Air Traffic Control Training Around the World
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Sunny San Juan, Puerto Rico
Age: 78
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Air Traffic Control Training Around the World
My wish is to establish contacts with other ATC training professionals around the world to share information about successful (and unsuccessful) training programs and methods. I'm interested in "real life" issues like:
What are potential dangers during OJT?
What is the instructor's role in student motivation?
Are students today different from those in the past?
What are your favorite teaching methods?
You get the idea.
Perhaps this thread can become a home for all of us - whether university professor, training manager or OJT instructor - who believe that the future of global ATC lies in the hands of well-trained Controllers.
Please begin by introducing yourself and sharing a bit of your hard-won knowledge and experience.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Germany
Age: 46
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ATCO training in Germany
Itīs going to be an interesting thread I think!
In Germany students will learn ATC theory for 9 months followed by 6 months in the simulator. APP/ACC are both part of the sim sessions, although a decision who will be going where is only been made after about three months sim training if I remember correctly.
The simulator resembles a part of the Frankfurt FIR (oh, sorry, Langen of course
). Thatīs a good thing for the guys and gals working those sectors later, but not so good for all the others I think. In my EBG (group of sectors Iīm working) the structure of traffic flow is much more chaotic than in the sim which makes it very hard for beginners fresh from the academy. The washout rate accordingly is very high, although it could be better if we had the resources to conduct sim training specifically for our sectors.
Ideally the general sim training would be cut to 4 months and after that it would be another 2-4 months sim at the traineeīs unit. Unfortunately we donīt have the people for that with extra shifts every other day and the extra work hours accounts going through the roof.
This leads to another problem in our training system. Since our active controllers are busy most of the teachers in the sim are retired guys (some of them ex-supervisors) who havenīt worked real traffic for a long, long time!
Then, the simulator runs during the last couple of weeks training are just not workable in real life....unless you know what will happen next (which every clever student will), and that of course is of arguable help.
So the students come to their unit having "worked" (out of memory) 60+ movements in an sim-ACC environment but will still be lost with 20 movements in real life. Not a confidence builder I think...
About the trainees themselves I have to say that I have the impression the new guys just donīt have the same kind of interest in the job we did...although itīs just been 8 years since I have started OJT (that might be typical of any older generations view). ACFT types and performances are a complete mystery to some of them, let alone cockpit workload etc.
They canīt even always be blamed since a lot of things we enjoyed like fam flights are just not part of training anymore. That also applies to fully licensed controllers of course who after a couple of years just forget about the other end of our work. If you donīt have professional pilots as friends you often wonīt talk to them for years other than on the radio.
Over the past three years the trainees that got relieved were either incapable of doing the job (too slow mostly; the picture was ok, but they couldnīt give clearances according the priority, got way behind and thus lost the picture) or not able to work in a team (one actually told us she prefers to work for herself rather than in a team...unbelievable).
The coachesī work also has to be reviewed and I do see it quite critically. The main problem I guess is that everyone is going to be OJTI regardless of qualification. The official OJTI-training is very good, but I think that after passing the test some people just forget about everything they learned there.
Also our companyīs TWR/APP seperation concept and the subsequent movement of the old Dusseldorf APP/ACC to Langen has proved to be a problem. In one of our EBGīs the average age must be about 26 or so....the old guys stayed at DUS TWR, the young ones went to Langen. I think itīs not good for training (and safety?) if there are hardly any older guys around.
Ok, too late now...
In Germany students will learn ATC theory for 9 months followed by 6 months in the simulator. APP/ACC are both part of the sim sessions, although a decision who will be going where is only been made after about three months sim training if I remember correctly.
The simulator resembles a part of the Frankfurt FIR (oh, sorry, Langen of course
). Thatīs a good thing for the guys and gals working those sectors later, but not so good for all the others I think. In my EBG (group of sectors Iīm working) the structure of traffic flow is much more chaotic than in the sim which makes it very hard for beginners fresh from the academy. The washout rate accordingly is very high, although it could be better if we had the resources to conduct sim training specifically for our sectors.Ideally the general sim training would be cut to 4 months and after that it would be another 2-4 months sim at the traineeīs unit. Unfortunately we donīt have the people for that with extra shifts every other day and the extra work hours accounts going through the roof.
This leads to another problem in our training system. Since our active controllers are busy most of the teachers in the sim are retired guys (some of them ex-supervisors) who havenīt worked real traffic for a long, long time!
Then, the simulator runs during the last couple of weeks training are just not workable in real life....unless you know what will happen next (which every clever student will), and that of course is of arguable help.
So the students come to their unit having "worked" (out of memory) 60+ movements in an sim-ACC environment but will still be lost with 20 movements in real life. Not a confidence builder I think...
