NATS advert

[high-hopes]

Just heard a NATS recruitment radio advert on XFM Scotland.

Very unusual for commercial radio.
Also, the key was the 85k earning potential - planes or airports hardly mentioned.

I look forward to my new career with NATS and I regard it as a special one. I only wish it was advertised as something special, and not just another fast track to money making !

But maybe I am wrong !

regards

[vintage ATCO]

Why, oh why, do they do this, emphasising the dosh????? :confused: It is not the way to go (or gone, I'm out soon).

[eastern wiseguy]

Not got the potential to earn 85K here!!

CAN

WORMS

OPEN :( :(



again again again again again again again.

Good luck in your career if it happens ....and I hope you come in for the right reasons

[Gonzo]

I'm not going to comment on the advert, as I haven't heard it, but if you had to make it a requirement that all candidates had to have a great interest in aeroplanes, you'd get at most three or four on a course, and not 40-60.

[clearthedecks]

£85K was mentioned. Was the £10K starting salary mentioned? :p

[intherealworld]

also wondered if it did mention being on £10k, racking up debts, that even if they make it to the college they don't have a huge chance of validating and actually attaining that £85k

[begbie]

I think you'll find that many atco's (myself included) work for the money and not because of their love for aviation. An interest in aviation is not essential to do the job. I do enjoy the job but I enjoy more the financial benefits attached!

[Quincy M.E.]

not to mention getting out of college, to unit, in the first place!

[VectorLine]

QWERTY9

I think you would be surprised.

[foo fighting]

Its about time this job, or should i say profession, is not advertised as jolly spiffing fun for those who like planes but as a demanding but rewarding career where you can earn a very good salary after putting in a lot of effort to reach and maintain the standard required.

[Lock n' Load]

I'm always surprised by those who claim no interest in aviation in this job, and by the fact that it isn't something of a requirement for entry. Sure, being a spotter can be counterproductive, but I think it's much easier for someone with an interest in aviation to gain an appreciation of things at the pointy end of a plane (or blunt end of a helicopter).

I know the people in ATC without enthusiasm for aviation will disagree with me. Fair dos, it's your right to disagree. Still, would you expect to be treated by a doctor without an interest in medicine? Would you accept legal advice from a lawyer without some enthusiam for the law? Would you rather go to a car mechanic who restores an E-Type at the weekends or one who thinks of cars in the same terms as domestic appliances? How about taking communion from an agnostic priest?

To truly be a profession, those of us in it must maintain an interest in our area of professional expertise. That, to my mind, includes the things we're vectoring about the sky and their operation; not just how and where we vector them.

[PH-UKU]

Lock'n Load wrote To truly be a profession, those of us in it must maintain an interest in our area of professional expertise. That, to my mind, includes the things we're vectoring about the sky and their operation; not just how and where we vector them.

HEAR HEAR :ok:

[Gonzo]

LnL, I agree with you 100%, but the fact remains that if it were a condition of entry, we'd not have courses of 50 or so trainees starting every few months. I think many do grow an interest, and even of those who don't, most still have an interest in learning more about aviation as they understand it will make them a better ATCO.

[bratback]

LnL, in answer to your question I would like to be treated by the best doctor, represented by the best lawyer, have my car fixed by the best mechanic, don't take communion so not relevant. The point is just because you like aircraft doesn't make you good at working with them and just because you have no interest in aviation does not mean you cannot be professional and maintain an up to date knowledge of aviation matters, is that not what LCE's are meant to check? The implication that since I am not a spotter means I am less professional or able to do my job is one which I continue to find arrogant and offensive.

[kraggy]

Hi guys,

A slight aside.

Was wondering at what stage do most of those who are unfortunate enough to fail, actually fail?

Would most still be in the college or would some fail after reaching their respective centre and start OJT?

[Lock n' Load]

bratback - as I said in my post, it is your right to disagree. It's just as offensive and arrogant of you to assume that you're right and I'm wrong as it for me to think the converse. Luckily, we have the right to disagree. My own experience suggests that controllers with no interest in aviation tend to be very good at moving traffic, and less good at accommodating unusual requests or allowing pilots some flexibility of operation. That's an observation based solely on what I have seen and is thus by no means the be all and end all. I'm sure you'll continue to disagree and hey, be glad you live in a country where freedom of speech still mostly exists!

[GT3]

I have to agree with LnL here. Having no interest in aviation does not prevent you from being a good controller, but it does prevent you from having that little extra in certain unusual situations. I am not a spotter but I have a keen interest in aviation. I know stuff that no doubt seems useless to most but who knows one day it might come in handy. I think an interest in avaition is key to the role of an ATCO.

[Gonzo]

I concur with the above.

[2 sheds]

Likewise - and not only in unusual circumstances - but having sufficient involvement and interest to know what is meant by, say, a particular military term or procedure, or having the gumption to look up where a particular aerodrome or private strip is located - just for future reference, just in case - out of interest. Perusing current aviation magazines, perhaps, in the rest room, instead of playing computer games?

[Gonzo]

You have aviation magazines and computer games in your rest room????:eek:

Wow! :D

[bratback]

GT3, Gonzo, LnL, 2 sheds, at the risk off sounding argumentative it still strikes me you are all saying 'spotters' are better than non-spotters, is that what you believe? And on the point off education can you give me an example off when this extra knowledge helped you out off an unusual situation? 2 sheds, are we to take it that we should all have an indepth knowledge off how the military work in order to do our jobs? LnL, finally at no point did I say non spotters are poorer controllers merely it did not make a difference, I don't think that is an arrogant viewpoint!

[begbie]

Hear hear, Bratback..

[Gonzo]

Whoa!

No, spotters or not doesn't come into it.

Without wishing to speak for the others, what I think we are saying is that an ATCO who takes a wider interest in ATC, and wider still the rest of aviation, will make a more rounded ATCO.

Someone who is keen to go on fam flights, keen to chat to flight crew if and when they visit, keen to go on visits to neighboring units to discuss mutual problems etc. Someone who is keen to learn how different airlines operate their a/c, and why etc etc.

[Van Der Hum]

And on the point off education can you give me an example off when this extra knowledge helped you out off an unusual situation?

How about the amount of times people who don't have any interest in taking the time to learn/pick up a little bit of background about aircraft will continually end up sending aircraft back to stand because "there's a panel open near the rear". Those who've bothered to go on fam flights, talk to aircrew etc won't even bother to point out "you're vent is open as it should be".

Or what about the same people who won't even consider that an aircraft coming in with hydralic failure could well end up gouging two grooves in the runway, not to mention the damage to the aircraft, because the gear doors won't be retracted.

Many people think this is basic but it happens a lot.

[I'm not joking sir]

2 sheds, are we to take it that we should all have an indepth knowledge off how the military work in order to do our jobs?

If you're somewhere like here then yes.

[Lock n' Load]

Bratback - I'm certainly not advocating hiring only spotters! I have no interest in "collecting" tail numbers or registrations, I have no model aircraft (not that there's anything wrong with that!) and my bookshelves have only a small aviation section. But at least I have an aviation section!

Where does in-depth knowledge that isn't in the MATS/MANOPS/local orders matter? Okay, let's say a pilot requests direct "high key". It isn't taught at the College... Old Q codes aren't taught anymore (and QFU isn't rude)... Why are the pilots of a 747-400 busier than the pilots of a 747-200 when an engine fails? Why do 777 jockeys complain when given "160 knots to 4 miles"? Why do you have to give speed reductions really early to A330-200 crews? Why do some Beech 1900 operators have a 180kt speed limit below FL100? Why would most crews prefer on orbit downwind followed by a 10 mile final instead of no orbit and a 16 or 18 mile final? Why is a smooth landing on a wet runway a really bad idea?

Maybe bratback can answer all of the above without reference to books or even having to think much about it. If so, I'm glad. But there are those who don't have the answers at their fingertips and who have no interest in gaining such knowledge.

