should violations and ghosting also apply to ATC?

Did you follow up with the controller to ask why you were reported? Controllers are required to take screen shots when reporting to back up the action.

This is one of the reasons the new replay feature will come in handy.

I did not know who was ATC.

Is there a sort of list

You can find who reported you in your logbook. We usually can only investigate reports for the past 7 days. Trying to argue a report from October is not going to be possible.

Oh Okay
thanks you, why not make this in the ATC schedule.

YYZ - (username) That person will be atc so if we got reported we know who to talk to.

We have too many controllers to try to put it on the schedule. Plus it varies depending on their own schedule. We do ask controllers to try to match their name in the sim with their forum name.


If you’re talking about Pilots then yes, there r non-expert pilots more than expert one. And if you’re talking about non-expert controller then uhmmm🤐…u r wrong bud! Expert server controllers r trained, pilots are not!
They go through many noobs per day, ghost 4-5
In busy airports, mistakes happens, we’re also human and once we feel report was wrong we try to reverse it and you’re also free to give you explanation on why you shouldn’t be ghosted via pming a controller


1 Like

Yes, and I’m going to work on organizing it better by having a seperate list of all of the IFATC controllers. :)


Dont worry about getting ghosted, for every 1 topic you read about an “unfair” ghosting (which is usually down to the pilot making a mistake) there are 1000’s of pilots who DONT get ghosted. I have flown on Expert server since the begining (IFATC in those days was only peopple who where ATC IRL or Pilots IRL), and I have been ghosted just once. On that occasion it was 100% my fault as due to a busy FNF i rolled over a hold line insteading of waiting! Hadnt even taken off!

IFATC members are trained and take an exaim before they are allowed to control on Expert, whilst us pilots can just turn up once we reach the right grade! ATC on Training Server can be hit and miss. Sometimes its as good as IFATC if you get an experinced controller who has taken the time to research the field before controlling and might be practicing in order to take the IFATC exaim, othertimes its someones first attempt at controlling and they are just pressing buttons to see what happens…

Happy Landings!

I agree, atc have trolled me sometimes of training and should be reported.

I can’t understand, what can be the reason. I have choosen it because the default voice wassaying it so funny. That’s my own reason, what should i think?

Well you could try using a sensible Call Sign?

Example if you are using a EasyJet A320 then sleect the “EASY” followed by number of your choice then you have a perfectly good call sign!

If its a B767 or bigger then feel free to use “Heavy” as well.

An easy way to find a suitable call sign would be to use Flightracker to find the flights between two airports that you are intrested in and then you will have a selction to choose from , as well as their flight plans.

GA Aircraft tend to use the registration umber of the aircarft.


I don’t often try to speak for others, but I think I am safe in saying this - We, IFATC, would prefer to have everyone understand and follow our instructions perfectly, and never need to ghost again. Unfortunately that is not a reality, and as a last resort we must ghost pilots who are interfering with other pilots and/or disobeying repeated and/or critical commands. But as I said, it is a last resort and we have much more fun when everyone is following proper ATC instructions.


Just to be clear, the pilot has overall responsibility for the safety if his aircraft. However if he/she is given a command by ATC then he is to follow it unless he deems it unsafe. (Only excuse would be terrain or something.)

The pilot is also mandated to follow TCAS alerts, no matter what.

In the UK, we file whats called a D-ASOR (pronounced DAY-SAW) to report any flight safety occurrences including pilots going UDI and not following instructions. Theyre then given the right to reply but if it doesnt rule in their favour (several factors behind this not worth explaining)? They might aswell be ghosted while theyre sitting watching daytime TV (worst case scenario).


Pilots in real life all know what they’re doing and don’t just ignore ATC at will.

Comparing the two won’t lead anywhere very fruitful.


