SO !?!? What do you like and not like about VATSIM?
Richard Jenkins
Just looking for a little feedback.
Richard Jenkins
VATSIM Co-Founder
VATSIM BoG
JoeTst2
time to time, but for the price I can't complain at all.
"Richard Jenkins" <ric...@vatsim.net> wrote in message
news:3d20cf9b$1...@news.simflight.com...
Mark McCauley
Not really sure what vatsim can do but maybe updating Pro Controller.. and
changing the offical VATSIM drink to Coke. Just a thought..
Mark
"Richard Jenkins" <ric...@vatsim.net> wrote in message
news:3d20cf9b$1...@news.simflight.com...
>
Richard Jenkins
Well, I can just about guarantee you it would be easier and faster to update
ProController than change the official drink to Coke. That person who insists
on Pepsi can be downright vicious if he doesn't get it.
Nate Johns
move this be put to a vote!
I can see it now... offical policy, on a 7-6 vote, saing Coke is the
preferred drink of VATSIM, mwahahahahah! ;)
--
Nate Johns
VATSIM VA Liason
vapar...@mail.vatsim.net
PS - Let it be known that I have a 24 pack cube of Pepsi in my fridge... it
was on sale ;)
"Richard Jenkins" <ric...@vatsim.net> wrote in message
news:3d20dbab$1...@news.simflight.com...
Mike Evans
Mike
(it doesn't exist guy)
"Nate Johns" <joh...@colorado.edu> wrote in message
news:3d20e1f5$1...@news.simflight.com...
Ray White
I have flown at other virtual ATC sites. But once I tried Vatsim I never
looked back.
The best thing about Vatsim has to be Squawk Box, and it's stability. I
remember flying at other
sites and constantly getting disconnected or Flight Simulator crashing, it
is very frustrating when you
spend the whole session trying to solve problems with Multiplayer or Roger
Wilco connections.
Another great thing is the professionalism of both the Controllers and
Pilots on Vatsim.
Vatsim has given me many hours of fun over the past year, and I hope many
more in the future.
Regards,
Ray (COA1121)
Check it Out Today!
www.sunraypc.com
Jeff Thomas
with some kind of rating system for pilots!!!
I had a guy the other day who knew ZERO about the flight simulator,
navigation, and general flying. Of course, he's trying to fly a 747 as well
in crowded airspace! He was frustrated because he didn't understand a thing
I was telling him, and I was frustrated because he wouldn't do what I told
him....an endless circle in this circumstance.....ok maybe an hour isn't
endless....but he sure wanted to fly and he sure needed instruction.
Something along the order of the controller ratings would be great. If you
are student, no flying jets just the props, and no class B for you or IFR.
Then Senior Student, IFR and little jets, still no Class B. Then First
Officer, Class B, little jets, IFR, turbo props. Finally, Captain,
everything goes.
Anyway, just a suggestion....and I'm not trying to quell enthusiasm, but
this needs to be done, especially with fall coming, and everyone getting
back to school/shorter days/etc, etc.
If I can help, just let me know.
Jeff Thomas
"Richard Jenkins" <ric...@vatsim.net> wrote in message
news:3d20cf9b$1...@news.simflight.com...
Richard Jenkins
hopefully when it is released it will relieve some of the frustration
between Pilot and Controller. Thanks for the input!
Richard Jenkins
VATSIM Co-Founder
VATSIM BoG
"Jeff Thomas" <jttho...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3d20...@news.simflight.com...
John Van
Good idea but two drawbacks that I can see.......
1 - it will be very difficult to police from a controllers point of view
2 - if not done correctly, will portray VATSIM in a negative light impacting
pilot retention.
Richard...to you and the folks working this project - best of luck !
John Van
ANC ARTCC
kevin Pollock
also. I already have had calls abut the Student on Ctr rule it will be
really hard if we have to police pilot ratings & where they can & cant go as
well as doing other Runs for the Atc & pilots. If also its to restricted
it will drive the pilots away. Perhaps a pilot test on SB & pilot skills
when they apply for the CID would help & then a test to be able to fly
jets. Plan & simple. Rember the old KISS rule.
Kevin Pollock
Vatcan 5
SUP NA DIV
"John Van" <jv...@gsinet.net> wrote in message
news:3d21...@news.simflight.com...
Ryan Stone
controllers even, which should be left to the ARTCC Chiefs and the VATUSA
Supervisors as it is.
While it may have a negative impact on pilots, I personally would rather
have fewer pilots who know how to fly the aircrafted they are rated to fly
then have a whole bunch of pilots who disrupt the flow of traffic and ruin
not only the controllers fun but also the pilots around him who now get
upset as they have to wait for that controller to deal with a disruptive
pilot before they can get back to their job of provide a safe flow of
traffic.
I am 100% behind a Pilot rating system and hope to see one in place sometime
soon.
Ryan Stone
ZOA Chief
"John Van" <jv...@gsinet.net> wrote in message
news:3d21...@news.simflight.com...
Ryan Stone
wont allow the student to log into a CENTER position so you wont have to
worry about enforcing that at all as it will be done on the network level
which is how it should be for pilots.
If its restricted it will make sure the quality of pilots is higher just as
controller ratings insure we have a higher quality of controllers. I think
its kind of hypocritical to enforce a controller rating system and not a
pilot rating system. Using your arguement we could say enforcing a
controller rating system would restrict the amount of controllers and drive
more controllers away. While its true some controllers choose to leave or
move on, the pilots enjoy the VATSIM realism more because of those rating
restrictions as it insures we have a higher quality of controllers.
Ryan Stone
ZOA Chief
"kevin Pollock" <jan...@rogers.com> wrote in message
John Van
I am not against the idea of certifying pilots.....rather, I applaud the
efforts that are underway. While the ANC ARTCC may be VATSIM's sleepy
hollow, I too have had my fair share of pilots who were in way over their
heads from the moment they started their engine(s).
John
ANC ARTCC
"Ryan Stone" <zoac...@oakartcc.org> wrote in message
news:3d212c26$1...@news.simflight.com...
Jim Bartosh
Jim Bartosh
In all the discussions on pilot ratings, I have not seen the idea pitched
that we start a simple strictly voluntary program.
I think we would get huge dividends from having a voluntary training and
rating system. The reason I say this is from viewing the issue from a statistical
perspective. While hazardous newbies are annoying, they are certainly not
the prevalent type of pilot encountered. Making pilot training voluntary
would help us address the problem without coming off as authoritarian and
restrictive. It would probably increase our signups instead of discouraging
them.
I would strongly support a top-down instructor program modeled after the
real-world, where we had a VATSIM regional adminstrative function that could
produce designated CFIs, who in-turn could conduct OTS check-rides and used
a simple database to issue privalages. Those privelages or ratings could
be shown on the pilots Flight Plan comments, and ATC could then handle the
pilot accordingly.
I suspect most pilots would feel natrual competative drive to improve and
climb the ratings ladder.
Jim Bartosh
ZLA ARTCC Asst. Chief
Mike Bromley
You may have opened Pandora's Box here but since you did, here's my two
cents.
After reading the threads about pilot training and certification there
appears to be a feeling that whatever program is implemented it has to be
done in a way that doesn't offend the pilots. In my opinion this is
backwards thinking. Why is VATSIM more concerned about the pilots than they
are about the controllers? Pilots are a dime a dozen. The key thing that
seems to be overlooked is that the pilots will fly with whatever
organization has the most controllers online. That is what has made VATSIM
successful to this point. Quality and quantity go hand in hand here. The
amateur pilots are looking for quantity. The professional pilots are
looking for quality as well. I'm surprised I never hear anything about
recruiting controllers. Retention of controllers is another item that needs
to be considered. Every time I read a resignation announcement that says
the individual was resigning due to "real world commitments" what I see is
"this isn't fun any more". We need to do something to enhance the enjoyment
of our controllers or risk losing more of them. New controllers should be
made to feel welcome and not treated like they are intruding. Militaristic
enforcement of position and rating restrictions is a burden on everyone.
When it comes to rules and regulations, sometimes less it better.
I could go on with specific examples but my two cents is turning into a
nickel so I'll leave it at that.
Michael Bromley
Senior Controller
"Richard Jenkins" <ric...@vatsim.net> wrote in message
news:3d20cf9b$1...@news.simflight.com...
>
Richard Jenkins
Mike,
Thanks for the input.
I see the point you're making. Unfortunately, VATSIM is growing at such a
rate that control of the beast is essential. As of June, VATSIM was averaging
a little over 60 new members per day and on the weekends averaging 110 new
members per day. The vast majority of those fall into the Pilot/Observer
category.
Currently, the North American region has roughly 2,085 controllers and about
11,000 pilots. The controller ranks for North America grow by about 3 % per
month. So, as you explained, we do lose controllers to attrition yet we still
are gaining controllers. In fact, I feel VATSIM is in need of some method
of encouraging new controllers to advance up the chain. North America currently
has about 1,100 student controllers (not Sr. Student). Yet the number of
Senior Controllers and Instructors grows at a much slower rate. We are rapidly
approaching a situation where we will have a defenciecy in training staff
to handle the influx of controllers.
Just out of curiosity Mike what encouraged you to move up the chain and obtain
your Sr. Controller rating? You obviously have a great interest in ATC and
VATSIM (SATCO earlier) by the amount of time you spend online. But if you
would have remained a Student, you still would have been able to control
most positions. What made you jump in and take the test and earn the rating?
Once again thank you for the advice.
Richard Jenkins
Geez!!!
Someone teach that guy to spell ! ! !
Scott
Mike Bromley
Don't get me wrong. I'm not totally against rules and I fully understand
their necessity when dealing with a group as large and diverse as VATSIM.
In fact I thought the recent Senior Student minimum to work CTR was a good
idea. My opinion as to one of the reasons why there was such an outcry
about it is that in some areas getting promoted can be a daunting task.
