Skip to content

Fixes 1521 - Add conspicuity and listening codes#1523

Open
ThomasSaunders wants to merge 3 commits into
VATSIM-UK:mainfrom
ThomasSaunders:listening-conspicuity-codes-1521
Open

Fixes 1521 - Add conspicuity and listening codes#1523
ThomasSaunders wants to merge 3 commits into
VATSIM-UK:mainfrom
ThomasSaunders:listening-conspicuity-codes-1521

Conversation

@ThomasSaunders

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Fixes #1521

Summary of changes

Adds listening and more conspicuity squawks for code callsign conversion.

@Liaely Liaely added the enhancement For new or improved features label Jun 11, 2026
@ThomasSaunders ThomasSaunders changed the title Listening conspicuity codes 1521 Fixes 1521 - Add conspicuity and listening codes Jun 11, 2026

@Liaely Liaely left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Can you change 0043-0045 from generic 'UKP' as with the other ones?

Image

Also, I'm not too sure on the labelling for NATO Air Policing (Air Defence Priority) flights, open to hearing opinions on that front.

@ThomasSaunders

ThomasSaunders commented Jun 11, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

The AIP doesn't have specific callsigns unfortunately for UKP.

Put NATO on there as they're used for QRA stuff, a prompt to the ATCO that they're a higher priority flight. Happy to remove though.

@ThomasSaunders

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Thinking more about it, would the generic UKP (and maybe HLE?) be better as a label than C/S? I went with C/S to reflect what I know to be reality but might be an occasion where deviating may be a better course of action?

@Liaely

Liaely commented Jun 12, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

I think if someone is using a special squawk code for a specific air ambulance, etc, as specified in the AIP, then it's worth it to keep it with the callsign.
As for the specific police ones, I see that point, so probably better to keep it as generic UKP instead of UKP251/252/37.

WRT ADP flights, on VATSIM, no flight can declare itself to have priority, but that doesn't stop the use of callsigns/squawks appropriate to the 'mission' that may be being flown. I have some thoughts in regard to that, but moreso I don't think that 'NATO' would be the best label for them, as that implies generic NATO stuff, whereas something else may be better matched to the squawk.

@ThomasSaunders

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

All makes sense, I'll leave UKP as it is for now then.

For NATO, perhaps AIRPOL or similar (Air Police) is better? I believe this is the primary use for the squawks.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

enhancement For new or improved features

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

More listening/conspicuity codes

2 participants