POSCON ATC training model?

[Tim S]

@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]

@Tim S

I think you summarize the shortcomings of the VATSIM model very well.

A lot of this is completely up for discussion. We are a feedback-driven company... that is to say, we really make it our mission to listen to the concerns of the users and try to figure out common sense solutions based on their feedback. Having said that, I also have a lot of great ideas in regards to ATC training, but none of which are even close to implementation at this point, they are merely concepts. I am somewhat reluctant to get into a major discussion about ATC training because of how far off that part of the project is. ATC training will be the last thing we develop because it is the least needed. When we launch into Open Beta, we can utilize a large group of well-qualified controllers that already exist on multiple networks. As we progress through the Open Beta stage, we will be shifting our focus to ATC training, Division and Sub-Division development, etc.

What I will say for certain though is that we will not streamline the airspace to make it easier for hobby controllers. I believe we can create a solution that maintains realism while also ensuring quality and efficiency.

[Tim S]

@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

[aeroniemi]

In the UK on vatsim, a division known for it's slow wait times; the time taken to go from OBS-S2 is now under 6 months; as a result of that we're seeing issues that haven't been seen before, at least not on this scale. People coming up to S2 aren't good enough at the "core skills" (how to deal with planes, how to be a controller, how to deal with high workload etc) because it's now moving too fast, and we're getting to a point where people going in for S3 training only have < 100 hours on the network, whereas before, due to the long waiting lists, this was never really an issue. There's definitely a balance required here. The issue becomes access to airports with a good amount of traffic, but the UK is lucky in that there are a lot of busy airports available.

There's a balance between having people that are compitent enough to be controlling airports such as Gatwick and Heathrow, and making training run faster. To the students, it might seem like it takes ages, but I don't honestly see that we'd want to make that part go any faster.

It would definitely be a good idea to have a computer-based training program for things like workload, but ultimately it can't substute for raw hours taking to planes. It's very hard to teach controllers how to deal with the unpredictability that comes with running a system dependent on people.

[Sonny N. (1017212)]

Coming from VATSIM UK as well, I would say their ATC Training department work very hard to try and make their waiting lists as short as possible however the problem is, the amount of mentors and instructions they can actually get that are willining to train students. I’m sure everyone would rather wait and learn the best way than just be free to control without any proper training. Although waiting lists maybe long, it isn’t definitely worth the wait I would say because it just allows you to learn more from people instead of just being given an eLearning system. 

I know VATSIM use both eLearning and practical training which I think is very good because usually the student is requirement to complete the eLearning course then go to the practical training, this way they already know the basics for their positions before turning up and wasting crucial time when’s they could be doing practical stuff. As well as that, VATSIM have a Sweatbox server which I’m sure everyone knows about and what it does and I think that’s good because it allows mentors/instructors to focus on certain competency’s whereas say if you’re on the live network, there may not be traffic that allows the mentor/instructor to teach that competency. Which is why they use both SweatBox and live sessions as it isn’t beneficial being trained 100% on SweatBox when it isn’t real traffic a series it doesn’t really simulate what real pilots are like.

[Tim S]

@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

[aeroniemi]

8 hours ago, Tim S said:

@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

There's a balance between quality and quantity required, of course. In the UK, the OBS>S1 training takes people less than 6 weeks in most cases, dependent on their availablilty, and as a result we see that pretty much every airport that gets any planes is staffed with at least GND during the majority of the local "peak times"; I don't necessarily think it's possible to beat that.

However, from APP up the story is slightly different; due in part to a lack of mentors, but also a whole set of other factors, the time taken for S2>S3 and S3>C1 is exponentially longer than lower ratings. It's not helped by the lack of mentors to run it, but it is ultimately as a result of the skills being required of these people being much more difficult to learn quickly.

The UK, and other european FIRs are an exception in their high traffic levels and ATC staffing (the same isn't seen on IVAO, at least not in the same locations). VATSIM has a shortage of ATCOs in many areas of the globe, and at many times of day, but I think that's as a result of people who fly in different countries choosing IVAO over VATSIM. If you merge the ATCS coverage of both networks, you get a pretty good spread both spatially and temporally ; I don't think that's related to training though.

[Tim S]

4 hours ago, aeroniemi said:

 If you merge the ATCS coverage of both networks, you get a pretty good spread both spatially and temporally ; I don't think that's related to training though.

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

[Tim S]

28 minutes ago, Tim S said:

 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

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.

[Andrew Heath]

@Tim S

I agree that innovation is the key here. I am a firm believer in breaking the norms of online flight simulation and busting through barriers that previously prevented many people from joining. There is clearly a market outside of the already established user bases, just look at these results from the 2018 Navigraph Survey. Innovation is the key, POSCON cannot simply be a VATSIM/IVAO version 2.0 and we have no intention of being that. 

