NATS official figures for MACC.
Moderator
Join Date: Jul 1997
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For a day, a month, or what ?? It can't be the yearly figure since we ain't done with 2007 yet.
MACC had 0.7% growth for 2006 (against 2005 levels) and for the year to date (to the end of July 2007) was - 0.8% compared to the same year to date figure for 2006.
The 7.7% growth (whether it be for a day, week, or month) will not make a big difference to the annual change so far published.
(PS The following come from my official source
)
March 2007 -0.8%
April 2007 -0.9%
May 2007 -1.7%
June 2007 -0.4%
July 2007 -0.3%
Weekly ending 29 July -1.9%
Weekly ending 05 Aug -1.2%
Weekly ending 12 Aug +1.8%
Weekly ending 19 Aug -1.0%
Weekly ending 26 Aug -1.8%
Weekly ending 02 Sep -1.6%
At the end of the day no one has control over these figures. They are not due to ATC capacity or performance but solely down to airlines and other operators putting aircraft in the sky. So no one should get too smug if their unit has a higher growth rate because it's not down to anything the ATCOs have done. Delay (weighted against published capacity) and subsequent flight cancellations down to NATS are the things which measure how successful any particular unit is.
MACC had 0.7% growth for 2006 (against 2005 levels) and for the year to date (to the end of July 2007) was - 0.8% compared to the same year to date figure for 2006.
The 7.7% growth (whether it be for a day, week, or month) will not make a big difference to the annual change so far published.
(PS The following come from my official source
)March 2007 -0.8%
April 2007 -0.9%
May 2007 -1.7%
June 2007 -0.4%
July 2007 -0.3%
Weekly ending 29 July -1.9%
Weekly ending 05 Aug -1.2%
Weekly ending 12 Aug +1.8%
Weekly ending 19 Aug -1.0%
Weekly ending 26 Aug -1.8%
Weekly ending 02 Sep -1.6%
At the end of the day no one has control over these figures. They are not due to ATC capacity or performance but solely down to airlines and other operators putting aircraft in the sky. So no one should get too smug if their unit has a higher growth rate because it's not down to anything the ATCOs have done. Delay (weighted against published capacity) and subsequent flight cancellations down to NATS are the things which measure how successful any particular unit is.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Im not disputing your figures but it means that someone,somewhere whatever their motives is not being entirely accurate or truthful with the figures they're giving out. Ours came from the NATS figures on our watch managers desk and was brought to our attention by our watch management.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Scotland
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Figures did change on Monday following work reqeusted by MACC to understand why growth wasn't as they thought it would be. I understand that these revised figures reflect more accurately the real traffic capture following last years re-org around S7 etc. I'm not sure the figures from the Intranet have fully caught up yet but would also point out that ScOACC & LACC growth went down co-incidentally with MACC's rise so i'm not sure everything is stable yet.
I do agree with PPRuNe Radar's comments and wouldn't want to read this as some kind "I'm better than you" thing. A 7+% rise is a good resut for any of us
, but I'd expect your management will want to tell you how much they appreciate the work going in, and this should mean more than any form of acknowledgement on a bulletin board (?)
I do agree with PPRuNe Radar's comments and wouldn't want to read this as some kind "I'm better than you" thing. A 7+% rise is a good resut for any of us
, but I'd expect your management will want to tell you how much they appreciate the work going in, and this should mean more than any form of acknowledgement on a bulletin board (?)
Join Date: May 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 351
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well done MACC staff, an excellent result! Now then, have level busts increased or remained constant? Genuine question as we are trying to make life easier in that particular area. 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 351
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think that's anything to do woth MACC engineering. The IP is going through the system - the 'system' is probably what's slowing it down at the moment. I expect MACC to get SFL displayed by next year.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: warm climate
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi all, not really the thread for this, but is NATS hiring experienced controllers at all? I am from the South Pacific, currently working in the Middle East, hold a British and EU Passport. (En-route radar by the way).
Cheers, beers and barbeques
Cheers, beers and barbeques
Join Date: Jun 2001
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C'mon Mahaba, you're slipping.
The corrected figures have been on the NATSnet home page for two days now and you've not picked it up yet.
Let me say to all MACC staff - WELL DONE!
Look on the Home Page for -
Update: Air Traffic Growth Continues
it's about 4 articles down.
The corrected figures have been on the NATSnet home page for two days now and you've not picked it up yet.
Let me say to all MACC staff - WELL DONE!
Look on the Home Page for -
Update: Air Traffic Growth Continues
it's about 4 articles down.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Costa Packet
Posts: 158
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NATS official figures for MACC.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MACC traffic UP on last year by 7.7%. The highest rise of all the centres.
Official.
No argument.
And still no-one's listening.
But you guys at Manch can't work without a "P " man,
, so your workload has only increased by about 3.85%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MACC traffic UP on last year by 7.7%. The highest rise of all the centres.
Official.
No argument.
And still no-one's listening.
But you guys at Manch can't work without a "P " man,
, so your workload has only increased by about 3.85%
