Board index FlightGear Multiplayer events

The Festival of Flightgear-1&2 Nov, 2014

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: The Ultimate MP Fly-in

Postby IAHM-COL » Mon May 12, 2014 7:53 pm

Rick Ace wrote in Mon May 12, 2014 7:41 pm:- Leave the ground to pilots. A lot of time is wasted on startup, pushback, taxi via, and such (I'm not saying that it's always unneeded, but it's not needed since there are rarely more than a couple planes in an airport). It might be easier to focus on handling departure clearances, the runways, and approaches. The only reason why I'm suggesting this, is because I believe ATCs will have a lot more work on controlling planes already in the air.



That is sad. I dont find anything more appealing that trying to get realistic to the max.
Delivery is really fun, that is my opinion.
Ground controls taxiing on aerodrome. Many times in areas with no taxisigns I have to thank a correction like: yes, Kilo is the next to your rite! :D

So, I do like ground service when Im piloting.
If we gave everybody in the World free software today, but we failed to teach them about the four freedoms, five years from now, would they still have it? Probably not, because if they don’t recognise their freedoms, they’ll let their freedoms fall
User avatar
IAHM-COL
Retired
 
Posts: 4064
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2012 5:40 pm
Location: Homey, NV (KXTA) - U.S.A
Callsign: HK-424D or ICAO4243
Version: 3.7-git
OS: Linux

Re: The Ultimate MP Fly-in

Postby IAHM-COL » Mon May 12, 2014 8:01 pm

Rick Ace wrote in Mon May 12, 2014 7:41 pm:
IAHM-COL wrote in Mon May 12, 2014 7:06 pm:In other terms, it is important that ATCs know the boundaries of their responsabilities and that they are kept rigorously.

I slightly disagree


It almost seems you are saying:
<<It is actually irrelevant for an ATC to know the boundaries of his responsability, and rather unnecesary that he keeps these rigorously>>


:lol:
If we gave everybody in the World free software today, but we failed to teach them about the four freedoms, five years from now, would they still have it? Probably not, because if they don’t recognise their freedoms, they’ll let their freedoms fall
User avatar
IAHM-COL
Retired
 
Posts: 4064
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2012 5:40 pm
Location: Homey, NV (KXTA) - U.S.A
Callsign: HK-424D or ICAO4243
Version: 3.7-git
OS: Linux

Re: The Ultimate MP Fly-in

Postby elgaton » Mon May 12, 2014 8:02 pm

IAHM-COL wrote in Mon May 12, 2014 7:24 pm:Then Elgaton may say. OhMy, COL's so cool, Im gonna be his CTR, and schedule himself as LEBL_CTR for same day 0:00->4:00 (he has more time,so good)!! :D

Unlikely to happen - I'll be in UTC+1 at that time :P

IAHM-COL wrote in Mon May 12, 2014 7:24 pm:About the wiki: That should contain info about expected phraseology, Airspaces, Airports in Spain, Mumble usage, Howtos, and stuff like that.

OK, I'm going to start the wiki page - thread watchers, is the title "The Ultimate MP Fly-In, November 2014" good in your opinion?
NIATCA 2nd admin, regular ATC at LIPX and creator of the LIPX custom scenery
elgaton
 
Posts: 1107
Joined: Tue Mar 19, 2013 4:58 pm
Callsign: I-ELGA/LIPX_TW
Version: Git
OS: Windows + Arch Linux

Re: The Ultimate MP Fly-in

Postby IAHM-COL » Mon May 12, 2014 8:03 pm

elgaton wrote in Mon May 12, 2014 8:02 pm:OK, I'm going to start the wiki page - thread watchers, is the title "The Ultimate MP Fly-In, November 2014" good in your opinion?

Two thumbs up
If we gave everybody in the World free software today, but we failed to teach them about the four freedoms, five years from now, would they still have it? Probably not, because if they don’t recognise their freedoms, they’ll let their freedoms fall
User avatar
IAHM-COL
Retired
 
Posts: 4064
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2012 5:40 pm
Location: Homey, NV (KXTA) - U.S.A
Callsign: HK-424D or ICAO4243
Version: 3.7-git
OS: Linux

Re: The Ultimate MP Fly-in

Postby Rick Ace » Mon May 12, 2014 8:06 pm

IAHM-COL wrote in Mon May 12, 2014 7:51 pm:All Im saying is if there is more than 1 ATC on a same airport, it is very important both know clearly where their task end.

