What a interesting piece of software this is ...I'll try to state some impressions and mainly point the finger towards some issues that in my understanding need some revision to make this addon more useful.First of and above all: VoxATC really, really needs an official forum.I'm glad that AVSIM hosts the unofficial part but if you look through the posts and questions around you'll see that there's a huge amount of unanswered requests and posts. I'm happy to see some experienced users hop in and give advise on some topics and I also realized that one or two names around here are described as "devs" or somehow close to them, but this forum still lacks of support.The e-mail way is there and was described as quick and friendly (haven't tested yet) but how can a community profit from answers given on personal e-mail accounts?I think you've got my point :( I'd like to add that I don't know any VoxATC version before 5.63 and I'm very confident with the small performance impact the pure voice function has. Very well done in my opinion.I'm using an i7, maybe he deserves some praise too.VoxATC's approach on making offline ATC useful is great. The phraseology looks good to me and is among the best so far, the flexibility to just talk is THE main Pro on this product, especially when going VFR.Voice recognition works fine but we have to be aware that this achievement doesn't come with VoxATC but with Microsft's build in voice recognition. So be sure to give flowers to the right lady :( Of course, as mentioned, the phraseology comes with VoxATC and is very well done.After using some other ATC software and flying the rest of the time online, the "silence" when going offline annoyed me and therefor I came across VoxATC.I've been using it for some 20-30 flights now (I had to reset some of them because VoxATC stopped working after requesting startup) and want to point towards some room for improvement.The need for .flt file to set up SIDs and STARsA main Con point in my understanding and definitely far away from working flawless. To create, load, edit, re-load flights in FSX isn't a good and stable approach, it also adds some serious amount of loading times when you've installed some aircraft and sceneries and I can't report that it worked all the time.First of all the procedure is rather complicated and loading FSX, setting up a flight, saving it, exiting FSX, reloading FSX ... a time consuming procedure.I may also add that I didn't understand the manual on this topic and had to read the tips given here to realize that flights have to be loaded instead of just flight plans (which is a huge difference).Again: Loading FSX twice or even three times is far away from being a useful procedure to just get some raw SID and STAR data into ATC.Flexibility when setting up flightsThis might amend the SID/STAR issue. You can't actually set up a gate or parking location, can't define which runways should be used for takeoff and landing, there's no value to edit the FAF on an approach or to even edit the distance to being vectored towards the localizer. You're purely depended on the VoxATC standard values here and they surely don't fit everywhere.Training for online ATC is fine with VoxATC, in case of using your voice and the phraseology but as far as procedures go ... big room for improvements.I'm aware that some big amount of users will be glad to have VoxATC working out of the box - I'm not up to change this behavior and replace it with the need to read 100+ pages of manuals.I'd like to see an "advanced mode" (like in the other ATC addons) where you can define your SIDs and STARs in detail, tell VoxATC to not use the grass runway but the two concrete ones, define the altitude for the final approach fix, maybe the transition alt too, and so on ...This can all be done and should be saved in a lets say "user file", which then gets loaded accordingly to the flight plan loaded. No "user file" = VoxATC standard, "user file" present = values defined by the user.I think the aircraft type should be defined too. E. g. the emergency function of VoxATC is a nice idea, but getting vectored to a 400m grass runway to land your 737 is not as useful as expected :( Disadvantage of controlled AI trafficWhen I first read that VoxATC sets up its own traffic I though "wow, that's a great approach". Having experienced it in the flight sim some time now, I have to revise my impression about this feature.The other addons I know just recognize the AI traffic generated by FSX itself or the various addons availbale. Therefor, the "AI precision" is as before and fits your personal needs. In UT2 for example you can set up your own routes, assignments, plans and everything looks good, works well and acts like in the traffic addon logic defined.Now, VoxATC interferes this coordination and adds some aircraft with its own (non customizable, again) logic. In the case of UT2 it doesn't use the models given and just goes for the standard FSX "AI" aircraft, which are no "AI" (they are displayed in full detail) and therefor cause a severe performance drop together with bad optics (because no liveries are installed to fit e. g. a Lufthansa AI type).Another lack is the generation of traffic just at the departure and destination. Enroute mainly lacks of traffic, so the frequency is rather silent.I'd like to see the traffic detection that the other ATC software uses, because then you'll have your special AI models enabled, they go with the plans generated by this special AI addon and there optics, names and behavior can be influenced performance friendly through the interface of that traffic addon. No need for VoxATC to calculate, generate, arrange, define, name ...Might be that the above points get amended because I just wrote them down without a big concept in mind.I really like this software and I don't regret buying it, but at the moment, especially the lack of customization is a big bummer for me. SIDs and STARs, even departure runways and of course the strange and non editable traffic generation severely damages the good impression of this product.I also suggest to get rid of the need to load up a .flt file to get SID and STAR definitions into the ATC. This solution together with the only basic setup for those procedures generates more inconvenience then benefit.A simple "user file" that has to be loaded together with desired flight plan (= .pln file) would be much better and could contain those things like departure runways, altitudes, MDA and so on. If somebody wants to go without all that customization, no problem, leave the "user file" away and VoxATC works like it does now.So you'll get both sorts of customers happy, the out-of-the-box-guys and the ones editing their flights.In the current state, I can fly all easy and complicated flights with the other ATC addon: I can edit the runways to be used (e. g. leave the grass ones out, define a minimum length in case of emergencies), it recognizes all traffic generated by traffic addons, they tell me the name of the SID, I fly it, they catch me up at the defined waypoint. I reach my destination, they tell me to fly the defined STAR, I fly all those complicated procedures, they catch me up at the defined altitude and guide me towards the rest of the approach.This wasn't possible from version 1.0 on and therefor I'm looking forward to the improvement of VoxATC, because being able to talk to ATC is a big Pro.Last question answered:I'm aware that I recommend some huge changes to the product. Personally, I'd pay another 30 Euro to get an advanced version of VoxATC. I don't force the devs to go through big changes in code without getting money for it.Feedback on this threadAs this seems! to be a rather silent forum, any feedback is welcome. The one coming from the devs or the names close to them ... even more appreciated.If somebody wants to state, that he's "happy with the way it is", then go ahead but be aware, that I'll count you in as those mentioned out-of-the-box-users, which are not less precious than the I-want-to-edit-some-stuff-guys but a different user type, I think.Personally, I'm a bit sad to see that I now can talk to my offline ATC very well but also have to admit, that it works only in some basic flying means and can not be not set you up properly for some procedures used in real life or when flying online.I think that some stuff and programing approaches from the non-voiced ATC products (like the mentioned customization) should be implemented and can be implemented to get more professional on this.Again: I'm willing to pay for my "professional" needs again. Don't know what others think about an advanced version which has to be purchased additionally.

