Board index FlightGear Multiplayer events

EDDF-Triangle

Virtual fly-ins, fun flies, competitions, and other group events. Find out details of upcoming events, register for competitions, or organize your own tour of a favorite location.

Re: EDDF-Triangle

Postby LH-1701 » Wed Feb 19, 2020 2:57 pm

@AAL545
But I'm not sure how ATC's on FG will do this based on what I have experienced here, not being negative here but for example; Jomo needs to ask can you use ILS and or VOR? (I have been at this stage myself so not being critical)
Forgive me if I missed it (I had a bad day sorry) but how will Jomo and other ATC's handle to two types of experienced pilots?


Good question, honestly its only possible by knowing the pilots or ask them. I remember also some ATC, which wrote an info at flightgear-atc.alawaysdata.net (for ex: you need to know SID/STAR Procedures for this event). I am with you, its difficult to find out.

@Jomo
How about doing it like GEC(O)1701 is doing it: If he wants to use this or that he just asks for it! ?!?!
Thus he prefers to follow SID from north going KERAX PSA CHA ..RW25L instead my Standard "direct CHA .. 25L". That is nice for me -
giving me lots of time to care about others - BUT: How many of the visitors want to do that? And how do I know ?

As long as we do not get as much traffic as the real EDDF I guess that should be possible!
How about that?


Good suggestion! Will you also offer the ILS Yankee/Zulu approaches on request?

@tdammers:
It happens all the time.
Correct. I often have a look at the real traffic for EDDF and they are shortening approaches especially from south very often or give them direct clearances for ILS approach. And of course procedures are depending on aircraft capabilities.

reguards,

tobias
#ISupportJomo
LH-1701
 
Posts: 53
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2019 6:12 pm
Callsign: LH-1701
Version: 2018.3.2
OS: Linux

Re: EDDF-Triangle

Postby jomo » Wed Feb 19, 2020 6:29 pm

I am overwhelmed by that sudden interest in how to approach at EDDF!
So let me first explain MY existing/using/allowing approach procedures:
    1) Vectoring manually by hdg+alt+speed for pilots not able to use ILS/VOR (hoping that the pilot can hold those hdg+alt+speed!) --> most Time-Consuming[]

    2) Guiding pilots via VOR/ILS --> and watching closely

    3) Using SID/STARs (on request)
    3a) You may have noticed that I mostly e.g. ask to use the SID KERAX-2 (guiding to rw25R) also for landings on rw25L (which is our standard!) - and similar! One of the problems why we cannot always use the standard approaches -> because 25R is only for small/medium jets (e.g. A320 etc). I know I will be jailed if any accident happens because of that! Still I will continue doing so - i.e. just advising e.g. an approach from MTR to land on 25L and reverse form CHA ontu 25R (if the area is crowded and both runways used!). Makes life much easier for an overloaded ATC!
    3b) Also you may have noticed that I use 25C only for STARTS - but assign routs that are for rw25L/R. Again: That makes life much easier for ATC!!

    4) This mix in 3 makes it difficult to use ILS-Yanky and similar. I want to keep control about what runway to use for final! But it would be ok if you ask after pasing last VOR for using it (e.g. "may I use ..... for rw 25xxx!"). But only after you have passed the last VOR and identified for what RW (I do not want to search in big books which runway that procedure is! --> Exactly that is the most critical/overload time for an ATC! - but what pilot cares about how much an ATC needs to know all the time (be aware: In the real EDDF they have 1 unique ATC for each runway and another for Approach and Area!!!)

    5) Using the "holding patterns" on different altitudes. Also an exception from standard (I guess I had used that during the last 2 years 2 times!). Mostly I rather delay a plane by defining manually a longer Approach --> most pilots are not able to fly a "holding pattern")
So far my willingness to use everything you guys want - as long as I do not have to include those manually into my radar-screen (and my head!)!!!

From my side my biggest wish from you: Pls suggest to everyone to use MUMBLE [/b] (http://www.emmerich-j.de/mumble/mumble.html) - I guess that would help us all mostly in any of those mixed cases - and in the ability to use more different procedures!!
jomo / ATCjomo + EDDFjo1 + EDDFjo2
ATC at EDDF Fr,Sa,Su,We from 20:00 to 24:00 CET/MEZ., see http://www.emmerich-j.de
User avatar
jomo
 
Posts: 980
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2009 6:46 pm
Location: Mainz, Germany
Callsign: jomo jomoATC
OS: UBUNTU 18.4

Re: EDDF-Triangle

Postby AAL545 » Thu Feb 20, 2020 5:37 am

I am overwhelmed by that sudden interest in how to approach at EDDF!
So let me first explain MY existing/using/allowing approach procedures:



I believe you.
I just did some standing tests using SIDs and STARs someone wrote and I don't like what I see.
An approach from the south using STAR PSA2W is okay, the approach is PSA, CHA, then to final approach with a go around to CHA, this is okay.
PSA2E is weird in my books, the approach is PSA, CHA, back to RID and then to final on 25L, this is the approach for 07R.
This .xml file is far from perfect because some STARs should not be in the drop down list for the selected rwy.

