Canadian Air Traffic Control School (Not Nav Canada)

Pygmie · Post by **Pygmie** » Sat Mar 04, 2006 8:01 pm

A friend just showed me this, and it makes we wonder if we won't be seeing yet another change in the way controllers are trained here in Canada.

http://news.gc.ca/cfmx/view/en/index.js ... eid=199669

Anyone have any further information on this? I'm really curious how this fits into Nav Canada's controller training, if at all? And if not, who is this new program geared towards?

grimey · Post by **grimey** » Sat Mar 04, 2006 8:13 pm

It's not just an ATC school, it's an expansion of their current aviation department.

http://www.bcit.ca/news/releases/newsre ... 6730.shtml

I haven't heard anything else about it. Let the unfounded rumours fly! NC does train a decent number of controllers for other countries, they may be trying to get in on that.

http://www.navcanada.ca/NavCanada.asp?L ... efault.xml

(you'll have to copy/paste the link... the forums software doesn't like the forward slashies)

It is interesting that neither press release makes any mention of Nav Canada, though.

lexx · Post by **lexx** » Sun Mar 05, 2006 7:05 am

Yeah this doesn't make sense. Transport Canada got out of Air Traffic Control several years ago to avoid just this kind of thing. Training Controllers, among other things. And it's a "Western Canada initiative". Does that mean a non standardized training program nation wide?

Are you sure this isn't more about developing high tech equipment to provide training? Something Nav Canada might buy?

FamilyGuy · Post by **FamilyGuy** » Sun Mar 05, 2006 9:53 pm

"Air Traffic Management" is NOT Air Traffic Control!

Sounds more like some kind of namby pamby BS course to take $$$ from unsuspecting little rich kids to me. Bout as useful as Georgians old ATC degree.....

charlie_g · Post by **charlie_g** » Sun Mar 05, 2006 11:20 pm

Confusingly, they only actually mention controllers in the first paragraph. After that it's all about airspace management, and lots about airport security. Sounds vague enough to have been the recipient of a big government grant.

invertedattitude · Post by **invertedattitude** » Fri Mar 17, 2006 5:58 pm

If you want to become an employee of NavCanada as an Air Traffic controller, do NOT waste your money on this.

polythene_pam · Post by **polythene_pam** » Sun Apr 16, 2006 10:26 pm

If you want to become an employee of NavCanada as an Air Traffic controller, do NOT waste your money on this.

Why?

Have you taken this program?

Do you do hiring for navcanada?

Have you seen people come out of this program attempt atc?

Have you compared their success rates to those who have not done this program?

I see you're a moncton "trainee"... Does that make you an expert?

You're a commercial pilot.. do you think that helped you gain employment and hopefully succeed in your training, or become a better controller? If so, what makes you think this program won't be just as good, or possibly better at preparing you for your job?

Are you completely full of BS?

I really don't know much about the program, but I think it's pretty early to start shouting that it's a "waste of money".

I happen to know a few controllers that are interested in finding out more information for their kids who are about to graduate high school.

With such high ct rates, long wait lists, and abbreviated ATC training programs, this may be an excellent thing to do for a year or two to gain some life experience, aviation background, and a little atc trining before making the leap into navcanada! Plus, the management portion will give you some idea of where to go if you're unsuccessful or decide not to pursue atc.

lexx · Post by **lexx** » Mon Apr 17, 2006 2:09 pm

polythene_pam wrote:...................................Are you completely full of BS?

I really don't know much about the program, but I think it's pretty early to start shouting that it's a "waste of money".

Chill out dude!

The discussion originally was about whether there was any training offered at all.

If you "really don't know much about the program", maybe you could investigate for us before hurling insults around the thread.

Thank You

polythene_pam · Post by **polythene_pam** » Tue Apr 18, 2006 1:18 pm

I think you're the one who needs to chill out. My comment, while written in jest, was somewhat justified.

I was responding to a post in particular where somebody, who obviously knows as little as me about this topic, felt the nececity to tell everybody NOT TO WASTE THEIR MONEY ON THIS, while giving absolutely no reasons.

Perhaps we need a definition here:

to be full of B.S.: (verb) 1. To make a claim as if it is fact, with absolutely no expertise, experience, reasons, or sources to back up their claim.

