VATUSA Forums
General => General Discussion => Topic started by: Dave Weese on March 30, 2018, 10:13:47 PM
-
Hey guys just wondering why some areas on FNO events choice to follow the real world OPS at that time and limit available runways to what the real world is doing?
Seen this 40% of the events over the last year or so. There might be 50 plus aircraft and ATC will only use one runway when there are 2 or more that could be used. Ya the real world might only be using one runway at that time, but they only have 10 or so aircraft in the whole control space.
And why do controllers give themselves so much work? Clear the pilot on the arrival, use the published holds. All this vectoring around, creates way too much work for controllers. Pilots know how to fly a hold, when ATC does use them, I never hear or see any issues.
FNOs are great, and I know they are busy as heck, so why burn yourself out?
-
They may have their reasons. We derive our flow based on weather and operational conditions. For a Houston FNO, for example, real world runway assignments may have little to no bearing on our operational decisions.
Pilots may opt to simulate runway closures, etc., but I won't force it upon them.
-
I don't know specifically which events you refer to, but, I can tell you that a lot of times in my experience flying into an airport that has had a major configuration change since the default FSX scenery was created, a significant portion of the inbound pilots' systems will be missing any new runways that have been added. So whereas at Atlanta you'd ordinarily have three parallel arrival streams coming in, in VATSIM you might only have the southernmost runway at 5-10% capacity because so many don't have it. Most of us that have been around a while know look at the ARTCC website for information and/or where to find scenery updates but many do not know or don't take the time to do so.
-
I don't know specifically which events you refer to, but, I can tell you that a lot of times in my experience flying into an airport that has had a major configuration change since the default FSX scenery was created, a significant portion of the inbound pilots' systems will be missing any new runways that have been added. So whereas at Atlanta you'd ordinarily have three parallel arrival streams coming in, in VATSIM you might only have the southernmost runway at 5-10% capacity because so many don't have it. Most of us that have been around a while know look at the ARTCC website for information and/or where to find scenery updates but many do not know or don't take the time to do so.
For sure this is a problem, O'Hare is the best example of this.
But I'm not talking about scenery issues. And I'm not going to call out any one event. But one that sticks out as really foolish was one last fall where the real world had a runway closed for line painting or something at 10pm that Friday night. So in the middle of the event with 10times the traffic online then in the real world. The tower controller with support off all other ATC positions, shut down the runway. This created havoc for everyone. Sure this might be an extrem event. But I've flown 85% of the FNOs over the last 2 years. And almost half the time, I've seen runway usage restrictions of some type in place.
There are so many tools already in place for ATC to manager traffic, it just always boggles my mind to see controllers taking pilots off a published route and start vectoring them around 40 and 50 miles out when stacking them at a published hold does the same thing and it's almost zero work for the controller.
-
There are so many tools already in place for ATC to manager traffic, it just always boggles my mind to see controllers taking pilots off a published route and start vectoring them around 40 and 50 miles out when stacking them at a published hold does the same thing and it's almost zero work for the controller.
Things like that aren't always as they seem. Many VATSIM pilots cannot successfully execute many of the procedures they file, so they're broken off of their route, manually vectored to final (since that's something we can reliably trust), but due to inconsistent weather and final approach behavior, finals get ridiculously long.
-
Many VATSIM pilots cannot successfully execute many of the procedures they file,
I think this might be the main crux of the matter. Dave, you made a statement in your initial post that "Pilots know how to fly holds." I'm not sure if that is outdated information or based on a sampling of Canadian Xpress pilots who probably have a higher incidence of procedural understanding than the general VATSIM public. But I think, at least in my anecdotal observation on the network and here in the forums, that the overall average level of IFR procedural knowledge among the average VATSIM user is not what it was years ago. That is what has partially fueled the push for the ATO program, where organizations like mine are trying like crazy to up the overall level of knowledge among pilots on the network. But, we have a tall task ahead of us in that endeavor.
-
Many VATSIM pilots cannot successfully execute many of the procedures they file,
I think this might be the main crux of the matter.
This is the problem.
-
Many VATSIM pilots cannot successfully execute many of the procedures they file,
I think this might be the main crux of the matter. Dave, you made a statement in your initial post that "Pilots know how to fly holds." I'm not sure if that is outdated information or based on a sampling of Canadian Xpress pilots who probably have a higher incidence of procedural understanding than the general VATSIM public. But I think, at least in my anecdotal observation on the network and here in the forums, that the overall average level of IFR procedural knowledge among the average VATSIM user is not what it was years ago. That is what has partially fueled the push for the ATO program, where organizations like mine are trying like crazy to up the overall level of knowledge among pilots on the network. But, we have a tall task ahead of us in that endeavor.
Rob, you make a good point. I agree, I don't think pilots have the understandings of the procedures as we did in the past. The aircraft we have today, have taken away the need for basic understanding of what the procedure means. Saying that however, I think the average pilot does know how to 'push the right buttons' for lack of a better term, to make the aircraft do what they want. They may not understand what it means, but they understand what button to push on the FMC.
