Hi, I’m looking for a recommendation on where to advance my Pilot Rating with VATSIM. I’ve looked at the ATO list and there are but a few that are not VA based. I’m looking to progress without joining a VA just for the purpose and be a mainly English speaking ICAO based ATO.
1 Like
There are options here. As you say, many ATO’s are VA based (Their members are enthusiastic and want to get the most out of their online flying), but there are a few that are English speaking and NOT VA based. An example is that run by Vatsim UK.
Regarding ICAO based, the answer is that actually that is the wrong body here. ICAO is concerned mainly with negotiating flights between, or over, countries - not technical regulations.
ATO’s are situated within a country. That country will have it’s regulatory body which approves all ATO’s within its boundaries. In the USA that body is the FAA. In Europe that body is EASA, and in the Unted Kingdom, for example, that body is the CAA. Because there has to be commonality between countries to alloy international flight without confusion, all basic rules are the same. There are differences, for examople, to do with controlled airspace, but these are few and soon learned.
As a result, all Vatsim approved ATO’s will reflect the real-world situation. Therefore it shouldn’t matter which country you decide to do your Vatsim learning in.
There is, however, the vexed question of language. You should have no problem in finding an ATO which suits your requirements.The international language of aviation is English. All Vatsim controllers MUST, as in the real world, be able to speak English to an ATC acceptable standard. Vatsim pilots should be able to speak English. This can cause problems when student pilots are not fluent in English.
Thanks John. I’ve been on the VATUK waiting list for over six months, and basically given up on progressing (obtaining next level of rating). I wonder if VATSIM has statistic on the numbers getting Pilot ratings?
You could try messaging Darren Hill on Discord, who might be able to update you.
John
Last update was be patient we are volunteers.
BoG MMs have some quarterly stuff (e.g. the 2024Q1 MMs (specifically page 31 will be of interest for you) say there have been 15 pilot rating upgrades, most of them P1 - though from what I understand the vast majority of pilot ratings on the network are transfers from real world licenses).
Are there no courses offered at VATUK or are they full and there are waiting lists? Do you have to take courses in a strict order?
I am doing my P1 (PPL) at the VATSIM Germany PTD currently and am prepared that it can take a while depending on my time and the courses offered.
After all it is ~15 courses á 1-3 hours. There are courses offered on the forums and I am able to take one each ~2 weeks (that fits my schedule and what I have open in the curriculum). Courses do sometimes have requirements that other courses must have been completed before them (which is visible on the training platform).
I have now completed around half of the curriculum in 2 months but I guess from here on it will be slower since I have to wait for courses that I’ve not taken yet.
The courses are held in German language, so not a direct answer to your question, I just meant to give an example of how progress has been for me in that ATO.
Hi Jonas, I’ve completed the theory component of the P2 twice now. The first time I waited and waited and the course changed so I had to restart. Second time completed all the theory and just sit and wait for six months on a “waiting list”. I’ve tried several, but they are VA based and require membership with monthly hours to maintain membership.
I honestly think that if I was offering a service and the outputs were negligible, I’d be reviewing the processes. I am resolved that the P2 is not achievable.
Sadly, ATOs actually produce precious-few pilot ratings on the network. Nearly 97% of the pilot ratings awarded are from real-world ratings transfers.
OMG, so the one i am on a waiting list has done 3 in the last 12 months. The system is broken I believe. Why would they even say there is a waiting list, and allow people to do the theory? Yes it is personal development, but offering something that will not be delivered is rude, even for a volunteer organisation. It should be withdrawn for people without Real world licences.
@1035677 Don what is the Boards position on the PT process. Can we see the enrolment numbers to contextualise the above end of the pipeline. Is the problem no-one enrolling OR the Academies??
I don’t have enrollment data; that’s decentralized to each org. I’ll have a chat with VP Pilot Training and show him this data.
1 Like
It would still be interesting to see the demand for Pilot Training (enrolments) vs Certification numbers. (Actually completed). Surely this would be a performance criteria for the program, otherwise how do we monitor what we are delivering.
I had a chat before with one of trainers when i was looking to get trained, and he mentioned that: A lot of the pilots never finish their training for months, because they get overwhelmed, so i couldn’t even register because the Q is huge.
A suggestion here: Why not setting a minimum online per week requirement to be qualified for a training, so it shows that you are an active member that is serious in getting training, so those who’s not really interested don’t take spots from someone like me and more, really invested in learning.
I do not understand why they don’t just tell people up front. Why let people enroll, do their theory and no further communication for over 6 months. The data posted above suggests that they aren’t doing the training. Any program that produces 3 certificates in 12 months has to ask why do they exist?
I hope that @1035677 can display the enrolment data for the same period above.
Unfortunately, I don’t believe VATSIM has enrollment data for each of the ATOs. I’ve got a note into Simon Kelsey to ask. Or maybe @1484728 knows?
No we don’t keep any enrollment data for the ATOs.
There is however an overall consensus from each of the ATOs that they are over populated with students and wait times are to be expected.
With so little ATOs at this point, things are just a bit over populated.
I hope this answer helps
Thank you. It does not answer my question however I accept that. Vatsim is on the fence, they obviously don’t want to upset the free training providers service.
I accept my recommendation is not simply an opinion, but if I was managing a body of work like this I would be undertaking reviews to report on effectiveness and efficiency of the program. I believe that the system is broken ‘based on Vatsim stated goals’ in that a Vatsim member can enrol undertake the self paced theory and then be sidelined for over 6months with no interaction, update or communication. My thoughts are that this doesn’t meet membership expectations, nor Vatsim statements. Something needs to change.
33 members able to obtain a pilot rating in twelve months is sad considering the membership numbers. I believe you are saying you have no idea what the demand is for this service?
I know this may not answer your question in totality, but the VATGER PTD publicly archives the registrations for each of the non-CBT modules in the forum which may give you some idea how many people are actively working toward the P1 rating there (and for reference, they try to offer every module once per quarter).
Though from what I hear a major problem are the requirements for the courses put forth by VATSIM itself, I have now heard multiple real world pilots state that the VATSIM P1 is more difficult to obtain than a real world PPL (iirc, in one of the recent BoG MMs, there was a reference to a case where one ATO actively defied new rules set forth by the VATSIM PTD for that exact reason) and the lengthy training program (which, after all, yields no benefits beyond self-improvement) and apparently quite strict examination rules might result in many people starting the training only to break it off somewhere down the road.
1 Like
I don’t believe there is an answer that will satisfy the critics.
Simply put, Vatsim tries to replicate the real world of flight crew licensing. However, as has been stated, everyone involved doing the training, either as student, instructor or examiner is a volunteer. No-one gets paid - all are volunteers. This cannot be emphasised enough.
In the real world trainees pay for their training, so have a real financial commitment to incentivise them. Instructors get paid, so again are incentivised, as are examiners.
As a result, Vatsim students often fail to put in the work needed, or make the regular time commitments, instructors likewise, after perhaps an initial flush of enthusiasm. Instructor/examiner turnover is high, apart from a few dedicated individuals. I disagree with the view that real-world licences are easier to obtain - the difference is commitment levels by all involved.
Another factor is the variability of quality between the various ATO’s within Vatsim. Some give excellent full-on training on a one-to-one basis, and have real-world comparable syllabus content in their courses. Others, quite simply, don’t.
Yet another factor is the complexity involved in learning to fly an aeroplane correctly, taking into account aerodynamics, mechanics, weather, and manoeuvring in four dimensions (3 spacial, plus time). This has been perceptually minimalised by such as Microsoft treating flying an aeroplane as a ‘game’. In truth, flying is the complex interaction of a lot of necessary background theory, wedded to developed manual skills.
In a natural enthusiasm to include as many people as possible in its simulated ATC environment, Vatsim allows anyone to just join and ‘fly’ (recent moves to enforce a minimum standard notwithstanding). Those who fly regularly on Vatsim are only too aware of the problems this can cause.
Another factor is language. English is the international language of aviation. As I said earlier, Vatsim ATC controllers MUST be able to speak good English. The requirement for pilots is that thay SHOULD [not ‘must’] be able to speak good English. This creates all kinds of problems, both in maintaining adequate training standards, but also in flying online. It is my strongly held opinion that Vatsim pilots MUST also be able to speak good English.
How to improve the situation? Frankly, I don’t know. If Vatsim make it more difficult to join by setting higher entry qualifications, there is the risk that numbers would reduce below sustainable levels. If pilot training courses are made simpler/easier, then that runs the risk of inadequately trained pilots. It will all depend on your ultimate vision of what you expect from Vatsim.
John thank you. I’d like to cite your last paragraph please. If the issue is that pilots are not trained sufficiently, why would I only offer real world standards? Make the training system progressive, so it caters to MORE members. From those that first join up to the current offering. The bar is too high and not achieving much in my opinion.