Why isnt VATSIM free for all?

[Tom Knudsen]

I have alway enjoyed VATSIM as both pilot and ATC, mostly because it is free but also it is an place where you can log on and have fun togeather with other people.

 

The mantra of VATSIM says and I quote:

 

"You are free to enjoy VATSIM in the way you want to enjoy it, by flying, controlling, or both. VATSIM is a network for all to enjoy, and it can be whatever you make it. Welcome."

 

So my question is and I do hope some of the directors and supervisors read this carefully.

Why are we not allowed to controll or fly on VATSIM whenever we want?

 

My reason for bringing this question up is that in our region of the world (Europe Division - Scandinavia ATCC) we are not allowed to control as ATC as much as we want, i cannot say the same for pilots as they are not controlled by VACCSCA.

This means that if you are for some reason not active as ATC during a 6 months period, like .ie. your off working or on extended hollidays you are deactivated as ATC. For you to return to active duty you need re-training as it is indicated.

 

I am not sure this applies to every region or if it is standard to VATSIM, but in a sens what it is saying is that you need approval for login on as ATC again. This I can understand, as it is the same with "being sertified or checked out" as controller to get a rating. In many way this will also restrict ATC from joining but also keep the level of expertice up to a good standard as the pilots derserve. But a re-training after you have this learned ability is just wrong, especially when there are waiting list applied that will in some cases leaving you on hold for 6-months to a year before you can get "approved" to be ATC again is nothing more than saying that VATSIM is not free to use when ever you like.

 

I am rated as a Controller 1 and have about 200 hours online as Controller 1 rated. This may not be that much to some, but it has been restricted by this re-training ban. My last controller session was back in 2014 and I have been wanting to get back online ever since.

 

At this moment there is no available mentors in order for me to get an active duty re-training so I can log on, they are refusing to allow me to log on before I have a re-training. I am numer 13 in que for a mentor and that will after my calculations and summer holliday, mentor private life etc. Take about a 6 months to a year to get. I applied for a re-training in April and I got the message to be in this que today.

 

So my question is again directed to VATSIM and the community, why do you say it is free to use VATSIM when it is clearly not? Even though we spent ours training and getting our rating just to provide a service to other fellow enthusiast. Why can they log on and fly when we as ATC need to essentially be banned from entering the world of VATSIM

 

My only dream now is to serve as ATC, but sadly VACCSCA do not want me too.

Is this how the founders and board of directors want it to be?

 

Thank you for reading

Best wishes

Tom Knudsen

925670

[1275389]

I'll expand on this later... But it's a privalede to be trained, not a right. If you have to wait somewhere, then don't complain about it, everyone waits.

There are PLENTY of other places that are in need of controllers, have available staff, etc. So to your point, you aren't paying for training staff, they're all volunteers, taking time to train YOU. VATSIM's free, don't complain.

[Arvid Hansson]

Tom, VACCSCA wants you to control and we're glad that you're back. I am not sure why you would claim the opposite as both Håvard and I have made it clear to you that you have a place in the queue for a re-validation session.

 

Whilst some (sub-)divisions don't have inactivity policies, in VATSIM Scandinavia we have the 10h/6 months rule as you've highlighted in your initial post. Controllers who fail to meet the required hours are subject to an OTS session with an instructor or examiner upon their return. These are the rules, we expect our controllers to respect them and most of them do. There are several reasons and arguments behind using such a policy, the most important one being that your knowledge and proficiency declines as you stay away from controlling for long periods of time. Add some airspace changes, new phraseology, the introduction of Point Merge and a new Euroscope plugin into the mix and you'll see before you a completely different sector from when you last controlled.

 

The OTS sessions exist primarily to help you get back into controlling quicker, a seasoned controller is able to explain things, guide you in the right direction and correct any errors you make better than any written manual ever could. I am sure you can easily see why having one controller in a group of five who are controlling alongside each other who's not up to speed and lacks the proficiency to control their airspace swiftly could cause a chain reaction of poor service through the other sectors resulting in bad experiences for the other controllers and the pilots who flew. Hopefully I don't need to explain why I want to prevent this from happening.

 

You do bring up some valid reasons as to why a controller might be away for long periods of time (I'd love a 6 month holiday!). In these cases, we expect controllers to let us know they'll be away with the intention to return to the network once they're back. We see declined interest amongst controllers across the network on a daily basis, it's extremely common. Unfortunately you can't just fade away, come back two years later and expect everything to be as before.

