Zach B - 1217663
-
Posts
1812 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
88
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Calendar
Posts posted by Zach B - 1217663
-
-
Thanks for that Greg. As I suggested, could the people with the power sticky this and other relevant and active NOTAMs, so that they don't get lost and are easy to refer to?
Richard, thanks for that. I tried to summarise the key points of the policy. In terms of the staff member being unable to activate a position for themselves, it's not written anywhere but since I've been able to authorise non-standard position (as of a few years ago now), I was told from the beginning you can't active positions for yourself. It makes sense too. It's like being a flight examiner for flight tests. You can't test yourself, someone else has to test you, despite you being able to conduct the test.
This should definitely be included in the policy. If you are in a situation where the traffic level warrants the opening of a non-standard, there will be other controllers around that you can delegate to OR other senior staff/controllers that you can consult.
-
Hi all,
Following on from a discussion last night, this is a quick reminder as to the activation of non standard positions. Here are the key facts:
- A Deputy Director or Director can approve a non-standard position.
- A C3/I3 can approve a non-standard position.
- A staff member, listed above, cannot approve themselves to activate a non-standard position.
- A non-standard position may be activated if; it does not unreasonably interfere with a standard position, the position is operationally required AND the staff member judges that members of the network will benefit from the activation (increased enjoyment).
Example:
Last night ELW and BIK were opened. This was approved since there was a steady departure and arrival traffic stream out of both airports (operationally required) and the non-standard positions did not unreasonably interfere with WOL or SNO and the activation of the positions provided more enjoyment for the members.
Additionally, HUM was asked to be opened. This request was denied because whilst the traffic levels could be used to justify the opening, HUM would remove SNO almost entirely from the stream of traffic. One of the requirements for a non-standard position was not met, so it could not be activated.
Please be vigilant when approving non-standard position as not doing so can often result in "they were allowed to, so why can't I"?
As I understand it, currently during Milk Runs, _DEP positions are deemed to be 'standard' and do not require special approval. Does anyone know where this NOTAM is? Is there any way we can STICKY active NOTAMs in the forums or a better way to display active NOTAMs?
- A Deputy Director or Director can approve a non-standard position.
-
Oh no!! More frequency changes??!? Giving the pilot something extra to do?!?! How terrible ;D
-
Sorry to open up the discussion to other sectors, but this is the reason for my suggesting OXLEY goes to SNO.
Technically, I cannot provide VOZ332 a service for that 75NM area where it is in TBD airspace, since I am not/do not want to extend all the way to YPAD (TBD).
-
More thumbs up from to Quigs.
-
I figure, if your going to change one, why not make a few adjustments everywhere.
My initial thoughts on WEG and TBP were to be longer horizontally, since that's how our screens are shaped. The current ISA shape is a lot longer vertically, and as you said, doesn't quite fit.
I broke up ASP and FOR, since you hardly have enough vis points to cover the ASP main sector. With FOR, you will be able to extend to ESP and TBD with no issues.
-
Looks good.
Only one thing, the reason I had Oxley in Hume was so you didn't have to extend all the way to adelaide, to accept YBBN/YBCG/YBCS arrivals a bit earlier.
-
When do you ever say Snowy Centre? haha. :cool:
It's Melbourne Centre or Melbourne Centre...I know which one I prefer!
Also my reasoning for breaking up the current ASP sector is, it's too big. You can barely cover that sector with 400NM vis points, let alone extend anywhere.
@Tracy, next i'll be counting the sheep by their wool strands, and dividing by 300,000. :-X
-
It was this, or count the cows outside my window. ;D
-
Food for thought...
-
Could the question be re-worded?
If I want to chat with VATPAC people, I'll use Teamspeak, because that's all we've got.
But you're asking if we have another program that we prefer to use for voice chatting other than teamspeak, then I would select Discord?
-
Any change proposed does need to consider the work involved in not only sector file updates (generally tedious manual work), but also the support applications like VATSpy, SERVINFO, Accumap etc.
And those many man-hours that people like Pete put in to adjusting our software that can automatically produce these files.
-
Yep, exactly Sean!
-
Jacob, I have an 'older' (not old) PC sitting in my cupboard.
It has an intel i5 (3rd gen), 8gb of ram, motherboard, case, PSU.
Only thing you'd need to buy is a HDD/SSD and if required, a graphics card. Could be something to get you started; served me well for many years!
PM me if you could be interested.
-
All staff should have staff badges.
People deserve recognition of their work/contribution amongst other community members.
There should be a difference between the Staff badge (maybe a Volunteer badge) and a moderator (Director/other delegates)....as Tracy has suggested.
-
Hi Brett,
To actually answer your question....
The Euroscope sector files have a special area for radar definitions. I don't remember the specifics, but I think it creates a simple
inverted 'cone' shape based on range/distance/altitude. It does not simulate any sort of ground interference, etc.
I believe there could be some ADS-B stations missing. Not sure when was the last time someone went through the sector files and checked the radars/ADS-B locations.
Aircraft can enter airspace without being identified.
-
I would absolutely support (and encourage) a review of the overarching sectors that we used daily.
Changing the "sub-sectors" (that the overarching sectors are aligned with) would be a bad move, in my opinion. These sectors are aligned as they are in the 'real world'. Yes, we don't have the same traffic levels (hence, change the upper sectors). The lower sectors allow for the sector to be split up, and make sense with the airway layouts, airspace, etc.
-
Jacob,
Do you have any parts on your old PC that can be re-used, to reduce the cost? Things like HDDs/SSDs/GPUs?
-
Most of them are members here, who you could PM.
Otherwise there are Facebook Groups as Harrison said.
-
Just for 3.5 weeks, alternating between Whistler and Vancouver.
-
I'm going to be in Canada, so I can do graveyard shifts for you... (except they'll be normal time for me).
-
Is it a requirement now in Australia for all aircraft to be RVSM approved above FL290?
-
Hey Jake,
Any updates on this? Euroscope's been giving me the shits lately with voice timeouts and other issues.. ;D
-
I heard Melbourne Centre say this the other day "climb via STAR.....wait....crap...SID" ;D
Chris Hoare - ENR Controller
in ATC Promotions
Posted
A big congratulations to Chris for achieving his C1 controller rating!