ATC deviates from flight plan

[Stein Carlsen]

Ok, thanks.

I misunderstood. I thought SUGOL and RIVER were the endpoints of a STAR and therefore the last point before the final app.

niets

 

[Martijn Rammeloo]

5 minutes ago, Stein Carlsen said:

Ok, thanks.

I misunderstood. I thought SUGOL and RIVER were the endpoints of a STAR and therefore the last point before the final app.

niets

 

Actually, they are STAR endpoints. And indeed, the 'DCT to' part is intended to make you fly in the general (right) direction after the IAF. However... some 10 miles prior to passing the STAR end point, the radar controller will transfer you to the approach controller. and whenever he thinks is an appropriate moment, he will start issuing vectors. 

When traffic is low, he will direct you to the base leg right away. On a busy night, expect a full downwind leg, or even an 'overhead' (passing SPL, in order to fly the downwind leg on the other side of the runway).

Every (major) aerodrome has its own particulars, and only experience will make it easier. Again, if you don't understand something, speak up. All controllers are used to new pilots, and as long as you have at least the skills to control heading/altitude/speed, you'll be just fine. Please don't pretend that you understand an instruction, and actually do something completely different.

Martijn

 

[Alex Ying]

To add on to what's already been mentioned, there are situations in which you will never fly the full STAR due to airport and airspace configuration. For example, the LENDY arrival into JFK does not have runway-specific transitions and when JFK is landing 22s or 31s, the full arrival procedure sends aircraft into departure control airspace. Because of that, you will always get vectored off the arrival prior to getting to the end of the STAR.

[Stein Carlsen]

Thanks for all the answers.

Being vectored I think should go pretty smoothly. Worse, it can probably be to "go direct" to a waypoint. I understand that this must be done using FMC.

An additional challenge in this is that it is often very difficult to hear what ATC is saying. They often speak fast and indistinctly. But here you can ask ATC to repeat if necessary?

On the whole, quite a lot is required of the pilots on Vatsim, I think. But I guess I have to learn to crawl before I can walk, not to mention run. And on the way forward, a lot of strange things will probably happen!

niets

[Tobias Dammers]

2 hours ago, Stein Carlsen said:

Worse, it can probably be to "go direct" to a waypoint. I understand that this must be done using FMC.

Not at all.

"Proceed direct" just means that you should turn towards the indicated waypoint ASAP, and go there in a straight line. How you achieve that is up to you:

• You can use the FMC's "DIRECT TO" feature to make a leg from where you are now to the DCT waypoint, and have the LNAV fly it; this is how you would normally do it in an airliner, but it's not required.
• You can locate the waypoint on your ND / MFD, switch to HDG mode, and turn the heading knob until your nose points towards the waypoint.
• If the waypoint is a VOR, you can tune NAV1 to that frequency, then twist the OBS knob until the needle is centered, and then enable NAV mode to make the autopilot follow the direct radial to the VOR.
• If the waypoint is defined in terms of a VOR radial + DME, and you are already on that radial, you can tune NAV1 to the VOR, set OBS to the target radial, and then enable NAV mode to follow the radial. (Note that you may need to select the opposite radial, depending on where you and the fix are relative to the VOR station).
• You can locate the waypoint by whichever means are appropriate, and hand-fly towards it.

2 hours ago, Stein Carlsen said:

But here you can ask ATC to repeat if necessary?

You can always use the phrase "say again" to ask ATC to repeat what they said. This is always better than guessing (and getting it wrong). If you only missed part of a message, you can also specify which part you want repeated. E.g.: "KLM123, turn right heading 265, descend altitude 2000 feet, QNH 1021" - "say again heading, KLM123" - "KLM123, turn right heading 265" - "right heading 265, descend 2000 feet, QNH 1021, KLM123".

Also: ATC is much easier to understand when you expect their calls. E.g., when you're on the downwind leg of a STAR or transition, the next things that you should expect are a descent to your intercept altitude, a turn onto base, and then another turn onto an intercept heading (or you may be turned onto the intercept heading right away), immediately followed by "cleared ILS (runway)". Just being primed for these calls will already make them 100 times easier to understand. And you can prime yourself for most other calls in much the same way. Frequency changes, taxi clearances, takeoff clearances, climb altitudes, these should rarely come as a complete surprise.

[Stein Carlsen]

Thanks for a good and complementary answer.

