Military ATC on PPrune
 

Dear Officer Commanding PPrune,

I am really hacked off that we don't have a military ATC page on this site.

Mil ATC boys/girls have to read all that Civvy ATC blah, which frankly is terribly boring and mundane.

The mil aircrew boys get their debating pages, can we have one too?

Thanks awfully old chap.

"Military ATC"? Oh, is that what it's called? :-)

Flobadob

Have a look at the military aircrew forum, and you may get an inkling of perhaps why there isn't a military ATC forum.
Its almost exclusive of anything civilian, and anyone who dares to state a civillian perspective gets shot down.

If thats what you want, so be it, but I think it will be a waste of resources as a separate forum, we have a lot to learn from each other, something which your flying coleagues seem unable to accept until they enter the big bad world of airlines.

As a civi' atco I work along side the Mil', and although our working practices are a world apart, we have a lot in common.

Post here and accept the consequences.... :ok:

Aaaaargh. :ugh: Let me guess the hot topics:

Controller Licensing
Terrain clearance responsibilities
Specialist pay
Controller Licensing - again
Duty of Care
Pristina BOI
RPAR
Bl**dy aircrew
Bl**dy Civvis (controllers and aircraft)
Why can't we have civil licenses as 70% of the aircraft we talk to are civvi?
'That' Courts Martial
Fighter controllers :yuk:
TG9 Controller Selection Boards
Organisation formally known as MATO
Controller Licensing

Dear Mods, please don't do it!!!!!

PS. I agree with niknak; maybe we would learn something from each other.

Can you brits imagine controllers working with ESARR-5 licences on all the mil airfields in a country? And hey! One set of rules, the same ones as the civies! Nahh, that would be boring! :8 :8

I didn't think that the British military had enough controllers in it to even fill up a thread <EG>...

Running away before the fire starts <G>

regards

Scott

Scott.....many a word said in jest. You're not far off the mark!:(

Honourable Friends,

You have all highlighted/made enough subjects/comments to make an Mil ATC forum worthwhile.

Thanks for making my point.

Some of us civvies control quite a lot of mil traffic. Some of us are even interested in a military point of view. I'll continue to read any of the ATC threads be it in Civvy ATC, Mil ATC or Mil Aircrew. Can't we just keep ATC all together?

Rant over, Big smiles all round

CF

:D

Personally I don't see the point in a separate Mil ATC forum.

From a Civil view point I am very interested in how the Mil operate and what their problems and issues are. I hope they are interested in what happens in the civil world.

I would also hope that rather than consdier ourselves to be separate, that we are Controllers first and foremost, albeit with different, but inextricably linked, agendas.

It's worth pointing out that we operate in the same airspace for much of the time. Mil crossers of Airways for example, and the many and varied operations in Class "G" (Which doesn't "belong" to anyone BTW), both Mil and Civil.

Rgds BEX

There is no need for a separate Mil ATC Forum.

The reasons are two fold.

Firstly, there are already 2 Forums where military ATC can be discussed. Either here in the non specific ATC Forum (which welcomes both civil and military input), or in the Military Aircrew Forum whose remit is ''A forum for the professionals who fly the non-civilian hardware, and the backroom boys and girls without whom nothing would leave the ground. Army, Navy and Airforces of the World, all equally welcome here.''

Secondly, there is a constant review on PPRuNe which actually looks at reducing Forums, not increasing them. The addition of a new Forum is only ever done where there is demonstrated need which can not be currently met, along with an indication that there will be sufficient members to meet a critical mass which will provide a lively and robust Forum with lots of debate and input. For example, the NATS Forum is one which always hovers close on being disbanded. It certainly has plenty of registered members - around 400 - and so meets our experience (gained over the years) of the numbers of members needed for a sustained Forum. However, the input is relatively low and it becomes very stagnant at times. PPRuNe doesn't believe that there are that many Mil ATCOs out there, or that the number of daily topics and issues could be sustained for a dedicated Forum.

So, we will continue with the two Forums we have today, which have a wide and varied input from all manner of aviation professionals on both sides of the mike from all over the globe.

Thanks for raising the issue.

[Edited to remove words twice :O ]

Hear Hear. Did you have to say it twice, or was it just finger trouble? :p

Heh.

I can just see Radar typing all that out twice :E

Mil ATC Forum
 

As a Mil ATCO of 30+ years and a frequent visitor and occasional contributer to this forum, I also see no need whatsoever for a separate Mil ATC Forum. I agree completely with the views expressed by Bexil160 and believe both civil and military ATCOs can benefit enormously from reading certain posts that broaden their understanding of each others problems. With the advent of ESARR-5 at long last we are gradually moving towards each other and anything that promotes greater unity m ust be the right way forward.

That said, I wouldn't mind adding my opinions to some of the threads suggested by my old colleage WBS!!!

Matoman

Please whatever you do don't give the mil ATC controlling gits their own forum, it would be a painful thing to behold. I've a better idea, get rid of them altogether. The RAF/FAA is so small now that we could emulate the Kiwis and use civil servants instead in toto.:E

:eek: :} :\ ........:eek: :} :\ .....gulp:eek: :} :\ ......sorry DK388 no bites here!

DK338
 

Best sort your facts out.....we had the choice to be in uniform there as well buddy, and if I am not mistaken military is public service as well???

:rolleyes:

Agree with WBS, I have been in for 30+ yrs and we do need to work together. On the last post, your idea worked well at Boscombe?.

New Zealands system worked very well. You had the choice to join the Territorials and received a commission based on your job grading or previous military experience (this was appropriate to the RAAF controllers that came over as they were all Flt Looeys).

This gave the RNZAF deployable Controllers in peace time and war if required. Additionally the controllers participated in MAOT courses etc. You could also go flying and participate in all activities synonymous with Air Force life.....ie. Bar-O-Clock :E

Best 2 years of my life....:ok:

Yippe Ki Yi Yay!

Any Mil ATC forum would have to be limited to 3 replies per thread.