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 - Harold Rutila

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 19
The Control Room Floor / Need C1s for an Event
« on: December 22, 2011, 05:52:36 PM »
If you're free on Friday, December 30th, and you're a C1-rated member, I could use your assistance for the Denver ARTCC FNO. We're almost fully staffed down below (TRACON/ATCT), but I could use 2 additional hands to work some high sectors at Denver Center. We are anticipating a lot of traffic.

General Discussion / C3 Rating
« on: December 02, 2011, 08:44:33 PM »
Exactly. I'm honestly a bit shocked that people thought those banners were the coolest things since voice ATIS. We need commitment from each and every member who wants to become a controller. We highly encourage staff participation if that member is capable of providing it. The 1,000 hour banner isn't resume-type material. Neither is a C3.

NOTAMs / New Honolulu ATM Selected
« on: December 02, 2011, 12:23:46 PM »
Congrats Danny!

The Control Room Floor / ATC Headsets
« on: December 02, 2011, 08:38:05 AM »
Quote from: Kevin Kelm
Foot pedal idea seems like a good one. Due to the very old codecs used by VRC, I honestly don't think a quality microphone is worth really worth it besides for controller comfort. Its amazing how much controllers sound alike because of the current codecs; we'll see what happens with vStars.
Trust me, a good quality microphone makes all the difference between sounding like talking through a can of Progresso or actually being understandable. Not all pilots use the "realistic VHF frequency" setting, either. And how is vSTARS going to change the network codec?

The Control Room Floor / WHERE ARE THE VIDEOS?
« on: December 02, 2011, 08:34:37 AM »
Quote from: Kevin Kelm
I laugh every time I hear Kyle's cheesy sign off: "This is Kyle Warner, frequency changed approved..."
I do a facepalm every time I hear that. Hahh

General Discussion / Proof that the VATUSA exam questions are misleading
« on: November 28, 2011, 03:53:09 PM »
Quote from: Isak Moebius
My point to make is that the wording of the questions above and the questions themselves should really only be focused on how the positions work on VATSIM. For example the Approach Controller Primary Function: On VATSIM the APP controller also controls Departure and that is how it is taught in my ARTCC from what I hear almost every other ARTCC. So when I come into a test with practical training and experience on the APP controller position and see the word Approach Controller it is obvious to assume that the APP controller is controlling both positions because well VATUSA is a VATSIM controller training environment and none of this training should be used for real life controller training as the disclaimer states.
Purely for the sake of education:

Don't let your VATSIM callsign make you think differently about your radio callsign. In terminal radar, if you are providing departure control services, you should be called "Seattle Departure" by the pilot and yourself on initial contact with that pilot. Likewise, if you are providing approach control service, you should be called "Seattle Approach" by the pilot and yourself on initial contact with that pilot. This is how it's done in every terminal radar facility throughout the US. Some of those facilities do split the normal departure and arrival airspace corridors into two or more positions, but it makes no difference.

In Denver, the guy manning DEN_L_DEP is controlling the departure corridors in the Denver TRACON, but he also works the satellite airport sectors, too. When aircraft contact that controller, he identifies himself as "Denver Approach." The VATSIM callsign is simply a means of helping controllers identify who is who, and pilots place way too much reliance on those callsigns when flying in the virtual system. The same goes for NORCAL and SOCAL Departure and Approach.

General Discussion / Basic Controller Exam and choice of ARTCC
« on: November 26, 2011, 09:39:19 PM »

On what basis do you feel it is appropriate to lecture us about the VATUSA test center policies? Just curious.

General Discussion / Proof that the VATUSA exam questions are misleading
« on: November 26, 2011, 09:27:29 PM »
I'm also going to suggest you contact Tom Seeley or Gary to clarify your points. In any organization, professional or volunteer, you'd be pretty heavily reprimanded for posting the exact copies of test questions and answers in a public forum to begin with.

Simple Insanity / Typical, typical...
« on: November 25, 2011, 01:44:48 PM »
Quote from: Tom Seeley
[img]\\\" border=\\\"0\\\" class=\\\"linked-image\\\" /]

General Discussion / Happy Thanksgiving
« on: November 25, 2011, 01:42:00 PM »
Indeed! Hope everyone had a great Thanksgiving.

General Discussion / Oh no...
« on: November 15, 2011, 09:08:40 PM »
I'm not signing a petition; this is a real world issue with real world consequences. One poster says "I fly online with MSFS and not having charts would very much ruin the exprience. Also, what about real pilots who use laptops to bring up charts? Come on FAA, this isn't cool." How does that at all substantiate the importance of the issues? It doesn't, and there are many others like it on that petition. Write Congress. Here's why:

Congress has actually authorized the FAA to do this under this law: According to the law, the FAA cannot make a profit, though I suppose the numbers could be skewed (and then reported later by the inspector general or something).

There are many different solutions they could take in reducing operating expenses that do not include initiating a fee. They could switch to all paper charts again, and then let websites digitize and distribute for free. They could limit their own digital distribution service to third party companies. In combination or separately, Congress could get rid of the provision that allows us to be double-taxed.

One other major concern I have is that VFR pilots will no longer care to look up information on IFR approaches that are being conducted at airports. Free distribution especially contributes to safety of flight in this instance.

I'm still wondering if anyone knows about any other federal government services that require fees. Just curious.

General Discussion / Oh no...
« on: November 14, 2011, 09:06:08 PM »
Quote from: Tim Farrell
Postal Service (broke)
Amtrak (broke)
Medicare (broke)
Social Security (broke  - backed by Treasury bills, no cash)
Healthcare (on the verge of chaos)
Fannie Mae (bailed out with stimulus money and still asking for more)
Freddie Mac (bailed out with stimulus money and still asking for more)

...and now it appears the FAA may not be far behind.  
And amen to that!

General Discussion / Oh no...
« on: November 14, 2011, 09:04:06 PM »

The problem is that when it comes to fees, proposals for them rarely disappear unless there is a very vigorous opposition to them. User fees in both the Bush and Obama administration are a prime example of that, and we have AOPA and EAA to thank for their lobbying against that issue. I feel the same way about the chart fees; in a way, it's almost like because user fees are no longer on the table, they want to collect funds from chart distribution, which to me is unacceptable.

Also, I feel that 3rd parties will start subscription services as a means of surviving this. Individuals will have access via those parties.

General Discussion / Oh no...
« on: November 14, 2011, 06:36:29 PM »
What I meant by petition was to petition Congress members, not necessarily sign a huge email or anything. Had to make it quick because I was on a mobile .

Somebody can correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought at one time you could get the charts directly from the FAA for the cost of shipping. Am I wrong or...?

I was also thinking about the FOIA requirement for these plates. I guess the real question is "Can a government bureaucracy can charge for products it creates using taxpayer dollars? It's almost like they're double taxing us.

Does DoT charge for anything else? Road maps? Waterways? I don't know how those systems work. I can't think of anything I have to buy from our government bureaucracies, though.

General Discussion / Oh no...
« on: November 14, 2011, 12:13:32 PM »
This makes no sense. For 50 years the FAA has provided charts for free (except for the cost of shipping), and all of a sudden they terminate that service, switch to an all-online distribution, and then decide to start charging for it? What is this? There are so many online distributors who get the charts, house them on their own servers, and allow users to access them for free, which reduces the burden on the FAA servers. The more sensible thing would be to simply distribute the charts to such companies as Airnav, FlightAware, etc. and let them continue with their service (OH, and keep people employed at those locations, too). This is clearly another tax/fee hike that somebody in the DoT wants because they're completely incapable of doing any sort of budget management. Totally inexcusable!

Might be time for another petition just like we did with the AIRAC commercialization several years ago.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 19