Jump to content

Brad Littlejohn

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Brad Littlejohn last won the day on September 5

Brad Littlejohn had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

13 Good

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. "At pilot's discretion" is exact phraseology, and that is correct. yes. "When ready" is what I would be questioning. I may be wrong on this one so I'm hoping one of the RW guys can clarify on it, but "when ready" doesn't ring as standard phraseology since I started ATC. BL.
  2. Ahh.. This is one of the inevitable fallacies of VATSIM but is not a fault of VATSIM or anyone, so please do not take this as a criticism against VATSIM. Here is what I mean. To answer your question, "taxi when ready" is not ATC phraseology, nor should ever be, regardless of division (US/FAA, ICAO, or otherwise). Additionally, what is happening here is broad scope of what top-down design gets us. As the top-down design for ATC would imply that the Center/FIR controller is also the Ground controller, that would also imply that the Center controller would be familiar with every taxiway
  3. There is a difference between what you have posted, and a visual approach. What you have posted is what is referred to as a CVFP: Charted Visual Flight Procedure. Those are approaches, yes, but as you said, there are pointouts that you need to call in sight, along with instructions on what to do when you are cleared for that specific approach. That is different than a visual approach.The Light Visual Approach that you posted would require you to point out one or both lighthouses, or Fort Warren to be cleared for that particular approach only. For a visual approach, I would either ha
  4. While I agree with this here, I also have to disagree to an extent, because you could be given direct to fixes or waypoints that you did not file, but are in your flight plan. Let me explain. If you filed a flight plan that includes an airway, for example, you could be cleared to a fix or waypoint that is on that airway, because the airway includes the fixes or waypoints you could be cleared directly to. For example, reference: STAAV EIGHT (RNAV) VFRMAP BUNTS TWO If a pilot filed STAAV8.VERKN HVE J60 PSB.BUNTS2 from KLAS to KPHL, I, as a controller at ZLA, could clear
  5. I don't think this has changed from when I was heavily controlling, but let me put this out there. For most places (and yes, I know I'm speaking in the US here; other regions, please correct me or chime in with those local procedures), you don't even have to file a flight plan to fly VFR. You could just connect to the network, announce your intentions via unicom (if untowered/uncontrolled) or call up the controller (if the airport is controlled) and tell them that you're wanting to depart VFR. The controller will accommodate if the controller isn't busy. But is a flight plan needed
  6. Hmm... Kennedy Steve, or Boston John? That would be a hard choice.. I'd be okay with either one, just as long as it isn't JFK Arnie! 😁 BL.
  7. The difference here is that this isn't a feature. this is a BUG. They know this is a known issue and has to fix it. If this were a feature, then you're right; they would have to be forthright and public about what is going on, because at that point they are controlling the narrative because it is a feature that they are introducing. They control the testing and the QA on it. If they meet the deadline, they are good. If they aren't, then they need to give an update. I've been a sysadmin/database admin for the past 25 years in both the public and private sectors, have more than enough knowledge
  8. Yeah.. definitely rocking chair time. 😁 I remember a website at some point when FS2K came out... or was it FS2K2? Yeah.. I think it was FS8.. when they finally fixed the KPHX runway issue, because they finally had updated geographical data.... ... but no airport in that entire simulator had ANY taxiway signs.. so that made someone (whose name I honestly don't remember) come up with an idea.. let's make them for the airports in question, especially if someone has the data for them! Thus, taxiwaysigns.com was invented. Who expected history to have to repeat itself 18-20 years
  9. That is a BIG problem. If it is every airport then that is a serious issue that MS needs to fix. It sounds to me like they were more concentrating on flight dynamics, how scenery looks, and how to get access to scenery than the integrity of the scenery. They should have known better on this, especially if considering at the time, FSX had updated taxiway signs. It still makes me wonder if MS has publicly posted a list of bugs that they are addressing. BL.
  10. I don't know if I should return to my rocking chair, since around this time 20 years ago, I am reminded of how MS released FS2000, which was supposed to be the most advanced flight simulator at that time... ...only for the masses to be stuck in shock waiting for some updated 3rd party scenery, because MS failed to realize that 9 months prior, a new runway was added to KPHX, and their runways renumbered. So the FS2K was already outdated, with SATCO/VATSIM/IVAO pilots getting lost on the ground because they had current, updated charts/taxiways, etc., while the scenery was lacking... ye
  11. One thing you should know about software development: NEVER give a date for when a certain patch or feature is going to be released, because if it isn't released, the consumer complains. When it is announced, the consumer complains ("Why wasn't it released earlier?!?!!?"). Either way, because of how the consumer in the western world thinks, the software developer loses, because either they get blasted for not having it out any faster, or not having it out when they give a release date (which that date is to appease the consumer because they keep asking when the release date is)). I would
  12. True, but once again, if they are operating as DEL, they could call themselves Clearance Delivery. When they call for Taxi, they could call themselves Ground as they are operating that position. If a TRACON/Control sector is combined, you could hear them calling themselves Departure for aircraft departing, as well as Approach for aircraft arriving. In short, the positions may be fluid if the positions are combined on a single frequency. BL.
  13. This. However, keep in mind that the local controller might refer to themselves as delivery, ground, or tower, as they are acting as all 3 by being the local controller. But as long as you are listening to them, you should be good. BL.
  14. I can't help but laugh at this.. or should I say laugh WITH this. Ever since I started a family, I told myself I wasn't going to build computers anymore, since that was all that I did in my free time, outside of being a linux sysadmin for the past 20something years. So when we had my daughter, I built one last rig, and that was going to be it: Gigabyte Z77N-WIFI miniITX motherboard 8GB Corsair DDR3 1066 memory Sapphire Radeon R9 200 3GB GDDR video card Too many SSDs Intel Core I5-3750K CPU (yes, this is Ivy Bridge!) I went with this setup because of bei
  15. As a controller, I take the Kennedy Steve approach, and would call you "USAir in disguise." 😁 Seriously, this is the best you really can do here. Not every controller, especially those that are new to the network (read: past 4-5 years) that hadn't caught on to the the happenings going on in HolyMergerville. Technically, even if they called you Cactus, they would have had it wrong, because the correct callsign they should have given you was "American." 😉 But seriously, either try to be the one to initiate the contact, or stress what your callsign should be in the comments for your
  • Create New...