Future of Online Flying

[Boomer 1,619]

And combat flying...eg DCSW or FalconBMS..?

Any experiences to share?

[Ident 198]

1 hour ago, Bobsk8 said:

I then decided to give Pilotedge another try. They have controllers starting at 8:00 am PST for 15 hours. Problem there is you are limited to either the LA area, or the Western area which they added in the last year or so. You get one controller normally for the entire flight and that controller switches you from one frequency to another, but the voice and the controller is always the same, which sort of ruins the immersion. I only fly A2A aircraft now, mostly the AT6, Comanche, and Skylane. Some  of the Western area in the Pilotedge area, requires a pressurized aircraft due to the mountainous terrain, , or you can't fly there. Besides being limited to one area of the US, and the cost of $20 a month, the other problem I personally had was copying the clearances. I have zero problems with IFR clearances on Vatsim and all my flights are IFR, but copying the clearance on Pilotedge, especially when they changed my FP, required me to write at a shorthand speed to get it down, and I don't know shorthand. There is no text option, so a couple of times, I just gave up trying to get the clearance down.   After a week or so , I decided that I much preferred Vatsim, and that is the only on line ATC I currently fly.  

At least you gave PE an honest try. I fly PE with a VR headset so I know what you mean about shorthand and clearance as I have the added layer of having to look at my kneeboard through a small gap in the nose piece area. However, you should be able to get "Cleared to XXXX as filed" 99% of the time flying in the small planes you mentioned if you file a friendly FP. I use Skyvector to start my route, then look at the available SIDs and STARs if there are any, make sure my final waypoint on my route works with an approach if I am using one and try to keep my routes simple. A lot easier to do in a small plane then doing a tubeliner into and out of Class B's.

I also fly with Ultimate Traffic Live and P3DATC but with the sound for ATC down low.  that way PE ATC will always talk over any AI or ATC inside the sim but when I use an non-PE airport I still have ATC and the chance of local traffic. I fly from airstrips to Internationals inside the entire PE coverage area and have yet to run into any conflict issues as I have my GA set at 15% and Commercial set at 50%.

While you might get handed off to the same controller from start to finish, they are also very sterile in a profesional way that has you treating each freq as a new person. Also a lot of enroute handoffs really dont require much in communication transmissions or info and when departing or arriving one usually can be busy enough with their checks to not care too much about the same person. I see PE as a tool for maximizing my skills at the radio more than enhancing my sim. However, I also feel the sometimes free for all of free online flying to be more of a immersion killer than any of the cons that PE might have.

But yeah there are no text options on PE just like in real life so if you can advance in PE then you can advance in RL and you should be able to do all the things you can do in real life in PE. Its seems an issue can arise when a real world private pilot rated member tries to fly a scheduled airliner flight of a ATP rating without knowing a lot about all that there is to know between the two and the years of experience that comes with it. Members arent paying for ATC to dumb down to work with them but instead hope to provide a professional environment for members to advance their skills in if you know what I mean.

[NickJZX 17]

5 hours ago, Boomer said:

And combat flying...eg DCSW or FalconBMS..?

Any experiences to share?

Flew with a group called the F99th for about a year, it was really good fun. They were on DCS. It depends on the groups you're looking for and how serious you want to go. But getting together with buddys and jumping on blueflag was great, go and take out objectives. We'd hang out in a group of 4, 2 guys great at air-air and the other 2 good for air-ground. The mirage was great in this aspect as you could self escort (albeit to a limited degree). We'd sometimes have 2 A-10's buddy lase for 2 Mirages with GBU-12s and that was quite cool to watch on a TGP. There's a voice service for DCS called SimpleRadio which simulated VHF and UHF radios, allowing you to communicate with different flights, AWACs and other various players, however most people tend to fly with others on teamspeak. If you have DCS and are interested in flying online, you can PM me and I have a couple friends who'd be willing to fly with as well! 

 Not DCS or BMS related but, I only just started dabbling into VATSIM the last couple weeks after joining Canadian Xpress. I don't think I'd have ever taken the plunge into it had I not joined a VA. There seems to be a level of intimidation to the whole thing. However a couple flights in and listening to comms and it's starting to become familiar. I normally fly between Edmonton/Calgary area and Vancouver due to the relatively low amount of traffic to get used to. However I've found the controllers to be extremely helpful and I've started to wonder why I hadn't tried this before. I'm sure in some cases VATSIM can be improved, I myself haven't experienced tons of issues as far as voice goes, most times it's pretty good. Usually it's the pilots that are kind of hard to hear. A new codec would be excellent and I'm sure would help lots of people out there and maybe help people join when they can start to understand controllers and other pilots.

[Bobsk8 12,489]

I made a determined effort to re-evaluate my feelings about Vatsim that I had when I flew using it back in the 2005 time frame for a couple of years. I downloaded V Pilot which works quite well in the beginning of October, 2017, and started flying with Vatsim again.  Since then I have flown over 200 hours with Vatsim. Here is the conclusion that I have come to as of this week:

 

1. My major complaint about Vatsim is having to gear my flying around controller availability as far as time and areas of the world  to fly in.  Every time I plan a flight, I have to check Accumap or Vatatsic and see where controllers are, and if there are even any. 

2 Once I locate a controller somewhere, I have to quickly make a flight plan, set up the flight, and contact clearance. Very often, by the time I have done that, the controller has signed off or is gettting ready to sign off. A couple of times, I have been given a clearance after my flight plan was amended by ATC ( Flight plan from Skyvector BTW), taxi to the active, take off, and controller annunces they are going off line.   Sometimes I would repeat and move everything to another area if I can locate another controller, and try it all  again. I even learned to see how long the controller was on duty, thinking that if the controller was already on for a couple of hours, the odds are the controller would be signing off soon most likely. I have had numerous instances of the controller being on for a very short time  ( once as little as 15 minutes) and signing off anyway. 

3. Looking at the online monitoring, I see many pilots flying with no controllers anywhere, on Unicomm. This I don't get at all. Why even bother? No ATC, no AI traffic, Unicomm by text which doesn't make any sense at all, etc....

4. In planning a flight, I try and stay within  an active Artcc so I will have ATC at both departure and arrival, which usually turns out to be the same controller for the entire flight. This usually limits my flights to under 200 miles.  Not very immersive. 

 

I finally decided, when I started flying my Majestic Q400, last week, that I was going to go back to using  Pro ATC X for ATC. Now I have realistic sounding ATC ( Pro ATC X now has many voice sets and also excellent very realistic background ATC chatter as I am flying. All of the flights I have done so far have been flawless. I get Sids and Stars assigned on almost every flight, approaches vary depending on the  weather, controllers are there from clearance and ground to  approach and tower, all very realistic sounding. The flight planning is done  right in the program, and works very well. I have totally enjoyed each and every flight and now don't have to worry about that dreaded , " XXX Center is now signing off, change to Unicomm, and have a nice day" message. 

At least I gave it a re-try.

 

 

[qqwertz 770]

59 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

2 .... Very often, by the time I have done that, the controller has signed off or is getting ready to sign off ....

3. Looking at the online monitoring, I see many pilots flying with no controllers anywhere, on Unicomm. This I don't get at all. Why even bother? No ATC, no AI traffic, Unicomm by text which doesn't make any sense at all, etc....

Hi Bob,

Your point 2 gives a partial answer to your point 3. ATC going offline before one reaches its airspace happens all the time. At some point I just stopped bothering about searching for ATC that just happens to be online. But there is more to flying on Vatsim in empty spaces:

- My VA encourages flying online because it shows an online presence. For a VA that is also a Vatsim authorized training organization (ATO), there are even requirements for a certain amount of online presence.

- I often use Ultimate Traffic Live, Pro-ATC and Vatsim together. Hence, I have traffic and reasonable ATC even when flying in areas without Vatsim ATC. If Vatsim ATC goes online I switch off Pro-ATC, and if I get into areas with a lot of Vatsim traffic I switch off UTL.

The best way to make sure that you have Vatsim ATC is to check for events at https://www.vatsim.net/events . I have only experienced it once or twice in 6 years that there was no ATC even though an event had been announced. Some controller spaces also use a booking system, so that you can check when ATC is online. Qutescoop can display those bookings.

Peter

 

[ShezA 176]

8 hours ago, Bobsk8 said:

I made a determined effort to re-evaluate my feelings about Vatsim that I had when I flew using it back in the 2005 time frame for a couple of years. I downloaded V Pilot which works quite well in the beginning of October, 2017, and started flying with Vatsim again.  Since then I have flown over 200 hours with Vatsim. Here is the conclusion that I have come to as of this week:

 

1. My major complaint about Vatsim is having to gear my flying around controller availability as far as time and areas of the world  to fly in.  Every time I plan a flight, I have to check Accumap or Vatatsic and see where controllers are, and if there are even any. 

2 Once I locate a controller somewhere, I have to quickly make a flight plan, set up the flight, and contact clearance. Very often, by the time I have done that, the controller has signed off or is gettting ready to sign off. A couple of times, I have been given a clearance after my flight plan was amended by ATC ( Flight plan from Skyvector BTW), taxi to the active, take off, and controller annunces they are going off line.   Sometimes I would repeat and move everything to another area if I can locate another controller, and try it all  again. I even learned to see how long the controller was on duty, thinking that if the controller was already on for a couple of hours, the odds are the controller would be signing off soon most likely. I have had numerous instances of the controller being on for a very short time  ( once as little as 15 minutes) and signing off anyway. 

3. Looking at the online monitoring, I see many pilots flying with no controllers anywhere, on Unicomm. This I don't get at all. Why even bother? No ATC, no AI traffic, Unicomm by text which doesn't make any sense at all, etc....

4. In planning a flight, I try and stay within  an active Artcc so I will have ATC at both departure and arrival, which usually turns out to be the same controller for the entire flight. This usually limits my flights to under 200 miles.  Not very immersive. 

 

I finally decided, when I started flying my Majestic Q400, last week, that I was going to go back to using  Pro ATC X for ATC. Now I have realistic sounding ATC ( Pro ATC X now has many voice sets and also excellent very realistic background ATC chatter as I am flying. All of the flights I have done so far have been flawless. I get Sids and Stars assigned on almost every flight, approaches vary depending on the  weather, controllers are there from clearance and ground to  approach and tower, all very realistic sounding. The flight planning is done  right in the program, and works very well. I have totally enjoyed each and every flight and now don't have to worry about that dreaded , " XXX Center is now signing off, change to Unicomm, and have a nice day" message. 

At least I gave it a re-try.

 

 

This is what I am having developed.  I hope pilots and ATC both use it to the mutual benefit of both....

www.atcbooking.com

There are a few final enhancements to make before I officially launch it so watch this space.

Shez

[HighTowers 1,434]

I know its been discussed numerous times in the past, but having better coverage might work better if IVAO and Vatsim finally set aside their differences and work together. More controllers, more pilots= alot more traffic, and a better chance a controller would be online.  Alot of logistics would have to be worked out as well as better training for all to be on the same page, but just seems to make sense to have everyone together on one network.  Seen a few threads on its discussion and its mostly mocked and scoffed that it will never happen but this is the only way your going to fill up some of the voids of dead controlled airspace.

I used Pro-ATC for quite a while too but was tired of the canned responses and strict FPs and wacky vectoring. Things like going out 30nm on the downwind because thats where the IAF is instead of turning base 10-15nm out and intercepting like vatsim controllers have you do. They also cut your route short often enough giving direct TOs. This is the immersion factor that cant be beat by linear programming that follows a script. 

[ninerwhiskey9W 19]

6 hours ago, HighTowers said:

I know its been discussed numerous times in the past, but having better coverage might work better if IVAO and Vatsim finally set aside their differences and work together. More controllers, more pilots= alot more traffic, and a better chance a controller would be online.  Alot of logistics would have to be worked out as well as better training for all to be on the same page, but just seems to make sense to have everyone together on one network.  Seen a few threads on its discussion and its mostly mocked and scoffed that it will never happen but this is the only way your going to fill up some of the voids of dead controlled airspace.

I used Pro-ATC for quite a while too but was tired of the canned responses and strict FPs and wacky vectoring. Things like going out 30nm on the downwind because thats where the IAF is instead of turning base 10-15nm out and intercepting like vatsim controllers have you do. They also cut your route short often enough giving direct TOs. This is the immersion factor that cant be beat by linear programming that follows a script. 

Ha ! If only. It would indeed be a great if IVAO and VATSIM could work together, but the possibitlity of that happening is slim. I doubt most pilots and controllers would have any issue with the merge, but management is a completely different story. 

With POSCON in the works, I do hope it manages to deliver the features it has adverstised, and attracts enough traffic to be successful.

[HighTowers 1,434]

2 hours ago, ninerwhiskey9W said:

Ha ! If only. It would indeed be a great if IVAO and VATSIM could work together, but the possibitlity of that happening is slim. I doubt most pilots and controllers would have any issue with the merge, but management is a completely different story. 

With POSCON in the works, I do hope it manages to deliver the features it has adverstised, and attracts enough traffic to be successful.

Never heard of that. Sounds well and good. So the answer then instead of a merge which is apparently impossible is to make a new network and hopefully draw everyone from the two other networks. 

[simbol 5,767]

Having a third network will not help.

What we need is a new client app for pilots and controllers that connects to both networks (Vatsim and Ivao).

This way the integration happens at user level leaving both organisations to run separate as they are so they don't have any conflict.

But the result would be that we see more controllers and traffic online.

Simbol 

[ErichB 3,637]

23 hours ago, Bobsk8 said:

At least I gave it a re-try.

 

Well, one can't argue with that Bob.  Fair enough.

Where I differ in my approach (pun not intended) is I don't necessarily plan a flight based on where ATC is.  I plan for where I want to fly to and from. Sometimes I get nothing - sometimes I get 100% coverage.  Sometimes I join events.  Even when there is no-one about at any given time, what VATSIM does make you do (at least for me) is maintain a discipline about your flight, because someone may pop up online at any time.  So it keeps you focused, and doing things by the book anyway (within reason).  It;'s not always ideal, but when it works (and that's most of the time for me), its works really well and nothing comes close to it. 

I also echo the thoughts for IVAO and VATSIM to sort out their BS for the greater good of the community. That would be a pretty great day for all.  I echo  concerns from a mate of mine who I often fly with online, that new online networks just further fragment the community and online organisations and further dilute both IVAO and VATSIM.  Unless everyone makes a move, it's of little use.  A new platform with new tech infrastructure is of no use without pilots in the sky.   I'm not sure what the lure will be, but at this stage my jury is out on that one.

 

[Bobsk8 12,489]

2 hours ago, ErichB said:

Well, one can't argue with that Bob.  Fair enough.

Where I differ in my approach (pun not intended) is I don't necessarily plan a flight based on where ATC is.  I plan for where I want to fly to and from. Sometimes I get nothing - sometimes I get 100% coverage.  Sometimes I join events.  Even when there is no-one about at any given time, what VATSIM does make you do (at least for me) is maintain a discipline about your flight, because someone may pop up online at any time.  So it keeps you focused, and doing things by the book anyway (within reason).  It;'s not always ideal, but when it works (and that's most of the time for me), its works really well and nothing comes close to it. 

I

Actually I get the same thing with PATC. Starting with looking up and switching freqs which I do myself, writing down clearances, looking at Sid and Star charts which are assigned by PATC, ,  and making sure they are properly entered into the FMC, following taxi instructions, following headings when vectored, maintaining assigned altitudes, monitoring speeds, adjusting descents, it's all there on every flight. No time at all to get bored. 

[Glynn 405]

On 9/27/2017 at 6:36 PM, ErichB said:

New voice codecs have been announced for VATSIM which will improve the quality of voice transmission.

https://www.vatsim.net/news/new-voice-codec-voice-unicom

 

No time frame announced, which for Vatsim could mean sometime in the next couple of decades

[Glynn 405]

On 9/27/2017 at 6:36 PM, ErichB said:

New voice codecs have been announced for VATSIM which will improve the quality of voice transmission.

https://www.vatsim.net/news/new-voice-codec-voice-unicom

 

No time frame announced, which for Vatsim could mean sometime in the next couple of decades