- Messages
- 171
- Facility
- POC Brackett Tower
Thats my plan every quarter
November (Q1) 2023
- Thread starter Phanatical
- Start date
Papacharlie327
Trusted Contributor
- Messages
- 129
This whole ncept thing is a massive joke.
- Messages
- 421
Seems like the Placement List Inbound number was skewed on a ton of facilities. Could be HR being HR and counting a “committed inbound” as both a committed & placement list inbound.
Eagle1Fox2
Trusted Contributor
- Messages
- 440
So what happens now will all facilities just re-rank? Monday they convene? Tuesday is the final list?
Acquired Taste
Forum Sage
- Messages
- 964
I'm sure they're getting in touch with the facilities that need to re-rank and having them insert the newly available candidates. For example, reference the very helpful and thorough write up that Termine did on the last page, AUS can now gain 1 in round 1 instead of 0 so if anyone applied to there from a level 8+, they would now have get included in the ranking list since AUS was only previously eligible to gain in round 2. Same for LAX and ORD. On the other hand, there were 4 places that couldn't release that now can: BWI, CRW, JNU, and LVK. Those facilities have a total of 31 ERRs in the system according to the latest ERR demand sheet so any of the places amongst those 31 that can select will have to add the new additions to their ranking list. Outside of any oversights by me, the rest of the changes to the PPT are negligible to the process. A lot of it was places that could release 1 can now release 2 instead which changes nothing in terms of ranking lists.
SlightVector
Member
- Messages
- 4
Which number shows how many a facility can actually take? I see Possible Gains to Target, Possible Gains to National Average, and Possible Gains to NCEPT target. Of the three, two are zero and one isn't, so could this be my lucky panel?
In Round 1, all facilities may gain bodies until their projected % CPC is equal to or greater than the national average projected % CPC (Cell AA6 of the PPT) and it is currently 86.6%. I don't know if they recalculate that national average after every transfer, or if they use 86.6% as a static number for the entirety of Round 1. This number of bodies is Column AB. If you click on any cell in Column AB, you will see that the formula uses Column G ("CPC Target") multiplied by the value in Cell $AA$6.
The theoretical "target" of the process is 100% projected CPC to target. The number of bodies a facility would have to gain to put them at 100% projected is Column AC. If you click on any cell in Column AC, you can see that the formula uses Column G with no multiplier, that is, 100% of Column G. Under the temporary rules for the current panel, this number is not used. It is purely informational.
In Round 2, all facilities which are ATC Level 8 or higher may gain bodies until their projected % CPC is equal to or greater than 90%. It appears that they tried to calculate this number of bodies in Column AV. But if you click on any cell in Column AV, you can see that the formula uses Column G multiplied by 0.85 instead of 0.90. So they couldn't even do that correctly. Probably someone should email the NATCA NCEPT people and point them to this comment, to make sure they make sure the FAA fixes it.
The theoretical "target" of the process is 100% projected CPC to target. The number of bodies a facility would have to gain to put them at 100% projected is Column AC. If you click on any cell in Column AC, you can see that the formula uses Column G with no multiplier, that is, 100% of Column G. Under the temporary rules for the current panel, this number is not used. It is purely informational.
In Round 2, all facilities which are ATC Level 8 or higher may gain bodies until their projected % CPC is equal to or greater than 90%. It appears that they tried to calculate this number of bodies in Column AV. But if you click on any cell in Column AV, you can see that the formula uses Column G multiplied by 0.85 instead of 0.90. So they couldn't even do that correctly. Probably someone should email the NATCA NCEPT people and point them to this comment, to make sure they make sure the FAA fixes it.
Last edited:
GulfBravoPapa
⭐SuperStar
- Messages
- 1,988
No.
CaptainObvious
Legendary Member
- Messages
- 2,140
Delayed until next week
Eagle1Fox2
Trusted Contributor
- Messages
- 440
Yeah like I’m confused, when do they re-rank ? do all facilities re-rank ? does the list come out Monday or Tuesday?
SlightVector
Member
- Messages
- 4
Looks like the level 8 or higher stipulation is fucking me out of round 2. Go figure.
Last edited:
kombucha23
Forum Sage
- Messages
- 423
List should be out Tuesday. The panel meets Monday. They’ll probably have the affected facilities adjust their selections if necessary, but it wasn’t a massive amount that would warrant a whole new manager ranking across the FAA.
There are like 30-40 facilities that changed how many they could lose or gain. That's kind of a lot imo. I'm glad they caught it but it's pretty fucked up. I'm starting to think HR didnt do their job for there to be so many facilities. I doubt there are that many lazy ATMs that didnt update their workbook in time... but I could be wrong.
Also, why does each facility have to update their staffing and not just one centralized area per region or national? When you get credentialed shouldn't that mark that your numbers increased by 1? Doesnt that whole process go outside the building to a higher level or does all that just stay in house? I feel like they could maybe streamline the process a bit.
rugbydog11
Forum Sage
- Messages
- 615
Excuse me sir, there will be no "making sense" or "efficiency" allowed in this agency.
- Messages
- 136
Training success rate.
They need to stop screwing around and start only taking people born and raised on Long Island because no one else wants to be in the shithole of suffolk county, NY except people with family ties. Either that or start paying $275k base.
kombucha23
Forum Sage
- Messages
- 423
GOOD LUCK TO ALL AND TO ALL A GOOD FIGHT
