I agree. People who are supposed to be on Casual end up playing there.
2 Likes
There should be a rule on expert: no military aircraft at airports like KSEA, KJFK, LSZH, etc.
3 Likes
Also, there needs to be a separation between the 747-8 and A380 gate categories. The 747 can fit at SEATAC, but not the a380.
2 Likes
I agree 100%. This would likely reduce the amount of unrealism and trolls that is seen at big airports on Expert.
4 Likes
Yeah, I’m not paying a monthly membership fee to take written tests just to be able to play the game 😂
2 Likes
That may be an entirely valid point, but it also is pretty discouraging to spend 10 bucks per month on a game where even the most advanced of the servers doesn’t grant immunity from trolls
2 Likes
We need IFATC members to LIVE in IF. Not just play the Sim, live in the Sim. If IF could pay IFATC members a salary to forget real life and live in the Sim staffing every airport in the game 24/7, that would be a major improvement.
No one is saying you can’t play because of a test-there’s a whole server dedicated to doing whatever you’d like. But let me guess, you don’t think casual is “good enough”?
1 Like
No, I play on Expert and fly real long-haul Lufthansa A380 routes. I try to keep my gameplay as realistic as possible because I like it that way and because it’s fun. I’ve seen players on the Expert server with the wrong call signs flying the wrong routes with the wrong airline in the wrong aircraft among lots of other things, but it doesn’t really bother me. I paid for membership to the game and I’ll play it how I like, so they have the right to do just that, too. I believe that as long as players follow the basic rules for the Expert server (which really isn’t that hard to do) they should be allowed to do whatever they want. Trolls and players whose only goal is to disrupt another player’s gameplay are dealt with anyways through the game’s violation system. At the end of the day, it’s just a game. A mobile game. People just don’t tend to take mobile games or simulators as serious. And I almost forgot to mention - the majority of players who fly on the Expert server are good, experienced pilots with a sense of situational awareness. At least from what I’ve seen.
3 Likes
This thread has been active for a relativly long time on the IFC, something like this would’ve been closed a long time ago by mods but I’m thinking that they’re considering to change something about the es.
4 Likes
I just came across this topic and I honestly couldn’t agree more with what you said. Both ideas can be achieved if the higher people on IF pay the necessary attention to all the issues you have raised above!
In regards to maintaining the realism, I have to add that IFATC members have to make some adjustments too. It’s not just pilots. For example, EGLL most of the times is being controlled with both 27L & 27R used for both landings and take offs which is unheard of IRL. Also, the other day, LSZH was packed but the airport was controlled with only RWY16 used for take offs which is also unrealistic. I think you see were I’m going with this.
I understand that if an airport is packed, the ATC members have to do anything they think is necessary to avoid conflict even if that means using the airport in an unrealistic way and that comes back again to the rules you mentioned that pilots need to follow.
So my point is, if a change happens to the way pilots are treated and if it’s all successful, are IFATC members willing to strictly follow IRL airport controls?
I understand that people are paying for the game, and yes, they are entitled to play it-are they entitled to just decide the expectations of one server? If I got on Casual right now, it’d be delusional if I expected realism-and the same way realism doesn’t belong in casual, unrealism doesn’t belong in expert.
2 Likes
That’s a good point about ATC as well-we are often encouraged to employ realism, but if there is a conflict, we might have to resort to practices that are okay in game but not in real life. Καλή ιδέα!
There should also be measures taken for when ATC has just left-not only do the same dangers exist as before, but there are also more people because ATC often attracts attention.
2 Likes
That’s my hope. I’m not trying to sound cheesy or anything like that, but I’m here to try and promote a change. You see how many votes we have for the poll up there? A lot. Clearly this has impacted so many people, and now something is going to be done
2 Likes
This FedEx pilot was landing on runway 27R at Philadelphia International during the fly-in/fly-out event hosted there a couple weeks ago. I was instructed to cross the runway all the way at the other side (I am circled in red). As you can see in this picture, there are a few things wrong. First of all, their landing was unstable and way off centerline, which I won’t even blame them for. Secondly, they remained rolling on the runway without braking, and as they came incredibly close to hitting me down on the side of the runway that I was on, they slid off of the runway and continued rolling (at least, that’s my guess as to what happened, judging by the replay - it’s so incredibly laggy for me that I could barely tell when I was moving or not).
I have to say that this is partially the ground controller’s fault for allowing me to cross when an aircraft was landing, but it was also partly the tower’s fault for not issuing a go-around. Both of these errors I think would be excuseable considering the fact that the airport was immensely packed, thanks to the successful hosting by @chazdawg8819. Unfortunately, it was so packed that I think that there were a lot of people lagging, and not all aircraft had been rendered in (to ensure that people’s phones wouldn’t explode), which would certainly have made it more of a challenge for the pilot to initiate their own go-around. Ultimately, it was an unlucky combination of poor network, pilot error, and a lack of communication, but it was still an unprofessional occurence that shouldn’t happen.
2 Likes
I agree with you for the most part. I do, however, think that there are basic things that can be done to maximize reasonable realism. For example, SeaTac, Portland and Denver can only accommodate up to a 747-8 IRL. But a380s can still start up there in the sim, which is unrealistic. As a scenery editor, I would love to see the A380 have its own gate class so that we could allow airplanes up to the 747-8, and not the a380.
1 Like
If people want to fly online and be unrealistic, that’s what the training and casual servers are for. The exper server should be a place where pilots can enjoy flying realistic procedures without having to cope with trolls who fly F18s at JFK or who fly between SEA and SFO on an a380.
2 Likes
I 100% agree with this. I hope the devs pay attention to this and hopefully take steps to make the expert server more realistic.
1 Like
I have to agree with this. This is a simulator, and not real-life. We should stop placing real-life expectations on a simulator.
2 Likes
Couldnt agree more.
It’s getting a bit boring now with the real aircraft/ airline/ airport/ gate droning. This is a mobile flight sim, it will never compete with the realism that can be offered with XPlane or MSFS series.
VAs enforce it which is great - join one if it really bothers you. I actually do like the experience of my previous sentence as it happens… but…
If someone is doing a flight you deem “unrealistic”, just pretend they are doing a ferry flight or something.
All anyone should care about on ES is that ATC is followed and everyone treats others with respect 🙏
3 Likes