[bratback]

VDH, I would ask questions off your TRUCE set up if you have valid controllers unable to understand the implications of a hydraulic problem or other situations considered 'basic.' Injs, it sounds like you work at a unit which deals with military regularly in which case surely completion of the UTP should cover these aspects. LnL, no I do not have the answers to all these questions, some but not all, but tell me where the harm is in asking a pilot to tell you his requirements if it's an unusual suituation, better to give them what they need than think we know, the rest you learn through experience and keeping up to date with current developments. Maybe I am being pedantic but I don't think professionalism is the the same as having an interest and anyone who does our job should be professional or leave the job its not a past time, and on that note I am off to look up some answers!

[Lock n' Load]

Bratback - there's no harm at all in asking a pilot if there's time. You just reminded me of an example where time was lacking years ago. I was working tower (ah, the heady days when I could look out of a window!) and a SF34 had just departed. As they passed the upwind end of the runway at about 300', they called "mayday, compressor failure".

I can almost guarantee that somebody, somewhere, likely in a centre or tower near you, would be thinking "what's a compressor?" Knowing that it's a big spinny bit in the engine which, if it fails can lead to a punctured fuselage and tanks and possibly a fire, I offered them a visual circuit, either direction and immediate landing clearance. The funny (after the event) thing was that it wasn't actuallya compressor failure at all. It was a compressor stall which makes a loud bang and certainly is enough to make it worth having an engineer look at the engine, but with much less serious consequences.

There was a case of a C150 pilot many moons ago calling mayday for a "power unit failure" while over water. The ATCO sat scratching his *ss for a second or five before realising that meant an engine failure.....

I'm not for a minute advocating seeing this profession as a pastime. I AM advocating having enough interest to read the odd professional journal, talk to pilots when you get the chance, take fam flights and simply be interested enough to want to be a better ATCO. Besides, the more interested you are, the more you'll enjoy it! Enjoying your job is nothing to be ashamed of!

[bratback]

LnL, I think we are kind off talking around the same thing but my point is that enjoying your job and wishing to be as good at it as possible is not the same as having an interest in aviation it's merely being a professional who is lucky enough to like their chosen job. Before I started this job I had no interest in aviation, outside work I still have little or no interest, if it does not affect my day to day working life then no interest at all. If I left this job I would cease to have any interest in aviation at all, and whilst this may sound like a bad boast it's not meant that way, I am merely trying to point out that having an interest should not be a requirement before being allowed to enter the selection process- it does not make you a poorer or better controller. My original point that the inference that those without an interest in aviation are neither as good nor as professional is one I still believe to be held by many and one which I still believe to be incorrect and if not arrogant then certainly verging on it. Sorry if I am going on but I don't believe you would like your ability/professionalism questioned just because you have an interest in aviation.

[GT3]

bratback - I did not refer to spotters in fact I said "people with an interest in aviation helps you" if you read into that differently then there is nothing I can do to stop that.

For examples of where my knowledge has helped me, there would be plenty, but one example was when a fellow controller noted something that was hanging out of the back of the 767s tail. It was the tail skid which I was able to inform them, no problem with the a/c as may have been thought.

One of my good friends is a 747-400 SFO and I often ask him about his a/c and some of the seemingly minor things that occur and why they do it. Its interesting to me and I personally feel it makes me a more rounded ATCO.

[bratback]

GT3 if you are going to quote yourself then please quote what you wrote, 'I have a keen interest in aviation' and 'an interest in aviation is key to the role of an ATCO' from which became, 'people with an interest in aviation helps you'. The latter implies it's no big deal but the former claims it's key to the role, right up their with being able to keep aircraft apart! Also when asking for examples I was looking for things that could not be gained through TRUCE, a UTP or asking a pilot/other controllers. So far the best example has been LnL and the SF34 but I would like to think any valid controller faced with an aircraft declaring a mayday due to a failure of any description in his/her circuit would get it down asap and on any runway available, pilots don't declare mayday lightly, but maybe I have too much faith in my colleague.

[GT3]

bratback - you mentioned spotters and my name in one of your posts. Granted I did not correctly quote myself but to be fair neither post says you need to be a spotter. Yes ANY atco faced with a mayday would do their best to help but that is not what is being discussed here, there was talk about knowledge of aviation making you a more rounded controller - something which does not appear in training or TRUCE.

