Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Ground & Other Ops Forums > ATC Issues
Reload this Page >

NATS Lose Gatwick Contract (Split thread)

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.

NATS Lose Gatwick Contract (Split thread)

Old 22nd Jul 2014, 20:21
  #81 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: france
Posts: 126
HEATHROW DIRECTOR
A past general manager at Heathrow, who was an ATCO, told us once that we had no idea how much power was in our hands. 'nuff said.
luv pringles
I suppose that was about 50 years ago, didn't you leave about 20 years ago, The world has moved on.
Nimmer
Luv Pringles, the world hasn't moved on. Controllers still have a lot of power, we just choose not to use it.
DFS need planes landing and departing at Gatwick airport, they can't do that without controllers, fact. The Gatwick controllers could demand a huge premium to do that job, they won't of course because they worry about losing their jobs.
However if they stand up for themselves and stay together, a wage rise can be obtained. Unfortunately too many people think like yourself.
No other solution than calling #EUATCOsCOLLECTIVE to take over the #EUATMcontrols... Just think about it...

#saintex2002
saintex2002 is offline  
Old 22nd Jul 2014, 20:55
  #82 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Down sarrrf
Age: 41
Posts: 2
It's a real shame that off the back of Birmingham, NATS lost another one (and a bigger one at that). And everyone seems so surprised and shocked? (not just the shop floor staff but the management?)

Did anything happen within NATS after Birmingham? Any inward looking, cross examination of what went wrong? Or did we just think Birmingham Airport were a bunch chancers who'd cobble together a cheap in house solution and just about get away with it because it's not that busy an airfield? In the mean time it seems NATS carrys on business as usual and here we are again...

At least the bid team have been congratulated for doing a great job!
Tomohawk is offline  
Old 22nd Jul 2014, 21:24
  #83 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: farfaraway
Posts: 161
I am constantly amazed by the number of people who feel they have to continue working to "keep the old grey matter going ". There's a big beautiful world out there to explore and we are not given long to explore it. The thought of spending a retirement talking to puddle jumpers fills me with horror. Get out there and smell the flowers,it'll be gone soon enough. To return to the loss of contract issue most of my working life the constant whinge was how bad NATS management was , well now people will have a chance to experience a new order; maybe in a year or so the staff at EGKK and EGBB can let us all know how it's all panning out.
obwan is offline  
Old 23rd Jul 2014, 09:46
  #84 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Luton
Posts: 425
Having been out sourced to NATS from Local Government some 12 years ago I was not impressed by NATS management at all, and I thought Local Government wasn't that good.

The only good thing to get out of it was the pension scheme, which I have taken and run and having no regrets at all.

Especially the way things are going in NSL.
Level bust is offline  
Old 23rd Jul 2014, 09:51
  #85 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: 50+ north
Posts: 893
Level bust

Me too!
TCAS FAN is offline  
Old 23rd Jul 2014, 14:16
  #86 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: T.C.
Age: 53
Posts: 248
I have mused over a 24 hour period, and feel I can't hold back. TCAS Fan You are talking complete Cr*p, there is no way the safety regulator in the UK will allow a green field validation at a major international airport.

As for 2 days live training and then controlling a 55 hour at Gatwick, WTF!!!

Oh but it will be fine because I have read the procedures!!! Total boll**ks

Your list of qualifications sounds mightily impressive, but how about adding a few
validations that we might of heard of into the mix, I will start with a list of my own, as I think this may prove that I might actually know what I am talking about.

Gatwick and Essex radar, Gatwick tower, Dubai tower and radar, Luton radar.
Nimmer is offline  
Old 23rd Jul 2014, 16:08
  #87 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: somerset
Posts: 120
Didn't the NATS controllers lose the chance of sticking together when Area was split from Airports (was it around 2000?). I do remember voices back then saying that was the thin end of the wedge.It now seems the fatter end of the wedge is arriving.

As a current (non NATS) controller i'd be rather reluctant to fly out of Gatwick if i knew the ATCO's there were trained only on a sim and given green field status! However, as a non NATS controller i can also see the pressures to drive down costs from NATS levels. There will be sufficient new ATCO's willing to work for say 60% to 70% (debate?) of current NATS salaries who, presumably, can be properly trained in time.
possibleconsequences is offline  
Old 23rd Jul 2014, 16:30
  #88 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Deepest darkest Inbredland....
Posts: 571
I'm sorry, but the problem isn't the ATCO salaries. I work at a London airport as a tower only (although do have and validated approach), if I leave and go to a nearby non NATS airfield I would, if I joined at the top of the scale where I am now, have a reasonably large pay rise. We operate with less staff than a few years ago, and work all the hours we can. There are less support staff than before so the extra costs, apart from pensions (which are decreasing as there are less staff on them as newer ones arrive), the costs have never been lower relatively. HH started with about 20 people. How many now? All a case of the tail wagging the dog I'm afraid.
terrain safe is offline  
Old 23rd Jul 2014, 23:22
  #89 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: River Thames & Surrey
Age: 72
Posts: 9,014
TCAS FAN; if you want to keep the grey matter exercised by FISO ing, I know of an airfield in Wales which is looking for FISOs, but then I guess you probably know about that already!
chevvron is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2014, 02:43
  #90 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 141
NATS Lose Gatwick Contract (Split thread)

