Glad I asked 

No, there is not. Even if there was, there would not be a point considering your visibility range wouldn't be able to be big enough to cover that entire area.

Awesome job Cam and ZBW!

Appreciate it, DK! Again, my apologies for distracting you while taxiing on the ground at Syracuse International. I know how much focus that takes 

Our 60 Hours of ATC event has concluded (although we are still online and going on 62 hours)! The Boston Virtual ARTCC Administration Team would like to recognize the controllers involved and thank them for their dedication throughout the weekend. Many controllers joined in staffing up the airspace and providing dozens of hours of service to pilots. It is truly extraordinary what we were able to accomplish for the second year in a row, and we would not have been able to do it without them. Considering the fact that we also had our Friday Night Ops event and Cross the Pond Eastbound, I'd say it was a pretty successful weekend.

We'd also like to thank all pilots who flew into or out of our airspace during the 60 hours. You made the event fun and enjoyable for all, giving our controllers consistent traffic even during the overnight hours! It was incredible to see the event-level traffic throughout the day today! It resulted in Boston Logan being fully staffed almost all day long - A quick shoutout to our Boston Tower controller, Ben Dudley, for pulling a 15 hour shift. Last but not least, thank you to our neighboring ARTCCs for the support throughout the weekend.

Please take the time to send our controllers feedback so that we know how we did. Feedback can be sent via www.bvartcc.com/feedback

We look forward to next year's 60 Hours of ATC event and wish you blue skies and happy landings until then.

Congrats!

I'm slightly confused. Is this project being sponsored and/or developed by VATUSA? The VATUSA Command Center, advertising of VATUSA events, and iFrame of the VATUSA TMU map makes me believe so. But I'm not 100% sure based on this post or the website.

Mark your calendars, stock up on munchies, and tell the family to head out of town for the weekend: October 13-15, 2017 will be the biggest weekend of events in BVA's history!

It all starts at 11am ET on Friday, October 13 when we launch 60 Hours of ATC, 60 straight hours of Boston Center coverage. Any time you wish to fly in ZBW, day or night, you will find coverage online.

Starting at 7pm ET, we host VATUSA's Friday Night Operations event. There will be a full staff of controllers online at Boston Logan International (KBOS), and staffing at other local airports. The event runs until 11pm ET, but ZBW will remain online overnight and for the rest of the weekend.

Then, we kick off Saturday morning early! At 7am ET, the first departures for Cross the Pond Eastbound 2017 will be connecting to the network. Cross the Pond takes place twice a year (westbound in March, eastbound in October) and is one of the busiest and most sought after events in the VATSIM calendar. It is a mass crossing of the North Atlantic with full ATC offered the whole way, with heavy traffic levels guaranteed for your whole flight. As a departure airport, KBOS will be fully-staffed, and there will be multiple Approach and Center controllers online across ZBW. Whether you're flying across the Atlantic for the event or are just looking for a great chance to fly in a lit up airspace, join us all day on Saturday, October 14.

Looking for information on flying this event? Check out our Oceanic Procedures Ground School, hosted by Air Traffic Manager Camden Bruno.

60 Hours of ATC continues throughout the day on October 15, and ends at 11:00pm on Sunday, wrapping up what is likely the busiest event weekend our community has ever participated in!

Well, Tony, were we supposed to simply sit in silence and not engage in the discussion? Whether or not his messages were justified clearly differs based on opinion (which, since you're a controller, you're apparently not supposed to be able to express  ). From what I can tell, it's only you and Matthew who think the messages were flat out unjustified. Could wording be changed? Yes, and we'll certainly take that feedback into consideration and make those changes for the future to avoid further forum threads like this one. However...

Hello, my name is Evan. I'm a controller at ZBW and have some feedback for you based on your flight thus far. I am a big believer in the power of VATSIM as a learning tool. Would you mind if I shared a pointer for next time with you? Feel free to reply at a good time to talk (doesn't have to be immediate).

Your callsign isn't a valid airline or general aviation callsign. Airline callsigns in the United States begin with three letters, followed by the flight number. For example: AAL123. General aviation callsigns use the letter "N", then 3 numbers, then three letters (for example, N331KB). While not required, I would encourage you to use a realistic callsign while you are flying on the network. Feel free to ask if there are any other questions.

If you are telling me that if you received the messages above that you wouldn't have taken them in a positive manner, I believe that's a you problem (especially taking into consideration the bolded portions). As we've stated multiple times, most pilots love these types of messages, as they are usually unaware and looking to improve their knowledge-base, skills, and realism. These types of messages are all in good heart to promote pilot education, realism, etc. The pilot doesn't have to change their callsign, and could continue to fly around as ABCDEFG for all we care. But (the majority of the time) there's no hurt in reaching out. Personally, if anything, the primary reason I'd be reaching out is because when I see "VRD" on the scope, I automatically associate that with an Airbus series aircraft. Just as if I saw a "JBU", I'd automatically think E190 or A320/321. So realism also can avoid confusion in certain circumstances.

Also, for the sake of clarity, Tony, he already is in VATSTAR's ATO* program.

If you read the topic in full, there was already an apology made:

I apologize if my attempt to help and provide some additional information came across as belittling, rude, or as unsolicited. I was simply trying to help.

I don't see anything further to apologize for, nor do I think "sucking it up" in these situations is the solution. It's okay to have a discussion and voice separate opinions. Sometimes it leads to an agreement, or a better understanding of each individual's perspectives and outlooks on a given situation.