Jump to content

Alex Seeberger

  • Content Count

  • 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. You're comparing apples and oranges. The visual references required at DH on approach are, of course, very different to those required for an LVTO and clearly defined (at least in EASA land -- I [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ume also in the AIM). For a CAT I approach, that would basically be 'something' (at least one of the runway, runway threshold markings, runway edge lights, elements of the approach lighting system, PAPIs, touchdown zone markings/lights etc). For CAT II, at least three consecutive lights including a lateral element are required, CAT IIIA requires three lights, IIIB with a DH re
  2. Hi Andreas, I understand where you are coming from but as far as the US is concerned, Dhruv is spot on. The FAA does not limit displaced threshold use based on visibility. In the US, that pavement is available in all visibility conditions. Certain companies may require that they visually identify the runway identifier (or whatever they are called) but the regulations do not. I have heard of counting runway lights before in the past. This isn’t really a thing in the US, except in novelty cases (Overachieving pilots). When RVR is taken, it typically includes readings from multiple
  3. At the other end is where the problem would come into play. Once you start guys down, that turboprop gets in the way as far as in trail separation goes. It can be delt with but makes the center guys job harder. It’s not a function of learning, it’s traffic separation and in my opinion a reroute reduced the burden on the down line controllers.
  4. While I can understand your frustration, there are a few things to consider... 1) Some tools real world controllers utilize are not available to us on VATSIM. The primary being flow management software, which are not simulated primarily due to issues inherent to the network, i.e. different weather engines for each pilot client, which affect separation and therefor timing. 2) The level of traffic present in an FNO is much higher then VATSIM controllers are accustomed to. Effectively, they don’t get to practice techniques real world controllers do on a daily basis. Just because you fly a
  5. Are you running the program as an Admin?
  6. Update: Fixed by using an aircraft as the vehicle when utilizing P3D as the tower view engine. I was previously using the avatar, which caused a sim connect error:1 and would result in incorrect aircraft states being displayed.
  7. Hey Josh, I was experiencing a similar problem. Make sure the aircraft you are using for tower view is an actual aircraft. I was using an avatar in P3D thinking that would reduce system resources. I switched my tower view aircraft to the J-3 Cub and no more Error 1 messages. Ross, this also fixed my issues with aircraft states (gear and engines) being incorrectly represented within P3D.
  8. Thanks for the proxy/towerview fix for the networked computers Ross. Everything works correctly except for some aircraft states. As far as engine/prop states, everything is close enough. Landing gear always appears in the retracted position. When using vPILOT as an aircraft, the landing gear states of the exact same aircraft are correct. -Using vSTARS Beta (1.1.2) and vPILOT Beta (2.1.1) Not a big deal but thought you should know...
  9. Sounds great....Thanks for the great work!
  10. - vPILOT works fine in Host/Remote mode between the two computers - Connected the two computers directly to one another with Windows 10 Mobile Hotspot (Internet sharing), which [Mod - Happy Thoughts]igns each a Windows IP address rather then the [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ignment through the Apple router. Same results...
  11. Hi Ross, When vSTARS and vPilot are operating on the same system, I have no issues regarding the proxy/towerview within either program. However, when they are operating on separate machines and I attempt to establish a connection with .towerview (My case), I get the below message within vPilot: Network error: Connection failed: (10060) A connection attempt failed because the connected party did not properly respond after a period of time, or established connection failed because connected host has failed to respond - Have used the .startproxy command and
  12. Correct. What you might also want to check out is a USB to HDMI or Display port dongle. I guess it depends whether you have any open USB ports but for VATSIM radar clients the refresh rate won't be an issue.
  13. Bootcamp - I've used many methods and this is the only one that works seamlessly. I was kicking myself for not doing it earlier because Windows 10 is actually pretty good. Works great with: VRC Euroscope vSTARS vERAM
  14. As always....Thanks for the hard work and selfless contribution!
  • Create New...