This alone made me laugh to the point my parents were desparing…
Speaking of which…way back soon after Global came out…I was heading out of Dubai heading to Fort Lauerdale and this other guy copied my flight plan, took-off, proceeded to overtake me, climb at a ridiculous V/S and then proceed to become a wave and bounce in between about 45000 and 55000ft…in a 777!
And I’m like…
I totally agree with you Tim and the rest of you. I get so much negative response to every time I say something towards this but im happy I have people like you guys who are professional and understand. Something must be done because us real professional virtual pilots want to enjoy the experience!
This… Oh dear lord so much this. One flight I was flying the published STAR following all the speed/altitude restrictions to join the ILS at the appropriate altitude only to have someone with a WPT KLAX flight plan come cooking overhead and dive in front of me on final.
Quick question, when was “Realism” a trademark?
I Understand The Frustration But Without These Young Users We Would Lose Most Of Our Game. Without Them We Would Have Less Money And That Leads To Less Progress To Make The Game Better! I Think To Improve The Quality Of Expert Server, To Limit The Less Realistic Users, We Should Have Stricter Expert Server Requirements. See This Topic To Vote On It - Stricter Expert server rules
Edit: I Also Want To Make Clear That Not All Younger Pilots Are Bad! And In The Topic @James_Browne Says To Make A Expert+ But I Do Not Agree With That.
This stuff happens on Expert
It’s my way of sarcastically indicating that the word is used on this forum a lot, but when it actually comes to things like this and other things related to actual flight, people tend to be less adamant about realism. Sorry, Realism™.
Essentially, I want it to be more than a buzzword.
And I want the word “butter” to disappear entirely.
Why? It means a really smooth landing.
i agree with you, even before i got IF when i was looking to get a new flight sim i have watched a lot of reviews and stuff on youtube and i have always seen people talking about IF being more about realism and stuff like that but its can also sound like a buzzword cause we still have pilots that are trying to land on the moon anyway or those who are breaking long haul flight records or whatever LOL,.
So does the word “smooth,” as you’ve just noted.
It’s also used without the slightest variation by everyone here as if there’s no such thing as a thesaurus.
It has jumped an entire line of sharks. It’s at the point where when your parents’ generation starts using your generation’s slang, you find a new word.
But that isn’t the topic. No more on that.
Yeah, exactly. There’s about ten tutorials on flying to space
It’s not age but maturity
Er… you do realize you need to be 13 to abide by the TOS?
There used to be a server that catered exclusively to “realism” almost five years ago with our controllers booting people who even so much as used the incorrect ATC verbiage. Long story short, the place was a ghost town.
For many of the posters in this thread - because something isn’t present at the moment doesn’t mean it hasn’t already been tried or explored in various internal discussions. A fine balance has to be struck between what can be reasonably expected out of the primary user base and those who are actually committed to procedures on the level of, say, VATSIM.
It needs to be placed in that new filter they just enabled
Would that perhaps mean a newer server down the line? A-la a PilotEdge/VATSIM-esque experience? Where flightplans can’t be WPT KLAX and procedures are followed? The whole stricter topic/request is very subjective and can be interpreted in many ways-like the ghost town super strict place you spoke of-or it could be that the flightplans need to be filed and followed including procedures (RNAV or vectored) on either end.
To be fair though, PE/VATSIM has no rule that the flightplan cannot be KLAX DCT KJFK. Both PE and VATSIM are learning networks (each to their degree), and it is the job of the controller to make sure the flight plans are valid. Not everyone is flying procedures either, which gives an additional, but realistic challenge.
This is what makes controlling fun. You get unexpected events, people new to the network, and that is the responsibility of the controller to handle. A good controller is able to sort out those events quickly.
What would be realistic is a server where these kinds of procedures are accepted, but not mandatory. I can tell you as an official that VATSIM does not require pilots to utilize P-RNAV procedures. I don’t think IF would benefit from having such a rule either.
But that entails a lot more complicated matters. What about charts? AIRAC/navdata updates? SID/STAR systems outside the US? What about radar vectored approaches without ATC?
Infinite Flight Multiplayer is not VATSIM, and it has never intended to be it either. It is a different user group, a different market share and a different experience alltogether. As a fairly experienced VATSIM controller and staff member I still love relaxing with a bit of IF from time to time, to get away from all the pre-planning, work and energy needed to fly online on the other networks. :P
So those of us who want to fly them should never be able to use ATC then? We should get vectored 3/4 of the way to KBOS when the destination is KJFK? I’m a little confused here as to your post… Not all IF users have PC’s with sims to be able use VATSIM/PE (tho I am saving for one) and some of those users (I know I’m not the only one) wish to have that kind of experience or at least as much of the experience as IF will allow. It has become easier and easier to plan flights using RW plans and procedures as each successive IF update has come along.
As for VATSIM-I always flew tubeliners online but I never recall getting a VATSIM clearance that didn’t include an RNAV or Vectored SID/STAR. Pilot Edge is the stricter of the two on that kind of thing from what I understand.
As to the first quote above-as IF improves-there should be at least some consideration for the users that wish to fly realistically is the important thing. For example, for pilots who use it as their primary sim. (simulator-NOT “game”)
For the second quote-I suppose I could say that “there’s TS/casual servers” for that kind of thing (please don’t take that the wrong way)
The important point I would like to get across is that there is the ability for users that want to to be able to use them without getting vectored all over the place because of a WPT KLAX type FP cutting onto a STAR.
As for the ATC side of things the (RNAV) procedures are designed to reduce RW controller workflow and keep planes appropriately separated with speed constraints while the vectored procedures (JFK/ORD come to mind) put the incoming/outgoing aircraft into a “basket” if you will for the controller’s to properly guide them into the Approach. Incidentally, if they were to make procedures mandatory during some events, not only would it help ease workflow, but it could really help increase operations and avoid pilots overflying the airport at 18K and causing extra unnecessary work.
No, because you were P-RNAV capable. If you fly a plane without an FMC or without the ANP to perform the SID/STAR, you have other means for the departure, such as a vectored or non-standard departure.
My point is if you want to make flying the procedures mandatory, you are going further away from realism and real life than it is today. With very few exceptions, no airspace requires you to fly a P-RNAV procedure.
Don’t get me wrong, I am all for realism on IF as well. In the times where I was very active in IFATC, I had the ICAO doc. 4444 (Non-FAA equivalent of the 7110.65) in front of me.
This is the heart of why we have ATCO’s in the first place. These things happen. Not because of your example, but other means. It is very much realistic that you can recieve vectors even though you have filed a procedural arrival. And that is up to the controller, since he has the big picture.
I’m not against this at all, heck - before I got deeply involved in vatsim, this was one of the cases I fought for. But don’t think that procedures are mandatory, or that you can force people to fly them. Just like in real life :D
Every response a mod would say would be that they cant do anything more about it. And I do feel you trust me its annoying when you have this happen to you. It happens a lot to me when I am just flying and I see airplanes landing on the runway their not supposed to and it gets frustrated when you see these thing incoming traffic on the wrong end of the runway when everyone else is using the right one. I got my post flagged for trying to address and issue of this same exact problem and it seemed like no one cared. I agree with you 100%