 

[Martijn Rammeloo]

7 hours ago, Stein Carlsen said:

Thanks for all the answers.

Being vectored I think should go pretty smoothly. Worse, it can probably be to "go direct" to a waypoint. I understand that this must be done using FMC.

An additional challenge in this is that it is often very difficult to hear what ATC is saying. They often speak fast and indistinctly. But here you can ask ATC to repeat if necessary?

On the whole, quite a lot is required of the pilots on Vatsim, I think. But I guess I have to learn to crawl before I can walk, not to mention run. And on the way forward, a lot of strange things will probably happen!

niets

Obviously, you can practice your flying & navigation skills offline. Just fly your route. And then simulate the you must fly '10 degrees to the left for separation'. And after a few minutes or so 'resume own navigation, proceed DCT to [next convenient waypoint on your route]. Etc ...

Depending on your aircraft, there may be many tutorials on YouTube.

[Stein Carlsen]

Thanks,

I'm already started. Flies a bit at random. Follows hdg, enter a vor in nav1 and then a waypoint in FMC. Everything seems to work! I'm going to fly around a bit this way just to practice. Quite funny. Thanks for the help.

[Martijn Rammeloo]

1 hour ago, Stein Carlsen said:

Thanks,

I'm already started. Flies a bit at random. Follows hdg, enter a vor in nav1 and then a waypoint in FMC. Everything seems to work! I'm going to fly around a bit this way just to practice. Quite funny. Thanks for the help.

One more thing: if you _really_ cannot understand the controller, simply ask him to send the message by text. No problem at all.

Disclaimer: controllers may be less patient during busy events 😉

[Robert Shearman Jr]

On 4/17/2022 at 5:04 PM, Ryan Renz said:

of there is no traffic around at all then there is no reason to vector me.  I want to use VATSIM to practice real procedures; canceling my flt plan and flying vectors doesn't give me much practice

I think you have it exactly backwards.  If there is no traffic, there is no reason to make you fly a longer, more convoluted route versus vectoring you on a more direct path.

You also have it backwards when you suggest that being taken off the route and following ATC instructions is LESS as opposed to MORE practice.  Being left on the STAR to fly it exactly as published can be done (a) without pilot intervention and (b) without ATC instruction.  Being on VATSIM means you need to be prepared for (b) so you can practice (a).  If all you want to do is program your full route, including departure runway, SID, enroute routing, STAR, and approach, without any possibility for needing to deviate from that, then really what do you need a controller for?  Someone to give you your takeoff clearance?  Surely you recognize they have more function than that, yes?

[Stein Carlsen]

2 hours ago, Martijn Rammeloo said:

One more thing: if you _really_ cannot understand the controller, simply ask him to send the message by text. No problem at all.

Thanks, I will remember.

[Ryan Renz]

Well just because I like different things than others in here doesn't mean I am wrong.  So I don't understand why I'm always being attacked.  I'm not saying anything negative about anyone on here, my only point is that I don't like when ATC is always changing your flight.  PIC means I should be able to decide where I'm flying.  Yes, there are times that need to change and yes changes are good from time to time to keep you on your toes. 

 

But I don't need to be personally handled and vectored every single flight.  Otherwise if that is the case and that is the purpose of ATC, then my flight plan should only be Arrival Aerodrome.  Then ATC can issue me the details and vector me. 

 

A large part of pilotage is to flight plan, check the weather, plan routes/ altitude/ speed, put everything together (if IFR) select SIDs plan runways, enroute, STARs, Arrivals and Approaches, runways, radios... emergencies and contingencies etc etc.

 

Then to have someone come and say it's all crap just fly direct.  So then why did I spend hours planning all this and preparing that.

 

Bash me all you want, but I don't think putting AP on and having it fly a heading direct is really testing my pilotage. Sure, from time to time (that's not what I'm saying, moderation is good; but I'm taking about all the time/ every time - before you even jump to that conclusion).  I'd much rather an instruction to intercept such and such a procedure and fly that.  In the real world to test your abilities the examiner doesn't merely ask you to fly direct; you are required to fly a VOR on a specific radial, or fly a full ILS procedure, and then go missed.  Tasks where you have to either fly or monitor the aircraft to ensure when you reach waypoint X you also continue on to waypoint Y; and not just a ghost aircraft with no thought.

 

I'm not trying to hijack this thread, but when everyone's quoting me saying I'm in the wrong I feel I need to explain.  Unfortunately it seems I need to spell everything out because everyone misunderstands me and doesn't sympathize with my view at all. 

(also for what is worth; I think this is a very horrible explanation, but it's all I have effort for at this time.  I find everyone is very judgemental and not very understanding; my opinions don't seem to be welcomed here so perhaps I'll just keep off the forums since I'm not welcomed)

[Kirk Christie]

Where has any one said you are wrong?

Where has any one attacked you?

Where has any one bashed you?

All that has been said, is that if you come online, to interact with ATC, then you follow their instructions, plenty of people have politely offered you reasonable explanations for why you are being asked to do certain things by ATC. Your dislike for ATC vectoring you off your flight plan, is not a reasonable excuse, for not being willing to follow ATC instructions.

Code of Conduct B8, which you agreed to when you singed everytime you connect.

B8 - A pilot must comply with all agreed (read-back) air traffic control clearances and all issued instructions, or notify air traffic control without delay if unable to do so. Additionally, compliance with the following ATC instructions is mandatory, unless operational safety (e.g. TCAS conflict resolution) is compromised:

- Holding position when on the ground at an airport.

- Flying at a speed.

- Flying a heading.

- Flying at an altitude or flight level.

Edited April 21, 2022 at 03:56 AM by Kirk Christie

[Louis Sikkema]

3 hours ago, Ryan Renz said:

But I don't need to be personally handled and vectored every single flight.  Otherwise if that is the case and that is the purpose of ATC, then my flight plan should only be Arrival Aerodrome.  Then ATC can issue me the details and vector me. 

In most of europe for example you dont even file a STAR, because they are often runway and traffic dependant and for example in LSZH/Zurich, the approach transitions from the IAF's are extremely long because they need to be conventially defined by navaids and a lot of navaids are not in service anymore, so using the approach transition would destroy every possibility of using the airport to capacity, because arrivals and departures would be crossing over multiple times, they are only for lost comms procedures and are never flown in real life.

This is only one example but there are lots of examples like this one.

But as mentioned before: if you want to train handflying a non-rnav transition for example you can always on first contact with approach tell them for zurich for example: "Request flying the full gipol-non-rnav approach transition for training purpouses"
If traffic levels are low enough they would probably approve, if there is any traffic however they would probably have to deny as they would be violating one of the main atc rules to provide efficient service.

[Torben Andersen]

3 hours ago, Ryan Renz said:

  I find everyone is very judgemental and not very understanding; my opinions don't seem to be welcomed here so perhaps I'll just keep off the forums since I'm not welcomed)

I'm sorry, if you feel the repondees (incl. me) are being judgemental. Explaining, why some of us looks differently at your views, is exactly that: An explanation, not a judgement. However, being on VATSIM is about interacting with other people, incl. ATC. I fully understand, if you want to practice a full star, ils approach with procedure turn, whatever, and you can ALWAYS ask for that. But if you want ATC, you also have to acknowledge, that they also are there for the fun. And only having to say CLEARED xxx STAR, CLEARED ILS APPROACH, CLEARED TO LAND RWY xxx, well, it won't take long before you won't have any atc left - you might as well have the AI ATC instead. As controllers, we try to the best of our abillities to do the job, as we see it being done IRL, where vectoring planes is most common practice. This is our job, this is what we do - and we expect you to fly the plane accordingly. But again, if you want the full procedure, ask, but don't get displeased because you have to ask for it.

[Robert Shearman Jr]

16 hours ago, Ryan Renz said:

when everyone's quoting me saying I'm in the wrong I feel I need to explain.  Unfortunately it seems I need to spell everything out because everyone misunderstands me and doesn't sympathize with my view at all. 

You posted your concerns for public comment, thus, you're receiving public comment.

You seem to be upset that most of the responses here don't agree with your viewpoint.  Perhaps consider that there is a reason behind that.  It may not actually be personal, but, the voice of many thousands of hours of collective experience and reason and knowledge which is suggesting you should reconsider your position.

[1341101]

16 hours ago, Ryan Renz said:

My only point is that I don't like when ATC is always changing your flight.  PIC means I should be able to decide where I'm flying.  Yes, there are times that need to change and yes changes are good from time to time to keep you on your toes. 

You really do sound like you think ATC here is your enemy. No. ATC is literally here to help you get to your destination as smoothly and as safely as possible, whether that requires a reroute, a direct or a vector... If you truly want to "decide where you're flying" (which in this context really isn't realistic at all because again, ATC is your friend and issues reroutes, directs or vectors either for shortcuts or to separate you from or to sequence you within other traffic. Changes aren't good "from time to time", they're always for the overall benefit of both keeping the airspace clean and safe and also to benefit your passengers or cargo and to get them to your destination faster.

Quote

But I don't need to be personally handled and vectored every single flight.  Otherwise if that is the case and that is the purpose of ATC, then my flight plan should only be Arrival Aerodrome.  Then ATC can issue me the details and vector me. 

Again, you sound annoyed when the whole point of flying with other aircraft and with ATC is to work together and to display airmanship to other pilots and to ATC. No one here is your enemy - ATC is literally just there to help you. If you can do whatever it takes to make controller's lives easier, especially in a heavy-workload situation, then do it. If ATC can do something to make your flight more efficient by giving you a shortcut, they will do it. Or, if ATC gives you a vector to avoid traffic, that's literally for your own benefit so you don't crash.
 

Quote

So then why did I spend hours planning all this and preparing that.

So that you can fully prepare yourself to be in a situation where you do have to fly the full routes, SIDs, STARs, in case ATC can NOT give you a shortcut, due to traffic, or so that you are prepared to fly across heavy weather in case ATC isn't able to give you a direct... I really don't think you understand the way things work around aviation and whilst I'm no aviation expert, I know that in aviation you always prepare to be safe than sorry - prepare to be able to mitigate a disaster, rather than unknowingly flying into one and not being prepared for it. That's the whole point - preparing to mitigate a potential disaster... You stop at an intersection even if there's no other cars because until you stop, you don't know if a car will come flying across the intersection. 

Quote

Bash me all you want, but I don't think putting AP on and having it fly a heading direct is really testing my pilotage. Sure, from time to time (that's not what I'm saying, moderation is good; but I'm taking about all the time/ every time - before you even jump to that conclusion).  I'd much rather an instruction to intercept such and such a procedure and fly that. 

So file an IFR flight plan with some interesting routes for you to be able to intercept such and such and fully fly said procedures, come online and ask ATC "Hey, we'd like to do this and that and would like to fly the full procedure for training purposes...".

Quote

In the real world to test your abilities the examiner doesn't merely ask you to fly direct; you are required to fly a VOR on a specific radial, or fly a full ILS procedure, and then go missed.  Tasks where you have to either fly or monitor the aircraft to ensure when you reach waypoint X you also continue on to waypoint Y; and not just a ghost aircraft with no thought.

In the real world, on a day-to-day basis, you don't undertake special challenges, you fly "normally", in the traditional way of every-day flying where when it's safe and possible, you get directs or vectors off for a shortcut or for separation and you rarely come into situations where you have to take on the challenges you mentioned. That's what we simulate on VATSIM and I'm not sure why you're annoyed at that - if you really truly want to test your pilotage, do an IFR training flight.

 

Edited April 21, 2022 at 07:48 PM by 1341101

[Andreas Fuchs]

In the real world all I want from ATC is shortcuts, shortcuts, shortcuts and (if possible) clearance for a visual approach to - you guessed it! - shortcut and land as soon as possible. Every minute in the air costs tons of money. On my ride we are talking about 150 USD per minute. Per minute!

PS: I just returned home from a tour. We got some nice shortcuts, had a 500 NM+ direct clearance from Southern Germany to the STAR entry point in Stockholm. That's service! (and also because the ATCO in question is a friend of mine who was on duty 😄 ). But seriously, this kind of stuff happens on a regular basis and we LOVE it.

Edited April 22, 2022 at 10:58 AM by Andreas Fuchs
Grammar

[Alistair Thomson]

3 hours ago, Andreas Fuchs said:

In the real world all I want from ATC is shortcuts, shortcuts, shortcuts and (if possible) clearance for a visual approach to - you guessed it! - shortcut and land as soon as possible.

I think Ryan's perspective is different. He isn't an ageing, real world, crusty old seen-it-all like you and I! I think he will have some mulling to do from the responses to his posts, and I trust that he will try to (will actually need to) balance his hopes and needs against the bigger picture, like in real life.

I think David has hit the nail on the head:

4 hours ago, 1341101 said:

In the real world, on a day-to-day basis, you don't undertake special challenges, you fly "normally"

Ryan, get up there and fly normally, and when you want to, ask for some special consideration when you want to try something out. If you choose your moment wisely (avoiding events, for example, or crowded airspace), you will be pleasantly surprised by the reception you get.

[Andreas Fuchs]

10 hours ago, Alistair Thomson said:

I think Ryan's perspective is different.

Yes, obviously. Although it always baffles me when pilots are not interested in shortcuts (unless they have technical issues that would bug-out their GPS/FMS if they changed their routing), because everyone is requesting "realistic ATC". And some of those asking for "realistic ATC" are not aware what "realistic" means, because they still need to learn this. Everyone here has explained it with a degree of patience and objectivity that there is no way to doubt that it is correct.

And as many have pointed out here: if you want to fly a certain departure, route, arrival and approach procedure according to the charts, then simply ask for it. I urge you to NOT do it during an event/weekly online day of an airport, because there will be too much traffic. Rather fly to regional airports and practice these procedures there. ATC will be delighted to support you on this feat.

[Robert Shearman Jr]

The key point -- SIDs, airways, and STARs are designed to route large levels of traffic efficiently with a minimum of ATC workload.  When traffic levels are reduced, a controller has enough bandwidth available to issue more direct and efficient routings to each individual aircraft without compromising safety.  Plan for worst-case and hope for best-case.  Shortcuts are also issued to increase or decrease spacing between you and the aircraft ahead or behind, to ensure maximum efficiency in the airspace.  That's the essence of realistic ATC, and if a pilot prefers not to have their route adjusted, that simply may not be a realistic expectation in a multiplayer environment.

It's a very similar argument for why pilots can't always rely on a speciific arrival runway at airports which have multiple arrival runways (such as in the case of parallels).  If 100 pilots are planning to arrive at KIAD, and 80% of those pilots are planning to use 19L (because "that's what SimBrief gave me" or whatever), then what is a controller supposed to do?  Stack everyone into holds and sequence them one at a time for 19L, while 19C and 19R remain empty?  No -- pilots need to understand that expected arrival runways are assigned by the Approach controller in order to maximize the airport's efficiency, and be ready to adjust their planned route accordingly.  If you aren't ready to have your arrival runway re-assigned upon first contact with Approach at your destination, you aren't ready to fly in a realistic multiplayer environment.

Edited April 22, 2022 at 01:27 PM by Robert Shearman Jr

[Andreas Fuchs]

50 minutes ago, Robert Shearman Jr said:

If 100 pilots are planning to arrive at KIAD, and 80% of those pilots are planning to use 19L (because "that's what SimBrief gave me" or whatever), then what is a controller supposed to do?

Ask them to land in formation 🙂

[Horacio Rotonda]

Flying online has its rules, and there is no other way than to respect them. However, there are a few things a pilot can do to simplify things: 1) Use an aircraft with simple, straightforward technology that allows you to quickly activate the most common requests from an ATC (change heading, altitude, speed, go direct to a point or fly around a point). Personally, I think that the Airbus A319, A321 or A340 are much simpler for that than the Boeing, although they are personal tastes. 2) Consider the flight plan as a practical alternative if there is no ATC coverage when taking off or landing, nothing more than that. 3) It is okay to study the departure and destination airports for a few minutes, but also not to obsess over SIDS and STARS that possibly cannot be followed if ATC is present. It is enough to insert the simplest option in the FMC so as to be prepared in the event that there is no coverage.

I hope that these recommendations will help you, I am not an expert but it is what I have learned with some flights in the short time that I have been in VATSIM.

[Stein Carlsen]

Thanks for the helpful comment.

[Lauri Uusitalo]

On 4/21/2022 at 11:47 PM, Andreas Fuchs said:

PS: I just returned home from a tour. We got some nice shortcuts, had a 500 NM+ direct clearance from Southern Germany to the STAR entry point in Stockholm. That's service! (and also because the ATCO in question is a friend of mine who was on duty 😄 ). But seriously, this kind of stuff happens on a regular basis and we LOVE it.

But hey, I had 25 waypoints programmed on my FMC, now all of that for nothing! No more turns here and there.

I wonder what people think when FRA get's more widely adapted.