Kosovo Airspace

[Ivan Kovacevic 920456]

A lot of electrons for 5 flights in the past 3 weeks.

[Alex Bailey 969331]

A lot of electrons for 5 flights in the past 3 weeks.

 

Red herring... diversion... smoke and mirrors. You pick.

[Richard Jenkins]

A lot of electrons for 5 flights in the past 3 weeks.

 

Red herring... diversion... smoke and mirrors. You pick.

 

No, puts context to the debate.

[Alex Bailey 969331]

A lot of electrons for 5 flights in the past 3 weeks.

 

Red herring... diversion... smoke and mirrors. You pick.

 

No, puts context to the debate.

 

I'd agree with you if the issue was simply about airspace procedure, but to me it seems the inclusion of political matters in VATSIM is the issue. It sets a precedence for future problems, and seems counter productive when VATSIM strives to remain clear of sensitive issues. David's explanation was excellent, but it still shows that politics are included in VATSIM and somehow people could potentially be suspended for flying through there, as Kyp describes. That is the issue...

[Frank Otero]

Alen,

 

I am judging no one. I am giving my opinion on a policy that I view as faulty and designed to please the most vocal. Just because I have a US address does not mean that I am there all the time and not aware of what is going on in the world. And besides, if this policy is not politically motivated, then knowledge on regional politics should not be a prerequisite to understand the policy in question.

 

I think what you are getting at is that because we are not from there we do not know the “truth”, who was right or who was wrong, who is the victim or the aggressor in this 10-year old conflict. I careless about that side of the argument because it brings nothing to this discussion.

 

If the Kosovars would be restricting entrance to their airspace under the pretense that an ICAO-approved identifier was offensive to them (as clearly stated by Ivan), my opinion of the policy would still be the same…... it should not exist in VATSIM because by design it divides us. FIR borders in VATSIM should not become the political borders they are in RW

 

The mojitos are on me, you have to find your own culito.

[Richard Jenkins]

Ever hear of:

 

Cyprus

Ukraine

Malvinas (Falklands)

Areas of the Middle East

Taiwan

 

 

All have special accommodations within VATSIM; in the hopes the people in those areas can come together and function better than their real world counterparts. While it is nice to have all these egalitarian ideals, the real world functions differently. We try to make the best of a bad situation. Kyprianos is dead on about this.

[Jeff Thomas]

BKPR vs LYPR

 

I really don't know, nor do I care personally, what the difference is except one starts with BK and the other with LY....call it cultural ignorance...which is my right as well.

 

I just want to know if I file and fly to the "inappropriate" one, what will happen, worst case? No ATC? Fine by me because I really could care less. I just want to play the game. BUT, if you are saying some SUP is gonna come on and possibly suspend me, then that is indeed another issue.

 

I thought there was some mandate about ATC being INCLUSIVE on VATSIM anyway. This doesn't really seem to 'fit'. Provide services in a friendly and inclusive manner regardless.

 

To me, this is a lot like saying, hey if you don't have the new runway scenery for Chicago that has the new 9L/28R you don't get service. Now, that's a more appropriate comparison in my eyes.

 

Of course, I know the BoG thinks I'm wrong, but at least I got to say my piece on this. At least we can still do that.

[Peter Ingerslev Nielsen]

WOW!!!

 

Gents,

 

4 pages of essentially wasted time for a LOA and PSA which has been in place since 2008 and which will remain in place for the foreseeable time as these are the real life situation as it is in this part of the world, and if you bother to dig deeper you will find other PSA's going back to 2005 and for good reasons.

 

If you want to fly in or out of Kosovo then you are very welcome, but follow the PSA and LOA, if unable to comply then fly off line.. inclusive, before you all ask, yes...... as I am looking after an INCLUSIVE community which is slightly larger than the 4 or 5 flights per month who actually ever bother to file there.

 

Before we all shoot, please take the time to actually READ the PSA which in this thread seems to have been missed after page 1 as all and everyone are simply replying to a "post".

[Opher Ben Peretz 882232]

David's explanation was excellent, but it still shows that politics are included in VATSIM and somehow people could potentially be suspended for flying through there, as Kyp describes. That is the issue...

Alex,

action if and when taken isn't related to politics, but rather to systematic provocation.

Vatsim and VATEUR have brilliantly succeeded in resolving potential tensions with a unique balancing act, other leaders should learn to adopt.

 

Richard & Peter I.,

the specific PSA people are debating, is only a trigger for a core discussion, about implementation of Vatsim fundamentals, such as the right to use airspace, and keeping politics out. Not an out of proportion or wasted discussion IMO. One proof of my view is the level of people who posed questions in this thread.

