ATC goes on my nerves...

[Guest]

Yes, PF2000 is adventure based with all the associated woes. But it's still better than the MS ATC. I think the MS ATC was designed with VFR traffic in mind only. Bears almost no resemblance to being "as real as it gets". If RC was under $30US I'd be buying, but at $44US plus shipping, and taxes (16%) at the border (around $70-75Cdn total) it's way out of reach for a FS add-on for me. ..and no, I can't afford the fancy golf courses either. My last round cost me $35cdn at a public course. Come to think of it, that was kinda of waste too, I still can't break 95!

[Guest]

>adventure based with all the associated woes. Hi fellas,Not trying to stir up a hornet's nest or anything, but I have noticed a rather negative view of APL adventures in the flight sim community. Aside from the obvious limitations and ommisions that MS have put on the FS2002 ADV.DLL (which BTW have been almost completely remedied by FSUIPC) the most obvious one being the switching off of AI aircraft (why?), APL is still a very powerful language that can create some very realistic ATC/flight experiences. Just check the spec sheets on some of the adventures contributed by various authors on our site and you will see what I mean. I would love to hear about "all the associated woes" of adventures, perhaps someone can point them out to me so that I can understand?Fermin - fsadventures.net][/b

[Guest]

FS ATC works quite well within its limitations.The main limitation is of course that there is only ever one active runway, which was probably because the code to allow multiple runways wasn't done in time for the release.Main problem with that is the congestion at runways, nothing more.I agree that RC is overpriced for me too. The $44 may include shipping (the website says so) but with customs charges and sales tax added at the border it would end up costing me

[Rocky 128]

I know you're not a RC3 reseller, but you convinced me. I will seriously think about purchasing the product. It will definitely improve the flight management... Unfortunately, the traffic managed by FS2002 will still be a mess. Yesterday, I was on final approach at Chicago O'Hare (much traffic) and another aircraft just crossed my trajectory, in final also, at less than 1 mile in front of me. I was cleared for landing number 1, and he was number 2. He landed first, and I had to go around. FS2002 ATC is really bad when it comes to respect the minimal space between aircrafts... Let's hope it's going to be better in FS2004.Thanks for all the information !!Eric

[Guest Stamatis]

Obviously and understandably this is a personal judgement for everyone of us.But as far as features and functionality are concerned, Radar Contact is a huge improvement over default ATC. It still has limiations, no doubt about that, but it is a huge step in the right direction nonetheless.Stamatis

[Guest]

>>but with customs charges and sales tax added at the border it would end up costing me

[jd 57]

no shipping charges. 44 includes shipping anywhere in the world.

[jd 57]

from a programmer's standpoint, i can name a number of problems with apl. again this is from a programmers standpoint.no string variablesno arraysno debug mechanismno access to external weather programs weather values (for arrival)no ai informationno ai while running the adventureno method for inputting information into the adventure, while it is running (like a change of destination)no way to save and adventure in the middle and restart it.most fsuipc values are not accessible from the adventure (some are, granted)by rewriting radar contact in visual basic, and having a debug mechanism and the ability to save and restore flights, easily cut development time in fourth. it took 2 years to write/test version 3, i would be insane if i was still doing it in aplc.

[Guest]

I totally agree with your move to VB as it is a far more powerful language, especially with the complexity of a world-wide ATC program such as RC3.I just think that despite it's inherent limitations APL still has alot to offer, especially for specific "custom-made" flights. Eg.ChecklistsOn-board first officer to make radio calls Real Background ATCGPWS Altitude callsFO confirms autopilot inputsFO calls 1000 ft to go, altitude captureFO confirms your inputs into the autopilot (altitude & heading) FO can set the auto-throttle speeds FO changes NAV radio frequencies & sets the course selector And for VFR General Aviation flights:Instructor reads out (audio) Track to next waypointInstructor reads out (audio) Heading to next waypoint (wind corrected) Instructor reads out (audio) ETA to next waypoint Reads out the current time in two-figure formatetc,etc Fermin - fsadventures.net][/b