• AVSIM Interview: Gunnar Lindahl, VATSIM President


    skelsey

    By Simon Kelsey
    Contributing Editor

     

    Gunnar Lindahl is the new man at the top of online flying network VATSIM. Elected in August to serve a two-year term as President of the network’s Board of Governors, he’ll be responsible for the day-to-day running and long-term development of the organisation, which has more than 76,000 members. He sat down with AVSIM’s Simon Kelsey to talk about his vision for the network.

     

    SK: Welcome to AVSIM! To start at the beginning -- what brought you to VATSIM?

    GL: It’s an interesting question. When I was at school, I was in to the simulation genre of games but I’d never really come across flight simulation. One of my school friends introduced me not to Flight Simulator but to VATSIM, so I actually discovered Flight Simulator through VATSIM, which I realise is a bit of a weird way of doing it, and yeah, hooked from there. So he was a pilot and a controller in the UK division, I joined as a pilot, bought myself a copy of FS9, got my head around the world of aviation, or at least the bits that I needed to know, and then basically became an active pilot, shortly followed by going down the controller route. So that’s how I got introduced to it -- very little, or zero aviation knowledge before being introduced to VATSIM, which is probably the other way round to how most people do it.

    SK: A lot of people say that VATSIM can be quite bureaucratic -- what do you say to them?

    GL: It is! I’ll be the first person to say yes, it is extremely bureaucratic. The way VATSIM was formed, and where it came from -- for example SATCO -- means that VATSIM has always been inherently hierarchical. It’s built on a structure which is based very much on relying on this pyramid of people, for better or for worse, and yes, absolutely accept the observation this it’s bureaucratic.

    It can be very difficult consequently to get things done and it can mean that some people can feel, maybe, excluded from the club sometimes and that’s one of the things I’m really keen to do -- to try and break down those barriers and make it more inclusive, and that’s really important to encourage VATSIM to go forward as well.

    SK: What do you think are the biggest challenges faced by the network?Gunnar Lindahl, VATSIM President
    VATSIM President Gunnar Lindahl

     

    GL: Plenty of challenges! I think what we face generally is operating within the flight sim community, obviously development of flight simulation platforms generally has slowed down pretty dramatically which I suppose means that the market of flight simulation is not expanding as much as it might have done in the past. Saying that though, developers are still in full gear doing lots of stuff so I think there’s a risk there for VATSIM.

    On the other hand, we know that we have a huge untapped section of the flight sim community that don’t fly online at all, so regardless of that risk we still have a big opportunity to try and bring those people on board and get them using the network.

    Internally within VATSIM I think one of the biggest risks we have is not being able to get enough controllers through our ranks -- we have a reputation for providing extremely high quality training for our controllers and our controllers are generally known to be very good, but the flip side of that is that we sometimes can’t get people trained quickly enough. What needs to be acknowledged is that VATSIM is a hobby and, you know, some people don’t have the time or commitment to spend in some cases literally years training to become a certain level of controller and I think that needs to be worked on, and that’s certainly a long term thing that we need to work out.

    So generally I think the big risk is the flight sim community as a whole and how we maximise our exposure to that and internally the slowness of controller progression is a big problem. Ultimately people don’t want to fly in empty skies and one of the huge pull factors for VATSIM is the fact that you get air traffic control so I think that’s something we need to work on.

    SK: When I started on VATSIM and when VATSIM itself became a concept - at the time there was no AI traffic, there was only very basic ATC software and so on but ultimately whatever you could get out of an online flying network was going to be more than what you could get from software -- even if there was only one other aeroplane on the ground, that was more than nothing! Now that everybody has loads of AI and there’s programs like VoxATC, Radar Contact and so on that can give you ATC any time of the day anywhere in the world -- how does VATSIM deal with that?

    GL: You’re absolutely right -- obviously these are things which have materialised over time and certainly they might be an issue. For me personally, I will never be able to replace the human engagement factor that I get from controlling and flying on VATSIM with some sort of AI either guide me around, or me guiding AI planes around a virtual sky. For me it’s all about the human element -- interacting with people, being part of the community, knowing that I’m flying in to Heathrow as part of some wider event with other pilots - you know, we’re holding, it’s busy and that sort of immersive factor of virtual air traffic is what really got me in to VATSIM.

    Like I say, when I got in to VATSIM I didn’t have an aviation background so that wasn’t the spark for me -- the spark for me was that online immersive environment. So yeah, I suppose for some maybe it’s sufficient to replace that environment with something you can get off the shelf but for people like me - and I won’t speculate how many mes there are -- that’s certainly no substitute.

    SK: Anecdotally, people seem to be joining VATSIM on a fairly regular basis, you see plenty of new ID numbers on the forums and so on. At the same time though, looking at the “Who’s Online” data, the average number of people connected at any one time seems to have stayed fairly consistent over the years. Is retention an issue?

    GL: Retention is certainly an issue and that is a multi-faceted problem which VATSIM needs to tackle. Last summer I gave a talk at VATUK Live and I put together some statistics which show that in terms of gross hours spent of the network as ATC and pilots, that is pretty much stable - it’s not going up and it’s not going down, which sort of indicates that the number of members we’re losing are being replaced by members who are participating. What it doesn’t take in to account is regional variations or what levels controllers are providing ATC - so it wouldn’t take in to account for example an area controller leaving to be replaced by a ground controller. So talking very generally we are stable in terms of gross activity on the network as a whole.

    The problem that VATSIM has seen -- has always seen -- is that generally speaking you lose a number of members at the higher ATC ratings after a time. One reason is that there’s then not really anywhere else you can go in terms of ratings, some people simply drift on to other hobbies, some people have other reasons for leaving and I think that’s one area VATSIM really needs to work on - how to retain those people and how to make them feel as if there’s something else they can get from the network and deliver that expectation for them.

    SK: There’s always been a requirement for ATC training -- there’s a lot of talk on various forums about whether there is the right balance between what’s required of controllers and what is or isn’t required of pilots on the network, and how that might impact on the experience of a controlling or flying session. Is that something you feel needs looking at?

    GL: VATSIM’s a really interesting environment because lots of people have lots of views -- it’s a huge community and a balance needs to be struck somewhere. My personal view is that we expect too much of our controllers and a little bit too little of our pilots -- that’s my personal view. I can see an improvement if we were to bring the bar down just a tiny bit for our controllers -- make it a little bit easier for them to get through the ratings. That can be done through increased automation of training methods, maybe acknowledging that not every day is an event day on VATSIM so when they’re taking their controller exams and their over the shoulder checks they aren’t being forced to wait for a day when they get loads of traffic to demonstrate that.

    On the pilot side -- this is a really tricky one, and one that we actually discussed at the convention in July. How do we tackle the issue of some pilots -- and it is a small minority, but a significant enough minority that it is a bugbear for many controllers and pilots -- how do we tackle pilots who just log on to the network without having a clue?

    Some have mentioned compulsory pilot training -- the question is what level of training would be given and how would that training be delivered. We’ve seen from the controller world that that one-to-one training simply wouldn’t work for pilots for obvious reasons.

    There is the option of something like a short theory test, and for me - the ideal, what I would like to see going forward is a very short, very basic series of questions which every new member of VATSIM would simply go through when they join the network, which would basically allow them to demonstrate that they have read the most basic documentation about what VATSIM is, how they’re expected to interact with the network and interact with others, and that they know where to go to get help. I think that’s a really crucial thing - so whatever system would be introduced would be all about giving them the tools to learn what they need to do.

    For people who say, well why not make the testing more vigorous like we do for controllers, I think what we need to remember is accessibility to the network. You could have a 40 year old guy who’s got a PPL and flies a Piper in real life, and stumbles across VATSIM and he already knows a lot about aviation, and he wants an environment where he can jump in Flight Sim and fly around and maybe become a controller, but he’s faced with all these obstacles and what’s he going to do? Well of course he’s just going to forget about it, and I think that’s a really important thing -- we risk losing valued members who do want to learn if we do put up excessive obstacles, and that’s where the balance needs to be struck.

