Grrrrrrrr @ ATC

Can I say it? Can I please say it? Pleeeease?

What the heck, I will:

DUMP the horrible ATC and come fly on VATSIM!

Yeah, it happens in FS09. I have had them clear me to land, then after landing, met a plane taking off in the opposite direction on my runway! 😳

I've developed my own tricks for dealing with ATC. I have a theory that when you request to land at an airport, FS09 generates new traffic for that airport to make it "more realistic." So, I don't request to land until I am ready to turn to final, ready for the final approach. That way, any airborne traffic that FS09 decides to generate is BEHIND me.

I usually tune to the tower frequency when I'm in the vicinity of the airport, and see if I can figure out which is the active runway, then I set up the approach, get really close, and THEN request the landing.

Sometimes it works. 😉

Ed

Bindolaf wrote:

What the heck, I will:

DUMP the horrible ATC and come fly on VATSIM!

I tried a few weeks ago but couldnt figure it out.

Maybe its time I tried again.

That picture looks very familiar. I've tried to do VATSIM, but it's a bit more complicated than my attention span will allow.

Radar Contact 4, on the other hand, is a great alternative to the built-in ATC. I use that quite often for my long flights since I'm always having to walk away from the computer. I just hand over the controls to the co-pilot and go do my work. There are problems with that though. The co-pilot doesn't seem to be able to change the autopilot altitude so I have to watch for that. Not sure if it's just my comp or a bug.

if i'm flying vfr then i only tune to the tower when it is number 1 on the nearest airport list: ie. really close - 'fly straight in' 😀

Vatsim has its good and bad points. While ATC on vatsim is far superior to the FS9 default, it is very much geared toward people flying airliners, IFR. GA VFR is a bit of a stepchild.

Due to a lack of resources, there are major inconsitancies with with the real world. For example, the busiest GA airport in the Los Angeles area I Van Nuys. It is considered untowered while Santa Monica Airport is. Santa Barbara Airport is considered controlled space while San Bernadino isn't. Not having a definitive way of knowing when I had to request clearance to transition airspace and when I didn't, has caused be to be less interested in flying on Vatsim than I was.

Doyley wrote:

Stupid thing gave me clearence to land then I see this as im just about to land

Damn you ATC!!!

This is where your combat training comes in handy. Judging by your PFD you're flying a small nimble crate. Just jam the throttle and touch down in front of the AI a/c - I bet you it won't take off. If all else fails, do a steep right bank and land on the taxiway.

Might not be by the book but as the saying goes, rules are made to be broken. 🍅

Have you been drinking? 😂😂

I'm with you, Tailhook,

I'm not too proud to land on a taxiway, a parking area, or on a country road, if that's what it takes. I think it's funny when ATC gets all hissy about my unauthorized arrivals and departures.

Ed

Doyley wrote:

Have you been drinking? 😂😂

All I drink is mother's milk

i cant be bothered using atc. its bad enough trying to land without atc moaning at you for landing without being cleared.

Stupic fecking thing did the exact same thing again on the exact same flight

Try the same flight without FSpax... ah, the good old days

You are already far too low and still descending at 400fpm so you're unlikely to reach the runway in any case.

I can't tell what zoom level you have set and exactly how far you are from the threshold but if you are more than about 6/10 mile there's nothing wrong with ATC having cleared you to land with another aircraft in that position.

Bottom line is if you don't feel comfortable with ATC's clearance or if the other aircraft doesn't move by the time you get to separation minimum, it's your call to go-around if ATC hasn't already waved you off in the latter case.

Your acceptance of the clearance or the other aircraft not moving in time is not ATC's fault.

As it happens, a very similar question was asked in this month's AOPA Flight Training magazine. It refers to landing behind another aircraft that has already landed but being given clearance to land following a departing aricraft is the same.

Question: While on approach to a towered airport, the controller advised me that I was cleared to land in my Cessna 172 even though a Piper Cherokee was still on the runway. Is that legal?

Answer: Yes. Air traffic controllers have minimum separation standards for aircraft using the same runway, making it possible for you to land on a runway that has another aircraft on it. The distance permitted between aircraft using the same runway is based on the category of aircraft. The specifics on separation for arriving and departing traffic are found in the Air Traffic Controller's Handbook, Chapter 3. In your situation, you needed a minimum of 3,000 feet separation since you were a category I aircraft landing behind another category I aircraft.

Technically we avoid giving landing clearance while an aircraft is still on the runway, just in case. Giving a clearance and then cancelling and then giving it again can be confusing, so we prefer ("we" is VATSIM ATC by the way) to say "continue approach, call me outer marker" or something similar, then give landing clearance when the first aircraft has vacated the active.