Scrap NERC!
 

Remember the hype surrounding the film Jurassic Park? Now as I recall the slogan was '200 million years in the making'.Well now how many years has NERC been 'in the making'? 10 at least? Not bad to create a new dinosaur.Unfortunately messrs Eddington,Bishop,Branson et al that's exactly what you have bought.D'oh!
Now doubt Chis, President Blaaaaah and two jabs/jags Prescott did a brilliant make over on the product on offer.(appologies to all the other Nats units who have their own problems,staff shortages etc but Nerc is centre stage right now)
Perhaps the sales pitch went something like this:Now look lads Nats is a steal at £800 million.We've done all the hard work at Nerc.It's a fantasic place.The equipment is top notch and state of the art.(totally reliable as is the Nas computer at Latcc)Nerc will enable you to move more of your aircraft with minimal delay and lower costs.There are plenty of staff and they are all totally subserviant to Nats management so you wont have any bother with them.The electronics are dead easy to use so you can train even Atcos up in no time.There might be some minor delays next spring while some of the luddite Latcc staff make a meal out of having to use a keyboard,but there's always one isn't there!
So there you have it, Nats is real bargain we can't see how you can turn it down!(besides you don't want to upset Tonys' thought police at Millbank now do you?
Well lads at the AWG, sorry to be a party pooper but unfortunately fings ain't always what they seem.
Hopefully you will see through all the bulls##t from the men in suits at Nats/Nerc.
Here' a gentle hint:

The operation at Nerc is labour intensive.The T&P system requires between 25 and 30% more controllers to operate the positions currently in use at Latcc.(probably a conservative estimate)Suprise suprise Chis we don't have the staff)
The electonics are over comlicated,cumbersome and not user friendly.The planners role is to soley satisfy the software with little or no relation to the real Air traffic situation.
Aircraft will have to get used to frequent level changes to suite the system and remain 'enroute'as constantly updating the electronics will be in the too busy/difficult pile.
Nerc will not move any more aircraft than at present.(perhaps only gaining more CAS would do that)
There's no fall back system when the software falls over.
The delays you will experience next summer will be appalling.(look out Mr Easyjet)and what has been gained?.er...... I'm struggling.
As a low life Atco it's not for me to dare to suggest a solution,but you can have it anyway:
Scap the Nerc concept.Cancel OCT(and the delays this summer will suddenly get less).Forget opening on Jan 27th 2002.Maintain the operation at Latcc until the furniture at Nerc has been modified to accept the current Latcc mediator operation then move the Area control operation down.
Meanwhile look for an off the shelf proven workable system which can be installed and operational at Nerc circa 2004.
Good luck.
PS If I were you (ie the Airline Group)I would ask those con men you bought the company from for £600million off the list price!

Over and out.

Oooops.... The TRUTH is out.

I wonder, if the "new" NATS management (contradiction in terms, I know) really subscribe to the "Climate where everyone can contribute" legend on this mug that I'm drinking out of?

If so, they ought to take the above VERY seriuously... betcha they won't though.

Rgds BEX

After more than a quarter of a century working at LATCC, I endorse the above comments! I'm horrified after a couple of training sessions on the new kit, it appears that moving aeroplanes has become a secondary task at NERC, the No1 priority is keeping the electronics up to date and only when that labour intensive, user unfriendly job is done can we turn our attention to controlling the aeroplanes!

All of a sudden, working at a non - NATS unit in the sticks takes on a new, green grass perspective...... http://www.pprune.org/ubb/NonCGI/tongue.gif

------------------
It wasn't me.

Trouble is Mehusala, there are NO decent off-the-shelf ATC systems - Industry doesn't know how to produce them. That's because Industry doesn't really know how ATC works - anything beyond printing paper strips is outside their capability.

Spoonbill, you must be mad (I must ask you for some of those pills, only joking)?

Compared to the private sector life within NATS is fantastic for me having experienced years of being 'shafted' by my previous employer.

There are a many excellent non-NATS units, but the view of ATC by senior management from my own experience is usually based upon the costs involved in running the unit. Well paid staff who sit on their ar*es all day long.

My previous employer had an HR manager who was angry that I was on a higher salary than he/she was!

A shocking attitude especially as if he/she made a mistake it would probably only have a 'small' financial penalty where as if I make a mistake............

Nuff said.

Now where is my bonus?

GroundBound....

Actually I think that there are some "off the shelf systems" that might work for Swanwick.

The kit at Brest is pretty good (Thomson CSF as I recall), and the stuff at Maastricht looked good the last time I visited.. It's been updated since I think. Amsterdam has system that works and our dear colleagues in the USA at least have nice big colour displays now.

For a system that works just look "next door" at TC. NODEL isn't perfect, but is a darn sight better than the ergonomic nightmare that LATCC AC has to offer and, it has a PROVEN track record of reliability. Oh, it's also available, right now.

Personally I think that this "evolutionary" step to NODEL is the way we should have gone, rather than the "big bang" complete system change that NERC has been.... too late now..

Rgd BEX

The Barco (Cobham/Flight refuelling) 29 inch displays at EGGW were much better than the TC units which are now well dated. Modern, full colour and cheap.

They looked like big wide screen TV's with great resolution and very easy to manipulate 'HOT KEYS'. Available 'off the shelf'.

They're not as good as the "new" screens at Scottish Pffffffffffffffffff.

