I had a rather strange experience tonite...I was flying from YSTW to YPEC and was almost at the TOC when RC started to scold me for drifting off my filed course. My filed course was 148 but RC directed me to 320 and added "proceed direct when able". First I didn't understand anything and rather stupidly assumed I was being delayed so I headed back to 320 as directed and after a few minutes I started to feel I "was able" to "proceed direct". Yes, that wasn't exactly too bright but there you go. :( Anyway, some five minutes later I was being yelled at again and the controller directed me back to 320 while adding I'm a moron that shouldn't even allowed to drive cars, let alone fly airplanes (rather funny actually :( ).Now, what I suspect happened is this: The flight plan was auto generated by FSX (VOR to VOR) and started with YSTW to TW. The TW VOR is located 1.5 miles to the north of the airport but I took off to the south (RWY 12L) so I guess RC never detected I flew that first leg? I never bothered to remove the first leg because I've been trying out VoxATC for some time and in these scenarios VoxATC always instructs me to: "after take off, proceed direct <the second steerpoint>", (West Maitland in this flight). For this reason I leave that first leg in there as I find it practical to have that first VOR as a starting radial during departure.Is VoxATC simply slightly more "artificially intelligent" in these situations or am I just making the wrong assumptions. Or is RC actually simulating ATC better when the controller forces me to go back to that first steerpoint before he allows me to "proceed direct when able"? What would have happened in real life if I had filed a flight plan like that and flew it like I did? Would the controller hand some smirky remark and then let me proceed to the second steerpoint or would he actually force me to go back like RC did?I'd appreciate any input/advice Cheers/Jonas

That is kind of funny.. I've noticed they seem to be fairly sensitive to deviations, but then again Im new at this whole RC thing. Last night was my first flight with it, and after shutdown I did the Flight Critiqe thing. It was ugly. It started out as "1, 2, 3 strikes your out" and then basically told me I did nothing right and shouldn't be allowed to look at aircraft. Im thinking that the creators have one hell of a sence of humor!

I had a rather strange experience tonite...I was flying from YSTW to YPEC and was almost at the TOC when RC started to scold me for drifting off my filed course. My filed course was 148 but RC directed me to 320 and added "proceed direct when able". First I didn't understand anything and rather stupidly assumed I was being delayed so I headed back to 320 as directed and after a few minutes I started to feel I "was able" to "proceed direct". Yes, that wasn't exactly too bright but there you go. :( Anyway, some five minutes later I was being yelled at again and the controller directed me back to 320 while adding I'm a moron that shouldn't even allowed to drive cars, let alone fly airplanes (rather funny actually :( ).Now, what I suspect happened is this: The flight plan was auto generated by FSX (VOR to VOR) and started with YSTW to TW. The TW VOR is located 1.5 miles to the north of the airport but I took off to the south (RWY 12L) so I guess RC never detected I flew that first leg? I never bothered to remove the first leg because I've been trying out VoxATC for some time and in these scenarios VoxATC always instructs me to: "after take off, proceed direct <the second steerpoint>", (West Maitland in this flight). For this reason I leave that first leg in there as I find it practical to have that first VOR as a starting radial during departure.Is VoxATC simply slightly more "artificially intelligent" in these situations or am I just making the wrong assumptions. Or is RC actually simulating ATC better when the controller forces me to go back to that first steerpoint before he allows me to "proceed direct when able"? What would have happened in real life if I had filed a flight plan like that and flew it like I did? Would the controller hand some smirky remark and then let me proceed to the second steerpoint or would he actually force me to go back like RC did?I'd appreciate any input/advice Cheers/Jonas

