More CW melodrama

[Lost_luggage34]

Seems that our friends at Computer Weekly are attempting to continue the melodrama ;

http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_645811.html?menu=


OK, so it's silly season, people are on holiday, stories are in short supply - whatever. But please, let's have a balanced viewpoint.

We all know that there are many complex issues within NATS. These are well aired via this excellent website.

CW used to be a well regarded technical publication. To continue with this unconstructive tone ranks it down towards the gutter press end of the spectrum. It is headline grabbing and it is unnecessary. Yes, the public need to be able to read about the truth, but let's write about the whole truth and not some semi-sensationalist crap which is just going to up the circulation figures.

UK ATC is the best in the world. Sorry, just my point of view, I am not an ATC or an ATPL but like to see both sides of the fence.

Soap box CB pulled.

[FlyingPiglet]

Hopefully there will be some balanced probing of both sides of the argument today. What I'm interested to know is

- why, if there are apparently fewer flights than pre 9/11 aren't flights operating closer to on time. Or is this incorrect.

- how much more efficient Swanwick is than the centre it replaced; as I understand it, the number of planes that can be handled by all sectors of airspace across Europe is declared as a figure per hour. If this is correct, then what are the comparitive figures for Swanwick and the same sector when at West Drayton

- I may be missing the point but how is Swanwick an advance if it is handling less traffic with higher delays using (2 x 22 = ) 44 controllers at once as opposed to 24 at once. I thought that the tac and planner controllers were the same qualification so it seems that the old centre could have opened even more sectors and reduced delays to zero.

[Lost_luggage34]

Piglet,
Thank you - this was exactly the sensible, well constructed discussion I was attempting to build here with my posting. Please may it continue.

[BDiONU]

There is a single reason really as to why there are more delays. Its been aired by Bexil160 and other ATCO/ATSA's.

Lack of staff.

Swanwick can handle more planes IF there's the staff to open more sectors. Unfortunately things are so critical that some sectors have to remain bandboxed and flow imposed. There is no short term solution, although there are now a lot of trainees in the system, projected retirments etc. mean there will be even LESS trained staff in the foreseeable future.

Tactical & Planner are not the same validation. Some Planners are former Sector Chiefs who do not have a valid radar endorsement and cannot be Tacticals.

So you can quite happily discount all the BS in the media about Britains crowded skies, accident waiting to happen etc. Safety is paramount and if there ain't the staff to handle the traffic NATS does not impose more traffic on existing controllers, it keeps the planes on the ground. Simple really.

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

I'm not at Swanwick and don't wish to get involved in the politics of that place.. However, where does all this nonsense come from about "fewer flights"? Heathrow broke it's daily record again a week or so back so do I assume that all other airfields have experienced a severe drop in traffic but we haven't?

[WetFeet]

Director

As I understand it the reason for fewer flights is the drop in N Atlantic traffic i.e. overflights, are down. NAT traffic is still a couple of months behind where it was this time last year, although picking up. This drop is further compounded when eastbound NAT traffic is southabout with airlines being advised by CFMU (on behalf of LFMU) to route through France, thus avoiding southern UK sectors.

Therefore, the lower sectors may be just as busy but the high level sectors, compared to last year, are quieter.

Mind you, that doesn't explain why London to Scotland flights are level capped. If the upper sectors are quieter, why level cap? Perhaps I am missing something. Could it be that the airspace is being kept free for these overflights because of international implications?

[5milesbaby]

The upper sectors are 'occasionally' quieter, but the level capping is due to lack of staff being able to split the upper sector, therefore giving an image its quieter/handling less traffic.

Think of this though, several airlines have recently expanded, ie Easy, Go, and BMI. Their new bases have increased the traffic in the Middle and Upper sectors, taking up the previous slots given to Oceanics so no downturn in traffic levels has really been seen.

As for flow rates, I only know one exactly off the top of my head, and its for Dover Sector combined (15/16), not enough staff to split it . At west drayton it ran at 36 a/c in 60 mins, and at Swanwick has just been increased on a trail period to 40 a/c in 60 mins. If we ever do manage to split it before I retire, the current regs for each sector will be 24 a/c in 60 mins, so only a gain of 8 per hour for 2 extra bods plus releif!!!!!!

[5milesbaby]

Wet feet, having just re-read your post, I have got slightly misleading as to refering to the upper sectors!!

The upper sectors you refer to are Lakes and Daventry, and level capping in these is entirely lack of staff . Seeing a trend here???

[Nogbad the Bad]

NATS has a staffing problem that will continue for years.

It affects Swanwick and West Drayton alike.

The cause of all this ??

BAD MANAGEMENT !!!

Does the new NATS learn anything from this ??

NO......IT JUST GIVES BONUSES TO THOSE THAT ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MESS THAT NATS IS IN !!!!!!

Can anyone see why the staff are so demoralised ????

[Slippers]

Just a quick question for the nerc bods?

Is it possible / has anyone tried running two tactical positions with one planner?

For example on DTY (apologies if the sector numbers are wrong), having 32T and 27T open southbound and have one person doing 32P and 27P bandboxed.

[BEXIL160]

Yeah, you could sit him in between the two Tacticals..... He'd be a sort of "super" planner wouldn't he? Of course he would need a new title.. lets call him the Chief Sector Controller .....

Nah, on second thoughts lets not. A system like that would NEVER work, would it???:rolleyes:

BEX

[Exel]

Slippers, to answer your question:-

Q. "Is it possible / has anyone tried running two tactical positions with one planner? "

A. NO - A sector (or bandboxed group) consists of 3 staff - Tactical, Planner, Assistant - I believe this is an SRG requirement, unless anyone out there can put me right ? - All 3 staff must be present for the sector to open LEGALLY. What you are suggesting requires 2T,2P,2A (at least until all the A's are made redundant that is).

[Scott Voigt]

Wow, you have to run a sector with three folks???

[Lieutenant Dan]

Yeah, it's amazing. This is the computer age, where in every other industry technology replaces humans.

But in UK ATC, all-singing all-dancing systems need more people per sector. It's all really pretty, though.

The problems on Lakes and Daventry are due to a lack of staff, wich means on Lakes most days we struggle to split sectors 3/4 and 7. Thats THREE sectors which can't be pulled apart.

Maybe once the airlines have standing-room only again, they'll put pressure on the Government to wake up. It's bigger planes, or more controllers, but something will have to give.

[Lon More]

I see that tonight the CLN Sectors will be closed 2130Z until 0530Z due staff shortage, everything rerouting around it.

My questions:
When we, Maastricht, phone you at night we often hear, "Clacton, N. Sea", so how do you collapse or bandbox the sectors? In the above case it seems peculiar to close half a sector?
Is the airspace then totally closed or can it be delegated to adjoining sectors?
Are priority flights, I.e. emergency, state or ambulance flights accepted?

[FlyingPiglet]

Hello Lon More

Clacton is either combined with Daventry or North Sea on night shifts. Which of these it is used to be decided by the workers based on who fancied doing nights. Now it's decided by the 'Ministry of Rosters' as someone called it using their hi-tech rostering program and imposed upon us.

Normally, 4 staff would be rostered for the Clacton+? combination for a night shift. As we require (a) mandatory fatigue breaks after 2hours and (b) people available on a pager in case of incident we have to close the sector if there's e.g. 2 staff.

Note we don't have any overbearing of staff rostered in case of sickness etc and our management allegedly say that they are happy to take the hit on nights as it results in little delay.

I guess that only 'half' the sector is closed because some of the other staff on duty must have a North Sea or Daventry validation and thus that bit can stay open.

Delegation of airspace......I'm sure we don't do that. As for safety of life of course as professionals we use common sense.

[NERC Dweller]

You can run 2 tacticals in a bandboxed configuration.

Here's how

1) Start with a bandboxed sector
2) At the adjacent workstation elect the Tactical for 1 of the sectors.
3) The electronics will then go and get all of the flight data etc from the bandboxed sector


Of course I can only speak for what the system will let you do and there may be functions which you need but aren't available until you take control. I'm also not sure that I would recommend running it as the norm.

PS you can't open the sector by mistake as you don't have an elected Planner or Assistant

Hope this helps

[OrsonCart]

What the flying f@*** has most of the ranting via this post, to do with Comp Weekly.

Stick to the thread chaps please!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

A seasoned journal reporting facts eh?

According to the web links via this site to the Govt select committee, once we are paid toward the end of Sept, NATS will be insolvent unless BAA contribute, and the only way they will do so, is via an increase in charges.

News on a CAA decision is due soon. BAA has its own problems, pax down apart from EGSS, so will want a way out of their promise is charges are held?

A shortfall in cash according to Everest.

Now this is worth ranting and raving over!!!!!

[atco-matic]

The CW story seems totally accurate to me! In fact, it's becoming really irritating when any of the press say ''X'', the management go public and say ''er no that's not true, they're just after headlines'' and us at the front line are, once again, saying ''erm, excuse me but yes it IS true actually!!!''

[Aunt Rimmer]

PPP was a **** up from the start.

NATS is living hand-to-mouth each month.

BAA money is to pay off debt (not for investment).

Go to war with Iraq = revenues down the pan = NATS bust.

Might as well force that early and at least stop them robbing the pension fund for another year = vote NO and bring the PPP to an abrupt end.

But then again, I'm a simpleton (as vercingotrix says).