I have been using RC for some days and I am really impressed with it.I find though that a big problem is not assigning an arrival gate.If you assign a gate yourself it is often occupied by AI aircraft.It would be great not only to be assigned to a gate but given instructions to it as well.One question.Is it possible to have RC from my headset as I have this option with default ATC?And one more question.When is RC 5 planned because the last update from the blog is already some months old.Thanks

I made a small search and I found out:As far as the gate issue is concerned there is no solution.Even default FSX ATC assigns your aircraft to gates that other AI aircraft are parked, so it is better to go to the terminal area and park to the first free gate you will find.As far as the headset sound issue is concened there is a solution.Using as default sound device the headset and sending FSX sounds through the speakers from the FSX menu.As far as v5 of RC is concerned I hope it is not going to be to far.I found posts in this forum since 2006 talking about one more year development.Now it is 2010.I hope we will not have to wait till 2014.

And one more question.When is RC 5 planned because the last update from the blog is already some months old.Thanks

Same to me. and for many users too, I think :( Maybe there is no real date, but an idea at least ? all users are very impatient about this new version :(

I have been using RC for some days and I am really impressed with it.I find though that a big problem is not assigning an arrival gate.If you assign a gate yourself it is often occupied by AI aircraft.It would be great not only to be assigned to a gate but given instructions to it as well.One question.Is it possible to have RC from my headset as I have this option with default ATC?And one more question.When is RC 5 planned because the last update from the blog is already some months old.Thanks

For the gate issues, v5 will handle it much, much better. For now though, one workaround is edit the afcad file and reduce the radius of your pre-planned arrival gate to something rediculously small (like 2m). This will ensure no AI occupy the gate during your flight, and so it'll be free upon your arrival.There is still a lot of work to do for v5. The last of jd's comments were hoping by end of 2010, but that's not set in stone by any means. "Quality before Calandar" :(Subs

It'd indeed be nice to read a bit about the goings-on in the blog. .no pressure though, I've always loved JDs perfectionist approach (for the record, am one myself)

For the gate issues, v5 will handle it much, much better. For now though, one workaround is edit the afcad file and reduce the radius of your pre-planned arrival gate to something rediculously small (like 2m). This will ensure no AI occupy the gate during your flight, and so it'll be free upon your arrival.There is still a lot of work to do for v5. The last of jd's comments were hoping by end of 2010, but that's not set in stone by any means. "Quality before Calandar" :(Subs

Can you "book" a gate or what does this mean.. I remember JD once mentioning that it has logic that selects an approppriate gate/stand, if none are free it nukes an AI to get one...

If RC 5 could nuke an ai aircraft from a gate then it could assign any gate to the user's aircraft based on it's size.If this could happen ot would be ideal.

Hey, I've got an idea to improve the logic further..suppose all gates are taken an you check in to ground, it says "Your gate is still occupied, hold at XX" Then after a few minutes, if all fitting gates are still occupied, THEN it would nuke an AI. More realistic...

Hey, I've got an idea to improve the logic further..suppose all gates are taken an you check in to ground, it says "Your gate is still occupied, hold at XX" Then after a few minutes, if all fitting gates are still occupied, THEN it would nuke an AI. More realistic...

that may be more realistic, but it's one of those fine lines between realism, and user friendliness. you have to keep in mind, those folks with a limited amount of time to fly, and they aren't going to appreciate holding while a gate clears.right now, the logic goes something like thisif no gate is chosen:a gate, same size or bigger than the gate you left, that is assigned your carrier code, that is open, is the one you get. if all gates of your size or bigger, assigned your carrier code are taken, then i look for other gates, with no carriers assigned, that are your size or bigger. if all the gates of your size or bigger are taken, then i will nuke the closest gate that is big or bigger than your size, assigned to your carrier. if there are no gates your size or bigger, regardless of carrier - i forget what happens. i can't squeeze a 777 into a gate for a erj.if a gate is assigned, it's easier. if the gate is occupied, the ai is nuked, and you get the gate.jd

right now, the logic goes something like thisif no gate is chosen:a gate, same size or bigger than the gate you left, that is assigned your carrier code, that is open, is the one you get. if all gates of your size or bigger, assigned your carrier code are taken, then i look for other gates, with no carriers assigned, that are your size or bigger. if all the gates of your size or bigger are taken, then i will nuke the closest gate that is big or bigger than your size, assigned to your carrier. if there are no gates your size or bigger, regardless of carrier - i forget what happens. i can't squeeze a 777 into a gate for a erj.if a gate is assigned, it's easier. if the gate is occupied, the ai is nuked, and you get the gate.jd

I wii be very happy with that.I do not need anything more!!!

What about making the delay stuff an option? That's what I was thinking in the first place...

What about making the delay stuff an option? That's what I was thinking in the first place...

like i mentioned earlier. i'm not going to implement something that make a user to sit and wait for something. just trying to be respectful of users that don't have a lot of time to fly, and just wants to get to the gate, to shutdown.jd

Yes of course, I understand that. Might also complicate the codebase "a bit" when you make a zillion options no-one uses. Since this thread is all about questions, lemme shoot one more. You once mentioned that in V5, there will be more places to be held at. Could you give some more detail?PS JD, I really respect the enormous complexity of the work you're doing. I have to bear with ever more sophisticated models of the human brain on a daily basis myself, so we're in the same boat. Hopefully I'll have won the Nobel Prize for my research by V25... :( Just remind me to sponsor JDT LLC a couple years in paradise -- not forgetting the beautiful gals.... seriously though, I really appreciate the work you do to enhance the Flightsim experience, and yes, I think in it's own way RC is more realistic than the networks because of the uninterrupted ATC coverage. I can fly all the way from Helsinki to Hong Kong without anybody telling me there's no further ATC available. I think many others will agree too, and that's why we'll be using it in the A320 sim I showed some pics of...