 

I feel that myself and Håvard have done all we are required to as members of VACCSCA's ATC Training Staff in order to help you progress. We have both given several reasons as to why training is slower at the moment and given you resources to read up on whilst you wait for training. I am concerned that you'd rather spend your time posting stuff like this than brushing up on procedures, observing active controllers and in other ways showing a will to get back into controlling.

 

I explained to you that the queue isn't strictly managed on a "first come, first served" basis. Let me put it this way, posting incorrect statements and false accusations will not get you a head start. VATSIM is free for everyone, you just have to follow the rules.

[Tom Knudsen]

Dear sir

 

I am fully aware of the rules and regulation of the community of VACCSCA and further more i am bound to obay them as everybody else are. This post is mearly ment to highlight the issue of the 10h/6months rule placed by VACCSCA on its members.

 

While I obay that rule I do not agree with it for several reason, this is not just argumentativ for the sake of arguing, but hopefully in the spirit of voluntares aimed to be some day lifted or removed. You say it your self that the volunteers are declining and the time spent online is not what it used to be. I will not argue how long this OTS ban has been in place, but i take it it has been for some years.

 

That said, I do hope VATSIM will see this as an un-necessary restriction and perhaps guide us in ways we might do things more different in order to get more volunteers, make it easier for people to go to school, be away for work (fishing) etc. and then come back controlling.

 

I do believe in the OTS refresh system as a general aid to refresh someones knowledge, but I do think it should be voluntary not demanded. But that is me, we have all different opinions. Perhaps we can find other solutions, perhaps there is none. In anyway I need to wait for my OTS and meanwhile I will update my self and my knowledge, learn new procedures before getting this training hopefully this year due to vacations etc.

 

But I hope there will be a review internal at VACCSCA where you ask yourselves this, is this rule necessary or could we have more ATC coverage without?

 

Anyway, not here to argue, just qurious to know why there are such rules for ATC when Pilots can fly whenever they want regardless of how long they have been offline...

[Daniel Klepp]

Tom, we keep a very high standard in VATSIM Scandinavia, and it is for a reason. I don't think you logging in as a C1 after at least two years away, without any introduction to current procedures, would be a good experience for you, the pilots or your fellow controllers.

 

You even said so on our forum that you don't know how to use EuroScope, which can be quite overwhelming at first without anyone helping you get started.

 

What you are trying to do here, is to make sure everyone who has ever held an ATC rating can just log on any time they feel like. Which I think would effectively take our good reputation on the network and toss it out the window. Demotivating other controllers who are actually current, and making pilots who receive a lower standard of service maybe think twice about flying up north to us again.

 

I'm not saying no one is able to get up to speed on their own, using docomeentation and reading LoA, but I know from experience that most wont.

[Christian Frederiksen 1315]

We keep a high standard in Vatsim Scandinavia, and we expect our controllers to provide the best controlling possible. That can only be done if they are kept up to date with how the systems work, the local agreements and alike.

If you havn't controlled in the past two years, then there is no doubt that a refresh training is in its right. Local agreements will have changed, workflows will have changed, sectors will have changed.

 

Pilots visit Vatsim Scandinavia and expects the best quality ATC service possible, and a rusty ATC that hasn't controlled for two years, can hardly provide the ATC quality that is expected by the pilots. I am not saying it's not possible, but I really doubt it.

 

If you've had 200 hours or 2000 hours, doesnt change the fact that you will be out of shape after 2 years without controlling.

[Tom Knudsen]

Hi Daniel

 

I will agree with you on most points Daniel. The reputation level of VACCSCA is good and some at vaccsca have said the best on VATSIM. But I am not sure reputation is what should be a genuine factor of the VATSIM community. Not saying this is bad, but saying this should not be a key factor for allowing people to be ATC or Pilot for that matter. Saying people should aim to be better controllers is more than ok, but you also need to allow them to screw up once in a while and not care about the reputation of the controller environment.

 

That said, its not that difficult jumping in as an controller on VATSIM even after 5 years off, its like riding a bike, also it should not be hard. We are doing this for fun and the level of fun is different from user to user. Demanding people to sit ATC is also bad cause as you know they are providing their service for free and on their own time. This is my argument for needing the re-freshment training cause it is based upon others to volunteer their private life in order for me to use mine.

 

There is now rule that says a pilot cannot log on and fly whenever or whereever he wants, we as ATC are there to [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ist and help in the best manner we know and with the time we have to spare. So setting restriction requirements are basically saying to all ATC that we demanding of you to be ATC at our convenience regardless of your personal time.

