GA traffic not encouraged enough

@Fred_Stitz. MaxSez: “Calm Down Fred”… I’m the biggest, Oldest and experienced advocate of GA in the IF Universe and have learned over time to speak to the GA lack of access on Expert with finesse & Expertise.
The problem is endemic to the Controllers mindset and the ease of access to the Expert Sever by unprepared Pilots who lack aeronautical skill. Compounding this phenomenal is the addition
of non-IFATC certified unskilled operators calling the shots from key positions on Expert. Plus the failure to use all the tools of the controller trade
In high tempo OP’s mode, like Flow Control (No Centers/Airways, Holding Patterns, Ground Stops, Diversion ect.) Finally, the IFACT “Circled Wagon Syndrome”! (Explained by Off Line Only). Relax Fred… this is a 0 Sum Gripe that only draws little fish and defenders of the Castle. GDay, Max

2 Likes

I see that you say this often, but I’m not sure it’s accurate. Many controllers on expert choose not to put IFATC in their name because it is not an actual requirement (myself included). Rest assured that myself, and the others, have taken and passed both the written and practical tests for certification to control on the expert server. Even after passing both, controllers are judged by their performance before being elevated to control Bravo airspace. And, there is additional training and a written and practical test prior to becoming radar certified.

The lack of IFATC in a username means nothing. Anyone who controls on expert has been through the certification process. Fact.

2 Likes

I Yeah i get it, a 60kt cessna might mess up a pattern. But isnt that what an atc does? Provide a service. I sometimes feel like if it’s a busy day in IF I better not get into a cessna, cos honestly, I get diverted almost every time I’m low fuel or in a light aircraft. If I were ATC I would most likely try my very hardest to accommodate the needs of inbound traffic. Especially if I just had them go around for a while, and yes @Jeffrey1o2 I did observe you cut me on a short right base, which I do realize was a small window which was messed up by a mistake of someone else. I appreciated it very much in fact, which may have added to the feeling of let down after. I just don’t know why you couldn’t find another plane to go around. Light aircraft just do turn up every now and then I. Lots of airports, not all. And I see them usually turned away. Me personally I would love the challenge and then the pleasure of seeing the pattern work out quite fine, by making another plane go upwind or something like that. Its all just a bit of quick n easy maths. Everyone else has (should have) fuel reserve to fly long Patterns and approaches and holding. Basically you are saying that it IS to do with being a light aircraft…right?
after the update calmed down a bit and people have come back to using not only the newbies it’s just a bit boring. It should really be the other way around. In my opinion, if you can’t deal with a fuel shortage (which you do incredibly well I must say) or can’t cut a cessna in here and there, then you can’t and should not control air traffic in real life. I really am just trying to make sense of why I’m stil playing the sim, and spending hundreds of dollars on.
Don’t like the feeling of looking at incoming traffic at each manned airport, thinking:hmmm, maybe I won’t get into that cessna now. Cos its quite busy there cos I might be turned away…
I mean then I could just get a cracked version and play single with no atc and imagine my own holding patterns like in the early days of IF.
@Maxmustang really appreciate you input btw. I’m not the most diplomatic guy on the planet.
It just really gets me, that I spend 2 hours, and then I’m turned away. Happens too often. And now I just sometimes play on the crazy server, just cos controllers might be pretty erm… Yeah… But at least they will let me land at my flight plan destination.
What’s the point of flight plans if you keep diverting anyway, cos most airports lets face it get busy. And I don’t not like it when a controller gets rid of me, while letting in these hoppers, that come. From an airport, that plane, that airline doesnt even fly from, nevermind it being like a stone throw away, having not even climbed 10000ft. I know you don’t get the time to loom at each person’s point of origin.
I guess I’m rambling by now. It just tipps it over to the other side where I think the sim is too expensive for the service its controllers sometimes provide…
Also the message should be: no light aircraft accepted. So that we don’t have to be accepted into and then removed from a pattern after being in it for a good amount of time.
I hope i’m not being offensive. Its just my opinion, and personally I wouldn’t control traffic in this way. As ATC you have the power to ghost. So your pattern is only messed up if people get impatient…i wouldn’t look to blame the cessna pilot for filing a flight plan in messing up a pattern which I have quite a lot of control over, and clearly, therefore messed up myself.

1 Like

I am in a cessna 172 doing 77 kt. This is not a problem for most controllers. That’s the point of my thread actually.

Specific GA days? 💔
Is anyone else reading this??

I don’t have an issue with GA traffic unless one shows up where there aren’t GA services available. Every plane gets equal priority. Solve the puzzle.

I think the issue stems from people lacking airmanship and not enough GA traffic in general.

