Good post, Shane. The cab guys often get overlooked when it comes time to plan a big event, but sequencing into the destination starts from the moment an aircraft pushes back from the gate.

We're pretty spoiled with DFW (https://skyvector.com/files/tpp/2007/pdf/06039AD.PDF). Not only do we have parallel runways so we don't have to worry about any complicated squeeze plays, we also have plenty of holding/sequencing pads that we can use. The layout of DFW is pretty awesome too. We utilize directional departures so that westbound departures use the westbound runways and vice versa for eastbound guys. It's always interesting to learn how other facilities deal with their situations!

I agree with Matthew. Every facility needs to look at this from their own perspective. BUT more than that, EVERY facility has to be willing to play ball. One weak link in the traffic management chain and the whole thing goes out the window. I totally agree that FNOs have been crazy lately, but a blanket solution isn't going to help much imo since every facility faces different issues. In ZFW, our airport is very central to the geography of the ARTCC so we can do a lot of work in our own borders. Not every facility has this luxury though.

Only one attempt at a landing? I love everything you guys do in terms of event planning but there's too many variables to make that a hard and fast rule...

Blake,

Really cool that we finally have something like this, give a pat on the back to yourself/whoever is deserving. That said, a few comments.

1) Am I (a staff member at a random facility) supposed to have the ability to edit/remove other facilities initiatives? The buttons are there for me to, but I didn't want to actually test if I had the ability.

2) I also found it a little non-intuitive to go to the TMU management page and not the page where the notices are posted. I'm assuming this has something to do with hiding it behind permissions, but imo, it would be easier to have a button on the NTOS page to add a new one.

Just my $0.02... I think this is a huge step forward, especially if there are other ways to integrate this into our own websites or tools.

Congrats, Bryan. ZFW looks forward to working together in the future!

FWIW, I've been using 3jFPS for a while now, and with the exception of a select few areas it really helps maintain frame rates. Perfectly smooth 30fps while flying over LAX with ortho, MisterX KLAX, and lots of traffic around.

I personally believe (not speaking as ATD) that all minor fields should be open per a Controller's GRP rating.  Training Departments should be teaching transferable skills when conducting ratings training. A controller should be able to read a chart and a SOP for any Non-Designated airspace field across the Division (perhaps with a few exceptions).  Training bandwidth across the Division is very tight.  Training Departments should be focusing primarily on Designated Airspace training.  The whole purpose of Designated Airspace training is to teach material that is in addition to GRP Competencies. 

Maybe this is the grumpy old man in me coming out, but it seems like this might be one area where VATUSA as a whole is somewhat lacking. It seems to me that a lot of facilities aren't teaching students how to learn on their own. I think that a lot of students are just happy to get spoon-fed the knowledge to control in their home ARTCC and they miss out on reading SOPs, or the .65, or other forms and instead would rather just become "readers of cheetsheets" instead of "controllers".

This is obviously off the topic of the post so I won't go any further on it, but just an observation of students I've seen recently.