And yes, a lot of us at Canadian Xpress have been around this for many years. We are also a VATSIM ATO partner as well, and try very hard to get our own members to take some of the training we offer, and most have.
Maybe we need a secret code for vPilot that will tell ATC how smart we are, so we get front of the line ;)
-
Maybe we need a secret code for vPilot that will tell ATC how smart we are, so we get front of the line ;)
Respond quickly and accurately to ATC instructions. I trust a pilot way more when I see the plane turn while the readback is occuring...
-
Maybe we need a secret code for vPilot that will tell ATC how smart we are, so we get front of the line ;)
Respond quickly and accurately to ATC instructions. I trust a pilot way more when I see the plane turn while the readback is occuring...
+1.5
-
Maybe we need a secret code for vPilot that will tell ATC how smart we are, so we get front of the line ;)
flightplan remarks: VATSIM Pilot Ratings P1, P2, P4 ;-)
-
Respond quickly and accurately to ATC instructions. I trust a pilot way more when I see the plane turn while the readback is occuring...
+100
Pilot knowledge and skill on the network sucks compared to what it was years ago. When I joined, you could count on at least 85-90% of the pilots to fly well, and most of the rest were really interested in learning to do better, with the occasional bonehead thrown in. Now the numbers are significantly different. I was flabbergasted watching last night's FNO, where indeed two arrival runways were being used, yet roughly 30-35% of the pilots couldn't execute to save their lives, with WAY too many that simply didn't even know their left from their right. (Side note for pilots: NEVER EVER when a controller is asking you why you went left instead of right say, "well, I dialed in the heading and the plane just took me left...". YOU are supposed to be a pilot, one who COMMANDS an aircraft, not a MONKEY who turns a dial, grabs the popcorn, and just WATCHES what's happening to him, screaming "WOOHOO!")
In most cases, a controller can manage and recover from a bonehead. The problem really occurs when there are two or more boneheads (or even one bonehead and one or more "less skilled" pilots) in a row or at the same time that the controller is trying to deal with simultaneously. That ramps up the stress and ramps down the efficiency tremendously, and can quickly and easily cause the controller to get behind, negatively effecting the experience of the controller and several pilots. And unfortunately during large events, it seems to happen more and more....
-
Don, I agree with you. Some of these pilots just have no business flying into an FNO. I have also noticed a lack in controller competency. It can range from not knowing their airspace to not using proper phraseology to not knowing how to run their airspace.
-
Don, I agree with you. Some of these pilots just have no business flying into an FNO. I have also noticed a lack in controller competency. It can range from not knowing their airspace to not using proper phraseology to not knowing how to run their airspace.
Also a true statement.
-
Respond quickly and accurately to ATC instructions. I trust a pilot way more when I see the plane turn while the readback is occuring...
+100
Pilot knowledge and skill on the network sucks compared to what it was years ago. When I joined, you could count on at least 85-90% of the pilots to fly well, and most of the rest were really interested in learning to do better, with the occasional bonehead thrown in. Now the numbers are significantly different. I was flabbergasted watching last night's FNO, where indeed two arrival runways were being used, yet roughly 30-35% of the pilots couldn't execute to save their lives, with WAY too many that simply didn't even know their left from their right. (Side note for pilots: NEVER EVER when a controller is asking you why you went left instead of right say, "well, I dialed in the heading and the plane just took me left...". YOU are supposed to be a pilot, one who COMMANDS an aircraft, not a MONKEY who turns a dial, grabs the popcorn, and just WATCHES what's happening to him, screaming "WOOHOO!")
In most cases, a controller can manage and recover from a bonehead. The problem really occurs when there are two or more boneheads (or even one bonehead and one or more "less skilled" pilots) in a row or at the same time that the controller is trying to deal with simultaneously. That ramps up the stress and ramps down the efficiency tremendously, and can quickly and easily cause the controller to get behind, negatively effecting the experience of the controller and several pilots. And unfortunately during large events, it seems to happen more and more....
Could not have said it better myself. 8)
-
...not a MONKEY who turns a dial, grabs the popcorn, and just WATCHES what's happening to him, screaming "WOOHOO!
So... The more excited controllers at FNOs? :o ;D
Is there a way to continue this discussion WITHOUT touching on pilot training in some way? I know that's been a bit of a hot topic, and in my (limited) understanding, the answer thus far has been "no".
I'm all for simulating real ops - as long as we have both knowledgable controllers AND pilots. Without both, it cannot possibly succeed.
-
Is there a way to continue this discussion WITHOUT touching on pilot training in some way? I know that's been a bit of a hot topic, and in my (limited) understanding, the answer thus far has been "no".
IMO, no. Events run smoother with better pilots, regardless of what operations are being simulated.
-
Is there a way to continue this discussion WITHOUT touching on pilot training in some way? I know that's been a bit of a hot topic, and in my (limited) understanding, the answer thus far has been "no".
IMO, no. Events run smoother with better pilots, regardless of what operations are being simulated.
Agreed, however, good pilots don't help if controllers still can't work them.
-
The aircraft we have today, have taken away the need for basic understanding of what the procedure means. Saying that however, I think the average pilot does know how to 'push the right buttons' for lack of a better term, to make the aircraft do what they want. They may not understand what it means, but they understand what button to push on the FMC.
