IFATC after Global [Suggestion]

ATC
1

First off, let me say this is just an idea / suggestion.

Currently, IFATC is one large group of controllers. After global flight, controllers will need to disperse across the globe. I think I have come up with a solution for making this as smooth as possible.

For this example, I will be using Indianapolis Center (ZID) & CMH TRACON.
Indianapolis Center is circled in red.

image
image1273Ɨ793 211 KB

A senior IFATC Officer would be put in charge of their native region. They would be in charge of all center controllers, TRACONs, and tower/ground controllers in said region (ZID for this example). Below this ARTCC supervisor would be an individual TRACON supervisor. There are many TRACONs in the ZID ARTCC area among CMH, but I will be using Columbus as the example. So, this supervisor would be in charge of all of the APP/DEP & TWR/GND controllers in the TRACON (CMH, OSU, LCK, MFD, ILN, DAY, FFO, TOL, FWA).

You might be thinking, isnā€™t FWA in the Chicago ARTCC (ZAU) region not Indy? Or maybe, arenā€™t TOL & MFD in the Cleveland ARTCC (ZOB) region? This would mean that the TRACON supervisor would have multiple people overseeing his area, right?

Well, hereā€™s the solution to that: The TRACON supervisorā€™s base (CMH) which in this case is Columbus, is in the Indy Center region. Therefore, the Indy Center supervisor would over look the CMH TRACON. Chicago and Cleveland would still control the airspace above FWA, TOL, & MFD. Indy would just be in charge of the local controllers.

Hope this makes sense! Let me know what you think of this idea.
Also, I know this example was explicitly made for the US, but Iā€™m sure it can be amended for other parts of the world.

9 Likes
2

I think this means Asian areas would be quite empty as there are not many IFATCs from Asia.

6 Likes
3

Iā€™m not saying there has to be an ARTCC supervisor for there to be controllers in the area.

1 Like
4

There currently are some ideas but Iā€™m sure any new ones will be welcomed because after all Global will change the way we control dramatically. Maybe @Tyler_Shelton could add something to this.

4 Likes
5

I am aware there are some ideas already. I have had this idea for a while and wanted to get it out though!

1 Like
6

I came up with an idea like this a while ago with @Nathan and @FlyFi. We talked with Tyler about it, and we believed that this sort of idea would restrict controllers as to what they could do, and where they could control.

4 Likes
7

Then maybe there could be a ā€œvisitorā€ system. Where a controller temporarily moves to another ARTCC or TRACON.

8

Then there would probably be a lot of moving between ARTCCs or TRACONs. I have a feeling that controllers wouldnā€™t want to frequently open up in the same location.

1 Like
9

Maybe there would be a lot of moving. I would think the opposite, though. The more ATC is open in a location, the more pilots will come. You are the IFATC though, not me. šŸ˜

1 Like
10

Well, look at SoCal TS1. Hundreds of pilots fly there and you rarely see a controller at KLAX but you still see a lot of traffic. I think it would have to depend on the airport you are controlling at.

2 Likes
11

You can usually see controllers there. Just for a very short time each. Probably, the controllerā€™s app crashes or they get fed up with the TS1 pilots.

12

But, would you implement your idea on TS1 also, or just Expert. Because, you know TS1ā€¦ (sorry, I canā€™t ā€˜likeā€™ I ran out šŸ˜‚šŸ˜Š)

1 Like
13

if we are already a supervisor IRL in one of the regions, do we automatically get that region??

2 Likes
14

I was aiming this at IFATC specificallyā€¦ but if The training server ATC group like this idea (@Cpt_Chris) I think it will work out decently.

15

I see now. Maybe he would like to give it a try. Great idea btw. :) šŸ‘Œ

1 Like
16

Yes, that is what I was going for. Since you are one IRL, you would get that region.

17

There isnā€™t an unlimited amount of IFATC controllers and the amount if airports in the USA alone is more than 10x the amount of controllers, never mind the rest of the world and approach/departure/center frequencies.

Maybe one way to do it is IFATC agrees to have X airport open for a 12 hour period pre-established and made public so those interested can fly there. It shouldnā€™t be a problem to keep one airport open for that long. Controllers donā€™t like going to the same region/airport every day so this is great for everyone.

2 Likes
18

Wait, one controller, controlling for 12 hours straight? Or am I understanding it wrong?

1 Like
19

No break it up into shifts. 3 shifts at 4 hours each, or 4 shifts at 3 hours each.

2 Likes
20

no, we would keep a region open for that long

2 Likes