A positive approach to NERC and the future
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: I sell sea shells by the sea shore
Posts: 856
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A positive approach to NERC and the future
Okay folks, we've all been thru a lot, and are still, but here's a proposal for y'all.
The powers that be at NATS, especially our new co-owners, are supposed to frequent these pages so we have an opportunity to perhaps directly influence the future.
Just for a moment try to forget the almighty f**k up that has brought us to where we are now and look FORWARD a bit. What I'd like to see posted here are some thoughts about what we CAN do in the next few years to improve matters. Anything, no matter how radical would be interesting. Post from newbies as well as old hands please..
Here's some ideas and thoughts to start off with:
1) Forget the January 02 "O" date. Get everybody back to LATCC to sort out the current staff shortage.
2) Use the time contructively to investigate how to get NERC open in October 02,
with the least possible risk
This might mean only taking a few sectors, at least initially. It might mean investigating whether NERC can be run in a "mediator" type format. Abandon the electronics and use the radar "as is" with the "planner" becoming a "co-ordinator", much like TC do now anyway. There may be other options.
3) Have a serious look at buying something "off the shelf" for installation ASAP. Perhaps the EuroControl systems at Maastricht would be appropriate? I don't KNOW, but at least they DO work and must be worth a look.
4) ABOVE ALL. INVOLVE THE STAFF. Don't treat them as mindless Luddites. They ARE NOT. They are a resource. Imagine just what could be achieved if all NATS staff truly were enthusiastic and involved with the company and it's future.
I want things to get better in the future, don't we all, but I am not prepared to roll over and chant the mantra that all is okay with NERC and LATCC. It is not. I am prepared to look forward with workable, achievable ideas that ALL staff can contribute something to. They may not be platable ideas to our current masters, but Tough, they've had their chance and blown it.
...maybe, just maybe..
Rgds BEX
The powers that be at NATS, especially our new co-owners, are supposed to frequent these pages so we have an opportunity to perhaps directly influence the future.
Just for a moment try to forget the almighty f**k up that has brought us to where we are now and look FORWARD a bit. What I'd like to see posted here are some thoughts about what we CAN do in the next few years to improve matters. Anything, no matter how radical would be interesting. Post from newbies as well as old hands please..
Here's some ideas and thoughts to start off with:
1) Forget the January 02 "O" date. Get everybody back to LATCC to sort out the current staff shortage.
2) Use the time contructively to investigate how to get NERC open in October 02,
with the least possible risk
This might mean only taking a few sectors, at least initially. It might mean investigating whether NERC can be run in a "mediator" type format. Abandon the electronics and use the radar "as is" with the "planner" becoming a "co-ordinator", much like TC do now anyway. There may be other options.
3) Have a serious look at buying something "off the shelf" for installation ASAP. Perhaps the EuroControl systems at Maastricht would be appropriate? I don't KNOW, but at least they DO work and must be worth a look.
4) ABOVE ALL. INVOLVE THE STAFF. Don't treat them as mindless Luddites. They ARE NOT. They are a resource. Imagine just what could be achieved if all NATS staff truly were enthusiastic and involved with the company and it's future.
I want things to get better in the future, don't we all, but I am not prepared to roll over and chant the mantra that all is okay with NERC and LATCC. It is not. I am prepared to look forward with workable, achievable ideas that ALL staff can contribute something to. They may not be platable ideas to our current masters, but Tough, they've had their chance and blown it.
...maybe, just maybe..
Rgds BEX
Guest
Posts: n/a
Hi Bex,
Yet again I find myself in complete agreemwnt with you. I have to say though that there is a complete layer of management particularly at Swanwick who will have to be redeployed.
If TAG read these pages then please come to the ACR without your minders and without ANY of the old management and talk to us. We will talk to you honestly and frankly. The major resource of NATS (please don't even think of changing the name) is the staff, particularly the professional control staff. As long as we can trust you we will fix this little problem.
Yet again I find myself in complete agreemwnt with you. I have to say though that there is a complete layer of management particularly at Swanwick who will have to be redeployed.
