It honestly kills the immersion for me when they use Runway 27R, 22R, 27L, 28R, 28C, 28L, and 22L for landing at the same time; which happened not too long ago. There is no reason to have more than 3 runways in operation for landings at KORD since they never use 28L for landings because of the FAA separation rule, unless it’s eastflow traffic, then they use 10R for landings because they have an established offset instrument approach procedure for that side. They haven’t developed an offset procedure for proper separation on 28L yet. So they use 28C, 27L, and 27R.
I know that ATC won’t always use real life procedures, but I think at least runway operations can be like real life.
IFATC’s don’t work at the airport. IRL controllers read many many books and train a lot in order to familiarize themselves with the airport. With a new region being featured everyday, controllers have to find the best way to use the airport be it using real world procedures or not.
In the IFATC manual it also states that controllers must use all available runways in order to maximize efficiency.
Okay I can understand that, but when you use 22L and 28C at the same time or 22R and the 27’s at the same time it’s just plain unrealistic. I’m not trying to be the realism police but it kills the immersion for ANY airport with similar intersecting runway layouts like O’Hare.
Tbh I agree that controllers should have to follow real world procedures. But unfortunately, they are allowed to use whatever they want. It helps flow, wether we like it or not.
I would like to bring in @PlaneGeek here, as we talked for a solid 30 minutes the night before ORD was featured so he could get everything right. He did everything realistically, and it went amazing according to him
I can tell you for a fact that 22L and 28R were not used for landings for sure, as 28R arrivals would create an additional mess around the busiest departure runway at the airport, and the 22L approach would interfere with approaches on the 27s.
There’s no need to be mad at IFATC members for not using realistic runway procedures. Personally, I’d let the 28L issue slide, as coming from a former IFATC member, you wanna utilize everything you have. They set up a plan for arriving and departing runways, and stick to it. Changes cause too much confusion
This also pains me a lot! I absolutely hate the unrealistic procedures in place by IFATC, and the sheer incompetence I feel when other players cannot even get simple taxiing procedures correct.
However, all manuals explicitly say that pilots are to follow/prioritize IFATC instruction over realism. Additionally, IFATC will use as many resources as they can to alleviate traffic flow, and if that means using unrealistic runway operations, then that means that!
Because of all this, I keep by one simple rule which I suggest you follow:
Do not fly into/from KORD when IFATC are present or an event is happening there
At least for me, this helps maintain my sanity and peculiar standard of realism while still being able to enjoy the simulator. It’s give and take kind of thing though. You gotta choose: realism or IFATC
Dude honestly, it’s not fine at all. Why couldn’t he just vectored the pilot into 28C or even 28L look at the green path in the first picture he was coming from the south. You’re literally flying into other airplanes as you land…
Or, instead of crying about realistic procedures, how about we appreciate ohare was featured. Poland has never been featured as the main location for ages, and if it is featured as a secondary destination, it is dead there
I gotta say, I’m both in Chicago and a member of IFATC (who happened to control KORD) all I gotta say is as much as I love seeing planes land on…28L (oh my) we sometimes need to sacrifice those especially if traffic amounts get high and use the maximum amount of runways. Let’s just be happy that KORD was featured, and realistic procedures or not, we are able to fly from our home airport to the world!
I controlled O’Hare approach at one point, and while I was trying to adhere to realistic procedures, several aircraft requested 22L to land. Who am I to deny them and add extra work for myself and the pilots by vectoring them into lines for the 27s/28s?
Sorry, but I just don’t see the big deal here. Realism is nice, but absolutely isn’t always necessary to provide a good controlling service to pilots (which is the point of ATC, after all).
Wow, strong words there! 🙂 I understand that realism matters quite a lot because we all like to simulate real world scenarios. It does matter to me a lot as well; and I had always been, and am a sucker for realism in IF. I guess I know quite enough about ATC ops IRL, and I’ve been IFATC, I know how it works too; and so I’d like to share my thoughts here in this matter.
A fundamental thing that we can all agree on is that Infinite Flight skies differ by great means from what’s out there in the real world, especially on event times. The ATC IRL has to deal with lots and lots of rules, regulations and guidelines which are set to serve the real scenario: flights coming in frequently, possible unexpected mishaps, safety of thousands of lives every minute, etc. IFATC on the other hand, has rules and regulations, which are specifically designed to manage how typical airspace scenario would be in any airport in game. Even the busiest airport IRL may not receive the same traffic volume in IF, and even a remote airfield IRL can receive loads during IF events. I am sure that I can speak for IFATC in saying that simulating realistic operating procedures is indeed given a high priority, but it is to be understood that different scenarios require different approaches.
I agree with OP’s point, and also with @mkwiecek in pointing out that it probably was a dead time. Looking at the shots, it’s not how the real KORD looks like. The FAA regulations are made so, taken into consideration the real factors that play at KORD. In IF, I would say the IFATC probably didn’t want to keep you in the air for long or anything… but my point is, that Delta flight could’ve landed safely without conflicts, and that’s the very idea how both IRL and IFATC works by!
And to finish, guys, please, if you wanted to land on other side or try a different approach, you could always ask IFATC and you could try the exact approach you want; no absolute reason to be scared or be away from IFATC controlled airspaces.
I’d also like to add this is the only IFATC to have it exactly like it is in real life normally. The other screenshot that I posted was not how it should have been done. Intersecting landings at any featured airport breaks the purpose of a simulator and all immersion of the game for anyone. Even if the runway operations can’t be like real life (not the approaches), the point that I’m trying to make is make the runway operations logical. It’s not fun for anyone if another pilot is colliding with you as you’re landing.