Again, don't get me wrong. Standards are good. What I have seen, in one
area in particular, is that the training/promotion process has turned into a
chore that takes the enjoyment out of the hobby. I don't know the specific
numbers but my guess is that there is a relatively high number of new
student controllers who drop out rather quickly because the enjoyment aspect
is given a back seat to fulfilling the training requirements. I think a
good training program should be able to do both. Increase the new
controllers knowledge and skill without taking the fun out of it. Everyone
out there with a pilot's license can relate it to their first solo. You
went through hours of training that at times was hard, but still fun. Then
one day, out of the blue (no pun intended), your instructor had you park at
the ramp, got out of the airplane, and told you to do 3 touch and goes. It
was your first big test and you loved every minute of it. When you got back
to the ramp you were grinning so hard your face hurt. There is no reason
why we can't do the same thing. The current training mentality where I am
assigned is why I am no longer an Instructor. I really enjoyed working with
new controllers but the beauracracy of the program took all the fun out of
it.
Why did I move up the ranks? That's an easy one. I wanted a way to measure
my skill level. Personal evaluations tend to be less than objective. I
know that there are a lot of Students out there that say they can control
better than some Senior Students or Controllers. I'm sure some of them can.
My impression from some of the postings I read here in the newsgroup is that
they aren't getting promoted because they feel the process is more work than
it's worth. The bad part is that, for VATUSA at least, the process isn't
that difficult. Pass a short open book written exam and then an over the
shoulder exam. An Instructor who thinks a student is ready to be promoted
probably doesn't even need the OTS. He/she has been watching them work and
in all likelihood based the promotion recommendation on the performance they
have already observed. The problems begin when the ARTCCs/FIRs start
embellishing the process and add additional knowledge and performance
evaluations over and above what is required by their division.
You're right, I have been doing this for a long time. Just about four years
now. There have been a lot of changes in that time. Some good, some I
reserve judgment on. But I still firmly believe that we can have a
competent, professional controller staff while at the same time making it
challenging, rewarding, and fun.
Mike
"Richard Jenkins" <ric...@vatsim.net> wrote in message
news:3d21db31$1...@news.simflight.com...
Richard Jenkins
>The problems begin when the ARTCCs/FIRs start
>embellishing the process and add additional knowledge and >performance
>evaluations over and above what is required by their division.
Interesting, I'll talk to some other people and see what they think about
this. Thanks for the response.
gene guilford
Depends on your definition of "fun," as what might be "fun" for you isn't
what is "fun" for others.
Some people's definition of "fun" is to be allowed to do whatever you
please wherever you please. Other's definition of "fun" is working
together as a team, learning and improving their skills in the enjoyment
of the hobby.
Good pilots are not a dime a dozen. Closer to a buck. Some think it "fun"
to load up a 747 and pop up at an airport and just fly...leaving out
flightplans, clearances and the like. Other's definition of fun is to make
use of all the time and effort put into the hobby by hundreds of people
are treat the simulator like a simulator.
To those who endure a publicly posted training program and follow it,
working with others as part of a team...we also need to show them respect
for their accomplishments versus those who show up and expect to do
whatever they please.
Spend some time running these things and working with student controllers
every day, you'll gain some perspective on trying to maintain a balance
between these competing interests as it isnt all as easy as you've
suggested.
gd
boston chief
Richard Jenkins
Okay Folks,
We have mainly heard from North American members. Europe, Asia, Africa, South
America, and all you other regions, where are you? I want to hear from you
also! ! !
Craig Moulton
ZLA and like everyone else, I started out as a Student (S-1 in SATCO), and
worked my way up to Sr Controller, with a stint as an Instructor and Sr
Instructor. While it may be true for some, that all the "hoops" one must
jump through are daunting, for others it is a challenge worthy of the time
and effort. I'm sure that we will always have a large gap in the training
requirements between ARTCC's/FIR's within the same divisions, and I am sure
that those who only want the "fun" of directing Aircraft around the sky,
without really getting down and dirty will always have a place to go and
have his/her "fun." There will also be those, for whom the challenge is the
fun, and will gravitate towards the more structured facilities, such as ZLA.
I'm not saying that one is better than the other, that is for the individual
to decide. Each Division has appointed it's facility chiefs, and it's up to
the chiefs to run it's facility as he/she sees fit. If we expect all the
ARTCC's/FIR's to be equal, or the same, why then appoint facility chiefs?
Why not just let the head of each division run the show?
Personally, I am very happy with VATSIM, and thank the stars every day that
I log on to fly or controll. I am looking forward to many more years with
VATSIM, and the imagination runs wild with the possibilities of what may be
down the road! <vbg>
Thank you Richard, and everyone else within VATSIM!
Craig Moulton
-=AAL20=-
ZLA Sr Controller
"Richard Jenkins" <ric...@vatsim.net> wrote in message
news:3d220523$1...@news.simflight.com...
Mike Bromley
The definition of "fun" needs to be determined by the majority, not a chosen
few. As for the two definitions you provided, most people find it to be
something in between the two stated extremes.
You're right. "Good" pilots are probably closer to a buck. But I didn't
say anything about "good" pilots. We have to deal with brand new pilots all
the time. It's the nature of the beast. The vast majority of the pilots
who take advantage of the services that VATSIM offers are not accomplished
aviators. Some of them wouldn't know a sectional from an Interstate road
map. We, as controllers, still provide them with ATC services and in the
process contribute to their enjoyment. Why are inexperienced pilots a bad
thing? They don't have a flight plan? We give them one and show them how
to find one on their own next time. What's so bad about popping up at an
airport and flying? Every real pilot out there has done the exact same
thing in the real world. I actually got a lot of enjoyment out of renting a
plane and just boring holes in the sky for an hour. It's a great stress
reliever. The simulator isn't quite the same, but it's close.
You used a term that is at the heart of my position. "To those who endure a
publicly posted training program". No one should have to "endure" a
training program. It should be a natural progression. Nobody expects, and
I never suggested, that someone should be able to "show up and expect to do
whatever they please". What I am saying is that in this environment you can
overtrain. You shouldn't have to memorize the entire .65 to become a member
of the team. You *should* have to show a willingness to learn and an
ability to use common sense. Completing the training program shouldn't be
the prerequisite to be shown respect.
As for the last paragraph, I have been training students in one way or
another for most of my working life as well as over a year on SATCO/VATSIM.
Been there, done that, doing it tomorrow. Training isn't as hard as you
make it out to be. If there is a student out there that thinks I didn't
treat them with professionalism and respect, I apologize. Let me know and
I'll apologize in public. It's the Us vs. Them, "competing interests"
philosophy that makes it difficult.
Mike Bromley
"gene guilford" <ggui...@suscom-maine.net> wrote in message
news:3d220a65$1...@news.simflight.com...
Richard Jenkins
Ezequiel,
Thank you for taking the time to let us know what's on your mind. All interesting
ideas and concerns.
Ezequiel Gomez Balaguer
-I fully support the pilot rating system. If correctly set up, I am certain
this should have the same effect as the one desired on controllers: the
desire to do better in each and every flight. I also guess the certification
process needen't be operated by VATSIM but could be taken over by an
endorsed virtual flight academy or such.
-I would like to see elections extended to as many staff positions as
possible. I understand this could be a bit overwhelming for the VATSIM EC or
BOG, but if properly implemented through regions and divisions this could go
down even to ARTCC/FIR chiefs. It has happened in my country that thanks to
the "he was first", "it was this way in SATCO", "this ain't a democracy",
"this is an until-he-decides-to-leave assignment" and such, people who
clearly showed their ineptitude and lack of interest towards VATSIM and
fellow simmers occupied positions from which they could -and did- cause
great damage.
I know democracy isn't a perfect system...but it's still the least imperfect
from all we may consider
Hope it helps,
Ezequiel
"Richard Jenkins" <ric...@vatsim.net> wrote in message
news:3d22122d$1...@news.simflight.com...
Ernie Alston
"Richard Jenkins" <ric...@vatsim.net> wrote:
>Currently, the North American region has roughly 2,085 controllers and >about
11,000 pilots. The controller ranks for North America grow by >about 3 %
per month. So, as you explained, we do lose controllers to >attrition yet
we still are gaining controllers. In fact, I feel VATSIM is in >need of some
currently has about 1,100 student controllers >(not Sr. Student). Yet the
number of Senior Controllers and Instructors >grows at a much slower rate.
We are rapidly approaching a situation >where we will have a defenciecy in
training staff to handle the influx of >controllers.
Controlling has one significant problem there can be times of little or no
activity, that happens once or twice to a new person they start finding something
else to do besides staring at a blank screen for an hour.
The deficiency in training issue is interesting. To me the best training
tool is experience, that seems to be borne out that the best controllers
in VATSIM seem to be the ones that have the most oportunity to work traffic.
We need to do things that will get people interested from day one. Having
someone stare at a blank screen for an hour working tower at a seldom used
airport is not the way to do it. A good experience the first few times
out would help a lot in this area. That wouldn't happen in the present system
because the most interesting areas in VATSIM to work tend also to be the
areas the least tolerant of inexperience.
Ernie.
gene guilford
Majority did decide...you were in the minority. Hence, you were on the
short end of the stick. In all your complaints you never specified what
you would change or how...you just complained.
If you ever showed up and plugged in at Boston, something you havent done
in several months...you'd see our nicely trained people who volunteered to
be with us...helping pilots every night. Must be why we rated so highly
with pilots? Enduring is right...lasting quality Mike, look it up instead
of always taking the negative view of everything you encounter.
Everyone knows you don't like the system Mike, but it doesnt change with
your complaining without offering anything specific you would do
differently. As long as Ive know you, you've never come forward and
proposed anything...just complained about other's work. I have little
regard for whining.
To those who show up, participate, ask to join and commend our program and
volunteer to be a part of it and excel in it...you've managed to diminish
their accomplishments to salve your own wounds for having lost an
instructor rating...because you didnt instruct.