If TAG read these pages then please come to the ACR without your minders and without ANY of the old management and talk to us. We will talk to you honestly and frankly. The major resource of NATS (please don't even think of changing the name) is the staff, particularly the professional control staff. As long as we can trust you we will fix this little problem.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Fort Worth ARTCC ZFW
Posts: 1,155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BEX;
Sounds like the problem we had a bunch of years ago when we abandoned AAS (ISSS) and finally put together DSR. Not the best in Human factors, but it was all that the FAA was going to spend money on. So with begrudging controller input, we put together something that at least works. It's is by no means where it should be, or what it could be. But we are finally making small improvements to it as well as working on different types of functionallity that will plug into it...
Sounds like the problem we had a bunch of years ago when we abandoned AAS (ISSS) and finally put together DSR. Not the best in Human factors, but it was all that the FAA was going to spend money on. So with begrudging controller input, we put together something that at least works. It's is by no means where it should be, or what it could be. But we are finally making small improvements to it as well as working on different types of functionallity that will plug into it...
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: I sell sea shells by the sea shore
Posts: 856
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hiya Scott,
Yes indeedy.. As I understand it the NERC systems are closely related to your abandonned AAS, courtesy of IBM/LORAL/Lockheed Martin.
The FAA came to to senses (?) and abandonned AAS, we stuck with it. Who's better off now???
Rgds BEX.
(P.S. It's cooled down now)
Yes indeedy.. As I understand it the NERC systems are closely related to your abandonned AAS, courtesy of IBM/LORAL/Lockheed Martin.
The FAA came to to senses (?) and abandonned AAS, we stuck with it. Who's better off now???
Rgds BEX.
(P.S. It's cooled down now)
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Fort Worth ARTCC ZFW
Posts: 1,155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Like I told the pilots in my Raincheck class today. AAS didn't fail because it couldn't do what IBM said it would do. It failed because it made the workload go UP for the controllers and didn't make the job easier. There were some other issues too, but what the heck <G>.
I'm glad that we have finally abandoned that approach and are now working on other items to add to our DSR consoles. Hopefully if we can keep some steady funding coming into the FAA we will see some rather nice additions and improvements to our systems even before I retire <G>...
I'm glad that we have finally abandoned that approach and are now working on other items to add to our DSR consoles. Hopefully if we can keep some steady funding coming into the FAA we will see some rather nice additions and improvements to our systems even before I retire <G>...
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Greystation
Posts: 1,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dear All
Bex - cracking idea, but unfortunately no-one seems to have the bottle to put anything yet. That to me shows the state the company is now in, that everyone has a 'fear' of what may happen. The company at management level seems so volatile that anything may occur.
As Scott says, the equipment we are to work with isn't the best. What I have seen so far though is better than what we have now, and any further improvements will come about when we get in and use it, by the complaints that are very likely to happen. I really want it to go ahead as and when, but have no big problems if it gets delayed further. The problems that arise for me though, are that management won't and don't update us on the situation. All I ever hear is rumours that eventually get hammered out on here and no real answers gained. We need some sort of monthly brief that gives us an update on monthly movements, and not like Airway, something that tells us useful things.
As ZIP250 says, the new management really needs to get onto the floor and speak to EVERYlast one of us, to gain a comprehensive train of thought. Who cares if its going to take ages, building Nerc is taking ages too, and who gives a damn? Why has it taken so long? Time isn't a factor, just get all thoughts together. As these things go, doing it on nights only isn't good enough either. Only certain staff are in and at 3am, the last person I wanna talk to is a manager.
I don't actually care if we are told Nerc is a complete f**k up, staffing is low, and its going to be even tougher, I JUST WANT TO KNOWso as I can be prepared mentally and physically. If the management came out and said it, told us how they are going about fixing it, showing how they apprechiate us, then they will also probably find the sickness rates will drop, and everyone will start pitching in more. When I first joined Nats, everyone was happy (ish), and had good words about most things. I have found myself recently questioning myself as to why I joined now, just to try and get that happy vibe back, but it doesn't stay long enough these days to warrant me thinking I have a good job.
I know a few people may not agree with me, but this thread isn't about agreeing, its putting forward what you are thinking and what you would like to happen. No-one talks to management anymore, the union is having a tough ride too, so how else are we to get our personal feelings across. We know this is read by all who care, and we have to start somewhere to try and repair the bridge.
I hpoe this thread can start things off, and I have been and will be thinking hard for more to say, I hope others can join in too,
we own the shares now, so its also partly our company!
Keep posting everyone, 5mb
Bex - cracking idea, but unfortunately no-one seems to have the bottle to put anything yet. That to me shows the state the company is now in, that everyone has a 'fear' of what may happen. The company at management level seems so volatile that anything may occur.
