Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 11/30/21 in all areas

  1. Dear Members, There has been much discussion in various mediums recently about issues on our network relating to pilots using aircraft that they are unable to properly operate which in turn causes disruption on the network. The VATSIM Board of Governors has been monitoring this, and while this is not a new problem, it has been exacerbated recently by the release of some amazing new aircraft simulations. This post is to address this issue. In 2010, I bought my first PMDG product - the MD-11 for FSX. It was a complicated product, and even as an ATPL rated pilot, I flew it offline for a couple of months before connecting to the network with it. I have purchased numerous products since, and for each one, I mastered the systems offline before connecting to the network. As PMDG, Leonardo, Fenix, and other manufacturers bring their newest and most advanced products to the MSFS 2020 platform, it is important to remind all of our users that VATSIM is an environment for virtual pilots and virtual controllers to come together to simulate the real world of aviation. The absolute prerequisite to this is that pilots must know how to fly and property control their aircraft before connecting to the network. For these advanced aircraft, this is not limited to knowing how to fly a heading, an airspeed, and an altitude. If a pilot connects to the network using a simulated aircraft with advanced automation, they MUST also know how to use that automation. In almost every case, violating an ATC clearance and blaming it on your autopilot doing something you didn’t expect is a pilot problem, not a simulation problem. In a recent Facebook post, a VATSIM member and good friend of mine reminded us all what the “R” in “IFR” means. I would add that we all know what the “SIM” in “VATSIM” means. As I said in a post when I became President of the network, we are an educational network dedicated to members who want to simulate real world aviation. Connecting to the network to learn how to fly your aircraft is simply not why VATSIM exists. You cannot play in our sandbox if you don’t know how to use your shovel. Follow the Rules, respect the Simulation. The VATSIM Board of Governors is currently working on updates to our Code of Conduct to codify a stricter requirement for pilot competency on the network. Additionally, a pilot feedback program is in the final stages of development that will assist controllers in providing meaningful advice and education to pilots through our Pilot Training Department. In the meantime, network Supervisors and Administrators will be continuing to work hard to assist members. Please make note that if you connect to the network and are unable to adequately control your aircraft, you will be removed from the network and asked to either increase your skill level with your chosen aircraft offline before reconnecting, or connect to the network with a less advanced aircraft that you can adequately pilot without causing disruption to other members of the network. Ignoring these requests may require us to remove your ability to connect to the network for a period of time. As members of this amazing community, at all times I would ask you to please respect the enjoyment of everyone connected to the network. If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to e-mail me president(at)vatsim.net Tim Barber, VATSIM President
    113 points
  2. VATSIM is pleased to announce that Velocity will release on 31 January, 2022 at 22:00 UTC. Velocity raises the refresh rate of position updates for aircraft from once every five seconds to five times per second. VATSIM members will notice much smoother movement of other users’ aircraft, be able to pick out details as small as an aircraft’s nose dipping down when braking and be able to conduct formation flights with a precision not possible under our current infrastructure. Here is a preview video Implementation of Velocity will require all VATSIM servers to be taken offline for a period of 30 – 45 minutes to apply the update. VATSIM will communicate with members via our social media platforms and community discord when the servers are back online. All VATSIM members must update their pilot clients to the newest version. These new versions will be released concurrently with Velocity and members are encouraged to utilize the network downtime to update their pilot clients. vPilot users will be automatically prompted to update their clients the next time they open vPilot. xPilot users must download the newest beta version from https://vats.im/xpilot and ensure both xPilot and xPlane are closed prior to updating. swift users can download the latest version from https://vats.im/swift Failure to update your pilot client will result in inability to connect to VATSIM. You will receive an “Invalid Client Version” error message if you try to connect with an old version. In 2021 we retired some pilot and air traffic control clients in preparation for Velocity. Through our development and testing cycle, we determined that xSquawkbox for xPlane will not be compatible with our new technology and must also be retired. xSquawkbox users will no longer be able to connect to VATSIM effective 31 January 2022 at 2200z and we encourage those users to change to xPilot or swift if they wish to continue to connect to VATSIM. We thank the xSquawkbox team for their support of VATSIM over the years and apologize to xSqauawkbox users for the short notice of retirement of this client. Outside of the fast position updates, Velocity brings some other changes to the VATSIM experience. These changes include better error messaging if you are unable to connect to the network. For example, errors will detail if you are missing the P0 exam, have an inactive account, or an incorrect password. New registrations and reactivations will become instant as opposed to the current system where users must wait for next scheduled ratings sync with the VATSIM servers. Note that at rollout, Velocity has little to no affect on ATC clients. The radar and flight plan processing functions in current ATC Clients (Euroscope, vat-sys, vERAM, vSTARS, and VRC) will continue to function both before and after the rollout with no changes needed. Users who use virtual tower functionality utilizing a proxy server with vSTARS will need to update vSTARS. Virtual towers via a proxy server with Euroscope will not function until a new version Euroscope is released. Velocity does present some exciting opportunities for future features in our current and any future ATC clients! The VATSIM Founders, Board of Governors, and Tech Teams thanks all the developers and beta testers who participated in the Velocity project. They would especially like to thank Mike, Ross, Justin and the Swift Team for their support in rolling out this update to the network. Please join us in thanking these individuals and enjoy Velocity!
    26 points
  3. Hello All, At the July 16 meeting of the VATSIM Board of Governors, updates to the VATSIM Code of Conduct were approved. These changes will come into effect at 0001z on August 1, 2022. We are always looking for ways to elevate the enjoyment of the network, and after input and consultation with our users, the Board of Governors has approved these changes with that intent. These are changes that are beneficial for both pilots and controllers alike, and will be supported with supportive educational content across the network. Through a continuous improvement process, additional tools are consistently being developed to further enhance everyone's VATSIM experience. As always, lots of resources for pilots are available at https://my.vatsim.net/learn, and free resources for flight planning and charts across the web, including for example Simbrief and Chartfox. Most of the changes were editorial in nature, clarifying and codifying current practice on the network. More meaningful changes were made around pilot preparation and conduct on the network as we continue moving towards an environment where pilots are expected to be more prepared when flying on VATSIM. The full text of the new Code of Conduct will be published shortly at https://vatsim.net/docs/policy/code-of-conduct. Below is a summary of some of the more meaningful changes: Use of voice communications on VATSIM: Pilot proficiency: Flying during events: Use of real-world weather:
    21 points
  4. The Board of Governors is pleased to announce that Jannes van Gestel has been selected as the new Vice President – Marketing and Communications. Jannes has been a part of the VATSIM community the past 11 years and has volunteered in various roles, including Training Director of the Caribbean Division, Network Supervisor and VATSIM Marketing Content Director since 2020. He hails from the Netherlands where he has run his own video production company for the last 7 years. He has a background in Communications and Multimedia Design. Jannes is looking forward to help bring VATSIM Marketing & Communications to the next level and help our community grow and improve. Please join us in welcoming Jannes to his new role!
