Planning ahead for retiring VRC

[Ross Carlson]

1 hour ago, Benjamin Koula said:

since it is server side wouldn't that put a larger strain on users routers/internet usage

Why do you say that?

The initial release version will most likely not have voice directly integrated, so yes, it'll still require the AFV standalone client. Integrating voice will be near the top of the priority list for shortly after release, though.

[Benjamin Koula]

1 hour ago, Ross Carlson said:

Why do you say that

--____-- I guess I'm confused on how the server will send all the calculation data (since the server will now be doing the calculations) Because isn't it like you're now streaming a view from the server, or are you just receiving positions of planes(and their flight information)?

[Ross Carlson]

The server will essentially just send data block contents to the client. It should end up being slightly less network data usage than a normal client like VRC.

[Matisse VanWezer]

17 hours ago, Ross Carlson said:

Unfortunately, we don't have such a database, and creating one would be a very complicated job.

As a Euroscope user, which iirc you are not familiar with, that's not entirely true. 

And since I am not a VRC user, let's get this straight:

• VRC users don't see the airspace volume they are controlling when logging on... ? 
• VRC users don't see the next frequency for an aircraft ...?

.. Since there is no sort of airspace DB.

Assuming both as true here's how we do it in Europe:

17 hours ago, Ross Carlson said:

The way airspace volumes are activated/deactivated when different controllers log on/off, plus the way some airspace volumes change shape depending on which runways are active at one or more airports, makes this a logistical mess.

Yup and that is all implemented in Euroscope.

Currently, every vacc has its own file with airspace volumes. They look something like this:

This is indeed a lot of work. Predictions weren't always as good as they are now either, but after having been refined for 10 years, it works - at least here in Belgium - really well. Are there hacky corridors to push trajectories in the correct volumes? Yes, unfortunately. But they also exist in real life! 

Is Euroscope's approach the best out there? No, not at all. For one, its current implementation isn't the most efficient yet it shows that it can be done, and that giving users the ability to do it, it will be done. 

Here's a thread that explains some of the current issues as well as propositions to improve it:

I'm sure some Europeans more knowledgeable than me will have even better ideas on how this can be achieved in a more modern way. But most importantly I hope, I have at least somewhat convinced you to reconsider it, setting a precedent for the future!

Edited May 14 by Matisse VanWezer
clarity

[Ross Carlson]

2 hours ago, Matisse VanWezer said:

19 hours ago, Ross Carlson said:

Unfortunately, we don't have such a database, and creating one would be a very complicated job.

As a Euroscope user, which iirc you are not familiar with, that's not entirely true. 

You say it's not entirely true, but then you agree with me:

2 hours ago, Matisse VanWezer said:

This is indeed a lot of work.

 

2 hours ago, Matisse VanWezer said:

yet it shows that it can be done

I didn't say it can't be done, I said it would be a very complicated job, which you agree with.

2 hours ago, Matisse VanWezer said:

I hope, I have at least somewhat convinced you to reconsider it

It's been considered and reconsidered many times, by myself and by others. And it's not something I would do. It would require an effort by the global VATSIM community, not just one developer. Remember, this part of this thread is about giving pilots a way to know whom they should contact. This goes way beyond what I'm doing with CRC.

[Alex Ying]

On 5/14/2022 at 4:09 AM, Matisse VanWezer said:

And since I am not a VRC user, let's get this straight:

• VRC users don't see the airspace volume they are controlling when logging on... ? 
• VRC users don't see the next frequency for an aircraft ...?

.. Since there is no sort of airspace DB.

In VRC, vSTARS, and vERAM, that's correct, the controller is responsible for knowing all of their airspace blocks and knowing who their neighbors are. One of the briefing items when logging on is to know which controllers around you are online, what airspace they're handling, and on what frequencies.

I've used Euroscope a little, and one of the problems we run into is the inability to do dynamic changes to sector ownership, or even sector boundaries, and communicate that to other facilities. Depending on traffic flows and airport configurations, different airspace blocks may be owned by different controllers, or there may be a change to a split configuration before or during an event to meet the needs of the traffic at that time. These changes aren't communicated to other controller clients, so you could end up with mismatched information.

The real systems do know about airspace blocks and when a controller sets up their scope, they assign themselves various airspace blocks which also communicates that information to other scopes and other facilities. The infrastructure to do that does not currently exist on VATSIM.

[Justin McElvaney]

Ross - I started VATSIM in high school and that led to real world ATC for about 10 years split between approach in the AF and enroute at the FAA. So, first and foremost, thank you - sincerely - for everything you put into this network.

Pure curiosity, I had two questions with regards to vERAM in CRC. Is continuous flight plan readout going to be a feature included by chance? And will there be a route key functionality incorporated (<RTE> <FIX> <ENTER> which will update the route string accordingly)?

I've been playing with the vEDST that is being developed and it has some really great potential and does a great job (just like vERAM) at matching the real world system. If all these pieces can ultimately end up working together things would be absolutely fantastic.

 

 

[Ross Carlson]

6 hours ago, Justin McElvaney said:

Is continuous flight plan readout going to be a feature included by chance?

No plans for that currently, but who knows what the future will bring.

6 hours ago, Justin McElvaney said:

And will there be a route key functionality incorporated (<RTE> <FIX> <ENTER> which will update the route string accordingly)?

Yes, that'll be incorporated. Perhaps not for the initial release, but likely soon after.

6 hours ago, Justin McElvaney said:

I've been playing with the vEDST that is being developed and it has some really great potential and does a great job (just like vERAM) at matching the real world system. If all these pieces can ultimately end up working together things would be absolutely fantastic.

I'm working closely with the vEDST team and we plan to have the two systems tightly integrated.