Jump to content

The ZAK (Oakland Oceanic) Facility Lead position is now open


Richard Ruminski
 Share

Recommended Posts

ZAKlogo.JPG

 

The ZAK (Oakland Oceanic) Facility Lead position is now open.

Interested applicants should submit their resume to VATUSA7 (AT) vatusa (dot) org. Applications will be accepted until 0500 ZULU Sept 15 2007.

 

Duties and responsibilities include the following along with some unique differences dealing with the Oceanic airspace.

 

Reports to the region's Air Traffic Director and oversees operations and management for an [Mod - Happy Thoughts]igned ARTCC.

Maintains an on line presence on the VATSIM server.

Functions as VATUSA HQ staff member. Attends periodic meetings to report on ARTCC activities and to stay abreast of VATUSA issues and policies.

Establishes an ARTCC web page and oversees its maintenance.

Initiates, obtains Air Traffic Director approval for, and maintains ARTCC Standard Operating Procedures.

Provides for coordination of position [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ignments and position restrictions when necessary.

Provides guidance and help to [Mod - Happy Thoughts]igned controllers or guests. Optionally, establishes a staff of "Mentors" to [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ist new controllers and guests.

Works with Region Events Coordinator on events that may affect the ARTCC's operations.

Conducts testing and training as defined, and in accordance with, the VATUSA Training SOP.

Optionally, conducts additional training and testing on area-specific subjects.

Establishes an [Mod - Happy Thoughts]istant ATM position and defines the duties of that position. Submits selection to the region Air Traffic Director for final approval and announcement.

Nominates Center Instructor candidates to the ATM Instructor or Training Director for Training Department approval and announcement

Recommends disciplinary actions to the region Air Traffic Director.

Applicants should be aware that this will be an additional [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ignment to their home ARTCC, they Will remain [Mod - Happy Thoughts]igned to their Home ARTCC with this addtional responsibility.

 

 

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Edited by Guest

Ric Ruminski I1

VATUSA11

Communications Manager VATUSA

email: VATUSA11 (at) vatusa.net

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only reference I could find describing the duties and responsibilities for the ZAK Lead come from the ZAK web itself.

 

http://zak.vatusa.org/about.htm

 

Quote: On VATSIM, this region is managed by the Oakland Oceanic Facility Advisory Board (FAB), as part of VATUSA's Western Region. The Facility Leader reports to the Western Regional Director.

 

So it would appear that there is a unique and separate position. I believe that VATUSA7 [Mod - Happy Thoughts]umes the role whenever it is vacant. As such, it appears to have been vacant often. If anyone has more current info regarding the position please feel free to comment.

Ric Ruminski I1

VATUSA11

Communications Manager VATUSA

email: VATUSA11 (at) vatusa.net

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ric,

 

When KZAK was officially commissioned, we decided that since it was a "shared" airspace, its decisions should be made by an advisory board consisting of representatives from the facilities that bordered it.

 

Thus - we created an advisory board with the chiefs of Los Angeles, Oakland, Seattle, Vancouver, Anchorage, and Hawaii. The Western Region Director acted as the "Facility Leader".

 

A year or so after things were running smoothly, a new person was appointed as the facility leader.

 

A few years after that - the facility leader moved on to bigger and better things. The original intent was that in this case the West Region Director would again [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ume the facility leader position until they appointed it to someone else.

 

I don't know who what when why or if all of this changed - I can only tell you what the original intentions were with KZAK back then. It took over a year to get things off the ground officially (lots of political capital spent to make this happen) and I think we officially went live the summer of 2003.

 

Others who probably have really good history on the intentions we had (and who are still around) would be Craig Merriman and Dane Pennington.

Ian Elchitz

Just a guy without any fancy titles

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Years ago ZOA used to run Oakland Oceanic, I thought, but when I've asked to have it back, I've been denied on all counts, saying that it would be unfair to Seattle and Los Angeles...

 

Even years ago when ZOA ran it, the advisary board was combined of ZSE, ZLA, ZOA, HCF and Anchorage.. *shrugs*

 

No that's incorrect. It was never "run" by ZOA.

 

EDIT: Sorry Tom I had to run and deal with a crying baby and thus wasn't able to complete my thought. 30 mins later here it is:

 

To my knowledge - ZOA never ever ran ZAK Oceanic. My knowledge is certainly not the be all and end all. As my memory serves - the only person who ran KZAK back in the stone ages of Satco was a gentleman named John Schumacher (sp). Jeff Clark during his time as ZLA Chief had a vision of bumping up the "coolness" factor for pilots flying over the pacific by staffing the Oceanic Sector. He of course also thought it would increase both the "fun" and "traffic" that ZLA saw.

