ATC or FC?
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: The Inner Planets
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Even last year BAS ATC were regualrly co-ordinating directly with and on behalf of the resident Bgdge and coalition JTACs operating in the MND(SE) AOR. This included integraring other air assets (including UAVs) with requests for shows of force, artillery, mortar firing , CAS and strike packages.
I believe this area of the job out there there has moved on massively since then.
But let's not call a sow's ear a silk purse.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Where I lay my head is home.
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agreed
unfamiliarity with the role....
The role of ATC is the same in peace as it is in war - namely flight safety which is still a key enabler for deployed ops. I do think we need to broaden our horizons on the more operational side - agreed. More reason for a dual role FC/ATC methinks.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: RAF Lincolnshire
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I very much doubt that we could dual hat and be proficient at both roles. Although the aptitudes are similar, the jobs are not with each having a great deal of specific training & knowledge.
Should the branches merge, I believe that we would still end up with a selection/filtering process which would result in personnel being streamed either Surveillance, Local ATC, Area ATC or Weapons.
Should the branches merge, I believe that we would still end up with a selection/filtering process which would result in personnel being streamed either Surveillance, Local ATC, Area ATC or Weapons.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Firmly grounded, thankfully
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Change............
All,
Fighter Controlling, as I knew it, is definitely old hat - hence my comments. Before anyone starts shouting mutinous language, those who know me will testify my unending support for AD - I just believe we have to be honest about what the requirement is in the 21st Century.
Yes, there is still a need for Air Defence of UK airspace. Yes, there is still the need for embarked WC in deployable assets such as E3/Wedgetail. But, lets face it, recent experience has shown that the 'traditional' role of bunker-bound SC/WC and RN Freddies, floating on the oggin is massively under-used. As far as I can make out there has been a lot of discussion about the RAF's support to Ops in both Iraq and Afghanistan - now, frankly, whether that is by ATC or FC proves the point - neither is a 'traditional' role so why not admit that we should re-focus and analyse whether or not ATC can perform this role or whether this tempo and style of operations will continue for such a time as to warrant additional training and manpwer to the FC branch to cover this role.
IMHO this should be something done by what is currently known as ATC, although I think there neeeds to be far more of a tactical focus on their training than simply 'take 5'. If you can apply RIS/RAS/RC then surely you can have a stab at a 2v2? If you can provide a PAR then there must be the aptitude to do multiple joins to the Tanker Tow or perform the role of Red Crown? And, whatever the arguement, lets ensure we provide the best sevice possible to our aircrew brethren over whichever dusty, sandy sh*thole that the government sends our boys and girls to.
Fighter Controlling, as I knew it, is definitely old hat - hence my comments. Before anyone starts shouting mutinous language, those who know me will testify my unending support for AD - I just believe we have to be honest about what the requirement is in the 21st Century.
Yes, there is still a need for Air Defence of UK airspace. Yes, there is still the need for embarked WC in deployable assets such as E3/Wedgetail. But, lets face it, recent experience has shown that the 'traditional' role of bunker-bound SC/WC and RN Freddies, floating on the oggin is massively under-used. As far as I can make out there has been a lot of discussion about the RAF's support to Ops in both Iraq and Afghanistan - now, frankly, whether that is by ATC or FC proves the point - neither is a 'traditional' role so why not admit that we should re-focus and analyse whether or not ATC can perform this role or whether this tempo and style of operations will continue for such a time as to warrant additional training and manpwer to the FC branch to cover this role.
IMHO this should be something done by what is currently known as ATC, although I think there neeeds to be far more of a tactical focus on their training than simply 'take 5'. If you can apply RIS/RAS/RC then surely you can have a stab at a 2v2? If you can provide a PAR then there must be the aptitude to do multiple joins to the Tanker Tow or perform the role of Red Crown? And, whatever the arguement, lets ensure we provide the best sevice possible to our aircrew brethren over whichever dusty, sandy sh*thole that the government sends our boys and girls to.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Going deeper underground
Age: 55
Posts: 332
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is plenty of scope for an integrated Air Control Capability branch based around the common skill set ie the provision of radar services to aircraft. That should be the starting point as both sides need to be qualified in these basic skills. This would give all members of the branch the same start in life, the same essential knowledge and a better understanding of what the various specialisations are trying to achieve at the operational level. The streams after that would than include the traditional FC and ATC specialisations, but with the opportunity for a bit of cross-pollination for those who show the potential for command. After all, pilots all start from a common skill set at BFT and then specialise after streaming.
