FISO Jobs/ Validation
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: london
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FISO Jobs/ Validation
Hi all,
I have recently passed my FISO exams and am now looking to validate and hopefully find some work! I am based in London and would prefer work in the SE. My primary interest is in part time work however I may consider full time if it was on offer! Does anyone know of anywhere where they are looking for FISOs or where there may be the opportunity for some work?
Thank you for your help- greatly appreciated.
I have recently passed my FISO exams and am now looking to validate and hopefully find some work! I am based in London and would prefer work in the SE. My primary interest is in part time work however I may consider full time if it was on offer! Does anyone know of anywhere where they are looking for FISOs or where there may be the opportunity for some work?
Thank you for your help- greatly appreciated.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: On the wireless...
Posts: 1,901
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does Denham ever have public transport flights of the level which requires Aerodrome Flight Information Service? For AFIS to be necessary such flights would have to be on scheduled journeys or exceed 5700kg. Can't see that happening much there so why waste money on AFIS.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TDM.. Remember that terribly nice chap who used to fly the United Biccies Kingair G-UBSH (I think). That used to fly in and out of 'LD but I don't know how much those things weigh..
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: On the wireless...
Posts: 1,901
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, I remember Dave W who flew KingAirs G-HLUB/G-UBHL etc. MTOM was 5670Kg but AFIS didn't apply because they were private (ie. non PT) flights. They used to fly to that titchy strip at Hector Laing's place in Scotland, I forget the name. They started with a C90, I forget the reg too....
Remembered name: Mundole airstrip at Forres.
Remembered the reg too: G-BABW
Remembered name: Mundole airstrip at Forres.
Remembered the reg too: G-BABW
Last edited by Talkdownman; 16th Aug 2009 at 06:00.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: On the wireless...
Posts: 1,901
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Also, what type of ATS does an Aerodrome FISO provide?
It cannot be Basic Service because an Aerodrome FISO is required to provide traffic information. CAP774 says so.
It cannot be Traffic Service because a Traffic Service shall only be provided by a controller with access to an ATS surveillance system. CAP774 says so.
Could it be that Aerodrome Flight Information Service Officers provide Flight Information Service?
What 'type of service' are Aerodrome FISOs supposed to inform service recipients?
Does ATSD even know?
It cannot be Basic Service because an Aerodrome FISO is required to provide traffic information. CAP774 says so.
It cannot be Traffic Service because a Traffic Service shall only be provided by a controller with access to an ATS surveillance system. CAP774 says so.
Could it be that Aerodrome Flight Information Service Officers provide Flight Information Service?
What 'type of service' are Aerodrome FISOs supposed to inform service recipients?
Does ATSD even know?
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe it's an Aerodrome Information Service.
I'm sure they can provide a Basic Service outside controlled airspace - that's what I've been asking them for and getting from them anyway.
I'm sure they can provide a Basic Service outside controlled airspace - that's what I've been asking them for and getting from them anyway.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: On the wireless...
Posts: 1,901
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, Aerodrome FISOs may provide a Basic Service outside CAS outside the ATZ (if they feel a need to get involved.....). CAP774 says so.
But what about INSIDE the ATZ.....? CAP774 doesn't cover this eventuality.
Aerodrome FISOs are required for the purposes of Air Navigation (General) Regulation 13, and Rules of the Air Regulation 45, (and not much else.....)
CAP774 states that in order to comply with the Rules of the Air Regulations 2007 (as amended) with regard to flight within an ATZ, specific and, where appropriate, updated traffic information will be provided to aircraft operating in an ATZ.
Basic Service does not include specific and updated traffic information and Traffic Service requires a controller with access to an ATS surveillance system which is ADS-B, PSR, SSR or any comparable system that is used to determine the position of an aircraft in range and azimuth, which clearly doesn't include Mark One Eyeball.
So what the hell is it that Aerodrome FISOs provide? FIS at Aerodromes?
'Flight Information Service', perish the thought.....!
Has ATSD thought about this at all??
Any CAA ATSD Lurkers out there able (or willing) to respond?
But what about INSIDE the ATZ.....? CAP774 doesn't cover this eventuality.
Aerodrome FISOs are required for the purposes of Air Navigation (General) Regulation 13, and Rules of the Air Regulation 45, (and not much else.....)
CAP774 states that in order to comply with the Rules of the Air Regulations 2007 (as amended) with regard to flight within an ATZ, specific and, where appropriate, updated traffic information will be provided to aircraft operating in an ATZ.
Basic Service does not include specific and updated traffic information and Traffic Service requires a controller with access to an ATS surveillance system which is ADS-B, PSR, SSR or any comparable system that is used to determine the position of an aircraft in range and azimuth, which clearly doesn't include Mark One Eyeball.
So what the hell is it that Aerodrome FISOs provide? FIS at Aerodromes?
'Flight Information Service', perish the thought.....!
Has ATSD thought about this at all??
Any CAA ATSD Lurkers out there able (or willing) to respond?
Talkdownman
Best of luck, having asked this question and receiving nothing that could pass for an answer, I offered a way out. "For the purposes of CAP 774 and ATZ could be deemed to be controlled airspace and therefore beyond its scope". Reply, "that would be a reasonable interpretation"!
Best of luck, having asked this question and receiving nothing that could pass for an answer, I offered a way out. "For the purposes of CAP 774 and ATZ could be deemed to be controlled airspace and therefore beyond its scope". Reply, "that would be a reasonable interpretation"!
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: On the wireless...
Posts: 1,901
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not sure that CAA ATSD proof-read the draft CAP774 properly...
I suspect that what CAA ATSD meant to say was ATSORA (....Regulated....), and not ATSOCA.....
I notice that some ATC Units outside CAS are providing only Basic Service within their ATZ and thus NOT passing the required ATZ traffic information.
Sure as hell scares me.
Infact they have done so already.....
So, Keep a sharp look out within ATZs, it is certainly possible that you have not been given the full picture....
Outrageous.......
I suspect that what CAA ATSD meant to say was ATSORA (....Regulated....), and not ATSOCA.....
I notice that some ATC Units outside CAS are providing only Basic Service within their ATZ and thus NOT passing the required ATZ traffic information.
Sure as hell scares me.
Infact they have done so already.....
So, Keep a sharp look out within ATZs, it is certainly possible that you have not been given the full picture....
Outrageous.......