cost cutting or a good idea

[man friday]

just heard that the plan is to train a couple of ATSA's as approach radar controllers only at my unit. Neither have any previous controlling experience, and one with only limited ATSA experience, never having been sent on even a basic ATSA's course.
we are short staffed and this appears to be a quick 3 month fix to the problem of ATCO numbers, what will become of the ATSA's as their numbers are poached we dont know as they're a bit thin on the ground too.
Traditionally ATSA's were given tower ratings first and then returned to the unit to validate before moving up to approach radar, but since the change of management this tried and tested method of staff career development seems to have been dropped.
have any other units gone down this cost cutting ( or streamlined, depending on point of view) route, and what was the end result, competent radar controllers or bemused ATCO's with very little experience.

[Standard Noise]

I'm afraid I don't see where your objection is. We are considering putting people into radar first and don't see why it would cause us any problems. Part of it depends on how many 'tower onlys' there are. At the minute, we've got too many and radar courses aren't coming up fast enough (or we can't release people for them due to operational reasons), therefore it makes sense to train new starts in RAD first to alleviate staffing issues.

For years student ATCOs have been posted into TC at LATCC with only an APR rating and started there. At least your ATSAs will have some experience of the Tower at Gib. If you want them to have more, then program some time in their training for them to sit with the Tower guys to see it from that end.

[Gonzo]

Oh my God!!! I've just realised that I had no previous ATC experience before I did the Aerodrome course at Hurn. And I was posted to Heathrow! What were they thinking????????

:E

[Tarq57]

What about salary bands? If there are tower controllers wanting to move (up?) to approach who have their promotion delayed as a result of streamlining, that's a concern.

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

As long as they attend a good training course and are properly trained by competent conrtrollers there can be no problem. I did not have a radar rating until I joined the "Ministry" in 1971 and following a radar course at Hurn I went straight to Heathrow. There are many, many previously-inexperienced ATCOs doing radar at busy units...

[Beetlejuice]

......and many, many that have fallen by the wayside!

[AlanM]

Oh my God!!! I've just realised that I had no previous ATC experience before I did the Aerodrome course at Hurn. And I was posted to Heathrow! What were they thinking????????

:E

We sometimes still ask that question in the bunker.

NATS for a while had ATCOs who (for a number of reasons) ended up tower only at radar/tower units - which made little business sense.

[Roffa]

Probably over 90% of the approach trainees at TC come direct from the college with no other rating or previous experience.

Some do very well and some struggle as has generally always been the case.

It is probably fair to say though that the more rounded experience that was the older and longer student atco/cadet course produced an overall higher standard of trainee arriving at the unit.

I do feel a bit sorry at times for the current system throwing our barely able to swim students in at the deep end with only a half inflated rubber rings worth of experience to help support them!

[Gonzo]

Alan, I was going to say that jealousy doesn't suit you, but I can't lie......

[man friday]

standard noise,

no objection to anyones career advancement, i was mearley questioning if too much was being asked of the individuals, and would it be more beneficial to do the aerodrome course first and gain some experience that way.

[chevvron]

You say a quick 3 month fix, but how can they do ANY controlling without passing an approved course which will take up to a year or have I missed something?
I'd volunteer to come and help for a while, but the missus doesn't fancy Gib.

[Barnaby the Bear]

Ab-initio course first to learn the ANO etc. Then formal training. Assuming they pass the course, then OJT.
Finally validation by the powers that be. I don't see the problem.
With the shortage of controllers out there, training your own seems like a sensible option. :}

[Standard Noise]

man friday - I wasn't thinking of career development, but as someone who was trained to go to TC and validate approach radar, I don't see why people can't be trained like that for less busy units. Anyway, if someone at a NATS unit is tower only, there can be a ceiling on their salary in certain circumstances (for new units like Gib and Briss) whereas I'm told that salary cap doesn't apply if they validate radar first. Airfield contracts are too tight to have staff valid in only one position, so I would have thought that 'career development' will follow as soon as the unit can afford, for operational reasons, to send the ATCO on an ADC course. You need to think outside the box with this one.

[man friday]

the main problem is that we're a small unit, usually only 2 controllers, 1 tower only guy and the other valid in both positions and able to give the tower chap a break as required.

if we end up with tower only and radar only controllers breaks will become a problem, unless we have some additional plumbing installed!!!!

[Standard Noise]

the main problem is that we're a small unit, usually only 2 controllers, 1 tower only guy and the other valid in both positions and able to give the tower chap a break as required.

So the dual valid man/woman doesn't get a break then? Or maybe the problem lies with the fact that your unit needs to get the current 'tower onlys' onto radar courses then there'd be room for someone to go on a tower course rather than a radar course first. Regardless of which, I don't see the problem of starting someone off in radar.