In the current state of the Expert Server, there is a noticeable increase in behavior that falls short of “expert” standards. This adds unnecessary traffic pressure to hub airports and negatively impacts the experience for both pilots and controllers. At the same time, the Training Server seems to fail in providing the necessary preparation for pilots aspiring to enter the Expert Server. Therefore, I propose a series of adjustments to the Training Server to transform it into a true training environment:
Allow IFATC to Control on the Training Server and Issue Violations
For pilots to practice with ATC, they need guidance from professional controllers who can provide accurate instructions. Currently, the Training Server is filled with both pilots and controllers who lack expertise, rendering it ineffective as a preparation ground for the Expert Server. Allowing IFATC to control on the Training Server would provide a better learning environment for pilots.
Enable IFATC to Issue Warning Violations Without Enforcement
Building on the first point, if controllers cannot issue warnings, they are unable to effectively inform pilots of their mistakes. While warning messages exist, they often fail to cover all potential issues, and pilots may not fully understand the consequences of their actions on the Expert Server (how many people actually read the manual is an interesting question). Since this is a Training Server, mistakes should be allowed; therefore, violations issued here would only serve as reminders without actual enforcement.
However, for certain egregious behaviors—such as runway incursions, taxiing through others, disobeying instructions, or landing on the wrong runway intentionally—IFATC should have the authority to kick the violator from the server as a warning. (If you want complete freedom, you should fly on the Casual Server.)
These are my suggestions. If you have other ideas or recommendations, feel free to share them in the comments!
One additional point to consider is that the number of controllers on the Expert Server currently far exceeds the actual demand. Therefore, diverting some controllers to the Training Server to provide guidance would not compromise the quality of service on the Expert Server.
Moreover, I believe many controllers would be willing to help out on the Training Server, as this is preferable to dealing with the disruptions caused by unprepared pilots on the Expert Server and at hub airports.
Training Server is a place to learn without the threat of being banned for making a mistake. Yes the issue of unprofessional pilots and clueless ATC is a problem - but letting IFATC control on TS and report pilots isn’t the solution.
At present, aside from not being able to control ATC, there is essentially no difference between the Casual Server and the Training Server. Measures should be taken to give the Training Server its intended “training” purpose—namely, allowing reports to be issued without being enforced.
In my eyes it doesn’t really matter - because the pilots who often cause “issues” will either not touch Expert Server, or they will likely end up swiftly reported if they do venture onto ES (at which point maybe hopefully they will “learn”) so… 🤷🏼♂️
I think what he means is that - people who are complete professionals with ATC in training should be able to give certain warnings or report like “Failed to do a go-around” or “Entered the runway without permission” - or even with approach - “Did not follow Heading, Altitude/ speed instruction”. Maybe he just wants what’s best for the Training Server - as those who are extremely professional with ATC in Training including myself ; we try to issue the correct problems certain pilots are doing and what’s wrong. We don’t want them to instantly enter into Grade 3 not knowing what to do and also getting impatient with the queue. EGLL is the hub for Training Server (what I’ve noticed) and with its peak times during the day , it gets often busy with long queues. We try to issue departing Sequences- but hence one guy will get on the runway and just take off then other pilots follow along and it’s very annoying- as we always have to issue go around but no one listens.
We really do want what is best for these fellow pilots in Training , we really don’t want them to suffer with not knowing what to do in ES. We want them to get used to a certain few procedures like heading , entering a downwind /turning base , diverting to a airport (they always spawn by nearby airports), needing to follow runway changes or what runway/s are in use etc. We trying not to be harsh but I think they should really get the idea that we as the ATC in Training are trying to be quite precise with them.
So we really do recommend of the few suggestions please :). Thanks
But “complete professionals with ATC” is a subjective assessment until tested formally by people with proven skilled experience.
And how do you develop a pool of new ATC to be tested formally by the system, without an environment where everyone can first try and practice ATC and make mistakes just like new pilots?
Training Server’s role for becoming familiar with the basics of the ATC environment is the other half of the issue that hasn’t been considered here.
The novice ATC’s need to practice with pilots, so both novice pilots and novice ATC can emerge together from making relatively many mistakes to a point of greater familiarity with the “full system” to where both groups become relatively more seasoned.
TL;DR: It’s about new ATC learning too, not just pilots. TS adds both system violations, and the ATC environment for introduction and practice.
I’m just confused because as the saying goes, “Every expert was once a beginner.” With that in mind, who would make the best teachers? People not properly or legitimately trained on proper procedure or someone who went through training?
IFATC sends CUG on requesting to taxi at a stand that requires a pushback on TRAINing server…
Well, someone at least attempted to TEACH or TRAIN on TRAINing server.
Training doesn’t occur if you aren’t taught the correct procedures.
The training server provides minimal training for pilots. At least for me, when I first started with IF, I wasn’t very familiar with the ATC functions in the game. However, since I subscribed to the game intending to join as a controller, I carefully studied the knowledge related to ATC. The training server not only failed to help me practice ATC but even disrupted my flying experience because almost no one followed the rules.
My experience: Horrible.
People join atc just to leave 2 minutes later, just to rejoin again after 3 minutes and do the same bs over and over. Its honestly annoying. Please take it at least a bit serious, ur ruining the experience for everyone else…imo
You’re going to mix IFATC and non-IFATC on TS? Wouldn’t it risk causing so much confusion you’d essentially have to split the TS stage in two?
So, you’d have something like: CS, TS1, TS2, ES?
And then you’d have to organize (and motivate?) IFATC to split time between TS2 and ES?
And what about the added cost and complexity of administering that, not to mention perhaps users might start avoiding the system if it becomes too rigidly complicated?
One could entertain the idea of renaming TS so people don’t get confused by the word “Training”?
But “Stage 2 Server” or something maybe sounds too bland.
Anyway, it actually is Training on the TS in the sense: that is where you train.
It doesn’t mean you are being formally trained though, it is self-directed. In the end, violations grade the end result of one’s self-directed training. And there’s the community and UG’s to help with the process of self-directed assessment.
It frees up the entire system to keep complexity to a minimum, allowing complexity to be limited to focused areas, such as the system of IFATC recruitment and instructed training.
I don’t think IFATC and untested controllers would cause confusion on the server. Because, as I mentioned, only IFATC can issue non-enforceable violation warnings on the training server to inform pilots about their mistakes.
Right, I see your point. I skipped over that part too quickly. It is an interesting idea.
There still might be some concern though about the confusion of mixing IFATC and non-IFATC on a single server, again tending to split the server in two.
An example: If IFATC is offering their services on TS, would there be a stampede of TS pilots away from users trying to get a taste of, and further practice with the raw ATC environment offered on TS?
And would that tend to dry up the pool of future IFATC recruits?
So this is exactly the purpose of the training server—to allow those officially certified to play a greater role, rather than competing for one or two positions on the ES. Honestly, the current number of IFATC controllers is extremely high. There are people competing for control positions at hub airports 24/7. Why not let the remaining controllers contribute on the training server? And there’s no need to worry about hub airports lacking controllers, because managing a hub airport is definitely more enjoyable than training on the training server.
However, I also understand your concerns, but in my opinion, the benefits outweigh the drawbacks. Anyway, thank you for your comment.