CoolP,Well, I actually agree with you on almost everything :(

The need for .flt file to set up SIDs and STARs

As I have understood the developer, this solution is mainly caused by the way FSX handles flights and flight plans.Nevertheless I would too love to have an alternative, as the file management can be a bit tiresome.

Disadvantage of controlled AI traffic

Agaín the developer has informed me at some point, that VoxATC actually uses the traffic at hand (be it MYT, UT2...), so it should not be that far from traffic without VoxATC. I usually have a fair amount of enroute traffic, but the most annoying part is the endless touch-n-goes from GA.I have a set of primary addons and without these flying in FSX would not be the same experience:PMDGASE/REXVoxATCFTX (+ a few other sceneries)

Thanks for your reply, Michael.I'd really like to read some stuff from the devs too, because the explanation about sticking to .flt files doesn't really fit right know (in my knowledge). The ATC instructions are generated by VoxATC and therefor this process is independent of how FSX handles flight plans.The other ATC addons don't need to load a plan into FSX (you can of course load one, if you like or have to), so why does VoxATC need it?Only explanation could be, that it uses some of the FSX engines routing and somehow ATC capabilities and logics (which would degrade the work of VoxATC, the other addons have their own logic established, working well and can be customized through an interface).It surely is a big convenience factor to just load your plan and fly (some other addons have to compile their flight plans first), but it lacks of all mentioned options and if you want to get some of them (meaning SIDs and STARs), the load times increase dramatically because you're forced to use .flt files now, meaning to load different flights and hoping, that VoxATC recognizes the amended data (which sometimes doesn't work).So I follow your wish towards another solution here.The traffic issueWell some of us might still fly with the default FSX traffic around. Some other guys might have spent some money on additional models and logics, so do I.I can tell a huge difference in AI traffic experience when I enable UT2 itself or let traffic be controlled by VoxATC.In fact, the only influence I have on the Vox traffic is the amount of it.So why disable all those fine tuned and customizable values of the extra traffic addon and go for a rather raw traffic solution?The idea of having an ATC addon really control your traffic is great, no question. The experience is far away from great or realistic.As I described above, I first was impressed about the idea of VoxATC. Now I'd suggest to go the way back and just detect the other traffic around.I'm a bit frightened somehow, because the lack of a real support forum and some mechanics inside VoxATC currently leaving it in the hangar, because you can't set up a realistic flight (in the means of simulating) with a good traffic experience around.I know that some people might be very confident with this out-of-the-box experience and the easy way to just load a flight and get some ATC on your frequency together with some other planes around you.But I think that if they look closer or get more advanced in flying somehow realistic, they will soon recognize that there need to be some more options.The default ATC takes you into mountains or clears you to strange altitudes, VoxATC does this too, but you now can talk to the controller before crashing or - if you avoid the mountains - will hear them talking to you all the time, because you deviated from the into-the-mountain-heading I tried a flight yesterday, SAEZ to SULS, of course with a SID and a special approach towards SULS (you can look up the charts to see why this is necessary, if you like) - impossible with VoxATC (but possible with other addons, that's why I mention it).Had to load FSX three times to get the SID recognized by the engine. VoxATC stopped after asking for startup clearance, had to reload the situation (without changing a thing), then it worked.Flew my SID, had some nags on the frequency but continued towards the end point of it, enroute guidance was good, approaching SULS, had to disable VoxATC completely because the nags came up every few seconds, advised some heading (like the default ATC would do) all the time, that would not fit to this approach. Landed without ATC at all.Now I ask myself if this nag, no-nag, nag is worth the fun have when being able to talk to the controller. It took my some minutes in preflight to set up my other ATC solution for this special flight but then ... flawless guidance throughout the whole flight.It takes you minutes to load different flights into FSX too to enable the SID and STAR feature in VoxATC - so a tie on this issue.Am I a flying nerd if I want to get some realism offline and would like to be able to switch some options?Currently, VoxATC works best when flying without SIDs and STARs towards and from normal airfields where you can be vectored from any direction into any direction, no mountains, no other airspaces, no short runways together with longer ones or some that aren't used anymore.If you like to fly this way (which I did for a long time), that's ok and big fun.Any more than this ... currently fails or annoys.Sad story, huh?