Anytime you want to actually participate, be a part of a team and not
insist on having things YOUR way regardless of our mentor/instructor
group's position...you're welcome to join us. You won't accomplish much
sitting up in the stands complaining about what those who are on the field
are doing everyday.
GD
chief, bos
Gilligan
My comments:
1- I would like to know when ATCs are online from the beginning until
closing; it's a "little bit" frustrating to discover that an ATC has just
closed when comes the time to land (he was there at takeoff).
2- I would prefer to have ATCs logged all over the world at a given moment,
even if they do a few mistakes, than only a few ones logged with a perfect
knowledge. I think it would be better to have more departures/destinations
than only the favorites ones like KJFK, KBOS, KLAX, KORD, CYYZ, etc.
Best regards :)
"Richard Jenkins" <ric...@vatsim.net> a écrit dans le message de news:
Richard Jenkins
Gentlemen,
Restraint please. If you feel the need to engage eachother in this manner
then please take it private.
Richard Jenkins
Hello,
Let me guess your a pilot only on VATSIM? I'm not sure how we would be able
to get people spread around the world as you say. We have to take into account
time zones and languages. Perhaps you have some ideas in mind on how we could
spread the controllers?
Thanks for writing in....
Michael Bromley
I never said I objected to structure. The students need to have defined
objectives showing them what they need to learn to advance and the
instructional staff needs them to know what to teach. The hard part is
defining objectives that are appropriate for the level of proficiency
desired. Personally, I think ZLA has done a great job with theirs. I've
seen some that have none at all and some who teach too much. Believe it or
not, I agree with everything you said.
Mike Bromley
"Craig Moulton" <gasp...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:3d221052$1...@news.simflight.com...
Mike Evans
Imagination......
=)
<vbiggerG>
Mike
Dave Wild ntlworld.com>
This only from a pilot's point of view, I have not controlled and
currently have no desire so to do.
Also I should add that I use 2 PCs for on-line flying so cannot comment
about problems specific to running everything on one PC.
First off, as someone else posted 'The best FS add-on ever' :-)
The touchy subject of pilot rating has raised its head again with various
suggestions and cautions. I agree that something needs to be done to
prevent 'I have no idea what I am doing' pilots roaming free, but before
any rating system can be implemented you need to have in place a training
method for each region at least, and preferably each division.
I note some are suggesting something similar to real World training; you
can only fly VFR in a GA until you pass such and such an exam, I don't
think this is a good idea.
From my own point of view I would struggle to fly VFR in a GA but consider
myself competent in an airliner with all its mod cons - whoever jumped
into KLAS_APP last Sunday evening (UTC) may disagree ;-)
I would suggest what is needed is a pilot who knows how to fly his
aircraft and its systems, knows correct r/t procedure (goodness that gets
rid of a lot of current pilots :-)), can respond to ATC commands and knows
how to create, fly, and file a flight plan.
A bit of history.
I started simming with FS98 and found out about SATCO which sounded great
but daunting.
Luckily I found a small group this side of the pond, UK Flying Club (RIP).
This small group of experienced pilots and controllers welcomed newbies to
train with them.
The training was carried each week at Cardiff airport (EGFF), a small,
out-of-way airport that did not conflict with the main UK routes.
We were not trained how to fly the plane as such but taught how to use SB
& RW and how to respond to ATC commands and how to create and file flight
plans.
IMO that is all a pilot needs to join VATSIM and not anger
controllers...oh and a good dose of common sense, e.g do not join a major
fly-in for your second flight :-)
I am indebted to that group of dedicated simmers for it was they who gave
me the push and knowledge to enjoy on-line flying.
Improvements/wish list?
It would be nice to see 'VIP2' implemented so that more diverse a/c and
liveries can be seen in multiplayer, as long as bandwidth is not
compromised.
A more robust system/network that does not 'fall over' when big fly-ins
happen. I appreciate that if this is just a bandwidth problem then not a
lot can be done but if it is a 'rogue' program or two then I hope they can
be upgraded or fixed. SB3 has been talked about for a long time but it,
and the development team seem to have gone into hibernation:-(
There was talk sometime ago about controllers rosters where controllers
would 'advertise' when certain facilities would be open, I would like to
see that implemented globally.
A similar idea for pilots would be worthwhile. I think I am right in
saying that if you file a FP and then log off SB that FP vanishes. If SB
and/or PC could 'store' FPs say for an hour, a pilot decides to fly from A
to B at 1900Z he could file his FP at 1800Z so any controllers on-line
could see that in an hour airport 'A' needs to be manned.
If this *could* be implemented it would mean ATC *will* have traffic and
pilots will know they will have ATC.
All the above 'not withstanding real world interruptions'.
Just thinking about pilot/controller rosters, I wonder if ServerInfo could
take on this role?????
An ability to record text built-in to SB. At least if you miss an ATC
transmission and it has scrolled out of the window you can recall it.
A switch from SB weather to FS Meteo, I know..very contentious, but Meteo
servers seem to be on-line more and generally provide more up to date
weather. No big deal here, I use it as default anyway ;-)
I am sure I will think of other things once I have posted but this is too
long already :-)
Sorry for the ramble but you did ask Richard :-)
Finally my 150% thanks to everyone at VATSIM, from the dedicated ATC &
pilots, to the 'admin' personnel, the back room boys who keep the network
running, and of course the people who so generously provide the hardware
and bandwidth to keep this great 'add-on' functioning so well.
Rgds
Dave a.k.a Vulcan
Jeff Thomas
that.....my question is,
where are they?
I see the same folks online over and over, and only a handful of new folks
now and again. I think yes, they
sign up, but they don't stick around. I know I could be totally wrong here
so I hope I don't offend. Maybe we should
put an activity monitor on like IVAO does.
It also appears that there are folks who stay in positions forever, or until
"real-life commitments" make it
unrealistic for them. Has anyone ever talked about a term limit for say
Chiefs, Chief Instructors, etc. or is
there simply no interest because those are really, really tough positions?
I'm not saying this is a good or bad idea
just an idea ;-)
Also, I think it would be neat if we could have some sort of awards....I
know these are typically political and would be
tough to get setup. We all know who the main contributors are, but what
about the next pillars of folks...the best pilots,
best controllers, the workers?
Again, more ideas....I got more the 2 cents that's for sure ;-)
Jeff
"Richard Jenkins" <ric...@vatsim.net> wrote in message
news:3d20cf9b$1...@news.simflight.com...
>
> Just looking for a little feedback.
>
>
Richard Critz
--
Richard Critz
VATSIM
VP/Pilot Training
"Dave Wild ntlworld.com>" <dave.wild2@<getrid> wrote in message
news:Xns9240F95CE...@64.246.15.37...
>
> The touchy subject of pilot rating has raised its head again with various
> suggestions and cautions. I agree that something needs to be done to
> prevent 'I have no idea what I am doing' pilots roaming free, but before
> any rating system can be implemented you need to have in place a training
> method for each region at least, and preferably each division.
It will be VATSIM-wide, at least at first. But it will be optional and
progressive, not regressive. Expect to start seeing more public information
from me after Toronto.
>
>
> A more robust system/network that does not 'fall over' when big fly-ins
> happen. I appreciate that if this is just a bandwidth problem then not a
> lot can be done but if it is a 'rogue' program or two then I hope they can
> be upgraded or fixed. SB3 has been talked about for a long time but it,
> and the development team seem to have gone into hibernation:-(
Begging your pardon, but the network generally has no issues with most big
fly-ins these days. It certainly had none with the last CTP or Overload.
There was an internet issue at the beginning of CS5 that resolved itself
fairly quickly. We routinely handle 500+ clients nowadays. 6 months ago,
that was beyond the realm of consideration.
> A similar idea for pilots would be worthwhile. I think I am right in
> saying that if you file a FP and then log off SB that FP vanishes. If SB
> and/or PC could 'store' FPs say for an hour, a pilot decides to fly from A
> to B at 1900Z he could file his FP at 1800Z so any controllers on-line
> could see that in an hour airport 'A' needs to be manned.
> If this *could* be implemented it would mean ATC *will* have traffic and
> pilots will know they will have ATC.
> All the above 'not withstanding real world interruptions'.
Wait a week. Or use USA-S2, currently running beta FSD code. It will allow
you to reconnect WITH YOUR SAME CALLSIGN immediately should you disconnect.
It will also preserve your flight plan for 30 minutes after you disconnect
and automatically reattach it to you if you come back. And a few other neat
things I'm not telling about just yet. :-)
Richard Critz
Careful, Mike.
cz
--
Richard Critz
VATSIM
VP/Pilot Training
"Mike Evans" <mi...@usc.edu> wrote in message
news:3d22...@news.simflight.com...
> > Wait a week. Or use USA-S2, currently running beta FSD code. It will
> allow
> > you to reconnect WITH YOUR SAME CALLSIGN immediately should you
> disconnect.
> > It will also preserve your flight plan for 30 minutes after you
disconnect
> > and automatically reattach it to you if you come back. And a few other
> neat
> > things I'm not telling about just yet. :-)
>
>
> Oh please... tell us.. tell us....
>
> Daddy.. I want a rally monkey.. =)
>
> <VBG>
>
>
> Mike
>
>
Mike Evans
allow
> you to reconnect WITH YOUR SAME CALLSIGN immediately should you
disconnect.
> It will also preserve your flight plan for 30 minutes after you disconnect
> and automatically reattach it to you if you come back. And a few other
neat
> things I'm not telling about just yet. :-)
Marvin Thompson
Directors are just in this for the title. I know of several controllers that
have wanted to test for such things such as voice, SR Student and controller
ratings. One guy that I know has been cleared for voice, but it's not
posted, so he has been told not to use voice. The guy is 40 years old and
has been trying to get this straightened out for over a month. What a joke.
