Returning to Flight Sims. Is XP11 suitable?

[strider1 575]

4 hours ago, vortex681 said:

But wasn't that also the case with XP10? To quote from the developers blog for XP10 at the end of 2011 with reference to ATC:

What kinds of things might you expect in the next stage? (NOTE: these are not promises. The details of future features have not been finalized but i'm trying to offer an idea of roughly where we're headed). VFR operations. Requesting higher/lower altitudes in flight. In-air conflict prevention and resolution. Changing destinations in flight. Requesting specific runways. Requesting specific approaches...etc. etc.

Even while XP10 was in developement, this was one of the priorities discussed at an XP Congress:

Improved ATC (Also high on Austin's list).

Austin has wanted to tackle ATC for a long time. I wouldn't hold your breath!

I am holding my breath ! It's going to happen. How good or bad it's going to be is anyones guess.

[Paraffin 2,197]

17 minutes ago, strider1 said:

They also provide radar vectors if you need assistance with navigation, low altitude alerts, transitions through controlled airspace, etc...

Yeah, we're not all out in the boonies. The area I live in has some nice VFR flying areas to the West and North, but in any other direction we're surrounded by military bases and controlled airspace. I mean really, seriously controlled with the West Coast Trident sub base out here, and the Naval Air base at Whidbey Island with their protected flight training areas. Any VFR flight in certain directions would involve at least some interaction with ATC. 

Now, whether Austin's ideas about ATC would match situations like military airspace notification and avoidance is an open question. 

[ryanbatc 13,012]

Since everyone is talking about my job lol... let me clear up some misconceptions.  ATC is certainly around not just for IFR, but VFR traffic as well.  In our manual, the 7110.65 - 

 

"The primary purpose of the ATC system is to prevent a collision between aircraft operating in the system and to provide a safe, orderly and expeditious flow of traffic, and to provide support for National Security and Homeland Defense"

I was lazy so I copied that from the pdf version - but we do a GREAT deal of other items as well, we are here for the pilots!  That's the point!

[sd_flyer 6,084]

12 hours ago, strider1 said:

Its called flight following ! AC seperation. It's workload permitting.

"Radar traffic information service — commonly known as VFR flight following — is a service provided by air traffic control (ATC) and available to all VFR pilots which can enhance your flying safety. While receiving flight following, you'll be in radio contact with a radar controller at a Terminal Radar Approach Control (TRACON) or Air Route Traffic Control Center (ARTCC)"

"The purpose of the service is for controllers to issue traffic information to pilots, based on radar-displayed targets, concerning other aircraft in their proximity or that will intersect their flight path"

They also provide radar vectors if you need assistance with navigation, low altitude alerts, transitions through controlled airspace, etc...

 Yes VFR flight following is advisory but you can be dropped as controller feel overwhelmed with IFR traffic. After that you will be on you own

[sd_flyer 6,084]

9 hours ago, ryanbatcund said:

Since everyone is talking about my job lol... let me clear up some misconceptions.  ATC is certainly around not just for IFR, but VFR traffic as well.  In our manual, the 7110.65 - 

 

"The primary purpose of the ATC system is to prevent a collision between aircraft operating in the system and to provide a safe, orderly and expeditious flow of traffic, and to provide support for National Security and Homeland Defense"

I was lazy so I copied that from the pdf version - but we do a GREAT deal of other items as well, we are here for the pilots!  That's the point!

Ok lets talk about midair collision of VFR aircraft on ATC duty in SoCal. Two years ago at SDM student pilot from MYF in the traffic patter (VFR) ? An airplane out of SEE on IR instructional flight (VFR). List can go on and on...

And how about "stay outside my airspace" on VFR flight following? You will never get this on iFR flight plan. 

[Griphos 138]

I'm really not sure what you're trying to say or argue for.  I'm trying to understand, but, you're not being very clear.  If you're still wanting to argue that ATC is just (or primarily) for IFR, then, you're just wrong.  