[throw a dyce]

I think that the term Aviation Interest can cover a multitude of things.It can be anything from spotting,GA flying,gliding,microlights,aeromodelling etc etc.
Is this interest include drinking with pilots and talking 10000ft talk?
It's too general to say that an Aviation interest helps.Everyone is different.Having a pilot whinging at me,because he was number 21 today is not that interesting.Half of Aviation interests have nothing to do with ATC,and long may that continue.:cool:

[high-hopes]

Wish I hadn't started this spotters vs non spotters debate :)

I was just curious about NATS advertising a 85K job on XFM radio, that was it.
Usually highly specialised professions are not advertised on commercial radio, in fact you will only hear about telesales, call centres or part time IKEA jobs.

I went through flight training before applying for NATS (no it wasn't part of the preparation ;) ) and it made the whole process a lot easier, so that the dreaded interview became a relaxed chat about stuff I knew inside out. So yeah, I would like to think that having an interest helps. And I swear I've never taken a photo of an airplane in my entire life ! :)

regards

[Jerricho]

Bratback, if I may pose a question to you........

Candidate "A" and Candidate "B" both applying for an ab-initio position have exactly the same scores/results from their selection process. Candidate "A" has an interest in aviation, Candidate "B" does not. Who gets the job?

[bratback]

Jerricho, by the way you pose the question it would imply NATS selection process in which case if both meet the criteria both are offered a place on a course. If non NATS then it would come down to the iterviewer, it is a fact that most job interviews are decided on first impressions, if all else equal. Just because someone shares an interst with you does not mean you necessarily will like them and believe they will fit in with your team, something that is viewed as important throughout ATC.
If I may pose a question to you, the same candidates, same scores, both male, Candidate A also has multiple ear piercings, a nose ring,and multicoloured hair, Candidate B has no piercings and a regular hair style, in our working environment who do you think the board would give the job to now?
On a personal note when I went for my interview and was asked why I wanted to do the job I replied because it looked challenging and the money was good. Subsequently I have validated at any unit I have been at, held positions of LCE and watch manager amongst others, but am basically being told by some on here that because I previously did not have an interest in aviation I should not have been allowed to even apply, that is what I find offensive and arrogant. On the argument of whether it makes you a better controller it's an impossible argument to solve but I would ask when the last time an incident board cited lack of inerest in aviation as a causal factor as opposed to controller judgement. There is absolutely nothing wrong with having an interest in aviation in this job but provided you keep up to date with matters which affect you the converse is also true.

[Gonzo]

Bratback,

but am basically being told by some on here that because I previously did not have an interest in aviation I should not have been allowed to even apply

Sorry, can you point out that bit to me?

[Jerricho]

Actually Bratback, it was a general, all encompassing scenario anywhere in the world, not just specific to NATS. Agreed, just because somebody does share the same interest as you doesn't mean you will like them, but it certainly provides common ground to start from. One thing I have certainly learnt in this job is you can pick up a hell of a lot of useful information from experienced bods sitting around you, especially from the old dinosaurs recounting war stories of "....and this one time, at controller camp......."

I've read back through the thread, and not one single post hints at or implies that yourself, or any other person who has donned a headset in anger should not have been allowed in based on the premise raised.....you've drawn that inference in a very defensive manner, and your "offence" is certainly unwarranted. No one here is trying to to start a pissing match about ability or professionalism, just a friendly little discussion regarding opinions (all be it a horrendous thread drift :D )

To echo the opinions of other controllers here, I believe an interest in aviation can certainly aid in your performing a service (NOTE: I am not referring to anyone's professionalism or abilities), especially in unusual circumstances where thinking "outside the numbers" is required. 2 instances I can think of off the top of my head......a Sirrus SR20 informs it has an engine failure, what can be expected. A Cessna 337 on a hot day informs you it's having engine problems. A Caravan informs you it's having problems with "it's boots". I'm sure others out there could add to the list.

Of course, as has been stated already, "ask the pilot what's up" will provide more information, but anything tucked away in the grey matter that hasn't become beer fuddled over there years that can aid in situations described above can only viewed as an advantage.

