Jump to content

Joseph Jucha 1343412

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral
  1. Orjan, believe me there are loads of us , given the time, that love helping people get a solid start. When you set up at an airport look at your client to make sure there is no controller online before you taxi/take off. If there is call them, don't wait for a call me now, you will get your clearance and instructions. That is on the ground. In the air it's a bit trickier, Take a look at the vatsim pilot's resource page for help on when to call and what information they will be looking for. Have fun and enjoy the learning!
  2. VFR doesn't bother me at all! Texters that don't need to be texters, well...that's another story. I wish we (controllers) could follow real world a bit closer. There is an airport in my artcc that IRW puts pattern work off to a far runway. They let you do 3 or 4 circuits and then shoo you off because it does cause issues with the primary dep rwy. In vatsim it's all good, normally not enough traffic to worry about.
  3. Somehow increase Supervisor coverage. So many Sups, but they seem to run in packs. I know they have minimums to make each quarter, so the hours shouldn't be a problem. We really need them during the fringe times. I just had a guy with 3k hrs that didn't know to sq mode C. Nor how to follow instructions, but that could just be he didn't want to.
  4. This is a fairly common problem. As has been noted in a few other threads, FSX is stock to 2006 at best. I won't even guess on FS9. Bright and shiny P3Dv4 is the same as FSX. What we do in most cases for fields that have had extensive remodeling, we have overlays on our scope. Old taxiways and runways will be a different color than the current. And we just do our best. At KCMH if you don't tell us, we might put you on a taxiway instead of a runway..we have to coordinate you with others using the field. One of my favorites is KIND. There the taxiway changes are minor, but in 2008 the opened
  5. I see the next challenge will be to allocate freqs so we don't have crosstalk between stations within and outside the various artccs. Will Centers have to have multiple freqs based on geography? No need to answer, it's just the same problems as in the real world.
  6. Same to the OP, and don't forget Festivus! For the Rest of Us! Ya'll have fun!
  7. Thanks Magnus..and I bounce between KIND and KSDF. Since I generally work TWR , it is a no brainer to just add a line in my personal atis about when I am expecting my wife to demand my attention. I want to point out the 'personal atis' in the world of vATIS. The information that is in VRC ATIS Maker *still* is sent out. even if you don't have it on a voice channel. That is where we can point out to customers that we plan to close at XXX time. As well as any other authorized information. ARTCC website/feedback location and whatever else your artcc authorizes. No one has an issue with the
  8. As low level controller I would like to mention that I agree with Randy and For the vast majority, Don. I see your posts here on a regular basis and would like to remind you of one small overlooked item. The entire continent is the size of two US east coast artccs, I can easily understand how you generate the traffic to keep controllers busy. I am, again, quite low level, but I bounce between two airports for the most part, NEVER under 1hr, as that is the expected standard at my ARTCC. Day before yesterday I went 4hrs without so much as a flyby. As of this writhing I have been onli
  9. I think you are getting close. It isn't a vatsim thing so much as the law of where that controller is physically living says it is illegal to speak of N routes to foreigners. As a former military person, I understand it, but I don't agree with it. The problem is there IS a person under that jurisdiction involved and that person is at risk of disciplinary action. My only plea is lets help him out so we have SOME ATC in the area. As to the implications of vatsim using forbidden routes, in this instance it isn't USING or FILING the route that is the problem, it is the individual in that j
  10. I re-read the opening post and it isn't you at risk. Yibo is in the country whose laws HE would be violating by discussing the routes in question. So it isn't what you are doing so much as putting him in legal jeapordy for even acknowledging the route. By extension the action is unlawful in the country, bringing the CoC into play. Are you really willing to risk others because you have access to, what is in their country, contraband materials? Consider just pretending to be hijacked by applying the correct transponder code gets you automatically dumped from the network. This is a real worl
  11. So does anyone have a direct answer? I too would be intrested in seeing a video on using twr trainer on Sweatbox (does that satisfy you nit pickers?) This may come as a shock, but some places aren't very well staffed.
  12. Just to throw more gas on the fire. Consider opening vPilot as an Administrator.
  13. Oh, you've seen me fly into Memphis! Folks, there is a REASON I don't fly much on the network and it's got nothing to do with dealing with ATC.
  14. I do not speak for VATSIM. I only speak for myself and no other entity. You did the right thing. It would have been a violation of your laws. As I recall, one of the items in the CoC(Item 11) is not to do any thing unlawful. In your country, that was unlawful. I may be mistaken in the applicable regulations, but they are no different than trying to squawk hijack. I believe if this had happened to me I would .wallop the individual(s) with the explaination you provided and allowed a SUP to deal with them. Again. I believe you were right. Please p[Mod - Happy Thoughts] on to your friend my
  • Create New...