answers
 

Evening

Well after a full day of this and a top up here i think we sould try and get some real answers here (if we really can)

1 Can we confirm that we were given initially wrong information regarding the acceptable size of fonts

2 Kill the rumour that it was promised to use size 14-16 fonts and we are using size 6-8

also the thoughts are that this smells of spin doctor influence by those who know their work well
(not everyone who works on a screen has worked for NATS and some still have friends in Vauxhall house)

Thanks for your time

MM

Route BIG-KOK


I'm sorry but your post is incorrect on every count.

The screens were never meant to be read that close, cannot recall the distances off the top of my head but Swanwick is within HSE 'limits'.

It was NEVER designed to be stripless (we are, only now, working on Elimination of Paper Strips but the future does not look too good for that project).
Workbench size was never changed to accomodate the strip boards. You should note that the channels that the strip board holders sit in are part of the design. Originally the strip boards were mounted to one side of the Tactical, after ergonomic problems they are now positioned directly in front of the Tac.

All

Forgive me if I'm wrong, and please tell me why you don't use them tubes this way, but there is a selectable option 2 clicks away that allows you to increase the font size. I did this myself yesterday to sort out a rather wooly tube. Is there some reason why the font size is set to the smallest of the 3 options? Let me know if there is a reason for this, but it seems to me that it would solve all these problems that are happening.

I'm not trying to stir up a hornet's nest here, just asking.

Cheers.

All Systems Go:

I think what you are referring to is the 'TDB Presentation' option where you can indeed change the size of TDB font from Small to Medium to Large. The problem with setting it to large is that the TDB then obscures or overlaps others making the screen very cluttered.

What most people are complaining about is the size of the font on the Planner's strip bays, the Flight Data Editor and the Full Flight Plan. The font size on these is not changeable, and although I am told I have very good eyesight I have difficulty reading the figures on these. Indeed, I get an eyestrain headache after 90 mins planning (as happens often now since we have barely enough staff). If I return to planning again after a 30 minute break then it gets worse.

Take 3 Call 5:

You surprise me. I had always understood that the intention was to make NERC stripless but concerns about systems failures meant that a method of displaying paper strips had to be devised afterwards.

Thanks Eye. I was under the impression that it was the TDBs that were the problem. What you are suffering from is something called "Rainbow Effect". To cut a long story short the space between the characters isn't enough. They tend to merge into one, especially the smaller characters. I've been reliably informed it's being looked into with much gusto and will hopefully be sorted when NERC 2.0 happens (a small engineering joke there...). All we can do I'm afraid at the moment is keep re-setting up the bleepers.

Dinosaur...

Apart from "emboldening" the fonts there has been NO CHANGE in them since the start of OCT, over a year ago. Indeed NERC management DEFENDED them as completly acceptable with no need to change them at all (Source..letter from R Herron. Oct 2001)

If you were told "this is what the controllers want", you have been misled. NOBODY ever asked the operational people at LATCC what they wanted.

There has been a resposnse to the HSE report. It has not been widely publicised. Why NOT?

Rgds BEX

Well, no surprise there, I guess.

--Dinosaur

Dinosaur......it seems like management are used to being frugal with the truth.........

I would think that what you were told about the fonts was what management wanted, in order to keep things moving so that they could reach the (VERY BELATED) opening date, and still keep not only their political face but also their bonuses.........

Cynical ???...........Moi ??

eyeinthesky:

Fallbacks is only one issue of concern about EFS, there are lots more. The main reason I can see for it falling by the wayside currently is that there is just no business benefit. What do the controllers gain by doing away with paper strips?

Can they handle more flights?
No.
Is it 'easier' to control?
(Currently) No.
Can NATS 'save' on ATSA's.
Not likely.

So not worth the investment at the moment.

Parliamentary question
 

House of Commons question on 23 May from Mr. Mark Hoban (Fareham) to Mr. Robin Cook questioning problems with displays.
Response from Mr. Cook "NATS completely rejects these allegations and remains put out that the integrity and competence of its staff have been questioned in such a manner."

And I thought it was the integrity of the equipment that was being questioned. However, I'm so pleased to hear that you are all obviously talking rubbish and there are no problems with reading displays. After all, Mr. Cook wouldn't mislead Parliament would he?