Air Traffic Controllers
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: N/A
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Area Radar is suffering almost as badly as the Towers due to manning. The problem extends out to the RN ATC branch as well as the RAF - the requirement for QNLZ (& shortly PWLS) is only exacerbating this.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,808
Received 135 Likes
on
63 Posts
Having been involved in the early staffing for DE Sgts ATC, I understand that the uptake is still below expectations.
With due deference to Danny42C, I enjoyed all my 'operational' time in ATC on airfields (Strubby, Tengah,Waddington and Stanley) and in Area (Eastern x 2 and LATCC(Mil)). And whilst acknowledging the 'battery hen' term Danny uses, there was always something about the 'big picture' that made Area appealing. That said, there's no doubt that Local was my favourite seat [for many reasons].
With due deference to Danny42C, I enjoyed all my 'operational' time in ATC on airfields (Strubby, Tengah,Waddington and Stanley) and in Area (Eastern x 2 and LATCC(Mil)). And whilst acknowledging the 'battery hen' term Danny uses, there was always something about the 'big picture' that made Area appealing. That said, there's no doubt that Local was my favourite seat [for many reasons].
Guest
Posts: n/a
airpolice (#39),
..."they make them Sgts now"...
I believe this is also true of the USAF, too (anybody know ?)
YellowTom (bell rings, but will not put it into words), (#40),
The mind boggles ! Calls to mind (closing stanzas only) ..........
"She said 'Wait - Let's get this straight,
Who does what, and with which, and to whom' ?"
Quite enough of that ! Cheers, both, Danny.
..."they make them Sgts now"...
I believe this is also true of the USAF, too (anybody know ?)
YellowTom (bell rings, but will not put it into words), (#40),
The mind boggles ! Calls to mind (closing stanzas only) ..........
"She said 'Wait - Let's get this straight,
Who does what, and with which, and to whom' ?"
Quite enough of that ! Cheers, both, Danny.
We had one or two ex Eastern controllers posted to Farnborough mid '80s?
But didn't Lindholme close several years before Watton? I think Lindholme went about '74/75 but I may be wrong, certainly some of my civilian colleagues in '73 had their posting notices although new controllers were still being posted in. What year did Watton Close?
Chevvron
IIRC Lindholme civil closed in '77 - I looked at the LL arrival date of one of the ATCOs who had been posted from there and again IIRC Eastern civil closed several years later. The atchistory website may have more info?
Last edited by Brian 48nav; 4th Oct 2017 at 13:02. Reason: missing word
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RAF ATM
The problems in the RAF ATM Specialisation are deep-rooted and are unlikely to be resolved by attempting to rapidly increase recruitment.
Whilst there is a financial incentive for those who wish to become a direct-entry SNCOs, nothing similar exists for those who join as an officer. I imagine many potential officers who attend AFCOs or Cranwell consider what career options are available and then decide that they would rather not put themselves through JATCC, followed by the endless training and examinations when they will be earning exactly the same as any other ground branch officer. Unsurprisingly they frequently opt for an easier career in Flt Ops, Supply, etc.
Trying to 'shoe-horn' individuals who are not really motivated into ATM is just repeating the same old failed 'solution' of once again papering over the cracks. Retention is the problem that urgently needs to be addressed if VSOs really want to find a solution, but it won't happen and we will continue to loose controllers to NATS and elsewhere.
One solution to recruiting and retention would be introducing a structured transition to a civil ATC licence. You could set the qualifying criteria at say a 12 year engagement, recovering the cost of training, whilst allowing the RAF to have the benefit of a cadre of young controllers who are motivated to stay the course. A correspondence course, with an on-line element, could be introduced to begin after 10 years service that would lead to a basic civil ATC licence, followed in the final year by an aerodrome course that would also include time at a civil ATC college. This solution would certainly act as an incentive to join and yet for personal domestic circumstances not everyone would want to leave the RAF, particularly if they wish to remain in a particular geographical area. Whilst there would be a cost, I would have thought the current wastage must be an even greater cost.