it's hard to say what happened without a log. maybe you had a departure procedure in the .pln, and didn't know it. did you get a heading to fly in your take off clearance? if not, you had a departure procedure. you have to fly within 2 miles of every checkpoint in the departure procedure. miss one, and you are penalized. in the real world, no you wouldn't have been told to backtrack to the checkpoint you missed. but you also wouldn't be flying much if you are unable to fly a departure procedure you filed.the other thing that could have happened, is that you were told to fly heading resume own navigation. that doesn't mean to crank the plane left or right, so that you can get on that magical green/pink line on the fmc. it means to fly direct your next checkpoint.the other thing that i discovered recently, someone had put 180 degrees in for their heading deviation, in hopes they wouldn't be yelled at. that's not going to work because of a freaky line of code in rc. be sure the heading deviation is 30 or less. same for altitude. don't set it for 10000, so you don't get yelled at. the key is to become a better pilot, and to be able to hold altitude within 300 ft. or a heading within 30 degrees. better is 100 ft and 15 degrees.if you can duplicate the problem, create a log and send it to me. instructions are pinned to the top of the forum.email it to me, and tell me where you were yelled at , and what was said.i should be able to find where it went wrong pretty quickly.jd

No worries. I had no idea I had managed to file a DP from that auto generated flight. I went back and loaded the same FSX flight into RC and checked the "controller info" page and you're right: The "Alt Restrictions" radio button was indeed selected and the "No Dep Proc" option was disabled. I assumed selecting a DP was something I needed to do actively.I'll read the RC manual a bit more carefully on that part and return with any questions if it's ok.Cheers/Jonas

No worries. I had no idea I had managed to file a DP from that auto generated flight. I went back and loaded the same FSX flight into RC and checked the "controller info" page and you're right: The "Alt Restrictions" radio button was indeed selected and the "No Dep Proc" option was disabled. I assumed selecting a DP was something I needed to do actively.I'll read the RC manual a bit more carefully on that part and return with any questions if it's ok.Cheers/Jonas

when the first checkpoint is inside 30 miles of the departure airport, RC assumes you are flying a departure procedure. load your .pln up again, and listen to the cleareance delivery. notice he says "...via departure procedure, then as filed..." that's the first clue that you have a departure procedure in your .plnalso, tower will always say "...fly runway heading..." or "...fly heading nnn..." where nnn is +/- 20 degrees of the runway heading. if you are assigned a heading from tower, you know there is NOT a departure procedure. in other words, if tower doesn't give you a heading, you have a departure procedure.i think if you disable "alt restrictions", you can check the "no dep proc" box. that way you don't have to change your .pln file.jd

Don't know if this applies directly here, but when you get that "turn around and go back until you correct your many sins" direction (command), request to fly direct to the next (or second next) way point. This usually puts the ATC mavens into a better humor. While you really shouldn't miss those pesky way points, this is a quick and dirty work around.

Don't know if this applies directly here, but when you get that "turn around and go back until you correct your many sins" direction (command), request to fly direct to the next (or second next) way point. This usually puts the ATC mavens into a better humor. While you really shouldn't miss those pesky way points, this is a quick and dirty work around.

yes, that is the preferred way of dealing with the penalty turn.

when the first checkpoint is inside 30 miles of the departure airport, RC assumes you are flying a departure procedure. load your .pln up again, and listen to the cleareance delivery. notice he says "...via departure procedure, then as filed..." that's the first clue that you have a departure procedure in your .plnalso, tower will always say "...fly runway heading..." or "...fly heading nnn..." where nnn is +/- 20 degrees of the runway heading. if you are assigned a heading from tower, you know there is NOT a departure procedure. in other words, if tower doesn't give you a heading, you have a departure procedure.i think if you disable "alt restrictions", you can check the "no dep proc" box. that way you don't have to change your .pln file.jd

I'm a relative noob with RC, but I noticed when I load a flight plan into RC, if there is a departure procedure for the flight it will say so in the box to the right of the "Controller Info" button. Usually it reads "Departure Procedure w/ Altitude Restrictions, " or is blank when there is no departure procedure for the flight. So I know in advance if there are departure procedures without needing to listen to clearance delivery. BTW that 30 nm limit seems pretty hard and fast - I loaded in several FSX-generated flightplans into RC to check for departure procedures. Sure enough, I had one flight where the first checkpoint was at 30.1 nm - no departure procedure! ;)