That is very important. It's also why I suggested METAL should pick a person to coordinate all the official ATCs for the event.

IAHM-COL wrote in Mon May 12, 2014 7:51 pm:In principle, pilot is the one who initiate contact.
But if I get a pilot not doing it, and clearly heading INTO my airspace (not at FL350.. that is my second point), I do not see a major problem issuing a welcome, please state intentions message.

Of course. I never said that ATCs should stop asking. But I suggested that it was overused.

I would expect, that with enough information on the wiki and thread, pilots will remember to contact towers or state their route in the chat dialog. Additionally, if pilots see others doing it, they'll follow. :D

IAHM-COL wrote in Mon May 12, 2014 7:53 pm:Delivery is really fun, that is my opinion.
Ground controls taxiing on aerodrome. Many times in areas with no taxisigns I have to thank a correction like: yes, Kilo is the next to your rite! :D

So, I do like ground service when Im piloting.



The only problem I see is that ground can be very distracting when you have more than one aircraft approaching the airport. The controller (if he's handling approach) already has to worry about separation. It's hard for a person to give taxi instructions, watch aircraft, and handle an above normal load of planes approaching an airport.

Although, I do enjoy ground air traffic control as well. :P

And I'm not saying that boundaries are irrelevant. But the issue is more on the pilot side than the ATC side. If a pilot has filed a flight plan and handles communication well, the chances of the ATC needing to ask the pilot will greatly diminish.
Rick Ace
 
Posts: 1023
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 6:02 pm
Location: New York City
Callsign: rickace
Version: 2.6.0
OS: Vista

Re: The Ultimate MP Fly-in

Postby Lydiot » Mon May 12, 2014 8:08 pm

Rick Ace wrote in Mon May 12, 2014 7:41 pm:
IAHM-COL wrote in Mon May 12, 2014 7:06 pm:In other terms, it is important that ATCs know the boundaries of their responsabilities and that they are kept rigorously.

I slightly disagree. I think it's more important for pilots to be aware of where they are headed, and to contact traffic controllers as needed.


One thing doesn't exclude the other necessarily. Responsibilities lie with both parties, but I think his point simply was that the ATCs understand the boundaries between each other, so that 'ground' doesn't clear aircraft for takeoff as 'tower' has cleared a plane for landing.

Rick Ace wrote in Mon May 12, 2014 7:41 pm:For example, you wouldn't have a traffic controller trying to identify a random craft approaching the airport. Technically, it should be the pilot's job to contact the center FIRST.


Well, that's debatable I think. On the one hand a plane that gets into controlled space is possibly an 'issue', and on the other hand for this event some people will want to fly uncontrolled. So the key is finding a balance I think.

Rick Ace wrote in Mon May 12, 2014 7:41 pm:What we saw in KLAS was that the ATC sort of aimed planes on to different runways, and hoped that they would not get too close. As we saw, that didn't work out well. As a result, I think ATCs will have to make some changes as well...


I don't think so. In that case it was my fault as a controller. I should have paid more attention and more firmly asserted what the planes should have done. When you guys got close the options were letting you land close or tell one of you to abort and go around. I chose the former and that was not realistic. Some ATCs will obviously be very firm and others loose. I think I was too much the latter, even though I admit it took me somewhat by surprise.

Really it's solved by enforcing better spacing earlier during approach, before final.

Rick Ace wrote in Mon May 12, 2014 7:41 pm:- Try to keep notes on all the planes within the area. If another ATC is talking to pilotXYZ, then it might be a good idea to note that pilotXYZ is headed to another airport.


I think that'll probably be too much work for the ATCs if many people show up.

Rick Ace wrote in Mon May 12, 2014 7:41 pm:- Leave the ground to pilots. A lot of time is wasted on startup, pushback, taxi via, and such (I'm not saying that it's always unneeded, but it's not needed since there are rarely more than a couple planes in an airport). It might be easier to focus on handling departure clearances, the runways, and approaches. The only reason why I'm suggesting this, is because I believe ATCs will have a lot more work on controlling planes already in the air.


I have to disagree with this. If we want realism at controlled airports then I think ground would be good to have. ATCs won't have too much work controlling planes in the air, because the duties are separated. One ATC for ground, another for tower, another for approach/departure perhaps. In fact I think it will probably be essential. Without ground control, and with a lot of pilots, ground would probably be close to pure chaos and that would effect takeoff/landing as well.

