EC making ANSPs reduce costs

[Conspiracy Theories]

Hi all

Not read it however i have been told that the airline lobby group as well as the CAA I believe have said that the ANSP is not doing enough to reduce the cost over the 2nd regulatory period. I have heard that they would like ANSPs to further reduce their cost by another £100m+.

Is this true? can someone put the link on for me to read the CAA's and airline lobby's response to the ANSPs revised business plan? Any other thoughts too to get an idea of the ATC community on the subject.

Thanks

[Rossoneri]

This (http://www.caa.co.uk/default.aspx?catid=5&pagetype=90&pageid=16033) might be what you're looking for. The airline's response makes for interesting reading. Sounds like it's come solely from people who aren't aware first hand, of the service we actually provide.

[Una Due Tfc]

Well that was a depressing read

[kcockayne]

Rossoneri

When did the "People Who Matter" in ATC ever have any awareness of the service we actually provide at the coalface ?

[Defruiter]

Very depressing reading, especially from the airlines. Kinda makes me wonder why I should bother giving the many shortcuts I do on a daily basis and all of the other fuel/time saving methods of operating. Thankfully, I don't think that it's the pilots that have that opinion and just the people running the airlines, though I could be wrong.

[Rossoneri]

Personally, I'm of the opinion that's the bean counters talking. I'd also like to think it's far more extreme than their honest opinion, and they're merely using it for corporate leverage...

Despite the number of crews who bother to thank you on the RT for a direct being shockingly low, from the people I've spoken to on fam flights, they've always been very complimentary of the UK in comparison to many other countries.

While I'm not endorsing this as a suitable reply, I'm sure the airline folk who wrote the report would notice the difference if we all stuck to flight plan routes & levels, and stopped co-ordinating the nice continuous climbs and descents, enforced level restrictions 24/7 and complied with all MATS 2 level capping even just for a week...oh the extra fuel burn

[ZOOKER]

It is depressing, and as Defruiter points out, it's not the folks in big hats sitting at the 'pointy ends' who are behind these demands.
U.K. ATC is still in an enviable position. Many in big hats who sit at 'pointy ends' regard it as being among the best. This is good, an endorsement directly from 'the end user/customer' or whatever this week's buzz-words happen to be.
U.K ATC is also regarded as some of the most expensive in Europe. Well that's alright then.
As many of the airline/airport/ operators who enthusiastically contributed to this discussion will tell you……
If you want a first-class service, (be it valet parking, or even parking, use of our business-lounge or a first-class ticket), you have to pay a premium price.
Job done.

[Squawk 7500]

If they want a first class service then suggesting new recruits self-fund their training would be a mistake. People will be accepted not on aptitude but whether or not they have the means to buy themselves a career. The calibre of students would surely drop?

[Una Due Tfc]

They are already self funding in Ireland. Only a matter of time before NATS follow suit, the Airlines have already asked for it

[ZOOKER]

'Self-funding'…..
It makes business-sense….moving forward. :E

[kcockayne]

Why does everything good have to F'd up by people who interfere in things they know little about ?
As my ex-colleagues & I said on many occasions, "We're glad that we got the golden years of ATC !"

[Una Due Tfc]

The new generation aren't going to be paid as well, worse pensions, no allowance for training etc etc. The ANSPs are playing a dangerous game. If I was starting now I'd get my couple of years experience then :mad: off to the sandpit for ten years, then come back and buy a pub :)

[ZOOKER]

spot on kcockayne.
Not just ATC, but many other fields of employment/professions too.

[ZOOKER]

The 'self-funding' thing is interesting though.
When we went through CATC, we were told that the cost of our training to validation was about £50,000 each. I'm sure I read on the NATS web-site a few months ago that this figure is now about £220,000 a shot.
It might deter many from applying, among them a percentage who would possibly make good ATCOs.

[kcockayne]

ZOOKER

Mutual congratulations !

I'm sure you're right in your observation. My son is a WZZ EA32 pilot; he had to pay for his training & he can hardly be said to be recouping the cost of it from his (pitiful) salary !

[Conspiracy Theories]

