TSATC special instructions

As we all know, the only kind of ATC who are given special treatment are IFATC. They can warn and ghost. But what if TSATC can get something similar?

I know that the training server is just training but it doesn’t have to be so chaotic in places with active TSATC. Look at KLAX. It’s a jungle over there, but we don’t have to ghost in order to make them behave!

what do TSATC Need?

I know they can’t report, i have been through a lot of conversations with this, but they don’t need too. If TSATC are at KLAX, and they order someone to hold short of runway 25R, and then that someone just takes off through without clearance, all that we need to do to fix KLAX, is kick them out. No violation, no report, just kicked out of the server for not following ATC instructions. Simple as that!

They would also have a warning option like “please follow instructions or you will be removed” or something like that. And also wether they add this feature or not, TSATC NEED to be able to say, “please check tutorials on the forum for assistance using ATC instructions”. This could really help. Tell me guys what do you think:)

I don’t think something this would happen mainly because anyone can be ATC in TS and abuse the system. This is my opinion though.


I’m saying that only TSATC will get these treatments

1 Like

Anyone can join TSATC though. From what I can tell, their application process isn’t as intense and thorough as IFATC. That means anyone can abuse the system if them have a little ATC knowledge and make a good application.


TSATC is not a FDS run or sponsored organization. If you want to have the same privliges of being IFATC then join IFATC…


That’s not the case, this could make the TS a better environment

TSATC should be the training grounds for members who wish to gain experience before moving on and applying for IFATC as well as for members who wish to casually control on the training server. If they do however wish to be able to gain commands like these then they can happily apply for IFATC and control on the expert server which is what we should be motivating people to do. We should’nt be turning what is a “Training server” into the “expert server” which this feature request would basically do.


Folks, it’s been said over and over again, TSATC will not be getting special privileges.


I think we all know (well, most of us do) what has been said about special privileges for ATCs on Training Server. But this has always been stated in relation or comparison to privileges of IFATCs. And you gotta give this to @Abudy, this idea is unique and creative. Being ‘kicked’ or removed does not have any lasting repercussions for the pilot, but simply puts him out of the game (ghosted) with the ability for him to go back into the game straight away. All it does is to get the pilots to think about their mistake and for others to not be hindered by this noob. Better game-play; all good fun!

Two problems however, and the second one I’m afraid will be the killer:

  1. How to make sure the TSATC is ‘right’ and the pilot is ‘wrong’. In other words, how do we make sure the TSATCs have the right skills to rightfully ‘remove’ a pilot
  2. who (which organisation) will police this?

With power comes responsibility and accountability. Without it, we speak of anarchy. Around the IFATC team stand Supervisors, Moderators and a Community Manager who guard quality and hold IFATCs accountable.
We simply don’t have such an organisation around the TSATCs.

I’m afraid I have to agree with the rest above: special privileges for TSATCs…afraid not.


The thing is, even IFATC that can report on training aren’t allowed to, so why would anyone on TS have such an ability?

If you kick someone out of a session, they’ll just come back. Half of them more determined than ever to be a thorn, so there’s that.

But mostly, while I don’t know for sure, I’m guessing that when you received the go-ahead to create TSATC, one of the stipulations was that it would be an organization, but that its members would not be separated from other training server controllers in any other way. I can pretty much guarantee that was a stipulation.


This topic was automatically closed 3 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.