One guy just keeps passing the buck back and forth to another guy. This all
tells me that the bureaucracy that students have to deal with in some areas
is out of hand. This student is not the only one that has given up on the
system. Some of the ARTCC's and divisions need to be shaken up a little. I
hate to see so many guys slip through the cracks, just because of lazy
Chief's and Directors. Well trained controllers is what most of the pilots
that I know really want, quit letting them get away.
So much for the "what you like and don't like thread".
On the good side, I think that there is nothing like this anywhere else on
the internet. It still amazes me what this enviroment really is and that it
exists. Where else in the world can you have 300+ guys online, connected, at
the same time, playing the same game, all over the world. Nope, other than a
few carbon copys, I can't think of any. All volunteer, heck the list goes on
and on of just how unique this really is.
Marv
"Jeff Thomas" <jttho...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3d2249ed$1...@news.simflight.com...
Gilligan
You are wrong, I controlled on VATSIM last winter as CYUL_V_TWR (Dorval,
Montreal) :) (By the way, thanks to Fred Thivierge and Raymond Paquin for
their great assistance).
While controlling as CYUL_V_TWR, some pilots requested takeoff and landing
at CYMX (Mirabel) and CYQB (Jean-Lesage) even if it wasn't "my job" (there
were no CZUL_V_CTR at this moment of course). I didn't know all the SID and
STAR by heart for all these airports; but I know pilots appreciated my job
then even if I had to improvised a little bit; it was better for them to
have me than nothing at all. Of course I had informations about CYMX and
CYQB... but not all the informations expected for the job.
As a pilot, as I mentionned sooner, I've noticed there is a lot of ATC's job
at KBOS, KJFK, etc but it might be interesting to have air traffic control
all over Amerca in the evening, even if ATC's job is not perfect. It might
be interesting to fly from/toward Louisianna and New-Mexico in addition to
KBOS and KJFK.
I agree that working as a CTR is not appropriate for a newbie, I tried to
act as CTR a few times and felt better as TWR after all :). But when an ATC
has a good basic knowledge, instead of acting as a perfect TWR in KJFK, he
(or she) might work somewhere else to give more choices to the pilots.
Best regards.
"Richard Jenkins" <ric...@vatsim.net> a écrit dans le message de news:
3d222e77$1...@news.simflight.com...
Stamatis Vellis
I note the move towards "pilot certification".
I believe that for this to have value and not work as a detriment to online
flying, it should be limited to teaching/examining:
a) correct r/t procedures and phraseology
b) creation,and filing of an IFR flight plan
c) very basic navigation (VOR, ADF, holds, etc.) and basic IFR rules
Nothing to do with "type ratings" and the like, which I find totally
unrealistic when related to PC simulator flying. If someone can "fly" the
default B737 in FS2002, he can also "fly" the default B747-400 too.
Stamatis
"Richard Jenkins" <ric...@vatsim.net> wrote in message
news:3d22122d$1...@news.simflight.com...
Vulcan ntlworld.com>
news:3d22dc59$1...@news.simflight.com:
> Richard,
>
> I note the move towards "pilot certification".
>
> I believe that for this to have value and not work as a detriment to
> online flying, it should be limited to teaching/examining:
>
> a) correct r/t procedures and phraseology
> b) creation,and filing of an IFR flight plan
> c) very basic navigation (VOR, ADF, holds, etc.) and basic IFR rules
>
> Nothing to do with "type ratings" and the like, which I find totally
> unrealistic when related to PC simulator flying. If someone can "fly"
> the default B737 in FS2002, he can also "fly" the default B747-400 too.
>
> Stamatis
>
I agree entirely Stamatis, with one extra just to be sure:-
d) Be able to carry out ATC requests/commands.
Rgds
Vulcan
Stamatis Vellis
> d) Be able to carry out ATC requests/commands.
Definitely. In fact it would be point number one in my list.
But it is so obvious that I assumed it. I shouldn't have. As the saying
goes..."Assumption is the mother of all f**k ups".
Stamatis
"Vulcan ntlworld.com>" <dave.wild2@<getrid> wrote in message
news:Xns92408D4CF...@64.246.15.37...
Michael Skinner
add to making it as real as it gets... Well yes, but only by adding to the
beaurocracy and cost (in time) that real pilots also have to deal with.
Will it make it more realistic for ATC... you would have to be kidding if
you thought that real atc don't have to deal with inexperienced and
dangerous pilots...
so instead of penalising those pilots that have been on the system for years
(5 years in my case) why not just penalise those who are causing the
problem. In my case i don't bother with ATC much because of the ratings
required, after all i just want to relax and enjoy my time on line. Last
time I logged on as a APP position, i was told that i wasn't qualified and
to log off... (it was dead quiet and I do ATC for a living...) so really not
interested, but i can fly any time and have a great time.
Got enough exams at work.... looks like i'll have to put up with the atc
from microsoft...
just a customer's opinion.... (dime a dozen us pilots....)
Michael Skinner
Richard Jenkins <ric...@vatsim.net> wrote in message
news:3d20cf9b$1...@news.simflight.com...
>
> Just looking for a little feedback.
>
>
Richard Green
--
Richard Green
VATUSA4
Events and VA Director
Richard Critz
I'm not aware that anyone with any knowledge of what we are working on
indicated that there would be pilot ratings or anything manadatory about the
program. We're still working on it but I can assure you that for the
foreseeable future it will entirely voluntary. Quoting from the August 19,
2001 Board of Governors meeting minutes:
"The board has decided pilot training will be optional for all pilots on the
system when it is made available. "
And so it shall be. As for some of the other concerns raised here,
relevance to online flight is one of my hot buttons as any on the team can
tell you. My team is doing a lot of good work and we're getting closer to
having something to talk about publicly.
cz
--
Richard Critz
VATSIM
VP/Pilot Training
"Michael Skinner" <ko...@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:3d22...@news.simflight.com...
>
Craig Moulton
I am always amazed at the reluctance to change, even when the change is
good, and might help some. Don't worry pilots, you can still log onto
VATSIM and wreak havoc with everyone else's enjoyment, but for those who
might actually like to learn something other than how to fly from Pt A to Pt
B using something other than the GPS, the Pilot "training" that will
accompany the ratings will be well worth your time. Ratings can only to
enhance EVERYONE's enjoyement of what we have, as a Controller who sees a
pilot with the lowest rating will know that he may expect to need to take
extra time with that pilot, while pilots with the highest ratings can be
"expected" to be able to do whatever ATC requests (within reason of course).
After all, Real Student Pilots are (in some places) required to include
"Student Pilot" in their callsign. It lets everyone else in the chain know
to get out of the way! <g>.
-=Craig Moulton=-
"Michael Skinner" <ko...@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:3d22...@news.simflight.com...
Marvin Thompson
so what. We can still land our Microsoft planes. Tell me this, if there are
no planes, will you still have a job. I don't mess with the ATC program
around here either, It's not necessarily the training, it's the BS that you
have to put up with. But I do enjoy flying on Vatsim. Rest assured that if a
pilot rating program is started, I won't be putting up with it either.
Just another "dime a dozen pilot"
Marv
"Michael Skinner" <ko...@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:3d22...@news.simflight.com...
Marvin Thompson
You say that people with lower ratings will tell the atc that he may need a
little more attention. Great sounds good, I will get the lowest rateing
possible. By the way, I am never worried in this enviroment. I don't fly
GPS, nor do I create HAVOC for everyone elses enjoyment, what ever that may
or maynot be. That's a matter of perception. In this case yours. I fly on
Vatsim for my enjoyment, and if that helps other's to enjoy the game, all
the better. I do believe that Richard J. will be able to sort through all of
this and come up with some Idea of the complaints about Vatsim, in the North
America division anyway.
Marv
"Craig Moulton" <gasp...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:3d231282$1...@news.simflight.com...
Bob
use it now and if VATSIM wants to have pilot ratings, then it will be very
very seldom.
I see more aircraft using the MS provided AI. Plus, they move smoother, are
in the correct color and model configuration after installing the Project AI
package. ATC will get much better with each new release and add-on
software. We are using the very first iteration of ATC. If the ATC program
follows the typical development timeline, the next several interations of
the ATC will be at least 2X improvements each.
I hope the same is going to happen here.
Bob who seldom uses VATSIM
Mike Evans
experience other real pilots in the sky... if you don't want to talk to
anyone else, by all means, use AI aircraft.. I like talking to the pilots,
but I would like them to have at least a basic understanding of how to fly..
heading 220 is NOT north, despite what I saw last night at LAX.. =)
Mike
Mark Brummett
<marv...@home.com> wrote:
>
>One observation that I have is that some ARTCC Chiefs, assistants, and area
>Directors are just in this for the title. I know of several controllers that
>have wanted to test for such things such as voice, SR Student and controller
>ratings. One guy that I know has been cleared for voice, but it's not
>posted, so he has been told not to use voice. The guy is 40 years old and
>has been trying to get this straightened out for over a month. What a joke.
>One guy just keeps passing the buck back and forth to another guy. This all
>tells me that the bureaucracy that students have to deal with in some areas
>is out of hand. This student is not the only one that has given up on the
>system. Some of the ARTCC's and divisions need to be shaken up a little. I
>hate to see so many guys slip through the cracks, just because of lazy
>Chief's and Directors. Well trained controllers is what most of the pilots
>that I know really want, quit letting them get away.
I'd really like to believe that this is the exception and not the
norm. Of all the Chiefs (I was one once) and ACs and RDs, not one of
them do I know that I believe are in this for "title only".
As an AC and Chief Instructor, I'd like to make my points as well.
I'd like to see people who actually get on the system move up in the
ranks. There are a lot of Students under me who remain students
simply because they never control actively. I make myself as
available as my time allows, but that takes co-ordination between the
trainees and trainers. You don't know how frustrating it is to see a
very competent Student get recommended for his Sr Student rating, then
voice rating, only to have them never show back up. It almost makes
you feel like you've done the work and training for nothing. On the
flip side, though, there are those trainees I've had (a regional
director comes to mind here) I'm quite proud of...although he's
probably 15 years older than I, there was a time when he actually knew
less about this system than I, and to me, teaching someone who is
responsive and interested is much better than having a Student who
only wants to have "fun", as opposed to having both fun and keeping
this thing as real as it can be.
Point being is that the higher-ups do have real-world committments
that sometimes have to take precedent over other non real-world things
(such as this hobby). If a regional director feels a Chief is doing a
subpar job, he'll recommend to have that person removed, just as a
Chief who feels anyone under him (AC, CI) is not doing well, will take
the appropriate actions. I'm all for change, but not for change's
sake only. If the wrong people are in those positions, then counsel
them as to what they are doing wrong, and take appropriate measures
and follow-up measures.
For the good things:
I've been on this system since 1998, when I was an S3 on Satco and
Chief of KC. I was the ONLY controller assigned to that sector, and
felt like I did some good by getting a little bit of traffic there. I
would never have thought there would be 51 controllers in that sector
as there are now. I've made some good friends online (even if I
haven't met them in real life), and I take that away from this hobby.
--Mark Brummett
ZKC (Kansas City) Ass't Chief - VATSIM
Ryan Stone
the heart of the problem. As a Chief or AC, CI, or controller we have no
authority to punish a pilot who is disruptive when we have 10-15 other
planes to deal with at the same time. The fact of the matter is when their
is a disruptive pilot we have to seek our a Supervisor who is online which
can be a teadious task while still trying to keep our traffic flowing. I
believe if there was a way for a INS, AC, CI, CF to take action on the fly
to elimate disruptions quickly most pilots would never even notice what
happened. My experience with disruptive pilots and having them booted off
has been that most supervisors dont like to boot pilots and then only if
they are causing a problem in there own eyes. While its true many pilots get
kicked off that doesnt prevent them from logging back in 5 mins later and
causing a problem and in effect the whole process of tracking down a
supervisor and explaining the situation while getting slammed with traffic
just is more trouble then its worth sometimes.
While I would try to suggest a solution that allows others to make those
decisions I know it will never happen. So for now I think a pilot rating
system should or could potentially relieve some of those problems.
Ryan Stone
ZOA Chief
"Michael Skinner" <ko...@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:3d22...@news.simflight.com...
Ryan Stone
dont just pop up at a Class Bravo Airport either. I have no problem with a
new pilot visiting or starting out at a small airport as thats the way it
should be, the problem comes into play when they visit a major airport in
there 747 they dont know how to fly, popping up on the runway while another
pilot is on approach or flying there plane around a busy airport with no
regard for other pilots or controlled airspace while making no attempt to
contact other pilots or controllers. Should we let the pilot ruin everyone
elses idea of fun? This isnt about filing a flight plan or showing them how
to find one, its about new or inexperienced pilots disrupting the safe flow
of traffic and choosing to do so at some of our busiest airports on vatsim.
Ryan Stone
ZOA Chief
> You're right. "Good" pilots are probably closer to a buck. But I didn't
> say anything about "good" pilots. We have to deal with brand new pilots
all
> the time. It's the nature of the beast. The vast majority of the pilots
> who take advantage of the services that VATSIM offers are not accomplished
> aviators. Some of them wouldn't know a sectional from an Interstate road
> map. We, as controllers, still provide them with ATC services and in the
> process contribute to their enjoyment. Why are inexperienced pilots a bad
> thing? They don't have a flight plan? We give them one and show them how
> to find one on their own next time. What's so bad about popping up at an
> airport and flying? Every real pilot out there has done the exact same
> thing in the real world. I actually got a lot of enjoyment out of renting
a
> plane and just boring holes in the sky for an hour. It's a great stress
> reliever. The simulator isn't quite the same, but it's close.
Jeff Thomas
beautiful parallel approaches in low viz and high winds with a few going
into Midway just to mix it up a bit.
Unless you work as a controller in Chicago, there IS NO WHERE ELSE to see
this from a controller's viewpoint.
That's what I LIKE about VATSIM.
I like when I'm one of those pilot's and can look out the window and wave
(virtually) at the guy next to me!
That's what I LIKE about VATSIM.
I like that there is ALWAYS someone to answer my questions!
That's what I LIKE about VATSIM.
The other threads were bringing me down ;-)
Jeff
GWA2680
Richard Jenkins
Okay People,
I think we have covered the pilot situation rather well. Lets not get fixated
on just one subject here. Lets move on. . .
I would like to her comments and opinions on what would help develop ARTCC/FIR/ACC
in places not well travelled on VATSIM.
Richard Jenkins
Okay People,
I think we have covered the pilot situation rather well. Lets not get fixated
on just one subject here.
I would like to her comments and opinions on what would help develop ARTCC/FIR/ACC
Mike Evans
LAX while I had other traffic for ONT, SMO, SNA, etc... =)
Mike
"Jeff Thomas" <jttho...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3d2378c3$1...@news.simflight.com...
Richard Jenkins
Marvin,
Have your friend email me and I will get his situation to the right person.
Richard Jenkins
VASTIM Founder
VATSIM BoG
Greyfox
All the pilot bashing in this thread is definitely not going to help that
situation! As far as I understand it, there is a system in place to take care of
troublesome pilots. And yes, if they are kicked off then can log back in. But, if they
do log back in and create problems, it is a simple matter to disable their ID and
Password!
As far as increasing traffic in individual areas, the only REAL solution is to
have more ATC available. But, with all the ratings and such involved, I don't think
the diverse areas are going to get covered anytime soon!
This is a hobby for the majority of users and all these ratings and restrictions,
in my eyes, simply take the enjoyment out of it for most.
I also believe that all this 'REALITY' that is being implemented is just going to
drive away many people who would otherwise join our ranks and in time become
'proficient' pilots or controllers.
Sure, we have a rather large membership, but how many of these are actually
active? And how active are they? For some reason, it seems the most active areas are
Europe, which doesn't count in this case, and the western US region. How many of the
western region members actually live in that region? What are the overall demographics
of the SATUSA membership? Do we have talented controllers who actually live in other
regions working in the western region, simply because that's where the action is?
Anyway, I see a lot of bickering in here which I am sure is not why you started
this thread! Can't we all just put in our $0.02 without arguing about what others are
submitting.
Richard, I do not envy you when it comes to trying to get this organized! I wish
you the best of luck and will return to the sidelines now...
ciao,
Michael Fox
"Greyfox"
Ex-SATCO Beaurocrat!
Richard Green
double - no no - make that TRIPLE what we make now - <G>
Noone does this for titles - at least I shutter to think that anyone would
- we work our tails off - many do it without any title or perks
My asst. Gary has done this for going on a year with no title - no SUP - no
nothing...
Only the knowledge that he is helping to make VATUSA's part of VATSIM as
great as it can be.
Thank you Gary....
and NOW - my list of titles and ego builders
--
Richard Green
VATUSA4
Events and VA Director
Offical Pepsi Taste Tester for VATSIM
Chief Beta Tester for PSD
Beta Tester for Dreamfleet,FSFLIGHTMAX, among others.
VP of Pilot Training for Frontier Airlines
and lastly -
SQUAWKing ABNORMAL -
Marvin Thompson
some of your titles with him, you have plenty. (and a few you left off).
Give him a couple of yours. Be a good guy and share. Kidding of coarse, This
is an interesting thread, for some of us. I would like to know what you
think about "What you like and don't like about Vatsim". I think your
opinion would carry some weight. I know that you do find some time on both
sides of the scope once in awhile and have been known to be fair with some
of the "Not so popular decisions" that you have made.
Marv
"Richard Green" <vat...@vatusa.org> wrote in message
news:Xns9240D1CE07EB2rg...@64.246.15.37...
Marvin Thompson
JULY holiday that is Celebrated in the US. I hope he will come back and give
it another try. Thanks Richard for looking into this.
Marv
"Richard Jenkins" <ric...@vatsim.net> wrote in message
news:3d238d53$1...@news.simflight.com...
Richard Jenkins
This conversation is turning into something I was hoping it wouldn't. Could
we stick to the topics please? Do you gentlemen have any comments or
suggestion on improving traffic flow in the less traveled areas of VATSIM?
Richard Jenkins
VATSIM Co-Founder
VATSIM BoG
VATSIM Janitor
VATSIM Dear Abbey
VATSIM AA Founder
"Marvin Thompson" <marv...@home.com> wrote in message
news:3d23a1e7$1...@news.simflight.com...
Jordan Langelier
Fly-in's always work. But fly-ins always seem to have to be a big
production. Maybe have a daily featured center/airport. Does not have to
be a big deal. Favor the areas not getting enough traffic in the daily pick
(in other words, LA is not a candidate, ANC is). The featured area does not
have to have ground, north and south approaches, etc... just one or two
controllers guaranteed in an area seldom visited. Do it every day so people
get in the habit of checking for the featured area.
"Richard Jenkins" <rjen...@neteze.com> wrote in message
news:3d23d129$1...@news.simflight.com...
Richard Jenkins
fly-ins were much more simple to stage. I agree not very fly-in needs to be
a barn burner.
Thanks for the input Jordan.
Richard Jenkins
VATSIM Co-Founder
"Jordan Langelier" <jplan...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:3d23...@news.simflight.com...
Paul(EIN125)Byrne
How about a group of voluntary controllers, above a
certain rating that can be assigned to an area as "flying squad"? This way,
with notice this group can be briefed on the local SOP's etc. and plan a
day/night of controlling in that area. If this were rostered you could
assign them to different low coverage levels, say, once a month and get
those areas open for the pilots. Just a thought.
Hope this helps,
Paul(EIN125)Byrne
"Richard Jenkins" <ric...@vatsim.net> wrote in message
news:3d237ae4$1...@news.simflight.com...
