Cockpit to ACC

[up_and_down]

Wondering if anyone has any insight into pilots becoming controllers?

Does an IFR pilot have any business thinking they can successfully become a IFR controller given the proper training?

Are there any pilots out there that have made this career change and care to talk about it?

Would love to hear about the good, the bad and the ugly of ATC life.

Any comments would be much appreciated.

Thanks

[invertedattitude]

Hey there,

There are several people I work with, myself included who left the path of piloting to ATC.

The one thing I will say is that I have never looked back. Do I sometimes wish I stuck with it? Yea sometimes I think about it, but no aviation job in this country is as secure and as rewarding at the end of the day.

I see my beautiful wife everyday, I get to have a normal social life (outside of the shift work, but the amount of days off are plentiful) and I get to enjoy flying on a recreational note, which really is the best part IMO.

Bottom line, I wouldn't trade this job for any flying job in this country, it would take 10 years at least to get to my current payscale if I had followed a pilots career.

That all being said this job is not for everyone, but if you can make it, it's a fantastic life!

[parrot_head]

ditto.

I flew commercially for 15 years before making the switch to ATC. I left a great flying job with decent pay and turned down offers from the airlines to come here and would do it again if I had the chance. The job is challenging and the pay and benefits are great. At the time I made the switch, I had friends going to airlines such as Westjet, Cathay, Jazz, and Air Canada and are still there today. For the most part we are all around the same level of pay, benefits, and days off. The dark side of ATC (besides no windows) is the shift work, however I work my 8 hours and then go home. For me it was a lifestyle choice. Being a pilot first did help as I understood the phraseology and had a good understanding of aircraft performance. Not so important if you are working the high level stuff but a great benefit in the terminal environment.

[hootbag]

I made the switch to IFR after a few years flying around.

I've found my ATC career lacking any real reward or incentive other than the financial stability. Few people really enjoy the work. Any novelty will quickly wear off, and once you get used to the pay, the "golden handcuffs" will be thrown on. The working environment can be difficult. There is lots of gossiping, and "you should see what so and so did". It's manageable, but not contributing to an overall enjoyable experience. You take on a lot of responsibility managing an infinite number of variables with little recognition to the complexity and effort involved.

Having said that, its stable work and great pay. There are lots of breaks and plenty of opportunity to shift trade. In a roundabout way, you work for yourself. That is, manage the dots as you see fit. Home every night except for 4 - 6 midnight shifts per 56 day cycle (trade for more or less if you want). Good benefits. Good equipment.

Training is very challenging but doable. Studying is a must. Practicing as much as possible to stay ahead of the curve is key. Those that did not make it were cease trained because of poor performance, not because of any other of the popular excuses.

[up_and_down]

Hootbag,

Would you say that you studied harder for your a/c licences or your IFR ATC training? Do you still fly for recreation? Do you have time?

What did you mean by "popular" excuses?

[W0XOF]

What did you mean by "popular" excuses?

Need a Centreman this year, not a Leftwinger

[hootbag]

up_and_down,

Hands down ATC training is harder than flight training. I think flying is rather linear. Checklists, procedures, priorities, etc. "when this happens, do that".
ATC has more depth and complexity. There is an "art" to the more difficult specialties. It seems to be a main stumbling block for everyone. A common gripe from students during debriefs is, "I want to know what I should do when that happens". The job is too complex to limit solutions to a checklist/procedure mentality . An understanding of what's happening is the ticket to becoming good at the job.

I was lucky to be able to hold down a part-time 704 job. A good chunk of controllers who have licenses fly regularly. A handful have commercial work.

You always hear CT'd trainees talk about controllers protecting their overtime, picking those who've played junior hockey, my instructor didn't like me, they didn't teach the course properly, they always made me work the busy sectors. Since the move to local IFR training, the training process is pretty structured.

[up_and_down]

Thanks HOOTBAG for the insight. I guess it just takes the right type of person then.
Would you say your knowledge of IFR procedures and knowing airspace structure and classifications helped you in any way in your training?

If one is successful in the IFR stream, do they rotate between say terminal and enroute controlling?

Where do the arrival and departure controllers fit in?

I guess I had it in my mind that a checkout applies to a specific job or chunk of airspace. Is this true or is an IFR controller expected to cycle through many positions in a shift?

[Braun]

I am not a pilot but I had a few on my course (all IFR rated) and not one made to actually work real traffic. While it can help in the initial phase towards the actually controller job it is pretty much useless. Of course it helps with airspace, CAR's and all that other stuff but the actual controlling aspect is totally irrelevant.

As for arrival/departure controllers those are a part of terminal. The terminal usually includes, departures, arrivals, TURSA (terminal VFR control) and a few others depending on which terminal you are looking at. For example Ottawa has 1 departure sector, 1 arrival sector and one VFR sector. Toronto has more obviously and so on and so forth.

The way it works when you finish training in the initial phases is that you get sorted out into specialties. An example would be 1 Terminal specialty, 1 low-en route, 1 high level. Each ACC has a different number of these "Sub-units" and when you train you work in only one of these depending on your skills and where staffing is needed. Also once you qualify in one of these "sub-units" you only work in that one. Eventually if you want to switch you to to cross train. Most people stay a few years in their initial sub-unit and then if they want they change but there is no actual time you have to stay.

[hootbag]

It does all come down to the ability to make critical decisions quickly. There's no specific background that stands out. I'd say the common personalities are: curious/inquisitive, strong attention to detail, able to work independently, and deal with a high pressure work environment.

The FIR is chopped up into various specialties. For ease of training, they're typically organized into similar control tasks. i.e. High Level en-route, Low Level en-route, and Terminal. You are assigned a specialty, usually depending on staff requirements, and are qualified to work only in the sectors that make up that specialty. For the most part the busy Terminals will not take ab-initio trainees. As your breaks come up, you rotate through the various sectors in your specialty. You're restricted from transferring for two years after check-out. Then you can throw your name on the National bid list which comes out once a year.

Busy Terminal specialties can have upwards of 10+ sectors/positions within it. Several arrival sectors (high/low north/south etc), ILS monitor, coordinator, departure (usually a couple of those), and TRSA. Again, you qualify in all the positions and rotate through them.

It would be hard to tell, but IFR flying experience wouldn't help with understanding the core skills needed to do the job. It does help with an overall understanding, I guess. I find it helps on the finesse side of the job. Knowing what information needs to be said and when, especially when dealing with weather or emergencies.

[up_and_down]

That clears some things up for me thanks.

So after 2 years or so on your initial checkout sector, you can bid for cross training? Does that usually happen at your home ACC or wherever the staffing need exists?


On another note,

I get the feeling that alot of people jump into the idea of being a controller hastily without researching or thinking through what sort of commitment is required. I imagine that most don't seek out advice or information past what is on the "Take Charge" website. I presume that this can be frustrating for people in these forums who are controllers and can see failure coming a mile away. What I would like to know is this....

Once in the course, given the right attitude and proper studying habits, do they not teach you the profession? What I mean to say is, is it not in Nav Canada's best interest to see their recruits succeed? I can tell that the course will be difficult but surely a proper work ethic can help to avoid being CT'd (and I hoped I used that correctly) to some degree.
Why is there such a high failure rate? I read in posts that people just fail out. What are the specific reasons? Lack of effort? Not being able to apply the knowledge? Speed? I get the feeling from reading previous posts that Nav Canada is the evil boogey man when it comes to these courses. Maybe someone could help me understand the reasons that people don't work out for the job beyond "They ct'd once they hit the floor"

Thanks

[IFRATC]

Up and down,
I would have to say that Hootbag has eloquently responded to all of your posts. I agree with everything that he has said. I will add this though.
I also flew for years prior to ATC. Where did I find that it helped??? When you first start training whether it be in the simulator or on the job, TIME is your number one best friend. The more time you can make for yourself to plan and execute your decisions, the more TIME you have to monitor your actions. Having phraseology, airspace, and a/c perfromance knowledge is ALL things you DON'T have to concentrate on as much as lets say an ab initio off the street. Seems petty, but it will be those few seconds every time you go to think or speak, that add up to precious minutes throughout the shift. Trust me you will be distracted enough while training, one less thing to think about equates to more time to make critical and educated decisions. Its all about multi tasking and time management. I do believe it is an advantage. I have had more than my share of trainees. I have seen both sides of this.

GOOD LUCK
IFRATC

[Jerricho]

If somebody ever came up with a method of recruiting ATC trainees that would ensure a close to perfect check out rate, they would probably make a load of money.

Unfortunately, at the moment it doesn't exist. Folk can exhibit an aptitude to the job (spatial reasoning, multi-tasking, being an asshole), but when things get busier and busier, their abilities don't keep up with what is being asked, or the capacity to take on more isn't there. Someone may be able to perform to a 70% traffic load (arrival sequencing for example), but add more complexity/traffic/crap weather and performance deteriorates.