    So going back to what I originally said - we expect a little bit too much of our controllers and a little bit too little of our pilots, and I’m hoping that over time that balance will be rectified, but again that is a long-term process -- it’s always a challenge doing things at a global level on VATSIM, because VATSIM is made up of so many communities spread across the world that do things in very different ways, and we need to build as much consensus as possible across all those different regions. So it’s definitely a challenge, but one certainly that I’m keen to pursue.

    SK: You’re obviously just at the start of your term -- at the end of your two years, when you look back on your tenure, what would success look like for you?

    GL: For me success is a busier network and a network which is more enjoyable for our members, and I know that’s very generic but actually both of those things can be measured and very generally that is what I’d like to achieve.

    I’d like to make the network bigger and busier and I would like to have delivered some stuff which makes it better. One of the huge things that we’re looking at as a board at the moment is the planning of the new voice codec, which has been on the wishlist of the entire community for many years as I’m sure you know.

    Reducing delay, increasing voice quality I think is something that VATSIM absolutely 100% needs urgently, and I think that will add a huge element of enjoyment to a lot of people who have been tolerating the voice quality that we’ve had for many years, including myself. So I think that will be a huge boost, and I think it will help in lots of ways -- it will help with our existing members feeling like there’s a new dimension to their VATSIM experience and it will help our new members as well because it will make understanding controllers easier, understanding fellow pilots easier, and I think in general it just be a huge improvement to the network infrastructure as a whole.

    We also have to look at how we market ourselves. There’s a huge amount of people in the flight sim community who have Flight Simulator, have lots of kit at home and fly around the world, but in their own isolated world and haven’t yet discovered online flying, and I want us to go out to exhibitions, events and conferences related to flight simulation all around the world and get VATSIM shouting about what VATSIM is and what VATSIM can give to people. So that’s another really big part -- getting more people to join, and improving the ratio of people who join who then go on to connect to the network, because there’s a huge number of people who join the network and never connect, and that’s all part of the induction process -- getting people feeling that they can access the network quickly and without obstacles, I think is really important.

    I also think there’s a big opportunity in making VATSIM a little bit less hierarchical and making VATSIM more inclusive to get more a lot more people in to the circle who are generating useful things for VATSIM.

    The problem is when you have so many staff members with an extremely specific remit and responsibility is that anyone who isn’t a staff member doesn’t feel as if they are invited to, for example, make a sector file, a useful document or a guide, maybe make a website, things like that. I really want to change the culture so that anyone feels that they are welcome to put up their hand and say, “hey, do you know what, I think we’re missing this, I’ve got the skills to make it, do you want me to make it.” Ultimately VATSIM’s a community-driven organisation and I think it’d be really fantastic if we could get to a place where everyone feels that they could make that contribution. Again, that is a long process to change that culture but that is certainly something I’d really like to achieve.

    SK: IVAO has been around for a long time, but more recently we now have other networks such as PilotEdge -- do you think there’s more competition out there and is that a threat to VATSIM?

    GL: I think there’s always been an element of competition in the sense that someone comes in to the flight sim community, wants to dabble in a bit of online flying and has a choice to make, whether that’s between VATSIM and IVAO or VATSIM and PilotEdge or whatever. I’m not too concerned about that competition, that competition’s always been there and I think competition is always healthy because it encourages both parties to do the best they can.

    My vision and my goal for VATSIM is to make the network the best it can be so that when people do come to that crossroads, they look at what’s on offer and the majority think -- VATSIM’s a good thing, I think I’ll go with that. So not a threat, possibly even an opportunity for us to do things better.

    SK: On that note -- is VATSIM doing enough to stay ahead of the crowd in terms of software and development?

    GL: That’s a really good question. I think the clients we have both on the pilot and controller side are really quite cutting edge. There’s always room for improvement and there’s always more features that can be added and I’m hopeful some of those features will be prevalent in Swift and future releases of pilot clients.

    I think where VATSIM has a lot of room for improvement is the peripheral tools if you want to call it that -- so for example things like Vatspy, now Accu-map and Servinfo historically -- all these tools that we use to see who’s online, that we use to track people’s statistics and so on. I think VATSIM can be a lot better at driving the development of those tools, and driving developers to go in a particular direction that VATSIM as a whole wants them to go to make the experience better.

    For a long time we’ve relied on some fantastic developers coming up with ideas for what would be a good tool -- I think VATSIM needs to be more involved in those discussions, to provide ideas and provide ideas and innovation of what those tools should be, because I think in that particular area IVAO probably has the upper hand with their WebEye tool.

    SK: Is VATSIM open enough to developers? At the moment to develop anything for VATSIM there’s been a lot of hoops to jump through, things like non-disclosure agreements and so on. Are all these things necessary for a hobby organisation like VATSIM? Could it be more open to developers?

    GL: As a non-developer, I will always say that VATSIM is far too closed for developers and always has been. But it’s very easy for me to say, because I’m not a developer, I’m not a technical expert, that is not my forte, so I absolutely rely on and accept the past conventions which have made VATSIM what it is today. Which means that it can be at times difficult to develop programs and clients for VATSIM.

    I think there’s an acceptance generally that we can be less restrictive and I know that there are efforts being made to make us less restrictive, make us more open and particularly to allow people access to various parts of our infrastructure that aren’t critical to in terms of security and keeping our intellectual property secure et cetera.

    So there is stuff being done but, again, as a non-technical person I’ll always say there’s more that could be done and in an ideal world everything would be open source and everyone would be happy, but obviously that’s very much a different universe to the situation that we’re in at the moment.

    SK: Finally, if someone’s reading this and they’re thinking “I’m quite interested in doing some online flying” -- what would you say to them? Why should they join VATSIM?

    GL: So if you’re reading this article you’re probably a flight simulation enthusiast more than likely -- or you might not be, in which case well done for finding it! And I guess my question to you is -- you’ve invested all this time and money in to flight simulation, why not take it to the next level to experience the real immersive atmosphere of virtual air traffic, and VATSIM can give you that.

    You can be flying your plane in a world with lots of computerised planes flying round as AI, or you can be flying your exact same plane in a world populated by hundreds of others flying their own planes, and not only that, with controllers who are highly trained and will guide you to your destination.

    It’s just a huge immersive opportunity and it’s a massive opportunity for people to take their simulation experience to that next level, and for me personally that is a massive boost. I’ve never seen any attraction myself in not flying online -- it’s just such a huge enhancement to the experience as a whole.

    So come and join us, join the network, find your local community, introduce yourself to that community, get some pilot training and have a go and see how you like it. And good luck, and welcome if you do join!

    1




    User Feedback


    I stopped flying online after a sequence of rude controllers took all the fun out of it. Reading Gunnar's comments may entice me back. I wish him well.

    2

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Rude controllers are not tolerated on VATSIM.  If a controller is performing in a non-satisfactory fashion it is urged that any aggrieved party report this controller and behavior either to a network supervisor or to the management of the FIR/ARTCC from which the controller was working.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Thumbs up, indeed!  Excellent in all regards.  What I'll mention to jonesrob is that I've been flying on VATSIM for 10 years, and have definitely seen a shift, somewhat about 5 years ago, and most definitely within the last year or two, to REALLY move the needle away from rudeness/intolerance to more helpfulness/tolerance.  I myself have participated in this shift (I was trained that intolerance was OK because our expectations were so high, but I now know that tolerance and helpfulness is the key to growing our community and keeping it a nicer place to be).  So I encourage you to give it another shot.  Culture change takes a while, but it is definitely palpable, from someone that's been here a while.

    2

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Lol, they want to keep guys like me off Vatsim. I know nothing about ATC and would love to participate but would only get in the way.

    I have a buddy that is a GA pilot and I asked him to come over and teach me a bit about ATC and how to interact. He said he hates it and only uses small airports to stay away from it so would be little help to me. 

    I am an old dog and most likely will not learn any new tricks but it sure sounds like a cool way to fly virtual aircraft.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    One time that I was flying on Vatsim around the UK, there was no controllers on, so I was typing in everything that I was doing at the time on 122.80 and squawking 2200.