So far my willingness to use everything you guys want - as long as I do not have to include those manually into my radar-screen (and my head!)!!!


The way I see it we are still facing the problem with outdated SIDs & STARs or you will really be screaming at us and for good reason.


Use Mumble and,
KEEP FLYING!


AAL4955
AAL545
 
Posts: 227
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 4:14 am

Re: EDDF-Triangle

Postby LH-1701 » Thu Feb 20, 2020 10:03 am

Hi,

AAL545, you are right, the problem will persist.

Requarding PSA:

In actual charts, there are the following approaches via PSA

PSA2B/2L both via PSA and CHA for RW 25L/R/C
PSA2H/M both via PSA CHA FFM to RID for RW 07L/C/R

I also know these outdated PSA2E in FG, it was used for RW07 years ago.
Also setup in FG is not correct, because it allows to use it for RW25.
Also it allows to use PSA2W for RW07

reguards,

tobias
#ISupportJomo
LH-1701
 
Posts: 53
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2019 6:12 pm
Callsign: LH-1701
Version: 2018.3.2
OS: Linux

Re: EDDF-Triangle

Postby jomo » Fri Feb 21, 2020 10:24 am

AAL545 wrote in Thu Feb 20, 2020 5:37 am:
The way I see it we are still facing the problem with outdated SIDs & STARs or you will really be screaming at us and for good reason.
AAL4955

Yes I do! Let me explain why:
    * Only the routs released by FAA are valid - and change often - and are always rather costly - and may not just be copied, etc. -- unless you pay for it or similar!!
    * Because poor guys like me cannot afford those wonderful always actual maps --> there are some people distributing them for their customers - some for pay - some for membership - some against the law!
    * So I would be careful for just downloading them from some "informal source"!!!
That should not be a problem for us - because we use them for simulation!! We just must care that we use all the same charts!!! As well as pilots as well as ATCs! So beginning this year we got an agreement that we are allowed to use the German VATSIM-Charts! That is what I use to update our OpenRadar.
To help you guys with that I provide on top of the "FILM"-pages a pointer to all those VATSIM-pages, but during our sessions we use only the SID/STAR ones (please !!!!!!!!!!).


(Yes - I noticed that the pointer to those pages was outdated - I updated it right now - it should work now again. And pls.: IF someone notices that my SID/STARs in the movies do not match those any more (e.g. there is a new FAA release posted by VATSAIM) then pls tell me to update my OpenRadar!

I hope that clears the the problem! Again: We all do need all the same charts for flying controlled - you better do not use unofficial publishing's !!!!
jomo / ATCjomo + EDDFjo1 + EDDFjo2
ATC at EDDF Fr,Sa,Su,We from 20:00 to 24:00 CET/MEZ., see http://www.emmerich-j.de
User avatar
jomo
 
Posts: 980
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2009 6:46 pm
Location: Mainz, Germany
Callsign: jomo jomoATC
OS: UBUNTU 18.4

Re: EDDF-Triangle

Postby tdammers » Fri Feb 21, 2020 2:01 pm

No need to make it this complicated.

For departures:

1. Pilot requests SID as part of flight plan / clearance.
2. ATC clears for a specific SID upon clearance delivery.
3. If pilot has charts with this specific SID, acknowledge clearance. If not, "unable SID FUBAR6A, request SID FUBAR1A" or "unable SID, request vectors".
4. Everyone is happy.

Or:

1. Pilot request vectors for the departure.
2. ATC clears pilot for vector departure.
3. Everyone is happy.

For arrivals:

1. Pilot files flight plan with a STAR.
2. Pilot makes initial contact.
3. If ATC can provide the requested STAR, ATC clears for the STAR and advises to expect a specific transition. If not, provide vectors.
4. If pilot has the right chart, pilot acknowledges clearance. If not, "unable transition FUBAR1S, request vectors to final".
5. Everyone is happy.

Or:

1. Pilot does not file a flight plan at all, or files without a STAR.
2. ATC clears pilot to last enroute waypoint, then provides vectors.
3. Everyone is happy.

This will work, one way or another; it may break if someone uses charts that aren't just outdated, but actually wrong, but IME this is rare. If you have charts that match the right procedure designator, you should generally end up on the right flight path.
tdammers
 
Posts: 341
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2017 10:35 am
Callsign: NL256
IRC name: nl256

Re: EDDF-Triangle

Postby jomo » Fri Feb 21, 2020 3:49 pm

tdammers wrote in Fri Feb 21, 2020 2:01 pm:No need to make it this complicated.

