They would let me practice holds, and procedure turns and various approaches including PAR approaches till my heart’s content, while providing quick and succinct correction to my errors.

Interesting. Does the controller software have the correct screen for PAR approaches? PAR is when the final controller is able to give you trend information on the glidepath (not glideslope) using a split screen where the top half is dedicated to the glidepath, and the bottom half is dedicated to course. The antenna looks like a Snickers bar on top of a snack-sized snicker bar. It updates much, much more frequently than a normal radar sweep. Are you sure they didn't give you a Surveillance approach ("Recommended altitudes will be provided each mile on final")? If they have the proper interface for PAR approaches, I'd be extremely surprised. I'll take some photo's tonight when I go on shift of our facility. We are able to do PAR's.

I sometimes fly on VATSIM and BVATC (Boston Virtual ATC). BOTH groups are great but sometimes there isn't any ATC coverage. Like on BVATC, theres hardly any coverage during the day. They usually come on around 6pm EST.

Interesting. Does the controller software have the correct screen for PAR approaches? PAR is when the final controller is able to give you trend information on the glidepath (not glideslope) using a split screen where the top half is dedicated to the glidepath, and the bottom half is dedicated to course. The antenna looks like a Snickers bar on top of a snack-sized snicker bar. It updates much, much more frequently than a normal radar sweep. Are you sure they didn't give you a Surveillance approach ("Recommended altitudes will be provided each mile on final")? If they have the proper interface for PAR approaches, I'd be extremely surprised. I'll take some photo's tonight when I go on shift of our facility. We are able to do PAR's.

As I recall, there used to be a separate plug-in that required the pilot to connect to in addition to Squawkbox that allowed simulated PAR approaches. I don't think it is still used. This was a long time ago now.

Interesting. Does the controller software have the correct screen for PAR approaches? PAR is when the final controller is able to give you trend information on the glidepath (not glideslope) using a split screen where the top half is dedicated to the glidepath, and the bottom half is dedicated to course. The antenna looks like a Snickers bar on top of a snack-sized snicker bar. It updates much, much more frequently than a normal radar sweep. Are you sure they didn't give you a Surveillance approach ("Recommended altitudes will be provided each mile on final")? If they have the proper interface for PAR approaches, I'd be extremely surprised. I'll take some photo's tonight when I go on shift of our facility. We are able to do PAR's.

Hi, I am not sure what the ATC interface looked like because I was flying under PAR Control and I never gave PAR instructions as ATC. I remember I had to download a program (additional to Squawk Box) to allow me to do it, so I presume that the Controller ran something on his end to see whatever it was he was looking at. I can say that the Controller was a real-world Canadian Armed Forces Controller, accustomed to and familiar with PAR approaches. He was the only Controller that ever used and gave PAR control in all of my VATSIM experiance [(Mike Gould, out of CZEG (sim), he controlled out of CFB Trenton (real.)]. I can also say that his vectors to the approach were highly accurate. It was a long time ago but seem to remember when I was final he would state words indicating that I was being given a PAR approach to the runway, he would give vectors like 1-dgree to the right and call out distance to runway and amount I was off-or tracking on the approach course. Memory is vague, it was long ago.

Example:In VATSIM, you find VA meets and pilots (the massive heavies), professional pilots, real-life and wannabe ATC-ers, and the occaisional pleasure pilots and noobs (GA).

Newbs as GA huh? I think you'll find the opposite... many newbs fly the big iron because they have no clue how to hand fly so they require fms/fmc. I fly GA 95% of the time and am more competent than most pilots on the network.Anyway, I pointed this thread out to the guys at vatsim so they could see some of the valid points over here. Here's their thread:http://forums.vatsim.net/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=56539

It was a long time ago but seem to remember when I was final he would state words indicating that I was being given a PAR approach to the runway, he would give vectors like 1-dgree to the right and call out distance to runway and amount I was off-or tracking on the approach course. Memory is vague, it was long ago.

Sounds more like an ASR (surveillance approach), example:"n12345, this will be a surveillance approach to ry 9, the missed approach point is the end of the ry, published minimum descent altitude is 1920." "n12345 turn right heading 115, left of course correcting."etc - We do these for real where I work.

Newbs as GA huh? I think you'll find the opposite... many newbs fly the big iron because they have no clue how to hand fly so they require fms/fmc. I fly GA 95% of the time and am more competent than most pilots on the network.Anyway, I pointed this thread out to the guys at vatsim so they could see some of the valid points over here. Here's their thread:http://forums.vatsim.net/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=56539Sounds more like an ASR (surveillance approach), example:"n12345, this will be a surveillance approach to ry 9, the missed approach point is the end of the ry, published minimum descent altitude is 1920." "n12345 turn right heading 115, left of course correcting."etc - We do these for real where I work.

That thread was an interesting read. I was a little disappointed to see some of the gamespy comments. I don't think anybody here wants a dumbed down version of Vatsim. My only point was regarding software updates. Client disconnects and other software related issues became a problem for me personally. I was trying hard to follow proper procedures. Having the app blow up was frustrating. I was also reminded once again how many great people frequent the Vatsim network. Lots of good folks over there keeping the hobby alive. Perhaps somebody will step up and fix these apps so guys like myself can start having some "fun". :(

I've had no disconnects from SB4 in a long while. I do remember having them often when the SB4 beta first came out. Perhaps that's when you were flying?

I've had no disconnects from SB4 in a long while. I do remember having them often when the SB4 beta first came out. Perhaps that's when you were flying?

