This change is relatively straightforward and should be implementable without issues.
Change EDGG_PSA_CTR to EDDF_PSA_APP
This would allow controllers endorsed for EDDF APP to open PSA in case holdings are required. This could help alleviate staffing issues on CTR and shouldn't cause any issues as APP controllers are required to know how to work with holdings.
There would be no negative side effects.
These changes are more exotic and would require more consideration.
Change EDGG_TAU_CTR to EDGS_TAU_APP
This would partially relieve workload from GIN, again helping in alleviating staffing issues on CTR. It could be used in a similar way to HMM or EIF, sequencing some in- and outbounds and reducing the topdown workload of CTR. A side effect might be in attracting some traffic to EDGS.
A problem could arise if this station and GIN are staffed, but not RUD, as some pilots might have to switch from GIN to TAU/SIG and then GIN again. If WUR/FUL/FFM is staffed as well, GIN's airspace would be completely split into two parts here. However, both of these things would happen right now if TAU/SIG were staffed in these constellations.
This change would also require EDGG_SIG_CTR to be changed to EDGS_SIG_APP.
Change EDGG_NKH_CTR to EDFM_NKH_APP
This would partially relieve workload from DKB, again helping in alleviating staffing issues on CTR. It could be used in a similar way to HMM or EIF, sequencing some in- and outbounds and reducing topdown workload of CTR. A side effect might be in attracting additional traffic to EDFM and making this airport more attractive for S1 trainees.
There are no immediate problems that would arise from this.
capzDE
commented
1 year ago
This change is relatively straightforward and should be implementable without issues.
Change EDGG_PSA_CTR to EDDF_PSA_APP This would allow controllers endorsed for EDDF APP to open PSA in case holdings are required. This could help alleviate staffing issues on CTR and shouldn't cause any issues as APP controllers are required to know how to work with holdings. There would be no negative side effects.
These changes are more exotic and would require more consideration.
Change EDGG_TAU_CTR to EDGS_TAU_APP This would partially relieve workload from GIN, again helping in alleviating staffing issues on CTR. It could be used in a similar way to HMM or EIF, sequencing some in- and outbounds and reducing the topdown workload of CTR. A side effect might be in attracting some traffic to EDGS. A problem could arise if this station and GIN are staffed, but not RUD, as some pilots might have to switch from GIN to TAU/SIG and then GIN again. If WUR/FUL/FFM is staffed as well, GIN's airspace would be completely split into two parts here. However, both of these things would happen right now if TAU/SIG were staffed in these constellations. This change would also require EDGG_SIG_CTR to be changed to EDGS_SIG_APP.
Change EDGG_NKH_CTR to EDFM_NKH_APP This would partially relieve workload from DKB, again helping in alleviating staffing issues on CTR. It could be used in a similar way to HMM or EIF, sequencing some in- and outbounds and reducing topdown workload of CTR. A side effect might be in attracting additional traffic to EDFM and making this airport more attractive for S1 trainees. There are no immediate problems that would arise from this.