However, I am not holding my breath, as VSOs appear to place little value in the ATM specialisation in general and even less in the actual personnel. In the current climate, manning problems are only likely to get worse, not better.
Whilst there is a financial incentive for those who wish to become a direct-entry SNCOs, nothing similar exists for those who join as an officer. I imagine many potential officers who attend AFCOs or Cranwell consider what career options are available and then decide that they would rather not put themselves through JATCC, followed by the endless training and examinations when they will be earning exactly the same as any other ground branch officer. Unsurprisingly they frequently opt for an easier career in Flt Ops, Supply, etc.
Trying to 'shoe-horn' individuals who are not really motivated into ATM is just repeating the same old failed 'solution' of once again papering over the cracks. Retention is the problem that urgently needs to be addressed if VSOs really want to find a solution, but it won't happen and we will continue to loose controllers to NATS and elsewhere.
One solution to recruiting and retention would be introducing a structured transition to a civil ATC licence. You could set the qualifying criteria at say a 12 year engagement, recovering the cost of training, whilst allowing the RAF to have the benefit of a cadre of young controllers who are motivated to stay the course. A correspondence course, with an on-line element, could be introduced to begin after 10 years service that would lead to a basic civil ATC licence, followed in the final year by an aerodrome course that would also include time at a civil ATC college. This solution would certainly act as an incentive to join and yet for personal domestic circumstances not everyone would want to leave the RAF, particularly if they wish to remain in a particular geographical area. Whilst there would be a cost, I would have thought the current wastage must be an even greater cost.
However, I am not holding my breath, as VSOs appear to place little value in the ATM specialisation in general and even less in the actual personnel. In the current climate, manning problems are only likely to get worse, not better.
I heard a rumour last week regarding young Warrant Officers being Commissioned and after 4 years being presented to the Board for Sqn Ldr, not sure what this does for Junior Officers in the Air Traffic Branch.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: UK sometimes
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There’s no getting away from it, the branch is in trouble. It has over the last decade or two suffered infighting at the high echelons, neglect and downright mismanagement. There are now SO2s and SO1s making policy decisions, who years ago, could organise an amazing Summer Ball or Christmas Draw but were frankly dangerous if left alone in Director, Tower or Approach. Please correct me if I’m wrong, but I cannot imagine the Pilot branch promoting to senior officer status personnel who were simply poor at their primary task.
I really fear for Mil ATC, it’s a matter of when, not if something big will bring everything into sharp focus. I just hope no one gets hurt.
I really fear for Mil ATC, it’s a matter of when, not if something big will bring everything into sharp focus. I just hope no one gets hurt.
Proletarian - we begged for the same type of licencing arrangements for pilots for many years to no avail.
The VSOs convinced themselves that licences would lead people to leave early for more lucrative positions in civvystreet.
Instead, people left early because they needed to get their licences and didn't want to be left behind. The evidence is writ large in the PVR rates.
You will have the same battle with ATC licences unfortunately.
The younger generation understand the importance of terms and conditions and until those VSOs can make the military competitive and attractive, recruiting and retention will continue to be an issue. Just look at what they have done to pensions....
The VSOs convinced themselves that licences would lead people to leave early for more lucrative positions in civvystreet.
Instead, people left early because they needed to get their licences and didn't want to be left behind. The evidence is writ large in the PVR rates.
You will have the same battle with ATC licences unfortunately.
The younger generation understand the importance of terms and conditions and until those VSOs can make the military competitive and attractive, recruiting and retention will continue to be an issue. Just look at what they have done to pensions....
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,808
Received 135 Likes
on
63 Posts
Eastern's reincarnation at LATCC(Mil) doesn't count
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,808
Received 135 Likes
on
63 Posts
You raise some interesting points: my comments are as follows:
I'm not sure that I agree with the general thrust here. For a start, the motivations of a putative ATCO are going to be different to those of other Branches. Nor do I expect the individuals are aware, in any detail, of the time spent doing OJT and being examined at each Unit.
