Aircraft contact violations

As I have browsed around the IFC I have seen far too many topics recently of people taxiing through others. I think a simple solution would be for an aircraft contact violation to be implemented. I specify below how the violation would work.

Engagement of violation

  1. The violation would be a system violation
  2. Violation only occurs when parts of an aircraft travel through another part of an aircraft.
  3. Violation administers 1 violation every 3 seconds
  4. Violation notifies active ATC of a violator.
  5. Violation only occurs on Expert server
    6.Contact zone are the physical rendering of the aircraft.

Preventing trolling

  1. System violation would only be administered to pilots with >0kts GS.
  2. Pilots with parking break set and 0GS will not recieve a violation
  3. Violators will continually recieve violations until out of contact with other aircraft. Recieving initial violation and engaging parking breaks and being at 0GS does not stop system violation if still in contsct with other aircraft

As much as i can see the positive from this. But if someone has bad internet then they’d get useless violations and it’d be worse…


The simple solution is to stop before the aircraft position of the previous aircraft. Additionally, as stated if they are not moving and are with parking breaks engaged they wouldnt recieve a violation anyway

1 Like

Seems like a great idea. You have my vote.


I’m partly for and against this feature.

If IFATC is not present, or if on Unicom on ES/TS this could be nice. The problem is:

  • There is currently no collision physics in IF - maybe a good thing? 🤔😆
  • Some uhh issues result in aircraft not loading or suddenly unloading in view, which may cause frustrations with the proposed feature.

I’d say just be cognizant of your surroundings, do the best you can, be patient, expect the unexpected, and be safe is about the best you can be in IF.

1 Like

The RL spacing you put between two aircraft is around at least a Cessna apart with it far greater with larger aircraft. The reason I suggest this is because usualy the ones most likely to taxi through other aircradt are the ones most likely to not use expert server correctly.


I think the IRL spacing is a little bit larger than a Cessna 😉.

I get that. I understand your frustration - I really do. It’s just that the coding isn’t there, and we can adjust for these situations for the most part. On the bright side, if they do it while an IFATC is present, they’re getting a nice vacation to the TS. On another bright side, if you’re not yet G3, you’ll get a better flight experience soon.

In theory a good idea, in practice what if a troll intentionally tailgates you? Either you push faster and go off the taxi way or exceed 35, or you get a violation for contact…

Maybe add that the faster person receives a violation. With the current proposal, similar to what @xsrvmy said, if you were taxiing and another aircraft was trolling, they could just taxi faster and you both would receive violations, as both of your barking brakes would not be engaged.

Another scenario is that is you were at an intersection with another aircraft perpendicular to you, and you continue on into the intersection, the other aircraft can troll by going into you at a slower speed, which would be a loophole to the proposal earlier.

I think that this a great idea and should be discussed more, but this has been discussed before in other topics and there are just too many loopholes for trolling at this point.

Another trolling type problem: pushing back into each other…

This would be good on the TS since it’s where people are only training, but on the ES there’s already an option for IFATC to ghost for taxiing through others.

I would like to support but it is so hard. As @Alphadog4646 explained connection problems etc.

which means ATCless ES airport is less punishing than TS which would be a bad idea.

1 Like

Also this should not be a thing in the air. If you are unlucky you could end up on top of someone on an overnight flight.

I mean, in that case there could be a violation. Maybe the devs can create a violation that keeps you off the ES for 7 days.

How to decide which one of the aircraft should be handed out a violation? Wouldn’t be fair to give a violation to the one who got hit by another, would it?


I think the biggest rpoblem is determining fault. If an aircraft pushes back into a taxing aircraft, then the aircraft pushing back should be flagged. But the way people are suggesting here the taxiing aircraft would be flagged.

1 Like

yeah best example of faster aircraft not being in the wrong is pushing back into a taxiing aircraft.

You have a point. The devs could make it so that only the moving aircraft (in this case the one pushing back) gets an automatic violation. Yet that might not solve it completely, as both aircraft could be moving at the same time.

Yeah. TBH if taxiing through grass becomes a crash, then maybe there might be advanced ways to solve this. Other problems are tail gating and brake checks.

1 Like