Jump to content

Nick Warren

Members
  • Content Count

    141
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by Nick Warren

  1. In whatever interim there may or may not be, you can open up a chat window with the ATIS and type in there .subscribe. It will at least pop up a chat when that field's ATIS updates.
  2. Honestly, ATC usually builds in a bit of a buffer for situations just like this, assuming you're on flight following. You're really not going to go wrong at 105, or 115. There isn't a need to climb and decend based on your direction on any particular leg. There are several interesting real world discussions about this out there. If you're VFR, it's generally not going to be an issue. While you can certainly fly below the MEF as discussed above, you need to be at least 500 above any terrain in an uncongested area. If that's a valley floor, then it is what it is. Just be mindful of the te
  3. "Say again" is fine, or even ask the controller to please speak a little slower. Worse case scenario, if they are issuing you, say, a flight plan reroute, have them send the plan via text. Again, my rate of speech is pretty standard and consistent. That rate will go up as needed if there is a lot going on. It will also go down as needed to accommodate those in need.
  4. Answered your question in your other thread as well, however, to be honest, it's usually pretty obvious when someone is a beginner. I'm going to go my usual pace, however if I can tell someone is struggling (again, usually obvious and early in the encounter), I will slow down and cater my instruction set accordingly 🙂
  5. To be honest, it's usually pretty obvious when someone is a beginner. I'm going to go my usual pace, however if I can tell someone is struggling (again, usually obvious and early in the encounter), I will slow down and cater my instruction set accordingly :-)
  6. Tower Enroute Control (TEC) routes notably in Southern California have jets below 10,000 on many routes. These are pretty short duration flights though.
  7. As long as 'SVFR' is no longer an option to file a flight plan as 🙂
  8. Certainly don't take it as degrading if a controller offers you a visual approach though. I'll hand out visual approaches like candy if conditions permit and it has nothing to do with pilot quality. Actually, I've found newer pilots tend to struggle more with the visual approaches than ILS ones because it removes the automation component. Visual approaches significantly reduce the controller and the pilot workload. They don't take nearly as long to execute, and we can slide more traffic in. They really are a good thing.
  9. You can try manually entering the waypoints of a given arrival or departure. That will at least give you LNAV capability. Utilizing published departures and arrivals are certainly commonplace and helpful, but they are not required. Most facilities have provisions for No SID/STAR aircraft that allow vectoring in ir out of a sector gate while not conflicting with others.
  10. In 2018 at the virtual Oshkosh event, ZAU hosted the vSOA Virtual Blue Angels for an airshow. It ruffled feathers and caused a lot of drama with VATSIM and VATUSA management prior to and after the event. In the end, they pulled it off, and it was one of the best things I have ever witnessed on the network. Not to mention, those guys are amazing simmers. One day, we'll look outside the box...errr...C.o.C again. This wasn't from the Oshkosh event, but it is the same caliber show they put on there.
  11. Are we still discussing this? Okay. So my statement that you chose to quote, which is fine, was part of a larger earlier discussion. Essentially you became the fork in a spoon and knife discussion. That's fine though. Look, I understand what everyone is saying. I send plenty of .contactme's. Actually, I don't even routinely send the default .contactme's because I personally believe the wording of them is rude and intrusive. I generally send a much kinder personal message. I certainly do this if I just come online and have aircraft in my airspace. Now, if I've been online for some tim
  12. There's an Android app called VatAlert that loosely does this. It's not airspace specific per say, but will ding you when you come in range of a controller.
  13. Can't wait to use that one with my boss or local law enforcement official
  14. Yeah. I mean with todays technology, maybe we can just have the controllers fly the pilots whole route for them too. It's bad enough that a large slice can't follow a simple flight procedure or something that deviates off the magenta line, it's now the controllers responsibility to make the pilot aware of where they are geographically at any given phase of their flight. I'm done man. If you're ever in my airspace, I'll just clear a wide birth where the FMS tells you decend and you can do it on your own....errr...the machine can do it on it's own. Thank goodness for autoland, or I'd quest
  15. Move along. Nothing to see here The boundaries don't change at the "J" and "Q" level either.
  16. The horror! A pilot having charts and having some sense of accountability as to where they are at, and where they are in relationship to a given airspace? Might have to put down the sandwich, pause Netflix, and back out of the Fortnite game to do that.
  17. Owen, Thank you for your response. Just to one point as quoted above. This, while just an example, is still in the realm of what I'm talking about. When I say cursory requirement to staff a tower at a secondary field for GA, I'm looking in the Cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts] D or maybe Cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts] C environment. So in the case of ZFW, if you're staffing up an event focusing on DFW, then also staff a tower at ADS or AFW for example. Also, one thing I can't believe I didn't add because it is a huge thing for me. More daytime events! FNO's are what they are. It's in the nam
  18. As a GA pilot on the network, my suggestions always lean towards GA. 1. I think it should be a cursory requirement to staff at minimum a local (tower) controller at a secondary field during events (FNO, etc.) The emphasis on Cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts] B primary fields has become very commonplace and not welcoming for GA pilots. I understand the reasonings behind it, but I think it would go a long way to staff an adjacent Cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts] D field. 2. More events catered to GA. A poker run between 5 or 6 fields is a great event and has been done. Or just do an event staffin
  19. I guess this is the point where the discussion ends and nothing changes then?
  20. Which is why I question why SVFR and DVFR exist as "flight rules" in the flight planning fields of the pilot clients. While rare, people are wrongly filing with those selected.
  21. Are you by chance receiving the default simulator ATIS on that frequency? It would sound like you are describing with the faint "air traffic" in the background. One way to check would be to fire up your sim, do not connect to the network, and tune an ATIS frequency and see if it is what you were hearing.
  22. Thank you, and I'm fully aware of what SVFR is, and again know that it's procedural and not a flight plan following. My thoughts going into this post were: 1.) Do other countries actually file SVFR/DVFR flight plans. I doubt this as ICAO is the standard, and does not afford this option (nor should it). 2.) If the answer to 1 is no, then it shouldn't be an option to file such in the flight planning system on Vatsim. To that, I agree with Robert's point that it should be removed, or at least memo'd to not file those flight rules until such time as future clients and/or updates c
  23. I posted this in general discussion because the topic spans both ATC and pilot side clients. A pilot transited my airspace today (legally somewhat, sans the wrong altitude for direction under VFR flight) with SVFR as his "flight rules" category. This is not the first time I've noticed this. The conditions in my airspace were actually less than SVFR (<1 mile), but it isn't important here. My question is, as SVFR is procedural in nature and limited to the airfield surface area, then why is it a valid flight rules option in the flight plan. I know SVFR, and I also know it isn't anyth
  24. Would love to see this more readily available to facilities alone
×
×
  • Create New...