Of course, Face-to-Face debriefs are very beneficial....as are sitting in on the crews in brief, seeing the extent of the mission etc etc.

However, the longer you control, the more you get used to names and voices and vice versa, thus debriefs become better and more honest. And, to expand on the top, the longer you control, the better the questions asked on landline debriefs and more understanding is gained. Whenever I've rang for a debrief and not got much back, I just assume the crews DCO and I didn't to anything that was a detriment to the sortie aim. If unsure, I ask if anything could have been done better, which usually gets the same question returned to me. Honesty works well :)

I don't think relations are any 'better' at CRC South than North...just takes a while to build rapport and good relations between controllers and crews.:)

Polo:ok:

orgASMic

Agree completely. Plenty of scope to amalgamate the branches, however, Surveillance (FC) and Airfield (ATC) are poles apart in aptitude. Commonality between Area and WC is already recognised.

c-bert

If you are actually considering joining either branch, you will be aptitude tested for both and (hopefully) given a choice. If you want to do an Operational task, go FC; if you want to do a civvy job in uniform (other than TacATC), but get a good job when you leave (and a better choice of postings during your Service) go ATC.

HOWEVER,

FC skills are more in demand on Ops (other than TacATC, again), which may be a factor.

As for the comment from WannaBeCiv, NeverAlert has a point, in my opinion, as backed up by your rather defensive and OTT reply.

Oh, and MM, you're right, danileoakworth was talking utter hoop:ugh:

You're not paying attention are you. My point is not made up, nor is it my personal opinion. It is my experience of direct comments from a number of E3 guys. That means Some not all expressed the opinion, post Kosovo, that they had little interest adapting the way they controlled to suit the F3's as it would not be representative of what they did on live ops with the americans (you have to remember that post Kosovo was a major trough for the F3 guys as they were involved in nothing other than FI).

ATC has a better choice of postings? Not sure about that .... from an FC in Italy!

ciao ciao :cool:

If you ever get bored out there & fancy an exchange...;):ok:

Freddie or Approach?
 

Thought I'd stick my two penn'eth in for good measure. As a (dark blue) Freddie (sadly, no longer current) I'd have to say that being a FC WAS the best job over being an Air Trafficker. However, I reckon, what with the Russian hordes not likely to invade this week and the only real opportunity to operationally control FW being from the back of an E3D, go ATC. Yes, I'm sure the bunker boys will argue that they would rather chisel their own toes off but you have more opportunities wrt places to work from and the obvious option of taking your services outside the mob. People always used to ask me what I did and the truth is that getting fast jet fixed wing to close each other so they could have a scrap really isn't in that much demand outside the mob. That and the two times I controlled from an RAF tower (Akrotiri and St Mawgan) they provided cup of tea and doughnuts at the console. Trying to imagine SATCO's face at EGDY if I turned up with a big, cream cake for my annual standards check! One way of passing I suppose..............:E

Subsidised Starbucks...
 

Doughnuts on console...:O

I was sold about the ATC idea on a visit to Swanwick Mil, 80p for a Starbucks Mocca!!!

Saw the thread title and logged on assuming the usual mud slinging would have taken place. What a pleasant surprise and some good stuff too!!

I have had the pleasure of sitting with the female ATC Officer currently going through the Boulmer course. Top lady and a good controller. It has actually been quite refreshing to look at some of the ATC aspects from the point of view of an Air Trafficker as opposed to some of our own FC 'we have always done it like that' practices. Hopefully, we will glean some top tips from her and that will lead to some slight adjustments to the way we do things on the basic Flight Safety module we teach. It is also true to say that she is not very well versed in some of the tactical aspects. Something she has been very quick to point out herself.

