Civil vs Military
Thread Starter
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
From: UK
Civil vs Military
How do people find the military and civil ATC infrastructure and systems differ?
I know they have different priorities, emphasis and needs but do those who have made the transition from mil to civ go Wow! Heave a sigh of relief or grumble and accept the higher pay?
I know they have different priorities, emphasis and needs but do those who have made the transition from mil to civ go Wow! Heave a sigh of relief or grumble and accept the higher pay?
niknak
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,335
Likes: 0
From: UK
I'm not ex Mil but I know plenty of folk who are and the things I'm most often told are by those who make the switch are:
1) In some cases, how much harder than expected, they found the civillian courses and find the subsequent transition at the unit equally difficult. There's a big difference between certain aspects of the Mil and civil atc job.
2) Once they've got a CAA licence and a job, being an ATCO is the only thing they have to do, (they're no longer required to do secondary duties), there is no pressure to go into any sort of management unless you want to.
3) The pay structure is significantly better.
4) They won't be moving house every three years or so to satisfy the needs of the MOD.
5) A very small number take a long time to get used to the fact they're no longer an officer, they're the bottom of the heap for a while and no one will call them Sir, but it generally is a small number.
On the whole, most ex Mil atcos who have become civvies are cool dudes and a pleasure to work with, IMHO, a lot of that is to do with the fact that they've had to work twice as hard to get where they are.
1) In some cases, how much harder than expected, they found the civillian courses and find the subsequent transition at the unit equally difficult. There's a big difference between certain aspects of the Mil and civil atc job.
2) Once they've got a CAA licence and a job, being an ATCO is the only thing they have to do, (they're no longer required to do secondary duties), there is no pressure to go into any sort of management unless you want to.
3) The pay structure is significantly better.
4) They won't be moving house every three years or so to satisfy the needs of the MOD.
5) A very small number take a long time to get used to the fact they're no longer an officer, they're the bottom of the heap for a while and no one will call them Sir, but it generally is a small number.
On the whole, most ex Mil atcos who have become civvies are cool dudes and a pleasure to work with, IMHO, a lot of that is to do with the fact that they've had to work twice as hard to get where they are.
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 335
Likes: 0
From: ?
As one who has done the transition i agree with "most" of what NikNak says.
a. It is harder, having to unlearn what you have previously done to control aircraft. No allowances are made for previous experience (in fact sometimes it can hinder you as you revert to what you know when it gets busy)
b. There are still 'secondary duties' to a degree (OK these aren't forced upon you) but it can get you out of controlling for a bit.
c. The money is better BUT not until you qualify (which could take upto 3 years!) Try living as a trainee on the current structure if you have a family or any sort of committments.
Thats my thoughts...
a. It is harder, having to unlearn what you have previously done to control aircraft. No allowances are made for previous experience (in fact sometimes it can hinder you as you revert to what you know when it gets busy)
b. There are still 'secondary duties' to a degree (OK these aren't forced upon you) but it can get you out of controlling for a bit.
c. The money is better BUT not until you qualify (which could take upto 3 years!) Try living as a trainee on the current structure if you have a family or any sort of committments.
Thats my thoughts...
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
From: England
Having recently undergone 'reprogramming' to become a civilian ATCO( I self funded a Surveillance rating course), I have experienced next to no difference in terms of exercising the function of controlling aircraft. Yes, there are subtle differences in the way that 'control' is exercised but not to the extent that I found difficult to adapt to. Sure, the equipment used might be different in appearance but the functions remain largely the same. In short, there is next to no difference between the 2 domains and to be frank, I found the course a doddle(apart from picking up the training tab at the end which was extremely difficult!).
My advice would be to approach the course with a willingness to abandon your previous experience and start back at square one; ditch any airs and graces you might be saddled with; and when you get to your unit say nothing and just do as you are told. All towers have politics, and mostly the same issues exist; the only difference is that nobody wears the same uniform!
The military are currently critically short short of ATCOs (particularly the officer cadre who are leaving in droves) are it is not in their (MoD) interest for the grass to appear too green over the fence or for the process of conversion be too easy to achieve.............
