Richard Jenkins Posted November 14, 2005 at 05:45 PM Posted November 14, 2005 at 05:45 PM (edited) Controllers, When logging in please be sure to set the appropriate visibility range for the position you are manning. This will help with various issues concerning the network. If you login with the incorrect range, you will be asked to correct it. Thank you for your cooperation! General rule: 10-20 nm for DEL/GND 30-50 nm for TWR 100-150 nm for APP/DEP 300-600 nm for CTR Edited March 29, 2006 at 05:15 PM by Guest RJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerry Hattendorf 935415 Posted November 14, 2005 at 07:51 PM Posted November 14, 2005 at 07:51 PM Wilco! Gerry Hattendorf ZLA Webmaster VATSIM Supervisor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Javier Larroulet Posted November 15, 2005 at 02:33 AM Posted November 15, 2005 at 02:33 AM wilco! Richard, maybe it would be a good idea to email a m[Mod - Happy Thoughts] notam to the network saying this so everyone gets it and we can save some work to supervisors all around the network Javier Larroulet (C3) - Chile vACC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Heaney 879309 Posted November 15, 2005 at 03:28 AM Posted November 15, 2005 at 03:28 AM I posted this message on the ZSE Forums, earlier today. Thanks Richard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Jenkins Posted November 15, 2005 at 04:09 AM Author Posted November 15, 2005 at 04:09 AM wilco! Richard, maybe it would be a good idea to email a m[Mod - Happy Thoughts] notam to the network saying this so everyone gets it and we can save some work to supervisors all around the network We will send it in the next NOTAM, we just need to wait a few more days before sending one. We don't want to end up on a ISP spam list. RJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Roda 908206 Posted November 15, 2005 at 01:28 PM Posted November 15, 2005 at 01:28 PM Rather than relying on the honor system forever, maybe the next version of ASRC should restrict the visibility based on the position controlling. Mike Roda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Steinberg 939662 Posted November 15, 2005 at 03:14 PM Posted November 15, 2005 at 03:14 PM Sounds good! Andrew Steinberg C-1, VATUSA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Jenkins Posted November 15, 2005 at 05:51 PM Author Posted November 15, 2005 at 05:51 PM Rather than relying on the honor system forever, maybe the next version of ASRC should restrict the visibility based on the position controlling. We would like to try and go the education route first, that will leave some flexibility for people who might need a few extra miles here and there. Plus the new ATC clients will have remote sensing so range will not be a huge issue. They will just create second and third views. If we can't get some compliance then we will go the tech route and just restrict it from the server. RJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Lee Posted November 15, 2005 at 07:13 PM Posted November 15, 2005 at 07:13 PM Posted in the ZOA forum. Rich Lee - C3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ross Carlson Posted November 15, 2005 at 07:37 PM Posted November 15, 2005 at 07:37 PM If we can't get some compliance then we will go the tech route and just restrict it from the server. Perhaps a combination of the tech route and education? Use the server to send a reminder to the client if, 5 minutes after they connect, their range is still too high. (Give them 5 minutes to set the proper range.) And allow SUPs to easily fetch a list of clients which have an invalid range set, so that they can follow up. (Maybe this already exists, not sure if you have to check each client individually or if you have a way to list them.) Developer: vPilot, VRC, vSTARS, vERAM, VAT-Spy Senior Controller, Boston Virtual ARTCC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicholas Bartolotta 912967 Posted November 15, 2005 at 08:37 PM Posted November 15, 2005 at 08:37 PM ZID's got it down! Nick Bartolotta - ZSE Instructor, pilot at large "Just fly it on down to within a inch of the runway and let it drop in from there." - Capt. Don Lanham, ATA Airlines Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garry Morris 920567 Posted November 15, 2005 at 10:28 PM Posted November 15, 2005 at 10:28 PM Fred has posted it at ZAB's forums as well. Good idea, thanks Richard. http://www.execjetva.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Ingersoll 814352 Posted November 15, 2005 at 11:23 PM Posted November 15, 2005 at 11:23 PM You might want to add the OBS range restriction. Richard, you're from Sacramento? My family is from there and I'll be visiting for Christmas, maybe I'll see you around. Justin Ingersoll, PSMEL, Instrument ZAB Training Administrator MidCon P237 757/767 AWVA AWE1331 737 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Brummett Posted November 16, 2005 at 05:54 PM Posted November 16, 2005 at 05:54 PM I had an instructor of mine bring up a valid point. What if that instructor, or any instructor, is logged on as xx-xx-ins, and needs to have his range set to 600 miles. Or he's pulling double duty; working approach and instructing someone who is working center, when he will need to have that range to see the student? Just something to point out. Mark Brummett Website owner, http://www.zkcartcc.org ZKC Events Co-ordinator Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Jenkins Posted November 16, 2005 at 07:58 PM Author Posted November 16, 2005 at 07:58 PM Those are not what we are looking for. It is common to login and find most positions with their range set to 400 -600NM. There is no reason DEL...GND...TWR...or APP need to see anything that far. It puts a tremendous strain on the network when traffic is heavy, people need to get used to the idea of always checking their range, even when traffic is low. If you