Mil/Civ Operations
StandupfortheUlstermen
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Peoples' Democratic Republic of Wurzelsetshire
Age: 53
Posts: 1,182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pierre Argh - the point I was making there, was that my input wasn't asked for on whether the a/c in question would be accepted direct the BRI, by either London OR Lon Mil, rather, it was assumed that it would be, and when informed that I would not accept the a/c, Lon Mil threw the toys out and freecalled the a/c in the middle of the FIR surrounded by unknowns from which I had little chance of maintaining any sort of separation. That's not a very professional attitude to take and I would suggest that in future, before they decide to be 'helpful', they phone us first to ask if it is OK. Then we can spare any embarassment that would be caused by the 'Cavalry' cocking things up and adding to our workload. Anyway, with the incident I'm talking about, the a/c came to me on the drop to 80, he was actually passing 147 about 13 miles south of the BRI when he called me, which to be frank, was as much use as a choccy fireguard!
Update to Pierre's edit :
I know everyone was trying to be helpful, and that pilots will 'chance their arm' trying to get direct routes, but it would be nice if these things were co ordinated before they happened. As for what I expected the Mil controller to do, I expected him to follow the actions I passed to him ie hand the a/c off to DY, who, after all, are responsible for providing LARS in that area and knew about a great deal more of the traffic in that area than I did. The Mil ATCO chose to do something very silly, which put the a/c in potential conflict with upwards of a dozen other a/c. The only saving grace was the height of the inbound at the time of contact.
Update to Pierre's edit :
I know everyone was trying to be helpful, and that pilots will 'chance their arm' trying to get direct routes, but it would be nice if these things were co ordinated before they happened. As for what I expected the Mil controller to do, I expected him to follow the actions I passed to him ie hand the a/c off to DY, who, after all, are responsible for providing LARS in that area and knew about a great deal more of the traffic in that area than I did. The Mil ATCO chose to do something very silly, which put the a/c in potential conflict with upwards of a dozen other a/c. The only saving grace was the height of the inbound at the time of contact.
Last edited by Standard Noise; 15th Sep 2005 at 08:53.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: wherever I lay my headset
Posts: 538
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Standard... re-read my post and you'll see I agree with you almost completely... it has long been general SOP to accept traffic on the assumption that it will be accepted further along en-route and that pre-note was sufficient? Let's not get hung up on the particulars of one specific incident... Things are changing, everyone is busier, most have fewer resources... we need practical solutions that allow everyone to work together, NOT antagonism... which will always lead to toys all over the floor.
StandupfortheUlstermen
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Peoples' Democratic Republic of Wurzelsetshire
Age: 53
Posts: 1,182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pierre, I understand what you are saying, but there was no pre-note. And often, we get no pre-note, rather, just a call to give a handover.
Perhaps the initial fault here lay with Sector 6, but I sorted that out with a phone call afterwards. Don't get me wrong, I like the direct route idea, but only when it is going to work. Routing SAM-BRI or even BHD-BRI during business hours Mon-Fri however, generally doesn't work, so a quick phone call to us from whoever has the traffic, will establish the suitability of such a plan.
Perhaps the initial fault here lay with Sector 6, but I sorted that out with a phone call afterwards. Don't get me wrong, I like the direct route idea, but only when it is going to work. Routing SAM-BRI or even BHD-BRI during business hours Mon-Fri however, generally doesn't work, so a quick phone call to us from whoever has the traffic, will establish the suitability of such a plan.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Sometimes north, sometimes south
Posts: 1,809
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
1 Post
Standard Noise:
Maybe I'm just being thick here, but my little ruler and chart tell me that a direct route SAM-BRI goes straight through EGD123, permanently active to 50,000ft.
AyrTC:
Isn't there a bigger story to this though? INS is applying for CAS and will need a radar service to support it. But the radar at Lossie can't see all of INS's airspace, so they'll need not only civil controllers, but their own new radar...
Similar situation at Doncaster. RAF controllers at Waddington couldn't provide an approach service, but Liverpool controllers using the Waddington picture can.
NS
Maybe I'm just being thick here, but my little ruler and chart tell me that a direct route SAM-BRI goes straight through EGD123, permanently active to 50,000ft.
AyrTC:
Up North the Mil at Lossie had a shot at being civil ATCO's providing radar !!! service for Inverness ( well at least monitoring traffic entering the INS hold).The trial has been so " succesful" ( for various reasons I imagine), that HIAL have put the service out for Civil tender ie HIAL inhouse,NATS or Serco
Similar situation at Doncaster. RAF controllers at Waddington couldn't provide an approach service, but Liverpool controllers using the Waddington picture can.
NS
StandupfortheUlstermen
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Peoples' Democratic Republic of Wurzelsetshire
Age: 53
Posts: 1,182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NorthSouth - no, you're not being thick at all, you are correct, but that route was the easiest way to explain rather than saying 'the a/c was put on a radar heading while south of SAM and taken round etc etc'. Although since the a/c was going to under the control of Lon Mil, that would have been their problem to deal with.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Wales
Posts: 302
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
would be accepted direct the BRI
I agree it wouldn't be very helpful, choccy fireguard springs to mind, but at least if it had you would have been talking to it, so not all bad!!!
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SN
Again showing my ignorance - what little yellow license?
I think the last yellow licence I had was my provisional car licence. (Or is that actually all I need......?)
And yet again this kind of thread highlights the real core of the matter, which is the fact that Mil/Civ controllers and indeed the airspace users are trying to complete a wide variety (& indeed often disparate variety) of tasks in a relatively confined bit of airspace.
Are we the only country on the planet that has the problems? I think not.
I think the real answer is to realise that we probably are all after different goals, and if you do end up on the end of a landline to someone playing "their game" much to your own angst, then it is probably better to suck back, chill out and do the best you can without going off on one and giving yourself a cardiac (or at least an earlier one) which probably isn't going to help the situation any.
And if you can't help but be Mr Stressed and Angry, are you sure ATC is actually the vocation for you?
Again showing my ignorance - what little yellow license?
I think the last yellow licence I had was my provisional car licence. (Or is that actually all I need......?)
And yet again this kind of thread highlights the real core of the matter, which is the fact that Mil/Civ controllers and indeed the airspace users are trying to complete a wide variety (& indeed often disparate variety) of tasks in a relatively confined bit of airspace.
Are we the only country on the planet that has the problems? I think not.
I think the real answer is to realise that we probably are all after different goals, and if you do end up on the end of a landline to someone playing "their game" much to your own angst, then it is probably better to suck back, chill out and do the best you can without going off on one and giving yourself a cardiac (or at least an earlier one) which probably isn't going to help the situation any.
And if you can't help but be Mr Stressed and Angry, are you sure ATC is actually the vocation for you?
SN
For crying out load, will you calm down! Your posts are becoming more of a rant rather than dealing with the issue at hand.
First of all London (Mil) no longer operate in your area, it is Swanwick (Mil) who share the same ops room as sector 6.
If the situation you were presented with was dangerous, then did you file a report? If so, the facts will come out when the WHOLE issue is investigated.
A certain airport to the south west of you, never seems to have the problems you have.
For crying out load, will you calm down! Your posts are becoming more of a rant rather than dealing with the issue at hand.
First of all London (Mil) no longer operate in your area, it is Swanwick (Mil) who share the same ops room as sector 6.
If the situation you were presented with was dangerous, then did you file a report? If so, the facts will come out when the WHOLE issue is investigated.
A certain airport to the south west of you, never seems to have the problems you have.
Interesting that the considered, even posts seem to come, in the main, from the Mil fraternity and the rants from Civ. 
How many of the Civ moaners have been to a Mil unit recently to either see what they get up to or to present their case?
As a matter of interest, all future Mil controllers will have undertaken liaison visits to Civ towers and ACCs as part of their training.
How many of the Civ moaners have been to a Mil unit recently to either see what they get up to or to present their case?
As a matter of interest, all future Mil controllers will have undertaken liaison visits to Civ towers and ACCs as part of their training.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: The World
Posts: 283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BRS were always bleeting about the Mil traffic operating in Class G when I was at BDN. Did they do the same when BDN was a CAA Unit I wonder - they probably weren't even that busy before the Mil rescued the mess that Airwork left! That was the Airwork employing people with little yellow licences by the way!
