1
News / Re: New TA for ZTL!
« on: April 08, 2017, 11:49:17 PM »
Fantastic choice!! Congrats
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.
Just to clarify... It is indeed the pilot's responsibility... And solely the pilot's responsibility. That said, and I think what folks are portraying here, most controllers like to reach out to play nice in the sandbox. Nice in the sandbox is good. Mark and Chris and others in this thread that are looking out for the best interests of all, including teaching the pilots, are definitely on the right track.
But I still hate the .contactme. It's a crutch.
I've said it a million times before. I'm not a fan of the .contactme. It is unrealistic. Another pilot responsibility is to be monitoring unicom at all times when in uncontrolled airspace. So assuming a pilot doesn't realize he entered controlled airspace, that's the way I reach out. It emulates a controller reaching out to a pilot on guard (121.5) which happens all day long RW. When I log on and see that there are people in my airspace that may not be aware that I just logged on, is send a text message on unicom that says something to the effect of: "XXX_CTR is now online, 1xx.xxx" This gets, on average, about 65% of the pilots out there who are dutifully monitoring unicom to call me.
The others, I generally send another message, on unicom, directed at their callsign, that says Contact XXX_CTR on 1xx.xxx For those controllers/Facility Engineers that choose to add it to their facility's standard alias file, it could look like
.cme Contact $callsign on $com1
I use the .contactme as a last resort. It it the least realistic (the hailing attempts on unicom mirror what the RW would do on guard), but sends a clear message. By the time I've sent the third request for contact, the pilot has now neglected their responsibility to monitor for online ATC and contact ATC for a decent number of minutes (I usually don't send .contactme messages for at least 15 minutes, unless there is a traffic conflict brewing) (and their situational awareness tools (e.g. VATSpy, Servinfo, etc.) should have updated, showing online ATC), and have also neglected their responsibility to monitor unicom. In my estimation (because I stopped collecting hard data months ago), when I've been online for 15+ minutes and start to send the .contactme messages, 80+% of pilots aren't paying attention, and fewer than 20% are newbie-ish that need some assistance/reassurance.
I would wager that the vast majority of controllers on VATSIM just rely on the .contactme crutch right out of the chute, most likely because that's the way they were taught. That's also likely why we hear a lot of pilots say, "Oh, I was just waiting for the .contactme message; everyone else does that...." That's true in Europe. I hope to hell we are not training our controllers to use the .contactme message as a crutch, but as a last resort. Please stop propagating anything along the lines of "if a pilot wanders into your controlled airspace, immediately send a .contactme" or "pilots should wait for a .contactme". It is the pilot's responsibility to contact ATC, not ATC's responsibility to contact the pilots (reference the VATSIM Code of Conduct, section B3). Much has been written about this over the years, with the main argument that pilots have only one controller to contact, while controllers may be working several, indeed a lot of, aircraft, working multiple approaches and terminal operations at multiple airports.
Stop feeding the pilots fish; teach them how to fish! Just please do it in a kind, helpful and respectful manner. Otherwise, we'll have a different problem on our hands.
Too harsh and we lose people. Too loose and we lose people. That sweet spot in the middle where everyone gets better/smarter and has more fun is a tough place to find, but a great place to be. Let's all look for that sweet spot that maximizes the enjoyment of the network for everyone....
I don't get paid enough!
Thanks, Nicholas--I would very much enjoy meeting up with either (or both) of you sometime--SDF and IND are both easy drives for me! (Hmmm...CVG is about right in the middle *coughcough*
Right now, my brain hurts from trying to figure out which vARTCC to sign up for. ZTL and ZOA look like they have some really active and well-organized training departments, but ultimately, I'd like to someday control out of ZMA. Decisions, decisions!
*Later that hour*
Soooo...I jumped on ZTL TS as you recommended (I'm a total TS n00b, by the way), and while I was text chatting with an innocuous-looking S1 (who seemed very nice), this gentleman popped up:
<16:39:03> "Josh Davidson": hey whats your VATSIM CID?
<16:43:00> "Jason Powell": 1374988
<16:43:27> "Josh Davidson": OK cool
<16:43:43> "Jason Powell": Keeping the riff-raff out? LOL
<16:43:52> "Josh Davidson": I highly recommend flying before controlling. It makes it easier. Also note this TS if ro Atlanta ARTCC controllers/members only.
<16:44:06> "Josh Davidson": That's why they block entry
<16:45:10> "Jason Powell": Ah, sorry--a ZTL member over in one of the VATSIM forums recommended that I connect and try to chat with folks about choosing ZTL as my home.
<16:45:31> "Josh Davidson": Do you mind advising who?
<16:45:36> "Jason Powell": Let me look
<16:45:50> "Jason Powell": I have about 8,000 tabs open.
<16:46:16> "Josh Davidson": Well, I can tell you the Training is fantastic, the staff is nice and supportive, and the only artcc that lets S1s control tower ;0
<16:46:19> "Josh Davidson": xD
<16:46:40> "Jason Powell": Sweet.
<16:46:52> "Jason Powell": Nicholas Watkins was the one who referred me.
<16:46:56> "Josh Davidson": ahh OK.
Aaaaaaand I was suddenly banned from the server (I have no idea who did it--Josh seemed very nice, and I think was unlikely to have done it).
Ugh.
JP