Eg. I can't cite any sources for this definition, as I made it up just now; therefore, I am completely full of B.S.

invertedattitude · Post by **invertedattitude** » Fri Apr 21, 2006 10:19 pm

I'll say this:

Every instructor I have spoken to has the same belief:

It is a waste of time, you STILL HAVE TO WRITE THE SAME APTITUDE TEST.

You have the aptitude or not, there's no course that's going to prepare you for it.

And no being a pilot does not help one bit with being a Controller.

polythene_pam · Post by **polythene_pam** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 7:07 am

And no being a pilot does not help one bit with being a Controller.

WOW, so you ARE full of complete B.S. thanks for clarifying that!!

You're not serious are you? not ONE BIT? okay, mr. trainee!!!

Besides, the aptitude test is a small part of becoming a controller. If you can't pass that, you do have some serious problems. An air traffic management school that exposes you to some aspects of ATC sounds like anEXCELLENT way to get involved in aviation industry. Maybe a good way for some young guys to get their feet wet instead of diving right into a career at age 18!! It also may increase your chances of checkout, since you would have a better idea as to what you're getting into.

I actually know two separate VERY experienced OJIs who were quite interested in finding out more information on this as a possible option for their teenaged kids. Why not get a little depth before getting into atc? Wouldn't be my choice. but to call it a waste of money is just ignorant.

Jerricho · Post by **Jerricho** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 8:46 am

av8rpei wrote:And no being a pilot does not help one bit with being a Controller.

Not sure I agree with this. Any exposure/experience to the aviation industry certainly provides an excellent starting point. Having undergone flight training certinaly is advantageous regarding principles of flight, aircraft performance, pilot/cockpit workloads as well as navigational concepts..........even being able to confidently talk on the R/T. ATC training in the UK included 15 hours flying for this very reason.

I think it should be reinforced that it is not however going to ensure an "easy checkout". I have seen trainees in the past who have strutted around ATC schools/colleges with PPLs and even CPLs and haven't been backwards in letting one and all know it. Sure, these guys and gals have an in depth aviation knowledge, yet don't quite get ATC.

As to paying for something like this before having to fork out for a Nav Canada course? Who knows. Valuable background information can be obtained simply by visiting a unit a couple of times and talking to controllers. I remember one guy who got hold of the UK version of ManOps (MATS- Manual of Air Traffic Services) and tried to learn it word for word before he started his course. He just ended up very confused when he tried to learn procedural sep standards.

Jerricho · Post by **Jerricho** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 5:37 pm

...............

bigfssguy · Post by **bigfssguy** » Sun Apr 23, 2006 6:02 pm

cpl_atc wrote:
av8rpei wrote:And no being a pilot does not help one bit with being a Controller.
Totally disagree. It certainly doesn't guarantee success by any stretch, but it helped me a lot during the training and even now doing the job. There are countless aspects of controlling that are made easier and/or seemingly less random if you know (and can anticipate) what's going on inside that little yellow hexagon on the screen.

I agree with cpl on this one. No it won't make or break you during the training ( iwas an underground miner before FSS) but it will give you an insight. We had 5 pilots on my basic course and only 2 made it out but one of those was tops in our class.

I think the biggest thing is inter job awareness. Meaning knowing what the guy is doing on the other side of the mic is doing. Be it ATS, vehicle operater or pilot. I have had lots of pilots come up and watch me during busy periods and they are blown away with how much i have going on. And vice versa to that i have been in the cockpit with pilots and i was amazed what was happenign, checklists, talking on the radio, flying etc.

yes everyone should go see how the other half lives ATS and pilots. Those that are pilots going into ATS already have a leg up on there counterparts. Will it garauntee success, not a chance but it will help.

polythene_pam · Post by **polythene_pam** » Mon Apr 24, 2006 1:53 am

would a non-pilot know to tell a screaming, stalling, spinning vfr 172 pilot in imc: "release the stick, throttle back."?

I seriously doubt it.

Being a pilot probably doesn't help much in atc training, or on the job as long as everything's going routine. I'm sure it comes in very handy when the fit hits the shan.

invertedattitude · Post by **invertedattitude** » Mon Apr 24, 2006 7:38 pm

cpl_atc wrote:
bigfssguy wrote: yes everyone should go see how the other half lives ATS and pilots. Those that are pilots going into ATS already have a leg up on there counterparts. Will it garauntee success, not a chance but it will help.
Which is why it is bloody stupid that controllers can't get up front any more (at the airline level, at least) to get an idea of how busy the pilots can be, and to see how they work. Makes a lot of sense, doesn't it: Controllers have a secret-level security clearance, and the ability to create a mess when sitting behind a radar screen, but they can't get into the cockpit...

Just glad I was able to get up there before everyone got so paranoid.

Well My NavCan bit and the fact my g/f works for a major airline in Canada got me in the cockpit of a 8 month old airplane for 2 legs of my trip couple months back

Technically if you read the CARS, controllers are technically allowed in the cockpit:

"Any Person who provides a direct service related to the operation of the aircraft"

invertedattitude · Post by **invertedattitude** » Tue Apr 25, 2006 1:03 pm

Thats True CPL

Some things on my side:

I work the Ramp for this Airline through a third party company for a long time.

NavCan employee

Girlfriend is a WestJet employee, and I get along well with the Base Manager.

It's legal for a controller to sit jump, just most airlines have shut the door to everyone but employees, check the CAR's pretty sure its actually quite vague.

CD · Post by CD » Tue Apr 25, 2006 2:41 pm

av8rpei wrote:It's legal for a controller to sit jump, just most airlines have shut the door to everyone but employees, check the CAR's pretty sure its actually quite vague.

Here is the subsection of the rule that I believe you are saying permits you to occupy the flight deck:

(3) No person shall be admitted to the flight deck of an aeroplane other than

(a) a flight crew member;

(b) a crew member performing their duties;

(c) an inspector referred to in subsection (1);

(d) in accordance with the procedures specified in the company operations manual,

(i) an employee of the air operator who is not a crew member performing their duties, and
(ii) a pilot, flight engineer or flight attendant employed by a wholly owned subsidiary or a code share partner of the air operator; and

(e) a person who has expertise related to the aeroplane, its equipment or its crew members and who is required to be in the flight deck to provide a service to the air operator.

705.27 - Admission to Flight Deck

I suspect that paragraph (e) is the closest that you're going to get and it would have to be demonstrated that the controller is required to be in the flight deck to provide the service to the air operator.

invertedattitude · Post by **invertedattitude** » Tue Apr 25, 2006 7:01 pm

Exactly CD, my memory of the CARS was a little off apparently.

However the argument could be made still I suppose, albeit losely.

However it does seem foolish.

Controllers, even ATC students have higher clearence than anyone else touching that aircraft, with the exception maybe of TC.

Seems foolish as said above controllers cannot sit jump.

grimey · Post by **grimey** » Tue Apr 25, 2006 7:28 pm

av8rpei wrote: Controllers, even ATC students have higher clearence than anyone else touching that aircraft, with the exception maybe of TC.

I'd guess that TC inspectors have secret/level II clearance, the same as controllers and FSS. I don't see why they'd need top secret.

CD · Post by CD » Wed Apr 26, 2006 5:00 am

General ... "Do not be so sure, Mr. Rivers. Evidently your friend did not realize that here in East Germany we use 220 volt current. He was found in his hotel room impaled upon a large electrical device. Our surgeons did what they could, but it took them two hours just to get the smile off his face."

Ahhh, the classics...

invertedattitude · Post by **invertedattitude** » Fri Jan 05, 2007 10:26 pm

I jumped at that comment: Being a pilot does help, but it would depend what level of pilot, a VFR Cessna pilot would be helped by working the comms but thats about it.

Some of the best controllers I've met had zero experience prior, on that same token theres ex-military pilots, aerobatic pilots, commercial pilots who are all also great controllers.

My point is I guess, is that being a pilot doesn't have much bearing on controlling as people would think. The things that flying relate to ATC can be taught in a classroom, with the exception of the experience big iron pilots can bring to the table.

MCA · Post by **MCA** » Sat Jan 06, 2007 12:01 pm

polythene_pam wrote:
If you want to become an employee of NavCanada as an Air Traffic controller, do NOT waste your money on this.
Why?

Have you taken this program?

Do you do hiring for navcanada?

Have you seen people come out of this program attempt atc?

Have you compared their success rates to those who have not done this program?

