Serious thoughts on rc4

[flyinpilot212121 724]

Ive searched but come up with nothing, Im seriously considering rc4 as its the only thing left missing in my fs9( I have ground enhancements, activesky, flight environment, a bunch of scenry installed, and just recently mastered the pmdg 747). Its just such an expensive program so i was looking for some serious thoughts about it.Thanks

[JSkorna 137]

Hi,It's worth the money.Jimhttp://www.hifisim.com/banners/hifi-community-sigbanner.jpghttp://www.hifisim.com/

[Guest revporl70]

It's a tremendous product. It controls your flight very sensibly, you can stick to flight plans as filed, no more being vectored to timbuktoo. It can handle SIDS and STARS and a variety of different types of approach/landing. It's v (nerdily) realistic, the level of detail compared to the default ATC is incredible. It's not as intimidating as VATSIM, but it can be nearly! It's even got some really funny soundbites in it when you mess up.Have a look at the documentation they've put on their website, it's very comprehensive and will give you a good idea whether or not you want to buy it.

[Guest Jeffhew]

Wouldn't fly IFR without it. It won't do anything for a VFR flight though (they are working on that for the upcomming RC5). Most of my trips are IFR, even in nice weather. Rolling out on the localizer just outside the marker and perfectly separated from the traffic in front of me is routine with RC. If you have some experience in RW aviation, it will make the learning curve much easier as it adheres to RW procedures quite realistically. This makes anticipating what will come next alot easier. Like any add-on, it has some shortcomings due to FS limitations, but there are no issues that would make me look for an alternative. RC4 is definately in the "must have" catagory for me. The cost of add-ons has certainly increased over the past year but, this is one that doesn't disappoint. I've spent the same or more on things that are now in the "sorry I even looked at it" catagory. I put RC4 up there with ASv6.5, or the registered version of FSUIPC, as things I can't live without in FS.Best Regards,Jeff

[ubersu 78]

Love it - don't leave home without it...DJ

[bkeske 0]

Get it. It will become a 'must have'.

[sluggy 3]

A vote for RC from me. Couldn't 'fly' without it, although Bill Stevens and I know each other quite (too?) well!Cheers, SLuggy

[flyfisher 0]

It is good but you will need a reasonably fast setup as it is very demanding on the system:-cool

[EngineRoom 205]

I've been a user of RC for many years now. It's a very good programme, definitely a must have for any serious simmer.One of the developers works as a real life ATC controller so as you can expect the procedures and phraseology are very accurate (although with a US slant). It does its job very well indeed and does a lot to add to the immersion. The developers are active on their forum here and are very responsive to customer feedback. They genuinely listen to their customers and try to implement customer requested features in new versions when possible.However it does have its limitations:Callsigns - there are lots of callsigns in RC4 but still nowhere near as many as you get with Editvoicepack. If you have comprehensive AI packages installed don't expect RC to speak the callsigns for many smaller airlines and companines (especially outside the US).RC4 has very little interaction with AI aircraft on the ground, on many occasions I found myself being run over by an AI aircraft when taxying, although this seems to have improved a lot with the updates.As the previous poster said, it does nothing for VFR.There are quite a few voices available, but the majority are US accented and it does kind of spoil the immersion when flying into somewhere like Hong Kong and the controllers all have American accents!The voices can sound a little robotic at times, this has improved dramatically since the initial release of RC4, but it's still not perfect.

[flyinpilot212121 724]

Thanks for all the re[lies. Looks like its a winner.P.S Is it really a big ressource hog?Thanks again

[mnmon 0]

Not for me. I have a 3.0Ghz 4 year old machine with a very old video card, and 1GB of memory. I also run AS6.5 and FSP on all my flights and get my locked fps of 26 consistently. RC is a must for me. In fact, it is so good I sometimes have to ask for a full IAP approach just to make sure I can still do IFR on my own. My biggest complaint is the lack of ground traffic control, but that's really only a problem at busy airports. You just have to sequence yourself. IF you fly INTO places like ORD or EWR with 100% AI you will be amazed that you will be able to land without a plane on the runway or one giving you a buzz haircut as it flys over you to the same runway. RC will also initiate weather/traffic holds on your approach if you want even more realism. Flying into JFK or EWR with that option set almost always results in a traffic hold. Mike

[TC1 0]

Sorry to sound so dumb...but is rc4?ThanksTom

[JSkorna 137]

Radar Contact 4.Jimhttp://www.hifisim.com/banners/hifi-community-sigbanner.jpghttp://www.hifisim.com/

[Guest Jeffhew]

>Thanks for all the re[lies. Looks like its a winner.>>P.S Is it really a big ressource hog?>>Thanks againNo, not really. I've found that the best performance comes for me when RC lives and runs on a hard drive different from the one FS is on. This seems to smooth things out a bit as every interaction with controllers requires the drive to search and find the necessary WAV files. With everything on one drive you're having to compete for search and load time with FS and whatever other add-ons you may have running. With two drives, one can handle FS stuff while the other is devoted to RC, and both drives can work simultaneously.Hope that makes sense.Regards,Jeff

[TC1 0]

Thank you.Tom