Jump to content

Nick Warren

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Nick Warren

  1. I am C3 rated, but only choose to work the terminal environment and occasionally local positions. I have committment issues and trying to hold on to a long term relationship through the whole enroute phase causes me angst.
  2. Open up the entire frequency spectrum for voice connection by pilot client. A pilot tunes the frequency, they can voice communicate on it. Allows for voice usage of the proper CTAF/Unicom frequencies for respective fields, training areas, and SFRA's.
  3. Thank you for taking the time Ross. Will just wait to see how some of the network improvement plans pan out.
  4. Thank you for the reply. Although different, they are helpful. I am curious Ross, as a long time user of VRC and then vSTARS, what becomes the purpose of being able to tune and/or create multiple voice channels at once if the pilot clients can't simply tune to them noting the exceptions you mentioned? I am actually all for being able to work multiple frequencies at once. For example a tower controller simultaneously working a ground frequency, or an approach or center controller working multiple sector frequencies (although emphatically unnecessary). Having been on the network since it's
  5. I guess the best way to answer this would be to just try it out, but I am not near my computer at the moment and curiosity was there. Basically, does a controller (I use vSTARS, but any client all the same) have the ability to host a secondary voice frequency while connected? I know only the primary frequency will show up in the pilot client list of controllers, but if the secondary frequency was hosted, could a pilot or pilots tune to it and be able to voice communicate? This question has been on my mind for some time, but stemmed from the other night flying the Newark FNO. I flew the
  6. In SkyVector, if you click on KTPA, not just a chart, but the actual airport information, it says it is in the Miami ARTCC. It's one of those quirky border fields. I think Miami got KTPA and Jacksonville got KMCO. Either clicking on the actual airport link in SkyVector, or looking at Airnav will provide you guidance in these cases for finding the overlaying ARTCC. In any event, and like stated above, it isn't a huge deal, and you can always reach out to the controller and ask to make sure ahead of time.
  7. I think this idea has worth. My 2 cents suggestions would be drop down box choices which compile into PIREP coding. Not everyone knows how to do this, especially on the fly. Pinpointing the PIREPs on a map would be even more beneficial. I can see this being a tool that controllers and pilots can utilize. Skyvector offers this for the US real world as a point of reference.
  8. It has long been a contentious play on words, and probably a discussion for another thread (although plenty of them already exist). Safe to say though, respectfully of course, positions won't be changed in this discussion.
  9. At risk of deviating from the original post, "Should" doesn't equate to "Shall" or "Must" no matter how it gets spun, nor should it be required outside of what traditional CTAF operation dictates.
  10. I barely monitor it when I fly; why would I subject myself to the torture when I control?
  11. That's quite the ear popping decent from 10,000 in a 10nm spread
  12. Hmmm. I don't have a FMS, what do I do? I mean that really was the initial question. C'mon Kirk, you didn't just join the network yesterday. You're ststements of this being a hobby, recreation, etc. where anything is possible fosters this kind of behavior, despite the fact that a great deal of members who take it halfway serious. It's somewhat insulting to those who do, and makes people like me more dismissive of those who don't. Of course there isn't ill will by the OP, rather an embracing of quantity over quality thst even stems these questions in the first place.
  13. I am not a Memphis or a Detroit guy, so hopefully one of them can chime in with some more local knowledge, but let's look at it. Example 1. This is kind of tricky as you can see it puts your precariously in the vicinity of KMEM. That said, if you look at the approach plate, you can basically go direct to the MEM VOR which is on the field and enter the teardrop to the east at the IAF (EFPUB). Yes it does put you on top of KMEM, but you will be at 2500ft or above right over the top of the field, which really is the safest place to be if you are transitioning because you are not in the way
  14. Yes, to the point. You want to fly a high performance, military jet from and to primary Cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts] B civil fields with no concept of navigation or planning. Ummm, how about just don't. Or do; whatever. If you choose to do so, might I recommend doing it during a FNO. It will be much better received then.
  15. I posted this in another forum today. Still no solid answers, but some things to maybe go back and look at: I really can't figure out where the problem lies with those who can't get this to work. All I can say is re-trace your steps. I use P3Dv4 currently, but it worked just as effectively when I used FSX, and FSX-SE. Some possible tips: -Make sure the computer you are simming on and your ipad displaying Foreflight are on the same network. -Make sure you FSUIPC installed and that it shows in the modules when your sim is running. You don't have to have the paid version, but
  16. Yeah, we should. Now that doesn't mean it's always done the best, but it's generally done the best way that the controller is trained and can take on. Sometimes you just can't fit 10lbs of potatoes in a 5lb bag. It's "air traffic control" not "air traffic accommodation". And, ATC in controlled airspace, can deny entry to VFR aircraft on a workload basis. Nxxxx remain outside of the XXX Cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts] B or Cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts] C airspace. Doesn't mean you can't go under, over, or around it. It's all about separation and if it can't be maintained adequately through skill or
  17. I have no solid answers for you. I can tell you I have no issues with Foreflight viewing VATSIM traffic through FSXFlight which is of even less help to you. I can also view traffic on the GTN750. I won't be in front of my system for several days, but maybe see if simconnect is at all involved in the process. Run everything as administrator. I know there are threads in other forums regarding this issue and some discoveries made that fix some users issues. Maybe one of those fixes will apply to you. I'll check back in when I can dive into it further.
  18. So what about flight 4, 5, and 6? With all due respect, you are kind of starting to complain yourself out of rational argument. This environment represents a hobby or recreation as you will, of which nobody is time committed beyond the rules set forth by the organization. I have received it on both sides of the scope as well. I've had controllers go offline. I had two controllers drop during an event that I was utilizing. I have also sat as a controller for 2, 3, or 4 hours and had little to no traffic, while an adjacent uncontrolled area gets a steady flow of traffic. This isn't the en
  19. Big distinction here is if you were "Cleared for the LOC approach, rwy XX" vs. "Intercept the rwy XX localizer". After all, simple LOC approaches do exist right, so it's not an unreasonable instruction. The former allows you do descend within the capacity of the approach. The latter does not. The latter is a technique by controllers to get you pointed in the right direction until such time that they can clear you for the approach. As stated above however, it is only a lateral clearance, to which they must follow up with an official approach clearance, be it an ILS, visual, whatever.
  20. I've added the vATIS main and Appdata folders to my antivirus exclusions. Won't hurt anyway. Thanks for the feedback.
  21. I have just started having this issue over the last week or so. No changes on my end that I am aware of. Aircraft report only hearing static on vATIS established frequencies. I am able to hear the ATIS on preview. I have tried changing voice servers. This has happened with multiple aircraft on multiple occasions.
  22. Little bit of keeping the thread alive and also sharing a short video from the Air Safety Institute and NATCA. Basically the nuts and bolts go to say that ATC may not see what the pilots see as far as Wx goes. I'm biased, but I think it supports the argument of implementing something consistent on the ATC end without as much worry for what the pilot may be seeing.
  23. This is a very welcome and long overdue addition to the network. I agree with Ross from and earlier post suggesting that it should be implemented as realistically as possible. I would love to see all CTAF freq's covered and range limited. This gives the user the least amount of confusion in my opinion. The frequency is defined on the chart, and frankly not having a chart is poor airmanship even on here. After all, are we supporting a realistic environment or catering to an arcade game? There is another network that accomplishes this quite effectively. While their product is likely prop
  24. That is quite the time investment. Okay, thank you.
  25. Robert, How does one generate a ruleset as you have? I am interested in doing one for v4 until the AI models issue gets resolved.
  • Create New...