Ground maneuvres in LAX.

[Jeff Nielson 839877]

Technically, the center doesn't have to provide you with ATC services until you are in their airspace which you were not. They do so out of the goodness of their hearts.

 

The pilot that backed into to you would be considered pilot/marshaller error in the real world during ground operations not under ATC control.

 

The pilot that cut you off on the taxi way was not under the control of the Center either. Had there have been a ground or tower controller it could have possibly been another story.

 

As a real world pilot myself I can tell you that even under ATC control it is still the responsibility of the pilot in command or the PF as it's commonly refered to maintain safe operations even while under ATC control on the ground or in the air.

 

On VATSIM those lines get blurred because the Center is issuing clearances, taxi instructions, etc, in order to maintain some sort of fun factor and a sense of realism.

 

I've often had a bit of a problem with that part myself. I don't think the center should even take cotnrol of an aircraft until that aircraft is in that controllers airspace. In FS and online networks we have to make concessions though because we can't staff all these positions at once.

[John Speranza 908835]

I think that all points have been made and at this point, we're beating a dead animal with a stick expecting it to Animo Recuperat "Regain one's senses" as it would literally translate in latin...(Sorry, doing latin homework...)

 

Anywho...

 

I think this is the bottom line: Mr. Anopov, If you do not like LAX, DON'T Fly there. Simple as that. That may not be what you want to hear, but, unless you disable crashes, you're simply 'going to get run into'. Blame it on pilots, atc, multiplayer client, whatever; but, in the end, if you want to continue your flight, TURN IT OFF. If you can't, don't fly to LAX.

 

Nothing against you, just, if you don't like somthing, and it's happened more than once, don't you think you'd stay away from it?

 

In any event, Good night to you all. Safe flying, and happy (con)trails....

 

 

-SA

[Ingo Harders]

John Speranza wrote: "I think that all points have been made and at this point, we're beating a dead animal with a stick expecting it to Animo Recuperat"...

 

Good post John. My question is, what took you so long?

 

 

 

 

 

N405HT

[Jan Naslund]

Hi,

 

I have limited experience with LAX but my experiences there have been excellent except once when my PC decided to quit just after departure which i had spent over an hour to prepare.

 

I am curious about the responsibility of the controllers in these two cases. In the case where there was an accident while the pilot was taxiing in to the stand my guess is that the pilot was given an instruction to taxi to stand XX via taxiways X & Y etc etc.... In that case is not the controller responsible for separation until the pilot has reached the stand and is thus controlling the ramp area too?

 

Perhaps it is implied that once the aircraft is entering the ramp area separation by ATC is no longer in effect or is it so that no ground traffic is separated by ATC?

 

In the other case where he was backed into by another aircraft which was pushing back. It has been said here that ramp operations are not simulated but in my experience, i mostly receive push-back clearance from ATC regardless ATC-position (GND,TWR,APP,CTR)

 

In those cases when a CTR controller has given the pilot a push back clearance is he not at that point controlling the ramp as well?

 

Sorry, i fly and control mostly in Europe and i am not so good at US procedures but over here in Europe i myself and i also hear other controllers use the same phraseology. Even if i am logged in on a CTR-position i still control the ramp as i have been given the pilot his pushback clearance.

 

How about that eh?

 

Cheers / Jan

[Jeff Nielson 839877]

Most real world US airports have painted on lines which seperate the ramp/gate area from the actual area where ground control is responsible for. If you hear a ground controller issue a push back clearance it is usually because the pushback leaves the ramp/gate area an enters an area where ground control is responsible for controlling movement. Each airport is a little different. Sometimes you will also hear the ground controller issue a tail cardinal direction at the end of the pushback i.e. "pushback approved, tail east, advise when ready for taxi. So you actually can have 2 instructions.

 

It also depends on the airports operations. Somtimes you can hear special ground movement instructions and even departure instructions in the ATIS. At DEN I've heard instructions for aircraft to contact the tower while still in the ramp area while taxiing out because they are so busy. They just keep shuffling you over to the next guy.