[Tim S]

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

[Andrew Heath]

Precisely.

[Todd Cox]

Andrew,

Thank you again for the discussion at FS Expo.  As a longtime VATSIM, SATCO, Eagles ATC member (original ATC group that resulted in the formation of SATCO), and retired controller, I applaud your efforts and vision regarding POSCON.  It will be important that people understand that POSCON is not trying emulate the past nor is it trying to imitate an existing group structure; that it is moving things forward for the future.   One of your most difficult challenges, however,  will be balancing real-world with the whims of virtual pilots and controllers.  That was one of the hardest things for SATCO, VATSIM, and IVAO to overcome.  Thus, how you develop your rules and training will also be an important part of the overall equation.  

On the ATC perspective, I agree with TIm.  Controller Basics is key.  Just like real world, a controller who understands the basics of ATC (vectoring, separation, speeds, altitudes, and basic phraseology) can perform well at any facility.  As they move from facility to facility, they only need to understand that facility's procedures and configuation.  A controller that does not understand their basics and the reasons behind it will either struggle or not be successful.

Keep up the good work.

Todd (Nat)

[Andrew Heath]

Agreed, I don't think the legacy networks do a bad job with ATC training, but there is a serious lack of standardization which results in the fundamentals sometimes getting overlooked.

I am excited to work on the ATC side of things, I have a lot of great ideas to standardize the training experience.

Unfortunately, the ATC training program development has taken a back-seat to resolving what I personally find to be a much larger issue in the community, and that is is pilot ability. From a training perspective, we have been working tirelessly to provide pilots with the tools they need to succeed in the online environment. Once we are satisfied with that, we will move on to creating a comprehensive and standardized ATC training experience.

When we launch into our Invite-Only beta in a few months, we won't need the ATC training program fully developed because there is a wealth of very talented controllers itching to control pilots that know what they are doing. We will rely on those individuals to provide POSCON with ATC service while we work on developing a program that will eventually teach the next generation of controllers.

[Todd Cox]

Sounds cool.  Really excited!

[Rob Shearman Jr]

> "there is a wealth of very talented controllers itching to control pilots that know what they are doing." 

 

This is the sentiment I've heard rumblings of throughout years of active participation in forums and other discussion outlets of the online flight sim community.  I have visions of seeing dozens and dozens of names emerge in the opening days of POSCON, renowned names that haven't been active in online flight sim communities for years due to the ever-declining levels of pilot education on the current networks.  I have great hope that POSCON is going to unite the cream of the crop from all the others.   I can't wait to see it happen! 

[Dillon P. (1016752)]

One of the things I'm interested in seeing that goes along with standardization, is what new/previously rarely staffed airspace pops up. I rarely see any of the Middle East/Asia zones staffed while right now Europe and Northeast US are usually staffed nightly. If controllers are standard, they could potentially staff different airspace for a change of pace as long as they're willing to learn the new airspace. I admit I don't have a ton of knowledge on the VATSIM visiting controller system. I know there are systems for controllers to do that but is it standardized?

[Andrew Heath]

Visiting can be difficult on VATSIM. I have some ideas on how to make the visiting controller experience easier. I'll share those ideas in the coming months as we dive into developing the system.

[Andrea M. (1015884)]

On 4/8/2019 at 7:26 PM, Andrew H. said:

@Tim S

I agree that innovation is the key here. I am a firm believer in breaking the norms of online flight simulation and busting through barriers that previously prevented many people from joining. There is clearly a market outside of the already established user bases, just look at these results from the 2018 Navigraph Survey. Innovation is the key, POSCON cannot simply be a VATSIM/IVAO version 2.0 and we have no intention of being that. 

I saw just only now this post, and about this comment that  was made by Andrew, I was litteraly surprised from the questionnaire. Seems that the majority of flight simmers that doesn't fly online, doesn't want perform a flight on their pc with real time settings or be forced to don't stop their simulation. Before to read this topic, my opinion was that probably, the main reason because these flight simmers would fly offline is connected to the lack of documentation "newbie-friendly", or the quality of these informations. When I joined IVAO on 18th March 2013, then VATSIM in 2014, I was litteraly surprised about what it was possible doing with these network. Before, I was only a user that has performed his flight with FSX until the closing of gamespy servers. However, I was also interest to join a virtual airline because I was interest to know other flight simmers and comparize my flight experience with other flight sim enthusiast. IVAO and VATSIM has given me the opportunity to know better the entire community of flight simulation, from any country of the world. I'm litteraly surprised that a lot of people doesn't know that it's possible perform online with any network some operations that doesn't need a great theoretic knowledge, and that I learned with my flight experiences on both network.