[Jerricho]

I'm sure the pilot in this example was more than a little pleased someone had "an interest" (http://www.alexisparkinn.com/photogallery/Videos/flightassist.mp3)

Yeah, probably a little over the top, but it certainly validates what some people have posted

[Gonzo]

Jer, perhaps you've developed a sense of irony, but isn't it Cirrus, not Sirrus? :}

[Jerricho]

................which goes to prove my point no matter how smart you think you are and how much you think you know, somebody is always smarter and knows more than you and will readily point it out ;)


I really wish I could spell good....thanks Gonze. Ironic? No. Moronic? Maybe.

[Gonzo]

Ahh, you know me well! ;)

Seems you're not the only one though, there are numerous results in a well known search engine for 'Sirrus aircraft'. Even one edition of the EAA newsletter misspelled it...you're in good company!

[Jerricho]

Just proving I'm not a "spotter"

:E

[lenny1974]

Gulp,
You guys are scaring me! I have my initial assessment for NATS on April 24th, and as i am not a spotter, i feel more apprehensive about this than the actual tests themselves!!! I fear that even if i get through this stage, i will be thrown to the lions in the next, especially as i am former cabin crew, yikes! Please consider that many people who apply would be leaving well paid jobs for what can only be described as a pittance for a few years and so the money is not the motivation for all non-spotters.
Obviously i know a little bit about aviation, and am also doing my homework, hence my signing up to this forum, and Gonzo, exactly how large would a bribe have to be for you to consider it?

[Gonzo]

Lenny,

No need to worry mate. On my course of 36, back in the day, there were maybe a handful who were really interested in aviation.

Let me say this loudly:

Not having a strong interest in aviation is no barrier to becoming an ATCO.

Oh, and not a lot, as I've said before, I'm very cheap. :ok:

[lenny1974]

Ok no need to shout at me! Am female too, and probably older than most applicants so i am expecting to be somewhere at bottom of pile during selection, however i intend to give it as much as i can.

[Gonzo]

Two things:

1) Wasn't shouting at you, more a general broadcast....

2) Your age and sex won't matter at all. If you're good enough, you'll be in.

[high-hopes]

I say again -

I now regret starting this thread. The whole spotter vs non spotter scenario is cringeworthy. Like several pprune discussions it turns into a "my dad is bigger than yours" debate. I would have otherwise ignored it, but now feel responsible for starting it.

Read the title : "NATS advert" - it had more to do with the fact NATS "recruit" on commercial FM.
Gonzo will probably be able to illustrate how this affects the selection process. Perhaps more quantity / less quality to start with ?


I didn't even look at the motivation papers provided by NATS as it was all very basic aviation information.
I can see someone with no interest in that stuff going through VOR and SID and finding it very boring.

Easy and interesting beats difficult and boring in my book, so I guess those could be the advantages of having an interest in the subject, still, as correctly pointed out, with no relation whatsoever to whether it makes you a better or worse ATCO.

At the end of the day, there aren't any bad ATCOs. are there ? ;)

[lenny1974]

No, don't regret posting the thread. It's all helpful and informative, i didn't respond to an ad as such, mine was a speculative viewing of the NATS site, which i suppose suggests i have more of an interest than those lured by the 85k temptation. I was just suggesting that for those of us who are not aviation experts, it's all a little intimidating, especially compared to the way the website portrays the job. I totally believe that somebody with sound aviation knowledge is a better candidate for the job, my point in fact was that the initial confidence i had has pretty much gone after reading such posts. Whereas i previously thought i had a small chance, i now think theres more chance of getting a pilot to pay for a round of drinks:p .

[Gonzo]

i now think theres more chance of getting a pilot to pay for a round of drinks:p .

Now now, hold on, don't be rash!! :p

High hopes, don't worry about this thread.....the topic rears its head once every year or so, and it is oft debated in the rest room.

Lenny, one thing you'll learn about ATCOs is that they love dishing out the banter and have strong views on lots of subjects. As long as you can take it (and give it back ;) ) you'll do fine.