My advice would be to approach the course with a willingness to abandon your previous experience and start back at square one; ditch any airs and graces you might be saddled with; and when you get to your unit say nothing and just do as you are told. All towers have politics, and mostly the same issues exist; the only difference is that nobody wears the same uniform!
The military are currently critically short short of ATCOs (particularly the officer cadre who are leaving in droves) are it is not in their (MoD) interest for the grass to appear too green over the fence or for the process of conversion be too easy to achieve.............
Joined: Nov 2005
Aviation Qualifications: PPL
Posts: 12,458
Likes: 368
From: Wildest Surrey
I went the other way. Having done a 3 year ATCO Cadet course with NATS, my final posting was to a MOD(PE) unit with military aircraft, procedures and aircrew where I had to quickly learn all the subtle differences eg PAR, 1/2 mile SRA's not using continuous talkdown, autonomous airway penetrations etc. This I found was no problem because the three 3 year course (including a 9 month stint at a JATCRU) had prepared me to expect anything so I could readily adapt.
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 613
Likes: 0
From: england
I think it is worth looking at the future and not 20+ years ago (the time when Chevvron and I started out
). Indeed, the whole environment may havce significantly changed in the next ten years with the military side of the house becoming more and more compliant with civil licensing regulations. Furthermore, the whole Air Traffic Management development piece will seriously affect the way we drive aricraft around they sky.
You will find loads of comments about secondary duties etc on previous threads. But answering your question:
The infrastructure is quite similar and the rules are almost identical. They manner in which the rules are interpreted/applied and priorities are allocated can differ somewhat; this is one of the reasons people don't waltz through cross training. Nevertheless, I would say that the vast majority can turn their hand to the opposing profession as the basics are the same. As someone says, it is a matter of unlearning stuff.
I did the RAF route and would not have swapped it. However, I would say that a significant amount of that enjoyment was the variety, opportunity to do lots of different things and the whole 'package' of military life.
Conversely, the civil route offers stability and is far better suited for someone who wants a steady, predictable (ie predictable in how your career will pan out) well paid job.
No one is going to give you the right answer. All I can suggest is that you visit one of the centres (Swanwick/Prestwick), a couple of airfields/aerodromes and/or the training schools (Bournemouth and RAF Shawbury), having a look at both sides of the house. Too often prospective controllers will just have a look at one without so much of a cursory glance at the other; to me this doesn't make sense. Obviously the military route brings additional obligations that you would need to consider, but I think that is outside the scope of this discussion.
Good luck. If you want some military contacts, PM me.
). Indeed, the whole environment may havce significantly changed in the next ten years with the military side of the house becoming more and more compliant with civil licensing regulations. Furthermore, the whole Air Traffic Management development piece will seriously affect the way we drive aricraft around they sky.You will find loads of comments about secondary duties etc on previous threads. But answering your question:
The infrastructure is quite similar and the rules are almost identical. They manner in which the rules are interpreted/applied and priorities are allocated can differ somewhat; this is one of the reasons people don't waltz through cross training. Nevertheless, I would say that the vast majority can turn their hand to the opposing profession as the basics are the same. As someone says, it is a matter of unlearning stuff.
I did the RAF route and would not have swapped it. However, I would say that a significant amount of that enjoyment was the variety, opportunity to do lots of different things and the whole 'package' of military life.
Conversely, the civil route offers stability and is far better suited for someone who wants a steady, predictable (ie predictable in how your career will pan out) well paid job.
No one is going to give you the right answer. All I can suggest is that you visit one of the centres (Swanwick/Prestwick), a couple of airfields/aerodromes and/or the training schools (Bournemouth and RAF Shawbury), having a look at both sides of the house. Too often prospective controllers will just have a look at one without so much of a cursory glance at the other; to me this doesn't make sense. Obviously the military route brings additional obligations that you would need to consider, but I think that is outside the scope of this discussion.
Good luck. If you want some military contacts, PM me.
