Jump to content

David Z - 1027224

Members
  • Posts

    3119
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    31

Posts posted by David Z - 1027224

  1. After almost a month, it is time that we revisited this.

    Aside from the matter that triggered the shutdown, it seems that the main sticking point against bringing back Discord is the descent into a free-for-all and our inability to enforce our rules due to the volume of text. If we can resolve this issue, then my vote goes to restoring Discord.

    The obvious solution to me is to simply eliminate text channels, but I'm not normally one for blunt solutions.

    Interested to hear everyone's thoughts and ideas...

  2. Applications are now invited from suitably experienced members of the VATPAC division for the position of VATPAC Director Operations (VATPAC2).

    Responsible to:
    VATPAC Director of Division

    Direct Reports:
    Deputy Director Operations
    AIS Officer
    AIS Officer, Pacific Area
    Virtual Airlines Liaison Officer
    Operations Advisors

    Duties:

    • Attends periodic VATPAC Board meetings to report on pilot-related issues to act as a liaison between pilots and the VATPAC Board bringing pilot and controller views, complaints, ideas, and proposals to the appropriate Division and Board meetings in order to consistently improve the effectiveness of communications, suitability of new procedures, and overall satisfaction of pilots with ATS provided
    • Assists the Events Director where required in the coordination of Events, Fly-Ins and Group flights in the VATPAC airspace
    • Reports quarterly on activity within the division.
    • Liaises with Virtual Airlines for anything they may need from the Division (events, contact information)
    • Maintains an online register of all VATPAC affiliated Virtual Airlines
    • Acts as the Division's Point-of-contact for VATSIM's main VA Coordinator
    • Stay abreast of real world issues which may involve VATPAC airspace
    • Coordinates the personnel and activities of the VATPAC AIS Team
    • Monitors VATPAC policy change proposals as they affect pilots
    • Liaises closely with the Director ATC Training on operational matters affecting pilots and controllers
    • Stays abreast of current issues and contributes to discussions and dissemination of information within the VATPAC and VATSIM community as they affect pilots
    • Monitor facilities and accuracy of the ATC Clients to the TAAATS specification.
    • Maintains an online presence of 5-10 hours per month on the VATSIM Network

    Essential Criteria:

    • Consistently active participation in the greater VATPAC community for the last 2 years
    • Be a member of good standing in VATSIM for more than one year at the time of application
    • Have a good rapport with VATSIM pilots and maintain this rapport throughout their tenure
    • Be rated on VATSIM to no less than Enroute Controller Level (C1)
    • Have good knowledge of the VATSIM Code of Conduct and Code of Regulations
    • Have proven ability in the management of a small group of people
    • Be able to work well within a voluntary organisation
    • Have proven ability with the use of Flight Simulation, VATSIM Approved Pilot and ATC Client Software

    How to Apply:

    Members interested in being considered for the role should apply by outlining their experience and suitability, addressing each of the essential criteria listed above.

    Applications should be sent via email to director at vatpac.org

    APPLICATIONS IN STRICTEST CONFIDENCE CLOSE AT 23:59 hours AEDT on Sunday 4 November 2018.

    • Like 1
  3. I'll put together something more over the weekend, but I will address a few things in Greg's post.

    As mentioned, an investigation is being conducted at the BOG level into recent events. At this point, I still only know as much as the rest of you. Our hands are very much tied as we lack information to work off and it would be inappropriate for us to pre-empt the findings of an investigation. 

    • Like 2
  4. While our thoughts and discussions are bubbling away in the "Expectations of Staff" thread, I propose Sunday 14 October at 8pm AEDT (0900 UTC) for a town hall meeting. This will be an opportunity to canvass the views of the community on the issues we have raised/will raise in the other thread. Of course, we don't want it to be all about governance and there will be opportunity for portfolio directors to share their plans for the future and take portfolio-specific questions.

    I have titled this thread with a season... my thoughts at the moment are to make this a quarterly affair, but undecided as yet.

    In the mean time, please keep discussing in the other thread. By my count, there have to be two dozen staffers who haven't put their thoughts to text. I encourage you to do so, and I will do my best to keep the piranhas away in the event that you are not as eloquent as you would like to be!

  5. It appears that there is agreement on at least one fundamental point: as the people entrusted with the running of the organisation, we ought to listen the views of the community. And as Richard points out, the hierarchical structure set in place by the COR puts us, at the divisional level, as the membership-facing part. To me, it follows that we must only listen to the views of our community when developing policy and direction, but also advocate those views at the regional and global level. I am aware that in the past, examples of this including lobbying on the Global Ratings Policy. I would expect that in the medium-term that divisional activism will arise again when the time comes to set the global policy parameters around Voice CTAF. I don't think any of us are here to play "god" - we are merely the custodians of something that was here before us and (hopefully) will be here after us.

    Last year, during the "interim" board, Tracy suggested that it may be useful to have a constitution of sorts that sets out the objectives of the organisation, developed with consultation with the community, to serve as a high-level document to guide the direction that the Board takes. Some 12 months later, this kind of document seems ever more needed.

