Peter Adamos
-
Posts
1005 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Calendar
Posts posted by Peter Adamos
-
-
Good job @Callum Strawbridge, you've come so far mate, never stop improving!
-
2
-
-
I like to set a 'Toggle VAD' keybind so I can easily switch between voice activated and push to talk. If you combined this with a push to mute as above, you get the best of both worlds
-
On 4/3/2020 at 7:01 PM, Sean Harrison said:
Is this still a thing that ENR need to indicate the services they are providing topdown?
It was indicated to me this evening that ENR always provide topdown and don’t need to indicate that they are.
Yes - the division policy is pretty clear in this regard - in your controller info, you must include, as an enroute controller:
- Where extending to an adjacent ENR sector, the identifier and frequency
- Where where providing top down coverage to an aerodrome, the ICAO identifier of that aerodrome.
- Where not extending to a underlying TMA, a note as to why (@sean as to moving that clause you are probably right as it applies to a controller on an enroute sector).
If you are controlling SNO, extending WOL and providing top down, you would expect to see: extending WOL 125.0, Top down YMML YSSY YSCB
Potentially there could be some refinement in the clarity of this policy and the way underlying TMAs are treated, however some common sense judgement wouldn't go astray. As a pilot logging on at YMML, not familiar with local policies or ENR boundaries, clicking controller info should provide a reasonable guess as to whether YMML is being covered by the controller or not.
-
2
-
-
Back on the original(ish) topic, you can set a VAD Toggle hotkey which will easily toggle between PTT and voice detection with a button press. It's what I use when moving between servers/channels to switch between the modes.
-
Maybe we can make Sydney a Major Airport/Designated Airspace too while we're at it
-
In my experience, toxicity was kept at bay when the relevant policies were actually followed and enforced by staff. As we've seen lately, toxicity thrives when it's the staff themselves violating the policies, rather than setting the example and implementing said policies. Perhaps these issues should be addressed at the core, rather than stripping away services from the community to mask the symptoms of dysfunction.
-
7 hours ago, Richard Quigley said:
VATSIM is NOT a social club. It is a Virtual Air Traffic Simulation network. It is bought, paid for and owned outright by The Founders. It is set up like a business corporation. The Owners appoint the Governors. Those Governors appoint the Regional Directors who appoint the Divisional Directors who appoint their Departmental Directors and so on. All this is to manage and regulate the provision of a virtual air traffic simulation network.
VATSIM, and in this particular instance VATPAC, is under no obligation to provide, maintain, manage or otherwise be associated with any other medium of communication other than the officially sanctioned fora such as this one.
This is not a debatable matter.
With respect, yes, but no.
I, nor I suspect many of my friends in this hobby, would be here without the social and community aspect. This is a place for people with similar interests to bond and enjoy a hobby. Without communication, friendship and a place to discuss things apart from technical ATC requirements, this network loses 90% of its value. Regardless of who owns what, and who appoints who, without the members and community the founders and staff may as well own and manage a wet paper bag.
The shortsightedness to not realise this has been a persistent issue throughout the years, and I find through the tone of your post this is not likely to change.
-
Who forgot to update the year in the header and title page?
-
Why not own it and do an April Fool's edition
-
And your reference to a "firing offense" is shear hyperbole. The supervisor clearly mishandled the situation. That's fine. Sups are human. But this was not the way to handle this particular situation.
And which portion of this thread will have the effect of remedying that? Please feel free to point it out.
Either send it to the sup team, or to the division team to escalate. This thread does not in any way enable the issue it's about to be fixed. It only serves to point out a staff members' (possible) mishandling of a situation to the public. There is also no suggestion that the initial complaint wasn't resolved. If a supervisor was summoned to deal with a situation, then ensuring there aren't additional CoC violations by one of the parties to the complaint is absolutely a valid course of enquiry.
Everyone agrees the supervisors need more training in understanding our local extension policies, but nobody here has the power to do that. If the supervisor didn't act properly, the exact same point stands.
We don't encourage people to make public forum posts when a new ATC controller stuffs up - those would get deleted. I fail to see how this is different.
-
Given two out of the four listed issues are only issues when under ATC control, I'd posit that establishing that the aircraft in question is actually under the control of the person making the complaint is a reasonable initial action - maybe not the most efficient, but not the hugely incompetent and firing-worthy action some of you are making it sound like.
-
What is the aim of this thread exactly? The public forums are used for issues that concern the general membership.
Either we need intervention at a local divisional level to educate the supervisors of our policy (which can be achieved through the feedback form), or the issue needs to be brought to the attention to the supervisor team directly via the email listed for that purpose on the VATSIM website.
This thread achieves nothing other than airing complaints about the supervisor's actions to the public.
I'm also very sure many of the VATPAC members who are also supervisors are not intimately familiar with the relatively niche policies of every FIR on the network, and fail to see what part of the supervisor's asking for information regarding the parties involved in a complaint was inappropriate.
-
Mr S Stirrer
No idea what you mean
-
The average trajectory of every new VATSIM VA
-
Also given than the TeamSpeak policy (Drafted by Tracy, if I recall) refers that:
8.1.1.2 Any VATPAC Staff member may apply the above policiesGiven that the staff badge is required to administer said policy (eg, issue bans), then it would be contradictory to suggest VATPAC Staff were not given those relevant permissions.
If this is not the case, said policy needs an update.
-
I was always under the impression that if you were listed on the website staff pages by name, you got the teamspeak badge or permissions relevant to being a staff member.
The opposite has never been standard procedure to my knowledge...
-
Faraday Cages are "isolationist" in both functionality and perception.
-
That post was in a staff forum, the membership can't see it
-
Try manually recording a voice ATIS via microphone and single record playback to see if that works as intended.
If that works fine then it rules out the networking/port/connection stuff from a troubleshooting perspective
-
Booting up a TS server is a matter of copying a few files and executing the script. Anyone with half cooked backups could manage it in about 15 minutes, so I get the feeling there's some stuff happening behind the scenes that we are not privy to
-
Congratulations to Adam, who recently completed his training for the Tower rating.
You should all see him around on the network soon - well done Adam.
-
The Oceanic Partnership agreement (from memory) lists KZAK as a participating sector, and makes no distinction between East and West, nor any conditions to operate.
The whole idea of the agreement was to allow controllers Oceanic endorsed (by any controlling division) to control any of the participating sectors - this is why the website is maintained (http://pacificoceanic.vatsim.net/) and endorsements are listed on CERT (for supervisors to verify where required).
I think this is simply a case of VATUSA members not being either aware of the agreement or the mechanisms to which it is supposed to work, rather than some malicious scheme to deny ATC service
-
Congratulations to Alex who recently completed his tower controller rating.
-
Congratulations to Sam Hall who recently completed his TMA rating.
Well done, Sam.
Controller Awards
in Feedback, Suggestions and Ideas
Posted
it's already done? I hereby decree that the person listed as leader on the homepage at the end of each month may update their forum signature to brag about it.