As Scott says, the equipment we are to work with isn't the best. What I have seen so far though is better than what we have now, and any further improvements will come about when we get in and use it, by the complaints that are very likely to happen. I really want it to go ahead as and when, but have no big problems if it gets delayed further. The problems that arise for me though, are that management won't and don't update us on the situation. All I ever hear is rumours that eventually get hammered out on here and no real answers gained. We need some sort of monthly brief that gives us an update on monthly movements, and not like Airway, something that tells us useful things.
As ZIP250 says, the new management really needs to get onto the floor and speak to EVERYlast one of us, to gain a comprehensive train of thought. Who cares if its going to take ages, building Nerc is taking ages too, and who gives a damn? Why has it taken so long? Time isn't a factor, just get all thoughts together. As these things go, doing it on nights only isn't good enough either. Only certain staff are in and at 3am, the last person I wanna talk to is a manager.
I don't actually care if we are told Nerc is a complete f**k up, staffing is low, and its going to be even tougher, I JUST WANT TO KNOWso as I can be prepared mentally and physically. If the management came out and said it, told us how they are going about fixing it, showing how they apprechiate us, then they will also probably find the sickness rates will drop, and everyone will start pitching in more. When I first joined Nats, everyone was happy (ish), and had good words about most things. I have found myself recently questioning myself as to why I joined now, just to try and get that happy vibe back, but it doesn't stay long enough these days to warrant me thinking I have a good job.
I know a few people may not agree with me, but this thread isn't about agreeing, its putting forward what you are thinking and what you would like to happen. No-one talks to management anymore, the union is having a tough ride too, so how else are we to get our personal feelings across. We know this is read by all who care, and we have to start somewhere to try and repair the bridge.
I hpoe this thread can start things off, and I have been and will be thinking hard for more to say, I hope others can join in too,
we own the shares now, so its also partly our company!
Keep posting everyone, 5mb
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: I sell sea shells by the sea shore
Posts: 856
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
5mb..
Thank you for the above. It seems I am not alone with my sentiments.
To everyone else...
Any more ideas, controversial or other wise. Please post them here, and don't let the apathy the "old" NATS management have so successfully cultivated ruin my/your/our future. I still believe it's possible to turn this thing around. Do you?
Rgds BEX
Thank you for the above. It seems I am not alone with my sentiments.
To everyone else...
Any more ideas, controversial or other wise. Please post them here, and don't let the apathy the "old" NATS management have so successfully cultivated ruin my/your/our future. I still believe it's possible to turn this thing around. Do you?
Rgds BEX
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
While I do do not think that NATS management has ever had the b$%$s to admit they were wrong, and that not a single one of them would ever stick their head up above the parapet and say, "Hold on a minute, this is crap". I will enter into the spirit of your topic, as it is admirable.
1/ Delay the O date. The training of staff for one is dangerously flawed. Apart from the high workload now put on ATCOs which is both operationally questionable, and a health issue. To ask ATCOs to sign off as competent on a new system with so little training, is dangerous. Personal pride makes most resist the temptation to refuse to sign on the dotted line.
2/ Re-work the concept of operation. For one I feel that the Local Area Supervisor Position, is nothing more than a get out for employing LATCC Chiefs who would be unable to validate on the new, or any system. No other unit in the country works like this. It is not revolutionary, but a step back to LATCC. What can the reasoning possibly be, apart from jobs for the boys.
3/ Ditch completely the NERC Software. It is cumbersome, time consuming, and an excellent examle of the system dictating the operation. IT SHOULD BE THE OTHER WAY ROUND. I am discusted by it frankly.
My solution then is:
Admit that NATS got it badly wrong and buy off the shelf. Forget the British Bulldog approach of continuing on in the face of adversity. Look where it has got us already.
1/ Delay the O date. The training of staff for one is dangerously flawed. Apart from the high workload now put on ATCOs which is both operationally questionable, and a health issue. To ask ATCOs to sign off as competent on a new system with so little training, is dangerous. Personal pride makes most resist the temptation to refuse to sign on the dotted line.
2/ Re-work the concept of operation. For one I feel that the Local Area Supervisor Position, is nothing more than a get out for employing LATCC Chiefs who would be unable to validate on the new, or any system. No other unit in the country works like this. It is not revolutionary, but a step back to LATCC. What can the reasoning possibly be, apart from jobs for the boys.