    While successive boards of the past have done very well to bring us to where we are today through some trial-and-error and a healthy dose of wisdom, a mature and growing organisation should translate these "lessons learnt" and good practices into concrete processes. It is by having concrete processes that an organisation reduces the burden on its management team by enforcing good practices and preventing the same mistakes from being made time and time again. One example of these mistakes we make is reactive policy making - instead, policy should be carefully thought out and debated both within staff circles and out in the wider community. While we can never make everyone happy, such consultative processes improve decision-making (by increasing the available information and ideas) while giving all involved a sense of ownership.

    I am looking forward to you all continuing this debate. At a certain point, I will call a Town Hall Meeting so that these issues can be discussed with the wider community. It is important that we flush out all of the problems that we face today so that we can find ways to resolve them. We will not agree that every problem is in fact a problem or that each solution is the best solution, but we must at least put our best foot forward. That starts with the conversation we are having now.

    • Like 1
  6. Jacob,

    Most people are aware of what was said. I don't think anyone disagrees that it was regrettable. It was not necessary for the profanity to be repeated and hence the quote was removed.

    I nonetheless advocated for your post to be reinstated so that I could respond. This thread is about my expectations of VATPAC staff, which do not change because just because the person who drafted them did something regrettable.

    The policy is not unreasonable and does not prevent staff from raising legitimate issues in an appropriate environment. If any person is unwilling to comply with this policy, then I expect that person to write their resignation to [email protected]

  7. I have a great deal of respect for Jackson. He and others who have come before us have moulded and shaped this organisation to where it is today. With a history of some 20 years, today, we have a large number of active members, both ATC and pilots. 

    In my post above, I said that:

    1 hour ago, David Zhong said:

    The response to that effort by various people from the division level up did not do much to provide confidence to our members that things were under control.

    I do not propose to judge whether Jackson's actions were right or wrong. There is much that we still don't know about the circumstances. The only thing I will say about the matter is what I wrote above about providing confidence to our members.

    What is clear to me though, that regardless of who wrote the policy above, it is even more relevant today. Our priority should be to move forward from the recent weeks and focus our efforts on making VATPAC the best it can be. That is, after all, the reason we (the staff) are here.

    • Like 2
  8. Team,

    In recent weeks, some members have made a concerted effort to make changes to the direction of the division. This effort was done in a way that was detrimental to the reputation and stability of the division. The response to that effort by various people from the division level up did not do much to provide confidence to our members that things were under control. These issues are now being handled at the BOG level. Virtually anyone that has anything to do with VATPAC, including the BOG members formerly on our Board, has been deemed to have a conflict of interest and is excluded from that process.

    There is a balance between having free and open discussions and presenting a united front. It is important for free and open discussions to be had as these are vital for the division to make the best decisions for the future. The staff presenting a united front to the rest of the membership is also essential to ensure that ordinary members are confident in the actions of the division. Therefore at this point, I was to endorse the message from Jackson above. This policy continues to apply to all staff.

    In addition to the above, it is essential that all staff strictly comply with the policies that we have published on our website. If you are not conversant in these policies, please take the time to read them now. These policies serve a number of purposes. They are a direction from the Board to staff. They are also a declaration by the division that "this is how we are going to do things". Failing to follow our own policies opens us up to questioning and criticism from the membership, who will rightly ask "why should we follow rules if those who write the rules don't". If our policies need changing, then that is a process that we should go through, but until then, we must follow those policies.

    This applies particularly to the Teamspeak/Discord Policy which affects all staff members. If you witness inappropriate behaviour on these media, you are expected to either take appropriate action, in accordance with the policy, or if you are uncomfortable or unsure doing so, refer the matter to another staff member. Any potential breaches of the VATSIM Code of Conduct shall be referred to a VATSIM Supervisor.

    • Like 2
  9. Applications for this position closed on Sunday 9 September. 

    Thank you to all of the applicants. I have sent an email out to each of you confirming receipt. If you didn't get one, please contact me via forum private message ASAP.

    In accordance with convention, the Board is currently in the process of selecting an appointments committee which will interview candidates and make a recommendation to the Board.

  10. All,

    As you will be aware, I have been asked to act as the division director for the foreseeable future. While it is disappointing witness the events of the last few weeks and be called back into the ring after less than 12 months, I am encouraged by what appears to be a very active team of volunteers. Our volunteer staff have always been and always will be the engine room of the organisation and I'd like to take the opportunity to thank you all for your hard work.

    It is the job of the senior leadership to not only ensure that we have a plan for the future of the organisation, but to ensure that our volunteer staff are ready for the future. Over the past few years, our organisation has been seriously challenged in finding suitable people to fill senior roles. In recent times, we have appointed people who sound good on paper but have little organisational experience and this has contributed to the issues we have seen over the past year and a half. This problem is a result of a failure to recruit members into staff and then expose them to an understanding of organisational issues. Addressing this issue will be a key priority for the Board.

