VATUSA Forums
Login
  1. VATUSA
  2. VATUSA Forums
  3. Profile of Dhruv Kalra
  4. Show Posts
  5. Messages

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 - Dhruv Kalra

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 15
31
Events / Re: Atlanta Real Ops (KATL) {6/29 2200z-0300z}
« on: June 28, 2019, 12:34:34 AM »
Quote from: Matt Bromback on June 27, 2019, 10:25:42 AM
Are you a XP11 simmer and suffer with low frame rates?? (unable to maintain 20FPS)

Do you want to fly in the event and not effect spacing of other aircraft!??

Well download this plugin!

https://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?/files/file/26517-autospeed/

Better yet, download this:
https://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?/files/file/43281-3jfps-wizard11/

Rather than running a groundspeed hack, this one will adjust your rendering on the fly to actually maintain a workable framerate.

32
General Discussion / Re: Why flying your airplane well is the most important part of a successful FNO
« on: May 12, 2019, 08:10:15 AM »
Quote from: Lance Williams on May 11, 2019, 10:44:32 PM
I fly so sporadically now so this observation may be irrelevant, however I feel there is such a lack of "regular" atc online lately that any event draws 80% of the daily traffic. Yes, that's a made up stat just like most, however it just seems ATC along with Pilots have no idea how to handel their respective "equipment..." ATC should be issuing vectors and speed restrictions to avoid the inevitable final approach load described above. Pilots should use VATSPY or whatever map client to help ATC out the same way.

I find it a bit comical that ATC is here complaining about pilots ability to fly (I get it, 60% of the pilots on VATSIM probably would be better off trying to put a round block into a square hole, but...) when most of the issues I experience, again in limited time recently, are inept controllers.

It is what it is though. You can't have a free network of both pilots and ATC without these issues...

You’re not wrong. I’ve lamented on more than one occasion that controllers don’t just staff up anymore for the sake of being online. It almost takes an event to draw people out of the woodwork to provide ATC. Maybe I’m just being nostalgic, but you used to see a lot more ATC coverage on random weeknights, and the traffic was certainly there.

33
General Discussion / Re: Most scenic US flights?
« on: May 10, 2019, 01:17:54 PM »
Sedona (SEZ) is also quite fun and scenic.

34
General Discussion / Re: Most scenic US flights?
« on: May 10, 2019, 09:07:25 AM »
Quote from: Robert Shearman Jr on May 10, 2019, 06:39:38 AM
ZSE's "Fly the Gorge" event a couple weeks ago got me thinking -- where are some other really scenic flights one can make in the US?  Obviously there's the Grand Canyon, the Manhattan skyline, the various resort airports around Colorado, the Florida Keys -- maybe around Mount Rainier, too -- what are some other "pretty" US flights you've done that you recommend?

Start in DLH and track up the north short of Lake Superior towards Grand Marais. It’s breathtaking, especially in the fall when the colors are starting to turn.

Otherwise the Grand Canyon is great, as is the arrival into SLC from the east over the Wasatch range. Obviously, Colorado ski country is very scenic flying as well (ASE, TEX, etc.)

35
General Discussion / Re: Why flying your airplane well is the most important part of a successful FNO
« on: May 10, 2019, 12:46:47 AM »
Quote from: Shane VanHoven on May 09, 2019, 10:20:52 PM
Quote from: Dhruv Kalra on April 28, 2019, 04:03:28 PM
Quote from: Tom Campagnola on April 28, 2019, 11:36:02 AM
Flew the BOS FNO on Fri night. What an experience and how everyone worked together to get into KBOS. However,

While being vectored to ROBUC, in heavy storms, the ZIBO MOD B737 lost airspeed and lost control. I got my finger on the PAUSE button and had to disconnect...

Better lucknext time...
Tom

And this is why most pilots on VATSIM need to be better about taking reroutes around storms. The number of people I have outright refuse deviations or reroutes around the wx and then complain about turbulence blows my mind.

Isn't this the same night where the real facilities completely shut off the ROBUC flow cause of weather? Good thing brains are used IRL  ::)

Yep. R/w ZBW really got into the spirit of “FNO: The ROBUC STOPS HERE”. Literally.

36
News / Re: A discussion on voice CTAF
« on: May 06, 2019, 10:19:34 PM »
Quote from: Matthew Kramer on May 06, 2019, 07:28:46 PM
Hopefully more information will come about this ATIS bot and how it is integrated into vATIS as well as the facility level here in VATUSA. LAX, for example, has much higher tailwind tolerances than other airports in the facility. Ideally each facility would be able to set their own rules for runway configurations as well as the information provided.
I believe the plan is for them to allow divisions (and presumably subdivisions such as vARTCC/vACC) to outline canned time of day, wind direction, and wind speed rules to dictate runway in use.

ZMP already has this information published for our major field on our website, so hopefully we can just port those same rules over to whatever ATIS bot we get.

37
General Discussion / Re: Why flying your airplane well is the most important part of a successful FNO
« on: April 28, 2019, 04:03:28 PM »
Quote from: Tom Campagnola on April 28, 2019, 11:36:02 AM
Flew the BOS FNO on Fri night. What an experience and how everyone worked together to get into KBOS. However,

While being vectored to ROBUC, in heavy storms, the ZIBO MOD B737 lost airspeed and lost control. I got my finger on the PAUSE button and had to disconnect...

Better lucknext time...
Tom

And this is why most pilots on VATSIM need to be better about taking reroutes around storms. The number of people I have outright refuse deviations or reroutes around the wx and then complain about turbulence blows my mind.

38
Events / Re: The Fifth Runway Sunday (KATL) {5/19 2100z-0100z}
« on: April 14, 2019, 06:42:15 PM »
Why would you punish the flying public so?

39
The Control Room Floor / Re: "Limited Services"
« on: March 28, 2019, 05:04:22 PM »
Quote from: Meg Bruck on March 28, 2019, 08:06:55 AM
As Kosmo said, non-radar is still a service which should be provided to aircraft on the ground or below radar coverage. Just because a controller is using vERAM does not mean that s/he can say "you're below my radar, taxi your discretion, call me in the air" to an aircraft at a Class D. I've heard controllers say that.

I'd worry that some controllers are using vERAM's limitations as an excuse not to provider service at all below 5000', except for at the majors.
The only controller to date in whose info that I’ve seen the “service limited by accurate radar coverage simulation” statement isn’t doing this. If people are copying that without knowing what it means then it’s been misconstrued on both the controller and pilot ends of things.

I’m a firm believer in NOT advertising what Radar client you’re using or any descriptors to that effect. If someone requests a radar service that we can’t provide due to lack of radar coverage, I just respond with “unable due to radar coverage” and offer alternative options. Usually it’s requests for radar vectors to approaches for which we don’t have a centerline depicted or VFR flight following in areas where the radar might not pick up an aircraft below 5500-6000. We field these sorts of requests in the real world™ every day. No reason why they can’t be handled just as succinctly on the network.

40
The Control Room Floor / Re: "Limited Services"
« on: March 27, 2019, 11:37:40 PM »
Quote from: Nolan Danziger on March 27, 2019, 09:23:43 PM
I don't think anyone is advocating for not having full radar coverage where it's realistic. I believe that real world enroute radar is supplemented by TRACON radars where applicable. What we're implying when we say that we're limited by realistic radar coverage is that we won't be able to give you full radar coverage to the ground if you're going into an airport in BFE. If you're going into a TRACON or up-down you'll be fine...

Spot on.

41
The Control Room Floor / Re: "Limited Services"
« on: March 27, 2019, 06:23:46 PM »
Quote from: Matthew Kosmoski on March 27, 2019, 05:24:42 PM
Quote from: James Hiscoe on March 27, 2019, 04:54:33 PM
Radar coverage below certain altitudes is the thing that strikes me as most likely to be what they're referring to. I'm not sure what else they could mean.

Even then, we're still obligated to do top-down, so what's really limited?  Non-radar itself isn't "limited"

Can’t provide radar services like traffic advisories or vectors to final approach course if you don’t have radar coverage.

42
The Control Room Floor / Re: Good Operating Practices for TRACON
« on: February 14, 2019, 10:04:07 AM »
Quote from: Jeremy Peterson on February 14, 2019, 06:52:19 AM
Wow excellent source! Do you have a citation for this particular document in case others would like to use it in the future? (And to credit the author/s)

Originally published as an Appendix in an FAA facility SOP, so presumably created by their airspace/procedures specialist with input from their training department and OJTIs.

43
The Control Room Floor / Re: Mode C on the Ground
« on: January 30, 2019, 07:17:51 AM »
We’re really making this more complicated than it needs to be.

ASDE-X airport? Ground and local share responsibility in ensuring code accuracy and Mode-C prior to takeoff clearance being issued.

Non ASDE-X airport? Ground/local have no ability to see transponder status on the ground. Local holds responsibility in ensuring proper track acquisition prior to handoff to the overlying radar controller. At these airports the earliest you’ll get interrogated about your transponder is once you’re in the air.

Simulating ASDE is another can of worms. Personally I like it at the major fields because it allows ground to quickly differentiate between aircraft authorized to operate on movement areas vs. not.

44
The Flight Deck / Re: Climb Modes Boeing Version
« on: January 22, 2019, 01:49:07 PM »
Quote from: Matt Bromback on January 22, 2019, 07:40:06 AM
Quote from: Ryan Parry on January 21, 2019, 10:53:28 AM
You mentioned SPD INTV but not ALT INTV, but for those who don't know, ALT INTV works the same as how SPD INTV was described. You can clear the next altitude restriction by hitting ALT INTV. Great write up Matt!

Thanks! completely forgot about that one!

Is this type of format good for a post? or would everyone like to see videos instead?

I’m good with the reading. Perhaps we should collaborate with ATC staffing and try and record some demo examples of being issued “climb via” vs “climb and maintain” and also being assigned speeds, etc. and make some short videos.

45
The Control Room Floor / Re: Visual Separation and You: Dos and Don'ts
« on: January 09, 2019, 09:29:53 PM »
Quote from: Matthew Kosmoski on January 09, 2019, 08:38:28 PM
I don't think anybody is arguing the need for the clearance.  My point is that the only thing that is actually law permits for it.

The law permits for lots of stupid things (like helicopter Special VFR in 0/0). Can we get back on topic?

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 15