Great topic thanks for the post! 😁

1 Like

there’s a lot of recorded arguments between pilots & controllers irl tho! you can find them on youtube, like pilots threatening to make a report about the controller or a controller getting frustrated over a pilot that is making mistakes like the Lufthansa and Egypt Air near-miss in 2011 at JFK


I’m well aware of that.

But you know what the pilots don’t do? Just fly as if the other traffic doesn’t exist. They may disagree with the choices. May disagree with why they’re being asked to do something. But, unless there is danger to their aircraft, they do not simply fly around at will, no matter how upset they are.

People on here love to use the PIC-is-in-control thing, but we aren’t talking about ATC asking a pilot to descend into a mountain generally. What we see is “I don’t want to do that so I’m just doing this.”

That doesn’t meet the framework. It isn’t the same thing.

So, yeah, pilots will always have arguments with ATC. Calls will be made to supervisors after landing. But what won’t happen is a pilot just deciding “the heck with this, ima just do what I want.”

So let’s not pretend the pilot pool in real life bears any resemblance to the IF pool.


“So let’s not pretend the pilot pool in real life bears any resemblance to the IF pool”

but the expert server is supposed to be as realistic as possible tho! also since you said let’s not pretend the pilot pool in real life bears any resemblance to the IF pool, i also say let’s not pretend the ATC pool in real life bears any resemblance to the IF pool,.

i am not saying the ATC make huge mistakes like asking a pilot to descend into a mountain but there’s some sort of double standards here! the pilots can’t even argue with ATC until after they are being ghosted!

my point is the controller shouldn’t have the authority to ghost a pilot, if we want IF to be as realistic as possible then both the pilot and the controller have to follow the standard procedures when something goes wrong which is as you stated “Calls will be made to supervisors after landing” in this case i suggested we have team that does the ‘NTSB’ job so after the incident happens the controller or the pilot can report it and have the issue settled, but in IF the pilots can report while the controller can report and can also ghost a pilot!,.

your argument is pilots being like “I don’t want to do that so I’m just doing this.” the same thing applies to the controller cause they can ghost/punish a pilot without necessarily knowing why the pilot did that in the first place! most often i see the pilots here trying to justify their reason for why they did what they did, therefore a ghosting punishment shouldn’t be given until both parts have an argument and an investigating team will decide whether or not the pilot should get ghosted or not!

or maybe give the IFATC a report command like “xxx heavy you have been reported” to let the pilot know that they are subjected to possible punishment “ghosting”! this means after the flight is done both the pilot & the controller & the investigating team will sort it out, the reason is because we don’t have that many commands so lets say a pilot have a reason to not follow some instructions he might not know how to explain it through the commands list that we have therefore he can’t really argue with the controller and then he gets ghosted so he goes and makes a topic trying to explain why he did what he did! my point is it’s shouldn’t be sorted out after the ghosting is given it’s should be sorted out before giving a ghosting therefore you wouldn’t have pilots wondering around asking why they are being ghosted and think it was unfair or whatever,.


No, it doesn’t. Because we have to apply a specific reason and have photographic evidence. We can’t do anything for fun or spite.

The appeal process you want already exists.

The reason that there’s ‘disputes’ seen on the forum is because there, the pilots can present their case untethered by the need to provide any photographic evidence.

You are asking for something that already exists. If you’re ghosted, just PM the controller. If you weren’t doing anything wrong, then an image of you doing so won’t exist, and it will be reversed. This already happens.

The reason that the ghost has to happen in real time is because, unlike real life, we can’t just let the triple-7 fly straight through the Cessna and then deal with the pilot later, because the damage is already done. I promise you, these complaints you’re trying to wedge into a similarity where none exists aren’t relatable to real life, they’re not arguing over whether it was cool if they just t-bone the fuselage of another plane in real life.

That’s the level we get in IF. It’s events like that. And I promise you, no pilot is going to go to the NTSB and say, well, I’ve only destroyed 4 planes in the last 12 months, so I have one more chance.

Bottom line is we already have an appeals process.