ATC forecast

[Michal Rok]

I recently launched a new feature in ATC forecast, showing the probability of ATC coverage in specific airspace sector, by weekday and time of day. The information is based on actual activity in VATSIM network in preceeding 4 weeks.

 

 

(if you want more information, check out the latest vroute newsletter).

Since this feature is targeted specifically at VATSIM audience I wanted to use this forum to ask how do you like it?

 

 

Michal

 

ps. as part of my commitment to extending the freeware products as well, this feature is available in both premium and cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts]ic (freeware) version of vroute.

[Thomas Reid 1073761]

I haven't had a chance to fly in a while, but it looks like its a great tool to have! Thanks for it!

[Kenneth Haught]

Thanks for adding this Michal. It definitely helps when planning when/where to fly to see if I can expect ATC in an area. I also like the rest of the additions you put through, in particular the wind aloft feature you added a while back.

 

Thanks for all the work you put in to this!

[Kyprianos Biris]

Very nice idea Michal.

It caters for the ATCO's who do not book their positions.

 

Can you see the next feature request coming ?

A reverse thing from what you did; a page that will indicate percentages of ATC presence in the last 4 weeks in certain regions of vatsim so the pilot could decide where to fly based on (statistically expected) ATC Presence

 

This would be the chance to indicate also the booked ATC positions per vatsim region in a certain time period, a tool that some people miss in VROUTE

[Michal Rok]

I'd rather implement the ability to read bookings for specific time&date.

 

The concept of vroute telling you where to fly is nice, but fails reality check. If implemented, this feature will simply tell you to fly in Germany at 1800Z. What's the point?

 

 

Michal

[Ross Carlson]

Can you see the next feature request coming ?

A reverse thing from what you did; a page that will indicate percentages of ATC presence in the last 4 weeks in certain regions of vatsim so the pilot could decide where to fly based on (statistically expected) ATC Presence

 

I'm missing something ... isn't that just about exactly what the new feature does?

[Michal Rok]

I guess Kyp was expecting something to tell him where to fly . Instead, vroute shows you ATC forecast for a route that you already selected. So you need to decide "where to" first, then you get an answer.

 

 

Michal

[Ross Carlson]

Ahh ... that's what I was missing. I didn't realize you had to choose your route first.

 

I actually think Kyp's suggestion is sound ... that's what I thought this feature was, at first. I'm not really sure what good it does to show the probability of ATC coverage after you've already chosen your route. I think you'll find that many people will put in a bunch of *possible* routes, looking for the one with the best chance of ATC coverage, then choose one of the routes. Kyp's suggestion would allow them to see the same data at a glance, instead of having to submit a bunch of routes.

 

Edit: Note that I realize drawing a map, showing the probability of ATC coverage over an entire region, would likely be much more complex than what you have shown here ... I imagine it would be LOTS of queries. Not sure if you do any caching or precaching of the percentages.

[Michal Rok]

The problem is people think of ATC coverage as something that is relevant for a point in time. In fact, after you choose i.e. Warsaw, Poland as your departure location, you want to know the coverage in Berlin FIR for T+1 hours, in Netherlands for T+2 hours and for London at T+3 hours - because if you choose to fly to London, you want to know the probability of ATC showing up 3 hours after your departure.

 

This is exactly the kind of information that the current ATC forecast is delivering - instead of suggesting a route to fly, it tells you what time to expect ATC at for your selected route. It's then helping you realize that if you leave Warsaw at 2100Z it's unlikely London will still be online at arrival time, but if you leave at 1700Z then it's a completely different story.

 

 

Michal

[Ross Carlson]

Yes, ATC coverage changes over time, and is only relevant to a portion of a given flight, but that doesn't obviate the potential usefulness of Kyp's suggested feature.

 

ServInfo allows you to see ATC bookings for a given (relatively small) block of time. When deciding where to fly, you look at the blocks of time that fall within the span of time you plan to fly. Based on what you see, you can choose a flight that has a good change of decent ATC coverage.

 

Using your probability algorithm, you could do exactly the same thing. You could think of it as you would be creating "pseudo-bookings" based on historical data.

 

Note that I think both features complement each other. The feature you've already developed shows you bookings and probability of coverage over time for a given flight. Kyp's feature would show you bookings and probability of coverage over a larger region, but for a smaller block of time.

 

Thinking about it a bit more, I can picture a hybrid of these two features. The user enters the block of time they plan to fly, and the region where they want to fly, and you show a map of that region, with some iconography showing the projected coverage for the specified block of time. Something like a small bar next to each position (twr/app/ctr) with portions of the bar filled in representing the probability of coverage at that position over the specified time span. (I'm picturing the little blue bars that my pocket pc shows in the calendar showing my schedule bookings for a given day.) Totally just brainstorming here ... ignore me at will!

 

Edit: For example, if I choose to fly from 1200 to 1600, and LAX_TWR has a booking (or high probability of being online) from 1200 to 1400, then it would "fill in" the first half of the bar shown next to LAX on the map. If LAX_CTR is booked to be online from 1000 to 1800, then the bar next to LAX_CTR on the map would be completely filled in.

[Michal Rok]

Ross,

 

nice idea, but do you a person with average IQ like mine would be able to read this map?

 

I'd rather think of a "variable time axis" map, where you indicate a starting point and the time selected for each sector would be relevant for a given speed of flight. So you pick Warsaw and 450 kts, and Berlin automatically shows at T+1 hours from your departure time.

 

 

Michal

[Ross Carlson]

nice idea, but do you a person with average IQ like mine would be able to read this map?

 

Yeah, I think it could be quite readable, provided you stick to the main airports in each ARTCC/FIR (such as only cl[Mod - Happy Thoughts] B and C in the US) and the CTRs.

 

I'd rather think of a "variable time axis" map, where you indicate a starting point and the time selected for each sector would be relevant for a given speed of flight. So you pick Warsaw and 450 kts, and Berlin automatically shows at T+1 hours from your departure time.

 

That sounds great to me ... you still have to pick a starting point, so it wouldn't convey nearly as much info, but it would certainly be simpler to interpret.

[Kyprianos Biris]

Ross caught my point. Indeed it was about deciding where to fly based on probability of ATC presence everywhere (including your departure airport & time).

 

Thinking of it again now with a more subjective view on the issue, this would not promote traffic to less active FIR's (who may be under recent development and in great need of traffic) but rather the "busy hubs".

 

Power to the minors !

Forget my proposal

 

Michal, your idea of outlooked activity based on departure time & radius sounds wise.