About the trainees themselves I have to say that I have the impression the new guys just donīt have the same kind of interest in the job we did...although itīs just been 8 years since I have started OJT (that might be typical of any older generations view). ACFT types and performances are a complete mystery to some of them, let alone cockpit workload etc.
They canīt even always be blamed since a lot of things we enjoyed like fam flights are just not part of training anymore. That also applies to fully licensed controllers of course who after a couple of years just forget about the other end of our work. If you donīt have professional pilots as friends you often wonīt talk to them for years other than on the radio.
Over the past three years the trainees that got relieved were either incapable of doing the job (too slow mostly; the picture was ok, but they couldnīt give clearances according the priority, got way behind and thus lost the picture) or not able to work in a team (one actually told us she prefers to work for herself rather than in a team...unbelievable).
The coachesī work also has to be reviewed and I do see it quite critically. The main problem I guess is that everyone is going to be OJTI regardless of qualification. The official OJTI-training is very good, but I think that after passing the test some people just forget about everything they learned there.
Also our companyīs TWR/APP seperation concept and the subsequent movement of the old Dusseldorf APP/ACC to Langen has proved to be a problem. In one of our EBGīs the average age must be about 26 or so....the old guys stayed at DUS TWR, the young ones went to Langen. I think itīs not good for training (and safety?) if there are hardly any older guys around.
Ok, too late now...
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Sunny San Juan, Puerto Rico
Age: 78
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for the input
Eagleflier,
Thanks for the thoughtful comments. I visited the facility in Langen about 10 years ago and was very impressed with the professionalism of the entire operation. I also liked the beer at the bowling alley!
Rich
Thanks for the thoughtful comments. I visited the facility in Langen about 10 years ago and was very impressed with the professionalism of the entire operation. I also liked the beer at the bowling alley!
Rich
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: in a world of my own
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On simulation
Hi guys,
A very interesting topic indeed. When I'm at work, I'm involved in training with NavCanada. In fact, I'm also doing some post-grad research into simulation at present. What is surprising is to see how little of the research on flight simulation has been mirrored in an ATC context.
Clearly, simulation presents something of a conundrum for ATC trainers. Until now, we have striven for high-fidelity simulation which replicates the operation as closely as possible. However, this is hellishly expensive to maintain, and is subject to every slight change in procedures (or interpretation!). Add to this our own cumbersome methods for scenario creation (in my workplace anyway), and we are at the mercy of a spectacular but unwieldy beast.
Anyway, studies in simulation appear to indicate a change. In short, we may move towards an increase in low-fidelity sim - even something as basic as classroom scenarios - in an effort to reduce time spent in full simulation. Research seems to support such a move: high levels of physical realism in simulation do not guarantee effective transfer of training, and in some cases are even an obstacle to it (too much extraneous information). On the other hand, limited physical realism can still provide students with optimal psychological fidelity - an accurate recreation of what it feels like to perform the task or tasks. There are also studies which highlight the effectiveness of low-fidelity in part-task simulation;this includes "reverse-chaining" of objectives, where the trainee starts close to an end-point and adds tasks in front of the objective until an entire operation (e.g. a landing sequence) is mastered. There seems to be a clear case for exploring low-fi simulation further.
In any case, much of the research has been conducted in flight simulation. There are clear parallels with ATC, and these still contain considerable room for investigation. From my point of view, it looks like there is a need for further use of low-fi and part-task simulation as a precursor to combining performance tasks in more realistic scenarios. I'm certainly a proponent of simulation in ATC training, but I believe there is plenty of room for refinement.
Any comments or findings would be welcome (supported by appropriate empirical evidence of course!
). I would be very interested to hear from anyone else who might have conducted research in this field.
Cheers,
Pig
A very interesting topic indeed. When I'm at work, I'm involved in training with NavCanada. In fact, I'm also doing some post-grad research into simulation at present. What is surprising is to see how little of the research on flight simulation has been mirrored in an ATC context.
Clearly, simulation presents something of a conundrum for ATC trainers. Until now, we have striven for high-fidelity simulation which replicates the operation as closely as possible. However, this is hellishly expensive to maintain, and is subject to every slight change in procedures (or interpretation!). Add to this our own cumbersome methods for scenario creation (in my workplace anyway), and we are at the mercy of a spectacular but unwieldy beast.
Anyway, studies in simulation appear to indicate a change. In short, we may move towards an increase in low-fidelity sim - even something as basic as classroom scenarios - in an effort to reduce time spent in full simulation. Research seems to support such a move: high levels of physical realism in simulation do not guarantee effective transfer of training, and in some cases are even an obstacle to it (too much extraneous information). On the other hand, limited physical realism can still provide students with optimal psychological fidelity - an accurate recreation of what it feels like to perform the task or tasks. There are also studies which highlight the effectiveness of low-fidelity in part-task simulation;this includes "reverse-chaining" of objectives, where the trainee starts close to an end-point and adds tasks in front of the objective until an entire operation (e.g. a landing sequence) is mastered. There seems to be a clear case for exploring low-fi simulation further.
In any case, much of the research has been conducted in flight simulation. There are clear parallels with ATC, and these still contain considerable room for investigation. From my point of view, it looks like there is a need for further use of low-fi and part-task simulation as a precursor to combining performance tasks in more realistic scenarios. I'm certainly a proponent of simulation in ATC training, but I believe there is plenty of room for refinement.
Any comments or findings would be welcome (supported by appropriate empirical evidence of course!
). I would be very interested to hear from anyone else who might have conducted research in this field.Cheers,
Pig
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi,
I'm working in Switzerland, and i can say that the training is quite similar as the training in Germany.
1st year (in ZHR)
3-4 months theory (and only theory)
7-8 months of basic simulations in a completely fancy airspace, with fancy flow of trafic and procedures
If you managed to survive this years, you finally get the chance to see what "Air Trafic Control" looks like.
Students dispached either to Zurich or Geneva, and back to the classroom for 2 months, and 3 more months of sim on the "real sectors". Finally about 1 years of OJT before the final check.
Big problem of the school: during the 1st year all the courses / simulations are given by instructors (from all over the world) who didn't talked to a/c since ages, and don't even know what the systems and the procedures are know!!! I feel like they just manage their school and just don't care about what the units really need... To my point of view it should be the other way round.
Things get better afterwards when the get to the units. For the time we are just enough controllers, and we can still dispach contollers (or permanent instuctors who know how it's working) to teach the theory and coach the students on the simulator, so they get the right inputs.
Concerning OJT, all controllers have to become an OJTI after about 3 years of license. Remains the problem that not all OJTI are good teachers, and are motivated...and it's probably going to remain like that.
As an aditionnal information, just about 25-35% of the students who begin the school manage to become a controller. About 40% fail the 1st year and the rest in the units...
Looking at these results, is ATCO going to be an endangered species
I'm working in Switzerland, and i can say that the training is quite similar as the training in Germany.
1st year (in ZHR)
3-4 months theory (and only theory)
7-8 months of basic simulations in a completely fancy airspace, with fancy flow of trafic and procedures
If you managed to survive this years, you finally get the chance to see what "Air Trafic Control" looks like.
Students dispached either to Zurich or Geneva, and back to the classroom for 2 months, and 3 more months of sim on the "real sectors". Finally about 1 years of OJT before the final check.
Big problem of the school: during the 1st year all the courses / simulations are given by instructors (from all over the world) who didn't talked to a/c since ages, and don't even know what the systems and the procedures are know!!! I feel like they just manage their school and just don't care about what the units really need... To my point of view it should be the other way round.
Things get better afterwards when the get to the units. For the time we are just enough controllers, and we can still dispach contollers (or permanent instuctors who know how it's working) to teach the theory and coach the students on the simulator, so they get the right inputs.
Concerning OJT, all controllers have to become an OJTI after about 3 years of license. Remains the problem that not all OJTI are good teachers, and are motivated...and it's probably going to remain like that.
As an aditionnal information, just about 25-35% of the students who begin the school manage to become a controller. About 40% fail the 1st year and the rest in the units...
Looking at these results, is ATCO going to be an endangered species
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Sunny San Juan, Puerto Rico
Age: 78
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Simulation: High vs. Low Fidelity
In US FAA training, hi-fi sim is used almost exclusively in Enroute training. The equipment, which cost a zillion bucks, is excellent in portraying "live" traffic simulation. Even veteran controllers work up a lather in some of the busy scenarios. The question, of course: is this the best way to teach?
As Mr. Pig notes,
...high levels of physical realism in simulation do not guarantee effective transfer of training, and in some cases are even an obstacle to it (too much extraneous information).
As complexity and volume increase over time, the opportunity to instruct diminishes as the "machine" is now the prime instructor and interruptions may detract from its efficiency.
I agree that lo-fi sims, particularly early on, have great value. Hi-fi sims seem best for trainees in the final stages of development.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: in a world of my own
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are part-task or reverse-chain methodologies employed in the US to any great extent? It seems to me that there is much benefit to be had here in Canada from teaching component parts of a task individually, before combining them. Instead, what we tend to see is a cumulative training pattern - learn one skill, then add another, then the next. This means that it can be very hard to isolate the precise areas in which difficulties arise for individual students.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: zurich
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello GVATCO
Your contry needs you!!!