3/ Ditch completely the NERC Software. It is cumbersome, time consuming, and an excellent examle of the system dictating the operation. IT SHOULD BE THE OTHER WAY ROUND. I am discusted by it frankly.
My solution then is:
Admit that NATS got it badly wrong and buy off the shelf. Forget the British Bulldog approach of continuing on in the face of adversity. Look where it has got us already.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: I sell sea shells by the sea shore
Posts: 856
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Baby Face..
You listened to 5mb then
I'm glad, and heartened that you've taken the trouble to post your thoughts. They aren't too dissimilar to what has already been posted here.
The intent of this topic was to get people thinking forward, and being constructive, not distructive, which is fairly easy.
Thanks again, anymore ideas will certainly be welcome.
Rgds BEX.
You listened to 5mb then
I'm glad, and heartened that you've taken the trouble to post your thoughts. They aren't too dissimilar to what has already been posted here.
The intent of this topic was to get people thinking forward, and being constructive, not distructive, which is fairly easy.
Thanks again, anymore ideas will certainly be welcome.
Rgds BEX.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the biggest concern in SM's heads would probably be how the media would handle the "NERC delayed again" headlines.
Give them a get out clause for this and perhaps you're in business.
SA
Give them a get out clause for this and perhaps you're in business.
SA
Pegase Driver
Quote :
>>>3) Have a serious look at buying something "off the shelf" for installation ASAP. Perhaps the EuroControl systems at Maastricht would be appropriate? I don't KNOW, but at least they DO work and must be worth a look.<<<<
I am affraid there is nothing : " off the shelf " for large ATC centres such as London and Maastricht.
You have to customise and integrate smaller pieces of equipment or sofware that were designed for something else. Integrating distributive systems is one of the most difficult thing in ATC.
Specifying what is needed is another.
A controller only needs 40 or 50 functions to do its task, but when technology can give you 300, it is often difficult to resist the temptation..especially see the cost of the whole thing.
The current Eurocontrol Maastricht systems (MADAP) works well. Its intoduction in our new ODS room( same thing as NERC)is not without its own problems as well.
No-one is here to give lessons to anyone else. We are all in the same boat, with he same problems, and it is often too late to stop, re-think and change direction.
The Swiss have done so, costed them 52 Millions USD . Result : Parliamentary inquiry, some managers were fired...some were procecuted ... Unlikely to be repeated elsewere I guess.
Good luck with NERC . I mean it...
>>>3) Have a serious look at buying something "off the shelf" for installation ASAP. Perhaps the EuroControl systems at Maastricht would be appropriate? I don't KNOW, but at least they DO work and must be worth a look.<<<<
I am affraid there is nothing : " off the shelf " for large ATC centres such as London and Maastricht.
You have to customise and integrate smaller pieces of equipment or sofware that were designed for something else. Integrating distributive systems is one of the most difficult thing in ATC.
Specifying what is needed is another.
A controller only needs 40 or 50 functions to do its task, but when technology can give you 300, it is often difficult to resist the temptation..especially see the cost of the whole thing.
The current Eurocontrol Maastricht systems (MADAP) works well. Its intoduction in our new ODS room( same thing as NERC)is not without its own problems as well.
No-one is here to give lessons to anyone else. We are all in the same boat, with he same problems, and it is often too late to stop, re-think and change direction.
The Swiss have done so, costed them 52 Millions USD . Result : Parliamentary inquiry, some managers were fired...some were procecuted ... Unlikely to be repeated elsewere I guess.
Good luck with NERC . I mean it...
In the hope that we COULD have some effect in, at least, slowing the NERC "runaway train", here are my thoughts.
I basically agree with the overall ideas of Bexil160 and others, but I am somewhat perturbed that the only mention of CSCs was a rather derogatory comment in the context of the LAS function.
Let us not forget that the vast majority of CSCs have "been throught the mill" at LATCC for a large number of years and, in that time, have built up a large pool of knowledge and expertise. It would be foolish to ignore them, or their thoughts, if a meaningful review is to be held.
The original "driving force" for NERC was to introduce electronic coordination to eliminate the perceived bottle-neck caused by the CSC. Whether this simplistic concept was derived from a genuine misunderstanding of the complexities of the CSC role (when done properly!!!) or whether the originator had some other agenda we will never know.
However, many years later, after major re-designs of sectors and the introduction of more standing agreements, the concept of the CSC as a bottle-neck is simply not true.
Nowadays the bottle-necks are various -
a) airspace limitations - not addressed by NERC
b) lack of concrete in the LTMA - not addressed by NERC
c) strip production and input of FDP amendments by the SSAs/SAs - no significant change at NERC
d) bunching of traffic - not addressed by NERC
So, if the CSC is not the bottle-neck, how can his/her expertise best be utilised?
Perhaps the answer is to consider a hybrid system, either all at NERC or part-NERC / part-LATCC for the next two or three years.
We all moan about the concept at NERC and the inadequacy of the training. If a delay were announced until October 2002 several areas could be addressed.
I think we can all agree that there are SOME LATCC sectors which are better suited to the NERC concept, either by their airspace design or their traffic flows. Equally, there are other sectors where the NERC concept is either frightening (eg LUS), or just inefficient (eg BRS/BCN/STU).
I think that consideration should be given to taking those sectors that ARE suitable to NERC (possibly October 2002), whilst leaving those that derive major benefits from having a CSC at LATCC. The additional time available, together with the smaller numbers involved, would allow adequate training to be achieved without ruining peoples' lives for another summer.
There would, of course, be a loss of flexibility with staffing as people would be either NERC or LATCC, but the goodwill engendered by the staff having been "listened to", and a realistic "give and take" attitude as to who worked where, would probably reduce its impact. In addition, there are a number of CSCs who have opted for early retirement purely to avoid NERC who could probably be enticed to stay on at LATCC whilst a new master plan is evolved for the eventual totally-NERC operation.
So how does this help the airlines? Well, for a start, it removes the imminent prospect of total chaos in January. The subsequent partial introduction in October 2002 should have less impact as staff will be better prepared and there may well be re-route options through unchanged LATCC sectors to avoid delays caused by the initial flow restrictions for NERC sectors.
In addition, the pool of knowledge and experience held in the LATCC CSC team could be tapped, and the numerous ideas for delay-reduction which are often heard in the coffee lounge could be utilised to improve the overall NATS service delivery.
Meanwhile the boffins at NERC, aided by the increasing experience of those controlling real traffic there, could address the very real difficulties in transferring the remaining sectors. Hopefully, if we all work together, with mutual trust and respect, we COULD end up with a NERC which is a real world leader some years down the line.
At this point my alarm went off and I awoke .....
I basically agree with the overall ideas of Bexil160 and others, but I am somewhat perturbed that the only mention of CSCs was a rather derogatory comment in the context of the LAS function.
Let us not forget that the vast majority of CSCs have "been throught the mill" at LATCC for a large number of years and, in that time, have built up a large pool of knowledge and expertise. It would be foolish to ignore them, or their thoughts, if a meaningful review is to be held.
The original "driving force" for NERC was to introduce electronic coordination to eliminate the perceived bottle-neck caused by the CSC. Whether this simplistic concept was derived from a genuine misunderstanding of the complexities of the CSC role (when done properly!!!) or whether the originator had some other agenda we will never know.
However, many years later, after major re-designs of sectors and the introduction of more standing agreements, the concept of the CSC as a bottle-neck is simply not true.
Nowadays the bottle-necks are various -
a) airspace limitations - not addressed by NERC
b) lack of concrete in the LTMA - not addressed by NERC
c) strip production and input of FDP amendments by the SSAs/SAs - no significant change at NERC
d) bunching of traffic - not addressed by NERC
So, if the CSC is not the bottle-neck, how can his/her expertise best be utilised?
Perhaps the answer is to consider a hybrid system, either all at NERC or part-NERC / part-LATCC for the next two or three years.
We all moan about the concept at NERC and the inadequacy of the training. If a delay were announced until October 2002 several areas could be addressed.
I think we can all agree that there are SOME LATCC sectors which are better suited to the NERC concept, either by their airspace design or their traffic flows. Equally, there are other sectors where the NERC concept is either frightening (eg LUS), or just inefficient (eg BRS/BCN/STU).
I think that consideration should be given to taking those sectors that ARE suitable to NERC (possibly October 2002), whilst leaving those that derive major benefits from having a CSC at LATCC. The additional time available, together with the smaller numbers involved, would allow adequate training to be achieved without ruining peoples' lives for another summer.
