Frankfurt Overload Event

[Ericson 0]

I was using Rw as usual but i was unable to hear anything from S_CTR - normal situation during online flying - so i swich to backup ( text ). After hand-off to APP and others controlers i was continuing with voice.And as it was said earlier it is hard to say anything when there are 20-30 people on the channel. :-(start of quote ==> I would suggest a Pilot qualification or rating system of some kind should be implemented ASAP, not only for Overloads, but for general daily use. <== End of quoteI will second that - rating system for pilots is a very good idea :9regardsEricson

[marcom 139]

Yes Vatsim definitely needs a rating system for pilots!!In the beginning of times (Satco :-) ) this was not necessary as the size of the network was much smaller. But now, with real world ops at some airports (for example Frankfurt!) we do need pilots that are able to turn with more than 10 degrees of bank angle! You can not know how extremely frustrating it is to watch a pilot flying at 170 kias on a downwind 4 miles next to the localizer turn right to intercept it at a 30

[Guest]

I hear you...I would also say that pilots should know the limitations of the aircraft A/P they are flying...hand flying is recommended ;-)Just one note "in general" for the ATC side...I sometimes find when I am being vectored for an APP, ATC will suddenly start dealing with people on the ground looking for IFR clearance (in the case of an APP controller who is handling GND and CTR for example)...meanwhile I am blowing past the LOC at 30+ degrees 180kts on the last given heading while little Timmy on the ground is asking for his third readback and FP correction, then Timmy does not know the FL's for Eastbound and so on. It's about that time I hit the "APP" lock and make the adjustments myself, the ATC becomes redundant at this point, then they yell at me after for being so presumptuous ;-) The moral here; don't bite off more than you can chew. If you are going to control APP, CTR and GND, focus on one or the other, but don't screw up both or more ;-) When things get busy, focus on your own area. It's not often, but when it does happen, I get angry..."Don't make me angry, you wouldn't like me when I am angry..."Dr. Banner aka The Incredible Hulk.

[Guest MB327]

(Folks, don't get nuts on me here, this is just free thinking)Rob,Go get em with your text/voice ATC theory. I know where you

[Guest]

I like the way you think...I like the Star method..I think I like the hours method even better....less than 40 hours or some kind of line around that time should weed out the newbies from the people who know how to work with ATC properly.I can't write more at the moment, we should discuss this while sucking up some VATSIM bandwidth tonight.Try not to fix anything tonight Mike, you know it will only cause problems ;-)Rob.

[Guest]

Just a note - I can't speak to details but a pilto certification system is in the works on VATSIM....Richard GreenVATUSA4Events and VA Director

[Guest ielchitz]

A few comments....1) Fly ins - The overload type "hey let's ALL fly to XXXX" of event is IMHO generally lame and always a frustrating event. It takes some SERIOUS planning and a lot of skilled controllers to pull it off. The Cross The Pond events are a pretty good example of this - excellent planning (well in advance), and excellent execution by the controllers. Of course it also helps when the pilots all get into this "real world" mode.This is a common phenomena - the pilots start to get excited by all that is happening on the frequency - the other pilots execute and respond quickly (and briefly) and the controller is "all business" I find that many pilots change their acts at this point as they completely focus into "the zone" - as a controller I always try and set the tone on my radio when traffic picks up - I'm not there to chit chat - I'm there to get you where you need to be safely. None of this runway transition stuff - you and every other pilot are going to get the exact same speed, vectors, and altitudes.. any deviation will result in you going to the back of the line .Anyhow - this is one of the reasons we came up with the California Screaming concept - we had a fly in to LAX last year - and it was horrible - on top of us not being prepared - we had traffic backed up so far that aircraft were being held inside of Denver and Albuquerque (sp?) centers. The Criss Crossing of traffic in the southwest seems to work a lot better - and having 250 pilots flying to 20 airports seems to cut down on the delays - as well as increase controller participation. If you have never taken part - I suggest you give it a try.2) Text controllers. Part of me wants to agree with you 100% Rob - while another part of me wantes to disagree 100%. I can totally understand that it is next to impossible to switch to a text only tower controller in bad weather, tight sequencing, at the OM, while hand flying your aircraft, and say "with you OM 25R". Then just as you reach your DH you see him type a clearance to someone or say something ridiculous like "I have your clearance advise ready to copy" (well I've been sitting here waiting for my IFR for 10 minutes already - what do you think I went to the Galley to make myself a sandwich?). The thing is - some people will NEVER be able to use voice due to a variety of reasons - and we can not exclude them. You also have to remember that people have to learn to work somewhere and at somepoint. I'm not sure what the hard fast rule is - but our local rule is that you can not get your voice certification until you reach the rating of S3. We can't have these text only guys working any of the radar positions when they first start working the scopes.. and they eventually need to learn how to run the tower position. So what should we do with them? Learning proper phraseology takes some time - and I would prefer to keep people off of voice until they can prove that they know what the proper phraseologies are (typing phrases out appears to help immensely). On top of this we must keep in mind that MANY of the people out there are NOT native English speakers - I find it amazing that I can get outstanding ATC in Sweden with a busy airspace in English - simply amazing.When I am in that last minute switch to tower on final and he's text - I'll just send a blank message to him "ACA301: " and usually they clear me to land. When working tower - if I am text only - Ill send your landing clnc soon after I see the alert that ACA856 selected my ATIS.3) Payware - this sounds like an interesting concept - but it would turn out to be a horror story. Would I get paid as ATC? Would you be able to ask for your money back if I gave you a crappy approach (or spun you for sequencing like AA327 always seems to have happen ). Not sure how this would work.4) Pilot Ratings. As far as I know, VATUSA has plans to get a pilot training program off the ground. I *think* that there will be "levels" that people can attain - so that when you fly you could put (in Rob's case) "ATP" in your comments. This training program is taking a long time - I belive this is due to the fact that the person who is responsible for it has been spending 100% of his time making our VATSIM server software more reliable - and has been responsible for many of the recent improvements in reliability (especially no lag). Remember this is volunteer.5) Roger Wilco. This program bites. A lot of the problems are due to people having their roger wilco program set up improperly - or a poorly configured Firewall/NAT Router. I have "heard" that the NAT problem may be resolved through some other software on the horizon. With that said, I belive I can speak from experience as someone who works on a BUSY frequency on a regular basis. A lot of the problems have to do with simple CONSIDERATION. - Don't call in after ATC has asked someone to "turn left heading 065, descend and maintain 2,500 vectors for the ILS Runway 24R Approach" - wait until that pilots has responded.- When ATC says something to you and end it with "No Response necessary" - do NOT say "Roger".- If Instructions are given to 2 aircraft separated by the word "BREAK" the LAST aircraft responds first. I personally never use this.- If you didn't copy what was told to you don't say something like "ummm well SoCal, you were coming through a little bit broken, I caught everything but the transponder code.. could you please say it for me one more time.. ummm SWA281" - try something like "SoCal say transponder code again for SWA281".- Have a pen and paper handy.- Write stuff down.- If you respond to "9 miles from JETSA turn right heading 220 maintain 220 until established cleared ILS runway 24R approach" with: "Whats the frequency for the ILS and the OBS" prepare to learn how to fly a 45 minute hold.6) Assuming Multiple ATC roles. I have to agree with Rob on this one. If you can not handle working multiple poitions at one time - don't do it. You are just getting yourself in over your head - before you know it you will be crying for mommy. VATUSA has recently changed a rule that does NOT allow any controllers holding an S1 rating of working ANY CTR position. It's too much to do for some people - especially while still learning, and even harder to do properly. At the same time, please have some mercy on those controllers who are crazy swamped with traffic - controlling is a lot of work. Imagine what it's like when you work SoCal approach with no one below you. You have guys calling for IFR from LAX, SNA, SAN, ONT, LGB, BUR, etc. etc. You have guys who need the routings ammended, people who need the weather, guys want to fly this approach or that, people who want "clearance" to pushback or shut down thei engines (give me a break), oh ya - then theres the takeoff/landing clearances, departures and approaches, and 3 aircraft asking for VFR flight following PLUS some guy who wants IFR out of Phoenix or San Francisco and can not understand why you can not help them. Yes - controlling is not easy... when you get good service, appreciate it for what it is. On top of all that you hear on voice and see on text, there are MANY things going on behind the scenes... many many. This past Saturday night I had my butt kicked for 4 hours while handling ONLY the LAX_APP/DEP sector. On top of the pilots I had to coordinate EVERYTHING with LAX_TWR, ONT_APP, SNA_APP, BUR_APP, SBA_APP, LAX_ABD_CTR, and LAX_C_CTR. You could not imagine how much is going on in the background. (BTW I didn't recognize anyone coming through my sky from this forum except for "Canadian Triple Three Niner").I guess my opinion on this is threefold. First - ATC is very COMPLEX at times and some people just MAKE IT look easy. It is not. Second - People who can not handle the complexity should be working a position that they can handle. Third - ATC is very COMPLEX at times and some people just MAKE IT look easy. It is not.-----I now realize I have WAY to much to say about things. I think i am merely releasing words since I have not made many posts the past 3 weeks and I miss flying ;-(I hope to see many of you out for the California Screaming Event (www.laartcc.org) on June 23.Sincerely,Ian ElchitzVATSIM and PIC Addict.

[ACA857 5]

Excellent post!I just left KLAS for your place...where are ya? ;-)

[marcom 139]

"If Instructions are given to 2 aircraft separated by the word "BREAK" the LAST aircraft responds first. I personally never use this."Whoa. Are you sure?!In Europe this is used exactly the other way around. The first aircraft readsback first, then the second a/c!I've heard this used live aswell and there it was first aircraft to be called = first readback.

[Guest ielchitz]

>"If Instructions are given to 2 aircraft separated by the >word "BREAK" the LAST aircraft responds first. I personally >never use this." >Marcom,AFAIK this is how it works in US airspace. My apologies for not stating that whatever I say (or think I may know which often times is not the case ) usually relates to FAA procedures. With that in mind - I was unable to come up with a reference to the "break" phraseology in either the FAA 7110.65 or the AIM. I do remember a discussion once upon a time where someone stated that use of the word "break" was actually poor form (in the US) and thus I opted against ever using it.Again my apologies... I keep forgetting to mention that I am only aware of how things are done in the US and really do not know much about the various European and other systems - which in fact is a little humurous itself since I am 100% Canadian, eh? Ian.

[Vulcan 14]

Interesting thread this but probably more suited to the Vatsim forum :-)Ian,You and others make very valid points and I would like to add my two penn'oth as a virtual pilot.1) I don't think I have ever attended a single airport 'overload' fly-in for the very reasons you state. I see no pleasure in attempting to fly in lag conditions and overworked controllers.Sunday I took part in the Nordic overload event purely because it was a multi airport event with plenty of promised controllers and lots of good quality pre-planning. Even on this event though I ditched my last flight because I was late arriving at the airport and the controller was swamped by traffic.2) I would like to see voice only but appreciate this would exclude some participants and it is a stated aim of Vatsim to keep text; this topic was discussed a while back on the vatsim ng.I admit that I cannot fly and communicate via text, at least not when carrying out high demand workloads such as departures and approaches.I am not so sure about requiring controllers to be S3 before being allowed voice. I *think* in the UK voice rating is seperate from the actual controller rating. By that I mean a controller is restricted to certain positions commensurate with their rating level but can have voice rating at that level after passing the voice exam. For example a student may be limited to GND position at a regional UK airport but as long as they have passed the voice exam they can use voice.4) I think there is a need for pilot ratings but I can see that it will be a can of worms and you need good, system wide training which IMHO is woefully inadequate at the moment on a global basis.I think more VAs could do more in the training field, but there again not all on line pilots fly with VAs.Certainly major fly-ins should emphasise that experienced pilots only are welcomed and novices should stay away, IMO.This should give an incentive to gain more experience and become more proficient.I must admit pilot training and RT discipline are 2 of my biggest 'grrrr's' :-)5) This point would be answered to a large extent once RT discipline is the norm.6)Multi ATC roles. IMHO I think this is a no-no for major events and even published events.I do not control but I do not see how anyone can control gnd, app, twr, & del, let alone multiple airports during an event and give a quality service. A lot of the vatsim memebership take it seriously and want 'as real as it gets' and in the real World each area has a dedicated controller.'Pay for use' has been mentioned a few times in this thread and a new 'pay for' service was mentioned some time back either here or the other site but from memory it is still in the making.As I'm sure we all know, paying for vatsim causes all sorts of problems with the s/ware as became apparent at the demise of SATCO.Finally I hope to 'do' Screamin' 5, I did book in for Screamin' 1 but problems meant I never actually got of the ground at my first airport :-), better luck this time.Rgds

[Guest Martin]

>less than 40 hours or some kind of line around that time should weed >out the newbies from the people who know how to work >with ATC properly. Not really. I don't fly very much online, but with SATCO I probably gained 100-200 hours, but with VATSIM I only have a little over 30. So does few hours with VATSIM mean the pilot is a newbie? Not necessarily.Martin767 fetishistIt's a lot like life and that's what's appealing

[Guest]

I am suggesting the VATSIM "line" has to be drawn somewhere - 20 hours, 40 hours, whatever the consensus is that someone has enough hours that they 'qualify' as a NON-novice user....they have achieved a level of proficiency that allows them priviledges to fully participate at VATSIM.There could also be a test to bypass an hours requirement...for experienced users who have low hours...a simple written exam (on-line perhaps) could easily determine if a pilot is ready to join in.Solves that problem I would say. I am only suggesting that some kind of screening is required....LAX is not a place to learn how to do ATC, it ruins the experience for everyone else when people try to learn in a busy area.Rob.

[Guest Martin]

>- When ATC says something to you and end it with "No >Response necessary" - do NOT say "Roger". Or my favourite:"Speedbird 555 standby.""Uh, roger Ground, Speedbird 555 at gate 44 standing by for IFR clearance to London.">"clearance" to pushback or shut down thei engines (give >me a break)At both EDDF and the Nordic flyin this weekend this seemed to be common "practise" from the controllers: They actually said "call me for shutdown" or something like that... :-hmmmAnother thing, I think these huge flyins are hyped up too much on, say, the Avsim front page and places like that. This means newbies will invade the flyin... Keeping a lower profile might also lower the amount of newbies I think.Martin767 fetishistIt's a lot like life and that's what's appealing

[Guest Martin]

I agree. And a written (online?) test would be a rather simple yet effective way I can imagine.Martin767 fetishistIt's a lot like life and that's what's appealing