Jump to content

Alex Ying

Members
  • Content Count

    39
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Alex Ying

  1. If you're flying in the US, the FAA has a preferred route database query that most if not all US facilities on VATSIM follow: https://www.fly.faa.gov/rmt/nfdc_preferred_routes_database.jsp Some ARTCCs also publish their own copies of the PRD as well.
  2. Rob already gave some great answers, so I"ll just add on some additional context SimBrief sometimes generates some non-sense routes. In the US, many ARTCCs have Preferred Route Databases (PRDs) that you can search. ZNY and ZBW for example. You'll see on there that it also shows altitude and aircraft type restrictions for each route as well. Another source for routes is the FAA's Preferred Route Database. For some longer routes, there may not be a preferred route. In that case, you can serach FlightAware for real-world routes. In the US, SIDs have a short code depicted on the chart.
  3. I'll echo what Evan said and emphasize that it's highly situation dependent. If it's just another day on the network then there probably isn't likely to be a need. However, if it's an FNO or some other massive event? There's a lot of traffic management and flow planning going on the background that is not readily apparent to pilots. In the real world, sequencing and flow management for LGA or JFK can start as far west as Chicago and Minneapolis. VATUSA's FNO events in particular can regularly exceed real-world demand, so it's very common to see flow management even hundreds of miles away from
  4. Alex Ying