CoolP,It is true that VoxATC (like default ATC) can happen to vector you into high terrain.Nevertheless if the arrival airport has an ILS approach, then this can be worked around by asking Approach for a Full ILS approach.Nice feature I think and it goes well hand in hand with a STAR.

Maybe I did something wrong on my other approaches (the described one above towards SULS has no ILS approach), but when asking for another approach I often got "unable at this time" and therefor remained vectored all the time.A simple option to go for the approach at pilot's discretion would make it in the first step.Getting annoyed by those turn here and there calls could then be ended even without having to set up a STAR in preflight.I think the most traceable reason for VoxATC not being that customizable like other addons is that it uses some amount of ATC logic from the default FS9/FSX implementation (which hasn't changed from FS9 to FSX).That would explain the need for flight plans and those .flt files too.Of course, I have no prove for this and I'm stating this as clear guesswork.Another one:Wanna take of with your Concorde on the 27L at Heathrow? Well, of course no ATC addon knows that this runway would be a fine short taxi time takeoff for this fast bird, but ... in the other addons you can tell them to use it and will get a clearance for it (winds should of course fit here, but this can easily be checked when looking up the weather in preflight, a mandatory step for a good preflight).As I said before, if there were options for such things, no normal user would be harmed when going on standard pre-given values while the other users could enter their favored data and receive a more realistic ATC behavior.It currently might no be realistic to press keys instead of talking to your controllers but I think that it is more satisfying to have a precise and close to reality guidance then one which can only be used without annoyance if going for some workarounds here and there.

Some replies to the points made in this thread.AI TrafficUT2 uses a different format of flight plan file to FSX and thus VoxATC cannot work with it. VoxATC works with other traffic add-ons such as MyTraffic and Traffic XBuilt in AI traffic levels should be set to 0 (GA and Airline) when running VoxATC as it generates all its own AI traffic.Flights and flight plansIf you’re flying IFR you really do need to have a flight plan (.PLN) loaded. VoxATC also requires that the flight plan has been saved as part of a flight (.FLT) situation. This is due to the VoxATC requiring data from both these sources for the flight.However, after saving a flight you do not need to exit FSX, just load the flight. There is an exception to this, a flight with a SID/STAR. In this case you must load another flight first, end the flight (you don’t need to exit FSX entirely) and load the flight with the SID/STAR. I know this is painful, but is required so that VoxATC can get the correct name of the currently loaded flight which it uses to identify the SIDS/STARS to use.Flexibility when setting up flights.VoxATC uses the facility data defined in the FSX scenery. It will use the FAFs as specified in the defined procedures. Also runways can be set as closed or not used for takeoff and landing, however point taken about transition alts and grass runways. Airports selected in emergencies are chosen so that the available runways are suitable for the aircraft you are flying, however grass does get selected in error at times. This is being investigated.Controlled Flight into TerrainIf you don’t want vectors, request one of the approaches available explicitly. You can do this after you have been told to contact approach. Before making contact, press the zero key to bring up the options menu and select the approach you want. You can then request that approach and be cleared for that approach which you can then fly yourself without vectors. You will be handed over to the tower at a suitable point. While being vectored, you can also press zero to display the options menu and select another approach as described above.I hope this has answered some of your questions. Anything further, please contact us through www.voxatc.com

Since version 6 is out and offers quite some improvements together with great new features, my complains from above aren't current anymore.I recommend this update if you're looking for a very immersive voice ATC addon. Especially the new SID/STAR integration is one big thing for me and works very good. The handling of this "save a flight" feature got enhanced and is nowhere near the old and sometimes awkward procedure. The UT2 traffic integration is achieved with a small tool which converts the UT2 files to a VoxATC compatible one. One has to contact the support guys to get it for free and I can tell that it works just fine.Great enhancement in my eyes.

Thanks for the thoughts and review, CoolP. I'll definitely upgrade to the latest version.Cheers,Dirk.