Richard Jenkins
Kind of a "Have charts, will travel" group?
Interesting,
Richard Jenkins
VATSIM Co-Founder
"Paul(EIN125)Byrne" <i...@te.spam.com> wrote in message
news:3d23...@news.simflight.com...
Stamatis Vellis
merits.
One of these demerits/drawbacks, is that its members will only control
within the boundaries of the VACC they "belong" to.
For example, a Greek controller who is part of the HvACC team will never
log-on as a controller in a remote, non populated region (e.g Iran)
a) Because he prefers to stay where the traffic is, i.e. within his own FIR
b) Because he feels more comfortable controlling within his FIR, since he
knows the procedures almost by heart
c) because he may fear he is infringing on someone else's "kingdom" if he
logs-on outside of his FIR
Thus, because of a), b) and c) above, you will not see much happening in
places not well travelled on VATSIM.
Stamatis
"Richard Jenkins" <ric...@vatsim.net> wrote in message
news:3d237ae4$1...@news.simflight.com...
>
Stamatis Vellis
enough to be the scope of such a discussion.
I fly almost daily online, and have never come across such a disruptive
pilot.
Stamatis
"Ryan Stone" <zoac...@oakartcc.org> wrote in message
news:3d23...@news.simflight.com...
Stamatis Vellis
> Sure, we have a rather large membership, but how many of these are
> actually active? And how active are they? For some reason, it seems the
> most active areas are Europe, which doesn't count in this case, and the
> western US region. How many of the western region members actually
> live in that region?
If you pay some attention to the number of pilots/controllers online via
Whazzup and/or ServInfo, I am sure you will come to the conclusion that the
number of active users, and by active I mean those that log-on at least
twice a month, are not more than 2,500, as a minimum and 5,000 as a maximum
.
Stamatis
John Van
GroupFlight does that now with it's core of 6 controllers. If an area to be
"visited" does not have coverage available for whatever reason (the ARTCC is
always canvassed ahead of time), Groupflight controllers will try to man the
critical positions for Groupflight participants and any other pilots in the
covered sector...........
John
ANC ARTCC
"Richard Jenkins" <rjen...@neteze.com> wrote in message
news:3d2419b3$1...@news.simflight.com...
Greyfox
I just about agreed with your entire post, right up to the last paragraph! That
paragraph could have been left out. Otherwise I think this was a fairly well
"spoken" post.
Michael Fox
Marvin Thompson wrote:
> How about organizing a world wide events director, who would perhaps get a
> flyin event going in some of these far away places that never get allot of
> attention. Have some volunteers man positions at the incoming-outgoing
> airport. One big problem that is and has always been, is the obvious time
> zone differences throughout the world. Some of these events would have to be
> held on weekends. One example that makes it tough for some of us to
> participate, I live on the west coast of the US. By the time I am ready to
> fly in the evenings, the east coast is shutting down, or soon will be. The
> fellows in Europe have been snoring for some time. That's one of the big
> reasons Australia, Japan and the far east have such a hard time in getting
> something going. People are creatures of habit, and for the most part, like
> to control there own areas that they live, and also where there is some
> traffic.
>
> That's why I like the idea of a roving group of controllers that could
> organize events in some of these places, perhaps on weekends where we might
> be able to attrack some attention from those who might otherwise be in bed.
> These controllers could be divided into groups depending on their time zones
> where they live also, not just guys from the US.
>
> I realize that this would be a long road to plow by hand, It's just an Idea
> that's nearly impossible. Time zones is a big killer here, and long term
> concentration in certain areas might also be something to look at.
>
> I fly with a group of guys, and we fly all over the world, ATC or no ATC. I
> know this is looked at as rouge bandwith users or something like that. We
> are always questioned by SUP. on what we are doing, but traffic attracks
> traffic. It's not always perfect, but it sometimes works. Four of us were
> flying into Mexico City a month or so ago, no other planes around, no ATC.
> All of a sudden as we got close, ATC came online, pilots started beaming up
> at the airport etc. etc.
> Please encourage those who fly this way to continue. The Mexico City ATC guy
> thought it was great.
>
> One thing that turns alot of people off, is the regirously controlled and
> secular type flyins. Made for certain types of pilots and people. One
> example is Richard Greens flyin that is advertized below. Looks really great
> until you read the note that the website must be "studdied up" as all rules
> will be followed religoulsy. What a turn off, even for those of us who fly
> VFR quite often and are quite familiar with VFR flying regulations. I hope
> someone else plans an event for the same day elsewhere, for those of us who
> don't care for this kind of attitude. Some people are getting way too
> carried away with this " as real as it gets" attitude. That phrase means
> different things to different people, and many are being shoved asside by
> those who take this a little too far. Lets make these event fun for all, not
> just for a few "so called experts". This is a game, not even a close second
> to a simulation.
>
> I would sure like to hear from some of the big wigs on what they like and
> don't like about Vatsim, or do they put their pants on a little differently
> than we do. I'll bet that it's fear driving their reluctance to post. What's
> the matter guys, afraid you are going to loose your make believe jobs.
>
> Marv
Marvin Thompson
Marvin Thompson
put up with some pretty childish bureaucracy while flying online here
lately, and just a little frustrated. I've been doing this for a few years,
and it seems to have gotten worse. My appoligies. ( I have about 400 hrs.
controlling, but not on this network nor will I ever control on this network
that's for sure. ) Woops, sorry again.
Marv
"Greyfox" <n...@home.net> wrote in message news:3D248152...@home.net...
Richard Green
simula... err umm I mean GAME.
Richard Green
> One thing that turns alot of people off, is the regirously controlled
> and secular type flyins. Made for certain types of pilots and people.
> One example is Richard Greens flyin that is advertized below. Looks
> really great until you read the note that the website must be
> "studdied up" as all rules will be followed religoulsy. What a turn
> off, even for those of us who fly VFR quite often and are quite
> familiar with VFR flying regulations. I hope someone else plans an
> event for the same day elsewhere, for those of us who don't care for
> this kind of attitude. Some people are getting way too carried away
> with this " as real as it gets" attitude. That phrase means different
> things to different people, and many are being shoved asside by those
> who take this a little too far. Lets make these event fun for all, not
> just for a few "so called experts". This is a game, not even a close
> second to a simulation.
>
Marvin - sorry but there are type specific events all the time
OSHKOSH is a VFR event - if you don't like it - I am very sorry - but no
one will make you fly it -
If you fly VFR a lot GREAT - then you should have no issues complying
with the NOTAMs.
As far as "experts" I get emails all the time asking for certain types of
events - so I would appreciate you not speaking for the masses - as I got
at least 30 or 40 emails asking if I was going to do this type of event
for SUN-N-Fun and AIRVENTURE - it was too late for the former but we got
a great plan for the latter.
I take offense that you think I am some kind of elitist - I give people
what they ask for... you say a lot of people get tuned off - well you are
the only one I have heard from - and even if a lot of people don't want
to fly it - that's fine - there are events for all types of people -
LAX ARTCC has VFR flyins - are they snobs? Of course not, they are just
giving a segment of the flying community a chance to practice or polish
their skills.
Bottom line - if you don't like it - don't fly it... but don't assume
because you don't want to or don't wish to do a bit of light reading -
that others won't.
Ezequiel Gomez Balaguer
areas promote it locally. My country is one among those "less travelled"
areas, and the most a fly-in can (and has) done is bring a bunch of
"foreign" traffic for just a couple of hours. No one but locals will choose
to fly in an area he is not familiar with, and which -to make things worse-
has ATC just sporadically.
The only "guaranteed" ATC in Argentina is the one provided during training
sessions of a local flight school on Tuesdays. Otherwise, you must count on
controllers' desire to control. I suggested that our local ACC should keep
an ATC schedule many times (controllers voluntarily sign up and let's say
"promise" to staff a certain position on a certain date and for a certain
period of time). I was never listened to.
The issue of "what should go first: controllers who encourage pilots to fly
or pilots who encourage controllers to control?" was discussed down here a
thousand times. And it turned out to be surprisingly similar to "What was
first? The hen or the egg?"
My conclusion on the subject was that it was mainly inertia: let's take a
situation where there are absolutely no flights here in Argentina (nearly
impossible other than in the small hours in the USA/Europe), but quite
frequent here. One lonely pilot decides to fire up Squawk Box and fly online
anyway. He's the only one in the airspace. Then maybe another pilot shows
up, and another. So the ball starts rolling. Then, a controller who sees
there is traffic indeed logs in (this won't be that boring after all). Then
another pilot sees there's a controller online. So he logs in too. And this
is how it works. If no one sets the ball rolling, it'll never do it on its
own.
As I said in an earlier post, it was the case in my country that the local
ACC showed absolutely no interest in promoting online flying, not even among
those who knew about it and had flown online already (or did it regularly).
I prefer to keep my opinion on the situation nowadays as new people are at
the helm, and the time they've been in isn't quite enough to pass verdict on
the issue. But I insist that VATSIM's only viable choice to promote flight
in areas such as mine is making sure that ACC staff care. You guys in the US
and Europe are very lucky to be able to take that for granted. It isn't the
case with us. People who are in "just for the title" (as someone expressed
in an earlier post) DO exist here. I certainly don't blame any of you BOG
guys for considering such things obvious (I guess none of you guys regularly
considers this issue, same as I guess you don't consider someone not paying
his taxes and boasting about it or a politician blatantly stealing from
every taxpayer and then getting away with it), but I insist that these areas
will flourish when VATSIM itself establishes a close control over what and
how is done there.
Ok, I guess this is quite beyond two cents <g> but I do hope it helps
Ezequiel
"Richard Jenkins" <rjen...@neteze.com> wrote in message
news:3d23d129$1...@news.simflight.com...
Gary Frothingham
Marvin;
A poll was taken concerning VATUSA Events.....WHAT DO YOU WANT?!
These are the results, with many many comments. VATSIM is growing for a reason
!
