Why can't ATC use realistic (®) procedures?

But many don’t use IF as a simulator i.e. those who quickly plan a flight before going to work/school without researching the airport procedures in depth.

That’s an understated opinion, I believe that there are way more pilots who fly realistically than don’t. Even if, why cater to those who wish to not act/fly professionally? That’s flawed thinking imo.


That makes me happy. Hopefully that will also mean less leeway with errors on at controlled airports by the pilots too. I know that could make a huge difference with having those that know the operations for the airport also that dont require as much ATC direction freeing up more valuable time for the ATC to keep ATIS up to date and liberate ATC to do more than just the parallel runways because not every airport has parallel runways and runway utilization is essential for smooth operations.

I can understand your argument here. That’s what makes Infinite Flight so great. You can plan a flight and end up in the air within 10 minutes all in the palm of your hands. Though, if we do ever get the ability to input chart data directly into our flight plans, this won’t be an issue anymore.

This is mostly seen on other servers though. I’ve seen a lot of pilots on the expert server take the simulator more seriously thanks to third-party apps like SimBrief, FPLtoIF, IF-A, etc. They file accurate and realistic flights plans, even if they’re just doing one of those quick takeoff-to-cruise flights. There are still some users out there though, who simply input their destination and fly direct. We can’t do anything about it but educate 'em to use realistic charts and the like. This is why the community exists! :)

Yes, that is true. Those who treat it as a game and ruin the experience for others with their trolling. It’s sad, but that can change. Something has got to give in order to improve the expert server a lot. There are lots of pilots acting like fools, as I mentioned earlier. I think the expert server is too easily accessible nowadays.


Haha no, just IFATC.

1 Like

We appreciate and welcome ATC feedback. You are welcome to PM the controller after your session and/or get moderators involved if something needs addressed. Tyler works hard on training and can bring up items that may need refreshing.

We understand that quality may fall when a controller logs off and we are working on ways to improve the pilot experience.

If you feel strongly about ATC procedures we could always use more people to man frequencies. As air spaces get busier we need more bodies to split the frequencies to make a quality experience for the pilots.


I do agree with everyone’s opinion.
Currently, the ATC in IF is not only unrealistic but also lack services. At a decent international airport, having just ATIS, tower and ground is not enough, but frequencies like delivery are essential. The main reason that causes ATC so chaotic is cause there are no departure/ arrival routes used in the real world. And most of the time, there is ONLY tower/ground/ ATIS opening for service. Yes, the traffic is not that much, but how could we, as pilots, land a plane with ONLY ATIS instructions, which is also way too simple?
Even worse, there are not enough waypoints in IF!! For so many times I tried to use Jeppesen charts to guide myself into the final approach and usually, I can only pick up barely one or two or none waypoints. This is absurdly ridiculous. The ATC is not realistic when active and lacking waypoints is making people struggled to land sometimes refer to air charts.
This MUST be changed. For the reputation of a flight simulator, which is realism first.


I meant with ghosting being more frequent. I see too many second and third chances at controlled airports that really bog down the controller than. If there were to be added a recommended for Training server report button alongside the ghosting option that may help out a lot more. Ghost the serious offenders but have a recommendation option that would recommend a pilot stay on training from IFATC. No ghost or violation just a message before they log into a flight on expert the next time that an IFATC controller believes they should remain on training. The help tutorials tries to do this but people think just because they read the tutorial they are good to go back to expert and not training. But that is a different subject from the thread subject.

1 Like

Currently it’s very difficult to control on the expert server due to a decline in the quality of the pilot’s and how they interact with ATC, but rest assured that service from controllers can be improved internally as @BluePanda900 said.


This “excuse” you call it, I believe is perfectly valid. With the current lack of IFC and IF integration for pilot education, IFATC is constantly expected to be performing at it’s top-tier best, while the pilots are frequently below par in terms of quality. The reason why certain procedures might turn into “disasters” in IF is that many (but not all) pilots don’t know how to behave themselves properly, with or without ATC. IFATC controllers do the best they can with what they’re given.


I see the frustration. I have lived it. The interface for IFATC is a little cludgy. Work a few hours on the trainingn server to see the steps they have to take. Just to give landing clearance. It is not ideal… maybe you have worked it. If so let’s focus on small immediate steps to improve it.

This can all be solved with stricter enforcement of the rules within the controlled airspace. There would be far fewer “excuses” and “mistakes” made if pilots not listening to ATC instructions, not observing and maintaining the established traffic flow(i.e. cutting/not maintaining spacing), taking off 20 miles away from the manned airfield just to land with ATC, deliberately have a fuel emergency to land ASAP, etc were more fearful of IFATC and were sent back to the training server. Let them make most of their mistakes there, it’s what it’s there for. As of now they know for the most part, all they’ll get is a slap on the wrist, so the saga continues. How does this relate to the main topic? If you had a little less traffic, but pilots who know what they were doing and were alert to their surroundings and instructions and made it a point to not make a mistake, would it not be easier on your workload. Would it not be easier to at least try to incorporate what real world procedures you could? Make Expert Server Great Again!


Hmmm, I think this near enough answers a question I’ve had in my mind for months. I thought opening up multiple positions for each thing (i.e. 2 X ground, 2 X tower etc) was supposed to reduce this problem, but it makes sense that realistic procedures cannot always be followed considering the amount of ‘expert’ server pilots that act like amateurs. Kudos to ATC as always for doing a typically fantastic job with the tools they have!


Everybody loves rl procedures, but with unrealistic amounts of traffic in a short time it’s just not to handle. In that case, all runways open and go for it.


Are you aware that IFATC are required to pass a written and practical examinations? We don’t just spend “a few hours on the training server” and then magically get promoted :). If you ever feel there is something a controller could improve upon, feel free to message them and, who knows, you might even learn that what they do could be better than you originally thought.

1 Like

As said a few other times, another reason why some of these other frequencies/procedures do not exist is that some pilots are not as experienced as others, and may be able to behave themselves or properly execute such procedures.
For the waypoints, I suggest you check out fpltoif.com, where you can find the coordinates (How to Input GPS Coordinates to your FPL) for missing waypoints.

1 Like

Hey guys, I would like to chip in having controlled a fair amount ^^ Hear me out too.

While I was by no means the most effective controller on expert, when controlling even on smaller airports, the amount of traffic is actually very high.

This is not to say that controllers arn’t ready to handle these traffics, but that it is also a rather unrealistic amount of traffic. While some pilots in expert simulate their passenger boarding, most pilots would jump on, spend 15mins keying in routes, start their engine and ask for pushback.

When you multiply the amount of pilots who does that, the messages flood in real fast and a controller may break this realistic procedures that some people demand ^^ All so you dont have to wait 20-30mins stuck on a taxiway. If you are the minority that say you don’t mind waiting, that’s really nice of you =D

So now that we’ve established what pilots often do, how many pilots often do it, we can add a third factor where the messages queue up once you send it. There is no radio discipline in IF, while some users do patiently wait (god bless xD), many dont.

I believe these are a huge number of factors that contributes to the stress of an IFATC controller due to the design of the game itself but that isn’t to be blamed.

Ultimately, these IFATC peeps provides the ATC services that pilots want, but may not always have the liberty to follow RW procedures, otherwise the airport would be really full.

I hope it make sense ^^ Tyfys.

1 Like

I agree with this but my home airport KSJC doesn’t get as much traffic as say EGLL, KLAX, or KJFK.

It shouldn’t hurt controllers to follow the standard procedures for KSJC in IF as in real life.

Heck, when KSJC gets featured in a few days, most will be heading over to KLAX.

It shouldn’t hurt for those at KSJC to be able to fly realistically, do the right loop, and continue on.

It will get a fair amount of traffic. Additional I’m a person with a real life and IFATC. Sometimes I just jump in and start controlling without reading what the rl procedure is, just to provide service to the pilots.

1 Like

When it is in the schedule it usually gets a fair amount of traffic