Jump to content

All Activity

This stream auto-updates

  1. Last week
  2. Shaun Anderson

    GCAP Update 2: Technology and Endorsement Changes

    Hi Adam, "Currency Renewal Under GCAP, all controllers in divisions which maintain a Controller Roster will be required to control for a minimum of 3 hours in each fixed quarter. Should controllers become inactive, they will be automatically removed from the Controller Roster and be required to 'renew' their currency. During our initial implementation of GCAP, controllers will be able to 'self serve' through a web-based wizard in order to be re-added to the Controller Roster." Was looking at returning to controlling, any idea where I can find this web-based self-serve wizard in order to return to the active roster? Thanks Shaun
  3. Sebastian Wheeler

    EGGP_APP | Wednesday 13th March | 1900z

    Thanks all, huge appreciation to all that have mentored me during the S3 journey!
  4. Darren Faux

    EGNT_APP | Thursday 14th March | 1800z

    Congratulations Daniel 🤩
  5. Darren Faux

    EGGP_APP | Wednesday 13th March | 1900z

    Congratulations Sebastian 🤩
  6. Fergus Walsh

    EGNT_APP | Thursday 14th March | 1800z

    Congratulations to @Daniel Lovett who passed his exam on Newcastle Radar this evening and gained his S3! Thanks to all the pilots who flew in/out/around NCL and to the adjacent ATC who supported the exam. Enjoy the rating!
  7. Good evening all, Please join me in congratulating @Sebastian Wheeler for passing his S3 exam on Liverpool Radar last night! Well done Seb, and enjoy the rating. Ben
  8. Kye Taylor

    EGNT_APP | Thursday 14th March | 1800z

    Good luck!!!!
  9. Sebastian Wheeler

    EGNT_APP | Thursday 14th March | 1800z

    Good luck!
  10. Earlier
  11. Darren Faux

    EGNT_APP | Thursday 14th March | 1800z

    Good luck!
  12. There will be an exam on Newcastle Radar (EGNT_APP) on the 14th March, commencing at 1800z. The exam is expected to last 60-90mins but the exam may end earlier/later, depending on whether the competencies have been sufficiently assessed. A good number of IFR inbounds from different directions and VFR movements around Newcastle are essential to making this exam a success - a few IFR departures going southbound would also be helpful. Please, no funny business without first speaking to EGNT_X_APP. Pilots wishing to fly to ensure that they are familiar with the pilot guidance for ATC exams. Good luck to the candidate!
  13. Oliver Parker

    GCAP Update 2: Technology and Endorsement Changes

    Like a duck to water mate!!! If only you’d have had this job 15 years ago!!! I might come back and do my Self Serve if I ever buy myself a Windows device!!! Take it easy pal, hope you’re well.
  14. Adam Arkley

    GCAP Update 2: Technology and Endorsement Changes

    Given the time since you last regularly controlled, do you honestly think you could log on and control tomorrow like nothing happened? Your controversial opinions might not have changed, but the network is busier than ever and procedures change regularly. GCAP is not a VATSIM UK policy - but I fully intend to ensure that people are competent before letting them loose on the network after protracted absences.
  15. Oliver Parker

    GCAP Update 2: Technology and Endorsement Changes

    Creating hurdles and making it harder for past controllers to come back doesn’t seem like a future-proof, cutting-edge vision 🤷‍♂️ ‘Self-serve’ is one thing but it seems evident you would like to make the case for returning controllers to require mentoring going forward. Been a while since I was on the network but some things in Vatsim (UK) never change 😂
  16. Version 1.0.0

    29 downloads

    This document outlines the sharing of airspace and procedures over the North Atlantic between Shanwick and Gander OCAs.
  17. Will Jennings

