Benton Wilmes

Correct. Dropping the track doesn't make the flight "inactive" but literally just drops the track. There is a set time limit where the system will flush the flight plan but I'm not sure what that is (I'm sure it's facility specific).

QB_(code)_ should remove any code from your code list or will add it to the list if not already in it. At least it works on my side. I.E. QB 1200 will put the code in the list or remove it if entered again. What do you mean by "manual highlight" though? If you mean you can see that code on the scope and it dwells, then the code is in your list and if it isn't dwelled it is not so not sure what you mean.

On the real system (can't remember if this was modeled or not), LDBs will "dwell" for any aircraft in your code list. That would be anyone in your airspace, any code you put in manually (such as all the VFR and military codes we have to monitor) or a flight coming into your airspace. Not sure if that's what you were seeing or what...

Just trying to imagine using this in real world Ross... Only situation I can think of is someone doing a full stop, taxi back and depart again. In a case like that, the center ([Mod - Happy Thoughts]uming they work the approaches into that airport) would just drop the track at some point so it wouldn't reacquire when they departed again. We would have to manually start the track again. The only way for a DM to work would be a if we removed the flight plan and the tower or us put a new one in and departed it when the aircraft departed again (lot of extra work so wouldn't happen ). For a t

According to 7110.65V 4-3-2(e)(4), "climb via" is only used when "when the SID contains published crossing restrictions." Why did you use "climb via" in this example? Source: http://www.faa.gov/docomeentLibrary/media/Order/JO_7110.113D_Procedures_for_Issuing_Automated_Clearances.pdf This is the order talking about PDC but it does talks about Climb Via... Here are the fine points (Option Field 3 is the portion of the PDC that contains Climb Via or maintain part of the clearance FYI): Number 2 is the key one that seems to be causing the most issues. In this one,

This is just because we have all grown up with the way the current system is designed. In essence, when you get certified on Center right now, you can become the equivalent of a FAA CPC (Certified Professional Controller) since it is the last thing you can train on at your facility. As it is right now, you are either a S1, S2 or S3 until you get checked out on Center and you become a C1 (aka a CPC) since you are no longer a student. Why not keep the same scheme except have each level represent a step completed in the training process. As an example, lets say a student wants to start at Center

Whenever the load permits, you are required (shall=must) to provide a full top-down service. Our "Special Centers" that terminate at FL240 are exempted from that, although it is common practice to provide a STAR and services for descent below FL240 here and there, when coordinated with local APP-controllers. Well it seems like we know one section that we can change/eliminate for the 3rd revision of the GRP

I was going to stay out this topic but I have to make a comment on this one... The qualifications to become a center controller is NOT the issue. The hardest position to get checked out on in any of the ARTCCs I've been at has been at the Approach level. When I was an Instructor, every student I ever had struggled with understanding the entire radar environment, being able to multi-task and stay 4 steps ahead of the aircraft. Just like in the real world, radar is not for everyone and about half would decide that they had a lot more fun working the tower so that's as far as they got. Th

We use this in the real world, most for pop ups but it is perfectly legal to state "cleared to XXX airport via radar vectors to YYY, then as filed...." [Mod - Happy Thoughts]uming that YYY is a fix on their filed route. It's 4-3-2 d-1 in the 7110, which states: The second part doesn't apply since we are vectoring them to a fix on their filed route. That is our interpretation we use at my facility anyways... To bring it back around to departures off the ground, stating "cleared to XXX airport via the YYY departure, radar vectors to ZZZ, then as filed..." is perfectly fine since the

With so few controllers online, would it not be better for a center controller to sign on and control his own ARTCC from the ground all the way up then to just control FL240 and above over 4-5 ARTCC's? The pilots will be getting a lot more services provided and a much better experience with full coverage all the way to the ground rather than just having a high enroute controller along the way. Now if you have 2 center certified controllers online at the same time for the same ARTCC, I could definitely see one of them then covering the other ARTCCs while the other covers all of their home ARTCC

The problem with this thought is what's the real point of putting this into use when there will be a very limited number of people that actually benefit from it anyways? By that point in the night, there are very few pilots in the air so what is a high only enroute controller going to provide to these guys as far as services? We would get to radar identify aircraft, climb them, descend them (most likely with a PD descent), maybe give a shortcut or some routing and switch them back to Unicom. 99.999% of the time, the controller wouldn't even have to worry about his top priority (separating airc

Anyone ever come up with a VATSpy update?

"We're currently in the process of wrapping the discussion up and will hopefully have an announcement very soon." Either that statement still stands or they have someone selected and just haven't announced it yet...

Canada also doesn't get near the amount of traffic that the US does...

I agree. From what I remember being told by one of their controllers, its basically the only time they are told what RNAV to fly over a voice frequency (clearances are all PDC so no voice). It's more like a cover your butt scenario with the FAA as now they have it on tape that you agreed to fly to a waypoint. If you end up going to a different one, that's a pilot deviation now and the pilot [Mod - Happy Thoughts]umes a lot of the responsibility for whatever happens for his error. They used to use headings instead and departure would tell you to proceed direct whatever fix and join the depa