[jhb_airlines] Re: Vatsim/IVAO

  • From: "Bones" <bones@xxxxxxx>
  • To: <jhb_airlines@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2005 14:24:04 -0000

If you feel that any controllers are overly heavy handed or unfair then drop
me an email privately. I'll then have a quiet word with Stephen or Ruth..

bones

-----Original Message-----
From: jhb_airlines-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:jhb_airlines-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mike Lucas
Sent: 19 December 2005 11:43
To: jhb_airlines@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [jhb_airlines] Re: Vatsim/IVAO


Thanks to Denis, Bones and Peter for shedding some light on this
situation.  I shall try to remember to use 'hundred' instead of
'zero-zero' when appropriate for flight levels.  Fortunately during my
VATSIM flight last night I only aspired to FL090 ...

Th conroller in question yesterday was manning EGPX_CTR and was very
busy (a point he remarked upon explicitly on 2 or 3 occasions during the
session).  But, despite his being busy, he took time out to reprimand
this errant pilot.  So it was a pretty public dressing down.  I noted
the controller's name, but I will not post it in open discussion.

Mike L

Peter Dodds wrote:
> CAP 413, the UK ATC 'Bible says, and I quote:
> "When transmitting messages containing flight levels each digit
> shall be transmitted separately. However, in an endeavour to
> reduce ?level busts? caused by the confusion between some levels
> (100/110, 200/220 etc.), levels which are whole hundreds e.g. FL
> 100, 200, 300 shall be spoken as ?Flight level (number)HUNDRED?.
> The word hundred must not be used for headings."
>
> Some VATSIM controllers do like to play God - there is one such
> who mans Bristol frequently. I have fallen foul of him, and I am
> a real world PPL!  However, VATSIM, the organisation, frowns on
> this and tries to ensure its controllers are "nice to pilots".
> <g>
>
> Peter
>



Other related posts: