VATJPN
By Andreas Fuchs 810809
#516066 Hi Sean,
Sean Harrison 870618 wrote:
Andreas Fuchs 810809 wrote:I agree that if a person controlling send you a "contact me" then you should contact them, But if they can't substantiate why they are doing so, then it's SUP time. People are people, and whether they are controlling or flying they make mistakes, or in minor cases blatantly do the wrong thing. Just because someone online or even on these forums says something doesn't make it right.
I have to say that this discussion is getting more and more frustrating for me. As a pilot you normally do NOT know the exact lateral or vertical boundaries of a sector. You normally do NOT know if a letter of agreement between ATC-units exists, you might be flying in delegated airspace. You normally do NOT know whether a controller is offering extended services.

So, what's the matter? If an ATC is offering you competent ATC-services, just take it. We are here to fly online, to interact with other members, not to question their abilities, competencies and attitude.
By Sachin Gnath 1260885
#516087
Andreas Fuchs 810809 wrote:As a pilot you normally do NOT know the exact lateral or vertical boundaries of a sector. You normally do NOT know if a letter of agreement between ATC-units exists, you might be flying in delegated airspace. You normally do NOT know whether a controller is offering extended services.

So, what's the matter? If an ATC is offering you competent ATC-services, just take it. We are here to fly online, to interact with other members, not to question their abilities, competencies and attitude.


+1 Andreas!
By Anastasios Petros Stefopoulos 901134
#516161
Sean Harrison 870618 wrote:I believe this is the reason why artcc's/divisions/regions should make their local policies clearly defined and readily available. To encourage people to fly in more places, it should be easier to find the differences.

After having an issue in Singapore artcc, I think not having documents to reference will only put people off. Would be interesting what the SUPs will utilise for reference, if contacted in similar situations.

My thoughts are that whenever a person controlling sends a "contact me" then you should so, but then call a SUP for clarification on the differences.

I think I would have contacted the controller, requested 16, and then maybe logged off if denied.



Sean,
These guys discuss something very specific and you found ground to start refering to policy from vacc level then division then vatasia and i dont know what other body within vatsim. Since you refer to policy quite often you should have been aware that each airspace and Division or vacc (when there is one) is responsible to publish their own manuals or policy or whatever they think necessary for their FIR and members.
VATASIA as a region has nothing to do with that. Search other regions and if you find any info regarding airspaces in the REGIONAL SITE let me know. Please dont mix the meaning of wording in English of region and division. In VATSIM and in Asia we have specific names for specific areas. VATASIA refers to everything within Asia as a whole. A Division is a subarea of VATASIA and a vacc is a subarea of a Division. Usually one or more FIRs. you mention SUPs as well. i see no point of doing that. Their job is different.
Sean, what happened in the short past in Singapore it is not worth to be mentioned in JAPAN forum and what happened is disclosed. Hence i dont find it fair to partially take advantage of facts and refer to Scott "frustration". I am sure Scott is not frustrated at all. He just asked for info.
While you expressed interest for BIOT airspace to create something there, i have not seen any plan of proposal, how this is going to maintain our balance within VATSIM ASIA REGION and the local communities, how this is going to benefit us (after all , all these years there was not such airspace, though operations continue) etc etc. I only see from your side refering to policy, expressing strongly your opinion and trying to find ground to expose our Region and the divisions there in.
Finally i find your mention to incidents which have to do for another Division, in a public forum, where the subject is DIFFERENT and someone asks for a simple airspace info, not acceptable.
If you wish to contribute and nkt to cause havoc you are welcome to express your interest with no rush moves. This region is delicate and has a balance which I and my team do not tend or tolerate to let anyone destroy. Otherwise i would kindly ask you to stop sit back and fly and enjoy the hobby which all makes us happy. And something for the end. Real world is real world. Vatsim is vatsim. If anyone wish to bring his flying or atc as close to reality then do. But you ALWAYS need to play with the rules of the network.
Thanks for your attention.
By jesil rahman 1161373
#516166 Agree with Anastasios and Andreas,

As a pilot i don't think its necessary to know the vertical limits of the ATC facility. (unless flying VFR in terminal areas) If a controller is helping the Pilot, as long as it doesn't effect the safety of the flight, Pilots can take it. If any doubt, ask.

Also i believe TRACON is only used in USA. Rest of the world don't have a concept like that. If he means APP/DEP facility, many of airports has the Ceiling up to FL245. ( Correct me if i am wrong).

Regards

Jesil
Vatsim West Asia
By Sean Harrison 870618
#516191 I think this has become subjective rather than objective. I personally believe that if someone asks a question then it should be answered.

Scott asked a question twice, and I didn't see an answer. I am also interested in the answer. :wink:

I apologise to anyone who has taken offence or affront to anything I have posted, I have not intended to do so. I am an old persistent so-en-so, and for the life of me can't see why if a question is asked someone can't simply answer it.

I'd like to think that VATSIM is a community. Not pilots vs controllers, not pilots vs staff, and so on. A very small percentage appear to me to believe we should just do as we are told. I disagree. We should do what is appropriate in the circumstances. If any region/division/artcc or staff/members believe people should just fly, do everything a controller says, and never ask a question, then my belief in what VATSIM is will change.

Again, I sincerely apologise if anything I post causes anyone to take offence or affront. As I said, I am extremely objective and feel as individuals we should be able to ask a question of a progressive organisation and be educated. I do persist when I see anyone ignored, and not respected.

If someone posts a question here, or emails a staff member, I believe respect dictates a response. Just my personal belief.
By Shunsuke Yamabe 1162075
#516201 Hi all,

We don't use the term "TRACON" in Japan, so I read it as "ACA(Approach Control Area)"; probably the nearest concept to "TRACON".

The boundaries of the airspaces in Japan is defined in the charts found on the real world eAIP (requires a free sign up).
https://aisjapan.mlit.go.jp/html/AIP/ht ... l_Area.pdf
Image

RJTT_ACA is especially complicated and I don't know from what direction Scoott approached the RJAA, but typical ACAs have the radius of approx 50NM and the ceiling of 10,000ft~FL200.
In order to provide pilots with ultra realistic ATC service, controllers in VATJPN follow AIP as long as possible.

However, it dose NOT mean that the chart is ablolute.

In the real world (and VATSIM) ATC, the H/O points are quite flexibully adjusted by coordinations between controllers.
In sometimes CTR hands off the ARVL TFC to APP at 150NM south of airport, while CTR may issue STAR clearance into ACA on behalf of APP in the other time.
(of course, even the real life pilots can't know what coordinations are done by the controllers, so they just contact APP when CTR says to do so.)

In addition to the fact as above, given that the first contact with TFC which requires the radar pickup takes longer than H/O from CTR, I don't think it is unnatural that RJTT_APP expanded his area to 100NM / FL330.


PS.
We don't plan to publish the same information as eAIP on our web site, because we have 100+ aerodromes in our division and they are frequently ammended.
We all have the access to the real data for free on the eAIP.

Rather than consuming time for copying the eAIP, we would like to train more trainee, or plan attractive events.

Regards,
Shunsuke Yamabe / VATJPN Training Director