    Dev Mode

    Awesome! Thanks for the info.
  5. Alex Ying

    Dev Mode

    This is a bit of a feature request: For airspace and sector boundary development, it'd be useful to be able to have a Dev Mode where we could load a custom datafeed file in order to test how different boundaries light up when controllers are online without having to actually log on to VATSIM and wait for the datafeed to update. It would also enable testing and debugging of multi-sector interactions without having to find multiple people to log on.
  6. Many large airports now also have surface movement radar which requires Mode-C to work, so you should always check the airport charts and ATIS for information on how that's handled.
  7. I noticed this as well, I believe the "advise you have info [X]" is now built into the format by default, so it doesn't have to be included in the configuration text anymore.
  8. "Descend via" is used in many (most?) parts of the US with FAA procedures, however, it's only used when there are published altitude restrictions and ATC still has to [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ign with the "descend via" phraseology. On procedures with published restrictions but no "descend via" clearance or on charts that only have "expect" altitudes published, the clearance only applies to the lateral portion of the STAR. One of the more frustrating things is when pilots don't comply with these rules and descend when they don't actually have clearance to do so because they misread or don't unders
  9. I'm not sure, I'm not the pilot. It was reported to me by one of our controllers who was logged on to the HF station.
  10. The HF/VHF thread is locked it seems and I can't reply there. Controllers logged on as ZWY_CTR on 5520 with VHF alias 130.000 and ADR_CTR on actual VHF 130.000. Pilot tuned to 130.0 in Adria Radar airspace tuned to HF instead of the VHF frequency.
  11. HF appears to be broken. I logged on as ZWY_W7_CTR which matches an HF position in the database on 5520 and VHF alias 130.000. At the same time ADR_CTR was online as well on VHF 130.000. I had a pilot call me from LJLJ airport. The pilot was in range of ADR_CTR on 130.000 but the AFV system still tuned him to 5520 as shown on the AFV map. I had another pilot attempt to test with me while flying in the US and he was not able to contact me. The pilot tuned 130.000 and it stayed there instead of retuning to 5520. I then logged on as ZWY_EM_CTR on 17946 aliases to 130.900. The pilot ov
  12. We actually have implemented pseudo ADS-C at ZWY. Like the OP said, we have all the data available to us at the client side from VATSIM, so simulating ADS-C reporting is trivial. Especially for heavy event traffic, this lets the controller actually provide air traffic control service, rather than just taking position reports non-stop. Things like re-routes, deviations, ADS-B ITP, and ADS-C CDP can be implemented by the controller. Greatly increases capacity and reduces controller workload providing an all-around better experience for everyone.
  13. For airports that have it, you can also listen to the ATIS on LiveATC. (The LGA ATIS for example, is the first feed on the page https://www.liveatc.net/search/?icao=klga)
  14. For the US, my preferred site is https://skyvector.com/ METARs, weather layers, and route plotting in addition to charts and airport information.
  15. In response to this point specifically, it's not a "preemptive airspace service denial" in the way that your painting it, if I'm reading that correctly. The key point here is "workload permitting." Like I said above, everything is workload permitting. I will refuse handoffs for IFR aircraft into the primary airport if my workload is too high. This is common during events, which is why aircraft go into holding. It's not specific to Cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts] D airports or text pilots or whatever. If I can more efficiently serve more pilots by letting a text pilot wait a little longer, then I will
  16. Everything is workload permitting. You can be refused VFR entry into a Cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts] B if the controller is overloaded (I've had to do this before working N90 top down), you may have to wait a while for a clearance if things are busy in the air, etc. I'm not sure how you jumped from what's written there in the controller info to not servicing text pilots, but that's not at all what that means. The 7110.65 (at least in the US) is what we go off of in terms of what services we provide in general. "VATSIMisms" like "Cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts] D services provided based on workload" ar
  17. In the US at least (not sure about elsewhere), you will sometimes see fixes determined by a VOR radial and distance. For example, you could enter LGA055049 which is a point along the LGA 055 radial 49 nm from the VOR (this happens to be a named fix called MERIT, so you should use the name if it exists, but that's not always the case). In general though, if you can use named fixes or airways, that'll be easier for the controller to read.
  18. While that's usually true, it's not always true. I've seen SWAP routes be the most frequent route on FlightAware before. And even if not, someone who looks at FlightAware may not necessarily choose the most frequent route or the correct route for their type of aircraft when multiple routes are available. Additionally, FlightAware sometimes chops off earlier fixes if a flight gets a shortcut or the filed altitude will be listed incorrectly. That's why I would recommend the PRDs first, since those are organized for that specific purpose and not dependent on archived data which may have arti
  19. For the US, my first stop would be to check the vARTCC's site for their preferred route database. Many of the VATUSA sites have them. For example, New York's or Boston's. If you don't find it there, then check the FAA's preferred route database at https://testfly.faa.gov/rmt/nfdc_preferred_routes_database.jsp. I generally only use FlightAware if I don't find a route in any of the PRDs or I need a SWAP route.
  20. Here in the US, if I have aircraft on approach, I'll send them to tower without before any tag handoffs. I'll usually do it as a courtesy, but it's not required and I'm fairly certain that doesn't happen IRL. Sometimes the tower controllers also pick up the tag then immediately drop it, or just never pick it up. No big deal. As for entering another airspace before picking up a tag, that is, like Ryan said, not allowed in the US. The issue is not the size of the total area of control, but particular subsectors getting overloaded. I'll keep taking handoffs into EWR and LGA but reject JFK arr
  21. Like others have said, it depends a lot on local procedures. In the US, for the most part, all cab positions start with the ICAO code but dropping the first K. (Ex. Kennedy Tower at KJFK becomes JFK_TWR) The exceptions are en-route positions where the ARTCC abbreviations are used (NY for New York Center, CLE for Cleveland, etc.) and TRACON facilities separate from the an ATCT facility. New York TRACON is a separate facility from the control towers at JFK, LGA, and EWR and uses the NY callsign. SoCal, NorCal, and Potomac are similar.
  22. Is there a way to specify (either in the airport file or via the aircraft commands) a direction to taxi on a taxiway in TWRTrainer? For example, at KJFK, A is (generally) used for clockwise taxiing while B is for counter-clockwise taxiing. However, when giving taxi instructions, I didn't find a way to get the aircraft to go in a particular direction.
  23. I've seen this issue as well on an up-to-date version of Windows 10 and using VRC. Usually, minimizing and opening it again draws it correctly.
  24. I updated to 1.2.5 and the HTTP version check and server loading is resolved, but I run into audio issues now. No matter which device or audio mode I choose, all audio was choppy and cutting in and out. I tried restarting VRC and my computer as well with no resolution. I reverted back to version 1.2.4 and the audio issues were immediately resolved.
×
×
  • Create New...