Some Thoughts...

[Andrew Doubleday]

I'm not sure who's call it was to all of a sudden change everything back to the old FNO style... and don't get me wrong here, I'm not against FNO by all means. However, I was beginning to see some form of potential for this Air Traffic Corridor event to really be more successful, so I'm going to share an idea here as I feel this would be the best place to do it to get all of your input as well...

 

Since a majority seem to favor FNO (Myself included - I really do like the success it brought), I definitely agree with keeping that going on a regularly scheduled Friday night basis... however, would it not be possible to hold "ATC" on one Friday night per month in between the mix of FNOs to vary things up a bit?

 

I think it would provide a bit more of a variety to pilots and controllers.

 

Now, follow me for a minute with regards to "ATC". I was no fan of the way it was set up by the previous administration... what I was thinking for possible changes is to narrow the facilities from 3 down to 2. The two facilities should be next to each other (neighboring) to "concentrate" the traffic levels a bit more. This will allow for a different type of challenge for controllers and require coordination with the neighboring facilities to be accomplished on a higher level than usual. This should allow for a bit more variety without spreading the traffic out so much that it is too boring for controllers to be interested. Choose one airport for each facility as the spotlight airport, allowing others to be staffed as secondary when desirable at each facility’s discretion. And finally, don't choose the facilities for this event, allow sign-ups for once a month in which two facilities can agree on a night to staff up and hold the event at their own will.

 

I think there is still potential for this idea to work by starting a bit smaller and allowing more "freedom of choice" for when to sign-up and concentrate the traffic flow between two neighboring facilities. And, of course, FNO would still be available for the other Friday nights of the month!

 

Just looking for thoughts on this idea... maybe it's already been considered - I don't know, but I figured I throw my two cents out there to vary things up a bit.

 

 

Regards,

[Alex Bailey 969331]

It has already been discussed (Corridor with two ARTCCs) and considered, however, this month is more of a trial period. The corridor event isn't exactly gone... lets just say it has been put on hold. We are experimenting with FNO this month to see how much participation actually increases from the corridor event. This is a great way to see if all these complainers actually have some solid ground, or if they are just blowing hot air.

[Andrew Doubleday]

Understood then... out of curiosity Alex, are you heading up events at VATUSA now? I ask because I see you stepping to the plate on this forum more often than not with questions about FNO.

[Alex Bailey 969331]

No, just trying to fill the gap when we don't have anyone. Brian is actually handling the events department until a replacement is found, but if I can jump in here and save him some work then I'd be glad to. Somebody has to do it!

[Matt Bromback]

We will see how well the fno-style comes back next month in Dec, however I would like to say one thing...

 

Maybe some would say the time period was to short to act on anything but consider this...Where have all the events coordinators for the ARTCC's been?? I have noticed when VATUSA introduced the ATC corridor event they expected some of the ARTCC's to step up to the plate and fill in some gaps on those fridays that no longer had events scheduled on that evening. If I recall correctly, I saw only a few that were scheduled on friday nights, if any at all. While VATUSA is going through a lot of changes right now which is a good thing, I believe us in the ARTCC's should really step up to the plate and start doing things about it. Its not like VATUSA prevents us from having our own events during the rest of the week.

 

Now I am not saying all ARTCC's are this way, there is a good amount that are active and do schedule events on a regular basis. But to give you an example, us at ZHU I had emailed last week all of our bordering ARTCC's about potentially staffing up at least their CTR positions on the night of our FNO event on 12/14. To this date I have only received a reply from MONTERREY CTR in MEXICO!!! I know some people are more busy then others but all it takes is a simple reply to an email thats all! It is sad when VATMEX sends a responce before one of our own VATUSA ARTCC's does.

 

That is my opinion on this issue, VATUSA is doing a great job right now trying to make things better and I dont believe some of the VATUSA ARTCC's are appreciating that

 

Take Care

[Alex Bailey 969331]

Matt made an excellent point here. Many of the ARTCCs aren't stepping up and planning their own events and in some cases the event coordinators aren't even active, especially within the staff forum where most of the new information is released. VATUSA isn't supposed to hold our hands and plan our events. VATUSA is there to advertise and get the word out, and to ultimately provide [Mod - Happy Thoughts]istance and guidance.

[Brian Sperduto 856560]

Right now were are in a testing mode to see what events gain the most interest. That is why the schedule came out for only the month of December, we will defiantly explore other options in January, I'm more than happy to listen to other ideas so don't hesitate to bring them forward.

[Ross Carlson]

Andrew, I think your idea has merit. I'd love to see us try a 2-ARTCC corridor event once a month. I also fully agree that the ARTCCs should coordinate with their neighbors and sign up for dates, perhaps listing 1st, 2nd and 3rd preference dates, and let VATUSA publish the schedule based on those preferred dates for each ARTCC pair. The gaps would be filled with single-ARTCC FNO events.

[Ian Elchitz 810151]

To each his own...

 

I'd prefer multiple ARTCC events over single FNO style anyday. Both as a pilot and a controller.

 

My personal observations are that the FNO style events aren't even fun on either side of the scopes.

 

As a pilot I prefer criss crossing and wide variety of traffic to having my nose up someone else's APU and either holding or having speed restrictions for 200 nm.

 

As a controller it's painfully boring to say the exact 4 phrases to 200 successive aircraft. I'd much rather have traffic going all over the place, flying different equipment types and under different flight rules.

 

I've always thought that FNO was a step BACKWARDS in the evolution of "the event".

[Alex Bailey 969331]

Ian, I completely agree and I think a lot of people would love this type of event... however, the FNO style event is the only way to get a lot of traffic concentrated in one area. I think we should test-run a two ARTCC corridor event in January to see if we can still keep concentrated traffic levels while also providing the [Mod - Happy Thoughts]orment of traffic that you mentioned.

[Aaron Barclay 878822]

I respectfully disagree Ian. the old FNO was a challenge and required you to take shotgun arrival from other ARTCC's and sequence them to an arrival. That's a test of one's controller quality. I'm not saying the new FNO wasn't a challenge (I personally never had the chance to control a new one) but I like the old one better, it had more concentrated traffic and gave controllers a chance to shine because it was so busy. That's my $.02

 

Respectfully,

Aaron Barclay

ZAU Training Administrator

[Brad Littlejohn]

I respectfully disagree Ian. the old FNO was a challenge and required you to take shotgun arrival from other ARTCC's and sequence them to an arrival. That's a test of one's controller quality. I'm not saying the new FNO wasn't a challenge (I personally never had the chance to control a new one) but I like the old one better, it had more concentrated traffic and gave controllers a chance to shine because it was so busy. That's my $.02

 

But nobody said that both situations couldn't happen. I think what really gets to everyone is the [Mod - Happy Thoughts]umption that FNO and the ATC Corridor are two types of events that are exclusive to eachother and can not happen at once.

 

For example, Say the ATC Corridor featured ZDV, ZKC, and ZID, with either DEN, COS, PUB, or ASE being the departure airports, and SDF being the destination. There would be (If I'm reading this right) nothing stopping an FNO-style event going to the same location with routes coming in from all over the place. the same thing would be happening in an FNO style (whether 'scheduled' or not) as well as the ATC Corridor. There would be no real difference. Sequencing for the arrivals would be the same.

 

This would give pilots more options to fly to and from, as well as more situations for controllers to deal with as they'll be getting departures and arrivals to and from everywhere. They don't have to be exclusive.

 

BL.

[Andrew Doubleday]

To each his own...

 

I'd prefer multiple ARTCC events over single FNO style anyday. Both as a pilot and a controller.

 

My personal observations are that the FNO style events aren't even fun on either side of the scopes.

 

As a pilot I prefer criss crossing and wide variety of traffic to having my nose up someone else's APU and either holding or having speed restrictions for 200 nm.

 

As a controller it's painfully boring to say the exact 4 phrases to 200 successive aircraft. I'd much rather have traffic going all over the place, flying different equipment types and under different flight rules.

 

I've always thought that FNO was a step BACKWARDS in the evolution of "the event".

 

This is what I am talking about with regards to concentrating "ATC" a bit more... this provides that variety outside of FNO... and if we held it once a month in between FNO's to keep others happy, I think it might work out quite well...

 

 

AJ

[Travis Faudree 821145]

The problem with an FNO event of old is that you're asking controllers to shove an extremely unrealistic amount of traffic into airspace that wasn't designed to handle even 1/2 of what shows up during the duration of the event.

The only real world places that are anything like what I remember FNO being is N90 and Socal.

[Zachary Beard]

Quick, dumb question! I am not part of VATUSA but have heard of the FNO events. My question is what does FNO stand for?

[Daniel Doorgakant]

I believe FNO stands for Friday Night Operations.

[Andrew Doubleday]

The problem with an FNO event of old is that you're asking controllers to shove an extremely unrealistic amount of traffic into airspace that wasn't designed to handle even 1/2 of what shows up during the duration of the event.

The only real world places that are anything like what I remember FNO being is N90 and Socal.

 

I guess you've never flown into a Chicago one then!

 

 

 

Well... again, the whole idea was just to provide some insight to improve upon what we have. Maybe in January we'll be able to implement some of these ideas for testing?

 

 

 

AJ

[Karl Kleiber 812804]

Hi

FNO is Friday Night Ops, this was a spotlight event for ARTCC's. The event was started by a couple VA's getting together to bring the maximum traffic to one arrival field.

As for splitting event types between the 2 I think it is a stellar idea, Set up FNO's the first and third Fridays with corridor events on the second and fourth, this gives pilots and controllers the best of both worlds. The ATC event using 3 ARTCC's produced far less traffic than was hoped for, it was spread too thin and could be boring for some. Using 2 neighboring ARTCC's for the corridor will minimize the flight times and concentate the traffic, making for much improved traffic levels for both ARTCC's and alowing pilots to see traffic in both directions at once.

[Zachary Beard]

Hi

FNO is Friday Night Ops, this was a spotlight event for ARTCC's. The event was started by a couple VA's getting together to bring the maximum traffic to one arrival field.

As for splitting event types between the 2 I think it is a stellar idea, Set up FNO's the first and third Fridays with corridor events on the second and fourth, this gives pilots and controllers the best of both worlds. The ATC event using 3 ARTCC's produced far less traffic than was hoped for, it was spread too thin and could be boring for some. Using 2 neighboring ARTCC's for the corridor will minimize the flight times and concentate the traffic, making for much improved traffic levels for both ARTCC's and alowing pilots to see traffic in both directions at once.

Nice, sounds like fun!

[Aaron Barclay 878822]

Aaron Barclay 878822 wrote:

I respectfully disagree Ian. the old FNO was a challenge and required you to take shotgun arrival from other ARTCC's and sequence them to an arrival. That's a test of one's controller quality. I'm not saying the new FNO wasn't a challenge (I personally never had the chance to control a new one) but I like the old one better, it had more concentrated traffic and gave controllers a chance to shine because it was so busy. That's my $.02

 

 

 

But nobody said that both situations couldn't happen. I think what really gets to everyone is the [Mod - Happy Thoughts]umption that FNO and the ATC Corridor are two types of events that are exclusive to eachother and can not happen at once.

 

For example, Say the ATC Corridor featured ZDV, ZKC, and ZID, with either DEN, COS, PUB, or ASE being the departure airports, and SDF being the destination. There would be (If I'm reading this right) nothing stopping an FNO-style event going to the same location with routes coming in from all over the place. the same thing would be happening in an FNO style (whether 'scheduled' or not) as well as the ATC Corridor. There would be no real difference. Sequencing for the arrivals would be the same.

 

This would give pilots more options to fly to and from, as well as more situations for controllers to deal with as they'll be getting departures and arrivals to and from everywhere. They don't have to be exclusive.

 

BL.

 

I'm not disagreeing that you can't have a successful event if you combine the two. I'm just stating I preferred the old one. I do like the idea of two ARTCC's instead of three. Thanks for bringing that tid bit to light brad.

 

AB

[Alex Ferrari 887554]

The following is just another proposal that could be looked into:

 

Apparently from a controller's point of view, the corridor spread the traffic a bit too much, to the point that it wasnt challenging and exciting. This could also be due to the fact that I remember 1 or 2 events where the ARTCCs involved werent even next to each other. (A decision I dont understand, but thats another topic for another day). The FNO provides, according to some, unrealistic traffic to 1 single airport.

 

My idea is similar to the original poster's idea of having 2 neighboring ARTCCs but with some differences (I think).

 

Let me use Miami and Jacksonville as examples.

Under a FNO style fly-in using a single ARTCC, Miami Intl (KMIA) would most likely be chosen as the primary airport to fly into.

Under an ATC corridor, I suspect maybe Orlando Intl. (KMCO) or Jacksonville (KJAX) flying to KMIA once again.

 

Why not stay away from limiting pilots' airport choices?

Why not choose, for example, Miami ARTCC and Jacksonville ARTCC, and have several "important" airports open and staffed for pilots to choose their different hops throughout the event?

Instead of having 2 aiaport fully staffed from DEL to TWR and then 3 APPs, 2 DEPs, 4 CTRs, etc, why not have Miami Intl (KMIA), Ft. Lauderdale/Hollywood Intl. (KFLL), Tampa Intl. (KTPA), Orlando (KMCO), Jacksonville (KJAX), and maybe even Tallahase (KTLH) all semi staffed at least so pilots can fly to different airports. This is more "free-style" event that could prove to be not only fun, but realistic.

You'll have traffic coming and going to different airports and pilots are not limited to fly into a particular airport.

Staff each aiport as much as possible, but if a controller has to take both GND and DEL, whats the big deal?

 

Open several "important" airports, staff them up as much as possible and let pilots choose where to fly. This opens different options for all pilots to fly, different flight plans filed, different routes. If a Southwest Airlines pilot wants to participate in a KMIA fly-in event, technically speaking, Southwest doesnt offer flights to KMIA, but they do to KFLL.

Time and time again, events are centered around 1 particular major airport. Let's have a free-style event opening several "important" aiports within the ARTCC and let pilots choose.

[Aaron Barclay 878822]

Not bad Alex. I dont want to create a debate but my suspicion is that the intent of FNO or ATC corridor was and is to GUARANTEE traffic for controllers so they pick specific airports to staff for traffic. Maybe you're idea would work, I dont know.

[Ian Elchitz 810151]

That's a grand idea Alex - however in my experience at ZLA - no matter what or how many airports we feature - we always get m[Mod - Happy Thoughts]ive numbers into our 2 major airports.

 

That's not to say that many pilots won't pick SNA over LAX/LAS/SAN in our airspace - but the Lion's share will always head to LA and Vegas.

 

Perhaps some sort of incentive for the pilots would help. I never read much into the "points" that were given out to VA pilots, nor do I understand if the pilots care - but going with the [Mod - Happy Thoughts]umption that they did care - if (using a ZLA example again because that's all I'm familiar with but this of course could be applied elsewhere) we were to offer 1 point for LA, 2 points for San Diego, and 4 points for Ontario or Burbank.. I wonder if it would pick up traffic at other airports.

 

Of course this wouldn't work for a lot of places. You'd need to have enough controllers to staff all the fields from bottom up, and have enough traffic going to all fields to give the controllers "their share". At the same time, the pilots really enjoy heavy traffic because it allows you to fully immerse in the simulation. I see evidence of this everytime I either clear someone for a visual following other traffic, or have paralell approaches. You can just hear the excitement in the pilot's voices (along with the TCAS wailing in the background).