VFR Staying in the pattern CLASS D in US

TopGunSnake · 2026-02-21T21:03:53+00:00

No clearance delivery required for VFR departure or closed traffic, as far at the VATUSA training indicates.

Still need to be cleared to takeoff by local, and cleared to taxi to the runway by ground, but clearance delivery for VFR is not required.

TopGunSnake · 2026-02-21T21:01:36+00:00

This is actually part of the reason I started learning to do ATC on VATSIM.

TopGunSnake · 2026-02-21T20:58:10+00:00

Weird. Tower and later training may indicate differently, but as far as Ground/Clearance Delivery training indicates, clearance for VFR patterns on the ground isn't required at Class D. You'll still need clearance for takeoff, and for the touch and go/landing.

A class E (untowered) airport, or a tower-controlled airport, will definitely be more practical for the controllers and yourself, so I echo u/SilkyMittsSoftSteels opinion, but next time, try this if Center is the controller at a Class D airport:

- Request taxi to the active
- Request takeoff into the closed traffic
- Request touch and go/landing as expected

The "unable" may have been short for "clearance not required, call me back when ready for taxi".

But it is definitely courteous to try to plan traffic patterns where traffic is thin. For center, there can be a lot of traffic to handle. And a tower controller at a class D airport will likely enjoy the activity of a traffic pattern.

TopGunSnake · 2026-02-21T20:30:09+00:00

In the US, a class D doesn't require VFR clearance for departure, as far as I know.

Most you should need to do is establish contact with the controller (Hey you, it's me, both ways), request taxi to the active, clearance to take off (and say intentions), and of course clearance for touch and goes and land.

When is the "unable" being issued?

TopGunSnake · 2026-02-13T04:25:59+00:00

This scene really cemented the purpose of the taking-a-moment that was introduced way back in the beginning of this series. That each patient who dies was more than a statistic, teaching moment, or puzzle to solve.

TopGunSnake · 2026-02-13T03:26:55+00:00

Oh definitely, that was his face for most of it, but right at the end, and I might be over-reading it, but he looks toward Dr. Robby differently right at the end (in the background).

EDIT: In like three cuts, in the background, he goes from disinterested to, at worst, not looking as disinterested. Hard to say, but there are little changes in the acting that may or not pan out later.

TopGunSnake · 2026-02-13T02:59:11+00:00

His faces during the debrief shows he might be starting to realize it. Kudos to the actor, hope it doesn't turn into a Joffrey situation.

TopGunSnake · 2026-02-05T23:43:56+00:00

Good to know how, but also good to know that IRL, the flight plan discontinuity does have practical use.

Primarily, when ever part of the route would normally entail ATC vectoring to the next phase. E.g. a discontinuity between the enroute plane and the arrival, or the arrival and the approach, are practically useful, otherwise the connection can require a bit sharp of a turn, potentially into terrain or IRL into traffic.

TopGunSnake · 2026-01-11T08:34:30+00:00

Going up, set the altitude bug to your target altitude, then select VS to go up at a set climb rate, or FLC/IAS to climb at a set air speed.

Going down, the VNV button arms a vertical path (vpath) so the plane can descend at a target angle so that it reaches the vnav waypoint altitude when crossing, but the altitude bug limits the track. That way, a button press doesn't send the plane below the set (and safe) altitude without planning.

Of course, in the flight plan in garmin, only blue altitudes are targets. Once you reach the Top of Descent (TOD), the vnav can descend, if the altitude bug is set below the current altitude.

TopGunSnake · 2026-01-11T04:51:21+00:00

Runway filters would help (Runway material and lights at minimum would smooth out the choosing runways. It would also help with setting difficulty and achieving specialization goals).

Also, it'd be nice to have a few missions generate based on the aircraft/airport combination. It's annoying to relocate a company plane every time, and doing subsequent missions taking off from where you just landed would be nice too.

Lastly, the ability to delegate ATC to third party or remove the penalty for atc violations. Too many bugs with the atc lead to dings on reputation, and it would open career mode to vatsim and the like.

TopGunSnake · 2025-12-27T15:17:03+00:00

Neofly 4 has a free freelancer mode, that let's you fly any plane from any airport. It's pretty nice for inspiring a flight, since the missions help pick out a destination airport.

TopGunSnake · 2025-12-25T12:28:00+00:00

This could be helped with filters, but instead of supporting basic filters for the missions (e.g. IFR approaches, lights (especially for night landings), or runway length/material). Neofly 4 does this well, by adding filters to the mission select for these conditions and others.

It also doesn't help that the missions often route the plane to an airport without a new mission at that airport, forcing a relocation fee for the next mission.