    S2 Syllabus and Lesson Plans

    Over the last few months in tenure, @Adam Arkley and myself have worked with TG Staff to create a holistic syllabus for all ATC training undertaken in VATSIM UK. Individual Syllabi for each rating will comprehensively detail all theoretical and practical training covered during mentoring sessions. The content of the syllabi gives mentors clear direction and focus in their sessions and ensures students understand what is expected of them; also key competencies will be cemented that will make transition to higher ratings easier and should reduce the amount of repeat mentoring. Thus, it is with great pleasure that I can announce the first of said Syllabi to be released - 'S2 Syllabus & Lesson Plans'. Please see the new format of our S2 training below: Block 1 - Basic Training: In Block 1, students will undertake 3 set sessions with defined lesson plans contained in Section 4 of the document. These sessions will be conducted on Sweatbox only to ensure the required topics for each lesson are completed. Students will still be assigned a training aerodrome where all mentoring will be undertaken however these sessions will use the CTS identifier TWR_BTRG with their own report. It is expected that students will pre-read about topics to be covered in each lesson from the S2 Moodle. Once the 3 lessons are completed students will sit End of Block Exam 1, this has the CTS identifier TWR_B1. This session will be conducted by @Will Hinshaw or any Division Instructor; it cannot be failed... however competencies marked as developing or below will be earmarked for remedial training within Block 2. Block 2 - Consolidation and Network Practice: Block 2 is essentially a continuation of the current system, students will have one-to-one mentoring sessions on the live network or sweatbox using the [ICAO]_TWR/SBTT CTS identifiers. Section 5 of the document details all competencies expected of students by the end of training, new CTS reports will be appended to these sessions to match the syllabus. Once students are deemed ready for exam by mentors, they will sit End of Block Exam 2 with the CTS identifier TWR_B2. This is essentially a mock exam on the live network and will be conducted by Will Hinshaw (or DIs in his absence), the decision will then be made whether to forward for the formal exam or whether more training is required. Mentors, current students and future students.. you're probably wondering how this will be implemented. The syllabus is effective immediately and thus: Current Students: Please read through the whole document, especially Section 5 detailing the Syllabus. Make a note of any competencies that you are unsure of and ensure that mentors cover them with you in future sessions. You will sit End of Block Exam 2 (TWR_B2) before being forwarded for your formal exam. Future Students: Trials are to begin on Stansted (EGSS) imminently and we will be closely monitoring the effectiveness of Basic Training. This will then be rolled out to all new students at all training aerodromes in due course. Please ensure you utilise the S2 Moodle course prior to starting your training to give you the best head-start possible. Mentors: Communication will come from Will imminently, he has prepared a short presentation to walk all of you through the new system. Keep an eye out in #twr_mentors on Discord for updates. Also, please familiarise yourself with all the content - any questions please speak to Will or a DI. Finally, the syllabus can be found here:
  18. Robbie Garrett

    GCAP Update 2: Technology and Endorsement Changes

    Hello Adam, Was looking at becoming current again, been refreshing on procedures and looking to setup my controller client again on the weekend to get some controlling in. Where can I find this web based wizard or is it a current case of just doing the revision/refresher/self learning and logging in before 1st of April? Update: I see I can't control and have had to email member services. So reading all of the above, presume some self-learning or a quiz is in order?
  19. Fraser Cooper

    GCAP Changes to Heathrow Training

    Hello everyone, To comply with the introduction of the Global Controller Administration Policy (GCAP), we have made some changes to the way training is conducted within the Heathrow TG. Heathrow is now categorised as a Tier 1 airfield. For more information regarding GCAP, please see the VATSIM.net policy here. Introduction of Heathrow GMP/GMC endorsements for S1 members With the implementation of GCAP, members who hold an S1 rating are now able to apply with Heathrow Training. For an S1 to be eligible for Heathrow training they must: Be on the active controlling roster, and Must not have significant negative feedback, and Hold a Gatwick ground endorsement with 50 hours on EGKK positions. (This is required due to high traffic level experience/exposure) Due to the expected demand in training at an S1 level, there will be a waiting list for S1 members who wish to gain an endorsement on Heathrow. Where excess training capacity exists within the Heathrow TG, S1 members at the top of the waiting list will be given access to the entry exam and offered practical training. If you wish to start your Heathrow training as an S1, please submit a ticket to ATC-Training stating you meet the requirements above. Changes to (S2+) Ground & Tower Training - (Removal of Training Places) There are little changes to how training is conducted if you have an S2 or higher rating. However, there is no longer a requirement to express interest in training. You are able to self enrol on all courses and attempt the entry exam. Additionally, there will be no waiting lists unless training demand is exceptionally high. Therefore, after the entry exam has been passed, members will be given permission to request practical sessions. Upon completion of the endorsement, if your permanent rating is higher than the Heathrow endorsement you were granted, you will be enrolled on the next Moodle course to continue your progression within the training group. Note: Due to the amount of sessions required to obtain an endorsement on Heathrow Director, training places will still be utilised and the training process remains unchanged. However, members may self-enrol on this course. The Heathrow Endorsements page on the VATSIM UK website will be updated shortly. Any questions, please reach out to me on Discord.
  20. Callum McLoughlin

    GCAP Update 2: Technology and Endorsement Changes

    I think I am looking for something along the lines of a local policy applicable to VATUK. The division appears to be the arbiter of whether to petition to the VP, and what to recommend in terms of action. There is a lot of scope to do almost anything in the wording of GCAP, as it contains suggestions rather than an exhaustive list of outcomes. As such I think the division needs to be a driver of this.
  21. Adam Arkley

    GCAP Update 2: Technology and Endorsement Changes

    The requirement cannot exceed three hours. The activity may. I find the defendant guilty and sentence them to a period of controlling of a duration no less than level 6 on the standard scale. I have properly planned for this in advance. You'd have to speak to the region if you think it should be enshrined in policy - GCAP is, of course, a .Net policy and not a VATSIM UK policy!
  22. Callum McLoughlin

    GCAP Update 2: Technology and Endorsement Changes

    Would it not make sense to formalise this, given other processes that impede on members ability to fly/control are? In addition as it is unlikely to be a routine issue, there is more chance of inconsistency / unfairness? This could be published so everybody can see, in general, how things generally would progress. I don’t think it would necessitate tying down anything specific, but I think it is helpful to properly plan for this in advance.
  23. Robin Meads

    GCAP Update 2: Technology and Endorsement Changes

    Hello Callum. A bit pedantic as a former lawyer (😥), but am puzzled by the requirement in GCAP 9.4(c)(ii) - The controller meets an activity requirement which shall not exceed three hours on any controllable positions within the Subdivision or Division in a three-month period. This literally means that the activity must be less than 3 hours. If you do 4 hours then you do not qualify !! Surely it should say "shall be a minimum of three hours in total on any one or more"
  24. Adam Arkley

    GCAP Update 2: Technology and Endorsement Changes

    Good morning, Callum, I have spoken with others within the DSG who predate my tenure to understand how the division reached this position. I am pleased to say their thoughts are mine: We are a busy division with some busy and complex airspace which changes frequently. A three month absence is the difference between there being no FRA and there being FRA. Three hours is really considered very little. One hour a month to remain current is not much. Our revalidation process is considered to be very lenient: "read this, tell us you have, welcome back" - in most cases. The idea that someone can make 'a connection' of undefined length in 12 months is meaningless - I can connect for one minute, the connection be detected and I am considered current. To your point on recurrency - yes, we are limited. But that doesn't make it challenging and we still intend to be lenient. This should be an easily accessible process for anyone that is removed from the Controller Roster for currency reasons. We remain convinced that three hours per quarter is a perfectly achievable target - certainly more achievable than the 'you must participate every 31 days' that we see in some other virtual organisations! Please rest assured that Simon and I have spoken many times on what we think would be acceptable by way of petition to the region on competency grounds. It is not formalised; more an understanding of what is required by us to try to remedy locally and what is required of us to present a good case to Simon. Needless to say this is a last resort and we hope that controllers who have been away for some time and lack competence engage with us before that's needed. Cheers, Adam
  25. Callum McLoughlin

