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

[Chock 17,769]

Well, it looks to me as though people are already voting with their feet judging by this thread, and using offline ATC instead. So the ball is in the court of these organisations as it is if they want to change the status quo, and if they can't see that and make overtures to their rival to pull off such a merger for their own good, then maybe they are not the people to do the job. Thing is, when MS Flight gets released, that might be the very time for them to make such a move without the need to cry over losing their present little empires. We shall have to see what ATC options Flight offers us.Al

[Chalkman 0]

I don't refuse to fly online really, just that time is an absolute killer lately. I don't have but maybe 1-2 hours a week to fly so, not really a good use of the time for me.

[slait 169]

I'm sure you guys are right, I'm just amused as to the point of position that makes those feel that empowerment. How easily one can elevate ones self.

[N400QW 205]

Perhaps the real solution is something created from scratch, rather than expecting an existing network to eventually change their rules.Where in the design of the system all these things mentioned can be taken into account. - Free membership.- The need for a certain level of realism on both the pilot and ATC side.- Wider ATC coverage, more general ATC standards.- Free basic pilot and controller software (limited functionality , but more than enough to participate).- Allowance of payware developers to create more advanced fuller featured software that can be used on the Network, that they can charge fees for.- Payware sponsorship advertising (startup contributuons etc) etc (to offset the costs of creating and maintaining the system).Not an easy task, but the ability and the resources to do it certainly exist.I think for it to work it'd be crucial to have some of the big names in Flightsim behind it.Regards.Ernie.

Ernie, drop me a note on this please....:(

[MarkW 1,493]

How about paid membership of say $25/year. This right away gets rid of many who just want to mess with everyone. One caveat though, you can earn your money back if you control. Say 50 cents/hour peak and 25 cents/hour offpeak time so if you put in 50 hours of peak hour controlling in a year its free for you. Seems like a great way to get more controllers online.Mark.

[Chock 17,769]

Good idea, but for a 25 Dollar subscription, it would have to be worth it from day one to justify that, which is kind of tricky to do, not impossible, but not that easy either.Al

[Sekstifire 10]

If they start to charge for the service then the responsability for the network owners changes totally. I dont think that they are too keen on that to be honest

[Hirgab 9]

How about paid membership of say $25/year. This right away gets rid of many who just want to mess with everyone. One caveat though, you can earn your money back if you control. Say 50 cents/hour peak and 25 cents/hour offpeak time so if you put in 50 hours of peak hour controlling in a year its free for you. Seems like a great way to get more controllers online.Mark.

I really like this idea.

[ErnieAlston 33]

Good idea, but for a 25 Dollar subscription, it would have to be worth it from day one to justify that, which is kind of tricky to do, not impossible, but not that easy either.Al

Its an interesting idea. Also the idea of some small compensation from sitting in front of that screenfor many many hours proving ATC services. It doesn't necessarily have to be cash, maybe a gift certificateor a specified addon title.But I'm not sure any membership fees would be needed. If the Addon Devs make profit from the salesof the Client software, a percentage of that could be put back into the upkeep of the network. That alongwith any advertising and sponsorship income might be enough to cover operating costs.Or the fuller featured addon client software developed by the payware Devs is included in the subscription package.So you have the choice to have free membership, and if you want later on upgrade purchase the fuller featured client software to upgrade from what is being provided for free. Or you purchase the yearly subscription and get the payware software, as well as any other extra's that are part of the subscription service (newsletters, Magazines, new software upgrades titles etc etc).But I agree with Mark, the fee might be a way to discouraging those who just want to mess about. No doubt though either way the system will need to be moderated.Regards.Ernie.

[Mike_CFII_MEL 789]

Hi,The only problem I see with the pay option, if individuals are going to pay for this service you better have controllers manning the scopes. I can see the complaints now, I paid money for this and there is never a controller online in my area.If Radar Contact 5 or another automated ATC type program can be incorporated and used in the absence of actual online controllers I think you'd have a winner.

[PIC007 82]

As a former manager of a MMOG with thousands of subscribers, I can tell you right up front, the minute you add a fee to the mix, you have a whole new can of worms, and you best have a support team that includes a lawyer. My previous employer actually looked into this for FS, and after talking to some folks involved with MS Flight, he dropped the idea. Without knowing exactly what the folks have in mind at MS for Flight, I can tell you I already see some familiar ideas being floated from their PR.

[ErnieAlston 33]

Hi,The only problem I see with the pay option, if individuals are going to pay for this service you better have controllers manning the scopes. I can see the complaints now, I paid money for this and there is never a controller online in my area.

