More on the great controller shortage

roncachamp said:
In the US all ATC is conducted in accordance with Order JO 7110.65 Air Traffic Control. Some items are annotated as being applicable only to the designated service but there aren't a lot of them.
Click to expand...

Do you think I've never heard of the .65 before? Jesus Christ.
 
Last edited:
Funny. Over at the pro pilot forums they ask about ATC jobs in order to improve upon the "home life" the airline pilot lifestyle doesn't afford them LOL....
 
MarkZ said:
+1 to PeeGee's response. Controller life isn't exactly conducive to family or normal social life.

18 per class nowadays in enroute...wow that's low. They used to run a lot more than that! My class had 34 and that was in 2002 before the big "hiring push."

Loren, if you want to be mad at anyone, be mad at the CTI schools for lying to their students. A CTI degree is not a guarantee of employment, and it sure isn't a guarantee of succeeding in training. That said, the FAA used to hire anyone who qualified, allowing the academy to screen and select. Due to lapses in appropriations, the FAA recently resorted to other methods to screen and select candidates. What gets neglected is that even those few who get selected still have to pass the academy and succeed in training.
Click to expand...

A good friend taught at the academy in OKC for a few years recently. We spoke to him before my son embarked on his education. He said his experience with CTI students out of my son's school were consistently at the top of his classes. He said the school's tower sim was better than the one at the academy.

But, water under the bridge. He questioned his ATC decision on more than one occasion so maybe it's for the best.
 
roncachamp said:
Hmmm... Working in the FAA can't compare with doing ATC. Interesting.
Click to expand...

No, working ATC in the FAA today, to me, wouldn't be nearly as satisfying as my experience as a Marine controller 20 yrs ago. Two completely different things.
 
LDJones said:
A good friend taught at the academy in OKC for a few years recently. We spoke to him before my son embarked on his education. He said his experience with CTI students out of my son's school were consistently at the top of his classes. He said the school's tower sim was better than the one at the academy.



But, water under the bridge. He questioned his ATC decision on more than one occasion so maybe it's for the best.
Click to expand...


My experience with CTI's is that they are no better or worse than an off the street or military veteran hire. The academy kind of evens the playing field.

CTI was merely a way to get your foot in the door.

I've seen UND's tower sims and have played with them. They are top notch. The only thing that comes close is the sim at ORD, and that one doesn't do 360 degree viewing. The sim does a pretty good job simulating an F18 flyby. :)
 
Velocity173 said:
No, working ATC in the FAA today, to me, wouldn't be nearly as satisfying as my experience as a Marine controller 20 yrs ago. Two completely different things.
Click to expand...

I've heard the same. Plenty of "experts" here will point out the rules are the same but they can be applied very differently.
 
MarkZ said:
My experience with CTI's is that they are no better or worse than an off the street or military veteran hire. The academy kind of evens the playing field.

CTI was merely a way to get your foot in the door.

I've seen UND's tower sims and have played with them. They are top notch. The only thing that comes close is the sim at ORD, and that one doesn't do 360 degree viewing. The sim does a pretty good job simulating an F18 flyby. :)
Click to expand...

CTI schools varied greatly from the und and I assume erau down to programs that literally just taught the faa Academy basics class. A guy in my class said it was literally the same presentations.
Gutting the CTI program was a mistake in my opinion. And I'm an off the street hire but und grad, not atc.

From what I've seen und, Mark school, Beaver, mid tenn etc were all pretty good. But nobody asked me
 
roncachamp said:
How so?
Click to expand...

I'm not referring to .65 procedures Steven. That's a given, they're mostly the same. I'm talking about the experience of doing ATC in the Marines. Surely you can understand there is a difference in doing a job in the Marines compared to a civilian. Since you asked, here ya go.

PARs. While RFC is "dumb dumb" ATC, doing PARs was probably some of the most rewarding experiences I had. Did them for every current military aircraft imaginable including AF-1. Since most facilities, it was the only way of getting a tactical jet down in the soup, your calls could be the difference between landing or going missed. It can be a daunting task for some "kid" right out of high school. Feels good to get an attaboy (Strategic Air Command) at the end of an approach.

