Jump to content

"FSS" vs European "FIS/RIS"


Recommended Posts

Hello,

I've just come across this section, and definition of "Flight Service Station":

Quote

Flight Service Station A Flight Service Station (FSS) is an Air Traffic Service that provides information and services to aircraft before, during, and after flight but is not responsible for giving control instructions, clearances, or providing separation. This information can include weather, NOTAMs, active runways, and other pertinent aeronautical information.

Previously, FSS were designed to provide basic information services overseas and low-volume traffic to give an ATC services (like: Africa's/Asia's FSS positions). As we know, FSS had possibility to set the biggest possible visibility range because of that. According to this definition, now FSS would become more of what's in Europe known as "Flight Information Service"/"Radar Information Service" with stations called "Information" (like "Warszawa Information", "Langen Information", "Praha Information" etc.) These stations provide following ATS: information service, and alerting service (which, obviously does not apply on VATSIM) in uncontrolled airspace. With the new definition, quoted above, it seems that these "FIS" services could become "_FSS", is that right?

Edited by Mateusz Zymla

Mateusz Zymla - 1131338

VATSIMer since 2009, IRL pilot rated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Mateusz Zymla said:

Hello,

I've just come across this section, and definition of "Flight Service Station":

Previously, FSS were designed to provide basic information services overseas and low-volume traffic to give an ATC services (like: Africa's/Asia's FSS positions). As we know, FSS had possibility to set the biggest possible visibility range because of that. According to this definition, now FSS would become more of what's in Europe known as "Flight Information Service"/"Radar Information Service" with stations called "Information" (like "Warszawa Information", "Langen Information", "Praha Information" etc.) These stations provide following ATS: information service, and alerting service (which, obviously does not apply on VATSIM). With the new definition, quoted above, it seems that these "FIS" services could become "_FSS", is that right?

Correct. The definition of FSS is changed within GCAP and FSS will now basically mean a FIS, as you described. Stations that were previously defined as FSS (special centres, such as ASIA_FSS, EURW_FSS, CZQX_FSS, etc.) will now be defined as CAOCs, as defined in the policy.

C1-rated controller

Gander Oceanic FIR Chief (ZQO1) | Deputy Director of VATSIM Spain (ACCSP2)

[email protected] | dsolesvik#0739

1341101

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks David for your immediate response.

I will ask few more here to avoid creating new topics:

1. Can we expect login suffixes to change?

2. Ground Metering - do I understand correctly, it's like "slot control/planning controller" as we used to do, when we simulate slotting/timing during biggest events?

Mateusz Zymla - 1131338

VATSIMer since 2009, IRL pilot rated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Mateusz Zymla said:

Thanks David for your immediate response.

I will ask few more here to avoid creating new topics:

1. Can we expect login suffixes to change?

2. Ground Metering - do I understand correctly, it's like "slot control/planning controller" as we used to do, when we simulate slotting/timing during biggest events?

1. I believe not quite, since the changes will be very hard to implement on the technical side, but using things such as _I_FSS or other "mid" suffixes would probably resolve this.

2. Yes.

C1-rated controller

Gander Oceanic FIR Chief (ZQO1) | Deputy Director of VATSIM Spain (ACCSP2)

[email protected] | dsolesvik#0739

1341101

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, David Solesvik 1341101 said:

1. I believe not quite, since the changes will be very hard to implement on the technical side, but using things such as _I_FSS or other "mid" suffixes would probably resolve this.

2. Yes.

so CAOC's keep logging as _FSS?

Mateusz Zymla - 1131338

VATSIMer since 2009, IRL pilot rated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would imagine that currently, given the FSS callsign is the only one allowing the range needed for the CAOC's.  It would have to remain the same for the time being until the tech folks have had sufficient time to enable the changes that are needed.

On that I would imagine more input from the tech folks would be needed for a realistic answer.

Phil

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Philip Dowling said:

I would imagine that currently, given the FSS callsign is the only one allowing the range needed for the CAOC's.  It would have to remain the same for the time being until the tech folks have had sufficient time to enable the changes that are needed.

On that I would imagine more input from the tech folks would be needed for a realistic answer.

Phil

Actually, FSS can be a technical problem, as we have seen a lot more crashes and bugs due to the forced increased range on FSS, hence the reason for the use for CTR callsigns during CTP. Not sure if you know, but we've actually worked on a little something to try and fix this issue and there will be quite some updates at 2108 with our sector packages. But yeah, I personally see increased FSS range as more of an issue, the way it works right now on the network.

C1-rated controller

Gander Oceanic FIR Chief (ZQO1) | Deputy Director of VATSIM Spain (ACCSP2)

[email protected] | dsolesvik#0739

1341101

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, David Solesvik said:

Actually, FSS can be a technical problem, as we have seen a lot more crashes and bugs due to the forced increased range on FSS, hence the reason for the use for CTR callsigns during CTP. Not sure if you know, but we've actually worked on a little something to try and fix this issue and there will be quite some updates at 2108 with our sector packages. But yeah, I personally see increased FSS range as more of an issue, the way it works right now on the network.

David.  To be fair, as I understand it from Andrew.  The issue there is more of a client issue than a network issue.  But that is beyond the scope of this post.

Back to the point of the post.  I am sure there will be some suffix changes, but it will need to wait for the servers et al to be adjusted accordingly.

Phil

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Philip Dowling said:

David.  To be fair, as I understand it from Andrew.  The issue there is more of a client issue than a network issue.  But that is beyond the scope of this post.

Back to the point of the post.  I am sure there will be some suffix changes, but it will need to wait for the servers et al to be adjusted accordingly.

Phil

I'm in touch with Andrew regarding software related topics and can confirm, euroscope gives up when certain amount of radar targets are shown.

Mateusz Zymla - 1131338

VATSIMer since 2009, IRL pilot rated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...