Jump to content

Alexander Cohrs

Members
  • Content Count

    180
  • 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. Thank you for the great event! We came from Berlin-Tegel as SWR96C with a shared cockpit, had packed one hour of extra fuel and still, while in the RILAX holding, had to report to ATC that we only had ten minutes left before we had to divert - and that's how it happened. Especially in the shared cockpit, everything felt very realistic, including the decision-making process and the rather hectic phase of the diversion - it was great fun. Many thanks to everybody involved!
  2. Uh, MSFS2020 pilots online at VATSIM with a totally different ground speed on approach than the rest of the world? Doesn't that sound like the need for forced disconnects via the pilot client? 🙂
  3. Hi Robin, yes, in Swift settings, you are able to select if and how messages will be displayed in the flight sim window. Don't have it in front of me right now, but if I remember correctly, you can select between no messages at all, only supervisor messages, only all private messages or all messages. Alex
  4. No, that was indeed intended to calm down the fear that MSFS2020 users might also have to fear disconnects - if you read the full paragraph, you see that my message was: Don't worry about it, it's much too early to say (and even if there was a problem, it would have to be investigated first).
  5. But you DO notice how VATSIM has changed in it's tone here, don't you? Instead of helping affected members, we are mainly telling them to stop complaining (or to "cry" as some people here chose to call it) and why they are quite rightly removed from the network. After years of lament about not enough members/traffic, this is a quite new approach. I wonder if there is any relation to the membership increase we saw after the voice codec update. Maybe some people think that we are not anymore in such a need of active pilots as we have been before, so we can be much stricter and don't have to try
  6. The question is what we want to achieve. Of course we can tell users with insufficient computer performance that it's their own fault and that they should finally buy reasonable hardware. Now the question is what is more likely: a) they think it's great, go straight to the nearest hardware shop and fly happily on VATSIM b) they turn their backs on online flying and we lose members. Personally, I regard b) as more likely, and therefore I think it's shortsighted to use tough words here to tell X Plane users to shut up and simply upgrade their system. (Brad, this was explici
  7. Do you guys think we might see a similar behaviour of MSFS2020? My understanding is that they aim to maintain 60 FPS by all means. Does that mean they also have to go a similar way like X-Plane? And would that mean the same rule now enforced on X-Plane pilots will also be enforced on them - but with the difference that it's a forced disconnect <60 FPS for them?
  8. Maybe we have to introduce forced disconnects at low frame rates for Euroscope, too? (Sorry, Kyprianos, I just could not resist...)
  9. Just a quick question concerning the 3jfps plugin that was mentioned in this thread and also recommended by VATSIM to avoid the forced disconnects: Do I see correctly that script installs libraries in the Custom Scenery folder without asking or notice? They are called something like AAxxxx, so I [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ume it has something to do with the auto-anti-aliasing feature of the script. Furthermore I observed when using the script: - if this auto AA setting function is active, some of the multiplayer planes don't have liveries anymore - the FF A320 is not usable anymore (
  10. Guys, just a short one: I like how this discussion developed recently. Thank you to everyone involved!
  11. Interesting question! I like events that... ... have a connection to a real world event (e.g. summer olympics) ... offer procedures that are not used in daily VATSIM operations (e.g. the SRA approach event we once ran at Mogadishu) ... are not unrealistically overcrowded (like CTP is, although I know how the members love it - it's just not my kind of event) ... staff the most experience controllers on Delivery and Ground to avoid chaos and long delays on departure ... offer CPDLC communications both for Clearance and en-route ... feature airports that are not in the focus of the daily ro
  12. Ross, from my point: Not especially at you, I am just noticing that there are a lot of reports here and on other forums/social media channels from pilots who should not get disconnected but actually are - and I have the impression these users don't receive the attention and help they deserve (of course, I could be wrong here, maybe the staff and the developers are already talking to them via private channels). My opinion is: If you introduce something like these forced disconnects, you also have the obligation to care about the users who are wrongly affected by it.
  13. Agree with Robert. Wouldn't it be good if the ones who enforced this rule started to help these guys that are reporting disconnects in situations where they shouldn't be disconnected? I am talking about FPS>20, stutters with time <30 seconds – or like in this case sitting at the gate and simply switching to the pilot client for sending a flight plan?
  14. But is it really neccessary to disconnect users that are preparing their flight at the gate, not moving, just trying to send a flight plan? How do they cause any interference that needs to be penalized?
  15. Agree with that. Apparently, there are users reporting that they are being disconnected with fps > 20 or drops shorter than 30 seconds, and so far it looks like they did not receive much attention or help. Let‘s concentrate on helping them first.
×
×
  • Create New...