VA Classifications

Hello community!

With VA rankings/awards now in the mix and a wide differential between the amount of pilots one VA has to another, should the IFVARB be requested to assign a classification to VAs based on their current pilot roster counts? Example:

VAs with more than 50 pilots = Class A VA

VAs with more than 25 pilots but less than 50 pilots = Class B VA

VAs with less than 25 pilots = Class C VA

This would allow pilots to know right off the bat what type of VA they are joining as well as give VAs the option to rise up to a class A through pilot recruitment campaigns or remain a small, close knit group of pilots. If you’re courageous enough, post your reason for voting either way below!

  • Yes
  • No

0 voters

4 Likes

Great idea! I hope the IFVARB approves…

4 Likes

I would contact either @neo or @joshfly8 before investing too much time in this :)

1 Like

Don’t assume that I haven’t lol. I most surely did ask Josh 👍🏾

1 Like

I voted no. This is because the ranking will make people assume that VAs with more pilots are better, which is not necessarily the case.

12 Likes

Ok - my mistake then. Usually it’s put int he post - which is why I was confused. Good luck and maybe co-ordinate with the VA awards :)

1 Like

From an independent point of view I don’t like this, from the view that a good va does not necessary have the most pilots, and it gives a false sense of being a good or bad VA, just from the number of pilots.

Plus an accurate number of active pilots is hard to get.

7 Likes

I disagree with that assumption. Maybe I don’t want to join a huge VA with a ton of people and would rather join a “small close knit group of pilots”? I totally appreciate your input though!

I personally joined a VA with a lot of pilots, wasn’t that great of an experience for me. But I do like the idea of joining a smaller boutique group of pilots that maybe focus on synchronized flying or patrol flights etc. Also for the awards, it’s not fair that smaller VAs are going up against huge VAs. Just my opinion and a different thought process 👍🏾

I agree with @IceBlue here as I usually do lol.

The line between “pilots” and “active pilots” can be a blurred one. Also, I’d be concerned that ppl would naturally be attracted to the “higher ranked” VAs, leaving the smaller ones in their wake. Size doesn’t always represent quality. I personally think that a VAs main post, website, and staff members should be the main things to go off.

8 Likes

I would like to see this feature, and I love the classifications. I would like it if the VA’s were ranked as small, medium, or large. Becuase I can understand how someone may confuse this for a system based on which VA is the best. I think the community would really benefit from this though!

1 Like

You do raise a valid point though, but I think it’s more of a solution for possible floors in this awards thing that’s been going on, rather than the VA community as a whole.

1 Like

I totally understand what you’re saying. But that is the reason I specifically used the word Class, not rank. This isn’t about “who has the most pilots”, rather where that VA stands with pilots, and maybe even an indicator of what that VAs goal is whether that be to grow to be massive, or stay a smaller, closer knit group of pilots. Apologies if I didn’t make that clear 😊

1 Like

Not a fan. It would put people off new VA’s (even more) and discourage growth. If you are going to rate VA’s, it should have nothing to do with numbers in that VA.

Also, giving the classifications specific terms (ie charter VA) is unproductive and misleading. Even if they name themselves ‘B class’, the association with ‘charter VA’ may give off the wrong impression of the VA.

Word.

6 Likes

Not a fan. For example, say that a VA only excepts grade fours or higher, very proven and professional pilots only. They could be very professional and a top notch VA, but have less then 25 users, and then be classified as a “C” VA. On the inverse, a very poor quality VA may take everyone and have 100 users, and be given an “A”. Many flaws in this, but with amendment, a grading system like this, not necessarily based off size, could work.

2 Likes

Exactly. Like Misha hinted at, “Class” still probably has the same connotations as “rank” in most users minds. It would be misleading, and I don’t think that the size of a Virtual Airline represents its quality. New ppl to the community would probably be drawn to the more highly classified. That could inhibit the growth of those only starting up. It’s not a ridiculous idea by any means, I just don’t think it’s practical, or necessarily fair.

1 Like

The general conception here that a letter grade represents the level of professionalism or quality of a VA proves most of the commenters point, regardless that I’ve replied numerous times saying that the grade isn’t and shouldn’t be used as an indicator of such

Totally agree. Go get rid of this. Smaller VAs have no chance then.

Also, I think that for those VAs whose ambitions are to become a class A, this could be kind of be a milestone marker for them.

Do you know how long it takes to achieve 50 active members? :D focus on activity, not size. IFES have had like 200 members, whereas 170ish were inactive. This system is totally useless. Sorry for the harsh words. If you improve and get details, structure and realism and uniqueness in your VA, people will turn back and always come back. Just my 2c.