nature anyway.

Now is that as in "Civilian nature" or the kind of genial behaviour we like in our COMBINED mil/civ ATC forum!

:}

[Airdrop Charlie]

Widger,

Actually you may be interested to know that a considerable amount of work has been completed towards accreditation of the CATCS syllabus. There are plans afoot to generate a new type of contract for youngsters coming into the branch - this is in line with the aim of ensuring everyone leaving the Service has a usable civilian qualification - it may happen sooner than you think.:ok:

[Widger]

Airdrop,

Most of the accreditation that the military does is because of IIP. Most of the accreditation counts for very little in the Civil world unless you want to be an assistant or an ATC manager. If you want to work for a major employer like NATS, your CATCS time will count for nought.

The idea that you are all suddenly going to become civilian employees is farcical. Companies like NATS and SERCO can just about support the task they have at the moment.

You can't send civilian ATCOs to Basra, Baghdad or Bagram, most of them would not want to go to MPA, although they might like to go to Cyprus.

Your ATCOs have a wide portfolio of experience that is extremely valuable on deployed ops, just ask those that have served in some of the places mentioned above.

Once again I get the feeling that you also are one of those who would secretly like to "jump ship". Well regardless of an ATCOs CATCS experiences, moving to NATS will still cost you time and money.

The CAA has today published its firm proposals for the regulatory price controls for Control Period 2. Chief executive, Paul Barron, this morning said: "We are disappointed at the stance the CAA has taken. In particular, we are concerned that the latest proposals require us to cut operating costs further in CP2, on top of the £106 million we already plan to take out of the business. With staff costs representing 70 per cent of our operating expenditure, the CAA's latest demands are going to be very tough to meet."

Even NATS cannot afford to waste money on the likes of those that it is not going to get value out of. They are no longer employing many staff on permanent contracts. All it will take is another 9-11 and you could well be on the dole, knocking at the door of 3Gp asking for your job back.

If you are a military ATCO, then you should be advertising what you can do. You are a flexible beast, go anywhere, do anything, without the restrictions of a powerful union. You can be ORDERED to open up Director and also exceed the European Working Time directive in extremis. You should be pushing the boundaries of your branch to ensure that your expeditionary capability is enhanced, rather than sitting in your Vale of York/Lincolnshire/Welsh (delete as appropriate) Tower moaning about being on console for 61 and half minutes without a break.

You should be proud that when you deploy, your knowledge of airspace management is streets ahead of your American counterparts and you also have some awareness of what your WC brethren are about, because you have spent some time in 1ACC.

So stop speculating about turning civvy, in ain't gonna happen any time soon. Use your energy in spouting about how much better you and your colleagues are, than that Serco/NATS etc employee is, whose company is only concerned with making a profit for it's shareholders...at your expense.

Nuff said.

:ok: :ok: :ok: :ok:

And no wise cracks about any Spillong mistakes either!

[Scott Voigt]

I don't know, when I was a military ATC I too was mobile and all it really qualified me for was to prove that I could work in a really small space with old equipment in crappy conditions. The traffic was always less than what we handle on any moderate push today and normally with less hassle other than the amount of emergencies returning for sorties <G>...

regards

Scott

[EXATCO]

Airdrop

What you say is very interesting.

Way, way back in about 1982 it was proposed (informally) to the then CNATS (AVM Ian Pedder) that the ATC syllabii at CATCS and CATC be aligned in the subjects of Nav. Met. and Air Law. The object being to provide all ATCOs with the foundation to Licences and do away with the special Article in the Air Navigation Order (as then was) that provided for the Certificate of Competance. Military and Civilian student controllers would then complete their own specialist syllabii prior to appropriate endorsements etc.

CNATS's view was that it was a non-starter - the reason given was that it would enable Mil ATCOs to move across to the Civilian area (having done the appropriate courses and/or exams) too readily and that the 'Unions would never wear it as it would interfere with career paths of existing ATCOs'. Have things changed at all?

BTW Let's keep the thread Joint - UK airspace is too cramped not to be aware of what is going on in the bigger picture.

[niknak]

Many moons ago, I did my aerodrome training at the origina Dundrige College in Devon, alongside a fast track course of some 10 ex - mil atcos, all of whom had been recruited by NATS to do aerodrome/approach procedural and approach radar in about 12 weeks.
As I recall, 9 out of the 10 passed with flying colours, and I have the utmost respect for those guys, had they failed, they would have been sacked by NATS and had nothing.

The difference between them and the vast majority of the current Mil ATCOs who desire to work in the civilian world, is that they had the balls to leave the "comfort zone", and risk everything.

If you're prepared to do that, good for you, you'll have the respect and support of nearly everyone in the Civillian world, if not, by all means pursue your military career, but don't blather on about what might have been until you have the courage to venture into the real world.

[EXATCO]

I was under the impression that anyone could sit the ATC exams, whether or not they had completed an ATC course - a risky/expensive thing to do but still permissable. There would be no need to leave the 'comfort zone' to obtain the appropriate Licences; this path has been trodden by several to my certain knowledge. Mind you getting the appropriate Endorsements is a different matter!

I understand that Permanent Commissions are rarely awarded in the current unstable climate in MoD recruitment so the option of leaving the 'comfort zone' is no longer a matter of choice.

BTW I agree with your comments, niknak, re. the guys that went the Dundridge route.

[CUNIM]

Many moons ago, I took the ATC exams privately while waiting to go on a NATS course - the short one, 4 months I think. Passed all but one exam before going on the course and passed the last one half way through the NATS course. Got me yellow peril and waved it at the instructor when asked questions:E Mind you I had to retake all the exams again at the end of the course:yuk. I then claimed three ATC licences, my original, a UK non state one and a UK state one.:ok: :}

As far as mil controllers are concerned - worked closely with them over many years at LATCC, good bunch in the MAS.

Must try to push correct button before posting.

[Airdrop Charlie]

Widger,

I'm not talking about IIP, I'm talking about professional recognition, and by the way, having done some of the interesting and exciting overseas work you mention we mil are so good at, if the last job on earth was civvy ATCO I'd rather stick rusty nails in my eyes. You're totally wrong about me wishing to jump ship (at least to civvy aviation)! My point is that I know that work is on-going to reallign the military terms of employment to enable mil ATCOs to leave after a defined contract period with a usable licence. This will not happen in my time, but look ahead a few years and wait and see.

EXATCO,

As I say, 85% of our trg is already aligned, work is progressing slowly to achieving full recognition. The concept is that the mil controller will have to fulfill their contract in order to leave with the qualification - thus avoiding the train and drain syndrome previously feared.

:O

[Number2]

Wasn't all that promised by AOC MATO (showing my age!) at West Drayton in 1990!!!!

All a bit too late for some of us!