Orson and Roger Out,

The screens are the easy bit - it's the software behind them that is the problem.
Most software engineers cannot comprehend the complexity of ATC and require a considerable re-education before thy can function here.
Unfortunately they are then often head hunted and we can start the proccess all over again.

------------------
Lon More,just an ATCO

Oh OK, If we have to we will take it off your hands, we could call it .....Maastricht POMMY sectors. Shouldnt be TOOOO difficult to fit most of LATCC in somewhere.

Then u guys would be in the EU

[This message has been edited by TrafficTraffic (edited 16 June 2001).]

Whenever I start to wonder why we shouldn't sign up to all this euro stuff, somebody comes along and reminds me.
TrafficTraffic, I rest my case!!

LonMore is right. It isn't the displays that are the problem. There are any number of really good displays out there that outperform NATS equipment (incl NODE).

NAS, Host, HCS or whatever you want to call it is going to be the UK standard for a LONG time yet. Even NERC "piggybacks" on it.(repeat after me... "NAS BEFORE NERC" ten times). The software origally written in the late 1960's for the beloved IBM 9020D lives on!!

Strangely enough the situation is very similiar in the USA. Nice new BIG colour workstations using existing NAS software.... without NERC type electronics(abandonned as too risky)

Where did we go wrong??

Rgds
BEX

Bex,
I agree with your point, and your comfirmation of Lon More's. The display is whizz, but the system behind it is a limiting factor.
Because ATC functions are not really understood by suppliers, you don't get good off-the shelf systems.
Where did you go wrong? Like everyone else probably. Getting a good ATC system requires ATC guys who understand software to specify it, and software guys who understand ATC to write it - neither are easy to find. And.. they should all be in-house, not selling their services elswhere.

There ARE ATC guys in NATS who do understand software and could specify a usable system. Where are they? Our current CEO for one - a job he WAS good at. The GM LATCC-ER is another, a DWS and a few CSCs also feature on the list. Why aren't they doing the job? Well, historically Data Processing has been seen as a dead-end job for an ATCO; anybody who had any ambition baled out asap many years ago. Perhaps things will be different in the future, but I doubt it. There is a widespread attitude that non-operational ATCOs are, somehow, a lower form of life, and are only there because "they can't stand the heat in the kitchen". In some cases, perhaps, but there have been, and still are, numbers of qualified ATCOs who are doing their bit behind the scenes, trying to improve the quality of "progress" to benefit us all. Sadly, the cynicism that they frequently encounter tends to drive them back into mainstream ATC, if only to prove that they CAN do the job. Small wonder that the non-ATC software engineers always have the upper hand in specifying what we do and do not want.

Well put Numpo, how many ATCO's who go into other areas now keep their ticket so as to maintain some credibility (and as insurance!).

and a few CSCs also feature on the list. Why aren't they doing the job?
Yourself included i am sure Numpo, or is the lure of controlling aircraft still too great?

Reading through this it all has a familiar ring to it -- When Australia transitioned to TAAATS (Thomson-CSF Eurocat based System), out with all those old fashioned paper strips, and in with electronic everything.

After 3 years, we can now move almost as much traffic as before with almost as few staff -- whizzo. But the amount of inputs to the system are incredible.

I think you are about to learn the 1st phrase we did (apart from the inevitable profanities), .... FEEDING THE ELEPHANT!.

Good Luck!

Thanks for that LoLevel, I think you've hit the nail on the head.

Amongst the many concerns about NERC is the ability to handle more traffic, which our illustrious "suits" have promised the airlines on our behalf . Guess who'll be taking the blame when it doesn't?

I think your observations about the Australian system are most prophetic. The UK system appears to be heading the same way, as you have so rightly observed.

To anyone else out there, some serious questions. Maybe I'm wrong. Here's your opportunity to prove it. How, exactly, is NERC going to increase capacity? Is NERC really more labour intensive than LATCC (i.e. more people required)? Where are the extra staff coming from? Who is going to train them on the live equipment?

There's the challenge, just answer the questions, in an open and honest manner sic ..... I wonder if anybody will?

Rgds
BEX

Good debate here!!
If Jan 02 is O-date, I will have done about ten times the number of days that most at Latcc will get on the kit.
My point is that I have been trying to relate the weather avoidance carnage of the last few days at Latcc with trying to cope with this at Nerc.
One of the days the wx was between Woodley and Midhurst.
Planes all over the place.
With the Nerc/TC airspace sectorisation in that general area at all levels, I think there are 11 different sectors.
Try targetting the right sectors then as a planner with a few days famil!!! What's the sector number for Hurn west - quick!!!
Could take the rest of the week to get the electronics back up to scratch.
Bad enough these days as a Crew chief with a versatile phone and a blank strip or 2.

Any one suggest a way of getting my mortgage paid off early so I can retire at 50? and thus avoid Nerc

From the little I have seen to date, it occurs to me that the CAA have chosen over the years NOT to involve a true technology company in the design and build process. Your guys know what's needed and some companies can take their own technology and customise it to fulfil a need. That way, you end up with "off the shelf" hardware allied to bespoke or shared software systems which are easier to migrate and upgrade as requirements change. I don't think anything you have is or ever was "industry standard" so you have to re-invent the wheel rather than follow a technology path. Yes I do work in IT and I may be talking out of the fat bit I'm sat on but I'd be interested in feedback....