Board index FlightGear Multiplayer events

The Festival of Flightgear - ATC - info and discussion

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.

The Festival of Flightgear - ATC - info and discussion

Postby Lydiot » Thu May 15, 2014 4:23 pm

Use this thread for discussing all things ATC...

ATC Mumble channels::

Image

Quick Mumble setup tutorial::

...here...




Standard Terminal Arrival Routes (STARs) AND Standard Instrument Departures:

Get them here!

Everyone who decides to either ATC or use flight-plans that include STARs/SIDs should grab them from the website above. That way we all know more or less what to expect more or less.



To schedule your ATC session for the event:

Lenny's ATC session website.



For standard ATC terminology and procedures, go to:

The FlightGear wiki page on ATC phraseology.

and

The FlightGear wiki ATC tutorial page.



Ground Networks for Open Radar:

https://gitorious.org/festival-of-fligh ... undnetwork




"Open Radar" provides the greater flexibility for ATC and is the preferred app for it. Get the latest version here!


Other information can be found on the wiki page of the event.

Special thanks to IAHM-COL and elgaton for being involved and providing great info!

this post will be updated with what is hopefully a consensus on, eh, stuff...

Image
Last edited by Lydiot on Sat Nov 01, 2014 4:09 pm, edited 8 times in total.
Lydiot
 
Posts: 984
Joined: Tue Oct 22, 2013 10:50 pm

Re: The Festival of Flightgear - ATC - info and discussion

Postby elgaton » Thu May 15, 2014 4:29 pm

OK, I think this is a good summary of all the points we have agreed so far and of those which still need to be discussed.

Consensus reached on:
  1. Communications - Mumble as primary means, text as backup/for the pilots unable to use voice.
  2. Scheduling tool once ATC availability has been determined - we'll use Lenny's website. Flight plans, though appreciated, will not be required.
  3. Chart set - we will use the charts in AIP Spain.
  4. ATC requirements - anyone willing to be an ATC must offer voice service, have an excellent knowledge of phraseology and procedures, know his/her airspace, be patient and polite.
  5. ATC hierarchy - in case not all positions (ground/tower/approach) are manned, every position takes the duties of the ones that have lower priority, until either the list is exhausted or there is an available controller. (We need to check if an ATC manning only an Approach/Tower position should offer ground services as well).

Still need to be discussed:
  1. ATIS - should we offer ATIS as well? (I don't know for sure if a Mumble bot exists for that purpose, need to search).
  2. Phraseology - though we basically agree to use ICAO standard phraseology, we still need to decide how to act in case a pilot does not know it very well.
  3. Separation - Rick Ace proposed only vertical separation, Lydiot said both, IAHM-COL pointed out that uncontrolled aircraft might enter the controlled zone without knowing and that we need to be tolerant with respect to that scenario, I made the remark that STARs and SIDs generally require approach control to guide the aircraft in a 60 NM radius from the airport. We need to be flexible.
  4. Reasonable scenario - we need to establish a minimal amount of rules for all traffic.
  5. Problematic pilots/situations - again, we should make a list of most (if not all) common problematic situations that can arise and of their respective corrective actions.
  6. Handoffs - we should check that all aircrafts can be handed off at appropriate points without much trouble (especially when they want to fly from an airport to another, near one and SIDs/STARs overlap); if we identify any potentially problematic situations, we should agree on an appropriate procedure.
Last edited by elgaton on Fri May 16, 2014 9:18 am, edited 4 times in total.
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 Festival of Flightgear - ATC - info and discussion

Postby Lydiot » Thu May 15, 2014 5:09 pm

Thanks elgaton.

I have a request for procedures which is a clarification of something that is often fuzzy when we play.

The term "line up and wait" (in OpenRadar "Line up and wait on runway, report when ready for departure") is as far as I understand it ONLY required if there is a reason for the pilot to line up but also wait, e.g. if there is a plane down the runway that just landed or is crossing, so that the pilot literally has a reason to wait. If there is NO obstruction this command is unnecessary and the pilot should just be cleared for takeoff after which he lines up AND takes off.

This constant use of "Line up and wait" is no doubt often the result of the command being readily available in OpenRadar. But my problem with it is that it almost always needlessly slows down departures and therefore traffic in general.

I think it would be good to

* recommend/remind ATCs to NOT use this command unless there is a good reason to, and
* inform pilots that once they receive the "cleared for takeoff" command they can indeed take off, and don't have to wait

Did I understand the issue correctly, and would you be okay with those clarifications?
Lydiot
 
Posts: 984
Joined: Tue Oct 22, 2013 10:50 pm

Re: The Festival of Flightgear - ATC - info and discussion

Postby IAHM-COL » Thu May 15, 2014 5:15 pm

IH_COL: elgaton, line up and wait
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 Festival of Flightgear - ATC - info and discussion

Postby IAHM-COL » Thu May 15, 2014 5:23 pm

El gaton,
In principle runway times MUST be minimized.
If an airport is heavily traffic, this fact only accents.

On arrival: A plane is instructed to vacate runway and hold on the taxiway exit after the holding point mark, EVEN if communication fails. Thus minimizing RWY time.
On departure: A plane is instructed to hold short the runway. No line IN the runway. That way obstructions to the runway do not happen, and the plane will get IN the runway, as a general rule, when it is REALLY ready to go. no need to stand, spawn or wait runway heads. In addition, to minimize runway times, ATCs may even inform to the pilot if they are willing to take an intersection for a shorter roll, specially to planes that need less roll distance. Less roll distance = less time on Runway.

You line a plane on the runway, ONLY in special circumstances. And you double verify many things such as no plane in approach is present (which again is rare is really heavily transited airports).

To restate, Take off clearance is given by TOWER controller (no-one else), once this is handed off by Ground, and the pilot is standing holdshort position, and all ready to roll. Take off clearance ENDS with the words: <<Clear to take off>>, and the read back of a pilot will end with <<cleared to take off>>. After reading back as this, why on earth (or skies) would a pilot line and wait? (answer, something went wrong, and immediate abort should be communicated to tower, plus respective authorizations to taxi off runway if able, or Emergency Runway closure if unable). In other circumstances the pilot smoothly enters runway and rolls

(take a trip one of this days and pay attention when your pilot stands of the holding. Once it rolls, it GOES)

IHCOL
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 Festival of Flightgear - ATC - info and discussion

Postby elgaton » Thu May 15, 2014 5:31 pm

Lydiot wrote in Thu May 15, 2014 5:09 pm:Thanks elgaton.

I have a request for procedures which is a clarification of something that is often fuzzy when we play.

The term "line up and wait" (in OpenRadar "Line up and wait on runway, report when ready for departure") is as far as I understand it ONLY required if there is a reason for the pilot to line up but also wait, e.g. if there is a plane down the runway that just landed or is crossing, so that the pilot literally has a reason to wait. If there is NO obstruction this command is unnecessary and the pilot should just be cleared for takeoff after which he lines up AND takes off.

[...]

I think it would be good to

* recommend/remind ATCs to NOT use this command unless there is a good reason to, and
* inform pilots that once they receive the "cleared for takeoff" command they can indeed take off, and don't have to wait

Did I understand the issue correctly, and would you be okay with those clarifications?

That's correct - see here, emphasis mine - didn't manage to find an official publication though:
Definition: Used by ATC to inform a pilot to taxi onto the departure runway in takeoff position and wait (hold). It is not authorization for takeoff. It is used when takeoff clearance cannot immediately be issued because of traffic or other reasons.


I'll add your suggestions to the wiki.

IAHM-COL wrote in Thu May 15, 2014 5:15 pm:IH_COL: elgaton, line up and wait

elgaton: IH_COL, runway indication is missing, say again :P

(jokes aside, you're right)
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 Festival of Flightgear - ATC - info and discussion

Postby IAHM-COL » Thu May 15, 2014 5:42 pm

ATC hierarchy

I would not call it "a hierarchy" in terms no-one is MORE important.
Just in principle more experienced.

I would say we should always go like this (as properly refected with callsigns)

DEL (ie LEMD_DE):
should take delivery position, and no more... (should not attempt be ground)
GND (ie LEMD_GN): Should take Ground position. If no DEL on place, it takes BOTH functions, (should not attempt be tower)
TWR (ie LEMD_TW): Should take Tower position, and unfilled lower positions. Should not attempt take Center. example, if there is DEL and TWR, TWR drops to exercise both GND and TWR, but respects the DEL domain
CTR (ie LEMC_CT): Should use proper IFR callsign, like NO LEMD. Should control airspace of CENTER and FIR only. Will drop back to unoccupied lower positions ONLY in the airport of location, but hand off to Tower on every other place (even if there is not man covering that, which means pilot goes by its own)

Example

you have LEMC_CT and LEMD_GN, and LECU_TW present.
LEMC_CT will cover the Madrid South airspace, and hand off pilots once they get to TWR airspace of any airport within, regardless of this being controlled or not. It will also drop functions as LEMD_TW. It will hand off pilots to LECU_TW when these ARE ABOUT TO reach that airspace.
LEMD_GN: will cover both LEMD_GN and LEMD_DE positions. Receives pilots vacating RWY from LEMC_CT. Hands off pilots holding short to LEMC_CT
LECU_TW: will cover all LECU_TW, LECU_GN, and LECU_DE. Receives pilots arriving to airspace from LEMC_CT. Hands off pilots departing airspace to LEMC_CT

