The FS++ team is pleased to announce the release of V1.6 of their award winning add-on to both FSX and FS2004 called Multi Crew Experience. MCE is a speech based add-on that allows the flight sim enthusiast to fly those heavies in a more realistic way. Issue commands to co-pilot, go through the checklist, etc. It is also a serious alternative to VoxATC for interaction with the FS built-in ATC system

Can anyone who seriously uses VoxATC X attest to the above statement?Thanks,Dirk.

I couldn't be doing with the awful computer simulated speech, it drives me nuts, it's like trying to understand an outsourced telephone support operative from another country who has a extreme accent. There is no excuse for poor computer simulated voices these days either, just look at how good the speech is on the top of the line Tom Tom sat nav devices that can read street names out and sound exactly like a human being.

Why not downloading the demo? Is it for free :) You won't regret.Great product, I use it almost every time!Please do remember, that the accuracy of SAPI is dependent on Your voice training. Without it, the software is useless.

Please do remember, that the accuracy of SAPI is dependent on Your voice training. Without it, the software is useless.

It's the least I'm concerned about, nor the machine voices bother me too much. What makes difference though is the ATC simulation quality. If there is essentially FSX ATC under the hood of MCE (meaning NO ATC simulation by MCE), then their comparison as 'a serious alternative bla-bla-bla' is blown out of any proportion.Dirk.

I think the original question misses the point. MCE is not supposed to be a direct alternative to VOX ATC, any more than it is supposed to be a direct alternative to FS2 Crew, although it can somewhat function as an alternative to both of those apps. The clue is in the names:Multi Crew Experience facilitates more than simply voice activated ATC. For example, it also adds a co-pilot that responds to voice and who can run checklists as well as functioning as a 'Pilot Monitoring'. It has the capability to create and assign custom audio checklists to specific aircraft as well as having built in standard templates for most types, including some complex craft such as the PMDG 747. There are ground and cabin crew that respond to voice, a training pilot who can comment on your flying and advise you, and of course the voice control can operate the FS interface too, meaning you don't have to press any keys at all for any function in FS. This in addition to its voice ATC interface.What all that means, and what the 'Multi' in the MCE name alludes to, is that it is a collective set of utilities under the MCE banner from which you cherry pick the functions you want to use. So for example, if you were physically handicapped, you could use audio control for the FS menu interface and the simulation controls, as well as the cockpit switch functions. Or if you just want to run checklists on custom aircraft with a co-pilot, you could use that function alone. This means to some extent it is a partial alternative to FS2 crew-type add-ons as well as Vox ATC, and an alternative to windows voice control applications too. This is in fact probably one of the reasons why FS2 Crew are now adding voice control to their products, but again, FS2 Crew has a more targeted focus, and so if you want something which ticks all the boxes for a co-pilot on a 727 or whatever, it will be a better choice.With MCE, it is all about offering you lots of capabilities and allowing you the choice to pick the bits you want, and it is this functionality (and notably that it is compatible with every Windows OS), more than the ATC voice capabilities alone which won it the award when it was reviewed by AVSIM, in that it offers a lot of bang for your bucks and pushes the developmental envelope.In a similar fashion, Vox ATC also does what it says on the label; i.e. it lets you use your voice to talk to ATC and has a few other functions on top of that, but - like FS2 Crew - it is essentially a product more focused on one area. and it is good at what it does too, because it is more finely targeted.That is the difference, and the choice will come down to what it is you want.Personally I have both (and a few FS2 Crew add-ons as well) and I happen to prefer MCE, but keep in mind that is a personal preference and not a reflection on the relative merits of the alternatives. I think the fact that MCE uses the native FS ATC and AI system is an advantage with it. The voices on FS ATC are really well implemented and although FS ATC can have its moments, the fact that you are using the native simulation system generally means less strain on your computer as opposed to running yet another add-on, in that MCE (and any other add-on which uses the native system) slots into things smoothly. There are a lot of misconceptions about the ATC in FS, for example, many people will tell you that it has no procedures such as SIDs and STARs in it, which is completely not true (look on the default GPS if you think otherwise).With regard to the voices both MCE and Vox use, that is purely a case of what SAPI-compliant voices you have installed on your computer; if you have good voices, it will sound good, if you stick with the MS default, it will use those, and you will either put up with that and not mind, or want something different. If you do want something different, check out additional AT&T add-on SAPI voices, or try Vista, which has more native voices than XP.Superficially, Vox ATC and MCE may do a lot of similar stuff, but when you look closely, they are doing very different things. They are both worthy choices, but you need to decide exactly what it is you are looking for, because it is not strictly correct to regard them as being in direct competition with one another.Al

I think the original question misses the point. MCE is not supposed to be a direct alternative to VOX ATC, any more than it is supposed to be a direct alternative to FS2 Crew, although it can somewhat function as an alternative to both of those apps. The clue is in the names ...

Hi Alan,I read with great interest your review of MCE. I am currently engaged in trying to help Robert Cesar develop his IYP (It's Your Plane) so that it can be used in built cockpits using, for example, Project Magenta, FlightDeck Software or Sim-Avionics, rather than any FS-contained instrumentation. He has already made IYP work fine from a client PC, as an alternative to the FS PC -- this is important for me as my ATC/pilot speakers and headsets are connected not to the FS PC but to the client PC running my ATC program (Radar Contact). [This would also be the PC running Squawkbox when the authors finally add the facilities I asked them for to enable the transponder mode and ident to be operated via a remote message, so I can actually operate the transponder in my cockpit].I am currently downloading the MCE demo to try -- but, again, I will be trying to make it work from a separate PC to FS. Do you know if this is, in fact, possible? I will also be writing to the authors about it. I am mostly interested in the monitoring, ATC (but Radar Contact, not default) and, especially, the checklist facilities. Direct copilot control over the cockpit switches and so on are much less important for me -- and especially for the 737 overhead, of course, where I must operate them or have the hardware not match the software setting. I suppose MCP and radio frequency settings would be useful, as indeed they are already can be with IYP.I understand that you may only use a single PC setup, but thought, with your in-depth investigation, you might be a little knowledgeable at least about the multi-PC possibilities of the software you review so ably?Incidentally, I note that you are a few miles only from EGCC. I live just south of Congleton, about 15nm south of EGCC, just south of LISTO (was CONGA). I actually have a friend who lives in Cheadle Hulme, under the EGCC flight path, and he occasionally comes and spends a weekend with me flying my 737NG cockpit this last weekend was one of those). Maybe we too could get together some time? My cockpit is the PFC 737NG (see www.flypfc.com).Best RegardsPete

I'm really not sure about that. I guess you best course of action would be to contact the MCE developers, who, from what I could determine, were keen to get things working with more sophisticated add-ons, and they did say they would be happy to work with add-on developers in writing specific modules to get around issues.As you probably know, MCE doesn't use FSUIPC, so that might, or might not, be a stumbling block when it comes to getting things to talk to one another, and was in fact one of the reasons they were keen to work around issues. The one advantage MCE has which might make things simpler, is that MCE accesses the default FS stuff, which is in fact why it is not so keen of gelling well with more complex add-ons that have custom autopilot routines. That of course may be either a good or a bad thing depending on what you are trying to achieve!I daresay you'll be impressed with what MCE can do, but keep in mind that it is more in the nature of a jack of all trades as opposed to being a particular master of one.Yup, I guess you'd be the one with rattling windows when stuff was leaving Manchester on a Conga 1 Romeo before turbofans were the norm. I used to live under the EGCC flight path to what was runway 24 (now the right runway on a different magnetic designation) and all those old turbojets used to really shake the house back in the days of DC-8s and Tridents. Now I live a bit nearer to Woodford than Manchester so the only thing that ever comes over my house is good old India 99, the GM police helicopter.I'd love to see your cockpit Pete, especially since the 737 is one of my favourites, perhaps we could indeed bump into one another at some point?Al

I'm really not sure about that. I guess you best course of action would be to contact the MCE developers, who, from what I could determine, were keen to get things working with more sophisticated add-ons, and they did say they would be happy to work with add-on developers in writing specific modules to get around issues.

Right. Actually, I've just tried. I installed it on the client PC, and went through all the speech training (sailed through because I'd already done quite a lot with IYP). But then that's it. There appears to be nothing else to run on the client. I assume all of the real program is in FS modules only.

I daresay you'll be impressed with what MCE can do, but keep in mind that it is more in the nature of a jack of all trades as opposed to being a particular master of one.

Yes -- the main attraction for me was its easily configurable checklists. The only problem with IYP in this area is that the author has to create all of the checklists -- they are kept on the Server and downloaded when the program recognises the aircraft. I'd prefer a bit more user-adaptability so I could develop them incrementally.At least IYP can be run on a client PC, which is my main need. I'm unlikely to go any further at present with MCE because I'm not about to alter my cockpit for headset connections to the FS PC.MCE would also need a configurable "press to talk" control, as there are three headsets connected to an intercom system and all three mikes are alive all the time. The ATC and other cockpit sounds are also normally heard on the overhead speakers, potentially causing problems, and conversations with wife or friend could also be taken the wrong way sometimes! IYP implemented a PTT -- before then it got into an interminable loop taking its confirmations of my commands as further identical commands!

I'd love to see your cockpit Pete, especially since the 737 is one of my favourites, perhaps we could indeed bump into one another at some point?

Email me ([email protected]) some time when you have a spare day approaching. We'll make some arrangements.Best RegardsPete

Yup, I'll do that Pete, sounds like fun.It looks like you are getting into some complex stuff there, which being in the early stages of knocking up my own cockpit, I've yet to get to. Anyway, I hope you can figure it out.I can well understand the domestic confusion when using voice comms too; fortunately my wife now understands that when she overhears me, I'm not actually asking her to climb and maintain fifteen thousand and contact Belgrade on 120.425. :( Al

I can well understand the domestic confusion when using voice comms too; fortunately my wife now understands that when she overhears me, I'm not actually asking her to climb and maintain fifteen thousand and contact Belgrade on 120.425. :(

LOL!Actually I meant it the other way around -- IYP getting confused when I was addressing my wife! ;-)Pete

My original question was about whether MCE had their own ATC code. I don't understand why people tend to ignore the fact that MCE uses essentially FSX's ATC by saying:

a serious alternative to VoxATC for interaction with the FS built-in ATC system

as it was posted on AVSIM's front in the news today? 'A serious alternative to VoxATC? Give me a break! The person who wrote that for the news doesn't know what he's talking about. I'd rather say it was an alternative to FS2Crew or Shoot and other voice control programs. Lack of it's own ATC code makes MCE of no interest for me. And I wish they had it! (instead of comparing with VoxATC on their website for what it matters...)

The only problem with IYP in this area is that the author has to create all of the checklists -- they are kept on the Server and downloaded when the program recognises the aircraft. I'd prefer a bit more user-adaptability so I could develop them incrementally.

Good point there, Pete. Checklists must be editable by users as they are edited by every carrier company in r/w. This is a shortcoming in FDC, even though it alows some limited sets of edits to the check lists.Thanks,Dirk.

Can anyone who seriously uses VoxATC X attest to the above statement?Thanks,Dirk.

I use VoxATC on a regular basis and have tried the MCE demo. Whoever wrote the headline is comparing apples to oranges so I would say they had no clue what they were talking about. If they can explain it to me I'll be happy to listen. Regards, Craig