71 replies to this topic

[Jim Johnson]

I personally, if I am on tower or approach would perhaps find it useful to know that I am sharing control with a STV/SAV. Bearing in mind their skill level could be 'satisfactory', who knows, I may even be useful if asked As I always check servinfo before logging on, this in my opinion makes sense if the STV/SAV status is include there. Failing that, perhaps when logging on they could indicate their status as a STV/SAV. Just a personal view and not meant to be part of the 1984 brigade.

Edited by Jim Johnson, 24 January 2012 - 03:46 PM.

[Luke Cunningham]

Dave James, on 24 January 2012 - 02:41 PM, said:

As I said it was a wild guess - sorry.......

And if the website is down for 2 days ?.............

Then I'm sure a Supervisor would give the user the benefit of the doubt. After all, they are not here to police the network.

[Gunnar Lindahl VATUK1]

As Callum has said, Supervisors know where the pages are.

Moving on...

[Dean Preece]

I'm not sure I understand how it helps either. Surely anybody could inlucde this in the controller info, STV/SAV or not, it will still have to be checked. And as Callum has already pointed out, Sups know where to look. Happy to be corrected =]

[Neil Stewart]

Dan Parkin, on 24 January 2012 - 08:37 AM, said:

Jim Johnson, on 23 January 2012 - 03:04 PM, said:

We are now training pilots as well as controllers, why can't we also train mentors to an agreed standard.

Because it's impossible to cover every single facet that you might come across in mentored session to check that all mentors agree across the board. We can only practically agree on the key skills that we expect a controller to demonstrate.

In work I have to do a set number of call monitorings a week. I do these with a set of guidelines for this and then coach as appropriate. Every month I have to do a standardisation where every person who does monitorings gets together to grade a call and assess a couple of calls to make sure that we are all scoring fairly and consistently. I was trianed in how to monitor the calls so that I was doing them fairly like everyone elese, but that doesn't happen with mentoring here. However, this is a sidetrack from the subject of the introduction of SAVs

[George Wright VATUK5]

Harry has just made an update to the RTS System which displays the last achieved grade on a new report sheet. This will cut down on mentors re-grading students unknowingly.

Putting the note about "Solo Approach Validations" in your text ATIS will simply remind any onlooking Supervisor that you're allowed to be there and prompt him to check if he wishes. This is instead of a supervisor looking, seeing you're the wrong rating, wondering why, asking you, then verifying the SAV anyway. There are no disadvantages of adding this notice. SAVs are new after all.

[Luke Cunningham]

George Wright VATUK5, on 24 January 2012 - 11:17 PM, said:

Harry has just made an update to the RTS System which displays the last achieved grade on a new report sheet. This will cut down on mentors re-grading students unknowingly.

Putting the note about "Solo Approach Validations" in your text ATIS will simply remind any onlooking Supervisor that you're allowed to be there and prompt him to check if he wishes. This is instead of a supervisor looking, seeing you're the wrong rating, wondering why, asking you, then verifying the SAV anyway. There are no disadvantages of adding this notice. SAVs are new after all.

George

As Dean has said, anybody could put "Solo Approach Validation" in their text ATIS and I can see Supervisors becoming complacent in checking them. It's a line taken up by useless information which could otherwise be occupied with something more relevant to pilots since we are here to satisfy them, not Supervisors. It's been highlighted by both Gunnar and Callum that Supervisors know where to look if there is any doubt. Can we please move away from this labelling scheme, it's ridiculous.

[Scott Diamond]

George, could you leave out this stupid "add 'Solo Approach Validation' to your text ATIS" nonsense from the requirements, please? As has been said by 2 supervisors above, they know where to look if needed - there is no need for such a silly, demeaning line in a text ATIS which is limited as it is. A lot of pilots won't have a clue what it means anyway and the ATIS is for their use, not Supervisors'.

Edited by Scott Diamond, 25 January 2012 - 04:27 PM.

[Adam Arkley]

I'm not sure why this is even being discussed. Students should not be dishonest enough to log on without a validation, and Supervisors should know where to look if they want to verify.

[Richard Keen]

Hi All

I think its a good idea really .. ... it will give the student some insight in controlling an Approach position on his/her own with out any input/help from a mentor and will be able to put what they have learned into practice and try to learn from any mistakes made .

Rich

[Nat Sacks]

Adam Arkley, on 25 January 2012 - 04:29 PM, said:

I'm not sure why this is even being discussed. Students should not be dishonest enough to log on without a validation, and Supervisors should know where to look if they want to verify.

agreed

[Mark Cable]

Great Idea,

although I do believe 1 month is too short, 3 months would be better with a proviso that you have to take the exam at the end, now where do I apply !

Regards, Mark