NATS tower loss

[YouSaidBolt]

is it right that edinburgh control tower is to be run by someone other than nats soon????if so any contacts and jobs avail do we reckon????

YSB

[T250]

Another loss to the Germans! Oh well! :hmm:

[YouSaidBolt]

have nats lost edinburgh,gatwick,birmingham?

[LostThePicture]

"To lose two tower contracts could be regarded as unfortunate, to lose three, careless..."

[octavian]

And if London City makes it four?

[YouSaidBolt]

have natslimiited gained any??????

[terrain safe]

Belfast City has been won. And Wattisham. They soon rack up you know. :yuk::yuk::yuk::yuk:

[octavian]

Lose Gatwick and gain Wattisham. Hmmmmm not exactly a big win.

[YouSaidBolt]

on 2nights swingometer what would that mean financially to natslimiteed?cud Dfs take over swannick?

[italiancars]

Yes over last 18months or so NATS have lost the 3 above contracts, though the subtle difference is Gatwick and Edinburgh airports have same owner and have subcontracted to another provider. ANS a subsidery of Germany's DFS. Birmingham on the other hand have taken it in house creating its own subsidery within the larger airport infrastructure.

[2 sheds]

YouSaidBolt


I suggest that you check your spelling and punctuation before applying for a job with DFS.


2 s

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

2 sheds... Just what I was thinking!

[GAPSTER]

Hold on a minute with all this negativity....NATS also recently gained Netheravon and Middle Wallop

[kcockayne]

Puts the EU Referendum result in the shade !

[chevvron]

Hold on a minute with all this negativity....NATS also recently gained Netheravon and Middle Wallop
Isn't Netheravon AFIS rather than ATC?

[Talkdownman]

nats at Netheravon? Must be the only nats AFIS unit then. nats NS & L scraping the barrel somewhat for contracts?

AFIS at Netheravon? AFIS is meant for tiddler public transport. Public Transport at Netheravon? In my day as a lift attendant there all the passengers jumped out because they hated landing in aeroplanes.

The world has gone mad...

[LostThePicture]

I can't decide where this thread should be moved... I think I'm about 48.1% in favour of Spectators' Balcony, 51.9% in favour of Jet Blast...

[ZOOKER]

Isn't The Red Barron something to do with the folk that run EGPH?

[panpanpanpan]

I am 99% sure that the Belfast City contract is NATS Solutions, not NATS Ltd, is there a difference?:confused:

[TCAS FAN]

Only way that NATS could compete with the real world to provide AFIS is to do it either at cost or a loss leader to get the Wallop contract.

[eastern wiseguy]

Panny

Looking up Companies house...it seems a bit "you say potato...I say potato" I expect someone who works for them might be along to quench your thirst for knowledge.

I am surprised though that your "contacts" at EGAC can't help you out?

[chevvron]

Only way that NATS could compete with the real world to provide AFIS is to do it either at cost or a loss leader to get the Wallop contract.
That's possible I suppose. The contract may have been a package as Wallop is ADV/ADI and APP/APS which NSL could do. NSL as far as I'm aware do not have any AFIS contracts and the Area FISOs who do FIR are NERL not NSL.

[261_p]

Middle Wallop and Netheravon were acquired by Aquila - NATS (NSL?) as part of Project Marshall.

AQUILA - Air Traffic Management Services | About AQUILA (http://www.aquila-atms.com/about.php)

[2 sheds]

Let's hope their technical ability is better that their web designer putting white lettering on a white cloud background.


2 s

[EGLL19791986]

Lets's hope that NATS becomes a better company to work for!

[LEGAL TENDER]

Lets's hope that NATS becomes a better company to work for!

Let's hope that with more contracts being lost, it will become easier to go to work for other employers.

[BigDaddyBoxMeal]

The conspiracy theorist in me thinks that all these contract losses and consequent wins by other ANSPs are all orchestrated by NATS themselves in an elaborate plan to get shot of as many people on the DB pension plan as they can.

Give it a decade or so and we'll all be back with NATS with a nice new DC pension and reduced T&Cs ;)

[3miles]

nats at Netheravon? Must be the only nats AFIS unit then. nats NS & L scraping the barrel somewhat for contracts?

AFIS at Netheravon? AFIS is meant for tiddler public transport. Public Transport at Netheravon? In my day as a lift attendant there all the passengers jumped out because they hated landing in aeroplanes.

The world has gone mad...