 

At LAX, and it's been a while since I've been there, the gates are arranged in an old fashioned 1 lane taxi lane with gates on both sides. I think what aircraft do is they get their clearance probably from a meter frequency if not electronically through the FMC before contacting ground. They may then possibly let ground control know they are pushing back and told to monitor ground freq while talking to their cmmpany freq which is responsible for the actual pushback. I think ground control merely gives them their sequence for taxi out of the gate area. Once they leave the gate you'll notice they hold short before entering the taxiway. This is because they have to contact ground again before taxiing out.

 

You would then taxi all the way to the hold short of the departure runway and contact the tower to request takeoff. Busier airports have you contact the tower long before the RWY hold short now.

 

I've given you some very very basic and general scenerios which you might hear. By no means do I claim them to be 100% accurate, but it should be close.

 

On VATSIM even during the busiest operations I've never heard it get to that level...lol. Like I said before, we have to compromise between fun, realism, and the level of the controllers position at the time as well as the amount of aircraft being controlled and the services available at any one time.

 

MODS: Can we get rid of this blue posting screen please. It's very hard to see...lol. White is always the best background and much more professional. Thanks.

[Jeff Nielson 839877]

I forgot to address your concern about controlling the Center position on VATSIM. Technically I guess you could say you would be correct. If the Center [Mod - Happy Thoughts]umed to role of issuing the pushback then he should probably at least make sure it's clear.

 

That's not always going to be possible since a center like LA has 6 very very busy airports all with traffic at the same time on the ground. Throw in the transient traffic and it can get really difficult to issue an IFR clearance let alone makes ure everyone is taxiing correctly. Somtimes aircraft can even get forgotten all together. LA is usually very good about then asking for anyone forgotten.

 

 

It comes down to a point where the pilot and the controller have to understand what is going on around them in the sim and the scopes. There are never going to be enough controllers online at any one time to prevent this type of situation.

 

In VATUSA we are staffed from the highest level down not the lowest level up. We do this so we can cover as much as we can at any one time. It's a juggling act that's been going on since the start of flying online with any network.

 

In the real world at BAA airports, am I correct in [Mod - Happy Thoughts]uming ATC or the BAA operators are responsible for ALL aircraft movements? I can't remember. I thought that was the case. I could call BAA at EGKK and find out. I still have their number as +44 8700002468. It's been a while since I've talked to them...lol.

 

Hope this helps you a bit.

[George Anopov 895164]

Guys, i didn't say anything about Centre Controllers, in both cases Tower was on-line...

[Lance Williams]

Guys, i didn't say anything about Centre Controllers, in both cases Tower was on-line...

 

Yes, but what you aren't understanding or are choosing to ignore, is the fact that NO ATC has control over the ramps in the US. Either turn off your aircraft collision, or continue to have your flights reset after a collision.

[George Anopov 895164]

NO ATC has control over the ramps in the US

 

Sounds dismayed for me.

So as you stated above i will not be likely to hear something like:

"SpeedBird 560, position a hold, company traffic crossing from left to right" ?

[Paul Biderman]

George,

 

In VATUSA I'm sure you've heard the following:

 

"Readback correct. Pushback and engine start at your discretion. Advise ready to taxi".

 

This is specifically done this way because it was decided that since virtual ATC can't really "SEE" the gates, tarmac, non-movement areas (we have no windows, and our ground radar isn't that sophisticated), we don't take responsibility over those areas. So we allow aircraft to push and start at their own risk because we cannot guarantee their safety.

 

We teach that to just about every controller (as far as I know) from the first time they plug into DEL positions.

 

As for what happened to you on the taxiway, as was mentioned earlier, if ATC told the pilot to go 1 way and he went another, then it's the pilot's fault, not ATC.

 

Bottom line....

 

Turn aircraft crashes off. Everyone does. I've been flying on this network since 1998 and I've had crashes off on just about every flight (unless I forgot to turn it off after a new FS install). There are simply too many variables beyond everyone's control to be able to [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ure you of avoiding collisions with other planes.

[George Anopov 895164]

I never used to have any collisions in Vatsim, that's why i didn't switch off Fs crash. The only that i did have - happened on last two months in LAX...

[Richard Green 810012]

George....

 

I will explain this the best and only way I can.