In short, it has highlightd the same aspects that have been dicussed on here. As for me, as an FC of some 25 years (:eek:), I think it is high time for a fairly radical change. Never mind tinkering around the edges and ending up with a crappy solution. Let's go the whole hog and set up a new Branch. Instead of having baby FCs sitting around the crewroom waiting for their one or two sorties, why not have them as Dual Hatted Area radar Controllers. The Surveillance side is the biggest part of what we do and that would still be a stand alone specialisation, but with cross over points as we have now in the FC world. Likewise, airfield work would be a specialisation but could still be an integral part of the 'all rounder' approach. The over riding slant though, would have be war fighting Ops and so the same courses would need to be taught and some individuals would still need to specialise, but at selected points in their career. E3D and 1ACC will just be another 'option' on your dreamsheet. All done under the same roof and in one Branch.

As for where to put the C2 hubs. Never mind the MOBs, far too limiting to concentrate on one weapons platform. Put everything UK based at the main ATCRUs, Prestwick and Swanick. One recognised Air Picture that serves Civil and Military purposes. Co Location with Civil to smooth the way for Policing Actions (which will remain politically important for the forseeable future). ATC Supervisors who are also Master Controllers so we cut down on the number of people (and locations) getting involved.

I know it's a huge wish list that may well not ever see the light of day but you get the drift of just how radical I think we need to be. There is no longer, IMHO, any justification for two stand alone Branches. Time to integrate and move on. Personally, I think it would provide an amazing opportunity to give those who choose it a truly massive selection of jobs, locations and career paths.

Anyway, I am currently in Oman on holiday and I can hear a freezing cold beer calling my name. :ok:

On holiday in Oman....and still logging on to the prune to talk about work. Some people really need to learn let go and relax. :cool:

You made some good points though but I fear they are too radical. Remember the new "single phase training" farce where the only thing we did was change the name of the course. :ugh:One step at a time...

A couple of years ago (you'll be able to work it out) the story went that the Israelis had FCs on each sqn. Now when the Lightning deployed to Luqa the FCs also deployed to Magdelana but lived in the Luqa mess.

Similarly 56 Sqn and the FCs at Gata Radar were also colocated. Whether the FCs took an active role in the debrief I do not know.

Back in the early 1990s, the USAF combined ATC and 'FC' (air battle manager as the kids call it now.............with a straight face, too!).

We have since split them back up.

FC's at Bastion Promo 'blog' from BFBS
 

An insight into the Fighter Controller's world at Camp Bastion thanks to BFBS:

http://cdn.streamcdn.com/cdn.asp?c_i...n=221007-3.wmv

Embedded Squadron 'D's
 

Pontius,

Up until some bright spark (cue WEBF rage) cancelled the SHAR, each squadron had an embedded FC that went evrywhere with the jets. The benefit of having a very current controller and, more importantly, one that the pilots trusted, was massive. If you want the proof, just ask anyone who went through the 56(R) CQWI course against any of the SHAR squadrons. Sometimes GCI really can make the difference...............if you listen to them.

Oops, must be time to go back to the beach.....................

NQP Debrief Points - One Good, One Other
 

Nunquamparatus,

I couldn't agree with you (and a number of other contributors) more about the value of a close working relationship between FC Weapons Controllers and FJ sqn mates. It engenders understanding and trust on both sides, and by the FC actively participating in the briefs and debriefs, taking the slings and arrows (and hopefully plaudits too), makes them far better controllers than doing it via phone (or not at all). So, collocation of FCs and AD fighters is a big plus.:D

However, your comment 'the only real opportunity to operationally control FW being from the back of an E3D, go ATC' is utter hoop. The 1ACC Det at Camp BASTION has been doing operational FW (and RW and UAV) control every day for almost a year now. The E3D boys are currently in an operational 'pause', so are providing augmentees to the Det to gain/maintain operational controller experience.:=

As for the whole ATC/FC thing, my feeling is that you probably start off with a common entry-level individual who, by the way he/she is trained, is then indoctrinated into a mindset. ATC, because of their training and evaluation look at the 'rules' as being all they are allowe to do, while FCs see the rules as telling them what they can't do, therefore anything else is permissable if circumstances dictate. IMHO, that way, you finish up with one set who's mindset is 'safety is paramount' while the other is mission-oriented with due regard to saftey. Interesting that where the RAF is looking at merging ATC and FC because they both work with radar, while the RAAF has recently merged FC, NAV and AE because of their mission-related roles.:O

Cheers,

SkippedOnce

'Hoop'
 

SkiipedOnce,

So at the start of Op Telic where was 1ACC ? Don't get me wrong, I know they do, and have done, a great job but come day one of the war with no host nation support, guess you'll need to be in the back of an E3D to get some operational control. Which was my point. But thank you for allowing me to demonstrate it.

And, having conversed with someone who was there, during Op Telic, in the back of an E3D (Grunt) I got the impression 8 out of 10 pilots said they'd prefer to be under control of an RAF not a USAF E3...............sorry - guess the special relationship doesn't extend to ****ty joins and being airprox'ed by a Rivet Joint.............................:E

Oh FFS,
Let's not let this thread degenerate into a 1ACC v E-3D willy waving competition. :ugh:They both have different but complimentary capabilities and both do very important jobs.
Regards,
MM

RAAF
 

Oh, and SkippedOnce - I'm not of the antipodean variety, merely exchange filth. Can't comment on the Rarely Available After Four boys but I know they'll be awfully pleased to see their WedgeTail thingy in operational service. It might even get to operate in Australia..............but more likely in Afghanistan.....in fact anywhere sandy.

Their RAN brethren are in the same (proverbial) boat as the RN. Not enough hours, never a sign of a radar equipped jet, feet wet, so currency a big issue. Also, their Freddies are not trained to nearly the same level as ours - which really scares the bejesus out of me. However, this brings me back to my original point - AD is just not fashionable these days. Don't get me wrong, its great fun and I personally loved every minute of my 7 years of it BUT moving mud/sand is where its at - unless we suddenly go to war with China/Russia etc. When we'll be in the poo.:sad:

Same Job - different theatre
 

As far as I can see the 1ACC job (FC) in the 'Stan is almost identical to the Basrah Approach Job (ATC) in Iraq.
The difference being the ATC guys also carry out the normal ATC task for BAS as well and don't have quite the background training in the tactical support to ops etc but trust me they learn that side of life pretty quickly out there and the guys on the ground appreciate that!
FCs also seem to have an almost inexhaustable list of Acronymns and TLAs which explain what they are doing, ATCs don't have the lingo but are doing it anyway - this side of life for ATC has evovled during Op TELIC rather than been forseen from the outset and hence the pre deployment training has been tweaked to cover more of the traditional FC / 1 ACC roles.
I have wondered for some time if the drive to combine the branches has stemmed from this comparison. I personally think it is a good idea and can only help the operational customer and the future of both the jobs.
SID:ok:

MM

Agree wholeheartedly that 1ACC and the E3 are complimentary rather than competing capabilities. One gets there rapidly, but is a more difficult to support at range for a lengthy or enduring op, while the other arrives slowly (depending on how much AT (or more likely shipping) is prepared to be sacrificed to move it), but once in place is much less of a burden to sustain.

NQM

Read your own first post, which I quoted. You are talking in the present tense, not the past, and presently 1ACC is doing operational control in HERRICK, where it has been for almost a year now. Don't you take kindly to constructive debrief points?

SID

How many JTACs has BAS ATC talked to today? While I agree that there are common skills between the two branches, there are also a lot of significant differences, as there needs to be for both to achieve what they're put there to do. BSN ATC is doing a job that the 1ACC FCs don't, but again the two are complimentary.

skippedonce
 

As previously mentioned about the FC world of abbreviations I had to double check with the wonderful tool that is google. Now:
If you meant - Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre (JTAC) then the answer is probably none.
However, if you meant Joint Terminal Attack Controller (JTAC) aka Forward Air Controllers then the answer is probably several. 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.
SID :ok: