It is a sad sad thing when a person finally cracks under pressure.
This evening, after a nice scenic flight from Mexico City to Puerto Vallarta, I started my descent from 18k ft.
In a period of about ten minutes the poor soul at the ATC instructed me to:
Descend and maintain 8,500’
Descend and maintain 8,200’
Descend and maintain 7,300’
Descend and maintain 8,700’
Descend and maintain 8,100’
Descend and maintain 7,300’
Descend and maintain 8,200’
Descend and maintain 7,500’
Descend and maintain 8,600’
Descend and maintain 7,100’
Descend and maintain 7,500’
Descend and maintain 8,600’
Descend and maintain 7,100’
Descend and maintain 7,800’
Descend and maintain 7,200’
Descend and maintain 7,800’
Descend and maintain 6,600’
Descend and maintain 7,800’
Descend and maintain 7,200’
Descend and maintain 6,600’
Descend and maintain 7,200’
Descend and maintain 5,400’
Contact Mazatlan Center on 124.2
All was normal after that.
How do I find out if the guy will get good care?
yeah, the ATC pretty much has to be turned off, unfortunately.
The recommendation for those who want realism would be to play on VATSIM/IVAO/PilotAdvantage, but it requires some serious investment to learn the real jargon fluently, a bit like learning to speak a new language (not as involved, but you get the idea).
I’m just enjoying what the game offers for now. This is the first simulator I’ve played since I spent about an hour on one back in the 1980s. I have always been fascinated with flight and travel. MSFS can allow me to do both from my recliner with a laptop.
It has its annoyances, for sure. But it is usable. But when it goes wonky, I just cancel IFR. I had one over the weekend where it wanted to send me up to 17,000ft in the JF Arrow. I was maybe 20 miles away at the time at 9,000ft. I cancelled IFR, and flew on till I was around 5 miles away. I then used the option to re-file the previous IFR plan, and it wanted to send me up to FL170 again.
Yeah, this has happened to me a lot. I find that once you cancel your IFR, it’s probably best to just go in VFR unless you’re flying in IMC conditions. Although at that point, you’re unable to comply with the dumb instructions. I love when I’m told to climb to flight levels in my C172 when I’m 10 NM out from my destination…
That’s probably because ATC is trying to get you on the STAR, which it really shouldn’t do. They tried adding standard procedures but they made the system a bit too dumb. This could be massively improved if the community had access to the ATC system. If the community were allowed to play around with the ATC logic as they can with airplane and GTN1000 logic, we’d have a much, much better system within the month.
That’s probably true and a good idea. Has anyone opened a suggestion like that?
Also the nav database in MSFS is pretty limited and may not have the correct altitude constraints. So the ATC is just trying to do what it thinks is right. What they really need is two additional dialogue options: direct to waypoint request, and descend now request. And an earlier notification of runway.
We’re talking about the ATC system. It probably uses the in-built MSFS database. I do update MSFS with Navigraph data and I still get the weird altitude instructions. So there is some other issue than just the nav database.
Just what he said. When you created your IFR flight plan it added you to a STAR which requires entry at 17K. It took me a bit to figure that out but when I went and looked at the STAR in the skyvector map, there it was… 17K. You can fix this by selecting a different arrival.
On the one hand, you shouldn’t add procedures in your flight plan that you’re unable to fly. On the other, just doing that will not fix all issues since if you’re flying IFR ATC will try to get you on a published approach, even if you have a direct to airport. ATC seems unable or unwilling to give vectors to final. It will force you to the approach transition no matter how close you are to the airport, and no matter how low you are. They should really add an option for vectors to final.
On a separate note, what did your flight plan say? Did you make it in the world map? Did you check the altitudes for the STAR? Or did you make the flight plan in the GPS?
If I had to pick one ATC quirk that causes me the most grief is the instruction to land on a runway that is seldom, if ever used at an airport IRL. CYYJ is one that keeps annoying me every time. IRL I can not remember the last time I was directed to land on RWY 03. I have had numerous night arrivals in IMC where I was cleared to the 09 (6124ft rwy with full approach lighting) ILS circle to land RWY 03 (3622 ft with displaced runway and no approach lighting. No matter what approach I ask for they will happily approve the approach and finish the clearance with, “CIRCLE TO LAND RWY 03”!
This airport has a cautionary for only pilots familiar with the terrain should utilize YYJ at night and yet they want me to deviate from the safest approach from over water and a straight in landing to circle the airport over an unlighted hill on approach to an unlighted rwy in marginal VFR with poor visiblity below 1000ft.
I ignore them only to be berated for landing without clearance on runway 09. Ideally, my next step should be to taxi to the tower and drag the controller out onto the tarmac by his ankles.
Not really. I was descending from 18K to something I programed in and just let it drop, watching that I did not hit the top of a hill. Then I sat back and listened to the ATC babbling, wondering how long it would continue.
