Oxford Radar
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: wilts
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oxford Radar
Has anyone been interviewed for the radar controller jobs at Oxford yet? This is going to be a greenfield site new radar going in now I hear, looks intresting!
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: France
Age: 55
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oxford... ermmm... I heard that's the place around the World where the purest English phraseology is in use !
Or is it just English language in schools ?
Anyway, nothing else than a rumour...
Or is it just English language in schools ?
Anyway, nothing else than a rumour...
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: York, UK
Age: 34
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe, that all the ATCOs already in place at (London) Oxford are to be trained and validated on Radar. I'm no expert, but I haven't heard anything about new jobs there?
Phil
Phil
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: wilts
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Definately recruiting two new ATCOs and an ATCA. Getting busier all the time with commercial traffic, mainly business aviation, but they've got big ambitions for airline routes according to my sources.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 143
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having recently visited Oxford, I'm not entirely sure that the Airport Owners have really done their sums about the ongoing costs of running the facility and staffing it to make it cost effective and provide the best service for customers.
Trying to provide a seamless service is a nightmare.
We'll see where they are in 18 months time.
I hope it all goes well.
Trying to provide a seamless service is a nightmare.
We'll see where they are in 18 months time.
I hope it all goes well.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 79
Posts: 8,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
<<all the ATCOs already in place at (London) Oxford are to be trained and validated on Radar>>
It's a bit more complex - they have to undergo an approved course of training and pass the appropriate exams for a radar rating. Then they have to validat the rating locally. It's not a 5-minute job and if they don't have the aptitude for radar.........
I'd go back for £100k plus all the coffee I could drink!!
It's a bit more complex - they have to undergo an approved course of training and pass the appropriate exams for a radar rating. Then they have to validat the rating locally. It's not a 5-minute job and if they don't have the aptitude for radar.........
I'd go back for £100k plus all the coffee I could drink!!
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: France
Age: 55
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Took us almost 4 years to change from non-radar-procedures to radar vectoring in my previous APP/TWR.
Not only we had to train : most of us had been trained and qualified on radar before coming to this TWR.
Procedures with surrounding APPs, ACCs had to be created and tested first.
At the beginning, the radar system came in. We had no right to use it for vectoring : only surveillance.
Then procedures and training for radar vectoring on arrival only.
Finally, procedures and training for vectoring on departure.
I was about to forget : a new tower had to be build because the ancient wasn't fit for purpose. And the furniture had to be moved twice in the new one because the architect had placed us back to the runways.
I guess things can be done much faster, but beware of doing things too fast for political/economical reasons : this kind of (too) fast decisions can lead the wingtip of a 380"super" straight in a building... don't want to figure what could happen airwise.
When is that London Olympic thing, again ?
Not only we had to train : most of us had been trained and qualified on radar before coming to this TWR.
Procedures with surrounding APPs, ACCs had to be created and tested first.
At the beginning, the radar system came in. We had no right to use it for vectoring : only surveillance.
Then procedures and training for radar vectoring on arrival only.
Finally, procedures and training for vectoring on departure.
I was about to forget : a new tower had to be build because the ancient wasn't fit for purpose. And the furniture had to be moved twice in the new one because the architect had placed us back to the runways.
I guess things can be done much faster, but beware of doing things too fast for political/economical reasons : this kind of (too) fast decisions can lead the wingtip of a 380"super" straight in a building... don't want to figure what could happen airwise.
When is that London Olympic thing, again ?
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: France
Age: 55
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They could be right : radar could be operational in summer 2011... End of summer is scheduled 21th of September this year. 
But an operational radar (the screen with all the colors on it) doesn't mean you can control with it in real life with a real environment. I reckon "London-London" APP should be careful before validating LOAs with the new radar APP.
Environment in the vicinity seems to be complicated enough to avoid increasing complexity just because someone up-there in the hierarchy decided it had to be done the day before tomorrow.
But an operational radar (the screen with all the colors on it) doesn't mean you can control with it in real life with a real environment. I reckon "London-London" APP should be careful before validating LOAs with the new radar APP.
Environment in the vicinity seems to be complicated enough to avoid increasing complexity just because someone up-there in the hierarchy decided it had to be done the day before tomorrow.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 143
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does the new facility include SSR?
Even assuming they get enough qualified ATCOs (nowhere near 6 at the moment) and get everyone validated within 12 - 18 months - very unlikely for a "Greenfield start" - 6 is a pretty tight ship and nowhere near enough to even consider providing a seamless service for the airfield, never mind money earning stuff such as LARS (which is what they should be aiming for).
To even consider covering their current operating hours, never mind the demands which new commercial operators will demand, you need at least 5 radar atcos on duty each day of the week, (possibly less at weekends if commercial operations are fewer - commercial means serious revenue earning movements). A simple calculation using SCRATCOH regulations will make it all clear.
As I said, I don't think that the airport owners (or the management so delegated) have done their sums properly, if they don't currently have SSR (which commercial operators will press for), they should stand by for an eye watering quote from NATS or MOD for the nearest available feed.
Even assuming they get enough qualified ATCOs (nowhere near 6 at the moment) and get everyone validated within 12 - 18 months - very unlikely for a "Greenfield start" - 6 is a pretty tight ship and nowhere near enough to even consider providing a seamless service for the airfield, never mind money earning stuff such as LARS (which is what they should be aiming for).
To even consider covering their current operating hours, never mind the demands which new commercial operators will demand, you need at least 5 radar atcos on duty each day of the week, (possibly less at weekends if commercial operations are fewer - commercial means serious revenue earning movements). A simple calculation using SCRATCOH regulations will make it all clear.
As I said, I don't think that the airport owners (or the management so delegated) have done their sums properly, if they don't currently have SSR (which commercial operators will press for), they should stand by for an eye watering quote from NATS or MOD for the nearest available feed.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: at home
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aiming at 6 radar atcos? possibly to begin with?, increase to 8-10 maybe!! ALOT of work to be done, if they believe that a sufficient number of Atcos would be fully up and running in 8-10 months, consolidated... in good time before the 'olympic rush'..mmm
As for SSR, think that is to be on-site rather than a very expensive feed.
As for SSR, think that is to be on-site rather than a very expensive feed.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hants
Posts: 2,295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oxford ATC have done their homework... they will not be going into this with their eyes closed. There is a huge possibility that they will be offering an interim radar service before they get their own radar installed and working. They are fully aware that it will take time to get fully up and running... They have awarded a contract for installation and have the space in the existing building already earmarked (and probably cleared out by now). LARS is not a money-spinner, and the whole idea behind this radar installation is to afford some protection to Oxford traffic.
Radar need only be manned for scheduled IFR movements if that is what Oxford want to do... meaning the number of radar controllers is more than enough.
They know fully well how many ATCOs they need, they also know exactly how much of a service they will be able to provide with the numbers they are going to have. It is not exactly breaking new ground... other small airports have done it in the past. As the radar service develops, they will want to entice new customers and will build the provision with the traffic...
Instead of slating it, they should be applauded... there are too many airports operating in class G airspace that think it is acceptable that once off the airways structure, fee paying aircraft are left to fend for themselves in class G airspace.
As for the comment about the Olympic Airspace... it has nothing to do with the provision of a radar service from Oxford. After simulation it was agreed between NATS and Oxford that the airspace change originally applied for was not needed in its entirety and that it was possible to handle the Olympic traffic in a different way, meaning that some of the airspace could be 'handed back' to the GA community, which is in keeping with the whole attitude that, where able, the impact of the Olympics should be as little as possible on GA.
Radar need only be manned for scheduled IFR movements if that is what Oxford want to do... meaning the number of radar controllers is more than enough.
They know fully well how many ATCOs they need, they also know exactly how much of a service they will be able to provide with the numbers they are going to have. It is not exactly breaking new ground... other small airports have done it in the past. As the radar service develops, they will want to entice new customers and will build the provision with the traffic...
Instead of slating it, they should be applauded... there are too many airports operating in class G airspace that think it is acceptable that once off the airways structure, fee paying aircraft are left to fend for themselves in class G airspace.
As for the comment about the Olympic Airspace... it has nothing to do with the provision of a radar service from Oxford. After simulation it was agreed between NATS and Oxford that the airspace change originally applied for was not needed in its entirety and that it was possible to handle the Olympic traffic in a different way, meaning that some of the airspace could be 'handed back' to the GA community, which is in keeping with the whole attitude that, where able, the impact of the Olympics should be as little as possible on GA.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
meaning that some of the airspace could be 'handed back' to the GA community, which is in keeping with the whole attitude that, where able, the impact of the Olympics should be as little as possible on GA.
This means not dividing it in a way (such as loads of Class A followed by loads of Class G) which keeps all users equally unhappy.