[Andrew (1017363)]

Very interesting. I would love to see say Vatsim S1's being able to control. At Least for that position. I also believe an instructor position should be developed.

[veselko (1018510)]

I'm new here, but I stoped with VATSIM because of bad training.

I'm 70 years old and former ATC in Croatia and my trainer was 20 years old student who has no connection to ATC in real life.

Also I waited for training nearly 1 year.

[Andrea M. (1015884)]

On 7/26/2019 at 9:09 AM, veselko said:

I'm new here, but I stoped with VATSIM because of bad training.

I'm 70 years old and former ATC in Croatia and my trainer was 20 years old student who has no connection to ATC in real life.

Also I waited for training nearly 1 year.

Sorry for this question, probably inappropriate, but if I remember, if you had a license as ATC in real life, you can show this on VATSIM to get immediately an ATC rating...however, this trainer was in any case, able to explain how it work an ATC inside a tower? I could be surprised if it wasn't able to explain which steps, stuff, informations any other elements  are necessary for a TWR

[Tim S]

On 7/26/2019 at 3:09 AM, veselko said:

I'm new here, but I stoped with VATSIM because of bad training.

I'm 70 years old and former ATC in Croatia and my trainer was 20 years old student who has no connection to ATC in real life.

Also I waited for training nearly 1 year.

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

[veselko (1018510)]

On 8/8/2019 at 3:19 PM, Andrea M. said:

Sorry for this question, probably inappropriate, but if I remember, if you had a license as ATC in real life, you can show this on VATSIM to get immediately an ATC rating...however, this trainer was in any case, able to explain how it work an ATC inside a tower? I could be surprised if it wasn't able to explain which steps, stuff, informations any other elements  are necessary for a TWR

At that time, I didn't know how to use ATC client, so I wanted that somebody explains that to me.

But the only way I get additional help about ATC client is that I get complete training.

So I give up.

[Daan L.]

My two cents:

@veselko (and @Tim S ) I'm not sure why you find 20-year-old instructors with no real ATC experience a problem..? Good luck finding a veteran real-life controller who is willing to spend time on (virtual) air traffic control networks when he/she isn't working. The training staff is (almost) entirely made up out of volunteers who got (almost) all of their knowledge from previous instructors. You don't need real world experience to control (or fly) on online networks. 

[Waiting an entire year for (one?) training session seems a bit excessive.]

@Tim S 
 

 

• 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.

I'm not sure how things go at your ARTCC, but it takes time to work through the ratings. If everyone could get their C1 rating in less than a month, the quality of ATC would rapidly degrade; there's a reason why it takes some time to get through your ratings. I feel like one year is a very reasonable time to get from S1 to C1. Moreover, there actually are self-study tracks, most ARTCC's will give students a SMT (self monitored training) certificate once they've shown a reasonable level of proficiency.

If newbie controllers would work major, class B airports during training sessions, things might (and often) go wrong, causing an unpleasant experience for the pilots. We want students to have a good grasp at what exactly they're doing, and what is expected from them before they're allowed to control larger airports.
 

• 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.

All instructors hold at least a C1-rating which means that they do understand the subject they're teaching. Age shouldn't matter and even if it did, good luck filling a training team with only 30+ year olds because they usually don't have the spare time like younger folks have, it's impossible to do on VATSIM and I am willing to say it's impossible to do on POSCON. This would only cause longer waiting times.

 

 

• 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.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say; first you say that the real airspace system is complicated and air traffic controlling is a full-time job, but then you're surprised that center controllers do not fully understand their entire airspace? Obviously they have to look things up from time to time, especially when it's a low use SOP or special restricted airspace. Mind you, it's VATSIM and we're not real world controllers. All the center controllers I've met knew perfectly well how to handle VFR operations (whatever that may be).

They knew about ATC and the airspace system from being involved in VATSIM, but there was no real world connection.  

Once again, if you'd require controllers to have some sort of real world connection or educational background, there would be no controllers left. More controllers is exactly what you're advocating for. 

 

Comparing air traffic controlling to Fortnite would be comparing apples to oranges, not fair. There's no experience required in a game like Fortnite, but pilots do except some level of experience when you're providing them air traffic control services.

 

Training just takes some time. I got my S1 rating within 3 training sessions. My ARTCC recommends controllers to wait at least 30 to 40 hours before continuing training, to make sure there is proficiency at the said position before moving on. It takes even more time to get familiar with your airspace when working TRACON or en-route positions. You would surprised to hear how many people fail OTS exams because they're not proficient at a lower position.

In conclusion, I don't think POSCON should blatantly copy the training programs from other networks, and there for sure is room for improvement, but it should not compromise the quality of the ATC or realism.

Edited September 3, 2019 by Daan L.
Typo