I agree with the rest though..
Lydiot
 
Posts: 988
Joined: Tue Oct 22, 2013 10:50 pm

Re: The Ultimate MP Fly-in

Postby Lydiot » Mon May 12, 2014 8:13 pm

Rick Ace wrote in Mon May 12, 2014 8:06 pm:The only problem I see is that ground can be very distracting when you have more than one aircraft approaching the airport. The controller (if he's handling approach) already has to worry about separation. It's hard for a person to give taxi instructions, watch aircraft, and handle an above normal load of planes approaching an airport.


I think the solution to this is to just decide on a hierarchy, or priority list. For example:

# controllers : duties

1 : approach / tower (i.e. no ground)
2: a) approach / departure, b) tower
3: a) approach / departure, b) tower, c) ground

Or whatever.... in other words we prioritize which types of control will be most important and then just fill up accordingly depending on the number of participants.
Lydiot
 
Posts: 988
Joined: Tue Oct 22, 2013 10:50 pm

Re: The Ultimate MP Fly-in

Postby Rick Ace » Mon May 12, 2014 8:24 pm

Lydiot wrote in Mon May 12, 2014 8:08 pm:Well, that's debatable I think. On the one hand a plane that gets into controlled space is possibly an 'issue', and on the other hand for this event some people will want to fly uncontrolled. So the key is finding a balance I think.

Well, it might be much simpler to handle airports the way they are handled in real life. If it's a major airport, then it can be classified as controlled. If it's a small airport without a tower, then we could have it the same way in real life. But I think it's important for pilots to report what they are doing, and where they are headed. Even if you are flying in uncontrolled airspace, you wouldn't want to collide. It could turn into a KSFO scenario.

Lydiot wrote in Mon May 12, 2014 8:08 pm:I don't think so. In that case it was my fault as a controller. I should have paid more attention and more firmly asserted what the planes should have done. When you guys got close the options were letting you land close or tell one of you to abort and go around. I chose the former and that was not realistic. Some ATCs will obviously be very firm and others loose. I think I was too much the latter, even though I admit it took me somewhat by surprise.

Really it's solved by enforcing better spacing earlier during approach, before final.

Actually, I think the issue was much simpler. One of the planes landed on the left instead of right. :P

But people should not be on final approach if there is traffic. Telling a plane to abort while on approach isn't the safest thing to do either. Once again, I don't think that you were at fault. The issue is that there needs to be a better (read as more realistic) system for take offs and landings.

Lydiot wrote in Mon May 12, 2014 8:08 pm:I think that'll probably be too much work for the ATCs if many people show up.

This is the only part where I'll disagree with you. The ATC should have some sort of record of what planes are doing. OpenRadar makes this task very simple.

As for the last part about priorities and ground control...

Clearance delivery might be needed, yes. But it could be useful if we could avoid pushback, startup, and taxi instruction. As sometimes, planes have to restart a lot, and you would have to go through the whole process again. This isn't a problem if the approach isn't heavy. But I'm saying this with an assumption that there will be a multitude of planes arriving in a short period of time.

The hierarchy seems more realistic. :) It will work out if one of the people in the hierarchy isn't bored or asleep. :P
Rick Ace
 
Posts: 1023
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 6:02 pm
Location: New York City
Callsign: rickace
Version: 2.6.0
OS: Vista

Re: The Ultimate MP Fly-in

Postby IAHM-COL » Mon May 12, 2014 8:30 pm

Lydiot wrote in Mon May 12, 2014 8:08 pm:Really it's solved by enforcing better spacing earlier during approach, before final.

Rule of thumb
If we gave everybody in the World free software today, but we failed to teach them about the four freedoms, five years from now, would they still have it? Probably not, because if they don’t recognise their freedoms, they’ll let their freedoms fall
User avatar
IAHM-COL
Retired
 
Posts: 4064
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2012 5:40 pm
Location: Homey, NV (KXTA) - U.S.A
Callsign: HK-424D or ICAO4243
Version: 3.7-git
OS: Linux

Re: The Ultimate MP Fly-in

Postby IAHM-COL » Mon May 12, 2014 8:36 pm

Rick Ace wrote in Mon May 12, 2014 8:24 pm:But people should not be on final approach if there is traffic. Telling a plane to abort while on approach isn't the safest thing to do either. Once again, I don't think that you were at fault. The issue is that there needs to be a better (read as more realistic) system for take offs and landings.

What happens in FG stays in FG :P

I am sorry for the hard land there Rick :P

Respect to ATC in KLAS, I saw a very good job. Just a though one. You were getting 6 big airliners all packed like a flock of ducks, all arriving with the same STAR, all trying to get the same RWY, and all within less than 5 nm each other (This is FG community should be renamed as the "FANW effect").
Really, I would have had my hands sweaty.
Image

Hint Hint: That's what holding points are for :D
If we gave everybody in the World free software today, but we failed to teach them about the four freedoms, five years from now, would they still have it? Probably not, because if they don’t recognise their freedoms, they’ll let their freedoms fall
User avatar
IAHM-COL
Retired
 
Posts: 4064
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2012 5:40 pm
Location: Homey, NV (KXTA) - U.S.A
Callsign: HK-424D or ICAO4243
Version: 3.7-git
OS: Linux

Re: The Ultimate MP Fly-in

Postby Lydiot » Mon May 12, 2014 8:46 pm

Rick Ace wrote in Mon May 12, 2014 8:24 pm:This is the only part where I'll disagree with you. The ATC should have some sort of record of what planes are doing. OpenRadar makes this task very simple.


I understand what you mean, and I agree. I'm just saying that I think what is likely to happen is quite a few players will log on to check out the event and won't have filed any flight plans, and won't even have any plans at all; they just want to fly with others. And if a bunch of people show up like that then it's going to be a lot of work to "hunt them down" just to get the information.

But I totally agree that a plane that has a flight plan should have it entered into OR. For sure.

Rick Ace wrote in Mon May 12, 2014 8:24 pm:As for the last part about priorities and ground control...

Clearance delivery might be needed, yes. But it could be useful if we could avoid pushback, startup, and taxi instruction. As sometimes, planes have to restart a lot, and you would have to go through the whole process again. This isn't a problem if the approach isn't heavy. But I'm saying this with an assumption that there will be a multitude of planes arriving in a short period of time.


hmmm.... I would probably insist on taxi instructions given by ground if there's an ATC available to do it. Sure, pushback/startup seems like "gravy" that's for added realism rather than making sure stuff doesn't turn into chaos, but taxi instructions are pretty reasonable to demand pilots follow in my opinion - if there is ground ATC.

Imagine for a second that four players have spawned, pushed back, started and taxi'd to the same runway at the same time, all without any ATC clearing them. They may even be approaching from different sides. Who goes first? I think the lack of control risks "encouraging" lack of "courtesy". If nobody is controlling ground traffic then "me first" is completely acceptable to some, while they might otherwise simply follow permissions.

But this will probably have to be somewhat flexible depending on how many ATCs are available, and:

Rick Ace wrote in Mon May 12, 2014 8:24 pm:The hierarchy seems more realistic. :) It will work out if one of the people in the hierarchy isn't bored or asleep. :P


exactly!... Let's hope everyone is properly caffeinated at the time!
Lydiot
 
Posts: 988
Joined: Tue Oct 22, 2013 10:50 pm

Re: The Ultimate MP Fly-in

Postby elgaton » Mon May 12, 2014 10:40 pm

I have started the wiki page for the event - for now, regard it as an early draft. If anyone wants to edit it, please do so! Also, I think most ATC best practices/guidelines could be added to the wiki as well for present and future use.

As for the ground control discussion, I'm all the way for it (unless the workload is absolutely unbearable for the controller, which is rarely the case, from my experience); also, the hierarchy concept is the way to go. Regarding the specific issue of clearance/delivery, I've got a solution: should a player crash and the airport be busy, the controller could simply approve pushback and startup "as before", thus reducing the workload.

(I think I'll also summarize this discussion tomorrow for some feedback and inclusion in the wiki. It's past midnight here - time to sleep...)
NIATCA 2nd admin, regular ATC at LIPX and creator of the LIPX custom scenery
elgaton
 
Posts: 1107
Joined: Tue Mar 19, 2013 4:58 pm
Callsign: I-ELGA/LIPX_TW
Version: Git
OS: Windows + Arch Linux

Re: The Ultimate MP Fly-in

Postby Lydiot » Tue May 13, 2014 12:53 am

elgaton wrote in Mon May 12, 2014 10:40 pm:I have started the wiki page for the event - for now, regard it as an early draft. If anyone wants to edit it, please do so! Also, I think most ATC best practices/guidelines could be added to the wiki as well for present and future use.

As for the ground control discussion, I'm all the way for it (unless the workload is absolutely unbearable for the controller, which is rarely the case, from my experience); also, the hierarchy concept is the way to go. Regarding the specific issue of clearance/delivery, I've got a solution: should a player crash and the airport be busy, the controller could simply approve pushback and startup "as before", thus reducing the workload.

(I think I'll also summarize this discussion tomorrow for some feedback and inclusion in the wiki. It's past midnight here - time to sleep...)


Is there any discussion anywhere about ATC terminology and procedures?

The one thing I mentioned earlier that I was told by an actual pilot was that "line up and wait" is only used when there's a good reason for waiting (e.g. wake turbulence, waiting for landing plane to clear runway etc), and otherwise the command is simply "cleared for takeoff" given while the plane is holding short. I've notice a lot of times pilots now expect "line up and wait" and even though they're given the command "cleared for takeoff" they line up and then just sit there waiting for a repeat of the same command. So, just curious if this can be clarified.

Another point of much confusion is what happens at the point where the plane intercepts localizer and turns to final approach.
Lydiot
 
Posts: 988
Joined: Tue Oct 22, 2013 10:50 pm

Re: The Ultimate MP Fly-in

Postby HJ1AN » Tue May 13, 2014 1:51 am

Well, I started one here:
viewtopic.php?f=25&t=22992

hoping that we can discuss ATC-traffic communications in an *online* environment, not necessary one that sticks to the real world, for reasons that people are in front of computers over a network instead of flying a plane (ie everything else is different, and probbaly not so convenient, ergonomically).


Lydiot wrote in Tue May 13, 2014 12:53 am:The one thing I mentioned earlier that I was told by an actual pilot was that "line up and wait" is only used when there's a good reason for waiting (e.g. wake turbulence, waiting for landing plane to clear runway etc), and otherwise the command is simply "cleared for takeoff" given while the plane is holding short. I've notice a lot of times pilots now expect "line up and wait" and even though they're given the command "cleared for takeoff" they line up and then just sit there waiting for a repeat of the same command. So, just curious if this can be clarified.

Another point of much confusion is what happens at the point where the plane intercepts localizer and turns to final approach.


Yeah when I was at controlled airport I confused everything as well. Just not used to these instructions. It's like, "ok what do I next now?" and then it seems like the ATC is busy with everyone else so I reread the instruction over and over until sometimes I just go "taking off now, g'bye" lol

Here's my suggestion, given that we are an online environment, considering the lag, and the variety of players, (ie those useing chat rather than mic), we should give each other some leeway around them...

for example:

ATC : cleared for take off, climb to 2500 and do whatever you see fit

or

ATC : cleared callsignxxx for VFR approach, everyone else don't land, contact me if you need help

Something like that. Well it was loosely worded but I hope others get the idea
User avatar
HJ1AN
 
Posts: 377
Joined: Sat Jul 25, 2009 4:45 am
Callsign: HJ888
Version: 3.4
OS: OS X

Re: The Ultimate MP Fly-in

Postby elgaton » Tue May 13, 2014 10:25 am

I have read again the latest two/three pages of the thread and incorporated most suggestions in the ATC best practices wiki page.

As for ATC terminology and procedure, I'll outline below what I use at the moment, hoping it will serve as a starting point.
  1. I go for absolute realism (that means, I always get the latest AIP data and follow real life SIDs/STARs/procedures).
  2. I use ICAO phraseology (this Eurocontrol booklet could be useful as a reference).
  3. I normally expect pilots to contact me at 60 NM, if that's not the case, however, I send them a chat message asking them if they are inbound (provided they are heading towards the airport I'm controlling and at an acceptable altitude, i.e. they are not just overflying).
  4. I usually ask pilots on initial contact if they have got the charts; if yes, I just clear them to follow an SID/STAR, if not, I give them vectors.
  5. If the pilot has not filed a flight plan, I just ask him for his destination/cruise altitude and fill them in. (That takes about 20 seconds and does not usually add much time, but reduces the workload for other controllers, in my opinion; it would be nice to test it during the practice session).
  6. If there is more than one ATC, I coordinate with him and we usually agree on handoff procedures and areas of control.

(As for the event itself, I have now booked my ATC sessions at Barcelona - if any other ATC wants to join in, he'll be more than welcome :wink: )
NIATCA 2nd admin, regular ATC at LIPX and creator of the LIPX custom scenery
elgaton
 
Posts: 1107
Joined: Tue Mar 19, 2013 4:58 pm
Callsign: I-ELGA/LIPX_TW
Version: Git
OS: Windows + Arch Linux

PreviousNext

Return to Multiplayer events

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: FlugHund and 1 guest