C3 Rating

Bryan Wollenberg · « **Reply #15 on:** November 25, 2011, 01:35:37 PM »

Quote from: Jonathan Cox

Personally I think the C3 should just disappear.

If it were up to me, it would be gone, period. Completely agree. If we can't return it to a control rating, it's absolutely useless.

Salvatore Barcia · « **Reply #16 on:** November 25, 2011, 01:38:30 PM »

I'm not disagreeing with your points, I was just giving my opinion. I feel that C3 wouldn't be useful in this division. But I agree with what was said above, apply for Vatusa staff vacancies in the future and maybe you can make it happen, because I don't see it happening in the near future.

William Lewis · « **Reply #17 on:** November 25, 2011, 05:11:09 PM »

If The C3 is just an incentive to continue to control maybe we should set a standard of 5000 controlling hours with 3000 hours as an instructor and 2000 has a staff member.

Rahul Parkar · « **Reply #18 on:** November 25, 2011, 05:57:59 PM »

Kevin,

You say that the C3 should be issued to reward controllers, and you refer to people from 2004, Let's say they got their C1 in 2005 (for arguments sake) and their C3 in 2006 or 2007, There are no "rewards" after that so why should they continue to control, (Also, most people leave for real life commitments, or burnout, I don't see why they would leave because they weren't rewarded via a rating) I see the C3 rating as a rating that would either cause arguments because someone got their C3 and another person didn't, or just a single reward that came after a bunch of hours and after that there would be no incentive other then getting on to enjoy it, but as you say, they wouldn't do that because they are just adding hours to a tally for a reward they have now obtained.

Most if not all of the controllers I speak to, hop on and control not to add hours to a tally, but to have fun and enjoy the experience and enhance their own knowledge. So why is the C3 necessary, why can't we just leave it at the point where, we're not issuing the C3 rating, therefore no arguments over it (except this one) and everyone continues on with daily life?

-Prepares to be shot down-

Cheers!
Rahul

Robert Prescott · « **Reply #19 on:** November 26, 2011, 09:50:02 PM »

Quote from: Bryan Wollenberg

If it were up to me, it would be gone, period. Completely agree. If we can't return it to a control rating, it's absolutely useless.

Back in the day it wasn't and I worked and studied my tail off to get it...granted it is irrelevant now, but I earned it and being irrelevant is fine with me :-)

Kevin Kelm · « **Reply #20 on:** November 26, 2011, 11:11:40 PM »

I had the pleasure of speaking with a staff member about the issue for almost an hour today. After reading some of these points, I have come to agree that the C3 rating itself really wouldn't incentify controllers to stay on and control anything more than any other rating; I do not control for hours or ratings, and as "flashy" as a C3 rating is, it wouldn't make me personally stay on any longer to control than if I had a C1.

I did discuss with the staff member that I think it is important that VATUSA recognizes the power of awarding controllers for experience and longevity; even things as simple as the badges they create for controllers who hit 1000 hours etc, and we were in agreement on some of these issues. I do appreciate your guy's input on the issue, it did help open my eyes a bit to really analyzing the issue more objectively.

Tom Seeley · « **Reply #21 on:** November 28, 2011, 06:56:50 AM »

I agree with Bryan. The rating now is useless in VATUSA. I'm also in the same boat with Rob. Back when I got my C3, it wasn't given away ... you had to be approved by your staff and pass an exam. However once awarded it still served no purpose that I am aware of. You had no additional privileges, no additional control responsibility. I would have no objection to it disappearing, but that might not sit well with those who did earn it over time. We can't just do away with it, as long as there are other areas in VATSIM that still utilize it (last time I checked). VATUSA did the next best thing - ceased using it in this division. Pretty much end of story.

Charles Rizzi · « **Reply #22 on:** November 28, 2011, 08:43:23 PM »

Quote from: Tom Seeley

I agree with Bryan. The rating now is useless in VATUSA. I'm also in the same boat with Rob. Back when I got my C3, it wasn't given away ... you had to be approved by your staff and pass an exam.

Back when? As the one that gave it to you (I think) the "point" of the C3 rating at that time was to reward those individuals who had done the work to go beyond the minimum required to simply run a CTR position somewhat respectably at moderate traffic levels (at the time that was all it took to get a C1). The rating was supposed to be based entirely on controlling ability and 7110.65 knowledge (not just VATUSA training). It was a very effective way to motivate good controllers to become really, really good controllers. Then GRP arrived and it was converted into whatever ill defined administrative or political merit badge it is now.

