Wikiposts
Search
ATC Issues A place where pilots may enter the 'lions den' that is Air Traffic Control in complete safety and find out the answers to all those obscure topics which you always wanted to know the answer to but were afraid to ask.

Uk-nats-nats-net

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 21st Apr 2010, 10:34
  #21 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: FG11
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Legal Tender
all of it
Location is out of date: I have not got round to changing it.

I am not going to tell you what I do because that would undermine my anonymity. But I agree that this thread is becoming tedious and circular.

If NATS-NET were not there you would then be moaning about the lack of information and communication from management.

What seems to alienate and frustrate operational staff to me, seems to be any kind of change or progress.

I am not interested in reading what my CEO has been up to...in order to do my job efficiently and safely, I don't even need to know who my CEO is.
Its funny how ATCOs moan that non-ops people don't understand what they do and what their needs are etc and how little regard or interest they have for the want and needs of those non-ops staff.
Quincy M.E. is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2010, 10:56
  #22 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: FG11
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
No axe.

If you read what I was asking in my original post you will see that there was nothing said of a malicious or bitter nature that would suggest I had an axe to grind, but an observation about the posts on the forum. In fact I was highlighting the number of comments coming from ATCOs that sound like they are the ones with axes to grind. They are the ones insulting us (non ops).

Sinse then I have mearly responded to the aggresive and derisory replies which I have come to expect.
Quincy M.E. is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2010, 11:00
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: swanwick carp lake
Posts: 232
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
quincy jones:

Yes I could do my job if there were no ATCOs in the company. I could form my own company (with no ATCOs) and do what I do.
If that is true, then without knowing what you do in NATS there is absolutely no need for your role in NATS and you are a drain on resources.

What part of the company made money over the last week?

Air traffic service provision is the breadwinner for NATS, anything that supports that operation is a necessity. Anything that could carry on operating without a single ATCO employed in NATS should be removed from NATS.
ImnotanERIC is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2010, 11:18
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: 5116N00044W
Age: 76
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Anything that could carry on operating without a single ATCO employed in NATS should be removed from NATS.
This is where it all gets a bit silly. NATS could be a holding company which owns all of the infrastructure used in ATC (buildings, systems etc.) and could invite tenders to provide Air Traffic Services using this equipment. SERCO, who specialise in providing services using other peoples' equipment could win the contract and all ATC staff could be TUPEd to them. (Operational support staff may or may not be included in the transfer). It's a business model that could work, and it would be much closer to SERCO's philosophy than their involvement under the terms of the original PPP would have been.

By the way, over the last few days, NATS will have been continuing to offer services (such as messaging), which don't involve ATCOs, to the industry without much in the way of income to support it.
PeltonLevel is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2010, 12:00
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Earth
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Anything that could carry on operating without a single ATCO employed in NATS should be removed from NATS
Does that mean cleaning and building maintenance staff?

Employees need a clean, well-maintained building to work in. A clean, well-maintained building could stand empty.
fuzzy6988 is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2010, 12:05
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: in a house
Age: 43
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
ImnotanERIC
What part of the company made money over the last week?
Air traffic service provision is the breadwinner for NATS, anything that supports that operation is a necessity. Anything that could carry on operating without a single ATCO employed in NATS should be removed from NATS.
Really? Are you sure about that? Where do all your documents and procedures come from? NSL is losing circa 200k a day because of this ash cloud yet I know invoices were sent off within the last 6 days for thousands of pounds for services that don't include ATCO's.

PeltonLevel - well said sir!

le pingouin - its a fair comment, I could have worded better! Out of curiosity, have you been around any department in your ANSP other than Tower/Radar? (not having a go, just curious!)


