Joel Richters Posted July 31, 2017 at 10:35 AM Posted July 31, 2017 at 10:35 AM It is with great pleasure and anticipation that the Executive Committee announce our intentions with regard to Voice UNICOM / CTAF. At the Quarter 2 Executive Committee Meeting held yesterday, it was approved and with in principle agreement to implement the function of Voice UNICOM / CTAF on the VATSIM Network. The process from here will be one of consultation with the client developers and other stakeholders to ensure our vision can be made a reality; which is currently underway. We have been given a clear message from senior leadership that this process should move ahead without delay, and we look for your support and feedback in this venture. You should expect to hear more from VATSIM leadership in the coming months as we make this change to better support and modernise the network you love. If you have any questions or suggestions, feel free to touch base with us via email or the forums. You may also contact me directly at [email protected]. Joel Richters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christoph Reule 1379750 Posted July 31, 2017 at 10:42 AM Posted July 31, 2017 at 10:42 AM How will this work? I mean, is it an "addition" to the currently existing UNICOM (aerodrome independent) or more an aerodrome-based feature on specific frequencies (CTAF, MULTICOM or however you call it)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Harrison Posted July 31, 2017 at 10:44 AM Posted July 31, 2017 at 10:44 AM Thank-you. Looking forward to developments, but hoping FSInn remains an option. Sean C1/O P3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joel Richters Posted July 31, 2017 at 10:46 AM Author Posted July 31, 2017 at 10:46 AM (edited) How will this work? I mean, is it an "addition" to the currently existing UNICOM (aerodrome independent) or more an aerodrome-based feature on specific frequencies (CTAF, MULTICOM or however you call it)? Christoph, we have an initial idea that we are putting to the developers which will be moulded to achieve the outcome. The definition of Voice UNICOM / CTAF which is in the initial docomeent defines it as "a facility that allows pilots to communicate their intentions within the vicinity of an airfield without air traffic control" via voice. More information will come out soon enough to alleviate speculation... however how would you like to see it work? We would like to hear your thoughts? Edited July 31, 2017 at 10:56 AM by Guest Joel Richters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Callum Strawbridge Posted July 31, 2017 at 10:50 AM Posted July 31, 2017 at 10:50 AM (edited) This is fantastic news, Joel! I can't wait to see this implemented on the network. Edited July 31, 2017 at 12:18 PM by Guest Callum Strawbridge VATPAC Senior Instructor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christoph Reule 1379750 Posted July 31, 2017 at 10:53 AM Posted July 31, 2017 at 10:53 AM Christoph, we have an initial idea that we are putting to the developers which will be moulded to achieve the outcome. The definition of Voice UNICOM / CTAF which is in the initial docomeent defines it as "a facility that allows pilots to communicate their intentions within the vicinity of an airfield without air traffic control" via voice. More information will come out soon enough to alleviate speculation... however how would you like to see it work? We would like to hear your thoughts? Sounds for me like I supposed (something like aerodrome based CTAF/MULTICOM), which is indeed a great addition. Personally I would love to see to have the possibility (for the ATC department) to define specific frequencies for aerodromes (maybe not all, perhaps selected/busy ones) with a limited range (e. g. 25 NM) where pilots can state their intentions when no ATC is present at such airfields. For others maybe remain on 122.80 but with limited range (around the pilot's position). Just my thoughts... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joel Richters Posted July 31, 2017 at 10:56 AM Author Posted July 31, 2017 at 10:56 AM Personally I would love to see to have the possibility (for the ATC department) to define specific frequencies for aerodromes (maybe not all, perhaps selected/busy ones) with a limited range (e. g. 25 NM) where pilots can state their intentions when no ATC is present at such airfields. For others maybe remain on 122.80 but with limited range (around the pilot's position). Just my thoughts... I think you will be pretty happy then Joel Richters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Sindle 1324025 Posted July 31, 2017 at 11:07 AM Posted July 31, 2017 at 11:07 AM Great idea! One question: How do you propose that his frequency will be used for its intended purpose, and not be abused