Jump to content

Bradley Grafelman

Members
  • Content Count

    934
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Ah, yes, the numbers in a virtual radio stack not matching real-world charts (once again, somehow ignoring the fact that VATSIM's top-down hierarchy can already render the frequency-finding process unrealistic) is definitely "totally detached from reality." Likewise, I was clearly advocating the "logic" that you can't only work on simulating the things the matter and it must be an all-or-nothing approach. You're definitely not bringing ignorance and straw man arguments into the mix. Definitely. Disregard all I said - carry on!
  2. No, it hasn't. If you want to talk to Clearance Delivery on VATSIM, you don't just tune in the real-world frequency of that position wherever you are. You first check to see which ATC is online. Because of the top-down hierarchy, you might need to tune to DEL, GND, TWR, APP/DEP, CTR, or perhaps even FSS. For each of the positions, there may be multiple frequencies in use in the real world but combined into a single position on VATSIM. Once you find the appropriate controller, the frequency [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ociated with that controller is already given to you in the pilot client. As su
  3. Well there's no way to "prefile" on vPilot - that's just "filing" the flight plan. If you're getting an error trying to do so, perhaps there's something wrong with the data you're trying to send in the flight plan. Can you show us a screenshot of either the prefile form or the vPilot flight plan window before submitting either?
  4. FWIW, that's likely a Simconnect-driven consideration. Whether your aircraft radio's display shows "133.52" or "133.525", SimConnect will only reveal "3352" to FSInn, vPilot, etc. - it's up to the pilot client software to add the [Mod - Happy Thoughts]umed "1" in front and the correct decimal digit at the end (or, as vPilot does, ignore the 3rd decimal digit altogether and tune a controller's frequency if the first two decimal digits match). In that case, are all controllers required to obtain real-world controlling licenses/ratings/etc. and are then likewise paid a realistic salary for
  5. Try launching it with Administrator privileges instead.
  6. Hmm... I'll [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ume this is a trick question. If so, the answer is either "None" or "Not enough information given." METARs don't make runways "active" - controllers in the tower on the airport do (and their decision is then broadcast by an ATIS, not a METAR). Even if your real question was "Which runway maximizes headwind while minimizing crosswind?", it would still be a guess - as pointed out above, the runway choice doesn't appear to match the airport referenced in the METAR. Even ignoring that, it still wouldn't necessarily answer the question of "Which runway should I
  7. Can you post a screenshot of the filled in form before you submit it? Most likely culprit is the total length of all the data exceeds a specified limit. Best solution in that case is to remove superfluous information from the remarks section. EDIT: Looking at your most recent flight plans, this is almost certainly the culprit. Personally, I fail to see the point in filing EETs when they're likely outdated by the time you're actually airborne and never get updated after filing. In addition, I don't think there's any purpose for the "REG/" data on the VATSIM network.
  8. Not anymore, anyway... it certainly used to be there, though.
  9. Have you tried running FSX in windowed (not fullscreen) mode instead? There are several solutions out there to turn any windowed game into a "borderless windowed" app such that you can't see the title bar at the top or the taskbar at the bottom.
  10. Based on questions you later ask below, I wanted to ask you one to clarify here: by "using only VORs for navigation", do you mean "flying only directly from one VOR to another"? Because that's not really the extent of an /A aircraft's capability. For example, are you also precluding the use of Victor / J airways and/or identifying fixes based on DME or crossing radials? It's not just DME (which you could simulate not having by filing /U instead); fixes can also be defined by the intersection of the radials from two VORs (which would require you have two NAV radios). So, yes, even filing
  11. I usually did when working LA Center with little to no bordering ARTCCs online. If it was slow, I'd use UNICOM in lieu of .contactme's (which I practically never used). Relevant VRC alias: .uc $radioname() calling on UNICOM, change to my frequency $freq()
  12. So, in addition to the scattered inquiries on these forums (and perhaps elsewhere), the devs will have yet another entity nagging... er, I mean, liaising... for communication. Gee, I bet they're just thrilled for that position to get filled.
  13. An FMS isn't required to navigate in an airplane - even using RNAV and SIDs/STARs - so no, I'd recommend you plan out a more sensible route based on your aircraft's navigation capabilities. As for the callsign, it depends. If you're not simulating any specific mission/operation and you're just relocating an aircraft, you could reference some of the examples in AIM 4-2-4(a)(6), using serial numbers or letters/numbers. Otherwise, the 7110.65 (if you'll pardon the ATC materials reference) has a list of options in section 2-4-20(a)(6). For example, you could go with a "pronounceable [word] of
×
×
  • Create New...