|
The written/practical entrance test (the ATSAT) plus an aggressive practical test at the academy is adequate I think. Problem is that the academy had relaxed passing standards for years. This led to a lot of very under performing academy graduates showing up at their facilities and performing poorly. They were also sending off the street hires to the busiest facilities in the nation, with 0 ATC experience. Not until after people started failing their training in horrific quantities (and getting fired or at best sent to smaller facilities to try again) did the FAA start to change things up. First, with the removal of OTS hiring in favor of ATC College applicants, and now back again with OTS hiring and this ridiculous future-predicting questionnaire. It's clear the FAA is scrambling to show that they know what they're doing when selecting applicants, but they keep falling short. The academy testing is getting more aggressive, especially for terminal students, so that's something at least. The Ferret King fucked around with this message at 17:32 on Apr 11, 2015 |
#
?
Apr 11, 2015 17:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 03:35 |
|
|
So basically, what we're seeing is that the FAA can't even hire people competently? 
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2015 19:36
|
|
|
Jealous Cow posted:
Reminder that, per Ferret King above, actual former controllers don't pass the bioq, as well as reports of quite a few former military controllers failing it. Not calling it bunk because a couple goons failed it, calling it bunk because actual controllers can't pass it. Spacewolf posted:So basically, what we're seeing is that the FAA can't even hire people competently? Are you actually surprised, especially after the clusterfuck that was the actual job posting/description?
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2015 21:17
|
|
|
Well the good news is, if you guys try again and get accepted in future years, you can enjoy this level of competence every working day while trying to handle the burden of separating airplanes! For 25 years!
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2015 21:20
|
|
|
DNova posted:A friend of mine was in charge of hiring for a bunch of retail stores and they had a question sheet as part of the process. One of the questions was something like what would you do if you paid for an item in a vending machine, but the machine gave you two of that item. Anyone who answered that they would report it to the machine owner and give it back was not hired. I understand the thought behind it -- that the person answering that way is obviously full of poo poo, but I don't understand setting that kind of trap in the first place. That's a bullshit question, because there actually are people in the world who are honest enough to do that, and the only way that they can pass the test would be to lie, which is not something that a person who would actually return the item would even think to do, so they get rejected, and they'll never know why either.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2015 22:19
|
|
|
The Locator posted:That's a bullshit question, because there actually are people in the world who are honest enough to do that, and the only way that they can pass the test would be to lie, which is not something that a person who would actually return the item would even think to do, so they get rejected, and they'll never know why either. And the other questions that tie into that one might reveal that they answered honestly.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2015 22:44
|
|
|
fknlo posted:And the other questions that tie into that one might reveal that they answered honestly. Exactly. If you answer using a lot of "somewhat agree/disagree" for questions you feel comfortable with and then select an extreme STRONGLY AGREE with a calibration question it will impact validity, and reduced validity results are usually given failing/unfavorable scores for stuff like MMPI. (yes I know MMPI is more complicated than that, and that the validity score is actually also provided for interpretation, but that's not the case with most HRM-oriented tests)
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2015 22:55
|
|
|
A biographical questionnaire being the determining factor - not prior experience or education or professional background or anything else - is a very lazy and bad way of weeding down the applicants no matter how intelligent the BQ makers are. Former controllers with great records not being able to pass it and get in is the prime example of this. It is what it is though. Typical government hiring bullshit. I'm disappointed of course but can't get too upset since I already have a career that pays comparably, and I didn't spend much time or money on making my way into having a career as an ATC. I do know I'd be an excellent candidate based on my education and professional experience - not based on if I answered whether I dislike being late or working with others more but I have to move on. I'll probably be aged out by the next go round.
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2015 23:36
|
|
|
I'm over it already. I will continue to use our airspace and be grateful for our controllers/facilities. I'm mean, the FAA IS THE BEST IN THE WORLD when you think about it. As a private pilot I'm thankful for the great service without fees. (We've never lost a 777, go team!) What pisses me off is the fact that I go to bed last night feeling like an idiot that can't even pass a simple test to have a chance at an interview for a dream career. This is the only time in my life I have felt like I have failed even though I know I should not have. I was so nervous clicking the "more information" link yesterday. I wanted it so bad yet I failed. What a lovely feeling. Imagine the feelings of people who have made ATC their dream. Sad.
|
|
#
?