    18 points
  5. Following an operational review of Divisions and vACCs in the Region, I have decided to move the Ukrainian vACC from the Russian-speaking division of VATSIM (VATRUS) to VATSIM Europe (VATEUD). The move has been agreed in consultation with both Division Directors and members of the Ukrainian vACC. All current airspace standing agreements and LOAs will remain in place. The move will take place on 0001z on August 1st 2022 and will be subject to a 3 monthly review by VP Regions (EMEA) and the Division Directors of VATEUD and VATRUS.
    18 points
  6. As many of you will be aware, the New York ARTCC has announced that they will not be staffing their airspace for this Cross the Pond. They informed us prior to airport voting that this would be the case, so that we have been able to include it in our planning. I’m writing to address the concerns that they posted, which may be shared by others. Are we listening to concerns? Many facilities have expressed to us that it is challenging to staff their airspace for long periods (i.e. over 6-8 hours) and especially that it is challenging to staff the USA so early in the morning. The Planning Team engaged many of the USA ARTCCs and Canadian FIRs prior to the start of this event about the issue created by timezones for the eastbound edition. At this time, there is no ‘solution’ that fits everyone, however we have all agreed to depart traffic starting later in the day, over a shorter time window. I will post more details out to this when appropriate, but it will inevitably result in fewer slots offered at this event. Last event in response to the issues with keeping (various) facilities open for extended periods, we were careful to stagger traffic appropriately to minimise long oceanic opening times. We have, for the last 3 events, also not created slots to all city pairs on the basis of managing enroute airspace capacity. Below is an example of the city pairs offered in Westbound 2022: Importantly, you will notice large red blocks in the bottom left and top-right corners. These are decided based on capacity and how long enroute sectors can realistically stay open. Our route structure also considers this, as shown below our routes for Westbound 2022: You will see traffic to the Caribbean being specifically routed south earlier, to move it into the Piraco Oceanic FIR and thus not impact our capacity (and staffing time) for New York Oceanic. Likewise you will notice traffic being crossed in Europe to route it up into Reykjavik airspace, preventing complex crossings in the northern parts of Canada. Moving on to this event then, what slots can we expect? Here is a picture of our airports put out to voting: While it is not a foregone conclusion as to which airports will be included, we can tell you with absolute certainty that the only traffic possible in the Southern hemisphere will be from Brazil to South Africa. The staff members involved with discussions with the Planning team prior to this event are completely aware of this and do not have the expectation of traffic from the USA/Carribean. With that in mind, the selections we choose are always with staffing in mind. As we already knew that NY Oceanic was unlikely to be staffed, we have already met to discuss what will be possible. In response to enquiries by the NY ARTCC prior to their announcement, I have guaranteed there is no chance of traffic from the USA to FAOR. As such, there has never been any possibility of needing NY Oceanic for extended time periods. If we did have it available, I anticipate their time open would have been even shorter than previous events. If there are any other ARTCCs/FIRs concerns about combinations that might create staffing concerns, please get in touch. If you’ve told us already (as a couple have) then we already know. But you are welcome to reach out directly to me if you are worried the message hasn’t got through. Why are we allowing places outside the USA/Canada? A regular piece of feedback that we on the planning team receive is that the airports chosen are “the same” each year. We recognise this as being a completely legitimate concern, as the length of flight, combined with the size of airport, appropriate staffing and timezones make it hard to choose airports in Europe/USA/Canada that you haven’t seen before.As I have already said above, we also have to reduce slot capacity slightly for our more typical airports, despite already having demand for slots exceed our capacity. We have therefore reached out to some newer airports over the last few events to see if they were interested in applying, to give you something slightly different. For example, you will have noticed the inclusion of Tenerife last year to facilitate some extra capacity from Central America. This time, you will see that we have allowed the interest of places in South America and Africa. We don’t see opening up different opportunities to pilots to be a negative for the event. The event will always remain dominated by traffic between Western Europe and Eastern USA/Canada and we have no intention to try to stretch facilities beyond their capacities. We welcome feedback both now and at the end of the event in our formal feedback process. Do you think offering some newer and more unusual opportunities takes away from the event? Who Decides the airports? Does my vote count? I have been very open about the way airports are decided and nothing has changed in the method of the past 2 years. I often post in discord about how the selection process works. A summary is that we open as much up to voting as we can and then figure out how closely we can stick to it based on sector capacities. At the end of the voting, we look through at the airports that you want to have in the event. The top few airports on each side are automatically selected. We then progress down the voting to see if we can accept later airports based on the airport choices above. To give a fictitious example. If the top 4 airports in Europe on a given event were Amsterdam (EHAM), Brussels (EBBR), Paris (LFPG) and London Heathrow (EGLL), we have a massive amount of congestion and work for the southern sectors in London control and limited overflight capacity in EBBU, EHAA (Koksy sector). If the next 3 airports were London Gatwick (EGKK), Dusseldord (EDDL) and Frankfurt (EDDF), it would be impossible to include them all. We would likely have to reject 2 of those 3 on the basis of capacity and then proceed to airports lower in the vote. This can, and does, result in airports being selected that have lower votes than some that are rejected. However this is necessary to make the event manageable. The only way we could go completely with voting would be for the Planning Team to eliminate large numbers of airports prior to the vote based on our own preference. In the above fictional example, we could choose to remove 2 of those 7 airports from voting in the first place, on the basis that selecting 5 would be ok for capacity. We choose however, to hear what you all want and then try to find a way to achieve it. As such, we spend a lot of time before and during the voting period reaching out to various sectors that we foresee issues. It is common also for concerns to come to us from ARTCCs, FIRs or vACCs, over airport combinations that would cause their airspace issues. We listen and respond to these issues prior to confirming the final airports. Who are the Planning Team? For those of you in our discord, you may recognise those of us on the planning team as having a red colour. We are a group of (currently) 7 members with significant experience running this event. The team gets added from time to time from those that contribute significantly, but often has members sitting on the group for several years. Planning for each event starts several months in advance and takes a huge behind the scenes effort. In addition to our Planning Team, we also recruit an Event Team, who take on specific roles to achieve each event and require the help and coordination of ARTCCs, FIRs, Divisions and vACCs. I currently sit as the coordinator of the planning team, a role which I took on from Westbound 2020. Since that time myself and the team have been aiming to improve communication and coordination, so that you all know more about what is going on and how things work. We have a long way to go, but know that we’re always happy to hear what you want from our event and to hear your concerns. You can get answers to direct questions via this forum thread or the #organiser-questions channel in our discord. Thank you for taking the time to vote in our airport poll. Kieran CTP Planning Team
