[jhb] Re: dvd
- From: 175@xxxxxxxxxxxx
- To: jhb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 03 Feb 2008 11:05:24 +0000
Gerry
In the controller software, I get a "Flag" everytime an aircraft requests my
ATIS, I seek them out to know what to expect, many are EGLL outbounds with no
controller on duty there. If I am not busy (substitute keen & mustard) I will
usually open a chat box with them and offer a RIS/RAS asking them to contact
me at 2000ft with a request on voice. Most do, and I give the service they
request.
This is how the Dutch thing started. Inbounds now call me early if no-one is
on duty there and I offer the same. There tends to be a lot of "If safe to do
so" from my end, but I think they appreciate it. I wonder why they dont just
change their destination, but I guess these are virtual routes/schedules!
I think inasfar as your flight was concerned you were perfectly right in your
MO. If no infringements into EGLL airspace occurred and I presume you were IFR
filed, then totally your choice, I may have tuned EGLL_APP and lurked, just to
know what was going on.
The question is did you follow EGLF departure procedures, outbound CPT?
I remember being excited when someone introduced ATC Chat, a prog which ran
spurious atc chat just to aid "ARAIG", well if you want it as real then I
would call and report to as many controllers on or near my route, however
reading earlier posts you might get a Tony Belfast reception!!!
Look forward to hearing you on 134.35
Kev T
Gerry Winskill <gwinsk@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Kev,
>
> May I butt in with another Farnborough related question?
>
> Last night I flew the Citation, IFR, from Farnbro to TM's version of
> Leeds. The wind dictated the Westerly runway and I could see Heathrow
> had a couple of aircraft listed on Servinfo as about to depart.
> Naturally the opportunity to get in a flight didn't coincide with your
> lonely sessions on seat. Sod's law!
>
> EGLL_APP was manned but the FSC and Servinfo displays indicated I was
> outside his zone. I lined up and checked neither was indicated as
> airborne, then sent a Unicom saying I was Citation about to depart EGLF
> RWY 25 with immediate turn onto heading 360 deg for EGNM. Should I have
> passed the same info, instead, as a Message to EGLL_APP, or asked
> whether I was clear to roll, or just sent out the Unicom transmission as
> it was?
>
> Every day brings something else to resolve. Ferry interestink!
>
> Gerry Winskill
>
> 175@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
> >I follow, and this all makes good sense. The Forum outlines revision of all
> >this for version 2, suggestions closed some months ago, otherwise I would
> have
> >added my twopenneth on this factor, to be able to associate these overlays
> >with the 4 zoom positions would I feel, also have a distinct advantage.
> >
> >I have quite a lot drawn in my "Approach" mode - including goaround info,
> >adjacent frequencies and "FL at" markers. These are aid memoire until all
> this
> >info sinks in, but add well to confidence levels.
> >
> >Downloading examples of other airport sector files from IVAO GB, show
> >variations of method, mostly being written by Gareth Richardson, a young
man
> >in the final phase of training for Heathrow ATC, so designs "by the book".
> >
> >My previous post mentions the 2 channel comms, and this would be the
greatest
> >single advantage from v2. A dichotomy exists as to whether to operate
> >"Farnborough Radar" on 134.35 alongside Approach, or operate Approach
within
> >"Radar" on 1 of the 3 frequencies 125.25W, 123.225E or the new North you
> >mention on 132.8? Interestingly they expect Mode C.
> >
> >Cheers
> >
> >Kev
> >
> >"bones" <bones@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >>It's hard to explain this but I'll try.
> >>
> >>Objects on the display can be divided into two groups - waypoints and
> >>outlines. Waypoints are point source objects like fixes, navaids, VRP's
etc
> >>and outlines are line drawings to delineate controlled airspace or danger
> >>areas or whatever.
> >>
> >>The trouble is that the SCT file format has not taken the above into
account
> >>and so we don't have a lot of options for creating outlines. The only
choice
> >>is to place these in the few categories that do exist and so LOW AIRWAY or
> >>HIGH AIRWAY get hijacked for other purposes. This is why, in my own SCT
> >>file, I have moved holding points to Low Airway and VRP's to High Airway
so
> >>at least I get the chance to turn them off.
> >>
> >>In the SBS software there are no less than 30 individual sections for
> >>waypoints and the same for outlines. I can therefore have coastlines, TMA,
> >>CTA, CTR, ATZ, MATZ, Upper airways, lower airways, Danger areas, FIR,
AIAA,
> >>ARA, ATA, Airports and so on as separate items to turn on or off as I
wish.
> >>The same goes for waypoints and I have these separated into Major
Airfields,
> >>VOR's, NDB's, Fixes, TACAN, Minor Airfields, Masts, Disused airfields,
> >>Heliports, VRP's - and even Hang Gliding, Microlight and Parachute sites.
> >>
> >>The SCT file format needs urgent revision to allow similar flexibility.
> >>Until then each designer does what he thinks best for his own airspace and
> >>this may not be ideal for other sectors.
> >>
> >>bones
> >>
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: jhb-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:jhb-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
> >>Of 175@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> >>Sent: 03 February 2008 03:52
> >>To: jhb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >>Subject: [jhb] Re: dvd
> >>
> >>
> >>Many thanks bones
> >>
> >>Reading through the IVAO Forum, I discover that many sector files for
Ground
> >>and Approach are written with overlays in the Airways pages, as these are
> >>generally not utilised for these positions.
> >>
> >>Having read further "wishlist" posts, extra pages for overlays are high on
> >>the agenda for v2. I say this as I have a lot of stand, taxiway and apron
> >>info on the screen for use when giving taxi and parking instructions,
> >>however when zoomed out this becomes a huge blob completely obscuring the
> >>airfield plan.
> >>
> >>Having used the controller software for a while it is growing on me, but
it
> >>can get very lonely, especially due to having only the one comms channel,
> >>and being a smidgen over 200 miles from EGNS I cant see how the experts do
> >>it!
> >>
> >>Muchas Gracias
> >>
> >>Kev T
> >>
> >>"bones" <bones@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>I don't add LARS to my airspace files normally as it isn't controlled
> >>>airspace - just a boundary for providing a service. All other
> >>>airfields have a LARS boundary of 30nm or 40nm radius so it's not
> >>>exactly difficult for the controller to work out his area of
> >>>operation.
> >>>
> >>>The Farnborough LARS is quite unique and you are right that it needs
> >>>flagging up on screen. I'll send you the data sometime over the
> >>>weekend for the SCT file.
> >>>
> >>>bones
> >>>
> >>>-----Original Message-----
> >>>From: jhb-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:jhb-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
> >>>Behalf Of 175@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> >>>Sent: 02 February 2008 14:15
> >>>To: jhb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >>>Subject: [jhb] Re: dvd
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>All good news bones
> >>>
> >>>Can you advise how to add this "Farnborough Radar" area to my .sct
> >>>info? Might you have it for SBS?
> >>>
> >>>http://www.ais.org.uk/aes/en/LARS.PDF
> >>>
> >>>Cheers
> >>>
> >>>Kev T
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>"bones" <bones@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Now that Farnborough is providing LARS for the east as well as west
> >>>>and south sectors I think you will have your hands full... <g>
> >>>>
> >>>>bones
> >>>>
> >>>>-----Original Message-----
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
Other related posts:
