Air Traffic Controllers - a loss of skills?
Moderator
Join Date: Jul 1997
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have just watched the Level Bust DVD that came with CHIRP. I noted with interest that ATCOs are not expected to crosscheck the cleared level with the MCP selected level. Why not?
(Fictitious aircraft shown is VSHJV - ATCO uses V-YV each time).NATS should sack the continuity checker ... unless the ATCO really did make a horlicks of the callsign in the actual incident !!
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Fort Worth ARTCC ZFW
Posts: 1,155
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Definate dumbing down of ATC from my point of view. No one is willing to spend the money for a good product. Just make sure they can keep them apart and get them checked out. Doesn't matter if they don't understand the first thing about what an aircraft can do or not, nor what to actually ask an aircraft to do. Then there is that pesky little thing about being able to help someone out when they are in trouble.
Model ATC... Sorry I am going to have to disagree with you. First of all, you are going to need to have EVERY aircraft be able to datalink you all that wonderful information. Shoot, we just canceled CPDLC do to lack of money, so that isn't going to happen here anytime soon. Besides, if I need to figure out how to separate some aircraft, I have seconds to do that sometimes when things get BUSY! I don't have time to start looking up things in Janes or on the aircraft datalink (if they have it.) I should KNOW that sort of stuff. It's kind of like knowing your airspace, if you don't you are going to get yourself in a lot of trouble quickly.
I don't think that ATC automation is anywhere nearly ready for self sepatation yet. I think that there are a lot of neat tools out there for display purposes in the cockpit, but again, you have to have EVERYONE equiped and that just isn't going to happen in this climate where the industry is trying to bankrupt itself. Also, when talking with the different pilot groups, they seem more than happy to help out with the separation stuff, but they always say that when it gets to busy or they can't handle it, they want to give it back. It just won't work that way, if you want separation duties in the cockpit, they you get to have it as well as the responsibility of what happens when you close to 2.96 miles instead of 3 miles and the computer snitches on you.
Wish I would have known that you were in the Dallas Fort Worth area. I went to ATCA on Wednesday and would have been able to meet you for a bite sometime during the week (I live about 15 minutes from the Gaylord.)
regards
Scott
Model ATC... Sorry I am going to have to disagree with you. First of all, you are going to need to have EVERY aircraft be able to datalink you all that wonderful information. Shoot, we just canceled CPDLC do to lack of money, so that isn't going to happen here anytime soon. Besides, if I need to figure out how to separate some aircraft, I have seconds to do that sometimes when things get BUSY! I don't have time to start looking up things in Janes or on the aircraft datalink (if they have it.) I should KNOW that sort of stuff. It's kind of like knowing your airspace, if you don't you are going to get yourself in a lot of trouble quickly.
I don't think that ATC automation is anywhere nearly ready for self sepatation yet. I think that there are a lot of neat tools out there for display purposes in the cockpit, but again, you have to have EVERYONE equiped and that just isn't going to happen in this climate where the industry is trying to bankrupt itself. Also, when talking with the different pilot groups, they seem more than happy to help out with the separation stuff, but they always say that when it gets to busy or they can't handle it, they want to give it back. It just won't work that way, if you want separation duties in the cockpit, they you get to have it as well as the responsibility of what happens when you close to 2.96 miles instead of 3 miles and the computer snitches on you.
Wish I would have known that you were in the Dallas Fort Worth area. I went to ATCA on Wednesday and would have been able to meet you for a bite sometime during the week (I live about 15 minutes from the Gaylord.)
regards
Scott
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Guildford
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Assuming MCP is Mode Control Panel then NATS did some work on that in 2000. Also, in the mid-1990s there was a retired Group Captain working for NATS whose group worked on Mode S requirements. He was passionately against using any downlinked tactical data such as level. I admit I don’t know the acronym ECT. A PM would be appreciated.
I agree that there are two distinct skills issues. I’m just suggesting that automation is some compensation for the loss of a broader aviation background. It is the environment that youngsters grow up in that is driving change. Very few kids make flying models these days or take them to playing fields to fly them. The model market is almost completely RTF - Ready to Fly – and most of today’s aeromodellers grew up in the 1960s.
Almost all aircraft now look the same and there is no steady flow of distinctive new civil and military types. Many RAF aircraft are in long term store. The on-board systems are so complex that the old syllabus items of pitot-static systems and gyroscopes don’t get you very far in understanding the displays. All of this excludes youngsters from aviation.
So we should expect to see changes in the backgrounds of people applying for jobs as aircrew or controllers. The challenge is to find ways of encouraging and developing the best people that can be found.
I agree that there are two distinct skills issues. I’m just suggesting that automation is some compensation for the loss of a broader aviation background. It is the environment that youngsters grow up in that is driving change. Very few kids make flying models these days or take them to playing fields to fly them. The model market is almost completely RTF - Ready to Fly – and most of today’s aeromodellers grew up in the 1960s.
Almost all aircraft now look the same and there is no steady flow of distinctive new civil and military types. Many RAF aircraft are in long term store. The on-board systems are so complex that the old syllabus items of pitot-static systems and gyroscopes don’t get you very far in understanding the displays. All of this excludes youngsters from aviation.
So we should expect to see changes in the backgrounds of people applying for jobs as aircrew or controllers. The challenge is to find ways of encouraging and developing the best people that can be found.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Downtown
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I personally think that there is a move away from the sort of training we used to get at the college, with the emphasis now on getting as many bums on seats in the quickest time.
My interview for NATS in 1996 concentrated on any aviation interest I had, visits and fam flights I had arranged etc. The training at Bournemouth included aircraft recognition and characteristics, Aerodrome (+OJT) even though I was destined for Area, BA course, flying training etc. All this, I hope, made me aware of aircraft, pilots, other units and not just the Area task I was ultimately training for.
Ab initios are arriving at our units with very little exposure to these things, and in my view it is the fault of the management, they are desperate to fill places with no regard to all of the skills these people need (two weeks with BA may seem like a jolly to bean counters but I learned a lot from talking to pilots about their workload and what would help them in emergencies and bad weather).
I think the situation is only going to get worse, especially when our man in charge says that he doesn't think of flights as aircraft, but sales in a salesbook, and his aim is to get as many sales in his book as possible!!
My interview for NATS in 1996 concentrated on any aviation interest I had, visits and fam flights I had arranged etc. The training at Bournemouth included aircraft recognition and characteristics, Aerodrome (+OJT) even though I was destined for Area, BA course, flying training etc. All this, I hope, made me aware of aircraft, pilots, other units and not just the Area task I was ultimately training for.
Ab initios are arriving at our units with very little exposure to these things, and in my view it is the fault of the management, they are desperate to fill places with no regard to all of the skills these people need (two weeks with BA may seem like a jolly to bean counters but I learned a lot from talking to pilots about their workload and what would help them in emergencies and bad weather).
I think the situation is only going to get worse, especially when our man in charge says that he doesn't think of flights as aircraft, but sales in a salesbook, and his aim is to get as many sales in his book as possible!!
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: At home
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have to echo some of the previous comments: in it for the $, no aviation background, almost going through their careers in a daze! 25 years ago, we got in because we felt it was so cool to vector airplanes all over, to be part of the aviation community! The money wasn't an issue...
However, today's system works! How can that be? Let me tell you... Automation is one part of it, sectorization the other. In our brave new world, a new hire only has to master one particular sector, be it FL290 and above, or in a busy terminal, vector left downwind from 2 entry points. In the towers, everything is regulated to death, whatever you do, don't become innovative. That's it. It's great for the company, although it requires more staff. It's great for the newbie, he/she can qualify faster than ever before. It's just that, like some other posters, I feel a loss that I can't quite define. Kind of like the crusty, I've seen it all jet captain, versus the kid who bought his training at E. Riddle and now is rt. seat in an RJ with 300 hours...
However, today's system works! How can that be? Let me tell you... Automation is one part of it, sectorization the other. In our brave new world, a new hire only has to master one particular sector, be it FL290 and above, or in a busy terminal, vector left downwind from 2 entry points. In the towers, everything is regulated to death, whatever you do, don't become innovative. That's it. It's great for the company, although it requires more staff. It's great for the newbie, he/she can qualify faster than ever before. It's just that, like some other posters, I feel a loss that I can't quite define. Kind of like the crusty, I've seen it all jet captain, versus the kid who bought his training at E. Riddle and now is rt. seat in an RJ with 300 hours...
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Used to be the Beer Store, now the dépanneur
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
During my basic training I identified the following groups:
1-In it for the money, and have the aptitude for the job.
2-In it for the money but have no aptitude for the job.
3-Aviation buffs with aptitude for the job.
4-Aviation buffs but with no aptitude for the job.
5-The rest.
#3 are usually the most fun to work with.
It is a very unique profession, and the training after all these years seems to be an elusive academic mystery, which is not getting helped by the exponential growth of traffic.
1-In it for the money, and have the aptitude for the job.
2-In it for the money but have no aptitude for the job.
3-Aviation buffs with aptitude for the job.
4-Aviation buffs but with no aptitude for the job.
5-The rest.
#3 are usually the most fun to work with.
It is a very unique profession, and the training after all these years seems to be an elusive academic mystery, which is not getting helped by the exponential growth of traffic.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 375
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The reason for the reduction in training time at the college is that The Board have identified that it costs £xxx 000 to train a multi disciplined ATCO but £xxx 000 minus a lot to train specifically to a given discipline.
So, as is the way in the world of business (I hate it too Jer), students are streamed to their disciplines very early on. I was lucky enough to visit the college to see what is going on and my findings are as follows:
1/. The reduction in quality of Aerodrome ab initios is down to the fact that the essential skills of observation of other controllers workload and advanced co-ordination, something that dynamic Tower ATC vitally requires, are not practised on the ADC course. In the past, tthose of us who were lucky enought to do APR Rad practised these skills on that course. I'm not advocating that everyone undertakes this (although I do believe that they should!!) just that the skills are missed form the current course. The proposed introduction of "bolt on" modules for the bigger aerdromes may help to rectify this but only if they are approved by said aerodromes.
2/. The reduction in quality of the Area/Apr students is down to the fact that the non completion of an Aerdormoe course leaves them without the very basic but vital grounding that the ADC course provides. Trying to cram all of the book work into the new Intro course, before the guys and gals have even stepped into a simulator to put these rules into practice to appreciate their effects, is, for my money, the biggest retrograde step that has taken place in NATS training regime. The ADC course sgowed the relationship bewtween the boring lesson work undertaken and the real world ATC effect. That has now gone and units now are getting students that, through little fault of their own, lack some of the skills that they require to validate at the busier NATS units.
I'm sorry to any students that may be reading this. I'm not in any way laying any blame at your door, this is a rod that NATS has made for its own back. However, this is something that we need to address, as a company, to maintain the skillsets required and to keep our jobs as the most enjoyable in aviation. Well mine is anyway
P7
So, as is the way in the world of business (I hate it too Jer), students are streamed to their disciplines very early on. I was lucky enough to visit the college to see what is going on and my findings are as follows:
1/. The reduction in quality of Aerodrome ab initios is down to the fact that the essential skills of observation of other controllers workload and advanced co-ordination, something that dynamic Tower ATC vitally requires, are not practised on the ADC course. In the past, tthose of us who were lucky enought to do APR Rad practised these skills on that course. I'm not advocating that everyone undertakes this (although I do believe that they should!!) just that the skills are missed form the current course. The proposed introduction of "bolt on" modules for the bigger aerdromes may help to rectify this but only if they are approved by said aerodromes.
2/. The reduction in quality of the Area/Apr students is down to the fact that the non completion of an Aerdormoe course leaves them without the very basic but vital grounding that the ADC course provides. Trying to cram all of the book work into the new Intro course, before the guys and gals have even stepped into a simulator to put these rules into practice to appreciate their effects, is, for my money, the biggest retrograde step that has taken place in NATS training regime. The ADC course sgowed the relationship bewtween the boring lesson work undertaken and the real world ATC effect. That has now gone and units now are getting students that, through little fault of their own, lack some of the skills that they require to validate at the busier NATS units.
I'm sorry to any students that may be reading this. I'm not in any way laying any blame at your door, this is a rod that NATS has made for its own back. However, this is something that we need to address, as a company, to maintain the skillsets required and to keep our jobs as the most enjoyable in aviation. Well mine is anyway
P7
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 45
Posts: 4,392
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey, Jer, note this down; I agree 100% with P.7!!!
Yeah, shock to me too!
Not much one can add to that, at least regarding NATS. It will be fascinating to see how this all pans out.
Yeah, shock to me too!
Not much one can add to that, at least regarding NATS. It will be fascinating to see how this all pans out.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: uk
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I couldn't agree more with point seven but I think the days of everyone doing the aerodrome course will never return.
The Intro course has managed to totally screw up all the other courses at the college but the company must be happy otherwise the main drivers behind this disaster would not have been promoted.
Now that the staff rather than the managers have been proved right, the intro course is now a thing of the past.
The Intro course has managed to totally screw up all the other courses at the college but the company must be happy otherwise the main drivers behind this disaster would not have been promoted.
Now that the staff rather than the managers have been proved right, the intro course is now a thing of the past.
Ohcirrej
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: This is the internet FFS.........
Posts: 2,921
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Westy, and I know I speak for everyone when I say that when a controller puts his/her hat on, they only want to provide the best service they can provide.
But with more and more of the older generation parting ways through retirement, there is a huge wealth of knowledge that is walking out the door. I've lost count of the things I have picked up from these people that I have drawn on, and can only hope to impart to newer types coming through, but as Gonzo says "It will be fascinating to see how this all pans out."
But with more and more of the older generation parting ways through retirement, there is a huge wealth of knowledge that is walking out the door. I've lost count of the things I have picked up from these people that I have drawn on, and can only hope to impart to newer types coming through, but as Gonzo says "It will be fascinating to see how this all pans out."
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: London
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
otherwise the main drivers behind this disaster would not have been promoted.
Yes, I have now left the company, due entirely to the state of NATS management, and found out that it is actually different in the outside world.
So, there is another reason thrown in to the ring - anyone care to tell me that i am wrong?
(The bit about "Don't listen to their staff" is the biggest problem)
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Cheshire, California, Geneva, and Paris
Age: 67
Posts: 867
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I count myself as an "old timer aviation type person" alluded to previously. In the old days going to work used to be "FUN" and now it is not fun anymore. I put it down to getting older, the privitisation of NATS, the tyranny of accountants and their pursuit of profits and the "competence"of NATS mangers, both locally and nationally. I do not want to be part of it anymore and look forward to retirement with increasing pleasure.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Cheshire, California, Geneva, and Paris
Age: 67
Posts: 867
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
West Coast, you are absolutely right. I joined 25 years ago and then we had a lot of ex-military personnel who looked down on you if you were not ex-military. I did mention this in my posting that I think that this is a function of getting older where things are not as good as in the "old days". In the UK though and in NATS in particular I think the preoccupation with profit and the tyranny of accountants is paramount with inevitable reduction of the "fun factor" in the job.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Downtown
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wonder if the current crop of talent that looks with lament towards the FNG's were looked down upon themselves by the old timers who trained them.
I guess everyone will lament the next generations as they come along if training is pruned further in years to come.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 45
Posts: 4,392
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Six months ago I bookmarked this thread in anticipation of resurrecting it after a period of time to restart the discussion. I admit I hadn't thought it would be this soon.
We in NATS have now seen the effects of the more streamlined courses (in my case, Tower only). What are the thoughts of others now? I was doing a bit of digging the other day on validation rates at EGLL for ab initios (both 'old style' - Tower then Approach Radar; and 'new style'). My findings shocked me. I doubt that it's even cost effective at the moment.
We in NATS have now seen the effects of the more streamlined courses (in my case, Tower only). What are the thoughts of others now? I was doing a bit of digging the other day on validation rates at EGLL for ab initios (both 'old style' - Tower then Approach Radar; and 'new style'). My findings shocked me. I doubt that it's even cost effective at the moment.
More than just an ATCO
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Up someone's nose
Age: 75
Posts: 1,768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's not a new thing. Probably started the day Min. against Av. employed me. 
I can remember that there were a couple of new ATCAs on my course who couldn't tell the difference between an HS06 and a CV99.
Things haven't improved, I think it's for economic reasons. Even at Eurocontrol, where there is 0% chance of working TWR/APP we did sim training for that. Dropped now, to get people through quicker and cheaper. Same with the Fam Flight programme, if management and airlines were really interested it would still be possible.
Also the selection process itself. See some of the links here, people not really asking for details of the job, only, "How do I pass the tests?" As a training officer I complained long and loud about the fact that, in order to keep the numbers up, people often made it through the initial phase, only to fall directly when OTJ training commenced.
Management is also distancing itself from the workers; extra layers inserted - often those who were not suited/suitable/interested in working in the Ops. Room (before someone posts it, I know being a good controller is not a guarantee of being a good manager; however an ATC manager should have a good knowledge of what's involved an, more importantly, be interested in it, not just in furthering his/her own career).
Rant over, and no further suggestions for rectifying the problem as I'm too busy enjoying retirement
I can remember that there were a couple of new ATCAs on my course who couldn't tell the difference between an HS06 and a CV99.
Things haven't improved, I think it's for economic reasons. Even at Eurocontrol, where there is 0% chance of working TWR/APP we did sim training for that. Dropped now, to get people through quicker and cheaper. Same with the Fam Flight programme, if management and airlines were really interested it would still be possible.
Also the selection process itself. See some of the links here, people not really asking for details of the job, only, "How do I pass the tests?" As a training officer I complained long and loud about the fact that, in order to keep the numbers up, people often made it through the initial phase, only to fall directly when OTJ training commenced.
Management is also distancing itself from the workers; extra layers inserted - often those who were not suited/suitable/interested in working in the Ops. Room (before someone posts it, I know being a good controller is not a guarantee of being a good manager; however an ATC manager should have a good knowledge of what's involved an, more importantly, be interested in it, not just in furthering his/her own career).
Rant over, and no further suggestions for rectifying the problem as I'm too busy enjoying retirement