Jump to content

Martin Loxbo

FIR Director Group
  • Content Count

    1,157
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    136

Martin Loxbo last won the day on July 1

Martin Loxbo had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

874 Excellent

2 Followers

About Martin Loxbo

  • Rank
    Director of Sweden FIR

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. To my knowledge I compiled the file in FSX format. Did you recompile it in P3D format @Martin Stockzell? You could try the attached file - it should be in FSX format. ESSB_FSX.bgl
  2. Beats me why he never called any of the releases stable. Maybe because the documentation hasn't really kept up?
  3. This is 6 years old. Try the beta releases.
  4. You can edit what text the plugin looks for when checking if an area is active. Add this line to TopSkySettings.txt: HTTP_NOTAM_Area_Sched_Text= If you want the area to be activated without any specific keyword, simply put a blank space after the = sign. Then the plugin will activate the areas whenever it sees a NOTAM that matches the ACTIVE text. The downside of this is that areas will activate any time the area is mentioned in a NOTAM, so you may see some "false" activations.
  5. Couldn't have done it without such professional and cooperative pilots!
  6. Indeed, and it was quite busy in the tower at ESMS! It's interesting how even with 16+ years controlling experience on VATSIM, a bit of mixed VFR/IFR traffic still poses a real challenge on a TWR position.
  7. I noticed a small section of taxiway Y5 is wrongly designated Y4. Only really noticeable when you use the default FS ATC... EDIT: Slightly more relevant is that the DMEs are missing for both runways. I can have a look at the files and do some adjustments myself if that's OK with you @Martin Stockzell @Arvid Hjalmarsson?
  8. Just installed this scenery, finally an accurate one for Bromma! I'm running P3Dv3 and the P3D version crashes the sim. FSX version seems to work fine though.
  9. Correct. But in Sweden for example we have no SIDs with altitude restrictions, except the initial climb clearance, and obstacle/airspace/noise altitudes that are "at or above". So there is no need to use the "level restrictions cancelled" or "unrestricted climb" phraseology.
  10. I don't think "to" was ever officially removed from the phraseology in Sweden. It is still standard ICAO phraseology, but some countries (like the UK) have decided to remove it from level instructions in order to avoid confusion with "two".
  11. For the ICAO phraseology, this may be of help: https://www.icao.int/airnavigation/sidstar/Documents/SID-STAR Phraseologies Leaflet.pdf As far as I know, in Sweden the "climb/descend via SID/STAR" phraseology has not been officially implemented (it is not mentioned in our phraseology regulations). For the other Scandinavian countries I'm not sure, but in general we all tend to follow ICAO phraseology. In the UK they should indeed always say "climb now". In real life, if they don't say "climb now", usually the pilot will ask if it's "cliimb now" or not, and I've never heard them issue a climb clearance above SID levels that does not cancel the restrictions. In real life it's very common to use "climb unrestricted" even if it's not official phraseology. It's useful because it's a short phrase and it makes it absolutely clear that there are no level restrictions.
  12. Are you sure the callsign is actually online? I'm not 100% sure but I think it needs to be a callsign that's online, and that doesn't have a flight plan filed already. So if the pilot logged in as OY-ABC it wouldn't work with OYABC for example.
  13. I get the correct click spot to create APL on an uncorrelated track. If you don't have that option it sounds like your tag definition is not set up to use the TopSky function for uncorrelated tracks. Exactly, Flight plan window, CREAPL
×
×
  • Create New...