Just catching up with some old bookmarked emails. What does MEL stand for? Peter > *From:* "Bones" <bones@xxxxxxx> > *To:* <jhb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > *Date:* Fri, 10 Oct 2008 17:55:34 +0100 > > Indeed. Every airfield is completely different and a small airfield > can be > just as complex to control as a big one. If this sounds odd then > accept that > at smaller airfields with fewer staff the tower controller is often > in > charge of ALL airfield operations and can be fulfilling the roles of > controller, Operations Manager and Airport Director because he is > the only > management representative present. Once the 9 to 5 staff go home > the tower > controller is often left to run the whole airfield and ATC is only > a minor > part of his total remit. > > Once you get to larger airfields a controller's area of > responsibility > shrinks greatly and I doubt a Heathrow controller has much > knowledge outside > his specific ATC training. For example he won't have any authority > over work > on the airfield but will simple accept that it is going to happen as > dictated by an Ops Manager or the Works Department. > > When you arrive at an airfield you can't control until you have > completed a > minimum 90 days MEL in that position. It matters not whether you > have been > controlling for 40 years or 2 - you simply don't know what is going > on and > so you spend a week going through all the paperwork like MATS Part > 2 and > then you sit in with a mentor to learn the local procedures. After > 90 days > you qualify for validation but the decision to put you forward > rests with > the mentor and it can take much longer sometimes. > > If you pass the validation your license is sent back to the CAA and > it is > endorsed for the new position (say EGNS Tower). At the same time > your > previous endorsements for any other airfields are revoked - you > cannot go > back and control there without going through the 90 day MEL again. > Back at > Ronaldsway you now start again and do a 90 day MEL for > Approach/Radar. > > With VATSIM or IVAO they are stuck because they have no experienced > staff to > teach newcomers at unit level. They have both chosen an easier > option in > nominating large airfields to train controllers - I presume on the > understanding that if they pass the exam they should be capable of > working > at any airfield large or small. It's a crude system but reasonably > effective. It's only downfall is that the controllers who go > through this > system can only think in terms of big airfield ops, SID's and > STAR's etc and > would be lost trying to control at places like Blackpool with no > controlled > airspace, lots of VFR movements and no SID's.. > > bones > bones@xxxxxxx > http://woodair.net > > > -----Original Message----- > From: jhb-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:jhb-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On > Behalf > Of Peter Dodds > Sent: 10 October 2008 12:46 > To: jhb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > Cc: pdodds@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: [jhb] Re: FRA's > > The biggest flaw in both Vatsim and IVAO it seems is that training > has to > be carried out at airfields of which you have no knowledge and at > which you > have no intention of operating. If I want a VATSIM C1, I will have > to > start training at Manchester and learn procedures I will never need > at > Carlisle or Gloucester. > > I suspect (Bones?) this is not an echo of real world practice at > all. If > I'm any judge of the CAA/NATS, you have to get a "type rating" for > every > position and every individual airport. > > Peter > > >