We have a vaccancy for you now!
We in the training school at Zurich are desperate for good new instructors. If we get applicants they are not local. When we do get local people who are interested in coming to the training school the Units will not let them come because of staff shortages.
I am one of the old guys who have not spoken to an aircraft for years but I still remember while being trained (started 1968) that the controllers from the units complianed that we were not getting taught right stuff that we needed to know for 'on the job'.
Nothing changes. But it is often overlooked that teaching the basics to new students is not quite the same as Unit training.
c
Your contry needs you!!!
We have a vaccancy for you now!
We in the training school at Zurich are desperate for good new instructors. If we get applicants they are not local. When we do get local people who are interested in coming to the training school the Units will not let them come because of staff shortages.
I am one of the old guys who have not spoken to an aircraft for years but I still remember while being trained (started 1968) that the controllers from the units complianed that we were not getting taught right stuff that we needed to know for 'on the job'.
Nothing changes. But it is often overlooked that teaching the basics to new students is not quite the same as Unit training.
c
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Sunny San Juan, Puerto Rico
Age: 78
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for Participating
I'm delighted to note the professionalism and competence finding a home on this thread. I believe it will become a resource for all of us in the ATC training field.
- Conflict Alert: certainly your thoughts are welcome here. Your experience has no doubt given you unique insights into ATC training. We look forward to your input.
- Chillie: You are correct in noting that in many respects, nothing changes. I suppose nothing ever will change, either, unless folks like us take action.
- Mr. Pig: We do use part tasks in the US - sort of. Rather than teach and solidify knowledge, our part tasks often lump together many different skills rather than build one-at-a-time. I believe this is because our training is so compressed that time doesn't permit such a methodical, step-by-step approach. We flood the trainees with information and hope enough sinks in to get them through their evaluations (which about 96% do). It ain't pretty, but it seems to be working!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Sunny San Juan, Puerto Rico
Age: 78
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FAA Training vs. All The Rest
I'm sure there's no place else in the world that is training controllers at the rate the US FAA is doing. We're "cranking out" 1,500 - 1,700 new controller trainees a year and this will probably go on for the next 5 - 10 years.
Our system relies on the College Training Initiative (CTI) program which generates thousands of college graduates (AS and BS degrees) who are trained in the basics of ATC. We also draw from the military for experienced controllers. In some hard-to-staff areas, the FAA hires locals "off the streets". It is a huge effort and one like no other place on the planet.
The question, of course, is what level of quality are we maintaining? Time will tell.
Our system relies on the College Training Initiative (CTI) program which generates thousands of college graduates (AS and BS degrees) who are trained in the basics of ATC. We also draw from the military for experienced controllers. In some hard-to-staff areas, the FAA hires locals "off the streets". It is a huge effort and one like no other place on the planet.
The question, of course, is what level of quality are we maintaining? Time will tell.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: in a world of my own
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CTI etc.
wlatc - what proportion of trainees do you get "off the street"? How do you adjust the training programme for these people versus the CTI group? Is there a clear disparity in success rates between the two?
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've seen some of the TRAINEES that Oklahoma City places in the field, and it makes you wonder if they teach anything. The ones we get with prior experience have some idea but a majority of the others (CTI/Street) hires have very little grasp of the basics. I've heard rumors that some are passed into the field to make the numbers (graduation rates) look good.
Plus, with the lack of oversight at CTI schools, they may as well hire everyone off the street instead of having someone pile up student loan debt.
Just my two cents worth from someone that sees it daily...
Plus, with the lack of oversight at CTI schools, they may as well hire everyone off the street instead of having someone pile up student loan debt.
Just my two cents worth from someone that sees it daily...
Argus
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: in a world of my own
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
success rate?
So, guys: is 1500+ trainees per annum the "human-wave" tactic, or is your success rate quite high? Do you have any percentages for those making it as far as a first qualification?
I've checked out the syllabi at some of the establishments participating in the CTI programme. These look pretty impressive; there is a significant amount of time dedicated to ATC, as well as introductory aviation subjects. How is it that (if controllerzhu is right) this system fails to produce competent trainees?
I've checked out the syllabi at some of the establishments participating in the CTI programme. These look pretty impressive; there is a significant amount of time dedicated to ATC, as well as introductory aviation subjects. How is it that (if controllerzhu is right) this system fails to produce competent trainees?
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr. Pig,
I recently found a web site that will give you an idea about the current state of affairs at the FAA and their training. Some good reading.
Regards, CZHU
www.faafollies.com
I recently found a web site that will give you an idea about the current state of affairs at the FAA and their training. Some good reading.
Regards, CZHU
www.faafollies.com