asitis Posted August 26 Share Posted August 26 Funny though how historically this legislation was 'managed' in a far more sensible manner ! Legislation has to be abided by but maybe the interpretation of, and co-operation to comply have changed !!!!!!! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nellie Posted August 26 Share Posted August 26 9 minutes ago, Tinpot said: It’s nothing to do with length of shifts. Its time between breaks so would make no difference. Well, it would obviously make a difference if the second shift clock starts ticking at (say) 15.00 instead of 13.00. Breaks would be taken two hours later too, but the shift would (or could) end later. Anyway, they need people with imagination and ingenuity to find a way to resolve this, as the approach they have adopted for the last two years has left them in exactly the same place, and possibly worse off. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lfc84 Posted August 26 Share Posted August 26 https://www.nats.aero/news/london-city-is-first-major-airport-controlled-by-remote-digital-tower/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wake Up Call Posted August 26 Share Posted August 26 So, somebody in ATC last night knows the flights take off from London and at the same time knows they can't accept them. Is this some serious neglect of duty? 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numbnuts Posted August 26 Share Posted August 26 2 minutes ago, Wake Up Call said: So, somebody in ATC last night knows the flights take off from London and at the same time knows they can't accept them. Is this some serious neglect of duty? Somebody forcing home a stance or point perhaps. A power battle between those that do and those that say ? . Just a thought. With all you hear from down there sounds feasible . 5 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wake Up Call Posted August 26 Share Posted August 26 10 minutes ago, Numbnuts said: Somebody forcing home a stance or point perhaps. A power battle between those that do and those that say ? . Just a thought. With all you hear from down there sounds feasible . Costs and risks have been incurred. This could be a criminal matter as the wilful negligence/blindness or whatever has resulted in unnecessasy outcomes for 1000's of people. Don't even mention the pollution caused. Full enquiry please. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forestboy Posted August 26 Share Posted August 26 18 minutes ago, Wake Up Call said: Costs and risks have been incurred. This could be a criminal matter as the wilful negligence/blindness or whatever has resulted in unnecessasy outcomes for 1000's of people. Don't even mention the pollution caused. Full enquiry please. Where is the DOI Minister whilst all this chaos is repeatedly going on? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numbnuts Posted August 26 Share Posted August 26 (edited) 26 minutes ago, Wake Up Call said: Costs and risks have been incurred. This could be a criminal matter as the wilful negligence/blindness or whatever has resulted in unnecessasy outcomes for 1000's of people. Don't even mention the pollution caused. Full enquiry please. Yes , I can see what you saying but perhaps, was a reasonable request to work made? , or was it outside someone’s rostered hours. Sunday night and all that. Can’t blame someone for saying no if they had other arrangements . Again just guessing. At the end of the day there’s clearly a problem with management and a shortage , and getting worse, of ATC’s. This isn’t ending any time soon. As for where’s the DOI minister. He’s waiting to be told how to explain this one by probably the ones who are creating and causing the problem. This won’t end well. Edited August 26 by Numbnuts 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Banker Posted August 26 Share Posted August 26 1 hour ago, Wake Up Call said: So, somebody in ATC last night knows the flights take off from London and at the same time knows they can't accept them. Is this some serious neglect of duty? Yes by easyJet who knew the cut off time & chose to ignore it!! Not as bad as guernsey when flight was cancelled 90seconds from landing whilst on final approach Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lfc84 Posted August 26 Share Posted August 26 5 minutes ago, Banker said: Yes by easyJet who knew the cut off time & chose to ignore it!! Not as bad as guernsey when flight was cancelled 90seconds from landing whilst on final approach Don't forget Loganair in your rant Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asitis Posted August 26 Share Posted August 26 1 hour ago, Numbnuts said: Somebody forcing home a stance or point perhaps. A power battle between those that do and those that say ? . Just a thought. With all you hear from down there sounds feasible . Respect and Co-operation are earned methinks ! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTF Posted August 26 Share Posted August 26 2 hours ago, Numbnuts said: Somebody forcing home a stance or point perhaps. A power battle between those that do and those that say ? . Just a thought. With all you hear from down there sounds feasible . we could possibly have quite a few ATC's returning to ronaldsway that have left in recent months if only the powers that be would tell one person who can't actually operate as an ATC to fuck off. 2 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numbnuts Posted August 26 Share Posted August 26 8 minutes ago, WTF said: we could possibly have quite a few ATC's returning to ronaldsway that have left in recent months if only the powers that be would tell one person who can't actually operate as an ATC to fuck off. Never a truer word spoken. This needs to be sorted , and now. Bite the bullet and problem solved. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lcd Posted August 26 Share Posted August 26 3 hours ago, Wake Up Call said: Costs and risks have been incurred. This could be a criminal matter as the wilful negligence/blindness or whatever has resulted in unnecessasy outcomes for 1000's of people. Don't even mention the pollution caused. Full enquiry please. It's inexplicable that this problem still.exists. Reading here it would appear that in addition to a long standing and still unsolved staffing crisis, those who are holding the fort are not being respected as those carrying out such a safety critical function ought to be. Will the minister ever admit to the problem and take decisive action? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Utah 01 Posted August 26 Share Posted August 26 4 hours ago, asitis said: Funny though how historically this legislation was 'managed' in a far more sensible manner ! Legislation has to be abided by but maybe the interpretation of, and co-operation to comply have changed !!!!!!! Rules are for the guidance of wise men and the obedience of fools. The fools have taken over nearly every asylum you can think of - nobody is allowed to think for themselves, probably for the past 60 years. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.