    12 points
  7. Hello @Ivan Duris I am sorry you are upset. Let's recap what happened today - it started by you sending an unsolicited message to my flying partner while we were in uncontrolled airspace telling him that he was on the wrong squawk code and telling him to change it. I reached out to you to remind you that squawk codes are assigned by ATC, not other pilots. I also let you know that sometimes messages sent from one pilot to another criticizing their flying often not well received. I conveyed these messages in a friendly way in an attempt to help you in your interactions on the network. A short time later, you connected to the network at our arrival airport and interfered with our arrival by flying circuits in the opposite direction to our arrival without making any radio calls on unicom. At that point a supervisor was called. My communications with you were friendly and meant to help you. I don't know why you chose to escalate them to the point you did. I do not have an email from you today, but if you want to reach out to me, my email is [email protected] Tim
    12 points
  8. As of today, I've been on this network for 18 years. I've been controlling and visiting ARTCCs and FIRs around the world, actively for this entire period, and I do not recognize this at all. Bull. At least not in any of the major ARTCCs. This might have been the case for you in one situation, but most ARTCCs and FIRs pride them selves in keeping scenario files up to date. Are there ARTCCs with limited staff and the ability to fix scenarios? Yup, but those are the exceptions, not the rule. Yes, a lot scenarios include errors that you are responsible to fix. Why? Because we have documentation that you're supposed to read and know, to know the routine situations. On this network, we get non-conformant situations in almost every single session, so we drill in what things you need to look at to ensure it is correct, every time. I don't expect a new S1, S2 or S3 student to know everything by heart - I don't know everything off the top of my head either, but I expect them to know when something is wrong, and where to go to look it up. I have never, in 18 years, experienced this. Most ARTCCs/FIRs don't do syllabus training in that way. I expect you to show up to a session prepared, having already read the materials so I don't have to read it to you. If you haven't done so, then that is an entirely other conversation. Yeah, a lot of this network lives on teenage mentors. Why? Because we don't have anyone else. By your statement, I assume you're of an older generation, and to be frank: people over 25-30 don't want to deal with training, so if you don't want to deal with teenage mentors, do something about it - suck it up, then come help us and contribute as a mentor yourself, I'm sure nearly every single subdivision on this network would greatly appreciate extra help - I know we sure as heck would. Bull. Are there people that do this? Absolutely. The ZNY TS usually have people talking about 18-20 hours a day, 7 days a week, since we have members from all over the world. But do I expect people to? Not at all. Not even close. Out of the 250+ active members and visitors in ZNY, only a small handful are actively on TS daily. There is about a quarter of the members that show up semi regularly, but most people just show up when they control, then hang around for a few minutes, before disconnecting. There is absolutely zero requirement to do so. Are there mom jokes when people hang around for hours at a time? For sure. But if there are things like homophobic references or other discriminating or offensive talk, I expect you, and anyone else who would be a part of such a conversation to report it, immediately to either the ARTCC/FIR staff or to a VATSIM SUP. ABSOLUTELY NOT. With the current GRP it is really difficult to pull someones cert after they have been certified for a position, but it does happen if people do not meet our standards or do not follow policy. I cannot emphasize enough how false this statement is, and this goes for the entire network as far as I have seen. You clearly haven't been around on this network for long, so I understand that you might think this, but it's absolutely wrong. VATSIM centrally, has been trying to standardize a training process for ages, especially with the latest version of the GCAP policy. The big problem is that Air Traffic Control is done very differently around the world, not just on VATSIM, but real world as well. Procedures, scopes, you name it, nothing is the same from one country to the other, hell, even in the US it varies from ARTCC to ARTCC. People have been complaining that it's too hard to become a controller in the beginning of this thread too. I'm sorry, but I disagree with you strongly here. You're talking about trying to make things easier, for a job that in the real world takes 2-4 years for you to get on a scope depending on your facility. If you want to become a controller quick, there are plenty of smaller, less complex ARTCCs in the US that will get you up to C1, very quickly, but if you want to control ZNY, ZLA, ZBW or ZTL, I'm sorry, these are insanely complex facilities that you need to work top down, something a controller, real world, would never, ever do. vZNY is fortunate enough that we now have a significant number of real world ZNY, N90 and PHL controllers as our members as well, controllers that have worked their sectors for years, yet they struggle when combining it all from a center position, when you need to cover not only ZNY Area A34, but also the entire area A, and B, C, D, E and F. Oh, and on top of that, you also need to cover the TRACON that have a 70% washout rate. We have made huge strides in making things simpler. Trying to move people up faster. The problem is that it is a lot of materials to memorize for most ARTCCs, and that just comes with practice.
    11 points
  9. Soon a major change will come to the way vatSys works. Working in parallel to Ross’s CRC project, is a server project for vatSys. This server will see all flight data, radar, alert and coordination processing move from the client running on the users computer to a centralised server where all data is synchronised and distributed. Users will no longer be connecting directly to FSD. Divisions will be able to create and edit profiles that run on the server to define local data. These “partitions” - effectively processing islands for each division, will be a very realistic emulation of Eurocat / TopSky architecture. Peer to peer, visibility points and even callsigns will be a thing of the past. The current client will remain in open beta until eventually cutting over to server. I encourage those developing profiles to continue, as they will be useable with just a few changes on vatSysServer. More soon.
    11 points
  10. VATSIM is not political and you can perform your flights "as you wish". Of course, stay respectful and reasonable with your choice of flight route.
    10 points
  11. The rule, saying that the responsibility to contact ATC, lies with the pilot, originates from the days when VATSIM's airspace and sectorization was much more simple, like 15+ years ago. These days it is often not possible for pilots to understand all the different sectors, when several of them are active. Yes: I am writing this from a European perspective! Those of you who are calling for pilots to be hit with disciplinary action for such a thing, should not do so until you have operated in busy European airspace yourselves. Until then, you are simply not qualified to make such statements, sorry for being so blunt. Fly from London to Frankfurt, for example. And tell me exactly who you will have to contact when. It's often impossible, simple as that. On the other hand, and this is the encouraging part, vATCOs will not cry a river over having to ping pilots who have no clue whom to call at what point in time. In conclusion: effectively, you will not see any "disciplinary action" taken against such evil violators of VATSIM regulations. Don't get scared by statements, just fly and do your best in finding out whom to contact. If you are unable, ATC will ping you. Easy.
    10 points
  12. I've made another major design change for CRC, this one even more impactful than the last. So it's time for another development update. Ever since I developed vSTARS and vERAM and learned a lot about how the real STARS/ERAM systems work, I've wanted to build my own server that the clients would connect to, instead of connecting directly to the VATSIM FSD network. This server would in turn connect to the FSD network in order to get a feed of all aircraft locations and their flight plans. This architecture would allow me to simulate how the real systems work to a far greater degree of fidelity. After numerous discussions with other developers that are helping with this project, and discussions with many VATUSA ARTCC staff members, I've decided that I'm going to take this approach with CRC. All logic for radar data processing, flight data processing, controller command message processing, conflict detection, etc. will be moved to the server. The CRC client will not have any "logic" at all, it will just be a UI showing the state of things on the server. The following is a list of some of the main benefits that this new approach will provide: Users will sign into positions, not callsigns. - FEs will define positions within each of their facilities, and CRC users will choose which position they are signing into. Users will not need to type in a callsign or primary frequency, as those things will be determined automatically by the server, based on the selected position. Multiple users can be signed into the same position. - This is to facilitate shift change, observing, and student/instructor scenarios. When one user makes a change such as initiating/accepting a handoff, that will be reflected on any other scope for the same position. Even small changes like the position of a data block will be mirrored across all scopes for the same position. Just like how the real systems work. Shift change will not require handoffs. - When you sign into a position to relieve another controller, you automatically have track control of all their aircraft, because it's the same position. No need for the first controller to hand off aircraft. All data blocks will be in exactly the same position for the incoming controller as they are for the outgoing controller. When the incoming controller is ready to take the position, they will enter a command or press a button to declare "my control". It'll be just like the real world when a relieving controller sits down at the same physical scope for the relief briefing. Track state will be properly shared. - All track state data (ERAM CID, scratchpads, ERAM 4th line data, temporary altitudes, handoff state, pointout state, etc.) will be stored on the server, within the simulated STARS/ERAM "computer". Track state data will be shared among positions within the same simulated computer, and will only transfer to other facility computers where it is appropriate and realistic for that to happen. You will be able to see a handoff occurring between two other controllers, just like you can in the real systems. Realistic beacon code assignments. - The server will assign beacon codes based on the real world NBCAP. (National Beacon Code Allocation Plan.) TRACON facilities will have their own internal code banks for flights originating and terminating within the facility. Recovery after unintentional disconnect. - If you lose your connection due to a client crash, brief power failure, etc. you will be able to reconnect and all your tracks with all their state will be intact, because it will be maintained on the server while you were disconnected. If you aren't able to reconnect and sign back in, another controller can sign into your position and take over, or the system will automatically drop your tracks after a certain period of time. Third-party tools can connect to the server. - Tools such as a simulated EDST or FDIO can connect to the server and sign into a position, allowing e.g. ERAM controllers to have a "D-Side" console using software external to CRC. You will even be able to provide D-Side services to another controller. The third-party applications will have full access to the server data, without needing a regular FSD connection. Server-based radar simulation. - The server will have a map of radar coverage for each facility. This map will be pre-generated based on real world radar site locations, facility surveillance coverage areas, and terrain. If an aircraft is flying in a valley where there is no radar coverage, you won't see it. This surveillance coverage map will also incorporate real world ADS-B coverage. That's a list of things that will be in the initial release version, and this new architecture will pave the way for many more highly-realistic features in the future. This probably goes without saying, but this is a very significant increase in the scope of work required to bring CRC to an initial release version. I was originally targeting an initial release date some time in the summer of this year, but with this change, I think an initial release is more likely to be toward the end of the year or even early 2023. It's very hard to say how long this will all take, because it's such a major change, but late 2022 or early 2023 is a good guess as to the absolute earliest time frame for anyone to expect release. As with any sizable software project, that date is likely to slip multiple times. I hope you'll all agree that the benefits listed above will make it worth the wait!
    9 points
  13. FYI we’re on our final private beta release Before hopefully going into public beta. Been spending a lot of time working around data quality issues in the VATSIM feed To make the product as robust as possible. One more round of testing and I will publish the software
    8 points
  14. Hi all, With very mixed feelings, I have informed the Regional Vice President that I will be stepping down as Division Director for VATEUD. Two years and 3 months ago, there was an agreement that I would take the position as acting division director to fill in the gap for which no people could be found and to offer the much-needed support to the division the role gives. During these years it has been a pleasure and an honour to serve the division and the network in this role. I don’t want to be my own judge, however, I feel like I can safely say that I am leaving the division in a better state than when I took it (not a perfect sate, of course, there has to be some work for my successor as well). Several vACCs have been reborn and the new local staff teams have done wonders for the communities of their countries. Web issues that we were facing beforehand are no more. The connectivity and communication within the division is better and local staff teams have more possibility to have direct contact with the EUD board and to hold them accountable, while also enabling the easy sharing of ideas, the creation of healthy debates and engagement from all corners of the continent. We have expanded several division teams to provide better services to the membership and are looking to implement new “features”, if I may call them that, to better assist the newcomers (I’m sure my successor will be sharing more about this in the near future). Last but not least, there is a draft of a new division policy in the final stages of review. While this has been paused due to debates, the new division director, who would be the one working with the new policy, alongside the division and vACC Staff, will have the opportunity to pick this up, iron out the last issues internal debates have raised, and implement the document. This would not have been possible without the help of all staff members within EUD. Particularly, I want to say thank you to the people who have sat on the EUD board during my tenure: @Mattia Torti, @David Kirchner, @Matan Budimir, @Miguel Frias, @Arturs Vasiļjevs, @Nestor Perez , and all the vACC directors, current and past. Joined by all the staff in VATEUD, this truly was a team effort and without you we wouldn’t have gotten where we are today: from keeping everything running and keeping the stress for me minimal, through assisting experienced and new members alike, to all the discussions and debates we have had (one topic in particular that I can remember, the debate for which lasted a whooping 5 hours!!!). With this, VATEUD is not simply the biggest division by member numbers, but also by member engagement and enthusiasm. I will still be around, however, in my region capacity – it’s not easy to get rid of me! But whenever I look back on the experience, the contacts, the achievements we have all build, it will be with a smile! I feel comfortable that there is a team (EUD and vACCs both) in the division that is passionate about VATEUD, about aviation and most importantly the network! Keep it up folks, this is what makes VATSIM great! Thank you! A vacancy will shortly be posted about my position, and I will stay until my successor is appointed and I can do a handover with them.
    8 points
  15. It appears that, in spite of well-reasoned logic, most (though not all) many would agree with, this thread is quickly devolving into a "no-win" situation. Never mind no-win, we are not progressing as a community. As such, time to stop the nonsense and hope (and pray, for those so-inclined) it does not rear its ugly head again.... Some may perceive this as not nice, but... frankly, in the interest of the overall community... There is a way to push for continuous improvement, and there is a way to "pee in someone's sandbox".... If you don't want to be constructive and are just excited to start arguments that hurt the community, please find another sandbox. Those who cannot figure out the difference may be considered as fundamentally incompatible with our community....