[bratback]

Gonzo, Lnl said earlier he was always surprised by those who claim no interest in aviation in this job, and by the fact that it isn't something of a requirement for entry, now yes it doesn't say I can't apply but it quite clearly says he feels I don't meet his entrance requirements. Jerricho asked the question which I beleive meant he would have given Candidate A the job i.e someone with an interest would deserve this job over someone without - that'll be me not deserving the job then if someone with an interest wants it instead. You concurred with GT3 when he stated that it was key to the role of an ATCO. All of this says that either I didn't meet the requirements to get the job or was less qualified to do it than someone with an interest. You obviously took the same inference from vintage ATCO's post that I did otherwise you would not have posted your reply about candidates having a great interest in planes, is that pointing it out to you enough or are you just going to claim something different was said/meant like GT3. My comment about being told I should not even apply was based not only on this thread but others of a similar nature, ATCO/Trainee ATCO's pay scale for example where the person who started this thread, and now says we are cringeworthy stated on one of those 'Is the 85k lure going to attract people for the money?
Maybe. They won't make it anyway, it takes more than money drive to pass the selection.'
Sorry to rant since I have obviously loked again at some of these threads and you and Jerricho both appear open minded on the subject but there are a lot with a different viewpoint.
And unless you desperately want me to reply to something else, which I would find hard to believe, I will agree agree with LnL about one thing and agree to disagree.

[Scotsliveit]

Well Lenny

(Edited by Mods to remove personal details)

Good Luck.

[Scotsliveit]

MMM I don't believe I mentioned anyone by name.
Aw Fidgel would the truth tarnish the company name.
Funny how NATS brought in drug testing in Jan 2006. They're even urine testing trainees now. Yer a Machiavellian shower.
She better not vector any aircraft myself or my kids(family) are in.
I'm lucky I had an education and well paid career to fall back on.
Advice to anyone don't step off the property ladder to work for these people.
Don't ask too much advice or reveal yourself in this forum, there are sad judgmental gits out there waiting to pounce.
I can laugh now about NATS ....

I remeber my class being held back from having lunch so a vain glorious instructor could pose with us in the background for his pic in NATS News. I never got anything decent to eat that day

Being hundreds of miles from any city with culture.

Socialising with some socially inept parochial small town geeks who were jealous if you went out and got laid.

There were some very great people there though, instructors/managers and trainees.

Fascinating job,(crap lifestyle though) but always weigh up if it's worth the sacrifice.

My only regret is walking out before my flying lessons but I've remedied that.

Edit away cowards. Here all week folks. There are two sides to every story.

Good luck Lenny

[PPRuNe Radar]

Happy to be a coward and leave your last post for others to judge for themselves. One side of the story could have been that you were simply not up to the task of being an ATCO and so have a bit of a grudge ...... maybe not though.

[tired-flyboy]

Scotslivet,

Correct me if i'm wrong - i often am,

BUT you didn't make it through the college did you?

Walk or pushed????

Lenny - apply, go through the tests and see what happens. You have to have a thick skin to do this job, and banter is the way 'we' get over things.
:ok:

good luck

[Scotsliveit]

Not up to the task of being an ATCO, Radar spare me that please. I was being harassed from day three by an individual with a guilty conscience worried about their career. Whether I was or wasn't up to the job could never have been accurately assessed.
Perhaps it wasn't the life for me though.
The post you (perhaps wisely)deleted gave a better picture. Wonder how her urine test went;)
Flyboy I was being pushed so i took the NATS pay off and walked. I had a better life back home. Alot was brushed under the carpet. For me it turned out for the best though. Life is very good and I couldn't imagine my life still being on hold while studying.
To anyone in the know I'm sure if myself and that harlot banshee's roles had been reversed in the situation she created... I'd have been told to shut up and get on with my work. Not in the same unit,town or even county. Not even in the same stream. Ho hum :ugh:
One thing I did particularly dislike was doubt being put on me being at RAF Cranwell in 1998 by a certain Swanwick Watch Manager. I never got a chance to tell him what I thought of that(lucky for him)...aye that miffed me for a little while.
Best wishes and good luck to all going for it.

nuff said c'est tout.