 

A number of us worked with Jeff to help get things going - but as usual things were very slow. During my time as a member at ZOA, the fire was rekindled by the chief at the time - Jim Bartosh. Both Jim and Jeff agreed that KZAK shouldn't be "owned" by any one facility because we really wanted it to be "simple" to get certified to open the sector. The idea of the Facility board was tossed around. Jim drafted up the original SOP (and a web site which still uses the same template today) which still stands today (yet appears to have ammendments that weren't part of the original signing).

 

Anyhow - again, as far as I know - ZOA never "ran" it. Not sure why ZOA would be interested in taking it over today either.

Ian Elchitz

Just a guy without any fancy titles

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great question?

 

Why would ZOA like to run it today? Because in real life, it's the same facility, and it should be. Just like ZNY controls atlantic, ZHU, and Anchorage... on vatsim do already. Why _shouldn't_ we be given ZAK?

 

We wouldn't open up OAK_CTR and staff all of the ocean, no. But we would love to see it active and staffed all the time, because it in turn increases ZLAs, ZOAs, and ZSE's traffic, not to mention ZHN and sometimes even Anchorage.

 

The website as it stands, is out of date since about 7 months ago. The only reason the previous administration didn't let ZOA run it is because they didnt' want to upset anyone's feelings (Or this is what they told me).

 

Since last year, October, when I became an ATM, I haven't had a single email come to me for ZAK or anything about the ZAK Advisary board or anything of the sort.... something seems amiss there.

"TF", ZMA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why would ZOA like to run it today? Because in real life, it's the same facility, and it should be.

 

Since last year, October, when I became an ATM, I haven't had a single email come to me for ZAK or anything about the ZAK Advisary board or anything of the sort.... something seems amiss there.

 

Completely agreed. It should be run by ZOA. Why would ZLA or ZSE or anyone else have a say in how the oceanic sectors (that's all they are...oceanic sectors up at ZOA) are run? I understand why the FAB for ZAK (acronym overload) was put into place originally, but when you really sit back and look at it, it doesn't make any sense. It isn't anybody else's facility to be running in the first place. It belongs to ZOA, and they should be the ones running. Hopefully then, as Tom says, the website will be updated, the policies will be verified, etc. The FAB obviously isn't doing any sort of decent job if none of this stuff has been updated...ever.

Bryan Wollenberg

ZLA!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would run for it, I mean seriously, I love doing this sort of stuff, I told Andrew when I took my test, if he needed some help to let me know, I'm a working guy, I love VATSIM, and creating stuff. In my opinion of self concept of my self, I think I'm able to run it, I've become very interested in the pacific etc, but I'm still not 100% Certified for ZAK_FSS yet ( i still need my OTS ). But anyway, if anyone needs my help, I'm always here to help. I'm on everyday ( or at least I try for a few hours ) and like to work

 

Let Me Know!!

 

- Jose

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to the SOP I have been on the FAB for over a year and a half in that time there has never been a meeting or anything.

 

Now the reason I am against giving ZAK to any facility is because I like ZAK to be an easy to certify position. If we gave it to ZOA then possibly it could be like it is in MIA, NY, or ZHU you get certified on in that facility then you go and can get your oceanic endorsement. And the way we control ZAK is very different than the way we control a Center. We use non-Radar ops like Gander. I know ZMA uses radar on their Oceanic position and I believe HOU used Radar for awhile at least. NY uses radar. And I wouldn’t want to see ZAK switch to radar until we completely understand how they are switching in the real world.

 

 

If it becomes necessary to merge ZAK with a facility Lee and I would need to get together to determine what we would like to do. I like the fact that ZAK is a separate “entityâ€

Andrew Rogers

Senior Controller -HCF

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a question. I find it strange that Guam CERAP is located in Honolulu FSS. Shouldnt it be in Oakland FSS? Why is that?

 

On VATSIM or real world?

 

According to the SOP I have been on the FAB for over a year and a half in that time there has never been a meeting or anything.

 

Which is why this should not be its own facility, and should be delegated to the rightful owners, who will actually have time to work on it, update it, and incorporate it into their existing program.