Here is the second crux. Automation does NOT replace the need for the pilot understanding. Automation is merely a tool to reduce workload. Pilots on VATSIM routinely have the automation do the wrong thing, and when we ask what they're doing, the universal reply is "my FMC is doing it!"
No, sir, you programmed it. You're in command of the vessel. Don't blame the platform for your misunderstanding.
-
Flying /W, A, or U makes you appreciate that FMC or GPS. I wish more pilots understood how to fly.
-
Ironically flying /W all the time reveals how little some controllers have to deal with that. "Unable direct - DC9" throws a lot of them off it seems. I had more than one guy think I was somehow incompetent. "You got the default GPS right?" "No, just the VOR"
-
This thread, threads like it, and many discussions I've heard on VATUSA facility teamspeaks disappoint me. Controllers are openly critical of pilots, and sometimes outright hostile. The way I read it and hear it, it goes beyond good-natured kidding. And it's not coming just from the rank and file, but from people who are in official and unofficial positions of leadership.
For those who remember me from ca. 2005-2007, I used to be among the critical crowd. Occasionally I slip up today and let my emotions get the better of me. So I'm not without fault.
If I'm having a bad day, I will do my best to bite my tongue and try again tomorrow. If I ever get to the point where I hate my pilots, I think it's time I take a long break. I'll come back when controlling is fun again.
The VATUSA family atmosphere needs to include pilots.
Members should, at all times, be courteous and respectful to one another.
Since this is a learning environment, there are times when a pilot may encounter a new air traffic controller who is in the process of learning his airspace and/or general air traffic control procedures. The same may be true of the controller who may find himself issuing ATC to a pilot flying online for the first time. Everyone should remember to exercise patience and courtesy to these new pilots and controllers.
-
This thread, threads like it, and many discussions I've heard on VATUSA facility teamspeaks disappoint me. Controllers are openly critical of pilots, and sometimes outright hostile. The way I read it and hear it, it goes beyond good-natured kidding. And it's not coming just from the rank and file, but from people who are in official and unofficial positions of leadership.
For those who remember me from ca. 2005-2007, I used to be among the critical crowd. Occasionally I slip up today and let my emotions get the better of me. So I'm not without fault.
If I'm having a bad day, I will do my best to bite my tongue and try again tomorrow. If I ever get to the point where I hate my pilots, I think it's time I take a long break. I'll come back when controlling is fun again.
The VATUSA family atmosphere needs to include pilots.
Members should, at all times, be courteous and respectful to one another.
Since this is a learning environment, there are times when a pilot may encounter a new air traffic controller who is in the process of learning his airspace and/or general air traffic control procedures. The same may be true of the controller who may find himself issuing ATC to a pilot flying online for the first time. Everyone should remember to exercise patience and courtesy to these new pilots and controllers.
I agree with your sentiment, and largely think that us controllers DO feel a sort of "familyness" towards pilots. I think you may be misinterpreting what other controllers in this thread are trying to communicate. Controllers, at least in VATUSA, spend a lot of time learning and trying to "do it all right". We spend so much time learning and so much time attempting to perfect our controlling (to no avail of course because no one will ever be perfect), that when we see pilots who don't have that same drive that we do to learn everything there is to know about flying their airplane properly, well it can be a little disappointing.
I think the controllers of VATUSA are willing and ready for more knowledgeable pilots, but not all pilots desire that amount of detail out of their simulated experiences. With Controllers and Pilots, the relationship is one of "Yin and Yang" in a lot of respects.
K
-
... I think you may be misinterpreting what other controllers in this thread are trying to communicate. ...
Communicating is what the listener does.
Much is lost in written conversation and maybe I misread some things. Still your post reads very differently than some of the quotes I could pull from other contributions to this thread.
Thank you for offering up some positive and encouraging remarks!
Steve Perry
-
I agree with your sentiment, and largely think that us controllers DO feel a sort of "familyness" towards pilots. I think you may be misinterpreting what other controllers in this thread are trying to communicate.
If this wasn't true, you wouldn't hear controllers spend so much time trying to help pilots understand what they filed, what's expected of them, and what they're doing. I've heard (and spent) a lot of time helping pilots.
-
Controllers, at least in VATUSA, spend a lot of time learning and trying to "do it all right". We spend so much time learning and so much time attempting to perfect our controlling (to no avail of course because no one will ever be perfect), that when we see pilots who don't have that same drive that we do to learn everything there is to know about flying their airplane properly, well it can be a little disappointing.
+1 million
-
Communicating is what the listener does.
I'm sorry, wut? I think you may be mistaken on that. Communication is the act of 2 or more people exchanging information or ideas.
But yes, I think sometimes you hear acrimonious things on frequency from controllers. I think that is mostly a result of frustration or having a bad controlling day. We all have our good days and our not so good days, and we have to take the good with the bad.
If this wasn't true, you wouldn't hear controllers spend so much time trying to help pilots understand what they filed, what's expected of them, and what they're doing. I've heard (and spent) a lot of time helping pilots.
^
K