"Scraping the barrel" - nothing like an elitist statement, sure the hard working guys at these units appreciate that attitude, regardless of size or movements, each unit carries its own challenges and it's a job that I'm sure people still have pride in. Could say easy life at EGKK being tower only, just one rating part skilled ATCOS, so ANS scrapping the barrel, compared to say a unit that requires ADI, APS and APP, with a mix of traffic types and speeds.

Perhaps NATS losing contracts is as equally as much to do with the views of the airport management of "Some" NATS staffs arrogance with statements like that, especially when they compare the t&c to their own staff.

[3miles]

Let's hope that with more contracts being lost, it will become easier to go to work for other employers.

It is - Amazon are recruiting.

[Gonzo]

3miles,

Hate to break it to you but TDM isn't a NATS ATCO.

[chevvron]

3miles,

Hate to break it to you but TDM isn't a NATS ATCO.
No, like me he's a retired NATS ATCO who got pi$$ed off with NATS HR.

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

Yep.. and he was an ATCO for many more years than Gonzo!

[Gonzo]

Errr, ok.

I was just pointing out that 3miles seemed to misunderstand TDM's language when he said 'scraping the barrel', and assumed he was 'NATS elitist', which couldn't be further from the trut in my experience.

Never mind.

[Spambhoy]

I was at Brum when the local "expertise" bought out the contract, not nice. Know Edinburgh well, but it's Tower GM is a bit of a tool and his Engineering predecessor was an even bigger one, so no surprises the contract was lost because of the infighting ( and its serious infighting). Glasgow will most definitely follow, I'd rather hope that the shambles at HIAL will implode pretty quickly as a result.

My main beef : The people in charge of NATS and its subsidiaries, are not forward thinking in any sense of the phrase and are still entrenched in the outdated dogma of the DoT.

Paul Reid and the Germans, that's does make me smile, good on you Gazza.

F NATS !!

[Nimmer]

I think NATS losing tower contracts is an interesting situation, the bosses are getting it wrong somewhere. The controllers are still doing the job they are paid to do, but for the airport owners are not happy with NATS as ATC providers.

That said, Gatwick could be a disaster yet if validations don't happen soon. The latest recruits are from Bournemouth and Oxford, I hope they do well, but it's a big ask. Are wages going to have to increase to attract ex gatwick or ex Heathrow tower validations, or Middle East expats I wonder. Watching with interest.

[kcockayne]

The cynic in me says that there will be no problem with Gatwick validations. All will be well - because that is what is needed, so that is what will happen !

[Nimmer]

T250, 1 Middle East expat, 1 has already failed. Sorry if the Oxford info was wrong, do you know where others are being recruited from?

[chevvron]

Gatwick is not an easy place to validate; we had at least 6 from Farnborough who went there and I believe only 2 managed to qualify. Certainly my personal feeling is someone from Oxford or Bournemouth would find it a bit of a struggle as the traffic is more IFR biased than the places they've come from ie very few VFR arrivals/departures at Gatwick.
For instance, in NATS days, I've been on the flight deck of a 737 landing on easterlies and at 4 miles with one lander ahead just vacating, they've still got 2 departures away before giving us landing clearance.
Do they do that nowadays?

[Hootin an a roarin]

Know Edinburgh well, but it's Tower GM is a bit of a tool and his Engineering predecessor was an even bigger one

They were/are both engineers but you have it the wrong way around!

[ATCO Fred]

Gatwick is not an easy place to validate; Certainly my personal feeling is someone from Oxford or Bournemouth would find it a bit of a struggle as the traffic is more IFR biased than the places they've come from ie very few VFR arrivals/departures at Gatwick.?


I would call you out on your perhaps 'vintage' view of the task at Oxford. IFR, (whether it be PA34, G650, Global or anything up to BBJ/A319) is the staple diet these days. All single controller in radar with circa transit figures that match most LARS units. Takes a controller on the top of their game to achieve the capacity required to validate. . . . . until such time as manning allows Rad 2 !!!!

For instance, in NATS days, I've been on the flight deck of a 737 landing on easterlies and at 4 miles with one lander ahead just vacating, they've still got 2 departures away before giving us landing clearance. Do they do that nowadays?

We aim to issue IFR clearances at 4nm but no later than 2. I'm sure your quote is somewhat sensationalist and well before the days of SMS lead decision making. :ok:

Fred

[Ratatat]

Gatwick is not an easy place to validate; we had at least 6 from Farnborough who went there and I believe only 2 managed to qualify. Certainly my personal feeling is someone from Oxford or Bournemouth would find it a bit of a struggle as the traffic is more IFR biased than the places they've come from ie very few VFR arrivals/departures at Gatwick.
For instance, in NATS days, I've been on the flight deck of a 737 landing on easterlies and at 4 miles with one lander ahead just vacating, they've still got 2 departures away before giving us landing clearance.
Do they do that nowadays?