There would, of course, be a loss of flexibility with staffing as people would be either NERC or LATCC, but the goodwill engendered by the staff having been "listened to", and a realistic "give and take" attitude as to who worked where, would probably reduce its impact. In addition, there are a number of CSCs who have opted for early retirement purely to avoid NERC who could probably be enticed to stay on at LATCC whilst a new master plan is evolved for the eventual totally-NERC operation.
So how does this help the airlines? Well, for a start, it removes the imminent prospect of total chaos in January. The subsequent partial introduction in October 2002 should have less impact as staff will be better prepared and there may well be re-route options through unchanged LATCC sectors to avoid delays caused by the initial flow restrictions for NERC sectors.
In addition, the pool of knowledge and experience held in the LATCC CSC team could be tapped, and the numerous ideas for delay-reduction which are often heard in the coffee lounge could be utilised to improve the overall NATS service delivery.
Meanwhile the boffins at NERC, aided by the increasing experience of those controlling real traffic there, could address the very real difficulties in transferring the remaining sectors. Hopefully, if we all work together, with mutual trust and respect, we COULD end up with a NERC which is a real world leader some years down the line.
At this point my alarm went off and I awoke .....
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Fort Worth ARTCC ZFW
Posts: 1,155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Glad to see that todays problems are the same everywhere <G>.
With what you mention, it's one of the reasons that with DSR we kept it simple. Put in the open systems so that we can improve and add to them later. Make the transition as easy as possible. We had some facilities cutting over in one or two days in a big bang. Our facility was one of the first BIG facilities to cut over and we were very conservative...
By the way, is there anyway to attach pictures on this board?
With what you mention, it's one of the reasons that with DSR we kept it simple. Put in the open systems so that we can improve and add to them later. Make the transition as easy as possible. We had some facilities cutting over in one or two days in a big bang. Our facility was one of the first BIG facilities to cut over and we were very conservative...
By the way, is there anyway to attach pictures on this board?
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Winchester.Hants.England
Posts: 406
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, click on the link below.
web page
Then use the "Instant UBB code" which is directly under the white box that you type your post into.
PS I don't think they like porn pics.
[ 16 August 2001: Message edited by: Flybywyre ]
web page
Then use the "Instant UBB code" which is directly under the white box that you type your post into.
PS I don't think they like porn pics.
[ 16 August 2001: Message edited by: Flybywyre ]
Guest
Posts: n/a
Numpo,
Yet again I have to say I agree with every word you say. I just hope that TAG can understand the real concerns expressed here and not hide behind the "anonymous rumour" smokescreen beloved of our past masters. Perhaps they should consider why it is necessary for obviously experienced, knowledgeable and dedicated staff to post on this forum rather than by contributing directly through the "proper channels".
TAG
We really can solve your problems if you listen to us.
Yours hopefully
Z
Yet again I have to say I agree with every word you say. I just hope that TAG can understand the real concerns expressed here and not hide behind the "anonymous rumour" smokescreen beloved of our past masters. Perhaps they should consider why it is necessary for obviously experienced, knowledgeable and dedicated staff to post on this forum rather than by contributing directly through the "proper channels".
TAG
We really can solve your problems if you listen to us.
Yours hopefully
Z
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It would be a good gesture if our new management could start the "ball rolling" by sacking those repsonsible for lying about the viability of the existing systmem, it's ever receding operational start date, and those who just refuse to listen to the input from operational controllers.
That way, we might see that TAG are serious about the future developement of this Company.
That way, we might see that TAG are serious about the future developement of this Company.
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Southampton
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's A Joke
Come on....this thread is (I thought) supposed to be a New Horizons inspired positive approach to the future. Sacking managers - and presumably the past & present ATCOs/engineers on the project team/NTT - is a bit 'old NATS' isn't it?
I honestly think that if TAG want some answers then they need to let all staff say what they feel and what should be done. But it has to be recognised that the managers and teams you would sack - and those previously sacked - have got a wealth of experience re NERC and would probably love to be freed of corporate responsibility for sticking to the script to say what they personally think should be done to get NERC operational and developed into an efficient traffic-shifting system.
Our new owners need to look at the resources which they now possess and work out how to best deploy them which is the point of this thread (I think).
The Public Relations escape from the 27-Jan-01 O date is to declare NERC ready for operations on that date and elect not to use it on the basis of excessive delays or could actually go live (can still have the press launch showing the FIS's first plane making contact).