Apr 12, 2015 02:44
|
|
|
fknlo posted:Now that's retarded. That's the FAA.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 02:47
|
|
Lame, I failed. I had a little sparkle in the back of my mind that this would pan out but it looks like I'm going to start studying engineering in the fall after all. I'll always love airports and planes. 
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 09:34
|
|
|
So far our CTI program is reporting ~50% pass rate for the BQ. It's goddamn depressing being in this class with people who passed it but just give blank stares to the simplest questions we learned the answers to in AVIA 101.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 22:34
|
|
|
That number sounds fake as hell.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 22:36
|
|
|
~50% for students at the school within the program.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 22:53
|
|
|
Last year over 90% failed the BQ overall. I just think it sounds like an optimistic percentage. Considering that real world controllers were among those who failed, I can't imagine being in a CTI program has anything to do with passing a psych test.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 23:06
|
|
|
I agree. From what I can gather, this is based on "students telling their instructors if they still have a green check." Empirical as the BQ.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 23:07
|
|
|
Haha, yeah. Hey, I want it to be true. I hate hearing about folks failing that stupid test.
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 23:15
|
|
|
My classmate is a former military controller with several years of experience. She applied back in February in the bid open to folks with ATC experience. She was getting antsy about not hearing anything, so she applied in the OTS bid. She failed the BQ and just heard back from the FAA yesterday; they're hiring her on as a controller. I'm glad that she got the job, but it's just another example of the ridiculous logic of this whole thing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 07:13
|
|
|
Pope Mobile posted:former military controller with several years of experience. We have one of these about to wash out on his first two D sides. His trainers are trying to stretch it out so he hits his year and can hopefully go to a tower but I don't know if the supervisors are down with that game plan. Former certified FAA controllers shouldn't have to apply in bids. There should always be some sort of hiring thing open to them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 14:59
|
|
|
The idea of someone who can successfully fog a mirror washing out on D-sides is a foreign one to me.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 15:46
|
|
|
ATC privatization bill introduced
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2015 16:20
|
|
|
Profit and the public interest are mutually exclusive.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2015 16:24
|
|
|
NATCA's position on this is that it's a junk bill, unlikely to make it to a vote and even more unlikely to pass.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2015 16:35
|
|
|
The Ferret King posted:NATCA's position on this is that it's a junk bill, unlikely to make it to a vote and even more unlikely to pass. For now at least. In work related news, our rides are terrible today and the command center is trying to put a bunch of traffic through us due to some weather over central Kansas. They'll tell us to pound sand even though we've been getting moderate to severe turbulence reports, so we're basically putting in as many PIREPS regarding the rides as we can so the airlines will tell them to gently caress off when they suggest the routes. So if you notice an abundance of PIREPS over southern Illinois, that's why! Fun stuff!
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2015 22:09
|
|
|
Good, the more pilot reports the better. Today saw multiple thunderstorm systems moving through the Corpus Christi area, with a temporary flight restriction set up over NGP - Navy Corpus Truax FIield for our semiannual air show. The weather completely wrecked the air show schedule. When I was going home, the traffic to get in to the show was backed up on to the freeway, I can only imagine how disappointed those folks were. What shame. Deviations around the weather systems for arriving aircraft took people close to the TFR and so we had to get a little creative to avoid it, but thankfully we were not that busy so it was not difficult to manage. Our bad weather days are much different than a busy facility's bad weather days. Our weather days tend to slow things down.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 03:44
|
|
|
fknlo posted:For now at least. As a jumpseater watching the weather antics unfold yesterday over the Midwest, I sympathise. Does it get annoying though when a bunch of us start asking about ride conditions and start begging for flight level changes?