You travel the world in the Marines. Only Marine Aviation can set up a FOB on some island in the middle of the Pacific and start running ops out of there in less than 24hrs. Personally, I thought it was pretty cool using state of the art PAR (TPN22) equipment running Harriers down final to a coral runway in the middle of nowhere. A PAR that's far better than any permanent station gear as well.

I took part in exercises in conjunction with the MEU in both Thailand and Korea, essentially taking over an airfield's entire ATC structure for about a month. Where an FAA controller might take a year to get signed off at a new facility, we study for 2 weeks and are running the show. Training their foreign controllers on radar ops while we at it.

I've gone out to the ship and got to witness how the CATCC operates while underway. Once again, like the MEU, it just shows the flexibility by the carrier air wing compared to land based aviation. I just find it fascinating to provide the capability of IFR ops night and day 24/7 anywhere in the world.

While in, I got to fly in various military FW and RW aircraft. While I never did it, backseat rides in tactical jets were authorized by regulation in the military. Knew several controllers in the Navy that went up in A-4s and F-5s in Key West.

Probably the most profound difference is, well, you're a Marine and immersed in the Marine way of life. Yes, they show up to work and sign on position in the AM just like FAA guys do. Only before doing that, they've already run 5 miles, cleaned their rooms for inspection, formed up for a uniform inspection and done a FOD walk. While at work, ATC is just one of your tasks. Still have classes to give, cleaning, boards to attend etc. You have to somehow divide the tasks associated with being a Marine with your ATC duties. These are tasks that at the time were unpleasant but looking back I see them as character building. The lifestyle instills traits that have served me well after the military.

Finally, there's a huge leap in cockpit technology from 20 years ago until now. While on approach I enjoyed providing a form of situational awareness that's quickly becoming extinct today. I worked pilots that asked for vectors to airports because they were lost. Pilots asked for vectors around weather. I issued low altitude alerts when required. I issued traffic advisories when required. I fly an aircraft for work today that has 3 GPSs, HTAWS, TCAD, SVT and XM weather. I don't require any of those services that I listed. Don't get me wrong, controllers are still relevant today, but the tech is taking away some of that spark that I feel created more of a job satisfaction then compared to now.

So yeah, I wouldn't have traded my 8 years in the Marines for anything in the FAA today. It's a corny slogan that the Navy uses to get recruits but my job truly was an adventure. Not for everyone, but it worked for me.
 

Attachments

  • CALFEX.jpg
    CALFEX.jpg
    356.1 KB · Views: 25
  • A-7.jpg
    A-7.jpg
    320.6 KB · Views: 24
  • AV_8s.jpg
    AV_8s.jpg
    337 KB · Views: 16
  • F-14.jpg
    F-14.jpg
    365.3 KB · Views: 22
  • F-15.jpg
    F-15.jpg
    255.7 KB · Views: 19
  • Flag.jpg
    Flag.jpg
    311.1 KB · Views: 23
  • Green.jpg
    Green.jpg
    358.6 KB · Views: 24
  • Hornet.jpg
    Hornet.jpg
    390.2 KB · Views: 18
Last edited:
Velocity173 said:
I'm not referring to .65 procedures Steven. That's a given, they're mostly the same. I'm talking about the experience of doing ATC in the Marines. Surely you can understand there is a difference in doing a job in the Marines compared to a civilian. Since you asked, here ya go.

PARs. While RFC is "dumb dumb" ATC, doing PARs was probably some of the most rewarding experiences I had. Did them for every current military aircraft imaginable including AF-1. Since most facilities, it was the only way of getting a tactical jet down in the soup, your calls could be the difference between landing or going missed. It can be a daunting task for some "kid" right out of high school. Feels good to get an attaboy (Strategic Air Command) at the end of an approach.

You travel the world in the Marines. Only Marine Aviation can set up a FOB on some island in the middle of the Pacific and start running ops out of there in less than 24 hrs. Personally, I thought it was pretty cool using state of the art PAR (TPN22) equipment running Harriers down final to a coral runway in the middle of nowhere. A PAR that's far better than any permanent station gear as well.

I took part in exercises in conjunction with the MEU in both Thailand and Korea, essentially taking over an airfield's entire ATC structure for about a month. Where an FAA controller might take a year to get signed off at a new facility, we study for 2 weeks and are running the show. Training their foreign controllers on radar ops while we at it.

I've gone out to the ship and got to witness how the CATCC operates while underway. Once again, like the MEU, it just shows the flexibility by the carrier air wing compared to land based aviation. I just find it fascinating to provide the capability of IFR ops night and day 24/7 anywhere in the world.

While in, I got to fly in various military FW and RW aircraft. While I never did it, backseat rides in tactical jets were authorized by regulation in the military. Knew several controllers in the Navy that went up in A-4s and F-5s in Key West.

Probably the most profound difference is, well, you're a Marine and immersed in the Marine way of life. Yes, they show up to work and sign on position in the AM just like FAA guys do. Only before doing that, they've already run 5 miles, cleaned their rooms for inspection, formed up for a uniform inspection and done a FOD walk. While at work, ATC is just one of your tasks. Still have classes to give, cleaning, boards to attend etc. You have to somehow divide the tasks associated with being a Marine with your ATC duties. These are tasks that at the time were unpleasant but looking back I see them as character building. The lifestyle instills traits that have served me well after the military.

Finally, there's a huge leap in cockpit technology from 20 years ago until now. While on approach I enjoyed providing a form of situational awareness that's quickly becoming extinct today. I worked pilots that asked for vectors to airports because they were lost. Pilots asked for vectors around weather. I issued low altitude alerts when required. I issued traffic advisories when required. I fly an aircraft for work today that has 3 GPSs, HTAWS, TCAD, SVT and XM weather. I don't require any of those services that I listed. Don't get me wrong, controllers are still relevant today, but the tech is taking away some of that spark that I feel created more of a job satisfaction then compared to now.

So yeah, I wouldn't have traded my 8 years in the Marines for anything in the FAA today. It's a corny slogan that the Navy uses to get recruits but my job truly was an adventure. Not for everyone, but it worked for me.
Click to expand...

Nice write up. Thanks for taking the time, and thank you for your service.
 
PeeGee said:
Mmmmmm noooo my post indicated I was never a military controller.
Click to expand...

You said military ATC is "pretty different" from FAA. Had you been familiar with the order you would have known that isn't so.
 
Velocity173 said:
I'm not referring to .65 procedures Steven. That's a given, they're mostly the same. I'm talking about the experience of doing ATC in the Marines. Surely you can understand there is a difference in doing a job in the Marines compared to a civilian. Since you asked, here ya go.

PARs. While RFC is "dumb dumb" ATC, doing PARs was probably some of the most rewarding experiences I had. Did them for every current military aircraft imaginable including AF-1. Since most facilities, it was the only way of getting a tactical jet down in the soup, your calls could be the difference between landing or going missed. It can be a daunting task for some "kid" right out of high school. Feels good to get an attaboy (Strategic Air Command) at the end of an approach.

You travel the world in the Marines. Only Marine Aviation can set up a FOB on some island in the middle of the Pacific and start running ops out of there in less than 24 hrs. Personally, I thought it was pretty cool using state of the art PAR (TPN22) equipment running Harriers down final to a coral runway in the middle of nowhere. A PAR that's far better than any permanent station gear as well.

I took part in exercises in conjunction with the MEU in both Thailand and Korea, essentially taking over an airfield's entire ATC structure for about a month. Where an FAA controller might take a year to get signed off at a new facility, we study for 2 weeks and are running the show. Training their foreign controllers on radar ops while we at it.

I've gone out to the ship and got to witness how the CATCC operates while underway. Once again, like the MEU, it just shows the flexibility by the carrier air wing compared to land based aviation. I just find it fascinating to provide the capability of IFR ops night and day 24/7 anywhere in the world.

While in, I got to fly in various military FW and RW aircraft. While I never did it, backseat rides in tactical jets were authorized by regulation in the military. Knew several controllers in the Navy that went up in A-4s and F-5s in Key West.

Probably the most profound difference is, well, you're a Marine and immersed in the Marine way of life. Yes, they show up to work and sign on position in the AM just like FAA guys do. Only before doing that, they've already run 5 miles, cleaned their rooms for inspection, formed up for a uniform inspection and done a FOD walk. While at work, ATC is just one of your tasks. Still have classes to give, cleaning, boards to attend etc. You have to somehow divide the tasks associated with being a Marine with your ATC duties. These are tasks that at the time were unpleasant but looking back I see them as character building. The lifestyle instills traits that have served me well after the military.