Terrain safe,
Which non-NATS airfield near to london is paying more than NATS top spine point??
Squawk 7500 is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2014, 06:44
  #91 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Down South
Posts: 294
When the word "safety" is replaced in several documents by the words "acceptable risk" I think we can all see where the motivation lies, regardless of what else is going on
The Many Tentacles is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2014, 07:59
  #92 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hants
Posts: 2,294
LookingForaJob

I have no idea whether what NATS does warrants the higher costs but the fact is that there are other ANSPs in Europe which demonstrably are able to provide high quality services and whose costs for doing so are lower
Only on headline figures... it is not a level playing field... NATS costs include pension costs, the vast majority of other ANSPs do not include these in their costs as they are subsidised by their governement.

That said, it is the hand NATS has been dealt with PPP; no point whingeing too much about it; we (NATS) needs to prove that the extra cost is worth it to the customers.

I get sick of BA et al complaining that we pass through pension costs to them, the customer... that is exactly what every service industry does, BA included!!

Gatwick will not achieve more movements per hour now without paying NATS over and above the cost of the DFS contract as the 60+ movements per hour they are hoping for is reliant on systems etc designed and supplied by NATS who will, hopefully, not give this away for peanuts. The LTMA works fairly well given the outdated procedures (being revamped as we speak)... it is not in NATS interest as a company to up the delivery numbers to Gatwick without passing on the cost as it will have a staffing implication in the LTMA.
anotherthing is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2014, 08:08
  #93 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The foot of Mt. Belzoni.
Posts: 1,996
As Tentacles points out, it's interesting how the language in ATC has changed. I remember reading an article on the internal intranet from office-dwelling bod about ways to "incentivise our controllers.
The word 'incentivise' was used about 3 times in one paragraph.
ZOOKER is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2014, 09:35
  #94 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: 5116N00044W
Age: 73
Posts: 179
Following a link from Richard Deakin's latest blog (http://nats.aero/blog/2014/07/competition-can-deliver-change-europe/), I see that
the main reason DFS gave when it announced earlier this month that it plans to increase air navigation charges was its “unmanageable” pension obligations!
(http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-ne...-cost-increase)
PeltonLevel is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2014, 16:39
  #95 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 563
The LTMA works fairly well given the outdated procedures (being revamped as we speak)...
Y'all better make sure the new design doesn't exclude transit GA/VFR flights with Class A airspace or PRNAV airspace or telephone PPR or other unnecessary requirements.



We are watching as well as the UK Government GA Red Tape Panel.
soaringhigh650 is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2014, 17:21
  #96 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: HANTS
Posts: 192
Oooooh,bit scary that
GAPSTER is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2014, 18:13
  #97 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: LHR/EGLL
Age: 42
Posts: 4,346
SH,

I assume you're familiar with the PBN IR that will come from EASA?
Gonzo is offline  
Old 24th Jul 2014, 21:25
  #98 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: T.C.
Age: 53
Posts: 248
Soaring high, my old pal, that report is 83 pages of total [email protected] that basically says nothing, you will still be soaring low!!!
Nimmer is offline  
Old 25th Jul 2014, 12:28
  #99 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 563
Gonzo,

I assume you're familiar with the PBN IR that will come from EASA?
Not exactly but if I can recertify my PA28 to PRNAV quickly and cheaply then in principle I don't have a problem.

Nimmer,

that report is 83 pages of total [email protected] that basically says nothing
Ah my old anti-GA pal. We meet again. Are you still working for National Airline Traffic Services Limited? 'Cos you won't be for much longer!
soaringhigh650 is offline  
Old 25th Jul 2014, 21:51
  #100 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: T.C.
Age: 53
Posts: 248
Explain, how and why won't I be working for NATS?

Plus I am not anti GA, just today I gave a lovely service both traffic and a crossing service across both Gatwiick and Luton zone.

However my basic failing is I just love catching fish!!!
Nimmer is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.