Jump to content

Nicholas Fredrich 827138

Members
  • Content Count

    80
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Alright.. I didnt clarify enough again.. say that normally in the realworld aircraft is routed over and is [Mod - Happy Thoughts]igned to cross fix ABCD at 7000. On VATSIM the pilot didnt file that fix in thier route. I have requested from the center controller if they could have N12345 go direct ABCD and cross at 7000. If the controller doesnt want to do it, or the pilot can't do it. No big deal. It's VATSIM. No, I guess what I'm trying to get across is that I approve everything. I let the pilots do whatever they want so long as it doesnt disrupt other people on the network. I
  2. Now to address your point. Yes it was a mistake, and the way I relayed that information was in a very arrogant and cocky manner. I think at some point everyone is entitled to change thier views on a topic. I wholeheartidly have. I look upon VATSIM as a hobby and some might say thats a biased opinion. A hobby that in some instances resembles the real world. I belive that keeping things simple is means to keeping things fun. When you throw in hard-core super realistic procedures and make people abide by them its not that fun anymore. I have guilty of doing this myself on many occasions. I still
  3. I had to Edit my original post, first point already made by Dan Everette in regard to pilots stepping over eachother on multiple frequencies Thats me! It's OK to call me out, you won't hurt my feelings if you would have read my original post in this forum it starts with "my technique". A personal VATSIM only technique. A technique that I don't train controllers on. A technique that I don't force upon others. A technique that I use that keeps me working like I'm busy all the time. Which again brings me back to my question that has yet to be commented on for debate --- Why not let
  4. So this again begs the question.... why not let it be up to the individual controller to decide what types of services they will provide to cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts] C / D airport? one mans garbage is anothers treasure.
  5. Come again? I think you just said you agreed with me, such things are unheard of Why even have an SOP to regulate this? why not leave the "realism" in the hands of the individual controller?
  6. My technique.... I always provide limited service to all cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts] B airports with a tower offline..."taxi to runway XX your discretion" "radar service terminates, runway XX cleared to land".... Cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts] C and Ds.... "cleared XXXXXXXX approach, no observed traffic between you an the XXXXX airport, radar service terminates, report IFR Cancellation in the air or on the ground on XXX.XXX (freq), change to advisory freq is approved.". Hold for release clearances, releases with void times etc.
  7. Harbor Visual RY 29 - PWM (Portland Int'l Jetport - Portland,ME)
  8. I tend to shy away from these forums so, I apologize for the late reply. It was a poor attempt at realism with a hidden message to some ARTCCs that I noticed are attempting to start a TMU program. That message is simple: "It will never work on VATSIM" for exactly the reasons stated above. As realistic as VATSIM may seem to some people, it only scratches the surface of the realworld, which is why we call it a game (or as others would rather refer to it as a hobby / simulation). JM- Thanks for explaining the CDT/DSP and EDCT times you hit it right on brother. How's the FAA treating
  9. Ahhhh then that means I'll get that info in the R&I binder on October 15th lol
  10. Yes I did So I'm not entitled to state my point? It takes you 5min to do that? I'm not buying it.... there are two docomeented key commands to clear your airspace available .pan NOTAM-Joe Shmacateli is logging off change to UNICOM or something to that effect (sends a private chat to all tracked aircraft) Attention all aircraft such and such of place is closed. that should take you about 1min. As I said in my previous post, it was something that was commonly used in events, it was somehow allowed to be taken away from that and established as a past pract
  11. I saw another piece of paperwork at my facility that they are still using USA**** but the name is Cactus... havent seen anything on USA going to AWE on the alphanumerics.
  12. I would like to share my opinion on ATC channel messages such as these. I think they are against everything ATC on VATSIM is for: providing a service to virtual pilots on the network. It's a very inconvenient way to create more work for your fellow controller brothers and sisters. Frequency congestion increases with pilots inquiring why they aren't being handed off to the next controller because they still show up in their list. In my humble honest opinion the only GOOD excuse for refusing hand offs when you're still online are during events when you are experiencing "heavy" traffic and a
  13. My guess is that you won't... If you could the pilots wouldn't be pestering me for updates to ground stops and EDCT times. I could be wrong though
  14. For vZBW I [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ume?
×
×
  • Create New...