i have read the airline article. i find myself very sad and upset by the way they feel. i do not refer to the pilot for whom on every occasion possible, i will send them direct and sometimes even got in trouble for it. Im just trying to get them where they want to go as quickly as possible so they may finish a little ahead of schedule.
I'm very disappointed that this capitalist world is getting rid of most if not all professional jobs. They think that computers can do it all and at minimal cost. Good luck to them and to our future children who will have nothing to do.
We see that students going to university now come out with a degree and about 20k in debt without having a job yet. This is surely going to go up since unis now can charge what they want. That is a big debt to then find yourself looking for a job/career and work hard to work your way up to a descent wage.
There is a fundamental difference with having to pay for myself to put myself through training. I can pay about 50k for an ATPL however the failure rate is pretty low. Paying for your driving licence may not be analogous because of the difference it cost but there a very few people that fail. ATC... the learning curve is steep per course. i was told that from start to finish, for everything including overheads it is approximately 600k. Furthermore, if i am to pay to become an air traffic controller, then i would like some sort of assurance that i would become one at the end of it. i'm not going to pay 50k and then after a year i get told i haven't passed.
Going back to the airline group's response, the EC compares us to the US and the very few centres they have there and thats why their cost is low but they forgot to mention that it is also subsidised by the FAA by about 500m annually. i pay my tax to the UK. Out of my taxes i'm sure are the wages for all the politicians and so on. If the EC is making all the rules, are we demanding that they get paid too much too then. They are no longer making the rules and how much of our taxes is going to brussels?
This is a very big and complex bubble to which everyone is looking for scapegoats. Look what happened in Spain. Everyone wants someone to blame for the poor financial crisis, lets blame them. All controllers in europe are being made to look like the scapegoats. why? i dont know but maybe its to do with money. with all these cost cutting from ANSPs, do you really think that airlines will reduce their ticket prices? will i be able to go on holiday in august for 100 quid? i doubt it.
how long will it be before a certain merger that has taken a few spanish towers comes over to the UK and starts bidding on UK airports?
maybe to make more money, we should have a promotion like orange wednesdays......maybe a 2 for 1 blue skies thursdays......

Will i stop sending my pilots colleagues direct. no, of course not because i consider myself a professional (or so i think). however, this cost cutting being enforced is treading close to peoples fuses all over europe.

As for having to pay yourself to become an air traffic controller. Good luck to the guys who will take out loans/life savings to put themselves through the course and i hope they dont fail or worse, get posted somewhere they never wanted to go.

My rumour is done and thanks for the link on the airlines response

[kcockayne]

Conspiracy Theories

I agree with everything that you say. I never thought that I would ever say this but, I am so very glad that there is an end to this existence - &, I'm so very glad that it is not to far away now.
I just pity my children & grandchildren ! just what have we all made of this world ?

[saintex2002]

Definitely time to head towards #EUATCOsCOLLECTIVE and sell our knowledge via our own private EUATCOs company...

@saintex2002

[saintex2002]

There's still another way possible to even more " Golden Years of ATC "... #EUATCOsCOLLECTIVE making our own #KindOfStuff...

@saintex2002

[Flitefone]

Single European Sky - Transport (http://ec.europa.eu/transport/modes/air/single_european_sky/index_en.htm)

https://www.eurocontrol.int/articles/ses-performance-scheme-reference-period-2-2015-2019

https://www.iata.org/pressroom/pr/Documents/blueprint-single-european-sky.pdf


Actually, most of the people involved in the planning and developments have a rather broader understanding of all the issues than you might think..

It's easier to pick holes in the IATA view, but the customers have to articulate their collective views somewhere.

Things are changing, that's life!

FF

[Flitefone]

The "Size Matters" Argument in Air Traffic Control

Article from the current issue of ATC Newsletter from the Reason Foundation:

In a Viewpoint column in the April 21st issue of Aviation Week, the NBAA's Ed Bolen argued that the Nav Canada business model "isn't scalable" because its system is only one-tenth the size of the U.S. air traffic system. And, for good measure, he repeated the point regarding the corporatized systems of Australia, New Zealand, and the U.K.

This has always been a bogus argument. If one kind of funding model—airspace users paying their air navigation service provider directly for services received, rather than paying a tax into a politicized funding allocation system—is demonstrably better and more sustainable, that model should be applicable to ANSPs over a wide range of sizes. Similarly, if one kind of governance model—a corporate form governed by a board of directors representing all the key stakeholders—is demonstrably better than a government agency accountable to numerous overseers, none of whom specializes in aviation, then that, too, should be independent of size and scale.

But these points are even more compelling when we take into account the large economies of scale that exist in the provision of air traffic management. That fact underlies the overall difference in cost-effectiveness between air traffic control in Europe and the United States, and is one of the prime driving forces for creation of a Single European Sky. The November 2013 report from Eurocontrol's Performance Review Commission comparing ATC in Europe and the United States (2012 data) reveals the following:



Europe

United States

Geographicarea (km2)

11.5

10.4

ANSPs

37

1

En-route Centers

63

20

Total staffed facilities

756

696

Controllers

17,700

15,930

Total staff

58,000

38,130

IFR flights (M)

9.5

15.2

IFR flight hours (M)

14.2

22.4

ATC cost (B)

$11.27

$10.45

From these numbers, it is easy to derive two key performance indicators. Cost per IFR flight hour averages $794 in Europe versus $467 in the United States. And annual IFR flight hours per controller are 802 in Europe versus 1406 in the United States. Clearly, the U.S. system delivers far more bang for the buck than the fragmented system in Europe. That reflects significant economies of scale.

But it gets even more interesting when we turn to the latest Global Air Navigation Services Performance Report 2013, produced by CANSO, likewise covering 2012. Although only 23 of CANSO's 84 full members (i.e., functioning ANSPs) provided complete data, the results on the above two key performance measures, by country, are revealing. For this article, I am using data from only the six reporting ANSPs from developed countries. And due to some differences in terminology, the numbers in the CANSO report are not identical with those in the Eurocontrol report. But here are the 2012 numbers for six developed country ANSPs in the CANSO report:



Cost/IFR flight hour

IFR flight hours/ controller

Nav Canada

$339

1739

Airways New Zealand

$431

697

FAA ATO

$454

1729

Nav Portugal

$565

1434

Finavia

$702

620

Naviair

$741

1033

As you can see, despite their smaller size (and hence less economies of scale to take advantage of), both Nav Canada and Airways NZ are delivering first-rate air traffic services at a lower cost per flight hour than the FAA's ATO (with its large economies of scale). Nav Canada is also delivering slightly more flight hours per controller than the ATO. The other three have both much smaller airspace and lower flight activity, hence less potential economies of scale.

My take-away from this is that the cost-effectiveness and productivity of the ATO—already high—could be even higher if it were reorganized as a self-supporting ANSP, with de-politicized funding and governance.

[The Many Tentacles]

It's somewhat meaningless comparing the US and the EU. One country vs 28 who all have their own priorities is never going to make any sort of fair comparison.

[Mantovani]

A long time ago I seem to recall NATS was privatised on a not for profit basis.

During the Barron years the not for profit basis was dispensed with and now NATS makes handsome profits every year for the government and The Airline Group.

The Airline Group wants NATS to make a good profit.

The overwhelming majority of the airlines are not part of The Airline Group so they view the annual profits NATS makes in an entirely different light.

The Airlines want NATS to reduce their costs.

The question is how does NATS reduce its costs; do they cut staff and investment or do they cut the profits they make for the government and The Airline Group.

[kcockayne]

Mantovani

Silly question !

When does anyone EXCEPT the staff pay ?

[ZOOKER]

Flitefone,
Thank-you for the 3 links. I read some of that stuff yesterday, fairly well padded-out with woffle.
Couldn't find a lot of beef though.

[Flitefone]

Zooker, if it's meat you want look here:

http://www.eurocontrol.int/sites/default/files/content/documents/single-sky/pru/news-related/2014-03-06-final-draft-PRR-2013.pdf

This sets out the legal basis why charges must fall (governments have agreed to the plan several years ago) and provides details of actual Performance versus plan.

FF

[Defruiter]

NATS reports record environmental savings (http://www.nats.aero/news/nats-reports-record-environmental-savings/)

That makes the airlines response even more infuriating, IMO

[GAPSTER]

There's an enemy within and there's an enemy without.There is certainly a lot we could do to help ourselves resist the former....though heavens forbid that any ATCO stop earning his desperately needed overtime money😳.
As for the latter,how much are you willing to compromise your principles and pride in the second to none service we give whilst still taking that money? (And weakening at the knees everytime there is a voting opportunity to show some solidarity and defiance....oh,hang on that's not our fault that's the unions fault)

[ZOOKER]

I met the 'environmental guru' once…
"Where do you work?'
Er, Southampton.
"And where is your home address?"
Er, Oxford.
"So you commute everyday from Oxford to Southampton, producing CO2?"
Er, Yes, but I drive a Mini.
:E: ok:

[Flitefone]

For an airline , charges matter a lot, despite all the good work done by the operational staff, this kind of thing does the ANSP reputation no good whatsoever:

http://www.atn.aero/article.pl?mcateg=&id=50255&member=47635F6C616B65407961686F6F2E636F2E756B7C323532307C323 031342D30362D3036

[Not Long Now]

Perhaps all ANSPs should be obliged to cover pension costs rather than them being met by the government at some time in the future. This might lead to a meaningful cost comparison being possible, and the airlines, sorry, customers, being faced with actual costs rather than effectively nationally subsidised rates.

[121decimal375]

ZOOKER...

I don't think you have the full story of how the "guru" commutes. Ask again, I believe it is mostly by public transport and bicycle power

[ZOOKER]

121.375,
admittedly it was a while ago, it was an encounter the memory of which I treasure. I seem to remember he arrived on our unit with a very large laminated-plastic cut-out of a purple foot, accompanied by a similar model in green.

[Mantovani]

This pension funding argument is being used by some to muddy the waters of ANSP charges.

Government owned ANSPs are not generally run as businesses. Privately owned ANSPs are run as businesses.

A business should generate enough profits to cover their costs such as pensions.

It seems to me some businesses want retain all their profit for their shareholders and for their customers to stump up for their pension costs with pass through.

I can fully understand the airlines position. They want lower charges. They always will. They see ANSPs making huge profits and they wonder why those profits are not going to pay the pension liabilities.

[Mantovani]

French Air traffic Control say Non! :=