Finally, there's a huge leap in cockpit technology from 20 years ago until now. While on approach I enjoyed providing a form of situational awareness that's quickly becoming extinct today. I worked pilots that asked for vectors to airports because they were lost. Pilots asked for vectors around weather. I issued low altitude alerts when required. I issued traffic advisories when required. I fly an aircraft for work today that has 3 GPSs, HTAWS, TCAD, SVT and XM weather. I don't require any of those services that I listed. Don't get me wrong, controllers are still relevant today, but the tech is taking away some of that spark that I feel created more of a job satisfaction then compared to now.

So yeah, I wouldn't have traded my 8 years in the Marines for anything in the FAA today. It's a corny slogan that the Navy uses to get recruits but my job truly was an adventure. Not for everyone, but it worked for me.
Click to expand...

Most of those "differences" are unrelated to ATC.
 
roncachamp said:
You said military ATC is "pretty different" from FAA. Had you been familiar with the order you would have known that isn't so.
Click to expand...
Were you familiar with anything coming out of your mouth, you would know that it is. The ignorance that runs rampant on these forums is ****ing staggering.
 
PeeGee said:
Were you familiar with anything coming out of your mouth, you would know that it is. The ignorance that runs rampant on these forums is ****ing staggering.
Click to expand...

With Steve it isn't ignorance, it's a show put on in an attempt to be dominant...sorta like Peacock only not nearly as pretty.
 
MarkZ said:
My experience with CTI's is that they are no better or worse than an off the street or military veteran hire. The academy kind of evens the playing field.

CTI was merely a way to get your foot in the door.

I've seen UND's tower sims and have played with them. They are top notch. The only thing that comes close is the sim at ORD, and that one doesn't do 360 degree viewing. The sim does a pretty good job simulating an F18 flyby. :)
Click to expand...

When did you teach at the academy? Did you know Vaughn Lemke, perhaps?
 
MarkZ said:
Never taught at the academy. I was invited to speak at a UND aviation career. I don't know Mr. Lemke.
Click to expand...

Oh, ok...I understood you'd taught there. I'm sure the right OTS candidate can be trained to the same standard as any equally talented CTI candidate. I think Vaughn's point was, the candidates from a good CTI program finished in the top of their class because they came with previous experience, already knew the pilot-controller glossary, etc. If both make it through the academy and meet all the training metrics along the way, I wouldn't expect you to see a marked difference in performance in the field.
 
LDJones said:
Oh, ok...I understood you'd taught there. I'm sure the right OTS candidate can be trained to the same standard as any equally talented CTI candidate. I think Vaughn's point was, the candidates from a good CTI program finished in the top of their class because they came with previous experience, already knew the pilot-controller glossary, etc. If both make it through the academy and meet all the training metrics along the way, I wouldn't expect you to see a marked difference in performance in the field.
Click to expand...

:dunno:

Never said I taught at the Academy. Been a controller since 2002. OJTI (On the Job Instructor) since 2007.

Some CTI schools are great, and have potential. Other CTI schools are not so great. But, in my opinion, they all extend their program far too long to accommodate the two or four year collegiate degree plan.

Only one program was a bypass to the FAA Academy: the MARC program pre-2004. It was four months long, required a competitive entrance exam, and had regular semi-weekly skill evaluations. If you didn't meet the minimum cut score at each evaluation, you packed your bags. All training took place on actual FAA DSR equipment, which was better than what the FAA Academy students were using at that time.

The old MARC program boasted a 98% certification vs. washout rate. Not sure why it was disbanded.

I'm sure CTI students do well and have an advantage at the Academy, as opposed to the OTS hires. My experience has been that the CTI students and OTS hires have equal certification vs. washout rates at the facility.
 
Last edited:
PeeGee said:
Were you familiar with anything coming out of your mouth, you would know that it is. The ignorance that runs rampant on these forums is ****ing staggering.
Click to expand...

So help make this forum a bit less ignorant by explaining how military ATC is "pretty different" from FAA.
 
denverpilot said:
Heh. They get to talk to airplanes with cooler call signs. ;)
Click to expand...

Well, so do the FAA controllers.

the military ATC get to do all the FAA 7110 stuff, except that last I knew, none of the military controllers worked any civilian enroute positions (ground, tower, approach, and departure, yes but not civilian enroute).