I would have to check my Vatsim membership information, but I believe it was within the last year or two.

You could always try the other one, FSInn. I frequently had CTD's with that one.It's true though, the pilot clients need serious updating, the GUI isn't very user friendly, and the software doesn't get much upkeep these days.

I didn't plan on posting here until the network was ready for launch, or we at least had a FS/X client for people to try out, but since the topic has come up and the network was mentioned...PilotEdge is a new pilot/ATC network that is primarily geared towards commercial flight training organizations, student pilots, or instrument students. Sim enthusiasts are absolutely welcome to utilize the network, too, although I fully expect it to be of interest only to a small group within that community.This is a commercial venture. Pilots will pay a subscription fee to use the service, while controllers will have the opportunity to be paid to be there (I won't go into the specifics of the staffing model here). Once it's live, the network will offer guaranteed ATC coverage in the published service area (limited initially to the Los Angeles and Oakland ARTCC), 15 hours a day, 7 days a week.There will likely be opportunities for sufficiently qualified pilots to fly for free on the network in return for their presence at certain airports at certain times, to provide additional background traffic for our commercial customers.The network provides:- guaranteed ATC quality utilizing real world IFR departure instructions for every airport within the covered area- guaranteed ATC coverage during published hours- 100% voice comms (no text), - realistic frequency usage, you dial the facility's frequency, be it delivery, ground, tower, app/dep, or center, regardless of our staffing configuration.- rapid position updates (5/sec for all nearby aircraft), control surface deflections and light settings- voice CTAF at non-towered airports using published frequencies, and range-limited by altitude- 550+ recorded aircraft flying 24/7, providing background VFR traffic in Class E/G airspace, ranging from GA pistons doing air work, short hops, long cross countries, military repositioning flights, military aircraft in restricted/warning/alert airspace, MOA's (military operating areas) and MTR's (military training routes).The compromise is that we don't provide ATC service across the entire globe...or even the entire country. We have a relatively limited service area (about 240,000 square miles) in which we provide ATC. This makes it financially viable to provide ATC on a guaranteed, frequent basis, and also increases traffic density, maximizing the chances of seeing and hearing other aircraft.Aircraft CAN fly outside of the coverage area, and still utilize voice communications (ie, fly the Hudson corridor in the NY SFRA, making position reports at the required points), however, ATC is not provided outside of the core area.We will eventually expand to include other ARTCC's (east coast likely to be next) at some point, and will likely provide "high altitude enroute service" between the full-staffed ARTCC's. At launch time, however, it will only be Oakland/Los Angeles ARTCCs. That still allows for a typical airline flight with 90 mins of enroute time.We have an X-Plane client up and running at the moment and plan to have the FS9/X client running in a small number of weeks (it is now the top development priority).Once again, I fully realize that this won't be of interest to ALL sim pilots. It won't even be of interest to ALL online pilots. I suspect it will be of interest to SOME, though.The network is currently in public beta testing, with guaranteed staffing 2 days a week (Wed/Sun evenings). We also do adhoc staffing outside of those hours. This will expand to a steady 15x7 schedule after launch.The short version is, if you want to do 6 hour coast to coast trips with ATC, this is not the solution for you. If you want to fly with guaranteed atc coverage and quality with a high-end voice system and don't mind that it's in a specific part of the world...then this could be up your alley. The feedback from r/w pilots has been very positive so far. They recognize what this offers over the free solutions that are available today.Lastly, yes, the web site is terrible...a new one is in the works.

Sorry for the delay! I forgot my camera the day I said I'd take them. Anyway, here's a photo of the PAR scope for anyone interested. Also, since I was tardy, I've enclosed a bonus picture.:(

Sorry for the delay! I forgot my camera the day I said I'd take them. Anyway, here's a photo of the PAR scope for anyone interested. Also, since I was tardy, I've enclosed a bonus picture.:(

Thank you for the pics. Was that a real 7700?

I always fly on Vatsim with FS9 although during the last few months I've picked up flying GA planes offline in FSX too. For me coverage is not really a problem. There is always an area where you find a decent amount of controllers so I simply locate those areas and pick DEP/ARR airports based on that. My only "issue" is that I usually fly in the US between 2200Z and 0200Z and for some reason that I haven't quite figured out, the controllers there are prone to being online for shorter sessions and very often abruptly leaves without a notice. Perhaps it's time zone -related?Among the guys I've spoken to, their biggest hindrance to starting flying online, is that they feel so insecure with procedures and terminology and are afraid of making a mess. They don't realize that most controllers in my experience, are very understanding with newbies, especially if they also state in their flight plan that they are unexperienced. I felt very much the same way when I started flying on VATSIM some ten years ago, but I was fortunate enough to be guided by a friend who flew SAAB340 IRL. Now, cholesterol levels permitting, I will soon start flying to get my certificate (only UL, but still...) and learning proper VFR RT on VATSIM will be a huge benefit and hopefully lessen the mic freight! Yes, sometimes I do miss having lots of AI traffic around me on the apron, but the adrenalin rush I get talking to ATC and realizing I have others eyes on me, far outweighs that!

Yes, sometimes I do miss having lots of AI traffic around me on the apron, but the adrenalin rush I get talking to ATC and realizing I have others eyes on me, far outweighs that!

Well put!

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,

When If I have the time it's great to have a flight with coverage on IVAO and you even meet new people...But do also offline stuff with RC4Great experience and amazing all that free time is put in there :Applause:Cheers,André