ATC enroute sector validations

[clicker]

A question if I may to answer the curious cat that resides in me.

I know controllers have to validate for each sector they work but I'm also aware that at night a controller will have more than one sector to look after.

I noticed that Reims published a notam stating that at night all of their sectors would be controlled via a single radio frequency. In other ATCC's up to four or more sectors can be bandboxed together.

Does that mean that the controller would have to be fully qualified for every single sector or does the night time role hold another form of validation because of the different workload encountered?

Thanks clicker

[HEATHROW DIRECTOR]

Controllers have to be valid for all sectors they operate.

[ZOOKER]

Also as most UK en-route sectors are manned by both a radar and a planning controller, you have to hold both of these validations for each of the sectors that will be band-boxed. In the case of the old Manchester East Bank total band-box, that meant 10 validations were required to work 133.8MHz, during the short time it was single-manned in the wee hours on night-shifts.

[Plazbot]

I have worked in two facilities in two different countries that used light traffic ratings for low volume ops. Certain parameters such as traffic volume, weather, holding etc were the limiting factors on who could man the sector. Used during my time there exclusively at night.

Also worked a group where we put up to six sectors with 12 frequencies together at times.

[Vector361]

In the US we need to be certified on all CENTER sectors, radar and radar associate to work combined sectors. However, many centers take over approach/terminal airspace from 12 AM - 6 AM in addition to working combined sectors. We have no approach certifications/validations for this airspace. Generally, it works well, though.

[Vector361]

The answer to that it way above my pay grade. Why we don't have the approach rating is the better question. And if I have your point correct then why not allow combining slow sectors that you aren't validated/certified on if you can take other airspace you aren't checked out on.

[clicker]

Thanks for all of the replies.

Only last night I was driving back home across the UK and monitoring a sector in the south.

The controller and planner were clearly very busy with their combined sectors but everything sounded cool and calm.

Did get the old impression of the duck paddling slowly on the pond with the feet going ten to the dozen underneath.

Could never do that job and admire the ones that can.

[obwan]

In the U.K. you are required to be valid on the sectors you are providing a control service for. However occassionaly at night I have been asked what level I would like an inbound aircraft to be descended to when normally they would have been transferred by standing co ordination; and no the offering sector was not being operated by a trainee because I asked the question after the third or fourth request, makes you wonder!

[055166k]

obwan

Standing agreements between sectors reduce co-ordination workload significantly and enable vast amounts of traffic to be handled in a one-size-fits-all manner. At this time when airlines and other operators are loaded with unbelievable costs, surely we can do our "bit" to save gas. During quiet hours it should be possible to co-ordinate an eco/cost/flight-efficient/time-saving flight profile. Standing agreements are designed to help us when it's busy, but the down side has always been the draconian effect on smooth economical flight profiles.
Maybe the "offering sector" had been reading up on service provision goals but no-one mentioned it........besides which I thought that anything can be co-ordinated [within reason].
Just an opinion.....no hassle intended. rgds.