 

Now the reason I am against giving ZAK to any facility is because I like ZAK to be an easy to certify position.

 

It this all going to matter when it becomes a minor facility in a while? Surely, it can't be justfied as a major facility right? It sees relatively low volumes of traffic, and I think I've only seen 5 or 6 different people actually staff it during my entire time here on VATSIM.

 

I like the fact that ZAK is a separate “entityâ€

Bryan Wollenberg

ZLA!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ZAK is airspace it can't be cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts]ified as Major or Minor. Becuse of that ZAK still uses the same training program except in order to man it the controllers need to be a C1 not an S3

 

You're saying that the policy says that if it had an actual airport in the airspace, it could be considered minor, but because it has no airports, it's just "space" and needs to have an official training program and be more exclusionary than it is currently.

 

That makes sense.

 

Oh, and technically, ZAK does control Guam, so if we considered Guam a minor airport(no justification for anything else), could then ZAK then be considered minor center?

 

 

Really, shouldn't Oceanic Controlling be something that actually should have very loose restrictions in order to boost traffic, unlike say ARTCC's that already have good training programs and are doing well? Instead of having this rigid "you have to be a C1 to control enroute" nonsense, why don't we exercise a little common sense and say, "an S3 should be able to control ZAK", and hopefully trust them enough to read the SOP's and light it up on ServInfo . Especially since S3's already are working it, presumably competently. That actually makes a little sense, as opposed to the forced opening of places within functional ARTCC's.

CS13_Sig_E.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to the SOP I have been on the FAB for over a year and a half in that time there has never been a meeting or anything.

 

Now the reason I am against giving ZAK to any facility is because I like ZAK to be an easy to certify position. If we gave it to ZOA then possibly it could be like it is in MIA, NY, or ZHU you get certified on in that facility then you go and can get your oceanic endorsement. And the way we control ZAK is very different than the way we control a Center. We use non-Radar ops like Gander. I know ZMA uses radar on their Oceanic position and I believe HOU used Radar for awhile at least. NY uses radar. And I wouldn’t want to see ZAK switch to radar until we completely understand how they are switching in the real world.

 

 

If it becomes necessary to merge ZAK with a facility Lee and I would need to get together to determine what we would like to do. I like the fact that ZAK is a separate “entityâ€

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ZAK is airspace it can't be cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts]ified as Major or Minor. Becuse of that ZAK still uses the same training program except in order to man it the controllers need to be a C1 not an S3

 

You're saying that the policy says that if it had an actual airport in the airspace, it could be considered minor, but because it has no airports, it's just "space" and needs to have an official training program and be more exclusionary than it is currently.

 

That makes sense.

 

Oh, and technically, ZAK does control Guam, so if we considered Guam a minor airport(no justification for anything else), could then ZAK then be considered minor center?

 

 

Really, shouldn't Oceanic Controlling be something that actually should have very loose restrictions in order to boost traffic, unlike say ARTCC's that already have good training programs and are doing well? Instead of having this rigid "you have to be a C1 to control enroute" nonsense, why don't we exercise a little common sense and say, "an S3 should be able to control ZAK", and hopefully trust them enough to read the SOP's and light it up on ServInfo . Especially since S3's already are working it, presumably competently. That actually makes a little sense, as opposed to the forced opening of places within functional ARTCC's.

 

I know I don't have anything to do with the whole convo, but on the S3 Part, im sorta like the only one, and I believe it was because I applied before the C-1 Restriction came into place, and spent like 5 months studying for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's probably HNL FSS but that doesn't mean HNL is doing the "controlling", they are just Flight Service. Oakland Oceanic controls the airspace. If you look at the Paradise VOR on skyvector.com you'll see it has [Riverside] written underneath it. This is the local Flight Service Station for that area. It has nothing to do with who controls it. Socal Approach owns that airspace and above it, its ZLA.

 

Let me just get this clear: Oakland Oceanic ISN'T a Flight Service Station.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's probably HNL FSS but that doesn't mean HNL is doing the "controlling", they are just Flight Service. Oakland Oceanic controls the airspace. If you look at the Paradise VOR on skyvector.com you'll see it has [Riverside] written underneath it. This is the local Flight Service Station for that area. It has nothing to do with who controls it. Socal Approach owns that airspace and above it, its ZLA.

 

Let me just get this clear: Oakland Oceanic ISN'T a Flight Service Station.

 

Then what do you refer it as? Center? It's vatsim after all remember..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...