troller acceptance. The standards which are to be achieved must be clearly defined so that all personnel are aware of the performance that they are expected to attain. The standard thus defined for a sector or position will be the qualification standard and the minimum level for checked-out personnel. A number of controllers will be selected to conduct a task analysis of the control positions and determine the level of proficiency required for each task. A check list of tasks to be assessed during on-the-job evaluation will be prepared. Practice evaluations using the staff who assisted in the task analysis followed by discussions will revise and verify the system so that an agreed valid check list can be produced. The position standard and check list will be published so that all personnel are aware of the performance level required and of those items that will be ·assessed during the proficiency check. . . On-the-job evaluations and briefings must be carried out objectively and fairly and the results considered as confidential. Conclusions (a) A system of proficiency checks carried out objectively and fairly and above all treated confidentially is seen as being desirable by many Member Associations. (b) Proficiency checks would pr~ serve safety in the ATC system by monitoring a controller's performance an.d 1dent1fy and examine any areas of his performance that should be improved. (c) Controllers selected for the t.ask of Proficiency Check Officer (PCO) will: (I) have to be currently rated. . . (11) have to undergo special training. (Ill) not be considered as part of the operational personnel for staffing purposes. (IV) be responsible for the organisation of retraining as required. (d) The check could take the form of: (I) OJT evaluation (II) tape monitoring (Ill) knowledge verification (IV) simulated exercises and be carried out twice a year. (e) The standards to be achieved and the check list of items to be evaluated will be made available to all controllers. (f) Full debriefing and exchange of views will follow each evaluation. Supervisors may attend as observers. (g) Full controller part1c1pat1on is necessary at all stages 1n the evaluation and 1mplementat1on of a system of proficiency checks. (h) The results of prof1c1ency checks must be considered as conf1dent1al information between the PCO and the controller.
Top Earnings for McDonnell McDonnell Douglas Corporation earned $ 144.6 million or $ 3.65 per share fully diluted on sales of$ 6,066.3 million in 1980.
The previous year McDonnell Douglas earned $ 199.1 million or$ 5.06 per share on sales of$ 5.278.5 million. The 1980 earnings included $ 4.3 million or 11 cents per share from a sale of securities in the fourth quarter and $ 15.5 million or 39 cents per share from a previously reported real estate transaction. The year's sales included 41 per cent commercial and 59 per cent government business. The corporation's earnings for the fourth quarter of 1980 were $ 45.8 million or $ 1. 15 per share on sales of $ 1.503.3 million. In the comparable period of 1979 earnings were $ 51 . 7 million or $ 1 . 3 1 per share on sales of$ 1.330.1 million. Firm backlog on December 31. 1980 was $ 8.815.5 million. compared with· $ 6.981. 7 million at the end of 1979. This backlog. made up of 34 per cent commercial and 6 6 per cent government business. excludes order.snot yet funded to the corporation. orders being negotiated as continuations of authorized programmes. and commercial orders subject to contingencies. Total backlog. including these additional amounts but excluding options. was approximately $ 13. 777 .8 million on December 31. 1980 and included 27 per cent commercail and 73 per cent government business. A year earlier the total backlog was approximately$ 10.877.9 million. Employment at the end of 1980 was 82.550 compared with 82. 736 a year earlier.
1980 Lower Sales for 1980 were higher in all ma1or lines of business but increased most in the commercial and military aircraft areas. The primary sources of backlog growth were now orders for military aircraft. notably the selection of the F-1 SA Hornet by Canada at the conclusion of the first foreign competition in which the aircraft was entered. Earnings for 1980 were lower in all product Imes. but the primary factor in the overall decline was a pre-tax loss on commercial aircraft of $ 1 44 million. compared with 1979's commercial aircraft loss of $ 56 million. The corporation's commercial aircraft loss increased substantially in 1980 because development and production costs associated with introduction of the new DC-9 Super 80 were much higher than ant1c1pated. During 19 80 we achieved good cost performance in connection with DC-1 0 production and made good progress in the amort1zat1on of DC-1 0 deferred production costs. The 40 DC-1 Os delivered in 1980 absorbed $ 31 2 m1ll1on of deferred tooling and production costs. The firm orders now on hand are considered adequate to absorb the programme·s remaining deferred costs New orders for DC-9s and DC- 1Os were received at a comparatively slow rate
throughout 1 980 as general economic conditions worsened and the airline industry incurred substantial losses. Because of this. deliveries of the DC- 10 will occur at a lower rate in 1 981 than in the year JUSt ended. Some DC-9 deliveries orginally planned for 1980 were delayed beyond the end of the year: DC-9 deliveries are expected to occur at a higher rate throughout much of 1981 as the delayed aircraft are readied for service and we complete the manufacture of aircraft ordered before the 1980 recession. A slowing of DC-9 deliveries in 1982 now appears likely. Military aircraft sales increased substantially in 1980 as work accelerated on the F18A Hornet and AV-8B programmes. Military aircraft earnings declined because these programmes. both still in early stages. have lower margins than the mature programmes that dominated the corporation's military aircraft work in recent years. Earnings were adversely affected also be further increases in estimated total costs of developing and producing the six DC-10 extender tanker-cargo aircraft ordered by the US Air Force. The total military aircraft backlog was $ 8.943. 7 million on December 31. 1980. Approximately 55 per cent of 1t involved aircraft in development of early stages of production. An additional cause of 1980's earnings decline was the fact that the corporation had substantially decreased interest income and increased interest expense in 1980 compared with 1979. As of December 31. 1980. McDonnell Douglas had firm orders for 364 DC-10 airliners and cond1t1onal orders and options for 25 orthers. bringing the overall total to 389 aircraft of which 339 had been delivered. At year-end the corporation had firm orders for 1 .061 DC-9s and cond1t1onal orders and options for 23 others. bringing the overall total to 1.084 aircraft of which 955 had been delivered.
GOODWOOD DATA SYSTEMS LTD .. announced the award of a contract for an AFTN Switching System by the Federal Air Traffic Control Authority of Yugoslavia. This contract 1s valued at nearly $ 2 m1ll1on and provides a 1 28channel capacity system for the routing and processing of Aeronautical Telecommunications data. This system 1s part of the overall series of Flight Information System offered by Goodwood on the internat1ona I market The maiority of the technology being offered was first developed for Canada by use in its own Civil Av1at1on System. 23