want to keep the lag monster somewhat undercontrol, don't be part of the problem. This is more of an education thing than an enforcement issue. So far we have had no trouble when asking people to reduce range. It most cases they had simply forgot to check after changing positions. RJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicholas Bartolotta 912967 Posted November 16, 2005 at 08:04 PM Posted November 16, 2005 at 08:04 PM Yeah, in fact, I had no idea what the Range even was or how it was used until I saw this post...and I'm S3 Nick Bartolotta - ZSE Instructor, pilot at large "Just fly it on down to within a inch of the runway and let it drop in from there." - Capt. Don Lanham, ATA Airlines Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timothy Suckow 847603 Posted November 17, 2005 at 08:08 AM Posted November 17, 2005 at 08:08 AM ZHN (Honolulu) Center has now incorporated the range limitations into the online training. Even on Center, our border only exdends out to 330 miles. I usually have it set for 350. - Tim ZHN ARTCC Training Administrator VATSIM 847603 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Roesen Posted November 17, 2005 at 11:42 AM Posted November 17, 2005 at 11:42 AM Which ain't a problem, as you won't have too many aircrafts in this range. Not the range determines the network load, but the amount of aircraft position data that has to be relayed. A 600NM range with 10 planes in it is less of a problem than a 5NM range on GND with 20 planes on the apron. As such, it depends on the traffic in your range wether a choosen range is a problem or not. I could now man EDDM TWR with a 600NM range and produce less load on the servers than today evening (local time) with a 50NM range. At least as far as I understand the server architecture and network protocol used. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Best regards, Daniel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ross Carlson Posted November 17, 2005 at 05:01 PM Posted November 17, 2005 at 05:01 PM Technically speaking, you are correct Daniel, but the problem is controllers who have the range set higher than it needs to be for the position they are working. In that case, it doesn't matter if there is one plane at the far range or 100, you're wasting bandwidth. A GND controller simply doesn't need to see any planes beyond a few miles. Like Richard said, this is an education issue ... we need controllers to get used to checking their range every time they sign on, since it's very easy to go through a whole session on GND or TWR without even realising you have a 300 NM range set. Developer: vPilot, VRC, vSTARS, vERAM, VAT-Spy Senior Controller, Boston Virtual ARTCC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Meyer 944876 Posted November 17, 2005 at 06:27 PM Posted November 17, 2005 at 06:27 PM I agree Ross. I was flying last night, and was picking up TWR and GND of an airport that I was more then 300 miles away from. With the amount of planes I'm sure where in the sky, I can only imagine what kind of problems it might have or did cause. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ross Carlson Posted November 17, 2005 at 06:42 PM Posted November 17, 2005 at 06:42 PM Education is nice, but I think eventually we're going to just have to enforce this on the server side. Developer: vPilot, VRC, vSTARS, vERAM, VAT-Spy Senior Controller, Boston Virtual ARTCC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Smith Posted November 17, 2005 at 07:52 PM Posted November 17, 2005 at 07:52 PM I agree Ross. I was flying last night, and was picking up TWR and GND of an airport that I was more then 300 miles away from. With the amount of planes I'm sure where in the sky, I can only imagine what kind of problems it might have or did cause. My understanding is that the controller's visibility settings have NO bearing on the distance from which aircraft will see that facility. The visibiilty setting in ASRC determines how far away a controller can see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ross Carlson Posted November 17, 2005 at 07:54 PM Posted November 17, 2005 at 07:54 PM I agree Ross. I was flying last night, and was picking up TWR and GND of an airport that I was more then 300 miles away from. With the amount of planes I'm sure where in the sky, I can only imagine what kind of problems it might have or did cause. My understanding is that the controller's visibility settings have NO bearing on the distance from which aircraft will see that facility. The visibiilty setting in ASRC determines how far away a controller can see. Yeah, the visibility range that you set in the ASRC settings window only affects which aircraft position updates are sent to your computer, thus which aircraft show up on your scope. The range at which you show up on pilot's controller lists is hard-coded in the server and varies by station type. The user cannot control it. Developer: vPilot, VRC, vSTARS, vERAM, VAT-Spy Senior Controller, Boston Virtual ARTCC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Meyer 944876 Posted November 17, 2005 at 07:58 PM Posted November 17, 2005 at 07:58 PM Thanks guys. I wasn't aware of that. Guess you learn something new every day. Although, that now leads to the question, why exactly does ground and tower go out so far? There really isn't any reason I should be seeing ORD ground and tower when I'm flying in western zone of ZKC. I realize it might be hard to program, I'm just curious now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ross Carlson Posted November 17, 2005 at 08:33 PM Posted November 17, 2005 at 08:33 PM My guess is that the controller logged in with a TWR callsign, but actually connected with Center chosen from the facility type dropdown. Developer: vPilot, VRC, vSTARS, vERAM, VAT-Spy Senior Controller, Boston Virtual ARTCC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts