Anyone here refuse to fly online? If so, why?

[trisager 2]

Plus I have seen a few youtube videos of some VATSIM departures and some of the controllers in the audio must have been around 12 years old or so. Not that there is anything wrong with that, but if I am departing a large hub and am getting clearance from a fellow who sounds like he's 10 yrs old it kind of spoils it for me, especially when he is stuttering and forgetting what he is supposed to say.

That is definitely not typical of VATSIM controllers. They have a fairly lengthy training process to go through, and most are very good at it. The real danger flying online on VATSIM is that once you've tried it, canned ATC just isn't good enough any more.

[Sekstifire 10]

....I wouldn't say I refuse to do it, but I am just not interested in getting all the software necessary to do, setting it up, and then trying it to find coverage is sparse or non existant. Plus I have seen a few youtube videos of some VATSIM departures and some of the controllers in the audio must have been around 12 years old or so. Not that there is anything wrong with that, but if I am departing a large hub and am getting clearance from a fellow who sounds like he's 10 yrs old it kind of spoils it for me, especially when he is stuttering and forgetting what he is supposed to say.

VATSIM, so real that we even got kids in the tower!

[FS++ 708]

I feel for the volunteers VATSIM controllersConsidering that even the FAA cannot keep their well-paid controllers awake at times (:( did you read the latest news?), no wonder coverage is patchy. Gerald R.http://www.multicrewxp.com

[davethewave2 20]

online flying comes in many guises.

• IVAO/Vatsim take it very seriously.
• Gamespy sessions can be full of kids in F/18s attatcking you.

But there are other sessions out there that offer:Group formationsLanding competitionsVFR specialsRacing round obstaclesetc etcAs evidence may I present.

[Christopher Low 5,353]

100% agree with this - I work rw traffic and let me tell you, sometimes it's impossible to understand pilots. Crappy headsets, crappy avionics, turbulence, weather, confidence level of pilot. Not to mention my side of the mic - crappy headset, distance and position of our ground transmitters to the aircraft, stuff breaking... the list goes on.

Isn't that potentially catastrophic?

[simba_nl 34]

I have found VATSIM coverage areas are actually pretty good in both Europe (in particular the UK, Swedish airspace, and Germany) and the USA depending upon time zone prime-time and fly-in's etc. Canada is very well covered too.I am not quite sure what there is to "refuse" regarding online flight as it is totally optional and being a sim one can enjoy it as you like. Personally I tend to do 95% of my flights with X-Plane on VATSIM (namely because the built-in ATC is laughable and the XSquawkbox plug-in is completely unobtrusive). With FSX I suppose I am now about 50-50 depending on if I wish to see my Ultimate Traffic stuff flying around and if I can stand the FSInn UI that does seem to affect framerates a bit although you can totally minimize the UI to a tiny single column strip and park it out of the way. Without exception I have found the volunteer controllers on VATSIM to be extremely professional at what they do and they work hard to learn that aspect of our simulator hobby. I also enjoy hearing the "real" chatter and practicing my various "hello's, thank you for great service etc" in ten different languages just to be friendly :(.Then again I don't normally "fly" more than 3 hours max for my routes and when I am on call for my real world job I avoid online flight as I need that "pause" button-it can be real frustrating to be on final and have the bleeper go off.I guess after this little ramble the best suggestion I could make is don't knock it until you have tried it!p.s. If I might suggest routings that have almost nightly coverage in EU prime time check out legs between London-area airports and Sweden (ESSA) or Germany. In the USA the PNW area from KSEA/CYVR is usually covered as well (nice for the ORBX junkies I imagine) and I think the Moncton folks are there daily too (do they ever sleep? lol).Remember you can always have fun by requesting VFR flight-following or touch n go's or whatever-online flight is not remotely restricted to IFR long haul. And even with no ATC about you can still practice all your procedures and communicate intentions with fellow pilots. Just my two cents/pence/currency of choice.

I'll put my 2 cents next to you, I'm also flying 90% of my big iron time on VATSIM on short haul flights between The Netherlands, Germany, Austria and Switserland. I started with VATSIM in 2007 and have 2500+ hours so coverage is not a real issue here. I can affirm that the best coverage is in the UK and Germany. Don't know how it is in the USA but when there is only poor coverage the fun of flying online is gone. Very soon I will post a video of a short haul from Stuttgart Germany to Innsbruck Austria with one of the most difficult approaches in Europe, Eastern Approache and RW 08 Circle to Land with coverage of VATSIM.

[CXA001 5]

I always fly online on the Vatsim network.- Nice to able to interact with real people such as controllers and other pilots. - Nights and weekends which is when I fly there is usually very good ATC coverage.- If there is not ATC for areas that I usually fly too, I will choose an area where there is ATC. (Allows me to visit areas that otherwise I would not normally fly too)- ATC is far more realistic online that what you would find in any offline product.

[CFIJose 5,485]

I actually enjoy listening to pilots and ATCs. It took me a while to get used to the robotic voices of FSX, but now I actually enjoy what I'm hearing.I have not tried VATSIM. I've always wanted a good ATC program with real voices. I thought PFE with the add-on voices would be a good match, but I was not able to get it working properly. I will give PFE another shot or just keep the default. I'm currently using Edit Voice pack with the default ATC for FSX and that is good enough for me.Learning ATC procedures is a very important part of being a pilot. If you want to simulate that you are a pilot, then it does not hurt to use some sort of ATC program to help you stay sharp or to improve that skill.I love that part of flying. That part is listening to ATC instructions and following those instructions. In real life, I love listening to the pilot voices and even the interaction that takes place between controller and pilot. It's an integral part of being a complete pilot.That said, I understand that some people want the freedom to just fly anywhere and anytime. But to me, that's simply not realistic.

[tf51d 284]

I've always wanted to try VATSIM but my setup is in the family room, so I can take advantage of my 9 foot projected screen. With an open Kitchen area, my sister watches television on, it would make online flying challenging. So unless the VATSIM controllers, want to hear the Real Housewives of XXX (You name the city) or cooking shows in the background, it's best I stay off line. Instead I use default ATC, modified with EditVoicePack, along with my own modifications with AI to satisfy me. I know RC4, and PFE may be better at procedure for the user aircaft, but they don't seem to interact with AI as well, at least with RC4 which I have, and from what I've seen with PFE in videos. IMHO.

[Mike T 208]

I've tried VATSIM a couple of times in the past, but have never gone back since then. The lack of ATC coverage, the lack of traffic over any given area (except during events,) and the terrible UI (FSInn/Squakbox) turned me off for good. I'm curious if I'm alone in this category or if there are others out there that feel the same way. Surely I can't be missing out on much.Regards,

I think "refuse" is the wrong word. I absolutely love the immersion factor of VATSIM, there is simply no equal when it comes to ATC operations whether you are flying IFR in a 747-400 or a Cessna 172 cross country with flight following. However, VATSIM has some glaring holes which have been pointed out here that don't jibe with my flying style.1 - I emulate COA (UAL) flights out of hub airports: KEWR, KORD, KIAH, KSFO, KLAX, KIAD. If I'm lucky there is a tower controller up but then the tower controller is also ground, tower and maybe departure. Once I've cleared the Class B or fall off the departure radar I get: "United 906 heavy, you are leaving my airspace, squawk 1-2-0-0, g'day." That falls below the level of realism even provided by the default FSX ATC no matter how great it was up until that point.]2 - With a wife, son and twin two year old girls, in addition to a lot of business travel, I highly value my time when I can use FSX. I'm not going to wait until VATSIM has some type of fly-in to get realistic ATC from point A to point B. And if I'm at a smaller airport such as KSJC or KFLL, there is probably going to be no ATC at all unless I happen to wander into a ARTCC that is actually staffed. Radar Contact gives me the flexibility to get real ATC within reason the entire route whenever I want it.3 - Having only a handful of flights in the VATSIM ARTCC area, if they are online is unrealistic. Unless you are lucky to wander into a heavily flown area at the right time, the world is deserted. And then landing at an airport is like landing in a ghost town unless there is a fly-in.4 - You will never get end-to-end enroute ATC coverage unless you restrict your flights to an active area and keep flights relatively short.And on...and on...and on.I think VATSIM is a great idea, its simply not ready for prime time for me. What VATSIM needs is a hybrid model that integrates live controllers with Radar Contact artificial controllers. Live controllers control traffic within their sector when they are online but when you are leaving their airspace they seamlessly hand you off to an artificial controller than takes over. This needs to be seamless and transparant and not done with a bunch of windows and boxes filling up the screen. I'm surprised that they haven't come up with something like this yet.All things being equal I'd use VATSIM if these drawbacks could be overcome.

[simba_nl 34]

I actually enjoy listening to pilots and ATCs. It took me a while to get used to the robotic voices of FSX, but now I actually enjoy what I'm hearing.I have not tried VATSIM. I've always wanted a good ATC program with real voices. I thought PFE with the add-on voices would be a good match, but I was not able to get it working properly. I will give PFE another shot or just keep the default. I'm currently using Edit Voice pack with the default ATC for FSX and that is good enough for me.Learning ATC procedures is a very important part of being a pilot. If you want to simulate that you are a pilot, then it does not hurt to use some sort of ATC program to help you stay sharp or to improve that skill.I love that part of flying. That part is listening to ATC instructions and following those instructions. In real life, I love listening to the pilot voices and even the interaction that takes place between controller and pilot. It's an integral part of being a complete pilot.That said, I understand that some people want the freedom to just fly anywhere and anytime. But to me, that's simply not realistic.

Well, I did my practising for Communications examination for the real world over VATSIM, Normally they are focusing on IFR flights but found some real world controllers in Germany who where so kind to help me with VFR ATC training over VATSIM. I passed the examination with very good results. Now I have had the LPE examination for JAR/FCL and thanks to my hours on VATSIM I also had good result so yes, If you want to go as real as it gets, simflying over VATSIM or IVAO is a must and even for real world pilots it's a very good training course to stay sharp.

[Guest aeroscout]

After dealing with the FAA in the RW. Flying offline is a relief from the daily BS from the boys in DC.......retired EAL pilot

[greggerm 312]

Nope - don't fly online. I did use VATSIM in years past during my V.A. days a handful of times, but now that I've flipped to mostly VFR-style flying, I don't use it anymore at all. Many of the exact same reasons for not using online ATC which have already been mentioned apply to me... such as lack of coverage and the extreme rigidity to realism. On the realism topic - I fully and completely understand that there are users who love doing everything by the book - both with flying, and in their ATC positions. There's nothing at all wrong with that!!! In fact, I was once one of those users... talking myself through an airline flight with callouts, hitting all the checklist items, nailing the SID/STAR/Approaches to perfection... but, times change, and now I'm far more of a "Squawk 1200" pilot. VATSIM use actually did help me a bit with my real PPL training in that I was already a bit familiar with some of the radio calls. There is another reason why I don't do VATSIM - My wife thinks I'm crazy enough as it is flying fake planes around on a computer screen - if I were to start talking to the computer, I don't think her eyes would survive the rolling back into her head that they would involuntarily do. :) In lieu of using VATSIM, I have my airband scanner running next to me as I fly. I pick up the local Class C airspace as well as the local airport's tower, clearance, and ground.... it lends to the immersion on a nice, background level.

[TedG 1]

What VATSIM needs is a hybrid model that integrates live controllers with Radar Contact artificial controllers. Live controllers control traffic within their sector when they are online but when you are leaving their airspace they seamlessly hand you off to an artificial controller than takes over. This needs to be seamless and transparant and not done with a bunch of windows and boxes filling up the screen. I'm surprised that they haven't come up with something like this yet.

VATSIM/IVAO are FREE services with volunteers passing rather a lot of training in order to participate as controllers. Not to mention the software is free as well and supported fully over FS9/FSX/X-Plane.Something along the lines of what you and others suggest and/or find lacking would enter the realms of very difficult to integrate payware-grade software and full-time support.Also-to make the point regarding the "youthful voices"-the potential "12 year-old" controller has to pass the same requirements in order to control that a 42 year old (or whatever age bracket) must achieve and progress from Delivery-Ground-Tower etc etc in similar fashion. I don't think I would be incorrect in saying that for VATSIM it is probably a minimum of a year before actually taking control of aircraft in flight. Pretty big committment for anyone given it is an unpaid position.But we have the choice to participate or not-its your simulator.One does wonder how the Microsoft folks view this in terms of the someday forthcoming Flight. From a business standpoint thats a lot of potential pilots/ATC types with wallets currently untapped. Cynical me? Never :(

[Clutch Cargo 384]

I've listened in on a few occasions but never actually got down to trying it. Would really like to. I think there is a little intimidation there. To finally get out in the mix of it all and not screw up. I have always thought it would be good PR for VATSIM to hold some "clinics" or workshops where nubies meet at some far off airport. VATSIM mans it with a few controllers and then you line up with others and do some fly-arounds with hand-on instructions from the controllers on proper speak... what to expect... things like that.But I would love to attend a big fly-in at Kai Tak. I think that would be quite a rush.Clutch