ATC or FC?
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: RAF Lincolnshire
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As an aside - FC can cause havoc. Especially if they send a whole package home for weather on one of the best days in Spadeadam ever. 
Not that we mind, really.
I think you might find that the package leader will make calls like that, being best placed to assess the situation.
Not that we mind, really.I think you might find that the package leader will make calls like that, being best placed to assess the situation.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Belgium
Posts: 254
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think you might find that the package leader will make calls like that, being best placed to assess the situation.
My original comment was a (probably slightly unfair) dig and also a degree of fishing in reference to a recent (very recent) incident.
The reason it may be unfair is because, in my experience, the FCs always get the blame in the debrief, not because they are crap, but because they are not there to defend themselves or put their side of the story. Serves them right for not operating from MOBs!
Guest
Posts: n/a
My first post was merely to highlight the fact that there is scope (whoops, excuse the pun) for a convergence with the ATC & FC branches. I'm not suggesting that we fire the starters gun and get all ATC trained as FCs or FC as ATC. In fact there are some ATC guys who would scare the s... out of me if I knew they were controlling a package (so to speak) No doubt the same would apply to some FCs doing a busy director session during poor weather. However, there is common ground and more than people would like to admit to. To go down this road could well solve many of the problems currently facing both branches.
The RAF ATC bosses have to get away from their apparent protectionist attitude towards the branch and move with the times - I can't speak for the FC guys. Before I left, a former CinC STC, stood up in front of an ATC conference at HQ STC and said move with the times or get left behind (or words to that effect). I don't think RAF ATC has made that journey. But hey, I may be wrong.
WJMcP
P.S. There was also a plan to put FCs into the newly built Coningsby tower, but that bit the dust. FCs would be part of the resident flying sqns strength. That would have made for good start. Any reason why it didn't happen?
No doubt the same would apply to some FCs doing a busy director session during poor weather. However, there is common ground and more than people would like to admit to. To go down this road could well solve many of the problems currently facing both branches. The RAF ATC bosses have to get away from their apparent protectionist attitude towards the branch and move with the times - I can't speak for the FC guys. Before I left, a former CinC STC, stood up in front of an ATC conference at HQ STC and said move with the times or get left behind (or words to that effect). I don't think RAF ATC has made that journey. But hey, I may be wrong.
WJMcP
P.S. There was also a plan to put FCs into the newly built Coningsby tower, but that bit the dust. FCs would be part of the resident flying sqns strength. That would have made for good start. Any reason why it didn't happen?
Last edited by Wee Jock McPlop; 18th Oct 2007 at 19:37.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: RAF Lincolnshire
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
W J M
I agree with everything you've said there.
Why no FCs at CY? Not sure however, keeping a CRC in Lincs has got to be a winner if we are to improve pilot/FC relations. I find the Typhoon guys quite receptive to debrief points (far more so than the F3 crews) & find that they offer very valid points back, which as a newbie, I always take onboard. It would be great to be able to do this on a face to face basis pre and post sortie, as it would massively increase the understanding between GCI & aircrew.
There is no doubt that both branches will converge in some capacity (although I do feel that putting an ATC officer onto the E3 fleet ,straight out of WC training, is a recipe for disaster) and if it's done properly, the outcome will be a win win for all involved. It's just a shame that any amalgamation will be financially driven & probably rushed.
Why no FCs at CY? Not sure however, keeping a CRC in Lincs has got to be a winner if we are to improve pilot/FC relations. I find the Typhoon guys quite receptive to debrief points (far more so than the F3 crews) & find that they offer very valid points back, which as a newbie, I always take onboard. It would be great to be able to do this on a face to face basis pre and post sortie, as it would massively increase the understanding between GCI & aircrew.
There is no doubt that both branches will converge in some capacity (although I do feel that putting an ATC officer onto the E3 fleet ,straight out of WC training, is a recipe for disaster) and if it's done properly, the outcome will be a win win for all involved. It's just a shame that any amalgamation will be financially driven & probably rushed.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Never Alert,
keeping a CRC in Lincs has got to be a winner if we are to improve pilot/FC relations.
Not really the point of the thread...however...
How often have you used this to your advantage and briefed of debriefed face to face? I would think as much as you used it at Buchan or Boulmer!!
As for FC/ATC branches merging....it's only a matter of time!!
keeping a CRC in Lincs has got to be a winner if we are to improve pilot/FC relations.
Not really the point of the thread...however...
How often have you used this to your advantage and briefed of debriefed face to face? I would think as much as you used it at Buchan or Boulmer!!
As for FC/ATC branches merging....it's only a matter of time!!
Last edited by airwaverider; 18th Oct 2007 at 20:06.
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Road to Nowhere
Posts: 1,023
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thread Drift Alert!