It must be so so hard to be perfect.
It must be so so hard to be perfect.
Widger thankyou for making the correction about it being Swanwick not London, it was very hard being tarred with that particular brush 
Standard Noise, as Widger said, if the ac was freecalled to you in confliction then file a report. However, your comment about the height of the ac being the saving grace suggests that actually the confliction was well below you. You have however highlighted a VERY important point and that is the provision of ATSOCAS to CAT outside CAS, a problem that is close to all our hearts in one way or another. Believe me, Swanwick (Mil) like working RAS airliner traffic inbound to you through Class G airspace, about as much as London Mil like working RAS airliner traffic through the Vale of York. No mean feat when the airliner is an A340 with a pilot who doesn't understand RAS and the Vale of York has got up to 40 VFR ac within it, playing up to FL200.
The main problem that I believe that we have is the provision of ATSOCAS and the way in which we interpret the rules, because I don't believe the civ and mil rules for RAS are going to be that much different.
Standard Noise, as Widger said, if the ac was freecalled to you in confliction then file a report. However, your comment about the height of the ac being the saving grace suggests that actually the confliction was well below you. You have however highlighted a VERY important point and that is the provision of ATSOCAS to CAT outside CAS, a problem that is close to all our hearts in one way or another. Believe me, Swanwick (Mil) like working RAS airliner traffic inbound to you through Class G airspace, about as much as London Mil like working RAS airliner traffic through the Vale of York. No mean feat when the airliner is an A340 with a pilot who doesn't understand RAS and the Vale of York has got up to 40 VFR ac within it, playing up to FL200.
The main problem that I believe that we have is the provision of ATSOCAS and the way in which we interpret the rules, because I don't believe the civ and mil rules for RAS are going to be that much different.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: where should i be today????
Age: 57
Posts: 342
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can't believe that I have avoided reading this thread for so long but Canary Boy, your post of 14 Sep is spot on. We all work with a variety of people with a variety of qualities. We do the same job but interpretaton of rules and procedures do vary ; god I spent several years banging my head against a brick wall at my last unit trying to get some of mycolleagues to comply with the rules correctly, almost all did but some are intent on 'being gash and doing it their own way' thereby they do not deserve the respect of their peers and IMHO should seek alternative employment where such exacting professional standards are not required (what an opening to start a feud between other military occupations but I shall pass on that one!!)
Standard Noise, I notice that the views on the neighbours of your unit seem to have changed in the last 15 months or so; as a controller I also get frustrated that others do not listen to the information given during handovers, or maybe the controller misheard or had inputs coming from left, right and centre during the handover - I remember what it can be like in that area on a weekend when everyone is on min manning.
I think, with the odd exception, controllers do a bloody good job in this country, whether it be civ or mil. And those who let the side down should be gash elsewhere
Standard Noise, I notice that the views on the neighbours of your unit seem to have changed in the last 15 months or so; as a controller I also get frustrated that others do not listen to the information given during handovers, or maybe the controller misheard or had inputs coming from left, right and centre during the handover - I remember what it can be like in that area on a weekend when everyone is on min manning.
I think, with the odd exception, controllers do a bloody good job in this country, whether it be civ or mil. And those who let the side down should be gash elsewhere
Last edited by rej; 16th Sep 2005 at 15:42.
StandupfortheUlstermen
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Peoples' Democratic Republic of Wurzelsetshire
Age: 53
Posts: 1,182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To answer a few queries.............
No, I didn't file a report cos there was no airprox, but with fast jets flogging around, there's nothing to say there won't be a confliction in the blink of an eye. I'd prefer not to have to sort out a mess of someone else's creation.
As for the mil traffic whcih operates to the south of BRS, hey, it's free airspace, I've no problem with them being there, and will try to keep my traffic out of the way. Saves on the paperwork.
I don't think mil controllers are bad controllers, but there was, in this particular case, a bad decision made ie 'if BRS won't take a handover, then we'll point it thataway and chuck it.' That seems a bit silly to me as it's not something I'd do, but there you go.
But guys, if we're all meant to be on the same side and working towards the same end, then ask yourself before you do something if it will help the next guy down the line. I made a decision not to accept a particular aircraft on a particular (non standard) routing. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean to say you can disregard it. Problem is, next time, I might be more pre-disposed to go into print, but I really don't want to.
Oh yeah, RNG , when you've done your time and come to the civvy world, you'll need a little yellow licence, we've all got them, and they're not provisional either. Read up about them, they're fab.
No, I didn't file a report cos there was no airprox, but with fast jets flogging around, there's nothing to say there won't be a confliction in the blink of an eye. I'd prefer not to have to sort out a mess of someone else's creation.
As for the mil traffic whcih operates to the south of BRS, hey, it's free airspace, I've no problem with them being there, and will try to keep my traffic out of the way. Saves on the paperwork.
I don't think mil controllers are bad controllers, but there was, in this particular case, a bad decision made ie 'if BRS won't take a handover, then we'll point it thataway and chuck it.' That seems a bit silly to me as it's not something I'd do, but there you go.
But guys, if we're all meant to be on the same side and working towards the same end, then ask yourself before you do something if it will help the next guy down the line. I made a decision not to accept a particular aircraft on a particular (non standard) routing. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean to say you can disregard it. Problem is, next time, I might be more pre-disposed to go into print, but I really don't want to.
Oh yeah, RNG , when you've done your time and come to the civvy world, you'll need a little yellow licence, we've all got them, and they're not provisional either. Read up about them, they're fab.
Thread Starter
I am pleased to see the debate my post started.
However, My question was not answered. We all believe that we are doing the "right thing." The difficulty is that we sing from different hymn sheets.
Should'nt the powers that be sort out this mess or is it up to an organisation like GATCO to sort out their airships?
However, My question was not answered. We all believe that we are doing the "right thing." The difficulty is that we sing from different hymn sheets.
Should'nt the powers that be sort out this mess or is it up to an organisation like GATCO to sort out their airships?
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Dreamland
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mil/Civ operations.
I've been following this thread with interest and an incident yesterday has compelled me to add my views.
The comments made by GMST are not an attack on military ATCOs, but rather are critical of the system under which they are required to work.
The incident in question happened when I was extremely busy, a military area controller rang asking about traffic 10 nm east of the airport, squawking A, but not C. When I told her it was on a FIS not above 3000' she then proceeded to try and co-ordinate against traffic more than 25 nm North, passing FL210 climbing!
I also tried to explain that civil ATCOs can not permit traffic to operate FL100+ without mode C.
This was not only a waste of both her and my time, but an unnecessary distraction for me at a time of high workload.
I would also comment that there are a lot of ex-military ATCOs working at civil units, but how many ex-civil ATCOs work at military units?
The comments made by GMST are not an attack on military ATCOs, but rather are critical of the system under which they are required to work.
The incident in question happened when I was extremely busy, a military area controller rang asking about traffic 10 nm east of the airport, squawking A, but not C. When I told her it was on a FIS not above 3000' she then proceeded to try and co-ordinate against traffic more than 25 nm North, passing FL210 climbing!
I also tried to explain that civil ATCOs can not permit traffic to operate FL100+ without mode C.
This was not only a waste of both her and my time, but an unnecessary distraction for me at a time of high workload.
I would also comment that there are a lot of ex-military ATCOs working at civil units, but how many ex-civil ATCOs work at military units?
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Toadpool
Whilst appreciating your rules, you must surley understand that when giving a RAS the Military controller cannot deem your aircraft to be below FL100 just because it has NMC (Our rules will not let us do that) and the fact that you have passed TRAFFIC INFORMATION (see the rules for a definition Of Traffic Information vs Co-ordination) which is dead information the moment you have given it means that the Military Controller must get co-ordination on that track from you. Seeing as you have already passed Traffic info on the track, the extra sentance that you have to say for co-ordination is hardly that much of a burden. And Despite the fact that it was 25 miles away, I assume that it was coming towards your traffic, otherwise the military controller wouldn't have bothered disturbing you, so in fact the Mil Controller had a fairly good scan and was co-ordinating early - Just like taught at CATCS!
It's attitudes like this that mean more and more mil controllers are disinclined to even bother their civil counterparts with trivia like co-ordination or handovers.
And as for your last throw away comment, if the pay was comparable, how many military controllers do you think would be having the blinkers inserted and becoming a Civil Atco then?
Time for some of you lot to look beyond your 10 mile range ring or your CAS A and see the big wide world out there.
Whilst appreciating your rules, you must surley understand that when giving a RAS the Military controller cannot deem your aircraft to be below FL100 just because it has NMC (Our rules will not let us do that) and the fact that you have passed TRAFFIC INFORMATION (see the rules for a definition Of Traffic Information vs Co-ordination) which is dead information the moment you have given it means that the Military Controller must get co-ordination on that track from you. Seeing as you have already passed Traffic info on the track, the extra sentance that you have to say for co-ordination is hardly that much of a burden. And Despite the fact that it was 25 miles away, I assume that it was coming towards your traffic, otherwise the military controller wouldn't have bothered disturbing you, so in fact the Mil Controller had a fairly good scan and was co-ordinating early - Just like taught at CATCS!
It's attitudes like this that mean more and more mil controllers are disinclined to even bother their civil counterparts with trivia like co-ordination or handovers.
And as for your last throw away comment, if the pay was comparable, how many military controllers do you think would be having the blinkers inserted and becoming a Civil Atco then?
Time for some of you lot to look beyond your 10 mile range ring or your CAS A and see the big wide world out there.
Now now Grommit....cracking toast!
Toadfish,
You stand into significant danger if you assume that if a track, is either not showing mode C, or not squawking at all, then it cannot be above FL100. There are many good controllers on both sides of the camp who have fallen foul of this assumption. I am sure that MATS part 2 does not say that you can deem this traffic either.
ASSUME and you will make an ASS of U M E.
[QUOTE]This was not only a waste of both her and my time, but an unnecessary distraction for me at a time of high workload.
Well this comment needs to be treated with the contempt it deserves. That is not the attitude of a professional ATCO and you should be ashamed of yourself for even saying it!
Toadfish,
You stand into significant danger if you assume that if a track, is either not showing mode C, or not squawking at all, then it cannot be above FL100. There are many good controllers on both sides of the camp who have fallen foul of this assumption. I am sure that MATS part 2 does not say that you can deem this traffic either.
ASSUME and you will make an ASS of U M E.
[QUOTE]This was not only a waste of both her and my time, but an unnecessary distraction for me at a time of high workload.
Well this comment needs to be treated with the contempt it deserves. That is not the attitude of a professional ATCO and you should be ashamed of yourself for even saying it!
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Sea Level
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mil/Civ Operations
The nail has been hit on the head quite frequently in this thread. The military controllers have to work to almost different rules at times. This causes us all some headaches but really some sort of standardisation should be sought from all concerned.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: where should i be today????
Age: 57
Posts: 342
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote
I also tried to explain that civil ATCOs can not permit traffic to operate FL100+ without mode C.
So Toadpool, if one of your tracks suddenly experienced a mode C failure (or if it was showing out of limits and you told the pilot to deselect Mode C ) would you force the pilot to descent to below FL100 - I think not.
Yes the words on the hymn sheet might not always be the same but as RNGrommits said, the mil controller cannot deem such tracks. Maybe some understanding of our rules relating to the regulations might have prompted you to review your post .
However, IMHO if you have time to explain to that civil ATCOs can not permit traffic to operate FL100+ without mode C, I would suggest that you would have had time to bite your tongue and carry out the coordination as requested.
I also tried to explain that civil ATCOs can not permit traffic to operate FL100+ without mode C.
So Toadpool, if one of your tracks suddenly experienced a mode C failure (or if it was showing out of limits and you told the pilot to deselect Mode C ) would you force the pilot to descent to below FL100 - I think not.
Yes the words on the hymn sheet might not always be the same but as RNGrommits said, the mil controller cannot deem such tracks. Maybe some understanding of our rules relating to the regulations might have prompted you to review your post .
However, IMHO if you have time to explain to that civil ATCOs can not permit traffic to operate FL100+ without mode C, I would suggest that you would have had time to bite your tongue and carry out the coordination as requested.