Tim S

I've had similar experiences. For me it was 16 to early 20 year olds that were reading from a syllabus. They knew about ATC and the airspace system from being involved in VATSIM, but there was no real world connection. It was tough to sit through at times. Had to bite my tongue a lot.....LOL. Tim

Interesting. So, basically, FSCloud, without all the drawbacks of FSCloud. I like it. Tim

I knew it! ?

So, how does one know if they are on a restricted or watch list? ? Tim

Does this imply that ATC will be top down like the current VATSIM model? Tim

While I know that a lot of people are interested in badges and such, I don't happen to be one of them. I think they are a cool idea for those that like collecting them. I'm curious to know if there is going to be some sort of reputation system? Kinda like what this, and most other forums have. Tim

Wow. Forty eight percent is the number that stands out to me in the top graph, and 25% is huge in the bottom table. I'd say there is a big opportunity here to take a big bite out of that low hanging fruit. Tim

Unable to edit above post..... What I mean is POSCON needs to be an innovator when it comes to ATC training. Perpetuating the same 'ol, same 'ol, won't be beneficial for them.

Yeah, the worst day in flight sim online flying with ATC came when SATCO imploded, resulting in VATSIM and IVAO being born. Two competing niche organizations is never good for a small community like flight simming. Just look at open wheel racing in the United States back in the 1990's, when Tony George split from CART to create the IRL. Open wheel racing has never recovered in the U.S. ever since. Unless POSCON changes the way controllers are trained to provide more ATC online at any on time than the other two orgs, it's just going to be another split in a niche community. Tim

@aeroniemi I can see your point to an extent. My point is that for POSCON to succeed to any extent, they need the same number, or more controllers, than either VATSIM or IVAO, providing ATC at any time. If they don't, then they will just dilute the online pilot population seeking ATC services again. Unless POSCON finds a way to shorten the ATC path, to create a bigger stable of controllers, then what's the point of the network? Success of POSCON is directly pinned to the number of ATC volunteers that will ultimately control on the network. Take the same arduous path that VAT-VAO does, and... Tim

@Andrew Heath Agreed, that a full blown discussion of the ATC training is not pertinent at this point of the genesis of the system. I was just hoping to show the common dissatisfiers, and barriers, of the current VATSIM system, in the hopes of avoiding some of the same pitfalls, along with some questions to provoke feedback based thought process on the future training model. Like every contractor will tell you, it's easier to make changes on the paper plans of the house, than after the cement foundation has been poured. Regarding the the last comment you made about streamlining the airspace. What I meant was, not changing depicted airspace on charts, or any IAP's, but the behind the scenes stuff. In other words, instead of every ARTCC having a SOP/LOA for hand-off altitudes from center to approach control, a universal 13,000 or 14,000 feet depending on direction of flight handoff would be instituted. Stuff like that, which makes the controllers job easier, and allows them to move around the POSCON airspace system to control in other areas, but is invisible to pilots. Anyhow, I'll drop it from here. Thanks for listening. Regards, Tim

@Andrew Heath ATC training on VATSIM is a long, and overly complicated process. Each ARTCC has their own way of doing things, and there are many barriers for people that want to become a controller. Some of those barriers in the current VATSIM training model are: Length of time to go from student to controller is far too long, typically 12 to 18 months, and even as long as 2 years in certain ARTCCs. All hands on training has to be scheduled with a training controller, and there are no self study tracks that allow on the job opportunities without meeting with a training controller. This results in unnecessary training delays, and causes trainees to lose interest. Very little, if any, opportunity to control any meaningful airspace during training. You become a ground or tower controller, and you can control a small airport that sees 2 aircraft in 6 hours. This is a result of lack of knowledge of how humans learn, and how to put learned material into practice. Little understanding of the human learning process by the people creating training material, and especially by the very young people that are the majority of VATSIM trainers in any given ARTCC. Most 16 and 17 year olds do not have the ability to teach a subject that they themselves only have a rudimentary grasp on. The airspace in real life is complicated for a real air traffic controller that works the system as their full time job. VATSIM has slowly moved to try and replicate the real airspace system, to the point where most VATSIM center controllers do not fully understand it, especially when it comes to LOA's, VFR operations, and most low use SOP's. Controllers are the backbone of your service. You need more controllers than VATSIM, otherwise you're wasting your time, and will just split the community again, the way SATCO's implosion split the community into VATSIM and IVAO. There are many people that want to control but see the above barriers as a road block. Imagine if every person that bought Fortnite was told they had to go through a Fortnite training program for 12 to 18 months before they could fully use the game.....LOL. The current VATSIM training model is inefficient, locally based at each ARTCC, fulfilled by trainers that have zero educational background, is too long, and has no opportunity for hands on self guided learning live on the network. With the above said, will the POSCON training be any different? Will POSCON streamline the airspace to make it easier for hobby controllers, and hobby pilots to navigate(pun intended) the virtual airspace system, while still maintaining a degree of realism? Lastly, knowing what's currently planned on the training side, how long do you predict it will take for someone to go from the start of training to full controller in the POSCON model? Tim