    GCAP Update 2: Technology and Endorsement Changes

    Hi Adam The GCAP appears permit the division to utilise any of the three requirements, not all. Moreover, the Division has a choice if it does use a quarterly hours requirement to require up to three, not mandate three itself. I have highlighted this below for clarity. Why were the other two options ruled out either in combination or on their own, and why was the maximum of three hours chosen rather than another time period? The controller meets an activity requirement which shall not exceed three hours on any controllable positions within the Subdivision or Division in a three-month period. The account holder connects to the network as a controller once within a period of 12 months. The controller acknowledges changes to local procedures. A controller is only considered out of date if they have not acknowledged changes that are over two months old. Prior to removing a controller from the roster a Subdivision shall notify the controller to allow them to re-establish currency within a one month period. Acknowledging changes to procedures may only consist of reading, accepting and responding to information. Moreover, I note that the division will be limited anyway in terms of what can be required in terms of re-currency. When a controller previously removed from the roster due to ‘currency’ wishes to be reinstated, the Subdivision may allow the controller to be reinstated immediately or otherwise will define a training plan. This can include written courses, self-study materials and/or one practical session with a suitable controller. All training must be relevant to the controller’s currency and cannot require the controller to undergo a course designed for controllers training for a rating. No training plan may be more extensive than this, unless explicitly requested by the returning controller. I don’t think that this element of GCAP will provide you with the answer to the legitimate issue of people not controlling for several years and then making a hash of it. Whereas, as you suggest, the below appears to offer the solution. A controller is expected to be competent to control the positions they connect to. Where a controller is consistently below the required standard as defined within this document to the point that it causes disruption to other account holders, a Subdivision may petition their Division to place restrictions on this controller until the problem is resolved. The requested restrictions could include the removal of endorsement(s) and removal of eligibility to receive training for a higher ATC rating. Such a petition must show reliable and sustained evidence of the controller’s impact. When a Division receives a petition, it shall notify the Region Vice President. If a Division considers this petition to be appropriate, it shall be presented to the Region Vice President for a decision. Placing restrictions on a controller shall only be considered following attempts to resolve the situation by the Subdivision. The Region Vice President may partially delegate their responsibilities for reviewing and actioning these petitions but must be notified prior to restrictions being imposed. My suggestion is to drop the hours requirements on a quarterly basis and instead require one connection as a controller in a 12 month period, and acknowledge updates to local procedures relevant to their ATC position (this is already largely in place via UKCP). Then put the bulk of the hard work you are all doing into formulating a strong and robust policy between VATUK and Simon so that when the individual who presents a real issue does come along, the Division can act faster and more effectively to block controlling at a level they have lost capability to control… rather than imposing additional burden on others who are unlikely to fall into that category. I hope this suggestion is taken in the spirit intended, as I recognise the problem. I think there is a different solution which achieves that aim more robustly and without impacting those who aren’t the target of these efforts. Callum
  26. Adam Arkley

    GCAP Update 2: Technology and Endorsement Changes

    Hi Callum, I can and I can't - we did not decide on three hours per quarter. That is a condition stipulated by GCAP if we want to maintain a controller roster. I cannot share others' views within the DSG of why we want a controller roster, but I absolutely can share my own. Quite recently, we seem to be blessed with a high number of returning controllers to VATSIM. In some cases, they've been gone six months and little has changed. In some cases, those people have been gone for five years or longer, during which much has changed. Some of these controllers are very pragmatic, recognise their skills fade and ask lots of questions to become current again. Some of these controllers log onto very busy positions without reading any documentation and this causes chaos, both for the pilots that they control and the adjacent controllers who are up-to-scratch and following our latest and greatest policies and procedures. The only way that we can prevent this is by maintaining a controller roster. GCAP also provides us with the ability to petition the region to remove controllers from the roster on competency grounds, but only after we've tried to remedy the issue locally. Very sadly, in my short tenure in this post this time around, I've already had cause to remove a number of validations from controllers following long runs of negative feedback and the observations of either me or my team. We ensured, in all cases, that these controllers are offered remedial training. I will be very clear: the DSG does not have a long term view on recurrency. We all agree that self serve in the first instance is fine, in order to point people at critical documentation, outline changes and bring them as up-to-speed as we can on policy and procedure. There is no expectation in the first phase that any competency is evaluated in a recurrency process. However, my discussions so far suggest that there is a well-held view that 'not being current' might mean you controlled 2.9 hours in the last quarter, or it might mean that you've not controlled for 10 years. The way in which we bring these categories of people up-to-speed is very different, but suffice to say, in keeping with what everyone hopefully either knows about me or already or is learning quickly, there will be no needless bureaucracy. The objective is clear: we want everyone controlling in VATSIM UK controlling to a satisfactory standard, whether you last controlled in the last week or the last decade. How we achieve that is very TBC.
  27. Callum McLoughlin

    GCAP Update 2: Technology and Endorsement Changes

    Hello, please can you provide further detail and background on the rationale for electing to require 3 hours per quarter to remain on the roster. In addition please provide further assurances on what the long term view is on re-activation should somebody not meet the activity requirements and come off the roster; I understand the current position but what is the trajectory and the objective? What impact does the division consider this will have on itself being able to deliver ATS and controllers who may end up unable to control despite holding a valid rating. Cheers
  1. Load more activity
×
×
  • Create New...