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
From: North of Birmingham by a lot
Grabbers,
I made the jump at the 22year point (3 years ago). No major problems, you soon get back into the classroom learning routine. Also your previous experience is a big help in the simulator, whether it is just being at ease on the R/T or having an instinctive reaction to pop up traffic when giving a RAS. The courses aren't easy and you have to fully commit throughout the 18 months to 3 years training but with a Mil background you'll be used to that! If you are thinking about NATS, they are quite big on recruiting experienced controllers at the moment so give their HR people a ring.
Regards, ADIS
I made the jump at the 22year point (3 years ago). No major problems, you soon get back into the classroom learning routine. Also your previous experience is a big help in the simulator, whether it is just being at ease on the R/T or having an instinctive reaction to pop up traffic when giving a RAS. The courses aren't easy and you have to fully commit throughout the 18 months to 3 years training but with a Mil background you'll be used to that! If you are thinking about NATS, they are quite big on recruiting experienced controllers at the moment so give their HR people a ring.
Regards, ADIS
Thread Starter
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
From: UK
Lurking... Thanks for the offer but that was not why I was asking. I am trying to understand not make a career choice!
In fact if any Military ATCOs were leaving soon and wanted to use their experience but didn't want to be a civil ATCO then PM me
In fact if any Military ATCOs were leaving soon and wanted to use their experience but didn't want to be a civil ATCO then PM me
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 196
Likes: 0
From: In the South !
Better pay..hmmmmm
I've done the math...Level 8 Flt Lt is £43K. Nats start up pay is (to be polite) low. Self fund and get an ADI rating circa £30-36K depending upon unit. Self fund and get an APS rating £45-50k depending upon unit although more difficult to secure that first job.
Yes....fully appreciate the potential for more as you gain experience/ratings (circa £60k) in civil side but I don't think the pay divide is as large as some think!
Yes....fully appreciate the potential for more as you gain experience/ratings (circa £60k) in civil side but I don't think the pay divide is as large as some think!
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
From: North of Birmingham by a lot
ATCO Fred,
I've honestly no axe to grind either way. However; Level 8 Flt Lt = £43K. Can't argue with that, but by definition a level 8 Flt Lt will have been in the Service at least 10 years. NATS salary after 10 years will be between approx £55K and £85K. Also you can add the Service pension on top of that if you've reached 16 / 22 year point before you jump ship. I reckon that even if you self fund your training then you would be ahead in salaries on the civil side within 5 years.
Regards, ADIS
I've honestly no axe to grind either way. However; Level 8 Flt Lt = £43K. Can't argue with that, but by definition a level 8 Flt Lt will have been in the Service at least 10 years. NATS salary after 10 years will be between approx £55K and £85K. Also you can add the Service pension on top of that if you've reached 16 / 22 year point before you jump ship. I reckon that even if you self fund your training then you would be ahead in salaries on the civil side within 5 years.
Regards, ADIS
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
From: swanlake
Fred you hit it on the head.....money should not be anyones deciding factor on whether civil or mil........if you want good social life, random postings,a fair pay and a good pension, mil life aint so bad.
If all you want to do is control, good pay and pension then civil the way to go. Both have pro's and cons and all down to an individuals circumstances and what suits.
If all you want to do is control, good pay and pension then civil the way to go. Both have pro's and cons and all down to an individuals circumstances and what suits.
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
From: Reading
I took the leap last year
After 22 years I was lucky to get a place as an ATCO. I was offered a course in Wales and Serco paid for it too-I was lucky. If you are in your twenties I would go down the NATS route as your future earnings and career would be better overall. If you are like me and not to fussed about setting the world alight then self funding/sponsership thru one of the ATC schools is a great way into it. After all you can always try to get into NATS at a later stage if you fancy it, they advertise for jobs around the country at regular intervals and I know lots of people who now work for NATS that started for other ATC service providers. After only a year I know earn what I earned in the RAF and with my pension I am better off financially and in my private life ie no secondary duties etc just the gardening lol . The only down side really is the commuting which many service people may not be use to, but you will get use to it. Civil ATC is slighty different from Mil but not so much that it is a problem for someone who has the right motivation. Good luck
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
From: South East
Self fund and get an APS rating £45-50k depending upon unit although more difficult to secure that first job.
Anyone like to comment?