[ryanbatc 13,012]

I'm not really sure either.  That midair at Brown was very very sad - I have no idea what happened, I didn't read up on what happened - but obviously the controller really screwed up.  I'm sure he or she will have guilt the rest of their life.  That being said the FAR's will tell you the PIC has sole responsibility for operation of their aircraft.  

There are multiple reasons why we'll tell you to stay clear of XYZ airspace, one of them being there are different rules for separation that we must apply.  When you're VFR, typically you're just wandering around on any heading or altitude (not always but usually), you could easily turn towards another aircraft or in this case, another airspace that we haven't coordinated with first.  We have internal conditions/procedures that need to me met that pilots typically don't have any idea about (nor should they).

I've never flown in socal irl but it is some of the busiest airspace out there.  Where I work in northern MN, VFR traffic advisories is our bread and better, along with VFR (and IFR) practice approaches, IFR/VFR transients, fast moving military aircraft, and a few airliner types.  I tend to agree if all you know is Socal, then yes, IFR is the preferred method of getting around there - from my pilot edge online experience, if it is as much like the real world as they say it is, it's actually EASIER to fly IFR than VFR.

But to say ATC only cares about IFR aircraft, or only is around for IFR aircraft is just silly.  There is more airspace than the busy west coast :)

[sd_flyer 6,084]

Just now, Griphos said:

I'm really not sure what you're trying to say or argue for.  I'm trying to understand, but, you're not being very clear.  If you're still wanting to argue that ATC is just (or primarily) for IFR, then, you're just wrong.  

You get VFR advisories, there are no separation minimum applied for VFR aircraft. Unless you are in CLASS B, C, D you can be dropped at any time over priority for IFR traffic and you solely will be responsible visual separation. Moreover, on VFR you can be denied entering airspace, flight following  and other VFR ATC services due ATC priority over IFR traffic. Please prove me wrong.

I witnessed midair in CRQ class Delta many years ago with controller on duty. A classic high wing low wing, crosswind/downwind interception where ATC simply advised both aircraft (172 and Twin Beech I believe) of each other. 

It's pilot responsibility on VFR flight to see and avoid. ATC just gives you advisories. It's a different picture for IFR traffic especially in IMC

P.S. I've been flying for 14 years and I remember around minimum 6 midair involving VFR traffic with ATC on duty and talking to them

[scottb613 1,188]

Hi Folks,

I'm missing the point you're trying to make as well "sd_flyer"... All that said ATC is still a big asset when flying VFR - I use them all the time when doing anything more than puttering around my home dromes... I've had them call out fast moving traffic that I didn't have visually and provide separation... LOL - I've also had aircraft show up close aboard that ATC didn't inform me of while receiving radar services - responded with "oops - sorry"... See and avoid works much of the time but we all know it's not an ideal system... I recall being a bit stunned by the amount of visual traffic I would most likely have missed when I moved up to an aircraft with a fish finder... It's not a perfect world - mistakes do happen - if we as GA pilots could stop repeating the same basic mistakes (Fuel Starvation - CFIT - VFR into IMC) - GA flying would be pretty darn safe... IFR or VFR the PIC is still ultimately responsible for the safe operation of the aircraft and sometimes you need to use the word "unable" when working with ATC...

Regards,

Scott

[sd_flyer 6,084]

5 minutes ago, ryanbatcund said:

 

But to say ATC only cares about IFR aircraft, or only is around for IFR aircraft is just silly.  There is more airspace than the busy west coast :)

Well Ryan it is what it is. I hold nothing against ATC - for the most part a highly professional good folks...Unless they stressed up in busy SoCal airspace LOL

I got near miss on VFR flight following many years ago, and had  a talk to ATC. And guess what? They wouldn't be responsible if something happened. They were busy handling IFR traffic and that was it. As you said PIC is responsible for safety of the flight but VFR is see and avoid.

I teach all my students to  utilize everything  they can: TIS, ADS B, flight following, traffic advisories freq and so on. But most important thing is to be aware that you cannot  purely relying on anything but your own eyes (situation awareness). Of course picture changes drastically during IFR flights, you cannot be dropped  with 1200  unless you decide to cancel IFR on your own 

[Griphos 138]

The first part of what you said is correct.  In Class E airspace, IFR traffic has priority and ATC is offered on as available workload conditions.  That's still ATC for VFR.  Priority doesn't mean exclusion.  I've yet to be "dropped" from flight following on any VFR flight where I've asked for it.  And in Class D, C, and B airspace, ATC is required for VFR flight.  

Being denied entry into airspace is itself ATC comms.  You're not ignored!  You are interacting with ATC and you will continue to interact with them until permission to enter is granted and you complete your flight or transit.  That's ATC service.  

You seem to be confusing priority with service.  ATC prioritizes IFR in many situations.  That doesn't make ATC only for or even primarily for IFR.   

[sd_flyer 6,084]

5 minutes ago, scottb613 said:

Hi Folks,

I'm missing the point you're trying to make as well "sd_flyer"... All that said ATC is still a big asset when flying VFR - I use them all the time when doing anything more than puttering around my home dromes... I've had them call out fast moving traffic that I didn't have visually and provide separation... LOL - I've also had aircraft show up close aboard that ATC didn't inform me of while receiving radar services - responded with "oops - sorry"... See and avoid works much of the time but we all know it's not an ideal system... I recall being a bit stunned by the amount of visual traffic I would most likely have missed when I moved up to an aircraft with a fish finder... It's not a perfect world - mistakes do happen - if we as GA pilots could stop repeating the same basic mistakes (Fuel Starvation - CFIT - VFR into IMC) - GA flying would be pretty darn safe... IFR or VFR the PIC is still ultimately responsible for the safe operation of the aircraft and sometimes you need to use the word "unable" when working with ATC...

Regards,

Scott

Scott my point is that VFR is world of advisories. And if you want to develop ATC system for XP it's better to concentrate on IFR - a beautiful world where you fly on predetermined routes, approaches with possibility of bonus shortcuts such as vectors :)

[sd_flyer 6,084]

4 minutes ago, Griphos said:

The first part of what you said is correct.  In Class E airspace, IFR traffic has priority and ATC is offered on as available workload conditions.  That's still ATC for VFR.  Priority doesn't mean exclusion.  I've yet to be "dropped" from flight following on any VFR flight where I've asked for it.  And in Class D, C, and B airspace, ATC is required for VFR flight.  

Being denied entry into airspace is itself ATC comms.  You're not ignored!  You are interacting with ATC and you will continue to interact with them until permission to enter is granted and you complete your flight or transit.  That's ATC service.  

You seem to be confusing priority with service.  ATC prioritizes IFR in many situations.  That doesn't make ATC only for or even primarily for IFR.   

Well in my book if something has priority over another that other is primary. They provide VFR services if they can - work load permitted. And when ATC denied you of something you are responsible for everything yourself. So there is that. 

 

[sd_flyer 6,084]

By the way about aircraft separation.. Not until I install ADS B (in and out) on my aircraft, I realized what word of ignorance I was living in. Even in terms of VFR flight advisories ATC would call traffic 1 mile away 1000 ft below and didn't mention someone passing 300 feet above my head at all. So things happens of course but FAR 91.3 is our domain.

[Paraffin 2,197]

19 minutes ago, sd_flyer said:

Scott my point is that VFR is world of advisories. And if you want to develop ATC system for XP it's better to concentrate on IFR - a beautiful world where you fly on predetermined routes, approaches with possibility of bonus shortcuts such as vectors :)

That's the easiest approach from a programming angle too. But remember Austin is a private pilot, who probably does a number of VFR flights in his Lancair. He builds into X-Plane what he's personally interested in. In a recent Q&A before the flight sim conference, he was talking about a project he's working on for a more ad-hoc ATC for VFR flights.

The impression I got was that this was something extra that may or may not work, and it would be in addition to the main work they're doing to beef up the ATC system for IFR flights. We're getting that regardless. We just don't know when.