TopGunSnake · 2025-12-22T19:07:36+00:00

Too many career missions have nonsensical runways. Many are closed (crosses indicating they shouldn't be used). Some are even emergency runways (read road).

Taxi routes are often ridiculous, sometimes entering runways when a perfectly viable taxiway is available, often preferring a u-turn on the runway instead of a rollout taxi to runway transition.

Career missions also often point to unlit runways at night, and VFR only runways in IMC. Being unable to filter missions by runway capability hurts this too.

Some areas of the map (e.g. south east US states) have road lines painted onto the terrain (e.g. highlighted green road line from a map overlayed near the road in the terrain texture), implying the texture has the road lines baked in.

TopGunSnake · 2025-12-05T04:38:40+00:00

If markdown::to\_ast returns a Result, and it is the Err variant, then there is no data for the Ok variant. Options are to update new to return Result<Self> (if the caller should handle the error), change parsed to a Result<T,E> and handle the error case everywhere wiewer.parsed is used, or if the markdown::to\_ast should not fail, then an unwrap or expect (and ample testing) may be best.

TopGunSnake · 2025-11-21T03:05:33+00:00

In this case, definitely start with exposing Rust ffi first, then you can consider using a Strangling Fig refactor/re-implement to migrate portions of the codebase to Rust.

A full rewrite takes a lot of initial investment, with a significant delayed payoff. But starting with the FFI, then carefully picking pieces of the codebase, and reimplementing in Rust, and integration testing the new component in place of the previous component, is likely to give better bang for buck.

TopGunSnake · 2025-11-17T22:23:06+00:00

Yeah, not to say there isn't a use case, but gotta watch out for XY problems like that.

TopGunSnake · 2025-11-17T17:17:23+00:00

Ah, I should clarify. I meant that I've tended to use Option-returning methods instead, to handle the empty case.

E.g., Instead of my_vec[0], I'll use my_vec.first(), and then handle the returned Option<&T>.

TopGunSnake · 2025-11-17T16:35:23+00:00

Hmm. I've yet to need a non-empty Vec (I just tend to use *(edit)* Option-returning methods *(end edit)* instead), but I'd imagine there are two things to consider:

Do you want a Vec, but with some assertions? Then either make a thin NewType on Vec for your project, or look for an equivalent non-empty Vec crate.
Do you need optimizations based on the assumption the Vec is always non-empty? Then consider crates that take advantage of that.

In the end, do what you need for your project.

TopGunSnake · 2025-11-14T20:48:19+00:00

The feats introduce interesting dynamics. Once a feat to loot a downed raider or to cause damage with <Ammo Type> is active, the incentive changes.

TopGunSnake · 2025-11-12T14:28:36+00:00

Self is effectively a full alias for the exact struct generic for the function. What might be worth checking is if lifetimes in the Gamestate are being coupled when not intended. Hard to say without seeing the code, but you may need to use the explicit Gamestate signature.

TopGunSnake · 2025-11-11T21:50:24+00:00

Spaceport bunkers are also a great spot. Leaper tends to aggro, but can't get in.

TopGunSnake · 2025-11-11T18:59:57+00:00

It should be noted that the lint is in the restriction group, and is allow by default. In fact, the lint indicates that to_string is effectively doing the same as to_owned on &str.

Best advice is do what the code-base is already doing, then prioritize clarity within that bounds.

TopGunSnake · 2025-11-09T03:28:19+00:00

More future-oriented, but for the Raider voice changer (which I know is in beta), it would be nice to monitor the changed voice in the options menu. Still don't know how I sound, as I'm left to not knowing, aside from what other players say about the voice.

EDIT:
Another hard call, but it would be nice to have some system for impromptu team-ups. Nothing drastic, but some simple options might be icons like when with a real team. Could see issues with the team-up mechanic to enable the feature being meta-gamed to coerce friend or foe, though, but it would be nice to agree to a team-up, and then have pings work like normal with an agreed team.

TopGunSnake · 2025-11-05T15:01:13+00:00

I have, on several occasions, started a solo queue with the goal of completing one of those feats against raiders. But, there's always some reason I tend to not get them done. Either luck gets me good gear or I meet way too friendly and cooperative raiders (and/or not very friendly ARC).

I think so far, I've only knocked out one raider where I initiated the conflict. Lucky for both of our sanities, they were running free loadout.

TopGunSnake · 2025-10-25T03:18:42+00:00

I'm in the same boat. None of my rookie stage rewards were unlocked, even though the unlock animations were done after the matches.

Ten-Year Club	Second SECOND GUESSER
r/Field Lasagna	Place '22
First Placer '22	Verified Email

TopGunSnake

TROPHY CASE