There are military towers, military RAPCONs, but no Centers.

But it's been a while since I've worked any military ATC systems, so maybe it's changed.
 
Air Force used to have a center in Germany (Berlin Center) during the Cold War running 3 corridors in and out of Berlin. And I not positive but maybe another over Nevada (Area 51 and all that) many years ago. But none now that I'm aware of.
 
Velocity173 said:
Only Marine Aviation can set up a FOB on some island in the middle of the Pacific and start running ops out of there in less than 24 hrs. .
Click to expand...

Air Force and ANG Combat Communication Groups/Squadrons can do that too.

When I was in the 2nd Combat Comm Group we had 3-4 MPN-14 Mobile radar units w/ surveillance and PAR. I seem to recall during inspections we had 22 hours to site it and then USAF Flight Check would certify it, Also had the TSW=7 Mobile Control Tower which was self contained w/ UHF and VHF, wind measuring and even air conditioned! ALoshad mobile TACANs. Retired in '88 and I think the USAF was to get the TPN22 also.
 
And yet they laid of hundreds of Controllers 3-4 years ago to hire contract Controllers.

Your government at work.
 
mscard88 said:
Air Force and ANG Combat Communication Groups/Squadrons can do that too.

When I was in the 2nd Combat Comm Group we had 3-4 MPN-14 Mobile radar units w/ surveillance and PAR. I seem to recall during inspections we had 22 hours to site it and then USAF Flight Check would certify it, Also had the TSW=7 Mobile Control Tower which was self contained w/ UHF and VHF, wind measuring and even air conditioned! ALoshad mobile TACANs. Retired in '88 and I think the USAF was to get the TPN22 also.
Click to expand...

Yes, the Army has tactical ATC capability as well. My point was the comparison of the FAA to Marine ATC that Steven was asking. The FAA isn't going to be living in a tent in the middle of nowhere conducting ATC ops. That's what I was getting at with the primary difference between Marines vs FAA.

The .65 is a given. For the most part you operate the same. That's just the act of doing ATC. The lifestyle of doing ATC that I experienced in the Marines can't be compared to by anything in the FAA. I mean I worked at the same radar room from The Great Santani. That alone blows anything in the civilian world out of the water!:D
 
Velocity173 said:
Only Marine Aviation can set up a FOB on some island in the middle of the Pacific and start running ops out of there in less than 24 hrs. .
Click to expand...

Well you stated ONLY Marine Aviation could do it! :dunno: :nono::D
 
mscard88 said:
Well you stated ONLY Marine Aviation could do it! :dunno: :nono::D
Click to expand...

Yeah but we'd still be set up and flight checked in half the time of the Army or AF. Plus, you all don't have Harriers.:rofl:
 
Ok all you "in the know" military guys.....

Question...

Back when Cheney was VP and spent the summers here the military would bring out a temp radar set up.. Complete with a large dish, several tents and a gen set.... They would set it up a bit north of town with a clear site of the VP's airspace...

I was a CAP member back then and they would give us a specific course to fly including various altitudes to caliberate the AZ and El and ranging of their beam...

Remind me which branch of the military did that ????:confused:
 
N801BH said:
Ok all you "in the know" military guys.....

Question...

Back when Cheney was VP and spent the summers here the military would bring out a temp radar set up.. Complete with a large dish, several tents and a gen set.... They would set it up a bit north of town with a clear site of the VP's airspace...

I was a CAP member back then and they would give us a specific course to fly including various altitudes to caliberate the AZ and El and ranging of their beam...

Remind me which branch of the military did that ????:confused:
Click to expand...

Most likely that was an Army ADA unit using Sentinel radar and not controllers. ADA radar is best suited for IFF purposes.

They came out to our airport when the POTUS flew in as well.
 
Last edited:
Velocity173 said:
Most likely that was an Army ADA unit using Sentinal radar and not controllers. ADA radar is best suited for IFF purposes.

They came out to our airport when the POTUS flew in as well.
Click to expand...

Thanks......

And yeah,, they were not controlling anything , probably more of a security theatre /feel good image for the public...
 
roncachamp said:
What "cooler call signs" would be used by military ATC but not FAA?
Click to expand...

Think the reference is to military aircraft call signs like fighters. But FAA as well military, or anyone else would call that plane by that call sign.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top