True, which means under a subscription service the Controllers would have to be compensated. Then youcan have them work the scopes in shifts etc.Also under this system the Controllers must be trained to work any ATC position anywhere in the world, so they can plug in anywhere when they are needed.The current VATSIM/IVAO staffing system where the controller stays in one place and waits for the pilots to come to them will not work.Controllers would need to be a lot more flexible, and learn how to provide an Air Traffic services in different areas, not just be a local procedure follower.

If Radar Contact 5 or another automated ATC type program can be incorporated and used in the absence of actual online controllers I think you'd have a winner.

Controllers should also be able to work traffic in different areas at the same time.I remember in the early SATCO days before they got all big on the rules, and regulations, I was able Control planes in MSP,DEN and SLC at the same time. When traffic was light in my area I was easily able to extend myselfto other areas. A Controller should be able to work multiple areas at the same time, when these areas are light in traffic. The Radar client software would need to be able to support this, via multiple screens, etc.If its done right, there should be no need for attaching an automated ATC program in the background.Flexibility from the Controllers would be the key, being stuck following the same procedures regardless of traffic levels will not work.Regards.Ernie.

[Chock 17,769]

As a former manager of a MMOG with thousands of subscribers, I can tell you right up front, the minute you add a fee to the mix, you have a whole new can of worms, and you best have a support team that includes a lawyer. My previous employer actually looked into this for FS, and after talking to some folks involved with MS Flight, he dropped the idea. Without knowing exactly what the folks have in mind at MS for Flight, I can tell you I already see some familiar ideas being floated from their PR.

Further to the previous comment I made, unfortunately, I think this post also highlights the reality of attempting to offer a subscription service. All the successful subscription games (typically MMORPGs) work because they keep the paying customer happy, and that's generally a large user base. Most go for a monthly fee (EVE for example), but some have gone for a 'buy the game and then its free to play it online' model (Guild Wars for example), others offer these options and/or lifetime subscriptions for a largish fee (STO for example). But in all cases, they have to ensure that it works from day one, that content keeps on coming and that what content there is already in there works very well, and there is pretty much instantaneous assistance from GMs if someone has a problem with any of that. On top of all this, what 'keeps people coming' for most MMOs, is that the game itself is often secondary to the social aspect of clans or other groups of friends that play the game, where it often ends up being a very fancy chat room in some respects. An online ATC service does not have that element, that's more the realm of virtual airlines or virtual squadrons where flight sims are concerned.It is an expensive proposition too, which is why it costs at least a tenner per month for the majority of online subscription games, and even then, most supplement that fee with extra payware content. Even if all that is done right, it is still not an instant recipe for success; there have been plenty of MMOs which have failed despite having got all that infrastructure in place.So for an ATC system based on a subscription model, it would probably have to implemented in an area-by-area slow roll out in order to make it even remotely feasible when considering meeting demands, to ensure controllers were actually going to be there. This means probably at least five people per area to ensure 24 hour coverage, and this doesn't even touch on people behind the scenes, this is the kind of service people will expect if they are paying for it. Frankly unless you are Microsoft or some other big noise, which has the cash to really do something right if they want to, I think flight simulation is too much of a niche to ever make that workable on a worldwide scale, and given that it would be a gamble, I think someone would have a hard time even in the board room at MS trying to convince them to go for it.So is it impossible? Nope, but I think something more manageable such as Emma Field or Andras Field with permanent air traffic controllers would be a more realistic goal, and would possibly be a stepping stone to greater things if it proved successful, possibly taking in a large international airport nearby if it all proved to be a hit.Al

[MarkW 1,493]

If Radar Contact 5 or another automated ATC type program can be incorporated and used in the absence of actual online controllers I think you'd have a winner.

Exactly. There needs to be some way to incorporate a computer based ATC system and AI traffic in areas that do not have any coverage. I have often thought even in covered space with only one or two aircraft on the ground it would be nice to have AI traffic at least for visual effect. You would of course need to control the line up at the runway so that it does not interfere with controller operations.Mark.

[TedG 1]

As a minor counterpoint/caution/reminder regarding payware (or whatever) implications of some suggestions here please bear in mind that the current software across the networks also supports multiple platforms (i.e. WIN/MAC/Linux) enabling those who fly X-Plane to enjoy the current excellent service of live ATC.....for free.I would hope that is taken into consideration considering these intergration ideas regarding payware FS9/FSX AI ATC etc.p.s A quick snapshot of VATSPY shows 581 pilots, 73 controllers, and 17 observers with good coverage in Europe :(.**edit**The Asian areas as well as offshore eastern US and Gander/Moncton are well covered too. A good day in the virtual skies!