I know a bloke who worked in Blackbushe "Tower" - couldn't get a job in the "Ministry" as an ATCA 'cos he only had 2 O levels. Went off and got experience abroad and ended up working at Heathrow as an ATCO. They must have been insane to employ him....

And I thought it was just that they couldn't afford your hourly rate...;)
If anyone's interested, EGHR is on the lookout again, this time for a Senior FISO(A). Dunno wot they pay but it's a nice friendly professional place to fly and work (surroundings of course, don't pay the mortgage).

<<but it's a nice friendly professional place to fly >>

So why don't they employ professional Air Traffic Controllers? Don't s'pose they'd pay the money........

Money and hours!

When you do a 13 hour day by yourself at the height of summer with only a couple of toilet breaks.........thats when you know youre a FISO

DBB

Perhaps they prefer professional FISOs:E

That is pretty bad. At a busy unit how are you meant to maintain concentration?? Even though the same regs don't apply to working hours as ATCOs there must be some employment law to say such a long shift with minimal break is illegal

I dont think it applies when you do it on a voluntary basis, when you have a pilot desperate to get into the airfield at 21:50 and needs the lights then these things have to be done.

My second to last day as a FISO went as follows, in at 0640 for runway inspection and aircraft due in at 0700 (all times local), aircraft turned up at 0735, Shift starts at 8 so no chance for break. Second person calls in sick (never more than a 2 person crew) so all toilet breaks conducted by airport manager, who, are very busy in their own role.

Shift finishes at 1800 but local charter firm want to return to the field at 1925. No point in going home so wait in the tower. Leave tower at 1940. Head down the road for some chips then back into work for 2040 for another late flight. Eventually got home at 2145.

Concentration is difficult but when you are used to days like that its a matter of suck it up, turn the air con on chill and put another pot of coffee on.

A day like that would prob happen maybe twice a month but as most FISOs in summer will agree with, late flights happen close to every day.

In fairness winter months when its wet and miserable we have nothing to do and at the end of the day it goes back to my comment right at the beginning of the thread, if i didnt want to do it i wouldnt have but without the experience i would not have the job and the possibilities i have now.

And also i loved the work, the pilots were great, new challenges all the time especially when things went wrong and apart from a few members a great crew to work with.

DBB

European Working Time Directive

Probably because they don't HAVE to provide ATC any more

I think all this is utterly appalling. At some places mentioned AFISOs appear to be working under similar conditions I had to endure when I became a "Trainee Controller" at Blackbushe in the mid-1960s. On a work-day you went up in the tower and stayed there. The SATCO would provide a half-hour meal break but that was about it. Many is the time I turned up the speaker and rushed down to the sandbox.

It's time you lot all got together and formed some sort of union!

We had one once, AFIO, the 'Association of Flight Information Officers', run by John Daly. Whatever happened to that? And whatever happened to him? I used to quite enjoy reading 'The Fizzer'.

I suppose you'll be on FISO pay from 4/1/07 then.

Firstly, LHR-D, the FISOs that work there are as 'professional' as you were when you used to wear a headset and in terms of the FISO function for aircraft and vehicles operating on the Manoeuvring Area except an active runway whilst taking-off and landing, the procedures and process are identical to an ATCO providing GMC. Similarly, for aircraft that are airborne, the procedures and process in respect of FIS provision are identical to FIS provision by ATCOs.

Your rather patronising implication concerning their professionalism is simply miguided and ill-judged.

Secondly, the reason that ATCOs are not employed by many FISO(A) aerodromes is because SRATCOH regulations mean that the required number of FISOs doesn't directly correspond with the required number of ATCOs. And although FISO(A) units are also 'approved' by the CAA's SRG, the requirements in some areas differ from the 'approval' for ATC units.

Where you're 100% correct is in respect of the frankly appalling regulation by SRG of FISO(A)'s working hours - ably demonstrated by other posts in this thread. It should be remembered that many of the aerodomes where these FISOs work don't just handle private and training flights, but also handle 'public transport' flights (e.g. Beech 200 on charter) and it's nothing short of disgraceful that the Safety Regulator chooses in the face of industry opposition, to adopt a 'Nelsonian eye' rather than regulate on safety grounds - a scaled-down version of SRATCOH would be more than adequate.

Unfortunately, the European Working Time Directive whilst being quite prescriptive about weekly hours worked, permits an averaging-out over 12 months thus over-long hours in the Summer, for example, can be compensated by significantly shorter hours in the Winter. This does absolutely nothing for a FISO(A)'s fatigue after working in what can be a busy environment with similar responsibilities and procedures to a GMC ATCO for five or six hours without a proper rest break.

However, like most situations where any safety regulator chooses to ignore a problem, if God-forbid, a serious accident occurs perhaps involving a ground collison and loss of life, the employer who allowed a FISO(A) to work for six hours without a break during a 12-hour day would almost certainly be guilty of a failure of their Duty of Care and so end up in a civil court.

The imminent Single European Sky legislation that'll require all licensed aerodomes to have in place an auditable Safety Management System may (if it's not watered down by the UK Government) in part address this issue under the 'safety-related staffing' requirements (training & competence, provision of staff, facilities provided for staff, etc).

:uhoh:

I may have opened up a can of worms here but i just wanted to reiterate what i was trying to get over in my previous post.