The wiki update I deliver for multiple men in one airspace details all these sceneries.
Last edited by IAHM-COL on Thu May 15, 2014 6:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
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 Festival of Flightgear - ATC - info and discussion

Postby elgaton » Thu May 15, 2014 5:46 pm

Good for me.
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 Festival of Flightgear - ATC - info and discussion

Postby Lydiot » Thu May 15, 2014 5:49 pm

COL,

Can you please verify the nomenclature and make sure "DEL" isn't confused with "DE" and "DL"?
Lydiot
 
Posts: 984
Joined: Tue Oct 22, 2013 10:50 pm

Re: The Festival of Flightgear - ATC - info and discussion

Postby IAHM-COL » Thu May 15, 2014 5:54 pm

Centers and its locations (in IBERIA peninsula)

There are 3 FIRs in spain:
Madrid, Barcelona and Sevilla
Image

But Madrid splits in 3 sub-centers
Image
So you could potentially have 5 Centers covering all spain. their locations and callsigns are

LEMC_NW:
On Santiago de Compostela (LEST)
LEMC_NE: On Bilbao (LEBB)
LEMC_CT or LEMC_S: On Madrid barajas (LEMD)
LEBC_CT: On Barcelona El Prat (LEBL)
LECS_CT: On Sevilla San Pablo (LEZL)

EDIT: Lisboa is also part of the Iberian Peninsula (I apologize to Portuguese): LPPC_CT locates on Lisbon Portela (LPPT)

Due to openradar limitation, center controllers need to monitor traffic with mpmap02 and communicate via mumble to distant aircraft.
Most good centers, and Controllers in general will let a plane do, as much as they following what's planned. They may issue a pilot with flight plan updates, or correct them back to their route, if they seem to be getting lost. They Will control vertical navigation so a plane: 1) its not too high for approach, and 2) does not violate vertical separation rules.

And off course, while executing as FIR may be prompt to provide regional Flight information, weather updates, and stuff like that.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_information_region
Last edited by IAHM-COL on Thu May 15, 2014 6:05 pm, edited 10 times in total.
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 Festival of Flightgear - ATC - info and discussion

Postby IAHM-COL » Thu May 15, 2014 5:55 pm

Lydiot wrote in Thu May 15, 2014 5:49 pm:COL,

Can you please verify the nomenclature and make sure "DEL" isn't confused with "DE" and "DL"?


Lydiot,
FG only accept up to seven char callsigns

LEBL_DEL exceeds that.

I suggest using
LEBL_DE
I dont know what confusion would be if using
LEBL_DL
or
LEBLDEL

But :roll:
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 Festival of Flightgear - ATC - info and discussion

Postby Lydiot » Thu May 15, 2014 6:09 pm

IAHM-COL wrote in Thu May 15, 2014 5:55 pm:
Lydiot wrote in Thu May 15, 2014 5:49 pm:COL,

Can you please verify the nomenclature and make sure "DEL" isn't confused with "DE" and "DL"?


Lydiot,
FG only accept up to seven char callsigns

LEBL_DEL exceeds that.

I suggest using
LEBL_DE
I dont know what confusion would be if using
LEBL_DL
or
LEBLDEL

But :roll:


Just wanted you to check your post, you wrote: "DEL (ie LEMD_DE): should take delivery position, and no more... (should not attempt be ground)", it should be "DEL (ie LEMD_DL): should take delivery position, and no more... (should not attempt be ground)", correct?
Lydiot
 
Posts: 984
Joined: Tue Oct 22, 2013 10:50 pm

Re: The Festival of Flightgear - ATC - info and discussion

Postby IAHM-COL » Thu May 15, 2014 6:11 pm

sure. apologize for the typo.
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 Festival of Flightgear - ATC - info and discussion

Postby elgaton » Thu May 15, 2014 6:27 pm

I think having the FIRs is a good idea, as long as they let the planes do as much as possible (that way uncontrolled aircrafts will be free to fly as they wish).

Should we discuss potentially problematic scenarios next?
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 Festival of Flightgear - ATC - info and discussion

Postby IAHM-COL » Thu May 15, 2014 6:38 pm

totally
A CTR should have the policy of "let do", not "let's control!! [control maniac smile]"

and people that report willing to go uncontrolled should be just left alone with respect. Is not this FIESTA everyone's party anyways?

besides, anyone that is below FL195 in spain is by definition, not the CTRs business.
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

Next

Return to Multiplayer events

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 1 guest