I've noticed while flying around the country on the network, controllers have used more than one method of radar identification to radar ID me. Which is cool and all... but just in case it wasn't on purpose, I figured I'd write up a little bit on it, to give you a perspective of someone who spends about 60% of his real world transmissions establishing radar with someone!

This can all be found in chapter 5 of the .65. Specifically 5-3-2 and 5-3-3. The methods are broken down into two categories. Primary methods (5-3-2) and Beacon methods (5-3-3). They are pretty self explanatory: the primary methods can be used on primary targets, while the beacon methods can be used on Mode 3/A beacon systems (that's lawyer talk for a transponder).

5-3-2 Primary Radar Identification Methods:

1. Observe a departing aircraft target within 1 mile of the departure runway.

- Airport must have an operating control tower.
- A verbal or nonverbal rolling call must have been received from the tower for each departure.
- This is the most common method used for IFR departures. Since most facilities on the network simulate some sort of rolling call or automatic release system, you can use this method, as long as you observe the target on your screen within a mile.

2. Get a position report from a pilot and correlate that report to a target located in the same spot

- The chosen fix or visual reporting point MUST be depicted on your radar scope.
- There must be only one target at that location (obviously) or else you'd have to choose another method.
- This is a common way to ID someone coming into your center from uncontrolled airspace on the network. The pilot might check on with "10 miles south of Hector." That phrase is perfectly acceptable and adequate to complete the ID. If there are more than one target on the scope at that position, choose a different method.

3. Identifying turns of 30 degrees or more

- It's as simple as it sounds, but obviously make sure only one aircraft makes these turns!
- Keep minimum altitudes in mind if you're using this method on an IFR aircraft!

5-3-3 Beacon Identification Methods

1. Tell the aircraft to IDENT

- See the ID on your screen, boom.

2. Request the aircraft to change to a specific squawk code

- Observe the squawk change. Technically you actually have to watch the numbers change on your screen in order to apply this one in the terminal environment, but that rule gets broken at least several times per minute. Side note: a good general practice, if you're going to break a rule, know the rule you're breaking!

3. Request aircraft to squawk STANDBY

- Observe the target go away, then tell them to squawk normal again and observe the target reappear.



Those are the options! You only need to apply ONE of them. More is extra work that doesn't earn you extra pay or any stickers or anything. But boy that'd be nice.

Questions are welcome, I'll leave you with DX's favorite radar ID method. It's the one that uses all the methods in one transmission: "DAL2168 IDENT, squawk standby, reset transponder squawk 4635, turn 30 degrees left vectors for radar identification, squawk normal, radar contact!" Or something like that. Sorry for misquoting you DX.

Happy identifying!

SQ

"Great event guys, but can you pretty please capture that loc?"

Does not equal:

But for goodness sake. Can we please figure out how to intercept the localizer?

Doesn't matter. Do you really think I'm asking too much of pilots? If you can't join a course, you shouldn't be flying in the IFR system. Plain and simple. If that's asking too much, then I'll find better ways to spend my free time.

So i understand that you guys are striving for perfection but are you striving to be real controllers or be the best vatsim controllers?

The majority of the controllers working the event were not real world controllers. We all recognize VATSIM's challenges and strive to be the best VATSIM controllers we can. 

So i understand that you guys are striving for perfection but are you striving to be real controllers or be the best vatsim controllers? Last I checked you are a real controller, when does the line get drawn between a game and real life? In my real plane most of the time one person will be talking while the other is performing the request. On vatsim its just me having to talk, pan my camera around, hope that vpilot is working correct, hope my sim doesn't freeze, adjusting my autopilot, etc... The real FAA did these studies with real airplanes and real pilots. We cannot treat vatsim pilots as real pilots or even these planes as real planes, this has been proven time and time again. You still have to account for the fact that this is a simulation that is not 100% accurate and that the pilots you are working with learned to fly this airplane by watching a video on youtube.

I think you might have slightly missed my point. I agree with you with all of that. My argument for the FAA research and development was solely for traffic flow management. Specifically, how to move airplanes in the way that would be most efficient. Every flight will involve routing, vectors, and altitude assignments, however, the art of traffic management is figuring out when to use those methods of control in a way that is most effective...how to design STARs and OPDs to cater to a specific operation.

Going against what the FAA does at the real facility would be like ordering a steak well done when the head-chef of the restaurant recommends medium-rare. The real system built these procedures because it proved to be the best way to move airplanes. That method shouldn't really effect how much workload the pilot has when flying the airplane. Well, actually, leaving them on the OPD arrival should actually reduce their workload. So make that a 4th reason why we don't use all that empty airspace in the TRACON.

...With video evidence.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6m2Tt7JrT3Q

Thanks for everyone who flew into the ZMP FNO last Friday, it could very well have been one of the most enjoyable FNO's that I've ever worked.

But for goodness sake. Can we please figure out how to intercept the localizer? Go ahead and watch that timelapse linked above... Someone counted 44 (FORTY-FOUR) localizer overshoots. Our final controllers got their butts handed to them because of how much extra hand holding they had to do on the final because of people that can't be bothered to hit the APP button on their autopilot.

Also, fly your assigned speed please.

Also, X-Plane users with slow frame rates: https://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?/files/file/26517-autospeed/

Notice how much of an impact every overshoot has on the aircraft behind them. It snowballs really fast and if the traffic flow doesn't have natural breaks to allow the final to recover, poop hits the fan really fast.

But anyway, it was fun, thanks for flying in.

Quote from: Shane VanHoven on July 15, 2018, 02:12:48 AM

Bringing back an old post cause I was messing around in the sim again tonight. Here's the death scenario for M98... Basically running finals to MSP at the max rate for about 25 minutes...combined. Normally we'd have final de-combined north and south, but for training purposes, and cause who doesn't like pain, we combined them. This scenario is basically ran at the very end of training just to see what the absolute breaking point of the student ends up being. I'm curious how other facilities in VATUSA progress students through radar training! Start them slow and work them up through busier problems? Break down each TRACON position one at a time? Let me know what you guys do!

Shane where would I find the Keyboard UI for Euroscope's Simulator?

I can't remember where I got it. It's called ESKey, maybe one of the other Euroscope users on here can point you in the right direction.

Quote from: Daniel Everman on July 15, 2018, 04:36:43 PM

Quote from: Matthew Kosmoski on July 15, 2018, 03:18:16 PM

I'll make the argument that death files are not training tools here:  They're toys.  They're abused to make students do things they're likely not ready nor capable of.

Don't get me wrong, they're fun once you're comfortable and learn some tricks of the trade, but subjecting new students to them seems to do more harm than good.

With respect, I think you missed this part of Shane's post:

Quote from: Shane VanHoven on July 15, 2018, 02:12:48 AM

This scenario is basically ran at the very end of training just to see what the absolute breaking point of the student ends up being.

No, I very much caught that part.  I don't think it changes the situation at all.  What value does driving a student to a "breaking point" bring to the table?  As an instructor, we should be able to derive that very information without attempting to defile the student.  If you can't, you aren't spending enough time learning the student.

Maybe you should just see yourself out of the thread before you make even more of a fool of yourself. Every single one of the radar developmentals at our facility experience that scenario. They end up wanting more. Maybe this is because we actually take a great deal of pride in being the best we can be, and it shows when we host events and are actually capable of keeping the final contained inside the final controllers' airspace.

Just because you might be incapable or unwilling to be a better controller doesn't mean everyone else on the network can't.

Bringing back an old post cause I was messing around in the sim again tonight. Here's the death scenario for M98... Basically running finals to MSP at the max rate for about 25 minutes...combined. Normally we'd have final de-combined north and south, but for training purposes, and cause who doesn't like pain, we combined them. This scenario is basically ran at the very end of training just to see what the absolute breaking point of the student ends up being. I'm curious how other facilities in VATUSA progress students through radar training! Start them slow and work them up through busier problems? Break down each TRACON position one at a time? Let me know what you guys do!