Success rates of ATC wannabes

[Gilles Hudicourt]

I have a question. What is the failure rate of ATC trainees who passed the initial aptitude/selection process, begin an ititial ATC course, but were never checked out as controllers in your area? (In percent please)

I would like to compare figures from different countries

[The Many Tentacles]

Of the 8 people on my training course once we got to the unit, 2 of them didn't make it all. One didn't validate at that unit, but went on to validate elsewhere and the other 5 of us validated at the unit and 4 are still there now.

This is in the UK

[Gilles Hudicourt]

Could those who reply specify a country or at least a continent or a region, something that will allow a comparison. Thanks.

[Satellite Man]

When I trained only 1 in 48 didnt pass the initial training. Another 3-4 were about to fail but finally passed.

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

<<Because of staff shortage, validation rate is close to 95% now - albeit very lengthy on-the-job training and incompetent controllers produced as a result.>>

I don't know where you work but that sounds incredibly dangerous. Remember you are playing with people's lives.

[vector4fun]

When I went through initial training in the US back in 1980, the washout rate was 50% in the facilities after the Academy at OKC. After the strike of '81, that improved to perhaps 70-80% passing.

Since about 2000, in my units, passing rate was around 80-85%, but they were giving those trainees way, way more time to qualify than back in the 1980s. In a busy up/down radar facility, had seen 4 years to qualify before I retired.

Maximum training hours varied up and down depending on how badly they needed people over the last 15 years or so. Also, when I was first hired, most everyone had an aviation background of some sort to qualify for hire. Not so after the strike. Many didn't know UHF from VHF or piston from turbine.

US Southwest region

[EastofKoksy]

When I worked in the UK at one of the larger units the success rate was 2 in 3. The system used to be quite ruthless but qualification was made a bit easier by training on only one pair of sectors rather than two. Eventually the 'tick box' training system pretty much allowed as much time as was needed unless it was clear a trainee was completely clueless. This did leave the OJTIs wondering how the person had been allowed to make it that far!

Some of the trainees were very motivated and able but for quite a lot of them ATC was just a job. Their attitude was that if they didn't pass they would just try something else The motivator for most of the trainees I encountered seemed to be the comparatively high salary rather than any interest in aviation.

[kcockayne]

Give me "interest in aviation" any day !

[Hotel Tango]

At my former unit, despite all their valiant efforts to improve recruitment procedures, the failure rate was roughly between 40% and 50%. Sadly today very few ATCOs have any interest in aviation. It's just a job and they perform as the trained robots they have become.

[chevvron]

At Farnborough, many new arrivals had already failed ACS and were being given a 'second chance' at an airfield, but they hadn't done an APS course so could only do ADI/ADV initially and only if they got their C of C in the tower were they sent on an APS course.

[Talkdownman]

At Farnborough, many new arrivals had already failed
You said it. Nats hasn't done itself any favours in the past by using Farnborough as its 'dumping ground'. Not conducive to team spirit or the unit's morale. For Farnborough's sake I hope that nats has cut back on that.

[Plazbot]

36 on my course of which 9 checked out. Of course as according to some things were always harder back in the day......

[Squawk 7500]

I'm sorry, but being an aviation enthusiast does not, in any way, make you a better controller!

45% of the students on my intake went on to validate.

(UK)

[kcockayne]

7500

You are, of course, quite correct. There is nothing about being an aviation enthusiast that makes you a better ATCOS than someone who is not an enthusiast.
What makes me prefer enthusiasts is the commitment to getting the job, keeping it & to carrying through this enthusiasm to the job once qualified.
I have seen many trainees over 40 years. I have seen quite a few fail & a lot who went on to be controllers. In my view, most ( but not all )of the best controllers came from the ranks of the "enthusiasts". That is, in no way, to suggest that some of the best controllers I have seen have not been "enthusiasts"; but, in my experience, a lot of the ones we lost were those who came from the "only in it for the money" brigade.
My course, all ex-assistants (& not all "enthusiasts") lost one out of 24. Which I believe is a record.

[Dan Dare]

being an aviation enthusiast does not, in any way, make you a better controller!

This is like saying being interested in music does not, in anyway make you a better musician. Playing music is just hitting/plucking/blowing the right note at the right time and anyone (or a computer) could pick out a tune with enough practice, but would you expect a soulful, virtuoso performance? In the same way a trainee with no interest could be taught to say the right words at the right time and have a full career doing so, but having an understanding of the subbtleties of what they are doing and why take a great degree of interest and enthusiasm. Some non-aviation enthusiasts have sufficient professional pride to learn these things (which paradoxically makes them enthusiasts?), but many don't and unfortunately I think these people will never give a virtuoso ATC service and some seem to start hating the job.

Back to the OPs question: -

In the UK when I was a trainee about a third of my course did not get though each stage of training. A few were given a second chance (more timing of places available than skill of the trainee) so maybe half of the course continued employment to endorsement.

I would wholeheartedly agree that training success is often increased with staff shortages. Wrong, but true.

[Lord Spandex Masher]

<<Because of staff shortage, validation rate is close to 95% now - albeit very lengthy on-the-job training and incompetent controllers produced as a result.>>

I don't know where you work but that sounds incredibly dangerous. Remember you are playing with people's lives.

That's ok, I'm not into doing daft or dangerous things just because a voice tells me to.

[DaveReidUK]

That's ok, I'm not into doing daft or dangerous things just because a voice tells me to.

That's reassuring to know.

That said, you're just as dead if an instruction that sounds perfectly sensible to you turns out, with hindsight, to have been the one that kills you.

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

But if standard phraseology and procedures are strictly followed, nobody should end up dead.

[kcockayne]

Dan Dare

I completely agree with your first paragraph. However, to compare controlling with musicianship is somewhat misleading, I feel.
I have no doubt that having a love of & interest in music will enable one to deliver a virtuoso performance (more so than a musician who does not possess these qualities). But, are the two professions exactly the same ? Would a person who was not interested in music ever become a professional musician ? I have my doubts !
We do know, however, that there are ATCOS who have no intrinsic love of aviation & pursue an ATC career for somewhat different reasons. What I was suggesting is that it is undoubtedly true that such ATCOS can be as good at the job as an enthusiast.
Enthusiasm is not a prerequisite, but being one helps you to make the effort to be selected, qualify, gives you initial experience (for instance, by starting as an ATCA), keeps you dedicated, improves your peripheral knowledge of the job, gives you extra knowledge (which a non-enthusiast may not have),gives you added experience (knowing the ropes) & helps you through the more difficult times.
As I said, in my experience, "give me an aviation enthusiast any day". - & some non-enthusiasts also !

[Lord Spandex Masher]

That's reassuring to know.

That said, you're just as dead if an instruction that sounds perfectly sensible to you turns out, with hindsight, to have been the one that kills you.

How can an instruction kill me?! My fate is in my hands alone. It's only my action or inaction that'll snuff me.

[DaveReidUK]

How can an instruction kill me?! My fate is in my hands alone. It's only my action or inaction that'll snuff me.Ah, you only fly in VMC and therefore don't need to take a controller's competence to keep you clear of the other guy on trust. Point taken.

[Lord Spandex Masher]

Ah, you've never flown in IMC without ATC, or in Spain.

But still, the instruction won't kill me. What will is my decision to follow it, or not.

[Tarq57]

That's ok, I'm not into doing daft or dangerous things just because a voice tells me to.
How would a landing clearance, at night, on an occupied runway fit into that?

(PS: you have no reason to suspect the runway is occupied.)

Happened.

[Gilles Hudicourt]

Carefull you're going to have to let the janitor into the tower before one of the two controllers goes out to take a leak if you guys joke along those lines...

[Dan Dare]

Two controllers? They've been tending towards one in the tower wherever they can for years:=

[Lord Spandex Masher]

How would a landing clearance, at night, on an occupied runway fit into that?

(PS: you have no reason to suspect the runway is occupied.)

Happened.

I always suspect the runway is occupied.

A clearance doesn't mean it's safe to do something. It's still my decision to land or not.

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

Agree 100%. All ATC can do is to ensure that to the best of their knowledge the runway is clear, often using excellent ground radar.