Whilst I have no doubt that AFCOs will attempt to steer candidates into career paths to meet their own manning requirements, I would be surprised if the individuals would be easily persuaded to change their perceived path. Why would they opt for something radically different [and potentially more demanding] from their first choice?
Several points here:
1. Amortisation of Training was, IIRC, achieved after the first productive tour as an ATCO, which is why we never worried too much about the loss of WRAF ATCOs on marriage.
2. Motivation to remain is surely [or at least was] the twin dangling carrots of promotion and pension. I appreciate that much has changed since my day, but even for the middle-of-the-road controllers it remained an interesting and rewarding role.
3. The facilitated acquisition of a civil licence rarely entered conversation in my time. In part, I suggest, is that the RAF was generally a good place to be! Now, with less mobility/variety, it may be that the new generations want to sit in the same place, doing the same job, forever. It certainly wasn't what I wanted, but I suspect th RAF is heading that way now with just Swanwick for the Area people and fewer airfields to choose from. Perhaps this is the sad future?
4. Promotion, or indeed the prospect of that, can be a major retention driver. I suspect, however, that those opportunities are now much more narrowly drawn than in my day, when we had 5 x gp capt, 30+ wg cdr and 150+ sqn ldr. BUT, with roughly half of the 'shop floor' being SNCO controllers, there is an ongoing demand for JOs to fill what one would call Junior Management posts (e.g. Watch Supervisor, Local Examining Officer and indeed ATCEEB). It was that requirement, and the need for a decent-sized pool of suitable candidates for promotion to sqn ldr, that demanded [in my day] the retention of the officer/SNCO controller ratio despite suggestions that more SNCOs would be cheaper. (IIRC the ratio was 60/40 Officer/SNCO at the time.)
It will be interesting to see the impact of the combining of the former ATC and FC specialisations, and whether cross-pollination works in practice as well as in theory 
Whilst there is a financial incentive for those who wish to become a direct-entry SNCOs, nothing similar exists for those who join as an officer. I imagine many potential officers who attend AFCOs or Cranwell consider what career options are available and then decide that they would rather not put themselves through JATCC, followed by the endless training and examinations when they will be earning exactly the same as any other ground branch officer. Unsurprisingly they frequently opt for an easier career in Flt Ops, Supply, etc.
Trying to 'shoe-horn' individuals who are not really motivated into ATM is just repeating the same old failed 'solution' of once again papering over the cracks. Retention is the problem that urgently needs to be addressed if VSOs really want to find a solution, but it won't happen and we will continue to loose controllers to NATS and elsewhere.
One solution to recruiting and retention would be introducing a structured transition to a civil ATC licence. You could set the qualifying criteria at say a 12 year engagement, recovering the cost of training, whilst allowing the RAF to have the benefit of a cadre of young controllers who are motivated to stay the course. A correspondence course, with an on-line element, could be introduced to begin after 10 years service that would lead to a basic civil ATC licence, followed in the final year by an aerodrome course that would also include time at a civil ATC college. This solution would certainly act as an incentive to join and yet for personal domestic circumstances not everyone would want to leave the RAF, particularly if they wish to remain in a particular geographical area. Whilst there would be a cost, I would have thought the current wastage must be an even greater cost.
1. Amortisation of Training was, IIRC, achieved after the first productive tour as an ATCO, which is why we never worried too much about the loss of WRAF ATCOs on marriage.
2. Motivation to remain is surely [or at least was] the twin dangling carrots of promotion and pension. I appreciate that much has changed since my day, but even for the middle-of-the-road controllers it remained an interesting and rewarding role.
3. The facilitated acquisition of a civil licence rarely entered conversation in my time. In part, I suggest, is that the RAF was generally a good place to be! Now, with less mobility/variety, it may be that the new generations want to sit in the same place, doing the same job, forever. It certainly wasn't what I wanted, but I suspect th RAF is heading that way now with just Swanwick for the Area people and fewer airfields to choose from. Perhaps this is the sad future?
4. Promotion, or indeed the prospect of that, can be a major retention driver. I suspect, however, that those opportunities are now much more narrowly drawn than in my day, when we had 5 x gp capt, 30+ wg cdr and 150+ sqn ldr. BUT, with roughly half of the 'shop floor' being SNCO controllers, there is an ongoing demand for JOs to fill what one would call Junior Management posts (e.g. Watch Supervisor, Local Examining Officer and indeed ATCEEB). It was that requirement, and the need for a decent-sized pool of suitable candidates for promotion to sqn ldr, that demanded [in my day] the retention of the officer/SNCO controller ratio despite suggestions that more SNCOs would be cheaper. (IIRC the ratio was 60/40 Officer/SNCO at the time.)
Didn't do us much good; one was promptly posted to HQ with a medical problem and the other validated on radar but was unable to make it in the tower so went to the college as an instructor (higher pay scale, better pension prospects)
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,808
Received 135 Likes
on
63 Posts
The classic "Those who can, do: those who can't, teach" 
A nice tangled web of tarmac at F'boro too, which must be fun when busy.
A nice tangled web of tarmac at F'boro too, which must be fun when busy.
MPN11 re your post#14
I thought my memory was playing tricks,until I realized that your photo had been printed in reverse,and that the picture is a 'mirror image'.
The guy seated on the left is the Controller,the woman at the edge-lit board must be u/t,being supervised by the ATSA sitting in front of the Trackers position on the right.It was not usual for there to be a dedicated Tracker,one person usually carrying out this task,as well as updating the ELB,unless it was very busy,when up to 16 store-dots could be in use.That is not the case here,as evinced by the lack of writing on the board.
I have tried to post a similar,but later image in the correct sense,but am told that I'm not allowed to do that until I have submitted 10 post,so that will have to wait.Just be aware that the Controller sat at the RH console,that on the left being for the Tracker.
I thought my memory was playing tricks,until I realized that your photo had been printed in reverse,and that the picture is a 'mirror image'.
The guy seated on the left is the Controller,the woman at the edge-lit board must be u/t,being supervised by the ATSA sitting in front of the Trackers position on the right.It was not usual for there to be a dedicated Tracker,one person usually carrying out this task,as well as updating the ELB,unless it was very busy,when up to 16 store-dots could be in use.That is not the case here,as evinced by the lack of writing on the board.
I have tried to post a similar,but later image in the correct sense,but am told that I'm not allowed to do that until I have submitted 10 post,so that will have to wait.Just be aware that the Controller sat at the RH console,that on the left being for the Tracker.
MPN 11re your post#18
Though as you rightly say,we had proper plumbing at ER,right up until Eastern Radar(civil) closed, on 4th March '88, the paper provided in the (gent's at least) lavatories was that horrible shiny stuff.BUT,we civvies discovered that the Commanding Officer's (the W/Cs) W/C,on the ground floor,near his office was supplied with the soft variety made from fluffy puppies, a privilege of rank I suppose.Well worth the longer walk !
Though as you rightly say,we had proper plumbing at ER,right up until Eastern Radar(civil) closed, on 4th March '88, the paper provided in the (gent's at least) lavatories was that horrible shiny stuff.BUT,we civvies discovered that the Commanding Officer's (the W/Cs) W/C,on the ground floor,near his office was supplied with the soft variety made from fluffy puppies, a privilege of rank I suppose.Well worth the longer walk !
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,808
Received 135 Likes
on
63 Posts
ex82watcher ... goodness me, so it is! That will teach me to use other people's photos at face value! I rarely ventured across the ERD ops room to the Civil corner, and they had a slightly different console layout to us Mil chaps!
Here's a picture of a typical Mil console: you can see bank of SSR selectors in the big control box on the right in now the correct orientation, with the 8 big code selector switchboxes on the left!
Here's a picture of a typical Mil console: you can see bank of SSR selectors in the big control box on the right in now the correct orientation, with the 8 big code selector switchboxes on the left!