ZLA knocked it out of the park, as usual.  A particular shining star for me was the Center controller who worked the northwestern sector, who handled my VFR-turned-IFR flight from KSBP to KSNA.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kS5w9lgG5fQ&t=3103s

Can't wait for the next one!

I've been pleased to see more events lately where two or more adjoining facilities partner up, and more than just a pair of focus airports are staffed up.  That fosters a higher level of regional traffic without it all being in a single-file line.  Despite all of the work & coordination that goes into creating & executing those, I hope that trend continues!

"...descend at pilot discretion..." {...} In such a case, the pilot need not start the descent immediately.

... and in an airliner with a standard FMC the usual pilot input is to adjust the cleared altitude on the Autopilot Master Control Panel (front dashboard) to the new cleared altitude, and let the FMC manage the descent's starting point and rate.

If a controller gives you a hard altitude, they will use the phrase "...descend and maintain..." followed by an altitude. If given this clearance, the pilot should start a descent promptly to the assigned altitude. We expect jets to descend at a rate of at least 1,000 feet per minute

And as a pilot you can either (a) put the plane into a Vertical Speed hold at -1000fpm until the VNAV path "catches up with you," then re-engage VNAV; or, some FMCs have a "DESCENT" page where you can activate a "DES NOW" mode which manages all of that for you.

... and, apologies if the original poster is already aware of that.  I'm just posting this info for anyone else who runs across it and wants verification on how the two situations can be handled from the pilot's perspective.

I think one thing that sometimes gets lost is the fact that a person with a S3 rating is still a student even when they have achieved their major endorsement.  Most of us who have earned our C1's are still students especially for those who do not have the aviation background as part of their career.

In the field AND the hobby of aviation, whether pilots, controllers are both -- we are ALL still students, ALL the time.

I tried to get ZOA setup with VATSTAR but it fell apart because we don't meet some of the requirements they've set for a few check rides.

Untrue.  It fell apart when I stopped receiving responses to emails about setting up a time to meet & discuss.  Let's get back in touch & try again to get it moving.

That is great to hear.  Now, will you commit to tightening up the level of of information and instruction your program provides regarding pilot to ATC communication, and the pilots' ability to fly basic arrival and departure procedures, regardless of what the VATSIM standards require?

What you guys all seem to be asking for -- discussion about communication, how to fly SIDs / STARs / Approaches, how to pilot a plane rather than program an FMC -- we have all of that on our site already.  It's called the P4 rating.  What we don't have is any compulsory reason anyone should take the P4.  We could try to include it in the P1 course but why would we duplicate?  Holding a P1 basically says you know (or have acknowledged, at least) how to connect to the network, that you aren't supposed to spawn on runways or taxiways, that you know how to figure out which controller you should be talking to, you have some idea how to handle it when your weather and/or scenery doesn't match everyone else's, and that you know you're not supposed to be chasing airliners with fighter jets.  We can re-design our P1 to include the full gamut of IFR communication and procedure but then what purpose would the P4 serve?

What we lack -- and what has been discussed on this forum and VATSIM forums endlessly and without any change in status for at least eight years now -- is the ability to hold pilots accountable for any competency standards.  What use is a P4 if no one takes it?  Forget about VATSTAR -- look at the WORLDWIDE stats for the Pilot Training Division (http://ptd.vatsim.net/statistics).  387 pilots WORLDWIDE have a P4 rating.  Even in the EXTREMELY optiistic hope that they are a subset of the 80,000 members who have been active in the last six months, that's less than half of one percent.  If half of P4 holders are no longer active, then less than a QUARTER of a percent of active members have taken it.

Even for the P1, we're fighting a losing battle.  PTD as a whole issued its 10,000th rating in February of 2017.  We're now at 11,186.  That's about 60 ratings per month.  Based on the rate that new CID numbers are climbing, VATSIM gets around 2,500 new member registrations per month.  That would mean less than three percent of new members enroll in a Pilot Rating.  That assumes CID numbers are sequential; even if they're not, let's say the last digit is a checksum -- I have no idea.  That's still 250 new registered members a month and 75% of them are not taking a Pilot Rating course.

We can do everything possible as far as outreach with our programs -- which as you all know, I passionately believe in, even if some of you think you could do it better.  And if you can, then please, have at it -- I'm not in a competition.  The more resources we have to improve pilot education on the network, the better -- and if someone comes up with better methods than ours, I'll certainly take note.  But we are fighting a losing battle as long as it's completely voluntary.  Until / unless VATSIM can come up with a plan to hold pilots accountable for a basic level of competency, this is what we will face at every FNO.

And I'm still a bit sour following the whole attempted vatstar "premium" subscription model, personally.  The fact that those words are still on the site at all is potentially misleading to unknowing students.

For what it's worth, I agree with you.  But at this point (seven months later), every reference to premium subscriptions SHOULD be gone off our website.  If you see any I'm not seeing, by all means, email me screenshots, as I am as anxious as you to put that escapade behind us.

See we learn a little each time we fly...

The fact that you're here asking the question puts you miles ahead of many others up in our virtual skies!

Our 900th Certification Celebration flight from KBUF to KERI and back to KBUF is just seven hours away!  The event commences at 2000z (4pm EDT); meet in our Discord server then, and we'll start getting clearances and expect to begin departing between 2015-2020z.

The question is: IFR or VFR?

As of this writing (1300z / 9am EDT), the forecasts are as follows:

KBUF 011120Z 0112/0212 18005KT P6SM SCT035
  FM011500 20010KT P6SM SCT040
  FM012200 19008KT P6SM SCT250
  FM020400 20008KT P6SM BKN040

KERI 011125Z 0112/0212 15012KT P6SM SCT250
  FM011400 17012KT P6SM BKN250
  FM012000 21008KT P6SM BKN100
  PROB30 0122/0201 4SM TSRA BKN030CB

In laymans terms: at Buffalo, winds are expected to be around 10 knots out of heading 200, visibility six miles or better, scattered clouds at 4000 feet.  At Erie, we should possibly expect winds from 210 at 8 knots, visibility six miles or better, and a broken cloud layer at 10,000 feet.  Then back at Buffalo by 2200z we might be seeing cloud cover lift to scattered at 25,000.

If those forecasts hold up, we should be able to do this VFR right down the Lake Erie coast, which I think would be fun!  I am always given a little pause by a scattered cloud layer, though -- to operate legally as VFR you have to be able to dodge them (stay 500 feet below, 1000 feet above, and one-third of a nautical mile laterally away from clouds at all times).  Plus there's that line in the KERI forecast about a chance of a thunderstorm between 2200z and 0100z.  To me that's iffy enough to make me think about filing IFR so I can just go right through the clouds if I want; the storms, I would probably want to steer clear of.  It's up to you!

FILING IFR:

From Buffalo to Erie, I would file KBUF (BUF7) JHW V270 ERI KERI.  It's only 108 miles so I wouldn't plan to cruise any higher than 8000.  The Buffalo Seven is just a vectored departure that says to fly runway heading (or other heading as assigned by ATC) until passing 3000 feet, then expect vectors to your first VOR.  Initial altitude is 10000 or filed cruise, whichever is lower.  Jamestown VOR (JHW) is on 114.7.  V270 is on the 266 outbound from JHW.  Erie has a runway 6 and 24.  With the probability being that we'll be landing west, in practice I would expect ATC to break us off of V270 at or before WABOR (DME 33) for vectors to final; if not, passing WABOR I would be switching to Erie VOR (109.4) and navigating in on the 265 inbound (charted as 085 outbound) if using radio navigation.  We should be in good enough weather for visual approaches, but, there's an ILS in either direction at KERI we should have tuned for reference / backup.

From Erie back to Buffalo, there are no SIDs out of KERI nor any STARs into KBUF, so I would file KERI ERI V270 JHW V115 BUF KBUF if you're /A (expecting radar vectors to join V270 rather than actually flying to Erie VOR after departure), or, KERI WABOR V270 JHW V115 BUF KBUF if you're /G (and expect radar vectors WABOR then on course).  Again, JHW VOR is on 114.7 and we're inbound on 086 (charted 266) and outbound on 032.  Cruise, recommended, would be 7000 or 9000.  KBUF has a 5/23 and a 14/32, and I would think we're expecting 23 for arrival if the forecast holds true.  Again, we should be in good enough weather for vectors to visual, but, tune the ILS to give you that backup reference if you're given 5, 23, or 32 for arrival.

FILING VFR:

If the weather holds up, I think it would be fun to file and fly this VFR and fly it right down the coast of Lake Erie!  It will save us about 20nm and should be more more exciting as well.

From Buffalo to Erie, I'd file it KBUF to KERI with the route showing as "VFR SOUTHWESTBOUND" with a listed cruise of 8500 (with discretion to remain lower if cloud cover dictates).  Call would be "Buffalo Delivery, {callsign} is a {type} with information {ATIS}, request VFR southwest-bound departure, flight following at 8500 to Erie."  (or, "... negative flight following.")  We're in Buffalo's Class C until 10nm out from the airfield, then we're in Class E and free to navigate as we please.  There's a medium-sized Class E airport, Dunkirk (KDKK), about halfway in between; it would be good to be above 2500 AGL (3200 MSL, there) at that point just to avoid any conflicts with its traffic pattern.  KERI is a Class D with a small TRSA extending out 10nm from the airport and up to 6,000 feet MSL.   I would tune Erie VOR on 109.4 and, since it's 6nm southwest of the airport, I would be in touch with their Approach controller no later than 16 DME; to be courteous I would pad that by another 10 and initiate the call at around 26 DME.  That would be "Erie Approach, {callsign} is a {type} with information {ATIS}, 26 miles northeast of Erie VOR at {altitude}, inbound for full-stop."

For the return trip I'd file it KERI to KBUF "VFR NORTHEASTBOUND" with cruise listed as 7500.  Call to KERI (Ground, probably) would be the same as the above: "... {callsign} is a {type} with information {ATIS}, request VFR northeast-bound departure, flight following at 7500 to Buffalo."  Again, once clear of KERI Departure's area (although radar services are optional once outside of the Class D at 4nm out), I'd join the coastline, but tune BUF on 116.4 and contact Buffalo Approach no later than around 25 DME to establish two-way comms and enter the Class C: "Buffalo Approach, {callsign} is a {type} with information {ATIS}, 25 miles southwest of Buffalo VOR at {altitude}, inbound for full-stop."

Either way, it should be a good time, and we hope to see you in our Discord server starting at 2000z!