Im sure all fiso's will agree that we do the job because we enjoy it (past tense for me), if we did it for money or easy work then we would be no where near the tower. Its hard work and just above the bread line if you work in the london area but i suppose you could compare it to being a first time flying instructor. You work your arse off doing the lowest paid work to get yourself set up for the future and a good reputation, you then see how it goes from there.

Going to a day vfr type ATCO certificate is an idea, but, and its a big but, the day that happens is the day when you are told that you're services as a FISO are no longer required and have the choice of redundancy or being paid less to provide a radio service!

Remember its not always the fault of the aerodrome because they just cannot afford the ATCO service. I'm sure solutions are possible but as it has not changed in the past 20 years, i see no possibility of it changing in the near future.

What i do like though is the fantastic support and equality of attitude that experienced ATCO's like HD have always given to the lower qualified guys like ourselves and it is well apprieciated.
DBB

CAP493. I think you misread me - I'm on YOUR side! I used the term "professional air traffic controller" not in a derogatory sense towards AFISOs but to differentiate between those who hold and those who do not hold ATC licences and I'm fully aware of what each can and can't do. However, it has to be said that at some airfields where licenced controllers also provide AFISO services you can quickly tell when an ATCO is on the mic even if he can't do much more than the AFISO.

I agree with much of what you say and many, many years ago - possibly before many readers here were born - I entered into a great deal of correspondence with GATCO and Ministry of Aviation regarding the lack of CAS around busy airfields. It's frightening that aerodromes handling public transport flights do not have full ATC facilities and CAS. But.... try putting that argument to the people who fly clockwork mice!

Dannyboyblue is right that many AFISOs do it for the love of the job, which is why they're often taken advantage of. When I wore a headset I treated the bloke at the other end of the phone as an equal, whether he was licenced or not. I just took into account the limitations of the service he was providing.

Roll on winter i say!! though last two were dry:( not long to Farnborough
show now

TDM you around tom?.

Not sure if you're refering to my earlier suggestion here - but my thought was not that FIS airfields would upgrade to full ATC, just that as 'career progression' FISOs could progress to an ADV rating without having to follow the full syllabus. They could then move on to other airfields who do provide full ATC. This would encourage 'new blood' in to the FISO role, whilst at the same time aiding the national ATCO shortage!

Its a good idea and i think its been pushed around the airfields for a year or so.

A couple of things spring to mind, Money would be the first. Im not quite sure how much other countries pay nats to put students through the college but i would imagine thousands. Trying to convince the airfields to pay this may be a challenge.

Next, if the person you put through the college got the extra rating personnaly i would expect more money to use it or at least have studied for it, again airfields want more for less so difficult to persuade them.

The next issue is that if the newly qualified Atco has a rating which allows him or her to go elsewhere to do less work for more money they may jump at the chance. The airfield has then paid for the experienced person to go elsewhere.

Another thing springs to mind, im not sure what the regs are regarding switching from an FIS service to full ATC service but what would happen if youre an ATCO for 1 1/2 hours then management say there is nobody to cover youre break so you have to downgrade for an hour then you go back up to a full ATC service?

You are still doing the same job but under different rules. At the end or the day youre responsibilities are the same ergo the one that says dont let things bump into each other no matter what service you provide.

And to top everything off...... airfields are barely surviving as it is, in this current climate i dont think the smaller airfields are to bothered about the shortage of ATCO's in the bigger picture because they have to look afeter themselves before helping others.

On those rainy days i had a lot of time to think about the issues and try to work solutions to them all before suggesting them to management. At the end of the day its safety first but money counts.:rolleyes:

DBB

I think maybe we are still at cross purposes;) :
No, the airfields would not be paying NATS anything. My idea is that FISOs would benefit from dispensation from a proportion of the college course - this could be undertaken at any of the colleges that provide training in the UK. The FISOs would pay their own fee,(or maybe find a sponsor from an existing ATC provider who may want to employ them) - the advantage for them being that it is cheaper than doing the full course.
Well the new employer would pay the going rate for an ATCO.
No see above, the whold idea being that FISOs do move on to full ATC, but not at the expense of the FIS provider. The advantage to the FIS provider is that there is a ready supply of new recruits who want to be FISOs as a stepping stone to ATCO.
Again, not applicable - FIS airfields continue to provide FIS, ATC still provide ATC.
It actually used to be the case that some exemptions were available for the Aerodrome Course for FISOs, but apparently no one took advantage of it, and this route has now been removed. In fact I understand that it used to be the case that you could self study for an Aerodrome Control rating !

Squadgy.
Aerodrome Control rating through self study.....Yes you could. I did it. It worked like this. Pay for your own Class 1 medical, (or get a kindly ATC provider to pay). Apply for student ATCO licence. Get said kindly ATC provider to agree to let you train for an MER. (I think it was 90 hours but it was a looooong time ago). You could then apply to take the exams without an approved course. That avenue is long gone I'm afraid. I did it in the 1970's and I think it was gone by the end of that decade but don't quote me! Personally, I think it would be an excellent idea for there to be abreviated courses for people who already posess a valid FISO licence but the powers that be seem more interested in getting in people with higher academic qualifications than practical experience these days. Did all your FISO team enjoy the visit by the way?