Jump to content

Brad Littlejohn

Members
  • Content Count

    658
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Brad Littlejohn last won the day on March 4

Brad Littlejohn had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

30 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. This is good to know. So there should be nothing restricting someone from departing a military airport, flying from one end of that military airspace, turning back around, and landing at the same airport they departed. If that's the case, I think that is what Jason is looking for. BL.
  2. You bring up some good questions here. First, I don't think it's right that one has to be certified by a VSO to fly out of a civilian airport that may lie within any SUA. That would essentially mean that every airport I mentioned would require certification by a VSO to fly into or out of, even if it is a public (read: not military) field. I'll check our SOPs to see if we have anything regarding that. Second, this brings up a much broader question. Does VSO's requirements for a pilot trump the SOPs/LOAs for a given area in relation to a non-military airport in any SUA? Granted this is
  3. Think about it this way. There are still some civilian airports that lie within that airspace. For example, NV65, L92, and 1L1 are in the NTTR. NV65 is about 15 miles east of KINS, while L92 and 1L1 are way up in the desert. You could also fly from KTPH to KTNX, and go from outside the NTTR to inside it. Or fly one of the EG&G (read: Just Another Non-Existent Airline) flights from KLAS to the NTTR. As for other airspaces, we have the fun-loving R-2508, where KEDW is, KTSP, KIYK, and KMHV are there, and open to the public. So you could end up with civilian flights in restricted airspa
  4. To answer your question here, in the US, we definitely do use restricted airspaces. We also have SOPs for them as well. For NTTR Area 51, that is controlled by ZLA, in coordination with VSO. As for detail? they definitely are detailed, as the SOPs we have in place define the airspaces, both laterally and vertically, and what airports are controlled by those operations. We as controllers have to not only be aware of that airspace, but how to avoid that airspace, as there are scheduled times when that airspace is hot (active). So needless to say, we have you covered. BL.
  5. Don't get me started. It isn't just the wind direction that some pilots overlook; it is also the lack of knowing the SOPs for the airport in question, especially if those SOPs are time restricted. Case in point, since you brought up LAX: How many still decide to land to the west after midnight, when the second part of noise abatement procedures are in effect, where we land to the east, and depart to the west. Knowing when that occurs and estimating the flying time relative to the time you'll be wheels down would help pilots back at the flightplan filing and clearance delivery portion of
  6. The bold is very true. If the pilot is using any type of chart for their flight, the proper callsign is depicted on the chart. In the US, you should see the frequencies and applicable callsigns in the top left or top right of every chart, including what the position is named. BL.
  7. Once again, one person's luxury may be a dream for another. Case in point: The above controller who has to use a text synthesizer (read: find other avenues to possibly to go /V just to accommodate those who could take /V for granted and prefer /V because of convenience). That isn't leveling the field of play; it is making those who may not have a choice on /V to go out of their way to accommodate others because they can't (or may not want to) handle anything else besides /V. That is the problem. The saying "walk a mile in their shoes" comes to mind; but I may be biased; I wish I could give my
  8. I've never seen or heard of controllers being restricted FROM being /T. If we have, then that is a major problem. As far as being restricted from being /T only, the answer to that should also be no. As we as controllers should always be able to accommodate /T, it has never been stated to my knowledge that we are required to accommodate /V or /R. In short, if you wanted to control as /T only, there hasn't been any underlying document saying that you can not do that. BL.
  9. Again, this would come back down to knowing the full functionality of the software. There are features in vPilot as well as the free versions of FSUIPC that you can assign keys of your panel to certain functions. You can easily have those more common replies to calls programmed to that, and off you go. For example, on a simple Logitech joystick, you could assign "cleared to land" to one button, "cleared for takeoff" to another button, and "will go, good day" to a third button for a reply to a frequency change. All of the sims are capable of using FSUIPC, and aliases are available in vPilo
  10. That is a good point. When looking at those stats, it is easy to determine if a person is speaking from experience and how much they have dealt with on the network versus just trying to counter an argument for the sake of argument. In this case, there are a lot of people here who are talking from experience as the proponent of supporting those and being inclusive of those who are /t versus those who have come in where /v has been the only thing they have known and think anything else may be a detriment. That older CID along with the hours they have controlled, especially if it shows the dates
  11. I did. Like I mentioned before, we have pilots who are deaf. We have pilots who are not as confident in their abilities as /V than others. What this post is practically doing is asking them to out themselves and explain why, which is the very exact thing we should not be doing. Not only would this subject them to any potential ridicule, but would drive them away from our network, which goes against the principle of inclusiveness that we have had on this network, as well as our predecessor (SATCO), for the past 20+ years. Again, good and valid reasons are: deaf/hearing impaired. Reference
  12. Not only do we allow /T controllers, but I don't know if you have realized what my first post in this thread stated: I, and everyone in my ARTCC/FIR at that time started out as /T. It wasn't until we passed our S1 exam, S2 exam, S3, exam, and a separate voice exam before we even were able to go /V. And this wasn't just SOP for my ARTCC/FIR; this was for the entire VATUSA division. If I remember correctly, VATMEX, VATCAN, and VATCAR also had that as SOP. At the time, only VATUK, VATEUD, VATPAC, VATNZ, and VATSUR did not have that restriction. The rationale for it was that not only did we
  13. Let me answer that question with another question. Do we single anyone out based on name? You'll find that answer to be no, which is the same answer I have when it comes to singling out people who valid reasons to be /t. We need to be accommodating to everyone, regardless of what limitations they may have, not try to single them out for those limitations. Not everyone can be /v. That's a simple fact. We as controllers and pilots need to be accommodating of that instead of being given an asterisk by their name because they are /t. BL.
  14. I hate to put it this way, and it is going to sound absolutely horrible, but it is the only way I can say it. Do you realize that what you are asking for is the same thing that was used in Europe during WW2? You're asking them to label themselves as something that would make them ashamed to be able to fly on this network because of shyness with using their voice, a disability, or otherwise. That is not in the nature of this network, nor has it ever been in the nature of this network, just because some people aren't willing to figure out how to accommodate them to the best of their abilities.
  15. Exactly. If I can greet a pilot, tell them they are following traffic 3 miles ahead, give the wind, and landing clearance with only typing 5 characters and selecting the aircraft who called in, there is no way an alias should be hard, or harder than typing in "ABC123, Los Angeles Tower, you are following traffic 3 miles ahead, wind 250 at 15. Runway 25L, cleared to land." Again, this comes down to knowing how to use the clients in question and knowing all functionality in the client, instead of relying on something that may be a luxury to us that some others do not have. I guess I h
×
×
  • Create New...