by trolls like many frequencies are now? Will you provide training for pilots who do not know how to use UNICOM, especially a voice UNICOM? I think this is a great idea, but these hurdles should be accomplished first, in my opinion. UAEvACC Deputy ATC Training Director ACCAE4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joel Richters Posted July 31, 2017 at 11:13 AM Author Posted July 31, 2017 at 11:13 AM Great idea! One question: How do you propose that his frequency will be used for its intended purpose, and not be abused by trolls like many frequencies are now? Will you provide training for pilots who do not know how to use UNICOM, especially a voice UNICOM? I think this is a great idea, but these hurdles should be accomplished first, in my opinion. As this development progresses, we will work with all the stakeholders such as our divisional staff, ATOs and other areas of the network to support this change. Misbehaviour will no doubt be handled the same way it currently is. Supervisors are able to join any voice room they like so monitoring them if needed shouldn't be a concern. What would you propose that ensure that the voice channels are used for the intended purpose? Joel Richters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Sindle 1324025 Posted July 31, 2017 at 11:33 AM Posted July 31, 2017 at 11:33 AM I think that offering basic training (at least) which all pilots must take before being allowed to talk on the UNICOM frequency. This training should include information about how to structure the broadcasts and how to listen out for other's broadcasts. This could be done with a simple powerpoint or Moodle online. A test may or may not be required, depending on how the training is given, to allow the pilots to have at least a basic knowledge of how the UNICOM system actually works. e.g. When and when not to use it, what frequency to use for major airports, etc. Of course, this is my opinion and totally up to you guys to decide how to run the new UNICOM system UAEvACC Deputy ATC Training Director ACCAE4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joel Richters Posted July 31, 2017 at 11:44 AM Author Posted July 31, 2017 at 11:44 AM I think that offering basic training (at least) which all pilots must take before being allowed to talk on the UNICOM frequency. This training should include information about how to structure the broadcasts and how to listen out for other's broadcasts. This could be done with a simple powerpoint or Moodle online. A test may or may not be required, depending on how the training is given, to allow the pilots to have at least a basic knowledge of how the UNICOM system actually works. e.g. When and when not to use it, what frequency to use for major airports, etc. Of course, this is my opinion and totally up to you guys to decide how to run the new UNICOM system This is great feedback. Do you think a bit of promotional educational video that we distribute to everyone to watch? Joel Richters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Sindle 1324025 Posted July 31, 2017 at 11:51 AM Posted July 31, 2017 at 11:51 AM Yeah, that sounds good. It should also be put on the main website so people can review it, if they feel the need. UAEvACC Deputy ATC Training Director ACCAE4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Layth Al-Wakil Posted July 31, 2017 at 12:04 PM Posted July 31, 2017 at 12:04 PM Great idea! One question: How do you propose that his frequency will be used for its intended purpose, and not be abused by trolls like many frequencies are now? Will you provide training for pilots who do not know how to use UNICOM, especially a voice UNICOM? I think this is a great idea, but these hurdles should be accomplished first, in my opinion. As this development progresses, we will work with all the stakeholders such as our divisional staff, ATOs and other areas of the network to support this change. Misbehaviour will no doubt be handled the same way it currently is. Supervisors are able to join any voice room they like so monitoring them if needed shouldn't be a concern. What would you propose that ensure that the voice channels are used for the intended purpose? I think introducing a way to see who is actually transmitting on frequency may help, we currently are able to see who is in a voice room, on Euroscope, but on busy frequencies when someone may be trolling or may just have a stuck mic it is tough for the controller to find out who the actual culprit is. This would make it easier for supervisors to deal with these issues both on a CTAF and on a normal frequency. Layth Al-Wakil (1304151) Marketing and Communications Team Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deon Mathews Posted July 31, 2017 at 12:18 PM Posted July 31, 2017 at 12:18 PM Just to confirm... Until further notice, Unicom will remain a text only frequency? Another factor to consider will be the language when it officially goes to voice, will it be an English only channel? Deon Mathews VATSIM Marketing & Communications Team Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nathan Elliott 1278737 Posted July 31, 2017 at 12:28 PM Posted July 31, 2017 at 12:28 PM If no supervisors are online , CTAF should be disabled during that time. Pilots should only be able to tune into Unicom voice for their specific departure and arrival airports, meaning if someone has filled for an arrival to Newark they shouldn't be able to tune into a nearby aerodrome such as LGA. but that might be complex to implement? The voice CTAF worked well in the Vatpac region in the past but they used this feature at real world uncontrolled aerodromes only where-as giving voice uni-com to Heathrow is subject to abusers , thus this option should only be available to smaller aerodromes or aerodromes that rarely get ATC RW and/or vatsim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nathan Elliott 1278737 Posted July 31, 2017 at 12:41 PM Posted July 31, 2017 at 12:41 PM Just to confirm... Until further notice, Unicom will remain a text only frequency? Another factor to consider will be the language when it officially goes to voice, will it be an English only channel? I stand to be correct but VATBRZ certainly doesn't use English 100% of the time and they even state that some of there ATC doesn't speak English although they're encouraged to do so. It shouldn't be an English only channel and it should be left to individual divisions to decide. What are the statistics of Vatsim users actually using Unicom? When someone isn't monitoring or using unicom surely they're not aware of your intentions ( tcas can help ) my point being someone speaking a different language is no different to someone not using unicom at all , useless or helpful? i'm not going to say... But nevertheless the language barrier in my opinion is currently an issue in just a few regions and will remain the same after voice unicom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jorge O'Connor 1048862 Posted July 31, 2017 at 01:09 PM Posted July 31, 2017 at 01:09 PM Maybe integrate a google translate of some sort. When logging into vpilot or fsin ect. You choose your language of choice. When someone from usimg a different language types it will be broacasted to you in your set language. Granted it may not be perfect translation but its better than nothing. Just a thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Tyquin Posted July 31, 2017 at 01:10 PM Posted July 31, 2017 at 01:10 PM I'm so glad that this has now been implemented. VATPAC host's multiple events during the week that require " CTAF " in the past members have had to install extra software to be able to communicate via " CTAF ". We believe that communication is a vital part of any type of flying and this feature has been a long time coming. I'm looking forward to this being implemented on the network. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jorge O'Connor 1048862 Posted July 31, 2017 at 01:11 PM Posted July 31, 2017 at 01:11 PM Disregard its to early for me and clearly we are talking about voice here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emmanuel Pacamalan 1333172 Posted July 31, 2017 at 01:42 PM Posted July 31, 2017 at 01:42 PM (edited) SUGGESTION: After the recent Connexion, it's been made clear the the VATSIM board is not in favor of mandatory pilot training as it would be a barrier of entry to vatsim. Now, CTAF is not an element of entry to vatsim, rather, it is a tool within the system, can we implement a rating/training/certification based usage for the CTAF instead? by that I mean, in order to use voice on UNICOM/CTAF, your pilot ID must have p[Mod - Happy Thoughts]ed basic pilot training. I doubt people who are serious about using CTAF would mind p[Mod - Happy Thoughts]ing a short basic training course. I understand that the current plan is still to "moderate" but sticking to just moderation is archaic and is such a brute force inefficient way of keeping voice unicom organized. CTAF certification is self sufficient and will work even without moderators online. Edited July 31, 2017 at 01:49 PM by Guest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Simon 1275481 Posted July 31, 2017 at 01:47 PM Posted July 31, 2017 at 01:47 PM I would recommend training material be provided to pilots on the network before accessing this. Perhaps a system based on a user's CID could be implemented that tracks or logs that training being complete. Completed training would enable access to the voice channel while not completing would restrict to text. As said before, it would be realistic to