ATC or FC?

[c-bert]

Gents,

I suspect that this will decend into a slagging match but....

What is the difference between Air Traffic Control and Fighter (Weapon) Control? I have the rather simplistic view that (mil) ATC keeps (mil) aircraft apart while WC push them together. Do Weapon Controllers actually provide an Air Traffic Service (RIS, RAS etc) to their aircraft?

Many thanks in advance.


(Also posted in mil av)

[45 before POL]

A lot of FC is intercept. Basically pushing together...but not as easy at it seems. Yes Atc is separation but that is not all they do, as tower for example is a different ball game. As for ris and ras? + rcs well yes provided by atc and generally quite well.....Fc can provide these but their concept of it can be open to interpretation....as many mil ATC'ers will tell you.

[Ginjav]

The two jobs only look slighty similar because much of the visible FC task is conducted in UK airspace in peacetime. ATC's task is to provide air traffic services appropriate to the airspace. FC's provide these services when necessary, but it isn't their primary function, GCI is (Ground Controlled Interception). One way of looking at it is that ATC separate aircraft and FC try and kill them (take that however you want)

A FC's training centres more around the "fighting" element, generally providing either "close" control to a small number of aircraft or "broadcast" control to larger groups. ATSOCAS and RCS are taught and practiced throughout, and you will not be successful as an FC if you cannot utilise them well, but the tactical aspect is also a vital requirement to grasp (and is far more involving and detailed than many realise).

There is a degree of overlap in the skillsets required for each job, but in practice they are rather different in many ways.