NATS, Manchester, and some Charity work?
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: uk
Posts: 1,122
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If Manchester was losing money hand over fist,and all of a sudden is it now non profit,then where are the savings coming from?
Are the ATCOs going to be busted to Atco3.
Are the lower band units going to keep our Manchester friends in their higher pay,by subsidising them.Or is the axe going to fall at the smaller units,so that Nats can be seen to retain a big contract.
Are the ATCOs going to be busted to Atco3.
Are the lower band units going to keep our Manchester friends in their higher pay,by subsidising them.Or is the axe going to fall at the smaller units,so that Nats can be seen to retain a big contract.
But we're really, really, really good at using it when we get the chance
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Up North
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having chatted to a senior manager about Manc they stated that they would be highly surprised if the airport could run on the new contract with the current set up. The Tower may not be able to hang on to the area boys coat tails anymore when they leave, which could well spell a scaling down of staff, maybe a loss of a few ATCO1+ 's, which went towards helping the old contract run at a loss anyway.
You never know a drop in Banding could be on the cards but I doubt it.
Would it have been such a bad thing if we had lost the contract? Most of us stay within Nats for the pension as at lower band airports we can gain similar pay from outside. Seeing as alledgedly management are going to come back to us for further cuts I would have expected most Manc staff to stay put and work direct for MAPLC anyway. You certainly would not be without a job.
You never know a drop in Banding could be on the cards but I doubt it.
Would it have been such a bad thing if we had lost the contract? Most of us stay within Nats for the pension as at lower band airports we can gain similar pay from outside. Seeing as alledgedly management are going to come back to us for further cuts I would have expected most Manc staff to stay put and work direct for MAPLC anyway. You certainly would not be without a job.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Home
Posts: 234
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The statement I saw only said that the cost savings agreed in the new contract will make the contract "not loss making". It's easy to see why people would read that and think its a deal to break even.
If NSL have managed to do a deal that allows them to turn a significant loss-maker into a break even deal, then good on them. Question is though... at what price?
Point was made earlier... but it's very much worth it for NSL to keep on contracts that make very little profit or small losses as it allows them to spread corporate costs more widely. Walking away from one loss-making contract could have the knock-on effect of turning barely profitable contracts into loss makers too.
If NSL have managed to do a deal that allows them to turn a significant loss-maker into a break even deal, then good on them. Question is though... at what price?
Point was made earlier... but it's very much worth it for NSL to keep on contracts that make very little profit or small losses as it allows them to spread corporate costs more widely. Walking away from one loss-making contract could have the knock-on effect of turning barely profitable contracts into loss makers too.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: London
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Doing it for free??? Just wait until NATS gets hold of this - there will be just one of you in your bedroom doing it:
In a joint project, Saab and the LFV group has demonstrated how air traffic services can be managed remotely. With the new system, it is possible for one person to handle the traffic around up to three airports, resulting in reduced costs and increased security. This means better conditions for small and medium sized airports.
An aircraft took-off and landed at Angelholm Airport today, entirely under guidance from Malmo Airport about 100 kilometres away. The system, which is called ROT (Remotely Operated Tower), makes remote air traffic services possible. This way of working leads to increased security and cost savings – a matter of survival for smaller, regional airports.
In the development project cameras are mounted on the air traffic control tower in Angelholm. Images from the cameras are transmitted to a flight control centre at Malmo Airport where they are projected onto the wall in a circular room, similar to an air traffic control tower. In the control centre there is an air traffic controller directing the traffic just as they would from the tower itself.
At many small and medium-sized airports, the traffic is intense at certain times, while at other times of the day it is significantly quieter. When an air traffic controller takes responsibility for several airports, resources can be allocated more effectively and moreover, any equipment required can be invested in jointly.
There are multiple safety aspects. Using cameras to detect any changes in the picture, dangers can be discovered more easily, for example forgotten tools that have been left on the runway. The air traffic controller can also zoom-in on anything of interest using the cameras. Furthermore, events taking place in the sky and around the airport can also be recorded and replayed later, for example following an incident.
The system has been developed by Saab with the LFV group as operational partner.
In a joint project, Saab and the LFV group has demonstrated how air traffic services can be managed remotely. With the new system, it is possible for one person to handle the traffic around up to three airports, resulting in reduced costs and increased security. This means better conditions for small and medium sized airports.
An aircraft took-off and landed at Angelholm Airport today, entirely under guidance from Malmo Airport about 100 kilometres away. The system, which is called ROT (Remotely Operated Tower), makes remote air traffic services possible. This way of working leads to increased security and cost savings – a matter of survival for smaller, regional airports.
In the development project cameras are mounted on the air traffic control tower in Angelholm. Images from the cameras are transmitted to a flight control centre at Malmo Airport where they are projected onto the wall in a circular room, similar to an air traffic control tower. In the control centre there is an air traffic controller directing the traffic just as they would from the tower itself.
At many small and medium-sized airports, the traffic is intense at certain times, while at other times of the day it is significantly quieter. When an air traffic controller takes responsibility for several airports, resources can be allocated more effectively and moreover, any equipment required can be invested in jointly.
There are multiple safety aspects. Using cameras to detect any changes in the picture, dangers can be discovered more easily, for example forgotten tools that have been left on the runway. The air traffic controller can also zoom-in on anything of interest using the cameras. Furthermore, events taking place in the sky and around the airport can also be recorded and replayed later, for example following an incident.
The system has been developed by Saab with the LFV group as operational partner.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: home
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The contract itself may not make a loss but when you factor in the NSL overheads and wages of all the people who work for the company at CTC and NERC etc it is a different matter.
It is this very fact that has lead NATS to negotiate loss making contracts as without them a portion of these costs would not be met and NSL would be in even deeper financial straights. They would also have the architecture and infrastructure among other costs to write off if they let the contract go.
It is not as easy or simple as it first appears.
Hope I got most of that right, from the lions mouth today.
It is this very fact that has lead NATS to negotiate loss making contracts as without them a portion of these costs would not be met and NSL would be in even deeper financial straights. They would also have the architecture and infrastructure among other costs to write off if they let the contract go.
It is not as easy or simple as it first appears.
Hope I got most of that right, from the lions mouth today.
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Up North
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The contract itself may not make a loss but when you factor in the NSL overheads and wages of all the people who work for the company at CTC and NERC etc it is a different matter.
We pay the same overheads but still make a healthy profit.
However Manc did have numerous managers, safety being an example, which other airports do not, plus numerous ATCO1 +'s. Are/were these people essential or was it the fact that NSL at Manc considers itself a large unit because it resides in the same place as the NERL controllers?
If the contract will break even, or even make a loss then the money has to come from somewhere to fund the loss. Are the controllers at Manc NSL, in this current climate, desperate to stay within NATS or more likely desperate to stay at Manc. Plenty of other airports short of controllers within NSL or stay put and work for MAG or whoever. Just my opinion but i don't believe that if Nats had lost the contract then there would have been a mass exodus of the people in situ.
Why should they now pay over the odds when Manch has negotiated a better deal.
Bad times, here we come!
Bad times, here we come!
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: uk
Posts: 1,122
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well here's a cost saving solution.Post a lot of the top of the scale ATCO2 out to Heathrow.They are really short at the moment,and there shouldn't be any problems with them validating.After all one has to be suitable for Manchester,so Heathrow should be easy.Then replace them with cheaper Atcos out of the college,and pay them less. Where have I heard that before.
Once the centre goes,then Manchester airport NSL is a smaller unit than Aberdeen,and should get the same treatment.
Where have I heard that before.Once the centre goes,then Manchester airport NSL is a smaller unit than Aberdeen,and should get the same treatment.
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Up North
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Post a lot of the top of the scale ATCO2 out to Heathrow.They are really short at the moment,and there shouldn't be any problems with them validating.After all one has to be suitable for Manchester,so Heathrow should be easy