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 18:25
|
|
|
Butt Reactor posted:As a jumpseater watching the weather antics unfold yesterday over the Midwest, I sympathise. Does it get annoying though when a bunch of us start asking about ride conditions and start begging for flight level changes? Weather related requests and tasks can easily send an already busy traffic situation into "almost impossible" territory. Weather increases complexity a lot. But it is what it is, gotta stay out of the harsh stuff. The sooner you let us know, the better.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 20:47
|
|
|
The Ferret King posted:Weather related requests and tasks can easily send an already busy traffic situation into "almost impossible" territory. Weather increases complexity a lot. All of these things. Calling weather and getting you cleared to deviate and/or re-routed is cumbersome and time consuming, but decidedly not optional. The only thing a pilot can really do to help us out in my experience is not argue the direction for deviations, unless he thinks it will put him into more weather. We strive to give you the least restrictive deviations we can, but occasionally, the deviation you want puts you into conflict with a different traffic stream, which would take an already crap situation, and make it spectacularly worse. This is especially true when you're still climbing, or descending, since traffic flows are generally set up to separate arrival and departure traffic laterally. Nothing ruins an already busy situation than a pilot who sees that really pretty hole over to the west as he's climbing out, won't take east deviations, and ends up stuck on the wrong side of the weather, head-on with a bunch of arrivals trying to get down.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 21:08
|
|
|
What part about the following statement is hard to understand for a delivery controller. For information. We can only accept runways 01 up to a maximum of 05kts tailwind due performance. The guy in a certain US airport yesterday had a loving hissy fit with us as a result. 50 minutes delay at the runway as we missed the departure gap because the tower guy realised he (delivery) had, as a result cleared us to depart against oncoming traffic, not turning with it, meaning we had to replan at the hold. its a loving max weight long haul flight... and you've closed the drat longest runway. hjp766 fucked around with this message at 21:33 on Apr 20, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2015 21:31
|
|
|
I only partially understand the situation as you've described it. Maybe that's why it was hard for them to understand too? So I think they were using a runway with a tailwind that exceeded your limits, and you requested to depart opposite direction to the flow of other traffic. There was some delay.... Then after that I can't figure out what you're talking about. Runway closures happen, and ATC can't do anything about that really. It's the airport management that chooses to close a runway.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2015 22:02
|
|
|
The Ferret King posted:I only partially understand the situation as you've described it. Maybe that's why it was hard for them to understand too? Not arguing about the runway, just the lack of professionalism from the controllers... No one told centre we had changed runways. Cleared to line up and wait. Then complete sid change... why aren't you moving, - can't illegal to go while not briefed, give us 5 minutes to reset and rebrief due terrain and new navaids. Hopefully the Air Safety feedback might actually highlight the stick up arse problem of the first guy who caused it all (the rest were fixing his shitstorm) Main cause: Stick up arse of delivery controller Aggravating factor: US you don't have numbers codes on the end of SID names that indicate runway and airport... that way when he punched in the new clearance it would have instantly sounded alarm bells... I do have sympathy for the poor sods in tower and centre who made the gap and as we were lining up realised the gently caress up... but why they could not manage to coordinate another gap for 35 minutes was beyond us. We also reported the fact that even though ground & tower knew where we were departing they had aircraft holding for the other runway within the screen height at the departure end of the runway that we would have gone through in the event of an engine failure.... any problems and you would have had a Tenerife North on your hands... For a big airport they had a very, very, very bad day. As I say I think the feedback is already on its way. Anyway, I also suspect the guys waiting to depart off 01R will have needed new underwear after our departure... we only rotated about 500 yards from them... and too late to have stopped. hjp766 fucked around with this message at 22:49 on Apr 20, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2015 22:44
|
|
|