    8 points
  16. The conroller is here to control, and if taking you off the STAR is required for how they plan to operate their airspace, then follow the instructions, if you want to fly, with out controller intervention, go offline. Im trying to create a list of what controllers arent allowed to do, so far it looks like this; Don't log off when i'm inbound, Don't stream snipe, Don't log in where i'm already flying, Don't alter my flight plan.
    8 points
  17. Ive seen quite a bit of people in europe use the callsign starting with SHT... I mean amagain controllors trying to say that with out saying the S word! what do you guys think? .wallop them? or not allow it on flightplans. theres a couple online now SHT8A and SHT8Y i personally dont like to swear and think its wrong and should be banned on the nettwork. what do you guys think? I would like to hear any suppivisors commets too! best regards DANIEL B. FARIA-FILHO site owner: www.prayorbeprayedfor.com www.alexandrerezende.net
    8 points
  18. A prime example in the Scandinavian countries
    8 points
  19. Good luck with that. The problem is that sectorization in Europe is a complex 3D+ issue - not simple 2D. The lateral boundaries of a specific online controller AoR (Area of Responsibility) is for most center sectors and many approach sectors different depending on the altitude, so we're talking three dimensions. So every tool that just shows one lateral outline for a controller is in part lying to you. To make things even more complicated, the actual AoRs also depend on which specific stations are actually online at the same time. This will result in a single controller's AoR to dynamically change (lateral and vertical) depending on surrounding controllers coming online/offline. This makes a 3D problem a 3D+ problem. The only tool that I know of that has the whole picture of those complex interdependencies and 3D sectorization is the EuroScope ATC client, provided to it via ESE files describing all the complexities and dependencies (over here built automatically from a central metadata database). But even EuroScope can't (it doesn't have to - it's not a mapping tool) display a real 3D map, it displays a "compromise" 2D lateral boundary for the current controller's AoR. The controller still has to know in which areas in which level bands he/she/it is responsible for, and that can be quite complex, even involving things like tactical temporary delegations of airspace (in Germany often called "XYZ phase"). So, unless you have your shiny large (structurally) trivial sector with a single lateral boundary GND-UNL, all VATSIM tools fall flat telling you the truth, by design. They don't even have the required information to do better. And even if they would have, that map would become very very complex over here, trying to display complex 3D airspaces in 2D form on a display. I could show you map examples from real-world LoAs (letter of agreement between ATC facilities) which do that, I assure you they are not fun to "read", but unfortunately those are non-public. I can only agree with Andreas Fuchs. Especially in places like central Europe, the ancient VATSIM CoC rule makes no sense and controllers want to pull vpilots coming from uncontrolled airspace via "contact me" at the vATCO's pace and timing, instead of having them call in from randomly uncovered positions. Best regards, Daniel
    8 points
  20. It's pretty disingenuous to refer to it as "stream sniping," too, when a VATSIM controller logs on to provide ATC services, whether or not he targeted the time and location because you were there. I watched the stream in question, Daniel. All he did was clear your partner on the exact route he already filed and prepped, before you got annoyed and disconnected without even calling him up. So it wouldn't have even required any real effort on your part if you had just stayed on, gotten your clearance, and went on about your flight normally. I hope you never experience true "stream sniping" but I'll tell ya -- this ain't it.
    8 points
  21. To all Air Traffic Controllers, real world and/or on VATSIM, we salute and thank you for all you do!
    7 points
  22. Recruiting isn't the problem, retaining people is. Speaking from the perspective of my own vACC, the wait time from sign up to actual training can be a year long because there's so much interest, but unfortunately a lot of people in that queue are only mildly interested. Once it's their turn, they do the training because they've waited all this time, right? Great! But after having spent between 5 and 15 sessions worth (times 1 or 2 hours each) of their mentor's personal time becoming a decent VATSIM tower controller, they say thank you very much, control for a month, and disappear forever because they weren't really that into it in the first place. This very human, but taxes VATSIM specifically because everything is done voluntary without compensation. Noone really cares too much when someone gets their PPL and then never flies again, which is fairly common, because they only wasted their own time and money. Instructors and aircraft owners got paid, so the system kind of works. There's no simple solution to this problem, all you can do is try to make the training as easy and efficient and with as much self-study as possible to ensure minimum time is wasted on people who won't stay around. Stopping training because someone isn't cut out for it is really hard to do on VATSIM under the current rules (it is a hobby community where you try to avoid excluding people, after all), so many hours can and will be spent grinding the same basic theory and techniques over and over again. The last couple years I've trained between 10 and 20 people who certified, maybe two or three are still active. Most of the time I'd rather be doing anything else than mentoring due only to this fact, as it feels rather hopeless at times, but it's a way to give back to a network which not only have given me an amazing hobby virtually for free, but also led to a great career. And once in a while you get to train people who are passionate about it, stick around, climb the grades, and becomes resources to the network, and that is always a joy to see.
    7 points
  23. Good evening, I write today to report that Matt Bartels has stepped down from his position as Vice President, Marketing and Communications on the VATSIM Board of Governors. Matt joined the Board in April 2018 and during his time was instrumental in developing and expanding our social media footprint, transforming it into one of the strongest in virtual aviation today. He is a strong advocate on behalf of our network, and managed VATSIM's participation at major flight simulator exhibitions in the United States. Matt was also a regular presenter at those conventions and I honestly don't know a stronger supporter of VATSIM. On behalf of the network, I want to publicly thank Matt for everything he has done to advance virtual aviation in general, and VATSIM in particular. We will miss Matt, and wish him all the best in his future endeavors on and off the network. Tim Barber
    7 points
  24. Enough. The suggestion was proposed, the discussion was had. The reopening of this discussion served no positive purpose. See you next time.
    7 points
  25. Dear VATSIM Members, I am posting this evening to report that Federico Navarro has announced that he will be retiring from the VATSIM Board of Governors. Fed will be officially stepping down upon appointment of his successor to the Board. Fed joined the VATSIM Board of Governors in October of 2020 as Vice President, Americas, and prior to that he represented South America on the VATSIM Executive Committee. He has spent many years and hundreds if not thousands of hours volunteering his time to the betterment of the VATSIM Network, and he will very much be missed around the board table. Fed intends to remain an active member of the network, and will continue helping the network when and where needed. On behalf of the entire Board of Governors, I sincerely thank Fed for his dedication to VATSIM, and wish him all the best in his future endeavors.
    7 points
  26. ... or, I log on intending to control 3 hours, but 90 minutes in there's absolutely no traffic... now I'm gonna get bad feedback from the one person who was enroute from hundreds of miles away if I log off and decide to fly instead?
    7 points
  27. To any controllers who have helped blind pilots when we arrive on the scene causing total chaos, joking, or to pilots on Unicom helping us with position information, thank you from our community. Many of us have over a thousand hours on the network and for pilots who can’t even taxi that’s some going and just shows how helpful the majority have been. To clarify, we are totally blind pilots using screen reading software. We used to use freeware aircraft with basic autopilot software’s, but thanks to the amazing work of the blind pilot’s community and the cooperation of PMDG our addon program Talking Flight Monitor has given us access to the pmdg line up of aircraft. Hence I do hope we are following instructions with more accuracy. The most frustrating thing for us is not being able to taxi the aircraft. The software allows us to fly once airborne perfectly, and the Autoland allows us to ensure we are on the centreline and touchdown zone, but as you may have seen if you are a controller we will always ask for permission to reposition to the runway threshold for take-off. We are exploring options to rig up some kind of taxi system, but with our small community it is difficult. Not all sceneries in p3d expose the full taxiway data. We are exploring other solutions like pulling data from openstreet maps. On a side note if anyone has any ideas feel free to drop me a line as to be able to taxi properly Is the last thing holding us back and we are desperate to make some headway. Nevertheless we make do with what we have, and from the controller making room for us on the busy one runway airport at a packed event, to the pilot informing us of their position relative to our aircraft on Unicom for a coordinated approach, thank you. For controllers, if there’s anything we can do to make things easier then do let us know. I will say that for those who have experienced us, you will know the reposition takes only a few seconds, and so hopefully getting us out isn’t too difficult. Here’s to a future method of taxi for us, but until then vatsim and the pmdg aircraft are the closest a totally blind individual can get to flying for real. I remember well the first time explaining to a controller I was totally blind and hearing the absolute confusion. Now it’s commonplace for controllers at airports I commonly fly to to know immediately what we need. Our virtual airline, vision or BVI, is also widely known, and if you hear the vision callsign it will be a blind pilot transiting your airspace. Best, Declan.
    7 points
  28. Ah, come on. How about being honest. You've opened nine ten different accounts, all with different names. It's no wonder Membership is looking to verify your true identity. I agree with Alistair; just do what you've already been directed to do. And I'll offer some additional strong advice. If you open another duplicate account, your membership will be permanently terminated. Word to the wise: Think very carefully about your next move.... 🙂
    6 points
  29. Hi Jack, The self deprecation here is only going to keep you into a limited mindset that will make it harder to learn and feel comfortable on this network. I promise it's not nearly as bad as you may think 🙂 I suggest you go into your aircraft of choice and do some repeat flights on the same route to practice all of these things you're struggling with. Either do this offline, or during a quiet time, so that ATC is able to help you. Avoid London for this if you can. Something that helps me when learning a new aircraft is to follow a streamer VOD alongside or a proper tutorial alongside my own flight. This gives me points of reference for major steps in flying the aircraft. Good luck with your VATSIM journey!
    6 points
  30. Kevin, I'll do my best to provide my perspective. I can't speak to Tim's experience, don't know what facility he's talking about, and I don't know when (leaders change, people change/move on, culture changes (albeit somewhat slowly)). But I can tell you that between the facilities that I've controlled at, and visiting all VATUSA Teamspeak servers during my five years as a Division Director, and having had to deal with complaints that would have come from behavior like that, I never saw any such requirements or any such behavior. That said, I'm not naïve enough to think some folks/facilities might have been on their better/best behavior when the boss was around. And I'm also not going to say that on occasion there isn't behavior that rivals 8th grade behavior, but in my experience it happens only on occasion and is not the rule. Heck, I'm guilty of it on occasion too. But it's certainly not normal. Just trying to be completely honest. The training I've participated in and witnessed has been top notch. The facilities I've trained with have always updated their tools, files, and ensure the most realistic procedures (as reasonable for VATSIM, of course). I've never been "read to". Frankly, the instructors and mentors that I had the pleasure to work with (as a student and then as a peer mentor or instructor) expected you to read and come prepared so they could maximize the effectiveness of training time. No facility that I know of has ever expected/demanded you to hang out needlessly in a Teamspeak. No facility that I know of has ever trained to a high standard and then had no expectations after certification. Quite the opposite, most facilities that I have been associated with or aware of treat certification as a license to learn, gain experience, and really get good. Again, I'm not saying Tim's wrong, or that he didn't experience what he describes. I do not, however, appreciate him representing his experience as something all students can expect at all facilities across the globe. I'd also say that there is a chain of command and personal choice that are also tools that any individual can use. Questionable behavior or poor tools/process? Bring it up to the facility staff. Or to the staff's leadership (for example, in the USA, a facility reports into a regional staff, which reports into the Division Director, who reports into a VATSIM Vice President for the Region). Then it can be dealt with. Or, alternatively, one can simply transfer to another facility. Sorry, long post, but you asked.... 🙂
    6 points
  31. All good points. Yeah, I wish we had coverage for all facilities all, or at least most, of the day. Many variables seeking a delicate balance. More quantity can be gained by reducing our quality standards, but then again we pride ourselves on our quality standards. Given a choice, we, as a network, have given the nod to quality over quantity. Nothing is perfect, there are "VATSIM-isms", but we'd rather have fewer folks on that are interested in a quality simulation vs. more folks on that are looking to "play" and care less about quality. Really good points, though. Our facilities, in general, are still trying to catch up with pent up demand from the pandemic. We rely on our instructors and mentors as the backbone of our training and certification arm, but the pent-up demand has been burning out a lot of folks. Very delicate balances around a lot of variables. That said, I really appreciate your well-reasoned input and suggestions, and hope that our folks at various facilities are listening and are willing to self-reflect and course correct as prudent. Thank you, stick with it, look to fly in as many events as you can where more staffing is "more-or-less-guaranteed", and my best wishes for continued tailwinds! (side note: I earned most of my ratings in the 90s also! 🙂 )
    6 points
  32. The VATSIM Board of Governors is pleased to announce that Manuel Manigault has been selected as the new Vice President – Americas. Manuel has been a part of the VATSIM community for the past 16 years and has volunteered in many roles, most recently as the VATUSA Division Director since 2020. He lives in the Rocky Mountain Region of the United States and in his free time enjoys playing piano, hiking and cycling. Please join us in welcoming Manuel to his new role! With this appointment, the Board of Governors says goodbye to Federico Navarro. Fed joined the VATSIM Board of Governors in October of 2020 as Vice President, Americas, and prior to that he represented South America on the VATSIM Executive Committee. Many thanks to Fed for volunteering to stay in his role until a successor was appointed, and we wish him all the best in the future.
    6 points
  33. I'm pleased to announce the reopening of the Morocco vACC after almost 2 years of inactivity on the network. With this new vACC comes a new staff team to take the FIR of Casablanca to new heights! Join us on their launch event happening on the 18th of June between 17:00 UTC and 19:00 UTC partnered with Royal Air Maroc Virtual. Their website will be released soon, however, you can join their Discord server here.
    6 points
  34. VATSIM is happy to announce that vATIS version 4.0 Beta 1 is now available to download from https://vats.im/vatis A key new feature of the beta is that Terminal and Enroute Controllers now have the ability to host an ATIS at more than one airport during a 60 day trial period recently authorized by the Board of Governors. This trial period runs from 19 April 2022 0000 UTC until 18 June 2022 2359 UTC. The trial period grants controllers relief from VATSIM Code of Conduct C7 which only allows a controller to make 1 ATIS connection to the network, to allow instead up to 4 ATIS connections along with their controlling connection. Currently the vATIS version 4.0 Beta only allows for creation of additional ATIS frequencies at individual airports. However should functionality be added which allows for controllers to create multiple ATIS frequencies at the same airport, (such as in cases where an airport has a departure and an arrival ATIS on separate frequencies,) this action would be allowed in the trial period. Creation of 2 ATIS frequencies at the same airport would still count as 2 connections of the maximum 4 allowed. The additional ATIS frequencies must still conform to the VATSIM ATC Frequency and Information Management Policy found at https://vats.im/atcfmp and only contain operational information that is applicable in the VATSIM environment. Real-world operational information that cannot be effectively implemented on VATSIM such as but not limited to lighting and/or navaid outages should not be included in any ATIS information. Thank you to the vATIS Team for development of this feature, and we look forward to seeing the results of the trial!
    6 points
  35. Time for an update on CRC design and development progress: I've been making a lot of progress over the last couple months. Here's what is currently complete: The ability to create profiles and add/remove displays. All the UI for configuration/settings. The ability to import ARTCC configuration data from the ARTCC web site with a single click. Automatic updating of ARTCC configuration data when the FE releases a new version. Automatic updating of nav data and aircraft data. The ERAM, STARS, and ASDE-X radar modes. STARS fusion mode. (Still 5 second update rate though.) The controller list. The tabbed messages area. The flight plan editor. Assigning CIDs from the "CRC Server" so that everyone in an ARTCC sees the same CID for a given aircraft. Here's what is currently under development: Assigning beacon codes from the CRC Server from the NBCAP or from beacon code banks that are internal to a given terminal facility. (FEs will maintain these code banks by uploading a data file through the ARTCC Editor.) This will eliminate issues we've had in the past with duplicate beacon codes due to non-overlapping vis ranges. I'm about 50% done with this feature. Here's what remains to be done: Aircraft list. This was originally going to show arrivals and departures, but it will likely only show departures since that is what is most needed operationally. (Some users said they like to see arrivals in the aircraft list in VRC so that they can gauge upcoming traffic levels, but there are other tools for that like any of the mapping tools.) The aircraft list will also show anyone that is on your reminder list or that have a countdown timer running. One second update rate in STARS and ASDE-X modes. Flight strip bay. Tower Cab display mode. (More on this below.) Tower view proxy server. A big change, design-wise, is that I've decided not to have a Generic display mode in CRC. The original reason for including a Generic mode was for situations where it wouldn't make sense to use ERAM, STARS, or ASDEX mode, such as when you're working a cab position (DEL/GND/TWR) at an airport where there is no ASDE-X in the real world. However, as I started to think about how the Generic mode would work, and how to make it flexible enough for use across all levels of controlling from DEL up to CTR, with all the varying needs for video maps, data blocks, etc, I realized that it would be a lot of work for not much payoff in the long run, because a lot of the work would be duplicating functionality that already exists in the other radar modes. So, instead of Generic mode, I'll be making a Tower Cab mode that is focused specifically on providing whatever a controller needs when working a cab position. The design concept is that it replaces the real-world controller's ability to look out the window and actually see the aircraft. As such, it will have aircraft icons (similar to ASDE-X) so that you can see which direction the aircraft is facing. It will have a 1 second update rate initially, and ultimately it will have a real-time update rate using Velocity data. I'm not sure yet what the data blocks will look like, but I might provide a few options that the user can choose from, such as the Simple, Ground, and Tower data block types from VRC. When creating and maintaining ARTCC data files for CRC, FEs will create a video map for each towered airport in their ARTCC. This video map will include the ground diagram (either in outline form or using filled polygons, at the FE's discretion) as well as any surrounding features such as coastlines, visual reporting points, extended centerlines, etc. This video map will be used when the user selects Tower Cab mode for the display. This all means that ERAM will be the only option for working center positions, and STARS will be the only option for working Approach/Departure positions. I know there are a few users that won't be happy about that fact, and they just want to use VRC and don't care about the realism of ERAM/STARS. I've heard from one or two such users already since I announced that VRC will be retired. However, I've heard from a far larger number of users that have reluctantly moved to vERAM/vSTARS and found it to be nowhere near as difficult as they assumed it would be. I am confident that any controller that has progressed to the ability to work APP and CTR will have no problem getting used to the ERAM/STARS interfaces for working traffic. Indeed, the syntax for the most common functions is nearly the same as VRC. This leaves the issue that vSTARS and vERAM can be a little clunky when working top down. I was planning to address that through new/modified functionality in the ERAM and STARS modes in CRC. That has not changed. It remains a primary design goal of CRC for it to be suitable for comfortably and efficiently working top down from a single screen. For example, you'll be able to see ground targets in top down mode anywhere, not just ones that are near one of the airports in the STARS airport list. You'll be able to call up the flight plan editor for any aircraft, even ones that are airborne and not yet squawking their assigned code. And you'll have the aircraft list which doesn't exist in vERAM/vSTARS. Lastly, I'll be adding functionality to make it easier to start track on aircraft when you first plug in on a position, or if you come back after an unintentional disconnect. I'm not sure yet how this will work exactly, but it's definitely an issue that needs to be addressed. There will be some way to do a single-click track similar to VRC, regardless of whether or not the aircraft is squawking its assigned code. That's it for now ... feedback welcome!
    6 points
  36. In short: no, it’s not OK, and you will be suspended if you are caught (and rightly so). VATSIM is not a logbook - it is a service to allow pilots and controllers to come together and enjoy live ATC services. If you want to log your flight time there are other services and pieces of software that will do this for you (Volanta, for instance).
