Yes, it sounds really silly, doesn’t it! But my recollection of working towards my first licence RW was exactly like that. Of course, I wasn’t just sitting listening, and I wasn’t alone. But there certainly is a better way in VATSIM, eg. using the computer to simulate radio comms in a wide range of scenarios, and I’m sure that many ATOs do that.
Great point about using sims to practice radio calls. That kind of structured learning would be way more helpful for new pilots than just listening. Maybe VATSIM could work with sim companies to build out more comprehensive training scenarios.
I think VATSIM already has all the required skills in-house. It’s a combination of educational expertise (building stepwise learning paths towards full radio chat competence), flying knowledge (knowing the content and structure of comms, eg the contents of CAP413 in the UK and other similar docs elsewhere), and technical skills to build the topic content (html, javascript, SVG if graphics and animations are required, speech recognition and interpretation).
I don’t think that any sim company could do a better job than VATSIM! 
Hi Alistair,
Sorry for the delay in responding; I have been away.
You’re correct in the updated scheme; it’s the principle, though, that remains the same – not wasting bandwidth.
We have indeed had discussions about potentially implementing some kind of “sleeping person’s switch”. There are currently other stronger priorities, but it is certainly a tool in the toolbox if the network decides we need to go there. In the meantime, our hope is that gentle education/reminders within the community will keep things in check.
2 Likes
You can do that in Observer mode.
Raises the question, does a pilot in OBS mode take up less bandwidth than a pilot logged in?
Probably, since they only receive position updates from other pilots, but won’t transmit any position packages
That’s what I thought. So they don’t actually contribute to the bandwidth requirement, they just suck data. But they do appear in the controller’s list, don’t they?
They do show up on the list, but I believe most atc clients have a way to filter them out.
Also, they do require some bandwidth to download everyone else’s position, they just don’t send position updates back. Also, Code of Conduct A9 still applies - “unattended connections are not allowed”
Thanks. 
So OBS is a bit less bandwidth-hogging, but still limited to 30 mins. It might be better, if a pilot wants to listen and learn, to log on to liveatc rather than VATSIM. That has issues, of course. It definitely looks like a VATSIM-built simulation for learning radio chat, hosted on myvatsim or maybe the Moodle, would be useful.
Alistair, there is no time limitation on what I will call “active observing” - attentively observing in order to learn. We WANT our users to observe, listen and learn to better prepare them to be more effective when actively flying and/or controlling. I believe the concern that was raised was toward folks that are logged in and not actively doing anything with their connection, e.g. landed and walked away, watching other media, etc.
2 Likes
Although I really like Alistair’s idea here:
The main problem is, of course, that every country does things slightly differently so there would need to be a way for people to prepare for the specific country or area (I’m sure that there are also many countries that are similar enough to be grouped together, at least for VATSIM purposes). In fact, I pitched a similar idea to Simon Kelsey via Discord a while ago but didn’t (and unfortunately still don’t) have enough time to help him with setting up a pilot and he himself is obviously way too busy to undertake something like that on his own: provide a basic course based on ICAO rules/recommendations and standard VATSIM procedures for people to start learning with on the moodle, and then individual divisions and/or vACCs can create courses that teach users about all the differences from the default as well as any additional stuff that they deem important for pilots to know. The idea wasn’t aimed at phraseology per sé, but just generally at all procedures (which obviously includes certain phraseology topics); nevertheless, a moodle course like this can obviously include some type of basic RTF simulation. Beyond the obvious benefit of having more localized information available directly on a VATSIM site, it could also serve to inform pilots where individual vACCs may host further information like pilot briefings or if they have a vATO for people interested in more thorough training (and the idea would at least technically also make it possible to go down to airport level; e.g., you take the basic course, then the Germany course, and then the Frankfurt course, with each level based on the previous one) and Supervisors could point problematic pilots to better resources that deal more accurately with whatever they had issues with.
As I said, nothing came of it thus far due to a lack of time, but thought it fit here and maybe someone else has the time to develop the idea into an actual project 
Because while observing is certainly nice, it does very little in helping people learn. You hear what they are saying, but you don’t know why they are saying that and might not necessarily understand what it even means; but in my experience, that’s exactly what most people have issues with - they have no problem understanding what you are saying and usually read it back correctly, but they often don’t fully understand what a clearance means, particularly if something is only implied (e.g. when the Brits say “climb now”, you have to know that that clearance cancels the restrictions on your SID - you won’t figure that out just from listening to the comms) and by far the biggest issue is that pilots don’t know what type of instruction to expect next or at least how to figure out what they will probably get next. A well-designed moodle program would go a long way in helping people learn about all these important details and the logic behind the system (and with a localization as in the idea above, you could also prevent “cross-cultural misunderstandings” like the common issue of pilots starting to slow down with the approach clearance despite being under speed control because at some point an American tutorial video taught them that the approach clearance cancels any previous speed instruction).
Thanks Don. I agree that that is absolutely sensible. But Marcelo pointed out that, even for OBS status, CoC A9, which includes the 30 minute rule, still applies.
Hi Alistair, the difference is:
- Unattended connection may not occur for more than 30 minutes.
- Observer may not be logged in for “excessive” periods of time. Very gray area, and intentionally no time limit placed on it, specifically to allow for active observation and learning.
Gray area is a tough one with respect to interpretation, but we have long held that someone who is actively observing, listening and learning is OK, regardless (being reasonable, of course) for as many minutes as they are actively observing, listening and learning.
Of course there is a spectrum there. Can someone, particularly someone inexperienced on the network, be actively observing, listening and learning for 30, 60, 90, 120 minutes? Sure. Would I expect 8 hours, 12 hours, 14 hours, longer? No to each of those. As with most things, judgment is important. But I just wanted to clarify that there is not a 30 minute limitation for observer connections.
That’s fine, in which case should CoC B3 not be amended? “Notwithstanding anything in this Code to the contrary, no pilot connection is permitted to be unattended for a period of longer than 30 minutes” leaves the OBS status pilot wondering what must be done to show that the connection is attended. It would help, of course, if the legal language using outdated vocabulary, was converted to normal language. 
Nope, no need to amend B3. B3 deals with pilots, not observers.
We try to be reasonable, and navigate the (intentionally) blurry line between not desiring to police the network yet still having the ability to contact an observer and check to ensure it is an attended connection. I would never expect such a check to be conducted at 31 minutes. However, any “larger than average/normal” number of minutes/hours are certainly fair game for a check. Do such checks happen often? No. Are they fair game? Yes.
Again, it’s all about trying to be reasonable, and doing the right thing, even when no one is looking.
1 Like
Ah, I think I understand. A member logging in as OBS is NOT a pilot under B3. Thanks for that clarificaton! Marcelo obviously misunderstood that as well. There will probably be other members in the same boat.
Absolutely! That is why the PTD exists, and the existence of the IR course set is just one of the outcomes from Simon’s team’s efforts. A wodge of pilot briefings, addressing some of the issues which many pilots find troublesome, is certainly bound to be on the PTD agenda. Things like flight plans, the topdown system, ATC communication, etc. There are already many resources available, eg. in the myvatsim pages, and I’ve seen lots of new members, asking questions in Discord, being directed towards those resources. Maybe there’s a promotional issue if some new members don’t know about that stuff, or maybe there’s an attitudinal issue in the members themselves, some of whom seem to want total handholding (tl;dr for example) rather than being proactive in their learning.
I didn’t. As Don mentioned, A9 applies to any unattended connection. “Actively observing” is not an unattended connection.
So leaving an unattended connection is not allowed, which is what this topic was about. I’ve edited my original message to make this a bit more clear
Why do you connect and then do preflight stuff? Does connecting make a difference?