Another thing that is seen constantly (and this is where comparisons to studying at university pisses me off) is where you have a trainee who achieves very, very high marks in written exams being able to quote verbatim every single line of MANOPS while standing on one leg balancing a crayon on their nose BUT when it comes to actually applying it (separation, vectoring) in a simulator or live traffic in real time, with other things going on, it's just not there. I've seen trainees who can quote wake turbulence standards to you in a flash and totally forget about it in the sim/live traffic or can draw you a perfect minimum vectoring altitude chart and sit down the next day and try to descend an aircraft below it.

Other pitfalls that I've seen trainees fall into is a lack of being able to trust in their own decision making (constantly second guessing themselves and getting behind the game). There is also the dreaded over reliance on the OJI, where the trainee seeks on the spot validation of every single move they make (this can be overcome by a good OJI), and in later phases of training where somebody should be starting to do it by themselves, it's just not there. Then there's the dreaded "Yeah, yeah yeah! I know" syndrome, where a mistake is made, the trainee acknowledges the mistake when pointed out to them (sometimes quite animatedly), and proceeds to do the same thing again 5 minutes later.

[hootbag]

Yes, after two years you can bid to any specialty that is posting a vacancy. Your seniority will decided if you get the position, and the staffing in your current specialty will decide when you can leave. Can be a few years of waiting.

Nav Canada could use some outside help in training their instructors. The instructor courses are weak at best. The candidates they send to take those courses aren't hand picked. A lot of controllers who instruct are marginal at their jobs and aren't the types who strive to set a good example. Some are very good at it.

That said, how do you teach someone to understand a concept or visualize airspace utilization??

[SkyWolfe]

I'm doing it right now

[invertedattitude]

Yes, after two years you can bid to any specialty that is posting a vacancy. Your seniority will decided if you get the position, and the staffing in your current specialty will decide when you can leave. Can be a few years of waiting.

Nav Canada could use some outside help in training their instructors. The instructor courses are weak at best. The candidates they send to take those courses aren't hand picked. A lot of controllers who instruct are marginal at their jobs and aren't the types who strive to set a good example. Some are very good at it.

That said, how do you teach someone to understand a concept or visualize airspace utilization??

I haven't heard recent numbers, but the new local training program seems to have improved check-out rates. However, I think most Centres send their courses to the High Level specialties which tend to be a little more straight forward. It's probably handed a few managers some nice bonuses as "cost per successful trainee" is down, I'm sure.

Few things about the internet, I wouldn't paint with such a broad brush.

First of all, the people for our instructor courses are picked, you don't just sign up and go.

This High Level specialty which as you say is apparently "straight forward" is not reflected as such by the check-out rates.

[kevenv]

This High Level specialty which as you say is apparently "straight forward" is not reflected as such by the check-out rates.

What's so hard about "Unable higher, unable lower, contact Boston, contact Gander????

[invertedattitude]

This High Level specialty which as you say is apparently "straight forward" is not reflected as such by the check-out rates.

What's so hard about "Unable higher, unable lower, contact Boston, contact Gander????

Yea yea I know thats all there is

[jakey]

Just chiming in... 5 in my VFR class that just started at YYZ.

4/5 of us have pilot backgrounds. 1 of those is actually an IFR controller cross-training to VFR. (Can't say that I blame him... )

[reality_check]

"I haven't heard recent numbers, but the new local training program seems to have improved check-out rates."

Wrong. Winnipeg has had horrific checkout rates since NCTI closed -- the most recent figure is between 8-12%. That's right, eight percent.

The West High speciality has only checked out 1 of the last 18 trainees that have attempted it. That's as of a month ago.

The training system is horribly broken, so much so that they're about to halt training for a couple of years in some specialities to see if they can fix it.

[DeuceEng]

Just chiming in... 5 in my VFR class that just started at YYZ.

4/5 of us have pilot backgrounds. 1 of those is actually an IFR controller cross-training to VFR. (Cn't say that I blame him... )

Melissa

PSHAW, I'm in that class, and flew a plane once..don't bag me with the dirty pilots

I do have an Aerospace Eng degree so I am familiar with aviation which helped me on the Aircraft performance section (aka 3-5 exam questions tops)

Alex

[aircrow]

I got to the point just after my PPL where I though do I want to continue this or become a controller. I'm glad I chose ATC. Apart from being used to talking on a frequency and a little theory like altimetry and compass headings the skillset was totally different.