There is an FC/GCI facility at Coningsby - it's the one that lived at Waddington for several years but was not used for reasons which, I am sure,could fill an entire thread. The facility is called the Remote Work Station (RWS) and it housed in one of the eng facilities. It comprises 2 MASE workstations and is designed to allow control within the southern MDAs based on radar and comms feeds from (IIRC) Trimingham and Staxton Wold. As such, it is only possible to see as far as the southern MDAs, Lincs MTA and Borders/part of OTA E. The system does not have the number of redundancy measures that the CRCs (Boulmer and Blackdog) enjoy, and its Safety Case reflects this - control may only be provided within an active MDA.
When it was installed, the intention was to operate it with personnel from either of the CRCs or No 1 ACC, but only during certain phases of Typhoon activity (multi-ship Air-Air) where face-to-face debrief would be really useful. Unfortunately, on the few occasions we tried to use it during my time at Blackdog, unserviceabilities prevented its use.
Additionally, use of the RWS in the current climate is difficult to justify because the actual services can be provided just as well at the CRCs (and arguably better given the superb capabilities of UCCS). However, the main problem with using the RWS is the loss of flexibility in deploying a team to Cy. Those people, if left at a CRC, can provide GCI services all over the UK - having them at the RWS limits them, as mentioned before, to working the 323s. This wouldn't be so much of an issue if the CRCs actually had WCs to spare, but I can assure you they don't (and if any of the crews out there don't believe me, go pay them a visit! (sorry JT)).
MM made an interesting point earlier regarding the current employment levels of the UK E-3 Component ... why shouldn't they support the RWS facility? Given it wasn't used when installed at Waddington, it's hard to see how the few(?) FAs and WCs at Waddo might be persuaded to get themselves over to Cy ....
Now then, where's that Kevlar Helmet ...
Edited to add that the debriefing problem will only be properly resolved when the CRCs and Fighters are based together. This is extremely unlikely to occur for several years as there is, you guessed it, no money!
STH
There is an FC/GCI facility at Coningsby - it's the one that lived at Waddington for several years but was not used for reasons which, I am sure,could fill an entire thread. The facility is called the Remote Work Station (RWS) and it housed in one of the eng facilities. It comprises 2 MASE workstations and is designed to allow control within the southern MDAs based on radar and comms feeds from (IIRC) Trimingham and Staxton Wold. As such, it is only possible to see as far as the southern MDAs, Lincs MTA and Borders/part of OTA E. The system does not have the number of redundancy measures that the CRCs (Boulmer and Blackdog) enjoy, and its Safety Case reflects this - control may only be provided within an active MDA.
When it was installed, the intention was to operate it with personnel from either of the CRCs or No 1 ACC, but only during certain phases of Typhoon activity (multi-ship Air-Air) where face-to-face debrief would be really useful. Unfortunately, on the few occasions we tried to use it during my time at Blackdog, unserviceabilities prevented its use.
Additionally, use of the RWS in the current climate is difficult to justify because the actual services can be provided just as well at the CRCs (and arguably better given the superb capabilities of UCCS). However, the main problem with using the RWS is the loss of flexibility in deploying a team to Cy. Those people, if left at a CRC, can provide GCI services all over the UK - having them at the RWS limits them, as mentioned before, to working the 323s. This wouldn't be so much of an issue if the CRCs actually had WCs to spare, but I can assure you they don't (and if any of the crews out there don't believe me, go pay them a visit! (sorry JT)).
MM made an interesting point earlier regarding the current employment levels of the UK E-3 Component ... why shouldn't they support the RWS facility? Given it wasn't used when installed at Waddington, it's hard to see how the few(?) FAs and WCs at Waddo might be persuaded to get themselves over to Cy ...
.Now then, where's that Kevlar Helmet ...
Edited to add that the debriefing problem will only be properly resolved when the CRCs and Fighters are based together. This is extremely unlikely to occur for several years as there is, you guessed it, no money!
STH
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: RAF Lincolnshire
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airwaverider
How often have you used this to your advantage and briefed of debriefed face to face? I would think as much as you used it at Buchan or Boulmer!!
The point was that FCs at CY would allow such debriefs. I would also suggest that here at Blackdog, we have a better relationship with the Typhoon guys than Boulmer does. This may well be down to the fact that there are fewer WCs at Blackdog & as a result, it's not too difficult for the Typhoon guys to recognise our dulcet tones!
Plans are afoot for more regular visits down to CY. On the other foot, it will be much easier to convince the pilots at CY to take the time to visit a CRC if it's only 1 hour up the road. Boulmer is too far out of the way for this to happen IMHO.
How often have you used this to your advantage and briefed of debriefed face to face? I would think as much as you used it at Buchan or Boulmer!!