@Andrew Heath So, flying on the network when the family is sleeping is a choice, and I certainly accept that it is on me for making that decision. If what you are alluding to is a limited service experience if you don't use voice then I'm not sure how I feel about that for some other users. There are disabled users, and users with speech issues, who's only choice will be limited POSCON service because they can't comply with a "voice comm's = full service" model. Not the most inclusive, nor understanding way to proceed in my humble opine. Tim

Yeah, especially when you have a house full of sleeping kids, and a sleeping spouse, and then can't fly on the network because you wake everyone up to keep the "real-ness factor." That reason is kind of short sighted to be blunt. Voice in a late night household isn't always an option. VATSIM for the win by allowing texting for those situations. Tim

Flights generated based on user definable criteria, including ATC availability, would be a nice to have feature. This would be especially attractive to those simmers who fly primarily GA, or who fly airliners, but do not want to participate in a virtual airline. The reason Pilot Edge can exist at their very high price point, yet still attract gamers, is the fact that they guarantee ATC during their business hours. Being able to generate a flight, that guarantees ATC in the moment, would narrow the gap between paid ATC like P.E., and volunteer ATC like POSCON. I would envision during the flight generation process, if ATC has committed to a certain length of time, your flight plan would indicate that ATC will be available, barring an unforeseen circumstance. And if your generated flight plan falls outside of the ATC's commitment, then that would be made clear as well. Lastly, a cool feature would be to submit a pended flight plan criteria, such as distance, flight time length, ARTCC, or city pair, and when ATC schedules in advance, they you get notified that all your criteria has been met, and you can then plan on making a flight. No more guessing. Just some food for thought. Tim

I was curious too if anyone had posted FSExpo vids. I don't have a Facebook account, so it would be nice if the FB media could also be posted on YouTube.

@1369362 I do agree that VATSIM and IVAO are ripe for the picking. They are both very rigid in their policies, and outdated in their technology. A newcomer, who can fix a lot of the recurring gripes people have about online flying, will prosper I believe. Tim

Exactly! This happens because it's just a hobby, that people participate in a few hours a week. Nobody at VATSIM, or IVAO, should be expected to perform at such a high level. That's why, in my opinion, if you simplify things, then baseline service quality goes up, and even peak events will be handled in a better fashion, because the less complicated procedures between centers, approach, departure, and local control, will have built in efficiencies. Yes, some hardcore VATSIM/IVAO controllers will turn their noses up at this approach, and not participate, but, you will also have a lot more people that will embrace the concept, and enter the world of ATC because of it. POSCON needs pilots to succeed. To attract pilots, POSCON needs more ATC online, at any one time, than VATSIM or IVAO, to attract those pilots. If ATC services on POSCON do not exceed what is offered on VATSIM and IVAO, all that will happen is the online ATC community will be fractured for a third time, and the pool of pilots and controllers, will be split again. That, will not benefit anyone. Tim

I understand what you're saying, but I think you are missing the point just a bit. Local differences are there in the real world because real lives are at stake. These many, many local details don't have to be there in simulated ATC. The pilots would never know the difference, and the ATC learning curve, and advancement would be improved. There's really no need to mirror the real world from the ATC side. You'll never match the quality of a real FAA controller, doing it as a hobby. The way VATSIM events break down after about 1 hour is a prime example. Anyhow, just a thought. If there aren't more controllers on POSCON than VATSIM or IVAO, there won't be more pilots on the network. It just doesn't have to be that hard to become an ATC. The difficult mirroring of the real world is a choice, and it doesn't have to be that way, and can still provide a believable experience for the controller, and the pilots. Tim

The VATSIM training model is a looooong road, and can take over a year to progress through all of it. Have you considered a site run "POSCON academy" that graduates you with the basic tools to operate as ATC, and then allows you to move directly into the ARTCC of your choice, to start controlling, while learning on the job? Currently, VATSIM ARTCC's, try to operate like real world air traffic control. They have the airspace carved out like the real world, along with pages on top of pages of SOP's, and hundreds of pages of LOA's, most of which gets ignored by the majority of controllers once they move out of training, BUT, has to be learned during training. Have you given any thought to simplifying the airspace, the intra-facility procedures, and the inter-facility procedures, to streamline controller training, and get more ATC involved? I think you have a real chance here to do what VATSIM failed to do. VATSIM tried to make controller training easier with global ratings, but failed that, by giving the ARTCC's too much control. You have the ability, I think, to create a smoother path for ATC participants, which will mean more controllers, which will mean more ATC online at any one time, which will attract more pilots to the network. If you mirror VATSIM's controller training, and setup, you will, I believe, be left with spotty ATC coverage, and that will give no incentive for people to fly on the POSCON network. Tim