For departures:
1. Pilot requests SID as part of flight plan / clearance.
2. ATC clears for a specific SID upon clearance delivery.
3. If pilot has charts with this specific SID, acknowledge clearance. If not, "unable SID FUBAR6A, request SID FUBAR1A" or "unable SID, request vectors".
4. Everyone is happy.
...


Sorry ! But for me your suggestion is that complicated that I am not able to agree! e.g.:
1) Where does the pilot get the "SID FUBAR6A" (etc.) from?
2) How can the ATC differentiate between FUBARA and SID? Does he need to offer both?
3) How do we ensure that everybody uses the same release-level of a SID?
etc.
Pls consider my requirement again : We all need the same level of SID/STARs.

I still believe we better work with one supplier for our (constantly changing) routs!
As I suggested from: https://vatsim-germany.org/pilots/aerodromes/EDDF
jomo / ATCjomo + EDDFjo1 + EDDFjo2
ATC at EDDF Fr,Sa,Su,We from 20:00 to 24:00 CET/MEZ., see http://www.emmerich-j.de
User avatar
jomo
 
Posts: 980
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2009 6:46 pm
Location: Mainz, Germany
Callsign: jomo jomoATC
OS: UBUNTU 18.4

Re: EDDF-Triangle

Postby tdammers » Fri Feb 21, 2020 11:41 pm

1) Charts. You could either file a specific SID explicitly, e.g. the route in your flight plan could be, say, "EDDF MARUN6M MARUN" etc., or you just write "EDDF .MARUN" etc., indicating that you want a SID to MARUN.

2) FUBAR6A in this is example *is* a SID. If the pilot filed a specific one, and ATC can provide it, ATC clears the pilot on that SID. If not, they can either clear them on a different one, or offer vectors. In the above example, let's say the pilot filed "MARUN6M", which is a SID from the 25 runways, but the active takeoff runway is 18; ATC might then offer MARUN4T instead.

3) The "release level" is encoded in the SID name. In the above example, if at some point the MARUN6M departure is revised, it will be published as MARUN7M in the next cycle. That's how you tell the difference (and that's also how people tell the difference IRL: if you request MARUN5M, but ATC says MARUN6M, you better go check the expiration date on your charts / FMS data. Whether you get your charts from navigraph, vatsim or the official AIP, if the code is the same, then the procedures should also be the same.

So if your requirement is that everyone use the same procedures: that's easy. Advertise the charts you expect people to use (the vatsim ones are fine). When people file / request "any SID", clear them for one from these charts. If they file / request one that's in the charts, and the runway matches your current active runways, clear them for that. If they file anything else, offer the version you have instead, and if they aren't able, provide vectors.
tdammers
 
Posts: 341
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2017 10:35 am
Callsign: NL256
IRC name: nl256

Re: EDDF-Triangle

Postby jomo » Sat Feb 22, 2020 10:31 am

tdammers wrote in Fri Feb 21, 2020 11:41 pm:So if your requirement is that everyone use the same procedures: that's easy. Advertise the charts you expect people to use (the vatsim ones are fine). When people file / request "any SID", clear them for one from these charts. If they file / request one that's in the charts, and the runway matches your current active runways, clear them for that. If they file anything else, offer the version you have instead, and if they aren't able, provide vectors.

1) All the FPs must be visible by ATC and Pilots (and AutoPilot). So they should be provided in http://flightgear-atc.alwaysdata.net/ so that all ATCs en Route can see them. ATCs usually have not the time to retype them e.g. into OpenRadar.

2) I do not not accept different names for same routs and/or from different providers! I will NOT create a dictionary to check all names given to what they may be compatable or not! As I suggested in my Note we all should use: https://vatsim-germany.org/pilots/aerodromes/EDDF.

tdammers wrote in Fri Feb 21, 2020 11:41 pm:When people file / request "any SID", clear them for one from these charts. If they file / request one that's in the charts, and the runway matches your current active runways, clear them for that. If they file anything else, offer the version you have instead, and if they aren't able, provide vectors.
Sometimes am not sure if your suggestions are for the pilots or the ATCs. But I am sure no pilot can make a FP without knowing where to start (e.g. which SID). Same for landings (STAR). For sure that can only work if all ATCs worldwide see that FP - for OpenRadar that is the case if filed in http://flightgear-atc.alwaysdata.net/ !
jomo / ATCjomo + EDDFjo1 + EDDFjo2
ATC at EDDF Fr,Sa,Su,We from 20:00 to 24:00 CET/MEZ., see http://www.emmerich-j.de
User avatar
jomo
 
Posts: 980
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2009 6:46 pm
Location: Mainz, Germany
Callsign: jomo jomoATC
OS: UBUNTU 18.4

Re: EDDF-Triangle

Postby AAL545 » Sat Feb 22, 2020 3:50 pm

1) All the FPs must be visible by ATC and Pilots (and AutoPilot). So they should be provided in http://flightgear-atc.alwaysdata.net/ so that all ATCs en Route can see them. ATCs usually have not the time to retype them e.g. into OpenRadar.

