In respects to the original topic being discussed, I'd offer my own strategy with flying. I always take a look at the controllers online (vatview.com) and choose a route based on the available controllers. I personally find it more interesting to fly in and out of airports that I'm not familiar with. This keeps me on edge and makes the experience all the more realistic. If you are determined to fly a specific route and the ATC is not online, you will be out of luck. One quick word as a controller and instructor - we at VATSIM are real people with real lives. Remember that we do this for fun, just like the pilots, but choose to endure the rigorous training in order to provide quality service. Often when real life takes over, VATSIM takes a back seat. For myself, being a professional musician, I will go for long stretches of time (2-5 weeks) without really participating, and then will return. I hope you can understand why sometimes coverage is not predictable. On the topic of becoming a controller, it took me 6 months from ground to center and I had to work quite a lot. I really appreciate the trouble that VATSIM takes to ensure that every controller has competency. As an instructor, I can say that the last thing I'd ever want for a student (say on a center position) is to run into a skilled pilot, choosing to do some military air refueling in restricted airspace and have no clue on how to deal with them. Also, do keep in mind that the higher the position, the more likely you will need juggle aircraft in very different situations. This is why we put such emphasis on every skill as you accumulate them. I find the experience extremely rewarding and hope that folks will take the time to really seek out training and become controllers. It also will make you a better pilot! If any folks have questions, I'd be happy to answer. Also, do come fly in Oakland airspace when I'm on center sometime! :) Thanks!

If you're alright with a small geographical area - it is. You can beta test (aka fly for free) right now, just go to the site:http://pilotedge.net/page/home PE isn't a competitor for vatsim - the target audience is really towards real world pilots (or students) and what I would call hardcore flight simmers OR both! I'll give you my insight. I've flown on the network about 25 times since the FSX client was released. (XP, FS9 clients also available). What draws me the most is quality ATC. I'm a real world controller and pilot so having quality controllers is more important than a huge coverage area. I also tend to fly GA, but lately have been flying the NGX on short "BBJ-style" routes. The coverage area for the remainder of the beta is Socal (southern cali tracon), but the production model will have both norcal and socal areas. The neat part about PE is the frequencies. You don't get a list in your pilot client like vatsim/iavo but you simply pull up the charts and look at the real world frequencies. You'll talk to a human everytime, no matter what freq it is. They've also modeleld reception range based on altitude or obstructions. For instance in some parts of CA you can't call the center until airborne due to mountains in the area. But they've also modeled RCAG's and RCO's so normally you'd be able to get an IFR flight plan from the ground. Drones. They essentially add atmosphere to the whole thing. They are NORDO hehe so you can't really interact with them at an uncontrolled field but they'll still fly around, military and civilian alike. The controllers will issue traffic advisories as you fly near them just like real life. Setup is simple, just download SB4 like you would for vatsim or ivao and make a few slight modifications and you're set. If you want to practice pattern work, there's always a controller on during the beta times (6-9pm PDT). If you want to fly a TEC route, you'll use real world frequencies. If you want to fly a longer route, same. If you want to practice instrument approaches, super. I've done all those and it works out very well. I highly recommend PE, try it now while in beta. I'd love to help another RWer out... PM me.

Hi Ryan, Although I have not signed up for the PE beta, I'm quite excited about it. My virtual home base is the Bay Area, and I recognize many of the names involved in the PE project, so I know the ATC side will be top notch. I'm a bit disappointed to hear that PE uses a modified version of SB4. In software terms SB4 is now ancient. One of the biggest downfalls is the horrible default VIP model matching (BTW, whoever decided that unmatched aircraft should show as a paper airplane with a red x should be shot. lol :-p Why could it not default to something common like a 737). Do the modifications to SB4 improve this? I know you can get better models by downloading AI sets and modifying the SMS file, but to be honest, I don't want to chance causing some sort of crash by doing so. I also doubt that real world trainees who aren't sim enthusiasts would want to fart around with that either. I don't think I'd want to spend the $20 a month or whatever it is unless the client modifications really are a huge improvement, and to know that the client is undergoing continuous development.

Unfortunately I'm sure it's the same crappy VIP model set and the famous question mark. You can edit it yourself though. For instance there's a Katana that does patterns from KOKB (Oceanside) and I own the Aerosoft 4x version so I changed the file to reflect my addon. Now it shows up in game as AI. I don't know what all went into the SB4 mods but the AI stuff remains the same. You'd think by now someone would have created a huge library of basic models to fit SB4... ???

In order for Vatsim to grow they need to get rid of this crappy "only freeware/no donation" policy. Everyone here agrees SB3/4 is way out of date. It took Joel a long time to get this software to us and in te end he gets what? Nothing. Motivation is quickly diminished when there is no light at the end of the tunnel. He took away how many hours from his family to get nothing for it. I can see why he sn't doing anything with it. He deserves something for it. Jeez even 5 bucks from each of us would have possibly given him motivation to continue development. At least he could have taken his family on a nice vacation for all the time he spent. Vatsim really needs to get over themselves and start realizing without change you sooner or later disolve because someone else will step up to the plate and do a better job. Honestly I dont think the BOG cares much about the future of Vatsim. From what I understand and have been tod by programmers tat the architecture of Vatsim is 1990's and is ancient.

I dont think paid software is the solution, some of the most used software out there are free. For example Apache, Firefox and Linux. When I develop software I give it away for free, the payment for me is simply that I enjoy helping people if I am able to do that and I think the value of that enjoyment is worth spending time developing. I do of course enjoy developing in itself as well.

If Vatsim starts charging a subscription, it will die due to lack of members.. If they need Money. they should seek sponsorship. Once PilotEdge comes out of Beta, and starts trying to charge pilots $20 / month, I suspect they will quickly die as well. Sad reflection of the current times we live in .... everyone thinks the DESERVE something for nothing.The reality is starting to sink in.

The coverage area for PE during the beta is not just the Socal Tracon, it's the entire Los Angeles ARTCC. Shortly after launch, we'll add the Oakland ARTCC, too. That will bring the coverage area up to a 600x400nm area with more than 200 public-use airports. The published beta hours are 6-9pm PDT prior to launch. However, we also do ad hoc staffing outside of those hours. Folks in Europe, feel free to simply check the site and look at the Network Status page. If it says "socal is online" then the entire ZLA ARTCC is available with ATC. See the PE where page for a map showing the ZLA coverage area. Geoff, your understanding of the space is flawed. There are plenty of real world pilots who are EXCITED to pay $19/mth for GUARANTEED ATC coverage and quality. Anything else is a waste of time in most pilots' eyes (I've spent 7 years trying to recruit r/w pilots to VATSIM and have not roped a SINGLE one. They love the demo with full staffing, then they come back the next day to try it and have an experience that doesn't match the demo). PE is also working with many commercial customers who are going to use the network for a variety of purposes. Oh, and if $19/mth is too much to stomach, then sim enthusiasts can try the Frequent Flier program which will allow them to have their subscription fee waived if they fly enough hours in the previous month. This will be extended to a few hundred pilots at most to help build the baseline of traffic to get started. It's a sad reflection of the times that you are so unwilling to take the time to look into exactly what is being offered before passing judgment. I don't take offense easily, but I'm bothered by the comment about thinking that we 'deserve something for nothing.' There is value in what is being provided. It shouldn't be hard to see that, even if you decide that what's being offered isn't right for you. I'm fine with people saying that the service isn't what they need, but I'm bothered by the implication that isn't not useful for anyone. The reams of feedback from real world pilots who have tried it at AOPA Summit and Oshkosh certainly found it useful. The commercial customers that we spoke with certainly found it useful. Regarding the pilot client, it IS our intention to build a library of high quality models. We HAVE modified the client already to allow for the use of high quality models that are already on the pilots' drive. In fact, we ship with our own SMS files that refer to the existing STOCK FS aircraft for FS9/FSX. The client installation WILL change prior to launch so that you're not installing SB4 then patching it. It will have its own installer. Yes, the client will be developed over time. If 15 hours/day of guaranteed ATC coverage, real world frequency usage, and voice CTAF is NOT of interest to you, then this is not the network for you. Otherwise, you should look at it very closely. We also model light settings, control surface deflections and gear retraction states. All this data is sent 5/sec for a high fidelity experience. The FS9 position interpolation code needs some work, but FSX and Xplane are running nicely. Please excuse the temporary web site, we'll have something considerably better prior to launch. Sky Blue Radio is doing a FS InFocus show on Saturday night, you can hear more about it and have all of your questions answered....for those that are actually interested in the answers, anyway.

I figured PE would come into the conversation here. Though curious why this is in the NGX forum... As Ryan pointed out, it's not meant as a replacement for VATSIM. Both networks cater to different audiences. Having flown/controlled on VATSIM since 2003 and flown on PE since XP Beta, I can offer the following differentiation: VATSIM – Would recommend for someone that wanted to fly around (world wide) with other pilots in the skies, and roll the dice with a) having ATC and :( quality of the ATC. It's a good hobbyist network, and in it's hey day was the pillar of quality and competency (both on the pilot and controller side). Unfortunately I think it's degenerated to kind of a moderated MS Zone. However, when all the planets and moons are in alignment (meaning full, competent ATC service and proficient pilots) it's one of the best things I've ever experienced behind a computer screen... well, ok.. behind a computer screen displaying FlightSim. PE – Would recommend to my instrument students or to pilots looking to remain proficient in the mechanics of instrument flying. The adherence to real world frequencies & sectorization, as well as the increased (for lack of a better term) maturity on the network makes it more ideal for modeling real world procedures. Obviously the tradeoff is it's not free, and it's restricted to a small geographic area. While PE uses the SB4 framework for it's MSFS clients, there are some significant changes. The “paper airplane” isn't the default unrecognized aircraft. The position refresh rate is higher than on VATSIM, and being voice only with range limited voice comms (including UNICOM/CTAF) truly set it apart. Besides the obvious (pay/free, worldwide/specific area), the nuances of the network are what will appeal to it's intended client base. If anyone has interest in online flying with a different spin (i.e. focus on realism with regards to ATC interaction), I'd recommend giving the beta a try. It's a bit neat to sit there at some random field and actually have to look up the airport's CLNC or GND frequency, rather than just blindly calling LAX_CTR. Cheers,

You have to fly the events - VATUSAFriday and Saturday nights. You usually have ATC from takeoff to landing.

Geoff, your understanding of the space is flawed.

I don't think so. I have reviewed you website, and watched your video. It seems quite obvious what you are doing, and I wish you every success.

PE is also working with many commercial customers who are going to use the network for a variety of purposes.

Using a COMMERCIALLY Licensed FS, and not Entertainment MSFS ?

Oh, and if $19/mth is too much to stomach, then sim enthusiasts can try the Frequent Flier program which will allow them to have their subscription fee waived if they fly enough hours in the previous month. This will be extended to a few hundred pilots at most to help build the baseline of traffic to get started.

Missed the "Frequent Flier" part on the website. But as you say, $19/mth is a small price to pay for what you propose to offer.

It's a sad reflection of the times that you are so unwilling to take the time to look into exactly what is being offered before passing judgment.

I WAS willing to take a look, and as a RL Pilot, I can clearly understand what you are offering. Once again, I wish you every success, and fully intend to try your service, when time permits.

I don't take offense easily, but I'm bothered by the comment about thinking that we 'deserve something for nothing.' There is value in what is being provided.

You missread my post. Its "some" FS Pilots that think that they DESERVE something for nothing, not PilotEdge !!

I'm fine with people saying that the service isn't what they need, but I'm bothered by the implication that isn't not useful for anyone.

I never said that !!! I am sure it is usefull for many, including me !! --------------- That being said, who exactly is PilotEdge.? If it an established Company ? Is it an informal group of FS enthusiasts ?

Geoff, My apologies, it appears I misinterpreted your post. The frequent flier program hasn't been announced on the site yet, it has only been discussed in the forums thus far. The commercial users won't be using FSX. Some are using X-Plane or ESP/Prepar3D, but the higher end ones are using custom engines. PE is a company (that will be the DBA name, the legal corp name is separate). This will be a real corporate venture, it's not a hobby level site. Thanks very much for clarifying your message, I appreciate it. The only part we disagree on, then, is your comment about the venture dying after we launch, but we'll see ;)

I'm not sure where people got the idea that VATSIM should start charging for network connection. The comments before were for VATSIM to drop the requirement that you cannot charge for products related to connecting to it. The thing that kills me is that in order to connect, you need a copy of a flight sim. None of the available flight sims are free. On the other side, though, you cannot create a controller client that is not free. To be honest, I'd pay what I paid for FS if I had a nice, realistic representation of ARTS/STARS or DSR. Furthermore, you cannot charge for a pilot client to connect. Because of this, the models are terrible (who wants to create the client and the models and configure them - nobody), and if you want to improve on them, or set them up correctly, it's on you, as the end user. I'd pay to have a good pilot client that properly integrates with my SimConnect aircraft (so I don't have to turn my transponder on twice, among other things), with proper models. I'm not saying there shouldn't be freeware alternative, or that we should be required to pay. I'm saying they need to get over themselves and start to allow people to charge for their products to improve their experience. I fly PMDG aircraft all over VATSIM. I paid for that to improve my experience. Why is that allowed, but someone who wants to charge someone for Pilot Client AWESOME Version 1 can't? I've made websites pro bono. I've written macros pro bono. I've volunteered hundreds of hours on VATSIM pro bono. I have no objection to not charging for things, but the fact of life is that things are generally better and faster if you get compensated for them.

Have you given IVAO a spin? There is much more controllers in Europe than Vatsim, No hating please, but dude if your from the US then Vatsim is probably the best for you

I dont think paid software is the solution, some of the most used software out there are free. For example Apache, Firefox and Linux. When I develop software I give it away for free, the payment for me is simply that I enjoy helping people if I am able to do that and I think the value of that enjoyment is worth spending time developing. I do of course enjoy developing in itself as well.

I do and don't agree with ya there Johan. I have given lots of my time in different manners for the flight sim community. But in order for things to improve on vatsim I think some of these devs should be compensated in some manner. Referring to SB, i wouldnt expect Joel to continuously put out new pilot clients. He's done enough as it is. Everytime i turn on my computer I open servinfo to check whos online. Before SB3 there was a continuous ~ 400 pilots logged on. After his SB3 was released, those stats jumped to ~ 700-800 (more on a flyin). His software at the time changed vatsim drastically. But really what is wrong with givingthe guy 5-10 bucks to update to SB5. 5-10 bucks for software you are going to use for 3-5 years? Best deal ever! It might give him to motivation to do it.

If Vatsim starts charging a subscription, it will die due to lack of members.. If they need Money. they should seek sponsorship. Once PilotEdge comes out of Beta, and starts trying to charge pilots $20 / month, I suspect they will quickly die as well. Sad reflection of the current times we live in .... everyone thinks the DESERVE something for nothing.The reality is starting to sink in.

I also agree and dont agree with this statement too. I think everyone should "donate" time to the hobby they enjoy BUT on the other end of tbe spectrum with your comment.......everyone thinks they DESERVE everything for free. You are making it sound like this is OK. i do feel that some people out there are opportunists and think they can make a dollar on everything they do. I dont agree with this but I do agree with Coma in that there is nothing wrong with charging for value. But its up to each individual to know what is valuable to them. For Coma. I do like the idea of what you are doing but here is my question. I fly only online and would like to perhaps use your network. BUT I fly the NG for a living and I dont think I will be coming home from flying a real aircraft and then have to pay to fly online. I like flying online but not that much. Do you have any solutions for people such as myself?