(not quite a) Feature request

[Mateusz Zymla]

12 hours ago, Ross Carlson said:

I'm not understanding your suggestion here. Can you rephrase or elaborate?

Yeah, I am sorry I didn't make myself clear. Let me give you on the example:

You have defined: FIR/ARTCC (let's say NY_CTR), and 2 splits defined (NY_43_CTR, NY_68_CTR).

NY_CTR, NY_1_CTR, NY_W_CTR [...] and so on => Entire ARTCC shows up;
VATSpy detects NY_43_CTR logged in => NY_43_CTR sector shows up.

[Ross Carlson]

5 hours ago, Mateusz Zymla said:

You have defined: FIR/ARTCC (let's say NY_CTR), and 2 splits defined (NY_43_CTR, NY_68_CTR).

NY_CTR, NY_1_CTR, NY_W_CTR [...] and so on => Entire ARTCC shows up;
VATSpy detects NY_43_CTR logged in => NY_43_CTR sector shows up.

Yeah, that's the fallback mechanism, where it falls back to working the way it does now, if no sector-specific callsign match is found.

[1341101]

Hiya, just noticed this thread and was wondering if this is still something to consider?

@Ross Carlson I think, having an option where the facility engineer adds the relevant callsign infix (this could be a range of them for each relevant sector) OR frequencies, that would already be a major improvement and would solve 95% of the problem and would make it much better than it is now. Of course, if an infix is used that isn't defined, highlighting the sector could work - but this happens now anyway. So, with this in mind, would it be possible to have something like this implemented? I don't think this is seen as such an issue in the US itself, where 80% of the time, the CTR just covers the whole ARTCC. But in FIRs such as London, the LON_CTR bandbox (consolidated) position is barely ever online (I genuinely don't remember the last time I saw that position is online), and it's always either LON_S, _W, _N, etc. So for such FIRs, it would resolve the problem by a lot. 

[Ross Carlson]

4 hours ago, 1341101 said:

wondering if this is still something to consider

Yeah, definitely. I mean, nothing has changed since it was last discussed.

Edited October 26, 2021 at 09:36 PM by Ross Carlson

[Kirk Christie]

Vatsim does not define that a callsign must be XX_XX_XX if your facility changes to XX-XX_XXX then you won't have the same problems, the issue is, as has been raised in some divisional forums, no one wants to change their log in styles.

One thing that gets me is now Facilities are uploading sector splits to vayspy as _U_CTR and _T_CTR (as an example) and then some controller logs in as _K_CTR and yoh have no idea if they are meant to cover U T or both.

Vatspy recently updated, to only show a controller on the map when there is a primary frequency set, if vatspy can recognise this, can it also recognise what frequencies are active for a controller and light up those sectors, particularly when a controller is providing extended coverage to a lateral sector.

 

[Ross Carlson]

29 minutes ago, Kirk Christie said:

Vatspy recently updated, to only show a controller on the map when there is a primary frequency set

That was more than three years ago. 😄

33 minutes ago, Kirk Christie said:

if vatspy can recognise this, can it also recognise what frequencies are active for a controller and light up those sectors

Sure, just need the data ... have a look at the rest of this thread to see where it's been discussed.

[Bernardo Reis]

You shouldn't even need to define replacement callsigns now, as the character limit got extended to 12.

In the past we replaced LPPC_N_CTR with something like LPPC_3_CTR but now we can do LPPC_N__CTR