     A controller came on the told me to squawk a number which I put in the box immediately, but because I didn't respond orally, he banned me from Vatsim for the day.

    I've taking several courses on flying both VFR and IFR, and the King course that I took said that when a controller gives you a squawk code, there is no need to repeat the code back because by putting the code in the box, they understand that you understood the instruction correctly.

    I felt that him banning me from Vatsim for the day for not responding was a little over the top, after I had already put his instructed squawk code in the box. It just rubbed me the wrong way and I thought it was unprofessional.

    I fly on Pilotedge most of the time and love the controller filled atmosphere, but I still try to fly on Vatsim once in a while to support the venue and to get better at it, because Vatsim is a little different than Pilotedge. Unfortunately, most of the time that I get on Vatsim, I find that there are no controllers where I want to fly. 

    Anyway, I'm glad to see a new president for Vatsim and I wish him luck and hope that he will be a great and positive influence for change and improvement.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I am really happy that VATSIM is looking within to look at how it impacts the road ahead. What I do agree on 100% is that they need to open the doors for the developers to work in with VATSIM. A perfect example becomes something as simple as why today with all the advances in FMC technologies we still have to go outside of the sim to a client for VATSIM integration. I know companies like PMDG and others can integrate it into a FMC page for simmers to read and communicate with out going to a different window. 

     

    Mobile is an area that is largely untapped by the online simulation community. For example how powerful are our iPhones and other devices. Why still till this day there isn't a mobile client that we can use to communicate, connect and interact with. Even if I have to pay for a service like ti would be willing too. 

     

    Anyhow agajn I am happy to see a future coming to VATSIM. I remember clearly my first flight in FS9 that I was coached by a controller that showed me how to fly in VATSIM after being lost completely that person took the time to show me and I am forever grateful. Today I am a certified pilot IRL thanks in part to VATSIM first baby steps to the point that my instructors were very impressed by my communication skills. 

     

    The he future is bright and I look forward to it. 

    1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    9 hours ago, warbirds said:

    Lol, they want to keep guys like me off Vatsim. I know nothing about ATC and would love to participate but would only get in the way.

    I have a buddy that is a GA pilot and I asked him to come over and teach me a bit about ATC and how to interact. He said he hates it and only uses small airports to stay away from it so would be little help to me. 

    I am an old dog and most likely will not learn any new tricks but it sure sounds like a cool way to fly virtual aircraft.

    No, we do not want to keep guys like you off VATSIM.  We would like for you to come on the network and let us help you to interact with ATC.  There are pilot guides available to get you through the basics and then when you interact with the controllers put a remark in your flight plan that you are a newbie or "1st time on VATSIM" or the like and the controllers will be happy to help you out and get you in the groove of working with ATC.

    3

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    1 hour ago, signmanbob said:

    One time that I was flying on Vatsim around the UK, there was no controllers on, so I was typing in everything that I was doing at the time on 122.80 and squawking 2200.

     A controller came on the told me to squawk a number which I put in the box immediately, but because I didn't respond orally, he banned me from Vatsim for the day.

    I've taking several courses on flying both VFR and IFR, and the King course that I took said that when a controller gives you a squawk code, there is no need to repeat the code back because by putting the code in the box, they understand that you understood the instruction correctly.

    I felt that him banning me from Vatsim for the day for not responding was a little over the top, after I had already put his instructed squawk code in the box. It just rubbed me the wrong way and I thought it was unprofessional.

    I fly on Pilotedge most of the time and love the controller filled atmosphere, but I still try to fly on Vatsim once in a while to support the venue and to get better at it, because Vatsim is a little different than Pilotedge. Unfortunately, most of the time that I get on Vatsim, I find that there are no controllers where I want to fly. 

    Anyway, I'm glad to see a new president for Vatsim and I wish him luck and hope that he will be a great and positive influence for change and improvement.

    I am sorry that your experience on VATSIM was unsatisfactory, however, there simply has to be more to this incident than has been related here.  First of all, controllers cannot "ban someone from VATSIM for the day", that action can only be taken by a supervisor or administrator and with good and documented cause.  Secondly, you are correct-a readback of a squawk code is not necessary (just as you need not and should not respond if a controller instructs you to "stand by".

    If you would like to message me with your VATSIM details (Name/PID) I would be happy to look into this incident and discuss it with you.

     

    1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    58 minutes ago, AvA757Pilot said:

    Secondly, you are correct-a readback of a squawk code is not necessary

    Agreed with all the above apart from this: reading back a squawk may not be necessary in the USA, but it is worth knowing that in the UK SSR operating instructions, including codes, are a mandatory readback item.

    1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    2 hours ago, AvA757Pilot said:

    I am sorry that your experience on VATSIM was unsatisfactory, however, there simply has to be more to this incident than has been related here.  First of all, controllers cannot "ban someone from VATSIM for the day", that action can only be taken by a supervisor or administrator and with good and documented cause.  Secondly, you are correct-a readback of a squawk code is not necessary (just as you need not and should not respond if a controller instructs you to "stand by".

    If you would like to message me with your VATSIM details (Name/PID) I would be happy to look into this incident and discuss it with you.

     

    I believe you Jonesrob. I too hope VATSIM has a fresh new beginning with needed real change under new leadership, and clearer skies ahead.

    Kind regards, 

     

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Except that I was able to do a little checking in the VATSIM records system and this person has no record of ever having been suspended from the system-period.  So he was not "banned for one day" which implies that there may be other elements or distorted memory at play here.

    1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    14 hours ago, AvA757Pilot said:

     Secondly, you are correct-a readback of a squawk code is not necessary.

     

    Not entirely true, it's necessary in most (if not all) European ACC's

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    14 hours ago, AvA757Pilot said:

    Except that I was able to do a little checking in the VATSIM records system and this person has no record of ever having been suspended from the system-period.  So he was not "banned for one day" which implies that there may be other elements or distorted memory at play here.

    Hello,

    I did send you a message with my Vatsim ID.

    Being "Banned for the Day" was my assumption.  Maybe there was something else that was going on, but I remember getting a message that said something to the effect that I was booted off for not responding to the controller. Every time that I tried to log back on, I was booted off again.

    I'm not very experienced flying on Vatsim yet (especially with all of the text messaging when no controllers are available) and I didn't notice right away, that a controller was trying to contact me by text.

    It is not a big deal.  I will continue to fly on Vatsim, and just be more careful to watch the text board for controllers who try to contact me.

    I just passed my P1 rating for Vatsim and will be continuing with the rating program, so hopfully i won't get my ego offended again by getting careless and being booted off :laugh:.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    For my two cents worth, i have been online for well over 20 years, starting in 1995 with SATCO and i have seen many changes over the years, and usually for the better, and i wish you well in your new position sir. I might suggest that the one single thing that could make the most difference to the most people, pilots and controllers both is this.... make the rules the same everywhere for everyone, please :) as has been mentioned in a few of the responses here, pertaining to read back of squawk codes, not needed in USA, but needed / expected in Europe, and this is just one example of the countless differences between the different areas of the world. From the pilot side, i can tell you is very very frustrating. Another example might be to call for push and start, not needed in USA, but needed in Europe. I have gotten to the point of just avoiding Europe completely now days, as not being familiar with all the nuances of European controlling preferences, i do things like we do here in the USA, and some controllers can get quite testy, even down right rude, and hostile which i do not need nor appreciate, so i just avoid. Now i am not saying they are all like that, i have met a few in Europe that were very nice and understanding that that is not my normal flying area, and i might not be like a local pilot and was great, but the ones who were mean, even to the point of calling me an Arrogant Yankee word not allowed on text chat in local for all to see, was not cool LOL. So knowing many around the network have learned i am not alone in my feelings of wanting to stay away from certain places if staffed by ATC because of this so hence why i have said make all the flying rules the same all over the world, for everyone, so we can eliminate this issue for all. I hope this might help, if not, just ignore it, and no matter what, have a good day :)   Gary A Hall  aka  PDX2530 on VATSIM

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    There are a few problems with VATSIM which are acknowledged, but little is done about.

