Read my post again with the new emphasis added.

 

Then agani, RW if you don't question an ATC clearance you do not understand or can not perform you will be in far greater problem when you cause an incident and get your license on the line, compared to if you use the perfectyly legit phrase "say again".

 

It's there for a reason, no it isn't to help people who can't fly with ATC (depsite it sometimes being used like that), but to claim the use of "say again" RW would get you to lose your job is just plain wrong. If you don't get it you have to ask, especially in real world when real people are involved!

 

My post refers to the real world, not vatsim. It also tries to point out that the phrase is there to be used, but not to help people who can not fly with ATC (for example on Vatsim).

 

You will have your medical reviewed at certain times (depending on mainly age) regardless of your R/T, if your hearing is impaired the doctors will notice and will most likely do so way before you can't hear the radio anyway, so it's not really an issue.

 

As for multitasking I see your point, but having flown over 700 hours on vatsim now (and controlled over 1000) I think it's not that difficult as long as you're well prepared and know what you're doing, and sometimes you may haev to change your priorities. For example on vatsim setting XPDR to TA/RA can be done before getting line-up clearance without it causing issues to anyone apart from maybe creating nuiscanse TAs for yourself. Sometimes these small deviations from RW procedure allow you to transmit and maneuver the aircraft when needed, rather than operating systems (which RW would, along with R/T, be done by the pilot that we don't have the luxury of on vatsim).

I wonder if it would be possible to have a sound option for online (VATSIM etc) flying.

Now it's very hard to understand the controller since the cockpit noice is so present.

In real life a headphone would keep that noice away and only transmit ATC, in FSX all sounds come through my headset.

The answer to this is having a Headset/Headphone which does not have all the engine sound coming through it at the same time as ATC.

 

If only we could have an (let's call it) "multiplayer sound" option that would reduce all other noise (engines, environment etc) and focus on ATC....

There is already an in-built option that reduces all other noise (engines, environment etc) - You press the letter "Q" on the keyboard, and all other noise (engines, environment etc) becomes entirely silent.

 

I just hope this is not a serious suggestion! If you did that in real world, you wouldn't keep your job for a long time!

The suggestion is entirely serious. 100% totally serious. The 2 suggestions together should reduce the amount of times a VATSIM user should need to request a repeat, both by having the ATC speech coming direct to your headphones, and giving you the option of removing background noise.

 

If you did that in the real world, you would have a magic plane that can fly without making any noise.

 

I hope you don't seriously believe that a forum thread on the PMDG forum titled "VATSIM sound option?" is about "The real world" and that you think I would be incapable of "Keep(ing) my(sic) job for a long time!" because I suggest using a USB headset and pressing Q to remove background noise if you can't understand something due to background noise while flying on VATSIM. Vatsim: an online internet based group that uses Microsoft Flight Simulator, Xplane, and various other types of software to simulate an air traffic environment for entertainment purposes.

 

Also if you have some kind of phobia against the words "Say Again" then how do you avoid exchanges like the following:

• ATC: "ABC123, turn left heading *radio interference noise*"
  
• Word Not Allowed: "ABC123 turning left heading *mumble something*" - Word Not Allowed then turns left ... to an unspecified random heading he made up.
  

I think "Say Again" is a better outcome than a TCAS-RA or CFIT.

 

Trent Hopkinson

-A guy who knows the difference between a post about PMDG 777's flying on Vatsim, and "The Real World" and doesn't deserve to "loose his job" because of it.

Would everyone just hold up a moment here, step back, calm down, and look at what's actually being discussed here?

 

Stop trying to defend positions that aren't being attacked. I know it's close to election time, but the polarity is insane around here sometimes.

 

Nobody in this thread is trying to say that the use of "say again" is in poor taste, is poor phraseology, or anything of that nature. What is being said is if you're a pilot and you have to request ATC to say again after every transmission, there's a problem. It doubles frequency congestion simply because you're not paying attention, or don't have the proper equipment. That's it.

 

As an ATCer on VATSIM, and as someone who works closely with ATC now, I appreciate clarity. I agree that I'd rather have clarity over an efficient frequency. However, if a pilot is causing repeats because he or she isn't paying attention or cannot hear properly, both on VATSIM and in real life, I'd likely say something about it.

 

The issue isn't the validity of "say again," it's the troubles it can cause if it gets used every transmission.

 

If the VATSIM pilot doesn't have split channels (one for FSX, one for voice), and needs to use the Q method, it could devolve into that if he or she is toggling the sound each time:

"United 223, [instruction]"

[Pilot recognizes callsign, didn't hear instruction over noise, hits Q]: "Potomac, United 223, say again."

"United 223, [instruction]."

"[repeats instruction], United 223." [hits Q to turn sounds back on]

"United 223 [new instruction]

[Pilot recognizes callsign,didn't hear instruction over noise, hits Q]: "Potomac, United 223, say again."

"[repeats instruction], United 223." [hits Q to turn sounds back on]

7 transmissions to address one pilot.

 

Split comms:

"United 223, [instruction]."

"[repeats instruction], United 223."

"United 223, [new instruction]."

"[repeats instruction], United 223."

4 transmissions to address one pilot.

 

That's the only point. I encourage the use of the "say again" request when nothing was received, but it would be better radio technique to point towards clarification if it was unclear. In the case you're flying a profile STAR and hear:

"United 223, descend and maintain 10,000."

"Descend and maintain 10,000 - will we be complying with restrictions? United 223."

"United 223, affirmative, sorry about that: descend and maintain 10,000, comply with restrictions."

This method essentially tells ATC you heard the transmission, but need clarity, instead of simply repeating the unclear message again.

 

In the RW when I'm manuevering whilst on SoCal Dep/App I may miss a call, I'll simply say something like "Sorry could you repeat that please". No pilot is perfect ALL the time, but asking ATC to repeat an instruction every time must be pretty annoying for the controller.

 

I'm not saying you're not doing it correctly, because it's all dependent on frequency congestion, but I wouldn't use that in a busy TRACON like SOCAL. "Say again" is much shorter and gets to the same point. Sure, it's more cordial to do it your way, and it's certainly friendly, but it takes up a lot more time. One thing that most pilots don't know about is controllers often work combined positions. This means that a controller is listening to a couple frequencies at once. If you've ever been flying and talking to ATC and hear the controller but not the pilots, often times it's not that you're out of range, it's that they're on the controller's other frequency. My point there is that even though the frequency you're on may seem calm, it doesn't mean the other frequencies are.

 

Like I said, though, it's up to you. If you know it's a calm time of day, and the controller's phraseology seems relaxed, then you're golden. If not, brevity is key.

 

Regarding clearances, they're wrote down no matter what. I've heard people obviously trying to remember a clearance out of JFK, pretty funny to think that those people think that's how it's done in the real world.

 

I don't agree. I can't remember the last time I wrote a clearance down. Since they're given in a standard sequence - clearance limit, route, altitude, frequency and transponder code - you can either break it down in your head, or use your resources. I personally use the aircraft as my scratchpad. Initial alt goes in the autopilot, frequency goes in the standby, and the transponder code goes right in as it's spoken. The result is that I just killed two birds with one stone. I don't need to write it down and then enter the info later on. It's entered and ready to use, and I can use that for reminders on my readback. Granted, you should always have some paper in case they change your route when you call, but I wouldn't go as far as to say every clearance is written down.

 

Then again, if you're new to flying with ATC, or receiving clearances, you'd better be writing it down if only to save face.

Hi guys,

 

Viper1740 gave me a solution that works (without the need for a 2nd soundcard or a usb headset:

 

Use your FSFDT Control panel located next to the clock when you start VATSIM to control where your sounds go. You can set up your headset to only accept voice and outside speakers to produce engine/cockpit sound. You will need to have at least a 5.1 system for this. May not work on traditional stereo two speaker output. Good luck!

 

Everybody else: thank you for your ideas.

 

This thread can be closed

but the polarity is insane around here sometimes.

 

The issue isn't the validity of "say again," it's the troubles it can cause if it gets used every transmission.

 

 

Exactly what I was saying the whole time, and to quote:

"not talking about the Q button but rather often repeating..."

 

It's tiresome if a pilot is saying "say again" for each transmission because he has to press Q.

 

We are coming back to the beginning of the post with this - a separate sound card, USB adapter or USB headset are a must (or the idea posted above works too without additional hardware).

I don't agree. I can't remember the last time I wrote a clearance down. Since they're given in a standard sequence - clearance limit, route, altitude, frequency and transponder code - you can either break it down in your head, or use your resources. I personally use the aircraft as my scratchpad. Initial alt goes in the autopilot, frequency goes in the standby, and the transponder code goes right in as it's spoken. The result is that I just killed two birds with one stone. I don't need to write it down and then enter the info later on. It's entered and ready to use, and I can use that for reminders on my readback. Granted, you should always have some paper in case they change your route when you call, but I wouldn't go as far as to say every clearance is written down.

 

That was regarding for real world Airline Pilots, it's standard to write down the important information. I.e Squawk, Dep Frequencies, RWY & SID. Friends I know said they do the same throughout the airline and that's many different companies from EZY>BA>EK>QF>CLX. Of course in the UK our clearances aren't as ridiculous as the IFR clearance here in the states ha. EGLL for example it's a Cleared to Destination, SID & Squawk. 09L has a slightly different procedure for the CPT departures as you don't fly a SID, it's all vectored so you get a little more.

 

But for GA flying VFR & IFR of course it's not that hard to remember if you prepare and enter the information as they say. Out of KSNA I don't write nothing down since it's information I already know before hand.