Andrew Heath

Recommendations will be accepted from the division, but ultimately they are appointed by HQ. There are similarities, but it is definitely a different role. Too early to tell. Preferably, real world experience such as airline pilot or real world ATC. Why?

@donpilot All feedback goes to a "pending" status when submitted by either a pilot or a controller. We have a new role called a "Moderator" that will review feedback before they give it to the receiving party. The Moderator will have tools to fact check feedback for its accuracy and worth.

The issue becomes when your emergency affects the enjoyment of others. There are many people who have their emergencies set to a higher occurrence rate than others. Also different add-on developers have different standards than others. For example, one add-on developer may throw an engine failure at you more often than another. In the real world, I have only had 2 engine "issues" and neither of them resulted in a failure.... I have 7000+ flying hours in jets, turbo-props, and props. In the real world, emergencies happen everyday, but the difference is maintenance technicians and pilots are all trying to do everything in their power to prevent emergencies from happening. In the FS world, there is no standard... some people have them turned all the way on high and some turned all the way off. I think the best course of action is to simulate it like VATSIM. If the controller cannot handle your emergency, and you think they were absolutely capable of handling it, then you need to leave them bad feedback which will ultimately hurt their overall POSCON ranking.

Hey everyone, We are looking for someone with extensive Adobe Captivate experience to help in the creation of learning modules. If you have Captivate experience, please DM me and we will arrange an interview. Thanks!

@Faris Chong

@Arttu Uusi-kyyny

@Alexey Khokhrev

@Richard McDonald Woods What do you mean by "intelligent responses to pilots' messages"? I guess some examples of how you see this working would be good.

You misunderstand the concept of Eurocontrol, this is not how it work works in the real world. In the real world, Eurocontrol is a central authority that controls traffic management.

@buraktiftikci Why would that be a decision for the Division? Shouldn't it be based on if they are part of Eurocontrol in the real world?

@Jonas Kuster Any idea how we might able to calculate TSAT? I imagine it requires a TON of historical data to work, such as the average time to push and start from stand xx, taxi to runway xx, etc.

Question for the VATSIM and IVAO people. On those networks, in Europe, how are TSAT, TOBT, and CTOT times simulated, if at all?

Hi all, we are looking for help with translating our CPDLC system to various languages. If you are able to volunteer your time to this, please DM me. We currently have someone working on Turkish, but all other languages are still needed! Thanks! We currently have translators for the following languages: Korean Japanese Chinese Turkish

@Scorpio I feel you are grossly overestimating the amount of times you would be affected by a delay program. You'll just have to wait for beta and see.

@Jonas Kuster First off, a one hour delay in the real world is not at all uncommon. If we want to be as realistic as possible, then delays have to be expected and accepted. If time is a limitation for a pilot, there will always be locations to fly that are not affected by delays such as a satellite to the primary field (e.g. KMDW instead of KORD). Additionally, unlike the real world, fuel costs are not an issue with FS. So, in the case of an airspace delay, taking a longer route around the congested airspace is also a feasible option. Second, in your example of an after-work flight, I believe we have covered this with the idea of "optional delays" where the pilot has the option to comply. In the case of mandatory delays, we can tailor the system in such a way that those should only be activated when an event is occurring. The pilot client will inform the pilot of the delay through a status message allowing him/her to accept or reject it, if the delay is optional. If the delay is not optional, the system will simply not issue an IFR clearance or squawk code, which will be automatic when ATC is offline through PDC/CPDLC. After that, the pilot has two options: they can either depart VFR or they can file a flight plan to a different airport. Good question. We have some ideas of using the controller's points score to help the system determine a proper airspace/airport operations rate. This will obviously take a lot of testing and tweaking. That's easy, we just use information published by the FAA and other international AIPs to determine the airport capacity based on the configuration. These capacities can be further reduced based on the amount of controllers staffing an airport/airspace as well as those controllers' ability.

@Jonas Kuster You think that people will not accept a delay? We considered this when we first started putting our design ideas on paper. We were thinking that there will be two types of ground delays: Optional Delay: In this case, we are going to incentivize the delay as much as possible. Example, you have a 1 hour airspace delay on the ground at LZSH going to KPHL. You have the option to accept the delay on the ground (you will receive points for your compliance) or you can depart and you will be subject to possible enroute delays with no point value attached. I am making up the numbers here, but I assume this would be in effect when an airspace or airport was forecast to reach 100% capacity. Mandatory Delay: This delay of course is compulsory. I am not sure whether we would give points for your compliance or not, probably not. Again, making up the numbers, but I would assume this would be in effect when an airspace or airport was forecast to reach 110% capacity or more.

@georgebarlow @aeroniemi Our version of CTP will be a bit of both. You will be able to pre-book from a list of real world flights/slots ahead of time (this system will actually always be running, even outside of CTP). If you choose your departure time the day of you are subject to delays which, unlike VATSIM, will be strictly enforced. The delays will be created and managed real-time by automated systems that are analyzing airport/airspace capacity and overhead flow.

POSCON recently commissioned a developer to create a TTF font for our ERAM ATC Client project. Unfortunately, this font has some errors and we are looking for a volunteer who has extensive experience in TTF and OTF fonts to help us fix it! Thanks in advance to anybody who is interested in helping!

@Mark Horvat

ProjectFLY has levels of membership, but POSCON will be completely free.

I am arranging a meeting for August 11th in Lisbon at 1400 local. Please DM me if you are interested in learning the location and joining us.

@Lenny Colton I believe these are edge cases and we can deal with them on a case by case basis as we progress forward.

@Bernardo Reis That is the plan.

@Joshua Akehurst In most European destinations, the AIPs strictly prohibit the use of reverse thrust (other than idle) unless absolutely necessary for safety reasons. This is okay because most EU runways are long and landing distance calculations for aircraft certification purposes are usually predicated on the use of ground spoilers and brakes ONLY. Autobrake setting is usually airline and pilot preference. There are very rare cases where the landing distance requires the use of a specific autobrake setting (usually abnormal procedures or contaminated runways). For the 757/767, I usually set 2 for all runways and then click off the autobrake when I no longer want it engaged. Sometimes, I will even land with the autobrake off, especially if it is a long runway. All takeoffs require the RTO (Rejected Takeoff) autobrake setting.