New ATIS Requirements?

[Nate Johns]

Can someone please justify the new, apparantly required entry in to VATUSA controllers' ATIS for regional night promotion (albeit in enforcement circa 3/1/06)?

 

It seems after ages and ages of trying to pare down the size of ATII (plural of ATIS? ) for the sake of bandwidth, this seems like b[Mod - Happy Thoughts] ackward logic to require another line. Besides, how many pilots really either 1.) know the difference between ZMA and ZME (etc.), or 2.) actually bother to read controller ATIS information?

 

~Nate

 

PS - Will there be ATIS police checking everyones ATIS making sure this line is in there, thereby using more bandwidth?

 

Reference (as posted at the ZAB [Albuquerque] Forums):

 

"Effective March 1st, 2006

 

All VATUSA controllers are required to add the following message to their ATIS

 

Code:

 

Its XX Region night... ZYY is in the spotlight. A flight from ZAB to ZYY sure would be nice tonight!

 

 

Replace XX with West, Central, North East, South East, Alaskan, Hawaiian, and ZYY with spotlighted ARTCC.

 

Example ATIS:

 

$mypvtrw

KAMA Information TANGO - Winds 250 at 04, skies clear...etc.

Departing and Arriving Runway 22

Its NE Region night... ZBW is in the spotlight. A flight from ZAB to ZBW sure would be nice tonight!

 

Note: This is manditory for all ZAB controllers."

 

PPS - I'm not a dolt, and I understand the basic premise behind the rule. Alas, I'd still like to understand how this was the best solution to come up with.

[Craig Moulton]

You can bet that you will NEVER see such lines in my Controller info.

[Norman Blackburn]

Nate,

 

Like you I understand what is trying to be achieved but completely perplexed on it. The EC Policy is clear with its requirements (due bandwidth) to restrain ATIS to 3 lines with a maximum of 4.

 

Whilst ATIS is a misnomer my preference would always be to see relevant information such as QNH/altimeter, Sky/Cloud, etc over such advertisements.

 

To put all of this on one line technically complies with the requirement it goes against the spirit.

[Nicholas Bartolotta 912967]

I have never even heard this went into affect, but I think its ridiculous. Like Nate said, everyone has been trying to shorten your ATIS, and I'm not going to sub info that is helping pilots for an advertisment.

[Chanse Watson 834810]

The idea behind this was to eliminate the blame of 'stealing traffic' during Regional Nights, etc. The problem was that of advertising being an issue, or lack thereof. You're right, it's not the best idea. My original idea was that of leaving some of the advertisement up to the VAs for these regional nights or what are now - ARTCC Spotlights. Being that's where most of our pilots come from, I really didn't want to bring up what is now in effect. Apparently though, forwarding some of the advertising campaign to all of the VAs in VATUSA was not the best way.

[Garry Morris 920567]

"Stealing Traffic"?? Give me a break.

 

This is a highly complex, low effectiveness, worthless rule that really serves no purpose but to confuse controllers as to what ARTCC they are supposed to put in.

 

Stealing Traffic? We may as well just demand that all ARTCCs not in the featured region for the night stay offline to funnel the pilots to the staffed region.

[Nicholas Bartolotta 912967]

We may as well just demand that all ARTCCs not in the featured region for the night stay offline to funnel the pilots to the staffed region.

Don't tempt them

[Gerry Hattendorf 935415]

Wow!

 

And I thought spamming the ATC frequency was bad, now I'm going have to spam my controler info?

[Richard Green 810012]

The logic behind this was to help tell the pilots who the hosted ARTCC was as the non-dolt Nate Johns as said.

As to people who flat out refuse, thats your right, and I never made it a REQUIREMENT, just a suggestion.

How the ATMs interpit this is another issue...

 

That being said... it always amazes me that people, rather than make a positive suggestion or comment, always want to come out of the woodwork and complain.

 

If you don't have anything positive to say, why bother to say it?

[Nate Johns]

Fair enough then to hear that it was a suggestion, not a requirement, but that's not how it was presented.

 

As toward "If you don't have anything positive to say, why bother to say it?"

 

I'd call this healthy dissent toward a questionable requirement/suggestion. The world is not all peaches and cream, and not every proposal is the next big incredible blowout idea to implement.

 

~Nate

 

PS - Thank you for acknowledging my non-doltness

[Richard Green 810012]

I have no control over how ARTCCs present suggestions.... rather I never make demands of anyone.

 

Rather I ask all ATMs in a group what they think of things.

 

My only request is... if you dont like my idea, thats fine.... but give me a different solution.

[Richard Green 810012]

To further this end...

 

A kind soul put it better than I did... ."Guys, we're moving to a rotating spotlight scheme for the regional nights to help out some of the quieter ARTCC's. To further this goal, we could use your help. If you wouldn't mind referencing the spotlighted ARTCC in your region somehwere in your ATIS, it would really help out."

 

As far as the ATIS line issue... I was under the impression that was a SUGGESTION and not a REQUIREMENT.

As such we will hope the VAs, Broadcasts and the Event Calendar are enough.

[Ross Carlson]

I say stick with regular SUP broadcasts. They are MUCH more visible than any controller's ATIS and much less wasteful of bandwidth. (Yes, I realize that a broadcast goes to everyone, not just the person tuned to a given controller, but since people are much more likely to notice and read broadcasts, that bandwidth is used much more effectively, thus not wasted.)

[Keith Smith]

The original proposal was that the ARTCC's in the participating region would have a reference to the regional night, and the spotlit ARTCC. To my knowledge, there was no suggestion that EVERY controller in the controller would have to reference the regional night. For example, if I'm working LAX_CTR, and it's the east coast regional night, suggesting that ppl fly from ZLA to Boston doesn't make much sense, as the event would be done by the time they arrive.

 

However, if it's western region night, and it's ZOA's turn...I might put a note in my ATIS with words to that effect.

[Kyle Sipples 932159]

The simple fact is that we have seen more and more "advertising" on ATIS's lately.

Whether it's asking for feedback or promoting regional nights, there is plenty of it out there.

And if it is out there, I suppose this is not a big deal to put in the ATIS.

 

My only concern is that the more non-ATIS information we put in our ATIS, the less likely pilots are to pay attention to them. And who can blame them? I'm not sure where it lies, but there is a fine line somewhere.

 

I hope the BOG or VATUSA provide some guidance as to what exactly should and should not go into an ATIS. Right now they have restricted the length, but I think content is just as important.

 

Just my two cents!

Edited February 14, 2006 at 08:15 PM by Guest

[Ross Carlson]

I think you make a few excellent points there, Kyle. I agree that the more information that controllers put into their ATIS that is not directly related to the flight, the less likely it is to be read by pilots.

 

I've also thought that the restriction based on the number of lines is somewhat off the mark. What's to stop controllers from having 4 very long lines? I agree that there needs to be some control over the content, not just the number of lines. For starters, I would not allow any information not directly related to conducting a flight in the airspace. No advertising of events, no solicitations for feedback, no rooting for your favorite superbowl team, etc.

 

I believe that VATSIM (or at least VATUSA) needs a better way to advertise events. Ideally, it would be some sort of "push" mechanism that automagically sends event data to the membership, either by email or through something more fancy like a browser plugin, RSS feed, etc. I would love to be able to sit down at my computer and see a list of upcoming events for the next 7 days in my areas of interest. Those areas of interest would be configurable, as well as the number of days ahead that are shown.

 

For controller feedback, I think a central "intake form" for controller feedback would be great. A single form on the VATUSA site where pilots could go to provide feedback for any controller in any ARTCC, I think would help increase the amount of feedback actually received. If pilots could have a single bookmark to use, and not have to extract a URL from an ATIS, or find a form in a different place on each ARTCC site, they would be much more likely to leave feedback.

 

My 2 pennies.

[Michael Kaplan 896249]

 

That being said... it always amazes me that people, rather than make a positive suggestion or comment, always want to come out of the woodwork and complain.

 

If you don't have anything positive to say, why bother to say it?

 

Wish we had more guys like this on the network. Thanks for all your work Richard. There are those out there who recognize it and appreciate it!

[Gerry Hattendorf 935415]

I have no control over how ARTCCs present suggestions.... rather I never make demands of anyone.

 

Rather I ask all ATMs in a group what they think of things.

 

My only request is... if you dont like my idea, thats fine.... but give me a different solution.

 

Richard,

 

Please forgive me for being terse, but the email was sent to all of us via ZAB, and not from VATUSA.

 

And looking up the minutes of the last BoG meeting, I failed to see anything about this NPRM.

 

I'm sorry, but the email that I received appears to state that's a requirement, not an option.

 

So please accept my applogies on this, as many other posters feel the same way I do.

 

The ATIS (Controller Info) should only contain the RELEVENT information that the pilot is concerned about, like the current METAR, and [Mod - Happy Thoughts]igned runways from the tower.

 

I've been using Ross's great program ATISMaker for a long time, and pilots, (95/100) report the current ATIS code every time!

 

I'm afraid, (and I understand what your trying to accomplish) if we start sending out "advertisments", like Ross has stated, were wasting bandwith, and "spamming" our ATIS, to the point that nobody's going to bother, so then we move back to server overloads, just as when all the controllers kept their settings on 600 NM.

 

I'm now wearing the flame-proof suit now, but this is just my opionion on this!

 

Respectfuly,

[Josh Hjemvick 811983]

So what happens to those controllers, myself as an example, that refuse to put that spam into my ATIS?

[Jeffery Williams 849847]

So what happens to those controllers, myself as an example, that refuse to put that spam into my ATIS?

 

I think Richard made it pretty clear that it isn't a requirement, but that some ARTCC's interpreted it that way. Did you not read the entire thread before posting a sarcastic comment?

 

If you don't want to do it, then don't do it. I see nothing wrong with supporting the advertising of our events. I say "our" because we are ALL part of VATUSA as a team. It amazes me to see how some of you react at the slightest hint that someone may be telling you what to do.

[Josh Hjemvick 811983]

So what happens to those controllers, myself as an example, that refuse to put that spam into my ATIS?

 

I think Richard made it pretty clear that it isn't a requirement, but that some ARTCC's interpreted it that way.

 

If you don't want to do it, then don't do it. I see nothing wrong with supporting the advertising of our events. I say "our" because we are ALL part of VATUSA as a team. It amazes me how some of you seem to have such a fear that someone may tell you what to do.

 

Ah you see Jeffery, I neglected to read the whole post. My bad. . .

 

Now your remark about members not acknowledging that we are all on one team, I find that a bit condesending. If that's your opinion, then great. But I'm doubtful that many would agree with you. Just like it amazes you how some seem to have such a fear that someone may tell them what to do, it amazes me how some people feel the need to get on a soapbox and seem so high and mighty at every possible time.

 

Thanks for clearing it up for me Richard.

[Jeffery Williams 849847]

Now your remark about members not acknowledging that we are all on one team, I find that a bit condesending.

 

So if we're all part of the same team, whats the problem with advertising our events in our ATIS broadcasts?

 

I don't buy the whole spam thing. If someone is advertising their VA or something not directly related to VATSIM or VATUSA that would be "spam". Controllers often advertise their own ARTCC's events using their ATIS, so what exactly is the issue with advertising their division's events? How can doing so be considered "spam" any more than making a broadcast about it to the entire network? At least if its in the ATIS it is read by a select crowd that will most likely have an interest in it, not someone flying down in South America that doesn't know or care about whats going on in VATUSA. I'm sorry, but the logic behind this seems perfectly reasonable to me.

 

As for Gerry's comment about bandwidth, that is definitely something that should be taken into consideration. That is a valid issue that was brought forth in a constructive manner. I trust that our leadership will look into that.

 

As far as my "soapbox" goes, yes I do get on one from time to time. I only do so when someone gives me a good reason to though. Remember, I wasn't the one who started off with the sarcastic post. Richard is doing his best to promote our events for the better of all of us, and it frustrates me to see people complain and make sarcastic remarks with no real justification behind them.

[Craig Moulton]

I will admit that my initial post was a bit off the cuff and was not "reasonable". However in my own defense, I had not heard of this until this post came up, and in the initial context that it was presented caused me heart burn.

 

I now understand the spirit underwhich it was presented, though I still do not expect to change my "ATIS".

[Kyle Sipples 932159]

For the record, a "team" can have healthy discourse.

I think it's fine if we have different opinions, as long as we are cordial to each other and abide by the rules.

[Richard Green 810012]

I will admit that my initial post was a bit off the cuff and was not "reasonable". However in my own defense, I had not heard of this until this post came up, and in the initial context that it was presented caused me heart burn.

 

I now understand the spirit underwhich it was presented, though I still do not expect to change my "ATIS".

 

Craig, in the many ( many, many, many ) years I have known you...

You have always been one to speak your mind, and thats not a bad thing.

 

You did read something that made you upset, and you have every right to post your thoughts.

I however hope that if you hear something that doesnt sound 100% kosher in the future, you will shoot me an email or ask "Did this come from VATUSA"?