I’ll just include a suggestion, you may follow it or not. When controlling an airport, especially in low-traffic situations, take a look at Flightradar24 to understand the real-world conditions. It’s extremely frustrating, as someone who’s flying, to deal with a controller who sticks to a decision made in their own head and refuses to adapt as real-world conditions change. Recently, I received a Level 3 Violation — which is fine by me. I knowingly didn’t follow the procedures broadcast on ATIS because the controller was using the opposite runway from what was being used in real life. I say this with all due respect, I truly appreciate the work IFATC does.
Amen!! I couldn’t agree more. Unfortunately much to my disliking and I’m sure yours too, there is no way to mandate this. Its unfortunate, but requiring every controller to adhere to the same standard of realism as we do, just isn’t feasible.
Realism might mean different things to different people; but regarding which runway is in use, I do think that FlightRadar can be used as a reference but it doesn’t necessarily translate to how any airport on IF should be operated. We do not have the same kinds of traffic that airports in real life have at any given time. Our weather is also delayed and may be different from real life. Many pilots here do not have the kinds of training pilots in real life have. Many do not have navigation and approach charts. We are also limited in terms of what we can do (for example flying an RNP approach on IF is basically almost always approximated). We do even not have the same kinds of navigation database and navigation aids.
At the end of the day, yes, use your discretion and FlightRadar as a reference when you are flying uncontrolled. But when you are in a controlled airspace, follow the instructions. That’s realism.
Most controllers, including myself always check FR24 or the real world ATIS before opening. However because we are focused on controlling, it can be challenging to spot a runway change in real time.
I see your point. Though you have to understand that we can’t be monitoring runway changes all the time just because of device limitations, for example. We have to monitor things like Discord, many controllers don’t have enough devices to actively look at multiple sites. Not to mention that if there’s traffic waves that take away our attention fairly quickly and forgetting to check if a runway change has happened is inevitable, furthermore influenced by IF’s delayed weather.
Especially when flying into Dubai International.
IRL this airport usually operates 30L and 30R despite tailwind conditions.
I understand we takeoff and land opposite the wind. However, for some reason OMDB operates 30L/R despite tailwinds (as long as it is in safe limits) i’ve read somewhere that this is because they maximise runway operation efficiency due to the nature of dxb being a very busy hub.
Often times IF Atc vectors you or advises you to use 12L/R even active rwy in use is 30L/R in real time.
The approach profiles are mostly meant for 30L/R easier to sequence aircrafts from all sides. And no runway crossings needed for 30L landings and pretty much taxing for departures.
Most cases, we always try to accommodate traffic as per their request, and also try to use as much real life procedures as possible. As per the IFATC manual, controllers can accommodate the pilots request, even if against ATIS, that also includes landing on the opposite runway if they have to. But this unnecessarily increases workload. We don’t have to always follow IRL procedures, there can be better alternatives that suite the higher than usual(IRL)traffic levels we get in the sim. We do what’s best for us and what’s efficient, and sometimes that may lead to deny someone’s request.
I understand the frustration when real world operations differ from what we implement on IFS. While we do consider real world runway usage when possible, we also need to prioritize in sim weather conditions, traffic flow, and the guidance provided in our ATC manual to maintain efficiency and safety for all users.
There are times when winds and traffic volumes in IFS may require us to use a different runway configuration than what is shown on FR24, especially when winds are calm or when managing large event traffic.
This is extremely frustrating to hear a ES pilot say. You might not like the procedures being operated at an airport but that is not your prerogative to police or ignore. Realism has it’s limits in IF because of how arrivals and departure timings work. A great example is today at EWR where the traffic load well exceeded anything normal. I understand not being able to replicate an IRL flight but please don’t cause extra work for controllers just because you don’t get your way. Fly on the training server if you want to follow without listening to anyone.
Yes, you’re right! I regret this decision, although, as I communicated to a senior IFATC member, there was a clear issue with the controller (whom I won’t name). Given the wind conditions in this case, the runway should have been the opposite of the one being used, based on both IFATC and real-world procedures—not to mention the FlightRadar discussion.
I agree, there’s no doubt he made a mistake by not following the ATIS. However, he does have a point, since the game is designed to replicate real-world weather conditions. ATC should check the current conditions of the airspace they’re going to operate in and respect them. The idea is to always keep it as realistic as possible.
