Controllers Don't Respond to Text

[Avi Rosenberg]

I was flying at miami the other day as a /r pilot and I kept trying to contact the controller but he wouldn't respond. He would respond to other pilots and other pilots could see my messages. This also happened at the Cincinnati event today with three separate controllers. What should I do in these situations?

[David Stone]

Avi, while I can not speak for anyone else, I will take lead on the issue during the KCVG event tonight. You did not mention which controllers it was you had an issue with but I will offer a generic answer which will likely cover a lot of situations. Often during events there are many operations drawing the focus of the controller, trying to maintain situational awareness of the airspace they are responsible for. And unfortunately this will often overshadow an incoming text message. And to compound this, if there is a lot of chatter on the Controller Chat line that message may get pushed up before the controller even realizes it's there. No, this is not the idea response but unfortunately it can happen without intent to ignore anyone. And for the controllers at ZID, I apologize and hope we will do better in the future.

[Fady Botros]

Send me an email about the time with Miami. My email is atm@zmaartcc.net.

Cheers,
Fady

[Evan Reiter]

What should I do in these situations?

Unfortunately, all you can do is keep trying...just like when you try to check on via voice and don't get an answer. After a few attempts, go back to the previous frequency and let them know you couldn't make contact. Or, if you were coming from UNICOM, try to reach any OTHER controller you can and advise them "I was supposed to reach 127.97 but the controller hasn't acknowledged after a few attempts, confirm you're able to see this message?" or similar. I suppose you could also try a private message to the controller, though chances are if they're not watching their radio message, a PM might not get much further.

If you're flying as "/r", which is a perfectly valid thing to do, then the controllers are responsible for monitoring their messages and responding to you. Of course, ensure you're sending an actual radio message and not a private message when you do check on. (Sounds like you were doing it right.)

As others have said, it can get very busy and sometimes the radio message doesn't get our attention as much as it should. It's not a great situation but it's also understandable when you're handling the volume of traffic we see during FNOs; it often exceeds what a real-world controller would be handling.

[Avi Rosenberg]

Thank you all for the help and for responding so quickly. I do try to go up to the next controller or the previous one but when there is just one that doesn't work. I guess I'll just have to keep trying. And to David: at KCVG it was the delivery, and east ground, although both responded eventually after multiple calls and after I contacted other aircraft via pm and they contacted them for me.

[Robert Shearman Jr]

There are many, many legitimate reasons why a pilot should operate /r.  And if you fall under one of those, then please ignore the rest of this post.

If your reason for flying /r is something like "mic fright," then consider giving two-way voice a try.  It's much easier on the controllers, you'll get better service during events, and you may find the process much less burdensome than typing and flying.  Don't be afraid to sound like an idiot the first few times.  Trust me when I say it's unavoidable and we all did too. ;-)

[Avi Rosenberg]

There are many, many legitimate reasons why a pilot should operate /r.  And if you fall under one of those, then please ignore the rest of this post.

If your reason for flying /r is something like "mic fright," then consider giving two-way voice a try.  It's much easier on the controllers, you'll get better service during events, and you may find the process much less burdensome than typing and flying.  Don't be afraid to sound like an idiot the first few times.  Trust me when I say it's unavoidable and we all did too. ;-)

I do fly /v sometimes I just have people sleeping at nights and don't want to wake them up but I do try to fly with voice as much as possible.

[Kyle Sanders]

There are many, many legitimate reasons why a pilot should operate /r.  And if you fall under one of those, then please ignore the rest of this post.

If your reason for flying /r is something like "mic fright," then consider giving two-way voice a try.  It's much easier on the controllers, you'll get better service during events, and you may find the process much less burdensome than typing and flying.  Don't be afraid to sound like an idiot the first few times.  Trust me when I say it's unavoidable and we all did too. ;-)

I do fly /v sometimes I just have people sleeping at nights and don't want to wake them up but I do try to fly with voice as much as possible.

It is my opinion that this a VERY valid reason to fly /R. However, like said above, events might not be the most ideal place to do it haha

[Jason Cochran]

I don't intend to hijack this thread. /r makes a lot of sense for the reasons mentioned above. Sorry this happened to you, I hope it wasn't me; I haven't controlled that airspace for a while, so I doubt it was. If I ever ignore a text message, it's because I got distracted and it's never on purpose.

In my opinion, in 2020 (when every computer has a sound card, headphones are dirt cheap, and bandwidth is not as scarce as it once was) there is not much excuse for /t. The only valid reason for /t would be a hearing or other disability that prevents /r operation.

Text-only pilots increase workload for everyone and kill the realism for both controllers and fellow pilots. I believe VATSIM would do itself a favor by formally restricting /t to only those with a need.

I am required to say that my opinion does necessarily represent the opinion of the Miami ARTCC or its staff (except me, I guess).