Still happens. A good headwind would be required.

[Squawk 7500]

Why wouldn't an experienced ATCO from Oxford or Bournemouth validate?! Plenty of ab-initios manage it with zero experience!
Classic pretentious attitude from the OAPs on this forum.

[GASA]

In my experience in air traffic I have seen folk of high and low abilities (out of the college and from other units) validate at traditionally difficult places such as Heathrow and Gatwick easily and struggle at traditionally quieter units (won't specify, don't want to offend). I personally think that the quality of OJTIs matter more towards validation than raw ability. If someone reasonably competent from Oxford or other not 'busy IFR big jet' units go to Gatwick then I think a few good OJTIs should validate them. Not a view shared by everyone I'm sure, and I stand ready to get slammed by someone saying I haven't worked at a top 2 in Britain unit therefore I don't know 😋

[Spambhoy]

Know Edinburgh well, but it's Tower GM is a bit of a tool and his Engineering predecessor was an even bigger one

They were/are both engineers but you have it the wrong way around!

That'll be why the GM is still there, on the new contract, with the Germans having been "outed", by NATS, for collusion with the opposition.

The "tool" reference remains I'm afraid ( to both).

[EastofKoksy]

It seems to me that the incestuous management team selection practices are coming home to roost at NATS. It also doesn't help when a lot of 'managers' are used to giving orders and struggle to get their heads around the idea that their colleagues like to be treated as people not machines.

[Del Prado]

We aim to issue IFR clearances at 4nm but no later than 2. I'm sure your quote is somewhat sensationalist and well before the days of SMS lead decision making. :ok:

Fred

That wouldn't work at a busy airfield. That's not even what Gatwick aims for in LVPs!

[chevvron]

It doesn't help that some NATS managers are sent on a course at Henley College where they seem to teach them to be deliberately conforntational.(NB I did say 'seem')

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

<<We aim to issue IFR clearances at 4nm but no later than 2>>

Do you mean landing clearance?

[chevvron]

It seems to me that the incestuous management team selection practices are coming home to roost at NATS. It also doesn't help when a lot of 'managers' are used to giving orders and struggle to get their heads around the idea that their colleagues like to be treated as people not machines.
I did 2 (or was it 3) 'Assessment Centres' for management jobs with NATS having 'rescued' an Air Training Corps Squadron from oblivion by my management practices by treating the cadets as 'young adults' instead of children.
It was pretty obvious the centres were just whitewash, going through the motions and that the decision was made before the assessment started; needless to say I was never selected as I got the label 'not a people person' on my records from somewhere, (never did figure out who or why).

[cossack]

...I got the label 'not a people person' on my records from somewhere, (never did figure out who or why).
"Doesn't suffer fools gladly" was written on one of my annual appraisals way back in the early 90s. I have avoided management positions throughout my entire nearly 30 year career. 'Nuff said?

[vintage ATCO]

In an interview, whenever asked the inevitable 'What is your worst trait?', reply 'I don't suffer fools very well'. They are never sure how to take that. Didn't seem to do me any harm. :)

[ATCO Fred]

<<We aim to issue IFR clearances at 4nm but no later than 2>>

Do you mean landing clearance?

Doh !! My comment was in response to a quote about landing clearances so is quite clearly about landing clearances.

Keep up at the back !!

[ATCO Fred]

That wouldn't work at a busy airfield. That's not even what Gatwick aims for in LVPs!

Just following the broader guidance contained with 493 Section 3 Chapter 2 Para 10.1.

Always wise when operating with types of significantly different speeds.

[Gonzo]

Just following the broader guidance contained with 493 Section 3 Chapter 2 Para 10.1.

Always wise when operating with types of significantly different speeds.

Isn't that referring to Approach Control passing landing clearances though? Or am I missing something?

[ATCO Fred]

Isn't that referring to Approach Control passing landing clearances though? Or am I missing something?

Hi Gonzo - no you are right; thus why I specified "Broader Guidance". We need to cater for the scenario of Gulfstream 5 approaching 4 mile final with a PA28 at 2 mile final and having a safe and managed arrival for the G5 and also a save and managed go-around for the G5, in the event that the PA28 ahead is actually doing a go-around. Caveat - taking into consideration the met conditions at the time. All this coupled with a single exit point on the runway and the inability to issue a "land after clearance" in such a scenario due to the speed differential. This is more about the boarder SMS piece of how we operate safely with our diverse aircraft types constrained by the physical characteristics of the aerodrome.

Hope that helps but things into context. Fred