2) I do not not accept different names for same routs and/or from different providers! I will NOT create a dictionary to check all names given to what they may be compatable or not! As I suggested in my Note we all should use: https://vatsim-germany.org/pilots/aerodromes/EDDF.



Shouldn't your link at http://flightgear-atc.alwaysdata.net/ be directed to https://vatsim-germany.org/pilots/aerodromes/EDDF so that pilots can look at or download the charts.



AAL4955
AAL545
 
Posts: 227
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 4:14 am

Re: EDDF-Triangle

Postby jomo » Sat Feb 22, 2020 4:51 pm

AAL545 wrote in Sat Feb 22, 2020 3:50 pm:
Shouldn't your link at http://flightgear-atc.alwaysdata.net/ be directed to https://vatsim-germany.org/pilots/aerodromes/EDDF so that pilots can look at or download the charts.
AAL4955

Have a look at those 2 pointer-descriptions:
1) is for FlightPlans --> http://flightgear-atc.alwaysdata.net/
2) is for Downloading SID/STARs: --> https://vatsim-germany.org/pilots/aerodromes/EDDF
any problems with that ?
jomo / ATCjomo + EDDFjo1 + EDDFjo2
ATC at EDDF Fr,Sa,Su,We from 20:00 to 24:00 CET/MEZ., see http://www.emmerich-j.de
User avatar
jomo
 
Posts: 980
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2009 6:46 pm
Location: Mainz, Germany
Callsign: jomo jomoATC
OS: UBUNTU 18.4

Re: EDDF-Triangle

Postby LH-1701 » Sat Feb 22, 2020 5:10 pm

Hi,

just4interest:

for today i filed a FP based on VATSIM from GCTS to EDDF.

FP is filed at http://flightgear-atc.alwaysdata.net

I will try to use EMPAX3E/W transition, which brings me to PSA and CHA.
I think, you dont have transitions within your radar picture, correct?
But from PSA we can continue as usual with PSA2B STAR.

Will appear in EDDF airspace at apx 2130 local time (2030 utc)
reguards and see u later,

tobias
#ISupportJomo
LH-1701
 
Posts: 53
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2019 6:12 pm
Callsign: LH-1701
Version: 2018.3.2
OS: Linux

Re: EDDF-Triangle

Postby AAL545 » Sat Feb 22, 2020 6:39 pm

Have a look at those 2 pointer-descriptions:
1) is for FlightPlans --> http://flightgear-atc.alwaysdata.net/
2) is for Downloading SID/STARs: --> https://vatsim-germany.org/pilots/aerodromes/EDDF
any problems with that ?



No problem at all, matter of fact I like the progress being made it's just that your "Airport documentation" link is dead and it points to a different web site!


WILL KEEP FLYING!
AAL4955
AAL545
 
Posts: 227
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 4:14 am

Re: EDDF-Triangle

Postby jomo » Wed Apr 15, 2020 6:42 am

Mumble at EDDF
I noticed Yesterday, that in our films the sound was missing - although it worked perfect during our sessions!
SORRY
I found hardware-problems in my PCs - it should be working fine again now.
Pls always tell me if you find problems in our films. I see them as a major item for those who want to improve their flying procedures.

Hope you all had a wonderful Eastern - as it was here.
jomo / ATCjomo + EDDFjo1 + EDDFjo2
ATC at EDDF Fr,Sa,Su,We from 20:00 to 24:00 CET/MEZ., see http://www.emmerich-j.de
User avatar
jomo
 
Posts: 980
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2009 6:46 pm
Location: Mainz, Germany
Callsign: jomo jomoATC
OS: UBUNTU 18.4

Re: EDDF-Triangle

Postby geed » Thu Apr 16, 2020 1:51 pm

guys I like the positive vibes now around flying at EDDF and around! Thumbs Up :)

I fly VFR most of the time and would like to chime in on your ballet from time to time. I know my way around south of EDDF and EDFE and would like to practice approaches from SOUTH to either one of them.

What do you think - can we mix in VFR approaches using reporting points and VFR flight maps? (which are, thanks to an enormous effort) are now available online and actually quite accurate.

To me this would be nice and challenging if I could simulate together with you guys flying into the airspace and navigate to my destination using COMMS.

Geed
geed
 
Posts: 86
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 12:53 pm
Location: in between
Callsign: G-EED
Version: 2017.3.1
OS: OSX, Win8.1

PreviousNext

Return to Multiplayer events

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests