-

[1270930 gdpr removed]

-

Edited November 7, 2022 at 05:46 PM by Damon Hemstrom Burton

[Bradley Grafelman]

Doesn't seem like the policy explicitly restricts or prohibits restrictions for transferring/visiting based on your rating itself, so it would seem it's fair game for a vACC/etc. to establish a minimum if they so desire. Their local policy(ies) for transferring/visiting controllers, if any, would almost [Mod - Happy Thoughts]uredly be available for you to read even without applying.

 

Otherwise, if you read the first part of 2(1):

 

The requirements detailed above for a Transfer Controller shall equally apply to a Visiting Controller ...

and then the first sentence of 1(3):

 

A Transfer Controller is required to first consolidate their current rating by satisfactorily performing online for at least 50 hours at their current rating, and in the Division where the rating was granted.

 

that would seem to suggest that you must have at least 50 hours of active ATC time at your current rating (obtained within your current division) on record before becoming a visiting controller. Now, as to who is responsible for deeming whether or not your 50 hours of performance were "satisfactory"... I'll leave that up to you to decide.

[Anthony Lawrence]

 

that would seem to suggest that you must have at least 50 hours of active ATC time at your current rating (obtained within your current division) on record before becoming a visiting controller. Now, as to who is responsible for deeming whether or not your 50 hours of performance were "satisfactory"... I'll leave that up to you to decide.

 

The expectation for many is also that the consolidation can only be done on a suitable position. 50 hours on a delivery position isn't consolidating the rating.

[Andrew Ogden]

in NZ we dont have the S1 rating, so it doesn't apply. We go straight up to S2, and most policies say that 50 hours of active controlling as an S2 or above is required, with at least 20 of those hours done on one position. So im not sure if an S1 would be able to control, so you would have to look up local policies.

[1270930 gdpr removed]

-

Edited November 7, 2022 at 05:46 PM by Damon Hemstrom Burton

[Johnathan Ellis 1250874]

in NZ we dont have the S1 rating, so it doesn't apply. We go straight up to S2, and most policies say that 50 hours of active controlling as an S2 or above is required, with at least 20 of those hours done on one position. So im not sure if an S1 would be able to control, so you would have to look up local policies.

 

What do you mean by there is no S1 there??

[Mark Richards]

 

What do you mean by there is no S1 there??

Jon

 

In accordance with the GRP, Divisions can choose to skip S1 and combine S1 and S2 in their training programme and issue an S2 straight away. This is common in smaller divisions as it sees a quick progression and more towers online.

 

Mark

[Kyle Ramsey 810181]

There is nothing wishy washy about it, it is well defined. But sometimes one must also understand other policies to see the full effect, as Mark points out above.

 

What discussion did you think needed to be enjoyed on this? I'm not clear on what you're looking for.

[David Zhong]

Mark, how does a division combine S1 and S2 ratings? Is S1 not the trainee tower rating which does not have any competencies (in the sense that they do not need to be demonstrated prior to rating issue)?

[Ernesto Alvarez 818262]

nothing new, in fact several areas have the same practice because it makes no sense in even having someone stay at S1 in those areas for any amount of time, instead we get them to S2, combining all material to that point

 

the goal being to move them up as quickly as possible, least that was the goal for us when i was with Thailand. S1 makes no zero sense to even have people jump through in those areas, one less hurdle

[Andrew Ogden]

For my S2 training way back when, we just combined the duties of the S1 and the S2 controller, so i learnt about delivery, ground and tower in my S2 training. It makes no sense to have S1 in our division, which is only 496 members strong. Plus, we only have 47 active controllers.

 

EDIT: Only 188 of those 496 members are actually active.

[David Zhong]

My point is that no-one in this thread (apparently including the former chair of the EC?) appears to have noticed the change to the GRP a few years ago:

 

A. Tower Trainee (S1)

 

This rating does not cover any particular competencies. A member can use this rating to control no higher than Tower (TWR) subject to local restrictions.

 

How, then, does one combine the S1 and S2 ratings? The S1 rating is no longer a DEL/GND rating. For a person to be issued with an unrestricted ATC rating, they must be issued with a full TWR (S2) rating (unless I'm missing something...)

[Andrew Ogden]

A. Tower Trainee (S1)

 

This rating does not cover any particular competencies. A member can use this rating to control no higher than Tower (TWR) subject to local restrictions.

I think that's what it means. The S1 rating is cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts]ified differently in each Division/ARTCC/vACC (I think). Its a Tower Trainee rating, so it is used in ARTCC's that want people to gain experience before heading up to the S2 rating. Makes no difference, I'm as good a controller as I would've been if I had the S1.