    6 points
  37. I want to thank all those who made Velocity happen. Lots of hard work and many hours, I'm sure! We appreciate it. Bob Bressert
    6 points
  38. With all due respect I think this was really needlessly aggressive. It can be really complicated to work out who to contact. I was flying the other day through German airspace, and the sector I was in went offline so I was handed off to unicom, then despite the atc maps showing I was in a place with no atc, I got a message from an ATC asking me to contact them. I did so instantly. I wasn't trying to break the rules and implying that I should be subject to disciplinary action is going to turn off people from bothering with VATSIM. I try my best to work out who I'm going to need to contact next, but with just around 24 hours flying on vatsim, I'm often wrong when it comes to unfamiliar airspace. If you're going to go down this route of enforcing the CoC so strictly in this case, you better make sure there's an accurate ATC map available to make this possible without expecting hobbist pilots to study all the nuances of German and British airspace before dare flying on the network. Like you correctly said, this is a hobby, so maybe give your hobbyist pilots a bit of a break and don't imply that people are knowingly breaking the code of conduct when not able to work out who to contact when transitioning through airspace. Personally I WANT to fly places with ATC, that's the point of the network after all, so I'm not ignoring ATC on purpose in these cases.
    6 points
  39. Hi all, Last night staff members from across the division and its vACCs gathered together to look back at 2021 and look forward to 2022. With all of you, we have gone through yet another difficult year together, as a community. A community of pilots, controllers, many knowledgeable people and those who are still learning the ins and outs of our hobby. We have begun many new projects, finished others and set goals for new things we can do in the future to make this place better for everyone. vACCs are collaborating like never before with one another and are a key part in discussing how we will go forward. This will be seen even better with a new version of the division policy, which we expect to be released in Q1 or mid-Q2 of 2022. We also see collaboration in various other places, such as events, training (sharing valuable materials, tips and sometimes even code for training systems), as well as general support on good practices within the various local communities. We have particularly seen a lot of mentoring and new ratings being given out in the division. Every week, dozens of new ratings get rightfully and deservedly assigned and even more training sessions take place thanks to the hundreds of hard-working mentors. Events take place regularly and Europe is light up like a Christmas tree every single evening (pun intended, albeit being a bad pun). We have also seen the introduction of a new vACC, which was retired previously man ears ago, which added yet another ornament to our division's tree. We have also seen great developments from the tech-people within the division - from small tools to aid members to projects that have the potential to do big things. With this being said, personally from me and on behalf of the VATEUD team - THANK YOU - to all the staff members for creating, upkeeping and developing local communities and doing all the work you do for our members; to other volunteers that spend countless hours mentoring, writing materials, or simply helping new members with their first steps on the network; and last but not least, to all our members for being with us through this journey. This division and the network at large is what it is thanks to you. With only a few days before the holidays and seasonal festivities, many of us will be taking a step back from the duties that we normally do to enjoy some time with our families and friends. With that being said, you can expect longer reply times to tickets, emails and messages from staff, but we will be back to full speed at the start of 2022. Happy holidays and stay safe! 🎅🎄
    6 points
  40. Can we please get a handle on the controllers continuously stream sniping us? We can be sitting at a gate for 30 minutes prepping a flight with not ATC in sight. Then all of a sudden when we are ready to push back, they connect. The only reason is because we are live on twitch. Please stop the stream and traffic sniping. If you are on when I connect, I have zero problem going through the proper channels for clearance and ect. Thank You.
    6 points
  41. I was trying to set up a new computer and you're right I think most ATC are a nuisance, ergo I'll no longer fly here.
    6 points
  42. I would suggest 'CONCRETE 1 HEAVY' here!
    5 points
  43. So which ARTCC are you starting your training with?
    5 points
  44. While I agree that its not conventional to fly with LH instead of DLH, I disagree with the ground controllers approach to the situation. The ground controller has no authority to tell some one to leave the network and change their call sign. This happens all the time, I often see QF and QANTAS123 etc when I'm controlling, and I am guilty of doing it myself back when I joined the network I have never told some one to log off and change their callsign, nor was I ever told to log off. There is no harm, nor impact on anyone else on the network if that person continues their flight with that callsign. You can of course point the person to the relevant section about choosing a callsign in the my.vatsim.net training academy, but as a polite message. Something along the lines of. "Hey before you fly next time would you mind having a read of this about choosing a callsign" This allows the person to continue their flight this time, and prompts them to read up on the preferred process. I say proffered because there is no correct or incorrect way to select a callsign. Its simple, non confrontable and usually gets a better response from the pilot. Telling some one to log off and change any thing, implies authority that some one doesn't have, and results in a bad first experience, it doesn't allow people to grow.
    5 points
  45. Thanks for everyone repsonding to this thread; we have had a great respe and some amazing testing and feedback from a really knowlegeable and enthuiastic team . The private beta is now closed, we have one more release to go and then we will move into public beta, the tool will then be publically available to download . I'll provide links in the near future
    5 points
  46. As a controller, I think my biggest complaint about actually controlling on VATSIM right now is radio etiquette. I can work with a pilot unfamiliar with the airport, needs vectors, progressive taxi, or whatever, but nothing frustrates me more than having to call a pilot 3 times for every single instruction. And the increase in workload is exponential when more than one pilot with bad radio etiquette is on my frequency. I don't know where this came from, my personal feeling (no data unfortunately) is that this has gotten much much worse the past 1-2 years. Instances of having to call a pilot multiple times to even get any acknowledgement (much less an good readback of instructions) has gone way up. Task saturation is a real thing and as Don has said above, affects VATSIM controllers (particularly terminal and en-route) more acutely than RW controllers. Sometimes when a controller forgets a plane, it is just that, forgetting, but other times the overwhelming number of pilots with poor radio etiquette or even just poor aviator skills causes task saturation even with low traffic levels. Having to babysit a pilot from cruise all the way to the gate takes up as much time as working up to 5 other planes. Soapbox moment: We (VATSIM, collectively) train controllers to very high standards, but lately, pilots (collectively, most pilots are great, but it only takes 1 or 2 to completely sink a controlling session) have not been holding up their end of the deal with how many people who are simply not prepared to fly in the environement they're trying to fly in (whether that's on the network at all, or at a busy event with an airport trying to put 40 planes on the ground an hour). Part of it is the pilots themselves, but I think a bigger issue here is structural, and VATSIM as a whole is not setting them up to succeed.
    5 points
  47. VATSIM is not a logbook.
    5 points
  48. Unless the controller disconnects immeditly after you depart, of wich you have not identifed in your potst. Then the controller is entitled to log in whenever they want, regardless of the phase of flight, or preflight you are going though. Lack of evidence, to suggest this is the reason some one is logging into provide ATC. So this is an accusation based off an assumption.
    5 points
×
×
  • Create New...