Come on....this thread is (I thought) supposed to be a New Horizons inspired positive approach to the future. Sacking managers - and presumably the past & present ATCOs/engineers on the project team/NTT - is a bit 'old NATS' isn't it?
I honestly think that if TAG want some answers then they need to let all staff say what they feel and what should be done. But it has to be recognised that the managers and teams you would sack - and those previously sacked - have got a wealth of experience re NERC and would probably love to be freed of corporate responsibility for sticking to the script to say what they personally think should be done to get NERC operational and developed into an efficient traffic-shifting system.
Our new owners need to look at the resources which they now possess and work out how to best deploy them which is the point of this thread (I think).
The Public Relations escape from the 27-Jan-01 O date is to declare NERC ready for operations on that date and elect not to use it on the basis of excessive delays or could actually go live (can still have the press launch showing the FIS's first plane making contact).
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry Piglet old chap but I have to disagree. Those that are in the positions to be able to affect the outcome of things (ie the Managers of the Project) should have dug their heels in and made SURE that the project was handled correctly, not told their "masters" what THEY wanted to hear.
This has been the main part of the problem with the NERC project so far. NOT listening to those that will have to run the system when it is introduced, and blithely ignoring the facts of the situation.
It's why the WHOLE of NATS is in such a mess at the moment.
For instance, all you have to look at is the pathetic situation that we find ourselves in concerning staffing. This predicament was forecast about ten years ago, but was completely ignored because those in the managerial positions at the time, who were advised of the future manpower problems, would not stand up and be counted.
So how CAN we go forward when we still have the same managerial set up in place ?
This has been the main part of the problem with the NERC project so far. NOT listening to those that will have to run the system when it is introduced, and blithely ignoring the facts of the situation.
It's why the WHOLE of NATS is in such a mess at the moment.
For instance, all you have to look at is the pathetic situation that we find ourselves in concerning staffing. This predicament was forecast about ten years ago, but was completely ignored because those in the managerial positions at the time, who were advised of the future manpower problems, would not stand up and be counted.
So how CAN we go forward when we still have the same managerial set up in place ?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: I sell sea shells by the sea shore
Posts: 856
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flying Piglet..
This thread has nothing whatsoever to do with New Horizons /New Dawn etc. I don't think that either project has much credibility amongst the Operational staff and should be binned forthwith. The reason I started this off was an effort to look to the future, accept the Shuttle 1T we are in, and come up with a few ideas of where it is practical to go from here.
I do not accept that current managers "would love to be freed from the corporate responsibility for sticking to the script". They are individually responsible forthe mess we are in. Had all of them taken a stand this would not have happened. The first stage of fixing a problem is to admit that there is one. None of the managers you seek to defend appear to be able to do this. So as Ms. Robinson would say: "
You are the weakest link. Goodbye."
You would bemoan the loss of "experience of NERC". Well, perhaps that ain't no bad thing. Fresh ideas are what we NEED, not indoctrinated NERC thinking.
Sorry for the rant, but I put this topic here to look to the future, for people to come up with radical ideas that TAG might actually take on board. I did not put this here to justify the past. The Basic premise is THEY F**ked it up, what can WE do to make OUR future better.
Rant over, soapbox back under stairs.
BEX
This thread has nothing whatsoever to do with New Horizons /New Dawn etc. I don't think that either project has much credibility amongst the Operational staff and should be binned forthwith. The reason I started this off was an effort to look to the future, accept the Shuttle 1T we are in, and come up with a few ideas of where it is practical to go from here.
I do not accept that current managers "would love to be freed from the corporate responsibility for sticking to the script". They are individually responsible forthe mess we are in. Had all of them taken a stand this would not have happened. The first stage of fixing a problem is to admit that there is one. None of the managers you seek to defend appear to be able to do this. So as Ms. Robinson would say: "
You are the weakest link. Goodbye."
You would bemoan the loss of "experience of NERC". Well, perhaps that ain't no bad thing. Fresh ideas are what we NEED, not indoctrinated NERC thinking.
Sorry for the rant, but I put this topic here to look to the future, for people to come up with radical ideas that TAG might actually take on board. I did not put this here to justify the past. The Basic premise is THEY F**ked it up, what can WE do to make OUR future better.
Rant over, soapbox back under stairs.
BEX