    At present, the leadership of the organisation is as follows:

    • Regional Director (VATOCE): Alan Cooke
    • Acting Division Director: David Zhong
    • Acting Director Operators: Richard Quigley
    • Director ATC Training: Daniel Martin
    • Acting Director IT: Steven Brown
    • Deputy Director Events: Trent Hopkinson

    Could each portfolio lead please provide a brief outline of:

    • Staffing levels (i.e. whether or not adequate)
    • Current activities/projects
    • Current and future issues and opportunities
    • Like 4
  11. I'm pleased to announce that Steven Brown has agreed to return as Acting Director IT. A vetetan of the organisation, Browny needs no introduction. Please join me in welcoming him back into this position.

    • Like 5
    • Thanks 2
  12. When MATS/LIs (TMA Supps as they were known then) and Moodle were being developed, the philosophy that was taken was that there should be a separation between the "what to do" and "how to do", with the former being covered by "documentation" and the latter by training resources such as Moodle. 

    While MATS/LIs tell you what to do, often they don't give you the conceptual/theoretical or background knowledge that you need to effectively apply it. In the case of helicopters and military operations, it would certainly be useful for controllers to gain an understanding of what those pilots are looking for (since many controllers won't have flown helicopters or military aircraft online) and to see some examples. That being said, the manpower to develop such resources is always limited and has always been prioritised on a need basis.

  13. There are many of us who have "embraced the suck" and watched this organisation go through its ups and downs, as active members, later on the staff and then from the sidelines. I think we all strongly believe in the objectives of the organisation, so it is pretty disheartening to see the current direction of the organisation.

    Members deserve much better treatment than they have been given by management. There has been little explanation of what has been going on this week and what has been announced is nothing short of insulting to our members.

    With POSCON in development, now more than ever, we should be consolidating our strengths and looking to improve in areas where we have struggled (e.g. Zach is currently doing a great job leading technical development from what was a standing start). It is certainly not a time to self-implode and hand an own goal to the competition. 

    This week's events have served to distract from Paul's original question and while there must be answers about this week, there must equally be a vision for how this organisation remains the leading online flight sim community for our region. 

  14. If you are cleared for something, you must of course, comply. That being said, you are almost always compliant with a visual approach clearance, if you do a runway-aligned instrument approach. From an outside observer, the following can look identical (taking Sydney as an example):

    • visually hand-flying a 10NM straight-in approach to runway 16R
    • hand-flying the ILS RWY 16R approach on raw data
    • using the approach and auto-land modes to fly the ILS RWY 16R
    • using basic autopilot modes (i.e. speed hold, heading select, vertical speed) to fly the same approach profile

    All of these, and many more, comply with the ATC instruction. ATC only tell you what to do, not how you do it.

    It is considered good practice, even when expecting a short visual approach, to load up some sort of runway-aligned procedure into the FMS. When set up correctly, this provides additional situational awareness, distance to runway, etc., even if you end up turning off the automation.

    Something that might be considered bad practice, but is certainly possible, is to "draw" the visual circuit using custom waypoints and you could certainly fly down to short final entirely on LNAV/VNAV!

  15. The word "available" is a defined word for certain contexts (1.3a) in this policy. Better drafting practice might have used the phrase "not available" and perhaps bolded or italicised to indicate that the latter word is a defined word. Even better drafting practice may have chosen a word that is more obvious, but with the number of iterations and reviews this has gone through, it is clearly not obvious what word would be more obvious!

  16. Note that most of this also applies outside of the surveillance coverage (i.e. radar, ADS-B) in regular airspace. While we now have full surveillance coverage of continental Australia above FL350, if you are below this level in remote areas or flying across the Bight, position reporting will also be required.

  17. Release circuit airspace to tower. Tower uses visual separation between circuit traffic and other aircraft. Tower uses circuit sequencing instructions (e.g. extend downwind; follow A320 on 3 mile final). 

    • Like 2
  18. On a visual approach, you can use as much or as little automation as you like to achieve your desired flight path. Some people go as far as drawing the circuit with place bearing distance fixes so that they can practically fly to the ground on LNAV!

  19. On SY/ML APP/DEP: With that notice in place, during the specified times, it should be noted that DEP can be opened without APP. In that case, DEP assumes the whole TMA. The intention is to allow the first-online controller to choose his/her preferred position in the event that a second TMA controller logs on.

     

    The policy does not explicitly prohibit a staff member from "approving themselves" onto a non-standard. However, consideration should be had by those that are granted this power that: (1) the wording of that paragraph explicitly makes reference to that person's judgement; and (2) a staff member has, in the past, been asked to resign his post after doing this. In drafting that paragraph, I did not prohibit staff members from "approving themselves", but it is clear from 4.2.6 that there are a range of factors that should be considered, and those items should be considered carefully in this context in case of potential controversy. To avoid doubt, it may be better to ask another staff member to be the decision maker in these circumstances.

×
×
  • Create New...