    1) "Single-player mode" pilots: These are pilots who are armed to the teeth with the latest add-ons and will operate their aircraft according to what that software allows and expect 100% cooperation from ATC, the exact opposite of what should be happening. You will often hear "Erm, My GXS won't allow that", "there is static aircraft on that stand", "My FMC has <this route> plugged in so I can't redirect". What they have done is taken all of the addons designed to enhance the single-player experience and expect it to be 100% compatible with online mulitplayer flight. If a controller asks such a player who has been pushed back for 10 minutes to begin taxi to avoid blocking the apron for incoming aircraft,you might hear "I can't move yet, I'm waiting for the de-icing crew to finish"

    2) "Real world" pilots: These are (usually, but not always) members of a Virtual Airline who have been given a flight and attempt to recreate that flight in every detail possible. This means that they (might) request pushback when the real-world flight does so, and get impatient if another aircraft is in their way. Will insist on what runway/route they are to use, even if VATSIM's internal systems say otherwise.

    3) "Text-happy" pilots: These are members who report every single action they take on UNICOM, regardless of whether or not there is anyone in the vicinity, or even if the call is actually necessary. It is common to see aircraft putting out a call such as "EGCC Traffic, ABC123 landing Rwy 23". Pilots in the vicinity of EGCC then start biting their nails because they are looking out for this aircraft and cannot find it. It then occurs to someone to check VatSpy to see where they are and they're over FRANCE!!
    Another common message is "ABC123 Descending to FL340". Great, but where are you? What level are you at now? Which direction are you flying? Where do you expect to be when you complete the descent? etc. Another common one is "EGCC traffic on final rwy 23" and they're actually 20 miles away and rwy 05 is in use. Landing/departing traffic usually flip about now.

    4) Abusive Pilots: There has been a lot of ranting regarding "abusive" ATC controllers but, in fact, there are very few. What they are greatly outnumbered by are abusive pilots. Not only are they abusive to ATC but also to other pilots (see #5)

    5) "FSX:SE" pilots. FSX had a multiplayer capacity via GameSpy which eventually died. This made MP inaccessible to many, although some alternatives did spring up. MP only regained a foothold once the Steam version was released. This allowed players to participate in multiplayer once more but with almost no rules whatsoever. A quick look through YouTube videos of players on FSX:SE will show you what I mean. These players soon discovered VATSIM and, lo and behold, they started appearing there and behaved the same way they did on Steam.

    6)  "Quick-shot" pilots: These are pilots who do not understand some fundamental "rules" of MP flying and react type a situation as they see it, not as it actually is. The main "culprit" is usually the users' Client software which has a "default aircraft" setting which will display (in the case of vPilot, an Airbus A321 for ANY aircraft that their system does not recognise - whether it is because they aircraft is using an (incorrect) ICAO code for their model type or the user does not have that model type  on their system but they do not bother to check the aircraft's filed flightplan to see what aircraft type they have actually used. This includes reporting (to a supervisor) any aircraft that appears to be behaving "oddly". Examples would be a helicopter (which is almost never matched by a vPilot) hovering near an airfield and (especially to FSX:SE users) appears to be a rogue aircraft waiting to collide with them; another might be that an A321 appears to be flying erratically near the airfield, when in fact it is a light aircraft/glider simply going about its business. Lastly, and most annoying of all, is when these pilots announce a "rogue aircraft" via UNICOM and 5-6 other people (usually hundreds of miles away) all report the aircraft. This (mis)leads a supervisor into thinking that it has interfered with ALL of those aircraft (because Sups rarely check where the reporting aircraft are, only the reported aircraft) and the person gets kicked off for no reason.

    7) "Number 7": Those pilots (for which I can't give a name for fear of getting banned ;p) that believe that they are 100% bona fide pilots because they fly payware "big tin". They are usually annoying for two reasons: They beileve that

    a) anyone who does not fly "big tin" is incapable of doing so and, therefore, inferior. This usually manifests itself in the form of "I bet you can't even program an FMC". The truth is that most of these pilots cannot fly without one!!! The argument is usually that "they use an FMC in the real world, so I'm just being realistic". Well, nope. Fly GA for a few hundred hours, then right-seat for couple of thousand more and maybe you'll be good enough for the left seat. Having an FMC in your aircraft does not make you a pilot, it's makes the FMC the pilot!!

    b) anyone who flies freeware is "poor". While they may have a job/parents that guarantee that they can buy the latest and greatest addons, not everyone can/wants to. 

    8) "YouTube" pilots. We've all seen comments on YouTube and they are usually unrelated to the video. The vast majority are people who (try) to make a clever/humorous comment or, failing that, try to make themselves look smarter/better and others dumber/inferior. UNICOM is, again, the "best" place to witness this, especially in uncontrolled airspace. It is not uncommon for a pilot to make a mistake. However, when that mistake is broadcast by a witness via UNICOM, they can usually expect 10-30 lines of text from other pilots (upto 200 miles away!!) along the lines of "RIP" "Noob", "get off the network", "my gran can do better than that", "he's probably <insert nationality here based purely on callsign>"

    9) "peter pan" pilots; These are pilots who fly with "failures on" and, if they manifest themselves, expect the entire system to co-operate with their "emergency". In reality, you can either turn failures off, or reset the failure and carry on flying. But oh no, there are usually 1 or 2 per session that will announce "pan pan pan" via UNICOM and expect everyone else to get out of their way. With no controller present, this usually brings out the #2. #4. '5 and #8 pilots (if the calling pilot isn't one of them already)

    10) "houdini" pilots; These are pilots who, whenever they are given an instruction which they do not wish to comply with, will disconnect and reconnect once they are clear of the airfield/control zone. While this is irritating for controllers, it is also annoying for pilots who suddenly find an aircraft in front of them where none was before. If a conversation ensues, you can be sure that it is never the fault of the pilot who reconnected.

    11) "not my problem" pilots: Generally, these are pilots who either fail to notice/check for ATC being online and then blame ATC for not contacting them when something amiss happens. The most common occurrence is pilots who log on with no ATC, spend 30 minutes setting up their flight and, not noticing that ATC is now online, and begin pushing back/taxiing onto the runway. When called by ATC to contact them the first response is usually "well, you didn't tell me you were online". The simple logic of "I need permission to do this, maybe I should check if there's anyone online to seek permission from" escapes them. ATC might be monitoring 30+ high/mid-level aircraft around 300+ square miles of sky and hasn't noticed Jeff Tandy in his Pilatus PC-12 trundling down the runway 100 miles north of the Airfield he;s currently taxiing aircraft around. But no, again, it's never the pilot's fault.

    In short, VATSIM is (currently) a breeding ground for "individuals", trolls, bullies and "gangs" that have little appreciation for multiplayer flying or, indeed, for anyone other than themselves. Is it any wonder that the more mature/experienced pilots/controllers are leaving?

    1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites
    On 10/5/2017 at 7:44 PM, jonesrob said:

    I stopped flying online after a sequence of rude controllers took all the fun out of it. Reading Gunnar's comments may entice me back. I wish him well.

    Thank you - you would be welcome back with open arms!

    9 hours ago, Kyrelel said:

    ...

    Hi Kyrelel,

    Thanks for taking the time to post.

    I don't disagree that a small amount of people fit into the various categories you've described. However, I would contest the notion that VATSIM is a "breeding ground" for such individuals. As an avid pilot and controller for 12 years on the network, I have come across very few 'trolls' or others looking for trouble, and where they have occasionally reared their heads they have been dealt with quickly.

    ---

    Thanks to Simon and AVSIM for taking the time to sit down with me.

    1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I gave up VATSIM after a series of 'disagreements' with controllers about VFR squawk codes in UK/EU. Also, many of them had difficulty with the concept of 'uncontrolled' airspace, and VFR procedures in general.

    On more than one occasion I had vehicles doing wheelies on the runway as I came in to land. Quite often I saw aircraft slewing around airports like dodgems.

    Maybe things have improved.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites


    Create an account or sign in to comment

    You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create an account

    Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


    Register a new account

    Sign in

    Already have an account? Sign in here.


    Sign In Now