NATS makes money from all sorts of other avenues away from its main hub of air traffic control nowadays. The original points made by Quincy M.E. were to point out that some operational staff don't want/like change and that they make it known 'noisily' on Nats Net which brings about the divide and fosters resentment. I am of the opinion that we should all try at least, to see each others positions and see that we all contribute to the business. I have good knowledge of ATC from both sides and am quite willing to host any visits from ATCO's or ATSA's or Engineers that would like to broaden there knowledge of what else NATS does. Likewise, I am more than willing to visit ATCO's/ATSA's/Engineers to find out how ATC is evolving in the towers/radar rooms.
Angrel is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2010, 12:07
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: behind the fruit
Posts: 233
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
oh for God's sake, even private pilots getting involved!

I don't see any similar threads regarding the FAA, DFS, Eurocontrol and ANSP's the world over. What's wrong with NATS and the UK? Have we created a monster?

Can this useless thread be removed please??
LEGAL TENDER is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2010, 12:07
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: 24/7 Hardcore Heaven
Posts: 525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Does that mean cleaning and building maintenance staff?

Employees need a clean, well-maintained building to work in. A clean, well-maintained building could stand empty.Do
Fuzzy

Why are you commenting on this? As far as I know it has nothing to do with the refusal of VFR transits.

Quincy,

NATSNet is a joke. Its like PRAVDA...if you post anything other than the company line you get shot down in flames. Witness the AMAN fiasco where we had untold amounts of office people backslapping each other on a job well done, when the equipment was not fit for purpose. As soon as operational staff started to comment on this, it was game over...in the office you go for a "little chat". And you wonder where the resentment comes from
mr.777 is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2010, 12:09
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: swanwick carp lake
Posts: 232
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Could you tell me how NATS makes money other than form air traffic then, because I honestly have no idea.

the infrastructure/buildings etc were built to house ATC operations and therefore integral to providing atc.

Cleaning staff and maintenance are indeed essential, but without any income generating work going on inside these clean and maintained buildings, how long would they have their wages paid to clean/maintain these buildings. Then of course, they would become unmaintained and dirty failry quickly

And what is "messaging?"
ImnotanERIC is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2010, 12:17
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: swanwick carp lake
Posts: 232
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
peeton:

This is where it all gets a bit silly. NATS could be a holding company which owns all of the infrastructure used in ATC (buildings, systems etc.) and could invite tenders to provide Air Traffic Services using this equipment. SERCO, who specialise in providing services using other peoples' equipment could win the contract and all ATC staff could be TUPEd to them.
So your argument is that, NATS does not need to provide an ATC service to make money, they could get someone else to provide an ATC service.

So ATC is the bedrock of NATS then..........my point exactly.

does anybody have specifics about profit from ATC endeavours, compared to Non-ATC ones, over the last few years? even a percentage would do.
ImnotanERIC is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2010, 12:40
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: in a house
Age: 43
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
ImnotanERIC
Could you tell me how NATS makes money other than form air traffic then, because I honestly have no idea
I couldn't quote on the margins in a public forum (the 200k thing above is in the public eye anyway) but I can mention some of the stuff we do to make the money. Things like digital mapping for charts, procedure design for people like the MoD, South Africa etc, nucleus (have a butchers on NatsNet for this one for the detail), maps and charts for the aviation industry. There are more things out there, this is just a snapshot of some of it.
Angrel is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2010, 12:45
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: swanwick carp lake
Posts: 232
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
could you send me a PM with the margins? Or if not, where would i find them out at work. So I could compare these earnings with ATC revenues.

Cheers.
ImnotanERIC is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2010, 12:49
  #33 (permalink)  
CRR
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: ?
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Yahoo
My guess would be he's a former trainee with an axe to grind.
BINGO!

http://www.pprune.org/atc-issues/369...ml#post4849291

Quincy the point you so eloquently miss that when a non operational staff member tries to tell a LICENCED controller what is required to do his her job and and they need to be happy doing it is the root of the problem. Resistance to change? Maybe but when the change is for the sake of change or somebody who never held a licence who is probably going to score a bonus out of it and will try to get it implemented no matter what, what do you think the optics of that is?

You are very quick to defend NATSNET yet did it occur to you that the format/content/tone IS NOT what is required?

Last edited by CRR; 21st Apr 2010 at 17:22.
CRR is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2010, 13:27
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: in a house
Age: 43
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
ImnotanERIC - PM sent
Angrel is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2010, 17:30
  #35 (permalink)  
CRR
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: ?
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Do not get me wrong. In any organisation everyone has a job to do. But to think I am not going to react when I read
Originally Posted by Quincy
What seems to alienate and frustrate operational staff to me, seems to be any kind of change or progress.
No controller begrudges technology change when it is done correctly, with consultation with those who will be using it to provide an Air Traffic Service. When somebody comes along jumping up and down with what they see as the next big thing (the FAST trial a few years ago in TC;Boarding Cards to rally the troops): that causes frustration. When an operational staff member expresses a view contary to the new proposed outcome, they are branded as "just causing trouble for not getting with the program".
CRR is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2010, 18:20
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hants
Posts: 2,295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
CRR/Yahoo - just where in the link does it imply that Quincy has an axe to grind?

By Quincy, my bold
I put in as much work as possible but got chopped along the way. The fact is that attitude doesnt get you through, ability does! Face it: some people (myself included) get through selection but are not good enough (by varying degrees) to do the job.
You are correct however, Providing a service to aircraft is the bedrock of NATS - from that task the Part Private company has branched out into other areas that make money, albeit maybe not as much as en-route charges etc (mind you NERL has the most expense to counter that).

For example NATS now sells airspace design expertise, trains ATCOs for other agencies etc. These are jobs that could still be done if NATS lost the contract at all its airports and en-route.

The FACT of the matter is, the depth of knowledge gained over the years through providing the ATS that NATS does, has enabled NATS to be at the forefront of other ATC related ventures.

The FACT of the matter is, either part of the business could work as a standalone company.

The FACT of the matter is, having all those different skills makes NATS a stronger company which is important to you and me as ATCOs, and to all the support staff, because the stronger the company is, the more chance there is of having a pension to look forward to in the future
anotherthing is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2010, 18:25
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: cheshire
Posts: 208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Angrel
how can you say that NSL is losing 200k because of the ash . we at NSL have contracts with the airports whether acft fly or not Where is NerL getting its money from with no acft in the uk/oceanic firs for the last week
opnot is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2010, 18:26
  #38 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: FG11
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Yeah i take that back actually. Thats a good point CRR about the tone/format you talked about too. Tone is something that forums are not good at.

I know we all do a great job we all do it together, it just gets me down a bit when people are down on the company so much.
Quincy M.E. is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2010, 19:44
  #39 (permalink)  

 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 796
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
What seems to alienate and frustrate operational staff to me, seems to be any kind of change or progress.
Possibly because, for example, most of the recent change or "progress" has made my job more often than not more difficult or awkward not less so*.

And then, the next change to the procedures I use, no doubt dreamt up by someone who's never done the task I do and which is coming in a few weeks time despite our concerns is going to make it even more awkward whilst also loading more risk onto me. Very good.

* the one notable exception in recent years is the introduction of Mode S.
Roffa is offline  
Old 21st Apr 2010, 20:15
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: southampton,hampshire,england
Posts: 869
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Well I need mode S like a hole in the head. I can't switch it off and it makes the labels absolutely huge......the overlap is a real problem unless you pull the labels all over the place and risk losing perspective. The Mode S appears as red...which is the same colour depicting unattained level on my display. AMAN is [for me] pathetic.......crew file plan for transatlantic to EGLL and expect [for example] OCKHAM 2F arrival........maybe over Ireland they prebrief for OCK 2F......on first contact with London they are given OCK 2F........about 50 miles out, the frantic panic calls arrive from Terminal Control "switch to BNN 1D".
End of a night shift for me and after an ocean crossing for them.....by the way....the pilots I speak to do NOT want to shuttle around the London TMA from stack to stack at low level, they would prefer a spin or two further out and at a more economical "mid" level.
Is this progress?
055166k is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.