I see you're a moncton "trainee"... Does that make you an expert?

You're a commercial pilot.. do you think that helped you gain employment and hopefully succeed in your training, or become a better controller? If so, what makes you think this program won't be just as good, or possibly better at preparing you for your job?

Are you completely full of BS?

I really don't know much about the program, but I think it's pretty early to start shouting that it's a "waste of money".

I happen to know a few controllers that are interested in finding out more information for their kids who are about to graduate high school.

With such high ct rates, long wait lists, and abbreviated ATC training programs, this may be an excellent thing to do for a year or two to gain some life experience, aviation background, and a little atc trining before making the leap into navcanada! Plus, the management portion will give you some idea of where to go if you're unsuccessful or decide not to pursue atc.

because no one will and can train you to become ATC except Nav canada training units. that is it.

justplanecrazy · Post by **justplanecrazy** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 4:18 pm

Sorry Pam,

I gotta say that the trainee sounds like a very experienced controller compared to your ignorant attempt at a trainee bashing.

Being a pilot does very little to help you get checked out. Sure it gives you an edge that is quite obvious at the begining of training but by the time you're nearing the end, it really isn't the make or break skills that you need. I've seen 3,000 hr pilots stink up the mic and dissapear in the first month and a surf bum control better than anyone in the unit before the end of training.

would a non-pilot know to tell a screaming, stalling, spinning vfr 172 pilot in imc: "release the stick, throttle back."?

I seriously doubt it.

????? I hope you're joking. If someone is losing control of the aircraft, the last thing I'd want to hear on the tapes is a controller guessing as to what is going on and offering advice. That is what flight instructors and licences are for. The last thing I'm going to do is pretend I know what is going on and open myself up to litigation by offering advice. Oh and I imagine you are refering to a Cessna in the circuit as that's about the only time you'd be able to see one spinning, in which case your advise to release the stick and throttle back would proabably allow him to recover at -500 AGL and leave you with a million dollar law suit. So maybe you should tell him to release back pressure, ailerons neutral, apply opposite rudder, as soon as it breaks start to apply back pressure and watch for a secondary stall then nail your airspeed at 60kt's and apply full throttle. All this in the 30 seconds it'd take him to lose 1000' AGL. I don't know maybe I'm shetlered but has anyone heard of a controller doing this on a regular basis or ever in 35 years of work? Do you comment on their flares as well????

Me thinks you're trying to justify the $45g that you wasted attempting to get your CPL instead of a real job. I say my licence and experience is a complete waste as there isn't a single thing that I learned during that time that I can use for controlling that wouldn't have been passed on to me from the other experienced controllers or the pilots themselves. The only advantage it gave me is knowing my aircraft capabilities, cockpit workload and confidence on the radio, all things which were taught to the non-pilots in their 1st year of training free of charge. If you can name one thing that you use on a regular basis that the non-pilot sitting beside you doesn't, then maybe I'd change my tune.

Second the program is a complete wast of money. Less than 1% of the applicants to Nav Canada receive a licence. If you want to spend even more money than the NC training and time away from work costs in order to possibly bump your odds to maybe even 2 or 3%, then you are a complete idiot. I don't see any program significantly increasing your odds to the point that you are relatively assured that you will be able to receive a licence regardless of your aptitude, you either have it or you don't. Doing this before you even take the apptitude test and interview to see if you'd even be offered an opportunity to train is ridiculous. NC's training program gives almost everyone a fair shot at achieving a licence, if you have the proper skills. Taking a post secondary course in order to possibly squeek by in case you don't have the talent, is ignorant.

Take a course that you can use for a different career if the NC training doesn't work out! Not everyone can control and to find that out after a 2 year post secondary diploma and 2 years in the NC training program would leave you in a pile of debt and hurt with nowhere to turn.

That's just my opinion. If daddy controller is hell bent that their son become a controller also, then maybe sinking a huge amount of money into giving their kid a slight edge, makes sense. To anyone out there simply looking to find a good job, spend your money on an alternative career and when you're finished your schooling, if you still want to become a controller, apply and see what happens.

Braun · Post by **Braun** » Sat Jan 13, 2007 5:58 pm

justplanecrazy wrote:Less than 1% of the applicants to Nav Canada receive a licence.

Are you sure it isn't higher than that?