Talk:European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The states name is Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia ! See:http://www.eurocontrol.int/dgs/publications/skyway/1998/v3n12/p26.html Vergina 21:12, 13 Oct 2003 (UTC)
- I added the "Former Yugoslav" back in. [[Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia]] just redirects. --Jiang 21:14, 13 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia is not identical to Republic of Macedonia ---->Vergina 21:25, 13 Oct 2003 (UTC)
You need to answer with more backing. I don't see how. "Former Yugolslav" is already included in the article. It's just not part of the link. --Jiang 23:22, 13 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Lifted from somewhere
Is it just me or does the content of this page all sounds suspiciously as if it was lifted from a EUROCONTROL promotion document somewhere? (in which case it may give Wikipedia legal and POV problems) Andrewferrier 18:38, 2004 Nov 23 (UTC)
- It has been taken from either http://www.eurocontrol.int/library/brochures/cfmu.pdf
in the pdf it states at the bottom: This document is published by EUROCONTROL in the interests of the exchange of information. It may be copied in whole or in part, providing that the copyright notice and disclaimer are included he information contained in this document may not be modified without prior written permission from EUROCONTROL. I've added a references section (I hope that's ok) but really the text needs rewriting because it's frankly crap. 80.229.143.117 22:52, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
-
- Considering that the contents cannot be changed without prior written consent, that would put it at odds with Wikipedia policy, and probably should not be included. --CVaneg 08:30, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Where exactly is this copied from? There's no violation that I can see in the above document (this was originally pointed out on WP:CV). -Lommer | talk 21:19, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
According to Fair use#Amount and substantiality, the amount of text is too small to count as infringement. Plus, it has by now been reformulated. Pgan002 21:38, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Bombastic
As some of this text was initially promotional, it sounds a bit over-inflated: "widely recognized as the world's most productive and efficient air traffic control center", "far-above-average productivity", and the general tone of that paragraph. Are there any refernces to substantiate these claims? Pgan002 21:46, 24 January 2006 (UTC) I just edited it a bit. Pgan002
[edit] Acronyms
MAUC (originally it was AUC) is not really an acronym. I cannot find it in the supposed source, or on the internet. ACT is not an acronym either, though it is mentioned at these pages. What shall we do about them? Pgan002 22:13, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] This article is very poor
It does not describe what eurocontrol is in the slightest. It goes some way to describe the air traffic control system of the Benelux cuntries, but this is also inaccurate. (This would be rather like describing the electrical system in a car, and trying to pass it off as a description of a car, which it is not)! For example, MAUC does not control upper airspace in Germany. This done at Rhein Radar in Karlsruhe Germany. It uses a system originally derived from MADAP in the late 1960s. Until 1972, the software and ATC in (West) Germany was provided by Eurocontrol, when the ATC was nationalised. The software maintenence and development, remained a Eurocontrol function in Karlsruhe. This ATC was operated in conjunction with the Lufwaffe and USAF. In fact KARLDAP was said to be the only ATC sytem to integrate control of both of these. The civilian ATC function was privatised in 1993 and I am not certain of the involvement of Eurocontrol at present. But these are just two examples of relationship between Eurocontrol and nation governments. Each member states has its own arrangement, and these are many and varied. Even if the info in the article is lifted from Eurocontrol publications, it must be remembered that it is a highly politicised organisation. By that, I mean that it is not inconccievable that Maastricht may want to give this impression, for its own purposes, though I suspect the article is simply describing Eurocontrol's in Benelux, and not Eurocontrol itself. The suggestion that they also control upper airspace in Germany hints at competitveness between Karlsruhe and Maastricht, but they have never provided upper airspace ATC for Germany (I belive prior to Eurocontrol, it was undertaken by the Allied powers).
Also the statement "EUROCONTROL Maastricht Upper Area Control Centre (MUAC), widely recognized as the world's most productive and efficient air traffic control center" surely needs a citation, though I believe this probably comes from MUAC itself!
The article makes no mention of the fact that Eurocontrol followed hot on the heals of Eurocoal and Euratom as one of the original european bodies, and was established in 1960. It was established to harmonise ATC in Europe (Europe in its own sense not in the sense of the EU). It therefore has many member states, but its constitution, payscales and taxation status are similar to all other european bodies.
The degree to which eurocontrol is actually involved in ATC varies from meber state to member state. The fact that MADAP is maintained and run by Eurocontrol staff is just one of many arrangements, but it IS ABSOLUTELY NOT THE CASE that all member states use MADAP; they do not!
As I remember it, Eurocontrol is Headquartered in Brussels, has a training centre in Luxembourg and an experimental development centre at Brettigny, near Paris France.
It could be argued that Eurocontrol is an expensive and beurocratic failure. One of its founding goals was to reduce the number of IT systems used to handle ATC in Europe; they have proliferated since 1960.
I cannot remeber what the relationship is between Eurocontrol and ICAO; this may vary from member states to member state.
I will hunt down my notes on the functions of Eurocontrol.