 

Edit: I'd like to remind us all, that not all members are well informed about the history and details of such matters, and for them who form the majority of readers, the discussion is educational and meaningful.

Edited April 17, 2010 at 06:11 AM by Guest

[Frank Otero]

..............

If you want to fly in or out of Kosovo then you are very welcome, but follow the PSA and LOA, if unable to comply then fly off line.. inclusive, before you all ask, yes...... as I am looking after an INCLUSIVE community which is slightly larger than the 4 or 5 flights per month who actually ever bother to file there.

...........

 

Mr Director, SIR!!

 

Yes, indeed, it is a wasteful inconvenience when a few people with a different opinion open their mouths to express it. So much nicer if they would just shut up and blindly agreed with the all “inclusive” PSA, or better yet just disconnected, as you eloquently directed. No wonder only 4 – 5 flights a month… I used to be one of those who “bothered” to fly there…… a lot, actually, when I started in VATSIM, that is until the PSA-induced political tone got too loud.

 

I have abided by this VATSIM rule, but do not ask of me to sit quietly and agree with it just because it is a copy/paste of a RW political jab.

[Ivan Kovacevic 920456]

I just want to know if I file and fly to the "inappropriate" one, what will happen, worst case? No ATC? Fine by me because I really could care less. I just want to play the game. BUT, if you are saying some SUP is gonna come on and possibly suspend me, then that is indeed another issue.

 

In short, what would happen is: if no one noticed, nothing would happen. If ATC was online and a SUP was involved, he would explain to you the details of the policy. If you continued, spite knowing about the policy, you get the same treatment as if you knowingly went against any other VATSIM policy.

 

As for the number of flights in there, you can put that in your pipe and smoke it, since Pristina has seen more traffic in the past year or two than in the whole decade before that.

 

@Frank: Maybe if the "other side", that you're so worried about, actually put their efforts towards bringing activity to the region (rather than wasting it on provocations) we'd see more traffic in there. All they were talking about was the Kosovo's independence. When they were offered ATC training, they quickly went silent and disappeared.

[Frank Otero]

Dear Ivan,

 

I am not worried about the “other side” or “your side”, in VATSIM or in real life. If the “other side” decided to close their airspace unless I used BKPR, my complaint would be the same.

 

But I see how you can perceive it as such, especially when viewed through the lens you have chosen to use. Actually, your view is pretty much what I got from your controllers when I was trying to fly in your area.

 

The first few times I flew from Kosovo to Vienna, I had no idea of the procedures and always flew straight through Serbia. The first time I saw a LYBA controller on line, I happily called him from the ramp and was told he did not control Kosovo airspace and to call him at the border. Then, as I called him to enter LYBA airspace, he said I needed to use LYPR airport ID. I had no clue, I just wanted to enjoy flying and ATC.

 

The next time I used LYPR and tried to fly through Serbia directly from Kosovo, I was told by one LYBA controller that I needed to used the established procedure (south to Macedonia and around Kosovo) before entering LYBA airspace.

 

OOOKKKKKK, I stuck the published route in my default GPS and filed thinking I was now a well-educated pilot. Well, LYBA controllers did not like that BKPR in my flight plan and went on to tell me why. (BTW, FSInn will automatically take the airport codes from your FS flight plan and use them on the FSInn flight plan).

 

Now I was starting to get the picture and the political tone was coming to light, especially with the friendly enquiries of why I flew so often out of Pristina and other friendly talk.

 

When a controller comes on line, I would think that he/she would like to have as much traffic as possible and can forego with minor discrepancies between the real world and the VIRTUAL. If I would have sign up with some offensive call sign or comments on my flight plan I could understand the friction. But this was far from the case.

 

A few days ago I realized that I have been misspelling the intersection KOPUL on flight plans into Gatwick. Perhaps the controller (Innsbruck and others) did not catch it, or perhaps he knew this was a trivial matter and just a harmless oversight on my part, no one cancel my clearance over it. If LYBA controllers would have overlooked the BKPR – LYPR issue on a flight plan, it would have just remained what it is, an ICAO code, and not what it has become.

[Mirza Ibrahimovic]

@Kyprianos,

 

Thanks for the reply on end p.2., but I must say that it is silly to should take care for, who is unhappy with what. I am unhappy with many things in life and VATSIM, and no one cares, so I live with it! I rather saw that I in my FP could chose to file in "BKPR/LYPR" , because then I am on neighter side, my Serbian collegauies/VATSIM members will not look strange on me, neighter my Kosovar collegaues/VATSIM members! This is really something that is sort of splitting people.

 

My first flight after the Kosovo issue, was with BKPR, I read that is the new ICAO. As soon I departed, LYBA_CTR came out of nowehere and I gote some choices to choose between, LYPR and remain on routing, BKPR and enjoy Italy, and not to forget, I was told not to provocate by choosing BKPR!!! I am so tired of it, od politics and tensions, I just want to fly and be able to choce both ICAOs or fly in a network where I don't provocate by my normal actions, just because someone think that is a provocation! If I am really into provocating mu neightbours, I would not have been flying to LYBE and other LYxx airports daily for years.

 

And regarding just switching to unicom 122.80 over Montenegro, while LYBA_CTR is online, I have not experienced that it is possible! So please confirm that we as memebers, may do so in that area, even though LYBA_CTR is online, and no one can "force" us to be on that frequency while overflying GAC-POD-RETRA sector? I cannot belive that it be true...

[Fatmir Jusufi 1001462]

When they were offered ATC training, they quickly went silent and disappeared.

To whom are you referring? I'm just curious

[Krzysztof Szerszen 861225]

One wonders if we have this policy in place just because we have more Serbian then Kosovar members...

[Frank Otero]

@Frank: Maybe if the "other side", that you're so worried about, actually put their efforts towards bringing activity to the region (rather than wasting it on provocations) we'd see more traffic in there. All they were talking about was the Kosovo's independence. When they were offered ATC training, they quickly went silent and disappeared.

 

This is another part of this PSA that makes no sense. If a Kosovar wants to work a Pristina tower/radar (in VATSIM), he/she need to get training and approval from LYBA. How do you expect a Kosovar to endure this when according to the attitude of your crew the mere usage of the ICAO-approved BKPR insults you? Would it be fair then to expect that perhaps you also find offensive their attempt to open their own airspace, and hence they may be a little reluctant to face such attitudes?

 

For the record. Controllers in RW Kosovo are KOSOVARS, trained in ICELAND and need not to be granted permission by anyone but their own government. Then why should their VIRTUAL counterparts or anyone wanting to work Kosovo airspace have to be sponsored by LYBA?

[Andreas Fuchs]

I think the main arguments for and against these rules have been exchanged. Please don't start fighting for semantics and for things that cannot be discussed up to ultimate solutions. We know that there's a potential of conflict in this area and we have to ask for discretion of both parties.

 

One fundamental error that is made by some members of VATSIM is that they [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ume that pilots do file BKPR for a flight through the airspace of LYBE_CTR on purpose, intending to provoke members of Beograd ACC. In 99% of cases this is not true and we have to ask these members to stand back and re-think their attitude towards this "problem". BKPR is the official code for Pristina so do not blame pilots for using it. In most navigation programs and FMCs you are not even able to use LYPR, unless you add it to its database manually! I know, you simply need to file your flightplan with LYPR, but how should a member know that if that code does not exist anymore!?

 

It is sad that we need to have these special rules in place to cater for this real-life tragedy of attitudes, religions and ill guided nationalism. I wish we could set an example here at VATSIM. I am confident that the day will come that we can lift these special procedures (not just for Kosovo, but also for the other areas like Cyprus etc.) and just do what we love to do: simulate aviation without prejudice! This was our ideal and it must stay our ideal. Those few persons who feel offended by someone using a "wrong" ICAO-code or using a wrong airway and who are not able to change their personal attitude are in the wrong place, they should leave. It should not be the other thousands of members of VATSIM who need to "suffer" from this. It's a question of principle. But this is just my opinion on a hot topic. It will come up again at some other, again and again. You cannot make everyone happy, but you have to decide what direction you want to go.

[Kyprianos Biris]

Those few persons who feel offended by someone using a "wrong" ICAO-code or using a wrong airway and who are not able to change their personal attitude are in the wrong place, they should leave. It should not be the other thousands of members of VATSIM who need to "suffer" from this. It's a question of principle. But this is just my opinion on a hot topic. It will come up again at some other, again and again. You cannot make everyone happy, but you have to decide what direction you want to go.

 

I couldn't agree more Andreas. It is a real pity that just for these few even this thread is now 5 pages long.

What a waste of electrons indeed

[Mirza Ibrahimovic]

Sad to read the head folk-comments about wasting time, electrons and so on, and not seeing how serious this is. It is pure disrespect of some members of this community! But those members seem not to be as important as others whos site is chosen, even though you should be a neutrall head. S*r*w 5 members, when you can save 30, disregarding the message you send trough the community - the message we read and analyse on the last 5 pages, that are told to be waste of time, how ironic!

[Peter Ingerslev Nielsen]

Andreas,

 

I was going to post something very similar to what you have written, but why bother as i agree 100% with you, but as you very well know this topic has come up before as has Cyprus and the two will not go away anytime soon, it is indeed sad but the PSA's at least allow us to find a middle ground which keeps most parties at ease at this time.

 

Mirza,

 

I am surprised to see you commenting in this form, considering you know perfectly well the reasons for the PSA in the first place, not to mention your rather unique situation manning Bosnia within Croatia.

 

Gents,

 

Im not saying this is a waste of time, Im saying that this is not the place for this particular topic being discussed, the starter of this thread has so far managed to start a few different controversial topics in the span of less than 4 days, and THAT is a waste of everyones time, the wrong Altitude one is harmless but this one is not, this is a Divisional Policy, agreed and accepted by Region and again by the BOG and thats as simple as it gets.

 

At this moment in time the PSA's are in place, like it or dislike it, as long as its in place respect it and live with it and if you have any strong objections to it, then again it's simple avoid the area. However we much prefer you DO FLY into and out of the area, simply and kindly follow the parameters in place at this time.

[Mirza Ibrahimovic]

Peter, of course I know the reasons, similar I have felt on my own skin, but I maybe don't understand the ATC-regulations in practice well, so I ask before I get contacted by you or a other SUP.

 

And kindly please explain what you mean with "your rather unique situation manning Bosnia within Croatia"? just to be sure what you wanted to say, since you very well know that I am no longer active as staff in BiH, but ATC in HR and SLO. Answer where ever u want, thx

[Krzysztof Szerszen 861225]

So much for the letters and stuff.

[Richard Jenkins]

So much for the letters and stuff.

 

Heh...from a utilitarianism point of view quite possibly. I think Bentham had it right, and we just need to try harder. The screaming will get louder until the silence reigns from their departure.

[Paul Byrne]

Ok,

 

I did a bit of research.

 

Kyp and Peter. You two guys really need to stop hiding behind docomeents and actually do some critical research and thinking about this situation.

 

Kyp, you pointed to the SPINs docomeent in relation to the JoA of the Balkans. The latest incarnation of this (15 Mar 2010) says this (bold emphasis mine):

The CAOC5 emphasizes that the SERBIA and MONTENEGRO Air Traffic Service Agency (SMATSA) of S and M, also known as Belgrade Control, exercises control authority only over aircraft flying within SERBIA and MONTENEGRO. Any NOTAMS issued by Belgrade Control apply only to the airspace and airfields of SERBIA and MONTENEGRO, and do not apply to the airspace over KOSOVO. Procedures to be followed within the airspace over KOSOVO and at airfields inside KOSOVO are issued in this docomeent and applicable AIP.

 

Which means that this NOTAM you pointed to:

From official real NOTAMs for LYBA FIR flights from/to Pristina

A0699/04 - ONLY LYPR ICAO FOUR LETTER LOCATION INDICATOR FOR PRISTINA, SERBIA AND MONTENEGRO,

SHALL BE ACCEPTED IN THE FLIGHT PLAN. USING CODE BKPR CANCELS ANY PRIOR PERMISSION

TO ENTER BEOGRAD FIR. 08 OCT 08:15 2004 UNTIL PERM. CREATED: 08 OCT 08:17 2004

is actually invalid as it is produced by the Serbia and Montenegro aviation authority rather than the Kosovo aviation authority which now controls airspace up to FL290 in the Kosovo area (bar a couple of small areas). I've also checked the Kosovo AIP and it mentions nothing about filing LYPR as the code for Pristina in any circomestance.

 

The only thing close to this is the following (from SPINs):

6.5. The L608/M867 corridor supports NATO air traffic to/from Pristina airport only. Diplomatic clearance requests must show Pristina (or LYPR) as the departure/destination airport. Flight plans must be filed to LYPR (or ZZZZ in field XX and Pristina in the remarks).

But this only accounts for NATO/Diplomatic aircraft transiting on the 2 airways. It says nothing about civilian traffic flying the civilian procedures to the south.

 

Yes, you may argue that once inside LYBA airspace you are subject to that NOTAM. However, this means it is not internationally recognised and therefore there are nationalistic and political motivations behind this NOTAM. Nationalistic and political motivations have no place on VATSIM. I hope we can at least agree on that.

 

You need to remove the paragraph about the ICAO codes from the VATSIM Balkan PSA policy and the Serbia and Montenegro policies. This then will leave it open for the controllers to deal with as they see fit. However refusing to provide service to aircraft or claiming a CoC violation in this situation should not be allowed.

 

Cheers!

[Paul Byrne]

PS...Mods, you could at least have left a link to the moved topic in General Discussion rather than appear to be trying to bury this thread in a forum which doesn't see the traffic that General Discussion sees.