As for preparing ATCOs for ops, until AIR Cmd pulls its finger out and organises some meaningful trg, OJT on arrival in theatre is all we are going to get. The farcical trg objectives for ATC on Collective Trg, etc, are a product of poor exercise scenarios and minimal safety management from staff officers to rule-bound to provide the tools for effective pre-deployment trg. They seem to think that observing the exercise and having some PowerPointless presentations on what a tent looks like will prepare people for the extremely dynamic environment of the present battlespace.
Having an air ex at St Mawgan was ridiculous as ex play had to stop for the scheduled commercial traffic. Fairford was a slightly better idea as at least the exercising ATCOs got to control, but it was still limited by the local environment. We should be using somewhere like Sculthorpe or West Freugh where there is space for a realistic scenario with CAS, arty, helos, etc needing to be integrated with the airfield movements. Then the ATCOs might at least have an idea what to expect. Those sort of locations would also mean that people would have to get their admin squared away, rather than being able to nip to the shops to get what they forgot to bring.
As for preparing ATCOs for ops, until AIR Cmd pulls its finger out and organises some meaningful trg, OJT on arrival in theatre is all we are going to get. The farcical trg objectives for ATC on Collective Trg, etc, are a product of poor exercise scenarios and minimal safety management from staff officers to rule-bound to provide the tools for effective pre-deployment trg. They seem to think that observing the exercise and having some PowerPointless presentations on what a tent looks like will prepare people for the extremely dynamic environment of the present battlespace.
Having an air ex at St Mawgan was ridiculous as ex play had to stop for the scheduled commercial traffic. Fairford was a slightly better idea as at least the exercising ATCOs got to control, but it was still limited by the local environment. We should be using somewhere like Sculthorpe or West Freugh where there is space for a realistic scenario with CAS, arty, helos, etc needing to be integrated with the airfield movements. Then the ATCOs might at least have an idea what to expect. Those sort of locations would also mean that people would have to get their admin squared away, rather than being able to nip to the shops to get what they forgot to bring.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: RAF Lincolnshire
Age: 24
Posts: 104
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
More FC Branch PR work - 1ACC in Afghanistan again!
Recent story on the MOD website about the work of 1ACC in Afghanistan, not particularly detailed but all PR is good PR!
http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/De...ionSuccess.htm
Has anyone heard how much longer they will be in theatre or is it going to be another case like the GR7/9s - TFN?
http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/De...ionSuccess.htm
Has anyone heard how much longer they will be in theatre or is it going to be another case like the GR7/9s - TFN?
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Going deeper underground
Age: 55
Posts: 332
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"And civilian airliners continue to use Afghan airspace providing revenue for the Afghan Government."
Sounds like FCs are providing an en route service to commercial air traffic, for which they are not qualified!
Sounds like FCs are providing an en route service to commercial air traffic, for which they are not qualified!
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: EU Land
Posts: 189
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1ACC Afghanistan
AonP – Like any FE deployed on ongoing ops, waiting for the next PJHQ FLR.
orgASMic – No, not providing an enroute service to CAT, but an advisory of active mil airspace. Step around or go through the large green telephone pole firing area; your choice captain four-bars. Read what you want into the article, but nowhere dows it state that FCs are providing an enroute service to the civvies; merely that they require airspace to fly in or over the country.
orgASMic – No, not providing an enroute service to CAT, but an advisory of active mil airspace. Step around or go through the large green telephone pole firing area; your choice captain four-bars. Read what you want into the article, but nowhere dows it state that FCs are providing an enroute service to the civvies; merely that they require airspace to fly in or over the country.
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Southern England
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FC Controlling in 'Stan
I would like to point out that ALL civil en-route traffic in Afghanistan is 'controlled' by the Kabul Area Control Centre - albeit procedurally and when within comms range... The FC's - both Aussie and UK - are fully aware of the traffic flow and the routes, but they do not 'control' any en-route traffic.
Anyone beg to differ..... Come and see me
Anyone beg to differ..... Come and see me
