Possible ATC commands

Hi all,

I have recently been accepted in the IFATC team and after doing a lot of thinking and controlling these past few weeks, I realised that some simple but useful commands could be added in a next update. I was thinking of the following ones:

  • Cleared for takeoff runway xx via intersection xx” would be a command that a controller could use if a pilot requests an intersection departure in order to avoid taxiing all the way down the runway. It could be used by both pilots and atc for example when there is not much traffic. The controller could also respond negatively to the pilot and ask him to taxi down all the way, e.g. when there is a traffic on final.
    Of course, this could be used if one day we see taxiway names on airports.

  • The tower controller should be able to give vectoring instructions (speed, altitude and heading) to more easily handle traffic when approach is not present. Simple instructions are needed, especially for speed. Because, when there is only one runway in use for departures and arrivals, the controller would want to maintain separation between arrivals to squeeze in departures. With speed commands, this could be very useful.

  • It could be nice for the tower controller to give for example the command “line up runway xx behind the landing traffic” so the pilot is ready to line up once the aircraft passes ahead and can result in a major gain of time in heavy traffic situations.

These are only some ideas that I think would definitely help controllers easing up their job.


  1. Cleared for takeoff runway xx from next/desired intersection”.
  2. Line up runway xx behind next landing aircraft”.
  3. Possibility of vectoring instructions for the tower controller (to use moderately).

This should be in #features

Corrected. Sorry.

I’ve always wondered why there was never a push and start ATC command in IF


Intersections and taxiway names are not currently supported in-app. Intersection departures however, are and can be indicated in the ATIS whether a controller wants to allow them or not. As for the start up command, aircraft are expected to request taxi instead of requesting pushback if they are in a position to do so.

While these commands may resemble what is closer to real-life, the current commands we have can still achieve both of these things.

1 Like

Okay… but intersection what? Because we don’t have the taxiway/intersection labels, what would it say?

But I do love the idea to request start up. Would also allow for power backs if we ever got an aircraft that used to do that.

1 Like

When giving an aircraft pushback clearance that gives them the right to start engines unless otherwise instructed by the Controller.

Feel free to check this out for clearance delivery though Automated Clearance Delivery On Expert Server - #36 by CaptainDixon

okay get it. However, this could be a very good idea to add the taxiway names in IF.
On a big airport, ATC would have an easier job to direct an aircraft to a runway or to a gate :)

Let’s say: “Requesting intersection departure” and then from ATC => approved or rejected.
Then the aircraft can use whichever intersection that is free and which he feels comfortable with.

1 Like

I meant if there is no pushback needed. IRL though, I think you have to request both push and startup.

Most definitely! That would have to be in place first, though. We currently have progressive taxi which can help guide aircraft to their destination, but here’s also a feature request for more sophisticated taxi instructions. Maybe, we’ll see this one day.

1 Like

Does there exist a feature for taxiway names already ?

The one I have linked is the closest to what is being requested.

1 Like

Yea one time at NAZZ I wanted to ask atc for a started up and not just for taxi. Bc I was in that one DHL gate so you couldn’t push back.

I’ve added two more command examples in my original post with the last one probably being the most useful here.
It is the possibility for the tower controller to tell the departing aircraft to line up behind the landing traffic so that the pilot can prepare to depart quickly (typically useful when there is a lot of traffic).

I love this idea; however, that would impact the knowledge required to take the IFATC written and practical (for local), which may be a downside.

Again, great idea; however, at least 5-10% of the pilots I control in any given session do not know what LUAW command is. I feel this would greatly complicate things.

With this one, the training that new IFATC members would need training which would be insane and intense for new controllers. With this, it takes away the ranking structure we currently have. While I have been given vectored by tower before IRL, the controller said “N4655H, turn to a recommended approximate heading of 090,” it just don’t see it happening

Lastly, having tower to approach at the same time isn’t easy at all.

Well I guess use it for expert server only :p this could help in sequencing on ground.

Also for the vectoring, I’m not saying a full vectoring instruction but for example:

Suppose approach is on duty along with the tower controller. If an aircraft on approach has to go around with another aircraft already on roll close to rotate speed, the tower controller could tell the departing pilot to depart straight out until a given altitude (which he already can) but he could also tell the go around pilot to turn to a specific heading, stop climb at a given altitude and contact approach again for another vectoring instruction for example. (Instead of having the aircraft stay on tower frequency and having the two active controllers struggle to put back the aircraft in line for landing again).

That’s with a scenario like this that I thought the command would be useful. But no need for as much training as the real approach controllers. Just one single vectoring instruction and voila :p

That´s a really cool feature. These commands are missing in IF. Voted!

1 Like

And when the aircraft is on a remote stand? As InfiniteFlightDeck said: it´s good for power backs or just for taxiing out of the parking position.