GA traffic not encouraged enough

Hi everyone I hope I speak on behalf of a few here and I haven’t see this mantioned anywhere yet. So excuse me. If I’m in the wrong category.
I find that especially with the new update if the cessna 172, I very often see ATIS stating that no light aircraft are accepted. When clearly GA traffic operates from some of these airports. Its not an arcade game so I find it unrealistic to be diverted to somewhere cos the controller finds it easier to handle all the planes at roughly the same speeds. Just a bit boring to only have airliners at airports. Thanks and sorry if this exists already a topic or if noone finds it as important as I Do.


Light aircraft should always be allowed at an airport where there are GA gates. It is not traffic dependent and if there is a large area of the airport reserved for lights, for example today at Nice, lights will be allowed. If the airport is not suitable for lights, ie. Dubai, Heathrow, etc., they will not be allowed.

See 7.1.6 of the Public IFATC Manual:

No Light Aircraft in ATIS

“This command must be specifically reserved for large hub
airports (such as EGLL, OMDB and VHHH) where it is not
appropriate to have light aircraft. In addition, their presence
would cause undue delay to all other aircraft types due to the
aircraft characteristics. Controllers should note that this is not
traffic dependant, a consistent message must be sent that
there are other, more appropriate airports for light aircraft.”


The great majority of traffic that we see are airliners, which might explain some controllers’ hesitation to allow light traffic in the mix. Rest assured that as GA days become featured more often in the schedule and improvements are made to the GA fleet in IF, controllers will do their best to accommodate light traffic at appropriate airfields. :)


That is probably true

I think a lot of the time it goes back to the amount of traffic coming in. I understand that if I want to fly the 172 into a field with a bunch of airliner traffic its going to be pretty difficult for me to keep separation from jets because of the speed issue. I’m not quite sure IF pilots and atc are savvy enough to make flying into busy airports with a light aircraft easier yet. But let’s not forget that its pretty much the same thing in the real world at times in being that atc may have to get you out of the way of the jet traffic if youre too slow.

1 Like

also remember that in RL there are landing fees so you don’t have a 172 doing touch and gos and patterns at major hubs like we do in IF. lights causing undue delay, would be a couple C172s doing patterns with heavy inbound or outbound airliners… I would say Light Aircraft should still be allowed but no pattern work be checked.

1 Like

Listen, where able to, I’ve tried to fly GA every single flight. I vary from the Citation to the 208. They’re amazing. You can fly at a high VS with the Citation without speed warnings and it’s fun after takeoff just going straight up.

GA is amazing guys promise. Get out there. Next flight, I expect you to be in a smaller aircraft!

1 Like

I had heard the Cessna 208 wasn’t subjected to the same rules as other light aircraft somewhere.

Main problem is that even at airports where GA may exist in real life, traffic volumes faced by IFATC on expert are also substantially higher than the airport would probably be faced with in normal conditions.

Often I find that if there are 3 or 4 airports covered by IFATC at a time… as there often can be… at least 1 or 2 of them have coverage for light aircraft and pattern work.

I think back to the mess (a well handled one) that was EGKK a few weeks back as the featured airport and the 1 hour of holding and sequencing… Gatters is already the busiest single runway airport and the IF traffic was well above that of normal conditions and you had people in XCubs and TBMs taking off from EGKB trying to get approach in to EGKK… which doesnt exactly help.

IFATC has been good enough to encourage plenty of GA this week too…


Correct. Neither is the TBM.



I’m with the idea of GA should be allowed anywhere. If you can fly a 172 into Orlando or Boston no reason you shouldn’t be able to fly into them on IF. You guys forget you pay to use the game if the controllers can’t handle it that’s just a referendum on them not you as a pilot.


@Fred_Stirz… MaxSez “Well Said Fred. As a Matter of Record the
Citation, TBM & Caravan are not classified as GA IAW IF ATC Regs.

I’ve championed the GA cause at all multi-runway & Controlled IF airfields since day 1. The random IFATC “NO GA” hair on fire retorts here and in multiple of these like Topics & ATIS are “Specious”. (Apparently a few here need some time observing the evening TransLant rush at JFK or the Honolulu TransPac westerly wave flow and the scheduled GA slots). Here’s what I think; If it’s controlled, multi-Rwy, has GA Parking or an FBO and not hi-Flow FNF like under served events, then GA traffic should never be restricted.
GA all the way, Max


Hey @Fred_Stitz,

The hand-over back to Approach was a mistake (but it was too late to reverse it). Traffic was very busy, and there was some pilot’s that weren’t the most cooperative…

There were also a lot of people on the ground, awaiting takeoff, and there was barely enough space to get them out before another pilot landed, back taxied and exited the runway…

No, there were many other pilots who also had to divert due to heavy traffic; it’s not just because you were in a GA aircraft…

We aren’t incompetant, in fact, we go through hours of training to get to the position we are today… Controlling is a very stressful task, especially when there is a large quantity of aircraft inbound and trying to depart, on one single runway. I believe that this is a bit harsh but can understand where you’re coming from.

If you have any further questions, feel free to send them in a DM as publicly calling someone out isn’t the best thing to do…

Also, in regards to the thread title, IFATC controllers seriously encourage GA traffic, but only at the right times… This is not the place to complain about such things…

Best Regards,


Usually find in real life when I’m flying to somewhere that mixes with larger traffic it’s best to fly a tight base approach then hold till a gap in the inbound allows you to nip in land and clear the runway without causing to much stress. Air traffic is a service to the pilots not the other way round 👍


I don’t have any reason to encourage or to discourage GA, but in Live, I saw many GA users breaking rules, don’t follow ATC instructions etc.

For exemple, one hour ago, on the Expert Server in TFFR. Due to the huge traffic and the fact that there is only one runway, a queue of almost 10 aircrafts was created, by this guy using GA thinking he’s more important that others players, just taxied through all aircrafts. I waited during more than 30 minutes to get a clearance, and this guy do not take care about others and got his clearance in 2 minutes.

There were about three planes which were diverted. Two of them I noticed were inexperienced and had about 300 flight hours between them and appriach had to tell them to follow instructions a couple Of times. I could see they were going to cause a bit of a scene at this, I admit, very busy airport. But he accepted other planes into the pattern, all airliners of course… Anyway I was talking about the approach controller not wanting GA traffic. Your mistake handing me off again, fair enough, that happens.
But I really don’t know why someone would have me in a pattern for about an hour, and then tell Me he’s not accepting traffic. By then I was the only GA in the pattern. You can see why I’m getting heated? I pay for this game. A lot. I pack the extra fuel, I do it as a passion. I like the realism, i just don’t like unfair trwtment due to controllers preference, its absurd.


This is not on expert I presume

Yes it was ! It’s the only reason why I reported these pictures…

I can get where you’re coming from and why you’re heated. Sometimes the contoller does this as they can see a problem occuring later in time, such as a seperation issue. The controller is usually right, and in this case I can see why he had done it.

Wow… If I was a controller I would ghost someone like this…