The point was that FCs at CY would allow such debriefs. I would also suggest that here at Blackdog, we have a better relationship with the Typhoon guys than Boulmer does. This may well be down to the fact that there are fewer WCs at Blackdog & as a result, it's not too difficult for the Typhoon guys to recognise our dulcet tones!
Plans are afoot for more regular visits down to CY. On the other foot, it will be much easier to convince the pilots at CY to take the time to visit a CRC if it's only 1 hour up the road. Boulmer is too far out of the way for this to happen IMHO.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Never Alert
I appear to have mis-understood what you said...CY wasn't mentioned until STH explained. I'm so glad you have a good understanding with the crews at CY.
However massive Thread Drift.....
I appear to have mis-understood what you said...CY wasn't mentioned until STH explained. I'm so glad you have a good understanding with the crews at CY.
However massive Thread Drift.....
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: RAF Lincolnshire
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Never said we had a good understanding. Just a decent relationship which allows for banter if nothing else. A good understanding will only happen if we do the face to face bit.
AO Batman was here today & when asked about future of BL & Blackdog he was only slightly less evasive than when we asked him if ATC & FC were going to merge. No answer in any shape or form in relation to the amalgamation.
AO Batman was here today & when asked about future of BL & Blackdog he was only slightly less evasive than when we asked him if ATC & FC were going to merge. No answer in any shape or form in relation to the amalgamation.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Somewhere flat
Age: 68
Posts: 5,566
Likes: 0
Received 45 Likes
on
30 Posts
I have been dismayed over many years about the lack of liaison visits between Waddington and Conningsby. I have seen very few FJ types flying on the E-3 to offer advice and improve things for the future. The E-3 OCU used to visit Conningsby as part of the course. I believe that this no longer happens. Given that the 2 bases are less than 30 minutes apart, I can only conclude that the will of FJ and Controller to observe, discuss and learn is too much like hard work and not wanted.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: RAF Lincolnshire
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The guys at CY are more than happy to offer a decent debrief, as opposed to the frequent F3, "we were great, you were sh@t" attitude.
Not sure why there is little interest. As a newbie, I can only assume that I would learn shed loads by being at any face to face debriefs.
Not sure why there is little interest. As a newbie, I can only assume that I would learn shed loads by being at any face to face debriefs.
Last edited by Never Alert; 19th Oct 2007 at 13:19.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Never Alert
Perhaps as a "Newbie" you should be a little more careful with abusive remarks and gross generalisations. Your attitude certainly isnt the correct approach to improve the brief/debrief situation. Talk to some of the more experienced guys about a more mature approach - you might find it works wonders.
Perhaps as a "Newbie" you should be a little more careful with abusive remarks and gross generalisations. Your attitude certainly isnt the correct approach to improve the brief/debrief situation. Talk to some of the more experienced guys about a more mature approach - you might find it works wonders.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Going deeper underground
Age: 55
Posts: 332
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shock, horror!
There actually seems to be some reasonable debate starting up here, rather than the willy waving that seemed to be inevitable.
As an air trafficker and an ex OC TacATC, here is my twopen'orth:
ATCOs on E3 -experiment in progress. The girl we have sent is a decent controller and should do well. The trg programme is the same as for FCs and she will endorse at Boulmer before going to Waddington. Whether or not there is any intent for her to provide an ATC function or be purely a WC, noone knows yet.
Airfield approach task from an E3 - technically possible but for limited Gnd-Air comms and as long as the aircrew only want a radar service down to MSFL. Far better to properly equip and man a TacATC-type outfit with airportable airfield aids and do it from the ground.
ATC on Ops - I agree with the consenus that the ATC specialisation has been left behind by the FCs. Our HQ has been criminally parochial and risk-averse in the way they have gone about providing our contribution to ops. The FC stole the show on ops a long while ago while our ATC lords and masters were firmly shut in their ivory tower still fighting the Fortress Europe concept.
Very little trg is provided other than in pure ATC matters, with just a handful of us trained in BM/Jt Fires, etc. Most of the guys on ops have no experience in the job they are doing out there, having never even been TACEVALed let alone been on a proper exercise. This is changing slowly, but far too slowly. I am attending ATC Ops conference at the end of this month an am curious to see what is on the agenda.
AO BATMAN -When he came to do our AFI, he was quite open about closer ties between ATC and FC and his intent to provide a better service on ops. A little short on hard facts though. Oh, and his job title is wrong - his arena is airspace management and airspace control capability; he has no say on the Land manoeuvre element. It will be interesting to see what happens when an FC is in the job.
Civilianisation of ATC - gone as far as it can. You would not get civil ATCOs to do what the mil area radar guys do for the money they pay us. My civil counterpart gets twice what I do and will not control outside CAS unless he is avoiding weather. Ask him to duck and dive a pair of Typhoons across all that expensive commercial traffic on half pay? You might as well ask if you can take his daughter to a pole dance party in the Cock and Palm! Plus, PJHQ now need us for an increasing number of tasks, so you have to have a pool from which to draw.
TacATC - glad to read that they are appreciated. It was the best job of my career so far. A real ops asset that is under-resourced and generally under-used. There was a time when it looked like their only purpose was to train others to do their job. It is good that they are more involved now, doing what they are trained to do. IMHO all ATCOs should do a short det with TacATC to get some idea of what we should be bringing to the party. Maybe then we will get out of this parochial, small-minded attitude that war-fighting is something someone else does. To have ATCOs whining in Basra Tower that aircraft are infringing the airfield's Class D when the infringer is a CAS platform supporting TICs is inexcusable and shows a total ignorance of reality.
As an air trafficker and an ex OC TacATC, here is my twopen'orth:
ATCOs on E3 -experiment in progress. The girl we have sent is a decent controller and should do well. The trg programme is the same as for FCs and she will endorse at Boulmer before going to Waddington. Whether or not there is any intent for her to provide an ATC function or be purely a WC, noone knows yet.
Airfield approach task from an E3 - technically possible but for limited Gnd-Air comms and as long as the aircrew only want a radar service down to MSFL. Far better to properly equip and man a TacATC-type outfit with airportable airfield aids and do it from the ground.
ATC on Ops - I agree with the consenus that the ATC specialisation has been left behind by the FCs. Our HQ has been criminally parochial and risk-averse in the way they have gone about providing our contribution to ops. The FC stole the show on ops a long while ago while our ATC lords and masters were firmly shut in their ivory tower still fighting the Fortress Europe concept.
Very little trg is provided other than in pure ATC matters, with just a handful of us trained in BM/Jt Fires, etc. Most of the guys on ops have no experience in the job they are doing out there, having never even been TACEVALed let alone been on a proper exercise. This is changing slowly, but far too slowly. I am attending ATC Ops conference at the end of this month an am curious to see what is on the agenda.
AO BATMAN -When he came to do our AFI, he was quite open about closer ties between ATC and FC and his intent to provide a better service on ops. A little short on hard facts though. Oh, and his job title is wrong - his arena is airspace management and airspace control capability; he has no say on the Land manoeuvre element. It will be interesting to see what happens when an FC is in the job.
Civilianisation of ATC - gone as far as it can. You would not get civil ATCOs to do what the mil area radar guys do for the money they pay us. My civil counterpart gets twice what I do and will not control outside CAS unless he is avoiding weather. Ask him to duck and dive a pair of Typhoons across all that expensive commercial traffic on half pay? You might as well ask if you can take his daughter to a pole dance party in the Cock and Palm! Plus, PJHQ now need us for an increasing number of tasks, so you have to have a pool from which to draw.
TacATC - glad to read that they are appreciated. It was the best job of my career so far. A real ops asset that is under-resourced and generally under-used. There was a time when it looked like their only purpose was to train others to do their job. It is good that they are more involved now, doing what they are trained to do. IMHO all ATCOs should do a short det with TacATC to get some idea of what we should be bringing to the party. Maybe then we will get out of this parochial, small-minded attitude that war-fighting is something someone else does. To have ATCOs whining in Basra Tower that aircraft are infringing the airfield's Class D when the infringer is a CAS platform supporting TICs is inexcusable and shows a total ignorance of reality.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Here,there,everywhere
Posts: 174
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whether or not there is any intent for her to provide an ATC function or be purely a WC, noone knows yet.
She will be employed as a WC not ATC on the E3 and will wear an FC Brevet.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: London
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the early days of the E3 there were plenty of visits between Waddo and Cgy. However, after Bosnia and Kosovo there was a view amongst some of the more experienced E3 guys that their main customer was the USAF, so taking advice from the RAF would polute hard earned lessons.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Lincs
Posts: 453
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the early days of the E3 there were plenty of visits between Waddo and Cgy. However, after Bosnia and Kosovo there was a view amongst some of the more experienced E3 guys that their main customer was the USAF, so taking advice from the RAF would polute hard earned lessons.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: London
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having worked at Cgy in the early days of the E3D and then held a Staff Officer post with direct responsibility for some of their operations (sharing an office with a decent cross section of their people), this is true of some (as I said) E3D guys.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Lincs
Posts: 453
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Being one of the 'experienced guys' during Kosovo, I NEVER heard such a rediculous opinion expressed by any of my colleagues.
Last edited by Magic Mushroom; 19th Oct 2007 at 21:54.