 

There is NOTHING, we can do for you regarding what happens regrading crashes. You have three options:

1. Put up with random Crashes.

2. Turn it off.

3. Fly at unpopulaed airports or not in the US.

 

In the US we try and simulate what we normally do... in Europe they have a bit more control over that, but even then you are still responsible for the safe movement of your craft.

 

I have had crashes in the past ( when I forgot to shut CD off ) by moving Jetways.

 

In the end the system isn't perfect, but you are beating a rather dead horse with a rather large hammer. All you are doing is using your energy to worry about procedures that we don't simulate becuase the REAL CONTROLLERS also do not do them.

[Steven Perry]

"Readback correct. Pushback and engine start at your discretion. Advise ready to taxi".

 

I've said this before, but I'll say it again since this thread is fairly popular.

 

In my mind "at your discretion" indicates a clearance. e.g. "Descend at pilot's discretion maintain five thousand" indicates the pilot is cleared to descend to five thousand.

 

If there is no clearance to be implied the more proper phraseology in my mind is "at your own risk." This phraseology is used when approving aircraft operations on closed runways, areas not visible from the ATCT, and areas not under the jurisdiction of ATC.

 

In other words "I won't stop you from doing it, but it's your hide not mine!"

 

But that's all my opinion, the situation is not in the 7110.65 except that controllers should use their best judgement in situations not covered by the order.

 

SP

 

Edits: Typos

[George Anopov 895164]

Ok, i think there is nothing left to discuss in this thread.

 

I'm European Virtual Pilot. Atc here, in Europe doing their best to prevent any collisions, in air certainly and on ground as well. They take responsibility to provide safe push and taxi manoeuvres. I was totally sure that the US Atc pays the same attention...

 

Thanx

 

PS English is not my native language, so it is a bit simple...

[Trent Hopkinson]

Taxi is a VFR manuver. There is no IFR taxi... that is to say, ATC isn't giving you collision avoidance instructions. Ok so they CAN... but generally they are limited to "Stop" and "Go"... and those things take time to communicate, so "the guy 50 metres in front of you has come to a complete stop. and you are doing 25 knots" means there's nothing the controller can do

 

"you are 3 intersections away from one that an aircraft is soon going to need to cross, I want him to go first, so I tell you to stop short of that intersection" does work...

 

 

When taxying, always vigilantly look at the intersections you are approaching, don't go too fast (I usually taxi at 10 knots or less when in close proximity to tarmacs and aprons, and if I'm on a long taxiway with few intersections (for instance a taxiway parallel to a runway where I am taxying the majority of the length of it) then I might get it up to 20 knots. I usually try to keep below 23 knots and if I see it get up to 25 I put breaks on and reduce engine power a touch to get it in the 20 knots range.

 

 

Ok: So what can happen to make a pilot crash into another pilot?

 

First obvious one: SB3.0.4 sometimes makes aircraft not appear in the multiplayer session at all. So there might be 12 aircraft on the field, but you might only see 10... those other 2 are completley invisible! Not there!... except they are, and they may be able to see you!

 

2: sometimes FS detects a crash when the other pilot is a good 50 metres away. So I edge up toward you and while you are still a good wingspan away from my nose... you get a crash detection. How realistic is that huh

 

3: sometimes SB misses a packet... This is due to the internet being fallable, or to someones (either yours or theirs or even the Vatsim Servers) system being a bit slow for a second. the airplane then jumps around the field... I'm sure you'v all seen it on occasion... an aircraft is flying forward about to land, and then it suddenly speeds up and well overshoots the runway, then it slows to an impossibly slow speed for flight before shooting accross the field yawing stupidly, stuttering as it goes before suddenly reappearing on a perfect rollout on centreline on the runway. Meanwhile it has collided with 2 aircraft holding short of the runway, and appeared to be going completley nuts... From the landing pilots view, he just excecuted a perfect touchdown right on centreline at Vref + 0.