 

I know with current rules I need to wait for another volunteer to offer his or hers time, in order for me to log onto VATSIM. Even worse I know that I also need to wait for that person to be a Controller 1 or higher in order to approve me. This is how it is done and this is the message given to me, have no problem understanding or obey this.

 

Last but at least, I was under the impression that ATCs can still use one of the softeware listed under here https://www.vatsim.net/air-traffic-control/software whilst sitting online??

So even though I want to use Eurosope I do not need to if above statement is true. So since I mostly have done VRC I could infact "just jump in after 2 years" and still do a high level of ATC..

 

Whilst procedures can be read and learned for higher level of ATC, would you not agree that there isnt that much experience needed to sit Tower or Ground?? Could it not be easier to allow "re-freshing ATC" sitting as ground or tower just to make people feel welcome and then take it from there?

 

Whilst you can learn basic Euroscope fast i.e. via video on Youtube that shows you everything you need to know, it is good to have a fellow ATC to talk to, but hey we have TeamSpeak for that. And could not he also learn the program to some extent as an observer?

 

Anyway, this is all questions I have since I do not agree with the ban of the VACCSCA, it respect them and follow them as I would do with the rules of conduct by VATSIM, but I do hope we can find better solutions for new, old or returning ATC.

 

Would you not agree Daniel?

 

If you havn't controlled in the past two years, then there is no doubt that a refresh training is in its right. Local agreements will have changed, workflows will have changed, sectors will have changed.

 

I have been controlling during the last two years, I have had refresh training that did not finish, and I was clear to sit ATC during this period after a short training session. But sadly there was work that left me out of the loop for some months. I am now trying to get back in.

 

Level of expertice is good, but it should not be a factor for ATC other than something to aim for, not a requirement or restriction, this leads me back to topic.. Isnt VATSIM suppose to be "free" for all?

[Daniel Larsen 935413]

Hello Tom! I have read you arguments, but I'm struggling to understand why you think it should be done that way! We all know that is it frustrating to be in a waiting queue for training, but I think most of the members in Scandinavia are happy that it is done this way to ensure professionalism and to ensure that we all are up to date!

 

You are saying that you can log in using VRC and still do "high level" ATC after a few years without controlling! I do not know anyone in Norway or Scandinavia that are using VRC, because all the sectorfiles and plugins are based on EuroScope and you need to use that software in order to be "up to date"

 

Your general knowlege of controlling migh still be there (will be checked during the refreshment), but like others already stated - procedures, software, LoA, airspace, sectors and plugins have changed and it is necessary to have training in order to be updated on that and in order to be able to cooperate with fellow ATC's and the pilots in a good way!

 

Procedures and LoA's are changing so quickly that even after just a couple of months away you might feel that you need to do some selfstudy before logging on! I have been on Vatsim since 2005 and I got 2500 hours controlling the ENOS sector. Even though I've got a lot of experience I always need to update my self on things! I don't think that I would have been able to do "high level" ATC after being away for a few years!

 

I'm thinking how it would have been if everyone could just login when ever they wanted without any "quality check" It doesn't sound good in my ears.

 

We have earlier seen members with a lot of knowledge from earlier days coming back after a few years! Some of them are actually quite shocked how much that has changed! Some might feel that they are ready, but when they get a mentor and start re-training they suddenly understand that it's not a good idea to just log on! For some it's just necessary with a few sessions, but we do also sometimes see that some might need more than that also!

 

Sweatbox is a good tool to use in training. It's possible to simulate traffic and let the candidate practice on how to use plugins, new software, procedures and so on... And also ensure that the general controlling skills is still up to date!

 

I can [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ure you that if you had logged on a simulator session with a mentor tonight you would have understood that there are quite a few things that you need to learn and re-train on before you will be able to do a good job online on your own!

 

We have the rules for a very good reason Welcome back and I hope you will get a mentor as soon as possible!

[Asher Patterson 1355268]

VATSIM is a volunteer organization, 100%. Everyone is here because they want to be, and because they enjoy it. I noticed that the requirement for a controller of 10 hours every six months is very reasonable. That's about an hour and thirty five minutes a month. At NYARTCC the requirement is two hours every month, not twelve every six. I can say that after just a few weeks of not controlling my skills get dull and I need to refresh my memory and "get back in the game". I would also like to point out that while you leave VATSIM does not stop. New controllers are being certified while dedicated training staff help keep VATSIM alive even as we see more and more people leaving. I understand the demand for training is high every-where, but all mentors and instructors also have lives and responsibilities that absolutely must take precedence.