limit voice channels to smaller airfields that would actually have CTAF. In US airspace Cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts] D and below would make sense since these are either part-time or uncontrolled outright, and would have a CTAF in regular use. Would limiting the number of airfields reduce complexity? Finally would you need real-world pilots to test out the system? How or where would developers go to reach out for testing? I would be interested in acting as a beta tester and am excited for this change to operations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nathan Elliott 1278737 Posted July 31, 2017 at 01:58 PM Posted July 31, 2017 at 01:58 PM No pilot test... Just ban CTAF from large aerodromes , that's very unrealistic and produces trolls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cameron Bristol Posted July 31, 2017 at 02:30 PM Posted July 31, 2017 at 02:30 PM Another factor to consider will be the language when it officially goes to voice, will it be an English only channel? I stand to be correct but VATBRZ certainly doesn't use English 100% of the time and they even state that some of there ATC doesn't speak English although they're encouraged to do so. VATSIM Code is Regulations Article I 1.01 A Requirements VATSIM.net is open for membership to all individuals who have reached the age of thirteen (13) years old or older. In addition, membership is available to all individuals regardless of race, creed, color or nationality. Members should be able to converse and/or provide air traffic control services in English, the internationally accepted official language for air traffic control. I honestly don’t see a problem with a UNICOM coming in a different language, and I think so long as EVERYONE on the frequency speaks it that’ll be fine. But much like in the real world, the second a English only pilot comes on frequency, English should be spoken solely. Sounds terrible, but English is the universal language of aviation, not to mention a requirement to speak in order to join the network. That’s just my two cents. Maybe I’m crazy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ross Carlson Posted July 31, 2017 at 02:53 PM Posted July 31, 2017 at 02:53 PM No pilot test... Just ban CTAF from large aerodromes , that's very unrealistic and produces trolls. I think it would be a shame to not use voice CTAF at the larger airports. They are often unstaffed on VATSIM, and currently you get pilots using text on 122.8 at those fields. That's even more unrealistic than using voice CTAF (using the published tower frequency) at those fields. Developer: vPilot, VRC, vSTARS, vERAM, VAT-Spy Senior Controller, Boston Virtual ARTCC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nathan Elliott 1278737 Posted July 31, 2017 at 03:06 PM Posted July 31, 2017 at 03:06 PM Another factor to consider will be the language when it officially goes to voice, will it be an English only channel? I stand to be correct but VATBRZ certainly doesn't use English 100% of the time and they even state that some of there ATC doesn't speak English although they're encouraged to do so. VATSIM Code is Regulations Article I 1.01 A Requirements VATSIM.net is open for membership to all individuals who have reached the age of thirteen (13) years old or older. In addition, membership is available to all individuals regardless of race, creed, color or nationality. Members should be able to converse and/or provide air traffic control services in English, the internationally accepted official language for air traffic control. I honestly don’t see a problem with a UNICOM coming in a different language, and I think so long as EVERYONE on the frequency speaks it that’ll be fine. But much like in the real world, the second a English only pilot comes on frequency, English should be spoken solely. Sounds terrible, but English is the universal language of aviation, not to mention a requirement to speak in order to join the network. That’s just my two cents. Maybe I’m crazy. If you're going to quote me, quote me properly... and the good old saying when someone says "but" in there sentence it's best to ignore what is said after the but. so i will not read past the but in your sentence. Well i did read past the "but" in your sentence and as predicted it's incorrect information. There's no requirement for English to be spoken if a pilot starts speaking in English i'm not sure what real world organisation you're quoting. I also don't remember Vatsim saying you HAVE TO SPEAK ENGLISH TO JOIN? If that's true who's there to police it? i never had an language test to join Vatsim why's that? So as my point proves above it's best to ignore what someone says after they put "but" in their sentence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts