After spending a week or two getting to grips with the FMC (which was a new concept to me), at first I was torn between the MS ATC which was pulling me one way and the PMDG FMC that was pulling in the other! What I wanted was a compromise that allowed both to play their part.In the end I decided on the following which seems to work fairly well.1. Create a flight in the normal FS way, using the IFR and high altitude options, adjusting the cruise altitude as required.2. When in the 737 flightdeck, click f10 to get the FS route data and copy this into the FMC, adding SIDS and STARS as appropriate.When flying, the FMC and ATC are sufficiently aligned to eliminate the conflicts that were present before.

After spending a week or two getting to grips with the FMC (which was a new concept to me), at first I was torn between the MS ATC which was pulling me one way and the PMDG FMC that was pulling in the other! What I wanted was a compromise that allowed both to play their part.In the end I decided on the following which seems to work fairly well.1. Create a flight in the normal FS way, using the IFR and high altitude options, adjusting the cruise altitude as required.2. When in the 737 flightdeck, click f10 to get the FS route data and copy this into the FMC, adding SIDS and STARS as appropriate.When flying, the FMC and ATC are sufficiently aligned to eliminate the conflicts that were present before.

Hi Jim You're working hard on that FMC, aren't you?To my knowledge, there is no way ATC will guide you all the way to touchdown according to the last part of your flightplan (with STARs etc.). The reason is, most times, MSFS ATC will vector you all around the country into some kind of huge dme arc which is much wider than any realistic (and published) approach.It is relatively easy to have both MSFS and FMC flightplans match for the first segments of the flight and the method you describe is rather crude but works well. But if you want to fly the STAR (or the approach) you programmed in your FMC, then I have found you must ignore ATC soon after top of descent (or alternatively cancel your IFR flightplan, which is OK unless the conditions are really IFR at the destination airport)see my answer to one of your previous questions.http://forum.avsim.n...ost__p__1862047Brunops : it would be nice if you signed at least with your first name. I had to go back quite a few posts to find it.

My opinion: Forget the default ATC in MSFS because it is really just a toy and bears no resemblence whatsoever to what ATC does.An alternative, with much popularity, is RadarContact and you can visit there forum to get a taste of what goes on there. There on online options as well such as VATSIM.Full names in this forum please.

My opinion: Forget the default ATC in MSFS because it is really just a toy and bears no resemblence whatsoever to what ATC does.An alternative, with much popularity, is RadarContact and you can visit there forum to get a taste of what goes on there. There on online options as well such as VATSIM.Full names in this forum please.

Agreed. I've never tried the RadarContact program, but VATSIM (online in general) is well worth the time.

In FS AI approaches can be defined in the default APxxxx.bgl files or in add-on scenery XML files. These contain defined waypoints. If no approach is defined then AI use or semicircular approach by default.Perhaps FS ATC uses the same methods.ADE9X Airport Design Editor includes an Approach mode that will approach waypoints and also properties of the approach. You can therefore determine if they exist for a default or afd file of an add-on airport.The freeware utility for FS9 and FSX plus manuals and tutorials can be downloaded from:http://www.scruffyduck.org.uk/filemanager/navega.php?id=2&PHPSESSID=0e628f57dc6d9907bcf4b29bfb3b0f5bhttp://www.airportdesigneditor.co.uk/ is the product page.

Perhaps FS ATC uses the same methods.

Thanks for the info, Ron. I didn't know. Just out of curiosity, has anyone checked if this would work for FS ATC (although I must admit, even if it did, I doubt I would venture to modify even a few of my favorite airports)?Bruno

I suppose anything one does on a simulator is bound to be a compromise to some extent but the MS/FMC concoction seems to work reasonably well although it is true that the last stages of the journey have to be done using one system or the other. However, it is not at all unusual for ATC to overide or modiy STARS and SIDS so all is not lost.It is surprising the number of airports I fly to that don't seem to have STARS.Jim

Hi Jim You're working hard on that FMC, aren't you?To my knowledge, there is no way ATC will guide you all the way to touchdown according to the last part of your flightplan (with STARs etc.). The reason is, most times, MSFS ATC will vector you all around the country into some kind of huge dme arc which is much wider than any realistic (and published) approach.It is relatively easy to have both MSFS and FMC flightplans match for the first segments of the flight and the method you describe is rather crude but works well. But if you want to fly the STAR (or the approach) you programmed in your FMC, then I have found you must ignore ATC soon after top of descent (or alternatively cancel your IFR flightplan, which is OK unless the conditions are really IFR at the destination airport)see my answer to one of your previous questions.http://forum.avsim.n...ost__p__1862047Brunops : it would be nice if you signed at least with your first name. I had to go back quite a few posts to find it.

It is surprising the number of airports I fly to that don't seem to have STARS.Jim

Depends on what source you are using. The STARS may be missing in the database you are using or may not exist at all.Bruno

In the United States, the general rule of thumb is this:Is it busy? Yes/NoIs it complicated to vector people around the terrain/airspace? Yes/NoYes to both? SID/STARElse: ATC vectors or approaches with IFs along routes.The vast majority of airports in the US do not have SID/STARs. Heck, even DCA doesn't have a SID at the moment, and hasn't for years and it's complicated to get in and out of (new DP upcoming in March).

My opinion: Forget the default ATC in MSFS because it is really just a toy and bears no resemblence whatsoever to what ATC does.An alternative, with much popularity, is RadarContact and you can visit there forum to get a taste of what goes on there. There on online options as well such as VATSIM.Full names in this forum please.

Whenever I talk about virtual networks, I always name both major communities.So, there is not only VATSIM but also IVAO.AEROBest Regards,Bert Van Bulck

After spending a week or two getting to grips with the FMC (which was a new concept to me), at first I was torn between the MS ATC which was pulling me one way and the PMDG FMC that was pulling in the other! What I wanted was a compromise that allowed both to play their part.In the end I decided on the following which seems to work fairly well.1. Create a flight in the normal FS way, using the IFR and high altitude options, adjusting the cruise altitude as required.2. When in the 737 flightdeck, click f10 to get the FS route data and copy this into the FMC, adding SIDS and STARS as appropriate.When flying, the FMC and ATC are sufficiently aligned to eliminate the conflicts that were present before.

Good thing you get into the FMC stuff.Bad thing is the FS routeplanner and/or FS ATC.If you are REALLY interested in getting further and better with fligtplans and ATC, join VATSIM or IVAO.Best Regards,Bert Van Bulck