2 Likes

I understand if there are no GA operating there… @Aquila
Of course. What the hell am I doing there. It doesn’t take much research to find out. And I do some research before I fly.
I’m talking about where it’s totally fine.

And for those airports there is a no light aircraft accepted ATIS info

Well said. Solve the puzzle… The puzzle piece or its shape is not the problem.

1 Like

@Chitown. MaxSez: “Circle dem Wagon” ! “Show the Flag… I Done wanna… IFATC is an Honorarium after ones name, it certifies to me and all that you completed the requirement, I still use my military rank on all formal correspondence and legal papers. Even Barbers post their license. Don’t know a line Captain who does not use ATP after his name. Ok we gotta have a 10%er. “ChiTown”. Must be from Chicago… That non-Honorarium is ok by me. Lol
MaxSends

3 Likes

Instead of vectoring a ga aircraft onto a 10mile approach vector them in on a 4-6 mile offset then when 2 miles from the threshold either orbit till a gap on the approach or send them in visuall on a left or right base 👍

3 Likes

Yes this is my kind of thinking.

Hey, Max 👋🏻

First of all, IFATC in display name ain’t a requirement. IFATC controllers have the right to not put it in their display name. Meanwhile, a lot of other VA/VOs in the community has the requirement to put the name of the organization in the members’ display names. For example, my display name is IPP Leonard Brownies because IPP does have the requirement to put it in our display names. But if you do ask me to put all my certifications in my display name, it’ll be awfully long like “IPP IFATC TUIVA BAVA AAVA AFKLM … Leonard Brownies” and IF also has a length restriction on display names. So, I choose to not use IFATC in my display name tho I’m an IFATC Officer, as well as many other IFATCs. I hope you can understand the pros and cons of whether to put IFATC in display name or not after reading my text. Thanks!

-Leon

2 Likes

As other members have already stated above, GA traffic must always be allowed unless the airport is a large hub IRL. For example, airports like EGLL, VHHH, OMDB shouldn’t accept GA traffic. However, there’re exceptions, like when in FNF, Misha sometimes put a NOTAM like “GA traffic at controllers’ discretion”, disregarding the fact that whether the airport itself accepts GA traffic or it’s a large hub or not. I always check if the airport is a large hub or not by referring to Wikipedia, and check if the airport has GA gates or not. Like at EHAM, it has GA gates and a runway specifically built for GAs, so I would accept GA traffic tho it’s a large hub.

GA traffic is sometimes a pain for both the airport and the controller. Like when on approach at a very busy airport, other airliners fly at the speed of 200 KIAS on downwind usually while GAs often can’t even exceed that speed (depends on the aircrafts as well). So, at this scenario, GA traffic should not be allowed.

1 Like

I agree! GA is the base of all aviation. Without small planes we would not learn how to fly! I think GA should be encouraged more, maybe you cant fly larger planes before you have 3 online flight hours. Just so you can get to know the sim before getting into a big plane!

2 Likes

While it is tempting to blame controllers, I think the core issue is actually the low skill level of many pilots on the expert server. IFATC have been tasked with not only providing ATC service, but also policing the skies for incompetent and unruly pilots that wreak havoc on user experience. It is a bit unfair to think they should be obligated to accommodate GAs with massive speed differential when they already contend with so many that can’t understand or execute basics like calling in properly or intercepting a localizer.

If you want to see more GA at controlled airports, and an improved experience overall, we have to enhance the skill level of pilots on the expert server. That will likely take some combination of (1) rethinking how the training server is used - as poor practice makes poor performance permanent, and I rarely see anything but poor practice on that server and (2) IF & IFC Integration to enhance training and communication.

5 Likes

Sure there are many pilots with low skills, though they rarely fly cessnas, one can usually spot them trying to land A380s or F16s at EGLC.
Thanks for all the comments btw, I was fearing to be the only one with my opinion, Stil tho I don’t see why it’s a pain to land 1 or 2 lights grade 4 above 1500hours, if it comes close to interference, you would have to send an airliner or 2 on a 360 and make the queue a tad bit wider

1 Like

When commercial flights used to operate out of my home base we easily fitted in before and after even with wake turbulence spacing. If a 737 was a couple of miles behind me in a 172 and closing atc would give me a free landing and I’d go around no issues.

2 Likes

MaxSez: I Lov this Topic! Bias in the big/little plane Right of Way is evident by every controller represented here. This appears to be a leadership issue in most cases, Nobody said I It was gonna be ez.
If your unable to offerer full service as RW operators do and are atypical rote operational oriented you fit the IF SOP Profile. If you can’t hack the all comers pace MaxSez: “Get out of the race”… LOL…

3 Likes

It is not.

3 Likes