Here is the URL to the events poll results:
http://www.aviatorsim.com/Central/poll_results.htm
I do what i do because i enjoy what i do. A mind is a terrible thing to waste.
Gary Frothingham
VATUSA Events Coordinator
Virtual Cleveland ARTCC Instructor I-1/V
Pilot JDA 021 Jet Direct VA
Pilot FFT110 Virtual Frontier Airlines
Beta tester DTW and CLE scenery
HTMLr scripter
webmaster aviatorsim.com
(that should do it)
Bob
We just plain old bob without any CEO of this, and tester of that, or
director of this ....
I think I see a contest in signatures. "It's only make believe ..." a line
from a song that fits pretty good here.
Okay big guys, take your best shot. (engineers just love to discuss and be
.. about it. We nothing but pigs and make believe pilots, but we love it)
Just Old Plain bob
"Ezequiel Gomez Balaguer" <arvirtua...@fibertel.com.ar> wrote in
message news:3d24...@news.simflight.com...
Ezequiel Gomez Balaguer
Ezequiel
"Bob" <rs...@mtco.com> wrote in message news:3d24...@news.simflight.com...
Richard Jenkins
Thank you for your input. I think the description you provided about how
traffic builds or doesn't is very valid in some parts of VATSIM. In
addition, I'm not sure what "Bob" is talking about in his response to you
earlier. It seems he has some issues with VATSIM. He states "Okay big guys,
take your best shot.", I thought we were having a discussion about building
traffic in less traveled places on VATSIM?
Once again, thank you Ezequiel.
Richard Jenkins
"Ezequiel Gomez Balaguer" <arvirtua...@fibertel.com.ar> wrote in
message news:3d24fd9e$1...@news.simflight.com...
Richard Jenkins
Polling is a valid solution and in this case it seems to have been
productive for VATUSA. But lets not forget that North America is but one
seventh of VATSIM. There are six other regions out there that have issues
with fly-ins and the complexities that are associated with them. I was
hoping we could have a calm and productive conversation about this issue.
Thank you for your time,
Richard Jenkins
"Gary Frothingham" <es...@aviatorsim.com> wrote in message
news:3d24c612$1...@news.simflight.com...
Dave Wild ntlworld.com>
With respect to attracting traffic to less populated areas, aircraft wise,
mention has been made about time differences controller operating
'locally'.
I always assumed, until our World Tour flight, that a controller manning
say New York would live in that area, after the tour I am not o sure that
is the case.
If there are statistics for the geographical location of a controller do
they indicate the majority of controllers operate locally or is there a
large minority wjo control away from home so to speak?
If the latter then time differences need not be a problem.
I think Ezequiel has it right though, the only way to generate regular
traffic is to promote the local ACC which will then attract local traffic
but it sure is a chicken and egg situation.
Rgds
Dave Wild
Richard Jenkins
We do collect country of origin on the VATSIM application when a person
applies. I'm sure we could take a look at that and see were we have the
populations dispersed. Thank you for the input Dave.
Richard Jenkins
"Dave Wild ntlworld.com>" <dave.wild2@<getrid> wrote in message
news:Xns92427611D...@64.246.15.37...
Marc AZOULAY
France/Italy/Spain...
"Richard Jenkins" <ric...@vatsim.net> wrote in message
news:3d20cf9b$1...@news.simflight.com...
>
> Just looking for a little feedback.
Richard Jenkins
VATSIM is willing to discuss the possibility of merger at anytime with IVAO.
We are always open to new and progressive ideas concerning online ATC and
the continuance of the VATSIM mission. As of this date we have had no
communication with IVAO concerning the subject.
Thanks Marc! Glad to see we finally got your straighten out!
Richard Jenkins
"Marc AZOULAY" <ma...@azoulay.com> wrote in message
news:3d25...@news.simflight.com...
Greg Phelan
Often, an inexperienced pilot will come up at a major airport because
that is what he/she (thinks) he/she knows. If Person X., a newcomer to
flightsim, lives in, say, Calgary, then he will likely make some of his
first flights from, you guessed it, Calgary. Because more people live
in urban areas then rural areas, the urban airports will be busier (and
urban airports tend to be much busier then rural airports). Now, I do
agree with you, Stamatis, in that it is not common to have a totally
non-communicative pilot in crowded airspace, however is the pilot who
does not know how to follow commands any better? Several months ago, I
had the chance to control Edmonton Center in a large fly-in (PANC - CYYC
- CYVR - K???...). It was not that busy (only 10-12 pilots), however
there was one individual who nearly ruined the experience for many
pilots. He was the lead aircraft, queried me as to where the rest of
the aircraft were, and turned 180 degrees when I told him that they were
all behind him. He attempted to declare an emergency on fuel (which
would have been wecome as I could have given him to Vancouver center),
however did not accuratly calculate his fuel during his emergency
declaration (he missed the x1000 label on the fuel gauge). All aircraft
inbound to Calgary were put into a stacked hold while myself and the
tower controller attempted to get him on the ground. One example of the
communication that went back and forth (not word-for-word),
EDM_V_CTR: XXX111, maintain 6000, expect turn to final in 1 minute
XXX111: EDM_V_CTR, what heading is the runway
EDM_V_CTR: XXX111, Runway heading is 161
{pause, as XXX111 turns final 10nm early}
EDM_V_CTR: XXX111, it appears that you have turned early, turn left
heading 341 to resume approach
XXX111: EDM_V_CTR, negative, will approach from here
EDM_V_CTR: XXX111, sir you are 10nm west of the airport, maintain 5000,
turn left heading 341
XXX111: EDM_V_CTR, sir I do not understand
EDM_V_CTR: Sir, set your autopilot alititude to read 5000. Set your
course to read 341
XXX111: roger
........
5-10 minutes later, he crashed into Airdrie while on approach (10nm
short). He popped back up on the active at Calgary a few minutes later
(causing a go-around), and slewed around on the apron until finally he
was ejected from the system.
Now, looking back on that, I do not think that he was trying to be an
idiot, rather, I think that he simply did not understand. Pilot
training will help this. No, it won't be mandatory (very little is on
VATSIM), however I hope that a majority of pilots will take advantage of
the program being developed. If you think you know all there is to
know, then what do you have to lose? Maybe skip a flight, and go
through whatever program is developed, you may learn something new.
Heck, we all learn something new every day
Greg
Former Assistant Chief Instructor - Edmonton FIR
(and as it has come up before, I include that signature so that those
who read this know where I am coming from.)
Jan Naslund
Hi,
I agree completely with what you said about inexperienced pilots. They can
ruin a great controlling session. Everything is going great until......ABC001
enters your airspace and it all turns into shit.
Unfortenately there is not much we can do about this as there are no requirements
for pilots online with Vatsim. I have personally trained a few pilots from
scratch and there is a lot to go trough before they can plan a flight, navigate,
fly it, execute an approach and landing and communicate with ATC troughout
the flight.
A lot of these people have no prior experience of aviation at all and are
mostly confused and lost, they are not trying to be idiots. It just seems
like they are when you are controlling. I know, have sat there on flyinns
on a busy position with AC's not responding, not complying with instructions,
causing major havoc for me and other AC.
I would suggest a brief tutorial including a short test before people get
their pilot ID's on Vatsim. In order to control , you have to take tests
and prove your knowledge but for flying , there is nothing.
I know that is controversial but it could at least bring the pilot up to
a standard where it is possible to control him in a satisfactoy manner. As
long as they can read back clearances, fly a hdg, maintain altitude and control
speed i'm happy controlling them.
Maybe a tutorial and short test could focus on that.
My experience is that once a pilot has acheived a basic understanding of
on-line flying, they want to learn more.
Cheers / Jan
>.........
Rusty Rebar
As a new pilot I thought I would throw my 2 cents in. Just getting VATSIM
up is a big enough task as it is, but then throw in the confusion inherent
in an approach to a major airport....
I have been online a few times; fortunately I have not made an ass of myself
yet.
The way I see it, before you go online you should be familiar with the airport
that you are going into. Another thing that I find to be helpful is to fly
from a small airport to a small airport (in a king air or something) but
do it in a centers airspace. That is generally easy, you don’t have to deal
with APPROACH and TWR and all that stuff while you get used to the idea,
and get the nerve up to talk on the mic. Final Approach is not the time
to be trying to figure this stuff out.
>.........
Jeff Clark
becomes ever more obvious to us that we need a way of knowing if a pilot is
capable of flying IFR procedures or not. In the real-world ATC can
reasonably expect a pilot on an IFR flight plan to actually be able to fly
IFR procedures.
On VATSIM, there's usually less than a 50/50 chance that someone pretending
to fly a Boeing 747 into one of the most congested airspaces in the world
will have the slightest idea what a published hold is, and it makes the
controlling experience a nightmare because these pilots will happily say
"roger" when issued the clearance, but then fail to do it creating havoc in
the skies.
I propose a designation of IFR RATED that closely simulates the real-world
certification.
In other words, if I knew that a pilot was IFR RATED, then I should be issue
the following to him:
-vectors to intercept a radial
-vectors to intercept an airway/jet route
-published holds
-DME arcs
-full instrument approaches
If he DIDN'T have this rating, then I'd be suspicious and issue simpler
clearances to him.
Granted, there's not a lot of pilots on here yet who could achieve this, but
the ones who can should have some way of identifying themselves so that they
can get the FULLY REALISTIC ATC handling, rather than the baby-coddling "fly
heading 030, vector for the other side of the world" ATC that we're trying
to grow out of.
I -agree- with those who say that ratings should be in no way restrictive of
who can and cannot fly. But a voluntary rating could encourage pilots to
show that they are indeed the "Cream of the Crop", and signal to controllers
that these pilots are the ones who are going to know what they are doing.
