Jump to content

Nicholas Cavacini

Board of Governors
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About Nicholas Cavacini

  • Rank
    Vice President - Supervisors

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. I noticed this fairly recently as well in MSFS. It seems that if lights are on for someone else prior to you connecting, the light conditions don't sync. The other pilot needs to cycle lights. It seems the light status is only sent on change from a client, and you don't get current states when connecting.
  2. Also to note, most departure/arrival procedures are able to be flown with standard navigation.
  3. Regardless of your Ad hominem, my comments still stand, sorry I don't meet your criteria. Hopefully this post is not turning to personal attacks on posters. The CoC applies to VATSIM (the entire globe), if you would like to see a change I would recommend this be brought up through the proper channels.
  4. The CoC was relatively recently rewritten and I can tell you that it is not outdated. The onus still falls on the pilot and I don't see that changing anytime soon. The ContactMe request is a fallback feature.
  5. As with the above, I would highly recommend using https://skyvector.com/. While I think the data is somewhat limited outside the US, it has essentially all of the aeronautical charts that you could ever want, low, high, TAC, etc. These are actual charts and will show you the appropriate contact in which areas. Note that charts take into consideration that the frequency is staffed, but it should also give the facility name. Example, Potomac frequencies here in DC (https://skyvector.com/?ll=39.34945659919388,-77.48734267572173&chart=102&zoom=4)
  6. Not to mention that current architecture that VATSIM and many other connected systems use require unique callsigns.
  7. While functions that interacted with the frequency (read "monitor" function) will almost certainly need to be reintegrated. If I remember correctly, the G2G connections (being P2P?) worked differently, and most importantly separate from voice. Since Roger mentioned this has been a long time problem, I believe it may have been a port issue. However, these functions will need to be updated, I would not worry about it for the time being. Edit: Reviewing docomeentation, I believe the above is wrong. Appears that there is only one incoming port used for voice traffic so if there are no voice is
  8. Just as a note, not all members (including controllers) can use voice so you must still be able to communicate on text.
  9. Correct there is no official "public" VATSIM Discord. Organizations such as FIRs/ARTCCs, VAs, etc may use a server but there are no Discords that are VATSIM sponsored/official for the general VATSIM membership.
  10. Hi Karlis, this is not appropriate of a controller. Please send all of the information that you have to [email protected] and I would recommend filing feedback with the responsible vACC. With that being said, there are a few "implied" instructions when flying, vacating the runway being one of them. However please remove the image as it calls attention to a specific ATC station and can be linked to a person.
  11. It is currently in the early beta stages from my knowledge. It'll still need to be refined with tweaks, features, and integration into clients. There will be an update when the team has further information to share, this is how all progress is made. There can be no commitment as to a timeline right now because it is still in early testing. For right now just know that it is being worked on and the progress appears really good so far.
  • Create New...