Karl Mathias Moberg

To some degree, yes. You can add it as a position and center it on one airport. We have a similar problem with ZNY where we have NY_XXX_APP where XXX defines different positions that cover different positions. Your FIR can contribute to the VATSpy data project and add the position here: vatsimnetwork/vatspy-data-project: A home for VATSPY Data updates. (github.com)

Thanks for the update! Some really interesting notes in here. Very much appreciate it!

Yes please, it would be fantastic if this could be an option, and not the default behavior. Right now, if you click on the minimize button, the window hides in the system tray, making it inaccessible on a second or third monitor. Having it minimize to the task bar, would be much more useful - or at least give us the option to chose!

Speaking from the point of NYARTCC, I agree that changes in how the hours are counted should be announced. However, let me counter with this. NY_NWK_DEP and NY_ARD_APP _could_ cover JFK and LGA depending on how the controller is certified. In fact, for the vast majority of our students, they are certified for two or three facilities. The same with NY_CAM_APP and NY_KEN_DEP covering LGA and EWR as well. Additionally, NYARTCC has four major GRP airports, which makes a huge difference for students, as they have to go through a very hard training program for each one. With that said,

Please note however, that what is defined as mandatory readback items can vary from country to country. For instance: In the US, in an IFR clearance, unless anything has been changed in an IFR clearance, you as a pilot only need to readback the squawk code. If something has changed - you've been given a SID etc. that you did not file, you also need to read back the part that has been changed. It's very common during busy times in the US to have controllers specifically tell pilots: "Read back squawk only". For in the air read backs, technically, you only need to read back what has cha

I'm not talking about this from a realistic standpoint necessarily where you would get issued a STAR, but in the off chance that you don't (for whatever reason), wouldn't you fly directly to the field after your last waypoint until you get a STAR clearance? I agree with Josh. Although most of the IFR clearance phraseology differs accross the world, there's ONE thing that we all agree on... "XYZ123, cleared to the ABC airport via..." the clearance limit is not the flightplan, it's the airport or the VOR/FIX/airspace or whatever you clear them to, but you do say "cleared to the ABC airport

For the record, as far as I know all airport positions have until now been counted as one - meaning that ENGM_1_APP and ENGM_2_APP are all counted as one position - and if both are signed on at one time only one of them are counted (meaning you can't get double hours by signing on two controllers). Also, for New Yorks case - DEP and APP have been working the same way, meaning if NY_KEN_DEP is online, it counts towards the hours for NY_CAM_APP. This have been the case for many, many years.

To clarify - all New York approach sectors for the three main airports are now counted as one?

This! Personally, when I'm flying and I am getting close to an airport I constantly check VATSpy to see if there are other aircraft around me that could conflict. If there are no others inbound or outbound, I don't post anything in chat. Why? Because noone else cares about an aircraft at 3000ft when they are at FL380. Even if there is traffic in the area, if it's going to take them 10 minutes to get to where I am currently, I'm going to be long gone once the other aircraft gets to my location. I'm a hard believer that it's more important to look out the window of your cockpit where you ca

Holy smokes, that has to be one of the most on-point, and most perfect posts on how backwards things are in reality on VATSIM I've read in ages... Like Craig have said. Making software opensource does not mean it's prone to more attacks and vulnerabilities. Look at Google Chrome, Firefox as an example. They have BILLIONS of users combined and are both opensource...

That's really, really cool! Considering that Hoppies network already works, it would be really cool if this plugin became popular. The only think we need then, is for addon makers, to implement the pilotside client directly into the aircraft, so we don't need a separate window for that too, but considering that the hoppie network is fairly open, it shouldn't be too hard, should it?

Yeah, it's weird that it doesn't resolve anything else... In the last case it was a SWR callsign flying a 77W, getting resolved as the A321. Just have UT2 installed though, so might be that it doesn't recognize a plain 77W.

Hi, Is there a way currently (or if not - hope for the feature in the future) to override an aircraft model on other users? I've been flying around, and it's a downer when you see the default A321 and when you actually check what the user is flying in .debug, you see an 77W or a 747. Granted, they are not real liveries, which is why vPilot is displaying them as the default A321, but it would be nice to be able to override the A321 and select a 777 or 747 for example, so you get the right size of the aircraft. Karl

This might sound like a silly thing, but one thing that would be wonderful to have, and one of the things i LOVE about FSInn/FSCopilot, is a small option in the FSCopilot options to "Sync Real time". For people like me, who enjoy flying across the pond, and like flying real-time, this thing is a life saver! The FS9/FSX clock has a tendency to drift and after a few hours it might be in extreme cases almost half an hour off, which is a bad thing when flying with required position reports. Not sure if it is AS bad as it was in the FS9 days, but I do remember having trouble with the clock in

Yeah... It is blinking, so we are connected, just no sound!