Jump to content

Tobias Dammers

Members
  • Content Count

    247
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

Everything posted by Tobias Dammers

  1. The A380 is a special snowflake too. Both aircraft require procedures that differ from your standard airliner, though for different reasons (for Concorde, those reasons are noise, fuel burn, and speed; for the A380, it's size, weight, and wake turbulence). The reason the A380 procedures are still available is because the A380 is still flying; Concorde was decommissioned in 2003, and the type-specific procedures were scrapped IRL. I was making absolutely no comments about the merits of either aircraft - depending who you ask, either type is the best aircraft ever, or a horrible failure; I
  2. Who exactly are you yelling at? Eurocontrol, for publishing procedures that are challenging to fly in an aircraft type that last flew 17 years ago, and that was a special snowflake even back then? VATSIM for using official real-life procedures? People who fly normal airliners for being insufficiently compassionate about your self-inflicted problems? I don't understand what your problem is, what you want changed, and who you expect to make those changes.
  3. Indeed - the idea is that when a controller issues an instruction, the pilot should either do whatever it takes to make the aircraft do the correct thing and read back the instruction, or reject it (saying "unable") and negotiate an alternative instruction with ATC. Controllers should accommodate the latter: that is, if you're flying on MSFS2020, and cannot accept a STAR or approach that is different than what your flight plan says, then you can say "unable", and ATC will vector you onto a visual approach, or figure out some other way of getting you down. You can not, however, accept the
  4. Well done you! If you like the King Air and feel comfortable flying it, I'd just stick with it for a while. Remember that to ATC, you are no less important than those tubeliners, and it is their job to make it work. You most certainly shouldn't need to maintain 250 knots on final. In fact, that would be pretty fast even for a large jet - typical speeds for intercepting the localizer are 180-210 knots, and most jets will be able to slow down to 140 knots or so at least.
  5. Connecting as observer is fine, especially when you do it for learning purposes. The COC states that being connected as an observer for "excessive" amounts of time is not allowed, but in practice, as long as you don't keep the connection unattended or use vatsim as a "screensaver", you'll be fine. Observers are not visible to others as traffic or active ATC (though some clients do list observers as such), so you're not disrupting anyone, even if you move / fly around. You are essentially invisible. The only thing to keep in mind is that an observer connection still uses bandwidth and server ca
  6. Yeah, best bet is to look at something like vatspy or simaware to see where there is ATC, and make your pick. Your best bet is probably a local hop between minor airports when CTR is staffed: you'll get top-down coverage for the entire route, and by avoiding the major hub airports, you avoid things getting overly busy on the ground and through the approach. And don't worry about getting in the way: that's for ATC to figure out, and AFAIK most controllers actually enjoy a bit of a change of pace between all the tubeliners.
  7. It kind of baffles me that nobody thinks of reporting this as a bug to Apple.
  8. So, with a couple days to let things sink in, some constructive feedback from my end, as a first-time CTP pilot (and also a bit of professional perspective from a programmer of 30 years). First of all: this was by far the best and most impressive event I've been part of in my (relatively short) VATSIM career so far. Great work from everyone involved - organizers for making it happen, controllers for providing excellent service, the tech people for setting up all the infrastructure and software the event needed, and fellow pilots, with and without slots, for making this an incredible exper
  9. Also maybe worth noting that contacting the wrong controller isn't the end of the world - they'll tell you to contact someone else, or monitor UNICOM, and that's that.
  10. My $0.02 on that matter: the lottery is hands-down the better system; what caused this "frustration" was mainly this quirk of the human psyche where anything you receive repeatedly will be perceived as a habitual right, and changing it feels like something is taken away from you. And so any CTP veteran who got used to just grabbing a slot ASAP when the booking opens would get this subtle feeling of being "cheated" out of "their" slot. Apart from this weird psychological effect, the bottom line is the same in both events: some people get a slot, others don't, and those who don't will feel
  11. Because nobody really knew what was feasible, and the organizers wanted to avoid a situation like last time, so they erred on the conservative side.
  12. I didn't mean that as a question that I need answered here, but rather, that answering these questions clearly beforehand would have helped reduce the confusion around Gander when technical problems got in the way of radio comms.
  13. First-time CTP pilot here. Big shout-out to the organizers and controllers, you folks pulled off an incredible operation. Professional ATC, great job handling the rude, the impatient, the incompetent, and the uninformed. Awesome planning and logistics - I expected to be delayed at least 30 minutes on the ground, and an hour or so in the air, but actually got out of KBOS and into LSZH with zero delay. Absolutely amazing. AFAICT, the lottery did a great job too; painful for those who didn't get a slot, but IMO the best, sanest, most respectful way of going about it. Please keep.
  14. I think this was in reference to the ideas outlined in the famous "Children of the Magenta Line" lectures, especially how he emphasizes that the first response to unexpected automation behavior should be to drop to a lower level of automation. If the FMS doesn't fly where you want to go, don't try to fix the FMS - switch to HDG mode, turn the knob until the aircraft goes where you want it to go, and THEN fix the FMS. If the autopilot does weird things, don't try to fix the autopilot - disconnect it, hand-fly the aircraft, regain stability, and THEN assess the situation and fix the au
  15. The four most important phrases: "Standby", "Say again", "Unable", "Request vectors". And the two most important rules: Aviate, Navigate, Communicate. If you're too busy flying the aircraft (aviate) and figuring out what's going on (navigate), push the communication to the bottom by saying "standby". Never accept / readback instructions you are not comfortable executing. Saying "unable" when you can't comply is 100 times better than trying to wing it and messing up. And finally: task saturation is real, and cockpit workload is a perfectly valid reason to reject or postpone
  16. AFAIU, this is pretty much what's going to happen. If you fly without a slot, you will have to wait longer for your oceanic clearance (event traffic is prioritized in oceanic clearance delivery), and when you get it, it will contain a massive re-routing onto what amounts to an unofficial non-event track, where no ATC is provided. On top of that, non-slot pilots should also be prepared to hold a lot, both on the ground and in the air.
  17. Fair enough. I guess "skim the forums before asking your question, because you're probably not the only one" is too much to ask 😄
  18. Great! Now the bits I'm interested in are going to be interspersed with a million unrelated discussions! (Excuse the sarcasm, but what exactly is the goal of forcing all CTP-related discussions into a megathread?)
  19. The reason it works in London airspace is because the real-world procedures are all designed to make it work. Berlin's new procedures however won't be, so just taking the updated procedures for EDDB and the old ones for EDDT won't work as well as using real-world procedures over London.
  20. This is a somewhat inevitable consequence of model mapping. You see, people use all sorts of simulators on VATSIM, and not everyone has the same set of aircraft models and liveries installed. Hence, the pilot client will perform "model mapping": it takes the standard ICAO aircraft and airline codes sent over the network, and tries to find a matching aircraft in your local model set. If the other person flies a sensible combination (e.g. a KLM 737-800), and you have a matching model and livery installed locally, then the model mapper should find it and use it, and everything will look OK.
  21. As has been discussed earlier, the VATSIM protocol has no facilities that would allow transponders to talk to each other, and even if it did, it would be quite difficult to hook this up with the various TCAS systems in all sims and aircraft models. Hence, TCAS on VATSIM behaves like a real-world TCAS encountering traffic equipped with a Mode-C, non-TCAS transponder - it will figure out a best guess at a deconfliction path, but it won't know what the other side will do, and it won't be able to tell it either. The way TCAS rules are written, this should still lead to successful deconfliction in
  22. Considering that: ...the booking system only registers CID's, and doesn't even ask for a callsign; ...slots are issued to accounts, and come with a routing; ...CID and callsign are equally available to any clients, and equally easy to extract automatically; ...the clearance request tool (nattrak or whatever will be used) probably also uses VATSIM SSO; ...I am fairly confident that it will indeed be based on CID, not callsign.
  23. Not at all. No multitasking is required, just automation. And as someone who's been in that particular field of work for 30 years, I'm telling you that that's perfectly doable. Note that flights with a slot still need to obtain an oceanic clearance, and that this is done through an automated tool - meaning that all the filtering can be done before a human even gets to look at the request. And from here, things become fairly straightforward: without an oceanic clearance, domestic won't hand you over to oceanic control, so you just don't get to enter controlled oceanic airspace. At thi
  24. Frankly, since I've never done any controlling, I don't know exactly, but I'm sure that can be sorted out. For starters, in order to enter controlled oceanic airspace, you need an oceanic clearance, which means that whoever schedules those would be the one to do the check, rather than the oceanic enroute controllers. Since routes are assigned with the slot, and linked to the vatsim member ID, automating the "is this event traffic" check at this stage is going to be straightforward, and I bet someone has already prepared the necessary software. So what I would expect here is that when
  25. Go to https://ctp.vatsim.net/, log in, and there will be a heading "Reservation" in the menu. The slots aren't filled yet, because the lottery hasn't even started, and there is no limit to the number of people entering the lottery, just how many slots will be allocated. Reservations can be entered and changed until November 4th. Also read https://vats.im/ctpinfo2020, which explains the new process, the rationale behind it, and why there will not be any non-event support this year.
×
×
  • Create New...