Who knows - perhaps one day on VATSIM we'll end up having pilots start out
only flying VFR... then working up to their IFR rating, then up to their
commercial, and their ATP, and we could find a way to make that experience
enjoyable and fun for everyone involved. In the meantime, I don't see the
harm in having pilots help ATC know what they're capable of doing.
Jeff Clark
ZLA Chief
"Richard Green" <vat...@vatusa.org> wrote in message
news:Xns924067FA7E106rg...@64.246.15.37...
> I prefer never ASS-U-ME
Jeff Clark
When I first started out with SATCO, I -did- actually try controlling in
various countries other than one I lived in. I took a few turns at Holland,
Belgium, France, (but sadly not Greek) ATC.
What usually attracted me (or scared me off) of trying these areas was
whether or not their procedures were understandable or not, and if they
clearly welcomed visiting controllers or not.
I think that both pilots and controllers need one thing before going to
'underdeveloped' areas - (traffic wise) - information.
If whomever is in charge of the Israeli airports could provide me with the
DPs, STARs, and some basic information about traffic flow in the area, I
could, and would be delighted to fly there, or to control there.
On the other hand, if I was thinking about controlling at, say Madagasgar,
if I couldn't find the charts, sector files, or any other information like
that, I'd give it a miss.
The bottom line - I think the number one best thing you can do to attract
traffic is HAVE A GOOD WEBSITE.
Rich - if you want to build traffic at remote areas, take a look at the
quality of their websites, and see if that might be a reason that it's not
getting "it's fair share".
Jeff Clark
"Stamatis Vellis" <s_ve...@otenet.gr> wrote in message
news:3d24...@news.simflight.com...
Jeff Clark
> As far as increasing traffic in individual areas, the only REAL solution
is to
> have more ATC available. But, with all the ratings and such involved, I
don't think
> the diverse areas are going to get covered anytime soon!
I think that if you look over time, the development of VATSIM closely
parallels the availability of "flat rate" internet access. This is why
SATCO was so U.S. Centered in it's initial years - internet access was often
metered in most other countries.
About 3 years ago, un-metered access finally made it to the UK, and you can
see a related rise in the numbers at VATUK as it no longer became so
expensive to fly/control online.
Most other western European countries now offer flat-rate access as well,
and they are joining us.
If you want to find out why no-one controls at Pago Pago, Ecuador,
Madagasgar, etc., I think that you may have to wait a few years before
internet access costs drops for those fortunate enough to live in those
places, and that this will have more of an impact than any of the recent
policies that have been developed.
> I also believe that all this 'REALITY' that is being implemented is
just going to
> drive away many people who would otherwise join our ranks and in time
become
> 'proficient' pilots or controllers.
Some people -like- reality. Others don't. VATSIM strikes a pretty balance,
and at Los Angeles Center, we have always tried to do two things
simultaneously: 1.) Offer a VERY realistic service to those who can handle
it, and 2.) Offer a very friendly, courteous and patient service to those
who can't.
It pays off for us, and I think it's the way to go. All of the official
statements you've read about Pilot Ratings or Pilot Training make it clear
that they would be voluntary. How can this be a bad thing?
> Sure, we have a rather large membership, but how many of these are
actually
> active? And how active are they? For some reason, it seems the most active
areas are
> Europe, which doesn't count in this case, and the western US region. How
many of the
> western region members actually live in that region? What are the overall
demographics
> of the SATUSA membership? Do we have talented controllers who actually
live in other
> regions working in the western region, simply because that's where the
action is?
A lot. Los Angeles Center has done a lot of things right:
-we put in thousands of hours staffing what started out being a fairly
quiet part of the world.
-we concentrated on making the experience good and enjoyable for pilots
-we realized that pilots don't fly to places where they don't have charts,
so we spent thousands of hours making them easy to find on our web site.
-we realized the pilots like having flight plans done for them, so we made
thousands of those available for them to download and use.
-we realized that new pilots needed help, so we wrote up "How to Fly This
Route" documents explaining every twist of the VOR gauge, and how to fly the
route.
-we actively encouraged and recruited members who lived in other time zones
so that we weren't just staffed during the West Coast's evenings. ZLA is
now open almost 24 hours a day, giving people who live in Hong Kong, the
Middle East, Africa and the Pacific Rim somewhere to fly when their own
controllers are offline.
So the answer is, yes, there are a LOT of West Coast controllers who don't
actually live on the West Coast, and we see that as a great thing.
David Liu
I beleive that the pilot's rating should be VOLUNTARY and it would mainly be
used for bragging purposes with other pilots and for allowing controllers to
know that the pilot has some notion of flying. Maybe a special simbol would
appear in a flightstrip of a certified pilot. As for the uncertified
pilots, controllers could just tell them:
<ATC> Sir, do you see your compass?
<Pilot> I think so.
<ATC> Good, well put it on "E" and get out of my airspace!
:P
Regards,
David Liu
Mike Evans
ME
"David Liu" <lame...@netzero.net> wrote in message
news:3d289635$1...@news.simflight.com...
David Liu
"Would I get in trouble if I said I've done that?? =)"
Well, that depends if your supervisor was listening at the time. Also, it
might be normal procedures for departing aircraft to fly a heading of 090.
:P
Regards,
David Liu
Stamatis Vellis
Even if you supply all the charts in this world, pilots will not attempt a
flight to a destination which is not ordinarily manned by ATC. There are
exceptions, I know, but the exceptions make the rule. As far as the
chicken-and egg problem goes, I believe that in this case, it is ATC which
brings in the pilots, not the other way around.
Also, people tend to fly to places they are at least *slightly* familiar with.
A European will not feel strange flying to greece even if he has never been
there. But a European will not fly to a far out airport in the middle of Asia,
UNLESS he can expect some controlling.
Personally, I would love to start a 300/400 mile hop from the west part of
Europe till the east part of Asia with "my" B737, but I will be very lonely
doing that, no ? <g>.
Stamatis
"Jeff Clark" <je...@laartcc.org> wrote in message
news:3d28...@news.simflight.com...
Dave Tidwell
Well, here's my 5p worth!
As the chief training officer of a new VA I guess I'll be speaking from the
perspective of "How do I ensure that the image of the VA is one of
professionalism and quality?" When my colleagues and I set up the airline,
we did so concsious of the fact that it would be incumbent upon us to teach
our pilots to a level sufficient to allow them into the skies brandishing
our VA callsign loud and proud!
We therefore imposed our own rating system based on;
All pilots are enrolled as trainees, no matter what experience they boast
(supported by evidence or not)
All pilots undergo a suite of standardised training packages that teaches
them how to install and use the software effectively
Training is extended, firstly, to VFR operations at our local field, that
gets them used to ATC interaction, and doing funny things like flying,
maintaining an alitude/heading whilst talking, looking at charts, or even
worse, typing in responses in the SB textline!
Once they have finished basic training, which can be taken over as long a
period as they desire, they apply for a freely visible written examination
which tests their knowledge of procedures, terminology etc. The idea of
alllowing them to see the contents of the test "up front" is to enable them
to assess easily whether or not they have the "smarts" and knowledge to even
attempt it!
Once they've passed that initial written (theoretical) test, they are then
practically tested in online flight (IFR) on a regional UK flight, during
which their comms is monitored, as is their ability to execute SIDS/STARS
and so on.
Only when they have completed this checkride, do they become certified to
fly online (without a mentor watching over their shoulder) brandishing the
VA banner before them proudly! This ensures that they understand that they
have a responsibility to all of their peers on VATSIM, and also so that as
the VA grows, ATC will know that when they see our VA callsign, that the
pilot knows what he/she is doing and can be reasonably expected to execute
instructions without causing mayhem!
It does take a large amount of effort to pull together a suite of training
material! Its a lot of hard work, and WE EXPECT our pilots to show an
eagerness and willingness to learn. In return, we provide our time and
skills to assist them! Isn't this very much what VATSIM is all about? It
is a community experience, provided by all for the benefit of all! Pilots
are no good on vatsim without good/competent ATC. It goes the same in the
other direction! Why not expect VATSIM pilots to be given a two stage
enrollment procedure. Their first entry point limits them to gaining flying
experience, but such that ATC know/understand/can identify, that this pilot
is new. The second stage, being to "promote" them, much as ATC is promoted,
based on competence and proven understanding and ability to execute what
they have learnt.
There is TONS and TONS of material out there. Most of it distributed
throughout VA's spanning the globe! Surely with a little thought, we can
come up with a plan for pilots, that is not deemed restrictive or
beaurocratic, but gives them a protected environment in which they can learn
and thrive, before stretching their wings (pun intended) into more busy
areas or more complex flight operations. VATSIM boasts its own libraries of
information, most of it very technical, and very ATC biased. VATSIM is a
great institution, and one that I am proud to be a member of, but we "as a
group" must find a way to help our "newbies" into the air in a controlled
and assisted fashion.
I saw an interesting POLL on Tecpilot, that indicated that about 40% of
people didn't like the online experience because they were afraid of making
a mistake or it was too complex! A significant proportion of pilots
expressed an opinion that ATC was rude or aggressive! Is rude/aggressive
here a pointer at a busy ATC position struggling with heavy traffic, that
gets a newbie throwing a spanner in the works! If we thought about it, as
ATC, we should ensure that we support the newbie, perhaps even to the
detriment of the more capable pilots, otherwise we'll be pushing the newbie
away from ever wanting to connect again!
Anyway, I now I've made many points! Probably too many. Our little VA is
doing its little bit in its corner of the world to deliver competent pilots
into VATSIM. I'm sure most of the others do likewise! I don't think I've
particularly raised any new arguments, but would be willing to assist if
there's any way we can agree as a group how to help our new pilots into the
air, in a progressive and balanced fashion!
All the best, and happy landings!
David Tidwell
Chief Training Officer (part time ATCO for Leeds Bradford Approach)
White Rose International Virtual Airline
http://www.whiteroseva.com
<WRI004> da...@whiteroseva.com
msn messenger david....@ntlworld.com