School of Air Operations Control

[pr00ne]

I realise that this thread should perhaps reside in 'Aviation History and Nostalgia' but as it is recent almost contemporary RAF, I will try here.

When did the Royal Air Force Central Air Traffic Control School become the School of Air Operations Control, and why?

[Matoman]

The change was made last year to reflect the Flight Operations element of the school. It will probably change again at some point in the future when a new building is eventually constructed at Shawbury and SAOC is merged with SABM (School of Aerospace Battle Management) currently at Boulmer - but I wouldn't hold your breath because there's no money. Perhaps pr00ne and others can suggest a suitably amusing name for the new combined school?

MATOman

[Wensleydale]

The School of Hit and Miss.

[Herod]

We aren't allowed to use the word "miss" anymore. It's gender specific. I think the correct term would have to be "failed hit"

[Tocsin]

Nah, "failed" is too strong for snowflakes - "deferred" maybe? :)

[ORAC]

So the Typhoon carries non-hittiles?

[ricardian]

Nah, "failed" is too strong for snowflakes - "deferred" maybe? :)

"deferred" used to be the lowest possible precedence on a signal (remember F.Sigs.52?). Originally the precedences were Flash, Emergency, Operational Immediate, Priority, Routine and Deferred. These were "rationalised" in the 1960s and became Flash, Immediate, Priority and Routine.

[superplum]

We aren't allowed to use the word "miss" anymore. It's gender specific. I think the correct term would have to be "failed hit"

Warning shot would be close to the mark!
:cool:

[air pig]

To hit or not to hit, that is the question.

[Lima Juliet]

If we're talking Flt Ops then surely it is "School of O2 Thieves"? :E:E:E

[Melchett01]

If we're talking Flt Ops then surely it is "School of O2 Thieves"?

Wasn't the Flt Ops course done at FOTS, which more than one wag suggested was an acronym for Failed Other Training Schools :E

[Tocsin]

"deferred" used to be the lowest possible precedence on a signal (remember F.Sigs.52?). Originally the precedences were Flash, Emergency, Operational Immediate, Priority, Routine and Deferred. These were "rationalised" in the 1960s and became Flash, Immediate, Priority and Routine.

Every day's a learning day - I didn't know the 'old' precedences. (I was thinking of the vogue for calling failed exams a "deferred success")

[skippedonce]

The School of Hit and Miss.

Hit - far too agressive, so perhaps 'coming together'.

Miss - sexist, non-PC.

Deferred - suggests something not attained, and in these days of 'joint winners' et al, why not 'stopping things' - after all, ATC has been referred to as the 'flying prevention society'.

[MPN11]

2017 will see the emergence of the new Air Operations Branch, encompassing ATC and FC. The Battlespace Management Force HQ should stand up this month, AFAIK.

The Flying Prevention Branch will become a subset :(

[Melchett01]

2017 will see the emergence of the new Air Operations Branch, encompassing ATC and FC. The Battlespace Management Force HQ should stand up this month, AFAIK.

The Flying Prevention Branch will become a subset :(

Casting my mind a long way back to when I was at school and leafing through glossy brochures from the various Branches, I seem to recall FC had a hierarchy that went something like Weapons Ctrl - Identification (IDO -Surveillance now) - SAM Ctrl if you couldn't do either of the others. Will such a hierarchy of competence exist in the new Branch? And if so, what does that do for morale of those in the perceived 'bottom set'? Or, recognising that people blossom at different times and rates (arguably one of the reasons people get chopped, they just pick things up at a slower rate rather than not being able to pick it up at all), will people be able to move between sub-specialisations?

[KG86]

In my humble opinion, Air Traffic Control is not a military task, and could/should be privatised, just as SAR was.

Fighter Control and Ops Spt are, and I am not surprised that they are emerging as the lead elements.

While I am on my high horse, if the ATC (sub-) branch is to go, could they please take QFE with them! Let's join the rest of the world on QNH!

