I agree. And it might push the A80s higher up the priority list and maybe they can get over that inherent disadvantage the decision lense criteria formula places upon them.
4th quarter 2017
- Thread starter MJ
- Start date
- Messages
- 52
- Facility
- STT St. Thomas Tower
Sounds like the Ncept team need to hire members of this forum to make it actually run how it's supposed to!!!
SugarFoot1
Trusted Contributor
- Messages
- 475
I hope this fixes that...instead of them being so low and able to select 28...like this panel
Dontbotherme
Forum Sage
- Messages
- 876
A paid, targeted move, for level 9 radar certified controllers, with a one year priority release would greatly help the staffing at A80.
They can send 100s of level 4/5/6 controllers here, but it is just going to waste valuable training resources.
They can send 100s of level 4/5/6 controllers here, but it is just going to waste valuable training resources.
CaptainObvious
Legendary Member
- Messages
- 2,138
Unlike N90, people would probably take a paid A80 bid
Dontbotherme
Forum Sage
- Messages
- 876
The last paid bid, which wasn't finalized, had 80+ bidders on it and 50+ of them were from 9s and higher.
jen_n_juice14
Member
- Messages
- 28
I remember back when A80 had people come in to "test" at the facility for week, running real world problems in the Dysim. We had some of our people go give it a shot.
I wonder what criteria it now takes for managers to be able to put a bid out for controllers with or without move money.
CaptainObvious
Legendary Member
- Messages
- 2,138
NCEPT has to approve it
SugarFoot1
Trusted Contributor
- Messages
- 475
A80 should bid with no move money....
breakaway2000
Forum Sage
- Messages
- 1,693
Not official by any means, but as far as upcoming panels go, Sep, Dec, then starting in 2018, every two months, starting in Feb is what was discussed at this past panel without any objection.
SugarFoot1
Trusted Contributor
- Messages
- 475
Does anyone know how the projected number is actually calculated?
It's displayed in the cell.
Basically takes your CPCs and adds all the Inbound columns after merging them with your training success percentage and then subtracts all the Outbound column values including projected retirements etc.
This explanation is over simplified.
SugarFoot1
Trusted Contributor
- Messages
- 475
Ok thanks wasn't sure if there was a time mixed in there as in a brand new trainee getting to a facility
corn4ahead
Forum Sage
- Messages
- 663
Does anyone think the actual training success rates are going to hurt the amount of people actually eligible to leave rather than help it?
I personally think that it's going to raise the projected national average too much. There is going to be a point were the projected average is going to be more of an issue rather than current CPCs AOB.
I personally think that it's going to raise the projected national average too much. There is going to be a point were the projected average is going to be more of an issue rather than current CPCs AOB.
CaptainObvious
Legendary Member
- Messages
- 2,138
Yes. Our training average is 70% even though we've only had one washout in the a decade. It's always something with this process
Yeah but your new one on July PPT will be accurate to your facility
It's going to really hurt the facilities that were in the bottom half of their training success rate categories. I also think they will have to detach the requirement for release from the proj natl avg number at some point. Personally I think the goal line should be frozen at or below 90%.
CaptainObvious
Legendary Member
- Messages
- 2,138
That's what I'm saying. Our base facility type success rate is higher than our actual
Right so this change will definitely help your proj number. Whether its still considered a positive for you when you factor in the new goal line is harder to predict. I guess I was confused cuz the post you quoted was referring to the possible negative aspect of the training success rate change.
Last edited:
