Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Deal all,

 

Is there any interest in creating a South East Asia Flight Service Station?

 

In a year of controlling, I have hardly seen high volumes of airplanes arriving in one particular point of South East Asia. Most traffic p[Mod - Happy Thoughts] through or transit the SE Asian Airspace.

Having a FSS, would increase traffic, have less away form keyboard pilots and genuine interest to do more flights in the area.

 

The SEA's skies are hardly lit together anyways except during events. It would be a traffic boost I feel if pilots had En-route coverage from Burma (Myanmar) all the way to East Timor.

 

I could make a sector-file? 50% done already.

 

Am am currently looking at Manila along with Burma and East Timor. The rest to the areas I have. This would mean that we have a sector file ENROUTE descent for the whole SEA skies.

 

vACC Chief's / vACC staff of SEA what are your thoughts?

 

-

 

If there is interest expressed, then I will E-mail Chief of SEA and see if he can forward this good news onto the BoG for approval.

Next I might ask if Eurocontrol is willing to spare one controller to explain how they handle high density traffic and hopefully realise the creation of a SEA_FSS.

 

-

 

If there is uncertainty, we could always have a trial period? To test out _FSS maybe 4 months and submit a review? From then on Bog's or VATSIM ASIA final's the call? (I am not to sure who authorises the approval of a FSS)

 

Please let me know your thoughts or if I am simply talking lala land.

 

David.

Edited by Guest

David Lee

Timezone | GMT +8

Link to post
Share on other sites

SEA_FSS? 100% agree

 

I do believe this will bring more traffic to fly above SEA and I will not get this in my private channel "Hey, thanks for the ATC service.. very rare to get ATC service in this region"

 

David I'll email WIIF and WAAF sector files (both East and West region) to you.

 

Any thoughts?

------------------------------------------------------

Indonesia VaCC | Virtual Airlines of Indonesia

Link to post
Share on other sites

This could be a great solution; FSS positions have successfully been introduced in Russia and Africa (notably) and attract a great deal of traffic serving as a great way of combining sectors and extending service provision.

 

Who knows, in the long-term you might not need it, it could generate the growth you need to have every sector on every night Failing that though it could give you a terrific boost.

Thomas George

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wah thanks for the fast response all !!

 

SEA_FSS? 100% agree

 

I do believe this will bring more traffic to fly above SEA and I will not get this in my private channel "Hey, thanks for the ATC service.. very rare to get ATC service in this region"

 

David I'll email WIIF and WAAF sector files (both East and West region) to you.

 

Any thoughts?

 

Hi Ray,

Thanks for Indonesia's support. I totally agree! Please mail them to me and I'll add them ... you have my E-mail?

 

This could be a great solution; FSS positions have successfully been introduced in Russia and Africa (notably) and attract a great deal of traffic serving as a great way of combining sectors and extending service provision.

 

Who knows, in the long-term you might not need it, it could generate the growth you need to have every sector on every night Failing that though it could give you a terrific boost.

 

Hi George,

Thanks for wise input. 100% agree. I have seen these FSS and believe it's Asia's time to have a go ... and who knows, we may get more controllers to control local sectors due to Flight Service. Time will tell

 

Hi David,

you might want to check our the Eurocontrol vACCs webpage to see how we operate it.

 

You can also contact Pedro Diogo, the vACC director for more information.

 

Hi to you too Sebastian,

It is nice to see your support for an Asian _FSS. I will bookmark your webpage and contact Mr. Pedro as soon as I am sure this project is in development.

 

-

 

Manila, Bangkok, Vietnam any opinions?

 

David

David Lee

Timezone | GMT +8

Link to post
Share on other sites

David, i`m sure a few years ago FSS for Asia was proposed to the BoG, Someone correct me if i`m wrong but it was not approved due to the High bandwidth use on the VATSIM Servers, But that should not stop us from making another application to the BoG`s, Asia in real life has several FSS Facilities that cover 100% of Asia, i`m all for it David, Let me know if vACC Philippines can help out.

 

Rick Wilson

vACC Philippines Chief

vACC Philippines Chief

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rick,

 

You are correct that the wide range causes concern about network bandwidth so the use of FSS is strictly limited and requires BoG approval.

 

I believe the Asia FSS you refer to is RJTG_FSS; which received approval at the time and in 2009 was carried over into Appendix B of the Global Ratings Policy. http://www.vatsim.net/network/docs/

 

The suggestion here is certainly something for Deepan Mehta, the RD of Asia, to consider.

 

Roland Collins

VATSIM co-Founder

Link to post
Share on other sites
David

 

Please mail me regarding the FSS proposal .

 

Many thanks. On the way!

 

David, ... i`m all for it David, Let me know if vACC Philippines can help out.

 

Rick Wilson

vACC Philippines Chief

 

Hi Rick thanks for the support, I will mail you the necessities.

 

David.

David Lee

Timezone | GMT +8

Link to post
Share on other sites

Eugene Lee and I have submitted a proposal like this to the ex-VATASIA RD months ago, but when brought up to BoG, BoG just flatly rejected the idea, claiming that it will greatly reduce bandwidth. So this plan never came true.

 

I hope when this new proposal goes up to BoG again, BoG will look at this and analyse it objectively, and not deny Asia of having a major FSS.

Lester Lee

Training Director

Instructor

VATSIM South East Asia Division

[email protected]

 

President & CEO

Singapore Virtual Airlines Group

http://www.singaporevirtualairlines.org

[email protected]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Lester,

 

I think the main point is that "FSS" is not the only way, supercentres and such are also options. The point is that you would benefit hugely from larger centre positions to consolidate existing positions during times of low ATC coverage. Now you have to find the best way to achieve that.

 

Regards,

Thomas George

Link to post
Share on other sites
Rick,

 

You are correct that the wide range causes concern about network bandwidth so the use of FSS is strictly limited and requires BoG approval.

 

I believe the Asia FSS you refer to is RJTG_FSS; which received approval at the time and in 2009 was carried over into Appendix B of the Global Ratings Policy. http://www.vatsim.net/network/docs/

 

The suggestion here is certainly something for Deepan Mehta, the RD of Asia, to consider.

 

Roland Collins

VATSIM co-Founder

 

Hello Roland, Thankyou for the Info on RJTG_FSS.

 

David The FSS proposed would cover from Hong Kong, Philippines, Vietnam, Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, and Border with Melbourne`s FSS to the South and also East to Timor/PNG which is BNE FSS i think. This would be a valuble Service for transiting flights from Europe and the Sub Continent to AU and also regional Asian Flights.

 

Rick Wilson

vACC Philippines Chief

vACC Philippines Chief

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Lester,

 

I think the main point is that "FSS" is not the only way, supercentres and such are also options. The point is that you would benefit hugely from larger centre positions to consolidate existing positions during times of low ATC coverage. Now you have to find the best way to achieve that.

 

Regards,

 

Will 1 supercentre manned by 1 controller be able to cover that many countries then? If it does, then I presume the amount of bandwidth taken up is still the same.

 

And yes, we will find a way to bring it up.

Lester Lee

Training Director

Instructor

VATSIM South East Asia Division

[email protected]

 

President & CEO

Singapore Virtual Airlines Group

http://www.singaporevirtualairlines.org

[email protected]

Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with FSS is its large fixed 1500nm radius that cannot be tailored in any way.

 

Ideally an FSS service should not overlap any other ATC service of any type; which is usually quite easily achieved within a large oceanic area such as the Pacific or Atlantic.

 

A problem that I can see in the SEA target area is that it is relatively quite small and an FSS for oceanic would overlap the adjacent land based services. I believe the SEA area could be covered with a CTR of 600nm (SEA-OC_CTR); possibly only a single vis-centre but certainly with multi-vis.

 

Using a CTR to provide the service instead of FSS does not require BoG approval however; operating an oceanic service requires an oceanic endorsement since it is simulating radio procedures that are completely different to radar procedures.

 

Roland Collins

VATSIM co-Founder

Link to post
Share on other sites
The problem with FSS is its large fixed 1500nm radius that cannot be tailored in any way.

 

Ideally an FSS service should not overlap any other ATC service of any type; which is usually quite easily achieved within a large oceanic area such as the Pacific or Atlantic.

 

A problem that I can see in the SEA target area is that it is relatively quite small and an FSS for oceanic would overlap the adjacent land based services. I believe the SEA area could be covered with a CTR of 600nm (SEA-OC_CTR); possibly only a single vis-centre but certainly with multi-vis.

 

Using a CTR to provide the service instead of FSS does not require BoG approval however; operating an oceanic service requires an oceanic endorsement since it is simulating radio procedures that are completely different to radar procedures.

 

Roland Collins

VATSIM co-Founder

 

Hi Roland,

 

Thanks for information.

 

I have measured the distance from furthest West point to furthest East point diagonally and it is a lot more than 1,500 NM. To give you an idea WAAF it's self (meaning only Ujung area) is 1,789 + NM diagonally so the fixed 1,500 NM should be good?

 

I have tried opening a centre with multiple vis points but the maximum entry is four. It is not enough.

 

That's why I thought and some others agree that a FSS would be nice. The idea is to provide radar coverage. No Oceanic Radio Procedures. Same as EURE_FSS.

 

Reading here I see the term "Mega Centres?" Is there more information on this?

David Lee

Timezone | GMT +8

Link to post
Share on other sites

Understood.

 

My technical point was; "Ideally an FSS service should not overlap any other ATC service of any type".

 

As I said, this is usually quite easy with oceanic FSS covering a large ocean but becomes more difficult to achieve with FSS providing an overland CTR service; especially where the service covers several countries.

 

Those making the decision in this matter understand the technical aspects.

 

Roland

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

I think some of you have already mentioned brought into discussion the major barrier that the embryo version did not continue to work a few years ago. I myself generally support the idea of extended CTR coverage during off-peak hours. However, these concerns come to my mind:

 

1. The proposed FSS will leap over several countries that administer their own aviation rules. Provided that the person who mans the FSS position will cover the en-route ATC service of several countries, what sort of training shall such controller undergo before he/she is endorsed to control at the position? Does such person have to be a visiting controllers at all VACCs of VATSEA? Or will there be a special arrangement for that?

 

2. This FSS idea does not exist in the real world. Thus, a very precise definition on the boundary and service scope of the FSS should be set up. For example, what will be the ceiling and floor of such FSS? Will that vary from country to country? And also, what will be the arrangement if in case a CTR controller of a covered FIR comes online (e.g. VTBB_CTR or WSJC_CTR).

 

3. Local Procedures: This somewhat is related to item 1. If a flight is to land into an airport under the coverage of the FSS, FSS should be able to initiate the arrival procedure for such flight. Thus this leads to the question of how much knowledge of local procedure will the FSS controllers be required to learn before taking the post?

 

4. The displayed callsign cannot be "SEA" in fear that it may be confused with positions within Seattle ARTCC. I guarantee that would at least happen on servinfo.

 

These must be rigorously defined before the FSS can become fully operational. I hope you understand that I don't mean to bring all these up as a challenge but as a guideline for future planning.

Alfred Tang (934809)

 

Director | Hong Kong VACC

Senior Training Manager | Hong Kong VACC

cropped-logo.png

26

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 months later...

Hi all,

 

Four months later and here is the situation ... (to those that have followed this thread) Well the plan has been sent and we await the call form the BoG and EC

 

--

Update

--

 

If you desire to view the new facility on your maps then

 

Servinfo users.

To see the new FSS please add this to the .dat file under [uIR]

 

ASEA/South East Asia Control/VYYF+VTBB+VVTS+VVGL+VDPP+VLVT+WAAF+WIIF+WABZ+WADZ+WSJC+WMFC+WBFC+RPHI

 

For VATSPY

Vatspy users like myself you'll need to open your start menu and type in" %appdata%\VAT-Spy ". Open the file and locate the .dat file. Open it under [uIRs] you need to add:

 

ASEA|South East Asia Control|VYYF,VTBB,VVTS,VVGL,VDPP,VLVT,WAAF,WIIF,WSJC,WMFC,WBFC,RPHI

 

 

More updates when there is.

David Lee

Timezone | GMT +8

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Hi all,

 

We have received the OK from the authorities to commence operations beginning 4th December this year so I'm sure all are looking forward to this service!

 

Thanks to all the participants in this thread in making this a reality!

 

Regards,

David

David Lee

Timezone | GMT +8

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi all,

 

We have received the OK from the authorities to commence operations beginning 4th December this year so I'm sure all are looking forward to this service!

 

Thanks to all the participants in this thread in making this a reality!

 

Regards,

David

 

Me again,

 

It looks like I have omitted an all important word being "trial"

"We have received the OK from the authorities to commence trial operations ... "

 

Thanks Deepan for setting the record straight.

 

/David

David Lee

Timezone | GMT +8

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear David and Deepan, congrats on getting the 30 day trial for ASEA_FSS, i know David has worked so hard at making this dream a reality, this will indeed be a significant and needed boost for the South East Asia region as well as for VATSIM, be they Controllers or Pilots, if all concludes well. You have RPHI`s full support and we look forward to seeing the regions activity increase, Good Luck and i ask Everyone to support this, and make an effort, i hope we will all get behind this project and make it a great success.

 

Rick Wilson

vACC Philippines Chief

vACC Philippines Chief

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...