VATUSA Forums
Login
  1. VATUSA
  2. VATUSA Forums
  3. Profile of Matthew Blauser
  4. Show Posts
  5. Messages

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 - Matthew Blauser

Pages: [1]
1
General Discussion / Re: Improper use of airline callsign?
« on: October 05, 2017, 05:22:45 AM »
Quote from: Evan Reiter on October 04, 2017, 08:57:19 PM
VRD26 for a C172 a little silly.

If your intent was to educate and inform then I suggest that words like "unrealistic" and "silly" are a very poor way to initiate that conversation.

Quote from: Evan Reiter on October 04, 2017, 08:57:19 PM
I apologize if my attempt to help and provide some additional information came across as belittling, rude, or as unsolicited. I was simply trying to help.

Based on your usage of words like "unrealistic" and "silly" I struggle to understand how you thought I would take this any other way.

You say that your intent was to share information, but after I indicated I was perfectly happy with my callsign you continued with the conversation. (as per your own representation of the conversation)

If your intent was to educate and inform, what were you informing me of? Not informing me of CoC. Not informing me of VATSIM policy. Informing me of "realism"? Realism according to whom? By what standard are you determining what is "real enough"? Is there a listing of acceptable callsign and aircraft pairings that I can reference? Is this realism policy something that is written down somewhere, or is it just according to the current controller's whims on that particular day?

VRD is a real code. Redwood is a real callsign. C172 is a real aircraft. By what authority does a controller get to decide that the combination of those three is "unrealistic"? Do you have access to all the Virgin records to prove that they never-ever owned or flew a C172? You don't think its possible that ol' Richard charged a C172 to the company account and took it for a spin one day?

I had invested a lot of time combing the Wikipedia pages and picking out realistic callsigns that I thought were interesting. The fact that I put together that VRD was callsign "redwood" was something that I was proud of.

Given that context I hope you can see how someone flippantly dismissing it as "unrealistic" and "silly" in just a few lines of text might provoke a reaction.

Consider for a moment if I had been flying a C172 VFR with a callsign for an airline that closed 10 years ago. Would that have triggered you to shoot off a PM as well? "That airline has been closed for 10 years, that's unrealistic, that's silly..."

If I want to fly aircraft or routes from 20 years ago are you going to say that its silly? If I'm flying a 747-300 are you going to swoop in and tell me "oh, no.. that airline only actually flies 747-200s"? I will tell you right now, letting me fly any commercial jet is completely unrealistic. Even counting all the sim time I don't have anywhere near the required hours!

Based on all the gradations of "realism" I don't think that any controller should be using their position to express their personal opinions about realism while in the sim. If you express an opinion about realism in the forums I can choose not to listen. When a controller PM me in the sim I don't have any choice, I'm forced to listen. And if they use that position to push their own personal views on realism that aren't supported by any policy then they are over-stepping.

I've actually decided to rotate out the VRD callsign in favor of RVR for Raven Air. Now if you feel the need to research which aircraft you would find "acceptable" to pair up with this callsign then you go right ahead. If you post it here to the forums I might even take a look.


Matthew
Fort Worth, Texas

2
General Discussion / Improper use of airline callsign?
« on: October 04, 2017, 06:46:26 PM »
I was flying into Martha's Vineyard the other day. I was low and slow VFR in a Cessna 172. I had chosen VRD26 (redwood-26) as my callsign for the flight. During the flight I got a PM from Center. He had some "suggestions" for me regarding my callsign. In the PM the controller let me know that, while not prohibited by Code of Conduct, using an airline callsign for my flight was not "realistic". He further informed me that some might find my use of the callsign "silly".

Starting with his second assertion regarding the "silliness" of my callsign, how does the VATUSA community feel about that? Is it "silly" for me to use an airline callsign flying VFR in a C172?

Looking at his first assertion regarding the "realism" of my callsign, I'd like some help from the community on that point. I'm thinking I don't agree with him, but I'd like some feedback.

Are there realistic situations where a light piston plane on VFR would still be entitled to use an airline callsign? I'm really asking because I'm not clear. I can imagine some situations where this might happen, and want to check with people. Is "airline" and VFR mutually exclusive or are they sometimes compatible?

For example, a "mom and pop" company flying sightseeing tours, or doing for-hire small scale charters. I am thinking that either of these could be realistic situations where a light piston plane flying VFR would be entitled to an airline callsign. Is that correct?

Are sightseeing tours or for-hire private charter required to file IFR? Would they be entitled to an airline callsign? In either case I don't think the equipment is a factor.

Now, all of that aside, I'm going to say that controllers messaging pilots about their choices regarding the "realism" or "silliness" of their callsigns is not in line with my expectations. I'm also going to say that I don't think it makes for a friendly and inviting environment.

Matthew
Fort Worth, Texas

Pages: [1]