[VATSIM] What have I done wrong?

[Julien H 6]

Hi everyone! I have been flying since several years now, and so I decided to try the VATSIM network. 

So I wanted to start by a little flight; London Gatwick to Nantes Atlantique (my local airport). However, I couldn't hear some of the UK's controllers / pilots, that's why I used text instead of voice. Plus it's easier for me to get used to procedures. Anyway, I request the clearance, okay, startup and pushback, okay, taxi.. ah. The controller actually stated me "TRA44, Taxi K hold short P", as shown below:

At that moment, I was: okay cool, it's easy it's only two taxiways from here.

That's my problem. I wasn't so sure about it, so I just followed the red line and waited at P1.

What should I have done instead? Should I have waited right before turning onto Papa taxiway and then wait for the controller to tell me to continue?

Sorry if that sounds stupid or easy for you, but I really don't understand and I'm trying to improve myself at this. :)

Oh and if I'm not in the right section, please could you redirect me?

Happy flying :)

[fluffyflops 1,845]

stopped at the end of Kilo just abeam stand 130 and not at p1 like it looks like you did.

[Julien H 6]

1 minute ago, tooting said:

stopped at the end of Kilo just abeam stand 130 and not at p1 like it looks like you did.

Oh that's what I thought then! Thank you so much for the fast answer! Great continuation!

[fluffyflops 1,845]

just to be a fickle man..

1.There is no transavia 44 flight

2. Transavia dont operate to Gatwick

3. Transavia dont even operate to the UK

4. Transavia dont operate from gatwick to Nante

5. your flightplan you filed was at fl300  you need an odd level for CFMU compliance entering LFFF as there a RAD/CDR on that route a better flightlevel would have been as below at fl250

6 .you filed as (B738/H)   your not a heavy aircraft... TVL equipment codes are as follows -B738/M-SDE2E3FGIJ1RWXY/L

7. transavia use alphanumeric callsigns 

8.On a final note, as it bugs the word not allowed of me, lets say there was TRA44 in real life (which should of been filed tra044) that means someone cant use that TRA044 callsign on the proper route, as you doing some hookey LGW to NTE flight using it.

Sorry to sound horrible... cruel to be kind.

 

next time PM me, ill give you a proper route.

 

cheers

 

 

 

 

 

[SAS443 1,711]

12 minutes ago, tooting said:

6 .you filed as (B738/H)   your not a heavy aircraft... TVL equipment codes are as follows -B738/M-SDE2E3FGIJ1RWXY/L

Just to be a fickle sod.

You are probably not aware that the suffix after "aircraft type" denotes RVSM/GNSS capablities. So a heavy like the 744 would actually be written as H/B744/L in the VATSIM client. "L" meaning RVSM, GNSS onboard and Mode C xpndr.

[nisx 21]

58 minutes ago, Starbird said:

Hi everyone! I have been flying since several years now, and so I decided to try the VATSIM network. 

So I wanted to start by a little flight; London Gatwick to Nantes Atlantique (my local airport). However, I couldn't hear some of the UK's controllers / pilots, that's why I used text instead of voice. Plus it's easier for me to get used to procedures. Anyway, I request the clearance, okay, startup and pushback, okay, taxi.. ah. The controller actually stated me "TRA44, Taxi K hold short P", as shown below:

At that moment, I was: okay cool, it's easy it's only two taxiways from here.

That's my problem. I wasn't so sure about it, so I just followed the red line and waited at P1.

What should I have done instead? Should I have waited right before turning onto Papa taxiway and then wait for the controller to tell me to continue?

Sorry if that sounds stupid or easy for you, but I really don't understand and I'm trying to improve myself at this. :)

Oh and if I'm not in the right section, please could you redirect me?

Happy flying :)

 

 

You are correct, in this situation, you would have taxied on "K" up to "P" and held until further ATC instructions.

[BlueStar 323]

1 hour ago, tooting said:

Sorry to sound horrible... cruel to be kind.

Pete,

It's just a game. 

blaustern

 

[ErichB 3,638]

Nothing wrong with making legitimate mistakes.  That's how you learn.

[skelsey 765]

Just to be fickle...

1 hour ago, tooting said:

1.There is no transavia 44 flight

And?

1 hour ago, tooting said:

2. Transavia dont operate to Gatwick

And?

1 hour ago, tooting said:

3. Transavia dont even operate to the UK

And?

1 hour ago, tooting said:

4. Transavia dont operate from gatwick to Nante

And?

1 hour ago, tooting said:

7. transavia use alphanumeric callsigns 

8.On a final note, as it bugs the word not allowed of me, lets say there was TRA44 in real life (which should of been filed tra044) that means someone cant use that TRA044 callsign on the proper route, as you doing some hookey LGW to NTE flight using it.

I'm not sure why you're saying it should have been TRA044; leading zeros, whilst not banned, are explicitly discouraged by ICAO and Eurocontrol so TRA44 seems perfectly fine to me. The BA976 uses BAW05DV in real life which bugs the real ATCOs -- I was talking to one of the Maastricht guys who says they've been trying to get it changed for ages but BA won't for some reason!

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for realism and doing things properly as you no doubt well know, but come on, let's look at the big picture here. The callsign/livery someone flies in is not really a big deal is it, especially when they are keen to learn from their procedural errors. It's no wonder people get scared at the idea of flying online when people start sounding off about this sort of irrelevance.

@Starbird - you already have your answer, but well done -- by posting this not only have you learnt something, some others reading this will likely not make the same mistake. Welcome to VATSIM!

For what it's worth -- and it would be very interesting to know whether this would have made any difference to the way you interpreted the instruction -- the controller's R/T is actually very slightly off in that strictly the phraseology should be "hold short of..." (as in, "taxi via K, hold short of P").

[speedyTC 194]

Just now, skelsey said:

Just to be fickle...

And?

And?

And?

And?

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for realism and doing things properly as you no doubt well know, but come on, let's look at the big picture here. The callsign/livery someone flies in is not really a big deal is it, especially when they are keen to learn from their procedural errors. It's no wonder people get scared at the idea of flying online when people start sounding off about this sort of irrelevance.

1

Hallelujah. Some common sense. Thank you, Simon.

[nawarren 83]

Hi Simon,

 

Good info as always. Can I ask why controllers don't like call signs beginning with zero? I hadn't,t heard of that.

cheers

neil

[skelsey 765]

The problem with leading zeros in alphanumeric callsigns is that there is a history of controllers mistakenly transposing them (e.g. BAW027 may be mistakenly referred to as BAW207). As I say though, it's not banned and some flights do use them!

[BlueStar 323]

2 hours ago, skelsey said:

The problem with leading zeros in alphanumeric callsigns is that there is a history of controllers mistakenly transposing them (e.g. BAW027 may be mistakenly referred to as BAW207). As I say though, it's not banned and some flights do use them!

From time to time I'll have the same or similar numeric numbers as another aircraft on frequency and will be advised by ATC that there is another aircraft on frequency with a similar number.  This can really be a problem when I am on UHF and the other aircraft is on VHF.  It was not unusual to have a zero in my military call sign and it would be used by the controller which would be Texas zero five one. I'm not sure how it is reflected on the ATC data strip? In your example above it is my understanding that BAW027 and BAW27 would be different call signs. 

blaustern

[B777ER 2,483]

6 hours ago, tooting said:

just to be a fickle man..

1.There is no transavia 44 flight

2. Transavia dont operate to Gatwick

3. Transavia dont even operate to the UK

4. Transavia dont operate from gatwick to Nante

5. your flightplan you filed was at fl300  you need an odd level for CFMU compliance entering LFFF as there a RAD/CDR on that route a better flightlevel would have been as below at fl250

6 .you filed as (B738/H)   your not a heavy aircraft... TVL equipment codes are as follows -B738/M-SDE2E3FGIJ1RWXY/L

7. transavia use alphanumeric callsigns 

8.On a final note, as it bugs the word not allowed of me, lets say there was TRA44 in real life (which should of been filed tra044) that means someone cant use that TRA044 callsign on the proper route, as you doing some hookey LGW to NTE flight using it.

Sorry to sound horrible... cruel to be kind.

 

next time PM me, ill give you a proper route.

 

cheers

 

 

 

 

 

If you're a controller at LGW lemme know when your next on, I'll be UAL0003 flying circuits in a 747. Just keeping it real brah!

[DaveCT2003 1,820]

I agree with Simon that the response in question was over the top.  The same information could have been relaid in a far more tactful manner, something meant to help/mentor a new VATSIM pilot. Instead it came off as highly critical and coming from someone who found an opportunity to demonstrate a higher level of knowledge than someone new to the network and thinks themselves above someone new. Even if that isn't how it was meant, it's certainly how it came off  It's all in how we chose to convey our thoughts.

 

5 hours ago, Bluestar said:

It's just a game.

It's really difficult to know what blaustern meant when he said "it's just a game", as that term, like many others, is subjective.  Depending on what blaustern meant the term "game" to mean, I might well agree with him, but trying my very best taking his comment in context I find that I have to disagree (though I wish it were not so).

I'm fairly certain that the vast majority of VATSIM and VATSIM forum users (ATC and Pilots) would disagree with the term "game" being applied to VATSIM, but especially those who once used one of many Multiplayer servers and either wanted to avoid those who flew on the server to goof off and do and say whatever they wanted regardless of how it affected others, or simply came to VATSIM for a higher, realism based experience - and here is our line of demarcation. If one considers that a higher, realism based experience is a game (my disagreement comes if the term is meant to imply that VATSIM anything less than that), then it's a game.

With the above in mind, there are some on the network who either aren't aware or fail to keep in mind that each and every day real life aviation is full of people learning, making mistakes, humor, very nice people and jerks, clashing personalities, friendliness - all the things we see in other environments.  We should certainly expect all those things to happen on VATSIM, which makes the network more realistic rather than detracting from the experience.

My very best to everyone.