Has anything positive ever been written about FS9/FSX ATC? With a couple of exceptions*, does everybody honestly believe it is that terrible? I have both Radar Contact and PFE, which are both fine products, but that doesn't make FS a throw-away either. Moreover, Edit VoicePack has done wonders to fine tune certain elements such as adding military tactical callsigns and a host of other additions. As far as FS being totally unrealistic, and at the risk of being villified, I simply don't agree (after more than 30 years experience with ATC in the real world). One point in favor FS ATC as it relates to realism is the ability to use virtually all facility names, e.g. "SOCAL Approach", "Santa Barbara Tower", etc. I don't believe RC4 or PFE have that ability. I suppose VATSIM and the online community is ok, however that requires all facilities (or most) to be active for the element of realism to apply. Of course there are shortcomings with FS as previously mentioned*: 1.) Unable to select specific runway (s).2.) Unable to fly realistic SID/STAR profile. I've heard others complain of being vectored into mountains, but that has never occurred to me. By the way, effective September 30, 2010, FAA will eliminate the phraseology "Position and Hold**" in favor of the ICAO standard: "Line-Up and Wait". ** "Taxi into Position and Hold" was suspended a few years ago.

Has anything positive ever been written about FS9/FSX ATC? With a couple of exceptions*, does everybody honestly believe it is that terrible? I have both Radar Contact and PFE, which are both fine products, but that doesn't make FS a throw-away either. Moreover, Edit VoicePack has done wonders to fine tune certain elements such as adding military tactical callsigns and a host of other additions. As far as FS being totally unrealistic, and at the risk of being villified, I simply don't agree (after more than 30 years experience with ATC in the real world). One point in favor FS ATC as it relates to realism is the ability to use virtually all facility names, e.g. "SOCAL Approach", "Santa Barbara Tower", etc. I don't believe RC4 or PFE have that ability. I suppose VATSIM and the online community is ok, however that requires all facilities (or most) to be active for the element of realism to apply. Of course there are shortcomings with FS as previously mentioned*: 1.) Unable to select specific runway (s).2.) Unable to fly realistic SID/STAR profile. I've heard others complain of being vectored into mountains, but that has never occurred to me. By the way, effective September 30, 2010, FAA will eliminate the phraseology "Position and Hold**" in favor of the ICAO standard: "Line-Up and Wait". ** "Taxi into Position and Hold" was suspended a few years ago.

We are 2!! :( In fact i didn't like RC because of the lack of airlines callsigns and i'm fliying right now VFR more than IFR. I'm not saying that the products are bad but it didn't fulfill my needs! I use PFE back in FS2000 or so (don't remember :( ) and i don't think i need to emulate a software from 10 years. Again, it's my opinion.I've never stood up FSX/FS9 ATC publicly because my lack of technical knowledge. But i think that for the simulation and with the help of 3rd party applications like Editvoicepack it has a field of improvement up ahead.Salutes,Ignacio :Big Grin:PS:anyone knows why change from "Position and Hold" to "Line up and wait"?

"Line up and wait" = ICAO standard way of saying it, "Position and hold" US only. I guess they want to standardize it around the globe.

"Line up and wait" = ICAO standard way of saying it, "Position and hold" US only. I guess they want to standardize it around the globe.

firm grip on the obvious ...  :(

Has anything positive ever been written about FS9/FSX ATC? With a couple of exceptions*, does everybody honestly believe it is that terrible? I have both Radar Contact and PFE, which are both fine products, but that doesn't make FS a throw-away either. Moreover, Edit VoicePack has done wonders to fine tune certain elements such as adding military tactical callsigns and a host of other additions. As far as FS being totally unrealistic, and at the risk of being villified, I simply don't agree (after more than 30 years experience with ATC in the real world). One point in favor FS ATC as it relates to realism is the ability to use virtually all facility names, e.g. "SOCAL Approach", "Santa Barbara Tower", etc. I don't believe RC4 or PFE have that ability. I suppose VATSIM and the online community is ok, however that requires all facilities (or most) to be active for the element of realism to apply. Of course there are shortcomings with FS as previously mentioned*: 1.) Unable to select specific runway (s).2.) Unable to fly realistic SID/STAR profile. I've heard others complain of being vectored into mountains, but that has never occurred to me. By the way, effective September 30, 2010, FAA will eliminate the phraseology "Position and Hold**" in favor of the ICAO standard: "Line-Up and Wait". ** "Taxi into Position and Hold" was suspended a few years ago.

Sid/Star really is the only problem with Default FS, when used with editvoicepack. You can select alternate runways for takeoff, and landing, if conditions are satisfied. like wind. For example if you are assigned runway 27R and want 9L, with a wind of 270@10 it won't let you, but if 27L is open for takeoff in the afcad, you can choose that instead. You can only choose it though when ground gives you taxi clearance. Once you acknowledge the clearance you're committed to that runway. As for SIDs while ATC won't direct you, if you use FSBuild or other 3rd party Flightplan program, you can include them in your FP and still fly them. For STARS, that's possible to, but that requires the airport AFCAD to include them as approaches, which unfortunately few do. Jim Vile's airports did include these procedures for his KATL. You can then select it with the "Select another Approach" option in the ATC menu. As for the Phraseology, editvoicepack really improves things here, especially with the ICAO set. It ad winds for takeoff assignments, uses the Line up and wait instruction. My updates available in the FSX/Sound section in the library adds the wind for landing clearance and expected flight level for IFR clearance delivery, which both work with the FAA and ICAO set. The ICAO set even adds a little politeness to handoff instructions like "Over to 130.5 for Speedbird 560 Thanks for the help Good Bye".

I haven't tried other ATC packages in FS9 or FSX yet and am aware of some of the default ATCs short comings, but recently, I have been experimenting with SIDS and STARS and what I have noticed is that if you create a flight plan, even using FS's default flight planning software, is that if you program the intersections for a SID into the flight plan, ATC will not give you any directions except to resume normal navigation once handed off to departure. Now, STARS are a different story from what I see. Depending on altitude, you need to ask to descend compared to when default ATC would tell you and as you fly the SID, ATC will harp on you to fly a specific vector (all arrivals are vectored by default ATC from what I see) until you reach a certain point, usually as you turn onto final. Now I have seen people state that they fly with default ATC, but for approaches, close their IFR flight plan and just fly the SID.From what I see, default is usable to an extent, but could use some tweaking for future iterations of any flight game by MS.

I have often used RC4 and native FSX ATC during the same flight. Example: I file an IFR flight plan for the Carenado C-182. At some point enroute, the wx turns VMC and it appears it will be VMC all the way to the destination airport. I'll cancel IFR (which shuts down RC4) and then I'll activate FSX ATC, and tune 1200 into my transponder.I'll then contact FSX ATC and request VFR flight following, if the airport is still a significant distance from my current location. If I'm near the destination airport, I'll contact the airport Tower (or Unicom at an uncontrolled field)and request a full-stop landing. This is how it's done in the real world and it works well in FSX.

FAA ATC implemented the Line up and Wait a few years ago. Still confusing to some of us old time pilots

 

Asticou

Edit Voice Pack is great if you want improved ATC, but do not want to go with a program such as Radar Contact or Pro Flight Emulator.  If you want a more realistic ATC experience then you will have to look at the payware add ons or join VATSIM.