 

As he vacates, it seems as if he slides sideways for 2 seconds before speeding up into the taxiway and then coming to a screaming halt about 3/4 of the way accross the intersecting taxiway, taking out some traffic on the way. He then reverses slowly, the aircraft stuttering and the wings shaking back and fourth, till the nose is just on his side of the hold-short line, you hear on the radio a slightly broken "T. ow. we. r. this i. .s Ame. can two ni ... iner two holding short of Alpha on Alpha 6."

 

On his screen, he simply slowed to 60 knots, hung on the breaks to catch A6 so that he didn't have to go all the way to the end of the runway, as vacating on A6 was more convenient to where he wants to park. He begins his turn at 30 knots as it is a Highspeed Taxiway, and comes to a firm but smooth stop inside the holdshort area... Unfortunatley right then something in the internet introduced lag, and so a packet wasn't sent detailing the new movement details to the Vatsim servers. Thus, all people in his multiplayer session see the original packet re-calculated based on the one beforehand. And in that one he was travelling at 30 knots in a turn... 5 seconds later his packet makes it through, and Vatsim sees him stopped at the holdshort point. Squawkbox deals with this by smootly backing the aircraft model up to where it is currently. Unfortunatley not before someone with their crash detection enabled was collided with.

 

 

Note, we tell you to disable "COLLISION" detection. This is NOT "CRASH DETECTION". You can still crash if you hammer the aircraft into the runway. "Your" mistakes cause crashes... the internet's mistakes don't... With the "All crashes detected" mode on, Internet lag, Model overlaps, poorly implimented crash zones on Multiplayer traffic models and all of those nasty things can kill you... and on the very rare occasion, the bored jerk who likes to crash into aircraft for fun... which I believe makes up about 0.1% of the vatsim pilot base.

 

In many cases, the pilot who crashed into you won't have noticed... for one of two reasons:

 

He didn't register a crash because, on his computer, your two models actually did not intersect at any stage! (but internet lag made it appear that way on your system).

 

2: He didn't register a crash because he has Collision Detection turned off.

 

Oh, and not all of europe pays that attention all the time. I have flown in Europe when only Centre has been on, or even worse yet. Eurocontroll. I really hope you don't contact Eurocontroll FSS and ask him to provide IFR seperation standards for you on the Apron of Frankfurt.

 

Of course, during those SAG events where they load up a few airports with Delivery, Ground, Tower, Approach, Departures, and a couple of Centres... (ok, so it sounds better like that than saying Ground Tower Radar Radar Radar Radar and a few other Radar's and the odd Radio) the Europeans tend to have a very high level of controll, often including ramp controll. It's a great experience if anyone can get to one. I particularly reccomend Germany in a Flyin

 

but even then, there's nothing controllers can do about the internet lag, or oversized or displaced multiplayer models... or people randomly stopping on taxiways when using their menus. (when you use a menu in Flightsim, it makes you appear to suddenly stop).

Edited May 5, 2006 at 02:19 PM by Guest

[Nicholas Bartolotta 912967]

Ok, i think there is nothing left to discuss in this thread.

 

I'm European Virtual Pilot. Atc here, in Europe doing their best to prevent any collisions, in air certainly and on ground as well. They take responsibility to provide safe push and taxi manoeuvres. I was totally sure that the US Atc pays the same attention...

 

Good, now we'll have one less pilot to collide with in the US.

[George Anopov 895164]

ATC isn't giving you collision avoidance instructions.

I'm not even arguing with you about it! Sure it is like that. Atc may only notify the crew about possible threat IMHO.

 

Taxi is a VFR manoeuvre. There is no IFR taxi... that is to say, ATC isn't giving you collision avoidance instructions. Ok so they CAN... but generally they are limited to "Stop" and "Go"...

 

To follow asigned aircraft as well...

 

 

When taxing, always vigilantly look at the intersections you are approaching, don't go too fast (I usually taxi at 10 knots or less when in close proximity to tarmacs and aprons, and if I'm on a long taxiway with few intersections (for instance a taxiway parallel to a runway where I am taxying the majority of the length of it) then I might get it up to 20 knots. I usually try to keep below 23 knots and if I see it get up to 25 I put breaks on and reduce engine power a touch to get it in the 20 knots range.

 

I read quiet a lot books written by pilots about taxi manoeuvres, generally, the faster is better, also first you should set thrust to idle, than apply brakes... Normal and average taxi speed is not mandatory, it's up to crew decision, but basically it should not be above 25 knots and 8 knots on 180 degree turn.

 

Note, we tell you to disable "COLLISION" detection. This is NOT "CRASH DETECTION".

He-he. I know what you mean! But in Acars and i supose FSp[Mod - Happy Thoughts]engers you either disable ALL crashes/collisions, or disable nothing...

[George Anopov 895164]

Ok, i think there is nothing left to discuss in this thread.

 

I'm European Virtual Pilot. Atc here, in Europe doing their best to prevent any collisions, in air certainly and on ground as well. They take responsibility to provide safe push and taxi manoeuvres. I was totally sure that the US Atc pays the same attention...

 

Good, now we'll have one less pilot to collide with in the US.

 

Nicholas, this doesn't mean that i wont fly to US

[Trent Hopkinson]

Good, now we'll have one less pilot to collide with in the US.

 

LOL. There's always more, always more

 

 

Incidently I think I might have been the subject of one of his examples (the ramp one)...

 

I do remember a non-native english speaker complaining about being hit by someone after I'd just backed out of a stand in KLAX in a B744 (PMDG).

 

The full story goes something like this:

 

*me* LAX tower, Qantas 12 requesting pushback, if we can we'd like to do a two stage pushback onto the Charlie Taxiway and start up there.

 

*LAXTWR* Ah Qantas 12, I am using the Charlie at the moment, could you push back tail to the North, call me ready to taxi

 

*me* ok, tail north into the bay and we'll call you ready for taxi QF12

 

I switch to external view, estimate that I'v got about 50 metres to the centreline of the bay C10, and decide to dial in 45 metres for the pushback and the full 90 degree turn. I hit the go button and she starts pushing back, I decide to start engines 2 and 3 right there on the pushback so let them head.

 

I return to external to monitor how close I am to the other aircraft as I draw to a close. the pushback continues to go back for a good 10 seconds after the turn around which I did not expect or disire, but the clearance is still there. My Horizontal Stabilizer is pretty well directly behind his APU, and the distance between me and him at that closest point is about my wingspan.

 

I notice his multiplayer visulization seems to pop up a touch so that it's floating above the tarmac a touch... That's an anomalie but nothing that unusual. Vatsim has funny movements all the time, (for instance, people flying Cessnas always seem to be riding with about 1/4 of their wheel below the ground... the models just a touch lower than the Flight1 C172).

 

I am back to the cockpit setting up flap position and getting ready to fire up #1 and #4. Traffic behind me complains to ATC that he's been backed into by a large aircraft which reset his flight. ATC answers the request with the only available answer "roger"... by this stage he's just been handed off 2 landings and has about 4 aircraft on taxi along Bravo and another couple the other way on Charlie... I report ready to taxi but he sais I have to wait for 3 aircraft to p[Mod - Happy Thoughts] before I can get a gap. I begin to power toward the edge of the bay by now and stop before exiting the bay... 4 engines turning.

 

Aircraft I just apparently hit continues to complain, via text and voice about being hit. I wait for 3 aircraft to go and Im pretty keen to get out of there cos I dont want the kid Private messenging me with abuse about being a big fat clumbsy 747 that should looke where he's going... especially since I did look, and reduced my pushback distance from my standard 50 metres to 45 accordlingly. AND visually identified a good 20 metre clearance between my Horizontal Stabilizer and his APU fairing after making the pushback.

 

He then complained later about some other collision on taxi and I thought he was still on about me, but it might have been a second event on the same flight (remembering how buisy taxiway Charlie was... it suddenly became more buisy just as I departed C10 for 25R.

 

Anyway I got off airborne, said bie to the centres, and settled in to my 14 hour long trip.

 

I actually found the Tower's handling of ground operations to be more than I expected... ok so he wasn't directly telling us to go and stop in real time, but he gave me some pretty specific clearances along the way, including a direction to pushback (though I had prompted him with a direction which he didn't wish to be done). and traffic advisories of 3 aircraft in trail which I was to follow on Bravo to 25R. (Incidently, by the time I got about halfway down the runway, one of the 3 had dissapeared and was never seen again... By that stage I was getting paranoid and thinking I clobbered into the back of them too, even though I kept an entire 747 fuselage length between me and the one in front... I [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ume the one in front was just a standard internet disconnect/Flightsim freeze/logoff.

