Show Posts
1
The Control Room Floor / Re: Pilot Expectations, cont...
« on: July 06, 2021, 07:01:54 PM »
I agree with pretty much all points on this subject. Everything from this point forward is in my opinion. Bottom Line: Pilot proficiency is lacking and should be significantly improved. Pretty simple (but may take a lot of work) solution to said problem: Like controllers, pilots need to be trained and certified (either via self-study, face-to-face), prior to being turned loose. Anything short of this will yield the same results we've seen for years. However, like Robert said, there are plenty of pilots who are capable of doing their own self study to make themselves proficient enough to fly so restricting every pilot on the network is not necessary and will probably cause more headache.
Problem: By design, there are significantly more pilots than controllers so training such a volume face-to-face like we do controllers probably just isn't feasible.
Possible Solutions:
- Pilot Deviation Reporting - No brainier and everyone above has indicated exactly how I'd go about it. Pilots need to be able to see it so they can learn and grow. Should be managed by the Facility with the ability to be elevated higher if further action needs to be taken.
- Pilot Rating System similar to Pilotege - Their system works. What I like most about their system is you don't have to use it, but you better be good. If you are not good, use this program to get good. Oh by the way, no exam, just get on the network fly and prove that you can perform with a entire network of people around basically 24/7 to help you understand complex concepts/material.
- Controller kill Pilot capability - Remove the problem child when they are a problem (even if not on purpose) and file the report. Maybe they didn't know, but now they do and everyone can learn and grow. The reality is SUP's (to no fault of their own) are poorly equipped to actually decide if a pilot is worthy of a kill as it relates directly to air traffic operations in a "timely" and fair manner. The best equipped people to decide that is the facility. Guy who's frame rates aren't cooperating, kill. Guy who spawns on runway, kill. Guy who leaves computer 20 miles from the field on final freq, kill. File the report. They learn, your scope is manageable again, everybody happy. I imagine the process of the ".kill" is probably more complex, but you get the idea.
There is a certification and operation for those who choose that they in fact do not want to do the work either on their own or via a program to get smarter and more proficient. It's called the PPL and Visual flight rules. I have never complained with seeing a group flight of 30 aircraft in my airspace doing flips, tricks, and whatever else they do on unicom in uncontrolled airspace. The guy that doesn't want to do the work can still fly from ATL to SEA... just below FL180 and with basic radar services. Everyone still gets to play.
I realize that in practice, this is a gross oversimplification of what would be required to establish such a system and VATSIM/VATUSA has come such an incredibly long way over the last year. Most of what needs to be said has already been said and I ultimately want to provide my +1 for this issue.
V/R
Kaylan
Problem: By design, there are significantly more pilots than controllers so training such a volume face-to-face like we do controllers probably just isn't feasible.
Possible Solutions:
- Pilot Deviation Reporting - No brainier and everyone above has indicated exactly how I'd go about it. Pilots need to be able to see it so they can learn and grow. Should be managed by the Facility with the ability to be elevated higher if further action needs to be taken.
- Pilot Rating System similar to Pilotege - Their system works. What I like most about their system is you don't have to use it, but you better be good. If you are not good, use this program to get good. Oh by the way, no exam, just get on the network fly and prove that you can perform with a entire network of people around basically 24/7 to help you understand complex concepts/material.
- Controller kill Pilot capability - Remove the problem child when they are a problem (even if not on purpose) and file the report. Maybe they didn't know, but now they do and everyone can learn and grow. The reality is SUP's (to no fault of their own) are poorly equipped to actually decide if a pilot is worthy of a kill as it relates directly to air traffic operations in a "timely" and fair manner. The best equipped people to decide that is the facility. Guy who's frame rates aren't cooperating, kill. Guy who spawns on runway, kill. Guy who leaves computer 20 miles from the field on final freq, kill. File the report. They learn, your scope is manageable again, everybody happy. I imagine the process of the ".kill" is probably more complex, but you get the idea.
There is a certification and operation for those who choose that they in fact do not want to do the work either on their own or via a program to get smarter and more proficient. It's called the PPL and Visual flight rules. I have never complained with seeing a group flight of 30 aircraft in my airspace doing flips, tricks, and whatever else they do on unicom in uncontrolled airspace. The guy that doesn't want to do the work can still fly from ATL to SEA... just below FL180 and with basic radar services. Everyone still gets to play.
I realize that in practice, this is a gross oversimplification of what would be required to establish such a system and VATSIM/VATUSA has come such an incredibly long way over the last year. Most of what needs to be said has already been said and I ultimately want to provide my +1 for this issue.
V/R
Kaylan