hjp766 posted:Not arguing about the runway, just the lack of professionalism from the controllers... Ok so you made it to your opposite direction departure runway, then onto the runway itself to hold in position, before they tried to issue you a new departure procedure? That sucks. quote:US you don't have numbers codes on the end of SID names that indicate runway and airport... that way when he punched in the new clearance it would have instantly sounded alarm bells... Maybe so. If the original SID you were given was no good for your new departure runway, the delivery controller should have known that. ATC has to memorize all of them for their area of operation. Though runway numbers might have provided an additional hint, with an oversight like this it's possible the delivery controller still wouldn't have noticed the problem or remembered to check. quote:I do have sympathy for the poor sods in tower and centre who made the gap and as we were lining up realised the gently caress up... but why they could not manage to coordinate another gap for 35 minutes was beyond us. You never said where this was but I'm assuming it was a busy place? Maybe not, I can't tell. Opposite direction operations require a lot of room to pull off, especially with new rules in the US governing how they're conducted. quote:We also reported the fact that even though ground & tower knew where we were departing they had aircraft holding for the other runway within the screen height at the departure end of the runway that we would have gone through in the event of an engine failure.... any problems and you would have had a Tenerife North on your hands... What are you saying here? What is the "screen height?" quote:For a big airport they had a very, very, very bad day. As I say I think the feedback is already on its way. I'm glad you're reporting this and there should hopefully be some corrective action. Why were you a factor for aircraft waiting to depart on the other end of the runway? Were they ON the runway itself? If they were holding short, off to the side, how was it a conflict exactly? I'm not trying to be antagonistic here but I'm still only getting about 60% of what I think actually happened. The Ferret King fucked around with this message at 23:16 on Apr 20, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2015 23:09
|
|
|
So totally confused as to what HJP is describing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2015 23:17
|
|
|
To clear aircraft tails we need a height of 90feet (55+35). See dimensions here http://www.planecrazy.me.uk/html/boeing_767.html We only have to be 35ft above the runway at the far threshold (15ft in the wet) and climbing at 100ft per minute if we are as good as the test pilot. Therefore the holding aircraft were within the protected area for a max weight aircraft while retracting gear. http://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/Engine_Failure_During_Takeoff_-_Multi-Engine_Transport_Category_Jet_Aircraft http://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/Net_Take-off_Flight_Path We have a margin off centreline too remember... and especially due to crosswinds. https://www.airnav.com/airport/KLAS 25L at Klas. As I say tower and centre were sensibly reclearing us to a right turn sid not left turn sid... and it is terrain critical. 25r closed all month (normal widebody departure runway as we need no tailwind and length). Reported wind was 170/8 and they wanted us to use 01...not a hope in hell, too short with a tailwind. The change on the runway was tralr5 to staav5... fortunately we clocked it and held off otherwise all poo poo would have hit the fan, although tower wanted us to line up and spend 5minutes on the runway sorting out... The sid was good, but would now have had us flying toward all landing traffic, and you also make them land visually not on the ILS so you can reduce separation so you can no longer give avoiding vectors... it was a perfect Swiss cheese. One day they will grow a pair and learn how to change runway when there is a steady tailwind (Europe now 5kts tail they change runway because of lawyers) Safety not economy needs bringing back, like your weather problem the other day... but that's the way of the world now, bean counters win until something crashes. hjp766 fucked around with this message at 00:55 on Apr 21, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2015 00:16
|
|
|
And perhaps one day you'll put down the drink and learn to post coherently.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2015 00:37
|
|
|
hjp766 posted:but that's the way of the world now, bean counters win until something crashes. Yup. And then it's some knee jerk reaction for a little while and then back to normal. Sucks that you couldn't get a good release. Too bad you weren't departing from somewhere in ZKC because our TMU doesn't seem to give a gently caress. 35 miles in trail to Atlanta and the last 2 of the push are coming through with a 30 mile gap? Better release one in between them!
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2015 01:02
|
|
|
The Ferret King posted:And perhaps one day you'll put down the drink and learn to post coherently. Noted. The more I read and speak to you guys the more I realise that what your managers tell you guys to do fills us with dread when we hear it. Do you have the Sims where you do emergencies and get aircrews in so both sides react genuinely and not according to the managers mental model like NATS do in England? http://www.ukfsc.co.uk/events-a-courses/safety-events It has proved a massive bonus and eye opener over here, the debriefs certainly caused both sides to realise that we have totally different regulations and expect totally different things that can cause mayhem in an unusual through emergency situation... this was one of those where the sim experience would probably have led to both sides being more aware of the others mental model. Also I neatened the above and I hate autocorrect! hjp766 fucked around with this message at 01:07 on Apr 21, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2015 01:04
|
|
|
I listen to LAS ATC often and I'm surprised. They seem very professional and on the ball over there. 767 I assume?