 

I was waiting for a reprimand from someone, but none ever came, I suppose the big 747 who asked for the swanky pushback manuver on his way to starting a 14 hour flight gets some perks

[George Anopov 895164]

Well It was not me definitely. I never complain on atc freq.

 

In cases i described in the beginning of this thread, i just wanted to write a small complain via form which is located on LAX ARTCC web site, but i didn't do that hoping that it was just unlucky day for me

[Richard Green 810012]

George...

 

I don't think you will find any/many who would argue with your logic.

I agree if we had enough controllers I would love Ramp Controllers on all the time. ( we do use them at times for events )

 

We have to pool our resources however, we have a finite number of countrollers and as a rule since US ATC don't "own" the ramps, we don't provide the service as a general rule.

 

Nothing to stop ARTCCs from doing it, but at most places its not done for realism's sake. Perhaps we will real a point of critical m[Mod - Happy Thoughts] where we have enough people to do this.

 

I for one would love it.

[Ian Elchitz 810151]

I flew several times to LAX from LHR. And all this few times i had collisions with other aircrafts on ground while i was taxing or at boarding the gate. Nevertheless, there was a controller, who hardly paid any attention to traffic on the ground. You know, it become VERY annoying after long-haul transatlantic flight.

So what's the problem?

 

(Must comment)

 

George,

 

A) Sorry to hear your transatlantic flight was ruined - many of us have had similiar situations happen and it certainly is annoying. I fly with collision detection off but won't suggest that to you as per your request.

 

B) We've already established that in VATUSA the controllers generally don't control the ramp area and usually issue "Readback correct, advise ready for taxi" - ya we don't do pushback (or shutdown).

 

C) LAX is really busy. If you had a center controller - taxi at your own risk. If you had a Tower or Ground controller, it is THEIR responsibility to handle the traffic on the ground in a safe and orderly fashion. They need to pay attention to ground traffic - period. However, issuing "Welcome to LAX, exit right on Yankee, Cross 25R, right on Charlie, Charlie 12 to the gate" is interpreted by some pilots as "Cross 25R and taxi to the gate". This is either because they don't understand, don't have charts, or don't care.

 

Since our environment runs the full spectrum of realism (From person to person) you simply can not expect that everyone has taxi charts, parks at an actual gate, has collisions on, or even has multiplayer enabled.

 

Sorry you had a bad experience - suggestions are always welcome at VATUSA and most ARTCC's have feedback forms for this exact sort of thing.

 

Have a good one,

 

Ian Elchitz

(Guy who controlled at ZLA for a long time and probably should do so again at some point)

[Ross Carlson]

"Readback correct. Pushback and engine start at your discretion. Advise ready to taxi".

 

I've said this before, but I'll say it again since this thread is fairly popular.

 

In my mind "at your discretion" indicates a clearance. e.g. "Descend at pilot's discretion maintain five thousand" indicates the pilot is cleared to descend to five thousand.

 

If there is no clearance to be implied the more proper phraseology in my mind is "at your own risk."

 

Or, avoid it all together. After giving a clearance, I say "Readback correct, advise ready for taxi, expect runway __ for departure."

 

I wonder if this thread would have reached four pages if George had simply asked the question "why don't US controllers provide ramp control or taxi separation?" instead of calling LAX controllers "irresponsible."

[Ian Elchitz 810151]

I wonder if this thread would have reached four pages if George had simply asked the question "why don't US controllers provide ramp control or taxi separation?" instead of calling LAX controllers "irresponsible."

 

I doubt (or at least hope) that no one actually took his post personally. He was probably pretty frustrated at the time - I know I've felt the same at times - though never at LAX controllers

Edited May 5, 2006 at 07:01 PM by Guest

[Richard Jenkins]

Good question...I think not....but then his last thread where he called the Heathrow guys "Butchers" had a pretty good run also.