Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Benton Wilmes

Pages: [1]
1
Quote from: Harold Rutila
I responded to a parallel discussion in the VATSIM Forums in kind of a long post, but in a nutshell here's what I think:

With regard to not implementing it on VATSIM, we're going to put ourselves through much more trouble than we need to if we don't implement it. The first couple of months are going to be difficult, yes, (just as I'm sure the number of "incursions" under the new standard will very likely go up in the real world) but in the end people are going to start understanding this procedure.

From another perspective, if ARTCCs are given the choice as to whether or not they want to implement it, I would very sharply disagree with that decision. There are already discrepancies between the way ARTCCs operate, but this one is too big to be left to the ARTCCs to decide individually. VATUSA needs a division-wide standard to absolutely minimize confusion. There are other questions about this potential decision, too. How will one S1's training vary in one ARTCC compared to an S1 somewhere else? What will VATUSA say in the TRC, a centralized training document?

VATUSA should design a policy that allows for the simulation of the runway crossing limitations in all taxi clearances to a reasonable degree. I don't believe DEP/APP nor CTR should be required to do this, but perhaps GND/TWR should. Movement area ops are hard enough already for the radar positions, but GND/TWR should be able to handle that. I would suggest what Ernesto said -- a "Cross all runways" provision for DEP/APP and CTR controllers. If it's a well-advertised policy, then we'll see a good level of pilot understanding and an even better standardization of technique throughout all of the ARTCCs in VATUSA. It's simply got to be standardized and not left up to ARTCCs.

http://forums.vatsim.net/viewtopic.php?f=1...77&start=15

I honestly don't see this being treated any differently than when we could no longer just say "Taxi to runway 25R". Instead we now had to give a route with every taxi clearance so it turned into "Taxi to runway 25R via Bravo".

Some people still don't use that rule and its officially in the 7110.65 so why would this change get any other kind of special treatment?

2
The Control Room Floor / Real World Color Profiles
« on: January 16, 2010, 08:39:16 AM »
Here is the one I use. It's the same as what was used at ZKC when I did my internship there. The brightness on pretty much everything can be changed on the real scope so the background can be anywhere from bright blue or completely black depending on the controllers preference. I prefer a very dark blue almost black scope so that's what I have here.

Code: [Select]
[:CP:DSR]
ColorARTCCBound=8421504
ColorAirport=8421504
ColorAnchorLines=3145645
ColorBackground=655360
ColorCenterlines=8421504
ColorCoasting=3145645
ColorConflict=3145645
ColorEmergency=3145645
ColorFiltered=1605719
ColorFix=8421504
ColorHandoff=3145645
ColorHighAirway=8421504
ColorHighBound=8421504
ColorHistoryTrail=1605719
ColorLDB=3145645
ColorLowAirway=8421504
ColorLowBound=8421504
ColorNDB=8421504
ColorOceanicTracksEast=8421376
ColorOceanicTracksWest=8421376
ColorPositionSymbol=3145645
ColorPrimaryTarget=3210883
ColorRangeRings=8421504
ColorRunway=8421504
ColorSID=8421504
ColorSTAR=8421504
ColorSelected=3145645
ColorStickyBorder=4210816
ColorStickyText=9868950
ColorTargetSymbol=3145645
ColorToolLines=65535
ColorTracked=3145645
ColorUntracked=3145645
ColorVOR=8421504
ColorVectorLine=3145645

3
The Flight Deck / Preferred RWYs question
« on: January 07, 2010, 02:13:19 AM »
For the NY airports:

http://www.nyartcc.org/runway

For DC airports, you have to actually look through their SOPs if you are that desperate to see. Same thing with Boston, have to look in the SOP to find out exactly what they would be running. But usually, you can just guess correctly based on the winds.

4
General Discussion / Too high on approach!
« on: September 01, 2009, 01:59:48 PM »
If you were given a visual approach each time, it is up to you as the pilot to fly an approach down to the runway. If you are too high, then do what you need to do in order to get down as the controller just gets you low enough to see the airport (not necessarily low enough to fly an ILS approach exactly).

If they were ILS approaches, then it's another story. You should never be vectored to join the ILS above the glide slope.

5
General Discussion / Alternate forum skins
« on: February 04, 2009, 06:48:20 PM »
Quote from: Justin A. Martin
Umm... any math majors in the building?

 

Sorry...I have a real major  

6
General Discussion / Atlanta has a new ATM
« on: January 31, 2009, 06:14:23 PM »
Congrats Alan!

7
General Discussion / Suggestion
« on: January 09, 2009, 07:21:08 PM »
Quote from: Brandon Bartell
We are using our VATSIM password more and more on this website.... is there any chance we can change the member login to use our vatsim password as well.

You could just change your password to your VATSIM password

8
General Discussion / Questions, Comments
« on: January 04, 2009, 09:12:38 PM »
Quote from: Tim Krajcar
Is this where I point out that VATUSA is guilty of this already by deciding they needed their own forums instead of using or asking for more on the main VATSIM site?

Sorry, I'll go back to my hole now.


Well the UK division also has their own forums...why can't we?


I like the new forums, good job guys!

Pages: [1]