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2015 02:36
|
|
|
fknlo posted:Too bad you weren't departing from somewhere in ZKC because our TMU doesn't seem to give a gently caress. 35 miles in trail to Atlanta and the last 2 of the push are coming through with a 30 mile gap? Better release one in between them!  ZMATMU loves releasing MIA-ATL departures precisely four minutes ahead of PBI-ATL departures, so that the motherfuckers are DEAD rear end TIED at Orlando. The more in-trail ZJX wants, the more often they do it. They also seem to get bonus points for an FLL-ATL released in between. Also, no, gently caress you, you can't have ten out of the departure gates when there's thirty to ATL, with weather in between. Man up and work some traffic. *picks sandwich back up.*
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2015 03:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 03:35 |
|
|
gigButt posted:I listen to LAS ATC often and I'm surprised. They seem very professional and on the ball over there. 767 I assume? To be fair it was the Swiss cheese comparison we use to describe safety issues... all the little holes happened to line up. Also, relatively, Vegas handles very few weight critical flights, sure it handles a lot but its mainly SouthWest/Canadian/Domestic. Every time up to yesterday I had been in on a max weight widebody delivery automatically would be giving us full length 25R/07L with 0kts tailwind. Then yesterday all the little things line up. 1) Longest runway closed - in that case when you have longhaul movements you need to be using the into wind runway otherwise you make your biggest aircraft have to go against the flow. 2) Minimum take off weight we needed was 170 tonnes.... Limit weight on 01R with tailwind of forecast 8knot tail 164 tonnes, sure we can taxi and hold but we would be waiting, blocking the runway, for the wind to drop. Limit weight 25L 170 tonnes, any more tailwind and we will be saying we need 19L or we don't go, the flight would become illegal on flight hours. - 25 direction for departure is normal for longhaul to avoid tailwinds and ease flow... why were they surprised? 3) Delivery did not want to bother with liaising with the tower about wind even though the ATIS said it was 8kts of tail... he actually went off shift 5 minutes after our call... and I'm guessing told no one what he'd cleared us runway wise... we get it too at the end of the shift, we call it gethomeitis - and trust me I've made some dodgy calls under its influence - more worrying, why were more pilots not querying that wind...your 2 kts from breaking the law guys (10kt tail limit for most narrowbody, 15kt for widebody but then we can't lift any weight) 4) It takes about 5 minutes to configure and brief a new SID, sheer bad luck the change call came from Centre at the runway, although when we were airbourne they still did not know which SID we had eventually been cleared to take off on ("So are you on the TRALR or STAAV now"?) - as pilots we saw the SID and thought that was fine as it was also published for 25L albeit turning to the south, radar will interweave us with arrivals, but radar were just letting people land visually and not exercising positive control over arriving traffic, but I guess I'm used to a different level of safety coming from England, e.g. no more than 1 aircraft can have a runway clearance (line up/takeoff/land) at one time, was hearing 3 planes at a time simultaneously being cleared to land on one runway even as we were cleared to Line up & Wait. 5) We were already 40mins late because the loaders loaded us out of aircraft c of g limits.... we are now blocking incoming aircraft from their stands as we reload to get back in limits which then locks up apron and ramp with traffic that is now boxed in 6) Whereas the guy vectoring to the arrivals to 25L was vectoring them onto the ILS and speed controlling to give a departure gap, what we could hear monitoring 01L was them all just being given visual and shortcut with no gap being left - a lack of coordination and planning when you are trying to make a departure gap. Tower for 25L was releaseing them to visual only when he knew we weren't going to be rolling before they landed. Long story short. When they have 25R/07L open they KNOW widebodies will want it and use all of it, and hey, because it blocks all 3 runways they make drat sure they get the gap right because otherwise nothing can move. Looking and reflecting now, as 99% of traffic is shorthaul from T1 it probably seems logical to do it this way, the problem only comes with the heavyweight longhaul international stuff coming off of T3.... The passing comment to an inbound American 737 said it all on ramp frequency... he was told go via spot 2, then the voice came "I think you should fit past the 767s wingtips" I wonder just how long until the FAA makes ramp have to be positively controlled for legal purposes, not a taxying free for all... after all, even in Europe aircraft are still hitting each other on the ground following taxiway centrelines when given free taxi instructions. I'm guessing because it was closed they just weren't really thinking about it. Just a hey, land everyone on 01L and 25L and then make them all take 01R for departure. Makes life easier for everyone in control. Just a shame the pesky wind got in the way! As a final point, when the holes are fixed, the US controllers are very efficient (may I offer you Cuban or Greek military controllers to try please), they clear us without fail onto the ILS (you don't want to see the visual approach requirements mandated now in our rules, biggest point, for a lot of European airlines Visual Approaches are now ILLEGAL at night (too many people landing on taxiways or the wrong airport), we have to "Self position to the ILS"), they give full frequencies to arriving international flights (they don't just say point one), likewise on departure, they also give full progressive taxi instructions to us unlike to our American cousins. Everyone is beginning to understand each others procedures better, but I guess it just takes time as the standards are so completely different on both sides of the pond. Both sets of procedures have good points, and both have bad, the main thing is to learn from things, and openly discuss things as otherwise neither side can understand where the other is coming from.. hjp766 fucked around with this message at 03:41 on Apr 21, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2015 03:28
|
|