[KPax]

I watched the locals at Basrah controlling, well that was one definition for what they were attempting. And as for Bastion who was going to do the controlling, contractors?

[Basil]

In my humble opinion, Air Traffic Control is not a military task, and could/should be privatised, just as SAR was.

Fighter Control and Ops Spt are, and I am not surprised that they are emerging as the lead elements.

While I am on my high horse, if the ATC (sub-) branch is to go, could they please take QFE with them! Let's join the rest of the world on QNH!
I'd say that any essential element of military operations should be carried out by the military. They can then up-sticks and move at short notice without having to consider civilian rules.

Re QFE, again, I'd like to hear FJ, esp single seat, opinion on that.

[ORAC]

Casting my mind a long way back to when I was at school and leafing through glossy brochures from the various Branches, I seem to recall FC had a hierarchy that went something like Weapons Ctrl - Identification (IDO -Surveillance now) - SAM Ctrl if you couldn't do either of the others. Back in the 1970s everyone in the FC branch started off as a Fighter Controller (FC) then went on to become a Cheif Controller (CC) and then a Control Executive (CONEX). Along the way you could also pick up identification qualifiacations such as Display Controller and NATO Evaluation officer (EO).

if during initial training you couldn't pass the course you were chopped; if it considered this was for lack of capacity though you were still safe (i.e. You could safely keep aircraft apart - but could not simultaneously bring the required ones together at the same time), you were offered ATC and sent off to Shawbury.

The problem with this system was that the failure rate averaged around 80%. As a result the branch was redesigned with 2 streams - Control and Reporting.

After initial evaluation recruits were either streamed as Controllers or Identification and Reporting Officers - IDROs (If you want to be an IDRO clap your hands! - swing hands wildly towards each other and miss). Controllers went Intercept Controller (IC) then Fighter Allocator (FA - new name for CC); Reporters went IDRO then Track Production Officer (TPO - new name for DC); then branch recombining at Master Controller (MC - new name for CONEX). The Reporting stream picked up EO and then new qualification of Data Link Manager (DLM).

The new qualifications had to be given by someone, so in the early days some of the old hands acquired the new qualifications along with the old.

ORAC - FC, CC, DC, EO, IC, FA, IDRO, TPO, DLM, MC (plus various CQ and LEO tickets).

I did do a one year "bad boy" tour as an Ops Officer at LU including 4 months as Ops 1 and South Atlantic SFSO at Stanley as well - but that's another story......

[CADF]

On the subject of QFE, it's not the air traffickers that want to retain it, rather the 2 winged master race in 22 Gp.

During my time instructing at CATCS I do not recall any failed FC being given a second chance as an air trafficker; as a general rule, if you do not have the aptitude to get them together then the same applies to accurately keeping them apart. Then there is all that stuff about coping with multiple inputs, allocation of priorites, etc, etc, skills which apply to both disciplines

[[email protected]]

On the subject of QFE, it's not the air traffickers that want to retain it, rather the 2 winged master race in 22 Gp. Hmm perhaps because it is aircrew who rely on it when working hard in the cockpit as opposed to ATC sunning themselves on their a*ses in the tower;)

[Herod]

The change from QFE to QNH in my airline was driven by the change from turboprops to jets. Most departures and missed approaches are QNH based, and with the climb performance of a jet, there isn't time to faff about changing altimeter settings. (stands by to be flamed by the FJ community, who are of course superior beings)

[MPN11]

Airfield QNH (measured) or Regional QNH (predicted)? ;)

As a former ATCO I couldn't care less which pressure setting is used. We are but humble servants of the wing'ed Lords of the Air. :)

[vascodegama]

Basil

By FJ crews do you include those that manage perfectly well on QNH now e.g. the USAF?

[Basil]

Basil

By FJ crews do you include those that manage perfectly well on QNH now e.g. the USAF?
Nope, I said what I meant and I meant what I said.
I refer you to the comment by [email protected] with which I agree; although I wouldn't, perhaps, have couched it in those terms ;)

I had a short ground tour in ATC which, I may say, was a piece of doddle for a pilot. We were there to serve the aircraft, not the other way around.

An airline for which I flew most of my flying career had a FEEPS system.
The acronym stood for Flight Engineer Entry Pilots System (Selection ?) to kindly retrain redundant FEs as pilots.
One or two FEs had the magnanimity to admit that they had never realised how mentally loaded up pilots were.
I also had the advantage of flying as a Systems Panel Operator (as well as pilot) on the TriStar. Apart from being relatively easy, it was astonishing how one could sit and watch minor errors by the pilots and be tempted to think one would never have been so remiss . . . .

[Basil]

The change from QFE to QNH in my airline was driven by the change from turboprops to jets. Most departures and missed approaches are QNH based, and with the climb performance of a jet, there isn't time to faff about changing altimeter settings. (stands by to be flamed by the FJ community, who are of course superior beings)
They still get loaded up but, of course, would NEVER admit it - oh, the shame.
ATC is there to serve the aircraft and, IMO, if the SS FJ pilot wants QFE then that's what they get.
You see, I don't have any difficulty admitting that I wasn't good enough for FJ; I was bl00dy thankful to make it as a truckie. I have a colleague who says that the QFI who chopped him on Gnats probably saved his life - how magnanimous!

[Herod]

I was bl00dy thankful to make it as a truckie. I have a colleague who says that the QFI who chopped him on Gnats probably saved his life.

Likewise. My JP instructor said "You're a second behind the JP (probably generous), that would be dangerous on the Gnat, and fatal on the Lightning" Good call.

[ORAC]

How unusual - a thread about controllers morphs into yet another chat by pilots about themselves.

How do you know when there's a pilot in the bar?............... :E:E

[Herod]

How do you know when there's a pilot in the bar?

The engines have shut down, but you can still hear the whining.

[Captain Dart]

...and when there are two, the first to draw breath is the listener.

[Torchy]

Interesting stuff.......in my 37 years as an RAF controller, I never met a failed FC who had retrained as an ATCO.

[ORAC]

I have no idea if any subsequently passed the ATC course. But would any have ever admitted it?

[Cows getting bigger]

Interesting stuff.......in my 37 years as an RAF controller, I never met a failed FC who had retrained as an ATCO.

Didn't one or two go the other way in the early noughties though?

[Basil]

I was given a short ground tour in FC but a visit to a long suffering Air Secretary's Branch (ISTR) Wingco managed to get it changed to ATC.
"Oh, yes, you'll get a command on Hercs after this." Yesssss, I think FO on BEA Viscounts sounds a better proposition . . . ;)

[KPax]

Spent a long time as a Controller in the RAF, had the banter, heard the moans, dodgy Talkdown, crosswinds, issues with aircraft very rarely the Pilots fault, bottom line if Pilots are the top of the tree, why is the CDS a Nav?

[ORAC]

Those that can, do; those that can't, fly desks? And there's more money after the days of youth flying airliners than desk?

[Basil]

...and when there are two, the first to draw breath is the listener.
Breakfast following an RAF reunion; ex nav colleague said "I was the third last to leave; **** was doing the talking and #### was doing the drinking!" (Both pilots and clearly well suited to each other :E)

[KPax]

50-100k for sitting at a desk at Heathrow etc, I will take that.

[Herod]

Anyone who thinks being a controller at Heathrow is easy clearly has never flown into there as operating crew. I have, many times, and I take my hat off to them.

[Basil]

Anyone who thinks being a controller at Heathrow is easy clearly has never flown into there as operating crew. I have, many times, and I take my hat off to them.
Hear hear! Had what appeared to be an engine fire one night on the way in there. (Actually one bit of the engine grinding away another)
Bas: "Mayday etc."
ATC immediately: "Basair *** heading 240 cleared ILS 27L, break break, LU123 go around climb . . . ."
Bas: Thinks 'How did he know in advance I was going to say that?'

Much more recently walking around Swanwick and was surprised by how dramatically the workload increased as a line of bad weather swept across.

[Wyler]

Anyhow, back on thread....

The new Branch does stand up nest year and is an amalgamation of FC, ATC and Flt Ops.
The idea is good, really good.
The execution however, is dismal. Minimum planning, very little detail and a ridiculous timetable.
Unfortunately, too many ego's on the line to extend it into a realistic timescale so it will be another clusterf**k that will take years to sort out.

I cannot believe how many major projects are being run simultaneously with what looks like very little communication between them. All for an Air Force that would fit comfortably into a Championship football ground.

Still, you recruit and promote 'Managers', that's what you get.

[FODPlod]

A good excuse to 'wheel out' one of my favourite photos, courtesy of the Royal Naval ND Association

http://i1188.photobucket.com/albums/z412/Anonymouse365/Wrens%20on%20ice%20cream%20trikes.jpg

Navigating and Direction Officers' Association website (http://www.ndassoc.net/history/index.php?pg=0)

To better train the Direction Officers in the practical skills of interception, a Fighter Direction Training Centre (FDTC) was established at the Naval Air Station at Yeovilton in 1941. Operational activities at Yeovilton forced the FDTC shortly afterwards to move to nearby Speckington Hall. Due to the shortage of both radar and aircraft with which to practise, a heavy reliance was placed upon teaching the principles, and included the use of Walls ice cream tricycles, one being an "enemy aircraft" and another being a "friendly fighter". The Direction Officer could see both "aircraft" and would pass the necessary directions for the "fighter" to close and intercept the "enemy".

[jimjim1]

those that manage perfectly well on QNH now e.g. the USAF?


The USAF managing perfectly well on QNH?:)

http://i783.photobucket.com/albums/yy118/jimjim146/Capt-Christopher-Stricklin-ejects-from-the-USAF-Thunderbirds-number-six-aircraft-less-than-a-second-before-it-impacted-the-ground-at-an-air-show-at-Mountain-Home-Air-Force-Base-Idaho_3.jpg~original


http://i783.photobucket.com/albums/yy118/jimjim146/thunderbirds-4.png~original

[Previous Incorrect image removed - It has been pointed out that the post-crash image that I used may not be an F-16 and it may not therefore be involved in the same incident as the ejection. This replacement image is I believe correct although of poor quality.]

As I recall the cause was an arithmetic failure relating to altimeter QNH vs airfield height miscalculation for or during a display. Pilot error - again as I recall. Anyone who wants to look it up could search for [F-16 thunderbirds crash].

Video with commentary added later-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=alo_XWCqNUQ

[Wander00]

Ooh, Referee!!

[bobward]

Jimjim
Isn't the second picture an FA18 rather than a Lawn dart?

[albatross]

CF-18 I believe. As I recall an engine failed followed by an ejection.

[jimjim1]

I confess that I did not thoroughly check the second image, I looked it up on t'internet and accepted the result. For sure the first one really is the Thunderbirds F-16 crash due to running out of altitude. I have replaced the second image with one that is I believe correct.

The point still stands, that they use QNH and rely on calculations to avoid the ground during displays. In at least one case that did not work out so well.

I may get round to updating the post.

[Tengah Type]

I seem to remember that the RAF went across to QNH at all airfields at some time in the 80s(?).
This was not a problem for the heavy aircraft as the crews were used to QNH worldwide ops.
However after pressure from the FJ and Pilot Training communities the decision was reversed after
a couple of months, and it was back to QFE. Places like Brize used both if IIRC with the mix of civvy and FJ
visitors.

[vascodegama]

TT

It was the 90s. Brize uses QNH now as standard-has done for sometime. I still don't see why if the vast majority has moved to QNH why the RAF has not moved with the times. I wait to be corrected but I doubt the FJ fraternity used QFE at say Kandahar.

[binbrook]

Not again! QFE in the 40s (I'm told), QNH in the 50s, and QFE in the 60s. Then I left.