SIDs and STARs useless?

[signmanbob 592]

In the end, I actually like being vectored, and I agree with others here that it adds to the immersion, especially when the vectoring is due to real issues (within the VATSIM world) like traffic, sigmets, emergencies, etc.  

When I feel I'm being vectored because the controller is needing something to do, I remember that they are their helping us pilots with the immersion factor, so I'm courteous and return the favor. :smile:

 

 

You need to try PilotEdge on for size. 

[rsrandazzo 6,353]

Gents,

 

The purpose of SID/STAR procedures is to help both sides of the equation understand what the expected plan will be.

 

In the real world, at least in the USA, SID/STAR use has dramatically increased as high performance airplanes become largely FMS equipped. 

 

It is a RARE moment not to be given a SID or a STAR leaving congested terminal airspace in the USA.

 

I have seen a couple of comments about pilots "declining vectors" and the like- and all I can say about that topic is:  Not on my flight deck.  The controller is our partner in the outcome of the flight.  He sees a bigger picture than we do- and if he wants us to fly the whole SID/STAR, we will and we are prepared to do so.  If he wants to vector us off the procedure for simplicity or convenience- so be it.  We comply convivially. 

 

(Okay- sometimes I gripe to my copilot...  but that is more just to hear myself talk...  LOL)

 

As for VATSIM:  I'm betting most VATSIM controllers will vector you because it allows them to interact with traffic in their space.  The traffic load isn't as high or as continuous as many real world sectors- so why lump everyone into a SID/STAR and just sit and watch them? 

 

Either way- as a pilot- you should be prepared for both!

[dmwalker 601]

EDDF Charts have the statement:

 

STARs are not used as normal procedure at Frankurt
used as Lost Com procedure only.

 

Transition to Final Approach used instead as Standard Arrival
see Transition Charts / GPS/FMS RNAV Arrival.

 

What would be the reason for this?

[scandinavian13 5,192]

 

 

What would be the reason for this?

 

If you follow the regs and procedures back to their origin, you'll always end up back at lost comms: your clearance, your approach clearance, a holding clearance, and so on...all contain some sort of lost comms clause (even if not explicitly stated). The Transitions to Final Approach (TFA) are essentially STARs, but using STARs as lost comms and TFAs as actual procedure helps both separate lost comms traffic, and make it more obvious.

 

You file the STAR, but as you get closer to the airport (and the runway direction is known), the controller will assign a TFA instead.

[ahsmatt7 1,199]

a lot of you are making this much more complicated than it really is.

 

vectors off from a departure or arrival can happen for many reasons. quite frankly, it's usually for traffic separation or because they are giving everyone shortcuts at the same place across said arrival/departure. I rarely every fly an entire arrival fix by fix coming into ORD. they only have 1 departure so there's no need to comment on that.

 

when I was based in houston, it all depended on the weather and traffic load. if there was heavy traffic, we would fly the whole departure/arrival. if it was light traffic or bad weather, you could expect vectors most of the way up or down.

 

for those who don't fly transport category airplanes, if someone ever declined vectors, they better have a good reason. the things that IFR students are taught about declining this and declining that don't work in professional flying UNLESS there is a very good reason for it.

 

I've only declined certain clearances when we are going into small out stations, the weather is good and it's usually because we are the only airplane ATC is working at the time.