Bet you thought I was dead ;-)

CR

Bob Carmona · « **Reply #23 on:** November 29, 2011, 09:09:54 AM »

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE [/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]Back when I got my C3, it wasn't given away ... you had to be approved by your staff and pass an exam. However once awarded it still served no purpose that I am aware of.[/quote]

When I received my C3 it was before GRP. Back then the rating was given to those that achieved the level of "CTR" controller.

Kevin Copeland · « **Reply #24 on:** November 30, 2011, 03:10:55 PM »

Ha! the ole C3 discussion rears it's head again

Another facet to this is: You already have C3 rated controllers in VATUSA.
For some, this was a cert based on knowledge and for others (a majority I would guess) it was time and hours as a C1 with no extra knowledge required.

This equals a polluted pool of C3's.

Now, if VATUSA decided to bring back the C3 and put restrictions on it to mean this that or the other then you'd have different classifications of C3s and how would you tell the difference?
It should have just been left alone. UNLESS, you were going to downgrade all the current C3's to C1 and then start from scratch.

Who really cares if someone has "C3 senior controller" in their signature? I think that's a petty argument. Why should people be ashamed of their accomplishments whatever that may be?

Ryan Geckler · « **Reply #25 on:** November 30, 2011, 08:27:25 PM »

Per regs you cannot remove a rating from a controller (instructors being an exception).. so now what to do?

Jonathan Cox · « **Reply #26 on:** November 30, 2011, 10:04:09 PM »

I wasn't around when they changed the way the ratings work, could someone fill me in on why they changed? I'm wondering if it would ever make sense to go back to the way it was and make the C3 actually stand for something (i.e. CTR certified).

Andrew Wolcott · « **Reply #27 on:** November 30, 2011, 10:14:59 PM »

C3 used to have a benchmark. It represented 200 hours or more controlling as a C1.

Now it has come to be more of an indicator of who has served as a TA, or otherwise served in an ARTCC Staff position or higher.

Getting rid of the C3? Nothing doing.

Bryan Wollenberg · « **Reply #28 on:** November 30, 2011, 10:59:24 PM »

Quote from: Jonathan Cox

I wasn't around when they changed the way the ratings work, could someone fill me in on why they changed?

I honestly don't remember why or who actually came up with the idea, however, before GRP was introduced, there were 3 ratings schemes proposed:

GND Controller (S1) DEL, GND
TWR Controller (S2) TWR
TMA Controller (S3) APP/DEP
Enroute Controller (C1) CTR
C3 explicitly defined within GRP

S1 = GND (DEL/GND)
S3 = TWR (TWR)
C1 = TMA (APP/DEP)
C3 = ENROUTE (CTR)

S1 = GND (DEL/GND)
S2 = TWR (TWR)
S3 = TMA (APP/DEP)
C1 = ENROUTE (CTR)
C3 not defined within the scope of GRP

VATUSA and VATNA (though not all Divisions within VATNA) were the only ones who said Option 2 would be a doable system. I honestly think the reason we have it, is because Europe was under the impression that they would be able to use the C3 rating as a control rating for their supercenters, EuroControl or whatever. They fought VERY hard, in fact, to get the C3 rating for their use. Another early use was that it be given to Mentors, but seeing as the C3 rating cannot be taken away, how much sense would that make?

Since Europe has been shut down on the concept of using C3 as a control rating, I can assure you that they no longer hold the same position on the C3.

Without divulging too much information, since we are in very preliminary discussion right now, I will say that the EC is heavily discussing the current rating scheme, and exploring the possibility that other ratings schemes might be more conducive to training, etc. One preliminary outcome of these discussions has been the S1/S2 rating stuff that came out a couple months ago. Also in the discussions is the C3 rating, which the majority of us view as being completely useless in its current form.

Quote from: Jonathan Cox

I'm wondering if it would ever make sense to go back to the way it was and make the C3 actually stand for something (i.e. CTR certified).

It would absolutely make sense! I see it as a priority to eliminate some of the stupidity that came as a byproduct of the original GRP, and I'm not the only one on the EC with that point-of-view. Remember the huge mistake that was made with forcing all initial training offline? It took a while, but we fixed that little issue. I'm hoping it's only a matter of time before we bring some common sense back to the ratings scheme, the C3 being no exception. We'll just have to see how it plays out.

Jonathan Cox · « **Reply #29 on:** November 30, 2011, 11:09:02 PM »

I think if it would resolve a lot of these kind of issues, bringing it back would be cool. I didn't know S2 and C2 didn't exist at the time, I had heard those were part of the rating system then too.