5 ms·

The US can easily fill in gaps by taking the Special Operators Combat Controllers (CCTs) who are actually all certified Air Traffic Controllers. Furthermore, t

The US can easily fill in gaps by taking the Special Operators Combat Controllers (CCTs) who are actually all certified Air Traffic Controllers. Furthermore, the Air Force could additionally take the Terminal Air Control Party (TACPs) - think of them as a Radio/Strike guy that coordinates Air Strikes, that accompany tactical platoons and cross train them into Air Traffic Control, further augmenting their ability to perform this role.

somerandomdude2 1y ago
It would be great to help keep CCT skills fresh and current - rotate them around with 'deployments' to civilian facilities. It'd be a win all the way around.
- throwaway48476 1y ago
  It takes 1-3 years of facility based training in order to qualify as an ATC for a specific tower. A military enlistment is only 4 years. CCTs would end up doing their entire enlistment at one facility leaving no time to train as a CCT. You'd have to hire another person who's job is 100% CCT, at which point, why not just hire an ATC?
  - OrvalWintermute 1y ago
    Military enlistments vary from shorter than longer to 4 years. ATCs regularly go TDY to support other locations. You’re conflating ATC training with a location
- tdpvb 1y ago
  It sounds like a nice idea, but the only common factor between ATC and CCT is the certification and some fundamental core training -- everything else is super nuanced specific to each scenario. Some CCT who's specialized in deconflicting a stack overhead in wartime can't just waltz into ORD tower and say "all right boys and girls, go ahead and take a break, I've got this." Each requires domain-specific experience. And to add on what others have said: yes CCTs represent a pool of proven ATC candidates, but depleting that pool just to knee-jerk a short term-ish solution creates an equal problem for the military -- and it's a hell of a lot harder to recruit adequate candidates for CCT. For example, they have to do like, lots of pushups...
philwelch 1y ago
This doesn’t solve anything because the military still needs those people.
dragonwriter 1y ago
If I was an enemy of the United States, I would very much like the US to increase the degree to which applying its warfighting capacity required stripping out hard to replace experts on which its civilian air transport ability relies for safe operation, and vice versa. It would fit in well with the present administrations policy orientation, both toward militarization and toward making th country weaker and more fragile in general.

somerandomdude2 1y ago

It would be great to help keep CCT skills fresh and current - rotate them around with 'deployments' to civilian facilities. It'd be a win all the way around.

throwaway48476 1y ago
It takes 1-3 years of facility based training in order to qualify as an ATC for a specific tower. A military enlistment is only 4 years. CCTs would end up doing their entire enlistment at one facility leaving no time to train as a CCT. You'd have to hire another person who's job is 100% CCT, at which point, why not just hire an ATC?
- OrvalWintermute 1y ago
  Military enlistments vary from shorter than longer to 4 years. ATCs regularly go TDY to support other locations. You’re conflating ATC training with a location
tdpvb 1y ago
It sounds like a nice idea, but the only common factor between ATC and CCT is the certification and some fundamental core training -- everything else is super nuanced specific to each scenario. Some CCT who's specialized in deconflicting a stack overhead in wartime can't just waltz into ORD tower and say "all right boys and girls, go ahead and take a break, I've got this." Each requires domain-specific experience. And to add on what others have said: yes CCTs represent a pool of proven ATC candidates, but depleting that pool just to knee-jerk a short term-ish solution creates an equal problem for the military -- and it's a hell of a lot harder to recruit adequate candidates for CCT. For example, they have to do like, lots of pushups...

philwelch 1y ago

This doesn’t solve anything because the military still needs those people.

dragonwriter 1y ago

If I was an enemy of the United States, I would very much like the US to increase the degree to which applying its warfighting capacity required stripping out hard to replace experts on which its civilian air transport ability relies for safe operation, and vice versa. It would fit in well with the present administrations policy orientation, both toward militarization and toward making th country weaker and more fragile in general.