 

Also please understand that training takes hours and much effort. If all the training staff and mentors decided they would only dedicate 10 hours every six months then surely nothing would be done and controlling could not advance. Training staff already invest a lot of time into their facilities, certainly more than regular controllers do. If I were an instructor or mentor I would much rather invest my time and energy into an active and enthusiastic controller who might one day fill my shoes, rather than one who cannot control for 10 hours spread out over six months. Did you know you spend an hour and forty five minutes a week on the toilet? If you cannot find 30 minutes a week to control then your skills certainly will not be very good.

[Ernesto Alvarez 818262]

maybe you chose the wrong words but i dont see why you think VATSIM isnt free. free doesnt mean there arent requirements, or are you implying someone is trying to charge you for training?

[Kirk Christie]

There is actually no requirements as written in the GRP to permit a VACC/ARTCC to remove some one from an active roster, there is in fact no requirement for any VACC/ARTCC to maintain a controller roster, with the exception of "Designated Airspace" "Solo endorsements" and "Visiting controllers"

 

Even the busiest airport on the network EGLL does not remove endorsements.

 

This policy that is held by Scandinavia VACC and a number of other VACC's/ARTCC's are actually in contradiction of the GRP

 

 

5. Local Rules

5.1 An important objective of this policy is to make it easier to become a controller by removing VATSIM excessive restrictions and unnecessary local rules without adversely affecting controller standards.

 

5.2 On-line operations require a controller to be flexible and versatile therefore local rules must be carefully considered to ensure that they do not impair these important on-line qualities.

 

5.3 Notwithstanding paragraphs 5.1 and 5.2, it is acceptable for Divisions to introduce Standard Operating Procedures to provide guidance to Controllers in respect of local arrangements such as runway configurations, clearance altitudes, handoff procedures etc. Such SOPs must be approved by the Division Director and must be published on Division/Facility websites for all controllers and pilots to read.

 

5.4 Local rules cannot restrict who can provide ATC services on any position that is not approved as Designated Airspace in accordance with Paragraph 6 of this policy for members rated S2 or higher.

 

5.5 Local rules cannot provide restrictions that would be in contravention of this policy.

 

Adherence to the GRP is something im going to be writing to the EC about, I believe they are not doing enough to ensure that over restrictive policies are kept to a minimum, the introduction of the GRP was to get away from this system.

[Bradley Grafelman]

There is actually no requirements as written in the GRP to permit a VACC/ARTCC to remove some one from an active roster

Okay, but is there a requirement to the contrary? If not, then it sounds like it's something left up to lower layers (e.g. divisions or vACCs/ARTCCs).

[Thimo Koolen]

Vatsim is free for all, because nobody is required to pay for it.

 

The reason some VACCs have these online requirements is simply to make sure controllers still have the required amount of knowledge. If you're away for a longer time, your knowledge will drop a lot and you'll need a refreshment.

 

I agree about the queue, but that's just too bad. I've applied to be a controller at my home VACC in January. That means I have been waiting for almost 7 whole months now and I think it'll take a while before I can start. It's too bad (and I have 181 hours on observer at this moment) but I can't change it. I just have to wait and so do a lot of others. Mentors are required to have a lot of experience to correctly train new controllers. While experienced controllers leave Vatsim and a lot of new people join, the queue for a mentor can get quite large. It's too bad, but we have to live with it.

[Tom Knudsen]

You are saying that you can log in using VRC and still do "high level" ATC after a few years without controlling! I do not know anyone in Norway or Scandinavia that are using VRC, because all the sectorfiles and plugins are based on EuroScope and you need to use that software in order to be "up to date"

 

Hi Daniel, long time no speak, nice talking to you again, and yea I do look forward to controlling again.

It is not that I totally disagree with you, and I do want the same as everybody else and that is to provide as good service as I can to the pilots. I think this is essential and the way to do it.

 

However I do not agree on certain things for the sake of the rules and regulations. This should be ok in any sens of the argument without people thinking "now here is a dude out looking for trouble" or "here is someone that potentially could ruin everything we have worked for". I do not hope you all thing this of me for writing my opinions here!

 

But to say VRC is no longer in use, or to say that if a controller wanted to use this tool he cannot because an local VATCC has converted to another software etc. is like saying to VATSIM that we do not give a rats behind about your rules and regulations, we do as we pleases and if anybody want to be part of us, well they need to get with the program.

 

A bit harsh you may say to put it like this, but regardless of me using VRC or Euroscope, you or anybody else cannot do anything about the fact that it is still approved and can be used if a controller so chooses to do so, regardless of local sector files etc.

 

Now, that is just my opinon on that particular subject. Luckely I do not want to use VRC but rather provide the best service I can with the most updated tools of the trade. I think this is a valid arguement and a key factor for being a virtual air traffic controller regardless of position.

 

And to build of this I have now read through all the mandetory information and training docomeents here http://vatsim-scandinavia.org/training-department/docomeentation/norway/. I have also ready every local procedures found here http://vatsim-scandinavia.org/atc/local-procedures/norway/ and the general procedures for handover. I even done the reading on the letters of agreement just to be safe. I will now look at all the charts to familirize myself with those, just to see whats new and whats important. But as anybody knows, you cannot learn them all, and it is not sure even though I can that I'll be controlling any centers, I might in fact only controll local tower or app positions if so chooses. The world do not revolve around ENGM or ENOS even though this is the most controlled positions in VACCSCA and by far the most favored. But hey, this is an argument in itselves and I am not going there.

 

So I have done all the reading, I know all the procedures and I have done stress test in the Euroscope simulation and I still find it to be pretty much the same as I left it, ok so there are some new nice tools like the Virtual NATCON, Virtual AWOS, FlightStrip bay and VATMAP etc. And I still have not read through all the wiki for Euroscope (huge task).. But I do feel I am on the right track in order to get back into the game.

 

I can [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ure you that if you had logged on a simulator session with a mentor tonight you would have understood that there are quite a few things that you need to learn and re-train on before you will be able to do a good job online on your own! We have the rules for a very good reason

 

Well I would agree but only because of Euroscope, I need the training to learn this more, get the feeling sort of speak. But that will come I am not affraid of not handling this either. Done it before and will do it again but do you believe you have rules and regulations for a good reason if it contredicts the rules of VATSIM, that said refering to Kirks Christie's post above. I am not against VACCSCAs rules and regulations, belive me but I do want to question them for myself and others like me, why you might ask? Well so rules and regulations do not interfer with anybodys wish to be a air traffic controller on VATSIM just because they happen to come from Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland or Iceland. We should be best, but we should not be the best in restricting our members from playing this game (its a game, not a job and certainly not real life)

 

This policy that is held by Scandinavia VACC and a number of other VACC's/ARTCC's are actually in contradiction of the GRP

 

I concure, and this sums up why I started this thread.

 

5.4 Local rules cannot restrict who can provide ATC services on any position that is not approved as Designated Airspace in accordance with Paragraph 6 of this policy for members rated S2 or higher.

 

This why I think rated ATC controller could in fact do tower and ground to get his fingers warm after being away for any amount of time. He or she could be part of the online community by doing "warm-up" sessions by their own at an local airport. He or she would then have the option to learn the local procedures for that airport and the benefit of it all would be that pilots now have an extra airport to visit rather than the one favored airport that everybody want to controll and most pilots visit.

 

I bet if you search the statistic you would see ENGM and ENOS being the most active positions in VACCSCA.

 

So instead of saying to every ATC in VACCSCA "you are not allowed to be an atc on Vatsim " before you have waited 6months to a year for a training session, you may have multiple airports online at any given time.

 

Would you say that high level of expertise only applies to a perticular position and or controller or would you say that multiple positions online is a better service to the pilots??

 

Welcome back and I hope you will get a mentor as soon as possible

 

Thank you Daniel, I sure hope so. I cannot wait to be back as I do recall we had way much fun before.

 

 

I agree about the queue, but that's just too bad. I've applied to be a controller at my home VACC in January. That means I have been waiting for almost 7 whole months now and I think it'll take a while before I can start. It's too bad (and I have 181 hours on observer at this moment) but I can't change it. I just have to wait and so do a lot of others. Mentors are required to have a lot of experience to correctly train new controllers. While experienced controllers leave Vatsim and a lot of new people join, the queue for a mentor can get quite large. It's too bad, but we have to live with it.

 

My heart cries when reading this, so you have my deepest sympathy friend. It should not be like this and I thin this explains why I also wrote this post to begin with hoping some one at VATSIM or Europe Division would look closer at this rule set by local ATCCs.

 

So therefore I quote Kirk Christie's post above once again

 

5. Local Rules

5.1 An important objective of this policy is to make it easier to become a controller by removing VATSIM excessive restrictions and unnecessary local rules without adversely affecting controller standards.

 

5.2 On-line operations require a controller to be flexible and versatile therefore local rules must be carefully considered to ensure that they do not impair these important on-line qualities.

 

5.3 Notwithstanding paragraphs 5.1 and 5.2, it is acceptable for Divisions to introduce Standard Operating Procedures to provide guidance to Controllers in respect of local arrangements such as runway configurations, clearance altitudes, handoff procedures etc. Such SOPs must be approved by the Division Director and must be published on Division/Facility websites for all controllers and pilots to read.

 

5.4 Local rules cannot restrict who can provide ATC services on any position that is not approved as Designated Airspace in accordance with Paragraph 6 of this policy for members rated S2 or higher.

 

5.5 Local rules cannot provide restrictions that would be in contravention of this policy.

[Dace Nicmane]

I'm neither controller nor staff, so forgive me for butting in, but wouldn't it make sense to prioritize returning controllers over the rest of the queue? If just one or two refreshing sessions is all it takes to get one more Center controller, surely it's an easy [Mod - Happy Thoughts]et for the facility, plus if he starts mentoring, he can get the rest of the queue moving faster. Half a year or more for a refresh does sound unreasonably long.

[David Zhong]

Article 1.01H of the CoR prohibits a downgrade of rating (except for some administrative purposes). I would argue that preventing a suitably-rated member from controlling until they complete a further [Mod - Happy Thoughts]essment has the same effect as downgrading that member:

 

The effect of inactivity rules: you can't control until you do an [Mod - Happy Thoughts]essment.

 

The effect of a downgrade: you can't control until you do an [Mod - Happy Thoughts]essment.

[Scott DeWoody]

I agree with a PV check (proficiency verification) being done if a controller is away for more than six months as AIRACs change every month and there could be changes in that particular airspace. What I do not agree with is it taking 6 months to a year to schedule such PV check. Dace had a very valid observation, if you get this C1 controller back on the scopes quicker, he/she may be willing to take on a mentor role and get the less experienced controllers on the scopes quicker... it's a win/win for everyone.

[Kirk Christie]

Some VACC's/ARTCC's have a requirement that you must do 3 hours in 1 calendar month to remain on an active roster... Who is setting the standard and who is monitoring them.

 

Currently VATSIM does not allow you restrict who can control with the exception of designated major airspace. The rating you hold in CERT for a particular area is what a supervisor would look at if someone said "hey this guy cant control here" a Supervisor would not be able to do anything about it.

 

Currently LON_CTR and LLLL_CTR and EURM_CTR are the only overland centres (excluding FSS which require oceanic endorsement) that are designated major airspace, that means that any C1 in that is shown in CERT as being a C1 for a particular area can log in and control Centre and no one can stop them, regardless of if they are shown as an active controller on the VACC/ARTCC website. Ratings are issued at a division level, not a VACC/ARTCC level.

 

The main rule here is, a VACC/ARTCC cannot restrict who can control, they can suggest that members meet a requirement, but they cannot enforce it.

 

5.4 Local rules cannot restrict who can provide ATC services on any position that is not approved as Designated Airspace in accordance with Paragraph 6 of this policy for members rated S2 or higher.

 

There are a number of airports listed as designated major airspace they receive less traffic than airports that are not listed, my other proposal to the EC would be to introduce a minimum requirement for a particular division to designate an airport as Major.

[Andreas Dermitzakis 121021]

Gents,

 

In accordance to GRP local competency is required too before a member is eligible to man a position without being mentored. Each and every local facility is required to hold such a roster/list on their website. In regards of the major airports/special airspace, it means that regardless if you have achieved the ratings in your home vACC, you cannot man this airspace/airport without a further examination due to its complexity/traffic levels.

[Tom Knudsen]

I would agree with you both...

 

I would argue that preventing a suitably-rated member from controlling until they complete a further [Mod - Happy Thoughts]essment has the same effect as downgrading that member:

 

if you get this C1 controller back on the scopes quicker, he/she may be willing to take on a mentor role and get the less experienced controllers on the scopes quicker

 

 

Here is an example (and it is important to me to let people know this is just an example not in any way an way to diz or disrepsect my friend and collegue, therefore he will be nameless):

 

I asked to be refreshed as Controller 1 as this is my rating back in April this year.. In June I got an answer from one of the training staff asking me if I was still interested in taking the refresh.. I was and though finally it will happen. A month later I wrote and asked to see if there was an updated status on my training. I then got a reply that said I was number 13 in line to get my refresh and due to the fact they do not have any mentors available because of hollidays etc. I still would need to wait. So basically from here to end of holliday season it is a month or two, then school starts and people are returning to their work leaving the windows open for refresh training small.

 

I am not sure who is doing this refresh training but the one person I mentioned that is a training [Mod - Happy Thoughts]istant has only from what I can see a S3 rating. The Training Director of Norway has an Instructor rating and are well qualified to approve me.. If these two that are listed on staff page are the only two listed that can do mentoring at VACCSCA, there is understandable reasons why I am 13 in line for OTS training. Surly I hope there are many more mentors with C1 or higher rating that could speed up the process.

 

So what is the bottom line issue here?

 

The main rule here is, a VACC/ARTCC cannot restrict who can control, they can suggest that members meet a requirement, but they cannot enforce it.

 

 

According to VATEUD $5 an VACC can render one person inactive and therefore in need of OTS training to get back into the game as the rule now says, even though it is a arguable VATSIM contradiction.

 

So here is my information and according to VATEUD $5 I can in fact log on and controll what ever I like that my C1 rating allows me to do..

 

CID Name ATC Rating Pilot Rating Country Registration Date Active

925670 Tom Knudsen C1 P0 NO 2005-03-25 09:54:41 YES

 

I am active and I am approved to controlled, but I do would like a OTS training anyway, but I do not want it to restrict me from doing what I love, especially when I have spent years of my free time to get rated to play this game.

[Tom Knudsen]

n accordance to GRP local competency is required too before a member is eligible to man a position without being mentored. Each and every local facility is required to hold such a roster/list on their website. In regards of the major airports/special airspace, it means that regardless if you have achieved the ratings in your home vACC, you cannot man this airspace/airport without a further examination due to its complexity/traffic levels.

 

Thank you for sharing sir.. But I am confused with you reply and hope you can elaborate further.

 

1. The GRP states that one need to have an examination before one can control at any given Major Airport or even airspace that would then include these major airports. This I understand, but I might be blind and ignorent but I cannot seem to find within the GRP where it states that and already approved controller which already have had this examination for such major airports cannot control any airport inside the VACC which included for a Enroute Controller both ATIS, GND, TWR, APP, DEP, DIR and CTR? Could you please post a link to this section of the GRP where this is mentioned? My eyes hare tired after reading both the Code of Regulation and Code of Conduct as well as every docomeent provided by Vatsim Scandinvia today, so in advance please excuse me if I am wrong here.

 

Here is what I found

 

VATEUD Rules paragraph $5

 

§ 5 - Air Traffic Controllers and VACC Airspace

 

A member with an ATC rating in according with VATSIM's Global Rating Policy belonging to VATEUD, has the following rights as to where he/she can provide ATC:

 

In official VATEUD VACC's airspace, only if listed on the VACC's controllers membership roster, and if considered "active" by the VACC Director

In unofficial VATEUD VACC's airspace, only if listed on the VACC's controllers membership roster

In VATEUD airspace, where no VACC exists, only if the individual is registered as a VATEUD member

 

Members who provide ATC within unofficial VACCs are handled by VATEUD TD, who oversees their training, and authorizes and executes their ID up- or downgrade procedures.

 

Each VACC has its controller and pilot members. In official VACCs, only the listed "active" member controllers can provide ATC within the VACC's airspace. A VACC has the authority to refuse a member the status of active ATC, based on published VACC policy.

 

A VACC has the right to render a controller "inactive" based on published VACC policy (see § 2 for details), and to not allow the member to provide ATC within the VACC's airspace until necessary procedures are completed for reactivation of his/her ATC status. It is the duty of the controller to fulfill the VACC´s requirements, and communicate with the VACC in order to regain "active" status, similarly it is the obligation of the VACC to [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ist and support the member wishing to be reactivated by means of Over the shoulder (OTS) checks within a reasonable period of time after a reactivation request being submitted.

 

The list of active controllers must be publicly displayed by each VACC, while the decision to display the Pilots, or general members list, rests with each VACC. Names and VATSIM IDs must be displayed, while email addresses are optional.

 

Here is what VATSIM says in its Code of Regulation

 

ARTICLE I. MEMBERSHIP

§1.01 Section I. Maintenance of Membership:

 

Once an individual’s application has been received and approved by VATSIM.net and that individual receives access to the network with a certificate number, p[Mod - Happy Thoughts]word and, for Air Traffic Controllers, a rating, then he or she

shall remain a member in good standing in VATSIM.net and shall not be required to renew his or her membership so long as such member maintains his or her membership, abides by this Code of Regulations, the “User Agreement”, the “Code of Conduct”, and otherwise complies with all other rules and regulations of VATSIM.net. In order to maintain his or her membership, a member must log on and use the VATSIM.net network as a pilot and/or a controller at least once during the previous calendar quarter.

 

Basically at this point there is no way to get around this rule, this I understand but my reason for making this post is to ask why such rules exist and if you or anybody else think is fare to members (we are talking just ATC) to be restricted from controlling in periods up to 6 months to a year just because the local VACC does not have any mentors?

 

So what happens if the VACCs cannot get mentors to do OTS training, does this mean ATC on waiting list will never be allowed to control?

 

Whilst I am according the the local (rooster list) acitive ATC, I will of course wait for my OTS training, hoping there is an mentor out there willing to offer their own time to train me back in to shape

[Mathias Johnsen 839996]

I'm neither controller nor staff, so forgive me for butting in, but wouldn't it make sense to prioritize returning controllers over the rest of the queue? If just one or two refreshing sessions is all it takes to get one more Center controller, surely it's an easy [Mod - Happy Thoughts]et for the facility, plus if he starts mentoring, he can get the rest of the queue moving faster. Half a year or more for a refresh does sound unreasonably long.

 

We prioritize returning controllers and people needing refresh session over normal queue. At least that's what we used to do when I was Training [Mod - Happy Thoughts]istant for Norway. I presume its the same way now

 

I know that we are not so many mentors (even though 2 new mentors have re-joined the team in Norway), and we already have a lot of students [Mod - Happy Thoughts]igned. I can take 2-3 students at a time, due to my own personal life (my 2 year old daughter wants my time as well).

 

We are now down in a 4 months waiting time (4 months since the earliest student applied) if I'm not mistaken, so we are working very hard to have a shorter and shorter queue, but it takes time to train a fresh S2 student

[Tom Knudsen]

4 months sound good but is is true? I have been waiting for 4 months on the 18 of July if not mistaken and still there are 13 members in front of me?

 

Anyway, are there some good VATSIM statistics out here?

 

stats.vatsim.net seems to show wrong data, as I search the VACCSCA training director and [Mod - Happy Thoughts]istants data, and it shows me that they have not been active since 2015 which cannot be correct.. If it was it would mean that both the director and [Mod - Happy Thoughts]istant are basically inactive and in need of OTS training.

 

Surly, that would be ironic..

[Mathias Johnsen 839996]

4 months sound good but is is true? I have been waiting for 4 months on the 18 of July if not mistaken and still there are 13 members in front of me?

 

Anyway, are there some good VATSIM statistics out here?

 

stats.vatsim.net seems to show wrong data, as I search the VACCSCA training director and [Mod - Happy Thoughts]istants data, and it shows me that they have not been active since 2015 which cannot be correct.. If it was it would mean that both the director and [Mod - Happy Thoughts]istant are basically inactive and in need of OTS training.

 

Surly, that would be ironic..

 

18th of March is the latest student now, and you've been waiting three months! 18th of April was your application. And may I remind you that you dont need ATC hours to do an administrative task.......

[1275389]

I would highly advise that you don't waste your time with your rant, Tom. Six months is GENEROUS to say the least. And you complain about being inactive for two years and not being able to train? Go somewhere else if you still persist on having issues, you most likely don't value the training in VATSCA enough and would probably make a better fit elsewhere.

 

And Kirk, are you saying that you don't ever want to remove someone from a roster? Sure, leave anyone and everyone that has gotten any certification on forever, that works.

I can almost guarantee that anyone gone for over 6 months (that is not leaving to train for real world ATC duties), is going to forget a good chunk of information. This happens after a week for some people. And then you want to let them control again if they've been inactive for over a year? I don't see how that benefits anyone. The controller might not have the experience and the pilots might not receive the same quality of control.

At ZMA, we have a 3 hour/month requirement, any certified position, any time of day. That's .4% of your month, not a lot to ask in my book. And sure, this might seem "restrictive", but if you need to be inactive, request a LOA and you should be all good for at least 3 months. We also have policies that allow controllers that have been inactive (removed from our roster) for a certain amount of time to come back and with as simple as an email to our ATM, to rejoin with almost all their previous certifications. I find these restrictions to not be harsh in any way, and having them be loosened globally in the GRP wouldn't benefit anyone. This isn't riding a bicycle, you can most certainly forget to control in a mere matter of days.

 

I wouldn't want someone gone for two years training immediately, if at all for a while. You need certain checks to make sure a controller is still proficient. If someone in the US two years ago was instantly allowed to control again without knowledge of new procedures, they would have inaccurate phraseology, and handling of aircraft at many many airports. No, I'm not going to let you just control again because it takes up your precious time to get training; that in no way affirms quality of control.

 

Just my 2 cents.